* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:06] IT IS [CALL TO ORDER] 2:34 PM ON THURSDAY, THE 18TH OF SEPTEMBER, 2025. MY NAME IS LISA CLARK. I'M THE CHAIR OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION, AND I'M CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER AT THE CITY HALL ANNEX AT 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 INTO STAFF NEAR THE FRONT DOOR. CONSENT AND REPEAT SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED ONE MINUTE AND NEW SPEAKERS ARE TIME FOR TWO MINUTES. SPEAKER RULES ARE FOUND ON THE TOP PORTION OF THE SPEAKER SIGN IN FORM ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA. COUNCIL MEMBERS SPEAKING ON AN ITEM ARE NOT TIMED. APPLICANTS HAVE THEIR ALLOTTED TWO MINUTES TIME AS WELL AS REBUTTALS AND NON APPLICANTS OR GENERAL SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED. TWO MINUTES TIME. THERE'S NOT AN OPTION FOR REBUTTAL, EVEN IF YOU DID NOT USE YOUR FULL TWO MINUTES. AND LET'S SEE, YOU WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK AGAIN AND YOU CANNOT ALLOCATE YOUR TIME TO ANOTHER SPEAKER. TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM OF 11 COMMISSIONERS, I'LL CALL THE ROLE CHAIR CLARK IS PRESENT. VICE CHAIR GARZA GARZA. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN BALDWIN. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER COLVARD COLVER. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER. HE HE PRESENT. COMMISSIONER HINES HINES. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER JONES. JOHN'S PRESENT. COMMISSIONER KHALI KHALI. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER. MAD MODEST PRESENT. COMMISSIONER POROUS PERLE. POROUS PERLE PRESENT. COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG NOT PRESENT TODAY. COMMISSIONER SIGLER SIGLER PRESENT. COMMISSIONER TAHIR. COMMISSIONER VICTOR. COMMISSIONER VIRA LIVI, UH, VIRA BLAND. VIRA BLAND PRESENT. COMMISSIONER MON DE PACO MON DECO PRESENT. AND OUR SECRETARY, DIRECTOR VON TRAN TRAN. PRESENT. THANK YOU. WE HAVE 16 MEMBERS, SO WE HAVE ESTABLISHED A QUORUM. OKAY. I DO, DID NOT LOOK FOR WITHDRAWALS. DID YOU LOOK FOR WITHDRAWALS? I DID NOT SEE ANY NOTES. OKAY. THERE, I THINK THERE'S ONE. YES. 62, 2. OKAY. WHAT'S THE NAME OF THE ITEM? IT'S ESTATE SAID MAC, ALPINE PLACE. OKAY, SO ITEM 62 STATES THAT MAC ALPINE ESTATES HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. SO WE'LL NOT HEAR ANYTHING ON THIS ITEM AND OF COURSE MAKE NO, UM, MOTION FOR THE ITEM. ALL RIGHT, THEN I WILL MOVE [Director’s Report] ON NOW TO THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT. DIRECTOR TRAN. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR CLARK, COMMISSION MEMBERS AND THE PUBLIC. I AM V TRAN, SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DIRECTOR OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. WELCOME. I HAVE TWO ANNOUNCEMENTS TODAY. THE FIRST ONE, YOU'VE HEARD IT BEFORE, BUT THIS IS A REMINDER. THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT IS AWARE OF A PHISHING ISSUE CURRENTLY AFFECTING APPLICANTS, PARTICULARLY THOSE SUBMITTING DEVELOPMENT PLAT VARIANCES AND HOTEL AND MOTEL APPLICATIONS. APPLICANTS HAVE REPORTED RECEIVING MALICIOUS EMAILS THAT APPEAR AUTHENTIC BUT ORIGINATE FROM FRAUDULENT ADDRESSES. THESE EMAIL, EMAIL REQUEST PAY, UH, THESE EMAILS REQUEST PAYMENT THROUGH A SETTLEMENT INVOICE IN EXCHANGE FOR A PLA APPROVAL. PLEASE NOTE, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DOES NOT ISSUE INVOICES OR REQUEST PAYMENT BY EMAIL. THE CITY'S IT DEPARTMENT IS ACTIVELY INVESTIGATING THIS MATTER. IN THE MEANTIME, WE STRONGLY ADVISE APPLICANTS NOT TO OPEN THESE ATTACHMENTS OR RESPOND TO THE SUSPICIOUS REQUESTS. IF YOU RECEIVE AN EMAIL RELATED TO YOUR PLAT APPLICATION THAT SEEMS QUESTIONABLE, PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IMMEDIATELY. FOR LEGITIMATE UPDATES OR QUESTIONS REGARDING APPLICATIONS, PLEASE CALL THE POD LINE FOR ASSISTANCE. MY SECOND ANNOUNCEMENT IS THAT THE 2025 PFI PLANNING WORKSHOP WILL BE HELD ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23RD FROM 8:00 AM TO 4:00 PM AT THE THIRD WORD MULTI-SERVICE CENTER IN THE AUDITORIUM ROOM 1 29. THE ADDRESS IS 3 6 1 1 ENNI STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 0 4. AND FOR REGISTRATION INFORMATION, PLEASE VISIT HOUSTON PLANNING.COM. IN CLOSING, THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CAN BE REACHED AT (832) 393-6600 OR YOU CAN CALL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNER OF THE DAY AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 6 2 4. YOU MAY VISIT OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM. [00:05:03] THIS CONCLUDES MY REPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR TRAN. OUR NEXT ITEM [Consideration of September 4, 2025 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes] IS CONSIDERATION OF THE SEPTEMBER 4TH, 2025 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MINUTES. THESE MINUTES WERE ATTACHED IN YOUR, ON YOUR AGENDA. DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? SO MOVED. MOTION VIE BLAND. SECOND TO HEAR. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. [Platting Activities a & b] NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO ROMAN NUMERAL ONE PLANNING ACTIVITY. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS MARIA TOVAR. SECTIONS A AND B ARE PRESENTED AS ONE GROUP, WHICH INCLUDES CONSENT AND REPL. ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION. SECTIONS A AND B ARE ITEMS ONE THROUGH 57 SECTION A. CONSENT ITEMS ARE NUMBERS ONE THROUGH 38 AND SECTION B REPL ITEMS ARE NUMBERS 39 THROUGH 57. NO ITEMS NEED TO BE TAKEN OUT OF ORDER AND THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS MADAM CHAIR, IF THERE ARE NO INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNED TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS, THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSENT AND REPL ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. DO I HAVE ANY ABSTENTIONS ON ANY ITEMS? COMMISSIONER MAREZ? YES. UM, ITEM 1324 AND 33. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER. HE? YES. MADAM CHAIR IAIN FROM ITEMS 1 4 5 7 17 31 AND 32. I HAD, I HAD A COUPLE OTHERS. 1333 ON YOUR, ON YOUR FORM. NO, MAYBE THEY COMBINED IT ALL TOGETHER AND OKAY. THEY COMBINED IT ENDED, SO. OKAY. SO LET ME, 10 AND 33. OKAY, SO I NEED A MOTION FOR ITEMS IN, UH, ROMAN. ROLL ONE. I'M CHAIR. YES, I HAVE A QUESTION. YES, THE, UH, DIGITAL VERSION, UM, NONE OF THE CONSENT AND REPL ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION ACTUALLY FILLED OUT. SO MINE IS BLANK. MRS IS FILLED OUT. OH, GREAT, GREAT. OKAY. IT'S JUST YOU AND ME. OKAY, COOL. DO, YEAH, FORTUNATELY, OH, THEY'RE, OH, THEY'RE ALL BLACK. THEY'RE WORKING ON, OKAY. OKAY. AT LEAST WE HAVE THIS, WE HAVE THE BIG SCREEN IN FRONT OF US, SO NOTHING IS GONNA GET PAST US. DON'T WORRY OUT YOUR DEAL. YOU KNOW, LET THAT DEAL . COMMISSIONER BALDWIN, WE'LL MAKE A NOTE, UH, TO GO BACK TO THE ANTIQUATED, UM, YEAH, . COMMISSIONER BALDWIN, YOUR APPLE IS RIGHT HERE. I'M SHINING. THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY, SO I NEED A MOTION. SAVE AND ACCEPT ITEMS. 1, 4 5, 7, 13, 17, 24, 31, 32, AND 33. MOTION VICTOR. MOTION VICTOR SECOND GARZA. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NOW I NEED A MOTION FOR ITEMS. 1, 4, 5, 7, 13, 17, 24, 31, 32, AND 33. MOTION. MOTION POURS PERLE. SECOND. SECOND. VERA. BLAND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. YES. PUT YOUR MIC ON BANDY HERE. PLANNING DEPARTMENT. UM, I JUST WANT TO APOLOGIZE ABOUT THE, UM, THE TABS NOT HAVING THE CPCS. THE DOCUMENT THAT IS ONLINE HAS ALL OF THE CPCS AND THEY HAVE BEEN GENERATED. THERE HAS BEEN A GLITCH BETWEEN PLA TRACKER AND THE TABS THAT THEY'RE NOT SHOWING UP. WE ARE GOING TO ADDRESS AND TAKE CARE OF THAT, BUT WE CAN'T UPLOAD THE TABS AGAIN. SO, UM, PLEASE FORGIVE US FOR THAT. WE'LL MAKE SURE NEXT TIME. YES, STARTING AT 58. SECTION C IS ON OUR, IT'S ON OUR TABLETS. YES. SO WE CAN SEE THEM. OKAY. IT WAS A AND B, SO IT'S JUST A AND B. OKAY, GOT IT. WE'LL TAKE CARE OF THAT. OH, SO YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE EITHER. OH, OKAY. WELL, WE WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO WORK OFF OUR SCREENS TODAY, SO THANK GOODNESS WE HAVE THREE OF 'EM. OKAY. THANK YOU MS. BANDI. I APPRECIATE IT. OKAY, NOW WE'RE MOVING ALONG TO RELAS [c. Replats requiring Public Hearings with Notification (John Cedillo, Aracely Rodriguez, Dorianne Powe-Phlegm and Ken Calhoun)] REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARINGS WITH NOTIFICATION. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JOHN PHILLIPS CILLO. ITEM 58 IS ARBOR DEVELOPMENT. THE SUBJECT SITE IS NEAR, IS AN 18,000 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS AT THE SOUTHWEST INTERSECTION OF ARBOR STREET AND STATE HIGHWAY 2 88 SOUTH OF BLOT STREET. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A SINGLE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG STATE HIGHWAY 2 88. [00:10:01] IN LIEU OF THE 25 FOOT BUILDING LINE. REQUIRED STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE VARIANCE REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THE PROPOSED PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY. THE SITE IS PART OF AN ALIGNMENT OF REMAINING LOTS OUT OF RIVERSIDE TERRA SECTION ONE PLAT OR SUBDIVISION. AFTER THE CREATION OF STATE HIGHWAY 2 88, THE DEVELOPER INTENDS TO CREATE A THREE STORY MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT WITH A PARKING GARAGE MAKING UP THE GROUND FLOOR. THE GARAGE ITSELF WOULD TAKE SO ACCESS FROM ARBOR STREET AND IS DENIED VEHICULAR ACCESS FROM THE FEEDER ROAD. THE VERY DEDICATIONS OF PROPERTIES TO THE HIGHWAY HAS CREATED A JAGGED ALIGNMENT OF LOTS ALONG THE HIGHWAY. AS SUCH THREE OTHER RE PLATS IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY SHOWN IN GREEN, WERE ALSO GRANTED THE 10 FOOT BUILDING LINE VARIANCE IN 20 12 20 19. EARLIER THIS YEAR, THE FEEDER AT THIS LOCATION IS A SOUTHBOUND ONE WAY RIGHT OF WAY EXTENDING OFF OF THE FOUR-WAY STOP INTERSECTION OF BLOCK AND 2 88. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF THE OFF RAMP AND PRIOR TO ITS CONNECTION TO THE FEEDER. WITH THE OFF RAMP BEING GRADE SEPARATED AT THIS LOCATION, THE BACK OF THE CURB IS PROPOSED TO BE, HAVE THE BACK OF CURB TO THE PROPOSED BUILDING LINE IS 47 FEET IN TOTAL, PROVIDING A SIGNIFICANT BUFFER BETWEEN TRAFFIC AND THE BUILDING LINE. THIS BUFFER IS STRENGTHENED BY A 10 FOOT TALL SOUND, UH, T FOOT TALL SOUND WALL BARRIER SHOWN IN PINK, INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED BY TXDOT WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY PROPERTY STAFF. RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CCP C ONE ONE FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, IF YOU PLEASE THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 58. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. MOTION. MOTION SIGLER. SECOND. SECOND MADS. ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. ITEM 59. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS RODRIGUEZ, ITEM 59 AT COM GATEWAY AT STERLING SHIRE. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE CITY LIMIT EAST OF WEST SIDE DRIVE AND SOUTH OF PARKER ROAD. THE PURPOSE OF THE WE PLA IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY. NO VARIANCES ARE BEING REQUESTED. WITH THIS ITEM, THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND PER LEGAL, THE PROPOSED RE REPLY WILL NOT VIOLATE APPLICABLE RESTRICTION. STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY COMMENTS. UM, IN ADVANCE TO MADAM CHAIR. WELL, SORRY. THAT RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLANS SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 INFORMED CONDITION. NOW MADAM CHAIR IS TO PLEASE OF THE COMMISSION. YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 59. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING KNOWN? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. MOTION JONES. SECOND HINES. SECOND HINES. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. ITEM 60. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS DORIAN FLM. ITEM NUMBER 60 IS ED FIELD MANOR. THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG A SITE IS LOCATED, UM, IN HOUSTON, CORPORATE LIMITS ALONG AT THE CORNER OF ED FIELD AND CALHOUN ROAD. THE REASON FOR RE PLAT IS TO CREATE ONE MULTI-UNIT RESIDENTIAL RESERVE. THIS PLAT WAS DEFERRED AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION PER THE, UH, BE BECAUSE THERE WAS QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS PLAT. THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS CONCERNING THIS PLAT WAS, UM, CONCERNING THE RESTRICTIONS AND, UM, IN JULY, IN, IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT MAYFLOWER MANOR. MAYFLOWER. MAYFLOWER MANOR IS THE PLA UM, IS THE PLA THAT IS SHOWN IN, UM, PINK AND ED FILL MANOR IS SHOWN IN ORANGE WHERE THE ITEM TODAY IS ED FILL MANOR. BUT BOTH OF THESE, UM, BOTH OF THESE LOTS WERE A PART OF A AMENDMENT WHICH ALLOWED OTHER, OTHER, UM, USES THAN SINGLE FAMILY. SO THAT'S WHY THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS AND THAT'S WHY, UM, AND LEGAL CAME BACK AND SAID THAT IT DIDN'T VIOLATE DEED RESTRICTIONS. UM, ANOTHER QUESTION WAS, THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT TAKING INGRESS AND EGRESS FROM VILLE MANOR. THE APPLICANT HAS, UM, MET WITH COUNCIL MEMBER SHABAZZ AS WELL AS WITH THE COMMUNITY AND HAVE DECIDED THAT THEY WILL TAKE ACCESS FROM CALHOUN, UH, ROAD AS WELL AS, UH, MAYFLOWER MATTER WILL MIRROR THE SAME, UH, LAYOUT. [00:15:06] THE, THE PLAID HAZ MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. UH, REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OF THOSE FILED SEPARATELY. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT PER TO CBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION. YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU, MS. PO FLYNN. I'LL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 60. I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF SPEAKERS. OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS CHEN WANG. I . SO IF, UH, THEY HAVE QUESTION, THEY CAN OKAY. FURTHER. OKAY. SO YOU'RE JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS? YES. THANK YOU. UM, MS. DARLENE MAVEN. WELCOME BACK. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR AT LEAST ACKNOWLEDGING US FOR A LONG WHILE. WE FELT INVISIBLE AND BECAUSE OF THE DEFERMENT, WE WAS ABLE TO SPEAK WITH THE DEVELOPER AND GET SOME THINGS. OUR BELOVED TREES ARE GONNA BE THERE. WE'RE GONNA HAVE A BRICK WALL IN BACK OF IT. THE DRIVEWAYS HAVE BEEN MOVED AND ALL THIS IS BECAUSE WE WERE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE. WE KNOW WE CAN'T STOP PROGRESS, BUT WE'D LIKE TO HAVE SOME SAY SO ABOUT HOW IT IS GOING TO AFFECT OUR COMMUNITY. 'CAUSE WE ALL LIVE THERE. BUT I WANNA THANK YOU. WELL, WE APPRECIATE YOU, YOU'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK ON THIS ALONG WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS, AND SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING ALL THIS TO LIGHT AND I'M GLAD THAT EVERYTHING WORKED OUT WELL. OKAY. I HAVE NO ONE ELSE SIGNED TO SPEAK. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I WILL CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. MOTION COLLE. SECOND. SECOND. VERA BLAND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 61, HANG ON JUST A SECOND. YEAH. CAN WE, I NEED TO TAKE 65 BEFORE 61. THANK YOU. THE COUNCIL, COUNCIL MEMBER'S HERE. SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE THAT ONE UP. OKAY? OKAY. SURE. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 65 IS JEANETTA RESERVE. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS, UM, ALONG EAST ALONG JEANETTA JEANETTA STREET, UM, NORTH OF RICHMOND AVENUE. THE APPLICANT IS CREATING ONE, UM, COMMERCIAL RESERVE REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATE THAT THIS PLAT WILL VIOLATE DEED RESTRICTIONS FILED SEPARATELY. SO THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THAT THIS ITEM BE DEFERRED. UM, AND WE HAVE RECEIVED, UH, SEVERAL, UH, WE HAVE RECEIVED ADVANCE COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM, UM, CONCERNING CHANGING THESE UH, LOTS INTO, UM, A COMMERCIAL RESERVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLAID PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 65 IS OPEN. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL COUNCIL MEMBER THOMAS. GOOD AFTERNOON. HELLO, HOW ARE YOU? HELLO, MADAM CHAIR, MADAM SECRETARY COMMISSIONERS, UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK INTO THE THE PLANNING TEAM. I'M COUNCIL MEMBER TIFFANY D. THOMAS. I REPRESENT DISTRICT F, UM, ON THE WEST SIDE, THE BEST SIDE OF HOUSTON. I HAVE TO SAY THAT, UM, FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. UH, ONE OF THE REASONS IS BECAUSE OF PINEY POINT. UM, I'VE COME BEFORE THIS BODY A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO RAISING CONCERN AND AND DIRECTOR, UM, PRIOR TO YOUR APPOINTMENT. UM, UM, PINEY POINT IS ONE OF THE, THE FEW REMAINING, UH, UH, REMNANTS OF A FREEDMAN'S TOWN IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON. UM, WHAT ONCE WAS BUSTLING WITH FIVE NEIGHBORHOODS, AND I WANNA SHARE THE NAMES OF THOSE FIVE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT NO LONGER EXISTS. BLOSSOM HEIGHTS, HARLEM HEIGHTS, ULRICH PINEY POINT, AND WHAT REMAINS IS CARVER CREST AROUND 150 WOOD FRAME HOMES, UH, NESTLED BETWEEN RICHMOND AND JEANETTA AND CLARK CREST. UM, THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE WALKED HAND IN HAND WITH, AND I'M FLANKED BY, UH, REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE COMMUNITY, IS BECAUSE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ESSENTIALLY BEEN ERASED BY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, UM, PARTICULARLY CAR DEALERSHIPS AND MECHANIC SHOPS, WHICH DIRECTLY IMPACTS MOBILITY. UH, THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS ONE OF MY FEW SUBDIVISIONS THAT HAVE OPEN DITCHES. SO IN TERMS OF MOBILITY, LIMITED SIDEWALKS, BUT ALSO THERE'VE BEEN SOME ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS ABOUT LIVING SO CLOSE TO AUTO ACTIVITY, UM, UM, PRIOR WHEN I CAME TO THIS BODY ASKING FOR YOU ALL TO, UM, BECOME A MORE CURIOUS ABOUT HOW WE, UH, PLAN, UH, CAR DEALERSHIPS AND MECHANIC SHOPS. UM, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S BEEN ANY [00:20:01] PROGRESS OF THAT CONVERSATION, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND ANOTHER INVITATION FOR US TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. MY CONCERN AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, UM, IS THAT IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WILL BE PERMANENTLY ERASED. IT'LL BE JUST A, A MENTION IN A NOTE IF WE DO NOT INSERT, UM, AND INSERT OURSELVES IN THE PROPER, UH, PROTECTION OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND SO I KNOW THAT THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION BEFORE THE BODY TO DEFER THE ITEM, BUT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO CALL, LIKE THERE ARE DE RESTRICTIONS IN THE I THESE ITEMS CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD. UM, OFTENTIMES HISTORICALLY, NOT UNDER Y'ALL'S LEADERSHIP, BUT OVER DECADES, RIGHT? THIS HAS HAPPENED, UM, UH, BECAUSE THEY REALLY HAVEN'T HAD A PRONOUNCED FOOTPRINT. WHEN WE THINK FREEMAN'S TOWN, WE THINK MIDTOWN, WE THINK FORT WARD, UH, WE DON'T THINK OF PINEY POINT ON THE WEST SIDE, FAR WEST OF, OF THE CITY OF HOUSTON. UM, SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT Y'ALL HAVE THE SAME EYES AND ATTENTION AND SENSITIVITY, UH, THAT THIS BODY HAS AND COUNCIL HAS AROUND MIDTOWN IN FOURTH WARD IN FREEMAN'S TOWN THAT THERE'S A ROOM OF A FREEMAN'S TOWN ON THE WEST SIDE AND WOULD APPRECIATE, UH, I KNOW WE HAVE, UH, SEVERAL SPEAKERS FROM THE COMMUNITY APPRECIATE, UM, Y'ALL LISTENING TO THEM. AND, UM, THIS IS THEIR FIRST TIME, NOT ALL OF THEIR FIRST TIME HERE. UM, BUT WE WHIPPED UP THE TROOPS TODAY SO THEY CAN STAND BEFORE YOU, UH, UM, TO SHARE, UM, THE IMPACTS OF THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THEN IF THERE ISN'T OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO ENGAGE WITH THE OWNER, UM, I WOULD INVITE THAT TO HAPPEN AS WELL. UM, SO THEY CAN KINDA GET CLEAR ABOUT WHAT'S TO COME AND IF THEY COULD POSSIBLY INFORM, UH, BETTER USE OF THAT LAND. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN AND SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS. OKAY, THE FIRST, WELL, THE ONLY SPEAKER I HAVE SIGNED, THERE MAY BE OTHERS IS ALI GASPE. SORRY. OKAY, . GOOD AFTERNOON LADY GENTLEMEN. UH, I'M CALLING ABOUT THE REFERENCE NUMBER, UH, TWO FIVE DASH 2 0 2 5 AND THE PROPERTY AT THE LOT 17 AND 18 BLOCK ONE. THEY CALL IT THE THIRTY TWO OH ONE JANO STREET. THIS JANO, UH, THIS PROPERTY, I WAS THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY LONG TIME AGO. THE CITY OF HOUSTON SENT A LETTER TO ME MANY TIME TO REMOVE YOUR CARS FROM THAT PROPERTY BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY IS NOT COMMERCIAL, IT IS RESIDENTIAL OR THEY CALL IT BLACK HERITAGE. AND I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE CITY. I RECEIVED THE NOTICE FROM THE CITY. I BRING THE ALSO, UM, A LOT OF PROBLEM THAT I MOVE ALL MY CAR FROM THIS PROPERTY. AND, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU APPROVE THIS, THIS PROPERTY, B COMMERCIAL, THEN YOU HAVE TO, UH, APPROVE THE BLOCK ONE COMPLETELY BLOCK ONE FROM THE JARVIS AND JANO, BE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, BECAUSE OTHERWISE THIS PROPERTY SHOULD STAY AS A, AS A RESIDENTIAL, NOT AS A COMMERCIAL AND THE PROPERTY BESIDE IT ALSO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING IN TODAY. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS PASTOR DAMON WILKINS. HELLO TO, UH, THIS, UH, COUNCIL AND TO ALL THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS PASTOR DAMON WILKINS AND I'M THE PASTOR OF THE PILGRIM REST MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH. UH, THERE 34 1 JEANETTA ROAD, UH, IN PINEY POINT. AND, UH, AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE ARE THE OLDEST BLACK BAPTIST CHURCH, UH, IN HOUSTON. UH, ANTIOCH IS NOT THE OLDEST BLACK BAPTIST CHURCH. UM, THEY WERE BEFORE YOU ALL ANNEXED US, UH, SOME YEARS AGO IN 1920 OR 1930, SOMEWHERE ALONG THOSE TIMES. BUT WE WERE ORGANIZED MARCH, UH, 10TH, 1865. SO WE ARE ABOUT A YEAR AND TWO MONTHS YOUNGER THAN, UM, OLDER OR YOUNGER, OLDER THAN, UH, ANTIOCH CHURCH. UM, BUT, UM, BEING THE PASTOR OF THE CHURCH, UM, THE, I'VE BEEN A PART OF THAT CHURCH FOR ALL OF MY LIFE AND, UH, NOW ABLE TO SERVE AS A PASTOR. I'VE BEEN THERE ABOUT FOUR YEARS NOW. AND, UM, THERE'S TOO MUCH COMMERCIAL, UM, AUTO SHOPS IN THE AREA. UH, I GO TO CHURCH EVERY, UH, WHEN I'M COMING IN, I'M EITHER COMING DOWN DAFF DEAL OR DUNVILLE COMING INTO AND, UM, ALL OF THE AUTO SHOPS THAT ARE AROUND THE CHURCH CARS ARE JUST SITTING UP THERE AND NO ONE IS BUYING THEM. UM, THEY'RE JUST SITTING UP AND, UM, THEY'RE COLLECTING DUST AND, UH, IT'S, IT'S MOST OF [00:25:01] AN EYESORE COMING INTO, UH, OUR, UH, COMMUNITY. AND, UH, NO ONE'S BUYING THEM. THEY'RE JUST SITTING UP. AND SO MY FEAR FOR THIS ONE, IF THERE'S ANOTHER AUTO SHOP THAT COMES IN IS IT WILL BE THE SAME AS THE OTHERS ARE IN THE COMMUNITY. AND THE SECOND THING IS THAT I'M A REGISTERED NURSE AT ST. LUKE HOSPITAL, SO I'M A BI-VOCATIONAL PASTOR. AND, UM, THE HEALTH ISSUES, UH, THAT COME WITH ALL OF THIS AUTOMOTIVE AND MECHANIC IN THE AREA. YOU THANK YOU. WRAP UP REAL QUICK. YES, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. NO, YOU CAN WRAP UP. WRAP UP. YEAH, GO AHEAD AND WRAP UP. OKAY. UH, BEING A NURSE, UH, ALL OF THE AUTOMOTIVE, ALL OF THE CHEMICALS IN THE, UH, THAT SEE OUT FROM THESE, UM, MECHANIC SHOPS, UM, THEY ARE, THEY WILL DO SOME TYPE OF HARM, UH, NOW AND PROBABLY IN THE FUTURE. SO I OPPOSE, UM, THE, UH, THE COMMERCIAL AND KEEPING IT THE PLAS RESIDENTIAL. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CLEVELAND WESLEY. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, I AM A DESCENDANT. UH, MY MOTHER MOVED TO PINEY POINT IN 1927, SO ALMOST A HUNDRED YEARS AGO. AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE COMMUNITY STAY A COMMUNITY AND NOT BE A COL CAR LOT. SO THAT IS MY REQUEST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CAROLYN BOOZER. OKAY. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS CAROLYN BOOZER. I LIVE IN THE CARVER CREST SUBDIVISION, AND I STAND TO OPPOSE THE REPLY OF 32 0 1 JEANETTA INTO A COMMERCIAL RESERVE. UH, I'D LIKE TO SHARE A LITTLE STORY WITH YOU ON FRIDAY AFTERNOON, I BELIEVE IT WAS AUGUST 8TH, 2025, I OBSERVED ASPHALT BEING SPREAD OVER THE FRONT SIDE AND BACKYARDS OF THIS PROPERTY. JUST A FEW DAYS LATER, CARS WERE PARKED IN THE BACK AND SIDE YARD ALL BEFORE THE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SIGNAGE WAS POSTED. THIS PARTICULAR PUBLIC, PUBLIC HEARING AND BEFORE RELA APPROVAL, I BELIEVE THIS SHOWS A CLEAR DISREGARD FOR OUR DEED RESTRICTIONS AND AN INTENT TO PROCEED WITH COMMERCIAL USE REGARDLESS OF THE RULES. WE HAVE SEEN SIMILAR TACTICS, UH, USED IN THE PAST FOR MANY YEARS. OUR COMMUNITY HAS RELIED ON CITY AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS LIKE 3 1 1, THE DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, THE MIDWEST, UM, HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, IT'S DRT SECTION PRO BONO LEGAL AND OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, UH, TO HELP US, UM, PREVENT, UM, COMMERCIAL IN OUR, IN OUR, IN OUR SUBDIVISION. SO, AND WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THEIR EFFORTS, BUT IT'S RATHER SAD THAT WE HAVE TO CONTINUE THIS FIGHT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. SO TODAY I ASK YOU NOT TO RE REWARD THE PROPERTY OWNER'S ATTEMPTS TO SPLINTER OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. CARVER CREST WAS ESTABLISHED OVER 70 YEARS AGO AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, AND WE WANT TO PRESERVE THAT LEGACY. YOU CAN WRAP UP TWO SECONDS. I RA I RESPECTFULLY IMPLORE YOU TO DECLINE THIS APPLICATION IF IT COMES BACK AGAIN BECAUSE IT VIOLATES ID RESTRICTIONS AND BECAUSE IT WOULD CREATE GREATER TRAFFIC NUISANCES FOR OUR RESIDENTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MS. BOOZER, APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN. I DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED TO SPEAK. IS THERE ANY ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY, I DO HAVE A QUESTION. YES, MS. MICKELSON, CAN YOU HELP US ON THE D RESTRICTION QUESTION A LITTLE BIT? EXCUSE ME, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT. UM, THE APPLICANT DID SUBMIT ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS THAT THEY CLAIM AMEND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS. I WILL NOTE THAT THEY WERE, THERE'S A 19, THERE'S A 2021 DOCUMENT, THEN THERE IS A 2023 AUGUST, 2023 COURT AGREED JUDGMENT WHERE THE COURT DETERMINED THAT THOSE RESTRICTIONS IN 2021 WERE NOT PROPERLY DONE. AND SO THEREFORE THEY WERE STILL VALID. I WILL SAY THAT THERE, THERE IN [00:30:01] MARCH OF THAT YEAR, UM, THERE APPEARED TO BE AN ADDITIONAL ATTEMPT TO TRY AND REMOVE CERTAIN PROPERTIES FROM THE DEED RESTRICTIONS. UM, AND I'M JUST, HANG ON, I'M JUST DOUBLE CHECKING THE COURT ORDER. UH, THEY LACK A MAJORITY OF LOT OWNERS, SO BOTH OF THOSE ARE ATTEMPTS TO, TO AMEND THOSE ARE INVALID ACCORDING TO THIS AGREED ORDER FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT THAT THE CURRENT OWNER APPEARS TO HAVE AGREED WITH. SO, OKAY. I KNOW THAT, I KNOW THERE'S QUESTIONS IS THAT THEY VIOLATE THIS, IT'S RESTRICTED TO SINGLE FAMILY. RIGHT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN. SO TO CLARIFY, THE ORIGINAL RESTRICTIONS ARE STILL IN PLACE? YES. AND IT IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT? THAT IS CORRECT. AND WE HAVE NO INFORMATION THAT SAYS IT'S OTHERWISE. NO, THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S JUST THAT THE TWO ATTEMPTS TO TAKE IT OUT TO ALLOW DIFFERENT USES WERE NULL AND VOID IN THE COURT. OKAY. ANY OTHER? YES, COMMISSIONER COLVARD. SO, UM, AND MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND BETTER WHEN THIS COMES BACK, IF IT GETS DEFERRED, BUT HOW DID ALL OF THESE OTHER BUSINESSES GET APPROVED THEN IF THERE WAS A DEED RESTRICTION IN PLACE? THEY DIDN'T. I MEAN, THEY JUST MOVED AHEAD AND YES. SO I, HOLD ON. YEAH, LET, LET ME A, WE HAVE TO GO BACK IN AND LOOK AT THE CITY RECORDS. YEAH, RIGHT. YOU KNOW, OCCASIONALLY YOU, YOU MAY HAVE HEARD THAT WHEN SOMEONE APPLIES FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, THEY GO IN AND THEY FILE SOMETHING THAT SAYS WE'RE NOT VIOLATING DEED RESTRICTIONS. RIGHT. PERMITTING DOESN'T HAVE THE STAFF AND, AND EVERYTHING TO CHECK UP ON THOSE EVERY, FOR EVERY SINGLE THING AND SOMETIMES THINGS HAPPEN BY MISTAKE. YEAH. SO I MEAN, WHAT CAN BE DONE AT THAT POINT? I KNOW THAT WE'RE PLANNING AND NOT PERMITTING, BUT CORRECT, CORRECT. AND THIS, THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE HE NEEDED THE REPL, SO THAT'S WHY IT'S COMING UP. NOT NECESSARILY ANYTHING THAT SOMEBODY JUST GOES IN AND STARTS, WOULD REQUIRE A REPL IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS. SO IT MIGHT NOT HAVE GOTTEN STOPPED THERE AND WE'D HAVE TO GO BACK IN. I KNOW WE'VE HAD NUMEROUS CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THESE AREAS IN OUR OFFICE AND WE'D HAVE TO GO BACK IN AND REALLY LOOK AT THE, THE, UM, YOU KNOW, PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES FOR EACH, EACH COMMERCIAL PARCEL OR I THINK THAT EACH PARCEL THAT IS BEING USED COMMERCIAL, LET ME PHRASE IT THAT WAY. RIGHT. AND IT COULD BE GOOD TO UNDERSTAND MORE OF THIS BACKGROUND TOO. AND THIS COMES BACK, PLEASE. YEAH, IF OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MARS. I MEAN, I WOULD WOULD KIND OF QUESTION WHY WE WOULD DEFER IT INSTEAD OF DENY IT. LIKE IF, IF THEY'RE ALREADY ESSENTIALLY OPERATING THE BUSINESS AND, AND, AND WE KNOW THAT THAT'S VIOLATING DUE RESTRICTION, ANYTHING THEY SUBMIT TO IT HAS TO ADHERE TO RESIDENTIAL, BUT THEY'RE NOT USING IT AT THAT. I WOULD, I WOULD ARGUE THAT THEY'RE NOT OPERATING GOOD FAITH. SO PERSONALLY I'D BE INCLINED TO DENY VERSUS DEFER. ON THAT NOTE, IS THE DEVELOPER HERE OR IS THE APPLICANT HERE? IS THE APPLICANT HERE? MS. FLM, HAVE YOU SEEN THE APPLICANT? NO, AND IT, IT GOES BACK TO WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT ALL THIS YEAR, THE DEFERRALS WORK WHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WORKS WITH THE APPLICANT, BUT THE APPLICANT HAS TO SHOW UP WHEN THE APPLICANT DOESN'T MAKE ANY EFFORT TO COME TO OUR MEETINGS. WE'RE NOT INCLINED TO WANT TO GRANT THOSE DEFERRALS. AND SO I WILL MOVE TO DENY AND I WILL SECOND THAT. PERFECT. YES, I THINK SO. IS COUNCIL MEMBER THOMAS STILL HERE? I'M HERE. . I THOUGHT YOU HAD NOT GONE ANYWHERE. SO THE QUESTION IS MY CHURCH DANCE? YEAH. SO READY THOUGH? WELL, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T USUALLY LET PEOPLE DO THAT IN THE AUDIENCE, BUT WE'D LET YOU DO THAT. , THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, THE QUESTION IS, YOU HAD REQUESTED A DEFERRAL, SO IF COMMISSION REQUESTS DENIAL, I ME, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T REQUEST. I KNOW IT WAS ON THE AGENDA. IT WAS A RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. BUT I AM IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER. THAT'S WHAT WE WANTED TO HEAR. I'M IN SUPPORT. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, Y'ALL IN SUPPORT. SO, AND TO BE CLEAR, WE SUPPORT DEFERRALS WHEN IT'S IN THE BEST, WHEN THE PEOPLE WANNA WORK TOGETHER, BUT WHEN THE APPLICANT'S NOT HERE, THEY'RE NOT MAKING ANY EFFORT. RIGHT. OKAY. SO I HAVE A MOTION BY BALDWIN, A SECOND BY MAR TO DENY THE APPLICATION. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. IT'S DENIED. THIS IS TWO HAPPY ENDINGS. YES. SO NOW WE'RE GOING BACK TO 61. YES, COMMISSIONER. SORRY. I KNOW THAT THE ITEMS ENDED, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE ANYBODY IN PUBLIC WORKS OR THAT CAN TALK TO COMMUNITY ABOUT OTHER AVAILABLE OPTIONS THAT THEY COULD LOOK INTO TO ENFORCE MR. BROWN. SOME OF THIS, A RED TAG OR, YOU KNOW, BUT, UM, THAT [00:35:01] DOESN'T FALL WITH US, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE. YEAH, YOU HEARD THAT MR. BROWN? OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY, MOVING ON. GOING BACK TO ORDER, UH, ITEM 61 I, OKAY, ITEM 61 IS ESTATE AT HOMEWOOD LANE. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE CITY LIMIT WITH A METHOD DRIVE AND SOUTH OF FEET WHEEL ROAD. THE PURPOSE OF THE VLA IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY LOT. NO VARI ANSWERS ARE BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM. AND PER LEGAL REVIEW, THE PROPOSED V PLA WOULD NOT VIOLATE APPLICABLE RESTRICTION AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT AND STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT IN EVENT. SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLA SUBJECT TO THE CCPC 1 0 1 FORM. YEAH. CCPC ONE, ONE FORM CONDITION. AND, UH, MADAM CHAIR IS PLEASE TO THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 61 IS OPEN. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I'LL CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. MOTION GARZA. MOTION GARZA. SECOND JONES. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 62, WITHDRAWN. SORRY ABOUT THAT. 62 IS WITHDRAWN. 63. ITEM 63 IS FREE PARK. UH, MANOR. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON, CORPORATE LIMITS EAST ALONG DOVER STREET, WEST VENICE STATE 45. UM, LEGAL HAS REQUESTED THAT THIS ITEM BE DEFERRED. UM, FOR ADDITIONAL TIME FOR FURTHER REVIEW OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS DEFER THE PLAT FOR FURTHER DEED RESTRICTIONS. REVIEW. UM, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED. STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM. THE PLA HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM. AT THIS TIME, THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 63 IS OPEN. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO OKAY. HEARING NONE, I WILL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. STAFF. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. MOTION COLLE. SECOND. SECOND. VERA BLAND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 64. ITEM 64 IS GOUSS FOODS. THE SITE IS LOCATED, THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON, CORPORATE LIMITS SOUTH ALONG WEST ORUM DRIVE EAST OF BAT HURST DRIVE. THE REASON FOR REPLY IS TO CREATE ONE COMMERCIAL RESERVE. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO SEEKING A VARIANCE TO REPLY TWO LOTS FROM THE VE MANNER SUBDIVISION CREATED IN 1955 INTO A COMMERCIAL RESERVE. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST. THE TWO LOTS. UM, THIS, THIS, THIS MARRIAGE OF MANNER SUBDIVISION WAS CREATED, UM, WITH FACE OF THE PLAT RESTRICTIONS. AND SO THIS IS A VARIANCE FROM FACE OF A PLAT. RESTRICTIONS FROM FOUR TWO DASH 1 93. NEXT SLIDE. THE APPLICANT IS, UM, REQUESTING TO REPLANT THIS LOT INTO A WAREHOUSE IN ORDER TO, FOR, FOR HIS TO DO BAKERY, UM, TO DO BAKERY GOODS. WEST ORUM IS A MAJOR. THE F LM, UH, WEST ORM IS A MAJOR, THE FL AND THAT MOST OF THE PROPERTIES ALONG WEST ORUM IN THIS LOCATION IS FOR COMMERCIAL USE. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO, UM, GRANT THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT PER THE CBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR PLEASES COMMISSION. YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU MS. PFL. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 64. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I NEED A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. MOTION . MOTION GARZA. MOTION GARZA. SECOND. SECOND. VERA BLAND. ALL IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 66. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS KEN CALHOUN. ITEM 66 IS MILWAUKEE VILLAGE. THIS ITEM WAS DEFERRED LAST CYCLE TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT MORE TIME, UH, TO MEET THE [00:40:01] NOTICE REQUIREMENTS. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON CITY LIMITS, SOUTH ALONG MILWAUKEE STREET BETWEEN FULTON AND HELMER STREET. THE PURPOSE OF THE RELA IS GRADE TWO, SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM. AND REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY. STEPH HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY EVENTS WRITTEN COMMENTS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT DID NOT MEET THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS DURING THE DEFERRAL PERIOD. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE THE PLAT, UH, MADAM CHAIR. IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU, MR. CALHOUN. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 67 HAS CONTINUED. UH, I HAVE, LET'S SEE, I'M ON 66. SORRY. IT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE YOUR GLASSES ON. UM, I'LL CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 66 AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. MOTION JONES SECOND COVAR. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 67 IS UNIVERSITY OF ST. THOMAS STUDENT HOUSING AT BERNARD STREET. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON CITY LIMITS SOUTH ALONG BERNARD STREET, NORTH OF RICHMOND AVENUE. THE PURPOSE OF THE RE PLAT IS TO CREATE ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE. THERE ARE NO VARIANCE REQUESTS WITH THIS ITEM. AND REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THE PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY. STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY EVENTS WRITTEN COMMENTS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 67 IS OPEN. I DO HAVE THE APPLICANT SIGNED TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF THERE ARE ANY COMMISSIONERS OR ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. UM, I HAVE NO ONE ELSE SIGNED TO SPEAK. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION MOTION SECOND. CULVER . OKAY. MOTION, KALE. SECOND COVAR. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES I 68. ITEM 68 IS WOODLAND HEIGHTS. ITEM 68 IS WOODLAND HEIGHTS LIVING. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON, CORPORATE LIMITS AT THE SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF EUCLID AND WEST AND WATSON STREET. I'M SORRY. THE REASON WE APPLIED IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THERE ARE NO VARIANCE REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM. 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. STAFF HAS RECEIVED ADVANCED COMMENTS CONCERNING THIS PLAT CONCERNING, UH, REPLANTING, UM, ONE LOT. I MEAN, REPLANTING THE LOT, ONE LOT INTO TWO LOTS. UM, THIS IS PART OF THE WOODLANDS HEIGHTS, UM, HISTORIC, UM, HISTORIC DISTRICT. AND, UM, IT'S ALSO A PART OF A MINIMUM LOT SIZE AREA. UH, BUT THE, THE PLAT MEETS, UH, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE AREA, UM, SIZE FOR THE LOTS AS WELL AS IN THE WOODLANDS. FOR AS FAR AS THE WOODLANDS HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, OUR STAFF HAS, UM, PUT A NOTE ON THE CPC 1 0 1 THAT AT PERMITTING THEY WOULD HAVE TO MEET ALL OF THE REGULATIONS AS FAR AS, UM, THE COA. UM, THEREFORE, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLA FOR THE CBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 68 IS OPEN. I HAVE SEVERAL SPEAKERS. OUR FIRST ONE IS TIM MCCONN. GOOD AFTERNOON. UM, I, I DON'T USUALLY SPEND MY WEDDING ANNIVERSARY TALKING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT HERE WE ARE. UM, I AM A LAWYER, BUT I'M NOT A REAL ESTATE LAWYER, SO THIS IS A BIT UNUSUAL FOR ME. BUT WE, THIS MEANS A LOT TO MY FAMILY, MY NEIGHBORS AND ME. WE LIVE TWO HOUSES WEST OF, OF THIS LOT JUST ACROSS WATSON. UH, THERE'S A LOT I COULD TELL YOU ABOUT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT THAT THIS WOULD HAVE. THERE'S A LOT I COULD TELL YOU ABOUT THE DRAINAGE IMPACT THAT THIS WOULD HAVE, I THINK, UH, ON THE SURROUNDING AREA, INCLUDING MY PROPERTY, MY HOUSE, UH, AND MY CHILDREN. UH, I UNDERSTAND THAT'S PROBABLY NOT SUPER RELEVANT TO THIS COMMISSION, SO I DON'T WANNA WASTE YOUR TIME. WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS THAT IT IS VERY UNCLEAR FROM THE PLA THAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THE LIMITED INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE. UM, THAT THIS WE, IT'S UNCLEAR TO US AND FRANKLY KIND OF LOOKS TO US LIKE THIS WOULD VIOLATE THE DEED RESTRICTION. [00:45:01] UM, AND I WOULD POINT THE COMMISSION TO ARTICLE TWO, PARAGRAPH TWO OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR THIS AREA OF WOODLAND HEIGHTS. AND IF I CAN FIND THEM, AND I WILL READ IT TO YOU IN PARAGRAPH TWO, ABOUT A THIRD OF THE WAY DOWN, ALMOST HALFWAY DOWN, THE DEED RESTRICTION READS THAT NEW STRUCTURES, WHICH OF COURSE THESE WOULD BE, SHALL BE PLACED AT LEAST 10 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON ALL BORDERS OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH ABUT A PUBLIC STREET. UM, FROM THIS PLAT. AND FROM WHAT I KNOW ABOUT THAT PROPERTY, I DON'T SEE ANY WAY THAT THEY COULD FIT TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES ON THESE PROPERTIES AND COMPLY WITH THAT 10, 10 FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT. UH, I HAVEN'T GONE OUT AND MEASURED IT. THERE'S NO WAY I CAN, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE, UH, THESE WOULD BE. BUT AGAIN, BASED ON THE PLAT AND THE VERY LIMITED INFORMATION WE HAVE, WE THINK THAT THESE WOULD VIOLATE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS. AT THE VERY LEAST, I WOULD SUGGEST TO THE COMMISSION THAT FURTHER INVESTIGATION AND VETTING AND DISCUSSION WOULD NEED TO BE DONE BETWEEN THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE PLANNERS AND THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES. COMMISSIONER BALDMAN. MR. MCCONN, CAN YOU, UH, CAN, CAN YOU READ THAT SECTION ONE MORE TIME? ARE YOU SAYING THAT IT'S 10 FOOT SETBACK ON ALL FOUR SIDES? IS THAT YOUR INTERPRETATION OF HOW THAT NO, IT'S, UH, MR. BALD, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU. NO, GO AHEAD. UH, I, I BELIEVE WHAT IT SAYS IS THAT NEW, IT SAYS, NEW STRUCTURES SHALL BE PLACED AT LEAST 10 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON ALL BORDERS OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH ABUT A PUBLIC STREET. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S ON ALL FOUR SIDES, BUT CERTAINLY ON THE WATSON SIDE AND ON THE EUCLID SIDE. AND THESE ARE SHOWING A 15 FOOT SETBACK, ARE THEY NOT? SO IT WOULD MEET THAT CRITERIA. WELL, WE, I I WOULD SUGGEST THAT FURTHER INVESTIGATION NEEDS TO BE DONE BECAUSE WE DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANY WAY THAT THAT CAN HAPPEN GIVEN THE WAY THAT THESE, UH, THESE LOTS ARE SET OUT. UM, AND AGAIN, THERE, THERE WOULD BE INEVITABLE, UH, TRAFFIC PROBLEMS AND, AND IMPACT AS, AS, AS THIS GROUP KNOWS. I KNOW I'M OUT OF TIME, BUT YEAH, BUT JUST TO FINISH ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION, THIS, THIS AREA IS JUST NORTH OF WHERE ALL THE I 10 CONSTRUCTION IS GOING ON NOW. THIS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A FOUR-WAY STOP AT THIS INTERSECTION THAT IS ALREADY, UH, SUFFERING FROM HORRIBLE TRAFFIC WITH WHAT'S GOING ON WITH I 10. IT'S EVEN WORSE. UH, THE PEOPLE CONSTRUCTING THESE PROPERTIES WOULD INEVITABLY HAVE TO USE THAT PART OF WATSON AND IT WOULD CAUSE A TRAFFIC TIE OF, OF, UH, I, I WOULD SAY HORRIBLE PROPORTIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MARIAN MARIAN WRIGHT. HI. OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, THAT'S THE FUNNIEST STORY I'VE EVER HEARD. I LIVE ON BAILIN, WHICH IS JUST A COUPLE BLOCKS AWAY FROM THERE. THIS HORRIBLE TRAFFIC SITUATION IS CRAZY FOR THEM TO BUILD TWO HOUSES. SECONDLY, MR. BALDWIN JUST SPOKE TO MR. MCCONN RIGHT THERE AND SAID, THERE'S NO LEGAL REASON THAT THIS CAN'T HAPPEN. I DON'T WANT IT TO HAPPEN, BUT THERE'S NO REASON THAT IT CAN'T. MR. MCCONNELL THEN SAID, WELL, LET'S DO A DEFERRED SITUATION OR CAN WE DO DEFERRED SITUATION? HE SAID, WELL, POSSIBLY. OKAY. I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW, UM, ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE REALLY PUSHING FOR THIS, THAT LIVES ACTUALLY ON THE BLOCK. I REQUESTED THAT THEY GO AND SPEAK TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING THIS BECAUSE I DID. I PICKED UP THE PHONE AND CALLED THEM. THEY SPOKE WITH ME AND SHE SAID, GIRL, I HAVE A FULL-TIME JOB, KIDS LIFE, AND THE DEVELOPER WOULD LIKELY PAY ME MY HOURLY RATE. I'D BE HAPPY TO CONSULT WITH THEM, OTHERWISE I'LL SEE THEM IN PLANNING. OKAY. THAT'S THE TYPE OF PEOPLE WE'RE DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW WHO HAPPENS TO BE VERY GOOD FRIENDS. THEY'RE ALL ATTORNEYS TOGETHER. I THINK LIKE THE HUSBANDS MIGHT EVEN WORK THE SAME FIRM. OKAY. THEN WE HAVE, UM, IN THE PAST, AND IF YOU WANNA PUT THIS UP ON THE DOCUMENT, KIM, OR YOU CAN, IT WAS IN THE PAST WHEN THE SAME ATTORNEY WHO'S REALLY FIGHTING THIS THAT LIVES ON THE STREET, WAS PAID BY THE WILL HEIGHTS CIVICS ASSOCIATION TO SUE OR DEFEND ANOTHER NEIGHBOR IN ANOTHER PROPERTY PLOTTING ISSUE. THIS STUFF HAS TO STOP. YES. THEIR ATTORNEYS, WE GET IT. THEY'RE ATTORNEYS. THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND THEY CAN COME UP HERE AND SPEAK ALL OF THIS STUFF ABOUT NOT MEETING THIS, YOU KNOW, LEGAL REQUIREMENT THAT THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS. EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT THE LAND CAN BE RE PLOTTED AND THEY'RE TRYING TO PULL EVERYTHING OUT OF THEIR HEAD BECAUSE IT'S ON THEIR BLOCK AND THEY DON'T WANT IT TO HAPPEN. THIS HAS TO STOP. WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO GET BULLIED BY ATTORNEYS BECAUSE THEY'RE ATTORNEYS. THIS HAS TO STOP. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ADAM TURNER. [00:50:05] HI EVERYONE. UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE IN JUNIOR JOBS. I KNOW YOU HAVE TO MAKE SOME UNCOMFORTABLE DECISIONS. UH, I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY. I'M ACTUALLY PRETTY NERVOUS, UH, SPEAKING. DON'T BE NERVOUS. WE DON'T BITE. SIMPLE GEOLOGIST. UH, I AM A NEIGHBOR, HOWEVER, AND, UM, SO I I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE, THE REPL THAT'S BEING PROPOSED HERE. UM, I DON'T KNOW ALL THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, BUT I DO KNOW THAT WE LIVE IN THE HISTORICALLY PROTECTED AREA AND IT'S A VERY SENSITIVE AREA, RIGHT? WE'RE IN THIS LITTLE ISLAND OF HISTORICALLY PROTECTED HOMES, UM, THAT ARE GETTING JUST BUILT UP ALL AROUND US. AND THAT'S, THAT'S TOTALLY FINE, RIGHT? THOSE ARE NOT HISTORICALLY PROTECTED AREAS THAT THEY'RE BUILDING UP ALL AROUND US. UH, BUT IT SEEMS TO BE MAKING THE NEIGHBORHOOD SMALLER AND SMALLER ALL THE TIME. UM, SO WHEN I SAW THE SIGN GO UP FOR, FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS, UM, IT, IT OF COURSE MADE ME QUITE CONCERNED. 'CAUSE THIS IS A HISTORICALLY, UH, WELL, IT'S IN THE HISTORIC, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING LOT, UH, BUT STILL PART OF THAT, THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND PART OF THAT DEED RESTRICTION AND JUST REALLY, I, I DO NOT SEE, UM, HOW TWO HOMES CAN BE BUILT ON THERE AND BE, UH, CONSISTENT WITH THE, THE GUIDELINES THAT ARE GONNA BE REQUIRED. SO I REQUEST THAT THIS IS DENIED BASED OFF THE FACT THAT IT'S JUST WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR TWO HOMES BE BUILT THERE CONSISTENT WITH THE, THE HISTORIC, UM, PRESERVATION GUIDELINES. I ALSO HAVE A PETITION SIGNED BY MOST OF THE BLOCK, UM, STATING A SIMILAR THREAD. I DON'T KNOW IF I WANT TO PUT IT ON THE, I DON'T KNOW HOW THESE THINGS WORK. UH, IT'S HERE YOU, YOU CAN IT TO STAFF. THEY CAN. OKAY. YEAH. THEY'LL TAKE CARE OF IT. AWESOME. THANK YOU DOC DOCUMENT CAMERA. UM, SO, UH, IT'S ABOUT 20 ODD PEOPLE ON THERE THAT BASICALLY SAY THE SAME THING, THAT WE ARE JUST, UM, UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE IDEA OF, OF RE PLATING THIS AND, AND TRYING TO SEE HOW TWO HOMES COULD BE BUILT THERE. UM, AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH. REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND YOUR EFFORTS AND, UM, YEAH, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN, I THINK YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR SPEAKER, SIR. SPEAKER, YES, YES, ABSOLUTELY. SORRY. YOU KNOW, I'M YOUR NEIGHBOR. I'VE RESTORED A HOUSE OR TWO OVER THERE IN THAT HISTORIC DISTRICT. EXCELLENT. . UH, THIS BODY REALLY DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO DENY THIS. I MEAN, IT MEETS ALL OF OUR CRITERIA. YOU GUYS PROBABLY NEED TO WORK MOST AT THE HISTORIC COMMISSION FOR WHAT THEY REPLACED BACK THERE. THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT'S GONNA DETERMINE YOUR, YOUR BEEF IS, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE OF THE HOMES THAT ARE GOING BACK THERE. THAT IS A FUNCTION OF THE HISTORIC COMMISSION. YES SIR. WE ARE BOUND BY STATE LAW IF THEY MEET ALL THE CRITERIA OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND, AND WE POST THESE NOTICES TO SEE ARE THEY IN FACT VIOLATING SOME DEED RESTRICTION. THAT'S, THAT'S THE MAIN PURPOSE OF PUTTING UP THE SIGNS SO THAT YOU COULD BRING TO US SOMETHING THAT WE DIDN'T ALREADY KNOW. BUT IF THEY DO MEET THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, THEN WE'RE ALL, WE'RE BOUND BY LAW TO APPROVE THIS. THE, THE CONCERNS OF TRAFFIC AND DRAINAGE ARE ADDRESSED AT PERMITTING AND THROUGH PUBLIC WORKS AND YOU GUYS CAN CONTINUE TO MONITOR THAT, BUT THERE'S VERY LITTLE THIS BODY COULD DO TO STOP THIS PROCEDURE. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU KNEW. YES SIR. APPRECIATE THE ADVICE. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. AND MR. BROWN, ARE YOU STILL HERE? YES. MR. BROWN CAN SPEAK TO YOU OUT IN THE HALLWAY WHEN WE'RE DONE WITH THIS, UM, ITEM AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHERE IT GOES NEXT AND, YOU KNOW, GOES TO HISTORIC COMMISSION, BUT WHAT DOES POP PUBLIC WORKS LOOK FOR AND, AND ALL OF THAT SO HE CAN HELP YOU OUT. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE IT. YEAH. OKAY, OUR NEXT SPEAKER, SPEAKER, QUICK QUESTION. YES, I'M SORRY. THERE A MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD OR NO? SIX 5,000. 5,000, YEAH. OH, OKAY. YEAH, THEY MEET THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE. RIGHT. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY, MY NEXT SPEAKER IS ADRIAN RU RUTHIN. IF I MESS THAT UP, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CORRECT ME. NO, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. UM, I DUNNO IF YOU CAN PROJECT THIS. OH, NEVERMIND. UM, THANKS FOR HEARING ME AND I APPRECIATE YOU HEARING THIS CASE OR WHATEVER IT IS. I'M NOT A TECHNICAL PERSON RELATIVE TO THESE TYPES OF THINGS. I'M, UH, ADRIAN RUTHIN, MY HUSBAND LES AND I LIVE ON EUCLID. WE'RE A FEW HOUSES DOWN ON THAT SOUTH SIDE OF THE BLOCK OF EUCLID, UH, 7 0 8 EUCLID. WE'RE IN AN A, A DEFINITELY A WILSON PROPERTY. I HAVE DOCUMENTATION THAT SAYS OUR HOUSE WAS SOLD BY THE WILSON REALTY IN 19 EARLY 19 HUNDREDS. I THINK IT WAS 1909. THE HOUSES ARE BEAUTIFUL, EVERYTHING ELSE. WE'VE LIVED THERE FOR 40 YEARS ALMOST. UM, WE DID THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WERE PUT INTO PRESERVE THE HU HISTORIC HEIGHTS, THE, THE HISTORIC CORE OF THE WINLAND HEIGHTS. AND I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHEN THEY WERE PUT IN, BUT, UM, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE DEED RESTRICTION VIOLATIONS. THE, THE ISSUE IS THIS, THIS ONE ISSUE I KNOW RIGHT OFF IS THIS 15 FOOT OFFSET FROM THE, FROM EUCLID. UM, WE JUST WENT THROUGH A COA ON A HOUSE THAT'S BEING BUILT RIGHT NEXT TO US. THAT HOUSE HAD A CLOSER [00:55:02] OFFSET THAN THE 25 FEET THAT THE HOUSES ARE ON THAT SIDE OF THE BLOCK. THEY'RE SET BACK 25 FEET FROM EUCLID. AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT RESTRICTIONS DEFINE THE, THERE IS A DEFINITION IN THERE THAT ANYTHING THAT GOES IN THERE HAS TO HONOR THE SAME SETBACK THAT IS A PRE-EXISTENT ON THE BLOCK. AND THAT IS 25 FEET. THEY DETERMINED THEY AGREED WITH THE COA FOR THE OTHER HOUSE AND THEY REQUIRED THAT, OR IT WAS 26 FEET, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND SO THEY, THEY REQUIRED THAT THAT BUILDER MOVE HIS DESIGN BACK TO ACCOMMODATE THAT SITUATION. NOW THE OTHER THING IS THAT THE RESTRICTIONS SAY YOU CAN'T BUILD SOMETHING TALLER THAN TWO STORIES. NOW THIS PROPERTY, I DON'T LIKE MR. CON, I BELIEVE IT WAS, UH, SAID THE, THE, THAT THE HOUSES, WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE GONNA LOOK LIKE, BUT ALL I KNOW IS THIS IS A DOCUMENT THAT WAS A FLYER IN FRONT OF THE, IN THE BOX AND IT'S GO AHEAD AND WRAP UP, BUT I NEED YOU TO SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE. OKAY. SORRY. THAT'S OKAY. BUT ON, ON THAT IT SAYS 2 4100 SQUARE FOOT NEW CONSTRUCTION HOMES AND I CAN'T IMAGINE, AND ANOTHER REQUIREMENT IS THAT THE GARAGE HAS TO BE NOT ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE. SO THESE ARE DEED RESTRICTION REQUIREMENTS. SO, UM, AT 4,100 SQUARE FEET, I CAN'T IMAGINE A TWO STORY HOUSE FITTING ON THIS PIECE OF A LOT ACHIEVING 4,100 SQUARE SQUARE FEET. THEY'RE BASICALLY TOWNHOUSES. AND ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE ALSO DID THE RESTRICTIONS WAS NOT ONLY TO, UM, TO PRESERVE THE, THE PROPERTIES IN TERMS OF THE MEANING OF THE AREA, BUT WE, BUT WAS ALSO TO KIND OF KEEP FROM, UH, TOWNHOUSES GOING UP IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS. AND SO I THINK THERE'S GONNA BE SOME MAJOR ISSUES WITH THIS, UH, MEETING, MEETING DEED RESTRICTIONS AS THE OTHERS HAVE SAID. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE JUST TECHNICALLY FOLLOWING THE LETTER OF THE HOUSTON DEFINITION OF WHAT A AND WHAT AND WHAT CURRENT. YEAH, IT'S A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT LIGHT, BUT THAT WOULD BE A SINGLE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, AND, AND WELL THESE ARE SINGLE HOUSES TOO, BUT STILL BETWEEN THE GARAGE AND THE MULTI STORIES AND EVERYTHING, I THINK IT'S GONNA BE A PROBLEM. AND THE OFFSETS FROM THE FRONT, FROM NUCLEUS. RIGHT. SO YEAH, SO THIS BODY HERE, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS JUST THE ACTUAL PLAT. WE DON'T CONTROL WHAT'S, YOU KNOW, THE PRO WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, HOW MANY SQUARE FEET IT HAS. UM, BUT HEARING ALL THIS, WOULD IT BE, WELL, THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO TELL, TELL YOU. CAN YOU DEFER THE DECISION UNTIL THIS GOES THROUGH THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT? WELL, IT HAS TO BE APPROVED THROUGH THIS BODY TO GO TO THAT BODY. OKAY. ALRIGHT, WELL WE'LL JUST HAVE TO WORK ON THIS. SO THAT'S, COMMISSIONER BALDWIN IS RIGHT. THAT IS REALLY WHERE TO GO TO, RIGHT. HAVE THIS DISCUSSION. YEAH. ALL THOSE POINTS WOULD BE MADE AT HISTORIC AND THEY'RE NOT LIKELY TO GET THAT ATTACHED GARAGE APPROVED AT HISTORIC COMMISSION BECAUSE THAT'S NOT A HISTORIC LOCKER PROPERTY. BUT YOU, YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE GONNA BE AT HISTORIC COMMISSION, UH, AND THEY CAN'T VIOLATE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AT THE HISTORIC EITHER. THERE'D BE ANOTHER ROUND OF REVIEW OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS. SO IF THE GARAGES CAN'T BE ATTACHED, THAT WON'T PASS HISTORIC EITHER, JUST SO YOU'RE CLEAR. RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. RIGHT. BUT WE DO APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN AND SHARING YOUR COMMENTS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. THE LAST SPEAKER I HAVE SIGNED IS, DID I SKIP OVER SOMEBODY? OKAY. NICHOLAS WILLIAMS PRESENTATION VIEW, PLEASE. HI, I, UH, I LIVE NEXT DOOR TO THIS PROPERTY. UM, TO, TO ADD TO WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE, THE ROLE OF THE COMMISSION IS TO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE REPL IS A SEPARATE KIND OF, UH, ITEM FROM, FROM WHAT THE HISTORIC COMMISSION DOES. BUT I I I BELIEVE THAT BY APPROVING THIS REPL YOU ARE FORCING THE HISTORIC COMMISSION'S HANDS IN IN A WAY THAT THAT WOULDN'T OTHERWISE BE. YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT THAT WORKS. UM, I THINK PART OF, YOU KNOW, THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF, OF, OF THINGS THAT OTHERS HAVE BROUGHT UP HERE, INCLUDING A 25 FOOT SETBACK. UM, THERE'S BEEN AN APPLICATION BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ON, WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT HASN'T BEEN HEARD YET FOR THE TWO NEW PROPERTIES OR THE TWO NEW HOMES TO BE BUILT ON THE PRO FORMA REPL. UM, THESE ARE CLEARLY NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. IT DEMONSTRATES THAT THE, THE APPLICANT DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE GUIDE, WHAT THE GUIDELINES ARE. AND SO I BELIEVE THAT BY RE PLATTING THIS, UM, THE, THE APPLICATION OF THE REPL STATES THAT, UM, UH, THE REPL IS NOT AN EFFORT TO AVOID ANY TYPE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY. BY DOING THIS, I BELIEVE THAT THE OWNER WOULD BE AVOIDING WHAT IS A RESTRICTION ON THE PROPERTY TO MAINTAIN SIMILARITY WITH THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT, WHICH IS THE ENTIRE SOUTH SIDE OF THIS BLOCK. UM, THERE IS NOT A SPECIAL MINIMUM LOT SIZE, BUT IT COULD BE A SPECIAL MINIMUM LOT SIZE. IN HINDSIGHT, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORS ON THE SOUTH SIDE [01:00:01] OF SEVEN OF THE 700 BLOCK PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE GOT TOGETHER AND, AND DONE THAT. AND IF WITH, BASED ON THE MATH, I UNDERSTAND IT COULD HAVE BEEN, UH, NORTH OF 7,500 SQUARE FEET, ALL OF THE LOTS ON THIS SOUTH SIDE OF THE LOT OR SOUTH SIDE OF THE BLOCK ARE LARGE SINGLE HOMES WITH LARGE BACKYARDS. TO BREAK THAT UP AND INTRODUCE A LOT THAT FACES WATSON STREET IS COMPLETELY COUNTER TO THE HISTORIC CON CONTEXT OF THIS AREA. AND THEREFORE, I THINK MARKS A, YOU KNOW, DEPARTURE FROM THE, LIKE THESE RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE, THAT ARE IN PLACE TODAY. AND SO, UM, I THINK, I THINK IT'S JUST, UM, YEAH, NOT, NOT, UM, APPROPRIATE IN THAT REGARD. BUT I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S TIME. WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN. UM, SO ALL THIS IS, UM, I, AND I HATE TO REPEAT IT, I KNOW THAT YOU PROBABLY UNDERSTOOD, BUT IT HAS, THIS HAS TO COME HERE FIRST BEFORE IT GOES TO THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION. EVERYTHING THAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED IS WHAT THEY'LL BE LOOKING AT. YEAH. SO N NOTHING WE CAN DO HERE. THIS IS A SHALL APPROVE. UM, AND SO AS COMMISSIONER BALDWIN SPOKE SO CLEARLY ON, WE'RE, OUR HANDS ARE TIED ON IT, BUT ALL WE'RE APPROVING IS THE RELA THAT'S IT. IT DOES NOT GIVE THEM THE ABILITY TO DISREGARD, UH, GUIDELINES, HISTORICAL REQUIREMENTS, NONE OF THAT. I DO HAVE A QUESTION. YES. SO COMMISSIONER, ACTUALLY THIS IS FOR MS. MICKELSON. HI . SO WE'VE HEARD FROM A COUPLE PEOPLE ABOUT 25 FOOT SETBACK THAT I, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE, THEY'RE ADDRESSING SOME KIND OF RESTRICTION THAT IT HAS TO MEET WITH THE OTHERS ON THAT BLOCK. SAY, IF I UNDERSTOOD WHAT THE, THE POINT WAS, CAN YOU PLEASE WEIGH IN ON THAT? SO WHAT I'M LOOKING AT IN THE DEED RESTRICTION DOCUMENTS HERE IS AN ORIGINAL, UM, SETBACK WAS SET OUT IN THE OR VERY ORIGINAL DEEDS BACK, YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS PROPERTY, THESE PROPERTIES WERE ALL FIRST SOLD OFF, UM, FOR A 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK, NOT 25, THAT THERE WAS LATER IN, I'M LOOKING AT THIS NOW, DOCUMENT FILED, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, COMMITTEE TO REVISE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH SOMEWHAT EXPANDED 'EM. AND THE PORTION IN HERE ON PAGE THREE SAYS, ONE RESIDENT SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OR PERMITTED FOR EVERY 2,500 SQUARE FEET OF CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THESE RESTRICTIONS. ALL NEW RESTRICT ALL NEW STRUCTURES IN EXCESS OF ONE STORY SHALL BE BUILT AT A MINIMUM OF THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE SIDES AND BACK. AND NEW STRUCTURES SHALL BE BUILT, SHALL BE PLACED AT LEAST 10 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINES ON ALL BORDERS, WHICH ABUT A PUBLIC STREET OR 45 FEET FROM THE CENTER, WHICHEVER OF THE CENTER OF THE STREET, WHICHEVER IS GREATER, UH, SHALL CON UH, NO STRUCTURE SHALL CONTAIN MORE THAN THREE STORIES OR FLOOR LEVELS, NOR MORE THAN 40 FEET HIGH. NOW, WHAT I CAN'T TELL FROM THE DOCUMENTS IN FRONT OF ME IS IF THESE WERE FINALLY RATIFIED AND ADOPTED. SO THAT'S A QUESTION, BUT THE OPINION WE WE RECEIVED FROM NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES IS THAT, UM, THE, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL ONLY PERFORM, UH, PROVISION AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SETBACK. SO, SO ARE THESE CONFLICTING MM-HMM . AND IF THEY'RE NOT PARDON, BUT SO THEY'RE, THESE ARE NOT CONFLICTING FROM THE ORIGINAL? NO, SHE DID NOT BELIEVE THEY WERE CONFLICTING FROM THE ORIGINAL. OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. COMMISSIONER VICTOR AND THAT WAS, THAT WAS SIMILAR QUESTION MS. OLSON, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DID, OUR TEAM, YOUR TEAM REVIEWED THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND WE VERIFY THAT THEY DO NOT VIOLATE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS BECAUSE THIS BODY CANNOT DO ANYTHING. IF THERE ARE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE VIOLATED, WE CANNOT MOVE FORWARD WITH IT, SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. AND, AND THEN THESE WILL GO FORWARD WHEN APPLICATIONS COME FORWARD TO THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION. RIGHT, RIGHT. AND MAKE SURE, BECAUSE AGAIN, E EVEN IF A RELAID IS, IS APPROVED AND THERE'S SOME ERROR IN THAT APPROVAL, IT CAN'T MAKE A DEED RESTRICTION NULL AND VOID. AN APPLICANT MUST STILL MUST STILL MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS. THANK YOU. QUESTION? YES. COMMISSIONER GARZA, UM, THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY FOR YOU, BUT YOU BROUGHT UP A POINT, WHICH IS NONE OF THE HOUSES FACE WATSON STREET. CORRECT? CORRECT. THEY ALL FACE, THEY'RE ALL FACING EAST, WEST STREETS, EUCLID AND BAY AND SO ON, SO FORTH. SO YOU'RE MORE FAMILIAR COMMISSIONER THAN I AM WITH THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION. WOULD, AND AGAIN, I'M NOT GONNA HOLD YOU TO THIS 'CAUSE THAT'S NOT OUR JOB. THERE'S, THERE'S NOTHING THAT RESTRICTS 'EM FROM NOT FACING WATSON, FROM NOT FACING THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION. AND I'VE EITHER, WITH MATT HANSON, HE DID THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS. THEY WERE VERY THOROUGH. THEY'RE, THERE ARE MORE THAN ADEQUATE SIGNATURES. I I REVIEWED THEM MULTIPLE TIMES OR WHATEVER, AND LOOK, I, I DON'T LIKE THIS EITHER, BUT IT MEETS THE CRITERIA. THERE'S NOTHING THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN, CAN DO TO STOP IT. HISTORIC COMMISSION [01:05:01] USES THE GUIDELINES FOR THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND IF THOSE, YOU KNOW, IF THE NEW PROPOSALS ARE NOT IN KEEPING WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU'VE GOT A VERY GOOD CHANCE OF CONVINCING THAT COMMISSION THAT THEY SHOULDN'T DO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT IS YOUR FIGHTING CHANCE TO MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE. I PROMISE YOU. THE, THE, THE ISSUE IS THAT THE, WITH THE REPL, UM, YOU HAVE LOTS THAT, THAT ANY, ANY TYPE OF OF APPLICATION WITH THE HISTORIC COMMISSION WOULDN'T PASS SPOT FOR THE REPL. AND, AND YOU'D BE BY ACCEPTING THE REPL, YOU WOULD BE FORCING THE COMMISSION TO SAY EITHER YOU CAN'T BUILD A HOUSE HERE AT ALL. DIFFERENT ORDINANCE ALTOGETHER. CHAPTER 42, CHAPTER 26, THEY'RE, THEY'RE TOTALLY DIFFERENT ORDINANCES. IT'S NOT REFERENCING CHAPTER 26. IT'S REFERENCING THE RESTRICTIONS IN CHAPTER 42. UH, WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE. IT DOES NOT LIMIT THE HISTORIC COMMISSION IN ANY WAY. YOU CAN GO TO THE BUILDING ACROSS TVA OVER THERE AND GO AND LOOK AND SEE HOW THAT BUILDING'S SITTING THERE VACANT BECAUSE IT MEETS THE CRITERIA, BUT IT HAD TO PASS HISTORIC AT THE SAME TIME. THERE ARE MULTIPLE EXAMPLES THAT YOUR, YOUR BEST CHANCE OF MAKING YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE WITH THE HISTORIC COMMISSION AND THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO TO STOP IT. YEAH. JUST TO EMPHASIZE, HISTORIC COMMISSION IS VERY THOROUGH IN THEIR DELIBERATIONS. UH, THEY WILL TAKE THE TIME TO LOOK AT THIS CASE AND GIVE IT THE PROPER CONSIDERATION. UNFORTUNATELY, WE ARE LEGALLY BOUND TO ACT ON THIS ITEM. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. SO, YES. COMMISSIONER GARZA? YES. THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT HERE BY ANY CHANCE? I BELIEVE SO. COULD YOU COME FORWARD PLEASE, SIR? ONE IS I WANNA THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. OF COURSE. I APPRECIATE THESE TYPE OF THINGS. ABSOLUTELY. UM, SO YOU CAN SEE THAT, UM, I DON'T WANT TO USE THAT EXPRESSION, BUT I'M GONNA USE IT ANYWAY. THIS SEEMS LIKE A, A HOLD YOUR NOSE AND VOTE FOR IT. BUT AGAIN, I, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE HISTORIC COMMISSION TO MAKE SURE THAT, 'CAUSE YOU DON'T WANNA WASTE YOUR TIME AND YOUR MONEY, YOU WANNA SUBMIT THE APPROPRIATE THING AT THE APPROPRIATE PLACE, MEETING ALL THE RULES AND REGS SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK AND FORTH AND BACK AND FORTH. AND SO I WOULD SIMPLY ASK THAT YOU MEET WITH THEM, UH, HISTORICAL COMMISSION AND POSSIBLY THE NEIGHBORS, UM, TO FIGURE OUT THE FIRST TIME AROUND THAT YOU, YOU ARE MEETING ALL THE RULES AND REGS OF BOTH, NOT ONLY OUR GROUP, BUT THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION. YOU CAN SEE YOU'VE GOT A PASSIONATE NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU WANT TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR. I DO. I DO. AND, AND YOUR BUYERS WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS TOO. EXACTLY. AND I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND. I MET WITH THE HISTORIC DEPARTMENT ACTUALLY MULTIPLE TIMES. YES. GOOD. UM, EVERYTHING I DO, I DO A LOT OF DUE DILIGENCE. I'M BY THE BOOK. I FOLLOW LAWS, I FOLLOW FACTS. A LOT OF THINGS THAT WERE PRESENTED HERE WERE WE'RE OPINIONS, NOT FACTS. THAT'S COMPLETELY FAIR. SO A LOT OF THINGS THAT WERE SAID ARE NOT, I'M STICKING TO THE FACTS. SORRY TO INTERRUPT. COULD YOU SAY YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? OH, UH, YEAH, I GUESS THEY'RE GONNA, UH, ANTHONY MONACO, UM, THE DEVELOPER ON THE PROJECT. YES. UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT CONCERNS. I WISH I COULD JUST BUILD ONE HOUSE TOO, BUT YEAH. UNDERSTANDABLE. NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE CAN AFFORD $4 MILLION. YEAH. SO I, COMMISSIONER, THAT'S, THAT'S IT. THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I'M TRYING TO MAKE A, A NEIGHBORHOOD NICE. FOLLOW ALL THE RULES, WORK WITH THE HISTORIC DEPARTMENT. I'M ALSO OKAY. WORKING WITH NEIGHBORS. NO ONE'S APPROACHED ME AND WHEN I'VE TRIED TO TALK TO 'EM, NO ONE'S COMPLETELY FAIR ACCEPTED THAT SOMEONE MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT ATTACHED GARAGES OR YEAH, I DON'T, THEY HAVE TO BE SEPARATE. SO THAT'S, AGAIN, THAT'S ALSO AN OPINION. THERE'S, I'VE WORKED WITH THE HISTORIC DEPARTMENT. THERE ARE SOME THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED WITH THAT. OKAY. THE RULE IS IT HAS TO BE BEHIND, IT HAS BEHIND 50% OF THE PROPERTY. RIGHT. BUT THE DRAW HAS TO BE BACK. THOSE PICTURES THAT THEY SHOWED, THOSE WEREN'T REAL DRAWINGS. THAT WAS JUST LIKE, OKAY, MY AVERAGE TEAM THROWING OUT TIMES. SO WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE, YOU'VE MADE A COMMITMENT TO SPEAK OBVIOUSLY TO HISTORICAL COMMISSION. MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE COMPLETELY IN LINE WITH ALL OF THE RULES AND RES THAT WOULD APPLY HERE. YEAH. MET THEM THREE TIMES ALREADY WITH MARKET TECH THERE. THEY'RE WORKING THROUGH EVERYTHING TO TRY TO MAKE SOMETHING THAT WORKS FOR EVERYONE BY FOLLOWING ALL THE RULES AND MAKE THE NEIGHBORHOOD NICE. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. SO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF. EXCUSE ME, I GOTTA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I NEED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 68 AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. SECOND. MOTION BALDWIN SECOND GARZA. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES IN Q. MOVING ON TO D SUBDIVISION PLATS WITH VARIANCE REQUESTS. GOOD AFTERNOON, MA'AM. UH, EXCUSE ME, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JEFF BUTLER. UH, ITEM 69 IS ACE AND IVY RIVER OAKS. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT ALONG WEST ALABAMA, NORTH OF RICHMOND, WEST OF KIRBY. IN SOUTH OF WESTHEIMER, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A RESERVE FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR ZERO FOOT BUILDING LINES ALONG THREE PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY FRONTAGES INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 10 FEET. STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL TO ALLOW TIME TO SUBMIT [01:10:01] REVISED MATERIALS BY NOON. NEXT WEDNESDAY, STAFF HAS RECEIVED WRITTEN COMMENTS WITH RESIDENTS EXPRESSING CONCERN OVER TRAFFIC, DRAINAGE, AND NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. BUTLER. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO COMMISSIONERS? IF YOU HAVE NO QUESTIONS. MADAM CHAIR? YES. THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL. OH, OKAY. HE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. OKAY. COME FORWARD. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD FOR US. MY NAME IS LUIS ANA AND I AM THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT HERE. AND THIS IS MY FIRST TIME. THIS IS CRAZY EXCITING. I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT YOU GUYS DO THIS REGULARLY. THIS IS AMAZING. THIS IS AMAZING. WELL, WHAT I'LL SAY IS, UH, THE PROJECT BEFORE YOU, UH, AND THE EXHIBITS SHARED, ARE COMPLETELY IN THEIR INFANCY. BY ALL MEANS. THEY'RE A CONVERSATION AND INVITATION TO THAT. AND SO WHAT WE'D LIKE TO PROVIDE, LIKE MANY OF THE COMPETING PROJECTS IN THE RIVER OAKS, YOU KNOW, AND MY FIRM AT HOUSE IN ROBERTSON, OF COURSE YOU'LL SEE SOME OF OUR NAMES SPLATTERED ON SOME OF THESE UPCOMING DEVELOPMENTS. WE WANNA BE VERY SENSITIVE TO THAT. AND EVERY TIME WE HAVE BEEN, I THINK YOU'VE SEEN SOME OF THE DEVELOP, EVEN THE RIVER OAKS ITSELF. SOME OF THE MAIN PROJECTS SHOW THAT AND CREATE SOMETHING REALLY SPECIAL FOR THE CITY. SO THIS TIME TAKEN HERE, I'M MOSTLY HERE JUST TO SAY HOW WELCOMING WE WANT TO BE, HOW OPEN WE ARE TO TAKE THIS WEEK TO PROVIDE MORE EXHIBITS OR MORE INFORMATION THAT HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, MEET THE EXPECTATIONS IN, IN MANY WAYS, HOPEFULLY PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE EXCITEMENT TO THE CONCERNS THAT YOU ARE RECEIVING, PROBABLY VIA PHONE CALLS, COURIER PIGEON. I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WORKS, BUT I'M SURE THERE'S A VERY EXCITING WAY HOW THESE CONCERNS COME IN. LIKE THERE'S A FORM OF COMMUNICATION. YEAH. WHATEVER THAT IS. STAFF HAS IT. YES. ABSOLUTELY. WELL, IT'S ONLY THAT TO BE HERE IN GOOD FAITH TO ANSWER ANY INITIAL QUESTIONS AND OF COURSE. OH, CONTINUE. I DO TOO. YES. COMMISSIONER COLVARD. THANKS. SO I DID SEE THAT THERE WAS A PUBLIC COMMENT PROVIDED IN OUR PACKET, UM, ABOUT THE FACT THAT IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO LAMAR HIGH SCHOOL. MM-HMM . UM, AND I THINK THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED BOTH ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE HIGH SCHOOL, BUT ALSO FLOODING AND DRAINAGE, WHICH THAT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE, NOT OURS. BUT, UM, I DO. THIS IS, I MEAN, YOU'VE KIND OF SEEN NOW WHAT WE TRY TO ENCOURAGE, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPERS AND, AND YOU'RE THE ARCHITECT, BUT THE DEVELOPERS TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE MINIMIZING IMPACT THE NEIGHBORING, UM, COMMUNITY. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A POINT THAT, THAT WAS RAISED, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT HERE TODAY, WHOEVER IT IS, . YEAH. EVEN THOUGH THAT'S NOT IT. I THINK MAYBE THE CONCERN IS TO AN INCIDENT THAT HAS HAPPENED ON SITE, THAT'S WHAT I READ IN IT, THAT, UH, SOMEONE MIGHT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OR CLIPPED BY A CAR IN ITS EXISTING FORM. WE WILL TAKE THAT AND OBVIOUSLY LOOK AT THE EXISTING CURB CUTS AND SEE IF THERE'S A WAY TO SAY, WELL, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS AS IS, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WITH US. BUT OF COURSE, CURB CUTS AND AS YOU MENTIONED, DRAINAGE NOT PART OF THE REPL, BUT CAN PROVIDE A VERY SERIOUS ANSWER AS TO HOW THIS CAN BE PREVENTED. YEAH. YES. COMMISSIONER GARZA. UM, SO BAMAL LANE DOES NOT GO THROUGH TO WEST ALABAMA AT THIS POINT, DOES IT NOT? IT DOES. IT DOES GO THROUGH. MM-HMM . I TOTALLY WAS ON THE WRONG ROAD. MM-HMM . BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT BECAUSE BAMEL DEAD ENDED, UM, RIGHT BEHIND KIRBY HOUSE. NO, IT CONT IT DOES GO THROUGH THIS PORTION HERE. BOTH EAST SIDE AND BA WILL COME DOWN TO MEET WEST ALABAMA. I'M GONNA HAVE TO GO BACK HERE AND LOOK AT THAT AGAIN. AND A, A TASTE OF THIS, UH, AS PART OF THE EXHIBIT IS, UH, THE TRUE OWNER OF THE PROJECT WHO IS OUT AT THE MOMENT IS SURRENDERING, UH, A GOOD PORTION OF THE WEST ALABAMA FOR ITS EXPANSION AND SOME OF THE EXHIBITS. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE, WHILE IT'S IN ITS INFANCY, YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO EVEN PULL THE PROJECT BACK AND WELCOME SOME OF THAT EXPANSION INTO THE RETAIL END. OF COURSE SCALE. HOW MASSIVE IS THIS THING? IT'S RESPECTED TO TRY TO PROVIDE, AS YOU CAN SEE KIND OF HERE IN THE EXHIBIT, LOTS OF RETAIL, LOTS OF GRAIN, LOTS OF PASS SALE AND ACTIVITY. A PICKLEBALL COURT FOR ACTIVE USE. THIS IS NOT SUCCESSFUL IF THERE IS NOT PUBLIC USE TO IT. AND THE MORE SEALED PRIVATE, YOU KNOW, MULTIFAMILY USE REALLY SET BACK AS FAR AS POSSIBLE SO THAT IT, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S OVERBEARING. QUESTION COMMISSIONERS. OKAY. THANK YOU SO, SO MUCH FOR COMING IN. ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS? THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT, SO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION. I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ALREADY. YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE? I NEED A MOTION. MOTION. DEFER. DEFER. I'M SORRY. YEAH. MOTION. IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. HECK, I'M LOOKING AT THE WRONG THING. I SO IT IS A RECOMMENDATION TO DEFER. MOTION HINES. MOTION HINES. SECOND COLLEAGUE. ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. ITEM 70. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS DEVIN CRIDDLE. ITEM 70 IS BAUER HOCKLEY MASON TRACK GENERAL PLAN. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE ETJF HARRIS COUNTY, EAST [01:15:01] OF THE GRAND PARKWAY AND NORTH OF BAUER HOCKLEY ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING VARIANCE TO ALLOW REDUCED 1500 FOOT CENTER LINE RADIUS FOR A PROPOSED MAJOR FAIR FARE MASON ROAD INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 2000 FEET AND TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING BY NOT EXTENDING AUB STREET THROUGH THIS TRACT. MASON ROAD IS PROPOSED TO BISECT THIS GENERAL PLAN IN A SOUTHEASTERLY DIRECTION. THE APPLICANT ATTENDS TO REALIGN THE MAJOR FAIR FARE STARTING ALONG THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY AND HAS REQUESTED A DEFERRAL TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL TIME TO FINALIZE THIS PROPOSAL. STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRING THE PLAT PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. THANK YOU MR. CRIDDLE. I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAKER. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION IN FRONT OF YOU? I NEED A MOTION. MOTION JONES. SECOND. SECOND COURSE. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. ITEM 71. GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS TAMMY WILLIAMSON. ITEM 71 IS GENERATION PARK EAST GP. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN EASTERN HARRIS COUNTY, BOUNDED BY EAST SAM HOUSTON TOLLWAY, NORTH NORTH LAKE HOUSTON PARKWAY AND DEON PARKWAY. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 2000 ACRE GENERAL PLAN INTENDED FOR COMMERCIAL USES AND IS REQUESTING TWO SETS OF VARIANCES. ONE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING REQUIREMENTS ALONG A PORTION OF THE GP BOUNDARY AND SEVERAL RIGHTS OF WAY AND TWO TO HAVE A REVERSE CURVE CENTER LINE RADIUS OF 1500 FEET IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS IN LIEU OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED 2000 STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUESTS FOR THE FIRST TWO REQUESTS OF THE FIRST VARIANCE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG THE GPS SOUTHWESTERN PORTION BY NOT PROVIDING PUBLIC STREET CONNECTIVITY SOUTH AND WEST. A PORTION OF SHELDON RESERVOIR EXTENDS NORTH OF NORTHLAKE HOUSTON PARKWAY AND BORDERS. THE SUBJECT SITE SOUTHWESTERN BOUNDARY ADJACENT TO THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 160 ACRES OF WETLANDS OWNED BY THE TEXAS PARK AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT. THE NEED FOR PUBLIC THROUGH STREET CONNECTION IN THIS AREA IS MINIMAL, ESPECIALLY IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE INTERSECTION OF BELTWAY AND NORTH LAKE HOUSTON PARKWAY. THE REMAINING INTERSECTION SPACING VARIANCE REQUESTS ARE LOCATED AROUND TWO AREAS WITHIN THE GENERAL PLAN. THE FIRST AREA, WHICH IS FOR LARGE SINGLE USER INDUSTRIAL SPACE, IS LOCATED WITHIN MAJOR THOROUGHFARE'S, TIMBER FOREST DRIVE AND NORTH LAKE HOUSTON PARKWAY TO THE WEST AND SOUTH AND THE PROPOSED LOCAL STREET COMMON DOCK DRIVE AND A 375 FOOT WIDE HLMP TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR AND GAS PIPELINE. THE ORDINANCE DOES NOT REQUIRE THE CROSSING OF THE TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR. STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD REQUIRE AN EAST WEST STREET FROM TIMBER FOREST DRIVE TO COMMON DOCK DRIVE AND A NORTH SOUTH STREET FROM NORTH LAKE HOUSTON TO INTERSECT WITH THAT REQUIRED EAST WEST STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO PROVIDE NEITHER WITH THE INTENT AS A SINGLE USER FOR A LARGE INDUSTRIAL SITE. THE INTERSECTION SPACING REQUIREMENTS WILL ONLY SERVE TO PROVIDE INTERNAL CIRCULATION WITHIN THIS AREA, NOT REQUIRING EAST WEST STREET AND THE CORRESPONDING NORTH SOUTH STREET WOULD NOT GREATLY NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE REGIONAL CIRCULATION. THE FINAL INTERSECTION SPACING VARIANCE REQUEST IS NOT TO PROVIDE AN EAST WEST PUBLIC THROUGH STREET EAST FROM COMMON DOCK DRIVE. THE INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG COMMON DOCK DRIVE BETWEEN NORTH LAKE HOUSTON PARKWAY AND THE TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR IS ONLY APPROXIMATELY 1500 FEET EXCEEDING BY ONLY 100 FEET AND THE SITE IS INTENDED FOR A SINGLE COMMERCIAL USER. THE SECOND SET OF REQUESTED VARIANCES IS TO ALLOW A CENTER LINE RADIUS OF 1500 FEET AT REVERSE CURVES ALONG MAJOR THOROUGHFARES, TIMBER, FOREST DRIVE AND GENERATION PARKWAY. IN LIEU OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED 2000 FOOT RADIUS. THE TITER CURVE IS AN EFFORT TO CROSS BOTH THE PIPELINE AND THE TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR AT CLOSE TO A 90 DEGREE ANGLE. THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY BEGUN THE REVIEW PROCESS WITH HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING TO ENSURE SAFE MOBILITY AS THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE ROADWAY DESIGN WILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ASTROS STANDARDS BASED ON THE REDUCED RADIUS. HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTS, THEREFORE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCES AND APPROVE THE GENERAL PLAN SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON ITEM 71. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU HAVE NO QUESTIONS, I'LL SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. MOTION MANAK. MOTION MANKA SECOND MAREZ. ALL IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES ITEM 72. ITEM 72 IS NORTHWEST 99 BUSINESS PARK GP. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S EX TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN NORTHWEST [01:20:01] HARRIS COUNTY, SOUTHEAST OF THE GRAND PARKWAY. ALONG PROPOSED JERGEN ROAD AND WEST OF MU ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A GENERAL PLAN OF 236 ACRES FOR INDUSTRIAL USE AND IS REQUESTING TWO VARIANCES. ONE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG THE GRAND PARKWAY AND TWO TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG JERGEN ROAD. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF BOTH REQUESTS FOR THE FIRST REQUEST. THE GRAND PARKWAY AT THIS LOCATION DOES NOT HAVE A FEEDER ACCESS ROAD AND CROSS STREETS ARE LIMITED TO THOSE UNDERPASSES ALREADY PLANNED IN THIS CASE. JUST THE TWO MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. THIS SEGMENT IS NOT GRADE SEPARATED, THEREFORE AN EXEMPTION FROM THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS IS NOT BY RIGHT. HOWEVER, THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE IS STILL MAINTAINED. THE SECOND REQUEST IS TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG JERGEN ROAD BY NOT PROVIDING A SECOND NORTH SOUTH STREET TO CONNECT TO THE PROPOSED EAST WEST STREET. THE GENERAL PLAN PROPOSES ONE INTERNAL COLLECTOR STREET FROM FURTHER WEST ON JERGEN ROAD THAT EXTENDS NORTH AND THEN WEST TO CONNECT TO OLD MUY ROAD AT THE NORTHEASTERN END OF THE GP. THE INTENDED LARGE INDUSTRIAL SITES WILL BE SERVED BY THIS COLLECTOR STREET SYSTEM AND ADDITIONAL INTERNAL STREETS WOULD NOT GREATLY IMPROVE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION. LIKEWISE, SOUTH OF JERGEN IS HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROPERTY TO AID AND REGIONAL DRAINAGE SO NO STREETS WILL BE EXTENDED. SOUTH HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST. THEREFORE, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCES AND APPROVE THE GENERAL PLAN SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMPETE IN ADVANCE AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON ITEM 72. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? COMMISSIONERS YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION IN FRONT OF YOU TO HAVE A MOTION. MOTION. SECOND MAN. MOTION JONES SECOND MANCA. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 73 CHAIR I NEED TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM 73 AND 74. YES. AND STAFF WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ITEM 72, 73 AND 74 TOGETHER? YES PLEASE. ITEM 73 IS OAK HILL RESERVE GP AND ITEM 74 IS OAK HILL RESERVE SECTION THREE. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S ACTUARIAL EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN NORTHWEST HARRIS COUNTY EAST AND ALONG DECKER PRAIRIE, ROSEHILL ROAD AND NORTH OF FM 29 20. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A GENERAL PLAN OF APPROXIMATELY 100 ACRES AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG THE GPS EASTERN BOUNDARY BY NOT PROVIDING A SUB STREET. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST. THERE ARE NO EAST WEST THROUGH STREETS ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF DECKER PRAIRIE, ROSE HILL ROAD, SOUTH OF SPRING CREEK UNTIL FM 29 20. A DISTANCE OF MORE THAN 6,000 FEET. FURTHER EAST OF THE SUBJECT SITE IS A NETWORK OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED MINOR COLLECTORS DESIGNATED IN AN EFFORT TO RESOLVE THE LACK OF INTERSECTION CONNECTIVITY FOR THE AREA FROM THE NORTHERNMOST CORNER OF THE SITE TO FM 29 20 IS APPROXIMATELY 3,760 FEET. HOWEVER, REQUIRING AT EAST WEST STREET FROM THE SUBJECT SITE TO STUB INTO THE LARGE DEVELOPED ACREAGE TRACKS OF THE HOLLY CREEK UNRECORDED SUBDIVISION IS UNLIKELY TO BE EXTENDED NOR RESULTS IN A COMPLETED NETWORK. AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A FUTURE CONNECTION FROM HOLLY CREEK TO WESTWARD TO DECKER PRAIRIE ROSE ROAD COULD BE FROM THE HOOKED TERMINUS OF HOLLY CREEK TRAILS AT LIKEWISE VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES FROM HOLLY CREEK TRAIL EASTWARD TO COBBS ROAD. HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST. THEREFORE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE GENERAL PLAN. AND SECTION THREE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK FOR ITEM 73 OR 74. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR BOTH 73 AND 74 TO HAVE A MOTION. MOTION. MOTION. MAD PACA SECOND VICTOR. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 75. [d. Subdivision Plats with Variance Requests (Tammi Williamson, Geoff Butler, and Devin Crittle)] ITEM 75 IS ROD'S CAMPUS ON THE POND. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN NORTHERN HARRIS COUNTY SOUTH OF FM 29 20 AND WEST OF TC JESTER BOULEVARD. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TWO RESERVES RESTRICTED TO COMMERCIAL USE AND IS REQUESTING TWO VARIANCES. ONE FOR BOTH RESERVES NOT TO HAVE FRONTAGE ALONG A PUBLIC STREET, BUT INSTEAD TO TAKE ACCESS FROM AN EXISTING ROADWAY EASEMENT AND TWO, NOT TO EXTEND NOR TERMINATE IN A CUL-DE-SAC. BRADEN, BRADEN HALL LANE STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF BOTH REQUESTS. THE SITE IS CURRENTLY PARTIALLY UTILIZED FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES. THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE WAS PLATTED AS A COMMERCIAL RESERVE IN 2016 AND GRANTED THE SAME LACK OF FRONTAGE VARIANCE TO TAKE ACCESS VIA AN EXISTING ACCESS EASEMENT. THE SAME ACCESS EASEMENT WOULD PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE SUBJECT SITE'S PROPOSED RESERVES [01:25:01] AS IT HAS DONE FOR SEVERAL DECADES. FOR THE SECOND REQUEST, THE CURRENT INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG THE WESTERN BOUNDARY FROM FM 29 20 TO ALVIN A KLEIN DRIVE IS APPROXIMATELY 2,500 FEET. THE BRADEN HALL LANE SUB STREET IS ONLY 422 FEET FROM THE EAST WEST MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND REQUIRING EAST WEST CONNECTION AT THIS LOCATION WOULD NOT SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION AND WOULD ONLY USHER COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL AREA AS A CONDITION. WE'VE ALSO THAT BRADEN HALL LANE WILL BE GATED AND SO NO PUBLIC ACCESS WILL BE THROUGH THE STUB STREET FROM THE RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL. HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST. THEREFORE, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMON IN ADVANCE. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK FOR ITEM 75. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLA DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION. MOTION. OH, MOTION MANAK SECOND MARZ. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? WELL, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY I'M, I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THIS COMPANY AND, AND YEAH, THOSE ARE NOT THE TYPE OF TRUCKS THAT WE WOULD WANT GOING THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE. YEAH. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES NONE. YES. OKAY, LET ME SEE. I THINK WE DO, YES. OKAY. OKAY. THANKS COMMISSIONER BALDWIN. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. OKAY. UM, NOW WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM 76. ALRIGHT, ITEM 76 IS SAN JACINTO MEMORIAL SITE EXPANSION. UH, THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE ETJF HARRIS COUNTY WEST ALONG BELTWAY EIGHTH, JUST NORTH, JUST NORTH OF INTERSTATE 10 AND SOUTH OF WOOD FOREST BOULEVARD. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING VARIANCE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING BY NOT EXTENDING MULTIPLE STUB STREETS AND TO ALLOW ACCESS THROUGH A RECORDED ACCESS EASEMENT STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST. THE SITE IS A VACANT 17 ACRE TRACK INTENDED FOR A CEMETERY AND RELATED USES. THE SITE IS BOUNDED BOUNDED BY BELTWAY EIGHT TO THE EAST GALENA PARK ELEMENTARY TO THE NORTH AND THE HOUSTON MANOR SUBDIVISION TO THE WEST. THERE ARE NUMEROUS SUB STREETS FROM THE SUBDIVISION THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE EXTENDED TO ADDRESS INTERSECTION SPACING. JUSTIFICATION FOR NOT REQUIRING THE STREET TO BE EXTENDED IS BASED ON THE USE OF THE PROPERTY. THIS DEVELOPMENT IS A, IS AN EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING SAN JACINTO MEMORIAL PARK. THIS SITE DOES HAVE SUFFICIENT FRONTAGE ALONG THE BELTWAY. HOWEVER, THIS SITE WILL GET VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS THROUGH A RECORDED ACCESS EASEMENT CONNECTING TO THE EXISTING MEMORIAL SITE. GRANTED THIS VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE CEMETERY SITE TO BE EXTENDED WITHOUT INTRODUCING PUBLIC TRAFFIC THROUGH THE SITE. STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST AND RECOMMENDS GRANTED THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IN APPROVING THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON ITEM 76. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE. UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION COLLEAGUE? SECOND. SECOND HINES . ALL IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 77. UH, ITEM 77 IS SMC GROUP. UH, THIS ITEM HAS BEEN DEFERRED TWICE. UM, EXCUSE ME. THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN DEFERRED ONE TIME. SORRY. UH, THE SITE IS LOCATED IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY NORTH OF MAJOR AIRFARE 1314 AND EAST OF VALLEY RANCH PARKWAY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING VARIANCE TO NOT DEDICATE 15 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY ALONG MAY ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A MULTIFAMILY SITE WITH 25 UNITS ALONG A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH IS 30 FEET WIDE. THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN MADE AWARE THAT MONTGOMERY COUNTY IS NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE TO NOT DEDICATE THE REQUIRED RIGHT OF WAY. THE DEAD END PORTION OF MAY ROAD IS NOT IMPROVED AND THE APPLICANT IS CONSIDERING ACQUIRE HAS, EXCUSE ME, THE APPLICANT HAS CONSIDERED ACQUIRING A PORTION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY FROM MONTGOMERY COUNTY AND HAS REQUESTED A SECOND DEFERRAL TO, TO PRESENT THIS UH, PROPOSAL TO UH, MONTGOMERY COUNTY. MADAM CHAIR, THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK FOR ITEM 77. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY. COMMISSIONERS YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO DEFER PER APPLICANT REQUEST TO HAVE A MOTION. MOTION. MOTION TO YOUR PLAN. SECOND. OKAY. SECOND ROSENBERG. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 78. ITEM 78 IS TOLU. THE SITE WAS DE OR EXCUSE ME, THIS ITEM WAS DEFERRED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING. [01:30:01] THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE ETJ WITHIN HARRIS COUNTY WEST OF PITTS, NORTH OF FM 5 29 AND EAST OF THE WALLER HARRIS COUNTY LINE. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A RESERVE FOR A COMMUNITY AND RECREATION CENTER. THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING VARIANCES TO ALLOW FOR A 50 FOOT WHITE RIGHT OF WAY FRONTAGE INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 60 FEET AND TO ALLOW FOR EXCESSIVE INTERSECTION SPACING BY NOT REQUIRING IT NORTH, SOUTH AND TWO EAST WEST STREETS FOR THE SITE. STAFF RECOMMENDS A SECOND DEFERRAL FOR FURTHER STUDYING AND REVIEW. ACCORDING TO HCA, THE PLAT WOULD SEPARATE AN UH, AND A BUDDING ACREAGE TRACTED FROM ACCESS. WE HAVE DISCUSSED POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS WITH THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE AND EXPECT TO HAVE AN ADJUSTED PLAT BY NEXT MEETING. AND WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT IN THIS ITEM. THANK YOU MR. BUTLER. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED A SPEAK ON ITEM 78. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO OKAY. COMMISSIONERS YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO DEFER. DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION S MOTION SIGLER SECOND OCK. SECOND AKAKA. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 79. ITEM 79 IS THE TEXAS PETROLEUM GROUP GREENS ROAD. THE SITE WAS DEFERRED. THIS APPLICATION WAS ALSO DEFERRED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT NORTH OF BELTWAY EIGHT AND SOUTH OF THE GEORGE BUSH INTERCONTINENTAL AIRPORT. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A RESERVE FOR A NEW GAS STATION. THE APPLICANT INITIALLY REQUESTED A VARIANCE FOR A FIVE FOOT REDUCED BUILDING LINE ALONG GREENS. THEY HAVE SINCE WITHDRAWN THE VARIANCE AND HAVE REMOVED THE FIVE FOOT BUILDING LINE FROM THE PLAT. THE APPLICATION BEFORE YOU HAS BEEN FOUND TO MEET CHAPTER 42 PER THE CC ONE ONE FORM CONDITIONS AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON ITEM 79. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO OKAY. COMMISSIONERS YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL? DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION COLLE. SECOND. SECOND. HI. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. MADAM CHAIR, I'M GONNA RECUSE MYSELF FROM THE NEXT TWO ITEMS. 80 AND 81. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON TO EAST [e. Subdivision Plats with Special Exception Requests (Tammi Williamson)] SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS. STAFF WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ITEMS 80 81 TOGETHER. YES PLEASE. ITEMS 80 AND 81 ARE BLUE CREEK TRAILS, PEAK ROAD STREET, DEDICATION AND RESERVES AND BLUE CREEK TRAIL SECTION ONE. THE UH, SUBJECT SIDE IS AN OVER ITS 5 25 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE FOR BEND COUNTY EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION NORTH ALONG GRAND PARKWAY, 99. AT THE INTERSECTION OF PEAK ROAD THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TWO DETENTION RESERVES AND A DAY DEDICATION OF PORTIONS OF A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE OF PEAK ROAD AND THE MAJOR COLLECTOR OF MEADOW RANCH PARKWAY. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION BEING REQUESTED IS TO EXCEED THE MINIMUM INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE TO ALLOW MEADOW RANCH TO BE LESS THAN 600 FEET FROM LAVENDER PINES. STATUS IS SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST. THE PROPOSED OFFSET IS 512 FEET, WHICH IS ONLY A 15% DEVIATION FROM THE STANDARD AND INTENT WITHIN THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE. THE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAYS ARE A MAJORITY OF THE MTFP RIGHT OF WAY ALIGNMENTS IN THE OVERALL GENERAL PLAN. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING CHANGES TO THE APPROVED GENERAL PLAN RIGHT OF WAY NETWORK THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY GRANTED. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS THE CURRENT PROPOSAL WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL VARIANCES OR AMENDMENTS TO THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT TO COMPLY WITH CHAPTER 42. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DEFER IS TO DEFER THE PLAT FOR TWO WEEKS TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO COORDINATE WITH STAFF IN FORT BEND COUNTY ENGINEERING REGARDING THE PROPOSED MAJOR THOROUGH FAIR ALIGNMENT. MADAM CHAIR, THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON ITEM 80 OR 81. UM, UH, YOU HAVE A MOTION TO DEFER IN FRONT OF YOU. I MEAN, EXCUSE ME. A RECOMMENDATION. TRYING TO JUMP AHEAD HERE. . UH, MOTION GARZA. SECOND JONES. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO F RECONSIDERATION [f. Reconsiderations of Requirement (John Cedillo, Geoff Butler)] OF REQUIREMENT. ITEM 82 IS MH H STORAGE. THE SUBJECT SIDE IS A NEARLY 10 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HARRIS COUNTY. EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION NORTH ALONG MH H ROAD BETWEEN THE MAJOR THOROUGH AFFAIRS OF ER ROAD AND HAGAR ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ONE LARGE COMMERCIAL RESERVE AND ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING BY NOW PROVIDING A NORTH, SOUTH, OR EAST WEST STREET THROUGH THE PROPERTY. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST. THE SITE IS PROPOSED TO HAVE A STORAGE FACILITY WITH DETENTION IN THE SOUTHERN PORTION AND A TWO ACRE LOT ALONG THE LOCAL ROAD M HOF STREET. THE APPLICATION WAS DEFERRED LAST CYCLE AS THERE WAS AN INITIAL INTENT TO LEAVE THE NORTHERN TWO ACRES OF THE PROPERTY UNDEVELOPED, WHICH CREATED A CONCERN FOR FUTURE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE DEFERRAL PERIOD. THE APPLICANT HAS ALTERED THE LAYOUT TO REMOVE THOSE CONCERNS WITH THE PROPOSAL OF THE LOT. THE SUBJECT SIDE IS WITHIN A STRONG RIGHT OF WAY GRID AS KER FUTURE PREMIER ROAD WALL. SPRING CREEK ROAD AND HIGG ROAD ARE ALL MAJOR THOROUGHFARES. THE PALMAS PARK, THOMAS PARK SUBDIVISION TO THE WEST WAS GRANTED A VARIANCE TO NOT PROVIDE ANY NORTHWEST OR EAST, UH, NORTH, SOUTH OR EAST WEST STREETS. AS SUCH WOULD HINDER ANY EAST WEST STREETS GOING THROUGH THE SUBJECT SITE. THE LARGE SURROUNDING TRACKS DO NOT, NOT INCUR HEAVY TRAFFIC AND HAVE A SUFFICIENT FRONTAGE AND CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY. [01:35:01] NETWORK AT THIS TIME. RIGHT OF WAY IS DEDICATED WITHIN THE PLAT ARE NOT NEEDED AND SHOULD BE AND SHOULD FORWARD DEVELOPMENT TRIGGER REQUIREMENTS FOR NORTH SOUTH STREET. THERE ARE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES BETWEEN THE SUBJECT SITE AND THOMAS PARK. HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE VARIANCE. STAFF. RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION, UH, TO GRANT THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE TO HAVE A MOTION. MOTION MANCO SECOND MAD. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIRMAN RECUSE FROM ITEM 83. OKAY. PLEASE NOTE YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. ITEM 83 IS KIRKENDAL VILLAGE, SECTION ONE. UH, THIS ITEM WAS DEFERRED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE ETJ WITHIN HARRIS COUNTY ALONG KIRKENDAL ROAD BETWEEN HUFF SMITH KIRKENDAL AND THE GRAND PARKWAY. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A SUBDIVISION OF SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ALONG PUBLIC AND PRIVATE STREETS. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW LESS THAN 600 FEET OF INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE WHILE REMOVING A CONDITION TO RESTRICT THE INTERSECTION OF DOWDE ARBOR TO RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST. THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG KIRKENDAL BETWEEN TWO PROPOSED COLLECTOR STREETS, LINDSEY ROAD TO THE NORTH AND AVALON LAKE CREST TO THE SOUTH. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A LOCAL STREET THAT IS THE GREATEST DISTANCE BETWEEN THESE TWO INTERSECTIONS. THE APPLICANT HAS WAS RECENTLY GRANTED A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO DO THIS WITH A CONDITION THAT DOWDELL ARB BURPEE RESTRICTED TO RIGHT TURNS IN AND OUT. THE APPLICANT IS NOW REQUESTING TO REMOVE THIS CONDITION. THE CONDITION WAS INTENDED TO COORDINATE WITH A FUTURE TRAFFIC SIGNAL LOCATED AT A PLANNED INTERSECTION OF LAND ZERO ROAD. HOWEVER, CONSTRUCTING THE STREET WILL INVOLVE COORDINATION WITH OTHER AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS LEAVING ITS TIMETABLE UNCERTAIN GRIND. THE REQUEST WOULD ALLOW FOR THE APPLICANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH DOW DALE ARBOR AS A SIGNALED ENTRANCE TO THE DEVELOPMENT WHILE ALLOWING FOR CONSTRUCTION OF LINDSEY ROAD. IN THE FUTURE. STAFF FINDS A REQUEST TO BE A PRACTICAL ALTERNATIVE TO STRICT INTERPRETATION OF CHAPTER 42 AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. UH, HARRIS COUNTY HAS EXPRESSED NO OBJECTION AND WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON ITEM 83. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT THEIR REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO HAVE A MOTION. MOTION. MOTION AKAKA SECOND VICTOR. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. MOVING ON TO EXTENSIONS [g. Extensions of Approval (Adesoji Adeseyoju)] OF APPROVAL. G CHAIR, JUST A REMINDER, I NEED TO RECRUIT FROM 84 AND 90. YES. OKAY. AND I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER HEIS, YOU'VE GOT A COUPLE, COUPLE IN HERE TOO. YES. MADAM CHAIR ABSTAIN FROM ITEMS 86 AND 87. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM [Platting Activities g - j] CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS AJU. IF IT PLEASE THE COMMISSION STAFF WOULD LIKE TO TAKE GHI AND J AS ONE GROUP. IT DOES PLEASE THE COMMISSION. OKAY. UH, SECTIONS G EXTENSIONS OF APPROVAL CONSISTS OF ITEMS 84 TO 94 SECTION H NAME CHANGES CONSISTS OF NO ITEMS. SECTION I CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE CONSISTS OF ITEM 95. SECTION J. ADMINISTRATIVE CONSISTS OF NO ITEMS. THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SECTIONS GHI AND J. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION MOTION PO. SECOND GARZA. SECOND GARZA. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MOVING ON [k. Development Plats with Variance Requests (Geoff Butler)] TO K DEVELOPMENT PLA VARIANCE REQUESTS. ITEM 96 IS, UH, 1702 HARDY STREET. THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG HARDY AT HARRINGTON STREETS WEST OF ELIJAH WITHIN THE NEAR NORTH SIDE COMPLETE COMMUNITY. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON AN EXISTING LOT. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A FIVE FOOT SIDE BUILDING LINE ALONG HARDY INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 20 FEET. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST INTERSECTION OF HARDY AND HARRINGTON STREETS. THE SITE IS PART OF THE CASCARA SUBDIVISION, WHICH WAS RECORDED IN 1891. A HOME WAS CONSTRUCTED IN THE NORTHERN 42 FEET OF THE ORIGINAL LOT, LEAVING THE SITE MEASURING 24 FEET WIDE BY 68 FEET DEEP. WHEN FACTORING IN BOTH THE SOUTHERN AND WESTERN SETBACKS AND VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, THE SITE OFFERS FEW OPTIONS TO DEVELOP USING STRICT INTERPRETATION OF CHAPTER 42. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A REAR FACING GARAGE AND PARKING PAD ACCESSIBLE FROM HARDY. [01:40:01] THE PERPENDICULAR GARAGE AND ONSITE PARKING WILL DISCOURAGE PARKED CARS FROM OBSTRUCTING THE RIGHT OF WAY. STAFF FINDS THIS TO BE A PRACTICAL SOLUTION CONSIDERING THE SITE SIZE AND SIZE AND CORNER LOCATION. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON. YES, I DO. I'M SORRY. I DO HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. SO NOW YOU HAVE THE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF. DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION. MOTION SIGLER. SECOND. SECOND GARZA. ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 97. ITEM 97 IS 1817 SHARP PLACE. THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG SOUTH SHEPHERD, WEST OF SHARP PLACE AND SOUTH OF WEST GRAY STREET. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A SMALL ADDITION TO AN EXISTING HOME WITH AN EXISTING REAR FACING GARAGE. THE A THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THIS ADDITION TO BE SITUATED 10 FEET FROM SHEPHERD RATHER THAN THE REQUIRED 25 FEET FOR MAJOR THOROUGHFARES STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST. THE SITE CONSISTS OF A HOME FRONTING SHARP PLACE WITHIN THE RIVER OAKS COMMUNITY. THIS STREET CONSISTS OF LOTS FRONTING A LANDSCAPE COURTYARD WITH GARAGE ACCESS TO THE REAR. THE SUBJECT SITE IS ONE OF MULTIPLE HOMES WITH REAR ACCESS ALONG SHEPHERD A CONDITION. PREDATING CHAPTER 42 AND THE 25 FOOT BUILDING LINE REQUIREMENT. IT'S SOMETHING ELSE. NOT KEEP GOING. THANK YOU. THE EXISTING HOME HAS LONG ENCROACHED OVER THE BUILDING LINE AND THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO ADD A 360 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO IT. THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY ALONG SHEPHERD FEATURES A TURNAROUND, REDUCING INSTANCES OF CARS BACKING INTO THE THOROUGHFARE. IN ADDITION, SHEPHERD IS A 70 FOOT THOROUGHFARE WITH NUMEROUS INTERSECTION SPACE, INTERSECTION SPACE LESS THAN 600 FEET APART, RESULTING IN SLOWER SPEEDS THAN A TYPICAL MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. FURTHERMORE, THE REQUEST IS COMPATIBLE WITH A SIMILAR VARIANCE GRANTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON A PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH. STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANT, THEY REQUESTED VARIANCE AND WE RECEIVE WRITTEN SUPPORT FROM THE RIVER OAKS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. BUTLER. SORRY ABOUT THAT. THAT'S OKAY. WE ARE ON ITEM 97. UM, I DO HAVE A SPEAKER. MS. JENNIFER POOLE, THE APPLICANT. OKAY. DO YOU, JUST FOR QUESTIONS. OKAY. SO COMMISSIONERS, UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. SO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION HINES. MOTION JONES. SECOND HINES. ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO ROMAN NUMERAL TWO. [II. Establish a public hearing date of October 16, 2025] ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF OCTOBER 16TH, 2025 FOR THE FOLLOWING. BRADFORD VILLAGE, ENJOY PROPERTIES, ESTATES AT LAURA COPE ROAD. FAIRVIEW PATIO HOMES, HAZARD STREET, VISTA, NANTUCKET VILLAS, NEWPORT, GREENS ACRES, GREEN ACRES, SPRING S STUEBNER COMMERCE CENTER, SPRINGDALE ESTATES, SPRINGDALE HILL, SPRINGDALE PLACE, YMA CU ESTATES AND VAUGHN STREET PROJECT. DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION? HE SECOND. MAREZ. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR. YES. WE MAY HAVE TO DO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AGAIN. THE DATE IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE OCTOBER 2ND. IT HAS TO BE OCTOBER 16TH. I SAID 16TH. OKAY. YES. THANK YOU. BUT THANK YOU. BUT I DID SAY 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT IS ON MY AGENDA. YEAH. OKAY, GREAT. THANKS. OKAY, SO WE NEED TO GO BACK AND RECONSIDER ITEM 94. SO I, I DON'T KNOW WHO MADE THE MOTION IN THE SECOND. OH, I HAVEN'T. OKAY. NO, I DON'T. OKAY. THAT WAS THE MD ANDERSON MM-HMM . CANCER CENTER EAST WHO MADE THE MOTION S THE WHOLE THING. THAT'S WHY. OKAY. THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT WRITTEN THERE. THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. WE RE WE NEED TO RECONSIDER ITEM 94. DO YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO RECONSIDER PER SE. I JUST ASK THAT YOU HAVE ANOTHER VOTE WITH THE COMMISSIONER RECUSING HERSELF. OKAY. TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. SO I WANNA VOTE JUST ON THIS ITEM. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO I NEED, OKAY, SO I HAVE A MOTION BY K. WE JUST CLEAN UP THE RECORD. I'M SORRY. WE JUST WANT TO CLEAN UP THE RECORD THAT MAKES SURE. SO I HAVE A MOTION. MY COMMISSIONER KLEEK, SECOND BY GARZA. SECOND BY GARZA RE KEEL FROM COMMISSIONER KOVAR. ALL IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. MOVING ALONG NOW. THANK YOU TO ROMAN NUMERAL THREE [III. Consideration of a Blue Star Inn Hotel/Motel located at 8401 South Sam Houston East Parkway (Devin Crittle)] CONSIDERATION OF A BLUE STAR INN SLASH HOTEL MOTEL. LOCATED ON SOUTH SAM HOUSTON EAST PARKWAY. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. UH, ROMAN NUMERAL THREE BLUE [01:45:01] STAR INN IS SUITES LOCATED AT 84 0 1 SOUTH SAM HOUSTON EAST PARKWAY. UH, THIS SITE IS LOCATED ALONG THE SOUTH BELTWAY EIGHT. BETWEEN TELEPHONE ROAD AND BLACK HAWK BOULEVARD, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A HOTEL TO TAKE ACCESS THROUGH A RECORDED A ACCESS EASEMENT INSTEAD OF HAVING DIRECT ACCESS TO THE SERVICE ROAD. MAJOR FAIR FARE OR FOUR LANE PUBLIC STREET STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST. THE SITE IS A VACANT 37,000 SQUARE FOOT TRACK INTENDED TO HOUSE A 40 ROOM BLUE STAR END HOTEL STREET. APPLICATION OF THE RULES REQUIRES THE HOTEL TO HAVE FRONTAGE AND TAKE DIRECT ACCESS FROM THE SERVICE ROAD. MADE IT AIRFARE OR FOUR LANE LOCAL STREET. IN THIS SCENARIO, THE SITE DOES HAVE SUFFICIENT FRONTAGE ALONG THE SERVICE ROAD, BUT THERE IS NO CURB CUT FOR DIRECT ACCESS TO THE TRAVEL LANES OF THE SERVICE ROAD. THE HOTEL IS PROPOSED TO TAKE ACCESS FROM AN EXISTING ACCESS EASEMENT THAT HAS DIRECT ACCESS TO THE SERVICE ROAD. THE ACCESS EASEMENT IS 25 FEET IN WIDTH AND IS SHARED AMONGST MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL SITES. THIS IS A COMMON PRACTICE FOR DEVELOPMENT ALONG SERVICE ROADS AND FEEDER ROADS. JUSTIFICATION FOR SUPPORTING THE REQUEST IS THAT TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LIMITS THE NUMBER OF DRIVEWAYS WITHIN CLOAKS PROXIMITY OF EXISTING CURB CUTS. STAFF HAS NOTIFIED THE COUNCIL OFFICE OF THIS REQUEST AND HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY OBJECTION AND STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANTED THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE. AND THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON ROMAN NUMERAL THREE. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A MOTION, A, UH, RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL? DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION GARZA. MOTION GARZA. SECOND TO HEAR. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. SO I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THERE NEW? ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, WE WILL ADJOURN THIS MEETING AT 4:20 PM THANK YOU. . * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.