[00:00:05]
PLANNING COMMISSION[CALL TO ORDER]
AND I'M CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER AT 2:31 PM ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 19TH, 2026.THIS IS AN IN-PERSON MEETING TAKING PLACE IN THE CITY HALL ANNEX AT 900 BAGBY.
YOU MAY ALSO MONITOR THE MEETING VIA, UH, VIEWING VIA HTV 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 THE STAFF NEAR THE FRONT DOOR.
CONSENT AND REPEAT SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED FOR ONE MINUTE.
NEW SPEAKERS ARE TIME FOR TWO 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 AS WELL AS TIME TO REBUT, UH, FOR REBUTTALS.
NON APPLICANTS AND GENERAL SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED TWO MINUTES TIME AND THERE'S NOT AN OPTION FOR REBUTTAL.
EVEN IF YOU DID NOT USE YOUR FULL TWO MINUTES, YOU WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK AGAIN AND TIME CANNOT BE ALLOTTED TO ANOTHER SPEAKER.
TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM OF 11 MEMBERS, I'LL CALL THE ROLE CHAIR CLARK IS PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER NARANJO IS NOT HERE, IS THAT CORRECT? NO.
COMMISSIONER POS PERLE PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER SHEPHERD IS NOT HERE.
COMMISSIONER SYKES PRESENT AND COMMISSIONER VICTOR PRESENT.
AND OUR, UH, SECRETARY VON TRAN PRESENT.
[Director’s Report ]
UM, THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.CHAIR CLARK COMMISSION MEMBERS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC.
I AM V TRAN, SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT THIS ROUND.
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CAN BE REACHED AT EIGHT THREE TWO THREE NINE THREE SIX SIX ZERO OR YOU CAN CALL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNER OF THE DAY AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 6 2 4.
OUR OUR WEBSITE IS HOUSTON PLANNING.COM.
[Consideration of February 5, 2026, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes ]
FOR CONSIDERATION OF OUR MEETING MINUTES, OUR PRIOR MEETING, WHICH WAS FEBRUARY 5TH, 2026.THEY WERE POSTED WITH THE AGENDA.
DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? MOTION SYKES.
[Platting Activities a & b]
NUMERAL ONE, PLANNING ACTIVITY, WHICH ARE SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT PLATS.GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SECTIONS A AND B ARE PRESENTED AS ONE GROUP, WHICH INCLUDES CONSENT AND REPL.
ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION.
SECTIONS A AND B ARE ITEMS ONE THROUGH 72 SECTION A.
CONSENT ITEMS ARE NUMBERS ONE THROUGH 39 AND SECTION B REPL ITEMS ARE NUMBERS 40 THROUGH 75.
IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, STAFF WOULD LIKE TO MOVE CONSENT ITEMS NUMBER FOUR, BRIDGELAND PRAIRIELAND VILLAGE, SECTION 72 AND NUMBER FIVE, BRIDGELAND PRAIRIELAND VILLAGE, SECTION 73 WITH ITEM NUMBER 81 BRIDGELAND PRAIRIELAND VILLAGE, GP IN THE VARIANCE SECTION, THERE ARE NO OTHER ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE TAKEN OUT OF ORDER AND IF THERE ARE NO, THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS MADAM CHAIR, IF THERE ARE NO INDIVIDUALS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS, THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSENT AND RE REPLY.
ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION.
SAVE AND ACCEPT ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE.
COMMISSIONER HYS? YES, MADAM CHAIR.
I DO NEED TO ABSTAIN SOME FROM SOME ITEMS. A FEW OF THOSE THAT SHE JUST MENTIONED I DIDN'T WRITE DOWN, SO I'LL PROBABLY BE ABSTAINING TWICE.
UH, ITEMS TWO THROUGH 6, 11, 12 27, 48 THROUGH 50 AND 66.
WHAT ABOUT 47? UH, THAT WAS ON MY PAPER.
NO, I'M GLAD TO CATCH SOMEBODY.
I ALWAYS GET CAUGHT, SO THANK YOU
OKAY, ANYONE ELSE? I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER PIERCE? YES.
SO I'M GONNA NEED A MOTION SAVE AND ACCEPT ITEMS TWO THROUGH 6, 11, 12, 27, 47, 48, 49, 50 AND 66.
NOW WE NEED A, UM, MOTION FOR ITEMS TWO THROUGH 6 11 12 27 47 THROUGH 50 66.
[00:05:02]
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION.OPPOSED? ARE YOU? ARE YOU, UH, WE SHOULD NOT INCLUDE FOUR AND FIVE ON THE SECONDARY VOTE AS THAT SHOULD BE REVIEWED.
I SAW IT WRITTEN HERE AND DIDN'T EVEN PAY ATTENTION.
WE'LL, WE'LL LISTEN TO THAT, UH, FURTHER ON IN THE AGENDA.
SO LET ME REPEAT TWO THROUGH SIX.
6 11, 12 27, 47 THROUGH 50 AND 66 MOTIONS WERE JONES AND FA.
YOU ACCEPT THE REVISED MOTION.
[c. Replats requiring Public Hearings with Notification (Devin Crittle, Dorianne Powe-Phlegm, Aracely Rodriguez, Ken Calhoun, and John Cedillo) ]
SEE PUBLIC HEARINGS.GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM NUMBER 76 IS CLAREMONT PLACE, SECTION ONE PARTIAL RE PLAT NUMBER 13, DECIDED TO OF HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS AT THE SOUTHWEST INTERSECTION OF LINDA VISTA ROAD AND TREMONT STREET EAST OF NO WAYSIDE DRIVE.
THE REASON FOR REPLY IS TO CREATE FOUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND REDUCE THE BUILDING LINE REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT.
ARE THOSE FILED SEPARATELY? STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT PER THE CBC 1 0 1 FORM.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCE REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM.
MADAM CHAIR PLEASES THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 76 IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
MOTION FOR MOTION FORS PER GARZA SECOND GARZA.
ALL IN FAVOR OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM 77 IS CONCRETE DOLPHIN FAMILY PARTIAL REPL NUMBER ONE.
THE SITE IS IN HOUSTON CORP, HOUSTON, I'M SORRY, HOUSTON'S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS SOUTH ALONG BOYKINS ROAD EAST OF ROBERTS STREET.
THE REASON FOR REPL IS TO CREATE ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT TO BE REPLANTED INTO AN UNRESTRICTED RESERVE.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THE SITE IS A REPLAYABLE LOT THAT WAS CREATED WITH A FIVE LOT SUBDIVISION IN 2009 WITH THE CREATION OF THE CONCRETE DOLPHIN FAMILY SUBDIVISION.
ONLY TWO LOTS OF THE FIVE HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED AS RESIDENTIAL WEST OF THE PROPERTY.
TWO OF THE LOTS HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED, I'M SORRY, WEST OF THE PROPERTY.
TWO OF THE LOTS HAVE NOT BEEN DEVELOPED.
THE TRACT, THE TRACT OF THE EAST OF THE LOT IS BEING USED FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES AND THE TRACK EAST OF THAT LOT IS CURRENTLY BEING USED AS A CHURCH SITE.
BOYKINS IS A MAJOR RAFA AND THE PROPERTIES ALONG THIS STREET HAVE PRIMARILY BEEN DEVELOPED AS COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
THE PROPERTY IS BEING USED AS A LIMOUSINE COMPANY, HOWEVER, THE OWNER PLANS TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY INTO AN EVENT HALL TO ALLOW THE SITE TO BE DEVELOPED AS AN UNRESTRICTED RESERVE WILL BE CONDUCIVE TO THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS FILED SEPARATELY.
HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEER'S OFFICE HAS NO OBJECTIONS TO THE REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT PER THE CC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 77 IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK IT.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM 78 DARLING VILLA, WE PLOT NUMBER ONE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE CITY LIMIT NORTH OF I 10 AND EAST APTC BOULEVARD.
THE PURPOSE OF THE WE PLOT IS TO MODIFY THE WIDTH OF THE SHARED DRIVEWAY FROM 16 FEET TO 12 FEET FOR THREE LOTS.
NO VARIANCES ARE BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS PER LEGAL.
THE PROPOSED WE PLOT WILL NOT VIOLATE APPLICABLE RESTRICTION.
[00:10:01]
RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLA SUBSTITUTE, THE CCPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITION.MADAM CHAIR IS TO PLEASE THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 78 IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ITEM 79, ITEM 79, MONTGOMERY AND CLAY.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON, E TWO J IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY E OF S 59 AND NOR OF NORTH PARK DRIVE.
THE PURPOSE OF THE WIPA IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
NO VARIANCES ARE BEING, ARE BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND PER LEGAL THE PROPOSED WE PLA WILL VIOLATE THE APPLICABLE RESTRICTION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLAT PER THE APPLICANT REQUEST.
MADAM CHAIR IS TO PLEASE THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HAND FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 79 IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I'LL DEFER THE, UM, EXCUSE ME.
I'LL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES ITEM 80.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE SUBJECT SIDE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON, UH, HARRIS COUNTY, ETJ SOUTH OF FM 29 20 WEST OF ROSE HILL CHURCH ROAD.
THE PURPOSE OF THE RELA IS TO CREATE ONE SINGLE FAMILY LOT.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCE REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED WRITTEN COMMENTS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION.
THEREFORE, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR FOR PLEASES THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 80 IS OPEN.
I DO HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE FOR QUESTIONS.
HEARING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION MOTION S.
[d. Subdivision Plats with Variance Requests (Geoff Butler and Devin Crittle) ]
PLATS WITH VARIANCE REQUESTS.MADAM CHAIR, I'M GONNA RECUSE FROM 81 AND I BELIEVE FOUR AND FIVE.
HE GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEMS FOUR FIVE AND 81 ARE BRIDGELAND PRAIRIE LAND VILLAGES, SECTION 72 73 AND THE GENERAL PLAN.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE ETJ WITHIN HARRIS COUNTY ALONG TUCKERTON WEST OF PRAIRIE LAND CROSSING IN EAST OF POLLINATOR DRIVE.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A GENERAL PLAN IN TWO SECTIONS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING VARIANCES FOR INTERSECTION SPACING AT TWO LOCATIONS.
THE FIRST NO NORTH SOUTH STREET BETWEEN PRAIRIE LAND CROSSING AND MIGRATION WAY NORTH OF TUCKERTON AND THE SECOND AND NO NORTH SOUTH STREET BETWEEN POLLINATOR DRIVE AND MIGRATION.
WAY SOUTH OF TUCKERTON STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THESE REQUESTS.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE BRIDGELAND PRAIRIE LAND COMMUNITY.
THIS DEVELOPMENT FEATURES A NETWORK OF COLLECTOR STREETS AND MULTI-USE PATHS INTENDED TO FACILITATE CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN RESIDENCES, SCHOOL AND RECREATION.
THE SITE ALSO FEATURES PIPELINES IN DRAINAGE AREAS AND TRANSMISSION CORRIDORS THAT HINDER PROVIDING STREET CONNECTIONS AT THE REQUIRED INTERVAL.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING PER PERMISSION TO EXCEED THESE REQUIREMENTS IN TWO LOCATIONS.
THE FIRST LOCATION WILL BE WITHIN A A GRID OF COLLECTOR STREETS AND A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE WITH SINGLE FAMILY SECTIONS FEEDING INTO THE COLLECTORS IN A MULTI-FAMILY TRACK, FRONTING TUCKERTON.
THIS WILL ALLOW FOR SUFFICIENT ACCESS AND CIRCULATION WITHOUT CREATING AN ADDITIONAL NORTH-SOUTH STREET CONNECTION WITHIN THE BLOCK.
THE SECOND LOCATION WILL CONSIST OF SINGLE FAMILY TRACKS ACCESSED BY A COLLECTOR AND AN ADDITIONAL INTERSECTION ALONG TUCKERTON COULD COMPLICATE A PROPOSED BRIDGE CROSSING OVER A DRAINAGE CHANNEL.
STAFF FINDS THEIR REQUEST TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF CHAPTER 42 AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
AND WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON EITHER ITEMS FOUR, FIVE, OR 81.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THEM? OKAY.
COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT.
PLEASE NOTE COMMISSIONER HINES IS HERE.
[00:15:01]
APOSTLES E PROFETA LIBRAS.THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT SOUTH OF US ROUTE 90 NORTH OF OREM IN EAST DENDRON.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A RESERVE FOR A CHURCH AND RELATED USES.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR THE RESERVE TO TAKE ACCESS FROM AN ACCESS EASEMENT AND A PRIVATE STREET RATHER THAN A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL TO ALLOW TIME FOR STAFF AND THE APPLICANT TO RESEARCH THE ORIGINS OF THE EXISTING PRIVATE STREET AND TO DETERMINE IF IT IS A SUITABLE MEANS OF ACCESS.
AND WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT.
UM, I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON ITEM 82.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO OKAY.
COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION OF DEFERRAL.
MOTION JONES SECOND, FAM SECOND.
THAT'S A 30 DAY EXTENSION THAT WE DID LAST WEEK, SO NOTHING ON 83 84.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM 84 IS N-T-W-U-S-A HEADQUARTERS.
UH, THIS APPLICATION WAS DEFERRED AT THE PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
UH, THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON CITY LIMITS SOUTH ALONG BLE WESTFIELD ROAD AND WEST OF MCKAY STREET.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TWO VARIANCES.
THE FIRST VARIANCE IS, IS TO ALLOW A RESERVE TO TAKE ACCESS FROM A 25 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THE SECOND VARIANCE IS TO ALLOW A RESERVE TO TAKE ACCESS FROM A NON-CONTINUOUS STREET.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT IS COMBINING MULTIPLE TRACKS FROM THE JACOB DANEN BAUM SUBDIVISION TO CREATE TWO UNRESTRICTED RESERVES.
THE SUBDIVISION WAS CREATED WITH BORDERS ROAD, WHICH IS A 20 FOOT PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
NUMBER ONE IS HARRIS COUNTY ACQUIRED 40 FEET OF LAND ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE ROAD TO MAKE A 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY TO MAINTAIN A CONSISTENT CENTER LINE.
ALL OF THE REMAINING DEDICATION MUST COME FROM THE WEST SIDE OF GORDONSVILLE SCHOOL ROAD AND THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS ALONG THE EAST SIDE.
THE SECOND VARIANCE REQUEST DEALS WITH THE PROPERTY BEING BISECTED BY A PROPOSED MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.
JUSTIFICATION FOR SUPPORTING VARIANCE NUMBER TWO INVOLVES THE TIMING OF THE PLAT SUBMITTAL.
THE DEVELOPER IS DEDICATING THE REQUIRED 100 FOOT MAJOR AIRFARE WITHIN THE PLAT BOUNDARY AS SHOWN ON THE MAJOR AIRFARE AND FREEWAY PLAN BECAUSE THE OTHER PROPERTIES NORTH OF THIS SITE HAS NOT BEEN PLATTED.
BECAUSE THE OTHER PROPERTIES NORTH OF THIS SITE HAVE NOT PLATTED THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE TECHNICALLY DOES NOT MAKE A CONTINUOUS CONNECTION TO UMBA WESTFIELD ROAD TO HELP MITIGATE THIS PROBLEM.
THE APPLICANT IS CREATING A TEMPORARY EASEMENT TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT ACCESS UNTIL THE REMAINDER OF THE MAJOR, THE FAIR IS PLATTED NORTH OF THIS SITE.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY OBJECTION TO THIS REQUEST AND STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANTING THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE IN IMPROVING THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON 84.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? ALRIGHT.
COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION, UH, IN FRONT OF YOU.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION GARZA.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN HARRIS COUNTY WEST AND ALONG GOSLING ROAD, NORTH OF THE GRAND PARKWAY AND SOUTH OF WILLOW CREEK AND WEST RAYFORD ROAD.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE AND IS REQUESTING TWO SETS OF VARIANCES.
ONE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG GOSLING ROAD BY NOT EXTENDING ELM GROVE ROAD NOR TERMINATE IN A CUL-DE-SAC.
AND TWO, TO ALLOW FOR THE PARTIAL RETTING OF RESIDENTIAL RESTRICTED LOTS INTO USE, NOT PRESCRIBED BY THE ORDINANCE.
STAFF REQUEST TO DEFER THE APPLICATION FOR TWO WEEKS TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE REVISED INFORMATION AS THIS IS THE SECOND DEFERRAL STAFF WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A BRIEF PRESENTATION PLEASE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON AN UNRESTRICTED RESERVE.
ONE SET OF VARIANCES IS TO MODIFY THE PLATTED RESIDENTIAL RESTRICTIONS TO SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE LAND USES SPECIFICALLY LISTED.
AND THEN THE ORDINANCE STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST BECAUSE ALL OF THE PLATTED LOTS WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RESTRICTED SUBDIVISION ARE BEING RE PLATTED INTO THIS PROPOSED SUBDIVISION.
THE OTHER TWO VARIANCES ARE BEING REQUESTED TO ALLOW EXCESSIVE INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG GOSLING ROAD BY NOT EXTENDING AND EAST WEST THROUGH STREET THE PROPERTY
[00:20:01]
AND NOT TO TERMINATE ELM GROVE WITH THE CUL-DE-SAC.THE CURRENT INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG GOSLING ROAD IS APPROXIMATELY 6,700 FEET.
HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE NOT TO EXTEND ELM GROVE ROAD TO GOSLING ROAD.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, HOWEVER, IS TO DEFER THE APPLICATION TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE A REVISED TITLE REPORT THAT ENCOMPASSES ALL OF THE LAND WITHIN THE PLATT'S REVISED BOUNDARY AS REQUIRED BY THE ORDINANCE.
STEPH HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED FOR THIS ITEM.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR DEFERRAL? DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION BALLARD.
OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES NOTHING UNDER E SO WE'LL MOVE ALONG TO F RECONSIDERATION OF
[f. Reconsiderations of Requirement (Tammi Williamson and John Cedillo) ]
REQUIREMENT.ITEM 86 IS MK ENTERPRISES PLAZA.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN NORTHWESTERN HARRIS COUNTY, SOUTH OF HEMPSTEAD HIGHWAY BETWEEN KICKAPOO ROAD AND KERMER ROAD.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE AND IS REQUESTING A RECONSIDERATION OF REQUIREMENT AND VARIANCE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG LOCAL STREET OLD WASHINGTON ROAD.
BY NOT PROVIDING A NORTH SOUTH STREET THROUGH THE SUBJECT SITE, STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO UTILIZE THE PROPERTY FOR COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE STRUCTURES WITH ACCESS FROM OLD WASHINGTON ROAD.
THE SITE ABUTS OLD WASHINGTON ROAD, WHICH IS NOT PART OF THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE HEMPSTEAD HIGHWAYS RIGHT OF WAY SEPARATED BY A RAILROAD.
THE CURRENT INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG OLD WASHINGTON ROAD, A LOCAL STREET IS APPROXIMATELY 2,690 FEET FROM KICKAPOO ROAD TO PREMIER DRIVE.
STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD REQUIRE AN INTERSECTION AT LEAST EVERY 1400 FEET, WHICH WOULD MEAN ONE NORTH SOUTH PUBLIC STREET TO BISECT THIS BLOCK.
HOWEVER, THIS BLOCK IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH LOW DENSITY USES AND HAS ADEQUATE FRONTAGE AND ACCESS TO A PUBLIC STREET.
THE STREET NETWORK CREATED BY OLD WASHINGTON ROAD PREMIER DRIVE, BECCA ROAD AND KICKAPOO ROAD IS AN ESTABLISHED STREET GRID THAT IS SUFFICIENT TO HANDLE RURAL LOW DENSITY TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PRESENT ON THIS BLOCK.
LIKEWISE, ONLY KA KAPO AND MIR CROSS THE RAILROAD GOING NORTH, SO ANY ADDITIONAL NORTH SOUTH STREET WOULD STILL REQUIRE TRAFFIC TO UTILIZE THE EXISTING MAJOR THOROUGHFARE STREET NETWORK.
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 COMMENTS IN ADVANCE, AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
I DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED FOR ITEM 86.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? OKAY.
COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION BALLARD I TWO.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS JOHN PHILLIPS CILLO.
THE SUBJECT SIDE IS A 4,700 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CITY LIMITS AT THE NORTHEAST INTERSECTION OF PETTY STREET AND TC JESTER BOULEVARD.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A SINGLE LOT AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A REDUCED BUILDING LINE OF 12 FEET IN LIEU OF THE 25 FOOT BUILDING LINE REQUIRED ALONG THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE OF TC JESTER.
S IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING A SINGLE FAMILY HOME TO TAKE SOLE ACCESS FROM PETTY STREET, STRICT ADHERENCE TO THE ORDINANCE, UH, FOR THE 25 BUILDING LINE COULD MAKE THE SITE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE AND FEASIBLE.
A PROPOSED REDUCED BUILDING LINE WOULD ALLOW A SINGLE FAMILY HOME TO BE BUILT WITH A VIABLE DISTANCE FROM THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC.
THE DIMENSION FROM BACK OF CURB TO THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE WOULD VARY FROM 23 TO 26 FEET WITH VEHICULAR ACCESS DENIED FROM THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.
THE PORTIONS OF THE STRUCTURE AT THE 12 FOOT BUILDING LINE ARE SHOWN TO BE A PORCH, UH, AT THE SITE.
UH, BY THE SITE PLAN IT INTENDED TO BE UNINHABITED.
UH, SIMILAR BUILDING LINE VARIANCES HAVE BEEN GRANTED ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY AND SOME EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE BUILT CLOSER TO THE RIGHT OF WAY THAN THE REQUESTED VARIANCE.
BUT THOSE STRUCTURES PREDATE THE EXPANSION OF TC JEER.
THE APPLICATION WAS DEFERRED LAST CYCLE TO ALLOW STAFF AND TRAFFIC TO CONSIDER THE SITE VICINITY TO THE EXIT LANE ALONG TC JESTER.
THE APPLICATION INITIALLY REQUESTS A 10 FOOT BUILDING LINE IN, UH, IN LINE WITH THE OTHER PREVIOUSLY GRANTED VARIANCES ALONG THE THOROUGHFARE.
HOWEVER, THE EXIT LANE IS LIKELY TO INCUR SUDDEN LANE CHANGES IN TRAFFIC AND STAFF SUGGEST A 12 FOOT BUILDING LINE TO WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS AMENDED THEIR REQUEST.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CCP C 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS INCLUDING THE CREATION OF A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK ALONG TC ADJUSTER.
THIS CONCLUDES, THAT'S PRESENTATION.
THE GRAPHIC STILL SHOWS A 10 FOOT BUILDING LINE.
[00:25:01]
GRAPHIC.THE, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE SITE PLAN OR YEAH, THE, THE THE SITE PLAN? YES.
THEN THERE, THERE MUST HAVE BEEN SOME TIME MISTAKE, BUT YEAH.
THERE THEY HAVE SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN TO SHOW THE 12 FOOT BUILDING LINE AND IS INCORPORATED INTO OUR, OUR, OUR REPORT.
YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION GARZA.
[Platting Activities g - j]
OF APPROVAL NUMBER 88.GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, STAFF WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SECTIONS GHI AND J AS ONE GROUP? YES, PLEASE.
SECTIONS G EXTENSIONS OF APPROVAL CONSISTS OF ITEMS 88 TO 1 0 1 SECTIONS H NAME CHANGES CONSISTS OF NO ITEMS. SECTION I CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE CONSISTS OF NO ITEMS. SECTION J ADMINISTRATIVE CONSISTS OF NO ITEMS. THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SECTIONS GHI AND J.
MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE NOTE THAT I ABSTENTION FROM ITEMS 98 99 AND 100.
OKAY, MOVING ALONG TO KAY DEVELOPMENT
[k. Development Plats with Variance Requests ]
PLOTS ITEM 1 0 2.GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM 1 0 2 IS 1927 FAIRVIEW STREET.
THE SITE IS NORTH OF WESTHEIMER ROAD AND WEST OF DUN LAVEY STREET AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF WOODHEAD AND FAIRVIEW STREETS.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A COVERED PATIO ADDITION TO AN EXISTING RESTAURANT AND IS REQUESTING A ZERO FOOT SETBACK FOR THE PATIO ROOF LINE.
IN LIEU OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED 10 FOOT BUILDING LINE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PATIO SPACE.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE HEAD, HEAD-END PARKING ALONG FAIRVIEW STREET AND REPLACE IT WITH A NEW FIVE FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK, LANDSCAPE BUFFER PATIO AREA AND GREEN SPACE.
EXISTING PERMITTED PARKING INSIDE THE PROPERTY IS SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMMODATE THE RESTAURANT AND ADDITIONAL PATIO SQUARE FOOTAGE.
THE POST OF THE PATIO WILL BE SET AT THE 10 FOOT BUILDING LINE, BUT THE ROOF WILL EXTEND TO THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS A LARGER ENCROACHMENT THAN OTHERWISE ALLOWED BY ORDINANCES.
STAFF RECEIVE COMMENTS IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION TO THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT AGREED TO SHIFT THE PATIO TOWARD WOODHEAD STREET TO THE EDGE OF THE BUILDING FARTHEST FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WITHOUT ENCROACHING INTO THE 15 BY 15 FOOT VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.
THE REQUESTED SETBACK IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE AREA CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO CITY ORDINANCE BUILDING LINES BECAUSE THE PROPOSED REMOVAL OF HEAD AND PARKING AND ADDITION OF SIDEWALKS AND LANDSCAPING AREAS, OUR IMPROVEMENTS TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND THE PEDESTRIAN REALM BEYOND WHAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE REQUIRED BY THE PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON TO THE COMMISSION.
I AM THE OWNER AND RESIDENT ALONG WITH MY HUSBAND SPENCER GOOLSBY OF 1928 FAIRVIEW, WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS RESTAURANT.
UH, DOUGIE'S PIZZA AND TAVERN OPERATES SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY FROM 11:00 AM TO MIDNIGHT AND ON FRIDAY AND SATURDAYS UNTIL 1:00 AM THEY FEATURE A SPORTS BAR ENVIRONMENT WITH AMPLIFIED MUSIC, WHICH GENERATES NOISE AND OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES EXTENDING BEYOND THEIR PROPERTY LINE.
CURRENTLY THE NOISE IS PLAINLY AUDIBLE INSIDE OUR HOME LATE AT NIGHT, EVEN WHEN THE WINDOWS AND DOORS ARE CLOSED.
AND IN ADDITION, VEHICLES ARE ALREADY IDLY NEARBY WITH MUSIC PLAYING AND THERE'S FREQUENT RIDE SHARE ACTIVITY, ET CETERA.
AS YOU WOULD MIGHT EXPECT, WE HAVE REPORTED DISTURBANCES ON TWO OCCASIONS IN LEFT MESSAGES FOR MANAGEMENT, RECEIVING NO RESPONSE.
WE REMAIN CONCERNED THAT FUTURE ISSUES WILL GO UNADDRESSED.
THIS CREATES AN INSTANT REAL LIFE, POTENTIALLY NIGHTLY IMPACT FOR WHICH WE HAVE NO RECOURSE.
THE INTENSITY OF DUCKY LATE NIGHT OPERATIONS IN THIS WITH THIS, THIS EXPANSION IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE QUIET ENJOYMENT OF OUR HOMES IN THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED ADDITIONAL SEATING AND PATIO EXPANSION WILL INCREASE NOISE, TRAFFIC AND, UM, OTHER CONGESTION IN THE AREA RIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR RESIDENTS, POTENTIALLY OBSTRUCTING WITH ALL THE PARKING VISITORS TO OUR OWN HOME.
WE PURCHASED OUR HOME IN RELIANCE ON THE RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED USE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DID NOT ANTICIPATE A SEVEN DAY PER WEEK LATE NIGHT OPERATION SUCH AS A TAVERN GOING IN.
THAT'S THE ONLY RESTAURANT ON THE BLOCK.
UM, I AM A CORPORATE ATTORNEY.
MY HU HUSBAND IS AN IT PROFESSIONAL.
SOMETIMES WE WORK FROM, FROM HOME, UM, BUT WE CERTAINLY NEED OUR REST AND NEED TO HAVE THE QUIET ENJOYMENT OF OUR HOME SO THAT WE CAN ENJOY OUR HOME AND ENJOY OUR COMMUNITY.
SO FOR THESE REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE COMMISSION DENY THIS APPLICATION.
DID DID YOU WANNA COME UP AND SPEAK?
[00:30:01]
OKAY.LET'S ME TO COMMENT OR HAVE SPEAK? YEAH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND HAVE THE NEXT SPEAKER COME UP.
AND IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD PLEASE.
MY NAME IS JUAN CARLOS OLIVAREZ AND I LIVE IN 2 4 0 5 MOORE STREET.
I SERVE AS AN ADULT LEADER FOR SCOUT TROOP 55.
I'M MISSING MY SON'S FIRST VARSITY TENNIS MATCHES TO BE HERE TODAY BECAUSE WHILE THEIR MATCHES FOR ONE AFTERNOON, THIS VARIANCE ONCE RECORDED ON THE PLAS, ESSENTIALLY PERPETUAL.
I'M ALSO SPEAKING FOR SEVERAL NEIGHBORS, INCLUDING DR.
STEVEN SPAN, FORMER FOUNDING DEAN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON MEDICAL SCHOOL, WHO HAS SUBMITTED A FORMAL LETTER OF OPPOSITION BASED ON DOCUMENTED HEALTH HAZARDS.
THIS PROJECT CREATES THE 10 FOOT SETBACK IS A MANDATORY STATE REQUIREMENT, NOT A SUGGESTION.
THE APPLICANT FAILS A CHAPTER 42 THRESHOLD FOR THREE REASONS.
FIRST, THE DEVELOPER IESS NO PHYSICAL DEFECTS OF THE LAND SUCH AS A RAVINE OR ODD SHAPE.
THIS IS A STRUCTURAL CHOICE, NOT A LAND HARDSHIP.
IF WANTING A BIGGER BECOMES A LEGAL HARDSHIP, THE ORDINANCE EFFECTIVELY CEASES TO EXIST.
SECOND, THE APPLICANT'S CLAIM THAT THEY NEED ZERO FEET FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IS A FALSE CHOICE.
THEY CAN REMOVE THE HAZARDOUS PARKING AND BUILD A COMPLIANT INFRASTRUCTURE WITH SHADE AND LANDSCAPING.
THEY'RE CHOOSING A ZERO FOOT SOLELY TO MAXIMIZE SQUARE FOOTAGE AT OUR EXPENSE.
THIRD, UNDER THE CITY CODE, BETTER USE, MEANING HIGHER REVENUE CANNOT BE THE SOLE JUSTIFICATION FOR A VARIANCE.
MOST CRITICALLY, THIS PROJECT CREATES A DOCUMENTED HEALTH HAZARD AS SHOWN IN THE EXHIBIT THAT'S SUBMITTED VIA EMAIL.
SOUND TRAVELS VERTICALLY PLACED IN AN OPEN AIR SPORTS BAR AT ZERO FEET, ACTS LIKE A MEGAPHONE FUNNELING HIGH VOLUME NOISE DIRECTLY INTO OUR UPPER WINDOWS, CREATING OBSTRUCT CREATED COMPLETELY UNOBSTRUCTED BY ANY FENCE.
SPAN HAS TESTIFIED THAT THIS ENCROACHMENT WILL CAUSE SLEEP DISTURBANCES, WHICH ARE DOCUMENTED RISK FACTORS FOR HEART DISEASE AND DIABETES.
A PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY LOOK FOR A BAR DOES NOT JUSTIFY HEART HEALTH HAZARD FOR RESIDENTS.
WE ARE PATRONS OF THIS BUSINESS, BUT WE CANNOT LIVE WITH A SPORTS BAR IN OUR BEDROOM.
WE URGE YOU TO DENY THIS REQUEST.
AT A MINIMUM, ANY RELIEF MUST REQUIRE A FULL MASONRY ENCLOSURE AND A STRICT 10:00 PM CURFEW.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? OKAY, COMMISSIONER GARZA, YOU HAD A QUESTION? YES.
SO MR. BUCKLEY, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND.
SO THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A BUILDING OF A PATIO COVER, CORRECT? YES.
THE BUSINESS IS GOING TO CONTINUE AS IS WE BUILT THIS DOWN, THE BUSINESS IS GONNA CONTINUE AS IS.
THEY SIMPLY WILL NOT BUILD THE PATIO COVER.
THEY THEY COULD ALSO STILL BUILD A PATIO, JUST NOT THE COVER.
AND I YOU WENT TO MY NEXT POINT.
THEY COULD STILL BUILD A PATIO, STILL DO A FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK, STILL DO EVERYTHING ELSE THEY WANT AND NOT BUILD A COVER.
SO REALLY WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON TODAY IS THE COVER.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT THEM OUTTA BUSINESS OR CHANGE THEM, UH, REQUIRED THEM TO STOP EVERYTHING AT 10:00 PM IT'S NOT, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON HERE.
SO AGAIN, NONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'VE BROUGHT UP, THE NOISE ONE, SORRY.
THAT DOES NOT FALL UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION.
WHAT WE ARE VOTING ON TODAY IS WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN PUT UP THAT PERGOLA, UH, OVER THE BUILDING LINE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BALDWIN.
AND, AND I, I WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL TO THE AUDIENCE.
I I LIVE IN THIS EXACT SAME SCENARIO IN MONTROSE AND I HAVE LOUD MUSIC BEHIND ME AND I REPORT WITH 3 1 1 ON A VERY REGULAR BASIS.
AND I'D LOVE TO SEE THE NOISE ORDINANCE IMPROVED, BUT WE DO GET SOMETHING ELSE.
WE GET THE REMOVAL OF THAT FRONT END PARKING AND THEY WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO DO THAT SAME SIDEWALK OR BUFFER WITHOUT THIS VARIANT.
SO WE ARE GETTING SOMETHING, HOPEFULLY THEY'LL BE BETTER NEIGHBORS AND NOT PLAY LOUD MUSIC AT NIGHT OR THEY'LL GO OUT OF BUSINESS AND SOMEONE ELSE WILL REPLACE THEM.
UH, BUT BY HAVING AN ACTIVE PEDESTRIAN REALM, WE DO HAVE A CHANCE TO SLOW DOWN THE TRAFFIC IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND WE ARE GETTING WHAT I THINK ARE SAFER FEATURES FOR PEOPLE USING THAT SIDEWALK, WHICH PEOPLE DO ON A VERY REGULAR BASIS.
SO I THINK WE ARE GETTING SOMETHING.
COMMISSIONER SIGLER, AND SORRY IF I MISSED THIS, BUT THE PARKING THAT IS GOING AWAY, IS THAT, WAS THAT REQUIRED? DID THEY NEED THAT? NO, IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY, IT WAS NOT ALLOWED TO BE COUNTED TOWARDS THE ORDINANCE PARKING REQUIREMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE BECAUSE IT WAS PARTIALLY IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
MR. CARROLL? UM, ADDING THE PATIO WOULD SEEM TO ME TO MAKE ADDING THE PERGOLA.
THE PATIO CAN BE ADDED WITH OR WITHOUT SEEM, WOULD SEEM TO ME TO MAKE THE AREA MORE ATTRACTIVE TO, UH, CUSTOMERS AND CLIENTELE AND THEREFORE MOVE THE PEOPLE OUT FROM THE PHYSICAL RESTAURANT TO THE OUTSIDE.
SO THE NOISE WOULD MOVE FROM THE INSIDE OF THE RESTAURANT TO THE OUTSIDE? IT COULD BE PRESUMED.
HOW LONG HAS THE BUSINESS BEEN IN, IN EXISTENCE? UH, THIS PARTICULAR RESTAURANT I BELIEVE IS RELATIVELY NEW, BUT I'D HAVE TO DEFER TO THE APPLICANT ON THAT.
BUT IT'S BEEN A RESTAURANT SITE I GUESS FOR SOME TIME? YES.
[00:35:01]
FOR SURE.I WOULD JUST LIKE TO JUST ASK THE NEIGHBORS IF THEY UNDERSTAND, UM, WHAT, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER GARZA SAID ABOUT THE APPLICATION IS STRICTLY FOR THE AWNING AND I THINK FELLOW COMMISSIONER WAS MENTIONING, DOES THE AWNING DRIVE THE FOOT TRAFFIC FROM INSIDE THE STRUCTURE, UH, TO THE PATIO? UM, BUT THIS IS STRICTLY FOR THE AWNING, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE GRANT QUITE REGULARLY AND WE'RE GETTING SOMETHING.
AND I DID ASK IF THE NEIGHBORS KNEW.
SO DO THEY GET A CHANCE TO SHE CAN'T COME BACK.
IS HE ASKING A QUESTION THOUGH? THE QUESTION I ASKED IF THEY UNDERSTOOD YOU ASKING HER A DIRECT QUESTION? YEAH.
IF THEY UNDERSTOOD WHAT MR. CAR SAID, YES OR NO QUESTION? YES, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S THE REQUEST.
UH, BUT OUR ISSUE IS MORE OF WHAT COMMISSIONER CARROLL HAS DESCRIBED.
THE PURPOSE OF THE AWNING WOULD BE TO BRING THAT, UH, THE, THE TAVERN VISITORS OUT TO THE PATIO.
SO THAT THEY COULD STAND UNDER IT, WHICH WOULD THEN PRODUCE AN EXPONENTIALLY AMOUNT, MORE AMOUNT OF NOISE THAN WE'RE CURRENTLY RECEIVING UP UNTIL 1:00 AM WHICH IS EXCESSIVE.
I'M SORRY, BUT YOU CAN'T KEEP COMING BACK, SIR.
THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A QUICK YES OR NO, BUT YEAH.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? LEGAL, DID YOU EXCUSE ME? YES.
DID YOU WANNA WEIGH IN? I'M SORRY.
UH, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
THE PURVIEW OF OF THIS THIS COMMISSION IS TO, TO RULE ON THE COVER.
ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM THAT HASN'T SPOKEN? OKAY.
SO COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION IN FRONT OF YOU TO APPROVE THE PERGOLA.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION GARZA.
OPPOSED? WHO'S THE NAY? HEINZ.
AND, AND HORSE PER HORSE PER OH, OH.
YOU, SO FOUR OUT OF 15, 11, 12.
MOVING ALONG TO ROMAN NUMERAL, OH, EXCUSE ME.
SO ROMAN NUMERAL TWO ESTABLISH
[II. Establish a public hearing date of March 19, 2026 ]
A PUBLIC HEARING, A HEARING DATE OF MARCH 19TH, 2026 FOR THE FOLLOWING.CRAIG WOODS PARTIAL REPL NUMBER 41.
IT STATES AT BRINKLEY GREENWOOD EDITION PARTIAL REPL NUMBER ONE, ISABELLA VISTA, MORTON CREEK RANCH, SECTION 16 REPL NUMBER ONE AND EXTENSION PALUS AT BELAFONTE, BELAFONTE AND VENTANA LAKES EAST DRILL SITE PARK.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION SECOND GARZA.
OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES ROMAN NUMERAL THREE CONSIDERATION
[III. Consideration of an Off-Street Parking Variance at 3520 and 3616 Center Street (Ramon Jaime-Leon) ]
OF AN OFF STREET PARKING VARIANCE AT 35 20 AND 36 16.CENTER STREET, ROMAN NUMERAL THREE IS 35 20 AND 36 16 CENTER STREET.
THE SITE IS NORTH OF WASHINGTON AVENUE AND EAST OF HEIGHTS BOULEVARD AT THE NORTHEAST AND NORTHWEST CORNERS OF HARVARD STREET AND CENTER STREET.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSING A NEW MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT CONNECTED BY A SKY BRIDGE WITH ONSITE GARAGE PARKING, AS WELL AS STREET IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING ON STREETE PARKING, PUBLIC ON STREET PARKING, AND PEDESTRIAN PATHS BY ORDINANCE.
THE PROJECT REQUIRES 350 PARKING SPACES.
AFTER A 10% BICYCLE PARKING REDUCTION.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO PROVIDE 311 PARKING SPACES A VARIANCE OF ROUGHLY 11% FROM THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT.
STAFF HAS RECEIVED A NUMBER OF COMMENTS OPPOSING AND SUPPORTING THIS REQUEST.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DE FURTHER APPLICATION FOR FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW AND TO ALLOW THE ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED ALONGSIDE A RELATED SUBDIVISION PLATFORM AND STILL WILL BE ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING.
I DO HAVE SPEAKERS AND I JUST WANNA LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT IF THIS GETS DEFERRED TODAY, IT'LL COME BACK ON THE NEXT COMMISSION PLA UH, AGENDA.
BUT YOU WILL BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK IF YOU'D LIKE TO.
SO I'LL START CALLING YOUR NAMES.
OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS MICHAEL PITTMAN.
I'M FROM A RESTAURANT CALLED STAR PIZZA.
WE'RE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE MULTIFAMILY PROJECT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED.
ALL WE'RE REALLY LOOKING TO FIGURE OUT AS NEIGHBORS, WE KNOW IT'S GONNA GET BUILT.
UM, THEY HAD ORIGINALLY PLANNED FOR RETAIL ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
IN SPEAKING WITH THE BUILDER, I THINK THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PROJECT.
AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE TOLD US.
WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S STILL CORRECT AND TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY OTHER PRECEDENT FOR WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I GUESS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR WITHIN A MILE MAYBE OF A REDUCTION OF THIS AMOUNT.
'CAUSE THE ORIGINAL V THE PAPERWORK AND THE VARIANCE IS VERY CONFUSING.
[00:40:01]
THERE'S 374 SPACES REQUIRED.THEY'RE LOOKING TO GET TO 311, WHICH IS 20%.
IF THERE'S BEEN A 20% REDUCTION FROM A MULTI-FAMILY BUILD LIKE THIS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR SOMEWHERE NEAR THERE, WHICH THERE ARE QUITE A FEW, UH, WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO KNOW WHERE THAT WAS OR WHERE THAT IS AND IF IT WAS, UH, APPROVED OR DENIED.
AND THAT'S REALLY ALL WE HAVE.
WE, WE'D LOVE TO HAVE NEW NEIGHBORS.
UM, BUT THAT'S REALLY ALL THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
WHEN WE'RE DONE, MAYBE YOU CAN HELP US RESPOND TO THESE QUESTIONS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER, AND I HOPE I DON'T BUTCHER YOUR NAME.
UH, IT'S LOUIS, UH, PARDON ME, LADA.
UH, I'M HERE ALSO SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT, BUT AGAINST THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
OUR CONCERN IS SAFETY, UH, AND ALSO THE INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY AS WELL AS APPLYING A CONSISTENT STANDARD ACROSS THE BOARD.
UM, ALREADY ALONG SOME OF THOSE ROADWAYS, NO NOTABLY WRONG, LIKE HARVARD STREET, WE'RE SEEING THAT AS THE CITY'S EXPANDED, UH, WALKWAYS, WE HAVE REDUCED PARKING.
IT'S CREATING TIGHTENED PUBLIC PARKING AREAS AND LANE FLEXIBILITY, UH, THAT'S TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THE COMPOUNDING REDUCTION EFFECT SHIFTS ALL THAT DEMAND BACK ONTO THE STREET, WHICH AS WE SAID IS ALREADY CONSTRAINED.
UH, WHEN WE SEE VEHICLES PARK ALONG HARVARD, THOSE TWO, TWO CARS CAN BARELY FIT.
I'VE HAD MY CAR PERSONALLY HIT A FEW TIMES AND HEAVEN FORBID THERE SHOULD BE AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE COMING THROUGH EAST SECOND BECAUSE THEN IT'D BE A ONE WAY STREET AND YOU CAN'T EVEN TURN A LARGE TRUCK.
SO THAT'S OUR CONCERN AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THOSE, UH, THOSE VOICES ARE BEING FELT.
I I LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO I I'VE SEEN THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT, IT POSES A SIGNIFICANT RISK TO PUBLIC SAFETY.
AND, UM, THAT'S ALL THAT I WOULD CONSIDER.
AND I WOULD ALSO ASK TO RESPECTFULLY ASK WHETHER A FULL OCCUPANCY AND FIRE ACCESS AND TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS HAD BEEN CONDUCTED UNDER NO ADDITIONAL PARKING SCENARIO.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONERS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS KEVIN STRICKLAND.
HELLO, I'M KEVIN STRICKLAND, FOUNDER OF WALK AND ROLL HOUSTON, A NONPROFIT WORKING TO CREATE A CITY WHERE HOUSTONIANS CAN WALK AND ROLL SAFELY AND EASILY AS WE NEED.
PEOPLE DO NOT OWN STREET PARKING NEAR THEIR HOUSES OR AROUND THE CORNER.
STAR PIZZA DOES NOT OWN STREET PARKING FOR ITS CUSTOMERS WHO DECIDE TO NOT USE THEIR PARKING LOT.
A FEW NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS DO NOT CONTROL STREETS, WHICH BELONG TO ALL OF US.
HOUSTON HAS THREE AREAS WHERE PARKING MINIMUMS HAVE ALREADY BEEN REMOVED.
THERE'S NOTHING SPECIAL ABOUT THE CENTER CORRIDOR, WHICH SAYS IT SHOULD HAVE PARKING MINIMUMS. IF YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS AREA, I BIKE THROUGH IT A COUPLE OF TIMES A WEEK AND I LITERALLY BIKED PAST IT ON MY WAY.
THE WHOLE AREA IS RAPIDLY DENSIFYING PARKING MINIMUMS FOR THE WHOLE CORRIDOR SHOULD BE REMOVED IN A HYPER CAPITALIST CITY LIKE HOUSTON PARKING MINIMUMS OR SOCIALISM.
THE DEVELOPER HAS CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE AMOUNT OF PARKING IT NEEDS.
NEITHER THE RESIDENTS OR STAR PIZZA HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO SECOND GUESS THEM.
THE SECOND, THE COMMISSION SHOULD ALSO NOT SECOND GUESS THAT THEIR ANALYSIS BY SIMPLY DENYING THE VARIANCE IN A MUCH BETTER VERSION OF HOUSTON, THE COMMISSION AND PUBLIC WORKS WOULD COORDINATE TO ACTUALLY PLAN AND BUILD TRAFFIC CALMING IMPROVEMENTS AS THESE PROJECTS ARE APPROVED.
BUT HERE WE ARE, THE PROJECT IN AND OF ITSELF DOES NOT CREATE DANGEROUS PARKING.
YOU CANNOT PARSE OUT A ONE BAD ACTOR.
ENFORCEMENT AND SIGNAGE DOES NOT PREVENT PEOPLE FROM PARKING TO THE CORNER.
THE SOLUTION TO THE DANGEROUS PARKING THAT THE RESIDENTS CLAIM, WHICH HAPPENS ALL ALONG THIS CORRIDOR IS DAYLIGHTING.
I'LL BE BACK TO PROBABLY PRETTY MUCH REPEAT THE SAME THING.
I HOPE YOU APPROVE THE VARIANCE AT THE SECOND MEETING.
AND THE LAST SPEAKER I HAVE SIGNED TO SPEAK IS RUBEN GARZA.
I AM A LOCAL CHAPTER LEAD FOR STRONG TOWNS HOUSTON, WHICH IS THE HOUSTON CHAPTER OF THE NATIONAL NON-PROFIT STRONG TOWNS.
AND ON BEHALF OF, UH, OUR ORGANIZATION, WE'D LIKE TO OFFER OUR FULL SUPPORT, UH, FULL SUPPORT IN FAVOR OF THIS VARIANCE.
UM, AS FAR AS THE NUMBERS ARE CONCERNED, YOU KNOW, THIS IS APPROXIMATELY A 17% REDUCTION IN THE PARKING REQUIREMENT, WHICH IS ROUGHLY ABOUT 1.25 PARKING SPACES PER, UH, PER UNIT, ASSUMING A 90% OCCUPANCY.
SO, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE WILL BE PARKING PROVIDED.
UM, YOU KNOW, PARKING MANDATES, UH, STIFLE THE CREATION OF HOMES AND BUSINESSES.
[00:45:01]
CITY MANDATED PARKING MEANS LESS LAND FOR HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.UH, THE DEVELOPER IN QUESTION SHOULD NOT HAVE TO SACRIFICE HOUSING FOR PARKING.
UH, YOU KNOW, MANDATING ALSO HURTS, UH, EX, EXCUSE ME, MANDATING EXCESS PARKING ALSO HURTS.
UH, HOUSTONIANS FINANCIALLY PER RESEARCH FROM STRONG TOWNS NATIONAL AND THE PARKING REFORM NETWORK, EVERY $10,000 IN CONSTRUCTION COSTS, UH, ASSOCIATED WITH PARKING LEADS TO A ROUGHLY $10 INCREASE IN RENT.
AND THE PARKING REFORM NETWORK FURTHER FOUND THAT 200 TO $500 IN INCREASES IN RENT ARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO PARKING CONSTRUCTION COSTS.
IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS VERY SERIOUS ABOUT SUPPORTING HOUSING AFFORDABILITY IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON, IT SHOULD, UH, APPROVE AND PREFERABLY NOT DEFER THIS VARIANCE REQUEST.
UH, I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT, UH, ABOUT THE STREET PARKING AND WE'VE HEARD SOME OF THE CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBORS, BUT THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO MITIGATE ANY OF THESE CONCERNS.
'CAUSE CITIES HAVE REPEALED MAR UH, PARKING MANDATES AROUND THE COUNTRY AND THE SKY HAS NOT FALLEN.
AUSTIN IS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE AS IS BUFFALO, NEW YORK AND SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA.
UH, BUT AGAIN, THESE PERCEIVED, ANY PERCEIVED RISK BY THE NEIGHBORS ARE NOT, UH, SOLVED BY SHRINKING THE HOUSING SUPPLY IN FAVOR OF THE PARKING SUPPLY.
YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS, UH, PARKING CONCERNS, UH, THERE ARE EFFECTIVE TOOLS TO MITIGATE, UH, ON STREET PARKING CONCERNS SUCH AS METERING AND PARKING BENEFITS DISTRICTS.
AND AS MY COLLEAGUE, UH, AND MY FRIEND KEVIN STRICKLAND SAID, YOU CAN USE DAY LIGHTING AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS TO HANDLE ANY SORT OF THE SAFETY RISKS.
AND I KNOW THAT I NEED YOU TO WRAP UP REALLY QUICKLY.
WE HAVE COMPETING PETITIONS AND THE ONES IN FAVOR OF THE VARIANCE OUTWEIGH THE ONES AGAINST THE VARIANCE.
I HAVE NO ONE ELSE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO OKAY, MR. BUCKLEY.
THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS BROUGHT UP THAT I THINK YOU NEED TO ADDRESS.
UM, BOTTOM FLOOR IS, IT'S GONNA BE RETAIL.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THAT.
UM, WE DON'T EVEN REALLY SEE THEIR PLANS.
SOMETIMES THEY'LL PROVIDE US WITH PLANS, BUT CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT AT THIS STAGE WE'D HAVE.
WELL, IN THIS CASE, I MEAN, IT'S A PROJECT THAT ISN'T PERMITTING.
SO WE DO HAVE A WHOLE PLAN SET.
THE, THE CURRENT PROPOSAL DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY RETAIL USE.
SO THE PERMIT, THAT'S THE PERMIT APPLICATION THAT'S SUBMITTED DOES NOT HAVE RETAIL IN THE BOTTOM.
UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER MULTIFAMILY, UH, PROJECTS IN THE AREA WITH THE SAME REDUCED PARKING? I WOULD HAVE TO, IF YOU CAN ANSWER THAT WITHOUT STUDY, BUT YEAH, I WOULD HAVE TO FURTHER RESEARCH THAT.
BUT YES, I BELIEVE THE ANSWER IS YES.
UM, CAN I JUST ASK ONE QUESTION? YEAH, YEAH.
I MEAN, WE APPROVED THIS BEFORE.
SO WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE FROM THE ONE WE APPROVED BEFORE? I MEAN, WE'VE APPROVED THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH THAT SKY BRIDGE.
THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT STAFF NEEDS TO FINALIZE THAT.
OH, I KNOW, BUT I'M JUST THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE APPROVED BEFORE.
THE, THE SKY BRIDGE WAS A BUILDING LINE VARIANCE.
JUST THEY NOW THEY JUST WANNA REDUCE THE PARKING FROM WHAT THEY HAD BEFORE.
BE ANOTHER VARIANCE RELATED TO A BUILDING LINE ON THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA, WHICH IS REALLY THE PRIMARY REASON WHY WE'RE DEFERRING.
YOU WANNA PUT IT ALL TOGETHER IN NEXT COMMISSION MEETING? RIGHT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, GOOD.
UM, YOU MIGHT STILL WANNA TALK WITH THE NEIGHBORS 'CAUSE I KNOW THERE WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT STUDIES THAT WERE, WE DON'T DO TIAS AT THIS LEVEL, SO MAYBE YOU AND MR. BROWN FROM PUBLIC WORKS COULD GET WITH THEM AFTERWARDS AND SURE.
TALK THROUGH SOME OF THEIR QUESTIONS.
SO COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION OF DEFERRAL.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION BALDWIN.
WE DON'T NEED TO DO WE UH, WE DO NEED TO DO THAT.
[IV. Establish a Public Hearing date of March 5, 2026, for a proposed expansion to the existing Texas Medical Center Special Parking Area ]
A PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF MARCH 5TH, 2026 FOR A PROPOSED EXPANSION TO THE EXISTING TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER SPECIAL PARKING AREA.WE DO NOT NEED TO DO ITEM FIVE BECAUSE COMMISSIONER PIERCE IS HERE.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS? HEARING NONE? I'LL CLOSE THIS.
ADJOURN THIS AT 3:20 PM THANK YOU EVERYONE.