[CALL TO ORDER]
[INVOCATION]
[00:00:09]
IT IS I WILL THIS CALL THIS MEETING FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE TO ORDER.
>>> WOULD YOU PRAY? . >>> ALMIGHTY GOD, WE THANK YOU FOR CALLING THIS MEETING AND THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU HAVE DONE FOR US.
GOD AS WE GO THROUGH THIS SEASON, WE PRAY THAT WE REMEMBER THE REASON FOR THE SEASON AND IT'S THE BIRTH OF OUR SAVIOR. AND WE'LL NOT BE ABLE TO DO THE THINGS FROM A MONITORY STANDPOINT. WE ASK YOU GOD THAT YOU BLESS HIM IN A SPECIAL WAY.
BLESS US THAT ARE FORTUNATE THAN THEY ARE THAT WE MIGHT REACH OUT TO HELP SOMEONE THAT NEEDS HELP.
MAY GOD WE THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU'VE DONE IN OUR CITY. WE THANK YOU FOR BLESSING ALL OF US. WE ASK YOU TO CONTINUE TO LEAD OUR LEADERS.
ANOINT THEM AND BLESS THEM IN A SPECIAL WAY. WE ASK YOU TO DO THINGS THAT ARE PLEASING IN YOUR SITE. THESE BLESSINGS WE THANK TO ALL OF US.
WE ASK IT IN YOUR SWEET SON'S NAME, AMEN. >>> MR. CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU WOULD NOT MIND, TODAY IS PEARL HARBOR DAY. MY NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR JEFF HARDMAN WAS MY FRIEND GROWING UP. IF WE CAN TAKE 30 SECONDS OF A MOMENT OF SILENCE AND REFLECT ALL OF THE VETERANS. I'D APPRECIATE IT.
>>> ABSOLUTELY. >> I AM A VET.
[MINUTES]
THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. RIDDLE. MR. ORDER OF BUSINESS APPROVED FROM MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING. HAS EVERYONE GOTTEN A CHANCE TOTAKE AND MAKE SOME CHANGES. A MOTION. >>> CHAIRMAN WE NEED TO OPEN UP
FOR A PUBLIC MEETING. >> I INTERRUPTED YOUR SPIEL TO CALL THIS TO ORDER.
>> BUT I HAVE TO OPEN UP THE MINUTES? >> YES.
I DOUBT ANYONE WILL HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY BUT I DON'T THAT ANYONE WILL HAVE SOMETHING
TO SAY. >> OKAY, WE'VE NEVER DONE THAT BEFORE.
>>> OKAY, OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS ARE THE MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER THE SECOND MEETING.
I WILL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENT ON OUR MINUTES.
>>> SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANY DISCUSS OR A MOTION
FROM THE COMMITTEE. >> I MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND.
>> MOTION AND A SECOND. TO WE STILL NEED TO HAVE A CALL VOTE?
[PLATS]
>>> THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS TO MOVE ON THE COUPLE MATTERS OF ZONING.
THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD MAY APPEAL TO THE OFFICES OF THE SECRETARY NO LATER FROM TEN DAYS FROM THE OFFICE OF THIS MEETING AND IS REQUIRED IN WRITING. THE PLANNING IS REQUIRED TO SPEAK AS SPEAKING PERMISSION FROM THE CHAIR. THOSE WHO WISH TO SPEAK ARE REQUIRED TO STEP UP TO THE PODIUM AND ARE NO LONGER ALLOWED TO SPEAK FOR FIVE MINUTES.
IT LOOKS LIKE JEREMY IS GOING TO DO THE PLAT FOR US. >>> GOOD EVENING, I'M A CHAIR FOR THE ZONING AND THERE'S ONLY ONE WHICH IS HP-71 FINAL PLAT OF PALMETTO SUBDIVISION.
YOU ALL MAY APPROVE APPROVING THE ZONING REQUEST TO THE PATIO HOME.
THIS IS A CULMINATION LAYING OUT EIGHT LOTS TO LAYOUT IN THE ROAD.
>>> THIS PLAT WAS REMOVED TO THE COMMITTEE WHO WAS CONSISTENT FOR ARTICLE TWO AND THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO YOU ALL TODAY. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
YOU MAY HAVE. >>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR JARED? >> I WILL OPEN UP THE HEARING.
ANY DISCUSSION TO DISCUSS THIS PLAT. >> SEEING NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR A MOTION?
>> MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND. >> AND A SECOND.
[00:05:05]
>> YOU HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PLAT. MR. BARNETT, MR. BENHAM.
>> YES. >> MR. RUSSEL. >> MR. NUNEZ.
[ZONING]
>> AND MR. ROSENBAUM. >>> MOTION CARRIES. >>> 2021-02, REQUEST FROM THOMAS PAUL ANTHONY FOR USE FOR CONDITIONING PERMIT ANTHONY AND TRADE AND RECREATIONAL ROUTE 60
AND ACRES BORDERING THE 2700 BLOCKS OF WEST LAKE ROAD. >>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS JARED SMITH FOR PROUD LENS PLANNING AUTHOR FOR PLANNING FOR 2021-02.
REQUEST FROM TODD AND IT'S TO OPERATE A TRAVEL PARK KNOWN AS A RECREATIONAL PARK AND AGRICULTURAL ZONING AND THE LOCATION IS 2700 ON THE WEST LAKE ROAD.
PLANNING TO SEND OUT CERTIFICATION WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEY RECEIVED ONE RESPONSE IN FAVOR AND RESPONSE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
>>> HERE'S A RECREATION FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND ON THE WEST SIDE ON THE WEST LAKE ROAD.
IT'S CURRENTLY A VACANT PROPERTY. THERE'S ONE STRUCTURE SERVED AS A STRUCTURE THAT SERVICED THE GREAT VINE FARMS I BELIEVE IT WAS WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE.
THAT WAS LOCATED FOR QUITE SOME TIME. THEY NO LONGER OPERATE THAT FARM AT THAT LOCATION IS MY UNDERSTANDING. CURRENT ZONING MAP SHOWING THAT IT'S CURRENTLY IN AN OPEN ZONING COMMISSION AND YOU CAN SEE WEST LAKE ROAD IS A MAJOR ARTE RRIAL
ROAD. >> HERE'S A FLOOD MAP SHOWING THE WEST LAKE AND FLOOD AREA AND DOES ENCROACH ON THE MAJORITY OF THIS PROPERTY. PERMANENT USE SLIDE SHOWING ALL VIEWS THAT ARE ALLOWED IN THE ZONING AS YOU CAN SEE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED.
AND A TRAILER PARK ALLOWED FOR C CONCEPTUAL USE.
AND THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT AN OFFICIAL SITE PLAN BY THE ABILENE AND THIS IS NOT BY ALL MEANS WHAT THE FINISHED PRODUCT WILL LOOK LIKE. PHOTOS OF THE SURROUNDING
PROPERTIES. >>> NOTIFICATION MAP SHOWING THE EXTEND OF THAT 200 FOOTNOT NOTIFICATION. AND THEY SENT OUT LETTERS AND THEY RECEIVED ONE INDICATED IN
GREEN AND ONE INDICATED IN RED. >>> STAFF DID FIND THAT THIS REQUEST IS RESPONSIVE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND MAP PURSUANT OF THEIR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ALL THIS AFTERNOON. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE AT THIS TIME.
>> FROM THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS ATTACHED THERE, IT LOOKS LIKE MOST OF THAT IS IN THE FLOOD
PLANER MAYBE IN THE FLOOD WORD. >> THAT IS MY CORRECT. >>> SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IF THEY DO ANY SORT OF EARTH WORK, IT WILL REQUIRE THEM TO DEVELOP HYDROLOGICAL STUDY AND THEY WON'T HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT AND THERE'S OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ARE SOMEWHAT IN THE FLOODWAY AND THE ELECTRICAL ELECTIONS WILL BE SOMEWHERE IN THE BASE FLOOD AND ALL OF THAT WILL BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT DURING THE DESIGN FPHASE OF THE PROJECT.
>>> DID THE OBJECTION DETAIL ANYTHING? >> WELL, IT SAID I WAS IN FAVOR AND I HOPE THAT THIS PASSES ABILENE USE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> NO. >>> H402 CEDAR. LIKE ONE OF THE ROLLING STONES SONGS, THIS IS THE LAST SONG. AND I'VE KNOWN HIM FOR 40 YEARS AND HE'S WORKING ON FUMES.
[00:10:06]
RECOMMENDING THOMAS AND AS YOU NOTED, FLOODED ZONES AND FLOODWAYS AND TRYING TO GET SOMETHING ON TAX BASE SO AN RV PARK IS SOMETHING WE CAME UP WITH.TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YOU REMEMBER THE WHISTLE TOPPED FROM DOWN THE HILL FROM ACU IS KIND OF THE SAME FORMAT, A LOT OF THAT PROPERTY WAS IN THE FLOODWAY.
AND SINCE THE PEAK OF CEDAR CREEK AFTER THE DRAINAGE AREA WE FELT LIKE WE HAD PLENTY OF NOTIFICATION TO GET THOSE TEMPORARY RESIDENCES OUT THERE. THEN THOSE THINGS WILL NOT BE A PERMANENT MOBILE HOME. OTHER THAN THAT, I'M GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANKS. WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT MONTH. ANYONE ELSE.
ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO TALK IN THIS CASE. REQUEST FOR JARED OR A MOTION?
>> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND. AND A SECOND.
>>> MR. BARNETT. >> YES. >> MR. BENHAM.
>> YES. >> REVEREND LANKFORD. >>> AND THE MOTION
LANGFORD. >> AND THE MOTION CARRIES. >>> RECOMMENDING TO CHANGE 10.6
ACRES AND TO CHANGE FROM RS-8 TO RS-6. >>> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.
MY NAME IS NICK WATSON. I WORK FROM THE CENTER DEVELOPMENT STAFF WILL BE AIDING IN THIS CASE. THE REQUEST IS TO RETRACK ONE DENSITY AND THE OTHERS IS TO
REZONE FROM RS-6 DISTRICT. >> AND THIS IS FROM THE TWO IN QUESTION AND THIS IS AN EXTENSION FROM THE OLD FOREST HILL AND THE OLD FOREST MEADOWS EDITION.
BOTH TRACKS, ONE IS ZONED AS RS-6. AND THAT IS THE EASTERN MOST ONE AND THEY'RE PROPOSING THAT TO MEDIUM DISTRICT AND THEY'LL SEE THE PROPOSED SIX IS CURRENTLY
ZONED AS RS-P. >>> IN 1980, BOTH OF THESE TRACKS GIVEN A ZONE OF THE AL-DISTRICT. AND GIVEN THE TO WHACKS THESE WERE REZONED AND THE OLD NAME
WAS REZONED TO FOREST ZONE. >> AND THEY WERE REZONED TO RS-8 AND THIS WAS FORMALLY PLANTED IN 2021 AND CURRENTLY NOTING THE TWO HOUSES RIGHT THERE. THEY'RE REQUESTING TO CONTINUE
THESE DISTRICTS OF THE VACANT TRACK. >>> THESE ARE THE CURRENT ZONES RIGHT HERE. THIS IS THE PERMITTED USES WITHIN RS-ZONING.
MEDIUM USES WITHIN MEDIUM DENSITY. >> THIS IS THE GRAPHIC PHOTO
SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. >>> YOU CAN SEE THERE'S RECENT ZONING AND JUST TO VERIFY THE DISTRICT. KIND OF DIFFICULT TO GET PHOTOS THERE.
YOU CAN SEE IT'S JUST VACANT LAND AND YOU CAN SEE THE DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING.
>>> HERE'S A NOTIFICATION MAP AND YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LOT IN FAVOR FOLLOWED BY THE SAME
COMPONENT. >>> I FOUND OUT THIS WAS CONSISTENT FOR THE ZONING MAP AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 1.4 OF THE LAND CODE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL AND THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>>> THANKS, NECK. APPRECIATE IT. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF
ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND VISIT WITH US. >>> CLAYTON JACOB AND MARTIN AGENT FOR THE DEVELOPER. THIS IS AS NICK MENTIONED AN EXTENSION AND REZONING FOR OPENS TO FINISH OUT THIS TRACK. THIS IS THE SECOND PHASE OF THE MEADOW AND YOU CAN SEE THERE'S
[00:15:01]
AN MD OUT THERE AND THERE'S A SUBSET AS WELL AS SOME ELECTRIC THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO BE A POCKET ALMOST INDEPENDENTLY AS THERE ARE SIX TO BEING PROPOSED. AND WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANYQUESTIONS. >>> THANK YOU. >>> THANK YOU.
>>> ANYBODY ELSE? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? >> ANY DISCUSSION?
QUESTIONS FROM NICK OR A MOTION. >> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE. MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> AND SECOND. MR. BARNET.
>> MISS FLEMMING. >>> YES. >> AND THE MOTION TO APPROVE
CARRIES. >>> GOING TO -- Z AND TO AMEND TERMS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT NUMBER 122. >>> AFTERNOON AND AGAIN NICK WALLACE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. I'LL BE PLANNING THIS AND AGENT MICHAEL BURDEN.
>> THIS IS TO AMEND THE PLANNING FOR DISTRICT 122. >>> WE SEND OUT NOTIFICATIONS TO RECEIVE TWO IN FAVOR AND TWO OPPOSITIONS IN REQUEST. A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT THIS CASE IN SPECIFIC. AND YOU'LL SEE FROM THIS TRACK AND IT'S TRACK ONE AND TRACK TWO. IT'S MIGUEL RESTAURANT IF YOU HAVE EVER BEEN THERE.
RIGHT THERE. >> AND THIS WAS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, 122 AND CREATED IN
2 2008. >>> AND THIS TRACK BEING LOT 22 BLOCK A OF MD-ABILENE. AND THE APPLICANT OWNS BOTH TRACKS AND REQUIRES A BASE ZONING OF RETAIL DISTRICT WHEREAS TRACK TWO IS RESTRICTED TO RESIDENTIAL TWO DISTRICT
STANDARDS. >>> THE REASON FOR THIS WAS IN 2008, THERE WAS A REQUEST TO REZONE THIS FROM LIMITED COMMERCIAL TO DIFFERENT COMM COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT THE NEIGHBORING DISTRICTS AND AT THE TIME THERE WAS A FLOOD ZONE. IT WAS TABLED AND THEN STAFF RECOMMENDED A PD.
AND THEIR SPECIFIC LANGUAGE WITHIN THE PD. THE REASON FOR THIS LOT AND TRACK TWO IS TO REMAIN VACANT AND ONLY TO BE USED FOR PUBLIC USE AND TRACK ONE CAN REMAIN AS
RETAIL. >> LIKE I SAID IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE RS-6 AND SHOULD BE RESERVED FOR RS-6 AND PAST RECREATIONAL PURPOSES HOWEVER WITHIN THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REMOVE THAT EFFECTS TRACK ONE. IT'S SPECIFICALLY LISTED UNDER SITE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT 7S AND IT'S SCREENING AND FENCING. PER THE ORDINANCE, THERE SHALL BE A SILENT HEDGE TO ACHIEVE A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF EIGHT FEET WITHIN THREE WEEKS OF PLANNING AND SHOULD BE SPACED TO ALLOW A BARRIER BETWEEN HIGH DRIVE AND VISUAL WAY.
VISUAL ENTRANCES SHOULD BE MAINTAINED. THE REASON FOR THIS TODAY IS DURING THE FREEZE THAT WE HAD LAST YOU KNOW IN JANUARY THERE WAS A SOLID EVERGREEN EDGE
DURING THE TRACK THERE AND APPARENTLY THOSE HAVE DIED. >> SO THE APPLICANT REPLACED IT WITH THE GREEN GRASS. WE RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AND THEY LOOKED INTO IT AND THE CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE BECAUSE THIS IS A ZONING VIOLATION.
AND A VIOLATION OF THE PD. SO WE OPENED UP THE CASE AND INFORMED THE APPLICANT OF THIS, THE OWNER AND NOW THE OWNER IS LOOKING TO RECTIFY THIS LANGUAGE.
SPECIFICALLY THIS WAS AN IDEA OF THE PREVIOUS PLANNING STAFF BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE AN RS-6 DISTRICT THAT IS NEIGHBORING THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT YOU HAVE TO USE SOME SORT OF LAND USE BUFFER
[00:20:04]
AND IT WAS A SOLID ROW OF EVERGREEN HEDGES THAT SHALL SCREEN THE PARKING LOTS FROM ADJACENT DISTRICTS AND THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE SCREENING IN PLACE.>>> HERE ARE SEVERAL PHOTOS FOR THE SCREENING PROJECT. YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT SIDE, THAT IS A WESTERN VIEW OF THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE. YOU CAN SEE THE NEW GRASS VERSUS OLD GRASS THERE AND IN THE BOTTOM LEFT-HAND CORNER AND THERE'S THE EASTERN BOUNDARY LINE OF HEDGES THAT SHOULD BE LOCATED ON THE WESTERN PORTION OF THAT SIDEWALK.
THERE'S THE VIEWS FROM THE PARKING LOT WHERE YOU CAN KIND OF SEEN HOW IT SHOULD BE -- A PARKING LOT SHOULD BE SCREENED FROM THE RESIDENTIAL AREA AND THEN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORTH AND THEN THE VIEW OF THE TRACT ONE FROM TRACK TWO.
>> ONCE AGAIN, WE SEND A NOTIFICATION OF THIS REZONE REQUEST, TWO IN FAVOR AND TWO IN OPPOSITION. ACCORDING TO INFORMATION PROVIDES WITHIN THE OPERATION, THE PRIMARY REASON IS THAT THE APPLICANT FELT THAT ON BEHALF OF THE SAFETY OF THE STAFF WHO ARE EMPLOYED AT MIGUEL'S WEB AWEBSI. AND WE HAD TWO ATTEMPTED THEFTS THERE.
AND THE SOLID HEDGE DIED IN THE FREEZE SO THEY REMOVED IT ALL AND REPLACED IT WITH SOLID
EDGES. >>> THE STAFF FOUND THAT THE STAFF IS REVIEWED AND PURSUANT TO 1.4.1.4 AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDS A DENIAL IS A SCREENING ORDINARILY REQUIRED BETWEEN RESIDENTIALLY ZONED LOT AND COMMERCIAL LOT. I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS YOU GUYS MIGHT HAVE. >>> DO YOU HAVE THE SLIDE THAT WOULD NORMALLY BE REQUIRED?
I DO NOT. I JUST GOT THIS TEXT. >>> SO WHAT WOULD NORMALLY BE REQUIRED IS A 3-FOOT HEDGE. HOW DOES THE BUFFER FIT INTO THIS?
>> WELL, IF IT WAS PD AND NOT AN RS-6 THEY WOULD REQUIRE IT TO HAVE A 25 BUFFER WHICH IS 25 POINTS THAT THEY MUST MEET AND THESE POINTS ARE BASED OFF CERTAIN TYPES OF TREES THAT NEED TO BE PLANTED AND SEPARATION AND BUFFER YARDS AND FENCING AND THEY HAVE TO MEET FIVE FEET AT GREEN SPACE BETWEEN ONE SEPARATION AND 25 POINTS AS WELL.
>>> WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT IF WE WERE TO PUT THAT WOULD BE?
>> NO. >> THE COUNCIL WAS DENIED AFTER RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING, WHAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP? WOULD IT BE THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO INSTALL A NEW BUFFER LIKE A
DIFFERENT FENCE DESIGN? WHAT WOULD IT BE. >> YES.
THAT'S WHAT IS ORDINARILY REQUIRED. THAT'S WHY WE' ARE DENYING IT BECAUSE IT WOULD ORDINARILY BE ALLOWED. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE SEEING ABOUT
POSSIBLE OUTCOMES. ANYMORE QUESTIONS FOR NICK? >> THANK YOU, NICK.
>>> I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND VISIT WITH US.
>>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ROBERT BROWNING AND I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM BROWNING CIRCLE ON THAT CUL-DE-SAC. ANYWAY, WE OPPOSE THIS GOING IN.
WE BOUGHT OUR HOME IN 0-7 AND AT THE TIME WE WERE LEAD TO BELIEVE THAT HENRIK MEDICAL CENTER AND THEY HAD WHISTERIA NURSING HOME AND THEY WERE TOLD THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD A PARK AND BUILD SIGNS FOR THE RESIDENCE AND THAT DID NOT TAKE PLACE. SINCE THEY HAVE TAKEN THE HEDGES
[00:25:07]
ARE NO LONGER THERE. IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A LOT MORE TRAFFIC AND WHETHER IT'S EMPLOYEES OR CUSTOMERS AND JUST USING IT AS A SHORTCUT BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO WALK AND THE FENCING OR THE HEDGES ANY LONGER. ANYWAY THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE STRONGLY OPPOSE AND HOPE THAT IT'S STRONGLY APPROVED, ANY QUESTIONS.>>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE. GOOD AFTERNOON.
MICHAEL BURTON WITH EXCEPTIONAL HOLDING. I HAVE SOME PICTURES BUT I DON'T HAVE THEM IN A BING TAL FORMAT. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'LL WORK FOR THESE FORMATS.
>>> YOU CAN PASS THEM AROUND. >> AND I HAVE ENOUGH FOR ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE AS WELL.
>> WE JUST HAVE TO KEEP THEM COPIED. >>> I CAN BEGIN WITH THE BUSHES DIED WITH THE FREEZE IN FEBRUARY ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE GROUND. SHORTLY AFTER THE BUSHES DIEING, WE CUT THEM IN HALF HOPING THAT THEY WOULD BEGIN TO GROW BACK. WE QUICKLY REALIZED THAT WAS NOT GOING TO BE THE CASE. TOOK THEM OUT IN LATE APRIL BY THE ROOT.
FOR SPERSPECTIVE, THERE WERE 1 O BUSHES FROM 15-16 FEET TALL THAT WE HAD TO REMOVE BY THE ROOT.
WHEN WE DID THAT THAT WAS TO A COST OF ABOUT $15,000. WE SPENT AN ADDITIONAL $12,000 ON SPRINKLER REPAIR AND SAW INSTALLATION AND MAKING SURE WE MAINTAINED THE BEAUTY OF THE AREA THAT THE BUSHES DID EXIST IN. UPON TAKING THE BUSHES DOWN WE REALIZED THAT IT GREATLY IMPROVED THE LOOK OF THE PROPERTY FROM ALL ANGLES.
AND FOR PERSPECTIVE IF YOU LOOK AT THESE PICTURES IN THE PD AREA BEHIND THE RESTAURANT THERE IS 60-FOOT GRASS THAT WE'VE MAINTAINED LIKE A PARK BEFORE YOU EVER REACH HIGH MEADOWS THAT I CAN TELL YOU FROM UNFORTUNATELY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE PEOPLE USE REGULAR TO WALK THEIR DOGS IN WE LIKE THAT. WE'RE IN FAVOR OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD USING THE PROPERTY THAT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR FOLKS IN THE MORNING TO BE WALKING THEIR DOGS AND THE PARKING LOT.
SO WHEN THEY REMOVED THAT AND REDID ALL OF THE WORK IT WAS NOT INTENTIONAL AND WE HAD FORGOTTEN TEN YEARS AGO ABOUT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THE BUSHES DIED THROUGH NO FAULT OF OUR OWN.
AND WITH NO DISRESPECT TO THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE HERE TODAY. I VISITED WITH MULTIPLE CUSTOMERS AND THEY LOVE IT. THEY LOVE THE WAY IT LOOKS. WITH THE LANGUAGE IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION TO REACH 8 FEET WITHIN THREE YEARS IN WEST TEXAS THE ONLY BUSH THAT'S AN OPTION FOR THAT IS A CONDITION. THEY'RE SLIGHTLY DISEASED PRONE. VERY SENSITIVE TO WEATHER ONCE THEY'RE FULLY GROUP SO IT BECOMES A DIFFICULT ONGOING ISSUE FOR US TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 7 I'M TRYING TO GO I'M TRYING TO GO QUICKLY BUT THE PRIMARY OCCASION IS WHERE SOMEONE WAS HIDING BEHIND THE BUSHES TO DO SOMETHING NOT GOOD. ON TWO OCCASIONS, TWO WOMEN FROM GOING TO THEIR VEHICLE AND ONE MAN CAME BEHIND THEM WITH A KNIFE AND SOMEONE SCARED THEM OFF.
ON THE SECOND REPORT, WE HAD A CUSTOMER ON HIGH MEADOWS AND WE SAW THEM LOOKING THROUGH PEOPLE'S CAR WINDOWS. ON THIRD OCCASION WE HAD SOMEONE THAT HID THEMSELVES INSIDE OF THE BUSHES AND WAITED UNTIL AFTER WE CLOSED, CLIMBED THE FENCE AND WENT THROUGH THE BACK DOORS AND BROKE INTO ALL OF THE MEASURES AND DRUG IT HALFWAY AROUND THE KITCHEN.
[00:30:02]
IT REALLY BECOMES A SERIOUS CONCERN THAT I'M ASKING THE COMMISSION BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE MAKES A RULING ON THIS. WE DON'T WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS BECAUSE OF BUSHES THAT ARE TOO TALL: IT'S TRULY MAINTAINED. IF YOU'VE BEEN OUT THERE WE TAKEGREAT PRIDE IN IT. >> WE WENT THROUGH ALL OF THE RULES RELATED TO ALL OF THE SPECIFIC TYPE OF ZONING AND WITHOUT BELABORING THE ISSUE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL PARKING LOTS WITH RESIDENTIAL SCREENING THROUGHOUT ABILENE TO ANY OTHER BUSINESS AND THE ONE THING THAT IS UNIQUE FOR US WE HAVE A 50-FOOT BUFFER THROUGH THE SLEIGHTEST AREA.
ON THE PICTURE THAT'S THE SECOND PICTURE IN YOUR PACKET SHOWING THE PICTURES OF THE GENERAL THAT IS DIRECTLY FACING AN EXIT. WE HAVE NEEDED TO MAINTAIN THAT FOR RAT ISSUES THAT HAVE HAPPENED SO BUSHES THERE ARE NOT REALLY EVEN AN OPTION. IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT PICTURE FOLLOWING THAT PICTURE, YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE BUILDING THAT IS THE CLOSEST ON WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS EASTERN BOUNDARY IS NEARLY 200 FEET FROM THE PARKING LOT AND IT FACES WHISTERIA PLACE.
YOU'LL ALSO NOTICE THAT WHISTERIA PLACE THAT IS UNDER A PD, AGAIN I DON'T WANT TO CAUSE ANY ISSUES FOR THEM, THEY USE THE AREA IN FRONT OF THEIR BUILDING AS THEIR PARKING LOT.
IT'S ON THE STREET AT ANY GIVEN TIME. IT'S IN THE PARKING LOT AND THERE'S NO SCREEN AND THERE'S NOTHING STOPPING THAT FROM HAPPENING.
SINCE WE HAVE REMOVED THE BUSHES WE HAVE NO SAFETY ISSUES WHATSOEVER.
AND AS I MENTIONED, NUMEROUS PEOPLE HAVE COMMENTED TO ME ON HOW MUCH BETTER THEY LIKE IT THAT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. JOHN SAMS WOULD HAVE BEEN HERE TODAY.
HE'S THE CAPTAIN OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. THE REASON HE WAS THERE HE LIVED BEHIND THERE AS WELL. HE RESPONDED TO A TRUCK BACKING INTO THE BUSHES AND LEAVING IT RUNNING, BURNED THE STRUCK AND BURNED THREE OTHER VEHICLES AND CAUSED SOME PRETTY SERIOUS DAMAGE. SO I TRIED TO GET EVERYTHING OUT AS QUICKLY AS I CAN.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >>> SO DID THE STAFF VISIT WITH
YOUR FAMILY ABOUT THE CRITERIA IN THE LAND? >> THE ONLY CONVERSATION THAT I HAD WITH THE STAFF IS MY INITIAL THOUGHTS WHICH I JUST EXPRESSED TO YOU AND THEN THE PROCESS THAT I NEEDED TO FOLLOW FOR THE APPLICATION AND THEN THE NOTIFICATION THAT THERE WAS A DENIAL. THERE WAS NO CONSIDERATION FOR ANOTHER OPTION AND NO FURTHER CONSIDERATION FOR MY DEEP CONCERNS OF THE SAFETY ISSUES OR EVEN A CONSIDERATION THAT THERE IS 80 FEET TO THE NEAREST HOUSE ACROSS HIGH MEADOWS AND IT ONLY FACES A GARAGE AND A 6-FEET FENCE. THERE WAS NEVER ANY CONVERSATION BEYOND THE INITIAL REASONS.
>>> FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE I WOULD SAY -- SO IT'S PARKING LOTS, DRIVING LANES AND OTHER SIMILAR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS SHOULD BE SCREENED FROM RESIDENTIAL ACCIDENTS WHETHER ADJACENT OR CROSSING THE STREET AND COMBINATION OF THESE WITH A MINIMUM HIGH OF 36 INCHES.
>>> YES, I DID READ THAT WHICH LEAD ME TO LOOKING AROUND ABILENE AND THAT'S A FARM AND RANCH STORE DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE SAME RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING AND THERE IS NO HEDGE, NO BARRIER. WE WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO BEGIN A CONVERSATION ABOUT A 36-INCH HEDGE BECAUSE IT DOES HELP TO SOLVE A SAFETY ISSUE BUT THAT WAS NEVER PRESENTED IN THIS SCENARIO AND I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT FROM A BEAUTIFICATION STANDPOINT. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT 80 FEET OF DISTANCE THAT A 3-FOOT HEDGE WOULD HAVE ANY IMPACT ON A LOOK THAT HAS NUMEROUS TREES OR HEDGES AND QUITE FRANKLY, WE'RE
[00:35:07]
PROUD OF HOW WE MAINTAIN OUR PROPERTIES. WE'RE ONE OF THE FEW THAT ALWAYS REPLACES A DEAD BUSH OR A TREE OR MAKES SURE IT LOOKS SHARP ALL OF THE TIME.>>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MICHAEL? >> THANK YOU, SIR, I APPRECIATE
IT. ANYBODY ELSE. >>> I'M HIS BETTER HALF.
I JUST HAVE A LITTLE BIT TO ADD. >>> WHAT'S YOU'RE DRESS. >>> 10 WHISTERIA CIRCLE.
>>> 10 WISTERIA CIRCLE. >> NICK CAN YOU PUT THE MAP UP THERE SO WE CAN SEE WHERE
THEY'RE AT. >> AND WHERE ARE YOU GUYS AT? >> 52772 I BELIEVE.
WE'RE AT THE CORNER OF GOING INTO WISTERIA CIRCLE. >> ALL OF THE GARAGES FOR THOSE HOMES ARE IN THE BACK OF THEIR HOMES AND THEY COME OUT OF THAT ALLEY TO COME ON TO HIGH MEADOWS TO LEAVE. SOME OF THE PEOPLE, I KNOW THIS DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHILE WE'RE HERE AND THERE'S A LOT OF EMPLOYEES THAT PARK ON HIGH MEADOWS.
THERE'S NOTHING ANYTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT AND THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC COMING OUT OF THE ALLEY AREA. AND THERE'S A LOT MORE THAT YOU CAN SEE OUT OF THE ALLEY AREA TO SEE OUT OF THE CARS. AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IS IF A NEIGHBOR HAD SAW WHAT THEY DID, THEY WERE TOLD THAT THERE WOULD BE ADDITIONAL PARKING ADDED.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TRUE BUT THERE PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ADDED TO THE BACK AND A FENCE OR EVERGREEN FENCE WOULD BE NEEDED MORE THEN MORE IN THE FUTURE FOR THAT THAN NOW. IF IF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE APPROVES THIS CHANGE, THERE WOULD BE NO REQUIREMENT FOR ANY FENCING IN THE FUTURE. . AND AS YOU ALL KNOW, IT'S EASIER TO TAKE THINGS AWAY THAN TO ADD IT. SO IF THAT WAS DONE -- IF THEY DO ADD LATER AND THIS IS APPROV WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE ANY TYPE OF FENCING, IF THEY DO ADD PARKING THAN WHAT DO WE DO LATER ABOUT PARKING LOT MAY BE THERE TO BUFFER THAT FROM THE
NEIGHBORHOOD SO WE'RE OPPOSING. >> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. NICK, ON THAT TRACK TWO, IT'S RS-6, CAN THEY PAVE THAT WITHOUT
CHANGING THE ZONING ON IT? >> FURTHER PD THEY CANNOT PAVE THAT.
IT'S OPEN GREEN SPACE. >> SO IF THEY WANTED TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT THEY HAVE TO COME BACK HERE TO CHANGE THAT PIECE OF IT. JUST TO REITERATE BY THE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE CLOSE PROXIMITY FROM THE CLOSE COMMERCIAL, WE ONLY APPLY THESE STANDARDS WHEN THE STANDARD IS APPLICABLE. SO WHEN WE WANT TO MAKE ADDITIONAL APPLICATIONS, THAT'S WHEN WE MAKE THESE STANDARDS AND WE DON'T HAVE TO FORCE THESE STANDARDS UNLESS THEY GO THROUGH THE SOURCE PLAN PROJECT. SO THE SCREENING GOT INTO THE
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN 2010. >> AT LEAST THAT'S WHEN THE MOST RECENT UPDATE HAS GONE.
AND THERE'S THAT 36-INCH NORMALLY REQUIRED BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT AND ADJACENT
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, SORRY. >> DID I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?
>> I DID: >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM NICK AND FURS DISCUSSION OR A
DISCUSSION? >> WELL, IT SOUNDED AS THOUGH ENFORCEMENT WENT OUT AND MAKE THE PD AND THE PD WAS IF SCREENING WAS ALLOWED AND THERE ARE NO OTHER ALTERNATIVES AND IT DIDN'T SOUND AS IF THERE WAS ANY OTHER ENFORCEMENT AND I DIDN'T SEE ANY OTHER PROPOSALS COMING
[00:40:01]
THROUGH FOR OTHER OPTIONS THAT MIGHT FIT AS A SUBSTITUTE AND THEY'RE SAYING THEY CAN DO THIS AND STILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS. IT'S JUST AN OUT RIGHT REMOVAL OF IT.>> THAT'S WHEN I ASKED A QUESTION AND IT'S A FENCE OR SOMETHING NOT NECESSARILY ALIVE HEDGE THAT NEEDS TO BE MAIN MAINTAINED.
>> WE WOULD STILL LIKE TO SEE GREEN SPACE. AND WE WOULD STILL LIKE TO SEE LAND SCAPING AND SIMPLY ADDING A FENCE IS ADDING A FENCE TO THE NORTHERN PORTION.
ADDING A FENCE TO ALREADY A COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHED DISTRICT INSTEAD OF UTILIZING A
LANDSCAPING MATERIAL. >> I'M SORRY -- >> -- THAT'S OKAY.
THAT'S OKAY. ESSENTIALLY IT DEFEATS THE PURPOSE OF THE INAT THE PARTICULAR TIME OF THE LANDSCAPE INTENT OF THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS. YOU'RE CREATING THIS FALSE FACADE TO SCREEN. IT'S JUST ANOTHER COMMERCIAL THING TO LOOK TO.
>>> TO BE DISCRETE, THERE'S JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HIGH MEADOWS. IT'S BUTTED UP AGAINST THE STREET AS NORMAL. AND THERE'S A LOT OF BUFFER AND WHEN THE CODE WAS DEVELOPED, IT
WAS MORE FOR WHAT IS AROUND WISTERIA WAY. >>> YEAH, I WENT THROUGH THE MINUTES AND COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING ABOUT THE HEDGES AND TRAFFIC CONGESTION.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK FOR OPTIONS IF THERE ARE OPTIONS. I DON'T FEEL LIKE ENFORCING WHAT'S THERE. AS IF WHICH KNOW WHAT'S THERE TODAY IF ANYONE AGREES.
I THINK THERE SHOULD BE SOME BETTER OPTIONS THAN PUTTING UP 8-FOOT HIGH BUSHES UP AROUND
THAT. >>> I AGREE. >> KELLY, WHAT'S OUR -- CAN WE
MAKE A RECOMMENDATION? >> WELL, I THINK YOU CAN MAKE AN ALTERNATE REQUIREMENT IN THE PD BUT IF JARED, IF YOU CAN REPEAT AGAIN AS FAR AS THE ENFORCEMENT -- SAY WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE SITE PLAN AGAIN BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE NOT CREATING A NEW SITE PLAN BECAUSE THE
BUILDINGS ARE ALREADY BUILT. >>> SO WE HAVE WHAT IS CONSIDERED BETWEEN THE SITE DEVELOPMENT TRIGGERS IN THE EVENT THAT A COMMERCIAL LOT IS TO BE DEVELOPED OR THERE'S AN ADDITION TO IT AND THEY'RE IMPROVING AN IMPERVIOUS CIRCLE, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO MEET CERTAIN SITE REQUIREMENTS. AND THEY HAVE THE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS. IF YOU GUYS WANTED TO, YOU GUYS COULD HAVE 36-INCH SHRUBS SEPARATED WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE TO APIPEASE THE R RESI RESIDENCES. SO YOU CAN HAVE HEDGES SPACED BETWEEN 2-3 FEET IN THE NORTHERN PORTIONS AND ON THE EASTERN SECTIONS. YOU CAN PROPOSE SOMETHING LIKE
THAT AS OPPOSED TO A SOLID EVERGREEN HEDGE. >>> WE WOULD HAVE TO PROPOSE THAT OR ACCEPT THE CITY'S REQUIREMENT AND THEN YOU WOULD WORK ON THAT WITH THEM.
>> WE CAN TABLE THIS AND GO BACK AND WORK ON A PLAN. >>> THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION, TABLE THIS AND LET THEM WORK ON SOME OF THE DETAILS AND GO BACK TO THIS.
>> BUT WE DON'T NEED TO DISCUSS THE DE NNIAL OF THIS REQUEST. >> WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM SUGGESTIONS FROM YOU GUYS AS FAR AS LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS. IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF HAVING SOME SORT OF SHRUBBERY THAT IS THERE AND IF YOU ARE AN APPROVAL OF NOT PERMITTING THIS.
[00:45:02]
>>> I'LL BE HAPPY TO THROW UP MY THOUGHTS. >> I FEEL LIKE ALONG WISTERIA WAY. AND IF IT'S NOW IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES WE OUGHT TO SCREEN 6-7 AND WE HAD 75-FOOT BUFFERS AND WE REQUIRE A FEW MORE TREES IN THERE TO MAKE THAT NORTHERN BOUNDARIES LOOK A LITTLE BETTER. SO I GUESS I'M KIND OF IN BETWEEN. I'M KIND OF SAYING A HEDGE ALONG WISTERIA WAY AND SOME SORT OF
LAND BUFFER. >>> WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE REQUIREMENTS, IT CONSISTS OF A 5-FOOT WIDE BUFFER. AND THEY HAVE 60 FEET SO THE BUFFER IS THERE.
YOU GET 16 POINTS FOR EACH 5 ADDITIONAL POINTS SO JUST LOOKING FOR 10 POINTS.
THREE SQUARE FEET EQUAL TO EACH BUFFER SO TREES AS OPPOSED TO BUFFERS AND IT SAYS THREE TREES.
THEY ALREADY HAVE SOME TREES. >>> BUT THAT'S ALONG THE TRACK. >> THAT'S ON TRACK TWO.
>> AND TRACKS DOES NOT BUT UP AGAINST HIGH MEADOWS. TRACK ONE DOES NOT BUT UP ALONG THE NORTH SIDE. AND ALONG WISTERIA WAY ALONG THE LATTER PARAGRAPH, WHAT DOES IT
SAY IN THERE. >> BUFFER FOR THE ADJACENT FOR PURPOSES OF THE ADJACENT SEPARATED BY AN ALLEY AND DOES NOT INCLUDE PROPERTY SEPARATED BY A STREET.
WHICH ONE ARE YOU LOOKING AT? >> PARKING LOT AND LOADED AREAS ARE SIMILAR TO OTHER VEHICLE ACCIDENTS SHALL BE SCREENED FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WHETHER AJDJACENT OR ACROSS THE STREET AND WE'LL BURN WITH A MINIMUM HIGH OF 3-6 INCHES AND I THINK ALONG THE WAY OF WISTERIA WAY AND ALONG THE TRACK II IS MORE OF A BUFFER. BECAUSE THE TRACK II DOES BUT UP
ALONG MEADOWS. >> SO THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE PLACEMENT -- IT'S STILL A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. TRACK II IS A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND IT'S RS-6.
AND IT'S HEDGES. >> THERE'S NOT EVER GOING TO BE HOUSES BUILT IN THERE.
>> CORRECT. >> IT'S STILL ZONED APPROPRIATELY.
SO I GUESS I'M NOT IN FAVOR EVER AN OUT RIGHT DENIAL. WE CAN OPEN UP THE DISCUSSION AND TABLE IT AND WE'RE IN AN ALL-OUT PD SITUATION. IS THAT OKAY WITH EVERYBODY.
>> KELLY, DOES THAT NEED TO BE A MOTION? >> I CAN OPEN UP PUBLIC MEETING.
>> AND THEN MAKE A MOTION. >> I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. MIKE, WOULD YOU COME BACK UP?
>> YOU KIND OF HEARD OUR DISCUSSION NOW. I WOULD TEND TO AGREE WITH THE DISCUSSIONS ON TRACK II BECAUSE OF THE GREAT DISTANCE ON WISTERIA WAY AND TOTALLY UNDERSTAND AND AGAIN THE FENCE BECAUSE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE DO PARK ON THE STREET BECAUSE WE'RE BUSY IN THE CASE. I WOULD HATE SOMETHING TO HAPPEN IF SOMEONE IS GOING TO THEIR CAR AT 10:00 AT NIGHT AND I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR HERE BECAUSE THAT'S THE PRIMARY REASON AS TO WHY WE'RE HERE. ALONG WISTERIA WAY. TO ALLEVIATE THE CONCERN OF THE PARKING LOT ON TRACK II, THAT CAN'T HAPPEN BUT THE ORIGINAL STAFF AND RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE ACT FOR A TOTAL ZONING CHANGE. I THINK IF WE HAD DONE THAT WE COULD APPROACH PUTTING A PARKING LOT ON THERE. BUT NO WAY WE WANT TO OPEN PANDORA'S BOX. MOST OF THE NEIGHBORS ARE GREAT CUSTOMERS.
WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN TRACK II LIKE A PARK AND LET PEOPLE MAINTAIN IT AS WE
[00:50:02]
SEE FIT. >>> I THINK TRACK II DOES NOT WORK AS A BUFFER AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION DOES NOT WORK BECAUSE IT'S TO TRY TO CREATE A BUFFER FOR A CAKE.
AND YOU PROBABLY HAVE REACHED THE POINT OF TOTAL DISTANCE BUT WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY GETTING
CREDIT FOR TRACK ONE. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU NEED MORE PARKING.
>>> AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. >>> WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO TABLING
YOUR DISCUSS TODAY -- >> -- I WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK OUT THE BEST SAFETY AND I DON'T THINK THE NEIGHBORS WOULD RESPOND WELL TO THAT REQUEST BUT WE DO WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS.
>> SINCE I WOULD OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO COME BACK AND WORK WITH
US. >>> ALL RIGHT, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I'D LIKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS. >>> UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING? >> YEAH, UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING
SO HE CAN PRESENT THIS BACK TO US FOR THE LANGUAGE OF THE PD. >>> SECOND IT.
>>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE TO OUR NEXT MEETING. >> MR. BARNETT.
>> REVEREND LANGFORD. >> YES: >> AND MR. ROSENBAUM.
>>> YES. >>> THANK YOU, GOOD DISCUSS. NOW I'M LOST, D-2029 TO RETAIL
DISTRICT TO 2601 ROSS STREET. >> THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. >> MY NAME IS BRAD STONE AND I'M A PLANNER ON THE CITY PLAN STAFF AND I WILL BE PRESENTING THIS CLASS TODAY AND THERE IS A QUESTION FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM AN RS-6 OR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL DISTRICT ON ROSS AVENUE NORTH OF SOUTH 27 STREET. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE CENTER OF THE PHOTO BY THE YELLOW STRIPING THAT YOU SEE.
THERE ARE TWO ADDRESSES THERE. BOTH OF THEM OWNED BY THE SAME PROPERTY OWNER.
THE SOUTHERN MOST ADDRESS CORRESPONDS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 2646 ROSS AVENUE AND THE OTHER PROPERTY 2649 ROSS AVENUE CORRESPONDS TO A RESIDENCE WITH A VEHICLE AND AN
UP LAWFUL STRIPING CONTAINER. >> IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME, SURROUNDING THIS PROPERTY ARE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS. FOR EXAMPLE, TO THE WEST ACROSS WEST AVENUE IS A BROADVIEW
BAPTIST CHURCH ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THIS PHOTO. >> TO THE SOUTH IS A RESIDENCE BUT AS YOU MAY RECALL AT LAST MONTH'S MEETING, THEY RECOMMENDED RESIDENTIAL RETAIL SHOPPING AT THAT ZONING PROPERTY. AND LAST CITY'S MEETING CITY COUNCIL AFFIRMED THAT RECOMMENDATION AND DID APPROVE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AT RETAIL AND
ROSS AVENUE. >> TO THE NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY, WELL, OUR TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, ONE OF WHICH ACTUALLY EXISTS WITHIN THE RETAIL DISTRICT.
THE RED EARTH AT THE TOP OF THE PHOTOGRAPH, AGAIN IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME IS AN APARTMENT COMPLEX
UNDER CONSTRUCTION. >> THEY ARE JUST BEGINNING THIS PROJECT WHEN THIS PICTURE WAS BEGINNING IN THE SUMMER OF 2020, THOSE APARTMENTS ARE STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND IT IS A 48-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX FOR SENIOR CITIZENS. TO THE RIGHT OR EAST WE SEE THE EDGE OF A DISTRICT ZONING DISTRICT. THAT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT EXTENDS 500 FEET TO THE EAST ALL THE WAY TO BUFFALO GAP ROAD AND BEYOND. BUT THE FACILITIES THAT YOU SEE RIGHT HERE ARE AN O'RILEY'S AUTOPARK STORE AND THE EDGE OF A CAR WASH.
[00:55:06]
THOSE ARE IN THE GENERAL OF THE COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT THAT WE CAN SEE ON THE ZONING MAP.AGAIN WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS WE HAVE GOING ON HERE. THE PAIL YELLOW REPRESENTS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING. WE DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING MAP. BUT THE CORONER PROPERTY THERE THAT I MENTIONED AT SOUTH 27 AND ROSS HAS DURING THE PAST FIVE DAYS BEEN REZONED AS A NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL CLASSIFICATION WHICH IS SHOWN HERE BY THE COLOR PINK. THE APARTMENT COMPLEX IS IN DEEPER PINK AND I THINK I MENTIONED THE GENERALING COMMISSION TO THE EAST.
AND AGAIN THAT APPROVES THE CAR WASH ALL THE WAY TO BUFFALO CAR SHOP TO THE EAST.
>> HERE'S A BRIEF LIST TO THE USES THAT ARE USED IN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. BUT I WANTED TO FOCUS MORE ON THE RANGES OF UNITS ON THE PROPOSED RETAIL DISTRICT. SO AS ITS NAME IMPLIES, THE NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL IMPLIES IS INTENDED TO A LIMITED RANGE OF RETAIL TRADE SERVICES NEEDED TO SERVE A NEIGHBORHOOD AREA.
THE INTENDED SCALE PERMISSIBLE IN OUR DISTRICTS ARE DESIGNED FOR SOME MEASURE OF C COMPATIBILITY. FOR EXAMPLE OTHER RETAIL DISTRICTS MAXIMUM COVERAGE BY OTHER BUILDINGS FROM A LOT SHOULD NOT DESCRIBE RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FEET.
AND NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ALLOWED ALSO MAY NOT OPERATE BETWEEN THE HOURS OF SIX AND BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 11:00 P.M. AND 6:00 A.M. DURING THAT 7-HOURS AT NIGHT THEY'RE
SUPPOSED TO BE CLOSED. >> OTHERWISE, OTHER ACTIVITIES USED IN RETAIL DISTRICTS ARE VERY SIMILAR TO THOSE ALLOWED IN GENERAL RETAIL DISTRICTS WITH A FEW NOTABLE EXPERIENCES.
FOR EXAMPLE, NO AUTOMOTIVE RELATED ACTIVITIES ARE ALLOWED IN RETAIL DISTRICTS, NOT EVEN MINOR AUTOMOTIVE DETAILS DONE WHILE THE CUSTOMER WAITS. NO BARNS OR TAVERNS ARE ALLOWED IN NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTS. FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS ARE ALLOWED ONLY WITH APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS IN RETAIL DISTRICTS. AND CAR WASHES ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THE APPROVAL OF ADDITIONAL USE OF RETAIL DISTRICTS.
I HAVE A FEW PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES AND IT'S SURROUNDINGS.
>>> THE PHOTO AT THE TOP LEFT SHOWS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF AND EXISTING RESIDENCE AT 2606 ROSS AND A VACANT LOT TO THE NORTH. THAT INCLUDES THE UNLAWFUL FREIGHT CONTAINER THAT YOU SEE TO THE LEFT OF THAT PHOTOGRAPH. THE UPPER RIGHT PHOTO SHOWS BROAD VIEW BAPTIST CHURCH ACROSS ROSS AVENUE TO THE LEFT. THE LOWER LEFT PHOTO SHOWS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BUT ORIENTED TO THE SOUTH. AND YOU CAN SEE IN THE BACKGROUND THE RESIDENCE THAT WAS MOST RECENTLY WHILE THE RESIDENCES IS STILL THERE BUT THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THAT PROPERTY HAS CHANGED TO A NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL DISTRICT.
AND THE LOWER RIGHT SHOWS THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT LOCATED FURTHER TO THE EAST IN THE DIRECTION OF BUFFALO GAP ROAD AND YOU CAN SEE THE AUTO PARTS STORE AND THE CAR WASH AND SOME OTHER THINGS EVEN BEYOND THAT. CITY STAFF NOTIFIED RESIDENTS THAT ARE WITHIN 1,100 FOOT OF THE PROPERTY. WE NOTED THAT WITH SOME OPPOSITION. YOU CAN SEE THAT BASED ON THE RED CIRCLE.
>> I'M GOING TO BACKTRACK TO THE SLIDES SHOWING THE ZONING. >> I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO EXPAND THE SCOPE OF YOUR MIND AND SHOW YOU HOW IT EXISTS INCLUDING THE ENTIRE BLOCK WHERE
[01:00:03]
THE ENTIRE PROPERTY IS SITUATED. THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY HIGHLIGHTED BY THE STRIPING LAYS AT THE WEST WEND THAT EXTENDS ALL THE WAY BACK TO BUFFALO GAP ROAD AT SOUTHWEST 7TH STREET.BOTH BUFFALO GAP ROAD ARE FULLY IMPROVED MAJOR ARTIERIALS AND IT'S WIDELY APPROPRIATE AT SUCH MAJOR STREETS. ACCORDINGLY, ALMOST ALL OF THE LAND LOCATED WITHIN A 500 FOOT RADIUS TO THE NORTH OF THE STREET AT BUFFALO GAP ROAD OF SOUTHWEST 7TH STREET LAYS WITHIN A GENERAL RETAIL STORE AND GENERAL DISTRICT. THE RG ZONING COMPRISE S ALL OF THE PROPERTY AT THIS BLOCK. THE SAME SUBSET ALLOWS OUTSIDE OF THE BLOCK AND OUTSIDE OF THE INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION. AS A RESULT IT SEEMS APPROPRIATE FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE CITY BLOCK INCLUDING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED WITHIN SOME TRANSITIONAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION TO PROVIDE A USEFUL AND EFFECTIVE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE INTENSIVE ON COMMERCIAL USE RIGHT AT BUFFALO GAP ROAD AND THE RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT REMAINING TO THE WEST. THE NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL CLASSIFICATION IN STAFF'S OPINION DOES OFF SOME FOR THE INTENSITY FOR STAFF USE.
THE CITY RECOMMENDS THE APPROVAL FOR NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL ZONING. >>> THANK YOU.
I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >>> FRED, DO YOU KNOW IT CAME TO
THE NORTH THERE? >> I DO KNOW WHY. I SEARCHED FOR SOME DOCUMENTATION BUT I DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT HAPPENED. IT WAS SOMETIME AFTER I LEFT HERE IN 1983 AND SOMETIME BEFORE I CAME BACK IN 2012. ANY QUESTIONS FROM BRAD?
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. >>> I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO ANSWER IN THE ZONING CASE.
>> I'M BOBBY GRAM: I'LL BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND I'M ON THESE TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR BOBBY? >> PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD, BOBBY.
THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>>> MOVE TO CLOSE. >> I'LL MOTION. >> I'LL SECOND.
>> MOTION AND A SECOND. >> MR. BARNETT. >> YES.
>> REVEREND NELSON. >> YES. >> MISS FLEMMING.
>> YES. >> MR. ROSENBAUM. AND THE MOTION CARRIES.
>>> TC-7 DENYING A QUESTION FROM GARCIA TO ABANDON CERTAIN SEGMENTS FOR UNAPPROVED RIGHT OF
WAY. >> THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. >> AGAIN, I'M BRAD STONE WITH THE PLANNING STAFF. I'LL BE SPEAKING OF THE ABANDONED ZONE ON WEST STREET.
>> AND IT'S ABOUT THE VERY PORTION ON WEST STREET. AND THE FOCUS IS JUST ON THE NORTHERN DEAD END OF WEST BROOK STREET EXTENDING WEST FROM BAKER STREET.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE SEE HERE ON THIS AERIAL PHOTO. THE RIGHT OF WAY PROPOSED TO BE ABANDONED AT THE VERY CENTER OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. IT IS AS YOU MAY SEE A DEAD END SEGMENT OF RIGHT OF WAY EXTENDING WEST OF BAKERS STREET. THIS IS THE VERY END OF BAKER'S STREET. THE OTHER THING THAT YOU MAY NOTICE ALONG OTHER SEGMENTS OF BEN BROOK STREET IS UNIMPROVED AND BY UNIMPROVED, I MEAN WITH OTHER PAVEMENT OR UTILITIES.
[01:05:02]
THIS REMAINING -- WELL, IF IF THE ABANDONMENT IS APPROVED AS PROPOSED AND AGAIN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE NORTHERN STRIPES OF NORTH PORTIONS, THE REMAINING RIGHT OF WAY, AGAIN WEST OF BAKER STREET WOULD NOT EVER BE BIG ENOUGH TO FOCUS AS BAKER'S STREET AND WOULD FUNCTION AS AN ALLEY.>> THIS REQUEST IS BEING SPEAR HEADED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH WHO PLANS TO SUBDIVIDE HIS ACREAGE OF THE PLANNING ZONE WITHIN THE SU SUBDIVIDED ZONE.
TWO PROPERTIES REMAIN AT SOUTH BEND. NONE OF THESE PROPERTIES RELY ON BAKERS STREET FOR ANY TYPE OF THESE PROPERTIES. THE OTHER PROPERTIES AGAIN ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BEN BRIDGE ALL HAVE USEFUL STREET PROPERTIES EITHER ON BEN BRIDGE TO THE WEST RIGHT OUTSIDE OF THE PICTURE OR TO BAKERS STREET RUNNING NORTH TO SOUTH THROUGH THIS PICTURE OR TO FAIRMOUNT STREET WHICH IS JUST OFF OF THE PICTURE TO THE SOUTH.
IT THEREFORE SEEMS QUITE POSSIBLE TO ABANDON THIS PARTICULAR SEGMENT OF BENBROOK'S RIGHT OF WAY AND STILL LEAVE ENOUGH RIGHT OF WAY ALBEIT TO SOMEDAY FUNCTION AS AN ALLEY.
>> THIS SLIDE SHOWS -- WELL, IT SHOWS THE ZONING OF THE SURROUNDING PROJECT.
IT IS EITHER MOBILE HOMES INDICATED BY THE OLIVE PROJECTS OR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL INDICATED BY THE PAIL YELLOW PROPERTIES. THIS SLIDE SHOWS A GRAPHIC THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THE PROPONENTS OF THE APPLICATION AND COLOR THAT I THOUGHT I COULD SEE.
THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE ABANDONED IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW.
THE RIGHT OF WAY IS HIGHLIGHTED WITH MORE OF AN ORANGE COLOR. AND AGAIN, THE RIGHT OF WAY PROPOSED TO REMAIN IS WE BELIEVE BIG ENOUGH TO SOMEDAY FUNCTION AS AN ALLEY.
I HAVE A FEW PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDINGS AND I HAVE TO APOLOGIZE THAT THE CAPTIONS ARE NOT RIGHT ON OUR ACCURATE. THE PHOTO AT THE UPPER LEFT IS ACTUALLY NOT LOOKING AT BENBROOK. IT'S LOOKING AT BAKER'S STREET.
THIS SECTION OF BENBROOK THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE RECOMMENDED IS TO BE OVER GROWN AND UNIMPROVED.
THE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING IS AN EXTENDING NORTH FROM THE SUBJECT.
IT'S BAKER'S STREET NORTH OF WHERE WE'RE CONSIDERING. THE PHOTO AT THE VERY CENTER, THE TOP CENTER, THAT'S WHAT THIS SEGMENT OF BENBROOK STREET LOOKS LIKE.
IT'S UNIMPROVED. IT'S OVERGROWN. THE PHOTO TO THE UPPER RIGHT IS WHAT BENBROOK STREET LOOKS LIKE EAST FROM BAKER. IT'S NOT PROPOSED TO BE ABANDONED BUT LIKE THE SUBJECT SEGMENT, IT'S ALSO UNIMPROVED AND OVERGROWN.
EXCUSE ME. THE PHOTO TO THE UPPER LEFT WITH A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WITH THE VERY CENTER. WE DID NOTIFY SIX OWNERS AJOINING THE SUBJECT PHOTO OF BENBROOK STREET AND WE RECEIVED ONE COMMENT IN FAVOR. I WOULD MENTION THAT THE PROPONENT, GARCIA OWNS THE TWO PROPERTIES DIRECTLY NORTH FROM THIS SEGMENT OF BEN BROOK STREET PROPOSED TO BE ABANDONED. CITY STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVING THE CURRENT REQUEST TO ABANDON THESE NORTH PORTIONS OF BENBROOK UNIMPROVED RIGHT OF WAY LEAVING AT LEAST A 30-FSPACE TO FUNCTIO AS AN ALLEY. I DO NEED TO POINT OUT, THIS SEGMENT OF BENBROOK STREET
[01:10:04]
EXTENDED ALL THE WAY TO VETERAN'S WAY. BUT IN 1992, CITY COUNCIL ABANDONED THE WESTERN 420 FEET OF BENBROOK'S RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO THE REMAINING SEGMENT WAS LEFT A DEAD END TO LITTLE WITH NO PROSPECTS TO FUTURE EXTENSION.AND I WOULD ADVOCATE THAT THE SUBSEQUENT PROPERTY WOULD NOT ALLOW ANYMORE EXTENSIONS OF BENBROOK STREET TO LAST AS BENBROOK STREET. THE ONLY PROPOSED USE FOR A DEAD-END RIGHT OF WAY IS AN ALLEY FOR WHICH ONLY A 20-30 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY IS NECESSARY.
THE REMAINING SEGMENT TO BE LEFT IF THIS ABANDONED AREA IS 30-FOOT WIDE AND TURNED AROUND
FOR THE OTHERWISE DEAD-END. >> I MENTIONED THAT CITY STAFF IS IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS ABANDONMENT BUT WE DO HAVE AS USUAL A COUPLE OF CONDITIONS. THESE ARE ORDINARY CONDITIONS FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY AND A SUITABLE GRAPHIC REPLANT BE PREPARED SHOWING HOW THE EFFECTIVE RIGHT OF WAY WILL BE INTEGRATED WITH THE AJOINING PROPERTY AND SECONDLY THAT ANY DRAINING BE USED WITHIN THE OTHERWISE ABANDONED RIGHT OF WAY.
WITH THE TWO CONDITIONS, CITY STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVING THIS REQUESTED ABANDONMENT.
THANK YOU. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>>> COULD NOT HAVE ANY UTILITIES IN THE RIGHT OF WAY? >> I CAN SAY THAT THE ONLY REASON WE'RE SUGGESTING THE UTILITY IS THAT PORTION THAT WAS ABANDONED IN 1992, IT RESERVED UTILITY AND EASEMENT. SO JUST FOR THE SAKE OF EXTENDING THAT SAME DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT, WE RECOMMEND BASICALLY CONTINUING IT ON THIS OTHERWISE PROPOSED MANAGEMENT.
>> SO IT GOES DOWN TO THE PROPERTY DAMAGE AND IS IT 10-FOOT OR 15 FOOT?
>> THE EASEMENT THAT'S ON THE DFW SIDE? >> THE EASEMENT I THINK IS 40 FEET WAY AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS A CONTINUED EXTENSION OF THAT EASEMENT.
>>> IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE PRUDENT THING TO DO: MAYBE NOT ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY BUT PRUDENT
NONE THE LESS. >> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS?
>> I'LL OPEN IT UP TO THE ZONING? >> YES, MY DAD WANTED ME TO COME UP. THE ONLY REASON WHY WE'RE TRYING TO SHUT DOWN THAT ALLEY IS I'M TRYING TO BUILD AN AREA ONE FOR ME AND MYSELF. AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING TO SEE HOW WE CAN MAKE OUR DREAM HOMES A REALITY AND THIS IS THE SOLUTION WE CAME UP WITH AND WE'RE PRESENTING IT IN FRONT OF YA'LL AND SEE THE GOOD IN IT. JUST TWO HOUSES AND THAT'S IT.
>>> TWO QUESTIONS. >>> ARE YOU OKAY WITH THE EASEMENTMENT PROPOSED?
>> I HAVE NOT REALLY WENT THROUGH IT AND I CAN CALL HIM AND SEE ABOUT IT BUT I'M SURE
HE'S FINE WITH IT. >>> FURTHER QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. >>> ANYONE ELSE? >> I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING. >> MORE DISCUSSION OR A MOTION? >> A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. AND A SECOND.
>>> MR. BARNETT. >> MISS RUSSEL. >> REVEREND LANGFORD.
>> MR. ROSENBAUM. >> AND WITH
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.