Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[CALL TO ORDER ]

[00:00:12]

>>> IT IS 1:30 AND WE WILL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.

>> FATHER WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THIS DAY AND ALL THE OPPORTUNITY WE HAVE TO ADVANCE THE BUSY -- BUSINESS OF THE CITY AND PRAY FOR WISDOM FOR EVERYBODY HERE TO SPEAK TODAY AND GIVE THEM CLARITY AND GIVE US EARS TO HEAR CLEARLY AND MAY WE RENDER FAIR AND SOUND JUDGMENT ON EVERY DECISION WE MAKE TODAY AND THANK YOU FOR THE NATION'S FREEDOM WE CELEBRATE THIS WEEK AND WE PRAY YOU CONTINUE TO BLESS OUR NATION IS ONLY YOU CAN. IN JESUS NAME WE PRAY. AMEN.

>>> WE ARE THE FINAL AUTHORITY FOR THE APPROVAL OF PLANTS BUT ACTING AS A RECOMMENDING BOARD OF THE CITY COUNCIL MATTERS OF ZONING IN THE DECISIONS OF THIS COMMISSION MAY BE APPEALED THE CITY COUNCIL TO THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY NO LATER THAN 10 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS MEETING AND ALL APPEALS MUST BE

[MINUTES ]

IN WRITING. THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO SPEAK UNDER ANY ITEMS AFTER RECEIVING RECOGNITION BY THE CHAIR AND THOSE WISHING TO BE HEARD SHALL APPROACH THE STADIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME AND PURPOSE AND LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION TO NO MORE THAN THREE MINUTES IN THE DISTRICT WILL THEN BE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR AND THE FIRST ITEM IS MINUTES AND WE RECEIVED THE MINUTES IN OUR PACKET AND WE RECEIVED THOSE.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENT OR RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THOSE

MINUTES? >> I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC OUT THERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW OR REQUEST A CHANGE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE. >> ARE THERE NO PLATS TODAY? SO

[ZONING ]

WE GO RIGHT INTO ZONING CASES? OKAY. THAT MAY BE THE FIRST FOR ME. SO ZONING CASE CUP-2024-05 , APPLY A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A DUPLEX ON A ROT RESIDENTIAL FAMILY UNIT

RS-8 . >> I AM PRESENTING CASE CUP-2024-05. MY NAME IS ADAM HOLLAND. THIS IS REPRESENTED AS A REQUEST TO APPLY A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO APPROXIMATELY .42 ACRES ZONED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY TO ALLOW FOR A DUPLEX. AND HERE WE HAVE AN AERIAL LOCATION MAP SHOWING THE AREA OF THE PROPERTY AND THIS IS SOUTH OF GILL DRIVE ON WASHINGTON BOULEVARD. AND THIS IS CURRENTLY VACANT AND HERE IS A MAP SHOWING THE ZONING OF PROPERTY NEARBY AND CURRENTLY PROPERTY NEARBY IS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY FOR SQUARE LOTS AND HERE IS A SITE LAYOUT AND A PRELIMINARY SITE LAYOUT WE RECEIVED FOR THE PROPOSED 80 YOU AND DUPLEX'S. AND THIS IS A PRELIMINARY DRAWINGS ARE NOT NECESSARILY WHAT WOULD BE IN PLACE WITH APPROVAL. IT WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THE SAME CITY PERMITS AND PLANNED REVIEWS AS WELL. THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL PLAN. HERE ARE THE PERMITTED USES IN THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT. YOU COULD SEE A DUPLEX IS ALLOWED BY A PERMIT AND THIS IS WHAT THIS REQUEST IS FOR AND THEY ALSO WISH TO ADD THIS PROPOSED REQUEST. AND HERE ARE SOME VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS I STATED. THIS IS CURRENTLY VACANT. THERE IS SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH AND NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY AS WELL AS SURROUNDING ON ALL OTHER SIDES. WE DID RECEIVE SOME NOTICES IN OPPOSITION WITHIN THE FIVE DAY PERIOD ARE OUTSIDE OF THE FIVE DAY DEADLINE . WE RECEIVED SEVERAL MORE AND OPPOSITION AS WELL WITHIN THE PAST FEW DAYS.

THEY, HOWEVER, WORDS IN THAT FIVE DAY DEADLINE SO WE ARE NOT ON THIS PARTICULAR NOTIFICATION MAP. AND IN TOTAL THE UPDATED PERCENT OF OPPOSITION IS ABOUT 39%. THE STAFF HAS REVIEWED THIS AND FOUND THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND SURROUNDING ZONING AND PLANNING PRINCIPLES AND CRITERIA BUT STAFF HAS A RECOMMENDATION ,

[00:05:09]

RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOLLOWING THESE CONDITIONS THAT NO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT MAY BE LOCATED ON THE SITE AND THE PROPOSED PLAN SHOULD BE MODIFIED AS NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH ALL LDC REQUIREMENTS. AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> GO BACK TO THE ZONING. THE CASE IN QUESTION IS THE ONE SHADED THERE AND CROSSHATCHED AND TO THE LEFT OF THAT ALLEY THERE IS AN ALLEY AND INTO THE LEFT OF THAT OFF OF SCOTT, THOSE ARE RS 12, CORRECT?'S

>> I DO BELIEVE THEY ARE ALL RS EIGHT.

>> ARE YOU SURE ALONG SCOTT PLACE? I THINK THE ONES ARE RS 12 AND I THINK THERE IS RS-8 AND 12 AND SIX TO THE RIGHT AND THE ONLY MEDIUM DENSITY I WOULD CALL IT IS DOWN OFF OF EAST NORTH 10 AND THE ONLY MULTIFAMILY IS OFF OF INAUDIBLE ] AND IT IS OFF THIS MAP AREA .

>> THERE IS SOME MULTIFAMILY AND IT IS OFF THE MAP AS WELL.

>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER CONDITIONAL USES IN THIS AREA

CLOSE BY? >> NOT THAT I AM AWARE OF.

HOWEVER, THE ADU IS PERMITTED USE BY RIGHT , WHICH WOULD EFFECTIVELY ALLOW FOR TWO UNITS ON EACH OF THE LOTS AS WELL.

>> WHEN YOU SAY THAT, YOU MEAN RS-12 AND RS-8, AND ASSESSOR

UNIT IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT. >> SO EVEN IN OUR IS SIX YOU

HAVE THAT. >> CORRECT.

>> THERE IS ACTUALLY SOME RS-12 ON SCOTT PLACE AS WELL.

>> I THOUGHT IT WAS RS-12 ON SCOTT PLACE AND THEN THE RS-8

IS IN WASHINGTON. >> THANK YOU, ADAM . DO WE HAVE

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR HIM? >> WE ARE GOOD. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO COME UP AND VISIT WITH US FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING?

>> YES, SIR? >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. I LIVE AT 726 BERG DRIVE AROUND THE CORNER WITHIN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD --

>> WOULD YOU LEAVE THE ZONING MAP UP, ADAM?

>> THANK YOU. >> I HAVE LIVED HERE FOR OVER 10 YEARS AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS BOUNDED OR AS SHOWN ON THE MAP HERE WITH OLDER LARGE WELL-KEPT SINGLE HOMES AND QUIET LIVING IN RESIDENCE VALUE THE AREA FOR THESE REASONS AS WELL AS THE CENTRAL LOCATION AND PROXIMITY TO DOWNTOWN AND THE METRIC -- MEDICAL CENTER AND MANY OF THE OTHER ATTRIBUTES. HERE TODAY WITH SEVERAL FELLOW NEIGHBORS AND OPPOSITION OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION OPPOSING THE ADDITIONAL -- CONDITIONAL USE UNIT BECAUSE ALLOWING A MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURE IS NOT THE BEST USE AND ALSO CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND IMPACT NEGATIVE PROPERTY VALUES. MY BELIEVE IS THE HIGHEST USED OF THIS IS SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND THEIR EMPTY LOTS AND MOST OF THOSE HAVE BEEN EMPTY SINCE DEVELOPMENT AND THEY WERE PURCHASED BY OLDER OWNERS AT THE TIME THEY PURCHASE THEIR HOME AND AS THEY HAVE PASSED AND SOLD PROPERTY, SOME OF THOSE LOTS HAVE COME UP FOR SALE IN 624 SCOTT PLACE IS A RECENT EXAMPLE AND RECENTLY SOLD TO A FAMILY WHO BUILT A 2200 SQUARE-FOOT SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON THE LOT IN ORDER TO ENJOY THE QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD AND BE CLOSE TO FAMILY. AS WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT, THERE ARE NO OTHER MULTIFAMILY WITH AN A 1/4 MILE RADIUS. FOR ME, THE BIGGEST ISSUE I WANT TO DISCUSS AND I AM SKIPPING A LOT DUE TO TIME, BUT I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS REGARDING VEHICULAR TRAFFIC BASED ON THIS PLAN. SO THIS SHOWS TWO DRIVEWAYS COMING OFF THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE COMING OFF OF WASHINGTON DRIVE AND THIS IS AT THE SOUTH END OF THE LETTER AS SHAPED HILLY AREA WITH A HEAVILY TRAFFICKED STREET THAT IN MY EXPERIENCE A LOT OF PEOPLE SPEED ON IN THAT SECTION IS HILLY AND PEOPLE FLY THROUGH THEIR AND THIS IS RIGHT ON THE SOUTH END OF THAT. APPROVING THIS WOULD ALLOW AN INCREASE IN THIS TRAFFIC BACKING ON TO WASHINGTON AT THAT LOCATION WITH PEOPLE FLYING UP AND DOWN THAT ROAD AND THAT TO ME POSES A VEHICULAR HAZARD TO THE AREA

[00:10:02]

FURTHER AND I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO ANTICIPATE THERE WILL BE CARS PARKED ALONG THE CURB THERE AND IT'S NOT OVERLY WIDE AND I THINK IT COULD HAVE CONGESTION. FOR THESE REASONS I DO OPPOSE THIS APPLICATION TODAY. THANK YOU.

>> CAN YOU TELL ME YOUR NAME AGAIN.

>> BEN GRANT. >> THANK YOU.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS CHRISTOPHER SMITH AND I LIVE IT 860 NORTH JUDGE HEALY AND A LITTLE BIT AWAY FROM THIS PROPERTY, IT IS IN FACT A DUPLEX OVER A MEDIUM DENSITY AREA ON THERE AND I OWNED THAT PROPERTY AND HAVE LIVED THERE FOR THE PAST 16 YEARS. AS WAS NOTED, THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION IS RIGHT AT THAT COMPLEX INTERSECTION OF PIEDMONT, GILL IN WASHINGTON. IT IS A FAIRLY ACTIVE COLLECTIVE ROUTE AND THERE IS A LOT OF TRAFFIC THAT GOES THROUGH THEIR. WHAT YOU DON'T SEE ON HERE IS IT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE HILL. EVEN WHEN IT ISN'T RAINING, IT IS VERY BUSY AND PEOPLE COME THROUGH THAT A LOT FASTER THAN THEY SHOULD. CARS ARE VERY OFTEN PARKED ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THAT ROAD. I AM WORKING IN THIS PART OF THE CITY COMING FROM HERE IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE IN YOUR FILES. I DRIVE PAST THAT SPOT HEAVILY THREE OR FOUR TIMES A DAY ON AVERAGE. IT IS VERY FREQUENT THE CONGESTED IN TERMS OF PARKING AND MOVING VEHICLES.

I CAME HERE TO EXPRESS EXACTLY THE SAME CONCERNS THAT ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS HERE ABOVE SINGLE-FAMILY, ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A THREE BEDROOM DUPLEX LAYOUT WHICH MEANS SIX COLLEGE STUDENTS CARS AND THE TRAFFIC WILL LIKELY MAKE WHAT IS ALREADY BAD CONGESTION AND A DANGEROUS SITUATION EVEN WORSE. I DO OPPOSE THE PROPOSAL FOR

THAT. >> APPRECIATE IT.

>> MY NAME IS NORM ARCHIBALD AND THERE IS NOBODY IN THE ROOM THAT APPRECIATES YOUR SERVICE APPEAR MORE THAN I DO AND FROM ALL THE TIME THAT I SAT IN THOSE CHAIRS.

>> YOU GOT ME INTO THIS PROBLEM.

>> YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE UP HERE THAT I OPPONENT -- APPOINTED. I AM OPPOSED TO THIS ZONING AND I LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND MY WIFE AND I WILL HAVE LIVED THERE FOR 30 YEARS THIS YEAR.

HERE IS WHAT THIS IS. THIS IS NOT ONLY A ZONING ISSUE BUT AN INTEGRITY ISSUE AND THERE IS INTEGRITY OVER THREE THINGS.

FIRST OF ALL, THE ZONING AND THE SECOND IS THE TRAFFIC AND THIRD IS THE PROPERTY VALUES. AS SOON AS I SAW THE SIGN POSTED, AND I AM NOT IN THE 200 FOOT LIMIT BUT AS SOON AS I THOUGHT I TURNED TO MY WIFE AND I SAID, SOMEBODY WANTS TO BUILD A DUPLEX IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I SAID, THIS IS AND RIGHT.

NUMBER ONE BECAUSE I DO KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN. DON'T TELL ME IT WON'T HAPPEN BECAUSE I PROMISE YOU IT WILL HAPPEN.

THIS IS GOING TO BE RENTED TO EIGHT COLLEGE STUDENTS EACH WITH THE CAR AND THAT IS JUST CONSIDERING IF IT WAS A DUPLEX BECAUSE IT FOR WERE ALSO AN EXCESS REBUILDING, YOU HAVE THREE OR FOUR MORE CARS. NOW YOU ARE ASKING TO PUT EIGHT CARS ON WASHINGTON BOULEVARD COMING OUT AT THIS ALREADY, YOU CAN SEE, YOU HAVE TO KNOW THE TOPOGRAPHY TO KNOW THAT THAT IS DOWN IN THE DIP. THIS IS ONE HOUSE OFF OF THE INTERSECTION.

IT IS NOT A SAFE THING. YOU HAVE TRAFFIC COMING IN ON GILL STREET, PIEDMONT COMING INTO GILL AND THIS IS NOT GOOD. BUT HERE IS THE DEAL. THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE THE BEGINNING. THIS IS SINCE IT STARTED OUT PROBABLY 50 YEARS AGO. THERE IS ONLY THREE VACANT LOTS IN THIS WHOLE SUBDIVISION FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS. ONE OF THEM WAS JUST BUILT AS WAS MENTIONED AND IT WAS JUST RECENTLY BUILT WITH THE REALLY NICE 2200 SQUARE-FOOT HOME SO IT CAN HAPPEN THAT THERE COULD BE SOMEBODY WHO WILL BUILD A HOME ON THIS IN THIS AREA. BUT THE ZONING IS AN INTEGRITY ISSUE BECAUSE ALL OF US WANTED TO LIVE IN A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

SECONDLY IS THIS TRAFFIC. SOMEBODY SAYS I WON'T RENT

[00:15:02]

COLLEGE STUDENTS. BUT THE PERSON YOU SELL IT TO WILL AND DON'T TELL ME THERE WON'T BE COLLEGE STUDENTS HERE BECAUSE I KNOW THERE WILL BE. AND EIGHT MAY BE THE MINIMUM. AND YOU ARE ASKING TO PUT EIGHT CARS ON WASHINGTON BOULEVARD IN THE STREETS AND THE DRIVEWAYS COMING IN AND OUT AND IF THEY HAVE THEIR FRIENDS OVER, YOU MAY AS WELL BUILD THE PARKING GARAGE. BUT THE THIRD ONE IS THE PROPERTY VALUES TO KNOW THAT YOU HAVE PROPERTY VALUES GOING DOWN BECAUSE OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE ZONING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. I ASK YOU TO DECLINE AND REFUSE THIS AND I KNOW THE PEOPLE CAN APPEAL THE CITY COUNCIL BUT BE AT WHAT IT MAY BUT KNOW THAT I THINK MY PEOPLE ARE OUT HERE WHO ARE HERE TODAY AND IF YOU ARE HERE OPPOSED TO IT, RAISE YOUR HAND BECAUSE I DO WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT ALL OF THESE NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE IN THIS WASHINGTON BOULEVARD SCOTT PLACE BIRD DRIVE PIEDMONT AND ALL OF THESE AREAS, THEY AGREE WITH ME AND I ASK YOU TO DECLINE THIS

REQUEST. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING THIS HEARING AND MY NAME IS GREG POWELL AND I LIVE IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE MAP, MY WIFE AND I LIVE JUST TO THE LEFT OF THIS PROPERTY ON SCOTT PLACE AND OUR DRIVEWAY IS DIRECTLY OPPOSITE THE ALLEY FROM THIS PROPERTY.

WE ARE OPPOSED FOR SEVERAL OF THE REASONS MENTIONED ALREADY.

LIKE TRAFFIC, PARKING AND EXTRA CARS AND IN ADDITION PERHAPS EXTRA NOISE OR EXTRA TRASH AND WE FIND THE DUMPSTER FULL ON A REGULAR BASIS ALREADY AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY WOULD PUT IN ANOTHER BOWL STIR. OR DUMPSTER. BUT I DO THINK WHAT WAS SAID ABOUT INTEGRITY BY NORM IS A KEY ISSUE. TO ME IT IS ZONED THIS WAY FOR A REASON. IT SEEMS LIKE A PROMISE FROM THE CITY THAT THIS WILL BE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I DON'T WANT THAT PROMISE TO BE BROKEN. I THINK THE PROPERTY VALUES WILL DECREASE AND WE WORRY ABOUT SELLING OUR HOUSE RIGHT ACROSS FROM A DUPLEX OR TRIPLEX. I AM

OPPOSED. THANK YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON . MY NAME IS JOHN BOSS AT 701 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, WHICH IS THE THIRD HOME UP ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE ROAD AND I AM IN TOTAL AGREEMENT WITH EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN SAID SO FAR. I DO WANT TO REEMPHASIZE THE POINT OF THE DANGER OF ADDING PARKING AND TRAFFIC TO THIS AREA BECAUSE IT IS A DANGEROUS LOCATION IN MY STRONG OPINION. AND WHEN WE MOVED IN 13 OR 14 YEARS AGO, WE DID PARK A U-HAUL ON WASHINGTON STREET AND LEARNED VERY QUICKLY THAT WAS A MISTAKE BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC COMES AROUND THAT BEND AND IT IS DANGEROUS. WE HAVE HAD THE MAILBOX HIT MANY TIMES AND THE MOST RECENT TIME A COLLEGE STUDENT DROVE THROUGH AND KNOCKED OVER OUR MAILBOX AND ROLLED HER CAR AND TOLD IT -- TOTALED IT. I DON'T THINK THIS STREET WITH THE LEVEL OF TRAFFIC IT HAS NOW COULD ACCOMMODATE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING. I THINK THAT WILL INTENSIFY THE DANGER OF BEING OUT ON WASHINGTON BOULEVARD. WHEN WE DO HAVE VISITORS AT OUR HOUSE, WE ALWAYS RECOMMEND THAT THEY PARK IN OUR DRIVEWAY BECAUSE IT IS DANGEROUS GETTING OUT OF THE CAR IN WASHINGTON.

AND I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY ARE COMING DOWN THE HILL AND A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE NOT WATCHING. SO I WANTED TO FORMALLY ADD MY OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE IT BE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING IN THE SLOT. THANK YOU.

>> IS THE PROPONENT HERE BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD? WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP AND VISIT WITH US PLEASE?

>> I DO HAVE A HANDOUT IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE

[00:20:06]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS RANDY, A LOCAL HOMEBUILDER IN SMALL BUSINESS OWNER LIVING HERE IN TOWN AND I PURCHASED THIS LOT WITH MY BEST FRIENDS AND BUSINESS PARTNERS CHRISTIAN AND CURTIS SMITH AND WE BECAME CLOSE AT COLLEGE AND BECAME INTERESTED IN REAL ESTATE AND HAVE BEEN WORKING TO BUILD A BUSINESS TOGETHER EVER SINCE FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND EXCEPT FOR ONE PROPERTY IN WACO, ALL OF THE BUSINESSES CONDUCTED HERE IN ABILENE AND ALL RESIDENTIAL. OUR INTENT FOR THIS PROPERTY IS TO CONSTRUCT AN ATTRACTIVE DUPLEX STREET FACING THAT HAS ALLEY ACCESS AND THE INTENDED USE AS A LONG-TERM RENTAL STRATEGY FOR THE DUPLEX WITH PARTIAL OWNER USE JUST -- USAGE FOR THE 80 YOU. WHILE IN TOWN MY PARTNERS FAMILIES HAVE TAKEN AND OTHER CITIES IN THE NATURE OF HER BUSINESS IS HANDS-ON WHICH REQUIRES CURTIS AND CHRIS TO BE IN ABILENE OFTEN AND STAY THE NIGHT AND AS OUR FAMILIES HAVE GROWN AND AS WE HAVE BECOME MORE SOPHISTICATED IN OUR BUSINESS, AND AS WE HAVE PURCHASED AND BILTMORE PROPERTIES, THE GUYS, MY COLLEGE BUDDIES CRASHING ON OUR COUCH HAS RUN ITS COURSE. WE FOUND THIS LOTS AND PURCHASED IT AND ARE PROPOSING THIS BECAUSE WE SEE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A VERY WELL BUILT AND VERY WELL MAINTAINED INCOME PROPERTY TO HELP SUPPORT OUR BUSINESS NEEDS AS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER HERE IN TOWN WITHOUT ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR TO HER NEIGHBORS. SO HERE -- I DO WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IN PARTICULAR AND SHARE WITH YOU OUR PERSPECTIVE IN AN EFFORT TO HELP EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND WHY WE DO BELIEVE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 80 YOU AND THE DUPLEX WILL HAVE -- ADU WILL HAVE NO IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY AND WORK TO HELP INCREASE PROPERTY VALUES AS A WHOLE. HERE IS A RENDERING OF THE GIS MAP. THERE IS OUR PROPERTY INDICATED BY A STAR ON WASHINGTON BOULEVARD AND MEDIUM DENSITY PROPERTY SUCH AS DUPLEXES ARE INDICATED IN GREEN AND MULTIFAMILY COMPLEXES SUCH AS APARTMENT COMPLEXES ARE INDICATED IN BLUE AND FROM OUR VIEWPOINT THE IMMEDIATE AREA HAS A SIGNIFICANT PRESENCE OF A DUPLEX AND TOWNHOMES, RENTAL HOUSES AND APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAT ARE INTERMINGLED WITH SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. MANY OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ARE ADJACENT TO EITHER OR ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE MEDIUM DENSITY AND MULTIFAMILY PROPERTIES AND THERE ARE ALSO SEVERAL INSTANCES WHERE A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AND DUPLEX ARE SHARING COMMON PROPERTY LINES AND THE CLOSEST EXAMPLE OF THIS SHARED PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN A DUPLEX AND SINGLE-FAMILY HOME IS LESS THAN 1/4 MILE FROM OUR LOCATION. AND ONE OF THE KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN OUR PROPOSED PROJECT AND THE EXISTING EXAMPLES OF WHAT WE INTEND TO REPLICATE HERE AT THIS SITE IS THE SIZE OF THE LOT ON WHICH WE INTEND TO BUILD AND THIS IS ZONED RS-8 MAKING IT NOT ONLY ONE OF THE LARGEST COMMON LOTS BUT EXPONENTIALLY LARGER THAN LOTS IN THE SAME AREA WHERE THERE ALREADY EXISTS DUPLEXES AND SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES SHARING THAT COMMON PROPERTY LINE. BECAUSE OF OUR LARGER LOT SIZE, THE ALLEY ACCESS AND INTENDED USE, WE BELIEVE THE DUPLEX'S WILL HAVE NO IMPACT ON HER NEIGHBORS OR CREATE ANY MORE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND WILL BE AN UNNECESSARY STRAIN ON PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE. HARRISON IMAGES RECENTLY TAKEN OF THE RESIDENTIAL USAGES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA ILLUSTRATING THESE MIX BETWEEN MEDIUM DENSITY, MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE-FAMILY COMMON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU CAN SEE THERE IS A BLEND OF WELL-MAINTAINED DUPLEXES NEXT TO SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. AS A MATTER OF FACT, MY BUSINESS PARTNERS AND I RENTED THESE TOWNHOMES HERE AT ACU AS WELL AS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME UP THE STREET AND WE HAVE GROWN TO LOVE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THIS IS OUR FIRST REAL TASTE OF ABILENE AND OUR FIRST INTRODUCTION INTO ADULT LIFE AND HER DAD'S WEREN'T HERE TO MAKE SURE REMOTE OUR LAWNS AND GOT TO CLASS AND WENT TO WORK AND I CAN'T PROMISE WE DID ALL THAT VERY WELL BUT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS SPECIAL TO US BECAUSE OF OUR HISTORY WITH IT. WE DO CARE ABOUT IT AND WE WANT TO TAKE CARE OF OUR NEIGHBORS AND WE ARE EXCITED TO BE A PART

[00:25:01]

OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AGAIN. IT IS THE GOAL TO BLEND IN SEAMLESSLY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE WANT TO BE HERE AND WE FEEL STRONGLY THAT IT WILL HAVE A POSITIVE EFFECT ON THE SURROUNDING AREAS. THIS AREA HERE IS A GREAT PART OF TOWN. THERE ISN'T A LOT OF PROPERTY AVAILABLE AND THERE HASN'T BEEN MUCH IN RECENT TIME BUT EXPANDING THEIR RESEARCH AND SCIENCE FACILITY, THIS THE ALLEN RIDGE DEVELOPMENT AND TAYLOR ELEMENTARY NEW CAMPUS THERE IS A NOTICE AND BREATH OF FRESH AIR ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF TOWN AND AS A HOMEOWNER WHO LIVES CLOSE TO THIS AREA AND IS A LOCAL HOMEBUILDER I SEE ABILENE'S NEED FOR MORE AND MORE HOUSING BUT NOT EVERYBODY WHO NEEDS A HOME CAN AFFORD ONE OF THEIR OWN. NOT EVERY LOT THAT IS ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY IS CONDUCIVE TO THAT SORT OF PROJECT. AND AS MENTIONED BEFORE, THIS IS A PARTICULARLY CHALLENGING LOT TO BUILD A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON BECAUSE OF THE STEEP GRADE TO THE NORTH AND SINCE ITS ANNEXATION IT HAS TRANSFERRED OWNERSHIP SEVERAL TIMES AND HAS NEVER SEEN A STRUCTURE BUILT AND FROM WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED THE INTENT TO BUILD A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME HERE HAS BEEN DASHED BECAUSE OF THE COST INVOLVED IT WOULD TAKE TO MITIGATE THOSE ISSUES. THE MAIN CHALLENGE, LIKE I SAID, AND IT IS HARD TO TELL FROM THE PICTURE BUT THERE IS A STEEP GRADE TO THE NORTH WITH THE SLOT. AND AS A BUILDER ESTIMATED COST ON A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON A 4000 FT.÷ SLAB ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE DUPLEX WE INTEND TO BUILD, A TYPICAL HOMEOWNER COULD SAVE $15,000-$18,000 MORE CONSIDERING THE COST OF ENGINEERING TO DESIGN THIS LAB WITH HEAVY EQUIPMENT OPERATORS, DIRT WORK AND THE NEED FOR MORE CONCRETE AND FLOORING MATERIAL, AT A LABOR COSTS, THE REQUIREMENT FOR HEAVIER STEEL OR CABLES, DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS, THE TRUCKING UNIT AND BACKFILL MATERIAL IN THE POSSIBILITY OF RETAINING WALL. THIS ESTIMATED $15,000-$18,000 IS ON TOP OF WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT TO BUILD THE SAME SLAB IF IT WERE ON A FLAT LOT WITH NUMBERING. AND THIS IS SUBSTANTIAL AND HAS PROVEN TO BE A CHALLENGE AND HAVING LOTS HERE BUILT AND BREAKING A LOT OF BUILD BUDGETS. ANOTHER CHALLENGE FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME LESS PALATABLE THE ENCROACHMENTS OF NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES AND DRIVEWAYS OVER THE SHARED PROPERTY LINES AND WHILE THESE ARE SMALL THE POTENTIAL FOR PROPERTY LINE DISPUTES AND LEGAL CHALLENGES IS ENOUGH FOR MANY HOMEOWNERS TO RECONSIDER BUILDING ON THE SLOT AND AS A RENTAL PROPERTY, THE TENANTS WON'T BE BOTHERED BY THE EXISTING ENCROACHMENT WHEREAS A HOMEOWNER LIVING THERE FULL-TIME MAY FIND THOSE UNACCEPTABLE. FOR US AS OWNERS, THE ENCROACHMENTS ARE NOT A BIG DEAL BUT THEY IMPACT US VERY LITTLE AND IF THE TIME CAME WHERE THOSE STRUCTURES NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, WE COULD HAVE A CIVIL CONVERSATION WITH HER NEIGHBORS ABOUT HELPING THEM MOVE INTO THE RIGHT LOCATION ON THEIR PROPERTY BUT FOR NOW NO CHANGES NECESSARY . I DON'T THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE, WHEN THEY ARE LOOKING TO SPEND THIS MUCH MONEY ON A PROPERTY AND LIVE THERE FULL-TIME WILLING TO HAVE THOSE DIFFICULT AND AWKWARD CONVERSATIONS. SPEAKING WHO IS FAMILIAR WITH THE HISTORY OF THE SLOT, THOSE PROPERTY LINE DISPUTES AND THE DIFFICULTY OF THE BUILDING HERE ARE TWO OF THE MAIN FACTORS THAT BRING THE CHALLENGES TO

THE SLOT. >> YOU ARE WELL OVER YOUR TIME.

SO WRAP IT UP. >> YES, SIR. HERE IS A PICTURE OF WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO BUILD AND WE HAVE A WELL-DESIGNED RENDERING OF THE DUPLEX. THIS IS USING DESIGN ASPECTS AND MATERIALS THAT COMPLEMENT THE HOMES AROUND US IN THE AREA. AND BELOW IT IS A PICTURE OF THE ADU WE ARE PROPOSING EVEN THOUGH YOU CAN'T SEE IT FROM THE STREET, IT WILL MATCH THE MAIN STRUCTURE AND THE COMPLEMENT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. AND HERE IS THE LATEST PICTURE AND RENDERING OF THE PLAN AND WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE

[00:30:01]

CITY ENGINEERS TO FIND A WAY TO MITIGATE ANY TRAFFIC ISSUES THAT MAY ARISE AND WE DO HAVE A NICE WIDE DRIVEWAY THAT CAN ACCOMMODATE UP TO 6 TO 8 VEHICLES AT ANY TIME WITH OFFSTREET PARKING AND JUST A POINT TO KNOW THAT ONLY THE DUPLEX IS ACCESSIBLE BY VEHICLE TO THE STREET AND ONLY THE ADU WILL BE AVAILABLE OR ACCESSIBLE FROM THE ALLEY WAY. BOTH HOMES HAVE NICE FEATURES WITH TALL CEILINGS AND ATTRACT HIGH-LEVEL TENANTS. AND TO HELP UNDERLINE OUR COMMITMENT TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. WE WANT TO DO A GOOD JOB AND WE HAVE SEVERAL HOMES HERE. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE HOMES HERE AND WE CARE ABOUT THESE AND TAKE CARE OF OUR PROPERTIES AND TENANTS AND NEIGHBORS. I APPRECIATE ALL. THANK YOU.

>> BEFORE YOU STEP AWAY, ONE QUESTION AND I WANTED TO VISIT.

ARE YOU OPEN TO THE IDEA OF A REARDRIVE WAY THAT ACCESSES THE ALLEY WAY AND ONE OF THE CONCERNS BROUGHT UP IS THE

STREET SIDE PARKING. >> I THINK WE ARE OPEN TO THAT AND WE WOULD NEED TO REDESIGN THE LAYOUT AND ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD PROBABLY BE A PROBLEM ARE THE SETBACKS REQUIRED AND WE ARE SET BACK A LITTLE FURTHER FROM THE STREET. SO COMING OFF OF -- NOT INGESTING THE ALLOWAY -- ALLEYWAY WE THOUGHT WOULD BE THE WORST THINGS FOR THE NEIGHBORS. BUT WE ARE OPEN TO REDESIGNING THE FLOOR PLAN IF WE NEED TO PUT ALL OF THE PARKING IN THE BACK.

>> THANK YOU. >> I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR MOMENT AND I WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION APPEAR AND GIVE EVERYBODY THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK AND VISIT WITH US. BUT I WANT TO CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND HAVE A DISCUSSION HEARS YOU CAN HEAR A DISCUSSION AND I WILL OPEN IT UP AGAIN AFTER WE HAVE A DISCUSSION. I DO UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT RANDY SAID BUT THIS IS A DUPLEX APPROPRIATE IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. HE SHOWED A LOT OF EXAMPLES AND SO THIS RIGHT HERE, AND I HAVE LOOKED AT THE ZONING MAP, SCOTT IS RS-12. WASHINGTON INTO THE RIGHT HERE , THESE ARE RS-8 AND THERE IS RS-6 TO THE NORTH. THE EXAMPLE THAT RANDY GAVE BOTH MEDIUM DENSITY AND MULTIFAMILY AREAS, THEY REZONE THAT WE ORIGINALLY. THOSE AREAS WHERE HE HAD ON HIS CHART THAT WAS INTENDED TO BE THAT WAY. BUT ALL OF THOSE AREAS ARE MEDIUM DENSITY OR MULTIFAMILY AREAS. THIS DUPLEX IS RIGHT OUT IN THE MIDDLE. SO NOT SEEING ANY CONDITIONAL USE THESE NEIGHBORHOODS DON'T HAVE A LOT OF OPEN LOTS AND IT ISN'T MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION, WE ARE OF THE OPINION AND THERE ARE FIVE OF US HERE BUT TO ME THIS IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE SPOT IN THE MIDDLE OF A RS-12 AND RS-8 AREA FOR DUPLEX. THAT IS KIND OF MY OPINION AND I CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING SO I COULD VOICE OF THAT APPROACH. I AM WELCOMING YOU GUYS AND YOUR

INPUT ON THAT. >> THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT I THINK IS GIVEN THE MAKEUP OF THE OWNERSHIP OF THIS LOT I DOUBT ANYBODY WILL PUT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON HERE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY OCCUPANCY BUT THE OTHER SCENARIO IS WOULD LIKELY END UP WITH A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME RUN INTO THE SAME NUMBER

OF COLLEGE STUDENTS. >> THAT IS AND OUR CALL.

>> WE ARE ASKING FOR A CONDITIONAL USE FROM A DUPLEX

SPECIFICALLY. >> I AM CONCERNED AND I THINK THE CONCERN WAS RAISED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC. AND IT IS WHY I ASKED ABOUT REAR ENTRY WORKING. AND ALL OF THE HOMES AROUND IT AT THAT INTERSECTION HAVE REAR ENTRY DRIVES.

>> WE AREN'T VOTING YET AND I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING

[00:35:03]

AGAIN BUT I THOUGHT WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A DISCUSSION BUT THE REAL QUESTION IS A DUPLEX, IS IT APPROPRIATE IN THE MIDDLE OF A RS-12 AND RS-8? I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE EVER APPROVED THAT OR RECALL THE CONDITIONAL USE LIKE THIS.

>> I HAVE BEEN RESEARCHING AND LOOKING AT THE TRAFFIC AND LAYOUT ON THE AERIAL MAP. AND I AM KIND OF TORN ON THAT.

>> I WILL AGREE THAT RESALE WILL BE TOUGH. IT WILL BE. THAT

IS FROM MY REAL ESTATE VIEW. >> I WILL REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WHAT ANYBODY ELSE LIKE THE COME UP AND VISIT WITH

US?'S COME UP. >> HELLO. I LIVE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS LOT AND LIVE IT 717 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD. MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE LIVED THERE THE PAST SEVEN YEARS. HONESTLY MY HEART DROPPED WHEN THIS LETTER CAME IN THE MAIL. MY HUSBAND IMMEDIATELY TOLD ME WE SHOULD START LOOKING SOMEWHERE ELSE JUST BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO BE LIVING ACROSS HE STREET FROM THE DUPLEX AND WE PURPOSELY PICKED THIS COMMUNITY AND I THINK ANYBODY AROUND OUR AREA CAN AGREE THAT IT IS A BEAUTIFUL COMMUNITY AND THE NEIGHBORS ARE SUPPORTIVE OF ONE ANOTHER. EVERYBODY TAKES CARE OF THEIR LAND. THAT STREET IS SO BUSY AND LIVING DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM IT, I CAN DEFINITE WE ATTEST TO THAT THAT ARE NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO THAT LOT WHICH WOULD BE THE DUPLEX NEIGHBORS, THEY HAVE A LARGE FAMILY AND I AM NOT SURE WHAT THEY DO FOR A LIVING BUT THEY DO HAVE CARS CONTINUALLY COMING INTO THE AREA SO THE PARKING GOES ALL THE WAY INTO THAT LOT MULTIPLE TIMES. ALSO JUST THE BUSYNESS OF THE STREET AND I KNOW EVERYBODY HAS REITERATED THIS QUITE A BIT THAT I USED TO GO WALKING DOWN TO A SEE YOU ALL THE TIME AND I WALKED DOWN THE STREET TO GET THERE AND THERE WERE A FEW ENCOUNTERS DANGEROUS WITH THE CARS COMING DOWN THAT ROAD THAT I DRIVE NOW TO GET THERE. SO THIS IS A CONCERN THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. AND WE LOVE OUR COMMUNITY. AND I WOULD LOVE FOR SOMEBODY TO BUILD A HOME THERE AND JUST HAVING DUPLEXES IS THE CONCERN WITH THE TRAFFIC AND ALSO WITH NEIGHBORS KNOWING ONE ANOTHER AND GETTING ALONG WITH ONE ANOTHER AND WATCHING OUT FOR ONE ANOTHER. I DO KNOW THE PEOPLE ACROSS THE STREET ARE LOVELY AND WE LOVE THEM IN OUR NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBORS TO OUR LEFT, WE ADORE THEM AS WELL AND I WOULD HATE FOR THERE TO BE FAMILIES GOING IN AND OUT CONTINUALLY AND THAT IS MY TWO CENTS.

>> DOES ANYBODY WANT TO COME UP AND VOICE AN OPINION IN THIS CASE? DO YOU WANT TO COME BACK UP, RANDY?

>> I DO LIVE IN THIS AREA AS WELL OFF OF AMBLER. LIKE I SAID EARLIER, I HAVE LIVED HERE IN COLLEGE AND, WE DO CARE ABOUT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE DO CARE ABOUT THE NEIGHBORS. I DO GO TO CHURCH WITH SOME OF THE FOLKS WHO HAVE COME UP HERE AND SPOKE ABOUT IT. WE WANT TO DO A GOOD JOB AND TAKE CARE AND THIS LOT IS OF OCCULT TO BUILD ON AND IN THE 70S AND 80S WHEN CONCRETE WAS CHEAPER AND DIRT WORK WAS CHEAPER AND HOMES COULD BE BUILT ON A STEEP GRADE LIKE THIS BUT RIGHT NOW IT IS CHANGED OWNERSHIP SO MANY TIMES THAT A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME JUST WON'T BE ABLE TO BE BUILT THERE UNLESS SOMEBODY IS WILLING TO TAKE A LOSS ON IT. WE DO HAVE SEVERAL PROPERTIES IN HERE IN TOWN THAT WE TAKE CARE OF THAT WOULD DO WELL AND WE INCLUDE LAWN CARE AT OUR PROPERTIES. WE DO HAVE A GOOD STANDING RELATIONSHIP WITH ALL OF HER NEIGHBORS. WE ARE NOT LOOKING TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT IS CHIEF OR SOLD AND WE HAVE A LONG-TERM INTEREST HERE. IT IS IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO USE GOOD MATERIALS AND GOOD BUILDING PRACTICES AND LISTEN TO THE ADVICE OF OUR INTERIOR DESIGNERS TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT WILL BLEND IN AND VALUE PROPERTIES AROUND. SO I DO KNOW IT IS A LITTLE BIT OF A STRANGE DEAL TO HAVE A DUPLEX IS RIGHT HERE EVEN WITH SOME CLOSE AND IT WILL SHARE PROPERTY LINES

[00:40:01]

WITH SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. BUT THERE ISN'T A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY IN THIS FROM THIS AREA FOR INFILL AND ESPECIALLY IN NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THIS WHERE THERE ARE ALREADY SO MANY RENTAL PROPERTIES EXISTING. WE WANT TO BLEND IN AND DO A GOOD JOB AND TAKE CARE THE PEOPLE AROUND US. THANK YOU.

>> MY NAME IS MICHELLE AND I LIVE AT 709 SCOTT PLACE, ACROSS THE ALLEY FROM THIS PROPERTY. ALL THE SPOTS ON HERE THAT HE SAYS ARE MULTIFAMILY PLACES ARE NOT WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. I FEEL LIKE THOSE ARE ALL OUTSIDE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. HAVING A REAR ENTRY TERRIFIES ME. BECAUSE I AM RIGHT ACROSS THE ALLEY. IF YOU HAVE EIGHT CARS OR NINE OR 10 CARS WITH AN ADDITIONAL UNIT ALL COMING IN THE ALLEY THAT IS A LOT OF TRAFFIC IN OUR ALLEY AND IT IS ALREADY FALLING APART BECAUSE WHEN IT RAINS IT WASHES DOWN. THAT WON'T BE GOOD FOR THE ALLEY. OR FOR US HAVING TO SHARE THE ALLEY WITH ALL OF THE CARS. WE DO SPECIFICALLY -- WE MOVED ACROSS TO BE AWAY FROM RENTAL PROPERTIES AND THIS IS NOT WHAT WE MOVED TO THIS HOUSE

THREE YEARS AGO FOR. >> ANYONE ELSE? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. WHAT IS BEFORE US IS, IS IT APPROPRIATE TO PUT A CONDITIONAL USE ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AND THAT IS THE QUESTION BEFORE US. I DO UNDERSTAND TRAFFIC AND I DO UNDERSTAND CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND ALL OF THAT BUT IT IS A ZONING CASE FOR US. FRANKLY, I DON'T THINK THIS IS A GOOD USE OF THAT PROPERTY AND DUPLEXES BELONG IN MEDIUM DENSITY AREAS AND THEY SHOULD BE THERE. THERE ARE SOME CIRCUMSTANCES, MAYBE IF IT WERE CLOSER TO ONE OF THESE OR IF IT WERE ABUTTING TO OUR ACROSS THE STREET, MAYBE APPROPRIATE TO BE WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER WELL AWAY FROM ANY MEDIUM DENSITY OR MULTIFAMILY OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF A RS-12 OR RS-8 SUBDIVISION. BUT NOT A GOOD CONDITIONAL USE. OR A PLACE FOR US. SO YOU KIND OF KNOW MY STANCE HOPING WE COULD HAVE MORE DISCUSSION BUT WE NEED ONE OF YOU GUYS TO MAKE THE MOTION.

>> I DENY THE CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST.

>> I WILL SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY AND

A SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY.

THE MOTION TO DENY CARRIES. >> YOU CAN APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE WE JUST RECOMMEND. SO WE RECOMMENDED TO DENY SO YOU CAN APPEAL TO THE COUNCIL. SECT THE NEXT ZONING CASE IS Z-2024-11 . AND BY THE WAY I APOLOGIZE AND I WILL LET YOU GUYS GO AT IT. ALTHOUGH YOU ARE WELCOME TO STAY AND LISTEN

AND IT IS FASCINATING. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

INAUDIBLE ]

>> ZONING CASE Z-2024-11 TO CREATE A PLAN TO ALLOW GENERAL RETAIL AND MEDIUM DENSITY AND BUFFALO GAP?

[00:45:01]

>> IS ACROSS FROM HIGH SCHOOL. >> I LOST TRACK OF WHERE WE ARE. WITH MODIFIED

318 OF THE TALBOT SURVEY. >> IT IS ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD.

>> HELLO. I AM THE PLANNER WITH THE CITY OF ABILENE, KILEY HANNAH, PRESENTING CASE Z-2024-11 . IT IS TO CREATE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE 7400 BLOCK OF BUFFALO GAP ROAD. AND HERE IS THE LOCATION MAP AND THIS ZONING MAP , THE PROPOSED TRACKS. AND THE USAGE ALLOWING IN GENERAL RETAIL AND IN MEDIUM DENSITY. AND HERE ARE SOME VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY. WE DID SEND OUT NOTIFICATIONS AND A 200 FOOT BUFFER AREA. THERE WAS ZERO IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED. HOWEVER, ONE CAME IN FAVOR AFTER THE FIVE DAYS SO IT WASN'T UPLOADED ONTO THIS MAP. THE PROPOSED REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNED AND THE SURROUNDING USES IN ZONING AND GENERALLY ACCEPTED PLANNING PRINCIPLES AND THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

>> GO BACK. KEEP GOING. ONE MORE. RIGHT THERE. WHAT IS THIS

LITTLE THING DOWN TO THE SOUTH? >> IT IS A PORTION OF THE

PROPERTY THAT THEY OWN. >> I GUESS IS THE GIS -- IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TAKING OVER THE PORTION OF A LOT, THE NORTH

PORTION OF ANOTHER LOT. >> IT IS ALL OWNED BY THEM BUT IT OVERLAYS ON THE MAP AND THEY ARE ALWAYS 100%.

>> THEY WANT TO REZONE ALL OF IT?

>> EVERYTHING WITH THE LINES ON IT.

>> REALLY BASICALLY THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THEY ARE

EXPANDING THE MD? >> PRETTY MUCH.

>> OKAY. >> AND TAKING OUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL. GO TO THE NEXT ONE. THANK YOU. DOES ANYBODY WANT TO COME VISIT WITH US FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING?

>> HELLO I AM AN AGENT FOR THE DEVELOPER HERE. AS SHE SAID, THIS IS A PRETTY EASY CLEANUP PD AND MOST OF THE TRACK WAS ALREADY GR ALONG THE FRONTAGE AND THERE IS A SLIVER THERE AND IT IS A PARCEL THEY OWN SO IT WILL BE JUST THAT AND OBVIOUSLY EXTENDING IT INTO WHAT USED TO BE NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL. IT ISN'T IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT THE ORDINANCE HERE HAS BEEN LARGELY CRAFTED -- WE PUT TOGETHER WITH THE CLIENT AND THE CITY HAS REVIEW IT -- REVIEWED IT. THERE ARE A FEW THINGS ON HERE BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO DISCUSS WITH STAFF BEFORE IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL BUT THE REQUEST WOULD BE THAT WE HAVE TIME TO QUICKLY ADJUST A FEW OF THESE LINES AND I WILL IDENTIFY THEM AS A 1B, B3 A AND B FOR BE -- B 4 B BUT WE WANT TO HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT IT BEFORE IT'S PUT ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA NOT OPPOSED TO IT BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO MEET YET BUT OTHERWISE WE ARE HERE TO ANSWER

ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY. >> YOU ARE REFERENCING LINES

OUT OF THE PD? >> IN THE ORDINANCE. YES SIR.

GIVE ME JUST A SECOND. >> I THINK SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT STAFF WANTED TO INCLUDE WAS IN RESPONSE TO RECENT ZONING CASES AND WE GET IT BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THAT YET WITH STAFF.

>> I DIDN'T WRITE THAT DOWN. >> IT IS LETTER A 1 WOULD BE

[00:50:02]

INSTALLATION OF THE BUFFER YARD, B 3 LETTER A.

>> INSTALLATION OF THE BUFFER YARD SHAN'T BE DEFERRED TO COINCIDE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF TRACT 2.

>> OUR POSITION IS TRACKED 1 GETS DEVELOPED AND YOU WOULD PUT IN REQUIRED TO DO THE BUFFER SO THAT LANGUAGES --

>> I DO THINK YOU NEED A BUFFER ALONG WITH THERE'S HOUSES.

>> YES. YOU HAVE TO GO BETWEEN BOTH TRACKS AND THE HOUSES TO THE SOUTH BECAUSE YOU ARE GOING BUFFERING AGAINST THIS AND THERE IS NO CONCERN THERE ON OUR END BUT JUST THE LANGUAGE THAT THE INSULATION -- INSTALLATION CAN'T BE DEFERRED AND IT WON'T BE ANYWAY AS SOON AS TRACT 1 GETS DEVELOPED ANYWAY BECAUSE CODE REQUIRES IT.

>> THE OTHER IS WHEN WE PROPOSED THIS LANGUAGE TO STAFF THE IDEA WAS TO ALLOW FOR THIS BACK TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THROUGH THE RETAIL AND THE PARCEL WILL BE A WAGON WHEEL PROPOSE TO EXTEND THROUGH THIS TRACT AND CONNECT TO THOMPSON PARKWAY TO ALLOW FOR SIGNAGE FOR THE COMMUNITY AND I DIDN'T WANT THAT TO IMPEDE THE GR SIGNAGE IF THEY PUT IT IN , A

RETAIL TRACT UPFRONT. >> YOU DON'T WANT THIS TO BE THE SIGNAGE BUT YOU STILL WANT TO ALLOW THE GR SIGNAGE?

>> I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT RETAIL SIGNAGE WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THAT IN THE LAST ONE IS B4B JUST THAT THIS WOULD HAVE A UNIFORM DESIGN AND I THINK IT'S A GOAL BUT NOT REQUIRED ANYWHERE AND I THINK IT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED THAT WAY BUT JUST PUT IT INTO THE PD AND THAT IS NOT SOMETHING WE PROPOSED. HE SHOULD BE DOING THAT. AND I WOULD ASK FOR ADDITIONAL TIME AND I THINK IT WILL HAPPEN LATER THIS AFTERNOON TO WORK IT OUT WITH STAFF.

>> OKAY. >> ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO COME VISIT WITH US? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE QUESTION IS NOW WE HAVE AN OPEN-ENDED PD SO I'M NOT REALLY SURE HOW TO END

ON THAT. >> WE COULD SEE HOW FAR WE GET

ON THIS FORM IF YOU WISH. >> WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND DISCUSS THESE THREE ITEMS AND MODIFY THEM. AND EITHER LEAVE THEM AS IS OR MODIFY THEM OR REMOVE THEM OR WHATEVER YOU SEE IS APPROPRIATE.

>> WE WERE GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY.

>> I HAVE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AFTER I THINK ABOUT WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

>> I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. CLAYTON, LET ME SEE IF I UNDERSTAND AND YOU GUYS AS WELL. I DON'T SEE THE NEED FOR B BECAUSE IF YOU DEVELOP TRACT ONE YOU HAVE TO PUT IN A BUFFER YARD. SO WE COULD TAKE A1B OUT .

>> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. >> DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT,

KILEY HANNAH? >> IT HAS TO BE A BUFFER THERE ANYWAY SO IT WILL BE CONCURRENT WITH HOW THEY ARE BUILDING ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THEY PUT REQUIREMENTS FOR A BUFFER YARD

IN THE PD THEMSELVES. >> RIGHT. YES. OKAY. BUT THAT WITH THE CONDITION IS A SOMEBODY BUILDS ON A PORTION OF THE FRONT OF ONE OF THOSE LOTS LIKE IN OUT LOT THING AND BUILDS THE BACKEND OF IT SEPARATELY. IT WILL BE OUR PRACTICE TO RECALL THE BUFFER YARD WHEN LET'S SAY HE HAS TRACT ONE HERE AND 2 HERE AND YOU HAVE THESE IN INDUSTRIAL AND THERE IS A FAMILY DOLLAR THERE IN THE FRONT AND THEN IN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY IS FUTURE COMMERCIAL AND WE REQUIRE THE BUFFER YARD TO GO IN UPFRONT HERE EVEN THOUGH THE

[00:55:02]

BACK OF IT WAS RESIDENTIAL AND ZONED COMMERCIAL BECAUSE IT IS RESIDENTIAL BEYOND THAT. AND THAT WAS THE THINKING AND THE CONDITION AND IF YOU WILL ONLY HAVE ONE USER ON THE LOT IT IS

A SIMPLE THING. >> I WISH I COULD PROMISE THAT

AND I DON'T KNOW -- >> I DO UNDERSTAND.

>> I THINK THAT IS A SITE PLAN COMMENT AT THIS POINT.

>> THAT WAS THE REASONING. >> IF WE SAID SOMETHING LIKE HERE GO BACK TO THE ZONING MAP OR SOMETHING

>> ISN'T THE TYPE B BUFFER YARD REQUIRED ANYWAY?

>> GO TO THE NEXT ONE. RIGHT THERE. SO LET'S SAY YOU WANT TO DEVELOP THE UPPER PART OF TRACT ONE AND WHERE WOULD THIS GO? WANT TO DEVELOP THIS FIRST AND DOES IT SAY YOU HAVE TO DEVELOP -- THIS IS SAYING YOU HAVE TO PUT THIS ALL THE WAY UP

TRACT ONE. >> IT MAY BE HELPFUL TO LOOK AT THIS IN THE PRINT OUT I HAVE IN THE PRESENTATION AND DO YOU

HAVE THAT IN YOUR PACKET? >> I AM TRYING TO GET THE WORDING HERE. WHAT YOU WANT HERE IS IF THERE IS DEVELOPMENT AND TRACT ONE, WE WANT THE BUFFER YARD IN THAT PART OF THE

TRACT. RIGHT? >> YOU HAVE TO HAVE A BUFFER BETWEEN THE BOUNDARY OF TRACT 1 IN 2 .

>> WHAT IF YOU ONLY DO A PART OF IT?

>> YOU WOULD HAVE AN UNDEVELOPED BUFFER AREA. IF YOU DECIDE TO DEVELOP THAT IN THE FUTURE AND TRULY A BUT TRACT 2 YOU HAVE TO ADD A BUFFER. AND THAT IS IN THE INTENT.

>> I GUESS A BUFFER YARD SHOULD BE REQUIRED BETWEEN 2 IN THE

RESIDENTIAL AREA RS-6. >> THAT IS STATED IN THE OTHER AREA BUT BY DEFAULT YOU HAVE A BUFFER REQUIRED.

>> THAT IS AT TREND -- TRACT 1 AND THE RESIDENTIAL.

>> OKAY. THAT IS TRUE. >> I AM SAYING JUST AT THE RESIDENTIAL AND IT SHOULD BE REQUIRED BETWEEN TRACT 1 AND

THE RS-6 AND TRACT 2. >> THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE STANDARD LINE DEVELOPMENT CODE IF YOU ARE CONSTRUCTING

SOMETHING IN GR. >> THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT IS YOU TAKE A BUFFER ALL THE WAY OUT. I AM WONDERING WHY IT IS

IN THERE TO START WITH. >> I DO AGREE AND I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WAS REQUESTED. AND IT WASN'T IN OUR ORIGINAL

REQUEST, WAS IT? >> ALL OF THESE OUT IN THE GR DISTRICT INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING.

>> OUR SUBMITTAL INCLUDED LOT SIZE MODIFICATIONS AND STREET SETBACK MODIFICATIONS AND SIGNAGE PERMISSION FOR THE

RESIDENTIAL. >> SO WHAT IS THE REQUIREMENT? WHAT IS AND WHY IS THAT EVEN IN THEIR? BECAUSE IF YOU DEVELOPED INTO RETAIL YOU HAVE TO HAVE BUFFERING BETWEEN IT AND

EVERYTHING ELSE, RIGHT? >> RIGHT. IF YOU DEVELOPED GENERAL RETAIL YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT. AND FOR EACH CORNER IT IS GENERAL RETAIL SEE HAVE TO HAVE BUFFERING AND THEY GAVE YOU MY EXAMPLE AND I WAS THINKING OF THIS AND THINKING ABOUT THE BUFFALO GAP CASE WE HAD WITH STARBUCKS. AND EVERYBODY WAS %-Ú SO FORTH. AND WE HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD BEHIND THERE SOMEWHERE AND THIS WAS IN RESPONSE TO MAKING SURE THE NEIGHBORS WERE COMPATIBLE AND THEY ACHIEVE THE SAME THING WITHOUT HAVING TO PUT THE CONDITION IN AND SO BE IT. AND THOSE TYPE OF ISSUES ON THE BUFFERING GOES IN AND PROTECTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THE REASONS WHY THE

[01:00:01]

CONDITION WAS THERE. AND I GUESS IT IS MY FEELING THAT HERE ALL DEVELOPMENTS SET OUT IN GENERAL RETAIL DISTRICT APPLIES TO BE JUST LIKE THAT AND JUST LIKE WE ZONED THAT ONE

TRACT FOR GENERAL RETAIL. >> WITH THAT BUFFERING HAVE TO GO IN INITIALLY LIKE AS SOON AS THEY DEVELOPED IT ?

>> WHEN THEY DEVELOPED IT NEXT TO THE PROPERTY.

>> IT IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION AND IF YOU ARE UNCOMFORTABLE

WITH IT -- >> IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO ME AND

NEEDS TO BE THERE. >> IT DOES ACCOMPLISH THE SAME THING AS CLAYTON SAID WHEN THEY DEVELOP IT AS PART OF THIS PROCESS AND THIS IS ON THE BUFFER WOULD BE REQUIRED. SO LEAVING IT IN AND OUT, IT WILL HAVE THE SAME RESULT.

>> SO ALL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SET OUT IN THE GENERAL RETAIL DISTRICT . AND TAKE EVERYTHING ELSE OUT BELOW THAT?

>> YES, SIR. >> AND B3A. AGAIN,

>> THIS IS IN THERE FOR THE REASON AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY HAVE A SIGN ALLOWED ON THE FRONTAGE ADVERTISING THIS PART OF THE PROPERTY AND IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED TO BE A BILLBOARD SIGN. AND TRACT 2 AND 1 WILL BE TWO DIFFERENT PARCELS AND IF YOU DON'T DO THAT WE WANT TO HAVE A SIGN AND BECOMES A

BILLBOARD SIGN. >> LET ME SEE THE WAY I READ THIS. THAT IN ADDITION TO WHAT IS NORMALLY ALLOWED, YOU ARE ALLOWING THEM AN ADDITIONAL MONUMENT SIGN AND WAYFINDING

SIGN. >> RIGHT. THAT IS WHAT I WAS

TRYING TO TALK ABOUT. >> I AM TOTALLY GOOD WITH THAT.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WOULDN'T OVERWRITE GR SIGNAGE

REQUIREMENTS. >> THAT'S NOT THE WAY I READ

IT. >> THE LAST ONE AND IT IS PROBABLY A SIMILAR CONVERSATION THE FIRST CONVERSATION WE HAD ABOUT THE BUFFER YARD AND IT IS REQUIRED ALREADY AND IT SEEMS

UNNECESSARY. >> I AM CURIOUS HERE THIS IS A UNIFORM DESIGN ALONG THE LENGTH OF THIS IN TERMS OF FENCING AND MATERIALS. AND THE UNIFORM DESIGN I GUESS WE ARE NOT GETTING UNIFORM DESIGN? THIS IS BUGGED A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND STAFF AND ENABLERS BUT WHEN YOU APPLY FOR A PUD YOU'RE ASKING FOR SOMETHING SPECIAL, UNIQUE AND USUALLY THERE IS A PUBLIC BENEFIT THAT IS KIND OF A GIVE OR TAKE AND MOST CITIES WHO APPLY HAS NICE FENCING AND ORNAMENTAL FENCING OR LANDSCAPING BUFFERING AND IT LOOKS AND READS AS A CONTINUOUS THING TO PROVIDE BUFFERING ALONG THIS SIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THIS IS A WAY OF TRYING TO BALANCE THIS AND GIVING HIM SPECIAL ALLOWANCES TO DO THINGS LIKE A BILLBOARD SIGN ON BUFFALO GAP AND WE LIKE TO HAVE SOMETHING EQUALLY BALANCING OUT FOR THE PUBLIC AND IF YOU FEEL LIKE WE DON'T

NEED TO DO THAT -- >> YOU WANTED TO KNOW THE RATIONALE AND THAT IS WHERE IT CAME FROM.

>> I THINK THIS TYPE A BUFFER YARD DOES THAT. BUT IN ADDITION TO A TYPE A BUFFER YARD AND THAT IS MY QUESTION, WHAT IS THE REASON FOR B IF YOU SAY THIS WE GET A TYPE A BUFFER

YARD, RIGHT? >> AND I READ THIS, THE WAY I READ IT WAS THAT LONG THE ENTIRE SOUTH SIDE THEY WANT THAT TO BE A CONSISTENT LOOK VERSUS SOMEBODY DEVELOPING

THAT. >> BUT THAT'S YOUR PROBLEM THAN IF THIS IS NOT UNIFORM AND CONSISTENT BY DEFINITION IT'S

A PROBLEM. >> WE CAN ASK FOR WHATEVER WE

FEEL LIKE IS APPROPRIATE. >> IF THAT WERE JUST AN MD OR IF THIS IS NOT A PUD AND IT WAS STRAIGHT MD, WHAT WOULD BE

REQUIRED? TYPE A BUFFER YARD? >> WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROJECT IS ONGOING AND COMPATIBLE AND IS

[01:05:03]

ACHIEVED THROUGH THE PUD AND THAT'S THE WHOLE NATURE OF IT AND IF YOU READ THAT SECTION, THAT IS WHAT IT STATES AND IT IS THE PROMOTION OF A UNIQUE DEVELOPMENT THAT PROVIDES FOR THE GOOD OF THE DEVELOPER AND THE INTEREST OF THE LAND DEVELOPER AND THE COMMUNITY. AND CERTAINLY WITHIN YOUR POWER TO LEAVE IT LIKE IT IS AND GO WITH THE LDC RECOMMENDATION AND WE THOUGHT WE WERE TRYING TO ACHIEVE A HIGHER GOAL IN EXCHANGE FOR SOME OF THE GIVE-AND-TAKE THAT IT IS

SUPPOSED TO REQUIRE. >> IF THEY WILL DO THAT ANYWAY, WHY DOES IT MATTER IF THE LANGUAGE IS IN THERE IF YOU ARE

GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY? >> THERE IS NO NEED TO HAVE THE LANGUAGE AT ALL. I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT RANDY IS SAYING AND IT IS A PUBLIC GOOD IF WE CAN CODIFY THAT AND THAT WOULD BE GREAT AND MY ISSUE IS I DIDN'T KNOW THIS WAS IN THE ORDINANCE UNTIL THIS MORNING SO HAD WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THAT WITH MY CLIENT, I MAY BE ON BOARD WITH THAT AT THIS POINT THIS IS NOT WHAT WE REQUESTED.

>> WHEN YOU DEVELOP THAT, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A BUFFER YARD AND

IT WOULD BE A TYPE A? >> CORRECT.

>> THIS LANGUAGE REALLY DOESN'T AFFECT ANYTHING?

>> B 4 WHAT A DOESN'T FOOT B4B IS IN ADDITION AND WE WILL LIKELY CONSTRUCT THAT WAY BUT THE HABIT IN IT IS NOT SOMETHING WE TALKED ABOUT UNTIL THIS MORNING.

>> I KIND OF THINK IT IS GOOD AND I DON'T SEE THE NEED FOR B YOU GUYS OR MAYBE HEARING SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN I AM

HEARING. >> WHAT I AM ENVISIONING HERE AND I COULD BE WRONG IF I THINK THEY ARE THINKING OF MULTIPLE AND EVENTUAL SITES GETTING DEVELOPED IN A MEDIUM DENSITY

AREA. >> SO YOU BREAK IT UP INTO THREE PHASES OR SOMETHING AND EACH TIME YOU DO IT ACROSS A

PHASE IT'S A DIFFERENT. >> YOU GET A WALL ON ONE AREA

AND SOMETHING ON THE OTHER. >> I THINK THE INTENT IF I INTERPRETED CORRECT THE IS TO MAKE IT ALL CONSISTENT.

>> THAT MAKE SENSE? >> I HAVE TO RUN IT BY MY CLIENT. WE HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESS THIS

UNTIL TODAY. >> DID YOU WANT TO PULL IT OFF

THE TABLE? >> I WOULD RATHER NOT TABLE IT.

WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AND BRING IT BACK TO COUNSEL -- COUNCIL.

>> WE WILL SAY ON THIS ONE ALL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SET OUT IN THE GENERAL RETAIL DISTRICT AND THEN DROP EVERYTHING AFTER THAT IN A. AND THEN WE WILL LEAVE B3A , B 3 THE WAY IT IS AND B 4 THE WAY IT IS AND THAT IS THE WAY WE WILL GO WITH THAT

HERE. >> SURE.

>> ALL RIGHT? THANK YOU. >> CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION?

>> AND MAKING A MOTION IT WOULD BE THAT THEY HAVE APPROVED AS STATED WITH THE CHANGE AT EXHIBIT B S A B ALTERED AS

DISCUSSED? >> THE EXHIBIT ALTERED AS -- B ALTERED TO READ TRACT 1 ALL SET OUT IN GENERAL RETAIL DISTRICT.

>> SO MOVED. >> DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> COULD I HAVE SOME CLARITY? SO YOU WANT TO LEAVE THE A TRACT 1 AND REMOVE 1 LETTER A

AND B? >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTOOD. AND WE ARE EXCLUDING THE FOLLOWING AND

INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING? >> WE ARE GOOD.

>>

[01:10:04]

>> Z-2024-18 CHANGE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY TO MEDICAL USE LOCATED

AT 1750 PINE STREET. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS CLARISSA IVEY FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE AND THIS IS A TRUE CLEANUP CASE. AND IT IS Z-2024-18 AND IT WOULD BE MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS AND THEIR AGENT IS DHT WANTING TO CHANGE THE ZONING OF APPROXIMATE WE .40 ACRES FROM MEDIUM DENSITY WITH A CORRIDOR OVERLAY TO MEDICAL USE AND ALSO LEAVE THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY IN PLACE. AND THE LOCATION IS 1750 PINE STREET AND YOU CAN SEE IT'S RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR MEDICAL DISTRICT RIGHT OFF OF PINE AND NORTH 18 AND THIS IS ZONING AND THIS IS THE LAST REMAINING PIECE OF MEDIUM DENSITY IN THIS LOCATION. THE REASON FOR THEIR EXPANDING THEIR FACILITIES, THE NEED TO CHANGE TO MEDICAL USE IS THERE.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE THESE ARE SOME IMAGES AND THEY ARE MEDICAL BUILDINGS SURROUNDING THESE. AND YOU ARE ALLOW USES IN YOUR MEDIUM DENSITY ZONING AND THEN USES IN YOUR MEDICAL USE. WE SENT OUT NOTIFICATIONS TO NOT VERY MANY PEOPLE. AND WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY RESPONSE. THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS SURROUNDING USES AND ZONING AND THESE PLANNING PRINCIPLES AND THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVING WHICH STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> THAT WAS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

>> I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO YOU WANT TO COME

OVER HERE AND COMPLICATE THIS? >> BJ PRICHARD AND JUST TEARED

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> HOW DID YOU GET THAT START

IS MY ONLY QUESTION. >> HE SWORE UP AND DOWN THIS IS ALREADY BEEN DONE AND IF THIS NOW. -- IT IS DONE NOW.

>> I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION?

>> I MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING.

>> SECOND. >>

>> THE MOTION CARRIES. >> AFTER THE LAST TWO MEETINGS, I WILL BE ON VACATION NEXT MONTH SO THANK GOODNESS. BRAD WILL BE SITTING IN THIS CHAIR IN AUGUST SO I WILL SEE YOU AGAIN IN SEPTEMBER. WE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.