[ CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:17]
IT IS 1:30, WE WILL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
COULD YOU OPEN US UP WITH A PRAYER?
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS DAY, THIS OPPORTUNITY WE HAVE TO COME TOGETHER AT THE BUSINESS OF THE CITY TO CONSIDER WAYS WE CAN HELP AND RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT CURRENTLY WELL INTO THE FUTURE.
SO PRAY TO GIVE US WISDOM TODAY AS YOU HEAR EACH PRESENTER GIVE US CLARITY OF THOUGHT KIND OF UNDERSTANDING,, DECISION FAIRLY AND MAKE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL.
THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COME TOGETHER AND CONSIDER THE BUSINESS OF OUR CITY. AMEN.
>> THANK YOU. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS THE FINAL AUTHORITY FOR THE APPROVAL OF PLATS HOWEVER IT ACTS ONLY AS A RECOMMENDING BOARD TO CITY COUNCIL AND THE MEMBERS OF ZONING.
THE DECISIONS OF THIS COMMISSION MAY APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL THROUGH THE OFFICE OF THE CITY SECRETARY NO LATER THAN TEN DAYS FROM THE DAY OF THIS MEETING AND ALL APPEALS MUST BE IN WRITING.
THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO SPEAK ON ANY MATTER ON DISCUSSION AND RECEIVE RECOGNITION BY THE CHAIR AND THOSE WISHING TO BE SURE SHALL APPROACH THE PODIUM, STATE THEIR NAME AND THEIR PURPOSE FOR APPEARING. EACH SPEAKER REQUESTED TO LIMIT THEIR PRESENTATION TO NO MORE THAN 3 MINUTES.
IN ADDITIONAL TIME MAY BE GRANTED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR. ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT IN THAT IS EVERY CASE WE'RE HEARING TODAY BASICALLY IS A ZONING MATTER OR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND WE SERVE AS JUST A RECOMMENDING BOARD TO CITY COUNCIL.
IF YOU HEAR AND WE AGREE WITH YOU TODAY IT GOES FORWARD THROUGH CITY COUNCIL THROUGH THE TRADITIONAL ROUTE I WOULD STILL ENCOURAGE YOU TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL TO ADVOCATE ON YOUR BEHALF. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH US AND IT GOES FORWARD THROUGH AN APPEAL PROCESS OR WHATEVER THAT MAY BE, AGAIN, IT CAN STILL GO FORWARD VIA APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO WE WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTINUE TAKING YOUR MATTER AND WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE TODAY TO HELP US MAKE THE BEST
[ MINUTES]
EDUCATED RECOMMENDATION WE CAN. OUR FIRST AGENDA ITEM TODAY IS THE MINUTES FROM OUR PREVIOUS MEETING IN AUGUST.HAVE ALL THE COMMISSIONERS HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THOSE MINUTES AND IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION HEARING NONE WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ANYBODY WANTS TO ADDRESS THE MINUTES FROM OUR PREVIOUS MEETING? SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED SAY I. ANYONE OPPOSED?
[ ZONING]
THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE HAVE I BELIEVE EIGHT CASES IN OUR ZONING SECTION TODAY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE I'LL SAY ITEM NUMBER 4 WHICH IS CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS CUP-2026-12 HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE CALENDAR AND WE'LL DEAL WITH IT LATER BUT THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WON'T BE PRESENTED HERE TODAY. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, YOUR GREAT. YOU JUST MISSED THE PRAYER.ITEM NUMBER 2, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2026-13, RECEIVE A REPORT WHOLE DISCUSSION PUBLIC HEARING TO TAKE ACTION ON THE REQUEST FROM THE OWNER TO APPLY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO APPROXIMATELY 6.89 ACRES THAT IS ZONED GENERAL RETAIL AND TO ALLOW FOR OUTSIDE STORAGE AND SALES.
THIS IS LOCATED AT 2554 BARROW STREET.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE ADAM. >> GOOD AFTERNOON PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE, THIS IS CASE CUP-2026-13 OWNED BY SOUTH CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL REPRESENTED BY JERRY AS STATED.
THIS IS A PERMIT TO ALLOW RETAIL SALES AT DAWN ON VEHICLE AND DR ZONING. HERE'S AN AERIAL LOCATION MAP SHOWING THE AREA OF THE PROPERTY, YOU CAN SEE IT'S JUST SOUTH OF THE PLANNING FITNESS AND THE DRUG EMPORIUM AREA.
HERE'S THE CURRENT ZONING OF THE PROPERTY AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES. YOU CAN SEE IT'S MOSTLY ZONED GR TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH WITH SOME MULTIFAMILY TO THE WEST AND OFFICE TO THE EAST. HERE ARE SOME PROPERTY VIEWS, SUBJECT PROPERTY AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S SOME OFFICES NEARBY AS WELL AS THE DRUG EMPORIUM AND PLANNING FITNESS AS WELL. HERE IS A CONCEPT PLAN THEY HAVE PROVIDED FOR US. CONCEALED LABELED BY NUMBER 1, TO SELL VARIOUS OUTDOOR RELATED THINGS AND THE NUMBER 2 SHOWN ON THIS CONCEPT PLAN IS PROPOSED TO BE A GARDEN CENTER SIGN KIND OF SIMILAR THINGS THAT WOULD BE SEEN LIKE WALMART.
HERE'S THE PLAN OF OPERATION, THIS IS A RETAIL STORE ALMOND
[00:05:03]
RANCH STORE, I'LL GIVE YOU A MOMENT TO READ THIS AS WELL.WE SENT OUT NOTIFICATIONS, RECEIVED SEVERAL IN FAVOR AND IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. EQUATING TO ABOUT A 2.65% OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. STAFF FOUND THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SURROUNDING USES GENERALLY ACCEPTED PLANNING PRINCIPLES AND THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL IN THE LDC, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO FOLLOWING THE CONCEPT PLAN AND THE PLAN OF OPERATION.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE FOR ME.
>> ON THE OBJECTIONS SUBMITTED, WAS THERE ANYTHING SPECIFIC THAT
WAS PROVIDED? >> YES, THERE WAS SOME CONCERN WITH OUTDOOR SALES BEING A GENERAL USE.
THAT WAS MOSTLY THE CONCERN AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY THERE, PROPERTY ID 18584 WAS CONSIDERED AS PART OF THEIR PROPERTY. THIS MIGHT BE LIMITING TO THEIR
ABILITY TO USE. >> HINDRANCE RIGHT AWAY FOR THE
>> IT LOOKS LIKE ONE OF THE OBJECTORS IS THE ONE THAT HAS THE TOWER THERE. ARE THEY CONCERNED THERE MIGHT BE ACCESS PROBLEMS WITH THEIR TOWER OR IS IT JUST --
>> THAT'S THE PROPERTY THAT IS CONCERNED WITH THE DRIVE THRU ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR RETAIL STORE IN THE FRONT, EASTERNMOST
PORTION OF THAT PARCEL. >> SO THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT IT
ON THIS SIDE LIKE IN BETWEEN. >> AND ELIMINATING PARKING OR
DISRUPTING ANY DRIVES? >> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
I BELIEVE THIS PROPERTY IS VERY WELL PARKED.
THERE'S AN ELIMINATION OF PARKING BUT I BELIEVE THIS STILL WOULD LEAVE ENOUGH PARKING IN PLACE.
>> THANK YOU. >> WILL IT HINDER THE DRIVE THRU AT ALL? WILL THEY BE ABLE TO STILL USE A
DRIVE THRU THERE? >> I BELIEVE SO.
THEY SHOULD STILL HAVE ACCESS TO A DRIVE THRU THERE BUT THERE IS A CONCERN WITH THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THAT PARCEL, CARS BEING ABLE TO DRIVE BETWEEN THE GARDEN CENTER AND THE DRIVE
THRU. >> THE DRIVE THRU ON THAT SIDE.
>> SO IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S 50 FEET CLEAR THERE, WHICH IS MORE THAN THE STANDARD ROADWAY EXPECT FOR LIKE THROUGH TRAFFIC ON THAT STREET. ANY CONCERNS?
>> I THINK IT'S THE OTHER SIDE THAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT.
>> DOES THE CITY SHARE ANY OF THOSE CONCERNS?
>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. THIS PROPERTY STILL CAN USE A DRIVE THRU AS PERMITTED. IT WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THAT STANDARD PARCEL ITSELF AS THAT PARCEL WAS CUT OUT.
>> WE TIGHTENED IT UP A LITTLE BIT WHEN WE APPROVED THIS FOR SURE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ADAM?
>> THANK YOU. WE WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYBODY LIKE TO COME UP AND
ADDRESS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2? >> GOOD AFTERNOON I'M JERRY WITH ESTATE MANAGEMENT AND I'M HERE WITH THE OWNER TO TALK ABOUT THIS AND MAYBE ANSWER SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS THAT JUST CAME UP. THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION HAVING THE DRIVE THRU, ALL THE DRIVE THRU PROPERTY THAT THEY'VE USED FOR YEARS ACTUALLY BELONGS TO THE OWNER HERE THE PROPERTY LINE FOR THAT BUILDING ROADS WITHIN THE EAVES OF THE OTHER BUILDING SO EITHER SIDE OF IT BELONGS TO THIS OWNER AND WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO LOCATE ANY INGRESS OR EGRESS DOCUMENTS OR EASEMENT OR SURVEYS THAT RESTRICT THE USE OF OUR PROPERTY FOR THAT.
SO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING TO ABILENE A RETAILER THAT HAS FOUR LOCATIONS IN TEXAS, ABOUT A HUNDRED AND 90 LOCATIONS IN THE MIDWEST RIGHT NOW AND WOULD BE SIMILAR TO TRACTOR SUPPLY, HAVE ABOUT A HUNDRED AND 30 EMPLOYEES, THEY BRING SALES TAX MONEY IN PROPERTY TAX MONEY ON THEIR INVENTORY AND THEIR FIRST QUESTION, THEIR CLOSEST LOCATION RIGHT NOW IS IN WACO CACTUS SPECIALISES IN OPENING ALL THEIR PROPERTIES AT COST EVEN LESS, THAT'S WHY THEY ON THIS PROPERTY.
[00:10:05]
FOR 15 YEARS WE STRUGGLED TO GET A GOOD TENANT, WE HAVE 40,500 SQUARE FEET AND THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE THE SPACE.TYPICAL STORES OVER 50,000 FEET SO IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS WORK FOR THIS RETAILER WE HAVE TO HAVE NO SALES.
THEY EXPANDED BECAUSE MANY OF YOU KNOW HAVING AN OLDER BUILDING WITH 50,000 SQUARE FEET IS DIFFICULT TO DO SOMETHING WITH IN ABILENE. EVEN SOME OF THE NEWER BUILDINGS OF THAT SIZE, THERE'S A LIMITED NUMBER OF TENANTS.
SO WE HAVE ONES WILLING -- THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE OUTDOOR SALES, WILLING TO SIGN A 10-YEAR LEASE WITH US AND BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR IN ABILENE. THE OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING WE FIXED UP IT WILL DO THAT APPEARED TO THE SOUTH, THERE'S A LARGER SPACE THAT HAD THE SAME PROBLEMS GETTING TENANTS BECAUSE LOCATION, THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT COME TO THAT AREA, THEY'VE SIGN ON THEIR SIDE IT'S A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE IT WILL ALLOW THEM TO ... A DRUG ENFORCEMENT IS EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
AN ENVIRONMENT THAT FEELS CROWDED IS GOING TO BENEFIT FROM EXTRA TRAFFIC, PEOPLE IN THE PARKING LOT.
I THINK IT'S A WIN-WIN FOR EVERYBODY.
AS FOR THOSE PROPERTY LINES, IT RUNS PRETTY MUCH THE EAVES OF THE BUILDING ON EACH SIDE. SO ANY QUESTIONS?
APPRECIATE IT. I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS
MATTER. >> I'M ACTUALLY THAT LITTLE
BUILDING OWNER. >> THE MIDDLE ONE?
>> YES. I DO HAVE A CROSS PARKING AGREEMENT ACCESS EGRESS AGREEMENT IN PLACE THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE IN 1977. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO BRINGING NEW TENANT IN AND OCCUPYING THAT SPACE AS LONG AS IT'S NOT LIKE THE LAST ONE THAT WAS THERE THAT HAD BUSSES AND TRUCKS AND EVERYTHING PARKED OVER THERE. I'LL SAY THE ONLY REASON I AGREED TO THE TOWER ON THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY IS BECAUSE IT WAS FAR ENOUGH BACK WHERE I COULD STILL ACCESS THE DRIVE THRU. IT'S BEEN A DRIVE THRU AS FAR BACK AS ... THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN.
I'M JUST OPPOSED TO IT AS IS. >> AS YOU DRIVE THROUGH ON THE
NORTH OR SOUTH SIDE? >> ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
BUT TO GO AROUND THE BUILDING YOU NEED ACCESS TO THEIR, YOU WOULD HAVE TO LITERALLY GO IN AROUND THE TOWER AND BACK THROUGH AND I'D STILL BE CROSSING THEIR PROPERTY.
MY ONLY CONCERN IS WHY COULDN'T WE MOVE THAT SIDE FENCED IN AREA, I COULD DEAL WITH THE FRONT ONE AND DEAL WITH THE SIDE ONE, EVEN BACK FURTHER BECAUSE IT DOESN'T OBSTRUCT THE OVERHEAD DOORS FROM LOADING AND THAT'S REALLY ALL I'M OPPOSED TO CUTTING OFF MY -- BECAUSE LUCKILY I I'LL HAVE THAT THEN HAVING ACCESS TO THE DRIVE THRU SO IF THEY GET A NEW TENANT I'LL
LOSE ONE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. BURNETTE? THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
>> THANK YOU. >> WHAT IS IN THIS SPACE RIGHT
NOW? >> RIGHT NOW IT'S A CBD STORE BUT IT'S PROBABLY F FIXED AND THEY'RE GOING TO PUT SOMETHING ELSE THERE. BUT IF I CANNOT HAVE A DRIVE
THRU THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE. >> THANK YOU.
ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND ADDRESS THIS MATTER? SEEING NO ONE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
CAN I ASK THAT YOU ALL HAVE COPIES OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT THE GENTLEMAN MENTIONED?
I APPRECIATE YOU GIVING A COPY TO MR. MARSH AS WELL TO THE CITY. THERE ARE CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THAT THAT COULD BE LEGAL IN NATURE THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH US HERE. JUST OUT THERE SO THEY HAVE A COPY -- SO WHAT WE DECIDE THEY MAY END UP BEING CERTAILY COUNSEL WILL GET TO MAKE THE FINAL DECISION BUT IT MAY END UP BEING USURPED BY EASEMENT RIGHTS THAT SOMEBODY MIGHT HAVE IN AROUND THE BUILDING. SO I APPRECIATE YOU COMING I APPRECIATE YOU BEING WILLING TO BE OPEN TO MAYBE THAT BUILDING BEING MOVED BACK OR AROUND DIFFERENT THINGS AND I
[00:15:02]
APPRECIATE MR. MECHE BEING HERE TO HEAR THAT AND TALK TO THE POTENTIAL TENANTS HE HAS. GIVEN WHAT WE KNOW TODAY IN SUPPORT OF IT. I THINK IT'S A GOOD USE, I THINK IT'S A PLACE THAT HAD EITHER RECURRING VACANCIES OR TENANTS THAT TURNED OVER. I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE AREA AND A GOOD PLACE FOR THE MIDDLE OF TOWN. ALL OF THAT SUBJECT TO MAKING SURE EASEMENT RIGHTS WOULD BE ALLOWED THE WAY THEY SHOULD BE.SO THAT'S MY THINKING AND IT SEEMS LIKE ACTUALLY EVERYBODY HERE THAT'S THEIR THINKING AS WELL.
>> I LIKE THE IDEA THAT THIS IS WHAT'S COMING.
I THINK THIS IS FANTASTIC AND EVEN IF HE DOES -- I. THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT. I ALSO DO UNDERSTAND THIS AND LIKE YOU SAID I THINK THE% PROBLEM IS GOING TO BE IF THERE'S SOMETHING ON THAT PAPER THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN S.
>> THEY COULD DECIDE AND FIGURE OUT IF THEY CAN MOVE IT AROUND THAT WOULD BE BETWEEN THE LANDOWNERS TO FIGURE OUT THE
MOVING AROUND. >> NOT PART OF CONSIDERING THIS PERMIT HAS ANY EFFECT AT ALL ON THE LEGALITIES.
>> OURS IS AN APPROPRIATE WOUND FOR THE LAND I WOULD SAY IT IS
ANY DISCUSSION OR MOTIONS? >> MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> WITH CONDITIONS.
>> IT WAS SUBJECTED THE CONCEPT PLAN AND PLAN OF OPERATION.
MOTION WITH CONDITIONS. SECOND WITH CONDITIONS.
>> YES. >> THE MOTION CARRIES.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.
I HOPE YOU'RE ABLE TO FIGURE SOMETHING OUT AND GOOD LUCK WITH THE PROPERTY. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3, Z-2026-49, TAKE ACTION ON THE REQUEST FROM THE OWNER TO CHANGING THE ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 56.27 ACRES WHICH IS CURRENTLY ZONED AT CULTURAL SPACE MULTIFAMILY IN MEDIUM DENSITY AND RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY TO AGRICULTURAL OPEN.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, PLANNER WITH THE CITY OF ABILENE.
THIS IS CASE Z-2026-49. THE OWNER IS JASON BART LLC, CHANGING THE ZONING FROM 56.27 ACRES FROM AGRICULTURE MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY AND RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY TO AGRICULTURE HOME. HERE WE HAVE THE AERIAL LOCATION MAP. THE CURRENT ZONING MAP.
HERE ARE SOME VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
HERE ARE THE CURRENT PERMITTED USES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
MEDIUM DENSITY ZONING, MULTIFAMILY ZONING AND PERMITTED USES IN AGRICULTURE OPEN ZONING. NOTIFICATIONS FOR THE 200-FOOT BUFFER WE RECEIVED ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONCERNING USES AND ZONING GENERALLY ACCEPTED PLANNING PRINCIPLES AND CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL IN THE LDC STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE PICTURE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
ARE THE CURRENT USES OF THE LAND CONSISTENT WITH AGRICULTURE?
>> CURRENTLY BEING USED AS A LAYDOWN YARD AND THAT'S WHAT'S
THE NEXT CASE THAT WAS PULLED. >> BUT IS IT OPEN APPROPRIATE? IT'S A CONDITIONAL USE, DO THEY HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE?
>> NOT RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A ZONING CASE ON IT.
>> AS IS RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT WE WOULD BE
>> BUT IT'S ALSO NONCOMPLIANT FOR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILIES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU MADAM.
>> JUST TO CLEAN UP. >> WOULD ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND ADDRESS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3?
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS ONE.
I HAVE THE PLEASURE TO SPEAK ONCE BEFORE WHEN YOU REASON THE PROPERTY NORTH OF MY HOUSE FROM OPEN EGG TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.
SO NOW I'M IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF IT'S
[00:20:01]
SUITABLE FOR MY 80-YEAR-OLD PARENTS TO CONTINUE TO LIVE A HUNDRED YARDS FROM A NATURAL GAS POWER PLANT THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THAT PLANT. I BELIEVE THIS ISSUE CAME UP BECAUSE I CAME TO THE CITY AND ASK IS WHAT'S HAPPENING NEXT TO MY HOME APPROPRIATE WITH THE CURRENT ZONING? AND ZONAS FOR RESIDENTIAL AND BULLDOZERS AND LAYING DOWN LAY DOWN LAND. WAS TOLD BY THE CITY THEY WEREN'T AWARE OF ANYTHING HAPPENING ON THAT LAND AND I WAS TOLD THEY WOULD LOOK INTO IT. I THINK THE REASON WE'RE HERE TODAY FOR THIS ISSUE IS BECAUSE OF THAT.THEY'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE AS MY UNDERSTANDING.
WHEN IT RAINS NOW BECAUSE IT IS IN A RUNOFF, I LIVE NEXT TO THE CREEK, THIS WATER FLOWING NOW WASHES AND MUD ON SHIRLEY ROAD AND INTO MY TANK ON MY PROPERTY. I'LL ALSO SAY THAT'S TRUE FOR THE LAND AND PROPERTY NORTH OF MY PROPERTY BUT THAT'S NOT HERE FOR THIS MEETING. HERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DO WE WANT TO REZONE THIS TO SUPPORT THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND REWARD THE PEOPLE THAT ARE OWNING THIS AND MISUSING IT ARE NOT FOLLOWING CITY RULES I WAS TOLD THE CITY ISSUED A STOP WORK ORDER UNDER CAN ASSURE YOU THERE'S NOTHING STOPPED ON PROPERTIES SINCE THE DAY THEY STARTED BULLDOZING TREES AND FLATTENING IT AND BRINGING IN ROAD BASE AND PUTTING UP A BARBED WIRE FENCE PUTTING UP FENCE WITH RESERVOIR ON THE TOP OF IT AND PUTTING UP WORK TO POINT AT MY HOUSE AND HAVE TRAFFIC UP AND DOWN SHIRLEY ROAD THAT'S DAMAGING THE ROAD AND ENDANGERING PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON THE ROAD END.
I COULDN'T BE MORE AGAINST THIS, THEY'RE NOT FOLLOWING CITY RULES CURRENTLY WE SHOULDN'T REWARD THEM BY REZONING IT INTO SOMETHING STILL AS IN IN COMPLIANCE.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW -- I. REQUESTED FROM THE CITY HAVEN'T GOTTEN IT I'M SURE HAVEN'T TALKED TO THE RIGHT PERSON BUT HAVE BEEN SENT TO SEVERAL OFFICES TO STOP WORK THAT WAS ISSUED AND HAS THAT BEEN COMPLIED TO? WHAT'S THE PENALTY FOR SOMEONE TO COME IN AND DO SOMETHING THAT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY RULES AND BLATANTLY DISOBEY TO MOVE FORWARD. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WORK STOPPED UNTL THEY COME INTO COMPLIANCE AND I WOULD LIKE NOT TO REWARD THIS PROPERTY OWNER WITH DOING THINGS THAT SHOULDN'T BE DONE.
HAVE TO LIVE NEXT TO IT AND I DON'T LIKE WHERE I LIVE AND I DON'T THINK IT'S SAFE FOR MY FAMILY.
SO I AM AGAINST THIS REZONING. I WOULD LIKE IT TO STAY -- I BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY AND LIVED OUT THERE FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
I BUILT MY HOME MY PARENT'S HOME AND I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO LIVE THERE AND I CAN'T IF WE REZONE THIS FROM WHAT IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED TO SOMETHING ELSE.
SO DAMAGING MY PROPERTY DIRECTLY BY REZONING THIS.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO GO ON THE RECORD AS BEING AGAINST REZONING THIS PROPERTY. HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
>> ANY QUESTIONS? >> YOU MENTIONED GETTING MUD IN YOUR STOCK TANK. YOU'RE SAYING IT DAMAGED THE CAPACITY OF YOUR TANK BECAUSE OF THAT.
>> YES. AND I'M NOT AN EXPERT BUT WHEN THERE'S -- MUD COVERED SHIRLEY ROAD AND IS FLOWING IN YOU CAN SEE IT'S CLEARLY FILLING THE TANK.
YOU CAN SEE -- THEY PUT TOPSOIL, MAKING IT FLAT AND THEN WHEN THE RAINS HIT IT WASHES IT OUT AND THEY HAVE TO PUT MORE THERE, SO IT'S MOVING FROM THEIR PROPERTY ACROSS THE ROAD INTO MY TANK,
>> WOULD ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS MATTER? SEEING NO ONE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSIONERS. >> CAN YOU BRING UP THE MAP THAT SHOWS THE LAND USES AROUND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY? DO WE HAVE A HISTORY OF WHY THIS WAS ZONED MULTIFAMILY AND MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL? >> STAFF WAS WONDERING THE SAME THING. IT'S A VERY OLD ZONING HERE HAS
BEEN IN PLACE. >> ZONED THAT WHEN IT WAS
ANNEXED IN. >> IT'S A WEIRD ZONING IN THE
MIDDLE OF AGRICULTURE AREA. >> SAME WITH SOME OF THE OTHERS, YOU HAVE AGRICULTURE OPEN SPACE AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL OR GENERAL RETAIL OR WHATEVER IT IS.
IT JUST DOESN'T FIT. >> NO, IT DOESN'T FIT HERE I DON'T REALLY SEE THE POINT OF CHANGING THE ZONING IF IT'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR IT. BUT TO ME, THE ONLY REMEDY WOULD
[00:25:03]
BE TO BOTH CHANGE THE ZONING AND HAVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PUT IT IN COMPLIANCE. I GUESS THE ZONING CASE HAS TOCOME FIRST BUT I'M NOT SURE -- >> DO WE HAVE ANY REASON WHAT
THE NEXT ONE WAS PULLED? >> IT WAS INTERESTING BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THE SLIDES IT'S THAT IT WAS WITH -- CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN. IT WAS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS TO DENY. THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING.
I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE EVER SEEN CONSISTENT WITH ALL THESE THINGS SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS IN THE PLAN OF OPERATION OR THE CONCEPT PLAN THAT JUST NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED OR WHAT IT MAY BE.
>> PART OF THE REASON WHY IT WAS RECOMMENDED IS, WERE WORKING TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES HERE. ONE OF THEM IS A ZONING VIOLATION CASE WITH CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICE RIGHT, IN PART OF THE COMPLIANCE IS TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS TO BECOME COMPLIANT. DURING THIS TIME THEY EXPANDED THEIR USE A LITTLE BIT WHICH EXPANDED THE BOUNDARIES OF WHAT THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WOULD BE.
WE'RE WORKING WITH LEGAL AND OUR CODE COMPLIANCE AND PLANNERS TO ADDRESS HIS CONCERNS AT THE MOMENT.
I CAN'T GO INTO DETAILS BUT THEY ORIGINALLY WANTED TO PULL BOTH CASES BUT WE RECOMMENDED THEY MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ZONING CASE, TO CLEAN THAT AREA UP AND TURNING BACK AN OPEN SPACE LIKE THIS PROPERTY. THEN WE'LL WORK THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DURING THIS EXTRA TIME WE HAVE HERE I BELIEVE WE HAVE A MEETING TODAY OR TOMORROW?
>> THIS PROPERTY, 16266 WE WERE SEEING ON THERE IS GOING TO REMAIN RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, STILL GOING TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT ON THAT CORNER THERE IF WE WERE TO REZONE AGRICULTURE
OPEN. >> WE BELIEVE THAT'S AN ERROR, THE WAY THE PARTIAL LINES, THERE ARE SOME WEIRD PARTIAL LINES, WHERE THEY WERE DRAWN IN THE PAST THERE'S SOME MISTAKES.
>> OKAY. >> I SHARE YOUR CONCERN.
TO OUR GUEST POINT, IT'S KIND OF LIKE THE ALREADY COME IN AND DONE THIS AND WE KNOW THAT IN THE FUTURE WE'RE GOING TO HEAR SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON HOW THEY'RE GOING TO USE THIS.
I'M JUST NOT IN FAVOR -- >> THEY ARE USING IT.
>> AS IMPORTANT AS THE DEVELOPMENT IS PROBABLY TO OUR LOCAL REGION, I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE COMPLYING WITH THE CODES AND ZONINGS BEING RESPECTFUL NEIGHBORS TO THE EXTENT THEY CAN. TO ME I KIND OF AGREE LIKE I THINK IT'S SOMEONE STEPPING OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS A LITTLE BIT.
I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF REZONING THIS.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE WHOLE THING IN FRONT OF US TO MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION. >> IF WE WERE TO DENY IT THEY WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING IT BACK AGAIN.
>> THEY CAN APPEAL TO COUNCIL. THE ZONING REALLY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE VIOLATION CAUSE THERE STILL BE A VIOLATION IF YOU WERE TO PASS THIS PERIOD THERE'S ANOTHER PROCESS THEY STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH FOR THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO MAKE THEM COMPLIANT. SO JUST CHANGING IT AGRICULTURE OPEN SPACE DOESN'T MAKE IT COMPLIANT.
>> THAT'S WHERE I'M AT. I THINK IT'S TWO SEPARATE THINGS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, THE REZONING, WHICH TO ME KIND OF MAKES SENSE, BUT THE CUP WHICH WAS PULLED IS A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION THAT SHOULD BE HAD ON COMPLIANCE AND THEIR INABILITY
TO FOLLOW DIRECTION. >> WHETHER OR NOT IT'S AN APPROPRIATE USE, AGRICULTURAL -- BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE AN INDUSTRIAL YARD RIGHT NOW. DOESN'T LOOK THE WAY IT WOULD EXPECT THE CONDITIONAL USE OF AGRICULTURAL OPEN WHICH MAY BE LIKE LUMBER EQUIPMENT OR SOMETHING.
>> BUT CHANGING THE ZONING FROM A ZONING THAT WON'T ALLOW FOR LIGHT ON YARD TO ZONING THAT CAN RECEIVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS CLEARING THE WAY FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT'S IN VIOLATION TO
MOVE FORWARD. >> SURE, BUT THE COP STILL HAS
[00:30:02]
TO BE APPROVED SEPARATELY. >> I THINK WE DEAL WITH THIS AT A TIME OF PEOPLE THAT WANT TO COME IN AND TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC OR LIKE WE'RE REALLY JUST SUPPOSED TO LOOK AT LAND USE HERE WE'RE SORRY THAT'S AN ISSUE AND WE UNDERSTAND HOW CAN WE GET IT BUT IF YOU WERE TO BRING THIS IN THE VACUUM AND SAY THIS WEIRD PROPERTY THAT FOR SOME REASON WAS ANNEXED WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS, WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO BE AGRICULTURAL OPEN SPACE? I WOULD SAY YES, WE WOULD I THINK IT'S APPROPR TO HAVE -- THAT'S A QUESTION FOR A DIFFERENT DAY BUT AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, WHILE I'M AGAINST -- I. STARTED -- I WANTED TO SEE THE WHOLE THING TOGETHER, BUT I WOULD GENERALLY BE SUPPORTIVE OF AT LEAST RECLAIMING IT TO BE AGRICULTURAL OPEN ZONED AND THEN THAT'S A CONVERSATION FOR A DIFFERENT DAY.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S NECESSARILY A CONVERSATION ON --
>> MAKE SURE YOU TURN YOUR MICROPHONE SO PEOPLE CAN HEAR
I FORGET I NEED TO DO THAT. I'M GOING TO AGREE WITH WHAT EVERYBODY SAID, THIS IS A COMPLICATED THING BUT I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO WHAT THEY SAID AND WE'RE HERE TO LOOK AT CONDITIONAL USE. IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT IS SURROUNDING IT, WHAT ITS OWN RIGHT NOW DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
BUTALSO I UNDERSTAND NOT WANTING TO REWARD THESE PEOPLE, BUT FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, WERE NOT ALLOWED TO SEE BOTH.
>> THE SECOND ONE IS NOT COMING. >> OKAY.
>> SINCE WE'RE RECOMMENDING BOARD COUNSEL, THIS CAN BE A MESSY VOTE AND THAT'S OKAY. IT WILL GO TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL WILL KNOW THAT WE WERE SPLIT AND WE WERE CONFUSED BY IT AND WE DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND IT.
ONE OF OUR COUNCILMEN HERE CAN TAKE IT BACK IN THE TEST HE HAD TO COME SIT THROUGH THIS WHEN HE GETS SPEAKER AGAIN IN TWO WEEKS.
SO WE DON'T HAVE TO BE IN AGREEMENT LIKE I'M NOT SAYING THAT. IT COULD GO EITHER BY RIGHT OR BY APPEAL FORWARD. SO THAT'S OKAY.
THE FACT THAT IT'S A MESSY SITUATION I THINK IT'S BECAUSE IT'S A MESSY SITUATION AND YOU DON'T WANT GROUPS TO GET IN FRONT OF THEIR SKIS AND BEING IN VIOLATION OF WHAT THE USE OF LAND SHOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE THE CITY AND THE DOCTOR BRING TO THE CITY'S ATTENTION OF TRYING TO GET THINGS BACK THE WAY THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DONE IN THE ORDER THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DONE.
>> GREAT. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WE HAVE SOMEBODY FROM THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING SO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME.
>> THANK YOU. FROM MR. LAND USE, I'LL PULL OUT THAT YOU'LL NOTICE A LOT OF ODD SMALL SHAPED PLOTS JUST NORTH OF THIS. THOSE WERE ALL INDIVIDUAL HOMES, SO THIS AREA THIS LITTLE QUIET CORNER OF TOWN HAD SEVERAL RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT WERE UTILISING -- WHO HAVE HORSES AND THEY'RE STILL HORSES TO THE SOUTH OF MY PROPERTY. SO THIS FEELS APPROPRIATE TO BE A MIXTURE OF RESIDENTIAL AND OPEN AG, THAT'S WHAT IT WAS BEFORE THE PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED BY A LARGE GROUP AND BULLDOZED THOSE HOMES. SO YES, I'M THE ONLY HOME THERE NOW SO IT MIGHT LOOK LIKE IT'S NOT RESIDENTIAL BUT IT USED TO BE A RESIDENTIAL, AND IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BE -- REMAIN RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN DAMAGED BY THIS AND WHILE THIS MIGHT BE GREAT FOR THE SOUL CITY OF ABILENE CACTUS IS HORRIBLE FOR ME AND IT FEELS LIKE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF ZONING AND ME INVESTING IN A PART OF ABILENE THAT WAS ZONED APPROPRIATELY FOR MY USE THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT SOCIAL CONTRACT WERE INVEST IN A BUILDING AND BEING TAXED BY THE CITY AND THE CITY VALUES THAT AND THAT'S APPROPRIATE USE THERE.
IF WE BUILT A HOUSE IN THE MIDDLE OF A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE AREA THEN THAT'S ON ME BUT IF I BUILD A HOUSE IN THE MIDDLE OF A RESIDENTIAL AND OPEN AG AREA IN THE CITY CHANGES THE ZONING, THEN THAT FEELS UNFAIR TO ME. SO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO
WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING -- UNLESS ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS A PUBLIC HEARING.
SEEING NO ONE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSIONERS OR ANY MOTIONS?
>> I'LL JUST MAKE A FINAL REMARK.
GOING FROM THIS TYPE OF ZONING TO AGRICULTURE IS HIGHLY UNUSUAL. THERE'S PERCEPTION FROM SOME OF THE PROPONENTS OF THIS PROJECT THAT EVERYTHING JUST GOT MOVED FORWARD WITHOUT QUESTION AND I FOR ONE FEEL LIKE IT'S IMPORTANT
[00:35:01]
IN A CASE LIKE THIS WHERE WE HAVE UNUSUAL ZONING REQUEST, WHERE WE HAVE A CLEAR VIOLATION CAN WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT EVERYTHING IS NOT GREENLIT AND WE DO CONSIDERING VALUE PROPERTIES AFFECTED BY THIS. I INTEND TO OPPOSE AND I'LL MAKEA MOTION TO DENY. >> ACTUALLY I'LL DO THAT CAN I
CAN MAKE A MOTION TO DENY. >> SECOND.
>> SECOND TERM MR. HOUSE. THIS IS A MOTION TO DENY.
SO IF YOU'RE VOTING YES, YOU'RE VOTING TO DENY THE APPLICATION KIND OF JUST TO CLEAR UP ANY CONFUSION.
>> MR. HOUSE MR. BURTON, MISS LEWIS, MR. SEITZ.
>> NO. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 4 HAS BEEN PULLED. ADDITION ITEM NUMBER 5, OAM-2026-01 TAKE ACTION ON THE REQUEST FROM THE CITY OF BABYLON
TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, I AM MASON, THE PLANNING MANAGER FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
HOPE I GET TO THE RIGHT SLIDES. TODAY I'M GOING TO BE PRESENTING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE MATRIX LOCATED WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. HERE WE HAVE AN IMAGE OF OUR CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE MAP, KIND OF THE AREA IN QUESTION IS THAT LITTLE SHARK TOOTH AREA WITH THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HIGH COMMERCIAL KIND OF HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND LITTLE BIT OF PARKS AND OPEN SPACE. WE'RE PROPOSING TO AMEND THAT TO PARKS AND OPEN SPACE, HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL, SURROUNDING PINE STREET, OVERLAND TRAIL AND 83 IN NORTH DANVILLE.
AND THEN WE'RE PROPOSING MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ON THE INSIDE. HERE WE HAVE THE COMPATIBLE ZONING DISTRICT. THEN WE JUST HAVE THE SECOND HALF OF THOSE COMPATIBLE ZONING DISTRICTS.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THIS CASE.
WE HAD A COUPLE OF MEETINGS WITH SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE WANTING TO REZONE AND IT'S JUST NOT FITTING WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE CURRENTLY -- MOST OF ALL IN THIS AREA IT'S RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY, THERE'S A BIT OF GENERAL RETAIL IN THERE AND IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT JUST DOESN'T FIT.
SO WE WERE PROPOSING TO GO AHEAD AND AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ALLOW US TO HAVE ZONING CASES THAT WE CAN BRING TO YOU GUYS AT
A LATER DATE. >> SO THE CATALYST FOR THIS WAS JUST JOEL CONNECTING WITH MANY LANDOWNERS AND LOOKING TO -- JUST WANTING TO CLEAR UP THE ZONING FOR THE AREA THAT'S DEVELOPING IN A WAY DIFFERENT THAN THE PLAN ANTICIPATED?
>> YES, SIR. AS YOU CAN SEE, ALMOST ALL OF THE AREA WE'RE PROPOSING FOR MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND THEN IN HEAVY COMMERCIAL IT ACTUALLY DOESN'T ALLOW ANY RESIDENTIAL USES.
THAT'S ALL THAT IS THERE RIGHT NOW AND THAT'S WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED TO GO TO, A DIFFERENT VERSION OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
SO WE JUST KIND OF -- MEDIUM DENSITY FITS THE AREA BETTER.
>> WE DIDN'T GET A FLOOD ZONE MAP AND I DIDN'T TAKE THE TIME TO LOOK IT UP. THIS IS PRETTY MUCH ALL IN THE FLOOD ZONE IF I REMEMBER FROM A WHILE BACK, AM I MISREMEMBERING
THAT? >> A LOT OF IT IS A HUNDRED YEARS SO IT'S NOT FLOODWAY, IT'S JUST FLOOD PLAIN.
>> THEN WE CHANGE ALL OF THAT PARKS AREA AND REZONE THAT RECENTLY? WHAT'S PROPOSED IN THE PARKS
AREA. >> THERE'S CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN RV PARK THAT WAS IN THAT AREA.
AND THEN PART OF THE BIG PICTURE, THIS IS A SMALL AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHATEVER YOU DO, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, YOU'RE LOOKING TO CHART A PROJECT AND THIS PARTICULAR ANSWER, IT'S NOT GOING TO DEVELOP LIKE WE THOUGHT IT WOULD, EVERYTHING WE GOT PROPOSED IS FOR THE NEUTRAL BASED AND THIS WILL BE ONE AMENDMENT, BUT LATER ON THIS
[00:40:03]
COMMISSION WILL SEE A MUCH LARGER AMENDMENT TO THE OLD DOCUMENT. AS THINGS DEVELOP YOU NEED TOADJUST THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> STUFF GROWS IN DIFFERENT
WAYS. >> THAT WILL BE DONE WHEN WE'RE
DONE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. >> SO THIS IS NOT MAKING ANYONE NOT BRING THEIR ZONING CASE FORWARD.
IT'S JUST -- MAYBE IF THEY WERE LOOKING FOR A COMMERCIAL NOTES COMMERCIAL AROUND THE OUTSIDE OF IF THEY WERE LOOKING FOR MEDIUM DENSITY, IT IS KIND OF A GLOBALLY CHANGING SOME LARGE AREAS AND THAT SHARK'S TOOTH OF THIS AREA.
>> IT MAKES SENSE. >> IT MAKES SENSE CAUSE THINGS
ARE GROWING THERE. >> AND MEDIUM DENSITY, IT STILL DOES ALLOW US SIX PATIO HOME, MULTIFAMILY AND NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE AND RETAIL AND I BELIEVE IT -- IT'S A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY MULTIFAMILY JUST IN FOR THIS WHOLE AREA.
>> AND RV THIS CONDITIONAL USE ON ALL ZONING CASES ALWAYS.
>> YES. >> IS THEIR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING IN THE AREA THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAD PREDICTED THERE WOULD BE OR IS MOSTLY RESIDENTIAL?
>> THERE IS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING ALONG PINE WHICH IS WHY WE KEPT THAT A LOT OF HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL.
SO EVEN IN HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL, IF THEY CHOOSE TO DEVELOP HEAVY INDUSTRIAL OR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, IT'S STILL A PERMANENT USE IN THE HEAVY COMMERCIAL. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?
>> BUT ARE THERE LANDOWNERS OR COMMERCIAL LANDOWNERS HAVING SEEN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PLANNING FOR INDUSTRIAL THAT ARE NOW GOING TO FACE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT SAYS
CONFIDENTIAL? >> IT WON'T AFFECT THEM AT ALL.
>> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MASON? THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. >> OPENING UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME UP TO ADDRESS THIS MATTER? SEEING NO ONE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSIONERS OR EMOTION?
>> I THINK IT MAKES SENSE WITH THE CHANGES THAT WE HAVE SEEN SPECIFICALLY IN THIS AREA. L MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> MR. STRASSER, MR. HOUSE, MISS CARRIE, MR. HALLIBURTON, MISS LEWIS, MR. SITES AND ... THE MOTION CARRIES.
>> ON THE LARGER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CAN WE GET SOME TIME TO REVIEW THAT PRIOR TO US LOOKING AT IT?
>> WILL GIVE YOU AN EXTRA DATE. >> I DON'T THINK IT CAN HANDLE IT IN AN AFTERNOON. WE HAVE TO LOOK AT EVERY SECTION
LIKE THAT. >> WE'LL TRY TO GIVE YOU AT
LEAST ABOUT A MONTH. >> TO LOOK AT IT AND GO THROUGH
WEDNESDAY LESS. >> WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THIS MUCH TIME ON LIKE SIX BLOCKS I'M WORRIED ABOUT THAT MEETING.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6, ZONING CASE Z-2026-50, RECEIVED REPORT PUBLIC HEARING TAKE ACTION ON THE REQUEST FROM THE OWNER TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR APPROXIMATELY 10.5 ACRES FROM A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO MULTIFAMILY.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, ADAM PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE.
CASE Z-2026-50, REPRESENTED BY JEFF, MY METHODIST.
HERE IS AN ARRAY LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY TO BE REZONED TODAY. THIS PROPERTY WAS PREVIOUSLY ZONED AS A PD THAT ALLOWED FOR SOME MULTIFAMILY TYPE USES AND SOME GENERAL MEDICAL RELATED USES IN ADJACENT TO THAT.
>> THIS IS JUST SOUTH OF MESA SPRING, PART OF THAT
DEVELOPMENT. >> SOUTH OF THOSE DEVELOPMENT IS ANOTHER PD THAT ALLOWS FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL USES AND SOME SINGLE FAMILY TYPE USES AND GENERAL RETAIL AS WELL. MORE TOWARDS BUFFALO GAP ROAD.
THE REQUESTER ASKED YOU REZONE THIS TO MULTIFAMILY ZONING TO ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY TYPE USES AND SIMILAR DEVELOPMENT PER CURIAM PROPERTY VIEWS, SOUTH NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED UNITS. PROPERTIES CURRENTLY VACANT AND THE MESA SPRINGS IS JUST NORTH OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL.
[00:45:04]
>> ARE THOSE DUPLEXES OR DID YOU SAY SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED?
>> YES, DUPLEXES WHERE EACH HALF CAN BE SOLD SEPARATELY.
HERE THE PERMITTED USES IN MULTIFAMILY ZONING.
STAFF RECEIVE NO NOTIFICATIONS IN FAVOR OF POSTS TO BE PLACED ON THIS AGENDA FOR THIS MEETING. STAFF FOUND THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, USES IN ZONING, ACCEPTED PLANNING PRINCIPLES AND CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF THE LDC.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN -- HAPPY TO ANSWER
ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE FOR ME. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR ITEM.
>> IS IT A NEW AND EXISTING STREET THERE?
OPENING UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME UP
AND ADDRESS THIS MATTER? >> GOOD AFTERNOON I'M JEFF, PASTOR AT THE CHURCH AND WE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY ABOUT 13 YEARS AGO WITH THE INTENTION OF RELOCATING OUR CHURCH THERE.
WE WERE GROWING AND WE NEEDED A BIGGER CAMPUS HERE THEN WE GOT AN ESTIMATE OF OUR CONSTRUCTION COST AND WE WENT TO PLAN B.
SO ACTUALLY WE'RE IN PROCESS RIGHT NOW OF ADDING ON TO OUR EXISTING FACILITY AND THAT BRINGS THIS PROPERTY UP FOR SALE. SO I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO VOTE YES ON THIS AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE REZONING OF MULTIFAMILY.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
>> ANY QUESTIONS, THIS COULD HELP WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE
BUT WE'RE STILL ACCEPTING DONATIONS.
>> YOUR CHURCH WAS MY DAD'S OFFICE WHEN I WAS UNTIL FIVE YEARS OLD AND ONE OF HER FORMER COMMISSIONERS WHO PASSED AWAY WAS A MEMBER OF YOUR CHURCH, MR. NOONAN.
I WENT TO HIS SERVICE THERE AND THANK YOU ALL FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING FOR THE COMMUNITY WE APPRECIATE YOU.
>> MY PLEASURE. >> ANY QUESTIONS? HAVE A GREAT DAY, THANK YOU, SIR.
ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS MATTER?
I AM MARK WITH CROSS ARCHITECTS. I WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT DEPARTMENTS WE'RE PROPOSING. AS YOU'RE MORE AWARE THAN THE M, THERE'S BEEN AN AMAZING AMOUNT OF GROWTH HERE IN ABILENE.
FERTILISATION OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA THAT JUST FINISHED.
ALSO ACTUALLY HAVE TWO CURRENT PROJECTS BUILDING IN THE CITY OF ABILENE RIGHT NOW, UNDER CONSTRUCTION APARTMENTS.
THERE'S A LARGE DEMAND HERE, SO WE ARE HERE TO FILL THAT DEMAND.
WE'RE PROPOSING A LUXURY MARKET RATE APARTMENTS, THERE'S NO AFFORDABLE ASPECT TO THIS, SECTION 8 HOUSING, ANY TERMS LIKE THAT, THESE ARE HIGH END LUXURY APARTMENTS.
GRANITE COUNTERTOPS, STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCE, ALL THE THINGS YOU WOULD HOPE TO SEE IN A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GOOD NEIGHBORS SO WE ARE AWARE THAT THE MESA SPRING HEALTH CENTER AND RETIREMENT VILLAGE TO OUR NORTH, ARE INTENTIONALLY PUTTING OUR FIRE LANE ON THE OUTSIDE PERIMETER OF THE SITE AND PUTTING THE BUILDINGS INTERNALLY. SO FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE, THERE'S A MINIMUM 80 TO 90-FOOT SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE TO THE VERY FIRST UNIT. THAT'S JUST FROM OUR PART OF THE LINE TO INTERNAL WITH OUR SITE, NOT COUNTING THE FACT THAT THERE ARE PARCELS OF LAND BETWEEN US AND THOSE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AS WELL. SO WE'RE PROPOSING JUST ONE AND TWO BEDROOM UNITS, NOT TRYING TO BRING THREE BEDROOM UNITS OR LARGE FAMILIES TAXING OUR SCHOOL SYSTEMS, ARE REALLY AIMING AT BUSINESS PROFESSIONALS, MEDICAL SCHOOL, TEACHERS, OR YOUNG FAMILIES WITH YOUNG KIDS IT'S REALLY THE MARKET WE'RE AIMING FOR. I THINK THAT'S A REALLY QUICK OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT SPECIFICS, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THIS CLIENT FOR A FEW YEARS NOW.
WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S ABOUT TO BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN OUR OFFICE AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS INSTEAD OF TEXAS SINCE 2003.
SO WE'RE VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA AND WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT COMING BACK. SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS
PLEASE LET ME KNOW. >> I JUST WANT TO SAY, WAY TO PRESENT, YOU MENTIONED THE SETBACKS AND EVERYTHING.
IF WE HAD ANY QUESTIONS YOU COVERED IT, WAY TO PRESENT.
THANK YOU. >> IT'S WHAT WE DO FOR A LIVING.
>> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. >> THANK YOU.
>> ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS MATTER?
[00:50:04]
>> I HAVE THE 14 ACRES BACK UP TO THE PROPERTY OF THE GENTLEMAN WE'RE JUST SPEAKING ABOUT. I'M HERE TO APPROVE AND HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS GIVE A THUMBS UP.
>> THANK YOU FOR COMING WE APPRECIATE THAT.
ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS? SEEING NO ONE WILL WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ANY DISCUSSIONS BY COMMISSIONERS OR MOTION?
>> I RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> KEVIN WITH THE FIRST.
>> I SECOND. >> MR. STRASSER, MR. HOUSE, MISS BAKER, MR. HALLIBURTON, MISS LEWIS, MR. SYKES AND MR. BYNUM S.. THE MOTION CARRIES.
>> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 7 IS ZONING CASE P, TAKING ACTION ON REQUEST FROM THE OWNER TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR APPROXIMATELY 0.23 ACRES FROM MIXED USE TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL.
THIS IS LOCATED AT 1642 NORTH 19TH STREET.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON I'M CLARISSA, PLANNER FOR THE CITY ABILENE.
BEFORE YOU YOU HAVE CASE Z-2026-51, REPRESENTING THE AN AGENCY, THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE FROM MIXED USE TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT 1642 NORTH 19 IN THE CORNER OF GREATER NORTH 19. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED MIXED USE AND THEY HAVE MEDIUM DENSITY SURROUNDING THEM TO THE NORTH AND SOME GENERAL COMMERCIAL ACROSS THE STREET AND RETAIL TO THE SOUTH OF THEM. THESE ARE SOME OF THE PROPERTY VIEWS AS WELL AS NEIGHBORING. AS YOU CAN SEE A WAREHOUSE, SHOP, IT SAYS ON THE PROPERTY. WE SENT OUT NOTIFICATIONS, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION.
THESE ARE THE CURRENT PERMITTED USES BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS ZONED MIXED USE. IF APPROVED, THIS WOULD BE THE ALLOWED USES IN GENERAL COMMERCIAL.
THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, DISCERNING USES AND ZONING, GENERALLY ACCEPTED PLANNING PRINCIPLES AND THEIR CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
>> ON THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION WE RECEIVED ON THE ZONING REQUEST IT SAID THE PROPERTY OWNER TENDS TO AT LEAST WISHES TO USE THE PROPERTY FOR A PRIVATE VEHICLE WORKSHOP OFFICE SPACE AND STORAGE. CAN YOU FLUSH OUT THAT VEHICLE SHOP USAGE? IT SAYS PRIVATE, IS HE WORKING ON PERSONAL VEHICLES OR IS HE GOING TO BE WORKING ON CLIENT
VEHICLES? >> TO MY KNOWLEDGE WILL BE WORKING ON HIS PERSONAL VEHICLES.
>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR
CLARISSA? >> THE GARAGE DOORS, DO THEY
FACE GRAPE? >> YES, IT DOES FACE GRAPE.
>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> IS THERE ANY CONCERN WITH OUTSIDE PARKING OF CARS ON THE PROPERTY? IS THAT PRT OF THE PLAN
RECOMMENDATION? >> THAT'S PART OF THE ZONING.
IF THEY WERE TO STORE ANY VEHICLES OUTSIDE IN THE UNDERLYING REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING THEY HAVE TO SCREEN THOSE FROM YOU AND THEY HAVE TO USE APPROVED SURFACE.
SO IF, FOR ANY REASON, THEY DECIDE TO EXPAND THE BUSINESS OR LIKE TURN INTO A BUSINESS OR GET MORE VEHICLES, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE SCREENED FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY AND ALSO FROM RESIDENTIAL ZONING. SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN
AND DO SOME KIND OF SCREENING. >> OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS MATTER?
>> I'M THE AGENT FOR THIS REZONING.
I CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ABOUT THE TENANTS.
WHEN WE MADE THIS APPLICATION, THE TENANTS WERE THREE GENTLEMEN WERE GOING TOGETHER TO HAVE A SHOP OF THEIR OWN TO WORK ON THEIR OWN PERSONAL CARS. BECAUSE OF A FEW ISSUES THEY'VE HAD TO MOVE ON TO ANOTHER LOCATION BUT WE HAD OTHER INTEREST OF PEOPLE LOOKING FOR SIMILAR USES, AUTOMOTIVE RELATED MOSTLY AND IT'S GOT TWO GARAGE DOORS.
WE HAD TO DO A NUMBER OF THINGS TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY FROM WHERE IT WAS BUILT ORIGINALLY. ORIGINALLY THE ADDRESS WAS 1642
[00:55:06]
NORTH 19TH. WE ACTUALLY CHANGED THE SITE ADDRESS TO 1970. IT'S NOT UPDATED AT THIS POINT.WE DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT WHAT THE USE WILL BE BECAUSE THERE'S TENANTS THAT ARE INTERESTED BUT WE'LL FIND SOMEBODY.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A CHANGE COMMERCIAL USE? DO YOU THINK IT WILL HELP YOU FROM A SALES STANDPOINT ON MARKETING?
>> THE OWNER WANTED TO DO THIS FOR A WHILE.
ONCE WE HAVE A TENANT WE'RE READY TO MOVE THINGS FORWARD AND WE ARE WHERE WE ARE BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, SIR.
THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN.
ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE MATTER? SEEING NO ONE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSIONERS OR MOTIONS?
>> MOTION TO APPROVE, UNLESS THERE'S THE DISCUSSION.
>> SECOND. >> MR., MR. HOUSE MR. CARRIE, MR. HALLIBURTON, MISS LEWIS, MR. SEITZ MR. BENHAM.
THE MOTION CARRIES. >> FINAL MATTER OF THE DAY IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 8, ZONING CASE Z-2026-53, RECEIVE A REPORT DISCUSSION PUBLIC HEARING TO TAKE ACTION ON THE REQUEST FROM THE OWNER TO CHANGE ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 22.67 ACRES FROM AGRICULTURE OPEN TO MULTIFAMILY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE BOULEVARD AND EAST LAKE ROAD.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON ONCE AGAIN, PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE.
THIS IS CASE Z-2026-53 REPRESENTED BY DAWSON ON BY ABILENE LLC. THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE 22.67 ACRES FROM AGRICULTURE OPEN TO MULTIFAMILY.
HERE'S AN AREA LOCATION MAP SHOWING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
YOU CAN SEE JUST NORTH OF THIS AREA WAS RECENTLY REZONED TO MULTIFAMILY AS WELL AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY JUST TO THE SOUTHWEST TO YOUR ADJACENT. ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY.
CURRENTLY ZONED A OH WITH A OH ON THE WEST AND EAST AND JUST THE SOUTH AS WELL. AND SOME COUNTY AREA AS WELL.
HERE ARE SOME VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THESE ARE ALL VACANT WITH SOME CONSTRUCTION GOING ON JUST TO THE SOUTHWEST OF SOME NEW APARTMENTS. HERE THE USES PERMITTED IN AGRICULTURE OPEN ZONING. HERE THE PERMITTED USES IN MULTIFAMILY ZONING DISTRICT. STAFF RECEIVED ONE NOTIFICATION IN FAVOR SINCE SENDING THEM AND TO BE PLACED ON THIS AGENDA.
THE STAFF FOUND THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SURROUNDING USES AND ZONING, GENERALLY ACCEPTED PLANNING PRINCIPLES AND CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL IN THE LDC. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
>> WILL IT BE DEVELOPED ALONG WITH THE OTHER TWO PROPERTIES?
>> THEIR SEPARATE OWNERS, EACH DEVELOPING INDIVIDUALLY.
>> CAN WE GO BACK TO THE MAP REAL QUICK?
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ADAM? YOU DID THREE CASES TODAY HERE GOOD JOB THANK YOU. WE'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND ADDRESS THIS MATTER? SEEING NO ONE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSIONERS OR EMOTION? [SINGING] IN LIGHT OF WHAT WE APPROVED RECENTLY HAVING IT ALL DEVELOPED HOPEFULLY EVEN IF THERE ARE DIFFERENT GROUPS BUT HAVING HOPEFULLY LAID OUT SO IT MAKES
SENSE TOGETHER AT THE SAME TIME. >> MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> MR. STRAUSSER, MR. HOUSE, MISS,, MR. HALLIBURTON, MISS LEWIS, MR. SYKES AND MR. BENHAM.
THE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.