A. Consider the Rezoning Request from Agriculture & Open Space (AO) District to Residential, Primary (RP) District, Being the South 5.00 Acres of Lot 69 & the North 5.00

[A. Consider the Rezoning Request from Agriculture & Open Space (AO) District to Residential, Primary (RP) District, Being the South 5.00 Acres of Lot 69 & the North 5.00]

APPROVAL, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ON, BASED ON THE DISCUSSION FROM A PREVIOUS HEARING, AS IT APPLIES TO THE SIZE OF THE LOTS AS IT APPLIES TO THE ELECTRICAL POLES THAT ARE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LOT, AS IT APPLIES TO IMPROVING, CORRECTING, OR MAINTAINING THE FLOODING ZONE, WHICH WOULD IF IT IF THEY BUILD UP THOSE LOTS, THEN THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY THAT THAT WATER IS GOING TO GO ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME IS THE ELECTRICAL COMPANY. AND THEY ACTUALLY HAD TO DIG A RATHER DEEP DITCH FOR DRAINAGE IN FRONT OF MY HOME, THE COUNTY, WHEN IT WAS STILL COUNTY, PROPERTY OR COUNTY. ACCESS OR WHATEVER.

ANYWAY, COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVED ME CITY APPROVED ME PURCHASING THAT PROPERTY IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE SO I WOULD NOT HAVE TO DEAL WITH SOMEONE ELSE BUYING IT.

AND THEIR RESULTS FOR DRAINAGE WAS DIG A DITCH ABOUT SIX INCHES DEEP.

OKAY, SO I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT FOR SINGLE RESIDENCES THAT I AM TOLD BY THE DEVELOPER WILL BE SINGLE RESIDENCES, BUT NOTHING IS DOCUMENTED ON THAT.

SECONDLY, SINGLE RESIDENTS AS FAR AS WHAT IS FEDERAL HOUSING? IS IT DUPLEXES? I DON'T REALLY KNOW THE DEFINITION OF SINGLE RESIDENCES.

SO ALL I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT AREA.

THAT INCLUDES DEVELOPING, IMPROVING THE FLOOD RISK, WIDENING THE ROADS AND ALL THE UTILITIES THAT WILL BE NEEDED FOR BASED ON WHAT THE DEVELOPER JUST SAID WOULD BE A MAXIMUM OF 16 SINGLE RESIDENT HOUSES.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, I ASKED HIM WHAT SIZE? LOTS AND HE KIND OF GAVE ME A VAGUE NUMBER.

SO IF YOU'RE ONLY ABLE, BASED ON THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING.

ABLE TO USE ABOUT TWO AND A HALF ACRES OF THAT PROPERTY BASED ON THE WHAT DO YOU CALL THE EDGE ON EACH SIDE? EASEMENTS. EASEMENT. EASEMENT? YES, ON EACH SIDE. AND THEN THE ELECTRICAL ISSUE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE.

IS THERE IS THERE A PROCESS WHERE THE CITY IS VERY SPECIFIC ON WHAT, WHEN, WHERE AND HOW? AND THEN BASED ON THE FACT THAT WE ARE IN THE CITY LIMITS, THE MAINTENANCE OF THE WHAT, WHERE, WHEN AND HOW WILL BE CONTINUED BY THE CITY AND NOT RESPONSIBLE BY THE INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTS.

AND SO I I'M NOT QUITE CLEAR ON HOW THAT WORKS.

SO PERHAPS YOU COULD ELABORATE.

MY CONCERN IS UTILITIES, MAINTENANCE, FLOOD GAUGE, WIDENING THE ROAD AND SPECIFICS ON 16 HOMES ON WHAT SIZE? LOTS TO COMPLY WITH YOUR MEASUREMENTS OF THE EASEMENTS AND HOW MANY YOU CAN ACTUALLY PUT ON THERE. BASED ON THE SOUTH FIVE ACRES AND THE NORTH FIVE ACRES.

[00:10:01]

THE MAP OF WHICH I'VE NEVER GOTTEN ONE.

THAT'S CORRECT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I DO APOLOGIZE.

THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT IS UP.

YOUR TIME LIMIT IS UP.

I APOLOGIZE, BUT YOUR TIME LIMIT IS UP.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS? YES, SIR. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

I WAS THE ONE WHO INITIATED THE REQUEST OF THE STATE.

YOUR NAME PLEASE. APOLOGIES.

ARTURO. ALVAREZ. THANK YOU.

SIR. I'LL BE THE ONE DEVELOPING THIS IF IT GETS THE REZONING GETS APPROVED.

I WANTED TO SEE IF I COULD PULL UP SOMETHING JUST FOR THE SAKE OF SHARING THE DETAILS AND THE INTENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

THE PROPERTY ESSENTIALLY HAS POWER LINES RUNNING THROUGH ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDE OF THAT VACANT LAND AREA THAT IN TOTAL IS ROUGHLY ALMOST SEVEN AND A HALF ACRES.

SO ROUGHLY TWO AND A HALF ACRES IN THE MIDDLE IS WHAT'S REALLY ONLY ALLOWABLE TO DO ANY KIND OF DEVELOPMENT ON.

SO THE INTENT WOULD BE TO UTILIZE THOSE TWO AND A HALF, 2.8 ACRES USE THOSE AS RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY LOTS.

WHAT I SHOWED IN, IN THIS DRAWING WAS THE INTENT THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE MINIMUM SIZE OF RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY, WHICH IS 5000FT², BUT IT DOESN'T SHOW THE DRAINAGE. IT DOESN'T SHOW THE DETENTION POND THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED.

SO WHAT WE'RE LIKELY GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IS 14 TO MAYBE 16 LOTS AT THE MOST SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY, 5000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS.

WE MAY ACTUALLY EVEN DO 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS AND ALLOW PEOPLE TO BUILD BIGGER HOMES.

BUT THE INTENT IS NOT TO DENSELY POPULATE THIS AREA, IT'S TO MAKE USE OF THAT AVAILABLE LAND IF REZONED.

WE ARE WORKING WITH ENGINEERS ALREADY WHO ARE DETERMINING, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT NEIGHBORS HAVE, WHICH IS THE DRAINAGE. AND SHE'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. BUT BEFORE ANYTHING WAS WOULD WOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN ON THIS.

THE ENGINEERS WOULD HAVE TO SUBMIT A DRAINAGE STUDY AND ENGINEERING STUDY.

FEMA WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO REVIEW AND APPROVE AND UPDATE THEIR MAPS.

SO BEFORE WE'D EVER BE ABLE TO DO ANY KIND OF FILL AND BRING ANY OF THOSE LOTS UP, FEMA WOULD BE INVOLVED AS WELL.

AND IF WE DIDN'T GET THAT APPROVED, THEN IT WOULD BE UNLIKELY THAT WE COULD BUILD ANYTHING UNLESS IT WOULD BE IN THE FLOOD ZONE.

THAT WOULD BE AN ATTEMPT. BUT YES, THE DEVELOPMENT COSTS.

THESE WILL LIKELY BE SEPTIC.

WE ARE LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT COSTS TO BRING CITY UTILITIES TO THAT AREA.

BUT OF COURSE WE ARE LOOKING AT SEPTIC AS AN ALTERNATIVE AFFORDABLE SOLUTION.

SO AS FAR AS SIZE OF LOTS WE'RE LOOKING AT 16 5000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS MAXIMUM.

WE MAY EVEN POTENTIALLY DO EIGHT 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS, AND THEN A 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY FROM END TO END.

THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.

ANY MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS? OKAY. WE'LL GO IN AND CLOSE THE FLOOR COMMISSION.

I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SPEAK TO TO THE TO THE NICE LADY THAT CAME IN AND APPRECIATE YOU COMING AND YOUR CONCERN.

I THINK A LOT OF YOUR QUESTIONS, WHICH ARE MOSTLY ENGINEERING QUESTIONS, THOSE WILL BE ANSWERED. AND YOU CAN TALK TO STAFF AS OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR, HE CAN FILL YOU IN ON EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.

BUT MOST OF YOUR CONCERNS, YOU KNOW, IS AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT.

AND WE'RE JUST THE COMMISSION TO BASICALLY GRANT OR ADVISE TO GO FROM AGRICULTURAL TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

SO THEY WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

BUT A LOT OF YOUR QUESTIONS WITH DRAINAGE THAT GOES THROUGH THE PROCESS, ONCE THEY'VE BEEN GRANTED THIS, THEY'LL GO THROUGH THE ENGINEERING PROCESS WITH STAFF, WITH THE CITY, AND AND THOSE WILL BE ADDRESSED.

SO YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT. NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION.

[B. Consider the Rezoning Request from Residential, Primary (RP) District to Residential, Urban (RU) & Townhome District, Being all of Lot 6, Block 2, Gate-City Heights]

MOVE TO APPROVE. I'LL SECOND IT.

SECOND EVER BE IN FAVOR? PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM EIGHT B.

WE'RE GOING TO CONSIDER THE REZONING REQUEST FROM RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DISTRICT TO RESIDENTIAL, URBAN AND TOWNHOME DISTRICT BEING ALL OF LOT SIX BLOCK TWO GATE CITY HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 819 WEST SMITH STREET.

STAFF. THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE GATE CITY HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION.

THE REQUESTED ZONING DESIGNATION IS RESIDENTIAL, URBAN AND TOWNHOME DISTRICT.

THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A ZONE CHANGE TO ESTABLISH A NEW RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS PROPERTY.

ADJACENT ZONING IN ALL DIRECTIONS IS RESIDENTIAL.

PRIMARY AND SURROUNDING LAND USES ARE BOTH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. WE MAILED OUT NOTIFICATIONS TO 53 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE RECEIVED NO COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THIS REQUEST.

AT THIS TIME, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE REZONING REQUEST BASED ON THE ADJACENT ZONING AND THE ADJACENT DENSITIES.

THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT FOR ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL.

[00:15:02]

WELL, WHAT ARE THE ADJACENT ZONINGS? THE ADJACENT ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY IN ALL DIRECTIONS.

OKAY. I'LL GO TO OPEN THE FLOOR FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THIS TIME.

GO AHEAD. YES. THANK YOU AGAIN.

MY NAME IS ARTURO ALVAREZ.

I'M THE ONE REQUESTING THIS ZONE CHANGE.

THIS THE INTENT HERE IS TO ESSENTIALLY BUILD TWO UNITS.

TWO DWELLING UNITS TO CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY TO TOWNHOMES.

THE UNITS AND THE LOT SIZE WILL BE ABLE TO MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR TOWNHOME, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE LOT TOTAL SIZE, WHICH IS 8000 REQUIRED BY CODE, AND I THINK WE'RE AT 7700.

SO IF IT WAS TO BE REZONED, WE'D ALSO HAVE TO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE.

BUT THE INTENT IS TO TAKE THAT HOME, WHICH WAS MY FATHER'S AND IS NOW DILAPIDATED BECAUSE OF HIS HEALTH, AND BUILD SOMETHING BEAUTIFUL FOR THE COMMUNITY, WHICH WILL ACTUALLY MATCH THE ESTHETICS OF THE HOMES IN TERMS OF THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE, AND ALSO KEEP IT A ONE STORY AS WELL.

SO THAT'S THE IDEA TO BUILD TWO DWELLING UNITS IN LIEU OF THAT 1400 SQUARE FOOT HOME.

EACH HOME WOULD BE ABOUT 1300 SQUARE FEET WITH A ONE CAR GARAGE.

ARE YOU PLANNING TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING STRUCTURE? YES, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO.

BRAND NEW BUILDING. BRAND NEW BUILDING.

GROUND UP. HOW OLD ARE THE HOUSES IN THAT SUBDIVISION? I BELIEVE THAT ONE IS PROBABLY 60 TO 70 YEARS OLD.

IT ALSO HAS A REALLY BEAUTIFUL EBONY TREE THAT'S ABOUT THAT, THAT AGE AS WELL, WHICH WE'LL BE ABLE TO PRESERVE WITH THE PROPOSED FOOTPRINT OF THE NEW BUILD. ARTURO. THE DRAWING SAID DUPLEX.

BUT YOU SAID TOWNHOUSE.

TOWNHOMES. ARE YOU? ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE COMMON WALLS? THESE WOULD HAVE COMMON WALLS.

SO IT'S MORE OF A DUPLEX THAN A TOWNHOME, RIGHT.

SO THIS WOULD BE THE ENTIRE LOT WOULD BE SPLIT INTO TWO.

THERE'D BE TWO HOMES, TWO LOTS ONE DWELLING UNIT ON EACH LOT WITH A SHARED WALL. AND THEN, OF COURSE PEOPLE WOULD BE, BUT TO ME, THAT'S A DUPLEX.

THAT'S THAT'S NOT A TOWNHOUSE.

I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW, IS THAT OUR DESIGNATION FOR IT? BY CODE, THE TOWNHOMES REQUIRED 2500FT².

SO THIS HAS ABOUT 50FT OF FRONTAGE.

YOU COULD DIVIDE IT AND MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR TWO TOWNHOME LOTS.

THE COMMON WALL IS THAT THEY CAN HAVE A COMMON WALL AS LONG AS IT'S A FIRE RATED WALL. OKAY. THAT'S CORRECT.

ARE YOU AN ENGINEER? YES, SIR.

DO YOU HAVE TO SUBDIVIDE THIS? IT WILL HAVE TO BE SUBDIVIDED, WHICH WILL INITIATE ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS.

OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THERE WAS NOBODY AGAINST THIS AT THIS TIME? NO. WE HAVE A MOTION.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY BASED ON STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT.

SECOND. ANYBODY IN FAVOR? PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. HOW DID YOU VOTE FOR ME? AGAINST. AGAINST. OKAY.

SO 2 TO 3. 2 TO 3. 2 TO 3.

I VOTED FOR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AGAINST.

YES. OKAY. SO 3 TO 2, 3 TO 2, 3 TO 2.

SO MOTION IS DENIED. AGAINST MOTION APPROVED.

MOTION GETS APPROVED. MOTION GETS APPROVED. YES. GOING WITH THE DENIAL. WITH THE DENIAL I'M AGAINST. HOLD ON. I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.

WOULD YOU. WOULD YOU VOTE? I VOTED, SHE VOTED. THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO DENY.

TO DENY. OKAY, I VOTED TO DENY.

[C. Consider the Rezoning Request from Agriculture & Open Space (AO) District to Commercial, General (CG) District, Being a 0.453 Acre Tract of Land, More or Less, Being]

AND THEN ME AND VICTOR VOTED AGAINST YOU.

AGAINST THE DENIAL. ALL RIGHT, SO FOR CLARIFICATION, THE VOTE IS THREE TWO TO DENY THE REQUEST.

YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

MOVING ON TO ITEM EIGHT C. WE'RE GOING TO CONSIDER THE REZONING REQUEST FROM AGRICULTURAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT.

BEING A 0.45 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, MORE OR LESS BEING OUT OF A 20 ACRE TRACT.

OUT OF LOT EIGHT, BLOCK FOUR, LOT ONE, BLOCK FIVE, AND LOT ONE, BLOCK 17.

JOHN CLOSNER SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 5522 SOUTH VETERANS BOULEVARD.

STEPH. HI. GOOD AFTERNOON.

AND SO THIS EVENING, WE DO HAVE THE REZONING REQUEST FOR 5522 SOUTH VETERANS.

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF EAST OWASSO ROAD ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH VETERANS ROAD.

[00:20:04]

THE PROPERTY HAS AN 80 FOOT FRONTAGE ALONG SOUTH VETERANS BOULEVARD.

THE TOTAL AREA FOR THIS LOT IS 19,712.88FT².

THE PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED BACK ON MARCH 17TH, 2015.

AS AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO THE EAST AND WEST, AND COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH.

STAFF BUILDING NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING TO 40 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS ON FRIDAY, MARCH 1ST, 2024, AND HAD RECEIVED NO COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST STAFF'S RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REZONING REQUEST FROM AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT BASED ON ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USES.

THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO OPEN THE FLOOR FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM.

NO PUBLIC COMMENTS. WE'LL CLOSE THE FLOOR COMMISSION. I'VE GOT A QUESTION.

WHAT'S DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO IT? IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL, THE READ.

ON THE NORTH SOUTH SIDE OF IT, ON THE SOUTH SIDE.

IT ALREADY HAS A RED GENERAL COMMERCIAL.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS? I HAVE A PICTURE OF IT LOOKS PRETTY COMMERCIAL.

YEAH, I KNOW. I'M NOT TOO SURE IF IT WAS THE NORTH OR THE SOUTH SIDE. IT HAD SOMEWHAT OF A CAR AUTOMOTIVE BUSINESS ON THE SOUTH SIDE? YES. AND ON THE NORTH SIDE ALSO LOOKS COMMERCIAL BY THE BY THE STREET VIEW THE WAREHOUSE TOO. BUT IT HASN'T BEEN REZONED BASED ON OUR MAPS.

THERE'S THERE'S A LOT EVEN ACROSS ON THE, ON THE WEST SIDE OF SOUTH VETERANS.

IT'S JUST THAT WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT IN BACK IN 2015, THE CITY DOES IT AS A ZONING AGRICULTURAL.

SO IT STAYS THAT WAY UNTIL THEY EITHER DO A DEVELOPMENT OR WANT TO SELL AND THEN DO THE REZONING. SO IT'S ALL COMMERCIAL SOUTH OF IT, NORTH OF IT, ACROSS THE STREET. GOT IT.

I'M GOOD. OTHER THAN TO THE INTERNAL STREETS THAT ARE MORE RESIDENTIAL, BUT ALONG VETERANS. YOU. GOT A MOTION? MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

[D. Consider the Rezoning Request from Agriculture & Open Space (AO) District to Commercial, General (CG) District, Being all of Lot 1, KVM Subdivision, Located at 5601]

SECOND FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM EIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO CONSIDER THE REZONING REQUEST FROM AGRICULTURAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT.

BEING ALL OF LOT ONE CVM SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 5601 SOUTH SUGAR ROAD.

STEPH. YES. SO THIS REQUEST IS TO DO A PROPOSED FUTURE PRESCHOOL.

THE PROPERTY HAS A FRONTAGE OF 260 ALONG SOUTH SUGAR ROAD AND A DEPTH OF 280.

THE CURRENT ZONING IS AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, AND ADJACENT ZONING IS AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO THE NORTH, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST. SIMILAR TO THE OTHER PROPERTIES WHEN IT WAS ANNEXED, THAT WHOLE AREA STAYS AGRICULTURAL.

STAFF HOLDING NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING TO 23 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS ON FRIDAY, MARCH 1ST, AND HAD RECEIVED NO COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THIS REQUEST AT THE TIME THE REPORT WAS PREPARED. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REZONING REQUEST FROM AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO COMMERCIAL GENERAL BASED ON ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USES. THANK YOU.

WE'LL GO TO OPEN THE FLOOR FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THIS TIME. NO PUBLIC COMMENTS.

WE'LL CLOSE THE FLOOR COMMISSION. GOT A QUESTION? WHAT'S ON THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW? IS IT JUST VACANT LAND? SO THERE'S TWO PARCELS.

THE PORTION THEY JUST ADDED IS VACANT, BUT THE ADDITIONAL PARCEL THEY CURRENTLY SUBDIVIDED TO ONE LOT, IT DOES HAVE AN EXISTING OLDER HOME THAT WAS USED FOR A BUSINESS ITSELF.

SO ON THE NORTHERN PART THERE'S A SMALL HOME, BUT EVERYTHING THE REST OF IT IS VACANT.

ARE THEY CONVERTING THAT INTO THE DAYCARE OR THEY'RE BUILDING NEW? NO. SO UP IN THE SCREEN, THIS IS THE PROPOSED DAYCARE THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.

THANK YOU. AND WE HAVE THE ENGINEER HERE ALSO IN CASE YOU GUYS HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

[E. Consider the Rezoning Request from Residential, Primary (RP) District to Residential, Multifamily (RM) District, Being Lot 6, Block 241, Edinburg Original Townsite, Located]

MOVE TO APPROVE. I'LL SECOND.

EVERYBODY IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM 83 TO CONSIDER THE REZONING REQUEST FROM RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DISTRICT TO RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT. BEING LOT SIX, BLOCK 241 EDINBURG.

ORIGINAL TOWN SITE LOCATED AT 121 NORTH 21ST AVENUE.

STAFF. YES. SO THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE EDINBURG EDINBURGH ORIGINAL TOWN SITE.

THE REQUESTED ZONING DESIGNATION IS RESIDENTIAL.

MULTIFAMILY. ADJACENT ZONING IS A RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY TO THE NORTH AND WEST, RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY TO THE EAST, AND COMMERCIAL GENERAL TO THE SOUTH.

STAFF MAILED A NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING TO 32 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE RECEIVED ONE COMMENT IN FAVOR AFTER THE REPORT WAS PREPARED.

[00:25:01]

AT THIS TIME, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REZONING REQUEST BASED ON ADJACENT LAND USES AND THE DENSITIES IN THE AREA.

THANK YOU. I'LL GO AHEAD.

OPEN THE FLOOR FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THIS TIME. NO COMMENTS.

[F. Consider the Rezoning Request from Residential, Primary (RP) District to Residential, Urban & Townhome (RU) District, Being a 0.80 gross acre tract of land, more or less,]

WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE FLOOR COMMISSION. MOVE TO APPROVE.

HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. I'LL SECOND.

SECOND. EVERYBODY IN FAVOR? PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM EIGHT F.

WE'RE GOING TO CONSIDER THE REZONING REQUEST FROM RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DISTRICT TO RESIDENTIAL, URBAN AND TOWNHOME DISTRICT BEING A 0.8 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, MORE OR LESS OUT OF THE NORTH, TEN ACRES OF LOT FIVE, SECTION 274 TEXAS MEXICAN RAILWAY COMPANY SURVEY SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 1210 SOUTH JACKSON ROAD. STEPH. HI.

YES. SO THE REZONING REQUEST IS HERE, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH JACKSON, JUST 950FT NORTH OF WEST FREDDY GONZALEZ DRIVE.

THE CURRENT LAW CURRENTLY HAS NO FRONTAGE.

HOWEVER, IT IS, IT WILL BE A PART OF A LARGER DEVELOPMENT FOR TOWNHOMES ALONG THE EAST AND SOUTH SIDE. YOU COULD SEE IT IN OUR CURRENT ZONING THAT THERE'S A PORTION ALREADY CHANGED TO THE ACTUAL RU DISTRICT.

THE CURRENT TRACK RIGHT NOW THAT WE'RE REZONING IS JUST 60 BY 130, AND IT WILL BE INCLUDED TO THAT SUBDIVISION.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DISTRICT AND ADJACENT ZONING ARE RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DISTRICT TO THE NORTH AND WEST, AND RESIDENTIAL, URBAN AND TOWNHOME DISTRICT TO THE EAST AND SOUTH.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TO 32 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS ON FRIDAY, MARCH 1ST, I RECEIVED TWO LETTERS AGAINST THIS REQUEST AT THE TIME THE REPORT WAS PREPARED.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REZONING REQUEST FROM RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DISTRICT TO RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOME, BASED ON ADJACENT ZONING AND RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES IN THE AREA.

THANK YOU. I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE FLOOR FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS, PLEASE. NO PUBLIC COMMENT.

SO WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE FLOOR COMMISSION. DO WE KNOW WHAT THEIR THE.

WHENEVER YOU MAILED OUT THE ZONING CHANGE WHAT WERE THE AGAINST.

ARE THEY IN OUR PACKET.

YES. THEY ARE INCLUDED IN THE PACKET.

WHAT WAS THE PUBLIC'S CONCERN.

I DON'T BELIEVE THEY HAD ANYTHING. THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS. THEY JUST PUT AGAINST. THEY JUST SAY ANYTHING.

THERE'S NO NO MESSAGE OR THEY JUST SAID AGAINST.

NO, THEY DIDN'T SAY ANY REASON AGAINST IT.

IT'S JUST THIS THIS. SORRY TO TURN OFF MY MICROPHONE.

THIS PROPERTY IS RIGHT NEXT TO SOMETHING THAT WE JUST APPROVED.

CORRECT. RIGHT ON THAT ZONING ON ON THE TOWNHOMES THAT THIS DEVELOPER IS GOING TO COME IN AND THAT GATED DEVELOPMENT.

CORRECT. IT'S AT THE MOMENT IT IS NOT GATED.

BUT BASED ON THIS THIS IS THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION.

THAT'S, THAT'S LOOKS LIKE IT'S COMING IN AND IT'S THE THREE LOTS THERE INCLUDED IN THE SUBDIVISION THAT IT'S PENDING THAT TRACT, JUST BECAUSE THIS WAS SOLD IN LITTLE TRACTS OF LAND. SO IT'S MISSING THIS PIECE FOR THAT.

[G. Consider the Rezoning Request from Residential, Suburban (Rs) District to Industrial, Light, District, Being 10.505 acres out of Lot 12, Section 276, Texas-Mexican Railway]

BUT IT'S THE SAME DEVELOPER.

ALL THE SAME THING. OKAY.

SURE. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MOVED TO APPROVE.

I'LL SECOND IN FAVOR. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.

I REMEMBER. ARE WE GOING TO CHANGE THIS OR. DO YOU WANT ME TO READ IT OUT AND JUST PUT GENERAL COMMERCIAL? YEAH, IF YOU WANT TO. THIS IS A REZONING REQUEST.

AND THE REZONING REQUEST CAME IN AS A REQUEST TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN TO RESIDENTIAL TO INDUSTRIAL LIGHT.

THIS IS A 10.505 ACRE TRACT OF LAND OUT OF LOT 12, SECTION TWO, 76 TEXAS MEXICAN RAILWAY COMPANY SURVEY.

THIS IS AT 3406 WEST UNIVERSITY DRIVE AND THE APPLICANT IS IS MAILED IN IN HUNT.

A LITTLE BIT PRIOR TO THE MEETING, WE DID GET A SITE PLAN FROM MARIA REINA OF MELBOURNE AND HUNT, WHICH WAS GIVEN TO EACH ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS.

AND PRIOR TO SEEING THIS SITE PLAN, WE REALLY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON THERE, WHAT WAS GOING TO BE PROPOSED TO BE BUILT OUT THERE.

AND TALKING ABOUT IRENA EARLIER TODAY.

IT'S A CABINET SHOP THAT'S GOING TO BE SETTING UP.

HE'S PROPOSING A SALES OFFICE ON THE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE OF THE PROPERTY WITH THE CABINET SHOP IN THE MIDDLE AND THEN A COMMERCIAL PLAZA TOWARDS 107.

SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST IS WE DID A SIMILAR REQUEST TO, TO PRODUCE WHERE NIETZSCHE PRODUCE COMES IN WITH THEIR BOX TRUCKS, AND THERE'S DELIVERIES THAT ARE, I GUESS, GOING IN AND OUT.

[00:30:01]

SO RATHER THAN GOING WITH THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE, WHAT I WAS THINKING IS THAT WE COULD GIVE THEM THE COMMERCIAL ZONING, GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND THAT WOULD STILL ALLOW HIM TO DO THE OPERATION THAT HE WANTS TO DO.

BUT IT'S LESS INTENSE THAN WHAT HE'S PROPOSING.

SO OUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE FOR DENIAL OF THE INDUSTRIAL, BUT APPROVAL OF THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL.

AND IN TALKING TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY HE RECOMMENDS THAT WE APPROVE IT CONDITIONALLY SO THAT HE CAN CHECK IT OUT TO SEE IF IT'S ALLOWABLE.

BUT WORST CASE SCENARIO, WE WOULD HAVE TO BRING IT BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING. IF THE ATTORNEY TELLS US THAT WE HAVE TO ACT ON IT AGAIN.

DO YOU WANT IT TO BE GENERAL COMMERCIAL? YES, COMMERCIAL. GENERAL.

WOULD IT BE BETTER IF WE TABLED IT SO YOU COULD DO THE LEGAL ON IT? IT'S EITHER OPTION IF THE COMMISSION WOULD PREFER TO TABLE IT AND THEN HAVE A FIRM ANSWER WHEN WE COME BACK. OR YOU COULD CONDITIONALLY APPROVE.

AND IF THE RESEARCH WORKS OUT THEN IT CAN GO STRAIGHT TO COUNCIL AFTER THAT. HOWEVER YOU PREFER. I'VE GOT A QUESTION THOUGH ON THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL.

ARE THEY ABLE TO MAKE CABINETS? YES. UNLESS THAT MANUFACTURING TECHNICALLY YOU CAN DO IT, AS LONG AS IT'S NOT HAPPENING IN AN OUTDOOR SETTING.

AND THIS FACILITY IS CURRENTLY THEY HAVE ONE IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK IN MISSION, AND WE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT.

AND IT SEEMS THAT ALL THE OPERATIONS ARE INSIDE OF A BUILDING.

SO THAT'S WHY I DO LIVE IN THE AREA.

SO I PASSED BY THERE. IT'S KIND OF LIKE AN 8 TO 5 TYPE OF DEAL.

SATURDAYS AND SUNDAYS ARE CLOSED, SO IT'S NOT TOO, TOO IT'S NOT GOING TO PRESENT A LOT OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY TO THE AREA AS FAR AS MANUFACTURING. THE REASON INDUSTRIAL AND THE CONCERN, THE CONCERN THAT WE HAD IS IF WE LEAVE IT INDUSTRIAL AND IF THEY DON'T MAKE IT AND THEY MOVE OUT IN 3 OR 4 YEARS, THE PROPERTY IS ALREADY ZONED INDUSTRIAL, AND THEN YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE COMING IN. IT COULD BE A SCRAP YARD. SO WE DON'T WANT THAT. I THINK MARIO REINA IS HERE FROM ALDEN AND HUNT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD MAY HAVE. YOU KNOW MARIO.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, MARIO REINA WITH MELVIN HUNT FOR THE RECORD PROJECT ENGINEER. SO WE GOT THIS PROJECT UNDER CONTRACT ABOUT A MONTH AND A HALF AGO. WE DID THE SURVEY, TURNED IN THE ZONING. LAST WEEK WE TURNED THE PLAT, AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THE SITE PLAN THIS ENTIRE TIME, BUT I DIDN'T HAVE IT AVAILABLE WHEN WE TURNED IN THE CHANGES ON APPLICATION.

THIS IS A MANUFACTURING FACILITY THAT'S CURRENTLY IN MISSION.

HE'S OUTGROWN IT. THEY DO HIGH END CABINETS.

IT'S ACTUALLY A REALLY NICE FACILITY.

THIS IS THE OWNER'S WILLY GARCIA. I'M NOT SURE IF ANYONE KNOWS HIM, BUT A WELL-KNOWN GUY FROM THE MISSION AREA.

HE'S OUTGROWN THAT FACILITY.

HE'S TRIED TO BUY OUT HIS NEIGHBORS.

IT'S ANOTHER. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY DO THERE, ACTUALLY, BUT THEY DIDN'T AGREE, SO HE LIKED TO MOVE HIS HOME BASE TO EDINBURG. I'D LIKE TO.

KNOWING WHAT I KNOW NOW, I'D LIKE TO TO HOPEFULLY GET YOUR VOTE ON THIS FOR GENERAL COMMERCIAL.

WE DO HAVE A CLOSING SCHEDULED BASED ON THE CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL OF THE ZONING.

AND IF IT DOESN'T WORK OUT, THEN I'LL HAVE TO COME BACK. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION FOR A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL.

[H. Consider the Variance Request to the City’s Unified Development Code Article 5, Section 5.207, Easements for a Sign, Being Dutch Bros Addition Subdivision, Lot 1, Block]

CHANGING IT FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL.

GENERAL. I'LL SECOND THAT.

YOU HAVE A SECOND? ANYBODY IN FAVOR? PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.

MOTION CARRIES. ITEM EIGHT H.

WE'RE GOING TO CONSIDER THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.

ARTICLE FIVE, SECTION SIX AND 5.207.

EASEMENTS FOR A SIGN BEING DUTCH BROTHERS ADDITION SUBDIVISION LOT ONE, BLOCK A, LOCATED AT 4108 SOUTH BUSINESS HIGHWAY 281.

STAFF. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE FIVE, AS IT APPLIES TO ENCROACHMENTS OF EASEMENTS.

THE SIGN IN QUESTION IS FOR THE ADVERTISEMENT OF THE PROPOSED DUTCH BROS.

COFFEE AT THIS LOCATION.

THE PROPERTY IS PART OF THE DUTCH BROS.

LOT ONE BLOCK, A SUBDIVISION THAT WAS RECORDED IN 2023.

THE PLAT SPECIFIES 25FT OF ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY ALONG SOUTH BUSINESS HIGHWAY 281, FOLLOWED BY A 55 FOOT CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT.

WITHIN THE FRONT PORTION OF THE 50.5 CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT.

THERE IS A TEN FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT.

MEANT THE SIGN IN QUESTION IS INTENDED TO BE 11FT APPROXIMATELY.

WITHIN THE 50.5FT CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT, BUT OUTSIDE OF THE TEN FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT.

STAFF MAILED A NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING TO 13 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND WE RECEIVED NO COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST, AND IF APPROVED, THEY WOULD ALSO NEED TO COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS.

THANK YOU. SO SO TO CLARIFY, IT'S IT'S NOT OVER ANY UTILITIES.

IT'S JUST OVER THE IT'S GOING TO BE OVER THE CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT IF APPROVED.

[00:35:02]

AND OUTSIDE OF THE TEN FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT.

[9. SUBDIVISION (VARIANCES)]

OKAY. THERE WE GO. MOVE TO APPROVE.

I HAVE A SECOND. I'LL SECOND.

DO ME A FAVOR, PLEASE. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.

WE'LL MOVE OVER TO SUBDIVISION VARIANCE.

[A. Way & Paving Width, for Benitez Ranch Subdivision, being a 4.98 acre tract out of Lot 14, Section 233, Tex-Mex Railway Company Subdivision, located at 1013 North]

TO CONSIDER THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. ARTICLE FIVE, SECTION 5.203-1 RIGHT OF WAY AND PAVING WIDTH.

BENITEZ RANCH SUBDIVISION BEING 4.9 ACRES OUT OF LOT 14, SECTION 233 TEX-MEX RAILWAY COMPANY SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 1013 NORTH DEPOT ROAD, STEPH. GOOD AFTERNOON.

COMMISSION. FOR THE RECORD, THIS SUBDIVISION IS A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION.

UNLIKE THE DESCRIPTION, THERE WAS A TWO DIFFERENT PROPOSALS FOR THIS SUBDIVISION. IT'S A 4.9 ACRE TRACT.

IT'S ON THE NORTH SIDE OF OUR CITY LIMITS ON THE NORTHWEST.

THIS PROPERTY IS CONSIDERING DOING A SINGLE LOT SUBDIVISION OR TWO LOT SUBDIVISION.

THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS TO ARTICLE FIVE, SECTION 2.302.

I MEAN, .2031. AS IT APPLIES TO ROAD WIDENING AND DEDICATION, THE DEVELOPER CAN EITHER WIDEN THE ROAD OR ESCROW THE COST, SO A PAYMENT IN LIEU OF NORTH DEPOT ROAD IS CONSIDERED A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL, ACCORDING TO THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY METROPOLITAN ORGANIZATION, WHICH CONSIDERS THAT A 120 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY.

SO TO MEET THAT, THE DEDICATION ALONG THE FRONTAGE WOULD HAVE TO BE 60FT FROM CENTER.

NOW, THE ENGINEER AND PROPERTY OWNER ARE WILLING TO GIVE THOSE 60FT OR THE DIFFERENCE TO MAKE THE 60FT. BUT THE REQUEST TODAY IS TO NOT HAVE TO MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS OR PAY THE ESCROW. THE DIFFERENCE RIGHT NOW WOULD COME UP TO AN APPROXIMATE $18,712 WITH $0.25 STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL FOR THE VARIANCE.

BEFORE THIS MEETING BEGAN, I WAS TALKING TO THE PRESIDENT FROM MELBOURNE, HUNT MURRAY ARENA, WHO'S IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WAS CONSIDERING A DIFFERENT OPTION. THERE IS AN EXEMPTION FROM PLANNING THAT IS ALLOWED IN THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS FOR THE DEVELOPER TO PLATTE, NOT PLATTE TO BUILD A HOME ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY, SO LONG AS THE PROPERTY IS UTILIZED FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS ONLY.

AND IN THAT CASE, ALL WE DO IS ENSURE THAT THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY IS TO THE CURRENT THOROUGHFARE PLAN.

UPON PERMITTING, THEY WOULD HAVE TO ALSO DO THE SIDEWALK.

BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO ACTUALLY DO THE IMPROVEMENT ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY OR PAY A FEE IN LIEU OF SO THE DIFFERENCE IS, WHAT YOU SEE HERE WOULD BE THE ALTERNATIVE, WHICH IS THE ONE LOT. IF THEY HAVE THE VARIANCE APPROVED, WHICH IS CURRENTLY BEING REQUESTED, IT'S GOING TO BE TWO LOTS.

THIS IS A MOTHER AND SON.

SO RIGHT NOW TO QUALIFY FOR A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE, ASIDE FROM HAVING ACCESS TO A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, YOU NEED PUBLIC UTILITIES, SEWER AND WATER.

AND YOU CAN QUALIFY FOR SEPTIC IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN HALF AN ACRE, WHICH WOULD. THIS ONE WOULD QUALIFY FOR THAT, BUT IT'S CLOSER THAN 400FT FROM THE NEAREST LINE, SO IT WOULDN'T BECAUSE OF THAT CLAUSE.

WITH THAT BEING SAID ONE LOT WOULD QUALIFY FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE.

TWO LOTS WOULD REQUIRE THE VARIANCE WITH THAT.

SO WHAT ARE YOU ALL ASKING FOR IF IT GOES FORWARD? AS CURRENTLY PRESENTED, IT'S TWO LOTS, WHICH WOULD BE NOT HAVING TO MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS OR PAY THE 18,000 SOME ODD DOLLARS.

THAT'S WHAT'S CURRENTLY BEING PRESENTED. I WAS ASKED TO PRESENT THE ONE LOT CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE OPTION BECAUSE THE MR. MARIO ARENA WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND ANSWER A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

SO BUT IN BOTH INSTANCES, THERE'D BE A DEDICATION OF THE OF THE ADDITIONAL. THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY. BUT IN ONE PROPERTY WASN'T PREVIOUSLY SUBDIVIDED IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

IT HAS NOT BEEN PLATTED YET.

OKAY. SO THE TRUE BENEFIT IS THAT IF WE DO IT AS A ONE LOT, THEN HE DOESN'T HAVE TO ESCROW OR PAY ANY FEES AS LONG AS HE DEDICATES.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT? WILL YOU STILL BE ABLE TO BUILD THE TWO HOUSES? NOT.

[00:40:03]

NOT ON ONE LOT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, MARIO ARENA, FOR THE RECORD. SO KIND OF THE IDEA BEHIND THIS WAS THAT IF WE CAN'T GET THIS VARIANCE, WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK IN FOR A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR ONE LOT.

WHAT'S HAPPENED BETWEEN THE TIME THAT HE BOUGHT IT AND TODAY IS THAT HIS MOTHER WANTS TO LIVE NEXT TO HIM. SO WE'D LIKE TO ACTUALLY MAKE THIS A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU'LL STILL GET THE RIGHT OF WAY REGARDLESS.

IT'S UNDER FIVE ACRES. YOU CAN DO THE FAMILY PARTITION. WE COULD POTENTIALLY DO A FAMILY PARTITION. SO GET THE CERTIFICATE NOW THEN DO THE FAMILY PARTITION.

YEAH, I COULD DO THAT TOO.

BUT WE GOT A VARIANCE BEFORE YOU TODAY AND WE'RE WILLING TO DEDICATE THE RIGHT OF WAY.

WE'VE ALREADY EXTENDED A WATER LINE. YOU'RE GOING TO GET IT EITHER WAY.

SO AS LONG AS WE KNOW IT'S A FAMILY PARTITION.

WELL I'M COMFORTABLE TO HAVE IT PLATTED THEN FAMILY PARTITION WHEN SELLING AND BUYING AND SO ON. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, YES, IT'S STILL DEVELOPER IN THE SAME MANNER.

HOW DOES THAT MAKE IT CLEANER? WELL, IN THE PLANNING PROCESS, THERE'S OTHER FEES THAT ARE INCURRED.

ONE, IT'S EASIER TO LOOK IT UP.

YOU HAVE A SUBDIVISION AS OPPOSED TO HAVING TO FIND METES AND BOUNDS SURVEYS AND METES AND BOUNDS. IF YOU HAVE A PLAT, THEN CARSON MAPS AND HIDALGO COUNTY WEBSITE ARE BOTH GOING TO HAVE THAT LAYOUT.

AND EACH LOT WITHIN THAT SUBDIVISION IS GOING TO HAVE ITS LOT WITH DIMENSIONS, THE RIGHT OF WAY DIMENSIONS, THE EASEMENTS, ALL OF THAT'S GOING TO BE CONSOLIDATED IN ONE AREA.

AND DURING THE PLANNING PROCESS WE COLLECT FEES LIKE WATER RIGHTS, SEWER, SEWER TAPPING, WATER TAPPING WHEREAS ANYTHING ELSE IS VOID OF THOSE FEES. UNLESS IT'S FOR THE SERVICE CONNECTION.

SO WE DON'T GET WATER RIGHTS FEES WHEN THEY DO CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE, WHICH IS 3000 AN ACRE.

THAT HELPS OUR UTILITY DEPARTMENT.

WE DO GET THE TAPPING FEES, OF COURSE, ANYTIME YOU TAP IN.

REGARDLESS I MEANT COMPARED TO THE FAMILY PARTITION, I MEAN, IT'S THE SAME THING.

ALSO RECORDED. NO, A FAMILY PARTITION.

THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE HAVE THE SAME RULES, BUT IT'S NOT.

IT'S NOT THE FAMILY PARTITION.

IT'S NOT. IT'S NOT A PLAT.

IT'S NOT A IT'S LIKE A SURVEY.

IT'S A PARTITION PLAT.

IT'S A SOLD BY METES AND BOUNDS SURVEY WITH METES AND BOUNDS.

SO IT'S ALWAYS BETTER TO PLAT SOMETHING VERSUS IT'S ALWAYS CLEANER, EASIER FOR EVERYBODY TO FIND IT.

911 APPRAISAL DISTRICT ALL THOSE.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET SEWER TO THIS. NO SIR. WE'RE DOING SEPTIC. BUT BUT ANOTHER REASON WHY WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS IS WE HAVE TO DO AN OFFSITE WATER LINE EXTENSION FOR SHARYLAND WATER.

I HAVE IT HERE. WE PAID $61,000 TO EXTEND THE LINE ABOUT 600FT NORTH.

SO THEY WON'T REVIEW YOUR APPLICATION WITHOUT A PLAT.

SO THAT'S ANOTHER REASON WHY WE HAD TO SUBMIT THE PLAN.

AND WE'VE ALREADY RAN THE WATER LINE ACTUALLY.

AND WE BROUGHT FIRE PROTECTION TO THIS AREA. WE'VE INSTALLED TWO FIRE HYDRANTS. HOW WIDE IS THIS STRIP OF LAND? MR.. HOW IS HE ABLE TO DO? TWO OR OR SEPTIC IF THEY'RE SEWER CLOSE BY.

SO THE RULE IS A 400 FOOT DISTANCE OR FURTHER EXEMPTS YOU FROM HAVING TO CONNECT TO OUR SEWER. BUT YOU SAID YOU QUALIFY FOR SEPTIC.

I CAN'T RECALL OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. DO YOU RECALL, PETER, IF THEY QUALIFY FOR SEPTIC, WE LOOK INTO IT. I COULD ANSWER, I CAN ANSWER THAT. OKAY.

SO THE WATER AND SEWER ARE ABOUT 6 TO 700FT AWAY.

THEY'RE AT A SUBDIVISION CALLED OAK HILL AT VILLANOVA ESTATES THAT I DID JUST 600FT NORTH OF HERE. BUT WE EXTENDED THE WATER BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE WATER. THERE WAS A TWO INCH WATER LINE. HE'S BUILDING A 6000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE, SO HE WANTED A FIRE HYDRANT.

SO WE BROUGHT IN A 12 INCH WATER LINE, AND WE INSTALLED TWO FIRE HYDRANTS.

AND THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. BUT TO GO TO SHARYLAND, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PLAT AS PART OF THE APPLICATION.

SO THAT'S THE REASON WE'RE RUNNING THIS WAY. I THINK IT'S CLEANER AS WELL.

BUT YOU'RE GOING TO PLAT IT WITH TWO LOTS.

CORRECT. TWO LOTS. WE'RE ABLE TO GET THE VARIANCE BETWEEN TWO LOTS. IF NOT, WE'LL COME BACK AND JUST DO ONE. OH, OKAY.

OF COURSE, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL IS BASED ON FINANCIAL HARDSHIP IS NEVER SOMETHING THAT STAFF CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR.

SO I DIDN'T GET WHAT'S THE WIDTH OF THIS? THE WIDTH. THE ALONG THE FRONTAGE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I DON'T RECALL. OH, THE CALL OUTS.

WRONG. LET ME SEE. IT'S IT'S 164.5 LINEAR FOOT OF FRONTAGE.

164FT. FLAG SHAPE, ONE IN THE BACK, ON THE FRONT.

CORRECT. DO WE HAVE ANY AND THIS IS INSIDE THE CITY.

DO WE HAVE ANY INSIGHT AS TO WHEN DEPOT ROAD IS GOING TO BE WIDENED BY THE MPO?

[00:45:02]

I'D HAVE TO DEFER TO ONE OF THE CITY ENGINEERS.

OKAY. I KNOW IT'S A PRETTY BAD ROAD.

YEAH, WELL, I'M JUST WONDERING WHEN. WHEN ARE THEY GOING? WHEN IS IT COMING UP TO? TO WHITE CURRENTLY. THIS IS PETER, FOR THE RECORD.

COMMISSION. SORRY, COUNCIL.

NO. EXCUSE ME. SO, FOR THE RECORD, ON DEPOT ROAD, THERE CURRENTLY IS NO PLANS TO WIDEN DEPOT ROAD AT THE MOMENT.

MOST OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE BEING INDICATED HERE ARE USUALLY DONE BECAUSE DEPOT ROAD, I BELIEVE IT'S IMPORTANT.

AND SOME PORTIONS IS ALSO CO-OWNED MAYBE WITH THE CITY OF MCALLEN AS WELL.

BUT WE IF WE IF ANY PLANS WERE FOR DEPOT ROAD WE NEED TO ALSO HAVE TO DO VARIOUS TRAFFIC STUDIES ON THE AREA AS WELL.

AND IT ALSO INCLUDES TO SEE THE INTENSITY OF HOW MANY PEOPLE, HOW MANY HOMES ARE GOING TO BE UTILIZED IN THE AREA.

MOST OF THE TIMES IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF THE PATCHING AND PAVING IS GOING TO BE DONE BY PUBLIC WORKS VIA ANY OTHER TYPE OF REMEDIATION.

YOU'RE LOOKING AT MILLING AND OVERLAY, BUT INCLUDING ANY TYPE OF COMPLETELY REDOING THE ROAD. SO FAR IT HASN'T BEEN FORESEEN IN THE NEAR FUTURE AS OF NOW.

SO. SO, WOULD THE ESCROW MONIES HELP? OH, YEAH. OF COURSE. THANK YOU SIR.

COMMISSION. ANY QUESTIONS? THOUGHTS? YOU KNOW, AS A AS A FAMILY PRACTITIONER, I'M A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH JUST DEDICATING THE RIGHT OF WAY.

I MEAN, IF IT WAS FOR BUSINESS OR ANYTHING ELSE, I THINK IT'D BE DIFFERENT.

FOR AN AGE, YOU KNOW, AGED MOTHER THAT WANTS TO LIVE NEXT TO HER SON. I'LL. I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE TO TO AND TAKE THE AND TAKE THE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE AND TO DEDICATE THE RIGHT OF WAY.

I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT. YOU MENTIONED FAMILY PARTITION.

WHAT DOES THAT HAVE? WELL, I MEAN, IT'S IT'S FOR FAMILY PURPOSES.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT A FAMILY. I MISSPOKE THAT.

YES, BUT IT'S FOR FAMILY.

[10. CONSENT AGENDA]

YEAH. I'LL SECOND IT FOR A SECOND.

EVERYBODY IN FAVOR? PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. OPPOSED?

[A. Consider the Preliminary Plat Approval of Amira Subdivision, being a 3.19 acre tract of land, more or less, out of and forming a part of Lot 5, Section 274, Texas-Mexican]

SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES 4 TO 1.

WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GO TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

I THINK WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM.

TEN A. CAN WE GET A MOTION? WELL THERE'S SEVERAL. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TAKE EVERYTHING. THERE'S IT'S A THROUGH F.

OH, IT'S A THROUGH F. WE ONLY HAVE TEN A HERE.

THAT'S TEN EIGHT THROUGH F.

I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEMS. ITEM TEN A THROUGH F, TEN A THROUGH F ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.

MR.. ANYTHING ELSE, SIR?

[11. INFORMATION ONLY]

YES, REAL QUICK IN REFERENCE TO ITEM EIGHT G.

IN TALKING TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY, HE HAS ADVISED ME THAT WE CAN PROCEED TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE RECOMMENDATION AS AS PRESENTED HERE TONIGHT.