* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. OKAY, [00:00:03] [1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL] ALL, IT'S 5 0 3 ON TUESDAY. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 17TH. WE'LL CALL THE PLANNING, ZONING MEETING TO ORDER. WE CALL? YES. CAN YOU CALL RO PLEASE? YES. UH, JANICE CAROL. PRESENT. AUGUSTINE LAREDO. ABSENT. DONNA WINFREY? HERE. TRACY WHEELER? HERE. TAMMY SCOTT. PRESENT. RIC CARLO? HERE. OSCAR CHABA? HERE. KIM ICK. HERE. MIKE. DEAR HERE. ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A QUORUM. VERY GOOD [2. CITIZEN COMMENTS Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 551, prohibits the Planning and Zoning Commission from discussing, deliberating, or considering, subjects for which public notice has not been given on the agenda. Issues that cannot be referred to the administration for action may be placed on the agenda of a future Planning and Zoning Session.] MARTY. UH, FIRST THING I'M GONNA DO IS READ THE CITIZENS' CON COMMENTS. UH, THE PURPOSE OF THE CITIZENS' COMMENTS IS TO GIVE CITIZENS THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS. ANYONE DESIRING TO SPEAK SHOULD HAVE SIGNED THE APPROPRIATE LIST IN THE FOYER FRONT. UH, EACH CITIZEN SHALL GIVE THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS, PROVIDE A PROPER RECORD. THE RULES ALLOW EACH PERSON ONE MINUTE TO SPEAK. A CITIZEN MAY PASS THEIR TIME TO ANOTHER PERSON TO REQUEST WHO REQUEST, WHO REQUESTED TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION. HOWEVER, THOSE ASSISTANCE REMARKS SHALL EXCEED THREE MINUTES. THE ONE OR THREE MINUTE, UH, LIMIT MAY BE EXTENDED BY A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION. I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO BE AS CONCISE AS POSSIBLE. PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THE COMMISSION CANNOT DISCUSS OR DELIBERATE ON ITEMS FOR WHICH THE PUBLIC NOTICE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN ON THIS AGENDA. ISSUES THAT CANNOT BE REFERRED TO ADMINISTRATION FOR ACTION MAY BE CONSIDERED FOR PLACEMENT ON THE AGENDA FOR A FUTURE PLANNING AND ZONING, UH, AGENDA. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY, UH, SIGN UP TO SPEAK FOR ANYTHING? OKAY. ALRIGHT. THERE BEING NO, UH, NO ONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK. THANK YOU. UH, THIS INCLUDES THE CITIZENS' COMMENT PORTION OF THE AGENDA. WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO [a. Consider approving the meeting minutes of the November 19, 2024, Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting.] ITEM NUMBER THREE. UH, CONSIDER APPROVING THE MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 19TH 24 FOR THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION ON A REGULAR MEETING. I HAVE APPROVAL. SECOND. MOTION FOR ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. A. AYE. I IAIN, I WASN'T HERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, SO MOTION IS APPROVED. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO [a. Consider approving Goose Creek Commercial Preliminary Plat, approximately 95.57 acres located north of Interstate Highway 10 and west of John Martin Road. ] ITEM NUMBER FOUR, UH, PLATS. UH, OKAY. UH, ITEM NUMBER A FOUR A CONSIDER APPRO, UH, GOOSE CREEK COMMERCIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT, APPROXIMATELY 95.57 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF INTERSTATE I 10 WEST I 10 WEST AND WEST OF JOHN MARTH. JOHN MARTIN. ARE THESE TOGETHER? UH, NO. NO, THESE ARE ALL SEPARATE. OKAY. SO STAFF, I'LL ASK THAT YOU SU UH, SUMMARIZE. OKAY. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS LAMIA SALEM, SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THIS PLA IS LOCATED WEST OF JOHN MARTIN ROAD AND ON THE NORTH SIDE OF I 10. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 95 POINT, UH, 57 ACRES. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO, UH, DIVIDE THE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY INTO TWO LOTS AND CREATES THREE BLOCKS AND, UM, CONSTRUCT A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TO CONNECT FROM I 10 TO JONES'S ROAD. AND PLAT RECOMMENDS, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. ARE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS? I JUST, I HAVE A GENERAL QUESTION. IN SEPTEMBER MEETING, DID YOU NOT TELL US THAT WE WEREN'T GONNA BE APPROVING PLATS ANYMORE? OR WAS THAT JUST STARTING IN JANUARY? STARTING IN JANUARY, YOU WON'T SEE FINAL PLATS ANYMORE. WE ARE GONNA STILL BRING PRELIMINARY PLATS, UM, BASICALLY TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S STILL AWARENESS OF WHAT'S GOING ON. UM, AFTER JANUARY 1ST WHEN WE GET THE FINAL PLATS, STAFF WILL BE PRESENTING A REPORT EVERY MONTH, UM, IN YOUR PACKETS. THAT IS JUST, HERE ARE THE ONES THAT WE APPROVED. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION AND CORRECT ME PLEASE. IF, IF, UM, I KNOW YOU WILL THE, THIS PLAT IS THE, THAT WAREHOUSE DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. AND I KNOW WHEN THE CONVERSATIONS HAPPENED WITH THIS, WHEN IT CAME UP BEFORE, UM, AND WAS APPROVED THAT THE, THE TRAFFIC BEING DIVERTED TO JONES ROAD. CORRECT. AND THAT'S WHAT KIND OF THE PURPOSE IS, WAS OR TO KIND OF TAKE SOME HEAT OFF OF JOHN MARTIN. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS JONES ROAD NOT DEVELOPED RIGHT THERE? IT, IT IS NOT, UH, AS OF RIGHT NOW, NO. [00:05:01] BUT THEY'RE PROVIDING THAT, UH, FOR WHEN JONES ROAD DOES GET EXTENDED. I WISH THEM LUCK GETTING OUT ON JOHN MARTIN. 'CAUSE YOU CANNOT GET OUTTA SHELL CREDIT UNION ON JOHN MARTIN. THAT'S HOW FAR IT'S BACKED UP. SO WE'RE JUST ADDING TO THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE ALREADY BY ADDING TRUCKS TO THAT TRAFFIC. MY MY UNDERSTANDING AND, AND LAMIA MAY REMEMBER FROM WHEN THE REASON WAS DONE, UM, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, THIS RIGHT OF WAY DOWN THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY THAT CONNECTS TO THE FEEDER ROAD WAS TO KEEP 'EM OFF OF JOHN MARTIN. EXACTLY. YEAH. BUT THEN WE CAME BACK AND GAVE THEM APPROVAL TO GO ON JOHN MARTIN AND FOR THEM TO COME THROUGH THERE. THEY DON'T HAVE AN EXIT THAT WAY TO THE EAST. THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO DOWN THE FEEDER ROAD IF THEY COME THROUGH THAT WAY. THE, THE REZONE ITSELF, UM, WAS, DIDN'T HAVE CONDITIONS ON IT, SO. RIGHT. THIS WAS A STRAIGHT REZONE. THIS WAS NOT A PD. YEAH, IT WAS REZONED TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL, UH, AT THAT TIME PERMITS, UM, WAREHOUSES WITH CONDITIONS. UM, AND THIS WAS THE LAST, UH, WAREHOUSE DEVELOPMENT IN GENERAL COMMERCIAL THAT WE HAD BEFORE WE DID THE TEXT AMENDMENT TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND REMOVED THE WAREHOUSING FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL AT ALL. WE SAID IT WAS GENERAL COMMERCIAL LAST TIME IT CAME UP AND THAT IT WOULD PASS EVEN WITHOUT THE SUP. AND SO WE STILL HAVE A TRAFFIC ISSUE RELATED TO THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. A MAJOR TRAFFIC ISSUE, NOT A MINOR ONE. AND THEY WILL, UM, AND I'LL LOOK TO, UH, OUR CITY ENGINEERS IN THE AUDIENCE HERE. I, WE WILL, THEY'LL HAVE TO DO A, UM, TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY PRIOR TO THAT AND THEY'LL HAVE TO DO TIA PRIOR TO DEVELOPING IF THEY HAVEN'T ALREADY DONE ONE. AND, AND REMEMBER THAT FOR TONIGHT'S PURPOSES, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE, AT AT IS THE PLAT. SO, UM, STAFF HAS REVIEWED THIS, IT DOES MEET THE, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLAT. SO THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BASING OUR APPROVAL ON. AND I JUST LIKE ONE OTHER UNDERSTANDING. SO BASED OFF OF WHAT I'M SEEING, THIS WOULD NOT GIVE THEM ANY DIRECT ACCESS TO JOHN MARTIN? CORRECT. UM, 'CAUSE I'M NOT SEEING ANYTHING THAT'S YELLING AT ME THAT SAYS IT'S CONNECTING TO JOHN MARTIN. AND, AND IF THEY DID DECIDE TO CHANGE THAT, THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A MAJOR CHANGE THAT WOULD COME BACK TO US. NOT A MINOR FINAL PLA NO, THAT THAT IS INCORRECT. UM, I'M SORRY. THE PLA ITSELF DOES NOT GET INTO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. IT DOESN'T SHOW ACCESS POINTS OR ANYTHING THAT I CAN TELL. NO. UM, DOES, DOES IT SHOW ANY ACCESS POINTS ON MILLENNIA? NO. SO, UM, BECAUSE THERE IS, THERE IS UH, TWO PROPERTIES HERE IN BETWEEN, UH, THIS DEVELOPMENT AND JOHN MARTIN. SO, UM, THIS IS NOT, THEY HAVE THE, UH, THE VICINITY MAP, UH, ON THE SCREEN. AND THIS DEVELOPMENT IS FURTHER TO THE WEST. YEAH, IT DOES. IT DOESN'T HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO JOHN MARTIN. BUT THE POINT BEING TOO, THAT THIS WAS ZONED STRAIGHT GENERAL COMMERCIAL. THERE ARE NO CONDITIONS ON IT. IT WOULD NOT COME BACK TO THIS BODY OTHER THAN FOR THIS PLAT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. I'M GONNA AN UP MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? A. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NO OPPOSED. SAY AGAIN. TRACY IS OPPOSED. OPPOSED. TRACY? I OPPOSED. OKAY. YES. ALRIGHT. POTION. POTION PASSES. [b. Consider approving Jasmine Estates Preliminary Plat, approximately 2.03 acres located north of Battlebell Road and east of Oleander Drive.] ALRIGHT, ITEM ITEM FOUR B, CONSIDER APPROVING JASMINE ESTATE'S PRELIMINARY PLAT APPRO APPROXIMATELY 2.03 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF BATTLE, BE ROAD AND EAST OF OLENDER DRIVE. STAFF. CAN YOU SUMMARIZE, PLEASE? YES. GOOD EVENING. MR. CHAIRMAN AND THE COMMISSIONERS TIM CHI HERE WITH CITIES PLANNING AND THIS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. BEFORE YOU RELEASE EVENING, WE HAVE THREE ADDITIONAL PLATS. ALLOW ME TO BEGIN WITH THE FIRST ONE, WHICH IS THE JASMINE ESTATE PRELIMINARY PLAT. THE SUBJECT SIDE IS LOCATED NORTH OF BATTLE BELL ROAD AND EAST OF OLENDER DRIVE. IT IS IN HARRIS COUNTY AND THE CITY CTJ, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE DIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY AND APPROXIMATELY 2.03 ACRE TRUCK INTO ONE BLOCK, SIX LOTS AND ONE RESERVE. AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. ALL RIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? [00:10:04] NOPE. ALRIGHT. I NEED A MOTION TO, UH, A MOTION ON THIS. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY, UH, ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. ALL RIGHT. UH, ITEM FOUR [c. Consider approving the Ameriport Business Park South Section Four Preliminary Plat, approximately 56.68 acres located on the south side of FM 565 and east of FM 2354.] C, CONSIDER APPROVING THE AMERICORP BUSINESS PARK SOUTH SECTION FOUR. PRELIMINARY PLAT, APPROXIMATELY 56.68 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FM 5 65 AND EAST OF FM 2354. I WOULD ASK THAT THE, UH, THAT STAFF SUMMARIZE. OKAY, THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED EAST OF, UH, STATE HIGHWAY 99 OR EAST OF, UH, FM 2354 AND THE SOUTH OF FM 5 65. IT IS IN CHAMBERS COUNTY AND THE CITY CTJ, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE DIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 56.68 ACRES INTO THREE BLOCKS, TWO LOTS AND ONE RESERVE. AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. UH, ANY QUESTIONS COMMISSIONERS? I HAVE APPROVAL. SECOND. ANY OPPOSED? I'M SORRY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. [d. Consider approving the Pelly Place Section Four Preliminary Plat, approximately 47.05 acres located north of East Wallisville Road and east of Hadden Road.] ALL RIGHT. UH, ITEM FOUR D, CONSIDER, UH, APPROVING THE PELLY PLACE. SECTION FOUR PRELIMINARY PLAT, APPROXIMATELY 47.05 ACRES LOCATED NORTH, UH, NORTH OF EAST VILLE ROAD AND THE E AND EAST OF HUDDEN ROAD. ALRIGHT. OKAY. THE PURCHASE SITE IS LOCATED EAST OF NORTH MAIN STREET AND ON THE WEST SIDE OF HUDDEN ROAD. THE SITE IS IN HARRIS COUNTY AND THE ONE OF CITIES, UH, LIMITED PURPOSE ANNEXATION LPAS AREA. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE DIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 47.05 ACRES OF LAND INTO FIVE BLOCKS, 126 LOTS AND 11 RESERVES AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? YOU GOT A COPY OF THE PLAT THROW UP? YEAH. SO WHAT IS THEIR ACCESS RIGHT NOW THROUGH THERE? IS THAT GOING THROUGH THAT SUBDIVISION? THEY'RE BUILDING OFF OF MAIN NORTH OF THE HIGH SCHOOL AND THEY'RE ADDING ONTO THAT THEY ARE ACCESSING LEASE, UH, SECTION, WHICH IS SECTION FOUR OF THE LEY PLACE. MANDY THROUGH, I THINK IT'S COMING FROM HERE, THE LEY PLACE DRIVE, BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE MAN CAN TAKE TOO MUCH TRAFFIC RIGHT THERE. MORE. IT'S PRETTY BAD. I DRIVE IT JUST ABOUT EVERY DAY AND IT LOOKS LIKE, I THINK THEY'RE BUILDING ANOTHER ONE RIGHT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT. YES. WE'RE ALSO STILL APPROVING 40 FEET ACROSS THE FRONTAGE INSTEAD OF THE 50 FOOT FOOT MINIMUM. I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE KEEP DOING THAT. THEY'RE UNDER A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT ALLOWS THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. I KNOW. UH, BECAUSE IT'S IN THE ETJ. SO TO WHAT? BECAUSE IT'S IN THE ETJ THAT WAS ALLOWED. WHAT, WHAT'S THAT ROAD FROM, UH, WALLACE FIELD GOING TOWARD HADDEN? WHAT ROAD IS THAT? YOU SAY YOU DRIVE? NO. OR YOU SAY YOU DRIVE NORTH MAIN NORTH, MA'AM? NO, UM, HADDEN'S ON THE OTHER SIDE. HADDEN'S ON THE OTHER SIDE, BUT THERE'S NO ACCESS FROM THERE. THAT ROAD YOU SEE VILLE ROAD AND YOU SEE THAT ROAD THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S WINDING GOING UP. THIS ONE, THE PELLY PLACE. IS THAT PELLY PLACE? YEAH. YES. I THINK THAT'S THEIR ACCESS, ISN'T IT FROM VILLE ON THE OTHER SECTIONS? YES. YES. THAT'S ALSO THEIR ACCESS. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS? NO. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND, I'LL SECOND. YEAH. YEAH. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. . I HAD A QUESTION. I WAS THINKING ABOUT IT. ALRIGHT, MOVING [a. Conduct a public hearing and consider making a recommendation concerning a request to amend the official zoning map to rezone approximately 0.1 acres at 2109 West Texas Avenue from General Commercial (GC) to a Mixed Residential (MR) Zoning District. ] ON TO ITEM FIVE A. SO THIS ONE, MARTIN, THE WAY YOU MARKED ON THIS, IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING. YES. GO, GO AHEAD [00:15:01] AND READ THE, UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING. MAKE SURE. YEAH. ALRIGHT. UM, I'LL READ THE FOLLOWING ONE TIME. THIS APPLIES ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS. PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE HELD FOR THE PURPOSE OF GIVING ALL AND ARREST AND PERSON, PERSON THE RIGHT TO SPEAK, TO BE HEARD. EVERYONE DESIRING TO SPEAK AT TODAY'S HEARING SHOULD HAVE SIGNED AN APPROPRIATE LIST. AND, UH, AND THIS WILL PROVIDE THE SPEAKING ORDER FOR THE HEARING. EACH SPEAKER SHALL GIVE THEIR NAME, ADDRESS TO PROVIDE PROPER RECORD OF THE HEARING, THE RULES OF LAW FOR EACH SPEAKER. THREE MINUTES TO PRESENT INFORMATION. HOWEVER, I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO BE CONCISE. IF YOU'RE IN A GROUP AND YOU'RE WISHING YOU'RE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON THE SAME SUBJECT, PLEASE, SU SU SORRY. PLEASE SELECT A SPOKESPERSON TO PRESENT THE INFORMATION. IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE DIRECT THEM TO ME. NO ONE'S SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER. SO, ITEM, UH, FIVE A, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER MAKING RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO REONE APPROXIMATELY ONE 10TH OF AN ACRE AT 2109 WEST TEXAS AVENUE. FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MIX, UH, RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. GO AHEAD. THE, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY APPROXIMATELY 4,200 SQUARE FEET IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WEST TEXAS AVENUE AND ROBERT CLINE DRIVE. IT IS, IT IS CURRENTLY VACANT AND ENCUMBERED BY, UH, POWER LINES AS WELL AS, UH, PIPELINE EASEMENT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. IT'S VACANT AND UNDEVELOPED. THE ZONING, UH, ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERAL COMMERCIAL, WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW FOR ANY RESIDENTIAL TO BE, UH, PERMITTED ON THIS PROPERTY. AS IS THIS NEIGHBORHOOD OF, UH, CENTRAL HEIGHTS HAS BEEN IN TRANSITION. UH, SOME OF THE, UH, PROPERTIES THAT RECENTLY WAS REZONED FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL IS THIS 1 21 11 ON ONTARIO STREET, AS WELL AS THE, UM, A A FEW PROPERTIES HERE ON WEST GULF STREET. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS WELL AS ITS SURROUNDING AS MIXED DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WHICH PERMITS RESIDENTIAL USES WITH DIFFERENT TYPES, SAY IN VARIOUS DENSITY. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT TO REZONE THE SUBJECTS PROPERTY FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO, UH, MIXED RESIDENTIAL AND CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. IT'S 1600 SQUARE FEET, SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE. HOWEVER, THE, UM, WITH THE ENCUMBRANCE ON THIS PROPERTY, THE APPLICANT WILL BE, UH, REQUIRED TO, UH, TO HAVE, UM, REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES IN TERMS OF THE DRIVEWAY, UH, LENGTH AS WELL AS THE REAR YARD SETBACK IN THIS CONFIGURATION. RE REPEAT THE VARIANCES AGAIN. THE, THE VARIANCE WILL BE IN THE, POTENTIALLY WILL BE A REQUEST FOR VARIANCES FOR, UH, DRIVEWAY, UM, DEPTH HERE, BECAUSE THEY'RE PROPOSING 17 FEET DEEP. UH, HOWEVER, THE, UH, THE CODE IS REQUI IS REQUIRED THEM TO HAVE 25 FEET DEEP FOR A, UM, A GARAGE. AND ALSO, UM, IN MR, THE REAR YARD SETBACK IS 10 FEET. THIS PROPOSAL HAS SIX FEET. BUT THIS, THE VARIANCE IS NOT THE SUBJECT OF THIS REZONE, UM, REQUEST, BUT I'M SAYING THAT IN THE FUTURE, ANY DEVELOPMENT WOULD, UH, POTENTIALLY, UH, HAVE SOME ZONING VARIANCE ASSOCIATED WITH IT BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE, THERE IS A PIPELINE EASEMENT HERE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT THEY CANNOT DO ANYTHING AS WELL AS SOME, UH, POWER LINE EASEMENT THAT I SHOWED ON THE CORNER. AND THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MIXED RESIDENTIAL MR. TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. SO WHAT ELSE? REFRESH MY MEMORY ON WHAT ELSE? MIXED RESIDENTIAL ALLOWS. MIXED RESIDENTIAL ALLOWS FOR, UM, IF YOU [00:20:01] HAVE THE APPROPRIATE SIZE, UH, IT ALLOWS FOR, UH, DUPLEXES OR, UH, SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED OR TOWN HOMES. IT DEPENDS ON THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S IN THE NEW CODE. YEP. THIS PROPERTY WITH THE 4,200 SQUARE FEET WILL NOT PERMIT ANYTHING EXCEPT, UM, A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. OH. WITH VARI ANSWERS DO, SINCE I'M NEW TO THIS, DO VARIANCES COME THROUGH US OR THEY GO DIRECTLY TO THE CITY? NO, THEY GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. SO TWO, TWO DIFFERENT SITUATIONS. SO, UM, THE VARIANCES THAT BECOME A QUESTION FOR, FOR THE OTHER BOARD, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE LAND USE. IF I HAD A STRUCTURE THAT I COULD FIT IN THERE, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THERE RATHER THAN COMMERCIAL? UM, STAFF HAS LOOKED AT THIS ONE AND, AND WE REALLY FIND THAT, THAT THE IDEA OF A GENERAL COMMERCIAL ON THAT CORNER SLIM TO NONE. SO, UM, AGAIN, LAMI POINTED OUT THAT THERE ARE OTHER, UM, OTHER PROPERTIES IN THAT AREA THAT HAVE BEEN REZONING TO MIXED RESIDENTIAL. 'CAUSE IT, IT DOES MAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE SENSE. UM, IT, IT'S NOT THE BEST LOT IN THE WORLD REALLY FOR ANYTHING. UM, BUT IF SOMEBODY CAN MAKE USE OF IT WITH RESIDENTIAL THEN RATHER THAN, RATHER THAN LET IT SIT EMPTY FOR, YOU KNOW, UM, THERE, THERE WAS OF COURSE WHEN 1 46 CAME THROUGH, UM, A LOT OF THOSE PROPERTIES WERE, WERE CUT SUBSTANTIALLY IN SIZE BECAUSE OF, UM, TECH STOCK COMING THROUGH AND, AND ACQUIRING THOSE, THOSE RIGHT OF WAYS. SO, UM, SO IT'S ACTUALLY, UH, IT, IT'S A, IT'S A GOOD CONVERSATION, UM, FOR THE VARIANCE SITUATION, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL KIND OF GET TO THAT IN ANOTHER, UH, ANOTHER TIME. UH, MARTIN, WHY DOES THIS, THE ZONING MAP SHOW IT AS COMMERCIAL, BUT IF WE WENT OVER TO THE FUTURE LAND USE, IT SHOWED IT AS RESIDENTIAL. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS IN THE COMP PLAN, RIGHT? AND IT GIVES US A GUIDE AS TO IF WE WANT THIS TO REZONE, WHAT WOULD WE IDEALLY LIKE TO SEE IT REZONE TO? THAT'S THIS MAP IS WE WOULD THE, SO SO WOULD THAT ADJOINING PIECE ALSO BE BECOME RESIDENTIAL? SHOULD THE PROPERTY OWNER COME IN AND REQUEST THAT? YES, BUT IT COULD STAY COMMERCIAL. IT, IT COULD. SO THE FUTURE, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS JUST POLICY. THE ZONING, THE ZONING MAP IS, IS ACTUALLY WHAT DICTATES WHAT COULD BE ON THE PROPERTY. IT JUST SEEMS STRANGE IF WE CHANGE THAT TO RESIDENTIAL, THAT THAT IN BETWEEN WOULD STAY COMMERCIAL. I I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT HAS TO BE THE ON OWNER THAT RECORDS THE CHANGE. YEAH. YEAH. IT WOULD BE THE OWNER UNLESS, UNLESS THERE WAS SOME OVERRIDING THING OF LIKE WHERE THE CITY WOULD GO THROUGH AND DO A MASS REZONING, BUT WE DON'T TYPICALLY DO THAT UNLESS THEY'RE, UNLESS WE'RE SEEING SOME SORT OF UNIQUE DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES LIKE WE DID ON MASSEY TOMPKINS OR SOME CONVERSATIONS THAT MIGHT BE HAVING ABOUT ALEXANDER AND PLACES LIKE THAT. SO YEAH, I FEEL LIKE THIS PIECE OFFERS SOME REAL CHALLENGES. NOTHING NEW , EVERYTHING SEEMS, I, I'M PERSONALLY INCLINED THAT IF SOMEONE'S CRAZY ENOUGH TO BUILD A HOUSE AT THAT INTERSECTION WITH GAS TRANSMISSION LINES AND POWER LINES AND ON THE FREEWAY, MORE POWER TO 'EM. WE'VE SEEN THAT BEFORE AS, ALL RIGHT. SO WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER. UM, I'M SUPPOSED TO BE CLOSING THE, UH, THE HEARING AND THEN HAVE DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSION. SO A LITTLE BIT REVERSE ORDER. SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT 5 27. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSIONS BY THE COMMISSION? NO, SIR. OKAY. I NEED A MOTION I MOVE TO APPROVE. I'LL SECOND ITEM FOUR A FIVE A. I'LL SECOND I A SECOND WITH TAMMY. ANY, ANY PROS? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. MOTION CARRIES. ALRIGHT, MOVING ON [b. Conduct a public hearing and consider a request for a Special Use Permit (SUP) on approximately 2.96 acres at 1112 Kilgore Road to allow for the construction of a residential accessory structure prior to the construction of a primary structure. ] TO ITEM FIVE B. UH, CON, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUP ON APPROXIMATELY 2.96 ACRES AT 1112 KILGORE ROAD TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURE PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PRIMARY STRUCTURE. OKAY. UM, I'LL OPEN THIS, OPEN UP THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT 5 28. LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE SOME FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AND I'LL ASK THE, UH, [00:25:01] STAFF TO SUMMARIZE THIS ITEM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, RYAN , ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. UM, YES, AS MENTIONED BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS A SPECIALLY USED PERMIT, UH, FOR 2.96 ACRES AT 1112 KILGORE ROAD. UM, THIS SUP IS A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITHOUT A PRIMARY STRUCTURE OR PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY. IN THIS CASE, WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING IS TO CONSTRUCT A, UH, APPROXIMATELY 1200 SQUARE FOOT, UM, CARPORT ON THE PROPERTY. UM, AGAIN, TYPICALLY WHAT YOU WOULD SEE IS YOU WOULD HAVE A HOME OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON THE PROPERTY, AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE A CARPORT OR SOMETHING, UM, WITH THAT, THAT, THAT GOES ALONG WITH THAT. SO THERE'S A BIT OF HISTORY HERE, SO I'LL KIND OF GO THROUGH THAT HERE. UM, SO THE CARPORT ITSELF, UM, WAS CONSTRUCTED. UM, IT WAS CONSTRUCTED SOMETIME IN 2022. UM, OUR AERIAL IMAGERY, THERE'S A BIT OF A GAP, SO WE, WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHEN IT WAS CONSTRUCTED. UM, SO THIS IS AN ALREADY EXISTING, UH, STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY. UM, OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTICED IT, UM, AND BEGAN, UM, ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS WITH THEM. UM, THE APPLICANT THEN, UM, SUBMITTED A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE CARPORT. UM, AND WE, WE HAD TO DENY IT BECAUSE IT DID NOT MEET OUR CODE, WHICH OUR CODE REQUIRES THAT YOU HAVE, IN ORDER TO HAVE AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PRINCIPAL, UM, STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY. UM, THE CODE THOUGH DOES HAVE WAS UPDATED IN APPROXIMATELY 2015, UM, TO ALLOW FOR, UM, THIS AVENUE FOR RELIEF, UM, AND PROPERTIES THAT ARE ZONED. UM, AT THE TIME IT WOULD'VE BEEN, UM, OUR ER, OUR, I'M SORRY, OUR RE ZONE, OUR RESIDENTIAL ESTATE ZONE, OR ON OUR SF ONE ZONE, WHICH WOULD BE PARCEL, UH, PROPERTIES OF A QUARTER OF AN ACRE OR MORE. UM, SO WHAT YOU SEE HERE, HERE'S A PICTURE OF WHAT THE CARPORT ACTUALLY WAS. AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S, IT, IT IS ALREADY CONSTRUCTED, UM, CONSTRUCTIVE OF, UH, A VERY SUBSTANTIAL MATERIAL. UM, BUT HERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ABOUT IT. AS I MENTIONED, THE CARPORT WAS CONSTRUCTED SOMETIME IN EARLY 2022. THEY DID HAVE AN RV THAT WAS PARKED AND OCCUPIED UNDER THE CARPORT IN APPROXIMATELY AUGUST OF 2022. UM, THAT WAS ANOTHER CODE ISSUE THAT, UM, WE WERE WORKING, WE WORKED WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER ON, UM, THEY DID REMOVE, UM, THE RV FROM THE SITE SOMETIME BETWEEN APRIL AND AUGUST OF THIS YEAR. UM, SO THEY'RE NO LONGER, UM, RESIDING WITHIN THAT, THAT RV. UM, THE APPLICANT DID SUBMIT PLANS FOR THE CARPORT BACK IN JANUARY, 2023. AS I MENTIONED, WE WERE UNABLE TO APPROVE IT BECAUSE, UM, IT, IT DID NOT COMPLY WITH OUR ORDINANCES. THE APPLICANT THOUGH, HAS ALSO SUBMITTED PLANS TO CONSTRUCT A HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY. THEY CAN SUBMITTED THOSE PLANS IN JUNE OF 2023. THEY HAD A BIT OF A STANDSTILL RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF INTEREST RATES, UH, INCREASING CONSTRUCTION COSTS, THINGS LIKE THAT. UM, SO, UM, THE PLAN ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT, IS STILL TO CONSTRUCT A, A, A, UM, HOME ON THE PROPERTY. THEY JUST ARE KIND OF WAITING TO SEE IF THE MARKET, UM, KIND OF SORTS ITSELF OUT. UM, AND THEN THE APPLICANT DID APPLY FOR THIS SUP BACK IN OCTOBER OF 2024. SO, AS I MENTIONED, THE PROPERTY, UM, IN QUESTION IS, IS, UH, APPROXIMATELY ALMOST A THREE ACRE, UH, PIECE OF PROPERTY. UM, THEY ARE ZONED IN THE ESTATE, RESIDENTIAL, UM, ZONING DISTRICT, AS WELL AS A VAST MAJORITY OF ALL THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE PROP, ON THE MAP, THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF MIXED RESIDENTIAL AS YOU GO FURTHER, UM, FURTHER SOUTH ON KILGORE ROAD. BUT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ALL LARGE LOT, UM, WELL OVER AN ACRE. MANY OF THEM CLOSER TO FIVE ACRES OR MORE. UM, SO AGAIN, THIS IS NOT AN UNREASONABLE REQUEST. STAFF BELIEVES, UM, AND, AND STAFF ALSO BELIEVES THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE LARGE LOT SIZE OF THE PROPERTY, UM, SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT YOU WOULD TYPICALLY HAVE FOR, UH, AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE BEFORE CONSTRUCTED, BEFORE A PRIMARY STRUCTURE, UM, HAVE BEEN, UH, OR WOULD BE MITIGATED 'CAUSE OF THE PROPERTY SIZE. SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT YOU WOULD SEE WOULD BE THINGS LIKE POSSIBLY PEOPLE STORING AN RV OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, LIVING WITHIN THE RV, OR, UM, THEY'VE BUILT A GARAGE AND THEY USE IT TO, TO STORE THINGS. AND IF YOU'RE NOT ON THE PROPERTY, ALWAYS, SOMETIMES IT KIND OF GETS OUTTA HAND AND BECOMES A BIT OF A A, IT CAN BECOME A BIT OF A NUISANCE TO THE NEIGHBORS BECAUSE AGAIN, OF THE LARGE SIZE OF THIS LOT, UM, STAFF DOES BELIEVE THAT IS, IT IS A UNIQUE SITUATION AND, UM, THAT THIS, UH, REQUEST IS, IS REASONABLE. UH, THE SPECIAL, I'M SORRY, THE, THE FUTURE, UH, LAND USE MAP OF THE PROPERTY, UM, ALSO CALLS FOR IT TO BE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AS WELL AS THE VAST MAJORITY OF SURROUNDING AREA. AND THEN HERE'S JUST SOME, SOME, UH, PICTURES THAT OF, OF CODE ENFORCEMENT BACK IN MAY OF 2023 AS WELL AS, UM, APRIL OF THIS YEAR. AS YOU CAN SEE, UM, AT THE TIME THAT THESE PICTURES WERE TAKEN, IT APPEARS THE RV WAS, WAS OCCUPIED. THE SLIDES ARE OUT. UM, THERE IS, THERE IS A BIT OF, OF DEBRIS AND, AND KIND OF ITEMS AROUND [00:30:01] THERE. UM, AND THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF, OF WHAT SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT CAN BE. IF YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, AN ACCESSORY USE, UH, OR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, WITHOUT THAT PRIMARY STRUCTURE, YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE THAT, THAT KIND OF CONTINUAL, UM, YOU KNOW, OVERSIGHT OR PRESENCE THAT YOU WOULD SEE ON THE PROPERTY. AND THIS ACTUALLY IS, IS, UM, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE, WE HAVE PROPOSED SOME CONDITIONS. UM, AGAIN, WE DO THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE USE, UM, WITH SOME CONDITIONS. AND THOSE CONDITIONS WOULD BE THAT THERE IS A LIMIT ON THIS, UH, SPECIAL USE PERMIT OF THREE YEARS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE. UM, THE APPLICANT COULD REQUEST AN EXTENSION OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. UM, THE SIZE OF THE CARPORT SHALL BE LIMITED, NO MORE THAN 1200 SQUARE FEET BESIDES ELECTRICITY. NO OTHER UTILITIES SHALL BE PERMITTED TO BE CONNECTED TO THE CARPORT. AGAIN, WE'RE NOT INTENDING FOR THIS TO BE AN OCCUPIED STRUCTURE. IT'S MEANT FOR MORE STORAGE OF, OF ITEMS AND, UH, PROTECTION OF OF, OF THINGS FROM THE, THE ELEMENTS. UM, BECAUSE THERE IS THAT QUESTION ABOUT THE PERMITTING, UM, WE ARE, UH, RECOMMENDING THAT ALL THE PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE CARPORT SHALL BE OBTAINED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DAY OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT. AND THAT, UM, FINALLY THE APPROVED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OR ANY RECREATIONAL VEHICLE ON THE SITE SHALL NOT BE OCCUPIED AS A RESIDENCE. SO, UM, AGAIN, THOSE ARE KIND OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WE'VE SEEN KNOWING KIND OF THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE. UM, THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I DID SPEAK WITH, UH, MR. UM, INFANTE EARLIER THIS EVENING. UM, HE HAS RECEIVED THE STAFF REPORT AND, UM, HE HAS MENTIONED TO ME THAT HE IS IN AGREEANCE WITH THE, UH, THE CONDITIONS, BUT YOU ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO DISCUSS THAT WITH HIM. THAT, UM, THAT IS ALL THAT STAFF HAS. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, UH, LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE TWO FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. UH, FIRST IS KEITH COBURN. YES, SIR. CAN YOU SPEAK IN THE MIC AND, UH, GIVE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? GOOD EVENING. UH, I'M KEITH COBURN. I, UH, MY ADDRESS IS 1224 KILGORE ROAD. UH, I'VE LIVED THERE FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS NOW. UH, EXPERIENCED THE FLOODING OF, UH, IKE AND, UH, LOST OUR NEIGHBOR IN THAT NEXT DOOR HOUSE THERE THAT WAS ON THIS PROPERTY DUE TO THE FLOOD. IT WAS TOTALLY WIPED OUT. SUBSEQUENTLY, UH, ANOTHER PERSON HAD BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, BUILT UP SOME AREA, UH, THAT HE COULD CONSTRUCT A HOUSE ABOVE THE FLOODPLAIN. UH, THAT WAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO. AND, UH, AND HE SOLD IT TO OUR, UH, PRESENT. UH, A FRIEND, JOEL INFANTE. HE'S BEEN WORKING TO TRY AND DEVELOP, GET THIS PROPERTY WHERE HE COULD, UH, YOU KNOW, BUILD WHAT HE WANTED ON THAT. AND AS Y'ALL KNOW, AROUND KILGORE ROAD WE'RE, WE'VE GOT A FEW NEWER PROPERTIES, BUT MOST OF 'EM ARE LARGE, UH, AND HAVE BEEN FOR MANY YEARS. AND, UH, GENERALLY WELL TAKEN CARE OF IN, UH, SOME OF MY EXPERIENCE WITH JOEL AS A, UH, FUTURE NEIGHBOR IS THAT HE'S IN TIMES WHEN I'VE BEEN ILL AND NOT ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF MY SIX ACRES. UH, JOEL WILL COME OVER AND DO IT FOR ME. I DON'T EVEN HAVE TO ASK HIM. UH, WE SHARE AREAS OUT FRONT WHERE WE TAKE, YOU KNOW, DEBRIS OF LIMBS AND WHATNOT, WHICH YOU GET A LOT OF IN SIX ACRES, OR IN HIS CASE, THREE ACRES. AND HE'S JUST BEEN AN EXCELLENT NEIGHBOR IN THAT REGARD. UH, SO I'M IN SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. UH, AND I'M OPTIMISTIC THAT HE'S GONNA BE A GOOD ADD TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND, AND AGAIN, THE PROPERTIES, AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, CHAMBERS COUNTY ON THE OTHER SIDE. THINGS ARE KIND OF WILD WEST OVER THERE. IT'S SO NICE TO HAVE PEOPLE THAT STILL RESPECT THE WATERFRONT. AND, UH, I JUST THINK IT'D BE AN EXCELLENT THING IF WE CAN IN SOME WAY FACILITATE THIS, UH, FOR MR. INFANTE. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU MR. COOPER. ALRIGHT. AND THEN, UH, JOEL INFANTE, YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. UH, MY NAME IS JOEL INFANTE, 1112 KILGORE ROAD. I APPRECIATE THE WORK MR. COBURN. UM, THE SITUATION WITH THE RV BEING THERE, I WAS TRYING TO SELL MY HOUSE AND MY PARTNER, UH, IT ALSO SOLD HER PLACE. SO WE WERE JUST STAYING THERE UNTIL WE FIND THE INTERIM OF WHERE TO MOVE NEXT. UM, SINCE THEN WITH COVID, UH, AND THE PRICES OF EVERYTHING GONE UP, UH, PUT A LOT OF STRESSES ON OUR LIFE. SO WE HAVE SEPARATED OUR WAYS AND I HAD TO FIND A PLACE TO LIVE. SO I BOUGHT ANOTHER PLACE ON JAMES STREET, JUST DOWN THE ROAD WITH HOPES OF STILL TRYING TO DEVELOP SOMETHING THERE ON KILGORE IN THE FUTURE. UM, I JUST GOTTA TRY TO COME UP WITH A PLAN OF TRYING TO SOMETHING, DO SOMETHING THAT I CAN, UH, MANAGE WITHIN MY BUDGET. UM, EVERYTHING HAD SKYROCKETED MORE THAN TWO, TWO TIMES MY BUDGET ALLOWED BACK IN 2022. AND, UM, AND THAT WAS WITH FOUR DIFFERENT, UM, BUILDERS AND, UH, IT WAS, IT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER THAT I COULDN'T EVEN FATHOM TO TRY TO, UH, MAKE, UH, MAKE WORK. SO IN THE PRE, IN THE, IN THE CURRENT TIME, I'M, I'M LIVING ON EAST JAMES AND I DO [00:35:01] PLAN ON WORKING SOMETHING TO GET ONTO THE PROPERTY, 1112 KGO. UM, BUT MY FULL INTENT WAS TO BUILD AND TO GET OUT OF THE SITUATION WITH THE CARPORT OF THE RV. UM, SO I COULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH A, A PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND THEN THE RV AS A SECONDARY. SO MY TIME HERE WAS JUST TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT Y'ALL MAY HAVE AND, UM, MAKE MORE PRESENCE. ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? WERE Y'ALL, WAS ANYBODY LIVING IN THE RV? THE RV'S NOT THERE. I MOVED IT I KNOW BEFORE THEN, BEFORE YOU MOVED IT IN, IN BETWEEN, UH, WE WERE TRYING TO FIND A PLACE TO STAY, UM, FROM, BUT IT WAS, UH, USING THE NEIGHBOR'S EXTENSION CORD. AND UH, DO YOU, I SEE YOU HAVE A DOCK THERE, Y'ALL, Y'ALL, Y'ALL GO OUT AND USE YOUR DOCK, FISH, DO WHATEVER YOU'RE GONNA DO OR YEAH, WE HAVE, YEAH. AND BRING KIDS OUT THERE OR WHATEVER. CORRECT. OKAY. I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. DO WE NEED TO CLEAR THE, CLOSE THE HEARING FIRST? OKAY. THANK YOU MR. ANONTE. OH, OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UH, PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED AT 5:38 PM ALRIGHT. QUESTIONS FOR THE, I THOUGHT THAT, UH, WHEN WE WERE GOING THROUGH ALL OF THE, THE REWRITING OF THE, OF THE, THE LAND USE CODE, UH, I KNOW AT LEAST IN ONE COUNCIL MEETING THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THIS TYPE OF STRUCTURE MM-HMM . AND ALLOWING FOR IT, PARTICULARLY FROM COUNCIL STERMAN IN THE PROCESS, UM, IF YOU'VE EVER OWNED ANY PROPERTY IN THAT KIND OF AN AREA, UH, AND IT IS QUITE COMMON AND, AND, AND I DIDN'T LIKE THE RESTRICTIONS ON IT BEFORE, BUT IT'S QUITE COMMON TO BUILD A STRUCTURE OUT THERE THAT YOU CAN PUT YOUR EQUIPMENT AND STORE IT AND KEEP IT WHILE YOU PREPARE TO, TO BUILD TOWARD THE PROPERTY. UM, DURING, IN THAT, IN THAT PROCESS, UM, I WAS UNDER THE UNDERSTANDING, AND MAYBE I DIDN'T, THAT, THAT WE WERE ACTUALLY HAD CHANGED THAT CODE EITHER AT THE LAST MEETING OR IT WAS BEING CHANGED HERE AT THE NEXT MEETING. IS THAT RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT. AND THAT, UM, THAT WAS ONE OF THE, THE CHANGES OF THE ORDINANCE, UH, THAT WAS ACTUALLY PROVED AT, AT COUNCIL LAST WEEK. UM, AND THAT WOULD BE, UM, TO CARRY OVER THIS PROVISION THAT'S IN THE CURRENT CODE AND CARRY IT OVER INTO THE NEW CODE. UM, ALLOWING, UM, PROPERTIES IN THE ER, THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL AS WELL AS THE SR THE SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, UM, TO OBTAIN A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THEM TO HAVE AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UM, WITHOUT A, A PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY. SO IT WOULD CARRY OVER THIS. SO YOU, THIS EXACT SAME THING WOULD BE, COULD BE DONE IN THE, SO WHY ARE WE HAVING TO VOTE ON THE APPROVAL OF THAT IF THAT CODE'S ALREADY BEEN CHANGED? BECAUSE IT STILL REQUIRES A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. AND BECAUSE THE REASONING AGAIN BEHIND IT IS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ATTENTION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS BASICALLY THAT THE IDEA IS THAT CERTAIN USES LIKE THIS, UM, MAY BE ACCEPTABLE ON CERTAIN PROPERTIES, BUT NOT ALL PROPERTIES. SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO JUST DO A BLANKET AND SAY ALL ER AND ALL SR PROPERTIES, UM, WE'RE GONNA ALLOW THEM TO DO THIS. UM, WE AGAIN WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE THAT SPECIAL USE, UM, PROCESS AGAIN SO WE CAN PLACE CERTAIN REASONABLE CONDITIONS LIKE THIS ON IT SO THAT AGAIN, IT DOES NOT BECOME A, A POTENTIAL DETRIMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. DID WE SEND OUT NOTIFICATION TO ANY OF THE OTHER RESIDENTS AROUND THAT PROPERTY? YES, WE DID. IT'S NOTED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT WE SENT, I BELIEVE IT WAS EIGHT, SEVEN OR EIGHT LETTERS TO EVERYBODY WITH A 300 FEET. ANY NEGATIVES? NO, WE DO NOT RECEIVE ANY, UH, NEGATIVE, UH, FEEDBACK. UM, WHY ARE WE NOT ALLOWING THEM TO BRING WATER INTO THAT STRUCTURE PERSONALLY, IF I HAD THAT THERE AND I'M FIXING THE BILL, SO THEN I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WATER THERE FROM SANITARY THINGS, BUT WANTED TO BRING THE KIDS OUT THERE AND COOK OUT OR CLEAN FISH OR, I MEAN, I CAN UNDERSTAND THE SANITARY, BUT I DON'T SEE WHY WE'RE RESTRICTING THEM FOR THE WATER USAGE. THAT SEEMS TO BE PRETTY, PRETTY NOMINAL AND SHOULD BE ALLOWED. UH, AGAIN, YOU'RE GONNA PUT WATER IN EVENTUALLY ANYWAY. AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S TO, TO REMOVE THAT POSSIBILITY THAT INADVERTENTLY IT GETS CONVERTED INTO SOMETHING WHERE SOMEBODY COULD, COULD RESIDE IN POTENTIALLY, WELL, WOULDN'T THAT NOT BE A CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE? IT CERTAINLY, IF YOU'RE DOING YOUR JOB, YOU WOULD KNOW THAT. I'M SURE THE NEIGHBORS WOULD LET YOU KNOW THAT. AGAIN, THOUGH, THE, THE, THE, THE, THE REASONING OF WHY WE DO THIS IS IS AGAIN, BECAUSE THESE THINGS DO HAPPEN. AND AGAIN, WITH THE STAFFING THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE A VERY LARGE CITY, WE HAVE A VERY SMALL CODE STAFF, AND SO WE DO NEED TO USE OUR ORDINANCES AS TOOLS AS WELL, UM, TO PREVENT, UH, THESE CERTAIN THINGS FROM HAPPENING. I, I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH AN RV BEING STORED AT THE SITE AS LONG AS THEY'RE NOT LIVING IN, AS LONG AS THEY'RE NOT LIVING IN THAT MM-HMM . UH, AND THAT IS RATHER [00:40:01] THAN HAVING TO PAY $300 A MONTH TO GO STORE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE, AND IT'S NOT UNCOMMON THAT WHEN YOU STORE AN RV THAT YOU OPEN THE SIDES ON IT FOR AIR VENTILATION TO KEEP MOW FROM APPEARING INSIDE THOSE RVS. NOW, I KNOW SOMEBODY WAS LIVING IN IT, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT, THAT THEY SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GO THERE. AND WHY ARE WE, AND NOBODY'S SAYING THAT YOU COULDN'T DO THAT. WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS YOU CAN'T OCCUPY IT. YOU COULD NOT LIVE. YEAH, I AND BUT HERE WHAT YOU'RE RECOMMEND AND, AND OH, YOU SAID THAT NOT OCCUPY, YOU SAY COULD PUT IT THERE, BUT HE CAN'T BE OCCUPIED. CORRECT. OKAY. YES. SO WHY ARE WE GIVING THEM A THREE YEAR RESTRICTION? AGAIN, THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A, A, A TEMPORARY STATUS. THE, THE INTENT AGAIN IS THAT THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PERMANENT. THE INTENT IS THAT THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE A PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE ON THE SITE AT SOME POINT. AND SO THREE YEARS IS REASONABLE AND WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY OF AN EXTENSION, UM, WHERE THEY CAN REQUEST AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE THIS BODY. IT'S JUST A SIMPLE REQUEST THAT THEY NEED TO MAKE TO THE DIRECTOR. THE CODE SAYS THERE HAS TO BE ULTIMATELY A, A, A PERMANENT STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY BEFORE THE TEMPORARY ONE CAN BE BUILT, CORRECT? THAT'S WHAT THE CODE CURRENTLY SAYS, CORRECT? YEP. AND, AND WE WANNA REMIND YOU TOO, THAT AS PART OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, THE CONDITIONS ARE, THESE ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING. WE BELIEVE THAT THESE ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT WILL, UM, ALLOW THE CITY TO, YOU KNOW, KEEP A GOOD EYE ON IT, MAKE SURE THAT THAT, UM, THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DOING WHAT HE SAID HE WOULD DO, AND, AND WE'RE ABLE TO, TO, UM, TO WORK WITHIN THOSE THAT AS WELL. SO IF YOU, IF YOU AS A BOARD DECIDE THAT THERE ARE ANY OF THESE CONDITIONS YOU THINK ARE TOO MUCH OR YOU THINK WE MISSED SOMETHING, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO AMEND THOSE CONDITIONS AS WELL. WE JUST ASK THAT WHEN A MOTION IS MADE, MAKE SURE THAT THOSE CONDITIONS ARE LISTED OUT. THE SECOND PIECE OF THIS TOO IS REMEMBER THAT AS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, THIS WILL GO TO CITY COUNCIL TONIGHT, WHAT YOU WILL DO IS MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND AN ADVISORY, UH, CAPACITY TO CITY COUNCIL. SO NEXT MONTH THIS WOULD GO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL. YEAH, I UNDERSTAND IT'S THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, THAT'S WHY I'M QUESTIONING SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS. UM, ARE YOU CONCERNED THAT THE STRUCTURE MAY NOT MEET PERMITS IF THIS IS APPROVED? UH, IT ABSOLUTELY WILL NEED PERMITS IF IT'S, IF IT'S APPROVED. ARE YOU, IS THERE ANY CONCERN THAT THEY WON'T MEET THE PERMITS, THAT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO ADDITIONAL WORK? YOU DON'T KNOW. WE, WE DON'T KNOW BECAUSE AGAIN, WE HAVEN'T, WE HAVEN'T REVIEWED THE PERMIT BECAUSE IT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED. SO, UM, AT THE, IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WILL NEED TO, UM, CHANGE BECAUSE OF, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MEET CODE, WE'LL ADDRESS THAT THROUGH THE PERMIT ITSELF AND THAT'LL, THAT'LL HAPPEN. I CAN SEE WHERE THERE'D BE A FLOOD ZONE. MIGHT BE A FLOOD ZONE ISSUE WITH IT. YES. BUT IT'S OPEN, SO, YEAH. UM, SO IS THE THREE, THE THREE YEARS IS NOT CODE, THREE YEARS IS A STAFF RECOMMENDATION, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY EXPENSIVE TO BUILD RIGHT NOW, PARTICULARLY ON THAT PROPERTY. I THINK AN ESTIMATE I HEARD OUT THERE WAS A MILLION DOLLARS EXACTLY. TO BUILD. SO, AND THE MARKET COME DOWN. YEP. UH, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO REMOVE THE ONE YEAR, THE THREE YEAR RESTRICTION AND TO REMOVE, UH, TO AT LEAST ALLOW WATER ON THE PROPERTY. UM, SO AS THEY'RE CURRENTLY USING IT OUT THERE RIGHT NOW, THAT, YOU KNOW, AND I WOULD, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO MAKE A MOTION THAT, THAT, UH, BUT I'LL LET, LET, I'LL LET IT OPEN FOR OTHER DISCUSSION. UM, I I I AGREE WITH YOU. CAN YOU BELIEVE IT? WE AGREE. I I KNOW , MY HEART'S STILL POUNDING . I AGREE AS WELL. UM, AND, AND I WOULD, I WOULD EVEN GO FURTHER BECAUSE A LOT OF FOLKS AFTER COVID, THE JOB SITUATION CHANGED AND LIVING SITUATIONS HAVE CHANGED. AND IF YOU HAVE A THREE ACRE PROPERTY AND YOU HAVE A RV THAT YOU COULD ACTUALLY LIVE IN AND YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD ON YOUR PROPERTY, I APPRECIATE THE SUP AND WHAT IT ACCOMPLISHES ON SMALLER LOTS AND, AND, AND MORE AND NOW QUOTE UNQUOTE INNER CITY. UM, BUT ON, ON THESE LARGER LOTS, IF YOU CAN AFFORD TO PUT YOUR RV OUT THERE AND HAVE YOUR FAMILY LIVE IN IT WITH THE INTENT OF BUILDING YOUR HOME, UM, AT SOME POINT, UM, I DON'T SEE NECESSARILY WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT. SO THE IDEA OF HAVING WATER WOULD BE GOOD. UM, NOT EVERYONE CAN AFFORD TO OWN A PROPERTY AND PAY THE MORTGAGE ON THE LAND AND LIVE SOMEWHERE ELSE AND BUILD A HOUSE. NOT EVERYONE CAN, CAN CAN MEET THAT, THAT FINANCIAL STANDARD. SO AN RV, UM, DOESN'T HURT ANYTHING I DON'T THINK ON A PROPERTY THIS LARGE. IT'S ALL THE WAY IN THE BACK. SO, UH, THAT, THAT, THAT'S MY SUGGESTION IS TO ALLOW IT, UM, TO BE LIVED IN, NOT RENT IT OUT TO, TO SOMEONE ELSE, BUT BY THE FAMILY THAT'S BUILDING A HOUSE. I, I, I CERTAINLY HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. COMMISSIONER WINFREY, UH, THE [00:45:01] ONE THING I WILL CAUTION YOU IS THAT IF WE GO DOWN THAT ROAD AND ALLOW SOMEBODY TO LIVE, WE, WE CAN'T DO THAT WITH THIS, WITH THIS VEHICLE OF, WE CAN'T DO IT WITH AN SUP. UM, WE WOULD NEED TO CHANGE THE CODE, UM, BECAUSE THERE IS A STRICT LIMITATION ALREADY IN OUR CODE THAT SAYS YOU CANNOT LIVE IN AN RV OUTSIDE OF AN RV PARK. SO WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE AN ENTIRE OVERHAUL OF A CODE CHANGE. WE CANNOT DO IT JUST FOR A SINGLE PROPERTY IN THIS, THIS INSTANCE. CAN WE DO DOT, DOT DOT UNLESS YOU'RE BUILDING YOUR PRIMARY RESIDENCE? I, I KNOW AND I DON'T. IT'S SOMETHING STAFF WOULD NEED TO STUDY. YEAH. OKAY, GREAT. SO I'M, I'M LIKE TO MIRROR WHAT YOU SAID ON THAT, BUT WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, YOU COULD ALLOW THAT CORRECT. AGAIN, IT WOULDN'T, WE WOULD NEED TO AMEND THE CODE TO ALLOW IT. WE COULD NOT DO THAT THIS EVENING. WE WOULD NEED TO, TO DO A CODE AMENDMENT TO AMEND OUR, OUR RV, UH, CODE, WHICH IS CHAPTER 58 OF CITY CODE, AND THEN ALSO PLACE SOMETHING IN OUR UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT WOULD ALLOW IT WITH AN SUP. IT'S SOMETHING WE CERTAINLY CAN LOOK AT, BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN DO TONIGHT. SO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S CLEAR. WE CAN'T BYPASS, UM, RESTRICTIONS WITH THIS. WHAT THE SUP ALLOWS FOR IS TO BUILD THE STRUCTURE. IT DOESN'T ALLOW YOU TO LIKE THAT. THAT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PIECE OF THE CODE. THERE IS SOME THAT'S IN ZONING THAT, THAT DEALS WITH THAT, BUT AS RYAN MENTIONED, THERE'S ANOTHER PIECE OF CITY CODE THAT DEALS WITH THAT. THIS SUP DOES NOT HAVE THE, THE ABILITY TO BYPASS THOSE, THOSE REGULATIONS. SO, SO NO, WE CAN'T DO THAT. MY MY OTHER QUESTION IS, I THOUGHT, AND, AND I KNOW THE DIFFERENT SPECIAL PERMITS, SOMETIMES I CAN GET A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THEM, BUT I THOUGHT WE TOOK AWAY WHERE THERE WERE TIME LIMITS ON SPECIAL USE PERMITS. NOW I DO UNDERSTAND WHY Y'ALL DO WANT ONE, BUT THERE USED TO BE A TIME LIMIT ON 'EM. CORRECT. LIKE TWO YEARS OR SOMETHING. AND THEN WE TOOK THAT AWAY. AND SO FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, WE'RE SAYING, LET'S PUT IT BACK FOR THREE BECAUSE WE HOPE THAT WE WANT IT. I MEAN, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT PROPERTY AND WHEN YOU SPOKE OF IT ORIGINALLY, BEFORE HE EVEN SAID IT, I KNEW THIS HAD TO HAVE BEEN FLOODING FROM IKE, YOU KNOW, AND, AND WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THEM DID LOSE THEIR HOMES. AND I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT STILL HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO REBUILD AND MIGHT NOT EVER BE ABLE TO REBUILD. AND, AND I HOPE THAT YOU CAN BUILD A HOME IN THREE YEARS. I REALLY DO, BUT I'M NOT OKAY WITH PUTTING A TIME LIMIT ON THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IS WHAT IN, IN ANY SITUATION. AND SO I I WITH YOU THAT THE RESTRICTIONS THAT YOU SAID OR THAT YOU WOULD LIKE LIFTED WITH THE ALLOWING UTILITIES AND ALLOWING, UM, OR REMOVING THE, THE TIME LIMIT ON IT. THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I WILL SUPPORT THIS. YEAH. I DON'T CARE IF YOU TOOK FIVE YEARS TO BUILD A HOUSE OUT THERE. IF YOU'RE ENJOYING A PROPERTY AND YOU'RE MOWING IT AND YOU'RE MAINTAINING IT AND THERE'S PRESENCE OUT THERE AND YOUR NEIGHBOR DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT, JUST NOT SURE WHY WE'RE PUTTING, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE SOMETIMES WE GET OVERBURDENED WITH PROPERTY OWNERS ON THE THINGS THEY WANT TO DO. AND IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT RVS COME VISIT MY HOUSE TOMORROW, LOOK ACROSS THE STREET FOR THE ONE THAT THEY'VE BEEN LIVING IN THAT BACKYARD IN FOR NOW FOR FIVE YEARS, THE COUNCIL KNOWS ABOUT. SO LET'S, I THINK, UM, WE CAN ANSWER, UH, COMMISSIONER EK'S QUESTION ABOUT THE, THE TIME, UH, LIMIT ISSUE, UM, SUVS ON CERTAIN OTHER THINGS. UM, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS, UM, THERE IS A TWO YEAR LIMITATION ON, I BELIEVE THERE WAS A TWO YEAR LIMITATION ON THIS SUVS THAT DID NOT GET REMOVED. YOU'RE THINKING OF THE PUDS. OKAY. SO THAT, THAT DID GET REMOVED. SOS THAT TWO YEAR, UM, LIMITATION DID NOT GET REMOVED FOR THIS ONE, WE'RE ACTUALLY RECOMMENDING THAT WE GIVE THEM ANOTHER YEAR ON TOP OF THAT AND POSSIBLY ANOTHER YEAR IF THEY COME IN AND REQUEST THE EXTENSION BECAUSE OF WHAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A TEMPORARY SITUATION. AND THAT, THAT IS THE WHOLE REASON BEHIND IT. IT'S NOT TO BE ONEROUS OR, OR, OR OPPRESSIVE TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS. IT'S TO TRY AND MAKE SURE THAT WHAT IS, AGAIN, THEY COME IN AND MAKE THIS REQUEST. THIS IS A SPECIAL THING. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE JUST SAY, OKAY, EVERYBODY CAN DO IT. SO IN RETURN, WHAT WE ASK IS, OKAY, HOW ARE, HOW ARE YOU GONNA GET THIS DONE? WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO NEXT? AND THIS ALLOWS US TO KIND OF HOLD THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE ON THAT. IF THEY WERE TO COME BACK IN AFTER THREE YEARS, REQUEST THE EXTENSION, WE GIVE 'EM THE EXTENSION, THERE'S PROBABLY NO, UNLESS THERE'S UM, UNLESS THERE'S CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES GOING ON AT THE TIME, THE EXTENSION WOULD PROBABLY BE ISSUED. THEN THEY COME BACK IN AT ANOTHER YEAR AND SAY, I'M STILL HAVING ISSUES. THEY COULD ALWAYS COME BACK BEFORE THIS BOARD AND SAY, LOOK, I'D LIKE TO RENEW THIS FOR, YOU KNOW, AND THEN WE, WE [00:50:01] REEVALUATE AT THAT TIME. A LOT OF THINGS CAN HAPPEN IN FOUR YEARS. UM, THE MARKET COULD CHANGE COMPLETELY. UM, THAT BAYTOWN COULD BE UNDERWATER. WHO KNOWS? UM, SO DON'T SAY THAT. SAY THAT. I'M NOT WISHING IT UPON US SAYING NOT EVEN FUNNY. THAT'S A PROBABLY WE WOULD AND, AND I JUST, I'M, I'M NOT A FAN OF IT. I MEAN, NOT A PROBABLY. IT JUST, I DON'T LIKE IT. SO WHAT'S THE LONGEST AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WE CAN APPROVE THIS FAR DOWN? CAN WE TELL 'EM, CAN WE APPROVE FIVE YEARS BEFORE THEY COME BACK? YOU, YOU COULD APPROVE AS LONG AS YOU WANT IT. AGAIN, THE INTENT, THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE TEMPORARY STATE. THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE WHERE THERE IS THIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON THE, ON THE, ON THE PROPERTY FOR FOREVER AND EVER AND EVER. THE INTENT IS THAT THE PROPERTY GETS USED FOR WHAT'S IT ATTENDED FOR, WHICH IS A RESIDENTIAL USE. SO NICK, YEAH. YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN A MARKET THAT'S FIXED TO CHANGE PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY GIVEN THE ELECTION THAT OCCURRED AND THE, I MEAN, IT'S GONNA CHANGE ONE MORE BEFORE WE WALK AWAY. SO IF THIS PROPERTY GETS SOLD, IF HE SELLS THIS PROPERTY BEFORE THIS TIME PERIOD, DOES THE SUP STAY IN EFFECT OR DOES IT REVERT BACK? U PS RUN WITH THE LAND, I BELIEVE. IS THAT CORRECT? SO YEAH, THEY DO, THEY WOULD RUN THEM WITH THE LAND. SO ANY OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD BE ON THIS WOULD, WOULD CARRY OVER TO THE NEW OWNER. THIS WOULD, BECAUSE THERE'S A STRUCTURE INVOLVED, WE WOULDN'T, WE WOULDN'T IMAGINE A NEW OWNER WOULD COME IN TO JUST TO TEAR DOWN THAT STRUCTURE. THAT THAT WOULDN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE. AND THE, OUR CITY ENGINEER HAS A COUPLE COMMENTS ABOUT THE FLOOD PLAIN. CAN I HAVE JUST A QUESTION? SO LOOKING AT THAT PICTURE, THAT DRIVEWAY RELATIVELY OLD, IT LOOKS LIKE THE STRUCTURE WAS, MAYBE THERE WAS, IS IT NEW? NO, NO. BEEN, NO. THERE WAS A HOUSE ON THAT PROPERTY. YEAH, THAT WAS, UM, DEMOLISHED AFTER IKE, I BELIEVE, 2008, 2009. 2009. I BELIEVE IT WAS 2009. SO THAT, THAT STRUCTURE MADE IT THROUGH THE SEVERAL HURRICANES. THIS MY UNDERSTANDING AND, AND THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN CORRECT ME, BUT I BELIEVE THAT FROM OUR AERIAL IMAGERY, THIS CARPORT WAS BUILT SOMETIME BETWEEN 2020 AND 2022. SO IT IS, IT IS APPROXIMATELY, UH, THREE TO FIVE YEARS OLD. OKAY. GOOD EVENING. ONE OF SOME OF THE, UH, INFORMATION I DID WANNA PROVIDE Y'ALL WAS, UM, SINCE THIS DEVELOPMENT IS WITHIN, WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN, THERE ARE SOME REQUIREMENTS WITH THE FLOODPLAIN THAT ARE APPLICABLE. APPLICABLE. IF IT'S A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE, LET'S SAY AN RV, THE MAXIMUM DURATION IS 180 DAYS. UM, AND UH, THE OTHER OPTION IS THAT THEY HAVE AROSE ALREADY, BUT THERE ARE REGULATIONS IN CHAPTER ONE 10 THAT EVEN IF Y'ALL WERE TO SAY, HEY, WE WANT TO GRANT A LONGER TIME PERIOD OR ALLOW 'EM TO BE A PERMANENT STRUCTURE, THAT WILL STILL BE APPLICABLE. UM, I JUST WANTED Y'ALL TO BE AWARE OF IT THAT WAY. LET'S SAY WHICHEVER DECISION Y'ALL TAKE, AND IT'S KIND OF LIKE OUT IN THE OPEN AND EVERYTHING, I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND IT'S NOT A SURPRISE DOWN, YOU KNOW, ON THE LINE WHERE WE SAY, HEY, THIS ALLOWED FOR THAT. BUT BY THE WAY, THERE'S STILL CHAPTER ONE 10. SO, SO WHAT DOES CHAPTER 10 NOT ALLOW IT TO DO? MM-HMM . WHAT DOES CHAPTER 10 NOT ALLOW IT TO HAPPEN? UM, IF IT'S A RV, IT HAS TO BE EITHER ROAD READY. THE LIMITATIONS ARE 180 DAYS, UH, BASED ON THE LOCATION. AND I THINK IT HAS TO DO WITH THE IDEA THAT IF, IF FLOODS COULD DAMAGE OTHER STRUCTURE, UM, ANYBODY ELSE THAT'S BUILT THERE THAT COULD ACTUALLY BECOME VOYANT AND HIT OTHER THINGS. YOU CAN MAKE IT PERMANENT IF YOU WANNA MAKE IT PERMANENT, IN WHICH CASE YOU WANT TO ELEVATE IT. BUT LET'S SAY ONCE YOU START MAKING WATER CONNECTIONS TO IT THAT IT DOES BECOME A MORE OF A PERMANENT STRUCTURE, THEN SOME OF THOSE THINGS START TO APPLY. SO WHAT WOULD STOP THEM FROM BRINGING IT IN AND OUT FOR THE WEEKENDS IF THEY'RE OUT THERE WORKING? OH, THAT WOULD BE, LIKE, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S ALLOWED. 'CAUSE IT WOULD STILL BE WITHIN THAT 180 DAYS. AND AS LONG AS IT'S ROAD READY THAT YOU CAN GET IT, MOVE IT AROUND, THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED. UM, I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO MENTION IT THAT WAY. IF Y'ALL SAY, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL WERE TALKING ABOUT ALLOWING IT TO BE A PERMANENT STRUCTURE, IF IT DOES BECOME A PERMANENT STRUCTURE, IT WOULD PROBABLY WILL NOT BE ALLOWED AT THAT ELEVATION. HE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO ELEVATE IT AND DO OTHER THINGS, ANCHOR IT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOESN'T FALL OVER AND DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT IT CAN TELL DOES SO MOVING EVERY FIVE, AND TYPICALLY IT ENDS UP EITHER ONE WHERE THEY SAY IT'S GONNA BE A PERMANENT STRUCTURE OR A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE THAT ARE MOVING, LET'S SAY CAMPING, MOVING AROUND. UM, THE OTHER TYPE OF PEOPLE THAT I'VE ALSO SEEN IS, UH, PEOPLE THAT WORK A SHUTDOWN WHERE THEY'RE GONNA BE HERE A MONTH OR TWO AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA MOVE SOMEWHERE ELSE RATHER THAN RENTING AN APARTMENT. THAT'S WHAT THEY'LL DO. SO IS THAT, IS THAT ONE 10 A FLOOD? A COUNTY REQUIREMENT? IT'S A CITY REQUIREMENT. CHAPTER ONE 10 IS A CITY ORDINANCE. IT'S A SPECIFIC, UH, ORDINANCE. IT DEALS WITH FLOODS AND IT'S, IT'S, [00:55:01] IT'S BASED ON A FEMA, FEMA, FEMA ORDINANCE, WHICH IN ORDER FOR US TO GET FLOOD INSURANCE, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE FOLLOW CERTAIN FEMA STANDARDS. WELL, THERE'S A GOTCHA AT EVERY CORNER IN THERE FOR A PROPERTY OWNER. SO MAY MAYBE I CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION HERE. UM, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. OKAY. I'D LIKE TO ASK THE PROPERTY OWNER. UM, A QUESTION PLEASE, SIR. MR. INFANTE IS, IS THREE YEARS OR FOUR YEARS ENOUGH TIME FOR YOU TO BUILD YOUR HOME? I, I'M NOT, WE DON'T OR YOU DON'T KNOW? I CAN'T FORESEE EITHER OR. I WOULD LOVE TO BUILD THERE AND THEN EITHER SELL MY OTHER HOUSE THAT I JUST BOUGHT OR GET, GIVE IT TO HAVE MY CHILDREN TAKE OVER IT. BUT, UM, THE, THIS RV IN, IN IN QUESTION IS ALREADY REMOVED OFF THE PROPERTY. IT'S AT MY HOUSE THAT I'M AT RIGHT NOW. UM, NOT BEING PROTECTED, UH, UH, BECAUSE I THOUGHT I WAS GONNA BE LIVING THERE DURING CONSTRUCTION OF MY HOUSE. I BOUGHT IT REALLY BIG FOR ME AND MY NOW EX-WIFE. SO I'M IN PLANS TO SELL THIS ONE AND EVENTUALLY IN THE FUTURE WHEN I'M ABLE TO AFFORD IT, TO BUILD A HOUSE AND MAYBE GET A SMALLER RV OKAY. FOR TRAVELING PURPOSES. BUT, UM, THIS ONE I'M NOT ENTIRELY KEEPING, YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING TO SELL IT AND MAYBE IN THE FUTURE WHEN, WHEN I CAN AFFORD ALL THESE DIFFERENT THINGS, UM, I HAD EVERY INTENTION TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD A HOUSE ON THIS PROPERTY ONLY. I WASN'T GONNA GO GET ANY OTHER INVESTMENTS, BUT I'M NOT LOOKING TO SELL THIS PROPERTY. UM, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE MY RETIREMENT HOME THERE, YOU KNOW, SO, BUT, UM, OTHER THAN THAT, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, SO I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION. THANK YOU. SO IF WE APPROVE THIS THREE YEARS, THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO MEET THAT 180 DAY MOVABLE RV AND HE COULD TAKE UP TO THREE YEARS, POSSIBLY FOUR TO BUILD HIS HOME. HE'S NOT ASKING TO PUT THE RV ON THE PRODUCT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE ALL THIS CAME FROM. AND I HAVE TO SAY, I APPRECIATE THE STAFF GOING TO THIS EXTREME TO HELP HIM, AND WE'RE QUESTIONING THINGS THAT AREN'T EVEN PROPOSED AT THIS POINT. SO WE'RE, WE'VE GONE OFF THE SUBJECT MATTER. YES, IT'S THE TIME PERIOD ON THE PROPERTY. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE R IT'S A TIME PERIOD THAT HASN'T MOTION. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE FIVE B, THE FOLLOWING CHANGES THAT ONE THAT WE CHANGE THE TIME PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS, IT IS ON HERE. AND TWO, THAT WE ALLOW WATER ON THE PROPERTY BESIDES THE ELECTRICITY. UH, AND THAT, UH, YEAH, FIVE YEARS. AND, AND THAT FIVE YEARS WOULD INCLUDE COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OTHER REGULATIONS THAT GOVERNMENT AGENCIES MAY DECIDE TO JUMP IN ON. SO THOSE TWO ARE THE CHANGES THAT I, THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND PROVE, MAKE A MOTION TO DO THAT. AND YOU'D BE OKAY WITH THE REST OF THE CONDITIONS THAT STAFF HAS PUT FORWARD? IT, IT, YEAH. WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE AN RV AND THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE LIVING IN IT. AND IF YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO MAKE SURE IT'S STRUCTURALLY APPROVED AFTER YOU, YOU APPROVE IT. I DON'T. AND THE SIZE LIMIT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE AN ISSUE AT ALL. I JUST THINK Y'ALL ALLOWED 'EM TO HAVE WATER AND WE START TO GET AWAY FROM THIS THREE YEAR LIMIT. I HOPE YOU BUILD IN THREE YEARS. GOOD LUCK. THANK YOU. THAT'S MY MOTION. ONE SECOND. SO THERE'S A, A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. ORIGINAL, THEN THERE WAS A MOTION TO AMEND. I DON'T WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL MOTION? I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS A MOTION. THERE WASN'T, THERE WAS NEVER AN ORIGINAL MOTION. MOTION. THERE NEVER BEEN A MOTION. NO. MIKE MADE THE MOTION. MINE'S THE ORIGINAL. MINE IS THE MOTION. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND WE GOT A SECOND. YEP. ALL RIGHT. YOU READY? DO YOU DISCUSSION AND THEN VOTE? WE DISCUSS IT OR RE VOTE ON IT? EITHER WAY, IT'S WHOEVER'S RUNNING THE MEETING. BUT I WOULD, I WOULD ASK FIRST, IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? THEN ASK FOR THE VOTE IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. WELL, I, I THINK WE'VE HAD MORE THAN ENOUGH DISCUSSION, BUT I COMPLETELY DISAGREE WITH ALLOWING WATER. I THINK WE ARE OPENING UP A CAN OF WORMS THAT WE DO NOT WANT TO DRIVE DOWN AND, AND BE A PART OF. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS GENTLEMAN TAKING 12 YEARS TO BUILD HIS HOUSE, IF THAT'S WHAT HE HAS TO DO. BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS, I THINK WE ARE, WE'RE OVERSTEPPING IS WHAT I THINK WITH WATER. CAN'T BUILD WITHOUT WATER. YOU CAN'T THAT YEAH. CAN YOU BUILD A HOUSE WITHOUT WATER? THAT'S THE POINT. WE DON'T WANT THIS STRUCTURE TO BECOME A HOUSE THERE. THE HOUSE, THE WATER WOULD BE ALLOWED ONCE A BUILDING PERMIT FOR HOME WOULD BE ISSUED. PERMITS ARE IN. THIS IS JUST FOR, FOR THIS, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW. THE, SO ARE WE DOING A MOTION FOR FIVE YEARS PLUS WATER? YES. THAT IS THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR. SO THAT'S WHAT NEEDS TO BE OKAY. THIS POINT. SO, SO IF YOU'RE NOT OKAY WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS, [01:00:01] THEN YOU CAN VOTE TO DENY AND THEN WHAT, UM, RICK, YOU'D WANT TO ASK FOR, UH, ANOTHER MOTION RIGHT AFTER THAT. OKAY. SO, UM, IF UNLESS IT PASSES. IF IT PASSES, THEN IT PASSES. SAY THAT AGAIN. NOW, MARTIN, UM, IF ANY OF YOU ON THE BOARD DON'T LIKE ALL OF THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED AS PART OF THE MO PART OF THE MOTION, WHICH IS THE FIVE YEARS PLUS WATER MM-HMM . CORRECT AND EVERYTHING ELSE, PLUS THE OTHER THREE FROM STAFF, PLUS WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, THEN UM, THEN YOU CAN VOTE TO DENY IF IT IS ULTIMATELY DENIED. THEN YOU CAN MAKE ANOTHER MOTION RIGHT AFTER THAT. AND I WOULD COR I WOULD AGREE WITH, WITH ONE CHANGE, YOU CAN AMEND THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE TABLE AND THEN VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO GO FORWARDS. OR YOU CAN JUST DENY THE MOTION OUTRIGHT AND THEN ASK FOR ANOTHER MOTION. SO YOU HAVE TWO OPTIONS THERE. THEN I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO GO TO FIVE YEARS AND NO WATER IS THAT, AND THEN, AND YOU AND THEN, SO THEY WOULD ASK IF THERE'S A SECOND FOR THAT AMENDMENT. IS THERE A SECOND FOR THIS AMENDMENT? I CAN SECOND THAT ALL. SO NOW VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT. SO I MADE THE MOTION. I THOUGHT I MADE THE MOTION. I HAVE TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT. HE HAS TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT. YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON IT. AND THEN IF IT FALLS, THEN YOU CAN MAKE ANOTHER MOTION WITH THAT. YEAH. WE, WE HAVE, WE HAVE TO ADDRESS COMMISSIONER BEARDS. YES. AMENDMENT FIRST. MOTION FIRST. OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION. OKAY. SO THE MOTION THEN IS WHO, WHO IS VOTING TO APPROVE FIVE YEARS PLUS THE WATER? YES. WE HAVE A MOTION. AND A SECOND. I, I THINK THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT ASKED. AM I CORRECT? SO YOU'RE BEING ASKED RIGHT NOW TO VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT ITSELF. THE AMENDMENT IS TO REMOVE THE WATER RESTRICTION FROM THE, OR THE REMOVE WATER BEING ALLOWED FROM THE MOTION. SO THAT, THAT'S WHAT'S ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO MAKE IT EASY FOR YOU? I'LL AMEND MY MOTION. OKAY. TO THERE'S, THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE TABLE NOW. SO YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON I CAN'T AMEND THE, I, I DISAGREE. ALL IN FAVOR? ROBERT'S RULES THAT THE AMENDMENT, I MADE THE MOTION. I HAVE TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT. YES. OR NOT APPROVE IT. THEN IT'S VOTED ON IT. BUT NEVERTHELESS, GO AHEAD. APPROVE. COMMISSIONER. I MADE IT. WE'RE GOING TO, WE'RE GONNA DEFER TO OUR, UM, LEGAL ON THIS ONE. THAT'S FINE. I THINK YOU VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT AND THEN YOU VOTE AND THEN DEPEND ON HOW IT GOES. YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION. OKAY. SO A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT. IT'S BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. MADE AND SECONDED. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR? ALL IN FAVOR. WHO'S ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT? A AYE, AYE. AYE. OKAY. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. OKAY, SO THAT'S A'S PASSED. SO NOW THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS, THERE. IS MIKE'S RIGHT? IT WAS MIKE'S. NO, THAT WAS THE AMENDMENT. WE'RE DONE. NO, YOU ALL ACCEPTED THE AMENDMENT. THAT'S YOUR ACTION ON THAT ITEM. OKAY. OKAY, GOOD. OKAY, SO ITEM IS APPROVED. UH, ALL, ALL, UM, ALL OPPOSED? ANY OPPOSED? A AYE. OKAY, SO YOU HAVE, UH, FIVE TO THREE. FOUR WITH THE, WITH, WITH THE CONDITIONS OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS GOOD FOR FIVE YEARS. SI UH, LET'S SEE. SIZE OF THE CARPORT IS 1200 FEET. UM, BESIDES ELECTRICITY, NO OTHER UTILITIES PERMITTED. ALL PERMITS REQUIRED, UH, SHALL BE OBTAINED WITHIN 60 DAYS AND THE APPROVED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OR RV ON THE SITE WOULD NOT BE OCCUPIED AS A RESIDENCE. THAT WAS WHAT WAS WHAT WE JUST APPROVED. THAT WAS, OKAY. THAT'S, THAT'S FOR THE RECORD. OKAY. AND THAT WAS BEFORE CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 23RD FOR THOSE CONDITIONS WILL GO WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL IN JANUARY. OKAY. SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION GUYS. . OKAY. THANK YOU RYAN. ALRIGHT, RYAN, CAN YOU, UH, ADVANCE THAT FOR ME? AND THERE WE GO. UM, OKAY. I HAD A NUMBER SIX [a. Receive a report from the Planning Director.] DIRECTORS REPORT. UH, THANK YOU. UM, OKAY, SO WE DID HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF ACTION AT CITY COUNCIL SINCE YOUR LAST MEETING. UM, YOUR LAST MEETING IN NOVEMBER, THERE WAS A CITY COUNCIL MEETING, UH, RIGHT AFTERWARDS. IN FACT, THAT NIGHT, UM, 6 0 2 DANINA, UH, WAS A LITTLE OVER HALF AN ACRE. IT WAS A REZONE FROM, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO MIXED RESIDENTIAL THAT WAS APPROVED BY COUNSEL. UH, 65 11, UH, NORTH STATE HIGHWAY 1 46, WHICH IS PALM ROYAL ESTATES. IT'S A LITTLE OVER FOUR ACRES. WAS REZONED FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MIXED RESIDENCE RESIDENTIAL THAT WAS AT PEACE UP FRONT, ALONG WITH A STRIP ALONG THE SOUTHERN, UH, PORTION OF THAT THAT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL. UH, THEN NINE 50 STATE HIGHWAY 1 46 BUSINESS. UM, THAT WAS THE STONE MOUNT. THAT WAS THE, UM, THE WAREHOUSE THAT WAS KIND OF BETWEEN 99 [01:05:01] AND WAS ENDED UP BEING SOUTH MAINE OR OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ALEXANDER THERE. RIGHT. UM, THAT REQUEST WAS TO REZONE TO A PUD. UM, THAT ACTUALLY WAS NOT DENIED THAT NIGHT. THEY, THEY WITHDREW IT AT THE LAST SECOND. UM, THEY MIGHT BE BACK WITH A DIFFERENT, UM, PROPOSAL. WE'LL KIND OF SEE WHERE THAT GOES. THEY WITHDREW IT BECAUSE, UH, QUITE FRANKLY, EVERYBODY SAW IT NOT GETTING APPROVED AND THERE IS A TIME LIMIT IF YOU GET, UH, DENIED AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO BE SUBJECT TO THAT TIME LIMIT. SO WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING BACK FROM THEM, UM, THAT I KNOW OF AS OF RIGHT NOW. SO WE'LL SEE IF THEY COME BACK WITH ANOTHER PROPOSAL. UH, 58 14 NORTH STATEWAY HIGHWAY 1 46. THIS WAS 3.8 ACRES, UM, FROM PUD TO MIXED RESIDENTIAL. THIS WAS THAT INDUSTRIAL PUD AT 1 46 AND 1405. IT HAD THAT LITTLE STRIP ACROSS THE TOP THAT WAS APPROVED, UM, TO BASICALLY REMOVE IT FROM THE PED AND, UH, CHANGE IT TO MIXED RESIDENTIAL. UH, SO BECAUSE THEY'VE CONVEYED THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE NORTH. SO THAT'S A GOOD THING. UM, WE LIKE THAT ONE. IT WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE, UH, DEVELOPED ANYWAY. AND THEN FINALLY, UH, THE ULDC, THOSE CLEANUP AMENDMENTS TO THE NEW, UH, TO THE NEW CODE THAT YOU GUYS SAW BACK IN NOVEMBER. THOSE WERE ALSO, UH, APPROVED LAST WEEK BY CITY COUNCIL, UH, WITH NO CHANGES TO THOSE. SO THEY, THOSE WENT FORWARD EXACTLY HOW YOU GUYS SAW THEM LAST MONTH. UM, DID I MISS ANYTHING? NO. UM, WITH THAT, UH, I, I WISH YOU GUYS, UH, MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF AND, UH, WE'LL SEE YOU ALL. OH, UM, WE WILL SEE NEW APPOINTMENTS IN JANUARY FROM CITY COUNCIL FOR CERTAIN SEATS AT THE TABLE. UM, DON'T ASK ME IF YOU'RE GETTING REAPPOINTED. I HAVE NO IDEA. I HAVE NO INSIDE TRACK ON THAT AS OF TODAY. I MAY BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, BUT RIGHT NOW I HAVE NO IDEA. SO OTHER THAN THAT, THANK YOU MARTIN. IR CHRISTMAS TO YOU. ALL CLOSES MEETING SIX 10. THANK YOU. THANKS GUYS. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.