I am James Bell tonight and I'll be serving as the chair. This is the planning and zoning commission meeting for August 7th, 2025. The first matter matter of business is citizens comments. Any citizen wishing to appear before regular meeting of the planning and zoning commission regarding any matter posted on the agenda was to sign up no later than 6 pm on the day of the meeting. If anyone signed up to speak, they will have three minutes to speak. Staff will time each citizen and provide a warning when they have 30 seconds left. >> We have no speaker. Okay. The next matter of business is the approval of the minutes for the following meeting. July 10th, 2025 regular planning and zoning meeting. Is there a motion? >> Move to approve. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> All oppose, say nay. >> Motion carries, six to zero. Next up are the zone cases. First off, I will say that items 3.1, zone case number 3527, and 3.2 to 0774C are wanting to be postponed till the September 4th meeting. So we will need to take a mot that that we everybody's agreeable to that. Do we have a motion? >> Yes. Motion. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor please say I. >> I. Motion carries. So the first zone case we will hear is 3.3 zone case number 1190 D. Good evening. I am Sam Break with the planning department and this is zone case 1190D. The applicant is Ricky Plunkett for Sal Matsamudo. They are requesting a zone change from neighborhood commercial district to heavy commercial district. The property is located east of Quaker Avenue and north of 50th Street. 49 letters were sent out and we've received zero in favor and four in opposition citing reasons such as traffic noise and unsightly material stored outdoors. Here's the notification map showing the four opposed property owners. The aerial map shows restaurants to the east and west, a bank to the south, and single family residential dwellings to the north. The surrounding properties are zoned neighborhood commercial district to the west, east, and south, and lowdensity single family district to the north. The future land use map designates this area for commercial land uses. Here is a picture of the subject property as well as views to the west, east, and south. The future land use map designates this area for commercial land uses. The request conforms to this designation and would be appropriate considering the existing adjacent zoning districts and land uses. Therefore, this request is in complete conformance with the comprehensive plan principles. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and will be appropriate at the proposed location. The proposed zone change is compatible with the surrounding area and will not change the character of the existing development. The location is along 50th Street which is designated as a principal arterial street by the master thoroughfare plan 2018. Staff has no objection to this request and I can take any questions at this time. >> Is there any questions for staff at this time? >> Can you go back to the opposition now? >> Yes, sir. Thank you. Okay, we'll now open the public hearing. During the public hearing, I will call the applicant up representative to provide any additional comments. The applicant will need to clearly state their name and address for the record and briefly explain the case. After the applicant has spoken, I will ask for anyone in opposition to the item to speak. Those speaking in opposition should give their name and address and then speak to the board. We'll ask for anyone in favor to speak and those speaking in favor should give them the address and speak. After all the public comments, we'll close the public hearing and consider our deliberations. Is the applicant or here's representative here wish to speak? >> Thank you. My name is Ricky Plunkett. I'm applying for the zone change at 4322 50th Street. Um, I'm the one going to lease the building if that's if that comes up. I just don't I need it for an office and a showroom basically for my construction company. The uh block building on the west side is good for materials holding. Not planning on having any outdoor storage or anything like that. Any outdoor materials. The only thing that we would ever have out there would be maybe a a truck or trailer overnight. So that's that's the main thing. >> Does anyone else have any questions for the applicant at this time? >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Is there anyone here to speak in opposition to this request? Please come forward. Okay. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing for matter of discussions. Do we have a motion? >> Excuse me. Is there anyone else wishing to speak in favor? Okay, now we'll close the public hearing. >> Motion to approve is presented. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> Seems pretty >> cut and drive. >> Cut and drive. I mean, all that's commercial anyway. >> Change it up. >> And the objection was that they worried about outside auto repairs. He's not going to do that. So, >> so, okay. Let's go ahead and call the vote. All in favor, please say I. >> I. All oppose. Nay. Motion carries. 6 to zero. >> Next item of business is zone case number 3.4, zone case 3531. This is zone case 3531. The applicant is Quay Investments LLC. They are requesting a zone change from lowdensity single family district SF2 to Heavy Commercial District HC. The property is located west of Slide Road and north of 130th Street. Nine letters were sent out and we have received zero back. The aerial map shows a residential dwelling to the north and vacant land to the east and west. To the south is future loop 88 and vacant land. The surrounding properties are zoned auto urban commercial district to the east and south. The properties to the north and west are zoned lowdensity single family district and are currently in the process of reszoning to heavy commercial district. The future land use map designates this area for commercial land uses. Here's a picture of the subject property as well as views to the west, east, and south. The future land use map designates this area for commercial land uses. The request conforms to this designation and would be appropriate considering the existing adjacent zoning districts and land uses. Therefore, this request is in complete conformance with the comprehensive plan principles. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and will be appropriate at the proposed location. The proposed zone change is compatible with the surrounding area and will not change the character of the existing development. The location is along 130th Street Future Loop 88 which is designated as a freeway and slide road which is designated as a principal arterial street by the master thoroughfare plan 2018. The applicant herself was unable to attend tonight and was unable to locate anyone to speak on her behalf. However, she has submitted a letter to the board which has been provided to you on the dis and is requested to move forward on her request. Staff currently has no objection to this request and I can take any questions at this time. >> Are there any questions for staff at this time? Okay. We know that the applicant is not here, but we do have their letter from him, and I hope everybody has taken a chance to look over it. But we will go ahead and open the public hearing and ask if there is anyone here to speak in opposition to this request. Seeing none, ask if there's anyone else to speak in favor. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing for matter discussion. Do we have a motion? >> Move to approve. >> Second. We have a motion and a second. I think it's just cleaning up the last part from our last meeting others. So, >> nobody's going to build a house on Friday. It's all commercial anyway. >> So, okay. We'll go ahead and call the vote. All in favor, please say I. >> All oppose? Nay. Motion carries. Six to zero. >> Next item is on case 3.5. Uh case 3532. Mr. I think this is the one we'll ask you to recuse, please. It's all yours. >> All right. Good afternoon, board. I'm Hul Sevia Lobos. This is zone case 3532. The applicant is David Shepard for David Dominguez. requesting a specific use permit for a manufactured home park in low low density single family SF2. The property is located west of Chicago Avenue and north of 138th Street. 10 letters were sent out and we we received zero back in favor and two letters today in opposition that are not on the presentation but was provided to you stating that they do not like the way it looks as they believe the lot is too congested and that a zone change could impact marketability. Since the written opposition from property owners within the 200 ft notification boundary exceeds 20% of the land area, this a super majority vote of six out of seven votes will be required for the case to be approved at city council. Here is the aerial view of the property. There is a vac there is vacant manufactured homes directly to the north. To the west and east are single family residences. Directly to the south are 143 acres of open fields. and to the northeast is a property not in city limits. The opposite the opposition letter is the neighboring parcel to the left that abuts the property. The current land use map shows the properties to the north, south, east, and west are zoned SF2. The property located in the north in track 7 is currently undergoing the reszoning process from SF2 to light industrial LI. Here is a picture of the subject property as well as views to the south, west, and east. Here's some documents provided by the applicant. There are currently three manufactured homes on the property placed prior to annexation, and the applicant wants to add a fourth home, which is the reason for the specific use permit. The proposed SF2 specific use is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and will be appropriate at the proposed location. The proposed SF2 specific use is compatible with the surrounding area and will not change the character of the existing development. The specific use would allow for exist for the existing manufactured homes in the area to be replaced and would allow for new manufactured homes to be brought onto the property. The proposed resoning location will be along 138th Street and Chicago Avenue. The master thoroughfare plan 2018 designates both 138th Street and Chicago Avenue as collector streets. Collectors provide access and movement within residential, commercial, and industrial areas. Staff has no objection to the request and I could take any questions at this time. >> Any questions for staff? >> And you did say this is one that will require supermajority too as well. Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. >> We we had a case last meeting, I think, that was in a similar location, a similar request. Is that right? >> Yes, sir. It is directly north of the property. Um that lot, it's going to be home to the the elegant storage units that was reszoned to I believe it was HC. Yeah, I think we approved in some kind of light industrial or something like that. >> Okay, thank you. >> Okay, thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Okay, we'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Is the applicant or his or her representative here and like to speak? When you come forward, please state your name and address for the record. Hello, my name is David Shepard. I am here for the zone change for 5516 138th Street. I really don't know what much to say other than my grandfather over here. He has owned this land since it was county area. And so we've lived here for 20 plus years. And so I figured simply adding a house wouldn't be a big deal, honestly. So, I'm hoping all of you see the same thing that it's just a simple addition of one house. No trailer park is trying to be added to this area. It It does have bunch of trailer homes and whatnot, but I personally don't see it as one. >> Yes, sir. My address was 55168th Street. >> Yes, sir. Anybody? >> Is there anyone here in opposition to this request, >> Mr. Chairman? Anyone speaking opposition? Sorry. It's on. It's off again. >> Not my day. >> Okay. Good evening. My name is Jeff Swat. Uh, address is 8213 Alco Avenue and I represent West Texas Land Guys. Um, our issue with this is not, you know, one mobile home. Um, you know, if if the the property were to sell or, you know, you know what happens at that point. U, we have a 500 lot subdivision going in directly to the south. Excuse me. We've already bought the land. We've already put the sewer in. And so right, wrong or indifferent of what you think about manufactured homes, they do hurt the marketability. So that's that's our concern is just overall the all the money and the sewer and all the things that we've already done. You know, what does this do long term? You know, once again, our our concern isn't one mobile home. It's what happens once it's zoned and it changes what that does to our neighborhood. So, thank you. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else wishing to speak in opposition? >> I'm sorry. Can I say something else? >> Oh, okay. Is anyone else wishing to speak in favor? Come forward. Not on my game today. >> So, basically, I I get that. I do. I have no problem with the construction that's going on. I completely understand that. I have been currently trying to get this residence set up for close to a year now, I want to say. And I was trying to do a different lot, but then ended up getting declined mid construction. And now I'm over here mid construction again. And I really, it's just been a long, long headache for us really. And I it's not like it's a bad home. It's a nice double wide. It'll look good around there. I don't think it'll decrease value. Of course, I don't know much. I'm young, you know. I'm still learning life, of course, but this is my first hearing as well. You know, I'm sure y'all could tell I'm a little nervous. I'm sure everyone can. >> You're okay. Don't worry about it. >> I just I'm sorry. I do want to put a little extra input. I do appreciate y'all. >> Thank you very much. Is there anyone else wishing to speak in favor? Okay, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing for matter of discussion. Do we have a motion? >> Move to approve. >> We have a motion. Do we have a second? >> A motion and a second. >> How big is that tract again? >> Five acres. >> Five. >> So, >> and you have how many houses on it right now? >> It's just one family. So >> we've been there for over 20 years. It's been our home for over 20 years. >> We've literally lived in one trailer >> and we've just got the public parts off this is discussing us up here now. If we have questions, we will ask. >> It's currently SF2, >> correct? And so >> yes, >> you know, is there not a way to subdivide this in some way or form or fashion to create individual lots on this? The property could be subdivided, but you would still need approval. Even if it were subdivided, you would need approval of a specific use for a manufactured home subdivision. >> But to this point, if they don't add anything d non-conforming, >> they're non-conforming. The three homes were there prior to annexation. But to Drew's point, if if it was on one acre, then the concern would go away of there's going to be 15 manufactured houses on this plot. >> Yes. So, you're asking could they amend their postpone and amend the request to reduce the acreage on which they are requesting it? Because I think part of >> because it I guess the fear is is when we do the specific use and we do the change then it's there forever until it changes. >> Right. >> While their intent is just to add one, there's nobody to say that I came in and bought it next week and would want to put 40 on there. >> Correct. That's some >> Right. >> So construction is still an issue. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> So as it as it sits, how many trailers can you put on that piece of land? should get resed. >> I have not done the math, but there are certain specifications for the separation between the homes as well as the property lines. Um, definitely more than four if the specific east were approved. >> You got a ballpark, >> 20 at least. So, so if they if they withdraw and resubmit with the back half of the >> plot >> and and reszone that and leave the front half exactly like it is. >> Sure. >> They they could >> or even an area smaller than that. >> Yeah. >> Pick a section just big enough for four trailers. >> Yeah. and and and reszone that one small section or one new trailer, >> right? Yes. >> Can we ask if the applicant would be amendable to that? >> Can you come back up? >> Is that appropriate? >> Yes, y'all can ask. You can talk to him right now, but you aren't going to be able to make a decision on anything other than what the application is before you. >> You want to come back up >> today? Sure. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And give us just one second here while we're getting >> Do you'all understand what we're trying to propose? >> Uh sort of. U basically just want to like cut an acre out of the land and like give it to me kind of. >> No. What we're talking about is is cutting a small section out of it. reszoning that one small section which will allow you to put another trailer on there. >> Okay. >> It can be retained under the same ownership. >> Yeah. We're just going to reszone a smaller piece of that land. That way it limits it to the one trailer you're asking for. >> Yes, sir. >> Are you following that? Because the concern is is when we do this zoning here, if you understood what I said, if we do this zoning and we said yes and then y'all turned around and sold it, even though we're doing it with the understanding you were going to put one, that doesn't stop somebody from else from coming in and doing it. >> Yes, sir. I >> And that's, you know, that's not your intent. And so that's not really what our intent would be to do either. We want to try to work to see if there is a resolution that's aminable to anybody to get you where you want to be. >> Uh if he's okay with that, I'm okay with it's his. >> Yeah, I'm I'm >> okay. >> And so then procedurally we would need to >> postpone or withdraw. >> We're going to let council finish. >> Mr. way. How would what would be the the proper way to do this to proceed from this point? >> So, yeah. So I don't think that that I mean I don't the only action that can be taken tonight is approve disapprove as presented or they can ask for y'all to go ahead and postpone and then they can resubmit a different they can amend their application for the next meeting um back in September. I mean coming in September September. >> That's pretty much the only options that y'all have before >> you tonight. So they, you know, whatever if if they're amendable to what y'all are doing, then >> then they need >> then y'all then they need to ask for y'all to postpone it tonight. >> Otherwise, if y'all deny it, then it still goes to the council and still goes unless they withdraw it at that point in time, then I think you probably have to have another >> and this is the one anyway that's going to have to have the super majority. Correct. >> Right. >> That's correct. >> So >> So would you like to postpone? >> If that's the best option, then yes, sir. Well, >> yeah. >> So, yeah, it it's really up to you is what is what you want to do. If if they postpone it, then it looks like there might be a way to sit there and balance between the people who are in protest or in opposition and the desires of the applicant. >> And should should we do action pro or con? And it goes, you know, vote yes or no. It goes with city council and supermajority. Is there still the period after if there's a denial how long they can apply again? >> Yes, for the same for the exact same thing. They they could they could do something different, but it' be a new application, etc. >> processes. >> Yeah. So, this effectively it just delays you a month. postpone. >> We can postpone it. >> You want to postpone? >> So, do we need a motion for that? >> Motion to postpone. >> Okay. >> So, we have a request from the applicant to postpone this in a >> second. >> Yeah. Just so the records rec you're postponing it to a date certain, which is the next regular meeting of the plan commission. >> So, we have a request to postpone this case to date certain, which will be September 4th, 2025. So moving >> have a motion second. All in favor say I. I. >> All oppose. Nay. Carries. Five to zero. >> Y'all will need to get back and refile and try to carve out a little area of it for it. >> Just tell them they need to get done. >> They just need to come and get with planning staff. Okay. Thank you. >> Appreciate it. >> Okay. Okay. So, the one everybody's here for today is item 3.6, zone case number 3530. All right. Good evening. My name is Shane Spencer and this is zone case 3530. The applicant is AMD engineering for Patty Fulo and they are requesting a zone change from lowdensity single family district SF2 to medium density residential district MDR. You'll note the legal cap caption reflects their original request which was for HDR. They've since requested that be reduced to the more restrictive MDR as we are presenting today. The subject properties are located north of Erskin Street and east of Milwaukee Avenue. And we have sent a total of 156 notifications. We've received back one in favor and now we're up to actually 214 in opposition. There are several that we received uh today that are not reflected in this current version of the presentation of which uh 134 are outside the notification boundary. So, here is that notification map. We currently are at 54% of the 200 ft notification area in opposition, which as of today, as it stands today, would require a supermajority from city council. See, uh feedback from those in opposition included issues with traffic, noise, safety, access, and property value. Here's your aerial map. There are two properties in this request that are separated by that private road 1730, which serves as one one of the accesses for the neighborhood to the north. The subject property is surrounded on all sides by single family homes. Here's your zoning map. It designates the surrounding area and the subject property for SF2. And here's the future land use map, which designates the subject property for lowdensity residential land uses. And here are photos of the subject and surrounding properties. And here's an exhibit provided by the applicant. The future land use map designates this area for residential lowdensity land uses. Although the proposed zone change to MDR is not fully consistent with this designation, it is in moderate conformance and will provide a buffer between Erskin Street and the lowdensity residential to the north. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance. The location of MDR zoning can serve as a buffer for single family residential uses located further north of Erskin Street and the proposed zone changes compatible with the surrounding area will not change the character of the existing development. The proposed resoning location is along Erskin Street. The master thoroughfare plan 2018 designates Erskin Street as a principal arterial. Staff has no objection to this request and I'd be pleased to answer any questions you may have. >> Is there any questions for staff at this time? >> What was the slide that the applicant provided? >> There we go. Okay. Thank you. Anything else from Mr. Spencer? Okay. Thank you. Is the applicant or his or her representative? If you'll please state your name and address for the record, Mr. Stevens. >> Good evening, commission. My name is Will Stevens. I'm with AMD Engineering at 651568 Street. Um, go back to this graphic. And so Shane kind of mentioned it. I'm going to briefly mention it again. Um, when Miss Fruo engaged us to do this zone change, um, the original plan was to do HDR similar to um, pull up the zoning map. You can't see it. Two lots to the east. There was a zone change request in 2023 um, that zoned that property to HDR. And and so that was our original plan. And then once we learned about the uh substantial amount of opposition, we decided let's down zone this um to try and eliminate that massive height uh that is allowed in HDR. Um and so that was you know that was one of the steps that we took uh throughout this process. Another thing I'll mention is um this is atypical for us but you know there is no project associated with this zone change. So, um, Miss Fruo, you know, she owns these two pieces of property and, um, she's just looking to market it for apartment as well as the other uses that are allowed. Um, couple other points I'd like to make. Let's see. Under the current zoning of SF2, there are a number of uses that are fairly dense, um, such as town homes, multiplexes, cottages, etc. that also have a maximum building height of 35 ft similar to MDR. And so, um, I feel like this request, um, isn't it, you know, I feel like it's appropriate given its buffer between single family and a thorough affair. And I understand the concerns. I've read the letters about traffic and noise. Um, the fact of the matter is something will eventually get built here and due to the size of the lots, it's going to increase traffic and it's most likely going to be one of these um one of these denser uses. So, um, that's really all I have to add. If there's any questions for me, I'd be happy to answer them. >> Any questions for Mr. Stevens? Okay. Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this case? If so, please come forward. State your name and address for the record. Thank you. My name is David Teague. I live at 6205 Private Road 6470. And as I start, we turned in a uh aerial picture of the land in question. Oh, very good. [Music] This is the land we're talking about. These the vacant land at the top of this picture. And as Shane mentioned, you can see a road running north to south through about the middle of that land. Uh that road is a private road. Um and of course there's no public access to that road or wouldn't be from these properties either. But I'd really like to introduce you to our our homeowners, all of these folks that came with us today. Let's look to the north of the land in question. And that's Spanish bit Ranch. Uh beautiful subdivision, single family homes, very quiet subdivision. to the east of these properties, which actually isn't on this picture. Drone photographer had some issues, but that's another story. But to the east of it is two large acreage lots that are single family residences, been there for years. Uh to the south, of course, uh to the south is Shadow Hills, and everyone knows Shadow Hills. All single family residences. Great neighborhood, quiet. To the west, you can see over on the west some of it, that's Canara. Uh, great neighborhood, quiet neighborhood. Um, that's what surrounds the property in question. And I can say that all these neighbors are unified in their opposition to this zone change request. And you can see that by the number of letters that were returned to the PNZ that they sent out to the properties within a certain distance from that this land. You can also see it in the number of signatures of the folks who signed these petitions. The last I looked, it was over 300 signatures representing over 200 homes. Uh We're unified in our opposition. Um, we hope we could count on you to support this in our opposition and help us by voting against this zone ret zone request. This point, I'd like to introduce we have some of our speakers tonight. They represent all of our subdivisions. And actually, we had some sign up since I looked. So, there's some on the sheet out there. I I don't have on my list, but we've got Pam Moore. She'll be speaking for Spanish Bit. We have Charlotte Kinman who will be speaking for Shadow Hills. We have Jim Stevens from Canara. We'll also have Lloyd Reinhardt speaking from Spanish Pit and James Stevens from Spanish Bit. And again, we appreciate your time. We appreciate your service. Thank you. >> Thank you. Just be please be sure and state your name and address for the record as as you come up. >> Okay, great. >> My name is Pam Moore. I live at 6106 Private Road 6460 in Spanish Bit Ranch. We feel that this report is misleading and biased toward the applicant and this is our rebuttal. So, is this the report that everyone's looking at? Okay. If you'd follow along with me, um, at the top where it talks about notification, we've turned in a petition from over 260 residents of Spanish Bit, Canara, and Shadow Hills with very little time allowed. Our first contingent looks like looks at your site, conditions, and history. It says between the two tracks is a private road 1730 which serves as one of the access points to the south for Spanish bit to get onto Erskin. It is the only access point that we have to get out of the neighborhood to the south. We have one other access point that goes out to the west and that takes us into a U Legacy Elementary school that has a hundred or so parents each morning lining up at 7:15 to drop off their children. So basically, we can't get out that direction. So we're really concerned about this single exit onto Erskin. After that, it talks about the zoning request and the analysis. It talks about the current zone. Uh the SF2 area is supposed to maintain the character while providing buffering between lower and higher density adjacent neighborhoods as well as for recreational amenities and resource protection. If you flip over to the next page, uh it doesn't have a heading, but I'm thinking this is the MDR definition, and it says, "The purpose of the proposed medium density residential district is to provide for a village neighborhood environment of smaller size lots to include dwellings such as duplexes, town homes, and multiplexes. If that's true, why are they asking for a zone change? If you look at table 39.02.016-1, which talks about all of the different zoning um names that y'all are allowed and all of the different land uses. Uh if you'll notice that uh SF2 and MDR are side by side. Both allow for single family cottage. Both allow for single family detached. Both allow for single family garden home. Both allow for duplexes. Both allow for town houses. They even both allow for industrialized housing. The only thing that they don't both allow for is 45 foot or fourstory apartment complexes. So to me, that's why this is misleading. This area is already zoned SF2, which will fulfill everything except up to a fourstory apartment complex. So, I think that should have been um in much larger print rather than just duplexes, town homes, and multiplexes. Under compatibility with surrounding property, fourstory apartments up to 500 apartments of one, two, and threebedroom will drastically change an area of hundreds of single family homes, including two gated communities. next to it. It is moderate conformance and will provide a buffer between Erskin Street and the low density residential to the north. There is no buffer if that is just going to be fourstory apartment complexes. Could I get one of the pictures that we had of the drone footage? >> This one. You can use the arrow keys. >> Yeah, that one. Okay. This is a look at a house that is directly behind uh the current three-story apartment complex which is um east of our area just before you get to Frankfurt next to the police station. If you'll look at this, that homeowner when he goes out on his back patio looks straight up in the air at the top of a threestory metal building and we're out in the street. So, you've got the distance of a street, a front yard, a house depth, probably 30 feet to the fence, the alley, and the only Let's see. What is it? 10 ft that it requires to get to the apartment complex. >> Ma'am, can you give me the what's the address of this house on the picture? >> I mean, it's 3907, but I don't know what street >> it's in Uptown West, which is between It's a kind of Urskin and Frankfurt in that area right there. I don't know the street address. >> Yeah, it's not in our neighborhood. >> Yeah, this is not in our neighborhood. This is down the street to the east of us. >> To the east >> where you said it was >> called Uptown West. It's behind the police station at Erskin and just off of Frankfurt. >> Okay. So, if you can think of that, if you're coming out of any of the homes in Spanish Fit or along what I used to call Wilshire because it was a 50 plus community and now it's Canara, then that would be directly behind you. There is no buffer right there. The next item says suitability of property for allowed uses and it says the property is suitable for the proposed use. It is not suitable in our opinion for the conformity, the safety and the traffic of the surrounding area. The next page als talks about traffic and as far as I know there's been no traffic study done for this. It says that the property is on Erskin Street, which has a right of way of 75 feet, five lanes, undivided, paved, and that sounds good until it dumps into a two-lane four-way stop on the west side. So as you go down Erskin and you get to Milwaukee, it goes from five lane to two lane without even even a turning lane to go on to two-lane Milwaukee both north and south. If you were to turn to north, that's where you have traffic backed up to get into Legacy Elementary. And then as they leave, they back up at that stop sign to go one at a time back down Milwaukee or back into Shadow Hills. Now, sure, one day that'll probably be paved. And maybe one day, uh, Milwaukee will become five lanes. It's two lanes now. East of this parcel next to the north police station which is right next to that apartment. A threetory apartment complex is under construction on 4 acres. The land we're talking about has 22 acres. So up to five sets of those apartments containing 103 apartments each could fit into that 22 acres. If you think about traffic, and this sounds like a math problem from your high school class, I'm sure. If five apartment complexes of over 500 apartments with 1 to two vehicles each send 500 to a,000 cars onto Erskin at 7:30 a.m. or later for shift work. This would be a hazard. By changing SR2, the most restrictive zone to medium density district, one of the least restrictive zones anything goes. This change is not limited to the pretty pictures in this packet. It also includes the fourstory apartment complexes and we have seen no drawings as to what is intended. If this change occurs, the seller can't be held to any agreement. Legally, anything in MDR can be built. I'd like for you to look at the next page. And these are maps that that y'all looked at. And you've got the one that is a pretty little purple and then there's a dot. Um that's not the only space that apartment's going. If you see the light lines for property, it can go up to 10 feet at the back property line and five feet on the sides. So, it's quite a large area. Then if you turn the page and look at this map, there's a little bitty dot where they're talking about the proposed change affecting, but it's everything inside of those two large areas. Then if you'll look at the yellow map, this gives you a better idea of exactly what is impacted up to the very dark lines. That whole amount can be built on with certain regulations, setbacks, and so forth. But notice it goes right up to Canara and totally overwhelms the back of those homes at Canara. That would be their backyard. And then it goes right up within 10 ft of the lot lines along Spanish bit and it's directly across the street from North Shadow Hills. Now, if you'll look at the part of your packet that says the unified development code, it says the purpose of this zoning district and subdivision type is to provide for a village neighborhood with smaller size lots to include dwellings such as duplexes, town homes, and multiplexes. This could include a higher percentage of required common space. The open space shall be the focal point for dwellings that have plauses, parks, recreational amenities, preservation of environmental resources, and has a very nice looking picture. But those things can be built in the zone that it's in. Now, if you look on the next page, these are some more examples of what they're talking about. the side by side duplex, the stack duplex, the town homes, those are beautiful. They look like what's in Overton across from the Overton Hotel and they can build those in SF2. The only thing they can't build in SF2 is a fourstory apartment complex. down at the bottom is the um MDR permitted uses that I talked with you about earlier. All of these uses that you see all the way down to apartments is also available in SF2 where it is. This is some of the decision criteria in changing a zone designation. Actual or projected characteristics of the new activity which we don't know. Floor space for equipment which we don't know. Vehicle parking demand. Average and peak hourly trip generation both people vehicles and delivery vehicles. Impervious surface coverage. If any of you had the time to drive along Erskin today and maybe look at the uh three-story apartment complex, if you notice, there is no green space. Right up to the police property and right up to the man that owns the property next door. No green. Every bit of it is apartment parking place. Where are those kids going to play? If you've got one, two, and threebedroom places with 500 to a thousand people and all they've got is asphalt and we're already concerned about storm water drainage. With the lay of the land out there, if all of that is asphalt, it's going to drain back into our neighborhood. And that's another study that would need to be done. Noise and lighting. How tall are lights around a four-story apartment complex that would shine right into the homes around it? What are the hours of operation? Table 39.01.002 002 says, "The comprehensive plan says you will consider zoning changes in relationship to the comprehensive plan and the future land use map, both of which currently list this parcel as SF2. It is to encourage proper population densities. It is to promote walkability and riding bikes that the city likes. It calls for protecting and strengthening existing neighborhoods. It must consider when the new use is a change to operational characteristics of existing uses. Table 39.02.003. If changing to SF2 to a higher density must it it must maintain the character of the district while providing buffering between lower and higher density to adjacent neighborhoods. We don't know if it's one apartment complex surrounded by cottages. We don't know if it's all cottages. But if it's five straight apartment complexes, where is the buffering? Medium density includes duplexes, town homes, and up to fourstory apartment complexes. Where is the buffering? Currently, there are no sub subdivisions like ours, including Kelsey Park, Oakmont, the Trails, Lakeidge, or Vintage to name a few. that have fourstory apartment buildings connected to them. Approving this change would be an extreme departure from current land use. Will this be the new standard for those areas? Also, changing this zone at this time will be writing a blank check to the owner here and throughout the city. There is lots of land at the edge of the city that wants to be developed. And if people know that SF2 is no protection, they will be concerned. With the limited twoe time frame, we have not had time to walk the neighborhoods like ours to get their opinion about how they will be impacted if this change is approved. Lastly, recently Spanish Bit was annexed into the city. We did not need any city services. We had our own water, sewer, trash, lighting, and streets. While the city added a huge tax base, the tradeoff from the city to us was their ability to control how that area developed. If this change occurs, I don't think we got a very good deal. Will those opposed to zone change 3530 please stand? Thank you, >> Charlotte. Please state your name and address for the record. Good evening. My name is Charlotte Kenman. Sorry. My husband and I live at 516 North Highen Avenue and we have proudly called Shadow Hills North home for 34 years. We have had the privilege of building our home and life here. And I'm grateful for the chance to speak tonight, not only for myself, but for many neighbors who value this community deeply and who, for various reasons couldn't be here, but share concerns about the proposed resing of the parcel across Earth and from our neighborhood. Shadow Hills hosts a routine and rhythm of runners, couples of every age with their dogs, veterans who walk with assistance, mothers and fathers pushing their strollers, families riding their bikes, children in school buses and on skateboards and scooters. Our area boasts many veterans along with professionals, students, and retirees. Everyone shares a heartfelt connection to this neighborhood that offers a low concentration of artificial light. We have low crime and intentionally designed streets. Most of all, we cherish the peace and privacy and natural beauty our families have found here. Losing that would mean not only a change in landscape but a change in the character of our daily lives. We've watched our children, our grandchildren play safely in these streets, and as you can tell, we have built close bonds with those around us. That's why the prospect of what appears to be an unnecessary change feels both urgent and daunting for the majority of us. We appreciate the work and tough choices before the commission. With that, we respectfully question whether there is a true community need for this particular reasonzoning given Lebec's existing land and housing availability. Changes in our area should strengthen rather than disrupt the stability our families have worked so hard to build. We feel a sense of uncertainty knowing there is no development plan before us. Without transparency, it's hard to envision how changes might fit into the fabric of our neighborhood. And it leaves many with worries about what the future might hold. We need only look down the street to see what could be in store for us on an even larger grander scale. Similarly, the property owner hasn't yet reached out to listen or share ideas with us. Open dialogue could pave the way for a vision that honors everyone's interest and eases the concerns that brings many of us here tonight. Practical matters weigh heavily, too. Single family homes ring the parcel on three sides and only offer one public street for access. This raises serious concerns about traffic, noise, and safety. We haven't seen any information about how utilities or public services would be updated to meet new demands, which adds much to our uncertainty. If the commission moves forward against the wishes of our community, we can only urge you to enforce the 2023 Unified Development Code protections already in place. rather than negotiate new demands to oversee this process with transparency and respect to preserve our neighborhoods unique character amid Love's growth. We hope you'll also consider the voices not explicitly invited here tonight, residents who are not property owners. Their quality of life will also be touched and infect affected and impacted by these decisions even if their names aren't on property deeds. We find this ironic given the idea that many beneficiaries of high or medium density residential developments would themselves be renters. At its core, our request is simple. that any decisions made will protect what makes Shadow Hills North special for all of us who call it home and that existing protections in city codes will be carefully and consistently honored. Thank you sincerely for your attention and your willingness to listen to our community concerns. Do you guys have any questions for me? Anybody have any questions for at this time? Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um, I'm Jim Stevens. I'm a a homeowner at 22 Wilshshire Boulevard in Canara. I'm a member of the HOA there and our HOA represents 79 members regarding the uh planning and zoning case number 3530 in Canara. We live a pleasant low density price diverse uh residential neighborhood and we've recently um found out that you that someone is proposing to um reszone that property adjacent to our neighborhood which has raised mo multiple concerns. Um, we certainly share Patty, um, Pam and Charlotte's, uh, concerns, and we would like to give you just a few concerns from Canara. First, limited notification and response time was very short. We only found out two weeks ago. Um, it left us little time to, um, get everyone informed about what was happening. uh to check with u u legal counsel and many other things. A lot of our due diligence has not been completed yet. Um but we should be we will continue to do that even after this hearing. We agree and support the other uh person's concerns about uh the limited notification and we believe that the biggest concern here is the impact that it's going to have on our neighborhood. Uh the reasonzoning could s significantly alter the area's character by increasing population density, traffic, noise, light pollution, and potentially lowering property values. Property devaluation is another concern. Homes near the development risk devaluation due to proximity to high-rise apartments affecting both backyard privacy and part front yard views leading to longer selling times and reduced prices. And these reduced prices then become the comps on which future sales are based on. So they're going to impact everyone in our community u with this devaluation. Our biggest concern is maybe the safety concerns, increased traffic and lack of adequate road infrastructure. Um the raising safety issues for both drivers and pedestrians, especially at the Milwaukee Erskin um intersection. We would we know that your role is very difficult and that you're looking out for the best interest of love, but we do feel that other uses for this land might be more beneficial both to our community and to the city of Lach itself. We support the city's growth initiatives, but believe that maybe commercial zoning would be better suited to meet community needs. Uh allowing churches, clinics, offices, uh retail space, and other lowprofile you uses rather than introducing dense residential developments in our community. So our preferred development then is is a community uh that favors low density lowprofile developments, maintains neighborhood character and provides useful services but not the highdensity apartments that are being um allowed by this change. We in Canara are concerned about uh reszoning that how it will change the character of our community. The intended zoning challenges allow apartments which are inconsistent with the surrounding use which is low density single family housing. um we don't need more residents necessarily, but we do need commercial properties to provide services to that existing population um in that location. Um we are more than a mile removed from most services. Uh and even those are are are fairly um lack any substance. Um the commercial properties we envision resemble those that the current developer described to us when we bought the properties in our communities. The de developer, I believe it was also Miss Fulo, uh the developer suggested commercial properties developed in a way that would not detract from the beauty, wholesomeness, and attractiveness of the adjacent subdivisions. Since the enduser is not party to this zone process change, we cannot know what their specific intentions would be. And certainly the report presents a very pleasant uh change that we would welcome except we don't know whether it's going to be that or whether it's going to be threetory apartments with 500 or so apartments in it. While the uh the change from high density residential to moderate density residential um is a move in the right direction. Uh we have no reason to believe that the end user would choose not to build apartments if that option were available. We do not want this change to be to give the developer a blank check by unrestricted resoning. All the homes in Canara may All the homes in Canara will be faced with safety concerns during resoning. The most tangible safety concern is the traffic ability into and out of Canara. There's only one road in and one road out. If you're going to go uh from Canara to the east, you're going to have to cross a lot of traffic in order to do that. Okay? And that is also true for Spanish bit as well. Uh so trafficability is huge. Uh there are several uh roads that enter Erskin from the um subdivision known as Shadow Hills, but that subdivision is much more populous than ours is. MRD uh allows 45 foot high. I would anticipate three to four story apartments um to be built and we have again we have no reason to believe that a developer would not choose that particular option. Uh all the homes in Canara will be faced with safety concerns due to the reasonzoning. The most tangible safety concern is the traffic ability into and out of Canara, Spanish bit, and Shadow Hills. Um, again, we only have single entrances in in two of those. The closest intersection is Milwaukee and Erskin. Uh, it has multiple lanes of traffic feeding a four-way stop sign and represents a high risk of congestion. Congestion is high during drop off and pick off pickup dur near near the local school and the backup intersection and and so I'm sorry and will back up the intersection even more if we add 500 families uh to to the area. Soon Milwaukee will be widened. I think that's in the city plans right now. And it will increase the amount of traffic that goes our way. Everybody going to shallow water uses the uh thoroughfare that is Erskin has become as well as Milwaukee when it opens up. So the traffic is going to do nothing but increase even after construction is completed in the intersection in on Milwaukee past the intersections just past the school and shortly after you go west from the intersection those are county roads. There's nothing that the city can do about those. So, widening those roads to gain ingress or egress is going to be more complicated. Almost certainly traffic safety is going to diminish as a result of this zone change. We in Canara and and the subdivisions, other subdivisions believe the growth needed in our community is more consistent with commercial zoning policy allowing for churches, clinics, offices, retail, and other open space um and lowprofile uses. Our community requires more users that provide services to the current and future residents. The drawings in the engineer report are a good example of what we would love to have, but we do not believe that that's what we will get. Instead, we expect to get high density, high-profile apartments, which will destroy the character of our local community. Uh, apartments which do not meet our needs, uh, as well as moderate density commercial uses will. We support the commission's role in Love's growth, but urge the commission to consider these concerns and prioritize developments that align with the needs and the character of our neighborhoods. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Is there anyone else? Again, if you'll please state your name and your address for the record. Sir, >> my name is Gary Kirkland. I reside at 510 North Graanby Avenue. And before I get started here, I'd like to tell you that I've got uh two sets of 8 by10 photos. These are not going to be on the projector. I'd like to start one over here and one over here. They all meet in the middle. And I'd like to get at least one set back. You're welcome to keep on. That's okay. So, members of the board, I want to thank you first of all for giving me an opportunity to speak tonight. My name is Gary Kirkland. I reside at 510 North Graanby Avenue in Shadow Hills. I've lived there since I inherited that home in August of 2022. Uh at the time we inherited that house, we had a decision to make of selling it or remodeling it. And my wife and I decided that the house was the perfect size for a retiring couple. Uh over the second year, which would be August of 2023 until August of 2024, we completely remodeled everything in this house. Everything you can imagine. Uh, we basically turned it into a new home. I spent $150 and $150,000 in remodeling everything you could imagine. This house is near top of the line. It's now top of the line. The interior is gorgeous. Everything in there is is as up to speed as any million-doll home you would find. We really did it right. Uh at the time we did this when we made this decision, we never imagined what was about to happen to us. Those views and those pictures that you have in front of you are what I now look at from my driveway and just as I step off the driveway. And if uh the the pickup truck and trailer that you see parked next to my driveway wasn't there, I could have given you a better view. Uh, but that's what we're dealing with now. Thanks to this project that you see, I'm on the back side of this house here and and what Pam Moore was showing you there. I get to see the other side of that. If I'd ever imagined that there was a highdensity apartment complex that was about to be built right across the street that resembles a cotton compress or a massive grain storage facility or an industrial site, I would have put that house up for sale and never looked back. I've now sunk so much money into it, I'll never get it back out. And that's again, I have searched around my neighborhood for neighbors who were ever sent a letter or were informed in any way, form or fashion of what was coming. I can't find anybody. I know I never got a letter. Uh when they started scraping the ground over there, we wondered what was about to happen. We couldn't find out. Uh, as you will see from looking at those pictures of that property, there's no setbacks from the street. They're on Erskin. As Pam Moore told you, there's no play area for children. The entire grounds outside the apartments is concrete and for parking only. Uh, it is our understanding that the city has factored in 1.4 cars per unit. I don't believe that's going to be I don't think that's going to get it done. They're going to be parking up and down our street. Uh we're going to we're going to be catching overflow from those apartments. In addition, their residents will be walking and running up and down our streets because there's no green area over there. I I do I need to tell you what their dogs are going to be doing in my yard. No one ever warned us about what was to come with this city. As I said, I never received a letter, never found one neighbor that got one. None of us knew. And uh I I you know, I'm not here to be disrespectful. I hope that's the last thing that you might conclude. But I tell you, if I had any recourse against this city for doing to me what they've done, I would be taking that action. I I'd like to move now and uh I'm sunk into this house. Uh I think I'd be taking a minimum of $75,000 loss. I have just completed the construction, hired hired a very reputable fencing company here in Love. We just built a 7 foot privacy fence around our backyard. uh has a uh concrete curb underneath the fence that we put in. So the fence is probably a little over 7 feet tall. You can still see in my backyard from those areas, those openings that you see up there. We've lost our privacy in our backyard. I think this is exactly what's coming for our friends over here. One thing I can tell you though about my friends over here, they have million-dollar homes. When they bought their tracks of land, they were promised a park and a riding stable. None of it ever came to fruition. And now they want to do this. This is despicable. Uh I'm here to respectfully request that this case be refused, these zoning changes not be made. uh citizens, taxpaying citizens of this country deserve to have their property values protected and that should be the first and foremost thing in your mind in my opinion. Thank you for listening to me. >> Thank you. Anyone else? Hey, good evening. My name is Lloyd Reinhardt. My wife Gilda and I reside at 911 North Private Road, 1735 Lok, Texas in Spanish Pit subdivision. My career has included stints in public and non-public indies where I was charged with financial duties including being the chief financial officer in most indies. Additionally, I've been owner in startups, the last which was purchased by a large public indie. I've served on various boards in our city, including LPNL, which was struggling and was in an excellent financial condition at the end of my term. Other board positions include chairman of national institute of renewable energy for tech, board member of the transit advisory board for the city of love, board member of Plains Capital Bank. I'm currently a director at the American Bank of Commerce. I introduce myself this way not to inflate my ego or even to impress you, but to say that I've dealt with many business situations. I believe it relevant to back up a few years and describe the situation when I lived on Westfor Street on 30 acres which was in the city limits. There's a request to change the zoning on property immediately to the south providing for a deed mobile home subdivision. Well, I opposed the change and is ultimately not zoned for a mobile home development, but instead became a large single family starter home development. So, I finally sold my home, my barn, my acreage I'd owned for 25 plus years at a significant discount to what was the perceived market value before the development. My estimate about a 40% discount is what I got when I sold it. So fast forwarding, we looked forward to find a development where we could move for our remaining years and Spanish bit was our choice. It was a gated community with several deed restrictions, a functioning HOA, numerous professional residents, and some likeminded retirees located in excellent school district. So we built our forever home, and thus far, it's met our expectations. Thank you. That's all. >> Thank you, Mr. Ronin Hart. I'm James Stevens. I live at 6103 Private Road 6470. Um, aren't my neighbors awesome? All of them. Um, I think they've covered pretty much everything I wanted to say, but I want to pull a few things out that y'all said in zoning case 3532 over here. Someone said, "But so they could sell that tomorrow and the developer there wouldn't be bound when it comes to a mobile home park." Right? Blank check. We want you to approve something that we don't have any plans for and we intend to sell to a developer. A developer who has no ties to our community. A developer who has no desire to make any kind of concessions to us. We talked about buffer. What buffer is that? What buffer is that? I'm one of the 24 homes that back up within 10 ft of the edge of these properties. That's by going to be my backyard and many of my friends backyard. We were promised something better, something different by the developer who is now the developer of this land who's seeking to change. We were promised a quiet subdivision with parks and pond and recreation areas. And then after one street of development, they sold to a different developer and they deeded the park that was to be the pond, the recreation, the climbing hill to a family member of theirs who opened up his own gun range until the city came and annexed us which kind of shut him down because he couldn't shoot his guns in city limits. We've seen it. We've been there. We've had promises made. We've had promises not kept. We're asking you as a community to honor those promises that were made to keep this what it needs to be. They talk about a village plan and it can have all these things. As Pam told you, almost every one of those uses is available for the development he's talking about except for that thing. So we call the cotton compress a great elevator by year we call it the abomination down the road because that's what it is. That's what it is. I want to express on behalf of my neighbors and my friends, the people who I choose to live my life with and I'm very grateful to have in my life our appreciation for you serving our city. We respectfully request that you deny this change. It is not in the best interest of the city of Levik, which is really just the citizens of Levik, which we are. We are the city of Lach. We just live on the northwest side of the city of Levik and we're glad we do. Thank you. Thank you. Hello. I'm Andrew Beverly. I currently reside at 507 North Hiden. Um I I am a resident I've been a resident of Shadow Hills since 2009, so about 15 years. Um but um uh I just moved to 507. However, I just we there are three Beverlys who live in the Shadow Hills. Um so in uh in 2017, I moved my aunt from Corpus Christie to to live here with us. Um uh 2009 uh my wife and I purchased a house on H Highen. Um in January we we recently divorced, but um we like the neighborhood so great. I moved across the street. Um so uh so I moved across the street. I'm I'm leasing a house. Um the the the three of us, we we all we live together. We're in the same neighborhood. That's how much we love this neighborhood. It's it's it's so wonderful. And and you've heard all the things you know, has been said here. We really urge you to um to to to vote no on this. Um just wanted to say one final thing that I know this is specifically for the zoning now, but perhaps um Miss Fo may consider maybe a philanthropic endeavor and perhaps with some of the things that have been said here tonight, perhaps she may want to create a uh a park and have the Patty Fulo walking neighborhood park. those kinds of things to make it a very nice facility for for you. Thank you all. Thank you. Is there anyone else? Thank you. >> Hello, my name is Meredith Barlo and I live at 516 North Euron. Um, I only moved to the neighborhood a couple of years ago. Um, I have three sons. They all grew up and so I came back to um what I consider love to as as home basically and um really fell into this great house because my best friend's uncle um was selling it and I was told this is a great neighborhood. Um people hardly ever can get in. Houses don't go up for sale around here. Um and um I you know like other people have said this I expect this to be my forever home. Um it's a perfect size for us. I do want to address so um my neighbors have uh talked extensively about the concerns about what might happen if the apartment buildings do come in which like they have mentioned there's no reason to uh reszone if you're just going to put in more houses. So we have to assume even though there's no actual plan that it would be for um for something like an apartment complex. Um my concern kind of goes back uh before that. So, when we're thinking about um expanding residents, um my concern is there are already multiple commercial properties near our neighborhoods that have been empty for a very long time. There was a new um shopping center that has been built at the loop um in Frankfurt and it has been advertising for somebody to lease it, please, for quite some time. It took a very long time to even build it to get to that point. We have had multiple restaurants that have gone out. Nothing has taken its place. So, I feel like if there were truly a demand for this housing, we wouldn't see those types of of issues as well. Um, I am a teacher at Leach High and so I have a long commute because it's 17 minutes. However, I have colleagues who live uh you know 198th or whatever, right, to come to Leach High. So, there's this idea that like we live sort of I I tease and say I live in New Mexico, right? Because we're so far away like nobody ever wants to come to my house. So, it sort of begs the question, why are we adding additional housing if there's already um not really a need, you know, for it. So, um along with everything else that my neighbors have said, um we would really prefer if you would say no to the reasoning. Thank you. >> Thank you. Is there anyone else? Okay, seeing none, is there anyone to speak in favor? Okay, we will now close the public hearing for matter of discussion. Do we have a motion? >> Move to approve. >> Second. >> We have a motion in a second. Discussion. >> Uh, where do you start? >> Yeah. Where do you start? So, >> okay. >> All right. >> It's you. You can go. >> Well, putting a putting an apartment complex in the middle of a residential area is not a great idea anyway. It's in the middle of a, you know, it's it's in the middle of a section. It's it's a long ways from hard corners. >> Mhm. you know, the they're right. I mean, apartment complexes by limited use and medium density. And so I I mean, I I can't see you filling that up with I mean, I could see it being duplexes or town homes or something like that. I mean, maybe twotory, >> but but not >> No, not some >> Yeah. >> You look at what's gone down the street on the others that to go like that. I would personally I would not want to be a neighbor for that either. >> Yeah. I I just can't see this I I I can't see this working like this. There's plenty of opportunities to develop this out in the current zoning. >> So, >> right. I agree. >> Anybody else have any other comments? >> Um I I had a couple of questions for staff. Um there was some comments about like the private road. What would be the access points for this? Let's assume that this is going to be a an apartment complex. >> If the private road is not a dedicated public rideway, their access is going to be from Erskin, which is a dedicated public rideway. >> And I guess um the other questions I had were I had several buffer requirements was was brought up. Mhm. >> Um can you talk about you know what sort of buffer let's let's just assume sort of the worst the worst case scenario in their mind which is an apartment >> what what is the height that it could be how many units could there be what buffering is required so MDR being adjacent well I'll talk about the buffers first so MDR being adjacent to SF2 you would have a type A buffer yard um that's you're looking at a one Uh it's not the ornamental tree, but the basically three trees per 100 linear feet you're looking at. Um you're looking at um so and then that's a 5ft buffer yard right there as well with the that as far as the height goes, you're looking at uh 35 across the board for this the single family and two family uses and and uh multiplex. When you get up to the apartment, as they've said is 45 ft. That is correct. Um, and as far as density, uh, you're looking at maximum of 45% lot coverage for the apartments, it goes up to, I believe, uh, 65% when you get down to the the more single family uses like town homes and s such. Uh, what else? What else did you ask in there? Sorry. >> I've got a question for you. >> Yes. >> So, We've dealt with we've dealt with garden offices backing up to residential >> and uh a setback from the rear lot line >> and and allowing windows on the back of garden offices. >> Yeah. >> So let's say let's say they put twotory town homes there. What would be the What would be the rear setback requirement for a budding a budding Spanish bit Spanish bit? >> Yeah. >> What would be the rear setback requirement for for a two-story town home? >> For like a two-story town home. I'm >> 15 foot >> 10 >> 10 foot. Okay. So, you're looking at 10 foot. Um but that said, uh I don't believe there's a difference in terms of uh setback, rear setback as far as the height. uh be it singlestory town homes or trip threetory town homes or twotory town homes. So >> okay there was on garden offices but not town homes or or am I'm just am I conflating all this >> we there for commercial for non-residential uses there is and typically an increase in setback when adjacent to a residential use. >> Okay, gotcha. That's that's what I was asking. So in the SF2, my understanding, you still put a twotory, which is 35 foot town home in that. So currently >> current zoning, you can still get >> 35 >> 35 foot town home within 10 foot of their of the lot line. >> That's correct. Yes. >> So basically what they were saying too, the only difference is is adding the apartments. Correct. >> Apartments and I believe multiplex as well. >> Yeah. Yeah, >> I I think I did have one more question was what is the max density in in theory? >> The max density in theory is limited by um space required for parking. There is also a max open space requirement I believe 10% as well. You're also looking uh there there's again you can only build so high. You have to have a certain amount of parking based upon you know uh what what kind of dwelling units you have. be it's you know uh single single bed two bed three bed etc. So the there's not a established density per acre but there is effectual limitations on how much you can fit into a certain amount of space. >> Does anybody on the panel have a guess at that? >> I don't have the math. >> It's a lot. >> It's quite a few. >> Um the the traffic concerns Whoever were to build here before they were able to get a permit, would they be required to do a TIA study, traffic impact analysis study? >> No. >> No. So there is the concern that the intersection there in Milwaukee and Erskin would not be addressed if a high density project came in here >> and that intersection is part of the 2022 road bond. So Milwaukee from fourth all the way to the north city limit line at Marshall Street north of Erskin is part of that road bond. >> Okay. >> Yeah, this is one of those situations where um it would be nice to be able to have some more flexibility within the the code to accommodate some of those concerns and provide maybe a more tiered transition uh from just in density. And um you know it's it's a little disappointing to me we don't have that flexibility sitting here today in front of us. >> I would think my my big concern with just putting anything in the middle of a residential neighborhood is a blank check. You know just saying I'm going to let you as a developer build anything. I think not having a specific plan would be my big concern. especially in residential a lot of places in town that doesn't matter but in this in this lot I feel like that matters. >> You you said a more of a tiered the only thing I see different between SF2 and medium density is that apartments are a limited use. That's really the only difference. Is that accurate >> in terms of residential uses? Yes. >> Yeah. So all we're all we're really the only question we've got is do you allow apartments or do you not? That's true because everything else is everything else is good for current zone. >> See, they're even even residents and stuff or even more open to commercial garden offices or anything like that versus but I mean I'm not saying that but that's >> Yeah. >> One more comment, Mr. Chairman, if I may. Mr. Gray, you mentioned flexibility. We do have the option of a planned development within the unified development code where the the property owner could keep the current zoning of SF2 and add additional uses such as apartments. But the plan development the differences of plan development is very extensive. It requires a literal plan, a site plan of exactly what's going to be built, where the setbacks, the parking, the height, the uses, everything laid out. But that's the trade-off. they can get additional uses, they can get reduced setbacks, whatever they would like to request that the board could approve in the current zoning. >> Thank you for that clarification. I that's good to know. And um I just think with the level of representation here tonight, um you know, the obvious route is for more collaborative approach in my opinion, uh to plan out something that is more known and uh whether that's a PD or whether that's uh something else. Thank you. Any other discussion? >> Okay, we'll go ahead and call the vote. I will go ahead before we do the vote to remind that this is one that will already go to the city council. We'll have to have a supermajority to pass. So, with that being said, everybody understanding, we'll go ahead and call the vote. All in favor, please say I. All oppose, please say nay. >> Nay. The motion Motion failed 0 to6 and it is now 7:38 >> and we are adjourned.