[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[3. READING OF MINUTES]
[00:00:52]
MOVING ON CHAIR OF THE PLANNING ZONE COMMISSION.
JUST VERY BRIEFLY, JUST A THANK YOU TO STAFF, UM, FOR THEIR, UH, PARTICIPATION IN THE, UH, SNOW FEST PARADE.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US BE PRESENT, REPRESENT.
IF YOU WERE ON THE TRUCK WITH ME, IT WAS EVIDENT THE TIME I HAD, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.
AND, AND THANK YOU FOR, UH, FOR BRINGING SOME HOLIDAY CHEER TO THE, TO THE COMMUNITY.
AND I MIGHT ADD HE KNEW EVERY SONG.
[a. Development Services]
MOVE ON TO, UH, STAFF REPORTS, DIRECTOR OF ADULT SERVICES.ON THAT NOTE, WE'LL SAY HAPPY HOLIDAYS.
AND HERE ARE A FEW PICTURES, UM, FROM SNOW FEST AND, UH, WE THANK THE COMMISSIONERS WHO PARTICIPATED.
UH, WE HAD OUR VERY OWN DJ, ONE OF OUR, OUR BUILDING INSPECTORS WHO WAS ABLE TO JOIN US.
AND HE BROUGHT, BROUGHT THE MUSIC WITH US.
AND SO, UM, WE HAD OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TEAM, UM, ALONG WITH THE COMMISSIONERS THIS YEAR.
THE, IT WAS A LITTLE CHILLY, BUT THE RAIN HELD OFF.
UM, SO WITH THAT, WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO, UH, THANK YOU ALL FOR ALL YOU DO, UM, FOR THE COMMUNITY, FOR US, UM, ALL YEAR.
AND JUST HAPPY HOLIDAYS, UM, TO YOU ALL.
SAME, UH, ENGINEERING THAT REPORT.
[6. PUBLIC COMMENT]
ON TO ITEM SIX, PUBLIC COMMENT.IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM THAT'S TYPICALLY NOT ON THE AGENDA.
WHEN I STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE STEP UP TO THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
DAVID, 45, 11 CREEK POINT, UM, MISSOURI CITY.
SO THIS IS FOR NON AGENDA ITEMS. UM, COUPLE OF THINGS.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, I REALLY WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT THAT SNOW FEST.
I, I I, I WANT TO PARTICIPATE NEXT TIME.
I, I LEARNED THAT IT'S THE 40TH ANNIVERSARY.
SO I WOULD LOVE MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW, MAILERS OR SOMETHING.
I, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE NOT BEING REACHED OUT SO MUCH.
SO I, I, I'VE BEEN IN MISSOURI CITY FOR OVER 10 YEARS AND THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR I HEARD OF THE SNOW FEST.
SO I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE GOING FORWARD.
AND I THINK IT'S ALWAYS THE FIRST WEEKEND IN DECEMBER.
BELIEVE IT'S TYPICALLY ALWAYS IN DECEMBER.
SO, UM, ONE THING IS THE TOWER CELL, THE CELL TOWER THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO, OR WAS VOTED ON.
I JUST WANNA MAKE IT A POINT THAT, UH, I WOULD LOVE FOR IT TO NOT BE THERE.
I KNOW, I THINK IT WAS NOT VOTED IN OR SO, BUT, UH, WOULD LOVE FOR IT TO NOT BE THERE.
MAYBE FIND AN ALTERNATE POSITION FOR IT.
I THINK IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE HOMES THERE.
UM, I THINK IT DEVALUES THE AREA, UH, BEING A REALTOR.
I DON'T THINK MANY, UH, HOME BUYERS ARE, YOU KNOW, HAPPY TO BUY A HOME WITH A CELL PHONE TOWER IN THE BACKYARD.
SO I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT YOU GUYS, UM, YOU KNOW, FIND A, A A DIFFERENT LOCATION.
I DO KNOW THERE IS A-A-A-A-A PLACE IN KITTY HAWKINS PARK, UM, IN THE OFF LIMITS AREA THAT HAS A BEAUTIFUL MOUND RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE THERE BY THE WASH.
THAT I THINK IS A GREAT AREA FOR A TOWER.
UM, OTHER THAN THAT, UH, I WANNA SPEAK ABOUT THE, UH, CREMATORIUM THAT'S GOING UP, UH, OR POTENTIALLY GOING UP ON IN THE NEW TOWN CENTER AREA THERE.
HIGHWAY SIX, UM, ALREADY WHERE WE LIVE, UM, IN ESTATE OF SILVER RIDGE, THERE'S SOMETHING THAT BURNS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S NEARBY.
MAYBE YOU GUYS KNOW MORE THAN I DO, BUT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT BURNS, UH, CLOSE BY.
MAYBE IT'S A LANDFILL SOMEWHERE, BUT IT COMES, WE GET IT ALL THE TIME.
AND I GET THESE PINGS ON MY PHONE THAT THE AIR QUALITY IS NOT GOOD THERE VERY OFTEN, ESPECIALLY IN THE SUMMERTIME.
[00:05:01]
CREMATORIUM, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, UM, WHATEVER'S GONNA COME INTO THE AIR, UH, MERCURY OR WHATEVER'S GONNA COME INTO THE AIR.SO I WOULD, IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO MITIGATE OR NOT HAVE IT AT ALL, THAT WOULD BE, UM, MY SUGGESTION.
UM, IN ADDITION TO THAT, I READ SOMETHING ABOUT CONSTRUCTION SITES BEING CLOSE TO NEIGHBORHOODS, WOULD LIKE TO VOTE AGAINST THAT AS WELL.
IF WE CAN FIND SOMEPLACE MORE, YOU KNOW, UH, APPEALING OR THAT IS MORE INDUSTRIAL, NOT CLOSE TO HOMES, THAT WILL BE ACCEPTABLE.
UM, AND THEN I'LL TALK ABOUT THE GAS STATIONS A LITTLE LATER ON.
[a. CONSENT AGENDA]
WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM SEVEN, PLATT'S CONSENT AGENDA.CONSIDER AN APPLICATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SIENNA LAKES DRIVE STREET, DEDICATION.
PHASE THREE, CONSIDER AN APPLICATION OF A FINAL PLAT OF CNA, SECTION 76.
ANY DISCUSSION? WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[b. Sienna 3 H]
ON.ITEM B CENA THREE H I'LL TAKE THIS ONE.
UH, CNA THREE H IS A REVISION TO THE CONCEPT PLAN, UH, THAT CONTAINS, UH, SEVERAL SECTIONS.
UH, THE CONCEPT PLAN IS BEING REVISED BASED ON ROADWAY, UM, NETWORK CHANGES.
UM, THERE ARE NO OTHER CHANGES TO THIS CONCEPT PLAN AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS REVISED CONCEPT.
AND SO, UM, YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL VERSION OF THE CONCEPT PLAN AND THEN THE REVISED VERSION OF THE, THE CONCEPT PLAN.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION? I GUESS I HAD ONE QUESTION AS IT RELATES TO THE NEXT ITEM.
JUST, WE'VE GOT A REVISED CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR THREE H AND THE NEXT ITEM IS SECTION 71, WHICH IS PART OF THREE.
IS IT? WE OFTEN HAVE 'EM BOTH ON THE SAME MEETING, SO THANK YOU.
AND THE REASON WHY IT'S NOT ON YOUR CONSENT IS BECAUSE THE CONCEPT PLAN HAS TO BE APPROVED BEFORE THAT PRELIMINARY PLA YEAH, THANKS.
WE USED TO DO 'EM ALL AT ONCE AND THEN SEPARATE OUT THE CONCEPT PLANS BECAUSE WE HAVE TO APPROVE THE CONCEPT PLAN BEFORE WE CAN APPROVE THE PLAN.
UH, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE CONCEPT PLAN.
SO WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM TWO.
CONSIDER AN APPLICATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SIENNA SECTION 71.
AND SO THIS IS A SECTION ON THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONCEPT.
UM, IT CONTAINS 59 LOTS, UM, ONE BLOCK AND SEVEN RESERVES.
AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE DISCUSSION MOTION.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
[c. Misty Leaf Gardens]
WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM C.MISTY LEAF'S GARDENS CONSIDER AN APPLICATION OF A CONCEPTUAL PLAN OF MISTY LEAF GARDENS COMMISSIONERS IS DUE TO NOT BEING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBDIVISION, UM, SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, AS WELL AS THE INFRASTRUCTURE MANUAL AND THE PLATTING MANUAL.
YOU CAN'T, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT A FIRE TRUCK.
AND THIS IS THE SECOND TIME WE'VE SEEN THIS SAME, UH, THING TOO.
WE SAW THIS LAST MONTH AND DISAGREED THERE.
THERE'S SOME NEW COMMENTS THOUGH IN THE DOCUMENTATION FROM LAST MONTH IT LOOKS LIKE FROM THE DEVELOPER.
SO IN THERE HE TALKS ABOUT HOW, LIKE THE RIGHT ANGLES AND ROADS.
IT'S GOT A FIVE DEGREE LEEWAY, EITHER SIDE TO 85 OR NINE FIVE.
HE TALKS ABOUT, IT SEEMS THAT THERE'S A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FIRE TRUCKS BECAUSE HE SAYS THEY'RE, THEY ARE COMPLIANT.
YOU GUYS WORK THROUGH THAT BECAUSE, WELL, I MEAN, I'VE TALKED TO, I TALKED TO THE FIRE MARSHAL.
HE, UH, HE SAID HE AGREES WITH THESE.
SO THEY NEED, THEY NEED TO REVISE THEIR PLA
[00:10:01]
PLAN AND, AND IT, SO IT'S BASED ON THE, THE, UM, APPLICATION OF THE CODE.AND SO THEY'RE NOT MEETING, UH, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE.
SO THEY HAVE A, A DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE, BUT STAFF IS STICKING WITH HOW THAT BEEN APPLIED.
AND SO THAT, THAT REGULATION STILL STANDS.
AND SO RIGHT NOW THE LAYOUT THAT THEY'RE PRESENTING IS NOT COMPLIANT, UH, WITH THAT CODE REQUIREMENT.
AND IF, IF YOU GUYS CONTINUE TO DISAGREE, CAN HE CONTINUE TO GET THIS ON THE AGENDA? SO THE STEPS HERE IS, IS, WAS IN TWO PARTS.
SO IS THIS APPROVED ON THEIR INITIAL APPLICATION? UM, THEY SUBMITTED A RESPONSE, UH, TO THAT INITIAL APPLICATION AND NOW IT'S BEEN DIS IT'S RECOMMENDED FOR DISAPPROVAL AGAIN.
UM, IF THEY WANT TO CONTINUE FORWARD, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO CONT THEY'LL HAVE TO SUBMIT A NEW APPLICATION, PAY NEW FEES, UM, IN ORDER FOR THAT, UM, PROCESS TO CONTINUE.
SO IF THIS IS DISAPPROVED TONIGHT, THIS EFFECTIVELY CLOSES OUT THIS APPLICATION, UM, THAT THEY'VE SUBMITTED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? ALSO, THERE'S, THERE'S, SO TODAY THERE ACTUALLY DO THAT, UH, MAKES IT QUESTION RIGHT BY THE, BY THAT LEVEE.
IT'S NOT LE LIKE THEY, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A FULL EASEMENT AROUND LIKE THE CULDESAC, BUT THEY'RE NOT EVEN DOING THAT ON THE VERY HANDS.
SO THE MOTION IS TO DISPROVE AGREEING IS STAFF.
SO UNLESS YOU WANT TO APPROVE IT.
NO, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M CORRECT.
SO THE MOTION IS TO DISAPPROVE OF A MOTION AND A SECOND.
[a. Planned Development District - Missouri City Central shopping center]
ON TO ZONING A MAP AMENDMENTS A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, MISSOURI CITY SHOPPING CENTER.PUBLIC HEARING RECEIVED COMMENTS FOR OR AGAINST A REQUEST BY JARED JACKSON.
CONTEXT THREE TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 7.96 ACRES OF LAND FROM LC THREE RETAIL DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO S-U-S-U-P NUMBER 2 0 7 IN PART TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES, PLACES OF ASEN PLACE, PLACES OF ASSEMBLY RETAIL DISTRICT USES FOR CHILDCARE CENTER USE.
AND TO THE EXTENT THE ZONING DEVIATES FROM THE FUTURE LAND USE AND CHARACTER MAP OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO PROVI, UH, TO PROVIDE AN AMENDMENT THERE FROM, I HATE THAT WORDING.
UH, PRESENTED AS THE PROPOSAL FOR THE PD.
UH, THE SITE LOCATION IS AT THE MISSOURI CITY CENTRAL SHOPPING CENTER, UH, 2304.
TEXAS PARKWAY IS THE GENERAL A, UH, ADDRESS FOR THIS APPLICATION.
UM, HOWEVER, IT'S ALSO THE PROPOSED SITE, UM, LOCATION ADDRESS EACH, UH, TENANT, EACH LEASE SPACE, UM, HAS A DIFFERENT ADDRESS.
THE EXISTING ZONING AND USES, UH, LC THREE RETAIL DISTRICT USES, UH, THE EXISTING PLACES OF ASSEMBLY.
UM, THERE IS ONE NON-CONFORMING AND THEN ONE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.
UM, NUMBER 2 0 7, UH, WHICH IS FOR AN EVENT, UM, AN EVENT CENTER PREVIOUS USES, UM, THERE IS ONE NON-CONFORMING CHILDCARE CENTER, WHICH IS AT THE LOCATION OF 2304 TEXAS PARKWAY.
HERE IS THE SITE LOCATION HIGHLIGHTED ARE THE LEASE SPACES FOR THE PROPOSED, UH, ZONING CHANGES OF THE PLACES OF ASSEMBLY.
UM, AS WELL AS THE CHILDCARE CENTER.
WE HAVE THE PROPOSED CHILDCARE CENTER LOCATION, THE EXISTING, UM, PLACE OF ASSEMBLY, AN ADDITIONAL EXISTING PLACE OF ASSEMBLY, AND THE PROPOSED, UH, PLACE OF ASSEMBLY.
IN THE REPORT, UH, THE LOCATION OF OCCASIONS, UM, THERE IS A LEASE SPACE THAT IS CURRENTLY OPERATING WITH THE OCCUPANT.
UM, A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR OFFICE, UH, LOCATION.
UM, AT THE TIME OF THEIR PERMITTING, THEY DID HAVE A DESIRE TO HAVE AN EVENT LEASE SPACE.
UM, SO THIS ONE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE REPORT.
[00:15:01]
IF YOU CHOSE TO MOVE FORWARD, UM, AND ACCEPT THIS LOCATION AS AN ADDITIONAL PLACE OF ASSEMBLY USE, UM, YOU MAY DO SO BY, BY ADDING IT TO THE RECOMMENDATION TO FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL.ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UM, COMPLIANCE AS WELL AS THE UPDATING OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PROCESS, UH, THE APPLICATION HAS MET THREE OF THE GOALS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
UM, ALSO PRESENTED GOING THROUGH THE, UM, UPDATING PROCESS OF, OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WE HAD THE TEXAS CORRIDOR FOCUS GROUP, AS WELL AS THE COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE, UM, FEEDBACK.
UM, AND THAT INPUT IS PROVIDED IN THE PACKET AS WELL AS ON THE SLIDES.
UH, SO GOAL TWO, IT HAS MET FOR MORE VARIED DEVELOPMENT TO MOVE BEYOND THE BEDROOM, UH, PERCEPTION OF MISSOURI CITY AND INPUT HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO, UM, INPUT RECEIVED TO INCLUDE A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL OPTIONS FOR QUALITY CHILDCARE CENTERS OF GOAL THREE AND ONGOING AND INCREASING FOCUS ON NEIGHBORHOOD INTEGRITY, COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT.
AND, UM, AS THE COMMUNITY CONTINUES TO MATURE, SEVERAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOOLS HAVE BEEN UTILIZED TO UPDATE THE, UH, SHOPPING CENTER.
UM, ONE OF THOSE TOOLS IS THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FACADE PROGRAM.
UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS, UM, UPDATED THE BUILDING WITH FIRE SPRINKLERS, UM, AS WELL AS THE BUILDING FACADE AS WE ALL SEE TODAY.
AND ALONG WITH THE, UM, PARKING LOT, UM, UH, UPDATES, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS EXPRESSED DIFFICULTY, UM, IN RECRUITING AND ME MAINTAINING, UH, CITY DESIRED BUSINESSES.
UM, THERE AT ONE TIME THERE WAS A, A POTENTIAL TENANT RESTAURANT TENANT, UM, THAT WANTED TO OCCUPY THE SPACE AT 2304 TEXAS PARKWAY.
UM, THEY HAVE PULLED OUT, UH, THEREFORE, UM, THE PROPERTY OWNER CONTINUES TO EXPRESS THE DIFFICULTY IN MAINTAINING, UM, TENANTS MM-HMM
UM, ALSO WITH THE CODE COMPLIANCE IN FORCE, UM, ALL TENANTS, UH, OF THE SHOPPING CENTER WILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE, UH, CODE ORDINANCES OF GOAL FIVE, QUALITY DESIGN AND COMMUNITY APPEARANCE.
UM, ADDITIONAL INPUT CONTINUES TO EMPHASIZE THE APPEARANCE OF THE TEXAS PARKWAY CORRIDOR AS SHARED IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.
UM, WITH THE CORRIDOR BEING OUTDATED AND SEEING, UM, A DESIRE FOR FACADE IMPROVEMENTS, UH, THE TEXAS PARKWAY DID RANK FIRST AND HOW THE GENERAL COMMUNITY WOULD LIKE TO PRIORITIZE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.
UH, THE PLAN DOES, UM, DOES, UH, CHARACTERIZE THE CORRIDOR AS THE TEXAS PARKWAY MIXED CHARACTER DISTRICT FOR COMMERCIAL, UH, CHARACTER WITH THE POTENTIAL USES OF A SENIOR HOUSING, UM, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FLEX SPACE NORTH OF THE FIFTH STREET.
UM, AND COMMERCIAL USES FOR DRAINAGE UTILITIES, TRAFFIC.
THE SITE IS FULLY DEVELOPED, UM, AND THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS, UH, PROPOSED OR REQUIRED.
A TIA WORKSHEET HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND IT HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
RECOMMENDATION IS A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PD TO ALLOW FOR THE USES SUGGESTED LC THREE RETAIL DISTRICT ONE CHILDCARE CENTER USE IN THE SQUARE FEET AND LOCATION AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS.
ONE PLACES OF ASSEMBLY USE IN THE SQUARE FEET AND LOCATION AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN NOT TO EXTEND FIVE YEARS, INCLUDING THAT ADDITIONAL, UM, LEASE SPACE.
UM, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SUGGESTED CHILDCARE CENTER REGULATIONS TO, UM, HAVE AN OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREA.
IT IS DEPICTED ON THE SITE PLAN AS WELL.
AND FOR SECURITY FOR ALL EVENTS AND THE HOURS OF OPERATION FOR ALL EVENTS TO END AT 12 O'CLOCK MIDNIGHT.
HERE IS THE SITE PLAN, AGAIN, ITEMS TO CONSIDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDED TO REMOVE CHILDCARE CENTERS FROM THE, UM, AS A USE BY RIGHT.
AND SHOPPING CENTERS AND INTEGRATED BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES, SORRY.
UH, THE CODE OF ORDINANCES PROHIBITS THE CELL OF ALCOHOL BEVERAGES FROM A PLACE, UM, OF BUSINESS, BUSINESS WITHIN 300 FEET OF A CHURCH.
ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS ARE IMPOSED ON CERTAIN TYPES OF ALCOHOL CELLS IN PROXIMITY TO A CHILDCARE CENTER, UH, CURRENTLY, RECENTLY.
UM, AND, UH, A LIQUOR STORE HAS, UM, HAS SUBMITTED APPLICATION, UM, FOR A LOCATION
[00:20:01]
AT THE SITE AS WELL AS, UH, SPECIAL EVENT CENTERS.UM, THEY CAN SEEK, UH, ALCOHOL LICENSES AS WELL.
AND ADDITIONAL STANDARDS HAVE BEEN IMPOSED ON EVENT CENTERS, INCLUDING SAFETY AND HOURS OF OPERATION.
NOTICES WERE MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 250 FEET FROM THE PRO FROM THE SUBJECT SITE ON NOVEMBER 8TH.
AND ON THE SAME DAY, A UH, ZONING, UM, SIGN HAS WAS PLACED AT THIS TIME.
THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING, UM, BEFORE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE ON MONDAY, JANUARY 20 20TH, 2025.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
I'M NOT SURE IF THAT THE APPLICANT WASN'T ABLE TO MAKE IT THIS EVENING.
UM, BUT I DID ADVISE THAT HOPEFULLY THEY'RE STREAMING.
I, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
UH, YOU SAID ON THERE THAT CHANGING WILL ALLOW ONLY ONE PLACE OF ASSEMBLY WITHIN THAT PROPERTY.
NOT, IT HAS FOUR TWO, I THINK EXISTS IN DUE TWO POTENTIAL.
I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST PLACES OF ASSEMBLY.
I JUST THINK THAT'S A LITTLE UNUSUAL.
SO ONE TENANT, ONE SPEC, ONE PLACE OF ASSEMBLY IN THAT LEASE SPACE, IN A LEASE SPACE.
UM, JUST MAKING SURE THAT THERE AREN'T TWO, UM, OCCUPANTS WITHIN THERE.
UM, DOING DIFFERENT TYPES OF PLACES OF ASSEMBLY THAT ONLY ONE OCCUPANT IS IN THAT LEASE SPACE AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.
AND THEN THE, YEAH, SO THE, THE, EACH ONE OF THOSE SPACES IS PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION.
BUT FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE SPACES.
SO THEY DON'T SUBDIVIDE THAT ONE SPACE FOR MULTIPLE WITHIN THAT ONE SPACE, BUT ONE EARLY SPACE AS SHOWN MM-HMM
OH, SO THERE COULD BE FOUR MM-HMM
AND, AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION, YOU SAID THAT THERE WAS AN APPLICANT FOR A LIQUOR STORE OVER THERE ALSO? YES.
THIS MORE EDUCATION FOR ME, UM, BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE CITY, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT SELL ALCOHOL, UH, FROM A CITY STANDPOINT IS, ARE, IS THERE ANY LIABILITY CONCERNS WITH CHANGING, UH, THE ZONING TO WHERE THERE WOULD BE, UM, ALCOHOL SOLD? UM, AND I ASK BECAUSE OF THE, UH, NOT, I'M SORRY, NOT FOCUSING ON JUST THE ALCOHOL, BUT THERE WAS A, A MENTION OF HAVING SECURITY AT ALL EVENTS.
THAT THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING FOR.
THE, UM, LI FROM A LIABILITY STANDPOINT, IN THE EVENT OF INCIDENTS, WOULD THE CITY POTENTIALLY BE HELD LIABLE AT, AT AN EVENT WHERE THERE, UH, BECOMES AN ISSUE? DOES THAT QUESTION MAKE SENSE? MM-HMM
HI, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
SO IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY, YOU ARE ASKING WHETHER THE CITY WOULD BE LIABLE IF, UH, IN THE EVENT THERE WAS SOME SORT OF AN ACCIDENT RESULTING FROM ALCOHOL AT A PRIVATE BUSINESS? UH, YOU'RE ASKING WHETHER THE CITY WOULD BE LIABLE IN THAT INSTANCE? YES.
AND, AND IT'S MY MISTAKE FOR GUIDING US WITH THE ALCOHOL COMMENT, JUST REMOVING THE ALCOHOL COMMENT.
'CAUSE WHEN I SEE WE'RE, I, I THINK IT WAS SUGGESTED, NOT MANDATED, BUT SUGGESTED THAT SECURITY BE PRESENT.
SO IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE AS A CITY SUGGESTING THAT COULD A BUSINESS OWNER OR SOMEONE ELSE, BECAUSE WE'VE OPENED OURSELVES UP TO THAT KIND OF SUGGESTION, BE HELD LIABLE IN THE EVENT THAT SOMETHING HAPPENS, WHETHER SECURITY IS THERE OR NOT, GENERALLY, NO, THAT'S NOT CITY PROPERTY.
UM, AND THAT IS ACTUALLY A REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN REQUESTING OF DIFFERENT PLACES OF ASSEMBLIES THAT HAVE OPENED, UH, OR BEEN AUTHORIZED IN THE CITY.
SO THAT'S JUST A GENERAL REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY IS, HAS ASKED.
BUT NO, YOU'RE, YOU'RE THE LEGAL PERSON.
A LIQUOR STORE, YOU SAID WE ALREADY, WE ALREADY HAVE TWO.
SO THIS, UH, IT, IT APPEARS THAT THIS APPLICATION IS FOR A VARIETY OF USES AND I BELIEVE THAT LIQUOR STORES ARE AUTHORIZED UNDER LC THREE.
UM, SO IF THERE WAS A DESIRE TO REMOVE THAT, UH, BY THIS BOARD, YOU WOULD HAVE TO EXPRESSLY EXCLUDE, UH, THOSE TYPES OF USES IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO SEE THAT TYPE OF USE, UH, IN THIS PROP IN THIS DEVELOPMENT, YOU KNOW, BUT AGAIN, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE, UH, A JUSTIFIABLE REASON TO, TO DO THAT.
BUT IF YOU THINK THAT THERE'S A HIGH DENSITY OF THEM ALONG THE CORRIDOR,
[00:25:01]
I MEAN, THAT MIGHT BE ONE.BUT, UM, YOU, IS THAT A LEGAL LEGALLY, IF YOU TALK ABOUT THAT, IF YOU ALL WANTED TO GO INTO A CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 5 51 0.071, YOU COULD MAKE THAT MOTION AND WE COULD CERTAINLY ADDRESS, UH, THAT IN MORE DETAIL IN THE BACK IF DOES THAT.
SO I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED BY THE STAFF REPORT 'CAUSE IT HAD A NEGATIVE, A POSITIVE AND A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION.
UM, AND WHAT THIS BOILS DOWN TO, I BELIEVE IS, UM, WE DON'T WANT CHILDCARE CENTERS IN SHOPPING CENTERS, AND WE DON'T WANT ANY MORE PLACES OF SYMBI IN SHOPPING CENTERS, BASICALLY.
AND BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMIC SITUATION RIGHT NOW WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, WE'RE SAYING THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD ALLOW THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION TO, TO, FOR, FOR UP TO FIVE YEARS, I THINK IS, WAS THE RECOMMENDATION.
UM, AS FAR AS THE LIQUOR STORE, IT'S NOT PART OF THIS PARTICULAR ZONING REQUEST MM-HMM
SO I WOULD DEAL WITH THAT COMPLETELY SEPARATELY.
UM, WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GONNA ACTUALLY HAPPEN OR NOT.
SO, UM, SO I, I'M GUESSING THAT NO MATTER WHICH WAY WE GO, ULTIMATELY CITY COUNCIL'S GONNA KIND OF PUT THEIR MARK ON IT,
AND, UH, SO IT APPEARS FROM JIM'S, UH, REPORT THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDING POSITIVE AND WITH THE, WITH THE RESTRICTIONS THAT SUGGESTED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH I DIDN'T REALLY PICK UP THOSE IN THE REPORT.
SO, UM, SO I THINK THAT KIND OF, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA FOCUS ON MM-HMM
AND, UM, IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING.
LET'S SEE WHAT THE PUBLIC HAS TO SAY.
IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO SPEAK.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP.
UM, THEN, UH, I HAVE A QUESTION THOUGH, BUT WHEN YOU'RE SAYING SUGGESTED, DOES THAT MEAN YOU'RE REQUIRING IT OR IS IT JUST SUGGESTED THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO IT? I CAN REPLY TO THAT.
AND SO ULTIMATELY THE COMMISSION WILL VOTE ON THEIR RECOMMENDATION THAT'LL BE FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO IT'S, IT'S SUGGESTED UNTIL, UH, THE COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, EITHER ACCEPTS THAT SUGGESTION AND FORWARDS THEIR FINAL REPORT, AND THEN UNLESS CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTS THE RECOMMENDATION AND ADOPTS IT, IF, IF I DID HEAR, UH, OUR, OUR LEGAL COUNSEL CORRECTLY, I, I THINK THE CITY DOES REQUIRE OR SUGGEST THE SECURITY.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO GET UP TO THAT.
IT'S REQUIRED, YOUR HONOR, UH, SPECIFIC P THE CITY COUNCIL HAS REQUIRED.
SO IT'S NOT A RECOMMENDATION STOP ORDINANCE.
I, I APOLOGIZE TO YOU FOR THAT.
UH, SO IN PREVIOUS, UH, CASES, THE CITY COUNCIL HAS REQUIRED BY SPECIFIC USE PERMIT ORDINANCE OR PLAN DEVELOPMENT, DISTRICT ORDINANCE, OR THOSE OTHER PLACES OF ASSEMBLY TO HAVE SECURITY.
SO THAT HAS BEEN A REQUIREMENT BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
AND I LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT.
SO I GUESS, UM, WE WILL HAVE THE OPTION TO SAY, YES, THESE ARE GONNA BE REQUIREMENTS OR, OR NO, WE DON'T NEED TO ADD THOSE.
AND, AND ULTIMATELY SOUNDS LIKE CITY COUNCIL MAY ADD 'EM IN ANY WAY.
UM, BUT WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY WAS, UH, THEY WENT THE PD ROUTE.
IS THAT BECAUSE WE'RE KIND OF CIRCUMVENTING THE, THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE THAT SAYS NO, THAT WE CAN'T HAVE THESE LOCATIONS? SO THE PD IS, IS BECAUSE THEY, THEY'RE SUGGESTING SEVERAL TYPES OF USES, PLACES OF ASSEMBLY REQUIRED AN SUP.
UM, SO IF WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT SU OR, UH, PLACES OF ASSEMBLY, THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE A REQUEST FOR AN SUP.
UM, BUT BECAUSE CHILDCARE CENTERS ARE NOT A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT,
[00:30:01]
UH, USE THAT CAN RECEIVE APPROVAL, THEY'RE REQUESTING IT THROUGH A PD.UM, SO IF THERE'S NOBODY THAT IS GONNA SPEAK ON THIS, WE CAN CLOSE BOTH THE HEARING.
WAIT FOR HER TO PUT THE MOTOR.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO WE WILL, UH, MOVE ON TO CONSIDER POSSIBLE ACTION.
ANY DISCUSSION, THOUGHTS? YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD SOME DISCUSSION.
I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY'S, UH, KIND OF ON, ON, ON THE SAME PAGE HERE OR NOT ANY MORE DISCUSSION OR WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION, THEN WE HAVE A MOTION.
AND GO AHEAD AND STATE YOUR MOTION NOW JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY'S CLEAR WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE APPROVING OR DISAPPROVING.
THE MOTION IS FOR US TO APPROVE STAFFS RECORD.
WHICH INCLUDES BOTH THE GRAY BOXES.
JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT'S VERY CLEAR TO EVERYBODY.
EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THAT'S WHAT THE MOTION IS? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A, A SECOND.
AND THIS, AND EXCUSE ME, SORRY.
UM, IS THAT ALSO TO INCLUDE THE AT LEASE SPACE THAT WAS ADDED THIS EVENING THAT IS NOT IN THE STAFF REPORT? AND IF SO, IF YOU CAN INCLUDE THAT INTO THE STATEMENT.
WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION AGAIN? JUST MAKING SURE.
UM, WHEN THE REPORTS WENT OUT, THERE WAS FOR, UH, THREE LEASE SPACES, UM, AND THIS EVENING A FOURTH ONE WAS PRESENTED.
POSSIBLE, YES, FOR THE POSSIBLY LOCATION.
SO IT WOULD, SO THIS IS THE CURRENT STAFF REPORT THEN, RIGHT? YES.
ALRIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
[a. Nonconforming Use]
WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NINE.ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS, A NON-CONFORMING USE.
SO IN THE NON-CONFORMING USE, THERE'S NO PRESENTATION.
UM, THIS IS AN ITEM, UH, FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER.
UM, BASICALLY ADOPTING THE STATE, UH, CHANGES ON NON-CONFORMING USES.
AND SO THIS WOULD ADD, UM, A SECTION ON COMPENSATION, UM, REQUIREMENTS, UH, FOR NON-CON, NON-CONFORMING USES, UH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE TO 11 POINT, UH, 0 1 9.
UM, AND THEN ALSO THE REQUIREMENT FOR NOTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL USES THAT MIGHT BE IMPACTED BY AN ORDINANCE THAT CHANGES THE REGULATIONS.
AND IT'S ONE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT WITH GAS STATIONS, UM, WHERE IT REQUIRES NOTIFICATION IN A CERTAIN STATEMENT, UH, TO BE PLACED ON THOSE NOTICES, UH, TO THOSE POTENTIAL POTENTIALLY AFFECTED, UH, LOCATIONS.
UM, AND SO THIS IS AN ORDINANCE JUST TO TRACK THE STATE LAW, UM, IN THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE.
AND THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND WE HAVE NO ONE TO SPEAK.
SO WE WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT FIRST PART.
FIRST MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
GO AHEAD AND CAST YOUR VOTES, PLEASE.
SO WE WILL MOVE ON TO CONSIDER AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON NINE A ONE.
WHEN I READ THROUGH, UH, THE MAINTENANCE SECTION IN 16 SIX C, IT TALKS ABOUT THEY CAN DO, IF THEY HAVE A NON-CONFORMING USE, THEY CAN DO MAINTENANCE, BUT THEY CANNOT CHANGE THE FOOTPRINT OF WHAT THEY'RE THERE.
WHAT IF THE CITY OR THE STATE OR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PUT SOME KIND OF REGULATION IN PLACE THAT THEY HAVE TO CHANGE THEIR FOOTPRINT? DOES THAT SOMEHOW IT REQUIRES A NEW PIECE OF EQUIPMENT THAT CAN'T GO INSIDE A BUILDING THAT'S GOTTA GO OUTSIDE OR SOMETHING SUCH AS THAT?
[00:35:01]
IS THAT SOMEHOW GRANDFATHERED IN TO THE REGULATIONS? I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKELY.WE JUST KIND OF WONDERING WHO WE HAVE THE ATTORNEY RAISING THE EYEBROWS.
COMMISSIONER, YOU POSED A FANTASTIC QUESTION.
YOU SEE, MY WIFE SAYS I'M NOT GOOD FOR ANYTHING.
HOW ABOUT, I GUESS JUST, I THINK COMMISSIONER, I, I THINK YOU POSED A FANTASTIC QUESTION AND I THINK A SCENARIO LIKE THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE EVALUATED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
UM, JUST DEPENDING ON WHAT THE FEDERAL OR STATE REGULATION WAS.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE INTENTION OF THESE REVISIONS ARE TO MODEL THE REVISIONS TO THE STATE LAW AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS.
SO, UM, IN A ROUNDABOUT WAY OF GIVING YOU A REALLY NON-ANSWER, I THINK IT'S A, IT'S A CASE BY CASE ANALYSIS THAT WOULD, WOULD BE FACT SPECIFIC.
AND THE CITY HAS SOME LEEWAY WITH WHAT THEY DO IN THAT CASE.
I MEAN, THE CITY WOULD, WOULD FOLLOW STATE OR FEDERAL LAW.
BUT IF THEY WERE TO, BUT IF THE FEDERAL LAW REQUIRED THEM TO MAKE A CHANGE SUCH THAT IT CHANGED THEIR FOOTPRINT, DOES THE CITY HAVE THE ABILITY, THE AUTHORITY TO SAY, HEY, WE'RE YOU CAN DO THAT IN THIS CASE AND STILL KEEP DOING WHAT YOU'RE DOING? I MEAN, FEDERAL LAW TRUMP'S LOCAL LAW JUST AS A MATTER OF OKAY.
AND THEN, UM, I'M SORRY, THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE WAS ABOUT COMPENSATION.
SO IF SOMEBODY ENDS UP WITH A NON-CONFORMING, IT DOESN'T REALLY DETAIL WHAT COMPENSATION IS AND HOW THAT WORKS, CAN WE GET A BALLPARK OF JUST WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS IN THOSE CASES? BIG BOOK.
SO IT'S REFERENCED THE ISSUE OF COMPENSATION AND THE COMPENSATION OWED TO A PROPERTY OWNER WHO HAS WHAT'S CONSIDERED A NON-CONFORMING USE.
AND THEN THERE IS SOME ACTION BY THE CITY THAT REQUIRES THEM TO STOP THAT NON-CONFORMING USE.
THAT'S WHAT'S DETAILED IN THE CHANGES TO THE CURRENT STATE LAW.
IT'S REFERENCED WITHIN THE REVISED, UM, AMENDED ZONING TEXT AS PURSUANT TO TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE TWO 11.019.
IT'S DESCRIBED WITHIN THE TEXT.
UM, AS, SO IT'S, IT'S A TWO-PART, UM, ANALYSIS.
SO IT'S A PAYMENT FROM THE MUNICIPALITY.
THIS IS THE COMPENSATION OWED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER.
ONCE THE CITY SAYS YOU HAVE TO STOP OPERATIONS OF YOUR NONCONFORMING USE.
SO PAYMENT FROM THE MUNICIPALITY IN AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE SUM OF THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER TO CEASE OPERATION WITHIN THE PROPERTY.
SO THINK ABOUT IF IT'S A LESSEE OF A PROPERTY THAT HAS A 10 YEAR LEASE AND NOW THEY CAN'T OPERATE AND THERE'S A LEASE BREAK FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT TO THE LANDLORD, OR THEY HAVE A MORTGAGE ON THE PROPERTY.
SO SOME SORT OF, WHATEVER THAT VALUATION IS TO STOP OPERATIONS ON THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S ONE PIECE OF THE COMPENSATION THAT'S OWED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THE SECOND PIECE IS AN ANALYSIS OF THE DIFFERENCE IN THE VALUE OF THE LAND AFTER THE CHANGE IN ZONING AS COMPARED TO RIGHT BEFORE THE ZONING CHANGE.
SO IT'S, IT'S BASICALLY A TWO STEP ANALYSIS.
YOU DETERMINE THE DAMAGES TO THE PROPERTY OWNER BASED ON NOT BEING ABLE TO OPERATE ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN YOU CALCULATE THE DIFFERENCE IN THE PROPERTY VALUE BECAUSE OF THIS ZONING CHANGE.
BUT IT'S DESCRIBED IN TWO, UH, TWO 11.019 IN, IN GREAT DETAIL.
NOW, NOW I'M CURIOUS WITH, WE'LL JUST SET COST ANALYSIS OR UNDER THE STATUTE, THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO DIFFERENT AVENUES OF WHERE THAT MONEY CAN BE RECOVERED FROM.
AND IT'S AT THE ELECTION OF THE PROPERTY OWNER.
ONE OF THEM IS COMPENSATION OWED BY THE CITY.
SO THE CITY HAS TO COME UP WITH THAT, THOSE FUNDS AND PAY THEM TO THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THE SECOND POTENTIAL AVENUE IS THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN CONTINUE TO OPERATE FOR WHATEVER TIME IT TAKES FOR THEM TO RECOVER THOSE COSTS.
SO ONCE THAT VALUE IS IDENTIFIED, THEY CAN CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNTIL THEY'VE RECOVERED THAT AMOUNT.
UM, SO THERE'S TWO AND IT'S AT THE PROPERTY OWNERS ELECTION.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS? MR. DAVIDSON HAS ALREADY MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS, I ASSUME.
[b. Gas Stations]
NOW WE'RE GONNA TALK[00:40:01]
ABOUT GAS STATIONS, BUT WE'RE ONLY GONNA TALK ABOUT 'EM.WE'RE NOT GONNA, UH, TAKE ANY ACTION TONIGHT ON THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM.
ONLY PRESENTATION AND PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THE COMMISSION RECEIVES PUBLIC COMMENTS, UH, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED.
AND DO WE HAVE ANYBODY TO SPEAK ON THE SIDE? WE DO.
WHEN I STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM.
YOU HAVE TO LOOKING, LOOKING FORWARD TO THE, UH, PRESENTATION.
BOB DAVID, 45, 11 CREEK POINT.
ALSO, UH, NEWLY ELECTED, UH, VICE PRESIDENT, UH, AS STATES OF SILVER RIDGE.
UM, BUT WE SPECIFICALLY WANTED TO SPEAK AGAINST THE AMENDMENT TO THE GAS STATION, UM, RULES.
I, YOU KNOW, KIND OF LIKE CAR WASHES IN MISSOURI CITY.
THERE'S AN ABUNDANCE AND, UH, I THINK SPECIFIC PLACEMENT IS, IS IMPORTANT.
BEING TOO CLOSE TO RESIDENTS AND, AND NEIGHBORHOODS.
THE, THE INSIDE OF NEIGHBORHOODS, ESPECIALLY OVER IN OUR AREA THERE, BUT NOT JUST THERE.
WE ARE SPEAKING FOR THE ENTIRE MISSOURI CITY.
I THINK IT, BUT SPECIFICALLY OURS.
SO THAT REALLY AFFECTS THE AREA THERE.
JUST TO BE SPECIFIC ON THAT LITTLE CORRIDOR.
IT DEFINITELY, UH, AFFECTS THAT.
UM, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE CONSTRUCTION AND WHATEVER'S GONNA HAPPEN, UH, AIR QUALITY POLLUTION AND SO FORTH, IT'S ALREADY HIGH.
IT'S ALREADY, UH, HITTING LEVELS THAT WE GET DAILY ALMOST.
UM, SO WE DEFINITELY WANT TO GO AGAINST, UH, THE CHANGES FOR, UM, UH, WE EVEN HEARD LAST TIME SOME GUYS CAME AND WANTED TO HAVE MORE GAS STATIONS, MORE GAS STATIONS.
I, I JUST REALLY THINK JUST CAREFUL PLANNING AND STRATEGIC LOCATION, UH, IS REALLY WHAT MISSOURI CITY NEEDS AND WOULD REALLY ENCOURAGE, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS TO, UH, VOTE THAT WAY.
UM, SO THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT THIS ACTION IS TRYING TO DO IS TO PLACE MORE RESTRICTIONS ON GAS STATIONS REQUIRING AN SUP FOR A GAS STATION THAT IS ADJACENT TO ANY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, WHEREAS THAT'S NOT REQUIRED TODAY.
SO THE CITY'S GOING IN THE DIRECTION THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY SPEAKING FOR.
UM, AND THAT, THAT WAS THE ONLY PERSON WE HAD FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THEN WE CAN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING PLEASE.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION.
AND SO WE WILL TALK ABOUT THIS NEXT MONTH.
MAYBE IN FURTHER WE'LL SCHEDULE IT.
YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION,
SHOULD WE FEEL GUILTY EVERY TIME WE GET GAS BECAUSE OF THE AIR QUALITY? AND I MEAN, THAT'S WHERE THEIR YEARS DEVELOPERS HAVE DONE IT.
THE MORE ROOFTOPS WE HAVE IS THEY'RE GONNA BE CLOSE TO RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE.
I WAS GONNA SAY, THAT'S WHERE PEOPLE WANT TO GET GAS.
RIGHT? AND THERE HAS TO BE A BALANCE OF TRY TO LIVE A MONTH WITHOUT, AT GAS STATION.
WE, WE WILL HEAR MORE NEXT WEEK, NEXT MONTH.
[c. Political Signs]
WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM C.POLITICAL SIGNS, PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENT OR AGAINST PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE RECORD REGARDING POLITICAL SIGNS, JUST TO GIVE YOU ALL A LITTLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION BEFORE YOU OPEN UP YOUR PUBLIC HEARING.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY SPEAKERS REGISTERED FOR THIS ONE.
UM, BUT YOU, UH, THE CITY AUTHORIZES POLITICAL SIGNS, UH, PRIOR TO ELECTIONS IN THE PAST.
THE TIMEFRAME FOR WHICH, OR AT WHICH THOSE SIGNS COULD BE POSTED HAS BEEN INTERPRETED AS 30 DAYS PRIOR TO EARLY VOTING.
THIS LAST ELECTION CYCLE, THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION AMONG FOLKS RUNNING FOR OFFICE AND CITY STAFF ABOUT WHAT ELECTION DAY MEANS IN THE CITY'S ORDINANCE.
[00:45:01]
TO ADDRESS THIS, UH, FOR FUTURE ELECTIONS, UH, THIS PROPOSAL IS BEING, UH, OFFERED TO YOU ALL TO CONSIDER, TO JUST CLARIFY THAT ELECTION DATE MEANS 30 DAYS PRIOR TO, UH, EARLY THE BEGINNING OF EARLY VOTING.SO THAT IS THE ONLY CHANGE, UH, TO THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE AT THIS TIME.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THANK I REALLY APPRECIATED THE, THE, THE UPDATES IN THE ORDINANCE SHOWING WHAT CHANGED AND WHAT WAS ADDED.
'CAUSE THOSE ORDINANCES ARE, ARE READ JUST LIKE THE AGENDA DOES
UH, SO, UH, WE HAVE NOBODY TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION.
SO WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM TWO, CONSIDER CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? LET'S BE STRAIGHTFORWARD.
I THINK THERE WILL BE NOBODY QUESTIONING WHETHER OR NOT IT'S EARLY VOTING OR REGULAR VOTING.
SO WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY HAVE THE SIGN BEFORE OR AFTER OUTSIDE THE PERIMETER THAT YOU'RE FINDING? SO THE, UH, CAMPAIGNS ARE CONTACTED AND THEY'RE ASKED TO REMOVE THE SIGNS PRIOR TO THE TIMEFRAME IN WHICH THEY'RE ALLOWED TO POST THEM.
COULD THERE BE A DEPOSIT FOR LOCAL ELECTIONS? AND IN LIEU OF, AS LONG AS YOU FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES, YOU GET THE DEPOSIT BACK THAT IF YOU DON'T, THE FUNDS WILL BE USED TO TAKE YOUR SIGNS DOWN IF YOU LEAVE THEM THERE.
BUT THE CITY DOESN'T REMOVE SIGNS FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY.
WE ONLY REMOVE SIGNS FROM PUBLIC PROPERTY.
SO THERE'S COMMUNI A COMMUNICATION TO PROPERTY OWNERS AND TO CAMPAIGNS WHEN, UH, THOSE SIGNS ARE PLACED.
UH, THERE ARE LEFT THERE OUTSIDE OF THE TIMEFRAME.
UH, THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.
I, I DON'T KNOW THAT, UM, THE CITY WOULD WANT TO REQUIRE, UH, FUNDING FROM THOSE TYPES OF SIGN OWNERS WHEN WE DON'T DO THAT FOR OTHER TYPES OF SIGNS.
UH, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING, YOU KNOW.
WE'LL, WE WILL BE LOOKING AT THE SIGN ORDINANCE JUST TO BRACE YOURSELVES.
UH, WE WILL BE LOOKING AT THAT IN THE, THE NEAR FUTURE.
UM, SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CONSIDER AT THAT TIME, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA PICK UP THE SIGNS FOR YOU, JOHN
WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, TO APPROVE THIS AND, UH, WE HAVE A SECOND.
[a. Comprehensive Plan Update]
AND WE WILL MOVE ON THEN TO ITEM 10.COMMISSIONERS, I'M GONNA TAKE THIS ONE AS WELL.
UM, WE DO NOT HAVE A STAFF REPORT TONIGHT JUST TO LET THE COMMISSION KNOW THAT WE ARE STILL WORKING WITH THE CONSULTANT TEAM, UM, ON THE EVALUATION OF THE INPUT RECEIVED, UM, IN FORMULATING, UH, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
UH, SO WE HOPE TO HAVE THAT OUT FOR THE COMMISSION TO REVIEW.
UM, THE SCHEDULE STILL, UH, WOULD INCLUDE A PUBLIC, UH, TOWN HALL, UH, ONCE THE COMMISSION AND THE COUNCIL, UM, HAVE HAD TIME, UH, TO REVIEW THOSE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, SO THAT IS STILL PART OF THE SCHEDULE.
UM, WE'LL CONTINUE TO HAVE THIS ON THE AGENDA AS WE WORK THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, JENNIFER? AND WE ARE HAVING A PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY HERE.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY WE DON'T HAVE? OKAY.
ITEM THREE, PLANNING THE ZONING, COMMISSION INPUT AND DISCUSSION.
IS THERE ANY OF THAT TONIGHT? WE ANXIOUSLY AWAIT THE REPORT.
ALRIGHT, THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE LAST AGENDA ITEM.