Houston Planning Commission.

I'll now call this meeting to order.

I am uh Sunny Garza chairing.

I am chairing today the Houston Planning Commission meeting.

And I'm officially calling this meeting to order at 2 32 on Thursday, the 11th of June 2026.

This is an in-person meeting taking place in the city hall annex uh at 900 Bagby.

You may also monitor this meeting by viewing via HTV.

A little housekeeping before we move forward.

Um, if you wish to address the commission on an item, please fill out the speaker's form before the item is called.

It looks like this.

Watch your penmanship.

I'm really bad at it.

So I turned it into the staff over here by the doors.

Consent and repeat uh repeat speakers are allowed one minute.

New speakers are allowed two minutes.

Now, just so you know, the speaker signed up form.

The information is here on the back of the form.

Council members uh speaking for their constituents are not timed.

Applicants have their allotted two minute time as well as rebuttals.

Non-applicants and general speakers are allowed two minutes.

Um there's not an option for a rebuttal, even if you did not use your full two-minute time.

So with that said, to establish a quorum, I will go ahead and call the roll.

The chair, Lisa Clark will not be present today.

Uh Vice Chair Sunny Garza is present.

Um, Commissioner Baldwin.

Present.

Uh Commissioner Ballard.

Present.

Commissioner Carroll.

Present.

Commissioner Heisch will not be in attendance today.

Commissioner Heinz is not in attendance.

Uh Commissioner Jones.

Present.

It's present.

Uh Commissioner Marez.

Present.

Commissioner Naranjo.

Present.

Uh Commissioner Pham will not be present today.

Uh Commissioner Pierce is not here.

Uh, Commissioner Saran.

Present.

Is here.

Uh Commissioner Shepard will not be in attendance today.

Commissioner Sigler.

Present.

He's present.

Uh Commissioner Sykes present.

Is present.

Uh, Commissioner Virter Victor is present.

Thank you.

Um, Commissioner uh Madapaka.

President is present.

And who am I missing?

And Secretary Vontran.

Oh.

Present.

Thank you.

Commissioner Pierce.

Exactly, has just arrived.

And Commissioner Porrish Purdle is also here.

I didn't call you.

I'm so sorry.

That's okay.

I just I'm a little nervous.

You know how this is.

So I think we have 14.

One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen.

Thank you.

And we have quorum.

All right.

That done.

Um we will now move on to the uh director's report.

Director Tran.

Good afternoon, Vice Chair Sunny Garza.

Commission members, staff, and the public.

I am Von Tran, Secretary of this Commission and Director of the Planning and Development Department.

Welcome.

I have only one item to report today.

Our office hosted the 2026 major thoroughfare and freeway plan amendment.

Virtual open house yesterday evening.

This meeting allowed the applicants to showcase their proposed amendments to the public with the assistance of the development services staff.

We had several dozen attendees and a lively discussion on the amendment requests.

The next step in the amendment process will be a public hearing before the Planning Commission on Thursday, July 23rd at 1 p.m.

in this chamber.

In closing, for assistance, please call the planning and development department at 832-393-6600 to reach the planner of the day.

Call 832-393-6624.

You may visit us online at Houston Planning.com.

This concludes my report.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director Tran.

All right.

Are there questions or comments at all before we move forward?

All right.

Ladies and gentlemen, before we begin, the following items have been withdrawn and will not be considered today, and they are items 69, 70, 85, and 103.

Again, they will not be considered today.

Now on the side, I want to mention I have two people who have signed up to speak on item 69.

Are you here?

All right, so your option is again this item is not going to be considered today.

It will not be discussed.

You will have an opportunity to speak if you choose to stay till the end for uh for public comment.

It's completely up to you.

Uh, if and when this comes up, it will come up again on the agenda, and you'll you'll be notified that it's coming up again.

So, again, it's totally up to you.

If you want to speak today on item 69, you can wait for public comment at at the end of the meeting.

Thank you very much.

All right.

Uh, with that, we will move forward to um consideration of the May 28, 2026 planning commission meeting minutes.

Um, they are in your packet, uh, commissioners.

If there are no changes or corrections, is there a motion for approval?

Motion.

Second.

Ballard.

Ballard.

Thank you.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Okay, hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

Uh, if you would make a note that Commissioner Jones has arrived.

Right?

Yes, I understand.

Well, who just oh, thank you.

Okay.

I can't keep track of everything.

It's like juggling up here, you know that.

All right, so with that, we'll move on to uh Roman number one plating activity A and B.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair, members of the planning commission.

My name is Akilah Bidgee.

Sections A and B are presented as one group, which includes consent and replant items not requiring notification.

Sections A and B are items one through 64.

Section A consent items are numbers one through 33, and section B replat items are numbers 34 through 64.

No items need to be taken out of order, and there are no changes to staff recommendations.

Mr.

Chair, if there are no individuals signed up to speak on these items, the planning and development department request the approval of all staff recommendations for consent and replat items not requiring notification.

Thank you, Ms.

Becky.

Um, commissioners, items for separate consideration.

Commissioner Martes.

Yes, on uh section A 7, 20, 28, 2930, and on section B 60.

All right, 60.

Commissioners, anyone else.

All right.

We're going to be looking at items voting on items one through 64, save and accept 7, 20, 28 through 30, and 60.

If there are no questions, is there um a motion?

Victor, second.

Matis.

All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Alright, and now at this point, um, since we have no speakers, I will we'll now vote on uh items 7, 20, 28 through 30 and 60.

Is there a motion?

Poris Pertle, second, Carol.

Carol, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you, Mr.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to C replatts requiring public hearings.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair members of the planning commission.

My limit Araceli Rodriguez.

Item 65, Charlotte Mont Place.

The site is located in the city limit, south of Parker Parker Road and east of Northwestside Drive.

The purpose of the WIPLA is to create three single family residential lots.

No variances are being requested with this item.

The applicant has met all the notification requirements.

Review by legal indicate that the plot will not violate restriction on the face of the plat or those filed separately.

Staff did not receive any public comment in advance.

That recommendation is to approve the plot, substitute the CPC 101 form condition.

Mr.

Chair, it's a pleasure of the commission.

You may open the public hearing for this item at this time.

Thank you.

The public hearing for item 65, Charles Mont place is open.

I have no one signed to speak.

Is there anyone here who wishes to address the commission?

Seeing none, we'll move on.

I close the public hearing.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a recommendation to replace approve the plat, subject to the conditions listed.

Are there questions?

Is there a motion for staff recommendation?

Second ballard.

Ballard.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Item 66.

Item 66 cover residences.

The subsidy site is located in the city limit west of Scotch Street and south of Wheat Road.

The purpose of the Wii plat is to create one multi-unit reserve, M U R.

The applicant requested a variant to section 183 to convert one lot into the MURCER.

Staff recommend to defer the plot additional time if needed to allow the applicant to provide a letter of support from the adjoining lot.

The applicant has met all the notification requirements, and staff did not receive any public comments in advance.

That recommendation is to defer the plot for additional information.

Mr.

Chair is a pleasure of the commission.

You may open the public hearing for this item at this time.

Alright, thank you.

The public hearing for item 66 Culver residences is open.

I have no one signed to speak.

Is there anyone here who wishes to address the commission?

Seeing none, we'll move on.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a recommendation to defer this item and continue the public hearing.

Are there questions or comments?

Hearing none, is there a motion to defer?

Jones, second.

Carroll.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion is deferred.

Thank you.

The item is deferred.

Thank you.

Item 67.

Item 67.

Lavenport Manor.

The site is located in the city limit south of Belport Street and east of Scotch Street.

The purpose of the Wii Plat is to create two single-family residential lots.

No variances are being requested with this item.

The applicant has met all the notification requirements.

Review by legal indicates that the plot will not violate restriction on the face of the plot or those filed separately.

Staff did not receive any public comments in advance.

That recommendation is to approve the plat subject to the CPC 101 form condition.

Mr.

Chair, if the pleasure the commission, you may open the public hearing for this item at this time.

Thank you.

The public hearing for item 67 Davenport Manor is open.

I have no one signed to speak.

Is there anyone who wishes to address the commission on this item?

Seeing none, I will close the public hearing with a recommendation to approve the plat subject to conditions.

Questions or comments?

Is there a motion for staff um approval?

No, Maris.

Sir Rem.

Durham.

Sir Rem, pardon me.

I misheard.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

Item 68.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair, members of the planning commission.

My name is John Phillips.

Item 68 is FMU Kwood Collection.

The subject site is an over 10,000 square foot property located in the Houston City limits, east of Anchuan Drive and north of Westview Drive.

The reason for replat is to create four lots on a shared driveway.

There are no variances requested with this item, and the applicant has met all notice requirements.

This is a replat of lot one and block three of Pine Terrace Section 3.

Staff has received advanced comments regarding concerns over deed restrictions on the property.

Review by legal indicates the proposed plat does violate separately filed deed restrictions regarding building lines and lot size.

The application was deferred last cycle to per public per applicant request to coordinate with legal.

Staff recommendation is to get to again defer the plat for two weeks per applicant request to allow further coordination with legal uh to potentially come into compliance with those deed restrictions.

Mr.

Chair, if it please the commission, you may continue the public hearing for this item at this time.

Thank you, Mr.

Cudio.

Uh the public hearing is continued on item sixty-eight.

Um I have no one signed to speak.

Is there anyone who wishes to address the commission?

Seeing none, we'll move on.

We've got a staff recommendation for deferral.

Are there questions or comments?

Hearing none, is there a motion to defer?

Sigler, second.

All right.

All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

This item is deferred along with the public hearing.

Thank you.

Items 69 and 70 have been withdrawn.

We will move to item 71.

Item 71 is Madero Village.

The subject site is an over 11,000 square foot property located in the Houston city limits at the southwest intersection of Madera Road and League Road, north of Tidwell and east of Mesa Drive.

The reason for replat is to create two lots on a shared driveway.

There are no variances requests for this item, and the applicant has made all notification requirements.

This is a replat of lot one sixteen, block 5 of Kent Shire Place Section 1.

The item was posted in the agenda, but the items pack was missing from the full agenda packet.

Therefore, staff recommendation is to defer the plat for two weeks to provide the full packet in the following agenda.

Mr.

Chair, if it pleases the commission, you may open the public hearing for this item at this time.

Thank you.

The public hearing for item 71 is open.

I have no one signed to speak.

Is there anyone here who wishes to address the commission?

We have a staff recommendation to defer and continue the public hearing for two weeks.

As such, is there a motion for staff recommendation?

Baldwin, second.

Pierce.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

This item is deferred and the public hearing continued.

Item 72.

Item 72, Royal Plaza.

The site is located in the city limit north along Wishman Avenue and west of Fountain View Drive.

The purpose of the Wii Plat is to create one unrestricted reserve.

No variances are being requested with this item.

The applicant hath met all the notification requirements.

Review by legal indicate that the plot would not violate restriction on the face of the plot or those filed separately.

Staff recommendation is to approve the plat subject to the CPC 101 form condition.

Mr.

Chair, if it please with the Commission, you may open the public hand for this item at this time.

Thank you.

The public hearing is open on item 72, Royal Plaza.

I have no one signed to speak.

Is there anyone here who wishes to address the commission?

Hearing none, I'll close the public hearing.

We have a recommendation to approve the plat subject to conditions listed.

Questions or comments.

Motion.

Jones, second.

Carroll.

Carroll.

All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

Item 73.

Item 73.

Woodland Acres Part 2 replat number 5.

The site is located in the city limit south of Interstate Highway 10 and east of Federal Road.

The purpose of the replat is to create two single family residential lots.

No variances are being requested with this item, and the applicant has met all the notification requirements.

Review by legal indicate that the proposed lot are subject to a minimum 25 feet from borderline with 5 feet side of the line per applicable restriction.

The applicant has provided a revised subdivision plat meeting this applicable restriction, which not violate restriction on the face of the plat or those filed separately.

Staff did not receive any public comment in advance.

Mr.

Chair is to please the commission.

You may open the public hearing for this item at this time.

Thank you.

The public hearing on item 73, Woodland Acres, partial replot number five is open.

I have no one signed to speak.

Is there anyone here who wishes to address the commission?

All right.

Hearing none, I will close the public hearing.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a recommendation from staff for approval.

If there are no questions or comments, is there a motion?

Motion.

Sight, second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to D subdivision flats with variance requests.

Item 74 is FM 529 Eldridge Business Park.

The subject site is an over 10 and a half acre property located in the Harris County Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, south along FM 529 and west of Elders Parkway.

The applicant is proposing a single unrestricted reserve and is requesting a variance to not provide a north-south street through the site.

Staff is in support of the request.

The site is currently used for warehouse distribution and office and intends to create two additional structures in line with that use.

To the south is a residential trailer community which takes access from the dead end street of Weyman Road.

Further south is the Addicts Fairbanks landfill, the drill quick recorded plat, and the exit south recorded plat, which allow no further continuation to the south.

The Horse Pen Creek to the west uh allows no further connection to the west either.

So any traffic that would go through the site would be routed back to Eldridge Parkway, uh, through which FM 29 directly connects.

Uh FM 529.

Harris County Engineering Department has no objection to the variance requests.

Staff recommendation is to grant the requested variance and approve the plat subject to CPC 101 form conditions.

Mr.

Chair, this concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you so much.

Uh ladies and gentlemen, we're on item 74, FM 529 Eldridge Business Park.

I have no one signed to speak.

Is there anyone here wanting to speak?

No.

Okay.

Uh we've got a recommendation from staff to grant the requested variants and approve the plat.

Questions, comments?

Motion.

Victor, second.

Wait.

Carolyn who?

I'm sorry, guess.

I'm uh I'm old and my hearing is going.

Okay, so you might have to have each like a different colored flag and meetings to come just so that you know.

Yahoo.

Right.

Okay.

All right.

Uh if no, uh we've got a motion and a second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

Item 75.

Item 75 and 76 would like to be taken as one item, being grant meet Grand Mason general plan and Grand Mason uh detention reserve A.

The general plan and detention reserve are 1100 acres and 14 acres respectively, located in Harris County extraterritorial jurisdiction, east along 99 Grand Parkway and south of West Road.

The applicant is proposing a general plan intended for single family development along with amenities and drainage and detention.

They are requesting a variance to not extend nor terminate with the cul-de-sac Stock Dick School Road along the western boundary.

The eastern half of the right-of-way stubs into the GP boundary, while the western half stubs into privately owned lots shown in orange.

Stock Deck School Road currently exists as a dirt trail that gives maintenance access to the pipeline and center point power line uh corridor that intersect the right-of-way.

The applicant has discovered discrepancies and legal information regarding the status of Stock Dick School Road and whether it is publicly dedicated in part or in full.

Therefore, staff recommendation is to defer the plat for two weeks per applicant request to allow the applicant to coordinate with Harris County Engineering to confirm right of way information.

Upon the deferral, Grand Mason detention reserve A would require deferral, but has been deferred twice and must be disapproved.

However, the applicant has submitted in writing a request for a 30-day extension and is present to make that request of the commission today.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Cidio.

Actually, I'm a little confused.

Did you not say 75 and 77 when we started?

75 and 76.

Thank you.

That clears that up.

Thank you.

I may have.

I apologize.

All right.

No, no, no.

So that's perfectly fine.

So I have no one signed to speak on this item.

So, ladies and gentlemen, we're on 75 and 76.

Grand Mason GP and detention reserve number uh reserve A has been recommended for deferral at the applicant's request, the second being for 30 days.

Questions or comments?

Alright, hearing none.

Uh we again we have a motion for deferral.

Um two weeks and then 30 days.

All right.

So questions, comments.

Is there a motion?

Motion Montepaka.

Montepaca.

Second Baldwin.

All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

Now 77 Houston office build out.

That would it would be now for 76 for the third day session because it must be heard from the application.

Oh, it must be done separately.

It must be heard as a request from the applicant.

Okay.

So we have the deferral.

We just voted on the deferral.

Okay.

Consensus.

Are we good with that vote being only for 75?

Okay.

So we will now vote on 76, which is the 30 days.

And so uh questions or comments about the 30-day extension.

It must be heard from the applicant as a request to the commission.

Oh, the applicant is here.

Thank you.

I know that pesky state law gets in my car every time.

Go ahead, please.

Um good afternoon, Mr.

Chair, members of the planning commission.

Uh my name is Grace Lepetska with BGE and the applicant, and I would like to formally request um the 30 day extension.

Thank you.

And that will be on paper to staff.

It is.

Thank you.

All right.

Questions for our applicant.

All right.

Thank you so very much.

Thank you.

All right.

Hearing none, we'll move on to uh again item 76, the detention reserve, the 30-day extension.

Is there a motion?

Motion Rundapaka.

Montepaka, second.

Baldwin.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

Okay, we'll get there eventually, boys and girls.

It just takes me a minute.

Okay.

Houston office is built out.

Houston office built out.

The subject side is a 1.4-acre property located in the Harris County Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, south of Town Road and west of Gasner Road.

The applicant is proposing one on a restricted reserve and is requesting a variance to allow an unrestricted reserve to take access via an access easement in lieu of public street frontage.

Staff is in support of the request.

The site is a landlocked property that currently takes access via an existing 60-foot-wide access easement.

The site intends to make updates to the existing building that requires permitting and thus platning of the site.

In 2023, the site to the immediate west, Clara Road Industrial Park, was granted a variance and not providing East West Street to the site.

This limits potential access for the subject site outside of the existing access easement.

Harris County Engineering is in support of the variance.

Thank you, Mr.

Cidio.

All right, we're on item 77 office Houston office build-out with a recommendation for approval.

I have no one signed to speak.

Anyone wants to address the commission?

Alright, hearing that, questions, comments?

Is there a motion?

Motion.

Montepaka, second.

Jones.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

Item 78.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair, members of the Houston Planning Commission.

My name is Devin Critdle.

Item 78 is Market Street Lift Station number two.

The site is located within Houston City limits south of Market Street and west of Hayden Road.

The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a lift station to take access from an excuse me to allow a lift station to take access from an existing access easement instead of the required public right-of-way as required by the ordinance.

Staff is in support of this request.

The site is an existing 30 by 30 foot lift station created by the Uvaldi Center Subdivision Platte in 1985.

The purpose of this plat application is to increase the size of the lift station to better accommodate utility services in the area.

The unique circumstances surrounding this request is that the recorded plat dedicated a 60-foot access easement with the intent of providing access to the lift station.

The lift station is located in the rear of the paved commercial parking lot away from residential development.

Staff supports this request as the alt the alternative method of providing sufficient access to the lift station already exist.

Staff has not received any objection to this request, and staff recommends granting the requested variance and approving the plat subject to the CPC 101 form conditions.

This concludes my presentation.

Again, ladies and gentlemen, we're on item 78 Market Street Lift Station number two.

Uh we have a recommendation to grant the requested variants.

I have no one signed to speak.

No.

Alright.

With that, questions or comments.

Is there a motion?

Narangho and Ballard.

Correct.

Narangho and Ballard for staff recommendation.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to item 79, Mountain View Terrace.

Yes, sir.

Mountain View Terrace.

Uh, this site is located in the Acres Homes area in the city limits south of Little York Road and east of Carver Road.

The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the dedication of a 40-foot right-of-way instead of the required 50 feet and to allow a minimum intersection spacing less than 75 feet.

Staff is in support of this request.

The applicant is proposing 51 single-family lots along a series of shared driveways.

This property is located within the acres home mobility study area.

The intent of the mobility study was to analyze traffic needs in the area and identify valuable street connections to improve connectivity.

This property was identified as a desirable street extension of Bethune Drive to Wilberforce Street.

The applicant is making the necessary connection as indicated on the mobility study.

Chapter 42 requires local streets to be, excuse me.

Chapter 42 requires local streets to be a minimum of 50 feet wide, and to center line tie with an existing street or separate the intersection by at least 75 feet.

Justification for supporting the 40 foot right-of-way is a compromise for the applicant to provide the necessary street extension while also providing enough room for 10 foot travel lanes, five foot sidewalks, and safety buffers on each side of the right-of-way.

Due to the location of the property, the applicant physically cannot make the center line tie with Sebra Street south of Weberforce Street.

Houston Public Works is aware of this proposed intersection and will explore traffic calming measures once the project gets to the permitting stage if necessary.

Staff has not received any objection to this request and recommends granting the requested variance and approving the plat subject to the CPC 101 form conditions.

This concludes my presentation.

Thank you, sir.

Ladies and gentlemen, we're on item 79, Mountain View Terrace with a recommendation to grant the requested variances and approve the plat.

I have no one signed to speak.

Is there anyone who wishes to address the commission?

Hearing none, are there questions or comments?

Just curious, Bethune Street, what is the right-of-way there?

Is it 40 feet or?

What's 50 feet?

It's 50 feet north of this site.

Yes, sir.

I'd like to add it is separated by um Akilah.

Do you mind going to the exhibit that shows the drainage ditch to the north?

So the existing right-of-way to the north is separated by a 20-foot drainage easement.

It's likely to be paved over, but that's more of a public works kind of consideration, but it will be a transition from 50 down to 40.

But it will the intent is for it to connect.

I don't want to speak too much for for public works how that how the construction is going to be over a drainage ditch, but there are other examples of streets crossing this same drainage ditch.

So we know it's it's possible for sure.

And Mr.

Crittle, we've approved 40 foot right-of-ways.

Yes, sir, many, many times.

Yes, sir.

Yes.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Anyone else?

Yeah, I mean, respectfully, I'm just trying to figure out how this isn't a self inflicted.

Inflicted hardship.

Like I mean, physically, are there any reason other than their proposal that we can get a 50-foot ride of way, especially when we have a road extension to the north at that same width?

Sure.

So this site is within the Acres Home Mobility Study uh area.

Um this area is lacking a lot of street connections.

So a compromise to help with the dedication to make sure we actually get the streets.

Um we looked at different options for uh reduced right-of-ways.

Um we don't always have the ability to get the 50-foot right-of-way, so we did come up with different options.

Uh in this scenario, because I think getting the street was more was the most important thing.

Um, and even within that right-of-way, we can still get the necessary travel lanes and and sidewalks.

Uh so this is a uh common request and specifically in the acres home mobility study area.

Um let me ask a question.

Mr.

Crittle, I was just asking the director.

I am I recalling that the property next door was supposed to dedicate some right-of-way and could not or would not or something.

I don't remember, and it wasn't it wasn't viable at this point in time, and that's why we're going with the four.

Yes, that's uh that's a good comment.

Uh Akilah, go to uh the dash line you see in purple, technically this right-of-way portion of the right-of-way would be within this plat boundary, and if we were to make it 50 feet, maybe 10 to 15 feet would have to come from the neighboring properties, and it'd be it will be some time before we actually get the full dedication.

It would require all of those adjacent tracks to play.

Okay, that that kind of explains it better.

Thank you.

Yeah, all right, appreciate that.

Since we could do one or we can do that.

Or yeah.

So okay.

That explains it.

Thank you very much.

More questions, comments?

Commissioner Baldwin, did you have something?

Okay.

Anyone else?

All right.

Thank you, Mr.

Critdle.

So again, we're on item 79, Mountain View Terrace.

Have no one signed to speak.

Is there anyone here who wishes to uh address the commission on this item?

Okay.

So we've got a recommendation to grant the requested variants and approve the plat subject to the conditions listed.

Again, we're on item 79.

There's no questions or comments.

Is there a motion for staff recommendation?

Matis.

Second.

Sigler.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

Item 80.

Good afternoon, Chairman Garza and members of the Planning Commission.

My name is Petra Schop.

Item 80 is North Houston Commerce Park GP.

The site is located within the Houston ETJ, Harris County, north along FM 1960, east of these road, and west of Rayford Road.

The applicant is proposing a general plan and is requesting a variance to exceed maximum local intersection spacing along the northwest and northeast boundaries and major thoroughfare street intersection spacing along the southern boundary of FM 1960 by not providing streets through the property.

Staff is in support of the request.

The site is proposed for industrial use, including a warehouse, car and truck parking, and a detention area on the east side.

Adjacent to the northeastern boundary of the site are Ogden Elementary School, which is part of the recorded Rayford Intermediate Subdivision, McGrill Elementary School and North Airport Logistics Center, a subdivision currently in the process of being recorded.

A variance was granted to North Airport Logistics Center to allow in excessive intersection spacing along Rayford Road by not by eliminating their requirement for an east-west street connection through the property.

Given these existing conditions and approved constraints requiring a street connection to the northeast would be infeasible.

Adjacent to the northwestern boundary of the site are several large acre unrecorded single family properties and an unrecorded single family subdivision near Ogden Elementary School.

Requiring a street connection to these road would introduce industrial traffic into a residential area in school zone.

Harris County has no objections.

Staff's recommendation is to grant the requested variance and approve the general plan subject to the CPC 101 form conditions.

This concludes my presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Ladies and gentlemen, we're on item 80, North Houston Commerce Park GP.

Um I have no one's time to speak on this item.

Is there anyone who wishes to address the commission?

All right, seeing none, we'll move forward.

Um commissioners, uh, we have a recommendation to grant the requested variants and approve the plat.

Are there questions or comments?

Hearing none, is there a motion for approval?

Motion Park.

Montepaca, second.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

Item 81.

Item 81 is Poundbury Section 2.

The site is located within Houston City limits, Harris County, south of Holmes Road, and west along Fannon Street.

The applicant is proposing 301 lots and seven reserves restricted to compensating open space and landscape and open space.

And is requesting a variance to allow select lots to have frontage and access from a private alley.

Staff's recommendation is to defer the plat to give the applicant time to provide revised materials and new drawings.

This concludes my presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um I have no one signed to speak on item 81.

Is there anyone here who wishes to address the commission?

All right, seeing none, we'll move forward.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a recommendation to defer item eighty-one, Poundbury section two for additional information.

Are there questions or comments?

Hearing none, is there a motion?

Motion, Ballard.

Ballard, Baldwin.

All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

This item is deferred.

Thank you.

Item 82.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair, members of the Houston Planning Commission.

My name is Jeff Butler.

This item was deferred at the previous commission meeting.

Salinas estates at Sharon Street.

The site is located within Houston's corporate limit along Waco Street, north of Clinton Drive, and south of the East Freeway.

The applicant proposes two single family lots accessed by a shared driveway.

The applicant initially requested variances to allow for reduced building lines along Waco and to allow for five feet of dedication to Sharon Street, a 28-foot wide local street.

The applicant has revised their application as requesting the following variances.

One, to allow for a 12-foot building line along Waco as opposed to the required 25 for major thoroughfares.

Two, to allow for a zero-foot building line along Sharon Street instead of the required five.

And three, to allow no visibility triangle at the intersection of Waco and Sharon.

Staff is in support of these requests.

The site is located at the northeast intersection of Waco and Sharon, northeast of downtown Houston.

Waco is a hundred foot right-way featuring two vehicle lanes, three foot multi-use paths separated by a large median.

The neighborhood was platted in 1911, and the subject tract was originally a pair of 50-foot interior lots on a 25-foot street.

Waco Street was eventually widened and realigned to its current condition, resulting in the subject tract becoming a corner lot.

This reconfiguration includes a 14-foot corner cutback, allowing for optimal visibility at this intersection.

Per Chapter 42, the applicant is required to dedicate 12 and a half feet of Sharon to bring it to the required 50 foot width.

The app is requesting variances from the setback and visibility triangle requirements, citing the relatively large displacement of developable land.

Chapter 42 allows for reduced setbacks for corner lots with single family homes utilizing a shared driveway.

The site does not technically qualify being platted as an interior lot, but the result is similar.

In addition, the existing curb cuts and pay or curbs and paving were built, accounting for the cutback dedication and narrow width of Sharon Street.

Even with a zero-foot building line, the proposed dedication would set the property back 12 and a half feet from the cutback, allowing for visibility similar to the required 15 by 15 visibility triangle.

Staff finds the request to be consistent with the intent of Chapter 42 and recommends approval, and we have received no advance written comment.

Thank you, Mr.

Butler.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, we're on item uh 82.

Selena's estates at Sharon Street.

Are there questions or comments?

The applicant is here to answer questions if there are any.

All right.

So hearing none, we'll move forward.

Again, we've got a recommendation from staff to grant the requested variance and approve the plat, subject to conditions listed.

Is there a motion?

Baldwin and Jones.

All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

And thank you, Mr.

Castillo, for being here for questions.

We'll move on to item 83.

Item 83 is Wildcat Industrial.

This application was deferred at the previous planning commission meeting.

Uh the sites located within Houston City limits, south along Holmes Road between Haram Clark and Buffalo Speedway.

The applicant is requesting a variance to exceed intersectional spacing along Holmes Road and along the plat boundary by not providing a north-south or east-west street through the property.

Staff is in support of the request.

The applicant is developing a vacant 22 acre tract into an industrial site.

The site is bounded by center point injury, excuse me, center point energy corridor to the south and a Harris County flood control ditch to the west and light industrial uses to the north.

These existing conditions make it difficult to make a valuable street connection in either direction.

The transmission corridor does not require any local streets to cross per chapter 42, and crossing the drainage ditch requires approval from approval and coordination from Harris County flood control.

In addition, the majority of the undeveloped tracks to the east are under common ownership with frontage along the adjacent major fairfairs.

The councilmember's office requested a deferral last cycle.

Staff was able to coordinate with public works and members of the legal department to help address their concerns.

Mr.

Chair, I believe we do have a representative signed up to speak on this item after this, and this concludes my presentation.

We do.

Thank you, Mr.

Crittle.

All right.

Oh, excuse me.

Uh staff's recommendation is to grant the requested variance and approve the plan.

Thank you.

All right.

Again, we're on item 83 Wildcat Industrial.

We have Ms.

Chaffetz, Chief of Staff from Mayor Pro Tem Castic's Tatum here.

Ms.

Chaffetz.

Thank you so much for being here.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair, members of the Commission.

Thank you for this opportunity.

Um Perdita Chavis, Chief of Staff from Mayor Pro Tem, Martha Castex Tatum, Council Member of District K.

And in reference to the Platte Application Wildcat Industrial.

Constituents just recently, and I mean probably 10 minutes ago, reached out to the council member still expressing concern about the development adjacent to a sunset property.

I do want to thank Houston Public Works, Mr.

John Brown, and also the legal department and looking into the concerns that the constituents had regarding the adjacent property 300 homes road being a sunset property.

They still have concerns and want more details on the history of that property.

And we request the Mayor Mayor Pro Tim Cascanum does request a deferral to allow us to get details to address those concerns of the constituents.

We do understand that it's not the Planning Commission's um purview to uh with regards to any environmental issues and but still the Mayor Pro Tem would like uh uh more time so that we can get details on the history of the property to address her constituents' concerns.

Okay, thank you, Ms.

Chavitz.

Questions for our speaker, Ms.

Chaffetz?

Commissioners?

No, thank you so very much.

Thank you.

All right.

If there are no questions or comments, we're going to move on with item 83.

We have two opportunities.

We've got a recommended recommendation from staff to grant the requested variants, but our um our city council member uh pro Tim has asked for a deferral.

So questions or comments on either of those.

So if there is a motion, motion to defer.

I need to know what it's for.

Motion to defer Baldwin.

Second side.

Second Sykes.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

This item is deferred.

Thank you.

Um now move on to Section E, subdivision platforms with special exception request item 84.

Mr.

Chairman.

Yes, I'd like to uh recuse myself from uh items eighty-four and eighty five.

If you would make a note, Commissioner Pierce.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair, members of the planning commission.

My name is Tammy Williamson.

Item 84 is Dunham Point GP, and item 85, Dunham Point Reserve Section 5, which is related, has been withdrawn.

The site is located within Houston's extraterritorial jurisdiction in northwestern Harris County, located south of U.S.

290 and east of the Grand Parkway, bisected by Mason Road, Mushke Road, Mound Road, and Jack Road.

The applicant is proposing a 1300-acre general plan and requesting a special exception to exceed intersection spacing by not providing an east-west public street.

Staff is in support of the request.

In 2024, an amendment to the major thoroughfare and freeway plan was approved by City Council to remove a segment of the proposed major thoroughfare Mushki Road from Mound Road to Bridgeland Lake Parkway, where Mushki would have been required to cross Cypress Creek.

With this roadway no longer required to be provided, no east-west local streets are required to cross the existing detention labeled as JK 3 on the exhibit.

Variances were also granted in 2016 not to require any stub streets along the western boundary except southern boundary, except the proposed major thoroughfares due to Cypress Creek.

The special exception being requested is to allow section 30 and the area labeled as future development between section 30 and the detention area not to connect to each other's internal street network.

This proposed intersection spacing between Mezzanel Drive and the southwestern GP boundary represents a 16.7% deviation from the standard, which is not disproportionate.

The future development area intended for lots has more than 500 feet of frontage along Messinel Drive, allowing for its future connectivity.

While section 30 connects with the future section to its north and section 28 for two points of access to the same loop street.

Harris County Engineering has voiced no objection to the request.

Therefore, staff's recommendation is to grant the special exception and approve the general plan subject to CPC 101 form conditions.

Staff has not received any public comments in advance, and this concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you, Ms.

Williamson.

Again, we're on item 84 as item 85 has been withdrawn.

I have no one signed to speak on this item.

Is there anyone here who wishes to address the commission?

Seeing none, we'll move forward again.

We're voting on item 84, Durham Point GP, with a recommendation to grant the requested special exceptions and approve the plat.

Questions or comments?

Is there a motion?

Motion on Monday.

Montepaka.

Second, Jones.

All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

Alright, we'll now move on to item 86, Solara.

And we're in the reconsideration of requirement section.

Item 86 is Solara.

The site is located within Houston's extraterritorial jurisdiction in Harris County along the south side of Fuquay Street between Scott Street, Scott Street, and Cullen Boulevard.

The applicant is proposing a type 2 permanent access easement subdivision of 74 lots and 12 reserves for detention, compensating open space, and parking, and requesting a reconsideration of requirement with a variance to exceed intersection spacing by not extending the stub street thistle street nor to terminate in a cul-de-sac.

Staff is in support of the request.

The site is currently vacant and within the Minnetex Place subdivision recorded in 1908.

Thistle Street, the public stub street on the subject's western boundary, was recorded in 1955 in Holloway Heart, Holloway Heights Section 2 with a northward curve.

The alignment of Thistle Street and the existing commercial development to the east make extending the street through the site impractical and difficult for a meaningful connection.

Likewise, the property owner north of the unimproved stub street has structures within the right of way.

The loss of the potential east-west street for this block will not significant significantly affect traffic circulation for the area.

The intersection spacing between Fuquay Street and Sheer Mirror Road, both classified as major collectors, is approximately 1,520 feet, which is a little over an 8% deviation from the standard and could have been submitted as a special exception.

With the stub street being only one lot in depth and not improved, requiring a cul-de-sac is not beneficial for maneuverability.

Harris County Engineering has voiced no objection to the request.

Therefore, staff's recommendation is to grant the requested variants and approve the plat subject to CPC 101 form conditions.

Staff has not received any public comments in advance, and this concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you, Ms.

Williamson.

Ladies and gentlemen, we're on item 86, Solara, with a recommendation to grant the requested variants and approve the plat.

I have no one signed to speak.

Are there questions or comments before we move forward?

Hearing none, is there a motion for a staff recommendation?

Motion on Monda Parker.

Montepaca, second.

Ballard.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

87.

Item 87 is one word falls GP.

This item was deferred at the previous plan of commission meeting.

The site is located in the ETJ of Harris County along Katie Hockley Road, just north of Logan Bar Road.

The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a minimum intersection spacement of 301 feet instead of the required 600 feet.

Staff is in support of this request.

This general plan is intended for a residential community with access from Katie Hockley Road and Logan Bar Road.

Along Katie Hockley, the ordinance requires intersections to be spaced a minimum of 600 feet apart.

The one work cove subdivision northeast of this site was recently recorded and established an intersection along Katie Hockley.

The applicant doesn't have the option to center line tie with that intersection to the north because the property is under separate ownership.

Also, the proposed street connection cannot shift further south because it could interfere with buses making a left-hand turn into the Katie ISD school site.

Ultimately, Harris County has reviewed this request and has voiced no objection.

Staffs recommend granting the request variance and approving the plat subject to the CPC 101 form conditions.

This concludes my presentation.

Thank you, sir.

Ladies and gentlemen, we're on item 87, Windward Falls GP, um with a recommendation to approve the plat subject to conditions listed.

Um I have no one signed to speak.

Are there questions or comments?

Is there a motion for staff recommendation?

Motion to park.

Montepaca, second.

Victor, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to G H I and J.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair and members of the planning commission.

My name is Randy Lilly.

If it pleases the commission, staff would like to take sections G, H, I, and J as one group.

Please do.

Section G, extension of approval consists of items 88 through 100.

Section H name name changes consists of no items.

Section I, certification of compliance, consists of items 101 and 102.

And section J, administrative contains no items.

The planning and development department requests the approval of all staff recommendations for sections G, H, I, and J.

Thank you, sir.

If there are no questions or comments, Matis.

I have a recruit on 89.

A recusal on 89 for Matis.

Anyone else?

All right.

Hearing uh, any questions or comments on these items G through J.

Hearing none, is there a motion for staff recommendation?

Poris Pertle.

Sigler.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to K development plates with variance requests.

Item 103 uh has been withdrawn.

We'll move to 104.

Good afternoon, uh Chairman and members of the planning commission.

My name is Ramon Jaime Leone.

Item 104, that's 4210 Fulton Street.

The site is located along the north side light rail at the southeast corner of Fulton Street and Cody Street.

The applicant is requesting not to dedicate five feet for widening for Cody Street.

The current right-of-way width is 50 feet along Cody Street.

Staff recommendation is to defer per applicant's request.

Thank you.

Uh Mr.

Jaime Leon questions, comments?

I had a question.

Mr.

Baldwin.

On the parking requirements on the major thoroughfare, do they have any parking requirements?

With the rail adjacent to it?

Uh the permit is intended to meet um TOD requirements, so they are going they're taking advantage of the parking uh reduction by complying with TOD.

Could they have just the handicap spot?

I'm just asking.

Could are they required to have any?

Yes.

The three is the requirement.

That's the minimal.

Okay, perfect.

Okay, anyone else?

All right.

So again, we're on item 104, which is 4210 Fulton Street with a recommendation by staff to defer if there are no question or comments.

Is there a motion for staff recommendation?

Motion Baldwin.

Baldwin, second.

Modis, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

This item is deferred.

Item 105.

Item 105, 726 Lawrence Street.

The site is located along the west side of Lawrence Street, south of West 8th Street, and north of Heights Hike Bike and Trail.

The applicant is constructing a 4,916 single family residence.

The request is to allow a five-foot building line for the second floor in lieu of the ordinance required 10-foot building line along Lawrence Street.

Staff recommendation is to support the variance request.

This lot is located at the end of the street adjacent to an existing park.

The five-foot building setback is in line with the adjacent neighborhood houses and the footprint of the previous house.

This concludes my presentation.

Thank you, sir.

I have a question.

So the second floor cantilever down, how high up is that?

Is this Pierre and Beam?

Is this do we know how high up that is from ground?

Uh it's I believe it's nine feet.

Okay.

It meets the building.

Okay.

I have a question.

Yes, of course.

Commissioner.

So on this replat, is this going into the public right-of-way?

Is this going into the back park or where is this going into?

This is a development plates.

And the encroachment is along Lawrence Street with the second floor cantileering into the building line.

Into the building line.

Not into the right-of-way.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay.

Anyone else?

Yeah, I just um on the pictures.

Is the electric on Lawrence?

Yeah, Lawrence is it's on the side of the building.

So are they going to encroach in the 10 foot utility clearance for the aerial?

I'll make a note of that.

I'll have to look into that.

Okay.

Well, I guess it put it for the record that if they do create a code clearance violation, they're going to be financially responsible for handling that within a point.

I'll have to look at I don't know if that is a feeding line or it's a high voltage line.

Okay.

Yeah.

Um potentially they've got a problem.

I don't I don't know if they do or do not.

But thank you.

So uh let me ask a question.

Uh Mr.

Hime Leon, do we?

So the staff recommendation stays.

We just talked to the applicant about uh about restrictions.

We don't need to defer this for another two weeks, or do we?

It's uh it's administrative question.

Do you need time to do this or is it done with a note?

It's it's uh permitting, yes.

Okay, all right, great.

Thank you for clearing that up for me.

It's just a comment that they would be responsible to handle it.

Yeah, perfectly fine.

Anyone else?

All right, we are on item 105, 726 Lawrence Street with a recommendation to approve questions or comments.

Hearing none, is there a motion?

Motion Baldwin.

Baldwin, second, motis, all those in favor say aye.

All those opposed.

Hearing none, the motion passes.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to Mr.

Chair.

There were speakers for item 104, Fulton Street.

Okay, go ahead.

This was deferred.

Yes, oh I'm sorry, I didn't have you signed up, sir.

Did he give up his rate?

No.

No.

Uh hello, sir.

Uh, we had questions on the deferral of what that means for 4210 Fulton Street.

This is my first commission meeting.

I've been familiar with this.

It only means that uh that more information is going to be gathered over the next two weeks, and it will be coming up in the meeting in two weeks.

So the next meeting, two weeks from now, this item will be coming up again.

They have two weeks to get in line with uh staff to make sure that everything is, you know, the T's are crossed and the I's are dotted.

But it does give you two weeks in the interim to talk to uh the owner, the developer, and staff to get more information.

Is there anything on our part that's needed?

Applicant-wise.

Um that would be up to staff.

I don't I don't know.

Okay, because they were trying to make us dedicate 10 feet, which would eliminate the ability to do the building and there's a minimum TOD requirement for parking.

That is not for us to decide here today.

Because we've already made a deferral, but you would need to get staff because what we need is a recommendation from staff and legal to say this is good, let's move forward.

Okay, understandable.

Uh if there's somebody I can speak to afterwards, that's fine.

Well, uh Mr.

Butler or Mr.

Leon can give you some direction.

Just to correct this a dedication of five feet only.

Yes, okay.

All right.

Questions before we move forward?

All right.

Um with that, we will move on to Roman two, and which is to establish a public hearing date of July 9, 2026, for the uh items on the screen, which are Alkenbury Residents, Bayou Woods section two, partial replat number three and extension, Brays Park Estate, Hamlet residence, High Line Enclave replat number one, Kirk and Doll Village Section One, replat number one, Rhine Retreat, Torres Venture Replat number one, and Vale View Homes.

Is there a motion for approval?

Motion Ballard.

Ballard Carol.

Carroll.

All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed, hearing none, the motion passes.

Uh, we'll move on to Roman three public comment.

I have no one signed for public comments.

Is there anyone here who wishes to address the commission?

All right, hearing none, we'll move on to adjournment at 3 31.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.