Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

If we could please have our Spanish interpretation services statement.

Good afternoon.

Necessita interpretación al español.

Gracias.

All right, thank you so much.

All right.

My name is John Bustamante, and I am the chair of the zoning commission of the City of San Antonio as well as the District 5 zoning commissioner.

The time is 101, and I hereby call this regularly noticed meeting of the City of San Antonio Zoning Commission into session.

I'd like to do roll call by allowing the zoning commissioners to introduce themselves, starting with the Commissioner on my far left.

Thank you, Chair.

My name is Rob Sipes, and I represent District 7.

Good afternoon.

My name is John Kelly.

I represent District 8.

Danny Kellum, District 1.

John Whitsit, District 10.

Ken Lui, District 6.

George Inojosa, District 3.

ADP Rodriguez, District 4.

Janelle Chase, Mayor's Office.

All right, and remotely.

Hello.

I'm Mia Liz.

Joining virtually.

Hopefully the audience is okay.

It's great.

Thank you, Commissioner Losef.

All right.

Staff, is a quorum present?

Yes, the quorum is present.

All right.

Thank you.

Would everyone please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the fight of the United States of America.

And to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, individual with liberty and justice for all.

Before we begin our hearing, I would like staff to review our meeting format for the benefit of those few in the audience.

Staff, if you would.

Before I begin, please turn your phones on vibrate or turn them off.

The zoning commission is an 11-member body appointed by the City Council to make recommendations on zoning cases.

Upon receiving a recommendation from the Commission, you will have six months from the date of the Commission's recommendation to forward your case to City Council.

If you have any questions regarding this procedure, please contact your case manager.

Staff will begin each case with a short presentation of the request.

Part of the presentation includes a map that shows the area to be considered for rezoning and property within 200 feet of the subject property.

Following this presentation and any questions by the Commission, the applicant will present their request.

For those who have signed up to speak for or against the proposed rezoning, you will be called in the order that you are signed up to speak.

Those in support and opposition will be allowed a maximum of three minutes per speaker, and you were not obligated to utilize the maximum time limitation.

You will be informed that the three minutes are up.

All right, thank you so much.

Items number one, four, and eight.

Uh, for the benefit of those in the audience, withdrawn means the process is going to begin again.

Uh, which means if they come back, then you will get a notice.

Uh for the remaining items that are postponed.

Uh you will simply get another notice as you received in the mail that the project is going forward uh when it's time for the next public hearing.

So those items will not be heard today for Cincinnati Hemp Hill and Tesle Road.

Old TESL rule.

Um now to our consent agenda.

The item on the consented gentleman's item number nine.

Okay.

Uh any commissioners want to pull any item or the item from the consent agenda looking left, seeing none, looking right, seeing none, looking remotely, seeing none.

If we could applicant is requesting to amend the request.

Okay, very good.

Yes, I'm working with the control neighborhood association to proposed amendment is IDC1 with uses allowed in the NC neighborhood commercial.

Can we read in and then we'll make the amendment?

Thank you.

Sorry, Patrick.

But you'll get it right the next time.

Item number nine, a request for a change of zoning from RM6 to IDZ1 with uses permitted in C1 and RM6 located at 403 Blanco Road.

All other release remain the same.

Third notices were mailed.

Four in favor, zero post.

Beacon Hill Area Neighborhood Association is in favor of IDZ with RM6 and NC uses.

The applicant is amending the request to IDZ 1 with uses permitted in RM6 and NC, neighborhood commercial.

Okay.

Is there any voicemail?

Very good.

Hi, my name is Cynthia Walker.

I live at 1038 West Summer Avenue.

My phone number is 818-489-2599.

I'm calling regarding case number V-2025-1070 from the blanco.

Beacon Hill supports the rezoning of 403 blanco from RM6 to IDG1 for parking NC plus RM-6.

The residents voted to support the zoning change request over the following read.

This change will allow neighborhood friendly businesses and keep the option for housing open.

We are appreciative that the applicant changed the original request of C2 to NC.

Zoning change is compatible within with the properties that surround it.

Although we have concerns about the intensity of the UDC's interpretation of the mixed use land use, the current definition in our MNP is in keeping with the zoning change.

We want to recognize Mr.

Christensen and the property owner's willingness to work with the vegan hell zoning and urban design committee.

We also want to thank the zoning commission for continuing the case so that the residents could see the plan.

Thank you.

Cynthia Walker, Chair of the Zoning Urban Design Committee.

That is it for public comment.

Very good.

Mr.

Christensen, if you would now confirm that the applicant is amending their request.

Yes.

Thank you so much.

All right.

This is a district one case.

Um discussion or motion?

No, Chair.

How about a motion?

Uh I I would like to make a motion for it number nine for approval as amended.

Is there a second?

Second by Commissioner Woodsett.

Very good.

Any discussion left?

Seeing none.

Right?

Seeing none.

Remotely?

Seeing none?

Very good.

The motion is for approval as amended of item number nine by Commissioner Kellum with a second by Commissioner Woodsett.

Roll call vote, please.

Commissioner Kellum.

Yes.

Commissioner WhatsApp?

Yes.

Commissioner Losef.

Yes.

Commissioner Nohosa?

Yes.

Commissioner Pete Rodriguez?

Yes.

Commissioner Huey.

Aye.

Commissioner Sipes?

Yes.

Commissioner Kelly.

Yes.

Commissioner Chase?

Yes.

Chair Bustamante.

Aye.

Motion carries as amended.

All right.

Very good.

Um we're going to move on now to our continuance hearing for the March 3rd, 2026 meeting.

What items are on that agenda?

Item number five is requesting continuance to the March 3rd meeting.

Okay.

All right.

Uh this is a district seven case, so Commissioner Sipes to you.

I'd like to make a motion to continue item number five to the March 3rd meeting.

All right.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Witsett.

Very good.

And that's March 3rd.

Yes.

That's what he said.

Oh, I'm sorry.

I thought I heard fifth.

My bad.

I mean, maybe I miss her.

All right.

Any discussion looking left, seeing none, looking right, seeing none, looking remotely, seeing none.

The motion is for continuance of item number five to the March 3rd meeting.

All right, roll call vote, please.

Commissioner Sipes?

Yes.

Commissioner Woods?

Yes.

Commissioner Kellum?

Yes.

Commissioner Losef.

Yes.

Commissioner Nohosa?

Yes.

Commissioner Peter?

Yes.

Commissioner Huey.

Aye.

Commissioner Kelly?

Yes.

Commissioner Chase?

Yes.

Chair Bustamante?

Aye.

Motion carries.

All right.

Very good.

If you are here for the item number five on Culebra Road, we will see you in a couple of weeks, March 3rd.

Thank you so much.

All right.

We are now going to move on to our individual hearing agenda.

We are going to begin with item number two.

Good afternoon, Alex Ritana Zoning Planner with Development Services.

Item number two is located at 904 Pleasanton Road and 347 West Sayers Avenue, going from C3NA General Commercial, Non-Acoholic Sales District, C One Light Commercial District, and R4 Residential Single Family District 2C2 commercial district with all overlays staying the same.

There were 27 notices sent out, zero in favor, one opposed within 200 feet in St.

Leo's Neighborhood Association gave no response.

The existing C3NA, C1 and R4 base zoning districts are appropriate zonings for the property and surrounding area.

The proposed C2 commercial district is also appropriate for the property located at 904 Pleasington Road, but not for the property located at 347 West Sayers Avenue.

The subject property is located within a mix of residential and commercial uses along Pleasington Road, a secondary arterial.

The proposed C2 designation would permit retail and service uses that are similar in intensity to existing commercial businesses and would align with the current span of the commercial corridor along Pleasanton Road.

The property located at 347 West Aries Avenue is the proposed zoning for 347 West Sayers Avenue is not appropriate for the commercial zoning.

The subject property has an existing residence recently demoed and surrounded by residential uses to the east and south.

The request to rezone the property would contribute to commercial encroachment into the established neighborhood.

Staff recommends approval for the property located at 904 Pleasington Road, but recommends deny for the property located at 347 West Sayers Avenue.

Planning Commission recommends approval for the applicant's amendment to neighborhood commercial.

The applicant's representative is here to answer any questions and amend their request.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

Patrick Christensen, 315 East Commerce 304.

I've got just one slide I want to show you.

Okay.

Um we did reach out to St.

Leo's.

They've got some organizational issues.

They have not responded to or to our request for a meeting, but basically I would just like to show.

I don't have the pointer, but you can see the two little squares on the top and the bottom of that exhibit.

This is all part of the Gonzaba Medical Group.

They have very large very large uh office office complex right here.

And I want to show you.

Oh, why is it not?

And so this is the property at issue on Sayre Street.

Uh you've got Pleasant and Sayer.

This is the property where where staff is recommending denial.

Um amending requests for the entire property to C1S for non-commercial parking.

Um that will fit with what the planning commission recommended approval on.

Um the goal here with this property is to build this this parking lot.

There's a property just north of this.

You might have seen in the staff presentation that's a Mexican pottery store.

They would like to purchase that, and they've reached out to them about that, but there's nothing um secure at this time, so we're gonna let we're gonna build the parking lot, and if they ever decide to sell in the future, we'll probably come back and ask for a medical clinic rezoning.

But that's what we're asking for.

They definitely definitely need parking out there.

There they have large office complex, and um they realize they they they should not be encroaching into the neighborhood.

We promise not to do that any further going forward.

So that that is our request.

You have any questions, I'm happy to answer that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Christmason.

Any public comment?

There is no public comment.

All right.

This is a district three case, so Commissioner Hina Josa to you for questions.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh I do have a couple just a couple questions, Mr.

Patrick.

So they're gonna use it as a parking lot.

It I'm assuming this will be for their staff or patients.

Do you do do they know or do staff?

Because they they want to keep the parking as close to the clinics as possible for their patients, a lot of which are elderly, so yes, it will be for staff.

Are they planning on fencing it off at all?

Yes, they'll comply with the UDC.

They have to put a solid screen fence to the east where there's a single family home, and of course the properties in the north is commercial.

They there's already a fence there from the the pottery shop.

They'll probably put their own so it'll look a little bit nicer.

Okay.

That's all the questions I have.

Thank you.

All right.

Any further questions to my right?

Seeing none.

Uh remotely.

Questions?

None.

To my left questions.

Very yes.

Staff.

I just wanted to add to his amendment.

Um we have a stipulation in the code that if they are demolh, sorry, removing or demolishing a house that they need also another specific use authorization if your use is a parking lot.

And so basically the amendment would be C1S for a non-commercial parking lot and requiring the demolition of a home for the parking lot use.

Does that make sense?

It does not.

Okay, let me begin again.

All right.

So the house was demolished prior to the application being lost.

Correct.

Okay.

Um which we want to discourage, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

So if Commissioner Hina Hossa were to make a motion for approval of this, it would be uh an approval as amended, including the demolition of an existing house.

I'm basically telling you the amendment.

So the amendment should be C1S with a specific use authorization for a non-commercial parking lot and with requirement of demolishing the dwelling unit.

So that should cover both specific use authorizations.

It's basically the same use.

It's just again, we have it in our code that you need an S if a house is demolished for a prime if the primary use is a parking lot.

Very good.

We're gonna work on that in UDC amendments.

Yes, we are.

But for the meantime, this is how we're gonna go.

Uh okay.

Uh all right.

Now then it is to Commissioner Hina Hosa for discussion and uh potential motion.

Sure.

Uh thank you, Chair.

Uh this is a little out of place to be honest with you.

I'm assuming that's why City kind of uh is requesting a denial.

However, Gonzaba is pretty big, especially in that street on Pleasanton on the south side of San Antonio.

Um I see this as a positive uh help for that for that uh endeavor for Gonzaba.

Uh therefore I would like to make a motion for um approval as amended, C1S non commercial parking lot.

You don't have to read it.

Oh, we've read it in.

So you just have to say as amended.

Thank you.

Okay, is there a second?

Second by Commissioner Woodsett.

Um I was gonna see how close I could get on the next one.

Um but uh in any event.

Uh all right.

Any discussion, Commissioners to my right?

Seeing none remotely.

Discussion?

Seeing none to my left?

Discussion, seeing none?

All right.

The motion is for approval of item number two as amended, because I'm not gonna say it again.

Um by Commissioner Hina Hosa with the second by Commissioner Woodsett.

Roll call vote, please.

Commissioner Inoza?

Yes.

Commissioner WhatsApp?

Yes.

Commissioner Callum?

Yes.

Commissioner Lose.

Yes.

Commissioner Pete Rodriguez?

Yes.

Commissioner Huey.

Aye.

Commissioner S.

Yes.

Commissioner Kelly?

Yes.

Commissioner Chase?

Yes.

Chair Wisdomantham?

I.

Motion carries as amended.

All right.

Very good.

We are now going to move on to item number three, please.

Good afternoon, Alexa Ratana, zoning planner with development services.

Item number three is located at 206 West Heart Avenue, going from R6 residential single family district to C2 commercial district with all overlays staying the same.

There were 27 notices sent out, zero in favor, zero opposed within 200 feet in St.

Leo's Neighborhood Association gave no response.

The existing R6 residential single family district is an appropriate zoning for the property and surrounding area.

The proposed C2 commercial district is not.

The subject property is located at the end of an established residential block with single-family residences across the street.

Furthermore, the subject property had an existing residential dwelling recently demoed within the past few months.

The request could contribute to commercial encroachment into the neighborhood and adversely impact the surrounding neighbors with an increase in traffic and noise that results from commercial development.

Staff recommends denial.

Planning commission recommends approval of the applicant's amendment to neighborhood commercial, and the applicant's representative is here to answer any questions and amend their request.

All right.

If we could have the applicant's representative, please.

Yes.

This is also for the Gonzaga group.

This is the property there at the top.

So this is an existing building right here.

They would like to build another building at the rear.

This is the property we're talking about rezoning.

It will only really include a corner of a building and sort of a back end out for the for an ambulance drop-off or more likely pickup right there.

They asked for that because clearly it will be, you know, uh customers coming in and out through these portions here.

So again, you know, we started out with C2 commercial for medical clinics.

That's allowed by right, but in working with the planning commission and um staff.

Um I'm amending the request to C1S for medical clinic on this site.

Um again, we've been notified about demolishing houses for commercial encroachment.

So they Gonzava will not do that again.

We would just ask for your forgiveness on this one and please allow us to the rezoning for C1S.

Thank you.

Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Ms.

Christian.

All right.

Uh is there any public comment?

There is no public comment for this item.

All right.

Um question to me, uh, because it's just district five case.

Staff, I do have a question.

So in this case, it's not a non-commercial parking lot.

It is simply a C1S for medical clinic.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Okay.

Sorry.

Sorry.

We're we're gonna get down, we're gonna get it down to look at the case manager.

Uh I promise.

Um we don't have quite the same issues here, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

I think those are the majority of my questions, because I've already heard this case uh at Planning Commission.

Uh but commissioners to my left questions.

Commissioners to my right, questions?

Seeing none.

Commissioners remotely seeing none.

All right.

Uh to me for discussion and potential motion.

Um, you know, again, there is concern about potential encroachment into the residential neighborhood, particularly in light of the demolition.

Uh but that being said, I think this is a good solution given the planned expansion going back already, reaching into uh the residential area.

Uh it also, to my mind, provides some protection of the residential by putting any ambulance that comes to pick up and take out res are take out patients uh in kind of a protected covered area, so uh will have less impact on the neighborhood as they are retrieving uh potential patients.

So that being said, I am moving for approval of item number three as amended.

Second.

Second by Commissioner Hina Hosa.

Uh any further discussion, Commissioners to my left seeing none.

Commissioners to my right, seeing none.

Commissioner remotely seeing none.

All right.

The motion is for approval as amended by me, second by Commissioner Hina Hosa.

Roll call vote, please.

Chair Bustamante?

Aye.

Commissioner I know?

Yes.

Commissioner Kellum.

Yes.

Commissioner Lose.

Yes.

Commissioner Pete Rodriguez.

Yes.

Commissioner Huey.

Aye.

Commissioner Sipes?

Yes.

Commissioner Kelly.

Yes.

Commissioner Wetzett.

Yes.

Commissioner Chase.

Yes.

Motion carries as amended.

All right, very good.

We are now going to move on to item number six, please.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

At either Goldman's Zoning Senior Planet Wood Development Services.

Letter number six is located at 1403 Watkins Lane.

Go in from R5 Residential Single Family District to R5 C D residential single family district with a conditional use for non-commercial parking lot.

There were 35 notices mailed, seven in favor, zero opposed, outside 200 feet, one in favor.

The Kulebeda Park Neighborhood Association is in support of the request.

Staff has found indication of likely adverse effects on the public health and safety of welfare regarding this request.

The current IFR5 residential single family district is an appropriate zoning for the property surrounding area.

The proposed R5 C D with a conditional use for non-commercial parking lot is not appropriate.

The requested zoning change is inconsistent with the established land use pattern of the neighborhood.

The introduction of non-commercial parking lot on a property currently designated for single family dwelling creates an inherent conflict in land use intensity.

Furthermore, approval of this request would perpetuate commercial encroachment into a residential area that is already facing pressure from surrounding development.

The such properties geographically removed from the commercial corridor of Kuleba Road.

Commercial and parking uses are more appropriate along the major thoroughfare rather than encroaching into residential interior.

The applicant does not propose to demolish the existing dwelling.

Should the dwelling be demolished at any point in the future, a rezoning to obtain a specific use authorization would be required to allow for the property to be used as a parking lot, regardless of any previously approved conditional use.

And the applicant is answered here to answer any questions.

All right.

If we could have the applicant or applicant's representative, please.

My client purchased a property.

Would you mind switching the slides, Jerry?

Or can I do it up here?

Yeah.

So this is the client purchased this property.

He's the he's developing a food truck park here in this area.

His goal in miners overall objective was to create a you know a place where the community can go.

We can have children there, playgrounds, picnic tables, and whatnot.

When we created a site plan for the parking, it was going to promote uh I would say an unsafe area for patrons to navigate that food truck part.

So his goal when he purchased this property right here, which is the property in question of 1403 um Watkins, which we're seeking to rezone.

And it was it was for that, so to make it a more welcoming area.

This is a proposed site plan for 1403 Watkins with the buffer.

Um we didn't demolish the house.

So it's still standing.

Thank you.

Um this is the parking that we're proposing.

We met with the neighbors, we met with the neighborhood association.

We received um letters of support from the neighborhood association as well as the uh the neighbors surrounding that area.

I wanted to show you the um sorry, folks have difficult navigating this.

Um this is a site plan with parking, the um the proposed food truck park.

It's very busy, very very dense.

Um if we were to obtain zoning, it would clean up dramatically that food truck park.

It provides for playgrounds, people can navigate on foot.

Um, and there is approximately 200 feet in distance from the food truck park to the proposed parking area.

Any questions?

All right, thank you so much.

Do we have any public comment?

There is no public comment.

All right, very good.

This is a district seven case, so Commissioner Sipes, to you for questions I actually don't have any questions.

Very good.

Uh any questions uh to my left to my right remotely.

Have we all been cowed?

Uh no.

So the staff, I I you know what?

I'm gonna be quiet too.

Um there being no questions, uh it's a district seven case.

Commissioner Sipes to you for discussion and potential motion.

All right, thank you.

Um, I respect uh staff's analysis.

Um also recognize the the tremendous outreach and and uh support that the the neighborhood has um given.

Um this is one of those things where it I believe it cleans up a little bit of the the troubled area at that intersection that the neighborhood has had to deal with for a while.

Um I will also mention that a house isn't being demolished.

Um so this this could all always return to being a um residential use or a small office or something else like that.

So I will be making a motion for approval.

Okay.

Is there a second?

Second by Commissioner Woodsett.

All right.

Discussion to my left to my right remotely.

Okay.

Uh I'm gonna support the motion for the reasons that Commissioner Sipes said.

There are certainly concerns about that kind of usage in this residential environment, but given the support from the neighbors uh that there's a auto sales across the street, across Rita, uh I'm gonna support the motion.

All right.

The motion is for approval of item number six by Commissioner Sipes with a second by Commissioner Woodsett.

Roll call vote, please.

Commissioner Sipes?

Yes.

Commissioner Witset?

Yes.

Commissioner Callum?

Yes.

Commissioner Losef.

Yes.

Commissioner Inoza?

Yes.

Commissioner Pete Rodriguez?

Yes.

Commissioner Huey.

Aye.

Commissioner Kelly.

Yes.

Commissioner Chase?

Yes.

Chair Bustamante?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Very good.

Thank you.

All right.

We're moving on to item number seven, please.

Good afternoon, Alexa Ratana, zoning planner with development services.

Item number seven is located at 731 Probant Street and 134 King Roger Street, going from I1 General Industrial District, MF33, Multifamily District, and R6 residential single family district to IDZ2 medium intensity infilt development zone with uses permitted in C2 commercial district and IDZ1 limited intensity infilt development zone with uses permitted for a non-commercial parking lot with all overlays staying the same.

There were 37 notices sent out, one in favor, one opposed within the 200 feet in Lone Star Neighborhood Association gave no response.

The existing I1 is not an appropriate zoning district.

The existing MF33 and R6 are appropriate zoning districts.

The proposed IDZ2, medium intensity infill development zone with uses permitted in C2 commercial district is also an appropriate zoning for the property and surrounding area.

The proposed zoning is intended to accommodate the use of a convenience store into additional tenant spaces.

The applicant intends to utilize the existing building accomplishing goals of adaptive reuse.

Uses permitted within the C2 commercial district align in intensity with surrounding commercial uses and conserve the surrounding neighborhood.

Staff recommends approval for the property located at 731 Probant Street, and staff recommends denial for the property located at 134 King Roger Street.

The applicant is here to answer any questions.

Hi, good afternoon, Commissioners.

It is proposed solely as a supporting accessory function to the existing commercial building at seven at 731 Province Street.

These requests do not expand the commercial footprint into the area, but provides a code compliant solution to an existing parking deficiency that cannot be resolved on the proven property due to the physical constraints.

The proposed uh additional parking will be non-commercial in nature.

Accessory and control with appropriate landscaping buffers and lighting controls.

The design can be minimizing neighborhood impact.

Formalizing parking in a matter lot will reduce the likelihood of overflow parking along residential streets and help maintain the character of King Roger Street.

Regarding traffic concerns, the parking lot is intended to alleviate neighborhood impact by centralizing required parking and preventing spill over conditions.

The proposed use are neighborhood serving in nature and are not anticipated to generate high intensity commercial traffic.

Although the IDC zoning provides parking relief, the existing building site and proposed uses still require more parking than the one that can be accommodated at the property.

The use of King Rogers Street lot allows the project to meet seated standards and prevent long-term parking conflicts.

The intent of this zoning request is to rehabilitate a long abandoned building, improve safety and aesthetics, and introduce neighborhood servings retail rather than industrial activities.

Is there any public comment?

We do have a voicemail for this item.

Very good.

If we could have the voicemail, please the numbers are 295.

Okay, the numbers are 295.

Telephone number 210259-1374.

Calling uh leaving a message in regards to the loaning request for re loaning the lot behind me, which will turn it into a parking lot for the business at three at 731 probe band.

I know there's changes that need to be expected.

But I I really have concerns of when you know three different property, three different renters and one big parking lot.

What kind of people would be attracted, and at what times of day that they would stay open?

Um get extremely congested with people and vehicle noises that what we're trying to sleep.

Um trafficking, uh pan handlers would start to gather and prostitutes.

The area really has some lab vehicles that just race by and like I said, the parking lot would be my backyard, and uh it's really concerning.

The prior business had uh hours that would terminate at 5 p.m.

daily, and after that things were quiet.

Um I would really hate to see things change as much.

And there would be three renters, and they would all have probably had different different hours that we're just trying to keep the change to the minimal and uh the ownership of the 731.

If they do get their zoning passed through, and what intentions do they have to ease the the change on the local residents uh as far as uh you know the parking will they provide tall fencing to where wandering eyes can't see our backyards and what we have in our backyard?

Uh again, uh if anyone needs to ask you any questions, I lived here for most of my life as I mentioned, and it's concerning, and we don't want too many changes.

Thanks again.

That is it for public comment.

All right, very good.

This is a district five case, so it's to me for questions.

Uh Mr.

U, if I could have you up here briefly.

Um I guess one of my underlying questions is how are people going to access the building from King Roger Street?

Uh from King Roger, they will they will access to the back.

So is there gonna be a door there or yeah, there will have to be a door and then and and a sidewalk in there.

Okay.

And is that gonna be for all three tenants?

Uh it will have to be.

Yes.

Okay so we'll have to to provide doors for for those because as you can see on the on the uh pro and lot, there's only space for 20 lots right now, 20 parking spaces because of the of the current size of the building.

Probably when it was built, some way somehow it passed.

But right now it's uh it has a lot of issues.

Even there's some comments because this is this is up for for permitting right now, and there are some comments about text dot and things like that that does not comply, but it's it's it's impossible to comply it because of of the current situation there.

Okay.

So one of the uses uh that is discussed is a convenience store, correct?

Yes.

What would be the hours of that convenience store?

Well, the uh we I have I haven't discussed those with uh with the client, but they're open to to any suggestions, so they're probably trying to stay open until nine or ten in at night and that's about eight because it's it's not gonna be a gas station, so it's not gonna be at 24-7.

Okay.

Um how many spaces are on the King Roger Street property?

How many spaces?

Yeah, parking spaces?

Yeah.

Uh right now, I think we're we're having about 18.

Okay.

I'm getting about 25 or so.

Um I counting wrong, anyone?

So uh yeah, that's what it's showing in there.

I think that's that's gonna be to uh redesign due to the to the shape of it.

Okay, and I think that's what I want to talk about.

Yes.

Um I'm gonna give you an option.

Okay.

Uh I think we need to do two things here.

We need to talk about how many spot spots are in King Roger.

Okay.

Whether or not we can limit access to certain times on that property for parking.

Uh and we need to talk about hours of operation on the probant street as well.

Okay.

And then I still want to reach out to Mr.

Flotus again, and I can help with that.

I will go drop by myself.

Uh but I would suggest that we take a two-week continuance at this time.

Are you okay with that?

Yeah, I'm fine.

All right, very good.

Uh yes.

I just wanted to know you were talking about hours of operation, but because this is an IDZ, we cannot add conditions that the city can regulate.

I can add stuff to the site plan.

No.

I can't add access to the site plan?

No, definitely.

I'm sorry, access to the site plan.

We just can't put hours of operation.

Like it has to be a design aspect.

Sure, sure.

You're right.

Uh all right.

I still want to have further conversation.

That's fine.

I just want to do a limit some of the design aspects potentially as well.

Okay.

Uh if they will agree.

Uh because I do have well, let me see.

Any further questions to my left?

To my right.

Remotely?

All right.

So it's to me for discussion and potential motion.

Uh I am going to move for a continuance for two weeks to the March 3rd meeting.

Um my concerns are, you know, I have a real big problem orphaning three lots on this corner of King Roger and Bank.

Um Mr.

Flotus has raised a great number of those concerns.

Um I think we can deal with some of those in conjunction with Mr.

Flotas and maybe some of the other neighbors by uh maybe reducing some of the parking spots on the King Roger property.

Um I would probably want to add a gate onto the King Roger side uh that could potentially be closed at certain hours.

Um but we can talk about that later.

Um but you know, I'm ready to I think approve some of the probant stuff.

It's the King Roger property that's the biggest.

All right.

But if you're good with the continuance, I move to continue item number seven for two weeks to the March 3rd meeting.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Kellum.

Uh discussion to my left.

To my right?

Yes, Commissioner Hinohosa.

Uh just real quick.

Um, yeah, I'm gonna support this this uh motion.

Uh this area is pretty little outside my area, but is the way my wife goes to work, right there?

She goes ahead, little Bill Millers.

I'm not throwing her a shout out since I forgot to bring her flowers this weekend.

But my lovely wife of 16 years is here.

Uh this is a way to do her KIP.

She's a teacher at KIPP.

So uh that's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Very good.

Almost not germane, but I'll allow it.

Uh all right.

Any further discussion to my right?

Uh discussion remotely.

All right.

The motion is for a continuance of item number seven to March 3rd by me, second by Commissioner Kellum.

Roll call vote, please.

Chair Bustamantham?

Aye.

Commissioner Kellum?

Yes.

Commissioner Losef.

Yes.

Commissioner Nohosa?

Yes.

Commissioner Pete Rodriguez.

Yes.

Commissioner Huey.

Aye.

Commissioner Sipes?

Yes.

Commissioner Kelly.

Yes.

Commissioner Wetzett?

Yes.

Commissioner Chase?

Yes.

Motion carries.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Uh give me a call.

You have my number.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh next item is item number 10.

Good afternoon.

Alexa Ratana, zoning planner with development services.

Item number 10 is located at 1514 Rigsby Avenue, going from R4 residential single family district to C2C D commercial district with the conditional use for motor vehicle sales with all overlays staying the same.

There were 34 notices sent out.

Five in favor, zero opposed within 200 feet and no registered neighborhood association within the 200 feet.

The existing R4 residential single family district is an appropriate zoning for the property and surrounding area.

The proposed C2CD commercial district with the conditional use for motor vehicle cells is not the subject property is located within the middle of an established residential block with single family uses directly abutting the property.

Although there is a commercial designation on the block, the law is vacant, and any potential redevelopment of that property would enforce commercial setbox and buffering requirements.

The allowance of the proposed commercial zoning would allow for further commercial encroachment into the existing neighborhood, and the conditional use for motor vehicle sales would allow for a more intense commercial use.

That is typically removed from residential neighborhoods.

Staff recommends denial.

And this case was previously recommended for approval by the zoning commission on December 16, 2025, but was restarted due to a friendly amendment to C2R, which is not permitted.

The applicant is here.

Well, the applicant is not here.

I believe she's still at a prior engagement.

So just to double down as what Alexa just stated, this was reviewed and the zoning commission had recommended approval, but then there was a last second change to C2R, but C2R is not an option in our code.

It's either got to be C2NA.

The R is only permitted with the C3 based zone.

So again, because we cannot take a something that is not in the code to City Council, hence why it is being redone here.

Um but we can hope to get this resolved without Ms.

Russell having to be here since this was already discussed several times, I believe.

Good.

Thank you.

My blood pressure spiked a little bit.

Um District 3 case, Commissioner Hina Hosa to you for questions of staff, I suppose.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh just real quick, I'm gonna when it's time to make a motion, I'm gonna try to get I guess a C2NA that would pass, and that would be able to go to City Council for approval.

That is correct.

Okay.

Um again, I know that was the one meeting I was out sick, but uh I I walked the neighborhood of the old Sunny Slope Neighborhood Association, which is not an official organi uh neighborhood uh yet.

Uh but uh they are approved uh uh approved of it.

I mean they're not there's no opposition really from the neighbors across the streets, the SEISD Transportation Department that can I talk to them and they didn't really care.

But um I again I when it's time for make a motion, that's what I will be doing.

Thank you.

Very good.

Any further questions right?

Seeing none remotely.

Seeing none left.

Seeing none.

All right.

Uh now is the time for potential motion.

I'd like to make a motion for C2NA.

With a C D.

Yes, with the C D.

All right.

The motion is for approval as C2NA with a C D for item number 10.

Is there a second?

I'll second it.

Oh, all right.

I'm gonna give it to Commissioner Pete Rodriguez.

All right.

Uh any discussion to my right?

Seeing none.

Remotely?

Discussion?

Seeing none?

Left.

Discussion?

Seeing none.

Roll call vote.

Motion is for approval as C2NACD.

Commissioner Nelson?

Yes.

Commissioner Pete Rodriguez.

Yes.

Commissioner Kellum?

Yes.

Commissioner Losef.

Yes.

Commissioner Huey.

Aye.

Commissioner Sipes?

Yes.

Commissioner Kelly?

Yes.

Commissioner Witsett.

Commissioner Chase?

Yes.

Chair Bustamante?

Aye.

Motion carries.

All right.

The final item on our agenda is the approval of minutes.

Any discussion?

Amended amendments, changes?

Omissions.

I believe we did receive your email, Commissioner Huey, so you will be removed from it since you were not in attendance.

All right.

So there is a proposed amendment to the minutes that uh they apparently inadvertently included whoever and that will be fixed.

What else?

I don't think they called me to vote.

If I voted, I don't remember doing it.

Oh, they called me.

They said your name, but I guess anything else.

Oh, did you have a vote on that last item?

You're you're good with it?

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Good.

Uh sorry about that, Commissioner Watson.

Okay.

I I didn't I know I heard your name and I looked over.

All right.

Very good.

So in addition to uh the removal of Commissioner Huey, who was absent, are there any other changes?

Hearing none.

Uh is there a motion.

I'll make a motion to approve the minutes.

Uh with uh with with the amendment.

Okay.

Very good.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Kellum.

All right.

We can do this by acclamation.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, same same sign.

All right.

Minutes are approved.

Abstain.

Oh, an abstention from Commissioner Huey.

Some city attorney's office people say you don't have to abstain.

This is what I'm hearing.

Uh anyway, uh is there a director's report?

Just to re reiterate, um, starting April 1st, we will no longer be accepting voicemails for all DSD meetings, including the zoning commission.

And then secondly, I wanted to give a big thank you to Commissioner Janelle Chase.

She has been the uh mayor's representative uh with the zoning commission, I want to say for almost two years, maybe more.

I don't know for certain, but you've been a wonderful asset, and we truly thank you for all the help and uh dedication you have given us.

And thank you so much.

And I'm gonna take a personal uh point of personal privilege to also reiterate that.

Uh Commissioner Chase's service and insight have been invaluable, and we are going to miss you greatly.

But thank you.

Thank you for your service so much.

All right.

Very good.

All right, the time is 1 50.

There being no further business before the zoning commission of the city of San Antonio.

We are adjourned.