Good afternoon.

It is 2 02 p.m.

Welcome to the for the city of San Antonio for March 11th, 2026.

Commissioner Sanchez.

Present.

Commissioner Garcia.

Present.

Commissioner De Succi.

Present.

Commissioner Lopez.

Commissioner Let.

Here.

Commissioner Mylam.

Here.

Commissioner Orion.

Here.

Commissioner Bustamante.

Here.

Commissioner Prophet.

Present.

A quorum is present.

Thank you.

Can we please have information about Spanish language interpretation?

Good afternoon.

So you have a persona necesita or prefieres cucharla junta in espanhol.

Gracias.

Thank you.

Today we will have two agendas.

The first will be a combined consent agenda.

On the combined consent agenda, all items will be read into one motion.

Nobody sign up to speak.

And the commission will deliberate and then take one action on those items.

And then we will have three items on individual consideration today.

And those will be discussed individually.

And then for purposes of recusal, Commissioner Orion.

Okay.

On the consent agenda, are there any items for discussion by the Commission?

Anybody want to make a motion?

Motion to approve consent agenda.

Second.

Motion to approve Commissioner De Succi.

Second by Commissioner Mylam.

Commissioner DeSucci.

Yes.

Commissioner Mylam.

Yes.

Commissioner Sanchez.

Yes.

Commissioner Garcia.

Yes.

Commissioner Lopez.

Yes.

Commissioner Ulett?

Yes.

Commissioner Bustamante.

Commissioner Profit.

Yes.

Motion passes for approval.

Thank you.

Item 12.

All right.

Good afternoon, everybody.

My name is Clayton Wallace, Interim Principal Planner with Development Services.

Item number 12 is a request to amend the Campbells Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Military Protection Area Land Use Plan from Agricultural to Light Industrial.

This is 6.19 acres located along Ralph Fair Road between Old Fredericksburg Road and Fawn Mountain.

56 notices were mailed, two were opposed, zero in favor.

The applicant is seeking this plan amendment for a uh metal rebar fabrication facility.

The the property is located along a secondary arterial but is adjacent to well-established residential areas in the campus military base.

Section 35904A of the UDC states that development services shall review each plant and or development project for compatibility and conformity with the land use category of the city's comprehensive plan.

The SA Tomorrow Comp Plan States Light Industrial includes a mix of manufacturing uses, business park, and limited retail service uses that serve industrial areas.

Light industrial is meant to exist near existing industrial and heavy commercial that does not exist at the site.

Light industrial allows for uses in L I1, MI1, and BP zoning districts, which are not compatible with the existing neighborhood and other residences in such close proximity.

Thank you.

And just for the record, Commissioner Orion has returned.

Okay, perfect.

Well, good afternoon, Commissioners.

My name is Newty Dean Kalam.

I'm with Killing Griffin and Fairman, and we're here on behalf of Schneider Steele, the applicant for the plan amendment for property within the city's ETJ.

To introduce you to the property, I want to show you a general location map.

As you'll see, it's north of I-10 along Ralph Rail Road, across from and near the entrance to Camp Stanley.

Zoom in a little bit closer, you'll see uh the entrance at the bottom of the screen.

That is the one of the entrances to Camp Stanley and the one off of Ralph Row Road.

And the importance of the location is that since it is within the ETJ and within five miles of the military installation, it is subject to land use controls.

More specifically, it's subject to the Camp Bullis ETJ military protection area.

It's within the Campbell's ETJ military protection area, and it's currently designated agricultural use, which allows for ag uses in single family residential.

Our request is to amend the land use designation to light industrial, and that is to allow for uh steel rebar fabrication use.

Now, this is different from steel rebar manufacturing.

In this case, the steel rebar is manufactured off-site, uh delivered to the property where it is cut indoors to customer specific job requirements and then delivered to the job site.

Um again, the the operations are conducted indoors and not outdoors.

Um to the military installation, as soon as the application was accepted by the city, we opened and continued to maintain an open line of communication with JBSA to share operational details and proposed uh site plans.

Um after their review of the operational details and the proposed layout, um as staff indicated, they issued their letter of no objection uh to the proposed land use category.

Um again, I want to show you its location within or the future land use uh designation, but also uh more specifically its proximity to JBSA or Camp Stanley.

And a little bit of background, after the passage of Senate Bill 6 in 2017, um city was authorized to either at the election of the voters annex the property or subject the property within the CTJ to land use controls.

After an election uh by the voters, um the property was then subject to land use controls.

And as indicated in the statute, it's in a manner recommended by the most recent uh joint land use study.

Uh again, a little bit further on the on the purpose of regulating land use in the ETJ.

Um this is specific language from uh the 2018 ballot where the electors chose to remain outside of the city but subject themselves to land use control uh for the purpose of protecting the military installations.

And so I want to emphasize that because we as soon as the application was accepted, we engaged with JBSA to ensure that what we were proposing did not conflict with their mission.

Uh again, the purpose uh within the ETJ within the UDC uh section 35901 is uh to regulate the land in a in order to protect the military mission.

Um, this is from the 2009 version of the uh Camp Bullis joint land use study uh in a section uh chapter three uh discussing compatibility on page 310.

It lists light industrial as one of the compatible land uses within uh half a mile, or I'm sorry, within half a mile of the military installation, and it's and is as shown earlier, right across the street from Cantley.

Um from the plan also indicated one of the key concerns of uh the military is lighting and and and um disruptions to their nighttime training activity.

Again, um we share the operational details, one of which was all outdoor light fixtures will be shielded and downward facing.

And just to show the the letter of no objection.

Now, this is uh the proposed site plan as you'll see.

The the proposed structure where all of the steel rebar fabrication will occur is pushed closer to uh Ralph Rail Road.

Entrances to the site will be off of Ralph Rail Road, and you'll see in the light-shaded area is proposed gravel, the dark-shaded area is proposed pavement.

And as you'll see in the aerial, um there is significant tree coverage on the property, and the intent of the property owners to preserve as much as that uh tree coverage as possible, and again push the use as far away as possible from existing residential uh uses.

Again, just generally the location of the property within the the land use plan.

Oh, we'll remain available for any questions that you all have.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Uh, we have some public comments, so we will uh listen to some voicemails first.

I ask 702853043.

And I'm calling regarding case number 251160102.

I live at 7603 mission summit.

I would like to respectfully express my concerns about the proposal to change the land use designation from agricultural to light industrial.

The open land behind our neighborhood currently serves as an important natural habitat and environmental buffer from my home.

I regular regularly observe wildlife, including owls, cardinal deer, and foxes using this space.

The properties mature oak trees and natural vegetation likely support even more wildlife that isn't always visible from nearby homes.

Converting this agricultural land to industrial use and removing large part portions of the tree canopy would permanently disrupt that habitat and eliminate one of the few remaining natural spaces in our immediate area.

I respectfully ask that strong consideration be given to the environmental impact of this change, including including whether any of the mature oak trees may qualify as heritage trees under the city's preservation ordinances.

If development is ultimately approved, I strongly encourage meaningful mitigation, including preservation, preserving a natural tree buffer of at least 25 to 30 feet along the residential edge.

This would help maintain wildlife habitat while also providing a natural visual and environmental buffer for nearby homes.

I would also ask that lighting noise and potential truck traffic associated with industrial activity be carefully evaluated to ensure compatibility with the surrounding residential community.

Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration.

This is Adelina Long.

And my number is 210374 5054.

And I live at 26026 mission blue.

And I'm calling for case number 25-11600102.

And I just wanted to share my thoughts with the change of the land designation of agriculture to light industrial behind my house.

This is one of the areas left that's been untouched.

It has large mature oak trees and a natural habitat for the end.

The uh animals out here, and one of the labs disrupted areas.

Where when the noise and the lights, if there's no buffer between that business, the business park and uh if that was to go, but I would hope that this would be left untouched for such a use when there's not much land left out here that's not turned into um noise pollution, light pollution.

I would ask that you look into that of changing the designation of this land.

Thank you.

Name is Christopher Boschet, and I'm calling regarding CD 4733.

Uh, the proposals amend the zoning behind my home from agriculture to light industrial.

My favorite storage to my family and I live at 26010 mission bluff, directly adjacent to the proposed rezoning area.

And I want to express my strong opposition to this change.

We move to this neighborhood towards balance of suburban living and natural green space.

Converting this land to light industrial would disrupt that balance and significantly alter the character of our community.

This rezoning would also bring a loss of privacy as industrial development would remove the natural buffers that currently protect our homes.

In addition, it threatens the harmony of our community.

Creating noise, traffic, and activity levels that are incompatible with the residential neighborhood.

These changes would negatively impact quality of life, erode the natural environment, meet value, and likely reduce property values.

For these reasons, I respect the urged.

Do not approve the rezoning CB4733.

Thank you for your consideration.

Again, I oppose this.

Good afternoon.

This is Clifton Lewis.

Uh, Louisville 26042.

Mission Bluff, Bernie, Texas.

Uh the uh case number I'm calling about is YA 25-1160102, where you all are proposing to change an agriculture zone uh property to a light industrial property.

I would like to avoid my opposition to that change because why would you want to put light industrial among housing areas?

I would be okay with it being leaked zone for housing, but not for industrial or light industrial because of number of things, light industrial bring, it's gonna bring crime, it's gonna bring noise, it's gonna bring congestion to an area that uh we have pretty nice calm area where it's quiet and we don't have to be put up with noise.

So I am absolutely against this proposed uh new zone from resident.

I mean from commercial to light industrial.

Again, this is Clifford Lewis, man 16216 1840 is the phone number.

A little bit.

See ya.

I live at 26034 Mission Bluff, and my phone numbers 210630-9220.

Calling in reference to case number 25-1160102.

I'd like to respectfully express my concerns regarding the request to change the land use designation from agricultural to light industrial.

The open land behind our neighborhood currently functions as an important natural habitat and environmental buffer for wildlife in this area.

From my own home, I've personally and consistently observed owls, family of cardinals, deer, and fox that appear to rest or nest in that space, which indicates that the land supports native birds and mammals that rely on the undeveloped habitat.

Because the property is largely wooded with mature trees and natural foliage, it likely provides habitat not only for the wildlife residency regularly, but also for other animals that live deeper within the property that we may not always see or be visible from our homes.

Removing large areas of mature tree canopy and replacing it with industrial development would significantly disrupt that habitat and permanently eliminate one of the few remaining natural spaces in this immediate area.

I'd respectfully ask that careful consideration be given to the environmental impact and the compatibility of the proposed industrial land use with the surrounding residential area, particularly given that this property sits within the Campbell's extraterritorial jurisdiction and military protection area.

We're thoughtful land use planning is especially important.

Given the presence of mature oak trees on the property, I'd also encourage evaluation of whether any of these trees qualify as heritage trees under the city's tree preservation ordinance and ensure that appropriate protections are considered.

If development is ultimately approved, I strongly encourage meaningful mitigation measures, including preserving a natural tree buffer along the residual residential edge of the property, ideally maintaining approximately 30 feet of existing mature tree and foliage to serve as a natural environmental and visual buffer between the development and nearby homes.

The area behind our home is currently a naturally dark environment due to the existing tree canopy.

And if lighting is planned for the site, evaluation of lighting design and shielding could help prevent light spill into homes adjacent to this development.

Additionally, I'd encourage evaluation of potential noise impacts associated with industrial activity, including possible truck traffic, equipment operations, or early morning activity.

Because many of our residents in nearby homes work remotely during the day or are retired at home during daytime hours.

Noise throughout the day as well as early morning or evening hours could affect the surrounding residential environment.

Thank you for your time and consideration of the environmental impacts and the compatibility of this proposed land use with the surrounding residential community.

Again, my name is Jeanette Garcia.

I phone numbers 210630920, and my address is 26034 Mission Bluff.

Bernie 78015.

Calling regarding case number 24516 00102.

We are stating our strong opposition to the proposed amendment, changing the land use from agricultural to light industrial, even with the green buttons separating the property from our neighborhood.

Noise and operational activity to extend far beyond the physical boundary.

These impacts directly affect the key safety and character of our residential community.

We are also deeply concerned about the environmental effects, including reduced air quality from commercial vehicles, increased noise pollution, and long-term disruption to the natural buffer that currently protects our neighborhood.

These changes would negatively impact property values and retail potential, which is a major concern for homeowners to purchase based on the existing land use plan.

The zoning is simply not compatible with nearby residential development, and it sets a precedent that could further erode stability and desirability of our area.

For these reasons, we respectfully ask the planning commission to deny this request.

Again, this is Margot and Rhonda Rancerian opposition of K 2451-160102.

Thank you.

Good morning.

This is regarding case number 25 116 00102.

My name is Rita Spinning.

I live at 26018, Mission Bluff, Burning, Texas.

It is the house in the center of the street.

I have lived here for 18 years.

We plan to make it our forever home.

I wish to protest the possible change for the agriculture land directly connected to my backyard.

The intention is to change it into industrial.

I think it will affect my lifestyle a lot as this particular tract of land connect my bedroom, my eating area, my living room, and where I spend about a hundred percent of my day every day.

I can never sleep with any light whatsoever coming into my bedroom.

A neighbor told me last night there's a potential uh steel rebar operation going in there.

That would probably bring in trucks and cars that would bring in a lot of uh sprint lights.

Um I'm sure they would need them at night.

Um I'm thinking that they're about to be a lot of noise.

Um possible odors could be emitted in the air, maybe some harmful.

Um the traffic on Railfair will block, will be blocked probably for miles.

Um, my husband died in 2019.

I remained here because it is a very safe, friendly, quiet neighborhood.

Uh I have great friends and neighbors here, but as I said before, if this goes through, I will lose all of that.

So please consider my request.

Um I think my time is probably up.

Um goodbye.

Um, oh, my phone number 210213-3774.

Um thank you.

Okay, those are all the voicemails.

We do have one person who signed up to speak, Steve Huddleston.

You'll have uh three minutes.

If you can please state your name and address for the record, please.

Hi, my name is Steve Huddleston.

I live at 26109 Ralph Fair Road.

It's actually that property that's right adjacent to it.

Um, I'll probably be impacted more than anybody else.

Uh I've been at that property for about 18 years.

I want to start up by saying I'm not opposed to development in general, but I do have several concerns.

First is the issue of the land compatibility, the proposed 40,000 square foot light industrial building intended for storing, building, and cutting rebar implies significant industrial activity, including truck deliveries, loading operations, handling of steering materials.

My property says directly next to the site and is currently used as a residential homestead.

So introducing a large industrial operation immediately adjacent represents a significant change to the area.

I'm also concerned about the traffic on Ralphair Road.

It's already uh a high traffic area.

I've seen multiple accidents in front of my own driveway just from people not paying attention, pulling into my own driveway.

In fact, the pictures y'all were originally showing with the mailbox up there.

In fact, the pictures y'all were originally showing with the mailbox up there, there's a missing piece of my own fence from somebody running into that area.

Third, groundwater protection is important.

I am on well water.

My well is very close to that property line.

Uh when they were building the the uh fire station on the opposite side, I was getting a lot of sediment.

I actually had to replace my well pump during that time.

I don't know if it's directly correlated to that, but I did have to, and the timing was notable.

Fourth star or uh stormwater runoff is another issue, I think deserves consideration.

A building of this size, along with pay services associated with industrial roots creates large impervious area.

I would like to understand how stormwater from the roof and the paved areas will be managed so that runoff and sediment are properly controlled and not do not affect the surrounding properties or groundwater.

And then there's the visual impact of the building.

Uh 40,000 square foot industrial structure will likely extend well above any screening and significantly change the view and the overall character of the area when looking at it from an from a home and property because this is my primary residence, maintaining the rural and residential character of the area is very important to me.

And for those reasons, I would like to respectfully ask that those careful considerations be given to this project.

At a minimum, I would like to see detailed evaluation of traffic impacts, groundwater protection, and stormwater management before the project moves forward.

Given that my home relies entirely on our private well, I also believe it would be prudent for the city to ensure that potential groundwater impacts are thoroughly evaluated during the planning process so that both residents and the city are protected from unintended consequences in the future.

Thanks.

Thank you very much.

Sorry.

That concludes public comment.

We'll start with Commissioner questions.

Commissioner Bustamani.

Thank you.

Chair.

Correct.

So this is not a zoning case, and it will not come before the zoning commission.

And so uh I know one of the callers mentioned uh the tree ordinance.

That would not apply here, correct?

I'm sorry, the tree ordinance would apply with this property as it's in the ETJ.

Um so it would be subject to our tree ordinance.

Okay.

Uh and uh with respect to lighting, which was mentioned by a number of callers, that is also covered here though, right, with the MLOD.

Correct.

So we within the as part of the review process for the development, it would require a certificate of uh compatibility from the city, so we would review uh the lighting package to ensure it meets MLOD requirements at the point they're they're ready to put that in.

Okay.

All right.

Uh no questions.

Commissioner Lopez.

Commissioner Orion.

So I have a question for the applicant.

So have y'all reached out to the uh to the Lost Creek uh neighborhood association.

We have not.

They're not registered with the city, so we don't have their contact information.

I don't believe out outside city limits, neighborhood associations are registered with the city.

Uh if that's something that the commission would like, um, happy to do that.

Uh yeah, I think that um I mean it would be important to me to have some dialogue with them because there's just so many homes there.

Uh and um, you know, and so and then a question for staff, you do look at signage as well in the ETJ.

I think uh Chapter 28 applies to the United States.

Yeah, and then is the intent to put uh is this gonna be well or is this gonna have um uh like city water?

I I believe city water.

Um it haven't gone through the platning process yet, but the civil engineer is working on that.

Okay, because I I know this there's hydrants on the neighborhood to the west, but on Ralph Fair, I guess I didn't notice any hydrants, and we heard from a I'll have to ask, sorry, I'm gonna do that.

It's just you know whether or not it it's it's for purposes of fire protection.

We start going commercial like that, especially if there's going to be a use that might involve, you know, cutting.

Okay.

Well, my biggest concern was dialogue with the neighborhood association.

So I'm sorry, go ahead.

I was just wondering if I could, since I didn't get to rebut, if I could make a few comments.

Yeah, sure, go ahead.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um Ashley Fairmont with Killing Griffin and Fairmont.

Um thank you guys.

I know this is a a difficult request.

Um, and this property owner is in a bit of a difficult position as well.

So similar to the residential properties and everything that's been developed nearby, property owners want to sell at some point, right?

And so this property happens to be one of the later properties to sell.

So I think it's a bit unfair to ask that it remain natural forever because their neighbors aren't natural.

Um but at the same time, you know, the request for single family, um, we would never get support from that from JBSA.

So it's a question of what is the best use here?

Um in Light Industrial and when Schneider Steel came to us with the proposal.

Um actually we thought it was a pretty good fit.

Um there have been complaints on Ralphair Road, I think, for a long time, and commercial would add additional traffic to that.

This is actually a really low traffic use.

Um three trucks coming in and out during the day, 16 employees.

Um can we pull up the site plan?

Perfect.

Uh and so the other thing, operations would be limited, they wouldn't extend past 5 p.m.

So we think that's actually pretty friendly to a budding single family.

Um on this plan, uh there's quite a bit of open space in the back.

Um if if you look at the perfect, thank you.

So this is about a hundred feet here.

Um and then this from the building to the kind of the end of that gravel area is discussed, is another hundred feet.

So about two hundred feet from single family.

I don't know the exact measurement to Mr.

Huddleston's property, but it's pretty significant as well.

Uh with the intent of those areas remaining natural.

And that's something maybe we can talk to the neighborhood about as well.

Yeah, the the issue is is that because there's no zoning, uh it open, you know, if this thing passes and then this doesn't work out, it could be a lot of different things.

Right.

They may not close at five or may not have that kind of a buffer.

And so, you know, it's sometimes in these instances.

I mean, I this we can't obviously condition this, but maybe deed restrictions to put some of the stuff in writing might make the neighbors happy.

Sure.

Um but again, the dialogue is important to me.

Understood.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Commissioner Sanchez.

Question I have uh, where did the the um the designation of agriculture come from?

Are they currently using that as ag right now?

How long are you operating?

Realistically, uh Commissioner Sanchez, the the designation came when the plan was adopted in 2019.

Um at that point, staff probably looked at what the land was being used for and and designated it that.

So, you know, this is a relatively recent um plan, so that that's most likely where that designation came from is there uh a tree uh is there a uh is there a tree preservation plan that's been done or a tree survey?

No, it hasn't been done yet.

Like I said, the engineer has been engaged, but I don't think that's been completed yet.

So some of the questions they had or some of the concerns were regarding the existing trees, the heritage trees and all that.

Um would there be a uh an opportunity before plating or maybe during platting uh to uh sit down with those those uh that are concerned and and just kind of go over the tree or the the tree survey with them to for concern?

Yep.

I would see the only the only way that they can secure a buffer really is just by preserving those trees, period, because there's nothing that's gonna hold them the owner to I have to provide a buffer.

So really the only thing that's gonna serve is those trees to provide that buffer.

Understood.

No more questions.

Commissioner Garcia.

Um my concern was for staff.

You have discussed this with the uh Air Force already.

So we send uh we send notification to JBSA, and as part of our review process, we have to get comment from them.

So they they have responded.

They we we send the application and then they'll send a letter.

Um so we we have gotten their their response, but that's a I was concerned because if they have antennas in this business, you know, the hive might be uh affecting the uh ACU's uh zone that the Air Force has.

But if they didn't give you any comments on that, I guess the right communications equipment is one of the comments that JBSA puts on their letter.

Um I know they had put in their presentation, but there is a uh request that that the communications manager for the the site reach out to JBSA to coordinate um on those those communication bandwidths.

So that is a comment that they they address.

Commissioner Orlett.

Really just any clarification uh or I have some questions on two things, noise and then just in any environmental impact, just understanding the business itself that they're planning on putting in.

So in general, noise, I mean, what's the typical noise levels that they they face?

Because I know that's one comment.

You know, she one of the voicemails stated, you know, lighting.

I don't like light in my room, you know, the noise that could be, especially with I guess well, it got taken off now, you know, the gentleman's house being near it, um, and any sort of environmental impact that they be on you know, sewer is there gonna be uh city sewer, or are they gonna be on any sort of uh you know uh septic system, you know, kind of I I don't know about the sewer or septic.

Um but in regards to noise, everything will be indoors in terms of the fabrication.

So they're not making rebar, they're cutting rebar.

So there's not chemicals, I guess we'll say there's just cutting.

So the noise from the cutting, but that would all be inside.

And they'll just be in the cutting the size it to projects.

Correct.

Things like that.

No fat no manufacturing of the rebar themselves.

Any environmental impacts, you know, in terms of uh you know, any anything that's gonna be released or anything that uh from that sober process or just strictly tools?

No.

Commissioner Mylan.

No questions.

Commissioner De Suckey.

Uh question to the staff.

Um reading here the staff report on the agriculture use, it says uh permitted agriculture and ranch lands at very low density.

And uh allowed related agriculture, agri business practices.

Can you give me examples of agribusiness practices?

Uh those would those would be like farming, ranching, those sorts of that's what agribusiness.

So if somebody would build a warehouse, would that be falls under as a storage?

Would that be false under agriculture agri business?

I think it really depends on the situation.

If if you have a 500 acre farm and you build a storage barn, I would say that's still part of an agribusiness operation.

But if the primary use of the property is warehousing materials, I would not call that agribusiness.

Okay.

Can I get a clarity on steel fabrication process?

Uh just to have to see if any additional comments to what I said, but just cutting and bending the the rebar.

Cutting.

Bending.

So the rebars is already manufactured somewhere else.

It would be coming to this facility to be cut in a different size.

Yes.

So there is a cut machines, there is noise, there is certain process.

I mean, I just need to understand the difference between a fabrication process and manufacturing process.

Just a clarity on this because I'll let the the expert speak to that.

Reed Schneider uh business center?

It's the 1327 Gimbal Road, uh, San Antonio, Texas.

Uh we basically take the stock linked rebars, and then we will cut them or separate them and then bend them sometimes to job specifications, and then we ship them to the customer.

So they are coming actually from manufacturing straight to you.

And then we just you know basically turn it into a job lot quantity.

And the building that you propose to be built so that would have their own machines?

Correct, yes, benders and the shears and you know, to separate the no heating process involved, no, no, we it's all merchant sheared.

There's no grinding or you know, cutting with a saw or anything like that.

Okay, and that will require trucks coming in and out.

Sure, yes, sir.

Right.

Comes in yes, sir, on on like an 18-wheeler in 40 put links.

Sorry, Commissioner, and maybe staff can clarify, but I think if this was manufacturing of rebar, that would trigger the need for a different land use category, a heavy industrial.

Yeah, I just wanted to clarify what what is the because most of the comments from the phone calls have been about noise, trucks, traffic.

So I just want to have more clarity on that.

Uh you mentioned that you have proposed this previously as a single family development, and it didn't.

No, sir.

No, we we have not.

But in discussions with JBSA, they don't want single family across from the base, basically across from Camp Stanley or across from Camp Bullis.

That was one of the main reasons for adopting the land use controls.

So they responded by saying no, we don't want single family.

Because my my understanding, uh GPSA usually when they respond, they never said yes or no.

So they issue a letter of rejection to our our proposed amendment request.

And then we did have a follow-up call with them to ask you what would you say if this was single family?

And the recommendation would have been no.

So my final comments here, and I uh strengthened the comments from previous uh fellow commissioners that uh they haven't been any communication with the homeowner associations.

There is several single family housing here in the backyards, and I understand in your plan you showed some uh spacing that opens uh some room space to to maintain more trees between this development and the single families, but I would love to have more conversation with the homeowner association, although you have not started that because it's not listed, but I would love to hear their input into this, maybe to work with them some kind of an agreement.

And that would be my recommendation at this point.

Thank you.

Understood I think a lot of good uh comments made by my fellow commissioners again.

I think the presentation uh did a good job of explaining the significance of getting the non uh objection from the JBSA.

Uh and we've heard a lot of community commentary, and um it doesn't sound like they're a hundred percent objected to it.

I could be wrong, but that there is some little more clarity and maybe um understanding the plan and and maybe working together proactively to develop um buffers, operating hours, you know, things of those nature.

Uh this property is being in the county, so there is some in the plating process.

I think there is some traffic impact analysis, stormwater drainage, similar to what happens in the city of San Antonio, those things are considered uh by the fire uh fire marshal, I believe, to issue padding will be reviewed by the city of San Antonio.

Right.

So uh but um I think that you know community the community buy-in is important, you know, to be be good neighbors, and that seems like that's your intention, but I think they would like to hear a little bit more clarity about that.

So those are my comments, and we'll see what the commission does any further questions.

I had a question for the owner, please.

So at 1348 Gambler, that's the existing that's where you're at right now?

1327.

So it's that the office and then that large gray building where that's where and is it is it the same uh same purpose there?

You're just cutting rebar?

Correct.

So just looking at the area, I mean it's a large large industrial site.

Uh there's there's much need for laid lay down area.

Is that what you anticipate for the rear?

Is that gonna be just lay down area staging?

It if you can pull back up to the other side, Ben.

That's this area.

Not the space we talked about being open, but they kind of speckled space.

Would you think that would you would you say just because uh if trees weren't there, would you probably use that as lay down additional lay down area back there?

I mean it is the demand for that.

I don't think I mean I kind of that was in the size of this track was having enough room to have a buffer there, um you know, to be able to use kind of more or less what we have outlined there uh without having to be too close to the neighborhood.

Are you gonna keep Gimbler in operation?

Uh I'm not sure to be honest with you.

Thank you.

Any further comments or questions?

If not, I'll entertain a motion.

Motion to continue to April 8th.

Is that the right date, staff?

Second proposal to continue uh to April 8th.

Is that right?

April 8th Planning Commission?

Yes.

And second by Commissioner Orion, uh Sanchez.

Commissioner Bustamante?

I.

Commissioner Sanchez?

Yes.

Commissioner Garcia?

Yes.

Commissioner Dezucchi?

Yes.

Commissioner Lopez?

Yes.

Commissioner Ulett.

Yes.

Commissioner Mylam.

Yes.

Commissioner Orion?

Yes.

Commissioner Prophet?

Yes.

Motion passes for continuance.

Thank you.

Vice uh Vice Chair, I'd like to make a m um item.

Item 14 is going to be requesting a continuance.

Can we vote on that real quick?

Sure.

All right.

Uh item 14, please.

Yes.

So item 14 located at 5334 San Pedro Avenue is requesting a two-week continuance to the March 25th meeting.

So they can have further discussions with the neighborhood association.

And we do have speakers on that.

Right.

Do you uh the folks that have spoke uh sign up to speak?

Do you do you want to still speak today or would you rather actually go ahead and yeah, go ahead and make comments?

Um Jerry Peters or Gary Peters.

Did you want to speak, ma'am?

Yeah.

They're requesting a two-week continuance, so they will see this in two weeks.

That's just what we're doing.

You want to wait?

Okay.

And Ms.

Eckert, is that on your name?

Here.

Are you Ms.

Seckert?

Is that Ms.

Are you Ms.

Peters?

Okay.

All right, gotcha.

Hello.

I am Billy Acker from almost Cherus Neighborhood Association.

And we're asking for a continuous of this meeting today.

So we can go forward and further understand of exactly what's happening.

And we would like to make sure as we go forward with the plan how it affects the other neighborhood.

So we would like to call a meeting of those neighborhoods of the other neighborhoods to push this plan together to make this change today.

So that's what we're asking for for a continuous of this meeting.

So we have the time to better understand and know that we're making the right decisions.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

So the applicant is uh proposing a continuance to the March 25th meeting.

Can I get a motion?

Move that uh we continue to March 25th.

Motion to approve by Commissioner Mylan.

Second, second by Commissioner Sanchez.

Commissioner Mylam?

Yes.

Commissioner Sanchez?

Yes.

Commissioner Garcia?

Yes.

Commissioner DeSucci?

Yes.

Commissioner Lopez?

Yes.

Commissioner Ulett?

Yes.

Commissioner Orion.

Yes.

Commissioner Bustamante.

Commissioner Prophet.

Yes.

Motion passes for continuance.

Thank you.

Item 13.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

At other Gomez Senior Plan of Development Services.

Item 13 is requesting approval for an amendment to the IH 10 East Corridor Plan from Regional Commercial and Low Density Residential to Community Commercial, located at 3730 White Child Road.

There were 33 notices mailed, zero in favored, zero opposed.

There is no neighborhood association with interfeet of the property.

The proposed plan amendment from regional commercial and low density residential to community commercial is requested to rezone the property to C2 commercial district.

The proposed community commercial land use is consistent with surrounded properties.

The proposed rezoning to community commercial sorry, land use amendment to community commercial facilitates a logical and full development consistent with the establishment character, established character of Stantosh Road.

By positioning commercial activity at the periphery of the nearby neighborhood, the request serves as a functional transition between commercial uses and the interior single family neighborhood to the south.

Furthermore, the designation could facilitate neighborhood neighborhood serving amenities while shielding residential streets from through traffic.

Staff does recommend approval and the applicant should be here to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Is the applicant here to speak?

Yep, be complete.

Is the applicant here?

It appears the applicant is not here.

What is an applicant?

The applicant is the individual requesting the change.

We will call your name, ma'am, when we start public comment.

Thank you.

All right.

Without the applicant here, we'll take public comment.

So Ms.

Vanderpool.

You have three minutes.

If you can please state your name and address for the record.

Hi, yes.

My name is Gwendolyn Vanderpool.

I live at 3015 Sellhurst Street, Converse, Texas, 78109.

This is in the Paloma Park subdivision.

It's brand new.

Matter of fact, we were the first people to move in.

And uh we received this notice of a change from regional commercial and low density residential to community commercial.

And this property is a bit unique.

And this abuts directly to our uh backyard.

Currently it's an open field, it's uh farmland, and it was purchased in uh 2021 by Paloma Park LLC of Laredo, Texas, and now they're wanting to redesignate it.

And I believe the reason why they want to redesignate it is because the irregular pattern of this and also the size and the pipeline traversing it would make it very difficult to attract uh a regular commercial big box business.

So I'm thinking they're trying to redesignate it as the um community commercial to attract a strip mall of sorts.

But being is that what's far uh former farmland uh you do have issues of drainage and storm storming in there, and there are already flooding issues through there that we are already experiencing.

Uh I purchased this home in January of last year, and we have had numerous electrical issues through there, massive traffic issues there.

So I would respectfully request that whoever is proposing this would look at the environmental impact and uh also the dark skies right there on that corner of Wycold Road is a Fisher gas station with McDonald's and a water burger, so they are open 24 7, and on the side on that undeveloped there, there's already a de facto 18-wheeler parking space that uh the 18-wheelers are using because it's safer overnight parking than uh two exits down at the truck stop.

So we are already encountering encountering increased traffic and homeless encampment, busking, uh littering, and I believe that they would have to take the Y Cold Road and finish it out to Green Road so that traffic uh would need to be mitigated.

So this would be a bad impact on the home values of the Paloma Park subdivision.

We were promised that that uh area would remain a green belt, and now it's not so it's a wildlife habitat.

Uh the noise mitigation and shielding.

I'm sure that they're not going to build a retaining wall of sorts as a buffer zone between the subdivision and the proposed area.

So I would look into storm draining, flooding, environmental impact traffic, and additional road work, and there's going to be an ATB coming up there too.

So none of that has been taken into consideration.

Thank you, ma'am.

Uh wish the applicant was here to answer those questions for you, so they're not um I think that we should probably provide a continuance or at least propose that.

I'll ask the commissioners uh for two weeks.

Can I get a motion?

I can't make a motion.

Asking motion to continue this to the next meeting, March.

Another meeting on this second next week, but for the airspace above the ma'am, the public comment is done.

Thank you.

Uh motion uh for continuance to March 25th by Commissioner Lett, second by Commissioner Sanchez.

Commissioner Lett Yes.

Commissioner Sanchez.

Yes.

Commissioner Garcia, yes, Commissioner De Succi.

Yes, Commissioner Lopez?

Yes.

Commissioner Mylam.

Yes.

Commissioner Orion.

Yes.

Commissioner Bustamante.

Uh Commissioner Prophet.

Yes.

Motion passes for continuance.

Great.

Do we have a director's report?

Not today.

All right.

Then it is 254, and we are adjourned.

Thank you.