[3:59] It's 5:30. Welcome to the November meeting of the Planning and Zoning

[4:04] Commission. Thank you all for being here tonight to call this meeting to order.

[4:07] The first up is the citizens general discussion. There's anybody here who

[4:11] would like to speak to the commission regarding something in general regarding

[4:14] planning and zoning, not something specific to any agenda item tonight, now

[4:18] would be the time to do so. Does anybody wish to speak? All right, I'll go ahead

[4:23] and close the citizens general discussion. Next up is the approval of

[4:27] minutes. We need to consider the approval of October 15, 2025 meeting

[4:32] minutes. Commissioners, >> so moved.

[4:37] » Second. >> All those in favor of approving the

[4:41] October meeting minutes. Say I. >> I.

[4:45] » All right. Next up, uh, application number RZ, uh, 9272. Applicant Lee

[4:52] Bristo representing Summer Moon Equity is requesting a resone for property

[4:56] located at 957 Prey, parcel R3220 being block one, lot 2B of the kite

[5:04] second edition of the city of Stevenville County, Texas from R1 single

[5:08] family residential to R3 multifamily. Mr. Kellen,

[5:12] » thank you madam chair and commissioners. Um Mr. Bristo is requesting R3 zoning in

[5:19] his application. He indicated that he's looking to build town home style energy

[5:24] efficient housing. Uh because he mentioned town home, I did reach out to

[5:30] the applicant and mention to him that the R3 zoning is more for multif family

[5:36] and the R2.5 would be the zoning requirement for town home construction.

[5:42] He indicated at that time that um he was pretty comfortable with the R3 zoning

[5:46] and wanted to leave it as um presented on the application. And so just wanted

[5:51] to make that point that he and I have had that that conversation and I believe

[5:54] he's here tonight and he can speak to that in more depth. Uh relating to the

[5:59] type of construction. The future land use for this property is complete

[6:03] neighborhood and the intended project would fall within that designation. GIS

[6:07] is showing this portion of Fry to have approximately 44 foot of rideway. 50

[6:12] foot is required. So there may be additional rightaway dedication uh based

[6:15] on the survey once he gets to that point. Um, it's a flag shaped property

[6:21] with 75 ft of frontage. The depth is approximately 224 foot deep. Contours

[6:27] indicate the property is fairly flat. Sewer is shallow but at 56 in deep. So

[6:33] we believe um based on you know what I learned through my meetings with public

[6:38] works that the connection to that sewer line because of the depth should give

[6:43] them adequate fall without having to consider any type of lift station or

[6:48] anything of that nature. Um again applicant is present tonight and

[6:53] I'd be glad to answer any questions of the commission and thank you madam

[6:58] chair. >> Thank you sir. Any questions for Mr.

[7:00] Kellen? With this being a multif family, the

[7:06] amount of parking that's going to be there is going to need a retention

[7:10] area for water. Uh during the review process, he will be required to provide

[7:15] a drainage analysis and u possibly a full civil plan set with

[7:21] detention. Yes, sir. >> Okay. [snorts]

[7:25] » Other questions? >> Well, it's not a question. I went by

[7:28] there and it it just so it'd be the only town home

[7:34] in that on that street in that area. It looks like I'm just saying from it it

[7:39] would look like a really tight >> spot. We'll save that for discussion.

[7:43] Yes. >> Yes, sir. Okay. Uh any questions for Mr.

[7:49] » All right. I'm going to go ahead and invite uh Mr. Bristo

[7:54] come on up and um give us a description of what you're planning on doing doing

[7:57] on this property. >> Yeah, it's really just a six unit uh two

[8:01] floor uh uh town home apartment style building is what we're going for, but we

[8:09] just wanted to make the most of the space because it is a bigger lot.

[8:12] » Okay. So, you're looking to build apartments, not town homes,

[8:15] » correct? Yeah. >> Okay. Uh so, six units, how many beds?

[8:19] Uh, three bedrooms each, two and a half bath.

[8:22] » Six units with three beds each. >> Yes, ma'am.

[8:25] » Okay. Um, all right. Other questions?

[8:31] Where are you thinking of putting the parking?

[8:33] » Uh, on the front because it is a flag shape. So, the buildings will go on the

[8:37] back. >> Back and then the parking would be Yes,

[8:39] ma'am. Where where the house is right there.

[8:41] » Yes, ma'am. >> All right. Thank you, sir.

[8:45] » Okay. I'm going to go ahead and open a public hearing. Is there anybody here

[8:47] who wishes to speak in favor or against this reszone request?

[8:53] All right, I'll close the public hearing. Commissioners, we need a motion

[8:56] and then we can discuss.

[9:00] » I recommend a council denial of RZ 20225-9272.

[9:06] » Second. >> Okay.

[9:10] Uh thoughts? How many parking spots would that be?

[9:16] six >> uh depends on the type of operation. So

[9:20] if it's student housing, we're releasing it by the bed, it would be 1.5 spaces

[9:26] per bed, so 27. If it's if it is uh just straight rental, not necessarily for

[9:36] student housing, it is two parking spaces per dwelling unit. So that would

[9:42] be

[9:45] at six. So you have 12 12 if it's just straight.

[9:52] » I don't think there's enough space for just the parking alone there.

[9:55] » We have on our preliminary >> sorry

[10:00] » um >> any other

[10:02] » I think >> I just noticed the say it just seemed in

[10:06] my opinion a little out of place for the other residents around and it's such a

[10:13] crowded area. That's just my opinion. >> Any other uh thoughts?

[10:18] » I think it's uh 2.5 will fit better in this situation and the parking

[10:24] really needs to be in the back from here on out with any kind of property shapes

[10:28] like these because the parking up front is going to end up on the street and

[10:32] that's a very busy street to be done. So,

[10:36] » all right. Any more discussion? All right. Uh all those in favor of

[10:41] recommending to council denial of this reszone request say I.

[10:47] » I. >> Those opposed.

[10:49] » All right, gentlemen. So, this goes forward to city council uh the first

[10:54] Tuesday of the month. So, you want to present your case to them there and uh

[10:59] they'll make the final decision on this. Thank you for coming tonight. All right.

[11:04] Application number RZ 9272 consider approval of Oh, excuse me.

[11:14] Uh, application number A9119. Applicant Earl Ingram representing South

[11:19] Texas Cement LLC is requesting the assignment of industrial zoning for the

[11:24] recently annexed property known [clears throat] as 365CR177,

[11:28] parcel R78588 being approximately 5.01 1 acres of the

[11:34] A0804 Williams MR survey of the city of

[11:38] Stevenville County, Texas. With the assignment of zoning, the commission is

[11:42] requested to recommend extension of the ETH ET ETJ and subsequent revision of

[11:49] the Steven 2050 comprehensive plan. Mr. Keller.

[11:53] » Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioners, this parcel was voluntarily annexed on

[11:57] August 5th, 2025 by the city council. Uh we went through the legal notice

[12:02] requirements for that hearing. Um and the council again did vote to annex this

[12:07] property based on the voluntary uh petition.

[12:11] Based on chapter 15404C of our city ordinance, once a property

[12:17] is annexed into the city, uh we have six months to assign zoning and we are not

[12:23] able to issue any building permits until we do have assignment of zoning. looking

[12:28] at the way that area is developing and the type of projects that we see uh

[12:33] coming to these properties, uh we are recommending industrial zoning. Um the

[12:38] future land use is complete neighborhood, but that's just not how

[12:41] it's been developed up to this point. And so as we work our way east and and

[12:46] north, uh that future designation would probably be something to to give more

[12:52] consideration to. But given the development along 281 and on this side

[12:57] of the railroad tracks with the high fam industrial park, we feel industrial is

[13:01] an appropriate designation. Be glad to answer any questions.

[13:05] » Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Khan? >> Is this where the current railsburg has

[13:09] been added into? >> That's correct. And they've already been

[13:12] working on this area. >> That is correct.

[13:14] » Okay. >> Why are we being asked to recommend an

[13:18] extension of the ETJ? Isn't the ETJ automatic when you annex property?

[13:25] » Great question. Um, you can go every time you annex property, you have a onem

[13:31] distance, right, >> from the edge of the property that is

[13:34] annexed. >> So that's automatic, right?

[13:37] » We don't have to decide it. >> Well, with the comprehensive plan, it's

[13:40] good to include it in the recommendation so that I see it's part of the Yes, sir.

[13:45] So the the motion if when it goes through needs to include the extension

[13:50] of the ETJ. >> Yes, ma'am.

[13:52] » And uh and we are approving. We're not recommending to council,

[13:57] » but we're recommending to council. >> You're recommending it's a

[14:00] recommendation to the city council for the zoning and the extension of the ETJ

[14:05] and also the update to the comprehensive plan which is a land use document. So

[14:10] technically needs to have a public hearing.

[14:13] » Okay, got it. Thank you. Um, uh, is Mr. Ingram here tonight?

[14:18] All right, we'll go ahead and open a public hearing. Is there anybody here

[14:21] who wishes to speak in, uh, favor or against this resone or this zoning

[14:26] request? Close the public hearing, commissioners.

[14:29] We need a motion. >> I recommend a council approval of a 919.

[14:35] » Second, as recommended. >> As presented

[14:38] » or as presented. >> Thank you. And, uh,

[14:41] » I'll second. All right. Uh, any discussion?

[14:49] » All those in favor of re recommending to council um application number A9119 as

[14:56] presented say I. >> I.

[14:58] » Those opposed. >> All right. Next up,

[15:02] uh,

[15:06] » the [cough] committee assignment. Correct. Um,

[15:11] The development services committee has uh committee assignment 111-92025.

[15:17] The development services committee has tasked the commission with the review

[15:20] and subsequent recommendation regarding the home occupation guidelines of

[15:24] section 154.03 of the zoning commission. Mr. Keller.

[15:28] » Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioners, HB 2464 became effective upon the

[15:33] governor's signature on June 12, 2025. And this bill established parameters for

[15:39] for what is referred to as a no impact homebased business. And that designation

[15:46] prohibits local government from being able to provide or regulate a no impact

[15:52] home occupation. And so reviewing our current home occupation guidelines,

[15:59] there's an opportunity to where we could step across that um new regulation from

[16:06] the state that we cannot regulate those homebased businesses. So what we are

[16:10] recommending is an amendment to our existing code. And so I have in here

[16:15] your existing home occupation guidelines, which basically uh in

[16:19] essence what that's been meant in the past is that if you have a home

[16:23] occupation that doesn't violate these seven criteria, then you could operate

[16:28] that homebased business without having a conditional use permit. If you did

[16:33] violate one of those seven criteria, you would have to come to the PNZ and city

[16:38] council uh to request a home with our occupation conditional use permit.

[16:45] Because of the new language in this bill, which is now a law, effective June

[16:50] 12th, again, this definition, what we're recommending is that we repeal our

[16:54] existing lang language, add a no impact homebased business definition, which

[16:59] I've le listed there for you, which is directly out of the state code, and then

[17:03] add a violation clause that if you have a business, basic basically, I'm going

[17:08] to paraphrase, if you have something other than a no impact homebased

[17:13] business, uh in operation without a conditional use permit. It's a violation

[17:18] of city ordinance. This has been reviewed by our city attorney and also

[17:21] by our development services committee and uh they again assigned it to PNZ for

[17:27] review and re recommendation back to the full council. With that be glad to

[17:31] answer any questions. >> Thank you sir. Any questions for Mr.

[17:33] Cohen? >> Um so when we make the recommendation we

[17:38] need to say that it's amending the section 154.03

[17:43] 03. >> Uh, Commissioner, I believe I I would be

[17:46] comfortable with just um making a recommendation to um adopt the proposed

[17:52] amendments as presented. >> Okay.

[17:57] » Any other questions? >> We'll go ahead and open a public

[18:01] hearing. Is there anybody here who wishes to speak for or against these uh

[18:05] proposed u recommendations?

[18:11] Close the public hearing. Commissioners, >> I recommend that we or I propose that we

[18:17] recommend a council approval of assignment 111 92 025 with proposals. Is

[18:27] that right? >> That work.

[18:30] » As presented.

[18:35] » Okay. All those in favor of recommending to council as presented. this committee

[18:41] assignment and uh uh recommended amendment say I

[18:48] » those opposed. >> I'm I'm going to abstain. I'm an

[18:51] affected party. >> Bruce is going to abstain. Got it. Thank

[18:55] you. That goes forward council with positive recommendation. Last up, uh

[18:59] application number PD 9339 PD update. Troy Kungl, owner of 598 Westwood LLC,

[19:06] and co-owner Ree Flanigan are providing an update to the plan development PD for

[19:11] property located at 817 West Washington, parcel 29583 of city edition, block 62,

[19:18] lot 6A7, parts 14 and 17, 855 and 865 West

[19:24] Washington, parcel R29 581 of city edition, block [snorts] 62, locks four,

[19:30] part of five and 6B and 873. West Washington parcel R29580

[19:36] of city edition block 62 lot 3 of the city of Steenville US county Texas Mr.

[19:42] Yeah, >> Madam Chair, I'm so glad you read those

[19:45] in. Thank you for that. Uh, commissioners,

[19:49] on August 15, 2021, the applicant presented a conceptual plan to the

[19:53] planning and zoning commission for an intended town home development. PNZ

[19:57] recommended the city council approved the PD, which occurred on December 2021.

[20:03] In March of 2023, city council approved a modified development schedule and a PD

[20:08] update was also provided in November of 2024 and accepted by the commission

[20:13] that's attached in your uh packet this evening. The applicant is now returning

[20:19] with his annual update as required by city ordinance and I will be happy to uh

[20:26] announce and steal some of your thunder. Um the civil plan set has been approved

[20:31] for this project and they are uh actually starting construction at this

[20:34] point which I'm sure is in his his schedule. Uh but Mr. Rearen uh was

[20:40] authorized to speak as a representative for 598 Westwood LLC by the owner, Mr.

[20:47] Tory Kungl. And I have that email in my file. Um so with that, Madam Chair, be

[20:53] glad to answer any questions. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Kell?

[20:59] Mr. Rearen, would you like to >> Sure.

[21:09] Um, so do you guys want me just to go over the schedule? Is that what we want

[21:14] to do? >> Yeah. Yes. Just give us an update.

[21:16] » All right. So, we've um, like I said, we've just gotten approved to proceed

[21:21] and, uh, we have, uh, people on site right now. for involved with the site

[21:26] utilities. Um so we've got I don't know if you guys have that schedule that I if

[21:32] that's handy if you're if you're looking at it but anyway so um one of the things

[21:36] we got approved from public works uh is a kind of phase one phase two uh because

[21:42] these are going to be for sale and so um we are going to do all of the horizontal

[21:48] construction everything in one shot phase one and

[21:51] two. So, right now we're doing site utilities,

[21:55] uh, the turn lane, all the all the public improvements. Then we'll be

[21:59] grading, surveying, getting ready to set form boards and pour our concrete, our

[22:03] site concrete, all that stuff. Sight concrete, foundations

[22:08] east to west, the whole property we're going to do, but we're only planning

[22:12] right now for phase one going vertical on those buildings five and six. And so

[22:17] that's that's what we plan to have um completed uh by that um May May 8th of

[22:24] 26. We should have all of the 11 units in FA shown in phase one completed by

[22:31] then. And you know hopefully um shortly thereafter we'll begin vertical

[22:37] construction on phase two. So >> thank you sir. Do commissioners you have

[22:41] any questions for Mr. Ren? Uh, I'm kind of wondering about the

[22:45] rideway easement that's supposed to be in included in this. How long will that

[22:49] construction last? >> Um, so are you just talking about like

[22:54] uh in the text dot rightway? >> No, into the uh property behind

[23:00] » property behind um >> believe he's speaking about the access

[23:04] to property.

[23:06] » Yeah, the temporary road access that we have going into the mobile home park. Is

[23:09] that what you're saying? Well, how long till the

[23:12] » Oh, till the 40 foot shared access is done. Yes. So, that should be um let's

[23:17] see what we got here. I have to blow this up a little bit.

[23:23] Concrete. So, we should be done by I would say mid uh midFebruary. So,

[23:32] be a few months we'll be done. So, we'll get that first that phase one concrete

[23:37] complete, which includes that 40 foot shared access easement straight shot

[23:41] back into their uh their development there, the mobile home park. And we'll

[23:46] we'll leave a little bit of a a turnaround for the fire marshal in

[23:49] [clears throat] case they have to get in there and turn around and then so we're

[23:52] going to pour that, let it be curing out, and then we'll start forming the

[23:54] rest of the site concrete. So, um I would hope by midFebruary

[23:59] we're done and they they've got that opened opened up, you know, clear

[24:04] access. >> And then the access that you have around

[24:07] right now, is that going to be able to support a fire truck?

[24:10] » Uh yes, yeah, we just got that approved by uh Brandon Lockenour.

[24:15] » And uh I didn't see his email yesterday, but I just answered that before we came

[24:18] in that we're good. Um it should hold up just fine. We're going to reassess it

[24:23] after this bout of rain we're getting ready to get next week. We'll look at

[24:26] it. If we need to bring in more base and recompact, we will. We'll keep that

[24:29] maintained. So, um you know, it's safe. And we're also planning on uh I guess on

[24:36] the south side on our side of the road, we're going to put more construction

[24:40] fencing up so nobody's, you know, wandering off into construction. We're

[24:45] not impeding under the road. We'll leave that just basically for the the mobile

[24:49] home park. >> Yeah.

[24:52] I think he's >> madam chair if I may. Um

[24:56] » city staff on the preconstruction meeting we did uh mention to the

[25:00] developer that we were adamant about site safety and working with Missto on

[25:06] access. Um the all road all weather access to the back of the property has

[25:12] been reviewed by the fire marshall as he mentioned and so we have a path forward.

[25:18] Mr. Rearen received a call from Miss Sceto on Monday. I reached out to Mr.

[25:24] Rearen and put the two of them in communication and uh they had a great

[25:28] conversation from my understanding and I think they have a a good path forward

[25:34] with Miss Aceto on accessing her property, making sure that her her

[25:40] residents are not impacted negatively other than this temporary construction

[25:45] part that they're going to have to deal with. But absolutely appreciated you

[25:48] making that phone call. >> Yeah, you bet. Yeah, we'll make we'll

[25:51] make sure we can uh you know stay on good terms with them and uh you know

[25:55] minimize the disruption to their their property. So

[25:59] » absolutely. >> Thank you, sir. Appreciate your time.

[26:01] » You bet. >> Uh I'm going to go ahead and open up a

[26:03] public hearing. Is there anybody here who wishes to speak in favor against

[26:07] this um request to uh or this update? Is there going to be a turn into that

[26:15] property? >> Yeah,

[26:18] » that's very >> sir, if you can come up to the um come

[26:21] up to the podium so that the people online can hear you and state your name

[26:25] and your address. >> Dean Scott and I'm representing my

[26:28] stepmother. She lives on 782 West Green Street behind that the street over from

[26:34] We got a letter in the mail and I just wondering if there I don't know are

[26:38] y'all going to put a turn in off the highway into the property cuz that's

[26:42] right in front of the school that thing when school that's out it's very

[26:47] » it's a nightmare down and that's why I'm just asking.

[26:51] » Yeah. And plus the parking, are those people going to be able to park on that

[26:57] access going into the trailer park? You know, you know that.

[27:03] That's basically what I'm wondering. >> All right. Thank you, sir. Appreciate

[27:06] it. I'm going to go ahead and allow Steve to answer that.

[27:09] » Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. So, during the review process, uh, yes, the

[27:14] Washington Street has a 100 foot rideaway requirement. the developer was

[27:20] required to dedicate additional rideway and we'll be making road improvements

[27:24] along that dedication and that will include the turn lanes as

[27:29] you mentioned the access easement itself is a private access easement and the

[27:35] what I recall on how that was drafted many many years ago I believe at the

[27:39] turn of the century it is uh it cannot be blocked um by residents of the town

[27:46] home development so all of that the actual access easement and I'm going to

[27:52] use the term policing of that is not really a city function. It would be a

[27:57] civil matter. But again, we have a good working rapport with the developer and

[28:02] the owner of that property currently. >> That's highway though. That's 377.

[28:07] » Well, I understood you were asking me about the access from 377 to the the

[28:12] trailer park and that's a private access.

[28:16] » I was just wondering if there going to be turn

[28:19] » along 377. Yes. Yes, sir. Along 377 >> along Washington Street, there will be

[28:25] an improvement of the roadway to allow a wider road and a turn lane.

[28:32] » All right. Thank you, sir. All right. Uh, anybody else wish to speak?

[28:37] » I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Commissioners,

[28:40] » recommend the council approval of this update.

[28:45] All second. >> All those in favor of

[28:50] » Madam Chair, just kind of rule of procedure here for this um after

[28:55] reviewing the ordinance more and the way we've handled it recently. The only

[29:00] reason this would have to go to PN or I'm sorry to city council is if the

[29:04] commission chose to not accept the update.

[29:07] » Okay. >> Okay. I'll amend it. Just approving this

[29:10] update. >> Thank you.

[29:12] » All right. So, do we have to we have to vote on that amendment first or can we

[29:17] vote on the whole >> uh vote on the amendment first?

[29:19] » Okay. Okay. >> All right. So, uh

[29:23] the the uh the amendment that stands is uh simply

[29:29] um we are approving the update as stands. All those in favor say I.

[29:34] » I. Those opposed and then the original motion of uh recommendation of approval.

[29:41] All those in favor say I. I. >> All right. So that is our entire agenda.

[29:48] Ladies and gentlemen, I need a motion to adjourn.

[29:53] » Second. >> Thank you everybody for coming out

[29:54] tonight.

11/19/2025 - Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

Transcript