Link


Social

Embed


Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:02]

SIX, AND THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE AMARILLO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER. THE COMMISSION CONSISTS OF SEVEN VOTING MEMBERS,

[1. Call to order and establish a quorum is present. ]

FIVE OF WHICH ARE PRESENT HERE TODAY. AT THIS TIME, ANY CITIZEN WHO ADDRESS OR DESIRES TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGARDING ITEMS LISTED ON THE AGENDA RELATED TO CITY BUSINESS WILL BE RECEIVED.

THOSE WISHING TO SPEAK, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME WHETHER YOU LIVE IN THE CITY LIMITS AND SPEAKING TO THE MICROPHONE CLEARLY ADDRESS ALL REMARKS AND QUESTIONS TO THE COMMISSION, NOT THE CITY STAFF. YOU'LL HAVE A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES TO GIVE COMMENTS.

YOU CAN ALSO WAIT UNTIL YOUR PARTICULAR ITEM COMES UP ON THE AGENDA IF YOU'D LIKE TO AS WELL.

SO AT THIS TIME, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO SPEAK? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ON INTO THE ITEM 3A ON OUR AGENDA ANNOUNCEMENTS, BRADY.

DON'T HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR Y'ALL TODAY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY UPDATES YOU'VE GOT FOR US ON CASES THAT HAVE BEEN FORWARDED TO COUNCIL?

[3.B. Updates on cases forwarded to City Council by the Planning and Zoning Commission; ]

WE HAVE TWO THAT YOU ALL CONSIDERED A MEETING AGO.

THE TWO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS, OR REZONINGS FOR SOUTH HAVEN OFF OF OSAGE.

THOSE WILL BE GOING TO CITY COUNCIL NEXT TUESDAY FOR THEIR FIRST READINGS AND THEIR PUBLIC HEARING.

SO THOSE WILL BE MOVING THROUGH THE PROCESS. AND THEN AN UPDATE ON THE SUP THAT WAS TABLED AT THE LAST MEETING THAT DEVELOPER HAS OPTED TO SEEK AN APPRAISAL. SO HE IS WORKING THROUGH THAT PROCESS ON THAT, AND THAT WILL ULTIMATELY BE COMING BACK ONCE WE GO THROUGH THE NOTIFICATION PERIOD ON IT AGAIN. SO JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW KIND OF THE LATEST ON THAT.

WHAT WE'VE HEARD AS STAFF. SO. OKAY. THANK YOU.

COUNCIL OR COMMISSIONERS, DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS OR UPDATES THAT YOU GUYS NEED CLARIFICATION ON? OKAY. SEEING NONE, LET'S MOVE INTO OUR REGULAR AGENDA ITEM 4A APPROVAL OF OUR MINUTES FROM THE MAY

[4.A. Consider approval of the minutes from the May 18, 2026 regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission ]

18TH REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THOSE HAVE ALL BEEN EMAILED TO EACH OF YOU COMMISSIONERS. ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? IF NOT, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU JOSH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE.

AYE. MOTION APPROVED. ALRIGHT. ITEM 4B, EMILY.

[4.B. Public Hearing and Consideration of Vacation 2026-99-V Vacation of the 20-foot-wide public alley located within Block 143, Plemons’s Addition, an addition to the City of Amarillo, in Section 170, Block 2, AB&M Survey, Potter County, Texas. (VICINITY: SE 10th Ave. & S. Buchanan St.; APPLICANT/S: Geospatial Data, Inc. for Rillo Investments, LLC) ]

ITEM 4B IS THE CONSIDERATION AND PUBLIC HEARING OF VACATION 2026-99-V.

IT IS VACATION OF THE 20 FOOT WIDE PUBLIC ALLEY LOCATED WITHIN BLOCK 143 PLEMONS’S EDITION IS AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF AMARILLO LOCATED IN POTTER COUNTY, TEXAS. IT IS IN THE VICINITY OF SOUTHEAST 10TH AVENUE AND SOUTH BUCHANAN STREET, AND THE APPLICANTS ARE GEOSPATIAL DATA INC.

FOR RILLO INVESTMENTS, LLC. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING VACATION OF THE NOTED ALLEY TO DEVELOP THE BLOCK WITH A PARKING LOT AND A HOTEL.

THE APPLICANT OWNS THE ENTIRETY OF THE BLOCK ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ALLEY, AND PLANS TO CREATE A UNIFIED SITE WITHIN THE BLOCK AND ULTIMATELY REPLAT THE PROPERTY AS ONE LOT. UPON SUBMITTAL, THE REQUEST WAS DISTRIBUTED TO CITY DEPARTMENTS AND LOCAL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR REVIEW.

IT WAS NOTED THAT THERE ARE EXISTING UTILITIES THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE ALLEY.

INSTEAD OF RELOCATING UTILITIES, THE APPLICANT WAS AGREEABLE TO DEDICATING A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT TO THE CITY AT NO COST OVER THE ENTIRE AREA OF ABANDONMENT TO ALLOW EXISTING UTILITIES THE ABILITY TO REMAIN IN PLACE.

WITH THIS BEING SAID, THE CASE THE CITY AND LOCAL UTILITY COMPANIES ARE NOT IN OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST.

REGARDING FAIR MARKET VALUE, GIVEN THAT THE APPLICANT WILL BE DEDICATING A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT TO THE CITY OVER THE ENTIRE AREA OF THE ABANDONMENT AT NO COST, FAIR MARKET VALUE PAYMENT TO THE CITY IS NOT REQUIRED.

NO COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED REGARDING THE REQUEST.

STAFF IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE REQUEST IS READY FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COMMISSION, AND CITY REQUIREMENTS REGARDING ALLEY VACATION HAVE BEEN MET IN THIS INSTANCE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY IN OUR AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? FIRST, I WANT TO JUST SAY, HEY, THANKS FOR ALL THE INFORMATION IN THE PACKET.

REALLY APPRECIATE THAT A LITTLE BIT TRANSPARENCY THAT NOT BEING SARCASTIC, EVEN THOUGH PEOPLE THINK THAT'S COMING FROM ME A LOT AND I, SOMETIMES I HAVE TO BE SARCASTIC JUST TO KEEP MY SANITY.

SO BUT I WAS CURIOUS IF SHE COULD EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE IT, SINCE IT'S A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY OWN IT. SO I GUESS THE CITY IS STILL THE OWNER OF THE ALLEY.

[00:05:06]

AND I'M WONDERING HOW THAT FACTORS IN WITH THE FAIR MARKET VALUE AND WHY WE WOULDN'T CHARGE SOMEBODY FOR SOMETHING THAT'S STILL LAND, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE EASEMENT, JUST BECAUSE THE EASEMENT SHOULDN'T APPLY TO SOMETHING, BECAUSE THAT'S JUST THEIR RIGHT TO USE THAT LAND OR HAVE ACCESS TO THE LAND.

CAN I DO YOU MIND EXPLAINING THAT? AND THAT'S, ALL I HAVE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IF Y'ALL WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DETAIL.

YES. SO WITHIN THE ALLEY THERE IS STILL CITY AND SEWER, SORRY, CITY WATER AND SEWER IN THAT ALLEY.

AND SO IT IS ALLOWING FOR THE CITY, IF ANY ISSUES WERE TO OCCUR IN THE FUTURE TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS THAT.

SO THEY'D HAVE FULL USE OF THAT, THAT AREA. YES.

YEAH. SO THAT WHOLE YOU SAID IS THAT ALL YOU'RE GIVEN TO THEM IS USAGE OF THE ALLEY.

UPON IF THIS CASE WERE TO BE APPROVED, THEY WOULD OBTAIN OWNERSHIP OF THAT PROPERTY AND THEY WOULD BE GRANTING THE RIGHT TO THE CITY VIA THAT EASEMENT TO CONTINUE TO UTILIZE OUR UTILITIES. AND ALONG WITH XCEL ENERGY'S AND THE OTHER FRANCHISE UTILITY COMPANIES.

SO ESSENTIALLY THE THIS IS ESSENTIALLY WOULD TRANSFER OWNERSHIP OF THE ALLEY TO THE APPLICANT.

AND IN RETURN, INSTEAD OF RELOCATING THE UTILITIES OUT OF THE ALLEY, THEY'RE GOING TO GRANT US AN EASEMENT AT NO COST TO RETAIN THE RIGHTS TO KEEP STUFF UNDERGROUND IN THAT ALLEY. I KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, XCEL ENERGY, THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THEIR LINES UNDERGROUND AT NO COST.

WELL, THEY'RE GOING TO PAY FOR THE COST OF RELOCATING THE LINES UNDERGROUND.

BUT ESSENTIALLY THIS EASEMENT GIVES US THE RIGHT TO KEEP OUR ASSETS IN THAT AREA THAT IS THE ALLEY CURRENTLY GOING FORWARD. OKAY. I THINK THAT COVERS IT. THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I CAN GIVE A LITTLE MORE COLOR TO IT. I WOULD SAY WAIT, JUST LET'S SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY ELSE.

ANYBODY WANTS TO SPEAK AGAINST. OKAY. JOSH, GO AHEAD.

WITH AN EASEMENT IT'S NOT IMPROVED IN VALUE PER SE.

IT'S NOT IF THEY TAKE THAT BLOCK AND THEY TRY TO BUILD ON THAT, THEY CAN'T.

ANYTHING THAT WAS BUILT ON THE EASEMENT COULD GET TORN DOWN.

SO I DON'T I THINK CITY MADE A JUST CAUSE AND NOT ASSESSING THE VALUE TO THE PROPERTY BECAUSE RE-IMPROVING THAT IN THE CENTER OF IT, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S A WHOLE DEVELOPMENT WILL IMPROVE THIS WHOLE BLOCK, BUT IT'S NOT IMPROVING THE VALUE IN MY OPINION.

YEAH, I JUST GOT ONE COMMENT. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

THE ONLY REASON WE HAVE THE ALLEY TO BEGIN WITH IS FOR, OTHER THAN FOR THE EASEMENTS, IS TO SERVICE BOTH SIDES OF THE ALLEY PROPERTY IS TO PROVIDE TRASH PICKUP DOWN THE ALLEY FOR AND NOW THAT THIS OWNER OWNS THE WHOLE THING.

THERE'S NO MORE NEED TO HAVE TRASH PICKUP DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY.

THAT'S CORRECT. SO I DON'T THINK THAT WE'RE GIVING UP ANYTHING OF VALUE.

I GUESS IS WHAT I'M SAYING. SO YOU'RE SAYING THE OWNER I OWN IT TO THE MIDDLE OF THE ALLEY, MUCH? ACCESS? THE CITY HAS ACCESS TO SERVICE, THE DUMPSTERS AND THE WATER.

IS THAT RIGHT? YOUR PROPERTY PINS STOP AT THE PROPERTY LOT LINE.

SO ALLEYS AND ROADWAYS ARE NOT. DON'T HAVE OWNERSHIP IN THEM UNLESS THE ROADWAYS ARE PRIVATE.

YOU MIGHT SEE PINS OUT IN THE ROAD, BUT TYPICALLY IT'S NOT.

AND IT'S AN EASEMENT THAT THE CITY HOLDS AND MAINTAINS FOR LIFE.

THAT MAKES SENSE. OKAY. I ALSO HAVE ONE COMMENT I WOULD MAKE IS I ALWAYS GO BACK TO ONE OF THE FEW THINGS THAT I RETAINED FULLY FROM MY PROPERTY LAW CLASSES ESPECIALLY IN TEXAS, THE IDEA OF PROPERTY OWNERSHIP ISN'T ALWAYS AS SIMPLE AS PERSON A OWNS THIS LOT OF LAND. IT'S MORE OF A BUNDLE OF RIGHTS.

AND YOU MAY HAVE ONE PERSON AS THE DEED OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY, BUT THERE ARE CERTAIN RIGHTS THAT THEY MAY NOT FULLY HOLD TO THAT, SUCH AS USE OF EVEN CERTAIN AREAS SUCH AS WITH EASEMENTS.

AND SO SAYING THAT THEY OWN IT WHEN THERE'S AN EASEMENT, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY AS STRAIGHTFORWARD AS THAT.

BECAUSE THE CITY DOES HAVE A KIND OF QUASI OWNERSHIP RIGHTS ANY TIME THAT THERE'S AN EASEMENT THAT THE CITY HAS.

THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM?

[00:10:01]

IF NOT, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL.

I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE VACATION AS REQUESTED.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. JOSH, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT. THANK YOU DICK. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE. AYE. MOTION IS APPROVED.

AND WITH THAT, IT'S A PRETTY SHORT AGENDA TODAY.

DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? NO. THAT'S ALL WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA FOR TODAY.

OKAY. IT'S 3:10 AND WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.