Owner: Pacheco, Aurora J S
Applicant: Killen, Griffin, & Farrimond - Mikayla McIntyre

Date	Application Type
1/19/2023	Zone Change Planned Development District

On November 3rd, twenty-seven (27) public hearing notices were mailed to the surrounding property owners within a 200-foot boundary of the subject property. At the time of the staff report, zero (0) response in favor, zero (0) neutral, and one (1) opposed have been received. A public hearing notice will be published in the San Antonio Express prior to the City Council meeting.

The applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 65 acres of land from General Buisness District (GB) to Planned Development District (PDD), specifically titled "Schertz Gateway", generally located southeast to the IH 35 and Schwab Road. 

	Zoning	Land Use
Existing	General Business District (GB)	Undeveloped
Proposed	Planned Development District (PDD)	Mixed Use Development

Adjacent Properties: 

	Zoning	Land Use
North	Right of Way	IH 35
South	General Business District (GB)	Undeveloped
East	General Business District (GB) & Single Family Residential (R-6)	Undeveloped & Cypress Point Subdivision
West	General Business District (GB) & Right of Way	Undeveloped & Schwab Road

The Schertz Gateway PDD will be a mixture of commercial and residential uses. The development will be divided into three (3) separate "Areas". The uses and dimensional and design requirements are listed below.

Area I - Commercial/Retail
Area I will be abutting the IH 35 access road as well as Schwab Road. Area I will have enhanced landscaping requirements. Trees will be planted at a larger caliper, from 2" DBH (Diameter at Breast Height) as required in the UDC to 3" DBH. Also, a 15-foot landscape buffer shall be provided adjacent to any public right of way. No masonry wall or fencing material shall be required adjacent to right of way in Area I

• Acres: 19.61 
• Uses: General Business District (GB) and General Business-2 District (GB-2).
• Dimensional and Design Requirements: General Business District (GB).

Schertz Gateway Area I Dimensional Requirements
		Min. Lot Size			Setback*			Misc.
Code	Classification	Area sf.	Width sf.	Depth sf.	Front ft.	Side ft.	Rear ft.	Max Ht.	Max Cover
GB	General Business	10,000	100	100	25	25, 0**	25, 0**	120	80%
*50 foot setback adjacent to IH 35 & 25 foot setback for other public right of way **Non-residential adjacent

Area II - Multi-Family Residential 
Area II will be located on the eastern portion of the property in between Area I to the north and Area III to the south. Area II will have enhanced landscaping requirements. Trees will be provided at 11 trees per acres as opposed to the UDC requirement of 9 trees per acre, also these trees will be planted at a larger caliper, from 2" DBH (Diameter at Breast Height) as required in the UDC to 3" DBH. Also, a 15-foot landscape buffer shall be provided adjacent to any public right of way. 

• Acres: 14.8 
• Uses: Multi-Family Residential District (R-4)
• Dimensional and Design Requirements: Multi-Family Residential District (R-4).

Schertz Gateway Area II Dimensional Requirements
		Min. Lot Size			Setback			Misc.
Code	Classification	Area sf.	Width sf.	Depth sf.	Front ft.	Side ft.	Rear ft.	Max Ht.	Max Cover
R-4	Multi-Family	10,000	100	100	25	10	20	45	75%
a. Maximum density shall not exceed 35 units per acre, maximum unit count of 518 units.  b. Off-street parking requirements shall be one (1) per bedroom, plus an additional 5%.

Area III - Residential/Low-Density Multi-Family 
Area III will be on the southern end of the property abutting the Cypress Point Subdivision. Area III will have enhanced landscaping requirements. Trees will be provided at 11 trees per acres as opposed to the UDC requirement of 9 trees per acre, also these trees will be planted at a larger caliper, from 2" DBH (Diameter at Breast Height) as required in the UDC to 3" DBH. Also, a 15-foot landscape buffer shall be provided adjacent to any public right of way. A six foot semi-open decorative fence may be provided adjacent to public right of way.

• Acres: 29.92 
• Uses: Multi-Family Residential District (R-4)
• Dimensional and Design Requirements: Multi-Family Residential District (R-4).

Schertz Gateway Area II Dimensional Requirements
		Min. Lot Size			Setback*			Misc.
Code	Classification	Area sf.	Width sf.	Depth sf.	Front ft.	Side ft.	Rear ft.	Max Ht.	Max Cover
R-4	Multi-Family	10,000	100	100	5	5	20	35	75%
* 20 foot building setback shall be provided on the eastern property line adjacent to Cypress Point Subdivision  a. Maximum density shall not exceed 10 units per acre, maximum unit count of 299 units.  b. Off-street parking requirements shall conform to city's Multi-Family Residential (R-4) requirements; 2 per unit plus additional 5%.

• Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives: The Comprehensive Plan identifies the subject properties as Highway Commercial, Commercial Campus, and Single-Family Residential land use designations.
  • Highway Commercial is designated for regional scale retail and commercial uses that can take advantage of major highway intersections.
  • Commercial Campus is intended to encourage development of lower intensity commercial and office uses such as research, flex-office, and supporting uses, light industrial and assembly uses.
  • Areas classified under the Single-Family Residential land use designation are intended to utilize a traditional neighborhood design that includes a mix of residential uses, as well as limited commercial development to support the daily activities of the development. The proposed zone change meets the goals and objectives of the Single-Family Residential future land use designation, and is therefore in conformance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
• Impact of Infrastructure: The proposed zone change should have a negligible effect on the existing planned public water and wastewater system, each area of the development will have public improvements that will be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Schertz UDC Standards.
• Impact of Public Facilities/Services: The proposed rezoning request should have a minimal impact on public services, such as schools, fire, police, parks and sanitation services.
• Compatibility with Existing and Potential Adjacent Land Uses: This section of the IH 35 corridor has a variety of land uses and zoning districts. The current land uses are characterized by single-family subdivisions along with commercial and light industrial uses. The zoning districts in the area are General Business District (GB), Planned Development District (Homestead PDD), Single Family Residential (R-2, R-6, & R-7), and even Manufacturing District - Light (M-1). The proposed PDD would supplement the surrounding commercial land uses while conforming to the commercial designations in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed PDD would also conform to the residential in the area while providing a mixture of housing types that is desired in the Comprehensive Plan.

1. Whether the proposed zoning change or zoning map amendment implements the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Land Plan, including the land use classification of the property on the Future Land Use Map. Area I of the proposed PDD is proposed for commercial use, adjacent to IH 35, and does conform with the stated Highway Commercial and Commercial Campus classifications on the Future Land Use Map. Area II and Area III are located in areas listed as Single Family Residential. The description of Single Family Residential in the Comprehensive Plan indicates that "the Single Family Residential use may include a mix of residential uses" not a mix of single family residential uses. As such some multi-family is consistent with this language. Further the Comprehensive Plan has a goal to "Achieve an efficient, diverse and balanced pattern of land uses within the City and the ETJ." and objective of providing "an appropriate mix of different land use types in suitable locations, densities and patterns consistent with the goals and objectives established in the Plan" which this would do in both Area II and Area III. Finally, the plan states that "Housing should be developed to meet all needs of the community in terms of affordability, availability, adequacy and accessibility. Commercial Retail and Office" Multifamily housing helps to meet this need, especially in light of the rapidly increased cost of housing that has been discussed over the past few years. For these reasons both areas conform with the land use classification of Single Family Residential.

2. Whether the proposed zoning change or zoning map amendment promotes the health, safety, or general welfare of the City and the safe, orderly, efficient and healthful development of the City.
As part of promoting health, safety and welfare, the City should encourage development compatible with surrounding uses utilizing standards and transitional uses to alleviate negative impacts. Given the IH 35 corridor adjacent to the subject property, the proposed commercial in Area I is more appropriate adjacent to the right of way; also multi-family provides a better transition from the right of way and commercial than single family detached lots.

3. Whether the uses permitted by the proposed change in zoning district classification and the standards applicable to such uses will be appropriate in the immediate area of the land to be reclassified.
The site development standards in the UDC for commercial and multi-family development and the use of commercial and multifamily are appropriate and in fact seem to be the best in light of the significant variation in terms of zoning and land uses - single family residential, commercial and industrial.

4. Whether the proposed change is in accord with any existing or proposed plans for providing public schools, streets, water supply, sanitary sewers or other public services and utilities to the area.
As the Comprehensive Plan notes, as development matures in undeveloped areas, higher densities should be considered, Given the location of the subject property along the IH 35 right of way and the proximity of development, the city's various plans and infrastructure projects assume higher intensity development in this area, this includes a planned East-West Connector and improvements to Schwab Road in the Master Thoroughfare Plan. To the best of staff's knowledge, this change does not conflict with the SCUCISD or Comal ISD school district's plans, including the 10-year campus forecasting. However, a public hearing notice was mailed to each school district along with surrounding property owners.

5. Whether there have been environmental and/or economical changes which warrant the requested change. As has been a topic of discussion over the last few years, the significant rise in housing prices supports looking to increase the supply of multi-family housing. As has been mentioned in the past at P&Z the new median home value in SCUCISD has risen to over $430,000 from $210,650 in the past 10 years. 

6. Whether there is an error in the original zoning of the property for which a change is requested;
There is not an error.

7. Whether all of the applicant's back taxed owed to the City have been paid in full (no application will receive final approval until all back taxes are paid in full).
This does not impact consideration by P&Z. 

8. Whether other criteria are met, which, at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of the amendment.
The upcoming public hearing will provide a format for which the Planning and Zoning Commission can hear other potential issues and public opinion. The Commission may deem relevant and important considerations to inform their recommendation to City Council during this time. 

The Engineering, Fire, Public Works, Parks, and Planning Departments have reviewed the proposed PDD standards and requirements with no objection.

Therefore, Staff is recommending approval of the proposed zone change to Planned Development District as discussed.
 

Planning Department Recommendation
X	Approve as submitted
	Approve with conditions*
	Denial

* While the Commission can impose conditions; conditions should only be imposed to meet requirements of the UDC.

The Planning and Zoning Commission is making a recommendation to City Council on the proposed zoning application. in considering action on a zoning application, the Commission should consider the criteria within UDC , Section, 21.5.4 D.