02 C14-2025-0055 - 6512 McNeil ESS; District 6 - Public Comment 2 — original pdf

Backup

2. I was told by Ms. Lemus that the property will continue to be used as a storage facility, and the reason for the rezoning request is that the property is double-zoned. However, that doesn't justify a CS designation. W/LO seems far more appropriate, as it allows for "convenience storage" but does not allow uses that are "incompatible residential environments" that CS does, e.g., adult-oriented business, bail bond services, pawn shop services. And of course, if the property is sold, Ms. Lemus's assurance that the owner's plan is to continue to operate a storage facility on the property won't mean that a new owner with a CS designation couldn't operate an entirely different type of business there. Therefore, I oppose a CS designation unless the permitted uses are restricted so that they mirror what is permitted under W/LO. 3. A CS designation allows for a maximum structure height of 60 feet. This is entirely unacceptable given that the property abuts numerous residences. Therefore, I oppose the rezoning request unless a one-story maximum height limitation is placed on the property. I likely will not be able to attend the hearing on July 15, but I'd like my opposition included 02 C14-2025-0055 - 6512 McNeil ESS; District 63 of 5 Notice of Public Hearing for Rezoning Case Number: C14-2025-0055 Project Location: 6512 McNeil Drive Contact: Sherri Sirwaitis Public Hearing: July 15, 2025, Zoning and Platting Commission Glen McGuire 12609 Blackfoot Trl, Austin, TX, 78729 Comments: I object to the proposed zoning change. CS is not the appropriate zoning classification for the property: 1. The definition of CS states that it is “generally incompatible with residential environments”. 2. The subject property is bordered on 2 sides by single family homes, so it is clearly within a residential environment. 3. Therefore, by definition, CS is not an appropriate zoning classification for the property. 4. CS allows for 60-foot tall buildings which are not compatible with neighborhood environments. I believe that W/LO is the proper classification and I will support that change. 1. W/LO allows for the property to be adjacent to residential environment under certain circumstances. 2. W/LO lists “Convenience Storage” as a permitted usage. 3. W/LO has a max height limit of 25 feet which alleviates a major concern of myself and the neighborhood (the potential for a 60-foot tall building in our backyards). 4. The Storage Star self-storage property on nearby Pond Springs Road is classified as W/LO, so that would maintain area consistency in zoning. I am not opposed to expansion of the self-storage business as long as it expands “out and not up”. The CS classification allows for buildings that are 60 feet tall. I am concerned that the owner might build a 5- story complex (like the CubeSmart building on Parmer Lane and Anderson Mill Rd) that would tower over our backyards and be incompatible with a neighborhood environment. If the Commission insists on the CS classification, I propose adding a Conditional Overlay that reduces the maximum height from 60 feet to 25 feet, which is consistent with the W/LO classification. Thank you for your consideration. Glen McGuire 02 C14-2025-0055 - 6512 McNeil ESS; District 65 of 5