Message-ID: <9417211.1075858640210.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 11:56:25 -0700 (PDT) From: k..allen@enron.com To: gthorse@keyad.com Subject: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-From: Allen, Phillip K. X-To: 'gthorse@keyad.com' X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \PALLEN (Non-Privileged)\Allen, Phillip K.\Sent Items X-Origin: Allen-P X-FileName: PALLEN (Non-Privileged).pst Greg, I noticed in the san macos record that some zoning changes were underway. = First, I wanted to make sure our property would not be affected. Second, p= art of the land that is being rezoned is targeted for "seniors". I would l= ike to explore the possibility of developing a seniors project ( not assist= ed living). Maybe we could look at the property mentioned below. As I hav= e mentioned, my goal is to invest around $2 million in real estate over th= e next two years. At the current rate that amount would cover the equity r= equirements for 4 projects assuming I continued to have minority interest p= artner like Keith. Here is the article: Sector 2 plan geets boost from council By MURLIN EVANS - Staff Reporter H= ome and landowners in northwestern San Marcos will soon have a revised futu= re land use plan to consult for development in the area. The San Marcos Ci= ty Council on first reading unanimously approved changes to its Sector Two = Land Use Plan -- changes over a year in the making and covering a 1.26 squa= re mile area -- intended to encourage development that is both acceptable a= nd appropriate for the region. Significant to the revisions are those affe= cting a controversial tract owned by resident Jack Weatherford at the corne= r of Ranch Road 12 and the newly named Craddock Avenue (Bishop Street). We= atherford filed suit against the city earlier this year as a result of vari= ous city commissions declining to approve re-zoning plans the landowner say= s were in synch with land uses deemed acceptable in the current Sector Two = plan. Proposed changes to Weatherford's 54 acre tract -- which have no dir= ect effect on existing zoning -- deletes the 10 acres of high density resid= ential allowed in the current plan and adds instead two additional acres of= commercial, one additional acre of medium density residential, and seven a= dditional acres of low density residential. In addition, the total eight a= cres of the Weatherford tract proposed for medium density residential is su= ggested limited to town home, single-family, or multi-family senior housing= development in the revised future land use plan. The total 10 acres of co= mmercial allowed on the property is proposed limited to "community commerci= al" -- a yet to be established zoning district -- loosely defined as to ens= ure more compatibility with existing residential neighborhoods complete wit= h buffering and landscaping. A 50 foot greenbelt buffer is also proposed t= o separate the commercial areas from residential ones in the revised plan. = However, a curb cut envisioned to access this property from RR 12 drew som= e concern from council members over the potential traffic hazards it may po= se on the busy state highway. Proposed are two curb cuts, one accessing th= e proposed Weatherford commercial area from RR 12 and one from Craddock Ave= nue. While the state highway department and city would have input into the= plans for where the eventual curb cut would go, city planning director Ron= Patterson said the allowance of the two curb cuts was a compromise between= the wishes of area landowners and Weatherford. Council member Jane Hughso= n supported the idea of removing the RR 12 curb cut allowance from the Sect= or Plan, but evaluating a developer's plans for possibly locating one in th= e area as development proceeds. "I'd rather say "no' and if someone comes = us with a really good idea, look at it then," Hughson said. Councilman Ed = Mihalkanin expressed similar safety concerns over the final placement of th= e curb cut. "It seems to me we're asking for a bunch of accidents to happe= n there," Mihalkanin said. A motion by Hughson to amend the plan to exclud= e curb cuts from RR 12 into the property failed on a 3-3 tie vote with San = Marcos Mayor David Chiu and council members Joe Cox and Paul Mayhew voting = against the move. Council member Martha Castex Tatum was not present at the= meeting. Curb cuts or not, the Sector Two Plan earned support from severa= l residents and neighborhood representatives, who said the plan was a good = compromise. Oak Heights resident John McBride, who has been an active crit= ic and participant in the Sector Two revision process, especially concernin= g the Weatherford tract, said the revised plan better served the interests = of the city as a whole. "This is not a victory for one side or the other,"= said McBride, alluding to a fallout between neighborhood groups opposed to= Weatherford's initial plans for his property, "but a victory for the City = of San Marcos. We started out with all R-1...we've come a long way." =09 =20