Edinburg Denies Apartment Rezoning, Smaller Lots Requests After Neighbors Protest; Council Commends Neighbors Speaking Up
Photo above: Neighbors protested the change from single-family to multifamily at the location captured above. Google Maps photo.
Arnoldo Mata
Edinburg TX – The Edinburg City Council this week denied a request to change the zoning from residential single family to apartments and a separate request at a different site to develop a subdivision with smaller lots than the surround area after two groups of neighbors showed up at the meeting to complain about the proposed changes.
Located at the southwest corner of South 8th Street and West Canal Street, the first property up for consideration currently has one home on site. It is surrounded on three sides by single-family homes and is backed by Cenizo Park on the rear. It includes three city lots. Staff recommended denial of the change.
Neighborhood resident Albert Guzman organized a petition against the proposed changes, saying he had signatures from 95% of the residents within 300 feet of the property. “For the most part, I’m looking out for our fellow neighbors,” Guzman state. “Most of them are elderly, retired, and have done their service to this city and want to live in peace. We have retired, people that worked with the sheriff department, ex teachers, stuff like that. And if you go by our neighborhood, it is a residential neighborhood. We don’t have room for this. It’s nothing personal against her (the owner). So, I would just recommend that you all would go with the planning and zoning’s recommendation for denial.”
Resident Diane Teeter also spoke against the request. “The (Cenizo) park is a heavily utilized flood control park,” Teeter said, adding “and surrounding yards act like sponges absorbing rainfall and slowing down the flooding into storm drains. Consider our surrounding neighborhood is composed of mature trees and growth, which provide deep shade in our further buffer or enhancement to the park. The current one family house for rezoning is contributing as a park buffer and is also compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Now compare it to the multi-family dwelling, which is not compatible with the existing neighborhood.”
Teeter also noted that the city needs more single family homes in order to “increase the viability of the downtown area to make it attractive for more urban flair.”
Deborah Worley told the Council in no uncertain terms her feelings on the project. “I’m just going to say flat out, no!” she stated. “Don’t want it. We do not want to have to deal with parking cars. Don’t want to deal with it. I live right next to (the site), so it will definitely affect me. I am out and out asking you. No, I will continue coming back if she continues to try to do this because I know in 12 month’s time she can appeal with you guys again. I will be back in 12 months because this isn’t going to happen. We’re not going to have apartments in a neighborhood of family, kids. Just, no!”
The second contested change is for a 16.77 tract of land at 5161 N I- 69C. The property fronts the Interstate between W. Davis Road and Phillips Way. The request was to change the property from Agriculture and Open Space (AO) District to Residential, Suburban (RS) District.
Photo above: The location of the second property protested by neighbors. Google Maps.
Planning Director Jaime Acevedo explained that the develop submitted a preliminary drawing that indicated they planned 19 half-acre lots.
Roberto Ray was first to the podium to speak up against the request. “First, the impact that it’s going to have on the environment,” Ray said. “I moved to that area more than 15 years ago because I am a bird watcher enthusiast. Definitely, all this is going to bring down my hobby. I travel 45 minutes to my job because I don’t want to leave an area that is quiet and there is no pollution and there’s no traffic. And there is no noise and it’s a safe area.” Ray indicated that he lives across the property on Davis Road, north of the proposed new subdivision.
“Did you receive a notice of this zone change?” Mayor Garza asked. “Yes? Okay. The only reason I say that is in our packet we don’t see any comments for or against. I appreciate you being here tonight to state your opposition, but we don’t have that in our packet. Normally there’s a notice sent out and you fill out whether you’re for or against it. Just so you’re aware, it’s not included here, but I appreciate you being here tonight.”
Acevedo clarified that there was no opposition at the Planning and Zoning meeting and nothing was submitted in writing to the city.
Ray explained that there were other concerns over the proposed changes. “Another reason this project, the way that it is right now, is it is going to bring the value down to the entire neighborhood. If you’re gonna develop something, it should be to improve the neighborhood, not to bring it down. We don’t have lots that are less than 1.25 acres in the entire area. It’s definitely going to increase the traffic, the pollution, the safety of our kids. We walk in that area. That’s why I live there.” Ray also questioned what would happen with utilities, saying that the area floods easily. He argued that the lots should be at least an acre and a half to fit in with the surrounding area.
The Planning Director explained that the half-acre lots meet the minimum for the proposed single family zone change.
Enrique and Patricia Ramos, who also live on Davis Road, voiced their opposition to the proposed change. “We purchased the property because we own cattle,” she explained. “Our kids showed cattle, so it was close for us to have. When this property came up for us, we purchased it, and now our son lives there. He remodeled it, and he lives there. We still have our Brahman cattle. The only thing is that now with this happening, we don’t even know how it is.”
“Are we going to be an alley for these people? We have Ford F250s. Let’s face it, we don’t have small cars. We barely fit. When we are going to pass somebody, we have to go off to the side. It’s just us. It’s just a controlled community there. There are some older people that have lots of property like their acreages, but they’ve been there forever.”
The couple also raised environmental concerns with what had been there previously. She mentioned that, when they first purchased their property, that the property across from theirs had previously been used for a crop-dusting operation that included the use of chemicals and thrown on the property. “Now, all of a sudden, they’re going to develop stuff and they’re going to move dirt around and things are going to come out. How is it going to affect us?”
The City Council voted to deny the proposed changes in both cases.
Councilmember Dan Diaz voiced his encouragement for residents sharing their concerns. “I just have a comment for those neighbors who saw the sign. Just so you know in the past, (announcements about” properties that have large developments won’t reach some of the neighbors. We actually changed that with this administration where there’s a sign so people can be alerted.”
“So I’m glad that somebody saw the sign and alerted your neighbors. That’s what it’s for. Sometimes people think that ‘my neighbor got something I didn’t.’ They think there’s some sort of, like you said, maybe it’s too late. We want to hear from the public. We want to hear from the neighbors.”
“We want to hear from the landowners around there. That’s what the sign is put there for, so if you didn’t get a letter, maybe you’ll see the sign to your neighbors. I’m glad to hear that it worked here. It’s something that we worked towards. And I’m real happy that you guys showed up today.”
Councilmember David White also applauded resident attending the meeting. “I’d like to just say for everybody, meaning our audience, thanks for coming. It means a lot. This would’ve passed. You guys came and you’ve made a valid argument. You made a good point. And that’s the whole process of what we tried to do up here. We need to hear from everybody instead of just coming up here and hearing empty seats, and next thing, we get criticized ‘they shouldn’t have done that.’ This is what it was. This is how it works. We had two sets of our residents actually from two separate areas of the whole town. They came up and made their point. And I really do appreciate the effort you made. Yeah. And hopefully everybody else will start.”