San Benito opens public hearings on massage parlor, portable office, battery storage and easement abandonments

SAN BENITO, Texas — The San Benito City Commission on Sept. 16 opened four public hearings covering a conditional use permit (CUP) for a massage business, a request to place a portable office, a CUP for a battery energy storage system (BESS) and a petition to abandon two easements on East Stenger Street.

The hearings were read into the record at the start of the meeting and then opened for public comment and staff response. Planning staff read the applications aloud before the commission accepted public comment and closed the hearings without taking final votes at that time.

The first hearing was on a conditional use permit to operate a massage parlor at 251 West Expressway 83 in a C‑1 commercial zone (applicant referenced in the record). The commission opened the item for comment and no final action was recorded in the minutes; the item remained in the public‑hearing phase.

The second hearing involved a request to place a portable office building at 2684 Shaffer Road in a C‑2 commercial zone; the applicant listed in the record was John J. Butler. During public comment, residents expressed concerns about the visual appearance of stored equipment and suggested adding screening to fences to block views of materials and cables. A member of the public told the Planning and Zoning meeting had recommended some kind of shielding. Commission and staff discussion noted the surrounding area includes residential lots and open space, and staff indicated the portable office proposal would proceed through the normal permitting and zoning review process.

The commission also opened a public hearing on a conditional use permit to allow a battery energy storage system at 1123 East Eighth Street (applicant listed as Vessie 26, LLC). A member of the public, Mike Travis, addressed the commission during the hearing and raised safety concerns about battery storage technology, saying, “We should stay away from battery energy storage systems. They’re dangerous. We don’t know enough about them.” Staff recorded that the item had been considered at the Planning & Zoning hearing; the city did not take final action during the Sept. 16 meeting.

Finally, the commission opened a hearing on a request to abandon a 10‑foot utility easement and a 13‑foot ingress/egress easement behind properties at 1170 and 1176 East Stenger Street. Applicants listed in the record were Jesus M. Tijerina Jr., Vicky Barrientos and John A. Cortez. Commissioners and staff discussed survey responses from utilities and whether utilities occupy the easement; staff said utility companies had returned letters indicating no active utilities under the easement. Commissioners raised questions about whether future street widening or sidewalk projects could require additional right‑of‑way and whether acquiring property for a future road project might be necessary; staff said engineering review would be required to confirm any future acquisition needs. One commissioner noted that Lots 3 and 4 already use the easement as private driveway space and that the applicants sought to secure the rear portions of their lots for typical residential uses, such as a storage shed.

All four hearings were opened, received public comment and were closed; no final votes or approvals were recorded on those items at the Sept. 16 meeting. Staff indicated the items will continue through the normal review process and, where applicable, will return to the commission for final action or first/second readings as required.

Ending: The commission moved from the public hearing items into consent and scheduled business; the easement and CUP items will return to staff and commissioners for further review and formal action at a later date.