[CALL TO ORDER ]
[00:00:04]
14TH, 2020, UH, MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR A COUPLE OF MEMBERS TO SIGN ON, BUT WE HAVE A CORUM.
UM, SO WE CAN START OUR BUSINESS TONIGHT.
UM, THE, UH, FIRST THING THAT I'D LIKE TO MENTION IS, UM, SINCE, UH, WE MET IN NOVEMBER, UH, WILLIAM HODGE, ONE OF OUR MEMBERS FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, UH, HAS RESIGNED.
UM, SO WE HAVE ONLY 10 MEMBERS, UM, IN PLACE.
AND SO THAT CHANGES OUR VOTING, UH, FOR THE SUPER MAJORITY VOTES, UH, WHICH ARE 75% OF THE MEMBERS THAT ARE APPOINTED, UH, TO, UH, BE, UH, JUST A VOTE OF EIGHT PEOPLE TONIGHT SINCE WE ONLY HAVE 10.
AND KELLY, UH, IS, UM, UH, KINDLY, UH, FILLING IN FOR RON MCDANIEL, UH, TONIGHT.
UM, WE APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE.
UM, I DON'T BELIEVE ELAINE, IS THERE ANY, UH, CITIZEN COMMUNICATION, UH, ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR THAT? NO, WE DON'T HAVE ANY.
SO, UH, THAT HANDLES THAT PART OF OUR AGENDA.
UM, AND, UH, SO ONE THING THAT BEFORE WE GET INTO, UM, EVEN VOTING ON MINUTES AND SUCH, AND THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT HAD TRANSPIRED LAST TIME, UH, TONIGHT WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY, UH, THAT IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITE OF BROOKE.
DID YOU, WE NEED TO CALL THE HALL.
AND I SEE LEE'S HAND UP THERE TOO.
ALRIGHTY, MELISSA HAWTHORNE HERE IN PUPPY.
UH, DON LAYTON BURWELL I'M HERE.
UH, RON MCDANIEL IS ABSENT, UH, DARRYL PRUITT.
AND YES, I'M IN SMITH AND I ALSO DON'T SEE HER ON HERE.
HOPEFULLY THEY'LL JOIN US HERE SHORTLY.
DIDN'T HEAR YOU, MICHAEL? YES.
AND YOU'RE, YOU'VE DISAPPEARED AGAIN IN THE, UH, UH, SO I DON'T KNOW IF, UH, YOU'RE STILL HAVING VIDEO PROBLEMS OR NOT.
THANK YOU FOR THE PROCEDURAL STUFF HERE.
UH, AND SO FEEL FREE TO CALL ME BACK INTO ACCOUNTABILITY, ANYONE, UM, YOU, CAN YOU SEE ME GETTING OFF, UH, OFF COURSE HERE? UM, ALL RIGHT.
SO, UH, SO, UH, WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THAT WAS, UM, SO WE HAVE, UH, SOME APPLICANTS, UH, THAT ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, UM, AND, UH, BY, UH, THE RULES THAT HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, UH, ONLY THE PRIMARY SPEAKER FOR THE APPLICANTS WILL SPEAK TO EACH CASE.
UH, WE HAVE AS THE BOARD, THE ABILITY TO ASK THE OTHER SPEAKERS THAT ARE SIGNED UP QUESTIONS, BUT THEY ARE NOT A PART OF THE, UH, PRESENTATION.
UM, AND SO AGAIN, THEY SHOULD ONLY, UH, COME INTO, UH, INTO THE CASE, UH, ON A REQUESTED BASIS BY THE BOARD.
SO I JUST WANTED TO CLEAR THAT UP BECAUSE LAST TIME WE HAD SOME PEOPLE JUMPING IN AND OUT THAT, UH, WERE SIGNED UP, BUT WE'RE NOT THE PRINCIPAL SPEAKERS.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.
[A-1 Staff requests approval November 9, 2020 draft minutes ]
ALL RIGHT.UH, WE HAVE THE DRAFT, UH, UH, ITEM, UH,
DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THAT? OKAY.
UH, AND, UH, THERE IS A SECOND BY BROOKE BAILEY.
I'M JUST WRITING STUFF DOWN HERE IF YOU GUYS AND ROOK IS SECOND.
UH, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE CALL.
THE ROLE WAS THERE, WERE THERE ANY, UM, ADDITIONS OR, OR, UH, CLARIFICATION'S OR REVISIONS OR ANYTHING TO THAT BEFORE WE GET GOING? OKAY.
SO THIS IS TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS, UH, POSTED, UH, BROOKE BAILEY.
[00:05:02]
YEAH.UH, IS VERONICA WITH US YET? NO.
UH, YASMIN IS NOT WITH US EITHER.
I DID WATCH A VIDEO, BUT I DIDN'T PARTICIPATE.
AND AGAIN, JUST A REMINDER OF THE CLERK'S OFFICES THAT IT'S TOTALLY FINE TO, TO, UH, VOTE ON THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT, UM, BUT, BUT THAT'S FINE.
SO I WILL PUT YOU DOWN AS ABSTAINING AND THEN KELLY BLUE.
UH, SO MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM, UM, AND AGAIN, ONCE WE HAVE THE 10 PEOPLE IN PLACE, UM, WE'LL BE A FULL BOARD, EVEN THOUGH AGAIN, WE HAVE ONE VACANCY CURRENTLY.
[B-2 Staff and Applicant requests for postponement and withdraw of items posted on this Agenda ]
UH, THIS IS ITEM B TOO.I'M NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED TO BE ONE.
IT'S PROBABLY ACTUALLY THE ITEM B ONE, BUT IT'S B TWO ON OUR AGENDA.
AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT OR WITHDRAWAL.
SO ELAINE, WAS THERE ANYBODY THAT NO, I DON'T HAVE ANY REQUESTS FOR POSTPONEMENT ARTICLES.
ALRIGHT, SO WE WILL KEEP MOVING THEN.
UM, SO WE WILL MOVE TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA HERE, UM, UNLESS THERE IS ANYTHING ELSE IN THE GENERAL STUFF THAT I NEEDED TO HANDLE.
I DON'T SEE ANYBODY WAVING THEIR HANDS, SO, OKAY.
UH, THIS IS, UH, SIGNS NEW PUBLIC
[C-1 C16-2020-0009 Rodney Bennett for Lynn Nick 7900 FM 1826 Road ]
HEARINGS.IT IS C 16 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO ZERO NINE, RODNEY BENNETT FOR LYNN, NICK, UH, AT, UH, 7,900 FM, UH, 1826 ROAD.
THIS IS A VARIANCE FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING SIGNAGE.
SO MR. BENNETT, IF YOU ARE AVAILABLE, DETERMINE, UH, IN LIGHT OF THE EMAIL THAT WE RECEIVED THIS AFTERNOON OF EXPEDITING THE MEET, THE MEETING AND PEOPLE NOT FEELING WELL.
UH, I HOPE EVERYBODY DID THEIR HOMEWORK.
I, I LOOKED AT THIS CLOSELY, IT'S A HOSPITAL, IT'S A HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUE.
I'M NOT MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I SEE, UH, SEVERAL SECONDS THERE.
SO THIS IS, LET ME JUST WRITE THIS DOWN.
THIS IS, UM, UH, MOTION BY MICHAEL VAUGHN, OLIN AND A SECOND BY, I THINK I SAW, UH, JESSICA.
UM, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE? I HAD A QUESTION.
UM, WHERE EXACTLY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS SIGN UP NEAR TWO 90.
AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE NEW HIGHWAY GETS BUILT? YEAH, I'VE BEEN IN HERE.
RONNIE BENNETT HERE, BEN IN CONSULTING, UM, IS PROJECTED TO BE BUILT AND THERE IS A RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE TAKING.
UM, ONCE THEY DO TAKE THE RIGHT OF WAY, WE WILL HAVE TO RELOCATE THE SIGNAGE FURTHER BACK INTO THE PROPERTY.
THE SIGN IS ACTUALLY LOCATED ON TWO 90.
THERE ARE TWO EXISTING SIGNS ON FM, 1826.
THE FRONTAGE ON LONG TWO 90 IS ROUGHLY 800 LINEAR FEET.
AND, AND, AND RODNEY CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT ON ONE OF THE MAPS, IT SHOWED THE YEAH.
THE CURRENT PROPOSED LOCATION AND THEN A FUTURE LOCATION ONCE THE RIGHT OF WAY IS TAKEN.
UM, WERE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND AGAIN, THESE ARE THE ASSIGNED CASES ARE A SIMPLE MAJORITY.
SO GIVEN THAT WE HAVE, WE WOULD NEED SIX VOTES IN ORDER TO, UH, TO, UH, PASS THIS, I BELIEVE.
IS THAT, AM I CORRECT WITH THAT, ELAINE.
OH, AND THERE'S PROBABLY, WHERE WERE YOU? SHE MADE IT
[00:10:02]
THROUGH THEATERS.IF, IF LEGAL CAN ANSWER A QUESTION.
GIVEN THAT WE HAVE A PACKAGE OF MATERIALS, EVEN IF WE DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION OF ANYTHING FROM THE APPLICANT, CAN WE RELY JUST ON THE PRESENTATION MATERIALS, UH, AS EVIDENCE SUPPORTING OUR DECISION TO APPROVE THIS SIGN VARIANCE? ABSOLUTELY.
UH, AND LEE, IF YOU COULD CLARIFY THAT'S FOR ALL CASES, THAT'S PART OF THAT CASE, AND THAT'S THE PURPOSE.
WE DID OUR APP, OUR, OUR PACKAGES, AND DO OUR HOMEWORK BECAUSE BASICALLY THE WAY I'VE ALWAYS SEEN IT AS THE PRESENTATION IS SOMETHING FOR CLARIFICATION AND MAYBE ENHANCE THEIR PACKAGE.
BUT, UH, THIS ONE WAS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
THERE'S ANOTHER ONE IN HERE THAT COULD HAVE WROTE A NOVEL, BUT WE'LL WORRY ABOUT THAT WHEN WE GET THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO TAKE A VOTE, I HAVE TO DO THE FINDINGS, MR. CHAIR.
LET ME, I WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THIS.
IT JUST SEEMS TO ME TO BE SORT OF A, A WASTE TO DO THIS, AND THEN IN A YEAR AND A HALF OR WHATEVER THE SIGN'S GOING TO BE MOVED AGAIN.
SO, UM, I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PRESSING NEED FOR THIS SIGN THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SAID, IT'S GOING TO GO AWAY WHEN THE, WHEN THE HIGHWAY IS BUILT ANYWAY.
UM, WHY I JUST PUT THE SIGN WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE A BIT CHILLY ANYWAY, BUT WAS THAT A QUESTION, YOUR ROLE, OR JUST MY THAT'S THE ONE I WAS LOOKING AT IT, SO, OKAY.
THE VARIANCE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THE OWNER CODE PROHIBITS ANY REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGNS ON THE SIDE, CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE SITE, SUCH AS DIMENSIONS, LANDSCAPING, TOPOGRAPHY, AND BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY LARGE CORNER LOT, THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 2,120 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON NFM 1826 WITH TWO EXISTING SIGNS.
THERE IS 826 FEET LINEAR FEET IN FRONT OF JOHN
THE GROUNDING OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE A SUBSTANTIALLY ADVERSE IMPACT UPON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THIS PROPERTY DESIGNED TO SPREAD OUT, NOT NEAR THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH THE STATED PURPOSE OF THIS SIGN ORDINANCE, BECAUSE THIS SIGN IS FOR A NEW ENTRANCE OF US HIGHWAY TWO 90, THAT WILL PROVIDE FOR QUICKER ACCESS TO THE HOSPITAL.
THE EXISTENCE ENTRANCES OFF OF FM 1826, AND HAVE, HAVE EXISTING SIGNING WITHOUT THIS NEW SIGN.
THERE WOULD BE NO WAY TO IDENTIFY THE NEW ENTRANCE AS FOR THE HOSPITAL DUE TO THE ELEVATION OF THE STREET VERSUS THE LOCATION OF THE HOSPITAL ON THE PROPERTY.
FINALLY GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT PROVIDE THE APPLICANT WITH A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE IS NOT ENJOYED BY OTHERS, SIMILARLY SITUATED OR POTENTIALLY SIMILARLY SITUATED BECAUSE MOST OTHER PROPERTIES THEY'RE NOT SERVED THE PUBLIC IN A LIFE-SAVING CAPACITY, NOR ARE THEY ON A LARGE CORNER LOCK.
UM, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLE, UH, IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
UM, AND YASMINE IS STILL NOT HERE.
AND THANK YOU, MR. BENNETT FOR THAT, UH, PRECISE, UH, PRESENTATION THERE.
SO, UM, YOU GOT YOUR, UH, VARIANCE THERE.
UM, MR. BENNETT, SO CONGRATULATIONS.
YEAH, ABSOLUTELY GREAT HOLIDAY.
UH, SO THAT IS, UH, UH, OUR, THE END OF OUR SIGN, UM, UH, HEARINGS.
UM, ELAINE, HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING FROM YASMEEN? I HAVE NOT.
UM, I TEXT HER, I'M JUST WAITING TO SEE IF I GET A RESPONSE FROM HER.
MAYBE YOU CAN CALL HER IN THE INTERIM OR WHATEVER TO JUST IT.
UM, SO MOVING ALONG, THESE ARE VARIANCES, UH, NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS, UM, ONES THAT WE HAVE NOT HEARD BEFORE.
[D-1 C15-2020-0074 William Burkhardt for Michele Conners and Seth Bank 1501 Nickerson Street (Part 1 of 2)]
[00:15:01]
THIS IS ITEM D ONE D AS IN DOG.IT IS, UH, C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO SEVEN FOUR.
AND, UH, THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IS OUR PAST CHAIR, WILLIAM BURKHART FOR MICHELLE CONNORS AND SET BANK AT 1501 NICKERSON STREET.
AND THIS IS A VARIANCE FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, UM, UH, SUB CHAPTER F.
SO MR. CHAIR, MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. CHAIRMAN PASS, MR. CHAIR.
SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, AT THIS POINT WE ARE NINE MEMBERS.
WE ARE A NINE, WELL, WE ARE STILL 10 VOTING MEMBERS, SO IT WILL REQUIRE AN EIGHT VOTE.
SO IF THERE IS MORE THAN ONE WITH ONLY NINE PEOPLE PRESENT, IF THERE'S MORE THAN ONE NEGATIVE VOTE, IT WILL NOT PASS.
AND SO GIVEN THAT, THAT WE DON'T HAVE, UM, A FULL, UH, BODY, UH, RIGHT NOW, UH, I WOULD GIVE THE APPLICANT, UH, THE ABILITY TO POSTPONE IF THEY SO CHOOSE.
UM, SO MR. BURKHART, ARE YOU INTERESTED IN POSTPONING, MR. CHAIRMAN? IS IT POSSIBLE TO TABLE THIS UNTIL LATER IN THE MEETING, OR IS IT POSSIBLE THAT NEW, UH, A NEW BIT OTHER, UM, UH, I JUST WANT THE AGENDA TO BE TAKEN UP FIRST.
UH, I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH THAT UNLESS WE GET THINGS TABLED AND TABLED AND TABLE.
UH, BUT, UH, UH, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
UH, JESSICA, I SAW YOUR HAND UP, I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE THAT WE ADDRESS NEW BUSINESS AND A NEW BUSINESS.
NOW, CAN WE, I THINK WE CAN DO THAT UNDER THE RULES IS NOT RIGHTLY OKAY.
WHILE WE'RE WAITING TO SEE WHAT'S UP WITH, UH, YASMIN, UH, UH, AND MICHAEL, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP TOO? YES.
MR. CHAIR, IF I'M NOT, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN IN THE PAST, WE'VE ALSO GIVEN, GIVEN SOME OF THESE APPLICANTS AN OPPORTUNITY, AND IF THEY ARE DENIED TO RETURN TO COME BACK TO US FOR RECONSIDERATION WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY AGAIN, CORRECT.
MELISSA, DID WE USE TO DO THAT? AND THEN I SEE LEE'S SHAKING HIS HEAD.
BUT I RECALL IN OUR PAST MEETINGS, WE CAN STILL CONTINUE BUSINESS INHERIT.
AND IF IT DOESN'T REALLY, IF, IF IT'S DENIED AND THEY WANT TO COME BACK FOR A SECOND, YOU KNOW, OPPORTUNITY TO GET A FULL VAULT THAT WE WE'VE ALLOWED THAT TO HAPPEN WITHOUT MAKING THEM GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF PAYING AGAIN, THE, IS THAT IS I, WE DO.
I DO SEE YOU'RE SHAKING YOUR HEAD AFFIRMATIVELY.
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IF, IF THERE'S NOT A FULL BOARD ON THE DIETS THAT A DENIAL, UM, IN THE PAST, JUST AS A PROCEDURAL PROCEDURAL QUESTION CAN BE TAKEN UP WITHOUT ADDITIONAL FEES CONSIDERATION.
SO IT'D BE OUR PREROGATIVE TO DO THAT.
SO, UM, AND WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE BOARDS? UM, YEAH, MELISSA LET'S MAKE A MOTION THAT WE PROCEED TO NEW BUSINESS, AND THEN WE HANDLE THOSE LINE ITEMS, APOLOGIES CITIZENS, BUT I THINK THAT A FULL BOARD WOULD BE BETTER AND WE COULD DISCUSS OUR NEW BUSINESS ITEMS AND, UH, PERHAPS THEN WE'LL, WE'LL HAVE A FULL BOARD FOR THAT.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THAT THEN.
UH, SO WE WILL, UH, MOVE ON TO OUR NEW BUSINESS AND WE MAY MAKE SHORT WORK OF THIS, BUT LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THAT WHILE WE'RE WAITING TO SEE, UH, WHERE YASMIN IS.
[G-1 Discussion of the October 12, 2020 Board activity report ]
UH, NEW BUSINESS, UH, ITEMUM, WE HAVE OUR, UH, IT SAYS OCTOBER, BUT I BELIEVE THAT IT SHOULD BE NO NOVEMBER.
IT WOULD BE OCTOBER, UM, ACTIVITY REPORT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE IT, THE COMMENTS OR CHANGES THERE? THANK YOU, ELAINE.
OH, AND, AND, AND JUST AS A POINT OF ORDER, UH, ON THAT, IT ACTUALLY IS FROM OUR NOVEMBER.
UM, SO, UH, W W W WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT TO NOVEMBER 9TH AND ALSO, UH, THIS IS FOR ELAINE AND FOR DIANE, OR REALLY, UM, THAT, UH, IT SAYS,
[00:20:01]
UH, JUNE.IT SAYS JULY 20TH THROUGH JULY THROUGH JUNE, 2021, I GUESS WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT WE'LL ALL STILL BE HERE THEN.
SO, UH, IF WE CAN JUST MAKE THAT CHANGE, UH, TO MAKE THAT IT'S THE NOVEMBER 9TH, UM, 20, 20, UH, ACTIVITY
[G-2 Discussion and possible action regarding postponed BOA Trainings (including new topic “Area Character”); Staff & PC Coordination Workgroup (Leighton- Burwell, Hawthorne, Von Ohlen & Bailey); and, coordination with COA Planning Staff (including reporting, presentations and general accountability) and Planning Commission (including LDC overlap (e.g. Sign Regulations, etc). ]
REPORT.MOVING ON TO G TWO, UH, THIS IS POSTPONED, UH, BOA TRAININGS, ANY HEADWAY ON THAT? ELAINE? NO.
UM, BRENT AND I ARE WORKING VERY DILIGENTLY TO GET THIS DONE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
UM, I JUST SPOKE WITH HIM TODAY ABOUT THAT, AND WE'RE TRYING TO FORWARD AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
WE'RE HOPING FOR JANUARY, BUT WE'RE DOING WHAT WE CAN.
I MEAN, WE'RE TRYING TO GET ALL THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND RIGHT NOW WITH THE HOLIDAYS GOING ON, IT'S HARD TO GET AHOLD OF PEOPLE.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO GET THEM ONBOARD AND GET THEM SCHEDULED SO WE CAN GET YOU GUYS SCHEDULED.
WE'LL NEED SOME TIME TO CHECK OUR CALENDARS FOR THAT.
UH, AND THEN, DID YOU HEAR ANYTHING FROM YASMINE? ACTUALLY? YES, SHE'S TEXTING RIGHT NOW AND SHE'S SAYING SHE'S HAVING TROUBLE WITH WEB X, UM, AND SHE'S WAITING TO LOAD, UM, TO SEE IF SHE CAN LOG IN.
UM, HAVING HAD THE SIMILAR PROBLEMS TWO MEETINGS AGO, I UNDERSTAND.
[G-3 Discussion and possible action regarding UNO Sign regulations – requesting presentation by City Staff (Jerry Rusthoven). ]
OKAY.UM, THIS IS THE UNIT ASSIGNED REGULATIONS.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK TO THAT WE WERE ASKING FOR JURY REST OPEN TO APPRISE US OF, OF CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE LIKE THIS, WHERE THEY'RE AMENDING IT TO, UH, UH, GET IN SYNC WITH, UH, COUNCIL'S INTENT.
UM, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE'S ANY PRESENTATION ON THAT.
[G-4 Discussion and possible action regarding staff guidance on LA (Lake Austin) cases (in particular, the intent of increased setback requirements – environmental or other purpose?) ]
UH, ITEM G4, I THINK THAT THIS IS VERY SIMILAR.THIS IS, UH, STAFF GUIDANCE FOR LA ZONING, UH, TO GIVE US, UH, AND AGAIN, THIS IS PROBABLY GOES BACK MORE TO THE TRAININGS THAT HAVE BEEN POSTPONED TO GET THAT THAT'S CORRECT.
SO ANY OF YOU GUYS CAN JUST STOP ME IF, IF THERE'S AN ITEM THAT YOU WANT TO DISCUSS,
[G-5 Discussion and possible action regarding on the FY 2020-21 Budget Calendar - New Workgroup (Cohen, Smith and Von Ohlen) to look at access to BOA for lower income applicants and possible funding to help those without resources to pay current fees. ]
UH, ITEM G FIVE IS OUR BUDGET CALENDAR.UM, AND WE HAD THE WORK GROUP LOOKING AT, UH, RESOURCES AGAIN FOR LOWER INCOME APPLICANTS AND POSSIBLE FUNDING.
UH, IS THERE ANYBODY ON THAT WORK GROUP THAT, UM, HAS ANY UPDATES YET, JESSICA? NO, I DID THIS TIME, UH, ELECTIONS WITH GETTING A HOLDER TO STOP A LITTLE HECTIC.
SO WE'LL HAVE THE FINAL SUBMIT ALREADY FOR Y'ALL FOR THE JANUARY.
LET ME JUST MAKE A LITTLE NOTE HERE.
[G-6 Discussion and possible action regarding Workgroups Update: Transportation Criteria/Code Recommendations Workgroup (Smith, Hodge & Corral) ]
THE, UH,SO, UH, WE ONLY HAVE YASMIN AND, UH, OTTO, THIS IS THE TRANSPORTATION CRITERIA AND CODE RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT GROUP AND HAS EVEN MET IN A WHILE.
WE THOUGHT THAT THERE WASN'T REALLY MUCH TO DO RIGHT NOW UNTIL WE KNEW WHAT WAS HAPPENING WITH THE CODE A LITTLE BIT MORE.
AND AS MENTIONED, I BELIEVE LAST MONTH I HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH BETH CULVER AT THE CITY TO DISCUSS A WHOLE LITANY OF THINGS THAT I HAVE SEEN, UH, IN MY ROLE AS CHAIR AND THAT MELISSA.
SO THE TRANSPORTATION CRITERIA MANUAL, THERE'S A DRAFT.
AND, UH, UH, I HAD SUGGESTED TO ELAINE THAT PERHAPS THEY MIGHT BE PART OF THE TRAINING, UM, BUT THE DRAFT IS OUT AND THE, THERE IS AN UPDATE TO THE QUEUE ISLANDS AND SUCH IN THERE.
UM, I LOOKED AT IT BRIEFLY, BUT I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO FORMULATE ANY OPINIONS.
SO I THOUGHT THAT, UH, BEING THAT THEY'RE SEEKING INPUT THAT PERHAPS THEY COULD SEEK INPUT HERE, FOLLOW UP ON THAT WITH THE FOLKS THAT ARE DOING THE SURVEY ON THIS, UM, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SOME MADE THE CASE THAT THE TRANSPORTATION OR THE QUEUING FOR GAS ISLANDS IN PARTICULAR WAS OUT OF SYNC WITH INDUSTRY NEW INDUSTRY STANDARDS.
AND, UM, SO I TALKED TO THEM ABOUT THAT AND BASICALLY THE QUEUING THAT THEY HAVE IN THE CURRENTLY PROPOSED MANUAL IS NO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THEY HAD BEFORE.
SO I HAVE BROUGHT THIS TO THEIR ATTENTION THAT THEY PROBABLY WANT TO TALK TO SOME INDUSTRY PEOPLE AND A FLIGHT VIC TO SOME OTHER FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT HAVE A STAKE IN THIS TO SAY,
[00:25:01]
SPEAK UP OR, OR WE'RE GOING TO BE HEARING VARIANCES ON THIS UNNECESSARILY.SO THANKS FOR BRINGING THAT UP, BECAUSE THAT REMINDED ME OF WHAT I HAD DONE ON THAT AS WELL.
[G-7 Discussion and possible action regarding on the draft LDC; BOA LDC Workgroup Report (Workgroup Members: Leighton-Burwell, Hawthorne, Cohen, Hodge and Smith) ]
G SEVEN.UM, AND AGAIN, THIS IS, UH, SOMEWHAT OF A MOOT POINT AT THIS STAGE IN THE GAME.
UM, UH, BECAUSE IT'S, UH, THE WORK GROUP REPORTING ON THE DRAFT, UM, UM, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, UH, CODE NEXT, OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE CALLED AT THIS POINT.
UM, AND AGAIN, WE HAD FINALIZED, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS AND SENT THEM ON, UM, TO THAT, UH, THE FOLKS AT THE CITY STAFF THAT ARE WORKING ON THAT.
UM, SO, UM, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S REALLY PROBABLY ANY UPDATE ON THAT AT THIS POINT.
[G-8 Discussion and possible action regarding alternative meeting dates and locations ]
UH, AGAIN, THIS IS SAYING ON OUR AGENDA, BUT THIS IS POSSIBLE TURNITIN MEETING DATES AND LOCATIONS, AND THIS REALLY COMES INTO PLAY IN SOME WAYS MORE ONCE WE'RE ACTUALLY BACK TO MEETING IN PERSON AND THAT SOME OF THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WILL BE MEETING AT HIGHLAND, UM, AND, UH, AND MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT, UH, IT'S TO BE DETERMINED AT THIS POINT, FREE UP, UH, CITY HALL FOR US TO POSSIBLY MEET ON OTHER NIGHTS.SO I THINK WE NEED TO, AT THIS POINT, WAIT UNTIL ALL OF THAT SHAKES OUT UNTIL WE CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION AND, AND GET WITH, UH, THE SCHEDULING PEOPLE AT THE CITY ABOUT THAT.
UH, ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS CHAIR, SORRY TO INTERJECT.
JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT IT LOOKS LIKE YASMIN SMITH IS ON THE LINE NOW.
I CAN'T ADD IT TO THE SCREEN, BUT SHE'S PROBABLY BE ABLE TO HEAR AND BE ABLE TO HEAR HER NAME.
Y'ALL, I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT'S GOING ON WITH ME GETTING ONLINE, BUT I HAVE ANOTHER COMPUTER I'M GOING TO TRY TO GET ON WITH, BUT DIALED IN AND FILLED IN.
WELL, WE'RE JUST GLAD YOU'RE HERE, CAUSE THAT GIVES US EVERYBODY THAT WE NEED TO HAVE HERE TONIGHT.
SO, UM, JUST, UH, UH, STAY WITH US IF YOU CAN, AND, AND UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATIONS OF TRYING TO LOG ON SOMETIMES, EXCUSE ME.
[G-9 Announcements ]
SO, UH, THE ONLY, UH, UH, ANNOUNCEMENT THAT I'LL MAKE IS THAT, UM, UM, WE HAVE A VACCINE IN THE WORKS, SO THERE MAY BE A POINT AGAIN WHERE WE CAN ALL MEET IN THE SAME ROOM AS I HAD SAID.AND, UH, I, YOU KNOW, I, UH, HOPE THAT EVERYBODY STAYS SAFE AND, UH, AND WELL OVER THE HOLIDAYS, UM, SO THAT WE CAN COME TOGETHER IN JANUARY AND CONTINUE OUR WORK.
JESSICA, I SEE YOUR HAND UP JUST REAL QUICKLY, HANUKKAH, WHERE TO WISH EVERYONE WOULD KIND OF GO, WE'VE GOT CHRISTMAS COMING.
IF WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO COVER IT AT THE END AMERICA.
EVERYBODY BE SAFE OVER THE HOLIDAYS.
HOPEFULLY PEOPLE WON'T BE TRAVELING TOO MUCH.
UH
THIS IS, UM, DISCUSSION OF, UH, ANY FUTURE AGENDA OR NEW BUSINESS ITEMS. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE WANT TO ADD TO OUR ALREADY RATHER LENGTHY LIST? OKAY.
SEEING NONE, I WILL, UM, MOVE US BACK TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA.
[D-1 C15-2020-0074 William Burkhardt for Michele Conners and Seth Bank 1501 Nickerson Street (Part 2 of 2)]
GOING BACK TO VARIANCES NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS.UH, AGAIN, THIS IS ITEM D ONE, UH, C 15 DAYS 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO SEVEN FOR WILLIAM BURKHART FOR MICHELLE CONNORS AND SETH BANK AT 1501, UH, NICKERSON STREET, A, UM, REQUESTS FROM THE LAW, UH, UH, VARIANCE FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING, UH, SUB CHAPTER F MR. CHAIR.
UH, I WAS GOING TO SAY, GO AHEAD, MR. CHAIR.
UM, SO THIS IS A, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, REQUEST FOR 85 SQUARE FEET FROM THE, UH, FROM THE MCMANSION ORDINANCE.
UH, AND IT'S A, YOU KNOW, IT'S AN OLD HOUSE PROBABLY PRE 1920S WITH A GUEST HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY.
UH, YOU CAN SEE, AND, UH, TO THE CHECK, I'M GONNA RUN THROUGH THE FIRST TWO AND THREE SIDES, AND THEN WE CAN SIT AND SCROLL, UH, AT A REASONABLE PACE, YOU KNOW, TOUCH THINGS AS THEY GO.
UM, SO THAT THE GUESTS, THE PALMER HOUSE IS 14 AND 31 SQUARE FEET.
THAT'S A SLIDE TO A SLIDE THREE, A BIGGER PARDON, UM, WITH A GUEST HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY OF 620 PLUS AMOUNT OF SQUARE FEET.
UM, THE OWNERS ARE LONG TIME OWNERS.
THEY'VE LIVED THERE SINCE, UH, 2007.
SO ABOUT 14 YEARS, UH, THEY, YOU KNOW, GIVEN WITH COVID AND, AND
[00:30:01]
TH THE REALITY OF A FAMILY AND WORKING FROM HOME, THEY, THEY WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THE HOUSE.UH, AND IT'S A MODEST ADDITION.
I'M GOING TO EXPAND THE KITCHEN, THAT ADDITIONAL AREAS IN THE BEDROOM AT A PORCH ON THE SECOND FLOOR BEDROOM, UH, SLIDE THREE THEN IS, UM, IS, IS MORE OR LESS CONCERNED WITH THE IDEA OF THE GUEST HOUSE AS A HARDSHIP.
AND THE IDEA WOULD BE THAT IT'S POSSIBLE PROBABLY TO DEMOLISH THIS AND BUILD SOMETHING WITHIN THE, WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, UH, BUT WITH THE GUEST HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY AND WITHOUT DEMOLISHING IT, UH, IT'S, IT'S NOT FEASIBLE TO ADD TO THE EXISTING HOUSE, GIVEN THAT YOU'VE GOT AN UPSTAIRS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, UM, TO CREATE THE PRESENT A REASONABLE ADDITION TO THE HOUSE.
ANYWAY, THE FACT THAT HE'S IN A TRANSITION ZONE, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON, AROUND IT.
THERE'S A LOT OF FAIRLY LARGE STRUCTURES.
SOME ARE CONFORMING, SOME ARE NOT, SOME ARE, UM, QUESTIONABLY PERMITTED, UH, BUT THE POINT BEING, I GUESS, THAT THE, UM, UH, PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE ASKING TO LIVE IN A CERTAINLY NOT AFFECT, UH, ANY OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES ADVERSELY, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE IDEA OF MCMANSION BASICALLY WAS TO PREVENT, UH, HOUSES FROM BEING, BECOMING SO LARGE THAT THEY WOULD OVERWHELM, UH, ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
AND YOU CAN MORE OR LESS CITY FROM THE, UH, FROM THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT ARE PART OF THE PRESENTATION AND PART OF THE BACKLOG, UH, THAT THERE'S NO DANGER OF THAT HAPPENING IN THIS CASE.
UM, YOU CAN SEE FROM THE AREA THEN THAT'S PROBABLY SLIDE FIVE AND SIX THAT, UM, UH, THE HOUSE IS LOCATED VERY, VERY CLOSE TO CONGRESS AVENUE, AS I SAID, A LOT OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY IN THE, IN THE AREA.
UH, SO THERE'S, THERE'S A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC AND, UM, UH, GENERALLY SUFFERS FROM THE FACT THAT IT'S IN A TRANSITION ZONE.
UH, WILL YOU HOLD ON JUST A MINUTE THERE, UH, AB UH, AB CAN WE GET, UH, UH, KEEP UP WITH THE FIVE AND SIX ON THE PRESENTATION WHEN THE APPLICANTS ARE ASKING FOR THAT? THANK YOU.
SO, UM,
AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S A BLACK OFF CONGRESS.
UH, THERE'S A, WE ALL KNOW THIS AREA IS VERY HEAVILY TRAFFICKED.
UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, UH, IN CONTEXT, THE ADDITION IS, IS ALMOST IMPERCEPTIBLE THAT THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE FROM THE ADDITION THAT'S BEING REQUESTED IS ALMOST IMPERCEPTIBLE, UH, IN CONTEXT.
UH, AND AGAIN, UM, THE, UH, THE GUEST HOUSE, OBVIOUSLY, UM, BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT IT, IT IS EXISTING AND IT IS AFFORDABLE, AND IT IS A HOUSING SHOCK THAT, THAT IS DESIRED IN THIS AREA.
SO IT'D BE A SHAME TO TEAR IT DOWN OR TO REMOVE IT, TO GET, TO ADD SQUARE FOOTAGE TO A PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
AND THAT, THAT IS A RISK IF THE, IF THE, UH, IF THE PROPERTY WOULD IT BE.
SO, YEAH, SO THE, UH, THE WHOLE IDEA OF THE, UH, THE, UH, THE NEW CODE, UM, COMING ON, IS THAT MY THOUGHT I SHOULD, I SHOULD KNOW BETTER.
UM, WE CAN SCROLL THROUGH THE REST OF THE SLIDES.
I THINK THEY'RE PRETTY, SELF-EXPLANATORY, UH, BE HAPPY TO ASK YOUR QUESTIONS, OBVIOUSLY.
UM, THE, UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE, AGAIN IS 85 SQUARE FEET, UM, PUT IN IS, UH, BASICALLY MORE OR LESS THE RESULT OF A STAIRWELL.
UM, AND I THINK EVERYTHING OUGHT TO BE PRETTY SELF EXPLANATORY.
THE ADJUSTMENT STRUCTURES ARE OBVIOUS, UH, THE SCALE AND SIZE OF THOSE.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, SO, UM, ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR EMOTION I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, BUT DALE HAS, LOOKS LIKE HE ASKS QUESTIONS AND NOW WE'VE GOT A SECOND BY MELISSA AND JESSICA.
UM, SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE MICHAEL OLIN.
YOU SAID, UH, TAKE YOUR PICK JESSICA OR MELISSA.
YEAH, WE MIGHT NEED JESSICA LATER.
AND I'M SURPRISED WE DIDN'T JUMP IN EARLIER, MICHAEL.
I WAS GOING TO, BUT AFTER THE LAST ONE, I WASN'T SURE HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE FAMILIAR WITH THAT, WITH THE PATIENT AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
[00:35:01]
WOULD SHOW THE SLIDE AND THEY SHOW THAT BIG, EMPTY PARKING LOT ACROSS THE STREET AND THE PARK, YOU KNOW, SITTING ON THE CORNER, THEN PEOPLE WOULD BE ABLE TO MAYBE SUPPORT IT EASIER.SO DO YOUR OWN, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT? I HAD A QUESTION.
UM, THE, THE HARDSHIP IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE ADU, YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO, UH, ADD ANY MORE TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE.
IS THAT WHAT I UNDERSTAND, MR. BURKHART? I REMEMBER IT, YES.
UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE ENDING UP WITH ON THE, ON THE MAIN HOUSE, THERE'S ABOUT 2,250 SQUARE FEET WITH THE PROPOSED ADDITION.
UM, AGAIN, WE COULD TEAR DOWN EVERYTHING AND START FROM SCRATCH.
JUST THE SAME WAY WE COULD CUT A TREE DOWN, ALTHOUGH OBVIOUSLY A HEARD SHOE HAS ITS OWN LIMITATIONS.
UM, SO YES, UH, THE PROPERTY HAS A HOUSE ON IT.
IT'S A SHAME TO LOSE IT, UH, TO WORK WITH THAT CONSTRAINT.
WELL, THE END, THE THING THAT I'LL SAY ABOUT THIS, BESIDES THE FACT THAT IT SORT OF DESCRIBES DIMINIMUS, UM, IS THAT, UH, UH, AS, UH, UH, UH, MR. BURKHART SAID THE, UH, SUB CHAPTER F THAT MCMANSION ORDINANCE WAS TRYING TO REDUCE THE SCOPE AND, AND, UH, UM, SCALING OF A LOT OF THE MCMANSIONS.
AND, UM, AS, AS SHOWN THIS, THIS, UH, PROJECT IS ALREADY, YOU KNOW, UH, GOING TO BE SMALLER IN TERMS OF SCALE AND MASSING, THEN A LOT OF THE NEW THINGS THAT ARE BUILT AROUND IT, UH, SO YOU CAN MEET THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS AND STILL BE VERY OUT OF SCALE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS HOUSE SEEMS TO BE IN SYNC WITH THAT, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.
SO GO AHEAD, MR. CHAIR, I THINK THAT'S CORRECT.
MY CONCERN IS THE IDEA THAT THEY BROUGHT THIS ON THEMSELVES BY THE, BY THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ADU, THEY BUILD THE ADU AND THEN THEY COME IN AND THEY SAY, OKAY, THESE EXISTING FACTORS, WE NEED A VARIANCE FROM THEM BECAUSE OF SOMETHING THAT THEY THEMSELVES DID.
UH, I MEAN, I THINK THAT THE BOARD LOOKS AT THIS AND, AND IS WILLING TO DO THE VARIANCE, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT, UH, I THINK IT'D BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE MORE, I, MORE OF AN IDEA OF WHAT EXACTLY WOULD, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, STOP SOMEONE FROM BASICALLY CREATING A CONDITION ON THEIR LAW AND THEN USING THAT CONDITION.
WELL, HOLD ON THAT ONE LOT, ONE, ONE HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED BEFORE 1921 AND THE ATU AND THE OTHER ONE WAS THERE SINCE 1950.
SO I DON'T THINK THE FOLKS BUILT THAT SECONDARY UNIT AND CREATED A PROBLEM.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS JUST CHECKING ON WAS THE TIMING OF THAT.
THERE WAS NO OLDER ADA, BUT SHOULD I DO A FINDING, SIR? AND WELL, ANY MORE DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO FINDINGS? OKAY.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO A DEFINED EXTENT.
REASONABLE USE ZONING REGULATION APPLICANT WENT TO THE PROPERTY, DID NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS A CORNER LOT FOR TWO EXISTING MODESTY, MODESTLY SIZED STRUCTURES.
THE OTHER BY 1950, THE HARDSHIP FROM WHICH VARIANCE IS REQUESTED IS YOU NEED TO THE PROPERTY IN THAT THERE ARE CURRENTLY TWO HOUSES ON THE PROPERTY, A PRIMARY RESIDENCE IN THE 622 SQUARE FOOT GUEST HOUSE, GIVEN THE CONFIGURATION LAYOUT AND DESIGN CONSTRAINTS OF THE EXISTING PRIMARY RES RESIDENCE, EVEN A PROPOSED MODEST ADDITION TO THE PRIMARY RESIDENT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO ACHIEVE THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE MANY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THIS TRANSITIONAL ZONE HAVE REDEVELOPED INTO HYBRID RESIDENTIAL SLASH COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS WITH OUTSIDE STRUCTURES, OR HAVE DEMOLISHED EXISTING STRUCTURES TO CONSTRUCT NEW RESIDENCES OR OUT OUTRIGHT COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS AREA CHARACTER.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMANT PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATION OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THERE ARE CURRENTLY, THE AREA IS CURRENTLY CRAMP.
THE AREA IS CURRENTLY COMPRISED TONGUE TWISTING HERE OF MIXING ZONING AURIS AND A TRANSITIONAL AND HEAVILY TRAFFIC COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
AND AS EITHER ADJACENT TO, OR PROXIMITY OF A STRUCTURE OF VARIETY SIZES, MOST OF ALL, WHICH ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER THAN THE ONE THAT IS BEING PROPOSED.
ALL RIGHT, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL BAILEY.
[00:40:01]
DON LAYTON BURWELL.UM, AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD, UM, THE, IF WE COULD THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION ON COMING TO A HARDSHIP VERSUS, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT THIN LINE THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED, THAT BEING ADDED TO NEW BUSINESS OR ON THAT RUNNING LIST OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS.
I WOULD LIKE TO PULL THE THREAD, HOWEVER, ON WHERE THAT CONVERSATION TURN.
AND HARDSHIP WILL BE ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT IS GOING TO BE DONE IN OUR NEW TRAINING SESSIONS.
YOU ALL LOOK GOOD? AND IT'S GREAT TO BE BACK.
I WISH I COULD RECIPROCATE DIRECTLY.
I KNOW, I KNOW THERE IS LIFE, SO EVERYBODY HAVE A HAPPY HOLIDAY.
[D-2 C15-2020-0076 Gina Hill for Gina and Peyton Hill: 1605 Brackenridge Street ]
UH, SO MOVING ON TO ITEM, SORRY.THIS IS, UH, C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO SEVEN SIX.
UM, THIS IS, UH, GINA HILL FOR GINA HILL AND PEYTON HILL AT 1605 BRACKENRIDGE STREET.
THIS IS A, UH, REQUEST, UH, VARIOUS FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IS BEN MAY THE APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT.
CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
LOOK AT THIS WITH US THIS EVENING.
UH, THE VARIANTS WE'RE REQUESTING REALLY IS SPECIFICALLY TO THE DETACHED EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU GUYS HAVE THE PRESENTATION PULLED UP, BUT THE FIRST SLIDE IN THE PRESENTATION SHOWS AT THE TOP, THE EXISTING GARAGE LOCATION, WHICH IS PRETTY MUCH IN LINE WITH ALL THE OTHER EXISTING STRUCTURES.
THAT'S A BACKUP TO DRAKE STREET.
THIS, UH, THIS PARTICULAR BLOCK BETWEEN BRECKINRIDGE STREET AND DRAKE STREET IS KIND OF A UNIQUE ONE.
IT'S, IT'S PRETTY MUCH THE ONLY BLOCK, UH, OR A COUPLE BLOCKS WITHIN TRAVIS HEIGHTS THAT HAS THIS, UH, UNIQUE CONDITION WHERE IT HAS THE STREETS THAT FACEBOOK'S FRONT AND BACK.
UM, BUT WHAT WE HAVE THERE IS WE HAVE AN EXISTING GARAGE THAT IS CERTAINLY OLDER, AND, UH, THE OWNERS WOULD LIKE TO SIMPLY REBUILD THIS GARAGE.
AND BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT HAS STREETS FACING BOTH FRONT AND BACK, IT'S TECHNICALLY SUBJECT TO THE THROUGH LOT REQUIREMENTS OF HAVING A 25 FOOT SETBACK AT BOTH AND BACK.
AND, UH, THIS THROUGH LOT KIND OF REQUIREMENT IS ACTUALLY A BIT MORE DESIGNED TO APPLY TOWARDS DOUBLE LODGE THAT GO ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
THIS IS KIND OF UNIQUE IN THE SENSE IT'S JUST A SINGLE LOT.
SO IT DOESN'T EVEN REALLY HAVE A TYPICAL, UM, OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A STANDARD REAR SETBACK, BUT IN SHORT, THE EXISTING GARAGE WHERE IT IS LOCATED, UH, REALLY ALL THEY'RE ASKING TO DO IS TO REBUILD THAT GARAGE AND IN DOING SO, THEY'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE SETTING THE NEW GARAGE FURTHER BACK INTO THEIR PROPERTY.
SO IT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO SIT FURTHER BACK FROM THE STREET.
AND CURRENTLY IT'S ONLY ABOUT ONE FOOT OFF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE, UM, THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, AND WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE MOVING THAT BACK TO THE STANDARD WITHIN THE STANDARD FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK.
IT'LL ALSO BE MORE PROTECTIVE FOR FIRE CODE, AND IT'S GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY NEWER CONSTRUCTION.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO KEEP THE EXISTING GABLE AESTHETIC TO MATCH THE EXISTING HOUSE THAT, UH, THEY'RE GOING TO BE JUST DOING A LITTLE BIT OF INTERIOR REMODEL THAT, BUT THE EXISTING HOUSE IS GOING TO STAY THE SAME.
UH, WE'VE SPOKEN WITH ALL THE NEIGHBORS, UH, ALL ADJACENT AND ACROSS FROM THEM.
ALL THE NEIGHBORS ARE IN SUPPORT.
[00:45:02]
UH, WE ALSO SPOKE WITH DSRC.THEY CAME OUT, TAKE A LOOK AT THE CONDITION AND OFFERED A VERY RARE LETTER OF SUPPORT.
UM, AND BASICALLY IT NOT ONLY DID THEY OFFERED US SUPPORT, BUT THEY STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO PURSUE PUTTING AN ADU ABOVE THE GARAGE, UH, WHICH WE WILL BE EXPLORING IF WE HAVE THE AVAILABLE FAR TO DO.
I THINK WE HAVE JUST ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO GET A SMALL UNIT ABOVE, BUT IT CERTAINLY WON'T BE A VERY BIG UNIT.
UM, AND THAT'S REALLY KIND OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO.
THERE WAS ACTUALLY A VARIANCE PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FOR THIS EXACT SAME CONFIGURATION THAT VARIANCE EXPIRED.
SO WE'RE JUST COMING BACK TO SEEK RENEWAL ON THIS ONE.
I'M WONDERING, ARE YOU GUYS OKAY? YEAH, IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU JUST CAME TO THE END OF YOUR PRESENTATION.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO KIND OF SCROLL THROUGH THE PRESENTATION A LITTLE BIT, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE FIRST SLIDE BASICALLY SHOWS THE EXISTING GARAGE AND THE NEW PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE GARAGE SLIDE TWO GIVES A SITE PLAN, BASICALLY SHOWING A HASHED, UH, INDICATOR.
THE HASHED SECTION INDICATES WHERE THE EXISTING GARAGE IS, AND THEN THE DENSER HATCH SHOWS WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE RELOCATED.
UH, SLIDE THREE IS JUST THE SURVEY SLIDE FOUR IS ANOTHER ANGLE OF THE KIND OF MASSING STUDY, JUST TO KIND OF SHOW YOU HOW THE GARAGE WILL BE MOVING FURTHER BACK INTO THE PROPERTY AND FURTHER AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
SLIDE FIVE IS A PICTURE OF THE EXISTING GARAGE THERE THAT FACES DRAKE, THE OLDER STRUCTURE AND SLIDE SIX IS ALSO ANOTHER PICTURE SLIDE SEVEN SORT OF SHOWS YOU THE CONFIGURATION OR THE, UH, THE TWO BLOCKS THERE ON DRAKE AND ALL THE OTHER STRUCTURES.
THE THING THAT'S UNIQUE ABOUT THIS BLOCK IS THERE ARE PROBABLY THREE INSTRUCTED, EXCUSE ME, SIR, MAY I INTERJECT MELISSA? DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS ONE? AND YOU WANT ME TO MAKE A MOTION? WE DID PASS A VARIANCE ON THE BACK.
WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS NOT UNREASONABLE.
IT'D BE A LITTLE BIT MORE IN COMPLIANT.
AND SO MELISSA, YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO ARGO.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I BROKEN, WE'LL GIVE THIS ONE A BREAKFAST.
I'LL SECOND IT, BUT JUST QUICKLY.
UM, IF THEY DO DO AN ADU, I WOULD LIKE TO CONDITION THAT IT'S NOT AN STR.
CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? I DIDN'T HEAR THAT.
IF YOU DO DEVELOP THE SECOND STORY INTO AN ADU ON THAT GARAGE, I WOULD LIKE TO, FOR IT TO NOT BE AN STR, IS THAT THAT'S A CONDITION OF THAT ADU THAT IT'D BE USED FOR YOUR LONG-TERM RENTAL OR FAMILY OR WHATEVER THAT WAY IT'S AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I GUESS THE ONLY THING ON THAT THOUGH, BROOKE, THAT I WOULD DEFER TO LEE, UH, TO GET A QUESTION ON IS BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT EVEN SURE THEY'RE GOING TO DO ONE RIGHT NOW, AND IT MAY BE SOMETHING POSSIBLE THAT YOU MAY DO IN THE FUTURE.
ARE WE ABLE TO DO THAT? AND IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE TO PUT A RESTRICTION ON A POSSIBILITY OF FUTURE, UH, BOARD MEMBER, UH, THE, UH, THE BOARD HAS THE DISCRETION TO PLACE CONDITIONS ON A VARIANCE.
UM, I WILL SAY TYPE TWO VARIANTS, UH, TYPE TWO STRS AS A GENERAL RULE ARE NOT ALLOWED IN THE CITY TYPE ONE, UH, OWNER OCCUPIED, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE, THERE'S AN OWNER OCCUPYING THE, THE PRIMARY RESIDENTS ARE ALLOWED UNDER CITY CODE, BUT, UM, THAT SAID, UH, THE BOARD HAS THE DISCRETION TO PLACE THE, THE, UH, CONDITION IN THE VARIOUS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND I WANTED THE APPLICANT TO HEAR IT FROM YOU.
AND ALSO THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONCERN EXPRESSED BY THE NEIGHBORS AND SOME OF THE BACKUP FROM THAT.
ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE PROPERTY, DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USES.
AS THERE ARE EIGHT STRUCTURES ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF DRAKE, THEY DON'T MEET THE CURRENT SETBACK REGULATIONS AND THEY CAN'T BE USED FOR SETBACK AVERAGING, UH, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT A PRINCIPAL RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AS THIS VARIOUS WAS A PRE PRE PREVIOUSLY.
THIS IS AFFIRMATION OF THE, UH, PREVIOUS VARIANCE.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE BRANCH HAS REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AS, UH, SOME OF THE STRUCTURES ALONG THE STREETS, UH, HAVE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING CONDITIONS.
[00:50:01]
THIS STRUCTURE WILL BE MOVED RELOCATED TO ACTUALLY MAKE THE CONDITIONS BETTER.THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
AS MOST OF THE STRUCTURES ALIGNED DRAG DON'T COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT SETBACK REGULATIONS AND THE GARAGE IS IN SUCH POOR CONDITION.
I THINK ANYTHING WOULD MAKE IT BETTER.
UM, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF ADJACENT CONFIRMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT APPEAR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT AS WELL.
IT WOULD BE PROVIDING A REDUCED SETBACK.
IT IS ACTUALLY PROVIDING A BETTER FIRE DISTANCE SAFETY, UH, FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND BE IN ALIGNMENT WITH OTHER STRUCTURES ALONG THE STREET.
I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT HAPPENED.
UM, UH, SO, UM, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, THE VARIOUS, UH, WITH THE, UH, ADDITION OF THE, OR THE PROVISOR THAT IF AN ADU IS PLACED ABOVE THE GARAGE, THAT IT WILL NOT BE AN SDR.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL, UH, ROUTE BAILEY.
[D-3 C15-2020-0080 Paul Bielamowicz 2111 Wilson Street ]
OKAY.UM, MOVING ALONG TO THE NEXT ITEM.
THIS IS, UM, ITEM D THREE C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO EIGHT ZERO.
UM, HIS LAST NAME STARTS WITH A B FOR 21, ONE, ONE, UH, WILLIAM WILSON STREET.
UH, THIS IS A, UM, VARIANCE FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, UH, REGARDING, UH, SETBACKS.
SO, UM, WE HAVE AS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER, UH, MR.
YOU'LL HAVE TO TELL ME HOW TO SAY IT.
BASED ON MY REVIEW OF THE APPLICANT AND THE SUBMITTAL, UH, THE SUBMITTALS THAT IT APPEARS IN OUR PACKET, IT APPEARS THAT HE AND HIS TEAM DID EVERYTHING BY THE BOOKS SUBMITTED PLANS, WHICH WERE REVIEWED AND APPROVED AND OBTAINED, UH, BY, UH, BY, UH, THE SANDY OBTAINED A BOAT, A BUILDING PERMIT STARTED CONSTRUCTION UNDER THAT BUILDING PERMIT.
AND THE OVERSIGHT BY THE DSD SHOULD NOT BE HELD AGAINST THE APPLICANT.
THE GARAGE IS SITTING IN THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT OF THE OLD ONE AS WELL.
SO THERE'S REALLY NOT A WHOLE LOT.
IT'S NOTHING IS CHANGING OTHER THAN THEY'RE TAKEN DOWN.
AND THE PICTURE SHOWED THE DILAPIDATED OLD GARAGE.
SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I GOT THE SECOND ON THIS ONE, CAUSE I SAW THIS AND I WAS JUST MAD.
YOU SHOULD BE MAKING RESIDENTS PAYING FOR DSPS AND STATES.
UM, SO, UM, UH, DID I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? IF NOT, WE'RE CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY MICHAEL VON OLIN TO, UH, AND SECOND BY, UH, JESSICA COHEN, UH, BILL, IF YOU'LL READ YOUR YES, SIR.
THE REASON WE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY TO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE, UH, BECAUSE, UH, LDC 25 TO EIGHT 93 ALLOWS FOR VEHICLE STORAGE SIMILAR TO HIS OWN PROPERTIES WITH SIMILAR SIZED LAUDER ALLOWED TO HAVE A GARAGE AND HAVE A GARAGE HARDSHIP.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THE GARAGE CANNOT BE RELOCATED OUT OF SETBACK AS THERE'S A HERITAGE OAK TREE, 24 INCHES THAT CONSTITUTES HARDSHIP RESTRICTING CONSTRUCTION IN THE AREA, OUTSIDE THE SETBACK, COUNTING, UH, CONSTRUCTING A NEW FOUNDATION OUT OF THE SETBACK WOULD DISTURB THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE OF THE HERITAGE TREE.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE
[00:55:01]
AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE OF SIMILAR SIZE PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE A HERITAGE HOPE TREE IN THIS LOCATION WOULD NOT HAVE THIS HARDSHIP AREA CHARACTER.THE VINTAGE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY.
IT WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSES OF THE REGULATION, THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS OR THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE PROPOSER INNOVATIONS DO NOT INCREASE THE SIZE OR HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE AND DO NOT CHANGE THE USE OF DESTRUCTION.
ALL RIGHT, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL ROLL BROOKS, BAILEY.
AND I'D LIKE TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR THE DETAILED INFORMATION YOU PROVIDED IN THIS PACKET.
ALL, YOU'VE GOTTEN YOUR MARRIAGE, MATT AND A THOUSAND TONIGHT PEOPLE.
[D-4 C15-2020-0081 David Cancialosi for Jim Goodwin 1209 N. Weston Lane ]
THIS IS ITEM, UH, D FOUR C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO EIGHT ONE.DAVID CAMPSIE LOC FOR JIM GOODWIN, 1209 NORTH WESTERN LAKE AND DAVID KENT CLOC IS THE SPEAKER ON THIS.
UH, I HAVE FAIRLY, UH, IN DEPTH, UH, PACKET.
I WILL TRY TO CONDENSE IT IN AS FAST AS I CAN AS COGENT AS I CAN WITHIN THE THREE MINUTES.
UM, ESSENTIALLY WE HAVE A 1984 ERA CONSTRUCTION HOUSE THAT WAS NEVER ISSUED A BUILDING PERMIT, NO REQUIRED TO HAVE ONE.
UM, BUT BY THE CITY, EVEN THOUGH THE LAWS ON THE BOOKS AT THE TIME REQUIRED THE CITY, UH, TO HAVE THE BUILDING, UH, GET A BUILDING PERMIT AT THAT TIME.
SO WE DIDN'T KNOW WHY THAT WAS NEVER ISSUED OR SOUGHT AT THAT TIME.
WE JUST KNOW IT WAS, THERE IS NONE THAT, THAT EXISTS.
VARIANCES WERE ISSUED THAT REDUCED THE SHORELINE SETBACK IN THE 1990S, UH, POOL PERMIT WAS ISSUED IN THE 1990S, UH, OVER THE COURSE OF A FALL AND SUMMER OF 1990, THERE WERE LIKE THREE PERMITS AND THREE VARIANCES ISSUED, UH, REGARDING THE SHORELINE SETBACK, INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE POOL OR FOR THE REMODEL OR THE HOUSE.
UM, AND 2020, THERE WAS A DECK REPAIR PERMIT ISSUED THE CITY, PUT A STOP ON IT AND SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU, WE GAVE YOU THE WRONG KIND OF PERMIT THAT WAS OVERTURNED.
AND THEN, AND AS PART OF THAT REVIEW, DSD SAID, GO GET A POOL PERMIT BECAUSE YOU'RE, YOU'VE NEVER HAD A POOL PERMIT FOR THE CHANGE OF SHAPE OF YOUR POOL.
UH, SO WE SAID, OF COURSE, WE'LL GET A PERMIT FOR THAT.
I GUESS IT WAS DONE IN 2012 WHEN THE SHAPE WAS CHANGED, WE SOUGHT PERMIT.
THEY SAID, YOU'RE OVER YOUR IMPERVIOUS COVER, GO GET A VARIANCE.
AND OF COURSE WE DISCOVERED, YOU KNOW, WE WERE AT NEAR 38% IMPERVIOUS COVER WHEN THE ALLOWANCE IS 20 DISCOVERED THE, UH, SHORELINE SETBACK HAD BEEN REDUCED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IN THE 1990S TO AS MUCH, OR AS LITTLE AS 33 FEET.
UH, UH, PART OF WHAT STILL ENCROACHES INTO THE EXISTING GARAGE, WHICH IS WHY PART OF OUR, ONE OF OUR VARIANCES IS TO ALLOW THE REAR GARAGE TO ENCROACH, UH, INTO THE 33 FOOT SETBACK FOR A WIDTH OF 23.
SO IT REDUCES THAT PORTION DOWN TO A 21 FOOT SETBACK.
AND ESSENTIALLY WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP, WHAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FOR SOME 35 YEARS FOR THE MOST PART.
AND IN RETURN FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, WE'RE ASKING THE BOARD, UH, LOOK AT THE RAIN GARDEN FACILITY THAT'S BEEN, THAT'S BEEN DESIGNED IT'S 500 SQUARE FOOT.
IT CAPTURES ABOUT 5,000 FOOT OF RUNOFF.
THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE DITCH NEXT TO US, OUTPOUR THE LAKE.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO OFFSET ANY CONCERNS, UH, REAL OR THEORETICAL ABOUT IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE SHEET FLOW ON THE SITE AS A WHOLE.
SO WITH THAT, THAT'S MY THREE MINUTES.
[01:00:01]
FOR ANY QUESTIONS.WELL, LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FIRST.
MICHAEL, DID YOU HAVE WHAT I KNEW? AND THIS WAS ANOTHER ONE.
THIS WAS THE NOVEL THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.
SO FIRST OF ALL, DAVID, THANK YOU FOR CONDENSING IT BECAUSE I'VE READ, I READ THIS FROM FRONT TO BACK AND DID A LITTLE RESEARCH ONLINE AS WELL AT SOME OF THEM WITH SOME OF THESE PERMITS IN SEPTEMBER OF 1990, THE VRA APPROVED A SHORELINE REDUCTION.
UH, THE CITY, THEN WE ISSUED A REMODEL PERMIT IN 1990 FOR THE EXISTING NON-COMPLIANT HOUSE.
AND THE PERMIT WAS CLOSED OUT AND GOT A PROPER SEAL IN NOVEMBER OF 1990.
THE CITY ISSUED ANOTHER BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE POOL, THE POOL, AND ALL OF THE TRADES THAT WERE INVOLVED, THE PLUMBING, THE ELECTRICAL, EVERYTHING WAS CLOSED OFF PROPERLY.
AND THEN IN JULY, BETWEEN JULY TO NOVEMBER OF 1990, THEY'VE HAD TWO VARIANCES IN THREE PERMITS ON THIS SITE, UH, UH, TO SAY, UH, TO ME TO SAY THAT THE POOL CONSTRUCTED 90, WHICH WAS A MANDATE EIGHT YEARS AGO, NEED TO BE REMEDIED BY REDUCING THE DOUBLE DIGIT IN PREVIOUS CARVER.
NUMBER OF THE ENTIRE SITE TO ME IS A LITTLE BIT DISINGENUOUS, UH, WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING AND CORRECT ME, DAVID, IF I'M WRONG, THIS SIDE HAS AN 18% DELTA BETWEEN THE 20% ALLOWED AND WHAT'S EXISTING, BUT YOU GUYS JUST WANT TO FINISH THAT DECK AND NO FURTHER WORK HAS TO PROPOSE TO BE MADE ON THIS REQUEST.
AND THE HOMEOWNER ONLY WANTS TO REMEDY THESE ERRORS TO MAKE THE, THE SITE LEGAL.
BASED UPON THAT INFORMATION, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND THEN ANYBODY WHO HAS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, BUT I CAN ALSO TELL YOU, DAVID, THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION YOU PUT IN HERE, BECAUSE IT MAY GAVE ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO ONLINE AND GO INTO THE CITY RECORDS TO VERIFY SOME OF THIS STUFF.
I THOUGHT IT PROBABLY BEEN A LITTLE BIT RETICENT, BUT, UH, WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY MICHAEL VAUGHN OLIN A SECOND BY MELISSA.
UM, SO W AND ONE, ONE POINT THAT I WOULD LIKE, BECAUSE AGAIN, PART OF THE REASON THIS IS IN FRONT OF US APPARENTLY IS THERE'S, UM, SPECIFICITY IS NOT EVERYBODY'S FORTE.
SO, UH, ON ITEM A, WHICH IS DEALING WITH THE SHORELINE SETBACK, UM, FROM 75 FEET REQUIRED TO 20 FEET, THAT THE 21 FOOT SETBACK IS ONLY FOR THE THING GARAGE STRUCTURE AND THAT THE OTHER STRUCTURES WOULD BE BOUND BY THE 1990 VARIANCE, WHICH ALLOWED 33 FOOT.
MR.
AND THE OTHER WAY, I'M GOING TO MOVE WITH IT SINCE, UH, UM, MR.
AND, AND WITH THE RAIN GARDENS TO OFFSET THE, UH, THE DIFFERENCE IN THE, THE 18% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND SO, W ONE, THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE WITH THE APPLICANT BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH FINDINGS, UM, IS ON ITEM.
UH, WELL, HE IS ON THE NEW POOL, SO IT WAS THE NEW POOL PERMITTED BECAUSE YOU KIND OF TALKED AROUND THE FACT THAT THEY'VE INCREASED THE POOL DECK, THE POOL SPY AND EVERYTHING, UH, SUBSTANTIALLY IN 2012, THEY MAY HAVE BUILT IT ORIGINALLY IN 1990, BUT THIS AIN'T THE SAME POOL OR THE SAME POOL DECK.
SO, UH, MR. CASSIE LOSI IS, IS, UM, WAS THAT, UH, PERMITTED, UH, IN 2012, THE POOL AND DECK.
SO NO, THERE'S NO PERMIT THAT I CAN FIND FROM 2012.
BUT IF, BUT THE FOOTNOTE TO THAT IS AT THAT TIME, I CAN ATTEST THAT IT WASN'T CLEAR THAT YOU NEEDED A PERMIT TO MODIFY THE SHAPE OF YOUR POOL.
IT'S NOT MODIFYING, THIS IS A DIFFERENT POOL.
I LOOKED AT THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS, THEY TORE OUT AN OLD POOL AND DID A BRAND NEW POOL THERE, A BIGGER POOL DECK, EVERYTHING.
IT WAS A DEMO AND A NEW POOL AND POOL DECK IS, AM I OFF BASE HERE? OR NO, I'M NOT DISAGREEING WITH YOU.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT AT THAT TIME, IN MY, WHEN I WAS THERE DOING MY JOB, I, THAT WAS MY EXPERIENCE THAT THERE WAS DIFFERENT OPINIONS
[01:05:01]
AS TO WHAT REALLY REQUIRED A PERMIT OR WAS IT, YOU KNOW, SO I THINK I JUST TRYING TO EXPLAIN, THAT'S PROBABLY HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE WITH THAT.BECAUSE THAT, THAT, ONE'S THE LESS FORGIVABLE, UH, ISSUE ABOUT THIS FOR ME IS IN THOUSAND AND 12 POOLS BASICALLY NEEDED A PERMIT IF THEY WERE IN CITY LIMITS REGARDLESS.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, BY, UH, MR. MANA OLIN, AND A SECOND BY, UH, MELISSA HAWTHORNE.
DO YOU WANT TO DO YOUR FINDINGS? AND THIS IS THE MOTION IS WITH, UH, THE RAIN GARDEN AND, UH, THE GARAGE, CORRECT? CORRECT.
GO AHEAD, MR. CANGIALOSI IS SAYING THAT THIS IS ONLY TO ALLOW THE EXISTING WHAT'S OUT THERE EXISTING.
UM, SO THIS APPROVAL WOULD NOT, UH, WOULD NOT BE FOR DOING ANY FURTHER CONSTRUCTION OR, OR CORRECT.
THAT'S THAT'S THE WAY I'M, I'M MAKING MY MOTION IS IT IS SO THAT THEY CAN FINISH WHAT THEY'VE GOT IN PROCESS.
AND THEN DARRYL WAS THAT THOUGH FOR MR. KENNY CLOC THE QUESTION.
THAT WAS FOR, FOR, UH, APPROVAL.
IS THIS APPROVAL GOING TO BE CONDITIONED UPON UPON THAT, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE USED TO GO AND TRY TO OBTAIN FURTHER, UH, FURTHER CONSTRUCTION YOU'RE WITH ME.
REASONABLE USE SINGLE FAMILY TO USE A SINGLE FAMILY USE AND ITS ASSOCIATED SEXUALLY ASSESSORY USES OR REASONABLY USES IN THE LA ZONING DISTRICT.
I'M GOING TO KEEP IT SHORT AND SWEET AND MOVE OUT ALONG HERE BECAUSE I'M GOING TO PASS UP A COUPLE OF CHAPTERS HARDSHIP.
THE HARDSHIP FOR, WITH VARIANCES REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IN THAT THE ROB GROWER GUIDELINE FROM THE TIMEFRAME SPEAK, NOTHING OF CITY PROMPT, PERMITS, CITY COUNTY AND RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERN CASE.
WE, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A BIG ISSUE OF, I DON'T LIKE TO, UH, PUT, UH, STAFF AND VERSUS HOMEOWNERS THERE, BUT OKAY.
THE HARDSHIP IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THAT THE CITY USED A SERIES OF BUILDING PERMITS OVER THREE TO FIVE YEAR PERIOD, WHICH EITHER ESTABLISHED A NIGO LEGAL NONCOMPLIANT ICC.
I SEE BEING A IMPERVIOUS COVER SCENARIO THAT THEY HAVE THE HOUSE POSITION PERMITS AND CONSTRUCTED SINCE THE SITE WAS WELL OVER 20, 20% IMMEDIATELY UPON INITIAL CONSTRUCTION OR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENT, THE CITY PERHAPS UNKNOWINGLY EXACERBATED THE ICU ISSUE BY CONTINUING TO ISSUE A SERIES OF OTHER VARIANCES IN PUBLIC FOR THE SITE.
AND, UH, I DON'T HAVE MY HIGHLIGHTED STUFF HERE.
SO, UM, THE HOT FLIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THERE'S NO OTHER LOT IN THE AREA WHICH HAS BEEN ENCUMBERED IN THIS MANNER.
AND THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPROVE THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT THE PURPOSES OR THE REGULATION OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
BECAUSE IN TURN, THE HOMEOWNER WILL BE INSTALLING SUBSTANTIAL VANGUARD AND SYSTEM IN ORDER TO BRIDGE THE GAP BETWEEN ALLOWED INTO PREVIOUS COVER AND EXISTING AND PREVIOUS CARD COVER.
AND REAGAN GARDENS HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED BY THE BOARD IS ACCEPTABLE MANNER IN WHICH TO ADDRESS POTENTIAL IMPERVIOUS CORPORATE ISSUES ON A RESIDENTIAL SITE.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS AND A SECOND BY, UM, MELISSA HAWTHORNE, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL.
OH, THE ROLE, UH, BURT BAILEY.
YASMIN SMITH THINK, COME BACK TO ME.
SO I'M NOT A FAN OF THE POOL SITUATION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER.
[D-5 C15-2020-0082 Micah King for Doug and Jana Harker 908 W. 18th Street ]
MOVING ON TO OUR LAST NEW, UH, VARIANCE ITEM.[01:10:01]
THIS IS, UH, B FIVE.UH, IT IS C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO EIGHT TWO.
MICAH CAME FOR DOUG AND JENNA HARKER AT NINE OH EIGHT WEST 18TH STREET.
THIS IS A VARIANCE FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
DID HE HAVE ANY MORE MEMBERS? UH, MIKE KING WITH TOUCH BLOCK? WELL, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, MR. CHAIR, MAY I ASK IT BEFORE HE GETS TOO DEEP INTO THIS? I NOTICED THAT THERE WAS A LETTER THAT STATED THEY HAVE ORDERED A NEW SURVEY AND WILL UPDATE US ONCE IT'S COMPLETED.
AND I WOULD, BEFORE WE EVEN OPENED UP THIS CAN OF WORMS, I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF THAT'S BEEN UPDATED AND COMPLETED.
CAUSE I DON'T HAVE IT IN MY PACKET AND I'M NOT COMFORTABLE GOING FORWARD WITHOUT US HAVING AN UPDATED SURVEY.
SO, YES, UH, THE NEW SURVEY IS IN THE PRESENTATION AND I, UM, SENT A LETTER, UH, EXPLAINING THE MODIFIED VARIANCE.
SO WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY MORE WHERE IT'S JUST ACTUALLY, WE'RE ABLE TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER AND SETBACK THAT WE'RE REQUESTING.
UM, AND SO, UH, BEFORE WE WERE ASKING FOR 53% IMPERVIOUS COVER AND THAT'S GONE DOWN TO 52.2, UM, IF YOU GO TO SLIDE TWO, IT'LL SHOW THAT.
AND THEN, UM, INSTEAD OF, UH, FORD, UH, INSTEAD OF, UM, WE'RE AND A HALF, UM, WE WERE ASKING FOR MORE THAN FOUR AND A HALF FEET.
NOW WE'RE DOWN TO A FOUR AND A HALF SET ASIDE SET BOX.
AND THE SURVEY I THOUGHT I EMAILED IT TO YOU, BUT MAYBE NOT.
UM, IT'S ON PAGE FIVE OF THE, UM, PAGE FOUR OF THE PRESENTATION AS WELL.
WELL, JUST MR. CHAIR, IF YOU COULD POINT OUT TO HIM, HE'S ASKING FOR 4.5, WE CAN'T GO UP TO 4.0, HE'S ASKING 4.5.
SO WE CAN'T GO UP TO A 4.5 EVEN IF HE WANTED IT OR BECAUSE WE'RE A, THE, THE REQUIREMENT IS FIVE, SO 4.5 OR PUT IT A WIDER, VERY INTERESTED IN WHAT HE'S REQUESTED MOTION TO POSTPONE.
WE HAVE EMOTION TO POST BY MELISSA.
UM, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? OKAY.
UH, WE HAVE A SECOND BY MICHAEL BOND OLIN.
UM, SO DO WE WANT TO, UH, HEAR THE REST OF THE PRESENTATION OR JUST GO AHEAD AND I'D LIKE TO HEAR THE PRESENTATION BECAUSE I'M NOT REALLY SURE I'M ASKING YOU TO ASK HIM FOR MORE.
SO I THINK DUE TO THE SURVEY, IF HE'S ASKING FOR A WIDER NARROWER SIDE SETBACK, SO GIVE IT TO HIM AND IT'S TO AN EXISTING STRUCTURE.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE HE COULD TAKE LESS IF THAT MADE SENSE.
SO WE COULD HEAR IT NOW COMING IN ON THAT AND PERHAPS IT, YEAH, THE APPLICANT COULD SPEAK TO THAT.
SO, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, LET HIM DO HIS PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL ACT ON THE, UH, THE, UH, MOTION TO POSTPONE.
UH, SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION I AM.
SO OUR ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS FOR, UM, 4.4 FEET AND WE'RE ASKING FOR LESS OF A SETBACK.
SO I MEAN LESS OF CRUSHING IT, SO ONLY SIX INCHES.
UM, SO I THINK IT'S PROPERLY POSTED, BUT, UM, I CAN DOUBLE CHECK IF WE, IF WE POSTED THAT RIGHT.
UM, IF WE CAN GET A PAGE TWO OF THE PRESENTATION, UM, JUST THE, UM, AS WE SAID, WE'RE GOING FROM, UH, UH, 45% IN PERVIOUS COVERED AT 52%.
AND WE'RE ASKING FOR, UH, A HALF OF A FOOT, UH, SETBACK, UM, ARE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT IS REQUIRED.
[01:15:01]
OF, UM, THE FIGHTS THAT MANDATORY SETBACK, AND THIS IS THE RESERVE, A SHARED ACCESS DRIVEWAY.THAT'S SHARED WITH CONDOMINIUMS TO THE REAR, AS WELL AS THE PATIO AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THIS IS THE SS THREE ZONE PROPERTY IT'S IN THE JUDGES HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND IF YOU GET A, UM, WHICH IS WRITTEN A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THIS, UM, THE NEXT PAGE, PAGE FOUR.
SO THERE'S, WHEREAS THIS IS SITUATED TO SOUTH OF MLK BOULEVARD.
UM, WEST OF WEST AVENUE SLIDE FOUR SHOWS THE REVISED SURVEY WITH THE, UM, ENCOURAGEMENT OF SIX INCHES OR 0.5 FEET, UM, ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE HOUSE AND THEN A SMALLER AMOUNT OF HOME PLACEMENT ON THE EAST SIDE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SURVEY, THE COVERED STONE PATIO SAYS THE, UH, PATIO THAT THE CURRENT OWNER, UM, BUILT, UM, BASED ON SOME BAD INFORMATION, THERE USED TO BE, UH, A STONE SLABS HERE THAT WAS SMALLER IN SIZE.
UH, AND THEY, THEY BUILT A COVERED PATIO HERE.
AND THEN THE EASEMENT TO THE REAR SERVES PART OF LEE.
IT SERVES THE PROPERTY OWNERS, UM, REAR DRIVE.
AND THEN, UM, THE OTHER PART OF IT SERVES THE CONDOS.
UM, AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, WE'VE WORKED WITH
UM, AND WE COULDN'T FIND ANY SOLUTION WHERE WE DIDN'T, UM, WHERE WE WOULD BE ABLE TO PRESERVE THE PATIO, EVEN IF WE REPLACED WALKWAYS AND, UM, PART OF THE PARKING AREA WITH CONCRETE STRIPS.
SO THE ONLY OPTIONS WERE SECRETARIATS OR DEMOLISHED THE PATIO OR PART OF THE DRIVEWAY.
UH, THIS IS A PHOTO OF THE BACK OF THE PORCH ON PAGE SIX, SLIDE SIX SLIDE SEVEN SHOWS THE REAR OF THE YARD AND THE YARD ACTUALLY KEEPS CONTINUING PAST THE REAR FENCE, UM, THAT IT'S PLACED THERE, UM, TO PROVIDE PRIVACY IN FRONT OF BETWEEN THE PATIO AND THEN NEIGHBORING, UH, SHARED ACCESS DRIVE SLIDE EIGHT SHOWS THE DRIVE WITH THE HARKER RESIDENCE, THE AFRICANS RESIDENCE ON THE RIGHT.
AND JUST TO SHOW YOU SORT OF THE SLOPE OF THIS REAR PART OF HIS PROPERTY AND HOW, UH, THE DRIVEWAY CURVES IN THIS AREA, I HAD MYSELF TROUBLE NAVIGATING IT WHEN I HAD TO DEAL WITH ANOTHER CAR, UH, TRYING TO LEAVE.
AND WHEN IT DID DEMONSTRATE THAT TO YOU, SLIDE NINE, UH, SHOWS THE VIEW OF THE DRIVE LOOKING WEST, AND THEN THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY IS IMMEDIATELY TO YOUR LEFT.
AND THAT PHOTO SLIDE 10 SHOWS, UM, LOOKING DOWNHILL TOWARDS THE HARKER RESIDENCE AND THE LAST WITH THE GARAGE OPEN, UM, PART OF THIS AREA ON THE LEFT OF HIS PROPERTY, SLIDE 11, UM, IT'S LIKE, THIS IS A VIEW OF GOING UP INTO THE DRIVE SLIDE 12, THE BACK ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE HOUSE, SLIDE 13, THE SETBACK ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE HOUSE, THE EAST SIDE AND SLIDE 14, IT TALKS ABOUT REASONABLE.
YOU USED, UM, THE VARIANCE WOULD BE REASONABLE, UM, BECAUSE IT'S VERY TYPICAL OF THIS AREA TO HAVE A PATIO.
UM, AND IT'S REALLY UNUSUAL TO HAVE AN EASEMENT GOING THROUGH YOUR REAR YARD, UM, TO SERVE OTHER PROPERTIES.
THE, UM, NEXT SLIDE 15, THE HARDSHIP IS PRETTY UNIQUE, UM, IS A 25 FOOT WIDE ACCESS THAT GOING INTO THE REAR.
THIS IS TRACED BACK TO THE CONDO HISTORY OF THIS PROPERTY.
IT ENDED UP NOT BEING A CONDO, BUT THE OTHER PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH.
UM, AND SO THE DESIGN WAS ALWAYS SORT OF HINKY DIDN'T BEGIN WITH, UM, CAN'T REALLY RELOCATE THE DRIVES, UM, WITHOUT DESTROYING ACCESS FOR THESE OTHER UNITS.
AND, UH, IT'S ALSO UNIQUE BECAUSE MOST OTHER HOUSES, A COUPLE OF INCHES FROM THE SIDE SETBACK.
YOU HAVE THE HARDSHIP AND AREA CHARACTER SLIDES THERE WITH YOU TOO.
[01:20:01]
STAND BY WITH AN EXTRA QUESTIONS.SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS YOU, BEFORE YOU, WEREN'T ASKING FOR FOUR AND A HALF FEET, YOU WERE ASKING FOR FOUR FEET INCHES, AND NOW YOU'RE ONLY ASKING FOR FOUR FEET, FOUR INCHES.
THE WAY AROUND IT WAS WHAT I GOT.
YOU WERE ASKING FOUR FEET, FOUR INCHES.
NOW YOU'RE ASKING FOR FOUR FEET.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU NEED LESS THAN YOU THOUGHT, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
AND THE OTHER THING IS REALLY, I WANTED TO EXPRESS, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
AND I COULDN'T EVEN SUPPORT YOUR VARIANCE IS JUST THAT I WANTED TO SEE A CORRECT SURVEY WITHIN THE PACKET SO THAT I COULD INCLUDE THAT IN OUR RECORDS BECAUSE I DON'T, I DON'T SEE IT AND I DON'T HAVE IT IN MY PACKET.
IF SOMEBODY COULD CORN IT ALL TO ME, I'D HAVE A CHANGE OF HEART.
BUT, AND HE'S ALSO SENDING TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS EARLIER THAT HE, YES.
HE'S GOING TO PHONE HOME FOR FOUR TO FOUR OR FIVE.
IT'S PAGE 24, 24, 24 IN OUR BACKUP MATERIAL.
I WOULD POINT OUT THAT, EVEN ON THAT CORRECTED SURVEY, THOUGH, THERE IS A POINT THERE ON THE EAST SIDE WHERE IT IS ONLY THREE AND A HALF FEET SET BACK.
AND SO THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED AS WELL.
AND IF THEY HAVEN'T ASKED FOR THAT, UH, LEGAL CAN TELL US WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN EVEN DO THAT.
I WOULD SAY THAT WOULD DEPEND ON WHAT THAT IS, BECAUSE IF IT'S A BAY WINDOW OR SUCH, IT COULD GO INTO THE EXCEPTIONS THAT ALLOW FOR THAT.
IT'S A CHIMNEY THAT PERMITTED EXCEPTIONS TO OPENNESS OF YARD, SECTION OF THE CODE, BECAUSE I'M SUCH A NERD.
UM, I THINK YOU STILL HAVE A POSTING ISSUE.
CAUSE IF YOU, IF YOU NEED MORE THAN WHAT THE WORDS SAY.
SO I THINK, I THINK WHEN WE ASK YOU, YOU SAY, OH GREAT.
MY AGENDA JUST HAD AN ERA ERROR.
UM, SO I STILL THINK WE HAVE A POSTING ISSUE YOU'RE POSTED FOR 4.4 FEET AND YOU'RE ASKING FOR 4.5 FEET.
IT, BECAUSE IT'S A, A BUILT STRUCTURE.
AND I THINK YOU HAVE TO BE RE POSTED BOARD MEMBER IF I MAY.
UM, THE 4.4 FEET IS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE, UH, EXCUSE ME.
THE 4.4 FEET IS MORE PERMISSIVE THAN WHAT THEY'RE ASKING TODAY.
I, I BELIEVE THE BOARD HAS THE DISCRETION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE THAT IS MORE RESTRICTIVE AND 4.5 FEET WOULD BE IN THAT DIRECTION.
UH, IF THEY WERE ASKING FOR 4.3 AND WE WERE POSTED FOR 4.4, THEN THAT WOULD NOT BE THE CASE, BUT BECAUSE THEY ARE ASKED, WERE POSTED FOR 4.4 AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR 4.5, WHICH IS A MORE RESTRICTIVE SETBACK CATEGORY.
UH, I, MY, MY GUIDANCE WOULD BE THAT THAT WOULD BE PERMISSIBLE.
WELL, IF IT, IF, IF WE COME BACK HERE, IT WON'T BE BECAUSE WITHDRAW MY MOTION.
SO THE ONLY QUESTION THEN IS THAT THERE'S 3.5, WHICH, UH, DARRELL POINTED OUT.
AND THAT WAS THE THING THAT JUMPED OUT AT ME THAT WOULD BE, UM, YOU KNOW, A TIGHTER SET BACK OR MORE ENCOURAGEMENT IN THE SETBACK THAN THE 4.4.
UM, AND SO, UM, SO WE HAVE A, UH, A MOTION TO POSTPONE BECAUSE I THINK THAT AT VERY LEAST THAT NEEDS TO GET ANSWERED BETWEEN THE NOW AND NEXT TIME.
UM, I THINK THAT, I AGREE WITH LEE THAT THE POSTING ON THE REST OF IT IS, UH, IS FINE.
UM, BUT AGAIN, THAT MAY BE SOMETHING, SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY LEGAL VILLAIN, OLIN.
[01:25:01]
WITH YOU, HER MOTION.AND I'M LOOKING AT THAT CODE SECTION FOR YOU, WHICH CLARIFY, UM, MR. CHAIR, SORRY.
UH, MR. KANE, THE APPLICANT IS THAT, THAT, THAT IS A CHIMNEY.
SO I THINK ALL WE NEED TO DO IS ASK LEGAL WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS ALLOWED AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT HAD TO HAVE BEEN PART OF THE POSTING AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TONIGHT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT HAS TO BE A PART OF THE POSTING.
I AGREE WITH LEE, THERE'S A SECTION IN THE CODE 25 TO FIVE 15.
I BELIEVE THAT ALLOWS FOR, UM, TIMNEY BLUES CAN REMEMBER THAT STAFF WARNING IT'S IT'S FIVE 13, IT'S THE OPENNESS TO SELL BELT COURSE PUNISHED BOX WINDOW OR CANNULATE OR BAY WINDOW MAY PROJECT TO FEED INTO A REQUIRED YARD.
THE TWO FIT LIMITATION DOES NOT APPLY TO A FEATURE REQUIRED PER PASSIVE ENERGY DESIGN.
SO THIS IS ONLY AN 18 INCH, UH, ENCROACHMENT.
ALRIGHT, SO MELISSA, DID YOU, DID YOU PULL YOUR, UM, MOTION TO POSTPONE? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO NOW WE'RE BACK TO, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I FOUND IT ON D FIVE 24, THE CORRECTED SURVEY, UH, BURKE HAS GOT A SECOND OVER HERE AND IN BROOKLYN WE HAVE A SECOND FROM YOU.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR, UH, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, UH, JESSICA TO FIND OUT A BOARD MEMBER VINYL WOULD BE OPEN TO A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, YOU KNOW, WHENEVER WE DO THESE IMPERVIOUS COVER VARIANCES, I ALWAYS LIKE TO SEE IF MAYBE WE CAN TRY TO OPPOSITES, UH, SOME OF THE WATER RUNOFF AND WATERSHED PROTECTION.
WHAT WOULD YOU SUGGEST LIKE A RAIN GARDEN OR SOMETHING THAT WATER CAPTURE RAINWATER CAPTURE? WE HAVE A RAINWATER COLLECTION, A WORKSHEET THAT WOULD, UM, GIVE THEM A SPECIFIC TANK SIZE, UH, THAT THEY NEED TO CAPTURE, UM, FOR THAT.
SO IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT YOUR FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO DO A RAIN COLLECTION TO PICK UP THE ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVER? YES, SIR.
MAY I ASK THE POCKET? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS ARE A MATTER OF VOLTAGE? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
SO THIS APPROVAL WILL BE BASED UPON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AS SHOWN ON THE CORRECTED SURVEY D FIVE SLASH 24, AND IT WILL BE TIED TO THIS EXISTING STRUCTURE.
IF THIS STRUCTURE IS DEMOLISHED OR REVAMPED OR REMODELED OR WHATEVER, IN ANY WAY, THIS, THIS WON'T APPLY TO THAT, CORRECT? CORRECT.
REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY, DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE REGULATIONS DON'T ALLOW FOR THE PROPERTY USE ON THE PROPERTY DUE TO THE CONFIGURATION OF THE LOT, WHICH INCLUDES A SHARED DRIVE AND A 25 FOOT WIDE ACCESS EASEMENT EASEMENT, WHICH ALSO PROVIDES KEY ACCESS TO ADJACENT DEVELOPMENTS.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH VARIANCE IS REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY THAT THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY HAS SHARED THIS JAR RUNNING THROUGH ITS BACKYARD AS AN AZ, AND IS ENCUMBERED BY 25 FOOT WIDE ACCESS EASEMENT.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED CAUSE PROPERTIES WITH SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES IN THE AREA DO NOT GENERALLY HAVE A SHARED DRIVEWAY AND A 25 FOOT WIDE ACCESS EASEMENT RUNNING THROUGH THEIR BACKYARD AREA CHARACTER.
THE VERY INTEGRAL MODEL TO THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT APPEAR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT FROM WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS ARE TYPICAL OF THE EARS, CHARACTER, INTUITING, ARCHITECTURAL STYLE USE, AND SCALE.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY MARK BOND OLIN A SECOND BY BROOKE BAILEY WITH THE ADDITION OF RAINWATER COLLECTION FOR THE ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVER OVER 45%.
[01:30:01]
LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, TAKE A VOTE.ALL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON TONIGHT YET.
SO YOU GOT YOUR, UM, VARIANCE PROVISION MUST APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
SO, UH, I'M GOING TO USE, UH, SOME, UH, CHEER PREROGATIVE HERE, AND WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK MELISSA'S PUPPY HAS TO GO OUTSIDE.
AND SO DO I WE'LL BE BACK IN AT, UH, SEVEN 11.
[E-1 C15-2020-0053 Michael Gaudini for Thomas Bercy 900 Old Koenig Lane & 5916 N. Lamar Boulevard ]
WE'RE MOVING ON TO, UH, VARIANCES OF PREVIOUS POSTPONEMENTS.THIS IS ITEM E ONE C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO FIVE THREE.
AND, UH, THIS IS, UH, IT SAYS MICHAEL GABBY FOR THOMAS MERCY AT 900 OLD WEST, OR SORRY, OLD CANUCK APP, UH, LANE AND, UH, 59 16 NORTH LAMAR BOULEVARD.
IT IS A VARIOUS FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING TO PAT ABILITY STANDARDS.
AND THE SPEAKER IS MICHAEL WHALEN.
I WAS WAITING FOR THE PRESENTATION.
YEAH, A V IF YOU CAN PULL UP THE PRESENTATION COMING UP UP NOW.
WE'RE SEEING THE PRESSURE, UH, PAGE ONE OF THE PRESENTATION NOW.
THANK YOU, CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, COMMISSIONERS MICROWAVE.
ON, ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, BRC, KEN, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, I'M HERE TODAY TO REQUEST A COMPATIBILITY VARIANCE FOR 59 16 NORTH LAMAR, BECAUSE IT'S SLIDE TWO, PLEASE.
WE ARE PLANNING TO BUILD A VERTICAL MIXED USE PROJECT WITH 10% OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS AS AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT 60% OF THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME, THE TYPE OF PROJECT, THE CITY ENVISIONS FOR ITS MAJOR CORRIDORS, INCLUDING NORTH LAMAR.
HOWEVER, THE SITE FACES TWO KEY CONSTRAINTS, A LARGE HERITAGE TREE, AND A TRANSMISSION LINE ALONG OLD CANINE ON THE SITE'S SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE TO ADDRESS THESE CONSTRAINTS.
WE ARE REQUESTING WAVING COMPATIBILITY TO AN ADJACENT CHURCH.
THE CHURCH'S PROPERTY IS ALREADY ZONED FOR MIXED USE IT'S ZONE G RMU, WHICH WOULD NOT NORMALLY TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY, EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT IT IS USED AS A CHURCH.
AND IN THIS CASE, THE CHURCH SUPPORTS OUR REQUEST.
I ALSO WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT WE ARE NOT REQUESTING ANY WAIVER FROM COMPATIBILITY TO THE NEARBY SINGLE FAMILY.
THIS VARIANCE WOULD ONLY WAVE COMPATIBILITY RELATED TO THE USE OF THE CHURCH THAT, UH, THAT IS IMPACTING US.
IT WOULD NOT WEIGHT COMPATIBILITY TO THE SINGLE FAMILY ZONING OR OTHER SETBACK REGULATIONS, INCLUDING ANY SETBACK THAT MAY BE REQUIRED BY AUSTIN ENERGY.
WE ARE PREPARED TO FULLY COMPLY WITH ANY AUSTIN ENERGY REQUIREMENTS.
THIS IS THE AREA WHERE OUR SITE IS LOCATED.
AND THEN IF WE CAN GO TO SLIDE FOUR, PLEASE, AND THEN HERE'S THE SLOT, THE SITE ITSELF RIGHT HERE WE GO TO SLIDE FIVE, PLEASE.
AS I NOTED, WE ARE PROPOSING THE TYPE OF PROJECT THAT THE CITY CALLS FOR ALONG ITS MAJOR CORRIDORS, INCLUDING ALONG NORTH LAMAR, WHICH IS A CORRIDOR.
IMAGINE WASHINGTON CORRIDOR, A 2016 MOBILITY BOND CORRIDOR AND THE TRANSIT PRIORITY NETWORK ROADWAY.
HERE, YOU CAN SEE THE CHURCH SITE.
THIS IS A SITE FROM WHICH WE ARE REQUESTING A COMPATIBILITY WAIVER.
AS I NOTICED, AS I NOTED, THEY TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY BASED ON USE, NOT BASED ON ZONING, THEIR ZONE G RMU, AND THEY S AND THE CHURCH SUPPORTS OUR REQUESTS.
THEIR LETTER OF SUPPORT IS IN THE BACKUP SLIDE SEVEN, PLEASE.
THERE ARE ALSO A NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THE AREA.
THESE PROPERTIES TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY BASED ON THEIR ZONING IS SF THREE, AND THERE WOULD BE NO WAIVER FROM COMPATIBILITY FROM THESE PROPERTIES.
THEY WOULD STILL TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY.
HERE, YOU CAN SEE THE HARDSHIPS THAT ARE CONSTRAINING THE SITE, AND THERE'S SOME PHOTOS IN THE BACKUP AS WELL, AND IMPACTING THE REASONABLE
[01:35:01]
USE THAT THE SITE, THE CITY ENVISIONS FOR THIS SITE ON THE UPPER, RIGHT.YOU CAN SEE THE HERITAGE TREE THAT TAKES A LARGE CHUNK OUT OF THE SITE.
AND IN THE LOWER PORTION OF THE SITE, YOU CAN SEE THE TRANSMISSION LINE THAT IMPACTS US.
HERE IN THE BLUE, YOU CAN SEE, YOU CAN SEE THE EFFECT OF THE VARIANCE, LOOKING AT THE CROSS SECTION FROM THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE VARIANCE WOULD ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL 10 FEET OR AN ADDITIONAL 20 FEET, DEPENDING ON WHAT PORTION OF THE BUILDING YOU'RE LOOKING AT.
AND THE ENTIRE BUILDING WOULD BE SHORTER THAN THE EXISTING CELL TOWER THAT YOU CAN SEE LOCATED BETWEEN US AND THE CHURCH ON THE CHURCH'S PROPERTY.
I ALSO WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT TO RECAP THE VERTICAL MIS MIXED USE MIXED USE PROGRAM SO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT TYPE OF PROJECT WE ARE PLANNING.
AS YOU KNOW, VERTICAL MIXED USE IS A CITY BONUS PROGRAM THAT ALLOWS YOU TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL FLORIDA AREA RATIO AND OTHER STANDARDS IN EXCHANGE FOR PROVIDING AFFORDABLE UNITS.
IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU EXTRA HEIGHT THOUGH, AND WE'RE NOT SEEKING ANY ADDITIONAL HEIGHT ABOVE THE 60 FEET IN THIS AREA.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THE CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOAL FOR DISTRICT SEVEN IS 6,651 UNITS BY 2027, WITH ABOUT 896 UNITS BUILT IN ACTIVE IN THE DISTRICT TODAY, WHICH LEAVES A NEED OF ABOUT 5,755 AFFORDABLE UNITS IN ORDER TO HIT OUR GOAL IN 2027, THIS PROJECT WOULD PROVIDE 10% OF ITS UNITS AS AFFORDABLE, WHICH WILL BRING US CLOSER TO MEETING THAT IMPORTANT GOAL.
I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT WITHOUT THIS VARIANCE FROM THE G R M U PROPERTY ONLY THE OWNER WOULD LOSE APPROXIMATELY SEVEN ON-SITE AFFORDABLE UNITS.
IN ADDITION TO 63 MARKET UNITS, WE CAN GO TO SLIDE 11, PLEASE.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL FACTORS THAT SUPPORT OUR CASE.
FIRST, AS I MENTIONED, THE EFFECTED PROPERTY, WHICH IS THE CHURCH HAS SUBMITTED A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR OUR REQUEST.
ALSO, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS REVIEWED OUR REQUEST AND SUBMITTED A LETTER OF NON OPPOSITION FOR OUR CASE THAT'S BRENTWOOD.
AND SECOND, THE CHURCH TRIGGERS COMPATIBILITY ONLY BASED ON ITS USE OF THE CHURCH.
NOT BASED ON THE PROPERTY ZONING, WHERE THE CHURCH TO REDEVELOP IN THE FUTURE, ACCORDING TO ITS ZONING, IT WOULD NOT TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY AT ALL.
FINALLY, THERE IS A 75 FOOT CELL TOLERANCE TOWER ALREADY LOCATED ON THE CHURCH SITE TODAY BETWEEN OUR PROPERTY AND THE CHURCH ITSELF, OUR PROJECT WOULD BE SHORTER AND FARTHER AWAY FROM THE CHURCH.
THEN THIS EXISTING CELL TOWER IS TODAY.
AND THEN THE FINAL SLIDE SLIDE 12, JUST TO RECAP, THE CITY POLICIES IDENTIFIED THE SITE ISN'T APPROPRIATE AS APPROPRIATE FOR MIXED USE AND ON-SITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
HOWEVER, IT DOES FACE SOME UNIQUE CONSTRAINTS IN ORDER TO ACCOUNT FOR THESE CONSTRAINTS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM COMPATIBILITY RELATED TO THE CHURCH.
ONLY SINGLE FAMILY COMPATIBILITY WOULD STILL APPLY TO CANEY GLADE.
THE CANUCK LANE, CHRISTIAN CHURCH SUPPORTS THIS REQUEST AND THE BRENTWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DOES NOT OPPOSE IT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS AS IS BETHANY, FIDEL, WHO IS BOTH AN ARCHITECT AND WORKS FOR THE OWNER, PERCY CHEN, WHICH OWNS THE SITE.
UH, MR. ROLAND, APPRECIATE YOUR, UM, CONCISENESS.
UM, SO, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, BROOKE, I SEE YOUR FINGER UP.
HOW MANY UNITS ARE WE TALKING ABOUT TALKING TO THIS PROJECT? IF YOU'VE GOT YOUR PARENTS AND IF YOU DID NOT SHARE, UM, YES.
UH, COMMISSIONER BROKE UP A LITTLE BIT.
I THINK SHE WAS ASKING ABOUT NUMBER OF UNITS.
TOTAL NUMBER IN TOTAL AND THEN THE AFFORDABLE UNITS.
SO, UH, RIGHT NOW, UH, WITH, WITH THE, UH, COMPATIBILITY, VETERINARIANS WILL BE ABLE TO DO APPROXIMATELY 290.
WE HAVEN'T SPENT THAT MONEY TO DO SO UNTIL WE OBVIOUSLY FIND OUT THE RESULTS OF THIS HEARING OF WHICH 29 WOULD BE AFFORDABLE ONSITE.
IF WE WERE TO GO ANY HIGHER, LIKE 291, THEN IT WOULD JUMP TO 30 ON-SITE AFFORDABLE UNITS.
SO I'M SURE YOU'RE ROOTING FOR US TO GET TO TWO 91.
AND WE ALL KNOW EACH OTHER, BROOKE, YOU'RE CUTTING OUT A LITTLE BIT IF FOLKS THAT ARE NOT ON OR THEIR NEEDS THEIR MICROPHONES.
SO WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS THAT WILL BE 60% OR I'M GOING TO HAVE A SLIDING SCALE.
[01:40:03]
IT WAS REALLY GARBLED.SO THE QUESTION BE, WHAT ARE ALL OF THE PROPOSED AFFORDABLE? YOU NEED TO ADD 60% MFI.
DID I GET IT, BRO? AND THE ANSWER WAS THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS YES, UNDER THE VERTICAL MIXED USE, UH, PROGRAM, ALL UNITS WOULD BE AT 60% AND THAT BY, SINCE THAT'S WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ADOPTED.
AND, AND THIS, UH, THIS PROPERTY, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, DANCE, ONE IS LOCATED NEXT TO THE CHURCH, BUT ALSO IT SITS BEHIND THE NEW, THE AUSTIN ENERGY SUBSTATION.
IS THAT ACROSS THE STREET? HI, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO ASK BETHANY WHO'S THE OWNER, IF YOU DON'T MIND HER TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, I'LL MUTE.
HI, THIS IS, IT SITS RIGHT BEHIND THE TREES OFF OF NORTH NORTHERN MARTIN P TERRY'S.
BUT YEAH, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN ACROSS THE STREET FROM YOU, IS THAT BIG? IT'S GOT THAT BIG TAN.
BASICALLY IT LOOKS LIKE A FOLK ROCK WALL AROUND THAT TRIANGLE RIGHT THERE.
AND THERE'S AN EMS STATION ACROSS FROM DPS, CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND THERE, THERE IS A REGIONAL, UH, RESERVOIR THERE ALSO WATER HAS, AND THERE IS A LARGE, UH, UH, ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION THERE AS WELL.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.
AND THAT'S WHY, UM, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE MR. CHAIR.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY MICHAEL BONO OLIN A SECOND BY JESSICA COHEN.
ARE THERE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR DISCUSSION SEEING NONE? I DO.
UM, ANYWAY, I WAS LOOKING AT THIS CASE I WASN'T HERE LAST MONTH, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS DENIED BY AUSTIN ENERGY BACK IN OCTOBER.
SO TO THE APPLICANT, HOW ARE YOU ADDRESSING AUSTIN? ENERGY'S CONCERNS THAT IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE ASKING FOR THE SAME VARIANCE REQUEST AS YOU'RE ASKED FOR IN OCTOBER AND YOU NEED 25 FEET OF CLEARANCE FROM THE TRANSMISSION LINE AND ACCORDING TO THE AUSTIN ENERGY LETTER.
MAY I, MAY I RESPOND CHAIR? YES.
UH, THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
UH, AND, AND BETHANY MIGHT ADD SOMETHING IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THE CHAIR, BUT I'LL ANSWER THAT THE ELECTRIC LINE, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PICTURES, THERE'S A LONG, THE SIDE ON OLD CANINE.
THE SETBACK VARIANCE IS ON THE BACK AND WE HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH AUSTIN ENERGY AND THEY HAVE EMAILED US BACK.
UH, THE SETBACK WILL NEED FROM THE TRANSMISSION LINE AND WE ARE NOT SEEKING ANY VARIANCE FROM AN AUSTIN ENERGY MANDATED SETBACK.
UM, LIKE, I MEAN, ONE WHEN WE CANNOT DO THAT, AND THAT WILL BECOME, THAT WILL BE DEFINITELY, WILL BE A SITE PLAN ISSUE.
AND WE WILL COMPLY WITH AUSTIN ENERGY'S, UH, REQUESTED SETBACK.
SO WAS THAT INFORMATION FROM AUSTIN ENERGY INCLUDED IN THE PACKET THAT YOU KNEW? YES.
KELLY DID STATE THAT, UH, THEY DON'T, THEY DO NOT IS, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AUSTIN ENERGY.
UM, SO, UH, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THE FINDINGS REASONABLE ZONING RIGHT HERE REGULATE THE ZONING REGULATION APPLICABLE TO IF THE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE CITY POLICY HAS CONSIST CONSISTENTLY IDENTIFIED NORTH LAMAR IS A MAJOR CORRIDOR IN WHICH INCREASE HOUSING IS APPROPRIATE, INCLUDING THE DESERT, INCLUDING DESIGNATING IT, ACCORD, TRANSIT CORRIDOR HARDSHIP.
THE HARDSHIP FROM WHICH THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THAT THE VARIANCE IS NECESSARY AND WANTING TO DO DUE TO SITE CAN CHANGE CONSTRAINTS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE SITE CONSTRAINTS LISTED ABOVE ARE UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY.
AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM COMPATIBILITY TO A NEARBY CHURCH CHURCH.
IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THESE CONSTRAINTS AREA CHARACTER, THE VARIATION WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF DEREGULATION OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THIS VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE PROJECT TO FULFILL THE SUNNI'S VISION FOR REDEVELOPMENT ALONG NORTH LAMAR BOULEVARD, BY PROVIDING A MIXED USE PROJECT FOR THE AFFORDABLE INCOME, RESIDENTIAL INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS, THEY WILL ALSO MAINTAIN COMPATIBILITY WITH NEARBY SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES, ENSURING THAT THE DESIGN IS SENSITIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE.
[01:45:01]
RIGHT.AND JUST TO CLARIFY, UH, KELLY, UH, ON, UH, SHEET 10, IT IS DENIED BY AUSTIN ENERGY, UM, ON OCTOBER SIX, 2020, AND THERE IS NO OTHER THING IN THE PACKET THAT I AM AWARE OF THAT MAKES IT OKAY.
THAT SAID, AS THE APPLICANT MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING UNTIL THEY GET THE SIGN OFF FROM LAWSON ENERGY.
SO THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COMPLY WITH WHATEVER THE AUSTIN ENERGY.
ONE SECOND, PROBABLY JUST TRADITIONALLY THEN NOT WILLING TO APPROVE VARIANCES THOUGH.
IF THE AUSTIN ENERGY ISSUES AREN'T WORKED OUT HISTORICALLY, WE HAVE DONE THAT IF, IF THE, UH, IF THE, UH, VARIANCE HINGED ON THAT, BUT THE, THE SETBACKS THAT THEY'RE ASKING FROM ARE FROM THE CHURCH, NOT FROM, UH, THE, UM, POWER LINES, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK THAT OUT WITH AUSTIN ENERGY, UH, TO GET THEM THAT MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, WE HAVE ALSO CONDITIONED, UM, BASED UPON MEETING THE CRITERIA OF AUSTIN ENERGY.
AND IF KELLY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT, UH, MAKE AN, UH, A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THAT EFFECT, I'M MORE THAN MORE THAN OPEN TO ACCEPT.
WELL, I DON'T REALLY NEED TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO IT, BUT THE APPLICANT DEFINITELY NEEDS TO BE AWARE OF IT.
THAT JUST BECAUSE WE GRANT THE VARIANCE, THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD WHAT THEY WANT BECAUSE OF THE AUSTIN ENERGY ISSUE.
WELL, I'LL MAKE IT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT THEY MUST MEET.
UM, ALSO ENERGY'S REQUIREMENTS TO AND ACCEPTED.
DARRELL, DID I SEE YOUR HAND UP? WELL, TH THE THING I CAN SEE THIS, ANYTHING HAPPENING HERE IS DEPENDING ON THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS, DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO PUT THINGS TO FIT WITHIN THE AUSTRALIAN ENERGY SETBACKS, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU GOING TO BE PUSHING THINGS CLOSER TO THE CHURCH THAT MIGHT AFFECT THEIR WILLINGNESS TO AGREE TO THIS? AND THAT'S THE ONLY THING I WAS THINKING OF.
UM, BUT WITHOUT KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT ALL THE SITE PLANNING CONSTRAINTS ARE AND WHAT THEY MIGHT BE DOING TO MEET ALL OF THOSE, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE CAN REALLY EVEN GO DOWN THAT PATH AT THIS POINT.
I THINK IT'S A, I THINK IT'S A GOOD PROJECT.
I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS ENTITLED TO THE VARIANCE, BUT I WOULD BE CONCERNED THAT WITHOUT IT BEING A CONDITION OF THE VARIANCE THAT THEY GET THE AUSTIN ENERGY, UH, SITUATION FIGURED OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO GET THAT FIGURED OUT MAY AFFECT THE CHURCH'S WILLINGNESS TO AGREE TO THIS.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY THING I'D BE CONCERNED ABOUT.
I'M NOT SURE THAT IT'S GOING TO AFFECT THAT BECAUSE THE TRANSMISSION LINE RUNS ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE, SHUT THE BACK IS ON THE WEST SIDE FROM THE CHURCH.
SO I DON'T THINK ANYTHING THAT IS REQUIRED ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE IS REALLY GOING TO IMPACT THAT WEST SIDE.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I I'VE BEEN PROVED WRONG BEFORE, BUT I'M GUESSING IT'S NOT AN ISSUE.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE ROLE OF MAYBE WE'VE DEFINED THINGS RIGHT.
OKAY, MELISSA, IF YOUR PUPPY IS THERE, YOU HAVE TO HOLD HIM UP IS WHAT I'VE HEARD.
WELL, MELISSA IS GETTING PUPPY.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE OTHER ITEM.
[E-2 C15-2020-0066 Joel L. Aldridge, AIA for Josephat Valdez 1509 East 14th Street ]
UH, THIS IS ITEM, UH, E UH, C 15 DASH 2020 DASH.UH, ITEM C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO SIX SIX.
[01:50:01]
TOR, UH, JOSEPH FATS, UM, VALDEZ AT 1509 EAST 14TH STREET.AND THE, UM, PRIMARY SPEAKER IS JOEL ALDRICH.
I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE A DUAL ALDRIDGE ON THE LINE.
I GOT TO, I WASN'T ON THE LINE.
SO WE ARE SEEKING A VARIANCE TO BUILD A, UM, SMALL SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE ON AN EXISTING LOT THAT IS, UH, LESS THAN 2000 SQUARE FEET.
UM, SO IT'S, UH, IT'S A SUBSTANDARD LOT.
UM, AND WE'RE ASKING FOR A DECREASE ON THE FRONT AND REAR SETBACKS, UM, AND A REDUCTION OR REMOVAL OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
UM, UM, SLIDE TWO SHOWS YOU THE SITE CONTEXT WHERE NEAR THE, UM, OAKWOOD CEMETERY.
SO IT'S A, UM, EXISTING, UH, RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OF SMALL KIND OF COTTAGE DWELLINGS.
UM, THE EXISTING HOUSE, UH, SLIDE THREE, UM, IS VERY SMALL.
IT'S, UH, IT'S, UH, APPROXIMATELY 545 SQUARE FEET.
WE, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT TRYING TO, UM, TRYING TO IMPROVE OR, UH, REBUILD, BUT THE IT'S, IT HASN'T BEEN MAINTAINED.
THERE'S A FIRE INSIDE THAT HAS PUSHED IT BEYOND REPAIR.
UM, SORRY, LET ME BACK UP, UM, SLIDE FOUR SHOWS THE, THE RESTRICTION THAT WE'RE RUNNING INTO AS WE LOOK INTO THE, OUR DEVELOPMENT POSSIBILITIES BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING FRONT BUILDING LINE SETBACK AND THE EXISTING REAR SETBACK, WE'RE ONLY LEFT WITH 15 FEET APPROXIMATELY OF, OF DEPTH TO BUILD, WHICH LEAVES US WITH ABOUT 425 SQUARE FOOT OF A FOOTPRINTS.
UM, AND DEFINITELY THE TWO HERITAGE OAK TREES NEARBY, UH, CREATE A HARDSHIP IN TERMS OF OUR LOCATING ANY, ANY PARKING OR BUILDING ANY, ANY, ANY, UH, PARKING PAD.
SO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, UH, SLIDE FIVE, UM, AS A, AS A NEW RESIDENCE WITH A, UM, PARTIAL REAR SETBACK OF FIVE FEET, AND THEY PROPOSED FRONT SETBACK OF 17 FEET THAT WILL ALLOW US TO BUILD A, UH, 630 APPROXIMATELY SQUARE FOOT RESIDENCE.
UH, WHEN I PRESENTED BEFORE WE HAD A, UM, WHEN I MOVED TO SLIDE NUMBER SEVEN, WHEN I PRESENTED PREVIOUSLY, WE HAD A PENETRATION INTO THE, UH, BUILDING TENTS FROM THE BALCONY.
SO I'VE MODIFIED THE RIFT DESIGN AND THE BALCONY SO THAT WE ARE WITHIN THE, ALL THE BUILDING TENTS.
AND, UM, SO THAT SHOULD REMOVE THAT, UH, LIMITATION.
UM, AND I SUPPOSE I WILL OPEN IT UP TO ANY QUESTIONS.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, SO I HA I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, SO LOOKING AT THE, UM, UH, A, UM, THIS IS, UH, SORRY, UM, UH, SHEET FOUR IN YOUR PRESENTATION, UH, 81 OH ONE, UH, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO PARK IN THE, UM, IN THE HALF, UH, CRITICAL ROOT ZONE, IS THAT CORRECT? UH, YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
I SPOKE WITH A, UM, UH, A CONCRETE COMPANY THAT SAID THAT THEY WOULDN'T, THEY WOULDN'T POUR A PAD ON TOP,
[01:55:01]
YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY, THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THE, UM, THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF A, OF A PAD JUST SITTING WITH, WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO CUT DEEPER INTO, UM, THE ROOT ZONE THAN FOUR INCHES.THE MOST DRIVEWAYS ARE FOUR TO FIVE INCHES THICK.
SO THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT DIGGING DOWN TOO FAR, UH, TO, TO MAKE SOMETHING LIKE THAT WORK.
SO I, I WOULD QUESTION THAT, I MEAN, IT'S ONE THING IF YOU'RE DOING A FOUNDATION, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR THE BUILDING OR WHATEVER, WHERE YOU HAD TO DIG DOWN 30 INCHES OR MORE.
UM, SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I, I HAD I'LL, I'LL DEFER TO OTHERS AT THIS POINT.
UH, THERE ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT THE APPLICANT OR DISCUSSION.
YES, JESSICA, I KNOW I WAS PRETTY AGAINST THE PARKING, UM, THE SECTION SEAT PART FOR VARIOUS LAST TIME, BUT I DID SOME MORE RESEARCH AND IT'S, IT'S LOOKING LIKE HALF, MAYBE A THIRD OF THE HOUSES ON THAT STREET HAVE THE SAME TYPE OF DESIGN WITH NO GARAGE AND NO DRIVEWAY.
SO I DON'T KNOW, IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION? CAUSE I SORT OF FEEL LIKE IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR IF WE SAID NO, AT LEAST FOR THAT PART SETBACKS ASIDE, DIFFERENT ISSUES, BUT AT LEAST FROM THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
UNLESS SOMEONE CAN MAYBE TELL ME WHY I SHOULDN'T BE, I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH YOU, JESSICA ACTUALLY DROVE OVER THERE.
AND, UM, IT SEEMS LIKE THEY'RE, I'M SURE THERE'S TIMES WHERE THE PARKING IS VERY CROWDED, BUT WITH THE CEMETERY THERE, UM, AND A LOT OF SMALL HUMPS OF SOME SMALL LOGS, NOT EVERY HOUSE WHEN THESE HOUSES WERE BUILT, PEOPLE DIDN'T HAVE CARS AND IT WAS A WORKING CLASS NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY DIDN'T MISS, I HAVE DRIVEWAYS IN CARS AND IF THEY DIDN'T PUT ONE IN, I CAN ATTEST TO A HOUSE THAT DOESN'T HAVE A DRIVEWAY OR A GARAGE.
SO IT HAPPENS IN THESE OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? UH, I, I HAVE ONE, SO, UH, THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL, IT'S A 637 SQUARE FEET.
IS THAT JUST THE FIRST FLOOR FOOTPRINT? THE FOOTPRINT.
AND SO THEN ON THE SECOND FLOOR IS GOING TO BE EQUIVALENT ABOUT, AND YET THIS IS JUST A ONE BEDROOM.
UH, IS THERE A REASON, UM, YEAH, THERE'S A LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM OCEAN, BUT IT ACTUALLY SAYS A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET FOR THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO DID YOU HAVE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE SECOND FLOOR? UM, YES, IT'S ON PAGE FIVE.
UH, THE SECOND FLOOR IS, UH, 362 SQUARE FEET.
IT'S ESSENTIALLY, IT'S A SLEEPING LOFT WITH A, UH, BATHROOM AND, UH, AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO SOME LINKS, UH, WHICH IT SORT OF FLIES IN THE FACE.
I THINK OF AFFORDABILITY A LITTLE BIT TO DO THEN THE STEER OUT TO THIS BALCONY THAT OVERLOOKS THE STREET THERE.
UM, YEAH, IF THAT, IF THAT MAKES IT IN THE BUDGET, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE HOPEFUL.
AND SO WE, YOU KNOW, WE WANTED TO PRESENT THAT FOR, FOR THE VARIANCE.
UM, AND THAT WAS SO, SO YES, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE, THAT'S WHAT WE HOPE TO DO.
UM, THEY FELL IN LOVE WITH THE TREE AND THEY LIKED THE SMALL LOT.
AND SO THE CLIENTS WANTED A LITTLE KIND OF A STAIRWAY UP SO THAT THEY COULD SEE THE TREE AND LOOK OVER THE CEMETERY.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTION I HAD JESSICA.
UM, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTIONS, I'D LIKE TO GO AND MAKE A MOTION TO, OKAY.
LET ME PUT A MOTION BY JESSICA AND SECOND BY WHOM MELISSA, MELISSA.
UM, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, OTHERWISE, WE'LL GO TO THE FINDINGS THAT YOU'D GUESS.
YEAH, NO, I'VE JUST SEEN HIM WHEN HE WAS GOING TO OBJECT, UH, REASONABLE USE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE INCOMPATIBLE WITH AN 1800 SQUARE FOOT LOT DO DRIVEWAY WHEN INPUT ONE, HALF OF ONE QUARTER OF THE CRITICAL RUNESTONE ON THE STREET PARKED IN THE SUITE OF REASONABLE WHEN DAMAGE TO THE CRITICAL ROOMS, EMINENT, UH, AND TO THE 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK FOR THE REGULARLY SHAPED WHAT WE'RE LOT LINE WOULD LIMIT
[02:00:01]
THE BUILDABLE AREA AND RESULT IN AN IRREGULAR SHAPED POSSIBLY STRUCTURALLY COMPLICATED HOUSE, A FIVE FOOT SETBACK FOR APPROXIMATELY THREE QUARTER WITH A REAR HOUSE IS REASONABLE CITY ALLOWS FIVE FOOT NEAR SETBACKS.AND OTHER INSTANCES HARDSHIP THE HARDSHIP FROM WHICH THE VARIANCES REQUESTED IS UNIQUE PROPERTY IN THAT THE 1800 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY IS UNUSUALLY SMALL DEBRIS OF WHAT LINE HAS A SIGNIFICANT JOB MAKING THE SMALL LOT, EVEN MORE REGULAR.
THERE'S A LARGE CHURCH OAK TREE ON THE PROPERTY AND ANOTHER HERITAGE TREE ON AN ADJACENT LOT.
UH, THERE'S NO OTHER LOCATION TO PLACE A DRIVEWAY GIVEN THE EXPANSE OF THE HERITAGE TREES, CRITICAL ROUTES ZONES, NO GARAGE HAS PROPOSED.
UH, THE LOT SIZE IS LESS THAN 2,500 SQUARE FEET.
SO IT'S KIND OF FINDING THE FOREST TO FIND FOR A SMALL LOT ENLISTEE WHILE IT'S NOT DEVELOPED UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING REGULATIONS WITHOUT THESE VARIANCES.
I SEE WE'LL BE AT 38% AND ALL OF THEIR SIGN IN FRONT SETBACKS WILL BE COMPLIANT.
UH, HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE IT IS A VERY SMALLER, REGULAR LOT WITH FRONT PARKING AREA BEING PROHIBITED FOR ANY REASONABLE ONSITE PARKING IMPROVEMENTS OR NORMAL REAR SETBACK TYPICALLY FOUND WITH WATTS, HAVING A STRAIGHT LINE ACROSS THE REAR PROPERTY LINE COMBINATION IS NOT FOUND AMONG OTHER LOGS IN THE AREA.
ARE YOU A CHARACTER? A VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT THE PROPERLY.
PRIMARILY THEY ARE SEEKING VARIANCE TO SIMPLY BUILD A LOT TO THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE.
THE 900 METER FOOT SQUARE FOOT POST HOUSE WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER NEARBY SMALL HOUSES.
UH, DO I NEED TO READ PARKING FOR THIS FINDINGS AS WELL? YES.
SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO, IF WE'RE GOING TO GIVE HIM THE ABILITY TO, JUST TO MAKE SURE, UH, PARKING NEITHER PRESENT NOR ANTICIPATED FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES GENERATED BY THESE, THE SIDE OF THE USE OF SITES OF ASSUMING REASONABLY RESTRICT STRICTER LITTLE INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF A SPECIFIC REGULATION, BECAUSE PARKING IS AVAILABLE NEARBY ON THE STREET, EXPECTING ME FOR THE POST TINY HOUSES, ONE OR TWO VEHICLES.
THIS IS NOT EXPECTED TO INCREASE LOCAL TRIPS PER DAY IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.
GRANTED THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT RESULT IN THE PARKING OR LOADING OF VEHICLES ON PUBLIC STREETS IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO INTERFERE WITH THE FREE FLOW OF TRAFFIC OF THE STREETS, BECAUSE PROPOSED USE IS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DO NOT ANTICIPATE ANY UNUSUAL INCREASED TRAFFIC DUE TO THEIR PROPOSED TINY HOUSE OR ANY OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT CREATE A SAFETY HAZARD OR ANY OTHER CONDITION INCONSISTENT WITH THE OBJECTIVES OF THIS ORDINANCE, BECAUSE PARKING IS AVAILABLE NEARBY.
I MEAN, IT WAS ROUTINE FOR OTHER USERS TO PARK ON THE STREET FIRST AVAILABLE PARKING ON THE STREET, AND IT WILL NOT CREATE ANY KNOWN SAFETY STANDARDS, STANDARD HAZARDS.
IT WILL BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE ORDINANCE.
UH, THE VARIANCE WILL RUN WITH THE USER USES TO WHICH THE PARTIES SHALL NOT RUN WITH THE SITE BECAUSE THE VARIANTS WILL RUMP THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AS PROPOSED AS WELL.
THE STAFF PROPOSES A NEW DRIVEWAY IMPROVEMENT MORE THAN PORGES SEAT IN THE HERITAGE TREES, UH, CRITICAL ROADS AND OTHER, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
SORRY, BROOKE, BROOKE, BARELY YOU TURN OFF HER VIDEO AS SHE IS SPEAKING.
YOU'RE GOOD, JESSICA, IS THAT BETTER? IS THAT GOOD? BUT NO, THAT'S BETTER CONDITION.
THERE WERE SOME CONDITIONS IN A LIGHT BACKUP FROM OCEAN, A LETTER, A LETTER FROM OCEAN HAD SOME CONDITIONS.
SHOULD WE MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? I WAS GOING TO OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT THE VARIANTS BE CONDITIONED UPON NO S T R USE.
I'M NOT SURE THAT WE CAN SAY IT HAS TO BE, UH, SOMETHING WHERE THE OWNER RESIDES THERE, BUT I DO THINK IT'S A REASONABLE TO SAY NO S T R USE, UH, AND ALSO THAT IT IS TIED TO THE PLANS THAT ARE SHOWN THE UPDATED PLANS THAT ARE SHOWN E TWO SLASH FOUR PRESENTATION, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, AND EIGHT, WHICH ARE THE PLANS? A ONE.
OH, UH, I'M SORRY, A TWO OH ONE THREE OH THREE, THREE OH FOUR.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE MY TWO, UH, IN, I'D BE OPEN TO IT.
LEE, CAN WE ACTUALLY LIMIT A CR ON A PRIMARY RESIDENCE?
[02:05:01]
YES, YOU CAN.UH, AND ALSO, UH, SO, UH, BROOKE, UH, AT GETTING BACK TO YOUR, AND SO IN OUR PACKET, UH, UH, 21 AND 22, THERE IS A, UM, LETTER FROM OCEAN AND IT SAYS TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE CONSTRUCTION.
AND I ASSUME THAT THAT IS THE HOUSE IS LIMITED TO A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET IN INITIAL CONSTRUCT, A SOLID PRIVACY FENCE OF A MAXIMUM HEIGHT PERMITTED BY CODE, WHICH WOULD BE SIX FEET ON THE WESTERN SOUTHERN AND EASTERN PROPERTY LINES.
AND WITH THE OWNER SHELL NOT SEEK A VARIANCE FOR REMOVAL OF THE HERITAGE TREES IN THE FRONT YARD.
UM, D DID YOU WANT TO ADD THAT BROKE AS ADDITIONAL FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? OKAY.
SO WE GOT NO STR USE THOSE THREE REQUIREMENTS THAT I JUST READ BY OCEAN AND, UM, AND, UH, WHAT WAS THE, UH, OH, AND THAT IT'S TIED TO THE LATEST DRAWINGS IN THE PRESENTATION THAT WE'VE GOTTEN HERE TONIGHT.
UH, IS THIS THE APPLICANT? YES, THIS IS THE AFRICAN I'M SORRY.
UM, WELL, SO AS, SO I'VE, I'VE DONE KIND OF MINIMAL DESIGN JUST TO, TO PRESENT.
SO IF I, UH, FOR EXAMPLE, CHANGE WHERE THE, THE, THE TOILET IS, UM, AM I GOING TO BE, I MEAN, WHAT KIND OF FLEXIBILITY DO I HAVE AS FAR AS I WOULD SAY INTERIOR WISE, GENERALLY THERE'S THE PORT IS LESS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT THAN THE FOOTPRINT AND, AND THE MASSING AND THAT SORT OF THING ON THE LOT.
MY FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WOULD BE THAT IT IS THE FOOTPRINT AND THE CORRESPONDING FAR FROM THE LATEST DESIGN THAT WE HAVE IN THE PACKET.
WE LEAVE OFF TO SIX FROM THE AMENDMENT THEN SINCE THAT'S TEAMS TO DO INTERNAL DESIGN MOSTLY, AND WE CAN GET EVERYTHING FROM A TWO, FIVE AND TWO, FOUR.
WELL, AGAIN, I THINK WE JUST TIE IT TO THE, TO THE DRAWINGS THAT WE HAVE TONIGHT, BUT AGAIN, WE'VE NEVER TIED IT TO THE INTERIOR WHERE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN SITE PLANNING ISSUE, UH, RELATIVE TO WHAT, WHAT THE PLAN REVIEWERS ARE GOING TO LOOK AT ONCE THEY GO IN FOR A PERMIT, UM, IS, IS, IS, IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
SO ARE, UH, JESSICA AS THE MOTION MAKER, ARE YOU AMENABLE TO THOSE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS? YES.
AND THE SECOND YOU TOO, MELISSA? YES.
UM, SO SEEING NO OTHER HANDS RAISED, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE QUESTION, BROOKE BAILEY.
AND WE CAN ACTUALLY HEAR YOU NOW.
DID YOU GOT YOUR VARIANCE WITH CHRISTMAS MIRACLE? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
[E-3 C15-2020-0068 Courntney Mogonue-McWhorter for Peter Huff 3115 Westlake Drive ]
UM, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEMUH, THIS IS C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO SIX EIGHT.
UH, COURTNEY MAGONIA, MICK MORTAR FOR PETER HOUGH AT, UH, 31 15 WEST LAKE DRIVE.
AND THE PRINCIPAL, UM, PRESENTER WILL BE, UM, COURTNEY, UH, NICK BORGER, OR MAGONIA MCWHORTER.
UM, I REPRESENT THE PROPERTY OWNER, PETER HOUGH, AND BASED ON FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED DURING THE NOVEMBER MEETING, UM, WE SUBMITTED A LETTER TO UPDATE OUR VARIANCE REQUEST TO ONLY REQUEST A VARIANCE FROM THE SHORELINE SETBACK, UM, ON THE CANAL PORTION, 75 FEET TO 15 FEET ONLY.
WE WANT TO REMOVE OR REQUEST TO INCREASE THE, A LOT IMPERVIOUS COVER WITHIN THE ZERO TO 15% SLOPE CATEGORY.
UM, IF YOU WANT TO PULL UP THE PRESENTATION AS WELL.
SO LET'S START ON THE SIDE THREE IS JUST AN ARIEL SIMILAR TO WHAT WE PRESENTED LAST TIME.
UH, SLIDE FOUR, AS WE MENTIONED LAST TIME FOR REFLECTING
[02:10:01]
A SHORELINE SETBACK REDUCTION TO THE CANAL TO ACCOMMODATE A PROPOSED DESKTOPS AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS AS ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 25 TO EIGHT 93 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES UNDER SLIDE, SORRY.I WATCHED THE VIDEO OF LAST MONTH'S MEETING.
I SPENT ALL AFTERNOON YESTERDAY DURING, AND I PARTICULARLY PAID ATTENTION TO THESE, UH, POSTPONEMENTS BECAUSE I KNEW THOSE WERE GOING TO COME UP WHERE I WAS GOING TO HAVE SOME INVOLVEMENT.
AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTOOD IT, THAT IT LASTS MEETING.
MOST OF THE BOARD WAS THEY WERE OKAY WITH THE 15 FEET YOU WERE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION OF FOR 25 FEET.
AND PEOPLE HAD A LOT OF HEARTBURN WITH IMPERVIOUS COVER AND WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS FOR THE, JUST FOR TIME IS THAT IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE MOVED THE IMPERVIOUS CARVER ISSUE, WHICH WAS THE MAIN ISSUE AND HAD NO SUPPORT FOR, AND ALL THEY'RE ASKING FOR IS THE 15 FEET, UH, FOR THE SHORTLINE SETBACK FROM THE CANAL, THEN I'M WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE GUSTO.
THE MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO HEAR IT AND GO, GO THROUGH IT.
AND THAT WAS THE SECOND MIND, MELISSA.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, CLOSE.
UH, BROOKE, BROOKE HAS A QUESTION AHEAD.
UM, WHAT I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT IS DOING THE 15 FEET ONLY AT THE GUEST HOUSE AND 25 FEET FROM THE REST.
THERE'S ONLY ONE, EXCEPT FOR, I HAD A QUESTION ON THERE'S ONE PART OF THE DRIVEWAY THAT CURVES IN, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS, BUT THE REST OF IT LOOKS LIKE THE TWENTY-FIVE FOOT SETBACK, AND I WOULD BE AMENABLE TO THAT.
AND THE 15 FEET ONLY AT THE GUEST HOUSE AND, AND BURKE, IF THAT'S A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, I'M GOOD WITH THAT.
SO THE 15 FOOT SETBACK WOULD BE AT THE GUEST HOUSE.
I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE, THAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST MONTH WAS JUST THE LARGE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER WITH THE, AT THE, AT THE PARKING, AT THE GUEST HOUSE BACK THERE.
UM, AND, AND THEY'RE SAYING NOW THAT THIS SITE PLAN IS NOT UP TO DATE, THAT THEY WILL NOT BE DOING THAT.
THERE'LL BE SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAT'S WITHIN THE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER REGULATION.
THAT'S WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING DARYL.
AND THAT'S WHY I DON'T WANT TO INCLUDE THAT DRAWING IN THE PACKET.
I THINK IT'S BETTER IF WE JUST GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THE 15 FEET, UH, WHICH ON MY AGENDA, IT'S A, UH, AND, UH, AND BE RELATED, DIE ON THE VINE BECAUSE, UH, WHEN LEE SPOKE LAST WEEK, WE CAN JUST APPROVE ONE AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE OTHER.
AND THEN I'M ALSO GOOD WITH BOOKS, UH, RECOMMENDATION.
TO MAKE IT CLEAR WHERE SHE'S TALKING ABOUT, IF YOU LOOK AT, UM, THREE 17, IT MIGHT BE EASIER FOR US TO HAVE A DEF DEFINITE BOUNDARY WHERE YOU GO FROM THE 25 TO THE 15 AND THAT, UM, 75, I'M SORRY.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A, THERE'S A SETBACK THERE IT, 75 FEET, ZERO INCHES RIGHT THERE WHERE THE DRIVEWAY TURNS INTO THE PARKING.
AND BROOKE, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BEYOND THAT? IT SHOULD BE, THERE SHOULD BE A DIFFERENT SETBACK FROM THE SIDE.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT THE, TH THIS IS, UH, WOULD BE 15 FEET FROM THE GUEST HOUSE ONLY TO THE CANAL.
AND THAT BEYOND THAT POINT, IT WOULD GO BACK TO 25 FEET THAT IT IS ONLY, IT IS ONLY BEING DIMINISHED AT THE GUEST HOUSE FOOTPRINT ITSELF.
I HAVE A QUESTION THOUGH, OR A COMMENT THAT ARE, ARE, CAN I HAVE PERMISSION TO SPEAK? CAN I PERHAPS MAKE A CLARIFICATION BEFORE YOUR DAM? SO, SO IF IT'S NOT THAT STRUCTURED, THAT'S THE GUEST HOUSE.
THEN THE ACT DOESN'T APPLY TO ANY DRIVE THAT THEY PUT DOWN THERE BECAUSE IT'S FLAT WORK.
YOU'RE SAYING THE SETBACK WOULD NOT APPLY TO THE, THE DRIVEWAY NINE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND THE SETBACK.
I MEAN, YOU COULD PUT FLAT BARK, IT'S A REASONABLE PERTINENT, READ THEM ARE PERTINENT AND SAY FOUND WITHIN THAT CODE
[02:15:01]
WOULD BE PERMITTED.SO I WOULD LIKE TO ASK, STOP TIME OUT.
I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT, IF SHE HAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED SO FAR, UM, I DO, YOU ARE MAKING, UM, SOMEONE MADE THE COMMENT THAT IT WOULD GO BACK TO THE 25 FEET.
UM, THE ACTUAL SETBACK ON THE SLOT FROM THE CANAL IS 75 FEET.
SO ARE Y'ALL REQUESTING TO AMEND IT TO GO 15 FEET AT THE GUEST HOUSE LOCATION ONLY.
UM, AND IN 25, EVERYWHERE ELSE, ALONG THE CANAL.
SO WE'RE DOING TWO DIFFERENT PRODUCTIONS.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS, THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING.
AND I BELIEVE THAT WORK WAS ALSO, YEAH.
SO IT WOULD BE, INSTEAD OF THE WE'RE WE'RE, THIS IS A GIVEAWAY ON ALL THE REST OF IT.
SO WE'RE SAYING 15 FEET SETBACK FROM THE CANAL AT THE FOOTPRINT OF THE GUEST HOUSE.
AND THAT BEYOND THAT FOOTPRINT, THAT IT WOULD GO TO 25 FEET INSTEAD OF 75.
IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN I THINK THAT NOT WITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT IT FLATWORK TYPICALLY WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN THAT CALCULATION, THAT IT SHOULD BE IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION SCENES, HOW WE'RE GOING TO REDUCE THAT SETBACK, BUT WE CAN CHANGE THAT QUOTE IN THAT MANNER.
IT'S ALREADY, ALREADY SET THAT WE'RE IN CODE IF I'M NOT CORRECT.
IS THAT CORRECT, MELISSA? HMM.
SO THE STRUCTURE NEEDS THE SETBACK VARIANCE.
ANYTHING ELSE THERE DOES, BUT RESTRICTION DOESN'T BOTHER ME.
DID IT HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE IMPERVIOUS? NO, THEY HAVEN'T.
THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR AN IMPERVIOUS COVER.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF WE ONLY DID THE 15 AND LEFT THE REST OF 75, IT WOULD HAVE AN EFFECT ON THEIR IMPERVIOUS INHABITS CALCULATED AT THE, ON YOUR RIGHT.
AND I PERSONALLY, AS A, AS A MOTION MAKER, THINK THAT BROOKE WAS MAKING A VERY REASONABLE COMPROMISE.
REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY TO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS SET ON ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION PRIOR TO 1951, THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE VARIANCES REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY.
AND THAT THIS SIDE HAS A MAIN BODY IN A CANAL FEATURE, WHICH REQUIRES A 75 FOOT SETBACK FROM EACH HAVING BOTH FEATURES HIS HAIR.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE MAN-MADE ENDLESS ON PRIVATE LODGE AND NOT GENERAL TO THIS AREA, BUT RATHER ARE THE EXCEPTION AREA.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA, IMITATION TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE PATH, THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION IS LIMITED TO THE ACCESSORY, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, GUEST HOUSE, WHICH IS COMMON, HOW LONG THEY COST AND ALLOWED WITHIN THE LA ZONE DISTRICT.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLE, BUT BAILEY YES.
UM, YOU ASKED ME AND SMITH, UH, MICHAEL
SO YOU GOT YOUR VARIANCE WITH THOSE CONDITIONS.
[E-4 C15-2020-0069 Courtney Mogonye-McWhorter for Malia Muir 1230 Rockcliff Drive ]
MOVING ON TO ITEM FOUR, THIS IS A C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO SIX NINE COURTNEY'S AND DONI MAKE AN ORDER FOR MOLLICA MUIR AT 1230, UH, ROCK CLIFF DRUM.AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IS, UH, CHEERING.
[02:20:01]
WANT ME TO PROCEED? OKAY.UH, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, UH, THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, UH, FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, UH, COME BACK AND PROVIDE, UH, SOME REVISED EXHIBITS THAT WILL BETTER ILLUSTRATE THE HARDSHIP THAT THIS LOT FACES, UH, THIS LOT IS, UH, THE SMALLEST OF SEVEN LOTS IN THE LAKE CLIFF, UH, SUBDIVISION, WHICH WAS PLANTED IN 1976 UNDER THE
UH, IT IS THE ONLY LOT OF THE SEVEN AND THE SUBDIVISION THAT WAS NOT DEVELOPED UNDER THE ASSET TO REGULATIONS.
UH, I THINK THE REVISED EXHIBIT A, WHICH IS SLIDE NINE IN YOUR PACKET, UH, BETTER ILLUSTRATES, UH, SOME OF THE PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS OF THIS PROPERTY.
UH, IT IS BOUNDED ESSENTIALLY ON THREE SIDES BY BY WATER.
UM, THIS SUBDIVISION, UH, THE CITY DOES NOT PROVIDE SEPTIC OR SEWER SERVICE FOR THIS SUBDIVISION.
UH, SO IT IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A DRAIN FIELD, UH, AND THE, THE FRANK IS A SEPTIC REGULATIONS REQUIRE THAT, UH, ANY DRAIN FIELD DAY, A MINIMUM OF 50 FEET AWAY FROM ANY BODY OF WATER.
SO THERE IS A BODY OF WATER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF ROCK CLIFF DRIVE, UH, WHICH PROVIDES PART OF THE 50 FOOT SETBACK ON THAT SIDE, UH, 50, UH, 50 FOOT SETBACK, I'M SORRY, 25 FOOT, SEVEN 50 FOOT SETBACK FOR THE DRAIN FIELD ON THE CANAL SIDE AND ON THE LAKE AUSTIN SIDE.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, YOU HAVE THE 25 FOOT SHORELINE SETBACK FROM MAIN CHANNEL AND FROM THE CANAL, UH, THE, THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, UM, UH, TO THE NORTH WAS CHANGED BY THE, UH, LA ZOMIG FROM FIVE FEET TO 10 FEET.
AND THE FRONT STREET SETBACK OF 25 FEET WAS CHANGED BY THE LA ZONING TO 40 FEET, UH, WHICH ACTUALLY TAKES THIS, UH, 11,446 SQUARE FOOT LOT REDUCES THE NET SIDE AREA BY, UH, 4,600 FEET, UH, LEAVING 6,850, UH, NET SQUARE FEET OF NET SIDE AREA 4,500 SQUARE FEET OF THIS IS IN THAT FRONT STREET, 40 FOOT SETBACK.
UH, SO THERE'S ONLY ABOUT 2000 SQUARE FEET OF THIS ENTIRE SITE WHERE ANY, UH, VERTICAL IMPROVEMENTS CAN BE PUT IN.
UM, THE, ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT THE BOARD HAD LAST TIME WAS, UH, A NUMBER OF, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD COMPLAINTS.
UH, WE HAVE A LETTER, UH, THAT IS IN, UH, THAT WAS SUBMITTED, UH, THIS MORNING, UH, FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, DR.
CRAIG CLEVELAND, UH, ANNOUNCING THAT THEY WERE WITHDRAWING, UH, THAT HE WAS WITHDRAWING THE OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT.
I THINK THERE WERE TWO CONCERNS THAT THE, THE NEIGHBORS SAD ONE WAS BECAUSE OF THE SMALL SIZE OF THIS LOT.
THEY THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AS A PARTY HOUSE, UH, AND JUST USE FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
UH, THERE HAS BEEN, UH, RECENTLY A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT RECORDED, UM, UH, AGAINST THE PROPERTY, GETS THE PROPERTY IN THE SUBDIVISION PROHIBITING SHORT TERM RENTALS.
THE OTHER CONCERN THAT THE NEIGHBORS HAD WAS THAT THIS IS A, A PRIVATE STREET, UH, IT'S NOT MAINTAINED BY THE CITY AND, UH, CONCERNED WITH, UH, CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES AND, UH, DAMAGE THAT MIGHT OCCUR, UH, DURING, DURING CONSTRUCTION TO THE STREET, UH, UH, MS. UH, THE, THE, UH, OWNER, UH, MALIA AND GORTON MIRROR HAVE AGREED, UH, TO DEPOSIT A SECURITY DEPOSIT, UH, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, TO GUARANTEE AGAINST ANY DAMAGE THAT MAY BE DONE TO THE PRIVATE STREET DURING CONSTRUCTION.
UH, WE, WE HAD SOME ADDITIONAL PHOTOS, UH, THAT ARE, UH, IN THE FACT THAT, UM, UH, UH, SLIDES, UH, 12, 11, 12, 13, AND 14.
UM, I'LL, UH, I'LL, I'LL STOP HERE AND, UH, BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[02:25:02]
UM, SO, UH, HERE, HERE'S MY HEARTACHE ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT, THERE'S, THERE'S TWO THINGS.ONE IS EXHIBIT A SHOWS US A DESIGN SOLUTION THAT GIVES THEM ROUGHLY 1600 SQUARE FEET, A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN THAT ON FIRST FLOOR, NOT INCLUDING, UH, UH, CLOSE TO 500 SQUARE FOOT GARAGE, UM, THAT GIVES THEM A DESIGN SOLUTION THAT, UH, OF, UH, YOU KNOW, 3000 PLUS SQUARE FOOT HOUSE ON THIS LOT.
UM, SO EXHIBIT EIGHT TELLS US THAT THERE'S ANOTHER SOLUTION HERE, UM, THAT, UH, IS, UH, COMPLETELY WORKABLE.
UM, THE OTHER THING THAT I HAD MENTIONED, I THOUGHT LAST TIME WAS, UM, UH, BETWEEN THE SURVEY THAT IS ON, UH, SHEET EIGHT OF OUR PRESENTATION, WHICH SHOWS THOSE TWO NICE TREES RIGHT ALONG THE CANAL AND LAKE AUSTIN ARE NOWHERE TO BE SEEN ON THE OTHER SITE PLANS.
UH, I THINK THAT EXHIBIT A MIGHT VERY WELL RETAIN THOSE CYPRESS TREES ALONE, WHICH TAKE A LONG TIME TO GROW AND ALONG THE LAKE, UM, UH, VERSUS, UM, THE, UH, THE PRESENTATION, UH, ON EXHIBIT B.
UH, SO THOSE ARE THE COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ARE GIVEN ME HEARTACHE, AND THE FACT THAT THE CYPRESS TREE IS AGAIN HAVING BETWEEN LAST TIME AND THIS TIME HAVEN'T MADE IT TO THE SITE PLAN IS A LITTLE DISTURBING TO ME.
UH, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED MR. BARRY ON.
UM, SO, UH, IS THERE ANY, UH, DISCUSSION, ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? UH, MELISSA, MIGHT I ASK A QUESTION TO THE APPLICANT ABOUT THE CYPRESS TREES TEMPT TO, FOR THOSE TREES TO REMAIN? IT IS THE, THE 20 INCH CYPRUS TREE, UH, THAT IS, UH, SHOWN ON SLIDE 14 ON THE OUTSIDE IT'S OUTSIDE OF THAT TEMPORARY NETTING.
UH, IT WILL, IT WILL REMAIN, UH, I THINK THE 19 INCH CYPRESS TRAY THAT IS FURTHER INTO THE PROPERTY.
UH, WELL, I DON'T THINK THAT CAN BE SAVED UNDER EITHER SCENARIO, UH, UH, GIVEN THE FACT THAT THERE'S, THERE'S SUCH A SMALL AREA WHERE A HOUSE AND PATIO CAN BE PUT, UH, VETTERY WILL, WILL LIKELY AT LEAST HALF OF ITS, UH, UH, CRITICAL ROUTES, UM, UH, THE B WITHIN ANY, UH, CONSTRUCTION ON THE LAW.
UH, DARRYL, MY QUESTION IN, IN THE, UH, IN THE LAKE BACKUP, WE HAD AN EMAIL THAT SAID THAT, UM, THERE WERE TREES THAT WERE ON THE PROPERTY THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN PUT DOWN.
ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH ANY OF THAT, MR. IRRIGANT? UM, NOT, NOT BY, BY THIS, UH, UH, OH, I'M SORRY.
THE EMAIL, I'M NOT AWARE, I'M NOT AWARE OF THE EMAIL, SAYS THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY CUT DOWN TREES ON THAT PROPERTY.
THIS WAS DONE AS SOON AS THEY HAD A CONTRACT ON THE PROPERTY.
ARE YOU AWARE OF WHETHER THAT HAPPENED OR NOT? UM, NOT, NOT ANY, ANY PROTECTED TREE? UH, THERE, THERE WAS TH THE, THE LOT WAS, WAS CLEARED OF IT HAD A LOT OF, UH, VEGETATION ON IT THAT WAS, THAT WAS REMOVED, BUT THERE WEREN'T, THERE WEREN'T ANY, UM, ANY PROTECTED TREES.
UH, I THINK THEY WERE ALL PRETTY SMALL.
MS. SHARON, MICHAEL, I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
NUMBER ONE IS, UH, THIS LOT IS, UM, IT'S A CLEAN SLATE.
SO VILLI WE'RE BACK AT ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE THERE, THE HARDSHIP IS SOMEWHAT MINIMAL BECAUSE IT IS A CLEAN LOT.
YOU CAN BUILD SOMETHING ON IT, BUT IT MAY NOT BE AS BIG AS YOU WANT, OR AS LONG AS YOU WANT.
BUT ALSO I NOTICED ON, YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT A FRONT 40 FOOT SETBACK, AND I WAS JUST LOOKING AT YOUR, UM, THE VERY, UH, THE SITE PLAN ON THE VERY BEGINNING.
UH, AND YOU HAD THE HALF STOUT AREA.
IS THAT THE AREA WHERE YOUR DRAIN
[02:30:01]
FIELD IS GOING? YEAH.SO WHAT DID THE HASH AREA IS WHERE IT'S THE ONLY AREA WHERE THE DRAIN FIELD CORRECT? WELL, I WANT IT, UH, AND I, AND I RECOMMEND THAT IT'D BE AS FAR AWAY FROM THE LAKE AND WATER AS POSSIBLE AND CAN WHERE YOU DRAIN FIELD STARTS.
AND, UH, AND I'M FAMILIAR WITH HOW THEY BUILT BEING IN CONSTRUCTION.
I'VE PUT UP, PUT SOME IN, ESPECIALLY THE NEW MODIFIED SEPTIC SYSTEMS. AND SO HOW FAR IS YOUR DRAIN FIELD FROM THE PROPERTY LINE? FROM THE STREET THAT, ON THAT 40 FOOT SIDE? YEAH, IT IS PROBABLY ABOUT, UH, 25 FEET.
AND WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS IS BECAUSE YOU'RE ASKING FOR THAT 20, UM, YOU'RE ASKING FOR THAT SETBACK, UH, TO BE 25 FEET TO GO TO 10 FEET, TO GET YOU POSTED TO THE LAKE.
AND I'M LOOKING AT MOVING, YOU'RE MOVING EVERYTHING BACK TOWARDS THE STREET A LITTLE BIT, AND EXCUSE ME, WE CAN'T MOVE THE DRAIN FIELD CLOSER TO THE STREET, BECAUSE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF ROCKLAND DRIVE, THERE IS A CANAL AND WE HAVE TO BE 50 FEET FROM THE BANK OF THE CANAL.
MOON ROCK STREET DRIVE IS WIDER THAN 10 FEET.
ISN'T IT SHOULD BE, UH, THE RIGHT AWAY.
THE FULL RIDE AWAY IS ABOUT 35 FEET.
UM, ABOUT 25 TO YOUR PROPERTY LINE RIGHT NOW.
SO WE'RE RIGHT NOW, WE'RE ABOUT 25 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE? YES.
SO HAVE YOU IN, HOW FAR IS THE, IS THE, UH, CANAL ON THE BACKSIDE OF THAT ACROSS THE STREET? UH, HOW WIDE IS THE CANAL? PROBABLY 20 FEET.
SO, NO, NOT HOW WIDE IS THE CANAL? HOW, HOW FAR IS THE CANAL FROM THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE STREET? YOU SAID THE CANAL IS ACROSS THE STREET.
HOW FAR IS IT FROM THE BACKSIDE OF THAT STREET TO THE CANAL? MICHAEL, THAT IS SHOWN ON, ON, UH,
THERE'S A LINE THAT SAYS APPROXIMATELY EDGE OF CANAL ACROSS THE STREET, ESTIMATED FROM GOOGLE EARTH MAPS, AND THEY'RE SHOWING A 50 FOOT SETBACK TO THE LEADING EDGE OF THE SEPTIC.
SO THERE'S SEPTIC IS, AND, AND I, UM, I'M WORKING OFF THE TWO COMPUTERS HERE WITH MY GLASSES AND THAT'S AMERICAN GOING? OH, YES, SIR.
ON BOTH OF THE SITE PLANS, EXHIBIT A AND EXHIBIT B, ONE BEING THE SMALLER FOR THE HOUSE.
ONE BEING, UH, THE LARGER FOOTPRINT FOR THE HOUSE.
THE ASEPTIC IS EXACTLY THE SAME SIZE BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE SET BACK 50 FEET FROM THE CANAL, 50 FEET FROM LAKE AUSTIN AND 50 FEET FROM THE OTHER SIDE, AND THEN FIVE FEET FROM SIDE PROPERTY ITSELF.
IT LOOKS LIKE THAT WORK ONGOING IS I DON'T HAVE A BIG PROBLEM WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, UH, UH, VARIANTS OFF OF THE CANAL BECAUSE THE CANAL IS ACTUALLY MANMADE AND IT WAS THERE PRIOR TO, BUT, UH, AND MELISSA, PLEASE JUMP IN THERE BECAUSE I, UH, I THINK THAT'S OKAY.
THEY DIDN'T, THE CANAL WAS THERE WHEN THEY BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT SOME OF THE OTHER STUFF IS AS FAR AS GETTING A BIGGER, BIGGER FOOTPRINT ON, UH, ON THE PROPERTY, CLOSER TO THE LAKE, UH, IF THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS HAVE SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO COMPROMISE WITH THAT, WELL, THAT'S FINE.
BUT, UH, I THINK THE FACT THAT REALLY IT ISN'T, IT IS A CLEAN SLATE.
SO, SO MY ISSUE WITH THE WHOLE SITUATION IS, IS THAT THIS IS A SMALL LAW, LIKE AUSTIN ZONING IS FOUR, AN ACRE SIDE, AND HERE THE PLATTE DATE GOES BACK TO WHERE, YOU KNOW, IT WAS ORIGINALLY TWO STANDARDS.
ALL THE OTHER HOUSES ARE BUILT TO SFT STANDARDS.
AND SO IT JUST SEEMS TO ME THIS ONE SIDE, BECAUSE IT DIDN'T GET DEVELOPED BEFORE THE NEW OVERLAY CAME IN, THAT NOW WE'RE GOING TO LA STANDARDS, THEY HAVE THIS 40 FOOT SET BACK, THEY HAVE 50 FOOT.
THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE GOT WATER ON THREE SIDES.
IT SEEMS DIMINIMOUS TO ME TOO, TO HAVE AS 10 FOOT SETBACK ON THE MANMADE CANAL.
AND THAT'S WHERE I'M AT MELISSA.
AND I MEAN, YEAH, I'M SURE THAT THERE'S A, THERE'S A DESIGN SOLUTION THAT I DON'T THINK THAT THE REQUEST IS UNREASONABLE.
AND THE FACT THAT IT'S A MAIN COMPLETED CANAL AT THE LAKE, BUT THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION BEFORE, AS THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS IT IS
[02:35:02]
SHOWN THAT THERE IS NO REASONABLE USE OF THIS PROPERTY.AND I THINK GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE HAVE THIS SECOND SITE PLAN, SHOWING THAT THEY CAN DO THIS, I THINK THAT'S A REASONABLE USE THAT THEY HAVE SHOWN CAN HAPPEN.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S A HARDSHIP.
SO I'M STRUGGLING WITH THIS ONE FOR THE SAME REASON, THERE ALL LETTERS, UM, IS THE HARDSHIP QUESTION.
YES, IT IS, YOU KNOW, A MAN-MADE CANAL AND IT IS A TEMPORARY SETBACK DOESN'T POSE TO THE, THE OTHER, THE LARGER SETBACK THAT THEY CAN BUILD UNDER.
CAUSE IT SHOWS IT AND THEY CAN GET A HOUSE THAT'S OVER 3,500 SQUARE FEET.
IF YOU ADD IN A SECOND STORY OVER THE GARAGE, AS OPPOSED TO 4,500 SQUARE FEET.
SO IT'S NOT THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR A TON IT'S THAT I CAN'T FIND THE HARDSHIP IN WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR.
AND THEY DID BUY THIS UNDER THE NEW CODE.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'VE OWNED THIS AND JUST NEVER BUILT ON IT.
THEY'VE BOUGHT IT UNDER THE NEW CODE AND UNDER THE NEW REGULATIONS.
AND WE USUALLY SAY, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST HAVING A HARD TIME BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE USUALLY SAY IS, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO APPLY THE CURRENT CODE TO THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S WHY THEY PUT IN CODE IS TO BRING UNBUILT OR REMODELED PROPERTIES UP TO CURRENT CODE.
AND AGAIN, THOUGH, I WOULD WISH THAT WE HAD SOMEBODY FROM ENVIRONMENTAL OR WATERSHED HERE TO EXPLAIN WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE FOR A 10 FOOT SETBACK, AS OPPOSED TO A 25 FOOT.
IS IT A MINIMAL IMPACT? IS IT A BIG IMPACT? I MEAN, WHY DO THEY HAVE THAT OF THE CANAL, IF IT'S SO MINIMAL, YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOTTA BE A REASON.
AND I GET THAT THIS IS A SMALLER LOT.
AND I GET THERE'S ALL THESE OTHER CONSTRAINTS.
I JUST WISH I UNDERSTOOD MORE AS TO WHY FROM, FROM WATERSHED AS TO WHY THE 25 FOOT SETBACK OFF THE CANAL IS IMPORTANT AND MAYBE IT'S NOT, AND MAYBE THE 10 FOOT IS REASONABLE, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT ALL I KNOW IS I SEE NO HARDSHIP BECAUSE THEY CAN DEVELOP IT.
AND SO THERE'S NOBODY HERE TO, TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
I THINK I ASKED THIS LAST TIME, MICHAEL, I SAW YOUR HAND UP.
AND, AND ON THAT ON BOOKS NOTE, WHICH IS VERY VALID, I, I, I, IT IS VERY VALID.
AND ALSO MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU DID NOTICE THAT CLARITY IS THERE IS A JARRING SHOWING THAT THEY ARE CAPABLE OF BUILDING ON THIS WITH MINIMAL IMPACT.
I THINK IT'S PROBABLY BEST TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE AND PUT AND PUT THAT, PUT THAT ON AS A, BRINGING THAT INFORMATION TO US ON THE APPLICANT.
SO IF YOU'RE HEARING ME, UH, IT'S YOUR JOB TO GO TALK TO WATERSHED, SEE IF YOU CAN GET THAT INFORMATION, UH, THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER BAILEY IS ASKING FOR AND BRING IT BACK TO US AND ALSO TAKE A LOOK AT YOUR CHECK, TAKE A LOOK AT YOUR HARDSHIP THAT YOU HAVE SUBMITTED HERE.
CAUSE I'M LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW.
AND I DO BELIEVE THE CANAL IS A HARDSHIP, BUT THE HARDSHIP WAS, I HAVE TO AGREE WITH THEM THAT IT WAS THERE WHEN HE BROUGHT THE PROPERTY.
SO NOW THE FACT THAT YOU GOT THE OTHER TREE, THAT IS A HARDSHIP, BUT YOU NEED TO, YOU NEED TO PROBABLY WORK ON THIS AND I DON'T WANT, I DON'T WANT TO JUST CUT THE LEGS OUT FROM UNDER YOU.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, TO POSTPONE, BUT AGAIN, THE ONUS IS ON YOU TO GET WITH WATERSHED AND BRING BACK THE INFORMATION AND MS. BAILEY NEEDS, BECAUSE I I'VE, I CAN AGREE WITH HER.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE ON A SECOND BY, UH, MELISSA.
UM, AND JUST TO ADD ONE THING AND ELENA WILL GET, I WANT TO SEE THOSE TREES ON THIS SITE.
UH, AND BECAUSE, UH, WE'RE ALSO, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PRESENTATION OF, UH, THE, UH, ARIEL, UH, ON, UH, SHE THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, THERE'S TWO MORE BIG TREES, UH, THAT AREN'T ON THIS SIDE ANYMORE.
UM, SO SOMEBODY REMOVED THOSE, UM, AND, UH, AND THERE SEEMED TO BE EVEN MORE TREES DOWN ALONG THE SHORELINE.
SO I WANT TO SEE THE TREE DEEP LEASE THE EXISTING TREES ON THERE.
UH, ELAINE, WHAT DID YOU HAVE? OKAY.
SO I KNOW Y'ALL ARE REQUESTING THE POSTPONEMENT, BUT AS THE BOARD, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION FOR Y'ALL'S APPROVED BOA POSTPONEMENT DOCUMENT BECAUSE Y'ALL ARE ONLY ALLOWING THE APPLICANT TO REQUEST ONE POST COMMENT.
SO IT'S, I GUESS I KIND OF DON'T SEE IN HERE ANYWHERE, HOW MANY POSTPONEMENTS THAT THE BOARD CAN REQUEST THAT ONE, THOSE
[02:40:01]
ARE GUIDELINES AND I WOULD HAVE TO PULL THEM UP AND I'LL LOOK AT THAT WHILE SOMEBODY ELSE HAS TAUGHT TALKER CONSISTENT.UH, AND, UH, SO, UH, UH, JESSICA, I JUST WANTED TO ADD, I ALSO REALLY WANT US TO THOSE TREATIES ADDED INTO THE SITE PLAN, BUT, UH, ON A RELATED NOTE AND LEE, YOU CAN LET ME KNOW, PUT YOU INTO THIS.
I, I, IF POSSIBLE, I'D ALSO LIKE TO SEE THAT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AND THE AGREEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE BACKUP.
IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN REQUEST? CERTAINLY I WOULD DEFINITELY LIKE TO SEE THOSE THEN, PLEASE, MR. CHAIR.
UH, ALL WE HAVE HERE IS A SITE PLAN.
WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING SHOWING THE PLANS FOR WHAT'S ACTUALLY PLANNED TO BE CONSTRUCTED OUT THERE.
LIKE HOW MANY STORIES WHAT'S THE FAR, I THINK, WHERE WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE THAT TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT IS WE'RE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE ALSO.
CAUSE WE'VE ASKED FOR THAT IN THE PAST SO THAT WE HAVE, AND THEN AS WE DO MORE LAKE AUSTIN, UH, VARIANCES, I THINK THAT'S A VERY REASONABLE REQUEST.
SO APPLICANT, IF YOU'RE LISTENING, I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
GOING BACK TO OUR, OUR POSTPONEMENT ISSUE.
I UNDERSTAND WE HAD, WE ALL DISCUSSED SOMETHING ABOUT HOW OFTEN AN APPLICANT CAN POSTPONE A CASE, BUT THE BOARD ITSELF AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG LEE, BUT WE CAN ESTABLISH OUR OWN RULES.
ARE YOU IN, YOU KNOW, MAKE A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES AND GO WITH THAT DECIDE? UH, YES, SIR.
SO I'LL STICK WITH MY MOTION TO POSTPONE.
AND SIR, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO GET A CONCURRENCE FROM YOU THAT YOU'RE TAKING NOTES ON THIS.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO GET WITH STAFF.
YOU'VE HEARD THESE, THESE, UH, REQUESTS BECAUSE I WATCHED THIS BOARD MEETING, UH, I WATCHED THIS CASE COME UP AND LAST MONTH, YESTERDAY, LATE NIGHT.
AND, UH, YOU NEED TO BRING THAT INFORMATION BACK BECAUSE OTHERWISE I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE PUSHING A ROCK UP A HILL.
ELAINE, JUST TO GET BACK WITH YOU ON YOUR ITEM, IT'S NOT, UM, UH, IT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT IN THE GUIDELINES, BUT IT SAYS BOA WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING IN DETERMINING IF THE CASE SHALL BE POSTPONED AND IT'S THE NEED FOR THE APPLICANT TO INVESTIGATE REPORT TO ELA REGARDING ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS.
SO I THINK THOSE GUIDELINES WANT TO MAKE THAT MORE EXPLICIT AND AGAIN, THEY'RE GUIDELINES, NOT OKAY IF THERE'S ANY DOUBT, I WOULD SAY THAT WE, WE JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF I NEED TO MAKE A MOTION.
UH, WE JUST NEED TO, TO UNDERSTAND AND RULE AS A BOARD THAT THIS, UH, POST HOMA DOES NOT COUNT AGAINST THE APPLICANT.
THIS IS A, THIS IS US ASKING, SAY, HEY, WE, YOU KNOW, UH, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TO, UH, MAKE THE DETERMINATION THAT WE WANT TO MAKE TONIGHT.
AND WE, WE NEED MORE INFORMATION, I GUESS I DIDN'T MAKE MYSELF CLEAR.
THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE EXACTLY WHAT DARRYL SAID.
CAUSE I DON'T FEEL LIKE IT SHOULD BE COUNTED AGAINST THE APPLICANT BECAUSE THIS IS YOUR SECOND REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT AGAINST THEIR CASE.
THIS IS NOT ONLY APPLICATOR AT ALL.
IF THE APPLICANT WAS ASKING FOR PERSONAL, NEW, PERSONAL, NEW, PERSONAL, THEN AT SOME POINT WE MAY GO, NO, YOU KNOW, BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE HERE OR IT'S IT'S UH, IT'S UH, UH, UH, TRYING TO GET CLARITY.
UH, ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY MICHAEL BONO TO POSTPONE UNTIL OUR JANUARY MEETING AND A SECOND BY MELISSA HALSALL WORD.
CAN WE JUST, UH, ASK MR. AREA AND IF HE'S PRETTY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO SEE NEXT MONTH, UH, THANK YOU.
UM, I AM A LITTLE UNCLEAR WHAT INFORMATION YOU WANT ME TO GET FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT? WELL, I, I CAN JUST SPEAK FOR MYSELF.
UM, WHAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT IT ALWAYS SEEMED TO ME THAT THE SETBACKS WERE FROM THE MAIN BODY OF THE LAKE.
AND THEN YOU GET THE SETBACKS AS THEY APPLY TO THESE CANALS IS A LITTLE, IT'S A LITTLE TRICKY.
UH, I THINK WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS SOMETHING FROM ENVIRONMENTAL THAT CAN TELL US ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL, UH, IMPACT OR LACK OF IMPACT.
IF WE WERE TO GRANT A VARIANCE AND ALLOW CONSTRUCTION CLOSER TO THE CANAL
[02:45:01]
THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED.UH, JESSICA, CAN I SEE YOUR HAND UP? CAN WE MAKE THAT SPECIFICALLY, UH, THE, THE IMPACT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 10 FEET AND 20 FEET SO THAT WE HAVE SOME NUMBERS, SOMETHING SOLID THAT WE CAN LOOK AT? WELL, I THINK IN THIS CASE, IT'S, UH, IT'S 10 AND 25, OR SORRY, 25, 25.
AND THEN THE OTHER STUFF MR. AREA THAT I WAS LOOKING FOR WAS SORT OF, UH, MORE THAN JUST A FIRST FLOOR PRINT.
I MEAN, WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU, ARE YOUR CLIENTS PROPOSING TO BUILD OUT THERE AND YOU KNOW, WHAT KIND OF HEIGHT AND SMALL ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? OKAY.
SOME ELEVATION, THE IDEA WAS JUST TO HAVE A MAXIMUM FOOTPRINT CONCEPT, UM, BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN DESIGNED YET, BUT WE'LL TRY AND GET A LITTLE DETAIL TO YOU.
THE REASON WE REQUEST THAT IS BECAUSE OF THAT IMPACTS YOUR CHARACTER, SIR.
AND SO WE HAVE TO HAVE A GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE APPROVING HERE, UH, AND HOW IT'S GOING TO IMPACT THE, YOUR CHARACTER INTERNAL STUFF AT ALL.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STUFF WHERE WE CAN FIGURE OUT LIKE MAYBE AN FAR LIMITATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT MIGHT IMPACT THOSE, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER CALCULATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND THE FINAL THING THAT I'LL SAY IS, I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEING A SMALL LOT.
IT'S MUCH LARGER THAN MOST LOTS IN CENTRAL CITY, CONSIDERABLY LARGER THAN A DUPLEX.
YOU USED TO BE ALLOWED ON 7,400.
SO IT'S NOT A SMALL LOT, BUT THEY DO HAVE A SIZABLE AMOUNT THAT GOES TOWARDS SEPTIC.
SO I THINK THAT THAT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, TO THEIR, TO THEIR BENEFIT.
ACTUALLY THOUGH, GO TO NET SIDE AREA BECAUSE YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO TAKE OUT BACK AREAS TO GET DOWN TO THE ACTUAL LOT SIDE.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, CALL THE ROLL.
THIS IS TO POSTPONE UNTIL NEXT MEETING.
UH, BROOKE BAILEY, JESSICA COHEN OUT OF CAROLL.
ALL RIGHT, WE'LL SEE YOU GUYS NEXT MONTH.
[F-1 C15-2020-0054 Mari Russ for Matthew Satter 3612 Govalle Avenue ]
OUR FINAL ITEM FOR THE NIGHT, UM, IS A, UH, RECONSIDERATION, I BELIEVE YES.WAS A VARIOUS RECONFIGURATION.
WE HEARD THIS, UM, CASE LAST MONTH.
UM, IT IS, UH, UH, ITEM F1, SEE 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO FIVE FOR MARI RUSS FOR, UH, MATTHEWS.
UH, SATER AT THREE, SIX 12 GO VOLLEY AVENUE.
SO THE FIRST, UH, ORDER OF BUSINESS ON THIS WOULD BE, UM, UH, HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT RELATIVE TO THE MERITS OF RECONSIDERING, NOT THE CASE ITSELF, WHAT NEW INFORMATION, IF ANY, THAT THEY ARE PROVIDING US OR, UM, INFORMATION THAT WAS OVERLOOKED LAST TIME OR, UM, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, UH, IS EVERYBODY IN MR. CHAIR FOR RECONSIDERATION? AND ALSO I CAN IT, BECAUSE I WANTED TO, UH, I ALSO WAS GOING TO ASK LEE IF WE HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE HIM A RECONSIDERATION, I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE MEETING LAST TIME.
SO I WAS NOT ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE ORIGINAL DISCUSSION, BUT, UH, LOOKING AT THAT, THAT CASE, I PICKED UP A COUPLE OF THINGS BASED ON THE VIDEO THAT I SAW.
SO, UM, UH, SO, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION BY MELISSA.
WAS THAT CORRECT? AND A SECOND BY MICHAEL TO RECONSIDER IT, THAT'S CORRECT.
I HAD TO GO SAVE THE CAT FOOD.
UH, SO, UM, LET'S YES, FOR LEGAL, AS I'M LOOKING AT WHAT THEY, THEY PUT IN THEIR REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION, THEY'RE SAYING THAT THEY HAVE A REVISED THEIR REQUEST.
[02:50:02]
OR IS THIS A NEW APPLICATION? I THINK IF IT GETS THE MERITS OF A, UH, OF THE NEW INFORMATION, WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR A RECONSIDERATION, EVEN, EVEN IF IT TO BE A NEW REQUEST, UM, THAT'S A, THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION ACTUALLY.UM, THE WAY THAT THEY'VE WORDED IT, THAT THEY HAVE REVISED THEIR REQUEST.
I'M WONDERING IF WE CAN EVEN CONSIDER IT AS A RECONSIDERATION, MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY LOOKING AT WHAT YOU GOT HERE, AND I JUST, WHAT TRANSPIRED LAST MONTH, WHEN I LOOKED AT THE AGENDA FROM LAST MONTH, IT REALLY HASN'T LOOKED LIKE IT'S CHANGED AS THE POSTING, BUT IT IS A RECONSIDERATION.
SO I'M JUST DRAWING THAT INFORMATION.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO, AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY, LEE, IS THAT THE, THE TWO ASKS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME, SO THAT THEY'RE NOT THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS NO DIFFERENT THAN IT WAS LAST MONTH.
THEY'RE JUST BRINGING BACK DIFFERENT SOLUTION TO ADDRESS THAT AS MY UNDERSTANDING, WHICH, WHICH WOULD FALL UNDER THE CRITERIA OF NEW INFORMATION PRESENTED.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLE.
THIS IS TO RECONSIDER ONLY, UM, THIS IS BROOKE BAILEY.
SO, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR, UH, IF, UH, AFFLUENT WE CONSIDERATION AND, UH, APPLICANT HAS, UH, THREE MINUTES TO MAKE THEIR CASE.
UM, SO YEAH, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY, UM, FOR THIS RECONSIDERATION.
UM, SO YEAH, THE, UH, CONSENSUS THAT TOOK AWAY FROM LAST MONTH, UH, SCARING WAS THAT THE, UM, VARIANCE PROPOSAL WAS AGREEABLE, BUT THAT THE DETAILS OF WHAT IT MEANT, UH, THE PRESERVATION PLAN, UM, WAS, YOU KNOW, IT WAS THE MATTER OF DEBATE.
SO, UM, BY ALL MEANS WE RESPECT THAT DIFFERENCE AND, AND THE LEVEL, UH, TO WHICH THE COMMITTEE SORT OF SUGGESTED, UM, IN THEIR FRIENDLIER, UH, UH, AMENDMENT.
SO, UM, WHICH IS THE KEY, THE PLACEMENT OF THE DEFINING FRONT ELEVATION ITEMS, UH, THE DOOR WINDOW PORT PO, ET CETERA.
UM, AND SO WE WANT TO PRESENT NEW EVIDENCE THAT, UM, UH, CHANGES THAT FRONT ELEVATION, UH, IN LINE WITH, UH, A MORE STRINGENT PRESERVATION PLAN.
SO, UM, IN THE SLIDE, UM, I THINK PAGES 11, EIGHT, 11, 12, AND 13, UM, ARE THE ONES THAT ARE SORT OF MOST, UM, PRESENT TO THIS IDEA.
UM, WE'RE KEEPING EVERYTHING THE SAME I'VE WE INCLUDED A FLOOR PLAN TO JUST SUGGEST, UH, WHAT THIS ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, IN THE BACK, WELL IT'S WOULD IT BE USED FOR? AND, BUT ALSO MORE IMPORTANTLY, BEFORE PLANNING SHOWS HOW THE EXISTING DOOR AND WINDOW, UM, PLAN CAN, UH, CAN BE USED IN, UM, YOU KNOW, AN ALTERNATIVE INTERIOR FLOOR PLAN.
UM, SO YEAH, WITH THAT, I THINK, UM, I JUST WANT TO SORT OF PRESENT THAT NEW EVIDENCE, UM, AND ALLOW ANY QUESTIONS, SORRY, MR. CHAIR, WE'RE CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, YEAH, NO, I WAS GOING TO WAIT EIGHT OR CLOSER FIRST, BUT, UH, IN WATCHING LAST, LAST MONTH'S VIDEO, UH, AGAIN, I HAD NOTICED THAT THERE WAS, THAT WAS THE MAIN CONCERN AND BROOKE WAS, AND IT WAS A VALID, MAIN CONCERN, A VERY CHARACTER.
AND THEN THE OTHER CONCERN THAT I SAW THAT THERE ARE, THERE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE HAD THE BIG HOUSE IN THE BACK, WHICH WAS BEEN THE MAIN HOUSE IN THE SMALLER ONE THAT WAS GOING TO BE IN A FRONT.
UH, BUT, UH, I DID, UH, AND I WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT WE HAVE APPROVED THAT THOSE IN THE PAST.
AND IF YOU TAKE A LOOK, EVEN TAKING A LOOK AT THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR, THEY HAD A BIGGER STRUCTURE IN THE BACK AND WHAT THEY DO IN THE FRONT IT'S, AND YOU CAN SEE IT FROM ONE OF THE, I DID A GOOGLE THING WHO'S IN WHAT SATELLITE, BUT THEN IT WAS HARD TO DETERMINE,
[02:55:01]
BUT THEN, UH, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT SOME OF THE PICTURES IN THE PRESENTATION, THERE'S A BIGGER HOUSE IN THE BACK THEN THERE IS IN THE FRONT.AND SO THEREFORE I FEEL THAT THAT'S GOING TO KEEP WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER, PERSONALLY, MYSELF, WHEN WE HAVE THESE SMALL COTTAGE HOMES, EVEN IF THE MAIN EMPHASIS IS GOING TO BE IN THE BACK, AS LONG AS THEY HAVE SMALLER COTTAGE HOME, WHICH FRONTS THE STREET, WHICH BASICALLY MAINTAINS THE AIR AREA CHARACTER, UH, I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, UH, WE ENDED UP, WE AS A BOARD HAS LIVED WITHIN THE PAST AND I'M WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION ON CURRENTLY.
NOW I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT DID GO BACK, UH, AND WE REDESIGNED IT.
THAT'S GOING TO KEEP MORE THAT AREA CHARACTER.
AND SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
OKAY, JESSICA, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP YOU'RE A SECOND.
AS LONG AS WE TIE IT INTO HOW IT'S BEING PRESENTED TO THE SITE PLAN ON, ON THE, IN THEIR PRESENTATION.
CAUSE I'M WONDERING A HUNDRED PERCENT OF, RIGHT, RIGHT.
AND INTO THE BOARD'S DEFENSE, UH, THERE WAS, UH, RESISTANCE TO KEEP THAT FACADE OF THE HOUSE.
AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO, UH, DENY THAT PART OF AREA CHARACTER, THEN I THINK THAT THE DENIAL ON OUR PART WAS ABSOLUTELY IN LINE WITH THAT.
UH, I AGREED WITH IT WHEN I SAW IT, THAT, THAT, UH, THE REASONS FOR THE BOARD DENIAL ON THAT ASPECT AND WHAT I WAS HEARING WAS IT WAS GETTING A LITTLE BIT OUT OF, UH, OUT OF KILTER AND PEOPLE WEREN'T QUITE HEARING WHAT BROKE GOT TO WHAT YOU WERE GOING FOR.
AND WE ALL KNOW THAT THERE'S MORE THAN ONE WAY TO SKIN A CAT, NOT NO OFFENSE TO YOUR KITTY THAT YOU HAD EARLIER, BUT, UM, SO ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR ANY DISCUSSION? NO.
I JUST WANT TO THANK THEM FOR, UH, UPDATING THEIR DESIGN AND COMING BACK WITH SOMETHING THAT FIT MORE WITH WHAT THEY WERE PRESENTING SAYING THAT THE REASON THEY, THEIR HARDSHIP WAS PRESERVATION OF THIS HOUSE.
AND NOW THEY'RE SHOWING THAT AND I DO APPRECIATE THAT.
UH, MY COMMENT WAS, I JUST, I JUST DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THIS CHANGE THAT, THAT CHANGES MY MIND, THAT, THAT THERE'S BEEN SHOWN A HARDSHIP HERE.
I MEAN, THE HARDSHIP IS WE WOULD LIKE A BIGGER HOUSE AND WE WOULD LIKE A BIGGER HOUSE AND WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THIS SMALL HISTORIC COTTAGE, BUT I DON'T, I, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS A, A HARDSHIP AS A MATTER OF LAW, SO, OKAY.
ACTUALLY I DO THINK IT'S A HARDSHIP AS A MATTER OF PRECEDENT, IT, A PRECEDENT THAT THIS BOARD HAS SET AND THAT NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE ALSO SET FOR THEMSELVES IF THEY'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE THESE SMALLER COTTAGES SO THAT WHEN YOU WALK DOWN THE STREET, YOU HAVE THIS FEEL AT A COTTAGE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND ONE WAY OF ACHIEVING THAT HAS BEEN TO PUT THE LARGER STRUCTURE IN THE BACK.
I'VE NOTICED THAT I HAVE SEEN IT DONE WELL, AND I'VE SEEN IT DONE POORLY THAT WE DO HAVE A PRECEDENT FOR IT.
WELL, WE DO, BUT THE QUESTION IS, CAN THEY COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE THAT REQUIRES THE ADU TO BE 1100 SQUARE FEET OR LESS? SO IS IT A HARDSHIP THAT IS 2000 SQUARE FOOT ADU ON THERE ARE, YOU DON'T THINK IT IS.
THE, THAT, THAT, UH, THE HOUSE UP FRONT WAS GONNA STAY, WHICH IS LESS THAN 2000 SQUARE FEET.
AND THEN THE MAIN RESIDENCE, THIS IS WHAT I HEARD FROM YOU GUYS LAST MONTH, THAT THE MAIN RESIDENTIAL, THE 2000 OR WHATEVER, IT'S GOING TO BE IN THE BACK.
AND SO THEY WERE SO TECHNICALLY THEY ARE STILL MAINTAINING THE, UH, AN ADU THAT IS WITHIN, UH, WITHIN ZONING AND THE HOUSE IN THE BACK WAS GOING TO BE, IS GOING TO BE THEIR MAIN RESIDENCE.
SO ALL WE'RE DOING BASICALLY IS FLIPPING IT.
AND I KNOW LAST TIME THERE, YOUR COMMENT WAS NOT THE SUPPORT BECAUSE, AND I WROTE IT DOWN, QUOTE, BASED ON THE ORDINANCE AND HOW IT IS WRITTEN.
UH, IF WE GO BY THAT THIS BOARD DOESN'T NEED TO EXIST BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THIS BOARD IS IN PLACE FOR IS TO, UH, UH, PROVIDE REDRESS TO FOLKS THAT HAVE ISSUES WITH THE ORDINANCE.
AND WE'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN IT.
EVERYBODY'S GOT TO GO BASED ON HOW THEY GO OR ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN.
WELL, THEN, I MEAN, WE DON'T THAT FLIES IN THE FACE OF THE FACT THAT A VARIANCE IS BY DEFINITION SUPPORTING AN ISSUE THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE ORDINANCE.
AND SO IN THIS CASE, I THINK WHAT WE'RE ASKING TO DO IS TO MAKE THAT MAIN RESIDENCE IN THE BACK TO KEEP THAT SMALL UNDER 1100 SQUARE FOOT, 80 YOU IN THE FRONT, I DON'T THINK THAT'S UNREASONABLE.
[03:00:01]
PRECEDENT BY DOING THAT IN THE PAST, JUST TO MAINTAIN EVERY CHARACTER FOR SOME OF THOSE COTTAGE NEIGHBORHOODS.WELL PUT, UM, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE TAKE A TAKE ACTION ON THIS, THE, OUR LAST ACTION FOR 2020.
SO MICHAEL WAS IN YOUR HEARTS FOLKS, HERE WE GO.
I, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY CAN SEE ME.
I MUST BE JUST, DO WE NEED A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO DOCUMENT THAT THE FRONT DOOR WINDOW AND PORTICO WILL REMAIN IN PLACE OR IN THEIR CURRENT LOCATION? OR IS THAT UNDERSTOOD? I, I THINK IT'S, IT'S A GOOD, UH, SO TH TH BASICALLY THE FRONT FACADE OF THE EXISTING HOUSE WILL BE MAINTAINED.
LIKE KELLY, I REALLY LIKED THAT.
WE'RE STARTING TO BREAK DOWN HERE A LITTLE BIT.
CAN WE TIE IT TO THEM TO THEIR PRESENTATION? YES, YES.
I'M, I'M MORE AMENABLE TO THAT, UH, UH, SHEET NINE OF THE QUESTION.
REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY TO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE NEW PLEX TRUCKS, YOU WOULD REQUIRE A 50% SHARE IN WHILE REQUIRING DEMO OF THE EXISTING 1937 COTTAGE, THE PROPERTY, A HARDSHIP, THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED.
IT IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THAT THE PROPERTY INCLUDES AN ORIGINAL STRUCTURE THAT TYPIFIES THE HISTORY AND HERITAGE OF THE AREA.
BUT THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE, OF THE CLA L C O L D C WOULD DEPRIVE THE OWNERS OF THE SAME DEVELOPMENT PRIVILEGE, ENJOYED BY NEIGHBORS, A HARDSHIP FOR NOT THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE MANY LOTS, NO LONGER CONTAIN YOUR ORIGINAL STRUCTURES OF THIS UNIQUE TYPOLOGY.
DID I SAY THAT CORRECTLY? MY WIFE'S ALWAYS CRACKING ME SO TYPOLOGY AND THEREFORE, AND NOT BURDENED WITH THE TRUST BETWEEN PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT.
SOME HAVE DEVELOPED SECONDARY UNITS PRIOR TO THE EXISTING LCD CITY ORDINANCE, AND THUS ALLOW FOR LARGER VEER, SECONDARY UNITS, AREA, CHARACTER, THE VARIANTS, BUT NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATION OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, BECAUSE MOST OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA HAVE A SMALLER UNIT AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY WITH LARGER UNITS IN THE REAR AND THE HOME DIRECTLY TO THE RIGHT OF THIS PROPERTY EXEMPT STEP.
UH, SO, UM, AND JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, ACTUALLY IT SHOULD BE PROBABLY NINE AND 10.
THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES THE PLAN AND THE ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE, MR. CHAIR, TO, TO MAINTAIN THE FACADE OF THE EXISTING HOUSE EXCEPTED.
SO WE'VE GOT, UH, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLE, BUT BAILEY OKAY.
UH, VERONICA RIVERA, UH, UM, CAN YOU COME BACK TO ME? YUP.
UH, SO YOU GOT YOUR VARIANTS, UM, WITH CONDITIONS.
ALL RIGHT, FOLKS, UM, THAT IS, WE'VE ALREADY DONE EVERYTHING ON OUR NEW BUSINESS.
UH, LET ME HAVE, UH, THERE, WASN'T A REASONS TO HANG IT UP.
UM, UH, BUT AGAIN, I, I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR YOUR SERVICE THIS LAST YEAR.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO BETTER THINGS IN 2020 OR 2021, UH, INCLUDING THE VACCINE AND, UH, UH, YOU ALL STAY HEALTHY AND WELL OVER THE HOLIDAYS, BE SAFE.
UM, AND, UH, I APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE.
[03:05:01]
BIRTHDAY AND STAY SAFE.