May 10, 2021 Board of Adjustment

UM, SO, UM, THE, UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY THINGS COMMUNICATION.

CAN I ANSWER THAT CORRECTLY? OKAY.

HEARING NONE.

I'M GOING TO ASSUME THAT THAT'S THE CASE.

UM, WHAT DID YOU SAY? I'M SORRY.

WE HAD NO CITIZEN COMMUNICATION TONIGHT, CORRECT? NO, NO, WE DO NOT.

WE ARE, UH, RECOMMENDING AND LESS SOMEONE HAS AN ISSUE WITH THIS, UM, THAT ALL OF THE, UH, CASES, UH, WHICH WOULD BE, UH, ITEMS, UM, C ONE D ONE D TWO D THREE D FOUR, THE FIVE, THE SIX, THE SEVEN, THE EIGHT D NINE D 10 IN E ONE E TWO, UH, ALL BE POSTPONE UNTIL THE, UH, JUNE, UH, OR IS IT I BELIEVE JUNE 14TH MEETING.

SO, UH, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WERE ON THE LINE, UH, AND VIEWING THIS, UH, LIVE ON TV, UM, WE ARE SHORT, UM, A, UH, HAVING, UH, ENOUGH, UM, MEMBERS TO, UH, ADEQUATELY HANDLE THE PACES AND DO THEM JUSTICE.

UH, RIGHT NOW, UH, WE HAVE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN OF OUR MEMBERS.

THERE'S AN EIGHT MINUTE SUPPOSED TO BE ON HERE TONIGHT, BUT, UH, HE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET ON YET.

UM, AND AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THAT, UM,

[B-1 Staff and Applicant requests for postponement and withdraw of items posted on this Agenda]

UM, SO, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO, TO REACH OUT TO, UH, EACH OF THE APPLICANTS TO, UH, DOUBLE CHECK, UH, THAT, UH, THE POSTPONEMENT OF YOUR CASE IS, UH, ACCEPTABLE.

BECAUSE AGAIN, IF WE ARE TO TAKE BOATS TONIGHT, ONE MORE HAMPERED BY THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN APPOINTED.

AND, UH, IN ADDITION TO THAT, UM, ON THE CASES WE WOULD, UH, IF WE HAVE OUR EIGHT PEOPLE, WHICH AGAIN, WE ARE ONE SHY RIGHT NOW, WE WOULD NEED UNANIMOUS VOTES.

SO, UH, ANY ABSTENTIONS OR ANY, UM, UH, VOTES, UH, AGAINST WOULD AUTOMATICALLY DENY YOUR, UM, UH, REQUESTS FOR A VARIANCE.

UH, AND SO, UM, ELENA, I'M NOT SURE THE BEST WAY TO DO THIS.

I WAS THINKING THAT WE COULD JUST, UH, ASK EACH OF THE APP, GO DOWN THE ROLL AND ASK ME TO THE APPLICANTS, UH, IF THEY HAD AN ISSUE WITH THAT, IF YOU THINK THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE THIS.

SURE.

WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO, OR I MEAN, OR WE CAN JUST, YOU KNOW, JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, REQUESTING POSTPONEMENT, IF ANYONE HAS AN ISSUE.

WELL, I GUESS THEY CAN'T SPEAK RIGHT.

CAUSE THEY'RE ALL MUTED.

UH, THE F THE FIRST, UH, ITEM THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO, UM, POSTPONE WOULD BE ITEM C ONE, THERE'S A C 16 DASH 2021 DASH ZERO OH ZERO ZERO THREE.

THAT WAY AT EACH ONE.

SO, SO LET'S, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.

SO,

[00:05:01]

UH, MICHAEL GOT DANNY FOR, UH, TIMOTHY FINDLEY.

UH, TWENTY-FIVE 52 GUADALUPE, AND I ACTUALLY BELIEVE IT'S RICHARD SIDELL, UH, STEEPING NINE.

IS THAT CORRECT? MR. CHAIR? I AM ABSTAINING ON THAT.

AND MELISSA HAWTHORNE IS ABSTAINING.

SO MR. SOTO, DO YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH US? SO I DO NOT.

UM, SO, UH, UH, I'LL LET, UH, SO WE WILL GO AHEAD THEN IN POSTPONE.

UH, SO YOU ONE, UH, SINCE THE APPLICANT IS FINE WITH THAT.

MOVING ALONG, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

UH, WE FEDERAL, UM, MOVING ON TO THE VARIANCES FOR A NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS.

UM, THE FIRST ITEM IS THE ONE, UH, THIS IS, UH, ITEM C 15 DASH 2021 DASH ZERO ZERO TWO SEVEN.

UH, CHARLES SHAPIRO AT, UH, UH, ONE ONE, TWO NINE OH FIVE THERE NAZY DRIVE.

UM, MR. SHAPIRO, ARE YOU AVAILABLE TO SPEAK TO WHETHER OR NOT A POSTPONEMENT IS ACCEPTABLE? OH, YES, SIR.

THIS IS, THIS IS CHARLES SHAPIRO.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR.

UH, YEAH, I'M, UH, I'M OKAY.

IF YOU HEAR THE CASE TONIGHT, I'M ALSO OKAY.

IF, IF YOU POSTPONE AT WHATEVER YOUR, UM, WHAT OF YOUR, WOULD YOU THINK THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION AS WELL? WELL, UH, WE, AS YOU MAY NOT HAVE HEARD ME BEFORE, BUT WE ARE SHORT OF PEOPLE TONIGHT.

AND SO ANY, UH, NAVY VOTES WOULD AUTOMATICALLY DENY.

UM, AND SO AS WHEN WE AVERAGE, WHEN WE'RE SHORT ON THE STAFFING OF THE, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, UM, WE GENERALLY RECOMMEND THE PEOPLE TO POSTPONE UNTIL WE HAVE A FULL BOARD, WHICH WE'RE HOPING TO HAVE, UM, IN JUNE NEXT MONTH.

SO IF YOU'RE AMENABLE TO THAT AND YOU'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND SUGGEST THAT YOU PUT THEM BETTER, UH, WITH A FULL BOARD MR. CHAIR, THAN THEY ARE WITH CURRENT MEMBERS.

EXACTLY.

SO, MR. SHAPIRO, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT THEN? OKAY.

OH, JUST SORT OF WHAT SORT OF WHAT'S, WHAT ARE THE, UH, WHAT'S THE VOTE RATIO REQUIRED WITH THE FULL BOARD? IT IS, UH, UH, FOR A, A VARIANCE.

IT IS A SUPER MAJORITY, WHICH IS, UH, 75% OF THE BOARD, UH, AND THAT IS THE, UH, ACTUAL APPOINTED MEMBERS.

AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE EIGHT.

UM, AND SO, UH, WE WOULD, UH, UH, NOT BE ABLE TO, UH, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IT JUST GONNA BE DIFFICULT FOR US TO CONDUCT OUR VISITS WHEN WE ONLY HAVE EIGHT OF 11 MEMBERS AND HE WOULD NEED NINE OF 11.

YOU WOULD NEED NINE OF ALL.

I APPRECIATE YOU CHECKING WITH ME, SIR.

VERY GOOD.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE.

THANKS SO MUCH.

ALL RIGHT, WE'RE MOVING ON TO, UH, AGAIN, JUST, AND THIS, WHAT WE'RE ASKING THE APPLICANTS HERE AGAIN, IS TO JUST SAY IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH POSTPONING, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT YOU DO.

SO, UH, NEXT ITEM WOULD BE, UH, ITEM D TO C 15 DASH 2021 DASH ZERO ZERO TWO, UH, EIGHT.

THIS IS DAVID MORGAN FOR 34 OH SIX GONZALEZ STREET.

UH, MR. MORGAN, IF YOU'RE AVAILABLE, ARE YOU OKAY WITH US POSTPONING YOUR PATIENT IN, UH, THIS IS JASON FRYER WITH THE OTHER, FOR DAVID MORGAN REGISTERED TO SPEAK TODAY.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WITHOUT NINE PEOPLE, WE CAN'T EVEN BE APPROVED FOR VARIANCE.

IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE THE, THE NUMBER OF BOATS.

SO, UNFORTUNATELY, YEAH, YEAH.

WHY WE ARE NOT, WE'RE NOT EXCITED IN THE LEAST BIT ABOUT ANOTHER DELAY.

IT DOESN'T REALLY GIVE US MUCH OF A CHOICE IN THIS MATTER.

THIS IS, UH, UH, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UH, WHEN YOU HAVE AN ALL VOLUNTEER GROUP AND, UM, IN THE, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO, UH, UH, ARE IN THE PROCESS OF STILL MAKING SOME APPOINTMENTS.

SO, UH, IN, IN THEIR STRAINING GOING ON.

AND DO YOU MIND IF I ASK, I FEEL, I OVERHEARD YOU TALKING ABOUT IT, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE THIS NOVEMBER, SO THEY HAVE HAD ALMOST SEVEN MONTHS TO GET THOSE APPOINTMENTS MADE.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT THAT IS CORRECT.

UH, AND, AND WE DO HAVE, UH, NEW APPOINTMENTS, BUT THEIR APPOINTMENTS HAVEN'T NECESSARILY FINISHED ALL OF THEIR TRAINING OR OFFICE AND OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO WE'RE HAMSTRUNG.

DO WE HAVE ANY ASSURANCES THAT THE JUNE MEETING WILL ACTUALLY GO OFF?

[00:10:02]

UM, WE HAVE NO ASSURANCES THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, ANYTHING WILL HAPPEN EVEN NEXT WEEK, SO NO, WE, BUT, BUT, BUT THERE'S A MUCH BETTER CHANCE THAT WE WILL HAVE FULL STAFFING NEXT MONTH, UM, THAN WE DO THIS MONTH.

I MEAN, GIVEN THAT WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE, LIKE THAT'S A WEIRD, REALLY SEPARATE POST FOR ME.

IT'S NOT ANYTHING WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT OURSELVES, BUT IT'S ALSO HIS CHANCES OF GETTING SOMETHING PASSED IS BETTER WITH A FULL BOARD, ONE SINGLE, NO VOTE, AND HE'S DEAD IN THE WATER RIGHT NOW.

SO THE ODDS ARE BETTER.

DO YOU MIND CLARIFYING THAT? YOU'RE SAYING ONE SINGLE NOVA WAS JUST DEAD IN THE WATER, BUT THERE WAS ONLY EIGHT OF YOU.

AND MY UNDERSTANDING WAS WE WOULD NEED AT LEAST NINE YEA VOTES TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

IS THAT CORRECT? KEVIN, EVEN SO DON'T, WE STILL NOT NEED NINE THAT'S RIGHT.

FOR THE APPOINTED, UM, OR THE APPOINTED MEMBERS.

WE DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE ENOUGH MEMBERS, UH, FOR A SUPER MAJORITY TONIGHT.

SO ALL OF YOU GUYS.

SO YES, WE CAN'T, WE STILL CAN'T GET IT.

WE CAN'T REALLY, UH, CURE YOUR CASE, UH, AND, AND, AND, UH, AND MEET THE CRITERIA THAT WE NEED TO EVEN ACT ON MR. CHAIR.

AND I GUESS I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I GUESS, WHY ARE YOU ASKING US WHETHER OR NOT WE APPROVE OF THAT CHOICE OR NOT? WELL, I AM JUST WANT GONNA SAY TO EVERYONE, I MEAN, WE COULD JUST SAY WE'RE POSTPONING ALL OF THE PATIENTS.

I WANTED, UH, PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, UH, SPEAK TO THAT IF THEY HAD AN ISSUE, BUT, UM, WE COULD GO ABOUT IT ANOTHER WAY.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE ALL THE CASES.

I AM RECUSING ON D EIGHT AND ABSTAINING ON SEAT ONE.

AND I WILL SECOND THAT, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD BE A BETTER MOTION FROM MICHAEL TONIGHT.

I LIKE THAT.

AND MR. CHAIR ACTUALLY LIKE IT'S UP AND I, UH, IF I CAN OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THAT MOTION TO POSTPONE THE CASE THAT, UH, GUYS CHAIR HAWTHORNE HAS INSANE FROM AND RICKY AND ACCUSED FROM.

SORRY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

DO YOU ACCEPT MY FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? OKAY.

VERY GOOD.

SO, SO TH THE MOTION BY MELISSA WITH FRIENDLY AMENDMENT BY ROM AND THE SECOND BY, UH, BROOKE BAILEY, UM, IS TO POSTPONE ALL OF OUR CASES THAT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR TONIGHT.

SO THESE ARE ALL OF THE C, D AND E CASES, WHICH ARE, UH, NEW PREVIOUS VARIANCES AND SIGNED CASES.

UM, UNTIL JUNE 14TH, SIR, LET'S GO AHEAD AND PULL THE ROLL ON THAT SHARE.

I DIDN'T WANT TO INTERRUPT YOU, UH, SORRY TO CONFUSE THE PLAN, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE DARRYL IS ON NOW THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING.

I DON'T KNOW.

I'LL LET YOU DECIDE IT DOES NOT.

UM, IT, IT, WE'RE STILL, WE'RE STILL SHY THE SUPER MAJORITY, BUT WE NEED TO, BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT.

DO YOU WANT TO OFFER ANYBODY ON THE LINE, THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE US, UH, TO HAVE US, UH, DECLINE THEIR REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE? WE CAN DO THAT.

SO, UH, UM, THE FOUR, WE TAKE THE VOTE.

IS THERE ANYONE ON THE LINE THAT, UH, UM, TAKES EXCEPTION TO, UH, US POSTPONING YOUR CASE UNTIL NEXT MONTH? BECAUSE AGAIN, WE HAVE WE'RE HAMSTRUNG HERE.

UNFORTUNATELY DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO PROPERLY CARRY OUT ON, UH, WELL, DON'T, YOU BET HAVE TO GO THROUGH THEM ONE BY ONE, BECAUSE HE HAS TO KEEP EACH PERSON AND THEY HAVE NO WAY NOBODY CAN RAISE THEIR HAND.

NOBODY.

SO I THINK IT'S ALL A MOOT POINT.

UM, I MEAN, WE ARE HAMSTRUNG, NONE OF US WANT TO HAVE A DOUBLY LONG MEETING IN JUNE, AND I'M VERY SORRY TO ALL THE APPLICANTS, BECAUSE WE WOULD RATHER HEAR THE CASES THAN NOT HEAR THEM, BUT WE ARE ALSO, OUR HANDS ARE TIED IF WE DON'T HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY.

SO, UM, I SAID, I CALLED, OKAY, ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE BOAT.

UM, SO, UM, THIS IS TO POSTPONE ALL OF THE ACTIVE CASES, UH, THAT WE WERE HEARING TONIGHT, OR WOULD IT HAVE BEEN HEARING TONIGHT UNTIL OUR JUNE 14TH MEETING? BRUCE BAILEY? YES.

AND PLEASE NOTE, I AM ABSTAINING AND REFUSING ON DA.

THANK YOU, DON LAYTON BURWELL.

[00:15:01]

SO, UM, THAT TAKES CARE OF OUR, UH, ACTIVE CASE LOAD TONIGHT.

UH, SO LET'S, UH, BACKTRACK HERE A LITTLE BIT TO ITEM

[A-1 Staff requests approval March 8, 2021 draft minutes]

A ONE.

UH, THIS IS APPROVAL OF THE MARCH, UH, EIGHT, UH, 2021 GRAPH MINUTES.

DO I HAVE A MOTION ON THAT? I'VE SEEN MARCH, UM, BOARD AGENDA MINUTE SECOND.

AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY MELISSA.

UH, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION SEEING NONE HEARING NONE.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THAT.

UH, BROOKE BAILEY.

THIS IS TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.

THANK YOU, JESSICA GOING? YES.

WHAT WAS THE HAWTHORNE? YES.

JOHN LEIGHTON BURWELL.

MICHAEL LLANO AND YES, NO, GO AWAY.

UM, MOVING ON TO, UH, WELL, B ONE IS A NON-ISSUE BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY DONE THAT.

ITEM F SIX, UH, TO, UH, UM, HEAR STAFF PRESENTATION ON THAT SO THAT MR. CAN GET BACK TO HIS FAMILY.

LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR NEW BUSINESS.

UM, AND, UM, ELENA'S THEORY REST OPEN AVAILABLE.

I'M SURE THE REST OF IT IS ON THE SCREEN NOW.

OH, I SEEN HIM, I SEE HIS, UH, UH, BOX ON THE SCREEN THERE.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND BUMP FORWARD ON THE, UM, NEW BUSINESS TO

[F-6 Discussion and possible action regarding UNO Sign regulations – requesting presentation by City Staff (Jerry Rusthoven).]

SO, UH, YOU'RE MUTED, MR. UP-SKILLING.

I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS FOR ME TODAY.

UM, THE, UM, IN NOVEMBER OF 2019, UM, THE CITY COUNCIL PASSED A SERIES OF AMENDMENTS TO WHAT'S KNOWN AS THE, UM, NUNO ORDINANCE OR THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY.

UM, TWO CHANGES WERE MADE OF THE UNO OVERLAY.

UH, THEY WERE BOTH MADE INADVERTENTLY, UM, AND WERE NOT INTENDED TO BE A PART OF THE CHAIN, UH, THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE TO THE, UH, THE ORDINANCE.

UM, ONE OF THOSE CHANGES WE FOUND A WAY TO FIX ADMINISTRATIVELY.

UH, THE OTHER ONE, HOWEVER, I'VE BEEN INFORMED BY THE LAW DEPARTMENT.

IT REQUIRES A CODE AMENDMENT.

SO IN MAY OF LAST YEAR, THE ISSUE HAS TO DO WITH SPECIFICALLY THAT WHAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO CHANGE WAS THE REQUIREMENT THAT, UM, THAT, UM, THE NAME OF A BUILDING, IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S SIGNED BY THE SECOND FLOOR.

IT MUST COMMONLY IT'S THE NAME OF THE BUILDING? UM, THE REQUIREMENT BEFORE PREVIOUSLY WAS THAT IT HAD TO BE BASICALLY A PART OF THE STRUCTURE AND NOT ASSIGN, UM, THAT BECAME A PROBLEM WHEN BUILDINGS ARE CHANGING HANDS AND THE NEW OWNER WANTS TO GIVE IT A NEW NAME AND THEY COULD NOT, BECAUSE OF COURSE IT WAS IMPRINTED INTO THE CONCRETE.

SO WHAT WAS BEING DONE WAS A THING TO ALLOW THE, THE SIGN THAT HAS A BUILDING NAME.

THE NAME IS ON THE TOP OF THE BUILDING TO BE REMOVED AND CHANGED IN THE FUTURE.

IF SOMEONE SO DESIRED, UH, THERE WAS A PROHIBITION ON THAT PORTION OF THE SITE, THAT PART OF THE SIGN, THAT TYPE OF SIGN BEING ELECTRIFIED, UM, IN THE CHAIR, JUST WHAT WE'VE MADE IN, IN LATE 2019, INADVERTENTLY THE ORDINANCE WAS CHANGED TO SAY THAT AN ELECTRIFIED SIGN IS PROHIBITED ANYWHERE IN THE UNO DISTRICT, WHICH WAS OF COURSE NOT THE INTENDED RESULT.

UM, IT AFFECTS EVEN MORE THAN THE UNO DISTRICT BECAUSE THE UNO SIGN REGULATIONS ARE BY REFERENCE ADOPTED IN ALL THE CITIES TODD'S OR TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICTS, AS WELL AS THE NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY PLAN.

SO WHAT'S HAPPENED IS THAT WE'VE HAD AN INADVERTENT, UM, PROHIBITION OF ELECTRIC SIGNS IN ALL OF THOSE DISTRICTS WHEN THAT WAS NOT THE INTENT.

SO IN MAY OF LAST YEAR, I WENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND HAD THEM INITIATE A CODE AMENDMENT TO CORRECT THIS.

UM, IN THE MEANTIME, WHAT HAPPENED IS WE HAVE HAD A, UM, A LAWSUIT THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH SIGN REGULATIONS, BUT IT HAD TO DO WITH THE, UH, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REWRITE.

AND, UH, THERE WAS A JUDGMENT AGAINST THE CITY IN THAT CASE.

AND THE CITY HAS APPEALED THAT DECISION TO THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS, WHICH THEIR DECISION IS STILL OR NOT FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS, I THINK.

AND THAT DECISION IS STILL PENDING.

SO IN THE INTERIM, THERE WAS KIND OF A PAUSE, IF YOU WILL, ON CODE AMENDMENTS, THERE WERE NONE GOING THROUGH THE CITY COUNCIL.

UM, I DID HAVE TWO THAT WERE PUT ON THE SHELF BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

UM, AND WE WERE JUST BASICALLY WAITING.

UM, I DO APOLOGIZE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THE BOARD HAS HAD TO DEAL WITH SOME VARIANCES AND SOME LANDOWNERS HAVE INCURRED EXPENSES THAT THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD TO OCCUR INCUR BECAUSE, UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THIS WAS NEVER THE INTENTION TO BAN ALL ELECTRIC SIGNS IN THE UNIVERSITY IN THE WEST CAMPUS AREA, IF YOU WILL.

[00:20:01]

UM, SO HOWEVER, SINCE THAT TIME WHAT'S HAPPENED RECENTLY IS, UH, THE COUNCIL ITSELF HAS INITIATED A COUPLE OF CODE AMENDMENTS.

AND SO THE STAFF NOW FEELS THAT THE, BASICALLY THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD CODE AMENDMENTS AGAIN, WHEREAS BEFORE WE FELT THAT THEY WERE HESITANT TO SO LITTLE COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, MAYBE THREE WEEKS AGO, I STARTED MOVING THE CODE AMENDMENT FORWARD AGAIN.

I TOOK IT TO THE, UM, I CAN'T REMEMBER THEIR NAME NOW, BUT IT USED TO BE THE CODES AND ORDINANCES SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION.

THEY RECOMMENDED THAT WE FIXED IT.

IT'S A SIMPLE ONE LINE, OR EVEN FRANKLY, TWO WORD FIX TO THE ORDINANCE.

SO I'M GOING TO BE MOVING THAT FORWARD TO THE FULL PLANNING COMMISSION HERE SOON, UM, THAT THIS THAT'S WHERE OUR NIGHT, BUT PROBABLY MEETING AFTER THAT IN TWO WEEKS AND THEN ULTIMATELY TAKEN FOUR TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO HOPEFULLY Y'ALL, WON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH ELECTRIFIED, I MEAN, NOT ORDINANCES ANY LONGER.

SO WITH THAT, I'M AVAIL FRANK QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, MR. .

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JERRY.

SORRY.

IT TOOK THIS LONG AND IT SHOULDN'T HAVE TAKEN THIS LONG, BUT AGAIN, IT WAS JUST TIED UP IN A, IN A, IN A, IN AN UNRELATED ISSUE THAT KINDA GOT, UM, ANCHORED DOWN BY THAT IF YOU WILL.

UM, I DON'T THINK I'M EITHER, YOU KNOW, UH, SO FOR THE SIGNS ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY, UH, REQUIRED TO BE ENGRAVED OR, YOU KNOW, UH, THAT, UH, CAN THEY, UH, ONCE THIS ORDINANCE IS CORRECTED, UH, CAN THEY BE ILLUMINATED? NO, WE STILL DON'T WANT THOSE SIGNS TO BE ILLUMINATED.

UH, THE DIFFERENCES IS THAT THEY'LL BE ABLE TO BE REMOVED, BUT WE STILL DON'T WANT THEM, UM, LIT UP.

SO FIRST FLOOR AND SECOND FLOOR, YOU CAN ALUMINATE BUT ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR, UM, THERE'S NO ELIMINATION TERRIFIC TO JUST, THEY NO LONGER HAVE TO BE IN LADIES IF YOU WILL.

WAS THERE ANYONE ELSE THERE ALSO YOUR HAND UP CAME HERE? YEAH.

SO WE STILL HAVE IN PROCESS APPEALS RELATED TO ILLUMINATION OF SIGNS ABOVE THE SECOND STORY AFFECTED FLORIDA.

SO I GUESS WE'RE STILL GONNA CONTINUE TO SEE THESE FOR A LITTLE WHILE, AT LEAST.

UNTIL I CAN GET THE ORDINANCE TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND GET THEM TO VOTE ON IT.

UH, UNFORTUNATELY IF PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO WAIT FOR THAT, THEY'LL STILL HAVE TO, IT'S A PROCESS OF HER AUNTS, BUT, UM, HOPEFULLY I CAN HAVE IT DONE.

I'M HOPING RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE I HAVE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS TO HAVE TO TAKE OUT A NEWSPAPER AD, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, THIS TYPE OF THING.

IT'LL PROBABLY BE AS THE FIRST MEETING WHEN THE COUNSELOR GETS BACK FROM THEIR SUMMER BREAK.

BUT I'M ASSUMING THAT IF IT'S, I MEAN, BECAUSE IT'S, IT DOESN'T REALLY AFFECT THE PROHIBITION ON ILLUMINATION ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR.

UH, WE'RE STILL PROBABLY GOING TO BE SEEN VARIANCE REQUESTS OR ELIMINATION.

IF, IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO HAVE ELIMINATION ABOVE THAT SECOND FLOOR, THEY'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO COME TO US BECAUSE THEY WILL, THEY WILL GET A DENIAL AND THEN THEY'LL HAVE TO COME DOWN.

IF THEY WANTED TO GO ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR YET.

UH, MICHAEL , THAT'S ACTUALLY WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THE FALL ON DARYL'S COMMENT.

SO THE, UH, THE PRUDENT THING FOR US TO DO AT THIS POINT IS PEOPLE COMING IN FRONT OF US FOR A VARIANCE IS TO TRY TO IT, ACCORDING TO WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO PROPOSE JERRY TO COUNCIL.

UH, AND THEN AS DARRYL SAID, THE BONAFIDE REQUEST WOULD BE COMING FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE, UM, APPLYING FRESH.

CAUSE WE HAVE SOME THAT ARE ALREADY EXISTING, THAT THEY'RE STARTED GETTING DIME JOBS ON THEM.

AND THEN IT'S COMING BEFORE US.

IS THAT A CORRECT PERCEPTION THERE, JERRY? YEAH.

THE, THE, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HAVING TO GO THROUGH RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, IF THEY DON'T WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE COUNCIL DOES IT, I HAVE TO DO LIKE A THIRD PUBLIC HEARING.

I HAVE TO PICK UP A NEWSPAPER AD.

THAT'S TALKING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE WHILE BEFORE I CAN, UM, YOU KNOW, GET THIS THROUGH COUNCIL, PROBABLY I'M GUESSING THE END OF JULY, PROBABLY EARLY AUGUST, UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE OF THE BREAK.

UM, BUT SO, YEAH, SO IT WOULD BE REALLY UP TO SOMEBODY IF THEY WANT TO GO KEEP MOVING FORWARD OR IF THEY'D RATHER JUST WAIT.

UM, BUT, UH, UNTIL THE COUNCIL ACTUALLY PASSES THE ORDINANCE, THE ONLY OPTION RIGHT NOW IS THE VARIOUS, THANK YOU, BROOKE.

I SEE YOUR HAND UP.

WE CAN KIND OF USE YOUR WORDING AS GUIDANCE FOR HEARING THIS CORRECTLY.

I HAVE A, UH, JUST A QUICK REQUEST THEN.

AND YOU SAID, ELAINE, THE WORDING THAT HOW YOU'RE GOING TO TRAIN THE ORDINANCE THAT WE KNOW WHAT TO LOOK FOR, OR IF WE'RE HEARING THESE CASES BEFORE IT'S CHANGED,

[00:25:01]

SURE.

I CAN DO THAT.

YEAH, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

JESSICA, I SEE YOUR HAND UP.

CAN WE HAVE A, MAYBE SUGGEST TO POTENTIAL APPLICANTS TO JUST HANG ON A COUPLE MORE MONTHS AND SAVE THEM $3,000? CAUSE THAT WOULD BE AWESOME.

I DO.

I DO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, PERSUADE THEM TO WAIT, BUT SOME OF THEM JUST CAN'T, UM, DUE TO THEIR CLIENT WANTING TO MOVE FORWARD.

SO THAT'S DEFINITELY NOT UP TO ME.

IT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT AND THEIR CLIENTS OF COURSE, BUT AT LEAST NOW THAT WE HAVE A SORT OF LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL AND AN END DATE ISH, MAYBE THAT WILL HELP.

I'M HOPING.

YEAH, FOR SURE.

I'LL DEFINITELY LET THEM KNOW.

A, UH, DISCUSSION OR, UH, ON THE, UH, MARCH 8TH, UH, BOARD ACTIVITY REPORT.

WERE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS THIS, THE REST OPEN? OKAY.

SEEING NONE, UH, MR. , THANK YOU AGAIN FOR COMING OUT AND EXPLAINING THAT.

AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO, UH, HAVING, UH, THE INFORMATION REQUESTED FROM THE EAST SO THAT, UH, WE CAN MAKE, UH, THOUGHTFUL, UM, EDUCATION, UH, JUDGEMENTS.

HERE WE GO ON, UM, ON WHAT WE, UH, UH, GOING TO BE DOING BECAUSE YEAH.

YOU KNOW, SIGNING CASES, UH, COME UP WITH SOME REGULARITY AND STUFF.

SURE.

AND AGAIN, MY APOLOGIES THAT THIS HAS TAKEN SO LONG, UM, BUT HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET IT OFF YOUR PLATE AND YOU WON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE LEASEES ANY LONGER.

UM, MOVING BACK TO OUR, UH, NEW BUSINESS ITEMS, LET'S GO TO F1.

THIS IS

[F-1 Discussion of the March 8, 2021 Board activity report]

IS THERE ANY, ANY DISCUSSIONS? OKAY.

NONE.

WE'LL JUST ACCEPT IT AS IT IS.

UM, LET'S GO TO F TWO,

[F-2 Discussion and possible action regarding Election of Officers]

UH, AND, UH, THIS IS GOING TO BE A DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING ELECTION OF OFFICERS.

OH, I'M, I'M MOVING ALREADY.

I'M NOT, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A NOMINATION BEFORE I GET NOMINATED AND HAVE TO SAY NO TO NOMINATE, UH, JESSICA COHEN FOR CHAIR AND MELISSA TO CONTINUE AS OUR CO-CHAIR IF THEY WILL ACCEPT ALYSSA.

WE HAVE AN ACCEPTANCE OF HOW MANY, EVEN MELISSA, ARE YOU OKAY, PERFECT.

SORRY.

I'M HAVING A PATIO IS WHO'S THAT? I CAN'T SEEM TO CONTROL IT.

THERE'S A BLUETOOTH DEVICE THAT PLAYING MUSIC IN THE BACKGROUND AND I CAN'T TURN IT OFF.

RIGHT.

ARE YOU OKAY WITH, UH, UH, CONTINUING YOUR, YOUR POSITION IF I FEAR? ALL RIGHT.

UH, SO IS, UH, SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY, UH, MICHAEL, IS THERE A SECOND? UH, WE HAVE A SECOND BY BROOK MAINLY.

UM, OKAY.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLE.

THIS IS TO, UH, HAVE JESSICA AND THIS, UH, JESSICA IS, UH, UH, AND, AND, UH, WELL, MELISSA IS ALREADY VICE CHAIR.

UH, AND, UH, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTINUED SERVICE IN THAT ROLE.

UH, MELISSA.

UM, SO, UH, JESSICA WOULD TAKE, UH, UH, HER POSITION AT THE END OF THIS MEETING, UH, FOR ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER.

SO, UH, AFTER TODAY YOU HAVE A QUESTION OF THE CHAIR, UM, SO YOU WOULD BE THE PERSON TO SPEAK TO.

SO, UH, THIS IS, UH, AGAIN TO SUPPORT THE, UH, JESSICA COHEN AS CHAIR AND MELISSA HOFFMAN.

WE'RE GONNA SPICE SHARE, BUT BAILEY YES.

UH, THIS THE THRONE, UM, MELISSA HOFFMAN.

DON LAYTON BURWELL.

UH, WELL MCDANIEL, YES.

DARRYL PRUITT.

UH, AND, UH, IT IS PROBABLY THE HARDEST THING FOR ME ABOUT THIS WHOLE TRANSITION IN MY LIFE, WHICH IS ALL GOOD.

UH, MICHAEL VAN OWEN AND NICOLE WAIT.

UH, YOU GUYS, UH, AND, UH, AND, UH, W YOU KNOW, WHAT I'D LIKE TO SAY, UM, UH, IS, UH, I, I FULLY EXPECTED TO, UH, UH, UH, UH, SEE OUT MY, MY TERM, UH, UH, AND THINGS CHANGE AS LIFE, UH, DOES, UH, UH, PERIODICALLY, UM, AND IT HAS BEEN, IT'S BEEN AN HONOR TO, UH, TO SERVE WITH YOU GUYS.

[00:30:01]

UM, BUT, UH, I WILL MISS SEEING YOU GUYS, SO, UH, EVERY MONTH IN, UH, GETTING IMPORTANT WORK, I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND THESE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, AND, UH, AND HAVE BEEN ON THIS BOARD FOR THE LAST FIVE.

SO I REALLY, IT'S BEEN A HUGE BLESSING, MY LIFE, A REAL BEDROOM, MY GAP.

AND I THANK YOU ALL MR. CHAIR, THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND TAKING IT.

I KNOW IT WAS SORT OF SURPRISED ON YOU AS WELL, TAKING IT, BUT YOU'VE DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB.

YOU'VE REALLY KEPT THE MEETINGS MOVING.

IT'S BEEN, UH, PROBABLY SOME OF THE MOST EFFICIENT OR TENURE THAT I'VE SEEN, THAT WE'VE KEPT THINGS ROLLING AND ACTUALLY GOTTEN OUT EARLY A FEW TIMES, WHICH IS REALLY UNUSUAL IN OUR PAST HISTORY.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP.

AND I ALSO THINK, BELIEVE AT LEAST SINCE THE LAST 14 WILL NOT HAVE BEEN TO BE APPOINTED 15 YEARS OR WHATEVER IT'S BEEN, I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD.

THIS IS ACTUALLY THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE HAD WOMEN SERVING AS BOTH CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR OF THIS BOARD.

SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE LEADERSHIP THAT WE HAVE COMING IN AS WELL.

ABSOLUTELY, ABSOLUTELY.

I THINK YOU GUYS ARE IN GOOD HANDS WITH JESSICA.

SHE AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS FOR HER, UH, AS LONG AS I'VE KNOWN THAT I WAS NEEDING TO STEP DOWN AND, UH, I THINK YOU'RE, YEAH, YOU'RE DOING GREAT.

THE OTHER THING I'D LIKE TO SAY IS, UH, UH, A THANK YOU TO ELAINE AND LEE AND DIANA WHO I, I, I DON'T THINK IT'S ON WITH US TONIGHT, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, AS, AS SUPPORT FOR THE BOARD, I COULDN'T ASK FOR TWO GREATER PEOPLE.

UH, YOU GUYS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN THERE FOR ME AND, UH, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, YOUR WORK IS IMPECCABLE AND, UH, ELAINE AND I WERE COMMISERATING EARLIER ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT, UH, WE'VE KIND OF GOTTEN THIS THING GOING AND, AND, UH, IT'S BEEN WORKING REALLY WELL AND IT'S, IT CHANGES HARM.

SO, UM, I REALLY APPRECIATE BOTH OF YOU GUYS A WHOLE LOT, SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

AND, AND DIANA TO AN EXTENSION.

I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING TO DON.

UM, DON'T WANT TO, CAUSE I'M GOING TO CRY, BUT I DO WANT TO SAY DITTO WHAT MICHAEL SAID, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR GUIDANCE AND YOUR HELP.

I FEEL LIKE WITHOUT YOU, WE WENT IN ALL THE ACTION WE'VE GOTTEN AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE A SMOOTH RUNNING MEETINGS AS WE HAVE HAD, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU FOR THAT.

NO, THANK YOU.

THANKS.

UM, AND THIS IS A DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE HB 1475.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, LET'S MOVE ALONG THEN.

UM, SO THE NEXT ITEM, UM, IS, UH, F THREE,

[F-3 Discussion and possible action regarding HB 1475 BOA (Lee Simmons)]

UM, AND THIS IS A, UH, A, UH, UH, THING THAT CAME BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE THAT AFFECTS DOA SPECIFICALLY.

SO LIKE ASK LEE TO, UH, SPEAK TO WHAT IT IS AND WHAT DID, UH, UH, IN, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE BOARD NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT THAT.

UM, SO ALTERNATELY THEY'RE REALLY SURE.

CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? OKAY.

I KNOW I'VE BEEN HAVING SOME AUDIO DIFFICULTIES HERE.

AM I COMING THROUGH? YEAH.

IN THIS CASE, UM, LA, UH, COMPLIANCE WOULD ALSO RESULT IN THE UNREASONABLE ENCROACHMENT ON AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OR EASEMENT.

HB 1475 IS A, A BILL THAT WAS INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE SYRIA, UH, EARLIER IN JANUARY.

AND THAT'S REALLY HAS TO DO WITH ADDING ANOTHER, UM, CONSIDERATION AMONG THE LIST OF HARDSHIPS THAT THE BOA WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER WHEN FACED WITH THE VARIANTS.

UM, AND IT SORT OF LISTS OUT SEVERAL DIFFERENT, UH, BULLET POINTS.

THE FIRST BEING PRIMARILY THE FINANCIAL COST OF COMPLIANCE, IF THE FINANCIAL COST OF COMPLIANCE IS GREATER THAN 50% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE AS SHOWN ON THE MOST RECENT APPRAISAL ROLE CERTIFIED TO THE ASSESSOR FOR THE MUNICIPALITY UNDER A TITLE 26 OF THE TAX CODE, UH, ANOTHER BULLET POINT.

ANOTHER REQUIREMENT THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO FIND IS THAT COMPLIANCE WOULD RESULT IN A LOSS TO THE LOT ON WHICH THE STRUCTURE IS LOCATED UP, UH, AT LEAST 25% OF THE AREA IN WHICH THE DEVELOPMENT MAY PHYSICALLY OCCUR.

UM, A THIRD IS THAT COMPLIANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE STRUCTURE, NOT BEING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF A MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE, UH, BUILDING CODE OR OTHER REQUIREMENT.

AND I THINK THAT IS SOMEWHAT IN LINE WITH WHAT YOU ALREADY TENDS TO CONSIDER.

UM, I THINK THEY'RE JUST CLARIFYING IT FOR THIS, IN THIS, IN THIS POINT,

[00:35:01]

I, AGAIN, I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DUPLICATIVE OF WHAT YOU ALL CONSIDER ALREADY, AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST THE MUNICIPALITY CONSIDERS THE STRUCTURE TO BE A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE.

UM, THIS WAS RECEIVED ON THE, UH, HOUSE FLOOR THIS MORNING.

UM, I'M NOT SURE WHEN THEY'RE SCHEDULED TO SET IT FOR PUBLIC HEARING.

UM, I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM OUR INTER-GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS ABOUT THAT MY, UH, LEGAL ANALYSIS OF THIS BILL, UH, IN MY OPINION, WHEN IT WAS FIRST FILED, UH, WAS NEUTRAL, UH, BECAUSE I FELT LIKE THE BILL SPECIFIES CERTAIN GROUNDS TO DETERMINE WHETHER COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE WOULD CONSTITUTE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.

I THINK THIS IS ONE MORE CONSIDERATION.

MY, MY ONLY CONCERN IS, UM, HOW, HOW DO WE REALLY, UH, HOW DOES THE BOARD REALLY QUANTIFY THE FINANCIAL COST OF COMPLIANCE? AND I'M, I'M HOPING THAT THROUGH, UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS AND HOPEFULLY THROUGH TESTIMONY THAT THE, UH, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WILL BE ABLE TO SORT OF TEASE THAT OUT SO THAT YOU HAVE A MUCH CLEARER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THE PROCESS SHOULD WORK WHEN THEY ADD THIS HARDSHIP, UM, TO THE LIST THAT YOU'RE ALREADY CONSIDERING.

SO THAT WAS MY ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

THAT'S WHAT THE BILL DOES.

UH, IT'S THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE A FINANCIAL ASPECT THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE AMONG THE LIST OF HARDSHIPS.

AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME, UH, GETTING USED TO THAT AND, AND, AND, AND READING THE TESTIMONY OF, UH, WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY FILED, BUT, UM, I'M HAPPY TO CONTINUE MONITORING IT.

AND WITH THAT, IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO, UH, TRY TO ANSWER THEM.

I DO.

I HAVE, UH, JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, I WAS ALWAYS, I WAS UNDERSTOOD THAT ECONOMICS COULD NOT BE BROUGHT INTO THE DETERMINATION OF A VARIANCE.

I MEAN, THAT IS LIKE THE HARD AND FAST GOLDEN RULE OF VARIANCES.

PEOPLE CAN'T SAY THEY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY, OR THEY CAN'T SAY IT'S A HARDSHIP FINANCIALLY, BECAUSE THAT'S JUST A BEDROCK OF A VARIANT IS ECONOMICS CAN NOT BE BROUGHT INTO IT YET.

NOW THEY'RE GOING TO BRING ECONOMICS INTO IT.

SO DOES THIS MEAN THAT ECONOMICS AND OTHER AREAS CAN BE CONSIDERED? I MEAN, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THIS.

I JUST HAVE A REALLY REAL ISSUE WITH THE FINANCIAL PART OF IT, BECAUSE THIS BILL IS FAIRLY TAILORED TO, YOU KNOW, SUCH THINGS AS THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY.

UM, AGAIN, UH, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS FAIRLY SPECIFIC TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S, AGAIN, IT SAYS FINANCIAL COSTS OF COMPLIANCE IS GREATER THAN 50% OF THE PRAISE VALUE, UH, WOULD LEAD TO A LOSS, UM, A POLICE 25% OF THE AREA IN WHICH DEVELOPMENT MAY PHYSICALLY OCCUR.

SO THERE ARE SOME FAIRLY SPECIFIC GUIDELINES I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER AREAS, UM, RELATED TO VARIANCES WHERE, UH, THE FINANCIAL COST OF COMPLIANCE WOULD APPLY.

SO THIS IS, THIS IS SORT OF AN OUTLIER MR. TORRES.

SO LEE, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, IS THAT IT'S, IT'S GOING TO BE NARROWLY TAILORED OR JUST THIS TYPE OF SITUATION.

SO SOMEBODY ELSE COMES IN, UH, I MEAN, HOW ARE IT SORT OF PUTS THE BURDEN OF PROOF UPON US OR THE, UM, FOR US TO BE ESTIMATE OR TO KNOW WHAT'S THE COST OF, CAUSE I WAS AN ESTIMATOR AND A GENERAL CONTRACTOR FOR 30 YEARS ON BOTH COMMERCIAL AND, AND, AND, UH, RESIDENTIAL IN ESTIMATE ESTIMATES, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN, THEY CAN VARY WIDELY NOT TO MENTION IF SOMEBODY IS GOING FOR AN APPRAISED VALUE.

I'VE CONTESTED MY APPRAISAL EVERY YEAR FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS.

IS FOLLOW UP WITH OUR INTER-GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS OFFICE.

AND I'VE ALWAYS GOT TO COME DOWN.

AND SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S GOING TO BE SOMEWHAT SUBJECTIVE IN THAT MANNER.

MY, UH, I'M, I'M CON I'M CURIOUS, SO YOU'RE SAYING IT'S ALREADY COME OUT OF COMMITTEE.

THE HOUSE HAS ALREADY VOTED ON IT, UH, OR THE HOUSE HASN'T VOTED ON IT YET, BUT, BUT IS THERE A SENATE COMPANION BILL? AND IF, IF THERE ISN'T, IF THE HOUSE WAS TO VOTE ON IT, IT'S STILL GOT TO GO TO THE SENATE FOR APPROVAL.

ANY CHANGES MADE HAS COME BACK DOWN TO THE HOUSE VOTE APPROVAL BEFORE IT GOES TO THE GOVERNOR'S DESK FOR SIGNING.

SO WHAT'S IT LOOK LIKE THE POSSIBILITY OF A BEING ABLE TO BE, MAKE IT TO THE GOVERNOR'S DESK BEFORE SANDY DIE? I, I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT LEVEL OF SUPPORT THIS HAS IN THE HOUSE, MUCH LESS THAN THE SENATE.

UM, I, WHAT I COULD DO

[00:40:01]

UM, I KNOW THAT THEY'RE MONITORING ALL LAND USE RELATED BILLS, OBVIOUSLY TO MAKE ME ANALYZE THIS ONE, I WOULD SAY TO YOUR POINT ABOUT SORT OF THE, THE ONUS BEING PUT ON THE BOARD TO, TO, TO FIND THAT I, MY READING IS THAT THE ONUS IS ON THE APPLICANTS TO CLEARLY SHOW YOU.

AND I, I THINK THESE ARE VERY HIGH BARS TO BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE TO THE BOARD THAT THEY WOULD SUFFER THIS KIND OF A LOSS.

UM, IT'S A LITTLE BIT NEBULOUS.

UM, I THINK IT WOULD BE A GREAT CHALLENGE TO SHOW THAT IT WOULD, UH, LEAD TO, UH, DEPRECIATION AND VALUE AND A SHORTENING OF THE, OF THE AIR OF THE DEVELOPABLE AREA ON WHICH THEY CAN ACTUALLY CONSTRUCT.

YES, WE CAN, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING IS THEY'RE GOING TO BE BRINGING AN ESTIMATE TO US OF WHAT IT'S PROJECTED TO COST IN ORDER FOR THEM TO DO THIS WORK.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I CAN, I CAN PUNCH HOLES TO THAT.

I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT IT, BUT THE ESTIMATES VARY WIDELY AS IN BEING WORKING WITH THE CITY, YOU KNOW, UH, EVEN WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE COMPETITIVE BID PROCESS, THEY COULD WAIT, THERE'S A VERY WIDE RANGE IN THERE THAT COULD KNOCK IT OUT OF THE 50% DEPENDING, BUT IT IT'S JUST SEEMS LIKE, YEAH, THE BAR WAS HIGH, BUT IT ALSO SEEMS LIKE IT'S STILL VERY, VERY, AS YOU SAID, YOU'RE NEBULOUS AS TO BEING ABLE TO REALLY CONCRETE SHOW ME AS AN ESTIMATOR AND I'M THROWING ON MY, I STILL HAVE MY PROGRAM HERE.

CAUSE LIKE YOU CAN'T, IT'S CONSTRUCTION LIKE THE MOB, YOU CAN'T GET AWAY FROM IT.

THEY KEEP PULLING YOU BACK IN.

AND SO I SIT DOWN AND I'M ESTIMATING THINGS FOR MY HONEYDEWS HERE AT HOME.

I STILL HAVE MY ESTIMATING PROGRAM.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE VERY HARD FOR SOMEBODY TO GIVE ME AN ESTIMATE AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PROVIDE THAT ESTIMATE WITHIN THE, UM, OUR PACKET.

AND IT, AND IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE PRETTY WELL BROKEN DOWN TO A UNIT COST TYPE OF ESTIMATE SO THAT WE CAN REALLY VERIFY WHETHER THIS IS ACCURATE.

I DON'T THINK THE PUBLIC REALIZES WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE GETTING INTO.

RIGHT.

I COULD JUMP ON.

I LOOKED AT THE BILL TODAY AS WELL.

AND THE WAY THE PROPOSED STATUTE IS WORDED IS THE FINANCIAL FACTOR OF HARDSHIP WITH THE 50% RULE IS SOMETHING THAT MAY CONSIDER.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT NECESSARILY HAS TO PROVE IN ORDER TO OBTAIN THE VARIANCE.

VERY GOOD.

NICOLE.

SO THE WORD MAY IS WHERE WE'RE AT.

ANY FINANCIAL COMPLIANCE HARDSHIP COME OUT OF THE STATE.

AND THEY ALSO USE THE WORD OR SO, YOU KNOW, ANY, ANY ONE OF THESE THINGS, AN APPLICANT CAN ARTICULATE TO THE BOARD, YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONSIDER EVERY ONE OF THEM.

AND THE APPLICANT CERTAINLY DOESN'T HAVE TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF EVERY SINGLE BULLET POINT.

LEE.

I HAD A QUESTION.

UM, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE FINANCIAL COST OF COMPLIANCE, UM, I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO KIND OF KEEP ON TOP OF THE TESTIMONY, UH, AND ALL OF THAT.

BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A PHRASE LIKE THAT, IT SEEMS LIKE AS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WE HAVE SOME DISCRETION IN HOW WE INTERPRET THAT.

CORRECT.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE COULD INCLUDE, OR WE COULD EXCLUDE CERTAIN THINGS LIKE, UH, FEES PAID TO, UH, CERTAIN PROFESSIONALS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BECAUSE WE COULD JUST CONSIDER THAT TO NOT BE A COST OF COMPLIANCE.

CORRECT.

I THINK THAT THAT IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

AND, UH, UM, AND, AND, AND THE BOARD HAS THE DISCRETION TO ADD, UM, DIRECTION AND, UH, CERTAIN CONDITIONS ON APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE THAT INCLUDES A FINDING OF THE FINANCIAL HARDSHIP.

I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE THE FINANCIAL COST OF COMPLIANCE INTO THE SPEEDING TICKET.

I GOT THE OTHER DAY BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY THE SPEEDING TICKETS.

SO IT'S JUST TO, YOU KNOW, THROW THAT OUT THERE FOR HUMOR.

BUT I THINK OUR KEY STILL LIES IN THE WORDING BEING, SHOUT, NOT BEING SHELLED AND MADE AND BEING, OR THAT'S GOING TO BE THE BIG ONE FROM A CONTRACTUAL STANDPOINT.

AND I THINK JUST FROM A WIDER CONTEXT, WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT I THINK THAT APPLICANTS HAVE BEEN PUSHING FOR THIS KIND OF THING FOR A LONG TIME, BECAUSE IT'S EXPENSIVE.

UM, IT'S EXPENSIVE TO DO THE THINGS THAT THEY WANT TO DO TO THEIR HOMES.

I THINK THE WAY THIS IS DRAFTED DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEET THAT, THAT HOPE OR THAT GOAL THAT APPLICANTS HAVE BEEN LOBBYING FOR, BUT IT IS THE FIRST STEP THAT I'VE SEEN

[00:45:01]

WELL, IT'S ALSO ONE WHERE PEOPLE WHO HAVE GONE AHEAD AND NOW ARE ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS FOR IT, RATHER THAN ASKING FOR PERMISSION, IF THEY'RE LOOKING FOR COVER AND IT'S NOT REALLY GOING TO GIVE THEM THE COVER THAT I THINK THEY, THEY THINK IT'S GOING TO GIVE THEM, UH, LEAH, UH, ONE QUESTION ACTUALLY.

SO WHEN I READ THIS, I WAS LESS CONCERNED ABOUT THE FINITE, WELL, THAT'S THE WRONG WORD.

I WAS LESS STRUCK BY THE, BY THE ECONOMIC OR THE FINANCIAL COMPONENT THAN I WAS BY THE SECOND COMPONENT OF WHETHER COMPLAINANT COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF AT LEAST 25% OF THE AREA UPON WHICH DEVELOPMENT MAY PHYSICALLY OCCUR UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD THE DEVELOPMENT OCCUR? WOULD THAT BE IF THE VARIANCE WAS NOT GRANTED OR IF, UH, WELL, I, I I'LL, I'LL ASK YOU, I MEAN, LIKE WHAT, WHAT DID THAT REFER TO TWENTY-FIVE PERCENT OF WHAT, UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES 25% OF THE PRESENT DEVELOPABLE AREA UNDER ALL OTHER APPLICABLE REGULATION OR 25% OF THE DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPABLE ERIC, AFTER THE PROPOSED VARIANCE FOR GRANTED THAT BOARD MEMBER, I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK INTO THE ORIGINAL TESTIMONY.

I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T, UH, WATCH THE, UH, TESTIMONY WHEN IT WAS FIRST LAID OUT IN COMMITTEE.

UH, SO I WOULD FOLLOW UP, IT COULD BE THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT WE WERE ALLOWED TO DEVELOP ON.

UH, BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW TO A CERTAIN DEGREE, WHETHER THAT'S THE CASE.

SO WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD LOOK AT THAT.

AND I THINK IF WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A FOLLOW-UP, UH, FROM THIS DISCUSSION, ONE THING I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND IS THE CONTEXT FOR THE PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, LIKE THE DENOMINATOR, I SUPPOSE, FOR, FOR FIGURING THAT OUT.

AND THEN YOUR OPINION, OBVIOUSLY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S DUE TO HER OPINION OF WHETHER OR NOT THIS BOARD OR THE CITY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO LEGAL ACTION UNDER THAT PARTICULAR PROVISION.

IF WE DENIED A VARIANCE AND AGAIN, IT'S JUST ONE OKAY.

OF SEVERAL ITEMS. YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO MAKE A FINDING ON THAT, BUT IT IS ONE OF SEVERAL CONSIDERATIONS.

THE WAY NUMBER ONE IS WRITTEN, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THAT WOULD NOT APPLY TO NEW CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE A STRUCTURE ON THE CERTIFIED APPRAISAL ROLE, IF THERE'S NOTHING ON THE PROPERTY AND THEY'RE COMING TO US FOR A VARIANCE TO PUT SOMETHING NEW ON THE PROPERTY.

RIGHT.

I MEAN, IF, IF WE CAN'T GET THERE, I MEAN, THERE'S NO REASON TO SORT OF WALK THROUGH THE PARADE OF HORRIBLES, BUT NUMBER, BUT NUMBER TWO IN PARTICULAR, I THINK WAS, WAS, UH, GOT MY ATTENTION, UH, SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF TIMES WE'VE SEEN LOTS THAT HAD, THAT, YOU KNOW, HAD, UM, AN UNUSUAL CONFIGURATION WHERE WE DENIED A VARIANCE BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE, UH, THAT WOULD OTHERWISE PUT A LOT OF THE LOT INTO PLAY, UH, THAT, THAT WASN'T FOR VARIOUS REASONS, WHETHER THAT WAS THE REASONS OF SLOPE OR THAT WAS REASONS RELATED TO LAKE AUSTIN, THE, THE LAKE AUSTIN, UM, ZONING IN PARTICULAR, BUT THEN ALSO THINK, BUT THEN ALSO THINGS RELATED TO SLOPE AND THEN ALSO LOTS THAT ARE FORMED BY MEETS AND BOUNDS AT UNUSUAL, UM, LOCATIONS.

I THINK I WAS, I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT JUST CAUSE WE'VE SEEN SOME CASES WHERE THAT'S COME UP.

TO MEET, UH, PARKING REQUIREMENTS, THEY HAD TO CUT DOWN A HERITAGE TREE AND GET A VARIANCE OF VARIOUS KINDS.

THAT'S CONCERNING TO ME BECAUSE WE ALSO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THINGS LIKE HERITAGE TREES, ELECTRIC EASEMENTS, AND WOULD THEY START USING THAT AS, I MEAN, WE ALREADY DO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, BUT IF THE 25%, JUST THE BUILDING SETBACK LINES, YOU KNOW, 25% OF THAT, OR 25% OF, YOU KNOW, TAKING OUT SOMETHING LIKE ELECTRIC EASEMENT, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WOULD TAKE OUT 25% OF MOST, LOTS, BUT SOME HAVE THEM.

SO THINGS LIKE THAT, I THINK, YEAH, I I'M WITH ROM NEEDS TO BE EXPLAINED A LITTLE BIT MORE BROOKE.

I WAS ACTUALLY THINKING ABOUT THAT CASE THAT WE SAW.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER THIS, BUT IT WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WHERE THERE WAS A, WHERE THERE WAS A TRIPLEX THAT WAS NEVER FORMALLY, UH, UH, UH, USED AS A TRIPLEX.

AND IT HAD A COUPLE OF METERS ON IT.

AND IT SORT OF WAS ONE OF THESE BUILDINGS THAT HAD BECOME A TRIPLEX OVER TIME.

AND, AND WE, AND THEY, THEY ASKED US FOR A VARIANCE AND I REALIZED THE SITUATION WOULD HAVE TO BE REVERSED HERE.

THEY ASKED US FOR A VARIANCE BECAUSE IF WE HAD DENIED IT, WE WOULD HAVE ESSENTIALLY PUT THEM IN A POSITION WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO CUT DOWN A HERITAGE STREET IN ORDER TO MEET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

OBVIOUSLY THAT'S NOT RELEVANT TO THIS, EXCEPT THAT IF THE CASE WERE FLIPPED AND SOMEONE WAS ASKING US FOR A VARIANCE TO CONVERT A TRIPLEX INTO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IN AN ORDER, OR IN ORDER TO MAKE PARK FOR HER, A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IN ORDER TO TRIPLEX.

AND IN ORDER

[00:50:01]

WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO ALLOW THAT IF THIS IN FACT WAS A HARDSHIP AND ALL OTHER THE CRITERIA WERE, WERE MET, NOT HAD TO, BUT YOU, YOU GET THE IDEA HERE IS THAT WE TRY NOT TO BE CAPRICIOUS IN THIS PROVISION IN PARTICULAR, GOT MY ATTENTION.

WHAT I'LL SAY ABOUT THIS, IS IT IN LAW YET? UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS AND STUFF.

SO I, WE COULD POP UP THE MINCE WORDS, UM, ALL NIGHT LONG ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE IMPLICATIONS ARE, BUT, UH, IT'S GOT, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, IT'S GOT TO GO THROUGH, UH, THE SENATE.

UH, IT'S GOT TO GO TO THE GOVERNOR'S DESK.

UM, OBVIOUSLY IF ANY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE SPECIFIC INTEREST IN THIS OR CONCERNS, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE STILL, UM, UH, PUBLIC HEARINGS AT THE LEGISLATURE, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO ADVOCATE FOR WHAT WE THINK IS BEST AS WELL.

UH, AGAIN, NOT KNOWING EXACTLY WHERE THIS CAME ABOUT.

SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS THANK LEE FOR, FOR TELLING US ABOUT WHERE IT'S AT RIGHT NOW AND WHAT THE IMPLICATIONS ARE, UH, OR, UH, OR AT LEAST YOUR TAKE AT THIS STAGE.

AND THEN ONCE, UH, ASSUMING THAT IT DOES GO INTO LAW, THEN WE MAY NEED AN UPDATE, UM, ABOUT ANY CHANGES TO WHAT IT IS, HAS BEEN PROPOSED NOW AND, AND, AND HOW IT AFFECTS THE DAY-TO-DAY WORKINGS OF WHAT WE BELIEVE.

UH, ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY BEFORE WE MOVE ON? ALL RIGHT.

LET'S MOVE ON.

WE KNOW DON LIKES TO GET THINGS MOVING.

UM, SO THE NEXT, UH, NEXT TWO ITEMS ARE F FOUR

[Items F-4 & F-5]

AND F FIVE.

AND SINCE WE'RE WAITING ON NEW APPOINTMENTS FOR THE FULL BOARD, THIS IS, HAS TO DO WITH, UH, TALKING ABOUT A NEW WORK GROUP AND ALSO, UH, TRAININGS.

UH, I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND JUST, UM, TABLE THESE UNTIL, UM, THE NEXT MEETING.

WE'RE HOPEFULLY WE'LL HAVE A PRETTY CLOSE TO A FULL BOARD.

JESSICA.

I SEE YOUR HAND UP CHANCE WE COULD GET THESE SCHEDULED NOW.

SO NEW BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE COMING IN FOR THE NEXT MEETINGS, WE'LL BE WALKING IN PREPARED, UH, TO GO AHEAD AND START, UH, SCHEDULING THE, UM, THE TRAININGS.

CORRECT.

I MEAN, WE SHOULD HAVE ALMOST EVERYBODY BY THE NEXT MEETING AT LEAST.

I MEAN, YEAH.

WHAT I'D SUGGEST IS THAT YOU, UM, UH, W AFTER THE MEETING GET WITH ELAINE, UM, AND, AND SEE WHAT AGAIN, BECAUSE THIS HAS TO BE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, AND, AND SINCE WE'RE STILL DOING THINGS, THE, UH, UM, WEBEX AT THIS POINT, UM, THERE'S ANOTHER, I JUST TOOK IT LAST THURSDAY.

AND JUST MATTER OF FACT, PRACTICE DID MY OATH AND STUFF TODAY BEFORE THE MEETING.

SO, UM, THERE'S ANOTHER ONE SCHEDULED FOR THE 19TH, SO HOPEFULLY THEY CAN GET INTO THAT ONE.

I'M TALKING ABOUT OUR INTERNAL TRAINING.

OH, I SEE.

UM, THE, THE, NOT, NOT, NOT TO BE ON THE BOARD, BUT ONCE WE'RE ON THE BOARD TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, BRINGING NEW MEMBERS ON, ON, ON BOARD TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE DO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE SORTS OF THINGS, UH, THAT WE HAD BEEN TALKING ABOUT, UM, EVEN PRIOR TO NEW STAFFING WITH THE BOARD.

SO, UM, BUT THEN AGAIN, UM, IT NEEDS TO BE COORDINATED.

I THINK WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO HAVING THAT HAPPEN.

AND THEN WE SAID, HOLD IT LET'S WAIT, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A NEW BOARD MEMBERS COMING ON.

SO LET'S NOT BE TRAININGS ONLY, UM, HAVE THEM BE LEFT OUT OF THAT.

SO.

ANYTHING ELSE, UH, OR, OR FUTURE BUSINESS ITEMS? WE JUST THANK YOU, DON.

UH, ANY, ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS,

[F-7 Announcements]

THE PRIVILEGE TO SERVE WITH YOU.

THANKS VERY MUCH, JOHN.

THANKS FOR YOU.

YEAH, I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS.

YOU GUYS ARE THE BINS.

YOU CAN CHECK THIS ONE OUT, PROBABLY BEING THE QUICKEST ONE WE'VE GOT OUT OF WITHOUT HAVING, MAYBE IN THAT IT HADN'T BEEN POSTPONED ALTOGETHER.

UM, SO, UM, UH, WITH NO OTHER BUSINESS ON OUR, UM, PLATE, I WILL, UH, ADJOURN, UH, OUR MAY 10TH MEETING, UH, 2021, MY LAST, UH, ROLE AS CHAIR.

AND I THANK YOU ALL.

OH, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP? YEAH, JUST QUICKLY.

I JUST QUICKLY WANTED TO SEE MAYBE JESSICA AND ELAINE COULD GET TOGETHER AND SEE IF MAYBE THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY FOR TWO JUNE MEETINGS, JUST TO TRY AND BREAK IT UP.

I'M ALREADY GOING TO TALK TO HER ABOUT IT.

LYNN WORKED SO HARD TO TRY AND GET THESE MEETINGS DONE.

I WILL DO MY BEST.

WE'LL SEE YOU GUYS NEXT

[00:55:01]

MONTH AND WE'RE JOURNEY.

THANK YOU EVERYONE.

THANK YOU, DON.

AND OF COURSE, I'LL TALK TO YOU LATER.

WELCOME NICOLE.

WELCOME TO CALL THE YES.

WELCOME NEW MEMBERS.

WELCOME.