[00:00:02]
HERE CITY HALL ARE Y'ALL READY.
AND CHAMBERS, IT LOOKS LIKE ATX SCENE IS READY.
I WOULD SAY NO NEWS IS GOOD NEWS FROM THEM.
I'M GOING TO CALL THIS MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
[CALL TO ORDER]
TO ORDER AT 5:34 PM.IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A QUORUM.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL.
RON MCDANIEL ROM IS OUT TODAY.
YEAH, I BELIEVE FERRING IS RON OR KELLY.
ERIC DARRELL, PRUITT, AUGUSTINE AND RODRIGUEZ.
RICHARD SMITH IS AL NICOLE WADE.
KELLY BLOOM HERE AND CARRIE WALLER YEAR FOR RICHARD SMITH.
AND THAT'S THE ROLE? UH, JUST A FEW QUICK REMINDERS FOR EVERYONE.
SOME NOTES I GOT FROM THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, UH, FOR THE BOARD, PLEASE REMEMBER TO RAISE YOUR HAND AND WAIT TO BE CALLED ON IF I DON'T CALL ON YOU QUICK ENOUGH, IT MAYBE BECAUSE YOUR VIDEO DROPPED OUT AND I'M NOT SEEING IT.
SO JUST UNMUTE IN AN EMPTY SPOT AND LET ME KNOW THAT YOU'RE WAITING.
I'M NOT GOING TO SKIP ANYBODY.
I'LL ASK A LOT AFTER IT GETS QUIET FOR A LITTLE BIT, UH, FOR THE AUDIENCE.
ONCE THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED, OPEN DISCUSSION FROM APPLICANTS OR OPPOSITION IS NOT ALLOWED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY ASKED A QUESTION BY ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS AND SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN FORGETTING.
I NEED TO ADMINISTER THE OATH TO EVERYONE.
WHO'S GOING TO BE SPEAKING TODAY.
UH, SO JUST A VERBAL OR YOU'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO AGREE TO THIS, BUT DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU WILL GIVE TONIGHT WILL BE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE BY ACCEPTING THIS OR BY SPEAKING, YOU'RE ACCEPTING THIS OATH.
DID I MISS ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY, SO LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM.
[A. DISCUSSION AND REQUESTED ACTION ITEM A-1 Staff requests approval June 14, 2021 draft minutes On-Line Link: Item A-1]
THE STAFF REQUEST APPROVAL OF THE JUNE 14TH, 2021 DRAFT MINUTES.I'M SORRY, WHO WAS THE MOTION MAKER? OKAY.
BROOKE'S GIVING YOU THE SECOND.
YEAH, THAT WAS, THAT WAS QUICK.
WELL, MCDANIEL, HE'S NOT HERE.
I ACTUALLY WATCHED THE VIDEO TODAY, SO I'LL SEE.
[B. DISCUSSION AND REQUESTED ACTION ITEM B-1 Staff and Applicant requests for postponement and withdraw of items posted on this Agenda ]
AND WITHDRAWALS, UH, ITEM D ONE C 15 20 20 0 0 3 8, 4 14 OR NINE.POSSUM TROT IS REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 10TH.
ITEM D 22, SORRY, 20, 20 TO 2020, JANUARY 10TH, 2022 G.
AND THEN A
[00:05:01]
ITEM D NINE C 15 20 21 0 0 7 2 4, UH, 28 0 6.SPRINGWOOD AVENUE IS REQUESTING A WITHDRAWAL.
AND WE HAVE ONE MORE, UH, LATE REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT ITEM D FOR C 15 DASH 2021 DASH 0 0 6, 2 34 0 1 RIVER CREST DRIVE.
THEY'RE REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST 9TH, 20, 21 AS WELL.
DO I HAVE A MOTION OR DISCUSSION? OKAY.
DO WE NEED TO TAKE A D TWO SEPARATELY THEN? BECAUSE THEY WERE DENIED BY AUSTIN ENERGY, A CHAIR.
THIS IS LEE SIMMONS WITH A LOT OF DEPARTMENT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN UP SEPARATELY.
CAN WE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? I'D LIKE TO ADD D TOO, BECAUSE, UM, IT WAS, IT WAS OPPOSED BY AUSTIN ENERGY FOR THEM TO GET MORE INFORMATION AND GET THAT STRAIGHTENED OUT BEFORE THEY COME BACK TO US.
AND I WILL JUST POSTPONE UNTIL AUGUST.
I DON'T KNOW, UM, FROM THE APPLICANT, IF THEY NEED MORE TIME THAN THAT.
SO THAT'S D TWO C 15 20 21 0 0 5 6 FOR 3006 GLENVIEW AVENUE.
AND THAT'S POSTPONE TILL AUGUST 9TH.
WE DO HAVE SOMEONE TO SPEAK ON THAT IN OPPOSITION.
SO I THINK WE SHOULD HEAR THEM.
SO THEN I SAY, YEAH, WELL, SINCE, SINCE WE'VE MET THEM CHAIRS, SINCE WE POSTPONED IT AND IT'S AN AUSTIN ENERGY SITUATION, WHY DON'T WE JUST HAVE THEM COME BACK AND GIVE THEIR OPINION ON I'M OKAY WITH THAT.
IF EVERYONE ELSE'S WELL, I STILL DOUBT THEIR DESIGN IS GOING TO CHANGE.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY HARM IN HEARING THEIR WORDS.
AND THEN BEING THAT THEY GO TO THE FRONT OF THE MEETING.
I MEAN, THEY MADE THE TIME TO SPEAK TO US.
I THINK WE SHOULD HEAR THEM AND JUST HEAR THEIR CONCERNS.
THE ONLY THING MELISSA IS, IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE, THE POSTPONEMENT, THE POSTPONEMENT.
IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE AUSTIN ENERGY DENIAL.
SO, UH, W WHAT WOULD YOU STILL HAVE TO REHEAR THEM? I MEAN, THEY'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK.
WE'LL HAVE TO REMEMBER WHAT THEY WERE SAYING WHEN THEY WERE OPPOSING IT.
AND IF THEY DON'T COME BACK FOR TWO OR THREE MONTHS, IF SOMETHING ELSE CHANGES ON THAT, I MEAN, I DON'T MIND HEARING THEM, BUT I JUST WANT THEM TO ALSO KNOW FOR THE RECORD THAT THEY WILL PROBABLY NEED TO COME BACK AND THE DESIGN COULD CHANGE BETWEEN NOW AND THEN I WANT TO REMEMBER WHAT I HAD FOR LUNCH.
THE COUNCIL MEMBER MACARTHUR, OUR COUNCIL MEMBER, JESUS' BOARD MEMBER.
AND I WANTED TO ASK IF THE PERSON SPEAKS TONIGHT, WILL THEY BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK AGAIN ON THE DAY THAT IT STARTS? YES.
SHOULD WE DO THE POSTPONEMENT AND WITHDRAWALS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF
I THINK THAT WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE MADAM CHAIR.
SO IF YOU'RE WILLING TO WITHDRAW OUT OF LANDMINES, I'LL AMEND THE MOTION OR BROKER YOU AMENDING THEM JUST A MINUTE.
SO THEN THIS WILL JUST BE TO WITHDRAW D NINE AND POSTPONE D ONE D FIVE AND D FOUR AND E.
WHO WAS THE SECOND ON THAT? KELLY? HIS HAND TO THE GO KELLY.
UM, IF WE'RE GOING TO HEAR AN OBJECTION TONIGHT, WHICH I'M SUPPORTIVE OF, SHOULD WE ALSO THE APPLICANT A CHANCE TO SPEAK AS WELL? IF THEY'RE HERE? YEAH.
AT LEAST SIMMONS WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
WHY DON'T WE JUST HEAR THE KEYS AND THEN MAKE THE CHOICE ON WHETHER OR NOT TO POSTPONE? I MEAN, WE'LL HAVE TO DO IT AFTERWARDS BECAUSE IT'S AN IE DENIAL, RIGHT? SO I WANT YOU TO HEAR THE OPPOSITION FOR MEMBER ONE, MADAM CHAIR, AND ALL THE YEARS I'VE BEEN UP HERE.
IF IT'S AN A AND D DENIAL, WE'VE ALWAYS POSTPONED IT.
AND THEN WHEN IT COME BACK, BOTH TO PEOPLE WHO ARE FOR IT OR AGAINST IT, UH, THEY TESTIFY AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT FOR US TO HEAR IT FROM THE APPLICANT.
HE ALREADY KNOWS HE'S GOING TO GET POSTPONED AND THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK HERE AGAIN IN TIMES OF THE ESSENCE 10 O'CLOCK I'M OUTTA HERE.
CAUSE I'VE GOT A FOUR O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING FLIGHT.
SO I'M JUST SAYING FOR THE ESSENCE OF TIME, LET'S JUST HEAR THE CASE AT ONE TIME.
SO I'LL MAKE YOU MEET IN THE MIDDLE.
WHY DON'T WE MAKE THE MOTION ON THE ORIGINAL PLUS PULMONARY WITH DOLLS, AND THEN WE'LL DECIDE, UH, D TWO SEPARATELY, UH,
[00:10:01]
VICE CHAIR.I JUST, WE HAVE ONE PERSON TO SPEAK AGAINST THE CASE.
IT MIGHT BE INFORMATION OR A WAY TO CONNECT THE APPLICANT TO THE OPPOSING PARTY.
IF THEY, I MEAN, THEY SIGNED OUT IT'S, IT'S A FEW MINUTES.
AND THEN IT'S AN AUTOMATIC POSTPONEMENT BECAUSE IT'S IT, IT'S GOT A NAVY DENIAL, BUT IN FAIRNESS, IF WE'RE GOING TO LET THE OPPOSITION SPEAK, WE NEED TO LET THE APPLICANTS SPEAK AS WELL.
SO, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALSO ASKING FOR POSTPONEMENT IN ALL FAIRNESS AT THE LAST MINUTE.
SO, AND MADAM CHAIR, IF I MAY, UM, I THINK THAT THE DISCUSSION SHOULD BE LIMITED TO THE POSTPONEMENT AND NOT TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE SINCE IT'S COMING BACK.
IS EVERYONE OKAY WITH THAT? JIMMY? WE STILL WANT TO HAVE OPPOSITION SPEAK IF THEY CAN ONLY DISCUSS THE POSTPONEMENT.
OR DO YOU WANT TO KEEP THE AMENDMENT ON AND GO AHEAD AND POSTPONE IT? EVERYTHING AT ONCE.
SO LET'S JUST GO AHEAD AND PUT ON THE WHOLE THING AT ONE TIME.
I MEAN, NOBODY ELSE CAN SPEAK, I'LL SPEAK AND I'M ALL FOR POSTPONING.
IT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK.
WELL, THEY, HE WILL KNOW HE'S GOT OPPOSITION NOW AND IT'S IN HIS BEST INTEREST TO CONTACT THEM.
AND TO THE OPPOSITION WHO WAS WANTING TO SPEAK ON A D TWO, THAT'S A JOYCE BUS.
CIANO I THINK, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
PLEASE DO COME BACK FOR WHEN THIS IS RESCHEDULED.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLE THOMAS EATS.
GREAT MOTION IS APPROVED REAL QUICK.
THAT WAS SECOND WAS, UH, BRETT.
THANK YOU WITH MICHAEL BY NOLAN MAKING THE MOTION SPEECH.
ALL RIGHT, SO LET'S GET INTO IT.
I'M GOING TO CALL THE FIRST KEY.
LET ME SCROLL BACK UP A LITTLE HERE.
[C. NEW SIGNS PUBLIC HEARING C-1 C16-2021-0010 Leah Bojo for AISD 2309 Panther Trail On-line Link: Item C-1; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting a sign variance(s) from the 1993 Land Development Code, Sign Regulations, Section 13-2-862 (G) (Signs Authorized in all Districts) from a) sign area 32 square feet (maximum allowed) to 260 square feet (requested) b) 6 feet height above grade (maximum allowed) to 33 feet (requested) in a “SF-3”, Single-Family zoning district. Note: The Interlocal Agreement between the City of Austin and the Austin Independent School District, as amended, states that the City of Austin’s ordinance and rules as they existed on January 1, 1994 shall apply throughout the term of the Interlocal Agreement. Section 13-2-862 (Signs Authorized in all Districts) (G) Information signs. These include bulletin boards, changeable copy directories, or signs relating soley to public, religious, or charitable institutions, intended for use by the institution on which the sign is located. A maximum of one information sign shall be allowed per institution. Maximum sign area of an information sign is 32 square feet; and maximum height is six feet above grade.]
VARIANCE.THIS IS ITEMS C1 C 16 20 21 0 0 1 0.
AND THIS WILL BE LEAH BOHO AS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER I SPOKE OF YOU ONLINE.
MADAM CHAIR, I WILL NOT BE PARTICIPATING IN THIS CASE.
I'LL BE UNDERSTANDING STAINING.
DID WE HAVE MS. BOHO ON THE LINE?
UM, I'M LEE VODA WITH JENNER GROUP HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT AISD, UH, IN THE SCIENCE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE ANN RICHARDS SCHOOL FOR YOUNG WOMEN LEADERS CAMPUS.
UM, THE PRINCIPAL AT THE SCHOOL, CHRISTINA WATT IS ALSO HERE ON THE LINE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE ABOUT THE SCHOOL.
SO WHEN WE'RE THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION, UM, AND I FIRST WANT TO SAY, UM, AS A STRONG SUPPORTER OF THE ANN RICHARDS SCHOOL FOR YOUNG WOMEN LEADERS, THIS IS AN APPLICATION THAT I'M PROUD TO PRESENT TO YOU, AS YOU ALL LIKELY KNOW THE ENRICHER SCHOOL FOR YOUNG WOMEN LEADERS IS AN ALL GIRLS PUBLIC SCHOOL.
AND GOVERNOR ANN RICHARDS WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN DEVELOPING THE SCHOOL'S VISION, WHICH WAS FOUNDED TO GIVE YOUNG WOMEN FROM ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED BACKGROUNDS, THE SKILLS AND CONFIDENCE NECESSARY TO PURSUE COLLEGE EDUCATIONS AND CAREERS THAT NOW STANDS AS ONE OF THE SINGLE LARGEST SINGLE GENDER PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN THE NATION.
AND AS A TRIBUTE TO THE ENDURING LEGACY OF GOVERNOR RICHARD, UM, IT HAS A VERY LONG NAME WITH A LOT OF LETTERS IN IT.
UH, BUT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT, MAN.
THE ANN RICHARDS SCHOOL FOR YOUNG WOMEN LEADERS IS LOCATED OFF OF SOUTH LAMAR NEAR THE, OF BEN WHITE, BEHIND A STRIP OF COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES THAT FRONT ON THE MAR NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
UH, UNDER THIS CLOSER VIEW OF THE SCHOOL, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE THE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES
[00:15:01]
TO THE WEST, AND THERE ARE MULTI-FAMILY BUILDINGS LARGELY SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY.AND WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE ONLY THREE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ALONG THIS PORTION OF PEACH DRIVE AND THAT THE TOWN AND COUNTRY MONTESSORI SCHOOL ALSO FRONTS ON KEEP STRIVE.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO PUT THIS SIGN ON THE NORTHERN FACADE STACEY PANTHER TRAIL, AND THIS PROPOSED SIGN IS SMALLER THAN THE SIGN THAT HAD EXISTED ON THE, ON THE PRIOR AND RICHARDS SCHOOL FACADE BEFORE IT WAS REBUILT.
UM, FOR SOME BACKGROUND HERE, WE'RE ALSO LOOKING BACK TO THE CODE THAT WAS APPLICABLE ON JANUARY 1ST, 1994, BECAUSE AISD HAS AN INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN REGARDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
UM, THE PROVISIONS AT ISSUE HERE ARE, ARE SUBSTANTIVELY SIMILAR TO THOSE THAT ARE IN THE CODE TODAY.
UM, UNDER THE 93 CODE IN SECTION 13 TO 8 61, THE SCHOOL FINDS ITSELF AT A LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SIGNED DISTRICT.
THIS MEANS THAT THE SCHOOL IS LIMITED TO PROVIDING ASSIGNED TO THOSE PERMITTED IN ALL DISTRICTS PER STATE LAW, UH, PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARE GENERALLY PERMITTED IN ALL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
THERE IS NOT LIKELY ANOTHER SITE IN THIS SPECIFIC SITUATION, WHICH IS DEVELOPED WITH A SCHOOL AND IN A RESIDENTIAL SIGNED DISTRICT YET SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES BY COMMERCIAL AND MULTI-FAMILY USES NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
SO PER SECTION 13 TO 8 62 G OF THAT OLD CODE ARE SIGNED, WOULD BE CONSIDERED AN INFORMATION SIGN AS IT RELATES TO PUBLIC RELIGIOUS OR CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS INTENDED FOR USE BY THE INSTITUTION ON WHICH THE SIGN IS LOCATED.
THUS, THE MAXIMUM SIGN AREA IS 32 SQUARE FEET, AND THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS SIX FEET ABOVE GRADE.
UM, HERE ON THE SIDE, YOU CAN SEE WE'VE INCLUDED WHAT A PICTURE OF A SIX FOOT TALL SIGN THAT IS 32 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE WOULD LOOK LIKE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE RESULTING SIGN IS SO SMALL THAT IT'S REALLY NOT FUNCTIONAL.
UM, KIND OF JUST TO THE LEFT OF THE CENTER ON THE, ON THE SCHOOL.
UM, SO THEREFORE STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THIS PROVISION PREVENTS A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE SIGN.
HERE, YOU CAN SEE OUR PROPOSED SIGN.
YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S PROPORTIONAL TO THE SCHOOL FACADE AND THAT IT CLEARLY DISTINGUISHED AS THE ENTRANCE LOCATION.
ADDITIONALLY, IT'S IMPORTANT TO THE SCHOOL THAT WE'D BE ABLE TO INCLUDE THE ENTIRE THOUGH SOMEWHAT LENGTHY NAME OF THE SCHOOL.
AS I DESCRIBED EARLIER, THE NAME IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE SCHOOL'S PURPOSE IN EDUCATING AND WOMEN.
UM, HERE, YOU CAN SEE THE MORE DETAILED SIGNED PLANS.
YOU CAN SEE WHERE ON THE SIGN WE'RE ON THE SITE.
THE SIGN IS PROPOSED TO BE OVER THE FRONT DOOR ALONG PANTHER TRAIL.
UM, HERE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE SIGN IS ON THE BOUNDARY OF A COMMERCIAL SIGN DISTRICT WITH MOST NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, HAVING LARGE FACADE SIGNS.
IF WE WERE IN A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, OUR SIGN WOULD BE EASILY COMPLIANT.
UM, AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES DO HAVE SIGNS THAT ARE LARGER THAN TWO SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS WHY WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE REQUESTED SIGN WOULD IMPACT THOSE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
THE HAMILTON APARTMENTS ON THE TOP LEFT WILL FACE OUR SIGN, UH, AND THE TREMOR AT CREEK VILLAGE AND THE BOTTOM LEFT IS ALSO NEARBY AND ADJACENT.
THEY BOTH HAVE SIZABLE SIGNS AND THEN THE TOWN AND COUNTRY MONTESSORI SCHOOL ALSO NEARBY OUR SIGN LOCATION LOOKS LIKE THEY COULD ACTUALLY BE TRYING TO RESOLVE A VISIBILITY PROBLEM WITH THEIR SIGNS.
HERE, YOU CAN SEE SOME PICTURES OF NEIGHBORING WALL SIGNS IN THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO THE WEST.
UM, A LARGER SIGN IS NECESSARY HERE ALSO TO DESIGNATE THE FRONT DOOR AS COMPARED TO OTHER ENTRANCES AND EXITS.
UM, THIS LAYOUT IS IN LINE WITH WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM NEIGHBORS GIVEN THE TIME CONSTRAINTS.
I'LL JUST SAY THAT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT OR GO INTO MORE DETAIL IF YOU'D LIKE.
UM, I'LL ALSO SAY THAT, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PICTURE TO THE RIGHT, THE SCHOOL HAS A FEW DIFFERENT ENTRANCES FOR REASONS.
UM, BUT WITHOUT THE REQUESTED WALL SIGN, IT'S UNCLEAR FROM THE APPEARANCE, WHICH ENTRANCE IS THE MAIN ENTRANCE.
UM, THE SCHOOL DOES HAVE A HIGHER DRAW, UH, THAN TYPICAL SCHOOLS AS FAR AS NUMBERS OF VISITORS COMPARED TO OTHER COMPARED TO OTHER EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES.
UM, AND ADDITIONALLY, THE SCHOOL HAS JOINT USE POLICIES SUCH THAT PERMITTED, UM, BY NON-SCHOOL COMMUNITY GRIP GROUPS, UM, FOR USE BY NON-SCHOOL COMMUNITY GROUPS, WHICH MEANS THAT AGAIN, THERE'S GOING TO BE AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF NON-REGULAR VISITORS TO THE SCHOOL.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE FINALLY, UM, GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT CONFLICT WITH THE PURPOSE OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE WHILE THE 93 CODE IS NOT EXPLICIT PURPOSE.
THE CURRENT CODE DOES STATE A PURPOSE THAT IS RELEVANT, AND WE BELIEVE THAT DENYING THE EXPERIENCE, UM, REQUESTS WOULD IGNORE THE PURPOSE OF SAFETY AND EFFICIENCY AS IT WILL RESULT IN A PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARD CAUSED BY PARENTS, STUDENTS IN A WIDE ARRAY OF AS HAVING DIFFICULTY FINDING THE SCHOOL AND INCREASING THE LIKELIHOOD OF DRIVERS HAVING TO CIRCLE THE BLOCK THROUGH AN INTERSECTION WITH LIMITED VISIBILITY, WE'LL COME BACK AROUND AND USE THE RIGHT TIME.
SO IF YOU COULD JUST FINISH IT UP REAL QUICK FOR ME, PLEASE.
I'LL JUST GO ONTO MY FINAL SLIDE THEN.
UM, AND I'LL JUST SAY THAT I, I WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE THAT ANN RICHARDS LEGACY OF EMPOWERING GIRLS AND WOMEN LIVED ON THROUGH THIS FACILITY.
UM, IT IS A VERY LONG NAME AND THAT MAKES IT EVEN HARDER TO FIT IN AT 32 SQUARE FEET.
UM, WHICH IS WHY UNDER CURRENT
[00:20:01]
CODE, THE PERMITTED SIGN IS NOT EFFECTIVE.UM, BUT WE BELIEVE THAT OUR YOUNG WOMEN LEADERS DESERVE A PROPER SIGN AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING BOARD MEMBERS.
SO LET'S SEE A BOARD MEMBER OF ONE NOLAND CAME, HANG ON JUST ONE SEC.
I ACTUALLY SUPPORT MEMBER BAILEY IN A MINUTE.
SO, UM, MY PROBLEM WITH THIS IS THEY SAID THEY NEED IT FOR VISIBILITY, BUT THEY'RE PUTTING IT IN THE BACK OF A U THERE'S WALLS ON BOTH SIDES.
YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE IT FROM ANYWHERE FOR DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF IT.
IT WOULD SEEM LIKE A GROUND MOUNTED MONUMENT SIGN WOULD BE A MUCH BETTER OPTION THAT PEOPLE COULD ACTUALLY SEE FROM THE STREET BECAUSE WHERE IT IS ON THE WALL, YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE IT UNTIL YOU'RE RIGHT UP ON IT.
NO MATTER HOW BIG OR SMALL IT IS.
SO FEEL BY SAYING IT'S FOR VISIBILITY.
I DON'T BUY IT BECAUSE YOU'RE IN A, YOU, YOU LOOK WHERE IT'S LOCATED IN THE BUILDING WALLS AROUND IT, IT'S AT THE VERY BACK OF A YOU AND YOU CAN'T SEE IT FROM A LAVAR.
YOU CAN'T SEE IT FROM ANY OF THE MAJOR STREETS AT ALL.
SO I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING THE, THE REASONING ISN'T WORKING FOR ME.
AND, UM, SO TH THE HARDSHIP DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE IF IT'S FOR VISIBILITY AND PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO FIND THE ENTRANCE AND FIND THE SCHOOL, UM, THIS SIDE'S NOT GOING TO DO IT.
I'D LIKE HER TO EXPLAIN BEFORE I MAKE MY COMMENT.
UM, SO, SO THERE, THERE IS, I DON'T THINK THE ISSUE IS WITH PEOPLE FINDING THE SCHOOL CAMPUS OVERALL.
I THINK THE ISSUE IS WITH THEM FINDING THE FRONT DOOR AND FINDING SPECIFICALLY THAT DRIVEWAY.
IF YOU LOOK AT SLIDE THREE, UM, WHICH SHOWS KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF THE CAMPUS, YOU CAN SEE THAT IF SOMEONE WAS COMING OFF SOUTHWEST AND THEY TURNED ON PANTHER TRAIL, UM, THERE, THEY'RE GOING TO SEE THAT THE SCHOOL IS THERE, BUT IT'S HARD TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THE FRONT DOOR IS.
AND WITH THE LOCATION, IF YOU'RE DRIVING DOWN PANTHER TRAIL, AS YOU COME, AS YOU COME TO THE SCHOOL, THE, THE SIGN VERY CLEARLY DESIGNATES THE FRONT DOOR AND THEN DESIGNATES THAT THAT DRIVEWAY IS WHERE IT WOULD TURN IN TO ACCESS, PARKING, AND ACCESS TO THE FRONT DOOR.
SO I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC.
UM, SO COULD YOU PULL UP SLIDE THREE, PLEASE? UM, BUT WHEN YOU BE PAST THAT FRONT DRIVE, BY THE TIME YOU SAW THE SIGN, WOULDN'T IT BE BETTER TO HAVE THE TIME, OR YOU COULD HAVE A DIRECTIONAL SIGN.
THERE, THERE IS A MONUMENT SIGN ON THE CORNER THAT FACES OUT SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THE FACILITY'S OVERALL LOCATION, BUT THE SIGN OVER THE DOOR, UM, REALLY SHOWS YOU WHERE THE, AGAIN, THAT THAT'S THE FRONT DOOR AND WHERE THE ENTRANCE IS, WE WENT OUT AND ACTUALLY, MAYBE SLIDE SEVEN IS A BETTER ILLUSTRATION OF THAT.
IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND PULLING THAT UP.
SO IT REALLY DOES SHOW IF YOU'RE DRIVING DOWN PANTHER DRIVE, UM, YOU SEE THAT BIG SIGN OVER THE DOOR, YOU SEE THAT FRONT TREATMENT THERE, YOU KNOW, AND THEN YOU SEE THE DRIVEWAY AND YOU CAN, AND YOU CAN GO RIGHT IN THERE WITHOUT HAVING TO GO ALL THE WAY AROUND THE BLOCK AND THEN COME BACK MADAM CHAIR.
AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING, KEEPING THAT SLIDE ON THERE.
AND IT'S THE SAME AS
A MONUMENT SIGN WOULD BE SO BIG WOULD HAVE TO BE SO BIG AND IT WOULD BE SO ENCUMBERSOME AND THERE IS ONE THERE.
SO AGAIN, I'LL, I'LL STICK WITH MY MOTION TO APPROVE.
YEAH, I AGREE THAT BECAUSE IT'S IN THAT U SHAPE, IT'S NOT AS VISIBLE AS IT MAY BE.
SO I DON'T REALLY HAVE AN OBJECTION TO MAKING IT A LARGER SIGN IN ORDER TO DESIGNATE OR TO DENOTE THAT IT IS A MAIN ENTRANCE, BUT I DO QUESTION THIS, THE EXTENT OF THE VARIANCE THAT'S BEING ASKED FOR IS THIS SIGN, THE OPTIMUM SIZE OF SIGN IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THAT FUNCTION OF A SIGNIFYING, THAT THIS IS THE MAIN ENTRANCE, OR COULD A SLIGHTLY SMALLER SIGN AND THUS A SMALLER VARIANCE ASK ALSO ACCOMPLISH THE SAME THING.
AND I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE, WHAT IS THAT SIGN THOSE LETTERS YOU'RE BACK IN IT AS WELL, WHICH I KNOW DURING THE 12 O'CLOCK NOON DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE, BUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU READ INTO THE DETAILS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SIGN, IT'S ALSO BACK AT SIGNED LETTERS.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE DESIGNED THE SIGN SIZE TO FIT ON THE FACADE, UM, IN THE WAY THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN SEE AGAIN ON SLIDE SEVEN, BUT IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT TAKING UP THE ENTIRE FACADE AREA, BUT WE WANTED IT TO BE BIG ENOUGH TO READ EACH LETTER CLEARLY AND READ THE WHOLE NAME, YOU KNOW, THE ANN RICHARDS SCHOOL PORTION, BUT ALSO THE SCHOOL FOR
[00:25:01]
YOUNG WOMEN LEADERS PORTION AS WELL.UM, I WILL SAY THAT THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW DIFFERENT WAYS OF CALCULATING THE SIGN SIZE, AND WE WENT WITH THE MOST CONSERVATIVE OBVIOUSLY TO COME BEFORE YOU.
SO I THINK THAT THE MEASUREMENT OF IT WILL ACTUALLY PROBABLY BE A LITTLE BIT SMALLER, BUT WE DIDN'T WANT TO RISK ASKING YOU FOR A VARIANCE AND THEN FINDING OUT THAT WE NEEDED IT TO BE DOCUMENTED DIFFERENTLY.
SO I THINK THE NUMBER MIGHT BE A LITTLE MISLEADING, I GUESS, IS WHAT I SAY, BUT I THINK THIS EXHIBIT SHOWS CLEARLY HOW IT WILL FIT ON THE SIDE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? REMEMBER FOOT? YEAH.
I HAD A QUESTION, UM, I GUESS FOR THE APPLICANT AND THEN ONE FOR LEGAL.
I MEAN, IF WE'RE TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO DO A SIGN THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, THE ENTRANCE, UM, I'M NOT SURE WHAT HAVING THE ENTIRE NAME OF THE SCHOOL ON THE BUILDING DOES FOR YOU.
YOU COULD HAVE SOME TYPE, ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE A MONUMENT SIGN ALREADY AT THE CORNER, YOU CAN HAVE SOMETHING THAT JUST SAYS, YOU KNOW, MAIN ENTRANCE OR, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO I'M NOT REAL SURE ABOUT WHAT THAT W W WHY THE FULL NAME OF THE SCHOOL IS REQUIRED.
AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE FOR, FOR LEGAL IS IF THIS IS, IF THIS WAS DONE AS PART OF AN INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT, AND PART OF THE INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT IS THAT THEY WOULD COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE CITY, UH, CODES AND REGULATIONS.
IS IT EVEN, IS IT A VIOLATION OF THAT INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT, EVEN COMMON ASKED TO BE EXCUSED FROM THESE VARIOUS RULES AND REGULATIONS SUCH THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THIS BOARD CAN EVEN GRANT BOARD MEMBER LEE SIMMONS WITH A LOT APARTMENT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WOULD VIOLATE THE INNER LOCAL, I THINK, UH, THE INNER LOCAL, UH, CONTEMPLATES THAT EXPLICIT THAT THE BOARD DOES HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GRANT CERTAIN VARIANCES FOR SIGNS IN THIS CASE, AND OTHERWISE COMPLIANT WITH CODE.
IF I COULD REPLY TO THE FIRST QUESTION ONE SECOND.
DID YOU ALSO WANT TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT I WANTED? YEAH.
I CAN TELL YOU I'VE BEEN, I'VE BEEN BY THE SCHOOL AND, AND I DO THINK IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO FRONT TO FIND THE FRONT DOOR, UM, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT GOING AROUND THE BLOCK TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT TIMES.
UH, I'M JUST, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS, IS SHOW PEOPLE WHERE THE FRONT DOOR IS, WHY IS THE ENTIRE NAME OF THE SCHOOL NEED TO BE ON THERE? I THINK THERE'S TWO, TWO PARTS OF THAT RESPONSE.
THE FIRST ONE IS THAT THOSE SIGN REGULATIONS WOULD APPLY TO THE SCHOOL NO MATTER WHERE WE PUT THEM.
SO EVEN IF WE WERE TO TRY TO PUT A SIGN ON A DIFFERENT PLACE ON THE SCHOOL, IT WOULD STILL HAVE TO MEET THAT 32 SQUARE FOOT AREA AND SIX FOOT HEIGHT OFF THE GROUND, WHICH IS, WHICH IS VERY SMALL, I THINK, UM, IS TO MAKE IT HARD TO IDENTIFY, UH, THE SCHOOL, WHEREVER THAT, WHEREVER THAT THAT SIGN WOULD GO.
AND THEN THE SECOND THING I WOULD GET BACK TO AGAIN, IS ABOUT THE CULTURE OF THE SCHOOL AND ABOUT HOW IMPORTANT THE NAME IS TO THE SCHOOL.
AND I THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR THESE YOUNG WOMEN TO BE REMINDED EVERY DAY OF THE SCHOOL THAT THEY GO TO AND WHO IT WAS NAMED AFTER AND WHO THAT LEADERSHIP IS.
AND I THINK IT'S, IT'S TYPICAL FOR A SCHOOL TO HAVE THE NAME OVER THE FRONT DOOR.
AND I THINK THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THESE, UM, YOU KNOW, THESE YOUNG WOMEN SHOULD HAVE A SIMILAR OPPORTUNITY THAT I'M SURE I SEE YOU.
NUMBER ONE, THAT'S WHAT THIS BOARD IS CREATED FOR IS TO GRANT VARIANCES FROM SOME OF THESE, UH, RESTRICTIVE, UH, ZONING LAWS AND ISSUES THAT WE HAVE.
SO THAT'S WHAT THAT'S OUR WHOLE PURPOSE IS TO PASS.
SO WE DO HAVE, I AGREE WITH LEE, WE HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO DO THAT.
THE DISTRICT SUED OVER THE BERGER CENTER OVER A SIMILAR SITUATION AND THEY WON.
SO, AND IT'S NOT, THAT'S NEITHER HERE NOR THERE ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.
MY FEELING IS, IT'S NOT A BIG ASK.
IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, DRIVING UP IN THERE.
IF YOU GO TO SEE 1 35, YOU'LL SEE WHAT THAT MONUMENT SIGN LOOKS LIKE.
AND IN THE SCALE OF THE SIGN COMPARED TO THAT BUILDING, IT'S, IT'S NOT, IT'S REALLY NOT.
YOU COULD BARELY SEE IT IN HAVING THE NAME ABOVE WHERE IT'S AT RIGHT NOW, I THINK IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE SCHOOL IT'S IN THE SCALE OF THE SCHOOL.
SO I'D LIKE TO GET, HOPEFULLY GET A SECOND AND GET SOME SUPPORT FOLKS.
THIS ISN'T A, I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT ON IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA OR A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE SOMEBODY IS GOING TO BE BOTHERED BY A BACKLIT SIGN.
UH, I MEAN, THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS BOARD.
UM, MS. BOZO, DID I HEAR THAT MS. WALL IS ONLINE TO SPEAK? YES,
YOU CAN ASK HER A QUESTION, BUT I GUESS YOU WERE JUST SAYING, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK? OH,
[00:30:01]
NO.I WAS SAYING IF SHE WAS ONLINE TO SPEAK.
WELL, COULD YOU TELL ME YOUR THOUGHTS ON, ON HOW THIS TIME WILL MAKE YOUR SCHOOL BETTER, PLEASE? JARED, ARE YOU LOOKING FOR CHRISTINA? UH, W OR WHO ARE WE LOOKING FOR? CHRISTINA? W GIVE ME ONE SECOND.
I THINK THEY'RE MUTE AND GAVE ME ONE MINUTE OF LOOK THEM UP.
I THINK WE HAVE DONE A REALLY EXCELLENT JOB EXPLAINING HOW IMPORTANT OUR NAME IS, UM, TO OUR SCHOOL.
AND IT'S NOT JUST THE ANN RICHARDS SCHOOL, BUT IT IS THE N RICHARD SCHOOL FOR YOUNG WOMEN LEADERS.
SO, UH, THAT'S THE FIRST THING FOR ME IN PARTICULAR, WE HAVE BEEN GRANTED THIS BEAUTIFUL BUILDING WITH THESE THREE ENTRANCES AND PEOPLE REALLY ARE CONFUSED AS TO WHICH IS THE MAIN ENTRANCE.
AND SO SECURITY IS, UH, THE MAIN ISSUE FOR ME, PEOPLE WANDERING AROUND THE BUILDING, TRYING TO GET INTO DIFFERENT ENTRANCES, WHERE WE COULD PUT A SIGN SAYING, THIS IS THE FRONT DOOR.
THIS IS THE ANN RICHARDS SCHOOL.
SO THOSE ARE THE TWO BIGGEST ISSUES FOR, FOR ME.
UH, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SECOND.
BOARD MEMBER WALLER BUTTS UP A SECOND.
UM, I'M ALSO FOR THIS, SO I THINK THIS IS NOT THAT BIG AN ASS, BUT WE DO HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE FROM BOARD MEMBER ON OLIN WITH THE SECOND FROM BOARD MEMBER WALLER.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL.
THE BOARD MUST DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF SUFFICIENCY, OF, AND WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE AFFORDING THE FINDINGS DESCRIBED BELOW IN ORDER TO GRANT YOUR REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE.
THE BOARD MUST FIRST MAKE ONE OR MORE OF THE FINDINGS DESCRIBED UNDER ONE, TWO AND THREE BELOW, AND THE BOARD THEN MUST MAKE THE FINDING DESCRIBED IN ITEM FOUR BELOW ONE.
THE VARIANCE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THE ARTICLE PROHIBITS ANY REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGNS ON THE SIDE.
CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE SITE, SUCH AS DIMENSIONED, LANDSCAPING, OR TYPOGRAPHY, BECAUSE OF IT'S SOD OF THE NEW BUILDING IS RAISED AND ON A HILL SUCH THAT A 32 SQUARE FOOT SIGN IS NOT READABLE AT ANY REASONABLE DISTANCE FROM THE BUILDING.
ADDITIONALLY, THE UNIQUELY NOW A NAME OF THE SCHOOL MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE TO FIT IN SUCH A SMALL SPACE TO GRANTING IS VERY UNUSUAL, WILL NOT HAVE SUBSTANCE SUBSTANTIALLY ADVERSE IMPACT UPON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES BECAUSE THE PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL FACILITY USE THAT THE PROPERTY DEMANDS ADEQUATE SIGNAGE FOR THE FREQUENT VISITORS.
IT WILL RECEIVE THE GRINDING OF THE VARIANTS WILL NOW SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH THE STATED PURPOSE OF THIS SIGN ORDINANCE, BECAUSE THE FIRST PURPOSE OF THE SIGN, OR WHEN IT WAS JUST TO PROTECT HEALTH SAFETY IN GENERAL, LAWYER FOR WELFARE OF THE CITY AND ITS RESIDENTS, AND IS MEANT TO ENSURE THAT THE DESIGN AND LOCATION OF SCIENCE DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH TRAFFIC SAFETY AND STRICTLY ENFORCING THE SIGN OR A NICHE AS TO THE SCHOOL IS A HAZARD THAT WOULD CONFLICT WITH YOUR BOOK PROVISION GRANTING OF ERRANDS WOULD NOT PROVIDE THE APPLICANT WITH A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE, NOT ENJOYED BY ALL OF THESE SIMILARLY SITUATED OR POTENTIALLY SIMILARLY SITUATED BECAUSE SCHOOLS THROUGHOUT AUSTIN ARE TYPICALLY PERMITTED TO HAVE ADEQUATE SIGN IS SO THAT STUDENTS AND PARENTS CAN FIND THEIR SCHOOL FROM ENTRY.
THE ANN RICHARDS SCHOOL FOR YOUNG WOMEN LEADERS PLACEMENT IN A LOW DENSITY, RESIDENTIAL SIGN DISTRICTS SHOULD NOT PART STUDENTS FROM RECEIVING THESE NORMAL PRIVILEGES.
YES, BUT I DO THINK THEY COULD HAVE MADE IT SMALLER.
I THINK IT WAS A MORE OF AN ASS THAN WHAT WAS NEEDED.
LISA HAWTHORNE IS ABSTAINING BARBARA MACARTHUR.
THE OUTPUT I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN.
UM, I JOINED A NEW LAW FIRM A COUPLE MONTHS AGO, AND I KNOW THAT THEY REPRESENT THIS SCHOOL DISTRICT ON VARIOUS MATTERS.
AND CERTAINLY NOT ON THIS MATTER BECAUSE THE DRAINER GROUP IS REPRESENTING BILL.
BUT I THINK THAT I, UM, UH, SHOULD ABSTAIN FROM VOTING ON THIS MATTER.
SO THAT IS NINE TO TWO, TWO ABSTENTIONS NINE.
IT'S A SIMPLE MAJORITY OF MADAM CHAIR.
YEAH, IT'S SIX, BUT SO THE SIGN VARIANT IS APPROVED NUMBER.
[00:35:01]
ONE C 15 20 20 0, 0 3 8.DID I PASS UPON THIS ONE? WE'LL SKIP THAT TWO POSTPONED
[D-3 C15-2021-0058 Robert & Jennifer Carson 1209 Choquette Drive On-line Link: Item D-3; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25- 2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum front yard setback from 25 feet (required) to 16 feet (requested) in order to maintain a Carport in a “SF-3-NP”, Single-Family Residence-Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (Brentwood Neighborhood Plan)]
T3 C 15 20 21 0 0 5.EAT FOR 1, 2 0 9 CHOCOLATE DRIVE.
AND THIS IS GOING TO BE, UH, JENNIFER CARSON AS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
CARSON, ARE YOU ONLINE? THIS IS THE AB TECH GAVE ME A MINUTE TO BRING THEM UP.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, WHILE WE'RE WAITING.
DO WE HAVE ANY OPPOSITION FOR THIS? NO, THERE WAS ONLY ONE OPPOSITION.
JENNIFER CARSON, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? YES, I AM.
BEFORE SHE GETS STARTED, IF EVERYBODY DID THEIR HOMEWORK ON THIS ONE HERE, IT'S PRETTY SLAMMED ON IT ASKING FOR A $10 DIFFERENCE TO THE CAR PORT.
THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 2003, 18 YEARS, BUT I ALSO NOTICED SOMETHING THAT THE REASON THAT THEY'RE ALSO ASKING FOR IT IS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BUILD A PORCH THAT IS ALSO GOING TO GO WITHIN THAT SAME SPACE.
SO I WANTED TO ASK THE APPLICANT IS, YOU KNOW, IS, IS THAT PORCH BASED ON THE DRAWINGS I SAW IN THIS PACKET IS NOT GOING TO EXTEND PAST THE END OF THE CAR PORT.
AND IF IT'S NOT, WHEN WE GRANT THE CAR PORT, THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK FOR ANOTHER VARIANCE FOR THAT.
SO, SO THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS IS, IS THIS A TWOFER, THE CAR PORT, AND THEN THEY ALSO WANT TO BUILD THE PORCH APPLICANT.
THE, THE PROPOSED PORCH WILL NOT EXTEND PAST THE CURRENT.
IF THAT IS THE CASE OF MADAM CHAIR, THEN WHAT I WILL DO WITH THAT CAVEAT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UM, BECAUSE THE CAR PORT IS STILL, IT'S ALREADY BUILT IN AND IT'S, I'VE BEEN THERE FOR 18 YEARS.
AND JUST NEXT TIME, I THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER IF THE POSTING IS A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR TO INCLUDE THAT PORCH AS WELL.
I KNOW YOU COULD HAVE GOTTEN IT FOR THE HOUSE, SO TO SPEAK, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE OTHER WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU THE VARIANCE FOR, FOR THE, UH, CAR PORT, HOPEFULLY, BUT IT'S, IT'S BETTER TO BE FORTHCOMING WITH ALL THE INFORMATION, CAUSE WE'LL PICK IT UP ON THE DRAWINGS, UH, BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.
I BELIEVE THE ZONING ORDINANCE CHANGED IN THIS AREA AND THAT'S PERMIT A PORCH TO EXTEND INTO THE 25 FOOT SETBACK BY 10 FEET.
SO I THINK THE PORCH HAS MOVED IN THIS CASE.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER, BON OLIN, AND A SECOND BY VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE.
IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION FINDINGS? HE'S PULLING IT UP AMS PER YEAR.
WE DIDN'T WANT THE PRESENTATION OF IT.
UM, I THINK WE'RE JUST GOING TO SKIP THE PRESENTATION AND GO STRAIGHT TO A MOTION TO APPROVE.
WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT VOTING TO APPROVE ANY, ANY TOWARDS SPAN AT THIS POINT.
REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1957, INCLUDED A CARPORT OR PARTS OR COMMON FEATURES IN THE AREA.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH VARIANCES REQUEST IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY.
AND THAT EACH LOT IN BEL-AIR SECTION WAS DEVELOPED INDEPENDENTLY SITE PLAN, LAYOUTS AND FLOOR PLANS DIFFERENT FOR EACH LOT, THE PROPERTY LOT ELEVATION SLOPE FROM FRONT OF THE PROPERTY TOWARDS THE HOUSE.
SO THEY RUN IN WATER, RUNNING OFF THE ORIGINAL ROOF, FELL DIRECTLY INTO THE DRIVEWAY IN FLORIDA, FLOWED INTO THE HOUSE AND TOLD IN THE ORIGINAL CAR PORT AREA HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA, WHICH COULD CAUSE FLOODING BECAUSE YOUR HARDSHIP, THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE EACH LOT ON A BEL-AIR SET SECTION ONE WAS DEVELOPED INDEPENDENTLY AREA CHARACTER.
THE VARIANCE 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 THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE CARDBOARD HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 2003, AND THEY SIMPLY WANT TO MAINTAIN IT AS, AS IS OPEN
[00:40:01]
ON THREE SIDES AND ONLY ONE STORY TALL.SO IT DOES NOT PRESENTLY DOES NOT PRESENT ANY ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
YEAH, I'LL PUT NO, I'M A SENIOR RODRIGUEZ.
AND WE, WE WERE AWARE OF THE NEW CODING IN TERMS OF FRONT PORCH BEING ALLOWED.
THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T INCLUDE THE DRAWING THE SAME WAY.
MOVING ON TO ITEM D FIVE C 15 20 21 0 0 6 7 FOR 2003, AARP DALE STREET.
UH, THAT ONE'S ALSO A POSTPONEMENT.
IS THAT A POSTPONE TO THEM BEFORE THEY'RE DUE FOR WAS POSTPONED? YES.
[D-6 C15-2021-0068 John Hussey for Berry Shawn Cox 1411 Gaston Avenue On-line Link: Item D-6; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code Subchapter F: Residential Design and Compatibility Standards, Article 2, Development Standards Section 2.1 (Maximum Development Permitted) to increase the F.A.R from 40% (required) to 52.79% (requested) an additional 753 square feet, in order to add an addition to an existing single family residence in an “SF-3-NP”, Single-Family- Neighborhood Plan zoning district (Windsor Park Neighborhood Plan) Note: per Ordinance 20060727-084, this property was allowed to exceed the 40% and was granted 46.07%]
C 15 20 21 0 0 6 8 1 4 1 1 GASTON AVENUE.UM, WE HAVE, UH, BJ CORNELIUS AS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR B CORNELIUS CHERISH.
SO ARE YOU WITH US? YES, I AM.
I THINK I SAID HE, MY APOLOGIES.
CAUSE CORNELIUS, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
IT'S GOING TO BRING UP FOR PRESENTATION PLEASE.
UM, I'M ASSUMING I'M THEY CAN HEAR ME.
AND WE'RE LOOKING AT YOUR PRESENTATION.
UM, MY COMPUTER'S A LITTLE BEHIND, SO I'M GOING BACK AND FORTH.
MY NAME IS BOBBY JOE CORNY THIS AND I'M THE OWNER OF SITE-SPECIFIC.
WE ARE HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING MR. SEAN COX, OWNER OF 14, 11 DESTIN AVENUE.
MR. COX IS AVAILABLE TONIGHT TO SPEAK AND IS SIGNED UP IN CASE YOU NEED TO TALK TO HIM.
BUT WE ALSO HAVE THE ARCHITECT, JANE GINA INJURY TO REPRESENT THE OWNERS.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS, UH, EXHIBIT ONE IS OUR STREET VIEW OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ABOUT THE PROPERTY BEFORE WE GET INTO THE VARIANCE REQUESTS.
MR. COX PURCHASED THIS HOME IN 2013, SEAN COX IS A FULL-TIME ARTIST AND WORKS OUT OF HIS HOME WHERE HIS FAMILY LIVES.
HE DISCOVERED DURING COVID THAT THERE WERE QUICKLY OUTGROWING THEIR SPACE AND HIS PROFESSION WAS TAKING OFF AT THE SAME TIME.
HE HIRED, UH, CGS TO HELP HIM WITH THE DRAWINGS, TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO USE HIS HOME AND FOR HIM TO KEEP BOTH THIS, UH, WORKING STUDIO THERE AND HIS HOME.
UH, EXHIBIT TWO IS THE SITE PLAN.
THE HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED BY PREVIOUS OWNER IN 2006, 2007.
THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD REQUESTED AND RECEIVED APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 3,998 SQUARE FEET HOME, WHICH INCLUDED 534 SQUARE FEET GARAGE APARTMENT AND THE PARTIAL SECOND FLOOR FINISH OUT.
THEY DID NOT COMPLETE THE SECOND FLOOR AS REQUESTED ON THEIR PERMIT.
THEREFORE THERE IS 642 SQUARE FEET OF THE SECOND FLOOR THAT WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED TO BE FINISHED OUT.
MR. COX, REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO FINISH THE APPROVED 642 SQUARE FEET ALONG WITH AN ADDITIONAL 753 SQUARE FEET OF THE EXISTING SECOND FLOOR SPACE.
EXHIBIT THREE IS THE FRONT ELEVATION.
THE HOUSE HAS TWO EXISTING DORMERS AS SHOWN IN THE FRONT ELEVATION.
THE PROPOSED REMODEL PERMIT THAT MR. COX IS REQUESTING WOULD NOT CHANGE THE FRONT ELEVATION IN ANY WAY ON EXHIBIT FOUR IS THE EXISTING REAR ELEVATION.
THE EXISTING REAR ELEVATION TO SHOW, UM, DOES NOT HAVE ANY DORMERS IN IT AT THIS TIME.
AND IT'S, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE WHOLE SECOND FLOOR
[00:45:01]
IS ROOF BECAUSE THERE'S A 45 DEGREE ANGLE SLOPE ON THE ROOF THAT CREATES THE LARGE ROOF.EXHIBIT FIVE IS OUR PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION.
THIS SHOWS TWO NEW DORMERS MATCHING THE FRONT DORMERS, THE WINDOWS AND THE PROPOSED DORMERS ARE NEEDED TO QUALIFY FOR FIRE EXITS.
THESE TWO DORMERS ARE THE ONLY ADDITION THAT ALTER THE EXTERIOR OF THE EXISTING HOUSE.
THEN WE MOVE ON TO EXHIBIT SIX, WHICH IS A PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN FOR THE SECOND FLOOR, FINISH OUT AND WE'LL OCCUPY THE SPACE UNDER THE CURRENT ROOF.
THIS SPACE WILL CONSIST OF MR. COX'S STUDIO, A GUEST BEDROOM AND HIS DAUGHTER'S BEDROOM GOING ONTO HARDSHIPS.
THE HARDSHIP FOR THIS VARIANCE IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY.
AS THE OWNER OF THE HOME ALSO HOUSES HIS ART STUDIO AND BUSINESS.
MR. COX HAS DIVERSIFIED BOTH HIS WORK PRODUCT AND THE SIZE OF HIS WORK TO ACCOMMODATE GALLERY AND COLLECTOR DEMAND WITHOUT ADDITIONAL SPACE.
HE WILL BE FORCED TO FIND AND LEASE ALTERNATIVE SPACE TO CREATE HIS WORKS.
ALLOWING MR. COX TO CONTINUE WORKING FROM HIS HOME, ALLOWS THE FAMILY, THE ABILITY TO MAINTAIN ITS CURRENT LIVING AND WORKING ARRANGEMENTS.
THE, UM, THE PARENTS IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA.
THE VARIANCE FOR THIS ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE WILL NOT AFFECT ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS BECAUSE THE VOLUME IS ALREADY IN PLACE.
THEY ARE ONLY PROPOSING TO FINISH OUT THE EXISTING VOLUME.
THE LIVING AND WORKING ARRANGEMENT OF THE FAMILY IS ALSO LIKEWISE UNIQUE SUPPORT AND NOT, UH, OBJECTIONS.
EXHIBIT SEVEN AND EIGHT ARE SUBMITTED LETTERS FROM THE NEIGHBORS ON BOTH SIDES OF 14, 11 GASTON AVENUE, 14, 13, AND 1407 THAT APPROVED THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
WE HAVE ALSO SEEN TWO MORE APPROVALS GENERATED BY THE CITY'S NOTIFICATION FROM THE OWNERS OF 14, 12, AND 14, 14 GUESTS AND AVENUE ACROSS THE STREET.
SEAN COX SUBMITTED AN AFFIDAVIT CONTAINING THE STEPS HE TOOK TO CONTACT NEIGHBORS AND THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
BEFORE WE SUBMITTED THIS APPLICATION, WE'VE ALSO SEEN ONE OBJECTION LETTER IN THE LATE BACKUP GENERATED BY THE CITY'S NOTIFICATION FROM A RESIDENT AT 1406 PRESTON AVENUE.
PRESTON AVENUE IS THE NEXT STREET TO THE NORTH OF GASTON.
THE HOMEOWNER SITES INCREASING IMPERVIOUS COVER WILL AGGRAVATE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE GOOD NEWS IS THIS VARIANCE REQUEST IS NOT ADD ANY IMPERVIOUS COVER TO THE EXISTING SITES.
THE ADDITIONAL FINISHED SPACE IS ALL UNDER THE EXISTING ROUTES AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION.
ALL RIGHT, GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION ONE MEMBER OF ON OLIN.
I DON'T, I KNOW THEY'RE JUST GOING TO ADD A COUPLE OF GARMENTS.
IT'S NOT GOING TO INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND WHAT HAVE YOU BEEN AT CHINA ASKING FOR A FAR FROM 40% TO 52, 7% IN FRONT OF THIS BODY HAS ALWAYS BEEN LIKE PULLING HEN'S TEETH.
UM, I DO, UH, I DON'T REALLY SEE THAT MUCH HARM WITH IT, BUT I STILL, THE HARDSHIP IS NOT THERE AND WHAT THEY HAVE SUBMITTED IN THEIR DOCUMENT FOR A HARDSHIP.
ISN'T GOING TO GET US THERE BASED ON WHAT THIS BODY NEEDS TO INTERPRET.
UH, I'M ALL WILLING TO GRANT THE, UH, THE ADDITIONAL 642 SQUARE FEET THAT THEY DID NOT BUILD.
THEY DID NOT BUILD UNDER THE VARIANCE IN 2006, 0 7, 2 7.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, I THINK MELISSA AND I, AND POSSIBLY EVEN BORE, UH, VOTED ON THAT.
BUT, UM, CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW THAT HIS HARDSHIP, THE HARDSHIP, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, I CAN'T GET THERE.
I'M ALSO WILLING TO POSTPONE AND LET THEM GO LOOK AT THEIR HARDSHIP.
IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO MAKE ME DO THAT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO BUST THEIR CHOPS COMPLETELY, BUT WE JUST CAN'T GET HERE WITH WHAT THEY PRESENTED.
LET ME JUST MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE AND SEE IF WE'VE GOT A SECOND.
AT LEAST THERE'S A MOTION ON THE TABLE.
I DON'T REALLY SEE THE HARDSHIP HERE READER AND THE PLANS I'M LOOKING AT.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE APPLICANT'S BUILDING OUT THE SECOND FLOOR, BUT WHAT THEY'RE BUILDING ON THE SECOND FLOOR IS NOT JUST AN ART STUDIO, WHICH TELL A MAJOR EXPANSION OF OTHER FEATURES AND COMPONENTS OF THE HOUSE, WHICH TO ME ALSO DOES NOT SUPPORT THE HARDSHIP, UM, ARGUMENT AT ALL, UM, BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.
AND I JUST WANT TO ADD ONTO THAT BECAUSE I AGREE WITH BOTH OF THOSE PERSPECTIVES, IT, THEIR PLANS ALSO SHOW A STUDIO.
THE WHOLE SECOND FLOOR OF THE GARAGE IS A STUDIO.
[00:50:01]
STUDIO NAME USED FOR AND WHAT DOES HE NEED A SECOND STUDIO? UM, THAT'S ABOUT THE SAME SIZE AS THE ONE OVER THE GARAGE.SO I I'M I'M WITH, UM, BOARD MEMBER VINYL AND I DON'T SEE THE HARDSHIP, BUT I AM WILLING TO, UM, GRANT THE, THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE.
UM, BUT NOT THE ADDITIONAL BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.
I THINK THAT THIS IS AN EXCESSIVE WITH NO HARDSHIP AND, UM, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'VE MADE ME MOVING TOWARD A POSTPONEMENT AND I WOULD RECOMMEND THE APPLICANT THAT THEY PROVIDE A PLAN SHOWING THE, UH, THE CURRENTLY ALLOWED VARIANCE, THE THE 642 SQUARE FEET THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AND WHAT WOULD BE PROVIDED TO THE APPLICANT WITH THAT EXPANSION.
UM, THERE MAY BE ROOM TO EXPLAIN THE HARDSHIP THAT ALLOWANCE WOULD NOT GET THEM WHERE THEY NEED TO BE.
BUT, UM, I AGREE THAT IT'S HARD FOR ME TO, TO CONCEIVE OF A TRUE HARDSHIP IN THIS, IN THIS SCENARIO.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION WITH A BOARD MEMBER BAILEY I'LL SECOND THE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
MELISSA, ARE YOU DONE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR MEMBER WAIT, I CAN'T SEE YOUR VIDEO SO SORRY.
IT'S PROBABLY JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S TECHNOLOGY.
UM, NO DISCUSSION FROM MY END.
THEN WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO AUGUST 9TH BOARD MEMBER BOTTLING, RIGHT? I WANT TO GO TO AUGUST 9TH.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO AUGUST 9TH BY BOARD MEMBER OF ON OLIN CIRCUIT IN BY VICE-CHAIR HAWTHORN.
YES, BUT I WANT TO ASK ELAINE, UM, IF WE'RE AT OUR MAX ON, ON CASES FOR AUGUST, SO NOW WE CAN ONLY HAVE SO MANY CASES.
NO, WE CAN ONLY HAVE SO MANY NEW CASES.
POSTPONEMENTS, I THINK IS THE ROLE.
SO WE ARE GOING TO POSTPONE THIS TO THE AUGUST 9TH MEETING.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT THE LIEN.
[D-7 C15-2021-0070 Frank & Jeannine Clark 904 Avondale Avenue On-line Link: Item D-7; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code Section 25-2- 492 (Site Development Regulations): a) to decrease the minimum Lot Size requirements from 5,750 square feet (required) to 5,292 square feet (requested) and b) to decrease the minimum Front Yard Setback requirements from 25 feet (required) to 17 feet (requested) in order to remodel and addition of a Covered Front Porch in a “SF-3-NP”, Single-Family-Neighborhood Plan zoning district (South River City Neighborhood Plan).]
MOVING ON TO ITEM D SEVEN C 15 20 21 0 0 7 0 4 9 0 4 AVONDALE AVENUE.UH, SPEAKER'S GOING TO BE JEANINE CLARK.
JANINE, ARE YOU ON THE LOAN MADAM CHAIR? YES.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS, UH, TO THIS PARTICULAR CASE? I DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF THEM KNOW.
I HAVEN'T HEARD IT YET, SO THAT'S FINE.
IT'S PRETTY, SELF-EXPLANATORY IN OUR PACKET, BUT THAT'S FINE.
IF WE WANT TO GO TO HAVE HIM HERE, LET'S GO FOR IT.
I MEAN, I, I SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT PUTTING THIS TOGETHER.
WE DEFINITELY WANT TO HEAR YOU.
SO WE'RE PULLING UP YOUR PRESENTATION NOW AND OKAY.
I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MY HUSBAND, FRANK CLARK AND MYSELF.
UH, WE PURCHASED THIS HOME TO BE OUR RETIREMENT HOME.
IT'S VERY SMALL 594 SQUARE FEET.
AND WE INHERITED SOME CHALLENGES ON, UH, ON THIS LOT, BUT WE LOVE IT.
AND WE'RE RESTORING IT TO HOPEFULLY ITS ORIGINAL 1949 CHARACTER.
AND UH, WE'RE GOING TO LIVE HERE SO, AND HOPEFULLY NOT KILL EACH OTHER.
SO IT'S A SMALL SPACE, BUT A SMALL FOOTPRINT AND ALL THAT.
UM, SO OUR, OUR GOAL IS THAT, UH, IF YOU WANT TO ACCEPT SLIDE, ONE IS JUST SORT OF THE INTRODUCTION.
WE'RE APPLYING FOR A VARIANCE FOR OUR SCREEN PORCH TO BE ADDED AT THE EXISTING PAVED PORCH AREA, WHICH IS NOT COVERED AND NOT SCREENED CURRENTLY.
[00:55:01]
UH, IF YOU LOOK AT SLIDE TWO, YOU'LL SEE THE LOCATION.THIS IS ASSUMED TO BE A HISTORIC DISTRICT IN TRAVIS HEIGHTS.
AND UM, SO THERE'S NO SMALL LOT, UH, AMNESTY IN THIS LOCATION, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE, WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS.
WE'VE GOT A 5,300 SQUARE FOOT LOT.
AND UM, THAT'S A FEW HUNDRED FEET SHORT.
I THINK 5,700 OR SOMETHING IS, IS THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN THIS LOCATION.
UM, SO WITH THAT, IF YOU GO TO SLIDE THREE, YOU'LL SEE AN EXISTING PICTURE OF THE HOUSE IN THE TOP LEFT.
UM, YOU'LL SEE THE AREA OUTLINED WHERE WE'D LIKE TO ADD OUR NEW FLINT SCREENED PORCH.
IT'LL BE EIGHT FEET BY 13 FEET.
UM, WE'RE ALSO MAKING OTHER IMPROVEMENTS TO THE HOUSE TO UPDATE IT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD BY ADDING SHINGLES, BUT WE ARE NOT ADDING ANY, UH, NEW SQUARE FOOTAGE TO THE INTERIOR OF THE HOME.
IF YOU LOOK AT SLIDE NUMBER FOUR, YOU CAN SEE THAT, UH, WE INHERITED SOME CHALLENGING, UM, FIGHT ISSUES HERE.
UM, WE'RE WE HAVE A VERY LIMITED BUILDABLE SITE AREA AND THERE'S QUITE LITERALLY NOWHERE ELSE THAT WE CAN, UH, PUT A SCREEN PORCH.
SO YOU CAN SEE THAT RED TRIANGLE IS THE AREA OF ENCROACHMENT, UH, THAT ENCROACHES INTO THE 25 FOOT REQUESTS.
THAT BACK NUMBER FIVE, UH, SLIDE NUMBER FIVE, UH, IS OUR HARDSHIPS SUMMARY.
ONE IS AN UNUSUAL SHAPE OF THE LOT.
YOU'LL NOTICE THAT OUR BACKYARD IS ABOUT FIVE FEET DEEP.
SO WE'VE GOT KIND OF, UH, AN UNUSUAL ORIENTATION OF THE HOUSE ON THE SITE, UH, DECIDES THE LOT ITSELF IS FALL.
UM, WE'VE GOT THREE LIVE OAK HERITAGE TREES, UM, ON THE LOT, WHICH IS REALLY WHY WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE.
WE ABSOLUTELY LOVE THE TREES AND UH, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, LOOKING FORWARD TO PRESERVING THEM.
UM, AND SO, BUT OF COURSE, UH, IT LIMITS US IN TERMS OF WHERE WE CAN, WHERE WE CAN EXPAND OUR SPACE AND THEN THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE LOT.
UM, WE'VE GOT A 21 FOOT VERTICAL GRADE CHANGE FROM, UH, THE EAST SIDE TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE LOT.
IF YOU GO TO SLIDE SIX, YOU KIND OF SEE A LITTLE PICTURE THERE SHOWING HOW THE LOT IS PRETTY SEVERELY SLOPED, RIGHT UP TO, UM, IT'S ACTUALLY 28 INCHES AWAY FROM, UM, THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE THERE.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE IN THE BACKGROUND, WE'VE GOT A BEAUTIFUL FOUR STORY HOME DIRECTLY BEHIND US.
UM, HERE ON THE RIGHT, YOU'LL SEE THE PHOTO OF THE LARGEST OAK TREE THAT'S IN THE FRONT, WHICH, UM, WE'RE GOING TO ENJOY SITTING ON OUR PORCH AND LOOKING AT, AND THEN, UH, SLIDE NUMBER SEVEN IS THAT WE HAVE THE FULL SUPPORT OF ALL OF OUR ADJACENT NEIGHBORS HAVE BEEN VERY ENTHUSIASTIC.
THEY HAVE, UH, GIVEN US WRITTEN LETTERS OF SUPPORT.
WE ALSO MET WITH THE TRAVIS HEIGHTS, HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, RUSS, PAM, AND CLOUDETTE, THREE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WHO WERE ALL IN TOWN, CAME TO OUR HOUSE, GAVE THEM A TOUR.
THEY TAKE NO OBJECTION TO OUR REQUEST.
THEY COULDN'T GIVE US A FORMAL LETTER BECAUSE THEIR, UH, ASSOCIATION DOESN'T MEET UNTIL SEPTEMBER.
BUT THEY, THEY TOLD US THAT THEY THOUGHT WHAT WE WERE DOING WAS, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE VERY ENTHUSIASTIC EXCITED THAT WE WERE KEEPING IN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING A BOARD MEMBER OF ONE.
WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THAT'S WHY I WAS GOING TO MOVING SO QUICK ON THIS.
IT WAS A VERY GOOD PRESENTATION.
AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, I HOPE EVERYBODY ELSE WATCHING TONIGHT TO SEE HOW WE OPERATE.
WELL, IT CAN SEE THIS BECAUSE THIS IS HOW A PACKAGE IS REALLY PUT TOGETHER.
IT'S PROBABLY CHECKED OFF THE TOP FOUR HARDSHIPS THAT WE, WE HAVE EVEN IN OUR, OUR, OUR, OUR, UM, RULES OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PURPOSES OF THIS BOARD.
SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I DIDN'T WANT THE APPLICANT TO THINK.
I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO HEAR IT, BUT IT WAS VERY WELL DONE.
MOTION TO APPROVE BY BOARD MEMBER VONN OWEN WITH EAST SECOND BY BOARD MEMBER PUT, I DID HAVE A QUESTION ON PAGE 13 OF THE PACKAGE ISSUE OF THE COST, NOT EXCEEDING 20% OF THE VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE.
IS THAT SOMETHING THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK TO US ABOUT? UH, OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, THAT WE NEED TO WORRY ABOUT AT THIS POINT? I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE, IT LOOKS LIKE THEIR PROPOSED COST IS ONLY $12,000, SO I'M NOT SURE, BUT IT DOES LOOK LIKE THERE WAS SOME, UH, UH, UM,
[01:00:01]
THERE WERE SOME DISPUTE ABOUT HOW TO CALCULATE THAT, I SUPPOSE.AND, UM, WHEN, WHEN WE WENT BACK TO THE PLAN CHECK, UM, UH, PERSON WHO, UH, WHO WORKED WITH US ORIGINALLY, WE WERE CONFUSED ABOUT HOW ALL THE TERMINOLOGY NEEDED TO BE.
AND HE GAVE US THE ACTUAL TERMINOLOGY TO PUT ON THE APPLICATION.
HE SAID THAT IT WASN'T, I THINK IT WASN'T AN ISSUE AFTER ALL, BECAUSE EXCUSE ME, ONE SECOND.
IF I MANAGE IT, THAT WOULDN'T BE BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY HAD IN FRONT OF LEGISLATION, BUT IT DIDN'T PASS.
SO JUST IN CASE THEY WERE DOING THEIR HOMEWORK AND THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THIS WAS A VERY THOUGHT OUT, WELL, PUT TOGETHER PRESENTATION.
IT HAD THE LEGISLATION PASSED, THEN WE WOULD HAVE BEEN HELD BY THOSE CONSTRAINTS, BUT IT DIDN'T MAKE IT.
THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR A REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE HOME BUILT IN 1949 PRIOR TO CURRENT SETBACK REQUIREMENTS DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
HOME CURRENTLY IS NOT ALLOWED TO SMALL LOT AMNESTY IN TRAVIS HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD.
HOWEVER, THE INTENT OF THE REJECTION OF SMALL LOT AMNESTY IN THIS AREA WAS TO PRESERVE THE CODE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEIR TINY HOUSE WILL HAVE THE CHARACTER AND RETAIN ITS SMALL, ORIGINAL CODDLED STYLE WITHOUT ADDING ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, HARDSHIP.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE REQUESTED IS A UNIQUE TO PROPERTY AND THAT THE IRREGULAR SHAPE OF THE LOT, THE IRREGULAR SHOP SIZE OF THE LAW, NO WORRIES, HERITAGE TREES AND TOPOGRAPHY OF THE LOT LIMITED WHAT THE APPLICANTS ARE CAPABLE OF DOING ON THIS LOT.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE LOT SHAPE PROXIMITY, CRITICAL ROUTES ONTO THREE HERITAGE, CHEESE AND STEEP PHOTOGRAPHY THAT ARE NONSTANDARD AND VERY SITE-SPECIFIC TO THIS PROPERTY AREA.
CHARACTER, THE VARIANCE 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 THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THIS IS A 594 SQUARE FOOT COTTAGE, WHICH CURRENTLY HAS ASBESTOS SIDING.
SO PLEASE BE CAREFUL WITH THAT.
THE ORIGINAL EXTERIOR WAS WOOD SHINGLES AND THEY ARE RESTORING THE REGIONAL SHINGLE STYLE HOME WITHOUT ADDING INTO YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE.
I'M GOING TO LET IT GO WITH THAT SOUNDS GOOD.
YOU ARE VERY HUSBAND ORIENTED.
AND AGAIN, GREAT JOB ON THE PRESENTATION.
[D-8 C15-2021-0071 Susan Hays 902 Herndon Lane On-line Link: Item D-8; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code: a) Section 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum Rear Yard Setback from 10 feet (required) to 5 feet (requested) and b) Section 25-5-774 (Two-Family Residential Use) (C) (2) (a) which requires an Accessory Dwelling Unit to be located at least 10 feet to the rear or side of the principal structure (required), to 8 feet from the principal structure (requested) in a “SF-3”, SingleFamily zoning district.]
ALRIGHT.MOVING ON TO ITEM D E SO WE SEE 15 20 21 0 0 7 1 4 9 0 2 FROM DAN LANE.
SPEAKER WILL BE, UH, SUSAN HE'S ON THE LINE.
UM, JUST BOARD MEMBER BANAL ON ONE SECOND.
UH, AND CORRECT ME APPLICANT IF I'M WRONG, BUT APPARENTLY THIS VARIANCE WAS APPROVED JANUARY OF 2019.
I THINK, UH, MORE OR LESS IN MYSELF, IT WAS A UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING HER ABOUT.
AND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR NOW IS JUST WHAT WAS ITEM A, THAT WAS ON A PREVIOUS, THE PREVIOUS VARIANCE.
UH, JUST IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY, CAUSE I'VE READ THIS TWO OR THREE TIMES TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD IT.
YOU TOOK ADVANTAGE OF YOUR OTHER VARIANTS AND EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR ITEM EIGHT, WHICH WE APPROVED THE LAST TIME.
CORRECT? WELL, I DIDN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE VARIANCE IN THE SENSE.
I WASN'T ABLE TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT BECAUSE SOME FAMILY MEDICAL ISSUES IN ADDITION TO THE PANDEMIC AND IT EXPIRED.
I WOULD HAVE TO REAPPLY FOR IT.
WE'VE DONE NO WORK ON THE PROPERTY OTHER THAN HAVING TO FIX IT FROM THE BIG FREEZE.
BUT THAT'S ANOTHER STORY THAT'D BE IN THE CASE, MADAM CHAIR, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE BASED ON THE OLD PARENTS BOARD MEMBER FAILING FOR FIVE FEET.
I MEAN, WE, WE APPROVED 9.6 FEET, NOT FIVE FEET, THE OLDER AREAS.
[01:05:02]
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SIX INCHES DIFFERENCE.NO, FROM NINE POINTS, 4.5 FEET, SIX INCHES.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT TOO MANY PEOPLE ARE TALKING TO IT TO SAY, EXCUSE ME, HOLD ON CHAIR.
COULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN IT AGAIN PLEASE? BECAUSE THERE'S TOO MANY PEOPLE TALKING.
THE CURRENT REQUEST IS FOR A FIVE FOOT, THE REAR REAR YARD SET BACK FROM 10 FEET TO FIVE FEET.
THE APPROVED VARIANTS THAT EXPIRED WAS GRANTED REAR SETBACK TO NINE FEET, SIX INCHES, NOT FIVE FEET.
SO IT'S A DIFFERENT VARIANCE THAN WHAT WAS THAT? AND THAT'S, THAT'S MY POINT.
AND THAT'S WHY I WANT TO HEAR THIS.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND BRING UP.
DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR KI? YEAH, LET'S BRING UP HER PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL BRING THAT UP.
WE ARE ON THE FIRST PAGE AND YOU'VE GOT, AND I'LL START BY CLARIFYING THAT FIVE FEET VERSUS NINE FEET, TWO PIECES TO WHAT I GOT TWO YEARS AGO.
AND I'M ASKING FOR THE EXACT SAME VARIANCES TODAY.
ONE, THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK, BECAUSE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED WITH GARAGES BUILT OR BACK HOUSES BUILT WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE BACK.
AND I'M NOT CHANGING THAT THE SECOND ISSUE.
AND THIS ONLY APPLIES IF WHAT I'M DOING IS CONSIDERED A SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT AND THERE WERE SOME AMBIGUITIES AND, UM, DEBATES.
WHEN I'VE SPOKEN TO THE CITY BEFORE ABOUT THIS, IF IT IS CONSIDERED A SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT, THEN CURRENT CODE REQUIRES A SEPARATION OF TEMPE.
WELL, WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT IS ONLY SEPARATED BY FIVE FEET AND HOW WE ARE REALIGNING THIS BACK PRO BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY WOULD ACTUALLY EXPAND THAT DISTANCE TO SOMEWHERE BETWEEN AN EIGHT AND NINE AND A HALF FEET.
SO LET ME GO TO SLIDE TWO AND I'LL ZIP THROUGH THIS VERY QUICKLY, BUT I'M GOING TO PAUSE WHERE YOU CAN KIND OF VISUALIZE WHAT I'M DOING.
SLIDE NUMBER TWO IS WHAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY, AND THAT IS AN OLD 1950S SINGLE CAR GARAGE THAT HAS AN L SHAPED ADDITION ON IT.
SLIDE THREE SHOWS YOU, AND THIS IS A BLOW UP OF THE SURVEY PIECE OF A PLANS.
THE YELLOW AREA IS THE EXISTING FOOTPRINTS I AM BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY IS COVERED BY LIVE OAK TREES.
UM, AND THAT T 14, YOU SEE TO THE LAB THAT WAS NOT ALIVE.
UH, THAT WAS AN INVASIVE SPECIES THAT WAS NOT BOUND IN A STORM.
SO THERE'S NO LONGER A TREE THERE.
AND WHEN THAT HAPPENED, THAT ENABLED US TO MOVE THIS FOOTPRINT OVER TO WHERE YOU SEE THE RED OUTLINE.
AND WE DID THAT TO GIVE THE LIVE OAK TREE THAT'S PROTECTED.
SO WE'RE BUILDING ON THE SAME FOOTPRINT, BUT ADJUSTING OVER A LITTLE BIT.
WHAT TRIGGERED ME NEEDING THE VARIOUS THIS, BECAUSE THIS WAS GOING UP TWO STORIES AND THEN QUICKLY I'LL CALL THROUGH THE NEXT TWO SLIDES TO SHOW YOU WHAT WE'RE DOING.
FIVE NUMBER FOUR, FIRST FLOOR PLAN, BEDROOM, BATH, AND THEN A LAUNDRY UTILITY WET RIM, AND THEN FOUR TO AN OFFICE IN A CLOSET WITH A OUT AN EXTERNAL STAIRCASE AND DECKING THAT KIND OF WRAPS AROUND THAT BEAUTIFUL LIVE OAK TREE.
SO THE OFFICE HAS THE FEEL OF A, UM, TREE HOUSE AND THEN SLIDE SIX.
THIS GOES INTO DETAIL WITH, IF IT IS CONSIDERED A SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT, YOU JUST LAY OUT THAT LEGAL ISSUE FOR YOU GUYS, SLIDE SEVEN.
THIS IS A DRAWING OF WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE WHEN WE'RE DONE MORE OR LESS.
AND THE ONLY THING THAT HAS CHANGED SINCE 2019 IS I AM NOW WANTING TO CONSTRUCT THIS BUILDING OUT OF HEMPCRETE, WHICH WILL REQUIRE A THICKER WALL INSTEAD OF THE STANDARD SIX INCHES, IT'LL BE A FOOT AND I'M HAVING MY ARCHITECT RIGHT NOW, ADJUST THOSE FOUR PLANS TO GIVE THAT EXTRA THICKNESS TO THE WALL.
UM, AND WITH THAT, IF Y'ALL I'M HERE FOR QUESTIONS, I TRY WANTING TO GO FAST TO RESPECT YOUR TIME.
UH, CAN YOU, DO YOU STILL HAVE TWO MINUTES LEFT, BUT, UM, WELL, AS FAR AS HARDSHIPS, SINCE I'M NOW JEALOUS THAT I DON'T GET THE EIGHT PLUS PRESENTATION THAT THE PRIOR PRESENTER GOT, SO I'LL GO FOR THE B THIS, LIKE I SAID, THIS PROPERTY IS JUST PACKED WITH LIVE OAK TREES AND THE WAY THEY'RE POSITIONED.
UM, THERE'S NO WAY TO DO AN EXPANSION OF THE HOUSE REALLY.
AND I DO VERY MUCH LOVE THE TREES.
AND ONE OF THE, UH, ADDITION OR THE REBUILD WITH ADDITION ON THE PROPERTY TO REALLY RAPPER LITERALLY WRAP ITSELF AROUND THAT CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY.
[01:10:01]
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING A DISCUSSION OR NUMBER PER I HAD A QUESTION ON, UM, IN OUR PACKAGE, I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 15, IT'S EIGHT D EIGHT SLASH 15.UH, IT SHOWS A SURVEY HERE IS THIS, IS THIS A SURVEY OF WHAT'S EXISTING OUT THERE AT THIS, AT THIS POINT? AND I'M SORRY, I LOST MY SCREEN WHERE I HAD THE PACKET FILLED UP TO SEE THE SAME PAGE.
IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME A MOMENT WITH, UM, 15, I BELIEVE IT IS.
OH, ACTUALLY I SAID, THAT'S A PLOT PLAN.
I WAS TRYING TO SHOW YOU WHAT, HOW THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSES ARE THAT THIS BACKHOUSE CLIP CLOSE TO THE BACK PROPERTY LINE FITS IN WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE THREE PROPERTIES THAT MOST ADJOINED MY PROPERTY.
AND ONE OF THE, AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT ALWAYS COMES UP IN HERE IS, YOU KNOW, UH, AND I'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT WHAT YOU, WHAT YOU BELIEVE THE HARDSHIP TO BE, BECAUSE I JUST, I TYPICALLY THINK THAT NOT BEING ABLE TO BUILD WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO BUILD IS NOT NECESSARILY A HARDSHIP.
AND SO I'D LIKE TO ARTICULATE THAT A LITTLE MORE.
MA'AM OH, I WAS SAYING THAT THE HARDSHIP IS ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE PROPERTY ITSELF AND HOW UNIQUE IT IS.
AND THAT IS WHAT THE DENSITY OF THE, UM, TREE PLACEMENT ON IT.
AND THAT, IN FACT, I LEARNED THE HARD WAY.
IT'S MUCH BETTER TO HAVE A SECOND BATHROOM BECAUSE IN THE FREEZE WE LOST OUR ONE BATHROOM AND I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO LIVE AT MY HOUSE FOR, UNTIL VERY RECENTLY FROM ALL THE REPAIRS.
UM, THE TREES ARE SUCH THAT ANYTHING ON THE PROPERTY IS VERY DIFFICULT TO DO THE EXISTING BUILDING ON THE BACK.
IT WAS ROTTED OUT FROM A SLOPE IN THE GRADE.
IT WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT BELOW GRADE.
UM, AND TO REPLACE THE EXACT SAME THING WOULD NOT HAVE ADDED MUCH UTILITY TO IT.
UM, RIGHT NOW THE ONLY LAUNDRY ON THE PROPERTY IS IN THAT BACK GARAGE.
AND IT'S PRETTY, NOT FUNCTIONAL BECAUSE IT'S ROCK LOTS OF DIRTS AND SPIDER AND NO, UM, NO SEWAGE PLUMBING AND, UM, AND ACTUALLY SINCE THE FREEZE NEEDING TO COMPLETELY REPLACE THE PLUMBING THAT'S OUT THERE.
THAT WAS PROBABLY NOT MY MOST ARTICULATE ANSWER.
BUT DID IT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? THANK YOU FOR MEMBER BAILEY.
YOU WERE SAYING THAT THE BUILDINGS OR THE PROPERTIES AROUND YOU HAVE AN EXEMPT ACCESSORY UNITS IN THE REAR, ARE THEY ALL TWO STORY? OKAY.
UM, THEY ARE THE ONES IMMEDIATELY NEXT TO ME OR NOT, BUT LIKE MOST OF CENTRAL AUSTIN, MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS GETTING COMPLETELY FILLED WITH HOMES AS EXISTING HOMES BEING TORN DOWN AND HOUSES BEING BUILT TO THE MAXIMUM ENVELOPE THAT ARE TWO STORY AND LOOM OVER.
AND I'LL SAY ONE THING I DID WITH THE DESIGN OF THIS AND RESPECT MY NEIGHBORS BEHIND ME IS THE WINDOW PLACEMENT ON THE SECOND FLOOR IS NON-EXISTENT OR A SMALL WINDOW PLACED VERY HIGH.
BUT SINCE I DESIGNED IT, THE NEIGHBOR TO OVER, UM, A DEVELOPER HAS SPENT A GIANT HOUSE THAT CAN SEE, WELL, IT'S MY BACKYARD.
I BELIEVE THAT THE TREES ARE A HARDSHIP.
I SAT HERE TODAY AND MY NEIGHBOR CUT DOWN 17 OAK TREES TODAY TO ACCOMMODATE TO THEIR HOUSE AND THEIR POOL.
UM, SO I'M IN FAVOR AS I WAS WHEN YOU WERE HERE LAST TIME.
I APPRECIATE THAT 17 OAK TREES.
IT MADE ME SICK BOARD MEMBER PUT DARRELL.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
UH, BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE IS THAT WE APPROVE WHAT WAS APPROVED IN 2019 IN CASE NUMBER C 15, 2019 0 0 0 1.
UH, AND WITH THE PROVISO THAT THE, UH, NEW DWELLING UNIT NOT BE USED FOR SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
I JUST HAVE ONE COMMENT ON THAT DARYL, CAUSE I WAS GONNA DO THE SAME THING UNTIL I LOOKED AT THE SIZE OF THE TREE.
SHE HAS A CAT MOVE IT FORWARD ON THE FIVE FEET BECAUSE OF THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE OF THAT TREE.
UM, THERE'S NOT REALLY A PLACE TO MOVE IT.
[01:15:01]
WELL, I GUESS SHE COULD MOVE IT WITHOUT A BIG TREE.I THINK SHE SAID THAT TREE'S GONE NOW.
THAT'S THE ONE, THE ONE THAT GOT IS T 12 GONE.
IT'S THE ONE TO THE WEST OF THE STRUCTURE.
IS THAT THE ONE? IT WAS CHINESE PARASOL THAT WAS PIPING DOWN AFTER A STORM.
T 14 WAS WHAT WAS TAKEN DOWN K-12 IS WHAT I REFERRED TO AS THE BACK PORCH TREE.
THAT IS THE TREE THAT I'M DESIGNING THIS WHOLE THING AROUND PROTECTED TREE AS IS.
I HAVE ANOTHER TREE COMING OUT OF MY FRONT PORCH.
IT'S THAT ONE QUESTION WAS ALL I HAD JUST TO NOTE THAT WE COULDN'T REALLY MOVE.
I CAN'T MOVE THAT STRUCTURE FORWARD FIVE FEET BECAUSE OF THAT TREE.
DARRYL HAS MADE A MOTION TO ACCEPT OUR, TO APPROVE THE ORIGINAL VARIANCES ARE A SECOND FOR THAT OR SINCE THAT'S WHAT I SAID AT THE BEGINNING, I WAS SECONDED.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, BUT MICHAEL, I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO DO A, AN, A SUBSTITUTE MOTION FOR WHAT SHE ASKED FOR NOW BECAUSE OF THE TREES, I GUESS I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
WE GOT TO PASS THE LOVE, MELISSA.
SO I WILL MAKE OUR MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR WHAT SHE ASKED FOR.
NO TREES WERE HARMED IN THE MAKING OF THIS FILM EXCEPT FOR GETTING KRISTEN.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE MAKING MELISSA SUBSTITUTE MOTION? YES.
FOR, FOR, FOR THE VARIANCE REQUESTED I'LL SECOND.
I'VE KIND OF BEEN DIGGING AROUND HERE.
DOES EVERYBODY ELSE HAVE THE PROBLEM WHEN YOU OPEN THE CASE THAT YOUR AGENDA GOES AWAY? LIKE MY AGENDA, LIKE I HAVE TO KEEP OPENING THE AGENDA OVER AND OVER AGAIN TO WINDOWS.
WELL, IT KEEPS JUST MOVING THEM OVER AND OVER.
SO I'M THE MOTION OR NOT HAVE A SECOND BY BROOKE RECENTLY USED ZONING REGULATIONS, ADEQUATE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE AS, UH, THIS IS ALMOST AN AFFIRMATION OF A VARIOUS SUCH HAS EXPIRED, UH, MODIFIED SLIGHTLY, UM, WITH THE PLACEMENT OF THE TREES ON THE LOT, THE EXISTING HOME WAS CONSTRUCTED TOWARD THE BACK OF THE LOT AND WITH THE, THE EXISTING GARAGE PLACEMENT, UH, AND IN, IN PROTECTING AND ENHANCING AROUND THE TREES THAT EXIST ON SITE.
UH, IS THERE ANY REGULATIONS DO NOT ALLOW FOR, OR REASONABLY REASONABLE YEARS? THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE BRANCH IS REQUESTED? THE PROPERTY IS THE LARGE AMOUNT AND PLACEMENT OF THE TREES ON THE LOT AND THE EXISTING DILAPIDATED STRUCTURE.
UM, THIS PLACEMENT, HAVING IT BE A LITTLE BIT FARTHER BACK, ACTUALLY IT'S BETTER FOR THE 24 INCH LIVE OAK.
AND, UH, I THINK THAT THE TREES ARE A BIG ASSET TO THE PROPERTY.
OUR TIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AS IS THERE THE AMOUNT OF TREES, UH, PEPPER WITHIN AREA CHARACTER, THE PLACEMENT AND DESIGN THE STRUCTURES, KEEPING WITH THE ORIGINAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND AS SECONDARY STRUCTURES WERE BUILT, UH, AT THAT TIME WITHIN THE CODE WITH A FIVE FOOT, YOUR REAR YARD SETBACK, AND, UH, ALL THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES HAVE SOME MOTOR STRUCTURES AND THE DESIGN IS, IS DONE TO ACCOMMODATE, UH, PRIVACY OF THE ADJACENT HOMEOWNERS WITH THE WINDOWS CAREFULLY PLACED.
AND THAT THE COURTYARD IS REALLY FOCUSED AROUND THAT 24 INCH LIVE OAK THE END.
SO THIS IS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION MADE BY A VICE-CHAIR HOT FLORIDA FOR THE VARIANTS AS REQUESTED SECONDED BY BROOKE BAILEY.
AND I FORGOT TO ASK, UM, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
I'M ASSUMING IT'S NOT OVER 1100 SQUARE FEET, BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD IN WITH DARYL HEAD ON HIS MOTION, THAT IT TO BE AN STR EXCEPTED.
SO DO WE HAVE TO RESTART THAT SINCE THAT WAS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?
[01:20:01]
YES, SHE WAS THE SECOND I WOULD S THE EMOTION OR SO JUST A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OF STR, BUT FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS ACCEPTED.SO WE'LL JUST START OVER TIME.
THERE ARE NO AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.
YOUR VARIANCES APPROVED TEN ONE.
CONGRATULATIONS WITH THE, UH, NO STR PROVISION OR CONDITION.
NEXT ITEM IS GOING TO BE ITEM D NINE C 15 20 21 0 0 7 2 4 2 8 0 6.
THE MINUTE YOU SAID IT, I WAS LIKE, THAT SOUNDED FAMILIAR.
[D-10 C15-2021-0074 Sean O’Brien 5607 Highland Crest Drive On-line Link: Item D-10; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2- 773 (Duplex Residential Use) (B) (5) (b) from two stories (maximum allowed) to three stories (requested) in order to erect a Duplex Residential use in an “SF-3”, Single-Family Residence zoning district.]
YOU TURN C 15 20 21 0 0 7 4 4 5 6 0 7 HIGHLAND CREST DRIVE.LET'S GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP, MR. O'BRYAN.
YOUR PRESENTATION IS UP FROM PAGE ONE AND YOU'VE GOT FIVE MINUTES.
UM, SECTION 25 DASH TWO DASH 7 7 3 SPECIFICALLY RESTRICTS DUPLEXES TO 30 FEET FOR TWO STORIES.
INTERPRETATION IS NOT APPLIED TO EACH UNIT OF A TWO UNIT DUPLEX, BUT RATHER IT IS APPLIED TO THE TOTAL STRUCTURE HEIGHT.
THIS VARIANCE IS REQUESTING A TOTAL FRESHER HEIGHT OF THREE STORIES, AND NONE OF THE UNITS WILL BE MORE THAN TWO STORIES ON THEIR OWN.
THE BUILDING TENT WILL BE FULLY RESPECTED.
THE HARDSHIP FOR THIS SITE IS THE CROSS SLOPE, WHICH NATURALLY SPLITS THE FOUNDATION INTO TWO ELEVATIONS, ROUGHLY 12 FEET APART AND VERTICALLY WITH THE FIRST FLOOR OF EACH UNIT, STARTING 12 FEET APART.
THE NATURAL SIDE BY SIDE DUPLEX WILL BECOME THREE STORIES.
THE PREVIOUS NEW BLOOD STRUCTURE WAS APPROXIMATELY THE SAME SCALE, BUT THE STRUCTURE BURNED DOWN IN 2019.
WE WOULD LIKE TO REBUILD IN THE SAME APPROXIMATE SCALE AND SPACE AS THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE, GIVEN THE NEED FOR HOUSING UNITS IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, THE BEST USE FOR THIS SITE IS TO BUILD TWO AGAIN, AS IT WAS BEFORE THE FIRE, THE NEIGHBOR TO THE WEST IS ALSO A DUPLEX ON HIS OWN SF THREE.
THE TWO STORY PORTION OF OUR STRUCTURE WILL BE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOR AND THE THREE-STORY PORTION WILL BE ADJACENT TO OUR OFFICE BUILDING NEIGHBORS ZONE, BUT G R N C S REFER TO THE PHONE AND EXHIBITS FOR SCALP COMPARISON.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE ZONING OF OUR NEIGHBORS.
AS YOU LOOK AT THE HOUSE FROM, UH, HIGHLAND CRUSH, DRIVE THE NEIGHBORS TO THE LEFT, WHICH IS WHERE THE THREE-STORY PORTION WOULD BE ARE THE COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES.
AND THE TWO STORY PORTION WOULD BE TO THE RIGHT AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT.
UH, THE SF THREE ZONE PROPERTIES, SLIDE THREE, PLEASE.
THIS IS AN IMAGE WE GATHERED FROM, UH, GOOGLE STREET VIEW SHOWING THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE THAT BURNED DOWN IN 2019.
IT SHOWS A THREE-STORY STRUCTURE, UM, MOVING, WE'RE KIND OF MOVING DOWN THE HILL HERE, LABELED THEM FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD FLOOR.
AND I CHOSE THIS VIEW TO SHOW THE DUPLEX.
THAT'S STILL STANDING TO THE RIGHT, THE NEIGHBORING DUPLEX, UM, FOR SCALE IN GENERAL THERE, UH, SLIDE FOUR, PLEASE.
UM, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT IS ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE AND THE NEIGHBORING DUPLEX AGAIN IS ON THE RIGHT DEMONSTRATING THE STREET VIEW, BUT FOUR IS A SIMILAR VIEW, BUT MORE AT THE HUMAN LEVEL, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THAT WE'RE PROJECTING, UH, OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A MODEL, BUT WE'RE EXPECTING THAT OUR ROOF LINE IS GOING TO BE LOWER THAN OUR EXISTING NEIGHBOR.
THIS IS, UH, AN EXISTING SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY THAT WAS DONE, UM, IN 2021.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT ONE OF THE SLABS.
SO THE SLAB IS LEFT FROM THE FIRE.
[01:25:01]
ELEVATION.AND THE NEXT LAB OVER AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS IMAGE, UH, PLAN RIGHT, IS 785 FEET.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE, THE CHANGE IN ELEVATION THERE, UH, UH, THE PREVIOUS, UM, STRUCTURES AND WE'RE, WE'RE AIMING TO REUSE THIS, UH, FOUNDATION.
SO, UM, TRYING TO PRESERVE SENDING STUFF TO THE LANDFILL.
UH, AND THAT IS MY PRESENTATION.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, LET'S START WITH, UH, BOARD MEMBER BLOOM.
IF YOU HAVE FOR THE APPLICANT.
SO THE RENDERINGS SHOW PARKING ONLY ON ONE SIDE OF THE UNIT FOR ONLY ONE OF THE TWO UNITS IN THE DUPLEX.
UM, IS THAT CORRECT? IS IT THAT PARKING INTENDED TO SERVE BOTH UNITS OR JUST A SINGLE UNIT? AND IF IT'S SINGLE UNIT, WHERE IS THE PARKING FOR THE OTHER UNIT? SO THE OTHER PARKING, UM, IF, IF WE GO BACK TO SLIDE SIX OF THE PRESENTATION ON THE SURVEY, UH, IF YOU COULD IMAGINE DRIVING IN FROM THE TOP OF THE PAGE, UH, WHERE THE CURB CUT IS THERE'S PARKING JUST TO YOUR RIGHT AS YOU COME IN, THEY'RE UP AGAINST A RETAINING WALL, A ROCK RETAINING WALL.
SO THAT WOULD BE PARKING FOR ONE UNIT WHEN THEN THE CARPORT IS PARKING FOR ANOTHER THAT YOU NOTICED.
MY QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT WAS, UH, YOU'RE INTENDING TO BUILD TWO, TWO STORY DUPLEXES.
AND IS IT YOUR CONTENTION THAT AT TWO, ONE STORY DUPLEXES WOULD NOT BE A REASONABLE USE OF THIS PROPERTY? WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO COME CLOSE TO THE FR THAT I'M ALLOWED.
I DO HAVE TREES AROUND THE EXISTING SLAB TREE.
SO I CAN'T REALLY COME PLAN SOUTH ANY FURTHER.
AND I HAVE QUITE A BIT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER TO WORK WITH OR TO WORK AROUND.
I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE TO REDUCE IMPERVIOUS COVER OVER AS IT, AS THE LAND IS RIGHT NOW, IT'S OVER, UH, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS.
SO I'M TRYING TO KEEP A COMPACT FOOTPRINT WHILE STILL MAINTAINING DRIVEWAYS AND, UM, SIDEWALKS AND WELL, NO, BUT MY QUESTION, BUT MY QUESTION IS IF YOU STAY WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE CONCRETE SLABS YOU HAVE AND MAKE THEM BOTH ONE STORY THAT WOULD BE A REASONABLE USE FOR THIS PROPERTY, WOULDN'T IT? IT WOULD REMOVE QUITE A BIT.
IT WOULD RE REMOVE, UH, MAYBE A QUARTER OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT I'M ABLE TO GET WITH THE PLAN THAT I HAVE DRAWN.
BUT YOU CAN'T DO THAT WITHOUT A VARIANCE, RIGHT? CORRECT.
I NEEDED A VARIANCE TO GET BACK TO THE ALLOWED IF THEY ARE, AND, AND BUILDING ONE STORY DUPLEXES ON THOSE TWO SLABS WOULD BE A REASONABLE USE FOR THIS PROPERTY.
CHAIR, WILL YOU LET HIM SPEAK, PLEASE? I WANT HIM TO ANSWER MY QUESTION CLEARLY, DARRYL, YOU HAVEN'T REALLY CHECKED IT OUT BECAUSE I DROVE OUT TO THE SITE AND THAT SITE, THAT SLAB IS NOT A LEVEL SLAB TO SLAB THAT IS 11% HIGHER AND IT DROPS.
I WOULD LIKE FOR HIM TO ANSWER, I'D LIKE HIM TO ANSWER MY QUESTION.
WE HAVE TO SHOW, WE HAVE TO FIND, TO FIND THAT THERE IS NO REASONABLE USE CAN BE MADE OF THIS PROPERTY.
I'VE ASKED A QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT AND I WOULD LIKE FOR THEM TO ANSWER IT, LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER NO MORE ARGUING, PLEASE.
I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION I WAS HERE TO PRESENT A HARDSHIP, NOT A REASONABLE USE.
UM, BUT YES, I COULD REASONABLY BUILD A TWO STORY STRUCTURE.
I CAN NOT BUILD A TWO-STORY STRUCTURE AND MEET, UH, FAR THAT I'M ALLOWED, WHICH I THINK IS, UH, I THINK I SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO MAKE THE FIR OKAY, THANK YOU.
I DROVE OUT TO THAT SITE AT FOUR 15 THIS AFTERNOON AND THE, BECAUSE I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WHEN I GOOGLE EARTH, IT DID SEE THE OLD UNIT THERE AND HE IS CORRECT.
[01:30:01]
AND THAT'S WHERE KELLY'S QUESTION ABOUT WHERE'S THE PARKING KIND OF BE, THERE IS PARKING THERE THAT THE VIEW THAT HE SHOWS IN HIS PACKAGE IS SHOWING THE NEIGHBORING DUPLEX AND THEN IT TO THE LEFT OF THAT VIEW, THERE IS ACTUALLY A DRIVEWAY THAT GOES IN WHERE THE OLD, THE OLD DUPLEX USED TO BE.AND I HAD A LITTLE GARAGE DOWNSTAIRS, A CAR PORT OVER THE TOP, AND THEN YOU WENT UPSTAIRS.
BUT THE WAY THAT IS THE WAY THAT, THAT, UM, PROPERTY IS SITUATED, THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THAT PROPERTY IS TECHNICALLY, HE'S ASKING ALMOST THE HEIGHT OF A THREE-STORY, BUT HE'S ONLY BUILDING TWO STORIES FROM UP HERE BECAUSE THAT ONE SECTION IS 11 FOOT DROP.
AND BASICALLY WHAT I SAW ON THE OLD, UH, THE OLD TRAVIS COUNTY PLANS FOR THAT PROPERTY, AS YOU GO IN THE DOOR AND YOU WENT UP THE STAIRS AND YOU WENT UP TO THE DUPLEX, IT WAS UP IN THE TOP.
SO HE HA HE DOES HAVE A LEGITIMATE, UM, REQUEST.
MY ONLY CONCERN IS, IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE A SET OF DRAWINGS FOR THIS.
AND SO WE'VE SEE A COUPLE OF, UH, UH, PRELIMINARY ELEVATION SKETCHES.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A SET OF DRAWINGS BECAUSE I WANT TO SEE HOW THEY'RE GOING TO, UH, APPROACH THAT OFFSET IN THE SLAB.
I MEAN, LITERALLY IT'S 11 FEET IT'S I GOT OFF MY TRUCK AND I MEASURED IT.
IT'S 11 FEET FROM THAT DRIVEWAY TO WHERE HIS LAB IS UP AT THE TOP.
SO IF HE'S MEASURING FROM THE DRIVEWAY TO THE TOP OF HIS HOUSE, YES, HE'S REQUESTING THREE STORIES, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE SAYING HE'S ONLY BUILDING A TWO-STORY DUPLEX.
AND THERE'S SOME OTHER QUESTIONS HERE.
I'M GOING TO HOLD, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR SOME OF THE OTHER MEMBERS QUESTIONS.
I REMEMBER MACARTHUR, I MEAN, OKAY.
CAN I RESPOND TO THAT? WAS THERE A QUESTION THAT MICHAEL? YEAH, I'D LIKE, I'D LIKE TO HEAR, YOU KNOW, BARBARA IT'S GO AHEAD.
REMEMBER LESS IS MORE, I WOULD JUST LIKE THE, UH, POINT OUT IN MY APPLICATION.
UM, D DASH 10 SLASH THREE PAGE, I'M SORRY.
UM, THE HARDSHIP THAT PROPERTY HAS A SIDE SLOPE GRADE CHANGE FROM ONE PROPERTY LINE TO THE OTHER 16 FEET.
WHEN YOU PUT A DUPLEX NEXT TO ANOTHER DUPLEX ON THIS KIND OF A SITE, THE TOTAL STRUCTURE BECOMES THREE STORIES.
ASSUMING TWO TWO-STORY UNITS, THIS HARDSHIP IS UNIQUE ON THIS SITE GRADE.
ADDITIONALLY, A THREE-STORY DUPLEX WAS PREVIOUSLY ON THIS SITE BEFORE IT BURNED DOWN.
SO THE REASON I'M READING YOU THE WHOLE STATEMENT HERE, BUT THE LAST SENTENCE IS IT IS WORTH NOTING THAT NEITHER UNIT WILL BE MORE THAN TWO STORIES INDIVIDUALLY.
SO I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE A THREE STORY UNIT IN THE TWO UNIT MIX.
AND I THINK THAT MIGHT BE THE CONCERN, BUT JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.
UM, I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT, UH, AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, NOW THERE'S MANY STRUCTURES THAT ARE REGARDED AS HAVING LIKE ONE STORY THAT ACTUALLY HAVE ONE AND A HALF STORIES BECAUSE THERE'S ADVOCATE EXEMPTIONS FOR BUILDING.
SO I, I, I, I WAS A LITTLE CONCERNED WITH THE LOGIC THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WERE OWED THEIR MAXIMUM FAA, OURS.
UM, AND THAT'S A REASON FOR A VARIANCE.
I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A FURTHER PLANS WITH THIS PROPERTY, NOT A BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUEZ.
I WAS JUST GOING TO ECHO WHAT MICHAEL WAS SAYING THAT, UM, ADDITIONAL DRAWINGS ARE NEEDED.
UM, A LONGITUDINAL SECTION CROSS SECTION WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL.
UM, THERE'S ELEVATIONS, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S TOPOGRAPHY ON YOUR SURVEY, BUT I THINK THAT, UM, ADDITIONAL, YOU KNOW, DOCUMENTATION WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KIND OF REALLY VISUALIZE IT BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.
I DO THINK THERE'S A HARDSHIP ON THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THE TREES AND THE SMOKE.
BUT I DO AGREE THAT WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION, BUT HE IS REPLACING ON THE SAME FOUNDATION AND WE CAN, WE CAN ALSO TIE THE VARIANCE TO THAT, THAT HE'S GOT TO USE THE SAME FOUNDATIONS AS WHAT WAS BURNED DOWN.
AND USUALLY, UM, YOU DON'T AUTOMATICALLY GET A BUILDING PERMIT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, BUT USUALLY IT'S A REASON FOR A HARDSHIP.
THERE WAS A STRUCTURE THERE THAT WAS TWO STORY.
IT WAS ON THOSE FOUNDATIONS THAT ARE EXISTING.
HE'S GOING TO REDUCE THE IMPERVIOUS BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF CONCRETE OUT THERE.
UM, BUT I, I AGREE WITH SAYING MORE DRAWINGS, IF THAT WOULD HELP PEOPLE.
[01:35:02]
SO A BOARD MEMBER OF 1 0 1, I BELIEVE YOU HAD A MOTION.YEAH, MY WELL BERKS MADE A VERY GOOD POINT.
AND, UH, AGAIN, UH, IN A, YOU KNOW, AN EXPEDIENCY, IF, UH, I LIKE HER, IF SHE WANTS TO MAKE THAT AS A MOTION, I'M OKAY WITH THAT BECAUSE THE OLD PLACE DID HAVE THAT THIRD, THIRD FLOOR, WHICH CREATED A THIRD STORY SITUATION.
SO WORK, I MEAN, I'M, I'M, IF IT'S, I MEAN, I HAVE A SECOND ALSO, IF SHE'S FINE WITH, UH, WITH, WITH, UH, WITH GOING TO POSTPONEMENT MOTION, I'M WITHDRAW MY MOTION.
WHY WOULD THAT BE? I KNOW THERE WERE SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT WANTED MORE DRAWINGS AND SO I'M OKAY WITH POSTPONING SO THAT PEOPLE CAN GET THE INFORMATION.
THEY NEED TO MAKE THEM FEEL COMFORTABLE MAKING A DECISION, BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT THAT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES WE DON'T GET ENOUGH INFORMATION, SO I'M FINE WITH MOST PLANNING, BUT I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT THE POINTS THAT THERE ARE HARDSHIPS ON THIS PROPERTY THAT DO EXIST IN MY MIND.
WELL, AND I'M OKAY WITH THAT TOO, BROOKE, BUT WE'VE GOT, WE'VE ALREADY POSTPONED A BUNCH OF FOLKS.
I WATCHED YOU ALL LAST LAST MONTH.
ALSO POSTPONE SOME PEOPLE IN TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES AND WERE, BUT I'M OKAY WITH IT.
IF YOU WANT TO POSTPONE EVERYBODY ELSE WANTS TO SEE SOME PLANS.
I'LL HANG ONTO MY MOTION AND I'LL MOVE TO POSTPONE.
AND IF IT FAILS, I'LL MAKE A SECOND.
I'LL MAKE A SECOND MOTION IF IT FAILS.
IS THERE A SECOND TO POSTPONE? OKAY.
WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO POSTPONE BY MICHAEL NOLAN WITH A SECOND BY BOARD MEMBER WALLER AND THE SPEED OF POSTPONE TILL AUGUST 9TH.
AND YOU COME BACK TO ME, PLEASE.
EITHER WAY WITH BROOKS, POTION OR MICHAELS.
SO WHY DON'T YOU PUT ME AT THE END? OKAY.
UM, ANY MORE INFORMATION ON THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED NEW STRUCTURE WOULD HELP? UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE A PROMISING CASE, BUT, UM, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE APPROVING WITHOUT THE SECTION IN PARTICULAR KELLY BLOOM.
BAILEY SOUNDS LIKE PEOPLE NEED MORE OF THOSE.
SO WE ARE GOING TO POSTPONE THIS TILL THE AUGUST 9TH MEETING.
UH, YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT YOU NEED TO BRING, UH, PLEASE CONTACT ELENA PI.
JUST A REMINDER, PLEASE RESPECT EACH OTHER AND LET'S FOLLOW THE RULES OF ORDER WITHOUT TALKING OVER EACH OTHER.
RAISE YOUR HAND AND I WILL CALL ON YOU SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE CONFUSION.
[D-11 C15-2021-0075 Tere O’Connell for Chris Oakland 813 Park Boulevard Unit 2 On-line Link: Item D-11 Part1; Part2; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2- 774 (Two-Family Residential Use) (C) (5) (a) from 1,100 total square feet (maximum allowed) to 1,150 square feet (requested) and (b) from 550 square feet on the second story (maximum allowed), to 575 square feet (requested) in order to remodel an existing historic detached Accessory Structure in an “SF-3-CO-NP”, Single- Family Residence-Combined Overlay-Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (Hancock Neighborhood Plan) Note: Per LDC 25-2-774 (Two-Family Residential Use) (C) The second dwelling unit (5) may not exceed (a) 1,100 total square feet or a floor-to-area ratio of 0.15, whichever is smaller; and (b) 550 square feet on the second story, if any.]
IS GOING TO BE D 11, C 15 20 21 0 0 7 5 OR ONE THREE PARK BOULEVARD, UNIT TWO, A SPEAKER'S GOING TO BE TARA O'CONNELL TERRI OR TERRA.HI, TERRY, HANG ON JUST A SECOND.
LET'S GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP.
WE HAVE YOUR FIRST PAGE OF YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP.
I'M THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT? EIGHT 13 FALL APART.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO PRESENT OUR CASE TODAY RATHER THAN THE GARAGE WERE BUILT IN 1929 FOR TOM MILLER, MAYOR OF AUSTIN FROM 1933 TO 49 AND 1955 TO 60 1:00 AM ALONG AND HER HUSBAND, HER HUSBAND STEWART PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN 1950 AND 48.
MS. LONG HAD BECOME THE FIRST CITY COUNCIL, FIRST WOMAN TO BE ELECTED TO THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL IN ANY MAJOR CITY COUNCIL IN TEXAS.
SHE LATER SERVED AS MAYOR PRO TEM
[01:40:01]
AND OTHER FIRST FOR AUSTIN IN ANY MAJOR, TEXAS CITY BELONGS, LIVED IN THE HOME UNTIL 1971, TOM MILLER DAM AND EMMA LONG PARK ARE TRIBUTES TO THEIR ENDURING LEGACY AND IMPACT ON THE CITY OF AUSTIN.AND THIS WAS BOTH OF THEIR HOMES.
YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS PHOTOGRAPH, THE MAIN HOUSE AND GARAGE ARE ARCHITECTURALLY AND VISUALLY TIED WITH MATCHING MATERIALS.
STEEPLY PITCHED WE'VE LINED ROOT WOOD, TRIM DETAILS, AND OTHER TUTORS, REVIVAL, DESIGN ELEMENTS.
THESE BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN VACANT SINCE THE 1980S.
THE OWNER IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO REHABILITATE THE ORIGINAL TWO-STORY HISTORIC GARAGE STRUCTURE.
THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN DETERMINED, ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES BY THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION AND THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE.
THIS IS THE NORTH ELEVATION OR FRONT FACADE OF THE GARAGE AS BUILT IN 1929.
THE GARAGE IS 50 SQUARE FEET OVER THE TOTAL 1100 SQUARE FEET ALLOWED BY CODE SECTION 25 TO 7 74, C5 A AND B THE SECTION OF THE CODE DOESN'T ADDRESS EXISTING HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND MAKES IT UNNECESSARILY DIFFICULT TO REUSE THIS STRUCTURE.
THIS IS AN EXISTING HISTORIC BUILDING AND REMOVING 50 SQUARE FEET, OF COURSE, FROM THE GARAGE WITH DAMAGE THE INTEGRITY AND SYMMETRY OF THE BUILDING.
IT'S AN INFEASIBLE TO DO THAT SLIDE.
THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
THAT INCLUDES THE PERIO STATE SCENE HERE BEHIND THE GARAGE.
WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR PERMIT REVIEWER AND DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE.
THESE REVIEWERS HAVE CONFIRMED THAT THE SETBACKS ARE NOT AN ISSUE SINCE THE WHOLE TRACT OF LAND IS CONSIDERED.
WHAT PROPERTY FOR DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES.
WE USE OF THE BUILDING AVOIDS A WASTE OF RESOURCES AND MATERIALS, PROMOTE DENSITY AND PROTECTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.
ITS SIZE WAS LEGAL AT THE TIME THAT IT WAS CONSTRUCTED AND IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED ELIGIBLE FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION AT THE LOCAL AND NATIONAL LEVEL.
THESE IMAGES SHOWN SIDE BY SIDE, FURTHER EMPHASIZE HOW THE TWO BUILDINGS ARE ARCHITECTURALLY TIED TO EACH OTHER.
AS YOU'VE SEEN FROM SLIDES THREE THROUGH FIVE, THERE'S NO PLACE ON THE BUILDING WHERE WE CAN OR SHOULD NOTCH OUT 50 SQUARE FEET TO COMPLY WITH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE.
THIS IS A CLOSEUP VIEW OF THE GARAGE DOORS THAT WILL BE RESTORED USED.
THIS IS A SHOT OF THE INTERIOR VIEW OF THE GARAGE LOWER LEVEL.
THE STAIRS SHOWN IN THIS PHOTO IS TEMPORARY.
THE PERMANENT STAIRCASE WILL ASCEND FROM THE WEST ENTRY ON THE LOWER LEVEL.
THIS IS AN INTERIOR VIEW OF THE GARAGE UPPER LEVEL THAT WILL SERVE AS LIVING SPACE, UTILIZING THE ENTIRE BUILDING AS ONE WELLING UNIT.
THE CYCLISTS AND, UH, SHOWS THE TWO STORE GARAGE IN QUESTION NOTED IN GREEN, THE EXISTING BUILDING IS 575 SQUARE FEET PER FLOOR.
WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY INCREASE TO THE BUILDING'S FOOTPRINT OR MASSING.
WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO USE THE BUILDING WITH ITS CURRENT SQUARE FOOTAGE, 1100 SQUARE FEET, 1,150 SQUARE FEET.
THESE DRONES PRESENT THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS FOR THE GARAGE, UM, SHOWING THE RESTORATION SCOPE AND, UH, HOW WE ARE RETAINING THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING WITH THIS ADAPTATION TO A SECONDARY DWELLING.
THESE DRAWINGS ILLUSTRATE THE FLOOR PLANS FOR THE GARAGE.
THE DEMOLITION PLAN REFLECTS THE REMOVAL OF PORTIONS OF THE SLAB TO EVALUATE STRUCTURAL STABILITY, OLD ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING SYSTEMS. UM, EXTERIOR STUCCO FROM A PREVIOUS REPAIR AND THE REMOVAL OF WINDOWS FOR RESTORATION OR REPRODUCTION.
PARTIAL REMOVAL OF BRICK ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION WILL BE REPLACED WITH STUCCO.
SALVAGE BRICK WILL BE USED FOR MASONRY REPAIRS NEEDED ON BOTH THE GARAGE AND THE MAIN HOUSE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON THIS PROPERTY WILL COMPLY WITH ALL MODERN FAR AND IMPERVIOUS COVER REQUIREMENTS.
WORK WILL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH BY THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION AND THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION.
YOU SHOULD FIND LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM PRESERVATION, AUSTIN AND SEVERAL NEIGHBORS, NEIGHBORS WITHIN YOUR PACKET AS WELL.
THE HARDSHIP IS THAT LDC 25 TO 7 74 DOES NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE OF THIS HISTORIC BUILDING AS SECONDARY DWELLING.
WE BELIEVE THIS REQUEST DOES NOT IMPAIR THE SPIRIT OF THE CODE OR THE PURPOSES OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT AND MEETS THE CITY CITY'S GOALS TO PROMOTE DENSITY AND MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS WE'RE AVAILABLE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
[01:45:01]
AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION.OH, I WAS JUST, UM, I WAS REAL CURIOUS ABOUT THIS BEING A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT WITH THE BIG DEVELOPMENT ON PARK BOULEVARD.
IS THERE ANYBODY THAT CAN PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT? I, THE, THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS CREATED BY THE PERIO STATE.
UM, I THINK IN NEGOTIATION WITH THE NEIGHBORS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS PROPERTY REMAINED, UH
THEY, THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT IT BEING, UM, LOST OR DEMOLISHED AS PART OF THE PERRY ESTATE REDEVELOPMENT, AND THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
SO ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS IF THIS PROPERTY IS SOLD AND IT DOES NOT BECOME PART OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT, WILL IT NEED WHAT WILL HAPPEN? BECAUSE THE SETBACK IS CLEARLY VERY SMALL.
IS THERE A WAY TO SAVE THE PROPERTY THE UDA CARRIES WITH THE LAND, REGARDLESS OF OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR NOTING THAT YOU'RE RIGHT.
BOARD MEMBER AIDS, BOARD MEMBER, UH, ASKED HIM A QUESTION BOARD MEMBER, WADE.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAD AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE ABORIGINAL USE OF THE PROJECT.
SO LOOKING AT THE, IT LOOKED TO ME THAT THE PROPOSED USE WOULD BE TO HAVE AT DWELLING UNIT WHERE THAT GARAGE, THAT SECONDARY UNIT IS GOING TO BE.
I JUST WANT TO COME FROM, WAS THAT UNIT PREVIOUSLY USED AS A GARAGE OR HAS IT ALWAYS BEEN A DWELLING UNIT? YOU CAN SEE AS A GOOD QUESTION, YOU CAN SEE ON SLIDE NINE OF THE PRESENTATION, THERE'S PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SECONDARY SECOND FLOOR OF THAT BUILDING IT.
THERE WAS, UH, THERE WAS A DWELLING UNIT AT, AT THE SECOND FLOOR, ONLY AT THERE'S EVIDENCE OF A BATHROOM AND THE KITCHEN KITCHENETTE.
WE DON'T KNOW HOW LONG AGO IT WAS ABANDONED.
IT WAS NOT USED CERTAINLY IN THE LAST 40 YEARS OR 50 YEARS, BUT THERE WAS A DWELLING UNIT AT THE SECOND FLOOR ONLY.
AND THEN THE GARAGE WAS DOWN AT THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE GARAGE HAS A DOOR THAT HAS 16 FEET WIDE, WHICH REALLY ISN'T ENOUGH FOR A TWO CAR GARAGE, BUT IT WAS ORIGINALLY, THE FIRST FLOOR WAS USED AS A GARAGE.
THE SECOND FLOOR WAS USED AS A DWELLING UNIT.
WE WANT TO MAKE THE WHOLE BUILDING ONE DWELLING IT.
DID I SEE YOUR HAND UP OR NO? UM, I WAS GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE IF THERE'S NO.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY BOARD MEMBER WALLER AND THE SECOND BY VICE CHAIR HAWTHORN.
SO BROOKE, SHE BEAT YOU TO THAT.
I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT BY THE WAY.
SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS DISCUSSION LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, CALL THE VOTE FINDINGS FINDINGS.
UH, AND THAT'S UH, SO JERRY THAT'S THAT'S YOU AND I HAVE TO READ THE FINDINGS FROM THE BACKUP I SIGNED UP FOR MORE THAN I KNEW WHAT TO DO WITH SARAH.
UM, WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND? SO IF YOU, IF YOU HAVE YOUR PACKET PULLED OPEN, THEN YOU CLICK ON THE LINK FOR THE ITEM, THE ITEM.
DO YOU WANT PART ONE AND DRAFT FINDINGS WILL BE THERE ALL, LET'S SEE WHAT PEEVES THAT SOMETIMES ANYONE, ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER KNOW WHAT PAGE THAT'S ON RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF THEIR HEADS.
SO I DON'T HAVE TO LOOK IT UP FIVE DAY 11, FOUR, AND THEN THERE THEY ARE DEALING WITH BEFORE.
SO IT'S SECTION TWO VARIANTS FINDINGS.
YOU HAVE TO READ THE REASONABLE, USE THE HARDSHIP ABB AND THE AREA CHARACTER.
DO YOU 11 FOR MY PACKAGE? JUST LOADED.
WHAT PAGE IS THAT LOCATED ON? UH, PAGE FOUR.
SECTION TWO VARIANTS FINDINGS.
SO I'M READING THE REASONABLE, THE HARDSHIP AND BEING, AND THE AREA CHARACTER.
I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE REASONABLE.
UH, THE HISTORIC BUILDING FLOOR AREAS EXCEED THE ALLOWABLE AREA FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION BY 25 SQUARE FEET PER FLOOR, THE OVERAGE, THESE EXISTING UNAVOIDABLE, AND VERY MODEST IN SIZE.
[01:50:01]
VARIANCES REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IN THAT REMOVING 25 SQUARE FEET FROM EACH LEVEL OF THE TWO-STORY GARAGE IS NOT POSSIBLE OR REASONABLE WITHOUT INFLICTING DAMAGE ON THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING.THE RESIDENTS AND ACCOMPANY GARAGE WERE BUILT IN 1929 FOR AUSTIN MAYOR TOM MILLER, AND WAS LATER OWNED AND OCCUPIED BY EMMA LONG AUSTIN'S FIRST FEMALE COUNCIL WOMAN, UM, WHICH HAS CONTINUED IN THE ADDITIONAL SPACE.
DO I NEED TO READ THAT AS WELL? I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE ADDITIONAL SPACE LOOK AT IT.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE WE OFFER THAT THE UNIQUE LOOK CONDITION THAT QUALIFIES THIS PROPERTY AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS THE BUILDING IN QUESTION IS HISTORICALLY AND ARCHITECTURALLY TIED TO THE STYLE AND CHARACTER OF THE HISTORIC HOUSE AND SIGNIFICANT TO THE HISTORY OF AUSTIN.
LIKE FEW OTHERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD STRUCTURES WERE LEGAL AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION AND NO CHANGES ARE BEING MADE TO THE FOOTPRINT OF EITHER STRUCTURE AND THE AREA CHARACTER.
I HAVE A, THERE'S A PORTION OF THIS THAT I'M NOT ABLE TO READ.
THERE'S A BLANK SPOT ON MY PACKET.
UM, DO YOU HAVE THE FIRST PART THAT STARTS WITH THESE HISTORIC BUILDINGS? HISTORIC BUILDINGS I'LL READ AS MUCH AS, AS VISIBLE.
THESE HISTORIC BUILDINGS HAVE STOOD AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD FABRIC SINCE THEIR CONSTRUCTION IN 1929 BUILT THE SAME YEAR AS THE ADJACENT COMMODORE PERIOD STATE THE LAND ORIGINALLY BEGUN BELONGED TO EG COPPER PERIOD.
IF THE VARIANCE HAS APPROVED, THE MAIN HOUSE AND GARAGE WILL MAINTAIN THEIR ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT AND MASSING AND COUNTRY CONTINUED TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY BOARD MEMBER WALLER AND A SECOND BY VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE.
SO JUST REAL QUICK FOR THE NEW MEMBERS, WHEN YOU'RE READING THE FINDINGS, THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF WIGGLE ROOM ON WHERE YOU CAN CUT THE BOTTOM.
UH, IF IT, IF IT TENDS TO BE MAYBE A LITTLE LONG, BUT YOU CAN GET EVERYTHING YOU NEED THAT THAT'S LIKE PERTINENT TO THE FINDINGS INTO SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT SHORTER, FEEL FREE TO DO SO.
AND THEN LET'S MOVE ON TO CARRIE.
YOU WERE THROWN RIGHT IN A FIRE.
NORMALLY WHEN WE'RE ON THE DICE AND NEW MEMBERS COME, I USUALLY PULL THEM ASIDE AND LET THEM KNOW, HEY, THIS IS WHERE YOUR FINDINGS ARE BECAUSE MY FIRST TIME, 12, 13 YEARS AGO, WHEN I WAS APPOINTED, THEY DIDN'T TELL ME THAT.
AND WE WERE ON LIVE TV AT THE DIOCESE, AND EVERYBODY'S JUST SORT OF LOOKED AT ME AND SAID, GIVE ME YOUR FINDINGS.
SO I TRIED NOT TO LET ANYBODY ELSE FALL INTO THAT.
SO YOU DID A GOOD JOB BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUEZ.
DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION REAL QUICK? YEAH.
ARE YOU REQUIRED TO ALSO READ JUST THE, THE PART OF THE FINDINGS THAT'S PART OF THE PACKET, THE PART OF THE APPLICATION, OR CAN WE JUST GO STRAIGHT TO THE REPLY FROM THE APPLICANT? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YES.
THE REASON WE READ THOSE FINDINGS IS, IS BECAUSE IT'S GOING ON THE RECORD.
AND ON THE RECORD, IF YOU JUST START READING WHAT THE APPLICANT PUTS IN, SOMETIMES PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHERE THE HARDSHIP IS OR WHAT IS YOUR CHARACTER IS BECAUSE YOU WILL ALSO FIND, AND THIS IS FOR EVERYBODY'S EDIFICATION AS WELL.
SOMETIMES THIS HARDSHIP IS NOT UNIQUE TO THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE, AND YOU WILL FIND THAT THAT LITTLE BRIEF SECTION IS A BETTER HARDSHIP THAN WHAT THEY PUT IN THE HARDSHIP.
SO SOMETIMES, AND IT'S PERFECTLY OKAY.
AS LONG AS IT'S ON THE RECORD TO REVERSE THOSE AROUND IN THE HARDSHIP, BUT YOU, YEAH, IT'S JUST, AS SHE SAID, IT'S EASY.
IT'S OKAY TO CUT THEM DOWN SHORTER, BUT YOU DO WANT TO READ THE WHOLE THING.
SO EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT IF THEY PULL UP, UH, OPEN RECORDS, THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHERE IT GOES.
[E-2 C15-2021-0036 Ron Thrower for Chalice McGee 6141 Jumano Lane On-Line Link: Item E-2 PART1, PART2, PART3, PART4; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from Section 25-2-899 (D) (E) (F) (Fences as Accessory Uses) to increase the height permitted from 6 feet (required) to 8 feet (requested) in order to maintain a recently constructed 8 ft. fence in an “SF-2-NP”, Single-Family Residence-Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (West Oak Hill Neighborhood Plan) Note: The Land Development Code 25-2-899 (D) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a solid fence constructed along a property line may not exceed an average height of six feet or a maximum height of seven feet. (E) states: a solid fence along a property line may be constructed to a maximum height of eight feet if each owner of property that adjoins a section of the fence that exceeds a height of six feet files written consent to the construction of the fence with the building official; and (2) a structure, including a telephone junction box, exists that is reasonably likely to enable a child to climb over a six foot fence and gain access to a hazardous situation, including a swimming pool. (F) A solid fence may be constructed to a maximum of eight feet in height if the fence is located on or within the building setback ]
I DON'T NEED TO SEE 15 20, 21 0 0 3 6.UH, THIS IS GOING TO BE 4 6 1 4 1 JUNE MONOLINE
[01:55:01]
WITH RON.UH, WHEN YOU HAVE THE PRESENTATION PULLED UP, UH, WE'RE PULLING IT UP NOW ONE SEC.
WE ARE ON PAGE ONE OF YOUR PRESENTATION.
UH, BOARD CHAIR, BOARD MEMBERS, RON THROWER, UH, REPRESENTING THE LANDOWNER AT 61 41 JUMANA LANE.
ALSO ON THE LINE AND AVAILABLE IS VICTORIA HASI, WHO IS, UH, HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS, THE LANDOWNER.
IF THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, ONE OF US CAN ANSWER THEM.
UH, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE LEGEND OLD SUBDIVISION FROM 1985.
IT'S LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF WILLIAM CANNON AND ESCARPMENT DRIVE.
UH, THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE HOUSE TAKEN FROM GOOGLE OR STREET VIEW, AND YOU CAN SEE THE SIX FOOT EXISTING FANS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE, OF THE EXISTING HOUSE.
UM, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAD GONE TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WITH A SPECIFIC REQUEST TO INSTALL IT.
EIGHT FOOT STANDS ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE AND RECEIVED APPROVAL FOR THAT.
AND THROUGH THAT, UH, THERE WERE SEVERAL NEIGHBORS IN THE AREA THAT WERE, UH, NOTICED FOR THIS AND THEY ALL AGREED TO IT, UH, SAID THAT IT WAS OKAY.
THE NEXT SLIDE HERE SHOWS THE, UH, HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION HAS APPROVED THE REQUEST TO INSTALL AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
THIS, THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE ORIGINAL SIX FOOT FENCE, UM, AND, UH, ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AND THEN AT THE BOTTOM, IT SHOWS THE REPLACED EIGHT FOOT FENCE.
AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT HERE TO NOTICE THE TOPOGRAPHIC DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES IS VERY EVIDENT BECAUSE IN THE TOP PICTURE YOU CAN SEE THE, UH, THE, UH, UMBRELLA ON THE PATIO AND THE WINDOWS.
AND IN THE BOTTOM VIEW, YOU CAN SEE THAT DOES HAVE, UH, DISAPPEARED FROM THE VIEW.
AND THAT'S JUST A CLEAR INDICATION THAT HE HAS A TOTAL GRAPHIC DISTANCE BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES.
UH, THIS SLIDE SHOWS, UH, THAT THERE IS THREE OWNERS THAT ABOVE THE FENCE THAT HAS AGREED TO THE EIGHT FOOT STANCE.
THERE IS ONE OWNER ON THE WEST SIDE THAT, UH, WAS NOT APPROACHED ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, BUT THAT'S WHY WE'RE IN THE SITUATION TODAY WHERE WE'RE ASKING FOR THE BOARD TO GRANT A VARIANCE WITHOUT EVERYBODY'S CONSENT.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING FOR THIS FROM A SAFETY PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE WE BELIEVE IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
UH, THIS, THIS PARTICULAR SIDE, YOU CAN SEE THE, IN THE, ON THE LEFT SIDE, THAT THE SURVEY SHOWS THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE FENCE PRIOR TO THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE GOING IN.
AND THEN THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT SHOWS AFTER THE FENCE HAS BEEN, HAS BEEN PUT IN AND THE FENCE IS SOLELY ON MY CLIENT'S PROPERTY.
IT'S NOT ON ANYBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY.
AND AGAIN, HERE, YOU CAN SEE THAT IT WAS, UH, INTENTIONAL TO PUSH THE FENCE OFF THE PROPERTY LINE BY AS MUCH AS SIX INCHES TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS ON OUR CLIENT'S PROPERTY AND NOT ON THE ABUTTING PROPERTY.
UH, IN THIS PARTICULAR SLIDE, YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY SHOWN IN BLUE, AND YOU CAN SEE THE TOPOGRAPHIC DISTANCE BETWEEN, UH, THE PROPERTIES ON THE WEST AND THE PROPERTIES ALONG TO MOTO DRIVE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S FOUR FOOT OF DEFERENCE ACROSS A 50 FOOT, UM, UH, DISTANCE, FOUR FOOT OF TOPOGRAPHIC DESINENCE ACROSS A 50 FOOT RUN, WHICH CERTAINLY WARRANTS THE CONDITIONS FOR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THIS PROPERTY LINE SO THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN HAVE A SAFE CONDITIONS TO ENJOY THE SIDE OF THEIR HOUSE.
UH, THIS IS A SLIDE THAT SHOWS ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA THAT HAVE SIGNED A LETTER OF SUPPORT.
UH, THOSE LETTERS WERE LATE TO BACK UP.
THEY DID NOT MAKE IT INTO THE BACK OF MATERIAL, BUT, UM, MR. LANE, RAMIREZ DOES HAVE, HAVE A COPY OF THESE IN THE FILE, BUT THESE ARE THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT HAVE AGREED TO THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE BEING LEFT IN PLACE.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS A PANORAMIC VIEW OF THE REAR EAST SIDE OF THE SUBJECT TRACK, AS IT RELATES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OF WHICH PRIVACY IS MOST SPECIFICALLY THOUGHT.
AND AGAIN, AND THAT'S WHEN IT HAS A SIX FOOT FENCE AND YOU CAN SEE THE UMBRELLA AND, UH, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS TO NOT PROVIDE FULL PRIVACY TO OUR CLIENT.
AND AGAIN, THIS ONE JUST SHOWS THE ORIGINAL FENCE ON THE TOP VIEW AND THE EXISTING FAM IN THE BOTTOM VIEW.
[02:00:01]
AND I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT AGAIN THAT THIS TO ME CLEARLY SHOWS THE TYPE OF GRAPHIC DEFERENCE THAT IS EVIDENT ON THE SITE OF HOW MUCH PRIVACY IS GAINED WITH THE ADDITIONAL FANS WOULD ALSO PROVIDE, UH, ADDITIONAL SECURITY AND SAFETY FOR OUR CLIENT.AND AGAIN, UM, MS. VICTORIA HOTSY IS ON THE LINE AND, UH, MYSELF AND WE'RE AVAILABLE.
I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING A BOARD MEMBER OF A NOLAN.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR, UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, THAT I NOTICED ON YOUR, YOUR, UM, ILLUSTRATION THERE THAT YOU HAD EVERYBODY EXCEPT FOR ONE HOME OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES THAT YOU SAY YOU HAVE A LETTER FROM.
THERE IS ONE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER THAT WE DO NOT HAVE A LETTER FROM.
IS THERE A PARTICULAR REASON WHY YOU DON'T BECAUSE SECTION KNEE STATES A SOLID FENCE ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE MAY BE CONSTRUCTED TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF EIGHT FEET.
IF EACH OWNER ON THE PROPERTY THAT JOINS A SECTION OF THE FENCE THAT EXCEEDS THE HEIGHT OF SIX FEET, FILE'S WRITTEN CONSENT.
SO ALL YOU REALLY NEED TO DO IS GET A LETTER FROM THAT ONE, THAT ONE HOME OWNER AND PRESENTED TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, AND YOU DON'T NEED TO BE IN FRONT OF US.
I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CODE PROVISION YOU'RE SIDING.
AND I CAN TELL YOU WITH A HUNDRED PERCENT CERTAINTY THAT THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GAIN A POSITIVE LETTER FROM THIS ADJACENT LANDOWNER.
AND IT IS THIS ADJACENT LANDOWNER THAT IS CERTAINLY HEIGHTENED SITUATION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS CAUSING FOR OUR CLIENT TO PUT IN THIS EIGHT FOOT FENCE FOR HER SAFETY AND FOR THE SAFETY OF THAT ADJACENT LANDOWNER.
UM, IF YOU CAN SEE A, YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE FULL PRESENTATION AND THE VERY LAST SLIDE IN OUR FULL PRESENTATION SHOWS YOU THE CONDITIONS THAT'S GOING ON, UH, WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING FOR A SAFE, SANCTUARY TYPE CONDITION FOR OUR LANDOWNER TO HAVE WITH HIS EIGHT FOOT CATS.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S SUPPORTED BY THE VAST MAJORITY OF EVERYBODY THAT HAS VISIBILITY TO THIS FENCE.
AND CAN YOU TELL ME IF WHAT, UM, HEALTH AND SAFETY CONCERN IS IN PLAY HERE THAT YOU NEED AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE, OTHER THAN JUST, YOU WANT TO HAVE PRIVACY CAUSE YOU HAVE AN UNRULY NEIGHBOR.
OKAY, WELL, THERE'S CERTAINLY, UH, THE TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITION THAT IS AVAILABLE IN THE CODE THAT SAYS THAT THAT IS A POSSIBILITY TO HAVE THE EIGHT FOOT SAM, BUT I CAN ALSO, UM, I CAN ALSO SAY THAT, UH, THE SAFETY OF THE NEIGHBORS AND HOW THEY'RE CLIMBING ON THE EXISTING FABS CERTAINLY CAUSES A LEVEL OF CONCERN OF THEM CRASHING THROUGH AND COMING INTO OUR CLIENT'S PROPERTY.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE TOPOGRAPHIC GRAPHIC, THIS, UH, THE TOPOGRAPHIC SITUATION ALONE, WE BELIEVE MEETS THE CRITERIA.
WE JUST DO NOT HAVE THE PERMISSION OF THAT ADJACENT LAND OWNER IN THIS ONE LOCATION.
MY CONCERN IS WHAT I SAW ON THE OLD SIX FOOT FENCE.
TO ME LOOK VERY REASONABLE IF A GOING TO EIGHT FOOT, WE USUALLY DO NOT GRANT THOSE UNLESS SOMEBODY HAS A SWIMMING POOL IN THE BACK, THERE'S A SAFETY ISSUE THAT CHILDREN CLIMBING OVER A TRANSFORMERS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I'M GOING TO YIELD THE FLOOR TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT MAY HAVE QUESTIONS, BUT I'M, I CAN'T QUITE GET THERE YET, UH, WITH WHAT YOU'VE GOT HERE.
I'M NOT REALLY UNDERSTANDING THE PRIVACY ARGUMENT BECAUSE THAT PORTION OF YOUR YARD IS OPEN TO THE STREET, UM, WHICH WOULD SORT OF NEGATE ANY SORT OF PRIVACY THAT I THINK YOU WOULD EXPECT A FENCE.
THAT'S NOT EVEN IN THAT LOCATION TO PROVIDE.
UM, YOU CAN ELABORATE ON THAT IF YOU WANT, BUT I'M NOT SEEING THE, HOW THE PRIVACY ARGUMENT WORKS HERE.
AND I BELIEVE ALSO AS COMMISSIONER ON OLIN SAID, OR AT LEAST ALLUDED TO THAT, THE SAFETY AND SECURITY IS USUALLY TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT OF AN AREA WHERE THEY COULD BE AT RISK, BUT YOU'VE GOT A, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT TO, IT'S OPEN TO THE STREET HERE, THIS PORTION OF YOUR YARD.
SO SOMEBODY COULD COME INTO YOUR YARD WITHOUT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE FENCE IS SIX FEET OR EIGHT FEET.
COMMISSIONER ROM THROWER AGAIN.
UM, AGAIN, I WOULD JUST POINT TO THE LAST SLIDE THAT IS IN THE PRESENTATION THAT, THAT SHOWS THE SAFETY CONDITION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ELIMINATE HERE.
AND THAT IS, THERE IS, THERE ARE PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE THAT DON'T TRY AND COME
[02:05:01]
OVER THE FENCE, BUT THEY'RE PUSHING ON THE FENCE.THEY'RE STANDING ON TOP OF THE FENCE AND I'LL GO AS FAR AS SAYING, IF YOU READ THE FULL BACKUP, YOU'LL SEE THE LEVEL OF VIBRATION THAT MY CLIENT HAS GOING THROUGH THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO ELIMINATE HERE.
AND I DO BELIEVE THAT YES, IT IS THAT SAFETY CONCERN FOR THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE EXISTING FANS TO BE MORE SUBSTANTIAL AND NOT ONLY IS SIX, A CONSTRUCTABILITY, BUT I'LL SHOW THE VISIBLE CONSTRUCTABILITY ELEMENT OF THE FANS IS IMPORTANT TOO.
REMEMBER MY CARDS, I THINK THERE'S MORE THAN ONE WAY TO GET PRIVACY BESIDES BUILDING A TALL FENCE, YOU CAN PLANT SHRUBS AND THINGS, AND I'M NOT REALLY FOLLOWING THE ARGUMENT THAT HAVING A TALLER FENCE WOULD BE A STRONGER FENCE.
AND YOU MUST KNOW THAT, I MEAN, ONE WAY TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM CLIMBING OVER A FENCE IS NOT TO HAVE RAILS FOR THEM TO CLIMB ON, ON ONE SIDE.
SO I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH THIS.
AND ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT WAS CONSTRUCTED, UH, A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION GIVING APPROVAL IS NOT AS THE SAME AS THE CITY, WHICH I GUESS THEY FOUND OUT NOW.
SO I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT, THAT THIS WAS BUILT WITHOUT CITY APPROVAL, UH, COMMISSIONER RON THROWER.
AGAIN, WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT WAS NOT BUILT WITH CITY OF AUSTIN PERMITS AND THAT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION APPROVAL IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE.
I'LL ALSO JUST POINT OUT THAT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY, UH, SOMEBODY CLIMBING ON THE FENCE, BUT STANDING ON A LADDER NEXT TO THE FENCE AND LEANING ON THE FENCE FROM THE TOP.
THAT THAT IS A SITUATION THAT MY CLIENT'S CONCERNED ABOUT AND WANTS TO STOP.
WELL, I REMEMBER I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, UM, WHICH SUBDIVISION IS THIS PROPERTY IN? UM, THE REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE I LIVE IN LEGEND OAKS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, TOO, WHICH IS THE ONE ON PAGE THREE OF YOUR PRESENTATION THAT YOU MADE THE APPLICATION FOR, BUT THEN THE APPROVAL ON PAGE FOUR, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S COMING FROM LEGEND OAKS HOA, WHICH IS ACTUALLY LEGEND OAKS ONE, WHICH IS ON THE EAST SIDE OF A SCARP MINT WHERE GERMANO DRIVE IS.
AND SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF YOU APPLIED TO THE CORRECT ASSOCIATION AND WE HAVE THE CORRECT INFORMATION HERE FROM THE APPROPRIATE ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL COMMITTEE, UH, COMMISSIONER RON THROWER, AGAIN, UH, WE WERE NOT PART OF THE PROCESS TO OBTAIN THE HOA APPROVAL THAT WAS PRIOR TO OUR INVOLVEMENT IN THE CASE.
UM, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND ALL I CAN OFFER IS THAT A CONSIDERATION WOULD BE TO POSTPONE THE CASE THIS EVENING AND LET ME PROVIDE, OR FIND SOME ANSWERS FOR THAT.
AND ALSO LISTEN TO MORE BOARD MEMBERS TO FIND OUT IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL ANSWERS.
WE NEED TO SEE THE OTHER, THE OTHER ISSUE THAT I, THAT I NEED IS CLARIFICATION ON IS YOU HAVE THE APPLICATION ON PAGE THREE WAS THE, THE PART ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF PAGE THREE, WAS THAT PART OF THE APPLICATION SO THAT THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL COMMITTEE KNEW THAT WHAT THEY WERE APPROVING WAS AN EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE BECAUSE THE, THE, UH, THE PAGE FOR APPROVAL, DOESN'T SAY YOU'RE APPROVED FOR AN EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE.
IT JUST SAYS YOU'RE APPROVED OR YOUR APPLICATION, BUT TYPICALLY THOSE APPLICATIONS ARE JUST THOSE ONE PAGERS.
UM, AND SO I'M NOT REAL SURE WHAT EXACTLY THAT THE COMMITTEE DID APPROVE PAGE THREE FOOT FENCE IN THERE WHEN THEY DO THE HOMEOWNERS.
IF YOU LOOK AT
SO, I MEAN, IN GOING THROUGH THE PACKET AND LOOKING, UH, I GUESS IT KIND OF STARTS AROUND E 2 42.
IT APPEARS THAT, THAT THERE WILL NEVER BE CONSENT FROM THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR.
AND IT APPEARS ALSO THAT PERHAPS I WOULD WANT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE BETWEEN ME AND THEM AS WELL.
[02:10:01]
UM, THE POLICE REPORT, ET CETERA.UM, AND WITH THE TYPE OF GRAPHIC CHANGE AS WELL, I THINK I WOULD BE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS BRAND'S REQUESTS, IF YOU, SORRY, SORRY.
I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT E 2 51, THERE'S A, A LIST OF, UH, ACTIVITY THERE WITH APD, UH, IN A GENERAL SENSE OF SAFETY WITHIN YOUR OWN BACKYARD IS, IS, IS NOT AN UNREASONABLE USE.
FOR NUMBER ONE ON, YEAH, THE, THE, UH, THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS I DON'T SEE IT TO PA TOPO.
I'M GOING THROUGH THIS FAR BACK PART AND SOMETHING THAT TO SHOW ME, UH, HOW SEVERE AND HOW MUCH THE CHANGE IN ELEVATION IS HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUE IS THAT IS A LEGITIMATE, I DO SEE THE POLICE REPORTS, THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE ABOUT IT ALSO THOUGH, IS IF THEY'RE CLIMBING UP ON A LADDER TO GET UP, LOOK OVER A SIX FOOT FENCE, AND THEY'RE LEANING ON IT, I GOT AN EIGHT FOOT STEP LADDER DOWNSTAIRS IN MY, IN MY GARAGE THAT, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO GET AN EIGHT FOOT LADDER, THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE SAME THING.
I UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE DETERRENT.
AND, AND NOW I'M HAVING A SECOND THOUGHT ABOUT IT BECAUSE I'M SEEING THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CONCERN.
WHEN I SEAL, I GUESS, UH, MAYBE WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS POSTPONE IT.
IF HE CAN BRING IT TOPOGRAPHY, UH, TOW POLE.
SO THERE'S, WE CAN SEE THE, UH, THE VARIATION IN ELEVATION FROM THE BACK AND ON THAT SIDE, THAT WOULD PROBABLY REALLY SWING ME MUCH, MUCH, UH, UH, I MEAN, SWING MY BOAT MORE IN THE DIRECTION OF APPROVAL COMMISSIONER VON LMAI ADDRESS THAT RIGHT QUICK.
I'M ON PAGE NINE OF OUR PRESENTATION.
THERE IS A TOPOGRAPHIC MAP THAT IS PROVIDED THAT DOES SHOW THAT THERE IS AT LEAST TWO FOOT OF DIFFERENCE WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE.
CAUSE I'M DOING THIS ON AN IPAD, SO IT TAKES ME SECONDS.
I WAS JUST GOING TO MENTION THE SAME THING IS THAT THE TACOS ARE ON EIGHT TO NINE.
UM, THAT'S IT, UM, BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.
YEAH, I'M STRUGGLING WITH THIS.
CAUSE I MEAN, PEOPLE HAVE BAD NEIGHBORS.
AND, AND IT'S A TEMPORARY SITUATION IN SOME WAYS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHEN, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBOR COULD MOVE.
LIKE I'M ALSO CONCERNED THAT THAT DEFENSE COMPANY WHO IS A VERY WELL ESTABLISHED FENCE COMPANY BUILT THIS FENCE WITHOUT A PERMIT, KNOWING THAT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE WAS NOT DIDN'T MEET CODE.
THAT'S A WHOLE NOTHER ISSUE, BUT I DON'T, WELL, I THINK THERE WAS A TOPOGRAPHIC CHANGE.
IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM THAT DRASTIC.
AND I AGREED MY GOAL THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE GOING TO BOTHER HIS HOMEOWNER BUILDING TWO MORE FEET IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE THEM, GETTING A TALLER LADDER.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SOLUTION IS.
I'M NOT SAYING I'M AGAINST THIS.
UM, BUT I'M VERY MUCH STRUGGLING WITH IT.
I DON'T, YOU KNOW, A BAD NEIGHBORS ON A HARDSHIP COMMISSIONER, BAILEY MATT, MAY I ADDRESS THAT? THANK YOU.
UM, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, THE LANDOWNER IN QUESTION HAS BEEN THERE PROBABLY SINCE THE BEGINNING OF LEGENDARY OAKS.
UM, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN EXPECT THEM TO BE LEAVING ANYTIME SOON.
UM, AND THEN ALSO I'LL JUST OFFER YOU A FACT TO THE SITUATION THAT SINCE THIS FENCE WAS BUILT, THERE'S NOT BEEN AN EIGHT FOOT LADDER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE THAT HAS, UM, CAUSED THE SAME PROBLEMS AS A SIX FOOT LADDER DID WITH THE SIX FOOT FENCE.
AND AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE SAFETY AND WELLBEING SITUATION IS NOT NECESSARILY CODE REQUIREMENTS, BUT THE LEVEL OF, UH, CALMNESS THAT HAS OCCURRED HAS BEEN TREMENDOUS BECAUSE OF THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE.
THAT'S WHY THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS, ARE REALLY APPRECIATIVE OF IT.
AND, UH, AGAIN, I BELIEVE THE TOPOGRAPHIC DIFFERENCES THERE ARE JUSTIFIED DIRECTLY UNDER THE CODE.
THE ONLY THING WE ARE LACKING IS THAT ONE LAND OWNER SIGNATURE TO ALLOW FOR, THANKS ONE, REMEMBER BLOOM.
SO THE POWER TOPOGRAPHIC DIFFERENCE ARE YOU, I'M NOT REALLY CONVINCED OF IT.
HEY HAPPENS, KELLY, YOUR CAT MUTED.
[02:15:01]
SHE'S BEEN VERY FRISKY.SO I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE TOPOGRAPHIC ARGUMENT BECAUSE AGAIN, THE PROPERTY IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
SO WHETHER THERE'S A TWO FOOT DROP OR NOT MAKES NO IMPACT, IT HAS NO IMPACT ON THE VISIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY IN A GENERAL SORT OF WAY THAT ANY NEIGHBOR YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT COULD ALSO VIEW YOUR PROPERTY FROM THE STREET.
BUT, BUT EVEN ASIDE FROM THAT, I'M NOT SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD IS REALLY THE SOLUTION.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW A RESTRAINING ORDER.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT A LAWYER, SO DON'T DO THAT JUST BECAUSE I SAID IT, BUT I JUST KIND OF WONDER THERE'S HAS TO BE A DIFFERENT SOLUTION TO, TO THE ISSUE THAN, THAN A BOARD, YOU KNOW, A VARIANCE FROM US.
CAUSE I, I, I DON'T THINK AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE WILL, BASED ON WHAT I READ, I DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT IS A LONG-TERM SORT OF SOLUTION HAWTHORNE, JEREMY TO MELISSA.
YOU REMEMBER THAT CASE WE HAD WHERE, WHERE THE BIG GUY, THE GUY, LITERALLY THEY SHOT HIS DOG.
DO YOU REMEMBER? THAT'S WHERE A GOOD FENCE FENCES MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS.
AND THAT'S SORTA WHERE I WAS GOING, MELISSA, I SEE WHERE YOUR GARMENT AND I'M, AND I'LL BE THE FIRST ONE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, I DON'T STICK A STAKE IN THE GROUND AND STAY THERE AFTER, UM, I, TO BE REASONABLE AND I CAN ALWAYS CHANGE MY VIEW AND HAVING LOOKED AT THIS AND MELISSA, IF YOU RECALL IN ALL THESE YEARS, YOU'VE BEEN HERE WITH ME.
THAT ONE SIDE IS ON THE STREET SIDE.
WE'VE NEVER HAD A PROBLEM GRANTING EIGHT FOOT, UH, VARIANCES FOR THE STREETS SIDE.
THE OTHER TWO RESIDENTS IS HE'S GOT, UH, HE'S GOT, UH, APPROVAL FROM THE NEIGHBORS.
IT'S JUST THAT RED LINE ON E TWO SIX PRESENTATION, THE RED LINE THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE A LETTER.
UM, I THINK HE'D PROBABLY BEEN DULY CHASTISED ON, ON THE AIR IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY, UH, FOR BUILDING THIS WITHOUT A PERMIT.
I DON'T THINK RON IS GOING TO MAKE THAT, UH, MR. THROWER IS GOING TO MAKE THAT SAME MISTAKE TWICE.
UH, AND SO I WAS READING THROUGH THIS POLICE REPORT AND I CAN, I CAN, HAVEN'T BEEN BEING, BEEN MARRIED 34 YEARS.
I WOULD BE CONCERNED FOR MY WIFE BEING HOME ALONE AND THAT, AND SO IT DOES SOMEWHAT FALL UNDER MY VIEW OF A HEALTH AND SAFETY.
AND I'M JUST TALKING ON MY OWN OPINION.
UH, NORMALLY I WOULD PROBABLY STICK A STAKE IN THE GROUND AND HOLD MY GROUND.
BUT ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE, UM, I'M PROBABLY MOVING TOWARD MAKING A MOVE MOTION TO APPROVE.
I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE THE SUPPORT OR THE VOTES, UH, IF I DON'T THAT'S OKAY.
I DON'T TAKE THEM PERSONAL, BUT, UH, UH, MADAM CHAIR, I THINK I'M GOING TO MOVE FOR APPROVAL ON THIS PARTICULAR ONE AND THEN CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION.
CAUSE I, I SORT OF WANTED TO JUMP IN ON THIS REAL QUICK TOO, IF Y'ALL DON'T MIND, INSTEAD OF JUST WRITING THE MEANING, UH, I'M USUALLY THE FIRST PERSON TO GET ON BOARD WITH, WITH BAD FENCES, MAKE BAD NEIGHBORS.
I REALLY, REALLY AM, BUT I'M ALSO A VERY PRIVATE PERSON WHEN IT COMES TO MY HOME.
AND, UH, I PERSONALLY, FOR ME LOOKING AT THE AMOUNT OF PRIVACY AND PROTECTION THE FENCE GIVES, UH, FROM, FROM THAT STREET, UH, I'M 100% OKAY WITH THIS.
AND I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE WITH, WITH THE, THE OTHER NEIGHBOR THAT THAT'S LESS THAN HAPPY WITH THEM, BUT, BUT IT, IT SEEMS TO, SO I JUST WANT TO SAY I'M GOING TO BE VOTING FOR THIS AND THEN, UH, BY SHEER BOARD.
AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY, I'M, I'M YOUR SECOND, BUT I ALSO JUST WANTED TO SAY, I'D REALLY LIKED YOU.
I KNOW THE APPLICANT WASN'T INVOLVED AT THE TIME THAT THE FENCE WAS BUILT, BUT I'D REALLY LIKE TO GIVE YOU, UM, A LOT OF CREDIT THAT YOU COULD HAVE TAKEN THIS TO, TO A VERY ELABORATE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE NEIGHBOR AND THE POLICE REPORT AND SUCH AND YOU VERY TACTFULLY DIRECTED US THAT WAY SO THAT WE COULD, UM, GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE SITUATION.
AND, UH, I WANTED TO SAY THAT, UM, THAT WAS VERY CLASSY.
UM, YOU, YOU COULD HAVE, UH, I COULD HAVE SEEN PEOPLE TAKING THAT IN A LOT DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS AND I APPRECIATE, UH, THAT DELICACY WITH THE SITUATION.
THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUEZ, NOT TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE, BUT JUST ADDRESSING THE TOPOGRAPHY ISSUE.
I DO UNDERSTAND THE POINT THAT THE APPLICANTS MAKING, BECAUSE AT THE STREET, UM, IT'S LOWER ON THE STREET, SO YES THERE'S.
SO, AND I HAVE A QUESTION TOO, IS THE, IS THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE ONLY AND IT'D BE, OR WAS IT ONLY BOLT WHERE IT WAS INDICATED WITH THE RED LINE AND THE GREEN LINES? UM, ON SLIDE
[02:20:01]
SIX, YES.UH, THEN ALSO WHERE IT TIES TO THE HOUSE.
SO LIKE WHERE THE NEIGHBOR WHERE THE PROBLEM NEIGHBOR IS, THAT'S THE HIGH POINT.
SO THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO LOOK DOWN ON THEM, YOU KNOW? AND SO, UM, I'M COMPLETELY IN SUPPORT OF EIGHT FOOT FENCE, ESPECIALLY AFTER READING THE POLICE REPORT BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.
GO AHEAD WITH THE, UH, BOARD MEMBER, WADE.
I DON'T HAVE AN ACTUAL QUESTION.
I JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS, UM, MY SUPPORT IN THIS.
AND I THINK THAT WE CAN GET THERE BY IF WE CONSIDER THAT IF WE STRICTLY ENFORCE THE ZONING ORDINANCE AS IS, WE ARE CREATING THE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP OF THE SAFETY OF THIS FAMILY IN THE LOT.
UM, I CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE ANXIETY AND FEAR THAT CAN BE CAUSED THROUGHOUT THIS SITUATION.
SO I JUST WANTED TO VOICE MY SUPPORT ALONG WITH OTHERS BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.
I MEAN, I'M NOT, LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT NECESSARILY AGAINST THIS.
I JUST, HEY, NUMBER ONE, WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL ON PRECEDENT ON THIS, THAT WE CAN BUILD AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE WITHOUT PERMISSION.
AND SO I WANT EVERYBODY WATCHING THAT WE WILL LOOK AT EACH CASE INDIVIDUALLY AND DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS SETTING A PRECEDENT THAT YOU CAN COME IN AND BUILD AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE WITHOUT YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PERMISSION.
JUST, I'M JUST GOING TO THROW THAT OUT THERE AT LEAST UNTIL THE LAND CODE REWRITE.
WELL, I'M HOPING THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE EIGHT FOOT FENCES IN IT.
I ARGUED AGAINST IT, BUT WE'LL SEE HOW IT GOES.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ASSOCIATE HAND.
AM I MISSING SOMEBODY? OH, BOARD MEMBER AND FINDINGS.
I'M NOT REALLY OPPOSED TO IT EITHER.
UM, I MEAN, IN GENERAL, IF THE NEIGHBORS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SAY IT'S OKAY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT REALLY WHAT THE RESTRICTIONS SAY THEY SHOULD DO.
IT'S, IT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION.
I'M STILL HAVING A LITTLE TROUBLE AND IT'S NO, IT'S NOT MR. THROWER'S FAULT AT ALL.
IT'S JUST THE WAY THAT THIS WAS DEVELOPED OUT HERE, THERE WAS LEGEND OAKS, AND THEN YOU HAVE THOSE LEGEND OAKS RESTRICTIONS.
AND THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE IN THE PACKET.
THEN YOU HAVE LEGEND OAKS, HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION TWO, WHICH IS THE ONE THAT I ACTUALLY LIVE IN, WHICH I THINK IS THIS GERMANO LANE IS ACTUALLY PART OF WHEN YOU HAVE THAT APPLICATION.
BUT THEN YOU HAVE THIS APPROVAL THAT I CAN'T REALLY PUT MY FINGER ON IT AND SAY THAT THAT WAS FROM THE CORRECT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
AND YOU HAVE THE LETTERS FROM THE LAWYERS GOING BACK AND FORTH THAT HAVE THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS OF LEGEND OAKS, ONE ATTACHED TO THEM.
SO I'M STILL A LITTLE, I'M STILL A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT IT, BUT I'M, I'M ASSUMING THAT IF THE APPROPRIATE, UH, HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, UH, DOES NOT FEEL LIKE THEY'VE GOT THE APPROPRIATE APPROVAL, THAT THEY WILL TAKE WHATEVER ACTION THEY FEEL IS APPROPRIATE TO DO.
I MEAN, IT GOES WITHOUT SAYING, BUT MAYBE WE CAN JUST SAY THAT WE WILL APPROVE THIS, UH, VARIANCE TO ALLOW THIS EIGHT FOOT FENCE, UH, ON THE CONDITION THAT IT IS PROPERLY APPROVED BY WHATEVER RELEVANT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
UH, IS THERE JUST A MOMENT BOARD MEMBER, BLOOM, UH, BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAN? THERE YOU GO.
IS THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT BOARD MEMBER PRO.
ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAN? YES.
APPROVE WITH VERIFICATION FROM THE, EACH BECOME A BOARD MEMBER BLOOM.
I JUST WANT TO ALSO POINT OUT THAT IT'S NOT JUST THE RED PORTION OF THE FENCE, THAT DATES THAT IS EIGHT FEET IS ALSO THE GREEN PORTION, WHICH IF WE'RE MAKING THE CASE THAT THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE IS APPROPRIATE FOR ONE SECTION OF THE NEIGHBORS, BUT NOT THE OTHER, WITHOUT THE OTHER NEIGHBORS APPROVAL, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO IMPLY THAT THE REST OF THE EIGHT, EIGHT FOOT FENCE RECEIVE THE SAME SORT OF, UM, OUTCOME, IF THAT MAKES SENSE ONLINE.
UM, SO I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
IF THE SPIRIT GETS GRANTED, DO THEY NEED THAT? SO THEIR NEXT STEP IS TO GET A PERMIT THROUGH RESIDENTIAL
[02:25:01]
REVIEW.DO THEY NEED TO SUBMIT THAT CORRECT HOA APPROVAL WITH THEIR PERMIT? I MEAN, HOW IS THIS GOING TO WORK FOR THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OR JUMPING ON THAT OR VERIFYING, UH, LISA MINS FOR THE LAW DEPARTMENT? YEAH.
UH, VERIFICATION AS MR. THROWER SAID, OR, UH, JUST SPINNING THE CORRECT NATURE WAY.
INFORMATION I THINK WOULD BE, WOULD BE ADEQUATE.
NOW I WILL SAY FOR MR. THROWER'S BENEFIT THAT THE, UH, THE APPROVAL, ALTHOUGH IT DOESN'T HAVE THE FULL CORRECT NAME OF THE LEGEND OAKS TO ASSOCIATION, IT IS COMING FROM GOODWIN MANAGEMENT, WHICH I KNOW, BECAUSE I LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY FOR LEGEND OAKS ASSOCIATION, NUMBER TWO.
SO IF WE CAN JUST GET A, I THINK, A VERIFICATION FROM THAT MANAGEMENT COMPANY THAT, THAT, THAT WAS DONE, THAT THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE APPROPRIATE.
SO THE AMENDMENT B VERIFICATION FROM, UH, THE HOA TO ELAINE BEFORE THE, UH, VARIANCES APPROVED GRANTED, IS THAT HOW I'M HEARING IT? NO, IT WOULD GO TO RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PERMIT TO THE, OKAY, GOT IT.
SO, UH, AGAIN, THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE BY MICHAEL MINOAN.
HANG ON, SECONDED BY MELISSA HEARTBURN.
IF YOU COULD READ THE FINDINGS, THERE YOU GO.
REASONABLY USES ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY, DO NOT ALLOW FOR YOUR USE BECAUSE AN AVERAGE SEVEN FOOT FENCE IS NOT ADEQUATE TO PROVIDE A SECURE CONDITION, REASONABLE PRICING, PRIVACY, OR SAFETY, OR SAFELY OCCUPIED THE YARD AT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN A MANAGER IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH SAFE HAVING CONDITIONS IN SANCTUARY, NORMALLY ACCUSTOMED TO PEOPLE LIVING ON THEIR PROPERTY.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH VARIANCES REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THAT THE ELEVATION CHANGE PROXIMATE TO THE PROPERTY LINE IS GREATER THAN TWO FEET, TWO FEET.
AND IN SOME AREAS AS MUCH AS FOUR FEET WITH THIS ELEVATION AREA CHARACTER, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTERED THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY WILL NOT APPEAR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATION ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY ARE LOCATED BECAUSE ALL LOTS OF THIS SUBDIVISION HAS THE SAME CHARACTER.
WOULDN'T PRIVACY FETCHES THAT VARY IN HEIGHT.
I AM NOT PARTICIPATING ON THIS CASE SO I KNOW YOU'RE ACCUSING.
[E-3 C15-2021-0048 Stephen Drenner for Austin Hedge 35 Borrower, LLC 8300 N IH 35 SVRD SB On-Line Link: Item E-3; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25- 6-472 (Parking Facility Standards) Appendix A (Tables of Off-Street parking and Loading Requirements) to reduce the number of required parking spaces from 1.5 spaces and 1.5 spaces + 0.5 spaces per bedroom (required) to 1 spaces (requested) in order to complete a Multi-Family residential structure providing 226 units of significantly Affordable housing in a “CS-MU-CO-NP”, General Commercial Services-Mixed UseConditional Overlay-Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (Georgian Acres Neighborhood Plan)]
ITEM E THREE, UH, C 15 20 21 0 0 4 8 ED, 300 NORTH INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35 SERVICE ROAD SOUTHBOUND.AND THE SPEAKER IS GOING TO BE STEVEN DRAENOR.
MR. JENNER, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? I AM.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? I CAN HANG ON ONE SECOND WHILE WE GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP.
WE ARE ON PAGE ONE OF YOUR PRESENTATION.
CAN YOU MOVE TO A PAGE THREE? UM, THE, UM, I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON, UH, FOUR THINGS.
THE SECOND IS THE CHOICE THAT WE WILL FACE.
IF THE VARIANCE IS DENIED, THE THIRD IS SAFE, ACCESS TO BUS STOPS, AND THEN THE FOURTH WOULD BE A TEMPORARY PARKING THAT IS BEING, UH, AS PART OF THE REQUEST.
SO YOU SEE THE, UH, THE
THIS IS, UH, AS YOU HAVE HEARD NOW, A COUPLE OF TIMES A CONVERSION FROM A HOTEL TO, UM, UM, AN AFFORDABLE APARTMENT COMPLEX.
[02:30:01]
A, UH, AFFORDABLE, DEEPLY AFFORDABLE PROJECT WITH, UH, THE, YOU'LL SEE IN THE BACKUP, THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT, UH, IS DONE WITH, UM, A NONPROFIT THAT REQUIRES 50% OF THE UNITS TO BE AFFORDABLE AT 60% OF MFI.THE, UH, PROPERTY WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO USE PARKING, UH, IN THE, UH, ADJACENT LINE ON POWELL STREET.
UH, AND IT IS BECAUSE OF THE, UH, THE HARDSHIP BOTH WITH REGARD TO CONSTRUCTION ISSUES, AS WELL AS, UH, THE FACT THAT BY DOING SO WE WILL, WE WILL DRIVE A PARKING NUMBER THAT IS NOT, UH, PROBABLY USABLE, BUT WILL INCREASE RATES FOR THE 50% OF THE UNITS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE SUBJECT TO THE 60% MFI, BUT WE'LL PROBABLY BE UNDER A HUNDRED PERCENT OF MFI IF YOU WOULD SHIFT TO A SLIDE FORM.
UM, IF YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE, IT'S COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
AND IT IS A HARDSHIP, IN MY OPINION, A VERY, VERY, A REAL HARDSHIP, AND THAT THIS IS NOT A GREENFIELD SITE, AND THIS IS NOT A RECONSTRUCTION SITE.
IN OTHER WORDS, THE STRUCTURE OF THE UNITS AND ACTUALLY THE DIVISION OF THE UNITS, UH, IS FOR THE MOST PART, COMPLETELY BEING LEFT, INTACT AS ARE, AS IS THE A SURFACE PARKING LOT.
SO THIS IS NOT A SITUATION WHERE, UH, YOU CAN, UH, YOU CAN HANDLE IT JUST BY ALTERING THE MEANS OF CONSTRUCTION OR MAKING UNITS BIGGER OR SO FORTH.
THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE YOU'RE DEALING WITH, UH, THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, UH, AND CONVERTING THAT THEN INTO A MULTIFAMILY USE, UNLIKE ANYTHING THAT WOULD HAPPEN, UM, UH, ANY PROPERTY IN THE AREA, UH, SLIDE BY A PLACE.
IF YOU LOOK AT SLIDE FIVE, YOU SEE WHAT THE, UH, CODE REQUIRED PARKING WOULD BE.
IF YOU LOOK AT SLIDE SEVEN, PLEASE YOU SEE THE CHOICE THAT WE WILL FACE.
NEITHER ONE OF THESE MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL.
IF THE VARIANCE IS NOT GRANTED.
SO WE EITHER HAVE TO, UH, RENT, OFFSITE, PARKING AND, UH, IN, UH, ESSENTIALLY IN PERPETUITY.
UM, AND IN ORDER TO PARK TO CODE, EVEN IF THOSE SPACES ARE NOT USED, OR WE LITERALLY HAVE TO SHUT HER 34 UNITS THAT COULD BE USED FOR, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, IN ORDER TO, UM, MEET THE CODE REQUIRED PARKING, NEITHER OF THOSE MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL.
AND AGAIN, THE HARDSHIP IS WITHOUT THEN, UH, GOING IN AND TEARING UP PERFECTLY GOOD UNITS.
WE CAN'T MEET THE CODE REQUIRED PARKING.
IF YOU'LL MOVE TO SLIDE NINE, PLEASE, THE, UH, THE VARIANCE WOULD BE TO, UH, THE, THE PARKING CODE, THE THINGS THAT, UH, I TOOK FROM THE LAST MEETING, UH, WHERE WE RECEIVED THE POSTPONEMENT WAS THAT WE NEEDED TO BOTH FOCUS ON THE HARDSHIP, WHICH I HOPEFULLY HAVE DONE, BUT ALSO THEN TO SHOW YOU THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE, UH, THE BUS STOPS IN THE AREA.
SO I'M GOING TO DO THAT IN JUST A SECOND.
UH, BUT NOTE THAT WE'RE ADDING A NEW PEDESTRIAN TRAIL THAT TAKES THAT AS MUCH SAFER AND THAT TAKES, BUT THAT TRENDS AWAY FROM MY 35 AND CUTS THE DISTANCE SIGNIFICANTLY DOWN IN ORDER TO GET, I'M SORRY, I WORKED TIME.
CAN YOU QUICKLY SUMMARIZE, OR DO YOU NEED TO WRAP UP? SURE.
UM, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO SHOW YOU THOSE ROUTES IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO ANSWER A QUESTION, UH, AND THEN WE'LL ALSO BE USING THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, UH, FOR TWO YEARS FOR PARKING, UH, SO THAT PEOPLE GET USED TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET USED TO USING THE PUBLIC TRANSIT.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND START.
IF YOU DON'T MIND, BOARD MEMBER PAUL NOLAN, AND I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO SEE THAT AND WAS THAT OKAY, SO WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.
I BELIEVE IF YOU COULD PULL THAT PRESENTATION BACK UP, I'D LIKE TO HEAR THE EXPLANATION FOR THAT ADDITIONAL TRAIL THAT'S BEING ADDED.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT SLIDE 13, SLIDE
[02:35:01]
13 WOULD SHOW YOU THE, UM, THE ROUTE THAT ONE WOULD TAKE TODAY, WHICH YOU WOULD EXIT THE, UH, THE PROPERTY ON THEUM, AND THEN IF YOU WOULD SHIFT TO SLIDE 14, THAT SHOWS YOU THE EASEMENT, THAT WOULD BE GRANTED, THAT TAKES PEDESTRIANS AWAY FROM MY 35 AND THEN SHORTENED THE DISTANCE TO BOTH OF THOSE BUS STOPS.
I WOULD ALSO NOTE IT'S A, IT'S AN EASY THEN BACK DOOR ACCESS TO THE PARK, UH, THAT IS, UH, 0.1 MILES AWAY.
THANK YOU FOR ASKING THAT QUESTION AND THE OTHER, AND I'M FAMILIAR WITH THOSE TWO BUS STOPS BECAUSE WE BUILT THEM BACK IN THE DAY WHEN I HAD MY COMPANY LONG TIME AGO, BUT ANYHOW, IT, I LIKED THE IDEA AND I DID WATCH THIS VIDEO AND I, AND I NOTICED ROM WAS CHANNELING HIS INNER BOTTLE.
AND HE SAID, SO I'LL TAKE HIS CREDIT FOR THAT.
UH, THE, I LIKE YOU'RE ADDING THE TRAIL.
I LIKE THE EASEMENT ONE BETTER THAN THE ONE ON 35, BECAUSE THAT, THAT SECTION OF 35 IS REALLY A DANGEROUS SECTION.
UH, PEOPLE COME OFF 35 AND THEY'RE HAULING, BUT DOWN THERE, AND THEN SOMETIMES THEY MAKE THAT CUT OVER ON PAUL AND IT'S PRETTY DANGEROUS.
SO I LIKE THAT IDEA BETTER THAN THE OTHER, BUT I DIDN'T NOTICE THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT YOU HAD ADJACENT PARK NEXT DOOR FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
THE LOT THAT, UH, CONTAINS THE ACCESS EASEMENT, UH, THAT YOU'RE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT ON SLIDE 14, THAT LOT WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR PARKING FOR TWO YEARS FROM THE GRANT OF THE VARIANCE.
UH, AND YOU WILL BE ABLE TO ACCESS IT FROM, UH, THE, THE, THE MAIN SITE.
IN OTHER WORDS, YOU DON'T HAVE A SUIT FROM POWELL LANE, YOU CAN ACCESS IT FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SITE AND YOU HAVE THAT AGREEMENT AND YOU WILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT IN WRITING SO THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY CAN CHANGE YOUR MIND ON OR, OR CRAWFISH.
WELL, I SUGGEST THAT IF YOU GRANT THE VARIANCE THAT YOU MAKE IT CONTINGENT UPON CITY LEGAL, GETTING THAT, AND IN A FORM THAT IS SATISFACTORY TO THEM.
AND ANOTHER THING THAT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT IS I KNOW CERTAIN, UH, UH, THERE WERE CERTAIN SIZES THAT THEY USED TO HAVE FOR THE PARKING SPACE OF THEMSELVES, WHICH HAVE GRADUALLY GOTTEN SMALLER AND SMALLER AND SMALLER AND COMPACT CAR PARKING.
AND, UH, IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I SOLD MY DOULA IS I COULD COULDN'T PARK IT DOWNTOWN OR ANYTHING ANYMORE.
SO, UH, MY QUESTION TO YOU IS HAVE YOU TAKEN A LOOK AT ANY WAY OF MAKING SOME SECTIONS OF THE, OF THE, THE BACK PARKING COMPACT CAR PARKING, WHERE YOU'D BE ABLE TO SQUEEZE A FEW EXTRA IN HERE AND THERE? YES, SIR.
UH, WE WOULD STILL BE FACED WITH THE VARIANCE BECAUSE AS THE NUMBER OF UNITS WERE 44 SHORT, SO 18% IS, ARE DIFFERENT.
AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE I NOTICED ON YOUR SLIDE, I SAW 50% OF THE UNITS ARE ALL ARE AT 60% MFI.
IS IT BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'RE BACK HERE AGAIN, AFTER WE GRANTED YOU THE OTHER VARIANTS AND I WAS INVOLVED IN THAT ONE, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S SOMEHOW THAT THAT DOESN'T CHANGE AND THAT DOESN'T GET CRAWFISH, JOHN CAUSE QUITE FRANKLY, 60% OF THAT PIE IS STILL PROBABLY UNAFFORDABLE FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE IN AUSTIN.
UH, I WOULD, YOU KNOW, AND I KNOW WE CANNOT GRANT VARIANCES BASED ON FINANCIAL ISSUES, BUT, UH, I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO, UH, SEE THAT 60% IF THERE'S ANY WAY.
AND I KNOW THIS IS BOTTOM LINE DRIVEN, UH, UH, I WAS A BUSINESS OWNER FOR 30 YEARS, SO I UNDERSTAND, BUT IF THERE'S ANY WAY THAT, UH, SOME 60%, IF WE COULD GET A LITTLE BIT BETTER TO CLOSER TO 50% WOULD MAKE ME REALLY HAPPY.
I'M JUST ONE PERSON BECAUSE EVEN AT THAT RATE IS STILL FAIRLY UNAFFORDABLE.
AND ESPECIALLY IN THAT PART OF TIME WHERE YOU'RE AT, I'M FAMILIAR WITH IT, RIGHT.
UM, I THINK TWO THINGS WILL HAPPEN.
ONE IS, UM, THERE WILL, AS WE, AS THE LEASING, UH, MOVES FORWARD, UM,
[02:40:01]
THE PROJECTIONS HAVE SHOWN THAT YOU DON'T GET A A HUNDRED PERCENT AT 60%.YOU GET, YOU GET A HUNDRED PERCENT AT 60% OR LESS.
SO YOU WILL HAVE SOME THAT, UH, WOULD BE UNDER THE 60% LEVEL.
THAT PROJECTIONS WOULD ALSO SHOW THAT, UH, THE WHOLE OF THIS IS LIKELY TO BE AFFORDABLE AT SOME LEVEL COMPARED TO MFI.
UH, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
WELL, SAYING SOMETHING THAT'S IS, UH, AT 80% OF MFI DOESN'T DO ANYBODY ANY GOOD, THAT'S MAKING 40% OF MFI, BUT I THINK THIS WILL BE, UH, ACROSS THE BOARD A DEEPLY AFFORDABLE PROJECT.
UH, AND YOU'LL PROBABLY HAVE A FEW, IF ANY, AT ALL, THAT WOULD BE QUOTE, MARKET, RIGHT.
I, UM, I WANT TO MAKE A REALLY STRONG POINT HERE.
HE'S CONTRIBUTING 25,000 AND THAT TRAIL IS GOING TO COST A WHOLE LOT MORE THAN TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND.
SO WHERE'S THE REST OF THE MONEY COMING FROM.
IN OTHER WORDS, THE TRAIL IS REALLY NOT GOING TO GET BUILT.
CAN I RESPOND TO THEM? WE ARE HAPPY TO DO IT EITHER WAY.
REMEMBER I SAID, TRAIL, I DIDN'T SAY A 10 FOOT SIDEWALK.
UM, AND, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO EITHER BUILD IT OR CONTRIBUTE MONEY.
AND SO, AND THEN YOU WOULD ALSO MAINTAIN IT AND NOT THE TWO YEARS THAT, UM, TALK ABOUT THEM FOREVER.
THE TRAIL WOULD BE MAINTAINED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.
AND THEN MY OTHER THING IS YOU KNEW, OR THIS OWNER KNEW WHEN Y'ALL CAME FOR THE FIRST VARIANCE THAT YOU COULDN'T PARK IT.
SO I FEEL LIKE IT'S DEATH BY A THOUSAND, YOU KNOW, PRICKS BECAUSE HE CAME FOR SOME VARIANCES, EVEN THOUGH YOU KNEW YOU WOULD NEED THIS PARKING GRIDS, BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME NUMBER OF UNITS FROM THE ORIGINAL ONE WHERE YOU SAID YOU WOULD PARK IT.
AND SO I'M REALLY HAVING A HARD TIME WITH THIS BECAUSE WE WERE TOLD YOU COULD PARK IT.
WE HAD THE ISSUES WITH, WE EVEN BROUGHT THAT UP ON THE LAST PERIOD.
AND I JUST FEEL LIKE THAT YOU'RE SHORTCHANGING THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE BRINGING THERE BECAUSE IT IS A HALF MILE WALK.
IF THAT TRAIL DOESN'T GET BUILT FOR WHATEVER REASON.
AND THERE'S ONLY THAT PARKING ON PATH SITES ONLY FOR TWO YEARS, BUT THEN THERE'S ISSUES, OH, I GUESS THEY CAN COME THROUGH THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN I JUST, I DON'T KNOW.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THIS PROPERTY HAS ONE PROBLEM AFTER ANOTHER.
AND, AND I THINK THAT THE PEOPLE RENTING ARE REALLY GOING TO GET SHORTCHANGED IN THE END.
IT WAS ON, IT WAS JUST A COMMENT.
SO NO RESPONSE BOARD MEMBER OF ON ALL-IN BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.
UM, I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ESPECIALLY IN THIS AREA, BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF THE, THAT NEED IT AND WANT IT TO STAY IN AUSTIN ARE SERVICE WORKERS WHO USE VEHICLES FOR WHO WORK IN CONSTRUCTION ARE VERY NECESSARY.
UM, THEY CAN'T REALLY WALK TO A BUS WITH THEIR TOOLS AND EVERYTHING.
AND I HAVE CONCERNS IF YOU HOUSE PEOPLE IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY, AND THEN IN TWO YEARS, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY PLACE TO PARK.
HOW IS THAT GOING TO WORK? ARE YOU GOING TO ASSIGN SPACES TO THE UNITS OR EXACTLY? HOW DOES THAT WORK, UH, AS IS, AS IT IS MOST, MOST OF THE TIME, THE CASE, THE, WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS, UM, YOU, YOU BALANCE WHAT YOU HAVE WITH THE RENT THAT THE LEASES THAT YOU, SO YOU WOULDN'T, UH, YOU WOULDN'T PUT YOURSELF IN A SITUATION OVER THAT TWO YEAR PERIOD WHERE YOU WERE SHORT PARKING, OTHERWISE, UH, YOU'D HAVE TO COME UP WITH SOME OTHER ARRANGEMENT AT THAT TIME.
I GUESS MY RESPONSE WOULD BE, UM, WE THINK FROM AN AFFORDABILITY STANDPOINT THAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING CITYWIDE NATIONWIDE, BUT CERTAINLY CITYWIDE IS, THIS IS EXACTLY THE DIRECTION THAT THE CITY IS MOVING.
THAT WAS TWO VERSIONS IN THAT WAS, WOULD HAVE ELIMINATED PARKING IN THIS AREA.
YOU'VE GOT AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED, WHICH ELIMINATES PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
SO I THINK THE IDEA THAT, UH, PEOPLE IN THIS THAT WILL USE THIS PRODUCT WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE, DO
[02:45:01]
WITH LESS THAN CURRENT CODE PARKING, UH, ON THE WHOLE IS, UH, SUPPORTED BY, BY BOTH OF THOSE CONCEPTS.AND THE KEEP IN MIND, THE REDUCTION IS 18% FROM CODE.
SO IT'S NOT AS IF THERE WON'T BE PARKING THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT OF PARKING, BUT, UH, THE PARKING WAS SET UP FOR HOTEL USE.
IT WAS NOT SET UP FOR MULTIFAMILY.
WELL, I REMEMBER PAT HAD A QUESTION FOR MR. DRAENOR, UM, BASED ON THE APPLICATION.
I MEAN, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT YOU'RE CLAIMING A HARDSHIP, NOT NECESSARILY FOR THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY, BUT BECAUSE OF THE, UH, USE THAT YOUR CLIENT WANTS TO PUT THIS PROPERTY TO.
AND I'M HAVING A REAL HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING HOW WE SHOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND DETERMINING A HARDSHIP, UH, THAT ISN'T REALLY RELATED TO, UM, PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC OF THE PROPERTY COMMISSIONER.
AND THEN I'M NOT DOING A VERY GOOD JOB OF EXPLAINING IT BECAUSE TO ME, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS BECAUSE THIS IS A CONVERSION, NOT A MASSIVE RENOVATION, NOT A GREENFIELD SITE, CERTAINLY THAT, THAT IS THE HARDSHIP THAT YOU CAN'T, THAT YOU CAN'T GO FIND SPACES.
YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN GO OFF SITE TO FIND SPACES OR, UH, SHUT OR UNITS THAT ARE PERFECTLY GOOD UNITS.
THAT THAT'S THE CHOICE THAT WE FACE.
WELL, I THINK, I THINK I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF, OF GRANTING THIS VARIANCE.
IF WE WERE TO SEE SOMETHING LIKE A FEW MORE OF THE UNITS ARE, ARE AFFORDABLE UNITS AND THAT AFFORDABILITY TARGET IS REDUCED TO SOMETHING LIKE 45 TO 50% MFI.
UH, AND I WOULD EVEN MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT WITH THOSE TWO CONDITIONS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU TELL ME THAT THAT THAT WILL NOT WORK AND THE PROJECT WON'T GO FORWARD, THEN I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S REALLY GOING TO BE HELPFUL.
I'M GOING TO JUMP IN REAL QUICK.
AND I'M GOING TO ASK LEE TO JUMP IN ON THAT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE CAN ACTUALLY CONDITION THAT.
I WAS JUST GOING TO SPEAK AT, UH, LEESON'S WITH A LOT DEPARTMENT, AGAIN, A BOARD MEMBER PRUITT.
I DON'T BELIEVE WE CAN REQUIRE AFFORDABILITY AS A CONDITION OF GRANTING THIS VARIANCE IN THIS CASE, I GOTTA BE HONEST.
UM, I'M, I'M HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF A HARD TIME WITH THIS MYSELF.
UH, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS VARIANCE WASN'T BROUGHT WITH THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE REQUEST THAT WE HEARD, BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT THE CITY IS DESPERATELY IN NEED OF HOUSING.
AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT THE BEST REASON TO GRANT A VARIANCE LIKE THIS, BUT HONESTLY, I'M PROBABLY GOING TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THAT.
AND I'M VERY UNHAPPY ABOUT IT, BUT IF YOU CAN OFFER ANY EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THIS WASN'T BROUGHT WITH THE ORIGINAL VARIANCES, I'D REALLY LIKE TO HEAR IT.
COMMISSIONER, CAN I ANSWER? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
ONE IS THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNER THAT, UH, OWNED THE PROPERTY WHEN THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE WAS REQUESTED, HAS CHANGED.
AND SECONDLY, THERE WAS SOME IDEAS AT THAT BEFORE THEY GOT INTO THE DETAILED WORK ON, UH, CONVERTING THE UNITS THAT, UH, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO, UH, COMBINE UNITS AND DO THINGS TO REDUCE THE PARKING LOADS SO THAT IF THERE WAS A, UH, RATHER THAN HAVING TO USE THE ADDITIONAL LAND AS A PARKING AND, AND INCUR THAT COST, THAT THEY COULD REDUCE THE CODE PARKING, UH, BY DOING SO, AND IN DOING THE DETAILED ANALYSIS, IT TURNS OUT THAT BY DOING SO WE'RE DRIVING COSTS UP, WE'RE GOING THE WRONG WAY.
UM, WE'RE TRYING TO DELIVER THE DEEPER LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY.
[02:50:04]
YES, YES.UH, MR. JENNER, THE PROPERTY, IT IS NEXT DOOR.
HOW MANY PARKING SPACES WILL YOU GET ON THAT FOR TWO YEARS.
UM, WELL AT A MINIMUM THAT 44, UH, I THINK, YEAH.
HOW COME YOU GUYS DON'T JUST PURCHASE THAT PROPERTY? WELL, THEN YOU'VE DRIVEN COSTS YOU NO LONGER HAVE THIS TYPE OF PROJECT THAT YOU WOULD HAVE.
NO, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY TRUE.
YOU STILL HAVE THE PROJECT, BUT WHAT HAPPENS IS, IS THAT, UH, YOU, YOU WILL, YOU WILL GET THAT MONEY BACK FROM THE MONEY THAT YOU SPEND ON IT, PROPERTY FOR PARKING OVER THE LONGER TERM.
YOU'VE JUST MEMORIZED, STRETCH IT WAY OUT OVER MANY, MANY YEARS.
BUT, UM, UM, I THINK THAT WHEN YOU PURCHASE PROPERTY AND YOU ADD CALL IT A MILLION DOLLARS TO THE BOTTOM LINE, YOU'RE NOT GETTING THAT MONEY BACK BY CHARGING FOLKS THAT ARE MAKING 60% OF MFI THE PARK.
UH THAT'S THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK.
THAT'S GOING TO ALL THAT WE'LL DO IS DRIVE UP THE COST OF LIVING IN THOSE, IN THAT PROJECT.
WELL, I'M, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME GETTING THERE AS WELL, BECAUSE NOW THAT I'M THINKING ABOUT IT, THAT TRAIL GOING DOWN, PAUL AND I USED TO HAVE THE CONTRACT FOR CAPITAL METRO BACK IN THE NINETIES AND EARLY TWO THOUSANDS FOR DOING ALL THE SIDEWALKS AND ACCESSIBILITY TO ALL THE BUS STOPS THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND INTO GOOD.
YOU'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT A TRAIL ACROSS THAT PROPERTY.
OR, AND I NOTICED THAT THE, UH, DIAGRAM SHOWED IT GOING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO GEORGE, DON POWELL TO GEORGIA, BUT YOU CAN'T BUILD THAT BECAUSE THAT'S CITY PROPERTY, THE CITY EASEMENT SIDEWALK THIS ON PAL.
SO THE TRAIL THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SIMPLY FROM YOUR PROPERTY TO FOLLOW.
IT GETS, IT GETS, IT TAKES THE PEOPLE AWAY FROM THE OFF OF
I MEAN, GRANTED, I HAVEN'T BEEN OVER THERE BY GEORGIA POLLEN IN THAT AREA A COUPLE OF YEARS, BUT, UM, I DON'T RECALL IF THERE WAS A SIDEWALK THERE.
THEY DID THAT AS PART OF THE SIDEWALK PROGRAM TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
SO WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS THERE IS AN EXISTING THREE FOOT SIDEWALK GOING DOWN, PAUL.
THERE, THERE IS A SIDEWALK THAT GOES DOWN PAL.
SORRY, BUT YOUR BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.
I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THINKING ABOUT THE RESIDENTS OF THE PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT.
I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING RESIDENTS, UH, IT'S NOT EASY FOR THEM TO MOVE AS WELL AS THEY'RE NOT.
THEY, THEY DON'T MOVE AS MUCH AS OTHER PEOPLE, IF THEY FOUND SOME PLACE THAT WORKS FOR THEM.
AND I'M UNCOMFORTABLE BECAUSE I THINK TAKING AWAY THEIR PERKING AFTER TWO YEARS IS NOT COMFORTABLE FOR ME BECAUSE IT MIGHT FORCE SOME OF THEM TO LEAVE.
ESPECIALLY IF THEY HAVE MORE THAN ONE PERSON IN THE APARTMENT WHO WORKS IN THE BUILDING TRADE.
AND THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE BUILDING TRADE IN THIS AREA.
SO IN SOME WAYS I THINK DON'T PROVIDE THEM EXTRA PARKING AND JUST SAY, HEY, THIS IS AN UNDER PARKED PLACE BECAUSE I FEEL REAL UNCOMFORTABLE LURING PEOPLE INTO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, AND THEN HAVING THEM NOT BE ABLE TO GO TO WORK BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ANY PLACE TO PUT THEIR VEHICLE.
AND I THINK THAT THIS IS, I THINK IF YOU LOOK IN THIS AREA, YOU'LL FIND THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF CONSTRUCTION.
PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THIS AREA WHO ARE LOW INCOME.
AND SO I'D RATHER SEE SOMETHING UPFRONT, THEN THIS LET'S EASE THE MINUTE BECAUSE THE CITY SAYS EVERYBODY'S GOING TO RIDE A BUS IN A FEW YEARS BECAUSE WE CAN'T TELL YOU THAT, YOU KNOW, A FLUENT PEOPLE GOING DOWNTOWN TO WORK OR PEOPLE GOING TO SCHOOL, OTHER PEOPLE CAN DO IT NUMBER BAILEY.
I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE PAL SIDE.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD A TRAIL THROUGH THE PALACE SITE, BUT THEN YOU'RE NOT GOING TO OWN THAT SITE.
SO HOW ARE YOU GOING TO KEEP THAT TRAIL AFTER TWO, IF YOU DON'T PLAN ON KEEPING THAT SITE.
[02:55:01]
EASEMENT THAT, UH, WILL BE A PUBLIC EASEMENT FOR THE TRAIL.AND SO THAT'LL BE FILED OF RECORD.
NO ONE CAN DEVELOP OVER THAT EASEMENT.
UH, AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THAT WILL RUN WITH THE PROPERTY.
AND HOW WIDE IS THAT EASILY GOING TO BE 10 FEET WIDE? OKAY.
ONLY THING I'M WORRIED ABOUT IS IF IT'S JUST DOWN A FENCE, ALMOST LIKE A LITTLE ALLEY, IT BECOMES A DANGEROUS ZONE IN ITSELF.
UM, IF SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, BUYS KYLE AND THEY BUILT SOMETHING, AND THEN THEY BUILT A FENCE THERE, AND THEN THERE'S A FENCE ON THE OTHER SIDE THAT BECOMES A PLACE THAT I'M NOT GOING TO WALK DOWN AFTER DARK, UM, ESPECIALLY TO GET TO THE TUNE FROM THE BUS.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT PROPERTY.
AND THAT'S NOT ANYTHING YOU CAN ANSWER BECAUSE THAT'S IN THE FUTURE.
SORRY, TELL YOU WHAT I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE AGAIN.
AND I KNOW IT'S BEEN POSTPONED QUITE A BIT.
I BET I EVEN FOLLOWED LAST MONTHS OF MEETING.
AND THEN IT WAS EVEN BEFORE THAT, WHEN I WAS THERE, IT WENT THROUGH.
BUT, UH, I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, HE'S NOT, HE DOESN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO GET IT TONIGHT, ANYHOW.
AND SO HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO GO BACK AND GET REAL CREATIVE BECAUSE WHAT HE'S PRESENTING, HE'S ALREADY HIT THE TAR BABY.
SO HE'S THE PROJECT'S ALREADY BEING BUILT.
THERE'S ALREADY A LOT OF MONEY THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PUT INTO THIS PROJECT.
UH, AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE FACT THAT IT'S CHANGED OWNERSHIP, HE WASN'T DELTA FULL OF DECK OF CARDS ON THAT SITUATION, BUT THEN THAT HAS, HE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THAT UP WITH THE PREVIOUS, WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNERS, IF THEY WEREN'T, UH, FORTHCOMING WITH THE INFORMATION THAT, THAT THEY HAD A VARIANCE ALREADY, AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE PARK, AND THAT'S HIS PROBLEM, NOT OUR PROBLEM, BUT, UH, AND I'M LIKE, YOU, I KNOW WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ESPECIALLY IN THIS AREA, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND BROOKE ISSUE BECAUSE RIGHT THERE, WHERE THAT BUS STOP THAT WE BUILT ON, UH, THE CORNER OF PAUL AND GEORGE AND OVER THERE, IT STATES RIGHT.
THERE IS A, THE APD THAT IS A HOT, HOT AREA, VERY HOT IN THE OPEN, OPEN DOOR MARKETS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
SO, UH, IN APD WILL TELL IF THERE'S SIGNS TO APD TELLING YOU TO BE CAREFUL IN THAT AREA AND IT IT'S UNDER SURVEILLANCE.
SO I'M, I DON'T WANT TO JUST THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATH WATER.
I HAVEN'T QUITE COME UP WITH, UH, IN MY OWN PERSONAL MIND, A WAY OF A COMPROMISE, BECAUSE I FULLY UNDERSTAND ALL THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE HERE IN PARKING IT, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONERS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
A LOT OF, A LOT OF THAT AREA WILL PROBABLY WILL BE CONTRACTORS.
AND HAVEN'T BEEN A GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND HAVING MY MAN AND I LET THEM TAKE THE TRUCK HOME WITH ALL THE EQUIPMENT AND EVERYTHING ELSE, AND THEY, THEY NEED TO HAVE WORK.
SO I CAN'T, BUT I DON'T WANT TO KILL THE PROJECT YET.
AND I DON'T THINK IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION.
AND SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE AGAIN AND ALL I CAN SAY, MR. DROWNERS, YOU BETTER GET, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET, UM, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET REAL CREATIVE CAUSE YOU AND I BOTH KNOW THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE IN THIS THING REAL DEEP.
IT'S ALREADY, YOU'VE GOT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ALREADY OUT THERE AND THIS RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SITE, AND IN ORDER TO GO FORWARD, WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO HELP YOU.
BUT YOU'VE GOT TO GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WHAT WE'RE GETTING HERE NOW.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE A SECOND MADAM CHAIR, BUT I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE.
WE'VE GOT A SECOND FROM AUGUSTINO RODRIGUEZ BOARD MEMBER BLOOM.
UM, I'M ON THE FENCE ABOUT THIS ONE.
I THINK ONE THING THAT WOULD HELP ME SUPPORT THIS IS TO SEE MORE DISCUSSION OF HOW YOU'RE GOING TO REDUCE THE TRIPS.
I'M SPECIFICALLY THINKING ABOUT BICYCLES AND BICYCLE ACCESS TO TRANSIT.
LIKE ON THE SIDE, ARE YOU PROVIDING VERY SECURE BICYCLE PARKING? HOW EXTENSIVE IS THE BICYCLE PARKING? AND HAVE YOU CONSIDERED DOING ANYTHING A LITTLE MORE OUTSIDE THE BOX, LIKE PROVIDING A BICYCLE TO RESIDENTS TO USE MAYBE ON A SHARED BASIS OR, OR, OR SOME OTHER BASIS THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO REALLY SHOW A COMMITMENT TO MINIMIZING THE NEED FOR THAT MANY PARKING SPACES WOULD HELP ME A LOT SUPPORT THIS.
AND, YOU KNOW, MR. JENNER, JUST FROM MY OWN PERSONAL POINT OF VIEW, 60% MFI SOUNDS GREAT ON PAPER, BUT YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH AUSTIN'S MFI BEING ALMOST A HUNDRED THOUSAND NOW, IT'S, IT'S STILL A REALLY BIG NUMBER.
THAT'S LIKE ALMOST AS MUCH AS I MAKE.
SO I KNOW WE CAN'T CONDITION IT, OUR ASK HIM, BUT I CAN TELL YOU WOULD GO OUT REALLY LONG WAY WITH ME.
IF THEY CAME DOWN 50% TEETH, ANY GOODWILL GESTURE WOULD BE REALLY APPRECIATED.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A BOTTOM LINE AND IF THEY CAN'T DO IT, THAT'S FINE.
BUT I'M JUST SAYING FOR ME PERSONALLY, ANY LITTLE BIT WOULD HELP A BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.
[03:00:01]
YEAH.AND FOR ME, SOMEBODY WHO'S MAKING 60% PROBABLY HAS A CAR BECAUSE IT IS, I MEAN, THAT'S, YOU'RE, YOU'RE MAKING QUITE A, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU'RE MAKING QUITE A BIT OF MONEY.
I MEAN, IT'S STILL, IT'S STILL A TOUGH LIFE AND, AND WE DO NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I JUST DON'T WANT, JUST BECAUSE YOU NEED TO RENT SOMEPLACE AFFORDABLE, YOU SHOULDN'T BE SHORT CHANGED.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FINISHES ARE IN THIS.
I DON'T KNOW HOW NICE THEY ARE ON THE INSIDE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND I DON'T NEED TO, BUT, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK SOMEBODY SHOULD BE SHORTCHANGED BECAUSE JUST BECAUSE THEY, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW I CAN TELL YOU, I AM A NO ON THIS, EVEN THOUGH I KNOW WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
SO, UM, IF Y'ALL WANT TO POSTPONE IT, THAT'S FINE.
AND THERE'S WORK TO BE DONE BY THE APPLICANT.
MY RESPONSE WAS THAT A COMMENT OR A COMMENT? IT WAS JUST A SIR, MR. JENNER.
RIGHT? SO WE DO HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO AUGUST 9TH BY BOARD MEMBER ON OLIN WITH THE SECOND BY BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUEZ, A BOARD MEMBER PUT BEFORE, BEFORE WE TAKE THIS VOTE, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. DRAENOR TO ADDRESS ONE THING THAT HE, HE SAID EARLIER IN HIS, IN HIS OPENING, HE SAID THAT HE WAS GOING TO RUN THROUGH ALTERNATIVES THAT WOULD NEED TO BE EXPLORED IF THIS WAS NOT GRANTED.
UH, I WILL, I WILL TELL MR. DRAENOR, I PERSONALLY, DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF, OF WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE IMPLICIT THREATS, TO TRY TO GET THE BOARD TO, TO GRANT A VARIANCE, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF HAVING ALL OF THE INFORMATION ON THE TABLE, UH, IF MR. DRAENOR COULD ADDRESS THAT, UH, BECAUSE HE DID SAY HE WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT IN HIS OPENING.
I'D LIKE FOR HIM TO ADDRESS THAT FOR US BEFORE WE HAVE THIS BOAT.
UM, I, REALITY IS A COUPLE OF THINGS.
UH, ONE IS, AND I WOULD POINT THIS OUT.
WE COULD MAKE THIS AN AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED PROJECT SIMPLY BY TAKING 20% OF THE 50% AND MAKING THAT AFFORDABLE AT 50% OF MFI.
IF WE DO THAT, THERE ARE NO PARKING REQUIREMENTS, NONE.
SO THAT'S OPTION ONE, OPTION TWO WOULD BE TO, UH, SHUTTER, THE 34 UNITS THAT WOULD GET US BACK TO CODE REQUIRED PARKING OR THE OTHER WOULD BE TO PAY THE MONEY TO PARK ON ANOTHER SITE, NOT JUST FOR TWO YEARS, BUT FOR TERM, AND TO RAISE THE RANTS ON THE NON ON THE, ON THE NON 50%, THAT'S REQUIRED TO BE 60% OF MFI AND HAVE A GREATER DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN AT THE LOWEST NUMBER VERSUS THE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T SO, UH, HELP.
THAT'S NOT PERCEIVED AS A THREAT.
SO, UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO COME BACK AND OFFER FOR INSTANCE, DEEPER LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY, BECAUSE FRANKLY, IF I DO, IF I DO THAT, I DON'T NEED THE VARIANCE AFFORDABILITY UNLOCK GIVES ME THAT.
SO, UM, WHILE I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY, NORMALLY GRANTED BY A POSTPONEMENT, I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO, UH, IMPROVE THE AFFORDABILITY.
UM, BECAUSE FRANKLY, IF I DID, THEN THERE WOULD BE NO PURPOSE IN ME ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE.
I WOULD ALREADY HAVE IT WITH AFFORDABILITY I'M OFF.
WELL, REMEMBER, MACARTHUR AFFORDABILITY ON LOCK HAS MUCH DEEPER LAYERS OF AFFORDABILITY IN THE, UH, THAN WHAT IS PRESENTED HERE.
AND THE OTHER THING AFFORDABILITY, I'M NOT DOES SCIENCE GRANT WAIVERS TO PARKING IS, UM, THAT IT SAYS THE UNITS HAVE TO BE A CERTAIN SIZE, WHICH ARE BIGGER THAN THIS PROPERTIES.
50% OF THE UNITS HAVE TO HAVE TWO OR MORE BEDROOMS BECAUSE IT'S FAMILY ORIENTED.
SO IT'S AN INTERESTING KIND OF, IF THIS IS FOR AFFORDABLE, YOU KNOW, ANYWAY, I'M SAYING THERE'S CONFLICT THERE IN WHAT I'M HEARING.
[03:05:03]
I WAS THE FIRST ONE TO EVER USE PORTABILITY UNLOCKED AND HAVE USED IT NOW MANY A TIME.UM, SO I, ALL I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT THE REQUIREMENT IS 50% OF THE UNITS AT 60% OF MAF HIGH, HOWEVER, 20%, 20 OR 30% OF, I THINK IT'S 20% ON CERTAIN IDEAS OF THAT.
I BOUGHT THOSE THAT'S THE ENTRY LEVEL FOR AFFORDABILITY LOCKED THAT DOES WAIT WITH PARKING REQUIREMENTS, MADAM CHAIR, I CAN READ THE WRITING ON THE WALL.
SO I'M GOING TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION TO POSTPONE.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY AND, AND LET MR. GUNNA GO FIGURE OUT WHAT HE'S GOING TO END UP HAVING TO DO, BECAUSE, UH, I THINK WE'VE EXHAUSTED EVERYTHING.
I WISH I COULD HELP HIM, BUT, UH, I DON'T SEE, AS, AS OLD, OUR FORMER COMMISSIONER, BRIAN SAID, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO PUT 10 POUNDS IN A FIVE POUND BAG IS NOT WORKING.
AND SO, UH, I, I GUESS I'LL JUST MAKE A MOTION TO DENY A SECOND.
NUMBER EIGHT, I GUESS THAT WAS KIND OF WONDERING BEFORE THE APPLICANT, WHY DIDN'T HE SAY, WHY DIDN'T HE, UM, GO FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT, UH, UNDER AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED? UM, I'M JUST CURIOUS.
WELL, BUT THAT DEEPEN THE LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY FROM WHAT HAS BEEN, UH, REQUIRED AND THE EXISTING RESTRICTED, BUT IT'S AN OPTION.
THANK YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER MANUAL.
AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO APPROVE, WHICH WILL STILL HAVE THE SAME EFFECT, EVEN IF WE DON'T GRANTED FINE.
I REALLY, I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING AND MADAM CHAIR AND I RESPECT YOU FOR IT.
AND YOU'VE GOT A GREAT HEART, BUT I JUST, I CAN'T GET THERE.
I'LL WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO APPROVE THEM SECOND.
SO MOTION TO APPROVE, BUT JESSICA COHEN SECONDED BY NICOLE.
I THINK WE NEED FINDINGS FINDINGS.
I APPRECIATE YOU JUMPED BACK OVER.
REASONABLE USE THE DESIRED USE OF THIS PROPERTY AS A CONVERSION FROM A HOTEL USE TO A DEEPLY AFFORDABLE MULTI-FAMILY USE.
ISN'T IT CORRECT? THAT THE, UH, UM, CHAIR CAN'T MAKE A MOTION.
IS THAT CORRECT? ROBERT RULES? NO, AS FAR AS I KNOW, AS FAR AS I KNOW, THE CHAIR HAS THE DISCRETION TO MAKE THEM A GOOD, OKAY.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE SHE'S OKAY.
I RESEARCHED THAT ONE BECAUSE YEAH.
NORMALLY UNDER ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS, A CHAIR CANNOT MAKE A MOTION, BUT HER, OUR BYLAWS AND RULES THE CHAIR, I DIDN'T WANT YOU TO GET IN TROUBLE WITH DISCRETION, SO, OKAY.
AND YOU'LL NOTICE THIS IS THE FIRST ONE I'VE MADE SINCE CHERISH OR SECOND ANYTHING.
SO REASONABLE USE THE DESIRED USE OF THIS PROPERTY IS A CONVERSION FROM A HOTEL USE TO A DEEPLY AFFORDABLE MULTI-FAMILY USE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS EXCEED THE NECESSARY PARKING FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE CENTER PROVIDE SUCH PARKING WOULD REDUCE THE DENSITY OF THE AFFORDABLE PROJECT.
OUR CHIP, THE HARDSHIP IS INCURRED BY THE CONVERSION OF A HOTEL BUILDING INTO A DENSE AFFORDABLE MULTI-FAMILY USE, THEREBY NECESSITATING USE OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ONSITE ACCOMMODATING CURRENT PARKING REQUIREMENTS WOULD REQUIRE A REDUCTION IN DEEPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE HARDSHIP OR BECAUSE OF THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING HOTEL BUILDING OF THIS ERA INTO AFFORDABLE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES AREA CHARACTER, THE VARIANTS WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA BECAUSE THE BUILDING'S FOOTPRINT PARKING CONFIGURATION WILL MORE REMAIN THE WAY IT HAS EXISTED SINCE 1981, PJ SOME PROPERTY TO THE NORTH.
AND THAT WRAPS TO THE REST OF THE PROPERTY
[03:10:01]
IS A MULTI-FAMILY USE.AND THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH IS A HOTEL USE PARKING BY PROVIDING THE PROJECT WITH, OH, AND JUST FYI FOR THE NEW MEMBERS.
WHEN IT IS A PARKING PARENTS, YOU DO HAVE TO READ THE PARKING PART OF THE FINDINGS, UH, PARKING, UH, BY PROVIDING THE PROJECT WITH THE REQUESTED VARIANCE 226 PARKING SPACES WILL BE PROVIDED, WHICH IS ADEQUATE FOR DEEPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT LOCATED LESS THAN A HALF MILE TO BUS TRANSIT.
THE PARENTING OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT RESULT IN THE PARKING OR LOADING OF VEHICLES ON PUBLIC STREETS.
THE SITE IS DESIGNED IN A MANNER THAT ALLOWS FOR PICKUP AND DROP OFF TO HAPPEN ON THE SIDE.
AND NO CARS ARE ABLE TO BE A PARKED ADJACENT TO THE SITE.
THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT CREATE ANY SAFETY HAZARDS DUE TO THE REDUCTION OF VEHICLE CIRCULATION AND THE RESTORATION OF THE SIDEWALK AND DRIVEWAY INFERENCE AT THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT OF THE SITE.
THE PARKING VARIANCE IS ONLY NEEDED FOR THE CONVERSION OF A HOTEL STRUCTURE, INTO A DENSE AFFORDABLE MULTI-FAMILY USED.
AND THEREFORE THE REQUEST IS ONLY BEING MADE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CONVERSION OF THE STRUCTURE.
YES, MADAM CHAIR, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT, UH, THAT WE PUT BACK IN THAT HE OBTAINS THE TWO YEAR ADDITIONAL PARKING AND THAT THEY PAY FOR AND THEY CONSTRUCT THE TRAIL.
I DON'T WANT IT TO BE FARMED OUT TO SOMEBODY ELSE AND HAVE IT FALL BETWEEN THE CRACKS.
THEY MAINTAIN IT FOR THE TRAIL.
UH, AND THAT'S WHAT THAT EASEMENT, SO IT KEEPS THEM OFF 35 AND THEY OBTAINED THE TWO YEAR ADDITIONAL PARKING NEXT DOOR.
AND THAT IS PROVIDED EVIDENCE THAT PROVIDED FOR THE RECORD.
THIS IS ONE REALLY KILLING ME, YOU KNOW, OUT OF ALL, I WILL SAY THIS 14 YEARS, 14 AND A HALF YEARS BEING ON HIS BOARD, THIS IS PROBABLY THE HARDEST ONE FOR ME TO SUPPORT KILLING ME SMALLS.
SO CAN YOU, THE AMENDMENT BEING, UH, THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH AN AMENDMENT THAT THE TRAIL BE CONSTRUCTED AND MAINTAINED BY THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND THAT EVIDENCE IS PROVIDED OF THE TWO YEAR PARKING AGREEMENT.
UH, IT'S NOT GOING TO PASS, BUT I'LL, I'M STILL GONNA SAY YES FOR THE RECORD.
DARRELL PUT NO, I'VE SEEN HER RODRIGUEZ.
REFERRED THE POSTPONEMENT 1, 2, 3.
SORRY, MR. DONOR, BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
SO DISCUSSION OF THE JUNE 14TH, 2021 BOARD ACTIVITY REPORT ITEM ONE, ANY DISCUSSION LOOKS GOOD AS ALWAYS.
LYNN AND DIANE ARE JUST AMAZING.
AND SHE DOESN'T EVEN HAVE HER VIDEO ON SO WE CAN SEE HER FACE.
I ACTUALLY REALLY USED IT THIS TIME.
CAUSE THERE WAS, UM, UH, IT HELPED ME RESEARCH A CASE FROM SEVERAL MONTHS BACK JUST BY LOOKING AT IT.
CAUSE I COULD LOOK AT THAT REALLY QUICKLY AND FIND THE CASE AND THEN GO LOOK IT UP IN MY RECORDS.
NO, WE DEFINITELY NEED TO THINK DIANA FOR THAT.
UH, F TWO DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE BOARD'S ANNUAL INTERNAL REVIEW REPORT.
SO I KNOW THAT WAS UPLOADED TO YOUR LATE BACKUP TODAY.
HOPEFULLY EVERYONE GOT A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT.
IF NOT, PLEASE REVIEW IT NOW BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO VOTE ON IT.
UH, THIS IS JUST OUR MISSION STATEMENT, WHAT WE DID, WHAT WE PLANNED TO DO.
UM, WE DID BETTER WITH POSTPONEMENTS THIS PAST YEAR.
[03:15:01]
I'D LIKE TO ADD INTO THE GOALS, UM, TRAINING, TRAINING.I MEAN, I KNOW IT'S BEEN A GOAL FOR THEM, SOME SPECIFIC LANGUAGE OR, UM, TRAINING FOR, UM, OH MELISSA, HOW SHOULD WE PUT IT? NOT JUST FOR NEW MEMBERS, BUT FOR THE MOST PART NEW MEMBERS AND REFRESHERS OR EXISTING? UM, UM, WELL, CAUSE IT'S UNFAIR.
I MEAN, NEW MEMBERS COMING IN AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN TRAINED AND THEY KNOW, SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DECIDE ON EXACT WORDING TONIGHT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO VOTE ON END OF JULY.
SO, UM, PROVIDE TRAINING FOR NEW MEMBERS, ANNUAL TRAINING, ANNUAL TRAINING FOR LIKE THE MEMBERS.
I'M TRYING TO HELP YOUR FOR PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES AND ALSO UPDATES FOR EXISTING BOARD MEMBERS AS NEEDED.
UM, AS THINGS COME UP BECAUSE WE WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A PRESENTATION LIKE ON THE LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS THAT WERE TAKEN.
AND SO WE WOULD IN THE FUTURE, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE WOULD NEED EDUCATION ON FOR THAT WOULD BE AN UPDATING FOR EXISTING MEMBERS.
SO UPDATE EXISTING MEMBERS ON ANY NEW CHANGES AND PROVIDE TRAINING FOR NEW MEMBERS ON PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES, UM, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
HOLD ON ONE SEC FOR ME PLEASE.
LET ME JUST GET MY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOLDER OPEN WITH THAT IN IT.
I'M GOING TO GO TO, SO I'LL PUT THAT AS UNDER ITEM FOUR, I'LL ADD ANY E SUCH AN IIN WILL READ, PROVIDE ANNUAL TRAINING FOR NEW MEMBERS FOR PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES, PROCESSES, COMMA PROCEDURES, COMMA, AND UPDATES FOR EXISTING BOARD MEMBERS AS NEEDED.
UH, FOR MEMBER RODRIGUEZ, I SAW YOU FIRST AND THEN WE'LL GET TO YOU BOARD MEMBER WALLER.
I MEAN, WE, WE, WE DID RECEIVE TRAINING THAT WAS A REQUISITE FOR, YOU KNOW, COMING ONTO THE BOARD, HOWEVER, UM, YOU KNOW, TO YOUR, TO YOUR POINT, UM, IT WASN'T, IT COULD BE MORE IN DEPTH, YOU KNOW? AND SO I THINK THAT IF IT COULD JUST, YOU KNOW, IF I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU WORD THAT, BUT UM, JUST LIKE A BLOW BY BLOW EVEN OF LIKE ONE OF THESE SESSIONS AND A BREAKDOWN OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AND ALL OF THAT KIND OF THING, SO THAT WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, SORT OF FIGURING IT OUT AS WE GO ALONG.
I MEAN, IT'S BEEN, IT'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, THIS ONE IS OUR SECOND SESSION, I BELIEVE OUR SECOND ONE AS NEW MEMBERS.
UM, AND IT'S, IT WAS DEFINITELY EASIER THAN THE FIRST ONE.
UM, BUT YEAH, I THINK THAT THE, WE ARE GETTING TRAINING.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF GETTING A LITTLE BIT MORE IN-DEPTH TRAINING AND A LOT OF STUFF WELL BEEN DOING REALLY WELL BY THE WAY.
AND THE TRAINING WAS GREAT, BUT IT, YEAH, IT COULD BE MORE IN DEPTH.
YEAH, NO, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A SINK OR SWIM SITUATION.
YOU THROW THE BABY IN THE WATER AND SEE HOW IT GOES AND YOU GUYS ARE SO SEASONED, SO WE'RE LEARNING A LOT FROM Y'ALL.
UM, I DON'T SEE THIS DOCUMENT.
ARE WE LOOKING AT F TWO? IT'LL BE IN YOUR LATE BACKUP.
I DO NOT HAVE A LATE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BY GO TO AUSTIN, TEXAS.GOV FORWARD SLASH B O N.
AND THEN, UH, IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA.
IT'S AN OLDER BACKUP MATERIALS SITE.
AND THEN UNDER THE JULY 12TH MEETING, THAT'LL BE DOWN TOWARDS THE BOTTOM THERE F TWO.
UH, SO SHOULD I HAVE GONE TO THE WEBSITE PRIOR TO THE MEETING? I DIDN'T KNOW THAT THERE WERE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS.
BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE ALL THE BACKUP MATERIAL IS.
AND SO THAT'S ALSO WHERE ALL THE LAKE BACKUP MATERIAL COMES IN.
SO THAT'S ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA BEFORE THE MEETING AT ABOUT THREE 15 TO GO TO THAT PAGE AND IT WILL HAVE ANY NEW MATERIAL THAT THEY'VE DOWNLOADED.
THERE MIGHT NOT BE ON THE AGENDA OR MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN ON THE AGENDA.
WE WERE SENT ON FRIDAY BY ELAINE.
YOU CAN ADD THAT TO OUR FUTURE IN-DEPTH TRAININGS, UH, BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.
NO, IT WAS VICE-CHAIR HAWTHORNE, MELISSA.
I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY TOO, WE'RE NORMALLY TOGETHER.
THIS IS KIND OF LIKE A VERY STRANGE SCIENCE FICTION
[03:20:01]
FILM THAT WE'RE ALL IN AND WE'RE NORMALLY TOGETHER.SO WE WOULD NORMALLY BE NEXT TO EACH OTHER WHERE SOMEBODY COULD, COULD EXPLAIN OR WE'D GET THERE EARLY ENOUGH THAT WE'D ALL KIND OF BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT HOW THE AGENDA FLOWS AND THAT TYPE OF THING.
MY TRICK IS ALWAYS WHEN I REVIEW THE BACKUP MATERIAL, I ALWAYS START AT THE BACK BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO BE THE TIREDEST.
AND SO MY NOTES ARE BETTER AT THE BACK.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, CAUSE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, I'M A LOT FRESHER.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE START GETTING TOWARDS 10 O'CLOCK AND MY HAVE HAD MEETINGS GO TILL ONE OR ONE 30 IN THE MORNING.
SO I WANT MY NOTES TO BE REALLY GOOD.
UM, AND SO THAT'S ONE OF MY TRICKS AND SO WE ALL ARE TOGETHER.
WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE IN THIS, SO EVERYBODY'S BEEN A GREAT TROOPER AND, AND OF COURSE YOU'RE ALWAYS WELCOME TO CALL.
UM, AND I I'VE GIVEN MY, MY SUITE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE.
I THINK ELAINE JUST FOUND A TYPE.
I MEAN, YOU SAID THERE'S A TYPO.
UM, WELL WE JUST NEED YOU TO CORRECT IT NOW.
I THOUGHT I CAUGHT ALL THE 2018 TO 2019.
I WILL FIX THAT AND I WILL SEND THAT AS WELL.
AND I'LL SEND IT WITH THE, UH, ADJUSTED LANGUAGE FOR, UH, THE ANNUAL TRAINING THAT WE'RE GOING TO ADD UNDER PARTS.
I MIGHT WANT TO STATE IT FOR THE RECORD SO THAT WHEN WE WENT, WE DO SO, UH, FOR THE RECORD, I WILL ALSO BE CHANGING AT THE VERY TOP OF THE DOCUMENT, UH, THE DATE WHERE IT SAYS, UH, IT CURRENTLY SAYS FOR THE TIME PERIOD, 7 1 20 18 TO 6 30, 20 19, I'LL BE CHANGING THAT TO, UH, JULY, OR IS IT, I'VE GOT IT IN HERE SOMEWHERE ALREADY, JULY 1ST, 2022, JUNE 30TH, 2021.
SO LET'S SEE, UH, BOARD MEMBER WADE.
I THOUGHT THAT MAYBE FOR THE ANNUAL TRAINING WHERE WE HAD JUST AMENDED THE LANGUAGE, MAYBE WE COULD SPECIFY SOME ITEMS, BUT SAY INCLUDING XYZ, JUST SO WE'RE NOT LIMITED TO THIS.
AND AS A NEW MEMBER, MY IDEAS FOR TRAINING, UM, WOULD INCLUDE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE REVIEW OF SUPPORTING AND BACKUP DOCUMENTS, STANDARDS FOR GRANTING VARIANCES AND ETHICS AND CONFLICTS, WHICH I THINK IS ALL STUFF THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED PREVIOUSLY BY OTHER NEW BOARD MEMBERS, INCLUDING MYSELF.
SO I WILL DEFINITELY GET THAT ON THE LIST.
UH, LEE, IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD PUT IN THERE OR SHOULD WE LEAVE IT MORE GENERALIZED AND THEN TRY TO WORK ON THE TRAINING AMONGST OURSELVES, OUR, THROUGH OUR BOARDS THAT CAN USE ON, UH, MADAM CHAIR.
I IT'S TOTALLY UP TO YOUR DISCRETION.
WE'RE HAPPY TO ADD THAT TO THE MIX.
ONCE WE GET TO A TRAINING, UM, I KNOW THAT WE'VE PRESENTED, UH, PREVIOUS BOARDS WITH THAT SIMILAR TYPE OF TRAINING BEFORE.
SO, UM, I THINK IT'S FINE LEAVING IT OFF.
WE CAN CERTAINLY CONTEMPLATE THAT WHEN WE GET CLOSER TO THE TIME OF TRAINING, WE, WE DO HAVE A TRAINING MARK GROUP ONE RIGHT NOW A BOARD MEMBER WOULD, SO WE'LL DISCUSS THAT THE NEXT ITEM, UH, BOARD MEMBER HOTLINE.
WE, WE ALSO HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET THE TRAINING DURING THE COVID EXPERIENCE FOR ABOUT, UM, HM.
SO THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON CONTENTS, PARTICULARLY.
UM, I KNOW THAT PROCEDURES AND, AND SUCH WE'RE, WE'RE DEFINITELY IN THERE AND HARDSHIP AND, UH, ALSO ON LAKE AUSTIN CASES BECAUSE LIKE AUSTIN CASES ARE PARTICULARLY, UM, THEY'RE HARD FOR ME AND, AND I KNOW, BUT, UH, NO, I'M NOT THAT OLD.
UH, BUT YOU KNOW, SO I KNOW THAT STAFF ACTUALLY HAS A GREAT DEAL OF TOPICS THAT, THAT THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING ON.
IT'S JUST DIFFICULT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO BE TELEVISED.
SO THAT ALL HAS TO BE DONE THROUGH THE CLERK'S OFFICE TO THIS HAS BEEN, UH, ONE OF THE MOMENTS OF WHERE PATIENTS, UM, UM, I'M JUST GOING TO STOP.
UH, SO ANY OTHER COMMENTS? JUST GOOD JOB FIRST TRY, UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION?
[03:25:02]
I MOVE TO APPROVE THE ANNUAL INTERNAL REVIEW, MICHAEL, UH, NOPE.MICHAEL, MICHAEL, MICHAEL, I LET ME GET, SO, AND THAT WAS BROOKE.
SOME WITH THE CHANGES NOTED, BROOKE PICKS A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE MICHAEL S SECOND.
AND THAT'S WITH THE ADDITION OF SECTION FOUR OR E, WHICH WILL STATE PROVIDE ANNUAL TRAINING FOR NEW MEMBERS FOR PROCESSES, COMMA PROCEDURES, COMMA, AND UPDATES FOR EXISTING BOARD MEMBERS AS NEEDED.
AND I THINK, UM, WE DID MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO PUT SUBJECTS TO BE DEFINED, UM, IN CONJUNCTION WITH DEVELOPING THE TRAINING.
CAUSE I KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFERENT TRAINING SESSIONS ON DIFFERENT STAFF AND WE'LL ALL HAVE INPUT ON THOSE, BUT I DON'T, I'M NOT SURE HOW, HOW YOU WANT TO WORD THAT.
YOU CAN ALWAYS START A WORK GROUP ON THAT.
SO I THINK WE HAVE THAT WE HAVE ONE OF THE BOARD SUBJECTS TO BE DEFINED BY THE BOARD.
WELL, I THINK DON WAS A PART OF THAT WORK GROUP.
WE NEED TO MAKE SOME APPOINTMENTS.
SO WE'LL, WE'LL GET TO THAT HERE IN JUST A MINUTE AND ALSO TO CORRECT THE DATE FROM 2018 TO 2019 TO 2020 TO 2021.
SO, UH, TELL ME IT'S I HAVE A QUESTION.
ON THE TOPIC OF, OF WORKING GROUPS AND WHATNOT.
LIKE SINCE I'M AN ALTERNATE, I CAN'T BE ON A WORKING GROUP.
IS THAT HOW IT WORKS? I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT I'VE JUST ASSUMED THAT WAS THE CASE.
LET'S HOLD THAT QUESTION UNTIL WE GET TO THE WORK GROUPS SECTION OF THE AGENDA, WHICH IS COMING RIGHT UP AND I'LL HAPPILY ANSWER THAT FOR YOU IF HE'S PERFECT.
DOESN'T MIND, BUT LET'S LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET THIS DONE REAL QUICK.
MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, ITEM, ITEM F THREE
[F-3 Discussion and possible action to form a BOA Workgroup to review and propose changes to BOA Appeals (including, but not limited to, process and fees) Waiting New Appointments to BOA On-Line Link: Item F-3]
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO FORM E L WORK GROUP TO REVIEW PROPOSED CHANGES TO BOA APPEALS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO PROCESSES AND FEES.SO WE WERE WAITING ON THE NEW APPOINTMENTS HERE.
UH, I THINK MOST OF THE NEW APPOINTMENTS ARE HERE TONIGHT.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION QUICKLY.
MY UNDERSTANDING WAS WORK GROUPS DON'T EVEN HAVE TO BE ON THE, YOU CAN APPOINT PEOPLE THAT ALREADY WENT ON THE BOARD.
IS THAT CORRECTLY? A BOARD MEMBER? I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE THAT THAT'S THE CASE.
I'M, I'M LOOKING INTO THAT NOW, IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE YOU'RE OKAY.
KNOW WHEN I WAS ON OTHER BOARDS, BUT OF COURSE THEY WEREN'T BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT WHEN I POINT PEOPLE THAT WERE OUTSIDE OF THE BOARD TO BE ON A WORK GROUP, I THINK IN SOME CASES IT DEPENDS ON THE BYLAWS OF THE ACTUAL BOARD OR COMMISSION.
UH, SIX, I THINK FOR WORK GROUPS, UH, COMMITTEES COMMITTEES CANNOT THE EIGHT COMMUNITIES WORKING GROUPS.
WELL, WHAT ARE YOU GUYS LOOKING AT? I WANTED TO SAY A WELCOME TO BARBARA, OUR, OUR NEWEST PERSON TO BE HERE.
UH, SO LEE, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO LEAVE THIS ONE UP TO YOU.
THE, THE BYLAWS ARE NOT CLEAR ON THIS.
IT SAYS WE CAN DETERMINE THE SIZE OF A WORKING GROUP MUST BE LESS THAN A QUORUM.
I WOULD PREFER TO GET BACK TO THE BOARD ON THIS BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.
I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE A LEGAL ANSWER TO THAT.
LET ME JUST MAKE A LITTLE NOTE OF LAND, NON BOARD MEMBERS, ONE NUMBER BLOOM.
WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION AGAIN? I KNOW IT'S SPECIFICALLY FOR YOUR WORKING GROUP.
I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT I COULD NOT BE ON THAT APPOINTED, BUT IF THE WORKING GROUP ISSUE MIGHT TAKE CARE OF IT, BUT, UM, BUT IF IT'S MORE LIKE A SUBCOMMITTEE,
[03:30:02]
THEN THAT PROBABLY DEFINITELY MEDICATION.CAUSE I, I, SORRY, I WAS GONNA SUGGEST SOMETHING FOR ONE OF THE EXISTING COMMITTEES, BUT I CAN DO WITH IT AT SOME OF THE LEAD.
I SEE AN ANSWER TO THAT ONE EITHER.
IS THAT SOMETHING ELSE WE COULD HAVE YOU LOOK UP BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING? SURE.
IF ALTERNATES WELL CONSERVE ON WORKING GROUPS.
SO BACK TO F THREE, UH, LET'S SEE THE AND WHO, OKAY, SO WE'RE WAITING ON NEW APPOINTMENTS FOR THE BEGINNING.
SO THIS WORK GROUP HASN'T ACTUALLY BEEN FORMED YET.
THIS IS SOMETHING WE WERE DISCUSSING FOREMAN.
UH, AGAIN, IT'S TRUE OF YOUR PROPOSED CHANGES TO ONLY APPEALS.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE INTERESTED IN, UH, MAYBE VOLUNTEERING FOR THAT WORK GROUP, JESSICA JUST QUICKLY? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT, I MEAN WE'LL NOVEMBER, BUT I MEAN, WOULD THIS BE SOMETHING THAT THE NEW MEMBERS THAT MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN IT, BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY TRAINING WHAT THIS WORK GROUP IS AND THAT'S, THAT'S TOUGH CAUSE APPEALS, WE JUST, WE DON'T GET THAT MANY OF THEM.
BUT I MEAN, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE AT LEAST A QUICK SESSION FOR THE NEW MEMBERS ON WHAT THIS EVEN MEANS.
WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND POSTPONE THIS, OR IF SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE IT SECOND, AND, BUT JUST SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A QUICK PRESENTATION, YOU KNOW, NOT EVEN FIVE MINUTES KIND OF OUTLINE WHAT THIS MEANS, I THINK WOULD GO A LONG WAYS TO HELPING THE NEW MEMBERS.
IF THEY'RE EVEN INTERESTED IN THIS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD WANT TO DO.
SO LIKE, DO WE HAVE TO VOTE ON POSTPONING THE SOURCE SINCE THIS IS JUST A, A NEW BUSINESS ITEM, WE CAN JUST IT'S UH, IT'S BUSINESS WITH POSSIBLE ACTION, MADAM CHAIR.
SO I THINK, UH, WHAT YOU CAN DO IS JUST NOT TAKE ACTION, BUT REPOST FOR THE FOLLOWING MONTH.
SO, I MEAN, A THREE LET'S JUST REPOST FOR AUGUST AND WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME TRAINING AND BEFORE THEN.
[F-4 Discussion and possible action regarding postponed BOA Trainings (including new topic “Area Character”); Staff & PC Coordination Workgroup (LeightonBurwell, 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). (Jan. 2021: Waiting New Appointments to BOA) On Line Link: Item F-4]
UH, SO THIS IS, THIS IS, UH, TRAININGS, UH, DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING POSTPONED BOE TRAININGS.UH, I THINK THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH, OKAY, WHAT ARE YOU THAT FAR PERSONALLY? SO THE LATEST I HAVE IS BECAUSE WE'RE POSSIBLY HAVING TO GO TO IN-PERSON VERY SOON WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH OR TWO, THERE'S REALLY NO POINT AND SCHEDULING TRAINING, BECAUSE IF WE CAN DO A VIRTUAL TRAINING BEFORE THEN, YES, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
WE CAN HAVE A TRAINING SESSION, BUT IF WE CAN'T AND WE GO TO IN PERSON, THERE'S A HIGH POSSIBILITY THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A ROOM AVAILABLE.
THEREFORE THAT TRAINING IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE CANCELED.
SO THE BEST I HAVE IS WE PROBABLY SHOULD WAIT TILL AFTER SEPTEMBER.
CAUSE THAT'S MORE THAN LIKELY WHEN WE ARE GOING TO GO.
THAT'S WHY I WAS THINKING AS WELL.
AND NEW MEMBERS I'M REALLY SORRY, BUT, BUT THIS WORKING GROUP IS ALSO COMING UP WITH THE SUBJECTS AND TH AND WHAT WE WANT TO SEE.
IT'S NOT JUST ORGANIZING WHEN AND WHERE IT'S ALSO AN IMPORTANT MEETING WITH STAFF ON WHAT THE CONTENT SHOULD BE.
SO IT'S A SCARF AND PC COORDINATION WORK GROUP, WHICH WAS, UH, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN START BECAUSE THE NEW MEMBERS ALREADY KNOW WHAT THEY, THEY HAVE GOOD IDEAS ON WHAT THEY WANT TO LEARN.
SO YES,
YOU CAN DO IT BY VIDEO CONFERENCE.
UM, ONE WAS, THERE'S NOT A FORUM.
AND WE CAN DO IT BY EMAIL, MEAN WE CAN START WITH EMAIL, PEOPLE CAN GIVE INPUT, AND THEN WE CAN WORK WITH THE LANE, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER ELSE WE NEED TO WORK WITH.
AND LIKE I SAID, WE WON'T BE SETTING UP THE TRAINING.
WE'LL JUST BE MORE WHAT KIND OF
SO THAT AT LEAST AFTER SEPTEMBER 1ST, WE'RE ALREADY KNOW KIND OF WHAT WE WANT THE TRAINING TO LOOK LIKE.
[03:35:01]
UH, SO YEAH, I MEAN, I COULD, I COULD START BY SENDING OUT AN EMAIL WITH A LIST OF, I MEAN, IDEAS WOULD THAT SUFFICE OR, OR WHAT, WHAT, YEAH.THEN WE COULD JUST HAVE A DISCUSSION.
AND MELISSA, SO THE WORK GROUP IS MYSELF, MICHAEL AND BROOKE.
SO IF YOU'RE JOINING IN, SO WE CAN'T HAVE A ROLLING QUORUM, SO YOU CAN'T SEND IT TO EVERYBODY.
YOU CAN ONLY SEND IT TO THOSE THREE.
SO JUST, JUST TO, IT'S ONE OF THOSE WEIRD THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, HOW, LIKE ELAINE ALWAYS SENDS US EMAILS AND SAYS, DON'T REPLY.
THIS IS ONE OF THOSE DON'T REPLY.
ALL WHO ARE THE BROOKE AND, UH, ON ITEM FOUR ON THE AGENDA, THEIR NAMES ARE, ARE, THEY'RE LISTED.
UH, LEIGHTON IS OUR PREVIOUS CHAIR AND HE'S NO LONGER PART OF THE WORKING GROUP.
UM, AND, AND ANOTHER POINT WHEN YOU DO SEND THOSE AND WE KIND OF GO OVER AND LOOK AT DIFFERENT AGENDAS, THEN WE CAN SEND THAT TO LANE AND SHE CAN SEND IT UP TO THE GROUP FOR THE COMMENTS OR FURTHER COMMENTS THAT THEN WE'LL HAVE IT SET UP FOR THE NEXT MEETING.
AND THEN WE CAN GET COMMENTS BACK IN PERSON, OR WE CAN SEND IT OUT AHEAD OF TIME, BUT HAVE A LANE TO IT, NOT US FOR COMMENTS.
THAT'S HOW WE GET EVERYBODY INVOLVED.
[F-5 Announcements]
ANNOUNCEMENTS, UH, I'M SURE EVERYONE SAW IN THEIR EMAIL, UH, FROM STEPHANIE HALL AND CLERK'S OFFICE THAT, UH, GOVERNOR ABBOTT DID RENEW THE STATE DISASTER DECLARATION FOR COVID-19.BUT SEPTEMBER 1ST, UH, THE CURRENT SUSPICIONS OF TOMA, UH, THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT WILL EXPIRE.
SO THAT'S THAT PRETTY MUCH GUARANTEES WE'RE GOING TO BE MEETING IN PERSON AGAIN FOR OUR SEPTEMBER MEETING.
AUGUST IS STILL UP IN THE AIR.
UH, WHEN WE DO MEET IN PERSON, WE DO WELL, AT LEAST WE DID MEET AT CITY HALL IN THE CITY AND THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, UH, ON THE COUNCIL DIETS.
SO THAT THAT'S GENERALLY WHERE WE HAVE OUR MEETINGS.
SAME AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR CITY COUNCIL.
WE'RE PRETTY SURE, UH, LENNY AND I ARE PRETTY SURE WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET THAT AGAIN.
I'VE ALSO BEEN KIND OF DROPPING A BUG IN MY COUNCIL MEMBERS EAR, UH, THAT SOVEREIGN BOARDS WOULD ACTUALLY DO REALLY, REALLY WELL AT CITY HALL BECAUSE WE DO HAVE TO BE TELEVISED.
WE HAVE TO BE AUDIO AND VIDEO BROADCAST AND THAT'S PRISTINE LOSS.
SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO KEEP YOUR EYES OPEN FOR.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE ATTEND OUR HEARINGS AT PRESENT AND WE HAVE APPLICANTS FROM ALL OVER THE CITY.
SO WE NEED TO BE CENTRAL BECAUSE I DON'T WANT UNDUE BURDEN ON SOMEBODY THAT LIVES OFF OF WILLIAM CANNON TO DRIVE ALL THE WAY UP TO HIGHLAND MALL.
VERY, WE'RE KIND OF IN THE MIDDLEMAN.
I MEAN, EVERYBODY'S GOING TO HAVE THE SAME BURDEN BASICALLY, BUT WE'LL STILL BE THERE.
UM, SOMETHING I WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT I NOTICED DURING THE ANNUAL REVIEW IS THAT WE HAVE A LOT AND BY A LOT, AND I'M GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE A LIST, BUT IT'S, IT'S AT LEAST A DOZEN TABLED ITEMS FROM THE PAST 16 MONTHS DURING COVID THAT WERE SPECIFICALLY TABLED UNTIL WE MEET IN PERSON AGAIN.
SO THE FIRST IN-PERSON MEETING IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE VERY, VERY, VERY FORMAL.
WE MAY WANT TO LIKE TABLE SOME STUFF AGAIN TO THE NEXT MEETING, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT ALL AT ONCE, BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF ITEMS ON THAT MEAN TO DEAL WITH, UH, FOR NEWER MEMBERS.
JUST TO REMINDER ALSO, PLEASE FAMILIARIZE YOURSELF WITH THE BACKUP BEFORE THE MEETING.
IT WILL MAKE YOUR LIFE SO MUCH EASIER THAN HAVING TO TRY TO DO IT ON THE FLY.
AND I ALSO, I KNOW, UM, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ON THE AGENDA AND IT'S NOT, BUT I WAS WONDERING IF LEE COULD GIVE US IF IT'S ALLOWED FOR AN UPDATE ON, UM, THE BILL THAT PASSED.
WAS IT SIGNED? WAS IT CHANGED? UM, WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR US? THAT WENT BE WAY, REMEMBER WE'RE NOT FOR THAT TONIGHT.
I'M HAPPY TO EITHER PUT THAT TO THE AGENDA NEXT MONTH.
OR I CAN JUST FOLLOW UP WITH AN EMAIL TO THE, UH, TO THE WHOLE BOARD.
UM, I WOULD LIKE A FOLLOW UP EMAIL WOULD BE GREAT, BUT I'D STILL LIKE IT ON THE AGENDA IN CASE WE HAVE, I'M GOING TO GET IT AT IT.
I MUST THAT ONE THIS MONTH, IT WAS ON MY NOTES AND I OVERLOOKED IT WHEN I APPROVE THE AGENDA.
SO LET'S MORE THAN HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP WITH ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBERS MIGHT HAVE IN THE MEANTIME.
ANY OTHER ANNOUNCEMENTS? WELCOME NEW MEMBERS, CHILD BY FIRE GUYS.
REMEMBER IF MICHAEL LEAVES EILEEN? NO LEAVING MICHAEL.
[03:40:01]
ARE THERE ANY FUTURE AGENDA, NEW BUSINESS ITEMS? OUR STAFF REQUIRED WORKSHOP REQUESTS, DINNER REQUESTS.IT'S 9:13 PM MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
I AM EXCITED THAT YOU'RE HERE, BARBARA.