Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript


[00:00:01]

NO, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ORDER,

[CALL TO ORDER]

UH, WOULD YOU HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT? LET'S GO IN AND TAKE ATTENDANCE AND WE'LL JUST HOPE BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR COMES BACK ON.

SO ROLL CALL.

THOMAS SEATS HERE.

BROOKE BAILEY HERE.

ME HERE.

JESSICA COHEN, MELISSA HAWTHORNE HERE.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

SHE'S NOT BACK YET.

RON MCDANIEL.

DARRELL PUT NOPE.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ HERE.

RICHARD SMITH HERE.

NICOLE LEAD HERE.

AND KELLY BLOOM HERE.

OKAY.

AND TRUMAN IS HERE.

HE'S HE'S READY.

I'M SURE HE IS.

OKAY.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET THE LITTLE STUFF OUT OF THE WAY WHILE WE WAIT FOR A BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR, UH,

[A-1 Staff requests approval July 12, 2021 draft minutes]

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR JULY 12TH, 2021.

UH, ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS I'M HERE? OH, THERE SHE IS.

OKAY.

THE APP DOESN'T WORK ON MY COMPUTER.

I'M SORRY.

I'M JUST GLAD YOU'RE HERE.

WHETHER YOU HAVE VIDEO OR NOT.

YEAH.

YES.

I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE JULY, 2021 MEETING.

SECOND BAILEY MOTION BY BOOK BAILEY TO APPROVE SECOND BY VICE CHAIR ACTUALLY SHOULD, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE BETTER IF SOMEONE ELSE SECONDED IT.

CAUSE I HAVE THE CASE THAT I RECUSED ON.

AND THEN ALSO, HEY JESSICA.

I'LL ALSO I'LL STEP IN FOR THE SECOND.

YEAH.

THANK YOU.

OKAY, SO LET'S TAKE THE VOTE, TOMMY.

YES.

BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

MELISSA HAWTHORNE.

YES.

WITH NO ACTION ON THOSE TWO CASES, PLEASE UNDERSTUDIED AND SEE RICHARD.

BE REALLY GLAD YOUR NAME.

DOESN'T START WITH AN A, YOU COULD BE THE NEW GUY, LIKE TOMMY, WHO GETS TO GO FIRST WAY TOO MUCH.

ARBOR MACARTHUR.

YES.

MOM AND DANIEL.

YES.

DARRELL SNUCK HERE.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH OR ABSTAIN.

SINCE YOU WEREN'T HERE.

IF YOU WATCHED THE VIDEO.

I KNOW ONE IS OUT NICOLE.

WADE.

YES.

AND KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

SUPER OPIE PROVED.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE THIS IS GOING TO MEET EVERYBODY FOR TONIGHT.

SO JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK HOUSEKEEPING THINGS, BOARD MEMBERS, PLEASE REMIND ME WHERE THE WHITE YOUR HAND OR SORRY TO RAISE YOUR HAND AND WAIT TO BE CALLED ON.

AND IF I DON'T RESPOND, WHY WAY? UH, ESPECIALLY LIKE RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE I'M NOT SEEING ABOUT HALF OF YOU.

UH, WE KNOW ABOUT BARBARA AND DON'T SEE NICOLE LIKE MELISSA, I DON'T SEE YOU.

AND I DON'T SEE YOU, BROOKE.

SO WE'RE GOING TO GO.

I FEEL STRONGLY.

I'D LIKE TO NOT BE ON VIDEO.

I'M NOT FEELING WELL.

UM, AND I ACTUALLY AM PLANNING TO GO GET A COVID TEST TOMORROW.

SO I ACTUALLY TAUGHT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE ABOUT THIS LAST MONTH AND IT'S OKAY.

AS LONG AS YOUR VOICE IS BEING RECORDED.

OKAY.

PERFECT.

THANK YOU, SIR.

UM, I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU CAN'T SEE MELISSA THOUGH.

CAUSE I COULD SEE ALL OF US HERE HAVING A GRID.

YEAH, YEAH, NO, NO.

IT JUST GOT YOUR NAME RIGHT NOW.

OH, I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK WEBEX DOES THAT TO CONSERVE BANDWIDTH, BUT, BUT MELISSA HAD BROKE.

I CAN SEE IT'S REALLY BIZARRE.

AND I'VE GOT GOOGLE FIBER TOO, SO IT'S NOT LIKE OTHER SLOW CONNECTION.

OKAY, WELL LET'S MOVE ON.

UM, SO FOR PEOPLE ON THE PHONE WHO ARE GOING TO SPEAK JUST REAL QUICK, SINCE WE'RE VIRTUAL COLORS IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION, WE'LL SPEAK AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AND THEN THE CASES WILL BE CALLED.

UH, IF YOU WANT TO BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, PLEASE REMAIN ON THE LINE UNTIL DECISIONS MADE ON THE KEYS.

THERE'S ONLY GOING TO BE ONE PRESENTATION SPEAKER

[00:05:01]

PER CASE, AND THAT SPEAKER WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO PRESENT THE KEY.

MOVING ON.

WE'RE GOING TO GO TO ITEM B ONE,

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

WHICH IS GOING TO BE THE APP, UH, APPLICATIONS FOR POSTPONEMENT AND WITHDRAWAL.

ELAINE, DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL, UM, GUESS WE DO? UM, THINK IT'S.

HOLD ON.

IT'S THE SECOND.

LET ME SEE.

IT IS ITEM C 2 25 52 WHILE THE LUPUS STREET C 1 6 20 21 DASH OH 0 0 3.

THEY'RE REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TILL THE OCTOBER 11TH, 2021 MEETING OCTOBER 11TH.

YES.

AND THEN WE HAVE A C2.

UM, ONE SIX DASH 2021 DASH 0 0 0 3.

NO WAIT, SORRY.

WRONG.

ONE C ONE C ONE SIX DASH 2021 DASH 0 0 0 8, 7 15 WEST 23RD STREET.

THEY'RE REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TILL SEPTEMBER 13TH.

AND THEN ITEM E TO C 15 DASH 2021 DASH 0 0 5 5 12 0 6 WAS STREET.

THEY'RE REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TILL SEPTEMBER 13TH AS WELL.

AND WE HAVE ITEM EAST SIX, C 15 20 21 0 0 6 8 4 1 4 1 1 GASTON AVENUE AS A WITHDRAWAL.

YES.

CORRECT.

OKAY.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? WELL, JUST QUICKLY, UM, ON C1, SHOULD WE CAUSE THE REASON THESE ARE BEING POSTPONED IS THAT CODE AMENDMENT, YOU KNOW, CODE UPDATES, TRYING TO COME THROUGH TO FIX THE ISSUES WITH THE SIGNS.

SO SHOULD WE POSTPONE BOTH OF THOSE TO OCTOBER OR SHOULD WE JUST KEEP ONE IN SEPTEMBER? I WANTED UP TOBAR BECAUSE I'M SURE THAT BOTH OF THESE WILL BE HEARD ONCE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARS THAT CASE, IS THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICANT, BUT WE'LL NEED TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO SEE IF THAT'S ACCEPTABLE.

UM, IF, INSTEAD OF CONTINUING TO, UM, POSTPONE THESE EVERY SINGLE MONTH, BECAUSE THAT ACTION STILL HAS TO BE TAKEN, NOT JUST BY PLANNING COMMISSIONER, BUT ALSO BY COUNCIL COUNCIL.

I DON'T THINK LEAH BO JO IS ON THE BO JO IS ON THE PHONE WITH US TONIGHT.

YEAH, SHE DOES.

SHE'S GOT ANOTHER CASE.

YES, SHE SHOULD BE.

OH, THAT'S RIGHT.

SHE'S D FOUR TOO.

RIGHT? UM, MS. BURGESS OR YOU'LL KEEP POSTPONING TILL OCTOBER 11TH.

THIS IS CITY HALL.

I CAN UNMUTE HER PLEASE BY PLEASE.

WELL, YOU'RE BOHO.

YOU'RE UH, UNMUTE IT COMMISSIONER.

THIS IS LEAH BO JO.

I WOULD, IF IT'S OKAY WITH YOU, I WOULD PREFER TO JUST KEEP THIS SEPTEMBER DATE AND WE NEED TO POSTPONE AGAIN.

WE COULD DO THAT, BUT I'D PREFER TO KEEP SEPTEMBER NOT A PROBLEM.

WELL, OKAY.

I MEAN, THAT'S FINE, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT A NUMBER OF POSTPONEMENTS AND REQUESTED BY DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

OKAY.

I MEAN, BUT I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE POSTPONING THIS SO WE CAN REQUEST IT, BUT I KNOW THAT WE USUALLY HAVE A LIMIT ON, UM, POSTPONEMENT REQUESTS OR WE USUALLY DO.

MAYBE WE WON'T ON THIS ONE.

WELL, I MEAN, IF YOU, LIKE I SAID, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, WE CAN STOP IT.

I DON'T WANT TO POSTPONE IT AGAINST THE APPLICANT'S WISHES.

I'M JUST SAYING AT SOME POINT VOTE ON IT, THE APPKIT CANNOT JUST KEEP POSTPONING IT EVERY SINGLE MONTH.

OKAY.

AND THEN, UH, C TWO IS, UH, RICHARD SUBTLE.

DO WE HAVE RICHARD SUTTLE ON THE LINE? DIDN'T THEY WANT TO BE POSTPONED TILL OCTOBER SO THAT HE'S ON THE LINE.

I TOLD HIM IN CASE YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

YEAH.

BUT HE WANTS TO BE TILL OCTOBER AND THEN EASY TO, WERE YOU TALKING ABOUT THAT ONE AS WELL? BOARD MEMBER BAILEY? NO.

SO JUST THE FIRST TWO.

OKAY.

SO AS THE MOTION, MY GIRL I'LL WANT TO UNMUTE IT.

JUST KEEP THE ORIGINAL MOTION.

ORIGINAL MOTION.

YEAH.

AND WHO WAS THE SECOND ON THAT? DIDN'T DIDN'T HAVE ONE.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.

IT

[00:10:01]

ALL RIGHT.

SO THIS IS MOTION TO POSTPONE ITEM C ONE C 16, 20 21 0 0 8 2 SUB TIMBER, THIRD, 2021 ITEMS C 2 6 16 20 21 0 0 0 3 2.

HOLD ON SHARON.

IT'S SEPTEMBER 13TH, SORRY, SEPTEMBER 13TH.

THANK YOU FOR THE CORRECTION.

UH, 0 0 0 3 16 20 21 0 0 0 3 2 OCTOBER 11TH, 2021, UH, ITEM E TO C 15 20 21 0 0 55 TO SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2120 21 AND SEE, 15 20, 20 1000 ZERO HUNDRED 68, UH, WITH THE WITHDRAWAL AND LET'S CALL THE RURAL, UH, TOMMY.

YES.

BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

MELISSA.

HOCHBERG NON PARTICIPATING ON C1, C2, A VOTE FOR THE REST OF THE MOTION.

IF THAT ALMOST MADE SENSE.

YEAH.

I MEAN, DID YOU CATCH THAT? SO BOARD MEMBER HOP FORMS AND SUSTAINING FROM C1 AND C2 VOTING.

YES.

THE REST OF THE POSTPONEMENTS AND WITHDRAWALS.

YES.

I GOT THAT.

THANK YOU.

KI BARBARA MACARTHUR? YES.

RON MCDANIEL.

YES.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

AND I CAN SEE BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR NOW.

NICOLE WAYNE.

YES.

AND KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

CHEER WHO MOTIONED AND WHO? SECOND TO THAT MOTION.

MOTION WAS ROM.

SECOND WAS BROOKE.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

SO WE DO HAVE SOME SPEAKERS

[CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]

TONIGHT WHO ARE GOING TO BE SPEAKING, UH, AN OPPOSITION FOUR, I KNOW E 3 83.

LET'S SEE.

15 20, 21 0 0 5, 6, 3006 GLENVIEW AVENUE.

UH, JOYCE BASCIANO.

I HOPE I PRONOUNCED THAT CORRECTLY.

SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION, ESPECIALLY ON ALL.

ARE YOU ON THE LINE? STAND BY PLEASE.

WHILE I LOOK FOR HER, I GOT 8 0 9.

OOPS.

JOYCE YOU'RE UN-MUTED MISS .

YES.

MA'AM YOU ARE OKAY.

YOU'VE GOT THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

OKAY.

GOOD EVENING.

CHAIR, COHEN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ON JOYCE DAS, YANNO HERE FOR THE BRCA WOODS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND OUR OPPOSITION TO A DECREASE OF THE 25 FOOT REAR YARD SET BACK TO FIVE FEET AT 3006 GLENVIEW AVENUE.

HOWEVER, WE WOULD SUPPORT A DECREASE OF THE 25 FOOT REAR YARD SET BACK TO 10 FEET, A REDUCTION THAT WAS GIVEN TO 3,200 GLENVIEW BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, SEPTEMBER 8TH, 2014, THAT'S ON YOUR BACKUP PAGES E DASH THREE SLASH 26.

THAT TRUSTED AND HAS BEEN USED AS A GUIDELINE BY OUR ASSOCIATION SINCE THEN IN DECISIONS REGARDING REAL LOTS, THAT BACK REDUCTIONS FOR THROUGH LOSS.

AND IT SERVES US WELL.

THE DECISION IS IN KEEPING WITH THE 10 FOOT REAR LOT SETBACK OF THE NON TWO LOTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE DESIGN UNIFORMITY AND HISTORIC CHARACTER.

JEFFERSON STREET AS WAS NOTED IN THE STREETS, 3,200 GLEN TO UK WHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED, MOST OF THE THROUGH LOTS GARAGES I'M GOING TO VIEW WERE LOCATED 10 FEET OFF THE BACK PROPERTY LINE.

THIS WAS THE CASE FOR THE ORIGINAL GARAGE AT 3006 GLEN VIEW AS SHOWN ON BACKUP PAGES E DASH THREE SLASH 11 AND E DASH THREE SLASH 18.

ANOTHER CONSIDERATION IS THE LENGTH OF DRIVEWAYS VEHICLES PARKED IN DRIVEWAY SHOULD NOT BLOCK SIDEWALKS.

THERE IS A LONG SIDEWALK ON THE JEFFERSON STREET THOUSAND SIX GLEN VIEW.

DID YOU SEE ON PAGE 83 SLASH TWO, WHILE SOME MAY CONSIDER JEFFERSON STREET AND ALLEY, IT WAS ONCE ON THE NUMBER

[00:15:01]

19 BUS ROUTE IS CURRENTLY A SHERO AND CAN GET VERY CONGESTED AS A SHOWER.

AS IT PROVIDES ACCESS TO MOPAC RANTS AT WESTOVER ROAD, THERE WILL LIKELY BE A NEED FOR SIDEWALKS ON THE EAST SIDE OF JEFFERSON AND THE FUTURE.

THE ORIGINAL HOUSE AND GARAGE AT 3006 GLENVIEW AVENUE WERE DEMOLISHED IN 2015 TO MAKE WAY FOR THE EXISTING HOUSE.

SO THE APPLICANT STARTED WITH A BLANK SLATE.

THE ORIGINAL PLANS CALL FOR A GARAGE SLASH CARPORT TO BE BUILT ON THE FLIP SIDE.

BUT THE FINAL PLANS WERE FOR A CONCRETE SLAB TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED TWO PARKING SPACES AS PER CITY CODE.

THERE WAS NO HARDSHIPS HERE.

THAT IS NOT A SELF-INFLICTED ONE.

THE HARDSHIP LISTED DOESN'T OFFSET THE PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 2014.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY.

AND THANK YOU.

MA'AM APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

UH, CHAIRMAN COHEN.

I WANT TO, WITHOUT, WITHOUT GETTING INTO ANY, WITHOUT TAKING A POSITION ON A CASE, WE HAVEN'T HEARD, I WANT TO COME IN THE PERSON WHO JUST TESTIFIED ON HIGH-QUALITY MATERIAL TESTIMONY.

AND I HOPE FOR THOSE THAT ARE LISTENING OR WATCHING THIS MEANING THAT, UH, THAT TO TESTIFY ABOUT A CASE IS TO BRING THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL AND, AND, UH, AND CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK ABOUT A CASE, UH, TO THE COMMISSION.

SO I, I, REGARDLESS OF HOW THE CASE GOES, I DO WANT TO TELL YOU THAT I APPRECIATE THAT WAS VERY WELL THOUGHT OUT.

VERY WELL PREPARED AND VERY WELL DONE.

WOW.

I WOULD AGREE.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

THE NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE FOR ITEM E FIVE C 15 20 21 0 0 6 7.

THIS IS FOR 2003 AARP DALE STREET.

UH, SPEAKER IS LORRAINE ATHERTON.

MS. ATHERTON, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? HELLO AND HELLO? I'M HERE.

ALL RIGHT.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT, MISS ATHERTON.

YOU'VE GOT THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UH, I AM, UH, LORRAINE ATHERTON.

I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT WITH CONDITIONS OF THE VARIANTS THAT 2003 ARC TAIL.

UH, THIS PROPERTY HAS A LONG HISTORY OF WORK WITHOUT PERMITS BEGINNING IN THE 1980S, COMPLICATED BY A LACK OF RELIABLE SURVEYS AND CONFUSION OVER THE ACTUAL DIMENSIONS OF THE LOT AND BY THE TENDENCY OF OWNERS TO ALLOW PERMITS TO EXPIRE WITHOUT INSPECTIONS.

UH, IT CAME TO A HEAD SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN THE PLUMBING FAILED AND CITY INSPECTORS STEPPED IN AND ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ON SOME OF THESE CODE VIOLATIONS WAS SCHEDULED FOR MARCH, 2020, BUT I AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO FIND THE RESULT OF THE HEARING.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DOES NOT SUPPORT THE USE OF VARIANCES TO RESOLVE CODE AND WORK WITHOUT PERMIT ISSUES LIKE THIS, ESPECIALLY IF IT RESULTS IN ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY.

IT IS HOWEVER, IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO MAINTAIN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND TO HAVE THE PROPERTY BROUGHT UP TO CODE FOR THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF FUTURE RESIDENTS.

TO THAT END, I WORKED WITH SUSAN BARR OF RESIDENTIAL PLAN REVIEW TO FIND THE RESOLUTION DESCRIBED ON PAGES ONE AND TWO OF MY LETTER THAT I HOPE IS IN YOUR BACKUP, IT LISTS THREE GENERAL ISSUES AND FOR SPECIFIC ISSUES AND WITH CONDITIONS, UH, THAT SHOULD BE APPLIED TO THIS CASE.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT RESIDENTIAL PLAN REVIEW WILL REQUIRE A NEW SITE PLAN AND SURVEY TO VERIFY THAT THE BUILDING AND IMPERVIOUS COVER DO NOT EXCEED CODE RATHER THAN RELYING ON MEASUREMENTS SUPPLIED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.

UM, UH, THAT'S WHY I ASK THAT YOUR DECISIONS SPECIFICALLY LIMIT THE BUILDING COVER TO 40% AND THE IMPERVIOUS COVER TO 45% OF 5,500 SQUARE FEET WITHOUT REFERENCE REFERENCING THE APPLICANT'S DIAGRAM OR OTHERWISE APPEARING TO APPROVE INDIVIDUAL DEVIATIONS FROM CODE REQUIREMENTS.

ALSO, RESIDENTIAL PLAN REVIEW HAS DECIDED THAT THE SETBACK ENCROACHMENTS ON THIS PROPERTY DO NOT REQUIRE VARIANCES TO PRESERVE

[00:20:01]

THE, UH, COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.

I ALSO REQUEST THAT THE VARIANCE CONDITIONS INCLUDE A STATEMENT THAT THE ENCROACHMENTS WILL NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE ORIGINAL GARAGE FOOTPRINT OR HEIGHT.

AND, UH, I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS, UH, IF YOU WISH.

UH, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MISS ATHERTON, LIKE PRECIATE YOUR TIME.

OKAY.

MOVING ON.

LET'S GO AHEAD

[D-1 C15-2021-0078 William Hodge for Martha Cary Sadler 1305 W. 42nd Street]

AND MOVE TOWARDS THE FIRST CASE FOR ANY OF THE SPEAKERS WHO ARE GOING TO BE SPEAKING TONIGHT BY SPEAKING ARE ACCEPTING THE OATH THAT YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU WILL GIVE TONIGHT WILL BE TRUE AND CORRECT.

THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE.

FIRST CASE IS GOING TO BE ITEM C 15 20 21 0 0 7 8 4 1 3 0 5 WEST 42ND STREET.

THIS IS ITEM D ONE PRIMARY SPEAKER WILL BE VOLUME HODGE, GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

CAN YOU, CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU FINE.

IT'S GOOD TO HEAR YOUR VOICE.

GOOD.

GOOD, GOOD TO COOK.

HERE'S BLASTING Y'ALL FIVE MINUTES.

UM, I WILL RUN THROUGH MY PRESENTATION THAT I HAD POSTED, UH, OR THAT CENTRAL LANE.

UM, ONE SEC.

LET'S GET THAT PULLED UP.

CTM.

COULD YOU PULL UP THE PRESENTATION PLEASE? OKAY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ALL RIGHT, MR. HYDRO, ON THE FIRST PAGE OF YOUR PRESENTATION.

OKAY.

UM, HOW I'LL JUST PARAPHRASE IT SINCE I'VE TRIED TO WRITE IT OUT.

UM, WHAT MY CLIENT SEEKS TO DO HERE IS TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.

UM, IT'S NOT A PLATEAUS AS AUTHOR, SO THE PROPERTY IS NOT PLANTED.

AND SO WE NEED TO GET AN EXEMPTION FROM PLATTING.

WE CANNOT CURRENTLY RECEIVE THAT EXEMPTION FROM PLANTING BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY WAS FIRST CONVEYED ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATIONS AFTER THE CITY ASSUMED JURISDICTION OVER SUBDIVISION AND THE PROPERTY IS TWO FEET IS TWO FEET NARROWER THAN IT IS ALLOWED, UH, UNDER, IN SF THREE ZONING.

UH, THIS IS IN THE ROSEDALE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA, WHICH DOES NOT HAVE A CODIFIED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IN WHICH DOES DOES NOT HAVE SMALL AUDIENCE MEANS WE CAN GET EXEMPTION FROM FLAT.

AND IF WE RECEIVE A VARIANCE FROM, FROM THIS BOARD, FROM THE NEW, THE LOT REQUIREMENTS AND WITH SUCH A VARIANCE, WE CAN PROCEED TO GETTING A BUILDING PERMIT WITHOUT SUCH A VARIANCE OF THIS PROPERTY IS, IS UNBUILDABLE.

AND IT'S EASY TO THINK.

THERE HAS, I'VE MENTIONED TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS THIS MORNING AND THE DISCUSSION, UH, IT'S EITHER US OR SOMEBODY ELSE IN THE EVERYBODY GOING TO BECOME TO THE BOARD.

SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE WE'RE HERE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.

UH, WE WERE EXPRESSLY NOT REQUESTING ANY SPECIAL DISPENSATIONS FROM SETBACKS, COVERAGES, MAXIMUMS, ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE.

UM, PAGE TWO, UM, IF YOU GO TO THE PAGE TWO VERY QUICKLY, UM, THERE ONCE WAS A SINGLE TOWN COUNCIL IN THIS LOT AND MY CLIENT BOUGHT THE PROPERTY FROM A PERSONAL FRIEND.

UM, THERE, THERE WAS A NON-COMPLIANT GARAGE, UH, AND, UH, KNOCKING AND OFTEN BUYING HOUSE.

UM, THE GARAGE WAS BEYOND REPAIR.

THE EXISTING HOUSE COULD HAVE BEEN REPAIRED, BUT NOT, NOT ON SITE.

AND THAT IS BECAUSE THERE IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT 29 INCH TO THE CONTRARY ON THE NEIGHBOR, THE EASTERN NEIGHBORS LOT AND WHERE WE HAD REPAIRED THAT IT WOULD HAVE GREATLY AFFECTED THIS TREE IS THIS TREE HAS BEEN PART OF OUR WHOLE DESIGN PROCESS.

AGAIN, AS I EXPLAINED TO MR. JASON, VIRGINIA, GERARD WHO'S LISTED HERE.

SO IN 2020, UH, THE GARAGE WAS DEMOLISHED AND MY CLIENT, UM, DONATED THE HOUSE.

I SAID THE DONATING OF THE CHAIR, UM, ENDED UP GOING TO A, TO A YOUNG FAMILY AND IS NOW A BEAUTIFULLY REMODELED HOME FOR, UH, FOR A YOUNG FAMILY.

UM, PAGE THREE, PLEASE, IN THE PLACE OF WHAT WAS THERE.

UM, MY CLIENT WISHES TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.

AGAIN,

[00:25:01]

WHAT WAS, YOU KNOW, THE FAMOUS USE THAT WAS ALREADY THERE.

UH, IT'S GOING TO HAVE BOTH BEDROOMS. IT'S GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S AN OFFICE OR A STUDIO, NOT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UH, AND A TWO CAR GARAGE.

UM, WE KNOW THAT THE NEW HOUSE IS GOING TO BE LARGER THAN THE PREVIOUS HOUSE.

WE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER, SPECIFICALLY DESIGN THIS HOUSE TO RESPECT SPECIFICALLY THE TREE ONE, UH, THAT YOU CAN SEE HERE, A LITTLE OF THE PLAN.

UM, WE ALSO DESIGNED IT TO, TO TRY TO NOT EXACERBATE THE PARKING ISSUES IN THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THERE'S A HOSPITAL ACROSS THE STREET.

THIS IS A BLOCK AND A HALF OFF OF WHERE MEDICAL PARKWAY IN BURNETT MEDICAL PARKWAY WITH ITS COMMERCIAL AND MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENTS.

SO WE'VE GOT, WE TYPICALLY WILL DO ONE OUR GARAGE IN SITUATION LIKE THIS, BUT WE'RE DOING A TWO CAR GARAGE AND WE'VE GOT TWO ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO BE KIND TO, UH, TO BUILD IN THE KINDEST WAY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, PHASE FOUR, PLEASE .

AND AS I, AGAIN, AS I EXPLAINED, UH, TO THE, UH, TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER, UH, THIS MORNING, WE REALLY ARE ALSO TRYING TO RESPECT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THAT'S KAYLA THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND TO BE KIND TO HER TREE.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE ON PAGE FOUR, THE PRESENTATION, UM, WHAT WE REALLY TRIED TO DO IS CREATE A SINGLE FAN TYPE TO CREATE A TEAM STORY OUT THERE REALLY READS LIKE A ONE STORY HOUSE, UH, TO REQUIRE NO FRAMING TO, UH, THE STAR NEIGHBORS, NEIGHBORS TREE, AND TO REALLY TRY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO FIT INTO THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS VERY ECLECTIC.

IT HAS MANY BIG HOUSES, SMALL HOUSES, BUT ALSO IT HAS A LOT OF BUILDINGS OF ABOUT THIS SCALE, UH, SPECIFICALLY AROUND THE CORNER ONTO THIS PLANE.

UM, IN TURN, UH, ON PAGE FIVE, PLEASE, UM, RIGHT.

FIVE MINUTES.

SO IF I CAN GET YOU TO JUST BRIEFLY WRAP IT UP, PLEASE ABSOLUTELY REACHED OUT.

WE REACHED OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

UM, THEIR POSITION WAS A HAT AND OUR POSITION, UH, REACHED OUT TO NEIGHBORS.

UM, ONE WAS OPPOSED TO THE EAST.

UH, I SPOKE WITH HER THIS MORNING AND I BELIEVE I WAS ABLE TO LAY HER CONCERNS, UM, TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, AND WE RECEIVED LETTERS IN SUPPORT.

SO, UH, WE, WE JUST REQUEST, UH, HOPE, UH, HOPE THAT Y'ALL CAN, UM, HELP US WITH THIS TECHNICALITY AND, UH, GRANTED SEVERITY SO THAT WE MAY PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION.

I THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. HODGE.

ALL RIGHT.

LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING QUESTIONS.

KEY ONE HANDS JUST JUMPED RIGHT UP.

UH, LET'S START WITH BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.

SO, UM, I STUDIED THIS CASE AND I WAS A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED WHY I'D EVEN HAD TO COME TO OUR BOARD BECAUSE IN THE CITY CODE, IT SAYS A LOT, A SUBSTANDARD LOT RECORDED IN THE COUNTY REAL PROPERTY RECORDS BEFORE MARCH 15TH, 1946 MUST BE NOT LESS THAN 33 FEET WIDE.

I RESEARCHED THIS WHOLE SUBDIVISION AND THE EARLIEST HOUSES WERE BUILT IN 41.

SO I'M VERY CONFUSED ABOUT WHY THIS NEEDS A VARIANCE, IF IT PRECEDES THE DATE BY WHICH THE LOTS HAVE TO BE 50 FEET ACCORDING, BECAUSE WHAT IT, WHAT IT SAYS IN HERE IS WHEN WAS THE LOT RECORDED IN THE COUNTY, REAL PROPERTY RECORDS.

AND I NEED THE STAFF TO TELL ME WHY THEY NEEDED A VARIANCE, UH, BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.

UM, IF I, IF I, IF I MAY, UM, ACTUALLY I APOLOGIZE HER THAT SEEMED AT CITY STAFF.

OKAY, SORRY.

ELAINE, DO WE HAVE ANYONE WHO CAN ANSWER THAT OR? UH, NO, BUT IF Y'ALL WANT STAFF NEXT MONTH, UM, WE CAN REQUEST RESIDENTIAL STAFF.

UM, THE CUSTOMER MIGHT BE IN THE BEST PERSON SINCE HE'S BEEN WORKING WITH THEM ON THIS RESIDENTIAL REVIEW PROCESS ON THE PALLET, THE PROCESS IN THAT VEIN.

UH, I'D LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE THE SAME QUESTION.

YEAH.

SO, SO, AND SO THIS, THIS IS A GOOD QUESTION.

INITIALLY, MY CLIENT AND I WERE ALSO AT THE SAME OPINION THAT WE DIDN'T REQUIRE A VARIANCE TO GET THIS EXEMPTION FROM PLANNING.

UM, W I'M GOING TO ADULT ADULT BEAR WITH ME FOR JUST A SECOND.

UM, IF I'M GOING TO QUOTE CHAPTER AND VERSE

[00:30:01]

THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE I'M GOING TO HAVE THE GOSPEL IN FRONT OF ME.

SO, UM, BUT AS I, AS I GO TO THAT SECTION IN THE KELLER, THE, THERE ARE FOUR, SHALL WE SAY AVENUES TO GETTING AN EXEMPTION FROM PLOTTING, UH, ME AND THE CITY CODE, UH, IN THEN 25 FOR, UM, 25 FOR, UH, EXCUSE ME, UH, UH, CHAPTER 25.

I'M GOING TO GET, PLEASE JUST BEAR WITH ME WHERE IT GO, GO, GO TO MY NOTES.

UM, AND ONE OF THOSE AVENUES, THE FIRST AVENUE, UH, IS THAT SECTION THAT SPEAKS TO THAT SPEAKS TO, UM, THE, WHEN, WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS CONVEYED AND THAT REQUIREMENTS, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, RATHER THAT SAFE HARBOR IS AT WHERE IS IT? DEPENDS ON.

IT DEPENDS ON THE, THAT THIS HAS BEEN RECORDED IN THE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS THAT IN ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION, PRIOR TO WHEN THE PROPERTY BECAME SUBJECT TO, UH, TO JURISDICTION OVER SUBDIVISION OF LAND.

AND, UH, WE WERE DENIED THE ASSUMPTION FROM PROPERTY THAT FROM PLANNING REQUIREMENTS BY AMY CO'S OF, OF, UM, LAND USE REVIEW, BECAUSE IT'S ON MARCH 31ST, 1947, THIS PROPERTY WAS OWNED IN CONCERT WITH ME IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND OF COURSE THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT WE KNEW WHEN WE, WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE PROPERTY.

UM, THIS PROPERTY IN ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION WAS ONLY CONVEYED INDIVIDUALLY SEPARATELY IN 1965.

SO IT DID NOT MEET THE STANDARDS OF , WHICH SAYS THAT THE DIRECTOR MAY ACCEPT THE PERSONAL PLAN FROM THEIR PART SUPPLY IS THE DIRECTOR DETERMINES THAT PARTIALLY FITS IN THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION BEFORE BECOMING SUBJECT TO THE CITY'S JURISDICTION, THE LAND.

UM, THERE ARE, THERE ARE TWO OTHER SAFE HARBORS FOR GETTING A, AN EXEMPTION FROM PLANNING.

UM, BOTH OF WHICH REQUIRE THAT YOU COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CODE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR ROADWAY FRONTAGE, BUT THERE, UH, 25 4 2 B SAYS THAT IN THE, FOR FULL PURPOSE LIMITS OF THE CITY, THE DIRECTOR MADE EXCEPT THE PARCEL OF LAND, THE DIRECTOR DETERMINES THAT THE PARCEL I'M GOING TO READ THROUGH IT ALL THE WAY TO, UH, SUBSECTION FIVE OF THIS, EITHER COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS TITLE FOR ROADWAY FRONTAGE FOR WAS GRANTED A VARIANCE.

SO EVERYTHING INGES ON THE FACT THAT OUR, WHEN THIS PROPERTY WAS FIRST SOLD IN ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION, IT WAS AFTER THE CITY'S REQUIRED GRANDFATHER DATE, UH, BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.

DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? UH, IN SOME WAYS, I DON'T KNOW IF I UNDERSTAND IT EXACTLY BECAUSE I HAD A SIMILAR SITUATION, IT WAS SOLVED A DIFFERENT WAY.

UM, WE HAD, UM, WE HIT PUSHED BACK WHEN WE WERE INITIALLY DENIED IT AND EXEMPTION FROM FIGHTING FOR, AND WE USED MUCH THE SAME REASONING, UM, OF FORMER MACARTHUR AND, UH, WE WERE DENIED AGAIN.

AND, UM, IT WAS, UH, IT WAS MANDATED TO US THAT IN ORDER TO GET AN EXEMPTION FROM PLANNING, THAT THIS IS THE BRIEF THAT WE WERE REQUIRED TO TAKE BOARD MEMBER BAILEY, LET MELISSA GO AHEAD FIRST AND THEN I'LL GO CHAIR.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

AND THEN I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, CAUSE I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS BECAUSE ALL WE'RE LOOKING AT IS THE LOT WITH, BUT ON PAGE THREE OF THE PRESENTATION, YOU'RE SHOWING THE HOUSE IN RELATION TO THAT THE COUNTRY AND PART OF THIS HOUSE LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE BUILT IN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE.

HAVE YOU HAD AN ARBORIST LOOK AT YOUR PLANS? UM, YES WE HAVE.

UM, WE, WE WERE FIRST BROUGHT TO THE, THE TABLE AS IT WERE IN TERMS OF THE VARIANTS, UH, AFTER HAVING UNDERGONE AND OR RESIDENTIAL REVIEW AND THAT A RESIDENTIAL REVIEW INCLUDED A REVIEW BY A, UH, ONE OF THE CITIES, UH, POINT OF THE CITY ARBORIST TREE REVIEWERS.

AND THAT, UM, THAT REVIEWER, UM, IN, IN THE REVIEW PROCESS, UH, BROUGHT UP A COUPLE OF,

[00:35:01]

OF NOTES, WHICH WE ADDRESSED, UH, BETWEEN THE TIME OF OUR REVIEW EIGHT.

AND NOW, UH, ONE OF WHICH BEING THAT WE WERE ASKED TO DO PRETTY EXTENSIVE MEASUREMENTS OF THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR.

UM, BUT YES, WE ARE IN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE.

UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OUR REVIEWER CODE GOVERNMENT ASKED US TO DO WAS TO CALCULATE THE EXISTING HOUSE AT 13, 13 0 3, CALCULATE THEIR IMPACT ON ROOT ZONE AND THEN TO CALCULATE OUR PROPOSED IMPACT.

AND, UH, CITY CODE ALLOWS FOR MAXIMUM IMPACT OF 50%, UH, OF THE CIRCULAR AREA OF A PROTECTING TREES ROOTS.

WE'RE AT 46.3%.

AND, UH, ANY A LIVE CLIENT TO GO ASIDE FROM ALL THE OTHER DISCUSSIONS, MY CLIENTS IS ACTUALLY EVEN DISCUSS CHANGES, UH, MINOR CHANGES TO OUR COURTYARD, WHICH MAY INDEED RESULT IN AN EVEN LOWER IMPACT.

BUT WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE IN THAT ROOM ZONE.

UH, BUT WE HAVE ALSO DESIGNED SUCH THAT, YOU KNOW, ACCORDING TO A CITY CITY STANDARDS INTO BEST PRACTICES THAT I HAVE EMPLOYED AS AN ARCHITECT, UM, UH, THROUGHOUT THE YEARS, UH, AND TO, TO THIS POINT, UH, THE CITY ARBORIST HAD SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, PENDING THE RESOLUTION OF OTHER ISSUES THAT THEY ARE GOING TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT.

OKAY.

I WAS JUST WONDERING IF YOU HAD DONE SOMETHING LIKE A FLOATING FOUNDATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON THAT CORNER, OR EVEN IN THE COURTYARD, A PERVIOUS MATERIAL? ABSOLUTELY.

ABSOLUTELY.

AND WE ARE DOING BOTH OF THOSE THINGS.

THANK YOU.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

WE DO HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, RIGHT? SORRY.

RIGHT NOW I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT IN ORDER TO DO FINDINGS FOR THE MOTION.

OKAY.

SO WILLIAM, WHEN WAS THIS PROPERTY IN THE CONFIGURATION THAT IT SENT? I WILL GIVE YOU THE EXACT DATE.

IF YOU WILL BEAR WITH ME FOR JUST A SECOND.

I HAVE, UH, SEVERAL DIFFERENT WINDOWS OPEN UP ON MY END.

IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT BECAUSE AS I OPENED THEM, THE FINDINGS GET FURTHER AND FURTHER AWAY.

ABSOLUTELY.

GIVE ME JUST ONE SECOND, PLEASE, IF YOU WANT, LET'S SAY SO THE ORIGINAL, THE FIRST CONFIGURE, THE FIRST COMMAND IN THIS CONFIGURATION WAS ON MAY 26TH, 1960 65.

SO YOU'RE TRYING TO TAKE THE UTILITY EXEMPTION, THE 95 EXEMPTION.

SO THEREFORE THE RULES IN 95 ARE WHAT APPLIED TO YOUR LEGAL LOT STATUS.

THAT IS CORRECT.

YOU KNOW, SUBSECTION OF 25 POINTS.

IF YOU'VE MET CONFIGURATION, THEN THE 33 FEET, YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD HAVE YOUR LEGAL LOT STATUS ALREADY.

IF YOU MET CONFIGURATION IN 1946, THAT IS CORRECT THE DATE, BUT BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING UNDER THE 95 RULE, WHICH I DON'T EVEN, I USED TO BE JUST THE 87 RULE AND THEN THE 95 ROLE WAS ADDED, UM, AND BOTH REFERENCE THE ROADWAY FRONT INCH, WHICH IS THE, WHICH IS THE LOT WITH WHICH YOU'RE SUBJECT TO.

AND I THINK IT'S EVEN CRAZIER 75 FEET INTO THE PROPERTY.

SO IF YOU WEREN'T SQUARE AND YOU GOT NARROWER, YOU WOULD STILL NEED THE FRONT EXPERIENCE.

CORRECT? IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, MADAM CHAIR, ARE YOU READY FOR ME? OKAY.

IS THERE ANY REGULATIONS, AVOCADO PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR A REASONABLE USE AS THE LAW, WHICH HAS BEEN IN THE SAME CONFIGURATION AND OWNERSHIP SINCE 1965, UM, HAVE A HOUSE ON IT, WE'LL HAVE A HOUSE ON IT.

AND, UH, IS TWO FEET SHORT OF THAT.

THE CURRENT, UH, LOT WITH REQUIREMENTS, THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE VARIOUS REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IS THAT WHILE IT'S HAD A HOUSE ON IT AND IT APPEARED THAT IT WAS ON A JOAN, UH, SINCE 1941, UH, ACTUAL IN ITS CONFIGURATION WAS IN 1965.

SO TO ME, THE PLATTING EXEMPTION UNDER THE 95 ROW, A LOT WITH VARIANCES REQUIRED, THE HARDSHIP IS NOT RENTAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AS VERY SIMILARLY,

[00:40:01]

THE HOUSE HAS EXISTED AND DID IN THIS, THAT THE LAW HAS EXISTED IN THIS CONFIGURATION SINCE 1965.

UH, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER THEORY ADJACENT THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFIRMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, AS IT WILL CONTAIN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

AND THERE IS NOT A REQUEST FOR ANY OTHER VARIANTS ON THE PROPERTY, AND IT WILL COMPLY WITH CURRENT CODE AND CONSIDERATION IN ALL OTHER AREAS BEYOND EMPTY.

OKAY.

SO THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY VICE CHAIR.

HOFLAND SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER, MCDANIEL KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

WELL MCDANIEL.

YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

MELISSA HAWTHORNE.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

PLEASE TAKE CARE OF THAT TREE AND TOMMY.

YES.

YES.

ALL RIGHT.

MR. HODGE, YOU'LL HAVE YOUR VARIANTS.

THANKS.

THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON ITEM D TWO

[D-2 C15-2021-0079 Daniel Dunigan for Paul Le 6506 Hergotz Lane]

ON THE AGENDA, JUST GOING TO BE SEEN 15 20 21 0 0 7 9 4 6 5 0 6.

HER GUTS LIEN PRIMARY.

SPEAKER'S GOING TO BE DANIEL DOUGAN MR. DOUGAN.

ARE YOU ON THE LINE? YES.

SORRY.

YEAH.

DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION? I DO.

YEAH.

I SENT IT OVER TO A LANE.

OKAY.

YEP.

WE'RE ON PAGE ONE OF YOUR PRESENTATION.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

GREAT.

THANK YOU.

UM, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

THIS IS DANIEL DAN AGAIN, I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF PAUL LEE, THE PROPERTY OWNER.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING.

UM, AND REFERENCED TO THE PRESENTATION I SENT PREVIOUSLY, UM, I'M REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM LEARN DEVELOPMENT CODE 25 TO 49 TO, UM, FOR AN NSF THREE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, UM, FROM 25 SEATS WERE REDUCED TO 10 SEAT.

UM, THERE ARE A FEW NUANCES TO THIS PROPERTY THAT, UH, WE BELIEVE MAKE THAT MAKES US VARIANCE APPROVABLE.

UM, ONE IS MORE THAN 50% OF THE LOT IS UNBUILDABLE IT'S ON THE COLORADO RIVER.

UM, AND APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE BASICALLY DROPS OFF A CLIFF DOWN TO, UM, DOWN TO THE RIVER.

UM, ALL, UH, NEARBY EXISTING HOUSES ON THAT, ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET ARE SETBACK, UM, LESS THAN 25 FEET, UM, WHICH NORMALLY WE WOULD THEN GO TO SETBACK AVERAGING.

UM, BUT IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, UH, ARE YOU ON SLIDE THREE? SORRY, THE PROPERTY LOCATION.

UM, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DELAY ON THIS.

UM, YEAH, WE'LL SEE.

IN ABOUT 20 TO 30 SECONDS BEFORE YOU DO.

YEAH.

SO, UM, THIS PROPERTY IS, UH, LIKE I SAID, ON THE COLORADO RIVER, UM, AND ALL THE, ALL THE BUILDINGS ON THAT SIDE ARE SET BACK LESS THAN 25 FEET.

UM, THE REASON WE CAN'T DO SETBACK AVERAGING ON THIS PROPERTY, WHICH IS WHAT THE TYPICAL PROCESS WOULDN'T BE IS BECAUSE IT IS JUST OUTSIDE OF THE SUB CHAPTER S BOUNDARY, UM, WHICH IS THE HIGHWAY THAT YOU SEE THERE, UH, BEST JOB AT BLUE STATE BOULEVARD, KIND OF JUNCTION, UM, THAT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED IT ALLOWED US TO DO SETBACK AVERAGING.

UM, AND SO WHEN WE CAN'T DO SUBCHAPTER F WE GO TO THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ALSO WOULD ALLOW SETBACK AVERAGING, EXCEPT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A BUILDING, THEN IT'S DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO YOUR LOT, WHICH THERE WAS PREVIOUSLY, BUT IT WAS TORN DOWN

[00:45:01]

IN RECENT YEARS.

UM, SO THAT DOES NOT ALLOW SETBACK AVERAGING EITHER WHICH THAT BUILDING WOULD BE, WOULD ALLOW SETBACK AVERAGING OF, UH, APPROXIMATELY 10 FEET.

AND SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THIS IS JUST THE SURVEY.

NEXT SIDE IS THE FLOOD PLAIN.

UM, AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE IS, COULD DISTANCES FOR EACH OF THE BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO OUR PROPERTY.

UM, IF WE DID DO SETBACK AVERAGING, WE'D BE AT APPROXIMATELY 10.1 FEET.

UM, BUT AGAIN, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT BECAUSE OF THE SNAPCHAT BEING OUTSIDE OF SUBCHAPTER S BOUNDARY AND, UM, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, NOT ALLOWING IT FOR THE ADJACENT BUILDING.

UM, SO WITH THESE, UH, REASONS, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS VARIANCE REQUESTS ARE PROVABLE.

AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IN THIS MATTER.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ALL RIGHT.

LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND QUESTIONS, UH, BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.

YEAH.

UM, I THINK ACTUALLY MOVING THIS FORWARD AND THEN THAT WOULD HELP AS FAR AS FLOODING, BUT ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE ANY ISSUES GETTING PERMITS BEING IN THE FLOOD PLAIN? I MEAN THAT THIS FLOOD, YEAH.

YEAH.

WE ARE NOT, WE HAVE TO BE, UM, THE FINISHED FLOOR HAS TO BE A CERTAIN DISTANCE ABOVE THE FLOOD PLAIN.

UM, AND WE ARE PROPOSING TO TRY TO BE, UM, AT LEAST TWO FEET ABOUT THAT.

UM, OKAY.

THAT'S WHAT I'M PLANNING.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.

I WANTED TO ASK THE APPLICANT WHAT THE SETBACK WAS OF THE HOUSE THAT WAS DEMOLISHED ON THE SITE IN 2012.

IT WAS APPROXIMATELY I ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T WANNA, I DON'T WANNA SAY, CAUSE I DON'T, I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW.

I THINK IT WAS LESS, I KNOW IT WAS LESS THAN 25 FEET CAUSE THERE, THE FOUNDATION IS STILL OUT THERE.

UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS OR GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO APPROVE, BUT DON'T LET THAT STOP QUESTIONS.

I'M JUST READY TO GO.

I'M READY TO GO.

WHEN, UH, WHEN YOU ARE OR MELISSA WILL, MELISSA WAS TECHNICALLY FIRST.

THAT'S FINE.

I WASN'T LOOKING AT THE SCREEN THE KEY.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, OR MEMBER MCGINN AND YOU WANT TO GO WITH THE FINDINGS? UH, SURE.

UH, REASONABLE USE RIVER FOR UP TOPOGRAPHY CREATES AN UNDUE BURDEN FOR DEVELOPMENT WITH THE ZONE FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 25 FEET.

AND ALL THE OTHER HOMES ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET WERE BUILT LESS THAN TWENTY-FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT SETBACK AND ADDITIONAL WITH THE INABILITY TO DO, UM, TO DO, UH, AVERAGING DUE TO THE LACK OF A, UH, OF A STRUCTURE NEXT DOOR AND THE DISTANCE FROM THE BOUNDARY.

UM, UH, THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT AND THEREFORE NOT ABLE, UH, ALLOWED A REASONABLE USE.

THE HARDSHIP FOR THE VARIANCES REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IN THAT IT'S LOCATED ON THE RIVER FRONT OF THE COLORADO RIVER.

AND THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE LOT IS NOT CONDUCIVE WITHOUT A REDUCTION TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO GET OUT OF THE, UH, OUT OF THE FLOOD ZONE.

AND THAT'S HOW ALL THE LOTS ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET HAVE DEVELOPED.

AND THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE PROPERTIES IN FRONT OF THE GENERAL AREA VARIES FOR LOTS OF THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA, BUT RATHER SPECIFIC TO THE PRA AND UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY ITSELF.

UM, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, BECAUSE OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, THE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT PROPERTIES OR UNDEVELOPED NEARBY PROPERTIES ALONG THE RIVER ON THE STREET HAVE, UH, DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE 25 FOOT SUS UH, SETBACK REDUCTION.

THE FRONT YARD SETBACK ORDINANCE, UH, FOR THIS PROPERTY WILL NEITHER CREATE NONCONFORMITY WITH NEARBY DEVELOPMENT NOR INFRINGE ON FUTURE RIGHT AWAY INFRASTRUCTURE WORK.

AND THAT'S IT.

OKAY.

AGAIN, MOTION TO APPROVE.

LET'S TAKE THE VOTE.

UH, BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

ROBIN MCDANIEL.

YES.

ARE YOU MIXING UP THE ORDER? TAKE ME A BREAK.

YES.

I THINK IT'S SWEET PERSON.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

TOMMY EIGHTS.

YES.

[00:50:01]

BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

AND MELISSA HAWTHORNE.

YES.

OKAY.

CONGRATULATIONS FOR YOUR PARENTS HAS BEEN APPROVED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON ITEM

[D-3 C15-2021-0080 Micah King for Darius Fisher 74 San Saba Street, Unit 2]

D THREE.

SO WE SEE 15 20, 21 0 0 8 0 4 7 4 7 SABA STREET, UNIT TWO WITH MICAH KING IS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER.

MR. KING, ARE YOU ONLINE? YES, I'M HERE.

SUPER GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP AND SAID, OKAY.

WE ARE ON PAGE ONE OF YOUR PRESENTATION.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBERS, MIKE KING WITH HUSH BLACKWELL ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT DERRIUS FISHER.

AND, UM, THIS IS A, IF WE CAN GO TO THE SECOND SIDE, PLEASE.

UM, SO THIS IS THE VARIANCE REQUEST, UM, REGARDING SOME SETBACKS AND IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR A DECK THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED AT THE REAR, UH, A, UH, SECONDARY UNIT.

UM, THIS IS A PROPERTY JUST SOUTH OF CANTERBURY, UM, PATTERN ANALYSIS, UH, THE REQUESTED IMPERVIOUS COVER.

WE'RE ACTUALLY PROPOSING TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF THAT, UM, EXISTING AND THAT EXISTED BEFORE THE DECK WAS CONSTRUCTED.

UM, FESTIVAL BEACH, UM, OVERLAY REQUIRES 40% AND WE ARE PROPOSING TO RE REDUCE DEMOLISH MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAN WE CREATED WHEN THE DECK WAS INSTALLED.

UM, THE SETBACKS THAT WE'RE REQUESTING ARE FROM FIVE FEET TO 3.9 ON THE SIDE, IT'S JUST ONE OF THE SIDES OF THE DECK.

YOU'RE THE ONE IN COMPLIANCE.

AND THEN THE REAR SET BACK FROM 10 FEET TO 2.1 FEET.

UM, LIKE I MENTIONED, THIS IS A DECK THAT SERVES THE REAR UPPER LEVEL RESIDENTIAL UNIT.

UM, IT ONLY HAS LIVING AREA ON THE SECOND FLOOR.

UM, AND THAT'S, UH, THIS DECK ALLOWS FOR A SECONDARY POINT OF EGRESS, UH, FOR THAT UNIT.

UM, I THINK WE CAN ALL RELATE THAT, UM, THE FEELING OF BEING COOPED UP DURING THE PANDEMIC AND THE OWNER ACTUALLY LIVES IN THE REAR UNIT, BUT THE DECK, UM, AND BETWEEN HIM AND HIS FIANCE LIVING IN A 500 SQUARE FOOT UNIT, UM, THEY, THEY HAD THE DECK BUILT, UH, TO INCREASE THE LIVING AREA AND ENHANCE THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE.

UM, AND THEN UNFORTUNATELY RESULTED IN THIS HEADACHE BECAUSE THE CONTRACTOR, UM, WAS NOT AWARE OR DID NOT TELL THEM THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH THE SETBACKS.

UM, ON SLIDE THREE, UM, AS I MENTIONED, WE'RE PROPOSING TO REMOVE THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER AND THE WATERFRONT OVERLAY BEFORE THE DECK WAS INSTALLED, THERE WAS 44, JUST OVER 44% IMPERVIOUS COVER.

WE'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO GO DOWN TO 41.3, 8%, UH, BY KEEPING THE DECK, BUT REMOVING, UH, CONCRETE, IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT'S ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY SLIDE FORWARD.

UM, JUST THE GENERAL PROPERTY LOCATION.

UM, I KNOW YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE WATERFRONT OVERLAY IN THIS AREA.

WE ARE NOT INSIDE THE PRIMARY OR SECONDARY SETBACKS IS WHY WE HAVE THAT 40% IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMIT SLIDE FIVE SHOWS A SCREENSHOT OF THE SURVEY.

UM, THE AREA IN YELLOW AT THE BOTTOM OF YOUR PAGE SHOWS THE AREA WE'RE PROPOSING TO DEMOLISH.

UM, AND THEN ON THE TOP, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE WOOD DECK IS AND BLUE, UM, WITH THE BIG GATED FORMER ALLEYWAY, UH, IN YELLOW AND SORT OF CIRCLED IN PINK, UH, THAT ALLEYWAY WAS VACATED BY COUNCIL IN 1946, UM, AND HAPPENED, BUT IT WAS ADDED TO THIS YARD, UM, AND SHOULD MENTION THAT THE DECK IS UNDER, THIS IS THE PROPERTY LINES HAVE CHANGED, BUT, UM, FROM THE ORIGINALLY PLATTED LOT LINES, THE DECK IS MORE THAN 10 FEET FROM THAT FORMER LOT LINE TO THE REAR.

UM, AND WE ALSO ACTUALLY HAVE, UM, IT DIDN'T GET TO YOU GUYS IN TIME, BUT THERE IS A LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBOR IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY, UM, TO THE RIGHT LOT TO NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS SHOWS THE REAR UNIT, UH, BETWEEN THE MAIN HOUSE, WHICH WAS BUILT IN 1928 AND THE REAR HOUSE FROM 1930.

UM, THERE ARE SOME PALM TREES THERE, UM, AND WE ALSO HAVE TO KEEP SOME SEPARATION BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS.

UM, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, THAT SHOWS THE DECK.

UM, AND NEXT SLIDE, SLIDE EIGHT.

SO THE ALIGNMENT OF THE DECK WITH THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE, UH, REAR UNIT.

AND SO WHILE WE ARE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE FOR THAT SIDE SETBACK, UM, IT IS ACTUALLY ALIGNED

[00:55:01]

WITH THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO OUR FIRST ZONING CODE SLIDE NINE SHOWS HOW ENCROACHMENTS ARE PRETTY COMMON IN THIS AREA, UM, AND GOES TOWARD THE AREA OF CHARACTER AND, UM, REASONABLE USE.

WE'RE JUST ASKING TO ALLOW FOR A DECK THAT PROVIDES SECONDARY ACCESS AND HAS THIS QUALITY OF LIFE.

UM, AND THAT IS, UM, GOOD FOR THE RESIDENTS AND, BUT THE NEIGHBORS ARE OKAY WITH, AS FAR AS WE'VE SPOKEN WITH.

UM, AND I WILL END THERE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I'M ON THE PHONE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I SAW IT LIKE THE MINUTE YOU PUT YOUR HAND UP.

OKAY.

THANK YOU, MR. KING.

THAT WAS WELL DONE BY THE WAY, YOU HAD NINE SECONDS LEFT, SO GOOD JOB QUESTIONS.

OH, SORRY.

LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

CAUSE I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HEARD ME SAY THAT.

AND A BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.

YEAH.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON THIS.

UM, DO YOU HAVE THE APPROVAL LETTER FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT.

NEIGHBOR RIGHT BEHIND YOU THAT THIS GREATLY AFFECTS YOUR KIND OF SITTING OVER THEIR BACKYARD? UH, WE DON'T HAVE A LETTER FROM THEM EITHER WAY.

UM, WE HAVE NEVER HEARD FROM THAT NEIGHBOR IN RELATION TO THIS.

UM, UNFORTUNATELY I DON'T HAVE ANY INDICATION OF HOW THEY FEEL AND THIS, UM, THERE'S ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE ON THE FRONT OF THIS HOUSE.

UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THE FRONT HOUSE IS YOURS OR NOT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THESE ARE BOTH COMBINED, BUT DO YOU HAVE A VARIANCE FOR THE FENCE? UH, THAT IS NOT THE THING.

WHICH SENSE ARE WE LOOKING AT? LET ME GO BACK TO, IT RUNS ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.

IT'S QUITE A BIT HIGHER THAN THREE FEET.

OKAY.

UM, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING YEAH.

COME TO.

SO YOU DON'T OWN THAT PROPERTY THAT, THAT THESE TWO PROPERTIES ARE COMPLETELY SEPARATE.

HUH? IT'S THE SAME OWNER.

OKAY.

SO, AND IS IT CONSIDERED ONE PROPERTY OR TWO PROPERTIES? IT'S ONE, IT'S ONE PROPERTY.

AND IF HE HASN'T OWNED THE PROPERTY FOR FOREVER, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT SENSE WAS CONSTRUCTED.

UM, BUT HE DID BUY IT WITHIN THE RECENT COUPLE OF YEARS.

FEW YEARS.

OKAY.

I JUST, I'M CURIOUS IF THAT'S SOMETHING, ANOTHER VARIANCE THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE ON THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE IT'S QUITE A BIT HIGHER THAN THREE FEET.

MELISSA, DO YOU HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE ON THIS? NO SURNAME JUST GOT BOOTED OFF.

OH, OKAY.

YEAH.

I GOT BOOED UP MED STUDENT.

I GOT BACK ON, BUT IT'S ON STREET VIEW AND MAPS AND I KNOW EVERYBODY CAN'T SEE THAT, BUT THAT'S JUST, JUST, JUST A QUESTION.

YEAH, NO, IT'S A GOOD POINT.

I KNOW THERE ARE OTHER OFFENSES LIKE THAT.

UM, ON THE SAME EXACT STREET, ACTUALLY, UM, WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT THOSE PROPERTIES.

WE WERE ONLY LOOKING AT YOUR PROPERTY, SO WE DON'T, WE DON'T SPECULATE ON ANYBODY ELSE'S PROPERTIES.

SO THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE BROKE IS AT THE SETBACK OR IS IT CLOSER TO THE HOUSE? UM, IT'S RIGHT UP ON THE SIDEWALK ACTUALLY.

SO I'M ASSUMING IT'S IN THE FRONT SETBACK.

THAT WOULD, YEAH.

OKAY.

YEAH.

YEAH.

SO THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO LOOK INTO BECAUSE, UM, THAT'S, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A LEGAL FENCE.

UM, BUT, UH, SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO PAY TO VARIANTS FEES OR NOT, BUT ANYWAYS, ON THIS BACK ONE, SO YOU DON'T HAVE ANY LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBOR BEHIND YOU.

I HAVE TO SAY THIS ONE REALLY BOTHERS ME BECAUSE IF I LOOKED BEHIND YOU, IT WOULD REALLY BOTHER ME.

AND EVEN THOUGH THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT ENCROACH, THEY USUALLY ONE STORY SHEDS.

THEY'RE NOT A SECOND STORY DECK HANGING OVER A PROPERTY LINE OR UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

SO I DON'T, I'M HAVING ISSUES WITH THIS.

I DON'T REALLY SEE YOUR HARDSHIP OTHER THAN YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE A NICE DECK, VICE CHAIR HOTLINE.

I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE SO THAT YOU CAN GO SPEAK TO THE NEIGHBOR BEHIND AND YOU CAN LOOK AT WHETHER OR NOT YOU NEED TO AMEND YOUR APPLICATION FOR THE FENCE, WHAT HEIGHT, DEFENSES, AND THAT WAY WE CAN TAKE CARE OF IT ALL AT ONE TIME BOARD MEMBER NEEDS.

DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR WERE YOU SECONDING? ALRIGHT, THANKS MELISSA.

I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION.

YEAH, I CONCUR.

SO, UH,

[01:00:06]

ALL RIGHT.

POSTPONING TILL SEPTEMBER 13TH, THIS IS A MOTION TO POSTPONE UNTIL SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2021.

SO THAT THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE CAN GET MORE INFORMATION FROM THE NEIGHBOR BEHIND THE UNIT.

CORRECT.

AND ALSO AMEND THEIR VARIANCE REQUEST TO INCLUDE THAT FRONT FENCE.

NO WAY THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY TWICE.

WELL, THEY'D PROBABLY HAVE THE PAPER NOTIFICATION TO AMEND THEIR REQUESTS, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN HAVING TO REQUEST AND HAVING NOTIFICATION IS A CHUNK OF THE SO MIGHT BE BETTER.

OKAY.

UH, LET'S SEE.

HOW ABOUT AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ? YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

TOMMY GATES.

YES.

BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

MELISSA HAWTHORNE.

YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

AND RON MCDANIEL.

YES.

THIS IS GOING TO BE POSTPONED TILL SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2021.

THANK YOU.

BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

[D-4 C15-2021-0081 Amanda Swor for Maryelaine Soto & Bill Schurtz 1308 West 9th ½ Street]

OKAY.

MOVING ON NEXT CASE ITEM D FOUR, LET ME SEE.

15 20, 21 0 0 8 1 4 1 3 0 WEST NINTH, HALF STREET WITH LEAH BO.

JOE IS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER, MS. BOWDRY ONLINE.

I AM.

THANK YOU.

HANG ON JUST A SECOND.

SCOOT YOUR PRESENTATION UP.

GREAT.

AND ACTUALLY, WHILE YOU DO THAT, IF I COULD ASK, UH, IT LIKE IT'S, UH, IT'S A SHORT GAIUS TONIGHT, SO, UM, I'M HAPPY.

I KNOW YOU HAVE A BUSY MEETING IN SEPTEMBER AND I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO PRESENT, BUT I'LL JUST SAY THAT IF THERE'S ANY INFORMATION THAT YOU ALL ARE, ARE LACKING OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, WE'D BE OPEN TO A POSTPONEMENT.

OKAY.

KEY.

WE'RE ON YOUR FIRST SLIDE AND YOU'VE GOT FIVE MINUTES.

OKAY, GREAT.

THANK YOU.

UM, SO AS I SAID, I'M LEAH MOJO WITH JENNER GROUP HERE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNERS, DR.

MARY LANE SOTOS AND BILL SHIRTS.

UM, DR.

SODAS IS ON THE LINE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, AS IT ARE, IS OUR ARCHITECT.

RYAN LONER.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, WE ARE HERE TO REQUEST A VARIANCE TO THE BOARD AREA RATIO IN 25 TO SUBCHAPTER S ARTICLE TWO, TO ALLOW AN INCREASE FAR TO 0.4, SIX TO ONE FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 1308 WEST 99TH STREET.

THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT PERMITTED ON THE PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THIS SUBCHAPTER WOULD NORMALLY BE LIMITED TO 0.4 TO ONE FAR OR 2300 SQUARE FEET.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, TO SITUATE YOU, THIS SITE IS LOCATED BETWEEN LAMAR AND MOPAC, VERY NEAR, UH, THE WEST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD PARK.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

HERE'S A CLOSER VIEW OF THE PROPERTY, UM, SHOWING THE CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE OTHER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES NEARBY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE ON THIS IS ABOUT A 0.18 ACRE SITE, UH, IN THE OLD WEST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, HERE, YOU CAN SEE THE ZONING MAP FOR THE AREA.

IT'S A REAL MIX OF, UM, SINGLE FAMILY AND SMALL MULTI-FAMILY ZONED A LOT.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS SLIDE SEVEN SHOWS WHAT THE HOME LOOKS LIKE TODAY.

IT IS MODERN DESIGN.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, AND AS YOU ALL KNOW, BETTER THAN ANYBODY, THERE ARE THREE FINDINGS FOR VARIANCE TO BE GRANTED AND WE MEET EACH OF THEM AS FOLLOWS.

UM, THE REGULATION DEPRIVES, THE PROPERTY OF A REASONABLE USE IS FUNDAMENTAL TO ITS USE AND ENJOYMENT, AND IS ALLOWED BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED SF THREE, THEN IT'S INTENDED FOR AND DEVELOPED WITH, WITH A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

UM, THIS VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FOR THIS SODA'S TSHIRT FAMILY TO RENOVATE THE HOME, TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL BEDROOM AND BATHROOM FOR THEIR GROWING FAMILY.

UM, A FOUR BEDROOM HOME IS A REASONABLE USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY LOT AND IS REQUIRED FOR THIS FAMILY TO BE ABLE TO STAY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY LOVE.

UM, THE SECOND ITEM, A HARDSHIP THAT IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND NOT COMMON TO THE AREA.

UM, THE FAR REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS HOME ARE REDUCED BY A SEPARATE BACK BUILDING THAT EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY ALREADY AND CLEARLY CANNOT SERVE AS CHILD'S BEDROOM OR BE REMODELED TO SERVE THAT PURPOSE SINCE IT'S A SEPARATE STRUCTURE.

AND ADDITIONALLY, UM, THE HOME ITSELF IS DESIGNED IN SUCH A WAY THAT AN ENTIRELY INTERIOR REMODEL TO ADD THE ADDITIONAL BEDROOM CANNOT BE DONE, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE HERE WITH THIS REQUEST.

AND THEN THE THIRD ITEM GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IMPAIR THE USE

[01:05:01]

OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OR IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS WITH THE PROPOSED ADDITION, THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT WILL NOT CHANGE AT ALL.

THE ADDITION WILL GO ON TOP OF AN EXISTING FLAT ROOF.

SO THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVER OR ADDITIONAL BUILDING COVERAGE, AND THE HOME WILL STILL BE COMPLIANT WITH THE SUBCHAPTER TENT AS WELL.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, WE HAVE NO OPPOSITION THAT WE KNOW OF.

UM, WE HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THEY'VE DECIDED TO BE NEUTRAL ON THE CASE OR TO NOT, NOT TO TAKE A POSITION.

UM, WE'VE COLLECTED SEVERAL SUPPORT LETTERS FROM ADJACENT NEIGHBORS AND PROVIDED THEM TO YOU.

I THINK EVEN A COUPLE MORE HAVE COME IN SINCE WE MADE THIS EXHIBIT.

SO WE'RE AT SIX RIGHT NOW AND THEY INCLUDE THE FOLKS WHO LIVE CLOSEST TO THOSE SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY ON BOTH SIDES.

AND, UM, THE PROPERTIES ACROSS THE STREET ARE ALL IN, IN FAVOR.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, I, I DO FEEL LIKE THE CONTEXT HERE IS IMPORTANT AND I, AND I HAVE TO MENTION THAT THERE ARE NO HOMES FOR SALE IN THIS AREA THAT NEEDS THIS FAMILY'S NEEDS.

THERE ARE ONLY TWO THAT COME UP IN A SEARCH FOR CORE BEDROOM HOMES, AND EITHER OF THEM IS AN ACTUALLY A FOUR BEDROOM HOME.

UM, BOTH OF THEM ARE MADE UP OF MULTIPLE BUILDINGS IN NEED OF REPAIR ON THEIR RESPECTIVE PROPERTIES.

UM, AND THE LOCATION IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT FOR DR.

SOTO'S BECAUSE SHE'S A PHYSICIAN AT DELL CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL.

UM, AND IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO CROSS MOPAC I 35 OR THE RIVER, SHE CAN GET TO THE HOSPITAL WHEN SHE NEEDS TO IN UNDER FIVE MINUTES.

UM, IF SHE HAS TO MOVE FAR AWAY FROM THE HOSPITAL, IT'S GOING TO ACTUALLY AFFECT HER ABILITY TO DO HER JOB.

WELL, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, HERE ON SLIDE 11, YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED ADDITION AND YOU CAN SEE HOW UNOBTRUSIVE IT IS REALLY BLENDING INTO THE HOME.

UM, IT WILL, UM, YOU CAN ALSO KIND OF SEE FROM THIS EXHIBIT, I THINK HOW THE EXISTING DESIGN IS REALLY NOT CONDUCIVE TO CREATING AN ADDITIONAL BEDROOM INSIDE WITHOUT, UH, ENTIRELY WITHIN THE EXISTING BUILDING.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, SO TO REITERATE OR REITERATE OUR FINDINGS, UM, THE REGULATION DEPRIVES, THE PROPERTY OWNER OF A REASONABLE USE IN THAT, UM, IT'S A FOUR BEDROOM HOME FOR A GROWING FAMILY ON THE HARDSHIP IS THAT THE FLORIDA AREA RATIO REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS SITE ARE ALREADY REDUCED BY THE SEPARATE BACK BUILDING THAT EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY AND CLEARLY CANNOT SERVE AS A CHILD'S BEDROOM.

UM, AND ALSO THAT THE BUILDING IS DESIGNED IN SUCH A WAY THAT A REMODEL, UH, ENTIRELY INTERIOR CANNOT BE DONE WITHOUT THE SMALL INCREASE IN FHR.

AND FINALLY, THE GRANTING, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT WILL NOT CHANGE AT ALL.

UM, AND IT'S GOING ON THE EXISTING FLAT ROOF AND THE HOME WILL COMPLY WITH THE MCMANSION TENT, UM, AND ALSO HAS THE SUPPORT OF THE ADJACENT RESIDENTS.

AND I SHOULD CORRECT.

I APOLOGIZE.

I SAID EARLIER, UM, I SAID THE WRONG HOSPITAL, UM, DR.

SODAS WORKS AT DELL SETON AT 15TH AND RED RIVER, WHICH MAKES MORE SENSE FOR THE REST OF WHAT I SAID.

SO WITH THAT WE WOULD, WE WOULD REQUEST, UM, IT'S VARIOUS, UM, CHAIR, IF I CAN, UH, UH, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS OR JUST HIT THE FIVE MINUTE MARK.

PERFECT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MS. BOGGIO.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THE PRESENTATION.

CAN WE GO BACK TO PAGE D FOUR 12 AND PUT THEM BACK UP ON THE SCREEN? WOULD YOU MIND? THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UM, THERE WITH THE SUMMARY FINDINGS SLIDE PLACE.

THANK YOU.

OH, GO BACK.

SORRY.

THANK YOU.

SO, UM, MS. BUDGET, I AGREE WITH YOU THAT A FOUR BEDROOM HOME IS A REASONABLE USE.

HOWEVER, IT IS NOT MORE REASONABLE OR LESS REASONABLE THAN TWO OR THREE.

AND SO I'LL, I'LL SAY THIS MORE FOR THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION WHO ARE NEW THAN FOR YOU.

UH, WHO'VE PROBABLY WATCHED THESE HEARINGS BEFORE I'VE BEEN AS VOCALLY AND INTENSELY CRITICAL ABOUT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE SOMEWHAT ARBITRARY AND RESTRICTIVE NATURE OF WHAT IT DOES SEEMINGLY FOR NO PURPOSE OTHER THAN TO INHIBIT PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO ENJOY THEIR PROPERTY AND LIVE IN A WAY THAT IS BOTH ECONOMICAL AND COMFORTABLE FOR THEM WITHIN OUR CITY.

I THINK IT IS UNFAIR.

I THINK OUR, OUR CODE IS STUPID.

HOWEVER, DESPITE THE FACT THAT I THINK IT IS UNFAIR AND STUPID, THE FACT THAT WE DON'T LIKE IT IS NOT A HARDSHIP AND BOUGHT THE HOME AND DECIDING THAT THE, THAT THE DESIGN OF THE HOME THAT WE BOUGHT MAKES AN INTERIOR REMODEL IN FEASIBLE DOES NOT STRIKE ME AS A HARDSHIP THAT I CAN SUPPORT A VARIANCE FOR IN THIS MEETING.

ADDITIONALLY, THE IDEA OF ADVERSE IMPACT IS NOT REALLY DEFINED,

[01:10:01]

AT LEAST NOT IN MY MIND OF A POPULARITY CONTEST OF WHO CAN GET SIGNATURES FROM NEIGHBORS.

AND I HAVE TO SAY WITHOUT CALLING YOU OUT, OR WE'RE EMBARRASSING ANYBODY, I'M A LITTLE SURPRISED THAT THE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS HERE, UM, IN THE SENSE THAT WHEN WE SEE ALL OVER THE CITY AND WE SEE NOT NECESSARILY HERE, BUT HISTORIC COMMUNITIES THAT ARE GETTING WIPED AWAY BY THE INABILITY OF OUR CODE TO SUPPORT ANYTHING OTHER THAN LARGER AND LARGER FANCIER AND FANCIER SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, BECAUSE WE'RE UNABLE TO BUILD ENOUGH HOUSING FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE.

I'M SORRY, I CAN'T SUPPORT A VARIANCE ON THIS BASIS.

WHAT I WOULD SUPPORT IS A POSTPONEMENT.

SO YOU CAN COME UP WITH A BETTER HARDSHIP, BUT I, I CAN'T, UH, I CAN'T SUPPORT A VARIANCE BASED ON WHAT I'M SEEING HERE AT NIGHT.

YES.

AND, AND, AND I, UM, HOW, WHEN DID THIS OWNER BUY THIS HOME? THESE OWNERS, I BELIEVE IT WAS IN 2019.

SO TWO YEARS AGO THEY BOUGHT THIS HOME AND HOW MANY, AND IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER HOW MANY CHILDREN THAT HAVE, SO THEY BOUGHT A HOME THAT WAS NOT EVEN FEASIBLE FOR THEM TWO YEARS AGO.

AND SO FROM THE START THEY WANTED TO ADD ON, I'M PRETTY SURE IT'S PROBABLY TAKEN TWO YEARS FOR THE PLANS, SO I'M WITH WRONG.

UM, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING SPECIAL CAUSE I, I, FOR ME TO GO ON FAR AS MUCH AS YOU ARE, AND I DON'T SEE A HARDSHIP ON A HOUSE THAT YOU BOUGHT TWO YEARS AGO, THAT WAS ALREADY OVERBUILT, HAS A CABANA, HAS A FULL, IS A VERY LARGE HOME TO START WITH.

UM, I THINK THAT POSTPONEMENT IS YOUR BEST IDEA, BUT, UH, I THINK IT, I THINK YOU HAVE A ROAD AHEAD OF YOU.

THAT'S JUST PUT IT THAT WAY.

I APOLOGIZE FOR MY CRITICAL TIME, BUT I APOLOGIZE FOR MY CRITICAL TONE, BY THE WAY.

IT'S INAPPROPRIATE.

I DO APOLOGIZE.

SORRY, BRETT.

I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU, BUT, UM, BUT THIS IS, SEEMS BEYOND THE PALE DOMAIN.

YEAH.

UM, YEAH, I, IF I'M SUPPORTING, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF A POSTPONEMENT.

UM, AND ONE THING THAT POTENTIALLY I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS, DEPENDING ON HOW IT COMES BACK TO US, IF WE DO AGREE TO ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, APPROVE OF POSTPONEMENT IS THE STATE OF THE POOL HOUSE.

AND WHETHER THE ASK AND FAR CAN BE MADE UP FOR, BY REMODELING THE POOL HOUSE OR POSSIBLY, YOU KNOW, REMOVING IT ENTIRELY.

SO THAT THE VARIANCE THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS THE MINIMUM POSSIBLE VARIANCE THAT YOU, THAT YOU NEED VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE.

I THINK YOU'RE MUTED.

SORRY.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT.

AND I ALSO WANT TO ASK A BOARD MEMBER MCDANIEL.

OCCASIONALLY WHEN YOU HAVE THESE MOMENTS, I REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHEN YOU'RE RUNNING FOR COUNCIL, YOU BEAT ME TO IT.

SO I WOULDN'T HAVE THESE MOMENTS, MELISSA, BUT THANK YOU FOR ASKING ON OCCASION WHEN YOU GET, WHEN YOU GET ON A YEAH, THAT'S THE WORD? SO BOX, I ALWAYS WANT TO ASK YOU, YOU'RE GOING TO RUN YOUR, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE PASSED THE, WHEN WE PASSED OUR RECOMMENDATION ON ZAP WAY BACK ON THE 2012, ABOUT WHAT DIRECTION WE WANTED TO IMAGINE AUSTIN TO GO, I WOULD NOT HAVE ANTICIPATED THAT MORE TIME WOULD GO BY BEFORE THE PACKAGE OF PRIORITY PROGRAM.

NUMBER ONE, THAT IT TOOK BETWEEN JOHN F KENNEDY'S.

WE GO TO THE MOON SPEECH AND ACTUALLY PUTTING A PERSON ON THE MOON ON THE NOON.

WE NEED A NEW CODE.

WE'RE PUTTING GOOD PEOPLE THAT WE'RE PUTTING GOOD PEOPLE OUT AND ALL, AND I'LL STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT IT HERE, BUT WE REALLY SHOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

WELL, YOU KNOW, IT TOOK FROM 1999 UNTIL WHAT, 2019 FOR, FOR US TO ACTUALLY PUT RAPID BUS IN ON THE STREETS.

SO BEING THAT IN 1999, IT WAS ACTUALLY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO TELL YOU UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO RUN, BUT I'M IN PROMOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT MOTION WITH THE PROGRAM.

YOU'VE ALREADY GOT A SECOND BY BOARD MEMBER, BAILEY TTM.

COULD YOU PULL THE PRESENTATION DOWN PLEASE? AND ALSO I'M ALWAYS IMPRESSED THAT MS. MOJO CAN ACTUALLY SPEAK THAT FAST WITHOUT BREATHING.

UH, SHE GETS A CREDIT FOR THAT FOR ME, CAUSE SHE MADE IT IN FIVE MINUTES.

OKAY.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2021

[01:15:01]

RICHARD SMITH.

YES, I'M UH, I APPROVE OF THE MOTION TO POSTPONE.

I HAD A QUESTION THOUGH.

OH, I'M SORRY.

I DID NOT SEE YOUR HAND.

UH, MOTION MAKER WAS, UH, BY SHEER HOP ON NOKIA KEY IF WE TABLE THE MOTION FOR JUST A SECOND.

OF COURSE.

GO AHEAD, SIR.

MY QUESTION RELATES TO, UH, THE SECOND PROPOSED FINDING, UH, THE HARDSHIP IN THIS IS THE DESIGN OF THE PROPERTY MAKES AN INTERIOR REMODEL TO ADD A BEDROOM AND FEASIBLE.

AND THAT SEEMS VERY CONCLUSORY TO ME.

UH, I'M THINKING THAT WHAT THE REAL PROBLEM MAY BE IS THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO TAKE ONE BEDROOM AND SPLIT IT INTO TWO.

UM, YOU MAY HAVE A SMALLER BEDROOMS, BUT YOU CAN, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THE DESIGN OF A PROPERTY CAN MAKE, UM, MAKE AN ADDITIONAL BEDROOM AND FEASIBLE, MAN.

MAYBE THERE'S NO ANSWER TO THAT HERE.

WE'RE POSTPONING.

SO I THINK THAT'D BE SOMETHING I'D WANT TO SEE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS.

OKAY.

LET'S CALL THE ROLL AGAIN.

AGAIN.

THIS IS A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2021, UH, MADE BY VICE-CHAIR HAWTHORNE, SECONDED BY BROOKE BAILEY.

AND SO RICHARD SMITH? YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

KELLY HOME.

YES.

TOMMY EIGHTS.

YES.

BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

NO MELISSA HOPP YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

AND RON MCDANIEL? YES.

OKAY.

POSTPONE UNTIL SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2021.

BUT YES, THERE MISCUE I THINK.

SORRY.

YES.

SEE THAT'S WHAT I GET FOR TRYING TO SKIP AROUND.

OKAY.

SORRY.

I MISSPOKE JOE FOR POSTPONE UNTIL SEPTEMBER 3RD, SEPTEMBER 13TH.

OKAY.

OKAY.

OKAY.

[E-1 C15-2021-0027 Charles Shapiro 12905 Veronese Drive]

MOVING ON.

NEXT CASE WILL BE ITEM IN ONE SCENE 15 20 21 0 0 2 7.

THIS IS GOING TO BE FOR 1, 2 9, 0 5.

VERY NICE DRIVE WITH THE PRIMARY SPEAKER BEING CHARLES SHAPIRO.

MR. SHAPIRO, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? YES.

UM, WE HAVE NOT HEARD FROM THIS APPLICANT.

WE'D BEEN REACHING OUT TO HIM, YOU KNOW, FOR EVERYTHING, FOR HIS PRESENTATIONS, HIS ADVANCED POCKET.

WE HAVE NOT HEARD FROM HIM AND FROM WHAT I'M BEING TOLD, HE'S NOT ON THE LINE EITHER.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO DO WITH THIS PLACE AND JUST MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE IF HE'S NOT ON THE LINE.

SO I'M GOING TO POINT OUT REAL QUICK THAT NEXT MONTH WE'LL MOST LIKELY BE, BE BACK IN PERSON AND HAVE TO UNTENABLE, EVERYTHING WE TABLE DURING COVID WITH COVID AND THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN OUR WORLD.

I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT SOMEONE'S CIRCUMSTANCES.

UM, SO I REALLY FEEL STRONGLY THAT THINGS HAVE HAPPENED.

THINGS HAVE HAPPENED TO PEOPLE I KNOW, AND THEY ARE IN A POSITION OF UNEXPECTED OR UNABLE TO SPEAK.

SO I'D LIKE TO GIVE HIM THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT AND, AND JUST, YEAH, CAUSE YOU JUST DON'T KNOW WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW.

YEAH.

WELL, WE CAN'T REALLY HEAR A CASE WITHOUT THE APPLICANT.

IT MAY BE THAT IT'S IT'S INCONVENIENT AND UH, WE MAY, YOU KNOW, HE, WE DIDN'T GET ANY NEW INFORMATION AND MAYBE THAT'S PART OF IT BECAUSE I THINK WE NEEDED SOME NEW INFORMATION FROM THIS APPLICANT WE GOT.

SO LET'S HOPE THAT HE'S AT LEAST LISTENING BACK AT THIS AND BRING US SOMETHING THAT WE CAN LOOK AT.

THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU BROUGHT US BEFORE.

AND, UM, AS MUCH AS I HATE POSTPONING THIS, BUT I HATE TO TELL YOU ALL, I'M NOT GOING TO BE HERE NEXT MONTH.

SO GOOD.

UM, I SUPPORT THE POSTPONEMENT.

DID WE DID SOMEONE SECOND? I DIDN'T SEE IT SECOND.

I'LL SECOND.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THIS WILL BE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TILL SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2021.

TOMMY, TOMMY.

TOMMY.

CAN YOU HEAR US? ARE YOU ON MUTE? YES.

[01:20:01]

OKAY.

BROOKE FAMILY? YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

MELISSA HAWTHORNE.

YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

RON MCDANIEL.

YES.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

PAY A POSTPONE TILL SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2021.

CHERYL WHO MOTIONS.

AND WHO'S SECOND TO THAT MOTION.

I WAS CHAIR HEARTBURN WAS THE MOTION BOARD MEMBER.

BAILEY WAS THE SECOND.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

NEXT ITEM III TWO.

THIS WILL BE C 15 20 21 0 0 5.

WE'D POSTPONE THIS ITEM 82.

DID WE, DO WE DARE YOU TO POSTPONE? YES WE DID.

IF WE DID POSTPONED BEFORE YOU GOT THAT'S A LOT OF NUMBERS AND LETTERS, THEY SPIT OUT THERE.

THANK YOU.

YOU'RE DOING GREAT.

THREE, NOT POSTPONED IT.

ALSO REMINDER THAT WE DID HAVE SMALL POSITIONS SPEAK ON THIS.

SO NEXT ITEM WILL BE

[E-3 C15-2021-0056 Chase & Andrea Hamilton 3006 Glenview Avenue]

EAT THREE C 15 20 21 0 0 5 6 4, 3006.

GLEN VIEW AVENUE.

PRIMARY SPEAKER WILL BE ANDREA HAMILTON WITH HAMILTON OR YOU'RE ON THE LINE.

I AM.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? I CAN GIVE US ONE SECOND.

WE'LL GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP.

OKAY.

OH, NO PRESENTATION.

OKAY.

SO RIGHT.

NO PRESENTATION.

MY PRESENTATION WAS GOING TO BE THE SAME AS MY ADVANCED PACKET.

SO THEN IT SOUNDED LIKE THE INSTRUCTIONS OR IF YOU'RE PROVIDING THE SAME THING TWICE, JUST TO SAVE EVERYBODY THAT TROUBLE.

OKAY.

WELL YOU, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

OKAY.

UM, THANKS TO THE BOARD FOR HEARING ME PRESENT TONIGHT.

YOU HEARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MY CASE, OBVIOUSLY AN HOUR AND A HALF AGO, BUT I'LL RECAP A LITTLE BIT OF THAT JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS ON THE SAME PAGE HERE.

MY HUSBAND AND I OWN A HOME AT 3006 GLENVIEW AVENUE.

UM, IT IS ON THE WEST SIDE OF GLENVIEW AVENUE AND OUR REAR YARD IS, UM, BORDERED BY JEFFERSON AVENUE.

SO ALL OF THE HOMES ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF GLEN VIEW DO NOT HAVE CURB CUTS.

THAT RANGES FROM WHERE THE STREET BEGINS.

THAT MOLAY ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 35TH STREET.

UM, WHEN WE, THE REASON WHY WE STARTED WANTING TO DO THIS RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE'VE HAD A RECENT INFLUX IN THEFT, PETTY THEFT, AND WE'VE HAD SOME THINGS GO MISSING OFF OF OUR YARD AND OUR PORCH.

UM, AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE WENT FROM NO ADULTS WORKING IN THE HOME TO TWO ADULTS WORKING IN THE HOME.

SO BETWEEN TO CRAM EVERYTHING IN THE HOUSE AND THEN TRYING TO WORK HERE AND HOMESCHOOL HERE, WE'VE JUST KIND OF FEEL LIKE WE IT'S TIME TO BUILD THE GARAGE.

UM, WE HAD ALWAYS HOPED TO BUILD A GARAGE.

AND IN FACT, WE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SEVERAL YEARS AGO AT BOUT THIS.

AND AT THAT TIME THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION AND THE LOCATION OF THE GARAGE HAS NOT CHANGED FROM THE INITIAL MEETING TO TODAY.

UM, OUR HEART IN ADDITION TO THE FORCED REAR ENTRY OF OUR YARD.

THERE'S ANOTHER THING, I'M SORRY, WHAT, THERE'S ANOTHER THING.

THERE'S ANOTHER HARDSHIP THAT WAS NOT DISCUSSED EARLIER IN JOYCE'S REMARKS.

I DON'T HAVE THE MEASUREMENTS TODAY, BUT IN 2013 WE HAD A VERY HEALTHY AND STILL DO HAVE A VERY HEALTHY OAK TREE IN OUR FRONT YARD.

IT MEASURED 54 INCHES IN DIAMETER AT THE TIME OF OUR PERMIT PURSUIT FOR THE CURRENT HOUSE.

AND SO WE DID NOT BUILD TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, UM, PROP BUILD LINE.

WE PUSHED BACK FROM THAT.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAD TO, UM, DO A POST-TENSION SLAB TO AVOID TREE DAMAGE.

AND SO OUR HOME IS ACTUALLY BUILT AT ABOUT 30 FEET INSTEAD OF THE ALLOWED 25.

HAD WE BUILT AT THE RIGHT AT THE TWENTY-FIVE FOOT BUILD LINE, NOT HAVING THE BIG TREE.

I THINK WE WOULD PROBABLY BE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORS THAT THERE WOULD BE ROOM FOR US TO BUILD THE GARAGE AT THE 10 FOOT LINE INSTEAD OF A FIVE FEET.

BUT IN THIS CASE, THAT EXTRA MEASUREMENT MATTERS BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A BEAUTIFUL TREE IN THE FRONT.

YEAH.

ARE, UM, ARE ORIGINAL HOME THAT WAS BUILT IN THE THIRTIES, HAD A DETACHED GARAGE IN THIS LOCATION, WHICH WAS ALSO DISCUSSED EARLIER, UH, THAT WAS A NON-CONFORMING GARAGE BECAUSE NOT, I BELIEVE IT WAS INSIDE 10 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, BUT IT WAS ALSO ONLY THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE YARD.

SO WE DID NOT SAVE THAT GARAGE.

[01:25:01]

UM, I HAVE INCLUDED IN MY ADVANCED PACKET, A BUNCH OF PHOTOS OF JEFFERSON AVENUE ALL UP AND DOWN THE ROAD OF ALL OF THE GARAGES THAT RUN UP THIS STREET THAT BASICALLY EVERY HOME ON THE BLOCK HAS A REAR ENTRY GARAGE, AGAIN, ALL THE WAY FROM MOLAY ALL THE WAY TO 35TH STREET.

THAT'S JUST THE ONLY PLACE TO PUT THEM.

UM, AND I WENT OUT WITH A TAPE, MEASURE MYSELF AND MEASURED THE LOCATIONS OF THE VARIOUS GARAGES UP AND DOWN THE BLOCK.

AND, UM, SOME OF THEM ARE AS CLOSE AS 23 FEET FROM THE ASPHALT, BUT THAT'S NOT PUTTING THEM 23 FEET FROM THE BUILD LINE BECAUSE IT'S NINE FEET, AT LEAST IN OUR CASE, IT'S NINE FEET FROM JEFFERSON TO THE BEGINNING OF OUR BUILD LINE.

UM, SO THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE GARAGE WE'D LIKE TO BUILD IS 14 FEET FROM THE STREET.

UM, A SIMILAR VARIANCE WAS GRANTED, JOYCE MENTIONED THIS ALREADY, BUT THERE WAS A SIMILAR VARIANCE VARIANTS GRANTED IN 2014 FOR A GARAGE, UM, AND FULL APARTMENT, UM, AT CERTAIN 8,200 GLENVIEW.

UM, AND YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WHAT HE BUILT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WHAT WE INTEND TO BUILD IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

THE PLANS FOR OUR DESIGN ARE INCLUDED IN THE INVEST PACKET AS WELL.

UM, AND WE ALSO HAVE WRITTEN SUPPORT FROM OUR NEIGHBORS ACROSS BLEND VIEW AND ACROSS JEFFERSON.

AND, UM, WE HAVE OTHER SUPPORTERS ALONG OUR SIDE OF GLENVIEW AS WELL.

AND THAT IS ABOUT ALL I'VE GOT.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. HAMILTON.

I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING BOARD MEMBER BLOOM.

OKAY.

SO, SO WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE AUSTIN ENERGY OPPOSITION? IT HAS BEEN RESOLVED.

THEY OPPOSED IT ORIGINALLY.

AND THEN WE GOT CORRECT MEASUREMENTS OF THE DISTANCE FROM THE UTILITY LINE.

AND, UM, THAT'S HOW I KNOW THAT WE'RE 14 FEET FROM THE STREET CAUSE WE HAD TO GET OUT AND REMEASURE EVERYTHING, BUT THEY ARE NOW, UH, THEY HAVE CHANGED THEIR POSITION TO NO OPPOSITION AND THAT IS INCLUDED ALSO IN THE PACKET.

OKAY.

THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBER SMITH.

SO, UH, WE DID HAVE AN OPPOSITION TO THIS AND I BELIEVE THEY RAISED, UH, THE INDIVIDUAL RAISED A PRIOR DECISION THAT, UH, I THINK WAS ARGUED TO BE, UH, CONTROLLING HERE OR CERTAINLY SOME KIND OF, UH, UH, PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.

PERHAPS.

CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT, THAT HOME, UM, HAS DIFFERENT LOT CHARACTERISTICS FOR ONE THING, HE DOES NOT HAVE THE TREE IN THE FRONT YARD, SO HE DIDN'T HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT WAS PUSHED BACK THE WAY THAT OURS WAS BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.

YEAH, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I DID.

UM, I LOOKED AT THIS ON GOOGLE MAPS AND ALL THE HOUSES NEXT TO YOU ARE PRETTY MUCH IN THE SAME LINE AS YOURS IS IF NOT FURTHER BACK.

SO, UM, IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE CLOSER TO THE STREET THAT THE HOMES THAT ARE ADJACENT TO YOU AND I WOULD BE WILLING TO SUPPORT 10 FEET, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN GET THERE ON FIVE, JUST BECAUSE FOR SURE IF SOMEBODY'S GOING TO END UP PARKING BEHIND THE GARAGE AND YOU'RE, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO BE ACROSS THE SIDEWALK.

WELL, AND THE SIDEWALK IS SOMETHING ELSE THAT I'D LIKE TO BRING UP THAT SIDEWALK IS NOT CONNECTED TO ANYTHING.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAD TO BUILD IN 2015.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT MATTERS, BUT THERE IS A CONNECTED SIDEWALK ON THE OTHER SIDE OF GLEN D EXCUSE ME, THE OTHER SIDE OF JEFFERSON THAT RUNS ALL ALONG THE LENGTH OF THE STREET.

AND SO THERE IS NO FOOT TRAFFIC AT ALL ON THE SIDEWALK ON OUR SIDE OF THE STREET, BECAUSE IT'S NOT CONNECTED TO ANY HOUSES.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THERE IS STILL A SIDEWALK THERE AND THERE'S ADA ISSUES WITH THAT.

UM, EVEN IF IT'S A SHORT ONE THERE'S, UM, ADA COMPLIANCE.

AND SO IF YOU HAVE A BUNCH OF STUFF IN YOUR GARAGE, BECAUSE Y'ALL ARE OVERCROWDED IN THE HOUSE, AND THEN YOU PARKED BEHIND THE GARAGE, YOU'RE GOING TO BE OVER THAT SIDEWALK.

AND FOR ME, THAT'S A BIG ISSUE.

UM, ADA COMPLIANCE IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT THESE DAYS.

I APOLOGIZE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY HAS ANY PLANS TO CONNECT THAT SIDEWALK TO ANYTHING EITHER.

I MEAN, IT MAY BE THAT THERE'S A BIG SIDEWALK DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOWN THE LINE SOMEWHERE.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS, UH, BOARD MEMBER BLOOM.

YEAH.

I'LL JUST NOTE THAT SOMETIMES SIDEWALK IMPLEMENTATION IS DONE IN AN INCREMENTAL WAY AS PROPERTIES REDEVELOPED, THE IDEA BEING THAT EVENTUALLY YOU WILL HAVE A CONNECTED SIDEWALK ALONG THE BLOCK OF PACE.

[01:30:02]

SO IT MAY NOT CONNECT ANYTHING NOW, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S UNDERSTOOD, BUT THAT'S MAYBE THE CASE I STILL HAWTHORNE.

SO I THINK I COULD BE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF 10 FEET, BUT IF I AM SUPPORTIVE OF 10 FEET, I THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE REWORKING OF THE PLAN BECAUSE I THEN THINK THAT THERE'S ANOTHER ISSUE ABOUT THE DISTANCE, BUT I, IT'S NOT SORRY, MOMMY.

PLEASE WAIT UNTIL SHE ASKS YOU A QUESTION.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S A, IF I MADE A MOTION FOR 10 FEET, THEN THERE'S ANOTHER VARIANCE THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR DISTANCE BETWEEN THE TWO STRUCTURES.

AND THAT MAY NOT BE THE OPTION THAT THEY WOULD CHOOSE.

UM, SO I I'M HESITANT TO TOO, BUT I THINK, I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE A SUPPORT FOR FIVE FEET.

SO EITHER THEY COULD COME BACK FOR A RECONSIDERATION OR I KNOW YOU'RE TALKING A POSTPONEMENT NOTICE, I HEAR IT.

I WORK IT.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY COULD REWORK IT.

SO, UM, IT'S UP TO Y'ALL, LIKE I SAID, I'M, I'M OUT SEPTEMBER.

SO BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR, YOU HAD A QUESTION JUST GOING TO AGREE THAT, UM, FIVE FEET WOULD NOT BE ACCEPTABLE TO ME, BUT 10 FEET COULD BE, BUT WHETHER WE'D CONSIDER THIS NOW OR AT A LATER TIME, IT'S THE BOARD'S DISCRETION.

IF YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT VOTING NO.

AND THAT YOU MIGHT VOTE NEXT TIME, BETTER TO DO IT NOW AND GET IT OVER WITH, AND THEN HAVE NO REASON TO DRAG IT OUT.

I CHAIR I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE TO, TO POSTPONE IT TO THE OCTOBER MEETING OCTOBER.

OKAY.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? OH GEEZ.

JUST IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A WAY TO SOLVE IT, I DON'T THINK IT'S SIMPLE AND IT MAY REQUIRE A WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OR ADDITIONAL WELL, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE IT CLOSER TO THE HOUSE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT FAS SOLUTION, BUT BECAUSE THAT'S ANOTHER VARIANT THAT RIGHT ON, BUT IT'LL BE OCTOBER 11TH, RIGHT IN LINE.

THAT'S CORRECT.

UM, OCTOBER 11TH.

OKAY.

MOTION TO POSTPONE TO OCTOBER 11TH, 2021 MADE BY VICE CHAIR.

HAWTHORNE SECONDED BY ROM MCDANIEL.

LILY BLOOM.

YES.

NICOLE WANED.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RON MCDANIEL.

YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

MELISSA HAWTHORNE.

OKAY.

YES.

AND PERHAPS THERE MIGHT BE TIME TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DISCUSS THE 10 FEET JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

BROOKE BAILEY.

I'M GOING TO SAY NO.

OKAY.

TOMMY IT'S OKAY.

I DIDN'T HEAR YOU FOR MEMBRANES.

LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE SAYING YES, BUT WE'RE NOT HEARING ANYTHING.

YES.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

YEAH, WE GOT YOU NOW.

ALL RIGHT.

SO POSTPONE TILL OCTOBER 11TH, 2021.

MADAM CHAIR.

I NEED TO STEP AWAY FOR JUST A MINUTE.

OKAY.

[E-4 C15-2021-0062 David Cancialosi for Christen Steen 3401 Rivercrest Drive]

JESSICA, ARE YOU TALKING? I'M SURE YOU'RE ON MUTE.

THAT'S TWICE.

NEXT ITEM IS ITEM FOUR, C 15 20 21 0 0 6 2 4 3 4 0 1 RIVER CREST DRIVE WITH DAVID, KEN CLOC AS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER, MR. ONLINE.

YES MA'AM.

I AM.

CAN YOU HANG ON JUST A SECOND? LET'S GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP.

[01:35:03]

OKAY, SARAH, WE ARE ON PAGE ONE OF YOUR PRESENTATION.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

CHAIR, BOARD MEMBERS.

UM, I APPRECIATE THE POSTPONE FROM LAST MONTH.

I HAD A FAMILY EMERGENCY AT THE LAST MINUTE, SO I APPRECIATE POSTPONEMENT.

UM, I ALSO HAVE, UM, THE ARCHITECT, MR. CLINT, GARWOOD WHO'S ON HOLD.

SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY TECHNICAL OR OTHER DESIGN RELATED QUESTIONS? UM, I HAVE TO PROVIDE THE INITIAL INFORMATION.

SO THIS IS AN LA ZONE, UH, PROPERTY IN THE RIVER CREST NEIGHBORHOOD REQUEST NEIGHBORHOOD IS, IS NO STRANGER TO VARIANCES.

UM, THIS IS A VERY UNUSUAL SITUATION.

THIS IS, UM, ONE OF THE LOTS THAT IS NOT ON LAKEFRONT AND, UH, IS ACROSS THE STREET.

AND IT HAS THE, UH, IT'S THE LOT WHERE THERE IS A SIDE EASEMENT STREET THAT GOES UP THE HILL BEHIND THE REMAINDER OF THE HOUSES BEYOND IT.

UM, AND SO IT'S THE LOT IS BIFURCATED BY ABOUT 1500 SQUARE FOOT OF, OF THESE MEN THAT CONTINUES TO TRAVEL THROUGH THIS LOT AND UP TO THE REAR OF SEVERAL HOUSES, UH, THAT ARE ALONG RIVER CREST.

THIS IS A 37,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT IT'S LOT FOR LOT FIVE OF RIVER CREST, SECTION 2, 19 65 ERA PLAT IT'S OBVIOUSLY PRE 82.

IT WAS VACANT UNTIL ABOUT, UH, EARLY TWO THOUSANDS, UH, PRIOR OWNER SOUGHT PERMIT.

AND IN MY COVER LETTER, I, I GO ON TO CLAIM THAT THAT PERMIT WAS ERRONEOUSLY ISSUED BY WAY OF A BAD CALCULATION OF THE, OF THE IMPERVIOUS COVERED.

THE IMPERVIOUS COVER WAS CALCULATED ON THE GROSS SITE AREA AND, AND NOT A NET SITE OR, UH, PER SLOPE CATEGORY AREA.

THERE IS NO, UH, SHORELINE SETBACK BECAUSE IT'S NOT ON THE WATER, BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO USE PER SLOPE CATEGORY.

UH, SO ZERO TO 15% AND SO ON IN ORDER TO CALCULATE THE ALLOWABLE AND PERVIOUS.

SO TWO PERMITS WERE ISSUED IN 2006, 2007 ERA THAT ALLOW FOR THE, UH, THE ERECTION OF TWO OR A MAIN SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS.

W WHAT MY, SO WE'RE, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE VERY MUCH OVER THE IMPERVIOUS COVER.

WHAT DO YOU DO AT CORRECTLY? AND SO WHAT MY CLIENT WOULD LIKE TO DO IS TWO THINGS.

ONE SHE LIKED, SHE HAS A REMODEL PERMIT THAT'S IN REVIEW AND HAS BEEN CLEARED OF ALL COMMENTS, EXCEPT THE IMPERVIOUS COVER BECAUSE THEY CAUGHT THE ERROR DURING THE PLANE, UH, OF, OF THE ADDITION FOR A GARAGE THAT IS GOING TO SIT ON TOP OF AN EXISTING PAD SITE.

AND IN MY PACKET, YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THE OLDER, UH, UH, APPLICATION MATERIAL THAT SHOWS CLEARLY THERE WAS A PA A GARAGE CONTEMPLATED, BUT IT WAS CROSSED OUT AND THERE WAS A PAD SITE, AND THEY DID THE GROSS CALCULATION AT 16% FOR THE ENTIRE SITE, BY THE WAY, THE 37,000 SQUARE FOOT COMBINATION, LOTS OVER 50%.

I THINK 57% OF THOSE COMBINED LOT AREAS ARE ABOVE THE 35% SLOPE AREAS.

SO YOU CAN BUILD ON OVER HALF OF THE COMBINED LOTS, EACH OF A LOT BY THEMSELVES OR SUBSTANDARD IN TERMS OF LA ZONING TO BEGIN WITH, BECAUSE YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE ONE ACRE IN SIZE AND 100 FOOT OF FRONTAGE.

AND SO WE CAN GO THROUGH MY, MY PICTURES THAT I HAVE ON MY SLIDE, THE, IT THERE'S A MINE.

THEY CAN SCROLL THROUGH THOSE ALL THE WAY, AND YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S A MYRIAD OF ISSUES WITH THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE.

THAT'S STABILIZING THE HILL, WHICH IS DRIVING A LOT OF THIS CASE.

WE NEED TO REROUTE AND REBUILD THE RETAINING WALLS BECAUSE THEY'RE SIMPLY HELD UP BY A RUBBLE OR THE CRACKING, UM, AND THE, UH, DRIVEWAY AND, AND THE ACCESS POINT OFF OF THE EASEMENT, UH, NEEDS TO BE ON THAT SIDE OF THE GARAGE.

THESE ARE THE ON THAT SIDE OF THE ROAD.

THERE'S A PARKING PAD, THAT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE EASEMENT, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT SAFE.

IT'S A VERY STEEP, UH, AND VERY, YOU KNOW, JUST UNSAFE AREA TO, TO DRIVE AND TO WALK DAY OR NIGHT THE HOUSE ITSELF.

BUT THE PAD SIDE ACTUALLY BACKS UP TO, UH, A SHEER CLIFF, WHICH GOES PRETTY STRAIGHT UP ALL THE WAY TO A DECK AND A SET OF STAIRS THAT EVEN IF YOU LOOK AT EXHIBIT E FOUR SLASH

[01:40:01]

24, YOU'LL SEE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF BOTH EXISTING AND PROPOSED THAT STAIRS AND MY DECK, WELL, THOSE ARE VERY, VERY SAFE, BUT THEY'RE JUST STEEP.

AND SO ALL, ALL IN ALL, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS RECTIFY AN EXISTING SET OF ERRORS THAT WERE PUT IN PLACE BY ERRONEOUS APPROVALS SOME YEARS AGO.

AND IF WE DO A GROSS CALCULATION OF PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS COVER OF THE FINISHED PRODUCT BEFORE YOU THEN WILL ACTUALLY JUST LOWER THE IMPERVIOUS COVER.

AND MR. WE'RE AT FIVE MINUTES, SIR, SO PLEASE WRAP IT UP.

OKAY.

YES, MA'AM, PERSONAL CATEGORIES.

WE HAVE SOME GOING DOWN AND SOME GOING UP IN OF IMPERVIOUS COVER, BUT OVERALL, WE'RE TRYING TO INSTITUTE A HANDFUL OF SITE CONTROLS THAT IMPROVE THE SITE AND, UH, AND, AND NOMINALIZE NORMALIZE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S ALREADY THERE.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING KEY BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.

I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

UM, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A LONG HISTORY OF PROBLEMS ON HIS SITE AND MOST OF THEM NOT THIS APPLICANT'S FAULT, BUT WHAT, SO IF YOU TALK ABOUT BOTH EXISTING AND NEW HOME, WHAT IS IT? IS IT A NEW HOME, OR IS IT A REMODEL OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE OR WAS IT JUST A PAD IT'S NOT REALLY MADE CLEAR UNDERSTOOD.

SO IT'S, IT'S A 2006 ERA HOME THAT REALLY NEEDED TO BE REMODELED.

CAUSE IT JUST WASN'T DONE.

IT WAS FALLING APART.

SO THEY SOUGHT A REMODEL PERMIT AND GOT THAT ISSUED.

AND THEN THEY SAW THE, AND THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN VERY FAR WITH IT BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT AN ADDITION PERMIT FOR THE GARAGE ON TOP OF THE EXISTING GARAGE PAD.

AND THAT'S WHERE THEY UNDER THAT'S WHEN THEY FOUND OUT THEY HAD A PERVIOUS COVER ISSUES.

SO THAT WHITE HOUSE WAS EXISTING THERE.

JUST REMODELING THAT.

CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION.

OH, THE NUTS A REMODEL.

YES.

MA'AM THAT'S THE HOUSE THERE.

2006 ERA PERMITS.

OKAY.

MY OTHER QUESTION IS FOR STAFF, IS ENVIRONMENTAL HERE.

HAVE WE GOTTEN ANY COMMENTS FROM THEM ON THIS PROPERTY? BECAUSE THAT IS A PRETTY STEEP SLOPE AND WHILE THEY ARE NOT ON THE WATERFRONT, IT DOES AFFECT, YOU KNOW, LIKE AUSTIN.

UH, NO, BUT WE CAN REQUEST THEM FOR NEXT MONTH IF YOU LIKE.

OKAY.

UM, I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE A HUGE ISSUE WITH THIS.

I'M JUST REALLY WONDERING, AND I CA AND MR. YOU CANCEL OSA, YOU KNOW, WE ALWAYS NEED ENVIRONMENTAL COMMENTS.

I WISH YOU STAFF, AND YOU COULD HAVE GOTTEN TOGETHER AND GOTTEN THAT BEFORE YOU SHOWED UP TONIGHT.

SO, UM, ACTUALLY COMMISSIONER, WE, I MEAN, WE, WE SPOKE TO STAT TO, UM, NO, NO.

WE SPOKE TO OUR RESIDENTIAL REVIEWER AND THEY, THEY JUST DON'T, THEIR COMMENT WAS WE DON'T ROUTE ANY OF THOSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S JUST, THAT'S NOT PART OF THEIR PURVIEW.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HEAR LIKE AUSTIN CASES IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD, WE USUALLY REQUEST, UM, COMMENTS FOR WHAT YOU'RE ASKING THE VARIOUS FOR, NOT FOR YOUR SITE REVIEW.

I WOULD SAY THIS, IT REALLY SHORT AND QUICKLY, I THINK THAT'D BE IMPROVED, UH, AND NEW RETAINING WALLS ALONG WITH ANY OTHER, UH, YOU KNOW, DRAINAGE, UH, CONCESSIONS, THE BOARD MIGHT SEE FIT WOULD, WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO, TO CURB ANY, ANY ISSUES THAT YOU MIGHT BE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH.

I UNDERSTAND THAT TOO, BUT NONE OF US ARE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS HERE, BUT MELISSA MIGHT HAVE SOME INPUT BOARD MEMBER HOTLINE, MR. CANCELLOUS.

SO LOOKING AT YOUR EXISTING SLOPE MAP, UH, CATEGORIES AND YOUR ZONES, AS WELL AS YOUR NEW ZONES.

I THINK I'D LIKE AN EXPLANATION FOR EACH SON, PARTICULARLY IN YOUR GREATER THAN 35% ZONE, UM, ON WHAT THAT PARTICULAR INCREASES.

UM, SO LIKE YOUR ZERO TO 15%, I'M NOT AS CONCERNED ABOUT.

AND, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE VERY SMALLER SLOPES.

I'M NOT AS CONCERNED ABOUT THOSE.

[01:45:01]

DO YOU THINK THAT, UM, UH, BOARD MEMBER VON OLIN IS OUT, IT MIGHT BE IN YOUR BEST INTEREST TO MOVE THIS TO ANOTHER TIME? UM, AS LIKE AUSTIN CASES ARE HARD JUST IN GENERAL.

AND I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE A, UH, TRAINING COMING UP ON THE ELAINE YOU WANNA STEP IN AND HELP ME THAT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN LIKE AUSTIN CASES.

UM, BUT I THINK I NEED SOME EXPLANATION OF WHY EACH EXPLICIT, I MEAN, YOU GAVE ME A LOT OF PICTURES.

IT WAS A LITTLE OVERWHELMING, BUT I UNDERSTAND, BUT WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT YOUR GREATER SLUG BARRIERS AND IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE INCREASING THEM TO ME, THERE'S, IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY, BUT IF THERE'S A PURPOSE FOR IT OR IF IT'S TO ACCESS THE OTHER LOTS, I MIGHT HAVE MORE EMPATHY FOR THAT.

YES MA'AM.

YEAH.

I HAVE VERY SIMPLE EXPLANATION.

IT'S PRIMARILY DRIVEN BY THE RETAINING WALLS.

WE HAVE LONG, UH, RETAINING WALLS STRETCHING FROM THE VERY TOP OF THE LOT IN WRAPPING AROUND THE DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BOTTOM CORNER WHERE THE, FOR THE ACCESS EASEMENT, UH, SPLITS OFF OF RIVER CREST DRIVE.

UM, AND, AND SO THAT, THOSE, THAT'S A VERY, VERY S UH, UH, STEEP AREA, OBVIOUSLY.

AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY THING BEING BUILT IN THAT AREA.

IT'S NOT ANY PART OF AN ADDITION OR A DECK OR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THEY'RE JUST RETAINING WALLS TO, UM, KEEP BASICALLY THE WALL, THE, THE SIDE OF THE HILL FROM CRUMBLING, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS DRY STACK ROCK, IT'S JUST KIND OF BULGING AND SITTING THERE LIKE IT HAS BEEN FOR A LONG TIME.

AND SO THAT'S THE PRIMARY REASON, OR THE SECONDARY REASON IS YOU, YOU, YOU, YOU POINTED OUT IS TO ACCESS A PARKING PAD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE EASEMENT ON THEIR PROPERTY.

SO THEY CAN HAVE A PARKING PAD OVER THERE AS WELL.

SO, UM, WHICH I THINK IS REASONABLE, BUT, UM, PRIMARILY AT THAT IS DRIVEN BY THE, UH, BY THE, BY THE RETAINING WALLS.

JUST, I MEAN, BEHIND THE HOUSE, THERE'S A, THERE'S A, UH, A GABION BASKET RETAINING WALL THAT IS, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED PERCENT, YOU KNOW, VERTICAL.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO REACH, PREPARE THAT NOW IN THIS CASE, BUT IF WE WERE TO COME BACK, I MEAN, THE NUMBER ONE WOULD BE ASTRONOMICAL PERCENTAGE HIGHER THAN, THAN ANYONE WOULD WANT.

SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET THE LOWER LEVEL RETAINING WALLS THAT GO FROM THE HOUSE DOWN THE HILL, DOWN TOWARDS THE STREET IN PLACE.

SO IT CAN HAVE THE CORRECT SEPTIC PUT IN PLACE AND SO FORTH AND PAD THE WHOLE THING STABILIZED THAT'S, WHAT'S DRIVING THE NUMBER.

SO ARE YOU, SO IF, I'M SORRY, MY QUESTION SEEMS TO KEEP GOING, BUT SO ARE YOU DELETING THE EXISTING GUEST PARKING AREA IN YOUR REQUEST? UH, THAT'S NOT BEEN COMMUNICATED TO ME, BUT IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO SEE GONE, THEN WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE TO MAKE IT GRAVEL OR WHAT HAVE YOU, WELL, I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AT YOUR EXISTING SLOPE MAP PLAN VERSUS YOUR NEW SLOPE MAP PLAN, WHICH IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO LABEL STREETS AND SUCH.

AND THESE WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER ON TWO SEPARATE EXHIBITS, BUT, UM, OH, FROM THE ARCHITECT COMMISSIONER, I'M SORRY.

I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU.

HE JUST TEXTED ME AND SAID, IT'S GONE.

YEAH.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT HAS GONE.

SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE DECREASING, BUT THAT'S IN A, IN A, IN A LOWER SLOPE CATEGORY.

AND THERE IS ALL THAT GOES AROUND THERE BECAUSE IT'S VERY STEEP BELOW THERE.

CAUSE THEN ACROSS THE EASEMENT, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE STAIRS ARE AT THAT RETAINING WALL GOES ALL THE WAY DOWN.

IT'S VERY TALL, BUT IT GOES ALL THE WAY DOWN.

AND THEY COME TO THE WRAPS AROUND TO THE BACKSIDE SIDE OF THE LOT.

AND SO THAT'S, WHAT'S DRIVING THE WHOLE NUMBER IN THE 35% PLUS AND THE 20 AND SOME OF THE 25 30 5%, BUT IT'S, IT'S NOT LIVING SPACE OR ANYTHING.

IT'S JUST, IT'S STRUCTURAL IN NATURE ONLY.

SO MOSTLY IF YOU

[01:50:01]

DON'T MIND, I HAVE A FOLLOW ON QUESTION TO THAT NOW, BUT BY ADDING ALL THESE RETAINING WALLS AND MAKING ALL THIS VERTICALITY IN THESE FLAT AREAS, ARE YOU CHANGING YOUR RUNOFF AND HOW ARE YOU GOING TO HANDLE YOUR RUNOFF AS IT PERTAINS TO BOTH YOUR NEIGHBORS AND DOWN TO THE LAKE? BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THE WATERS HAVE TO GOING DOWN TO GET REROUTED.

IF YOU HAVE THIS FLAT AREA, ARE YOU PROPOSING ANY MITIGATION MEASURES ON, ON THE CHANGE AND YOU RUN UP, LIKE, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT IS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I'D LIKE IT, I LIKE WHEN ENVIRONMENTAL COMES IN, WEIGHS IN, ON THESE LIKE AUSTIN CASES, BECAUSE THEY CAN GIVE US SOME INFORMATION ON THAT.

RIGHT.

RIGHT.

SO WE THINK WA UH, THE ANSWER IS YES.

AND SO REDUCING THE RUNOFF OFF OF THE SLOW, UM, WILL OCCUR BY WAY OF THE NEW RETAINING WALLS.

AND, UM, WE'RE ALSO HAPPY TO INSTALL ANY, ANY OTHER MEASURES, LIKE WHETHER IT'S RAIN BARRELS OR RAIN GARDENS OR FRENCH DRAINS, UM, TO IN ORDER JUST TO DO WHATEVER THEY CAN DO TO CAPTURE THAT.

BUT THERE'S ALSO JUST A NATURAL, A NATURAL RUNOFF.

IT JUST KIND OF COMES DOWN THAT EASEMENT ROAD, UM, UH, BECOMES, COMES ALL THE WAY DOWN AND KIND OF PUDDLES AT THE BOTTOM OF RIVER WHERE IT MEETS RIVER CREST.

AND IT'S BEEN LIKE THAT FOR DECADES.

AND IT'S NOT NECESSARILY COMING FROM THIS SITE AND THE WALL THAT IS BEHIND THE HILL, THAT'S BEHIND THIS HOUSE.

UM, IT TEES UP TO ANOTHER HOUSE THAT HAS VERY FLAT, UM, MY S YOU KNOW, EIGHT ACRES BEHIND IT, BUT NOW YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MITIGATE THAT PONDING AT THE BOTTOM.

CORRECT.

WE'LL, WE'RE, WE'RE WILLING TO DO WHAT WE CAN ON THIS NIGHT.

YOU KNOW, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE IT'S ALL COMING FROM, I GUESS IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WAS KIND OF PART OF MY ISSUE.

AND SO, OKAY.

I DON'T KNOW THE DATE, BUT IT CAN SAY WHERE IT'S ALL COMING FROM.

I, I JUST, YOU'RE JUST RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE TWO LOTS, AND I DO UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME MITIGATION MEASURES.

WE'RE, WE'RE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN WHATEVER THE BOARD MIGHT SEE FIT BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.

I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS WHAT YOU MEANT WHEN YOU SAID ENVIRONMENTAL SHOULD COME IN, BUT I THINK THAT WATERSHED SHOULD COME IN WITH ALL THE WATER FLOW AND THE RETAINING WALLS, UM, BECAUSE I'D REALLY LIKE TO KNOW THAT BEFORE, UM, WE MADE OUR DECISION, I SHARE HAWTHORNE.

SO MR. CANCER, I WAS SEEING IF I, IF I LOOK BY, LIKE, FROM YOUR, YOUR PLAN, YOUR HOUSE PLAN VERSUS YOUR SLOPE MACK SLOPE MAP CATEGORY PLAN, I DO SEE THAT YOU WERE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT AROUND THE EXISTING GUEST PARKING AREA.

BUT IF I MOVE TO THE RIGHT OF THAT, THE PLACEMENT OF THIS RETAINING WALL, THIS VERY THICK RETAINING WALL, IT NEED SOME KIND OF JUSTIFICATION ON WHY IT'S THERE AND NOT PERHAPS CLOSER TO THE HOUSE, UM, BECAUSE THAT INCREASES THE LENGTH OF THE WALL.

AGAIN, I WOULD TELL YOU THAT YOU WOULD BE PROBABLY BETTER OFF IF A BOARD MEMBER VINYL WHEN WE'RE HERE AS WELL.

I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GETTING THROUGH THIS ONE ON UNSCATHED.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS.

YEAH, OBVIOUSLY.

DO YOU THINK THERE'S HARDSHIPS ON HIS PROPERTY? I JUST DON'T THINK WE HAVE COMPLETE INFORMATION.

SO IS THAT A MOTION? WELL, I'VE BEEN, I'VE MADE ALL THE OTHER PP MOTIONS SO FAR.

I DON'T REALLY WANT TO BE THAT PERSON, BUT IT REALLY IS THAT MOMENT FOLKS.

AND I'LL SECOND, I'M HAVING A SECOND THAT I WAS GOING TO MAKE IT A FEW DIDN'T SO, OKAY.

SO I'M GOING TO POSTPONE IT UNTIL OCTOBER, OCTOBER.

UM, I REALLY NEED TO SEE SOME KIND OF JUSTIFICATION FOR THE AMOUNT OF RETAINING WALLS IN THEIR PLACEMENT.

I MEAN, YOU GAVE ME A LOT OF PICTURES, BUT YOU KNOW, I'M LOOKING AT A HOUSE PLAN.

THAT'S ORIENTED LIKE THIS AND SLOPE MAP PLANS ARE LIKE THIS.

AND THEN I JUST PUT A WALL OVER HERE, BUT MY SLOPE OVER HERE, LIKE, I NEED THEM TO COME TOGETHER FOR ME AND A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A COHESIVE, UH, MANNER.

I SEE THERE'S

[01:55:01]

A PROBLEM AND I'M THERE, BUT, UM, IT ALSO BE GOOD IF PERHAPS LIZ JOHNSON OR NOW THAT WAS, MIGHT'VE GOTTEN A JOB PROMOTION.

WHOEVER IS HER PERSON SINCE SHE WAS ALWAYS SO KIND MY COMMON, W I, I DID ASK FOR WATERSHED, UH, THEY SEEM TO BE A BIT HESITANT TO ASSIST ON EVERY LA CASE WE HAVE, UH, I'LL WORK ON IT.

YEAH.

LIZ JOHNSON WAS ALWAYS VERY, VERY KIND TO US.

AND, UH, AS, UH, A LOT OF TIMES OUR CASES HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL HORDE CONSEQUENCES.

AND IN THIS CASE, BEING THAT IT IS YOU DON'T GO TO ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD.

DO YOU? MR. KESSLER? DAVID.

OKAY.

IS IT ME OR IS IT HIM? IT'S NOT YOU OKAY.

SOMETIMES I WONDER IF I LOST AUDIO OR SOMETHING, DAVID, UH, DOES THIS HAVE AN ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD, UH, VARIANCE REQUIREMENT AS WELL? NO, NOT AT ALL.

HAS NO REVIEWS.

THAT'S WHY.

OKAY.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

WELL, I TOLD YOU, WHAT, IS THERE A BIG QUESTION OR THAT I SHOULD BE ASKING WATERSHED OR THAT I CAN BRING BACK OR, OR TRY TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THEM BEFORE WE'RE COME BACK? UM, CAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO ASK THEM CAUSE THEY DON'T REVIEW RESIDENTIAL'S RESIDENTIAL PERMITS.

THIS IS QUITE EXTREME.

AND I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE EXISTING CONDITIONS.

UH, JUST THINK THAT, UM, THAT NOT EVERYBODY HAS HEARD AN LA CASE BEFORE.

UM, LA CASES ARE BASED ON NET SIDE AREA.

AND THEY'RE ALSO BASED ON SLUG CATEGORY.

AND HERE YOU HAVE SOME EXISTING CONDITIONS, UH, THAT APPEAR THAT MIGHT HAVE HAD, UH, INTERPRETATION OR STEP ISSUES ALONG THE WAY.

SO WE HAVE SOME EXISTING, UM, ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE RECTIFIED.

I THINK THIS WAS A HARD CASE WHEN WE HAVE SEVERAL NEW BOARD MEMBERS.

AND SO PERHAPS, UM, TAKING THE TIME TO, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S WAS JOHNSON OR IF IT'S SOMEONE ELSE MORE, IT'S MORE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE.

UM, AGAIN, YOU, YOU, YOU'RE ADDING IMPERVIOUS COVER THE IMPERVIOUS COVERS, GONNA RUN TO THE, YOU KNOW, RUNOFFS GOING TO GO TO THE LAKE.

AND WHAT MEASURES ARE YOU PROVIDING? I GET YOU'RE FIXING A PROBLEM AND FIXING A WALL, BUT HOW ARE YOU CAPTURING OR TREATING ANY RUNOFF IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS A BETTER SITUATION? IT MIGHT MAKE IT EASIER FOR SOME OF THE OTHER PEOPLE TO SEE THE PREDICAMENT THAT YOU'RE IN, IN TRYING TO REPAIR IT AND, AND BE MODERATE IN YOUR REPAIR.

I YEP.

I'LL DO THE BEST I CAN.

YEP.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ALL RIGHT, SO THIS IS A MOTION TO POSTPONE ME BY VICE CHAIR, HEARTBURN SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER BAILEY OCTOBER 30TH, OCTOBER 11TH, 2021.

THANK YOU.

TELL BOOK BAILEY.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

MELISSA HOP-ON YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

RON MCDANIEL.

YES.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

OKAY.

WE'RE GOING TO POSTPONE TILL OCTOBER 11TH, 2021.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU MR. KEN CLOC.

[E-5 C15-2021-0067 Scott Jacobs 2003 Arpdale Street]

NEXT ITEM.

FIVE C 15 20 21 0 0 6 7.

THIS IS GOING TO BE FOR 2003 AARP DALE STREET.

[02:00:01]

I'M A SPEAKER IS SCOTT JACOBS.

MR. JACOBS, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? YES, THIS IS SAM.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? I CAN HEAR YOU.

LET'S SEE.

DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION? I DO.

YES.

SO LET'S GET THAT PULLED UP.

OKAY.

WE'RE ON THE FIRST PAGE OF YOUR PRESENTATION.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

WONDERFUL.

THANK YOU.

WELL, FIRSTLY, I WOULD LIKE TO, I APPRECIATE THE ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR OUR SUPPORT FROM MY VARIANTS.

UM, OF COURSE WITH CONDITIONS AS LEARNING OTHER 10 MENTIONED, UM, SHE'S BEEN EXTREMELY HELPFUL THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS AND AS IS VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE AND ZONING.

SO IT'S BEEN HELPFUL TO WORK WITH HER, UM, THROUGH THIS.

UM, AS, AS YOU MENTIONED, THERE IS WORK COMPLETE WITHOUT PERMITS BEGINNING IN THE EIGHTIES, WHICH INVOLVES CONVERTING A GARAGE INTO AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

AND, UM, THAT STRUCTURE RECENTLY BECAME UNLIVABLE DUE TO WATER DAMAGE FROM THE WINTER FREEZE.

AND WHEN I WENT TO GET PERMITS FROM MY CONTRACTORS TO FIX IT, RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND PLANNING, IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF ISSUES, WHICH WOULD NEED TO BE RESOLVED PRIOR TO ISSUING THE PERMIT.

UM, AND I WOULD ASK THAT YOU PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT THESE WERE ALL PREEXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO MY OWNERSHIP, WHICH COMMENCED IN 2012.

UM, IT'S MY GOAL TO MAINTAIN THE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND BRING THE PROPERTY, UM, UP TO CODE.

UM, SO IN ORDER TO DO THIS, I'M ASKING FOR ASKING THE BOARD FOR A VARIANCE TO DECREASE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE BY 250 SQUARE FEET FROM 57, 50 SQUARE FEET TO 5,500 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS THE CURRENT OF MY LOT.

IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT PAGE, PAGE THREE, UM, SO YOU DON'T NEED TO, YOU DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT, UM, JUST GO TO PAGE THREE.

THIS IS, UM, THIS IS THE EMAIL STRONG, UH, FROM ZONING AND FROM, UM, RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND PLANNING.

AND, UM, AT FIRST SHE, UH, SUSAN BARR CALLED OUT THREE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD NEED TO MEET THREE VARIANCES THAT WE NEED TO REQUEST, UM, IN ORDER TO GET THE V R IN ORDER TO, UM, GET THE PERMIT.

AND, UM, I HAVE PLANS TO RESOLVE THE BUILDING AND IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE.

THEREFORE, THE ONLY VARIANCE I'M APPLYING FOR IS THE VARIANCE ON THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE.

UM, IF YOU GO TO PAGE FOUR, THIS HAS THE, UM, SURVEY AND SITE PLAN.

I, I HIRED AN ARCHITECT TO COME UP WITH THE, UH, THE NEW SITE PLAN TO ENSURE THAT MY IMPERVIOUS AND BUILDING COVERAGE WOULD BE WITHIN THE LIMITATION SET BY CITY CODE.

UM, I, IF THERE'S AN, AND IF THERE'S ANOTHER WAY TO VERIFY THAT MY PLANS ARE, ARE, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THE LIMITS OF, OF, UM, YOU KNOW, OF CODE, I'M CERTAINLY PLANNING ON BEING COMPLIANT SO HAPPY TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO THE CITY WHEN I'M GETTING MY PERMITS VIA CAD DRAWINGS OR WHATEVER'S NECESSARY.

UM, YOU KNOW, THE CURRENT, THE CURRENT FOOTPRINT OF THE TWO STRUCTURES WILL REMAIN ON CHANGED.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE SETBACK THAT LORRAINE MENTIONED EARLIER WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED AS WELL.

SO, UM, SO THAT, SO KEEPING THE CURRENT SETBACK SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE.

UM, THE BUILDING, THE BUILDING COVERAGE REDUCTION WILL BE ACHIEVED BY REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE COVERED DECK ON THE BACK STRUCTURE.

AND SO THAT'S HOW WE'LL DEAL WITH THE, UH, WITH THE BUILDING COVERAGE.

AND THEN AS FAR AS THE, UM, IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, THAT THERE WILL BE A NUMBER OF ITEMS THAT I'LL, I'LL, UH, A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I'LL DO THE PROPERTY, BUT THE PRIMARY WAY THIS WILL BE ACHIEVED IS BY CONVERTING THE CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY, UM, OR BY BASICALLY REMOVING THE CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY, TURN THAT INTO PERVIOUS COVERAGE AND FILLING IN THE, THE CURB CUT.

AND SO, UM, ALL OF THESE, UH, CONDITIONS ARE MENTIONED IN MY VARIANCE APPLICATION AND CAN BE REFERENCED THERE.

AND SO, UM, I, UH, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TODAY AND I'LL, I'LL, UH, OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

OKAY.

UH, BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.

SO YOU ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE THINGS ENUMERATED IN LORRAINE ATHERTON'S LETTER TO THE BOARD.

YES.

UM, YEAH, I REVIEWED THAT.

UM, AS FAR AS, YEAH, IT SAYS THE GARAGE FOOTPRINT MUST BE MAINTAINED.

UM, I, I WOULD, UM, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE, THE ONLY, UM, ITEM THAT I WAS GOING TO MENTION IS THAT I THINK SHE'S WORRIED ABOUT, OR I, I THINK THAT, UM, THE CONDITION WOULD BE JUST TO KEEP THE CURRENT BACK STRUCTURED THAT THE SAME, YOU KNOW, IN ITS EXISTING CONDITION, I'M NOT GOING TO BUILD UP, NOT GOING TO BUILD OUT.

IT'S JUST GOING THAT, THAT SAME, UH, STRUCTURE AS IT IS TODAY WILL REMAIN.

[02:05:01]

UM, SO I DON'T PLAN TO MOVE THAT.

I THINK THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE IN HER LETTER MENTIONED THAT IT WAS 184 SQUARE FEET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

BUT, UM, IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY, THE STRUCTURE IS ACTUALLY AROUND, I THINK, 450 SQUARE FEET.

SO WHAT'S THE DISCREPANCY THEN? CAUSE THAT'S A BIG DISCREPANCY BETWEEN WHAT SHE'S SAYING AND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

UM, I DON'T, I THINK THAT WHAT SHE'S SAYING IS, UM, SHE WANTS THE BUILDING COVERAGE TO BE WITHIN THE LIMITATIONS OF, UM, WHICH IS UNDER 40% OF THE TOTAL AREA, WHICH I WILL DO BY REMOVING THE COVERED DECK.

AND SHE ALSO MENTIONED TO, YOU KNOW, KEEP THE GARAGE, THE ORIGINAL GARAGE FOOTPRINT, WHICH, UM, WHICH IS, UM, SHE MENTIONED THAT THE SETBACKS, UM, ON, ON THE, UH, ON THE TWO SIDES CLOSEST TO THE FENCE LINE, UM, THAT WERE PREEXISTING.

AND SO THOSE WOULD REMAIN THE SAME SETBACKS.

SO THEN YOU'RE STILL OKAY WITH WHAT SHE HAS IN HERE.

HER CONDITIONED, YES.

OKAY.

THAT'S OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ALSO, I WANTED TO POINT OUT FOR THOSE OF Y'ALL WHO MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE MISSED IT IN THE LATE BACKUP.

THERE WAS AN EMAIL FROM JEFF JACK AND THE ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OF NON OPPOSITION.

OKAY.

A VERY SPECIFIC NON OPPOSITION.

PERRY SPECIFIC.

YEAH.

I MISS JEFF JACK.

I DO AS WELL.

SO, UM, MOTION, ANYONE BOARD MEMBER AIDS? YEAH.

SO I READ THE JEFF JACK'S BACK.

UH, WE ADDRESS THE QUESTION THAT HE HAD.

HE HAD SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, UH, SPECIFICALLY, I THINK YOU'RE PROBABLY REFERRING TO THE QUESTIONS AT THE END OF HIS LETTER AND IT'S NOT REALLY SOMETHING WE CAN ANSWER BECAUSE ELAINE'S BEEN WITH US FOR TOO LONG TO REALLY BE UP TO DATE ON THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, UH, FOR RESIDENTIAL REVIEW.

AND I DON'T THINK MOST OF US ARE THAT FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS AND YOUR MORNING MOTION.

I'M REALLY HESITANT TO MAKE THIS MOTION.

APPARENTLY I WILL.

UM, WELL, WHY ARE YOU HESITANT TO MAKE THIS MOTION? I WAS GOING TO ASK TO THANK YOU BOARD MEMBER MCDANIEL.

IT'S UH, IT'S COMPLICATED.

UM, I, NOT SURE THAT WHAT I HEARD AT THE BEGINNING AND IF I COULD SPEAK TO MS. ATHERTON, UM, DURING THE COURSE OF THIS PORTION OF THE HEARING, I WOULD FEEL MUCH BETTER ABOUT IT.

OKAY.

SHE'S STILL ON THE LINE.

YOU CAN ASK HER QUESTIONS.

OKAY.

I THOUGHT SHE HAD TO SPEAK AT THE BEGINNING.

SHE DID IT.

SHE DID.

UH, LEE SIMMONS.

COULD YOU PLEASE VERIFY, BUT I MEAN, WE CAN STILL QUESTION THE OPPOSITION, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

AS LONG AS SHE'S ON THE LINE, SHE'S AVAILABLE.

OKAY.

MISS, UH, MISS ATHERTON, ARE YOU STILL ON THE ONE CTM? IS SHE CONNECTED? SORRY.

SHE'S NOT SO, SO VICE CHAIR, IF I MAY, IS IT THAT YOU DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE OUTLINING THE FINDINGS IN, IN APPROVAL WITHOUT, I, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.

HER INTENT WAS THE ORIGINAL GARAGE STRUCTURE OR THE STRUCTURE THAT'S THERE.

OH.

WHICH IS A DIFFERENCE OF WHAT 300 AND SOME ODD SQUARE FEET.

AND SO I FEEL LIKE IN MAKING THE MOTION WITHOUT THAT CONFIRMATION IS BY CHANCE.

UM, JEFF JACK ON THE LINE, LET ME SEND THE EMAIL.

WELL, LET ME, LET ME ASK YOU THIS.

COULD YOU SUPPORT A MOTION AS IS TO APPROVE THE REDUCTION BASED ON THE HARDSHIP AS OUTLINED IN THE PACKAGE? NO,

[02:10:01]

NOT WITHOUT THE CONDITIONS.

I THINK THE CONDITIONS ARE, UM, I THINK THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A HISTORY OF NON-COMPLIANCE AND YOU COME TO A POINT OF ACCEPTANCE OR OF A, UH, WITH A NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP THAT THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS AND TO JUST, UH, IT IS A SUBSTANDARD LOT.

IT HAS TWO STRUCTURES ON IT.

ONE OF THEM WAS NOT HABITABLE IS OBVIOUSLY CREATED TO BE HABITABLE AT SOME.

AND, UH, IF THE, UM, ACCEPTANCE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WAS ON A VERY SPECIFIC, I FEEL THAT THE DETAIL IS IMPORTANT.

WELL, I'LL SAY, I MEAN, I THINK MAKE THE MOTION BASED ON THE CONDITIONS, PUT OUT BY MS. AND JEFF JACK THAT THE LIMITING, THE BUILDING COVER AND APPROPRIATE HIS COVER, UH, 40% AND PROGRESS TO 45 WITHOUT REFERENCING THE DIAGRAM OR OTHERWISE APPARENT TO APPROVE INDIVIDUAL DEVIATIONS.

IF WE CAN DO THAT, IT SOUNDED LIKE EMOTION TO ME.

YEAH.

NO, I'M HAPPY.

I'D BE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT AS WELL.

MAKE YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE, MELISSA.

IF I WENT UP THIS MS. MS. TIM'S TRYING TO CALL BACK.

HOLD ON.

OKAY.

LET'S WAIT FOR, THEN.

I WOULD ALSO NEED THE FAR TO BE LIMITED TO THE 0.4 TO ONE, NOT TO THE 2,400 SQUARE FEET.

THAT'S ALLOWED BY CODE BECAUSE THE LOT IS SUBSTANDARD.

UM, POINT OUT ONE THING, AM I ALLOWED TO SPEAK? THIS IS SCOTT.

I'M SORRY.

SO, NO, THAT WAS NOT A QUESTION.

OKAY.

SORRY.

IT'S OKAY.

YOU'RE FINE.

CITY HALL.

COULD YOU LET US KNOW IF MISS OTHER TICKETS WE CONNECTED, PLEASE STAND BY ONE SECOND, PLEASE.

I DO.

I DO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU DIDN'T CREATE THIS PROBLEM THOUGH.

I WILL SAY, SIR, AND YOU'RE TRYING TO SOLVE IT AND I'M JUST TRYING TO BE EQUITABLE SO FAR.

I ONLY HAVE A LORRAINE ATHERTON, ATHERTON, ATHERTON.

I MIGHT GO AND PROVIDE SOME CLARITY.

IT'S ALLOWED TO SPEAK.

I THINK THAT'S THE TRIGGER, NOT THE PUBLIC HEARINGS CLOSED.

I KNOW YOU'RE TRYING TO HELP, BUT IT'S GREAT.

I WAS TRYING TO COME BACK.

SHE SAYS SHE GOT, UM, INTERRUPTED AT HOME WHEREVER SHE'S AT.

WHAT NUMBER? MID MARKER.

OKAY.

UM, I JUST WANTED TO MENTION, I JUST LIFTED UP FROM AUSTIN BUILDON CONNECT AND THEN TO IN 2017, THE PREVIOUSLY UNPERMITTED CONVERSION OF GARAGE TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THE ADDITIONAL SINK TO BE REMOVED SO THAT THE STRETCHER IS NOT A DWELLING UNIT.

SO I THINK FOR A WHILE, SINCE THIS PERSON HAS OWNED IT, THIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, WHICH WAS NEVER PERMITTED TO BE A DWELLING UNIT HAS BEEN RENTED OUT AS A DWELLER.

MITCH HAVE RYAN ATHERTON ON THE LINE.

OKAY.

YES.

MISS ATHERTON, HANG ON ONE SECOND.

WE'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS FROM A COUPLE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, UH, VICE CHAIR, LAUREN.

YOU WANT TO GO FIRST, MS. ATHERTON.

I APPRECIATE HOW MUCH DETAIL YOU PUT INTO YOUR WILLINGNESS TO SUPPORT THEM THAT SIZE VARIANTS.

AND I, I AM ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION WHEN YOU MEAN THE ORIGINAL GARAGE FOOTPRINT AND HEIGHT.

ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE STRUCTURE THAT IS THERE NOW, OR THE STRUCTURE THAT WAS THERE AT THE BEGINNING OF BEFORE THE UNPERMITTED WORK? UH, UM, I'M TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT JUST THE, UH, THE SIDE AND BACK ENCROACHMENTS ON THE, THE, THE SETBACKS.

UH, UH, WHAT WE'VE WE FIND IS THAT, UH, UH, DEVELOPMENT, RESIDENTIAL REVIEW WILL SOMETIMES ALLOW, UH, UH, BUILDINGS TO, TO GO UP, TO ADD A SECOND FLOOR.

THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WE WANT WHEN WE SAY THE ORIGINAL, UH, THE ORIGINAL, UH, GARAGE.

WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE, THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS.

WE DON'T WANT THEM TO COME BACK AND ASK FOR A, A SECOND STORY.

SO THAT 450 SQUARE FEET THAT IS THERE,

[02:15:01]

AS OPPOSED TO THIS IS WHY WE'RE DOING IT THIS WAY IS WE HAVE FOR, UH, FOR SIX YEARS NOW, UH, UH, THERE HAVE BEEN, UH, DEBATES OVER, UH, WHAT, UH, WHAT THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT IS.

AND WHEN WE, UH, WHEN WE LOOK ON THE ORIGINAL, UH, UH, SURVEYS, THIS, THIS HAS BEEN THROUGH SIX OWNERS WITHOUT, UH, UH, WITHOUT A RELIABLE SURVEY.

AND SO WE FIND, UH, INCONSISTENT, UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE IS, AND WHAT WE REALLY WANT IS TO RELY ON, ON, UH, THE, UH, RESIDENTIAL REVIEW STAFF WHO REQUIRE A RELIABLE SURVEY AND TO, UH, UH, UH, UH, TO WORK OUT WHATEVER, UH, REQUIRE, UH, THE CURRENT OWNER TO BRING, DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO BRING IT DOWN TO, UH, UH, THE CODE COMPLIANT, BUILDING COVER AND, AND, UM, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER.

AND WE CAN GO AROUND AND AROUND, UH, AROUND ALL DAY ON WHAT'S ACTUALLY THERE NOW AND WHAT IT NEEDS TO BE.

WE WANT, WE JUST WANT IT SET THAT THE LOT IS ACTUALLY 5,500 SQUARE FEET.

AND THEY'RE ENTITLED ONLY TO 40% BUILDING COVER IN 45% IMPERVIOUS COVER, WHATEVER THAT COMES OUT TO BE THAT'S WHAT, WHAT HE NEEDS TO COME DOWN TO.

SO WHAT ABOUT, UM, THE POINT FOR FX? BECAUSE WE COULD ALSO PUT IN, IN THE CONDITION THAT, ON THE BACK UNIT THAT, UM, NO FURTHER APPROACHMENT, INCLUDING A SECOND STORY IS ALLOWED, BUT, UM, ALSO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FFR IS NOW, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD WANT INCLUDED.

UM, UH, WE ASSUME THAT THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN, IN BRINGING IT ALL UNDER CODE.

THIS IS, WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT IT'S EVERYTHING ELSE HAS TO COME INTO CODE FAR, EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAD, UH, YOU KNOW, RELUCTANT TO, TO LIST ALL THE, ALL THE WAYS THAT THEY COULD, THEY COULD, COULD, UH, UH, SKIRT THE CODE, UH, UH, BUT, UH, IT WOULD BE A HUGE, HUGE ADVANCE JUST TO HAVE IT, UH, IN WRITING CONFIRMED BY EVERYONE INVOLVED.

THAT'S A LOT IS ONLY 5,500 SQUARE FEET, AND THEY'RE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY MORE THAN 45% OF THAT FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER AND 40% OF THAT.

UH, AND, UH, UH, AND THE FAR LIMIT WOULD APPLY AS WELL.

UM, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

YEAH.

OKAY.

BECAUSE I THINK THE FAR, CAUSE MY ONLY WORRY, I THINK SAME WITH MELISSA'S IS YES, THEY ARE.

THEY'RE ABOUT TO KEEP THE SETBACKS ON THE GARAGE, BUT THEY COULD ALWAYS GO TO A SECOND STORY.

BUT I THINK BECAUSE THAT WON'T CHANGE PREVIOUS WHERE THEY'RE BUILDING COVER, BUT THE FAR COULD HANDLE THAT.

SO, UM, OKAY.

OKAY.

WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING BACK ON THE LINE FOR ME.

NO QUESTIONS.

ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. ABBERTON? ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING BACK ON THE LINE OR I'M SORRY.

UH, BOARD MEMBER SMITH, DID YOU? NOPE.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS, THERE WAS A MOTION MAYBE IN PROGRESS EARLIER.

NO, I DIDN'T ACTUALLY MAKE IT.

I STARTED EMOTION.

I SAID I WOULDN'T MAKE IT, BUT WHAT WAS ALSO SAID, SHE'D DO ONE.

SO IT'S UP TO HER CAUSE SHE HAS FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL.

I THINK THAT WE MIGHT JUST JOINTLY DEEPEST ONE.

OKAY.

YEAH.

IT'S A LITTLE TOUGHIE.

IT IS A LITTLE TOUGHIE.

SO,

[02:20:01]

UM, I MOVE THAT.

WE APPROVE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE SIZE FROM 5,750 SQUARE FEET TO 5,500 SQUARE FEET WITH THE CONDITIONS OF LIMITING THE BUILDING COVER TO 40% IMPERVIOUS COVER TO 45%.

AND FYR 2.4 TO ONE, UM, WITHOUT REFERENCING, LET'S SEE.

AND, AND ALSO REQUESTS THAT THE VARIANCE CONDITIONS INCLUDE A STATEMENT THAT HE APPROACHED MINUTES WILL NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE ORIGINAL GARAGE FOOTPRINT OR HEIGHT.

UM, AND IF THEY DO, YOU KNOW, THAT ONE GETS TOUGH FOR ME IN SOME WAYS, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY CAN'T GO UP TO A SECOND STORY, BUT WITHIN THAT FOOTPRINT NO MORE WHAT NO FURTHER ENCROACHMENT IN THE SETBACK.

UM, AND THEN WHAT IS ON THE FIRST FLOOR? RIGHT? HANG ON ONE SEC.

SO BOUGHT SIZE 5,500 A FAR SORT OF 0.4 TO ONE, UH, ENCROACHMENT STAYS THE SAME.

I MISSED THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE I'LL THEN COVER AND A PERVIOUS COVER BUILDING COVERS 40% OF PERVIOUS COVER LIVING TO TO 45%.

SORRY, WHAT DID YOU SAY AFTER THE FAR PATRICIA STATEMENT AFTER THE FAR? SO THIS IS WHERE I'M MADE MELISSA'S HELP, UM, IS ON THE GARAGE THAT ANY FUTURE ENCROACHMENTS WOULD NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE ORIGINAL GARAGE, BUT PRINT OR HEIGHT.

SO FOR ME, IT'S MORE, THOSE SETBACKS ARE THERE.

THEY'RE GRANDFATHERED, BUT I DON'T WANT THOSE SETBACKS TO GO TO A SECOND STORY.

SO NO FURTHER ENCROACHMENT.

SO OTHER THAN WHAT'S THERE.

SO TWENTY-FIVE TO 9 63 TALKS ABOUT MODIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE TO EXISTING STRUCTURES, AND IT ALLOWS YOU TO EXTEND, UH, THE FOOTPRINT UP AS LONG AS IT'S NOT ENCROACHING, IT ALLOWS YOU TO EXTENDED A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FEET OR A PERCENTAGE OF THE WALL.

AND SO, UM, I, I AM PRETTY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW WE CAN LANGUAGE SOMETHING, RIGHT.

ME TOO.

DOESN'T ALLOW THAT, UH, KNOWING OR LEE, DO YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS? UM, I'M SURE I WOULD PREFER THAT CODE APPLY IN THIS CASE.

I DON'T THINK WE CAN CONDITION SOMETHING THAT IS OTHERWISE, UM, APPLIED UNDER 25 TO 9 63, BUT IF WE CAN'T APPLY CODE BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY IN A SETBACK, OKAY.

TRY TO APPLY IT TO THE SECOND STORE THAT HE CAN'T BUILD A SECOND STORY WITH THESE SAME ENCROACHMENTS, THAT STRUCTURE, SINCE THAT, HANG ON.

Y'ALL I GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, BOARD MEMBER, ARE WE, ARE WE ALSO REQUIRING THAT, UM, A NEW SURVEY SURVEY BE DONE AS WELL? WAS THAT MENTIONED? I THINK THE CITY IS REQUIRING THAT, BUT HUH.

BUT YEAH, THAT WILL REQUIRE IT.

I, I DO BELIEVE THE CITY IS ALSO REQUIRING THAT, BUT I WILL ALSO REQUIRE IT.

SO ACTUALLY BROKE THE CITY.

DOESN'T MEET THEM, SUBMIT A SURVEY THAT WOULD BE THE INSPECTION DEPARTMENT.

THEY, THEY, FOR THEIR DRAWINGS, THEY REQUEST THAT THEY EITHER SUBMIT A PLAN, A SITE PLAN OR PLOT PLAN THAT IS SEALED BY AN ARCHITECT OR BUILDING DESIGNER, BUT NOT SO MUCH PER SE, A SURVEY.

WE NEED A SURVEY.

OKAY.

OKAY.

WHAT, WEREN'T THERE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AROUND THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION THAT ANY WHAT'S BUILT AND PROPERTY LINES AND OKAY.

I MEAN, LEE, CAN I, UM, CONDITION THIS ON ALSO A NEW SURVEY? UM, BECAUSE THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE AN ACCURATE ONE THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED TO THAT.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE CAN REQUIRE A NEW SURVEY AT THIS CASE AT THE INSPECTION DEPARTMENT.

AND WHEN WE CAN'T TELL THEM INSPECTIONS, THEY CAN REQUEST THAT OR REQUIRE THAT WHEN THEY'RE AT INSPECTION STAGE.

BUT I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WE CAN DO.

OKAY.

BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.

UM, I HAD TWO COMMENTS, BUT THE FIRST ONE IS OF COURSE, IF A, IF A BUILDING PERMIT IS COMING CLOSE TO, THEY REQUIRE SURVEYS ALL THE TIME WHEN, UH, STRUCTURES ARE BEING BUILT WITH ALL THE RECENT BUILDING PERMITS THERE'S SURVEYS REQUIRED CONSTANTLY.

WE'VE HAD TO HAVE SURVEYS ON OUR PROPERTIES.

SO MAYBE WE CAN NOTE THAT A SURVEY

[02:25:01]

SHOULD BE PART OF THIS, THEY'RE DOING IT ALL THE TIME.

AND IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE FOR EXAMPLE, TRAVIS COUNTY SHOWS THAT THIS LOT IS 5,800 SQUARE FEET.

SO NO ONE, YOU KNOW, AND THE OTHER THING IS, CAN WE SAY THAT THE ENCROACHMENT CANNOT GO TO A SECOND STORY OR THE ENCROACHMENT HAS A HEIGHT LIMIT? IS THAT SOMETHING, IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN SAY THE ENCROACHMENT HAS A HEIGHT LIMIT? SO JUST SO Y'ALL KNOW, 25 TO 9 63, WHAT MELISSA WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, UM, MODIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE, BUT NONCOMPLIANT STRUCTURE THAT TALKS ABOUT I'M TRYING TO FIND THE EXACT IT'S AN E N F E IS WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT.

SO THAT TALKS ABOUT THAT A PERSON MAY INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF A BUILDING THAT HAS A NON-COMPLIANT STRUCTURE BASED ON A HEIGHT REQUIREMENT.

IF THE INCREASE IS MADE TO A PORTION OF THE BUILDING THAT DOES NOT EXCEED THE EXISTING MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, AND IT COMPLIES WITH THE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION, UM, TO EAT TWO SAYS, UM, THEY MAY INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING.

THAT'S A NONCOMPLIANCE FOR SURE.

BASED ON HEIGHT REQUIREMENT, IF THE INCREASE DOES NOT EXCEED 15% OF THE EXISTING MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING AND AFTER MODIFICATION, THE HEIGHT OF THE MODIFIED PORTION OF THE BUILDING DOES NOT EXCEED THE EXISTING MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE BOOK.

RIGHT? SO THE BUILDING'S ALLOWED TO BE 32 FEET IN HEIGHT.

CORRECT.

SO I HAVE NOT, I DON'T FIND THAT TO BE ACCEPTABLE.

AND THEN IN EFFECT TALKS ABOUT EXTENDING A MODIFIED WALL TO BE FURTHER, TO CONTINUE FURTHER INTO THE SETBACK.

RIGHT.

SO I'M NOT, I DON'T FIND THAT TO BE ACCEPTABLE EITHER.

UM, CAN WE, CAN WE MAKE A HEIGHT RESTRICTION, A REQUIREMENT OR CONDITION OR A SECOND STORY OR YES.

YES, YOU CAN.

OKAY.

SO WHAT WOULD YOU BE COMFORTABLE WITH A SECOND STORY OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC HEIGHT? I, I WOULD, I WOULD ALMOST, BUT YOU KNOW, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE AN ACCURATE SURVEY AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TALL IT IS NOW.

UM, I MEAN, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO SAY ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, ACTS OF GOD, DO HAPPEN AND REBUILDING STRUCTURES DO HAPPEN, BUT SOMEHOW SOME YOU WANT TO SOMEHOW USE THE WORDS MODERATELY.

SO IF IT IS A ONE STORY STRUCTURE, I MEAN, IT, IT APPEARS TO BE SO A ONE STORY STRUCTURE GARAGE.

SO CAN I LINK, CAN I CONDITION THIS? I'M STAYING IN ONE STORY STRUCTURE AND DO I HAVE TO GIVE A SPECIFIC HEIGHT? THAT WAS MY QUESTION.

I THINK THAT'S UP TO YOUR DISCRETION BOARD MEMBER.

UM, BUT EITHER WAY IT'S LEGAL.

I BELIEVE SO.

YES, MA'AM.

MAY I SUGGEST WE WORD IT TO WHERE IT'S TO ONE STORY IN HEIGHT, AS LONG AS THERE'S NO, LIKE ACTS OF GOD OR ANYTHING THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE ENTIRE BUILDING TO BE REBUILT.

ONE STORY, SORRY.

WE, WE USUALLY INCLUDE LANGUAGE, UM, TO THE EXTENT OF ONE STORY OR A CERTAIN HEIGHT LIMIT.

SO, UM, YOU CAN, YOU CAN, YOU CAN NAME THE HEIGHT LIMIT OR YOU CAN JUST LIMIT IT TO ONE STORY.

I THINK I'M HAPPY TO LIMIT IT TO ONE STORY CAUSE THAT KIND OF PRECLUDES THEM, TEARING IT DOWN AND REBUILDING SOMETHING.

IT WOULD BE, IT WOULDN'T BE SO FEASIBLE.

NO.

WHAT DO YOU SAY, MELISSA? I THINK YOU COULD BUILD A 32 FOOT TOM ONE STORY STRUCTURE.

UM, I I'M, I KNOW YOU WANT TO LIMIT IT TO 15 FEET OR I THINK AT 15 FEET IN HEIGHT MOLESTING, HOLD ON, MELISSA.

THAT THAT'S NOT ACCURATE BECAUSE, UH, ONE STORE IT'S CONSIDERED A TWO STORY AFTER 15 FEET LIKE THE MAX.

I THINK I GOT TO FIND THAT SECTION OF THE CODE.

I THINK IT LIMITS THE MEASURE.

I MEZZANINE DOESN'T COUNT AS FLOOR AREA, LIKE STUFF.

SO LET'S PUT THE LIMITATIONS AT BOTH ONE STORE NOT TO EXCEED 15 FEET, ONE SECOND AND 15 FEET OR JUST NOT TO EXCEED 15, 15 FEET.

I MEAN, IT GETS TO BE TRICKY BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE THE SETBACK ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE THEY'RE GRANDFATHERING STRUCTURE SETBACK.

SO WE'RE ACTUALLY NOT HEARING THE SETBACK, BUT WE ARE PUTTING THE CONDITION

[02:30:01]

IN HERE ABOUT THAT GARAGE FOOTPRINT.

SO I THINK THAT BY DOING THAT, BECAUSE THEY WOULD NEED TO SET THAT VARIANCE AND BY DOING THAT THEIR LAW, YOU KNOW, IT JUST MAKES IT A LITTLE CLEARER AND CLEARER, BUT UNDER NONCONFORMING THEY COULD REBUILD THIS STRUCTURE.

OKAY.

AND I DON'T CARE IF THEY REFILLED IT A SINGLE STORY, 15 FEET.

OKAY.

I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL CARE.

I MEAN, CAUSE THEY'RE STILL GONNA STAY WITHIN ALL OF THEIR PERVIOUS, ALL OF THEIR FAR, ALL THEIR BUILDING, YOU KNOW, AND, AND ALL IT IS THEN IS ALL WE'RE GETTING, I HAVE MORE TROUBLE WITH THAT.

AND UH, I WOULD, I WOULD SAY THAT A SURVEY SHOULD BE HEARD, SO WE'LL REQUEST ONE.

I'M NOT, YOU KNOW, AND THEN IF IT CAN'T BE REQUIRED, IT CAN'T BE, BUT WE WOULD CAN REQUEST ONE AND THINK IT SAYS WE COULDN'T MAKE IT A CONDITION.

OKAY.

BUT WE COULD STILL REQUEST, EVEN WITH THAT, IT'S NOT A CONDITION WE CAN STILL REQUEST.

SO WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO REQUEST THAT THEY SUBMIT IT WITH THEIR BUILDING PERMIT WHEN THEY'RE GOING FOR PLAN REVIEW OR I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO, IF WE'RE GETTING ALL THESE DIFFERENT, UM, SITE PLAN AREAS, YOU KNOW, THAT WE NEED A SURVEY THAT TELLS US EXACTLY THAT LOT SIZE AND THE FUNDING.

THE THING IS, IS THERE IN SOME WAYS THEY'RE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE, THEY SHOULD ALREADY HAVE THE SURVEY BEFORE THEY COME TO US BECAUSE WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IF 5,500 SQUARE FEET IS, IS, UM, ACCURATE, ACCURATE YET.

SO I MEAN, THEY COULD BE GREATER THAN 5,500 SQUARE FEET AND THEN THEY'RE GETTING THEMSELVES INTO TROUBLE.

BUT THAT'S NOT OUR PROBLEM BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE AN ACCURATE SURVEY.

WE CAN ONLY GO OFF OF WHAT'S ON OUR AGENDA.

AND SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, SURVEY MIGHT HELP HIM IN THE END, BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT BEFORE THEY CAME TO US BECAUSE, AND THEY'LL STILL WANT TO MAKE SURE, LIKE, HAS EVERYONE PUT IN THEIR REQUEST? CAUSE I WANT TO READ IT BACK AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE EVERYTHING.

LET ME GO WITH WHAT I KNOW.

NO, I'M NOT SURE.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.

CAUSE THAT WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION FOR THIS.

IT WAS OKAY.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, UM, THE MOTION, SO MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO 5,500 SQUARE FEET WITH A CONDITION THAT LIMITS THE BUILDING COVERAGE TO 40% AND PURCHASE COVERAGE TO 45% FAR, FOUR TO ONE, BUT THE COLLAGE NO FURTHER APPROACHMENT WITH LIMIT, NOT TO EXCEED 15 FEET AND REQUEST A SURVEY WITH THE EXACT LOT SIZE FOR PLAN REVIEW, SINGLE STORY.

YEAH.

SIMILAR STORIES.

OKAY.

I'M A GARAGE.

THAT APP WE'RE ALSO NOT CALLING THE GARAGE IS NOT CALLED THE LIVING UNIT IN THIS CONVERSATION.

NO, STR IS THAT WHAT Y'ALL CHANGED? I R I MEAN, ARE Y'ALL THINKING WE'RE CALLING THIS GARAGE LIVING UNIT, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE REQUIRING THAT HE TAKE OUT THE KITCHEN SINK.

SO I'M ASSUMING THAT IT WON'T BE, ALTHOUGH HE SAYS HE WANTS TO MOVE BACK INTO IT.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF CONFLICTING HERE.

I DON'T MIND IT BEING A SECOND UNIT PERSONALLY.

I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S IN AN AREA THAT THAT'S PRETTY COMMON.

UM, OH.

OH, OKAY.

SO, SO THERE'S CHAPTER.

OH, OKAY.

SO THEN I KNOW HE'S PULLING OUT TO THE AGENCY, BUT HE SAID HE'S PLANNING ON LIVING IN IT.

SO THAT'S KIND OF A CONTRADICTION THERE.

SO, OKAY.

BOARD MEMBER, MACARTHUR, YOU KNOW, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ARE PRETTY DIFFERENT FROM LIVING UNITS AND THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS VIA FIRE CODE AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

SO THIS IS AN UNPERMITTED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WHERE THEY MADE A CONVERSION THAT WASN'T LEGAL AND IT MIGHT NOT BE SAFE.

NOW IF SOME POINT IN TIME, THEY WANT TO CONVERT IT INTO A REAL LIVING UNIT THAT MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS.

THAT'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT, BUT HE'S LIVING IN, HE WAS LIVING HERE.

I KNOW.

AND THERE'S BEEN, IF I LOOKED, I LOOKED IN THE CITY SYSTEM AND THERE'S BEEN 10 OR 15 COMPLAINTS ABOUT IT BEING IT'S LIVING UNIT, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE.

SO IT'S A COMMON COMPLAINT.

SO, SO HE SAYS HE'S REMOVING THE KITCHEN SINK.

AND, UH, THAT'S PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF, UH, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GIVING HIM ANY KIND OF VARIANCE FOR THAT UNIT OTHER THAN THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT.

SO I'M NOT SURE.

UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN CONDITION IT.

THAT'S NEVER A LIVING UNIT BECAUSE IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ONE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

AND THAT'S OUR CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT IS A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ISSUE.

WELL, I DON'T THINK WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE ADDRESSING IN HIS LIVING, YOU KNOW, YOUR DOLL.

RIGHT, RIGHT.

BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR THAT OUR VARIANCES NOT CONDONING RIGHT.

FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

IT'S ONLY

[02:35:02]

OH, FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

WELL, WE, I DON'T THINK WE'RE SAYING LIVING YET.

WE'VE SAID THE GARAGE AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, SO I THINK WE'RE OKAY THERE, BUT, UM, WE CAN MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS IS, OR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BEHIND THE, THE MAIN LIVING STRUCTURE, BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.

I'M MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THEM.

OKAY.

YOU DID NO INSPECTION AFTER HE DOES AT WORK.

IT, IT SAYS A SURVEY IS REQUIRED IF THEY BELIEVE THAT THE PROPERTIES WITHIN 5% OF THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT ALLOWED.

RIGHT.

AND THAT WOULD BE FROM INSPECTION DEPARTMENT, NOT FROM RESIDENTIAL PLAN REVIEW.

RIGHT.

RIGHT.

OKAY.

WELL KEY.

SO, UH, WHICH ONE Y'ALL WANTS TO TAKE CREDIT FOR THAT MOTION BOARD MEMBER BAILEY OR VICE CHAIR? I THINK THAT'S BROOKE, BUT I'LL TAKE IT, BUT SHE ALSO HAS TO DO THE FINDINGS THAT GO WITH IT.

YEAH.

I DON'T MIND.

I MEAN, WE NEED A SECOND FIRST.

OKAY.

SO WE'VE GOT A SECOND.

YEAH.

SO THE FINDINGS ARE SIMPLE.

IT'S ALL THE CONDITIONS THERE DID.

WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS WORRIED ABOUT WAS I DIDN'T I LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD NEXT TO ZILKER.

YEAH.

I'M NOT MESSING IT UP.

RIGHT.

OKAY.

SO IT'S THE MOTION.

SO INCLUDES THAT THIS IS AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON TOP OF EVERYTHING, ALL THE OTHER CONDITIONS YOU PUT IN.

UM, SO THE FINDINGS ARE CITY STAFF HAVE DETERMINED THAT A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IS REQUIRED BEFORE BUILDING AND PLUMBING PERMITS CAN BE ISSUED IN FINALIZED, CORRECT.

PREVIOUS WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT, BRING THE PROPERTY UP TO CODE AND REPAIR THE DAMAGE FROM THE RECENT FREEZE.

UM, HARDSHIP, MOST PROPERTIES IN THE SECOND MUSEUM WERE QUIET IN THE FORTIES OR FIFTIES AT 6,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE.

SO THEY WERE UNAFFECTED BY THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 57.

WHEN THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 57 50 WENT INTO EFFECT.

IT APPEARS HOWEVER THAT SOMETIME AFTER THE HOUSING BOARD PORTION OF THIS LOT WAS SOLD, THE RESULTING DEFICIENCY WAS NOT RECOGNIZED UNTIL ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO.

AND THIS CIRCUMSTANCE CIRCUMSTANCES UNIQUE WITHIN THIS AREA OF PROPERTIES IN DECEPTIVE VISION WERE PLANTED AT 6,000 SQUARE FEET.

MOST ARE BUILT OUT WITH MODEST HOMES THAT MEET CURRENT SSP SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

PURPOSE OF THE IS TO MAINTAIN EXISTING STRUCTURES AND BRING THE PROPERTY INTO THIS AREA, CHARACTER, SORRY, REPRESENTATIVE ANSYS, TO PUT, TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT REGULATIONS THAT WILL INCLUDE CLOSING AN UNPERMITTED CURB CUT, REMOVING AN UNPERMITTED SEEK SAYING PROVIDED TO CODE COMPLIANT, PARKING SPACES, REMOVING A STORAGE SHED AND THE REAR EASEMENT AS DIRECTED BY AUSTIN ENERGY AND REDUCING EXCESSIVE IMPERVIOUS COVER BUILDING COVER, WHICH SHOULD SERVE TO RESTORE THE PROPERTIES COMPATIBILITY WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

AND THERE'S NO HARKING ISSUES THERE CORRECTING THAT.

SO, UM, I THINK THAT'S IT ON, ON FINDINGS.

ELAINE, DID WE MISS ANYTHING FROM THE CONDITIONS? WELL, THAT WAS JUST FINDING THAT WELL, IT WAS JUST FINDING YEAH.

THE CONDITIONS WERE IN THE MOTION.

OKAY.

SO LET'S SEE, MAKE SURE I KNOW YOU TO ANY OF THE CURRENT SITE PLANS OR DRAWINGS.

I'LL READ THEM AGAIN JUST TO MAKE SURE I THINK I GOT IT.

THE CONDITIONS FOR THE MOTION.

SO YOU GOT A LOT SIZE AT 5,500, THE FAR 0.4 TO ONE, KNOWING THE ENCROACHMENT STAYS THE SAME, UH, BUILDING COVER STATES 40% OR PERVIOUS COVER 45% LIMITED TO ONE STORY, NOT TO EXCEED 15 FEET, UH, SUBMIT A SITE SURVEY FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW, AND ONLY FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OR ONLY AS AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

WELL, THE W YOU LIMIT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO ONE STORY IN 15.

SO THIS IS MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY A BOARD MEMBER, MAINLY SECONDARY BY VICE CHAIR, ALL FOREIGN LET'S VOTE.

TOMMY EIGHTS, BEST TO BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

MELISSA HAWTHORNE.

YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

RON MCDANIEL.

YES.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

ALL RIGHT.

YOU HAVE YOUR BRANDS WITH A FEW

[02:40:01]

CONDITIONS, HAVE QUESTIONS, CONTACT ELAINE.

OKAY.

AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

BOTH OF Y'ALL.

ALL RIGHT.

LAST CASE WILL BE EAST SEVEN,

[E-7 C15-2021-0074 Sean O’Brien 5607 Highland Crest Drive]

C 15 20 21 0 0 7 4.

THIS IS GOING TO BE 4, 5, 6 0 7 HIGHLAND CREST DRIVE.

SEAN OR BRIAN WILL BE THE PRIMARY SPEAKER.

MR. O'BRIAN ARE YOU ONLINE? I'M HERE.

OH SEVEN.

JUST ONE SECOND.

WHILE WE GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP.

OKAY.

WE ARE ON PAGE ONE OF YOUR PRESENTATION.

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

OKAY.

BEFORE I GET TO THAT PART OF THE PRESENTATION, I'D JUST LIKE TO REHASH WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME.

UH, I'M REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 25 TO 7 73 FOR DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL USE FROM TWO STORIES TO THREE STORIES IN ORDER TO ERECT A DUPLEX ON AN SF THREE LOT.

THIS SECTION SPECIFICALLY RESTRICTS DUPLEXES AT 30 FEET OR TWO STORIES.

INTERPRETATION IS NOT APPLIED TO EACH UNIT OF THE TWO UNIT DUPLEX, BUT RATHER IT IS APPLIED TO THE TOTAL STRUCTURE, HEIGHT DIFFERENCES, REQUESTING A TOTAL STRUCTURE, HEIGHT OF THREE STORIES.

AND NONE OF THE UNITS WILL BE MORE THAN TWO STORIES ON THEIR OWN.

THE BUILDING TENT WILL ALSO BE FULLY RESPECTED.

THE HARDSHIP FOR THIS SITE IS THE CROSS SLOPE, WHICH NATURALLY SPLITS THE FOUNDATION INTO TWO ELEVATIONS, ROUGHLY 12 FEET APART VERTICALLY, WHICH YOU CAN SEE ON SLIDE ONE THAT'S TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION.

UM, THE PREVIOUS NEW BLUNT STRUCTURE WAS APPROXIMATELY THE SAME SCALE, BUT THE STRUCTURE BURNED DOWN IN 2019.

AND WE WOULD LIKE TO REBUILD IT WITH A SIMILAR SCALE AND SPACE AS THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE.

AND IT'S ALSO WORTH NOTING.

I BELIEVE THAT THE NEIGHBOR TO THE WEST FURTHER INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS ALSO A DUPLEX ON HIS OWN SF THREE LOCKED.

AND THE TWO STORIES SECTION OF OUR PROPERTY WILL BE CLOSEST TO OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS AND THE THREE-STORY PORTION OF OUR STRUCTURE WOULD BE CLOSER TO THE COMMERCIALLY ZONED, UH, NEIGHBORS.

SO TO THE PRESENTATION, THAT'S UP NOW, YOU CAN SEE, UH, THE SLAB THAT'S, UH, REMAINING THAT WE WILL BE REUSING FROM THE, INSTEAD OF SENDING IT TO THE LANDFILL.

THIS IS THE STRUCTURE THAT'S LEFT OVER FROM THE FIRE IN 2019, THAT YOU CAN SEE THE STREET VIEW ON THE LEFT AND THE BACKYARD VIEW ON THE RIGHT.

YOU CAN ALSO TAKE NOTICE AND TREES SURROUNDING THIS, WHICH WILL BE SHOWN LATER.

UH, SLIDE TWO, PLEASE.

SLIDE TWO SHOWS THE TREES.

UM, THE BACKYARD IS, UH, TO THE TOP OF THE PAGE, THE FRONT YARD STREET SIDE IS TO THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE.

AND YOU CAN SEE THAT WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF ROOM TO EXPAND OUR FOOTPRINT.

AND AS WELL IN PREVIOUS COVER IS AN ISSUE.

SLIDE THREE, PLEASE.

UH, AFTER LAST WEEK'S OR LAST MONTH MEETING, EXCUSE ME.

UH, WE WERE ASKED TO GIVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF BREAKDOWN OF WHY IT NEEDED TO BECOME THREE STORIES AND HOW THE SLAB WORKED.

SO IF YOU LOOK ON THE LEFT, YOU CAN SEE A CROSS SECTION OF WHERE THE EXISTING SLAB KIND OF FILLS THAT VOID PROTRUDING FROM THE, THE GRADE WITH A UNIT BEING ON THE LOWER LEVEL, AND THEN ANOTHER UNIT STARTING ABOVE THAT EXISTING, HIGHER CONCRETE FOUNDATION AND GOING UP FROM THERE.

AND THERE'S ALSO AN EXCELLENT, UH, METRIC, UH, LOOKING FROM BOTH ANGLES, UH, WITH ONE UNIT DEPICTED IN RED AND THE OTHER UNIT DEPICTED IN BLUE.

AND THEN, UH, SLIDE FLOOR, SLIDE FOUR, PLEASE.

EXCUSE ME.

THIS WOULD SHOW THE FLOOR PLANS SO THAT THE UNIT MIX ON THE GROUND ON THE ABSOLUTE LOWEST LEVEL WOULD BE A ONE BEDROOM, A DUPLEX UNIT.

AND THEN THE SECOND UNIT IS LEVEL TWO AND LEVEL THREE.

IT'S A THREE BEDROOM UNIT.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE SLIDE FIVE.

THE LAST SLIDE I TOOK THE FLOOR PLANS AND BROKE THEM DOWN TO, UH, HELP SHOW A LITTLE BIT BETTER WHERE THE EXISTING FOUNDATION WILL BE USED.

SO THE RED HIGHLIGHTED AREA SHOWS THE LOWER PORTION OF THE FOUNDATION AND THE BLUE HIGHLIGHTED AREA SHOWS THE UPPER PORTION.

AND SO THE WAY THAT THIS WILL WORK IS YOU'LL BE STANDING ON CONCRETE AT ONE PORTION OF THE MIDDLE FLOOR, BUT THEN YOU'LL ALSO BE STANDING ON A WOOD-FRAMED SECTION, UH, ON ANOTHER.

AND I ADDED THE RED DASH LINE THERE.

SO YOU COULD SEE HOW THAT CARRIES THROUGH THE STRUCTURE THAT RED DASH LINE REPRESENTS THE 12 FOOT RISE IN ELEVATION FROM THE LOWER SLOT TO THE UPPER SLAB.

SO I HOPE THAT THIS, UH,

[02:45:01]

EXPLANATION, UH, GIVES THE INFORMATION THAT WAS, WAS REQUESTED AT LAST MONTH MEETING.

OKAY.

LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, LOT OF SILENCE HERE, ADVICE, UH, BOARD MEMBER BLOOM.

WELL, WHAT I HAD PICTURED FROM LAST MONTH WAS THAT ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, YOU HAD A EFFECTIVELY, A TWO-STORY STRUCTURE.

AND ON THE RIGHT SIDE, YOU HAD EFFECTIVELY A TWO STORY STRUCTURE.

AND THE DIFFERENCE WAS THAT BECAUSE OF THE TOPOGRAPHY, THAT ONE SIDE, I GUESS THE RIGHT SIDE, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM THE STREET, YOU KNOW, IS, IS HIGH ENOUGH TO BE CONSIDERED A THIRD OR A THREE STORY.

IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT IT RELATIVE TO THE, TO THE, YOU KNOW, THE CHANGE IN TOPOGRAPHY, BUT THIS CLARIFICATION WHILE I APPRECIATE HAVING IT, UM, UNDERMINES MY PICTURE OF WHAT WAS HAPPENING.

AND I'M SEEING YOU'VE GOT A THREE STORY DUPLEX TYPE ARRANGEMENT ON HALF OF THE PROPERTY.

SO I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT, THAT THE ORIGINAL EXPRESSION OF THE HARDSHIP REALLY FITS WITH THAT.

MY LENDER RESPONDER.

WAS THAT A QUESTION? YEAH, SURE.

IF YOU WANT, I'M STILL TRYING TO GET MY HEAD AROUND IT.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE CODE DEMANDS A CERTAIN SPLIT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE ACROSS THE TWO UNITS.

AND WHILE THIS WASN'T OUR, THIS IS PROBABLY OUR FOURTH ITERATION OF DESIGN AND IT'S DRIVEN A LOT BY SOUND AND FIRE BARRIER.

WE STARTED OUT TRYING TO HAVE EQUAL SQUARE FOOTAGE MIX, BUT AS THINGS DEVELOPED AND WE WERE TRYING TO MAXIMIZE OUR FAR, THIS WAS WHERE WE ULTIMATELY ENDED UP.

SO WHILE WHAT YOU'RE PICTURING IS WHERE I ALSO IMMEDIATELY STARTED THROUGH THE DESIGN PROCESS, WHICH IS CIRCULAR.

WE ENDED UP HERE FEELING THAT THIS WAS THE BEST MIX.

WHAT IS ADJACENT TO THE THREE STORY? THE W OH, I'M SORRY.

YEAH, THE RESOURCE SECTION.

SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING FROM THE STREET VIEW TO THE LEFT IS A COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT, AND THEN STRAIGHT AWAY, IF YOU GO BACK TO SLIDE ONE, UH, YOU CAN SEE BEYOND THE TREES, THEY'RE A THREE STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING, MAYBE IT'S FOUR STORY, BUT IT'S A, IT'S A COMMERCIAL BUILDING TO THE SOUTH.

AND THE PARKING LOT FOR THAT BUILDING IS TO THE EAST.

AND THEN THE NEXT ITEM EAST FROM THERE IS ABOUT KIND OF DRIVE OR 2222.

I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

CAUSE USUALLY WHEN A STRUCTURE BURNS DOWN, YOU'RE ABLE TO REBUILD, UM, THEY DID IT TOO MUCH TIME ELAPSED, OR DOES YOUR MORE THAN FIX IT WITH DIFFERENT FROM YOUR EXISTING THAT'S CORRECT.

I LOST, WELL, I DIDN'T LOSE IT.

SO WE JUST PURCHASED THIS IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR.

AND, UM, I HAD THE SAME EXPECTATIONS THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME FOR GRANDFATHERING, BUT THAT EXPIRED ONE YEAR TO THE DAY AFTER IT BURNED DOWN, BURNED DOWN IN 2019.

SO THAT TIME HAS ELAPSED.

OKAY.

YEAH.

I THOUGHT THAT, BUT I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS THE ISSUE.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? I'LL SECOND.

MY SHOT.

HOW FORM WITH THE SOCCER? YES.

SORRY.

I HAVE MY VIDEO OFF.

YOU'RE FINE.

OKAY.

UH, BOARD MEMBER MCDANIEL, WOULD YOU READ THE FINDINGS PLEASE? YEAH.

SO IT'S AN INTERESTING SOLUTION TO, UM, IT'S A CREATIVE SOLUTION TO AN INTERESTING SET OF PROBLEMS, BUT YOU BET, AT LEAST BY MY LIGHTS, YOU'VE CLEARLY GOT A REASONABLE USE AND CLEARLY GOT A HARDSHIP AS FOLLOWS ZONING REGULATIONS, UH, APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DON'T ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE DUE TO THE SIDE SLOPE GRADE CHANGE AT THIS PARTICULAR LOT, THE FOUNDATION IS STAIR-STEP THEREFORE EACH UNIT, IF YOU DUPLEX WOULD START A DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT DEFINED ELEVATION, ROUGHLY 12 FEET OF DIFFERENCE BECAUSE THE CITY INTERPRETS SECTION 25 TO 77 3 TO MEAN THAT THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE MUST BE ONLY TWO STORIES.

THE SITE SLOPE MEANS THAT TWO, TWO STORY UNITS CANNOT BE BUILT.

YOU THINK THEREFORE A I'M SORRY.

WE THINK THEREFORE IT'S REASONABLE TO BUILD WITHIN THE ENVELOPE OF THE LAW, REGARDLESS OF THE USE, WHETHER IT'S DUPLEX OR SINGLE FAMILY,

[02:50:01]

UH, THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY HAS SIDE SLOPE, GRADE CHANGE FROM ONE PROPERTY LINE TO ANOTHER OF 16 FEET.

SO A DUPLEX NEXT TO ANOTHER DUPLEX ON THAT SITE, THE TOTAL STRUCTURE WOULD NEED TO BE THREE, THREE STORIES.

AND THE SOLUTION WAS TO PUT ONE UNDERNEATH THE OTHER TWO.

SO A THREE-STORY DUPLEX ALSO WAS ON THE SITE BEFORE IT BURNED DOWN IN THE, UH, AND, UH, THE, UH, THE EXPIRED, THE TIMELINE EXPIRED BEFORE THEY COULD REBUILD.

UH, THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE MAJORITY OF THE SITES IN THE CITY HAVE EITHER GENTLE GRADE CHANGE OR NO GRADE CHANGE.

UH, THIS SITE HAS A SUCH A SEVERE GRADE CHANGE THAT THE PREVIOUS USE, UH, WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT A VARIANCE AND AREA CHARACTER.

FINALLY, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA BECAUSE THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE THAT WAS THERE FOR 40 YEARS BEFORE, UH, TH AND THIS PROPOSED STRUCTURE FITS UNDERNEATH THE TEMP REQUIREMENT OF THE CODE.

OKAY.

JESSICA COHEN? YES.

MELISSA HEARTBURN.

YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

RON MCDANIEL.

YES.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

KELLY BLOOM.

OKAY.

YES.

TOMMY EIGHTS ASKS BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

OKAY.

CONGRATULATIONS.

YOU HAVE YOUR VARIANCE.

THANKS.

Y'ALL Y'ALL HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.

YOU TOO.

ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON.

NEW BUSINESS ITEM,

[F-1 Discussion of the July 12, 2021 Board activity report]

F1 DISCUSSION OF THE JULY 12TH, 2021 BOARD ACTIVITY REPORT.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION TO STAFF FOR THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY.

THANK YOU.

YES.

THANK YOU, STAFF.

OKAY.

UM,

[F-2 Discussion regarding an update from 87th Texas Legislation, if board can appoint non board members to working groups and if alternates can serve on working groups. (Lee Simmons)]

MOVING ON TO ITEM F TO A DISCUSSION REGARDING AN UPDATE FROM THE 87TH TEXAS LEGISLATIVE LEGISLATION, IF BOARD CAN APPOINT NON BOARD MEMBERS TO WORK IN GROUPS, AND IF ALTERNATIVES CONSERVE ON WORKING GROUPS, THIS IS JUST A, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

BOARD MEMBERS HAD POSED, UH, MR. SIMMONS, WERE YOU ABLE TO GET SOME ANSWERS FOR US? YEAH.

GOOD EVENING.

MADAM CHAIR AND BOARD LEE SIMMONS FOR THE LAW DEPARTMENT.

IT'S GOOD TO BE WITH YOU TONIGHT.

UH, IN REGARD TO THE 87TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE, WE HAD ONE BILL THAT WAS PASSED THAT, UH, APPLIES SPECIFICALLY TO THIS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.

IT GOES INTO EFFECT ON SEPTEMBER THE FIRST, AND BASICALLY IT ADDS A NUMBER OF GROUNDS TO DETERMINE WHETHER COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE IS APPLIED TO A STRUCTURE THAT IS SUBJECT TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE AKIL WOULD, WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.

AND I'LL, I'LL JUST GO THROUGH THESE VERY QUICKLY WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE DO HAVE A TRAINING COMING UP, AND I'M HAPPY TO EXPOUND ON THESE, BUT BASICALLY THE BOARD STARTING IN SEPTEMBER, UH, WILL BE TASKED WITH, UM, CONSIDERING ADDITIONAL GROUNDS.

THE FIRST BEING THE FINANCIAL COST OF COMPLIANCE IS GREATER THAN 50% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE IS SHOWN ON THE MOST RECENT APPRAISAL ROLE CERTIFIED TO THE TAX ASSESSOR.

NUMBER TWO COMPLIANCE WOULD RESULT IN A LOSS TO THE LOT ON WHICH THE STRUCTURE IS LOCATED OF AT LEAST 25% OF THE AREA ON WHICH DEVELOPMENT MAY PHYSICALLY OCCUR.

UH, THE THIRD GROUND WOULD BE COMPLIANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE STRUCTURE, NOT BEING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF A MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE BUILDING CODE OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS.

THE FOURTH IS COMPLIANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE UNREASONABLE ENCROACHMENT ON AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OR EASEMENT, AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST THE MUNICIPALITY CONSIDERS THE STRUCTURE TO BE A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE.

UM, I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO TALK WITH OTHER LAW DEPARTMENTS ACROSS THE CITY OR CHRIS, EXCUSE ME, ACROSS THE STATE ABOUT HOW THEY'RE INTERPRETING THIS.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE A WHILE, UM, FOR US TO GET, UH, SORT OF A BEAD ON, UH, THE PRACTICALITY OF THESE PROVISIONS, UH, BE THAT AS IT MAY, THIS DOES GO INTO EFFECT, UH, THIS DOES AFFECT SECTION TWO 11.09 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

AND AGAIN, I'M HAPPY TO, UH, PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION AT OUR, UM, UH, TRAINING LATER.

AND MR. SIMMONS, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, COULD YOU EMAIL THAT TO ELAINE SO WE CAN GET IT SENT OUT TO ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS PLEASE? ABSOLUTELY.

AND THEN JUST VERY BRIEFLY ON THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THE BOY OR THE BOARD CAN APPOINT NON-BOARD MEMBERS, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY, UM,

[02:55:01]

UH, KOSHER IN CASE IT WOULD NEED TO BE A VOTE BY THE BOARDS.

SO, UH, IF, IF THE BOARD WANTED TO, UH, INCLUDE AN ACTION ITEM AT A FUTURE AGENDA, IT WOULD JUST, UH, CONSIDER, UH, YOU KNOW, A NUMBER OF BOARD MEMBERS OR, UH, ALTERNATES FOR THE WORKING GROUP, BUT THAT, THAT IS ALLOWED UNDER THE CITY CODE.

THE KELLY, I HOPE THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION AND I EXPECT TO SEE YOUR HAND UP WHENEVER I STARTED VOLUNTEERS.

UH, SORRY.

YEAH.

UH, BYE.

SURE.

SO MR. SIMMONS DOES THAT, SO IS THAT A, A MAY CONSIDER OR A SHALL CONSIDER ARE THE FINDINGS FOR THE ADDITIONAL FINDINGS? UM, THAT IS A MAY CONSIDER, SO YEAH, THAT'S GOOD.

IT COULD BE AN ADDITIONAL TOOL, BUT IT'S NOT A, THE BOARD IS THERE.

THE BOARD IS NOT BOUND TO THESE ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS.

HOWEVER, THE, UH, SINCE TIME AND MEMORIAL, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO UNDER STATE LAW PROVIDE A FINANCIAL REASON FOR AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.

UM, AND NOW IT MAY, UH, BUT THE BOARD IS NOT BOUND TO, UH, ABIDE BY THOSE, UH, THOSE GROUNDS.

YES.

IT'S ANOTHER TOOL THAT WE COULD USE.

UM, BUT IT IS DISCRETIONARY.

I JUST WANTED TO HEAR YOU SAY THAT OUT LOUD.

THAT'S CORRECT.

VICE-CHAIR YES.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. SIMMONS REGARDING WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED? ALL RIGHT, SIR.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE UPDATE.

REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

VERY INFORMATIVE.

[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)]

OKAY.

UM, MOVING ON TO ITEM F THREE, AND I THINK WE HAVE OUR NEW APPOINTMENTS HERE NOW.

UH, THIS IS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO FORM A BOE WORK GROUP TO REVIEW AND PROPOSE CHANGES TO BOE APPEALS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO PROCESS AND FEES.

I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THIS VICE SHARE.

I THINK IT COMES DOWN TO APPEALS.

SO, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE ON OCCASION, A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WILL FILE AN APPEAL.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT OUR FEE SCHEDULE, UM, OUR FEES ARE PRETTY HIGH.

UM, WE WORKED SPECIFICALLY IN TRYING TO LOWER A HOMEOWNER'S FEE, UM, BY, YOU KNOW, IF, IF YOU HAVE YOUR HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION OR AS WELL AS TO CREATE A POOL WHERE WE HAD MORE EQUITY AND WHO WOULD BE ABLE TO APPLY, WHICH WAS, UH, UH, SOME FABULOUS WORK.

UM, AND SO I THINK THAT THE INTENT OF THIS WORK GROUP WAS SIMPLY, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS GENERALLY THEIR FEES ARE, YOU KNOW, $10, UH, YOU KNOW, A HOUSEHOLD OR $10 PER PERSON.

AND YOU, YOU MAY BE AT A POINT WHERE YOU'RE REPRESENTING SEVERAL PEOPLE, THE FEE FOR AN APPEAL.

ELAINE IS HOW MUCH, NO PRESSURE, ELAINE, HOLD ON, LET ME LOOK IT UP.

I DON'T KNOW THAT ONE EITHER.

I KNOW ALL THE REST, BUT I'M JUST SAYING, SO YOU, YOU, UM, YOU HAVE AN APPEAL FROM, IT'S KIND OF LIKE A BESTED RIGHTS KIND OF ISSUE.

AND, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE SOMEONE WHO CHALLENGES IT ON BEHALF OF A GROUP OF PEOPLE.

AND SOMEHOW IT SEEMS LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOUR DUES ARE $10, YOUR APPEAL APPLICATION IS LIKE $3,300.

IS THAT, AM I IN THE BALLPARK? SO IS THERE ANY INTERPRETATION OF HERE? YEAH, IT'S UH, 29, 56 AND SOME 29, 29, 56 AND SOME CHANGE.

AND IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE ARE THINGS THAT THE CITY DOES FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY.

AND SOMEHOW I THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT THOSE IN A MEASURED WAY OF WHAT REALLY IS EQUITABLE.

BUT, BUT I DO WANT TO SAY A

[03:00:01]

LOT OF THE NEW BOARD MEMBERS, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT APPEALS PROCESSES OR WHAT IT'S LOOKING TO ACCOMPLISH.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD, THAT WE NEED TO HAVE TRAINING ON BEFORE WE CAN HAVE THIS WORK GROUP, OR ARE THEY GOING TO FLY BY THE SEAT OF THEIR PANTS ON THIS? BECAUSE IT IS A INTERESTING PROCESS TO SAY THE LEAST, AND WE DON'T, THEY SAY IT A LOT, BUT WHEN WE DO GET THEM, THEY'RE VERY INTENSE.

AND, UM, I WENT THROUGH TRAINING.

YEAH.

AND THE FEES ARE A BIG PART OF IT BECAUSE THEY ARE SO INFLATED UPON IT FOR JUST A NORMAL PERSON THAT PEOPLE CAN'T FILE APPEALS.

THEY JUST CAN'T AFFORD IT.

SO THAT'S A BIG COMPONENT OF THIS WORK GROUP, BUT I THINK THAT THEY HAVE TO, I THINK THE WORK GROUP NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND WHEN IT FEELS EVEN IS WELL, WHEN THERE'S AN APPEAL, IT'S USUALLY ON A STAFF DECISION AND, AND IT IS APPEALED TO A HIGHER AUTHORITY WITHIN STAFF AND YOU HAVE TO BE PRETTY DARN UPSET.

DO YOU TAKE THE, TO THE BOARD? I KNOW THAT FOR ME AND MY NEIGHBORS GET, I WOULD BE PRETTY UPSET WHEN LOAD INSULTED TWO TO PAY OUT $3,000 IN ORDER TO GET A, WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER A, UM, AN IMPARTIAL HEARING MEMBERS NEED TO EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT PROCESS.

BUT I THINK I'M SAYING IS THAT THEY DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE APPEAL, UH, LYNN, COULD YOU SEND OUT, UH, THE APPEALS PROCESS, LIKE DOCUMENT, LIKE THE ONE THAT, UH, CHAIR LIGHTEN BURWELL SENT TO US FOR THE LAST APPEAL? DO YOU STILL HAVE THAT? OR DO YOU WANT ME TO SEND THAT TO YOU TO SEND OUT AND AT LEAST HAS, YOU KNOW, BASIC GUIDELINES FOR THE APPEAL PROCESS AND YOU SEND IT TO ME BECAUSE I HAVE TO GO LOOK FOR IT.

CHAIRMAN HAS THE SQUEAKY TOY I'LL BEYOND ME.

OKAY.

I'LL SEND THAT TO YOU AFTER THE MEETING.

UM, DO WE WANT, UM, I MEAN, WE DO HAVE ACTION, UH, SLATED OR POSSIBLE ACTIONS SLATED FOR THE AGENDA ITEM.

DO WE WANT TO WORK ON A GROUP TONIGHT OR WE CAN SEE WHO'S INTERESTED SHOW OF HANDS WHO'S INTERESTED IN BEING PART OF THIS WORK GROUP.

SO I SEE BARBARA MACARTHUR AND RICHARD SMITH WOULD DEFINITELY WANT A MORE SEASONED.

RIGHT.

I THINK THAT THEY BOTH WOULD BE REALLY GOOD.

I, I JUST SO COMMITTED RIGHT NOW THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT I COULD ADD SOMETHING ELSE TO MY PLATE AND THIS IS GOING TO BE A LOT JUST SO Y'ALL ARE AWARE.

IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A VERY COMPLICATED PROCEDURE.

WELL, IT'S, IT'S THE SAME PROCESS AND FEE.

SO I WOULD ASSUME THAT'D BE REVIEWING BOTH.

NO, I'M ALREADY ON THE, UM, EDUCATION WORK, BUT I THINK THE TRAINING WORK GROUPS, I THINK I'M GOOD THERE BECAUSE I THINK MY, SO, UH, THAT'S WHY OR WRONG OR WRONG WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE TRAVELING AGAIN.

I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T WANT TO DISAPPOINT ANY MORE PEOPLE THAN WE'VE ALREADY GOT, BUT I WILL SAY THIS, THAT I THINK THAT, I MEAN, GIVEN, GIVEN, UH, HER HISTORY IN PARTICULAR, ON, ON ZONING ISSUES IN GENERAL, I, I DO THINK THAT BARBARA MACARTHUR QUALIFIES AS BEING A SEASONED A SEASONED PERSON ON THE WORKINGS OF THE PLANNING PROCESS AND IN AUSTIN AND THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CODE AND THE FEES THAT ENTAILED.

AND, AND BY THE WAY, UH, MS. MACARTHUR, I DON'T WANT TO BE TOO PRESUMPTIVE.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I, I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR WORK ON THESE AND THAT YOU BRING A LOT OF EXPERTISE THAT ARE PERHAPS NOT REFLECTED IN YOUR TENURE ON THIS BOARD.

I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE I DO WORK A LOT WITH LOW-INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS THAT CAN'T EVEN AFFORD, LIKE THE MONEY THEY NEED TO JOIN THE AUSTIN THAT'S COUNSELING.

NO, LOOK, I MEAN, IT'S A PROBLEM FOR THEM TO HAVE ANY BOYS.

AND I JUST DON'T LIKE TO SEE SOME NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE A VOICE.

WELL, NO, LOOK, IT'S A PROBLEM ON THIS BOARD.

AND I MEAN, WE HAVE, I MEAN, WE'VE, WE USED TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE WERE BECOMING THE BOARD FOR LIKE AUSTIN ZONING CASES AND NOTHING ELSE.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, UM, SO, SO I APPRECIATE YOU AND, AND, UH, AND MR. LEWIS STEPPING UP, UH, FOR THIS, UM, FOR THIS, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER, UM, OKAY, SO THAT'S TWO PEOPLE MIGHT I SUGGEST, UH, MAYBE ALSO WE CONSIDER A TABLING THIS TILL THE NEXT MEETING, WHEN BOARD MEMBER VON OLIN IS HERE, HE MIGHT SHOW SOME INTEREST IN THIS.

HE HAS IN THE PAST.

[03:05:01]

WE CAN'T JUST APPOINT HIM WHILE HE'S NOT HERE.

YEAH.

WE'RE GOING TO WATCH THIS VIDEO AND HE'S GOING TO BE LIKE CHEWING HIS NAILS RIGHT NOW.

LIKE, OH MY GOD, VICE CHAIR WHILE I WASN'T HERE.

SO I, I, I'M PRETTY SURE ABOUT THAT.

SO, UH, MICHAEL, WHEN YOU WATCH THIS REALLY NICE, IF YOU COULD BE ON THIS COMMITTEE, I AGREE.

AND, AND HE'S ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT HOW EVERY DAY IS SATURDAY FOR HIM.

SO YOU'RE RETIRED NOW.

OKAY.

SO I SAY LET'S, UH, LET'S TABLE THIS UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, OR JUST PUT IT BACK ON THE AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING.

WE'RE IN BOARD MEMBER VOLUNTEER AND WE'LL SEE IF HE, IF HE EXPRESSES INTEREST AND, UH, START WE'LL JUST MOVE FORWARD AND YEAH.

FIND OUT MORE ABOUT MORE HOW MUCH TIME IT'S REALLY GOING TO TAKE TO BEFORE.

YES, SIR.

THAT'S GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF TIME, WHICH I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE UNDERSTOOD.

OKAY.

UM, MOVING ON

[F-4 Discussion and possible action regarding postponed BOA Trainings (including new topic “Area Character”); Staff & PC Coordination Workgroup (Rodriguez, 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).]

ITEM F FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING POSTPONE BOA TRAININGS.

UH, DO WE HAVE AN UPDATE ON WHAT JESSICA? UH, DO WE HAVE AN UPDATE ON THAT, UH, UPDATE ON WHAT TRAININGS WE HAVE? YEAH, WE HAVE OUR FIRST TRAINING ON NEXT TUESDAY.

SHE'S SO NONE ON MY CALENDAR.

OH, NO, NEVERMIND.

I'M SORRY.

SOME OF Y'ALL HAVEN'T RESPONDED TO ME AND I'M STILL WAITING TO HEAR, OOH, CALL PEOPLE OUT SPECIFICALLY.

WHAT TIME, WHAT TIME IS FROM ONE TO THREE? I THINK I'M OKAY FOR THAT.

YEAH.

I MEAN, THEY ONLY GAVE US TWO OPTIONS.

THEY'RE NOT CITY CLERK'S OFFICE HAS NOT GIVEN US THE OPTION FOR LUNCH, UM, TRAINING SESSIONS, LIKE I HAD HOPED FOR, BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IT EASIER ON YOU GUYS.

UM, IT WAS EITHER EIGHT TO 12 OR ONE TO FIVE.

SO I DO HAVE IT ON MY CALENDAR IF I WAS REMISS AND NOT REPLYING EITHER.

IF I SAID, I'M NOT CALLING PEOPLE OUT, IT'S RIGHT THERE ON MY CALENDAR.

OKAY.

I WILL MARK YOU DOWN.

AND THAT'S A VIRTUAL TRAINING TO ACHIEVE.

IT IS A VIRTUAL TRAINING.

I HAVE A FIRE CODE TRAINING FROM EIGHT TO NOON.

SO THAT IS MY FULL DAY.

SO, UH, WE'LL GET SCHEDULED.

OH, YOU'RE KEY TO TAKE THIS OFF THE AGENDA FOR NEXT TIME.

I THINK NO, BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE A TRAINING WORK GROUP AND WORKING ON DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF TRAINING, WHAT, WHAT NEEDS TO BE REQUIRED.

AND I GOT A REALLY GOOD EMAIL FROM AUGUSTINA ABOUT THAT NEW PEOPLE NEED.

AND, AND I KNOW WE USED, WE HAD A BOOKLET FOR PEOPLE THAT DID APPLICATIONS, BUT I'M THINKING WE NEED SOME SORT OF A BOOKLET FOR NEW BOARD MEMBERS.

AND JUST SOME OF THE, A LOT OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE IN THIS EMAIL.

AND SO HOPEFULLY MY OTHER WORKING GROUP MEMBERS CAN, UH, READ THAT EMAIL.

UM, AND THEN WE CAN KIND OF MAYBE SET UP A FRAMEWORK AND THEN ALSO FRAMEWORK FOR FUTURE THING.

BUT I THINK WITH STAFF, WE ALL KIND OF DO THAT WITH PITCH IN, AND WE KIND OF TELL STAFF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING PRETTY SPECIFIC THAT WHENEVER I GOT IT, I REALIZED WHY DON'T WE HAVE SOME SORT OF A PDF THAT WE CAN EMAIL TO NEW BOARD MEMBERS OR SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN GO THROUGH AND READ AND REFER BACK TO WHEN AN ISSUE THERE'S A TRAINING POCKET.

I RECEIVED A BINDER WHEN I DID MY TRAINING IN 2018.

YEAH.

THERE WAS LIKE A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BINDER.

AND THEN WE HAD LIKE DINNER OR LIKE LUNCHES THING BEFORE AND ACTUAL LIKE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING.

AND IT WAS LIKE A, LIKE A CHEF WAS THERE.

AND, UH, YEAH.

AND IT WAS LIKE THIS BIG THING WHERE, UH, LIKE THEY DID LIKE POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS AND WE WENT OVER ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS AND THAT, BUT SOME OF THESE WERE KIND OF SPECIFIC TO WHEN WE'RE IN THE ACTUAL MEETING, THINGS THAT PROBABLY HAD NOT COME UP OR THAT COME UP AT THIS KEY SO THAT I NEVER GOT THE MANUAL BY THE WAY.

BUT, UM, I'VE MAYBE I NEED TO SEE THAT, BUT, UH, I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE A BOOKLET THAT WE CAN HAND OUT THAT WE DEVELOPED THAT NOT, NOT A CITY TRADING MANUAL.

IT'S MORE, UM, ISSUES THAT COME UP, YOU KNOW, ABOUT SOME OF THE GRAY AREAS.

THAT SOUNDS LIKE A PROJECT FOR THAT TRAINING WORKING GROUP.

YEAH.

YEAH, IT IS.

AND THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING THIS, I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO GET OUT THE AGENDA NEED TO MOVE FORWARD ON SOME OF THOSE ITEMS THAT ARE JUST KIND OF BASICS THAT NEED TO COME FROM, YOU KNOW, THE OLDER MEMBERS, MAYBE HELPING

[03:10:01]

DO SOME SORT OF A BOOKLET FOR THE NEWER MEMBERS, JUST ON SOME FINER POINTS OF SERVING ON THE BOARD.

I THINK IT'S USED TO GET RESOLVED WHEN WE MET IN PERSON THE CITY.

AND YOU'D SAY SOMETHING LIKE, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT NIGHT AND THEY'D BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN IT TO YOU, BUT WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT IN OVER.

AND WHO KNOWS WHEN WE WILL? YES, WE DO HAVE SEPTEMBER, BUT, BUT WE'RE BACK IN STAGE FIVE.

SO I DON'T REALLY SEE THAT HAPPENING.

AND I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE FOR A LOT OF US TO EVEN WANT TO BE THERE, YOU KNOW, WITH MASS ON FOR FIVE HOURS.

UM, BECAUSE I'M NOT COMING WITHOUT A MASK, EVEN THOUGH I'M FULLY VACCINATED, WE PICKED UP THE VARIANT AS RAMPANT AS IT IS.

SO, UM, ANYWAYS, OKAY.

SO PUSH THIS OUT TOWARD THE NEXT MEETING AND MELISSA AND, AND WELL, MICHAEL WILL REVIEW THIS, UM, READ HONESTY DOES EVEN, YOU CAN GET BACK WITH ME, GET BACK WITH US.

IT'S MORE JUST OPERATIONAL STUFF.

AND JESSICA, I DO WANT TO CLARIFY, AND I BELIEVE MR. SIMMONS IS ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT TRAINED US, IS THAT RIGHT? I MEAN, WE DID GET A GUIDEBOOK FROM, IT WAS PUBLISHED, I GUESS, ORIGINALLY IN JULY, 2015, WE DID, BUT I MEAN, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY COVER SOME OF THE IT'S A LITTLE BIT LIKE KIND OF, IT'S PRETTY BIG.

YEAH.

IT'S THE BEST WE COULD DO AT THE TIME.

EXCELLENT.

IT'S A GREAT START.

AND THEN IT'S, UM, I WOULD LOVE SOME, I'M THE KIND OF PERSON WITH LOTS OF QUESTIONS, SO I WOULD LOVE SOME.

YEAH.

AND I DO HATE THAT WE'RE NOT MEETING IN PERSON BECAUSE WE USED TO JUST DO THAT ON THE FLY, YOU KNOW, CAUSE YOU'RE SITTING, I USED TO GO TO DINNER AFTER AND ACTUALLY GET TO KNOW EACH OTHER AND IT WAS QUITE ENJOYABLE, SO WONDERFUL.

AND UM, SOMEDAY, YEAH, WE WOULD MEET AT FOLDING CREEK CAFE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

SO WE COULD SIT DOWN AND HAVE A MEETING CAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE TO MEET AT CITY HALL WITHOUT A QUORUM.

I KNOW YOUR WORKING GROUP IS NOT A QUORUM.

YOU CAN MEET YOUR WORKING GROUP ANYWHERE.

SO THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING TO LOOK AT.

OKAY.

UH, ARE THERE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS? NOPE.

OKAY.

AND THEN

[F-6 Discussion of future agenda new business items, staff requests and potential special called meeting and/or workshop requests]

LET'S, UH, WRAP IT UP WITH ITEM F SIX DISCUSSION OF FUTURE AGENDA, NEW BUSINESS ITEMS, STAFF REQUESTS.

UM, I MEAN, COULD YOU, BUT ON THE AGENDA WE NEED TO FOLLOW UP ON OUR RESOLUTION FROM LAST YEAR FOR THE, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

LIKE TO SEE WHERE THAT'S AT WITH COUNCIL.

CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? SORRY.

THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, THAT BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF WORK THEN YASMIN AND I WORKED SO HARD ON AND MANY, MANY OTHERS.

AND YOU WANT THAT FOR THE SEPTEMBER? A NEW BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA.

YEAH.

YEAH.

WE CAN JUST GET AN UPDATE THERE.

THAT WOULD BE NICE.

ANY OTHER AGENDA ITEMS DO BUSINESS? NOPE.

JUST WELCOME TO THE NEW MEMBER.

NEW MEMBER NOW.

ALL RIGHT, THEN, UH, I'LL SEE.

Y'ALL NEXT TUESDAY.

THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED AT WHAT TIME AT NIGHT