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