[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:03]
I HEAR BY CALL THIS MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ORDER A COUPLE OF QUICK HOUSEKEEPING NOTES.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CELL PHONES ARE PUT THEM ON VIBRATE.
AFTER YOUR CASES OVER, PLEASE GO OUT TO THE LOBBY.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR FINDINGS OR YOUR KEYS, YOU CAN EMAIL A CALL ELAINE TOMORROW.
UH, WHEN YOU'RE ADDRESSING THE BOARD, IF THERE'S ANY OPPOSITION, PLEASE SPEAK DIRECTLY TO THE BOARD.
AND WE MAY NOT NEED IT TONIGHT WITH THE BOARD DOES USUALLY TAKE A BREAK FOR ABOUT 10 MINUTES AT EIGHT O'CLOCK AND PARKING TICKETS.
IF YOU HAVEN'T STAMPED YOUR PARKING TICKET, WE'VE GOT A LITTLE CLAMSHELL AND A SIGN IN OVER THERE BY WHERE YOU WALKED IN.
MAKE SURE YOU GET YOUR PARKING TICKET VALIDATED.
HE SAYS HE'S HAVING ISSUES WITH HIS MICROPHONE.
SO I TOLD HIM HE MIGHT WANT TO TRY TO CALL IN.
AND MARCEL GOT GUTIERREZ GAZA PRESENT.
I AM I MISSING KELLY, KELLY, KELLY, BLOOM, AND KELLY BLOOM CURE.
YOU MIGHT WANT TO TRY THOMAS AGAIN FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS.
UH, ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN HERE BEFORE, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU SIGN THE SIGN-IN SHEET.
IT'S JUST A LITTLE PIECE OF PAPER GOING AROUND UP.
CAN YOU HEAR US? WE CAN'T SEE YOU EITHER.
TELL ME YOU HAVE A, SUCH A GREAT SMILE.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO YOU.
IF YOU ARE JOINING FROM YOUR BROWSER, GO AHEAD AND UH, GO OUT OF THAT AND DOWNLOAD THE APP AND TRY TO DOWNLOAD, UH, TRY TO JOIN FROM YOUR APP.
AND IT MIGHT CLEAR OUT ANY ISSUES YOU HAVE, OR YOU COULD DO A COLUMN, UH, QUICK POINT OF ORDER.
CAN WE ACTUALLY DO CALL HIM? WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SEE HIS FACE THE WHOLE TIME, RIGHT? OH, YES.
JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, OKAY.
UM, IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE GIVING TESTIMONY TONIGHT, IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE SPEAKING ON A CASE, I NEED YOU TO PLEASE STAND, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU YOUR TESTIMONY OR SORRY, YOUR OATH REAL QUICK.
DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU WILL GIVE TONIGHT WILL BE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE? PERFECT.
[A-1 Staff requests approval March 14, 2022 draft minutes]
STARTING WITH ITEM E ONE.THIS IS GOING TO BE STAFF REQUESTS APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 14TH, 2022 DRAFT MINUTES.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE SECOND, BROOKE BAILEY.
I WAS STARTING WITH YOU, BROOKE, BECAUSE TOMMY? YES.
[B-1 Staff and Applicant requests for postponement and withdraw of items posted on this Agenda ]
[00:05:03]
ITEM.B ONE, UH, STOPPING OFF KIM REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT AND WITHDRAWALS.
SO I BELIEVE WE HAVE TWO THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TONIGHT.
C1, UH, C 16 DASH 2021 DASH 0 0 3 25 52.
WHILE THE LUPUS STREET, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TOP TOBER, 10TH OF 2022.
OCTOBER WHAT? ELAINE WISH IT ON.
THAT WOULD WE WOULD, THEY NEED TO RE NOTIFY US ON THEIR AWARE.
THEY JUST PAID A RE NOTIFICATION FOR THIS.
AND THEY JUST WAITING OUT THE CLOCK.
UM, I THINK THEY'RE WAITING FOR COUNCIL ACTION.
UM, I GUESS IF SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION ON THAT ONE, UM, I'D LIKE TO ADD A POSTPONEMENT D FOUR WAS DENIED BY AUSTIN ENERGY.
I'M WONDERING, DO YOU TAKE THEM SEPARATELY? OKAY.
JUST BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF TIME THEY WERE ASKING FOR THIS POSTPONEMENT.
AND WHAT ABOUT THE, UM, MCKINNEY AVENUE? ARE THEY REQUESTING POSTPONEMENT? YEP.
ON THIS C1, IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN TABLE THIS? CAUSE EACH TIME THIS COMES UP, IT TAKES UP A SPACE FOR SOMEBODY ELSE AND IT'S NOT FAIR TO OTHER OTHER PEOPLE.
THEY WANT TO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE.
IF THEY CONTINUE TO POSTPONE EVERY MONTH, I'M ACTUALLY INCLINED TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY SIMPLY BECAUSE IF THEY WANT TO WITHDRAW IT, THEY SHOULD WITHDRAW IT.
AND I DON'T FEEL IT'S FAIR FOR EVERYONE FOR ARC TO ELAINE, TO HAVE TO KEEP POSTPONING THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THEY WERE WAITING.
THEY'RE JUST GOING TO TRY TO WAIT OUT COUNSEL.
WE MIGHT AS WELL WATCH PAINT JAR.
I WAS ABOUT TO SAY, IF WE NOTIFY ENOUGH TIMES, THEY'RE GOING TO END UP PAYING WHAT THEY'VE ALREADY WITHDRAW.
THE MOTION TO DENY SO WELL, WELL MOTION TO NOT POSTPONE POSTPONEMENTS.
IS THAT HOW IT IS ACTUALLY YEAH.
YOU'LL STILL NEED TO CALL THE ROLL THOUGH.
SO BOOK MAILING, UM, I'M CONFUSED.
SO YOU SAID THERE WERE TWO CASES? YEAH, I WAS GONNA DO THE SECOND ONE SEPARATELY.
CAN I, UH, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION OF LEGAL, JUST IN GENERAL? UH, GO AHEAD ON, UH, ON ASSIGNED CASE.
SO LIKE A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE, COULD YOU CAN'T APPLY AGAIN FOR 365 DAYS? IS THAT THE SAME ON ASSIGNED CASE? I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK IN ON THAT ERICA LOPEZ ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, BUT I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE THE SAME AND APOLOGIZE AND LAME.
SO THAT WAS ACTUALLY A MOST INTO DOMO DONATE POSTPONEMENT, WHICH WAS APPROVED.
SO WE'RE GOING TO HEAR THAT CASE.
WE HAVE A SECOND KEYS, WHICH IS IN AUSTIN ENERGY DENIAL.
UM, AUSTIN ENERGY HAS DENIED ITEM D FOR C 15 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 3 TO 2,904 RIVER CREST DRIVE.
THEY APPROVED THE FIRST PORTION OF
[00:10:01]
THE VARIANCE REQUEST, BUT THE SECOND PORTION THEY'VE DENIED IT.DO I HAVE A MOTION ON THAT? I MOVED TO POSTPONE THAT ONE BECAUSE IF, IF THE CLIENT AND I, I THINK DAVID'S HERE.
SO IF HE CAN GET WITH THE CLIENT AND FIND AND RECTIFY THAT ISSUE BY NEXT MONTH, COULD I MEAN, COULD I ASK DAVID APPROACHED THE MIC JUST TO SEE IF I'LL SECOND THAT COME ON UP, STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, YOU KNOW, THE GIRL.
DAVID CANCEL OSI REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE OWNERS OF 24.
WE REQUEST DRIVE THE AUSTIN ENERGY ISSUE CAN BE RECTIFIED THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION AND REDESIGN PROCESS AND STILL COMPLY WITH THE 35 FOOT HEIGHT LIMITATION UNDER LA ZONING.
SO DURING MY PRESENTATION, I PLANNED ON EXPANDING ON THAT, BUT ALSO REALLY JUST KIND OF GOING OVER WHY IT IS THAT THAT CAME UP, BUT ALSO TWO THAT WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON THE 15 FOOT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE 40 FOOT SETBACK, WHICH HAS BEEN THERE SINCE THE HOUSE IS ERECTED IN THE EIGHTIES.
SO WE'LL COME BACK IF YOU LIKE, DO YOU WANT TO PRESENT THE CASE TONIGHT? UH, YES.
BUT MY CONCERN, MY CONCERN IS LIKE, HE'S ASKING FOR, YOU ASK HIM FOR A COUPLE OF AREAS.
YOU'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON ONE, BUT YOU COULD GET THEM BOTH.
IF YOU RESOLVE THE AUSTIN ENERGY.
I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT I IT'S MY OPINION AFTER LOOKING AT THIS FOR THE LAST MONTH AND A HALF LEADING UP TO TONIGHT, I DON'T THINK WE NEED THE, THE, UM, THE HEIGHT VARIANCE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT RAISING THE TOP PLATE OF THE FIRST OR THE SECOND FLOOR.
SO THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING IS CHANGING.
AND THAT'S WHAT THE CODE SAYS.
IF YOU CANNOT INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF A NON-COMPLIANT WALL, DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE ROOF.
WE ARE RAISING SOME, SOME PORTIONS OF THE ROOF IS AS LITTLE AS EIGHT OR 12 OR 18 INCHES IN SOME POCKETS TO COMPLETE A CON A SOLID RIDGE LINE ALONG THE GABLE.
BUT THAT IN ITSELF IS NOT COVERED IN THAT CODE SECTION.
AND WE'RE NOT PRECLUDED OR PROHIBITED FROM DOING THAT.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING, BUT TO BE HONEST, IF I WOULD LIKE TO YOU TO GET THE AUSTIN ENERGY STUFF RESOLVED, I THINK IT'S PROBABLY B WILL BE FAIRLY EASY.
UM, I THINK YOUR BACKUP MATERIALS IS VERY GOOD, BUT WE USUALLY DON'T HEAR CASES THAT HAVE BEEN DENIED BY AUSTIN ENERGY.
THAT'S TRADITIONALLY WHERE WE WOULD HAVE STOOD ON IT.
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT DESIGN CHANGES YOU HAVE TO DO TO SATISFY THAT.
AND WE DON'T KNOW IF THERE, IF THAT CHANGES THE VARIANCES OR NOT, AND IT COULD.
AND SO I THINK THAT JUST TO BE CAREFUL FOR BOTH OF US, CAUSE YOU'D HATE FOR US TO HEAR IT.
AND THEN SOMETHING HAPPENS WITH AUSTIN ENERGY AND YOU HAVE TO DESIGN, REDESIGN SOMETHING, AND THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING.
SO FOR BOTH OUR SAKES, I'D LIKE TO POSTPONE THIS I'LL SECOND THAT I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE, UH, ITEM D FOUR C 15, 20 TO 22 0 0 3, 2 29 0 4 RIVER CREST DRIVE TO THE MAIN NINTH OR TO ADJUSTMENT, MEANING MOTION WAS MADE BY A BOARD MEMBER OF ON OLIN'S SECOND END BY MYSELF.
KELLY BLOOM AND MARCEL GUTIERREZ GARZA.
NOW I KNOW I ASKED YOU THIS LAST TIME.
HOW WOULD YOU, DO YOU WANT ME TO SAY MARCEL CARS, THE OCEAN.
I'M JUST GOING TO, I'M TRYING TO BE RESPECTFUL AND NICE.
[C-1 C16-2021-0003 Michael Gaudini for Timothy Finley 2552 Guadalupe Street]
OKAY.MOVING ON TO ITEM C ONE C 16, 20 21 0 0 0 3.
THIS IS GOING TO BE MICHAEL GARDENY FOR TIMOTHY FAMILY.
SO MATT AND SHARE THAT, UM, APPLICANT TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE TO MAKE THE PRESENTATION GOT CALLED OUT OF TOWN THIS MORNING.
SO THEY'RE NOT HERE, THEY'RE NOT AVAILABLE.
AND THAT WAS ANOTHER REASON FOR REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT BESIDES PINE.
HOW ABOUT WE JUST TABLE IT TALK.
[00:15:01]
IT, BUT TABLE IT IS THAT AN OPTION FOR US? AND THAT WAY IT DOESN'T SHOW UP ON OUR AGENDA.EVERY MONTH I THOUGHT WE WERE REQUIRED IS THAT IT'S AT FOR A RESEARCH.
UM, I LOST SOMEWHERE CAUSE I IT'S THERE.
THEY'RE NOT HERE TO PRESENT OR TO EVER SAY, BUT THIS IS THE ONE THAT'S TRYING TO RUN OUT THE CLOCK.
WELL, WELL, YOU DON'T KNOW THE BOOK.
YOU'RE NOT RUNNING OUT THE CLOCK.
THEY'RE WAITING FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION TO CHANGE THE CODE, WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT HAPPEN.
RIGHT? NO, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT IF THEY'RE NOT HERE, I'D RATHER JUST TABLE IT BECAUSE THEN IT WON'T SHOW UP ON OUR AGENDA IN THERE, LOPING UP A SLOT FOR SOMEBODY ELSE.
IT'LL OPEN THAT SLOT OUT FOR SOMEONE ELSE.
AND IT'LL ALSO SATISFY MELISSA THAT WE'RE NOT DENYING IT.
AND UM, THEY CAN COME IN AND REAPPLY WHENEVER THEY'RE READY, YOU KNOW, COMING IN, YOU KNOW, START AGAIN WHENEVER THEY'RE READY.
SO I MOVE THAT WE TABLE SECOND INDEFINITELY.
UH, MS. LOPEZ, WHAT KIND OF BOAT DOES THAT REQUIRE? IT'S A PARLIAMENTARY VOTE.
SO IT WOULD BE A, JUST A MAJORITY IN CASE.
IT'S ALSO A SUN CASE THAT SIMPLE MAJORITY.
AND THAT WAS THE MOTION WAS MADE BY BOARD MEMBER BAILEY SECONDED BY A BOARD MEMBER.
THIS IS A MOTION TO TABLE TILL OCTOBER OR WITH THE TABLE.
AS SOON AS LIKE TO DO TABLE INDEFINITELY.
I HAD A QUESTION FIRE AWAY WAS THE, UM, WAS THE GOVERNMENT CODE AMENDED TO REQUIRE US TO MAKE DECISIONS ON CASES WITHIN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME? I WAS WONDERING ABOUT THAT.
I DON'T THINK IT WAS, BUT MS. LOPEZ, DO WE HAVE A TIME LIMIT ON THIS? I DON'T THINK WE DO FOR SCIENCE.
I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH A TIME LIMIT ON SIGNS, BUT I, WHICH, WHICH TIME LIMIT ARE YOU REFERRING TO? I THINK HE WAS REFERRING TO THE POTENTIAL COACH OR NO, SORRY, LACI AND STATE LAW CHANGE.
THAT'S SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN IN THE LAST SESSION.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT ONE PASSED.
IT DIDN'T PASS, BUT EITHER WAY I THINK, I THINK WE'RE GOOD BOARD MEMBER PROHIBITED POET BECAUSE IT'S ASSIGNED CASE AS OPPOSED TO LAND DEVELOPMENT, CODE VARIANTS, AND ALSO TABLING, UM, KIND OF EFFECTIVELY TAKES IT OFF THAT TIME SCHEDULE BECAUSE IT TAKES IT OFF FEATURE AGENDAS.
COMMISSIONER, CAN YOU HEAR US NOW? THANK YOU.
YOU HEAR ME? I CAN, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
NOW WE HAVE TO DO TO SEE YOUR FACE.
CAN YOU TURN ON YOUR VIDEO? I CAN, I CAN.
SO HOW MUCH OF THAT CONVERSATION DID YOU CATCH BOARD MEMBER? IT'S WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO TABLE.
SO THIS IS A MOTION TO INDEFINITELY TABLE ITEM C ONE C 16, 20 21 0 0 3 MADE BY BOARD MEMBER BAILEY SECONDED BY A BOARD MEMBER OF ON OLIN, TOMMY IT'S YOU HAVE TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
DO YOU HAVE TO CALL, ROLL CALL AGAIN TO HAVE TOM THE EIGHTS BE ON THE AGENDA, DYLAN? YEAH, I THINK YOU MIGHT, MIGHT WANT TO CALL, ROLL CALL AGAIN AND HAVE HIM CAUSE HE WASN'T.
WHEN YOU ORIGINALLY CALLED HIM, HE WASN'T PRESENT FOR THE ORIGINAL ROLL CALL.
SO BACK TO THE, DO I HAVE TO RECALL THE ENTIRE ROLE OR JUST HIS NAME? I THINK JUST THE ENVIRONMENT ROBERTS.
I THINK IT WOULD JUST BE EASIER JUST TO MAYBE RECALL EVERYBODY AGAIN, JUST
[00:20:01]
TO, OKAY.WE'RE GOING TO CALL ATTENDANCE.
DARRYL PUT AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ HERE.
RICHARD SMITH, MICHAEL BY NOLAN, NICOLE LANE.
NOW SINCE BOARD MEMORIES IS OFFICIALLY HERE, THIS IS A MOTION TO TABLE AND INDEFINITELY ITEM C ONE C 16 20 21 0 0 0 3.
MELISSA HAWTHORNE ABSTAINING UPSETTING JAIL PRO YES.
THIS IS TABLE TO END, DEFINITELY.
[C-2 C16-2022-0001 Esteban Arrieta for Eames Gilmore 10107 Research Boulevard SVBD ]
NEXT TO THE ITEM, C TO C 16, 20 22 0 0 0 1.S SVB, COME ON UP TO THE PODIUM.
STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
HI, ESTEBAN VILCHEZ OR ARRIETTA UH, REPRESENTING WALTON, SIGNAGE AND TARGET ONE STEP.
LET'S GET YOUR PRESENTATION UP.
UH, THANK YOU FOR TAKING TIME TO HEAR MY CASE.
I REPRESENT WALTON AND TARGET, UH, IN THIS VARIANCE REQUEST.
SO WE HAD COME ACROSS, COME TO THE BOARD LAST MONTH AND PRESENTED THIS CASE, UH, UPON TO EXTEND THE HEIGHT OF A SIGN FROM 35 FEET BY 45 FEET ABOVE THE GRADE.
UM, TARGET WHERE IT STANDS RIGHT NOW IS ABOUT FOUR FEET ABOVE THE GRADE.
SO WE ARE ONLY ALLOWED 31 FEET OF HEIGHT ON THE SIGNAGE.
WE HAD A LOCATION INITIALLY FOR THIS PYLON THAT WE WERE PUTTING ON TARGET SITE, BUT DUE TO UNDERGROUND, UH, UNDERGROUND LOCATIONS AND PIPES, WE WERE NOT ABLE TO PUT IT THERE.
WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST AN ADDITIONAL 10 TO 12 FEET TO BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD.
THIS IS WHERE WE WOULD LIKE THE PYLON TO BE, IF YOU WOULD NOTICE.
AND I KNOW THIS WE'D SPOKEN WITH THE BOARD LAST TIME.
THE MAIN ISSUE WAS THE NEED FOR A PYLON ON THIS, ON, IN THIS LOCATION.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON GREAT TRAIL OR A GREAT HILLS ROAD ALL THE WAY ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE, THERE IS AN ENTRANCE THERE THAT ENTRANCE IS KIND OF OBSTRUCTED AND SOMEWHAT, YOU CANNOT REALLY SEE HOW TO GET IN SAFELY IF YOU'RE COMING EASTBOUND OR WESTBOUND ON GREAT HILLS ROAD.
SO WE HAD DONE FLAG TEST ON THIS, UH, TO SEE WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE IF THE SIGN WAS AT 31 FEET AND WE HAD TAKEN A COUPLE OF PICTURES AND THIS IS WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE.
IF YOU AREN'T LOOKING AT RESEARCH BOULEVARD, YOU CAN SEE THE SIGN JUST FINE THOUGH.
THERE'S ALREADY A PILE ON, ON RESEARCH BOULEVARD.
SO THAT'S NOT REALLY THE, THE, THE MAIN, UH, REQUEST.
WE'RE NOT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING EASTBOUND ON GRAY HILLS ROAD.
THIS IS WHEN WE START SEEING THE DIFFERENCES.
YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO SEE THE SIGN WHATSOEVER.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING, UH, WESTBOUND ON EAST, WE SEARCHED BOULEVARD.
YOU CAN SEE THE SIGN A LITTLE BIT, BUT NOT VERY MUCH, SAME, UH, SAME GOES WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING WESTBOUND ON NEW RESEARCH, ON A GREAT HILLS TRAIL.
RATHER THIS IS WITH IT APPLIED AROUND 10 TO 12 FEET.
NOW IN RESEARCH BOULEVARD, YOU'RE ABLE TO SEE IT JUST FINE.
YOU'RE LOOKING WESTBOUND ON GREAT HILLS, UH, EASTBOUND ON GREAT HILLS TRAIL.
IT IS OBSTRUCTED BY THOSE TREES, BUT I HAVE SPOKEN WITH A TARGET REPRESENTATIVE AND THEY'VE ASSURED ME THAT THEY ARE GOING TO TRIM DOWN THOSE TREES JUST TO KEEP ON THE SAME
[00:25:01]
LINE WITH THE TREES THAT YOU SEE IN THAT SECOND PICTURE.UM, AND WE ARE ALSO, WE ALSO HAVE CONFIRMATION THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE CONTINUING TO TRIM THOSE THREES THROUGHOUT THE YEARS SO THAT WE MAINTAIN THAT HEIGHT.
AND WE ARE ABLE TO ALWAYS SEE THE SIGN AND WE WON'T NEED TO REQUEST A VARIANCE IN THE FUTURE, WHICH WAS DISCUSSED WITH THE BOARD LAST TIME.
THIS IS ANOTHER PICTURE OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING AS WELL.
IF WE'RE LOOKING WESTBOUND ON GREAT HILLS TRAIL, UH, WE ARE ALSO TRIMMING DOWN THESE TREES JUST TO STAY WITHIN THAT TREE LINE.
THAT'S ALREADY ON THE GREAT HILLS TRAIL ROAD.
SO THE HARDSHIP THAT WE WERE REQUESTING THIS UNDER IS THE CODE CHAPTER 25 10, WHICH SAYS THE BOARD MAY GRANT A VARIANCE ONLY IF IT FINDS THAT VARIANCE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE THE REQUIREMENT PREVENTS ANY REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGNS ON THE SITE.
CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE SITE, INCLUDING ITS DIMENSIONS, LANDSCAPING, OR TOPOGRAPHY, UH, SORRY, IT'S NOT GOING.
UM, SO THE HARDSHIP THAT WE'RE REALLY SEEKING HERE IS BECAUSE OF THESE TREES.
NOW, IF YOU LOOK IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A MATTER OF SAFETY JUST TO GET INTO THAT PARKING LOT.
I KNOW THAT A BOARD MEMBER WAS, WAS REALLY, UH, YOU KNOW, INCLINED TO SAY THE ONLY WAY WE WOULD REALLY APPROVE THIS IS IF WE WERE TO SEE THAT THIS WOULD CAUSE SAFETY'S CONCERNS.
NOW, IF YOU WERE TO GO EASTBOUND, YOU COULD NOT BE ABLE TO SEE THIS, THIS TARGET ITSELF BECAUSE OF THE TREES.
AND SO THE PYLON WOULD BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU BETTER VISIBILITY.
SO YOU CAN YIELD THAT ENTRANCE.
I'VE ATTACHED SOME PHOTOS, SO YOU CAN SEE THIS IS GOING TO WRITE DOWN GREAT HILLS TRAIL.
UM, LIKE YOU SAID, LIKE I SAID, THE TARGET IS NOT VERY VISIBLE.
WE'D ALSO THE BOARD AT RCH ALSO REQUESTED THAT WE PUT A MONUMENT SIGN, WHICH WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO DUE TO THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
IT WOULD PUT THE MONUMENT SIGN INTO THE PARKING LOT, WHICH WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO.
AND SO THE PYLON IS THE ONLY ADEQUATE PLACE FOR THE SIGN.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE ENTRANCE RIGHT THERE.
ADDITIONAL HARDSHIP THAT WE HAVE IS WE ACTUALLY HAD, LIKE I SAID, IN THE BEGINNING, WE HAD A LOCATION ALREADY PLANNED FOR THIS PYLON.
AND SO WE ALREADY HAD AN APPROVED BUILDING PERMIT FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND WE'D ALREADY MANUFACTURED THE SIGN.
AND SO THIS, THESE, THESE PARTS ARE ALREADY MANUFACTURED AND TARGET AND WALTON HAS ALREADY INVESTED A LOT INTO THIS.
SO I'D ASK THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THAT AS WELL IN THE DETERMINATION FOR THIS VARIANCE.
WELL, LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? OKAY.
LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I WATCHED THE VIDEO TODAY FROM THE, THE MEETING.
I SHOP AT SPROUTS GO TO TRUE LOOKS ACROSS THE STREET, OR YOU GO TO THE LEXUS DEALER DOWN THE STREET AND SAM'S RIGHT BEHIND IT.
SO I KNOW EXACTLY WHERE YOU'RE AT AND TO BE FRANK WITH YOU BASED ON BURKE'S COMMENTS LAST TIME ABOUT THE PEDESTAL SIGN BEING THERE, UH, IS THE WAY THAT I, I, THE ONLY WAY I WOULD SUPPORT THIS, EVERYBODY KNOWS WHERE THAT TARGET IS.
I MEAN, LITERALLY YOU'RE EITHER IN TARGET PARKING LOT.
YOU'RE DRIVING INTO SAM'S ONE OF THE TWO THEY'RE RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER, OR YOU'RE GOING TO SPECS, WHICH IS THE LIQUOR STORES AT THE OTHER END.
BUT, UM, BASED ON GOING DOWN GREAT HILLS TRAILS, AS A MATTER OF FACT, I WENT DOWN THERE TWICE.
YOU WILL BE ABLE TO SEE A PEDESTAL SIGN FROM THERE, IF IT GOES INTO THE PARKING LOT, THAT'S OKAY.
BUT I THINK A PEDESTAL SIGN IS GOING TO BE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE THAN GOING WITH A SIGNED EXTENSION.
BECAUSE AGAIN, BASED ON WHAT I ALSO HEARD, IT LASTS LAST MONTH, MEETING, THE TREES ARE GOING TO GROW AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO BE BLOCKED OUT.
AND CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW, THE LAST SLIDE THAT YOU SHOWED THERE, SHOW SOME PRETTY CLEAR DATE WHERE THEY'VE CLEARED THE TREES FROM THE BASE DOWN.
THE OTHER COMMENT, I KNOW KELLY, UH, ALSO BROUGHT UP A PEDESTAL SIGN, UH, AND THAT, THAT TARGET'S BEEN THERE AT LEAST.
WELL, I THINK MELISSA SAID 13 YEARS, BUT I THINK IT HAD BEEN LONGER THAN THAT.
IT USED TO BE SOMETHING ELSE, BUT IT WAS THERE LONGER THAN THAT.
CAUSE I'VE BEEN LIVING THERE THAT AREA FOR 26 YEARS.
SO I'M GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, TO DENY BECAUSE I REALLY FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO GET AWAY FROM GOING TALLER ALL THE TIME.
UH, BKS HAS DONE A GREAT JOB WITH THEIR SIGN ORDINANCE, KEEPING SIGNS, PLEASE DOWNLOAD THE COMMENT WAS MADE ALSO BY, UM, MELISSA ABOUT GOOGLE MAPS.
AND I, AND I EXCELLED AT LAND NAVIGATION AND FORT BENNING.
SO I WOULD, UM, I'VE GOT TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY.
I CAN'T, I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS AND I DON'T THINK THE SUPPORT IS OUT THERE TO GET IT AS WELL.
BASED ON THE COMMENTS FROM LAST MONTH'S MEETING AND OH, KING, DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND BECAUSE I REALLY BELIEVE THAT IF YOU'RE DRIVING
[00:30:01]
A PEDESTAL SIGN IS MUCH MORE VISIBLE TO A DRIVER INSTEAD OF HAVING TO LOOK UP THROUGH TREES AT A TALL SIGN.UM, I KNOW THAT TARGET VERY WELL ALSO.
UM, AND SO I AM STILL STICKING TO, I THINK, A PEDESTAL SIGN.
IT WOULD BE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE BECAUSE YOU DON'T NEED IT FROM 180 3.
LIKE YOU SAID, THERE'S ONE OUT THERE ALREADY.
WHAT YOU NEED IS WHEN PEOPLE ARE DRIVING, WHICH I, HEIGHT IS SO MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE.
IF PEOPLE ARE DRIVING TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT, TO HAVE TIME TO TURN IN, ALSO WORK.
IF I MAY INTERJECT, THERE WAS A COMMENT ON LAST MONTH'S MEETING I SAW ON THE VIDEO ABOUT THE SIGN BEING YOU CAN'T GET, YOU CAN'T GO DIRECTLY ACROSS.
YES, YOU CAN FROM SPROUTS, YOU CAN GO ACROSS DIRECTLY ACROSS, BUT ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE, THERE'S A VERY TALL RETAINING WALL THAT SOMETHING COULD GO ON THE FACE OF THAT.
AND I PROBABLY WOULDN'T EVEN BE OPPOSED TO THAT BEING BACK LIT, YOU KNOW, HOWEVER, AND ALSO THE OTHER SIDE, THERE'S THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.
THAT'S ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, THAT BRIGHT RED ONE THAT IS ALSO THERE.
THOSE ARE IDEAL SPOTS FOR THAT AREA BECAUSE I GUARANTEE YOU GOING, DRIVING DOWN, EVEN THE SAM SIGN, WHICH IS FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD, THE TREES ARE ALREADY OBSTRUCTING IT.
IT'S ALREADY BLOCKING THE SAMSUNG.
IF YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET TO SAM'S THE BACK WAY BY PASSING UP TARGET, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET IN THERE.
YOU'RE GOING TO END UP GOING INTO THE ELECTRIC LEXUS DEALERSHIP.
SO THAT'S, I JUST CAN'T GET THERE WITH YOU, BRO.
SO I HAD A QUESTION FOR LEGAL AGAIN, IF WE TAKE ACTION ON THE, ON THE SIDE CASE AND PART OF WHAT I FEEL LIKE IS ACTUALLY THE RIGHT ACTION IS FOR A MONUMENT SIGN FOR A SETBACK, UM, INSTEAD OF FOR A TALLER SIGN.
AND IF WE DENIED THIS, CAN THEY APPLY ON ASSIGNED CASE WITHOUT WAITING A 365 DAY WINDOW, MELISSA? AND THAT'S ALSO TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THAT IT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT APPLICATION.
THEY WON'T BE, THERE'LL BE NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT PAPER-WISE BUT THEY'RE GOING TO BE GONE FOR A MONUMENT INSTEAD OF A SIGN ON THE POLE.
BUT I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT THE CODE DIFFERENTIATES, IF THAT APPLIES TO ASSIGN THAT'S, I'M JUST ASKING THE QUESTION.
IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO KNOW THINGS BEFORE YOU VOTE FOR THEM.
WELL, WHILE THAT LEGAL IS LOOKING, LOOKING FOR THAT, LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION.
OF COURSE, IS, IS THAT AN OPTION IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET YOU SEE WHICH WAY THE WIND'S BLOWING.
SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE DENIED TODAY, WOULD IT BE MORE BENEFICIAL FOR YOU TO, AND AS YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU THIS TOO.
UH, IF WE'RE, IF WE CAN MAKE AN AMENDMENT THAT PEDESTAL SIGN BE PLACED ON, ON SITE, INSTEAD OF, INSTEAD OF WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR, I THINK HE'S GOT TO RE NOTIFY BECAUSE THEN HE HAS TO STEP BACK.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY.
WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T GIVE THAT SETBACK BECAUSE IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA FOR US TO VOTE ON.
YEAH, I WAS POSTING, I FIGURED I WAS JUST THROWING THE DICE, BUT WOULD YOU EVEN GO ON, I MEAN, A MONUMENT, I MEAN, YOU'VE, YOU'VE FABRICATED A SIGN ALREADY.
YOU HAVE A GIANT MONUMENT SIGN IN THE BUILDING, WHICH HAS A GIANT TARGET SIGN ON IT ALREADY, WHICH IS EASILY VISIBLE FROM BOTH DIRECTIONS ON GREAT HILLS.
SO I CAN'T ACTUALLY, I'M GOING TO INTERRUPT REAL QUICK AND JUST REMIND THE BOARD MEMBERS THAT WE NEED TO RAISE OUR HANDS AND WAIT TO BE CALLED ON.
SO WE'RE NOT TALKING OVER EACH OTHER.
I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME SINCE WE'VE BEEN BACK IN PERSON.
IT'LL KEEP THINGS A LITTLE MORE ORGANIZED.
UM, SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO IF THEY WANT A MONUMENT SIGN ON THE PROPERTY OR NOT.
I WILL SAY THAT THEY HAVE PRE ALREADY FABRICATED THIS SIGN.
UM, THE BIGGEST ARGUMENT TO THAT WAS THAT THESE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES THAT WE FOUND IN THIS, UH, LOCATION THAT WE WERE PLANNING ON DOING, IT WAS NOT MARKED BY PUBLIC UTILITY LOCATORS.
AND SO WE ASSESSED THAT PER THE PUBLIC UTILITIES LOCATOR, AND THEN P F AND THEN HAD AN APPROVED BUILDING PERMIT.
SO THEREFORE WE THOUGHT IT WAS OKAY TO PREFABRICATE THE SIGN AND THAT'S WHERE THE ARGUMENT REALLY STANDS.
UM, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF, IF THE BOARD DOES DENY IT, I'M SURE THAT THEY'LL DO SOMETHING, BUT, UH, THAT THAT'S, I, I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT THEIR ACTIONS WOULD BE AFTER THAT BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAN.
I HAVEN'T BEEN A GENERAL CONTRACTOR, MAJORITY OF MY LIFETIME.
I CAN TELL YOU IF, IF THE UTILITY LOCATORS DIDN'T LOCATE IT, THEN IT'S PROBABLY TARGETS UTILITIES THAT ARE RUNNING THOSE CALL LIGHTS THAT ARE RUNNING AROUND THERE, BECAUSE I'VE RUN INTO THAT IN THE PAST, WHEN WE'VE DONE WORK IN THAT
[00:35:01]
AREA, WE DID ALL THE CAPITAL METRO BUS STOPS IN THAT AREA.AND IF, IF A PUBLIC, IF THE UTILITY LOCATORS DON'T LOCATE IT, THAT MEANS IT'S PRIVATE.
AND THE ONLY THING IN THAT CORNER IS TARGET.
IT DEFINITELY, WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT TO SEE WHAT YOU LOCATORS CAUSE I, IT EITHER WILL BE TARGET OR SAM'S, UM, CAUSE THE PYLON WAS AROUND WHERE THAT SAM'S PYLON IS AS WELL.
SO, UH, YEAH, I CAN SEE EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THERE THOUGH.
BOARD MEMBER MAILING, THIS IS JUST KIND OF AN IDEA.
AND I DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT, WHAT THE TARGET WANTS TO DO, YOU KNOW, MONUMENT SIGN WISE INSTEAD OF DENYING, BECAUSE I WOULD HATE FOR YOU TO NOT BE ABLE TO COME BACK FOR A YEAR BECAUSE WE DENY THIS.
UM, I KNOW THAT'S A CASE FOR LEGAL.
ERIC LOPEZ, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
SO IT IS A, THERE IS A YEAR LIMITATION ON IT'S A TWO-PART IT'S A SUBSTANTIALLY OR, UM, IS THE SAME OR SIMILAR VARIANTS.
AND THEN THE SECOND PRONG IS THE SAME SITE.
SO I DON'T WANT TO COMMENT ON A HYPOTHETICAL SECOND CASE, BUT, BUT IF IT IS NOT CURRENTLY, RIGHT NOW, IT'S POSTED AS AN, UH, AS A VARIANCE TO THE HEIGHT IN 25, 10 DASH 1 23.
SO IF IT WAS DENIED, BUT IF THE BOARD CHOOSES TO DIE, THEN THE APPLICANT WOULD BE PRECLUDED FROM SEEKING THE SAME OR SIMILAR, UM, TYPE OF VARIANTS FOR THIS SAME SITE.
WHAT YOU GUYS WERE DESCRIBING MAY BE A DIFFERENT ONE.
BUT AGAIN, SINCE I HAVE, I DON'T SEE THAT APPLICATION.
I DON'T WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT.
SO YEAH, IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT ONE, BUT IT WOULD BE ON THE SAME SITE.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE MELISSA WAS SAYING WE COULD RUN INTO THE YEAR THING.
SO, SO WOULD IT BE IN YOUR BEST INTEREST FOR US TO POSTPONE? SO YOU COULD SPEAK TO TARGET AND MAYBE COME BACK WITH A MONUMENT SIGN, OPTION SETBACKS, AND THAT WAY YOU WON'T BE PRECLUDED FROM COMING BACK FOR A YEAR.
DO YOU NEED ONE OR TWO MONTHS FOR THIS? UM, I THINK A MONTH WE'LL DO THE LIAISON.
DO YOU HAVE ISN'T UM, MELISSA ON THE PHONE FROM TARGET? UH, SHE IS SHE'S, UM, THERE ON SUPPORT, MOSTLY FOR THE TREELINE ISSUE SO THAT SHE CAN, YOU KNOW, BE THERE TO SUPPORT THE CASE AND TO SHOW THAT THERE IS A TARGET REPRESENTATIVE THAT IS GOING TO BE TRIMMING THOSE TREES YEAR ROUND BOARD MEMBER BLOOM, SORRY, I'LL SUPPORT THE POSTPONEMENT, BUT I DO WANT TO REITERATE THE COMMENT I MADE LAST TIME IS THAT I THINK THAT THE PHOTOS THAT WERE PROVIDED IN THE PACKET DON'T REALLY REPRESENT THE CONTEXT ACCURATELY BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE THAT EXISTING PYLON SIGN, A LONG RESEARCH BOULEVARD, WHICH YOU CAN SEE IF YOU'RE TRAVELING EASTBOUND ON GREAT HILLS TRAIL AFTER YOU CROSS UNDER 180 3.
AND TO ME, THE PICTURES ARE SHOWING OUR PICTURES OF OUR SITES WHERE YOU ARE ALREADY BASICALLY AT THE TARGET.
YOU'RE NEXT TO THE TARGET THAT HAS THE TARGET LOGO ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
SO, I MEAN, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT, BUT IF, IF THE NEXT ROUND THAT YOU SEE CONTINUES TO INCLUDE THE PYLON SIGN, I LIKE TO REQUEST SIGNS THAT BETTER CAPTURE THE CONTEXT AND THE OTHER AVAILABLE SIGNAGE ON SITE.
SO, UH, I, YOU HAVE A TEMPORARY SIGN THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE A PERMIT AT THE DRIVEWAY HOLE AND IT'S ACTUALLY IN A REALLY GOOD LOCATION BECAUSE YOU'RE REALLY TRYING TO GET THE, THE TRAVELING PUBLIC IN THE DRIVEWAY HALL SAFELY.
UM, SO IF THERE WERE ASSIGN VARIANCE REQUESTS THAT WERE PER SETBACK THAT MET THE VISIBILITY DIMENSIONS OF HAVING A CAR COME UP AND BEING ABLE TO SEE TRAFFIC, IT IS A DIVIDED ROAD RIGHT THERE NOT CREATING A PROBLEM.
I DON'T THINK FOR ME THAT HAVING SOMEONE SAY THEY'RE GOING TO COME OUT AND TRIM THE TREES, UM, IS ACTUALLY, UH, A WINNER.
UM, I ACTUALLY LIKED THE TREES AND WHERE THAT'S IN A VERY, UM, INSTEAD OF IN A PART OF TOWN WHERE I THINK THE TREES ARE ACTUALLY EVEN, EVEN MORE, UH, APPRECIATED AS A, THAT AREA OF TOWN REMINDS ME OF A PARTICULARLY ANOTHER CITY.
UM, NOT EVEN THE AUSTIN THAT I KNOW.
AND THIS IS A REALLY BEAUTIFUL STORY.
IT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST ONES BUILT UNDER THE DESIGN STANDARDS.
[00:40:01]
IT, IT IS AMAZING.AND EVEN I WHO LIVE IN SOUTH AUSTIN, UH, AND, AND SHOP AT THE ONE ON BEN WHITE WILL, WILL EVERY NOW AND AGAIN, HOP UP INTO 180 3 AND GO TO THAT PARTICULAR STORE.
UM, SO I, I'M NOT, I'M NOT, UH, UH, I AM, UH, I AM A TARGET FAN.
UM, JUST IN GENERAL, THIS ISN'T, THIS ISN'T A A, IS THERE MY PERSONAL THOUGHTS ABOUT TRIMMING TREES TO MAKE THE SIGNS WORK? UH, IT'S NOT, UH, IT'S NOT, UH, UH, I THOUGHT THAT'S BOAT WINNING IN MY BOAT.
JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT, SORRY, BOARD MEMBER VENTOLIN.
THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BECAUSE WHERE YOU WOULD WANT TO SEE THAT SIGN IS WHEN YOU'RE COMING NORTHBOUND ON GOOD HILLS TRAILS.
WHEN YOU COME IN, YOU KNOW, FROM OFF OF, OFF OF A QUARRY LAKE AREA, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU REALLY CAN'T TELL WHERE TO GET INTO TARGET COMING FROM UNDER 180 3, IT'S EASIER TO SEE BECAUSE OF THE OTHER EXISTING SIGNS.
AND YOU CAN LITERALLY SEE THE BUILDING WITH A SIGN ON IT COMING FROM 180 3, BUT COMING FROM CORY LAKE IS MOST OF THE TIME BE FRANK WITH YOU.
I OVERSHOOT IT MYSELF AND THEN GOT TO SPIN AROUND OR LISTEN TO MY WIFE, GET ABOUT IT, WHICH SHE CALLS IT TOSHA BY THE WAY TARGETED.
BUT, UM, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A GOOD IDEAL PLACE TO SET A PEDESTAL SIGN.
IF THE SIGNS ALREADY BEEN FABRICATED, IT WOULDN'T TAKE MUCH MORE BECAUSE BEING IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY TO WHACK OFF THE BOTTOM WHERE THE POST COMES DOWN MOUNTAIN AND DO SOME MASONRY AROUND IT.
BUT THAT'S JUST THOUGHT, I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE YOU SOME FOOD FOR THOUGHT TO BE ABLE TO TAKE BACK TO YOUR CLIENT BECAUSE I DON'T SEE THEM GETTING THE EXTENSION BOARD MEMBER SMITH.
I JUST WANTED TO GET A CLARIFICATION ABOUT THE POSTPONEMENT, BECAUSE WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT IF WE DO POSTPONE IT AT THE NEXT MEETING, WE ARE EITHER GOING TO DENY OUTRIGHT OR ARE WE BASED ON LEGAL'S OPINION? ARE WE GOING TO CONSIDER AT THAT POINT AN AMENDMENT, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING? IT'S NOT SURE OF THE MECHANICS OF THE POSTPONEMENT.
SO ERICA LOPEZ, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
SO THE FIRST QUESTION WAS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF, IF WE DENIED IT OUTRIGHT, WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO NOT COME BACK? AND SO AGAIN, IT'S A TWO PRONG QUESTION.
IT'S IS IT THE SAME OR SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR VARIANTS ON THE SAME SITE? SO IF THE APPLICANT WERE TO COME BACK WITH A DIFFERENT VARIANCE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S THE SAME SITE, THEY MAY BE ABLE TO, I JUST DON'T WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE BRINGING BACK.
THE SECOND QUESTION THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER VENTOLIN SAID WAS, COULD WE REQUIRE THEM TO DO A PETROSAL STOOL AND THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO A SPECIFIC PROVISION.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE THE BOARD, RIGHT? I GET THAT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
WHAT'S GOING TO BE BEFORE I SET THE NEXT MEETING, BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE INCLINED TO NOT DENY THIS, THAT PERHAPS.
AND, BUT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO HAVE AN OPINION ABOUT WHETHER WE CAN AMEND AT THAT POINT.
THIS, THIS POSTPONEMENT WE'LL GIVE LEGAL THE TIME TO RESEARCH HOW, BUT I DON'T.
I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT SAYING NO, BUT ALSO UNDERSTAND WHAT HE'S SAYING, BECAUSE IF, IF WHAT WE SAY IS, NO, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE GOING TO DENY THIS, BUT HE COMES BACK WITH A PEDESTAL.
WE MAY HAVE TO GIVE A SETBACK VARIANCE.
CAN WE ADD THAT IN? CAN WE NO, THAT'S OKAY.
THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE APPLICATION.
AND HE CAN'T DO THAT FOR A YEAR.
WHAT ARE OUR OPTIONS HERE? IS THERE ANY WAY TO WORK AROUND THIS, TO WHERE WE COULD GRANT IT? HE COULD WITH, SORRY, ONE SEC.
SO THE APPLICATION THAT THE VARIANTS BEFORE YOU IS FOR A, A VARIANCE TO SECTION 25, 10, 1 23, UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ANOTHER APPLICATION WOULD BE IF IT'S FOR A DIFFERENT TYPE OF REGULATION THAT HE MAY BE ABLE TO, BUT I, I'M NOT SURE IF YOU WERE TO DENY IT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE APPLICATION IN FRONT OF ME.
SO THAT THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO SAY.
IT'S THIS, IT IT'S A TWO-PRONG TWO-PRONG THING.
SO IT WOULD BE THE SAME SITE, BUT IS IT THE SAME TYPE AS TRUE A HOTSPOT? SO, OKAY.
WE ALL HAVE, HAVE OUR OPINIONS.
YOU KIND OF HEARD A LITTLE BIT OF THE FLAVOR.
THERE ARE SOME OF US THAT THINK IT, THAT A MONUMENT SIGN AND SOME OF YOUR EXHIBITS
[00:45:01]
ARE NOT QUITE FOCUSED ENOUGH.AND THEN A MONUMENT SIGN MIGHT BE BETTER.
SO IF WE POSTPONE IT, YOU COULD TAKE THIS A COUPLE DIFFERENT WAYS.
ONE IS, IS YOU COULD POSTPONE IT, COME BACK WITH A BETTER PACKAGE OF PHOTOGRAPHS.
IF YOU THINK THAT THAT CAN AND GET YOU A MAJORITY BOAT, UH, FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE, AS IT SAYS, OR YOU COULD REVISE THE APPLICATION AND RE NOTIFY FOR A SETBACK VARIANCE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN DO THAT IN THE TIMELINE BETWEEN NOW AND THE NEXT MEETING, BUT THAT IS, IF YOU CHOOSE TO TAKE THE WORDS AND DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, YOU CAN ALWAYS COME BACK IN AND UPDATE YOUR EXHIBITS FOR THIS EXACT VARIANCE THAT YOU HAVE.
BUT YOU'VE KIND OF HEARD FEEDBACK FROM A NUMBER OF PEOPLE.
UM, YOU COULD UPDATE THE APPLICATION TO INCLUDE IT ON THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IS, IS IF THAT EMOTION WERE MADE AND IT DID NOT PASS, IT COULD, COULD PRECLUDE YOU FROM BEING ABLE TO COME BACK ON THIS PARTICULAR POSTAGE STAMP FOR 365 DAYS.
AND I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAS THAT TYPE OF INTENT.
UM, AND AGAIN, LEGAL CAN'T REALLY COMMENT WITHOUT SEEING WHAT THAT NEW APPLICATION WOULD LOOK LIKE.
SO WE'RE KIND OF IN THIS, UM, DISCUSSION OF WHAT IF DOES THAT, DOES THAT DESCRIBE IT BETTER, UH, BOARD MEMBER SMITH? WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS THAT THE POSTPONEMENT WILL ONLY BE ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING THEM TO PRESENT A BETTER CASE ON EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE WANTING TO DO WITH THE, WITH THE SIGNAGE AS WE PRESENTED TODAY, OR AMEND THE APPLICATION TO PERHAPS HAVE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, UH, VARIANCE REQUEST.
I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT IT COULD BE EITHER, BUT I'M UNDERSTANDING LEGAL.
CAN'T TELL US WHETHER THAT'S OKAY OR NOT UNTIL THEY SEE THE ACTUAL APPLICATION.
SO THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SUBMIT A NEW APPLICATION ANYWHERE ELSE WITH THE SAME APPLICATION.
SO IF WE POSTPONE IT, NO, THEN, THEN NOT.
IF WE POST OPPONENT, WE'VE TAKEN NO ACTION.
WHAT I, WHAT THE QUESTION WAS IF WE DENIED IT, IF WE DENIED IT IS, IS WHEN THERE'S THESE CONSEQUENCES.
THAT'S WHY I TO LEGAL DAY AS TO THE QUESTION BEFORE WE TOOK THAT ACTION, BECAUSE THAT SOUNDED LIKE THAT DIRECTION.
WE WERE GOING BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.
AND, AND ALSO JUST, I DON'T KNOW, AND THIS IT'D BE FOR LEGAL, BUT AGAIN, GETTING BACK TO THE, TRYING TO NOT DENY YOUR APPLICATION IS IF, IF WE CAN'T AMEND THE APPLICATION TO GET WHAT HE WANTS, WOULD IT, IS THERE A WAY FOR HIM TO WITHDRAW AND THEN COME BACK BECAUSE OF WITHDRAWAL WILL ALSO NOT BE A DENIAL, CORRECT.
WITHDRAWAL THIS CASE AND COME BACK WITH, UM, A MONUMENT.
UH, SO I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT, SHE'S THE EASIEST PATH FOR YOU.
AND I, AND JUST SO THAT WE'RE NOT DENYING YOUR CASE, I APPRECIATE IT FOR MEMBER VIOLIN.
WE HAVE DONE IT SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD WHERE WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS WE HAVE POSTPONED A CASE AT THAT POINT, THE APPLICANT DURING THE TIME OF THAT MEETING TO THE NEXT MEETING WITH DREW HIS APPLICATION, HE HAD TO RESUBMIT HIS APPLICATION AGAIN, ALONG WITH REPOSTING AGAIN.
AND THEN AT THAT POINT, HE COMES UP HERE WITH A CLEAN SLATE.
UH, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WOULD ANSWER YOUR QUESTION TO MR. SMITH.
WE HAVE DONE THAT BEFORE, WHERE WE POSTPONED IT THERE.
IN THAT TIME THEY'VE WITHDRAWN IT, THEY AMENDED IT.
THEY SUBMIT A WHOLE NEW APPLICATION BECAUSE THE OTHER ONE HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN AND THEN THAT'S BROUGHT UP.
NOW WE WILL REQUIRE ANOTHER REPOSTING.
AND IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE ANOTHER FEE.
SO, BUT THAT'S, I MEAN, TYLER, JAY'S ALL LOWER, MAN.
IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S THE ROUTE THEY WANT TO GO, IF THEY REALLY NEED IT, THEY REALLY WANT THIS SIGN.
THE ONLY OTHER THING IS TO JUST CALL IT A DAY AND, UM, OR, OR TEST THE WATERS WITH, WITH LEGAL AND WORK WITH STAFF, DOING AMENDED OF THE SAME OF WHAT YOU WANT TO COME BACK WITH AND SEE IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN, THAT YOU CAN DO.
AND IF YOU CAN'T DO THAT BEFORE YOU COME BACK AND BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT, BECAUSE BY THEN LEGAL CON CAN LOOK AT IT AND STAFF CAN LOOK AT IT AND SAY, WHETHER THAT'S AVAILABLE OPTION FOR YOU.
THEN AT THAT POINT, YOU CAN DECIDE IF YOU WANT TO WITHDRAW AND JUST DO A NEW ONE, OR IF WE CAN GO FORWARD WITH THE AMENDED.
I THINK THAT, UH, IT'D BE AN ALL IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO POSTPONE JUST SO I CAN SPEAK TO MY CLIENT AS
[00:50:01]
WELL TO SEE THEIR PATH FORWARD.POINT OF ORDER, WE HAD A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO POSTPONE, WHICH WAS WITHDRAWN, BUT WE STILL HAVE ON THE FLOOR, A MOTION TO DENY MADE BY BOARD MEMBER VIOLIN.
UH, I'LL MAKE, UM, MOTION TO POSTPONE.
IS THAT TO THEM? MAY 9TH MEETING, CORRECT? CORRECT.
I THINK WE JUST WENT THROUGH A LOT OF TROUBLE TO TELL YOU.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE 2, 5, 9, 20, 22.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO THE MAIN NINTH, 2022 MEETING.
THIS IS GOING TO BE ITEM C TWO C 16 20 22 0 0 0 1.
SO WE'RE GOING TO POSTPONE THAT TO MAY 9TH.
AND SECOND OF THAT, THAT WAS A MOTION MADE BY VICE-CHAIR HEARTBURN, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBERS SMITH.
[C-3 C16-2022-0002 Clay Hardman for Campus Investors Austin, LP 2323 San Antonio Street]
NEXT ITEM C3 C 16 20 22 0 0 0 2.THIS IS GOING TO BE CLAY HARDMAN FOR CAMPUS INVESTORS.
AUSTIN LP, 23, 23 SAN ANTONIO STRAIGHT.
IT'S MR. HARDMAN HERE OR ON THE PHONE.
I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THE NAME? DON ALIMONY.
CAUSE SHE HAD MESSAGED ME THAT SHE DID.
CAN ANYONE HEAR ME? OKAY NOW? OH, GOOD.
I GUESS MY HEADPHONES DIET AND I DIDN'T REALIZE IT.
REPRESENTING, UH, CLAY HARTMAN.
LET'S GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP.
THERE'S GOING TO BE APPROXIMATELY 32ND DELAINE FROM WHEN YOU SEE IT ON YOUR TV OR WEB BROWSER.
SO IF YOU NEED THIS SLIDE A MAN'S JUST SAY NEXT SLIDE.
I'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN THE PRESENTATION IS UP.
UH, THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR TAKING THE TIME TO HEAR US OUT.
UH, THIS IS IN REGARDS TO 23, 23 SAN ANTONIO STREET FOR THE CASTILIAN, UM, ON THE FIRST SLIDE.
SO IF YOU GO TO THE SECOND SLIDE, YOU WILL SEE WHERE THE BLADE SIGN, THE PLANS, THE LOCATION IS THE NORTH ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING.
WHAT YOU SEE IS CURRENTLY THERE.
[00:55:01]
WE'RE ACTUALLY HAVING AN APPROVED PERMIT FROM THE CITY.OH, THAT SITE'S NOT MINE THAT I'M SEEING.
UM, SO THE SIGN THAT YOU SEE ON PAGE TWO IS CURRENTLY THERE.
WE HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN APPROVAL FOR BASICALLY REPLACED THE WHOLE SIGN, TAKE IT DOWN, PUT IN NEW, UH, SIGNAGE, NEW VINYL AND EVERYTHING ON IT.
WE'RE ASKING THE COMMITTEE TO ALLOW US TO HAVE A LIT SIGN IN THAT AREA.
THEY DO NOT ALLOW ILLUMINATED SIGNS WITHOUT APPROVAL.
AUGUSTINE, NORTH ELEVATION LOCATION.
IF YOU SEE IT'S RIGHT HERE ON THE CORNER OF WEST 24TH AND SAN ANTONIO STREET, AND IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, IT IS THE PICTURE OF WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE.
UH, EVERYTHING STAYS THE SAME.
IT GIVES YOU THE TEXT OF THE LEASING CENTER.
IT GIVES YOU EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THAT BUILDING AND UNDERNEATH IT, ALONG WITH WHAT THE TENANTS ARE AND THE NEXT SLIDE THERE'S OF COURSE JUST THE BASIC MOUNTING DETAILS OF HOW THE SIGN IS MOUNTED TO THE BUILDING CURRENTLY AND HOW IT WILL BE REMOUNTED BACK TO THE BUILDING ON THE NON LIT SIGN.
I'VE ALSO PUT IN THE ELECTRICAL DETAILS OF THE POWER SUPPLY FOR THE SIGN, LETTING YOUR HOUSE IT'S GOING TO BE ILLUMINATED INTERNALLY WITH THE LOADS AND EVERYTHING.
AND THE VERY LAST PAGE IS THE MOUNTING DETAILS WITH ELECTRICAL DETAILS.
WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR THE COMMITTEE TO GRANT US EXPERIENCE, TO TURN A NON ILLUMINATED SIGN TO AN ILLUMINATED SIGN THAT'S CURRENTLY IN PLACE ON THE BUILDING.
DO WE HAVE ANY OPPOSITION? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND START ON THIS ONE, IF Y'ALL ARE OKAY WITH IT, JUST TO REMINDER FOR THE NEW MEMBERS.
SO THERE IS, UH, AN ERROR, SO TO SPEAK IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHERE THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY WAS CHANGED TO PROHIBIT ILLUMINATION, BUT THAT WAS NEVER THE INTENT WITH APPLIED ACCIDENTALLY.
WE'VE HAD JERRY RESTHAVEN COME AND TALK TO US ABOUT THIS.
SO IF SOMEONE'S OPEN TO MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE I'M BEHIND IT.
I WAS, I WAS CURIOUS AS TO WHAT HEIGHT THAT SIGN WAS AT THE SIGN.
IF YOU GO BACK TO OF THE PAGE FOR THE BLADE SIDE.
SO THE SIGN WILL ACTUALLY BE 21 FEET IN THE AIR AND IT'S 11 FEET FROM THE BOTTOM ELEVATION FOR THE SIDEWALK AREA.
AND THE SIGN IS 12 FEET TALL? NO, THAT'S IT CURRENTLY.
THAT IS THE SIGN THAT'S OUT THERE.
UH, I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION, UH, BOARD MEMBER PUT, I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, HOW LONG HAS THIS SIGN BEEN THERE UNDER ILLUMINATED? UH, IT'S BEEN A NOMINATED AS FAR AS I KNOW ABOUT THE BEST I HAVE RECORD IS FIVE TO SIX YEARS.
AND THEN IT LOOKS TO BE ON PAGE, UM, FOUR OF YOUR PRESENTATION.
ARE YOU ASKING JUST FOR THE BOTTOM SEVEN FEET, FIVE AND A HALF INCHES TO BE ILLUMINATED JUST THE ORANGE PART? WELL, AND IT WILL ELOPE IT'LL ELIMINATE THE ENTIRE SIGN, BUT DUE TO WHAT'S ON THE TOP WHERE IT SAYS, LET ME GO BACK TO THE LEASING CENTER.
IT'S JUST GOING TO GLOW A LIGHTER, LIKE A, LIKE A HALO LIT IN A WAY.
IT'S JUST, I GUESS, REFLECTIVE LIGHT IS THE WORD I'M LOOKING FOR WILL BE ON THE VERY TOP.
JUST SO IT JUST KIND OF GLOWS, I GUESS.
I DON'T KNOW HOW IT STICKS PAYMENT.
I ENDED THE PERMITTING PART SO WELL, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE UNCLEAR, BUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT THE, THE, THE ILLUMINATION, THE LIGHTS WILL ONLY BE IN THE BOTTOM SEVEN FOOT FIVE AND A HALF INCHES PAGE
[01:00:02]
ON THAT ONE.WELL, THE ELECTRICAL DETAILS, I HAVE THE LINES GOING ALL THE WAY TOP TO BOTTOM.
SO I'M NOT SEEING WHERE YOU'RE SEEING THEM.
THERE'S JUST A LINE IN BETWEEN, I GUESS THAT'S HOW THEY SPLIT IT.
I'M LOOKING AT PAGE FOUR AND THE, THE TOP, UH, FOUR FEET WHERE IT'S BLUE AND IT SAYS AMERICAN CAMPUS LEASING CENTER.
IT SAYS, IT SAYS THAT THAT IS A NON LIT ALUMINUM CABINET SIGN.
THAT'S PAINTED IN A P ONE REGATA SW 65 17.
OH, THE LIGHTING IS WANTING TO RUN THE LIGHTING.
IT'S GOING TO RUN ALL THE WAY THROUGH IT SO THAT I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE ELECTRICAL PART ON THIS.
THE BOTTOM PART IS DEFINITELY LIFTED.
THE TOP IS JUST, LIKE I SAID, THE LIGHTS GOING TO COME FROM THE INSIDE AND JUST ELIMINATE TO THE TOP.
IT'S JUST, IT'S KIND OF JUST AN AFTERGLOW OPAQUE LIGHTING.
WELL, THE ACTUAL LIGHTING WILL JUST BE IN THAT BOTTOM ORANGE PART.
AND IT WILL COME UP TO THE TOP.
I THINK IT, I THINK THAT THE, THE, WHERE THE AMERICAN CAMPUS AND THE LOGO AND THE LEASING ARE THAT THE INTERNAL LETTERS WILL BE LIT AND THAT THE FACE IS ALUMINUM AND THAT THERE'S VINYL IN THE ORANGE PART.
AND THE LETTER, IF I WERE TRYING TO TRANSLATE WHAT I THINK IT SAYS, UM, SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE THE SCENIC SIGNS WHERE THE INDIVIDUAL LETTERS ARE LIT.
THAT'S WHAT'LL HAPPEN AT THE TOP.
UM, SO, AND CAN THE SIGN D PROGRAM TO NOT BE ON 24 HOURS A DAY? I MEAN, WE CAN HAVE A DIMMER SWITCH ADDED IF NECESSARY, UH, TO GO TO DESK LIGHTING.
WE'VE DONE THAT QUITE A FEW TIMES IN DIFFERENT AREAS, IF THAT'S NECESSARY, DOES IT NEED TO BE COMPLETELY OFF AT NIGHT? WELL, IT'S JUST THAT THERE'S, UM, THERE WAS SOME FEEDBACK IN THE PACKET THAT, UM, ABOUT BEING RESIDENTIAL KIND OF BEHIND THERE AND, AND CONCERNED ABOUT LIGHTING.
AND SO I JUST LIKE THAT IF, UH, AT SOME KIND OF, UM, I MEAN, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW HOW OFTEN YOU ARE OPEN AT, YOU KNOW, SAY 11 O'CLOCK AT NIGHT.
UM, I MEAN, I KNOW THAT THE IT'S, THE SIGN IS AT A NICE HEIGHT FOR PEOPLE WALKING DOWN THE STREET AND I GET THAT.
UM, AND, AND THAT YOU WANT THAT RECOGNITION.
UM, BUT WOULD IT BE, UM, I GUESS I SHOULD SAY BOARD MEMBER VON OLIN, PERHAPS, MAYBE THAT THE SIGN NOT BE ILLUMINATED, SAY 11:00 PM TO 7:00 AM.
IS THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT I'M HEARING THAT IS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT BOARD MEMBER VINYL.
AND ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? YES.
AND I THINK WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO DESCRIBE EARLIER, MELISSA, IS IT BASICALLY BACK-LIT, IT'S GOING TO BE BACKLIT.
I COULD NOT THINK OF THE WORD THAT SAVED MY LIFE.
I SHARE THAT, UH, NO LIGHTS FROM 11:00 PM TO 7:00 AM.
I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT, I MEAN, IF PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO SLEEP, BUT I THINK THAT'S THAT'S RIGHT.
AND, AND I UNDERSTAND THE NEED.
AND I DO THINK THAT THE SIGNS AT A NICE HEIGHT, THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO GET PEOPLE WHO ARE WALKING DOWN THE STREET AND WILL SEE IT IN REGISTERED LOCATION.
AND I THINK HE WAS AS APPROPRIATE IN THE CAMPUS AREA.
UM, BOARD MEMBER VANILLIN GOOD BOARD MEMBER SMITH.
I JUST HAD A QUESTION, WHETHER THERE WAS ANY CONSIDERATION OF ACTUALLY MAKING THIS, UH, SOLAR POWERED DELIGHTING.
UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT I, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'VE DONE OR WE DEALT WITH YET.
UM, SOLAR POWER, MY CONCERN ISN'T GETTING ENOUGH TO POWER THE SIGN DUE TO THE HEIGHTS OF THE BUILDING, BUT I CAN CHECK INTO IT.
I MEAN, IS THAT, I JUST THINK IN GENERAL, THE OUTDOOR SIGNAGE IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF SOLAR POWER.
AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW YOUR PARTICULAR
[01:05:01]
IS THERE, BUT MY QUESTION WAS MAINLY AS IT BEEN CONSIDERED AND I WOULD ASK THAT IT BE CONSIDERED IF IT'S NOT.I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE A GREAT GOING FORWARD WITH ANYTHING.
IT'S DEFINITELY THOUGHT FOR SOLAR POWER.
SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU.
I WAS JUST GOING TO MENTION THAT, YOU KNOW, BELOW THIS SIGN, THERE'S A RETAIL TENANT CALLED INSOMNIA COOKIES, WHICH IS A BACKLIT SIGN THAT IS PROBABLY SIGNIFICANTLY BRIGHTER THAN THE FOUR 60 WATT BULBS THAT ARE IN THE SIGN.
SO, UM, PRETTY MINIMAL POWER USAGE THEMES, PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
WOULD YOU HAVE ANY MOTION TO APPROVE? UH, WHAT DID AMENDMENT TO HAVE ASSIGNED TURN OFF? IS IT, IS IT OFFER, DO YOU JUST WANT TO DIM ALEXA? I, I THINK I'M OPEN TO WHAT YOU THINK, MICHAEL, AND I THINK, UH, EVERYBODY'S ABOUT TO GO TAKE PERMISSION.
SO I'M GOING TO MUTE, I THINK DYLAN CONCERNING OF THE OTHER SIDE OF THERAPY, ALL OKAY WITH THAT.
UH, CARLOS LET'S DO JIM FROM 11 TO SEVEN.
THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE SIGN DIMMED.
YOU WANT THE FINDINGS? MADAM CHAIR FROM 11 TO 70.
BUT WHO DID YOU MAKE? YES, FOR NUMBER ONE, FINDING THE BOARD MUST DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF SUFFICIENCY OF, AND WEIGHED OVER EVIDENCE, SUPPORTING THE FINDINGS DESCRIBED IN ORDER TO GRANT THE REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE.
THE BOARD MUST FIRST MAKE ONE OR MORE OF THE FINDINGS DESCRIBED UNDER ONE, TWO OR THREE IN THE APPLICATION.
THE BOARD MUST THEN MAKE FINDINGS DESCRIBED IN ITEM FOUR.
IF THE BOARD CANNOT MAKE THE REQUIRED FINDINGS, IT CANNOT PROVE ASSIGN VARIANCE.
THEY CONTEND THAT THEIR ENTITLEMENT TO THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SIGNING.
UH, THE FINDINGS WANDA VARIANCE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE OF THE STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF ARTICLE PROHIBITS ANY REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGNS ON THE SITE, CONSISTENT CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE SITE.
SO THAT'S A DIMENSIONS, LANDSCAPING OR TYPOGRAPHY BECAUSE THEY WOULD LIKE TO ADD THE INTERNAL ELIMINATION TO AN EXISTING BLADE SIGN THAT HAS BEEN INSTALLED FOR YEARS.
AND I'M GOING TO DROP STRAIGHT DOWN TO FOR THE ESSENCE OF TIME AND GRANTING A VARIANCE WOULD NOT PROVIDE THE APPLICANT AND A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE, NOT ENJOYED BY OTHERS, SIMILARLY SITUATED OR POTENTIALLY SIMILARLY SITUATED BECAUSE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANT IS NOT CONSIDERED A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE.
AS MANY OF THE NEIGHBORS HAVE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGN IS SIMILAR TO WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR.
SO ONE LAST TIME MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT TO DIM THE LIGHTS FROM 11:00 PM TO 7:00 AM, STRIATUM C3 C 16 20 22 0 0 0 2 MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAN SECOND IN BY VICE-CHAIR HALL.
DARRELL PUT GIVEN THE EXISTENCE OF THIS SIGN FOR SO LONG WITHOUT ILLUMINATION.
I DON'T THINK THAT THEY'VE MET THEIR BURDEN TO SHOW WHAT THEY NEED FOR A WAIVER.
UM, AND SO I'M GOING TO BOTH KNOW AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.
YOUR MOTION OR SORRY, YOUR VARIANCE IS GRANTED.
[D-1 C15-2022-0025 Karen McGraw for Suzannah Cox 3709 Cedar Street]
NEXT ITEM WILL BE ITEM D ONE C 15 20 22 0 0 2 5.IS THIS GOING TO BE CURE MCGRAW OR SUSANNA COX? 3 7 0 9 CEDAR STREET.
WE HAVE A PRESENTATION TO GET YOU UP.
I'M KAREN MCGRAW FOR SUSANNA COX.
WE ARE HERE TO REQUEST TWO VARIANCES FOR 37 0 9 CEDAR STREET.
[01:10:02]
UM, THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF APARTMENTS IN THIS AREA.I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS REALLY QUICKLY AND TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, THE EXISTING USE AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, THE YELLOW HOUSE ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THE ZONING IS MF TOO.
HOWEVER, IT CAN'T BE DEVELOPED AS MULTIFAMILY.
SO THE OWNER IS SIMPLY ASKING THAT SHE BE ABLE TO BUILD A SMALL SECOND UNIT, UH, WHILE MAINTAINING THE 1930 BUNGALOW, CREATING A TWO FAMILY USE AND THEN RELOCATING THE GARAGE FOR LEX'S WHILE PROTECTING THE HERITAGE, THE HERITAGE COUNTRIES.
THIS IS THE ZONING IN THIS BLOCK.
IT IS A VERY MIXED ZONING IN THIS LOT IS A UP TO THE FIRST, UH, VARIANCES TO REQUEST THE MINIMUM LOT, WENT FROM 50 FEET TO 41 FEET TO ALLOW THE TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE.
AND WE JUST HAVE SOME NOTES ABOUT HOW THE NCCD, UM, REQUIRES THIS.
AND, UH, BUT IT DOES ALLOW TO FAMILY ON A LOT, AT LEAST 57 50 IN THE EXISTING LOT, 66 36, THIS EXHIBIT INDICATES I'M SORRY, THE BUILDINGS ARE KIND OF LIGHT.
IT INDICATES BOTH THE, UH, FRONT WALK LOT WIDTHS AND ONLY TWO LOTS HERS.
AND THE ONE TO THE NORTH ARE OUR SMALLEST 41 FEET.
AND IT ALSO SHOWS YOU THE FOOTPRINTS OF BUILDINGS.
IT ALSO SHOWS YOU THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS ON THIS HALF BLOCK, THERE ARE 47 DWELLING UNITS.
THE SECOND VARIANCE IS TO DECREASE THE MINIMUM INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM FIVE FEET, WHICH IS REQUIRED TO THREE FEET TO ERECT A GARAGE, UH, IN THE S3, UM,
UM, THE NORTH UNIVERSITY NCCD ACTUALLY ALLOWS THESE GARAGES TO BE REBUILT BECAUSE MANY OF THEM ARE OLD AND FALLING DOWN, UH, WITHIN THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE IN THE SAME LOCATION.
THIS ONE WILL NOT BE IN THE SAME LOCATION BECAUSE OF THE PROTECTION OF THE TREES.
THIS IS A SITE PLAN AT THE TOP.
UM, THE EXISTING HOUSE IS SHOWN AT THE TOP AND THEN THE PROPOSED SECOND UNIT AND THE PROPOSED GARAGE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE, YOU SEE THE 16 FOOT PAVED ALLEY TO THE RIGHT IS A LARGE TWO-STORY HOUSE THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING BUILT.
AND TO THE LEFT IS A TWO STORY APARTMENT BUILDING REASONABLE USE ALL THE OTHER LOTS ON THIS BLOCK FACE HAVE A WITH THE AT LEAST 50 FEET, EXCEPT FOR THESE TWO AND 37, 11 HAS A LARGE TWO-STORY HOME UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
TWO FAMILY USES ARE PERMITTED ON MOST NEARBY LOTS.
AND THE SECOND DWELLING WILL MEET ALL OTHER REGULATIONS.
THE GARAGE THREE FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK WILL PROTECT THE 28.6 INCH HERITAGE BE CONTRARY.
THE HARDSHIP IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY.
AS MOST OTHER LOTS ARE ALREADY DEVELOPED WITH TWO OR MORE DWELLING UNITS AND THE HARDSHIPS, NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA AS ONLY TWO LOTS HAVE A WIDTH LESS THAN 50 FEET.
AND THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK FOR THE GARAGE WILL LIMIT ITS WITH 10 FEET, WHICH IS NOT A VERY FUNCTIONAL GARAGE.
SO WE NEED, UH, THAT THREE FOOT SETBACK TO PROTECT THE HERITAGE TREE AND PROVIDE AT LEAST 12 FOOT GARAGE.
KEEPING THE BUNGALOW WILL MAINTAIN THE ORIGINAL CHARACTER OF THE BLOCK.
THERE ARE ONLY THREE OTHER REMAINING ORIGINAL HOMES.
THE TWO FAMILY USE WHEN I SEE TWO STORIES FOR ALL THE ADJACENT BUILDINGS OR AT LEAST TWO STORIES, AND THE TWO UNITS WILL REQUIRE LESS PARKING AND LESS TRAFFIC THAN THE ADJACENT USES.
THESE ARE PHOTOGRAPHS, UM, STARTING ON THE LEFT AT 38 STREET AT THE TOP AND SEE THE APARTMENT BUILDING.
THEN YOU CAN SEE THE LITTLE BLUE HOUSE UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND THEN THE YELLOW HOUSE, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT AND NEXT TO IT, ANOTHER APARTMENT BUILDING.
THEN WHAT LOOKS LIKE A GREEN LOT THAT HAS A TWO UNIT HOUSE AT THE BACK AND ON THE CORNER ON THE RIGHT CORNER IS AN OLD VICTORIAN HOUSE THAT HAS TWO UNITS IN BEHIND IT.
IT HAS SIX APARTMENTS LOOKING ACROSS THE ALLEY.
YOU SEE THESE TWO APARTMENT BUILDINGS AT THE TOP, LOOKING TO THE NORTH FROM THE, FROM THE CENTER OF THIS LOT.
YOU SEE THE TWO STORY HOUSE UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND LOOKING INTO THE SOUTH, BEYOND THE GARAGE, YOU SEE THE TWO-STORY APARTMENT BUILDING.
SO THE TWO VARIANCES, UH, DECREASING THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FROM 50 FEET TO 41 FEET AND DECREASING THE MINIMUM INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM FIVE TO THREE FEET FOR THE DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDING.
IT'S GOING TO GO OFF RIGHT NOW.
[01:15:01]
ANY OPPOSITION? OKAY, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.LOOKING AT YOU'RE LOOKING AT D ONE EIGHT OF YOUR PRESENTATION.
I CAN SEE WHERE IT LOOKS AND THROUGH MODERN TECHNOLOGY, I CAN BLOW THIS UP.
IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE A THREE FEET THAT YOU NEED FOR YOUR, FOR YOUR, THE VARIANT IS ONLY FOR THE NEW GARAGE.
IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE I CAN SEE THE FIVE FOOT MINIMUM ON THE PROPOSED SECOND DWELLING.
YOU'RE JUST ASKING FOR THE GARAGE, JUST FOR THE ACCESSORY.
AND I CAN SEE, I CAN SEE WHY YOU WANT TO RELOCATE IT A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE OF THE CRITICAL ROUTES ON OF THOSE TREES.
UM, AND THE OTHER THING IS THEY'RE THERE.
THE, THE PURPOSE FOR THE SECOND DRAWLING IS FOR, IT'S NOT FOR AN STR, IS IT? NO, THE OWNER, UH, SUSANNA COX WHO IS HERE TONIGHT, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR HER, UM, SHE WANTS TO HAVE THE TWO UNITS SO SHE CAN LIVE IN ONE AND HER SON CAN LIVE IN THE OTHER.
AND EVEN, EVEN RUNNING IT OUT LONG-TERM IS FINE.
AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED FOR ADDITIONAL, YOU KNOW, REVENUE FOR LIVING WITHIN THE AUSTIN CITY LIMITS IN THE HOUSE, PAYING OUR TAXES.
BUT, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT WASN'T, SHORT-TERM RENTAL, MADAM CHAIR.
I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT.
AND THEN IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY QUESTIONS FINE.
I'LL SECOND THAT NOW DID YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT A CONDITION? NO.
STR AND THE SECOND UNIT AND THE SETBACK FOR ONLY THE LENGTH OF THE GARAGE FOR THE LENGTH OF THE GARAGE.
SO, YEAH, I ACTUALLY, I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, WHY PUT THE GARAGE AND COMFORT THE VARIANCE OF THE GARAGE INSTEAD OF JUST DOING TWO OUTSIDE PARKING SPACES THAT ARE LIKE ON THE CURRENT HOUSE? I'M SORRY, YOU'RE ASKING WHY SHE WANTS A GARAGE INSTEAD OF OPEN PARKING.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? I THINK SHE WANTS THE SECURITY OF THE GARAGE BECAUSE YOU SAW THE BUILDINGS AROUND THIS ALLEY, THE ALLEY 16 FEET, WHICH IS GOOD FOR MANEUVERABILITY.
SO I THINK THE GARAGE IS A SECURITY ISSUE.
IS THIS GOING TO AFFECT HIM PERVIOUS COVERED? ALBERT'S IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR MF TWO 45% WELL UNDER, UM, UNDER THE CODE.
IF YOU DEVELOP A SINGLE FAMILY TO FAMILY USE, YOU MUST USE AS IF THREE REGULATIONS, IF YOU USE MF REGULATIONS, YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH SITE PLANNING, ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
SO, SO THIS WILL ALL BE DONE UNDER THE SINGLE FAMILY REGULATIONS AND WE'RE GOING TO MEET EVERYTHING ELSE.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH YOU.
WHEN PEOPLE KNOW MORE ABOUT THIS, I SEE, OH, A BOARD MEMBER PUT TO, TO OTHER THINGS WE'VE TYPICALLY LIMITED FAR ON, UH, THAT CONDITIONALLY OR, UM, I'M SORRY, ON, ON SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS LIKE THIS.
UH, AND SO I THINK THAT THAT MR. BONO LYNN MAY WANT TO CONSIDER THAT, UH, IN ADDITION, JUST TO MAKE IT REAL CLEAR, I THINK THAT WE PROBABLY NEED TO JUST SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE THAT SECOND DWELLING UNIT, BUT THE GARAGE WILL NOT BE USED FOR DWELLING AT ALL.
IT'LL JUST BE USED AS A, AS A GARAGE.
HOW, HOW IS THIS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? HOW, HOW ARE YOU SETTING ON THE SIZE OF YOUR, YOUR SECONDARY DRAWLING? IT'S LIMITED TO 850 SQUARE FEET UNDER THE NCCD AND THE GARAGE.
WE ARE SHOWING A 10 FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN THOSE TWO BUILDINGS.
SO THE GARAGE IS LOOKED AT AS AN ACCESSORY BUILDING.
I THINK THAT YOU'RE GOOD TO GO.
I'M OPEN TO THAT AND I WILL COMMEND YOU.
YOU DID YOUR HOMEWORK BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE COME UP AND THEN THEY WANTED TO FIND IT THE LAST MINUTE, A LONG TIME.
IT SHOWS YOU DID A GREAT JOB, NO STR FROM YOU.
AND THEN, UH, BOARD MEMBER PUT, IT WAS NO POINT OR POINT FOR IT.
WE'LL MEET ALL THE, AND THEN ALSO THE, UH, ONLY THREE FEET FOR JUST THE GARAGE ITSELF.
SO WE WANT TO TIE IT TO THE SITE PLAN.
IT'S A D I BELIEVE IT'S D DASH ONE EIGHT AND THE PRESENTATION AND THE PRESENTATION.
[01:20:01]
OKAY.THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH, UH, NO.
AT THE CONDITIONS CONDITIONS OF NO STR 0.4 FOR THE THREE FEET APPLIES TO THE, THE FREE FOOT VARIANTS SETBACK, BRIAN SUPPLIES TO THE GARAGE ONLY.
AND WE'RE GOING TO TIE THIS TO THE PRESENTATION.
D ONE EATS SITE PLAN, CORRECT MADE BY BOARD MEMBER VINE, OLIN, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER BALING.
TELL ME, IT'S LIKE WE HAVE TO DEFINE THE FINDINGS EVERY TIME.
REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR A REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE SITE HAS A 41 FOOT FRONT WIDTH, WHICH IS THE NARROWEST ON THE BLOCK, EXCEPT FOR THE NEIGHBOR, WHICH HAS THE SAME AND A NEW HOMES BEING CONSTRUCTED THERE.
NOW THAT'S NOT IMPORTANT, BUT THE OWNER WISHES TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING 854 SQUARE FOOT HOME AND ADD A SECOND ROLAND OF 850 SQUARE FEET LIMIT PER CODE HARDSHIP.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH A VARIANCES REQUEST IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IN THAT ALL OF THE LOTS ARE EITHER DEVELOPED AS MULTIFAMILY OR HAVE A LOT SIZE WITH, TO CREATE A SECOND DRAWLING.
AND THE GARAGE DOES NEED TO BE RELOCATED TO THE ALLOW EARLY ACCESS AND ALSO DUE TO TREE PROTECTION.
SO IT'LL STAY OUT OF THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE ONLY TWO LOTS ON THIS BLOCK HAVE 8 41 FOOT LOT WITH ALL OF THESE ARE WIDER.
AND, UH, THE C AREA CHARACTER, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER TO THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BE FAR LESS DENSE THAN THE APARTMENTS TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND EAST, AND WILL BE ONE STORY WITH LOFT AND NEIGHBORING BUILDINGS ARE ALL TWO STORIES OR GREATER.
I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT A COUPLE OF COMMENTS HERE, NOT OKAY, COOL.
IF I CAN MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS, UM, I'M NOT, I'M NOT TOTALLY SOLD ON THE REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THERE IS A HOME THERE, AND THAT'S A REASON WHAT I THINK, BUT, UH, I THINK GIVEN THE OVERARCHING NEED FOR HOUSING IN AUSTIN, I THINK THAT CERTAINLY, UH, IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR.
UM, YOU'VE GOTTEN TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS ALWAYS IMPORTANT AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST AT HAVING GROWN CHILDREN, I APPRECIATE THE NEED FOR SEPARATE SPACES.
YOU'RE BRINGING IT TO THIS GRANTED.
THANK YOU FOR MY PRESENTATION.
[D-2 C15-2022-0026 Michele Rogerson Lynch for Lennar-Kevin Pape 7236 & 7240 Dancing Wind Lane]
WELL, THE D TO C 15 20 22 0 0 2 6.THIS IS GOING TO BE MICHELLE ROGERS.
ROGER LISTEN LYNCH FOR THE NAR KEVIN PIMP 7 2 3 6 AND 7 2 4 0.
WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO, WELL, I'M GOING TO TALK MY PRESENTATION ABOUT ITEMS D TWO AND D THREE, BECAUSE THEY ARE BOTH RELATED IN THE SAME PROJECT.
FORTUNATELY, YOU HAVE TO TAKE THEM SEPARATELY.
SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
IF YOU'D LIKE, AFTER HEARING THIS, I THOUGHT YOU JUST NEEDED TO TAKE TWO SEPARATE VOTES.
CAN WE HEAR IT ALL AT ONCE? CAUSE WE RAN INTO THIS LAST MEETING WE HAD TO DO, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SAVE HER A LITTLE BIT OF TIME HERE.
MADAM SHERIFF, I COULD LOOKING AT THE HARDSHIP.
EVERYBODY'S LOOKING AT THE HARDSHIP.
THE FACT THAT THE SETBACK DEVIATION IS MINOR AND IS SPECIFIC TO THE PARTICULAR SET OF LOT, IS NOT GOING TO GET US THERE.
SO I DON'T WANT YOU TO GO THROUGH A WHOLE PRESENTATION.
AND BASICALLY THAT'S NOT A HARDSHIP WE CAN'T IN MY 15 YEARS OF BEING HERE, A MINOR DEVIATION, IS IT THE HARDSHIP? SO HARDSHIPS ARE USUALLY A SHAPE OF THE LOT TREES, UH, TYPOGRAPHY, YOU KNOW, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
BUT THE FACT THAT IT'S A MINOR DEVIATION, ISN'T QUITE GOING TO GET US THERE FROM A LEGAL STANDARD, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, YOU KNOW, BUT A MISTAKE BY THE, SO I WAS THINKING IT WAS MORE OF A CODING ISSUE BECAUSE THEY, THEY ARE HARD CITY,
[01:25:01]
BUT NOT REALLY, IF WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T TAKE CODE IS A HARDSHIP EITHER.EVEN WHEN THE CODING IS THE CODE IS CONFLICTING WITH EACH OTHER.
I TRY REALLY HARD NOT TO COME HERE.
I HAVEN'T BEEN HERE IN A VERY LONG TIME.
I USUALLY TRY TO WORK THESE THINGS OUT.
SO IT'S A REALLY, IT'S A TOUGH ONE.
UM, I MEAN, I, YEAH, I MEAN, I'M HAPPY TO RUN THROUGH IT.
I UNDERSTAND IF, IF IT LEADS TO A POSTPONEMENT, AS YOU DID PERFECT CASE BEFORE I'M HERE.
I JUST HAPPENED TO SEE THE HARDSHIP AND I KNOW HOW SOME OF THE, I THINK WE WERE YOU'RE LUCKY CAUSE A YEAR OR TWO BACK WHEN WE WERE VERY HEAVY ON THE LAWYER SIDE UP HERE, I KNOW IT WOULDN'T HAVE MADE THE, MADE THE CUT, BUT I WORKED FOR A LAW FIRM.
I JUST MASQUERADE AS A LAWYER, BUT I'M NOT ONE.
I'M OKAY WITH, IF SHE WANTS TO PRESENT.
SO LIKE, YEAH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THE PRESENTATION.
I'LL BE BRIEF IN BOARD MEMBERS.
MICHELLE LYNCH WITH METCALF WOLF, STUDENT WILLIAMS ON BEHALF OF LINDAR TONIGHT, I'M GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT D T EXCUSE ME, D TWO AND D THREE.
UM, WHICH ARE VERY SIMILAR IN NATURE.
OH, DO YOU DO IT? YOU GOT TO DO IT.
AS, UM, AS MENTIONED AND YOU CAN SEE HERE WE ARE ON THE VERY EDGE OF THE CITY.
NEXT STOP IS CIRCUIT OF THE AMERICAS.
WE ARE IN A GREEN AREA, WHICH IS CALLED THE LIMITED PURPOSE JURISDICTION.
YOU'D PROBABLY DON'T SEE MANY OF THOSE.
UM, SO WE DO HAVE CONFLICTING REGULATIONS AS WAS MENTIONED WITH TITLE 30, AS WELL AS TITLE 25.
I MAY NOT WEAR MY, NO, I'M NOT.
UH, AGAIN, WE'RE IN AN
UM, SO IT IS A 25 FOOT SETBACK.
THE FIRST PROPERTY IS A FOUR AND A HALF THAT REDUCTION.
THE SECOND PROPERTY, WHICH IS ON A LARGER CUL-DE-SAC IS AN EIGHT AND A HALF.
THAT REDUCTION SOUNDS WORSE, BUT ACTUALLY IT'S A BIGGER LOT.
UM, IT IS A SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED HOME.
SOME DIVISIONS ARE SOMETHING WE DON'T SEE VERY OFTEN, UM, THAT HAS BEEN UNDER CONSTRUCTION FOR SOME TIME.
AND IT'S ACTUALLY, IT'S DIFFERENT THAN DUPLEXES.
IT'S ATTACHED HOUSES THAT ARE OVER TWO LOTS.
SO AN INDIVIDUAL COMBINED ONE HALF AND THE OTHER LOT, AND IT CAN BE BOUGHT BY SOMEBODY ELSE.
THERE'S 47 LOTS IN THIS SUBDIVISION AND 94 ATTACHED HOMES, TOTAL PLAN.
SO THE CONFLICT THAT WE RAN UP AGAINST WAS THE LIMITED PURPOSE.
IT WAS CONFUSING WITH TITLE 30 CONTROLLING SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS IN SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY BUILT INTO THE TITLE 30 AND THEN OF COURSE, TITLE 25 THAT YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH WITH ZONING.
UM, TITLE 30 HAS A PROCESS THAT'S A LITTLE LESS ONEROUS TO DEAL WITH THIS.
UM, YOU ACTUALLY DO A VACATION AND REPLIED AND YOU GO TO THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION AND ASK FOR A VARIANCE, A WAIVER.
UM, AND OF COURSE, WE'RE HERE FOR BOY.
I TRIED VERY HARD NOT TO COME HERE.
AND I SWEAR, I TALKED TO THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT, I TALKED TO MULTIPLE STAFF PEOPLE.
UM, THIS IS ONE OF THE STRUCTURES HERE, THE ONE THAT WAS THE FOUR AND A HALF FOOT, UM, YOU CAN SEE IT BEING CONSTRUCTED AROUND THEIR, THEIR, UH, PORT, UH, FRONT DOORS ON EACH SIDE.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE GARAGE SHARED THERE IN THE FRONT.
SO AGAIN, NOT TOO MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE YOU CAN SEE FROM HOW MUCH FURTHER IT IS BUILT UP BESIDE THE NEXT HOUSE.
HERE'S THE ONE IN THE CUL-DE-SAC, WHICH YOU CAN NOTICE HERE IS THERE REALLY IS NO FRONT YARD.
THAT'S WHAT THE SETBACKS FROM.
SO AGAIN, YOU CAN'T TELL THAT THAT HOUSE IS THAT MUCH FURTHER IN FRONT OF THE OTHER ONE AT THIS ANGLE, EVEN ON THE CUL-DE-SAC.
SO WE DID LOOK AT THE AREA CHARACTER AND I STARTED THINKING ABOUT WHAT IS THE INTENT OF THESE SETBACKS THEY'RE INTENDED TO PROVIDE DISTANCE AND UNIFORMITY AND DISTANCE BETWEEN YOUR NEIGHBORS AND STRUCTURES.
SO IN MY MIND, THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS WITH THE YARDS WERE MORE IMPORTANT TO RIGHT TO RETAIN.
AND, AND I'M GLAD THAT THOSE ARE BEING RETAINED.
UM, BUT THIS REDUCED FRONT YARD DIDN'T SEEM THAT IMPACTFUL.
WHEN I STARTED LOOKING AT THE PROJECT, BECAUSE AGAIN, I HAVE NO FRONT PORCHES, I HAVE NO YARD SPACE.
I HAVE NOTHING THAT I'M REALLY PROTECTING ANYBODY FROM OTHER THAN DRIVING INTO THEIR, THEIR FRONTAGE.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE BUILDER DISCOVERED AFTER CITY INSPECTIONS WERE PAST THAT WE'RE SORT OF TELLING ON OURSELVES, IF YOU WILL.
UM, AND GIVEN THAT CONFLICT WITH TITLE 30 AND 25, I HAD TO COME HERE WITH YOU TO DISCUSS REASONABLE USE.
I UNDERSTAND YOU DON'T LOOK AT THE PURVIEW OF HOUSING CRISIS.
I KNOW IT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER BY A COMMISSIONER BOARD MEMBER, BUT WE DO HAVE FOUR FAMILIES THAT WERE UNABLE TO CLOSE AND ARE WAITING FOR THESE MINOR DIMINIMOUS SETBACKS TO BE ADDRESSED.
AND WE DO FEEL LIKE THIS HARDSHIP IS UNIQUE BECAUSE AGAIN, THEY ARE DIMINIMOUS IN NATURE AND THEY DON'T IMPACT THE ENJOYMENT OF THE NEIGHBORING LOTS.
AND THEY WON'T, THEY'RE NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOUR LOTS OUT OF 47, 92 OUT OF 94 HOMES THAT ARE PRETTY MUCH ALL AT THIS POINT, ALMOST CONSTRUCTED AND DONE, AND PEOPLE LIVE IN THEM.
UM, AGAIN, THE AREA OF CHARACTER WE FEEL IS BEING MET.
UM, THERE'S NO MATERIAL FRONT YARD TO PROTECT IT'S ALL DRIVEWAY.
UM, AND WE ARE PROTECTING THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS THAT ARE INTACT, WHERE THERE ARE ACTUAL YARDS AND LIVING SPACE FOR PEOPLE.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OPPOSITION.
UM, AND THIS IS OUR LAST REMEDY FOR RELIEF.
[01:30:01]
OTHER THAN THE OTHER BUCKET, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION.SO I UNDERSTAND THE CONUNDRUM.
UM, I'M IN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE MYSELF.
UM, BUT I I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AND I DO APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT TONIGHT SO WE CAN GET THESE FAMILIES IN.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION, MADAM CHAIR, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING BOARD MEMBER.
THIS IS JUST FOR D TWO, RIGHT? YOU'RE JUST CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR D TWO T2.
I DIDN'T CALL T3 AND NOW, AND I'M READY TO ROLL ON D THREE SOON AS WE GET GO.
I UNDER I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE PLAYING.
WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS SO MINIMAL.
WE WOULD NORMALLY GRANT THESE ON ANY OTHER TIME.
UH, MY, MY DILEMMA IS I'M TRYING TO, AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS, UH, MEETING WITH LEGAL ABOUT.
I'M TRYING TO COME UP WITH CAUSE I'M, I'M OKAY WITH READY TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
SO YOU PUT ME BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO COME UP WITH THE PROPER VERBIAGE THAT I CAN BLEND THIS INTO A HARDSHIP.
UH, AND THE ONLY, UH, UH, THE CAN OVER THERE ON THE SCREEN TO MELISSA WHILE SHE'S THINKING ABOUT IT TOO.
UH, THE ONLY, THE ONLY THING THAT I COULD PROBABLY GO WITH IS THE FACT THAT THE CONFLICTING CODE BETWEEN TITLE 30 AND 25.
AND, UM, I BROKE, YOU'VE BEEN UP HERE ALMOST AS LONG AS I HAVE.
AND SO IS MELISSA AND I CAN'T RECALL US EVER HAVING ONE LINE EAST COME BEFORE US.
SO IF I'M GONNA STICK MY NECK OUT THERE, UH, I WOULD, I WOULD PROBABLY MAKE YOUR HARDSHIP MORE.
THE FACT THAT THE COM DUE TO CONFLICTING CODE BETWEEN TITLE 30, TITLE 25, THAT THE HOUSE IS ACCORDING TO TITLE 30 AND THE NECESSITY FOR THE VARIANCE.
SO I GUESS IF I COULD ACTUALLY REAL QUICK.
SO FOR, FOR ME, WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS, NORMALLY I'M NOT REAL BIG ON GIVING FORGIVENESS.
I WANT PEOPLE TO FOLLOW THE RULES, COME TO THE BOARD AND ASK PERMISSION.
FIRST, I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS WAS A MISTAKE AND IT IS DIMINIMOUS AND SURPRISINGLY THOUGH B BECAUSE OF IT BEING A NEW DEVELOPMENT AND THAT THE CODE CONFLICT THAT THAT'S, THAT FOR ME IS A HARDSHIP.
WHAT YOU PUT IN THERE IS LIKE, UH, YOU'RE DESCRIBING THE UPS THAT DIDN'T REALLY SELL IT TO ME, BUT LOOKING AT TITLE 30 AND THEN LOOKING AT CHAPTER 25.
YOU PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE VACATED AND REPLANTED BEFORE, BUT I'M INCLINED TO ALSO APPROVE IT.
IF SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE THE MOTION AND HANGING A BOARD MEMBER BLOOM AND THEN BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.
UM, SO I'M ACTUALLY WONDERING, I DON'T REALLY SEE THIS AS A DIMINIMOUS IMPACT IN THE CASE OF G2, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EIGHT AND A HALF FEET OF ENCROACHMENT, AND THIS IS NOT LIKE A FOOT OR TWO.
AND I'M ALSO LOOKING AT, UM, PAGE D TWO DASH SEVEN IN THE BACKUP.
AND MAYBE THE APPLICANT CAN EXPLAIN A BIT MORE ABOUT HOW THIS DRIVEWAY IS SUPPOSED TO ACTUALLY WORK.
UM, IT'S JUST SINGLE CAR GARAGES FOR EACH UNIT.
UM, HOW MANY BEDROOMS ARE IN EACH OF THESE UNITS? THREE BEDROOM.
SO THREE BEDROOM, ONE CAR GARAGE, WHICH MEANS PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE PARKING IN THE DRIVEWAY.
AND THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN FOR THE DEPTH OF THE DRIVEWAY HERE APPEAR TO BE JUST OVER 16 AND A HALF FEET, EXCEPT IT'S DRAWN AT AN ANGLE, WHICH DOES THAT MEAN? THERE'S AN ASSUMPTION THAT PEOPLE WILL PARK IN A WAY THAT ISN'T LIKE PERPENDICULAR TO THE FACE OF THE GARAGE, BECAUSE IF THAT'S NOT THE CASE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PROBABLY CLOSER TO 14 FEET.
SO ANY VEHICLE THAT PARKS THERE IS GOING TO HANG OVER INTO THE SIDEWALK BY, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY FIVE OR SIX FEET AT BEST.
SO I, I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF APPROVING SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BLOCK THE DRIVEWAY COMMISSIONER.
I THOUGHT OF THAT MYSELF, WHEN I LOOKED AT THE DRAWINGS OR I'M SORRY, THE PICTURES AND WENT OUT THERE AND IT IT'S THE ONE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE COL-DE-SAC LOT, WHICH IS MUCH DEEPER, RIGHT? SO IT'S NOT, I GUESS THE DEPTH OF THE LOT REALLY HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BLOCKING SIDEWALK WITH PARKED CARS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT WOULD TECHNICALLY BE HAPPENING.
UM, I THINK THAT THEY'LL HAVE ENOUGH ROOM TO PULL IN THE GARAGE AND THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE THEM SET OUT.
SO THERE'LL BE PARKING AND I'M WAS LIKE TANDEM, I SUPPOSE.
SO I DON'T THINK IT WOULD GO BACK TO THE PICTURE, I GUESS.
I'M SORRY, HOW? NO, I MEANT, I'M SORRY.
IN TANDEM WHERE THEY'RE PARKING BEHIND EACH OTHER EXHIBIT OF THE PRESENTATION PLEASE.
[01:35:02]
BUT I THINK THERE WAS A SURVEY AS WELL IN THERE THAT MIGHT SHOW THE SIDEWALK IN YOUR BACKUP.I THINK THAT'S THE PAGE THAT SHE WAS SAYING IN THE PRESENTATION
THE TWO DASH SEVEN OR SLASH SEVEN.
SO IT'S LIKE THE SIDEWALKS ALREADY IN THERE.
SO YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIT A CAR THERE.
I THINK I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO SEE MORE DETAILED, LIKE SOME MEASUREMENTS THAT ACTUALLY SHOW THIS AND MAYBE LIKE PUT IN SOME DESIGN VEHICLE INFORMATION.
UM, I DON'T HAVE QUITE THE SAME ISSUE WITH D THREE BECAUSE THERE'S MORE SPACE AVAILABLE, BUT THIS ONE I'M CONCERNED.
UM, BECAUSE WHERE ELSE ARE YOU GOING? I MEAN, YEAH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A THREE BEDROOM.
EACH HOUSE, EACH UNIT IS A THREE BEDROOM UNIT.
SO I DON'T REALLY SEE HOW IT'S GOING TO WORK UNLESS YOU HAVE PEOPLE STICKING, STANDING, MOVING OUT INTO THE ACTUAL CUL-DE-SAC, WHICH THEN STARTS TO INTERFERE WITH THE FUNCTION OF THE CULDESAC, MADAM CHAIR, UH, KELLY, IF YOU'D GO TO D THREE DEATH SEVEN, WHAT I'M SEEING ON THE LOOKING AT D THREE, I'M LOOKING AT YOU TWO, YOU TWO RIGHT NOW.
SO JUST LET ME GO BACK TO THAT ONE AND I'M SORRY.
LET ME JUMPED OUR, UH, LET ME LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER HER QUESTION FIRST.
DID YOU WANT TO RESPOND? YEAH.
UH, I'M KEVIN
AND I DID WANT TO POINT OUT, I KNOW THE, UH, THE PARKING IS VERY SOMETHING THAT'S ALWAYS NEAR AND DEAR TO OUR HEARTS BECAUSE, UH, IN EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD WE BUILD, UH, THERE'S ALWAYS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE CONCERN OF TRYING TO KEEP CARS OFF THE STREETS HERE AND IN THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE GOT THE EXHIBIT, BUT WE HAVE, UH, 20, UH, IT MAY BE 30, UH, OFF-SITE PARKING PLACES FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR GUEST PARKING AS WELL.
SO THAT MEANS IT MAY NOT BE EXACTLY WHAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR, BUT IT'S A, I THINK IT SPEAKS TO THE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'VE GOT THERE.
THANK YOU BOARD MEMBER, BAILEY.
I I'M KINDA WITH, UM, BOARD MEMBER VON OLIN, THE HARDSHIP OF STRUGGLING WITH, BECAUSE A MISTAKE, UM, CAN'T BE A HARDSHIP, BUT AN EVEN CONFLICTING CODES IS JUDGING IT.
I'M NOT AGAINST THIS VARIANCE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO FIND CERTAIN, WE HAVE TO HAVE CERTAIN FINDINGS AND FOR LEGAL ISSUES.
SO WHAT I WAS ALSO GOING TO GO WITH, I WAS GOING TO SLIP IN, THERE WAS THIS, THE SHAPE OF THE LOTS, BECAUSE IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE SHAPE OF THE LOT, WHICH IS A BENEFIT, WHICH IS A BONAFIDE HARDSHIP, IT'S NOT ONLY IS IT TRIANGULAR, BUT AT THE FRONT IT CURVES.
SO IT'S NOT A STRAIGHT FRONTAGE LIKE NORMAL.
UH, THE, AND I WAS TRYING TO GET AN IDEA ABOUT, I GUESS, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW AS EXPERIENCED OF BUILDERS AS THIS COMPANY IS, THEY MISSED ON TOO.
SO THIS IS AS, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, WE'VE, UH, SPENT QUITE OF A AMOUNT OF TIME, UH, FINDING OUT DIAGNOSING, MAKING SURE NUMBER ONE, WE DON'T EVER DO IT AGAIN.
AND, UH, SO THIS WAS A, YOU KNOW, A SERIES OF ERRORS THAT COMPOUNDED FROM THE SURVEYORS THROUGH OUR OWN CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS, THE CITY INSPECTORS THAT WERE APPROVING, YOU KNOW, THE FOUNDATION AND THE SLAB, UH, PORES.
AND, UH, CERTAINLY NOT, I'M NOT BLAMING THE CITY AT ALL.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT WE WERE ALL, UH, EVEN OUR, UH, FOUNDATION COMPANY WHO DOES OUR, UH, WHAT WE CALL LOT FITS JUST TO SHOW HOW THEY EXACTLY WHERE TO DO IT.
SO IT, EVERYBODY WAS, HAS SOME CULPABILITY IN THIS.
UM, AND WE CERTAINLY RECOGNIZE OURS.
AND, UH, WE'RE THE MANAGER, WE'RE THE DEVELOPER.
I'VE NEVER BEEN, I'VE BEEN, I'VE BEEN DOING DEVELOPMENT IN AUSTIN SINCE THE MID NINETIES.
AND I'VE, I'VE NEVER HAD SOMETHING LIKE THIS WHERE WE BUILT SOMETHING OVER A, A LINE LIKE THIS, BUT IT, UM, IT WAS UNFORTUNATE.
UH, SHELL'S SAVED US A BUNCH OF TIMES OF MY CAREER.
SO I WAS HOPING MAYBE, UH, WE COME HERE, WE TALK ABOUT THE S THE, UH, JUST THE FACTS OF THE, OF THE ISSUE AND, UH, SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO, SO, TO FOLLOW ON TO YOUR ANSWER.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE CITY APPROVED THE IN-CITY INSPECTORS CAME OUT AND APPROVED THE LOCATION YESTERDAY.
THAT'S ALSO A HARDSHIP THAT DUCKS IN THE BACKUP TOO.
YEAH, I KNOW, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO PUT SOME STUFF TOGETHER FOR USE, RIGHT? YES, YES.
UH, BOARD MEMBER PUT, YEAH, I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
UM, YOU SAID THE CITY APPROVED, I MEAN, TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, AN INSPECTOR COMES OUT TO LOOK AT THE CONSTRUCTION.
[01:40:01]
THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT, UH, PARTICULARLY FOCUSED ON THE SIDING OF YOUR, OF YOUR, UH, FOUNDATION, IF THEY'RE LOOKING AT, UH, JUST THE CONSTRUCTION, IS THAT RIGHT? AND CHECK EVERYTHING A MOMENT.MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY CHECK EVERYTHING.
THERE'S DIFFERENT INSPECTORS THAT DO DIFFERENT THINGS.
AND THEN, AND CERTAINLY THERE'S NO THAT, UH, THE CITY, UH, AND THIS IS WHATEVER CITY WE'RE DOING, UH, DEALING WITH IS THERE'S ALWAYS THE UNDERLYING THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT, UH, THE BUILDER'S SAYING THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE DOING THIS CORRECTLY, NO MATTER WHAT ALL THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, IF THERE IS AN ERROR HERE AND THERE THAT YOUR, UH, THE CITY'S NOT THERE TO TELL US THAT YOU DID SOMETHING WRONG, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S OUR JOBS TO DO IT.
SO, AND THEN I WAS WONDERING WHEN THE SURVEY PLAT THAT IS D TWO DASH OR SLASH SEVEN WAS COMPLETED BECAUSE IT CLEARLY SHOWS ENCROACHMENT INTO THAT 25 FOOT BUILDING LINE.
AND IT SHOWS THE 10 FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT.
IT SHOWS THE CONCRETE DRIVE GOING UP TO THE FRONT CORNER OF THE HOUSE.
UH, SO WHEN, WHEN WAS THAT SURVEY PROVIDED TO YOU GUYS? DO YOU KNOW? WELL, THE, UH, I'VE ACTUALLY PERSONALLY BEEN WORKING ON THIS THROUGH TWO DIFFERENT COMPANIES, UH, FROM SINCE 2015.
AND SO IT TOOK A LONG TIME JUST TO FIGURE OUT THE, UH, THE PRODUCT TO BUILD ON HERE, TO WORK WITH.
THIS IS AN IMMEDIATE SOME VOLATILITY JUST, OR, UH, SO, AND WE'VE GOT THE TWO DIFFERENT RULES OF, UH, YOU KNOW, THE TITLE 30 THAT WE, UH, WE DEAL WITH ON, UH, SEVERAL PROJECTS.
SO, UM, BUT THE SURVEY WAS DONE, I BELIEVE IN, UH, LAST YEAR.
BUT, BUT, BUT, AND I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT THE CONFLICT ALSO BECAUSE THE CONFLICT IS THE CONFLICT IN THE WAY YOU FIX THIS PROBLEM.
I MEAN, THERE IS NO CONFLICT BETWEEN THE, THE, THE, THE CODES YOU'RE, YOU'RE REFERENCING IN TERMS OF WHAT CAN BE PUT ON THE GROUND AND WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE LOCATED.
WELL, AND WHAT WE'RE SAYING, I MEAN, IF, IF WE CAN'T, YOU KNOW, UH, FIGURE OUT A SOLUTION HERE, I MEAN, IT'S THE ONLY SOLUTION HAS DEMOLITION.
WE GOTTA TEAR THESE TWO HOMES DOWN AND RESTART THEM.
AND, AND THESE HOMEOWNERS HAVE BEEN VERY PATIENT WITH US.
UM, UM, AS YOU SAY, THIS IS IN THE, YOU KNOW, EAST AUSTIN AREA THAT AS A VERY SUPPLY CONSTRAINED, AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S A REASON TO DO ANYTHING, BUT IT IS A FACT THAT, UH, WE'VE HAD SOME VERY PATIENT HOMEOWNERS.
SO, YOU KNOW, THEY TRUSTED US THAT WE WERE, UH, GONNA CARRY OUT THIS DEAL, RIGHT.
THIS ALSO WAS DURING, UH, AND THIS IS NOT EXCUSED, BUT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, WAS HIT HARD WITH COVID DURING, IT WOULD JUST EVERYTHING SHUT DOWN THE LABOR, EVERYTHING.
SO, UM, SO IF THE, SO THIS IS ON A CUL-DE-SAC IF THE CUL-DE-SAC, IF YOU TOOK OUT THE CURVE AND THIS WORD STRAIGHT LAW, IF I WERE JUST LOOKING AT IT AS IN TERMS OF LOT CONFIGURATION, HOW FAR DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE? YEAH, I DON'T HAVE THIS.
DO YOU PULL IT BACK UP? I'M GOING TO GO LOOK AT THE SURVEY.
I, I MEAN, I'M JUST LOOKING, CAUSE THIS IS THE ODDEST.
SO I LIVE ON A CUL-DE-SAC AND SO I CAN TELL YOU TRYING TO GET A SURVEYOR OVER THE LOOK AT YOUR LOG IS BEEN A VERY INTERESTING EXPERIENCE BECAUSE I HAVE CONSTRUCTION BEHIND AND I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE SURVEYOR, AND THEN HE WAS LIKE THREE YEARS.
I CAN'T EVEN COME BACK AND GET THEM TO COME OUT AND REDO ONE CORNER.
SO THE CUL-DE-SAC YOU HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY VERIFY THE WHOLE COL-DE-SAC IN ORDER TO BE ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO DO THE LOT.
I ALWAYS JUST CURIOUS WITH THIS TRAPEZOIDAL EXPERIENCE WITH THE CURVE IN THE FRONT, IF I LOOKED AT IT IN TERMS OF, IF IT WERE A STRAIGHT LINE AT THE FRONT, I MEAN, THE HOUSE ARTICULATED THE FRONT AND THERE IS A, UM, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST A THIRD OF IT IS, IS AT THE TWENTY-FIVE FOOT LINE.
SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF, FROM POINT A TO POINT B, IF YOU COULD TELL ME IF, IF THAT WERE STRAIGHT, HOW, HOW FAR OFF ARE YOU THEN? THIS ONE, THE, THIS IS THE CUL-DE-SAC V2.
I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SURVEY AND THE BACKUP, WHICH I CAN PULL UP.
ONE OF THEM IS FIVE FEET AND THE OTHER ONE'S FOUR AND A HALF ONE.
THIS ONE IS THE EIGHT AND A HALF.
THIS IS THE LARGER ONE VERSUS THE ONE YOU'VE.
UM, I'M TRYING TO THINK THIS THROUGH.
NO, I APPRECIATE THAT MADAM CHAIR WHILE THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THAT, MELISSA, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT, UH, D THE SURVEY
[01:45:01]
THAT DARRYL REFERENCEDBUT WE BOTH, WE BOTH KNOW HOW SURVEYORS WORK.
AND IF YOU WERE TO TAKE THE BUILDING LINE CORNER ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, AND YOU TAKE THE BUILDING LINE CORNER ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE, AND THE FACT THAT THIS IS CURVED, IF YOU WERE TO PULL A STRAIGHT LINE ACROSS THERE, THEY WOULD ALMOST BE, THEY WOULDN'T BE HERE TODAY.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS JUST ABOUT TO SAY.
AND SO SINCE YOU'VE GOT THIS RADIUS IN THE FRONT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT, MY QUESTION IS WHERE DID THIS, WHERE DID THEY TAKE THE SHOT FROM THE CR IS THE MEASUREMENT FROM THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE ON, ON, ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE AT 8.6 OUT OF THE CORNER OF THE LOT ON EIGHT, UH, THE HOUSE ON 8.7 OUT, OR DID THEY TAKE IT IN THE MIDDLE? BECAUSE I CAN'T, I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, IF I WAS, IF I TOOK MY TRANSIT OUT THERE, SET IT UP, GOT A BENCHMARK AND STARTED SHOOTING, SHOOTING POINTS.
I COULD PROBABLY GET 20 DIFFERENT POINTS IN THAT CURB AT MY POINT, EXACTLY.
WITH THE TRAPEZOID NOSE SHAPED LAW.
WELL, THE SHAPE OF THE LOT IS WHERE I WOULD GO WITH THE HARDSHIP.
NOW, NOT SO MUCH THE CODE, I DON'T LIKE GOING CODE.
AND I I'M ALSO, I W I WAS ALSO INFORMED THAT, YOU KNOW, THE MORE CONFLICTING CODE IS THE ONE THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.
BUT I DO BELIEVE THE FACT IT'S WEIRD BECAUSE WE'VE NEVER HAD ONE LIKE THIS, THE FACT THAT IT, THE SHAPE OF THE LOT AND THE CURVE, IT DEPENDS ON WHERE YOU SHOT THAT BABY FROM IS THE MEASUREMENT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET AND HOW MUCH YOU'RE GOING TO NEED.
IF YOU, IF ALL THEY ARE NEEDING IS THE EIGHT FIVE ON THIS PARTICULAR D TWO.
I MEAN, I'M SURE I COULD GO OUT THERE AND SHOOT THIS THING IN, INTO OTHER SHOPS AND PROBABLY GET DIFFERENT MEASUREMENTS.
BUT IF YOU'RE SURE THAT THE EIGHT FIVE IS WHAT YOU NEED IN ORDER TO GET THIS THING, SEOED CAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
GET SEALED AND GET THE PEOPLE LIVING IN THERE.
I MEAN, I'M, I'M WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE BASED UPON THE SHAPE OF THE LOT WE HAVE THE VOTES, BUT I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THE BEST WAY THAT I COULD GO ABOUT THIS A SECOND BOARD MEMBER BLOOM, IS IT, IS THIS NEIGHBORHOOD GOING TO HAVE OUT ON HOA OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO HAVE A SAY IN HOW PARKING IS MANAGED WITHIN THE COMMUNITY? YES, THIS IS, UH, RIGHT NOW THE, UH, THE HOS, UH, STAY IN THE LAMAR'S CONTROL.
WE GET ON A BOARD MEMBER WHEN THEY GET TO A CERTAIN SPOT AND THEN WE HAVE IT READY FOR THEM TO TURN OVER, BUT IT'S 100% AND LUNARS CONTROL RIGHT NOW.
WE, WE DEFICIT FUND WE'D PAY THE BILLS UNTIL THEY CAN, UH, YOU KNOW, ARE SELF-SUPPORTING.
AND, UH, WE ARE THE, WHAT THEY CALL IT'S CALLED THE DECLARANT.
SO WE ARE THE LEGAL, WE HAVE THE LEGAL, UH, ABILITY TO MANAGE AND CONTROL THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BECAUSE I REALIZE YOU ARE IN A VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION.
I'M JUST TRYING TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT.
SO IF THE HOA WERE TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE SURE THAT YOU, THAT THE PARKING IN THIS CUL-DE-SAC DOES NOT RESULT IN AN ISSUE WHERE IT BECOMES A PROBLEM FOR CIRCULATION OR ACCESS, YOU KNOW, THAT I, I, THAT COMBINED WITH THE FACT THAT IT HAS BEEN THROUGH MULTIPLE LEVELS OF CITY APPROVAL AND INSPECTION, I, I COULD VOTE TO APPROVE IT.
I STILL DON'T LIKE IT, BUT, UM, BUT I DON'T LIKE IT EITHER MITIGATING THE ISSUE AND TRYING TO MAKE THE BEST OF IT.
MY EITHER ONLY SOLUTION THAT REALLY MAKES SENSE FOLLOWING UP ON THAT.
I THINK THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I, I I'VE REPRESENTED HOS AND CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATIONS THROUGHOUT MY CAREER.
AND, UM, I THINK THAT WE COULD PROBABLY CONDITION THIS UPON ADOPTION OF PARTICULAR RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS FOR THESE TWO PARTICULAR LOTS, UM, THAT WOULD HAVE WHATEVER PROTECTIONS, UH, DARRYL, WE CAN'T DO RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, UH, AS A BOARD.
WELL, WE CAN'T CONDITION IT UPON ADOPTION OF A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FOR THAT PARTICULAR LOT.
THAT'S THAT'S BETWEEN THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT BETWEEN THE BOARD CANNOT DO A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, BUT I WILL SAY, I MEAN, I'M SURE YOU WISH YOU WOULD HAVE CAUGHT THIS EARLIER.
AND IF YOU HADN'T GOTTEN ALL THE APPROVALS YOU WOULD HAVE, AND FOR ME, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S A BIG HARDSHIP ON YOUR, FOR YOU TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL THIS AND FOR MICHELLE TO HAVE TO GO IN FOR, TO PAY ME YES.
BOARD MEMBER GARZA, UM, JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, I PULLED, YOU KNOW, PULLED UP THE BUILD CONNECT WEBSITE AND IT SAYS THE BUILDING
[01:50:01]
PERMITS EXPIRED.THEY THEY'VE PULLED THEM TO BE ABLE TO, BECAUSE OF THE, WE PUT THEM ON HOLD, UH, WITH THE CITY.
SO THEY'LL HAVE TO REENGAGE THEM ALL ON OLD.
ONCE WE RE-ENGAGE THE CITY, THEN THEY'LL GO BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS TO GET THEM BACK STARTED UP.
BUT WE, SOON AS WE FOUND OUT, WE WERE LIKE, DON'T COME OUT AGAIN, PUT DOWN, BUT DOWN THE PENCILS AND LET'S FIGURE THIS OUT BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUEZ.
UM, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE DEMOGRAPHIC AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I HAVE A PUBLIC ART PROJECT OUT THERE.
AND TO ME, I DON'T KNOW THE VALUE OF THE HOME, BUT, UM, TO ME, THIS IS THE MISSING MIDDLE.
AND SO I'M DEFINITELY APPROVING THE VARIANCE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? I DON'T KNOW IF THE MOTION'S BEEN SECOND, IF NOT OTHER BUS.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAN, THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY.
YOU'RE NOT OUT FOR YOUR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE CITY'S LIMITED PURPOSE.
JURISDICTIONS IS SUBJECT TO BOTH 25, 2 2 4 92 FOR M M F TO SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, AS WELL AS 32 DASH 2 33 FOR SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED USE IN THE ETJ PER APPROVAL.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH OUR VARIANCES REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY THAT THE SHOP IS THAT THE, THE SITE PROPERTY IS IRREGULARLY SHAPED AND ALSO HAS A CURVE, UH, COMING ACROSS THE FRONT, WHICH CREATES CREATED THE CONFUSION.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE ENTIRE SUBDIVISION OF 94 SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED TO WALLING UNITS AND 47 LOTS IS NEARLY COMPLETED.
AND THIS IS, THIS IS ONE OF THE ONLY TWO SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED DWELLINGS THAT HAVE THIS IMPACT AREA CHARACTER.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA.
JASON TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
BECAUSE AS NOTED ABOVE THE SUBDIVISION IS NEARLY COMPLETED, AND THIS IS ONLY ONE OF TWO SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED RAWLINGS THAT WILL HAVE THE SLIGHT DEVIATION FROM THE OVEN TO SETBACK REGULATIONS.
SO THAT'S THE MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY BOARD MEMBER VAN OWEN SECONDED BY VICE-CHAIR HAWTHORNE.
THIS IS FOR ITEM D THROUGH UC 15, 20 TO 22 0 0 2 8 D TWO D TWO D TWO D TWO C 15 20 22 0 0 2 6.
DARRELL PUT NO AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.
SO D TO YOUR VARIANCES, GRANTED, IT'S THE OAK.
[D-3 C15-2022-0028 Michele Rogerson Lynch for Lennar-Kevin Pape 7125 & 7129 Dancing Wind Lane]
SO DEAN, MADAM CHAIR, IF THERE'S NO OPPOSITION, NOW WE'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.UH, AND I WOULD LIKE TO CITE THE SAME FINDINGS AS IT'S IDENTICAL TO THE PREVIOUS CASE.
IT, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S IDENTICAL, BUT IT IS CERTAINLY DIMINIMOUS COMPARATIVELY.
WE HAVE A LOT OF DIMINIMUS TONIGHT.
BRIAN APPEARED TO THIS ONE, THE OTHER ONE, THIS ONE IS DIMINIMOUS AND IT HAS THE SAME ARTICULATION IN THE FRONT.
AND IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, AT THE, UM, SORRY TO TAKE YOUR PRESENTATION AND, AND JUST DO THIS, BUT ON D THREE SEVEN, IF YOU LOOK AT IT, THERE'S A VERY SMALL PORTION OF THAT HOUSE, WHICH IS THE GARAGE AREA THAT DOES SIT BACK.
AND IF YOU MOVE THE HOUSE BACKWARDS, THERE'S ACTUALLY, THERE'S ACTUALLY THEN NO BACKYARD.
AND THE WHOLE FRONT YARD IS THE DRIVEWAY AND IT, THAT PUE IS THERE.
SO THAT WITH THE HOUSE IN THAT STAGE OF CONSTRUCTION, THAT PUE IS FALL.
SO THERE'S NOT A WAY TO ALTER IT.
[01:55:01]
REALLY FEEL LIKE THIS ONE IS MUCH MORE DIMINIMOUS CHECK GOING.BEFORE YOU GET INTO DISCUSSION ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, DID YOU WANT TO GIVE THE APPLICANT EITHER A CHANCE TO PRESENT OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? YES.
AND I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK ANYMORE.
I MEAN, YOU DO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A FULL FIVE MINUTES IF YOU WANT IT.
ANY OPPOSITION? NO ACAPELLA, NOTHING CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING CAFTANS.
UH, WE DO HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR OR DOES HE HAVE TO REMAKE THE MOTION NOW THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED OR DOES IT CARRY OVER FROM BEFORE? LET'S JUST MAKE THE MOTION AGAIN, JUST IN CASE HE HAS TO MAKE MOTION.
SEE IT'S SAME FINDINGS AS D TWO IS ARTICULATED IN D TWO YESTERDAY.
UH, DO YOU HAVE TO REREAD THE FINDINGS OR CAN WE JUST KNOW? OKAY.
THEN THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM D THREE C 15 20 22 0 0 2 8 MADE BY A BOARD MEMBER ON OLIN, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER.
OH, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FOR ME, I'M AT, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS BECAUSE WE ARE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT HAVING, IT LOOKS LIKE AT LEAST 20 FEET OF CLEARANCE FOR THAT DRIVEWAY DEPTH.
DARRELL PUT NO AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.
UM, DID I MISS SOMEONE? OH, UH, SOME OLD SHEETS.
OH, GENE, YOUR VARIANCE FOR D THREE IS GRANTED YOU GUYS GUYS TIRED.
NO, I'M NOT GONNA BE BACK FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
IT'S GOOD TO HAVE YOU BACK GUYS.
EVERYBODY UP HERE MAKE IT ALL.
BEFORE WE GO INTO THE NEXT ROUND, DO YOU THINK WE COULD TAKE A BREAK? FINE.
WE'RE GOING TO RECESS FOR 10 MINUTES, EVERYONE.
MA'AM CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.
SO I'M GOING TO MUTE MY CELL PHONE, WHICH I LEFT IN THE CAR.
[E-1 C15-2021-0100 Ian Ellis 1003 Kinney Avenue]
ALL RIGHT.WE'RE GOING TO BE STARTING WITH ITEM E ONE C 15 20 21 0 1 0 0.
IT DOESN'T DO ME ANY GOOD OF EVERYBODY'S NOT HERE.
OH, WELL, WHY DIDN'T YOU ASK FOR 15? DID IT USED TO BE 15 MINUTES BROKE? WAS, I DON'T REMEMBER.
IT'S BEEN SO LONG SINCE WE WERE IN PERSON.
WAS IT 15 BEFORE? WAS IT 15 MINUTES? I'M LIKE, YEAH.
[02:00:10]
SORRY.IS THIS Y'ALL'S WAY OF PASSIVELY, AGGRESSIVELY TRYING TO TEACH ME THAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE 15, BUT AH, SEE.
AS SOON THERE MIGHT BE FOUR OF US UP HERE.
TERRIFYING, GREAT RECORD OF IT.
AND, UH, TOMMY IT'S ARE YOU BACK? YES.
JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY'S HERE VIRTUALLY.
UH, AGAIN, THIS IS U ONE C 15 20 21 0 1 0 0 IN ELLIS, 1003 KENNY AVENUE.
AND WE'VE GOT YOUR PRESENTATION UP AND YOU GUYS ARE GOOD FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I'M GOING TO TURN OVER ALL OF MY TIME TO MATT FICUS, AIA, WHO IS ONE OF THE OTHER MINORITY INTEREST OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY.
HE'S ALSO THE PRINCIPAL ARCHITECT OF MF ARCHITECTURE.
AND THANKS TO THE BOARD FOR YOUR SERVICE.
I KNOW THIS IS A THANKLESS JOB, UM, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S COMPLEX TO BALANCE THE INTEREST OF THE CITY, NEIGHBORHOODS AND INDIVIDUALS.
SO WE'LL TRY TO SIMPLIFY THIS REQUEST AS MUCH AS WE CAN.
AND BEFORE THAT, I'D LIKE TO MENTION THAT I DO LEAD THE ARCHITECTURAL PRACTICE.
THAT'S DEVELOPED THE DESIGN, THIS DESIGN AND THIS PROPOSAL.
UH, I'M ALSO A NATIVE AUSTINITE AND A FIFTH GENERATION CENTRAL TEXAN.
I RECEIVED MY FIRST DEGREE IN ARCHITECTURE HERE IN TEXAS, AND THEN WENT ON TO GET MY MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE AT HARVARD UNIVERSITY IN BOSTON.
AND I CHOSE TO RETURN TO AUSTIN SPECIFICALLY TO USE MICRO TEXTUAL SKILLS TO MAKE A POSITIVE IMPACT HERE IN AUSTIN.
MY PARENTS LIVE IN SOUTH AUSTIN AND I ALWAYS TRY TO TRY TO DO RIGHT BY IT.
UM, I'M ALSO A TENURED PROFESSOR AT THE UT AUSTIN SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, WHERE FOR 12 YEARS, I'VE TAUGHT COURSES ON SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECTURE DESIGN.
AND LIKEWISE AT MY PRACTICE, MF ARCHITECTURE, WE FOCUS ON THOUGHTFUL AND RESPONSIBLE DESIGN AND WE'VE RECEIVED LOCAL AND NATIONAL AWARDS FOR OUR BUILDINGS, FOR THEIR RESOURCEFULNESS AND THEIR RESPONSE TO CONTEXT IN THIS SLIDE FOR SOME LARGER PROCEDURAL CONTEXT.
THIS IS OUR SIX MONTH IN A ROW OF BOARD MEETING ROUNDS.
AS OUR CASE WAS POSTPONED FOR VARIOUS REASONS OUT OF OUR CONTROL FOR THE PAST FIVE MEETINGS AND DIVERSE MEMBERS FROM OUR TEAM HAVE DILIGENTLY ATTEMPTED TO PRESENT OUR CASE FROM VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES.
WE CREATED THIS DIAGRAM TO REPRESENT THE VARIOUS ROUTES.
WE'VE ATTEMPTED TO GET APPROVAL TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY, INCLUDING THE BOARD'S RECOMMENDATIONS, THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PROVIDED BY THE ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND AS THE DIAGRAM SHOWS ALL ROUTES LEAD TO THE NECESSITY OF A VARIANCE TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP ANYTHING AT ALL ON OUR PROPERTY.
SPEAKING OF THE HARDSHIP CRITERIA AND VERY PLAIN TERMS, THERE IS INDEED A UNIQUE HARDSHIP ON THIS PROPERTY THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH OTHER LOTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
EVEN THE VERY LOT NEXT DOOR AT 1001, KENNY IS EFFECTIVELY THE SAME SIZE AS OUR LOT.
SINCE THE TWO LOTS WERE GENERATED BY THE SPLIT OF A LARGER LOT IN BOTH LOTS OF UNDER 57, 50 SQUARE FEET YET THE NEIGHBOR DOES HAVE A HOUSE ON IT AS DO ALL OTHER LOTS IN THE VICINITY TO GET EVEN MORE FOR IT.
WE CAN ALSO LOOK AT THIS FROM ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE FROM THE COMMUNITY GUIDE TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AUSTIN'S, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
UM, UH, WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT THE CURRENT EXISTING VACANT LOT AT 1003, KENNY AT 54 61 SQUARE FEET IS SUBSTANDARD AND MEETS THE SUBSTANDARD DEFINITION PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 24, 2 4 9 3.
HOWEVER, THE DNA IS STATING THAT THIS IS NOT A HARDSHIP WHILE THE COMMUNITY GUIDE DOES SPECIFICALLY REFERENCE A SUBSTANDARD LOT AS A HARDSHIP.
THEREFORE, THE PLAT INDEED ARE HOW THE PLATEN DIETER APPLIED.
WE'LL DEFINE OUR WAY FORWARD, UH, SECTION 25, 2 4 9 3 SUB SUB-SECTION ONE STIPULATES THAT A SUBSTANDARD LOT MUST BE DOCUMENTED AS SUCH IN COUNTY REAL PROPERTY RECORDS.
AND PRIOR TO MARCH 15TH, 1946, THE TRAVIS COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR AGREES THAT THE GOVERNING DOCUMENT WOULD BE THE 1896 PLAT SINCE THERE HAS BEEN NO OTHER UPDATE TO THE PLAT.
HOWEVER, IN A CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN, WE HAVE BEEN CONSISTENTLY STEERED IN THE DIRECTION OF REQUESTING A VARIANCE THROUGH SUBSECTION TWO OF 25 TO 9 43.
LIKEWISE, IF WE GO THE ROUTE OF
[02:05:01]
SUBSECTION TWO, WE STILL SIMPLY NEED A VARIANCE, THE VARIANCE TO DEVELOP ANYTHING AT ALL ON THIS LOT.THIS REQUEST IS CLEANLY WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF CODE ALLOWABLE TO ANY PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
IT FITS WITHIN A REASONABLE USE AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE.
WE DID NOT REQUEST IN OUR PROPOSING A DESIGN THAT MEETS ALL CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF FAR BUILDING COVERAGE AND IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE.
OUR LOT IS A TEXTBOOK EXAMPLE OF A LOT THAT DEMONSTRATES A UNIQUE HARDSHIP FOR THE DEFINITION INCLUDED IN THE BOA COMMUNITY GUIDE.
THE LIGHT IS SUBSTANDARD, UM, PER CLA DEFINITION IN SUMMARY, THERE'S A NEED.
THERE IS INDEED A UNIQUE HARDSHIP ON THIS PROPERTY AS NOTHING CONCURRENTLY DEVELOP, DEVELOP, DEVELOP, AND BUILD ON THIS LOT.
AS IT STANDS, THE LOT IS ZONED TO SF THREE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE.
IT'S HAD A HOME IN IT BEFORE AND SHOULD HAVE A HOME ON IT.
IF THIS REQUEST IS DENIED, THIS LOT WOULD BE VACANT AND STAND AS ANOTHER MISSED OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL CENTRAL FAMILY HOME THAT OUR CITY SO VERY NEEDS THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THIS PROPERTY IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, NOT A VACANT LOT.
AND WE HUMBLY ASK THAT THE BOARD RULE AND APPROVAL OF OUR VANS REQUEST.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? OKAY.
IF I CAN GET Y'ALL TO STAND OFF TO THE LEFT THERE.
WE'LL HAVE YOU START FIRST STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU WILL HAVE, SORRY.
WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO CHECK ON HIM FIVE MINUTES AS WELL.
UM, MY NAME IS BILL NEIL AND I LIVE ON KEENEY AVENUE.
UM, AS THE APPLICANT POINTS OUT, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT QUALIFY TO BE REBUILT UNDER THE CODE.
THEY ASSERT THAT THIS IS A HARDSHIP.
UM, MR. ELLIS DID THAT AT THE PREVIOUS HEARING WHERE HE SPOKE, BUT THIS IS NOT A QUALIFYING HARDSHIP.
SINCE THE CITY'S REGULATIONS ALONE CANNOT BE SUCH A HARDSHIP, THE LAWS OF REASONABLE USE AND THE FAILURE TO QUALIFY FOR A PERMIT TO REMODEL AND ADD ON TO THE HOUSE WAS A SELF-CREATED PROBLEM BECAUSE THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND INVESTOR IN THE LLC FOUR SQUARE BUILDERS WERE ISSUED A DEMOLITION PERMIT ON MARCH 29TH, 2021, AND HAD THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE DEMOLISHED NOTE THAT THIS PERMIT DATE WAS FOUR DAYS BEFORE THE CLOSING ON THE SALE ON THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH WAS APRIL 2ND, 2021.
UM, SURELY MR. ELLIS WAS AWARE OF THE DEMOLITION PERMIT, WHICH WHEN EXECUTED CAUSED THE LOSS OF THE ENTITLEMENT TO NEW CONSTRUCTION, A LOSS THAT WAS ENTIRELY SELF-INFLICTED IN THE PREVIOUS HEARING, MR. ELLIS SAID THAT THE FACT THAT THE SUBJECT LOT TURNED OUT TO BE SMALLER THAN STANDARD LOT SIZE WAS BEYOND HIS CONTROL.
HE MENTIONED THAT IT WAS HARD TO FIND AN AVAILABLE SURVEYOR BEFORE THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY, BUT THE SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON FEBRUARY 26TH, 2021, WHICH WAS SEVERAL WEEKS BEFORE THE APRIL TWO CLOSING DAY.
PRESUMABLY SOMEBODY REPRESENTING THE PURCHASER WAS AWARE THAT THE SURVEY SHOWED THE SUBSTANDARD SIZE, BUT IN SPITE OF HAVING ACCESS TO THIS INFORMATION, THE PURCHASER HAD THE EXISTING HOUSE DEMOLISHED.
THIS IS A CLEAR CASE OF A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP.
MR. ELLIS ASSERTS THAT THE 1896 SUBDIVISION PLAT QUALIFIES THE PROPERTY FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE IT EXCEEDS 4,000 SQUARE FEET.
BUT WHAT SECTION 25 DASH TWO DASH 9 4 3 REFERS TO IS THE RECORDING OF A SUBSTANDARD LOT.
THE EARLIEST DEED RECORD FOR THE LOT IS FROM SEPTEMBER, 1947, WHICH MISSED THE MARCH, 1946 DEADLINE BY 18 MONTHS.
SO NOW THAT ENTITLEMENT TO REMODELING AND NEW CONSTRUCTION HAS LOST THE NORMAL LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS APPLY.
AND ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION MUST BE BUILT AND COMPLIANCE WITH CODE THE CODE ITSELF CANNOT BE A QUALIFYING HARDSHIP.
IF YOU DO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT A HOUSE, DESPITE DESPITE NOT QUALIFYING UNDER THE CODE, PLEASE LIMIT THE ALLOWABLE SIZE TO THE TOTAL VOLUME OF THE STRUCTURE THAT WAS DEMOLISHED.
THIS WOULD RESTORE THE DEVELOPER TO THE POSITION HE WOULD HAVE BEEN IN.
HAD HE NOT DEMOLISHED THE PREEXISTING HOME.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IF YOU ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO BUILD A STRUCTURE THAT IS LARGER THAN WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE YOU WILL ESSENTIALLY BE SETTING A PRECEDENT THAT WILL UNDERMINE THE SUBSTANDARD LOT RESTRICTION THAT'S BECAUSE OF PURCHASER OF REAL PROPERTY WILL, WILL SEE THAT THEY CAN DEMOLISH A SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURE, ASK FOR FORGIVENESS,
[02:10:01]
AND THEN BE GRANTED A VARIANCE TO BUILD SOMETHING LARGER.I'LL WRAP UP BY POINTING OUT THAT A NON-COMPLIANT STRUCTURE DESTROYED BY FIRE.
FOR EXAMPLE, COULD BE REBUILT ONLY ON THE SAME FOOTPRINT AND TO THE SAME SIZE.
SO I WAS EXPECTING THREE MINUTES.
NOW WE SHOULD NOT EMBRACE THAT, THAT, THAT SHOULD HAVE ACTUALLY STOPPED THERE AND THEN KEPT PLAYING WITH THE NEXT SPEAKER, BUT, OKAY.
UM, I'M I KNOW, YOU KNOW, THE HELLO BOARD.
I'M LORRAINE ATHERTON, UH, UH, BEEN HERE BEFORE YOU'RE YOU HAVE FULL LUMINOUS, UH, PAGES OF, OF MY SUBMISSIONS IN YOUR BACKUP.
I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT SEVEN OF THE EIGHT PROPERTIES.
LAST TIME I COUNTED ON THE BLOCK, UH, UH, ON THIS ALLEY WAY ARE UNDERSIZED.
MOST OF THEM SMALLER THAN THE SLOT AND ALL HAVE HOUSES ON THEM AND ALL HAVE USED THE REMODELING ORDINANCES, UH, TO, TO REMODEL AND MAINTAIN THEIR HOUSES.
UH, THE APPLICANT HAS REFUSED TO PRESENT FINDINGS OTHER THAN WHAT AMOUNTS TO A CODE INTERPRETATION CASE SAYING THAT THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO USE THE 1896 SUBDIVISION, WHICH ISN'T EVEN THE SAME LOT ANYMORE.
UM, BOARD MEMBER VON OLIN, LAST TIME POSTPONED HAD THIS CASE POSTPONE TO ALLOW THEM TO COME BACK WITH FINDINGS THAT THE BOARD COULD WORK WITH TO PUT A LIMIT ON FAR.
THEY HAVEN'T COME BACK WITH NEW FINDINGS.
UM, UH, I'VE, UH, I'M STILL STILL HOPEFUL THAT YOU CAN GET THEM TO WITHDRAW THIS AND COME BACK WITH FINDINGS THAT YOU ALL CAN USE TO PUT, UH, SOME SORT OF FAR LIMIT.
COULD YOU PUT OUR PRESENTATION? COULD YOU PUT OUR S OUR SLIDE DECK BACK UP, PLEASE SHARE.
DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE PROCEED? NO, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO AND A HALF MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL IF ANYBODY'S WONDERING WHERE THE HALF CAME FROM IT'S BECAUSE I GAVE AN EXTRA 30 SECONDS TO THE OPPOSITION AND WE HAVE TO GIVE EQUAL TIME.
SO OUR PROPOSED DESIGN IS SMALLER THAN THE PREVIOUSLY EXISTING CONDITIONS IN TERMS OF FOOTPRINT.
UM, THERE WAS SOMETHING MENTIONED ABOUT VOLUME.
UH, WE ARE NOT CALCULATING THE VOLUME OF THE HOME AS A THREE-DIMENSIONAL AREA.
WE WERE TALKING ABOUT SQUARE FOOTAGE AREAS AND PLAN, UH, BUT THERE PREVIOUSLY EXISTING HOME AND ITS DETACHED STRUCTURE WERE GREATER THAN THE FOOTPRINT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
UM, SO WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO BUILD SOMETHING LARGER THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY THERE.
UM, SO THIS IS AN EXHIBIT SHOWING AN OVERLAY OF AS A COMPOSITE, BOTH WHAT WAS EXISTING AND WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE NEW HOME OUTLINED IN RED, UM, AND THE AREAS ARE LESS THAN, I THINK I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT, UM, YOU STATE YOUR NAME, I'M INGRID ONCE ON THIS OTHER STAND ON PART OF THAT DESIGN TEAM THAT WORKED ON THE PROJECT.
UM, AND I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT, UH, REVIEWING THE CODE SECTION FOR DOING THE REMODEL ADDITION OR GOING BACK TO THAT, LIKE, IT IS AN EXISTING VACANT LOT AT THIS POINT, AND ANY KIND OF REFERRAL GOING BACK TO A REMODEL OR BEING BASED ON THAT WOULD BE UNTRUE SINCE IT WASN'T TAKEN DOWN BY FIRE.
IT WASN'T TAKEN DOWN BY A NATURAL, YOU KNOW, A NATURAL EVENT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
IT WAS THROUGH A CITY OF AUSTIN DEMO PERMIT THAT WAS APPROVED, AND THAT IS THE RIGHT TO ANY, UH, PROPERTY OWNER.
UM, SO I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE THAT POINT AS WELL.
WE ALSO MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY THAT THIS IS THE ONLY OUTSTANDING BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW COMMENT.
THE REMAINDER OF THE REVIEW HAS BEEN APPROVED OR INFORMALLY APPROVED PENDING THIS APPROVAL.
UM, SO THIS IS THE ONLY THING WE NEED IN ORDER TO SECURE THAT.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, IF WE WERE TO GO OUT OF THAT, WHICH WE'VE DESIGNED IT BASED ON WHAT'S COMPLIANT AS IS, UM, IF WE WERE TO GO TO SOME SORT OF COMPROMISE, UH, AND REMOVE SQUARE FOOTAGE, IT WOULD NOT CHANGE THE VOLUME OF THE BUILDING AT ALL, THE FOOTPRINT WOULD CHANGE, BUT IT'S PERCEPTION FROM THE STREET AND FROM THE NEIGHBORS WOULD BE ZERO.
[02:15:01]
SO WHILE YOU WOULD REMOVE A BEDROOM AND A BATHROOM AND DECREASE THE DWELLING CAPABILITY OF THIS HOME, THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY PRACTICAL IMPACT.I JUST WANT TO LASTLY MENTION, IT MIGHT BE WORTH NOTING A BIT OF CONTEXT ABOUT, UH, THIS PROJECT IN TERMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT ENTITY.
MOLLY DEVCO IS THE DEVELOPMENT ENTITY FOR THIS PROJECT FOUNDED BY MARK HARRIES, WHO HAS LIVED IN AUSTIN FOR DECADES AND IS SITTING, SITTING IN THE, IN THE AUDIENCE WHEN MARK'S MOTHER MOLLY PASSED AWAY, SHE LEFT AN INHERITANCE FROM MARK AND SIMPLY ASKED THAT HE DO SOMETHING GOOD WITH THE MONEY FROM THE INHERITANCE.
SHE WAS A GROUNDBREAKING WOMAN.
SHE, UH, SHE WAS CALIFORNIA'S FIRST LICENSED FEMALE PRIVATE DETECTIVE, AND DEVELOPED A MEDICAL PRACTICE AND LIVED IN A RICHARD NYCHA HOUSE IN CALIFORNIA.
ALL THAT SHE HAS TO START TO DO SOMETHING POSITIVE WITH THIS MONEY.
AND, UH, MARK NOT ONLY RISK LOSING THE INHERITANCE WITH THE CARRY COSTS OF EVERY SINGLE MONTH, BUT GOING BANKRUPT FROM THIS PROJECT.
AND SO, BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE THE LITTLE GUYS.
SO WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPERS, THIS IS, THIS IS A SECOND PROJECT THAT WE'VE DONE.
UH, WE'RE TRYING TO, UH, WE'VE TRIED TO EXPLORE EVERY SINGLE ROUTE AND WHERE WE'RE HUMBLY ASKING REQUEST FOR VARIANCE.
AND WE REALIZED WE HAVE TO THREAD THE NEEDLE WITH THE UNANIMOUS VOTE NINE ZERO HERE ON.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND LET'S OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS, BOARD MEMBER BLOOM.
SO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PREVIOUS NECKLACING HOUSE WAS 1,770 SQUARE FEET, OR WAS THAT JUST, WAS IT A TWO-STORY STRUCTURE? IT WAS A SINGLE STORY STRUCTURE WITH A SINGLE STORY, DETACHED STRUCTURE IN THE BACKYARD.
SO BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE WORKSHOP, YOU'RE GOING FROM 1700 SQUARE FEET TO ALMOST 2300 SQUARE FEET, CORRECT.
AT GROUND FLOOR AREA IS WHAT WE'RE DEPICTING ON THAT EXHIBIT BOARD MEMBER SMITH.
HAVE YOU MADE TO TRY TO REACH AN ACCOMMODATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? OH, AND THE, ALL OF THEM? I WOULD PRESUME.
UM, WHEN, WHEN WE FIRST CAME HERE, WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, SO WE, I PERSONALLY CALLED AND EMAILED EVERYONE THAT PROVIDED SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION AT THE BEGINNING.
UM, AND THEN WHEN WE MET IN NOVEMBER, WE WERE TASKED WITH MEETING WITH THE ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BEFORE THE THANKSGIVING HOLIDAYS, TO WHICH, UM, THEY AGREED THAT THEY WOULD, AND THEN THEY REFUSED.
AND WE ONLY WERE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE VIA EMAIL WITH LORRAINE ATHERTON THROUGH THE MAJORITY OF THE PROCESS.
IT WASN'T UNTIL AFTER THE LAST HEARING, I BELIEVE THAT BILL NEIL, WHO'S ALSO THE ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UH, WE HAD A BRIEF PHONE CALL THAT I THINK LASTED ABOUT 20 MINUTES, UM, WHICH MOSTLY WENT THROUGH MAJORITY OF THE INFORMATION THAT HAD ALREADY EITHER BEEN COMMUNICATED TO, OR FROM LORRAINE ATHERTON.
BUT WE'VE ALSO COMMUNICATED WITH THIS, UH, FRIENDS OF ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH I BELIEVE IS, UH, THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT IS AN INFORMAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT IS INCLUSIVE OF ALL ZILKER RESIDENTS.
UM, AND WE'VE TALKED WITH OTHER HOMEOWNERS AND WE HAVE SOME SUPPORT LETTERS THAT WE'VE INCLUDED AS WELL.
UM, BUT SHORT OF GOING DOOR TO DOOR KNOCKING, UM, THAT'S, WE'VE, WE'VE DONE AS MUCH AS WE CAN.
I BELIEVE THE REASON I'M ASKING IS IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE TWO, THE TWO SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION THEY'RE WILLING, I MEAN, THEY'RE WILLING TO REACH AN ACCOMMODATION ON BUILDING A HOME ON THE LOT, AND I'M JUST WONDERING, HAVE YOU ALL CONSIDERED THAT AND WHAT, WHAT WOULD BE THE PROBLEM WITH THAT? YES, I'LL LET INGRID ELABORATE.
AND I THINK, UM, WE HAVE LOOKED INTO THE CODE SECTIONS THAT THEY PROVIDED FOR THAT, AND IT WOULD BE UNDER THE RENOVATION.
IT WOULD BE UNDER THAT SECTION WHERE IT WAS FOR AN EXISTING HOUSE WHERE THERE IS NO STRUCTURE CURRENTLY.
SO THEY WOULD BE REVERTING BACK TO AN INTERPRETATION THAT NO LONGER APPLIES ON A VACANT LOT.
AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM THE STANDPOINT THAT THIS IS A VACANT LOT.
YOU KNOW, HERE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO.
WE ARE FOLLOWING THE CODE IN THESE SECTIONS, AND THEN WE ARE PROVIDING TO THEM IN OUR CORRESPONDENCE, AS WELL AS TO YOU TODAY, THE, UM, THE HARDSHIP OF IT BEING A SUBSTANDARD LOT, BECAUSE THAT WOULD APPLY FROM THE ORIGINATION OF THE LOT ITSELF AND IS ONE OF THE DEFINITIONS OF WHAT CAN BE REQUESTED FOR A VARIANCE.
SO I THINK IT'S PROBABLY A DIFFERENCES IN, IN CODE INTERPRETATIONS THAT THE TWO PARTIES ARE TRYING OR STRUGGLING AND ASKING YOU TO KIND OF WEIGH IN ON, WELL, I GUESS WHAT I'M DRIVING OUT HERE IS, I MEAN, IF YOU REBUILT THE HOUSE AS IT WAS BEFORE, IT WAS DEMOLISHED, OBVIOUSLY, UM, WITH NEW MATERIALS, WHY WOULDN'T THAT BE A REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY? IT WOULDN'T BE THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THE PROPERTY BECAUSE THE PREVIOUSLY EXISTING HOME WASN'T EVEN USED AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WAS USED AS A MUSIC FABRICATION
[02:20:01]
BUSINESS.UM, THERE HAPPENED TO BE A TENANT THERE, BUT IT WAS NOT IN A STATE THAT WAS, I THINK, SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO BE USED AS A HOME.
UH, IF WE WERE TO HAVE RENOVATED IT AND ADDED, SAY A SECOND FLOOR TO IT, TO ADD MORE BEDROOMS AND MORE BATHROOMS. UM, BUT THE COST OF DOING THAT FROM THE STRUCTURAL IMPLICATIONS, UM, AND JUST EFFECTIVELY GETTING EVERYTHING DOWN TO THE STUDS WOULD BE GREATER THAN THE COST OF BUILDING NEW.
SO BUILDING NEW ACTUALLY PROVIDES A BETTER HOME WITH MORE DWELLING UNITS.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE MORE OF A LEGACY THAN THE ONE THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY THERE, UM, WHICH WE DEEMED TO BE NOT IN A SALVAGEABLE OR READILY USABLE STATE.
UM, WE ALSO DONATED THAT HOME TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND WE MENTIONED THIS A FEW TIMES BEFORE THEY'VE USED IT FOR THEIR OWN PRACTICES, THEIR EXERCISES BREACHING, UH, BEFORE WE RECYCLED THE HUM.
UM, BUT TO GO BACK TO YOUR FIRST QUESTION THAT, THAT INGRID ELABORATED ON, UM, IN MY CONVERSATIONS WITH MR. NEIL, AND ALSO IT, IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE THERE WAS AN AVENUE FOR MORE COLLABORATION WITH THEM TO TRY AND DESIGN MORE, UM, SORT OF SUMMARIZING HIS WORDS WAS THAT HE'S GOING TO AGREE TO DISAGREE AND THAT THEIR PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO HAVE A VACANT LOT.
THEY DON'T SEEM TO HAVE, UM, AN ISSUE WITH VACANT LOTS AND ZILKER, WHICH I TEND TO DISAGREE.
THAT THAT IS A HUGE DETRIMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ITS CHARACTER AND THE NEIGHBORS.
UM, BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON, IF THAT'S THEIR PREFERENCE TO MAINTAIN A VACANT LOT, THEN THAT PLACES A BIAS ON THEM TO FUNDAMENTALLY NOT BE INTERESTED IN SUPPORTING OR COLLABORATING WITH US IN ANY SORT OF STRUCTURE FOR THE WAY THAT WE UNDERSTAND IT COLLECTIVELY IS THAT THEY'RE FUNDAMENTALLY OPPOSED TO ANYTHING THAT WE PLAN TO BUILD THERE.
AND IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A REMODEL I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM MR. NEIL, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE, THERE'S A STEP BACK THERE SAYING THAT YOU WANT A VACANT LOT THERE, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REQUIRING.
WE CAN HAVE MS. THIS IS, THIS IS BILL NEIL AGAIN.
UM, SO OUR POSITION IS THAT, UM, WE DON'T WANT TO SEE THE, UM, THE SMALL LOT, UH, VARIANCE, UH, OVERTURNED THAT THAT SCHEME OVERTURNED.
THIS WOULD SET A PRECEDENT THAT WOULD DO THAT.
UM, IF I CAN INTERRUPT REAL QUICK, IT WOULD NOT BE A PRECEDENT BECAUSE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS NOT SET PRECEDENT.
EACH INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY, EACH PLAN EACH LOT IS TREATED AS A UNIQUE HARDSHIP.
SO IT WOULDN'T, IT WOULDN'T ACTUALLY SET A PRECEDENT.
YOU'D BE SAFE AT LEAST FROM THAT.
SO, UM, WE DO NOT WANT TO SEE A VACANT LOT IF THEY CAN REBUILD TO THE SCALE OF WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE NOW, YOU MENTIONED NEW MATERIALS.
UM, MR. ELLIS MENTIONED, I SHOULDN'T SORRY.
UM, IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THERE WOULD BE, UM, THAT WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE IT WAS DILAPIDATED.
WE DON'T WANT TO SEE A DILAPIDATED HOUSE BUILT AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, KIND OF AN ABSURD IDEA.
UM, THAT'S HOW HE WAS PRESENTING IT, BUT THAT'S NOT OUR POSITION.
IT WOULD BE NEW MATERIAL, NEW DESIGN, BUT THE SAME SIZE.
AND SO THAT WOULD BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CODE.
HAD THEY NOT DEMOLISHED THE HOUSE? I DON'T AGREE THAT IT'S THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S, UH, GRANTING OF THE PERMIT TO DEMOLISH IT ACTUALLY REVERTS, UH, THAT, THAT ACTUALLY CREATES A VACANT LOT.
I MEAN, THERE WAS A LOT THAT HAD HAPPENED ALONG THE WAY AND THEY WERE INDIRECTLY INVOLVED.
I, IF I COULD REAL QUICK, AND I THINK I'M RIGHT IN SAYING THIS IN A POLICE VICE-CHAIR OR FORMER MEMBER, UH, FUN OLIN, BUT LEGALLY WE CAN'T REALLY LOOK AT WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH YOU.
I DON'T THINK THAT WAS IN THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW.
I THINK IT WAS KIND OF LAST MINUTE, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE REALLY LOOK AT.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT LIKE RIGHT NOW, LIKE HOW THE BOT IS BEING PRESENTED TO US LEGALLY.
THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON.
BUT THEY, UM, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT IN THIS, THIS AREA OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, PARTICULARLY THERE ARE A WHOLE LOT OF, UH, UH, SMALLER LOTS, UH, MODULAR LOTS, AND, AND THE, UH, THE CITY'S DEMOLITION RULE ON THE, ON THE WEBSITE, ON THE
IT HAS OVER THE YEARS, BIGGER AND BIGGER LETTERS SAYING, CHECK FIRST BEFORE YOU DEMOLISH.
AND WHAT USUALLY HAPPENS IS SOMEONE HAS A RUNDOWN PROPERTY.
THEY GO AND CHECK WITH THE CITY ABOUT REMODELING, AND THEN THEY HAVE AN ENGINEER COME OUT AND SAY THAT THEY CAN'T SALVAGE
[02:25:02]
THIS MUCH OR THAT MUCH.AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT, WANT TO BE CONSIDERED, NOT JUST ALLOWING EVERYBODY TO USE, ALLOWING THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO USE THE 1896 SUBDIVISION BRIEFLY, UH, FOR BOARD MEMBERS SMITH ANSWERED THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WOULD BE WILLING TO COMPROMISE OR COME TO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE APPLICANT, BECAUSE IF THERE'S ANY POSSIBILITY IN THERE AT ALL, I'D BE WILLING TO POSTPONE.
BUT IF IT'S JUST, IF Y'ALL AREN'T GOING TO WORK ANYTHING OUT, THEN WE'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND CALL THE VOTE TO ME.
AND YOUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT UNDERSTAND IT.
YOU'RE OKAY WITH A SIMILARLY SIZED HOME AS TO SIMILAR SIZE AS TO THE PRIOR HOME THAT WAS DEMOLISHED BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.
AND THEN I'M GOING TO FOLLOW ON WITH THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE SHOWING A FOOTPRINT THAT IS LESS THAN WHAT WAS THERE.
I KNOW IT'S A TWO STORY NOW AND NOT A SINGLE STORY, BUT THE ACTUAL FOOTPRINT IS LESS THAN WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY THERE.
SO THEY ARE DOING A SIMILARLY SIZED HOME, ACTUALLY SMALLER, AS FAR AS THE FOOTPRINT.
I JUST WANT CLARIFICATION ON THAT, BECAUSE YOU SAID YOU WANT A SIMILARLY SIZED HOME AND THEIR FOOTPRINT IS ACTUALLY SMALLER.
ALTHOUGH IT'S A TWO STORY, NOT A ONE STORY.
THE, UH, THE ORIGINAL, UH, HOME WAS, UH, 1,188 SQUARE FEET FOOTPRINT.
AND THEN THERE WAS AN UNPERMITTED SHED IN THE BACK AND A WORKSHOP STUDIO IN THE BACK UNPERMITTED.
IF YOU LOOK AT, AT WHAT THE, UM, UH, EARLY LAST YEAR, WHEN THEY WERE STILL COMMUNICATING WITH STAFF ABOUT REMODELING, UH, STAFF TOLD THEM THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO GET THAT, UH, THAT EXTRA, UH, THIS, THE STUDIO PERMITTED, AND BE ABLE TO KEEP THAT.
SO WHAT, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS SOMETHING THAT CONFORMS WITH CODE WITH WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO BUILD UNDER CODE.
UM, WELL, WE JUST HAVE A CONUNDRUM BECAUSE WE, WE DIDN'T, WE WEREN'T INVOLVED BEFORE THE HOUSE WAS DEMOED.
SO WE'VE BEEN BROUGHT A VACANT LOT.
AND WHILE I DON'T LIKE WHAT HAPPENED, AND I'VE SEEN IT A LOT, EVEN IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, WE HAVE RULES THAT WE ARE BOUND BY.
AND SO, AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE RUNNING UP AGAINST ON THIS.
AND ALSO, UM, I KNOW THAT Y'ALL ARE NOT SEEING EYE TO EYE AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO, UM, EITHER ONE OF YOU.
AND SO I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, UM, YOU SAID YOU, YOU SAID THAT YOU WOULD BE HAPPY WITH A SIMILAR SIZED HOME AND THIS, THE FOOTPRINT IS SIMILAR, IF NOT SMALLER, UM, IF NOT SMALLER.
AND SO I, I'M JUST, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT Y'ALL, CAN'T FIND A MIDDLE GROUND.
WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO? UM, WELL, WE ACTUALLY THINK THAT'S, THAT'S, UM, OUR PROBLEM
THEY DIDN'T WANT TO TALK TO US.
THEY'VE ALREADY GOT A, THEY'RE ASKING, THEY'RE ASKING FOR A HOME THAT'S MORE THAN THEY'VE GOT A DESIGN.
AND THAT'S, AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING TO GO WITH MS.
AND I W I, I WATCHED THE VIDEO FROM LAST, THE LAST PRESENTATION.
AND IN IT, IT SAID THAT YOU WERE COMPLIANT WITH IMPERVIOUS COVER, UH, EASEMENTS.
UH, IT DOES HAVE EXEMPTIONS FOR THE PORCH AND THE GARAGE.
AND WHERE ARE YOU AT ON YOUR FAR NOW? HERE'S, HERE'S WHAT CAME UP IN THE LAST, THE LAST VIDEO WAS PEOPLE WERE TALKING ABOUT SQUARE FEET VERSUS FAR WE DEAL ON FAR.
SO WHERE ARE YOU CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW STANDING WITH FAR AT THE MIXER MEAN BECAUSE IT'S, YEAH, IF WE COULD PULL UP THE SLIDE DECK AGAIN, UM, WE DO HAVE THAT LISTED IN THE TABLES ON THIS SECTION.
LET ME FLIP TO THE PAGE WHERE WE ARE COMPARING, UM, THE REDUCTION IN THE FOOTPRINT.
'CAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST AND HIS BOARD IS WE HAVE, WE HAVE GRANTED VARIANCES FOR SUBSTANDARD LOTS.
[02:30:01]
HOMES TO BE BUILT 2.4, NO MORE THAN FOUR FAR.WHERE ARE YOU AT? UH, SO WE PREVIOUSLY HAD SHOWN IT AT THE 42.1%, WHICH IS THE 2300, OR YOU DO THE FULL POINT FULLER, AND WE'VE ACTUALLY GONE BACK AND SHOWED CAUSE WE ARE WILLING TO COMPROMISE ON THAT, UM, AT SHOWN ON THE DIAGRAM ABOVE WHAT THAT WOULD BE REMOVING, WHICH WOULD BE ONE BEDROOM, UM, AND A FULL BATHROOM.
AND NOW WE ARE AT THE THAT'S SO TINY 39.4%.
UM, SO THAT WOULD ALSO NEED TO BE REVIEWED AGAIN BY THE CITY OF BOSTON, SINCE THEY'VE ALREADY APPROVED, UM, THE PREVIOUS FIR INTERPRETATION.
AND I UNDERSTAND I'M JUST TRYING AND THE MASSING, EXCUSE ME.
UM, THE MASSING IS STILL THE SAME.
IT'S ONLY REMOVING THAT BOTTOM POINT.
I UNDERSTAND, BUT I'M ALSO LOOKING ON E 1 69 AT THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR AND THE WAY, AND YOU GUYS ALSO HAD A RENDERING WITH THAT HOUSE, STARTED BACKED UP TO THE HOUSE ON E 1 69, WHICH ALSO DOES NOT HAVE ANY WINDOWS FACING YOUR HOUSE TO THE LEFT ON THE LEFT SIDE THERE.
YEAH, WE DID PUT WINDOWS, UM, FACING THERE'S ACTUALLY THE MAIN STAIRCASE AND WE ARE USING A DORMER TO BRING IN NATURAL LIGHT INTO THAT PORTION OF THE HOME IF YOU'RE STANDING AND LOOKING AT, OKAY, SO THIS IS FACING THE ALEKS.
SO THE BOTTOM LEFT IS FACING THE ALLEY.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE LEFT HAND OF THE HOME ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OVER HERE, I BELIEVE, IS THAT THE HOME, THE ON E 1 69, IT'S A TWO STORY.
THEY HAVE NO WINDOWS ON THAT SIDE.
MY PERSONAL FEELING ABOUT IT IS, AND I UNDERSTAND HOW A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOODS ARE.
WE ALL WANT AUSTIN THE WAY IT WAS BACK IN THE DAY, YOU KNOW? UH, SO, AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT REALISTIC.
AND I KNOW THE COST OF, I MEAN, I HAVE MY DAUGHTER HERE FROM PHILADELPHIA AND SHE'S NOT EVEN GONNA BE ABLE TO LIVE IN THE HOUSE.
AND I MEAN, IN THE CITY LIMITS ON THEIR SIDE PONY UP AND SHE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE REAL GOOD GIRL FOR THEM.
BUT I, I, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO VACANT LOTS, REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED, WHETHER IT BE ZILKER OR, AND FIELD OR WHEREVER, I DO FEEL THAT IF THEY CAN BE BUILT ON, IN A RESPONSIBLE MANNER, IT HELPS THE HOUSING SITUATION WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
UH, I, WHEN I LISTENED TO THIS, THE LAST TIME I HEARD, UM, UH, AND BURKE POINTED OUT, YOU GUYS ARE VERY EXPERIENCED BUILDERS.
SO YOU, YOU KNOW THIS, AND EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVEN'T BEEN OUT HERE AND I NOTICED, UH, KELLY AND MELISSA ALSO SUPPORTED A PORT FOR FAR, AND THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.
UH, SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO SPLIT THE BABY AND, UH, I'M, I'M A VERY BIG PROPONENT OF COMPROMISE.
I DON'T LIKE THROWING THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATH WATER AND LEAVING AN EMPTY LOT THERE FOR GOD KNOWS HOW, CAUSE I KNOW IT'S NOT GOING TO SOME OTHER DEVELOPER'S GOING TO COME AND SOMEBODY WE'RE GOING TO BE FACED WITH THE SAME THING DOWN THE ROAD, BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY THE HOUSING DEMAND IS IN AUSTIN.
AND I REALLY DO WISH ROM WAS HERE.
CAUSE MY MAN REALLY KNOWS HOW TO ARTICULATE THE LACK OF HOUSING HERE IN AUSTIN.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH THE JOB OF THAT IN THE FIRST HEARING, MY WIFE.
I, I LISTENED TO MY, MY FEELING ABOUT IS THAT AS I WOULD LIKE TO, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE HAVING YOU MEET THE POINT FOR FAR, UH, THE, THE HARDSHIP OF IT JUST HAPPENED TO BE A UNDERSIZED LOT.
IT'S THE SIMPLE FACT THAT IT HAS BEEN PLOTTED IN IT'S IT'S A SUBSTANDARD LOT NET THE BEST SQUARE FOOTAGE.
UH, I DO WANT, UH, I, I, I THINK WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS, HAS THEIR CONCERNS IS THE MASSIVE.
AND I AGREE WITH THEM BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU PROBABLY WALKED ON AND IT LOOKS LIKE AS A FORMER MEMBER, BRIAN USED TO SAY, THEY PUT 10 POUNDS IN A FIVE POUND BAG.
AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS LATER ON IS IF A FAMILY DOES PURCHASE AT HOME AND MAYBE THEY HAVE A CHILD, THEY WANT TO EXPAND A LITTLE BIT FOR A BABY COMING INTO THEY, BECAUSE IT'S MAXED OUT.
IT ALSO HAS A VERY NEGATIVE IMPACT TO THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO HAVING SAID ALL THAT, UM, I DON'T, I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW TO GET THERE TOO.
FROM A HARDSHIP STANDPOINT, I'VE GONE THROUGH THIS AND THIS IS WHAT I'VE BEEN DOING.
I WA I WENT THROUGH THIS AGAIN TODAY.
I LOOKED AT IT TODAY, EARLIER AT HOME.
AND I'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH TRYING TO FIND YOUR FINDINGS, UH, THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS.
AND EACH TIME I GO THROUGH IT, I FIND THE FRONT PAGE, THE SECOND PAGE.
AND THEN I DON'T, AND I SEE WHERE IT STATES THE, THE FINDINGS, BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE.
[02:35:01]
OTHER THAN THE FACT, I HAPPEN TO KNOW THAT YOU GUYS ARE APPLYING BECAUSE OF THE, UH, SUBSTANDARD LOT SITUATION.BUT EVEN IF I GO AND, UH, I'VE ALREADY OPENED UP THREE WINDOWS HERE AND I GO TO
AND SO I KNOW I MADE THE MOTION TO POSTPONE THE LAST TIME.
UH, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE REST OF MY COMMISSIONERS SIT, UH, MYSELF PERSONALLY, I DO.
I THINK A REASONABLE HOME COULD BE BUILT ON THIS LOT THAT CAN MEET THE, THE REQUIREMENTS AND THE ERROR CHARACTER.
BUT I JUST CAN'T, I STILL CAN'T GET THERE WITH JUST THE FINDINGS OF BEING JUST A SUBSTANDARD LOT.
COULD YOU PULL UP THE VIRTUAL BOARD MEMBERS FOR ME PLEASE? SO I CAN SEE IF THERE'S ANY HERE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I HAD IN MY NOTES IS THAT THEY NEED BETTER HARDSHIPS.
AND THEY HAVE TREES THAT YOU HAVE TREES THERE AS WELL FOR LOCATING IT OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, BUT THAT THE, IT, THE FACT THAT IT WAS PLOWED BACK IN 18 FOR THAT WE'VE NEVER DONE THAT I CAN GET, SORRY, ONE SEC.
YO, COULD YOU GET MY VIRTUAL BOARD MEMBERS UP, PLEASE? CAN I PROVIDE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS TO COMMISSIONER FUNNEL? WAS THAT A QUESTION BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAN? THAT'S FINE.
I THINK IT'S SOMETIMES LESS IS MORE THEN I WOULD, UH, I WOULD SAY YES, WE SCHOOLED EACH OTHER.
WELL, AS, AS ARCHITECTS, WE, WE SUBSCRIBED TO LESSONS MORE.
WE, AND WE DO HAVE ARCHITECTS THAT SIT UP HERE THAT ARE VERY WELL VERSED AND, AND, UH, SO I WOULD TRY.
SO IF IT'S BETTER THAN MELISSA'S SPEAKS, THEN I CAN TELL YOU HOW TO BUILD.
SO MY GOAL, IF YOU GO TO 81, 43, 44 IS WHERE I THINK THAT THE ARE, I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL TO MAKE THEM, WE ACTUALLY HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE BY BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAN.
I DIDN'T MOVE, YOU KNOW, CAUSE I WAS TOO SCARED OR FROM, WITH THE HARDSHIP, I WAS STILL TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT WHEN I SAID I WOULD, BUT I WILL.
I JUST WANNA, I WANT TO FIND A WAY THAT THIS, THIS IS IT'S GOING TO BE SPLITTING THE BABY.
SO NOBODY'S GOING TO BE A HAPPY A HUNDRED PERCENT, BUT EMOTIONALLY I THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO BE HARD.
YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST GOING TO BE HARD.
AND I DON'T PARTICULARLY LIKE THE WAY THAT THIS HAPPENED, WHERE DEMOLITION HAPPENED, NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT HAPPENED AFTER THE FACT.
UM, I REALLY FEEL LIKE THAT WE'RE ALL PART OF COMMUNITY AND THIS COULD HAVE HAPPENED A LOT BETTER AND I'M DISAPPOINTED IN THAT, BUT I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
UM, REASONABLE USE OF ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE REAL PROPERTY, DO NOT ALLOW FOR A REASONABLE USE BECAUSE AS THE CODE SECTION 25 TO 9 43 SUBSTANDARD LOT IS TAKEN FROM RECORDED DOCUMENTS IN TRAVIS COUNTY RECORDS AT 1946.
THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY.
THE DATE IS SEPTEMBER, I THINK 13TH, 1947.
HOW COULD I, HOW COULD I MISS THAT? THAT'S MY DAD'S BIRTHDAY, SEPTEMBER 23RD.
I DO MISS HIM, UM, SEPTEMBER 23RD, 1947.
AND WHILE THERE, THERE IS A DATE THAT THIS IS SO CLOSE TO THAT AND SHOULD I BELIEVE THE INTENT IS THERE? AND THAT THE LOT IS, IS VERY CLOSE.
I DO ALSO AS A PART OF THIS VARIANCE WOULD BE LIMITING IT TO A POINT FOR FAR, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH MASS AND SCALE.
UH, THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED AS YOU NEED TO THE PROPERTY, AS THERE IS AN UNIMPROVED ALLEY BEHIND THE PROPERTY THAT IS NOT USED FOR ACCESS AND PROVIDES SOMEWHAT OF A RELIEF
[02:40:02]
TO THE LOT, THE HARDSHIP, WHICH IS GENERAL, WHICH IS NOT GENERAL, THE AREA WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IS THE HOUSE ADJACENT IS, IS SIMILAR AND DID NOT TRIGGER THIS CODE SECTION, BUT IS ALSO OF A SMALLER SIZE.UM, BUT NO, NO, THAT'S NOT A QUESTION SHE'S READING THE FINDINGS.
I'M TRYING TO MAKE IT THROUGH THE FINDINGS.
WE, IF THERE'S QUESTIONS AFTERWARDS, I MEAN, I MAYBE HAVE TO BE CORRECTED, BUT AT LEAST IF I CAN GET THROUGH THE FINDINGS, AT LEAST WE'LL HAVE SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT.
THE VARIOUS WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER, THE AREA JASON, THE PROPERTY WENT ON AND PAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS AND THE ZONING DISTRICT.
AND WHERE'S THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AS IT DOES MEET THE MCMANSION TENT, THE POINT FOR FAR AND, UH, AGAIN WITH THE UNIMPROVED ALLEY, UM, IT DOES IT, IT IS INTENDED TO MEET ITS PROPORTION IN SIZE.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE CONDITION OF 0.4 F A R A.
I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UH, SO IS THE ADJACENT HOUSE NOT ALSO A SUBSTANDARD? YES.
SO IT, SINCE IT'S THE OTHER HALF OF THE LOT, IT IS A SUBSTANDARD SIZE.
AND WHEN WE LOOKED THROUGH ITS BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION, IT'S 2,900 SQUARE FEET.
I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF I HAD MADE AN ERROR IN MY FINDINGS.
THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION BOARD MEMBER SMITH.
I JUST, UH, I'M I'M SO BACK I, I'M NOT GETTING OVER THIS REASONABLE USE ISSUE AND I DON'T SEE THE HARDSHIP.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU WANTING TO MAKE YOUR PROPERTY MORE VALUABLE BY BUILDING A NEW STRUCTURE IS NOT A SUFFICIENT REASON THEY COULD BUILD IT.
I MEAN, AS I WAS ALLUDING TO, BEFORE THEY COULD HAVE BUILT AN, IT COULD BUILD A HOUSE SIMILAR TO WHAT HAD BEEN BUILT BEFORE, OBVIOUSLY WITH NEW BUT NEW MATERIALS.
AND THAT SEEMS TO BE A REASONABLE USE.
I THINK THE IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO SPEAK SO WAS, WELL, MY QUESTION IS, I GUESS, TO THE PANEL MEMBERS IS, UH, HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY THAT'S.
SO I THINK THAT, SO PERSONALLY, JUST AS THE MOTION MAKER, I THINK THAT SHIP HAS SAILED JUST BECAUSE HERE WE ARE AND, AND WE'VE GONE DOWN A ROAD, THE HOUSE ISN'T THERE.
I CAN UNDERSTAND THE THOUGHT AND FOLLOW THE CODE, THE CODE THROUGH THE THOUGHT OF THE REMODEL, BUT THE HOUSE ISN'T THERE ANYMORE.
AND, AND KNOWING THE AGE, IT PROBABLY WAS NOT VIABLE.
IT'S LIKE, UM, WE'VE HAD ANOTHER CASE WHERE IT'S AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING HOUSE AND UH, THEY WANT APPROVAL.
AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT IN LOOKING AT THE HOUSE AND THE PICTURES OF THE HOUSE, THERE'S NO WAY THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY PORTION OF THAT HOUSE LEFT.
UM, ONCE THAT ONCE, ONCE THEY ACTUALLY GET UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND, UH, SADLY I SEE A LOT OF TEAR DOWNS, UM, DAILY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND, AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND, UM, I'M NOT, I'M JUST TO BE CLEAR.
I'M NOT REALLY, I'M NOT SAYING THEY SHOULD HAVE REMODELED.
I'M SAYING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, SO WITHOUT A VARIANCE, THEY CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING BECAUSE THEY MISSED THE DATE OF MARCH, 1946 TO SEPTEMBER OF 1947.
SO IF THEY HAD MADE THE DATE OF MARCH, 1946, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE HERE AT ALL, BUT THEY MISSED IT BY THAT PERIOD OF TIME.
AND WITHOUT A VARIANCE, NOW THAT THERE'S NO STRUCTURE ON THE LOT, THEY CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING.
[02:45:01]
VARIANCE TO BUILD A HOUSE ON A LOT THAT IS ZONED AS THREE.I HATE THIS BECAUSE I HATE WHEN PEOPLE DEMO THINGS AND, AND, AND I HATE TO ENCOURAGE THAT FOR IN THE FUTURE, FROM OTHER PEOPLE THAT BUY LOTS AND WANT TO BUILD SOMETHING NEW IT'S TO MAINTAIN WHAT'S THERE.
I REALLY, REALLY CAUSE IT HAPPENS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD A LOT AND I'VE SEEN PERFECTLY GOOD HOUSES BE TORN DOWN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT OR JUST BECAUSE, AND I I'VE EVEN SEEN, UH, AN ARCA.
WELL, I CAN TELL YOU STORIES WHERE THERE WAS, THE HOUSE WAS DAMAGED.
IT WAS DAMAGED TWO DAYS BEFORE THE DEMO PERMIT WAS ASKED FOR.
SO I, I DON'T LIKE THIS, BUT I CAN'T RULE ON THAT.
I HAVE TO RULE ON, WHAT'S BROUGHT TO US IN THE CODE THAT'S BROUGHT TO US.
I DON'T ACTUALLY SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS.
I JUST, I DON'T KNOW THE HARDSHIP.
I'M STILL, I STILL DON'T KNOW THE HARDSHIP.
I MEAN, I DON'T, I DON'T FEEL LIKE WHAT YOU'RE BUILDING IS UNREASONABLE, BUT I DON'T, IF SOMEBODY COULD GIVE ME A WORSHIP, PLEASE, I TRIED.
SO A QUICK QUESTION FROM ME TO THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, IF WE DENY THE VARIANTS, CAN THEY BUILD ON THIS LOT AT ALL? BUT THIS IS THE LEGALLY PLOTTED LOT, RIGHT? AND THAT'S WHERE WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS IN THE PAST, ON THIS BOARD THAT IF IT'S BEEN LEGALLY PLANTED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN, WHY SHOULD IT BE DENIED TO BE BUILT UPON? BECAUSE THAT IS A REASONABLE USE FOR IT.
I FEEL WHAT THEY'RE DOING HERE.
NOW, IF THEY'RE GOING TO MEET THE FOUR PORT, THE PORT FOR FAR THEY'RE COMPLIANT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE AND PERVIOUS, CARVER SIDE YARD, SETBACKS, FRONT YARD SET SETBACKS.
TO ME, THAT IS A REASONABLE USE OF THE LAW OF A LEGALLY PLANTED LOT BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
SO IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE TYPE OF SITUATIONS IS IF THE CITY DOESN'T WANT SOMEBODY TO BUILD ON THE LOT, DON'T DON'T PLAN IT.
I MEAN, BECAUSE ONCE IT'S LEGALLY PLANTED, IT'S A LAND STATUS.
AND IT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I, I FEEL THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I KNOW WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM.
AND I KNOW THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, SAME THING WITH BODINE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SOME OF THE OTHERS, UH, STUFF LIKE THIS, WE'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH OVER THE YEARS AND IT IS IT'S HEART WRENCHING.
AND I KNOW, I KNOW YOU GUYS, AREN'T HAPPY.
I KNOW YOU'RE NOT REALLY GOING TO BE A WHOLE LOT OF HAPPY.
NOBODY GETS A HUNDRED PERCENT, BUT, UH, AGAIN, I'VE FELT, I HAVE FELT THAT MY, ONE OF MY ROLES UP HERE IS TO PROVIDE REDRESS AND TO AT LEAST FIND A COMPROMISE THAT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY, HAVING AN EMPTY LOT OUT THERE THAT IT'S LEGALLY PLOTTED, BUT NOTHING CAN BE BUILT ON IT TO ME IS THAT'S NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THIS, THIS COMMUNITY, AUSTIN AND THE HOUSING CRISIS THAT WE'RE UNDER.
I AGREE WITH WARD MEMBER VON OLIN.
ALTHOUGH I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT WE HAVE SEEN SOME CASES IN WHICH THE ASK WAS EGREGIOUS IN TERMS OF THE REQUESTED REDUCTION IN, UM, LOT SIZE.
AND I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE HERE THOUGH.
SO I I'M SUPPORTIVE OF A POINT FOR OVARIAN BECAUSE AGAIN, OTHERWISE, IF WHAT ELSE CAN YOU BUILD? OR YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING AT ALL.
AND THAT'S NOT A, A REASONABLE SITUATION.
WELL IT'S 276 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS BASICALLY 10 FEET WIDE BY 20 FEET LONG.
GIVE OR TAKE I'M ROUNDING MY WIRE WHEN I DO THE ALLEY.
SO I GUESS AS FILTERED THROUGH THIS, WHY CAN'T WE GRANT THE VARIANCE CONDITIONED ON BUILDING A HOUSE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT APPARENTLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS WILLING TO ACCEPT.
THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL MR. SMITH, BECAUSE WE CANNOT HAVE, ONE OF THE THINGS IS, IS WE CAN'T HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS DICTATING TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE OR NOT ACCEPTABLE? WE CAN ONLY GO BASED UPON ZONING AND CODE.
AND IF, IF CODE AND ZONING, WHICH IS WHAT THE LEGAL STANDARD IS ALLOWS POINT FOR FAR, THAT'S WHY YOU'LL NOTICE.
WE'LL PULL THAT POINT FOR QUITE A BIT IS BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT'S THE LEGAL STANDARD.
IF WE GO OUTSIDE OF THAT LEGAL STANDARD, THINGS CAN GET CONTESTED IN COURT IN ANOTHER LEGAL MATTER.
AND IT ALSO OPENS, UH, UH, US AND THE CITY UP TO A POTENTIAL LIABILITY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT FOLLOWING THE CODE AND STANDARD.
WE'VE HAD PEOPLE COME IN AS, AS KELLY HAS SAID, AND KELLY, IF I EVER STEPPED ON, I
[02:50:01]
HOPE YOU'RE WILLING TO COME ON FULL TIME.THIS HAS GONE ON LONG ENOUGH, BUT ANYHOW, UH, THE, UH, WE'VE HAD PEOPLE COME IN AND REALLY ASK FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS REALLY WAY OUT OF THE PARK AND THE ONLY WAY THAT WE COULD LEGALLY CONTROL IT WAS TO LIMIT IT TO THE POINT FOR FAR.
SO I WOULD ALSO ADD IT'S IT'S ALSO HARD TO QUANTIFY BECAUSE WHILE THERE WERE STRUCTURES AND FOOTPRINTS, AS MS ATHERTON SAID, I MEAN, LEGAL STRUCTURES.
AND WHEN YOU START GETTING TO THINGS THAT WERE BUILT PRIOR TO, SO THE CITY COMPUTERIZED THEIR PERMIT SYSTEM IN LATE 1979, IT WASN'T REALLY VERY CONSISTENT AND EVERYTHING BEFORE THAT IS ON LIKE CARDS THAT ARE OVER AT THE HISTORY CENTER.
SO WHEN YOU START GETTING INTO THESE STRUCTURES THAT ARE OLDER AND THEN WAS IT A SHED? WAS IT, WAS IT SOMETHING THAT WAS HABITABLE? I THINK THAT, UH, 0.4 IS A VERY CONSISTENT NUMBER AND IT WENT THROUGH MCMANSION TO COME UP WITH A NUMBER ON MASSING FOR THE SIZE.
AND SO, BECAUSE THE LOT SMALLER, THAT'S WHY I'M THE MOTION CONTAINS THE 0.4 IS CAUSE IT'S ABOUT MASSING.
AND SO THERE'S ALSO THE TENT THAT GOES WITH THAT.
NO, BUT AT THIS POINT I REALLY FEEL THAT WE NEED TO TAKE SOME ACTION ON THIS CASE AND, AND NO VARIANCE IS, IS NOTHING HAPPENS ON THIS LOT.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE WELCOME TO THROW OUT AMENDMENTS YOUR, I, I JUST, IT HAS TO GET DONE.
I MEAN, I'D LIKE TO COMMENT AS WELL.
I REALLY DON'T LIKE THE WAY THIS WENT DOWN AND I'M REALLY DISAPPOINTED THAT YOU GUYS COULDN'T COME TO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATES.
UH, IT, IT SMELLS FUNNY TO ME AND WHEN SOMETHING SMELLS FUNNY, IT USUALLY SOMETHING GOING ON, BUT REGARDLESS, I'M, I'M A HUGE PROPONENT FOR OWNER'S PROPERTY RIGHTS AND I'M INCLINED TO APPROVE IT SIMPLY BECAUSE IF WE DON'T, YOU CAN'T BUILD.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT IS IN ANY WAY FOR IT.
YOU BOUGHT SOMETHING, IT'S YOUR LAND, THE CITY MADE IT LAND.
YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD ON IT.
THE 0.4 FDRS IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING I THINK WE NEED TO INCLUDE THOUGH, AS A CONDITION A, IS THAT SOMETHING Y'ALL CAN WORK WITH.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE CONSIDERED ALREADY, AS WE'VE SHOWN IN, UM, THE EXHIBIT THAT SHOWS WHAT WOULD BE REMOVED IF IT CHANGED 2.4 AND IT'S YES.
AND EVEN WITH WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WE HAD ONE NEIGHBOR ASK US NOT TO INCLUDE AN ADU OR DETACHED STRUCTURE, WHICH AT THE VERY BEGINNING, WE WERE VERY HAPPY TO AGREE WITH TO ALSO REDUCE THE OVERALL MASSING.
SO EVEN SENSITIVE TO THIS OVERALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, NO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, POINT FOR GOOD WITH US.
I THINK WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO WALK AWAY WITH THAT DIAGRAM AND THAT FLOOR PLAN APPROVED BY YOU ALL.
UM, SO THAT WE CAN KEEP THE PERMIT MOVING FORWARD MORE.
IF I COULD DO A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, PLEASE, UH, VICE-CHAIR HAWTHORNE.
AND THAT WOULD BE NO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, HIS CONDITION AS WELL.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WELL, I WASN'T GOING TO SAY THIS, BUT IT WAS FUNNY HOW I LOOKED DOWN AND I SAW THE WORDS FROM THE DALAI LAMA COME UP, THEY SET WITH CARE AND COMPASSION OF WARM HEART AND DETERMINATION, DIFFICULT THINGS CAN CHANGE AND HELP HEALTHY, HAPPY PEOPLE CAN TALK THROUGH THEIR DIFFERENCES.
I WOULD LIKE EVERYBODY, INCLUDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, PLEASE TAKE THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY WAY THAT WE CAN REACH COMPROMISE IS BY EVERYBODY HAVE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WATCH THE EAGLES AND WATCH THE DON'T TAKE THINGS PERSONAL.
AND, AND YOU DID VERY GOOD REIGNING HIM IN.
SO LISTEN TO THE YOUNG WOMAN SHE RAISED, SHE DID LESS IS MORE THAN YOU GUYS DID.
I HOPE YOU CAN MAKE THIS WORK AND, AND MAKE SOMETHING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION CAN, THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN LIVE WITH.
AND REGARDLESS OF HOW WE VOTE, I DO WANT TO APOLOGIZE FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT'S TAKEN FOR US TO GET TO THIS POINT.
I KNOW THERE WERE A LOT OF TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.
I KNOW WE WERE SHORT SOME BOARD MEMBERS AND, AND THAT'S ON US, BUT JUST PLEASE REMEMBER, WE ARE VOLUNTEERS.
WE, WE SPEND OUR OWN TIME ON THIS.
HE WAS LOOKING AT THIS YESTERDAY, YOU KNOW, AND THIS WEEKEND WE DO THE BEST WE CAN.
[02:55:01]
Y'ALL BEING PATIENT ON THIS.AND I THINK IF I'M READING EVERYONE CORRECTLY, WE'RE WRITING FOR A VOTE.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE VOTE.
THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE 0.4 FAR AND NO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
IT'S GOING TO BE ITEM E ONE C 15 20 21 0 1 0 0 FINDINGS HAVE BEEN CALLED BY OR SORRY.
THE MOTION WAS MADE BY VICE-CHAIR HAWTHORNE, SECONDED BY A BOARD MEMBER BY AN OLIN FINDINGS HAVE BEEN READ.
YES, BECAUSE SOMETHING'S GOING TO GET BUILT ON IT, WHETHER YOU DO IT OR SOMEBODY ELSE THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING.
BUT I DO NOT LIKE HOW Y'ALL WENT ABOUT THIS AT ALL.
I DON'T NEED TO REPEAT WHAT SHE JUST SAID, BUT THAT'S KIND OF HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT TOO.
MELISSA HAWTHORNE, DARRYL PRA.
OH, HE'S ABSTAINING AND AUGUSTINE RICHARD SMITH.
I WANT TO ECHO THE OTHER COMMENTS HERE.
AND I WOULD ASK THAT, YOU KNOW, YOUR, YOUR, YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES AS HUMAN BEINGS IS TO TRY TO MAKE PEACE WITH FOLKS.
AND I THINK YOU STILL HAVE BOTH SIDES STILL HAVE THAT OBLIGATION TO TRY TO MAKE PEACE ABOUT THIS.
CAUSE IT'S TOUGH FOR BOTH SIDES.
AND THAT WAS ARTICULATED VERY WELL.
Y'ALL THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE AND YOUR TIME.
WE HOPE WE DON'T SEE YOU COMING BACK AGAIN.
WELL, WE DON'T, YOU CAN'T SAY IT LIKE THAT.
I MEAN, IN SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES, WE UNDERSTAND.
WE JUST DON'T WANT Y'ALL HERE.
Y'ALL I KNOW YOU CAN'T SAY THAT.
NO, YOU WERE KIDDING, BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE TYPE OF THING THAT THE REPORT WILL GRAB AND THEN WE'LL BE IN THE PAPER.
UH, IF THEY REALLY THINK THAT I'M THE PERSON TRYING TO RESTRICT ACCESS TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, THEN THEY REALLY NEED TO SEE SOME OF MY HISTORY OF WHAT I'VE DONE.
I'LL JUST SAY THAT IT WAS JUST UNDER ONE OF THOSE LESSONS, MORE MOMENTS THAT'S FAIR.
THAT WOULD BE I'M TRYING TO HELP YOU LESS THIS MORE.
[E-2 C15-2022-0011 Jonathan Kaplan for David Scott Kosch 2715 Long Bow Trail]
DON'T EAT TO SEE 15 20 22 0 0 1 1.THIS WILL BE JONATHAN KAPLAN FOR DAVID SCOTT.
AND SAME AS THE OTHER ONE WE DID EARLIER.
GUYS, WE WILL BE CARRYING THESE TWO SEPARATELY.
READY? UH, IS YOUR PRESENTATION ONE SEC? SORRY, TILL ACTS UP AND THEN OKAY.
STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
THIS IS JONATHAN KAPLAN ON BEHALF OF DAVID SCOTT COSH.
THAT'S ACTUALLY THE WRONG PRESENTATION.
SO WE'LL JUST RESET THE MADAM MADAM CHAIR.
I DON'T THINK THERE ARE PRESENTATIONS FOR THIS ONE.
THEY DIDN'T SUBMIT PRESENTATIONS.
UH, WE DON'T HAVE THEM FOR 27, 15, 20 SEVENTH.
AND YOU AT SUBMITTED FOR THAT VANCE PACKET, NOT FOR THE PRESENTATIONS.
I ASKED YOU IF YOU WANTED IT FOR THE ADVANCED PACKET OR THE PRESENTATION, YOU SAID ADVANCED PACKET.
I'VE GOTTEN STOPPED BY THE TERMS. OKAY.
SO JUST, I READ OFF MY INFORMATION THEN THE ADVANCED, THE ADVANCED PACKET AND MY PRESENTATIONS, THE SAME INFORMATION.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? UM, CAN WE USE THE, WELL, WE CAN VIEW THE EVENTS, RIGHT? Y'ALL CARE ABOUT YOU, THE ADVANCED PACKET.
UM, AND I, I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THE LETTER I NEED 2, 3, 2, 3, 2, 4, 2 5.
IS THAT THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE CALLING FROM? IRVING? YES.
SO THE ONE DATE OF MARCH 24TH, 2020 TO 24TH,
[03:00:01]
2022.ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND UH, I'LL START THE CLOCK.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE PACKET, WE'RE BACK TO THE SAME SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE TWO LOTS THAT WERE PLANTED BACK IN THE MID SIXTIES, THAT IN 2014, THE LA ZONING REGULATIONS ARE PLACED OVER THEM.
THESE ARE A QUARTER ACRE UNDER QUARTER ACRE, LOTS WITH THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY, MAKE SOME PRETTY MUCH UNDEVELOPABLE.
UH, WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS AN INCREASED IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE REGULATIONS ARE INCREASED IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ABILITY BECAUSE OF THE OVERLYING RESTRICTIONS.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S A FEW POINTS.
AS ONE IS THE LA JURISDICTIONAL REGULATIONS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE APPLIED TO ANYTHING UNDER ONE.
ACRE IS STRICTLY MANDATES, ONE ACRE OR GREATER FOR BOTH THE LA REGULAR OVERLAY AND ZONING REGULATIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, I HATE TO INTERRUPT HIM.
YOU CAN STOP THE TIMER ON HIM.
WHERE ARE YOU FINDING THAT THIS IS ILLEGAL? I HAVE CHECKED WITH, I HEARD JUST TO MAKE THE SAME STATEMENT ON THE LAST PRESENTATION AND IT ALSO STATES IT HERE IN YOUR LETTER.
AND I'M SORRY IF I'M JUMPING IN, THIS IS CURRENTLY, BUT THIS IS CRITICAL BECAUSE IF IT'S GOING TO GET LOST IN THE MIRE, LIKE IT DID LAST TIME, WHERE DID YOU FIND IT CAN SUBSTANTIATE THAT IT IS ILLEGAL IN YOUR ZONING REGULATIONS THAT STATES THAT LA ZONING CAN NOT BE APPLIED TO A LOT OR LA LOTS MUST BE A MINIMUM OF ONE ACRE OR SORRY.
CAUSE HE HAS TO BE GIVEN HIS FULL MINUTE.
UH, YOU KNOW, UH, ZONING, YOU KNOW, THE ZONING REGULATIONS, THE CITY HAS 12 ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES, ZONING REGULATIONS, AS YOU GUYS KNOW, UH, THE BIGGEST ONES ARE GOING TO BE THE, YOU KNOW, ZONING REQUIREMENT OR THE ZONING REGULATIONS SHOULD NOT DEFER USABLE PURPOSE OF THE LOT, WHICH THE CURRENT ZONING REGULATIONS DO THEY PREVENT ANY REASONABLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY? YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE DIFFERENT SITE ITEMS. WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY ZONING CHANGE OR IT'S ASKING FOR A VARIANCE, THE PROPERTIES WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF THIS LOT, HAVE NO REGULATIONS THERE, TRAVIS COUNTY JURISDICTION, NOT EVEN WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN REGULATIONS.
AND THEN IF WE GO INTO THE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE OTHER ITEMS WE'VE TOUCHED UPON LAST TIME, UH, THIS IS WITHIN THE APACHE SHORES COMMUNITY.
IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH WHERE THAT IS, IT'S BASICALLY ALL THE WAY UP LAKE AUSTIN, JUST FOR YOU TO HIT THE DAM ON THE WEST SIDE.
AND THERE'S THIS A SMALL STRIP IN THERE THERE'S LAKE AUSTIN JURISDICTION, UH, PATCHY SHORES POA REQUIRES THAT EACH, UH, LIVING STRUCTURE MUST HAVE A MINIMUM 650 SQUARE FEET ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S THE MAIN REQUIREMENT FOR THE BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES.
UH, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, ONE OF THE ITEMS I WAS BROUGHT UP WHEN WE HAD OUR LAST MEETING, THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE SIZE OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, YOU KNOW, ROUGHLY 2,500 SQUARE FOOT HOUSES.
IF YOU LOOK WITHIN A THOUSAND FOOT RADIUS OF THAT PROPERTY, THE NINE LARGER HOUSE IN THAT THOUSAND FOOT RADIUS COME UP TO TWENTY FOUR HUNDRED AND FORTY THREE SQUARE FEET.
IF YOU AVERAGE THEM ALL OUT TOGETHER, THE HOUSE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET IS ONLY 39 SQUARE FEET UNDER 2,500 FEET PER PERMIT.
AND I BELIEVE THE TEAK HAD, HAS A LITTLE BIT LESS BY ONE BY PERMIT.
UH, WE DID HAVE SOME OPPOSITION, YOU KNOW, INQUIRING ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT IN THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE TREES CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROPERTY.
WE DID HAVE AN AWESOME, BEAUTIFUL TREES GO OUT THERE AND ASSESS EACH TREE.
UH, THERE ARE SEVERAL PROTECTED AND ONE HERITAGE STREET.
UH, THE PLANS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN A SITE PLAN PROVIDED DOES NOT REMOVE OR DEMOLISH ANY OF THOSE TREES DOES NOT AFFECT THEM.
UH, THE DEVELOPERS THAT ACTUALLY TRYING TO SAVE THE TREES CAUSE HE REALLY DOES LIKE THEM, THE TREES THEMSELVES.
NOW I KNOW THE BOARD HAD SEVERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, CREATIVE DESIGN SEPTIC SYSTEMS USE APPEARS, YOU KNOW, CUTTING INTO THE LAW, PROTECTING THE TREES, THE CREATIVE DESIGN SIDE.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO PUT THESE HOUSES, YOU KNOW, AS TIGHT IN THERE AND FARTHER BACK FROM THE STREET AS POSSIBLE.
SO THEY'RE NOT OBSTRUCTING VIEWS OR LIKE DECREASING THE BEAUTY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW, SETS ON THE CREATIVE DESIGN SIDE, UH, USE APPEARS, DOES IT ACTUALLY HELP WITH IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, CITY OF AUSTIN? IF YOU HAVE A SAY PIER AND BEAM FOUNDATION, THEY STILL COUNT EVERYTHING UNDERNEATH THAT AS IMPERVIOUS.
SO I KNOW THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS BROUGHT UP.
UH, IT WAS ASKED WHY WE'RE CUTTING INTO THE STEEPEST PORTION OF THE LOT.
UH THAT'S BECAUSE THE STEEPEST PORTION ACTUALLY HAS THE SMALLEST AMOUNT OF WATER RETAINAGE, THE FLAT A LOT MORE WATER IT'LL ACTUALLY HOLD IN.
SO THE STEEPER PORTIONS THAT A LOT WILL ACTUALLY HOLD LESS WATER DURING A TERRAIN EVENT, UH, PROTECT THE TREES.
YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE OBVIOUSLY BEING SAVED THERE.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY SPECIAL TREE PERIMETRY REMOVALS TO PROJECT, UH, DRINKING WATER PROTECTION WAS A HUGE ITEM.
I COMPLETELY GET THAT CAUSE THIS IS LAKE AUSTIN JURISDICTION.
I SPOKE TO A COUPLE OF CIVIL ENGINEERING FIRMS AND THEY HAVE NO PROBLEM CREATING A HYDROLOGY DESIGN.
SO ANY OF THE ADVERSE RAINWATER THAT'S COMING OFF THE PROPERTY DUE TO DEVELOPMENT, THEY COULD CAPTURE WITHIN THE PROPERTY.
SO IT DOESN'T COME OFF THE PROPERTY
[03:05:01]
THROUGH A RAINWATER COLLECTION, TANKS AND STORE AND LET IT SEEP BACK INTO MOTHER EARTH.THAT'S A VERY, A COMMON PROCESS IN THE COMMERCIAL DESIGN INDUSTRY.
UH, I MEAN THE, YOU KNOW, I KNOW WE DO HAVE SOME OPPOSITION IN THE AUDIENCE HERE.
I SPOKE TO THEM A LITTLE BIT AGO.
THEIR BIGGEST CONCERN IS A THREE-STORY HOUSE GOING UP, YOU KNOW, CAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO LOOK THE THREE STORIES, BUT IT'S AN OPTION OF MORE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE AND A TWO STORY HOUSE OR THREE STORY HOUSE WITH LESS IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE.
THERE'S ACTUALLY A SITE MAP I DID ON THERE.
IT'S A SITE PLAN OF THE TWO PROPERTIES SHOWS THE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ALLOWED OR THE 27 15, WHICH I BELIEVE THE CASE WE'RE WORKING ON ONLY ALLOWS FOR 1,097 SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE WHILE THE ADJACENT LOT IS ONLY ALLOWING FOR 580 SQUARE FEET AND PREVIOUS COVERAGE UNDER CURRENT REGULATIONS.
AND WHEREAS ASKING FOR A 2,500 SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ON BOTH.
UH, FUCKING GET YOU TO TAKE A STEP OVER TO YOUR LEFT, PLEASE.
OPPOSITION, COME ON UP TO THE PODIUM.
YOU'LL STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND UH, SO MORE THAN ONE PERSON.
SO YOU'LL EACH HAVE TWO MINUTES IN 30 SECONDS AND IF YOU'RE AT AHEAD FIRST, I'VE NEVER BEEN TO THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL BEFORE I'VE LIVED IN AUSTIN SINCE 1992.
I'VE NO IDEA THE DEDICATION TO YOUR JOBS.
SO THANK YOU FOR EVEN LISTENING TO ME TONIGHT.
I'M I'M JUST A LITTLE HOMEOWNER HERE SAYING MY PIECE AND UM, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
IT'S 20 MINUTES UNTIL I SHOULD BE PUTTING MY KIDS TO BED RIGHT NOW.
SO I, YOU PROBABLY ARE IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS.
SO THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE.
I AM OPPOSED TO THIS PARTICULAR BUILD I'VE LIVED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
MY NAME IS SUSAN VAN AUSTRIAN.
I DON'T THINK I'VE TOLD YOU THAT WAS I.
SO I'VE LIVED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
IT'S BEAUTIFUL AND I'M NOT OPPOSED AT ALL TO HOUSES BEING BUILT IN A LOTS I KNOW WITH THE HARLEM HOUSING MARKET IS RIGHT NOW, ESPECIALLY WHERE I LIVE.
I MEAN, IT WAS REALLY CHEAP BACK THEN, BUT NOW IT'S REALLY CRAZY.
UM, BUT I'M HERE TO DISCUSS THEIR REQUEST FOR HARDSHIP IN COMPARISON TO THE LOT NEXT DOOR.
HE DIDN'T MENTION A LOT NEXT DOOR.
AND HE DID SAY THAT THE LOT NEXT DOOR AS THE REASON FOR THE HARDSHIP.
AND I WANT TO TELL YOU ABOUT THOSE LAWS THAT ARE NEXT DOOR, THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR HAS A REASONABLY SIZED HOME AND MINIMAL IMPERVIOUS COMER AND HAS PRESERVED THE HERITAGE OAKS ON THE PROPERTY.
THE LOT NEXT DOOR ALSO HAS UNDISTURBED NON IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT ABSORBS THE RUNOFF THAT WOULD GO INTO LAKE AUSTIN.
I DON'T THINK THERE IS SUFFICIENT HARDSHIP FOR THE DEVELOPER'S REQUEST TO INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER.
TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY'RE ASKING BASED ON THE COMPARISON OF THE LOTS NEXT DOOR, I'M NOT AGAINST THE DEVELOPER BUILDING ON THIS PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, I THINK THE VARIANTS SHOULD BE IN LINE WITH WHAT IS REASONABLE WITHIN THE CODE AND BASED ON COMPARISON TO THE OTHER LOCKS, THE GUIDELINES ON IMPERVIOUS COMER ARE THERE FOR A REASON.
IMPERVIOUS COVERS SOMETHING WE HEAR A LOT IN.
AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS CEMENT.
IT'S SUBMIT THAT YOU PUT IN THE GROUND AND I MOVED TO AUSTIN BECAUSE OF THE SPACE AND THE LIGHTS AND THE NATURE AND THE BEAUTY OF, OF WHAT SURROUNDS US AND HOPE.
NONE OF Y'ALL ARE FROM DALLAS, BUT I DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN DALLAS WHERE EVERYTHING IS CEMENT AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE CLEARING OVER 80% OF THE TREES ON THIS SLIDE.
NOW, NOT ALL OF THEM ARE HERITAGE JOKES, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF BEAUTIFUL TREES THAT, THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY PROTECTED.
THEY'RE JUST GOING TO BE CLEARING.
THEY'RE DIGGING OUT THE HILLSIDE.
THEY'RE DESTROYING THAT SPACE AND THE NATURE OF OUR COMMUNITY AND THE PLACE WHERE MYSELF AND MY NEIGHBORS HAVE LIVED FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
SEVERAL OF MY NEIGHBORS ARE ELDERLY AND THEY'VE LIVED THERE SINCE, GOSH, THE SIXTIES, SOME SINCE 1984, SORRY, THEY COULDN'T BE HERE WITH US TONIGHT.
THEY'RE JUST NOT PHYSICALLY ABLE, BUT THEY'VE ASKED FOR US TO SPEAK IN THEIR STEAD THAT WE DON'T ACTUALLY WANT TO LOOK AT THREE STORY WHITE WALLS AND TO HAVE THE TREES GO.
SO I'M REQUESTING THAT THEY NOT BE GRANTED AN EXCEPTION AND THAT A HARDSHIP PERMIT BE DENIED.
I KNOW THESE, AREN'T THE MOST EXCITING THINGS TO, TO SIT THROUGH, TO GET TOWARDS THE END.
YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL HAVE TWO AND A HALF MINUTES.
UM, GOOD EVENING BOARD MEMBERS.
UM, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME IF A COUPLE OF MINUTES TO SPEAK.
UH, I AM ALSO HERE TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
UM, MR. KAPLAN IN THE, IN THE CLIENTS HE REPRESENTS, UH, WANT TO BUILD TWO LARGE HOUSES ON SMALL, VERY STEEP WATTS.
UH, THESE LOTS ARE DENSE WITH MATURE OAKS IN THE LOTS FEED DIRECTLY INTO THE CITY'S WATER SUPPLY.
UH, JUST, WAS IT JUST A FEW HUNDRED FEET AWAY ALLOWING MR. KAPLAN AND HIS CLIENTS TO BUILD, UH, HOUSES OF THESE SIZES WITH SUCH
[03:10:01]
A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE ALLOWABLE IMPERVIOUS COVER ON SUCH DEEP IN SMALL LOTS IS ENVIRONMENTALLY RECKLESS, RIGHT? I MEAN, WHY, WHY, WHY, WHY, WHY WOULD WE, WHY WOULD WE TAKE THIS, THIS, THIS CHANCE RIGHT.FOR, UM, FOR HOUSES NOW I KNOW THERE'S THE HARDSHIP ARGUMENT, RIGHT? UM, BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY HOLD WATER IN THIS CASE, THE CLIENTS MR. KAPLAN REPRESENTS HAVE MULTIPLE ACTIVE HOUSING PROJECTS IN APACHE SHORES.
UM, SO THESE IN THEIR BUILDING MODERN, UH, SPEC HOUSES, UM, AND THEY'RE BUILDING THEM FOR PROFIT THEY'RE BUILDING FOR PROFIT, WHICH IS, WHICH IS FINE.
UM, AND WHILE MR. KAPLAN AND HIS CLIENTS, UM, COULD USE BOTH LOSS TO BUILD ONE GOOD SIZED, UH, HOUSE THAT WOULDN'T REQUIRE A VARIANCE, UM, OR THEY COULD ALSO BUILD TWO SMALLER HOUSES, UH, THEY ARE CHOOSING NOT TO.
UM, AND THE, THE REASON WHY IS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE TALKED WITH THE BUILDER DIRECTLY, THE REASON WHY IS, UM, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AS PROFITABLE FOR THEM, WHICH I UNDERSTAND, BUT, UH, FOR ME AND FOR MISS VAN NOSTRUM WHO SPOKE, THIS IS, THIS IS OUR COMMUNITY.
THIS IS OUR, THIS IS OUR HOME.
THIS IS A PLACE THAT WE LOVE OR RAISING OUR KIDS THERE.
SO THE LAST THING, AND JUST UNDER 2,500 SQUARE FEET, THESE HOUSES THAT THEY'RE TAUGHT, THEY'RE PROPOSING, THERE'LL BE THE TWO LARGEST HOUSES ON LONG BOAT TRAIL.
IT WILL BE THE LARGEST HOUSES ON LONGBOAT TRAIL IN THERE, AND VERY, VERY SMALL LOTS.
UM, MORE THAN THAT, THEY'RE OVER A THOUSAND HOUSES AND OR A THOUSAND PROPERTIES IN PATCHY SHORES.
THESE, THESE HOUSES ARE GOING TO BE THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE LESS THAN 2% OF THE HOUSES THAT ARE THIS SIZE OR LARGER, RIGHT? SO THESE, YES, THERE ARE SOME MR. UH, LAST TIME, UH, WHEN MR. KAPLAN SPOKE, HE DID MENTION THERE'S SOME OTHER HOUSES OF THAT SIZE.
UH, BUT THEY'RE VERY, VERY FEW.
SO THEY DON'T FIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, JUST TECH.
SO JUST TO SUMMARIZE AND PREVIOUS COVERAGE RULES ARE IN PLACE TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT AND TO PROTECT THE CITY'S DRINKING WATER.
UH, AND WHILE I CERTAINLY THINK EXCEPTIONS SHOULD BE MADE THIS CLEARLY, ISN'T ONE OF THOSE TIMES.
AND THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR THE, FOR THE TIME TONIGHT.
YOU WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.
THIS IS JONATHAN KAPLAN, AGAIN, I'M SORRY, BUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING AGAINST THIS KEY PROVIDING FALSE INFORMATION, THE, FOR EXAMPLE, HE SAID THERE'S WAS NO HOUSES THAT BIG YOU'D BUILT ON LONGBOAT TRAIL, UH, 28 0 5 LONGBOW TRAIL, WHICH IS JUST UP ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE IS 2,583 SQUARE FEET ON TAX ROLL.
LONGBOATS TRAIL ITSELF HAS NOT BEEN HEAVILY DEVELOPED.
THERE'S STILL A LOT OF EMPTY LOTS THAT ARE NOT BEING, HAD NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED YET.
THERE ARE PLENTY OF HOUSES BIGGER THAN THIS WITHIN A THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT THOUSAND FOOT RADIUS OF THE PROPERTY.
THEY BRING UP THE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WATER SUPPLY.
I GET THAT, BUT WE HAVE WAYS OF MITIGATING THAT.
WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE CONDITION, HAVING A CIVIL ENGINEERS, DESIGNED A WATER DRAINAGE PLAN TO BUILD, HOLD ANY ADDITIONAL WATER ONTO THEIR PROPERTY AND LET IT GO INTO MOTHER EARTH VERSUS RUNNING DOWN THE STREETS.
YOU KNOW, THE, UH, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE LADY'S NAME, SORRY.
UH, BUT, UH, HOW SHE'S REFERRING TO IS THE BLUE OF THE HOUSE ON THE RIGHT.
UH, IT IS A HOUSE I THINK WAS BUILT IN THE SEVENTIES OR EIGHTIES.
SO IT WAS WAY BEFORE ANY OF THESE REGULATIONS EVEN TOOK PLACE, YOU KNOW, AND YES, IT IS A SMALLER HOUSE, BUT THAT'S THEIR REPORT, UH, TO SAY 2% OF THE HOUSES AND APACHE SHORES OF THE SIZE.
I COULD RUN STATISTICS ON IT BY REALLY WOULD NOT BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, I PERMIT PROBABLY 30 PLUS HOUSES ON THAT COMMUNITY IN THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF.
YOU KNOW, WHAT WERE, YOU KNOW, THE PROPER CHECKS WE HAVE, WE ALREADY HAVE SEPTIC PERMITS FOR AWESOME WATERS, APPROVED THEM.
WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD THE SEPTIC PROMOTIONAL BUILT LAOS TO BUILD UP TO 2,500 SQUARE FEET.
I'M NOT SAYING WE'RE BUILDING EXACTLY 2,500 SQUARE FEET.
YOU KNOW, I'M NOT THE DEVELOPER, I'M NOT THE BUILDER.
YOU KNOW, I HELP THEM GET THROUGH THESE CYCLES AND PROCESSES.
AND NOW WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BUILD SOMETHING REASONABLE ON THESE PROPERTIES.
AS THE PROPERTIES ARE WITH THE CODES APPLIED TO THEM, WE CANNOT BUILD ANYTHING, BUT YOU KNOW, LEGAL TO THE PROPERTIES, WE CAN BUILD ANYTHING THAT'S LEGAL TO THE POA, YOU KNOW, AS THEY ARE, THEY'RE RAW DIRT, NO LIVING UNITS, NO PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE.
YOU KNOW, THEY'RE JUST, SELF-SERVING WHAT THEY WANT.
SO THEY HAVE TWO EMPTY LOTS THROUGHOUT THE, ACROSS THE STREET.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, SO I SAW HIM GO UP THERE FIRST VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE, SIR.
I WOULD LIKE TO BE PRETTY CLEAR.
SO THE LAKE AUSTIN OVERLAY DOES APPLY TO THESE LOTS.
THESE LOTS ARE NOT, UM, AN ACRE BIG
[03:15:01]
AND IT, IT IS QUITE A FEW LOTS THAT AREN'T AN ACRE BIG IN THIS LAKE AUSTIN OVERLAY.SO THAT, WHILE IT IS PART OF THE FACT OF YOUR LOTS, IT IS A FACT THAT THE OVERLAY STILL APPLIES TO YOU IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
THERE'S A LOT MORE INFORMATION THAT IS REALLY NEEDED, LIKE A SLOPE MAP AND THE LAST VERSION AND HOW EACH OF THESE CATEGORIES BREAK OUT AND IN THE ACTUAL PROPOSED DESIGN, I REALLY THINK THAT YOU'VE NOT TAKEN ANYTHING THAT THE BOARD SAID VERY.
AND, UH, THAT'S REALLY MY QUESTIONS.
UH, MAY I, SO ON THE PACKET I PROVIDED, SORRY, I'M SORRY.
WHAT'D YOU SAY THIS AUTHOR? SO I'LL TAKE MY OWN ADVICE AND SAY LESS IS MORE SO I'M THE ORIGINAL PACKET I PROVIDED.
I PROVIDED THE COMPLETE SLOPE ANALYSIS THAT WAS REQUIRED THROUGH ELLIE JURISDICTIONAL REGULATIONS.
ALSO ON THE MOST NEWEST PACKET, I PROVIDED THE SITE PLAN LAYOUTS FOR EACH PROPERTY, ALONG WITH THE, UH, ALLOWED AND, AND RE, UH, ALLOWED IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, UH, TO THE CURRENT PROPERTY CALCULATIONS AND WHAT THE PROPOSED AND PREVIOUS COVERAGE CALCULATIONS ARE ON THE FIRST PACK THAT I SENT IN, WE JUST HAD ASKED HIM FOR HIGHER PERCENTAGES ACROSS THE BOARD.
NOW WE'VE ACTUALLY GIVEN AN EXACT NUMBER OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, UH, FOR THE PROPERTIES, YOU KNOW, THE, YOU KNOW, QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD HAS REQUESTED, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, YOU KNOW, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, WE'VE, YOU KNOW, PROVIDED ALL THE INFORMATION WE HAD.
YOU HAD GIVEN YOUR PRESENTATION.
THIS IS THE TIME FOR BOARD CONVERSATION.
I WAS JUST ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION.
UH, BOARD MEMBER PLANOLY THAT MELISSA WAS NICE ABOUT IT, AND I'M GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING I SAID THE LAST TIME.
CAUSE I WATCH A VIDEO AND I EVEN WATCH MYSELF MAKE THE COMMENT THE LAST TIME GETTING IMPERVIOUS COVER VARIANCES ON LA PROPERTY ESPECIALLY WATERFRONT PROPERTY IS NAIL NEXT IN LINE.
IT'S LIKE PULLING HEN'S TEETH.
AND THOSE WERE THE WORDS I USE.
I WAS PRETTY OFFENDED ABOUT THE FACT THAT, UH, THE WAY IT'S BEING STATED IS THAT THE PRIMARY BASIS OF YOUR REQUEST AND I'M READING OFF A YEAR LETTER HAS BEEN, HAS BEEN ILLEGALLY ZONE FOR BOTH LA ZONING AND LAKE AUSTIN OVERLAY.
AND THEN IT'S THE ILLEGAL APPLICATION OF LA REGULATIONS OF THIS LOT THAT MAKES IT NON-DEVELOPER FOR REASONABLE USE.
AND THAT'S WHERE I SORT OF, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING OUT OF ORDER, BUT I DON'T LIKE PEOPLE BLOWING SMOKE UP MY ASS.
AND EVERYBODY UP HERE IN ANYBODY WHO'S DEALT WITH ME KNOWS I DON'T CARE IF I GIVE YOU A POINTED OR NOT.
SO I THINK I'VE CONTRIBUTED MINE TO THE CITY OF BOSTON, BUT I WILL CONTINUE TO SERVE AS LONG AS THEY ASK ME, THEY ASKED ME TO SERVE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN AROUND THE BLOCK A FEW TIMES AND I'VE SEEN THIS CONTRACTOR, I'VE SEEN A LOT OF THIS GOING ON.
I WAS VERY AMAZED THAT YOU EVEN CAME UP HERE ASKING FOR THIS MUCH IMPERVIOUS COVER.
YOU DID STATE THAT YOU'RE PRORATED 30 SOME HOUSES THERE.
SO IN THE, IN THE, UH, APACHE SHOWS AREA, SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S REQUIRED, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S OUT THERE, YOU KNOW, WHAT, HOW DID THAT, HOW IT'S DONE THIS, ISN'T YOUR FIRST BARBECUE.
THE OVERLAY DOES APPLY TO THIS.
AND THAT'S WHAT I, I'D ALSO ASKED, UH, LEGAL ABOUT THAT.
THEREFORE, THESE ARE NOT ILLEGALLY SONGS AND THEY'RE NOT ILLEGAL APPLICATIONS.
UM, ANOTHER THING AND BROOK WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS MANY TIMES, WE DO NOT EVEN CONSIDER IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE OF VARIANCES WITHOUT SEEING THE, UH, AS YOU STATED, YOU CAN HAVE SOME ENGINEERING DONE ON RAINWATER COLLECTION AND SYSTEMS AND HOW TO MITIGATE THE RUNOFF.
WE DON'T EVEN CONSIDER PASSING A VARIANCE WITHOUT SEEING THOSE ON THE DRAWINGS, BECAUSE NINE TIMES OUT OF 10, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND PUT THAT IN OUR RECORD AS HOW TO BUILD TOO.
THERE'S THE HARDSHIP IS NOT HERE.
UH, THE, I CAN'T, I CAN'T GET THERE HERE.
I DO FEEL THAT, UH, IT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE BOARD IS VERY SPECIFIC ON ASKING FOR CERTAIN INFORMATION AND
[03:20:01]
THE FA EVEN THE FACT THAT, UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY REALLY NEW INFORMATION.I, I PRINTED IT OUT, BUT THEY NO LONGER, THEY DON'T PROVIDE ME WITH A HARD COPY.
SO I PRINTED IT OUT AT HOME AND COMPARED IT TO LAST MONTH.
AND WHAT I'M SEEING HERE IS IDENTICAL TO WHAT WE GOT LAST MONTH.
AND LAST MONTH PACKET, WHETHER A NEW PACKET WAS SUBMITTED OR NOT.
I'M JUST TELLING YOU WHAT I HAVE HERE.
SO HAVING SAID THAT, I CAN'T GET THERE.
I'M GONNA, I'M GOING TO YIELD THE FLOOR.
AND, AND I, I'M MORE THAN WILLING TO POSTPONE ONE MORE TIME.
I'M VERY HARD AT, I I'M, I'M, I'M VERY RETICENT IN DOING THAT, BUT, UH, IF YOU WERE ABLE TO SHOW SOME HYDRAULIC D DESIGNS, I KNOW BUILDERS, DON'T LIKE DOING THIS BECAUSE IT COSTS MONEY.
BUT WE'RE NOT, I WILL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY WITHOUT HAVING THAT, BECAUSE I'M NOT, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA HAVE YOU A BUILDER PROMISE.
THEY'RE GOING TO RESPECT ME IN THE MORNING.
IT'S HAPPENED TOO MANY TIMES THAT WE, WE HAVE DONE THAT IN THE PAST.
AND THEN LATER ON DOWN THE LINE, WE FIND OUT THAT IT DIDN'T GO THE WAY THAT WE HAD, IF WE DON'T HAVE IT IN A PACKAGE WHERE WE CAN CONNECT IT TO THE RECORD, RECORDED DOCUMENTS AND HAVE IT FILED AWAY, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT.
SO, UH, I'LL LET I'LL YIELD THE FLOOR AND LET IT GO FROM THERE.
I HAD A, I HAD A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, I MEAN, TO PUT A, TO PUT A REAL FINE POINT ON IT, IF IN FACT YOUR, YOUR BASIS FOR BEING HERE IS THAT THE ZONING DOESN'T APPLY TO THESE LOTS.
THERE'S NOTHING FOR THIS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO GRANT YOU A VARIANCE FROM, BECAUSE UNDER YOUR OWN POSITION, IT DOESN'T APPLY TO THESE LOTS.
IS THAT YOUR POSITION? NO, MY POSITION IS WE SHOULD BE GRANTED THE VARIANCE BECAUSE THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LA OVERLAYS AREN'T MET ON THESE PROPERTIES, THE CITY'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE ZONING BECAUSE IT'S VERY STRICT AS TO HOW IT SPECIFIES THE ZONING.
YOU KNOW? SO IF THIS WAS A ONE ACRE LOT, I WOULD NEVER EVEN, I TELL MY CLIENTS, DON'T TAKE THE CHANCE I HAVE OTHER, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL OTHER LA JURISDICTIONAL PROPERTIES.
WE'RE IN PROCESS OF PERMANENT.
I TELL HIM, DON'T EVEN ASK BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
THESE ARE SMALL LITTLE PROPERTIES.
AND THEN AS I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU HAVE PRESENTED, UH, ON PAGE SIX OF YOUR, UH, OF YOUR PACKAGE THERE, YOU'RE ASKING TO INCREASE THE ALLOWABLE IMPERVIOUS COVER TO 40% IN ALL CATEGORIES, UP TO 35% SLOPE.
AND IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY THAT WITHOUT THAT YOU CANNOT HAVE ANY REASONABLE USE OF THIS PROPERTY? I WE'VE, YOU KNOW, THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPERTY IS VERY MINIMAL.
YOU'RE TESTIFYING THAT WITHOUT THOSE INCREASES IT IMPERVIOUS COVER ALLOWANCES AND THOSE PARTICULAR SLOPE CATEGORIES, YOUR CLIENT CANNOT HAVE A REASONABLE USE OF THAT PROPERTY.
WHEN YOU SAY IT SHOULDN'T APPLY TO YOU, WE HAVE TO GO BY WHAT IS ON THE BOOKS, WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IT, OR WE BELIEVE IT OR NOT IS IRRELEVANT.
THE LEGAL DEFINITION IS THAT LA ZONING APPLIES TO THIS PROPERTY.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO BASE OUR DECISION ON.
YOU DON'T WANT IT TO APPLY TO YOU.
THIS DOES FALL UNDER THAT CODE.
DOES IT MATTER THAT THE LOTS, A FEW, LOTS OF WAY, AREN'T IN THAT CODE.
WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH THOSE LOTS TO ONLY TWO LOTS WE'RE DEALING WITH ARE YOURS.
AND WE HAVE TO MAKE OUR DECISIONS BASED ON THAT.
AND I, THAT THEY'RE VACANT LOTS, WHICH LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THAT, UM, IT'S HARD.
IT'S HARD, EVEN ON A REGULAR LOT TO GET A VARIANCE FOR A VACANT LOT, BECAUSE DESIGN CAN USUALLY BE ADJUSTED AND YOU'RE NOT MINIMIZING IT.
I MEAN, YOU'RE GOING FROM 10% ALLOWED TO 40% REQUESTED ON B FOR YOU.
THAT IS REALLY HARD TO GET PAST WHEN I'M TRYING TO, I'M TRYING TO FIND A TRUE HARDSHIP, NOT ONE THAT YOU WANT US TO HAVE, WHICH IS THAT THE, THE REGULATIONS SHOULDN'T APPLY TO YOU.
SO, AND I GET THAT THE LOT IS SLOPED.
WE DEAL WITH THESE SLOPE LOTS ALL THE TIME, BUT I ALSO AGREE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION.
[03:25:01]
YOUR WORD THAT YOU'RE GOING TO MITIGATE, BUT YOU'RE NOT THE BUILDER.YOU'RE THE PERMITTER, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
BUT BY OWN THE, YOU KNOW, SO MY COMPANY HELPS, UH, GET ALL THIS INFORMATION PUT TOGETHER FOR THE DEVELOPER.
YOU KNOW, LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, YOU ARE NOT THE DEVELOPER NOT OKAY.
SO YOU CAN'T MAKE PROMISES FOR THE DEVELOPER.
YOU CAN PUT THE INFORMATION TOGETHER AND GIVE IT TO THEM, SAY, YEAH, I TOLD THEM THAT WE WOULD DO THIS UNLESS WE CAN SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING, OR THEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO IT.
WELL, HE KNOWS THAT, YOU KNOW, UNLESS WE GET THE APPROVAL, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
HE'S TOLD ME TO, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER NEWS THAT HAVE TO HAPPEN TO PUT IT TOGETHER, TO GET IT DONE.
SO WHAT ARE WE APPROVING IF WE DON'T SEE THE MITIGATION EFFORTS? WELL, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE HYDROLOGY REPORT OR THE RAINWATER COLLECTION AS BEING A, A REQUIREMENT OF THE APPROVAL, YOU KNOW, SO I'D HAVE NO PROBLEM IF HE SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, I, I COULD APPROVE THIS.
IF YOU PROVE US TO THIS, YOU KNOW, IT'S, WE'RE TALKING $5,000 PER LOT FOR SITE DESIGN.
YOU KNOW? SO IF WE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU SAY, OKAY, I THINK BECAUSE OF THAT, YOU HAVE NOT ADJUSTED YOUR DESIGN.
YOU HAVE A DESIGN IN MIND, AND THAT'S YOUR DESIGN PERIOD.
YOU HAVEN'T ADJUSTED TO TRY AND MITIGATE SOME OF THIS IMPERVIOUS.
I GET, YOU KNOW, THE TREES I GET, WE DEAL WITH THIS ALL THE TIME, BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN ONE THING CHANGE IN YOUR DESIGN TO TRY AND MITIGATE AFTER WE ALL GAVE OUR CONCERNS LAST TIME THAT YOU WERE HERE.
SO I, FOR 1:00 AM NOT THERE YET.
I MEAN, THE DESIGNS THEMSELVES WERE BASED ON THE TREES.
SO THEY WERE LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE RIGHT HOUSE, THERE'S THAT BIG HERITAGE TREE RIGHT THERE.
ONLY WAY TO PUT THE HOUSE IS IN THE BACK, THE SECOND HOUSE.
THE BOTH OF THEM IS A SEPTIC SYSTEM.
DESIGN CAN ONLY BE IN THE FRONT.
YOU KNOW, SO IT'S, WE'RE, WE'RE STUCK BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE ON WHERE THEY ARE AND WHERE THEY CAN BE.
I MEAN, THE ONLY OTHER OPTIONS ARE LITERALLY PUSH THEM BACK.
WE'VE PULLED THEM AS FAR FORWARD AS POSSIBLE TO MINIMIZE OUR IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE BASIS.
YOU KNOW, SOME, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, DESIGNING THREE STORIES TO EVEN GET TO 2,500 SQUARE FEET.
THE COMMUNITIES, YOU KNOW, THE, ONE OF THE MEMBERS CAME HERE AND SAID, THEY DON'T WANT THREE STORIES.
THEY WANT TO, BUT TO BUILD TWO, THEN WE NEED MORE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, THE, BOARD'S NOT MOST LIKELY NOT GOING TO PROVIDE A SMALLER HOUSE, BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S, WE'RE ONLY TALKING 2,500 SQUARE FEET OF HOUSE.
IT'S NOT A HUGE NUMBER FOR THAT AREA.
I KNOW, LIKE WHEN YOU TALK LIKE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN, 2,500 SQUARE FEET, IT'S HUGE, YOU KNOW, AND PATCHY SORES RIGHT NOW.
THERE'S A MULTIPLES DISCUSSING THE 6,000 SQUARE FEET.
AND IT'S PROBABLY ON A MUCH LARGER LOT.
NO, IT'S NOT, UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THOSE PRODUCTS, IT'S A 0.2, FIVE ACRE LOT, OR 0.2, FIVE ACRE.
AND OF YOUR REFERENCE, I GUESS I SHOULD JUST POINT OUT THAT WHEN BOARD MEMBER BAILEY TALKS ABOUT LA ZONING KIND OF WROTE THE BOOK ON IT.
NO, ACTUALLY I DIDN'T SO MUCH ON LA.
UH, I DID ON, YOU KNOW, MORE ABOUT IT THAN MOST OF US.
SO I WAS GOING TO SAY, WHAT YOU SUGGESTING, THE IDEA SHE'S THROWING OUT ARE USUALLY REALLY SOLID.
IT'S LIKE, I'M NOT TRYING TO REFUTE, AND THIS IS MY FIRST TIME EVER GOING THROUGH THIS WHOLE PROCESS.
AND THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING YES AS IS, YOU KNOW, LET'S TREAT IT LIKE YOUR FIRST TIME.
AND I'M JUST TRYING TO LET YOU KNOW THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN ONE CHANGE BETWEEN YOUR PREVIOUS PRESENTATION.
THIS ONE, EVEN THOUGH ALL THE FEEDBACK WAS NOT POSITIVE ON WHAT YOU HAD PRESENTED AND THAT MAYBE THERE COULD BE SOME THINGS DONE.
AND, AND I KNOW THAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU'RE, THAT YOU'LL DO MITIGATION.
WE CAN'T TIE THAT UNLESS WE HAVE A MITIGATION PLAN.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT MY THOUGHT WOULD BE, IF YOU SAID, OKAY, WE'RE CURBING IT.
WITH THESE NUMBERS, IF YOU BRING US BACK TO THE PLAN, BRING US BACK THE PLAN.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE VOTE, YOU KNOW, TO YOUR NICE.
SO IT'S LIKE A, I CAN'T SPEAK TO ANY, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR HOW ANY OF MY BOARD, OTHER BOARD MEMBERS ARE GOING TO VOTE AT ALL.
AND NONE OF US CAN, OH MAN, THAT'D BE, THAT'D HAVE TO BE AN ITEM.
THAT'D BE VOTED UPON ACROSS IF IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY SAYING, HEY, IF YOU WILL CURB IT, IF YOU DO THIS AND THE NUMBERS WORK, THE THING IS, I THINK WE ASKED YOU TO DO A FEW THINGS LAST TIME AND WE DIDN'T, HAVEN'T SEEN ANY CHANGES.
I MEAN, THE, THE ITEMS THAT I'VE YEAH.
I READ THE LETTER AND THEN WE'VE ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS THROUGH, YOU ASKED FOR SITE PLAN LAYOUT.
IT BROUGHT THE REVISE SITE PLANS.
FOR HOA INFORMATION, I ATTACHED THE HOA INFORMATION.
I BROUGHT ALL THE TREE INFORMATION.
YOU KNOW, I, I, IF I'M, IT'S SOMETHING I'M SORRY.
I JUST DON'T REMEMBER ANY OTHER ITEMS. RIGHT.
I WAS, I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO PUT THIS.
I MEAN, TO, AS BOARD MEMBER BOTTLE AND ALSO SAID, YOU'RE ASKING FOR A LOT, I MEAN, WE DON'T GIVE THIS MUCH ON SLOPE, LOTS IN LA ZONING.
SO WE HAVE TO FIND A REASON TO GIVE IT.
AND I HAVEN'T, I HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET.
[03:30:01]
I JUST HAVEN'T.UM, YOU'RE ASKING THIS, THE REASON LA ZONING WAS PUT INTO PLACE WAS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REASONS.
AND SO IF WE GIVE VARIANCES LIKE THIS AND YOU SAY, Y'ALL ARE WORKING ON ALL THESE OTHER HOUSES, THEN YOU BRING BACK TWO MORE SAYING, HEY, YOU GAVE US THOSE TO GIVE US THESE TWO.
AND THEN SOMEBODY ELSE COMES SAYS, HEY, GIVE THESE GUYS THIS ON THIS SLOPE, THEN WE SHOULD GET IT.
AND THEN WE TOTALLY NEGATE THE REASON FOR THE CODE CHANGE TO LA ZONING.
AND SO LA ZONING WAS PUT IN PLACE TO FIX PAST MISTAKES OF PEOPLE BUILDING CRAZINESS ON, ON VERY ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE PROPERTIES.
AND SO, AND SO WE'RE IN A CONUNDRUM HERE.
YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY YOU WANT TO BUILD, NOBODY'S SAYING THAT YOU, I DON'T KNOW IF THESE LOTS ARE BUILDABLE OR NOT, BUT, BUT WHAT YOU'VE BROUGHT US IS NOT FROM WHAT I CAN HEAR FROM THE REST OF THE BOARD OR THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SPOKEN SO FAR, ISN'T GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO WORK.
MY QUESTION, IF I COULD ASK IS WHAT WAS CONSIDERED REASONABLE.
CAUSE INSTEAD OF GOING BACK AND FORTH AND TAKEN UP ALL THOSE PEOPLE'S TIMES, IT'S TOUGH TO, YOU KNOW, BEING MY FIRST TIME.
AND YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND LA REGULATIONS ARE HELD TIGHT.
I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S OWN CODE SAYS THAT LA IS THE MOST STRICT REGULATION.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT ON A ONE ACRE LOT, YOU KNOW, BUT WE'RE LESS THAN A QUARTER ACRE AND WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD SOMETHING AND WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY CODE, WHICH TELLS US THAT YOU CAN'T BUILD WHAT YOU'RE WANTING TO.
AND, AND USUALLY IF SOMEBODY WAS ASKING FOR A VARIANCE, THEY ASK FOR A MINIMAL VARIANCE, THE MINIMUS IS WHAT WE TRY AND DO.
THIS IS QUITE A LARGE VARIANCE.
AND SO IT'S NOT FOR ME TO DESIGN YOUR PROPERTY.
UM, IT'S, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU LOOK AT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE DONE THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE SAME SITUATION THAT WE'RE ABLE TO BUILD AFTER LA ZONING WAS PASSED.
AND WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WAS ACCEPTABLE, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS, AS BUILDABLE AND WHAT VARIANCES WERE ACCEPTABLE AND WHAT, IS THERE A PLACE I COULD LOOK CAUSE I TRIED LOOKING FOR, AND I COULDN'T FIND IT.
IS THERE A PLACE I COULD LOOK IT UP? EVERY, EVERY MEETING THAT WE'VE HAD IS ON RECORD AND YOU CAN PROBABLY GO THROUGH NOW AND THIS AND THIS WHERE, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO GO WITH IT.
I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE, GIVE YOU ONE MORE BITE AT THE APPLE BECAUSE I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY, BUT I UNDERSTAND IT'S YOUR FIRST TIME HERE.
AND YOU HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND, YOU'RE COMING HERE FOR AN ASK.
AND SO, UH, AND, AND AS BROOKE STATED, THIS IS A BIG ASK.
THIS IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE ASKING ONE OF THE BIGGEST ONES SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD.
AND, AND SO TO, TO GET TO WHERE YOU ARE GOING TO GET THIS PASS.
AND, AND IT REALLY, UH, I WOULD PROBABLY SUGGEST EITHER YOUR BUILDER OR YOUR OWNER OR SOMEBODY WHO, WHO HAS DECISION-MAKING, UH, AUTHORITY COME TO THE NEXT MEETING.
BECAUSE AS YOU SAW EARLIER IN OUR MEETING TODAY, WE CAN TALK TO THE BUILDING.
THE ONE PREVIOUS TO YOU JUST A LITTLE WHILE AGO, THEY HAD THEIR ARCHITECTS HERE.
THEY MADE DECISIONS RIGHT THERE AND THEY GOT GOING, BECAUSE EACH TIME YOU GET POSTPONED, I KNOW IT COSTS YOU MONEY.
I WAS A CONTRACT GC FOR, YOU KNOW, 30 YEARS.
I KNOW IT COSTS MONEY EVERY TIME YOU, YOU GET A POSTPONEMENT, BUT THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING HERE.
AND, UH, I HAVE MY COMMENT ABOUT YOUR FIRST BARBECUE IS MAYBE NOT PERMITTING THE OTHER ONES, BUT IT'S THE FIRST ONE TO HEAR AND BELIEVE ME, IT'S IT, IT CAN GET HOT SOMETIMES.
UH, I WOULD GO BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT SOME OF THE, UH, OF OUR PREVIOUS, UH, MEETINGS THAT WE'VE HAD, WHERE WE'VE HAD ISSUES LIKE THIS COME UP OF WHAT BURKE IS TELLING YOU IS, IS LEGITIMATE.
I KNOW THEY, THEY DON'T, WE DON'T, WE DO NOT GRANT, UM, VARIANCES BY BARTERING BACK AND FORTH.
AND WELL, IF YOU DO THIS AND HOW MUCH IS THAT? AND GIVE ME THIS, WE DO MAKE A DANDELION SO WE CAN MAKE SOME AMENDMENTS TO THEM, BUT WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T LITERALLY TELL YOU BUILDING WHAT TO DO IN ORDER TO GET THROUGH HERE.
BECAUSE AGAIN, EACH, EACH CASE IS BASED ON ITS OWN MERITS.
UH, BUT YOUR, IF YOUR BUILDER, UH, AND, AND IT IS QUITE A BIT OF MASSING ON, ON THE SMALL LOT.
AND WHAT MELISSA IS ASKING FOR IS A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WHAT YOU, WHAT YOU PROVIDED AS IT'S FOR EACH COMPONENT, AS IT GOES DOWN.
THAT'S THE ONLY, THE BEST WAY THAT I COULD POINT YOU IS, OR COME IN AND SIT DOWN WITH SOMEBODY FROM THE, FROM THE CITY OVER IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD.
THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE HIS BEST BET.
I THINK BROOKE, AND THE REASON I TALKED TO BROOKE IS BECAUSE BROOKE HAS, AND ACTUALLY I CAN INTERRUPT, PLEASE.
WE STILL HAVE TWO MORE QUESTIONS.
I'LL MAKE IT QUICK, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO GIVE HIM A, SOMETIMES ENVIRONMENTAL,
[03:35:01]
ENVIRONMENTAL WON'T MEET WITH THEM BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE TO WORK ON SINGLE FAMILY SO THAT I WOULD MAYBE ASK STAFF FOR DIRECTION ON, BUT I WOULD ALSO JUST LOOK AT IT, BUT I WOULD JUST LOOK AT OLDER AGENDAS ON WHERE WE WERE DEALING WITH THE LAKE AUSTIN CASE, BECAUSE WE DEAL WITH THEM EVERY MONTH AND SEE WHAT, WHAT ENDED UP BEING THE FINAL, NOT WHAT THE VARIANCE IS.CAUSE IT MIGHT SAY IT WAS APPROVED, BUT YOU NEED TO FIND OUT WHAT CONDITIONS OR WHAT I WAS ABLE TO PUT IN LINES, UH, LIKE SETBACK ITEMS, HIGH ITEMS. I JUST COULDN'T FIND ICY ITEMS IS WHAT I LOOKED BACK A GOOD BIT.
WELL, YOU SHOULD, WE DO DO IT.
SO WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, YOUR MICROPHONE, UM, SO YOU'RE IN THE SITE ANALYSIS PHASE OF THE PROJECT.
AND LIKE YOU WERE SAYING THAT, UH, UH, BOARD MEMBER OF ANIMAL AND WAS SAYING THAT THERE'S A COST ASSOCIATED WITH HAVING CONSULTANTS JOIN YOU IN THAT EFFORT.
BUT I THINK HAD YOU INCLUDED THE CIVIL AND THE, AND DOING THE HYDROLOGY STUDY IN THE SITE AND THAT ANALYSIS FOR THIS PRESENTATION, IT WOULD HAVE DEMONSTRATED A COMMITMENT TO WALKING YOUR TALK.
AND BECAUSE THAT'S A COST THAT THE OWNER WOULD HAVE TO BEAR ANYWAY, IF THEY'RE PLANNING ON DEVELOPING THIS LOT.
AND SO HAVING IT WOULD JUST SHOW A SERIOUSNESS ABOUT THAT EFFORT, BECAUSE I HAVEN'T BEEN ON THE BOARD VERY LONG, BUT THE MOST SUCCESSFUL CASES, ESPECIALLY WITH IMPERVIOUS COVER, IT'S LIKE YOU ARE ASKING FOR SOMETHING, BUT THEN YOU'RE ALSO OFFERING SOMETHING YOU'RE NOT JUST ASKING FOR SOMETHING YOU, THERE IT'S LIKE EQUATIONS OR FORMULAS.
LIKE YOU CAN LITERALLY TAKE SURFACE AREAS AND OFFSET THEM WITH DIFFERENT REMEDIATION STRATEGIES.
LIKE WITH URBAN LOTS, YOU CAN DO THAT WITH LIKE A, UH, UM, A RAIN GARDEN.
YOU KNOW, YOU CAN LOOK AT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF YOUR ROOF AND THEN DETERMINE HOW MUCH THAT WATERSHED IS.
AND THEN YOU CAN, THAT'LL HELP YOU DETERMINE THE SIZE OF THE VEGETATIVE STRIPS OF THE GARDEN.
AND SO, UM, THE ASK IS AGREGIOUS SO EVEN MORE REASON TO HAVE THOSE CONSULTANTS ON BOARD, YOU KNOW, HELPING YOU WITH THIS CASE, BECAUSE I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I SAID WE COULD GET, I JUST SAID, I JUST DIDN'T KNOW HOW THE PROCESSES ARE.
YOU KNOW, LIKE IF SOMEBODY SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE'LL APPROVE THIS, BUT YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE US THIS TO VERIFY THAT IT WORKS.
YOU GOT TO GET THOSE CONSULTANTS ON BOARD.
IN MY OPINION, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE WORST THING YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS YET.
LIKE, WE WILL MOST LIKELY CONDITION SOME TYPE OF MITIGATION, BUT YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKING FOR SOMETHING YOU'RE TAKING.
SO IF YOU GIVE US SOMETHING BACK IN RETURN, IT'S, IT'S SHOWING THAT GOOD FAITH, LIKE WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT THIS, A BOARD MEMBER, PRUITT YOU QUESTION.
UM, I MEAN, I WAS READY TO VOTE TO DENY, BUT IF, IF A BOARD MEMBER IVANA ONLY WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE I'M I'M, I'M OKAY WITH THAT.
I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT THE APPLICANT GO THROUGH THE MATERIALS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED, ESPECIALLY THE, UM, CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE OPPOSED AND, AND REACH OUT AND ENGAGE WITH THEM.
THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S THE WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE, IF EVEN IF THEY DON'T ACCEPT EVERYTHING YOU WANT TO DO, AT LEAST THEY'RE OKAY.
AND THEY DON'T, YOU KNOW, WANT TO COME HERE AND TELL US WHAT A HORRIBLE MESS IT IS.
YOU'RE PROPOSING AND THEY'RE COMPLETELY OPPOSED TO IT.
SO I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT YOU DO THAT AS WELL.
AND, AND, YOU KNOW, YOU MAY GET SOME, SOME GOOD INFORMATION AND SOME GOOD IDEAS FROM THEM AS WELL.
AUSTIN, TEXAS.GOV FORWARD SLASH BEAT.
OH, HEY, CLICK, MEANING DOCUMENTS.
WATCH THE VIDEO FROM TONIGHT, TAKE ALL THE NOTES.
AND COMMISSIONER PRUITT IS A CONSTRUCTION LAWYER.
WE'VE GOT LAWYERS, WE'VE GOT ARCHITECTS, WE'VE GOT CONTRACTORS.
OH, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, THERE'S ALSO THE ONLINE MAPPING TOOL THAT DID THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PUT TOGETHER, WHICH I THINK IS A UNDERUTILIZED TOOL, BUT YOU CAN LOOK UP CASES BASED ON THE GEOGRAPHY.
THAT'S WHERE I WAS, YOU KNOW, JUST HAVING PROBLEMS, FIND THE IC.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THE COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEIGHBORS, THE BUILDER HAS BEEN TALKING WITH THEM.
CRAIG EVEN MENTIONED, AND HE'S ALSO A RESIDENT OF THE COMMUNITY.
SO I HEARD BOARD MEMBER OF VANILLA LEANING TOWARDS A WELL, AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE, UH, BOTH, UH, EAT THREE ANDY FOR, UH, SO I DON'T KNOW.
[03:40:01]
MY NECK OUT THERE, I'M ALWAYS PUSHING.OKAY, WELL, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE
SO NO OFFENSE TO YOU TO HAVE A SECOND.
CAN YOU VICE CHAIR? HANG ON ONE SECOND.
BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUEZ HAS A QUESTION.
DIDN'T WE ASK HIM FOR THE MITIGATION STRATEGIES LAST TIME AND THEN WHERE WE'RE AT.
MA'AM AND YOU, AND YOU, YOU, YOU WERE, YOU WERE VERY NICE IN YOUR EXPLANATION WHEN YOU'RE GIVING 'EM SECOND AND THIRD TRIES, BUT THIS WOULD BE THE LAST ONE.
YOU'RE READY TO ROCK AND ROLL NOW.
I'M ANYWAY, I'M LEADING THAT PAY, BUT I'M WILLING TO GO ONE MORE TIME.
I'M NOT, BUT I'M WITH YOU GUYS, BUT IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, THAT'S FINE.
GO FOR IT BECAUSE I MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO DENY YOU HAVE A SECOND, SECOND FIRST, SORRY.
BOARD MEMBER, PRUITT BOARD MEMBER SMITH, BEAT YOU TO IT.
THAT WOULD BE SO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION RULES IS THE FIRST ACTION.
UH, UH, BOARD MEMBER CARS, CARS, GUNS.
I'LL TAKE A NEW MEMBER NAIVENESS HERE, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, EITHER, THEY'RE ALL ON THE TAX ROLL AT $50,000, INCLUDING THIS PROPERTY.
IF YOU WERE TO BUILD SOMETHING IT'S LIKELY TO BE IN THE MILLION DOLLAR PLUS RANGE, UM, I'M JUST MAKING A COMMENT ON THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVING PROPERTY ON THE TAX ROLL IS BENEFICIAL.
I THINK THAT THERE THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, IS IT A HUNDRED PERCENT STORM WATER RETENTION THAT CAN BE DONE ON THIS SITE THROUGH A VAULT OR SOME OTHER SORT OF RAIN WATER COLLECTION SYSTEM DETENTION.
THAT'S GOING TO PROBABLY COST A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TO BE ABLE TO DO, WHICH IS GONNA IN TURN.
YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION OF, DO YOU BUILD, CAN YOU SELL IT MAYBE IN THIS MARKET? ABSOLUTELY.
SO I WOULD BE MORE INCLINED TO ALLOW THEM TO DO FURTHER DUE DILIGENCE.
AND I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE DON'T BRING ECONOMICS INTO OUR DECISIONS BY STATE LAW.
ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE HARDSHIP? NO.
IT'S AGAIN, NEW MEMBER NAIVENESS.
UH, IT'S JUST MORE OF A, MAYBE THAT BECOMES A PERSONAL DISCUSSION.
THAT FOR ME, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I THOUGHT I COULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, BUT IF NOT CIRCLE BACK WITH YOU OFF THE TOP, I REMEMBER RODRIGUEZ.
I MEAN THE MOTION TO DENY THIS ISN'T, THIS DOESN'T MEAN THAT HE CAN'T DEVELOP THE LOTS.
THIS MEANS HE HAS TO REDESIGN AND COME A LITTLE BIT MORE OUR WAY AND THEIR WAY, BUT THAT'D BE A YEAR DOWN THE ROAD FROM HER CORRECTLY.
AND THE CURRENT CAN COME BACK NEXT MONTH FOR A RECONSIDERATION.
I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECONSIDERATION ROUTE.
IF YOU FILE IT, THEN WITHIN THE AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED, ALL RIGHT, I'LL DO THE RECONSIDERATION.
YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE SOME, YOU'D HAVE TO DO SOME DUE DILIGENCE EVEN TO DO THAT.
SO I'D HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE IT.
IF I GET A CONTINUOUS THE NEXT MONTH TO LET MY CIVIL TEAMS, I MEAN, THE CIVIL ENGINEERS I SPOKE WITH SAID DOING A A HUNDRED PERCENT, YOU KNOW, UH, TO EXTERMINATE THESE, THE ADVERSE RAIN WATERSHED IS NOT AN ISSUE WITH THESE TYPES OF PROPERTIES.
AND THEY WOULD ACTUALLY DO A RAINWATER COLLECTION BINS.
SO, SO LET'S, LET'S ACTUALLY WAIT UNTIL SOMEONE ACTUALLY HAS A QUESTION, UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING SPECIFIC YOU WANTED TO ASK.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S THE ONLY CONCERN.
UH, AND SO I DON'T WANT YOU TO ONLY FOCUS ON THAT.
I THINK YOU NEED TO LOOK AT ALL THE CONCERNS AND
[03:45:01]
SEE IF IT'S EVEN SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN DO, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE ONLY CONCERN IF YOU COME BACK WITH JUST THAT THAT'S NO GUARANTEE BECAUSE THERE'S OTHER ISSUES.AND SO IT'S REALLY, I DON'T, YEAH, I KNOW.
I DON'T WANT TO KEEP YOU FROM, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER A DENIAL, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, I DON'T SEE WHERE I HAVEN'T SEEN YOU MOVE AT ALL.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN BY MONTH.
WELL, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT LIKE WHERE OUR HAPPY SPOTS GOING TO BE.
BECAUSE LIKE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE TWO LOSS THAT CANNOT BE BUILT.
ANYTHING BIBLE, YOU KNOW, PAUL, THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE A QUESTION.
ARE YOU, ARE YOU MAKING THAT OFFICIAL EMOTIONAL CALL THE QUESTION? YES.
SO I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND TO CALL THE QUESTION.
THAT MEANS WE CAN'T DISCUSS IT ANYMORE.
SO IF IT'S OFFICIAL, WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE ON THE CALL, THE QUESTION FIRST, AND THEN WE HAVE TO TAKE THE VOTE ON THE DENIAL.
SO FIRST WE HAVE TO DO THE MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION WHAT THAT'S, HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE DONE THROUGH PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE.
I DON'T THINK IT'S EVER BEEN CALLED ON BLA.
NO OBJECTIONS, VISUAL VOTE OF AFFIRMATION.
AND LET'S CALL THE MOTION TO DENY.
THIS IS FOR YOU TO SEE 15 20, 22 0 1, 1 MOTION TO DENY OR SORRY, SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO DENY ME BY OBVIOUSLY ANNA RODRIGUEZ.
SECOND TO BY RICHARD SMITH, TOMMY IT'S.
YES, BECAUSE I THINK YES, BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO SEE YOU COME BACK WITH RECONSIDERATION AND SEE WHAT YOU BRING JESSICA COHEN.
I'M GOING TO SAY NO, SIMPLY BECAUSE I WANTED TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANYTHING YOU COULD BUILD ON, ON THE PROPERTY AND I'LL SEE IF THERE WAS SOMETHING WE COULDN'T MEET IN THE MIDDLE.
I DON'T LIKE THE ASK ON THIS IMPERVIOUS COVERED ALL, UH, FROM AN ENVIRONMENTALIST PERSPECTIVE.
IT'S, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT SITS COMFORTABLY WITH ME, BUT I'M AT LEAST WILLING TO GIVE YOU THE CHANCE, BECAUSE I KNOW THIS PROCESS IS VERY LONG AND DAUNTING.
SO I'M GOING TO GO WITH NO VICE-CHAIR HAWTHORNE.
UH, SURPRISINGLY, I WILL SAY NO BOARD MEMBER PUT NO BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUEZ.
I WOULD JUST MAKE THE ADDITIONAL COMMENT THAT I WENT BACK TO.
UH, AS FAR AS FEBRUARY, THIS IS THE THIRD TIME YOU'VE BEEN HERE WITH BASICALLY THE SAME INFORMATION.
UH, UH, I DO A CONTINUOUS, MY WIFE ENDED UP HAVING SURGERY, SO I DIDN'T DO A DELAY ON ONE TIME.
AND HOPE YOUR WIFE IS DOING WELCOME.
SHE'S GETTING BETTER EVERY DAY.
I'M GOING TO SAY YES BECAUSE I'M SUPPORTING AUGUSTINE HAS VIEW THAT, UH, IT'LL GIVE HIM A CHANCE TO GO BACK, PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER, FREEZE UP THE DOCKET FOR SOMEBODY ELSE.
AND THEN THEY CAN COME BACK FOR RECONSIDERATION AND SHOW THE CHANGE.
BUT IF YOU DO COME BACK, JUST KEEP IN MIND.
THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY'S LOOKING FOR IS A CHANGE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE GOOD.
UH, NICOLE WADE, I'M GOING TO VOTE.
AND I HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL COMMENT THAT, TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS COMES BACK AS A RECONSIDERATION, I THINK THE APPLICANT SHOULD CONSIDER THE BALANCE BETWEEN WHAT IS REASONABLE AND WHAT IS MOST PROFITABLE.
AND IF YOU LOOK BACK AT SOME OF THE OTHER CASES WE HAD THIS EVENING, THERE'S A BALANCE YOU CAN MAKE BETWEEN MAKING PROFIT AND WHAT'S GOOD AND REASONABLE.
AND WHAT'S REASONABLE IN THIS CONTEXT FOR THESE HEARINGS IS NOT THE SAME THING AS HIGHEST AND BEST USE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE VALUE OF A PROPERTY KELLY BLOOM.
UM, NO, I TOOK ON A POSTPONEMENT AND IF IT WAS COME BACK, OUR CUSTOMER, WHATEVER FORM IT COMES BACK, IF IT COMES BACK, I WOULD REITERATE WHAT WORD NUMBER WADE SAID.
[03:50:01]
MAKE SURE YOU'RE ASKING FOR WHAT YOU REALLY NEED, YOU KNOW, NOT NECESSARILY WHAT YOU WANT, BUT WHAT YOU ABSOLUTELY NEED TO MAKE THE PROJECT WORK.SO THAT IS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, UH, MOTION DENIED.
DOES THAT NEED TO BE A SUPER MAJORITY, RIGHT? NO, NO, NO.
YOUR VARIOUS HAS BEEN DENIED ON THAT ONE.
[E-3 C15-2022-0012 Jonathan Kaplan for David Scott Kosch 2717 Long Bow Trail]
AGAIN FOR OUR DAVID SCOTT, CAUTIOUS.
HOW IT LISTS HAVE IT LISTED, SORRY.
AND YOU DO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL FIVE MINUTES FOR A PRESENTATION.
ALL THE SAME INFORMATION, SAME SITUATION.
YOU KNOW, IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE PROPERTIES ARE ON BUILDABLE AS THEY ARE.
YOU KNOW, THE ONE PROPERTY ALLOWS FOR, I BELIEVE 700 SQUARE FOOT OF IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE.
UNDER CURRENT CONDITIONS, WE'RE ALLOWED 580 SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ON THE ONE LOT ON 27, 17 ON 27, 15, WE'RE ALLOWED 1097 SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE.
NOW THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S BUILDABLE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, HELP MY CLIENTS, GET SOMETHING, GET LIVING UNITS FOR THE COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, HELP THE COMMUNITIES.
I MEAN, HE'S DONE A LOT IN THAT COMMUNITY.
HE SPEAKS WITH PEOPLE SURROUNDING, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE MR. CRAIG, IS THAT YOUR TEACHERS? NO, NO.
I, I BELIEVE, UH, CRAIG'S ONE OF HIS RELATIVES I THINK, OR MAYBE HIM TEACHES THE DEVELOPER.
I MAY BE WRONG ON THAT BECAUSE THE REASON WHY THE DEVELOPER'S NOT HERE AS HIS ENGLISH, ISN'T THE GREATEST HE'S FROM UKRAINE ACTUALLY.
AND AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, HE'S ALSO BEEN A WRECK WITH THAT SITUATION.
HIS DAUGHTER WAS IN UKRAINE WHEN THE BOMBING STARTED.
FORTUNATELY, HE WAS ABLE TO GET HER HERE NOW, YOU KNOW, BUT WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BUILD SOME KIND OF HOUSES IN THERE WITH, YOU KNOW, REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY.
YOU KNOW, I'M JUST TRYING TO IDENTIFY WHAT REASONABLE USE IS CLASSIFIED BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY'S THOUGHT PROCESS ON THAT IS DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.
IF I CAN GET YOU TO STEP OVER TO YOUR LEFT AGAIN, AND YOU GUYS HAVE A FIVE MINUTES TOTAL SPLIT BETWEEN THE TWO OF YOU TWO AND AT 30 SECONDS EACH.
FIRST NAME, CASEY SUSAN VAN NOSTRAND.
I'M SPEAKING AGAINST THE EXCEPTION FOR THE IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR THIS PROPERTY AS WELL.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT MYSELF AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS ONLINE, WHICH I'LL ACTUALLY MET WITH OR THE BUILDER, UM, HIS ENGLISH IS PERFECT AND HE SPENT A GOOD HOUR WITH US.
WE WANTED TO ACTUALLY EXPRESS OUR CONCERNS TO HIM DIRECTLY BEFORE WE CAME HERE OUT OF RESPECT FOR HIM AS A PERSON, CAUSE HE'S A LOVELY PERSON.
UM, WE HAD SNACKS AND WE TALKED ABOUT OUR CONCERNS DIRECTLY WITH THE BUILDER.
AND AT THE END OF THE CONVERSATION, WE, OUR GOAL WAS TO COME UP WITH A COMPROMISE BECAUSE WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE BEAUTIFUL PROPERTIES THERE.
UM, HE SAID, THESE ARE THE PROPERTIES THAT HE'S BUILDING.
IF HE CAN'T BUILD THIS SIZE OF A PROPERTY.
CAUSE WE WERE SAYING, WHY DON'T YOU BUILD SOMETHING SMALLER? HE SAID, HE WON'T MAKE ENOUGH MONEY.
HE DOES RENT IN OUR COMMUNITY.
UM, AGAIN, HE'S A LOVELY PERSON.
WE LIKE HIM AS A PERSON A LOT, BUT HE WAS 0% WILLING TO COMPROMISE WITH US.
AND THE OTHER TWO HOUSES ON THE SLOPE, UH, RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO HIM ARE 800 SQUARE FEET.
IT'S A BEAUTIFUL HOME RIGHT NEXT TO THAT IS 900 SQUARE FEET AND OTHER BEAUTIFUL HOME THAT ARE ON THE SLOPES.
SO IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE A COMPROMISE AND TO BUILD A HOME HERE THAT IS BEAUTIFUL, THAT FITS WITH THE NATURE.
IT FITS WITH THE SPACE OF WHERE WE LIVE, WHERE I LIVE FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS.
AND WE'LL LIVE FOR THE NEXT 50.
UM, BUT HE'S, HE'S A BUILDER AND HE'S DOING THIS BECAUSE IT'S HIS BUSINESS.
HE'S NOT DOING IT BECAUSE HE CARES ABOUT LONG PATROL.
UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE HAVE MET WITH HIM AND HE WAS NOT WILLING TO COMPROMISE BECAUSE OF THE FINANCIAL GAIN THAT HE COULD GET.
HE WANTS TO BUILD THOSE TWO HOUSES AND SELL THEM FOR $1.2 MILLION.
AND THAT'S JUST, HE SAID, IF HE DOESN'T GET THIS PERMIT, THEN HE'S DONE WITH IT AND HE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT THING.
SO I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT WE MET WITH HIM AND GAVE HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMPROMISE WITH US AND HE DECLINED.
[03:55:01]
YEAH.AND YOU'LL NEED TO RESTATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.
YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES, 42 SECONDS.
UH, MY NAME IS CRAIG LESLIE, AND THANK AGAIN FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO SPEAK TONIGHT.
UH, I AM, I AM NOT, UH, ANTI BUILDER, NOT BY A LONG SHOT AND NEITHER EITHER SUSAN WHO'S WHO TO TALK TO HERE.
UM, WE, WE WOULD LIKE MORE REASONABLY SIZED HOUSES TO BE BUILT ON THOSE LOTS.
I MYSELF LIVE ACROSS THE STREET AND UH, OUR HOUSE WAS BUILT AFTER THE, AFTER THESE, UH, THESE RULES WERE PUT INTO EFFECT.
UM, I, THEY SEEM, IT SEEMS REASONABLE TO ME.
I JUST, I CARE I'M I CARE ABOUT THE COMMUNITY.
UM, SO I JUST, YOU KNOW, SUSAN SUSAN MENTIONED OUR MEETING WITH THE, WITH THE BUILDER COMPROMISE.
IT JUST SEEMS, IT SEEMS, IT SEEMS REASONABLE TO ME.
YOU MEAN WOULD BUILD, BUILD A HOUSE, BUT IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE THREE STORIES.
IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE BIGGER THAN, AND I KNOW, I KNOW MR. KAPLAN SAID THERE'S A 2,500 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE SOMEPLACE ALONG THE TRAIL.
UM, THIS IS BE, THESE PLACES ARE MUCH BIGGER HOUSES THAN ANY OTHER HOUSE ON THE STREET AND THEY REALLY DON'T FIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AESTHETIC AND THERE'S, UM, THERE'S, THERE'S PRETTY, PRETTY WIDE.
UM, AND THERE'S A REASON THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE COMFORTABLE.
WE WANT THEM TO, TO BE ABLE TO BUILD THOUGH, YOU KNOW, BUT, BUT, BUT, BUT, BUT NOT, NOT HOUSES THIS SIZE, UH, RIGHT ON THE LAKE, UM, THEN WE'RE GOING RIGHT INTO THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S WATER SUPPLY.
SO THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AGAIN.
YOU WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES FOR A REBUTTAL.
ARE THEY REQUIRED TO BE UNDER OATH AS WELL? UH, THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS, YES.
ANYONE WHO SPEAKS TO IS REQUIRED OF ME IN A WHILE.
THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO TAKE THE OATH AT THE BEGINNING.
CAN WE GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT FROM LEGAL? LIKE IF THEY MISS THE, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, I MEAN, YES, EVERYBODY, YOU GAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE THE OATH AND IT'S UP TO THE BOARD TO ASCERTAIN AND, AND WEIGH WHO THEY VIEW AS CREDIBLE.
AND WHOSE THAT THE TV THAT'S CREDIBLE THAT'S WITHIN YOUR DISCRETION AND MADAM CHAIR.
I JUST WANT TO CAUTION THE DIRECTION, THIS CONVERSATION TODAY.
I WAS JUST CURIOUS FOR MY OWN, CAUSE I HAD WONDERED ABOUT THAT BEFORE.
CAUSE I DON'T EVEN USUALLY SHOW UP TO MEETINGS TILL LIKE TWO MINUTES BEFORE I THINK YOU MIGHT GET HURT ON THE AGENDA.
NO, BUT I THINK MR. VAUGHN OLIN'S CONCERN IS, UM, ANYTHING THAT THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE SAYS AFTER WHAT HE JUST ASKED IS PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE HELPFUL.
TWO MINUTES FOR READUP THE REASON WHY, THE REASON WHY I ASKED THE QUESTIONS WERE KEEP GETTING, KEEP GETTING PROVIDED FALSE INFORMATION.
YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING TO BE UP HERE AS I'M BEING A HUNDRED PERCENT HONEST, YOU KNOW, THEY COME BACK AGAIN AND SAY, THERE'S NO HOUSE THAT'S OVER 2,500 SQUARE FEET PER CHICA TAX ROLLS.
IT'S A 28 0 5 LONGBOW TRAILERS, 25 87.
UH, I WOULD, WE DON'T LOOK AT ANYBODY ELSE'S HOUSE OR ANY OTHER PROPERTIES.
THIS CONVERSATION IS IRRELEVANT FOR US.
THEY'RE PROVIDING FALSE INFORMATION AS A REBUTTAL, MADAM CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO CALL A POINT OF ORDER.
SO AGAIN, THIS IS A, LET ME STOP THIS CLOCK.
THIS IS THE TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
BUT WHAT SHE'S SAYING IS CORRECT.
SO IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR HAS THE EXACT SAME ISSUE, THE CHECKS COHEN.
CAN I, CAN I PLEASE INTERJECT? ABSOLUTELY.
SO, UM, THIS IS THE APPLICANT'S, UH, TWO MINUTES REBUTTAL.
THEY CAN DECIDE WHAT INFORMATION THEY WANT TO PRESENT TO THE BOARD, WHAT THE VIEW WOULD BE PERSUASIVE.
WHAT DO YOU, WHAT DO YOU USE IS MOST OF THE SPACE FOR THE NUTS UP TO WHAT THE APPLICANT WANTS TO SAY? SO I THINK WE WILL START THE CLOCK AND A MINUTE 45 SINCE WE INTERRUPTED A LITTLE BIT AND WE'LL LET YOU START AGAIN.
I'M JUST GONNA CLOSE MY, CLOSE MY RESPONSE AND GO FOR THE VOTE PLEASE.
LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION COMMENTS, MOTION.
I THINK, I THINK IT'S ALL BEEN SAID BEFORE.
MADAM CHAIR I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THIS TIME.
I'LL TAKE THE HEAT ON THIS ONE TOO, TO DENY.
I DO FEEL LIKE NOW THAT I'VE HEARD A LITTLE BIT MORE AND, AND THAT IT MAY BE WHAT IS NEEDED TO GET THE BUILDER OFF CENTER.
DO YOU NEED TO DO SOMETHING? IF NOT, IF IT'S TRUE THAT THOSE STATEMENTS WERE MADE, THEN WE PROBABLY WON'T SEE THIS BACK HERE AGAIN.
[04:00:01]
SO I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO DENY AUGUST 2ND IS WE LIKE TO CALL OUT ONE SECOND AND BY BOARD MEMBER WADE.ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE CALL THE VOTE? OKAY.
THIS IS A MOTION TO DENY MADE BY BOARD MEMBER OF ON OLIN STUCK A BIT BY BOARD MEMBER, WADE, TOMMY IT'S.
AND THE REASON I MADE THAT COMMENT IS WE DON'T LIKE THE, WHEN IT TURNS A DAY, HE SAID, OR SHE SAID, UNDERSTAND YOUR WHOLE POINT ABOUT THE OATH, BUT THAT THEY COULD PROBABLY SAY THE SAME THING ON SOMETHING.
AND SO IT JUST DOESN'T HELP YOUR CASE OR THEIR CASE OR ANYBODY'S CASE TO GET INTO AN ARGUMENT WITH EACH OTHER WHILE YOU'RE IN THIS CHAMBER.
UH, JESSICA COHEN, I'M GOING TO SAY YES THIS TIME.
JUST SO WE CAN HAVE BOTH OF THEM RECONSIDERED AT THE SAME TIME.
I WAS SAYING YES, BARBARA MACARTHUR, BARBARA, GOD, YOU KNOW WHAT MAN? SEE, THIS HAS BEEN MY MONDAY ROM ALSO GONE.
NO, NOT BECAUSE I'M READY TO PROVE IT, BUT BECAUSE I WOULD SUPPORT A POSTPONE FOR THE SHRIMP.
LIKE I WOULD, THE OTHER THAT'S FAIR.
UH, YES, I WOULD RATHER POSTPONE, BUT I SEE THE POINT THAT'S BEEN MADE.
UM, AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE IN A MONTH.
LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU BACK FOR RECONSIDERATION.
I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO PLEASE BE CLEAR ON AND CONTACTING LANE BECAUSE THERE IS A TIME LIMIT YOU CAN ASK FOR RECONSIDERATION.
WHAT IS THAT? THAT GO AHEAD AND GIVE ELENA CALL TOMORROW R AND OR SEND HER AN EMAIL AND SHE'LL GET YOU THAT INFORMATION, BUT YOU'D GET THE BALL ROLLING TOMORROW.
HE NEEDS TO LEARN THAT IT'S LIKE, I THINK IT'S 10 DAYS.
THEN THE WINDOW CLOSES, BUT HE, WELL, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 45 MINUTES.
UH, SHOW ME YOUR HANDS IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH IT.
I MEAN, I'VE MADE THAT COMMENT BEFORE THAT'S VOTED ON.
UH, I HAVE LIKE ONE MINUTE TO MAKE IT.
I AM JUST SAYING THAT REGARDLESS OF THE VOTE, I NEED TO LOG OFF IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE I HAVE A 6:00 AM FLIGHT TOMORROW.
YES, MA'AM THANK YOU FOR, THANK YOU.
GOOD NIGHT NIGHT, ANYBODY OPPOSED THE MOTION TO EXTEND? SO, OKAY, FINE.
UH, I GOT SMART AND I PUT A TIME WITH IT BECAUSE WHEN THERE IS A TIME WITH IT, PEOPLE ARE VERY PRUDENT WITH TIME.
SO A MILLION THAT WAS A MOTION TO EXTEND THE MEETING TILL 10 45 MADE BY VICE-CHAIR HOFFLER AND SECONDARY BY MYSELF.
[E-4 C15-2022-0018 Jason McNair for Paul Smith 54 Anthony Street]
YOU FOR C 15, 20 22, 0 0 1.EAT JASON MCNAIR FOR PAUL SMITH, 54 ANTHONY STREET.
IS THIS GOING TO BE VIRTUAL PRESENTATION? AND DO WE HAVE THE SPEAKER ON THE LINE? UH, THIS WAS ITEM BEFORE, CORRECT? YES.
THIS ONE'S A VIRTUAL PRESENTATION.
EVERYONE HEAR ME? WE CAN PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE TIME NOTES IN LATE.
I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF VICTIM MCNAIR, WHO HAD TO CATCH A FLIGHT AS WELL.
UM, MEANING AS LAST LITTLE LONG SITE.
SO, UM, I AM REPRESENTING PAUL SMITH, THE OWNER WHO HAS RECENTLY
[04:05:01]
PURCHASED THE LOT TO DEVELOP, BUT HIS HOME ON IT.AND, UM, I, MOST OF THE COMMISSIONER BOARD MEMBERS WILL REMEMBER FROM LAST MONTH.
WE ARE, IT'S A TWO-FOLD REQUEST WITH THIS, UM, WITH THE VARIANCES, UM, AND THE FIRST ONE BEING SEXUALLY TO, UH, REDUCE REDUCING THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 25 TO 10.
AND, UM, I THINK WE'RE IN, UM, MOST AGREEMENT OF, OF ALLOWING THIS, BUT, UM, WE CAN DISCUSS AND THEN, UH, SECTION TO BE AT 25 TO 1943 SUBSTANDARD A LOT, UH, DECREASING IT FROM 4,000 TO 33 80, WHICH IS CURRENT, UM, WAS IN, UH, AGREEMENT AS WELL.
UM, DO YOU WANT THE SCHOOL TO, UM, PAY FOR OF THE PRESENTATION? THERE ARE SEVERAL PICTURES OF THE CURRENT CONDITIONS OF A 1940S HOUSE WITH, UH, IT HAS THE GARAGE IN THE BACK, BUT IT'S IN REALLY BAD CONDITIONS.
IT NEEDS TO BE DEMOED, UH, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
UH, UH, SOME KEY FACTORS IF YOU WANT TO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, SORRY, LET ME INTERRUPT YOU FOR ONE SECOND.
UH, THE, THE CALLER ASKS CALLER ASKED FOR THE SLIDES TO BE ADVANCED FORWARD THREE.
WAS IT THREE OR FOUR? FIVE NOW? OKAY, LET'S GO TO SLIDE FIVE.
I'M ON SLIDE FOUR, FOUR, SORRY.
JUST SOME KEY FACTORS ABOUT THE LOT.
UM, WE HAVE A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL REDUCED A BUILDABLE AREAS DUE TO THE AUSTIN ENERGY REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE FAIRLY NEW.
THAT'S REDUCING THAT WHOLE AREA BY A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET, SO THAT, UM, COST US A LITTLE BIT OF ISSUE.
UM, THERE'S A BEACH OVERLAY AND THEN THERE'S A CAPITAL PORT OR VIEW OVERLAY.
WE ALSO HAVE ONE PROTECTIVE COUNTRY.
AND THE REAR OF THE LOT THAT WE HAVE TO PROTECT, PROTECT THE CRITICAL RISK ZONE AND THE COST IS OF THAT.
UM, THE WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, UH, PROBABLY A TINY HOME, ANYTHING IF WE'RE NOT APPROVED THAT VARIANCE.
UM, AND LIKE I SAID EARLIER, THE CURRENT STRUCTURES ARE IN DESPERATE NEED TO BE DEMOED.
UM, UH, THE LAST QUESTION I WANTED TO ADD IS, UH, THE PROJECT HAS HAD PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNTS OF NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT.
UM, I WANTED TO SCROLL ALL THE WAY DOWN TO, UM, SOME, SOME ITEMS WILL ACTUALLY, THEY, I DID LIST IN THE PRESENTATION ON PAGE FOUR SHEET FOR THE 14.
I LOOKED UP, UH, THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE ARE SOME APPROVED CASES, NOT EXACTLY SIMILAR.
AND AS, UH, AS I'VE HEARD SEVERAL TIMES IN THIS CALL THIS EVENING THAT EVERY, UH, VARIANCE REQUEST IS A CASE BY CASE AND EACH PROPERTY IS DIFFERENT AND UNIQUE.
SO, BUT I DID, I WAS ABLE TO SEE THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF SMALL LOTS AND THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, HOLLY, THIS HALLWAY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, AND THAT THERE HAVE BEEN QUITE A FEW REQUESTS FOR THIS FRONT YARD SETBACK PRODUCTION.
I'M GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU ONE MORE TIME.
THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CASES THAT, UM, SOME CASE STUDY THAT I WANTED TO MENTION.
IT IS RECOGNIZED IN THE HOLLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
UM, THAT IS, IT WAS ON PAGE 16 AND 51.
AND THERE'S ALSO THE OFFICIAL PLAN 2001 PAGE 11 OF 28, I BELIEVE, UH, SECTION 1.5 0.2, BUT I BELIEVE THE CONFUSION LAST MONTH WAS THE CODE SECTION 25, 2 DASH 1406 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT ALLOWS THE SMALL LOT AND THE SEAT, UH, FOR THE LOT TO BE, UH, A MINIMUM OF 25, 25 SQUARE FEET.
AND THEN THE NEXT ITEM THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP WAS THE SUBCHAPTER APP THAT, UM, ALSO SHOULD HAVE BEEN MENTIONED, WHICH IS SECTION 2.1 THAT ALSO ALLOWS FOR, UH, I HERE, IT ALLOWED FOR THE 0.4 TO ONE OR UP TO 2300 SQUARE FEET, WHICHEVER IS GREATER.
UM, WELL I HAVE THE LESS GARY ON THE CALL AND PAUL SMITH, IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE AS WELL,
[04:10:01]
ANY QUESTIONS, BUT THE OWNER HAS BEEN A FAIR AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THE EAST SIDE, LOT AS ADAPTING TO BUILD A MODEST PLOT WHERE HE IS TRYING TO BUILD A MODEL HOUSE FOR APPROXIMATELY 200, 2000 SQUARE FEET, UM, AND MAKE THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF BLAND.SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
AND, UH, AGAIN, I HAVE BOTH THE OWNER AND THE ARCHITECT ON THE CALL IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY OPPOSITION, NO OPPOSITION GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
MADAM CHAIR, BOARD MEMBER, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, AND HAVE IT BUILT TO THE POINT FOR FAR OR THE 2300 SQUARE FEET IS NOT THAT MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE, BUT, UH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE I'LL SECOND, BUT WHAT'S IT GOING TO BE 0.44 FOURS.
THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT TODAY AND WHO SECONDED.
WAIT, THE FINDINGS, THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY TO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE CURRENT SF THREE SITE DEVELOPMENT ZONING REGULATIONS DO NOT APPLY TO THIS LOT.
THIS IS A LOT CONSIDERED TO BE SUBSTANDARD LOT FOR THE LCD HARDSHIP.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH VARIANCES REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THAT THIS SUBSTANDARD LOT HAS ALWAYS BEEN USED AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AS EARLY AS 1940, WHERE THE SAME HOUSE WHICH WAS BUILT IN THE FORTIES WAS TELIC IS STILL EXISTING.
THIS PARTICULAR LOCK RUNS ALONG THE SIDE ALLEY AND NORTH SIDE OF THE LOT, WHICH HAS A 15 FOOT ELECTRICAL EASEMENT AS WELL AS TREES ON THE LOT.
THE HARDSHIP FOR IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE A MAJORITY OF THE LOTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ARE AT OR ABOVE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE PER C O L L D C AREA CHARACTER.
THE VARIANTS WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATION OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REDUCTION FROM 25 FEET REDUCES REDUCED TO 10 FEET REQUESTS WOULD GRANT ONLY THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWED ON THE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES BUILT ON A SMALL LOT, WHICH IS ALLOWED WITHIN THE HOLLYWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONDITION OF 0.4 FAR MADE BY BOARD MEMBER OF NOLAN SECONDED BY A BOARD MEMBER BAILEY TOMMY EIGHTS.
SO IT'S CLEAR THAT THE FAR IS LIMITED TO 0.4 0.4.
NICOLE WADE IS OFF THE DIONYSUS KELLY BLOOM.
CONGRATULATIONS YOUR VARIANCES GRANTED.
YES, BUT IS IT OKAY? UM, I'VE MENTIONED EARLIER, JUST PROPERTY THEN SUB CHAPTER AND I WENT FIT IT UNDER SECTION 2.1.
IF IT'S ABOUT THE FINDINGS, I'M GOING TO NEED YOU TO CONTACT THE BOARD LIAISON ELAINE TOMORROW BY BEING AN EMAIL OR PHONE, PLEASE.
IF IT'S ABOUT, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT YOUR FINDINGS, I'M GONNA NEED YOU TO CONTACT THE BOARD LIAISON RAMIREZ TOMORROW BY PHONE OR EMAIL.
IT'S NOT A QUESTION ABOUT THE FINDINGS.
IF IT'S A QUESTION ABOUT THE CHAPTER OUTS AND THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT WE THOUGHT THAT WE WERE ALLOWED, UM, WHICH WOULD BE, UH, AGAIN, IT, IT WAS CLOSED.
WE CAN'T ACTUALLY DISCUSS THE CASE ANYMORE, BUT HOW SH HOW AM I GOING TO ANSWER THAT ONE? Y'ALL SHOULD BE ANSWERING THAT QUESTION FOR HER.
YOUR QUESTION IS ON SUBCHAPTER APP.
WE, WHEN WE MAKE A, WHEN WE MAKE AN APPROVAL, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO, UH, PUT CONDITIONS, APPLY, CAN APPLY CONDITIONS TO DATE, TO THE APPROVAL.
[04:15:01]
MOST OF THE TIME WHEN WE WERE DEALING WITH SUBSTANDARD LOTS, I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM WITH SUB CHAPTER F, BUT WITH SUB STANDARD LOTS, WE HAVE DONE ALSO PREVIOUSLY DURING TONIGHT ON A COUPLE OF OTHER CASES, WE USUALLY LIMIT THEM TO PORT FOR FAR BECAUSE THAT ADDRESSES THE MASSING SIZING AND MASSING ON THE LOT, WHICH AFFECTS THE AREA CHARACTERS AS WELL.DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES, SIR.
I JUST THOUGHT THAT, UM, WE WOULD HAVE AN OPTION TO HAVE A CURATOR OF SAR, UM, HER, THIS SECTION 2.1 THAT, UH, CLEARLY STATE.
I DON'T, I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT, BUT NOW WE'RE DISCUSSING THE FINDINGS AND WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T DO THAT LEGALLY.
WELL, WE DIDN'T, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WE, WE COULDN'T DISCUSS IT ANY FURTHER AFTER NO, THE CASE IS DONE.
I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND, BUT THAT WE WEREN'T STILL GIVING THEM.
THE PERCENTAGE OF SOMETHING IS BETTER THAN A HUNDRED PERCENT OF NOTHING.
MOVING ON THE NEXT ITEM WILL BE.
[E-5 C15-2022-0019 Andrew Ryan Thompson 607 E 49th Street]
I GOT YOU FIVE.ANDREW RYAN THOMPSON, UH, 6 0 7 EAST 49TH STREET.
DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION? I GUESS WE CAN GET THAT PULLED UP, PLEASE.
THEN YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES LIKE TO COMMEND YOU ALL ON YOUR ENDURANCE.
DOESN'T ALWAYS MEAN SHORTER NIGHTS.
YOU'VE GOT FIVE MINUTES, SIX BLOCKER, PLEASE.
SO AS YOU SAID, MY NAME IS ANDREW THOMPSON.
I'M NOT REPRESENTING A BUILDER OR DEVELOPER OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UM, IF AM I ADVANCING THE SLIDE? OKAY.
SO I AM HERE TODAY TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT AN ADU THAT'S EXISTING ON MY PROPERTY.
UM, WE'RE HOPING TO DEVELOP THIS OPEN SPACE FOR OUR DAUGHTER.
SHE'LL BE 20 THIS YEAR, AND SHE HAS A DIAGNOSED MENTAL HEALTH DISABILITY.
UM, SHE RECEIVES SUPPORT SERVICES FROM THE TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION TO TRY TO GET HER EMPLOYED AND STABLE.
AND THE IDEA OF THIS BUILDING IS THAT IT WILL BE A POTENTIAL HOME OR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FOR HER AS SHE CAN TRY TO MOVE INTO THE WORLD.
WE ADVISE PHYSICIANS AND INSTITUTIONS, UM, HOUSEHOLD NAME HOSPITALS ON PATIENTS WITH RARE DISEASES.
SO THAT THE REASON THAT'S GERMANE IS IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO WORK IN THE HOUSE WITH HER THERE.
SO WE TEND TO HAVE VERY DETAILED CLINICAL IN-DEPTH CONVERSATIONS AND IT'S A CHALLENGING ENVIRONMENT.
THE ISSUE HERE IS PRETTY MUCH THAT WE INHERITED A PROBLEM.
THE GARAGE WAS NEVER PERMITTED AT THAT TIME, THE HOUSE WAS SOLD TO US BY A HOUSTON-BASED CONSORTIUM OF REAL ESTATE INVESTORS.
AND THEY NEVER TOLD US OF THIS PERMIT STATUS ISSUE ABOVE THE GARAGE, WHICH IS, WHICH WAS BUILT SOMETIME AROUND 2005.
WE BELIEVE THERE'S A, A BONUS ROOM.
IT'S 864 SQUARE FEET, ROUGHLY IT'S ENCLOSED CLIMATE CONTROLLED.
IT'S, IT'S SET UP FOR ELECTRICITY.
SO WE'RE W WE'RE REQUESTING THESE TWO VARIANCES THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT, UH, WE WORKED A LOT WITH JOHN RICHARDS.
WHO'S A PLAN EXAMINER FOR THE CITY IN COMING UP WITH OUR REQUEST.
THE NEXT SLIDE IS THE SITE PLAN.
AT THE TOP OF THE SCREEN, YOU SEE OUR STREET EAST 49TH STREET AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN IS THE PROJECT LOCATION.
UM, LET'S SEE HERE, KEEP FORGETTING TO ADVANCE.
SO HERE'S THE HOUSE SHOT FROM EAST 49TH STREET DOWN.
UH, THERE'S NOT A SORT OF PARKING ISSUES ARE FOUR OF US LIVING IN THE HOUSE, FOUR CARS.
WE CAN PARK THREE IN THE GARAGE, ONE ON A PARKING PAD AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND ANOTHER PARKING PAD AT THE BACK.
SO HERE'S THE BONUS ROOM ITSELF.
THE PICTURE ON YOUR LEFT IS TAKEN FROM THE DOORWAY TO THE BONUS ROOM AND THEN SHUFFLING TO THE RIGHT IS THE OTHER ANGLE.
UM, HE IT'S DRAWN UP BY A NEIGHBOR OF OURS WHO DID ANOTHER ADU ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THE ONLY OTHER THING I WOULD ADD ON THIS IMAGE IS THE BALCONY, WHICH
[04:20:01]
APPEARS AT THE TOP OF YOUR SCREEN IS NOT PART OF THE FINISHED PLAN.THAT WAS AN EARLY DRAFT IN FEBRUARY WHEN I WAS DUE TO PRESENT THIS, UH, THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH AUSTIN ENERGY.
YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT, UH, TO, TO TAKE AN EXCERPT ALL GOOD FROM AUSTIN.
WHO'S THE HEAD OF THE HYDE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE.
AND I'D JUST LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF HIS COMMENTS IN PARAGRAPH TWO.
HE SAYS, I PERSONALLY KNOW THAT 49TH STREET IS GOING THROUGH A TRANSITION WHERE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ARE BEING DEMOLISHED AND REPLACED WITH TWO LARGE HOUSES DUE TO THE LARGE LOTS.
YOU'RE MAINTAINING YOUR SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND WANT TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY WITH A MORE HABITABLE ADU FOR YOUR FAMILY.
I PERSONALLY HOPE THE BOA COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER THIS ALONG WITH THE FACT THAT YOUR LOT IS 10,000 SQUARE FEET.
AND THEN THE LAST IMAGE I'D LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU IS THESE ARE THE NEIGHBORS.
AGAIN, WHEN WE ARE SHOOTING FOR THE FEBRUARY MEETING, WE SHARED WITH THEM OUR PLAN, AND THIS IS THEIR SUPPORT.
THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD ADD THAT IS NOT IN THIS PRESENTATION IS I SAW THERE WAS AN OBJECTION.
AND THE PERSON WHO OBJECTS TO OUR PLAN IS CLEARLY CONFUSING.
OUR HOUSE 6 0 7 EAST 29TH STREET WITH A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, 6 0 7, A AND B EAST 49TH STREET, WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US SEPARATELY OWNED.
AND IT IS SUCH A COMMON PROBLEM THAT OUR UTILITY STOPPED BUILDING BILLING US FOR SIX MONTHS WHILE THAT PROPERTY WAS BEING CONSTRUCTED, UPS, FEDEX, UH, USBS AND AMAZON ROUTINELY MISSED DELIVER THINGS.
SO THAT'S EVERYTHING I HAVE FOR YOU.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I CAN ANSWER, I'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION OPPOSITION GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING BOARD MEMBER VIOLA, MAKE YOUR MOTION TO APPROVE.
I DO HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY BEFORE YOU GET INTO IT.
I AM COMPLETELY BEWILDERED AT HOW THIS HAPPENED.
I DO NOT KNOW HOW A WHOLE GARAGE GETS BUILT, HOW THE PERMIT DOCUMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED FOR THE HOUSE.
DON'T EVEN SHOW THIS LOT CONFIGURATION THE SAME THERE'S LOT COMES AND, AND L'S OFF THERE AT THE BACK.
I AM COMPLETELY BEWILDERED AT THIS SITUATION.
IT'S PROBABLY MELISSA BECAUSE THERE WAS BUILT AND DEVELOPED UNDER THE RADAR BY PEOPLE FROM OUT OF HOUSTON AND STUFF.
THE REASON I'M, I'M MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS IS BECAUSE NUMBER ONE, I WANT THEM TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE AND HAVE IT BE A LEGAL STRUCTURE.
AND IT'S AN ISSUE THAT, UH, UNTIL, UH, AFTER LOOKING AT THE BACK BACKUP INFORMATION, UNTIL THEY WENT TO GO REMODEL THIS, THEY WOULD'VE NEVER KNOWN UNLESS THEY DECIDED TO REMODEL IT.
THIS THING WAS NEVER BEEN PERMITTED.
SO, UM, I'M REALLY PRETTY BIG ON THE FACT THAT, UH, THE CURRENT HOMEOWNER, UH, IS NOT AT FAULT.
OTHERWISE I WOULDN'T BE, I WOULD BE VOTING, MAKING A MOTION TO DENY, BUT, UH, I DON'T SEE HOW LOOKING AT HOW IT'S FINISHED OUT.
I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT IN A LONG TIME.
I I'M JUST BEWILDERED AND HOW, YOU KNOW, THE GOD INSPECTIONS.
UM, I MEAN, I'VE BEEN DOING THIS A LONG TIME.
UH, SO NOT TO SAY THAT I'M NOT FRIENDLY TO YOUR MOTION, BUT THIS MAKES, JUST WONDER ABOUT THE WORLD.
IF IT'S ANY CONSOLATION AND MADE US WONDER ABOUT IT AS WELL, PUT BROWN, I'M SORRY.
I WOULD SAY THAT YOU DO HAVE A DUE DILIGENCE, UM, KIND OF REQUIREMENT AND THOUGHT OF YOURSELF REGARDLESS OF DISCLOSURE, BUT NOT TO SAY THAT I'M NOT FRIENDLY TO THE MOTION, UM, BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.
AND I FEEL THE SAME, BUT I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
CAUSE WE HAD TO HAVE A SURVEY DONE WHEN WE BOUGHT OUR HOUSE.
WE HAD A SURVEY DONE AND THIS STILL DIDN'T COME UP.
OR THE WEIRD CONFIGURATION THAT THE LAW HAD CHANGED.
IT, IT HELPS TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE WAS BUILT BY THE SAME BUILDER.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP THERE OFFSETS, INCLUDING THE DRIVEWAY AT 49TH STREET, BECAUSE
[04:25:03]
HE WASN'T VERY GOOD AT FOLLOWING A PROPERTY LINE.ELSE'S IS I'VE NEVER SEEN, THIS IS BIZARRE.
YOU HAD TO SPEND SO MUCH MONEY TO COME SEE US.
I FEEL BAD ABOUT THAT, BUT THANK YOU FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS BEFORE WE VOTE? FINDINGS OF FINDINGS.
I INTERRUPTED THE THOUGHT TRAIN.
THE REASON WHY I WASN'T GOING TO GO INTO HOW LONG YOU'VE BEEN DOING IT OR WE'VE BEEN UP HERE, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
THE REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE EXISTING ACCESSORY UNIT, WHICH IS A GARAGE WITH A ROOM ABOVE WHERE THE ABOVE IT SEPARATE FROM THE MAIN HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 2004, BUT WAS NEVER PERMITTED BY THE BUILDER OR ANY OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR OWNERS HARDSHIP.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH VARIANCES REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THAT THE BUILDER AND PREVIOUS OWNERS DID NOT GET THE PERMIT FOR THE ACCESS STRUCTURE WHEN BUILDING IT BEFORE CURRENT AUSTIN BUILDING GUIDELINES.
AND THE ISSUE WAS RECENTLY RECOVERED.
WHEN THE CURRENT OWNER DESIRED TO DO A REMODEL, THE HARDSHIP IS NOT JOURNALING TO THE AREA AND THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE IT IS UNIQUE TO THIS HOME ITSELF.
MAYBE THE NEIGHBORS WILL FIND OUT IN A YEAR WOULD TELL HER SOMETHING, BUT AREA CHARACTER, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATION OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE NO CHANGES ARE BEING MADE TO THE EXTERIOR, THE FOOTPRINT OF THE CURRENT BUILDING.
SO THERE WILL BE NO IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
NOT REALLY FOR HIM, BUT LIKE IF YOU SELL THE HOUSE SOMEWHERE LIKE 50 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, JUST SO THE NEXT PERSON.
SO THIS IS THE MOTION TO APPROVE CONDITION WITH NO STRS MADE BY A BOARD MEMBER OF AN OLIN SECONDED BY MYSELF.
NICOLE LADIES OFF THE DINOSAURS, KELLY BLOOM AND MARCEL GARZA.
AND I'M HAPPY TO BRING YOU SOMETHING YOU ALL HAVE NEVER SEEN WHEN YOU SEE THEM SMILING AT EACH OTHER.
LIKE, HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? AND THEY'RE BOTH LIKE WHAT? YOU'D KNOW.
I'M GOING TO GO HOME AND TELL YOU, THIS IS REALLY HARD NOW.
I MEAN, REMEMBER THIS, YOU GO PULL UP THE BUILDING PERMIT PLANS FOR THE HOUSE.
THE LOT ISN'T EVEN THE SAME SHAPE.
LIKE HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? OKAY.
[E-6 C15-2022-0021 Bhavani Singal for Heidi Lew 3701 Robbins Road]
LET'S HEAR THE LAST CASE.CAUSE I COULD TELL YOU ARE TRYING NOT TO FALL ASLEEP OVER THERE AND I CAN NOT BLAME YOU A BIT.
I USUALLY AM IN BED WHEN MY KIDS RIGHT NOW, BUT UM, ALL RIGHT.
YA'LL IF YOU COULD PULL THE PRESENTATION UP, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD WHEN YOU'RE READY.
AND IT WAS, I AM BHAVANI SINGLE.
I'M THE ARCHITECT FOR 37 0 1 ROBINS ROAD.
C 15 40 22 0 0 2 1 BHAVANI SINGLE FOR HIGH, YOU LOSE 3, 7 0 1 ROBINS WROTE.
AND LAST MONTH I WAS HERE AND SOME OF THE NOTES I LEFT WITH WERE, UM, FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS THAT LIKE TO SEE MORE VEGETATION REDUCTION IN CONCRETE, MITIGATE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT IS ABOVE THE ALLOWANCE WITH THE RAIN WATER COLLECTION SYSTEM AND STUDY PRECEDENTS AT 36 0 5, ALONG WITH SOME NOTES ABOUT CLARITY IN, UM, OUR DIAGRAMS, BECAUSE THE SLOPE MAPS ARE VERY CONFUSING.
[04:30:04]
OKAY.UM, SO ONE THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT BECAUSE WE HAVE AN AERIAL MAP ON THIS IS THE LITTLE OAK SHORE DRIVE THAT TURNS INTO ROBBINS ROAD.
YOU CAN SEE HOW SHARP THAT CURVE IS.
AND THEN RIGHT OFF OF THAT, YOU CAN SEE OUR PROPERTY.
THERE'S A DRIVEWAY RIGHT THERE.
I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK.
UM, BUT WE REVISED OUR SITE PLAN AND IT HAS A TON OF INFORMATION.
NOW IT SHOWS THE SEPTIC FIELD THAT IS LOCATED OUT TOWARDS THE LAKE.
WE HAVE, UM, WE BROUGHT UP THE RAINWATER CISTERN AND GREEN GARDEN COLLECTION IDEA TO OUR CLIENTS AND THEY WERE VERY EXCITED.
WE THINK THAT WE CAN KIND OF TURN IT INTO A NICE ZEN MAGNOLIA TREE, BEAUTIFUL ENTRY.
UM, SO WHAT WE HAVE, WHAT WE'RE SHOWING IS A TOTAL REDUCTION FROM THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION OF 470 SQUARE FEET OF CONCRETE.
SO THAT IS TAKING AWAY THE LANDING, UH, TURNAROUND SPACE ON THE DRIVE DRIVEWAY.
NOW IT'S LIKE A STRAIGHT SHOT GOING IN.
WE'RE GOING TO LANDSCAPE IT, UM, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, WE'VE REMOVED THE STAIRS STEPS FROM THIS FROM ROBBINS ROAD DOWN TO THE PROPERTY.
THAT WAS SOME CONCRETE WORK THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED.
AND THE BRIDGE GOING FROM THE DRIVEWAY, UH, COURT TO THE FRONT DOOR WAS PULLED AWAY FURTHER FROM THE HOUSE.
IT'S BEEN PUSHED CLOSER TO ALLOW FOR PROPER DRAINAGE FROM THE SLOPE COMING DOWN TO THE DRIVEWAY.
AND WE'RE COLLECTING IT IN THAT BLUE SQUARE THAT YOU SEE HUGGING THE DRIVEWAY.
UM, AND THEN WE ALSO ARE SHOWING A RAINWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM THAT IS TAKING A LOT OF THE WATER OFF OF THE MAIN ROOF.
THAT'S THE OUTLINE THAT YOU SEE IN BLUE IS BASICALLY, WE'RE TRYING TO SHOW THAT WHOLE ROOF AREAS GOING TOWARDS THE SISTER AND HAVE ABOUT 2000 SQUARE, 2000 GALLON CISTERN.
AND THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER RAINWATER COLLECTION, UM, RAIN GARDEN SYSTEM.
I CAN'T SPEAK IT'S TOO LATE, UM, FOR THE OVERFLOW DRAIN FOR THE CISTERN.
UM, SO WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THESE OVERFLOW AREAS INTO BEAUTIFUL LANDSCAPE FEATURES.
UM, THIS IS THE BRIDGE THAT I HAD MENTIONED LAST TIME.
THERE WAS NO CLARITY IN THE LAST PRESENTATION, BUT NOW WE'RE SHOWING YOU IT'S STRAIGHT SEE-THROUGH, THERE'S A BRIDGE THAT GOES OVER THAT BRIDGE.
THAT'S WALDEN CONDITIONS FACE IS ABOUT 130 SQUARE FEET.
AND THEN THIS GRADED BRIDGE IS COMPLETELY WIDE OPEN.
UM, THIS IS THE EXISTING SLOPE MAP, EXISTING 45%, 6% AND 6% WE MATCH THE RED, THE PINK, ORANGE, AND BLUE TO THE SLOPE MAPS.
WELL, WE'RE ASKING FOR, OOPS, SORRY.
UH, WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS, UM, SO WHAT WE FOUND ONCE WE STARTED GOING THROUGH OUR SQUARE FOOTAGES WAS A HUMAN ERROR.
OUR SURVEYOR HAD FLIPPED THE NUMBERS OF WHAT WAS ZERO TO 15% AND 16 TO 25% FROM OUR LAST PRESENTATION.
SO OUR IMPERVIOUS CAME DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY TO 36% FOR THE PINK ZONE, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY LIKE 45%.
AND THEN THE ORANGE BUMPED UP TO 21%.
UM, AND THEN BLUE IS AT 7% AND THEN 35% AND PLUS IS AT ZERO.
UM, THEN WE DID DO OUR PRECEDENT, 36 0 5 DOWN THE STREET HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR SIMILAR VARIANTS AND THEIR, UM, PERCENTAGES ARE RIGHT THERE.
WHEREAS WE'RE ASKING FOR 36, THEY HAVE 25.2, BUT WE'RE ASKING FOR 21 AND THEY HAVE ZERO WHERE WE'RE ASKING FOR SEVEN, BUT THEY HAVE 33.7% WHERE WE'RE WHERE WE DON'T HAVE AN IMPACT.
EVERYTHING'S A LITTLE BLANK, BUT THOSE ARE ALL OUR NUMBERS.
AND WE HAVE MADE DESIGN MODIFICATIONS BASED OFF OF SOME OF YOUR PREVIOUS INPUT ON IT.
THAT'S IT? EIGHT SECONDS LEFT.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION NOW? I'M HEARING CRICKETS.
SO WE DID HAVE A FEW NEIGHBORS WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO WALK THEM THROUGH EVERYTHING.
WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, I'M GOING TO START WITH THE QUESTION.
ARE THE NUMBERS STILL WITHIN THE POSTING LANGUAGE?
[04:35:02]
I'M SORRY.IS THAT A SEEING LANGUAGE LIKE, SO LIKE WHEN YOU ASKED FOR YOUR VARIANCE TO THOSE NUMBERS STILL MATCH WHAT YOU'VE ASKED FOR, UM, WHAT WAS NOTIFIED FOR THOSE NUMBERS? I BELIEVE HAVE CHANGED BY THE WAY, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ANYBODY ELSE, BUT I THOUGHT THAT WAS A GREAT PRESENTATION.
SERIOUSLY, FOR ALL THAT, THAT, THAT THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR Q2 AND Q3 EMAIL HIM LIST AND THEN TELL THEM TO LOOK AT LAST MONTH AND COMPARE THE TWO THAT'S A, WELL, YEAH, I APPRECIATE YOU LISTENING TO US AND COMING BACK WITH, OF COURSE, YEAH, WE GOT EXCITED WITH, AND WE WANT TO DO ALL OF THAT, SO IT'S GREAT.
WHY CAN'T EVERY APPLICANT BE LIKE THIS, LIKE, AH, ALL RIGHT.
SO ON THIS SLOPE, ON THE POSTING, WHAT ARE YOUR NUMBERS? OKAY, SO MY NUMBERS ARE, UM, THE ZERO TO 15% IS, UM, 36% INSTEAD OF 35.
WHEREAS THIS WAS BEFORE IN, IN COMPLIANCE.
UH, SO THE POSTING LANGUAGES, GOD, TO BE SORRY, I CLOGS MY AGENDA.
UM, DO YOU HAVE, DO WE NEED ALREADY NOTIFY FOR THIS AND WE ARE RE POSTED, BUT WHAT, WHAT IS THE SOLUTION FOR A PROBLEM LIKE THIS, MAYBE A LEGAL JUMPING.
IT NEEDS TO READ NORMALLY IF IT'S, IF WE'RE GONNA, IF IT'S POSTED FOR MORE THAN SHE'S ASKING, THEN THAT'S OKAY.
BUT IF SHE'S ASKING FOR MORE THAN IT WAS POSTED, THEN WE GOT US IT, THEN WE HAVE, RIGHT.
SO THE MIDDLE CATEGORY, THE MIDDLE CATEGORY IS NOT POSTED, BUT WHAT WE CAN DO, NO, WHAT'S THAT MELISSA? SO, SO THE 15 TO 35 IS LESS CORRECT.
AND THE, BUT THEN NEXT CATEGORY IS MORE, UM, 26 30 AND THEN THE NEXT CATEGORY IS NOT, IT LOOKS LIKE WE WERE MISSING A CONDITION OR REQUEST B TO B ANYWAY, RIGHT HERE, WHICH PEOPLE POSTING.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION, MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE, TO ALLOW FOR THE POSTING CORRECTION.
I THINK YOU'VE GOT YOUR VARIANCE QUITE FRANKLY.
I MEAN, IT'S JUST A MATTER, IT'S JUST A MATTER OF LEGAL OR LEGAL ISSUE THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S POSTED CORRECTLY.
UH, I WILL SAY THE SAME THING THAT MADAM CHAIR DID.
YOU DID AN OUTSTANDING, I WATCHED THE VIDEO AGAIN WHEN YOU WERE HERE LAST MONTH.
AND THEN BEFORE THIS AFTERNOON, BEFORE I CAME AND EVERYTHING THAT WAS ASKED FOR YOU ADDRESSED, THIS IS WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO CONVEY EARLIER.
I WISH YOU WOULD'VE COME ON BEFORE HE DID OR THEY DID.
AND SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE SETTING A GREAT EXAMPLE FOR, FOR PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMING UP HERE WITH LA I MEAN, LAKE AUSTIN AND, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER REQUESTS, BECAUSE WHAT YOU'VE DONE IS OUTSTANDING.
LITERALLY GOING TO ASK HER TO LINK TO THIS VIDEO OR PARK.
SO, UH, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE.
I DON'T WANT YOU TO GO AWAY DISAPPOINTED.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE, IF I WILL SAY THIS, WHEN YOU COME BACK AND IF I'M HERE, THEN I I'LL SAVE YOU EVEN THE BREADTH OF TIME.
AND, AND AS MADAM CHAIR, IF THERE'S AN OPPOSITION TO IMPROVE, MOVE ON IT, BUT I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TONIGHT SO WE CAN CORRECT.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE VOTE ON THE POSTPONEMENT? A BOARD MEMBER? PRED.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, I MEAN, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THIS RIGHT FOR NEXT TIME, BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THAT MIDDLE SLOPE CATEGORY
[04:40:01]
WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE REQUEST AS FAR AS I CAN TELL.SO WHEN IT GETS RE NOTICED, DOES IT JUST NEED TO INCLUDE EVERYTHING THAT'S ON PAGE FIVE OF THE PRESENTATION, THAT THOSE SLOPE CATEGORIES, AND THEN, THEN THE OVERALL IMPERVIOUS COVER, UH, ASK, I GET SHOULD BE PART OF THAT.
RIGHT? SO BOARD MEMBER PRUITT, THEY WILL HAVE TO UPDATE THAT APPLICATION TO STATE THAT CAUSE IT WASN'T ON THERE ORIGINALLY.
SO YEAH, THEY'LL HAVE TO UPDATE THAT AND THEN IT'LL GET RE NOTIFIED AND, AND WITH THE SURVEYOR LIPPING ERROR, FLIPPING THE CATEGORIES, I CAN EASILY SEE HOW THIS OCCURRED.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE EVERYTHING THAT THEY DO.
ALL THREE SLOW CATEGORIES AND THE OVERALL IMPERVIOUS COVER ASK, AND THAT'LL JUST HAVE TO BE PART OF THEIR AMENDMENT.
AND, AND WE DID GET, UH, SOME REALLY NICE CORRESPONDENTS ON YOUR CASE.
NO, IT WAS NOT, IT WAS NOT, IT WAS NOT, UH, UH, WE DID GET SOME CORRESPONDENCE ON THIS CASE AFTER THE LAST MEETING.
UH, SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TILL MAY 9TH, 2021 IN ORDER TO FIX THE POSTING MADE BY BOARD MEMBER BY AN OLIN SECONDED BY CHAIR COHEN.
WADE IS OFF THE DIALIS KELLY BLOOM AND MARCEL GARZA.
AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN MOVE THE CASE FORWARD TO THE AGENDA.
IT WAS PHONE FIVE, NINE TWENTY TWENTY ONE.
WE'VE ONLY GOT ABOUT OOH MINUTES.
YOU KNOW WHY I SAID 45 MINUTES AGO.
[F-1 Discussion of the March 14, 2022 Board activity report]
YOU NEED DISCUSSION OF THE MARCH 14TH, 2022 BOARD ACTIVITY REPORT AND LANE.[F-2 Discussion and possible action regarding Election of Officers]
OH, SHOOT.LET'S MAKE THIS FAST ITEM UP TO DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING ELECTION OF OFFICERS.
YOU CAN NOMINATE YOURSELF IF YOU'RE INTERESTED.
MADAM CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO IF POSSIBLE, TO BUY A VOTE OF ACLAM ACCLIMATION OR NOMINATE YOU TO CONTINUE AS CHAIR.
I THINK THE CONSISTENCY IS IMPORTANT AND YOU'VE BEEN DOING A GREAT JOB, EVEN THOUGH WE GET THROUGH YOU IN A FIRE THERE.
AND, UM, MELISSA, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, I'M ALWAYS GOING TO ASK YOU TO PROCEED FOR VICE CHAIR.
YOU GUYS ARE GONNA HAVE TO SWITCH ONE OF THESE YEARS.
SOMETIMES I HAVE TO DEFLECT QUICK BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO GO.
SO I, I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T SAY THAT I WILL.
I WILL, BUT I WOULD ALSO SAY IF SOMEONE ELSE WANTS TO DO IT, I'M MORE, I'M MORE THAN OPEN TO, UH, PASS THE BATON.
ANYONE ELSE INTERESTED IN BEING VICE-CHAIR OH, MELISSA, BY QUEEN OF VICE CHAIRS TO BE FAIR.
I THINK I'VE MADE THE VICE CHAIR POSITION EXTREMELY EASY THIS PAST YEAR.
I ASKED YOU IF YOU WERE IN THE HOSPITAL, IF SOMEBODY DIED OR IF YOU WERE BLEEDING, I THINK THERE WAS ONE, ONE NIGHT.
VICE-CHAIR YOU ACCEPT YOUR NOMINATION? UM, VOTE OF AFFIRMATION.
[F-3 Discussion and possible action regarding an update on the resolution sent to council for the BOA Applicant Assistance Program (BAAP).]
AM A THREE.UH, THE UPDATE WILL BE COMING.
I HAD ABOUT THREE IS DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING AN UPDATE ON THE RESOLUTION SENT TO COUNCIL FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION APPLICANT ASSISTANT PROGRAM.
THAT WILL BE, UH, THERE'LL BE AN UPDATE FROM CITY STAFF NEXT MONTH.
[F-4 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)]
ITEM A[04:45:01]
FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO FORM A BE AWAY.WE NEED TO CHANGE LANGUAGE ON THIS.
THE WORK GROUPS HAVE BEEN FORMED.
UH, SO, UH, MS. LOPEZ LEGAL, WE CAN'T ACTUALLY DISCUSS THIS BECAUSE THIS IS THE FORM OF WORK GROUP AND THE WORK GROUPS HAS BEEN FORMED.
I MISSED THIS ON THE AGENDA, RIGHT? SO WE NEED TO CHANGE THIS TO READ DISCUSSION FROM THE WORKFORCE.
I AGREE WITH THAT ASSESSMENT AND WE HAVE WORK GROUP.
WE WILL TOUCH BASE NEXT MEETING FOR AN UPDATE,
[F-5 Discussion and possible action regarding to hybrid meetings (in-person/virtual)]
UH, ITEM OF FIVE DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A HYBRID MEETINGS IN PERSON AND VIRTUAL.IS EVERYBODY OKAY WITH HOW WE'VE BEEN RUNNING THINGS? I MEAN, I'M INCLINED TO TAKE THIS OFF THE AGENDA.
UH, NO ONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS OR PROBLEMS JUST REMINDER FOR ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE, UH, OR SORRY.
ON VIRTUAL, UH, MASK, UH, MASKING MASKING REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN RESCINDED FROM CITY HALL FOR BOARD MEMBERS OF WHAT YOU'RE ALWAYS WELCOME TO JOIN FROM HOME FORCE.
ANY COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? NOPE.
[F-6 Announcements ]
ANNOUNCEMENTS.I'D NOT GOING THROUGH THIS KIND OF FAST, NO ANNOUNCEMENTS, NO BIRTHDAYS ANNIVERSARIES.
[F-7 Discussion of future agenda new business items, staff requests and potential special called meeting and/or workshop requests]
ITEM OF SEVEN.UH, FUTURE AGENDA, NEW BUSINESS ITEM STAFF REQUESTS.
THAT'S NO, THE TIME IS 10:41 PM.
THREE, FIVE MINUTES WAS JUST PERFECT AND EVERYONE.