[00:00:03]
[CALL TO ORDER]
BY CALLING THIS MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ORDER.GO AHEAD AND TAKE ATTENDANCE REALLY QUICKLY.
ONE SECOND HERE, TOMMY IT'S EAR.
MELISSA HAWTHORNE, VICE CHAIR HERE.
DARRYL PUT HERE, OBVIOUSLY GINA RODRIGUEZ HERE.
CARRIE WALLER HERE, KELLY BLOOM HERE AND MARCEL GUTIERREZ GUARDS UP HERE.
TELL ME ONE MORE TIME, MARCEL, WHICH I MEANT TO CROSS THAT OUT FOR THIS MEETING.
JUST SOME QUICK HOUSEKEEPING GUYS.
IT'S GOING TO BE A REALLY LONG NIGHT TONIGHT.
WE HAVE AN INTERPRETATION APPEAL.
I'M GOING TO BE MAKING A MOTION TO MOVE THAT INTERPRETATION APPEAL TO THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.
SO IF YOU'RE HERE FOR A VARIANCE OR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION KEYS, UH, IT'S GOING TO BE A WHILE.
FEEL FREE TO GO OUT INTO THE LOBBY.
UM, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A RECESS AFTER THE INTERPRETATION APPEALS, SO YOU'LL HAVE TIME.
SEE EVERYONE MOVING AROUND TO COME BACK IN.
I'LL ALSO ASK THE LIAISON TO GO OUT AND LET EVERYONE KNOW WHEN WE'LL BE STARTING THE VARIANCE HEARINGS FOR NOW.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CELL PHONES OR PUT THEM ON VIBRATE.
UH, I'M GOING TO ASK BECAUSE OF THE BUSY NIGHT, UH, AFTER YOUR CASE IS OVER.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE WAIT TILL TOMORROW.
BEFORE CONTACTING THE BOARD LIAISON, YOU CAN DO THAT BY EMAIL OR PHONE.
AND THAT'S, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT YOUR CASE OR THE FINDINGS IN YOUR CASE, WHEN YOU'RE ADDRESSING THE BOARD, PLEASE SPEAK TO THE BOARD, NOT TO ONE ANOTHER, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S ANY OPPOSITION.
AND IF YOU HAVEN'T STAMPED YOUR PARKING TICKETS, UH, THERE'S A LITTLE CLAM SHELL AND A SIGN IN SHEET OVER THERE.
JUST TAKE YOUR TICKET OVER STAMP AT ONCE.
FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS AND WRITE THE NUMBER ON THIS SHEET.
UH, EVERYONE, WHO'S GOING TO BE GIVING TESTIMONY TONIGHT ON ANY OF THE CASES TONIGHT.
I NEED YOU TO PLEASE STAND SO I CAN GIVE YOU YOUR OATH.
DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU WILL GIVE TONIGHT WILL BE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE? THANK YOU SO MUCH.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ITEM.
WE'RE GOING TO DO MINUTES AND MINUTES.
WHEN WE, BEFORE WE CHANGED THE GENDER DON'T WE HAVE TO VOTE ON CHANGING THE AGENDA.
THAT'S WHAT I GOT CORRECTED ON LAST TIME.
YEAH, I WOULD DO, I WOULD DO IT, BUT YOU'RE STILL DOING IT SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO IT.
[A-1 Staff requests approval April 11, 2022 draft minutes]
ONE APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 11TH, 2022 DRAFT MINUTES.I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY VICE-CHAIR HAWTHORNE.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? THE TAG TEAM IS BACK IN AND WE'RE GOING TO DO LITTLE THINGS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY THIS TIME, INSTEAD OF CALLING BY NAMES, UH, FOR THIS, THESE MOTIONS ON THE STAFF MINUTES AND THE POSTPONEMENT, OR SORRY ON STOCK MINUTES, NOT POSTPONEMENTS.
WE'RE JUST GONNA DO A, UH, APPROVAL, UH, BY NOT OR AFFIRMATION.
[00:05:01]
WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM APRIL 11TH, 2022.ONE ABSTENTION, BARBARA MACARTHUR, ITEM
[B-1 Staff and Applicant requests for postponement and withdraw of items posted on this Agenda]
B ONE, STOPPING APPLICANT REQUESTS FOR POSTPONEMENTS AND WITHDRAWALS.I HAVE ITEM D ONE C 16 DASH 2022 DASH ZERO ZERO ZERO ONE TEN ONE OH SEVEN.
RESEARCH BOULEVARD, SERVICE ROAD, NORTHBOUND, G C 15 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 1 1 27, 15 LONG BOW TRAIL AND G TO C 15 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 1 2 27, 17 LONG BOW TRAIL.
ALL THREE OF THOSE ARE BEING REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANTS TO POSTPONE TILL THE JUNE 13TH MEETING.
AND THEN I HAVE ITEM F THREE C 15 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 4 3 5 0 9 EAST 38TH STREET.
THE NEIGHBORS ARE REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT UNTIL THE JUNE 13TH MEETING.
I ALSO HAVE, WELL, THOSE ARE THOSE POSTPONEMENTS.
UH, SO THOSE ARE JUST THE POSTPONEMENTS.
WE HAVE TWO THAT WERE DENIED BY AUSTIN ENERGY.
THEN I HAVE TWO CASES THAT WERE DENIED BY AUSTIN ENERGY ITEM, F1 C 15 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 3 5 26 0 9, SOUTH SAN PEDRO STREET AND ITEM F THREE C 15 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 4 3 5 0 9 EAST 38TH STREET.
THOSE BOTH WERE DENIED BY AUSTIN ENERGY.
WOULD ANYONE CARE TO MAKE A MOTION? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR A POSTPONEMENT? I'M SORRY.
A DENIAL NEEDS TO BE WORKED OUT FIRST.
MADAM CHAIR WAS THAT FOR ALL, INCLUDING THE POSTPONEMENTS VICE CHAIR, UH, FOR THE TWO CASES, JUST FOR THE DENIALS, NOT FOR THE POSTPONEMENTS FOR THE DENIALS TO ADD THEM TO THE POSTPONEMENT LISTS WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON.
IF I WASN'T CLEAR, THIS IS A EMOTION.
I DO SEE A APPLICANT STANDING.
SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO BE TO APPEAL ONE OF THOSE OFF.
UH, SO COULD YOU COME UP TO THE MIC AND STICK YOUR NAME? TELL ME WHICH CASE YOU'RE HERE FOR.
I UNDERSTAND I'M HERE FOR F1 AND IT'S JUST A SETBACK VARIANCE.
SO 2,609 SAN PEDRO'S 35 ITEM 35.
UM, IT WAS DENIED BY AUSTIN ENERGY, WHICH MEANS WE WON'T APPROVE IT ANYWAYS UNTIL THEY GET APPROVAL FROM AUSTIN ENERGY.
I TALKED TO AUSTIN ENERGY TODAY.
JUST TALK TO KAREN AND SHE HAD NO PROBLEM.
I WILL GO AHEAD AND FIND OUT WHY SHE DIDN'T SEND SOMETHING.
WE HAVE, UH, THREE BOARD MEMBERS, ACTUALLY FOUR BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT.
SO YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO POSTPONE ANYWAY, CAN WE GO AHEAD AND POSTPONE NEXT MONTH YOU MIGHT HAVE ALL 11 BOARD MEMBERS HERE, RIGHT? ALL 11.
YOU MIGHT, YOU MIGHT LIKE THAT A LITTLE BETTER.
'CAUSE IT'S, UH, IT'S A REALLY SIMPLE CASE, BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE ABILITY TO POSTPONE AT THIS POINT IN TIME, RATHER THAN HAVE A DENIAL ON THE, WELL, I THINK YOU'D RATHER, IF YOU GOT POSTPONED AFTER YOUR PRESENTATION, JUST WITH A DENIAL, WE, WE REALLY PREFER THAT TO BE DONE BECAUSE THEY COULD BE IN CONFLICT OR IT COULD PUSH YOUR BUILDING FORWARD, WHICH THEN SOMETHING DOESN'T WORK.
AND THEN I UNDERSTAND YOU MIGHT CHANGE YOUR ACTUAL POSTING LANGUAGE.
NO, IT'S, IT'S A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD SITUATION, BUT THANK YOU, MELISSA.
SO, SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO ADD THE TWO AUSTIN ENERGY DENIALS TO THE POSTPONEMENT.
AGAIN, WE'LL JUST DO THIS BY SIMPLE AFFIRMATION, UH, ALL IN FAVOR.
SEE 15 20 22 0 0 3 5 AND SEE, 15 20 22 0 0 4 3 2.
[00:10:04]
THE POSTPONEMENT VOTE.THAT'S 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, UM, SIX, SEVEN MICHAEL.
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY WE HAVE TWO RECONSIDERATION CASES IN THE POSTPONEMENTS AND JUST BECAUSE WE POSTPONE IT DOESN'T MEAN WE'LL, THE BOARD WILL HAVE TO VOTE ON WHETHER TO RECONSIDER AT THE TIME OF JUNE 13TH.
WE'LL STILL HAVE TO RECONSIDER THE OR POSTPONING.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE WILL RECONSIDER IT, BUT THEY'LL, THERE WILL HAVE TO BE SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE FOR RECONSIDERATION, CORRECT? I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT OUT LOUD.
SO, UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENTS? SO MOVED.
I HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE, BUT YOU'D BY VICE-CHAIR HAWTHORNE SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER OF ON OWEN.
THIS WILL BE FOUR ITEMS SEEN 15 20 22 0 0 3 5.
SEE 16 20 22 0 0 0 1 C 15 20 22 0 0 1 1.
SEE 15 20 22 0 0 1 2 AND SEE, 15, 20 AND 22 0 0 4 3.
CAN YOU AGAIN, UH, LET'S DO A PHOTO OF AFFIRMATION ALL IN FAVOR.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS MOTION PASSES.
THOSE CASES ARE POSTPONED UNTIL JUNE.
JUNE 15TH, 13TH, 13, 13, JUNE 13TH.
AND SO THIS IS WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO SUSPEND THE ORDER OF THE DAY AND WHAT'S THAT FANCY ROBERT'S RULES THING CISO.
BEFORE I SUSPEND ORDER THEM 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.
WHO ARE WE MISSING? UH, CARRIE IS NOT ON SCREEN.
CURIOUS, UH, TROUBLE WITH WEBEX.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ALTERS THE ALTERS THE VOTE, UH, BOARD MEMBER WALLER.
UH, COULD YOU QUICKLY STATE FOR THE VOTE RECORD, HOW YOU'D LIKE TO VOTE ON? SHE NEEDS TO BE ON CASH.
SHE HAS TO BE ON CAMERA OR DOESN'T COUNT.
IT'S NOT IT'S ENOUGH TO CONDUCT YOUR CASE, BUT ALL THE APPLICANTS NEED TO UNDERSTAND IT.
LET'S GET INTO THE INTERPRETATION AND GO FROM THERE.
[E-1 C15-2022-0042 Felicia Foster for Valentin Bohorov 2212 Trailside Drive]
I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, MAKE A CHANGE TO THE AGENDA ORDER.WE MOVE ITEM 20 22 0 0 4 2 2, UH, IN FRONT OF ITEMS C SO THAT WE CAN TAKE IT UP IMMEDIATELY.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT AND AGAIN, UH, JUST PHOTOGRAPH PROBATION ALL IN FAVOR.
YES, SIMPLE MAJORITY FOR THEM.
SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THAT TO THE FRONT OF THE AGENDA.
FOR AND INTERPRETATION APPEAL.
BEFORE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ARE THERE ANY REQUESTS FOR POSTPONEMENT OR ISSUES OF STANDING THAT ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO
[00:15:01]
RAISE SEEING NONE? UH, IF OBJECTION, DUMPED UP.WE'RE GOING TO HEAR A REPORT FROM CITY STAFF FOR FIVE MINUTES.
UH, THEN WE'LL HAVE A PRESENTATION BY THE APPEALING PARTY OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE.
THEN WE WILL HAVE COMMENTS BY THOSE SUPPORTING THE APPEAL AND THEN A PRESENTATION BY OPPOSITION, IF THERE'S ANY, AND THEN COMMENT BY THOSE WHO ARE OPPOSING WITH ANY REBUTTAL BY THE APPEALING PARTY.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND START WITH THE REPORT FROM CITY STUFF CLEARER, PLEASE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I WAS WATCHING VIDEOS OF YOU FROM 2011 AND 12, AND DON'T WORRY, MICHAEL AND I WERE IN THEM AS WELL.
THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBERS, UM, CHAIR, UM, BRENT LLOYD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER WITH DSD.
AND I'M JUST GOING TO SAY A FEW WORDS TO INTRODUCE OUR MAIN PRESENTER WILL BE SUSAN BARR.
UM, BUT FIRST I WANT TO JUST, UM, SPECIFY THAT WE WILL HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME PRESENTING OUR CASE IN FIVE MINUTES.
THESE ARE DIFFICULT ISSUES THAT INVOLVE OVERLAPPING CODE PROVISIONS FROM DIFFERENT CODES, AS WELL AS PRIOR INTERPRETATIONS OF THIS BOARD.
SO WE WOULD, WE WOULD READILY AGREE TO AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR THE APPELLANT.
UM, IF WE'RE GIVEN ONE AS WELL.
SO I WILL JUST SAY BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THAT, UM, THIS IS AN APPEAL OF STAFF'S DISAPPROVAL OF PROPOSED BUILDING PLANS FOR DEVELOPMENT AT 2212 TRAIL SIDE.
AS I MENTIONED, SUSAN BARR, THE CHIEF BUILDINGS PLANS, EXAMINER ACTING, WE'LL BE PRESENTING THE CASE FOR DSD TO SET THE STAGE A BIT.
UH, WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU UPHOLD STAFF'S DECISION, WHICH IS BASED ON A PRIOR 2012 DECISION BY THIS BOARD IN ANOTHER CASE, HOWEVER, WE WILL FOLLOW WHATEVER DECISION YOU MAKE ON THE MEANING OF THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS.
AND WE'RE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AS WELL.
IF YOU HAVE ANY, UM, ANY IDEAS FOR HOW TO CRAFT A BETTER RESULT, THE MAIN ISSUE BEFORE THE BOARD IS HOW CEILING HEIGHT IS MEASURED FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING GROSS FLOOR AREA UNDER SUBCHAPTER F WHICH SOME OF YOU KNOW, AFFECTIONATELY AS, OR, OR NOT AS THE MCMANSION ORDINANCE IN A NUTSHELL STAFF'S POSITION IS THAT CEILING HEIGHT IS MEASURED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3.3 0.4 OF SUBCHAPTER F IN TANDEM WITH YOUR DECISION FROM 2012, THOSE PROVISIONS, INCLUDING THE PRIOR DECISION ARE COPIED OR LINKED IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU EARLIER TODAY.
IT DID NOT APPEAR IN YOUR INBOX AS SOONER APPELLANT RELIES ON PROVISIONS ON HABITABLE ADDICTS FROM THE 2021 IRC.
WE BELIEVE THOSE PROVISIONS ARE NOT BINDING ON HOW SUBCHAPTER F F AS APPLIED AND IF ADOPTED FOR PURPOSES OF GROSS FLOOR AREA, WE BELIEVE THEY WOULD PRODUCE RESULTS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE BULK AND SCALE LIMITATIONS OF SUBCHAPTER F.
SO WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO SUSAN BARK.
I'M THE ACTING CHIEF PLANS EXAMINER AS WELL AS THE MANAGER OF RESIDENTIAL PLAN REVIEW.
ELAINE, DO YOU HAVE MY, UH, PRESENTATION READY? I'M GOING TO PAUSE THE TIMER FOR JUST A MINUTE WHILE WE GET THE PRESENTATION PULLED UP.
I DO BELIEVE THAT 10 MINUTES PER SIDE.
UH, CITY STAFF HAD STATED THAT THEY MAY NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME AND THEY'RE PERFECTLY AMENDABLE TO GRANTING EQUAL TIME TO, I WAS GOING TO WAIT AND ASK THE, UH, APPELLANT IF THEY WERE OKAY WITH THE EXTENSION OF TIME.
I'M SURE THEY WILL BE, BUT YEAH, BECAUSE I DID AN EXTENSION.
[00:21:00]
SHE WAS HAVING PROBLEMS WITH HER.I THINK, UH, LET'S LET'S GO AHEAD AND GIVE YOU ALL 10 MINUTES.
WOULD THAT BE ENOUGH TIME? AND WE'LL GIVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF, UH, EXTENSION TO THE VOLUNTEER AS WELL.
ADAM CHAIR, BOARD MEMBERS, OUR APOLOGIES FOR THE DELAY.
ONCE AGAIN, MY NAME IS SUSAN BARR AND I'M THE ACTING CHIEF PLANS EXAMINER AS WELL AS THE MANAGER OF RESIDENTIAL PLAN REVIEW.
SO THE INTENT OF SUBCHAPTER F IS TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF NEW CONSTRUCTION REMODELING, AND ADDITION TO EXISTING BUILDINGS ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
THE STANDARDS ARE DESIGNED TO PROTECT THE CHARACTER OF AUSTIN'S OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN 2004, PRIOR TO 2000 AND SUBCHAPTER F WENT INTO EFFECT IN 2006.
SO PRIOR TO 2006, A HOUSE WAS ONLY LIMITED BY A 35 FOOT HEIGHT, 40% BUILDING COVERAGE AND 45% IMPERVIOUS COVER SUBCHAPTER F THEN INTRODUCED A 40% FLORIDA AREA RATIO OR 2300 SQUARE FEET.
WHICHEVER IS SMALLER AND REDUCE THE HEIGHT TO 32 FEET FOR SUBCHAPTER F GFA IS ALL ENCLOSED SPACE, REGARDLESS OF ITS DIMENSIONS THAT IS NOT EXEMPTED UNDER SUBSECTIONS 3.3 0.2 3.3 0.3 OR 3.3 0.4.
AND HERE ARE A COUPLE OF VISUAL
[00:25:01]
EXAMPLES OF SOME OF THE SUBCHAPTER F EXEMPTIONS.THEIR FIRST ONE IS 3.3 0.2, WHICH IS IN REGARDS TO PARKING AREA EXEMPTIONS.
THE NEXT IS 3.3 0.3 BASEMENT AREA EXEMPTIONS.
UH, THE NEXT ONE IS 3.3 0.3 PORCH EXEMPTION.
AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE, WE HAVE THE CONTINUATION OF 3.3 0.3, WHICH IS FOUR ATTIC EXEMPTIONS.
NEXT SLIDE AND HABITABLE ATTIC EXEMPTION.
THERE ARE SIX CRITERIA THAT HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED IN ORDER FOR THE ADDICT TO BE EXEMPT.
SO THE ROOF IS NOT FLAT OR MANSARD, IT HAS A SLOPE OF THREE TO 12 OR GREATER IS FULLY CONTAINED WITHIN THE ROOF STRUCTURE.
IT DOES NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE FOOTPRINT OF THE FLOORS BELOW.
IT IS THE HIGHEST AVAILABLE PORTION OF THE BUILDING OR SECTION OF THE BUILDING AND ADDS NO ADDITIONAL MASS TO THE STRUCTURE.
AND THE LAST ITEM IS THE ITEM THAT WAS ADJUSTED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, CODE INTERPRETATION IN 2011 SLASH 2015.
BUT FOR THE MOST PART, IT'S 50% OR MORE HAS A CEILING HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET OR LESS NEXT PIECE.
AND THEN ROUNDING OUT THE EXEMPTIONS IS 3.3 0.4, WHICH TALKS ABOUT ENCLOSED AREA WITH HEIGHT OF FIVE FEET OR LESS.
AND FOR THIS PARTICULAR ONE IT'S, UM, THE AREAS MEASURED ON THE OUTSIDE SURFACE OF THE EXTRA WALLS.
AND THE HEIGHT IS MEASURED FROM THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION UP TO EITHER THE UNDERSIDE OF THE ROOF RAFTERS OR THE BOTTOM OF THE TOP CORD OF THE ROOF TRUST, BUT NOT TO THE COLLEGE, HIGHEST CEILING JOISTS OR ANY TYPE OF FOR DOWN CEILING NEXT.
SO THIS D THIS IS THE VISUAL FROM THE BOE CODE INTERPRETATION FROM 2011 SLASH 2012.
AND WHAT IT DID WAS IT, IT TOOK THAT LAST SECTION AND BROKE IT DOWN INTO CEILING HEIGHTS WITH THAT ARE FIVE FEET AND LESS LIKE THEY DON'T EVEN MATTER.
AND THEN WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT A RATIO OF FIVE TO SEVEN AND SEVEN FEET ABOVE.
AND SO AT LEAST 50% HAS TO HAVE THE CEILING HEIGHT OF FIVE TO SEVEN FEET NEXT.
SO WHEN IT COMES TO THE CEILING HEIGHT RATIO, UM, THINK THIS IS JUST CUTTING WHAT I, WHAT I TALKED ABOUT, UM, THAT C 15, 2011 DASH 0 1 1 0, AND THE BILLING CRITERIA MANUAL SECTION 4.4 0.5 0.24, MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE CEILING HEIGHT RATIO USING ADDED CALCULATIONS IS MEASURED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUBSECTION 3.3 0.4.
AND WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT SUBSECTION 3.3 0.4, AS PARTICULAR TO THAT, THE CEILING HEIGHT IS MEASURED FROM THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION UP TO EITHER THE UNDERSIDE OF THE ROOF RAFTERS OR THE BOTTOM OF THE TOP CORD OF THE ROOF TRUST, BUT NOT TO THE COLLAR TIES CEILING JOISTS OR ANY TYPE OF FOR DOWN CEILING NEXT.
SO WHEN IT COMES TO SCISSOR TRUSSES, THIS WAS A DETERMINATION THAT WAS MADE, UM, UH, 2021.
SO THE TOP AND BOTTOM CORD ARE CLOSE IN PROXIMITY TO EACH OTHER.
THE DETERMINATION WAS PARTICULAR TO A PROJECT, AND IT ESPECIALLY NOTED THAT FOR HIM DOWN AT CEILING, IN ORDER TO MITIGATE FUTURE USE OF THE DETERMINATION FOR THE ROOF CONFIGURATION SIMILAR TO 20.
AND I APOLOGIZE THAT SHOULD BE 22, 12 TRAIL SIDE.
IT WAS SPECIFICALLY NOTED THAT YOU COULDN'T FIT DOWN THE CEILING SO THAT IT WOULD MITIGATE ANY KIND OF FUTURE USE OF THE DETERMINATION FOR OTHER PROJECTS.
SO IF WE LOOK AT THE IMAGES BELOW THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT IS A CONVENTIONAL SHED REFRAMING, THAT IS THAT GENERALLY YOU JUST HAVE TWO BYS AND THEY SPAN FROM BEARING POINT TO BEARING POINT, AND YOU CAN SEE IT GIVES YOU A REALLY NICE VOLUME VOLUMINOUS SPACE.
AND THEN IN REGARDS TO THE GRAPHIC THAT IS IN THE CENTER WITH THE OUTLINE IN RED, THAT IS THE TRUST FOR THE PROJECT AT 2212 TRAIL SIDE, AND HAD IT BEEN FRAMED IN A CONVENTIONAL MANNER.
THIS DISCUSSION WOULD ACTUALLY BE MOOT.
SO THIS IS THE SECOND FLOOR PLAN FOR 2212 TRAIL SIDE DRIVE.
AND WHAT WE HAVE IN KIND OF THE AQUA COLOR IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT COUNTS TOWARDS FLOOR AREA.
AND IN THE RED, WE HAVE THE AREA THAT'S NOT COUNTED TOWARDS GROSS FLOOR AREA BECAUSE THOSE AREAS DO MEET THE ATTIC EXEMPTION CRITERIA.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE AREA IN RED THAT THEN HAS A DIAGONAL HATCH PATTERN TOP OF IT.
THAT IS THE AREA OF THE HOUSE THAT IS IN QUESTION NEXT YEAR.
SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS JUST A QUICK GLIMPSE OF THE FRONT EXTERIOR ELEVATION.
AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS THE AREAS
[00:30:01]
WHERE THE ATTICS ATTIC AREAS OCCUR.AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE, WE HAVE A, A GENERAL LOOK AT THE RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION, AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE WILL SHOW THE GENERAL LOCATION OF THE ATTIC AREAS NEXT PIECE.
SO THIS IS JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE BEDROOM FOR FOUR SLASH OFFICE AREA THAT IS IN QUESTION NEXT, PLEASE.
AND THEN THIS JUST GIVES A MORE IN-DEPTH IN REGARDS TO THE CODE REQUIREMENTS.
SO CEILING HEIGHT IS MEASURED FROM THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION.
AND THIS ALSO IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE 2011 VOA CODE INTERPRETATION AND IT'S TO THE, TO BE MEASURED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE TOP QUARTER OF THE ROOF TRUST.
BUT WHAT HAS BEEN MEASURED HERE IS THE BOTTOM OF THE, WELL, IT'S JUST THE CEILING HAS BEEN MEASURED TO THE CEILING, THE FINISHED CEILING NEXT, PLEASE.
SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS THE TRUST DIAGRAM FOR THIS AREA OF THE HOUSE.
AND SO WHAT HAS BEEN HIGHLIGHTED IN THE RED BOX ABOVE IS T3.
AND SO HEIGHT IS ACTUALLY TO BE MEASURED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE TOP CORD, WHICH IS T3.
AND ALSO, UM, THIS TRUST PRO PROFILE DOES NOT MATCH THE SECTION, THE BILLING SECTION THAT WAS JUST PRINTED IN THE SLIDE BEFORE NEXT SLIDE.
SO WHEN IT COMES TO THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE, WE, WE, WE LIKE TO KEEP WELL.
SO THERE THEY'RE TWO DIFFERENT CODES WITH TWO DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS.
AND THE IRC IS THE TECHNICAL BILLING CODE THAT PERTAINS TO BUILDING SAFETY AND HOW TO BUILD A STRUCTURE.
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS A ZONING REGULATION FOR MASS SCALE AND COMPATIBILITY.
THE TECHNICAL BILLING CODE REQUIREMENTS OF THE IRC DO NOT INVALIDATE THE ADDITIONAL CRITERIA THAT MUST BE MET FOR A ZONING EXEMPTION.
KEEPING IN MIND THAT SUB CHAPTER F ZONING REGULATIONS ARE ALL ABOUT ENCLOSED SPACE, REGARDLESS OF IF IT IS A BIDDABLE OR NOT NEXT, PLEASE.
SO IF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS APPROVES THE APPEAL AND RESIDENTIAL REVIEW REQUIRES EXEMPTED ATTIC AT I'M SORRY, HABITABLE ADDICTS TO ONLY MEET THE CRITERIA FOUND IN IRC SECTION ARE 3 26 0.3 AND NOT THE BOA CODE INTERPRETATION.
THEN SOME ADDICTS WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS A STORY ABOVE GRADE PLANE AND WOULD NOT EVEN QUALIFY.
ADDICTS WOULD BE LIMITED TO A MUCH SMALLER FLOOR AREA.
ADDICTS WOULD BE PERMITTED AT MUCH LARGER HEIGHTS AND ZONY REVIEWERS WOULD THEN BE REQUIRED TO REVIEW FOR TWO DIFFERENT CODES NEXT PIECE.
SO AT 2212 TRAILSIDE DRIVE, THE GROSS FLOOR AREA EXEMPTION IS AN OPTION THAT THAT MAY NOT BE VIABLE FOR EVERY ATTIC.
THE EXEMPTION IS PARTICULAR TO HABITABLE SPACE AS SUCH, NOT HABITABLE SPACES, NOT TO BE EXEMPT REMOVING THE CEILING AREA REQUIREMENT ESTABLISHED BY A C 15 20 11 0 1 1 0 AND THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL SECTION 4.4 0.5 0.24 WOULD RESULT IN ROOF MASSES THAT ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER AND TALLER WHILE THE PROPOSED ATTIC IN THE SUBJECT PROJECT DOES NOT PENETRATE THE TENT.
ELIMINATING THE CEILING HEIGHT RATIO REQUIREMENT WOULD PERMIT MUCH LARGER, FULLY EXEMPTED ADDICTS THAT COULD BE OUTSIDE OF THE TENT NEXT, PLEASE.
THAT ENDED UP BEING 12 AND A HALF MINUTES.
AND DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON AT THIS TIME? IT WAS VERY THOROUGH.
WE WILL NOW HEAR THE PRESENTATION FROM THE APPEALING PARTY OR THEIR LEAD REPRESENTATIVE.
COME ON DOWN TO THE DIRE, STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, AND YOU WILL HAVE 12 AND A HALF MINUTES.
YOU MIGHT WANT TO MAKE SURE HE'S TEED UP WITH IT.
CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING? I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF PAGES.
MY NAME IS FELICIA FOSTER PRINCIPAL WITH BARON CUSTOM DESIGN AND I WAS HIRED BY THE OWNER OF 2212 TRAIL SIDE TO DESIGN A CUSTOM HOME.
THANK YOU TO THE BOARD FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
IN MY 35 YEARS OF WORKING WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME PRESENTING TO THE BOA WE'RE HERE BECAUSE STAFF HAS CHANGED THEIR INTERPRETATION.
AND I'LL GET INTO THAT IN A MINUTE.
AN APPLICATION OF THE HABITABLE ATTIC EXEMPTION WITH REGARDS TO CEILING HEIGHT, AND
[00:35:01]
WAS NO LONGER WILLING TO DISCUSS.WE RELY ON CONSISTENT REVIEWS AND INTERPRETATIONS BY STAFF.
WE HAVE DONE NUMEROUS PROJECTS SINCE MCMANSION WENT INTO EFFECT IN 2006 THAT UTILIZE THE HABITABLE ATTIC AS AN AFFORDABLE WAY TO INCREASE THE USABILITY FOR THE OWNER, BUT KEEPING FROM CHANGING HOW THE HOUSE LOOKS FROM THE STREET AS OUR CITY GROWS AND PRICES CONTINUE TO PUSH FAMILIES OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO FIND WAYS TO MEET, TO MEET THE NEEDS OF A GROWING POPULATION.
BY ADDING MORE FLEXIBILITY IN THE HOME WHILE MEETING THE CODES, THE COMPLEXITY OF OUR CURRENT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIME TO DESIGN AND PERMIT INCREASES THE COST FOR EVERY SINGLE HOME BUILT IN THE CITY.
WE STARTED THE PERMIT SUBMITTAL PROCESS ON THIS ONE BACK IN NOVEMBER, 2021, WE'VE PASSED ALL DEPARTMENTS EXCEPT FOR THIS LAST ZONING ITEM.
THE HABITABLE ATTIC IS PROPOSED AS UTILIZING AN AREA THAT WOULD NORMALLY BE USED FOR STORAGE.
A MECHANICAL ATTIC ADDS NO MASS TO THE STRUCTURE AND AS WELL WITHIN THE MCMANSION TENT AND DESIGNED TO MEET THE NEEDS OF A FAMILY NEEDS A DEDICATED SPACE FOR REMOTE LEARNING, WORKING THE NEW ZOOM ROOM.
IF YOU WILL, WE BELIEVE 2212 TRAIL SIDE AS DESIGNED WITH THE BEDROOM FOR OFFICE HABITABLE AREA WEDGED INTO A SPACE THAT WOULD TYPICALLY BE NON HABITABLE MEETS THE GFA EXEMPTION AND THE STAFF APPLICATION OF 3.3 0.4 IS INCORRECT BECAUSE OF TWO THINGS.
ONE, 3.3 0.4 REFERS TO AN EXTERIOR WALL.
WE DON'T HAVE AN EXTERIOR WALL.
WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE HEIGHT AND A CEILING HEIGHT.
SO THE PROPOSED HABITABLE ATTIC DOES NOT HAVE ANY EXTERNAL WALLS.
SECTION A OF 3.3 0.4 AND A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE PROPOSED EXEMPTED SPACE HAS A CEILING HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET, 3.3 0.4 B MEASURED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE HORIZONTAL MEMBER OF THE ROOF STRUCTURE REFERS TO HEIGHT AND NOT CEILING HEIGHT.
SO WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE DIFFERENCE THERE IN ORDER TO APPLY IN ORDER TO APPLY 3.3 0.4, YOU REALLY HAVE TO MEET BOTH BECAUSE IT IS ONE AND THE OTHER, NOT ONE OR THE OTHER THINK OF EXTERIOR AS IT RELATES TO HEIGHT AND INTERIOR, AS IT RELATES TO CEILING HEIGHT, GROSS FLOOR AREA MEANS THE TOTAL.
THIS IS DIRECTLY OUT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, TOTAL ENCLOSED AREA OF ALL FLOORS IN A BUILDING WITH A CLEAR HEIGHT OF MORE THAN SIX FEET MEASURED TO THE OUTSIDE SURFACE OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS.
3.3 0.4, AN ENCLOSED AREA SHALL BE EXCLUDED FROM THE CALCULATION OF GROSS FLOOR AREA.
IF IT IS FIVE FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SUBSECTION AREA IS MEASURED ON THE OUTSIDE SURFACE OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS.
AND HEIGHT IS MEASURED FROM THE FINISHED FLOOR, ELEVATION UP TO EITHER THE UNDERSIDE OF THE ROOF RAFTERS OR THE BOTTOM OF THE TOP CORD OF THE ROOF TRUST, BUT NOT THE COLLAR TIE CEILING JOYCE OR ANY TYPE OF FOR DOWN CEILING.
SO BASICALLY WHAT IT'S SAYING IS WE'RE TRYING TO CONTROL MASS.
WE'RE NOT ARGUING THAT WHERE THIS SECTION DOESN'T EVEN APPLY TO OUR HOUSE BECAUSE WE ARE INTERNAL WE'RE INSIDE THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
WE'RE INSIDE THE MASS OF THE ROOF STRUCTURE.
THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT PATHWAYS TO APPLY FOR EXEMPTIONS.
ONE PARKING, WHICH SUSAN ILLUSTRATED IN HER, UM, PARKING PORCHES, BASEMENTS ADDICTS, 3.3 0.3 AND 3.3 0.4 IS FOR AREAS THAT ARE LESS THAN FIVE FEET IN HEIGHT.
THAT'S SPECIFIC TO 3.3 0.4 ADDICTS ARE A DIFFERENT SECTION.
THE APPROACH THAT WE'RE USING IS 3.3 0.3 FOR HABITABLE ATTIC.
SO YOU HAVE TO MEET ALL SIX CRITERIA IN ORDER TO QUALIFY, AND I'M GOING TO BE HIGHLIGHTING THE TWO HEIGHT VERSUS CEILING HEIGHT, AND I'VE DONE IT IN MY PRESENTATION BECAUSE I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
THE ROOF ABOVE IT IS NOT FLAT OR MANSARD HAS A SLOPE OF THREE, 12 OR GREATER FULLY CONTAINED WITHIN THE ROOF STRUCTURE.
SO IF I HAVE A ROOF STRUCTURE AND MY ATTIC IS FULLY CONTAINED WITHIN THAT ROOF STRUCTURE, IT QUALIFIES.
IT DOES NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE FOOTPRINT OF THE FLOORS BELOW.
IT'S THE HIGHEST HABITABLE PORTION OF THE SECTION OF THE BUILDING AND ADDS NO MASS TO THE STRUCTURE.
AND 50% OF MORE OF THE AREA HAS A CEILING HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET OR LESS.
THE AREA OF BEDROOM FOR OFFICE HAS A MAX CEILING HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET IN ORDER TO ALLOW HPAC DUCTING TO ACCESS THE ROOM FROM THE MECHANICAL MECHANICAL ABOVE THE CEILING STRUCTURE IS DESIGNED WITH A TRUST IN ORDER TO PROVIDE STABILITY BECAUSE IT IS WEDGED BETWEEN THE FRONT MECHANICAL AREA AND THE BACK OF VAULTED CEILING.
I DON'T HAVE AN EXTERIOR WALL TO PROVIDE
[00:40:01]
EGRESS TO HABITABLE ATTIC.I HAVE EGRESS SKYLIGHTS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ACCESS.
IF YOU NEED TO GET OUT IN CASE OF A FIRE, IN ORDER TO SPAN THOSE SKYLIGHTS, I HAVE TO DO A ROOF TRUST TO CARRY THAT WE DID THE ROOF TRUST.
WE MEET ALL OF THE QUALIFICATIONS WITHIN THAT BOX.
THIS IS THE SECTION OF THAT IS ALSO THE HIGHEST PORTION OF THE HOUSE.
SO WE'RE NOT GOING ABOVE AN ATTIC ABOVE A SECOND FLOOR.
THIS IS ON THE SECOND FLOOR, NOT A THIRD FLOOR OR NOT ABOVE PLATE.
THE HABITABLE ATTIC IS ALL WITHIN THE ROOF AREA OF THE SECTION.
YOU CAN SEE THAT ON THE SEC, THE SECOND DRAWING UP THERE, THE SKYLIGHTS ARE OPERABLE AND THE ATTIC IS WITHIN IT.
YOU CAN SEE THAT WE HAVE THE STAIR TOWER ABOVE IT.
SO THE CITY OF AUSTIN ADOPTED 2021 IRC, THE R 2 0 2 IN IRC DEFINED CEILING HEIGHT.
THERE IS NO DEFINITION OF CEILING HEIGHT IN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
UM, THE CEILING HEIGHT IS DEFINED AT THE CLEAR VERTICAL DISTANCE FROM THE FINISHED FLOOR TO THE FINISHED CEILING.
SO WHEN I AM DESIGNING AND I HAVE OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THAT'S DIRECTING CEILING HEIGHT, I'M GOING TO LOOK FOR A DEFINITION OF CEILING HEIGHT.
AND BECAUSE WE ARE BOUND BY THE 2021 IRC, THAT CODE STANCE OR THAT DEFINITION STANDS.
SO HERE WE HAVE A CASE OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY.
WE HAVE 3.3 0.4 THAT'S FOR AREAS OF FIVE FEET MEASURED TO THE EXTERIOR WALL.
AND THEN WE HAVE 3.3 0.3 THAT'S IT'S FOCUSED ON HABITABLE ADDICTS, 3.3 0.4 FOCUSES ON HEIGHT, 3.3 0.3 FOCUSES ON CEILING HEIGHT.
SO IT'S, IT CAN BE VERY CONFUSING AND THINGS HAVE BEEN APPLIED IN DIFFERENT CONTEXTS.
SO THIS IS A SECTION 3.3 0.4, AS IT'S WRITTEN DIRECTLY FROM SUBCHAPTER F AND YOU CAN SEE SECTION A SAYS, AREAS MEASURED TO THE OUTSIDE SURFACE AT THE EXTERIOR WALL.
AND HEIGHT IS MEASURED FROM THE FINISHED FLOOR UP TO EITHER THE UNDERSIDE OF THE ROOF RAFTERS OR THE BOTTOM, BUT WE DON'T EVEN GET TO BE, WE HAVEN'T PASSED A YET.
SO THAT'S WHY 3.3 0.4 DOESN'T APPLY IT'S FOR AREAS WHERE YOU HAVE A GABLE END THAT YOU HAVE A TALL WALL, THEN YOU'RE TRYING TO EXEMPT YOUR HABITABLE ATTIC AREA.
THIS PROJECT IS NOT EVEN TRYING TO CLAIM THAT ONE.
IT'S GOING IT'S ALL FULLY UNDER 3.3 0.3.
SO 25, 1 21, WHICH I ALREADY, I ALREADY READ THE GROSS FLOOR AREAS.
ANYTHING WITH A CLEAR HEIGHT OF SIX FEET, 3.3 0.4 IS ANYTHING FIVE FEET.
SO THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE IN OUR CODE 3.3 0.4 FURTHER ELABORATES, HOW TO MEASURE THAT HEIGHT TO NOT SO PEOPLE AREN'T ARTIFICIALLY, UM, FURRING DOWN A CEILING BECAUSE IT'S MEASURED ON THE OUTSIDE WALL.
SO IT'S MEASURED TO THE UNDERNEATH OF THOSE ROOF RAFTERS UNDERNEATH OF THE ROOF TRUSS.
THERE'S NO MENTION ON 3.3 0.4 CEILING HEIGHT, 3.3 0.4 ALSO, UM, DEALS WITH AREAS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE FIVE FEET OR MORE.
THEY NEED TO BE CALCULATED IN GROSS FLOOR AREA.
SO HERE'S ANOTHER, UM, FLOOR PLAN.
SHE SHOWED WHERE OUR SEVEN, WHERE OUR ATTIC EXEMPTED ADDICTS, WHERE THIS IS ACTUALLY SHOWING WHERE OUR SEVEN FOOT CEILINGS ARE.
YOU CAN SEE WHERE MY THREE SKYLIGHTS ARE OVER THE BEDROOM FOR OFFICE AND THAT THERE'S NO EXTERIOR WALLS.
SO THAT'S WHY I HAVE TO SPAN IT WITH A ROOF TRUST.
AND IT'S ACTUALLY A GIRDER TRUST.
IT'S GOING TO GO FROM FRONT TO BACK HABITABLE ATTIC, AREA, BEDROOM FOUR, UM, SECTION IT'S IN AN AREA THAT IF I DIDN'T MAKE IT HABITABLE, IT WOULD STILL QUALIFY AS AN EXEMPTED SPACE.
SO I'M NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING THAT WOULDN'T NORMALLY BE EXEMPTED UNDER GROSS FLOOR AREA BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MEET 3.3 0.4.
AND THEN AGAIN, I SKIPPED ONE, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
UM, SO TO THE BOA INTERPRETATION, I HAVE GONE OVER THIS MULTIPLE TIMES BACK AND FORTH BECAUSE LIKE SUSAN REFERENCES IN HER LETTER, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LOT.
[00:45:01]
TO THIS DATE ABOUT 22,000 HOUSES IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.AND I HAVE READ THE CODE FORWARD AND BACKWARDS.
I ACTUALLY HAVE TABBED PAGES FOR EVERY SINGLE CODE DATING BACK TO 1991, WHICH IS A PAIN TO MOVE AROUND.
WHEN YOU CHANGE OFFICES, WHEN IT COMES TO THE BOA INTERPRETATION, I FEEL LIKE IT WAS RIGHT, BUT IT WAS WRONG.
I FEEL LIKE THE BOE INTERPRETATION SAID, HEY, THIS MOUNT MANEL PROJECT, YOU HAVE TO COUNT IT THIS WAY, THAT MOUNT BRUNEL PROJECT, GUESS WHAT THEY HAD THAT WE DON'T HAVE NEXT YEAR, A WALL THEY'RE LIKE YOU CAN'T ARTIFICIALLY GO IN THERE AND PUT A FLOOR AND NOW EXEMPT YOUR ATTIC BECAUSE YOU HAVE THAT SECOND FLOOR MASS.
WE'RE, WE'RE PLATING OUR ROOF FROM THE LOWER LEVEL, FROM THE FIRST FLOOR UP TO THE SECOND FLOOR.
WE'RE NOT ADDING A FLOOR AREA AND ADDING MASS WE'RE SIX FEET FROM THE TENT.
WE'RE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO PENETRATING THE TENT.
AND WE ALSO DIDN'T WANT TO ADD THE MASS ON THAT SIDE BECAUSE OF THE NEIGHBORS.
WE'VE GOT NEIGHBORS ON EACH SIDE.
SO PART OF MY PRESENTATION HERE IS I HAVE AN EMAIL FROM SUSAN.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF US THAT, YOU KNOW, SEND EMAILS TO CODE REVIEWERS AND SEND EMAILS TO EACH OTHER LIKE, HEY, HAVE YOU EVER HAD AN EXPERIENCE WITH THIS? WHAT WAS SAID, WHAT WAS DONE? UM, AND I HAVE ATTACHED SUSAN'S EMAIL THAT SAID, WE REFER TO CEILING HEIGHT AND I'LL READ IT.
AND SUSAN BAR'S OWN WORDS FROM AN EMAIL APRIL 15TH.
SHE VERY CLEARLY MAKES A DISTINCTION BETWEEN CEILING HEIGHT AND HEIGHT AND FURTHER ELABORATES.
A CEILING HEIGHT IS NOT MEASURED TO THE UNDERSIDE OF THE TOP QUARTER OF THE TRUST, BUT IN FACT, MEASURE TO THE UNDERSIDE OF THE BOTTOM QUARTER OF THE TRUST, WHICH IS ACTUALLY DEFINED CEILING HEIGHT, SUSAN BAR'S EMAIL WAS SPECIFIC TO CASE 20 21 0 1 9 24 PR REGARDING HOW TO APPROPRIATELY MEASURE CEILING HEIGHT UNDER A ROOF TRUST STRUCTURE MEASURE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE TOP QUARTER MEASURE TO THE, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS MY 12 AND A HALF MINUTES OR NOT MINUTES.
SO NEXT PAGE, I'M JUST GOING TO WRAP IT UP.
UM, AND THE THIRD SECTION THERE, IT SAYS IN REGARDS TO MEASURING FOR HEIGHT FOR AN ATTIC EXEMPTION, THE BCM CLEARLY CALLS OUT CEILING HEIGHT FOR ATTIC EXEMPTION THOUGH, THE BOA DETERMINES JUST SAYS HEIGHT WITH BCM, NOTING CEILING HEIGHT.
THE KEEP IN MIND FOR HIM DOWN FROM THE ROOF STRUCTURE WOULD NOT MEET CODE.
IS CARRIE WALLER STILL ON THE PHONE? JUST JOINED CHAIR.
SO LET'S, LET'S LIKE CARRIE, GET LOGGED IN AND THEN I'M GONNA OKAY.
AND TELL HER KELLY'S CAT IS MAKING ME LAUGH.
SO DID YOU HEAR THE PRESENTATIONS CARRY? I DID.
I'VE BEEN ABLE TO HEAR AND SEE EVERYTHING.
BUT THIS WEBEX HAS BEEN FREEZING ON ME.
SO I'M HOPING THAT THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE ANOTHER CRASH.
I APOLOGIZE FOR ALL THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.
TRUMAN FEELS REALLY BAD FOR YOU.
HUH? CHAIRMAN CHAIRMAN WOULD, WOULD COME AND GIVE YOU SOME, SOME ATTENTION JUST FOR THAT.
HE'S A HUNDRED POUNDS NOW, WHILE I'M WAITING FOR YOUR VIDEO, IT'S STILL SPINNING.
WELL, AT LEAST I KNOW YOU'RE THERE AND THAT YOU, YOU HEARD EVERYTHING AND YOU SAW EVERYTHING.
SO ONCE WE KIND OF GET GOING HERE, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE US ON FOR RIGHT NOW.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS BY CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OR IN OPPOSITION TO THE APPEAL? OKAY.
COME ON UP TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
[00:50:01]
YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES, UH, STATE, WHETHER YOU ARE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED, PLEASE.UM, HOW DO, UH, MY NAME IS ADAM TELE ANTI-ITCH AND I AM FOR, UM, THIS APPEALS PROCESS OR THIS CASE.
UM, I'M THE ONE THAT DESIGNED THE CASE IN QUESTION WITH ER, SUSAN'S EMAIL THAT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER.
UM, WE WITH HASH WORKS, DESIGNED SMALL LITTLE HOMES.
WE'VE ONLY DONE LIKE 20 PROJECTS IN THE LAST 10 YEARS.
UM, BUT I THINK IT'S SUPER IMPORTANT WITH THIS ONE.
I FEEL LIKE THE BOA, A RULING ON HABITABLE ADDICTS, UM, GOT IT KIND OF RIGHT, BUT NOT ALL THE WAY RIGHT.
AND THAT'S REALLY WHY I WANT TO BE HERE IS THAT I FEEL LIKE FELICIA'S PROJECT SATISFIES THAT REQUIREMENT, BUT IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO UNDERSTANDING THE NUANCE OF THIS.
AND I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A LONG TIME.
SUSAN BARR RESPECT THE HECK OUT OF HER AND HER PREDECESSOR, DANIEL WORD.
BUT WHEN YOU GET TO 3.3, ONE, 3.1, THE ORIGINAL ONE THAT SAYS GFA MEANS ALL ENCLOSED AREAS.
THAT'S NOT EXEMPTED UNDER SUBSECTIONS 3.3 0.2, 3.3 0.3 OR 3.3 0.4.
3.3 0.4 IS THERE TO MODIFY GFA.
SO THE ORIGINAL DEFINITION UNDER THE LDC, UH, IN OUR LDC 25, 1 21 FOR DEFINITIONS OF GFA, IT SAYS SIX FEET.
IT SAYS LET'S MODIFY THIS TO FIVE FEET AND MAKE SURE PEOPLE DON'T FOR IT DOWN.
AND IT SAYS SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS SUBSECTION, AND IT SAYS ONLY THIS SUBSECTION.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THE OTHER SUBSECTIONS.
THEY ATTIC EXEMPTION IS A SEPARATE SUBSECTION AND IT USES AN IRC DEFINED TERM CEILING HEIGHT, WHICH HAS BEEN ON THE BOOKS WITH THE IRC IS WAY BEFORE 2021 HAS BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOREVER.
IT'S TWO SEPARATE EXERCISES AND THE 2012, UH, BOA DETERMINATION SHOULDN'T HAVE EXCLUDED ANYTHING LESS THAN FIVE FEET.
UNDER 3.3 0.3, IT SAYS AVERAGE HEIGHT DETERMINED BY CEILING HEIGHT.
SO FINISHED FLOOR TO YOUR FINISHED CEILING.
THAT'S IT? YOU DON'T EXCLUDE ANYTHING LESS THAN FIVE FEET BECAUSE THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS CALCULATION.
UM, AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY JUST WHAT I WANT TO GET EVERYONE TO FOCUS ON IS THE SPECIFIC WORDS AND THE INTENT AND WHY THEY'RE EVEN THERE THREE POINTS, 3.4 WAS REALLY JUST A MODIFIED AUSTIN'S GFA DEFINITION DOWN FROM SIX TO FIVE FEET AND MAKE SURE PEOPLE DON'T ARTIFICIALLY FOR IT DOWN, WHICH I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY DID THAT.
ANY OTHER CITIZEN COMMENTERS FOR AGAINST SEEING NONE NEXT? WE WOULD HAVE REBUTTAL, BUT, WELL, ACTUALLY THERE IS NOTHING TO ROBOT BECAUSE THE OPPOSITION RIGHT REBUTTAL BY THE APPEALING PARTY, UM, THE OPTION TO REBUT IS THERE.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO TAKE IT A REBUTTAL AGAINST, THANK YOU.
IT'S IT SAYS REBUTTAL BY THE APPEALING PARTY THREE MINUTES, ONE SEC.
IT'S NOT STUFF THAT'S APPEALING PARTY COMMENTS BY CITIZENS AND SUPPORTIVE OFFICE.
AND THANK Y'ALL FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
UH, WE HAVEN'T HAD MANY INTERPRETATION APPEALS AND THIS IS MY FIRST HIS CHAIR.
SO MAYBE A LITTLE BUMPY, BUT WE'LL GET THERE A BOTTLE BY THE PARTY IS THREE MINUTES PEELING PARTY NUMB.
IT WOULD BE Y'ALL IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A, HAVE A REBUTTAL, DO YOU? SURE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS TWO THINGS.
UM, ONE, UH, SUSAN MENTIONED IRC AND HABITABLE ADDICTS, AND I JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.
SO THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD.
SO THE CITY OF AUSTIN ADOPTED 2021 IRC LAST SEPTEMBER.
AND THIS IS THE FIRST CODE BOOK DATING ALL THE WAY BACK TO ACTUALLY QUEBEC, WHICH IS WAY BACK THERE.
UM, THAT HAS A SECTION ON HABITABLE ATTIC, AND SHE REFERRED TO THE SECTION REGARDING STORIES.
THAT'S ONLY ONE SECTION UNDER HABITABLE ATTIC.
THERE'S TWO OTHER SECTIONS ON OUR HABITABLE ATTIC.
ONE DETERMINES A MINIMUM CEILING
[00:55:01]
HEIGHT, AND THEN THE OTHER ONE DETERMINES EGRESS.SO WE'VE GOT EGRESS, WE'VE GOT CEILING HEIGHT THAT IS DIRECTED BY CODE.
SO EVEN THOUGH WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EXEMPTING SQUARE FOOTAGE UNDER LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, I'M STILL BOUND BY IRC BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO INSPECT UNDER.
AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD UNDER.
SO I STILL HAVE TO MEET THE PROVISIONS OF A HABITABLE ATTIC UNDER IRC.
UM, ONE MORE THING IS THE BOA INTERPRETATION.
AND I KIND OF WENT THROUGH THIS A LITTLE BIT, BUT A OF THE BOA INTERPRETATION FROM 2012, IT SAYS THREE THINGS.
ONE MEASURED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUBSECTION 3.3 0.4 COMMA, 50% OR MORE EXEMPTED PORTION MUST HAVE A HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET, BUT MORE THAN LESS THAN SEVEN FEET, BUT MORE THAN FIVE FEET.
I THINK THAT THEY, I THINK THAT'S A TYPO BECAUSE 3.3 0.4, IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH 50% OR MORE.
SO IT'S SAYING MEASURING THE HEIGHT AND THEN 50%.
UM, AND THEN ALSO B IT SAYS THE EXEMPTED PORTION OF AN ATTIC MUST BE LIMITED TO ROOMS FOR HUMAN OCCUPATION, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO SPACES FOR USE FOR LIVING, SLEEPING, EATING, COOKING, ALL BATHROOMS, TOILETS, CIRCULATION.
SO I'M REQUIRED TO MEET THE CODE ACCORDING TO BOA.
AND I CAN'T MEET STAFF'S INTERPRETATION AND STILL MEET THE CODE BECAUSE THEY'RE TELLING ME THAT MY CEILING HAS TO BE MEASURED FROM TO THE VERY TOP.
AND SO IF I HAVE TO, FOR THAT CEILING DOWN, OR THAT CEILING HAS TO COME DOWN, THEN IT'S NO LONGER HABITABLE SPACE.
AND IF YOU SAY IT'S THIS WHERE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND LET'S, WE'RE STILL TRYING TO GET CARRIE WALLER CONNECTED AND PUSHES ON A SCREEN-SHARE, BUT WE'RE NOT SEEING HER VIDEO.
SHE CAN'T SPEAK ABOUT THAT'S HER.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF HER VIDEO IS WORKING, BUT HOPEFULLY SHE CAN GET THAT FIGURED OUT ON HER END.
I CAN'T SEE HER SETTINGS, CARRIE, HOW I WOULD LOOK IN.
WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SEE YOUR FACE WHEN YOU, MY NAME MIGHT ASK MS. BARRA QUESTION, UH, WHILE WE'RE WAITING ON BOARD MEMBER WALLER, CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU.
MY, UH, MY HOP, MY HOMES INTERNET IS OUT, SO I'VE CALLED INTO THE MEETING ON MY PHONE.
I DON'T THINK WE CAN COUNT YOUR VOTE UNLESS WE CAN SEE YOU.
AND I REALLY DON'T MIND START THE QUESTIONS UNTIL WE CAN SEE HER VIDEO BECAUSE I DON'T WANT HER TO, UH, SHE'S GOING TO BE PART OF MY BOAT.
I'M GOING TO NEED TO RECALL THE ROLE SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE THAT, UH, CARRIES ON THERE.
UH, WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME ANNOUNCED HERE, TOMMY EIGHTS, EAR JESSICA COHEN, I'M HERE, LISSA HAWTHORNE, BARBARA MACARTHUR HERE.
DARYL PUT YOUR AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ, MICHAEL VON OLIN, CARRIE WALLER, KELLY BLOOM HERE AND MARCEL GARZA YOU'RE.
AND THAT, THAT'S THE QUESTION FOR THE, COULD YOU, COULD YOU LOOK INTO FINDING OUT WHAT THE ACTUAL PROPER ARE, IF THERE IS ANY DEFINED PROCEDURE FOR WHEN WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO'S HAVING VIDEO TROUBLE, UH, HOW WE SHOULD HANDLE, LIKE, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO RECALL THE ROLE EVERY TIME? OR CAN WE JUST DO THAT ONE PERSON ONCE THEY'VE OVERCOME THE TECHNICAL ISSUES? BECAUSE JUST EASIER TO RECALL THE RULES PRESERVE THE RECORD.
IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S TAKING A LOT OF TIME FROM THE MEETING IT'S ALREADY LONG.
LET'S START WITH QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS ON THE INTERPRETATION APPEAL.
I ALREADY SAW YOUR HAND SHOOT UP.
YOU WANT TO START WELL? AND I WANTED TO ASK MS. BARN
[01:00:01]
BEING THAT WE HAD A REBUTTAL FROM ONE SIDE, IF THERE WAS ANY ADDITIONAL, UM, I HAD A QUESTION ON, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL ME AFTER ALL OF THAT BEING THAT YOU WERE POISED AND THEY WERE POISED AT THE SAME TIME.UH, SO I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF ITEMS FIRST AT THE 2011 BOA CODE INTERPRETATION.
IT BORROWED ITEMS FROM 3.3 0.4, IN REGARDS TO HOW HIGH IT IS TO BE MEASURED.
IT, IT DIDN'T BORROW ALL OF THE ITEMS, ESPECIALLY IN REGARDS TO EXTERIOR WALLS.
IN REGARDS TO THE PROJECT AT 2212 TRAIL SIDE, THE FRAMING ON THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE ACTUALLY STARTS WITH A GABLE RAFTER FRAMED STRUCTURE, AND THEN IT TRANSITIONS TO THE TRUST WHICH ADDS MASS TO THE SPACE AND THEN TRANS POSITIONS BACK TO A GABLE RAFTER CONSTRUCTION.
IN REGARDS TO MY EMAIL, IT CONTAINS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE REGARDING NOT FURRING DOWN A CEILING SO THAT DETERMINATION COULD NOT BE USED IN FUTURE SITUATIONS, SUCH AS 22, 12 TRAIL SIDE.
UM, THE, THE IMMIGRANTS ARE 3 26 0.3.
THE ONLY NEW ITEM WAS IN REGARDS TO WHEN AN ATTIC IS CONSIDERED A STORY.
ALL OTHER ITEMS WITHIN THAT CODE SECTION HAVE BEEN IN THE IRC FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
SUBCHAPTER F ATTIC EXEMPTION IS JUST ABOUT WHETHER THE SPACE CAN BE EXEMPTED OR NOT.
IF IT CAN'T BE EXEMPT, THEN THE HOUSE JUST NEEDS TO GET A LITTLE SMALLER SOMEWHERE ELSE.
IF YOU WANT TO KEEP THAT SPACE.
AND THEN IF THE SPACE DOESN'T MEET THE EXTENDED DEFINITION OF HABITABLE SPACE IN THE BOA CODE INTERPRETATION, THEN IT'S JUST SPACE THAT CAN'T BE EXEMPT.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING IN REGARDS TO INVALIDATE IRC REQUIREMENTS.
QUESTIONS, BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.
I'D LIKE TO ASK THE CITY STAFF A QUESTION.
UM, I READ EVERYTHING YOU WROTE AND YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THIS STARTING A PRECEDENT THAT WOULD IMPACT A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT AND CAUSED THINGS TO EXTEND BEYOND THE MCMANSION, UM, DIAGRAM.
SO COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT MORE EXPLICITLY? YES.
SO IF THE BOARD CHOOSES TO MODIFY THE BOA CODE INTERPRETATION FROM 2011 AND TAKE ITEMS OF THE 2021 IRC, THEN FIRST OF ALL, OUR 3 26 0.3 IS SPECIFIC TO ONE.
AN ATTIC IS CONCERNED A STORY.
AND SO IF YOU HAVE THESE ADDICTS THAT ARE CONSIDERED A STORY NOW FROM THE 2000, FROM THE 2021 IRC, THEN, THEN YOU'RE DONE LIKE YOU CAN'T EXEMPT THAT SPACE AT ALL.
EVEN THOUGH CURRENT CODE WOULD ALLOW YOU TO EXEMPT THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE, IT WILL THEN ALSO MAKE ATTIC AREAS SMALLER THAT CAN BE EXEMPT.
IT WOULD ALSO MAKE, COULD POSSIBLY MAKE ADDICTS TALLER.
AND I, I THINK THAT IS, UH, COVERS IT BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.
SO DOES THIS MEAN THAT EVERYTHING GO WITH GOING FORWARD WOULD BE REVIEWED IN A DIFFERENT WAY? IF THE BOARD CHOOSES TO REVISE THE VOA CODE INTERPRETATION FROM 2011, THEN DEPENDING ON HOW THE BOARD CHOOSES TO GO ABOUT CHANGING THAT LANGUAGE WOULD THEN CHANGE AND CAUSE A NEW DIRECTION FOR HOW PROJECTS ARE REVIEWED BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAN, UM, COMMISSIONER MACARTHUR.
AND I WAS ACTUALLY ON THE BOARD WHEN WE WRESTLED THIS PIG IN THE ALLEY, WE ALL GOT DIRT ON US.
SO BOTH MELISSA AND I ARE FAMILIAR WITH HOW MUCH AGONY IT WAS GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
AND I, WE, WE RECOGNIZED VERY WELL AT THAT TIME THAT IT WASN'T PERFECT, BUT IT WAS THE BEST WE COULD DO AT THE TIME.
THINGS WERE GETTING OUT OF MY HAND WITH MCMANSIONS AND, AND ALL THINGS.
UH, MY FEELING ABOUT THIS, UH, INTERPRETATION, AND I'M GOING TO THROW MY STANCE OUT THERE.
WE STILL HAVE TO VOTE IS THAT I WILL STILL SUPPORT STAFF'S INTERPRETATION, BUT THIS CASE IN CASES LIKE THIS, I THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY,
[01:05:03]
IT APPEARS THAT THIS IS BASICALLY A REMODEL OF AN ENCLOSED AREA IN AN EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR, UH, THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE ON NEW CONSTRUCTION, THAT WHOLE TRUST AND EVERYTHING.THAT'S ALL NEW, AN ENTIRE TRUST.
THAT'S A SINGLE STORY HOUSE RIGHT NOW.
WELL THEN IN THIS CASE, THEN IT'S PRETTY MUCH A CUT AND DRY SITUATION.
I FEEL TO SOME OF THESE WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THIS, IF, IF THOSE EXISTING TRUSTS IS BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING AT, UM, THE PRESENTATION AND I WAS UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT THAT SECTION WAS ALREADY FRAMED OUT, THE ROOF WAS ALREADY THERE.
THEY WERE GOING TO INSTALL THE, UH, WINDOWS IN THE ROOF, WHICH BASICALLY I'VE NEVER HEARD ANYBODY INSTALLING WINDOWS ON THE ROOF.
IT WOULD ACTUALLY, YOU INSTALL WINDOWS AND WALLS.
I'VE NEVER USED SKYLIGHTS AND ROOFS, BUT IN ALL MY YEARS, 30, SOME CLOSE TO 40 SOME YEARS OF IN CONSTRUCTION, I'VE NEVER INSTALLED A WORKING GATE WINDOW IN THE ROOF.
SO TO ME THAT, THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO TRY, THAT'S SPLITTING HAIRS, IF THIS WASN'T AN ENCLOSED AREA, I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER SERVED FOR THE APPLICANTS TO COME AND REQUEST A VARIANCE.
BECAUSE WHEN WE MAKE A DECISION ON A CODE INTERPRETATION, WE ARE WRITING CODE WE'RE CHANGING CODE, AND I AM VERY HESITANT TO OPEN THE BARN DOORS AND LET THE HORSES RUN FREE.
UM, BY HAVING PEOPLE COME IN AND REQUEST A VARIANCE.
AND WE'VE, WE'VE HAD PEOPLE REQUEST VARIANCES FOR ADDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL FAR, IF IT'S NOT OUTLANDISH THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
AND SOME GET GRANTED SOME DON'T, IT DEPENDS ON, ON HOW WELL THEIR PRESENTATION IS.
IF THIS SITUATION WAS ONE WHERE THAT ROOF WAS ALREADY THERE, THE TRUST WAS ALREADY THERE.
I WOULD PROBABLY RECOMMEND THAT THE APPLICANTS COME BACK AND REQUEST A VARIANCE, HAVING BEEN INFORMED THAT THAT WHOLE SECTION RIGHT THERE IS GOING TO BE ALL NEW SECTION THAN CLEARLY TO ME.
UH, I THINK EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT A PERFECT, UH, BOA INTERPRETATION BACK IN 2012, I THINK IT'S THE BEST THAT WE'VE GOT.
AND I'M VERY RETICENT AT, AT, UH, CHANGING IT AT THIS POINT UNTIL, UNTIL, UH, CITY, UH, THE CODE'S REWRITTEN AND IT'S ADDRESSED IN A BETTER MANNER.
ONCE WE MAKE THAT DECISION, WE'RE BASICALLY TELLING ANY, ANY BUILDER, ANY DEVELOPER, ANYBODY THAT THEY, THEY CAN ADD ON TO THIS AREA AND GET EXEMPTION FOR IT.
AND I JUST, I, I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
I HOPE THAT CLARIFIED WHAT YOU WERE, WHAT YOU WERE, UH, YOUR QUESTION UM, I WOULD ALSO BE, UH, SUPPORTIVE OF STAFF'S DETERMINATION IN THIS MATTER.
I WAS HERE FOR THE FIRST CASE AND, UH, THE DANIEL WORD MEMO, THE LONG DISCUSSIONS, THE, UM, QUITE AGONIZING EXPERIENCE.
UH, AND I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT IS PRETTY CLEAR.
AND WHILE WE'VE ADOPTED THE IRC AND THE IRC IS A TECHNICAL CODE, THIS IS ABOUT MASS AND COMPATIBILITY.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE SECOND FLOOR AREA, IT'S THIS SPACE OVER TO THE SIDE, AND IT HAS A MECHANICAL ATTIC DIRECTLY ADJACENT AND PUTTING A PIECE OF SHEET ROCK THERE.
SO I, UM, AM SUPPORTIVE OF STAFF'S DETERMINATION, THE BOARD MEMBER BLOOM.
UM, YEAH, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT'S A BIT OF A CHICKEN AND EGG SITUATION THAT BECAUSE THE SEVEN FOOT HEIGHT OF THE FINISHED CEILING IS SO SIGNIFICANT TO WHETHER YOU GET THE EXEMPTION OR NOT, THAT YOU CAN DESIGN SO THAT YOU CAN ACHIEVE THAT, OR YOU COULD DESIGN, SO YOU DON'T ACHIEVE THAT.
AND SINCE IT ISN'T A BUILT STRUCTURE, IT SEEMS LIKE THE CURRENT BUILDING ART, EXCUSE ME, FINISH CEILING HEIGHT DOES SEEM SOMEWHAT ARBITRARY IN WHICH CASE THERE MAY BE A DESIGN SOLUTION HERE THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE CHANGING THE PREVIOUS, UM, INTERPRETATION.
[01:10:01]
I MEAN, IN A NUTSHELL, I, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF SUPPORTING ART OF I I'M IN FAVOR OF STAFF'S INTERPRETATION, BUT I ACTUALLY WOULD ALSO BE IN FAVOR OF LOOKING AT IT AS A POTENTIAL VARIANCE IF, UM, THERE WERE OTHER, OBVIOUSLY OTHER CONDITIONS AND OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES IN PLAY BOARD MEMBER GARZA, I WAS JUST KIND OF CURIOUS, UM, THE STAFF, HOW OFTEN, UM, ARE, IS THIS INTERPRETATION, THE CURRENT INTERPRETATION BEING CITED, UM, IN CASES THAT YOU SEE, YOU KNOW, ANECDOTALLY JUST ANY CODE INTERPRETED, M SORRY, ANY PROJECT THAT HAS AN ATTIC EXEMPTION IN IT FOLLOWS THE 2011 VOA CODE INTERPRETATION.IS IT TYPICALLY A CONTENTIOUS KIND OF DECISION-MAKING PROCESS OR IS IT PRETTY CLEAR THAT WHOLE PROCESS IT'S NOT USUALLY CONTENTIOUS? UM, THERE'S DEFINITELY CAN BE SOME BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE, THE PLANS EXAMINER TO GET TO AN UNDERSTANDING IN REGARDS TO HOW THE 2011 CODE INTERPRETATION IS TO BE MET.
MAYBE MR. LLOYD MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS BETTER.
UM, I ADMIT I'M A LITTLE HESITANT AT THIS TIME TO MODIFY, UH, THE BOS ORIGINAL INTERPRETATION, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME WEEDING THROUGH AND RESEARCHING, AND THAT THIS MIGHT BE MORE PROBLEM FOR CODES AND ORDINANCES THAN ANOTHER INTERPRETATION OF PEOPLE, BECAUSE THIS IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE RULES AND THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL AND THE 2021 IRC, RIGHT.
I THINK THE, YOU KNOW, THEORETICALLY YOU HAVE THAT OPTION.
IF YOU HAVE, UH, AN IDEA FOR HOW THE INTERPRETATION COULD BE IMPROVED, THAT CERTAINLY AVAILABLE TO YOU.
THIS IS A DIFFICULT PIECE OF CODE.
UM, AND DEFINITELY THE PROCESS OF PURSUING CODE AMENDMENTS OR CODE CHANGES IS AVAILABLE.
I WILL ADD IF YOU'LL INDULGE ME JUST FOR 30 SECONDS OR SO THAT, UM, IT'S NOT UNCOMMON THAT, YOU KNOW, THE MCMANSION ORDINANCE, IT'S, IT'S NOT A MODEL OF CLARITY AND THERE ARE PROVISIONS THAT ARE JUST NOT CLEAR WHERE WE HAVE TO LOOK BY ANALOGY TO OTHER PROVISIONS AND TRY TO MAKE THE BEST OF IT.
AND I THINK ONE POINT THAT SUSAN MADE IS THAT WE DIDN'T JUST APPLY HOOK LINE AND SINKER ALL OF 3.3 0.4, THE PRIOR BOARD IN 2011 OR 12, UM, SELECTIVELY ADAPTED A PROVISION FROM 3.3 0.4 FOR PURPOSES OF CEILING HEIGHT.
UM, I ALSO JUST WANT TO ADD, AND I THINK SUSAN MAY HAVE SAID THIS, THAT IT'S NOT CORRECT, THAT YOU CAN'T MEET BOTH THE IRC REQUIREMENTS AND THE MCMANSION REQUIREMENTS.
YOU JUST WON'T BE EXEMPT ALL THE TIME.
THIS IS ABOUT THE RIGHT TO GO BEYOND WHAT THE DEFAULT RULES ARE UNDER MCMANSION AND TO QUALIFY FOR AN EXCEPTION.
SO THERE ISN'T A DIRECT CONFLICT.
UH, IT'S JUST A MATTER OF, YOU'RE NOT ALWAYS GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET THAT EXTRA FAR.
I ALSO THINK AT THE TIME, I MEAN, THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT THE BOARD HAS HEARD A ATTIC CASE OR RELATED TO A CASE.
AND AT THE TIME THE BOARD ACTUALLY HAD QUITE A FEW, UH, EITHER PEOPLE WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE AUTHORING OF MCMANSION OR, UH, ALSO WERE ON THE RDCC FOR A TIME.
AND SO THAT EXPERTISE WAS HERE ON THE BOARD DURING THAT CASE.
AND, AND WE ALSO HAD A CASE IN 2015 AS WELL.
AND SO THE ATTIC HAS BEEN DISCUSSED.
IT'S JUST WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE EXEMPT.
I MEAN, YOU HAVE A TECHNICAL CODE AND YOU HAVE A ZONING AND COMPATIBILITY CODE, AND THERE'S NOT ENOUGH OF THE PLANS OF 22, 12 TRAIL SIDE, BUT, YOU KNOW, I, I PULLED A, UH, VON OLAN TODAY AND I DROVE OVER THERE AND I LOOKED AT IT, IT'S A LITTLE ONE STORY HOUSE.
AND THE, THE MASSING ON THIS HOUSE, UM, IS RATHER LARGE, UM, OF WHAT IS PROPOSED.
AND, UH, IT IS KIND OF INTERESTING BECAUSE, UH, THE STREET IS HIGHER ON ONE SIDE AND THIS IS ACTUALLY ON THE LOWER SIDE.
AND SO, UH, ONE DAY THESE PEOPLE ARE GONNA WAKE UP AND THEY'RE GOING TO REALIZE THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE BLOCKING THEIR VIEW.
AND OH, HOLY MOLY WILL BE REALLY,
[01:15:01]
IT WOULD BE REALLY, UM, INTERESTING.I JUST, UH, I JUST STARTED BUYING, TOOK A LOOK AT IT.
UH, JUST CURIOUS, IS THE CURRENT PROPERTY GOING TO BE DEMOED OR SO THIS IS FRESH START AND THIS WAS THE ONLY DESIGN YOU COULD FIND TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE.
AND CARRIE, I SAW YOUR HAND, I'LL GET YOU NEXT.
SO, UM, AS FAR AS THE DESIGN IS CONCERNED, WE DESIGNED IT TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE CLIENT.
UM, AND WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO IS USE THE ROOF AND GET AS MANY YOU'RE ALREADY PAYING FOR THE SLAB, AND YOU'RE ALREADY PAYING FOR THE ROOF WE ALL KNOW IT'S EXPENSIVE, EXPENSIVE TO BUILD AND COMPLICATED IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
SO WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO IS KEEP ALL OF THE AREA WITHIN ATTIC AREA.
SO WE CAN EXEMPT A SPACE AND MEET THE NEEDS OF THE FAMILY.
UM, AS FAR AS THE MASSING, IT IS REALLY, IT'S A TWO-STORY MASS.
AND WE, YOU CAN SEE ON THE DRAWINGS THAT WE SUBMITTED, THAT WE'RE WELL BELOW THE TENT, WE WERE NOT PUSHING THE TENT.
WE ARE NOT PUSHING THE BUILDING HEIGHT.
SO, AND THE LOT SLOPES DOWN TO THE BACK, WELL, THIS IS CORRECT.
IT SLOPES FROM ONE SIDE, IT GOES DOWN AND THEN SLOPES DOWN.
SO WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO IS KEEP THE MASSING AS LOW AS WE COULD ON THE FRONT AND ON THE SIDES, AND THEN USE THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY TO GARNER ANY ABUSE, BUT IT WAS TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE FAMILY.
I MEAN, HONESTLY, IF THIS HAS COME BEFORE US IS A VARIANCE, IT'S SOMETHING I WOULD SUPPORT IT.
AND SPEAKING TO THAT, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, THIS WAS MY FIRST TIME AT BOA AND THAT WAS NOT EVEN PRESENTED TO US AS AN OPTION.
SO WE WERE TOLD THAT OUR ONLY OPTION WAS TO COME FOR AN INTERPRETATION APPEAL.
SO WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS A POSSIBILITY.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I'D BE THAT OPEN.
SO IF THAT IS A KIND OF, UH, YOU KNOW, AS WE ARE AS A, AS A WHOLE, IT'S A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE, UM, BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAN.
I JUST WANT TO ADD THAT NOW, UNDERSTANDING THAT THE EXISTING STRUCTURES GOING TO BE DEMO, UH, NUMBER ONE, UH, I APPRECIATE YOU COMING HERE ASKING FOR PERMISSION AND NOT COMING AFTER THE FACT.
SO I WANT TO MAKE THAT REAL CLEAR BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WILL START THE CONSTRUCTION AND GET TO THAT POINT AND WANT TO ASK FOR FORGIVENESS.
SO I REALLY DO APPRECIATE YOU COMING THROUGH IN HIS FACE, BUT I DO THINK KNOWING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A CLEAN SLATE AND I DO KNOW QUITE A FEW OF OUR MEMBERS ON THE BOARD ARE VERY PARTICULAR ABOUT CLEAN SLATE.
UM, I THINK YOU'RE, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO REDESIGN, UH, THE SOMETHING FOR YOUR CLIENTS THAT MIGHT MEET THEIR NEEDS AND MAY NOT BE EXACTLY THE SAME.
THIS IS NOT REALLY THAT BIG OF AN ASK.
I SORT OF HAVE THE SAME FEELING THAT THE, UH, THE MADAM CHAIR HAS, BUT, UM, IT CALMING AS AN INTERPRETATION TO CHANGE CODE, TO MAKE A PERMANENT THAT'S.
THAT'S WHERE ALL OF MY RETICENCE COME FROM.
AND WE HAVE PAST, UH, VARIANCES IN THE PAST FOR, YOU KNOW, AN ADDITIONAL FAR OR A NON-EXEMPT AREA.
SO IT'S, IT'S, IT HAS, DOES HAPPEN.
IT'S YOU HAVE TO PRESENT A GOOD CASE OF COURSE, BUT IT DOES HAPPEN.
AND SO, UH, IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, MADAM CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
UH, BOARD MEMBER WALLER SAW YOUR HAND UP EARLIER.
UH, I WAS JUST GOING TO ECHO WHAT BOARD MEMBER VENTOLIN JUST SAID.
I THINK THAT, UM, I'M IN SUPPORT OF, UM, THE STAFF DECISION.
I THINK THE CONCERN, UM, IS, LIKE YOU SAID, UH, MAKING ANY KIND OF CODE CHANGES ON THE SPOT FOR A PARTICULAR CASE, UM, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, MASSING AND WHAT THAT MAY DO TO FUTURE CASES.
UM, I THINK, AND I UNDERSTAND EVERYONE'S FRUSTRATION WITH THE CODE AS IT'S WRITTEN AND THE MISS ALL THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR MISINTERPRETATION OF IT.
UM, BUT I THINK THAT THIS, UH, SHOULD TAKE PLACE IN A MUCH BROADER SETTING.
WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THE BIGGER PICTURE.
YOU KNOW, WE, WE FAILED TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT, BUT AS DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, I DO BELIEVE THAT IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO, UM, PERSUADE, YOU KNOW, THE CHANGES THAT WE WANT TO SEE, UH, AND COME TO AN AGREEMENT WITH PROPERTY OWNERS AND DESIGN PROFESSIONALS.
UM, AND, AND AS THE PROFESSIONALS, IT'S OUR JOB TO PERSUADE, YOU KNOW, THEM.
UM, SO YEAH, IN LIGHT OF IT NOT, UH, I FEEL LIKE IT'S A MUCH LARGER THING THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE MAKING CHANGES LIKE THIS ON A SPOT ON THE SPOT FOR IT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS
[01:20:02]
BOARD MEMBER PER I HAD A, A COMMENT IMMEDIATE QUESTIONS SORT OF ON THE, UH, I GUESS ADMINISTRATIVELY HOW THIS INTERPRETATION APPEAL WORKS BECAUSE THE STAFF IN INCORPORATED THE PRIOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT A DECISION INTO THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL, AND I DON'T BELIEVE AN APPEAL ON STAFF'S INTERPRETATION OF THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUALS IN FRONT OF US.AND SO I'M NOT REALLY SURE THAT EVEN IF THE BOARD WERE TO AGREE WITH THE APPEALING PARTY, THAT THEY WOULD GET THE RELIEF THEY WANTED, BECAUSE THEY STILL NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL AND THEY HAVEN'T APPEALED ANY ISSUE RELATING TO THAT.
THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL MAKES IT VERY CLEAR HOW YOU DO THESE MEASUREMENTS AND, AND WHAT IS, UH, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHAT IS ALLOWED AS AN EXEMPTION FROM THE GROSS FLOOR AREA.
MR. LLOYD, COULD YOU SPEAK TO THAT PLEASE? SURE.
JUST GENERALLY I THINK THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL WAS AMENDED JUST FOR CLARITY SAKE.
UM, BUT IF, IF THE CODE INTERPRETATION IS WRONG, IF THE CODE ITSELF WAS INTERPRETED INCORRECTLY, THEN IT WOULD PREVAIL WHATEVER INTERPRETATION YOU ALL MAKE WOULD TRUMP THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL.
SO THE CODE ALWAYS TRUMPS THE CRITERIA MANUALS, AND IF THE CODE WAS INTERPRETED INCORRECTLY, THEN THAT REFERENCE IN THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL, I BELIEVE WOULD ALSO BE INCORRECT.
AND SO I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO WORRY ABOUT WE IDENTIFIED THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL BECAUSE IT IS A POINT OF REFERENCE.
IT'S A PART OF THE LARGER STORY HERE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IT, IT, IT WILL PREVENT YOU FROM TAKING WHATEVER ACTION YOU DEEM APPROPRIATE.
DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION BOARD MEMBER PRO? THANK YOU.
I UP STUMBLING IS READY TO MAKE A MOTION.
MADAM CHAIR, I'LL MOVE THAT WE UPHOLD A CITY STAFF'S INTERPRETATION.
AND ONE OTHER THING I'D LIKE TO ADD ONE COMMENT, MADAM CHAIR, THE REASON THAT ANOTHER REASON THAT I'M UPHOLDING STAFF'S INTERPRETATION IS BECAUSE SOME OF THESE SITUATIONS, AS IT'S BEEN STATED CAN BE ADDRESSED AS A VARIANCE.
A VARIANCE IS PER IS SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT PROPERTY, FOR THAT HOUSE.
IT'S NOT A BROAD BASE CODE AMENDMENT.
AND SO I STILL FEEL THAT IT IT'S THE WHOLE HEIGHT AND CEILING HEIGHT IS SORT OF SPLITTING HAIRS TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.
UH, I'VE HAD THOSE ARGUMENTS AS A CONTRACTOR WHEN I WAS BUILDING THINGS, NO OFFENSE, BUT WITH, WITH ENGINEERS AND OTHERWISE AS WELL.
BUT, UM, I, I JUST THINK IT STILL ALLOWS THE CITY TO HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CONTROL OVER THE DEVELOPMENT, THE MASSING OF PROJECTS ON SMALLER PROPERTIES.
AND IF THEY, IF A CASE IS PRESENTED HERE, WE CAN ADDRESS IT AS A BARRIER.
SO IT DOESN'T CREATE A WHOLE NEW WRITTEN CODE, UH, BOARD MEMBER VINYL.
THIS IS ERICA LOPEZ, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, JUST TO CONFIRM THAT'S A MOTION TO DENY THE APPEAL AND UPHOLD STAFFS.
AND THEN IS THE SECOND AS WELL.
UH, WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK FOR, OR AGAINST THE MOTION BOARD MEMBERS? I'M GOING TO SPEAK NEUTRAL TO IT REAL QUICK, BECAUSE I DO HAVE A, I STILL HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT DEFINITION OF HEIGHT VERSUS CEILING HEIGHT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A LEGITIMATE QUESTION, UH, THAT MAYBE WASN'T CLEARLY ENOUGH SPELLED OUT IN THE ORIGINAL, UH, INTERPRETATION.
UM, AND FROM A CONTRACTOR'S POINT OF VIEW FROM BUILDING CONSTRUCTION WISE, AND THIS MY OPINION, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY.
SO FROM A, FROM JUST A CONSTRUCTION STANDPOINT, TO ME, CEILING HEIGHT IS INTERNAL FROM A FINISHED FLOOR TO THE FINISHED CEILING HEIGHT.
IT CAN BE MEASURED FROM OUTSIDE FROM THE GROUND UP.
IT CAN BE MEASURED LITERALLY FROM A NON FINISHED FLOOR TO THE BOTTOM OF THE TRUST.
UM, BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T, IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT FINISHED YET.
IT'S NOT, YOU DON'T HAVE FLOORING.
[01:25:02]
IT'S ALTERABLE CORRECT.YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? BECAUSE IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE MEASUREMENTS, SOME OF THE MEASUREMENTS, THEY CALL CEILING HEIGHT AND IT DOES STATE IT.
IF YOU LOOK IT SAYS FROM FINISHED FLOOR TO FINISH CEILING, TO ME, THAT'S A FINISHED FIELD CEILING THAT YOU HAVE WHERE IT'S ALREADY BEEN SHEET ROCK, TAPE, FLOATED, TEXTURE PAINTED, IT'S A FINISHED CEILING.
THEN YOU HAVE YOUR HEIGHT WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU MEASURE IT.
AND WE HAVE TO DO THIS ALL THE TIME.
I'VE WALKED THE THIRD FLOOR TOP PLATES, ROLLING TRUSSES AND SETTING THEM WITH CRANE.
SO I KNOW WE USED TO, YOU HAVE THE SAME THING THAT YOU'RE WORKING OFF OF ALL OF YOUR PLANS, WHERE YOU JUST WORKING OFF OF BASE YOUR BASIC HEIGHT, WHICH IS FROM THE FINISH, THE CONCRETE FLOORS.
IF I CAN INTERRUPT QUICKLY, THAT'S KIND OF MY PROBLEM.
UH, IT UNDER SECTION EIGHT AND SAYS, MUST HAVE A HEIGHT OF LESS THAN SEVEN FEET, BUT MORE THAN FIVE FEET.
SO NORMALLY YOU WOULD GET AN ATTIC ATTIC JUST LIKE IN MOST OF THE EXEMPTIONS THAT YOU WOULD SEE BOTH SIDES OF THE TRIANGLE.
AND IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IN THIS AREA, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A VIEW LIKE THIS.
AND SO THE LITTLE SQUINTY PART OVER HERE THAT YOU CAN'T STEP STAND UP IN, BUT YOU COULD PUT DRAWERS OR, YOU KNOW, TYPE OF THING.
SO NORMALLY YOU WOULD GET A VIEW WHERE YOU WOULD GET BOTH, BUT IN THIS CASE, YOU'RE ONLY GETTING HALF.
AND BECAUSE THE PITCH IS SO HIGH AND YOU HAVE, WHETHER YOU HAVE A GABLE, A TRUST, A GABLE, AND YOU COULD PUT A PIECE OF SHEET ROCK THERE, BUT SHE REC SHEET ROCK, AND IT'S ADJACENT, IT'S ADJACENT TO ANOTHER FLOOR AS WELL AS ADJACENT TO GET ANOTHER ATTIC AND MECHANICAL SPACE.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF AN ODD ONE.
I MEAN, BUT THIS IS, THAT'S GETTING INTO SITE SPECIFIC IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE CODE, BECAUSE I THINK THEY'RE ONLY, YOU'RE ONLY LOOKING AT IT IN THIS PART, AS OPPOSED TO THE WHOLE PICTURE THAT IT MAY NOT MAKE AS MUCH SENSE IN THIS PARTICULAR, BUT YOU'RE ONLY SEEING ONE PIECE OF A PLAN OR TWO PIECES OF A PLAN, YOUR PLAN.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THIS SIDE VIEW, UNLESS YOU WANT TO GO LOOK THROUGH THE WHOLE CASE, WHICH THE WHOLE CASE, THE WHOLE RESIDENTIAL CASE IS NOT IN OUR PURVIEW AT THIS MOMENT.
SO, I MEAN, IT'S ALL, I MEAN, SOMETIMES IT'S THE, IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER, BUT IT WAS MEANT TO BE AN, AN AVERAGE SO THAT YOU GOT SOME EXAMPLE AREA FROM AN AREA THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BASICALLY BE UNUSED.
BUT THIS IS BEING DESIGNED TO BE USED.
WELL, THIS IS GOT HOW, HOW MANY ADDICTS ARE IN THIS BUILDING.
I MEAN, FROM WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE, THERE'S MORE THAN ONE.
AND JUST HAVING PARTICIPATED IN THE DETERMINATION, UM, THE TECHNICAL THERE'S, THERE'S THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS AT MASSING AND SUCH.
AND THEN THERE'S THE TECHNICAL CODE, RIGHT? I MEAN, THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
JUST WHETHER ONE, WHETHER YOU GET THE EXEMPTION OR NOT.
I MEAN, IF YOU, IF THEY DON'T GET THE EXEMPTION IN THIS MANNER FOR THIS, THAT'S THEIR FLORIDA AREA RATIO, LIKE AT 0.6 OR SOMETHING, AND THAT'S A LOT OF MASS OVER 600 SQUARE FEET.
IT WAS, IT WAS, UH, YEAH, IT, IT WAS MORE THAN A LITTLE THAT'S FAIR.
UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKING FOR, OR AGAINST OR NEUTRAL? ALL RIGHT.
THIS IS AN EMOTION TO DENY THE APPEAL AND UPHOLD DENIAL.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL.
SO WE'RE DENYING THE APPEAL, CORRECT.
AND I'M IN FAVOR OF UPHOLDING STEPH'S DETERMINATION.
[01:30:02]
SUGGEST, UH, GETTING WITH THE BOARD LIAISON TOMORROW AND INVESTIGATING POSSIBLY A VARIANCE REQUEST.AND THANKS EVERYONE FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
DID YOU STOP FOR YOUR TIME? THANK YOU FOR INSPIRING.
UH, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL RECESS FOR 20 MINUTES.
GET BACK INTO VARIAN SPECIAL EXCEPTION MODE.
I'M GOING TO CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.
WE ARE MISSING A FEW BOARD MEMBERS, BUT WE'RE GOING TO START WITH SCIENCE, WHICH DON'T REQUIRE A SUPER MAJORITY.
I SAID THAT CORRECTLY, RIGHT? YEAH.
SEEING I'M STILL IN INTERPRETATION.
[C-1 C16-2022-0003 Shana Gardner for Joshua Needham 1401 E. 6th Street]
ONE C 16 20 22 0 0 0 3.SHANA GARDNER FOR JOSHUA NEEDHAM AT 1 4 0 1 EAST SIXTH STREET.
I'M THE PROJECT MANAGER AND CONSULTANT.
UH, I AM SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF SHEENA GARDNER.
DO YOU GUYS HAVE A PRESENTATION? WE DO.
UH, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME PRESENTING TO THE BOA.
UH, AND SO THE NEW IS DOING IT VIRTUALLY OR OVER THE PHONE OR A LITTLE BIT HERE.
I'VE GOT YOU COVERED MR. THOMAS HOBBES, JUST SAY NEXT SLIDE AND I'LL DO IT.
UH, WHAT YOU NEED, UH, ALSO, UH, MR. HOBBS, JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE IF YOU'RE WATCHING THROUGH THE WEBSITE OR ON ETX, THEN THERE IS A 15 TO 32ND DELAY BETWEEN WHAT YOU SEE ON YOUR SCREEN AND WHAT IS ACTUALLY BEING DISPLAYED TO US HERE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
SO WHEN YOU'RE READY, SAY NEXT SLIDE, UH, THAT UV TECH WILL CHANGE IT.
UH, WHILE THIS AGAIN, UH, THIS EVENING, UM, I'M HERE, UH, BEFORE THE BOARD THIS EVENING, UH, DISTRICT BEING ASSIGNED VARIANCE.
WE HAVE THREE SIGNS, UH, AT 14 POINT EAST SIX, UM, SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT 25, 10, 1 33, THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT CODE PART H UH, REQUIRING A SIGNED, NOT ILLUMINATED OR CONTAIN ELECTRONIC IMAGES OR MOVING PARTS.
UM, WE ARE SEEKING ELIMINATION FOR ALL THREE SIGN TYPES, UH, AT 1401 EAST SIXTH, ALSO KNOWN AS CENTRO.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT NO ONE OF THEM, UH, IS GOING TO BE A WALL SIGN.
AND THEN THERE ARE TWO PROJECTING SIGNS.
UM, ONE WILL BE FOR THE BUILDING ITSELF AND TWO FOR A TENANT.
UM, IF I CAN MOVE TO THE PRESENTATION, UM, LET ME SEE.
THAT WOULD BE DOCUMENT PATIENT DEPART.
CTM LOGIN, SORRY, GUEST LOGIN HERE.
I'M CLICKING BACK AND FORTH TO SO, UM, I'M GOOD.
UM, IT'S JUST, WE'RE JUST SHOWING A SITE PLAN OR THE PROPOSED SIGN LOCATIONS NEXT PAGE.
SO WE HAVE THE ATLASSIAN TENANT BLADE AND THE ATLASTIN WALL SIGN.
AND THEN FOR THE PARKING PLEA, UM, THAT WOULD BE FOR THE BUILDING ITSELF.
AND THEN IF YOU CAN GO THE NEXT SLOT, WE'VE KIND OF PREPARED FOR A PRESENT SHOWING SOME COMPETING SIGNAGE AND AREA, UM, ALL PRETTY STANDARD, OTHER SIGNAGE, SOME OTHER PARKING TYPE SIGNS, BUT SIMILAR TO THE ONE WE'RE SEEKING A VARIANCE ON.
AND SO HOPEFULLY THIS KIND OF HELPS ILLUSTRATE TO THE BOARD KIND OF SOME OF THE COMPETING SIGNAGE, UH, FOR OUR HERE AT, UH, 1401
[01:35:04]
AND THE NEXT SLIDE.IT'S BASICALLY OUR DESIGN INTENT, UH, AND ALL OF OUR APPROVED CONCEPTS THAT ARE ON THROUGH THE LANDLORD, UH, THE ARCHITECT AND LAST CNN'S, UH, BRAND MARKETING.
SO IF, LET ME SEE IF WE CAN START WITH
UH IT'S BACK ONE PAGE TWO PAGE.
SO THIS, THIS IS, UH, SO TH THE BUILDING, THE PARKING BLADE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SEEK ILLUMINATION ON, UM, YOU'LL SEE THAT IT'S JUST A TYPICAL PROJECTING BLADE SIGN.
I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT, UH, FOR THE SIGNS THAT WE'RE SEEKING A VARIANCE ON, THEY DO ALL OTHER TIME CRITERIA AND ALL OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS.
WE'RE JUST SEEKING A VARIANCE ON ILLUMINATION.
UM, THIS ONE DIRECT PEOPLE TO THE PARK NEARBY, UM, AND WE FEEL THAT THIS ONE'S PRETTY CRITICAL TO THE BUILDING, UH, ESPECIALLY FOR THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
AND, UM, IT WILL ALSO HAVE YOUR AT THE TOP THAT WILL THE, WHENEVER THE PARKING LOT IS FULL, WHICH WE FULL WILL BE HELPFUL.
IT WILL REQUIRE AN UNLIMITED FEATURE.
AND THEN IF YOU SCROLL DOWN TO THE NEXT PAGE,
WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE PARKING LOT SELF OR THE BOARD'S REVIEW.
AND THEN THE NEXT PAGE, THERE'S A CALL OUT FOR THE LOCATION, FOR THE SIGN ON THE RENDERING TO MIGHT GIVE YOU A CLEAR PICTURE IN THE SITE PLAN.
IF WE GET TO SEE ONE SEVEN, UM, WE CAN SEE THE PROPOSED SIGN, THE PATIENT FOR THE TENANT SIGN AND ALL SIGN.
AND, AND IF YOU GO TO ONE, WE HAVE A, MOCK-UP SHOWING IT LEPTIN'S WALL SIGN IN ONE OF THE PROPOSED LOCATIONS.
UM, AND SO I UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS WILL BE THE FINAL LOCATION OF THE SIGN AS DRAWN FOR ATLASSIAN 12TH SIGN, UM, C ONE NINE, IF YOU SCROLL DOWN, IT'S JUST A MORE DETAILED VIEW OF THE CONSTRUCTION.
IT'S TYPICAL, UH, REVERSAL CHANNEL LETTERS, HALO LIT NOTHING CRITICALLY, NO EXPOSED NEON ON THE WALL SIGN.
SO WE FEEL LIKE THE LIGHTING IS GOING TO BE PRETTY SUBTLE.
MR. HOBBS, YOUR TIME IS UP FOR SPEAKING.
COULD YOU JUST SHORTLY WRAP IT UP FOR ME? SORRY ABOUT, UH, UH, MORE, UH, PRESENTATION, JUST LATE SIGN.
UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAN THE BLADE SIGN AS A REVISED CONCEPT ON PAGE D ONE THREE, THERE'S NO LONGER A NEON BORDER AROUND THE RETURN OF THE CABINET.
THAT'S JUST PUSHED OR ACRYLIC.
SO AGAIN, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO KEEP THE LIGHTING AS SUBTLE AS POSSIBLE AND STILL OFFER OUR CLIENTS SOME SORT OF ILLUMINATION.
ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION SEEING NONE? I THINK, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND LET'S START WITH QUESTIONS.
I'D LIKE TO JUST BRIEFLY SAY FIRST, IN MY OPINION, THIS FALLS UNDER THE SAME THING WE'VE BEEN SEEING OVER AND OVER UNDER THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLY, WHERE IT'S JUST ILLUMINATION.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT BECAUSE IT WAS A MISTAKE THAT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED BY CITY STAFF OR SORRY, CITY COUNCIL.
AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE DONE SOON, BUT I I'M, I'VE BEEN SUPPORTIVE THIS, UH, SORRY, BOARD MEMBER PUT, IF YOU'RE SPREADING AND I QUESTIONED THE APPLICANT JUST TO MAKE REAL CLEAR, WE KNOW WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THE, UM, ON THE PRESENTATION AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS, UM, WHAT IS IT? SEE ON SEVEN, THE PROPOSED WALL SIGN LOCATIONS YOU'D HAVE THREE OF THEM THERE, BUT YOU'RE ONLY PROPOSING TO PUT THE SIGN AT THE LOCATION SHOWN ON C ONE SLASH EIGHT, WHICH IS THE ONE CLOSEST TO THE CORNER.
AND THOSE OTHER TWO ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS.
YOU'RE NOT ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO PUT
[01:40:01]
ANYTHING IN THOSE LOCATIONS.IT IS JUST ONE SIGN AT THE LOCATION SHOWN ON C1 EIGHTH, UM, AT THE LISA'S FILL THE BUILDING.
UH, I THINK THAT WE'LL SEE ARE POSSIBLE OTHER VARIANCE REQUESTS FOR ENDING OF THE BILL THAT WE SELL, UH, AND THE SPACE OF EACH TENANT WOULD REQUIRE.
BUT AS FOR NOW, IT'S JUST THIS ONE AND THAT WOULD, AND I THINK THAT IT LASTING IS NOT FULL BOTTOM LEVEL.
AND THEN AS TO THE BLADE SIGN THE CHANGE IN THE BLADE SIGN, UH, WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS APPROVAL TO DO WHAT'S SHOWN ON C1 ONE SLASH 13, WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE NEON CIRCLING THAT SQUARE.
YOU BASICALLY JUST HAVE INTERNAL ILLUMINATION WITH LEDS.
UH, IN OUR ORIGINAL APPLICATION, IT SHOWED AN, A WHITE NEON BORDER AROUND THAT BLADE SIGN, AND NOW BEEN REPLACED WITH PUSH TO ACRYLIC INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED WITH LUVS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN TIE ANYTHING THAT WE, WE DECIDE TONIGHT TO PARTICULAR DRAWINGS THAT ARE IN THE RECORD.
SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, BUT I SAW THERE'S STILL SOME QUESTIONS OUT THERE A SECOND.
CAN YOU HANG ON ONE SEC, UH, BOARD MEMBER BLOOM, SORRY, LOTS OF THINGS DONE.
SO I'M, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE VARIANTS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO NOTE, LIKE, IF THERE'S A PARKING SIGN THAT GO BLADES AND IT'S PROPOSED TO HAVE LETTERS ON IT THAT ARE CHARACTERS ON IT THAT ARE ANIMATED IN SOME WAY OR DYNAMIC, LIKE TO SWITCH FROM NO PARKING TO PARKING AVAILABLE.
DOES THAT, IS THAT CONSIDERED A MOVING PART OR, I MEAN, DOES THAT FALL UNDER A, SHOULD THAT BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY THAN A STATIC ILLUMINATED SIGN? I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING ABOUT IT IN THE CODE, BUT MAYBE I MISSED IT.
SO MY UNDERSTANDING IT'S A ANIMATED SIGN.
IT IT'S, IT IT'D BE LIKE ANY OTHER TYPE OF ANIMATED OF SIGN OR THAT ROTATES OR, UM, AND, UH, THIS WILL BE THE, UH, LIGHTING CONTROL BOARD.
AND SO IT WILL BE AUTOMATED BASICALLY.
SO IT IT'LL BASICALLY TURN RED FOR NO PARKING AND ONLY HAPPEN WHENEVER THE PARKING LOT IS ACTUALLY FULL.
I GUESS IT KIND OF DOES IT, YOU KNOW, IT DOES, IT WILL CHANGE IN CHARACTER, BUT ONLY TILBURG PEOPLE WHEN THE PARKING LOT IS FULL OF FLAPPING ON AND OFF THING WITH THE REMOTE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, OR CONSTANTLY MOVING.
I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO POINT IT OUT.
CAUSE LIKE, IF, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY WERE TO COME BACK IN THE FUTURE WITH A MASSIVELY DYNAMIC AND VERY ANIMATED SIGN, THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT STORY.
I WOULD THINK AT LEAST FROM MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE CODE, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO STAY STATIC FOR LONG PERIODS OF TIME, THAT THAT MIGHT BE A MORE ON VERSUS OFF DESIGNATION AS OPPOSED TO AN ACTUAL MOVING SIGN.
UH, VICE-CHAIR HEALTH WORN AND THEN THE SIGNS ARE A MORE LIKE A HUMAN SCALE AND, AND MEANT TO CATCH THE ATTENTION OF THE PEOPLE ON THE STREET.
AND SO I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THEIR REQUEST WITH THE, UH, MODEST LIGHTING THAT WOULD BE GO MANGA BOARD MEMBER PUT, I DID HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION WITH REGARD TO THE PARKING BLADE, WHICH I THINK YOU HAVE ON PAGE FOUR OF THE PRESENTATION.
UH, IT LOOKS LIKE THE PUBLIC PARKING, THE TECHS PUBLIC PARKING IS GOING TO BE THE ACRYLIC PUSH THROUGH, BUT THEN AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE P PARKING IS JUST GOING TO BE ILLUMINATED NEON LIGHTS THAT ARE GOING TO STAND OUT FROM THE, FROM THE SIGN A LITTLE BIT.
UM, KIND OF, UH, IT LOOKS A LITTLE LIKE THE DAD TRADED ON THE SIDE VIEW, UH, OR TUBE SUPPORTS ARE ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF AN INCH LONG.
AND SO NEON WOULD STAND OFF ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF AN INCH FROM THE RETURN OF THE, OR THE PECK.
UM, I WAS JUST WONDERING IN GENERAL WHY THE DECISION WASN'T MADE TO GO AHEAD AND PUT THAT AT BIG, LARGE P ALSO AS LIKE AN ACRYLIC PUSH THROUGH RATHER THAN HAVE THE NEON TUBES STICKING OUT ON THE FACE OF THE SIGN.
UH, OUR CLIENT, UM, WE'VE WORKED WITH THEM ON OTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREA AND THEY CONSIDER THIS TO BE ON BRAND FOR THEM.
AND SO WE DID TRY TO INCORPORATE
[01:45:01]
A LITTLE BIT OF THEIR BRANDING ELEMENT INTO THE SIGNAGE ITSELF, UH, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A PARKING SIGN.UH, AND SO THEY WERE HOPING TO GO WITH THE, WITH THE, WITH THE NEON P UH, THE DOUBLE STROKE NEON P UM, I THINK THAT SPECIFICALLY, UH, WE DID SOME WORK DOWN AT 18 EAST AND HAD SOME OUR SIGN, UM, BUT TH THIS, UH, DEVELOPED, AND THIS BUILDING WAS DEVELOPED RIGHT AFTER THE ADDITION OF THAT ART OF THIS THING, CARPET, UH, GET PRE, OKAY.
SO WE DO HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ON THE TABLE MADE BY BOARD MEMBER UPON OLIN SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR HOFFLER.
AND I'M GOING TO GO IN, UH, THANK YOU.
THE BOARD WAS DETERMINED, MUST DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OR OF SUFFICIENCY OF IN WAY OF EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE FINDINGS DESCRIBED BELOW IN ORDER TO GRANT THE REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE.
THE BOARD MUST FIRST MAKE ONE OR MORE OF THE FINDING DESCRIBED UNDER ONE, TWO AND THREE IN THE APPLICATION.
AND THE BOARD MUST THEN MAKE FINDING DESCRIBED IN ITEM FOUR.
AND I'M GOING TO SELECT ITEM TWO AND ITEM THREE, THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE A SUBSTANTIALLY ADVERSE IMPACT UPON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY IS NOT UNIQUE IN THE TYPE OF SIGNAGE REQUESTS.
THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE IS COMPARE COMPARABLE TO THE EXISTING SIGNAGE ON OTHER MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
AND THEREFORE IT WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
AND NUMBER THREE, THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH THE STATED PURPOSE OF THIS SIGNED ORDINANCE, BECAUSE IN ADDITION, THE TYPE OF LIGHTING USED FOR THE BUILDING SIGNAGE IS UNDERSTATED IN NATURE AND MATCHES THE EXISTING AESTHETIC OF THE DESIGN DISTRICT.
AND FINALLY, NUMBER FOUR, GRANTING A VARIANCE WOULD NOT PROVIDE THE APPLICANT WITH A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE, NOT ENJOYED BY OTHERS, SIMILARLY SITUATED OR POTENTIALLY SIMILARLY SITUATED BECAUSE GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD SIMPLY ALLOW THIS PROPERTY, THE SAME LEVEL OF PRIVILEGE AND ENJOYED BY THE SURROUNDING AREAS AND SIMILAR, MIXED USE PROPERTIES.
IT WAS STILL THAT OF, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL.
I'M GOING TO CHANGE IT UP A LITTLE BIT THIS TIME TO ALLOW OUR NEWEST BOARD MEMBER TO START.
SO AGAIN, THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY BOARD MEMBER NOLA AND SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE, MARCEL GARZA.
AND CAN YOU REMEMBER SOME OF THE BOARD? I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.
AND, UH, OUR CLIENT WILL DO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
MOVING ON ITEM D ONE WAS POSTPONE THE ONE TIME I DON'T PRINT IT, RIGHT? LIKE THIS IS WHERE I'M RUNNING IN TROUBLE.
KEY, SOME MOVING ON TO EITHER GIVE US PAPER.
AND THEN WHEN YOU CAN MAKE ALL YOUR NOTES, I USUALLY PRINT LIKE, WORKED FROM HOME TODAY AND I DON'T OWN A PRINTER BECAUSE I'M ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIOUS ITEM F TO SEE 15 20, 22, 0 0 4, 0 9
[F-2 C15-2022-0040 Ned McDaniel 305 E St. Elmo Road]
MCDANIEL FOR 3 0 5.YOU SEE NUMBER ROAD, STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, AND YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
AND I'D LIKE TO GIVE DANIELLE A CHANCE TO SPEAK IF SHE GETS A CHANCE, UM, YOU CAN SPLIT YOUR TIME, EVEN IF YOU'D LIKE, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO LET YOU KNOW ABOUT HALFWAY? OKAY, I'M GOING TO TALK REALLY FAST THEN.
LET'S START WITH THE FIRST ONE.
UH, OR THAT'S JUST A TITLE PAGE, I GUESS.
SO THIS IS THE AREA IN QUESTION.
[01:50:01]
THAT'S THE LONG PART RIGHT THERE IN THE BACK IS AN URBAN, URBAN, AGRICULTURAL GROWING FACILITY.IT'S IN TENDED TO GROW, UH, UM, CULINARY MUSHROOMS. SO, UM, LET'S GO TO THE NEXT PAGE.
AND SO IT'S AT THE BACK OF MY PROPERTY, THE BACK OF MY PROPERTY, I HAD AN OPEN YARD THERE.
I'VE HAD THIS PROPERTY FOR 20 YEARS, RIGHT.
SO I HAD THIS OPEN SPACE THOUGHT.
IT'D BE, I'VE BEEN LOOKING FOR A SPACE LARGE ENOUGH FOR, TO BUILD AN ECONOMICALLY VIABLE THING.
AND I WAS LIKE, OKAY, HERE IT IS.
UH, SO I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT'S IN HERE.
THAT'S OH, THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE INSIDE.
SO WHAT YOU HAVE IS YOU HAVE AN AREA FOR COLONIZATION.
SO AT FIRST SHE STUFFED THE BAGS.
YOU HAVE A COLONIZATION AREA, IT TAKES ABOUT 20 DAYS TO COLONIZE.
THEN ALL THOSE LITTLE ROOMS ARE THE GROWING ROOMS AND THEY'RE IN THERE FOR ANOTHER 20 SOMETHING DAYS.
AND THEN, THEN YOU CAN, UH, THEY FRUIT AND THEN YOU TAKE THOSE AND THEN YOU GO TO ANOTHER ROOM THERE TO PACKAGE THEM.
BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF SPACE IN ORDER FOR THAT TO PROCESS, TO ROLL THROUGH RIGHT.
SO BEHIND MY PROPERTY IS THIS, THE CITY BUILT THIS RETAINING WALL HERE FOR THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
UH, IT ENCROACHES INTO MY PROPERTY, BUT YOU CAN SEE SORT OF THE BUILDING BEHIND THE TREES THERE.
THIS IS A MOBILE HOME PARK THAT, UH, BUTTS TO THE BACK OF IT.
I WENT BACK THERE AND TALKED TO SCOTTY, TALKED TO CINDY, THE MANAGER DISCUSSED ALL THIS WITH THEM.
UM, AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE BUILDING BEHIND THOSE TREES THAT ARE GROWING ON THE FENCE LINE.
AND THEN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
THEY HAVE A RETAINING WALL RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
HE GOES BY SCOTTY, CAUSE HE'S SCOTTISH.
HE'S GOT HIS SCOTTISH ACCENT, BUT, UH, I ASKED HIM, WELL, WOULD YOU WRITE THAT YOU DON'T FIND THE CONSTRUCTION OBJECTIONABLE? CAUSE HE'S THE CLOSEST ONE TO MY PROPERTY RIGHT ACROSS.
AND HE GOES, NO, IN FACT, GROW ME SOME PORCINI MUSHROOMS AND WE'LL ALL BE GOOD.
SO, UH, AND I'VE TALKED TO CINDY, THE MANAGER.
SHE'S LIKE, I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT ON, I DON'T EVEN WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO THIS IS THE CITY HAS APPROVED EVERYTHING ELSE EXCEPT FOR THIS, RIGHT? EXCEPT FOR THIS SETBACK ISSUE.
I'VE HAD THIS LA ZONING FOR 20 YEARS.
JUST LIKE MY NEIGHBORS HAVE BUILT THE FURTHER DOWN THEY'VE BUILT LITERALLY THE BACK WALL ON THEIR PROPERTY LINE.
THIS OTHER ONE OVER HERE, BUILT FIVE FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE.
I'M ASKING FOR SEVEN FEET INTO THIS.
I DON'T, I DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHY I'M HERE, HONESTLY, BECAUSE IT'S LIKE, THERE'S SOME SORT OF TWENTY-FIVE FOOT SETBACK THAT THEY'RE SAYING, BUT THIS FROM THE CITY SAYS I HAVE NO SETBACK.
BUT, UM, MY BUILDING IS THEORETICALLY WITHIN SET SEVEN FEET WITHIN THIS 25 FOOT SETBACK, WHICH I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT COMES FROM.
I HAVE A THEORY FROM TALKING TO SCOTTY.
HE SAID A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, THEY CHANGED THE ZONING ON THE MOBILE HOME PARK.
SO THAT DEVELOPERS COULDN'T COME IN AND BUILD.
HE SAID, YOU SEE THIS? SO YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A ROAD IN BETWEEN ME AND THEM FOR THE DRIVES WE HAVE ABOUT A MINUTE LEFT.
SO HE SAID THAT THEY CREATED HIGHER RESTRICTIONS ON THE MOBILE HOME PARKS SO THAT THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DEVELOP IT.
HE SAID, WE ARE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, QUIT TELLING US YOU'RE GOING TO DO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT AWAY FROM US.
SO HE SAID, EVERY TIME THEY GO A STORY, THEY'VE GOT TO COME FURTHER IN.
SO NEXT THING YOU KNOW, YOU'VE JUST GOT A SLIVER FOR A BUILDING.
SO THEN NO, ONE'S GOING TO DEVELOP HER ON THAT.
I'M ASKING FOR SEVEN FEET BECAUSE I ONLY HAD THAT MUCH DIRT BECAUSE OF THE WALL.
AND I NEEDED THAT MUCH SPACE TO MAKE IT ECONOMICALLY VIABLE, BUT THAT'S WHY I'M HERE.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? OKAY.
LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND MOVE TO QUESTIONS.
IF I GO FIRST, UH, IT WAS THE OPPOSITION.
[01:55:05]
THEY'RE NOT AN OPPOSITION OPPOSITION.SO WHERE DOES FAVOR? BECAUSE OPPOSITION.
YEAH, BUT THAT HAS TO BE YOU'RE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM AND YOU'RE IN SUPPORT NEUTRALIZE LIMIT THE TIME.
CAUSE I'M ASKING THEM QUESTIONS TO COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE IS BECAUSE OF MICROPHONE.
BECAUSE WE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THEY SHOULD BE, THEY SHOULD WORK.
CAN YOU TELL ME YOUR NAME? MY NAME IS MARIO CANTU.
I'M CHAIR OF THE SOUTH CONGRESS CONTACT TEAM.
UH, THE REASON WHY WE ARE NEUTRAL IS THAT WE DID RECEIVE INFORMATION FROM, UH, FROM THE INDIVIDUAL THAT WANTS THE VARIANCE CHANGE.
HE DID CONTACT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NEIGHBORS THERE IN THE BACK.
UH, THE REASON WHY WE, WE DON'T HAVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT IS BECAUSE THE CONTACT TEAM MEMBERS HAVE BEEN REALLY BUSY WORKING.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO, UH, VOTE ON IT AND HAVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT.
UH, SO I WANTED TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION THAT, UH, THAT'S WHY WE'RE NEUTRAL, BUT WE'RE NOT AGAINST IT.
AND WE DID TALK TO HIM ABOUT IT.
REALLY APPRECIATE YOU COMING DOWN.
AND BY THE WAY, MR. MCDANIEL, GOOD JOB REACHING OUT TO THEM.
QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS, BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAN, ACTUALLY, UH, TWO THINGS FIRST I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND THEN WE CAN TAKE OPEN UP TO DISCUSSION.
I UNDERSTAND WHERE HE'S COMING FROM, UH, BECAUSE MY PROPERTY USED TO BE ZONED ALLY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, WHICH IS, THAT WAS THE GOLDEN CHILD OF ZONING THAT YOU COULD GET AN AUSTIN.
YOU COULD PRETTY MUCH DO ANYTHING ON YOUR PROPERTY.
AND WHAT ENDED UP HAPPENING WAS THERE WAS AN OVERLAY DONE IN EAST AUSTIN, WHICH I WAS OUT OF THE COUNTRY WHEN IT CAME BY.
AND I DIDN'T, I FOUND IT A MONTH LATER IN MY INBOX AND IT HAD ALREADY GONE THROUGH AND BEEN VOTED BY COUNCIL.
AND WHAT IT STATED WAS AS LONG AS I OWN MY PROPERTY, I COULD DO ANYTHING ON MY PROPERTY UNDER THE LA ZONING.
BUT AS SOON AS I SOLD MY PROPERTY, DID ANYTHING YOU DID IMMEDIATELY REVERT TO WHATEVER THE OVERLAY IS.
SO I UNDERSTAND YOUR PREDICAMENT WITH THE LA ZONING ISSUE ALSO KNOWING, UM, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THAT, UH, THAT PLACE AND FAMILIAR WITH THE MOBILE HOME.
I USED TO HAVE SOME EMPLOYEES THAT WORKED THERE THAT I USED TO HAVE TO GO PICK UP SOMETIMES IN THE MORNING, UH, IN THE MORNINGS AND THAT AREA IN THE BACK.
UH, IF YOU'D TAKE A LOOK AT THAT DRAINAGE, SOME OF IT'S SLANTED, YOURS IS UP UPRIGHT RETAINING WALL AND SAW THE OTHER NEIGHBOR.
UM, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS AT ALL BECAUSE YOU ALL, YOU ARE ALSO LOSING SOME OF THE BENEFIT OF YOUR, UH, BEING ABLE TO UTILIZE YOUR PROPERTY UNDER THE LA ZONING BECAUSE OF THE, UM, UH, BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THE, UH, YOU HAVE THIS F1 NOW, THE MOBILE HOME NEXT DOOR.
BUT, UM, THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD PROBABLY REQUEST IS JUST, YOU KNOW, AND I, AND I, I WAS ACTUALLY FORAGING FOR MUSHROOMS JUST LAST WEEKEND IN THIS FUNNY, NOT HERE, NOT, NO, NOT THOSE KINDS OF MUSHROOMS. NO, I WAS UP IN OHIO AND WE WERE ACTUALLY TRYING TO FORGE THEM SO I CAN SEE WHY GROWING.
AND HE'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE A HECK OF A LOT EASIER THAN TRYING TO LOOK FOR THOSE OUT IN THE BUSH.
BUT, UM, I THINK THAT, UH, WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS VERY, VERY SMALL SEVEN FOOT.
AND, AND I THINK IT'S A, IT'S, IT'S A GOOD ASK.
AND I APPRECIATE YOU COMING AND ASKING US FOR A VARIANCE.
SO RATHER THAN INTERPRETATION, I GUESS, ON ALLIES.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I HAVE A, UM, A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
I'M LOOKING AT THE, UH, AT THE SURVEY, WHICH WAS ON PAGE SEVEN OF THE, UH, FROM THE PACKET MATERIALS.
AND I WAS WONDERING HOW LONG IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A CHAIN LINK FENCE THAT SORT OF ENCOMPASSES THAT ALL BACK PART OF THE, OF THE LOT.
SO I WAS JUST WONDERING HOW LONG THAT'S BEEN THERE OR ARE YOU INTENDING TO TAKE THAT OUT WHEN YOU PUT THE BUILDING BACK THERE? NO, THE CHAIN LINK FENCE HAS BEEN THERE AS LONG AS I'VE OWNED IT.
I DON'T INTEND TO TAKE IT OUT NOW.
AND THOSE PEOPLE WOULD LIKE FOR ME TO RIP ALL THOSE WEED TREES THAT ARE ON THE FENCE, BUT, UH, THAT'S WORK AND I'M NOT REALLY WANTING TO DO IT, BUT THE FENCE IS ALL THE ONLY, THE ONLY REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE YOU PRETTY WELL KNEW THEN THAT YOU WEREN'T GOING TO BE USING THAT BACK AREA UNLESS IT WAS FENCED IN FOR SOME OTHER PURPOSE.
[02:00:01]
PREVIOUSLY WHEN I RENTED IT OUT, I RENTED IT OUT TO A PLUMBING COMPANY THAT HAD THEIR EQUIPMENT BACK THERE AND STORAGE STUFF TYPES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.IT'S ALWAYS BEEN LIKE A YARD STORAGE YARD.
I BET YOU, THAT WOULD BE A NICE COMMUNITY PROJECT THOUGH.
OH, WHY YOU'RE PROPOSING TO REMOVE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND REPLACE IT WITH A NEW STRUCTURE.
ARE YOU MAKING USE OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, UH, MAKING USE OF THE STRUCTURE? THAT'S THERE? I'M NOT TEARING ANYTHING UP OR DOWN OR YOU'RE ADDING A STRUCTURE.
ADDING A STRUCTURE BEHIND THE STRUCTURE.
THAT'S THERE? NO, IT'S JUST THE, THE STRUCTURE THAT'S THERE IS GOING TO BE THE, AS THE FACILITY I'VE BUILT IT, IT'S THERE.
SO YOU'RE ASKING WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS THE EXEMPTION FOR THE SITE PLAN.
THEY'VE APPROVED EVERYTHING FOR THAT, EXCEPT FOR THE SETBACK ISSUE.
I SEE, SORRY, ONE SECOND OR A MEMBER OF MY CARDS, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION.
SO, UH, DID YOU BUILD IT AND THEN REALIZED THAT YOU NEEDED TO GET THE VARIANCE AFTERWARDS WHEN THEY STARTED LOOKING AT IT? WELL, THIS, THAT WHOLE BUILDING STORY IS A LONG STORY INTO ME GETTING INVOLVED WITH THE CONSULTANT, ALL OF THAT AND ORDERING STUFF FROM CHINA TO BUILD IT AND ALL OF THAT.
BUT I BUILT THIS BASED ON WHAT I KNEW TO BE AN AGRICULTURE.
IT'S LIKE A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE IT'S BUILT AS A TEMPORARY STRUCTURES AND AGRICULTURAL STRUCTURE, ALL OF THAT.
SO I'VE BUILT EVERYTHING TO MY KNOWLEDGE, AS I COULD DO IT, THIS IS WHAT I'M ALLOWED TO DO ON MY PROPERTY.
SO WHEN IT CAME TIME TO THEN GET PERMITTING FOR ALL OF THIS, I STILL, SO AFTER THIS, I CAN GET PERMITTING FOR ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
STRUCTURAL, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH IT BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF STRUCTURE IT IS.
SO AT THE I'M AT THE POINT TO WHERE NOW I NEED TO GET PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL AND STUFF TO FINISH IT OUT.
SO THIS CAME UP AS AN ISSUE, WHICH WAS A SURPRISE TO ME BECAUSE I'M SAYING, THIS IS YOUR DOCUMENT TELLING ME I HAVE NO SETBACK.
WHY DO I HAVE A SETBACK? NOW? THEY COULDN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR ME.
THEY JUST SAID GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
RIGHT? UH, BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.
SO YOU CERTAINLY BUILT THIS STRUCTURE AND YOU GOT A BUILDING PERMIT AND YOU NEVER MET WITH ANYONE THAT TOLD YOU OR DID YOU BUILD IT AND THEN GET THE BUILDING PERMIT AFTER IT WAS BUILT? YEAH, THAT, THAT'S WHAT I'M WORKING ON RIGHT NOW.
RIGHT? UH, I BUILT IT BY MYSELF, THIS BUILDING LITERALLY BY MYSELF.
UM, IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THE I'VE BEEN LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO BUILD A MUSHROOM FACILITY FOR TWO YEARS, WHEN THE PLUMBERS MOVED OUT, I LOOKED BACK THERE AND I SAID, HEY, I'VE GOT 5,000 SQUARE FEET HERE.
I HAVE SO MANY RESTRICTIONS ON MY BUILDING.
I KNOW THAT THEY'RE GOING TO WHERE I'M AT.
THEY'RE GOING TO COME TEAR IT DOWN.
WHEN THINGS CHANGE IN MY AREA IN TERMS OF RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE, THE CITY HAS PUT ON ME AND SOME BIG DEVELOPER COMES IN AND BUYS UP ALL THESE LOTS AND PUTS A BIG BUILDING UP THERE THAT DAY WILL COME.
SO WHAT CAN YOU DO? YOU PUT IN A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE.
AND OUR IDEA IS TO USE THE BREWERIES THAT AROUND US TO RECYCLE THEIR GRAINS.
UM, AND WE'VE ORGANIZED WITH SOME OF THEM TO BE ABLE TO USE THAT.
SO WHAT YOU DO WITH GROWING MUSHROOMS IS YOU CAN USE ANY DEAD CELLULOSIC MATERIAL.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO RECYCLE THAT MATERIAL AFTER IT GOES THROUGH OUR PROCESS, IT'S ACTUALLY BETTER FOR CATTLE FEED AND FERTILIZER AND FOR, UM, MAKING COMPOST COMPOST BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH HORMONES THAT ARE LEFT BEHIND IN THE, IN THE WASTE MATERIAL.
BUT THE IDEA WAS IS TO BE VERY SUSTAINABLE ORGANIC USING THE MATERIALS OF THE BREWERIES THAT ARE AROUND US, RIGHT? SO WHEN I GOT INVOLVED WITH THIS GUY, HE CHARGED ME $15,000 FOR CONSULTING BAYS, GIVING ME DRAWINGS.
HE GAVE ME REALLY TERRIBLE DRAWINGS.
[02:05:01]
DRAWINGS.YOU'VE GOT TO BUY THE STUFF NOW BECAUSE YOU GOT TO GET IT ON THE BOATS BECAUSE CHINA'S ALREADY PACKED IT UP, SEND ME THE MONEY.
I SAID, OKAY, I'LL DEAL WITH THAT.
SO HE SENDS ME THE, I GET THE STUFF COMES IN FROM CHINA.
AND THE MEANTIME I'M SAYING, HEY, GIVE ME WORKING DRAWINGS.
I NEED WORKING DRAWINGS WITH PLANS.
I ENDED UP DRAWING ALL OF THE WORKING DRAWINGS AND THE ELECTRICAL AND THE PLUMBING BECAUSE I HAVE THIS LIFE LIKE HIM.
AND, UH, AND I'VE SUBMITTED IT TO THE CITY BECAUSE HE SAID, I CAN'T WORK WITH YOU.
AND, UH, YOU GO AWAY CAUSE I CAN'T DEAL WITH YOU.
AND I'M LIKE, DUDE, ALL I'M ASKING FOR IS WHAT YOU CONTRACTED TO SAY, YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE ME, SO I HAD NO WORKING DRAWINGS TO GIVE TO THE CITY.
IN THE SAME TIME, I HAVE FOUR CONTAINERS FROM CHINA'S DROPPING THEIR STUFF ON MY PROPERTY THAT I HAVE TO DO SOMETHING WITH.
AND THE WAY THAT I HAD TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT WAS TO BUILD IT AS IT WAS COMING IN.
I BUILT IT BY MYSELF AND UH, AND WITHIN MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT I CAN DO ON MY PROPERTY.
SO TO ME, IT'S LIKE, WHAT DO I GET THE PERMIT NOW? OR LATER IT'S GONNA, I ASSUME THAT WOULD BE GETTING THE PERMIT BECAUSE I'VE DONE IT WITHIN THE LIMITATIONS THAT ARE ON MY PROPERTY AND FOR THE BUILDING FOR THAT TYPE OF STRUCTURE.
SO, BUT HERE I AM, UH, IF ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS OR MAYBE LEGAL, UH, COULD OFFER SOME CLARIFICATION ON THE PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS FOR A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE AND IF THERE ARE ANY WELL, DO YOU SEE THAT GREEN? THE THING WITH, SORRY, NOT SORRY, NOT FOR YOU.
ERICA LOPEZ, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH ANY DISTINCTION IN THE CODE REGARDING TEMPORARY STRUCTURES.
IT'S EITHER YOU GET A SITE PLAN OR YOU'RE EXEMPT FROM A SITE PLAN REVIEW, BUT I, I COULD LOOK INTO IT FURTHER.
I'M JUST NOT FAMILIAR TO APPLY FOR A SITE PLAN EXEMPTION, RIGHT? YEAH.
YOU WOULD APPLY EITHER FOR THE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT, EITHER RISES TO A SITE PLAN OR RISES TO A, IT CAN BE REVIEWED UNDER AN EXEMPTION AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M DOING.
SO WE'RE SAYING F TWO 14 IS HIS APPLICATION FOR SITE PLANNING EXEMPTION.
AND SO, UH, BUT WAS THAT DONE BEFORE OR AFTER THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT? IT DOESN'T MATTER.
IT PROBABLY DONE AFTER THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT SINCE HE DID IT IN.
SO BASICALLY 25 TO 6 0 1 IS BASICALLY SIMILAR TO THE FIRST TIER COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENT.
AND THIS GENTLEMAN PROPERTY ABUTTED A USE THAT WAS, THAT WAS MOBILE HOME.
AND THE CITY OF BOSTON REZONED THE PROPERTY BEHIND HIM IN 2019 TO MH.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR? NOT REALLY.
I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THE WHOLE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT.
AND THEN WHAT HAPPENED? DID IT GET RED TAGGED AND THEN, OR DID YOU TRY TO PUT ELECTRICITY IN AN UNPERMITTED BUILDING? AND THEN THEY SAID, OH, NOW YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE BOARD, BUT VARIANCE, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE WHOLE STORY.
THEY DID A DRIVE BY AND RED TAGGED ME.
THERE'S BUT YOU BUILT THIS IN GOOD FAITH ASSUMING THAT YOU DIDN'T HAVE A SETBACK REQUIREMENT.
AND, AND BASICALLY YOU BUILT IT ALL THE WAY UP TO WHERE YOU REQUIRED TO GET PERMITS.
I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT, UM, I WAS, SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS BUILT ON TOP OF THE 20 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT RUNS KIND OF DIAGONALLY IN THAT CORNER.
IS THAT, IS THAT IT'S AS IT SITS OUT THERE TODAY, IT IS BUILT OVER THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
I AM GENERALLY IN FAVOR OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTS, BUT KNOWING THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A MUSHROOM FARM AND KNOWING THAT SOMETIMES MUSHROOM FARMS CAN BE A BIT OF A NUISANCE FOR THOSE WHO ARE NEAR THEM.
ARE, ARE YOU TAKING ANY STEPS TO MITIGATE LIKE
[02:10:01]
ODORS, UM, IN EXCHANGE FOR THE SMALLER SETBACK? WELL, I WOULD DISAGREE ABOUT THE ODORS.I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT BEING THE CASE.
UH, IT IS A, IT'S A BUILT OUT OF, UH, INSULATED STEEL, UM, WALLS.
AND SO IT'S COMPLETELY SEALED AS TIGHT AS YOU CAN POSSIBLY DO THAT AND SANITIZED BECAUSE THE WAY THAT YOU GROW MUSHROOMS, IF YOU DO NOT HAVE IT COMPLETELY SANITIZED, YOU'LL GET MOLDS, YOU'LL GET, UH, INTERLOPERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
IT'S, DOESN'T HAVE, UM, UH, ODORS THAT I WOULD KNOW OF.
SO YOUR, YOUR, YOUR, YOUR PARTICULAR MATERIAL MIGHT NOT BE THAT ISSUE, BUT, OKAY, THANK YOU.
YEAH, HE SAID WE DO HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ON THE TABLE.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR, OKAY.
ARE YOU GOING TO USE MANEUVER IN THE MUSHROOM FARM? UH, NO.
WHAT, WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON IS THERE'S A COM THERE'S A BUSINESS CALLED, UM, DESERT DOOR, WHICH IS OUT IN DRIPPING SPRINGS AND THEY, UH, CRUSHED SO TALL CACTUS AND MAKE SO TALL LIQUOR.
SO THEIR WASTE PRODUCT IS A VOLUME OF WHICH WE CAN USE.
THEORETICALLY, WE'RE HOPING THAT OUR MUSHROOMS WILL GROW ON THAT CELLULOSIC MATERIAL.
WELL, BUT ALSO WE'RE LOOKING AT ST.
ELMO BREWERY AND AUSTIN STEEL AND VACANCY BREWERY.
THOSE ARE ALL WITHIN LIKE A STONE'S THROW FROM US AND THEY HAVE SPENT BARLEY GRAIN.
AND SO WE'RE HOPING TO USE THAT BARLEY GRAIN, AND MAYBE EVEN WE PRODUCE ON MY PROPERTY.
THE GUY HAS A LOT OF, UH, EMAIL STUFF WITH PACKAGING AND BOXES, MAYBE EVEN RECYCLING THE, UH, CARDBOARD AS OUR CELLULOSTIC MATERIAL FOR GROWING MUSHROOMS ON.
SO, UM, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? I THINK, I THINK WHAT IS HA WHERE IT'S COMING FROM, UH, COMMISSIONER MCCARTHY, THE ONES THAT GROW OUT OF MANURE, HAVING GROWN UP IN A RANCH IN SOUTH TEXAS THE FIRST 15 YEARS OF MY LIFE ARE NOT THE KIND OF MUSHROOMS HE'S GROWING.
I MEAN, THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF MACHINES THEY'RE NOT, YEAH, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TESTING RIGHT NOW IS A BLUE, PINK, AND YELLOW, UH, OYSTERS, WHICH ARE TYPICALLY THE EASIEST THEY'RE CALLING A CULINARY.
AND THEN WITH SOME WOOD WASTE PRODUCT.
NOW, ALSO JUST DOWN THE STREET FROM ME IS A CABINET SHOP THAT PUTS OFF A LOT OF WOOD WASTE DUST DUST.
SO THE WOOD, THE ONES THAT LIKE WOULD LIKE
SO IT HAS PROTEINS IN ORDER FOR THAT TO GROW ON THAT.
SORRY, IF I MAY INTERJECT JUST FOR, IN THE SENSE OF TIME, BASICALLY THE ANSWER IS NO, IT'S NOT GROWING OUT OF MANURE BECAUSE YOU'VE FOUND, WAIT, THESE ARE THE, WHAT YOU'RE CALLING THE CULINARY MUSHROOMS THAT ARE, UH, CHEFS USE FOR COOKING AND RESTAURANTS LIKE THAT.
AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CONVEY WAS THE ONES THAT GROW OUT OR MANEUVER ARE, ARE MEDICINALS.
SO ASIDE OF EMOTIONAL AND PADDLE MANURE ALL OVER, BUT YOU'RE NOT DOING THAT.
YOU'RE DOING, YOU'RE DOING FOR, FOR CHEFS AND FOR THE RESTAURANT.
I THINK THAT EIGHT TO $12 A POUND, YOU KNOW, AND IT GROWS ON DEAD.
IT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, THIS CACTUS, HOPEFULLY CELLULOSIC MATERIAL.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I THINK WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND CALL THE, TAKE THE VOTE.
SO FINDINGS PLEASE REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY, DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL LA ZONING DOES ALLOW FOR THE, A REASONABLE USE.
HOWEVER, THE CITY'S CHANGING AND ZONING OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY HAS NEGATIVELY IMPACTED HIS ORIGINAL USE ZONING USE HARDSHIP.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IN THAT THE CITY'S CHANGES TO THE ZONING OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, NEGATIVE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED HIS ORIGINAL ZONING USE HAVE NO REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT.
THERE'S AN IMPLIED REAR SETBACK RESTRICT RESTRICTION OF 25 FOOT BASED ON THE RECENT CHANGE OF ZONING IN THE CITY STORM DRAIN RETENTION WALL ENCROACHES UPON THE REAR REAR OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH REDUCES THE LAND USE.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE SEAT, AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THAT.
UH, THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE
[02:15:02]
THE OTHER PROB THE PROPERTY WAS BELIEVED UNDER LA ZONING TO HAVE NO REAR SET REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.IT IS THE OWNER'S OPINION THAT THE ZONING OF NO REAR SET BACKS REQUIRED MEANT MIGHT POSSIBLY BE GRANDFATHERED.
I BUTCHERED THAT ONE, BUT WE'LL GO WITH IT.
THE VARIANTS WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT APPEAR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE PROPERTY ADJACENT IS THE MOBILE HOME PARK WITH THE STREET RIGHT AWAY BETWEEN THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
AND THEN THERE IS NEIGHBORS STRUCTURE.
ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND WILL HAVE THE RESTRICTIVE STEP BACK BASED ON THE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE.
AND THE COMBINED SETBACK SHOULD PROVIDE PLENTY OF CUSHION FROM ANY IMPACT DESTRUCTURE MAY HAVE WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.
THAT'S YOUR MADAM CHAIR BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE.
UH, IT'S MORE THAN JUST POINTED OUT TO ME THAT, UH, THIS MIGHT BE ENCROACHING INTO THE EAST MODE.
UH, AND I DIDN'T SEE THERE'S A DIAGONAL HE'S BEEN GONE ACROSS THE BACK, BUT, BUT IT STOPS AT HIS PROPERTY IN, AND IT'S A STRAIGHT RETAINING WALL.
AND IT'S A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE AND HE CAN, THERE'S A PROCESS TO VACATE OR TO REROUTE THAT.
I MEAN, THE DRAINAGE IS ANOTHER STEP.
DOES HE REQUIRE CITY STAFF APPROVAL FOR THAT ENCROACHMENT OR? YEAH.
I MEAN, EVERYBODY IT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.
SO THEN LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE BOOKS.
IT'S A LITTLE FUNKY, BUT YES, IT IS A LITTLE FUNKY.
SHARING YOUR VARIANTS HAS BEEN GRANTED SMALL PURPOSES ONLY.
THAT WOULD BE, THAT WAS I, I ALMOST, UM, THERE WAS ALMOST VISIBLE.
LAUGHTER AND I WAS TRYING REALLY HARD NOT TO, IT'S BEEN GRANTED.
[H-1 C15-2022-0021 Bhavani Singal for Heidi Lew 3701 Robbins Road]
AM H ONE C 15 20 22 0 0 2 1 AVANI SINGH GOLF OR HEIDI LOOP.AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE, SO WE HAVE HEARD THIS, WE HEARD THIS LAST TIME.
THIS WAS THE ONE THAT DISPUTED NOTICING.
UH, MS. SINGLE IS ON THE LINE.
DO YOU WANT TO DO YOUR PRESENTATION AGAIN OR COULD YOU JUST INFORM US, UH, WHETHER OR NOT THE CORRECT NOTICING WAS SENT OUT? UM, YES.
UM, THE CORRECT INFORMATION WAS SHARED WITH THE LANE AND IT IS CORRECT ON THE AGENDA AS WELL.
AND IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, I MEAN, IF YOU'D LIKE YOUR FIVE MINUTES FOR PRESENTATION, BUT IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, WE HAD A MOTION TO APPROVE.
THAT WAS UP LAST TIME THAT WE DIDN'T GET TO SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THAT NOTICE.
BUT IF THAT NOTICE IS SENT OUT, THEN I WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SECOND.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO MOTION TO APPROVE SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR OR SORRY BY A BOARD MEMBER OF AN OLIN.
SO THE ONE, THE ONE ITEM WITH THE APPROVAL IS THAT THE, THE SETBACK IN THE FRONT WAS ONLY FOR THE GARAGE.
SO YOU NEED TO TIE IT TO A DRAWING.
AND I THINK WE LET ME SEE, IT WAS FOR THE, THE GARAGE STRUCTURE.
THEY HAD A GARAGE STRUCTURE THERE.
RIGHT? WE DO THAT FROM THE PRESENTATION LAST TIME.
WHERE WAS THAT? I BELIEVE THAT WAS IN OUR TECHNICAL DRAWINGS THAT WERE SUBMITTED AS WELL AS THE PRESENTATION.
SO WOULD THAT BE, IS, DO YOU THINK A ONE 10 IS A GOOD, A GOOD DRAWING TO USE A ONE H YES.
[02:20:03]
WOULD BE THE 25 SETBACK IS FOR THE GARAGE STRUCTURE.AND NOT FOR THEM, NOT FOR THE BODY OF THE HOUSE.
SO MOTION TO APPROVE, TIED TO THE, OKAY.
IS THAT THE BEST DRAWING MISSING GALL? UM, IT'S THE, I WILL SAY THAT THE PRESENTATION DRAWING AND THE SITE PLAN FROM THE TECHNICAL DRAWINGS ARE THE BEST DRAWINGS.
IT IS THE GARAGE THAT IS ENCROACHING.
THIS TRUNK SET BACK AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS.
IT IS TIED VIA A BRIDGE STRUCTURE TO THE MAIN HOUSE DUE TO THE CLIENTS, AGING IN PLACE REQUIREMENTS, PAGE ONE, PAGE 1, 10 8100.
DOES 100 SHOW THE GARAGE? YES, IT DOES.
IS THAT THE PRESENTATION OR IS THAT THE ADVANCED THAT'S THE ADVANCED PACKET EACH ONE 10.
UH, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THAT'S ME.
REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE SITE IS CHALLENGED WITH STEEP TOPOGRAPHY THAT TENDS TO FLATTEN A VARIOUS SPOTS IN ORDER TO BUILD THE NEW HOME ON THE FLATTENED PORTIONS OF THE LOT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO EXCEED THE IMPERVIOUS COVERED ALLOWANCE, UH, BY LA ZONING, THE HARDSHIP OF WHICH THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED SO UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THAT THE HARDSHIP IS UNIQUE DUE TO THE TOPOGRAPHY.
AND THE 100 YEAR FLOOD, PLAIN HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, BECAUSE THIS IS A COMMON ISSUE THAT MANY NEIGHBORS HAVE APPLIED TO THE BOARD OR ADJUSTMENTS FOR IN ORDER TO REBUILD ON THEIR LOTS AREA CHARACTER.
THIS IS A REDEVELOPMENT OF AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY, LOTS MAINTAIN THE FUNCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE OF USE AND LET'S CALL VOTE AS WELL AS THE IMPERVIOUS COVER IS DECREASED.
IF YOU GO BACK TO EACH ONE NINE, THE EXTREME SLOPES OR MODIFIED IN A WAY TO, I WOULD LIKE IT IN THE SAME ALIGNMENT.
SO YOU TALKING ABOUT FINDING, SIR, IT'S AN OVERALL DECREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVER AND A LESSER IMPACT ARE UTILIZING THESE, THAT BRIDGE SINCE YOU WERE USING THE ABBREVIATED FINDINGS.
I DIDN'T EVEN SEE THAT IN THE, IT CAME INTO MY HEAD.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT AGE NINE, THERE'S AN OVERALL DECREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVER AND A, UM, RECALIBRATION OF THE DIFFERENT SLOPE CATEGORIES THAT GIVE AN OVERALL DECREASE IN SOME AREAS AND UTILIZING THE OPEN WEB BRIDGE SYSTEM.
WOULD YOU APPLY THAT TO THE HARDSHIP?
SHE WAS IN HERE ALL NIGHT WITH US.
SHE WAS ON THE PHONE WAITING THOUGH.
[02:25:01]
LAST TIME IT WAS BAD.[H-2 C15-2022-0032 David Cancialosi for Cody Stavig 2904 Rivercrest Drive]
EACH TO SEE 15 20, 22, 0 0 3, 2.DAVID CAN SEE LOC FOR CODY STABBING 2 9 0 4 RIVER CREST DRIVE.
SO WHERE YOU HERE ON THE, THE APACHE SHORES CASES, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE HERE FOR? WE POSTPONE THEM, UH, HE ASKED FOR SOME ADDITIONAL TIME AND WE POSTPONED THOSE TO JUNE 13TH.
AND WE WILL, AT THAT TIME DECIDE WHETHER HIS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, WHETHER TO RECONSIDER THE CASE OR NOT.
DID YOU, DID YOU ALREADY WRITE IN THE LATE BACKUP.
I'M SORRY, MR.
SO IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE POSTPONEMENT VOTE ON THAT.
AND THEN WE HEAR THE MERITS OF THE POSTPONEMENT AND THEN SHE COULD SPEAK AFTER I REOPENED THE PUBLIC, HEARING IT AND SORRY TO INTERRUPT ERICA LOPEZ, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT IS ON THE LINE ANYMORE.
WELL, I DON'T THINK THE APPLICANT WAS ON THE LINE TO BEGIN WITH, BUT, UM, BUT, UH, SO WE POSTPONE THE CASE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE HEARING AND I JUST SAW YOU GO OVER AND I REMEMBER.
AND I READ, AND SO I'M SORRY, IT'S MY FAULT.
SO BASICALLY WE POSTPONED THE WHOLE CASE TO, TO JUNE 13TH.
AND LAST, THERE IS JUST SOMETHING, SOME EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES AND YOU'LL GET, YOU'LL GET EXTRA CREDIT, AT LEAST IN MY HEAD FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT ON JUNE 13TH.
UM, IF IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR IT ALL TO BE CONTAINED BECAUSE DEPENDING ACTUALLY ON THE LEVEL OF INFORMATION PROVIDED AND THEN THE WILL OF THE BOARD, WHETHER THE CASE WILL EVEN BE REOPENED.
I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO MISS IT.
THAT WAS, THAT WAS A VERY EXCITING CASE.
WOULD YOU MIND TELLING ME YOUR NAME? SUSAN VAN AUSTRIAN.
I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM WHERE THEY WANT TO BUILD.
I REMEMBER PRACTICING ALL MY SPEECH ALL NIGHT.
YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR? SORRY.
WELL, I SEE, I THINK THAT YOU'LL BE BETTER.
NEXT TIME WE NEED TO STOP BECAUSE LIKE THE PUBLIC SHARING'S BEEN CLOSED ON IT.
UH, LET'S GET HIS PRESENTATION PULLED UP PLEASE.
DID YOU PRACTICE YOUR PRESENTATION ALL NIGHT SINCE LAST MONTH? OH YEAH, LET'S GO.
AND I HAD AN EXTRA JACKET, SO I'M WORRYING SOMETHING I NORMALLY WOULDN'T BEFORE YOU, BUT, UH, SEEING AS HOW I'M CELEBRATING MY 180TH APPEARANCE BEFORE THIS COMMISSION IN 17 YEARS, HOPEFULLY IT GOES OUT WITH A BANG.
SO WE WERE POSTPONED LAST MONTH BECAUSE THERE WAS A SECOND VARIANCE REGARDING, UM, POTENTIAL VARIANTS FOR A HEIGHT ISSUE.
AND THERE WAS AN OBJECTION ON THAT FROM, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY.
SO YOU HAD ASKED ME TO GO GET THAT CLARIFIED WITH THEM AND REMOVED.
AND SO THE ONLY THING WE DID THAT SHOULD BE IN YOUR BACKUP.
WE DID THAT WITH ROBERT LONG FROM ENERGY AND THAT AS LATE AS TODAY, WE HAD IT CLARIFIED AGAIN THAT THEY DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION.
SO THE VARIANTS, AS FAR AS SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE AND LA ZONING, THAT WAS BUILT IN THE EIGHTIES AND IT'S BUILT WITH A 25 FOOT SETBACK IN THE FRONT INSTEAD OF A 40 FOOT, WHICH IS WHAT IS REQUIRED NOW AND WAS REQUIRED THEN.
AND THE HOMEOWNER WOULD LIKE TO DO A SIGNIFICANT REMODEL, REDUCE THE OVERAGE ON THE APPROPRIATE COVER TO BELOW 35%, MAKE A COMPLIANT ALL THE WAY AROUND, EXCEPT THAT WE'RE 15 FEET INTO THE 40.
SO WE JUST NEED TO MAINTAIN THAT TWENTY-FIVE
[02:30:01]
FOOT SETBACK.THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE SINCE IT WAS ERECTED WITH CITY PERMITS AND A CEO IN THE LATE EIGHT, MID TO MID, MID EIGHTIES.
WE THINK IT GETS KIND OF HAZY ON THE AREAS WHERE YOU GO BACK.
AND SO, UM, REALLY THAT'S, THAT'S THE GIST OF THE CASE IS WE HAVE CLARENCE MOSSE ENERGY.
AND LIKE A LOT OF LAKE AUSTIN CASES YOU HEAR FROM ME, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CITY AND THIS SHIT IS ZONING OF LIKE LA ON THESE PROPERTIES IN THE EARLY EIGHTIES, CREATED A LOT OF NON-CONFORMING ISSUES.
THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH HAS RIVER CREST IS RIFE WITH, UM, WITH NON-CONFORMING ISSUES.
JUST, I MEAN, ALMOST EVERY LOT IS NON-COMPLIANT JUST BECAUSE OF THE APPLICATION OF LA ZONING.
THIS IS ONE OF THOSE HOUSES THAT HASN'T BEEN REMODELED.
WE'D LIKE TO DO THAT AND KEEP IT WHERE IT'S AT, IF WE COULD.
AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING QUESTIONS.
SO IS EVERYBODY ELSE ON THE STREET BUILT TWENTY-FIVE FEET? THERE ARE SEVERAL COMMISSIONER.
I CAN'T SAY EVERYBODY, BUT I DEFINITELY KNOW ON EITHER SIDE, UH, TWO OR THREE HOUSES AND EITHER DIRECTION THEY APPEAR TO BE, UM, MR. KIM CLOC REAL QUICK, UH, H TWO 50 A IS A SCHEMATIC WHERE IT SHOWS THE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE THIS SIMILAR SETBACK.
IS THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? UH IT'S UH, IT'S LIKE A GOOGLE MAPS OVERLAY WITH A BUNCH OF ADDRESSES.
THOSE ARE, UH, VARIANCE CASES FOR, FOR VARIOUS, UH, VARIANCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WHAT I, IT GOES TO MY POINT ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ITSELF IS TO BEING RIFE WITH NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICATION OF LA ZONING.
AND THIS CASE TONIGHT IS NO DIFFERENT IT'S.
UH, THE BOARD HAS, UH, HAS HEARD ALL OF THESE CASES AND APPROVED THEM.
OBVIOUSLY, THIS CASE IS SORT OF A DIMINIMOUS IN NATURE.
IT'S JUST, WE WANT TO KEEP UP WHAT WE GOT.
WE WANT TO KEEP IT IN PLACE AND DON'T CHANGE IT AND REMODEL IT FROM THE INSIDE OUT.
SO JUST THE FRONT SETBACK ON THE, THE WALL HEIGHT VARIANCE IS GONE, CORRECT.
VIRTUAL MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS THERE? I LEFT DOWN THE RIGHTS.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
MOTION TO APPROVE BY VICE-CHAIR HAWTHORNE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER.
I'VE BEEN MARRIED LONG ENOUGH THAT I KNOW THAT WAS IT'S YOUR TURN DEAR.
AND YES, FOR THOSE BOARD MEMBERS THAT ARE NEW TO THE BOARD, THIS IS THE DYNAMIC DUO.
AND YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF THIS, IF ANY TIME THEY'RE IN PERSON.
SO ANY REGULATIONS, APPLICANT WOULD PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR A REASONABLE USE AS THIS IS A SUBSTANDARD LOT IN LA ZONING.
AND THERE IS EXISTING STRUCTURE ON THE LOG THAT IT HAS A 25 FOOT SETBACK AND THERE WILL BE AN EXTENSIVE REMODEL.
AND SO WITH THE ORIGINAL PLACEMENT OF THE HOUSE AND, UH, THE SETBACKS OF THE ADJACENT HOUSES, UM, PRETTY MUCH DIRECTLY ADJACENT, UH, IT WOULD BE WHAT IS IN ALIGNMENT FOR THE STREETS.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY.
MR. CANTALOUPE SEEN AS, AS THIS IS AN OLDER STRUCTURE BUILT PRIOR TO, UH, LA ZONING B BEING, UH, ON THE LOT.
IN FACT, I THINK IT WAS A ZONING.
UM, IT ACTUALLY DIDN'T TRANSLATE WELL.
AND THE, AND THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS WITHIN THE 40 FOOT SETBACK, UH, WITH A SETBACK OF 25 FEET, WHICH IS A STANDARD RESIDENTIAL.
SO SETBACK TO HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, AS IT IS, HAD SEVERAL, UH, REMODELED PERMITS ALONG THE WAY ON AN EXISTING NON-COMPLAINT STRUCTURE.
[02:35:01]
WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER, THE AREA JASON, THE PRIORITY 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 AS A SETBACK WILL BASICALLY BE WHERE IT IS NOW.UM, AND THAT THERE WILL BE AN OVERALL REDUCTION IN IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE SITE FROM 50% TO 35%, WHICH IS ACTUALLY A BENEFIT, UH, MORE TO THE DRINKING WATER AND MAKING FOR A BETTER SITUATION.
OVERALL, THE END, TOMMY IT'S YES.
CURIOUS WHILE IT'S HANGING IN THERE.
NOW, UH, KELLY BLOOM AND MARCEL GARZA.
HERE'S YOUR LUCY? VARIOUS IS GRANTED 180.
WHEN I WAS RESEARCHING FOR THIS INTERPRETATION APPEAL TONIGHT, I WAS WATCHING VIDEOS LIKE FROM 2011 AND GUESS WHO I SAW THAT? YEAH, Y'ALL LOOKED, BUT I ALMOST EXACTLY THE SAME, BUT I HAVE MORE HAIR THAN YOU.
AT WHAT POINT? I THINK I HAD MORE, I DON'T KNOW.
THAT'S WHAT WAITING FOR NUMBER 200.
[I-1 Discussion of the April 11, 2022 Board activity report]
ITEM I ONE UNDER NEW BUSINESS, THIS IS GOING TO BE DISCUSSION OF THE APRIL 11TH, 2022 BOARD ACTIVITY REPORT.UH, DON'T USUALLY COMMENT ON THESE, BUT I'M ACTUALLY, I'VE BEEN VERY PLEASED LATELY.
I WANTED TO LET THE BOARD KNOW THAT I'M HAPPY.
WE'RE PERFORMING OUR JOB BY GRANTING WAY MORE THAN WE'RE DENYING.
DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT.
GRANTED HIS 34 DENIED IS SIX, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TO GRANT RELIEF FROM A OUTDATED BROKEN, SERIOUSLY NEED OF A REWRITE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR OTHER COMMENTS? IT IS INTERESTING.
THE THEMES THAT COME UP IN AND WHAT PEOPLE ASK FOR LEAP FROM YES, IT IS.
YOU CAN DEFINITELY SEE THAT THERE ARE DEFINITELY A FEW MORE TYPES OF CERTAIN REQUESTS THAN OTHERS, BUT KEEP MOVING ON TO
[I-2 Discussion and possible action regarding an update on the resolution sent to council for the BOA Applicant Assistance Program (BAAP).]
ITEM I, TO DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING AN UPDATE ON THE RESOLUTION SENT TO COUNSEL FOR THE BLA APPLICANT ASSISTANT PROGRAM.I HAVE WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE EXCELLENT NEWS.
WE ARE TWO SIGNATURES AWAY FROM THIS BEING IMPLEMENTED.
UH, THE, UH, PROJECT MANAGER WHO I SPOKE WITH, UH, INFORMED ME THEY ARE GOING TO BE DOING MARKETING, UH, AND WORKING WITH, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY.
SO BECAUSE THEY TEND TO DEAL WITH THE FOLKS WHO ARE MORE INVOLVED WITH THAT CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, THROUGH AN EA WHO WILL ALSO BE AUDITING AND MAKING SURE, UH, OUR FOLKS OR OUR APPLICANTS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE PROGRAM.
SO THIS, THIS IS REALLY EXCITING NEWS.
UH, THE FIRST YEAR WILL BE A PILOT PROGRAM, UH, PER CITY STAFF, OR SORRY, PER CITY COUNCIL.
I'M HOPING IF WE CAN GET THE WORD OUT THERE THAT LIKE SOME OF THESE FOLKS WHO ARE GETTING RED TAGGED AND JUST TEARING DOWN THEIR STRUCTURES, UH, MIGHT BE A LITTLE LESS RETICENT TO COME AND FILE AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE WITH THE BOA.
SO AGAIN, REALLY, REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THIS.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT IT? GREAT JOB.
[I-3 Discussion and possible action to form a BOA Workgroup to review and propose changes to BOA Appeals]
ITEM I THREE DISCUSSION AND POT OPS, AND I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO CHANGE THE WORDING ON THIS, BUT I APPROVED THE AGENDA.SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LEAVE THIS TABLE FOR A LANGUAGE CHANGE FOR NEXT TIME, BECAUSE THE WORK GROUP HAS BEEN FORMED.
[02:40:01]
NEED TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE ON? OKAY.SO YEAH, I WILL MAKE SURE THE LANGUAGE HAS CHANGED FOR THAT ON THE NEXT AGENDA, UH, TO ENSURE THAT IT'S DISCUSSION ABOUT, UH, WHAT THE WORK GROUP HAS, UH, BEEN DISCUSSING FROM THE WORK GROUP.
OUR REPORT FROM THE WORK GROUP, I THINK IS HOW IT HAS TO BE PHRASED OR WRITTEN I FOR
[I-4 Announcements]
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND YOUR ANNOUNCEMENTS, BIRTHDAYS, WEDDINGS, GRANDBABIES, NEW PET.SO KEEN I HAVE ON REAL, REAL, UH, CLOTHING, REAL CLOTHING, CLOTHING BAND, UH, ACTUALLY, UH, I ACTUALLY PUT EARRINGS.
THAT'S DEFINITELY AN ANNOUNCEMENT THINGS.
UH, I DON'T MIND LIKE TWO YEARS THAT'S RIGHT.
THE SHIPPERS TIME BACK INTO IT'S BEEN LIKE TWO YEARS.
SO THAT'S PRETTY BIG DOING, I DON'T
[I-5 Discussion of future agenda new business items, staff requests and potential special called meeting and/or workshop requests]
HAVE FIVE IS GOING TO BE NEW BUSINESS ITEMS. UM, I'D LIKE TO ADD TO NEXT MONTH'S AGENDA, MAYBE A REVIEW OF ATTENDANCE POLICIES.IF YOU GUYS COULD GET THAT ATTITUDE THE NEXT TIME, ANY OTHER NEW BUSINESS ITEMS OR REQUESTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS OR STAFF, THE ONLY REQUEST I WOULD MAKE IS THAT IF POSSIBLE IN OUR MEETINGS, THEY COULD HAVE THE DOOR TO THE RESTROOM.
LIKE IT USED TO BE ACCESSIBLE.
YOU CAN ONLY GET THROUGH IT THROUGH THE BULLPEN, ANYHOW, BECAUSE EVERY TIME YOU GO USE THE RESTROOM OR WE TAKE A BREAK, WE'RE LOCKED OUT OF THE CHAMBERS.
SO MAYBE THAT'S A REQUEST WE COULD ASK OF SECURITY OR SOMEBODY JUST DURING THE BOARD MEETING.
AND THEN I SEE STAFF SHAKING THEIR HEAD, LIKE NOT GOING TO ELAINE, YOU HAVE SOME COMMENT.
WE HAVE TRIED SEVERAL TIMES AND THEY, THEY ONLY DO IT FOR CITY HALL EMPLOYEES ONLY.
WE'RE NOT, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE, WELL, THEY CAN START PAYING US AND THEN WE CAN BE EMPLOYEES, BUT YOU HAVE TO BE EMPLOYEES OF CITY HALL.
THEY WON'T EVEN GIVE US ACCESS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT CITY HALL EMPLOYEES.
CAN WE ASK WHEN WE TAKE A BREAK FOR THIS SECURITY GUARD TO BE THERE? YEAH.
I MEAN, WE HAVE AIR CONDITIONING, SORRY.
THIS IS JUST DISCUSSION OF NEW ITEMS, EITHER EIGHT 30.
THAT WAS DISCUSSION OF DO ITEMS. SO WE HAVE TO STOP IT.
IT IS 8:39 PM AND WE ARE ADJOURNED.
REALLY APPRECIATE Y'ALL STEPPING IN LAST MINUTE.
I THINK