Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

ALL

[00:00:01]

RIGHT, EVERYONE.

IT IS 5:36 PM.

[CALL TO ORDER]

HI, I'M HERE BY CALLING THIS MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ORDER.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE ROLE.

TELL ME, DEAR BROOKE BAILEY HERE.

I'M YOUR CHAIR, JESSICA COHEN.

AND I'M HERE.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YOUR DARRYL PUT AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ HERE.

RICHARD SMITH HERE.

MICHAEL LANOLIN IS OFF THE DAYAS.

COME BACK TO HIM.

NICOLE.

WADE.

YEAH, KELLY BLOOM HERE.

AND I'D LIKE TO THANK KELLY.

WHO'S GOING TO BE FILLING IN FOR ROM FOR A LITTLE WHILE, UNTIL SOMEONE ELSE GETS APPOINTED FROM DISTRICT FOUR KEY.

WE'D HAVE A QUORUM, OTHER AREAS.

I WILL WAIT.

30 SECONDS.

YEAH.

AND MICHAEL VAN OLIN.

OKAY.

WE HAVE A BOTTOM CHAIR.

YOU FORGOT CARRY WALLER AND CARRY A WALLER HERE.

SORRY, KAREN.

NO PROBLEM.

JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK HOUSEKEEPING NOTES.

PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CELL PHONES OR PUT THEM ON VIBRATE AFTER YOUR CASE IS OVER.

PLEASE TAKE ANY DISCUSSION OUT TO THE LOBBYING.

UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ELAINE, PLEASE WAIT AND EMAIL HER OR CALL HER TOMORROW.

UH, WHEN YOU'RE ADDRESSING THE BOARD, PLEASE SPEAK DIRECTLY TO THE BOARD.

DON'T SPEAK TO EACH OTHER.

AND IF NEEDED, THE BOARD USUALLY TAKES A BREAK ABOUT AT ABOUT EIGHT O'CLOCK FOR ABOUT 10 MINUTES.

UH, IF YOU HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO YOUR PARKING VALIDATED, THERE IS A LITTLE STAMP OVER THERE BY WHERE YOU WALKED IN.

MAKE SURE YOU GET YOUR PARKING TICKETS STAMPED AND PUT THE NUMBER IN THE LITTLE SIGN-IN SHEET.

AND NOW FOR EVERYONE, WHO'S GOING TO BE GIVING TESTIMONY TONIGHT.

IF I COULD GET YOU TO PLEASE STAND AND TAKE 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.

WE SEE THEM.

THE KEY ITEM, ANYONE

[A-1 Staff requests approval May 9, 2022 draft minutes]

STOP REQUESTS APPROVAL.

THE MAIN NINTH, 2022 DRAFT MINUTES.

I DON'T CARE.

MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY BOARD MEMBER BY AN OLIN.

SECOND.

SORRY.

WHAT? THE SECOND BY BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUEZ HAS ANYONE OPPOSED.

OKAY.

MOTION PASSES, ITEM BEING

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

ONE STAFF, AN APPLICANT REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT AND WITHDRAWAL OF ITEMS POSTED ON THIS AGENDA.

OKAY.

WE ARE GOING TO BEING, THERE IS AN APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT REQUEST FOR C 16 20 22 0 0 0 1.

ITEM G ONE IS A WITHDRAWAL.

THAT'S GOING TO BE C 15 20 21 0 0 9 7.

I'D LIKE TO THROW IT OUT THERE REAL QUICK.

[00:05:01]

UH, C ONE IS AN AUSTIN ENERGY DENIAL.

IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT AND POSTPONEMENT, I MAY HAVE TO INCLUDE C1 IN THE POSTPONEMENTS TO THE JULY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING.

I DON'T KNOW THE DATE 13.

THAT'LL BE JULY 13TH, ELAINE, UH, FOR D ONE.

DID THEY HAVE A DATE? IT'S IT'S SEVEN 11 IT'S JULY 11TH, JULY 11TH.

OKAY.

JULY ONE, THE SAME THING.

SEVEN 11.

OKAY.

SEVEN 11.

THAT'S GOING TO BE EASY TO REMEMBER.

OKAY, SO JUST TO GO OVER IT ONE MORE TIME.

WE HAVE AN AUSTIN ENERGY DENIAL ITEMS, C ONE C 16, 20 22 0 0 4.

POSTPONED TO JULY 11TH, 2022, ITEM D ONE C 16, 20 22 0 0 0 0 0 1 POSTPONE TO JULY 11TH AND ITEM G ONE.

SEE A 15 20 21 0 0 9 7 IS A WITHDRAWAL.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? MADAM CHAIR, BEFORE WE, BEFORE WE TAKE THE MOTION ITEM, D ONE IS THE SAME TARGET, UH, SIGNED THAT WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH FOR THE PAST THREE MONTHS.

NOW THEY POSTPONED LAST TIME.

THEY POSTPONED A LOT OF TIME BEFORE I WAS GOING TO MAKE IT.

SO THE COUNTER THAT WE POSTPONED THE TIME BEFORE, THEY'VE ONLY ASKED FOR PUMPS PULLMAN ONCE BROOKE OFFERED 60 DAYS, BUT THEY ONLY TOOK 30.

I MEAN, IT'S UP TO Y'ALL IF YOU WANT TO GIVE THEM A LITTLE MORE TIME TO WORK ON IT, I'M REALLY NOT INCLINED TO BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S, IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IT.

IT'S NOT, IT'S REALLY NOT GOING TO FLY.

I'M NOT GOING TO DISCUSS THE MERITS OF THE CASE, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO FLY.

THEY WERE GIVEN SUGGESTIONS.

AND I DON'T THINK IT'S TAKE 60 DAYS TO COME BACK, WHETHER THE SUGGESTION IS ACCEPTABLE OR NOT.

AND SO THEREFORE I'M RELUCTANT TO POSTPONE IT AGAIN.

OKAY, WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND PULL THAT ONE OUT OF THE, UH, WHAT WILL PROBABLY BE CONSENT A POSTPONEMENT.

WE CAN ADDRESS IT AFTER THAT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

CAUSE I JUST WANT TO ADD THAT WHATEVER THEY COME BACK WITH IS GOING TO BE A NEW VARIANT IF THEY NEED A VARIANCE, BECAUSE THEY'D HAVE, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MODIFY THEIR PREVIOUS REQUESTS BECAUSE IT WAS NOT GOING FAVORABLY.

YEAH.

YEAH.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE POST COMMENTS FIRST, SO, OKAY.

THEN WE'LL PULL A D ONE OUT.

THIS'LL BE FOR C1, C 16, 20 22 0 0 4.

POSTPONE TILL JULY 11TH AND ITEM G ONE C 15 20 21 0 0 9 7, WHICH IS A WITHDRAWAL.

DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY BOARD MEMBER, ONE OLIN ALL SECOND AND SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.

ANY OPPOSITION MOTION CARRIES.

OKAY.

SO LET'S, LET'S DISCUSS

[D-1 C16-2022-0001 Esteban Arrieta for Eames Gilmore 10107 Research Boulevard SVBD]

THE POSTPONEMENT, WHICH WON'T BE THE MERITS OF THE KEYS.

JUST THE POSTPONEMENT FOR ITEM 20 22 0 0 0 1.

THAT'S 1 0 1 0 7 RESEARCH BOULEVARD.

SO WE HEARD FROM BOARD MEMBER OF ON OLIN AND BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.

DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS, SUGGESTIONS, OR THIS ONLY NEEDS A SIMPLE MAJORITY PER POSTPONEMENT.

SO THAT'S SIX.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MEMBERS.

SO WHAT WOULD BE THE HARM IN POSTPONING OTHER THAN ADDING TO WHAT IS MORE REGULARLY AND REGULARLY BECOMING A VERY FULL AGENDA.

THAT'S REALLY IT.

AND, UH, IT, UH, IT DOES ALSO TAKE A SPACE.

SOMEBODY KNOWS WE'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO HEAR LIKE SO MANY CASES PER MEETING.

SO, AND, AND LIKE I SAID, WHATEVER THEY COME BACK WITH IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THEY FIRST SHOWED US.

IT HAS TO BE.

AND SO IT MAY BE ANOTHER VARIANCE OR THEY CAN COME IN WITHIN THE CODE.

SO I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE THIS.

DO WE TABLE IT OR JUST HEAR IT TABLE? I'M THINKING, I'M THINKING MADAM CHAIR, IF

[00:10:01]

I MAY SUPPORT BROOKE, I'M THINKING WE CAN TABLE IT BECAUSE THAT WAY THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE APPLY AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.

CAUSE IF THEY COME UP HERE, YEAH.

OTHERWISE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REPOST.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO RE NOTIFY.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY AGAIN.

I CAN MEET HALFWAY AND LET'S TABLE IT.

AND IF THEY DON'T COME UP WITH SOMETHING IN THE NEXT MONTH OR SO THEN I'LL MAKE A MOTION.

WE CAN TABLE IT FOR, I DON'T THINK YOU COULD TABLE IT FOR IF YOU'RE TRYING TO TABLE IT PAST THIS MEETING.

I DON'T THINK SO.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE KIND OF A, AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT PERHAPS IS THAT THE MOTION TO TABLE MANY, MANY TIMES IN THE PAST 15 YEARS.

AND SO, AND ACTUALLY THE THING WITH THAT IS IF YOU TABLE IT, THEY STILL HAVE TO PAY.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY REGARDLESS.

OKAY.

YEAH, THERE GO.

OKAY.

SO WHAT IF WE PUT, IF IT'S MORE OF, IF IT'S MORE THAN 60 DAYS, BUT IF WE, IF WE'RE JUST POSTPONING IT, THEN THEIR SLOT IS STILL SAVED AND IT CAN'T GO TO SOMEBODY ELSE WHO HAS A CASE THAT MAY BE READY TO GO, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

BECAUSE IS THERE SOMEONE AVAILABLE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE TONIGHT? UM, THERE SHOULD BE, LET ME SEE.

TAMBORA NANCE.

YES.

TAMPER NANCE IS ON THE PHONE.

OKAY.

SHE Y'ALL JUST WANT TO HEAR THE CASE.

NO, I DON'T WANT TO HEAR THE CASE.

I JUST, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE THE BEST PATH OR DO WE JUST SAY WE'LL POSTPONE IT FOR 60 DAYS INSTEAD OF JULY, WE POSTPONE IT TO AUGUST.

AND IF AT THAT TIME THEY DON'T HAVE SOMETHING, THEN WE CAN HEAR THE CASE THAT GIVES THEM THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.

I MEAN, I'M NOT, I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE I REALLY DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK WITH THE SAME DESIGN, MADAM CHAIR, TAMBORA ANNOUNCES AVAILABLE.

IF Y'ALL HAVE QUESTIONS FOR, I DON'T KNOW.

THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY.

IF NORMALLY WHAT WE'LL DO IS IF THEY'RE HERE PRESENT, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO COME UP AND TELL US WHY THEY WANT TO POSTPONE.

AND IF SHE'S ON THE LINE, LET'S DO THAT BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO MAKE, MAY MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN BRUH NANCE.

IS IT NANCY? NANCY? AND THAT'S AN ANSWER YOU ON THE LINE.

I AM.

COULD YOU TELL US WHY YOU'D LIKE ANOTHER POSTPONEMENT PLEASE? UM, ESTEBAN WAS THE, UM, THE PERSON REPRESENTING OUR WALTON ON THIS AND THE TARGET AND HE'S NO LONGER WITH THE COMPANY.

SO SHE'S TRYING TO GET, GET EVERYTHING SITUATED AND, AND TO GET CAUGHT UP ON THE CASE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

WE WERE JUST GOING TO TRY TO POSTPONE IT.

IF THAT'S THE CASE.

I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO GIVE HIM ANOTHER 30 DAYS.

IT DOESN'T TAKE SOMEBODY TO 30 DAYS PLEASE, UH, UH, HAVE THEM GO BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT THE VIDEOS.

UH, AND WHAT HAS BEEN SAID IN THE PAST.

THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO GET UP TO SPEED ON WHERE THE WIND IS BLOWING UP HERE AND I'LL MAKE A MOTION.

OKAY.

SO I HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE BY BOARD MEMBER BY NOLAND.

DO I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND BY BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUEZ? JUST TO CLARIFY CHAIR, THAT'S THE MOTION OF POSTPONE TO SEVEN 11, RIGHT? 11.

CORRECT.

OKAY.

LET'S CALL THE ROLL ON IT CAN, AGAIN, THIS IS FOR ITEM D ONE TO POSTPONE TO JULY 11TH, 2020 TO TOMMY S YES.

BROOKE BAILEY RELUCTANT.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

DARYL PUT YES.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

MICHAEL VAN OLIN.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

CARRIE WALLER.

YES.

AND KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

OKAY.

POSTPONE TILL JULY 11TH.

WE'LL SEE YOU THEN.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

PICKING THINGS BACK UP AND POSTPONED ITEM

[E-1 C15-2022-0002 Rao Vasamsetti for 5413 Guadalupe LLC 5413 Guadalupe Street (Part 1 of 2) ]

E ONE C 15 20 22 0 0 0.

THIS IS 54, 13 LOT OF LOOPING STREET, RAL FAST.

SOME SETTING.

[00:15:11]

ELAINE IS THE APPLICANT HERE TO HAVE A SPEAKER FOR THEM.

I DON'T SEE HIM.

HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE HERE IN PERSON.

HE EMAILED ME AND SAID HE WOULD BE HERE IN PERSON.

UH, WE CAN TABLE IT TILL THEY OBVIOUSLY LET'S TABLE IT FOR A LITTLE BIT LATER.

PICK IT UP MAYBE.

WELL, I HAD A QUESTION THOUGH, IS THERE A POSTING ERROR HERE BECAUSE WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING IN OUR AGENDA DOESN'T APPEAR TO MATCH UP WITH ANY OF THE DRAWINGS THEY'VE PROVIDED IN THEIR APPLICATION.

I MEAN, WE CAN STILL TABLE IT AND TALK ABOUT IT LATER.

THAT'S FOR, I NOTICED THAT AS WELL, BUT YEAH, UH, I SAY, UH, UNLESS THERE OPPOSITION LET'S TABLE IT FOR NOW.

PICK IT UP AT THE END OF THE EAS WELL POSITION.

OKAY.

COME BACK TO IT.

I, TO ME TO

[E-2 C15-2022-0044 Jason Fryer for Lucas Schlager 1907 E 9th Street]

SEE 15 20 22 0 0 4 4, THIS IS 4 1 9 0 7 EAST NINTH STREET.

JASON FRYER FOR LUCAS.

SLUGGER.

ARE WE ALL SET TO GO? DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION? SHOULD BE IN THERE? YEAH, I SAID IT LAST WEEK.

WE'LL JUST, LET'S GET THAT PULLED UP REAL QUICK AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

HELLO, KATE.

YOU'RE ALL SET.

GREAT.

CAN YOU HEAR ME ALL RIGHT.

OKAY.

WE'LL START HERE WITH THE SURVEY.

THIS IS 1907 EAST NINTH STREET, OR YOU CAN SEE THIS AS A, AN ORIGINAL ONE STORY.

1940 ONES, RESIDENTS, UH, WITH A FULL SIZED LOT.

THE LOT IS JUST AT THE 57 50 SQUARE FEET, UH, FOR ALLOWING FOR AN ADU AND A PRIMARY STRUCTURE.

IF YOU CAN SWITCH TO THE SECOND PAGE, THIS IS THE EXISTING LOT.

WE ARE PROPOSING TO KEEP THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.

THIS IS THE 1941 STRUCTURE.

IT'S STILL IN GOOD REPAIR.

WE'D LIKE TO ADD A PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO THE REAR OF THIS.

SO RATHER THAN HAVING THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT OF THE ADU IN THE BACK, WE'D LIKE TO SWAP THEIR POSITIONS.

OTHER THAN THAT, WE'D LIKE TO KEEP EVERYTHING ELSE THE SAME.

WE'D LIKE TO MAINTAIN THE SAME 10 FOOT DISTANCE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURES.

WE'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN ALL COMPLIANCE WITH THE TENT AND THE SIDE SETBACKS AS WELL AS WITH FAR AND IMPERVIOUS COVER.

AND IF YOU CAN SWITCH TO THE NEXT PAGE, YOU SEE THAT AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THIS PROPERTY FITS IN VERY WELL TO CHARACTER, THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND WE FEEL THAT REMOVING THIS STRUCTURE, ACTUALLY IT WOULD BE DAMAGING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, MY CLIENT, UH, LUCAS LAWYER HAS GONE THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND LOOKED AT IT AT THIS POINT ABOUT 30% OF THE PROPERTIES.

EXCUSE ME, OF THE HOMES FROM THIS ERA HAVE ALREADY BEEN REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH NEW STRUCTURES.

UM, HIS PARTICULAR BLOCK IS MUCH HIGHER.

IT'S ALMOST 46%.

SO REMOVING HIS YOU'RE LOOKING AT HALF OF THE ORIGINAL HOMES ARE BEING REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH LARGER STRUCTURES.

UM, SO IN THIS CASE, WE'D LIKE TO KEEP THIS ADD ON TO THE BACK AND MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND RESPECT THE ABILITY OF THE OWNER TO DESIGN THE PROPERTY FOR A MAXIMUM LIVABILITY.

AND IF YOU GO TO OUR LAST SLIDE, THIS IS GENTLEMEN, WE'RE PROPOSING.

THIS IS SCHEMATIC ONLY.

THIS IS A QUICK SKETCH OF WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT.

AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING SECONDARY RESIDENCE IN THE FRONT OF THE BILL OF THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

UM, AND THEN YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE SECONDARY RESIDENCE WOULD ADD ONTO THE BACK.

UH, WE'RE LOOKING AT ADDING A TWO-STORY STRUCTURE, MAINTAINING ALL OF YOUR ROOF LINES SO THAT THEY'RE WITHIN THE SETBACKS, THE PRIMARY SETBACKS AND THE MCMANSION TENT REQUIREMENTS.

UH, AND THEN AGAIN, AS I SAID, WE'RE GOING TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REST OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR FAR AND FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER.

NOW, THE NEIGHBORHOOD SEEMS TO BE VERY ON BOARD WITH THIS.

WHEN WE PRESENTED THE PACKET TO YOU, WE SENT IN OUR SIGNATURE PACKETS, UH, HE'S, HE'S DONE THE LEGWORK, HE'S GONE AND TALKED TO HIS NEIGHBORS.

UM, HE'S TALKED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND GOTTEN THEIR APPROVAL.

AND WE ACTUALLY REACHED OUT TO THE HISTORIC COMMISSION AS WELL.

UNFORTUNATELY, THEY HAD SOME LOSSES IN THAT DEPARTMENT AND THEY WERE UNABLE TO GET BACK TO US IN TIME ENOUGH FOR US TO GET IN FRONT OF YOU.

UM, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO, UH, THIS IS, UH, JUST MAKING A QUICK CHANGE BETWEEN THE POSITION OF THE TWO STRUCTURES.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THIS WAY.

THIS IS AGAIN, TALKING ABOUT CONCEPTUAL STRATEGY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UH, THIS IS WHERE THE COMMUNITY, EXCUSE ME, THE CONCEPTUAL CATEGORY OF INCREASING EXISTING HOUSING STOCK AND WHILE STILL MAINTAINING THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE DOING, TRYING TO PUT A SECOND.

YOU WERE SORRY.

YOU'VE DONE GREAT.

FANTASTIC.

I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION IF THERE'S AN OPPOSITION, BUT SHE HAS TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.

I DIDN'T REALIZE A PAGE DRAW THERE.

I'M SORRY.

YOU GOT ABOUT TWO MINUTES.

I'M DONE.

THAT WAS IT.

THE REST OF IT IS ALL JUSTICE

[00:20:01]

SUPPORTING INFORMATION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? OKAY.

SEEING NONE.

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

UH, BROOKE MAY HAVE A QUESTION.

I DO.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

BARBARA DOES TOO.

BARBARA HAS A QUESTION ALSO, BUT, UM, ON YOUR SCHEMATIC YOU HAVE THIS, THE NEW PRIMARY COVERING THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE OF THE TREE IN THE BACKYARD.

HOW ARE YOU DEALING WITH THAT REAL QUICK BACKGROUND ON THAT QUESTION? THE ARCHITECT THAT ORIGINALLY STARTED THIS PROCESS, UNFORTUNATELY PASSED AWAY IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS.

AND SO WE HAVE PICKED UP THIS PROJECT.

WE DIDN'T REDO HIS CONCEPTUAL WORK.

WE WILL REDO THAT WORK FROM THE, GET THE GROUND UP AND MAKE SURE WE RESPECT THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONES.

AGAIN, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY VARIANCE OF ANY OTHER REQUIREMENTS AT THE SITE.

AND THE CONSENT CONCEPT THAT HE PUT TOGETHER WAS SPECIFICALLY TO GIVE AN IDEA.

OKAY, SO YOU DON'T KNOW THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PRIMARY.

WHAT IS THE, I MEAN, WHAT IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOUSE IN THE FRONT? UH, THE SQUARE FOOT OF HOUSE IN THE FRONT IS 8 54, WHICH COMES IN AT RIGHT AT, UH, 15% OF THE EXISTING LOT SIZE.

RIGHT.

SO, AND WHAT SIZE IS THIS? THE NEW PRIMARY, BUT WE HAVEN'T DONE THE FULL FAR CALCS BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE LOT, BUT WE'RE STILL GOING TO MAINTAIN THAT 40% FAR.

RIGHT? I I'M, I'M ASKING BECAUSE I DON'T, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW YOU'RE GOING TO WORK WITH THAT TREE AT THE MOMENT.

I DON'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER FOR HOW WE ARE GOING TO WORK WITH THE TREE, BUT WE ABSOLUTELY WILL BE WORKING WITH THAT TREE.

SO IT'S HARD FOR US TO GIVE A VARIANCE WHEN WE DON'T HAVE A, UH, SOME SORT OF WHAT WE'RE GIVING A VARIANCE TO, UM, BECAUSE WE USUALLY TIE IT TO A DRAWING OR SOMETHING.

AND FOR YOU, AND DON'T, THIS IS NOT PERSONAL AT ALL.

UM, WE HAVE BEEN TOLD THINGS IN THE PAST THAT HAVE, BECAUSE THERE WAS NOTHING, IT WASN'T TIED TO ANYTHING.

UM, LET'S JUST SAY THE OUTCOME WAS NOT HAD, UM, UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES FOR CERTAIN STRUCTURES OR CERTAIN TREES ON, ON PROPERTIES.

AND SO, UM, IT MAKES IT HARD FOR US TO MAKE A DECISION WITHOUT COMPLETE INFORMATION.

CAN I, CAN I RESPOND TO THIS? SO WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A BLANKET, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO CONSTRUCT ON THIS SITE, WE'RE ASKING FOR THE ABILITY TO DESIGN A STRUCTURE ON THE BACK HALF OF THE SITE THAT COMPLIES WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND MY UNDERSTANDING, WORKING WITH THE CITY AND WORKING WITH CODY GREENBERG, HE'S AMAZING.

AND THE TREE DEPARTMENT, HE'S NOT GOING TO APPROVE A STRUCTURE THAT WOULD ENCROACH ON THAT Z.

AND WE WON'T PRESENT ONE EITHER.

AND THE CLIENT SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING WITH ORIGINAL ARCHITECT AND MONEY INVOLVED, AND WE DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS FAIR FOR US TO CHARGE HIM TO REDESIGN THE PROJECT AGAIN, BEFORE WE EVEN KNOW IF IT WAS A VIABLE OPTION TO PUT A SECONDARY STRUCTURE IN THE BACK, I THINK IT'S A VIABLE OPTION.

UM, I JUST WORRY ABOUT YOUR TREE BECAUSE IT'S, I MEAN, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW YOU'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN PUT A CONDITION, MICHAEL, THAT'S JUST WHERE I WAS GOING TO GO.

WE CAN CONDITIONER, WE HAVE DONE IT IN THE PAST WHERE WE WOULD PUT IN A CONDITION THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE VERIFIABLE PROOF OF ROUTE MITIGATION MEETING THE CITY OF AUSTIN ARBORIST REQUIREMENTS.

AND THEN THAT GOES INTO THEIR FILE WHEN THEY GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS.

AND AS, AS THEY'RE GETTING THEIR INSPECTIONS, WHEN THEY GET THEIR SLAB LAYOUT INSPECTION AND ALL THAT, AND WE'VE DONE THAT IN THE PAST.

I THINK THE REASON I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.

YEAH.

THE REASON I'M, I'M OKAY WITH IT.

AND I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IS BECAUSE EVERYTHING ELSE, THEY ARE DOING FAR SETBACK EVERYTHING.

BUT I, I, I, I FIGURED WILLIAM GOD REST HIS SOUL.

IF HE WAS STILL ALIVE, HE WOULD HAVE, HE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE TAKEN THAT INTO CONSIDERATION THE GROUP.

BUT WE HAVE DONE WHERE WE REQUIRE ROOT MITIGATION, WHICH BASICALLY YOU WOULD HAVE TO PUT TOGETHER A PLAN PROVIDED TO THE CITY ARBORIST.

HE OKAYS IT, IF NOT, BECAUSE SOMETIMES, AND I'VE DONE A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THE CITY IN A PAST LIFE BEFORE I RETIRED AND WE WOULD HAVE THE CUTS GO INTO THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE, BUT WE ALSO HAD TO DO THE WHOLE MITIGATION AND THE INJECTION AND THE TREE.

I MEAN, YOU GOT TO BABY.

IT IT'S JUST LIKE, IT JUST CAME OUT OF THE WOMB.

YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT IT TO GO AWAY EITHER.

IT'S A BEAUTIFUL TREE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING TO GO.

AND I'M OKAY WITH THAT MOTION.

AS LONG AS WE ADD THAT IN, IS THAT ACTUALLY A MOTION OR ARE YOU SAYING YOU WERE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION BECAUSE I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THAT, WITH THAT AMENDMENT INCLUDED THAT, UH, AND JUST SO THAT, YOU KNOW, ELAINE'S THAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE A ROUTE MITIGATION PLAN TO THE CITY ARBORIST FOR APPROVAL BOARD MEMBER MACARTHUR.

UH, MOST OF MY CONCERNS WERE JUST VOICED.

I DO SUPPORT THE CONCEPT OF ADDING ANOTHER STRUCTURE ON THE LOT, BUT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE TREE

[00:25:01]

AND I'M WILLING TO ACCEPT IT AS LONG AS WE HAVE WORDS IN IT ABOUT THE TREE BLOOD MEANT BY PERMIT MADE SURE WHAT I UNDERSTAND.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BASICALLY WHAT IS ON THIS AS A CONCEPTUAL PLAN, AS LONG AS THEY COMPLY WITH WHATEVER CITY STAFF TELLS THEM TO DO WITH REGARD TO RE MITIGATION AT THAT PARTICULAR TREE WHOSE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE IS BEING IMPACTED.

AND THEN, UM, WE'VE TYPICALLY CONDITIONED THESE ALSO UPON THE ADU NOT BEING USED AS A LOG AS TO ANY, ANY OF THE RESIDENCES THEY'RE BEING USED FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO BE PART OF MOTION THAT, UH, THAT, UH, IT IS NOW.

I JUST HAD A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT I'M HEARING.

OKAY.

NO STRS.

OKAY.

ANY OTHER HANDS, THE VIRTUAL, ANY OTHER, UH, WELL, AS, AS PART OF THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPROVAL WITH THE LIMITED FAR, THE POINT FOR, UH, CAUSE I KNOW HE SAID THAT THEY INTEND TO KEEP THAT THAT'S, THAT'S FINE AS WELL BECAUSE YOU'VE ALREADY PRETTY MUCH COMMITTED TO THAT.

SO THAT'S, YES.

THAT'S A ACCEPTABLE, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT AS WELL.

THEN I WILL.

AND I SECOND THAT AMENDMENT THEN OUT, BUT THAT MOTION, I DON'T THINK THAT THE SECOND BIGGEST YET.

OKAY.

SO WE ACTUALLY NEEDED A SECOND FOUR OR BROOKE, DID YOU SECOND TODAY? NO, WE'LL TAKE THAT AS THE SECOND FOR THAT LIMIT FOR, OKAY.

SO THIS IS GOING TO BE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE ROOT A ROOT MITIGATION PLAN TO THE CITY ARBORIST TO ENSURE THE PROTECTION OF THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE.

NO S T R SMALL SHORT TERM RENTALS AND LIMITED TO 0.4 F A R, CORRECT.

TELL ME, OH, SORRY.

CAN I, CAN I CLARIFY SOMETHING REAL QUICK? IT, THEY, THE REQUIREMENT IS NOT THAT THEY PRESENT A PLAN.

THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT CITY STAFF APPROVED PROVEN PLAN A ROUTE MITIGATION PLAN AND THAT THE CONDITION AT THE, AT THE PLAN BE APPROVED IS WHAT THE CONTINGENCY IS.

THAT WOULD, UH, YEAH.

OKAY.

SO I'VE CORRECTED THAT.

SEE CITY STAFF APPROVE ROUTE MITIGATION PLAN, UH, TO THE CITY ARBORIST, MADAM CHAIR.

IT WAS MICHAEL VON OLIN FOR, UM, THAT MOTION TO SEND SECONDED BY ADELE PUT, OKAY, THANKS.

OKAY.

FINDINGS REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW A RE REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE LDC WOULD REQUIRE A SIGNIFICANT MODIFICATION DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE IN ORDER TO ADD AN ADU TO THE REAR OF THIS STRUCTURE AND INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, BUILDING A NEW PRIMARY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT OF THE NEW ADU TO THE REAR WOULD ELIMINATED AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF THE 1940S ARCHITECTURE IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

HARDSHIP.

THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH A VARIANCE HAS REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IN THAT THE PROPERTY IS ONE OF THE FEW ORIGINAL 1941 BUNGALOWS STILL IN GOOD REPAIR IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, MAINTAINING THE STRUCTURE LIMITS THE HONORINGS ABILITY TO EXPAND THE DWELLING SIZE ON THE PROPERTY.

AND THE ADU PLACEMENT REGULATIONS WOULD REQUIRE THE OWNER TO REMOVE AND OR HEAVILY MODIFIED THE EXISTING STRUCTURE TO ADD ADDITIONAL LIVABLE, LIVABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE.

THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE MOST OF THE LOTS IN THIS AREA HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEMOLISHED.

THE ORIGINAL BUILDINGS FROM THE 1940S AND ARE THUS NOT RESTRICTED FROM BUILDING LARGER STRUCTURES AND OR ADDITIONAL UNITS ON THE PROPERTY AREA.

CHARACTER, THE VERY INTEGRAL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATION OF THE ZONING'S DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THIS VARIANCE IS REQUESTING THAT THE ADU AND PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE BE SWAPPED WITH RELATION TO THE FRONT LINE, ALLOWING THIS VARIANCE WILL HELP TO MAINTAIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.

THAT'S IT? TOMMY? YES.

BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

DARYL PRUITT.

YES.

AUGUSTINA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

MICHAEL LANOLIN.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

CARRY A WALLET.

YES.

AND KELLY BLOOM.

[00:30:02]

LUCHINI YOUR EMOTION ARE SORRY.

YOUR VARIANCE HAS BEEN GRANTED.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

BY THE WAY, FOR SAVING THAT LITTLE HOUSE, IT'S SUPER CUTE.

RIGHT? AND IT IS MOVING ON.

[E-3 C15-2022-0047 Christian Gutierrez for Steven Walker 4522 Caswell Avenue]

ITEM E THREE C 15 20 22 0 0 4 7.

THIS WILL BE 4 4 5 2 2 CASWELL AVENUE, CHRISTIAN FOR STEVEN WALKER.

HELLO.

HELLO.

LET US GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE FIVE.

SO I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT STEVE WAS GOING TO MAKE THE PRESENTATION, BUT HE JUST GOT DIAGNOSED WITH COVID.

SO I'M JUST GOING TO READ IT FOR HIM.

OKAY.

AND OKAY, SO FIRST I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THE CASE TO YOU TODAY.

IN OCTOBER, 2018, MY WIFE AND I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 45, 22 CASWELL, WHERE THE EXPECTATIONS THAT WHEN I RETIRED, WE WOULD MOVE TO AUSTIN.

I NEEDED AN OFFICE WHERE I COULD CONTINUE TO WRAP UP MY PRACTICE.

THE OBVIOUS CHOICE WAS TO TRANSFORM THE GARAGE INTO A SPACE THAT WOULD BE COMFORTABLE AWAY FROM THE HOUSE WITH GOOD INTERNET.

WE HIRED CHRISTIAN WITH THE ADDRESS AND HIS COMPANY TO ACT AS GENERAL CONTRACTOR FOR THE PROJECT.

OUR PROPOSED PLANS TO RENOVATE THE EXISTING GARAGE INTO A SECONDARY DWELLING HAVE BEEN DENIED PERMIT APPROVAL DUE TO A HARDSHIP CREATED BY TWO CONFLICTING CODES OR CODE RESTRICTIONS.

THOSE SPECIFIC CODES SECTIONS ARE REFERENCED IN OUR VARIOUS REQUESTS APPLICATION.

ON ONE SIDE, WE WERE TOLD THAT WE COULD NOT MOVE THE STRUCTURE CLOSER TO THE EXISTING PROTECTED TREE, BECAUSE DOING SO WOULD AFFECT THEM AND DOES WHAT THE NY OR APARTMENT REQUEST IT IS WORTH MENTIONING THAT LIVING THIS STRUCTURE, WHAT IT IS, WHAT GRANT IS TREE ORDINANCE APPROVAL, AS IT HAS BEEN STATED BY THE CITY ARBORIST UPON INSPECTION, THAT WOULD BE JAMES GOBEL.

ON THE OTHER SIDE, WE WERE TOLD THAT WE ARE ENCROACHING OVER THE REAR YARD SETBACK RESTRICTION AND WOULD HAVE TO MOVE THE STRUCTURE OUTSIDE THE SANDBAG RESTRICTION TO COMPLY.

SO WE CAN BE GRANTED OR PERMIT REQUESTS.

AS YOU CAN SEE THESE TWO CODE REGULATIONS CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHERS.

SO WE MOVE ONE WAY.

WE ARE DENIED A PERMIT FROM THE TREE ORDINANCE.

IF WE MOVE THE OTHER DIRECTION WHERE THE NIGHT APPROVAL FROM STONING, THE APARTMENT, WE ARE HERE TO CHANGE.

WE ARE NOT HERE TO CHANGE THE COMPLEXION OF HIGH PARK NOR THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

ON THE CONTRARY, THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE IS ASSIGNED IN A WAY TO PRESERVE HIS ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIC FEATURES AND VALUES CONSISTENT WITH OUR HOUSE AND WITH THE HOUSES IN THE AREA.

OUR HOUSE IS A BEAUTIFUL OLD 1930S CRAFTSMAN HOME.

AND WE WOULD LOVE TO PRESERVE THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

WE ARE ASKING THIS BOARD FOR A VARIANCE TO THE REGULATIONS THAT HAVE CREATED THE HARDSHIP DUE TO THE CONFLICTING SET OF RULES.

WE ASK THAT WE BE ISSUE A PERMIT THAT ALLOWS US TO BUILD 30 FEET INTO THIS SET OF RESTRICTIONS.

SEWN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

I THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT.

SEEING NONE, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS, BOARD MEMBER VANILLIN.

SO WHAT IS, AND I KNOW YOU YOU'RE SUBSTITUTING RIGHT NOW FOR CHRISTIAN, WHAT I'VE READ AND WHAT I RESEARCHED HERE IN YOUR PACKET IS HE WANTS TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING GARAGE WHERE IT IS ON THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT.

HE JUST WANTS TO REMODEL IT INTO, INTO HIS OFFICE.

THAT ALL, I MEAN, HE CAN GO UP.

HE JUST, HE'S NOT GOING OUT ANYWHERE, IS THAT CORRECT? NO.

UH, SO ACTUALLY WE WOULD ACTUALLY EXTEND TO THE FRONT, WHICH THAT'S NOT THE RESTRICTION THAT WE'RE ENCROACHING ON.

IT WOULD BE THE, THE BACK, THE REAR YARD SETBACK, WHICH IS NOT, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I MEAN, HIS REMODEL THAT YOU TELLING ME THAT HE'S GOING TO REMODEL AND EXPAND THE BUILDING TO THE FRONT.

YES.

CAUSE THE EXISTING WOULD BE THE DWELLING.

AND THEN WE WOULD ADD AN ENCLOSED GARAGE IN FRONT OF THAT STRUCTURE.

SO HE'S GOING TO DEMO THE GARAGE THAT IS THERE.

SO, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS UNDERSTANDING WHEN I WENT YES, YES.

THAT THE GARAGE WOULD BE, WE ACTUALLY WOULD KEEP, UM, AT LEAST 50% OF THE STRUCTURAL, UM, THE STRUCTURAL FRAMING OF THE, UH, SO IT'S A RENOVATION PERMIT,

[00:35:01]

SO WE'RE NOT DEMOING THE WHOLE BUILDING AND WE ARE RENOVATING IT WITH THE SAME ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AS IT IS NOW.

UM, I BELIEVE I SAW TWO WALLS THAT WERE GOING TO REMAIN IN TASKS.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

SO THAT'S GOING TO STAY ON THE EXISTING.

YES.

YEAH.

WE'RE JUST ENCROACHING THREE AND A HALF FEET OVER THIS EPIC BECAUSE IT WAS BUILT WAY BACK IN THE DAY.

I'M SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

MADAM CHAIR.

SO I'LL WAIT TO MAKE A MOTION PART NUMBER MACARTHUR.

UH, SO I'M LOOKING AT THE PICTURE RIGHT NOW.

SO YOU'RE NOT EXTENDING THE ENCROACHMENT TO YOUR NEIGHBOR'S SIDE YARD.

YOU'RE KEEPING THE SAME FOUNDATION OF THE EXISTING OLDER STRUCTURE.

UH, WE ARE, WE, WE WOULD HAVE TO EXTEND THE FOUNDATION TOWARDS THE NEIGHBORS.

THAT'S THE REAR, BUT A YARD SETBACK.

UH, WE'RE NOT AFFECTING THEM IN ANY WAY BECAUSE THE TREES THAT ARE PROTECTED ARE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE AND THEIR TREE IS, UM, IT'S FAR AWAY THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA ENCROACH ON THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE THAT SAYS FOR THE NEIGHBORS AND THE ONES THAT ARE IN TH IN THE LOT, UH, HAVE BEEN AS INSPECTED.

WE DID SOME, UM, AEROSPACE THING AND HAVE BEEN INSPECTED BY JAMES GLOBAL.

AND HE SAID, UH, IF WE WERE GRANTED TO KEEP IT WHERE IT IS LIKE OVER THE SETBACK, HE WOULD BE, HE WOULD APPROVE IT, BUT HE WOULD NOT ALLOW US TO BASICALLY BRING IT OUTSIDE THE SETBACK FOR THE FULL, UM, WITH, OF THE, UH, STRUCTURE.

LET ME BARBARA, IF I COULD HELP YOU UNDERSTAND IT.

CAUSE I'M LOOKING AT E THREE 11, THE WAY YOU EXPLAINED IT THOUGH, IN HER QUESTION WAS IF YOU WERE GOING TO ENCROACH TOWARDS YOUR NEIGHBORS OR THE OTHER NEIGHBORS IN A WAY I SEE ON E THREE 11, ACCORDING TO THE SURVEY THAT THE DRAWING, WHICH HAS A, UH, ARCHITECTURAL SEAL ON IT, I SEE WHERE THE EXISTING GARAGE IS SITTING IS STAYING IN THE SAME PLACE.

YOU ARE MOVING.

THE YOU'RE ACTUALLY ADDING THE ADDITION GOING TOWARDS THE DRIVEWAY.

IT'S GOING ON HIS DRIVEWAY.

IT'S NOT GOING TOWARDS A NEIGHBOR.

SO MY QUESTION WAS, ARE YOU EXTENDING TO THE NEIGHBOR ON EAST 46TH STREET? OR YOU JUST, OKAY.

THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO KNOW.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

BECAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S A LARGE TREE RIGHT THERE.

YEAH.

YEAH.

THERE'S FIVE TREES THAT WE HAD TO DEAL WITH.

YES.

THAT ARE PROTECTED BOARD MEMBER BAILEY.

I HAVE A, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

FIRST IS WHAT IS THE, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT YOU'RE ADDING? UH, WE'RE ADDING 222 SQUARE FEET, I BELIEVE FOR THE GARAGE.

OKAY.

SO YOU'RE ADDING THAT WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS CURRENTLY.

THAT'S CORRECT.

SO HOW DEEP IS GOING? THE NEW DRIVEWAY GOING TO BE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, NOT THE STREET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE FRONT OF THAT NEW GARAGE.

UM, IT'S GOING TO BE, I BELIEVE IT'S 11 FEET.

WE WERE, UM, WE HAD SOME, UM, WE HAD SOMEBODY OUT THERE TO MARK HOW FAR WE COULD EXTEND.

OKAY.

CAUSE THE THING I WORRY ABOUT IS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE CARS.

I KNOW THERE'S NOT A SIDEWALK THERE, BUT THERE COULD BE AT SOME POINT, YOU KNOW, IN THE CITY RIGHT OF WAY, BECAUSE A TRUCK IS LONGER THAN 11 FEET.

I MEAN, RIGHT.

NO, NO, NO.

THE GARAGE ITSELF IS IT'S 20 FEET.

WELL THE GARAGE, BUT THE DRIVEWAY SAID THINGS HAPPENED TO, YEAH.

I NOTICED THEY HAVE AN RV PARKS THERE, SO YEAH.

THAT'S GOING TO BE GONE.

THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT THERE AS THEY'RE JUST LETTING OKAY.

BUT IF SOMEBODY, IF SOMEBODY CAME TO VISIT THEM OR IF THEIR GARAGE GOT FILLED WITH STUFF LIKE PEOPLE'S GARAGES, DO THEIR CARS ARE GOING TO BE EXTENDING OUT PAST THAT DRIVEWAY.

NOT QUITE DEEP ENOUGH IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

RIGHT.

UM, YEAH, I GUESS THE, THE EXTERIOR WALL OF THE GARAGE, THERE'S ONLY A FIVE AND A HALF FEET TO THE RIGHT OF WAY OF, TO THE BEGINNING OF THE ROW AXIS.

ACTUALLY WHAT I'M SEEING ON E THREE 11, AGAIN, WITH THE SEAL ON IT, IF YOU LOOK REAL CLOSE, IT'S 15 FEET, FOUR INCHES FROM THE FACE OF THAT GARAGE TO THAT, IT LOOKS LIKE THE PROPERTY LINE.

AND THEN THEY'VE GOT ANOTHER ADDITIONAL, I CAN'T TELL WHAT, WITHOUT A SCALE.

I CAN'T SEE WHAT THEY HAVE FROM THERE TO THE BACK OF THE CURB.

BUT UH, WHERE YOU SAYS PAINT, WASH OUT AREA, CONCRETE WASH OUT AREA, HE'S GOT 15 FEET, FOUR INCHES FROM THE FRONT OF THE PROPOSED, A GARAGE ADDITION TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

OKAY.

IS IT POSSIBLE ALL THAT, OH, THOSE DOCUMENTS WE SUBMITTED.

IS IT POSSIBLE TO FOLLOW ALONG? I GOT TO ASK THE TEXT, MAN.

UM, YEAH, THAT'S THE SITE PLAN.

THE NEW SITE PLAN IS WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING AND WHILE THEY'RE TRYING TO PACKAGE YEAH.

IT'S IN THE PACKAGE.

IT'S IN THE PACKAGE.

IT'S UM, IT'S PAGE.

[00:40:01]

YEAH.

E THREE 11.

SO, AND WHILE THEY'RE TRYING TO PULL THAT UP, UM, HAVE YOU MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NEIGHBORS? UM, NO WE HAVEN'T.

OKAY.

THAT IS USUALLY A, UM, SOMETHING THAT WE ASK YOU TO DO SO THAT WE FIND OUT IF YEAH, YEAH.

NOBODY REQUESTED OR SUGGESTED WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH, UH, WITH THIS PROCESS FOR OVER TWO FOR YEAH.

TWO YEARS.

IT'S ACTUALLY IN YOUR PACKET WHEN THEY GIVE YOU THE PACKET TO APPLY FOR YOUR VARIANTS, IT'S IN THERE, IT'S SAYS IT, IT REQUESTS IT.

SO IT'S THERE JUST TO POINT OUT REAL QUICK.

I DID NOTICE THAT THERE WERE THREE LETTERS IN SUPPORT OF ONE OF THEM INCLUDED THE FRIENDS OF HYDE PARK.

AND THEN THERE'S ONE LETTER BOB POSITION.

SO RIGHT.

THAT'S NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS THE HIGH PARK WHO IS FRIENDS OF HYDE PARK.

I'VE SEEN THEM TWICE TODAY.

THEY'RE THEY'RE A SMALLER ORGANIZATION.

YEAH.

BUT, UM, I'M, UH, I'M A MEMBER OF FRIENDS OF HYDE PARK.

THEY ARE SO SUZY ASSOCIATE.

YEAH.

BUT THERE'S MORE THAN ONE AND THEY HAVEN'T EVEN MET WITH FRIENDS OF HYDE PARK.

OKAY.

SO THAT'S ALL WE'RE SAYING.

WE USUALLY, I MEAN, THAT'S USUALLY SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE THE APPLICANTS DO TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORS, MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, SHOW THEM WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

CAUSE A LOT OF TIMES THEY'LL GIVE YOU A LOT OF SUPPORT AND IT HELPS PAVE THE WAY.

RIGHT.

I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE, THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS, THE ONES THAT ARE NEXT TO THEM, UM, ON THE REAR YARD SETBACK, AND THEN THE PEOPLE THAT ARE, UM, UH, OPPOSITE TO THE 46TH STREET BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN THERE, YOU KNOW, DOING SOME, SOME WORK.

AND WE HAVEN'T EXPLAINED, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE, THE FULL CONSTANT, I GUESS I'M MOSTLY WORRIED ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ON 46TH STREET ADJACENT TO YOU BECAUSE THAT'S WHO IT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE MOST.

HAVE YOU MET WITH THEM AND SHOWED THEM? WE HAVEN'T EXPLAINED WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.

I HAVEN'T REALLY LIKE GONE IN THERE TALKING ABOUT, WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY.

AND, BUT I MEAN, THEY KNOW THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THE ARBORIST AND EVERYTHING.

UH, THEY SEEN YOUR PLANS.

NO, THEY HAVE NOT BOARD MEMBER RODRIGUEZ.

SO I HAVE A QUESTION.

I'M LOOKING AT YOUR, UM, STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS ON EACH 3 23.

AND DO I HAVE IT, AM I INTERPRETING IT RIGHT? THAT YOU HAVE TWO PEERS IN THAT 50% CRITICAL ROOT ZONE? WE, UM, THE WAY WE HAVE IT AS THE WAY THAT, UH, HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO, TO JAMES GOBEL.

OKAY.

SO I DON'T THINK I SAW IT IN THE PACKAGE.

DO YOU HAVE A WRITTEN STATEMENT THAT HE'S YES.

I HAVE AN EMAIL FROM THEM THAT THEY DIDN'T BE INSPECTED.

YEAH.

THE AREAS DID YOU INCLUDE IT IN THE, UM, I DON'T THINK I INCLUDED IT FOR THIS.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

AND THEN ALSO THE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS DON'T SEEM TO SHOW THE DETAIL FOR THE PIER, WHICH USUALLY IF YOU'RE BUILDING IN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE, YOU'LL SEE LIKE A VOID BOX MADE OUT OF CARDBOARD AND IT SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED IN THE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS.

YEAH.

I BELIEVE THAT IS AT THE, UH, AT THE BOTTOM PORTION OF THE, UH, UH, OF THE PACKAGE.

AND IT ALSO HAS REFERENCED TO WE'RE USING SOME, UH, A HELICAL.

I SAW THAT, BUT I DIDN'T SEE THE DRAWING FOR IT.

IT'S JUST A VERBAL STATEMENT THAT, IS THERE A DRAWING FOR IT THAT I MISSED.

I'M PRETTY SURE IT IS.

AND I CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE WANT ME TO THE, WHERE, WHAT SHEET THAT IS ON AND WHAT, WHAT THE DETAIL IS.

SHE'S STILL WAITING ON THE DIAGRAM.

SO I'M ON, ON THAT AXON DRAWING.

THAT'S ON I SEE ONE S ONE, WHICH WE'RE ON PAGE, JUST ONE AND IT SAYS, HE'LL GO PEER DETAIL.

AND I DON'T SEE A DRAWING

[00:45:01]

IT'S THERE'S ARROWS POINTING TO LIKE A BLANK SPACE.

LIKE ALMOST LIKE IT DIDN'T MAKE IT ON THE SHEET OR SOMETHING.

YEAH.

I KNOW THAT I'M NOT FINDING THE FILE, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE IS AN ACTUAL DRAWING OF THE PIER WITH A BRACKET THAT THE, UH, THAT THE FOUNDATION IS GOING TO BE MOUNTED ON WITH BOYD BOXES.

NO, IT'S ALL STEEL IT'S STEEL AND IT HAS THE METAL BRACKET.

AND THEN THE, THE, CAUSE THE, THE FOUNDATION, WE WERE PLANNING ON BUILDING IT WITH I-BEAMS WITH STEEL BEAMS, BUT SO UNDER THE SLAB WHAT'S HAPPENING THERE.

OKAY.

THEY JUST DRIVE, THEY JUST DRIVE IT, THEY JUST DRIVE THE PEER TO SUBSTRATE TO A CERTAIN PRESSURE TO WHERE IT'S OKAY.

STRUCTURALLY SOUND FOR ME, MY CONCERN IS JUST THE TREES.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE ARBORIST.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A DETAILED YES.

BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVE THE DETAIL OF I'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE INCLUDED.

AND THE REASON WHY WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING WITH THAT SYSTEM FOR PEERS IS TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT ON THE ROOT ZONE.

BECAUSE IF WE USE CONCRETE IS GOING TO BE TWICE AS WIDE FOR THE, FOR THE EXCAVATION.

AND THESE ARE JUST DRIVEN IN, LIKE I SAID, I THINK IT'S JUST A MATTER OF JUST INCLUDING THE DOCUMENTATION FOR MEMBER MACARTHUR.

YEAH.

I AGREE.

I'M LOOKING AT THE DOCUMENT TOO.

AND I THINK IF YOU'RE RUNNING PEERS THROUGH AN EXISTING CONCRETE FOUNDATION, THEN YOU PROBABLY CAN'T AIR DRILL TO LOOK FOR THE BIG TREE ROOTS.

SO I THINK WE JUST NEED A LITTLE MORE DETAILS ON THE TREE PROTECTION.

SORRY.

THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN ON PAGE THREE SEC SLASH 16, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO BUILD? BECAUSE OF THE INTRODUCTION MENTIONED AN OFFICE.

THAT'S NOT AN OFFICE.

SO I JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK.

YES.

IT IS A SECOND, A SECONDARY DWELLING.

UH, HE'S USING IT AS AN OFFICE.

AND IS THE INTENT OVER TIME TO LEASE THAT OUT? NO, NO, THIS IS THE DREAM HOME AND THIS IS THE RETIREMENT HOME.

OKAY.

THERE, THEY'RE DEFINITELY NOT CONSIDERING THAT GUESS.

I EVEN SUGGESTED BUILDING UP CAUSE WE HAD NO RESTRICTIONS GOING UP JUST FOR SQUARE FOOTAGE PURPOSES AND THEY DENIED BECAUSE THAT'S JUST, UH, INTENDED FOR THEM FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE.

WELL, IF YOU GO BACK AND TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND THE APPLICABLE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, AGAIN, IT WOULD BE, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE SEEN THIS PARTICULAR FLOOR PLAN OR NOT, BUT IF NOT, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO INCLUDE BOARD MEMBER SMITH.

SO I'M LOOKING AT THE ONE, OBJECTION.

THAT'S IN THE FILE AND I, THE WAY I'M READING IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS, UH, INDIVIDUAL, HAS IT BACKWARDS? HAVE YOU SEEN THIS OBJECTION? NO, I HAVE NOT.

OKAY.

UM, THEY SAY THAT THEY SHOULD TRY, THEY SHOULD ADD THE FIVE FOOT THEY'RE GOING TO GAIN TO THE FRONT OF THE GARAGE SLASH STUDIO, WHICH HAS AMPLE DISTANCE TO ACCOMMODATE THE FIVE FOOT AS OPPOSED TO THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE, BUT THE FRONT OF THE, UH, THE STRUCTURE, UH, WE'RE NOT ENCROACHING ON ANY RESTRICTIONS.

YEAH.

IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY BELIEVE THAT YOU WERE GOING TO BE BUILDING THE STRUCTURE TOWARD THE REAR AS OPPOSED TO THE FRONT.

AND SINCE WE HAVEN'T SPOKE TO ANYONE, THEY PROBABLY JUST WENT ONLINE TO READ WHAT WAS SUBMITTED AND MISUNDERSTOOD.

OKAY.

YEAH.

THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE, MAYBE.

SO I THINK AT THIS POINT, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE DEFINITELY LOOKING FOR HIM FOR MORE INFORMATION.

UH, HEARD THAT WE WANT TO SEE THAT EMAIL FROM THE ARBORIST.

AND, UH, THERE WAS REQUEST TO SEE A MORE DETAILED STRUCTURAL DRAWING AND DEFINITELY MEETING WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.

YES, ACTUALLY.

UM, AND THE, UH, INFORMATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HEARING, I WANT TO SAY WE SUBMITTED A, UH, IF IT'S NOT THE ACTUAL EMAIL, WE SUBMITTED AN IMAGE OF THE EMAIL WITH THE DATE AND TIME WHEN MR. GOLDMAN REPLIED.

SO IT SHOULD BE ACTUALLY PART OF THE PACKAGE REGARDLESS.

WE'RE DEFINITELY GOING TO NEED YOU TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND OKAY.

ALSO MADAM CHAIR, LIKE AUGUSTINA SET UP, UH, COMMISSIONER SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT, WHAT THESE DETAILS ARE GOING TO BE FOR THE THREE INCH PIPE AND THE EIGHT INCH FLIGHT.

CAUSE EVEN IF YOU'RE DRIVING THESE THINGS INTO THE GROUND AND I WAS A CONTRACTOR, BUILD THAT

[00:50:01]

WITH MY EYES CLOSED.

IF YOU DRIVE THESE THINGS INTO THE GROUND, YOU RUN A RISK FOR THE, FOR HITTING THE CREDIT.

OKAY.

ANOTHER CONCERN THAT I HAVE, IF THIS IS AN OFFICE, ONE OF THE OTHER CONCERNS THAT I HAVE AND THE VISION THAT I WAS, I WAS GOING TO MAKE A POSTPONEMENT AS WELL IS AS YOU LOOK AT THE DRAWING FOR AN OFFICE, HE'S GOT A STOVE, HE'S GOT A SINK AND HE'S GOT A, GOT A BATHROOM.

AND I'VE BEEN UP HERE FOR, FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, 15 YEARS GOING ON PLUS, AND I'VE SEEN A LOT OF STEALTH ADU.

IF IT'S GOING TO BE AN ADU, LET'S CALL IT AN ADU.

IT'S NOT LESS IS MORE AT THIS POINT.

RIGHT.

OKAY.

WHEN I SEE A BATHROOM AND WHEN I SEE A STOVE AND I SEE A SINK, THE FIRST THING COMES TO MY MIND.

THIS IS THE PERFECT DEP ADU IN.

WE'RE NOT OPPOSED AT 80 USE.

YOU'LL FIND IT QUITE A BIT OF SUPPORT FOR THEM, ESPECIALLY WITH THE HOUSING CRUNCH THAT WE HAVE IN AUSTIN.

BUT I MEAN, IF IT'S GOING TO BE AN ADU, LET'S CALL IT AN ADU AND NOT AN OFFICE BECAUSE REALLY, QUITE FRANKLY, I DON'T SEE A DESK AND YOU'RE DRAWING OVER HERE, YOU KNOW? SO THAT GETS, THAT, THAT SORT OF SENDS A RED FLAG UP TO US.

YOU DO HAVE A BONAFIDE HARDSHIP.

OKAY.

I'LL TELL YOU THAT.

AND, UH, READING YOUR HARDSHIP AND, AND, UH, YOUR FINDINGS, BUT WITHOUT SEEING HOW THOSE PERIODS ARE GOING TO GO IN AND IMPACT THAT WITHOUT EVEN THOUGH YOU'VE GOT A COPY OF IT, WE DON'T HAVE A COPY OF IT IN THE PACKAGE FOR WHATEVER REASON, YOU KNOW, STUFF HAPPENS.

IF YOU COULD PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION.

I THINK YOU'D PROBABLY, YOU'D PROBABLY DO WELL OFF.

AND THE REAL BIG THING IS GET WHAT THE HOA NET AREA.

OKAY.

LET THEM SEE YOUR DRAWINGS BECAUSE YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T WANT THAT.

YOU DON'T WANT IT TO GET UP TO THE STARTING LINE AND THEN, YOU KNOW, HAVE IT CRUMBLED BENEATH YOU.

OKAY.

BUT EVERYTHING ELSE HERE LOOKS, LOOKS PRETTY GOOD.

THANK YOU.

YEAH.

THAT SECOND TO YOUR POSTPONE ME JUST GIVING THEM A LITTLE GUIDANCE WHEN HE GOES BACK AND, AND YEAH.

AND I WANT TO REITERATE, ACTUALLY MEET WITH THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS PERSONALLY AND SHOWED THEM YOUR PLANS AND HAVE THEM SIGN OFF ON YOUR PLANS SAYING THAT THEY'VE SEEN THEM.

OKAY.

THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

SO THIS IS A, WELL, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, VIRTUAL FOLKS? SORRY.

DON'T WANT TO MISS Y'ALL OKAY.

THIS IS A MOTION TO POSTPONE, UH, TO JULY 11TH, 2022.

TOMMY EIGHTS.

YES.

BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

CAROL PUT YES.

OBVIOUSLY ANNA RODRIGUEZ.

YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

MICHAEL VENTOLIN.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

CARRIE WALLER.

YES.

AND KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

OKAY.

SO THIS IS POSTPONE TILL JULY 11TH.

GET ALL THIS STUFF FOR US.

COME BACK.

WE'LL TALK TO YOU EVER AGAIN.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO I'M SORRY.

[E-1 C15-2022-0002 Rao Vasamsetti for 5413 Guadalupe LLC 5413 Guadalupe Street (Part 2 of 2) ]

ELAINE, DID WE HAVE AN UPDATE FOR 54 13TH GUADALUPE STREET? DO WE HAVE A SPEAKER YET ON THAT ONE? NO.

I REACHED OUT TO HIM AND I HAVEN'T HEARD THAT.

I THINK MAYBE BECAUSE ACCIDENTS HAPPEN OR WHATEVER, AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'M HEARING IT, THAT I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO JULY 11TH, 2022, ALL SECOND SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER, BAILEY, JAMAICAN, ALL CAN EMOTION.

AND THE REASON BEING IS THEY DON'T HAVE A HEART.

THEIR HARDSHIP THAT THEY'VE SUBMITTED, THEIR APPLICATION IS NOT A HARDSHIP.

IT'S AN OPINION.

AND IF THEY'RE GOING TO DEMO THE EXISTING BUILDING, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A CLEAN SLATE.

SO, I MEAN, I I'M INCLINED TO AGREE, BUT WE NEED TO BE DISCUSSING MERITS OF THE POSTPONEMENT.

I DESERVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE THEIR CASE HEARD, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT'S AND I, AND I HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE AN ALTERNATE MOTION TO DENY.

DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY? I'VE REALLY JUST WENT WIDE.

THE REASON I WAS SAYING THIS NOW IS BECAUSE HOPEFULLY THEY'LL SEE THE VIDEO AND THEY'LL DO SOMETHING ABOUT MARCH BECAUSE OTHERWISE I'M GOING TO DENY IT NEXT TIME.

OKAY.

THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.

I HAD THE SAME THOUGHT.

SO, I MEAN, I'LL GO WITH THE POSTPONEMENT, BUT I HOPE THEY SEE THE VIDEO AND THE GRIEF YOU, IF WE JUST WENT, UH, FORD MEMBER MACARTHUR, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR

[00:55:01]

I WAS GOING TO AGREE ABOUT THAT.

CAUSE IT WAS PRETTY INCONSISTENT.

IT DIDN'T REALLY READ LIKE A HARDSHIP TO ME EITHER, BUT THAT'S JUST, SO IF THEY WATCH THIS, THEY NEED TO WORK ON THEIR HARDSHIP AND ALSO THEIR SITE PLAN, BUT TO THE POSTPONEMENT AND MAYBE THEY CAN MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AT UDAB JUST SPEAKING, HYPOTHETICALLY, IF WE WERE HYPOTHETICAL, RIGHT.

SEE, I WANT KELLY TO TAKE MY PLACE WHEN I STEP DOWN.

NO, I LET KELLY TO TAKE RAHM'S PLACE.

I WANT ROLL BACK ALL.

OKAY.

THIS IS A MOTION TO POSTPONE ITEM.

20 22 0 0 0 2 TO JULY 11TH, 2020 TO MEET BY JESSICA COHEN AND SECONDED BY WAS THAT YOU? THAT YOU BROKE SECOND.

OKAY.

SECOND NAME BY A BOARD MEMBER.

BAILEY.

TELL ME YES.

BROOKE BAILEY.

YES.

JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

MELISSA WOOP.

SHE'S NOT HERE.

BARBARA MACARTHUR.

YES.

DARYL PUT YES.

AUGUSTINA YES.

RICHARD SMITH.

YES.

MICHAEL VENTOLIN.

YES.

NICOLE WADE.

YES.

CARRIE WALLER.

YES.

AND KELLY BLOOM.

YES.

CAN YOU JUST SELECT THE POSTPONE TO JULY 11TH? JEEZ.

THAT'S 1, 2, 3.

THE NEXT

[F-1 C15-2022-0011 Jonathan Kaplan for David Scott Kosch 2715 Long Bow Trail]

WILL BE ITEM F ONE C 15 20 22 0 0 1 1 2 7 1 5.

LONGBOAT TRAIL.

JONATHAN KAPLAN FOR DAVID SCOTT.

COS WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO TAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER FIRST.

THAT'S A RECONSIDERATION.

YOU'RE RIGHT TO RECONSIDERATION.

OKAY.

ONE SEC PLEASE.

SO DO YOU, I HAVE A MOTION.

I AM HEARING A LOT OF SILENCE.

OKAY.

WHAT IS THE ACTUAL PROCESS FOR THEM? IT'S NEVER HAPPENED.

WELL, I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD, UH, ERICA LOPEZ, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.

SO, UM, THE BOARD PREVIOUSLY DENIED THIS CASE.

IT'S UM, THE APPLICANT FILED A RECONSIDERATION, ELAINE, PUT IT BACK ONTO THE AGENDA.

THERE MUST BE A MA UH, MOTION MADE TO RECONSIDER THE CASE.

AND THEN THE BOARD WOULD VOTE ON THAT.

IT WOULD TAKE SIX VOTES AFFIRMATIVE TO BRING THE CASE BACK UP.

AND THEN, UM, THE BOARD WOULD HEAR IT ON THE MERITS.

IF THERE'S A FAILURE OF A MOTION TO RECONSIDER, IT IS, UM, CONSIDERED A FINAL ACTION ON THE MATTER.

SO I GUESS YOU COULD VOTE TO NOT RECONSIDER THE CASE OR NOT HAVE A MOTION AND THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED FINAL ACTION.

SO THERE'S NO MOTIONS.

SO, OH, ACTUALLY I'D ACTUALLY MOVED TO RECONSIDER.

I MEAN, THEY DO STAY IN THEIR LETTER THAT THEY FOUND A WAY TO REDUCE THEIR IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS.

MADAM CHAIR, MY HAND, AS FAR AS I'M GOING TO MAKE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO DENY, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH I'VE READ THIS AND I'VE READ THIS SEVERAL TIMES, EVERYTHING IN OUR PACKAGE IS STILL THE SAME AS IT WAS.

AND I DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE TO GO THERE, BUT IT'S STILL THE SAME AS IT WAS ON 9 12 21, 2 14 22, 3 14 22, 4 11 22, 5 9 22.

NOTHING HAS CHANGED.

THE LETTERS IS INCLUDED, BUT I DO NOT SEE ANY DESIGN FOR VEGETATIVE STRIPS.

I DON'T SEE ANYTHING STATED THAT REQUIRED IN THE LETTER.

UH, I HAVE, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY CHANGES.

THERE WAS AN, THERE WAS A TALK ABOUT, UH, SOME MITIGATION.

I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT AND TALK ABOUT, UH, THE REQUEST WOULD REDUCE BY 33%.

I DON'T SEE THAT.

SO THEREFORE, UM, WE'LL MAKE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO DENY, SIR.

IT'S RIGHT HERE.

UM, I HAVE, SORRY.

SO HANG ON GUYS TOO MUCH TALKING TO ONES FOR MEMBER PER NURSING.

I HAVE A POINT OF ORDER.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT BOARD MEMBER OF AUTO LYNN'S MOTION IS IN ORDER AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A RECONSIDERATION,

[01:00:01]

THE BOARD MUST, SOMEBODY MUST MAKE A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND IT MUST BE APPROVED WITH A MAJORITY VOTE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANYTHING IN OUR BYLAWS THAT ALLOWS FOR A MOTION TO DENY RECONSIDERATION.

I MEAN, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS EITHER GOING TO PASS OR IT'S NOT GOING TO PASS.

UM, AND, UM, WE MAY NEED CLARIFICATION FROM LEGAL DARRYL BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD WAS YEAH.

TO MAKE A MOTION.

I MEAN, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO MATTER AT THE END OF THE DAY, BUT WE, THERE WAS A RELUCTANT NOTION TO RECONSIDER AND I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY HAS SECONDED IT AT THIS POINT.

SO IT MAY FAIL FOR ONE OF A SECOND IN ANY OF THAT.

OKAY.

SO W WHY DON'T WE START THERE? UH, BECAUSE TECHNICALLY, UH, THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION SHOULD HAVE WAITED FOR, TO SEE IF THERE WAS A SECOND TO THE FIRST MOTION, WHICH WAS THE MOTION THAT WE CONSIDER.

SO WE DO HAVE THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER, BUT BOARD MEMBER BLOOM, DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER? OKAY.

SO THAT LOOKS LIKE NO, WHICH IS AN AUTOMATIC FINAL ACTION.

CORRECT.

IS THERE A SPECIFIC LANGUAGE FOR THAT OR NOW THE MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND, THE MOTION FAILS.

WHY WERE THE PACKETS I SUBMITTED NOT GIVEN TO THE BOARD.

EVERYTHING YOU JUST ASKED WAS IN THE PACKET I SUBMITTED.

UM, I'M SORRY.

IT'S NOT QUESTION TIME.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE ANSWER .

I SUBMITTED IT AND HIS PRESENTATION, ALL THE UPDATED INFORMATION HE SUBMITTED IN HIS PRESENTATION.

OKAY.

DOES THAT CHANGE? ANYBODY'S WILLING TO SECOND.

SO EVERYTHING THE BOARD ASKED FOR IN THE LAST MIRRORING MEETING.

OKAY.

I WILL GO AHEAD AND I'LL BE THE SECOND CHAIR TO OPEN, UP TO VOTE ON THE RECONSIDERATION.

CAN YOU STILL GO TO VOTE? SO, SO THERE, SO THERE WAS A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND THEN YOU SECONDED IT.

AND SO IT'S GOING TO BE A VOTE ON THE MATTER TO RECONSIDER, WHICH WOULD NEED SIX AFFIRMATIVE VOTES.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO COULD YOU PULL THE PRESENTATION DOWN PLEASE? SO WE CAN SEE EVERYONE'S FACES.

SO THIS IS THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER MADE BY BOARD MEMBER BLOOM SECONDED BY MYSELF, TOMMY IT'S.

YES.

BROOKE BAILEY JUST, JUST VERY QUICKLY.

IF WE'RE GOING TO RECONSIDER, IT'S GOING TO BE A DIFFERENT VARIANCE.

IF HE'S REDUCING THE IMPERVIOUS, THE LANGUAGE WILL BE BROUGHT.

WE DISCUSSED THE MERITS OF THE KEYS.

WHOA.

OKAY.

I JUST WONDER IF IT'S A POSTING ERROR, THOUGH.

IF, IF THEY'RE COMING BACK WITH NEW DRAWINGS AND NEW INFORMATION, IT'S GOING TO BE A DIFFERENT VARIANCE, WHICH WOULD BE A POSTING ERROR.

IT'S NOT, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE MERITS OF CASE, CORRECT? BECAUSE OF IT'S REDUCED BY 43%.

IT DOESN'T SAY SO IN THE POSTING.

EXACTLY.

IT DOESN'T SHOW IT IN THE POST.

EXACTLY.

THE POSTINGS ARE STILL THE SAME.

DON'T WE STILL HAVE TO VOTE ON THE RECONSIDERATION.

YOU COULD STILL HAVE TO VOTE ON THE, YES.

WE STILL HAVE TO VOTE ON THE RECONSIDERATION.

AND THEN I, IF, IF, AND THEN IF YOU HAD RECONSIDER THE MATTER AND THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH THE POSTING, THEN, UM, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD POSTPONE THE CASE, UM, TO ANOTHER TIME WHERE THE POSTING COULD BE FIXED.

IF THAT,