[00:00:05]
[CALL TO ORDER]
ON MARCH 13TH, 2023.I HEREBY CALL THE SPEEDING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ORDER.
AM I MISSING ON? OKAY, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND ONE SEC.
WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL.
HOW MANY DOES THAT GIVE US? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
AND THEN ARE YOU COUNTING ME? I DIDN'T, KELLY, CAN ANYBODY HEAR ME? YEAH, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
KELLY, CAN YOU HEAR THE DIAS? OKAY.
SO IT'S JUST ME, JESSICA, AND THINK YOU NEED TO CALL JANELLE PAUL, WHO? OUR NEW BOARD MEMBER.
KELLY, CAN YOU HEAR US? CAN YOU I CAN HEAR YOU NOW.
CAN YOU HEAR? YEAH, WE CAN HEAR YOU NOW.
SORRY FOR THE AUDIO QUALITY FOR THE, YES.
SHE'S TAKING THE OATH AND SHE'S HAD HER TRAINING.
CITY CLERK HAS SAID SHE'S READY TO SEARCH.
JANELLE WHAT? HERE AND WHICH DISTRICT? COOL.
SO DARRELL'S NOT PRESENT, IS THAT? NO.
JANELLE, HOW DO YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME? V E A Z A N T.
I'M GONNA HAVE TO CALL YOUR NAME AND YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO STAY HERE.
WELCOME TO OUR NEWEST BOARD MEMBER JANELLE VANZANT.
THAT GIVES US 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.
UH, LANE, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? I'M NOT SURE.
I'LL JUST GO OVER THE BASICS REAL QUICK, Y'ALL.
UH, PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CELL PHONES OR PUT THEM ON VIBRATE AFTER YOUR CASE IS OVER.
PLEASE TAKE YOUR DISCUSSION OUTSIDE TO THE LOBBY.
UH, WHEN YOU'RE ADDRESSING THE BOARD, PLEASE SPEAK DIRECTLY TO THE BOARD.
IF THERE'S ANY OPPOSITION, DO NOT SPEAK TO THE OPPOSITE PARTY, JUST TO THE BOARD.
UM, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT YOUR CASE, PLEASE CALL OR EMAIL ELAINE TOMORROW.
UM, WE MAY NEED TO TAKE A BREAK TONIGHT, I'M NOT SURE, BUT IF WE DO, THAT'S USUALLY ABOUT EIGHT O'CLOCK FOR 10 MINUTES OR SO.
IF YOU HAVEN'T GOTTEN YOUR PARKING TICKET VALIDATED, THERE'S A LITTLE STAMPED DEVICE AND A LOG OVER HERE, UH, WHERE YOU WALKED IN.
JUST TAKE YOUR LITTLE PARKING TICKET, STAMP IT, WRITE YOUR NUMBER DOWN, AND THAT'LL VALIDATE YOU FOR YOUR PARKING.
FOR ANYONE WHO IS GOING TO BE GIVING TESTIMONY TONIGHT, CAN I GET YOU TO PLEASE STAND? I'M GONNA ASK YOU TO TAKE AN 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? THANKS SO MUCH.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 13TH, 2023.MOTION TO APPROVE MEANING BY SECOND, MELISSA HAWTHORNE.
UH, ANY CHANGES OR CORRECTIONS? NOPE.
UH, THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES FROM
[00:05:01]
FEBRUARY 13TH, MADE BY MELISSA HAWTHORNE.AM I, DO YOU SEE ME, JESSICA? AM I, YEAH, I, I ABSTAIN.
WHERE DID YOU COME FROM? I'M HERE.
AND I ALSO DIDN'T GET CALLED ROLL.
YOU WERE, IT WAS SHOWING YOU AS OFF DI EARLIER.
UH, SO AUGUSTINE RODRIGUEZ, ARE YOU HERE?
I WAS, I WAS NOT HERE YESTERDAY.
SO ARE WE 10 TONIGHT? YEAH, WE'RE 10 TONIGHT.
THAT MIGHT BE A CONSIDERATION FOR THE APPLICANT.
YEAH, I'M GO, I WAS GONNA MAKE THAT OFFER IN JUST A SECOND.
[2. Discussion of staff and applicant requests for postponement and withdrawal of public hearing cases posted on the agenda.]
ITEM TWO, DISCUSSION OF STAFF AND APPLICANT REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT AND WITHDRAWAL OF PUBLIC HEARING CASES POSTED ON THE AGENDA.ELAINE, OR DO WE HAVE ANY POSTPONEMENTS OR, SO WHAT WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING IS THAT THERE ARE ONLY 10 BOARD MEMBERS TONIGHT.
A FULL BOARD IS 11 ONE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
THERE'S, THERE'S ONE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
IT'S, UM, ITEM NINE, THE RECONSIDERATION THERE AND CONTINUING TALKS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD CREEK.
SO THAT IS, THEY'VE REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANNA GO AHEAD AND PUT THAT IN, BUT IF ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO WAIT, UH, TILL NEXT MONTH WHEN WE HAVE A FULL BOARD, UH, YOU ARE WELCOME TO ASK FOR A POSTPONEMENT TONIGHT.
ANYONE, BECAUSE THEY, THEY WOULD STILL NEED NINE VOTES.
SO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REQUIRES A SUPER MAJORITY, THAT'S NINE VOTES.
SO IF YOU HAVE TWO PEOPLE WHO AREN'T IN YOUR WHEELHOUSE, THAT'S IT.
THERE'S IS A LITTLE MORE WIGGLE ROOM.
ELAINE, COULD YOU TELL ME WHEN ITEM NINE WAS REQUESTING TO POSTPONE TO PLEASE? YES, MA'AM.
THEY'RE REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT UNTIL APRIL 10TH.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE.
DON'T YOU MS. MICHAEL ALREADY? YEP.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE ITEM NINE TO APRIL 10TH, MADE BY MELISSA HAWTHORNE, SECONDED BY BROOKE BAILEY.
ITEM NINE IS POSTPONED TILL APRIL 10TH.
[3. C15-2023-0010 Jay Hargrave for Harthan, LLC 600 Harthan Street]
MOVING ON, WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO ITEM THREE C 15 20 23 0, 0 1, 10 J HARGRAVE FOR HARTH, LLC, 600 HARTH STREET.UH, PLEASE STEP UP TO THE PODIUM.
LET US GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP.
STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
AND WOULD YOU WANNA CHANGE SLIDES? JUST, YEAH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
SO I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THIS, WHICH IS A PARKING CAROUSEL NAME, PLEASE.
WE'RE APPROVED FOR TWO OF THESE AT
[00:10:01]
600 HARK IN ORDER TO, UM, ACCOMMODATE OUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS OF 14.AND THIS HELPS US TO PRESERVE SIGNIFICANT BUILDINGS ON THE PROPERTY.
IF WE WEREN'T GOING TO HAVE THIS, WE'D HAVE TO DEMOLISH THE ORIGINAL ESTATE BUILDING THAT WE REFER TO AS THE VICTORIAN.
BUT AFTER FURTHER CONSIDERATION, WE'VE DECIDED THAT THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA.
IT HAS A NEGATIVE IMPACT TO HEARTH STREET, THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE, AS WELL AS CONCERNS FOR NOISE, FIRE SUPPRESSION, AND MECHANICAL FAILURE, ESPECIALLY DUE TO A POWER OUTAGE.
THIS ILLUSTRATION, UH, SHOWS THE CAROUSEL IN RED WITH THE EXISTING BUILDING THAT'S THERE RIGHT NOW IN BLUE, THE TOP OF THE CAROUSEL IS 41 FEET ABOVE THE ENTRY FLOOR LEVEL OF THE MAIN HOUSE, AND IS SEVEN FEET ABOVE THE EXISTING BUILDING.
THIS IS A HISTORIC BUILDING, HISTORIC PHOTO OF THE BUILDING, UM, BEFORE THE ADDITION WAS DONE.
YOU CAN SEE THE VICTORIAN BEHIND IT WITH THE TURRET.
PART OF OUR SOLUTION IS TO CONTRACT WITH, UH, REMOTE, UH, PARKING PROPERTY OWNER, WHICH IS NUMBER ONE.
THEY'RE AT THE END OF WALL STREET AND FOURTH BEHIND BETTER HALF TWO AND THREE ARE PROPERTIES THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED OPPORTUNITIES WITH.
AND THEN YOU SEE 600 HEARTH TO THE RIGHT.
JUST A FEW SLIDES SHOWING THE CHARACTER OF THE PROJECT.
NEXT, THIS SLIDE IS TAKEN AT THE ALLEY TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY, AND IT SHOWS THE EXISTING STRUCTURE TO THE REAR.
THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER TO THE NORTH IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SLIDE.
NEXT, THIS SHOWS THE TWO CAROUSELS OF PARKING TO THE REAR, SAME VIEW.
NEXT, THIS IS A VIEW FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER'S DINING ROOM THAT SHOWS THE EXISTING BUILDING NEXT.
AND THIS IS A VIEW OF THE PARKING CAROUSEL.
SO THERE'S TWO OPENINGS AT THE BOTTOM.
NEXT, THIS IS PART OF OUR SOLUTION IN TERMS OF ACCOMMODATING THE 14 SPACES THAT ARE REQUIRED.
WE CAN PARK SEVEN ON THE STREET AND SEVEN IN THE ALLEY IN ADDITION TO THE 15 THAT WE HAVE IN AGREEMENT WITH OVER AT WALSH AND FOURTH STREET.
IF YOU LOOK UP TO THE TOP RIGHT THERE, YOU CAN'T SEE IT BECAUSE OF THE WINDOW, BUT THERE'S, UH, BUILDING C, WHICH IS THE BUILDING THAT WOULD BE DEMOLISHED FOR THE CAROUSEL.
AND THEN THERE'S BUILDING B, WHICH WOULD HAVE TO BE DEMOLISHED IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE OFF STREET PARKING, UH, IF THE CAROUSEL WAS NOT BUILT.
LET'S GO TO THE LAST SLIDE 15.
IF YOU WANT TO GIVE ME A CONTACT, JUST HIT THE QR CODE.
THERE'S ALSO A VIDEO OF THE CAROUSEL ON THERE, AND I AM GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO SHEILA LYON.
SHE IS AANA ZONING COMMISSION CHAIR.
SHOULD BE GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.
I AM SHEILA LYON, ALANA ZONING COMMITTEE'S CHAIR.
I'M HERE TO SHARE OUR SUPPORT FOR THE REQUESTED PARKING VARIANCE AT 600 HEARTH STREET.
IF THE FOLLOWING FOUR CONDITIONS ARE WRITTEN INTO THE VARIANCE, NUMBER ONE, THE PROJECT WILL REMAIN UNIT HOTEL AND THERE WILL BE NO ADDITIONS IN THE FUTURE.
NUMBER TWO, THE HOTEL PARKING POLICY WILL BE VALE PARKING ONLY.
THE HOTEL VALE STAFF WILL ONLY PARK ALL VEHICLES ASSOCIATED WITH THE HOTEL AND CONTRACT SPACES AND IN FRONT OF THE HOTEL AND IN THE ALLEY ON HAREN VALLEY AND SAN STAFF.
PARKING WILL NOT BE ALLOWED ON THE RESIDENTIAL STREETS NORTH OF WEST SIXTH STREET.
NUMBER THREE, ALL OF EXISTING BUILDINGS WILL BE PRESERVED AND RENOVATED.
NUMBER FOUR, THE VARIANCE IS FOR THIS HOTEL PROJECT ONLY.
IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THE STAKEHOLDERS OF THE HOTEL ARE IN A GRIEVANT WITH THESE CONDITIONS.
THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE HAS MET TWICE WITH THE ZONING COMMITTEE, AND THAT HAS ALSO MET WITH THE NEARBY NEIGHBORS WHO ARE
[00:15:01]
IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE.THE PROPOSED HOTEL PROJECT DOES GIVE A THREEFOLD HARDSHIP.
NUMBER ONE, THE BUILDING FACING HEARTH AND BY BY THE LHD GUIDELINES.
NUMBER TWO, THE PROJECT IS PROPOSES TO PRESERVE ALL EXISTING BUILDINGS TO MAINTAIN LOCAL HISTORIC CHARACTER.
AND NUMBER THREE, THE EXISTING SITE WAS PREVIOUSLY USED FOR CONDOS WITH ONLY TWO PARKING SPACES.
THESE HARDSHIPS ARE UNIQUE TO THE SITE AND WILL NOT SET A PRECEDENT.
I WANNA APPRECIATE YOUR DILIGENCE AND APPROVING REQUESTED VARIANCES THAT WILL, WILL NOT PRECEDENT AND ASK THAT YOU APPROVE THE REQUESTED PARKING VARIANCE WITH A FORM MENTIONED CONDITION.
HAPPY THE BUZZER'S GONE OFF, BUT WE APPRECIATE YOU.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? ANY OPPOSITION ON THE PHONE? OKAY.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, I'D LIKE TO START WITH THE APPLICANT.
CAN YOU CONFIRM, UH, THAT EVERYTHING MS. LYONS SAID IS CORRECT? THAT, UH, LIKE IF I WERE TO CONDITION THIS ON, UH, VALLEY ONLY, NO STAFF PARKING ON RESIDENTIAL.
AND THE USE IS A HOTEL, CORRECT? UH, YEAH.
BASICALLY IT'S LAID OUT IN THE LETTER FROM AANA.
AND WE CAN'T CONDITION ON USE, RIGHT? WHAT'S THE CONDITIONS TO THAT? THE USE WOULD HAVE TO REMAIN A HOTEL? WELL, I THINK WE CAN CONDITION ON, I DON'T THINK WE CAN USE, BUT WE CAN CONDITION ON THIS OWNER, I THINK SO THAT IF IT TRANSFERS, NO.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU STATE THE CONDITION, UH, THAT THE USE OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE VARI? THE VARIANCE WOULD BE TIED TO THE USE OF THE PROPERTY BEING A HOTEL FOR THIS HOTEL, THIS HOTEL, THIS HOTEL ONLY LIKE THE OWNERSHIP OF THE HOTEL OR THE, WELL, IT JUST SAYS, IT SAYS THE VARIANCES WOULD TIE IT TO THE PERMIT.
SO IF THEY'RE REQUESTING ANY DIFFERENT TYPE OF PERMIT, IF, IF THEY WANTED TO CHANGE THE USE, THAT WOULD REQUIRE A NEW PERMIT.
SO I WOULD RECOMMEND TYING IT TO THE SPECIFIC PERMIT.
BUT IF IT WAS THIS SPECIFIC OWNERSHIP GROUP, NO NECESSARILY THIS OWNERSHIP, THE HOTEL, JUST HOTEL, THEN I WOULD RECOMMEND IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THAT RESULT, YOU WOULD JUST TIE IT TO THE PERMIT.
AND THEN I JUST HAVE A QUICK PRO YES.
AND I JUST WANT CLARIFICATION.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW YOU WOULD HAVE TO TEAR DOWN TWO BUILDING EXISTING BUILDINGS TO BUILD THAT CAROUSEL.
HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE? THIS IS IN A LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND THIS, THIS IS AN APARTMENT BUILDING FROM THE TWENTIES.
THE, UM, BUILDING ALONG HARTON IS, UH, A PROTECTED, IT'S PART OF THE HISTORIC, HISTORIC, BUT THE, THE THREE BUILDINGS THAT ARE BEHIND IT ARE NOT PROTECTED, BUT THEY ARE SIGNIFICANT.
SO ONE OF THE BUILDINGS WOULD BE REMOVED IN ORDER TO DO THE CAROUSEL TO DO JUST SURFACE PARKING.
IT WOULD REQUIRE, UH, REMOVING ANOTHER BUILDING.
THE VICTORIAN BOARD MEMBER HAWTHORNE, SORRY, VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE.
SO, UH, THE CAROUSEL TRIGGERING COMPATIBILITY TO THE NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE ALLEY DOES, ISN'T THE HEIGHT EXCEEDING WHAT COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS WOULD REQUIRE? I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT.
THE 41 FEET IS FROM THE ENTRY OF THE MAIN HOUSE.
COMPATIBILITY IS NO LONGER TURN.
SO 41 FEET WOULD BE FROM THE PROPERTY, UH, YOU KNOW, THE COMPATIBILITY WOULD BE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THEIR PROPERTY LINE.
SO IT'S 25 FEET AND YOU GO THE NEXT TIER.
COULD I RELY ON SOMEONE TO HELP ME ANSWER THAT QUESTION? YEAH, HE KNOWS THE DRILL.
I'M, I'M HERE REPRESENTING, UM, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER, MAUREEN MATOYA.
UM, AND THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS, UH, THE CURRENT STRUCTURE IS APPROVED IN COMPLIANCE WITH COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
AND THEN ALSO I THINK THE ADDED CAVEAT IS HER PROPERTY IS OWNED MF FOUR.
UM, SO NOT ALL COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS APPLY ANYMORE.
BUT SHE, WHAT'S THE USE OF IT? IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY USE, BUT THEN IF IT'S SINGLE FAMILY USE, THEN COMPATIBILITY DOES, UH, THAT'S CHANGED IN ON DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR.
CHANGE THE WHAT? OH, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE PROPERTY OR ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE RULE?
[00:20:02]
THE CURRENT SITE PLANS APPROVED UNDER CURRENT COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.UM, AND IF THERE ARE CHANGES TO THE SITE PLAN IN THE FUTURE, NOT ALL COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS WOULD APPLY.
BASED OFF OF HER HAVING A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE IN A MULTI-FAMILY ZONED PROPERTY.
THERE ARE CAVEATS NOW IN THE CODE THAT WEREN'T THERE.
BEFORE I GET WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH IT.
CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THE PLAN FOR STAFF PARKING? I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PLANS FOR FOR GUESTS, BUT WE HAVE, UH, SEVERAL LETTERS OF OPPOSITION THAT SEEM TO BE REFERENCING THE PARKING SITUATION.
SPECIFICALLY THE STAFF PARKING SITUATION.
WE WOULD USE THE REMOTE LOT FOR STAFF PARKING FOR THE STAFF THAT CHOSE TO DRIVE.
SO EVEN IF WHAT, WHAT IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE A REMOTE PARKING AGREEMENT IN PLACE? YEAH, I'M SORRY, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE REPORT, THE BACKUP IS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE A LONG-TERM.
AND THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE CORRECT.
AND THAT'S WHY I'M HERE BECAUSE WE REACHED OUT TO SEVERAL PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA THAT WOULD, UM, WOULD MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR REMOTE PARKING THROUGH THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
THERE WERE NONE THAT WERE WILLING TO, TO DO THAT BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN THE AREA.
SO, YOU KNOW, OUR OTHER OPTIONS WERE TO EITHER CONSTRUCT THE CAROUSEL OR REACH OUT TO BOARD AND SEE IF WE COULD FIND ANOTHER SOLUTION OR, YOU KNOW, LIQUIDATE THE PROPERTY.
SO CAN YOU COMMIT TO, IF YOU FOR SOME REASON HAVE A SHORTFALL OF REMOTE REMOTE PARKING FOR STAFF THAT YOU'LL SUPPORT YOUR EMPLOYEES USING TRANSIT OR OTHER MODES TO GET TO AND FROM WORK? YEAH, I CAN COMMIT TO THAT.
I WANNA ADD ON TO THAT THOUGH.
CAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE CAN'T, UM, THEY, IF THEY COME BY CAR OR THEY CARPOOL, UM, OR YOU KNOW, AND SO YOU DON'T HAVE, AS OF NOW YOU'RE SHOWING US THESE PARKING LOTS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE CONTRACTS ON.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? WE DO.
AND HOW LONG ARE THOSE CONTRACTS FOR? THE, UH, THE ONE THAT WE DO HAVE AN AGREEMENT ON IS FOR THREE YEARS.
FOR THREE YEARS AND THAT, YEAH, SO CUZ I LIVE NOT TOO FAR FROM THERE AND, AND I ACTUALLY KNOW HARTON VERY WELL USED TO BE MANY, MANY YEARS AGO ON THE ZONING COMMITTEE OF OANA.
SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THAT AREA AND I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PARKING ISSUES IN THAT AREA.
SO I HAVE TO SAY THIS IS WORRISOME.
NOW, I DON'T WANT YOU TEARING DOWN BUILDINGS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A BETTER PARKING PLAN THAN WHAT YOU'RE SHOWING US.
UM, WE HAVE TRIED, WE STARTED THE TEA PLAN PROCESS.
WE HAD A CONTRACT OR AN LOI WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER, UM, FOR WESTSIDE VILLAGE.
THEY DECIDED TO PUT THEIR PROJECT ON THE SHELF FOR THREE PLUS YEARS.
UM, I TALKED WITH MM AND L THEY DON'T, THEY'RE NOT READY TO COMMIT TO ANYTHING, RIGHT? UH, I S D IS NOT ABLE TO COMMIT TO ANYTHING.
THE PHOENIX CAN'T COMMIT TO ANYTHING.
SO ALL THE PROPERTIES THAT WOULD MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFSITE PARKING THERE, THERE'S NOTHING AVAILABLE.
SO WE, WE COULDN'T, NO MATTER WHAT, EVEN WITHOUT REGARDS TO A TIMEFRAME, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO FIND ANYBODY TO COME TO THE TABLE TO MAKE THAT AGREEMENT.
SO WE WERE STUCK WITH EITHER GOING TO YOU GUYS WITH THIS PROPOSAL AND SEEKING, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT BECOMES PART OF OUR OPERATIONAL PROCESS IS TO CONSTANTLY BE REACHING OUT TO AJ OR, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA TO LOOK FOR PARKING AGREEMENTS.
IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE GONNA RELY ON ONE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THIS AGREEMENT.
IT'S A CONSTANT PROCESS BECAUSE IT'S IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO MAINTAIN AS MUCH PARKING AS WE CAN.
BUT EVEN BEYOND THE REQUIRED 14.
SO IT'S REALLY, WE'RE, THAT'S OUR HARDSHIP.
WE CAN'T PARK THIS SITE WITHOUT REMOVING BUILDINGS OR WITHOUT THE CAROUSEL.
WE DON'T WANT TO DO EITHER ONE OF THOSE FOR VARIOUS REASONS.
AND WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE A REASONABLE SOLUTION IN PLACE, BUT WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T TAKE IT THROUGH THE STANDARD PROCESS.
YEAH, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A TEMPORARY SOLUTION.
AND THEN ONCE AND ONCE THIS UP, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORS WILL BE IN THE SAME PREDICAMENT THEY ARE WITH ALL OF THE, THE I I DO UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, AND I, THE LAST THING I WOULD WANT TO DO IS LIQUIDATE THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE WE COULDN'T MAKE IT MAKE SENSE FROM A, UM, FISCAL STANDPOINT.
BUT I DO KNOW THAT THERE IS AN ADJACENT COMMERCIAL NEIGHBOR THAT IS INTERESTED IN BUYING IT, WHICH THAT IS NOT BY ANY MEANS.
MY FIRST, YEAH, I MEAN, I'M NOT AGAINST WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
I THINK THE NEIGHBORS LIKE IT, BUT
[00:25:01]
I JUST, I WORRY ABOUT THIS THREE YEAR, ONE LOT OF PARKING.I MEAN, I CAN A LOT COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND.
I'M VERY FAMILIAR, FAMILIAR WITH AREA.
HAVE I GO TO, YOU KNOW, I GO TO CLARK'S AND THERE'S, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T DRIVE, I I TAKE RIDE SHARE BECAUSE OF THAT.
AND SO I I APPRECIATE IT COMPLETELY.
UH, DID YOU, DID I HEAR YOU SAY YOU'RE RELYING ON THE ORDER ORDINANCE A COMPATIBILITY ORDINANCE FROM DECEMBER, LAST DECEMBER? NO, I THINK THAT WAS RELATED TO MY QUESTION ABOUT COMPATIBILITY AND THE HEIGHT OF THE KEONG AND THE NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE ALLEY IS ZONED MULTIFAMILY, THOUGH IT IS USED RESIDENTIAL AND THERE ARE CHANGES TO COMPATIBILITY ORDINANCE IN DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR.
SO I DON'T THINK IT'S, I DON'T THINK IT'S APPLICABLE.
WELL THE REASON I'M RAISING IT THAT THAT DECEMBER ORDINANCE IS IN LITIGATION AS BEING A VIOLATION OF THE ACUNA CASE.
IS IT SO CERTAINLY MAKES IT INTERESTING, DOESN'T IT? WELL, I MEAN, I, TELL ME MORE ABOUT YOUR VIEW ON THIS CASE, HIS VIEW AS THAT VIEW OF THAT.
UM, THE REASON I ASKED THE QUESTION IS, CUZ WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE, THE SLIDE WITH THE HEIGHT OF THE GARAGE, THAT ALLEY IS PRETTY NARROW.
AND IF YOU WERE A HOUSE AND, YOU KNOW, GRANTED YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE IN THIS HISTORIC AREA, BUT IT WOULD NOT BE TYPICAL THAT YOU WOULD SEE SOMETHING THAT TALL.
UM, BECAUSE THE COMPATIBILITY TIERED HOW HIGH YOU COULD GO.
BUT THIS, THIS, THIS IS A SMALLER FRONTAGE AND A SMALLER LOT.
IT'S JUST, IT'D JUST BE UNUSUAL TO SEE SOMETHING THAT HIGH OVER THE FENCE.
I THOUGHT THE APPLICANT THOUGH MENTIONED THAT, THAT THE, THEY MENTIONED THE, THE DECEMBER ORDINANCE, UH, THAT WAS THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM, FOR THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR, MR. LAVINSKY.
BUT IT WAS IN RESPONSE TO MY QUESTION, MR, MY QUESTION IS
SO, UH, BOBBY LEVINSKY, AGAIN, I'M REPRESENTING THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR, MAUREEN MATOYA, WHO'S, I GOT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IN A MULTI-FAMILY OWN PROPERTY.
THE ONLY REASON I REFERENCE THE DECEMBER ORDINANCE IS WE REALLY DON'T WANNA HAVE TO RELY ON COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
SO I MEAN I THINK THAT THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE'RE CONCERNED WITH, UM, THAT THE QUESTION AND WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS VARIANCE BECAUSE THIS SOLVES A MAJOR ISSUE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND IT IS A COMPATIBLE USE COMPARATIVELY TO, UM, WHAT OTHER ALTERNATIVE OUTCOMES THERE COULD BE.
I'M GOING TO BRIEFLY TAKE A MOMENT AND ADDRESS BOARD MEMBER PRUITT AS JOINED THE DIAS SO THAT HE'LL BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE VOTE WELCOME BOARD MEMBER PRUITT.
AND CAN AND CAN YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PLEASE? DAR? YES.
OH, AND, UH, 6:10 PM MARCH 23RD.
UH, OTHER QUESTION? WELL QUESTION LUKI.
CHAIRPERSON, WERE YOU DONE? YEAH.
DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION? BOARD MEMBER SMITH? WELL, YEAH, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE ANSWER.
WAS IT, YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU ARE OR NOT RELYING ON THAT, THAT ORDINANCE, AGAIN, I'M NOT THE APPLICANT.
I'M A RAPE REPRESENTING THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR AND THEY ARE NOT RELYING ON THE DECEMBER ORDINANCE.
THE ONLY REASON I WAS ANSWERING THAT QUESTION WAS BECAUSE IT WAS RELATED TO, UH, COMMISSIONER WALEY HAWTHORNE'S QUESTION.
UM, THEY'RE NOT RELYING ON THE DECEMBER ORDINANCE, THEY'RE UNDER CURRENT COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS, BUT THAT IS A LIKELY OUTCOME IF THIS VARIANCE GET GETS DENIED THAT SOMETHING COULD BE SUBMITTED UNDER THE NEW COMPATIBILITY ORDINANCE.
SO THAT'S WHY IT'S, SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS WAITED OUT A FEW MONTHS AND IT'LL HAPPEN ANYWAYS.
SO I GUESS THE, WHAT I THINK THE, MY TRANSLATION OF WHAT HE SAID IS THE PREFERRED OUTCOME IS FOR THE CAROUSEL TO NOT BE BUILT, WHICH IS MY CONCERN WAS THAT COMPATIBILITY WOULDN'T ALLOW IT TO BE BUILT ANYWAY IF COMPATIBILITY HELD THE WAY IT WAS BEFORE IT WAS ALTERED IN DECEMBER.
AND SO HE'S SAYING THAT MY TRANSLATION OF WHAT HE'S SAYING IS THAT HE'S THERE REPRESENTING THE NEIGHBOR AND
[00:30:01]
THEY WOULD PREFER IT NOT TO HAVE THE PARKING CAROUSEL REGARDLESS OF WHETHER COMPATIBILITY OR NOT COMPATIBILITY.CUZ THE OUTCOME NEED BETTER AS, AS THE PROPERTY WOULD BE THE HOUSES, THE STRUCTURES THAT ARE THERE NOW AND USED FOR THE HOTEL AND SOME CARE IN LOVE PUT INTO THE HOTEL.
THAT'S JUST MY TRANSLATION OF ALL THAT.
EVERYBODY ELSE COULD, COULD, UH, CHIME IN OR, OR MR. LEWINSKY IF I DID NOT GET THAT CORRECTLY.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE WELCOME TO, TO, UH, YOU STATED IT BEAUTIFULLY.
SO MR. LEVINSKY, DID YOU GET, DID YOU GET NOTICE OF THIS AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST OR WHAT, HOW DID THIS ALL COME ABOUT FOR YOU? UH, THE NEIGHBOR HAS BEEN IN CONSTANT CONTACT WITH THE, UH, THE APPLICANT.
UM, THEY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO WORK ON SOLUTIONS AND THIS IS THE RE UM, RESULTING SOLUTION IS, UH, THIS PARKING VARIANCE ACTUALLY RESOLVES A LOT OF THE, THE PROBLEMS THAT WERE ARISE, INCLUDING THE TRAFFIC AND SAFETY CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED BY ANOTHER, UH, BOARD MEMBER.
SO, UM, THIS IS THE BEST OUTCOME I THINK THAT ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED COULD, COULD ACHIEVE.
NOW DO YOU KNOW, ARE THERE, SO THERE ARE OTHER, THERE ARE OTHER HOMEOWNERS THAT HAVE OBJECTED OR NOT? DO YOU KNOW? I AM NOT PERSONALLY AWARE OF ANYTHING.
I KNOW THAT THE OANA ZONING COMMITTEE JUST SPOKE IN FAVOR OF IT.
I'M JUST REALLY CURIOUS ON, ON THE PRICING OF THE CAROUSELS.
UM, HOW MUCH? THERE'S TWO OF THEM, IT LOOKS LIKE.
DO WHAT, WHAT DID THE PRICING COME OUT TO? IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT, UH, 700,000 ALL IN.
WELL, THERE, THERE ARE LESS THAN THAT.
BUT THEN WE HAVE FOUNDATION, ALL THE, ALL THE ELEMENTS, ALL THE OTHER STUFF BUILDING.
SO IT'S QUITE, IT'S, IT'S ON, ON THE EXPENSIVE SLIDE.
UM, THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS WITH THE, THE VALET, UH, IT'S ERICA'S WALKING AWAY.
ARE WE ABLE TO PIN IT DOWN TO THOSE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE OANA HAD MENTIONED INITIALLY? THE A VALET? YES.
HE AGREES TO IT AND HE SAYS IT ON THE RECORD, THEN WE CAN TIE THAT TO HIS AGREEMENT.
I I, I LIKED THIS, UH, THE VALLEY PARKING THAT HE'S GOING TO DO THE OFFSITE PARKING FOR STUFF AND VALET PARKING FOR THAT'S NOT TIED TO THE YES.
IT'S NOT, YOU CAN'T TIE THAT AS A CONDITION.
WHERE, WHERE'S VALET PARKING GOING TO BE? PARKING.
WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO PARK AT THE REMOTE PARK.
WE'LL BE ABLE TO STAGE PARKING IN THE ALLEY, BUT WE PREFER NOT TO USE THE ALLEY FOR VARIOUS REASONS.
AND THEN ANY SPOTS WE COULD GRAB ON HEARTH, WE WOULD, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING A LOT OF THAT GETS TAKEN BY, UM, STAFF OF THE ADJACENT COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN THE MORNING.
I THAT, THAT YOU CAN'T PARK THERE.
CAN YOU STATE WHAT CONDITION YOU'RE TRYING TO PUT ON? IF YOU GET THE LAKE BACK, THERE'S A, A BUTTER FROM AANA.
YEAH, SO THE CONDITION WOULD BE THAT IF WE GRANT THE VARIANCE THAT ANY PARKING WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE THROUGH VALE AT A REMOTE SITE.
NOT ON THE STREET, NOT ON UH, BUS SIX OR NO, THEY HAVE A FEW, THEY'LL HAVE A FEW PARKING SPACES IN HAR HARLAND THAT ARE CONTRACT, CORRECT.
THAT ARE YOU GONNA HAVE BE PERMITTED THE CURRENTLY THERE'S NO, THEY'RE NOT PERMITTED.
THEY'RE JUST, CUZ YOU HAVE THE PRIVATE PERMITS FOR HARTLAND.
I KNOW YOU HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL PERMITS.
NOT BETWEEN BECAUSE OF THE BUILDING.
RIGHT? WHAT'S THAT? OKAY, SO, SO, SO THE VARIANCE WILL HAVE TO BE LIMITED TO THE PROPERTY ON SITE.
SO IF, IF, ARE YOU TRYING TO RESTRICT THEM FROM PARKING ON THE PROPERTY? NO.
FOR WHAT? NO, TRYING TO GUARANTEE THAT THEY DO TRULY VALET AND THAT PEOPLE AREN'T PARKING ON THE STREET.
BECAUSE DOES, CAUSE THERE IS A HOTEL JUST OFF OF SOUTH LAMAR, BEHIND P TERRY'S, YOU KNOW THAT LITTLE HOTEL BACK THERE AND I THINK IT'S VALET ONLY.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY HAVE ANY PARKING, BUT UM, BUT THEY DIDN'T COME TO US SO THEY MUST HAVE SOME PARKING, BUT, UM, SO, SO, BUT YOU'RE OKAY WITH THE VALET ONLY? YES.
SO THAT'S A MO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE YEAH, THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO.
WE RIGHT, OF COURSE DON'T WANT OUR GUESTS TO SHOW UP WITH A CAR AT ALL, BUT IT'S ANOTHER PEOPLE DRIVE IN FROM HOUSTON, THEY'RE SHOWING UP WITH A CAR.
SO YEAH, SO, BUT YOU NEED TO ALSO MAKE THAT CLEAR.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT.
THERE'S NO SELF PARK WHEN THEY PULL UP.
IS IS THAT NOT CLEAR IN THE IANA CONDITIONS OR? NO, THE HOTEL HAS TO MAKE IT CLEAR WHEN SOMEBODY COMES IN.
CAN WE TIE IT TO THE EMAIL? YEAH.
WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN MAKE THIS LANGUAGE LEGAL FOR THE VARIANT
[00:35:01]
THAT IS SO CAN CAN, CAN SOMEONE GIVE THAT EMAIL TO ERICA? ONE, ONE SEC.SHE'S, SHE ALREADY LOOKED AT IT.
SHE'S GONNA, UH, ERICA LOPEZ AS ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
I'M PROBABLY GONNA NEED SOME TIME TO FINESSE WHAT THE, WHAT RESULT THE BOARD WOULD WANT.
I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT, CAN WE, CAN WE TABLE IT FOR A LITTLE BIT? IS THAT WHAT YOU NEED OR DO YOU NEED ALAR CLARIFICATION? DO WE NEED TO TAKE A BREAK? YEAH, I WOULD NEED CLARIFICATION ON WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE.
SO DO WE NEED AVE SESSION? NO, NO, THAT'S NOT LIKE PERSONALLY I AM MORE INCLINED TO GRANT THE PARKING VARIANCE EVEN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION IF WE CAN ENSURE THAT THERE IS SOME WAY TO GUARANTEE THAT THE STREET WON'T BE PARKED ON THAT, THAT EVERYBODY'S COMPLAINING ABOUT.
SO IS THERE ANY WAY TO TIE INT IN DON'T, IT'S ONLY ONE SECTION OF THE STREET.
MOST OF THAT STREET IS RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING, BUT THEN IT SPILLS OVER ONTO THE OTHER STREETS WHERE OTHER PEOPLE LIVE IS THE BIG ISSUE.
THEY'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT HART THEN THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT RIGHT.
A STREET OVER TWO STREETS OVER WEST SIXTH.
UM, THAT ARE LIKE HIGHLAND OAKLAND.
LIKE WITH THAT CONDITION, HOW DO WE TIE THOSE CONDI MAKE THOSE CONDITIONS? SO IF IT'S A STREET THAT'S NOT CONNECTED TO THE PROPERTY, THAT'S THE SUBJECT OF THE VARIANCE, THAT'S NOT WHAT'S ABLE TO, TO DO.
SO WE, WE CAN'T HAVE A CONDITION ON THAT.
THAT'S NOT PART OF THE PROPERTY.
THE FOR THAT'S REQUESTING THE VARIANCE.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S IN THE FOUR, THAT'S NOT IN THE FOUR CONDITIONS.
THE FOUR CONDITIONS STATE THE PROJECT WILL REMAIN A 15 UNIT HOTEL AND THERE WILL BE NO ADDITIONS IN THE FUTURE.
THE HOTEL POLICY WILL BE A VALET PARKING ONLY.
THE HOTEL VALET STAFF WILL ONLY PARK ALL VEHICLES ASSOCIATED, ASSOCIATED WITH THE HOTEL AND CONTRACT SPACES AND IN FRONT OF THE HOTEL ON HARTON VALET AND STAFF PARKING WILL NOT BE ALLOWED ON THE RESIDENTIAL STREETS NORTH OF WEST SIXTH STREET, WHICH MEANS ALL THE OTHER ONES.
BUT WE CAN'T REALLY DICTATE THAT CUZ THOSE ARE PUBLIC STREETS.
SO THREE IS THE MAIN ONE THAT WE, WE CAN'T DO, UM, FOUR THE VARIANCES FOR THIS HOTEL PROJECT ONLY.
SO I'M THINKING WE CAN DO ONE, TWO, AND FOUR BUT NOT, UM, WAIT ONE PARTS OF TUBE AND THEN THREE AND FOUR BECAUSE WE CANNOT SAY WHERE STAFF CAN PARK SO WE WON'T BE ABLE TO CONDITION THE VARIANCE ON WHERE STAFF PARKS.
I WOULD LIKE TO SECOND YOUR MOTION
SO DID YOU LIKE THAT? THAT WAS PRETTY SLICK.
I WOULD HAVE TO FIND THE, UH, CON THE STUFF, BUT YES, I MOVED TO APPROVE WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT WE CAN LEGALLY APPLY TO THIS FRANCE, WHICH, WHICH ARE IN THE OHANA LETTER.
AND UM, IT WOULD BE MY GLASSES ONE.
THE PROJECT WILL REMAIN A 15 YEAR HOTEL.
TWO, THE HOTEL POLICY WILL BE VALET PARKING ONLY AND HOTEL VALET STAFF WILL ONLY PARK ALL VEHICLES ASSOCIATED WITH THE HO HOTEL AND CONTRACT SPACES.
AND IN FRONT OF THE HOTEL ON HARTH, UH, WE'LL HAVE TO LEAVE OUT THE VALET AND STAFF PARKING WILL NOT BE ALLOWED ON THE RESIDENTIAL STREETS NORTH OF WEST SIXTH.
WE CANNOT, WE CANNOT CONDITION THE VARIANCE ON THAT.
YOU GUYS WILL HAVE TO SELF-POLICE.
UM, ALL EXISTING BUILDINGS WILL BE PRES PRESERVED AND RENOVATED.
AND THE VARIANCE IS FOR THIS HOTEL PROJECT ONLY TIED TO THE PERMIT.
DOES THAT SOUND GOOD, MELISSA? PERFECT.
DID YOU CATCH ALL THAT STEVE HOTEL USE? NO ADDITIONS.
YEAH, IT'S JUST IN THE LETTER I READ, I READ IT VERBATIM EXCEPT FOR THIS STEP.
THE VICE CHAIR ALREADY DIDN'T, DID YOU TOUCH ALL THAT? SORRY.
BOARD OF MEMBER BAILEY, WHAT WAS NUMBER FOUR? EXISTING.
AND, AND LITERALLY IT'S, IT'S VERBATIM FOR THE LETTER.
I DON'T ALL EXISTING BUILDINGS WILL BE PRESERVED AND RENOVATED, WHICH IS NUMBER THREE.
HOW IS THAT RELATED TO THE PARKING? IT'S A CONDITION OF THE VARIANCE.
IT'S A CONDITION OF THE VARIANCE.
IT'S IN, WE DON'T HAVE TO TIE TO PARKING.
WHAT HAPPENS IS IF WE DON'T GIVE THIS VARIANCE, THEY'LL TEAR DOWN ONE OF THE BUILDINGS.
SO WE'RE SAYING INSTEAD OF TEARING DOWN THE BUILDING FOR PARKING, THEY'RE GONNA PRESERVE ALL THE EXISTING BUILDINGS THEY'RE GONNA AND YES.
AND PRESERVE THE BUILDINGS FOR AS A CONDITION OF THE VARIANCE.
ALL EXISTING BUILDINGS WILL BE PRESERVED AND RENOVATED.
AND THEN I NEED TO, IS EVERYTHING THERE LEGAL? WE'RE GOOD? YES.
THE APPROVED ZONING IS COMMERCIAL AND APPROVED USES FOR 15 ROOM HOTEL.
EXISTING PARKING REGULATIONS ARE NOT POSSIBLE
[00:40:01]
IF HISTORIC DISTRICT CHARACTER AND BUILDING ARCHITECTURES TO BE MAINTAINED.ADDITIONALLY, THE CURRENT PROOF PLAN ALLOWS FOR A PARKING CAROUSEL, WHICH WE DO NOT BELIEVE IS BEST FOR THE CHARACTER OF THE SITE AND WILL RESULT IN A SIGNIFICANTLY NEGATIVE IMPACT TO THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.
AND STREET VARIANCE WILL BETTER PRESERVE THE BALANCE BETWEEN THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AND FUTURE COMMERCIAL HARDSHIP SITE CONSTRAINTS COUPLED WITH THE DESIRE TO MAINTAIN THE HISTORIC QUALITY AND ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE.
MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE 14 SPACES ON SITE AND OFFSITE OPTIONS ARE NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE.
STRICT ADHERENCE TO PARKING WILL OFFSITE OPTIONS ARE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE ON UNDER CONTRACT, SO, CORRECT.
THEY MAY NOT BE BUT MAY NOT BE, THEY NOT BE WITHIN THE DISTANCE.
THEY DON'T, NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE.
STRICT ADHERENCE TO PARKING REGULATIONS WOULD COMPLETELY ENCUMBER THE PROPERTY OR DEMAND OFFSITE SOLUTION THAT DOESN'T WILL MAY OR MAY NOT EXIST.
OUR SITE IS A UNIQUE LAYOUT AND CHARACTER AS IT WAS PREVIOUSLY USED AS A TWO RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON A CORNER LOT WITH A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT NEARBY.
COMMERCIAL SITES ARE EITHER PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED WITH ONSITE PARKING OR WILL UNDERGO A MORE SIGNIFICANT MULTI LOT AND MIXED USE REDEVELOPMENT PROVIDING GREATER SET OF OPTIONS AREA CHARACTER.
THE SOLUTION WILL BE BETTER FOR THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA THEN YOU.
UTILIZATION OF THE CURRENT APPROVED PARKING SOLUTION, WHICH ALLOWS FOR PARKING CAROUSEL TO BE CONSTRUCTED.
UM, ADDITIONAL CRITERIA PATRONS TO OUR HOTEL WILL ARRIVE VIA RIDE SHARE OR AUTONOMOUS DRIVERS
UM, YOU WOULD HOPE THAT THEY WILL ARRIVE? I NO, IT'S A REQUIREMENT DURING THE RESERVATION PROCESS.
FROM WHERE? I MEAN, IF YOU'RE DRIVING FROM HOUSTON, YOU CAN'T, THEY'LL END UP PARKING ON THE OTHER STREETS.
SO I MEAN IT IS A, THAT WOULD BE, I WOULD SAY THAT WOULD BE A GUIDELINE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T REALLY REQUIRE THAT, THAT THAT IS CORRECT.
UH, THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT RESULT IN PARKING OR LOADING OF VEHICLES ON PUBLIC.
HOW ARE YOU GONNA DEAL WITH LOADING AND UH, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE IT'S, UH, SERVICED FROM SIXTH STREET, SO, OKAY.
THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WILL BETTER ALLOW FOR LOADING OF VEHICLES OFF STREET AND WILL IMPROVE THE FREE FLOW OF TRAFFIC ON THE STREETS FROM THE CURRENT APPROVED PARKING PLAN.
ONE ADA PARKING SPOT WILL BE PROVIDED AND SEVEN STREET PARKING SPACES EXIST CONTIGUOUS TO THE SITE THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE ACCESS TO.
UM, APPROVAL OF VARIANCE WILL MITIGATE TRAFFIC FLOW ISSUES FOR THE RESIDENCE.
SO ON HAR HARK AND ELIMINATES ANTICIPATED NEGATIVE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROVED PARKING CAROUSEL AND THE CURRENT APPROVED USES, A HOTEL CANNOT CHANGE WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE COA PROCESS THAT WOULD TR TRIGGER REVIS PARKING SOLUTION.
CAN I USE YOUR NOTES? UM, THERE'S A HAND UP RICHARD, UH, BOARD MEMBER SMITH.
YEAH, I JUST, UM, TRYING TO ASK A CLARIFICATION QUESTION HERE.
I MEAN THE, THE, UH, THE REQUEST IS TO GET TO BASICALLY BE REDUCED FROM 14 SPACES TO, TO ONE ADA SPACE.
UM, SO I DON'T, I DON'T SEE, I MEAN WE CAN ADD ALL THESE ADDITIONAL CONTINGENCIES, BUT I, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT GIVING THEM, WE'RE NOT SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT THE CAROUSEL.
WE ARE, WE ARE DOING, SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT A CAROUSEL.
UM, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DEMOLISH ANY BUILDINGS ON THE PROJECT.
THAT'S ONE OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE VARIANCE.
AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO DEMOLISH A BUILDING TO BUILD THE CAROUSEL AND UNLESS, BUT WE CAN A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
WELL, I'M JUST SAYING IT'S NOT, I DON'T SEE IT.
THAT'S NOT THE NOTICE THAT WE'RE THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE WE HAVE BEFORE US.
HOW, HOW DO YOU FIGURE IT'S ABOUT THE PARKING SPACES? YEAH, BUT THE VARIANCE WE'RE GIVING THEM IS FROM 14 SPACES TO ONE SPACE.
THAT'S THE VARIANCE, RIGHT? YES.
SO WHAT'S YOUR QUESTION? YEAH, I GUESS I, I DON'T, I DON'T, I GUESS I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW WE HAVE AUTHORITY TO DO ALL THESE OTHER THINGS WHEN THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS, YOU KNOW, ARE WE GONNA ALLOW THEM TO HAVE ONE OFF STREET VERSUS 14? THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
I MEAN WITH THE HARDSHIP, IF THE HARDSHIP RIGHT, WE CAN GRANT THEM NO SPACES IF THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR.
JUST WELL, HOW WE CAN, HOW WE CAN DO IT IS PART OF HOW WE'RE CONDITIONING THESE GOING DOWN TO ONE SPACE IS THAT THEY DON'T DEMOLISH ANYTHING ON SITE, WHICH IN ITSELF WOULD PRECLUDE THEM FROM BUILDING A PARKING CAROUSEL.
WE ARE, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THIS IS A BETTER SOLUTION THAN PARKING'S CAROUSEL BECAUSE IT WILL PRESERVE THE HISTORIC STRUCTURES THAT ARE ON SITE AND IT WON'T IMPACT THE NEIGHBORS AS MUCH BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THEY'RE, UM, GOING TO HAVE OFFSITE PARKING.
SO WE'RE SAYING THERE'S NO, WE'RE NOT APPROVING A CAROUSEL.
NO, WE'RE NOT APPROVING A CAROUSEL.
[00:45:01]
OKAY.AND IF YOU WANNA MAKE THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT NO CAROUSEL IS ALLOWED, I'LL TAKE IT.
WHY NOT? FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WOULD BE IF THIS VARIANCE IS A, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE HOW THE WORD IT.
IF THE VARIANCE IS APPROVED, THEN NO, NO PARKING CARE SALE IS ALLOWED TO BE PERMITTED OR BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY.
NO, CAROUSEL BUILDS ARE PERMANENT PARKING, PARKING CAROUSEL,
WAIT, UH, BOARD MEMBER PR I HAD A RELATED QUESTION.
UM, IF THEY ALREADY HAVE AN APPROVED PARKING PLAN THAT INCLUDES THIS PARKING CAROUSEL, ISN'T THAT SOMETHING WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT IN DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A HARDSHIP AND A VARIANCE SHOULD BE GRANTED? I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYBODY AGREES IT'S NOT THE BEST SOLUTION.
THERE'S A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS, BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE SHOWN THAT THERE IS A NEED FOR A VARIANCE GIVEN THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE A PARKING PLAN THAT'S APPROVED.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO, I I THINK WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SACRIFICING BUILDINGS THAT ARE A HISTORIC BUILDINGS IN ORDER TO REPLACE IT WITH THE CAROUSEL, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT.
THAT THAT'S THE HARDSHIP FOR ME.
I'M, I'M, I DON'T WANNA SEE THE BUILDINGS GET DESTROYED.
I THINK, I THINK MY QUESTION IS MORE OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTION IS SHOULDN'T THAT APPROVE PARKING PLAN GO AWAY BEFORE THEY COME TO US AND SAY, WE NOW HAVE THIS HARDSHIP BECAUSE WE CAN'T DO WHAT THE REGULATIONS SAY WE NEED TO DO FOR PARKING ON THIS, ON THIS SITE.
VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE, DO YOU HAVE AN ANSWER? A QUESTION? I THINK, I THINK I MIGHT BE ABLE TO HELP WITH THIS.
SO, SO YOU HAVE THE CAROUSEL, WHICH IF THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS CHANGE FROM DECEMBER ROLES, THEN THEY MIGHT HAVE AN ISSUE ACTUALLY CONSTRUCTING THE CAROUSELS IN A NEW BUILDING.
AND IT IS IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THESE ARE CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND WITH THE STATE OF THE ECONOMY AND YOU KNOW, THE WORD RECESSION, THE WAR CONSTRUCTION, PRICING, EVERYTHING, THE PROJECT, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A LOT OF FACTORS THAT GO INTO THE CURRENT ECONOMY THAT WE'RE IN THE PROJECTS THAT ARE ADJACENT THAT, UH, I I THINK IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, THERE WAS A PROJECT THAT YOU MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE IN THE LAST THREE OR FOUR MONTHS THAT'S ACTUALLY JUST RIGHT AROUND HERE.
AND SO IT COULD HAD PARKING, THEY COULD AT LEAST THEY COULD PURSUE AN OFFSITE PARKING PLAN AND HAVE AN AGREEMENT FOR THREE YEARS.
BUT THAT HAS TO BE WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET AS YOU WOULD WALK IT IF YOU WERE ARON IN ORDER FOR THAT TO BE ABLE TO BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVE.
AND SO IT LOOKS TO ME THAT THE PROPERTY THAT'S AT, AT DOWN WALSH OVER AT FOURTH IS PROBABLY EXCEEDS THE THOU THE THOUSAND FEET.
SO, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THE PROJECT ON HOLD.
YOU, YOU, YOU HAVE, YOU COULD BUILD IT, BUT YOU, YOU WOULD NOT BE HONORING THE NATURE OF THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
IT'S LIKE YOU PUT ALL THESE TOGETHER AND THAT'S THEIR HARDSHIP IS WHAT IF, SO WHAT IF COMPATIBILITY IS APPEALED AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY TAKE THE BUILDING DOWN, WHICH NOBODY WANTS THEM TO TAKE DOWN AND NOBODY WANTS THE MECHANICAL LOUD THING NEXT TO THEIR HOUSE.
UM, AND THEN THEY CAN'T REALLY USE THE PARKING THEY'VE LEASED ADMINISTRATIVELY CUZ IT'S TOO FAR.
SO YOU HAVE ALL THESE COMPONENTS THAT A ACTUALLY ALL TOGETHER, I THINK REALLY MAKE THE HARDSHIP IN JUST TRYING TO KEEP A BUILDING AND NOT HAVE IT TORN DOWN AND TURNED INTO ANOTHER WHITE HOUSE.
NOT THAT IT WON'T END UP GETTING PAINTED WHITE, BUT YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING THAT GETS TORN DOWN AROUND MY HOUSE TURNS INTO A WHITE FREEZER BOX.
SO DID, DID, THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT ALL THAT QUICK.
QUICKLY, UH, WAS THE POSSIBILITY OF LIKE A PEA GRAVEL PARKING LOT EXPLORER? NO, YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
CAN'T DO A PEAK GRAVEL PARKING LOT AND THEY'D STILL HAVE TO TEAR DOWN A BUILDING TO CONSTRUCT A PEAK GRAVEL PARKING LOT.
DID YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN AND WHEN HE SHOWED
[00:50:01]
US WHAT HE'D HAVE TO DO FOR ONSITE PARKING, IT WAS CHERRY PEAK GRAVEL, IT'S PEAK GRAVEL.THEY'D STILL HAVE TO TEAR DOWN A BUILDING AND PEAK GRAVEL.
ARE YOU TRYING TO USE PEAK GRAVEL? I SEE IT'S NOT AN APPROVED FOR YOUR CHAIN DRIVE.
SO WE HAVE A
UH, THE PROJECT, UH, PROJECT USE REMAINS A HOTEL WITH NO ADDITIONS.
NONE OF THE BUILDINGS ARE DEMOLISHED.
UH, WE CAN'T DO THE VALET PARKING.
NO, ACTUALLY I DID IT, UM, VERBATIM.
SO IT REALLY IS, I WAS, I WOULD SAY TIED TO THE LETTER.
TIED TO THE WAN, THE ONLY THING THAT'S LEFT OUT IS, UM, THE VALET AND STAFF PARKING WILL NOT BE ALLOWED ON THE RESIDE STREETS NORTHWEST SIXTH, WHICH IS THE END OF NUMBER TWO.
THE SECOND SENTENCE OF NUMBER TWO OR THIRD SENTENCE OF NUMBER TWO, THE REST IS VERBATIM.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE EASIEST WAY.
I DO HAVE ONE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
ANOTHER ONE, UH, WELL CAUSE WE HAVE THE NOTE PARKING CAROUSEL BUILT.
UH, MY FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IS THAT IF THERE ARE ANY ADDITION THAT ARE MADE THAT THEY ONLY BE FOR HANDICAP ACCESS BECAUSE THAT'S ADA US THAT STREET IS REALLY, IF YOU THINK ABOUT HARTH, WE HAVE TWO, IT COMES DOWN TO SIXTH STREET AT A PRETTY, BUT THAT'S, THAT WOULDN'T FALL INTO VARIANCE.
THAT WOULD FALL UNDER GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS.
BUT YOUR VARIANCE SAYS NO ADDITIONS.
I DON'T THINK WE COULD STOP AN AN ADA REQUIREMENT.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY NO ADDITIONS? NO ADDITIONAL PARKING.
THEY, THEY, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ADDITION TO THE PARKING, NO ADDITIONS TO THE STRUCTURES.
IT'S A VERY HISTORIC STRUCTURES.
AND YOU WERE SAYING SOME OF 'EM AREN'T AS PROTECTED AS THE OTHERS.
IT'S A BEAUTIFUL, I I KNOW THAT BUILT THOSE BUILDINGS VERY WELL AND THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL.
SO, UM, AND SO BOARD MEMBER HAWTHORNE, WHAT WAS YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE ADDITION THAT THEY COULDN'T DO? ADA.
OH, SO THEY, THAT, THAT BY HAVING THE PARKING CONDITION ON NO ADDITIONS, THAT THEY NEEDED TO MAKE AN ACCESSIBILITY UPGRADE.
SO NO ADDITIONS EXCEPT REQUIRED BY FEDERAL, FEDERAL LAW.
THAT ONE AND THE OTHER AMENDMENT WAS, THAT WAS MY WAY OF BEING KIND.
MADAM CHAIR, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT JUST SO WE CAN GET CLEAR EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED TO WRITE ON THE NO OBJECTIONS TO THE STRUCTURE EXCEPT AS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAW.
DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT? LEGALLY, FEDERAL, OR, WELL, IT'S, IT'S NUMBER ONE, FEDERAL R STATE.
THE PROJECT WILL REMAIN A 15 UNIT HOTEL AND THERE WILL BE NO ADDITIONS EXCEPT AS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAW.
NUMBER TWO, THE HOTEL POLICY WILL BE AT VALET PARKING ONLY.
THE HOTEL VALET STAFF WILL ONLY PARK ALL VEHICLES ASSOCIATED WITH THE HOTEL IN CONTRACT SPACES AND IN FRONT OF THE HOTEL ON HARTLAND.
NUMBER THREE, ALL EXISTING BUILDINGS WILL BE PRESERVED AND RENOVATED AS THE APPLICANT HAS PRESENTED.
NUMBER FOUR, THE VARIANCE IS FOR THE HOTEL PROJECT ONLY, WHICH I GUESS WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS IF YOU ADDED A RESTAURANT THAT WOULDN'T BE INCLUDED IN THIS WITH THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OF NO PARKING CAROUSEL BUILT OR PERMITTED AND NO ADDITIONS EXCEPT AS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL OR STATE LAW.
NO ADDITIONS EXCEPT FOR NO ADDITIONS.
SO THAT'S PART OF NUMBER ONE DOESN'T HAVE THE SPECIFICATION ABOUT IT AS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL STANDARD.
AND WE JUST EDITED THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
BUT IT'S STILL PART OF NUMBER ONE.
YOU, WE DON'T HAVE TO ADD A FIFTH ONE.
SO SHE WANTS ALL OF THESE ALL FORMS. OKAY.
NUMBER FOUR, KEEP EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING.
[00:55:01]
YES.SO THAT'S NINE TO ONE ABSTAIN.
DID YOU AUGUSTINA, DID YOU GET HEARD? YOU SAID YES, RIGHT? AUGUSTINA? I SAID YES.
I JUST WASN'T, I, IT IT'S HARDER ON THE WEBEX.
I DIDN'T WANNA GIVE Y'ALL GERMS, SO I SAID CONGRATULATIONS HERE.
GIVE ME ONE SECOND WHILE I PLAY CATCH UP.
I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING IT WHEN IT'S DONE.
CARRIE WALLER HAS NOT SHIFT OUT.
[4. C15-2023-0013 Carly Emery 205 Adam L Chapa Street]
ITEM FOUR C 15 20 23 0 13.CARLY EMERY, 2 0 5 ADAM L CHAPA STREET.
I LIKE THE APPLICANT'S NAME IS CARLY EMERY AND SHE'S ON VIRTUALLY.
OKAY, MS. EMERY, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? HI, CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME OKAY? OKAY, WE CAN HEAR YOU NOW.
HANG ON ONE SECOND WHILE WE GET YOUR PRESENTATION PULLED UP.
IF YOU ARE WATCHING ON E T X N, THERE'S GOING TO BE A SHORT DELAY BETWEEN WHAT YOU SEE AND WHAT WE SEE.
SO WHEN YOU'RE READY, JUST SAY NEXT SLIDE AND IT WILL ADVANCE.
UH, GO AHEAD AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
YOUR PRESENTATION IS PULLED UP.
MY NAME IS CARLY EMORY AND I AM THE CURRENT OWNER OF THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 2 0 5 ADAM EL CHAPPA STREET.
I AM HERE TO REQUEST A DECREASE IN THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET TO 15 FEET AND A DECREASE TO THE REAR SETBACK FROM FIVE FEET, OR SORRY, 10 FEET TO FIVE FEET.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO STATE THAT MY HOUSE IS CURRENTLY BUILT THIS WAY BY A PREVIOUS OWNER AND SOLD TO ME AS SUCH.
UM, BUT IT HAS COME TO MY ATTENTION THAT CURRENT MEASUREMENTS OF THE HOUSE ARE INDEED VIOLATION OF SETBACK STANDARDS.
UM, YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
THAT IS JUST A PHOTO OF MY HOUSE FOR REFERENCE, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PHOTOS, UM, DUE TO MY EXTREMELY SMALL LOT SIZE OF ONLY 2,700 SQUARE FEET, I'M IN A SUBSTANDARD LOT THAT ALSO FALLS UNDER THE SMALL LOT AMNESTY FOR THE HOLLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
UM, THIS LOT IS ALSO A CORNER LOT THAT'S BUSTS UP NEXT TO AN ALLEYWAY.
AND MY HARDSHIP IS THAT IF I FOLLOW TYPICAL SETBACKS FOR MY LOT, IT WOULD MAKE MY RESIDENTS ONLY PERMISSIBLE TO BE 10 FEET IN DEPTH OF THE HOUSE, WHICH IS COMPLETELY UNINHABITABLE FOR ANY FLOOR PLAN.
UM, AS YOU SEE FROM THIS MAP, UM, THE PREVIOUS SELLER, WHO WAS ALSO THE DEVELOPER OF THIS HOUSE, LINED UP SETBACK MEASUREMENTS TO REFLECT THOSE OF MY DIRECT ADJACENT NEIGHBOR, UM, AS IF MY LOT WAS STILL CONSIDERED PART OF THE LARGER LOT SEVEN.
BUT BACK IN 2006 IT WAS SUB SUB-DIVIDED AS ITS OWN LOT WHICH I PROVIDED IN MY APPLICATION PACKAGE.
UM, FOR THE LAND STATUS DETERMINATION LETTER, IT SEEMS THAT THE FRONT SETBACK OF MY HOUSE HAS BEEN SET AT 15 FEET SINCE 2007.
AT LEAST THAT'S THE LAST GOOGLE IMAGE THAT I HAVE OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, BUT THE REAR SETBACK WAS ADDED BY AN ADDITION FROM THIS PREVIOUS OWNER.
[01:00:01]
I AM NOW CURRENTLY TRYING TO REMEDY.UM, ON THIS SLIDE, I ALSO INCLUDED ALL OF THE PERMITS THAT THE PREVIOUS SELLER APPLIED FOR BEFORE SHE SOLD THE HOUSE TO ME.
UM, YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
THESE ARE JUST FLOOR PLANS WHERE YOU CAN ALSO SEE WHAT WAS EXISTING VERSUS THE NEW ADDITION.
UM, I DO HAVE A SOLID IRON PRIVACY FENCE AROUND MY PROPERTY LINE, SO THE HOUSE DOES NOT ENCROACH ON ANY ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
I'VE ALSO INCLUDED, IF YOU CLICK ON NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
I'VE ALSO INCLUDED THE CURRENT FLOOR PLAN.
SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE REAR OF MY HOUSE, WHICH IS CURRENTLY IN VIOLATION, DOES CONTAIN MY KITCHEN LAUNDRY ROOM AND TWO BATHROOMS. SO, UM, QUITE A BIT OF A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PLUMBING ALONG THE BACK REAR.
I HAVE, UM, AGAIN, THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS THAT SHOW WHERE THE EXISTING RESIDENCE WAS TO WHAT THE PREVIOUS OWNER ADDED ON.
BUT AGAIN, AT THE TIME OF MY PURCHASE, I WAS NOT MADE AWARE THAT THE HOUSE WAS IN ANY KIND OF VIOLATION OF PERMITS ZONING ISSUE, NOR WAS I TOLD THAT IN ADDITION WAS PUT ON.
UM, THE TWO PICTURES SHOWN HERE ON THE SCREEN ARE THE AREAS THAT ARE IN VIOLATION, AGAIN WITH THE FRONT SETBACK AND THE REAR SETBACK.
UM, IF YOU CLICK NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
I THINK YOU WERE ON THE CORRECT SLIDE, BUT IT WENT BACK.
UM, SO I AM HERE TO ASK FOR THIS VARIANCE AS THE FIRST STEP TO ENSURE THAT I CAN GO THROUGH THE REMAINDER OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING WITH THIS HOUSE IS UP TO CORRECT PERMITTING IN CODE.
THIS VARIANCE IS IMPERATIVE FOR ME TO MAINTAIN THE HOME AS IS IF THIS IS NOT GRANTED, LIKE I MENTIONED, BE BEFORE A HOUSE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BE BUILT ON IT AND I WOULD BE LEFT WITH JUST A VERY SMALL LOT OF UNUSABLE LAND.
UM, I'VE INCLUDED EVERYTHING THAT I'VE JUST MEN MENTIONED IN THAT PRESENTATION, BUT I'M HAPPY TO ELABORATE ON ANYTHING ELSE THE BOARD NEEDS AT THIS TIME.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, I'M GONNA START REAL QUICK.
CAN SOMEONE, LIKE, ISN'T THAT SUPPOSED TO BE DISCLOSED SOMEWHERE? LIKE WELL, IT'S, IT'S ALSO DUE DILIGENCE.
THEY, THEY OB THEY DIDN'T, THEY MUST NOT HAVE DONE A SITE PLAN OR CHECKED THAT THEY WERE WITHIN ENCODE.
I MEAN THE HOUSE I THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN CAUGHT DURING THE SALES PROCESS.
IF, LIKE MELISSA SAID, DUE DILIGENCE WOULD'VE BEEN DONE.
AND I HAVE SERVED THE PREVIOUS SORRY MA'AM, THAT THAT WASN'T REALLY A QUESTION.
IT'S OKAY FOR, I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT FROM OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.
DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS? BOARD MEMBER PRUITT? YEAH, I HAD A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
IS THIS, I, I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HAS TRIGGERED THIS APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE.
I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT KIND OF PERMITS ARE YOU LOOKING TO GET THAT WERE DENIED? BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE UH, YES, GREAT QUESTION.
I AM ACTIVELY LOOKING FOR A BUILDING PERMIT AND A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
UM, LIKE I SAID, WHEN I PURCHASED THE HOUSE, NONE OF THIS WAS DISCLOSED AND THE CITY DID NOT APPROACH ME UNTIL FOUR MONTHS AFTER THE SALE OF THE HOME THAT IT WAS INDEED IN VIOLATION.
UM, WHEN I WENT THROUGH THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, THAT'S WHEN I FOUND OUT THAT THERE WAS ACTUALLY AN ISSUE WITH, WITH ITS CURRENT SETBACKS.
AND SO I'M TRYING TO REMEDY THE SETBACK ISSUE BEFORE I CAN GO AHEAD AND SEND EVERYTHING ELSE FOR CORRECT PERMITTING.
WHAT, WHAT, WHAT PERMITTING ARE YOU LOOKING TO DO THOUGH? I MEAN, ARE YOU LOOKING TO DO SOME NEW CONSTRUCTION ON THIS LOT? NOPE.
I'M JUST LOOKING TO KEEP MY HOUSE AS IS.
IT WAS, UH, MADE AWARE TO ME AFTER THE SALE THAT THERE WAS NO CURRENT BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE ADDITION SHE PUT ON THE PREVIOUS SELLER PUT ON.
UM, AND I DON'T HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
THE REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE THE DRAWINGS THAT YOU'VE SUBMITTED ARE DATED IN MAY OF 2022 AND IT SHOWS I HAD AN ARCHITECT TO REDRAW THEM.
WELL, THE, THE HASHED PART THERE SAYS NEW CONSTRUCTION.
THAT'S WHAT IS ALREADY EXISTING, RIGHT? CORRECT.
SHE GOT NOTICED BY CODE ENFORCEMENT, GERALD.
[01:05:01]
OH, UM, BOARD MEMBER PRUIT ASKED THE QUESTION I WAS GOING TO ASK, SO I'M GOOD.LOOKING AT THE DIOCESE OH YEAH.