[00:00:04]
SCREENING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ORDER.
[CALL TO ORDER]
WE HAVE A QUORUM.AND I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLE TOMMY YATES.
IS HE HERE? NO, HE'S OUT TODAY, RIGHT? NO, NO, I'M HERE.
YEAH, I'M JUST FEELING UNDER THE WEATHER.
I'M SORRY YOU'RE NOT FEELING WELL.
UH, JUST A REMINDER TO ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE HERE IN PERSON, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU SIGN IN ON THE SIGN IN SHEET.
IF YOU NEED TO LET ME KNOW AND I'LL PASS IT DOWN.
UH, FOR THE AUDIENCE, PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CELL PHONES OR PUT THEM ON VIBRATE.
AFTER YOUR CASE IS OVER, PLEASE TAKE ANY DISCUSSION OUT TO THE LOBBY.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE EMAIL OUR CALL THE BOARD LIAISON ELAINE RAMIREZ.
TOMORROW, UH, WHEN YOU'RE CALLED TO TESTIFY, YOU'RE SPEAKING TO THE BOARD.
PLEASE SPEAK DIRECTLY TO THE BOARD.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO TAKE A BREAK TONIGHT, BUT IF WE DO, IT'LL BE ABOUT EIGHT O'CLOCK.
FOR PARKING VALIDATION, UH, THERE ARE SOME LITTLE PRINTED SLIPS OF PAPER BY THE DOOR WHERE YOU CAME IN WITH A QR CODE.
MAKE SURE YOU GRAB ONE OF THOSE BEFORE YOU LEAVE.
UH, WHEN YOU LEAVE IN THE PARKING GARAGE, THERE WILL BE A SCANNER.
YOU HAVE TO HOLD THE TICKET YOU TOOK WHEN YOU CAME IN AND THEN THAT LITTLE QR CODE, AND YOU WILL BE VALIDATED.
FOR ANYONE WHO'S GOING TO BE GIVING TESTIMONY TONIGHT, I'M GONNA NEED YOU TO PLEASE STAND AND TAKE AN OATH.
SO IF YOU'RE GONNA BE SPEAKING BEFORE THE BOARD, DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU WILL GIVE TONIGHT WILL BE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE? SUPER.
I HAVE A SEAT STARTING WITH AGENDA ITEM ONE
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
TO BE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 13TH, 2023.I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE.
SECOND THAT, AND A SECOND BY BOARD MEMBER PETIT.
THIS IS AGAIN, MOTION TO APPROVE THE, THE MEETING MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER.
MOVING ON TO ITEM TWO, DISCUSSION OF STAFF
[2. Discussion of staff and applicant requests for postponement and withdrawal of public hearing cases posted on the agenda.]
AND APPLICANT REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT AND WITHDRAWAL OF PUBLIC HEARING CASES POSTED ON THE AGENDA.ELAINE, DO WE HAVE ANY POSTPONEMENTS OR WITHDRAWAL REQUESTS? SO, OKAY.
[3. C15-2023-0047 Donna Carter for Lynn Sherman 3505 Greenway]
BE ITEM THREE C 15 20 23 0 0 4 7.DONNA CARTER FOR LYNN SHERMAN.
3 5 0 5 GREENWAY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
I'M DONNA CARTER WITH CARTER DESIGN ASSOCIATES, AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE HOMEOWNER, LYNN SHERMAN.
UH, THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR SERVICE.
UM, IT IS GREATLY APPRECIATED.
I KNOW THIS TAKES A LOT OUT OF EVERYONE.
I RECOGNIZE SOME OF THE FACES HERE.
UM, IT'S A LOT YOUNGER THAN I REMEMBER.
UM, I GENERALLY COLOR WITHIN THE LINE, SO
[00:05:01]
I TRY NOT TO BE HERE TOO OFTEN.UM, WE HAVE MET WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND HAD SEVERAL PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCES.
AND BASICALLY BECAUSE OF WHEN THIS WAS BUILT, THE CODES IN PLACE AT THE TIME, THEY SAID THEY DID NOT HAVE THE, UH, AUTHORITY TO MAKE ANY CHANGES.
AND THEREFORE, WERE COMING TO YOU THIS EVENING.
AND WE'RE REQUESTING BASICALLY A VARIANCE FROM LDC 25 TO 4 92 FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER AND FRONT SETBACK.
UM, THE ORIGINAL, AND WE'LL GET INTO THIS IN OUR APPLICATION, I HOPE, UM, EXPLAINED IT WAS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED UNDER CITY CODE 19, UM, 81, AND WITH A SUBDIVISION THAT WAS CREATED IN, UM, CODES THAT PRIOR TO THAT TIME HOPE, I GUESS I, YES, I DO.
UM, IN FRONT OF YOU ARE JUST TWO DIAGRAMS. THE ONE ON THE LEFT LABELED EXHIBIT SEVEN SHOWS ESSENTIALLY THE BUILDING THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1983 AND THEN, UM, WITH THE DRIVEWAY.
UM, AND THEN TOWARD THE REAR OF THE BUILDING YOU SEE SOME LANDSCAPE THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED AND DESIGNED ACTUALLY BY CC PINCKNEY, UM, TO TAKE CARE OF SOME DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT WERE COMING OFF OF THE HIGH HILL FROM THE ORIGINAL ESTATE.
EXHIBIT B, WHICH LOOKS VERY SIMILAR, BASICALLY SHOWS, UM, AREAS WHERE WE WILL BE TRYING TO ADD ON STORAGE AREAS AND THE SORT OF DARK GREEN AREAS OR AREAS THAT WE ARE ALSO TALKING ABOUT TAKING AWAY SOME IMPERVIOUS COVER.
IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, IT'S A LITTLE BIGGER.
YOU CAN SEE THE FOUR BLUE CIRCLES.
THAT'S WHERE WE ARE ACTUALLY GONNA TAKE, THERE'S A STORY SHED THAT'S NOT VERY USEFUL TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN SOME LOOSE LAID ROCK THAT WAS PART OF AND HAS BEEN PART OF THE DESI LANDSCAPE DESIGN WE WILL BE REMOVING.
BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S SOME DARK BROWN AREAS.
THERE'S OVERHANGS THAT, UM, COMPRISE THE STORAGE AREA AND THE RECONFIGURATION OF THE CARPORT.
AND SO THOSE ARE THE LITTLE AREAS THAT WE ARE ASKING FOR DISPENSATION THIS EVENING.
THIS SHOWS YOU SOME OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS.
UM, YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE LARGE TREES THAT, UM, ARE ON THE PROPERTY THAT WE DO OBVIOUSLY WANT TO, TO CHANGE.
THAT FIRST PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS THREE THAT ARE ACTUALLY HAVE GROWN UP AROUND THE HOUSE.
UM, WE HAVE THE CARPORT ON THE LOWER LEFT.
YOU CAN SEE THERE'S ONE CAR IN THERE.
THE, IF A FULL SIZE SUV OR TRUCK TRIES TO MAKE THE TURN INTO THE OTHER SPACE, UM, THERE HAS BEEN DAMAGE TO THE HOUSE BECAUSE OF THAT.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO AMELIORATE THAT.
THE LOWER RIGHT SHOWS THE EASEMENT, UM, THAT WE THINK, UH, BEARS, UH, A LOT ON OUR SITUATION.
UM, TO THE LEFT, THE BLUE HOUSE IS THE OTHER HOUSE THAT, UM, ENJOYS THE USE OF THAT EASEMENT.
UM, JUST TO REMIND YOU THE HISTORY, UM, IT WAS CREATED AS PART OF A SUBDIVISION IN, UH, THE SEVENTIES FROM HISTORIC ESTATE.
UM, THE EXISTING DRIVE IS ACTUALLY, UH, THE NORTHERN BORDER OF, THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL PART OF THE ORIGINAL DRIVEWAY TO THE ESTATE.
THEY WANTED TO MAINTAIN THAT ACCESS TO GREENWAY AS THEY MADE THE SUBDIVISION.
THERE IS A JOINT USED DRIVEWAY AGREEMENT THAT WAS DULY EXECUTED AS PART OF, UM, STARTING TO THINK ABOUT THE REDEVELOPMENT THAT, UM, ACTUALLY IS A PERPETUAL EASEMENT.
AND IT PROVIDES FOR, UH, THE DRIVEWAY TO SERVE 35 0 9.
IT IS ENTIRELY ON 35 OH FIVE'S PROPERTY.
IT WAS BUILT IN 1981 WHEN WE LOOKED AT, UM, OPEN SPACE AS PART OF FIRST HEIGHT AND AREA.
WE HAD SIDE YARD, WE HAD SIDE YARD REQUIREMENTS.
WE HAD YARD REQUIREMENTS, BUT WE HAD NO IMPERVIOUS COVER PERCENTAGE AT THAT TIME.
THE, UM, THE VERY IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER IS IT WAS BUILT WITH IT AS AN EASEMENT.
THE ONE PROPERTY CAN ONLY FRONT ON THE, UH, STREET.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT.
SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
[00:10:01]
CHAIR, BOARD MEMBER LIN, I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT AND OPEN IT UP FOR ANYBODY TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.UH, BUT I DID REVIEW THIS ONE PRETTY MUCH AT, AT LENGTH.
I THINK, UH, THERE'S, UH, IN MY MOTION I'M GOING TO ADD SOMETHING, BUT I'LL WAIT AND SEE IF I HAVE A SECOND AND WHERE WE GO FROM THERE.
'CAUSE I, I'LL SECOND AND OUR, UNLESS ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO SECOND PUT ON ANY NEW FOLKS.
DO YOU WANT A SECOND ON YOUR RECORD? ANYONE? YEAH.
IT'S HARMLESS TO GET A SECOND.
OH, MAGGIE, SHERIFF, I'M GONNA GIVE IT TO MAGGIE.
FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
IT'S PROBABLY BEEN MORE THAN 10 YEARS SINCE YOU'VE BEEN UP HERE.
AND WHEN YOU SAID, YEAH, WE ALL LOOK YOUNGER.
SO, UH, AND, AND IT WAS VERY WELL, A VERY GOOD PACKAGE.
OKAY? YOU PROVIDED THE INFORMATION THAT MADE THIS, THIS ONE, AT LEAST WHEN I DID MY DEEP DIVE INTO IT.
PRETTY SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD, DONNA.
WHAT I'M GONNA DO, UH, MADAM CHAIR THAT IN LIGHT OF THE SUBSECTION F OF THE 1981 CITY CODE 13 2 1 26 B IN SUBSECTION H, WHICH EXEMPTS THE JOINT USE DRIVEWAY FROM THE LOT AREA, OPEN SPACE, YARD AREA COVERAGE AND ALTER REQUIREMENTS.
AND THE RATIONALE OF THE SECTION IS STATED ON ITEM 0 3 27.
I DON'T THINK IT'S UNREASONABLE TO INCLUDE THE REQUEST OF THE VERBIAGE, WHICH THEY REQUESTED TO BE PART OF THIS VARIANCE.
OKAY? BECAUSE THAT WAY IT KEEPS IT CLEAN, IT KEEPS IT VERY, VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
AND SO THAT VERBIAGE IS ON I PAGE, UH, ZERO THREE OF NINE.
AND, UH, MY VARIANCE IS GOING TO BE INCLUDING THAT AS PART OF THIS VARIANCE.
UH, SO THAT, THAT WAY THERE'S NO QUESTION IF YOU GET BACK TO PLANNING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, REASONABLE USE, UH, WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? YES.
UM, OUS COVER, I USUALLY LIKE TO CONDITION SOME RAINWATER CAPTURE IF THEY'D BE OPEN TO IT.
THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES ACCESS TO AN ADJACENT PROPERTY, REDUCING THE SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF IMPERVIOUS CARVER NEEDS OF THE NEIGHBOR, AND REDUCES THE RIGHT OF WAY CURB CUTS FOR THE SUBDIVISION.
UNDER THE CURRENT LDC INTERPRETATION BEARS 100% OF THE IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITATION DUE TO THE TERRAIN AND ORIGINAL HISTORIC ESTATE CONSTRUCTION DRAINAGE STRUCTURES COUNTED AS IMPERVIOUS COVER ARE REQUIRED TO CONTROL RUNOFF NOT ONLY FROM 35 0 5 GREENWAY, BUT ALSO THE OTHER UTILITY EASEMENTS AND UPHILL LOTS IN THE SUBDIVISION HARDSHIP.
THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IN THAT THE BUILDING AND DRIVEWAY WERE PERMITTED AND CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE 1981 CITY CODE AND 1983 LDC ON A LEGAL LOT IT CREATED AS PART OF A RE SUBDIVISION OF AN HISTORIC ESTATE THAT MEMORIALIZED THE HISTORIC DRIVEWAY CONNECTING THE ESTATE HOME HAMPTON ON GREENWAY.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, BECAUSE THIS PARTICULAR HARDSHIP IS A RESULT OF AN ADDITIVE EFFECT OF CITY OF AUSTIN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGES.
I WON'T GO INTO TOO MUCH ON THAT ONE, THAT ARE IN CONFLICT WITH THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS THAT ARE PARTICULAR TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
ALSO, THEY HAVE THE NATURAL SITE CONDITIONS, THE DRAINAGE PROTECTED TREES, WHICH ARE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE HOUSE, WHICH EXACERBATE THE ABILITY OF THE IMPERVIOUS COVER MITIGATION.
AT THIS TIME, THE APPLICANT ALSO REQUESTS AS PART OF THE VARIANCE THAT THE FOLLOWING BE ALLOWED, AND THIS IS THE VERBIAGE THAT I'D MENTIONED EARLIER.
ONE, THE ENTIRE LAND AREA ASSOCIATED WITH THE CITY UTILITY RECORDS OF THE 10,982 SQUARE FEET, AS USED TO DETERMINE THE OWNER'S DRAINAGE FEE WILL BE USED AS THE SIZE OF THE LOT FOR THE BUILDING CALCULATION PURPOSES.
TWO, THE AREA OF THE EASEMENT AS DEFINED IN THE RECORDED PERPETUAL DRIVEWAY EASEMENT AND CONFIRMED BY THE SURVEY DOCUMENT OF 1060 3.7 SQUARE FOOT NOT BE INCLUDED WHEN CALCULATING THE PER IMPERVIOUS COVERAGES FOR THE PROPOSED MAINTENANCE ADDITIONS, RENOVATIONS OF THE HOUSE AND EXISTING RESIDENCE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BASED ON THE CITY CODE OF 1981.
SECTION 13 TWO DASH 1 26 AND THREE, CONFIRM THAT THE PORTION OF THE EXISTING CARPORT IN THE CARPORT SETBACK THAT IS NO LONGER RECOGNIZED BY THE LDC MAY REMAIN, AND THAT A SMALL EXPANSION OF THE CARPORT INTO THE FRONT SETBACK, WHICH THEY'RE REQUESTING AND THEIR VARIANCE BE ALLOWED.
AND, UH, I, DEANNA, I HAVE IT FOR YOU
IT'S ON ITEM THREE, PAGE NINE.
ERICA LOPEZ, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
[00:15:01]
REDEFINE HOW IMPERVIOUS COVER IS? I DIDN'T MOTION.I DON'T CALL ON YOU MS. LOPEZ.
I I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE CONDITION IS LEGAL.
IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT ASKING TO REDEFINE IT, IT'S SIMPLY TO ACCEPT WHAT IS THERE BASED ON THE 1981 CODE THAT WAS ESTABLISHED AT THAT TIME OF THE TIME.
BUT THE, BUT THE VARIANCE THAT'S BEING REQUESTED IS TO INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER FROM 45%.
SO HOW DOES INCORPORATING THE CODE, WELL, WHAT THAT DOES ACTUALLY, THE, THE ALLOWANCE, THE VARIANCE, ALLOWING THEM TO INCREASE THE IS PART OF I TRUST YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ADVISING COUNSEL.
PART OF THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE.
SO THIS IS GOING TO BE A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY A BOARD MEMBER BY OLIN, UH, SECONDED BY MAGGIE ANI, UH, WITH THE RAINWATER CAPTURE CONDITION AND THE LANGUAGE OF ITEM THREE SLASH NINE, PAGE NINE, UH, UNDER ONE, TWO, AND THREE OF THE UPPER PART OF THE PAGE.
UM, I'M CONFUSED AS TO WHAT LEGAL WAS CONCERNED ABOUT, AND I'D LIKE TO GET THAT CLARIFIED BEFORE I SAY YES.
AND WE'VE ALREADY CALLED THE VOTE.
SORRY, WE CAN'T STOP IN THE MIDDLE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. CARTER.
AND MADAM CHAIR, JUST FOR THE RECORD, SO THAT I'M GOING ON THE RECORD, I WANNA SAY STATE THAT THE VERBIAGE THAT WAS ADDED IS NOT CHANGING THE IMPERVIOUS COVER REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT FOR THE CITY.
EACH, EACH ONE OF OUR CASES IS FOR THAT PROPERTY ON, RIGHT.
BUT I THINK IT WAS MORE IN REFERENCE TO THE, THE LEGAL DOCUMENT AT THE TIME.
AND SO ALLS I HAVE IS SUNGLASSES, SO I'M NOT TRYING TO BE THAT COOL.
I THOUGHT YOUR EYES WERE DILATED.
I I'M NOT TRYING TO BE THAT COOL, BUT IN ORDER TO SEE I AM THAT COOL.
[4. C15-2023-0048 Stephen Hawkins for Willow Beach, LLC 1446 Rockcliff Road]
C 15 20 23 0 0 4 8.STEVEN HAWKINS FOR WILLOW BEACH.
UH, ELAINE IS, DO WE HAVE A CALLER INTO, UH, ON THE PHONE MAYBE? YES.
OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, GET THEIR PRESENTATION PULLED UP PLEASE.
MR. HAWKINS, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? JOHN FISHER.
JOHN, WHAT'S THE NAME? ELAINE? HELLO, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH, COULD YOU TELL US YOUR NAME PLEASE? HI, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
OKAY, MR. TER, WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IF YOU'RE WATCHING ON ETXN OR ON THE WEB, IT IS GOING TO BE A SLIGHT DELAY IN YOUR PRESENTATION.
UH, BUT REST ASSURED THAT WHEN YOU TELL US TO MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE'LL MOVE IMMEDIATELY.
SO WHEN YOU'RE READY FOR THE NEXT SLIDE, JUST SAY NEXT SLIDE.
AND THE, UH, TECH HERE, WE'LL MOVE IT FORWARD FOR YOU.
AND THANK, YOUR PRESENTATION IS UP.
UH, MY NAME IS JOHN VITER AND I WORK WITH AQUA PERMIT.
WE ARE BRINGING THIS VARIANCE TO THE COUNCIL IN REGARDS TO A SITE PLAN WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON.
THIS VARIANCE PRESENTATION IS FOR THE PROPERTY AT 1446 ROCKCLIFF
[00:20:01]
ROAD.OKAY, THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY AT 1446 ROCKCLIFF ROAD.
YOU CAN SEE THE LARGE COVE IN THE CENTER AND ALSO THE NARROW CHANNEL TO THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE IMAGE.
WHAT WE ARE SEEKING A VARIANCE FROM IS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 25 2 11 76 A FIVE, THE FOOTPRINT OF A DOCK, BOAT DOCK THAT IS INCLUDING THE PORTION OF A CUT AND SLIP ATTACHED ACCESS STRUCTURES OR ROOF OVERHANG, MAY NOT EXCEED 1200 SQUARE FEET FOR A DOCK THAT IS ACCESSORY TO A PRINCIPAL RESIDENTIAL USE IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR THE PERMITTING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW 1,135 SQUARE FOOT BOAT DOCK, WHICH AMOUNTS TO 2,235 SQUARE FEET IN TOTAL.
THE REASON WE ARE SEEKING THIS VARIANCE IS THE EXISTING BOAT DOCK ON THE PROPERTY IS INACCESSIBLE DUE TO VEGETATION AND SEDIMENTATION ACCUMULATION IN THE NARROW CHANNEL WHERE IT RESIDES.
OUR CLIENT CANNOT USE THE EXISTING BOAT, DOCK OR CHANNEL LEADING TO THE EXISTING BOAT DOCK WITHOUT SUBJECTING THEIR BOAT TO RUNNING A GROUND OR HITTING TREE ROOTS AND DAMAGING THEIR BOAT IN THE PROCESS.
AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS PROPERTY DOES HAVE A BOAT DOCK.
CURRENTLY, IT IS AT THE END OF THE NARROW CHANNEL CLOSE INTO THE HOUSE.
THE BOAT DOCK WAS CONSTRUCTED AROUND THE TIME OF THE HOUSE BEING BUILT BACK IN 2008.
YOU CAN SEE THE CHANNEL HERE LEADING BACK TO THE BOAT DOCK.
THE EXISTING BOAT DOCK LIES TUCKED AWAY AT THE END OF THIS CHANNEL.
NAVIGATING THIS CHANNEL IS CHALLENGING WITH THE NATURAL BOUNDARIES.
ADDING IN YEARS OF SEDIMENT BUILDUP, COUPLED WITH THE ADVANCEMENTS OF WETLAND ENVIRONMENTS, HAS MADE IT INCREASINGLY IMPOSSIBLE.
ADDITIONALLY, THE CANOPY OF THE TREES ALONG THE CHANNEL POSES A RISK TO HARMING THE TREE OR THE BOAT.
THESE TREES OFTEN DROP BRANCHES INTO THE CHANNEL AS WELL.
THE CHANNEL HAS BEEN SLOWLY ENCROACHED BY THE SURROUNDING WETLAND ENVIRONMENT, CREATING A MURKY HEART TO NAVIGATE PASSAGEWAY.
UH, SEVERAL WETLAND SPECIES, INCLUDING BALD CYPRESS, HYDRILLA, AND FALSE METAL, ARE SEEN HERE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH.
THESE SPECIES ARE CLASSIFIED AS PROTECTED WETLANDS BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN AS ESTABLISHED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA MANUAL.
HERE ARE SOME MORE EXAMPLES OF NATURAL VEGETATION POPPING UP FROM THE SHALLOW LAKE BED IN THE CHANNEL.
IF DREDGING WERE TO OCCUR IN THIS CHANNEL, ALL OF THESE PROTECTED SPECIES WOULD BE WIPED OUT IN THIS PROCESS.
AGAIN, MORE NATURAL VEGETATION.
THE ROOT SYSTEM OF THIS BALD CYPRESS EXTENDS FROM THE EDGE OF THE CHANNEL'S MOUTH SEVERAL YARDS INTO THE CHANNEL, WHICH IN TURN MAKES ENTERING AND EXITING THE CHANNEL DANGEROUS TO THE TREE'S ROOTS AS WELL AS THE OWNER'S BOAT ENGINE.
WE TOOK A FIELD MEASUREMENT A FEW MONTHS AGO OF THE DEPTH OF THE CHANNEL AT DIFFERENT POINTS.
SO YOU CAN SEE HERE THE AVERAGE DEPTH OF CHANNEL ALONG THE SHORELINE IS ROUGHLY 12 INCHES OR ONE FOOT, VERY DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE.
THE AVERAGE DEPTH OF THE CHANNEL AT THE MIDDLE OF THE CHANNEL, THE DEEPEST PART IS ROUGHLY TWO FEET, SIX INCHES IN DEPTH.
THIS MAKES NAVIGATING THE CHANNEL IN A MODERN BOAT VERY DIFFICULT WITHOUT INCURRING DAMAGE TO THE ENGINE OR DISTURBING THE NATURAL PROTECTED ENVIRONMENT.
SINCE ACQUIRING THE PROPERTY IN 2021, THE OWNERS OF THE HOUSE AT 1446 ROCK LIFT HAVE HAD TO SUSTAIN REPAIRS TO THEIR WATERCRAFT TWICE AND HAVE NUMEROUS CLOSE CALLS WHERE DAMAGE TO THE WETLANDS WAS NARROWLY AVOIDED.
INVOICES FROM BOW TOWN ON SOUTH LAMAR ARE INCLUDED HERE TO SHOW THE EXTENT OF REPAIRS.
THE PROPELLER OF THE WATERCRAFT FREQUENTLY RUNS AGROUND IN THE SHALLOW CHANNEL.
ON THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, JUST A COUPLE OF INVOICES.
OUR SITE PLAN THAT IS CURRENTLY IN REVIEW FOR A NEW BOAT DOCK THAT IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SHORE ALONG LAKE AUSTIN'S THE CATALYST FOR THIS VARIANCE REQUEST.
THIS SITE IS A MUCH EASIER TO NAVIGATE LOCATION AS IT RESIDES ALONG LAKE AUSTIN AND IS NOT TUCKED AWAY AND AT CHANNEL OR COVE.
MR. ALTERNATIVE, SORRY TO INTERRUPT, TO IMPROVE YOUR TIME IS UP.
[00:25:01]
FINAL SENTENCE, GO AHEAD AND MAKE IT.UM, THAT'S BASICALLY EVERYTHING.
UM, THE CHANNELS, NAVIGABILITY ISSUES ARE DUE TO NATURAL CAUSES.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DISTURB ANY WETLAND ENVIRONMENTS AND TRYING TO PRESERVE WHAT IS ALREADY THERE.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE.
I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN IT UP TO DISCUSSION.
UH, MADAM CHAIR, BOARD MEMBER VAN OLIN? AYE.
I SEE THE SLIP, THE UH, THE DOUBLE SLIP THERE AND UH, I SEE THE, I BELIEVE THERE'S AN EXISTING DECK TRUCKER STRUCTURE.
NOW I DON'T HAVE A SCALE IN FRONT OF ME.
IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE IT'S 33 AND A HALF FEET ACROSS BY ROUGHLY 28 10 COMING IN FOR THE, FOR JUST THAT SLIP STRUCTURE.
WHAT IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR? I CAN PROBABLY FIGURE IT OUT.
'CAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE THE CUTOUT THOUGH.
WHAT IS IT SIR? WHAT IS IT, WHAT IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR? UH, BECAUSE IT, IT WOULD BE 1135 SQUARE FEET.
AND THAT, THAT, THAT IS GONNA COVER EVERYTHING THAT I'M SEEING THERE IN BLUE.
UM, THE VERY FIRST SHEET OF YOUR PRESENTATION, I'M WORKING OFF A LITTLE COMPUTER, FOUR OF 12, IS THAT CORRECT? IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT WHAT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE, THAT'S ALREADY WHAT'S EXISTING.
I BELIEVE THE SHEET YOU'RE LOOKING AT HAS A RED AND A BLUE ICON.
IS THAT CORRECT? UH, WELL, NO, ACTUALLY WHAT IT DOES IS IT'S SAYING THAT, UH, I SEE THE STEEL PILINGS, THE DOCK LIGHTING, PIER LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION.
IT'S THE VERY FIRST SHEET THAT YOU HAVE, UH, WHAT WE CALL FOUR OF 12 ON WHICH, WHICH PDF GROUPING.
DID YOU OPEN THE, OH MAN, IF I GO BACK AND LOOK, I'M GONNA LOSE THAT ONE.
IT'S A VERY, UH, THE SECOND ONE.
SO PROPOSED PLAN AND LARGE, UM, OH, SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT OUR SITE PLAN, I'M PRESUMING YEAH.
SITE PLAN FOUR OF SIX SITE PLAN ENLARGED IS HOW IT'S LISTED.
SO THAT'S THE BOAT DOCK THAT WE'RE PROPOSING WITH OUR SITE PLAN.
SO THAT IS THAT THE UH, 1,135 SQUARE FEET? THAT IS CORRECT.
WHERE I'M AT ON THIS IS I, I DEFINITELY FEEL THAT YOU HAVE A, UM, YOU HAVE A LEGITIMATE ASK ON RELOCATING THE DOCK.
EVEN ASKING FOR A DOUBLE SLIP TO ATTACH TO THE EXISTING PORTION OF THE BOARDWALK, I THINK IS REASONABLE.
THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE YOU'RE ASKING FOR, SIR, FOR THE STEEL STRUCTURE AND EVERYTHING, I'M SORRY, BUT I'M NOT REALLY FINDING A HARDSHIP TO BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY THAT VARIANCE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS ARE FEELING IT, BUT I'M ALL FOR GIVING YOU THE DOUBLE SLIP OR MAKE A MOTION TO GIVE YOU, I CAN'T GIVE YOU ANYTHING.
BUT I'M, I'M ALL FOR MAKING A MOTION TO GIVING YOU THE DOUBLE SLIP THAT'S GONNA ATTACH TO THE EXISTING DECK STRUCTURE, WHICH IS TO REMAIN IN THAT AREA.
BUT I REALLY CAN'T FIND A HARDSHIP FOR THE ADDING OF THE STEEL STRUCTURE AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
'CAUSE THAT'S BASICALLY, WE'RE NOT MOVING AN EXISTING BULK DOCK.
WE'RE, WE'RE BUILDING A WHOLE NEW ONE WITH A WHOLE NEW STEEL STRUCTURE AND EVERYTHING.
I THINK THAT THE ISSUE THAT WE'RE PRESENTING IS MORE OF THE FACT THAT THE BOAT DOCK THAT'S EXISTING IN THIS PROPERTY ALREADY HAS BEEN CUT OFF FROM THE ACTUAL BODY OF THE LAKE BY COMPLETELY NATURAL CAUSES.
AND THAT'S WHY I'M, EXCUSE ME, SIR, I UNDERSTAND THAT.
THAT'S WHY I'M WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE DOUBLE SLIP.
BUT YOU'RE ALSO ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE SO THAT YOU CAN ALSO INCLUDE, UH, FROM WHAT I'M SEEING, A STEEL STRUCTURE THERE.
I HAVE, LEMME GO BACK OVER HERE.
A STEEL STRUCTURE AND OTHER, OTHER CONSTRUCTION THAT WE DON'T HAVE COMING OFF OF THE OLD DOCK.
AND SO I SEE THAT I CAN JUSTIFY BASED ON THE WAY THE LIMITATIONS, WE HAVE TO MAKE MOTIONS TO BE ABLE TO GET GRANT YOU THE DO OR TO MAKE A MOTION TO GRANT YOU THE DOUBLE SLIP.
I JUST CAN'T FIND A HARDSHIP, WHICH IS A REQUIREMENT FOR OUR CRITERIA FOR THE OTHER PERTINENT PURCHASES THAT YOU WANNA ADD.
[00:30:01]
STEEL STRUCTURE AND OTHER AND THE OTHER THINGS.SO JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW THE NEW BOAT DOCK TO BE PERMITTED AND WHAT IS TO COME WITH THE EXISTING BOAT DOCK? WELL, CLEARLY YOU CAN'T USE IT.
I'M NOT GONNA MAKE YOU, I CAN'T MAKE YOU DO ANYTHING WITH IT.
IT'LL BASICALLY JUST STAY IN PLACE.
THERE'S NOTHING I SAW WHAT YOUR, BASED ON YOUR PRESENTATION, I MEAN, UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO USE IT TO GET INTO A CANOE OR A KAYAK, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN USE IT FOR YOUR MM-HMM.
SO, I MEAN, WHATEVER YOU GUYS WANNA DO WITH THAT, THAT'S FINE.
IT CAN, IT CAN BE DECOMMISSIONED IN PLACE.
THAT'S ALL WE WERE REALLY ASKING FOR.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE, THANK REMAIN THANK THAT WASN'T USING IT AS A QUESTION, SIR.
UM, SO THIS, THIS JUST MIGHT BE A CLARIFYING QUESTION.
SO I'M, I'M, I THOUGHT THE REASON THAT Y'ALL ARE ASKING FOR THE EXTRA SQUARE FOOTAGE IS PRECISELY BECAUSE YOU'RE KEEPING THE EXISTING DOCK AND THAT BRINGS YOU OVER THE, THE ALLOWED SQUARE FOOTAGE.
NOT THAT A STEEL STRUCTURE PUTS YOU OVER THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, RIGHT? YES, THAT IS, THAT IS CORRECT.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I'M CONFUSED BY YOUR PROPOSAL, UM, BOARD MEMBER VAN OLIN.
SO THE, SO THE STRUCTURE THAT YOU'RE WANTING TO PUT OVER THE DOUBLE SLIP IST ADDING, ADD ANY ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE TO WHAT YOU HAVE, WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, THE, THE, UH, PLANNING REVIEW HAS APPROVED THAT STRUCTURE YES.
AND OUR SITE PLAN PROCESS, ALL UM, DEPARTMENTS HAVE APPROVED THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE AND THE ONLY HANGUP HAS BEEN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWANCE.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SEEKING A VARIANCE.
ALLOWING YOU TO KEEP THE OTHER DOCK.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I GET HUNG UP IS THAT THEY TECHNICALLY HAVE TWO DOCKS.
AND REALLY THE OTHER DOCK IS NOT, IS NOT USABLE.
I KNOW IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT USABLE.
LIKE IS THERE A WAY TO JUST TEAR IT DOWN SO THAT THAT WAY THEY DON'T GO OVER THE, LIKE THAT'S WHERE I'M A LITTLE LIKE WHY DO YOU NEED THE VARIANCE? WHY NOT JUST TEAR DOWN THE EXISTING USELESS STRUCTURE? I HAPPEN TO HEAR HIM COMMENT, UH, SIDEBAR JUST NOW THAT THEY WANTED TO USE IT FOR STORAGE.
IS THAT CORRECT, SIR? THAT'S WHY YOU'RE ASKING FOR IT.
'CAUSE YOU WANT TO USE THE OLD DOCK FOR STORAGE.
THAT'S WHAT THE OWNERS HAVE BEEN USING IT FOR.
'CAUSE IT'S BASICALLY UNUSABLE AS A BOAT DOCK.
UM, SO THEY'VE BEEN USING IT AS DRY STORAGE AND THEY'D LIKE TO CONTINUE USING IT THAT WAY AND NOT TEAR IT DOWN IF THEY DON'T NEED TO.
I MEAN, THESE BOAT DOCK REQUIREMENTS APPLY TO A A, A DOCK EVEN IN A SHALLOW CHANNEL THAT YOU WOULD USE JUST FOR A CANOE.
SO IF YOU WANNA MAKE THAT EMOTION
IT'S JUST FEELING TO ME LIKE THIS IS NOT WARRANTING A VARIANCE.
ALTHOUGH I APPRECIATE THE CONUNDRUM.
BECAUSE IT, SO WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO DO RESTORATION IN THAT AREA? WELL, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DREDGE IT OFF.
BUT THAT NEVER, THAT NEVER LASTS.
BUT THEN THEY SEE, YEAH, AND WE DON'T WANNA DO THAT ANYWAYS.
AND THAT CYPRESS TREE WITH ALL THE ROOTS, THE CYPRESS TREE, THAT WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE A GOOD IDEA.
HAS THE BOARD EVER MADE A CONDITION WHERE, UH, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DECOMMISSION THE PARTS OF A DOCK? LIKE MAYBE THE SLIPS OR WE SUGGEST IF IT APPEASES THE BOARD, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO REMOVE, HANG ON THE DOCK.
AND I THINK WHAT I THINK WHAT HE WAS JUST SAYING RIGHT NOW IS, IS TO WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
SO YOU COULD YOU CAN WE DO THAT THOUGH? IT'S THE REAL QUESTION.
CAN YOU REPEAT WHAT YOU JUST SAID, SIR, PLEASE YOU'RE WILLING TO, WE WOULD APPEASE THE BOARD.
THE EXISTING BOAT DOCK HAS, I THINK TWO FLIPS IN IT.
WE COULD DECK OVER THOSE FLIPS, THEREFORE, UM, REMOVING THE BOAT DOCK ELEMENT FROM IT AND JUST HAVING IT BASICALLY A GLORIFIED WATERFRONT SHED, UM, WHICH IS BASICALLY WHAT IT IS RIGHT NOW.
IF IT WOULD APPE THE BOARD BOARD MEMBER, STAN, IF THAT WAS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE MOTION, WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE? YES, I THINK I WOULD TAKE THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? VIRTUAL OR DISCUSSION BOARD MEMBER POTE, WOULD THE INTENT THERE BE TO JUST REDUCE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER OR WHAT'S THE, UH, INTENTION BEHIND, UH, ONLY ALLOWING THEM TO KEEP ONE OF THE SLIPS FOR
[00:35:01]
THE EXISTING DOCK? UH, I THINK WE WOULD COVER BOTH SLIPS.UM, IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT AN IMPERVIOUS COVER ISSUE.
IT'S SUCH A SAME, IT'S A ALLOWED FRONTAGE.
YOU GET SO MUCH SO THEY HAVE, BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE ONE THEY CAN'T USE, THEN THEY HAVE THIS NEW ONE OR PROPOSE NEW ONE.
BUT IN TRYING TO DECOMMISSION THE OTHER ONE, IF WE DECK OVER THE SLIP PART, THEN WE'RE ADDING TO THE BOARDWALK AREA FOR THE PROPERTY.
SO THEY'RE GAINING ANOTHER APARTMENTS.
AND IF WE, IT'S NOT USABLE, IF THEY DREDGE TO TAKE IT OUT, THEN THEY'RE PROBABLY HARMING THAT CYPRESS TREE.
I I ASSUME IT'S CLEARING IT TO ONE DOCK ESSENTIALLY BY TAKING THE SLIPS AWAY.
YEAH, THEY'LL STILL HAVE, BUT THEY'LL GET A, THEY'LL GAIN IT FROM WHAT? BY ADDING DECKING OVER IT, THEN THEY GAIN A BOARDWALK ON THE, ON THE OLD SIDE.
LIKE THE WHOLE POINT OF THE, OF THE ORDINANCE IS ACTUALLY TO RIGHT LIMIT HOW MUCH YOU'RE BUILDING INTO THE WATER.
NOT WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN PARK A BOAT THERE.
THEY DON'T WANT THE ENTIRE COASTLINE TO BE DOCKS.
WELL, BUT THIS IS ALSO SORT OF OFF THE, THE COASTLINE.
IT IS IS ALSO IN THE CHANNEL IN, IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE.
PERHAPS THIS IS, UH, UH, PERMISSIBLE NOW IF WE PERMIT IT.
LEMME CAN I ASK HIM A QUESTION CHAIR? SURE, SIR.
SO IF I'M PICTURING THIS CORRECTLY, YOU'VE GOT A DOUBLE SLIP THERE, BUT CLEARLY YOU ARE USING IT FOR STORAGE.
IS THERE A, IS THERE A SMALL, I GUESS LACK OF A BETTER TERMINOLOGY? IS THERE A SMALL SHED OR SOMETHING THAT'S ON THAT, UH, WHERE, WHERE THE OLD DOCK IS THAT YOU GUYS WANT TO USE? OR WHAT TYPE OF STORAGE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT USING IT FOR? I MEAN, THE EXISTING BOAT DOCK HAS THE ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF, UH, LOCKER SPACE FOR A BOAT DOCK.
UM, AND THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT THEY'RE USING IT FOR.
AND THEN, LIKE YOU SAID, PROBABLY A CANOE OR SOMETHING OF THE SORT.
UM, BUT DEFINITELY NOT A PERSONAL WATER CRAFT OR MOTORIZED VEHICLE.
SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT USING STORAGE FOR A BOAT OR A WATERCRAFT VE VEHICLE.
NOT THAT THERE'S A CABIN ON THERE.
LITTLE, UH, A BUILDING ON THERE THAT YOU STORE THINGS IN.
IS THAT CORRECT? JUST CORRECT.
JUST THE LOCKERS? YEAH, JUST THE LOCKERS.
YOU SAID 48, YOU SAID 48 SQUARE FEET, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
UM, SO ONE THING I I'M CLEAR ABOUT BASED ON YOUR PRESENTATION, IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE THAT WOULD OCCUR BY TRYING TO DAMAGE THE CHANNEL AND MAKE THE DOCK USABLE.
WHAT I'M NOT CLEAR ABOUT ON IS HOW MUCH DAMAGE, WHAT ARE THE DOWNSIDES OF JUST PULLING OUT THE EXISTING DOCKS THAT YOU DON'T NEED THE VARIANCE? UM, I THINK THE DAMAGE TO WILDLIFE MIGHT BE A RISK IF ONLY BECAUSE THE BOTOX SITS ATOP A GREAT DEAL OF WETLAND AREA.
UM, SO YOU RUN THE RISK OF DISTURBING WHAT'S IN THERE.
YOU'D HAVE TO PROBABLY GET A BARGE UP INTO THE CHANNEL TO REMOVE THE PILING.
SO WE WOULD WIND UP DOING DAMAGE IN EXTRACTING THE DOCK.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHY WE'RE INTERESTED IN HAVING IT REMAIN WHAT HE SAID.
WHEN WE GO THROUGH THE TRAINING, IF IT EVER GETS SCHEDULE, THERE'S ACTUALLY A REALLY GOOD LITTLE PART ON THAT TOO, THAT THEY'LL GO OVER ABOUT NOT DAMAGING OUT INTO THE WETLANDS WHEN IT GOES UP.
AND HONESTLY, SOMETHING LIKE THIS, IF I HAD TO GUESS IN ANOTHER 10 OR 15 YEARS, WILL MOST LIKELY ALMOST COMPLETELY FILL IN JUST BECAUSE OF EROSION BAMBI OR BAMBI SALAMANDERS, UH, OR THE TREE MAN, I JUST, UH, KIM, MY BOARD MEMBER.
WHAT IS THE HESITATION OF COMPLETELY DECOMMISSIONING THE EXISTING DOG? COMPLETELY INCLUDING THE STORAGE.
WHY CAN'T WE RELOCATE IT TO THE NEW DOCK AND MAKE THAT COMPLETELY USABLE? AND ALSO REGARDING DAMAGE TO THE WETLANDS, IF WE REMOVE THE EXISTING DOCK, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IMAGES TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE CONDITIONS OF IT.
'CAUSE I CAN'T DETERMINE THAT MYSELF WITHOUT ANY IMAGES.
YOU KNOW, TO, TO, JUST TO QUICKLY ADDRESS THE FIRST PART, UH, BECAUSE THE DOCK IS SET FOR SO LONG AND THE, UH, THE EROSION, THE SEDIMENT THAT'S BUILT UP FROM EROSION IS CREATED WETLANDS UNDER A DOCK.
HIS CONCERN WAS THE INSPECTION PROCESS, WHICH REQUIRES DIVERS AND GETTING DOWN THE WATER WOULD BE DAMAGING TO THE WETLANDS.
BUT IF IT'S TRUE THAT, THAT, THAT, UH, CANAL IS ONLY 12 INCHES OF WATER IN MOST PLACES, LET'S JUST GIVE
[00:40:01]
'EM A FOOT, TWO FOOT, THREE FOOT ENOUGH FOR A CANOE.THE PYLONS CAN BE, CAN LEFT IN PLACE.
THEY BE LOCKED OFF, OR THEY CAN BE LEFT IN PLACE.
WELL, SO SOMEBODY CAN SEE THEM, OF COURSE, BUT THEY CAN BE LEFT.
UH, THE, THE, THEY CAN BE JUST LEFT IN PLACE AND EVERYTHING ELSE, THE DECKING AND THE, THE BOARDWALK AND ALL OF THAT REMOVED.
UH, AND THEN RELOCATE AS YOU WERE SAYING, BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO ENVISION THIS IN MY BRAIN TOO, BECAUSE I SEE THE NEW ONE AND I SEE THE DRAWINGS, BUT THERE'S NO ELEVATION, THERE ARE NO DETAILS IN THE DRAWINGS ON WHAT THE OLD BOAT DOCK LOOKS LIKE.
UH, BUT IF IT IS TRUE THAT IT'S ONLY, YOU CAN ONLY GET IN THERE, YOU CAN'T GET IN THERE WITH A MOTORIZED BOAT, WELL THEN YOU CAN LEAVE THOSE, THE, THE, UH, PYLONS IN PLACE.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO GET IN THERE WITH A BARGE.
BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY, IF IT'S ONLY 12 INCHES AND YOU'RE THINKING THE SAME THING I AM, IF THERE'S ONLY 12 INCHES, OR LET'S EVEN SAY THREE FEET OF WATER, FOUR FEET OF WATER, A BARGE HAS A BIGGER DRAFT IN THAT YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET A BARGE, BARGE IN THERE.
SO AM I HEARING A POSTPONEMENT WITH MORE INFORMATION LIKE A TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP AND PICTURES OR CONDITION? I DON'T THINK, WELL, THERE'S A LOT OF PICTURES IN THE BACKUP THAT JUST DON'T ACTUALLY SHOW THE DOCK, BUT SHOW EVERYTHING AROUND THE DOCK.
AND I MEAN, THERE, IF YOU GET IN AND, AND I MEAN YOU DON'T, THERE'S SUCH LIMITATIONS ON DREDGE.
LET, LET ME GET THE BOARD MEMBER BOW FIRST.
I WOULD JUST SAY I WOULD JUST TO REMOVE WHAT IS PRACTICABLE.
UH, WELL, MY QUESTION IS, WE ARE COMING UP ON THAT TIME OF YEAR WHEN THE LAKE IS DROPPED FOR DOING DOCK REPAIRS, THOSE TYPE OF THINGS.
SO I AGREE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY ELEVATIONS OR ANY, ANY REAL PICTURES THAT SHOW KIND OF WHAT THE EXISTING DOCK IS LIKE, IF IT'S GOING TO BE DRAIN, IF THE LAKE, WHICH IS NORMALLY DRAINED DOWN AT WINTER TIME FOR DOING DOCK REPAIRS, THOSE TYPE OF THINGS, THAT WOULD PROVIDE A TIME IN WHICH IT COULD BE THE DOCK COULD BE REMOVED WITHOUT BY PEOPLE WALKING ON IT.
WHATEVER THE CASE IS IN THAT AREA TO DO THAT.
THEN THUS SAVING THE WETLANDS AREA.
I, I'M JUST, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME ALSO WITH NOT HAVING ANY ELEVATIONS OR, OR OF THE SIZE OF THE SHED, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
BUT FACT THAT, UH, THAT, UH, BOARD MEMBER FIND OWEN'S POINT WITH IT BEING DRAINED DOWN TO A CERTAIN, THAT WAY, AT LEAST THE CAPABILITY OF BEING ABLE TO GET IN THERE AND DO SOME TYPE OF REMOVAL.
COULD BE, UH, ACCOMPANIED AT THAT TIME.
SO, SO RIGHT NOW, I'M, I'M ACTUALLY INCLINED TO DENY, UM, THE VARIANCE.
HOWEVER, I WOULD BE WILLING TO POSTPONE AND ASK FOR SOME BETTER PICTURES OF THE EXISTING DOC, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A PRETTY GLARING OMISSION FROM THE SUBMISSION.
I'M SORRY, I'D LIKE TO COME BACK TO BOARD MEMBER, KIM.
'CAUSE I THINK WE MISSED YOUR SECOND QUE.
WHAT WAS YOUR SECOND QUESTION? IT MAY HAVE THEN BEEN RELATED TO THE SHED.
WAS IT WAS THAT, WAS THAT THE SAME THING? PICTURES? YES.
BECAUSE THAT SEEMS TO BE, AND ALSO THERE'S A QUITE A BIT OF DISTANCE BETWEEN THE EXISTING DOCK AND THE NEW DOCK.
AND TO MAKE THE NEW DOG COMPLETELY PRACTICAL AND USABLE, IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE THE SHED TOGETHER WITH THE NEW DOG.
SO IT ALMOST MAKES THE SHED EXISTING.
SHED NOT PRACTICAL AND USABLE.
WHAT'S THE POINT OF THAT? IT'S TOO MUCH.
UH, YEAH, I THINK I, I I LEAN TOWARDS THE IDEA OF IF THE EXISTING BOAT STORAGE CAN BE SAFELY REMOVED, DECOMMISSIONED, MAYBE WITH THE PILE STAIN, UM, HOW, HOWEVER IT IS, UM, THAT, THAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE TO ME.
I, I GUESS MY, MY QUESTION IS, IS IS THERE A DEPARTMENT THAT CAN WEIGH IN ON THAT, ON THE SAFE DECOMMISSIONING ENVIRONMENTAL? THAT, THAT WOULD BE ENVIRONMENTAL, BUT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO RECEIVE ADVICE FROM STAFF? UNFORTUNATELY, NO.
BUT I, I DON'T, MADAM CHAIR, I DON'T THINK IT'S ANY DIFFERENT THAN US REQUESTING A HEALTH AND SAFETY INSPECTION FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
I MEAN, SO I MEAN, BECAUSE IT'S NOT LIKE ANY OF US ARE GONNA PUT SOME WAITERS ON AND GO OUT THERE AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
UH, WE DON'T HAVE THAT CAPABILITY OR THAT AUTHORITY TO DO SO.
IT STILL HAS TO BE E EVEN DOING DEMO IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS TO BE INSPECTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S BEEN DONE CORRECTLY.
SO I THINK, UM, UH, I THINK THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE TO GET THE,
[00:45:01]
THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.AND THEN IN THE MEANTIME, UH, MAYBE LEGAL CAN LOOK INTO THAT FOR US.
IF, IF THAT OR, OR, UH, ELAINE AND, AND ALL CAN LOOK INTO IT FOR US AS TO WHO WOULD GO OUT THERE TO MAKE SURE IT'S DONE.
'CAUSE THEY HAVE TO GET AN INSPECTION IN NOW ON THE NEW DOCK.
I THINK I'D BE MORE INCLINED TO SUPPORT A POSTPONEMENT FOR NOW.
AND LET'S SEE WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE BEFORE WE GO.
BRING IN PEOPLE IN ASKING TO SEE HOW MUCH WELL, THE DEMO WOULD DO.
IT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR LIZ JOHNSON TO COME ADVISE US ON A CASE.
UM, SHE'S ACTUALLY, SHE'S REALLY GOOD.
SO I MEAN, I THINK THAT THERE'S TWO THOUGHTS HERE.
THERE THEY WANNA PUT IN A NEW SLIP, TWO NEW SLIPS, AND IT'S A DOUBLE DECKER SLIP.
AND THE AMOUNT OF DREDGE THAT IT WOULD TAKE, THEY WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO DO TO DREDGE THAT WHOLE CHANNEL.
BUT REALLY WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE FOR THAT SLIP, OR IT SEEMS TO BE THAT, THAT SEVERAL US ONE IS, I FEEL LIKE STEVIE WONDER, I'M SORRY, I SAW MYSELF IN THE CAMERA.
UM, THE AMOUNT OF TO DECOMMISSION THE, THE EXISTING DOCK MAY NOT TAKE AS MUCH OR HAVE AS MUCH IMPACT IF IT JUST HAS PORTIONS OF IT REMOVED AND, AND IT'S JUST THE PILES THAT ARE THERE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD PLEASE EXPLORE IN TIME FOR THE NEXT MEETING APPLICANT? YES, CERTAINLY.
UM, I THINK, YEAH, WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE EASIEST METHOD, UM, MOVING FORWARD.
AND TO ME THAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE, THE SIMPLEST STRAIGHTEST LINE TO THE SOLUTION, SO YES, ABSOLUTELY.
SO DO I HAVE A MOTION? I'LL MOTION TO POSTPONE ITEM FOUR UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING.
UM, DO I HAVE TO MAKE THE REQUEST FORMALLY THAT THEY SUBMIT PICTURES? UH, IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
AND IT WILL BE TO JANUARY 8TH.
SO IT'D BE A MOTION TO, A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO JANUARY 8TH AND THEN STATE YOUR REQUEST.
AND I WOULD ASK THAT YOU ALL, UM, THAT THE APPLICANT PLEASE SUBMIT SOME PICTURES OF THE EXISTING DOC STRUCTURE SO THAT WE'RE BETTER ABLE TO ASSESS THE CASE.
BOARD MEMBER BOWEN GOT THE SECOND.
AND I'D LIKE TO ALSO ASK FOR A TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP OR SOMETHING THAT SHOWS ELEVATIONS AND PICTURES OF THE BOARD BOARDWALK AS WELL, PLEASE.
SO THIS IS GOING TO BE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO JANUARY 8TH, MADE BY BOARD MEMBER STAN, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER BOWEN.
THE CASE IS POSTPONED TO JANUARY 8TH.
[5. C15-2023-0049 Paul DeGroot for Stacey Martinez 4908 Crestway Drive (Part 1 of 2)]
FIVE C 15 20 23 0 0 4 9.PAUL DE GROUP ONE, STACEY MARTINEZ, 4 9 0 8 CREST WAY DRIVE.
HI, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
I KNOW YOU HAVE A LONG AGENDA, SO I'LL JUST JUMP RIGHT IN.
UM, I'M HERE SEEKING A VARIANCE, UH, TO BUILD A FUNCTIONAL SCREENED IN PORCH IN MY BACKYARD.
UH, THE REGULATION AT ISSUE IS 25 2 4 9 2D AND IT REQUIRES A 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK.
AND I'M ASKING FOR A VARIANCE OF FIVE AND A HALF FEET.
UM, AS YOU, AS YOU WILL SEE FROM SOME OF THE PICTURES I'M GONNA SHOW YOU, UM, APPLYING THIS REGULATION TO MY PROPERTY CREATES A HARDSHIP AS IT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY.
AND AS A PROPERTY OWNER IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, I'M DEPRIVED OF THE PRIVILEGES THAT OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE.
[00:50:01]
FUNCTIONAL SCREENED IN PORCH IN THEIR BACKYARD.I BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN 2004, AND I'M JUST GONNA KIND OF ORIENT YOU TO WHERE IT IS ON THE STREET.
SO THAT MIDDLE PICTURE THERE IS JUST KIND OF A FRONT ON PICTURE OF THE HOUSE.
UM, THE PICTURE ON THE LEFT, AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE SCREEN, SHOWS THE FACT THAT THERE ARE NO NEIGHBORS ON THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
THE HOUSE IS ON KIND OF A HILL, IF YOU WILL, THAT FEELS MORE LIKE A MOUNTAIN IF YOU'RE RUNNING OR RIDING A BIKE UP IT.
UM, BUT THERE'S, THERE ARE NO HOUSES OVER THERE.
HOUSES SIT UP ON TOP ON RIDGE OAK, WHICH IS BEHIND THE HOUSE, WHICH I'LL, I'LL SHOW YOU A LITTLE LATER.
THE, UM, UH, PICTURE ON THE RIGHT IS THE NEIGHBOR THAT'S NEAREST TO US, AND IT IS, UM, SEPARATED AS YOU'LL SEE AGAIN IN MORE PICTURES BY, UM, OUR YARD, OUR FENCE, THEIR DRIVEWAY, THEIR GARAGE, AND THEN THEIR HOUSE.
AND THEY HAVE A, A PRETTY BIG BACKYARD.
UM, SO I GUESS THE POINT IS IT DOESN'T REALLY, IT'S NOT GONNA INTERFERE WITH, WITH ANYTHING, UM, WITH RESPECT TO NEIGHBORS IN THE, IN THE AREA.
UM, THIS SLIDE TALKS ABOUT THE LOT ITSELF.
THE FIRST PICTURE ON THE LEFT, UM, SHOWS IT IS FROM THE PROPERTY REPORT AND THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT.
UM, THE PICTURE ON THE RIGHT IS A TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY THAT WAS DONE A FEW MONTHS AGO, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROPERTY IS A VERY ODD SHAPE.
UM, AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE HOUSE SITS TO THE RIGHT.
THERE IS AN EASEMENT THAT RUNS ALL ALONG THE HOUSE TO THE LEFT BECAUSE OF CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS, YOU CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING, UM, BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE 20 FEET BACK FROM THE SIDE.
I THINK IT'S 20 FEET, I'M NOT CERTAIN, BUT IT HAS TO BE SOME PORTION BACK FROM THE SIDEWALK AND THE STREET.
SO YOU REALLY CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING FUNCTIONAL, UM, ON THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
WE'VE USED THE PROPERTY, I THINK, TO THE BEST THAT IT CAN BE USED, BUT WE CAN'T EXPAND, UM, ANY PLACE ELSE.
UM, THE REQUEST THAT I'M MAKING IS TO PUT IN A SCREEN IN PORCH IN THE BACKYARD.
YOU CAN SEE THERE, UH, THERE'S A PORCH BACK THERE, UM, ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE.
UM, AGAIN, THAT SHOWS KIND OF THE AREA WHERE, UH, HOW FAR WE ARE AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORS WITH OUR YARD.
UM, AND ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, THE PICTURE SHOWS THE OTHER PART OF THE BACKYARD, WHICH IS KIND OF CRAMMED IN THERE BECAUSE OF THE RETAINING WALL THAT HAD TO BE PUT IN BECAUSE THE HILL WAS KIND OF DE DECOMPOSING.
UM, SO IT'S A, A SMALL AREA, UM, BACK THERE.
UM, THE REQUEST IS FOR, UM, AGAIN, A FIVE AND A HALF FOOT VARIANCE.
IF WE GET THE VARIANCE, THE PORCH IS GONNA BE 13 FEET, FOUR INCHES BY 15 FEET, EIGHT INCHES.
IF WE DON'T, THE PORCH WOULD HAVE TO BE EIGHT FEET BY, UH, EIGHT FEET, SIX INCHES BY 15 FEET, EIGHT INCHES.
UM, SO WE CAN DO IT WITHOUT A VARIANCE, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE REALLY THAT FUNCTIONAL WOULDN'T ALLOW US TO ENJOY THE PROPERTY.
UM, AND THE NEIGHBORS IN THE AREA HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF HAVING BIGGER SCREENED IN PORCH, UM, IF THEY WOULD LIKE.
SO THE FIVE FEET REALLY MAKES KIND OF A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE TO US AND BEING ABLE TO USE THAT PROPERTY, UM, IN A, A WAY THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO, WITH, UH, HAVING DINNER PARTIES OUT THERE, MAYBE HAVING A, UH, A, UM, UH, BACKYARD KITCHEN.
UM, SO THE SIZE OF THE PORCH WILL MAKE A, A HUGE DIFFERENCE TO, TO, TO THE PROPERTY.
UM, THIS IS KIND OF THE PERSPECTIVE.
AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE PORCH IS GONNA BE.
UM, IT DOESN'T IMPACT, UM, THE NEIGHBORS TO THE RIGHT.
THE NEIGHBORS, AS I SAID, LIVE ABOVE US.
UM, I, I DON'T THINK IN THE ALMOST 20 YEARS THAT I'VE LIVED HERE, I'VE EVER SEEN ANYBODY COME TO THAT FENCE, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY WAY THEY WOULD EVEN SEE THE PORCH IS IF THEY WALKED OVER TO THE FENCE AND, AND LOOKED DOWN.
SO IT DOESN'T REALLY HAVE AN IMPACT ON, ON ANYONE.
UM, SO THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE'RE JUST REQUESTING THE VARIANCE, UM, BASED ON THE SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY, UM, BASED, BASED ON THE USE AND WITH NO IMPACT TO THE NEIGHBORS OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? OKAY, MA'AM, I COULD GET YOU TO STEP AWAY FROM THE PODIUM.
AND SIR, IF YOU COULD COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE, STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL GET FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
UH, MY NAME IS MARK MCAFEE AND I AM THE NEIGHBOR RIGHT BEHIND THIS PROPERTY.
[00:55:02]
AS FAR AS THE HARDSHIP GOES, THE NIG, THE, THE LOT WAS ALREADY A TRIANGULAR SHAPE LOT WHEN IT WAS PURCHASED, AND IT HAD THE EASEMENT WHEN IT WAS PURCHASED.SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THOSE CAN BE CLAIMED AS HARDSHIP AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
UM, THE APPLICANT STATES THAT, UH, THAT MY HOME IS NOT CLOSE TO THE BACK OF MY PROPERTY, BUT JUST LIKE THEY PLAN ON DOING AN ADDITION TO THEIR HOME, I WOULD LIKE TO DO AN ADDITION TO MY HOME, AND THAT WOULD BE IN THE BACK.
AND, UH, THE, I JUST RECEIVED THIS.
I'VE HAD TWO BUSINESS DAYS AND BEFORE TODAY TO ACTUALLY LOOK INTO THIS, SO I'VE NEVER HAD A CHANCE TO MEET WITH THEM AND DISCUSS THE PROJECT.
SO, UM, THE NUMBER ONE REASON TO, TO, UH, POSTPONE THIS DECISION IS TO GIVE ME A CHANCE TO MEET WITH THEM IF YOU COULD, AND, UH, UM, SEE IF WE CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
ONE FINAL THING IS, I MEAN, I CAN SEE WHERE THE PORCH IS GONNA BE FROM MY BEDROOM WINDOW, SO THAT'S JUST NOT ACCURATE THAT YOU HAVE TO WALK BACK TO BACK.
I HAVE WALKED BACK THERE AND I'M PRETTY SURE I DID SAY HELLO ONE TIME FROM UP ON THE CLIFF.
BUT, UH, AT ANY RATE, UM, THE, UH, THIS AREA CAN DEFINITELY BE SEEN FROM MY HOUSE.
I DON'T HAVE TO WALK TO THE BACK PROPERTY LINE TO SEE IT.
ALL RIGHT, MA'AM, YOU'LL HAVE, UH, TWO MINUTES FOR A REBUTTAL IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME BACK UP.
UH, THE GENTLEMAN HAS HAD THE NOTICE THAT WAS REQUIRED, UM, BY THE REGULATIONS AND BY, UH, THIS COMMITTEE.
UM, I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT WE WOULD NEED TO POSTPONE BECAUSE OF THAT.
UM, THE OTHER THING IS, AGAIN, WE'VE NEVER SPOKEN.
UH, I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW HE COULD SEE THE SCREENED IN PORCH WHEN HE SITS HIGH ABOVE THE PROPERTY.
IF YOU WANNA LOOK AT THE, THE PHOTOS AGAIN.
UM, SO I WOULD HOPE THAT WE DON'T POSTPONE FOR THOSE REASONS.
I AM GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
AND SORRY, VICE CHAIR, BOARD MEMBER VAN OLAND HAD HIS HAND UP.
FIRST, FIRST OF ALL, MADAM CHAIR, UM, I WANNA THANK YOU FOR COMING TO US FOR PERMISSION.
NOT HAVING IT UP AND COMING AFTERWARDS.
THAT'S A, HAS A BIG IMPACT ON ME PERSONALLY.
UM, BUT LOOKING AT THIS CASE, AND EACH CASE IS TAKEN BASED UPON ITS OWN MERITS AS WE DO, I SEE MORE THAN JUST, UH, ONE BONAFIDE HARDSHIP FOR THIS PROPERTY.
UH, I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE I'LL, UH, ANYBODY ELSE IF THEY WANNA MAKE AN BUT THE TRIANGULATE TRIANGULAR SHAPE OF THE LOT BE.
NOW WEBSTER SAYS, YOU CAN SAY REGARDLESS, OR REGARDLESS, I'M ALWAYS CORRECTED BY MY MOTHER TO SAY, REGARDLESS, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE, IT WAS TRIANGULAR SHAPE WHEN IT BOUGHT THE HOUSE, IT IS STILL A BONAFIDE HARDSHIP.
THE TOPOGRAPHY IS QUITE EVIDENT SIMPLY BY TAKING A LOOK AT THAT RETAINING WALL AND LOOKING AT IT.
NOT TO MENTION THE HUGE WALL ON THE OTHER SIDE, I DON'T THINK IT'S A BIG ASK.
UH, AND EVEN THOUGH THE EASEMENT IS THERE EASEMENTS WE HAVE USED IN THE PAST AS WELL AS A BONAFIDE HARDSHIP.
I'M SORRY SIR, BUT, UH, YES, THE, THE, THE POSTING HAS BEEN OUT THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME AND THE POSTINGS ARE THERE FOR THAT SPECIFIC REASON, UH, SO THAT PEOPLE CAN GET TOGETHER.
BUT I DON'T SEE ANY REAL LEGITIMATE REASON WHY THEY WOULD NEED TO GET TOGETHER ON ANYTHING BECAUSE THIS IS A STANDALONE ISSUE IN MY OPINION.
SO I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE A SECOND, BUT, UH, BASED ON THESE, UH, THESE HARDSHIPS, IT IS A, A LEGITIMATE ASK BOARD MEMBER, SHERIFF ANI, UM, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF THE EASEMENT ON THE REQUEST.
THE, THE, WHERE THE PORCH IS BEING BUILT DOES NOT COME RIGHT UP AGAINST THE EASEMENT, CORRECT.
IT JUST COMES UP AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE.
I THINK THE POINT WAS WE CAN'T, I'M SORRY, MA'AM.
MICROPHONE, YOU STEP UP TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE.
UM, NO, THE, THE POINT ABOUT THE EASEMENT IS THAT WE CAN'T MAKE THE HOUSE ANY BIGGER, UM, ON THE OTHER SIDE.
IT'S NOT GONNA TOUCH THE EASEMENT, IT WON'T GO PAST WHERE THE PROPERTY OR THE HOUSE SITS, UM, RIGHT NOW.
THE PART THAT I'M WRESTLING WITH IS JUST THAT, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER BUILT THE HOUSE, LIKE I UNDERSTAND, I UNDERSTAND YOU DIDN'T BUILD IT RIGHT? YOU MOVED INTO, I ALREADY BUILT WHOEVER BUILT THE HOUSE OPTED TO BUILD IT THAT CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND I'M NOT SURE IF THAT CREATES A HARDSHIP JUST BECAUSE THEY CHOSE TO BUILD IT WHERE THEY DID.
[01:00:01]
IT OUT THERE FOR DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD.THE WAY I FELT ABOUT MADAM CHAIR, UH, SORRY, I CHECK MY PHONE.
UH, IT JUST SEEMED TO ME THAT I, I DO UNDERSTAND YOU GET A NOTICE IN THE MAIL AND IT, IT DOESN'T REALLY TELL YOU A LOT.
AND I HONESTLY THINK THAT IF WE COULD TABLE THIS AND TAKE OUR NEXT CASE AND LET THEM TALK IN THE LOBBY SO THAT THEY COULD EXPLAIN THE ACTUALLY WHAT'S GONNA BE CONSTRUCTED 'CAUSE THAT SCREENED IN PORCH WOULD BE BELOW THAT RETAINING WALL WHERE, I MEAN, THE CHAIRS OF THE BARBECUE GRILL ARE NOW.
SO EVEN IF YOU COULD SEE 'EM, IT'S WHETHER OR NOT YOU COULD SEE WHAT THE PEOPLE WERE DOING.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S, UM, I ALSO HAVE A HOUSE THAT'S BUILT VERY FAR BACK ON THE PROPERTY AND IT DOES HAVE TOPOGRAPHY.
SO I, I'D ALMOST ENCOURAGE, WE ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH THEIR NEIGHBORS AND I'D ALMOST ENCOURAGE THE COMMUNICATION BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU GET THE NOTICE, THE NOTICE DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING UNDERSTANDABLE,
AND, AND IT ALMOST SAY, UH, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION 'CAUSE I WOULD SECOND HIS MOTION.
UH, SO I NORMALLY WOULD'VE BEEN RIGHT ON TOP OF THAT, BUT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO TABLE FOR 30 MINUTES FOR THEM TO COMMUNICATE AND THEN TAKE THE CASE BACK UP THIS EVENING.
I AM GLAD YOU TOOK THAT APPROACH 'CAUSE I WAS GOING TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE FOR A POSTPONEMENT BECAUSE I AGREE.
I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR NEIGHBORS TO TALK TO EACH OTHER SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANNA LIVE SOMEWHERE FOR THE NEXT 10 OR 20 YEARS AND HAVE EACH OTHER HATING EACH OTHER FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
SO ARE, ARE Y'ALL OKAY IF WE JUST TABLE THIS FOR A BIT AND GO, GO OUT TO THE LOBBY, TALK ABOUT IT, LOOK AT THE DESIGN, AND THEN COME BACK? ANY, DO YOU ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? OKAY.
CAN I JUST CLARIFICATION? SO, UH, BY ALL MEANS, BOARD MEMBER BOWEN, UM, I JUST WANT TO ASK ABOUT A CLARIFICATION BECAUSE WHEN I LOOK AT THE PICTURES, I SEE KIND OF A CIRCULAR STONE WALL.
AND BASED UPON THE, THE THE SITE PLAN, YOU'RE REALLY GONNA TIE THE TOP ROOF IN FOR YOUR, UH, FOR YOUR SCREEN PORCH INTO THAT LOWER LEVEL ROOF.
AND THEN THAT THE RETAINING, THE SMALL RETAINING WALL IS GONNA BE TAKEN OUT AND BASICALLY SQUARED OFF TO MAKE A, A, A PORCH.
IS THAT CORRECT? I BELIEVE THAT TO BE CORRECT, YES, SIR.
UH, THE REASON I'M ASKING IS 'CAUSE IT IS VERY TIGHT, VERY CLOSE IN THERE, AND I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS, 'CAUSE THE SCREEN PORCH OF MY WORLD HAS A ROOF ON TOP OF IT AND IS NOT OPEN SO THAT YOU CAN, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS, I WAS JUST YEAH.
WELL, I UNDERSTAND THEY GOT A PLACE TO LAND, YOU KNOW, SO THEY'RE ALL, OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? VIRTUAL OR, OKAY, SO I DON'T, DON'T THINK BOARD MEMBER, OH, SORRY.
I, I, I, I'M STILL STRUGGLING WITH THE HARDSHIP ASPECT OF IT, UM, BECAUSE THE PORT SIZE DOESN'T SEEM THAT NARROW TO ME.
I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS A REASONABLE PORT SIZE THAT IS NOT CAUSING A HARDSHIP.
AND MAYBE IT'S, IT VARIES FOR PEOPLE, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WOULD BE A, IF YOU'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO PUT A DINING TABLE ON THE SMALLER PORCH, JUST LIKE TRYING TO PUT A DINING TABLE ON A SIX FOOT DECK.
IT'S REALLY, THE SMALLEST ONES ARE LIKE, IT'S A LITTLE BIT HARDER.
YEAH, I, I MEAN IT'S REALLY HARD TO EVEN LIKE IMAGINE HOW SOMEONE COULD PULL A CHAIR OUT.
I WAS WONDERING IF ANYONE ENTERTAINED MY TABLE.
SO I WAS GOING TO SAY WE DID NOT HAVE A SECOND YET ON BOARD MEMBERS, UH, MOTION TO APPROVE.
SO IT'S NOT ACTUALLY A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION AT THE TABLE FOR A PERIOD OF 15 MINUTES AND I'LL SECOND IT BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE NEXT CASE FIVE FIVE REBUTTAL.
WHY DON'T WE DO 30, JUST TO BE SAFE? 30 MINUTES.
I, I'D JUST LIKE TO TAKE IT UP RIGHT AFTER THE NEXT CASE.
UH, WHY DON'T WE TABLE IT TILL AFTER THE NEXT CASE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S PRECISE ENOUGH, OR LEGAL.
IS IT PRECISE ENOUGH? YEAH, WE CAN DO THAT.
WE CAN SPECIFY POINTS IN THE AGENDA OF THE MEETING.
SO IF YOU GUYS WOULD GO DISCUSS IT, WE'RE GONNA TABLE THIS TILL THE END OF THIS CASE.
THIS NEXT CASE, NEXT CASE, SORRY, WHICH WILL BE ITEM SIX.
SO WE'RE GONNA VOTE, UH, I DON'T BELIEVE WE NEED TO VOTE ON A
[01:05:01]
TABLE.WE CAN DO A VOTE OF AFFIRMATION JUST TO BE SURE.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO OBJECTS TO THE TABLING? OKAY.
OKAY, WE'RE GONNA GO TO ITEM SIX,
[6. C15-2023-0034 M Renee Suaste 5111 Lansing Drive]
HAPPY HOLIDAY.THIS IS A PREVIOUS POSTPONED CASES C 15 20 23 0 0 3 4 M RENEE SUAY 5 1 1 1 LANSING DRIVE.
UH, IS THE APPLICANT ON THE PHONE FOR THIS ONE? OKAY.
UM, MS. SWAS, YOU THERE? M OKAY.
I'M THE RESIDENT AT 51 11 LANSING DRIVE HERE IN AUSTIN.
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME THIS EVENING TO GRANT ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU TODAY ASKING, UH, APPROVAL FOR, UM, A, UH, VARIANT TO BUILD A 20 FOOT BY 20 FOOT CARPORT THAT WILL NOT CONTAIN ENCLOSED WALLS OR ELECTRICAL.
UH, THE CONDITIONS, UH, THIS PROJECT IS UNDER IS, UH, A FRONT YARD SETBACK IS 25 FEET AND GARAGE PLACEMENT UNDER LVC SECTION 25 DASH TWO DASH 1604 C ONE.
UH, THERE'S A PHOTO HERE OF, UH, ONE OF MY CARS.
UM, JUST NORMAL DRIVEWAY USAGE.
NEXT SLIDE, SECOND CAR ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY THERE NORMAL USAGE THAT WE CURRENTLY, UM, HAVE OUR BARS PARKED ON A DAILY BASIS.
UH, WE HAVE THE NEXT SLIDE IS, UM, A BUNCH OF, UH, DRAWINGS OF WHAT THE PROPOSED CARPORT WOULD LOOK LIKE, UM, IN, IN THE DIFFERENT VARIOUS ANGLES, UM, TO HOLD A, A, A DOUBLE CAR, UM, CARPORT.
I DO HAVE A, UH, HERITAGE OAK TREE, UM, THAT, THAT'S NEAR, UH, THIS AREA, UH, WHICH I'LL SPEAK TO IN A FEW MOMENTS.
UH, IT'S, IT'S OVER THE 19 INCH, UH, REQUIREMENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 32 INCHES.
AND, UH, IT, IT, IT'S GOT A PRETTY NICE SIZED CANOPY THAT IT EXTENDS OVER.
UM, THE CAR, THE SILVER CAR ON THE RIGHT.
I'M GONNA LET YOU CATCH UP BECAUSE, UM, THE NEXT ONE WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE ACTUAL OAK TREE, UM, PROTECTION PLAN.
AND, UH, THE 50%, UH, CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA IS TEETERING ON.
UM, WHERE THOSE TWO POSTS ON THE RIGHT WOULD WE GO IN, BUT WE, WE CLEAR THE REST OF THE
NEXT SLIDE IS THE, UH, ESSENTIALLY THE SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY.
I PUT THAT IN THERE FOR YOU ALL FOR DETAILS.
NEXT SLIDE CONTAINS, UH, THE NEIGHBORING BUILDS.
TWO NEXT SLIDES CONTAIN AREAS WHERE, UM, NEW BUILDS HAVE COME IN AND PUT IN ESSENTIALLY THE SAME, UH, DOUBLE CAR CARPORTS, UM, EXTRUDING FROM THE EXISTING ROOF LINE, WHICH IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO.
I'D LIKE TO MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND HAVE HAD NO OPPOSITION TO THE THE NEXT SLIDE.
THE LAST SLIDE CONTAINS THE HARDSHIP IN FEBRUARY.
UM, THAT OAK TREE, UH, SNAPPED A HUGE LIMB FALLING ON MY CAR.
UM, AND IN THAT EVENT, WHICH I KNOW I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE, UM, ALLOWED ME TO,
[01:10:01]
TO STAY HOME EVEN LONGER BECAUSE I DID NOT HAVE, UM, THE ABILITY TO GET TO WORK.SO, UM, I'M REQUESTING TO ALLOW PARKING STRUCTURE TO BE CLOSER TO THE FRONT LOT LINE THAT THE MOST EXTERIOR WALL OF THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE BUILDING FACADE AND REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR FIVE FEET FRONT YARD SET BACK TO, UM, ELECT A PARTICULAR CARPORT.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE AND I AGAIN, APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE.
I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, BOARD MEMBER, SHERIFF STAI.
UM, SO WHERE I'M AT ON THIS ONE IS OBVIOUSLY WHEN THE HOUSE WAS BUILT, IT WAS CONSIDERED REASONABLE THAT THERE WAS NO GARAGE OR CARPORT.
UM, OBVI AND OBVI OBVIOUSLY AS WELL.
WE'VE HAD CLIMATE ISSUES THAT ARE WAY DIFFERENT FROM, THAN WHEN THE HOUSE WAS BUILT.
UM, WE HAVE THESE FREEZES NOW.
UM, HOWEVER, THE PROBLEM IS REALLY WITH THE ABILITY TO TRIM AND MAINTAIN THE HERITAGE TREE, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN AN ISSUE ACROSS AUSTIN.
AND I DON'T KNOW, I THINK IT'S A REASONABLE ASK, BUT I'M FEELING NOT SURE IF A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IS THE RIGHT SOLUTION.
I'M A LITTLE, I'M A LITTLE, I STRUGGLE WITH THIS ONE A LITTLE BIT.
SO AM I ALLOWED ANYTHING? SORRY, THAT WASN'T A QUESTION QUESTION.
SORRY, THAT WASN'T A QUESTION.
DOES ANY BOARD, DOES ANYBODY, DOES? UM, YES, I WAS JUST CURIOUS.
I I, THERE WAS ONE, UH, NOTICE, UH, AN OBJECTION AND IT, IT REFERENCED A PREVIOUS REQUEST THAT WAS DENIED PREVIOUSLY.
DO YOU, DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? I'M ASSUMING THAT THAT QUESTION IS TO ME, YES, THAT'S THE OWNER AND NO, I DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THAT.
AND THEN MY, MY FOLLOW-UP QUESTION AND IN, DID YOU TRY COMMUNICATING WITH ANY OF YOUR NEIGHBORS AND DID YOU HAVE ANY, UH, POSITIVE FEEDBACK REGARDING THE ADDITION? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
UM, THE TWO NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET, UM, BOTH TOLD ME THAT, UM, THEY HAD NO OPPOSITION, UH, THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA.
UM, AND I DID NOT HEAR ANY OPPOSITION IN ANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS BEFORE THIS, THIS MEETING.
AND, UM, OBVIOUSLY AS YOU KNOW, IT WAS POSTPONED.
UM, SO THERE WAS AMPLE TIME FOR, UM, ME, I GUESS TO BE INCLUDED IN THAT, UH, DIALOGUE.
I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU.
UH, I'M LOOKING AT GOOGLE MAPS AND I'M THE ONE I WAS LOOKING AT EARLIER TODAY.
THERE'S A, A HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET WITH A GARAGE THAT ALSO HAS A CARPORT.
IS THAT KIND OF COMMON FOR YOUR STREET OR? THERE ARE.
UM, IT'S A VERY SMALL STREET AND I DID, UM, PUT THIS IN THE APPLICATION.
UM, THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 12 HOMES THAT, THAT, UM, GO UP TO DEAD END INTO THE, UM, ROW RAILROAD RAILWAY AREA THERE.
AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE ARE TWO, UM, PROPERTIES THAT HAVE ERECTED ALUMINUM, UM, COVERS ONE THAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED ACROSS THE STREET, AND THEN ONE DOWN, UM, I THINK THREE STREET, UH, EXCUSE ME, THREE PROPERTIES OVER FROM ME ON THE SAME SIDE PARTICULARLY.
UM, THE REST OF THE, UM, HOMES ON THE STREET EITHER HAVE CONVER GARAGE CONVERSIONS, MAJORITY OF THEM DO.
A COUPLE OF THEM HAVE REGULAR GARAGES IF THEY USE AS GARAGES.
UM, BUT NONE, NONE OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES TO MY KNOWLEDGE, HAVE CLOSE ADJACENT HERITAGE TREES THIS BIG OF THAT COULD IMPEDE, UM, THE VENT THAT, THAT I, THAT I HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, EXPERIENCED IN FEBRUARY.
I DO KEEP UP WITH MAINTAINING THAT PARTICULAR TREE BECAUSE IT IS SO LARGE, NOT JUST IN WIDTH, BUT IN HEIGHT AND IT HAS OVERHANG THE HOME ITSELF.
UM, AND FOR THAT SAME REASON, OBVIOUSLY I WANT TO ENSURE THAT I CAN, UH, MAINTAIN THE TREE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, BUT I WOULD'VE NEVER THOUGHT THAT I HAD EXPERIENCED WHAT
[01:15:01]
I DID IN FEBRUARY.UM, I DON'T THINK ANY OF US DID.
I AM SORRY, I SAID I DON'T THINK ANY OF US DID.
AND, AND I, AGAIN, I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE AND I'VE BEEN, I'VE BEEN LIVING IN THIS AREA, IN THAT HOME FOR 22 YEARS.
THE WANTING TO PUT A CARPORT IN FOR 22 YEARS.
AND I JUST HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO.
SO I WOULD APPRECIATE THE CONSIDERING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR HAVE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I MAKE S APPROVE MADE BY BOARD MEMBER VAN NOLAN.
IT'S A, IT IS A HARD, IT'S A HARD ASK.
UM, I WAS GONNA SAY, I NOTICED YOU WANTED IT 20 BY 20 WHEN I SAW THIS CASE, I WENT OUT TO MY DRIVEWAY AND I MEASURED MY WIFE'S SUVI MEASURED MY F-150, THE DISTANCE ON IT.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU IF YOU WOULD BE OPPOSED TO MAYBE GOING WITH A 20 BY 16, 16 WILL GIVE YOU ADEQUATE.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, MY GARAGE FROM WHERE THE CAR STAYS, 'CAUSE MY TRUCK'S NOT ALLOWED IN THERE IS 20 FEET, IS 16 FEET DEEP.
AND SO THAT WOULD ADEQUATE, BE ADEQUATE FOR YOUR CARS.
IT WILL JUST GIVE, YOU WON'T HAVE, IT WON'T BE AS MUCH OF AN ASK.
SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO HERE IS SPLIT THE BABY A LITTLE BIT AND SEE IF YOU ARE OPEN TO MAKING IT 20 BY 16 VERSUS 20 BY 20.
SO IN, IN THAT, IF I COULD ASK, ARE YOU SAYING THEN THE BACK TWO, UM, I GUESS, UM, SUPPORTS WOULD BE, WOULD BE, UH, A 16 FOOT AND I WOULD STILL GAIN THE, THE, UH, COVERAGE ON THE BACK END OF THE CAR OR YES.
IS THAT NO, IT SHOULD, THAT SHOULD GIVE YOU THE SUV THAT MY WIFE HAS.
IT'S A LEXUS SUV AND WHEN IT'S PARKED INTO THE GARAGE WHERE IT COMES UP AND IT TOUCHES, IT DOESN'T QUITE TOUCH THE, THE WALL OF THE GARAGE TO THE BACK OF THE CAR IS, IT'S LESS THAN 16 FEET.
SO IT'LL STILL GIVE YOU THE WIDTH THAT YOU NEED.
BUT, AND I KNOW, I KNOW WE'RE JUST NICKEL AND DIMMING HERE, BUT I'M TRYING TO GET YOU SOMEPLACE WHERE IT'D BE A COMPROMISE WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE THE VOTES TO GET IT TO PASS.
UM, THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE, I APPRECIATE THAT HERITAGE OAK TREE AND YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO LOCATE IT ANY PLACE ELSE OR MAKE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF PARKING IS THE ONLY HARDSHIP THAT I HAVE AVAILABLE TO USE IT.
BUT YOUR OAK TREE ALSO SITS OFF TO THE SIDE.
I WILL SECOND YOUR MOTION FOR A 16 FOOT ENCROACHMENT.
SO I DO HAVE A SECOND FOR A 16 JUST TO CLARIFY THAT.
YEAH, SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY, THAT WOULD MEAN CHANGING THE SETBACK FROM 25 FEET TO NINE FEET INSTEAD OF TO FIVE FEET? NO, THAT WOULD BE, YEAH, YEAH.
THAT'S THAT IT FLIP IT, FLIP THE THOUGHT.
SO IT'D BE 16 FEET OUT FROM THE HOUSE.
BUT THE REQUEST IS TO MOVE THE SETBACK FROM 25 FEET TO FIVE AND YOU GUYS ARE SAYING MAKE IT SMALLER SO WE CAN PUSH IT TO NINE.
AM I RIGHT? IT'S A FOUR, FOUR FOOT DIFFERENCE FROM 16 TO 20 OR FROM 20 TO 16.
THAT'S MY MATH, THAT'S MY THAT I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND 'CAUSE YOU'RE, YOU'RE ALTERING THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
I THINK I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THAT.
SO, SO TO BE CLEAR THEN IT'S, THE POST WOULD BE AT 16 FEET RATHER THAN 20 AND I WOULD STILL GET THE, UH, OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE OVERHANG TO CLEAR THE, THE, THE VERY BACK OF THE CAR.
THE OVERHANG IS IN THE PERMITTED EXCEPTIONS TO, AND ALSO THAT IT, IT, PART OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE THAT THE THREE SIDES STAY OPEN BECAUSE YOUR HOUSE, LOOKING AT YOUR HOUSE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT PROBABLY BUILT IN THE LATE EIGHTIES.
AND I REMEMBER A LOT OF HOUSES THAT WERE BUILT LIKE THAT ORIGINALLY HAD SOMEWHAT OF A CARPORT GARAGE THERE, THAT EVENTUALLY OVER TIME BECAUSE OF GROWTH OF FAMILIES AND GROWTH OF THE CITY, THEY GOT CLOSED IN WHERE YOUR TWO WINDOWS ARE.
AND SO I'M TRYING TO BE CONSIDERATE OF THAT AS WELL.
SO I THINK, I THINK WITH A HAPPY COMPROMISE, WE CAN GET YOU WHERE YOU NEED TO AT LEAST HAVE PROTECTION FOR YOUR VEHICLES.
VICE CHAIR, HAWTHORNE, ARE YOU OKAY STILL SECONDING THAT WITH THE THREE SIDES? STAY OPEN? YEP.
[01:20:01]
THE ORIGINAL INTENT NOT TO BE ENCLOSED AT ALL.WE'RE, WE'RE NOT ASKING QUESTIONS ANYMORE.
WE'RE JUST TALKING AMONGST THE BOARD, BOARD MEMBER BOWEN, UH, ONE OF MY QUESTIONS REALLY COMES BACK TO, I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE LACK OF ELECTRICITY FOR SOME TYPE OF LIGHTING, WHATEVER THE CASE IS, SO THAT WE DON'T, WE'RE NOT CAUSING SOME TYPE OF A SAFETY ISSUE FOR THE PERSON GOING ACROSS OR WHATEVER THE CASE IS.
BUT I DID NOTICE THAT, THAT THERE'D BE NO ELECTRICITY FOR, AND I'M, I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS, JUST FOR SAFETY PURPOSES OR WHATEVER THE CASE IS, THERE'S PROBABLY LIGHTING ALREADY ON THE EXTERIOR WALL.
WELL, AND THAT, THAT'S NOT SEEING THAT ON ANY OF THE PICTURES.
THAT LOOKS CAN'T THAT IT'S RIGHT BEHIND THE FLAG, SO.
AND YES, THERE IS LIGHTING, THERE IS MOTION DETECTOR LIGHTING THERE.
WHAT I SAID WAS NO ADDED LIGHTING.
THERE IS LIGHTING THAT EXISTS.
THAT'S, THAT, THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION REGARDING THE, A SAFETY CONCERN THERE.
SO I'M LOOKING AT VIRTUAL, UH, BOARD MEMBER KIM.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY YOUR QUESTION, THE LIGHTING, WHEN WE BUILD A CARDBOARD, WOULDN'T THAT BE COVERING THE EXISTING, ARE WE MOVING THAT TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE CAR? OKAY.
I JUST HAD A CONCERN THAT THERE'S NO, THAT THERE WAS NO SAFETY TYPE LIGHTING, THAT TYPE OF THING.
'CAUSE I REALLY COULDN'T TELL WHAT THAT WAS IN THAT PICTURE.
SO, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANY TYPE OF LIMITATION ON ADDING MORE EXTERIOR LIGHTING.
SO CAN, WOULD IT CAUSE THE EXISTING LIGHTING THAT'S ON THE OUTER WALL TO BE REDUCED IN ILLUMINATION BECAUSE OF THE CARPORT OR, OKAY.
IT SHOULDN'T, BUT I MEAN, SHE COULD ALWAYS MOVE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT REDUCING THE LIGHT.
SO REDUCING THE SAFETY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN YOU'RE WALKING.
BUT THAT'S WHERE IT WAS COMING FROM, BUT THANK YOU.
SORRY, I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION FOR MEMBER.
THE BOARD MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, ONE THING THAT I, I CAN IMAGINE IS THAT IF, IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD DID, YOU KNOW, TAKE A LOOK AT THE, THE, THE, THE, THE REQUEST AND THEY SAW THE RENDERINGS WITH THE CEDAR AND, YOU KNOW, BEING QUITE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING, THAT THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT THE IS PERSUADING TO, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS AND, AND YOU KNOW, HOW THE, IT'LL AESTHETICALLY AFFECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, SO WITH THAT, AND YOU KNOW, WHEN A CONTRACTOR FINALLY COMES AND BIDS THIS OUT, IT'S DETERMINED THAT, YOU KNOW, A METAL SHEET METAL, YOU KNOW, COVER IS ACTUALLY A 10TH OF THE COST OF DOING A A CEDAR PLANK.
YOU KNOW, THAT AND THAT DECISION HAS TO BE MADE.
UM, IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONCERN OURSELVES WITH? AND I, I KNOW, I GUESS WE CAN'T NECESSARILY TIE AESTHETICS TO A SKETCHUP MODEL, BUT, BUT UNFORTUNATELY JUST THE THOUGHTS WE CAN'T TIE DESIGN TO TO IT EITHER.
IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE CAN'T CONDITION.
BUT IF SO, JUST IN GENERAL, WE HAVE TO ABOUT IT'S A GOOD SUGGESTION FOR SURE.
DO YOU WANNA TIE IT TO, IS THERE A DRAWING, ONE OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS? I'M SORRY.
I'M REALLY HAVING A HARD TIME WITH THE NOT HAVING MY GLASSES.
I DON'T, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S NECESSARY, MADAM CHAIR.
I MEAN, YOU'VE GOT TWO CHOICES.
THE STEEL ONE OR ANYTHING THAT'S A LOT NICER.
I MEAN, YOU CAN'T GO ANY WORSE THAN THE STEEL ONE.
AND IF THEY, THEY ALREADY HAVE THOSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT, IT APPEARS TO ME IN HER DRAWINGS THAT SHE'S LOOKING FOR SOMETHING THAT AESTHETICALLY PLEASING.
SHE'S BEEN THERE FOR 20 YEARS.
I DON'T THINK SHE'S GONNA, UH, GO BACKWARDS WITH IT, BUT I DON'T WANNA GET INTO A DESIGN SITUATION.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY, UH, BOARD MEMBER VILA, THIS IS GOING TO BE A MOTION TO APPROVE A REDUCED SETBACK TO NINE FEET WITH DIMENSIONS OF 20 BY 16 FOR THE CARPORT WITH THREE SIDES REMAINING OPEN.
REASONABLE USE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE THE PROPOSED CARPORT IS UNABLE TO BE BUILT WITH BUILT WITHIN THE CODE WITHOUT THE NEED OF THE APPROVED VARIANCES.
THE HARDSHIP FOR THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED, IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IN THAT THERE'S A PROTECTED HERITAGE OAK TREE LARGER THAN 19 INCHES IN DIAMETER ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED BUILD.
BUILT OUTSIDE, 50% OF IT IS WITHIN THE CRI CRITICAL ROOT,
[01:25:01]
UH, ROOT ZONE.THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE TWO OUT OF THE 10 HOMES ON THAT SIDE OF LANSING DRIVE ALREADY HAVE CARPORTS.
UH, AND FOUR OUT OF 10 HAVE FUNCTIONAL GARAGES ALONG FOR PROTECTION AREA CHARACTER.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY, WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY, AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE PROPOSED DESIGN WILL EXTRUDE FROM THE EXISTING ROOF LINE, BLEND IN WITH THE NEW BUILD IN THE AREA, AND LEAVE THE EXISTING CHARACTER IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO JUST ONE MORE TIME FOR ELAINE.
THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, A REDUCED SETBACK TO NINE FEET WITH THE STRUCTURE, UH, AT 20 FEET BY 16 FEET, WITH THREE SIDES REMAINING OPEN, MADE BY BOARD MEMBER OF JUAN OLAND, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE.
I'M MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS THAN I WAS THE ORIGINAL.
YOUR VARIANCE HAS BEEN GRANTED.
DID I CALL WHO THE LAST YOU'RE GOING, MAGGIE? YEAH, YEAH.
WHEN YOU DON'T GO ALPHABETICAL.
SO WE ARE GOING TO PICK BACK UP
[5. C15-2023-0049 Paul DeGroot for Stacey Martinez 4908 Crestway Drive (Part 2 of 2)]
ITEM FIVE C 15, 20 23 0 0 4 9, UH, 49 0 8 CREST WAY DRIVE.SO LET'S START WITH THE APPLICANT.
WERE Y'ALL ABLE TO TALK AND MAYBE WE WERE ABLE TO TALK AND THANK YOU FOR, FOR THAT TIME.
I'M SORRY THAT WE DON'T HAVE, UH, A RESOLUTION.
UM, WHAT I LEARNED IS THAT THE OBJECTION THAT WAS MADE, UM, DID NOT REALLY HAVE TO DO WITH THE BUILDING OF A SCREENED IN PORCH.
IT WAS TO SAY THAT HE WOULD WITHDRAW THE OBJECTION IF WE CUT DOWN THE PECAN TREE IN OUR BACKYARD THAT HE CLAIMS, UM, IMPAIRS HIS VIEW.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? BOARD MEMBER VAN NOLAN CAN'T DO THAT.
WHAT? I MEAN, YOU CAN'T, UH, YEAH, THE CITY ARBORIST WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO.
I DID NOT AGREE TO DO IT, SO, NO, I UNDERSTAND, MA'AM.
BUT I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR SO THAT HE KNOWS IT'S NOT, IT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED ANYHOW.
I MEAN, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE MITIGATION, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE SOMETHING PLANTED THAT'S GONNA, THAT IS EQUAL TO OR BETTER THAN WHAT YOU HAVE IF FOR, TO REMOVE THAT TREE.
SO I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, IT, IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN.
AND, UH, BOARD MEMBER BOWEN OUTTA CURIOSITY, WHAT IS THE DIAMETER OF THAT TREE? UH, I, I, I DON'T HAVE A, A CLUE.
YEAH, I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE PICTURE.
YEAH, I LOOKING AT THE PICTURES A PRETTY GOOD SIZE.
MIGHT BE ABLE TO TRIM IT CHAIR, BUT I'M NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO REMOVE IT.
DID YOU HAVE A WELL, I WAS HOPING TO HEAR FROM THE OPPOSITION IF IT, WHETHER OR NOT IT HAD IT DELAYED.
I DO UNDERSTAND GETTING A NOTICE IN THE MAIL AND THAT IT, IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU ANY DETAIL, IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU ANY DRAWINGS, IT DOESN'T LET YOU DO ANYTHING.
CAN YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE JUST FOR A FEW MINUTES? JUST, UM, THANK YOU.
AND, AND I'M VERY SORRY THAT I FORGOT MY GLASSES AND THEN I REALLY LOOK KIND OF SILLY WITH MY SUNGLASSES ON AT NIGHT.
SO, I MEAN, SO THIS EDITION IS DOWN KIND OF IN THE HOLE BELOW YOU, YOU KNOW, SETBACKS ARE THERE FOR A REASON.
I COULD, I HAD VERY LITTLE VIEW OF THEIR HOUSE BECAUSE THERE WAS A TREE IN THAT AREA THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IT WAS RE REMOVED A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SETBACKS ARE FAR.
AND, UH, UM, SO YES, I CAN SEE THE HOUSE AND I CAN SEE IT REALLY,
[01:30:01]
REALLY WELL.THE PECAN TREE IS AN ISSUE AND I DID NOT KNOW.
IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S ALL THAT LARGE, BUT, UH, UH, SO I DIDN'T THINK IT WOULD BE A HERITAGE TREE.
PERHAPS IT IS, UH, 16 INCHES IS WHAT IT SAYS ON THEIR DRAWINGS.
AND YOU'RE RIGHT, I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING UNTIL, UM, TODAY BASICALLY ON WHAT THEY HAD PLANNED.
I, I UNDERSTAND IT'S A LITTLE SHOCKY WHEN YOU GET THE NOTICE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I'M SURE THAT IF THE TABLES WERE REVERSED AND I WAS PROPOSING TO BUILD FIVE AND A HALF FOOT FROM THEIR PROPERTY LINE, THEY WOULD NOT BE HAPPY ABOUT IT.
SO THEY ARE PROPOSING TO BUILD FIVE AND A HALF FEET FROM MY PROPERTY LINE AND I'M NOT HAPPY ABOUT IT.
I APPROACHED THEM ABOUT MAYBE SOME OTHER TRADE OFF, BUT YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT ISN'T GONNA WORK.
SO UNDERSTAND SIR, THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR, FOR ALLOWING THE TIME.
BUT WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, YOUR PROPERTY IS ABOVE THEIR PROPERTY BY JUST LOOKING AT THE DRAWINGS.
CAN YOU COME BACK UP TO THE PODIUM PLEASE, SIR? THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING, YOU KNOW, SORRY, UH, WAIT.
YEAH, WAIT TILL YOU HEAR AT THE MIC.
BUT BASED UPON THE PICTURES THAT I'M LOOKING AT, THERE'S A CHANGE OF ELEVATION BETWEEN THEIR GROUND AND THE, AND THE BOTTOM OF YOUR PROPERTY BY WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, AT LEAST 12 TO 15 FEET.
OH, MORE THAN THAT PROBABLY I WOULD BE.
OKAY, SO SO IT'S MORE THEY MAY HAVE AN IDEA.
I I DON'T, SO IT'S BASICALLY MORE THAN THAT.
BUT I MEAN, SO IF, IS IT REALLY, WAIT A MINUTE.
I, I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING THOUGH, BUT WELL, IF YOU KNOW WHERE I'M GOING, THEN I'M GONNA ASK YOU THEN IS IT REALLY FIVE FEET FROM YOUR REAL PROPERTY? IT REALLY ISN'T IN REALITY.
WELL, AT THE TOP OF THIS CLIFF, IT DOESN'T JUST FLATTEN OUT.
THERE'S A 30 FOOT DIFFERENCE FROM WHERE THE BOTTOM OF MY PROPERTY LINE IS TO THE CURB.
SO YOU GO UP, AFTER YOU GO PAST THE CLIFF, YOU GO UP, WHICH GIVES YOU A VIEW STRAIGHT DOWN INTO THEIR OKAY.
BUT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IS THEIR ROOF OF THEIR SCREENED PORCH.
AND, BUT THAT'S ALSO BECAUSE THEY'VE REMOVED TREES TO BUILD, SAID SHED.
AND, UH, SO NOW, SO YOU'RE, I CAN SEE THEIR HOUSE REALLY WELL BECAUSE THEY'VE REMOVED THE TREES THAT WERE IN THAT BUFFER ZONE.
SO YOUR OBJECTION REALLY IS THE FACT THAT THE TREE'S BEEN TAKEN DOWN.
WELL, I'M OBJECTING TO THE, UM, UH, DETRIMENT TO MY PROPERTY VALUE, BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S GONNA HURT MY PROPERTY VALUE.
WAIT, WAIT, THE, THE TREE IS NOT ON YOUR PROPERTY.
ON MOVING TOWARDS MY, WAIT A MINUTE.
THE TREE IS ON THEIR PROPERTY OR WAS ON THEIR PROPERTY, NOT YOURS.
BUT IT WAS SHIELDING MY, MY HOUSE FROM SEEING THEIR HOUSE.
AND SO IT WAS, IT WAS HELPING ME TO HAVE THAT TREE THERE.
BUT I THINK THAT THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE HAVE BUFFERS, YOU KNOW, SETBACKS FROM PROPERTY LINES IS SO THAT THERE IS AN ABILITY TO, TO, TO, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE SOME PRIVACY.
WELL, AND THEY'RE EXPECTING ME TO PROVIDE THE PRIVACY ON MY PROPERTY IF THEY BUILD TO THE FIVE AND A HALF FOOT LINE.
WELL, YOU'VE GOT A, YOU'VE GOT A, A LARGE, RATHER LARGE ROCK WALL THAT REALLY KIND OF DEFINES WHERE THE PROPERTY IS FROM MY PERSPECTIVE VERSUS THE OTHER.
AND I, I, WELL, I SEE THEIR HOUSE.
I MEAN, IN OTHER WORDS, THIS TREE THAT THEY REMOVED NOW, THEIR HOUSE IS JUST, IT IS REALLY IN MY VIEW, AND WHERE BEFORE IT WAS A TREE IN MY VIEW, MADAM CHAIR, CAN WE CALL THE QUESTION, BECAUSE I'LL TELL YOU WHERE I'M AT ON THIS.
I MEAN, I'M WITH, I WOULD WITH BALL COMMISSIONER BOWING SECOND.
I I'M, I'M JUST GONNA COME OUT AND SAY IT, THE, THAT WALL UP THERE AND I'M WITH YOU.
THE FACT THAT IT'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO DECREASE ANY VALUE ON HIS PROPERTY AT ALL TO HAVE THAT.
UH, AND IF IT'S A PRIVACY ISSUE, WELL YOU CAN'T SEE DOWN IN THERE AND THEY CAN'T SEE THROUGH THE ROOF.
IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT OUR BYLAWS AND YOU TAKE A LOOK AT OUR RULES AND PROCEDURES, A TOPOGRAPHY ISSUE, WHICH CLEARLY THERE'S A ALMOST A 30 FOOT THERE AND THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO, YOU CAN SEE THE RETAINING WALLS THAT WHERE THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO SQUARE THAT OFF.
AND ALSO, UH, THE SHAPE OF THE LOT, WHICH IS ALSO PART OF OUR HARDSHIP.
AND THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE ARE, WE ARE, UH, REQUIRED TO USE AS EVIDENCE FOR PASSING OF, OF A VARIANCE.
THIS IS A VERY SMALL ASK AND I REALLY, I'VE EVEN MYSELF, I CANNOT SEE THE ISSUE.
AND I'M NOT GONNA SIT HERE AND HAVE SOMEBODY NEGOTIATE, REMOVE YOUR TREE AND I WILL PULL MY DEAL.
NO, THAT'S EXTORTION BY MY BOOK.
AND I'M NOT GONNA STAND FOR IT.
[01:35:01]
BY MY, UH, MY MOTION TO APPROVE.AND THEY HAVE A LEGITIMATE ASK BECAUSE OF THE TOPOGRAPHY, BECAUSE OF THE, UH, THE SHAPE OF THE LOT.
AND BECAUSE THERE'S NO PLACE ELSE ON THAT LOT THAT THEY CAN LOCATE THAT, THAT BACK PORCH.
I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION AND I'VE GOT TWO SECONDS.
IF THERE'S NOT A SECOND, I DON'T REMEMBER.
I'LL GIVE THAT SECOND TO BOARD MEMBER BOWEN.
AND THIS IS JUST A MOTION TO APPROVE NO CONDITIONS, NO CON WELL, THERE'S NO CONDITIONS NEEDED IN MY OPINION.
UM, GOT A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS.
I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE THE VOTES.
UH, LEMME START WITH, UH, BOARD MEMBER SHERIFF STAI AND THE BOARD MEMBER KIM.
UM, SO I'LL START BY SAYING I AGREE WITH, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, VON OLIN IN TERMS OF THE OBJECTION FROM, UH, RELATED TO PRIVACY ON THE PART OF THE NEIGHBOR.
UM, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND, AND SHARING.
UM, BUT I THINK I AGREE WITH WHERE Y'ALL HAVE LAND OR YOU LANDED ON THAT COUNCIL MEMBER.
UM, HOWEVER, UM, I GOT A RAISE.
YOU'VE BEEN PROMOTED, SORRY, NOT COUNCIL MEMBER COMMISSIONER.
UM, BUT UH, I VOTE, I'M STILL, I'M STILL STUCK ON WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER KIM HAS RAISED, WHICH IS THE QUESTION OF IS THERE AN ACTUAL HARDSHIP HERE? I MEAN, IN MY VIEW, THE HOUSE COULD HAVE BEEN BUILT SLIGHTLY SMALLER.
IT COULD HAVE BEEN BUILT SLIGHTLY FARTHER AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
LIKE I'M, I'M NOT SEEING A HARDSHIP, LIKE A TRUE HARDSHIP HERE THAT JUSTIFIES I MAY A VARIANCE FROM THE CODE, IF I MAY ADDRESS THAT.
THE REASON THAT I'M OKAY WITH IT IS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T BUILD A HOUSE.
AND SO THEREFORE, IF, IF THEY WERE HAD BUILT THE HOUSE AND, AND BUILT IT IN THAT CONFIGURATION, I'M WITH YOU, BUT I'VE ALWAYS BEEN, FOR ALL THE YEARS I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD, I'VE ALWAYS BEEN RELUCTANT TO PUNISH SOMEBODY WHO BOUGHT SOMETHING AT THAT WAS ALREADY CONSTRUCTED AND WHOEVER THE BUILDER WAS, UNLESS IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY DIDN'T DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE ON, SHE'S BEEN LIVING IN THE HOUSE FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
I MEAN, YOU DON'T NORMALLY, I MEAN, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
IT'S NOT VISIBLE, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEHIND THE HOUSE.
IF IT WAS A SQUARED LOT AND THEY WERE ASKING FOR IT, AND THERE MIGHT BE SOMEPLACE ELSE TO PUT IT.
YES, I, I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU.
BUT THEY DIDN'T BUILD THE HOUSE.
THEY BOUGHT THAT HOUSE IN THAT CONFIGURATION.
IT'S ALSO IN AN AREA THAT THEY'RE ALREADY USING AS A PATIO.
YEAH, THEY'RE USING IT AS A PATIO ANYHOW.
SO IT'S NOT, OR MEMBER KIM, IT'S NOT RELOCATING IT.
I THINK I STILL AM STRUGGLING WITH THE HARDSHIP ONLY BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE ONLY SOLUTION.
AND SECOND, I BELIEVE YOU SAID THE HOUSE WAS PURCHASED IN 2004, SO YOU USED THIS HOUSE FOR ALMOST NINE OR NINE YEARS.
AND SO I WOULD THINK IF THERE WAS A HARDSHIP EXPERIENCE, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP MUCH EARLIER.
UM, IT FELT TO ME, I'M SURE IT'S AN UNCOMFORTABLE CURRENT SPACE, BUT LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN, IT FEELS LIKE THERE ARE, YOU CAN MOVE MORE TOWARDS TO THE EXPAND MORE SIDEWAYS OR WRAP AROUND THE HOUSE SLIGHTLY.
'CAUSE I DO SEE TWO CORNER WINDOWS, SO IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S COMPLETELY OBSTRUCTING THE VIEW OF IF YOU WERE TO KIND OF MOVE OUT SIDEWAYS.
SO I FEEL LIKE THERE'S MORE THAN ONE WAY TO APPROACH THE EXPANSION OF THE BACK SPACE WITHOUT, UH, UM, EATING INTO THE RETAINING WALL, WHICH IS A STRUCTURAL COMPONENT TO THAT BACK SPACE.
WAS THERE A QUESTION IN THERE? THERE WAS NOT A QUE IT WAS JUST AN OPINION THAT I FEEL LIKE, I STILL FEEL LIKE I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FULL HARDSHIP YET.
SO THERE'S A UTILITY EASEMENT ON THE SIDE SO THAT PORCH CAN'T WRAP AROUND 'CAUSE THERE'S A 10 FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT, UM, ON THAT SIDE.
I'M TRYING TO SEE THAT IN THE DRAWING.
AND IF MAYBE IN RESPONSE TO YOUR OTHER CONCERNS, FIVE 10, UH, IF YOU COULD ANSWER WHAT IS THERE, NOT THAT IT MATTERS TO ME, WAS THERE ANY REASON YOU WAITED SO LONG? UM, WE JUST DECIDED TO DO SOME CONSTRUCTION ON THE HOUSE.
UM, OTHERWISE, I MEAN, THERE WAS NO REASON WE WERE, WE WERE DOING SOME REMODELING INSIDE THE HOUSE AND THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE, THE TIMING WAS GOOD, WHICH IS FINE BY ME.
TO THE, TO THE, TO TO YOUR POINT, UH, IT, IT WASN'T A QUESTION THAT WAS JUST A COMMENT FROM, SORRY, THE BOARD MEMBER.
YOU GOTTA WAIT FOR QUESTIONS UNLESS SHE WANTS TO ASK A QUESTION.
AS A QUESTION BOARD MEMBERSHIP, COULD YOU ARTICULATE A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, SORT OF WHY THIS IS A HARDSHIP FOR YOU? UM, THAT'D BE GREAT.
AND AND I, I, I WANTED TO ADDRESS YOUR POINT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE HOUSE IS BUILT FARTHER BACK, BUT I THINK THAT'S BECAUSE OF THE 20 FOOT RULE THAT YOU HAVE TO BE 20 FEET FROM THE SIDEWALK IN THE STREET.
SO THAT'S WHY THE HOUSE IS SO FAR SET BACK.
AT LEAST THAT'S KIND OF HOW I, HOW, HOW I UNDERSTAND IT.
UM, AND I GUESS THE HARDSHIP OVERALL IS JUST
[01:40:01]
THIS, THE, THE WAY THE LOT IS SHAPED AND THE FACT THAT YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE WITH IT.UM, AND JUST THE ENJOYMENT OF THE PROPERTY, IT DOESN'T IMPACT ANY OF, OF THE NEIGHBORS.
AND, UH, I MEAN, IRRESPECTIVE OF, UM, THE OBJECTION THAT WAS MADE, UM, AND IT'S JUST A WAY TO ENJOY THAT PART OF OUR PROPERTY YEAR ROUND.
UM, SO, AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 72, SO IT WOULDN'T HAVE EVEN COMPLIED OR LIKE UNDER CURRENT CODE OR LIKE, WHAT WAS THE LAST CHANGE? 84.
SO IT WAS 84 WAS THE LAST BIG CHANGE.
IT WOULD'VE BEEN EVEN BEFORE THAT.
AND I'M SORRY, BOARD MEMBER BOWEN JUST, OH, JUST A, A CLARIFICATION BECAUSE I, WHEN I ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT THE, THE RETAIN, THE SMALL RETAINING WALL WAS GONNA BE TAKEN OUT, NOT THE, NOT THE NEXT RETAINING WALL BEHIND THAT.
WAS JUST THE ONE THAT'S ON THE CONCRETE FOR THE APPLICANT.
I'M SORRY, JUST, JUST AS A CLARIFICATION, SIR, BECAUSE WHEN I ASK ABOUT THE RETAINING WALL EARLIER, IT'S JUST A SHORT RETAINING WALL THAT YOU'RE TAKING DOWN IN ORDER WORDS.
BUT THE, THE NEXT RETAINING WALL THAT'S IN THE PICTURE THAT'S BEHIND THAT, THAT ONE WILL STILL REMAIN.
SO IS IT A RETAINING WALL OR IS IT A SEAT WALL? IT'S A SEAT.
THE ACTUAL RETAINING WALL BEHIND IT WOULD, WOULD STILL REMAIN.
SO YOU'RE SAYING IT'S THE CRESCENT WALL THAT'S BEING TAKEN OUT, NOT THE, THE THREE, ONE OF THE THREE TIER WALLS IN THE BACK? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND THEN THE UTILITY POST THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT PROHIBITS YOU FROM BUILDING SIDEWAYS.
I, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE EASEMENT THERE.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE EASEMENT THAT WE CAN'T GO PAST, UM, FROM WHERE THE, THE HOUSE LINE IS RIGHT NOW.
AND IN YOUR YARD, IS THAT SOMEONE, IS THAT THE NEIGHBOR'S? THE EASEMENT IS LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, 10 FEET.
IT'S NOT, IT DOESN'T COVER THE WHOLE LENGTH OF THE PROPERTY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR, YOUR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
I THINK HAVING HAD THIS DISCUSSION, I'M ON BOARD WITH APPROVING IF SOMEBODY MAKES A MOTION.
RACHEL MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? OKAY, LET'S CALL THE VOTE.
I, WELL, I WAS GONNA, I WAS GONNA JUST MAKE A COMMENT.
I, I I THINK I'M IN, I'M IN FAVOR OF, OF, OF THIS AS WELL.
BUT IN, IN SOME WAYS, LIKE THE, THE TOPOGRAPHIC ELEMENT IS ACTUALLY BENEFITING THE PROPERTY IN SOME WAYS FROM THE DI MINIMUS ASK IS, IS THE WAY I KIND OF LOOK AT IT.
'CAUSE IF, IF THIS HOME WERE ON THE SAME GRAY AS THE HOME ABOVE IT, THEN THE UTILITY EASEMENT THAT'S THERE, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, UTILITY LINES THAT ARE RUNNING, THEN THIS WOULDN'T BE A POSSIBILITY AT ALL.
AND IT WOULD BE WITHIN AUSTIN ENERGY'S CLEARANCES AND IT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED.
SO BEING STEPPED DOWN ACTUALLY MAKES THIS A RELATIVELY MINIMAL ASKS.
LET'S CALL FINDINGS, PLEASE REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY DO NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE BECAUSE ADHERING TO A 10 FOOT SETBACK LINE WOULD RESULT IN A VERY SKINNY SCREEN PORCH WITH INSIDE DIMENSIONS OF EIGHT SIX BY 15 EIGHT.
THIS DIMENSION WOULD BE TOO NARROW FOR SEATING AROUND PATIO TABLE FOR OUTDOOR DINING HARDSHIP, THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH VARIANCE IS REQUESTED IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IN THAT THE LOT IS TRIANGULAR, IRREGULAR SHAPED.
AND THE 10 FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT RUNNING THROUGH THE INTERIOR OF IT IS AT THE LOCATION JUST THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE EAST END OF THE HOUSE.
THE HOME WAS BUILT ON THE ONLY USABLE PORTION OF THE LOT, LEAVING VERY LITTLE BACKYARD SPACE.
FURTHER, A VERY TALL STEEP RETAINING WALL TAKES UP MORE YARD SPACE BEHIND THE HOUSE.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL IN THE AREA FOR WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE OTHER LOTS ARE NOT TRIANGULAR, IRREGULAR SHAPED OR HAVE DEEPER FRONT BACK DIMENSIONS ALONG FOR GENEROUS BACKYARDS AREA CHARACTER.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY, WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATION OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
BECAUSE THE FOUR LOTS ABORTED THIS LOT HAVE HOMES THAT ARE NOT NEAR THEIR RESPECTIVE PROPERTY LINES.
SO THERE IS CONSIDERABLE DISTANCE BETWEEN THESE HOMES AND THE PROPOSED SCREEN PORT PORCH.
FURTHER, THE STEEP HILL BEHIND THE LOT MAKES THE PROPOSED PORCH ESSENTIALLY HIDDEN FROM VIEW AND COVERED PATIO DECKS.
GREEN PORCH IS, ARE VERY COMMON IN BACKYARDS IN THIS RESIDENTIAL AREA.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY BOARD MEMBER V OLAND, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER BOWEN.
AND WE'RE GONNA CHANGE IT UP A BIT AND GO BACKWARDS THIS TIME.
SO LET'S CALL THE VOTE A BOARD MEMBER V OLAND? YES.
[01:45:01]
YES.YOUR VARIANCE HAS BEEN GRANTED.
[7. C15-2023-0044 Bruce David Johnson, Jr 1904 Eva Street]
C 15, 20 23 0 0 4 4.BRUCE DAVID JOHNSON, 1904 EVA STREET.
JUST A REMINDER, THIS IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION CASE, NOT A VARIANCE CASE.
UH, I WAS ALSO ASKED TO LET THE BOARD KNOW THAT STAFF TALKED TO RESIDENTIAL REVIEWERS.
AND WE WERE, OUR STAFF WAS TOLD THAT ONCE THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED IS WHEN THEY'LL DO THE SAFETY INSPECTION AND IT WILL HAVE TO MEET WHATEVER, UH, CRITERIA IT FALLS UNDER FROM WHEN THE SPECIAL ACCEPTED ITEM WAS BUILT.
SO, AND THAT WAS 19 THIR, 30 YEARS AGO.
SO I WAS ASKED TO PASS THAT ON.
UM, THIS IS GONNA GO A LOT LIKE LAST TIME, SO, BECAUSE IT WAS A POSTPONED CASE.
SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO PRESENT YOUR CASE TO US.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THANKS TO ELAINE.
WHATEVER, ELAINE RAMIREZ WERE SETTING UP THE INSPECTION.
THE INSPECTOR CAME ON THE 17TH AND, UH, I, UH, BOTH HE AND ELAINE SAID THEY WOULD EMAIL ME THE, THE REPORT, BUT, UH, I DIDN'T GET IT.
AND I FINALLY EMAILED ELAINE AND SHE SAID, WELL, SHE SENT IT TO ME.
SHE SENT IT AGAIN, AND I GOT IT AND I SAW WHAT THE ISSUES WERE.
AND, UM, I HIRED A, UH, CIVIL ENGINEER TO HELP ME WITH THESE ISSUES TO ADDRESS THESE STRUCTURAL ISSUES THAT, THAT ARE ENUMERATED HERE ON THIS REPORT.
YOU, YOU HAVE THE REPORT, I THINK.
UM, AND, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO DO.
UH, AND IF I HAVE TO COME BACK AFTER I DO THAT, I WILL.
MR. JOHNSON JOHNSON? DONE? WHAT'S THAT? ARE YOU DONE? YES, I AM.
THANK YOU ARE, UNLESS THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS.
OH, WE'LL GET TO THAT IN JUST A MINUTE.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION? PARDON? OKAY.
IT'S, IT'S, UH, IF I GET YOU TO HAVE A SEAT, SIR, IF YOU'LL COME UP TO THE PODIUM, STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
UH, MY WIFE WANTED TO BE HERE TONIGHT, BUT SHE HAD A HIP SURGERY THIS WEEK, SO UNFORTUNATELY SHE COULDN'T BE, UH, SHE WANTED ME TO MAKE SURE THAT HER, UH, STATEMENT FROM LAST MEETING WAS, UH, TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AS WELL.
UM, I JUST WANT TO TALK AGAIN ABOUT THE SITUATION FIRST.
THE EXCEPTION FOR THE FRONT, I DON'T THINK MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION BECAUSE THERE'S NO STRUCTURE THERE.
ALL IT IS, IS A COLLECTION OF DEBRIS WITH A TARPED ROOF AND A PIPE STRUCTURE THAT IS KEEPING THAT THERE.
SO, I, I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU'D NEED A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UM, FOR SOMETHING THAT ISN'T A STRUCTURE.
SECOND, THE EXCEPTION ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, FROM FIVE FEET TO ZERO TO MAINTAIN THE ROOF STRUCTURE THAT IS CURRENTLY LEANING INTO MY PROPERTY.
I ALSO OWN 1907 ACROSS THE STREET, WHICH IS MY PRIMARY RESIDENCE.
UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THIS STRUCTURE QUALIFIES FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
UH, THE STRUCTURE JUST COVERS MORE ACCUMULATED DEBRIS, UH, AND IT IS CREATING A HABITAT FOR RODENTS, SNAKES, MOSQUITOES, UM, UH, THE FENCE IS NOT STRUCTURALLY SOUND.
I HAVE AGREED TO BUILD A PRIVACY FENCE.
UH, BUT IN ORDER TO DO THAT, I'M ASKING HIM TO REMOVE HIS CURRENT FENCE AS WELL AS THAT STRUCTURE, UH, THAT IS IN THE SETBACK.
UM, AS FOR THE SETBACK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, UM, IT IS BUILT DIRECTLY ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
UM, IT IS A GARAGE WITH AN UPSTAIRS A DU.
IT DOES IMPACT THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AT 1906 EVA STREET.
UM, I AM IN TALKS RIGHT NOW WITH THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY AND I'M TRYING TO BUY THAT PROPERTY.
[01:50:01]
IS GRANTED, IT WILL, UH, IMPEDE MY ABILITY TO DEVELOP THAT PROPERTY BY EITHER PUTTING ADDITION ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.THE CURRENT HOUSE IS 1100 SQUARE FEET.
I'D LIKE TO PUT AN ADDITION ON THE BACK OF THAT HOUSE OR TEAR THAT HOUSE DOWN AND BUILD A NEW HOUSE.
UM, SO IF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS GRANTED, THE PROPERTY LINE, IF I BUILT TO THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK, WOULD BE FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THAT TWO STORY BUILDING.
I'M GONNA PAUSE YOU FOR JUST A SECOND TO SEE, SIR, WERE YOU ALSO WANTING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION BECAUSE THE FIVE MINUTE TIME, THAT'S MY FATHER-IN-LAW.
YOU STILL HAVE 10 HALF MINUTES LEFT.
UM, SO I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR THAT SOMEONE IS ABLE TO BUILD WITHIN THE SETBACK THAT WILL IMPEDE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PROPERTY.
UM, I DO ASK IF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS GRANTED ON THAT BUILDING, THAT THAT BUILDING IS BROUGHT UP TO CODE.
IT, IT IS A FIRE HAZARD IN MY MIND.
UM, AND IF AN EXCEPTION IS GRANTED, I WOULD ASK, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS POSSIBLE, BUT THERE'S AN EXPIRATION ON THAT SPECIAL EXCEPTION THAT IF CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP HAPPENS ON THAT PROPERTY, THAT THAT SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE TAKEN OFF.
ALRIGHT SIR, YOU WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO REBUT THE COMMENTS.
THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME A CHANCE TO REBUT.
UM, WELL FIRST, UH, THE RODENT THING, UM, UM, I HAVE PUT OUT NINE WRAP BAIT BOXES AND I HAVE MAINTAINED THEM, UH, OVER THE YEARS.
AND THERE AREN'T, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, THERE'S NOT ANY RATS ON MY PROPERTY.
AND, UH, ALSO TO ADDRESS THE, UH, CODE THING, THAT'S WHY I HAVE HIRED THE, THE, UM, CIVIL ENGINEER 'CAUSE HE AND OH, HE'S GOING TO WORK WITH, UH, THE INSPECTOR ALSO ON THAT.
SO WE CAN, WE COULD GET EVERYTHING UP TO CURRENT CODE.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS AND DEBATE.
I'M GONNA LOOK LEFT FIRST THIS TIME, SEE IF WE WANT, OKAY.
THEN LOOKING RIGHT, VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE.
SO THIS IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION CASE AND THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN A VARIANCE.
SO IT IS, IT IS NOT A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE.
IT IS A, IT IS A MAJORITY VOTE, CORRECT? CORRECT.
ERICA CAN'T SEE THAT I'M LOOKING AT HER BECAUSE I HAVE ON MY, I CAN BE ABLE TO SEE YOUR, HER SHADES.
UM, SO, SO A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS ABOUT THINGS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED, 75% MM-HMM.
BUT IT, MS. LOPEZ, CAN YOU PLEASE COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND, AND SAY YOUR BRILLIANT WORDS SO THAT WE MIGHT CONTINUE? UM, ON PAGE NINE OF YOUR RULES OF PROCEDURE UNDER F1, A APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUIRES THE CONCURRING VOTE OF AT LEAST 75% OF THE BOARD.
AND WHAT IS THAT TODAY? IT'D BE EIGHT.
YEAH, IT'S STILL SUPER MAJORITY.
ALRIGHT, SO THIS IS ABOUT SETBACKS AND THEN THERE'S A SEPARATE ISSUE OF THE INSPECTOR DEALING WITH THE STRUCTURES AND HAVING THE STRUCTURES UPGRADED TO MEET A CODE.
SO HAS THE STRUCTURE BEEN THERE? HAS IS IS REALLY WHAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS FOR IF I'M, THAT WAS MY END OF SENTENCE.
SEE, FOR SPECIAL EXEMPTIONS, RESIDENTIAL USE FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT, IS ALLOWED IN AN SF THREE OR MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONING BUILDING OFFICIAL PERFORMS AN INSPECTION AND DETERMINES THE VIOLATION, DOES NOT POSE A HAZARD TO LIFE HEALTH, PUBLIC SAFETY.
AND THE BOARD FINDS THAT VIOLATIONS HAS EXISTED FOR AT LEAST 25 YEARS, USES OF PERMANENT USE.
AND THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT SHARE A LOT WITH MORE THAN ONE OTHER PRIMARY RESIDENCE.
SO I THINK THAT COVERS EVERYTHING THERE.
IT'S JUST OUR, BECAUSE IT'S ON THE VARIANCE FORM, IT, IT'S A LITTLE, IT'S
[01:55:01]
NOT THE SAME CRITERIA.THIS IS, IT'S NOT REALLY ABOUT A HARDSHIP.
IT'S WHETHER OR NOT IT EXISTS, IT EXISTED AND MEETS THIS CRITERIA.
AND MADAM CHAIR, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT IN THE PAST, AND THE REASON I'M SAYING THIS IS BECAUSE HE'S ALREADY INDICATED THAT HE IS, UH, OBTAINED AND ENGINEERED TO ADDRESS ANY DEFICIENCIES THAT WE HAVE ON OUR, ON OUR IN INSPECT SPECIAL INSPECTION.
AND SO WHEN WE TAKE A LOOK AT THIS, AND ALSO TO THE OTHER GENTLEMAN'S COMMENT, THE SPECIAL, UH, UH, EXCEPTION, UH, IT DOES NOT, IT WILL NOT RUN WITH THE LAND.
THE IN SPECIAL INSPECTION, IF HE DECIDES TO SELL HIS PROPERTY, THEN YES, THE INSPECTION SPECIAL IN EXCEPTION GOES AWAY AND IF STRUCTURES ARE REMOVED CORRECT, IT GOES AWAY.
SO YOUR CONCERN ABOUT IS PUT A DATE ON IT, IT'S ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF.
AND ANY SPECIAL EXCEPTION, I HAD A LOT OF, UH, TURMOIL, HEART WRENCHING AND HAD TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF MEDITATION ON THIS ONE.
UH, AFTER I DID RECEIVE THE, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION INSPECTION, I DO SEE ITEMS HERE THAT CAN BE RESOLVED, HOPEFULLY WITH HIS ENGINEER AND WITH THE GENTLEMAN BEING ABLE TO DO SO, AND ALSO BEING INFORMED BY YOU THAT ONCE THE, ONCE IT'S DONE, ANOTHER INSPECTION WILL BE DONE AND THEN THEY WILL DETERMINE WHETHER IT MEETS THE, THAT STANDARD, UH, HAS CHANGED MY, MY APPROACH QUITE A BIT BECAUSE THERE THEY, THE ITEM 1, 2, 3, AND FOUR, TAKING THEM IN ORDER ON THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION INSPECTION, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO STABILIZE THE DUE TO SHIFTING.
THAT'S VERY COMMON IN AUSTIN TO REBUILD STRAYS TO MAKE A CODE COMPLIANT.
IT'S EI MEAN I WAS A CARPENTER, SO IT WAS A PIECE OF CAKE.
BUT I MEAN, YEAH, IT CAN BE DONE VERY RELATIVELY, UH, ECONOMICALLY, UH, AS FAR AS THE WOOD SHED IS NOT BEING STRUCTURALLY SOUND THAT WOULD HAVE TO EITHER BE, UH, REPAIRED OR REPLACED.
AND HIS POLE BARN TWO BY EIGHT RAFTERS IS NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT WE CALL A SISTER ON OF TWO BY SIX OR TWO BY EIGHT WHERE THEY LAP 'EM AND THEY, THEY SECURE IT.
I DON'T SEE ANYTHING HERE, UH, FOR MR. JOHNSON THAT IS OUT OF THE NORM.
THAT COULD BE, THAT CAN'T BE RECTIFIED.
AND HAVING SAID THAT, I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND LEAVE IT, UH, TO MR. JOHNSON AND YOUR ENGINEERS AS WELL AS THE CITY INSPECTOR TO ENSURE THAT THIS IS BROUGHT UP TO CODE BECAUSE IT HAS CLEARLY MET ALL THE OTHER CRITERIA OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND SECOND THAT WITH THE CLARIFICATION THAT, THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THIS IS JUST TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURES TO EXIST, THEY WILL STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH CODE.
THIS IS THE SAME AS THE HOUSE.
YOU CAN'T HAVE A HOUSE THAT'S NOT UP TO CODE.
YOU STILL GET RED TAGGED FOR THAT.
SO IT HAS TO COME UP TO CODE? YES.
AND DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT? VICE CHAIR? I SAW YOUR HAND.
UH, I JUST WAS, IT'S JUST THEIR LOCATION ON THE LOT.
IT'S STILL, IT'S STILL GONNA, IF THE INSPECTOR COMES AND SAYS THIS HAVE TO BE A ONE HOUR RATED WALL, I MEAN THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF DO IT.
IT'S NOT, UH, UP FOR DEBATE OR REMOVE IT.
IT, IT KIND OF GOES ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE, AND I HAD THIS LAST TIME TOO, WAS THAT ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS TO GRANT SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS THAT THE RESIDENTIAL USE FOR WHICH THE EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT, IS ALLOWED IN AN SSF THREE OR MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONING DISTRICT IN THE APPLICATION.
UM, IT'S BEEN STATED THAT THIS IS AN ART WORKSHOP, WHICH IS, OR AN ART STUDIO, WHICH I'M NOT SURE QUALIFIES AS A SSF THREE RESIDENTIAL USE.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT SOMEONE CAN ANSWER FOR ME WAY, THE WAY THE, UH, UH, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GOING NOW THOUGH, WITH THE ALLOWANCE OF THE EIGHT NEW ADUS ON THE PROPERTY, IT WOULD BE ALLOWED AS AN A DU ACCESSORY UNIT.
YEAH, BECAUSE THAT, THAT PASSED.
SO ON THE SEVENTH, SO IF I HAD A HOME AND I HAD, I HAD A, A FITNESS CENTER, YOU KNOW, IN THE HOUSE OR AN ARTIST, I GUESS THE, THE QUESTION IS, IS REALLY, IS IT A LIVING UNIT OR IS IT A, IS IT, IS IT A COMMERCIAL USE OR IS IT AN ACCESSORY TO THE RESIDENTIAL? AND I, I KINDA SEE IT AS AN ACCESSORY TO THE RESIDENTIAL AT THIS POINT.
[02:00:02]
MR. JOHNSON'S GONNA HAVE A LOT OF COMPANY FOR A WHILE AND THAT THINGS WILL GET BETTER.UM, SO THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS.
SO THE OTHER THING IS THAT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL HAS TO PERFORM AN INSPECTION AND DETERMINATION THAT THE VIOLATION DOES NOT CURRENTLY POSE A HAZARD TO LIFE HEALTH OR PUBLIC SAFETY.
UM, I PERSONALLY AM NOT COMFORTABLE SAYING YES AND PASSING A VARIANCE OR, SORRY, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION NOW BECAUSE I'M NOT COMFORTABLE SAYING THAT THAT CRITERIA HAS BEEN MET.
UM, AND JUST TRUSTING THAT THAT'S GONNA GET RESOLVED ON THE BACKEND.
SO RIGHT NOW I'M A NO, THAT'S FINE.
BOARD MEMBER VAN, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP EARLIER? I DID, BUT HIM, GO BACK TO ME.
UH, BOARD MEMBER BOWEN, AND PARDON ME FOR BEING SOMEWHAT NEW ON THIS, BUT ONE OF THE, MY STICKING POINTS, AND I REALIZE THIS SAYS SPECIAL EXCEPTION, BUT UNDER THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS IT TALKS ABOUT A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE SETBACKS, UH, TO DECREASE THE MINIMUM INTERIOR, UM, FROM FIVE TO ZERO SINCE WE'RE TALKING SPECIAL EX EXCEPTIONS.
DOES THAT NOT CHANGE THAT BECAUSE IT, IT'S UNDER A VARIANCE REQUEST.
IT'S IT'S A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, NOT A VARIANCE REQUEST.
SO IT'S JUST ON A VARIANCE DOCUMENT.
SO, SO BASICALLY THOSE, THAT THOSE STATEMENTS ARE NULL AND VOID ON THAT PARTICULAR LINE.
WELL, WE WOULD STILL BE ALLOWING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WHICH WOULD CREATE THE VARIANCE.
FOR THAT ONE ITEM, THAT STRUCTURE.
FOR AS LONG AS THIS OWNER OWNS THE PROPERTY OR UNTIL ONE OF THEM IS TORN DOWN.
AND, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE OF THAT, THE FRONT ISSUES, BUT THAT, OKAY.
YOU'VE, YOU'VE CLARIFIED MY QUESTION.
IT'S IT, BELIEVE ME, THE, AND GETTING THE LIFE SAFETY REPORT HAS BEEN AN ISSUE ON AND OFF SINCE THE VERY BEGINNING.
AND SO WE, WE KIND OF HAVE A NEW, UH, I GUESS PERSON DOING THAT.
AND SO, UM, IT KIND OF WENT A LITTLE OUT OF ORDER.
UH, SO THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO GO TAKE A LOOK AND TELL YOU WHETHER IT IT EXISTED OR DIDN'T EXIST.
AND SO THE LIFE SAFETY REPORT THAT IS IN THE BACKUP SHOULD HAVE CAME AFTER, SAYS THAT IT EXISTED PRIOR TO 1997.
I MEAN, HE DOESN'T SAY MUCH MORE THAN THAT.
OTHER LIFE SAFETY REPORTS HAVE IDENTIFIED THINGS FURTHER.
AND I DO REALIZE THAT, THAT THE FRONT, I I AM, I AM, I'M SMARTER THAN I LOOK SOMETIMES.
UM, SO I DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA ALTER WHERE I AM RIGHT NOW.
OKAY, SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND LET ME ASK YOU WHAT IT IS THAT HA THAT YOU HAVE ON YOUR MIND, MR. JOHNSON? IT'S OKAY.
I JUST HAVE ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION.
IS THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR ACTUAL BUILDINGS ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? 'CAUSE THERE THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT SETBACKS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, RIGHT? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A FRONT SETBACK IN BOTH SIDES.
SO ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE A DU UNIT? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE SHED THAT HE HAS BUILT OR THE NO BUILDING IN THE FRONT BECAUSE I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS MADE THAT IT'S NOT ALL THREE OF THOSE.
IT IS IT ALL, IT'S ALL THREE OF, IT'S ALL OF THE ABOVE.
SO HOW WOULD THE FRONT SETBACK BE CONSIDERED? A IT'S NOT A BUILDING.
AND HE'S ASKING FOR A SETBACK OR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO MAKE IT FROM 25 TO ZERO BASED UPON THE, WHAT I SEE IN MY SAFETY PACKAGE SAFETY REPORT TOO, THERE WAS A STRUCTURE, THERE'S A WOODSHED AND THERE'S A POLE BARN AND THAT THOSE ARE THE THREE THAT I AM THAT I'M SEEING.
THERE'S A TWO STORY BUILDING ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
THERE IS A PULL BARN ON THE NORTH SIDE.
THERE'S NOTHING IN THE FRONT THERE.
THIS, THIS ONE CALLS FROM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PHOTOS, IT, I, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA ARGUE OKAY.
THE INSPECTOR DEEMED IT A STRUCTURE AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO GO OFF OF.
AND THE IN INSPECTOR WILL BE BACK OUT.
IT APPEARS TO BE QUITE FREQUENTLY.
AND, AND AGAIN, AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE, UH, BOARD MEMBER SHERIFF STANDING, IF THIS WILL HELP SET YOUR MIND AT EASE JUST BECAUSE WE PASSED THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, IF HE DOES NOT BRING THESE STRUCTURES UP INTO COMPLIANCE, A NEIGHBOR COULD CALL IN A COMPLAINT THAT, THAT THE STRUCTURE GETS RED TAGGED AND THEN FINE START UNTIL THE POINT WHERE A COURT CAN EVEN ORDER FOR IT TO BE TORN DOWN.
SO THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW THE SAME LAWS AS IF EVERYONE ELSE WHEN IT COMES TO CODE COMPLIANCE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT TRUST WRITTEN INTO THE, BUT WRITTEN INTO THE VERY FABRIC OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
[02:05:01]
GRANTING IS A, IS A REQUIREMENT THAT IT'D ALREADY BE SAFE.SO IT'S ALL, THAT'S ALREADY SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED BEFORE IT EVEN CAME TO PLACE.
BUT HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU MAKE IT SAFE? HOW DO YOU MAKE SOMETHING SAFE WITHOUT A PERMIT? IT'S THE END OR SOMETHING IN THE SETBACK AND THEY WON'T, WON'T PERMIT MEAN IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT THIS IS NOT WELL MAINTAINED.
RIGHT? LIKE IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT THIS IS UNSAFE TO ME.
SO I THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M, I UNDERSTAND.
I I JUST HAVE A LITTLE MORE, I I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE, THE EMPATHY AND, AND UNFORTUNATELY WOULDN'T MAKES SENSE FOR HIM TO, IS YOUR MICROPHONE ON A BOARD MEMBER? IT SHOULD BE, YEAH.
UNFORTUNATELY IT WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE FOR HIM TO REPAIR IT LIKE TODAY OR YESTERDAY BECAUSE WE MIGHT FORCE HIM TO LIKE TEAR IT DOWN.
SO IT COULD BE A, A WASTE OF AN INVESTMENT TO REPAIR IT NOW UNTIL HE KNOWS HE CAN ACTUALLY KEEP THE STRUCTURE.
AND MR. JOHNSON'S BEEN THERE AN AWFUL LONG TIME.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SHALL GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE, PORTION OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT VIOLATES SETBACK REQUIREMENTS UNDER CHAPTER 25 2 ZONING.
IF THE BOARD FINDS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION MEETS THE RIGHT REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION, THE BOARD SHALL GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION UNDER SUBSECTION A OF THE SECTION.
IF THE RESIDENTIAL USE FOR WHICH A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT AS ALLOWED UNDER SSF THREE OR MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONING DISTRICT, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL PERFORMS INSPECTIONS AND DETERMINES THE VIOLATIONS, DOES NOT POSE A HAZARD TO LIFE, HEALTH OR PUBLIC SAFETY.
AND THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE VIOLATION HAS EXISTED FOR OVER OR FOR AT LEAST 25 YEARS, OR AT LEAST 10 YEARS.
IF THE APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SUBMITTED ON OR BEFORE JUNE 6TH, 2016, THE USE IS PERMITTED OR USE IS A PERMITTED USE OR NON-CONFORMING USE.
THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT SHARE A LOT WITH MORE THAN ONE OTHER PRIMARY RESIDENT.
AND GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA IMPAIRED.
THE USE OF THE PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY CODE OR GRANTED SPECIAL PRIVILEGE THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA, THE DISTRICT IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
A SPECIAL EXCEPTION GRANTED UNDER THIS SECTION APPLIES ONLY TO THE STRUCTURE WHERE PORTION OF THE STRUCTURES FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WAS GRANTED AND DOES NOT RUN WITH THE LAND, MAY NOT AUTHORIZE AN INCREASE IN THE DEGREE OF NON-COMPLIANCE OR EXCUSE COMPLIANCE WITH MINIMUM HEALTH AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS.
I THINK THAT ADDRESSES, UH, MAGGIE'S ISSUES AND MAY NOT AUTHOR OR REMO AUTHORIZE A REMODEL OR ADDITION TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT REQUIRED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO MEET THE MINIMUM LIFE AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS.
A STRUCTURE GRANTED A SPECIAL EXCEPTION UNDER THE SECTION SHALL BE TREATED AS A NON-COMPLIANCE STRUCTURE UNDER CHAPTER 25, 2 ARTICLE EIGHT NONCOMPLIANCE STRUCTURES.
I'M GOING TO, UH, OFFER A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE TABLE FOR 15 MINUTES BECAUSE BOARD MEMBER EIGHT HAS BEEN DISCONNECTED.
UM, I, I WOULD SAY THAT, UH, 25 2 4 76 WHEN WE FIRST GOT THE SPECIAL INSPECTION CRITERIA, UH, THE WORDING IN A, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NOW SAYS, SHALL GRANT, IT USED TO SAY, IT USED TO SAY MAY GRANT.
AND THAT WORD WAS ALTERED BY COUNSEL, UM, AS WE WERE HAVING PROBLEMS GETTING LIFE SAFETY REPORTS AND, AND WE WEREN'T PASSING THEM FAST ENOUGH, AND SO THAT LANGUAGE WAS CHANGED TO SHALL, UM, VERY INTENTIONALLY.
BUT IF WE'RE GONNA WAIT FOR TOMMY TO GET DISCONNECTED, FIND I TAKE A MOMENT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE AND STEP OFF THE DIALS.
YOU WANNA CALL A RECESS, YOU THINK? OR OKAY.
IF EVERYBODY ELSE, I WAS JUST GONNA STEP AWAY SINCE WE'RE WAITING FOR TOMMY.
I'M, I'M IF, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO A RECESS? 'CAUSE I'M, I'VE RAN IN HERE LATE.
I REALLY GOTTA USE THE BATHROOM.
THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS HEADED WITH THAT, BUT I'M JUST GONNA, BUT I WAS, LET'S CALL A RECESS FOR 12 MINUTES TILL 8:00 PM OKAY.
THAT'S CALLED A MOMENT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE IN THE DECORUM WORLD.
I HEREBY CALL THIS MEETING WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BACK TO ORDER.
SO, UH, INSTEAD OF THE TABLE, WE ENDED UP HAVING THE MOTION TO APPROVE WITH FINDINGS.
DO WE NEED TO REPEAT, UH, THE FINDINGS OR ANYTHING SINCE IT WAS, IT'S KIND OF UNORTHODOX TO CALL A RECESS IN THE MIDDLE? NO.
SO THIS IS THE MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY BOARD MEMBER VON OLAND,
[02:10:01]
SECONDED BY MYSELF.AND LET'S GO AHEAD AND
UM, ONE, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE ARE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT STRUCTURES AT PLAY HERE.
AND IN GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, DO WE HAVE TO GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR EACH OF THE STRUCTURES? OR CAN WE SAY THOSE THREE? YES.
WE'VE NEVER, WE'VE NEVER DONE THAT.
I DON'T, DON'T THINK THAT'S EVER HAPPENED.
BUT SINCE, SINCE THE COUNCIL HAD CHANGED THE VERBIAGE FROM MAY GRANT TO SHELL GRANT, SHELL, WE USUALLY JUST RAN WITH THE WHOLE PACKAGE.
YEAH, IT'S BASICALLY, WE'VE NEVER DONE IT BECAUSE I'VE NEVER WHAT THEY ASK FOR, WE KIND OF HAVE TO, AS LONG AS IT MEETS THOSE QUALIFICATIONS OR AS LONG AS WE BELIEVE IT MEETS THOSE QUALIFICATIONS.
SO THEN THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS, UM, SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FRONT STRUCTURE, UM, ON THIS, ON THE ADVANCED PACKET, UH, SORRY, THE NUMBER IS COVERED UP BY THE, IT LOOKS LIKE 7 22.
UM, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS LIKE METAL METALLIC POLE STRUCTURE THAT'S UNCOVERED? OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS THING THAT'S LIKE RIGHT BEHIND IT WHERE I CAN SEE SOME WOOD, UH, BEING STORED? COULD YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW? I AM LOOKING AT, IT'S LIKE A, LIKE A SIDE VIEW, I THINK OF THE FRONT OF THE LOCK.
YOU WANT A SPECIFIC PAGE IN THE BACKUP? UH, OF THE BACKUP? YEAH.
SEVEN SLASH 22 WITH THE PICTURES ON THE PART TWO, IT'S JUST KIND OF HARD TO SEE THE NUMBERS BECAUSE THEY'RE SUPER, I DON'T THINK THAT'S IT.
BUT THE SURVEY WAS SHOWING A CAR POURED OVER DIRT.
BECAUSE I JUST, I LIKE, I DON'T KNOW THAT I SEE A PICTURE OF THAT.
AND THAT'S, I WAS GOING BASED ON THE, I WAS GONNA DRIVE OUT THERE AND I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE, BUT I, UH, I WAS GOING BASED ON THE SURVEY THAT THEY HAD, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS.
THE STRUCTURE, THE WHOLE THING IS THE STRUCTURE.
BECAUSE I GUESS MY THOUGHT PROCESS BEING I, FOR THE OTHER SORT OF THINGS THAT WOULD REQUIRE AN EXCEPTION, I, I AM A LOT MORE LIKE, OKAY, THAT MAKES SENSE AS A, AS A STRUCTURE.
BUT I'M A LITTLE, I'M, IF THAT IS THE ONE I'M A LITTLE PERPLEXED BY THAT ONE.
SO I, I MEAN, SO WHAT HAPPENS IF, IF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS GRANTED, THEN HE IS GOING TO HAVE TO WORK WITH THE INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT.
AND I, I DO THINK THAT, AND HE'S ALSO HIRED SOMEONE THAT AT SOME POINT THAT IT WILL AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, WRITTEN SUPPORT ASSOCIATION, THAT AT SOME POINT IT, IT WILL BECOME PRACTICABLE TO FIX OR REMOVE, YOU KNOW, IT'LL BE ONE OF THOSE TO FIX THIS, TO MEET THE LIFE SAFETY CRITERIA.
SOME OF IT I, I FULLY BELIEVE WILL BE REMOVED IN THIS PROCESS.
I, I DO THINK THAT MR. JOHNSON HAS BEEN HERE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.
THIS ISN'T A SURPRISE THAT MR. JOHNSON'S PROPERTY LOOKS LIKE THIS.
UM, HE'S, HE'S BEEN THERE LONGER THAN EVERYBODY AND, UM, IT'S NOT VERY COMFORTABLE TO LET GO OF THINGS SOMETIMES.
AND, AND I THINK WITH WORKING WITH INSPECTIONS AND WITH WHO HE HIRED, THAT IT'S GONNA BECOME PRETTY CLEAR THAT SOME THINGS MAY NEED TO GO.
WELL, IT'S NOT, IT'S ALSO, SO THANKS TO GET PREPARED, BUT, SORRY, I'M GONNA INTERRUPT FOR ONE SECOND.
UH, I WAS TALKING WITH THE ETXN GUY AND HE DID MENTION HOW DIFFICULT IT IS FOR HIM TO PUT A CAMERA ON US WHEN WE DON'T CALL ON DIFFERENT BOARD MEMBERS.
SO I'M GONNA JUST REMIND EVERYONE ONCE AGAIN AND ASK, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND SO I CAN CALL, IT GIVES THE, AT TXN GUY A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO GET THE CAMERA FOCUSED BOARD MEMBER OLE
UH, BUT, AND THEN I'M A T BOARD MEMBER.
NO, I, NO, I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT I WAS SAYING WHEN I MENTIONED IT EARLIER THAT I HAD A HARD TIME WITH THIS CASE.
PROBABLY THE BIGGEST THING THAT SORT OF MOVED ME TOWARDS, UH, MAKING THE MOTION TO APPROVE WAS OVER THE, THE YEARS THAT WE'VE BEEN ON THIS, UH, AND EVEN YOU, YOURSELF, MADAM CHAIR,
[02:15:01]
THE BODIN CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS VERY, VERY INVOLVED.THEY DON'T, UH, TAKE THESE THINGS LIGHTLY.
AND UH, UH, IN THE FIRST MEETING, I WAS SURPRISED NOBODY WAS HERE REPRESENTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
BUT WHEN I FOUND THE LETTER IN HERE THAT EVEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WAS IN, IT WAS IN SUPPORT OF IT THAT SORT OF PUSHED ME IN THAT DIRECTION AS WELL, IS LEAVING IT UP TO THE INSPECTOR AND ZONING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT TO, TO DO WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO VERSUS SIMPLY CUTTING IT OFF RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING.
UH, AND THEN I APPRECIATE, UH, MELISSA BRINGING UP THE, UH, THE FACT THAT I DID FORGET, AND I WAS HERE WHEN COUNSEL DID CHANGE THE VERBIAGE FROM MAY TO SHALL.
SO THE FACT THAT THE GENTLEMAN IS HERE, AND I, AND THIS IS ALSO GOES TO ALMOST A LEGAL POINT.
UH, THE FACT THAT THE, THE, THE GENTLEMAN IS HERE AND HIS CASE DOES MEET THE CRITERIA OF THE, OF THE, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
UH, I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP THAT IN MIND THAT THE, THE LEGAL VERBIAGE DOES SAY SHALL, IT DOESN'T SAY MAY AND, BUT VOTE, VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE.
SO, UH, YEAH, THE SHALL MEANS THAT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER WORDS IN, IN THE CODE THAT HAVE TO BE MET BEFORE WE SHALL DO SOMETHING.
AND I THINK I'M RUNNING UP AGAINST, WHICH IS WHY I WAS ASKING IF YOU CAN SAY LIKE, WE'LL GRANT IT AS TO THESE THREE OR HOWEVER MANY STRUCTURES AND LIKE, NOT AS TO THAT, UM, LEGAL.
DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY INPUT ON THIS? ANY INSIGHT? 'CAUSE I THINK I'M FEELING JUST A LOT MORE.
THAT'S WHY I WAS POINTING AT HER.
UH, LEGAL, UH, COULD YOU ANSWER HER QUESTION PLEASE? UM, ERIC LOPEZ, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
SO, UH, BOARD MEMBER VAN OLAN IS LOOKING AT SUBSECTION A OF 25, 2 4, 7 6.
UM, THERE IS A SHALL AND IT'S IF THE BOARD, IF THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION.
SO IF I THINK IT'S WITHIN THE BOARD'S DISCRETION, WHETHER OR NOT IT, THE, IT MEETS THE, UM, CRITERIA LISTED BELOW.
SO I THINK, UH, THE NUTSHELL VERSION IS THERE'S A GRAY AREA BECAUSE WE'RE DECIDING WHETHER THOSE, UH, THE CRITERIA IS MET.
AND IF YOU FEEL IT IS, THEN THERE, THERE'S, IT'S NOT REALLY LIKE A YES, IT'S A YES OR NO QUESTION.
IT'S NOT LIKE BITS AND PIECES YOU HAVE TO EITHER IT'S AN ALL OR NOTHING.
UH, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? AND IT MAY NOT BE THE MOST TASTEFUL PILL, BUT NO, I, I THINK SORT OF LIKE, IF I DON'T AGREE THAT THAT IS PERHAPS A, A STRUCTURE SUCH THAT, LIKE IT IS, YOU KNOW, ELIGIBLE FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN MY BRAIN IF I'M LIKE, I WOULD BE DOWN TO, TO GRANT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION, BUT ACKNOWLEDGING THAT, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A STRUCTURE.
LIKE I DON'T THINK THAT'S LIKE DECLINING HIS REQUEST SO MUCH AS SAYING LIKE, THESE THINGS ARE TRUE FOR THESE THINGS AND IT JUST ISN'T TRUE FOR THAT ONE.
AND, AND HONESTLY, I'M INCLINED TO AGREE WITH YOU SOMEWHAT, BUT BECAUSE WE DID GET AN INSPECTION AND A LIFE AND SAFETY REPORT AND IT WAS DEEMED A STRUCTURE, WE HAVE TO GO WITH WHAT THE INSPECTOR SAID.
BUT DOESN'T THAT PASS OFF OUR DUTY TO DECIDE WHAT A STRUCTURE IS WITHIN THE THIS CODE? UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S OUR DUTY TO DECIDE WHAT A, A STRUCTURE IS, PER SE.
MM-HMM,
BUT FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE WE HAVE TO SAY AN EXISTING, LIKE, WE HAVE TO BUY THAT AS AN EXISTING STRUCTURE.
CAN WE LIKE BOOTSTRAP THAT TO THE FACT THAT SOMEONE ASKED SOMEBODY TO COME OUT AND INSPECT A STRUCTURE OR LIKE TO DO, WE ALSO STILL MAKE A DETERMINATION ON THAT.
THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION THAT I DON'T THINK HAS EVER BEEN RAISED BEFORE.
AND I'M GOING TO TURN TOWARDS THE FOLKS WHO HAVE BEEN IN HERE THE LONGEST, UH,
I MEAN, I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVER HAD THAT COME UP.
YEAH, I DON'T, SHE'S EVER ASKED.
I MEAN, AND I'VE BEEN OUTTA HERE A LONG TIME.
I I HAVE, WE'VE NEVER HAD THAT COME UP WHERE YOU, WHERE YOU COULD PARTIAL ONE OUT.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S LEGALLY ABLE TO DO SO.
I I DON'T, YEAH, I DON'T THINK WE CAN.
LET'S, LET'S GET AN ANSWER FROM LEGAL COME TO YOU GUYS.
COULD YOU CLARIFY ON THAT? IS THERE, ARE WE ALLOWED TO DEFINE WHAT A STRUCTURE IS? OR IS THIS, SO WE DON'T USUALLY HAVE GOTTEN, YOU KNOW, THREE OR FOUR STRUCTURES.
YEAH, IT'S, AND I REALLY AM, IT'S ONE,
[02:20:01]
I MEAN, IF THE INSPECTOR GOES OUT AND SAYS, THIS IS AN INSTRUCT, THIS IS AN INSTRUCTURE, REMOVE IT.I MEAN, I, I THINK I'M UP PUTTING THE BURDEN TO INSPECTIONS.
BUT THAT, I MEAN, WITHOUT MAKING POOR MR. JOHNSON DO DRAWINGS.
AND I, I MEAN, YEAH, I THINK WE CAN REALLY ONLY GO WITH WHAT, WHAT'S IN THE BACKUP.
UH, 'CAUSE I SAW, UH, MS. LOPEZ WORK.
THERE'S NO LIKE PRECEDENCE OR BASIS FOR THAT KIND OF, THAT THE CITY CODE DOES PROVIDE A DEFINITION OF STRUCTURE IN 25 1 DASH 21.
A STRUCTURE MEANS A BUILDING OF ANY KIND OR PIECE OF WORK ARTIFICIALLY BUILT UP OR COMPOSED OF PARTS JOINED TOGETHER IN A DEFINITIVE, IN A DEFINITE MANNER.
I THINK THAT WOULD QUALIFY AS A STRUCTURE THOUGH.
AND, AND 25 1 IS NOT OUR PURVIEW.
UH, MIGHT I ASK THIS GENTLEMAN A QUESTION? YES.
SINCE HE AND MR. JOHNSON SEEMS TO, TO HAVE, SO WE WOULD SUPPORT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THE BACK TWO BUILDINGS IF HE AGREES TO GET RID OF THE FRONT STRUCTURE.
SO IF HE IS THAT GOOD WITH YOUR SUBJECT, MR. JOHNSON? COULD, UH, CAN I GET YOU TO STEP AT THE SIDE FOR A SECOND AND LET, LET YES.
I, I AGREED TO REMOVE THE FRONT STRUCTURE.
IT WAS, IT'S THERE BECAUSE OF YEARS AGO I HAD MY, I HAD A BOAT PARKED IN MY FRONT YARD AND THE, UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT ENFORCEMENT WAS CALLED.
AND THEY SAID I HAD TO BUILD, PUT A, A, A FENCE AROUND IT.
AND I LATER PUT IN A CARPORT, WHICH I HAVE SUBSEQUENTLY TOTAL COMPLETELY PERMANENTLY REMOVED THE ROOF OF TO GET MY PERVIOUS COVER BACK.
SO NOW I HAVE 44.6% PERVIOUS, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER INSTEAD OF 49.
THAT'S BOARD MEMBER VAN NOLAN, UH, BOARD MEMBER VAN AND BOARD MEMBER ANI.
SO IF, IF WE GRANTED THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND DIDN'T APPLY IT TO THAT ONE STRUCTURE, WOULD, WOULD THAT, DOES THAT SIT OKAY WITH Y'ALL? I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO CHANGE THE, THE MOTION, WHICH HAS BEEN SECONDED.
SO UNLESS YOU'RE THE SECONDER ME OBJECTS, WHICH I DON'T, YOU CAN RESCIND IT AND REMAKE IT.
NO, I, I DON'T HAVE AN OBJECTION EITHER.
I WAS JUST GONNA COMPLIMENT THE TWO GENTLEMEN ON HASHING THIS OUT RIGHT HERE, BECAUSE I MEAN, THAT'S IT.
UH, I, I'M ALL FOR COMPROMISED AND WORKING WITH EACH OTHER, SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING ABLE TO WORK IT OUT HERE.
SO I'M NOT IN OPPOSITION EITHER THAT WE JUST, HE'S A GREAT NEIGHBOR.
SO, SO I NO MADAM CHAIR, IF YOU'RE MY SECOND, I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH IT.
SO WE'LL JUST, UH, REPHRASE THAT.
A MOTION TO APPROVE TO APPLY ONLY TO THE BACK TWO STRUCTURES THAT'S FINE'S OR TO THE SIDE AND THE REAR SETBACKS ONLY SIDE REAR SETBACKS ONLY.
I MEAN, OR YOU COULD JUST STRIKE THE, I THINK TO DECREASE THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET TO ZERO FEET.
I MEAN, I THINK YOU CAN JUST CROSS OUT THAT PART OF THE, WE DON'T HAVE TO TIE IT, THE STRUCTURE, THE LANGUAGE, THE LANGUAGE IS WRITTEN THAT IT'S FROM.
HANG ON, LET, LET'S, LET'S GET THE LEGAL OPINION ON THIS ONE.
DO WE NEED TO TIE THIS TO THE STRUCTURE OR TO THE VARIANCE THAT WOULD BE GRANTED BECAUSE WE GAVE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, IT RUNS WITH THE STRUCTURE, BUT I, UH, UH, WHAT, UH, BOARD MEMBER, UM, HAWTHORNE HAS SUGGESTED WOULD ACHIEVE THE SAME RESULT.
I MEAN, SO WE'RE JUST NOT DOING THE FRONT YARD SETBACK.
WE'RE DOING THE REST OF THE REQUEST.
A MOTION TO APPROVE THE SIDE AND REAR YARD SET SETBACKS.
SIDE, YARD SIDE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES.
AND I, I'LL START, I HAVE TO GO BACK.
SO THIS IS THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE, UH, SIDE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDE.
SETBACKS, EXCEPTIONS, NOT THE FRONT YARD.
I MEAN, IT ALSO LOOKS LIKE IT'S THE REAR YARD SETBACK AS WELL.
I MEAN, THAT'S AT THE TIME THAT THE STRUCTURE IS BUILT, HE ONLY HAD A FIVE FOOT IF HE HAD JOINED AN ALLEY, SO IT DIDN'T ACTUALLY REQUIRE A REAR YARD SETBACK.
SO MOTION TO APPROVE ALL EXCEPTIONS EXCEPT THE FRONT YARD.
THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON FOR COMPROMISING.
SO THAT THIS HAS BEEN AMENDED TO BE A MOTION TO
[02:25:01]
APPROVE ALL EXCEPTIONS, BUT THE FRONT YARD, AND WE'VE ALREADY READ THOUGH KEY.SIDEBAR WITH STAFF, OUR LOVELY AND TALENTED STAFF.
I KNOW, I FEEL SO SILLY WEARING MY SUNGLASSES.
I DO FEEL REALLY SILLY HAVING NOT BROUGHT MY GLASSES.
YOU, YOU LOOK LIKE A SEVENTIES.
I JUST TOTALLY, IT'S JUST LIKE I, BUT YOU KNOW, YOU'RE LIKE TALKING AND THEN YOU CAN SEE YOURSELF OVER THERE AND IT'S LIKE VERY DISTURBING.
UM, I WILL, I WILL SAY THIS THOUGH.
YOU GUYS HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN HERE FOR A FIRST FOR US TOO.
WE'VE NEVER, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS EVER HAPPENED.
I DON'T THINK WE'VE GOTTEN MORE THAN I'VE NEVER SEEN IT.
UM, AND I, I DO THINK IT'S A HARD JUDGMENT CALL ON WHETHER SOMETHING IS REALLY REMOVABLE ON WHETHER IT'S VICE CHAIR.
I'M GONNA INTERRUPT REAL QUICK, PLEASE.
SO THERE, THERE'S A LITTLE PIECE OF COVERED CONCRETE ON THE STREET SIDE FROM THE FRONT.
UH, SO WE WOULDN'T BE DOING LIKE THE, THE CARPORT OVER THE DIRT OR THAT LITTLE UH, UH, TINY.
IT'S FROM THE PORCH SORT OF STRUCTURE TOWARDS THE FRONT.
BUT THAT ONE PIECE OF A COVERED CONCRETE, THAT'S HIS FRONT PORCH, ISN'T IT? IS THAT, IS THAT THE FRONT PORCH? SO THEN WE WOULD LEAVE IT AS PORCH.
IT LOOKS LIKE RIGHT NEXT TO THE HOUSE, THERE'S, UH, SOME COVERED CONCRETE AND THEN WHAT USED TO BE CAR CARPORT OVER DIRT.
UH, IN THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE, UH, THERE'S A, LIKE, I ORIGINALLY HAD A GARDEN ON THAT SPOT AND I HAD A, A WIRE FENCE AROUND IT.
AND UH, THEN WHEN I HAD TO PUT THE BOAT BEHIND A WOOD FENCE, I PUT A WOOD FENCE AROUND IT.
THIS IS MORE THAN 25 YEARS AGO.
AND, UH, UH, IT'S, I'M WONDERING, DO I NEED TO REMOVE THE FENCE TOO? OR JUST THE STRUCTURE OR? NO, IT LOOKS, NO, NO, NO.
UM, JUST A FRAME OF THE CARPORT.
WHAT IS THIS? I WOULD SAY JUST THE FRAME.
IS YOUR STOOP COVERED? MOVE THE FRAME.
IS YOUR FRONT STOOP COVERED YOUR PORCH? YES.
IS YOUR FRONT PORCH COVERED? WHAT'S THAT? DOES IT HAVE A COVER OVER IT? YOUR FRONT PORCH? WELL, NO, IT'S, I, AS I SAID BEFORE, I PERMANENTLY REMOVED THE COVER FROM THAT, UH, CARPORT.
WHAT ABOUT THE PORCH ITSELF? WHAT ABOUT THE, WHAT, LIKE YOUR FRONT STOOP IS YOUR FRONT STOOP? THE PORCH COVERED OF THE FRONT PORCH, UH, OF MY HOUSE IS, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S WITHIN THE, THE PROPER SET BACK.
IF YOU COULD LOOK AT THE SURVEY YES.
AND SEE THAT, YEAH, WE HAVE TO DO THE PORCH.
ELAINE, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DIMENSION THAT.
UH, YOU KNOW, CTM OR DANIEL, COULD YOU PLEASE PULL UP SEVEN 12 FOR US? ITEM SEVEN 12, MADAM CHAIR, THIS CAN BE VERY EASILY DONE, UH, SIMPLY BY PASSING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
UH, AND THEN NOTATION IN FOR THIS, FOR THE CITY INSPECTOR THAT HE'S GONNA REMOVE THAT THE CARPORT AND I IN BETWEEN THE NEIGHBOR AND MR. JOHNSON HERE.
I DON'T, I'M NOT FEELING LIKE SOMEBODY'S GONNA TRY TO BACKDOOR US AND SLIP IT IN THERE.
SO, I MEAN, RATHER THAN TRY TO RECREATE A ENTIRE VARIANCE APPLICATION, WE CAN JUST PASS IT AS IS WITH THE COMPROMISE THAT YOU HAVE TO REMOVE THAT STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT.
THE EASIEST, EASIEST WAY TO GO, IS EVERYONE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT LANGUAGE PASSING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS WRITTEN WITH THE CONDITION THAT THAT ONE STRUCTURE THEY AGREED ON WILL BE REMOVED.
BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY ON RECORD.
SO I WILL CHANGE THIS BACK WITHOUT ANY OBJECTIONS TO YOUR MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE ONE STRUCTURE BEING REMOVED.
WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA VOTE NOW.
I'M GONNA START WITH TOMMY YATES.
[02:30:02]
YES.AND MR. JOHNSON, YOU JUST GET TOGETHER WITH HIM.
REMOVE THAT STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT AND YOU'RE GOOD TO GO.
AND THANK YOU FOR ALSO NEIGHBOR, FOR COMPROMISING.
YOUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION HAS BEEN GRANTED.
YOUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION HAS BEEN GRANTED.
UM, I WANNA SAY TO YOU, ESPECIALLY, YOU BETTER GET USED TO SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS COMING THIS WAY BECAUSE THE INSPECTOR TOLD ME 10 YEARS BEFORE THAT THEY HAD NO SPECIAL EXCEPTION LIFE AND SAFETY INSPECTIONS, BUT NOW THEY HAVE 12.
AND THANKS AGAIN FOR THE COMPROMISE.
I GUESS SOMEBODY'S GONNA GIVE YOU DETAILS OF KIND OF YEAH.
IF YOU'LL REACH OUT TO ELAINE TOMORROW, SHE'LL GET YOU EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW.
I HAVE PLACED, IT SOUNDS LIKE I'M GOING TO NEED TO, IT SOUNDS LIKE I NEED TO WORK WITH THE INSPECTOR.
AND PASSED THE BUILDING FINAL.
YOU PROBABLY HAVE WE THE ENGINEER'S LETTER, YOU PROBABLY HAVE, WE'VE ALREADY TALKED TO HIM ABOUT THAT.
AND, AND ELAINE CAN ANSWER ALL THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU TOMORROW.
ELAINE CAN ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU TOMORROW.
DOES SOUND LIKE YOU HAVE SOME WORK.
IT DOES SOUND LIKE YOU HAVE SOME WORK TO DO.
THAT'S ANOTHER THING I WANT TO SAY.
SO I'LL BE LUCKY TO LAST ANOTHER 20 YEARS.
AND AFTER THAT MY DAUGHTER'S GONNA GET THE PROPERTY AND SELL IT AND IT'S GOTTA BE SCRAPED, YOU KNOW? SO IT'S, UH, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT FOREVER.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM EIGHT,
[8. Discussion of the November 13, 2023 BOA activity report]
DISCUSSION OF THE NOVEMBER 13TH, 2023 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTIVITY REPORT.MERRY CHRISTMAS HOLIDAY AND THANK YOU FOR THE CARD AND THE GOODIES.
GREAT JOB, ELAINE AND DIANA, YOU GUYS ARE AWESOME.
AND I HAVE TO CUT BACK ON THESE A LITTLE BIT.
ANY DISCUSSION COMING? THE SUGAR, MY A1C
SO MOVING ON TO ITEM NINE, DISCUSSION REGARDING
[9. Discussion regarding agenda issues]
AGENDA ISSUES.AND I'M GONNA LET VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE BRING THIS ONE UP BECAUSE YOU ARE THE ONE WHO WANTED TO DISCUSS IT.
DO YOU NOT REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS ABOUT? YOU COULD GIMME A CLUE.
I WENT TO, I WENT TO AL IN BETWEEN HERE, LAST MEETING AND THIS MEETING.
I WOULD LITERALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT THE OLD VIDEO NOW.
NO, IT WAS, UH, IT WAS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING COULD BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA OR NO, IT WASN'T, IT WASN'T THE SPECIAL.
WE HAD AN ISSUE WHERE WE HAD AN AGENDA ITEM.
I DID GO TO MEXICO FOR AN EXTENDED, UH, SEE THIS IS WHY I SHOULD WATCH THANKSGIVING.
SO, UH, WE DID HAVE AN ISSUE WHERE, UM, THE CLERK DID NOT WANT TO POST OUR AGENDA BECAUSE IT HAD A 1, 2, 3, A, B, C, D, HOWEVER YOU WANNA SAY IT, WHICH IS TYPICALLY HOW WE GET AN AGENDA ITEM THAT THERE IS, LIKE, WHEN YOU WERE DOING FINDINGS, YOU WOULD NEED TO DO FINDINGS FOR EACH PORTION.
SO THAT, AND SO THEY DIDN'T WANNA POST OUR AGENDA BECAUSE THEY FELT LIKE THOSE SHOULD BE DIFFERENT CASES.
AND SO IN, IN THE CASE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, IT WAS ACTUALLY, I THINK, UM, I DON'T THINK IT WAS MR. JOHNSON'S, BUT IT WAS, UH, SOMETHING IN, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A SEPARATE CASE, IT'S A SEPARATE FEE.
AND IT JUST BECAME THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE AGENDA HAS TO BE POSTED WITHIN SO MANY DAYS, HOURS OF THE MEETING.
AND THEY DIDN'T WANNA POST IT 'CAUSE THEY WERE SAYING, BECAUSE IT HAD, IT HAD A 1, 2, 3 OR AN A, B, C, D, I DON'T EVEN REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS.
UM, AND THEY WOULDN'T POST OUR AGENDA WITH THIS LOGIC
[02:35:01]
THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE WAY WE'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR, UM, SINCE ELAINE, THAT WAS MR. JOHNSON'S, WASN'T IT? IT WAS, THERE'S COMBINATION EXCEPT THE ITEM LAST TIME IS THE ONE WE WENT OVER.SO IF IT WAS SEPARATE CASES, THAT WOULD'VE EATEN UP, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM MONEY.
UM, IS IT REALLY A SEPARATE CASE IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY? AND IT, IT SEEMED LIKE IT WAS, UM, A BIG CIRCLE WHERE WE HAD A SHORT TIMEFRAME IN ORDER TO SOLVE A PROBLEM AND NOTICES HAD ALREADY GONE OUT WITH THE A, B, C OR 1, 2, 3.
AND SO, UH, I DON'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS A SEPARATE CASE.
AND WHILE THERE ARE SEVERAL STRUCTURES, I MEAN, IT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR SOMEONE TO COME AND ASK FOR A FRONT SETBACK, A SIDE SETBACK, IMPERVIOUS COVER, WHATEVER IT IS.
I MEAN, IT'S ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY.
AND SO I THINK AS JUST A GENERAL, PERHAPS THAT WAS, UH, WORTH MORE DISCUSSION ON WHAT PLANET THAT WAS 'CAUSE.
JUST TO BRING EVERYONE UP TO SPEED.
I'VE BEEN DOING IT THAT WAY SINCE I CAN REMEMBER THE DRAFT AGENDA BEFORE, UH, WE HAD IT SUBMITTED TO THE CLERK BEFORE ELAINE AND DIANA HAD TO FIX IT.
IT IT IS, IT WAS ITEM FIVE LAST TIME.
IT WAS MR. JOHNSON'S SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
AND IT WAS, UH, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION VARIANCE FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 25 2 9 42 FROM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, A TO DECREASE THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET REQUIRED TO ZERO FEET REQUESTED IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN A COVERED CONCRETE PATIO.
AND B, TO DECREASE THE MINIMUM INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACKS FROM FIVE FEET TO ZERO FEET REQUESTED IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN A STORAGE SHED ARCH STUDIO AND GARAGE ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND STORAGE SHEDS NORTH SIDE THAT HAVE EXISTED FOR OVER 31 YEARS.
SO IT'S, IT'S BECAUSE IT WAS SPLIT INTO TWO THINGS THAT CLERK WAS TRYING TO SAY.
WE NEEDED TWO SEPARATE CASES FOR THIS, WHICH WOULD'VE BEEN TWO SPECIAL EXCEPTION CASES, WHICH WOULD'VE BEEN TWO HITS ON OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT ASSISTANT PROGRAM GENERAL FUND, FOR WHICH WE ONLY GET 10 GRAND, WHICH MEANS 10 CASES BASICALLY FOR THE YEAR.
WE'VE NEVER DONE IT THAT WAY IN THE PAST.
SO MAD, I'M, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT WAS ANY CASE THAT HAD CASE 1, 2, 3 A, BCD.
THEY WERE WELL, YEAH, BUT THAT'S THE ONE I THINK THEY CAME UP WITH.
BUT THAT, THAT WOULD MEAN THEY'D HAVE TO APPLY FOR SEPARATE, DIFFERENT VARIANCES.
I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT SEPARATE VARIANCES, WHICH I MEAN, NOTICES SEPARATE FEES FOR ANY CASE THAT HAD MULTIPLE VARIANCE REQUESTS FOR THAT ONE PROPERTY.
SO, SO LIKE WE DID A CASE ON SIXTH STREET, WE DID A CASE ON MATTHEWS LANE.
I MEAN, WE'VE DONE IT LIKE THIS FOREVER.
SO THIS IS A NEW INTERPRETATION OF, OF, YOU KNOW, A BRAND NEW DAY.
AND I DON'T LIKE MATTHEW'S LANE.
IT HAD COMPATIBILITY FROM THIS SIDE AND THIS SIDE, UM, WHICH WAS FUNNY FROM INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS.
WE HAD, UH, COMPATIBILITY VARIANCE.
I'M JUST SAYING THIS IS A PROBLEM AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SOLVE THIS.
THE CLERK'S OFFICE IS TRYING TO CREATE SOME UNIFORMITY BETWEEN THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK IS, IS CAUSING ALL THIS.
THEY'RE TRYING TO, UH, ALIGN ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, UH, AGENDAS TO LOOK LIKE THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA.
AND I THINK THE PROBLEM WE'RE RUNNING INTO HERE IS THAT, THAT THIS IS NOT REALLY A ONE SIZE FITS ALL KIND OF THING.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WE'RE A UNIQUE SOVEREIGN BOARD MANDATED BY THE STATE.
WE'RE THE ONLY QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARD, UH, THAT IT CAN'T BE APPEALED TO CITY COUNCIL.
OUR FORMAT IS VERY, VERY DIFFERENT.
ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING ARE, THESE ARE HEARINGS, THESE CASES, WHICH IS WHY THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHER, UH, LAND USE COMMISSIONS.
I THINK, I THINK MAYBE SHOULD WITH SETTING UP A MEETING WITH THE CLERKS, YOU KNOW, OR SHOULD WE JUST FOOT DOWN, HEY GUYS, SORRY, WE CAN'T DO IT THAT WAY.
OR VICE CHAIR HAWTHORNE, DO YOU HAVE A, WELL, UH, COMMISSIONER ANI HAS, UH, SOMETHING AS WELL, BUT I'M JUST SAYING WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT, AT THE VARIANCE LIST AND IT SAYS A, B, C, D 1, 2, 3, I DON'T, WHATEVER IT IS, IT GIVES YOU A VERY DISTINCT CLUE THAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING FOR FINDINGS FOR EACH OF THE CRITERIA FOR A, B, C, DEFG, OR, YOU KNOW, HOWEVER, BUT I'M JUST SAYING IT
[02:40:01]
GIVES YOU A CLUE THAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR FINDINGS THAT ARE SPECIFIC FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE ITEMS. AND I HAVE A FEELING THAT IF THEY JUST BECOME ONE BIG LONG RUN ON SENTENCE, THAT IT'S NOT GONNA BE CLEAR TO AN APPLICANT THAT YOU NEED FINDINGS FOR EACH OF THESE SEPARATE ITEMS, WHICH COULD LEAD TO OTHER PROBLEMS LIKE OUR CASES.YEAH, AND I AGREE WITH, I'M SORRY, UH, ELAINE, DID YOU I AGREE WITH MADAM VICE CHAIR.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S, IT'S, WE HAD TO DO IT THIS MONTH, YOU KNOW, AND IT, IT'S VERY CONFUSING.
IT WAS VERY CONFUSING FOR MYSELF.
RIGHT NOW AS WE WERE READING THROUGH THE VARIANCES, UH, REQUESTS FOR MULTIPLE, UM, I KNOW ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD IS GOING THROUGH THE SAME ISSUE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY'VE RECEIVED AN UPDATE ON HOW WE ARE TO PROCEED WITH IT.
UM, BUT WE ARE WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE MEETING BETWEEN CITY CLERK'S, OFFICE LEGAL, AND I THINK THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD.
I KNOW ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD'S HAVING THE SAME ISSUE.
DO YOU REALLY WANNA LAUGH? WELL, I, I KNOW IT.
I DON'T EVEN GET TRADITIONALLY SPEAKING, IT'S IN, WELL, IT'S IN OUR BYLAWS OR IS IT BYLAWS ARE RULES THE PROCEDURE THAT SAYS CHAIR HAS TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.
I DO KNOW THAT MADAM CHAIR, WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING THAT UP, YOU SHOULD LOOK LEFT AND LET THEM TALK.
UH, BOARD MEMBER SHERIFF STA SO I THINK, I THINK FOR SURE THIS NEEDS TO STAY ON THE AGENDA.
'CAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S GONNA BE A LONGER DISCUSSION.
UM, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT I THINK, I'M NOT OPPOSED IN PRINCIPLE TO THE IDEA THAT IF YOU HAVE MULTIPLE VARIANTS FOR REQUESTS, THERE ARE DIFFERENT FEES FOR EACH ONE OR, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT CASES FOR EACH ONE.
BUT I DO THINK THAT, UM, BECAUSE THAT COULD BE ABUSED, RIGHT? ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MULTIPLE PROPERTIES, THAT KIND OF THING.
UNLESS WE WANNA LIMIT IT TO LIKE ADDRESS.
UM, HOWEVER, I DO THINK THAT IF IT'S POSSIBLE WE SHOULD TRY TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION FOR THAT IN, UM, WHERE SOMEONE IS RECEIVING FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE, RIGHT? BECAUSE AS YOU SAY, IT'S COUNTING MULTIPLE TIMES AGAINST OUR, YOU KNOW, THAT PROVISION THAT WE HAVE.
I I THINK WE WOULD NEED TO ASK LEGAL.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN LEGALLY DO THAT BECAUSE IF WE DENY SOMEONE'S VARIANCE REQUEST, THEY CAN'T COME BACK TO THE BOARD AGAIN FOR A WHOLE YEAR.
SO WHAT WOULD END UP HAPPENING IF, IF MAYBE THERE WERE TWO OR EVEN THREE SEPARATE CASES, WE, WE DENY ONE, DOES THAT MEAN THEY CAN'T COME BACK AGAIN OR, I, I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE RUN INTO PROBLEMS. UH, HANG ON, LET ME, UH, I'LL GET TO YOU IN JUST A SECOND.
UH, BOARD MEMBER POTI, LET'S SEE.
I, I JUST GONNA SAY, I THINK YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY NEED TO LOOK AT THE STATE LAW VERBIAGE BECAUSE I THINK SO TOO, OF ALL THE COMM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, WE ACTUALLY HAVE SPECIFIC STATE LAW LANGUAGE AND I, WHILE WE'RE TRYING TO STANDARDIZE, SO EVERYTHING RESEMBLES ONE THING YOU KNOW THERE, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A PIECE OF PROPERTY, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN MAKE A SEPARATE CASE ON ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY.
AND I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE STATE LAW LANGUAGE.
UM, I MEAN, 'CAUSE YOU HAVE CITY CHARTER AND THEN YOU HAVE STATE CRITERIA.
OKAY, SO WE, WE DO HAVE A SECTION, SORRY, I'M GONNA JUST, I'LL BE RIGHT BACK TO YOU.
BOARD MEMBER POTI, IT'S, IT'S ARTICLE SIX IN THE BYLAWS IS AGENDAS AND, UH, TWO OR MORE BOARD MEMBERS IS, THIS IS, UH, SIX TO A TWO OR MORE.
BOARD MEMBERS MAY PLACE AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA BY ORAL WRITTEN REQUEST.
THE STAFF LIAISON AT LEAST FIVE DAYS BEFORE THE MEETING, AFTER FIRST CONSULTING WITH AND RECEIVING INPUT FROM THE STAFF LIAISON, THE CHAIR SHALL APPROVE EACH FINAL MEETING AGENDA.
SO I THINK THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR BECAUSE COUNSEL HAD TO VOTE ON THESE BYLAWS AND ANY AMENDMENTS MADE TO THEM.
SO THAT GIVES ME THE FINAL RIGHT IS HOW I'M READING THAT.
ATTORNEYS ON THE BOARD,
HOW DOES THAT READ TO YOU,
LIKE I THINK, UM, COMMISSIONER NOT COUNCIL MEMBER, UM, HAWTHORNE IS CORRECT THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT OTHER, I THINK THIS, THIS SOMETHING SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO LEGAL, HONESTLY.
UH, MS. LOPEZ, YOU WANNA CHIME IN ON THIS REAL QUICK? AM I, AM I READING THAT RIGHT OR? 'CAUSE I DON'T WANNA PICK A FIGHT WITH THE CLERK'S OFFICE?
ERIC LOPEZ, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
I WOULD NEED TO CONSULT WITH OUR OPEN GOVERNMENT AND ETHICS DIVISION OKAY.
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE BEING CONSISTENT, UM, AMONG, WITH ALL THE BOARDS, BUT I CAN, UM, TOUCH BACK WITH THEM AND REACH OUT TO YOU GUYS IN A SEPARATE CORRESPONDENCE.
[02:45:01]
AND I BELIEVE THE INTENT, OR LIKE THAT WE'D LIKE TO MAINTAIN THE CURRENT AGENDA STRUCTURE THAT WE'VE BEEN USING, WHERE WE LISTED OUT IN SEPARATE ITEMS THAT WOULD BE THE PREFERRED FORMAT.AND, UH, WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE THE POWER TO DO SO, EVEN IF THE CLERK DISAGREES.
AND I KNOW, AND I'M SORRY FOR THE CLERK'S OFFICE IF WE CAN DO THAT, BUT IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE AFRAID OF CHANGE, IT'S JUST THAT IT COMPLICATES THINGS LEGALLY FOR US.
LIKE, I THINK TOO THAT WE'RE NOT, WE'RE A SEMI JUDICIOUS BOARD, WE'RE NOT QUITE THE SAME.
AND SO, UM, WE'RE SPACIAL IT'S, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO TRY TO EXPLAIN TO AN APPLICANT NO, YOU HAVE TO WRITE SOMETHING SEPARATE FOR THE FRONT YARD AND AN IMPERVIOUS COVER, LIKE WITHOUT IT BECOMING LIKE THE, THE EPIC NOVEL.
AND WHEN IT'S BULLETED INTO LITTLE BY, ITS, IT'S MUCH EASIER FOR SOMEONE TO FOLLOW A LOGIC.
AND I WOULD SAY IN THE ENTIRE TIME I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD, THAT'S HOW WE'VE DONE IT.
UH, BOARD MEMBER ONE, I WILL DEFER TO BOARD MEMBER
YOU KNOW, I, I'M, BUT JUST DON'T FORGET, I'M OVER HERE, SO, OKAY.
I'LL GET, I'LL GET BACK TO YOU.
WELL, THE GOOD THING ABOUT WAITING IS, UH, MY QUESTION WAS ANSWERED, SO I'M GOOD TO GO AFTER
WAIT, BUT I'M JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION? WELL, I, I MISUNDERSTOOD.
I THOUGHT THAT, UH, THESE AGENDA ITEMS WERE GONNA BE BROKEN UP INTO MULTIPLE PIECES.
SO WE'D HAVE TO MULTI, UH, VOTE LIKE THREE DIFFERENT TIMES ON A VARIANCE THAT HAS LIKE THREE ASPECTS, WHICH WOULD BE LIKE A NIGHTMARE FOR OUR MEETING.
YES, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO THEN IT IS AS BAD AS I FIGURED.
I I DON'T WANNA MADAM ANY ONE SEC MAKE ANY LIKE REAL ASSUMPTIONS, BUT I HAVE A FEELING THAT AFTER THIS LATEST CODE THAT JUST PASSED FOR HOME, WHICH IS AWESOME, UH,
SO I'D, I'D RATHER NOT GET BACK UP TO THOSE 20 CASE A NIGHT, UH, MEETINGS THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD TO HAVE IN LIKE, OH, YOU'VE NEVER HAD 32 CASES IN A NIGHT.
SO THEREFORE, WHERE THEREFORE SHALL MAY BOARD MEMBER ONE WOMAN FIRST I'M TOLD TO RAISE MY HAND AND IF I GO FURTHER THIS THROW OUTTA A ROTATED CUFF.
FIRST OF ALL, UM, YOUR POINT IS VERY WELL MADE.
BUT ALSO WE'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM US SITTING ON THIS SIDE OF THE DAIS.
LET'S TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE APPLICANTS, NOT ONLY THE APPLICANTS FOR THE SMALL HOMEOWNER, BUT ALSO LET'S LOOK AT THE, AT WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN WITH THE APPLICANTS FROM THE DEVELOPERS WHO HAVE MONEY.
AND WHEN THEY GOTTA START, UH, ROLLING OUT THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR EACH ONE OF THESE, EACH ONE OF THESE, UH, VARIANCES THAT THEY'RE GONNA BREAK UP, THERE'S GONNA BE A MAJOR BACKLASH.
AND IT, IT'S ALSO GONNA BE, AND I'M GONNA, I'M JUST GONNA SAY IT IS SOMEWHAT DISCRIMINATORY TO GO IN THAT WAY BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT WE WENT THROUGH ALL THIS WORK TO DEVELOP THIS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM WILL NOW AGAIN, BE EXCLUDED BECAUSE THEY MAY BE ABLE TO GET ENOUGH ASSISTANCE DEVELOPMENT TO DO ONE.
BUT IF YOU HAVE TWO OR THREE, UH, TWO OR THREE PEOPLE GO OUT THERE TO HAVE THREE DIFFERENT VARIANCES ON THERE, IT WILL EXPEND THAT BUDGET.
SO I, I, UH, I THINK IT'S A, A VERY GOOD POINT THAT THEY, AND AGAIN, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THESE PEOPLE AT CITY CLERK THAT IS THERE NOW HAVE BEEN THERE, BUT I THINK THEY, AND I KNOW EVERYBODY WANTS TO GET MORE EFFICIENT AND MORE UNIFORM AND, AND ALL THAT, IT'S AN EQUITY ISSUE, BUT SOMETIMES IT'S JUST NOT, IT'S JUST NOT THERE.
AND FOR US AS A SOVEREIGN BOARD TO HAVE TO SIT, I, I TAKE PERSONAL OFFENSE TO HAVE TO TAKE AND BE TOLD, THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE GONNA DO AND THIS IS WHAT WE, HOW WE WANNA DO IT BECAUSE IT'S MORE EFFICIENT FOR US, OR BECAUSE WE WANNA UNIFORM, MAKE EVERYTHING UNIFORM WITHOUT REALLY RECOGNIZING THE DYNAMICS THAT WE DEAL WITH UP HERE, I THINK IS A VERY, VERY BAD CHOICE.
SO IT, AS FAR AS IF I WAS THE CHAIR, WHICH I'VE DODGED THAT BULLET, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO DUCK AND DO THE MATRIX ON THAT ONE.
I WOULD STILL, MADAME CHAIR, IT'S, IT'S, UH, UNDER, CURRENTLY UNDER YOUR PURVIEW, UNDER THE RULES AND BYLAWS, WHICH AGAIN, WE ALSO ARE GOVERNED BY STATE LAW FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO DE DESIGN THE, UH, THE AGENDA AND MAKE SURE THAT THE EQUITY ISSUES THAT WE ADDRESS
[02:50:01]
WITH ARE NOT OUR HOMEOWNERS AS WELL AS THE BIG DEVELOPERS THAT CAN AFFORD TO COME HERE.THAT IT'S BALANCED WITHIN THOSE DECISIONS.
I, I, I THINK, UH, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS, I'D LIKE TO CARRY THIS ON TO THE NEXT MEETING, KEEP IT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING SO WE CAN ALLOW, UH, MS. LOPEZ TO RESEARCH IT, UH, AND HER COLLEAGUES TO RESEARCH IT.
UM, I'LL, I WILL SEND AN EMAIL TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE AND SEE IF MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING WE CAN DO TO HELP MEET THE CRITERIA THEY'RE THEY'RE AIMING FOR, OR MAYBE JUST TO FIND OUT THE CRITERIA THEY'RE AIMING FOR AND SEE IF, IF WE CAN WORK THROUGH THAT IN THE MIDDLE.
AND I'LL GET WITH YOU ON THAT LATER, ELAINE, TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT WAS DISCUSSED.
AND THEN WE CAN, UH, DEPENDING ON WHAT I HEAR BACK FROM LEGAL, WE COULD PICK IT UP NEXT MEETING AND MAKE A DECISION FROM THERE, OR MAY NOT EVEN HAVE TO.
SO MAYBE IT'LL JUST BE AN UPDATE FOR EVERYONE.
SO THEN LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO
[10. Discussion regarding Special Exception cases and Life Safety Reports]
ITEM 10, WHICH IS, UH, DISCUSSION REGARDING SPECIAL EXCEPTION CASES AND LIFE SAFETY REPORTS.UH, SO THIS, OH, WELL I WAS GONNA SAY THIS WAS BROUGHT ABOUT SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT MR. JOHNSON'S CASE YOU WHAT THIS, THIS ONE WE CAN PROBABLY TAKE OFF AFTER TONIGHT BECAUSE, UH, ELAINE, THE WAY THAT YOU GUYS INCLUDED THE LIFE SAFETY REPORT IN HERE, THAT'S THE WAY WE, WE'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR THE PAST 20, 15 YEARS.
UH, 17, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW LONG I'VE BEEN F*****G UP YOU, BUT WE'VE BEEN DOING IT THAT LONG.
THAT'S THE SAME EXACT DI UH, UM, PREVIOUS FORMAT, PREVIOUS FORMAT THAT WE HAD BEEN USING.
AND I THINK, I THINK THAT MEETS THE CRITERIA WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR.
AND DOESN'T THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA SPECIFICALLY STATE, YOU KNOW, THAT IT HAS TO BE GOING TO SOMEWHAT SAFE OR IF NOT SAFE, LIKE ABLE TO BE FIXED TO BE SAFE.
SO WHY WAS THIS NOT INCLUDED AGAIN, IN THE FIRST PLACE? THEY DID IT A DIFFERENT WAY AND THEY THOUGHT IT WAS MEETING WHAT OUR NEEDS.
IT, IT WAS BECAUSE WE HAVE A WHOLE NEW STAFF THAN WHAT USED TO BE THERE PREVIOUSLY.
SO EVERYONE BUT IN BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND, WELL, I DON'T WANNA SAY EVERYONE, BUT MOST EVERYONE IN BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND INSPECTIONS HAD NO CLUE HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
'CAUSE WE HAVE NOT SEEN THEM IN OVER FIVE TO SEVEN YEARS.
IS THAT, DID YOU DO A GREAT JOB? SOMETHING YOU THINK YOU'LL BE ABLE TO ASSIST THEM WITH IN THE FUTURE? LIKE GUIDE THEM TO WE GET THAT REPORT? I'M, YEAH, I'M ALREADY WORKING WITH THEM ON THAT.
AND I'M GETTING GUIDANCE FROM RESIDENTIAL REVIEW FROM STAFF BOARD MEMBER.
IT'S STILL ON THE TOPIC, BUT IT'S NOT, I THINK THE REASON THIS WAS PUT UP HERE, UM, I THINK WE HAVE AN ISSUE TOO WITH THE WAY WHAT WHAT Y'ALL ARE SAYING ABOUT GETTING THAT LIFE SAFETY REPORT.
UM, SO WE CAN LIKE, MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED ON WHAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS REQUIRE, BUT ALSO, UM, THE FACT THAT THEY CAN'T GET ANYTHING DONE UNTIL AFTER WE MAKE A CALL ON IT.
UM, I THINK THE, THE COUNCIL HAS CREATED LIKE A VERY CIRCULAR PROBLEM BECAUSE TECHNICALLY, RIGHT, THE LIFE SAFETY REPORT WE SAW TODAY DOES NOT COMPLY WITH OUR ABILITY TO ACTUALLY SHALL GRANT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
AND I'M WONDERING LIKE WHAT WOULD THE PROCESS BE FOR LIKE BRINGING THAT TO COUNCIL'S ATTENTION? THAT WOULD BE A CODE AMENDMENT ON OUR, OUR VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY OUTDATED ARCHAIC EUCLIDEAN CODE
I I I COULD UH, NO, DON'T, JUST DON'T, JUST DON'T, JUST DON'T.
LET ME, LET ME TALK TO A COUPLE FOLKS ABOUT IT ON PLANNING COMMISSION AND I'LL GET WITH YOU SEPARATELY ABOUT THIS.
'CAUSE IT'S JUST PROCEDURAL, NOT CASE-BASED.
SO WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THAT.
UH, BOARD MEMBER SHERIFF STONEY.
REALLY, REALLY ON THE SAME TOPIC.
LIKE IF I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS AS IT EXISTS, RIGHT? BECAUSE THE PAPERWORK THAT THEY INCLUDE SAYS IT DOES NOT, LIKE IT DOES POSE A HAZARD AND I FEEL LIKE I CAN'T PASS, I CAN'T PASS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION UNTIL IT DOES NOT.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MEANS A PROCESS CHANGE.
I DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT THE CODE LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE CHANGED.
LIKE CAN'T THEY WORK WITH THE SAFETY FOLKS BEFORE WE GRANT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW.
I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BEST NEXT STEP IS TO RAISE THIS, BUT I THINK THIS TIES OUR HANDS IN A REALLY UNFORTUNATE WAY.
AND I THINK IT'S THE PROCESS THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE.
NOT NECESSARILY I'M INCLINED, INCLINED TO AGREE.
UH, I THINK MY ONLY ARGUMENT WOULD BE WOULD BE IN CASES LIKE WHERE WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO HAS QUALIFIED FOR OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
[02:55:01]
AND IF THEY'RE HERE MEETING THAT CRITERIA, ARE WE REALLY GONNA ASK THEM TO SPEND WHAT COULD BE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS SOMEONE MAY BE ON A FIXED INCOME OR DISABILITY TO REPAIR SOMETHING THAT, THAT WE MAY MAKE THEM TEAR DOWN.SO I'M, I'M KIND OF TORN ON IT.
I THINK MAYBE, UH, THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING FOR COUNSEL TO TAKE UP AND LOOK INTO BECAUSE THE CODE ISN'T AS CLEAR AS IT SHOULD BE.
IT'S, WE RUN INTO A LOT AND I'M SORRY, ETXN GUY DID THE THING THAT I WAS COMPLAINING ABOUT EARLIER AND I'M LOOKING AT HER AND NOT TALKING INTO MY MICROPHONE.
BUT, UH, LIKE I SAID, I THINK IF I PICK IT UP WITH A, THERE'S A COUPLE FOLKS ON PLANNING COMMISSION WHO ARE ON THE JOINT CODES AND ORDINANCES AND I'LL ASK THEM IF MAYBE LOOK THEY COULD MAKE A SUGGESTION.
I'LL JUST HAVE TO GET TO HERE AND FIND THE PIECES IN THE CODE WHERE IT SAYS THESE THREE THINGS AND TIE IT ALL TOGETHER.
I THINK, I THINK SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE, ESPECIALLY 'CAUSE I THINK WE ARE GONNA BE SEEING MORE OF THESE, SORRY, LET ME GET THEM FIRST.
'CAUSE I SAW VICE CHAIR HALL OR SORRY, YOU, UH, DO YOU MIND IF I GO WITH BOARD MEMBER BOWEN FIRST? WELL, UM, I HONESTLY, SINCE WE LOOKED AT MR. JOHNSON'S CASE THE FIRST TIME AND THERE WAS REALLY SOMETHING, THERE WAS REALLY THE MISSING DOCUMENTS THAT WERE REALLY NEEDED AND THEN THEY SHOWED UP THE FACT THAT IT, IN ALL HONESTY, IT KIND OF GAVE THEM A CHANCE TO KIND OF LOOK AND DISCUSS AND GO, NOT EVERY CASE IS GOING TO BE LIKE MR. JOHNSON'S LET'S, WE CAN HOPEFULLY SAY THAT, BUT IT AT LEAST BROUGHT TO LIGHT THAT THERE WAS A STEP MISSING IN THE PROCESS, WHICH WITH THE, THE PAPERWORK THAT CAME BACK, IT HELPED ME GO OKAY.
BUT IT DID BRING UP THE QUESTION WHY WASN'T THAT PART OF THE PROCESS IN THE BEGINNING SO THAT IT COULD HAVE BEEN KIND OF RESOLVED OR WHATEVER THE CASE IS.
BUT AT LEAST I, I THINK THIS, THIS GROUP HERE AT LEAST SAID THERE'S NOT ENOUGH AND WE NEEDED TO DO THIS AND GOT SOMEBODY ELSE TO DO IT.
SO AT LEAST THERE WAS ENOUGH COMMON SENSE HERE TO GO.
AND I HATE TO SEE OUR HANDS GET TIED BASED UPON THE LACK OF COMMON SENSE IN, IN REGARDS TO THAT.
BUT I, I FOUND THAT THE EXTRA PIECE, UH, SOMEWHAT REFRESHING AND SOMEBODY ELSE FINALLY PICKING UP AND DOING THEIR THEIR DEAL.
SO I DON'T, I GUESS I DON'T REALLY WANNA SEE US GET SO WRAPPED AROUND THE AXLE THAT WE'RE, THE HUMANITY SIDE IS TAKEN OUT OR THE COMMON SENSE PORTION OF IT IS TAKEN OUT.
UM, VERY WELL SAID THAT, THAT'S ALL I VICE CHAIR HORNE.
SO IT, SO WHEN WE FIRST GOT THESE AND THERE WAS THE MAY IN THE LANGUAGE, IT ACTUALLY WAS ABOUT US GETTING THE LIFE SAFETY REPORT AND US VERY STUBBORNLY WANTING THE LIFE SAFETY REPORT THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN THE LANGUAGE GOT CHANGED TO SHALL SO THE, THE LIFE SAFETY REPORT.
AND I THINK NOW THAT THERE'S NEW PEOPLE, THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR AND THEY WERE TRYING TO USE A MECHANISM THEY ALREADY HAD IN THE COMPUTER INSTEAD OF CREATING THE SEPARATE REPORT.
AND I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE THAT MUCH OF A HARDSHIP.
UM, IT MIGHT, IT MIGHT BE A JUDGMENT CALL IF THE INSPECTOR INCLUDED A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON THE STRUCTURES, LIKE, LIKE NEEDS FIRE RATING ON WHATEVER PROPERTY LINE SIDE OR, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING OR, UM, YOU KNOW, MUST PROVIDE ENGINEER'S LETTER ON STRUCTURAL STABILITY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I MEAN, THEY COULD GIVE US A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION.
I DON'T KNOW THAT IT, IT NECESSARILY NEEDS TO BE A CODE LANGUAGE CHANGE AS IT COULD BE MAYBE A LITTLE MORE DETAIL IN THE LIFE SAFETY REPORT.
SO THAT MIGHT BE A CONVERSATION, A FURTHER CONVERSATION WITH RESIDENTIAL INSPECTIONS, UM, AS OPPOSED TO CODE LANGUAGE THAT'LL THEN GO PLANNING COMMISSION COUNCIL LIKE THAT WE MIGHT NOT SEE FOR TWO YEARS.
WHEN WE COULD ACTUALLY JUST ASK FOR PERHAPS A LITTLE BROADER VIEW.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD ASK FOR ELAINE THE NEXT TIME YOU WORK WITH ONE OF THESE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS CONSIDERING YES.
I'M TAKING NOTE MR. MR. JOHNSON IS CORRECT.
THERE'S LIKE NINE MORE IN THE PIPELINE.
YEAH, I'VE TAKEN NOTE AND I WILL GET WITH THE CHIEF INSPECTOR AND TALK ABOUT THIS.
IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF AND I, I MEAN JUST THAT WOULD BE NICE BOARD MEMBER OF ENZA.
I I THINK I APPRECIATE THAT Y'ALL GAVE THE CONTEXT BEHIND THE CHANGE FROM MAY TO SHALL, BUT LIKE THE LEGAL EFFECT OF THEM CHANGING THAT WORD TO SHALL ALMOST MAKES IT SEEM THAT WE CANNOT GRANT A VARIANT,
[03:00:01]
AN SPECIAL EXCEPTION IF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL PERFORMS AN INSPECTION AND DETERMINES THAT THE VIOLATION, UH, DOES POSE A THREAT, UH, OR A HAZARD.UM, BECAUSE IT SAYS THAT ALL THOSE CONDITIONS HAVE TO BE MET.
SO I THINK LIKE IN PERHAPS HELPING TO LIKE MOVE THE PROCESS ALONG OR TRYING TO HELP MOVE THE PROCESS ALONG, WHAT THEY'VE DONE IS ACTUALLY LIKE SORT OF BOUND OUR HANDS AND PUT US IN A POSITION TO WHERE LIKE IF WHAT IF YOU HAVE A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION WHERE MAYBE SOMEONE COMES IN AND SOMEONE ELSE IS OPPOSING IT AND THEN WE GRANT IT, EVEN THOUGH THE SAFETY REPORT SAYS THAT IT DOES POSE A RISK, UM, THAT PERSON COULD APPEAL US AND PROBABLY, AND LIKE BASED ON THE PLAIN LANGUAGE SHOULD PREVAIL.
AND I, I THINK THAT'S THE BIG ISSUE IS THAT LIKE IF WE, YOU KNOW, SORT OF PLAY THAT LOOSE, IT LIKE SERVES US UP ON EITHER SIDE TO GET APPEALED.
IF WE SAY NO, WE DON'T WANT TO GRANT IT, OR YES, WE DO WANT TO GRANT IT, LIKE THERE'S GONNA BE A SIDE THAT IF THEY WANNA FILE AN APPEAL, LIKE I THINK ANY COURT IS GONNA LOOK AT THAT AND SAY LIKE, WELL IT SAYS YOU SHALL AND THAT THIS HAS TO HAPPEN AND THAT'S NOT HERE.
SO I THINK THAT IT HAS TO BE, I KNOW IT'S A LONG PROCESS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE CODE NEEDS TO BE REVISED BECAUSE OTHERWISE, LIKE I THINK IT, IT, IT TIES OUR HANDS TO GRANT A LOT OF SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND UH, YEAH.
BOARD MEMBER VAN NOLAN, YES, I, I WOULD AND THAT'S, I RESPECT YOUR LEGAL EXPERIENCE AND BACKGROUND AND THAT'S WHY HEARING IT COME FROM AN ATTORNEY WHO, WHO WOULD BE PROBABLY IN A COURTROOM AND, AND I'VE, IN ALL THE YEARS OF NEGOTIATING ALL MY CONTRACTS, I USED TO CHANGE THE VERBIAGE FROM ANYTHING THAT WAS SUBJECTIVE MAY TO IT SHALL OR YOU WILL.
UM, AND UH, AND FOR THAT SPECIFIC REASON, MY QUESTION IS, IT SAYS, AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM BECAUSE IT SORT OF, IT DOES PLAY LOOSE BECAUSE IT DOES ALLOW US TO DENY IT.
AND I, I, 'CAUSE I READ IT TODAY INTO THE RECORD, IT DOES ALLOW US TO DENY A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IF THE, IT DOES NOT PASS AN INSPECT HEALTH AND SAFETY INSPECTION.
BUT THEN ON THE OTHER HAND, THE VERY FIRST VERBIAGE AS YOU SHALL PASS ONE.
SO IT'S LIKE THE BLADE CUTTING BOTH WAYS.
IT, BUT WE CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GONNA UM, IF THAT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO COUNCIL AGAIN.
UH, MELISSA, WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THIS, WE WENT, I REMEMBER WE WENT THROUGH OH WE WERE, WE WERE IN BIG TROUBLE FOR THIS.
BECAUSE WE, WE REALLY WERE WAITING FOR THE, THE PERFECT LIFE SAFETY REPORT.
AND UH, YOU KNOW, THE DIRECTION IS IS THAT ONCE THE SETBACK SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS GRANTED, THEY GO GET A PERMIT AND THE PERMIT IS REQUIRED TO THEN HAVE INSPECTIONS AND THEN ANY MODIFICATION THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE INSPECTOR WHO'S ACTUALLY LOOKING AT IT THEN HAPPENS BEFORE THEY CAN GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY OR A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ON THE STRUCTURE.
SO IT IS, IT IS A CIRCLE, BUT THERE'S MORE TO THE CIRCLE THAN US HERE.
THEY CAN'T GET TO THE NEXT STEP WITHOUT, WITHOUT THE FIRST PART.
I MEAN IF YOU WERE TO TELL COUNSEL MY OPINION ON IT, I WOULD SAY YOU JUST REMOVE B TWO BECAUSE IF THEY'RE STILL GONNA HAVE TO WORK WITH CODE SAFETY ANYWAYS, LIKE WHY ARE WE LOOKING AT A LIFE SAFETY REPORT IN THE FIRST PLACE? VERY GOOD POINT.
SO, SO I, SORRY, I'M GONNA INTERRUPT REAL QUICK BECAUSE I THOUGHT I REMEMBERED READING SOMETHING IN THE REPORT.
AND UH, RIGHT UNDER THE DATE OF INSPECTION BUILDING OFFICIAL OR DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE JOEY MARTINEZ, UH, THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCES REQUESTED WILL NOT CAPITAL LETTERS UNDERLINED RESULT IN ANY HAZARDS, THE LIFE, HEALTH OR PUBLIC SAFETY FOR EITHER THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED OR TO AN ADJOINING PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY.
SO THAT SEEMS LIKE THAT THAT'S A DESIGNATION BY AN INSPECTOR SAYING IT'S NOT A HAZARD, BUT THE CHECK BOXES AND THE BOX BELOW IT THAT SAYS IT IS SO WE JUST NEED AND WILL RESOLVE TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CHECKED.
BUT IN THE CASE WE JUST DID, THEY, THEY EXPLICITLY CHECKED NOT THAT IT'S NOT SO, BOY THAT IS A CONUNDRUM, ISN'T IT? I'LL, THERE'S A NIGHT OF A COUPLE OF FIRSTS NOW THAT YOU POINTED THAT OUT, COMMISSIONER MAGGIE, BECAUSE IT'S THE FIRST TIME WE'VE EVER SPLIT UP A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
AND YOU KNOW, AND SECTIONED IT OUT.
AND IT IS PROBABLY ONLY THE SECOND OR THIRD TIME THAT WE PASSED ONE THAT HAD THAT BOX CHECKED UNDER THE PRETENSE THAT THE CLIENT HAD ALREADY HIRED AN ENGINEER AND HAD SOMEBODY THAT WAS GONNA COME OUT AND RECTIFY IT.
SO IT PUT US IN A POSITION WHERE WE HAD TO PUT A LITTLE BIT OF TRUST OUT THERE FOR THEM TO, TO DO THAT.
[03:05:01]
WHAT YOU SAID IS CORRECT THAT YEAH, IT'S UH, AND THAT GOES BACK TO WHERE THE, THE DILEMMA THAT WE HAD, WHICH COMMISSIONER VAN AMP BROUGHT UP IS YEAH, THE FIRST ONE SAYS SHALL, BUT THEN THE OTHER ONE SAYS HEALTH AND SAFETY, UH, BAGGIE HAS A QUESTION.BOARD MEMBER SHERIFF STONEY MORE OF A COMMENT REALLY.
UM, BUT ONE WAY TO READ THIS THAT HELPS US OUT OF THE CONUNDRUM, AND I, I DIDN'T GO WITH THIS READING ON MY RULING BUT, OR MY VOTE, BUT UM, YOU COULD READ IT TO SAY, DOES THE VIOLA, SO NUMBER TWO B TWO SAYS THE BUILDING OFFICIAL PERFORMS AN INSPECTION AND DETERMINES THAT THE VIOLATION DOES NOT POSE A HAZARD TO LIFE HEALTH OR PUBLIC SAFETY.
UM, IN THIS CASE, THE VIOLATION IS THE LOCATION OF THE STRUCTURE ON THE BOUNDARY, RIGHT.
AND SO YOU CAN READ IT TO SAY THAT WHILE THE PART THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT IS ACTUALLY A VIOLATION, UM, DOES NOT POSE A HAZARD.
WHEREAS YOU KNOW THAT THE OTHER STUFF IS NOT OUR PURVIEW.
THAT'S UP TO LIKE CODE INSPECTION.
INSPECTION CODE, CODE INSPECTION.
SO THERE IS A WAY OUT, IT'S JUST UNCLEAR.
I COMMEND YOU ON BRINGING THAT UP BECAUSE IT'S, I MEAN, IT IT'S PUTS US IN ANOTHER, GIVES US ANOTHER AVENUE TO GO WITH BECAUSE WE STILL DEAL WITH THE SHE COMPONENT OF IT.
BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING NOW AND THAT'S A REALLY GOOD INTERPRETATION TOO.
YEAH, SO, SO JUST I THINK A TX EXTENS SHOULD PROBABLY PUT ON LIKE WIDE ANGLE RIGHT NOW.
'CAUSE IT'S JUST GONNA JUMP FOR A MINUTE GUYS.
SO, SO I THINK THAT'S A DEFENSIBLE, UH, INTERPRETATION, BUT JUST, I MEAN I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER ZAS POINT STILL STANDS THAT IF THIS GOES TO COURT, YOU DON'T KNOW WHICH INTERPRETATION THE JUDGE IS GONNA WANT OR LIKE, RIGHT.
SO I MEAN, BUT, BUT UM, TO COMMISSIONER BOWEN'S POINT, I THINK, YOU KNOW, COMMON SENSE AND EMPATHY IS ALWAYS APPRECIATED.
SO, UH, JU-JUST IN FYI AND, AND WE CAN'T REALLY COVER IT MUCH 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT POSTED FOR IT.
BUT IF SOMETHING LIKE DOES GO TO COURT FOR THIS, THEY, THE DISTRICT COURT ONLY, UH, RULES ON WHETHER OR NOT WE FOLLOWED THE CORRECT PROCEDURE AND WHETHER OR NOT WE HAD STANDING AND UH, IF THERE WAS ANY TYPE OF RESTRICTIONS SET BY STATE LAW.
SO THAT THAT'S ALL IT IS FOR, FOR THAT KIND OF THING.
IT'S NOT WHETHER OR NOT OUR DECISION WAS RIGHT OR WRONG.
THAT'S WHETHER WE FOLLOWED PROCEDURE CORRECTLY FOR THE MOST PART EXCEPTION TO EVERY RULE.
UH, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I'M SEEING EMPTY FACES.
TOMMY, MARCEL, YOU GUYS HAVE ANYTHING? NO.
WELL I THINK THEN LET'S MOVE ON TO
[11. Discussion and possible action regarding bylaws changes, rules of procedure changes, and resolutions regarding board terms, vacancies, and use of alternates]
ITEM 11.AND I'M, I'M GONNA ASK THOUGH, I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN ON HERE TWICE WITHOUT ANY REAL DISCUSSION.
I'M GONNA ASK FOR JUST A LITTLE MORE LEEWAY BECAUSE FOLKS HAVE BEEN A LITTLE BIT BUSY UP AT CITY HALL WITH THE, THE HOME PROPOSALS.
UH, SO IF WE CAN JUST TAKE ONE MORE MONTH ON THIS AND, AND HOPEFULLY MAYBE WE'LL HAVE A BETTER ANSWER FOR IT NOW THAT FOLKS HAVE A LITTLE MORE TIME TO ADDRESS IT.
SO, UH, WITHOUT OBJECTION, I'M JUST GONNA SKIP 11 FOR TONIGHT.
WE'LL PICK IT UP AT THE NEXT MEETING AND MOVE ON TO ITEM 12, FUTURE
[12. Discussion of future agenda items, staff requests and potential special called meeting and/or workshop requests]
AGENDA ITEMS. SO LET'S KEEP THE AGENDA ITEM FOR ITEM NINE ON THE NEXT AGENDA AND CHANGE THAT TO DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING AGENDA LISTINGS.I THINK, UH, ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, WORKSHOPS, SPECIAL CALL MEETING? NO.
UM, MY ONE QUESTION IS, DID WE GET A NEW DATE FOR TRAINING? OH, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE WE TOOK THAT OFF.
DO WE HAVE ANY? NOT TILL THE NEW YEAR I THINK IS WHERE WE WERE AT.
'CAUSE WE HAVE, WE OBVIOUSLY HAVEN'T EVEN GOT OUR NEW MEETING DATES APPROVED YET.
WE'RE STILL WAITING ON CITY CLERK'S OFFICE TO APPROVE ALL THE DATES FOR 2024.
CAN WE PUT IT ON THE JANUARY AGENDA? YEAH, LET'S GO THAT, UH, TRAINING DISCUSSION BACK TO THE AGENDA FOR JANUARY 8TH.
AND IF WE HAVE TO, I WILL LITERALLY, LET'S, LET'S PULL OUT OUR OLD BOOKS AND WE'LL DO A TRAINING RIGHT HERE.
WE'LL DO IT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING TOO.
THAT WOULD BE A LOT OF FUN FOR SOME OF US.
WE KNOW YOU LIKE TO STAY UP LATE.
[03:10:01]
NO MORE REQUESTS.HOLIDAY, THE, THE SPIRIT OF THE SEASON TO YOU, WHATEVER, AND ALL THE THINGS IT IS.
AND TO ALL SEVEN VIEWERS WATCHING RIGHT NOW.
ARE TOMORROW HAPPY HOLIDAYS, EVERYONE.
IT IS 9:01 PM THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.