Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:03]

OKAY, VERY GOOD.

ALRIGHT.

UM, SO I AM, UH, THE TIME IS FIVE 33 ON, UH, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2020.

UH, AND I AM, WE HAVE A EQUIVALENT AND PRESENT, UH, AND WE WILL CALL THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ORDER A REMINDER TO EVERYONE.

IF YOU ARE NOT SPEAKING, PLEASE PUT YOUR MICROPHONES ON MUTE.

CAUSE WE GET A LOT OF BACKGROUND NOISE.

I SEE STUFF I'M LIKE, ALL RIGHT.

UH, WE'LL CALL THE ROLL.

UM, BECKY, THANK YOU, JESSICA COHEN HERE.

ALRIGHT.

UH, OUT OF CAROLL.

THANK YOU, MELISSA HAWTHORNE.

I SEE HER BOX THERE, BUT I DON'T.

OH, THERE SHE IS.

WE'RE CALLING THE ROLL, MELISSA.

SHE IS WAVING HERE OR I THINK LOADING EDGE IS I MAY HAVE TO LOG IN AND MARK OUT.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

WILLIAM HODGE HERE.

THANK YOU.

UH, DON LAYTON.

BOLWELL HERE, RON MCDANIEL HERE.

THANK YOU.

UH, DO APPROVE IT HERE.

THANK YOU, VERONICA RIVERA HERE.

ALL RIGHT.

WELCOME BACK.

UH, JASMINE SMITH HERE.

ALRIGHT, THANKS.

AND, UH, MICHAEL OLIN HERE.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.

UM, SO, UM, AS THE FOOD WE HAVE IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS DURING THE CURRENT SITUATION WITH COVID-19, THIS MEETING OF COURSE, IS BEING HELD VIRTUALLY ONLINE AND IS VIEWABLE AD, UH, W W W UH, ATX N T V.

UH, THERE WILL BE A LAG IF YOU ARE WATCHING YOUR TV.

SO JUST TRUST US, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT.

SO WHEN YOU'RE MAKING YOUR PRESENTATION, UH, THAT WE'RE SEEING THE SLIDE THAT YOU WANT TO SEE, BUT YOU NEED TO LET US KNOW WHEN TO CHANGE THOSE.

UM, ALL RIGHT.

UM, WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE AGENDA.

WE HAVE NO ONE TONIGHT THAT IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO ANY OF THE FIVE CASES.

UM, SO WE WILL JUST MOVE ON TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA.

UH, WE'LL START

[A-1 Staff requests approval of August 10, 2020 draft minutes]

WITH, UH, APPROVAL OF THE, UH, 10TH, 20, 20 DRAFT MINUTES.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? OKAY.

THAT'S A MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER COHEN.

AND, UH, IS THERE A SECOND WILLIAM .

OKAY, SO THIS IS FOR THE MINUTES.

UM, LET ME JUST WRITING THESE THINGS DOWN.

ALRIGHT.

SO WE WILL CALL THE ROLL ON THE MINUTES.

UH BOOKBABY OKAY.

IT LOOKS LIKE SHE'S HAVING CONNECTION PROBLEMS RIGHT NOW, JESSICA, JESSICA TO WORKING JESPER.

RIGHT, RIGHT.

OKAY.

ARE YOU THERE? SORRY, MY CAT UNPLUGGED.

OKAY.

WHERE IS YOUR, AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE ON THE MOTION.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

YES, THANK YOU.

SORRY, I GOT KICKED OUT FOR A SECOND.

SO I'M BACK FOR ME TO VOTE OVER IN TECHIE.

UM, MELISSA.

YES.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, WILLIAM TODD? YES.

THANK YOU.

DONALD LATENT BURWELL? YES.

UM, WELL MCDANIEL.

YES.

ALRIGHT, THANKS RON.

UH, DARRYL? YES.

ALRIGHT.

VERONICA RIVERA? YES.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.

AND MA'AM SMITH.

YES.

SEE RIGHT

[00:05:01]

NOW.

OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

SO THE MINUTES, UH, FROM, UH, SORRY, AUGUST HAD BEEN APPROVED, UM, THIS IS FOR ELAINE.

UH, DO WE HAVE ANY, UM, REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT OR WITHDRAWAL OF THE AGENDA? NO, WE DID NOT.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT.

UM, SO I'M SEEING NO OTHER, UM, ITEMS, UH, WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR VARIANCES REPUBLIC.

HEBREWS, WE'LL START WITH

[C-1 C15-2020-0040 Rodney Bennett for Pavan Narra 2303 Quarry Road]

ITEM C ROOM.

THIS IS C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO FOUR ZERO, RODNEY BENNETT.

UH, UH, PAUL VOLUN, UH, NORA AT 2303, UH, CURRY ROAD.

SO MR. BENNETT ARE AVAILABLE MR. CHAIR.

ON HIS SIDE, WE DID GRANT A VARIANCE ON NINE 17, 2017 FOR THE SAME VARIANCE.

THERE WAS ONLY A DIFFERENCE OF A FOOT.

UH, AND SO THEY'RE 10 FEET.

AND SO WHAT I WANTED TO DO WAS SINCE WE HAD ALREADY GRANTED THIS, THE APPLICANT'S ASKING FOR ONE FOOT MORE, ONE SQUARE FOOT MORE, WHICH IS DIMINIMOUS AND THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS ON 2301 AND 23 FIREARM, EITHER SIDE ARE SUPPORTING IT AS WELL AS 23 AND FIVE GOT THE SAME VARIANCE IN 2004.

SO I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

OKAY.

AND JUST TO CLARIFY, MICHAEL, UM, YOU HAD SAID ONE SQUARE FEET, BUT IT'S, UH, THE SETBACKS, BUT THEY'RE ASKING, I HAVE SOME THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE ORIGINAL BRILLIANCE, BECAUSE APPARENTLY THERE WAS A CONDITION IN IT.

UM, BUT UPSTAIRS THE BATHROOM WOULD BE DOWNSTAIRS.

SO ARE WE GOING TO REPROVE IT, HOW IT WAS APPROVED PREVIOUSLY? ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW THE BATHROOM UPSTAIRS OR, I MEAN, I DON'T UNDERSTAND, IS THERE A DEED RESTRICTION AGAINST 80 YEARS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD? SO I HAD HAVE QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE.

OKAY.

THAT'S FINE.

THAT'S FINE WITH ME.

IT DIDN'T MATTER TO ME WHETHER THE BATHROOM WAS UPSTAIRS OR DOWNSTAIRS, DEPENDING ON HOW BAD THEY HAD TO GO TO THE BATHROOM, BUT I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN.

AND IF YOU WANT TO HEAR IT, THAT'S FINE WITH ME.

OBVIOUSLY IT WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERN AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S RESTRICTIONS THAT DON'T ALLOW FOR AN ADU.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THEM, BUT IF THERE'S THESE RESTRICTIONS AND THIS COULD EASILY BE CONVERTED, AND THAT'S THE REASON ORIGINALLY IT WAS APPROVED WITH THE BATHROOM DOWNSTAIRS.

I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THAT.

OKIE DOKES.

ALRIGHT.

SO GIVEN THAT, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND HEAR THE CASE AND, UH, AT LEAST, UH, TO CLARIFY THE ITEMS THAT, UH, BROOKE HAS BROUGHT UP, UM, HERE TO ENSURE THAT YES, YES.

MA'AM.

AND I MIGHT BE UNDER THINKING THIS, BUT COULD WE NOT JUST PUT THE SAME CONDITION AND ADD THE ONE SQUARE FOOT? AND AGAIN, IT'S NOT A SQUARE FOOTAGE.

IT'S, IT'S, WE'RE TALKING LENGTH HERE.

SO IT'D BE JUST ONE FOOT, ONE ADDITIONAL FOOT NOT, YEAH, THAT'S FINE.

YEAH.

WE'RE NOT MAILING TO APPROVE A PREVIOUS, UH, VARIANCE, UM, YOU KNOW, BY JUST BECAUSE WE HAD DONE IT OR THIS BOARD HAD DONE IT AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST, WE'RE NOT BOUND TO DO IT AGAIN.

WE CAN, UM, HAVE THE SAME RESTRICTIONS.

WE CAN HAVE ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS, WE CAN HAVE NO RESTRICTIONS.

UM, AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE BOARD'S PREROGATIVE, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS COMING TO US AS A BRAND NEW CASE.

UM, WE NEED TO TAKE US THE MOTION FIRST, CORRECT.

BUT I HEARD EMOTION.

I DIDN'T HEAR A SECOND.

ALL THE MOTION IS THERE TO FINISH THE PRESENTATION FIRST, BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DO MOTIONS, I'D ASK THE CHAIRMAN IF HE WOULD CONSIDER THAT WE'D DONE IT IN THE PAST, IN THE DIOCESE JUST TO SAVE TIME AND YOU WANT TO HEAR IT? I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

I CAN WITHDRAW THE MOTION, MR. CHAIR.

IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL NOW.

WE'RE GO AGAIN.

SO, ALRIGHT.

ALRIGHT.

SO MICHAEL HAS WITHDRAWN HIS MOTION, SO WE'RE GOING TO JUST MOVE ON WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO, UM, UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN AND WE'RE WAITING MR. BENNETT, AND I THINK IT'S A SORT OF 69.

IS THAT CORRECT FOR, UM, MAKING YOURSELF HEARD? CAN YOU HEAR ME, MR. CHAIRMAN?

[00:10:01]

YES, I CAN.

THANK YOU.

RIGHT.

UH, MS. CHAIRMAN BOARD, I'M RODNEY BENNET.

UH, I'M ON HERE TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER, UM, PANERA ON HIS REQUEST FOR A GARAGE ON A THREE LOT WITH A SETBACK OF 15 FEET VERSUS THE REQUIRED 25 FEET.

YES.

IN 2017, THE BOARD DID GRANT A RANCH FOR 16 FOOT AND RAISE A RIDER ON IT THAT SAID THAT THEY WOULDN'T HAVE ANY HABITABLE AREA.

UM, WITH THAT SAID THEY WERE ALLOWED TO HAVE A BATHROOM THERE, AND I BELIEVE THEY HAD A KITCHEN IN IT.

UM, IT'S PART GARAGE AND PART POOL HOUSE, UM, ON THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION AND ON THIS APPLICATION, THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT OUR BATHROOM IS ON THE SECOND FLOOR.

UM, THE OWNER WAS WANTING TO USE THAT AREA AS A ROUGH AREA OR AN OFFICE AREA.

UM, HE HAD NO INTENTIONS OF USING IT TO RUN OUT, BUT WITH THAT SAID, WE DID MEET WITH WAYNE ON OCTOBER 9TH.

AND, UM, YOU NEED A LETTER FROM, FROM BLAKE STATING THAT THEY'RE NOT IN OPPOSITION TO IT, AS LONG AS THERE'S NOT HAVE A LITTLE SPACE IN THE SECOND FLOOR.

UM, AS MUCH AS MY CLIENT WOULD LIKE IT, WE UNDERSTAND HIS CONCERN.

UM, I'D HATE TO SAY THAT I'M WILLING TO GIVE IT UP IN ORDER FOR HIM TO HAVE THIS GARAGE HERE, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO.

THE GARAGE IS IN PLACEMENT IN THE GARAGE IS, IS HARD TO GET INTO 25 FOOT SETBACK BECAUSE OF A MASSIVE OAK TREE BACK THERE.

UM, REALLY THIS IS ABOUT THE ONLY PLACE WE CAN PUT IT.

SO WITH THAT SAID, I'D BE AVAILABLE.

SHOULD Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY.

I'M SURE THAT WE WILL.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

UH, WHAT GO AHEAD.

IS THAT RIGHT AROUND THERE? BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THOSE FOLKS ABOUT, IS THERE A DEED RESTRICTION ON THOSE PROPERTIES THAT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR AN ADU? I DO NOT KNOW THAT THERE IS ONE.

UM, WHEN I FELT THAT I DON'T REMEMBER WHY, BUT BACK THEN, I'M PRETTY POSITIVE THAT HE REQUESTED IT BACK THEN THOUGH.

OKAY, THANKS.

OKAY, MR. CHAIR, IF I RECALL, ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAD BACK AT THAT TIME WAS WHEN WE DIDN'T WANT IT TO BECOME AN STR.

AND THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE THE, I WAS LOOKING AT MY NOTES HERE.

THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE IT ALSO HAVE A KITCHEN BATHROOM.

IT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO ME.

SO AGAIN, I'LL GO BACK AND MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE.

OKAY.

NOW WE'VE ALREADY HAD A CONCESSION BY THE APPLICANT TO NOT HAVE THE HABITABLE SPACE, OR IS THAT WHAT YOUR CURRENT, IT WOULD HAVE THE BATHROOM, SO YOU CAN USE IT AS AN OFFICE, BUT IT WON'T HAVE, WOULD NOT HAVE A KITCHEN AREA.

CAUSE THAT WAS THE, THAT WAS THE BIG HEARTBURN ON THE LAST TIME.

WAS IT, PEOPLE WERE CONCERNED THAT IF HE HAD A KITCHEN IN A BATHROOM, IT WAS GOING TO TURN INTO A THANK YOU THAT IT WAS GOING TO TURN INTO AN STR SHORT TERM RENTAL.

AND SO I THINK A BATHROOM IS REASONABLE, WHETHER IT'S A BATH, A POOL HOUSE, OR WHETHER IT'S AN OFFICE, IT'S A LITTLE UNREASONABLE TO, IF YOU CAN USE IT AS AN OFFICE AND I'D TAKE HIM AT HIS WORD, I DON'T HAVE TO GO INTO THE MAIN HOUSE TO GO USE THE BATHROOM.

OKAY.

UM, ALRIGHT, SO, SO JUST TO CLARIFY, YOUR MOTION IS TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED IN THE DRAWINGS THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE TO US IN THE BACKUP.

CORRECT.

UM, I THOUGHT YOU JUST SAID NO KITCHEN.

LET ME GO BACK TO THE KITCHEN, MAN.

LET ME GO BACK TO, THERE WAS AN OUTDOOR KITCHEN.

OUTDOOR.

YEAH.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS SEEING.

YES.

I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY.

CAUSE THEY LISTED AS AN OUTDOOR KITCHEN, YOU'RE SAYING NO KITCHEN AND THAT KITCHEN IS FINE FOR THE MOTION.

OKAY.

WELL TO KEEP IT SIMPLE, THE KITCHEN'S NOT GOING TO BE IN THAT UPSTAIRS UNITS.

I DON'T CARE IF THEY HAVE AN OUTDOOR KITCHEN OR, YOU KNOW, OR BARBECUE OR AREA OR WHATEVER, BUT THAT'S ALSO SUBJECTIVE BECAUSE WHAT A LOT OF PEOPLE CALL IT AN OUTDOOR KITCHEN NOW AS A FANCY BARBECUE PIT SITTING OUT THERE THAT SOMEBODY BUILT IN, IT'S NOT IN THE UNIT ITSELF.

SO I REALLY DON'T, I'M LOOKING AT IT HERE RIGHT NOW AND I DON'T REALLY, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT AS DRAWN.

UH, AND THAT IS ON PAGE MINDSET SHEET SEVEN 11, CAUSE I'M ALREADY ON MY, MY IPAD HERE, BUT THE ONE DRAWING THAT I'M LOOKING AT BECAUSE NOT TRUE A KITCHEN WITHIN THE ACTUAL HABITABLE SPACE.

SO

[00:15:01]

I'M OKAY WITH IT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT, THAT THE, UM, THE FIRST FLOOR AREA THAT IS NOT THE GARAGE, WHICH IS, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST RIGHT OFF THE POOL THAT HAS THE KITCHEN, BUT THAT WOULD REMAIN OPEN TO THE POOL, UH, AS, AS IT'S SHOWN HERE BASICALLY.

AND THAT, UH, UH, THE UPSTAIRS WOULD NOT BE CONVERTED TO AN SDR.

AND I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE.

THAT'S ACCEPTABLE BY ME, MR. OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.

UM, IS THERE, UH, WHAT DID WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? OKAY.

WELL, WE HAVE A SECOND BY MELISSA AND I WILL START THE FINDINGS WHILE YOU WRITE THAT DOWN.

MR. CHICKEN, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

OH, I'M SORRY.

UM, AND, UM, UH, SO WE'RE CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THIS IS ITEM C.

OKAY, GO AHEAD WITH YOUR FINDINGS.

OKAY.

REASONABLE USE THE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY.

DO NOT ALLOW ANY REASON WE USE BECAUSE IT'S A TRUE LOVE WITH A 25 FOOT SETBACK AND SPACE FOR THEM TO PROTECT HISTORY, RESTRICTS THE BUILDABLE AREA, HARDSHIP THE HARDSHIP FOR WHICH THE VARIANCES REQUEST IS UNIQUE TO PROPERTY.

AND THAT THE NUMBER OF PROTECTED TREES ON THE SITE DO NOT ALLOW FOR COVERED PARKER OR ANYWHERE ELSE.

THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL TO THE AREA IN WHICH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL QDA IN WHICH YOUR PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE MOST HOMES, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE OLDER AND HAVE COVERED PARKING.

FURTHERMORE, NUMEROUS PROTECTED TO REDUCE THE BUILDABLE AREA TO THIS LOCATION 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 IMPROVE THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATION OF THE ZONING DISTRICT FROM WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE MOST HOMES IN THIS AREA, WHICH AREA HAVE COVERED PARKING, MOST OF THEM PREDATE THE TREE.

THAT'S IT? MR. CHAIRMAN.

OKAY.

VERY GOOD.

ANY OTHER QUESTION BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE VOTE OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MOTION? OKAY.

OKAY.

HERE IN BERKELEY, JESSICA COHEN.

YES.

ARTICLE MELISSA HAWTHORNE.

I'M HAVING, WE CAN HEAR YOU.

OKAY.

WILLIAM HOG.

YES.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, DON LAYTON BURWELL.

YES.

YES.

ALL RIGHT.

SO MELISSA'S BACK, MELISSA, GIVING US A THUMBS UP FOR THE RECORD.

ALRIGHT.

UH, DARRYL YOU'RE STILL.

YES.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, VERONICA RIVERA? YES.

ALL RIGHT, THANKS.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

AND MICHAEL VAN OLIN.

YES.

ALL RIGHT.

CONGRATULATIONS.

YOU GOT YOUR VARIANTS AGAIN, SO YES.

THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT.

UM,

[C-2 C15-2020-0042 Harmony Grogan for Jessie Patton-Levine 2202 West 49th Street]

MOVING ON TO, UH, ITEM C TO, UM, JUGGLE HERE.

SO THIS IS A, UH, ITEM C TWO C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO FOUR TWO.

UH, HARMONY GROGAN FOR JESSE PATTON LEVINE AT 2202 WEST 49TH STREET.

UM, HERMONEY IF YOU ARE AVAILABLE, UM, GO AHEAD AND GIVE YOU A QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN.

YES.

ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE AND I REVIEWED IT AND EVEN I EVEN DROVE OUT THERE.

AND SO I THINK IT WOULD BE IN HARMONY'S BEST INTEREST.

AND I JUST WANT TO BRING THIS UP NOW, CAUSE I KNOW WHERE IT'S GONNA GO.

FIRST OF ALL, THEIR HARDSHIP IS CRASHING WELL, BUT EVEN IF THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD WHAT THEY WANT ON IT, THEY'RE GOING TO NEED AN ADDITIONAL VARIANCE BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE ENCROACHING INTO THE SETBACK.

AND SO FOR THE SIDE YARD ON 49TH STREET, AFTER LOOKING AT THE DRAWINGS OF WHAT THEY WANT TO BUILD, SO TO SAVE THEM TIME AND NOT HAVE TO HAVE THEM COME BACK AND GET BEAT UP FOR NO HARDSHIP, THEY DO HAVE AN IRREGULAR SHAPED LOT, WHICH IS A HARDSHIP.

BUT IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE DRAWINGS, THEY'RE GOING TO NEED AN ADDITIONAL VARIANCE IF THEY WANT TO BUILD WHAT THEY WANT.

SO I WANTED TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE JUST TO SAVE THEM THE TIME, SAVE THEM, HAVING TO GO THROUGH ALL THIS SO THAT THEY CAN AT LEAST ADJUST THEIR HARDSHIP AND ALSO REQUEST

[00:20:01]

THE PROPER VARIOUS THEY'RE GOING TO NEED, WHICH IS GOING TO BE FOR A SIDE YARD SETBACK ON 49TH STREET.

I APPRECIATE WHAT MICHAEL IS SAYING.

AND I STRONGLY AGREE.

AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I'M GLAD HE SAID THAT BECAUSE I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR THIS CASE THE WAY THAT IT'S PUT OUT THERE NOW, NOT JUST BECAUSE OF THE HARDSHIP, JUST ISN'T STRONG ENOUGH.

I AGREE.

I WILL SECOND THE MOTION.

OKAY.

SO, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE BY MICHAEL VAUGHN, OLIN.

AND, UM, HOLD ON JUST A MINUTE AND A SECOND BY MELISSA.

UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE, THE ONLY DISCUSSION MR. CHAIR IS HOPEFULLY THAT THE APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE IS JUST LISTENED TO WHAT WE ARE HEARD AND TO GET WITH THE LANE ON IT WHEN THEY REPOST TO MAKE SURE THAT I'LL JUST STOP RIGHT THERE.

RIGHT, RIGHT.

I UNDERSTAND.

UH, BROOKE, GO AHEAD.

JUST PUT THERE TOO.

I THINK THAT BETH, A NEED, SOMEONE NEEDS TO EXPLAIN TO THEM WHY THEIR EXISTING HOUSE WILL BE ENCROACHING AFTER THEY DO THE ADDITIONS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ALREADY EXISTING.

I THINK THAT PART OF THE CODE, MAYBE HE HASN'T BEEN COMPLETELY EXPLAINED TO THEM.

AND SO MAYBE CLARIFYING WITH THE APPLICANT AND ALSO WORKING ON IT.

OKAY.

I JUST WANTED TO AGREE.

UM, AND YOU KNOW, FOR THE APPLICANT, I, THIS MIGHT BE FRUSTRATING, RIGHT.

A POSTPONEMENT, BUT I REALLY THINK PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD ARE TRYING TO HELP YOU OUT AND YOU CAN KIND OF COUNT THE VOTES NOW.

UM, SO I WOULD JUST SAY, AS IT'S PRESENTED, I WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO, SO YES, ON THERE.

SO I WOULD TAKE CONSIDERATION OF WHAT YOU'VE HEARD THE OTHER MEMBERS HAVEN'T SAID ALREADY, AND REALLY DO SOME DUE DILIGENCE ON IT.

AND MICHAEL, BASICALLY THAT THE ENCOURAGEMENT IS THE EXISTING ENCROACHMENT.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT INTO THE 15 FOOT, CORRECT.

ANY TYPE OF VARIANCE OR ANY TYPE OF WORK REMODELING ON THAT HOUSE THERE, THAT'S GOING TO COME UP AND THEY'RE GOING TO NEED A VARIANCE FOR THAT.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY ALSO, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE APPLICANT LOOKS AT, UM, DRIVEWAYS AS WELL, BECAUSE I THINK THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO DO, UM, PROPER ONSITE PARKING.

AND SO YOU MAY NEED SOME VARIANCES ON PARKING AS WELL.

I'M NOT SURE, BUT I WOULD DEFER TO STAFF ON THAT.

OKAY.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY MICHAEL VON OLIN TO POSTPONE, AND THIS WOULD BE OUR OCTOBER MEETING.

IS THAT, IS THAT SAFE TO SAY MEDICAL? YEAH.

YES, SIR.

I THINK THEY SHOULD BE HANDLED BY THEN.

OKAY.

VERY GOOD.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS, THIS IS REALLY JUST TO ADDRESS THE POSTING ISSUES.

UM, ALL RIGHT.

AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY, UH, MELISSA.

IS THERE, UM, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE MOVED TO OVER TO VOTE? WHAT OF YOUR HAND? OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

SO, UH, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SINCE WE DIDN'T EARLY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UM, UH, BROOKE BAILEY.

THIS IS A MOTION.

THANK YOU.

UM, JESSICA COHEN? YES.

THANK YOU.

UH, ARTICLE.

YES.

RIGHT? MELISSA HAWTHORNE? YES.

WILLIAM HAHN.

YES.

NOW I'M LAKE NORWELL.

YES.

RON MCDANIEL.

YES.

RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

UH, DARRYL UPROOT? YES.

ALRIGHT.

MONICA RUBBER.

YES.

THANK YOU.

UH, YES.

YES.

ALRIGHT.

IN MICHAEL BERLIN? YES.

VERY GOOD.

ALRIGHT.

SO, UM, MS. GROGAN, UH, IF YOU'RE STILL THERE, WE WILL SEE YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON

[C-3 C15-2020-0043 Katherine Loayza for Robin & Lorraine Moore 4708 Colorado Xing]

TO ITEM C THREE.

THIS IS A C 15 DASH 2020 DASH OH ZERO TWO OR THREE.

UH, THIS IS, UH, CATHERINE FOR ROBYN AND LORRAINE MOORE AT, UM, 47 OH EIGHT, UH, COLORADO CROSSING.

AND, UM, IT LOOKS LIKE, UM, CATHERINE IS THE

[00:25:01]

PRIMARY SPEAKER, GOOD EVENING PARENT MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

THERE IS REQUESTS FOR 47 OR EIGHT COLORADO CROSSING ASSEMBLER LAKE AUSTIN OVERLAY ZONING SLEPT IN PERVIOUS KIND OF RESTRICTIONS TO ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL 80.6 SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS COVER PER CONSTRUCTION OF A 348 SQUARE FOOT SWIMMING POOL.

IN ADDITION TO THE 80.6 SQUARE FEET IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR THE POOL COPING, THE OTHER IMPERVIOUS COVER INCLUDED IN THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS FOR AN EXISTING PLACE.

SO 51 SQUARE FEET AND PLAYHOUSE OF 93 SQUARE FEET, WHICH THE OWNER CONSTRUCTED AFTER 2015 THAT REALIZING THAT THESE MINOR TEMPORARY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE USE OF THE PRIVATE OUTDOOR SPACE TOOK HER TO A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE.

THE TOTAL BALANCE REQUEST THERE FOR US FOR 225 SQUARE FEET, WHICH WERE INCREASED A LOT IN PREVIOUS CALLER FROM 40.2 TO 42.2%, THE OWNER WILLING TO REMOVE THE PLAYHOUSE IN EXCHANGE FOR THE POOL COPING IF NECESSARY, BUT WOULD PREFER NOT TO SIZE FOR THE POWERPOINT SCALE, THE ZONING MAP AND SLIDE FIVE, THE AERIAL PHOTO, A SIZE SIX SHOWS EXISTING AS A POST OVER THE PROPERTY.

AND IN PART TO THE POWERPOINT SLIDE, TWO SHOWS THE PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS COVER REQUESTED IN GREEN AND A PROPOSED MOCKUP OF THE POOL AND LOCATION IN THE BACKYARD.

THE ADDITIONAL BACKUP MATERIAL SHOWS A PLAYSCAPE AND PLAYHOUSE AS WELL AS THE RAINWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM.

MY USE OF HARDSHIP, THE PROPERTY IS PART OF A SMALL SUBDIVISION SIDED IN 1982, THAT WAS INITIALLY ZONED SF TO THE LOT SIZE IS 11,643 SQUARE FEET, WHICH SOME OF THE STANDARD ZONING WAS TYPICAL FOR THE SUBDIVISION.

HOWEVER, BECAUSE THE PROPERTIES AT THE, OF THE THOUSAND FOOT DISTANCE FROM THE LAKE, IT WAS MOVED DOWN TO THE LA ZONING OVERLAY IN 1984, BECAUSE A LOT SIZE IS ONLY ONE FOURTH OF THE REQUIRED ONE ACRE MINIMUM, LOT SIZE.

IT AUTOMATICALLY BECAME A LEGAL NONCOMPLIANCE, A LOT ON IT BECAUSE OF THE PERMISSIONS OF THE LA ZONING.

IT ONLY ALLOWS FOR A TOTAL OF 12.8% IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE LOT OF WHICH 74% HAS LEFT TWO 15 AND 35% BECAUSE OF THIS SEVERE RESTRICTION.

THE HARDSHIP IN THIS CASE IS THE ZONING, WHICH PROHIBITS THE USE OF THE OUTDOOR SPACE WITHOUT TAKING HIS ARYAN.

LISTEN CONDITIONS ON THE PROPERTY ARE RESULTED IN INSURANCE AND A BUILDING PERMIT 1993 FOR THE CURRENT RESIDENCE BASED UPON PREVIOUS COVER STANDARDS, NOT LA ZONING, WHICH IS HOW THE EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY WERE PERMITTED.

THE CATEGORY HAS EXISTED SINCE 1993, AND IT WAS EXPANDED BY 600 SQUARE FEET IN 2015 WITH A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE CURRENT OWNER, THE ABILITY TO REBUILD AND EXPAND THE UPPER DECK.

AND AS THEIR SERVER ACCESS, THE RAIN WATER COLLECTION SYSTEM WAS INSTALLED AS A CONDITION OF EXPERIENCE, WHICH WILL BE ENLARGED TO ALSO CAPTURE THE RUNOFF FROM THE POOL.

BUT ZONING TAKES AWAY THE REASONABLE USE OF THE OUTDOOR AREA OF THE PROPERTY AND CREATES A HARDSHIP BY PROHIBITING THE USE OF THE OUTDOOR SPACE ON THE PROPERTY, SIMILAR TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND SUBDIVISION BECAUSE OF THE STEEP SLOPE WITH DEPENDENT ON BEING ABLE TO USE THE OUTDOOR AREA, THE PROPERTY MORE FULLY AS NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ARE ABLE TO ANSWER A LOT OF THEIR DAUGHTER TO BE ABLE TO SWIM IN OUR OWN BACKYARD RATHER THAN TO GO ELSEWHERE IS MORE CRITICAL THAN BEFORE.

IN ADDITION.

SO, I MEAN, IT'S ONE OF THE FEW PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES.

THE OWNER'S DAUGHTER ENJOYS THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENEROUS OR THE AREA BECAUSE THIS LIES AT THE EDGE OF THE THOUSAND FOOT RADIUS FROM THE LAKE.

AND THE MAJORITY OF THE SUBDIVISION IS ZONED THAT STUFF TO THE MAJORITY OF THE LOTS AND THE SUBDIVISIONS DO NOT HAVE STEEP SLOPE SUCH AS THIS LOT, THE AREA CHARACTER'S NOT IMPACTED BECAUSE MANY RESIDENCES HAVE SWIMMING POOLS.

I HAVE ADDITIONAL BREAKDOWN OF EACH IMPROVEMENT BY SLOPE CATEGORY, IF YOU WISH TO HAVE GREATER DETAIL.

AND ALSO I CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH ALTERNATIVE IMPERVIOUS COVER INFORMATION SHOULD BE DETERMINED THAT THE PLAYHOUSE SHOULD BE MOVED IN TO A LOT OF THE POOL IMPERVIOUS COVER.

THE SUBDIVISION IS OFTEN SUBJECT TO AN HLA, WHICH SUPPORTS THE VARIANCE REQUEST AS WELL AS EIGHT PROPERTY OWNERS ALONG THE STREET.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS VARIANCE REQUEST IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SWIMMING POOL AND KEEP THIS LISTING PLAYSCAPE AND PLAYHOUSE IN THE BACKYARD.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

THANK YOU.

TALKING TO MYSELF AS USUAL.

ALL RIGHT.

SO THANK YOU TO THE APPLICANT FOR THAT.

SO, UM, UM, OTHER, UH, WELL I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

LET ME, LET ME JUST START THAT OFF.

UM, I DON'T IN THE AREA, DO YOU GET A PHOTOGRAPH? THERE ARE A NUMBER OF TREES, BUT IN THE PRESENTATION THAT WE HAVE FROM THE MORE GROUP I SAW, NO TREES SHOWN

[00:30:01]

AT ALL, IS THAT INFORMATION READILY AVAILABLE TO US? THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT.

I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE SECOND PART OF THE POWERPOINT, YOU CAN SEE THE AREA OF SLIDE FOUR.

AND THE SECOND HALF OF THE POWERPOINT SHOWS WHERE THE, WHERE THE SWIMMING HOLE WILL BE LOCATED.

AND THERE ARE NO TREES THAT WILL BE IMPACTED.

OKAY.

WELL, YEAH.

SO, UH, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, UH, UH, ON THE PRESENTATION? RIGHT.

P TWO SLIDE FOUR.

SHE LIKES, LET ME GO TO SLIDES.

OKAY.

P TO, UH, I, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS IS A DETAILING IMPERVIOUS COVER BY SLOPE CATEGORY.

NO, THAT'S OKAY.

PRESENTATION THE SECOND PART OF THE PRESENTATION.

YEAH.

IF YOU KEEP, IF YOU KEEP SCROLLING THROUGH THOSE, THIS IS THE VERY LAST SLIDE.

WELL, YOUR LAST SLIDE SHOWS LOWER PATIO AND GRASS SLOPE SHOWING LOCATION.

RIGHT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

WELL, I MEAN, I COULD BE STANDING IN FRONT OF A TREE, NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE IT THERE.

SO, UM, UH, AGAIN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE OVERHEAD PHOTO THERE'S, UH, THERE SOME TREES IN THAT AREA, I DON'T KNOW HOW BIG THEY ARE OR WHAT THEY ARE, BUT THEY DON'T SEEM TO BE, UH, REPRESENTED HERE.

UM, AND I THINK THAT THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD WANT TO SEE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT THE APPLICANT, A BOOK? I KNOW I JUST HIT IT, I HIT IT TWICE.

UM, AND THERE'S NO ELEVATION VIEW OF THE SLOPE.

SURE.

IS THAT SIDE OF THAT POOL GOING TO BE, TO MAKE IT WORK TO THE OWNER IS ALSO ON HOLD.

UM, PERHAPS HE CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

UM, I THINK, YEAH, THE BACK BACKGROUND THERE'D HAVE TO BE ABOUT EIGHT OR NINE, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

YEAH.

UH, OKAY.

WHOSE HAND WAS WAVING THERE? UH, OUGHTA, GO AHEAD.

MATT HAS A COLORED PENCIL ON IT.

IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S SO MANY LINES GOING THROUGH THE SPACE MORE THAN A FOOT APART, BUT YEAH, THEY DO SEEM TO BE ONE FOOT CONTOURS.

AND SO IT LOOKS LIKE FROM THE EDGE OF THE FLAGSTONE WALK THAT WE ARE AT FIVE 81 AND WE DROPPED DOWN TO AT LEAST FIVE 74, IF NOT FIVE 73.

UM, SO, UM, THAT RIGHT THERE IS, UH, ROUGHLY EIGHT FEET OF FALL, UM, UH, ACROSS THE BACK THERE, IF WE, IF WE, UH, MAINTAIN THE, THE TOP OF THAT.

SO YEAH, IT WOULD BE AROUND NINE FEET, UM, OF A RETAINING WALL ALONG THE BACK OF THE, THE POOL THERE.

IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

AND AGAIN, I I'VE HEARD AN OFFER BY THE APPLICANT TO REMOVE THE PLAYHOUSE TO OFFSET, UM, THE, UM, IMPERVIOUS COVER, UM, THE, UH, EXCEEDING IT HERE.

UM, SO, UH, ARE THERE, UH, DURA, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE, THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND WHERE EXACTLY IT IS BECAUSE IT LOOKS UP, THERE'S A FLATTER SPACE BEHIND THE PROPOSED LOCATION AT THIS POINT.

AND IS THAT WITHIN THE PROPERTY DRAWING, ARE YOU LOOKING AT THERE JUST TO CLARIFY, I'M LOOKING AT THE EXHIBIT DETAIL THAT HAS THE, UM, UH, THE CONTOUR LINES ON IT.

OKAY.

SO THAT WOULD BE IN THE SECOND PART OF THEIR PRESENTATION C3 A FORWARD SLASH TWO DAY FATIGUE.

IS THAT, UH, YEAH, THAT'S EXACTLY IT.

OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

THANK YOU.

SO I'M

[00:35:01]

JUST, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THERE IS SOME ROOM BEHIND THE PROPOSED LOCATION WHERE IT COULD BE PLACED WHERE IT WOULD BE ON FLATTER GROUND, IS THAT AREA BEHIND THERE THAT SPLATTER WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINE WITHIN THE, WITHIN THE LAW? WELL, THAT, THAT IS WITHIN THE LOT, BUT THERE ALSO IS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT RUNNING THROUGH THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.

SO I THINK THAT'S THE, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING IN THAT AREA.

ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT RUNS THROUGH THIS, THIS AREA THAT'S FIVE 67, FIVE 68, FIVE 69, FIVE 70.

RIGHT.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

THERE'S A SECOND BY JESSICA.

OKAY.

I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION.

I MEAN, I SUPPORT THE MOTION, BUT I JUST HAD A CURIOSITY QUESTION THAT FLAT SPOT THAT DARRELL WAS TALKING ABOUT HOW FAR FROM THE HOME IS THAT, THAT SPOT, EVEN IF IT WASN'T THE DREAM, I'D HAVE TO DEFER TO THE OWNER AND MR. MOORE ON THAT.

WELL, YEAH, I JUST WOULD ADD THAT AREA RIGHT NEAR THE BACKPAGE ABOUT PROPERTY.

THERE'S SOME SORT OF LEAN ON IT BECAUSE IT'S A GREENBELT SPACE IS HOW FAR AWAY FROM THAT, FROM THE HOUSE.

I MEAN, IT'S NORMAL TO HAVE THE POOL CLOSE TO THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW? SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS HOW FAR FROM, FROM THAT FLAT SPOT IS YOUR HOME.

IF YOU WERE TO PUT THE POOL THERE.

OH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

WELL, THE GREEN OUTLINE THAT YOU SEE IN THAT EXHIBIT IS 14 FEET WIDE.

SO IT GIVES YOU SOME FEEL IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT ON TWO 25 FEET DOWN THE SLOPE TO THE PROPERTY LINE, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

OKAY.

THAT'S FINE.

THAT'S ALL THAT'S TOO FAR FOR, IN MY OPINION, TO MOVE A POOL THAT FAR OUT IF IT WAS AVAILABLE.

BUT I WAS JUST CURIOUS AS TO HOW FAR AWAY FROM THE HOUSE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN.

THANK YOU.

UH, MR. CHAIR.

OKAY.

UH, SO, UH, YEAH.

UH, YES, WE CAN GO AHEAD.

AND THEN WE'RE ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE WHITE HOUSE OR NO, ALEXA SAYS NO.

IS THAT CORRECT? THEN AFTER I MADE THE FINDINGS, IT'S NOT THE ONLY MELISSA THE OWNER DID SAY THAT THEY WERE AMENABLE TO INCREASING THE WATER RETENTION SYSTEM TO ACCOMMODATE THAT.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT AND ALLOW THEM, AND I'M NOT GOING TO DENY THE KIDS WORKPLACE GATES SO THAT THEY CAN GO SWIMMING, BUT AT LEAST LET'S COMPROMISE A LITTLE BIT.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT THAT WE DO AND THAT THEY DO INCREASE THEIR WATER COLLECTION SYSTEM TO ACCOMMODATE THE COUGHING AS THEY DISCUSSED.

OKAY.

SO THAT WAS AN ACCEPTABLE, CAN YOU GET TO THE FINDINGS? OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

WELL, OKAY.

YEAH.

SO, SO I, ACTUALLY, THIS IS A QUESTION MORE FOR, I SUPPOSE, UH, FOR BROOKE MORE THAN ANYBODY ELSE, BUT I TAKE ANYBODY'S OPINION.

HE'S NOT VERY OFTEN THAT WE SEE A CASE WHERE THE HARDSHIP IS THE ZONING ITSELF, AND I'M COMPLETELY FINE WITH THAT, BY THE WAY, IT'S RIGHT THERE IN THE STATE GOVERNMENT CODE.

BUT THE PURPOSE OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS TO MAKE EXCEPTIONS TO THAT, TO THE ZONING CODE, TO THE ORDINANCE WHEN IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE AND THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE.

BUT I SORT OF LOOK TO YOU ON THE LAKE AUSTIN ZONING ORDINANCE.

AND SO SHE SAID IT HERSELF IN THE HARDSHIP, IT SAYS IT SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN APPLIED TO THIS LAW.

AND SO MY, MY VOTE SORT OF HINGES ON YOUR OPINION OF WHETHER YOU THINK THAT LIKE OFTEN ZONING UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF THE, OF THE, UM, OF THE, OF THE APPROVAL HERE OF THE MOTION, WHETHER YOU THINK THE ORDINANCE SHOULD APPLY TO THIS LAW.

I, UM, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE ORDINANCE APPLYING TO THIS LAW, BUT IT DOES.

UM, AND I, THAT WOULD NOT BE A HARDSHIP

[00:40:01]

THAT I WOULD HAVE PUT FORWARD.

I DO THINK SOME OF THE SLOPE IS BECAUSE IT'S SO STEEP AND THEY HAVE A DRAINAGE EASILY IN THE BACK.

AND I THINK THEY HAVE, MOST OF THEIR TREES ARE FURTHER TO THE BACK OF THE, UM, WHERE THAT EASEMENT IS.

SO IT TAKES AWAY THE FLAT PART OF THEIR LOT.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE ZONING ITSELF DOES NOT CAUSE A HARDSHIP.

LET ME JUST PUT IT THAT WAY, BUT THERE IS A HARDSHIPS ON THAT LAW AND THERE ARE MITIGATING THOSE HARDSHIPS.

IT'S SUCH A NOVEL THING.

I NEVER HEARD SOMEBODY SAID, I DON'T WANT US TO OPEN THE BARN DOOR BECAUSE WE SEE SO MANY LIKE AUSTIN CASES.

AND, AND, UH, AND THAT WAS A BIT OF A RE LOOKING AT THE CASE.

I'M KIND OF COMING INTO THIS.

I HAD NO DOUBT ABOUT, ABOUT SUPPORTING OUR VETERANS HERE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT THAT WAS A BIT OF A RED FLAG FOR ME.

I FIND FOR ME ALSO, I HAD TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE THING AND LOOK AT THE SLOPE AND BETWEEN THE JS THEN AND WHAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR AND WHAT THEY HAD DONE TO MINIMIZE THEIR ASK.

UM, I WOULD BE AMENABLE TO THEM TAKING OUT THE KIDS I HAVE, BUT I THINK THAT'S A TEMPORARY THING.

KIDS GROW UP.

IT'S GOING TO GET OLD, IT'S GOING TO BE TAKEN DOWN AT SOME POINT.

SO I THINK THEY JUST PICKED THE WRONG HARDSHIP BECAUSE ZONING CAN'T CAUSE A HARDSHIP IN MY MIND.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

SURE.

WE HAVE DINNER HERE FIRST.

THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU.

I HAD AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT ON THE DOCUMENT.

THAT IS THE EXHIBIT DETAILING, THE AND PROPOSED AND PERVIOUS COVER, WHICH IS PAGE 12, C3 DASH 12.

IT SHOWS ON BOTH THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS.

IT'S LIKE A LITTLE WALKWAY THAT RUNS FROM THE BACK OF THE HOUSE DOWN TO THE, I GUESS THAT'S THE BACK PROPERTY LINE.

I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT EXACTLY THAT IS.

AND DOES IT GO ON TO ANY PROPERTY BEHIND THERE? AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S ALSO OWNED ABOUT AN OWNER? IT'S THAT GRAVEL PATHWAYS, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? YES.

MA'AM YES, YES.

THAT'S THAT'S ON THEIR PROPERTY, UM, IS, SO THEY DO OWN THAT.

WHAT DOES IT CONNECT TO? UH, I'M AFRAID I'LL HAVE TO DEFER TO THE OWNER ON THAT.

THEY'RE CONNECTING TO A COMMON GREENBELT AREA.

THERE'S A SMALL PAVED ROAD THAT AT TIMES IT GETS REALLY QUIET.

I'M SORRY, IF YOU CAN'T HEAR ME, IT CONNECTS TO A COMMON GREENBELT AREA OWNED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

AND SO KNOW IT'S NOT OWNED BY US.

AND YOU CAN, IS THAT, IS THAT THE HIND THIS BACK PROPERTY LINE THAT'S SHOWN ON THIS EXHIBIT? THAT'S RIGHT.

YES.

YOU CAN SEE THAT ON A C THREE, UH, FOUR SLASH TWO, UM, SORT OF A U SHAPE, UH, COMMON AREA, GREEN SPACE BEHIND ALL OF THE, UH, NORTH FACING AND, AND, UH, STATION PROPERTIES THERE.

AND, AND I GUESS I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE EXACTLY THIS DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS.

IS IT ON THAT COMMON PROPERTY OR IS IT ON THE BACK END OF THE REAR OF THIS LOT IT'S SALE? I'LL TELL YOU THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, CERTAINLY I THINK A SWIMMING POOL IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T FAULT ANYBODY FOR IT AND PUT A SWIMMING POOL THERE.

AND I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WANTING TO BUILD SOMETHING ON A SLOPE THAT THE CITY SAYS YOU SHOULDN'T BE BUILDING ON A, WHEN THERE APPEARS TO BE A AREA BEHIND WHERE YOU'RE PROPOSING TO PUT THE SWIMMING POOL AND YOU EVEN HAVE A PATH THAT GOES DOWN THAT WAY.

SO YOU WOULD ALREADY HAVE ACCESS TO THAT AREA.

I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO SUPPORT THIS.

CAUSE I DON'T REALLY SEE A HARDSHIP.

I SEE A HARDSHIP.

AND IN THAT YOU DON'T GET TO DO WHAT YOU WANT, WHERE YOU WANT TO DO IT, BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY THE HARDSHIP WE NEED TO FIND MR. CHAIRMAN.

YES, MICHAEL TOPOGRAPHY AND THE SLUG, DARRYL JUST TYPOGRAPHY HAS ALWAYS BEEN A HARDSHIP.

IT'S ALWAYS BEEN ACCEPTED AS A HARDSHIP AND THIS HOUSE PRIOR TO 1984, HE WOULDN'T EVEN BE HERE IF YOU HAD PUT HIS POOL.

AND PRIOR TO THAT, CAUSE IT WAS 1984 WHEN THE LAKE AUSTIN OVERLAY TOOK OVER HIS PROPERTY, BUT HIS PROPERTY EXISTED IN HIS HOME EXISTED PRIOR TO THE LAKE HOUSE AND OVERLAY, BUT TYPOGRAPHY AND I BELIEVE THAT'S PROBABLY WHERE I WOULD.

THAT'S WHERE I WOULD HAVE GONE IS A BONAFIDE HARDSHIP FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.

WELL, AND, AND SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND HERE IS THE ASK ON THIS.

UM, VARIANCE IS, UH, INCREASING THE,

[00:45:01]

UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER.

AND THE COVER OF THE POOL IS ONLY THE COPING OF THE POOL.

SO IT WHICH, YOU KNOW, THIS WIDE OF AN AREA AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE POOL.

UM, AND IT, UH, OBVIOUSLY IT'S TIED TO SLOPE, UH, AS THE ORDINANCE, UH, UH, UH, DICTATES IN LA, IS THERE ANYTHING, BUT WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT AMOUNT OF BEEN PRODUCED PEPPER.

I ASKED ME, I MIGHT HAVE MISSED IT, BUT WHEN WAS THE HOUSE, WHEN DID THE APPLICANT BUY THE HOUSE? WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN 2014, 2014.

SO THAT GIVES ME A LITTLE HEARTBURN BECAUSE I'M KIND OF SCREWED ON THIS AS FAR AS JUST NOT GETTING TO BE WHAT TO DO.

AND KNOWING THAT THAT WAS THE CASE WHEN YOU BOUGHT THE LAND.

SO I'M, I'M A LITTLE, I'M A LITTLE WEARY ON THE HEART AS WELL.

I UNDERSTAND TOPOGRAPHY, AND THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME, BUT, UM, I'M A LITTLE WEARY ABOUT SOMEONE BUYING SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN'T DO SOMETHING WITH, AND THEN THEY'RE UPSET THAT THEY CAN'T DO THAT THING WITH IT.

UM, I FEEL LIKE AS A BOARD TALKED ABOUT THAT MULTIPLE TIMES, AS FAR AS LIKE, WE'RE NOT HERE TO GIVE YOU WHAT YOU WANT.

THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT OUR, THAT'S NOT REALLY OUR FUNCTIONALITY WITHOUT THAT R-CHOP BUT IF SOMEONE HAD SOME PUSHBACK NOT PERSPECTIVE, UM, SOME NUANCE TO WHAT I JUST SAID, THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL FOR ME JUST TO SIT DOWN AND I PRAY WITH ALL OF Y'ALL IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE SUPPORT FROM THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS, UH, THE TOTAL ASK ON THIS PROJECT ON A LOT THAT IS 11,643 SQUARE FEET IS 225 SQUARE FEET.

IF YOU TAKE EVERYTHING THAT THEY'RE ASKING AND COMBINED TOGETHER.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M GOING WITH THE, WITH THE SLOPE.

AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT'S, IT IS FAR AWAY ENOUGH AND THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE THE ADJUSTMENTS TO INCREASE THE WATER COLLECTION SYSTEM.

OTHERWISE I AGREE.

I WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM, THE LAKE CONDITION THAT HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED YET, BUT MELISSA, I SEE YOUR HAND UP.

I'M ALWAYS WONDERING, OKAY.

MY FINDINGS AND SOMEONE'S OPINION.

OKAY.

IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO I APOLOGIZE FOR CONTINUING TO ASK OTHER COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS, BUT, BUT MICHAEL, IF, IF THIS LAW WAS ON, ON LAKE AUSTIN, IF IT WAS ON THE BLOCK, COULD YOU LIVE WITH THESE EXCEPTIONS? COULD YOU LIVE WITH THIS, BUT IT'S NOT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THAT WAS MY QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD APPLY TO THIS, WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD APPLY TO THIS LAW.

MAYBE I CAN SORT OF THE IDEA THAT IT SHOULDN'T, IN WHICH CASE IT'S AN, IN WHICH CASE IT WOULD BE A SLAM DUNK.

YES.

MY POINT IS THAT IS THAT I'M SORT OF ROLLING THIS AROUND AND I ACTUALLY AM KIND OF WARMING UP TO THE FACT TO THE IDEA THAT THAT SORT OF THIS STUFF SHOULDN'T APPLY TO THIS LOT, BECAUSE IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT REALLY WHAT LIKE AUSTIN ZONING WAS INTENDED FOR.

I JUST WANT EXACTLY NERVOUS ABOUT, I'M JUST VERY NERVOUS ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I MEAN, THE CASE WE JUST SAW EARLIER IS ANOTHER ONE OF THESE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES WHERE SOMEBODY DID SUBDIVIDED A LOT PRIOR TO THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE COMING IN, AND THEY DON'T THINK THAT IT SHOULD APPLY TO THEM CAUSE THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT IT WAS INTENDED FOR.

AND SO, ANYWAY, I'LL GET OFF MY SOAP BOX HERE, BUT THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING YOU THE QUESTION IS I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU AND I BOTH AGREED THAT IF THIS WAS ON THE BLUFF, THAT WAS NOT YOUR FINDINGS AND THE SAME THING I SEE BROKEN IN THE BACKGROUND, THE SAME THING BROKEN.

I READ, WE VISITED THESE MANY, MANY TIMES OVER THE YEARS CAUSE I'M A BLUFF AND IT HAD A WATERFRONT.

I PROBABLY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT IT, BUT IF IT GETS AWAY FROM THE LAKE, A LOT HAS TO DO WITH THE CAT SYSTEM, BECAUSE I THINK WHAT'S BEHIND IT BEING ADRENALINE IS GOING TO GO INTO THE BANK.

SO YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH YOUR RUNOFF, BUT IF THEY ARE GOING TO MANAGE THEIR RUNOFF AND HAVE OFFERED TO MANAGE IT, IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

NOT IT, NOT TO MAKE A PUN HERE, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS CASE ISN'T THE SLIPPERY SLOPE.

ARE THEY, DO YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP FOR AWHILE? YEAH.

I JUST WANT TO RESPOND TO LAST COMMENT ABOUT THE PURCHASING OF THE LAW, BECAUSE THIS COMES UP OFTEN,

[00:50:02]

IN MY OPINION, WE HAVE LOTS OF APPLICANTS THAT COME HERE AND THEY HAVE BOUGHT A LAW THAT HAS ISSUES AND THEY WANT TO GET A VARIANCE.

AND I THINK WE HAVE A PROCESS FOR THAT.

AND HE'S COMING TO THIS BOARD.

IF WE, IF THEY KNOW THAT THERE IS A PROCESS FOR THAT.

AND THEY THINK THAT THE ROD HAS A HARDSHIP, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A REASON FOR THEM NOT TO ASK BECAUSE WE HAVE A PROCESS TO ADDRESS THESE THINGS.

SO IF THEY HAD A REAL HEART SHIT, TO ME, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY KNOWING OR NOT KNOWING.

RIGHT.

AND BEFORE WE GO BACK TO MELISSA AND MELISSA, WE ARE COMING BACK TO YOU.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, I ALSO WOULD HAVE HEARTBURN A LITTLE BIT IF IT WAS FACING ONTO THE LAKE.

UM, I, IT ISN'T, UH, IT'S FACING ONTO A GREENBELT THAT PATIENT OFF TO THE LAKE.

IT'S QUITE A DISTANCE FROM BLAKE ACTUALLY.

UH, THE OTHER THING IS THAT, UH, POOLS ARE NOT UNUSUAL IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEXT DOOR AND COOPER SAY THEY HAVE A POOL.

ALRIGHT, MELISSA, UH, ANY FINAL WORDS BEFORE YOU DO YOUR FINDINGS? NO, I'M JUST, I THINK I MUST BE GETTING A LITTLE BIT OLDER BECAUSE I'VE ACTUALLY SEEN THIS PROPERTY BEFORE.

AND I REMEMBER IT BECAUSE OF THE SHAPE OF A DECK.

CAUSE WE ACTUALLY HEARD A CASE HERE IN 2015 AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO FIND YOUR HOUSE IS ON A LOT THAT'S SLOPED AND THEN YOUR USABLE BACKYARD SQUARE FOOTAGE IS THIS BIG.

AND SO I KIND OF, BECAUSE THE POOL IS ACTUALLY GOING IN AN AREA WHERE THERE AREN'T TREES AND IT IS A GRASSY AREA THAT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT AND, YOU KNOW, WITH MY LUCK, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT KIDS PROBABLY IN COLLEGE THAT THEY BUILT A LITTLE PLAYHOUSE FOR.

UM, YEAH.

OKAY.

LET'S MOVE ON TO THE FINDINGS.

AND, AND, AND AGAIN, HAD YOU ACCEPTED OR, OR, UH, ANY OF THE OTHER CONDITIONS, I HAVE ONE CONDITION THAT IS GONNA ATTACH THEIR VARIANCE FOR, UM, RAINWATER COLLECTION.

OKAY.

RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT.

SO THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE, UH, WITH THE ADDITIONAL RAINWATER COLLECTION, UH, MOTION BY MELISSA AND A SECOND BY OTHER.

SO IF YOU CAN DO THE FINDINGS WILL THEN DO ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY, DO NOT ALLOW FOR A REASONABLE USE AS THIS LOT WAS PLANNED WHEN IT WAS ZONED SF TWO AND THE SLOPE RESTRICTIONS AND THE NET SIDE AREA CALCULATIONS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN REQUIRED AT THE TIME THAT THE SUBDIVISION WAS PLANNED AND FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO AN EXISTING HOME, THE SENDING CAP, CERTAIN OVERLAYING IS VERY RESTRICTIVE AND THIS DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR LA AND IT'S ALREADY, UM, CONSTRUCTED.

AND SO AN ACCESSORY ADDITION, IT IS NOT UNREASONABLE TO ARCH CHIP.

THE BRILLIANCE IS REQUESTED AS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY IS THE HOME SITS ON A HEAVILY SLOPED LOT.

IT HAS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN THE BACK.

IT IS HEAVILY TREED AND AS PROPERTY WAS PLANNED AT HER SFTS, IT REALLY DOESN'T MEET THE CRITERIA FOR LA ZONING.

AND IT'S FARTHER BACK FROM THE LAKE AND HAS A GREEN BELT AND A, A DRAINAGE WAY THAT THAT WOULD FILTER ANY ADDITIONAL GRAY WATER FROM THE 225 SQUARE FEET, UH, REQUESTED THE HARDSHIP IS NOT GENERAL AREA, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.

AS OTHER HOMES DON'T HAVE THE EXTREME SLOPES RIGHT OUTSIDE THEIR BACKYARD AND WITH THE DISTANCE FROM THE LAKE AND THE MAJORITY OF THE SUBDIVISION BEING ZONED SFC.

IT WOULDN'T BE POSSIBLE TO BUILD ANYTHING HERE WITHOUT A VARIANCE AS WE'VE SEEN ALREADY, OR YOUR CHARACTER, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER.

JASON, THE PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPAIR THE USE OF JASON POPPING A LOT OF PAIR OF THE PURPOSE OF THE REGULATIONS BECAUSE OF THE ZONING DISTRICT, IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.

AS MANY HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD THEIR OWN POOL.

UM, IT WON'T BE VISIBLE FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.

AND, UH, IT IS BEING DESIGNED TO, TO PUT IN A VERY MINIMAL, I'VE BEEN KIRBY IMPERVIOUS COVER AND RAINWATER COLLECTION WILL BE FIRED FOR THE ADDITIONAL 225 FOOT A SEAT IN THE SYSTEM THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY FOR THE DECK.

THOSE PROPERTIES ARE SIX AND THEN I'M DONE.

THANKS.

OKAY.

UM, ALL RIGHT.

UM, ANY, ANY

[00:55:01]

OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE VOTE? AND AGAIN, THIS WILL TAKE, UH, ELENA MY CORRECT NINE OUT OF THE 11 VOTES TO PASS.

YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

VERY GOOD.

UH, BOOM BAILEY.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, JESSICA COHEN? YES.

ALRIGHT.

UH, OUT OF CAROLL.

YES.

WELL, THAT'S A HAWTHORNE.

YES.

THANKS WILLIAM HODGE.

YES.

DON LAYTON.

BOLWELL YES.

WELL MCDANIEL.

YES.

THANK YOU.

DARRYL PRUITT.

YES.

RIVERA.

YES.

ALRIGHT.

CAN YOU ASK ME TO SMITH? YES.

RIGHT.

THANK YOU, MICHAEL BOTTLE? YES.

ALL RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT.

YOU'VE GOTTEN YOUR VERY INTERESTING, JUST A MATTER OF HOUSEKEEPING HERE.

WHERE'S THAT? UM, I DO NOT THINK WE DID FINDINGS ON C1.

UM, AND, UH, MICHAEL, WERE YOU INCLUDING THE FINDINGS? THE FINDINGS FROM THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE FINDINGS WILL BE DEFINED IT'S OKAY.

YES, SIR.

I'M GETTING OLD.

OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

ALRIGHT.

THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT.

UM, SO, UM, MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.

[C-4 C15-2020-0044 Eduardo Ponce for Scott McElwain 1209 Taylor Street]

THIS IS, UH, C UH, C 15 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO FOUR FOUR.

UH, A PONCE, UH, FOR SCOTT, UH, MICK ELWIN.

I HAD, UH, 1209 TAYLOR STREET AND, UH, WE HAVE SOME FULL SHEET, UH, ADJACENT FLYERS TO SPEAK, UH, IN FAVOR OF THE VARIANCE MR. FIRE, IF YOU'RE AVAILABLE, I AM AVAILABLE AS LEAVING BEAR MEMBERS.

HE SAYS, JASON FRYER FROM FORESIGHT STUDIO HAS GOTTEN A BAD RAIN, UH, FEBRUARY OF UNITS AND GET THROUGH AS QUICKLY AS HE CAN.

AND WE ARE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE ON 10TH STREET.

THIS IS A CONDITION IN WHICH YOU SEE YOUR SHADOW FROM THE LIMITED OUTSIDE WITH 57 52 56 47, ON HIS PROPERTY ALLOWING FOR A RESOLUTION OF LIMITS.

, MAINTAIN THE PHYSICAL FEATURES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TRYING TO MAINTAIN, INCREASE NUMBER WITH HOMEOWNERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND SSQ AND THE, BY DROPPING IT DOWN TO THE 57 56 37, WE WILL BE ABLE TO SATISFY ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN ADU ON THIS PROPERTY.

AND THAT RAISE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM THAT I CAN ANSWER FOR YOU TODAY.

ONE ITEM THAT I BRING UP TO ALL OF THE ARCHITECTS IS THAT ON ANY DOCUMENTS THAT YOU PRESENT, THEY NEED TO HAVE THE DISCLAIMER REQUIRED BY TBA E SO FOR FUTURE REFERENCE, UM, THAT NEEDS TO ABSOLUTELY MATT.

YEP.

YEP.

BUT I HAD WAS, UM, A TWO FAMILY, UM, JONING IS LIMITED TO TWO STORIES, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A, A THIRD STORY HERE.

I WAS ATTIC, ESSENTIALLY THAT WE WOULD CONSUME IF IT WAS POPPING, WERE APPROVED.

AND THIS WAS VERY MUCH IN KEEPING WITH THE STRETCHERS SEVERAL.

SO THERE'S A HABIT OF SHOWED THAT HABITABLE ATTIC RESTRUCTURE HABITS, WHICH WOULD NOT EXTEND PAST THE FOOTPRINT.

OKAY.

[01:00:01]

WHAT'S THAT, BUT IT'S STILL, DEPENDING ON SATISFYING ALL THE REQUIREMENTS.

I JUST PERSONALLY, I THINK WITH THE DORMERS AND THE WINDOWS AND THAT THIRD STORY, BECAUSE IN THE THIRD STORY, YOU HAVE THE MASTER BEDROOM, MECHANICAL MASTER BATH, AS WELL AS, UM, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE TENANT, I THINK OF BEING IN THE ATTIC, IT'S SORT OF HIDDEN IN THE ATTIC WHERE THIS HAS TO MAKE THE MASSIVE, IS THIS A LITTLE MORE, AND ESPECIALLY WHEN WE COMPARE IT TO THE HOUSE.

OKAY.

UH, WILLIAM.

YES.

SO, UM, QUESTION AND THEN A STATEMENT.

UM, WHAT I CONFIRM WITH THE APPLICANT THAT THIS NEW PROPERTY, THIS NEW BUILDING, YOU ARE CALLING THIS THE SECONDARY RESIDENCE, OR CONSIDERING THIS, BECAUSE I SAVED THIS, TRIED TO SAY THIS IN THE NICEST WAY POSSIBLE.

THIS IS I DO THIS EVERY DAY.

YOU WILL NOT BE GIVEN THE PERMISSION BY RESIDENTIAL REVIEW.

DID YOU HAVE A THREE STORY, THREE LEVEL ADU WITH A HABITABLE ATTIC, IF THE, IF THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOT, INCLUDING HER HABITABLE? WELL, TWO THINGS HERE, THE FIRST IS, IS THAT THE DIFFERENT FOR TWO FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS, YOUR SECONDARY RESIDENCE IS LIMITED TO TWO STORIES, TWO LEVELS.

THEY DON'T ALLOW THIS SORT OF LEVEL.

IF THE STATIC EXEMPTION IN EVERYTHING I'M SAYING, I CAN TELL YOU THAT I I'VE TRIED EVERYTHING FOR THE PAST 14 YEARS, TRIED EVERY POSSIBLE WAY.

UM, THE SECOND IS THAT IF YOU, EVEN IF YOU'RE AT AN EXEMPTION, EXEMPTS YOU FROM GROSS FLOOR AREA AND CALCULATION OF LEADING YOU IT'S SUFFERED SECOND PERIOD RESIDENCE ITSELF.

I'M GOING TO ADD THAT IN.

AND SO, UNLESS YOU ARE IN WHAT YOU'RE LIMITED TO, LET'S SAY THAT YOU GET A VARIANCE FOR HAVING THIS LAW, WHICH IS UNDER 57 50.

LET'S SAY THAT YOU GET A VARIANCE FOR THAT AREA OF YOUR, YOUR, YOUR SECONDARY RESIDENCE IS STILL BY CODE BY THE REGULATION, WHICH, WHICH REGULATES TWO FAMILY RESIDENCES.

YOU'RE STILL LIVING IN 15% OF LOT AREA.

AND SO, SO I I'M, I'M I'M I GOT TO COME OUT RIGHT OUT AND SAY, THIS IS THAT I DON'T FEEL THAT THIS IS WISE FOR THIS BOARD TO APPROVE A VARIANCE FOR, I CAN FOR THIS CONDITION, WHICH IS NOT GOING TO BE, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE APPROVED.

UM, I'M NOT A, I'M NOT A FINGER ESSENTIAL REVIEWER, BUT I I'VE DONE ENOUGH OF THIS, THAT I CAN SAY THAT THIS IS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD NOT BE APPROVABLE.

UM, AND I I'M SYMPATHETIC TO I'M COMPLETELY SYMPATHETIC.

I, UM, I'M GOING TO SAY, SAY SOMETHING VERY UNPOPULAR, WHICH IS, I DON'T BELIEVE IT.

I DON'T SEE ANY REASON ON A BASIC SENTENCE, WHY YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO THIS.

HOWEVER, I KNOW THE RULES AND THE RULES ARE SAYING THAT MORE ADU IS GOING TO NEED TO BE NO BIGGER THAN 847 SQUARE FEET NEVER INCLUDED ANY, UM, ANY, UM, IDIOTIC EXEMPTIONS OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE.

UM, I'M GONNA MAKE A WEIRD SUGGESTION, WHICH IS I'M GOING TO SUGGEST YOU WOULD TALK.

AND I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT YOU, IF YOU WANT TO STILL DO TWO UNITS ON THE SLOT, YOU WOULD RETURN WITH A SCHEME WHERE THIS HOUSE IS CONSIDERED THE PRIMARY FRONT SONG, HOLLY, BECAUSE AS YOU SAY, THERE ARE TIMES I KNOW THIS AREA VERY WELL, AND YES, WE HAVE THESE THREE BLOCKS FROM TAYLOR, HOLLY, AND YES, WE HAVE PLENTY OF RESIDENCES FACING ALL ON THE SAME LOSS POINT IS FACING TAYLOR.

BUT DID YOU CONSIDER YOU EITHER, I GUESS, WITHDRAW, MODIFY

[01:05:01]

YOUR VARIANCE REQUEST TO, TO CONSIDER THE HOUSE FACING TAYLOR AS THE SECOND YEAR OF RESIDENCE, YOU ARE COMMITTED TO DESIGNATE A, AN EXISTING, AN EXISTING STRUCTURE AS A SECONDARY RESIDENCE.

THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, HINGE UPON MY QUESTION ABOUT WHAT IS THE AREA OF THAT EXISTING RESIDENCE.

I KNOW IT'S PROBABLY VERY SMALL.

MAYBE YOU COULD ANSWER WHAT IS THE EXISTING HOUSE I'VE ASKED THEM, GIVEN CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROJECT.

WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO APPROVE WITH VARIANCE? IF WE UNDER THE CONDITION THAT WE, WE MADE THE EXISTING STRUCTURES, THE ADL, AND WE BASICALLY MAKE THE NEW STRUCTURE AS THE PRIMARY, I'M GOING TO DEFINE THE YOUNGEST IN TERMS OF MY TIME ON THE BOARD.

I'M ACTUALLY THE NEWEST MEMBER OF THIS BOARD ASSIGNMENT AND FAR TOO SERIOUS COLLEAGUES HERE ABOUT ONLY THAT THERE, THERE ARE SOME ISSUES WITH POLICY AND GOT JUST BEFORE WE GO.

UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR IS THAT THE ASK LIST HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DESIGN.

AND I THINK IT'S NOT APPROACHING IT.

THEY WERE SEEING THIS DESIGN BECAUSE I AGREE.

I'M NOT SURE ON THE STUDENTS TO ALLOW A SUBSTANDARD BLOCK, I THINK IN TERMS OF SIZE.

SO THEY HAVE TO HAVE 57, 50 SQUARE FEET IS REQUIRED AND THEY HAVE A 56 47.

SO THAT'S THE ASK IS, IS BUILD A BOLT WITH TWO, UM, TWO, SO TWO FAMILY, LOT WITH LESS SQUARE FOOTAGE.

GO AHEAD, BRO.

OKAY.

JUST QUICKLY.

I THOUGHT HE SAID THAT HE SAID 1864 ON THE EXISTING, NOT EIGHT 64, WHICH IS CORRECT.

DO YOU WANT ME TO SEE IT? 800, 801,000 SQUARE FOOT.

IT WAS A SAID 1000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE EASILY IS VERY MUCH THE CASE.

THIS PROJECT IS SO FAR IN THERE.

WE'D LIKE TO PUT A PROJECT PROPERTY ON HER, BUT WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY PURPOSELY ON THE PROPERTY TO THE POINT OF BERLIN SECOND STRUCTURE.

AND WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS YOU MAY WANT TO POSTPONE TO EXPLORE WHETHER YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO AND FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU NEED.

EVEN THOUGH TO ME, THE VARIANCE, ISN'T A PROBLEM TO ME.

AND YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT ALL THAT OTHER STUFF THAT HAS NOTHING REALLY TO DO WITH WHAT YOU'RE ASKING HERE.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A LOT SIZE BEING JUST A HUNDRED