CONCEPTUALIZED TO. I SAID, ABSOLUTELY, WE DON'T HAVE A PARK ON THE WEST
[00:00:05]
SIDE OF THE PRECINCT. I THINK THE NEAREST PARK FROM HERE IS TRES LAGOS.YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. WELL GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.
[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER, ESTABLISH QUORUM]
AND WELCOME TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING. TODAY IS APRIL 3RD, 2024. THE TIME IS 529.CAN I GET A CITY STAFF? YES, MR. CHAIRMAN. QUORUM.
YES, SIR. WE DO ESTABLISH A QUORUM.
WE DO HAVE BOARD MEMBER, GREGORY VASQUEZ, VICE CHAIR.
MARK MORAN, CHAIR. BOARD MEMBER RUBEN RUIZ JR.
BOARD MEMBER ALICIA GARZA, BOARD MEMBER.
MR. ALMAGUER MISS ALEXANDRA RODRIGUEZ AND RONNIE CAVAZOS.
[A. Prayer]
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.CAN EVERYONE PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN PRAYER? LET US PRAY. HEAVENLY FATHER, WE COME TO YOU TODAY ASKING FOR YOUR GUIDANCE, WISDOM AND SUPPORT AS WE BEGIN TODAY'S MEETING.
HELP US TO ENGAGE IN MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION.
ALLOW US TO GROW CLOSER AS A GROUP AND NURTURE THE BONDS OF COMMUNITY.
FILL US WITH YOUR GRACE, LORD GOD, AS WE MAKE DECISIONS THAT MIGHT AFFECT OUR CITY AND CONTINUE TO REMIND US THAT ALL THAT WE DO HERE TODAY,
[B. Pledge of Allegiance]
ALL THAT WE ACCOMPLISH, IS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR CITY.WE ASK THESE THINGS IN YOUR NAME.
AMEN. MR. CAN YOU PLEASE LEAD US IN OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.
[2. CERTIFICATION OF PUBLIC NOTICE]
ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. PLEASE BE SEATED.CAN PLEASE CITY STAFF PLEASE VERIFY THAT THE PROPER CERTIFICATION OF PUBLIC NOTICE WAS GIVEN. YES, SIR. MR. CHAIRMAN, STAFF DID NOTIFY THE PUBLIC AS PER THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. ON THURSDAY, MARCH 28TH AT 5 P.M..
[3. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST]
THANK YOU FOR THAT. CAN I ALSO GET MR. OCHOA ON DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST? CAN WE ELABORATE ON THAT, PLEASE? YES, SIR.UNDER STATE LAW, A CONFLICT, A CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS IF A MEMBER OR CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THAT PERSON'S FAMILY HAS A QUALIFYING FINANCIAL INTEREST IN AN AGENDA ITEM. IF THERE IS A CONFLICT OF THE MEMBER, CAN'T PARTICIPATE OR VOTE ON THE ITEM.
[4. PUBLIC COMMENTS]
ARE THERE ANY CONFLICTS TO DISCLOSE? THANK YOU. YES. THANK YOU.PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. IF A RESIDENT DESIRES TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE NOTIFY THE CHAIRPERSON PRIOR TO THE START OF THE MEETING.
A SPOKESPERSON FOR THE LARGE GROUPS IS REQUIRED.
WE ASK FOR EVERYONE'S COOPERATION AND FOLLOWING THESE PROCEDURES.
NEXT ITEM. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE MEETING PROCEDURES USED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. ALL ITEMS ARE GENERALLY CONSIDERED IF THEY APPEAR ON THE AGENDA AS EACH ITEM IS INTRODUCED.
STAFF WILL PRESENT ITS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION ON THE ITEM BEING CONSIDERED.
THE PARTY MAKING THE REQUEST MAY MAKE A PRESENTATION, AND MAY ADDRESS THE BOARD ON ANY ISSUES ARISING DURING THE DISCUSSION OF THE ITEM BEING CONSIDERED. ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE DESIRING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION MAY DO SO. A 3 TO 5 MINUTE TIME LIMIT WILL BE GIVEN TO EACH PERSON INTERESTED IN SPEAKING ON THE ITEM. THE USE OF A SPOKESPERSON FOR LARGE GROUPS OF PEOPLE WILL BE REQUIRED.
ONCE THE CHAIR CLOSES THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE BOARD MAY QUESTION ANYONE AND MAINTAIN ANY DISCUSSION WHICH CLARIFIES THE PROPOSAL AND WILL THEN TAKE WHAT ACTION IT BELIEVES TO BE APPROPRIATE. A MINIMUM OF FOUR VOTES ARE REQUIRED FOR AN ITEM TO BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD.
[00:05:04]
MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM.MINUTES. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR MARCH 6TH, 2024 REGULAR MEETING. I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP FOR A VOTE FROM THE BOARD.
I MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
I HAVE MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY MISTER CANTU A SECOND.
I SECOND THAT MOTION. MISTER SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
MOVING ON TO OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.
CONSIDER A VARIANCE TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, ARTICLE THREE, SECTION 3.102 STANDARDS FOR RURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, BEING LOT 12 MADISON PARK PHASE TWO SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 3044 MADISON AVENUE, AS REQUESTED BY ROCHAS HOMES, LLC.
GOOD EVENING. ALEX GONZALEZ, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT.
THIS APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE SETBACKS FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED BUILDING STANDARDS. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A ONE FOOT REDUCTION OF THE SEVEN FOOT SIDE SETBACK AND A FIVE FOOT REDUCTION OF THE 15 FOOT REAR SETBACK.
AT THE MARCH 6TH, 2024 MEETING.
THE ITEM WAS TABLED PENDING APPROVAL FROM THE SUBDIVISION'S HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
THE APPLICANT HAS SINCE SUBMITTED A LETTER FROM THEIR HOA FOR CONSIDERATION.
STAFF MAILED A NOTICE OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO 38 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE RECEIVED NO COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THIS REQUEST.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REDUCTION TO THE SIDE SETBACK AND DISAPPROVAL OF THE REDUCTION IN THE REAR SETBACK.
THANK YOU FOR THAT. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY HERE TODAY REPRESENTING HOMES LLC? I WOULD LIKE TO COME TO THE FRONT AND SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ROCCO'S HOMES.
CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD. GOOD AFTERNOON AND BOARD MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS CLAUDETTE AGUAYO, AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF ROCHAS HOMES.
WELL, I'M HERE TO LIKE MISS ALEX SAID ON MARCH 6TH, THE VARIANCE REQUEST WAS SUBMITTED BY ROCHAS HOMES.
THE PURPOSE OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST WAS TO CHANGE THE SITE SETBACK FROM 7FT TO 6FT.
I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL HAVE THE.
YES, I HAVE MY I'LL SHOW IT TO THEM.
YEAH. AND THE REAR SETBACK FROM 15FT TO 10FT.
I KNOW WE HAD RECEIVED A PARTIAL APPROVAL.
HOWEVER, YOU ALL ALSO WANTED TO SEE A LETTER THAT THE MADISON PARK'S HOA WAS ALLOWING THIS, AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.
SO ATTACHED IS A DIGITAL VERSION OF OUR FLOOR PLAN FOR THE LOT 12.
THANK YOU FOR THAT. DO YOU NOTICE YOU HAVE THE, R IN THE LETTER THIS TIME.
AND MISS NORMA GARCIA HAPPENS TO BE THE, I'M ASSUMING, PROPERTY MANAGER FOR. YES.
SHE'S. MISS NORMA GARCIA IS A PROPERTY MANAGER.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANY CONCERNS FROM THE BOARD? I WANT TO ASK MR. GALE.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, AND WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DO IS TAKE ONE ITEM AT A TIME. AND.
THE FIRST ITEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON IS GOING TO BE THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE ONE FOOT REDUCTION OF THE SEVEN FOOT SIDE SETBACK.
SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THAT ONE.
CAN I GET A MOTION FROM THE BOARD?
[00:10:09]
I MOTION TO APPROVE THE THE SETBACKS ON THE SITE THE SITE TO SIX FEET.I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY MR. GARZA THE REDUCTION OF ONE ONE FOOT SIDE SETBACK.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD NOW AND OPEN IT UP FOR THE FIVE FOOT REDUCTION OF THE 15 FOOT REAR SETBACK. MOTION TO APPROVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY MR. MCGUIRE. CAN I GET A SECOND? MR. CANTU SECONDS THAT MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, CONSIDER VARIANCE TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE THREE LOT AND DESIGN STANDARDS BEING LOT NINE TANGLEWOOD TERRACE PHASE TWO SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 1001 WEST TANGLEWOOD, AS REQUESTED BY ALEJANDRO LONGORIA RAMIREZ.
GOOD EVENING. I AM RICARDO FARLEY, PLANNER IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
SO FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS THE ITEM THAT'S GOING TO BE CONSIDERED.
HERE WE SEE A CARPORT AND A RESIDENTIAL IN FRONT OF A RESIDENTIAL HOME.
SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD AND SEE WHAT CAUSED US TO GET TO THIS POINT WHERE VARIANCE WOULD BE REQUIRED.
OKAY. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS IT APPLIES TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURE STRUCTURES, IN THIS CASE THE CARPORT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING 18 FOOT ENCROACHMENT FOR CARPORT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE TEN FOOT ENCROACHMENT WHICH IS ALLOWED, WHICH IS ALLOWED BY THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SO THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF TANGLEWOOD TERRACE PHASE TWO SUBDIVISION THAT WAS RECORDED IN 2019. SO WHAT HAPPENED? THE WAY THAT THIS CAME TO OUR ATTENTION IS THAT CODE ENFORCEMENT DOING THEIR JOB, PATROLLING THE CITY, NOTICED THAT THIS WAS THIS CARPORT WAS BEING BUILT WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT. SO WHAT CODE ENFORCEMENT DID NEXT.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE PHOTO THERE, THEY PUT THEY POSTED A STOP WORK ORDER.
SO BY POSTING A STOP WORK ORDER, THEY GOT THE APPLICANT'S ATTENTION.
THE APPLICANT CAME TO THE CITY WITH A SITE PLAN, STAFF REVIEW THE SITE PLAN AND NOTICED THE ENCROACHMENT.
SO STAFF MAILED NOTICES OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO 30 NEIGHBOR AND PROPERTY OWNERS.
AND WE DID RECEIVE OVER 23 IN FAVOR OF THIS CARPORT, 23 WITHIN THE 300 FOOT RADIUS.
13 WERE NOT. THEY WERE IN FAVOR, BUT THEY WERE NOT WITHIN THE 300 FOOT RADIUS.
SO THIS PROPERTY IS ON A CUL DE SAC.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S AN IRREGULAR SHAPED LOT.
THE CARPORT MEASURES 22FT WIDE BY 18FT IN LENGTH.
MORE OR LESS GOING TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
CONSIDERING THE PROPERTY LINE TEN FEET FROM THE BACK OF CURB WHERE THE DRIVEWAY APRON BREAKS WITH THE DRIVEWAY.
USUALLY THERE'S AN EXPANSION JOINT AT THAT LOCATION, SO THIS IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR.
THE CARPORT, AGAIN, ACCORDING TO UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, MAY ENCROACH INTO A FRONT SETBACK BY A MAXIMUM OF TEN FEET.
NOW, AS FAR AS THE RECOMMENDATION, AS FAR AS THE RECOMMENDATION, IT HAS COME TO STAFF'S KNOWLEDGE JUST RECENTLY THAT THERE IS A LEGITIMATE HARDSHIP IN THIS CASE. HIPA LAW PREVENTS ME FROM GOING FORWARD AS TO THE EXACT HARDSHIP THAT THIS FAMILY HAVE. WHY THEY WOULD NEED THE CARPORT.
SO WE WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CARPORT CONTINGENT THAT IT GOES TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
I DO BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
PLEASE. MR. LONGORIA. GOOD EVENING, BOARD MEMBERS. MY NAME IS ALEJANDRO LONGORIA.
AND THE REASON I'M HERE IS, LIKE HE SAID, SORRY.
[00:15:02]
MR.. MR.. FARLEY. THANK YOU.THANK YOU FOR PROVING, FIRST OF ALL, OUR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
THE REASON I'M ASKING FOR THIS CARPORT TO BE ALLOWED TO TO BE FINISHED.
FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO MENTION THAT I DO TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR NOT REQUESTING A PERMIT. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IF I ASKED HOA, I WOULD BE FINE. SO THE PRESIDENT MENTIONED THAT IT WAS THERE WAS NO NO CONCERN THAT THEY WOULD ALLOW ME TO BUILD IT.
SO I MOVED FORWARD AND I LOOK AT AN APPRAISAL.
THERE WAS A AN APPRAISAL THAT I HAD DONE AT THE HOUSE.
THEY SAID THAT I NEEDED A TEN FOOT SETBACK.
NOW, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD CALL IT, I GUESS, LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, BUT I ASSUMED THAT MY PROPERTY STARTED WHERE THE CURVE IS AT.
BUT I GUESS IT STARTS FURTHER IN PAST THE SIDEWALK.
SO I MEASURED TEN FEET FROM THE CURVE AND THAT'S WHERE I PUT THE POST.
ACTUALLY IT WAS TEN FEET, TEN INCHES, SO IT'S WELL WITHIN MY PROPERTY.
THE POST. THE POST IS THE OVERHANG IS PROTRUDING INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY SO HE WOULDN'T HAVE TO ADJUST THE OVERHANG.
YES. AND I AM WILLING TO TO GO AHEAD AND, YOU KNOW, CUT PART OF IT AND BRING IT BACK TO, TO MEET THE, THE REQUIREMENT AS RECOMMENDED.
NOW THERE IS OTHER CARPORTS IN THE SUBDIVISION WHICH HAVE THEIR POSTS ENCROACHING INTO THE EASEMENT.
ONE OF THEM IS RIGHT UP UNTIL THE, THE, THE EDGE OF THE SIDEWALK.
BUT YOU KNOW, I'M OKAY IF YOU ALL CAN APPROVE AT LEAST TO TO THE MY PROPERTY LINE.
NOW, THREE REASONS WHY I'M REQUESTING THAT I LIVE IN A CUL DE SAC.
SO THAT TAKES AWAY ABOUT 10 TO 15FT OF MY DRIVEWAY.
SO I'M AT A DISADVANTAGE THERE.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M REQUESTING TO ENCROACH INTO THOSE TEN FEET SETBACK.
ALSO PROVIDE PROTECTION FOR MY VEHICLES.
BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE LAST REASON IS MY DAUGHTER SUFFERS FROM A SKIN DISORDER. AND, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH WE WE WEREN'T GONNA INCLUDED TALKING TO MY WIFE THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS, WE DECIDED TO TO INCLUDE THAT.
AND THAT'S REALLY THE REASON WHY I WANT TO BUILD IT.
SHE SUFFERS OF SOME MOUTHFUL, BUT IT'S IT'S CALLED PITYRIASIS ALBA.
SO SHE GETS SPOTS THROUGHOUT HER WHOLE BODY.
AND WHEN SHE'S EXPOSED TO HIGH TEMPERATURES, DIRECT SUNLIGHT, SHE BECOMES REALLY ITCHY AND IRRITATES STATES ARE ALSO, YOU KNOW, RATCHETS OR OUTBREAKS.
AND DURING THE SUMMER THE HEAT MAKES IT WORSE.
BUT DURING THE WINTER SHE KIND OF RECOVERS FROM IT, BUT IT LEAVES WHITE SPOTS THROUGHOUT HER BODY.
SO HER MEDICAL PROVIDER TOLD US THAT DECREASING THE EXPOSURE TO DIRECT SUNLIGHT.
AND I DO HAVE A MEDICAL EXCUSE HERE WOULD TREMENDOUSLY HELP.
SO I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE IT IF Y'ALL COULD APPROVE THAT.
THANK YOU FOR THAT, MR. LONGORIA. YES.
SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
YES, SIR. WE'RE SEEING THIS MORE AND MORE. WE ACTUALLY HAD A MEETING A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO WHERE IT WAS ANOTHER GENTLEMAN, AND WE SEE IT AROUND TOWN A LOT.
SO I SEE THIS MORE OF A STRUCTURE.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT MAYBE CODE ENFORCEMENT OR INSPECTION DEPARTMENT DOING, LET'S SAY WINDSTORM? BECAUSE THERE HAS TO BE SOME SORT OF REGULATION AT ONE POINT WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO SEE A WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE STRUCTURES UP IN THE FRONT. AND AT WHAT POINT ARE THEY SAFE TO WHERE WE HAVE STRONG WINDS OR SOMETHING, WHERE WE SAW A COUPLE OF MAYBE LAST YEAR, I THINK, WHERE MOST OF THE APARTMENTS HAD THE ALL THE CARPORTS KNOCKED DOWN AND EVERYTHING.
AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT CREATES A CONCERN BECAUSE WE'RE SEEING A LOT MORE IN THE CITY.
AND I FEEL WE IF WE SET A PRECEDENT RIGHT NOW WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, IT'S GOING TO OPEN UP FOR A WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD TO PUT STRUCTURES UP.
AND AT WHAT POINT IS SOMETHING LIKE THIS NOT MORE OF IT'S ACTUALLY TALLER THAN THE HOUSE.
IT'S I SEE IT MORE OF A METALLIC STRUCTURE THAT I FEEL MAY NEED SOME ENGINEERING.
I KNOW IT'S I FEEL, WHAT, 150FT² OR WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM? WELL IF YOU NOTICE, ON THE RECOMMENDATION ON THE NEXT PAGE, IT SAYS SO WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
RIGHT. AND IT SAYS IF APPROVED, THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS DURING THE PERMITTING PROCESS.
SO BUILDING INSPECTION, IF THE BUILDING IS OVER OR THE STRUCTURE IS OVER A CERTAIN SQUARE FOOTAGE.
THEY WOULD REQUIRE A WINDSTORM DESIGN BECAUSE I SEE IT MORE LIKE A CONCERN, MORE FOR THE SAFETY OF OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY BUILDING PLANNING AND ALSO THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AS WELL. OKAY. ALSO, WHAT I WANTED TO SAY IS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT ALL THE DIFFERENT CARPORTS THAT ARE POPPING UP EVERYWHERE, BUT WE'RE LEANING TOWARDS NOT
[00:20:04]
AMENDING THE CODES TO LEAVING THEM THE WAY THAT THEY ARE.SO THE PROCESS WOULD STILL BE THE SAME FOR THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN VIOLATION TO COME TO THIS BOARD AND SEEK A VARIANCE.
SO HE'S DOING THE RIGHT THING. THERE WAS A, I BELIEVE, 4 OR 5 OTHER VIOLATIONS IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DIDN'T DO THE RIGHT THING.
THEY DIDN'T COME FORWARD AND APPLY FOR A VARIANCE.
THEY JUST KIND OF LEFT IT AS IS AND THEY'LL HAVE THEIR TIME IN COURT.
SO THOSE CASES AREN'T FORGOTTEN.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE GOING AFTER THOSE PEOPLE. YEAH. AND I FEEL LIKE WE'RE GETTING TO A POINT WHERE WE MIGHT NEED TO MAYBE ASSIGN AN ACTUAL COMMITTEE JUST FOR THESE PARTICULAR STRUCTURES BECAUSE WE SEE THEM.
I MEAN, A LOT JUST IN NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND THERE'S YOU SAID 23 APPROVALS FOR THIS THAT WERE FOR THE THE STRUCTURE.
SO THAT LETS US KNOW THAT THERE'S, YOU KNOW, APPROVAL ON IT, BUT IT JUST COMES DOWN TO AT WHAT POINT ARE WE WALKING INTO NEIGHBORHOOD OR LOOKING AT NEIGHBORHOODS. AND IT'S JUST A BUNCH OF STRUCTURES IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSES. AND TODAY WE'RE SEEING ONE THAT'S MAYBE NINE FEET TALL, AND TOMORROW WE'LL SEE ONE THAT'S A TWO STORY WITH A STORAGE ON THE TOP.
IT'S THAT WAS JUST QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE THAT IT BECOMES MORE OF A SAFETY CONCERN THAN ANYTHING OF THE ACTUAL COVERING OF THE BOARD APPROVES THIS VARIANCE HERE TONIGHT.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE CORRECTLY.
HE WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO GET A BUILDING PERMIT AND MAKE SURE THAT IT MEETS THE MINIMUM BUILDING CODES THAT WE HAVE, AND THEN GO THROUGH PLANNING OR THROUGH US RIGHT NOW TO GET THAT SETBACK APPROVED ON THAT STRUCTURE.
EXCUSE ME, BUT THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AGAIN, PLEASE. OKAY. MR. GARCIA, BASED ON YOUR QUESTION, I DID BUILD IT TO LOOK KIND OF LIKE THIS.
HAVE THE SAME STRUCTURE OF THE GARAGE, SO IT COULD LOOK LIKE IT'S PART OF THE GARAGE, RIGHT? SO IF YOU LOOK.
IF YOU LOOK, LOOK AT IT SIDEWAYS, IT'S MAYBE ABOUT QUARTER INCH RIGHT UNDER THE, THE ROOF AND THE THE PULSE AND CELLS ARE QUARTER INCH.
THEY'RE FOUR FEET UNDERGROUND. SO I MEAN THAT THING GOES GETS PULLED OUT OF THE OUT OF THE GROUND. THAT MEANS MY GARAGE IS PROBABLY GONE.
SO I UNDERSTAND, MR. LONGORIA, AND THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. I JUST AND THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE MEASURES TO DO IT.
YOU KNOW, THE RIGHT WAY IS JUST WE FEEL THAT THERE MIGHT BE OTHERS THAT MAY NOT TAKE THE PROPER STEPS LIKE YOU DID TO TO SECURE THIS STRUCTURE.
AND OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
JUST ANOTHER QUESTION. HOW SIR.
MANY STRUCTURES OF THESE KINDS OF STRUCTURES AROUND IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
YEAH. SO STAFF DID GO OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE DID AN INVESTIGATION.
RIGHT. AND WE NOTED ABOUT 4 OR 5 OTHER CARPORTS THAT HAD BEEN BUILT.
WE DID RESEARCH. THEY WERE NOT PERMITTED.
SO WE ARE NOTIFYING OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION.
YOU KNOW, KEEPING IN MIND CODE ENFORCEMENT IS A PROCESS, RIGHT? YOU MAY NOT HAVE IMMEDIATE REMEDY, BUT IT IS A PROCESS.
AND CODE ENFORCEMENT WILL BE GOING OUT GETTING GATHERING INFORMATION ON THOSE OTHER CARPORTS THAT WERE BUILT.
SO IF THE BOARD WERE TO APPROVE THIS KIND OF STRUCTURE, AND I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE IF BOARD WERE TO APPROVE THIS, THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME CITATIONS ON THE OTHER STRUCTURES.
I'M ASSUMING OR AT LEAST NOTIFICATIONS THAT THEY NEED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE BUILDING CODE AND ALL THAT.
YEAH. SO CODE ENFORCEMENT AGAIN IS A PROCESS.
AND AS A LEVEL TWO CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER MYSELF, YOU KNOW, I CAN TELL YOU THAT CODE ENFORCEMENT, THEY ARE ACTIVE. THAT'S HOW THIS ONE WAS DISCOVERED.
WHAT? THE PROCESS IS HERE IN THE CITY OF EDINBURG FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT.
I'M NOT IN THAT DEPARTMENT, BUT YOU CAN COME IN, AND YOU AND I CAN WALK UP TO THAT DIVISION, AND WE CAN SIT DOWN AND DISCUSS WITH THE INTERIM DIRECTOR EXACTLY WHAT THE PROCESS IS.
BUT BUT IN ESSENCE, IF WE WERE TO AGREE TO THIS, THEN THE OTHERS WOULD PROBABLY NOT NECESSARILY.
THERE HAS TO BE A HARDSHIP CASE BASED ON HARDSHIP, BASED ON HARDSHIP. YES, SIR.
AND IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THERE IS A HARDSHIP.
YOU KNOW, WHILE I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS KIND OF STRUCTURE, AND I'VE BEEN SEEING THAT AND I AGREE, THERE'S A LOT OF STRUCTURES LIKE THIS BEING BUILT NOW. I CAN TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE HARDSHIP MEDICAL, FINANCIAL. AND SO I I KIND OF I UNDERSTAND WHERE THE CITY IS COMING FROM.
SO FINANCIAL REALLY IS NOT CONSIDERED A HARDSHIP.
IT'S JUST IT'S JUST MORE OF A HARDSHIP.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE, THEN? IS IT A. WELL, AS MR. LONGORIA READ TO YOU? RIGHT, EXACTLY. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY. THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR..
MR. FARLEY AND IF NOT. OF COURSE MR. LONGORIA. NO QUESTIONS.
[00:25:05]
GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE ITEM AND ASK THE BOARD FOR.CHAIRMAN MARK. YES. SO THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING TO APPROVE THE.
YES, THE RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED.
APPROVED? WE HAVE A. I'LL MAKE A MOTION IN CONSIDERATION OF THE OF THE CITY'S.
RECOMMENDATION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY MISTER.
HAVE A SECOND FROM THE BOARD. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.
MISTER CANTU SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT PUBLIC HEARING.
CONSIDERATIONS TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED CODE, ARTICLE THREE, SECTION 3.102 STANDARDS OF RURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. LOTS 18, 19 AND 20 UNIVERSITY TURN SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 223 02308 GESELL CIRCLES REQUESTED BY SERGIO DE MOLINA.
OKAY, SO HERE THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO SETBACKS IS A SETBACK IS A 25 FOOT. HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A SETBACK TO TEN FEET THERE IN THE FRONT.
SO THE LOTS 18, 19 AND 20 ARE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF GESELL CIRCLE, AND IT'S PRESENTLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY.
THERE IS A PLAT NOTE THAT STATES THAT THERE IS TO BE A 25 FOOT FRONT SETBACK.
ADJACENT ZONING IS MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST, AND COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT TO THE EAST.
SO SURROUNDING LAND USES OF MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST, AND VACANT LAND TO THE EAST.
SO THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF UNIVERSITY TERRACE SUBDIVISION THAT WAS RECORDED FEBRUARY THE 6TH, 1978.
HERE AGAIN, THE RECORDED PLAT MENTIONED THAT THERE SHOULD BE A 25 FOOT FRONT SETBACK.
THEREAFTER THE APPLICANT DID APPLY FOR ZONING, DID APPLY FOR THE VARIANCE ON MARCH THE 4TH, 2024.
AND THERE HAVE BEEN, AS ALSO NOTED, THAT PRIOR VARIANCES HAVE BEEN GRANTED AT THIS LOCATION. SO STAFF MAILED A NOTICE OF THIS VARIANCE REQUEST TO 30 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE DID RECEIVE ONE AGAINST GRANTING THE VARIANCE.
SO THE APPLICANT. SO THE WAY THAT THIS CAME TO US IS THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A BUILDING PERMIT. OKAY.
FOR LOT 20 WITH A TEN FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
LET'S SEE IF WE CAN FIND THAT BUILDING PERMIT RIGHT HERE.
HERE'S THE BUILDING PERMIT HERE WITH A TEN FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
SO THIS WAS NOT APPROVED BY THE CITY DUE TO THE PLATINO REQUIRING A 25 FOOT FRONT SETBACK. THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR THE VARIANCE DUE TO A LACK OF BUILDABLE AREA ON THE LOT. NOW, WHAT WE MEAN BY THAT IS THAT THIS LOT IS ENCUMBERED BY A TOTAL OF 30 FOOT EASEMENTS IN THE REAR.
THERE'S A 15 FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT AND THERE IS A 15 FOOT IRRIGATION EASEMENT.
AND THIS GREATLY AFFECTS THE BUILDABLE AREA OF THE LOT.
AND THIS IS TYPICAL FOR THE THREE LOTS THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD BE BUILDING ON.
FURTHERMORE FURTHERMORE, THE TEN FOOT FRONT SETBACK WOULD JUST MIRROR THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS IT IS TODAY FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
IN FACT, THIS ONE IS ACTUALLY CONSIDERED A MULTIPLEX.
SO BASED ON THAT, AND BASED ON THAT, THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
AND OF COURSE, THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND PAY THE $40 RECORDING FEE.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY. DO WE HAVE MR. SERGIO DE MOLINA OR A REPRESENTATIVE OF A TOWN? HE DIDN'T NOTIFY ME THAT HE HAD A WEDDING IN MEXICO.
OKAY. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO GO? WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN BEHALF OF THIS ITEM? NO.
ALL RIGHT. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. FARLEY OR FOR STAFF? NO.
NO. THEN I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS ITEM AND ASK THE BOARD FOR A MOTION.
MOTION TO APPROVE. I SECOND THE MOTION.
[00:30:06]
I HAVE A SECOND. MR.. VAZQUEZ.ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM. CONSIDER VARIANCE TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
ACCESSORY USE AND STRUCTURE STANDARDS.
FEATHERED HAVEN SUBDIVISION, LOCATED AT 5209 SOUTH SUGAR ROAD, AS REQUESTED BY ARLENA RAMOS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS IT APPLIES TO ACCESSORY USE AND STRUCTURE STANDARDS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FENCE HEIGHT OF EIGHT FEET, AND IS PROPOSING A 24 FOOT SUBDIVISION FENCE STRUCTURE.
THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR A BUILDING PERMIT ON JUNE 9TH OF 2023, AND THE STRUCTURE WAS CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT, AND THE APPLICANT IS NOW WANTING TO COME UP TO COMPLIANCE.
STAFF MAILED A NOTICE OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO 31 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE RECEIVED NO COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST.
THE STRUCTURAL PLANS IN YOUR PACKET INCLUDE THE OUTLINE, A 24 FOOT SUBDIVISION FENCE STRUCTURE WITH THE SUBDIVISION NAME UPON DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE STRUCTURE WILL NOT DISPLAY ANY SIGNAGE ON THE FENCE. ACCORDING TO THE SITE PLAN, THE STRUCTURE IS SITUATED APPROXIMATELY 96FT AND SEVEN INCHES AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST AND THAT THE APPLICANT ADHERE TO ALL OTHER APPLICABLE UDC STANDARDS.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE MISS KARINA RAMOS OR MR. RAMOS? HELLO. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MAY HAVE. WOULD YOU MIND STATING YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? JESSE RAMOS. THANK YOU, MR. JESSE RAMOS. GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP FOR THE BOARD.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. RAMOS? CHAIRMAN, I WILL SAY THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE STARTING TO SEE MORE AND MORE OF. THESE HIGH ARC FENCES SLASH FRONT FACADES.
SO WE ARE LOOKING AT AMENDING THE UDC CODE TO POSSIBLY ALLOW SOMETHING LIKE THIS BY CODE.
I DIDN'T NOTICE THAT THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
I'M ASSUMING THAT THAT WAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. ARE THESE STRUCTURAL PLANS THAT WERE SUBMITTED? HAVE THEY BEEN REVIEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT? THAT IS CORRECT. IT WAS ACTUALLY THEY'VE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. THEY WERE SIGNED AND SEALED BY AN ENGINEER.
SO THEY HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. RAMOS FROM THE BOARD? NO.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. RAMOS. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WANTING TO SPEAK IN BEHALF OF THIS THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS ITEM AND ASK THE BOARD FOR A MOTION.
A MOTION TO APPROVE. MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
I SECOND THE MOTION. MR. GARZA SECONDS THE MOTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
CONSIDER VARIANCE TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. ARTICLE TWO, SECTION 2.206 ACCESSORY USE AND STRUCTURE STANDARDS BEING LOT ONE.
MARTINEZ DASH 12 SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 1514 WEST CARMEN AVENUE, AS REQUESTED BY JORGE HERRERA.
SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE IS BASED ON ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
THIS HAS TO DO WITH CARPORTS FOR A MULTIPLEX OR APARTMENTS.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT TWO CARPORTS.
VERY NICE BUILDING. ONE ON EACH SIDE OF THAT GREEN SPACE.
SO HE'S PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT TWO CARPORTS.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH SUGAR ROAD AND WEST CARMEN AVENUE, AND IT HAS 80 FOOT OF FRONTAGE FOR TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF OVER 7000FT².
ADJACENT ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS TO THE NORTH, EAST AND SOUTH, AND RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN DISTRICT TO THE WEST.
THE LAND USES IN THIS AREA ARE MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY USES.
[00:35:03]
SO THE WAY THAT THIS CAME TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS HERE AGAIN, AS RECORDED ON A RECORDED PLAT.THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN SHOWING TWO PROPOSED CARPORTS IN FRONT OF THE MULTIFAMILY UNIT TO COVER SEVEN PARKING SPACES.
THE APPLICANT HAS SHOWN AN ENCROACHMENT OF AN ESTIMATE NINE FEET INTO THE CORNER SETBACK AND TO THE CORNER SIDE YARD AND SIX FEET INTO THE INTERIOR SIDE YARD AND 15FT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK. SO THAT'S WHAT THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR.
THIS WAS THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED.
SO STAFF MAILED NOTICE OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO 21 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS AND RECEIVED NO COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THIS REQUEST AT THE TIME OF THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED. SO THIS LOT HAS DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS.
IF YOU SEE THE GREEN SPACE THERE IN THE MIDDLE, ON THE EAST AND ON THE WEST SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, THE FRONT SETBACK IS 25FT AND THE SIDE YARD SETBACK IS SEVEN FEET AND THE SETBACK IS TEN FEET. HERE AGAIN, THE CARPORTS BEING PROPOSED IS TEN FEET IN THE FRONT. AND WE WANT TO KEEP IN MIND THAT DETACHED CARPORTS BASED ON THE NEW UDC MAY HAVE AN OVERHANG WITH A ZERO, AN OVERHANG WITH A ZERO FOOT FRONT SETBACK.
SO WHEN WE CONSIDER FRONT SETBACKS ON A MULTIPLEX, THE SETBACK IS TO THE TO THE POST.
OKAY, SO HERE'S THE POST HERE AND THE POST HERE.
THAT'S HOW WE MEASURE SETBACKS ON A FRONT FOR THE FRONT SETBACK NOT NECESSARILY TO THE OVERHANG. BECAUSE HERE AGAIN THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWS ALLOWS THE OVERHANG BASICALLY TO GO TO ZERO.
SO THE SETBACK HERE WOULD BE TO THE SUPPORTING POST.
THERE IS A TEN FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT IN THE FRONT.
SO THE POST COULD NOT BE WITHIN THIS UTILITY EASEMENT.
AND HERE AGAIN OUR UDC FOR MULTIPLEX ALLOWS A TEN FOOT FRONT SETBACK.
BACK. SO AS FAR AS THE RECOMMENDATION IS CONCERNED, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE FRONT SETBACK.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE SUPPORTING POST IS CLEARLY OUT OF THE UTILITY EASEMENT AND ALSO STAFF WHAT WE DID, WE WENT OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE DID AN INVESTIGATION ON ALL THE CARPORTS ON THAT PARTICULAR STREET.
AND NOT ONE CAR, NOT ONE POST IS SET AT 25FT.
THEY ALL ARE LIKE 12FT OR 16FT, CLEARING THIS TEN FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT.
SO THAT'S WHY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE FRONT SETBACK.
NOW LET'S CONSIDER THE CORNER SETBACK.
OKAY. SO THERE IS A TEN FOOT CORNER THE BUILDING WALL ITSELF.
AS YOU CAN SEE, HERE'S THE TEN FOOT HERE.
THE BUILDING WALL ITSELF IS SETTING BACK TEN FEET FROM THE CORNER.
I GOT WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
PETER, HE IS HERE. THE ON THIS SIDE OF THIS CORNER HAS ALREADY BEEN DEDICATED FOR THE WIDENING OF SUGAR ROAD.
SO THERE WILL BE NO STRUCTURE BUILT ON IN THIS PARTICULAR CORNER.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE THERE'S A ONE FOOT SEPARATION HERE BETWEEN THE CARPORT OVERHANG AND THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND TAKING THAT INTO EFFECT AND CONSIDERING ALL OF THAT, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL ON THE CORNER SETBACK.
OKAY. NOW WE MOVE OVER TO THE INTERIOR SETBACK.
THE INTERIOR SETBACK ESSENTIALLY WANTS TO BUILD TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
OKAY. WITH A ONE FOOT SEPARATION.
SO TYPICALLY WE DO ALLOW DRIVEWAYS OR TO EXTEND 1 TO 2FT SEPARATION FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO IN THIS CASE, ALL THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO DO IS MOVE THE CARPORT. MOVE THE CARPORT.
THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE IN LINE WITH THE SEVEN FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK.
AND HE WOULD MEET PLANNING APPROVAL.
SO IF SO, STAFF AT THIS TIME IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THAT UNTIL HE COULD BRING IN AN AMENDED SITE PLAN SHOWING THAT HE WILL MOVE THE CARPORT BACK TO THE SEVEN FOOT SETBACK.
MR. FARLEY? YES, SIR. SO ON THE WEST SIDE ONCE YOU WHEN YOU WENT OUT THERE, DO YOU SEE THAT CARPORT OBSTRUCTING THE VIEW FROM TRAFFIC COMING IN FROM THE SOUTH SIDE? NO, SIR. IT WOULD NOT OBSTRUCT THE TRAFFIC.
NO, SIR. NOT AT ALL. THANK YOU.
MR.. WE DROVE THE WHOLE LENGTH.
MYSELF AND ANOTHER PLANNER WENT OUT.
WE DROVE THE WHOLE LENGTH BACK AND FORTH ON THE STREET,
[00:40:02]
AND WE ALWAYS DO A SITE INSPECTION.YOU CAN'T DO AN INSPECTION FROM YOUR DESK, RIGHT? SO WE ALWAYS DO A SITE INSPECTION, EVEN IF IT'S 100 DEGREES.
WE WENT OUT THERE WITH OUR TAPE MEASURE. WE MEASURED THERE WILL. THERE IS NO OBSTRUCTION AT ALL. IN FACT, IT MIRRORS THE UDC FOR FRONT SETBACKS FOR MULTIPLEX COMPLEXES.
THANK YOU, MR. PURDY. YES, SIR. AND I DO BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF HE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. MR. FARLEY, I HAD A QUICK QUESTION BEFORE I ASKED THAT THE ONE FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK, THOUGH. YES, SIR. ON THE INTERIOR.
OKAY. OKAY. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF, SIR? THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING. OKAY. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE FOR THE INTERIOR. OKAY.
YES, BUT. SO WE CANNOT APPROVE THIS THE WAY IT IS SUBMITTED ON THIS SITE.
PLAN THE INTERIOR. THE ONLY WAY WE CAN APPROVE IT WOULD BE IF THE APPLICANT MOVES THE OR RELOCATES THE OVERHANG FOR THE CARPORT.
SO THE ENCROACHMENT ON THE INTERIOR IS THE OVERHANG.
IF HE RELOCATES THAT TO LINE UP WITH THE SEVEN FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK, THEN WE WOULD BE IN APPROVAL.
SO THERE WOULD BE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF IF HE RELOCATES THE OVERHANG TO ALIGN WITH THE SEVEN FOOT SIDE SETBACK.
YES, SIR. ON THE INTERIOR? YES, SIR. OKAY. DO WE HAVE MR. GEORGE HERRERA? YES, HE IS PRESENT.
GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JORGE HERRERA.
GOOD AFTERNOON. MR.. AND I SEE THE, YOU KNOW, THE THE SETBACK AND THE THE OVERHANG OF THE CARPORT IS ENCROACHING THE THE SETBACKS.
IF YOU APPROVE, I CAN MOVE THE CAR, PULL OVER, HAND THE SURFACE TO BE IN LINE LIKE MR. FARLEY EXPLAINED. OKAY, WELL, I CAN DO THAT.
AND AND AND ALSO IF IT'S THE PROPERTY, THE NEXT NEXT DOOR IS THE SAME OWNER.
AND I TALKED TO HIM TODAY, AND HE'S PLANNING TO DO A RECREATIONAL AREA FOR SERVICE FOR THAT APARTMENTS.
SO IT WON'T BE A ANOTHER CARPORT OR ANOTHER SITUATION LIKE THAT.
BUT BUT IN ORDER TO COMPLY I'M WILLING TO MOVE THE CAR FOR THE OVERHANG SHOULD NOT BE ENCROACHING THE THE SETBACK.
OKAY. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR..
AT THIS TIME? FIRST AFTER MR. FARLEY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR SIR.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. YES, SIR. SO THIS THIS LOT IS THE FIRST ONE.
FIRST LOT IN THE SUBDIVISION ON YOUR RIGHT HAND SIDE AS YOU COME IN.
RIGHT? YES, SIR. THAT IS CORRECT.
SO AS YOU'RE AS YOU'RE EXITING, IT'LL BE ON YOUR LEFT HAND SIDE.
YES, SIR. AND GIVEN THAT, HOW MUCH OF A RIGHT OF WAY IS BEING TAKEN FROM. WELL, THAT DOES NOT SHOW ON ON THE PLAT HERE.
SO ON THE PLAT THAT WAS SUBMITTED, IT DOESN'T SHOW, BUT THEY ALREADY HAVE DEDICATED 30FT OF RIGHT OF WAY.
30FT? YES, SIR. HOW MUCH WILL BE WILL BE PAVED? BECAUSE MY QUESTION BECOMES ONCE THAT CARPORTS BUILT AND THAT RIGHT OF WAY IS BEING PAVED, WHAT HAPPENS THEN WITH THE OBSTRUCTION OF.
YEAH, I GOT WITH OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND HE IS HERE.
PETER. YES. YES. GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS PETER, FOR THE RECORD.
SO SUGAR ROAD IS CONSIDERED RIGHT NOW AN 80 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY ULTIMATE SECTION.
SO BEING THAT IT IS 80 FOOT 80 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY, IT WILL GIVE US ABOUT 57 BACK TO BACK TOTAL.
CURRENTLY, RIGHT NOW, THE ASPECT OF THAT ROAD IS NEARLY FULLY PAVED OUT. THERE ARE NO PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THAT AREA, AT LEAST IN THAT SECTION.
NOT ANYTIME SOON. BUT IF THERE WERE ANY IMPROVEMENTS MORE THAN LIKELY IT WILL NOT BE REACHING OR EVEN BEING CLOSE TO THE ADJACENT CARPORT IN THAT AREA.
SO IF ANYTHING, IF YOU'RE DOING 80FT BACK TO BACK AND THEN 57 BACK TO BACK, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ROUGHLY ABOUT 20FT OF GREEN AREA OR SPACE FROM THE AREA.
AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE DEVELOPER, WHOEVER PROPOSED THE AREA, THEY ACTUALLY APPLIED AN ADDITIONAL TEN FEET, WHICH IS GOING TO BE EVEN MORE GREEN SPACE.
SO THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY TYPE OF OBSTRUCTIONS OR ANY ISSUES IN THAT AREA.
[00:45:02]
ARENA. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD.THEN I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE ITEM. BUT WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON. I'LL OPEN UP THE ITEM TO VOTE ON THE TEN FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FIRST.
CAN I GET A MOTION FROM THE BOARD? I MOTION TO UPHOLD STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
NOW OPENING UP THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS THE ONE FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK.
THIS IS FOR THE FOR THE WEST SIDE.
THIS IS THE ONE WHERE A STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND IN THE EVENT THAT WE WOULD, THAT MR. HERRERA WOULD RELOCATE THE OVERHANG TO ALIGN WITH THE SEVEN FOOT SETBACK.
THAT'S THE ONLY WAY STUFF WOULD MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION. SO I MOTION TO UPHOLD STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO THOSE CHANGES THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED.
AS LONG AS MR. HERRERA RELOCATES THE OVERHANG TO ALIGN WITH THE SEVEN FOOT SETBACK.
MR. VASQUEZ. SECOND TO THE MOTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
CONSIDER VARIANCES TO THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS FOLLOWS ONE.
ARTICLE FOUR, SECTION 4.20 FOR BUFFER YARDS AND TWO.
ARTICLE FOUR. SECTION 4.108 VEHICLE STACKING REQUIREMENTS BEING LOT NINE UNIT UNIVERSITY VILLAGE ON 10TH 10TH SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 500 SOUTH.
STATE HIGHWAY 336 AS REQUESTED BY RIO DELTA ENGINEERING.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRMAN AND BOARD.
WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS TWO DIFFERENT VARIANTS REQUESTS. ONE OF THEM, AND I THINK IT'S WORDED A LITTLE BIT WRONG. IT'S NOT REALLY THE STACKING REQUIREMENTS MORE THAN IT IS. HAVING A BYPASS LANE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY BECAUSE THEY CAN USE THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.
THAT WOULD BE THE BACK OF THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED. THEY CAN USE THE BACK OF THE BUILDING. THERE'S A DRIVEWAY THERE THAT THEY CAN USE FOR STACKING ALONG THE BACK OF THE BUILDING. BUT WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS THE USE OF A DRIVE THROUGH WINDOW, AND IT'S IT'S INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET, BUT YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE IT. IT'S KIND OF SMALL. BUT THERE IS A DRIVE THROUGH WINDOW BEING PROPOSED ON THE NORTH SIDE. HOWEVER, THE THE DRIVEWAY WIDTH IS NOT WIDE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE A BYPASS LANE.
SO BEING THAT IT IS FOR A FOR JUST, I GUESS, A SHORT AREA. IT'S NOT TOO, TOO, TOO LONG OF A STRETCH.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF OF LETTING THAT GO.
I WILL SAY THAT WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT THE POSSIBILITY OF ELIMINATING THE BYPASS LANES BECAUSE THE BYPASS LANES, ALTHOUGH THEY ARE BENEFICIAL, THEY'RE BENEFICIAL MAINLY TO MCDONALD'S.
CHICK FIL A'S, THE LARGER RESTAURANTS WHICH ARE GOING TO GIVE US THOSE BYPASS LANES ANYWAYS BECAUSE IT'S TO THEIR BENEFIT.
BUT WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT OTHER CITIES, AND WE'RE ONE OF THE ONLY CITIES THAT IMPOSES THAT ADDITIONAL BYPASS LANE ON ALL COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT POSSIBLY AMENDING THAT ORDINANCE. I'VE BEEN TALKING TO THE CITY ENGINEER, AND THAT SEEMS LIKE A STRONG POSSIBILITY.
SO BECAUSE OF THAT, WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE FIRST VARIANCE.
ON THE SECOND VARIANCE, I GOT A AN EMAIL EARLIER FROM THEIR ENGINEER, IVAN GARCIA, WHO ALSO GOT A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE BUFFER YARDS.
I'M GOING TO PASS IT. BUT WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS TWO DEVELOPMENTS.
ONE PHASE OF IT IS A COMMERCIAL PHASE FRONTING 10TH STREET.
AND FURTHER BACK WE HAVE A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT IS ALREADY UNDERWAY. THERE'S SOME PICTURES.
THIS IS THE HIGH RISE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED OR THAT'S BEING BUILT RIGHT NOW.
AND JUST SOUTH OF THIS, DO YOU HAVE SOME DUPLEXES AND TRIPLEXES AND SOME SINGLE UNITS THAT ALSO MAKE UP A LARGE SECTION OF MULTIFAMILY IN THE AREA? THEY HAVE CONSTRUCTED A CEDAR FENCE ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE THAT DIVIDES THE MULTIFAMILY FROM THE COMMERCIAL.
AND NOW TO IMPOSE A SECOND FENCE.
THEY SEE IT AS A LITTLE BIT OF A HARDSHIP AND SOMETHING THAT'S NOT NECESSARY.
SO WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING NOW IS TO MAYBE INCLUDE SOME LANDSCAPING TO CREATE, LIKE A NATURAL HEDGE WALL BETWEEN THE CEDAR FENCE AND THE COMMERCIAL SIDE.
[00:50:08]
I WILL SAY THAT THAT BACK OF THE BUILDING DOES FACE THE THE MULTIFAMILY.IT'S NOT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THE SOLID MASONRY WALLS TO DEFLECT SOME NOISE.
AND THERE'S GOING TO BE ABOUT 75FT FROM THE BACK SIDE OF THE BUILDINGS TO THE FRONT OF THE COMMERCIAL OR TO THE FRONT OF THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
SO THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF SPACE.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS JUST THROWN OUT THERE.
I HAVE SHARED THAT WITH SOME STAFF.
SOME ARE FOR IT, SOME ARE AGAINST IT.
I'M KIND OF FOR IT. I KIND OF LIKE THAT BECAUSE WE'RE STILL SEEING SOME MORE GREEN.
IS THERE STILL GOING TO BE CEDAR FENCE? I KNOW THAT'S THAT'S JUST AN IMAGE JUST TO SHOW. THAT'S JUST AN IMAGE TO SHOW WHAT COULD BE DONE. THERE'S STILL GOING TO BE A CEDAR FENCE, BUT IT'S STILL GOING TO BE.
BUT HE'S HE'S PROPOSING IN IN LIEU OF NOT PUTTING ANYTHING TO AT LEAST PUT SOME NATURAL BUFFERS THERE ALONGSIDE THE CEDAR FENCE.
AND I THINK THERE'S A, THERE'S A REPRESENTATIVE FROM FROM THAT DEVELOPMENT HERE IN THE AUDIENCE. LET'S GO AHEAD.
AND DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE REPRESENTING.
FROM RIO DELTA ENGINEERING? GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS DANIEL RODRIGUEZ.
I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF RIO DELTA ENGINEERING, ALSO REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER OF THIS PROJECT. AND I GUESS I'M HERE TO ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MAY HAVE.
FOR STAFF. MR.. YOU GUYS ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ELIMINATE THAT BYPASS LANE.
RIGHT. ARE YOU GUYS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE CEDAR FENCE AS WELL, OR TWO DISAPPROVAL? WELL, THE CEDAR FENCE IS ALREADY THERE, BUT IT'S ON THE DEVELOPMENT JUST ABUTTING IT.
IT'S ON THE ON THE MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT.
THE COMMERCIAL REQUIRES TO HAVE ITS OWN MASONRY WALL.
THE VARIANCE HERE IS TO ONE REQUIRE THAT MASONRY WALL OR TWO, THE OPTION THAT THEY ARE NOW PROPOSING IS TO CREATE A NATURAL LANDSCAPE BUFFER IN PLACE OF THE MASONRY WALL. GOT IT.
AND SO CITIES RECOMMENDS DISAPPROVAL OF THAT VARIANCE.
RIGHT. OR OR WHAT IS WHAT IS CITY RECOMMENDING FOR THE FOR THE CMU FENCE TO ALLOW. I'M RECOMMENDING THAT WE I MEAN I LIKE I KIND OF LIKE THE NEW PROPOSAL THAT THAT THAT THEY HAVE ON THE TABLE.
IN TALKING TO OUR CITY FORESTER, HE LOVES IT BECAUSE THERE'S MORE GREEN. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF THEM DOING IT RIGHT.
WE JUST DON'T WANT A COUPLE OF SHRUBS. WE WANT IT TO BE KIND OF FULL, RIGHT? QUICK QUESTION ON THAT NOTE WHO WOULD EITHER MONITOR OR WHO WOULD MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION? OR IS THERE GOING TO BE ANYTHING? WOULD THERE BE ANYTHING IN WRITING SPECIFIC TYPE OF, I DON'T KNOW, THE NAMES OF THE OF THE SHRUBS OR WHATEVER.
MAYBE THERE COULD BE SOMETHING SPECIFIC THAT WOULD WITHSTAND ALSO THE WEATHER THAT COULD BE PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY BUILD SOMETHING THAT IS ACCEPTED BY OUR CITY FORESTER. OKAY. WE COULD PUT THAT IN THE IN THE ACTION LETTER.
HAVE WE SEEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS DONE IN OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT MAYBE YOU'VE BEEN PART OF? NO, WE HAVEN'T WE HAVE GIVEN OTHER VARIANCES IN THE PAST TO STORAGE UNITS WHERE A SOLID MASONRY WALL IS REQUIRED.
THERE IS A SECTION OF OF THE CODE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO TO TO BE EXEMPT FROM HAVING THAT MASONRY WALL IF YOUR LOT IS DEEPER THAN OR LESS THAN 200FT DEEP.
THIS ONE IS 260FT DEEP, SO IT'S ABOUT 60FT OVER THAT THRESHOLD.
SO IT DOES REQUIRE THAT THERE BE A MASONRY WALL BECAUSE IT'S 60FT OVER THE LIMIT.
NOW I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.
SO THE PURPOSE OF HAVING A MASONRY WALL THAT'S ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS.
THAT'S THAT'S ACCORDING TO CODE AT THIS TIME.
CORRECT. THE PURPOSE OF THE MASONRY WALLS TO DEFLECT NOISE.
AND IT'S A REQUIREMENT. IT'S A BUFFER.
CORRECT. DO WE KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A MASONRY WALL AND WHAT YOU'RE WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED AT THIS TIME AS FAR AS BUFFER NOISE? WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WHAT THE EFFECTS ARE GOING TO BE.
YOU DON'T KNOW. WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO DEFLECT. MORE NOISE. LESS NOISE.
IS THIS OKAY? SO IS THIS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE'RE DOING THIS? THE FIRST TIME THAT WE'RE ENTERTAINING THIS? YES. OKAY.
AND SO THERE'S A COMMERCIAL, AND THEN THERE'S MULTI-RESIDENTIAL.
[00:55:02]
AND WE'RE THE CITY IS PROPOSING, I GUESS, THE VARIANCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO STRUCTURES. CORRECT. CORRECT.AND THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO STRUCTURES IS ABOUT 75FT.
ABOUT 75FT. I THINK THE CONCERN THAT I PERSONALLY HAVE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU JUST DRIVE AROUND AND LOOK AT ALL THESE FENCES, MULTI-RESIDENTIAL OR MULTI-RESIDENTIAL, THEY'RE DILAPIDATED, THEY'RE NOT BEING KEPT UP.
IT LOOKS TRASHY, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.
AS MY OPINION. THEY'RE FALLING ALL OVER.
IN FACT, YOU GO DOWN SHAPING THAT DIRECTION.
THEY'RE JUST ALL COMPLETELY FALLING OVER, AND THE CITY HAS TO KIND OF PICK THEM UP AND CUT AROUND THEM. AND SO I JUST I GUESS THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE, IS THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT IT'S BEING DONE. BUT THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS IS A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR DEVELOPMENT.
I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO KEEP IT UP FOR THE YEARS TO COME.
YOU'RE CONSIDERING THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT, THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT BASED ON.
WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH THESE LITTLE FOURPLEXES THAT YOU SEE ON.
I KNOW MCCALL. RIGHT. IN THE OLDER PARTS OF NORTHERN EDINBURGH, THIS IS A SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT THAT WE'RE GETTING INTO THE CITY.
SO DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA ON THAT NUMBER? JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, JUST KIND OF UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT ECONOMICALLY, HOW MUCH THE TOTAL PROJECT IS GOING TO COST? NUMBER ONE. NO. IDEA.
UNLESS YOU HEARD THAT. DO YOU MIND STEPPING UP, PLEASE? AND YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE. MY NAME IS SERENA, AND I'M HERE WITH INTEREST, IF YOU DON'T MIND. CAN YOU REPEAT THE. WE COULDN'T HEAR UP HERE WHAT YOU WERE SAYING.
SO IT IS A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR PROJECT.
IT'S A COMMERCIAL AREA, WHICH IS NINE COMMERCIAL.
LOTS. THEN 170 UNITS OVER AT THE VILLAGE, PLUS 200 UNITS OVER AT THE LAS VILLAS.
WE'RE DEVELOPING BOTH OF THEM.
AND EACH SITE OF THE MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS HAVE THEIR ON SITE MANAGEMENT.
SO THERE WILL BE NOT ONLY MANAGEMENT, BUT FROM THE MAIN OFFICE THAT WE WILL BE ENSURING THAT THE WHOLE PROPERTY IS KEPT UP.
SO THE PLAN FOR THESE ARE TO BE KEPT BY THE SAME DEVELOPER, RIGHT? THEY'RE NOT UP BEING SOLD OFF.
NOT INDIVIDUALLY. THESE ARE NOT INDIVIDUAL CELLS.
IF THEY ARE SOLD IN THE FUTURE, IT WILL BE AS ONE PACKAGE.
BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW, IT WILL BE MANAGED BY US.
WHAT'S THE REASONING BEHIND NOT USING THE CMU WALL AND WANTING TO DO CEDAR FENCE? IS THERE A CERTAIN REASON FOR THAT? I BELIEVE IT'S BECAUSE MAINLY WE ALREADY HAVE IT UP RIGHT NOW. SO IF WE ARE LIKE YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, THE THE FRONT OF THE COMMERCIAL IS STILL AWAY FROM THE CEDAR FENCE.
SO YOU HAVE THAT GAP PLUS THE FENCE IS UP.
IF WE CAN GET A MOTION TO APPROVE FOR THE LANDSCAPING AS PROPOSED BY DELTA.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO SEE IF WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.
AND, BUT STILL ADD THAT BUFFER BETWEEN THE MULTIFAMILY AND THE COMMERCIAL.
THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, MR. JAIME. SO WOULD THERE BE A WAY TO GET THE FORESTER MORE INVOLVED WITH THIS TOPIC AND LIKE WHAT MARK WAS SAYING, KIND OF GO BASED ON PLANTS THAT ARE MORE TO THE AREA THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO SEE, LIKE A FREEZE AND IT'S JUST GOING TO KILL OFF EVERYTHING, AND THEN IT JUST DEFEATS THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF WHAT THAT NOISE BARRIER WAS.
I LIKE I LOVE THE IDEA THAT WE'RE BRINGING MORE GREEN INTO THE INTO THE PROJECTS.
I JUST FEEL THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE STUDY ON WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE, WHICH IS THE NOISE BUFFERING.
BUT I FEEL THAT IF THE FORESTER COMES INTO PLAY AND HE GETS SOME SORT OF APPROVAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, I FEEL WE CAN START IMPLEMENTING THAT FROM HERE ON OUT WITH OTHER PROJECTS, BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, I MEAN, GREENERY JUST MAKES SPACES LOOK A LOT NICER.
AND ASIDE FROM JUST THE BLOCK FENCE GOING DOWN THE MIDDLE, AND IF THERE'S LIKE YOU'RE MENTIONING, IT'S A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR PROPERTY, IT LOOKS GREAT. I FEEL THERE'S GOING TO BE A GOOD MANAGEMENT THERE TO KEEP IT UP.
AND, YOU KNOW, OF COURSE, MAKE IT LOOK NICE.
SO I JUST THAT WAS A QUESTION.
IF WE COULD GET THE FORESTER MORE MORE INVOLVED IN THE SENSE OF WHAT PLANTS OR SHRUBS OR, YOU KNOW, HE DID THROW OUT SOME SOME NAMES OF PLANTS THAT ARE NATIVE TO THE AREA THAT CAN WITHSTAND THE ELEMENTS.
I JUST DON'T KNOW THE WAY THAT HIS LANGUAGE.
I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF A LITTLE BIT OF FOREIGN.
IT'S A LITTLE FOREIGN TO ME. BUT HE HE DID MENTION THAT HE WOULD WANT TO SEE SOMETHING 6
[01:00:04]
TO 8FT HIGH. NOT SOMETHING LIKE GROUND LEVEL.HE WANTS TO SEE SOMETHING HIGH. SO I GUESS IF, IF APPROVED ONE OF THE CONDITIONS COULD BE SUBJECT TO MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY FORESTER, AND AND THEN HE COULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHAT HE WOULD ALLOW AND WHAT HE WOULDN'T ALLOW. THANK YOU, MR. HYMIE. OR HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. RODRIGUEZ? FERNANDEZ. YEAH, I, I WANT A MOTION TO APPROVE.
BEFORE WE DO THAT, LET ME OPEN IT UP JUST TO MAKE SURE. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD.
OH, I WAS GOING TO SAY I MOTION TO APPROVE, BUT LIKE, I AGREE WITH MR. JAIME TO GET THE FORESTER INVOLVED WITH WHATEVER HIS RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD BE, AND GO FROM THERE.
OKAY, SO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND JUST TAKE A STEP BACK. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE ITEM.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP FOR MOTION. AND THEN SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A MOTION FROM MR. GARZA TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE BY MEETING THE REQUIREMENT BY THE CITY FORESTER.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I WOULD SECOND THAT MOTION WITH WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING THAT CONDITION THAT THERE BE THAT CONDITION WITH THE FORESTER.
I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S I APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR YOUR COMMENTS.
AND WITH THE GREENERY AND ALL, I CAN SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING A JUST A MASONRY, YOU KNOW, WALL. AND BASED ON YOUR RECOMMENDATION, I THINK I WOULD I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THAT CONDITION.
SO, MISS ALMAGUER SECONDS THE MOTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
WHAT ABOUT BEFORE WE HAVE TO GO BACK? YES, SIR. LET'S GO BACK TO.
DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? FOR EITHER PARTY OR INCLUDING STAFF ON THE ON THE BYPASS FOR THE STACKING.
ELABORATED ON SOME OF THOSE CHANGES.
YOU WERE DISCUSSING THAT IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
AS OF RIGHT NOW, THE IDEA IS TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE THOSE CHANGES AND DO AWAY WITH IT.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. WE'RE GOING TO BE MAKING QUITE A BIT OF CHANGES TO THE UDC. AND IT'S LIKELY THAT THIS BOARD IS GOING TO BE INVOLVED IN SOME OF THOSE MEETINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ON SOME OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
OKAY. WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO MAKE THEM WITHOUT INCLUDING YOU GUYS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THAT. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS ITEM AND OPEN IT UP TO THE BOARD FOR A MOTION. MOTION TO APPROVE.
MR. REES MOTION FOR TO APPROVE EVERY SECOND.
MR. VAZQUEZ SECONDS THE MOTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM WHICH HAVE INFORMATION ONLY ATTENDANCE ROSTER.
DO WE NEED TO DISCUSS ANYTHING ON THAT ITEM? MR. VAZQUEZ? I THINK ON THIS LAST MR. VAZQUEZ WAS OUT AT THE LAST MEETING, BUT I THINK OTHER THAN THAT, EVERYBODY WAS HERE. HE HASN'T MISSED VERY MANY MEETINGS, SO I THINK A PARDON IS IN ORDER.
ALL RIGHT. AND THEN ALSO UNDER INFORMATION ONLY WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A MEETING NEXT MONTH. SO WE ONLY HAD ONE ITEM AND IT WAS WITH THE EDINBURGH HOUSING AUTHORITY.
AND WE WERE ABLE TO WORK THINGS OUT WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS.
OKAY. SO THAT'S SOME GOOD NEWS.
WELL, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE ON THE AGENDA. THEN I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND ASK THE BOARD FOR AN ADJOURNMENT OF THE MEETING. ALL MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, EVERYONE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.