LORD GOD, AS WE MAKE DECISIONS THAT MIGHT AFFECT OUR CITY AND CONTINUE TO REMIND US [00:00:04] THAT ALL THAT WE DO HERE TODAY, ALL THAT WE ACCOMPLISH, IS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR CITY. WE ASK THESE THINGS IN YOUR NAME. AMEN. MR. GONZALEZ, CAN YOU LEAD US IN PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. [B. Pledge of Allegiance] ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU. FOR THE CERTIFICATION OF PUBLIC NOTICE. [2. CERTIFICATION OF PUBLIC NOTICE] MR. ACEVEDO ALREADY CONFIRMED THAT WE DID GIVE PROPER NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC. NEXT, OUR DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST. [3. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST] YES. UNDER STATE LAW, LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ARE REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE A SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST FOR THEMSELVES OR CERTAIN FAMILY MEMBERS AND ABSTAIN FROM VOTING ON ANY MATTERS RELATED TO SUCH A CONFLICT. ARE THERE ANY CONFLICTS TO DISCLOSE RELATED TO THE PENDING MATTERS ON TODAY'S AGENDA. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. 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 LARGE GROUPS IS REQUIRED. WE ASK FOR EVERYONE'S COOPERATION AND FOLLOWING THESE PROCEDURES. IS ANYONE HERE? WANTING TO MAKE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? NOBODY. OKAY. MOVING ON. ITEM FIVE. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE MEETING PROCEDURES USED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF [5. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE MEETING PROCEDURES USED BY THE ZONING] ADJUSTMENT. ALL ITEMS ARE GENERALLY CONSIDERED AS 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 THREE 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 BOARD. MOVING ON TO ITEM SIX ABSENCES. [6. ABSENCES] [A. Consider excusing the absence of Board Member Marc A. Gonzalez from the September 18, 2024] CONSIDER EXCUSING THE ABSENCE OF BOARD MEMBER MARK GONZALEZ FROM THE SEPTEMBER 18TH, 2024 REGULAR MEETING. CAN I HAVE A MOTION FROM THE BOARD? MOTION TO EXCUSE. I HAVE A MOTION TO EXCUSE FROM MR. ALMAGUER. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. AND I HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. VASQUEZ. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO OUR MINUTES. [7. MINUTES] CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE AUGUST 28TH, 2024 REGULAR MEETING. CAN I HAVE A MOTION FROM THE BOARD? [A. Consider Approval of the Minutes for the August 28, 2024 Regular Meeting.] MOTION TO APPROVE. I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM MR. ALMAGUER. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. AND I HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. VAZQUEZ. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. [8. PUBLIC HEARINGS] MOVING ON TO OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS. [A. Request by Wildcat Commercial Properties, LLC for a Variance to the City of Edinburg Unified] ITEM EIGHT, A REQUEST BY WILDCAT COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LLC FOR A VARIANCE TO THE CITY OF EDINBURG UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW AS FOLLOWS. TO HAVE A 6.9FT SIDE YARD SETBACK WHERE A 15 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK IS REQUIRED AT LOT SIX. BIGHORN BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION, HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS, LOCATED AT 926 BIG HORN DRIVE. GOOD AFTERNOON. I AM RICARDO FARLEY, ONE OF THE PLANNERS HERE IN EDINBURG. SO THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING IS GOING TO DEAL WITH SETBACKS IN PARTICULAR THIS BUILDING HERE, THIS PROPOSED BUILDING YOU CAN HEAR THE PROPERTY LINE AND WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT, BE EXAMINING THE REQUIRED SETBACKS FOR THIS BUILDING AND WHAT THEY'RE ASKING THE BOARD FOR. SO THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO ARTICLE THREE AS IT APPLIES TO SETBACKS FOR NON RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED USE LOT STANDARDS. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ALLOW THE PROPOSED BUILDING TO ENCROACH 8.1FT INTO THE 15 FOOT REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK, THEREBY LEAVING A 6.9FT SIDE YARD SETBACK AS IT IS DELINEATED HERE ON THIS SITE PLAN. SO BASICALLY THEY WANT A 6.9FT SIDE YARD SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE 15 THAT'S REQUIRED. [00:05:02] NOW, ONE THING I DO WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION, IF YOU NOTICE THIS 6.9FT IS NOT DIRECTLY TO THE BUILDING. THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT. SO IF YOU EXAMINE THE SITE PLAN, YOU WILL SEE THAT THERE IS A SIDEWALK HERE. WELL, THAT'S A COVERED SIDEWALK THAT THAT'S A COVERED SIDEWALK. AND SO YOU WOULD NEED TO GO TO THE FLOOR PLAN. LET ME GO BACK TO THE FLOOR PLAN HERE, WHERE YOU CAN SEE THAT THAT COVERED SIDEWALK RIGHT HERE ACTUALLY HAS SUPPORTING POSTS AND THOSE. SO THE SUPPORTING POST FOR THAT SIDEWALK IS WHAT WOULD BE ENCROACHING MORE INTO THE SETBACK THAN THE BUILDING. SO THERE WERE SOME ADJUSTMENTS THAT HAD TO BE MADE THERE EITHER AS WE WERE EXAMINING THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. SO THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE CUL DE SAC OF BIGHORN DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 640FT EAST OF THE EXPRESSWAY. THE PROPERTY IS IRREGULAR IN SHAPE, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE. FIND THAT ONE. SO THE PROPERTY IS IRREGULAR IN SHAPE. IT'S THIS LOT RIGHT HERE. LOT NUMBER SIX IS PART OF THE CUL DE SAC. THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED INDUSTRIAL GENERAL DISTRICT. ADJACENT ZONING IS ZONING IS INDUSTRIAL GENERAL DISTRICT TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST, AND RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT TO THE EAST. THE LAND USES ARE VACANT INDUSTRIAL LOTS AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL. SO LET'S SEE WHAT BROUGHT US TO THIS POINT TONIGHT. SO THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF BIGHORN BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION. IT IS A RECORDED SUBDIVISION AS WE SEE BEFORE US. IT WAS RECORDED DECEMBER THE 8TH, 2015. SO WHAT HAPPENED? THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A NEW OFFICE WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON MAY THE 8TH, 2024. AND SO PLANNING STAFF WILL REVIEW THESE PERMITS. AND AT THAT TIME, THE ENCROACHMENT WAS NOTICED ON THE SITE. PLAN THE APPLICANT REQUESTED FOR A VARIANCE WAS RECEIVED ON AUGUST THE 15TH, 2024 BY STATE LAW. WE BY BY LAW, WE DID MAIL THIS REQUEST TO ATTEND NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST AT THE TIME OF THIS MEETING. SO ON MAY THE 8TH, PLANS RECEIVED BY THE CITY DID SHOW THAT THE PROPOSED COVERED PORCH FOR THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS ENCROACHING 8.1FT INTO THE REQUIRED 15 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. BACK AND THIS ENCROACHMENT IS GREATER THAN WHAT THE BUILDING ITSELF WOULD BE. SO IF THIS IS APPROVED, THIS WOULD BE ALSO BE APPROVING THE BUILDING AS WELL. SO SETBACKS CALLED FOR BY THIS ZONING DISTRICT ARE AS FOLLOWS. FRONT 25. REAR 30 AND SIDE 15. THE APPLICANT STATES THAT BECAUSE THIS LOT IS IRREGULAR IN SHAPE, AND A SIMILAR VARIANCE WAS APPROVED FOR LOT NUMBER NINE ON FEBRUARY 24TH 24TH, 2021. HE FEELS THAT OF COURSE THE VARIANCE SHOULD BE APPROVED. AND ALSO, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS LOT CLOSELY, IT'S ENCUMBERED BY A LOT OF EASEMENTS. SO THE LOT CANNOT BE MOVED NORTHWARDLY BECAUSE THERE'S A 15 FOOT EASEMENT THERE AND IT CANNOT BE MOVED EASTWARDLY AS WELL BECAUSE OF 30FT OF EASEMENTS. SO STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST. HOWEVER, IF APPROVED, BASED ON THE IRREGULAR SHAPED LOT. BASED ON THE INCUMBENTS OF THE LOT ITSELF BEING ENCUMBERED BY A LOT OF EASEMENTS, AND BASED ON LOT NUMBER NINE BEING APPROVED FOR SIMILAR VARIANCE, THEN THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO PAY A RECORDING FEE TO THE COUNTY OF HIDALGO AND MEET OTHER APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS. THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY. IS THE APPLICANT IN ATTENDANCE? THANK YOU SIR. PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. I'M LALO RAMIREZ WITH QUINTANA ASSOCIATES, AND THIS IS FABIAN OCHOA WITH GARLOCK BUILDERS. OKAY. WE'RE ALSO THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO LOT SEVEN. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE SETBACK BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS, WE ARE GOING TO BE OVER THE 12 FOOT THAT'S REQUIRED FOR FIRE PROTECTION AS FAR AS BUILDING SEPARATIONS. SO WE'RE ALSO REQUESTING THE VARIANCE. AND WE'RE MEETING THE BUILDING SEPARATION BETWEEN LOT SIX AND LOT SEVEN. HOW MUCH OF THE ACTUAL I GUESS I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S CONDITIONED SPACE, BUT LIKE THE, THE ACTUAL BUILDING AND NOT THE PORCH AREA ENCROACHES ON THE SETBACK. [00:10:09] YEAH. SO WE GO. WE DO HAVE TO CONSIDER THE PORCH BECAUSE OF THE SUPPORTING POST, AND IT IS ATTACHED TO THE BUILDING. SO WE DO HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT. SO LET ME SEE IF I CAN FIND THE SITE PLAN. SO HERE'S THE SITE PLAN HERE THAT SHOWS THE 6.9FT SETBACK TO THE PORCH AND TO THE BUILDING IS APPROXIMATELY TEN FEET. SO THE TEN FEET SETS BACK A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THE PORT THE BUILDING DOES. SO IT WILL BE A TOTAL OF 6.9FT SIDE YARD SETBACK. REALLY. THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE ASKING FOR. THE BUILDING ITSELF IS ABOUT TEN FEET BACK. BUT WE DO HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT PORCH BECAUSE IT HAS SUPPORTING POSTS AND IT'S ATTACHED TO THE BUILDING. SO HERE AGAIN THEY'RE ASKING FOR A 6.9FT SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE 15 THAT'S REQUIRED. I SAW A COMMENT ABOUT THE PARKING SPACE. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S SEVEN. NO, THAT'S SEVEN FEET. BUT AN ACCESS AGREEMENT. BUT THEY THE SAME APPLICANT IS A. YEAH. SO THEY REALLY WILL NEED AN ACCESS EASEMENT AT THIS TIME BECAUSE IT IS THE SAME OWNER. SO THE ONLY TIME THAT THAT WOULD PROBABLY EVEN COME UP IF THEY GO TO SELL ONE OF THESE LOTS, RIGHT? SO THE OWNER OF SIX AND SEVEN ARE THE SAME OWNERS. YES, SIR. OKAY. AND THAT'S BY THEM BEING THE SAME OWNERS THAT'S ON THEIR PARKING IS IT'S GOING TO BE APPROVED AND SO FORTH. IS THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I'M SORRY. SO YOU SAID THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE THE SAME OWNERS THAT THE PARKING WOULD BE APPROVED? YES, SIR. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND THE MINIMUM, I THINK THIS WAS ALREADY SAID, BUT THE MINIMUM SEPARATION IS 12FT, RIGHT? YEAH. THEY HAVE MORE THAN 12 FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS. OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. IF THERE'S NO MORE. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE. YEAH. MR. CHAIR, I WAS JUST GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE HAVE AN OFFICIAL OPEN AND CLOSE TO THE PUBLIC FORUM. OKAY. SHOULD I OPEN IT? YES. GO AHEAD. SO NOW I'LL FORMALLY OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT? NO. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITH THAT, I'LL CLOSE THIS ITEM AND THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND ASK THE BOARD FOR A MOTION. A MOTION TO APPROVE REQUEST. I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM MR. VAZQUEZ. SECOND. AND I HAVE A SECOND FOR MR. ALMAGUER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. OKAY. MR. CHAIR. MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. [B. Request by La Esmeralda Services LLC for a Variance to the City of Edinburg Unified] ITEM EIGHT B. REQUEST BY LA ESMERALDA SERVICES, LLC FOR A VARIANCE TO THE CITY OF EDINBURG. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW AS FOLLOWS. TO HAVE A 50 FOOT LOT WIDTH INSTEAD OF THE 100 FOOT MINIMUM. REQUIRED BY CODE TO HAVE 7100FT² LOT AREA INSTEAD OF THE 12,000FT² MINIMUM TO HAVE A SIX FOOT YARD, SIX FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK INSTEAD OF A 15 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK AS REQUIRED, AND TO HAVE A SIX TO HAVE SIX UNITS INSTEAD OF FOUR UNITS MAXIMUM AT LOT 14, BLOCK 263 WEST ADDITION TO EDINBURG, HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS, LOCATED AT 105 WEST O'CONNELL STREET. OKAY, SO HERE THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO ARTICLE THREE AS IT APPLIES TO LOT DIMENSIONS AND SETBACKS. SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ADD TWO ADDITIONAL UNITS TO AN EXISTING FOURPLEX. SO HERE WE SEE THE GREEN REPRESENTS THE FAR WALL. AND SO SHE'S GOING TO SHE'S PLANNING TO GO IN AND CARVE THIS SECOND FLOOR UP AND CREATE TWO [00:15:04] ADDITIONAL ONE BEDROOM UNITS. THE ADDITIONAL UNITS HOWEVER, WOULD TRIGGER THE BUILDING TO BE CONSIDERED BY DEFINITION AS AN APARTMENT. SO THE UDC STATES THAT FIVE DWELLING UNITS PER BUILDING IS CONSIDERED AN APARTMENT. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TONIGHT FOR THE VARIANCE THE APPLICANT IS ASKING TO HAVE. ACTUALLY, SHE'S ASKING FOR FOUR VARIANCES. THE FIRST ONE IS TO HAVE A 50 FOOT LOT WIDTH INSTEAD OF THE 100 FOOT MINIMUM REQUIRED BY CODE FOR AN APARTMENT, AND THE SECOND ONE IS TO HAVE A 7100 SQUARE FOOT LOT AREA INSTEAD OF THE 12,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM REQUIRED. THE THIRD IS TO HAVE A SIX FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK, WHERE A 15 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK IS REQUIRED, AND TO HAVE SIX UNITS INSTEAD OF THE FOUR UNITS MAXIMUM. SO THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WEST CONNELL STREET, APPROXIMATELY 50FT WEST OF SOUTH SECOND AVENUE. THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED. SHE HAS A ZONING RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT. ADJACENT ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DISTRICT TO THE EAST AND SOUTH, COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS TO THE NORTH, AND RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT TO THE WEST. SO THE LAND USES SURROUNDING THIS PROPERTY ARE SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES. SO LET'S SEE HOW THIS CAME BEFORE US THIS EVENING. SO THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF WEST ADDITION TO EDINBURG. WHICH RECORD, WHICH WAS RECORDED BACK IN 1946. SO ON JULY THE 18TH, 2024, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A BUILDING PERMIT. AND HERE AGAIN, STAFF WILL REVIEW THE BUILDING PERMITS. AND THIS PERMIT WAS FOR THE ADDITIONAL UNITS. SO BY REVIEWING THE PERMITS, STAFF NOTICED THAT THE APARTMENTS DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIRED SETBACKS, LOT DIMENSIONS AND DENSITY. SO THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR VARIANCE ON OCTOBER THE 3RD, 2024. WE DID MAIL A NOTICE OF VARIANCE OF 32 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE RECEIVED NO COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THIS VARIANCE REQUEST. SO THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN PROPOSING THEY HAD TWO ADDITIONAL UNITS FOR A TOTAL OF SIX UNITS. SHE DOES HAVE TWO THREE BEDROOM UNITS ON THE FIRST FLOOR. AND SO SHE'S PROPOSING THE ADDITIONAL UNITS ON THE TOP FLOOR. THE SETBACKS FROM APARTMENT BUILDING ARE AGAIN 20FT IN THE FRONT, SIDE 15 AND REAR 20. THE PROPOSED BUILDING DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM LOT SQUARE FOOTAGE OR LOT WIDTH. THE LOT WOULD ONLY ALLOW FOR A MAXIMUM OF FOUR UNITS. NOW, THE APPLICANT STATES THAT THE REASON THIS VARIANCE REQUEST SHOULD BE APPROVED IS THAT THE ADDITIONAL UNITS ARE NEEDED TO KEEP UP WITH THE DEMAND OF APARTMENTS IN THE AREA. NOW, ONE INTERESTING THING IS THAT THIS WOULD NOT INCREASE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING, AND SHE WOULD MEET THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. IN FACT, THERE WAS A VARIANCE THAT WAS APPROVED BACK IN 2021 FOR THE PARKING. BUT YOU GOTTA REMEMBER BACK THEN THE PARKING CALCULATIONS WERE TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAN THEY ARE TODAY. BUT SHE WOULD MEET THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE VARIANCE REQUESTS, IF APPROVED, SHE WOULD NEED TO PAY THE $40 RECORDING FEE AND MEET ALL APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES AND REGULATIONS. AND AT THIS TIME, NO OTHER NO DEPARTMENT HAS APPROVED THIS PARTICULAR PERMIT. IT'S BEEN REVIEWED BY ALL DEPARTMENTS, BUT IT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED BY ANY OF THE DEPARTMENTS. THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY. I'LL OPEN THE ITEM UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. IS THE APPLICANT HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE ITEM? IS ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE ITEM? DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE FOR STAFF? SO, MR. FARLEY, YOU INDICATED THAT THE ACTUAL FOOTPRINT IS NOT GOING TO BE INCREASED. YES, SIR. THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING IS GOING TO STAY THE WAY IT IS RIGHT HERE. SO INSIDE THERE'S GOING TO BE MODIFICATIONS TO MAKE IT FROM 4 TO 6. YES, SIR. SO INSIDE ON THE SECOND FLOOR THERE WILL BE MODIFICATIONS TO TAKE ONE OF THE TWO BEDROOM. TWO OF THE TWO BEDROOM UNITS AND TURN THEM IN TO A ONE BEDROOM UNITS. OH I SEE. YES, SIR. BUT THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING WILL NOT CHANGE. AND ALSO SHE DOES MEET THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. SHE JUST DOESN'T MEET THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS. THAT TRIGGERS FOR APARTMENTS SUCH AS LOT WIDTH, LOT AREA SETBACKS AND SO FORTH. [00:20:04] AND WHAT ARE THE CONCERNS THE CITY HAS WITH REGARD TO THIS REQUEST BEING APPROVED? WELL, LET'S STOP AND THINK ABOUT IT. SO IF SOMEONE COMES IN WITH A REQUEST SIMILAR REQUEST AND THEY DON'T EVEN THEY DON'T MEET THE LOT AREA AND LOT WIDTH AND YOU KNOW, SO THEREFORE YOU'RE GOING TO GENERATE AND THEY MAY NOT EVEN MEET THE PARKING. SO THEREFORE WE'LL OPEN. WE'RE OPENING UP A SITUATION WHEREBY APARTMENTS CAN BASICALLY BE APPROVED ON LOTS THAT ARE NOT TO BE APPROVED ON APARTMENTS WOULD NEED A 12,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND 100 FOOT LOT WIDTH. SO THIS WOULD SET A PRECEDENT. YES IT WOULD. SIR, I DO BELIEVE, MR. FARLEY, I HAVE A QUESTION. DID A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AGO. I BELIEVE A SIMILAR SITUATION CAME. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS 6 OR 9 APARTMENTS THAT A GENTLEMAN OR A WANTED TO BUILD IN THE SAME, AND WAS REQUESTING THE SAME VARIANCES, BECAUSE A LOT WAS SUPER SMALL. YES, SIR. I KNOW THERE WAS SOME PEOPLE THAT WERE NOT IN FAVOR THAT CAME TO SPEAK. NOW JUST I BELIEVE THIS TO THE WEST ARE THOSE OTHER APARTMENTS TO THE WEST IN THIS PICTURE OR WHAT IS THAT, A HOUSE? THAT'S A HOUSE, SIR. IT'S A HOUSE. YES, SIR. AND MY THING IS, NOW THE APARTMENT IS GOING TO HAVE FOR BASICALLY SINGLE APARTMENTS AT THE TOP. IS WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECT. OVERLOOKING ANOTHER KIND OF THE SAME. VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE ALREADY EXPERIENCED. EXACTLY. WE HAD THAT PARTICULAR ITEM THAT CAME BEFORE US. WHAT A COUPLE WHAT, A MONTH AGO. RIGHT. AND YOU KNOW, IT WASN'T APPROVED. YOU KNOW, THERE WERE DIFFERENT CITIZENS WERE HERE. THEY WERE NOT APPROVAL OF IT. SO, YOU KNOW, APARTMENTS, THEY I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S THE REASON THE UDC STATES OUT THAT YOU GOT TO HAVE THE LOTTERY AND THE LOT WITH TO GO WITH THE APARTMENTS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING AT MORE TRAFFIC, YOU KNOW, THE PARKING AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. OKAY. IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ONE QUESTION YOU SAID ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS HAD REVIEWED AND DENIED. YES, SIR. ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS HAVE REVIEWED THIS PERMIT AND DENIED. OKAY. YES, SIR. INCLUDING FIRE BUILDING. ENGINEERING. PLANNING. OKAY. YES, SIR. OKAY. WITH THAT, I'LL CLOSE OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM. NEXT, I'LL ASK THE BOARD FOR A MOTION. MOTION TO DENY THE REQUEST. I HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL FOR MR. ALMAGUER. I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. AND I HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. GONZALEZ. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. SO WITH THAT, MOVING ON TO ITEM NINE. [9. INFORMATION ONLY] [A. Attendance Roster] ATTENDANCE. ROSTER. I'M NOT SURE IF THERE WAS A ROSTER INCLUDED IN THE PACKET. PACKAGE. OH. YES. YES. THERE'S A ROSTER HERE. WE DO. WE DO HAVE TWO NEW MEMBERS THAT I WANTED TO INTRODUCE. WE HAVE MR. OMAR GOUVEIA AND MISS NANCY RAMIREZ. THERE ARE TWO ALTERNATES AT THIS TIME. WELCOME, WELCOME. GLAD TO HAVE YOU GUYS ON BOARD. OTHER THAN THAT, WE HAVE NO NO FURTHER BUSINESS, SO ADJOURNMENT WOULD BE IN ORDER. [10. ADJOURNMENT] OKAY. EXCELLENT. IS THERE A MOTION? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. MOTION. I HAVE A MOTION. MOTION FOR MR. GONZALEZ. HAVE A SECOND. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION SECOND FROM MR. VAZQUEZ. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. MEETING ADJOURNED. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.