May 28, 2025 Zoning Board of Adjustments

TO REMIND US THAT ALL THAT WE DO HERE TODAY, ALL THAT WE ACCOMPLISH,

[00:00:04]

WE ASK THESE THINGS IN YOUR NAME.

[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER, ESTABLISH QUORUM]

[A. Prayer]

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

CERTIFICATION OF PUBLIC NOTICE.

STAFF DID NOTIFY THE PUBLIC AS PER THE TEXAS OPEN MEETING ACT ON THE 23RD OF MAY AT 5 P.M.. THANK YOU. CLAUDIA.

AND AND NOW, THE DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

BOARD MEMBERS. UNDER STATE LAW, A LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL IS REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE A SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST FOR THEMSELVES OR CERTAIN FAMILY MEMBERS AND ABSTAIN FROM VOTING ON MATTERS RELATED TO SUCH CONFLICT.

ARE THERE ANY CONFLICTS TO DISCLOSE RELATED TO THE PENDING MATTERS ON TODAY'S AGENDA? NO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

[B. Pledge of Allegiance]

[2. CERTIFICATION OF PUBLIC NOTICE]

[3. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST]

[4. PUBLIC COMMENTS]

WE ASK FOR EVERYONE'S COOPERATION AND FOLLOWING THESE PROCEDURES.

THE MEETING PROCEDURE. OKAY.

NUMBER FIVE. NUMBER FIVE.

AND THEN NUMBER FIVE. WE ARE THE FOLLOWING ARE THE MEETING PROCEDURES USED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? AYE.

ALL ITEMS ARE GENERALLY CONSIDERED AS THEY APPEAR ON THE AGENDA AS EACH ITEM IS INTRODUCED. B STAFF WILL PRESENT ITS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION ON THE ITEM BEING CONSIDERED. C THE PARTY MAKING THE REQUEST MAY MAKE A PRESENTATION,

[5. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE MEETING PROCEDURES USED BY THE ZONING]

[A. All items are generally considered as they appear on the agenda as each item is introduced.]

[B. Staff will present its findings and recommendation on the item being considered.]

[C. The party making the request may make a presentation and may address the Board on any]

[D. Anyone in the audience desiring to speak in favor or in opposition may do so. A three (3)]

[E. Once the Chair closes the public hearing, the Board may question anyone and maintain any]

[F. A minimum of four votes are required for an item to be approved by Board.]

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. PARAGRAPH F A MINIMUM OF FOUR VOTES ARE REQUIRED FOR AN ITEM TO BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD. OVER TO NUMBER SIX ON MINUTES.

PARAGRAPH A CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE APRIL 30TH, 20, 2025. REGULAR MEETING.

AND BE CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE MAY 7TH, 2025 SPECIAL MEETING. CAN I GET A MOTION FOR FOR THOSE MINUTES?

[6. MINUTES]

[A. Consider Approval of the minutes for the April 30, 2025, Regular Meeting.]

SECOND. MR. ALMAGUER. SECOND.

[B. Consider Approval of the minutes for the May 7, 2025, Special Meeting.]

ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES.

AND NOW THE. FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

BEFORE WE GET INTO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, I WANTED TO MAKE A LITTLE ANNOUNCEMENT OF OF SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED AT THE PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

[7. PUBLIC HEARINGS]

HOWEVER, THIS BOARD IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE WE TAKE NO ITEMS TO TO CITY COUNCIL.

THEY GET APPROVED HERE.

BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS ACTED UPON AT THE PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS THAT THEY ACTED ON THE BOARD, HOW THE BOARD IS SUPPOSED TO BE MADE UP.

WE HAD TALKED ABOUT POSSIBLY CHANGING FROM FIVE MEMBERS TO SEVEN VOTING MEMBERS, BUT THEY DECIDED TO KEEP IT AT FIVE.

NOW, THEY DID CLARIFY WHAT THE VOTING MEMBERS WERE GOING TO BE.

AND ALTHOUGH ALTHOUGH THEY DIDN'T SAY IT, I THINK WHAT THEY DID WAS THEY WENT BY SENIORITY, LIKE WHOEVER'S BEEN HERE THE LONGEST GETS TO BE A VOTING MEMBER.

THE FIVE VOTING MEMBERS WERE GIVEN TO YOU ON A PIECE OF PAPER THIS EVENING.

AND BASICALLY WHAT THAT DID WAS, I THINK IT TOOK MR. ALMAGUER FROM A VOTING MEMBER AND MADE HIM THE FIRST ALTERNATE.

AND IT PUT MR. REESE BACK AS A VOTING MEMBER.

BUT EVERYTHING ELSE KIND OF STAYED THE SAME.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.

THANK YOU. AND THEN TO CLARIFY THE VOTING MEMBERS, WE HAVE MICHAEL CANTU, WHICH IS THE CHAIRPERSON, ELISEO GARCIA JR. MYSELF AS A VICE CHAIRPERSON, MARK GONZALEZ, THE OTHER BOARD MEMBER, GREGORY VASQUEZ AND RUBEN RUIZ JR AS ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER, AND OUR FIRST ALTERNATE IS ANDREW ALMAGUER, WHO WILL BE VOTING IN PLACE OF MICHAEL CANTU,

[00:05:02]

YES, SIR. CORRECT. THANK YOU, MR. JAIME. ALL RIGHT. WE MOVE ON TO OUR FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS REQUESTED BY MISS ZULEMA MARGARITA GARZA VILLAREAL FOR A VARIANCE TO THE CITY OF EDINBURG UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW AS FOLLOWS ONE TO BUILD A CARPORT 25FT INTO THE FRONT SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE TEN FEET ALLOWED.

PARAGRAPH TWO. TO ENCROACH INTO A FIVE FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT AT SANTA GLORIA SUBDIVISION, LOT ONE, 39, HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS, LOCATED AT THREE 3226 NEPTUNE STREET.

GOOD AFTERNOON, BOARD.

I AM RICARDO FARLEY, PLANNER HERE IN THE CITY OF EDINBURGH.

SO THE REQUEST IS TO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 25 FOOT CARPORT SUPPORT FOR THE

[A. Request by Zulema Margarita Garza Villarreal for a Variance to the City of Edinburg Unified]

ALSO, SHE WAS ASKING BASICALLY FOR A ZERO FOOT SETBACK.

ALSO, SHE IS ASKING TO ENCROACH INTO A FIVE FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT.

THAT'S MORE OR LESS IN THIS LOCATION.

BY THE SIDEWALK. SO THIS IS HER REQUEST THAT UTILITIES EASEMENT IS ACTUALLY OCCUPIED BY AN EIGHT INCH SEWER LINE.

NOW, THE CODE DOES ALLOW A TEN FOOT ENCROACHMENT.

HOWEVER, SHE WOULD LIKE THE 25 FOOT ENCROACHMENT.

SO THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF NEPTUNE STREET AND IS ON RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY AND IS RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY IN ALL DIRECTIONS.

SO THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF A RECORDED SUBDIVISION SANTA GLORIA SUBDIVISION.

IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE PAY ATTENTION TO THE SETBACKS FOR THIS SUBDIVISION.

THE FRONT SETBACK IS 25FT, SO SHE WANTS A 25 FOOT ENCROACHMENT.

BASICALLY, SHE'S GOING TO HAVE A ZERO FOOT FRONT SETBACK.

AND A SIDE SETBACK IS SIX FEET.

SO A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY HERE.

ON APRIL THE 4TH, 2025, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN.

THIS IS THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED.

STAFF WILL REVIEW THE SITE PLAN.

AND WE NOTICED THE ENCROACHMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED NEW CARPORT AT THIS LOCATION, BASICALLY IS UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

SO AFTER REVIEWING THE SITE PLAN, THE APPLICANT WAS NOTIFIED.

AND SO A ZONING VARIANCE APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPLICANT ON APRIL THE 8TH, 2025. NOW, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS SUBDIVISION HAS A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY AS WE TALK ABOUT CARPORTS, PERHAPS MORE HISTORY THAN YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IN OTHER SUBDIVISIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, SIMILAR VARIANCES WERE GRANTED FOR LOT NUMBER 59. LET ME BRING THE MAP UP HERE.

SO THESE ARE THIS IS THE MAP THAT SHOWS THE VARIANCES THAT HAVE BEEN GRANTED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR CARPORTS.

SO THE FIRST ONE WAS GRANTED ON LOT 59 IN JUNE OF 2018.

LOT 31 IN DECEMBER 2020, LOT 32 IN APRIL 2021 AND LOT 15 IN JUNE 2024. SO LOOKING AT THIS MAP HERE, WE CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE SOME HISTORY ALREADY FOR CARPORTS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY NOT BY THIS BOARD IN PARTICULAR, BUT BY PREVIOUS ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOARDS.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND.

NOW NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT TO 47 NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE RECEIVED NO COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST GRANTING THIS VARIANCE.

NOW, THE PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF THE CARPORT AGAIN WOULD BE IN FRONT OF THE EXISTING HOME ON THE ON EXISTING SLAB FOR TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES.

THAT'S REQUIRED BY CODE.

SO THAT CODE WOULD BE MET.

THE PROPOSED CARPORT PLACED ON THE EXISTING SLAB WOULD HAVE AN ENCROACHMENT OF 25FT INTO THE FRONT SETBACK, AGAIN LEAVING A ZERO FOOT FRONT SETBACK AND ENCROACH INTO A FIVE FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT WHICH IS OCCUPIED BY AN EIGHT INCH SEWER LINE.

NOW, INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, IN SPECIAL ALLOWANCES, THAT SECTION OF THE CODE DOES ALLOW FOR CARPORTS TO PROJECT OR ENCROACH TEN FEET INTO THE FRONT SETBACK. SO THAT'S A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH 25FT INSTEAD OF THE TEN FEET THAT'S ALLOWED BY BY CODE. ALSO, THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE PROHIBITS ANY STRUCTURES TO BE PLACED IN ANY EASEMENTS.

SO IN THIS CASE THE SUPPORTING POSTS OF THE CARPORTS RIGHT HERE THE OVERHANG IS FINE, BUT THE SUPPORTING POSTS WOULD NEED TO SETBACK FIVE FEET SO THAT IT'S NOT INTO THE UTILITY EASEMENT. SO THE APPLICANT STATES THAT SIMILAR CARPORTS EXIST IN THE AREA AND THAT THIS IS THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND IF YOU GO OUT THERE AND YOU DO A DRIVE OR A SCAN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S A CARPORT, ONE OR 2 OR 3 CARPORTS ON EVERY STREET IN

[00:10:04]

SO STAFF ACTUALLY RECOMMENDS THAT NOW THE VARIANCE REQUEST GOING WITH THE CODE.

HOWEVER, IF APPROVED, BASED ON THE HISTORY THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT, THEN WE WOULD LIKE FOR THE CONTINGENCY TO BE THAT THE SUPPORTING POSTS NOT BE PLACED IN THE UTILITY EASEMENT, AND SHE WOULD HAVE TO MEET ALL OTHER APPLICABLE CODES AND PAY A $40 RECORDING FEE IF APPROVED.

AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY. I HAVE A QUESTION, MR. FARLEY. ON ON THE PREVIOUS ONES THAT WERE APPROVED BY THE OTHER ZBA MEMBERS.

WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT WHEN IT COMES TO THE SETBACKS THAT THOSE OTHER CARPORTS HAVE? THEY WERE ALL THE WAY AT 25 ALSO.

OKAY, SO THEY WERE AT ZERO PROPERTY LINE ALSO. YES, SIR.

THEY DID. OKAY. AND THERE'S BEEN NO ISSUES WITH VISIBILITY, WITH SIGHT OR ANYTHING OF THAT PARTICULAR NATURE.

WHAT ABOUT THE IS IT DISRUPTING THE SIDEWALK AT ALL OR IS IT PRETTY MUCH CLEAR? SO THE PROPERTY STARTS FROM SIDEWALK RIGHT THERE. RIGHT THERE AT THE ZERO, RIGHT AT THE PROPERTY LINE.

DID THE OTHER APPROVALS ALSO WERE ENCROACHING ON THE FIVE FOOT EASEMENT IN THE FRONT? YES, THEY WERE ENCROACHING.

HAVE THEY ALL ARE ENCROACHING INTO THE FIVE FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT.

IT'S SOMETHING, AS WE WERE GOING OVER THIS ONE WITH A FINE TOOTH COMB, THAT WE NOTICED THAT FIVE FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT.

BUT THEY ALL ARE ENCROACHING.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY. SURE. IS SOMEONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SAY SOME COMMENTS ON THIS AGENDA? SENORA. AQUI. BUENAS TARDES.

BUENAS TARDES, ZULEMA GARZA.

Y ESTOY AQUI PARA APOYAR CON EL PERMISO PARA HACER UN UN UN TECHO PARA MI CAMIONETA PARA ESTA ES MI PETITION. OKAY.

GRACIAS, MR. COMENTANDO.

MR. FARLEY. YA HAY MUCHOS OTROS EN ESTA MUY.

BUENO. SI HAY ALGUNAS OTRAS OTROS TECHOS.

NO SÉ SI SON LAS MISMAS REGLAS.

PERO PUES YO ME THEN OKAY.

ESTA BIEN SENORA. GRACIAS GRACIAS.

SO THIS HAS BEEN A GOOD TOPIC FOR US FOR A WHILE.

IT SURE HAS. AND YOU KNOW, IT'S.

YEAH, I THINK FOR MY CONCERN IS JUST THE EASEMENTS OF THE.

YEAH. SO IF IT IS APPROVED HERE AGAIN, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A CONTINGENCY OR APPROVE WITH THE SUPPORTING POLES NOT BEING WITHIN THE UTILITY EASEMENT.

AND THE LENGTH OF THE VEHICLE IS ABOUT 12FT. RIGHT. 12 13FT OF A VEHICLE THE LENGTH.

YES, SIR. THAT IS CORRECT.

WELL, THE CARPORT ITSELF IS GOING TO BE 20FT.

SO THEY'LL BE PLENTY IF WE REDUCE IT TO 15 INSTEAD OF THE WHOLE 20.

RIGHT. WELL. I'M SORRY.

GO AHEAD. ACTUALLY, GREG, I WAS LOOKING RIGHT NOW AT THE SIZE OF A TYPICAL VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE I WAS LOOKING AT A SILVERADO CREW CAB, FOUR DOOR SHORTBED 233IN.

WHICH IS HOW MANY FEET? 21.5FT.

ALL RIGHT. SO. SO WHAT'S HAPPENING IS THAT IN THESE SUBDIVISIONS WHERE YOU HAVE A 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK THEY NEED THE FULL 20FT TO BE ABLE TO FIT A VEHICLE IN THERE, BECAUSE IF YOU JUST GIVE THEM TEN, HALF THAT VEHICLE IS GOING TO STICK OUT.

SO ALTHOUGH THE CODE THAT WE CURRENTLY AMENDED ALLOWS FOR AN ADDITIONAL TEN FEET, IT STILL DOESN'T GIVE THEM THE COVERAGE THAT THEY NEED TO TO SHELTER A VEHICLE.

SO. OKAY. THAT'S THAT'S THAT IS KIND OF WHAT THE REASON WHY BASICALLY THEY DON'T HAVE THE ROOM. YEAH. A LARGER LOT'S GOING TO HAVE MORE OF A FRONT SETBACK IN MOST CASES.

INSTEAD OF GOING A LITTLE BIT FURTHER BEHIND ON THE HOUSE. THEY THEY PUSH IT UP.

THEY GO UP TO PROPERTY LINE OR, YOU KNOW, THE SETBACK LINE.

SO THEY'RE NOT. NOW WE HAVE WE'RE COMING ACROSS THIS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

THIS IS ONE OF THOSE NEW NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORHOODS THAT JUST GOT A JURISDICTION FROM THE CITY OF EDINBURGH. I TAKE IT FROM THE ON THAT SIDE OF TOWN.

I KNOW SOMETHING THAT WE'RE STARTING TO LOOK AT INTO NOW, THAT PART OF TOWN. WE DO HAVE CARPORTS THAT WE HAVE SEEN OR THAT WE'RE SEEING.

THE STAFF SAW THAT GOT APPROVED PREVIOUSLY YEARS AGO.

[00:15:03]

BUT THOSE ARE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BEFORE CITY OF EDINBURGH MOVED INTO THEM, AND WE'RE SEEING THEM A LOT IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND WHAT WHAT DOES THE STAFF RECOMMEND? I KNOW IT SAYS DENIAL FOR THAT SETBACK, AND I KNOW THERE'S ALREADY BEEN OTHER APPROVALS BEFORE THERE AND THERE'S OTHERS THAT AREN'T COMPLYING.

WHAT WORRIES ME IS HOW ARE WE BUILDING THESE AND CAN WE GET PERMITS OR AT LEAST BUILDING PERMITS FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, AND ALSO WHERE THE SUBDIVISION COULD SOMEWHAT ALLOW THAT. AND CAN THAT BE CHANGED? MR.. JAIME, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION OVER THE PAST YEARS.

I KNOW PREVIOUS ZONING BOARDS AND EVEN PLANNING COMMISSIONS HAVE TINKERED WITH THE IDEA OF REDUCING THEM.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE CONSENSUS HAS ALL BEEN WELL.

SETBACKS ARE THERE FOR A REASON.

CORRECT. I KNOW THAT IN OLDER SUBDIVISIONS, I GUESS IT MIGHT NOT BE THAT BIG OF A PROBLEM, BUT IT DOES TAKE AWAY FROM THE ESTHETICS WHERE YOU WANT ALL THE HOUSES TO BE SET BACK AND NOW YOU HAVE SOMETHING PROTRUDING FORWARD.

IT DOES TAKE AWAY FROM THE ESTHETICS OF THE.

AND THIS ISN'T A VERY INTERESTING ONE, BECAUSE WE HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE OTHER NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ARE DOING THE SAME THING. SO THEREFORE LETTING US KNOW THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IS BEING BROUGHT UP WHERE WE HAVE CITIZENS HERE DISCUSSING OF WHY NOT TO DO IT LIKE WE'VE COME ACROSS WITH OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS HERE, YOU KNOW, IN OTHER AREAS.

AND WE'RE SEEING THAT IT'S BEING DONE. MY MAIN CONCERN, LIKE MR. VASQUEZ SAYS, IS THE SAFETY OF ALL THIS.

AND WE BROUGHT IT UP. WHERE? WHAT IF THERE'S A STRONG WIND AND IT TOPPLES OVER TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, WHICH SITS REALLY CLOSE BY? IT'S ANOTHER OPTION. AND I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE PICTURE THAT WAS PROVIDED BY STAFF.

IS, IS MAYBE WE CAN CONSIDER IT ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE INSTEAD OF IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE AMPLE ROOM TO DO SOMETHING ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE.

AND THEY HAVE A RAMP SETBACK.

THE SIDE SETBACK. RIGHT? RIGHT, RIGHT. BUT IT'S EASIER TO GIVE THEM A VARIANCE ON A SIX FOOT SIDE SETBACK THAN A ZERO ON A 20. I MEAN, THAT'S JUST A THOUGHT.

THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE TO CONSIDER. AND WOULD THERE BE A WAY WHERE CODE ENFORCEMENT COULD GO AND VERIFY CERTAIN BUILDINGS, OR WHERE WE COULD HAVE SOME SORT OF A AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIZENS, PRETTY MUCH HOLD HARMLESS IN THE SENSE OF THERE WAS NO INSPECTIONS MADE FOR THESE TYPE OF CARPORTS WHERE EVERYBODY'S ALREADY WE'RE SAYING THERE'S 13 ALREADY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO THE ONE NEXT DOOR HAS ONE DAY TO GET TAGGED BY CODE ENFORCEMENT.

OKAY. AND IT WENT TO MUNICIPAL COURT AND IT WAS DISMISSED.

AND IT WAS DISMISSED. OKAY.

SO THERE'S NO RECOURSE.

YEAH, THAT'S IT'S MAINLY THE SAFETY OF IT ALL.

YOU KNOW, WE UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE A CARPORT AND OTHER NEIGHBORS ARE DOING IT. IT'D BE A DIFFERENT STORY IF IT WAS THAT ONE HOME ONLY.

AND THERE HADN'T BEEN ANY PREVIOUS APPROVALS, WHICH THAT'S WHAT MAKES THIS INTERESTING IS, WELL, IF IT WAS APPROVED, IT WOULD HAVE TO MEET BUILDING INSPECTIONS REQUIREMENTS.

OKAY. RIGHT. AND USUALLY THEY REQUIRE A WINDSTORM DESIGN SO THAT, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T PICK UP AND LANDS IN THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.

CORRECT. YES, SIR. OR DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, FALL IN? YEAH. AND WE COME ACROSS THIS A LOT WHERE WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT MOST PEOPLE DIDN'T GET PERMITS FOR A LOT OF THESE BUILDINGS.

AND THEN. BUT THIS PARTICULAR ONE.

OKAY. I THINK YOU COULD DO AS, AS, AS A BOARD IS MAYBE HAVE A JOINT MEETING.

WE COULD DO A LUNCH, A LUNCHEON MEETING WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND JUST TALK ABOUT IT AND SEE WHAT THE PROS AND CONS ARE, SEE IF MAYBE WE COULD WE ARE IN A PERIOD RIGHT NOW WHERE WE'RE ABOUT TO AMEND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, SO MAYBE WE COULD INCORPORATE CARPORTS INTO THE DISCUSSION OF SOME OF THE CHANGES.

OH, THANK YOU. MR.. I WOULD LIKE THAT, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY OTHERS IN THAT AREA. AND IT WOULDN'T BE, IN A SENSE, FAIR FOR MRS. GARZA HERE TO HAVE GIVE A DENIAL WHEN WE'VE ALREADY OR PREVIOUS HAS ALREADY SAID, YOU KNOW, APPROVALS IN THAT AREA.

AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S GOING ON IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. SO 12 BESIDES THE SIX THAT WERE APPROVED. SO HALF OF THEM WERE APPROVED, HALF OF THEM WERE DONE ILLEGALLY.

AND THEN WE WENT THROUGH CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THEY WERE DISMISSED RIGHT NEXT DOOR.

SO I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A MEETING WITH PLANNING AND ZONING, JUST COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF YOU KNOW, AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND OUR CITIZENS WHERE THEY UNDERSTAND THE RISKS THEY RUN ALSO DOING THESE KIND OF CARPORTS.

BUT ALSO WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE APPLICATION FOR THE BUILDING OF IT.

BUT THEN AGAIN, WE DO HAVE ALREADY EXISTING ONES THAT DIDN'T GET INSPECTED.

IT'S OKAY. WE COULD FACILITATE THAT.

OKAY. THAT WORKS. SO THANK YOU, MISTER JAIME.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS FROM ANYONE IN THE.

I HAVE A QUESTION, MR. FARLEY. YES, SIR. IS THAT AN ACCURATE PICTURE OR DESIGN OF WHAT SHE'S GOING TO BE BUILDING?

[00:20:04]

THIS IS HER ASSUMED DESIGNER FOR CARPORT.

BUT WHEN SHE DOES TURN THE PLANS IN HERE AGAIN, IT'LL BE REVIEWED BY THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM.

BUILDING INSPECTION, PLANNING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS IF IT NEEDS A WINDSTORM DESIGN, THERE'S SOMETHING BUILDING INSPECTION WILL LOOK INTO. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY. RIGHT. SO, REALLY, YOU KNOW, SHE'S TRYING TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY, YOU KNOW, BESIDES THE WAY HER NEIGHBORS DID IT.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY.

SURE. MR. JAIME, I HAVE A QUESTION.

WOULD WE BE, ONCE WE DO MEET WITH PLAN AND ZONING, WOULD WE BE ABLE TO MAYBE TALK ABOUT CERTAIN REGIONS OF CERTAIN DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS? WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING YOU KNOW, TO YOU COULD DO IT BY REGIONS.

YOU COULD DO IT BY THE, I GUESS THE AGE OF THE SUBDIVISION, HOW OLD IT IS. YOU COULD ALSO DO IT BY CERTAIN DISTRICTS, LOCATIONS, SEND SOME SORT OF NOTIFICATION TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES OF ALREADY EXISTING, WHERE WE'RE GETTING TAGGED WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT FOR THESE CARPORTS AND THEN LETTING THEM SPEAK UP AND SEE WHAT ALSO WHAT THEY FEEL ABOUT THAT.

AND BECAUSE I WOULD RATHER HAVE OUR CITIZENS COME TO US WITH PERMITS AND APPLICATIONS THAN FOR THERE TO BE CARPORTS ALREADY INSTALLED, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALREADY SEEING THAT IT'S HAPPENING. I THINK WE JUST NEED TO EDUCATE MORE OF THE OF OUR CITIZENS AND LETTING THEM KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE IS AN AVENUE WHERE WE COULD CATER TO THESE KIND OF CARPORTS, WHICH ARE POPPING UP A LOT.

SO, YEAH, WE COULD DO THAT.

OKAY. THERE'S SEVERAL WAYS TO TO ATTACK IT, I GUESS, AND KIND OF DEAL WITH THE, WITH THE PROBLEM.

BUT IN THIS CASE, I DO NOTICE THAT THIS ONE DOESN'T HAVE A GARAGE.

IN THE IN SOME OF THE DOWNTOWN AREAS, WE SEE THAT PEOPLE USE THE GARAGE FOR STORAGE, AND THEN THEY COME HERE AND ASKING FOR FOR A CARPORT, BECAUSE NOW THEY WANT THEIR CAR UNDER A SHADE BECAUSE THEY'RE USING THEIR TWO CAR GARAGE TO STORE OTHER ITEMS. YES, SIR.

AND THIS NEIGHBORHOOD SEEMS TO BE THAT IT'S MORE OF A COMMON OCCURRENCE WITH THESE CARPORTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

I'LL JUST WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY. ALL RIGHT.

WELL, IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE THAT MIGHT WANT TO COMMENT.

I AM GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO THE BOARD HERE TO VOTE ON THIS.

YES, SIR. OH, HELLO. I'M SORRY I DIDN'T.

WAS THERE SUPPOSED TO BE AN APPLICATION OR ANYTHING? I DIDN'T APPLY FOR THIS.

OH, GOOD AFTERNOON MA'AM. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS KIM LATTA AND I'M NERVOUS.

SORRY, MA'AM. IF WE COULD JUST GET YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. 3525 WEST ALTEZZA DRIVE. THANK YOU.

I DID NOT GET A PERMIT.

I HAVE AN EXISTING CARPORT.

IT HAS A. IS IT STEEL CANOPY? IT'S A CANOPY. I THINK IT LOOKS ESTHETICALLY PLEASING.

I DON'T THINK IT LOOKS BAD AT ALL.

IT'S NOT FOLLOWING REGULATION, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK DOWN THE STREET, THERE'S ANOTHER ONE, AND YOU TURN AROUND THE OTHER WAY.

THERE'S ANOTHER ONE, AND THERE'S TWO MORE IN THE NEXT STREET.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, THERE'S LIKE ONE HUGE ONE WITH MADE OUT OF WOOD.

VERY BEAUTIFUL. I WOULD HATE TO SEE THEM BRING THAT ONE DOWN, BECAUSE THAT'S STILL NOT IN CODE EITHER.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MAYBE A RESOLUTION TO WHERE WE DON'T HAVE TO TEAR THIS DOWN BECAUSE IT DOES HELP US WITH SHADE HEAT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE HOT TEMPERATURES.

AND IT'S IT DOESN'T REALLY PROTECT US FROM THE RAIN BECAUSE IT'S A CANOPY, BUT IT HELPS IN A SENSE THAT, YOU KNOW, MY CAR IS GOING TO LAST A LITTLE LONGER. I'M HERE TO JUST MAYBE ASK TO TO SEE WHAT WHAT WE CAN DO TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT, A CONSENSUS OF, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T FOLLOW THE RULES.

AND, YOU KNOW, I WOULD HATE TO TEAR THIS DOWN BECAUSE WE WE WORK SO HARD TO PAY FOR THIS.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU DO GET A PERMIT.

OKAY. BECAUSE IF YOU IF YOU WERE TO EVER GO TO SELL THIS PROPERTY AND THERE'S NO PERMIT, THEN IT'S A CLOUD ON THE TITLE, OKAY? YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SELL IT UNLESS YOU DID GET A VARIANCE.

OKAY. SO IF WE GO THROUGH THE PERMIT PROCESS WILL I HAVE TO TEAR IT DOWN? THAT IS SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS, MA'AM, BECAUSE WE DO UNDERSTAND. AND YOU'RE NOT THE ONLY PERSON. THAT'S WHY I'M BRINGING IT UP TO DISCUSSION. BECAUSE WE DO NEED TO

[00:25:03]

WE GET A LOT OF. WELL, HE DID IT.

I WANTED TO DO IT, AND I SAW IT THE OTHER WAY.

A PERSON DO IT AND THE OTHER WAY AROUND ALSO DO IT.

AND SO IT BECOMES ONE OF THESE LIKE, OKAY, WHAT ARE WE DOING? AND IT'S MAINLY FOR US.

WE'RE LOOKING AT THE SAFETY OF ALL THIS BECAUSE LIKE I TOLD PREVIOUS CITIZENS, OKAY, TODAY WE'VE HAD PEOPLE COME LIKE I USED THE HIGH GRADE METAL BEAMS, ETC. AND I SAID, OKAY, GREAT, BUT HOW DO WE KNOW YOUR NEIGHBOR'S NOT GOING TO DO SOMETHING WITH THE MOST FLIMSY WOOD? YOU KNOW, YOU'RE WALKING YOUR DOG OR YOU KNOW YOU'RE OUT AND ABOUT DOING YARD WORK.

THIS THING TOPPLES OVER FOR WHATEVER REASON.

THAT'S WHERE US AS A CITY ARE CONCERNED WITH THE CARPORTS.

WE UNDERSTAND IF A COMMUNITY OR SUBDIVISIONS ARE OKAY WITH THERE BEING CARPORTS IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. AT THE END OF THE DAY, LIKE IT SAID, YOU KNOW, THE CURB APPEAL OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES, YOU KNOW, BUT IF OUR CITIZENS, OWNERS OF THESE HOMES ARE OKAY WITH THAT AND ALSO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, WELL, THEN IT'S SOMETHING AS A CITY, WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT AND COME UP WITH A SOLUTION SO WE COULD, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, CITIZENS LIKE YOURSELVES, WHERE WHAT AM I GOING TO DO? I HOPE YOU DON'T TEAR IT DOWN. BUT ALSO WE ALSO HAVE TO PUT SOME SORT OF REGULATION WHERE WE DON'T WANT THE NEIGHBOR RIGHT, TO COME UP AND PUT A TWO STORY, YOU KNOW, CARPORT, AND THEN IT BECOMES LIKE, WHOA, WAIT A MINUTE. I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST GOING TO BE A CARPORT. NOW THERE'S AN APARTMENT ON THE OVERHEAD, AND THEN IT BECOMES THIS, YOU KNOW, UNORGANIZED AREA. SO NOW THAT YOU MENTIONED THAT.

SO, MR. GARZA, I AM GOING TO STOP THIS.

IT DOES SEEM LIKE THIS WOULD BE MORE GEARED TOWARD PUBLIC COMMENT.

IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THIS INDIVIDUAL IS SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THE ITEM THAT THE BOARD IS TO DISCUSS BECAUSE OF THAT.

IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AGAIN, EITHER FOR OR AGAINST AS PER THE RULES THAT ARE STATED IN THE AGENDA.

SO BECAUSE OF THAT, IT DOES NOT SEEM RELEVANT TO TO THIS.

AND SO WE CAN MEET YOU TOMORROW IN THE MORNING IF YOU'D LIKE TO DISCUSS IT A LITTLE BIT MORE. THAT WOULD BE THE PROPER AVENUE. IF SHE HAS QUESTIONS, SHE CAN DEFINITELY MEET WITH CITY STAFF TO ADDRESS THAT.

AND THAT CAN BE TALKED THROUGH.

BUT RIGHT NOW, THE CURRENT AGENDA ITEM IS FOR EITHER IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA. THANK YOU.

AND SO WHERE WHERE WOULD WE HAVE THESE CITIZENS TALK TO OR WHO DO WE HAVE THEM ADDRESS THESE QUESTIONS TO? BECAUSE IT IS A QUESTION THAT'S COMING UP. SHE MAY TIME OUT OF HER DAY TO COME AND TALK TO US ABOUT THIS. I WANT TO KNOW SOME SORT OF SOLUTIONS.

I SOLUTIONS. I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE, BUT I ALSO WANT TO LEAD THEM SOMEWHERE TO TALK TO SOMEBODY ABOUT.

FOR ALL OF US INVOLVED HERE, YOU KNOW.

SO WHAT WOULD BE THE MR. FARLEY? WELL, I JUST GAVE HIM MY CARD.

WE CAN START THERE. TOMORROW IN THE MORNING OR ANYTIME THAT YOU'RE AVAILABLE, YOU CAN COME IN AND WE COULD TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT YOUR SITUATION.

OKAY. OKAY. YES, MA'AM.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

SURE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS OR.

OR SUGGESTIONS ON THIS? ALL RIGHT. I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP FOR THE BOARD TO DO A MOTION ON THIS.

DO I HAVE ANY ANYBODY TO.

OH, I MOTION TO APPROVE IT.

AND YEAH I MOTION TO APPROVE THIS.

AND THEN WE WILL DISCUSS PLAN AND ZONING AT A DIFFERENT TIME FOR SOMETHING ELSE.

SECOND. I HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. ALMAGUER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ALL RIGHT. MOTION APPROVED.

ALL RIGHT. GOING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, WE HAVE A REQUEST BY ROBERT RAUL LOZANO FOR A VARIANCE TO THE CITY OF EDINBURG UNIFIED

[B. Request by Robert Raul Lozano for a Variance to the City of Edinburg Unified Development]

TO HAVE AN ON SITE SEWAGE FACILITY FOR A PROPOSED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT INSTEAD OF CONNECTING TO THE PUBLIC SEWER SYSTEM AT TEX-MEX SURVEY WEST, 165FT EAST 825 FOOT LOT SIX, SECTION 248 5.0 ACRES GROSS, 4.92 ACRES, NET HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS LOCATED AT 2917 EAST ROGERS ROAD.

OKAY, SO THIS APPLICANT REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS IT APPLIES TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR SANITARY SEWER.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO UTILIZE AN ONSITE SEWAGE FACILITY, WHICH IS A SEPTIC TANK.

INSTEAD OF TYING INTO OR CONNECT TO THE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM.

FOUR PROPOSED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

SO THIS PICTURE HERE SHOWS THE HOUSE AND THE FRONT.

AND THIS HERE, THIS LOCATION HERE IS MORE OR LESS WHERE THEY WOULD BUILD THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT HAVING TO GO ALL THE WAY TO THIS LOCATION HERE, OVER 380FT AND TIE IN.

AND THAT'S SHOWS A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THIS PROFILE HERE, SHOWING HOW THE PROPOSED SEWER LINE WOULD HAVE TO CONNECT.

WE'LL GET INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF EAST ROGERS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 600FT WEST OF NORTH DOOLITTLE

[00:30:04]

SURROUNDING ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL, SUBURBAN, MULTIFAMILY, AND RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DISTRICT.

SURROUNDING LAND USES ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES AND VACANT LAND.

SO THIS PROPERTY REALLY DOES HAVE SOME INTERESTING BACKGROUND TO IT.

SO THIS PROPERTY IS A FIVE ACRE TRACT THAT IS PART OF THE TEX MEX SURVEY.

SO HERE AGAIN, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO BUILD AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, NOT A GUEST HOUSE, BUT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

TWO DIFFERENT THINGS THERE TO KEEP IN MIND.

AND SUBMITTED PLANS INDICATING THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

SO ON THIS MAP HERE, IF YOU SEE WHERE THE X IS, THIS IS WHERE HE'S PROPOSING TO BUILD THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

AND WE CAN SEE IT SAYS REALLY FAR BACK FROM THE ROAD FROM EAST ROGERS ROAD.

SO INSTEAD OF CONNECTING TO THE PUBLIC SEWER SYSTEM, AS REQUIRED BY THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO USE AN ON SITE STORAGE FACILITY HERE AT SEPTIC TANK FOR THE PROPOSED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

SO FAR AS OF TODAY, WE RECEIVED NO COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THIS REQUEST.

SO THIS PROPERTY DOES HAVE FRONTAGE AGAINST THE EAST ROGERS ROAD.

AN EXCEPTION FOR ON-SITE SEWER SYSTEM.

THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ARTICLE FIVE SAYS THAT IF THE LOT IS MORE THAN 400FT FROM A REASONABLE, ACCESSIBLE SEWER SYSTEM, THEN THAT'S AN EXCEPTION TO TYING IN.

HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE, IT'S APPROXIMATELY 383FT FROM THE CITY OF EDINBURGH SEWER LINES, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ROGERS ROAD.

SO IT DOESN'T QUALIFY FOR THIS EXCEPTION, HOWEVER.

HOWEVER, OUR CITY ENGINEER LOOKED AT IT AND SO DID OUR STAFF ENGINEER, AND THEY BASICALLY SAID THAT IT WOULD NOT BE FEASIBLE TO EXTEND THE LINES ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT DUE TO THE DISTANCE, THE TERRAIN AND SO FORTH.

AND OUR CITY ENGINEER ALSO AGREED WITH IT AS WELL.

MOREOVER, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN SHOWING THE DESIGN OF THE SEPTIC SYSTEM.

THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE BY A REGISTERED SANITARIAN.

SO BASED ON OUR CITY ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST. THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY. SURE. DO WE HAVE ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO TALK ON THE ON THIS AGENDA? IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, SIR, FOR THE RECORD. ROBERTO RAUL LOZANO AND BACK IN 24, WE TALKED TO MORELAND AND GAZA USED TO BE HERE IN PLANNING, AND WE DISCUSSED THIS, AND WE WANT TO MAKE EITHER GUEST HOUSE OR IN-LAWS HOUSE. AND I TOLD HIM, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW THAT WE NEED THE HOUSE PERMIT FOR SEPTIC TANKS ALSO.

AND WE DISCUSSED THAT.

AND HE SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'LL SEE BECAUSE OF THE CITY AND ALL THIS AND THAT. SO THE ONLY AGREEMENT THAT WE WENT TO IS THAT HE TOLD ME, IF YOU DONATE 20FT TO THE CITY, THEY SAY, WE WILL ALLOW YOU TO BUILD YOUR HOUSE WITH SEPTIC TANKS.

HE'S NO LONGER WITH THE CITY.

HE I THINK HE QUIT IN DECEMBER OR SOMEWHERE LIKE THAT.

YEAH. HE WENT TO ANOTHER. YEAH, HE WENT TO SOME OTHER PLACE.

AND THEN I'LL TALK TO MR. FURLEY, AND WE'VE BEEN AT IT, YOU KNOW.

SO HOPEFULLY WE GET APPROVED ON THAT.

THANK YOU, MR. LOZANO.

SO YOU DID A DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR 20FT.

AT 20FT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, MR. LOZANO.

OKAY. HERE'S THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR 20FT.

SO ROGERS ROAD IS A COLLECTOR, RIGHT? AND SO ONCE HE GOT THIS ADDITIONAL FOOT OF RIGHT OF WAY, 20FT, AND HE RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FROM THE CITY.

SO HE'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, AT THIS CONTINUOUSLY TRYING TO GET THIS PASSED. THANK YOU, MISTER PURDY.

ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS? OKAY. I WILL NOW CLOSE THE ITEM AND OPEN IT TO THE BOARD MEMBERS TO VOTE ON THIS ITEM.

OR ANY COMMENTS? MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE MR. REESE WITH THE MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND FROM MR. MARK GONZALEZ. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

[00:35:02]

GOING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM WE HAVE FOR TODAY.

WE HAVE A REQUEST BY ROGELIO CAMARO CAMARO FOR A VARIANCE TO THE CITY OF EDINBURG UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW AS FOLLOWS.

TO HAVE 11 PARKING SPACES INSTEAD OF THE 13 PARKING SPACES REQUIRED TO HAVE A TEN FOOT

[C. Request by Rogelio Camero for a Variance to the City of Edinburg Unified Development Code]

LOT ONE, HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS, LOCATED AT 2104 NORTH SUGAR ROAD.

SO THERE ARE TWO VARIANCES THAT THAT'S BEFORE THE BOARD THIS EVENING.

THE FIRST VARIANCE IS AS IT APPLIES TO OFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING SPACES.

SO THIS IS AN EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING AT THIS LOCATION HERE.

AND ADDING THE ADDITIONAL UNITS WOULD TRIGGER THE ADDITIONAL PARKING.

SO THE APPLICANT IS ASKING TO HAVE 11 PARKING SPACES INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 13 SPACES.

AND HE SHOWS ON THIS SITE PLAN 11 PARKING SPACES AND JUST KEEP IT IN MIND.

EACH BEDROOM REQUIRES A PARKING SPACE AS PER THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THE SECOND VARIANCE IS TO TO APPLIES TO A LOT DIMENSION AND SETBACKS.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, ESPECIALLY THIS LOCATION HERE THE PLAT NOTE REQUIRES A 15 FOOT REAR SETBACK.

THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR A TEN FOOT VARIANCE INSTEAD OF THE 15FT THAT'S REQUIRED.

AND REALLY, THE TEN FOOT VARIANCE IS WHAT IS APPLICABLE TODAY FOR A MULTIPLEX MULTIPLEXES OR DUPLEX TWO DOUBLE DUPLEX FOURPLEX APARTMENTS.

SO THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF NORTH SUGAR ROAD.

ADJACENT ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT TO THE NORTH.

TO THE SOUTH YOU HAVE RESIDENTIAL, SUBURBAN AND THE ADJACENT LAND USES OR SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.

SO THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF A SUBDIVISION.

IT WAS RECORDED IN JULY THE 20TH, 1995.

SO THE APPLICANT CAME TO THE CITY WITH A SITE PLAN.

STAFF REVIEWED THE SITE PLAN, AND WE NOTICED THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PARKING AND ALSO THE VARIANCE THAT THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR IN THE REAR SETBACK HERE. AND THE APPLICANT TURNED IN HIS APPLICATION ON APRIL THE 23RD, 2025. AND TODAY, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTICES FOR OR AGAINST THIS REQUEST.

SO THIS IS HOW WE CAME UP WITH THE PARKING.

THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN TO ADD FOUR ADDITIONAL UNITS FOR A TOTAL OF EIGHT UNITS. SO HERE YOU HAVE FOUR APARTMENTS, TWO BEDROOM UNITS.

THERE'LL BE TWO, FOUR, SIX, EIGHT PARKING SPACES.

EACH ONE OF THESE HAS A BEDROOM FOR A TOTAL OF 13 PARKING SPACES.

SO THE TWO OF THE PROPOSED UNITS ALSO DO NOT MEET THE REQUIRED REAR SETBACKS.

THESE TWO UNITS IN THE BACK HERE.

SO THAT'S WHY HE'S ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE FOR THE TEN FOOT REAR INSTEAD OF THE 15 FOOT THAT'S REQUIRED. THE PROPOSED REAR SETBACK OF TEN FEET WOULD BE IN LINE WITH THE CURRENT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTIPLEX BUILDINGS TODAY.

THE PROPOSED ADDITIONAL UNITS, AS PREVIOUSLY NOTED, DOES INCREASE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

CURRENTLY, THERE ARE FOUR TWO BEDROOM UNITS WITH EIGHT PARKING SPACES.

THAT'S WHAT'S EXISTING IN THIS BUILDING HERE.

THE PROPOSAL IS TO ADD THREE ONE BEDROOM UNITS AND TWO BEDROOM AND ONE TWO BEDROOM UNIT, FOR A TOTAL REQUIREMENT OF 13 PARKING SPACES.

AND HERE AGAIN, THE THE SITE PLAN ONLY SHOWS 11 PARKING SPACES.

SO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE FOR THE REAR SETBACK BECAUSE IT'S IN LINE WITH OUR CURRENT ZONING FOR TODAY.

HOWEVER, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE 11 PARKING SPACES INSTEAD OF THE 13. HERE AGAIN, IF APPROVED, THEY WOULD HAVE TO MEET ALL THE DEVELOPMENT CODES AND STANDARDS. THANK YOU, MR. FARLEY. SURE. DO WE HAVE ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? SEEING. HELLO, GUYS. OKAY.

HELLO. MY NAME IS ROGELIO CAMERO, AND IT'S THE ACTRESSES.

LET'S SEE. 1802 NAGDCA.

GOOD AFTERNOON MR.. GOOD AFTERNOON SIR.

WELL, YOU KNOW, WE COME TODAY JUST TO SEE YOU GUYS CAN COMPLY WITH THE THE VARIANCE.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THOSE FOUR EXISTING APARTMENTS RIGHT NOW.

AND WE WAS TALKING TO MR. FURLEY. THAT APARTMENT NUMBER ONE HAS ONE, ONLY ONE VEHICLE,

[00:40:03]

AND SHE HAS ONE VEHICLE ONLY.

I KNOW THIS IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW.

IT CAN CHANGE IN THE FUTURE. THE RENTERS CAN LEAVE.

BUT THAT'S ONE OF THE NOTES THAT I WANTED TO SAY ON THE ON THE VARIANCE FOR THE PARKING SPACES. OKAY. THANK YOU.

MR.. YEAH. HI. MY NAME IS VICTOR FARIAS, AND I'M A REALTOR, AND I'M HELPING MR.. CAMERO.

THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS HIS DAUGHTER.

SO SHE LIVES IN NUMBER FOUR.

SHE HAS ONLY ONE CAR. SO RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT A PROBLEM.

SO HER DAUGHTER IS A NURSE RN, SO SHE'S TRYING TO DO SOME INVESTMENTS, AND THAT'S WHAT SHE'S TRYING TO PUT HER INVESTMENT.

SO I HOPE YOU CAN APPROVE IT.

WE'RE GOING TO COMPLY WITH EVERYTHING THAT THE CITY CD REQUIRES.

THANK YOU. MR.. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.

SO I SEE THE UNITS. THEY'RE A LITTLE SEPARATED FROM EACH OTHER.

IS THERE A REASON WHY WE'RE NOT LOOKING INTO DOING SOMETHING LIKE WHAT'S ALREADY EXISTING THERE TO MAYBE MAKE MORE ROOM FOR PARKING SPACES AND AND WHAT IS THE REASON BEHIND THAT? WAS IT SOMETHING HAVING TO DO WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING OR THE PERMITS DEPARTMENT? WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, ANY, I BELIEVE IS THE ONE FROM BUILDING INSPECTION HERE. OR MAYBE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CAN ASSIST AFTER YOU HAVE SO MANY UNITS UNDER ONE ROOF THAT TRIGGERS A SPRINKLER SYSTEM.

AND OUR FIRE MARSHAL CAN EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.

ROBERT ROJAS, FIRE MARSHAL, CITY OF EDINBURGH.

SO THIS PROPERTY DID COME IN A PRIOR WITH THREE UNITS UNDER ONE ROOF.

AND SO THIS GENTLEMAN IS TURNING IN HIS PLAN DIFFERENTLY AND SO HE CAN COMPLY.

SO THAT'S WHAT IT IS THERE.

OKAY. AND IF YOU KNOW THE SITE PLAN, HE DOES MEET THE REQUIRED BUILDING SEPARATION AND THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD AND FRONT YARD SETBACKS.

THANK YOU, MR. FOLEY. YEAH.

THE CONCERN IS THE OVERFLOW PARKING.

RIGHT. IF WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO PARK? ARE THEY JUST GOING TO START PARKING ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD? YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S ONLY ONE INDIVIDUAL, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A GUEST, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE KIND OF GOING TO HAVE TO BE FIGHTING FOR FOR SPOTS.

I'M ASSUMING THAT THEY'RE ASSIGNED PARKING SPACES.

SO I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE COMPLICATED. I MEAN, IT'S TWO PARKING SPACES IS A LOT RIGHT, FOR, FOR THOSE UNITS.

AND OBVIOUSLY THE SEPARATION SO THAT WE WOULDN'T SPRINKLER SYSTEM.

BUT I THINK IT'S, IT'S GOING TO BE A TOUGH ONE ON THE ACTUAL PARKING ITSELF BECAUSE IT'S IT'S THE OVERFLOW THAT'S THOSE BOTH STREETS, 17.5 AND SUGAR ROAD ARE VERY BUSY ROADS.

SO YOU KNOW, I THINK IT WILL BE A SAFETY CONCERN ALSO FROM MY PART.

WHERE WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO PARK HARK IF THEY HAVE A GUEST OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE. THANK YOU, MR. RUSSKIES.

THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.

SHE'S VERY YOUNG, SO SHE SHE'S SHE'S A SINGLE, AND SHE'S SHE'S GOING TO MANAGE THE PROPERTY WITH THE HELP OF HER FATHER.

SO THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY THEY RESPECT THE RULES OF THE CONTRACT FOR THE NUMBER OF CARS ALLOWED. TRYING TO AVOID THAT SO THEY KNOW THEY CAN.

THEY CANNOT GO OVER 11.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE A HONESTLY A RESPONSIBILITY AND A COMMITMENT OF THE OWNERS. SO THEY KNOW. AND THAT'S WHAT THEY REQUIRE THAT BECAUSE THEY THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CONTRACT THEY ARE USING, THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THE, THE HOW MANY CARS ARE ALLOWED IN EACH PROPERTY.

SOME OF THEM THEY HAVE ONE BEDROOM.

SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE.

IT HASN'T BEEN AN ISSUE.

SO I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE IF THEY RESPECT, BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE A RULE, AT LEAST RIGHT NOW IT MEETS CODE, RIGHT? RIGHT NOW CURRENTLY WITH PARKING SPACES.

YES. RIGHT NOW IT DOES.

BECAUSE CURRENTLY THE ONLY THING THAT'S OCCUPYING THIS SITE IS THE EXISTING FOUR APARTMENTS. YEAH. I MEAN, WE UNDERSTAND THAT COMPLETELY, YOU KNOW, BUT AGAIN IT'S AN INVESTMENT, RIGHT? IF FOR WHATEVER REASON THAT INVESTMENT GETS SOLD TO SOMEBODY ELSE, THEN SOMEBODY ELSE GETS, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE ISSUES WITH THE PARKING.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK FOR THE AREA THAT IT'S AT, IT'S ALREADY VERY TIGHT.

AND I'M SURE ALL THAT AREA IS GOING TO GET DEVELOPED AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO HAVE ISSUES WITH PARKING. SO THAT'S THE ONLY CONCERN THAT I HAVE WITH WITH THIS PROPOSAL.

IS THERE SOMETHING THAT BECAUSE, I MEAN, THERE'S NOT A PLAN TO, TO SELL RIGHT NOW. BUT YOU ARE RIGHT.

THEY PROBABLY IN THE FUTURE AND I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT THERE'S NOT A PLAN TO, TO SELL IT.

I MEAN, IT'S IT'S AN INVESTMENT BETWEEN MR. CAMERO AND HIS DAUGHTER.

SO THEY WANT TO KEEP IT AS LONG AS POSSIBLE.

[00:45:01]

THAT'S THAT'S WHAT IT IS. UNDERSTAND? THANK YOU, MR. FARIAS. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC THAT MIGHT WANT TO SAY ANY COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. I WILL CLOSE AND OPEN IT UP HERE TO THE BOARD MEMBERS FOR DISCUSSION.

A MOTION TO DENY FIRST REQUEST, WHICH IS THE PARKING SPACE REQUIRED.

AND I APPROVE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE TEN FOOT REAR SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE 15 FOOT.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. VASQUEZ.

ANYONE ELSE SECOND WITH THE SAME TERMS? SAME. SAME PROPOSAL? THAT'S CORRECT.

TO FOLLOW WHAT THE CITY IS INDICATING.

OKAY. THEN WE CLOSE THE ITEM FOR DENIAL MOTION ON THE FIRST REQUEST AND THE MOTION.

THE FIRST REQUEST FROM CITY STAFF.

SO THE SO THE DENIAL ON THE FIRST REQUEST OF THE 11 PARKING SPACES INSTEAD OF THE 13 AND APPROVAL ON THE SECOND REQUEST ON THE TEN FOOT INSTEAD OF THE 15.

OKAY. SO THEN WE WILL GO LEGAL'S SUGGESTION ON THIS WOULD BE TO TAKE EACH ONE INDIVIDUALLY. JUST SO IT CAN MAKE FOR A CLEANER RECORD.

ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT DOES SOUND LIKE THERE MAY BE A DENIAL.

SO THERE ARE SOME MOVING PARTS TO IT BECAUSE OF THAT LEGAL SUGGESTION WOULD BE TO TAKE EACH ONE INDIVIDUALLY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. I MOTION TO DENY THE FIRST REQUEST.

OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY FROM MR. VAZQUEZ. DO WE GET I SECOND THAT MOTION, AND I SECOND.

SECOND FROM MR. ALMAGUER.

SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ALL RIGHT. NOW, GOING ON TO THE SECOND ITEM, WHICH IS FOR THE SETBACK.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY MR. VAZQUEZ. DO I HAVE A SECOND FOR THE MOTION FOR MR. ALMAGUER? SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. ALMAGUER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR FOR THE SECOND MOTION.

ALL RIGHT, WE GO AHEAD AND APPROVE.

THAT GOES AWAY. OKAY. ANY COMMENTS, MR. HYMAN? NO, I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN.

I THINK IT'S SHE'S TRYING TO BUILD TOO MUCH ON THIS LOT.

I THINK THAT'S I THINK IF HE ELIMINATES THIS UNIT HE'LL HE'LL HE'LL MEET CODE.

HE'S STILL GOING TO NEED THE TEN FOOT, HOWEVER, TO TO EXTEND ON ON THIS UNIT SEVEN AND EIGHT. MAY I SAY SOME COMMENTS ON THIS, ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT? SO, MR. FARIAS I'M JUST GOING TO ADDRESS YOU GUYS, MR. KAMARA. I UNDERSTAND ABOUT MAKING THE INVESTMENT, CREATING THESE APARTMENTS. BUT GOING BACK TO WHAT MR. VASQUEZ IS SAYING, THAT AREA IS GROWING A LOT.

AND I KNOW WE NEED TO SET THE RIGHT FOOT ENTERING THIS INVESTMENT, HAVING ENOUGH PARKING SPACES.

THE UNITS THAT WE ARE SEEING HERE ARE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN A ONE BEDROOM UNIT, WHICH, YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE SAYING IN THE FUTURE COULD GET SOLD AND, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN FROM THERE.

RIGHT NOW. WE DO HAVE ONE VEHICLE PER UNIT, BUT I FEEL THAT WE DO NEED A RESTRUCTURE.

MR.. JAIME, LIKE YOU HAD MENTIONED, AND REDRAW THIS BECAUSE THEY ARE THERE IS TOO MUCH DEVELOPMENT TRYING TO HAPPEN IN ONE PROPERTY, ESPECIALLY IN SUCH A BUSY INTERSECTION WHERE WE DO NEED THAT PARKING SPACE.

I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THOSE COMMENTS OUT TO, YOU KNOW, FOR THE STAFF TO KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WE ARE AGREEING WITH THE STAFF SAYING THAT I THINK WE NEED TO RESTRUCTURE THE PARKING SCENARIO AND ALSO THE BUILDING SIZES ON THESE UNITS. YES, SIR.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I THINK THAT IS THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA FOR TODAY. AND THAT'S ABOUT IT WENT OUT FOR INFORMATION ONLY THE ATTENDANCE ROSTER.

WE DO HAVE MR. MICHAEL CANTU ABSENT TODAY.

AND ADJOURNMENT. I HEREBY VERIFY THAT THIS NOTICE OF THE MEETING WAS POSTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551 041 AT THE EDINBURGH CITY HALL BUILDING, 415 WEST EDINBURGH DRIVE, EDINBURGH, TEXAS. VISIBLE AND ACCESSIBLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC AFTER REGULAR WORKING HOURS AT 5 P.M. ON THIS 23RD DAY OR 28TH DAY OF MAY 2025.

SO MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

IF WE COULD HAVE A MOTION.

MOTION, MOTION TO MOTION.

OKAY. WE HAVE MR. GONZALEZ, A SECOND.

MR. ALMAGUER WITH A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL RIGHT. MEETING ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.