[Call to Order]
[1. Minutes: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing on Approving the Minutes from the Regular Meeting Held on September 14, 2021]
[00:00:13]
>> GO AHEAD AND CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.
>> NO. >> APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM
PREVIOUS MEETING. >> I DON'T THINK WE CAN IMPROVE MINUTES AS WRITTEN AT THIS TIME BECAUSE MR. THOMAS PARTICIPATED IN MOTIONS. HE IS NOT LISTED AS VOTING OR AN ATTENDEE. WE WILL NEED TO ADD HIM AND
THEN THEY SHOULD BE ALL RIGHT. >> I ASSUME THOSE CORRECTIONS WILL BE MADE AND WE CAN READDRESS ITEM IN NEXT MEETING.
APPROVE A MOTION TO TABLE THAT. >> I MOVED.
>> SECOND. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
[2. BA-2021-12: Receive a Report and Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing On A Request From Josh Stallings (Represented By Gerard Real Estate LLC) For Approval Of A Special Exception To Allow Expansion Of A Nonconforming Use, Specifically By Converting A Vacant Accessory Building To An Additional Apartment Unit On The Site Of Existing Apartment Buildings At 1250 Elm Street In A Heavy Commercial Zoning District (Brad Stone)]
>> TABLE MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING TO BE MADE.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FIVE MEMBERS, FOUR BE PRESENT.
APPLICANT 180 DAYS FROM DAY TO OBTAIN THE PERMIT IF ONE IS REQUIRED. LONGER PERIOD OF TIME CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD IF REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT AT THIS HEARING. THE BUILDING PERMIT MAY BE APPLIED FOR THE DAY THE REQUEST IS APPROVED AFTER THE MEETING HAS ADJOURNED. IF HER REQUEST IS IED, 12 MONTHS FROM THIS DATE. APPEALS FROM DECISION OF THIS BOARD MAY BE MADE COURT RECORD, THIS CASE DISTRICT COURT WITHIN 10 DAYS FROM THIS DATE. WE NEED TO SWEAR IN ANYONE COME FORWARD AND PRESENT REGARDING THE CASE ON THE AGENDA TODAY.
IF YOU PLAN TO COME TO A LECTERN TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ANY CASE TODAY, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING
BUT THE TRUTH. >> (INAUDIBLE).
>> THANK YOU. FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS BA-2021-12, RECEIVE SUPPORT PUBLIC HEARING ON REQUEST FROM JOSH STALLINGS, REPRESENTED BY GERARD REAL ESTATE, ALLOW EXPANSION NON-CONFORMING USED SPECIFICALLY BY CONVERTING VACANT ACCESSORY BUILDING TO AN ADDITIONAL APARTMENT UNIT ON THE SIDE OF EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDINGS AT 1250 AM SO, HEAVY
COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
MY NAME IS BRAD STONE, PLANNER ON CITY STAFF.
PRESENTING ONE AND ONLY CASE TODAY.
ONE AND ONLY CASE CONCERNS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THIS CASE A REQUEST TO EXPAND NONCONFORMING USE.
SPECIFICALLY, BY CONVERTING SOME OR ALL DETACHED EXCESS REBUILDING TO AN ADDITIONAL APARTMENT UNIT.
ON THE SITE OF SOME EXISTING APARTMENT UNITS.
THE YELLOW STRIPED AREA IS THE SUBJECT SITE ITSELF.
IT INCLUDES TWO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS.
EACH WITH FOUR APARTMENT UNITS. THESE TWO, FOUR UNIT APARTMENT BUILDINGS, 1983 1984. LONG PRECEDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE TWO APARTMENT BUILDINGS, WAS THE CONSTRUCTION OF APPROXIMATELY 30 FOOT BY 50 FOOT CONCRETE BLOCK BUILDING LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST OR LOWER LEFT CORNER OF THIS SITE.
THAT CONCRETE BLOCK BUILDING BELIEVED TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT SOMETIME BETWEEN 1955 AND 1964. ARIEL PHOTOS FROM EARLY 1983 INDICATE THAT BUILDING WAS STILL THE ONLY BUILDING ON THIS SITE AT THAT TIME. AGAIN, IN EARLY 1983.
LATER IN 1983 AND IN 1984 THE TWO 2/4 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED ON THIS SITE.
FADED SIGNS INDICATE THE CONCRETE BLOCK BUILDING ONCE USED AS LAUNDRY AND DRY CLEANING FACILITY.
THE PROPONENT MAY HAVE MORE INSIGHT ON THE MATTER, BUT I BELIEVE THE BUILDING IS NOW VACANT AND ACCESSORY TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES ON SAME SITE.
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS AERIAL PHOTO, THIS HIGHLIGHTED PROPERTY IS BORDERED BY COMMERCIAL USE ON SOUTH AND WEST BOUNDARIES. THOSE ARE COMMERCIAL USE
[00:05:01]
BORDERING BUTTERNUT STREET. NORTH AND EAST FROM SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE SINGLE AND 2 FAMILY RESIDENCES.SLIDE SHOWS ZONING MAP. THE COLOR RED INDICATES COMMERCIAL ZONING, SPECIFICALLY COMMERCIAL ZONING THAT ABUTS BUTTERNUT STREET. THE YELLOW COLOR INDICATES MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SHOWN IN THE VERY CENTER OF THIS SITE IS LOCATED IN THE SAME HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AS PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH AND WEST. HAS BEEN IN THAT SAME HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS SINCE AT LEAST 1974.
IN OTHER WORDS, ZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES HAVE NOT CHANGED SINCE 1974.
WHEN THE APARTMENT BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED, MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES WERE ALLOWED IN HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. AGAIN, IN 1983 AND 1984.
EVER SINCE 2010 NO NEW RESIDENCES OF ANY KIND HAVE BEEN ALLOWED IN HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
THE EXISTING MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES ON THE SITE ARE THEREBY NOW CATEGORIZED AS LEGALLY NONCONFORMING.
THEY ARE NON-CONFORMING, OF COURSE, BECAUSE RESIDENTIAL USE NO LONGER COMPLIES WITH THE PRESENT HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION. BUT THEY ARE LEGAL BECAUSE THE EXISTING APARTMENTS WERE QUITE LAWFUL WHEN THOSE BUILDINGS WERE INITIALLY CONSTRUCTED. THE PROPERTY'S OWNER NOW WANTS TO INTENSIFY THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE ON THIS FAMILY.
SPECIFICALLY BY CONVERTING SOME OR ALL OF THE EXISTING EXCESS REBUILDING TO A NEW APARTMENT UNIT.NY SUCH EXPANSION OF LEGALLY ÃEXCUSE ME. ANY SUCH EXPANSION OF THIS OR ANY LEGALLY NONCONFORMING USE IS GENERALLY NOT ALLOWED BY ZONING REGULATIONS. UNLESS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPROVES SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO DO SO.
THAT IS WHAT IS ON THE TABLE FOR CONSIDERATION TODAY.
YOUR PERMISSION TO EXPAND LEGALLY NONCONFORMING USE BY ALLOWING CONVERSION OF ACCESSORY BUILDING TO ONE ADDITIONAL APARTMENT UNIT. THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IDENTIFIES A COUPLE OF GENERAL CRITERIA FOR APPROVING SUCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION. ONE CRITERION IS WHETHER SUCH EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING USE WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH OR CONTRARY TO THE GOALS FOR LAND USE COMPATIBILITY EXPRESSED IN ABILENE'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AS YOU MAY SEE, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NOT IN THE CENTER OF THE HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, BUT RATHER LIES AT THE EDGE OF THAT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. ADJOINS RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FULL OF 1 AND 2-FAMILY RESIDENCES.
THIS SPECIFIC SETTING EXISTING AND PROPOSED APARTMENTS FUNCTIONS AS A SUITABLE TRANSITION IN INTENSITY OF USE BETWEEN COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENT ON BUTTERNUT STREET IN RELATIVELY LOW DENSITIES OF RESIDENT TO THE AST.
TYPES OF TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH LAND-USE PLANNING PRINCIPLES EXPRESSED IN ABILENE'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SECOND OF TWO STATUTORY CRITERIA FOR APPROVING SUCH SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS IS WHETHER THE EXPAND NONCONFORMING USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT UTILITY AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS. HERE IS WHERE WE HAVE A CONFLICT. THE EXISTING EXCESS REBUILDING PROPOSED TO BE CONVERTED TO A RESIDENCE SET THE TOP AND EXISTING SEWER MAIN. BASED ON THIS CONSIDERATION ALONE, CITY STAFF COMMENCE DENYING THIS REQUEST IS SPECIAL EXCEPTION. ALLOWING THE CONVERSION OF THIS APPROXIMATELY 60-YEAR-OLD BUILDING TO A RESIDENCE WOULD CERTAINLY PROLONG THE USEFUL LIFE OF THAT BUILDING.
IN THIS CASE, THAT SEEMS IMPRUDENT FOR A BUILDING THAT SITS ATOP AN EXISTING SEWER MAIN.
REPAIRING OR REPLACING THAT AGING SEWER MAIN MAY NECESSITATE HAVING TO REMOVE THE BUILDING ALTOGETHER.
[00:10:05]
FOR THAT REASON, CITY STAFF RECOMMENDS DENYING THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION. HERE IS A PHOTO OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SHOWING THE SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT CITY STAFF HAS.THE YELLOW AREA OUTLINES THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF WITHIN WHICH YOU CAN SEE THE 2, 4-UNIT BUILDINGS.
HIGHLIGHTED BY RED STRIPING. THE CITY SEWER MAINS ARE INDICATED BY THE GREEN LINES. INDEED, THIS 30 BY 50 FOOT CONCRETE BLOCK BUILDING DOES SIT ON TOP OF EIGHT USEFUL 6 INCH WIDE SEWER . A FEW PHOTOS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. THE PHOTO IN TOP LEFT SHOWS THE ACCESSORY BUILDING IN SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SUBJECT PROPERTY.
IT IS CONCRETE BLOCK IN NATURE. THERE ARE SOME FADED SIGNS ON IT INDICATING PREVIOUS OCCUPANCY BY LAUNDRY AND DRY CLEANING OPERATION. THE PHOTO ON THE UPPER RIGHT SHOWS HEAD-ON VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
YOU SEE IN THE FOREGROUND, ELM STREET ITSELF.
MIDDLE GROUND, YOU SEE PAID OFF STREET PARKING AREA FOR APARTMENTS. IN THE BACKGROUND, YOU SEE THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS THEMSELVES. PHOTO ON LOWER LEFT TILTS TO THE RIGHT OR TO THE NORTH AND YOU CAN STILL SEE ONE OF THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PHOTO.
THERE ARE OTHER RESIDENCES, 1 AND 2 FAMILY RESIDENCES TO THE NORTH. THE LOWER RIGHT, PHOTOGRAPHERS WOULD NEED TO SELL THEIR LEFT SHOWING BACK OF COMMERCIAL BUILDING. THIS COMMERCIAL SITE STRETCHES FROM ELM TO BUTTERNUT STREET, FORMERLY OCCUPIED OR ORIGINALLY OCCUPIED BY A SUPERMARKET. SUPERMARKET WHICH IS LONG SINCE CLOSED. WE NOTIFIED A TOTAL OF 20 OWNERS OF PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FOOT RADIUS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. WE RECEIVED NO COMMENT FORMS RETURNED TO US EITHER IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION.
ONCE AGAIN, CITY STAFF RECOMMENDS DENYING THIS REQUEST DUE TO THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING BEING SITUATED OVER AN EXISTING SEWER MAIN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
>> DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR BRAND?
>> THANK YOU. >> I'VE GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
>> YES, SIR. >> THAT SEWER LINE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, IF I AM READING THIS PHOTO CORRECTLY GOES UNDER THE BUILDING TO THE SOUTH?
>> YES, IT IS FLOWING TO THE SOUTH.
>> AND THERE IS A ANOTHER BUILDING ON TOP OF IT TO THE
NOW, I DO NOT KNOW WHETHER THE SEWER MAIN UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING TO THE SOUTH IS STILL IN USE BECAUSE OF THE LATERAL MAIN THAT YOU SEE EXTENDING IN EAST-WEST DIRECTION.
>> RIGHT. >> BUT THE SEWER MAIN UNDERNEATH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DEFINITELY BEING USED.
>> COULD YOU GO BACK A FEW SLIDES HERE TO THE ONE THAT SHOWS THE HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND ¦
>> WRONG DIRECTION. >> RESIDENTIAL ZONING?
>> THAT ONE. >> THIS SLIDE APPEARS TO SHOW THE ALLEY TO THE SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS NOT
ABANDONED. >> I DID RESEARCH THAT AND I DID DISCOVER EVIDENCE OF ITS ABANDONMENT BEFORE THE SUPERMARKET BUILDING CONSTRUCTED IN MID-1950S.
I HAD THE SAME QUESTION. I HAD TO DIG AROUND.
I DID FIND EVIDENCE OF THAT ALLEY HAVING BEEN ABANDONED.
SOUTH OF SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE ALLEY TO THE NORTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE L-SHAPED ONE, STILL IN PLACE AND
FUNCTIONING QUITE WELL. >> RIGHT.
ACCORDING TO THE NOTES, APPEAR THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE 50S THAT THAT ALLEY ABANDONMENT OCCURRE .
>> YES. >> DO YOU KNOW WHY THEY WOULD
[00:15:01]
HAVE ALLOWED IN ABANDONMENT WHEN THERE WERE PUBLICUTILITIES IN THE RIGHT AWAY? >> I SUSPECT, I DO NOT KNOW FOR A FACT, BUT I SUSPECT THAT THE EAST-WEST LATERAL SEWER WAS CONSTRUCTED AT THAT TIME. QUITE POSSIBLY THE NORTH-SOUTH SEWER UNDERNEATH THE FORMER SUPERMARKET BUILDING WAS MADE NONFUNCTIONAL. THAT IS WHAT I SUSPECT HAPPENED. BUT THE SEWER MAIN UNDERNEATH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESTROYED FUNCTIONAL.
IT'S STILL COLLECTING SEWAGE FROM THE NORTH.
AND DIVERTING IT EAST TOWARD ELM STREET.
I SUSPECT, BUT DO NOT KNOW FOR FACT THAT THE NORTH-SOUTH SEWER MAIN UNDERNEATH THE FORMER SUPERMARKET BUILDING IS
NONFUNCTIONAL. >> I WISH THERE WAS SOMEBODY HEAR FROM UTILITIES THAT WE COULD CONFIRM THOSE THINGS WITH. TO MEET THEY ARE WORKING TO THE
DISCUSSION. >> SUFFICE TO SAY, THE SEWER MAIN UNDERNEATH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS STILL FUNCTIONAL.
>> DO YOU KNOW? >> FOR THE RECORD, MICHAEL RICE, CITY MANAGER. YES, MR. CHAIRMAN I REACH OUT TO UTILITIES TO GET A LOAD ON WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE SEWER MAIN AT THIS LOCATION. IT IS A VERY SHALLOW SEWER MAIN AT NORTH END OF SUBJECT PROPERTY.
ABOUT 1.5 FOOT DEEP. ONLY ABOUT 3 FOOT DEEP AT THE OTHER END. PART OF THE PROBLEM IS, IT DOES DRAIN FROM NORTH TO SOUTH. I DO BELIEVE IT TURNS THE CORNER AND THEN HEADS TO THE STREET.
SO, I DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THE LINE UNDER EXISTING BUILDING.
IT IS SHOWN ON UTILITY MAPS. I DO NOT KNOW IF THAT IS A LIVE LINE OR NOT. BUT THAT IS WHAT IS THE EXISTING SITUATION THERE. I ASKED THEM ABOUT THE OPINION ABOUT THE BUILDING OVER THE LINE, THEY SAID THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THEY SUPPORT. THERE ARE SOME WAYS TO ADDRESS IT. WE DO HAVE CASES IN TOWN WHERE WE HAVE BUILDINGS OVER OUR LINES.
WE DO NOT LIKE THAT. WE DO FIND THEM.
MOST RECENTLY I FOUND IN DOWNTOWN AREA, ONE OF OUR CHURCHES. SOMETIMES THESE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS TAKE PLACE WITHOUT THE PROPER PERMITS.
>> RIGHT.> THEREFORE WE END UP IN SITUATIONS.
HOW TO RESOLVE THEM IS THE QUESTION.
NUMBER 1 WE CAN ABANDON THE LINE.
IN THE SITUATION NOT AN OPTION BECAUSE OF THE DEPTH.
NOT ENOUGH DEPTH TO REGROW. SECOND THING THAT CAN BE DONE, ACTUALLY GO IN AND LINETTE. 6 INCH DIAMETER LINE.T DRAINS EVERYTHING NORTH OF THERE, NOT JUST WHAT YOU SEE, BUT EVEN BLOCKS NORTH OF THIS. IT AS AN ACTIVE LINE.
THIRD OPTION, GO BACK TO DO PIPE BURSTING.
THEN TO PUT IN MORE HEFTY LINE. SOMETHING STRUCTURALLY STABLE IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN THE WEIGHT OF THE BUILDING.
THAT WAS INFORMATION THAT WAS DETERMINED LATE LAST WEEK.
THAT IS WHY IT IS NOT IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
>> THE LATTER OPTION, BE A LITTLE BIT RISKY IF IT IS THAT SHALLOW OF A SEWER BECAUSE PIPE BURSTING A SHALLOW LINE LIKE THAT CAN DISTURB THE FOUNDATION OF THE BUILDING.
>> IT COULD, INDEED. YES, SIR.
THOSE ARE THE OPTIONS UTILITIES PRESENTED TO ME.
>> DO YOU KNOW, MICHAEL, IF THERE BE ANY OPTION OF DIVERTING NORTH-SOUTH LINE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND INSTALLING A LINE THAT WENT EAST ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND DRAINED INTO THE LINE ON ELM
STREET? >> YEAH, I ASKED ABOUT THAT.
THEY SAID BASED UPON THE SITE Ã THEY HAD WANTED THIS SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF THE CASE BEFORE YOU TODAY, THEY DID NOT BELIEVE THAT WAS AN OPTION THAT WAS LIABLE.
YOU COME DOWN EXISTING GALLEY ON THE NORTH SIDE.
>> IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE IF IT IS THAT SHALLOW OF A LIE.
WE SHOULD HAVE FALL TO THE EAST TO TAKE IT TO THE ELM STREET LINE. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE DEPTH OF
ELM STREET LIME IS FAIR. >> YEAH, I'M NOT SURE WITH THAT LINE LOOKS LIKE FROM THAT SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY GOING TO THE NORTH. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT GRADE IT IS ON. THEIR DETERMINATION WAS THAT THAT WAS NOT AN OPTION. IT WAS WORKABLE.
INTERPRETATION, NOT MY. >> THANK YOU FOR THE
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> NO, SIR.
>> THANKS, MICHAEL. >> I DID HAVE A QUESTION.
SINCE THIS IS A NON-CONFORMING BUILDING AT THIS POINT IN TIME, DO YOUR SAFETY SETBACKS NOT APPLY?IN LOOKING AT THE
[00:20:03]
PICTURE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY I WAS LOOKING AT THE UPPER LEFT PICTURE. THAT APPEARS THAT BUILDING IS VERY CLOSE TO THE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE, MY CONCERN WOULD BE THE ACCESS OF FIRE DEPARTMENTS TO THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ON BUTTERNUT STREET AS WELL AS THOSE RESIDENTIALAREAS ON ELM ¦ >> CONCRETE BLOCK ACCESSORY BUILDING APPEARS TO BE A FOOT AND 1/2 OFF OF THAT REAR
PROPERTY LINE. >> WHAT ABOUT THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE?NOW, YOU ARE CALLING THE REAR LINE TOWARD BUTTERNUT
STREET, CORRECT? >> YES, WESTERN). A FOOT AND 1/2 OFF THE WESTERN MOST PROPERTY LINE.
ANY CONVERSION OF THIS EXISTING BUILDING TO A RESIDENCE WILL HAVE TO MEET BUILDING, PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL CODES. AS YOU MAY KNOW, ONE OF THOSE CODES STATES THAT EACH SLEEPING ROOM HAS TO HAVE A SUITABLE WINDOW OPENING. AGAIN, YOU CAN ESCAPE A CASE OF A FIRE. WINDOW OPENING NOT PERMITTED ON THE WESTERN SIDE SINCE IT IS JUST A FOOT AND 1/2 OFF-THE PROPERTY. YOU INDEED, I BELIEVE, AT LEAST 2 AND HALF FEET TO HAVE A WINDOW OPENING THERE.
TO MAKE A LONG STORY SHORT, THE BUILDING STILL HAS TO COMPLY WITH BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR A RESIDENCE.
THOSE WILL POSE SOME LIMITATIONS.
PERHAPS EVEN SOME CHALLENGES. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT
INFORMATION, MR. STONE. >> IT APPEARS NON-CONFORMING BUILDING, NOT ALL OF IT, IS ABOUT THE SEWER LINE.
IF THEY REMOVED THE PORTION ON THE SEWER LINE, DID THAT CHANGE
THE SITUATION? >> YOU CERTAINLY HAVE THE PREROGATIVE IN YOUR BAG OF OPTIONS.
YOU COULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT PORTION OF THE BUILDING THAT HAS PART OF YOUR CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL, STIPULATE THAT PORTION OF THE BUILDING IS OVER THE LINE BE REMOVED. MY ONLY CAVEAT ABOUT THAT A RESERVATION ABOUT THAT IS THAT REMOVAL OR REPLACEMENT OF THAT LINE WILL REQUIRE SOME MANEUVERING SPACE.
>> YEAH. >> NOT JUST THE FACT IT IS OVER THE LINE, BUT THE CREWS THAT REPAIR OR REPLACE THE SEWER
MAIN WILL NEED WORKING ROOM. >> OKAY.
>> THEY WILL NEED 10 OR 15 FEET.> THIS BEING ¦
>> NOT ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE, EITHER.
>> I WOULD BET THAT THAT ¦ >> THAT CONDITION IN YOUR BAG OF OPTIONS, WHAT YOU HAVE AVAILABLE TO.
>> SINCE THIS IS A CLAY LINE, EVENTUALLY IT WILL NEED TO BE REPLACED. WE WOULD ASSUME.
>> THAT IS MY LAYMAN'S UNDERSTANDING.
>> OKAY. WOULD IT CHANGE IN ZONING AFFECT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION?
TO RESIDENTIAL? >> IF THIS WERE REZONED TO MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATION, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO COME BEFORE YOU. BUT THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO SEEK A BUILDING PERMIT. CITY STAFF WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER IT VERY SERIOUSLY. BUT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO COME TO SEEK A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IF THE PROPERTY WERE REZONED TO MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.>
OKAY. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR BRAD?
>> THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I WOULD HAVE WOULD BE FROM OUR LEGAL STAFF. IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED, WHAT WOULD BE THE CITY'S LIABILITY IN CASE OF A SEWER
COLLAPSE? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT THE CITY WOULD HAVE LIABILITY FOR THAT. I MEAN, I DON'T THINK THAT IS REALLY THE ISSUE. I THINK IT IS MORE WHAT STAFF CAN APPROVE AS FAR AS THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING.
LIKE MR. STONE SAID, IF THIS WAS REZONED, IT WOULD NOT COME TO YOU AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. BUT WHATEVER THE BUILDING WAS BUILT, IT WOULD HAVE TO MEET ALL OF THE CRITERIA BUT I DO
[00:25:04]
NOT SEE THAT AS AN ISSUE. >> MY POINT WOULD BE MORE TOWARDS ANY CIVIL ACTIONS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
>> YOU KNOW, I DO NOT KNOW THAT I CAN, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW
THAT I CAN. >> MARK ODLE: THAT.
>> I DON'T SEE THAT BEING A PROBLEM, PERSONALLY.
>> ARTIST SEWER LINE THERE. IF THEY HAD TO GO DO SOMETHING, I MEAN, THE BUILDING IS OVER AND.
THE CITY MIGHT HAVE TO DO WHAT IT HAS TO DO TO PREPARE IT.
>> I THINK WE'VE GOT ALL KINDS OF SPECULATION GOING ON HERE.
I THINK IT IS TIME FOR THE APPLICANT TO PRESENT THEIR CASE AND PHYLLIS IN ON WHAT THE PLAN IS WHAT OPTIONS ARE.
AT THIS POINT I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, WOULD PROPONENT FOUR, STATE NAME AND ADDRESS AND REASON FOR YOUR CASE.
>> I AM OVER PREPARED. HE HAD A THOROUGH PRESENTATION.
[LAUGHING] >> I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S MUCH MORE I CAN ADD. EXISTING STRUCTURE.
RECENT ACQUISITION BY ONE OF OUR OWNERS.
IN KOREA, COULD NOT BE HERE TO PRESENT THIS CASE.
THE BUILDING ALREADY EXISTS. AS FAR AS BUILDING STRUCTURALLY, NOT ALL THAT BAD OF SHAPE.
IS IT PRETTY? NOT REALLY, WE LIKE TO MAKE IT THAT WAY AND ADD ANOTHER RESIDENCE.
CURRENTLY MANAGE UNITS IN FRONT THERE.
100 PERCENT FULL. SHORTAGE OF HOUSING IN ABILENE RIGHT UPPER WOULD YOU DO WITH? WHICH WAY YOU GO? MAKE IT A LAUNDRY MAT AGAIN, WHICH AS AN OPTION.
OR DO WE TURN IT INTO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE? WE ARE ASKING FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE.
AND MAKI (SP?) DESIGN PLAN HOW WE DO THAT FOR BEST USE.
WE HAVE AN EXISTING BUILDING. WHY NOT MAKE IT A RESIDENCE VERSUS TEARING IT DOWN. THAT IS THE REQUEST.
>> RIGHT.> HE HAS GOT A LOT MORE INFORMATION BACK HERE ON HOW THINGS SIT, WHERE THEY ARE, AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
LIKE I SAID, THE BUILDING IS THERE.
NOT ASKING TO ADD TO THE BUILDING, JUST ADJUST CURRENT
USE. >> BASICALLY WHAT WE DO, WE CLEAN UP THE BUILDING UP THERE. WE HAD A LOT OF HOMELESS PEOPLE LIVING THERE. THIS IS THE OLD SYSTEM PARKING LOT BUTTERNUT ACROSS FROM DOLLAR GENERAL.
AN UGLY PLACE, UGLY SIDE, HORRIBLE.
COVERED THAT OVER TO, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL AREA.
ONE BETTER APARTMENT. SMALL INDIVIDUAL, SMALL WONDERFUL. BROUGHT OUT CONCERNING SORT OF SITUATION. TWO CHOICES WE'VE GOT.
LOOKING AT DOING INTERIOR REMODEL.
NOT DEMO BUILDING, ADD ON, KEEP EXISTING STRUCTURE.
FIX THE ROOF ON IT. REDESIGN INTERIORFOR A SINGLE PERSON , COUPLE TO LIVE THERE. RIGHT NOW, IF NOT, CONVERT IT BACK BECAUSE IT IS COMMERCIAL RATED TO A LAUNDROMAT.
PUT 16 WASHING MACHINES IN IT, FLOOD THE SEWER LINE IMPOSSIBLY COMPLICATED ALL KINDS OF PROBLEMS ON CLAY SEWER LINE.
LIKE BRAD SAID, SEWER LINE IS WRONG.
NOWHERE WHERE IT SHOULD BE. DO WE TAKE THE CHANCE HAVING ONE PERSON LIVING THERE, PHLOGISTON, TAKE A SHOWER? OR 60 WASHING MACHINES FLOODING THAT COULD CREATE PROBLEMS FOR THE CITY, US, EVERYWHERE ELSE. THEY OWN THE BUSINESS, BUILD AND LIKE THEY SAID NOBODY KNOWS WHEN, BETWEEN 55-65.
NOBODY KNOWS EXACTLY WHEN, HOW AND BEFORE WE GOT INTO THE PARTICULARS AND MEANING ALL OF THE CODES REQUIRED TO ME TODAY, THIS WAS BUILT PREVIOUS TO ALL THAT.
WE ARE OBSERVING PROBLEMS OF WHAT WE GOT.
TRYING TO MAKE IT BETTER. TRY TO CLEAN UP THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON IT. THINK OUR CASE IS IT'S A LOT SAFER WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO THEN LEAVE IT THERE ABANDONED WITH NOTHING BE DONE TO IT. THIS IS YOUR 70 IS GOING TO HAVE TO BULLDOZE IT. CUSTOMER NOT HAVE TO, IT'S NOT ABANDONED. TRYING TO BE UPGRADED.
MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, TRY TO BRING UP TO CODE. NOT JUST ANOTHER BUILDING SITTING ON BUTTERNUT NOT BEING USED.
>> YOU GUYS SEE ANY OPTIONS OF CHANGING THE SEWER SERVICE TO ANOTHER ADJACENT LINE SO THAT WE CAN ABANDON THAT LIGHT
UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING? >> WE NOT RESEARCH THAT.
SOMETHINWHAT HAVE TO BE DONE PROBABLY ON HER PART TO DO THAT. MENTIONED SEWER LINE RUNNING
[00:30:02]
EAST TO WEST OUT OF THAT. I THINK MR. RICE SAID MAYBE MIGHT HAVE BEEN NOT AN OPTION ON IT.I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD BE AN OPTION.
WE'VE GOT SEWER LINES BOTH WAYS.
I DON'T KNOW WHY TAPPING EITHER ONE OF THEM WOULD IT WORK.
WE'RE NOT PREPARED TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, HONESTLY, WHAT WE
>> WE HAVE SEWER LINES IN THERE ALREADY.
NOT CHANGING, CONVERTING 16 WASHING MACHINES FOR A TOILET,
BATHROOM, SHOWER. >> EXISTING LINE AT BEING A CLAY TILE LINE LIKE THAT, MOST CLAY TILE LINES IN THE CITY ARE BEYOND THE USEFUL LIFE. THEY NEED TO BE UPGRADED TO A . LIKE MICHAEL MENTIONED, THERE ARE CASES AROUND TOWN WHERE WE HAVE SEWER LINES UNDER BUILDINGS. PERSONALLY, SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, NOT THE BOARD. PERSONALLY, IF THAT LINE COULD BE UPGRADED TO A TO WHERE WE KNEW IT WAS NOT GOING TO CAUSE PROBLEMS IN THE FUTURE OR THAT WE COULD ACCOMMODATE THE PROBLEM OF THE CITY SEES GOING FORWARD WITH EXTENDED USE OF A LINE THAT IS ALREADY AT THE END OF ITS USEFUL LIFE. I THINK WE COULD, PERHAPS, REACH A COMPROMISE HERE. BUT I THINK THE CITY'S ISSUE IS A REALISTIC ONE GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE CONDITION AND AGE OF THAT SEWER LINE IS NOT SOMETHING THEY WANT TO BET ON.
I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. THERE ARE WAYS OF HANDLING THAT. I THINK WE CAN REACH SOME KIND OF COMPROMISE. I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND APPLAUD IT. I THINK IT IS WHAT WE NEED AROUND HERE TO CLEAN UP SOME OF THE AREAS THAT CAN BE MADE MORE PRESENTABLE. CONVERT THE USE TO SOMETHING THAT IS POSITIVE. BUT I DO SEE THE ISSUE WITH THE SEWER LINE PROBLEMATIC. BUT I THINK THERE ARE WAYS OF
ADDRESSING IT. >> CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION?
>> YES, SIR. >> MY QUESTION WOULD BE, WOULD IT BE MORE FINANCIALLY SAFE TO CONVERT THAT AND REOPENED BACK AS A LAUNDROMAT TO MAKE USE OF IT?
>> NO, NOT AT ALL. >> YOU MADE YOUR POINT THERE.
[LAUGHING] >> NOT SOMETHING WE WOULD LIKE
TO DO. >> FIX THE LINE, UNDER THE BUILDING, TRAUMATIC WHAT IT WILL COST.
THIS WAY, LIABILITY LESS. >> LET ME ASK THIS, WOULD THE CITY ALLOW THEM TO MAKE THAT A LAUNDROMAT AGAIN?
>> THEY WOULD NEED MORE PARKING.
THERE ARE 14 PARKING SPACES IN THE EXISTING PARKING LOT.
THAT IS ENOUGH FOR NINE RESIDENCES.
THERE ARE EIGHT THERE NOW. >> SO, I DON'T THINK IT IS OPTION FOR YOU TO CONVERT IT TO A LAUNDROMAT.
PROBLEMATIC FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.
>> IT WOULD BE ON SITE FOR THE RESIDENCE.
BECAUSE THOSE UNITS CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE WASHERS AND DRYERS IN THEM. IT WOULD NOT BE PUBLIC.
IT WOULD BE ON SITE FOR THOSE RESIDENTS.
>> YOU NEED 16 WASHERS FOR NINE RESIDENCES?
>> MORE OF A POINT. VOLUME OF WATER.
>> USING SAME ARGUMENT YOU ARE USING.
>> THROWING OUR CARDS ON THE TABLE.
>> YES COSTS ARE. >> WE ACTUALLY ÃNOT JUST TALK ABOUT WATER CONSUMPTION. SOMETHING WE REALLY TALKED ABOUT DOING VERSUS MAKING THIS A UNIT.
WE ORIGINALLY WANTED TO DO TWO. BRAD POINTED OUT SHORT ABOUT HALF PARKING PLACE TO MAKE IT A DUPLEX.
THIS IS THE OTHER. >> MY QUESTION, HOW MUCH SEWER LINE LOOK TO UNDERTAKE? UNDERTAKE THE WHOLE LENGTH OF THE PROPERTY LINE THROUGH THE YELLOW RIGHT THERE? OR ARE WE LOOKING AT PORTION UNDER PART OF THE BUILDING THAT COULD RESTRICT POSSIBLE LATER DAY CONSTRUCTION TO COME AND REPAIR. OBLIGATED FOR THE SECTION, OF FOOTAGE ON EACH SIDE OF THE BUILDING?
>> SINCE IT IS A PUBLIC LINEUP, PROBLEM IN MY MIND EXISTS BECAUSE THE CITY ABANDONED THE RIGHT WAY WITH PUBLIC UTILITIES IN IT. IF THAT SEWER LINE SERVES PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE WE CAN DIVERT THE SEWER FROM THIS BUILDING TO THE LINE THERE TO THE SOUTH AND PICTURE BUILDING. BUT WE DON'T WANT TO ADDRESS
[00:35:06]
THE ISSUE OF PUBLIC WASTE WATER FLOWING THROUGH THAT LINE FROM NORTH TO SOUTH THAT CANNOT BE ABANDONED.SO, TO ME, FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE THE SOLUTION I WOULD LOOK AT WOULD BE TO INTERCEPT THAT PUBLIC LINE NORTH OF YOUR PROPERTY, TURNING EAST, TRAIN INTO ELM STREET.
IF GRADES ALLOW. CHANGE YOUR SEWER SERVICE FROM THAT ACCESSORY BUILDING AND GO TO THAT LINE TO THE SOUTH OF IT TO WHERE YOU CAN HAVE BEING INTO A LINE THAT IS IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THAT WHOLE LINE COULD BE ABANDONED. FROM WHAT MICHAEL STATED, APPARENTLY THE PUBLIC UTILITY PEOPLE EITHER DID NOT LOOK AT IT CLOSELY OR THINK OR HAD LOOKED AT IT AND THINKING CAN'T BE DONE. TO ME, DEPENDS ON THE GREAT, THE DEPTH OF THAT LINE ON ELM STREET.
WITH THAT LINE BEING SO SHALLOW AS WE STATED IN THE NORTH END OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THERE OUGHT TO BE GREAT, I THINK, TO DRAIN TO THE EAST TO THAT LINE.
BUT WITHOUT KNOWING THE EXACT ELEVATIONS, THAT IS JUST SPECULATION AT THIS POINT. IDEALLY, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ABANDON THAT LINE COMPLETELY WITHIN THAT RIGHT AWAY THAT WAS ABANDONED.THAT WOULD BE THE PROPER STEP FORWARD FOR THE CITY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
GO AHEAD. >> A COMMENT AND A QUESTION.
COMMENT IS, WHAT YOU BUILT IS DEFINITELY AN IMPROVEMENT TO
>> NO ARGUMENT THERE. WE LIKE THAT.
THE QUESTION IS, DO THESE EXISTING MULTIFAMILY APARTMENTS, DOES THAT SEWER LINE TRAIN TO THE EAST OR TO THE WEST? DOES IT GO TO THE ELM STREET LINE OR TO THE ALLEY LINE? LEX I DON'T KNOW, BRAD, DO YOU
KNOW? >> I DO NOT KNOW, WHICH WAY THE SEWER LINE RUNS, TO THE EAST OR TO THE WEST?
>> I THINK DIRECT ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, I DO NOT KNOW WHERE THE SEWAGE FLOW FROM THE APARTMENTS.
>> WERE THE SERVICE LINES RUN. >> THE 6 INCH LINE AT THE REAR OF THE SITE OR TO THE 6 INCH LINE AT THE FRONT OF THE SITE?
>> OKAY. >> ON THE OTHER HAND, MATERIAL.
6 INCH LINE AT THE REAR OF THE SITE BEING USED FOR SEWAGE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE NORTH FLOWS THROUGH IT.
>> AND WE DO NOT KNOW FOR SURE WHETHER THE EAST-WEST LINE ON THE SOUTH SIDE IS IN USE, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> VERY DEFINITELY IT IS. >> IT IS.
>> ABANDON MANY OF THE SELF. >> THE ONE OF MINE WE CONSIDER THAT WE THINK MAY BE NONFUNCTIONAL IS THAT ONE
UNDERNEATH. >> UNDER THE BUILDING.> YES.
>> I GUESS, I'M SLINGING MUD. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE DENIED OUR REQUEST WE WANT TO DO BECAUSE THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY'VE GOT OVER THERE. THAT IS NOT OUR FAULT.
>> IT SEEMS TO ME SO MANY OPTIONS GOING.VALID DECISION AT THIS POINT. SO MANY UNKNOWNS IS FUTILE.
YOU GUYS IN A HURRY FOR THIS THING, WE WOULD DELAY ANY KIND OF DECISION TO GET SOME MORE ANSWERS.
>> COULD WE TAKE SOME TIME FOR THE CITY TO DO SOME INVESTIGATION OF WHERE THE SERVICE LINES RUN?
>> WE WOULD RATHER TAKE THE TIME TO GET RESEARCH, THAT NOT GET COMPLETELY ON THE THING THAT WE THINK IS FUNCTIONAL IN THE CITY THANKS NONFUNCTIONAL. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A LOGICAL
EXPLANATION. >> FOR US TO KEEP THE OPTION
>> RATHER THAN BECAUSE OF THE DOUBTS AND THE SITUATION HAVE TO TURN HER DOWN. IF YOU'RE NOT IN A HURRY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT, OVERWHELMING THING.ABLE A, GIVE YOU TIME, GIVE THE CITY TIME TO LOOK THIS OVER.
MAYBE SHED ENOUGH LIGHT ON IT TO FIND SOME MURKY SITUATION.
>> I THINK EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
THAT IS WHAT THIS BOARD NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO PROVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS. THERE IS A LOT OF UNKNOWNS AT THIS POINT. AGAIN, MY PERSONAL OPINION IS THAT THE CITY PROBABLY SHARE SOME RESPONSIBILITY IN THE FACT THEY ABANDONED IT RIGHT AWAY THAT PUBLIC UTILITIES LIVE IN.
[00:40:06]
>> WHAT CAN WE DO FROM OUR STANDPOINT TO BRING INFORMATION OF WHAT YOU NEED TO MAKE THAT DECISION? ARE WE GOING TO SET IN LIMBO UNTIL YOU ALL DO THE RESEARCH? WHAT CAN WE DO TO HELP? THAT IS MY QUESTION.
>> I FEEL LIKE SOMEBODY IN THE KNOW WITH IN WATER AND SEWER
DEPARTMENT WHAT HAVE YOU ¦ >> NEAR TERM OR LONG TERM PLANS FOR THAT AREA AND SEWAGE LINE REPLACEMENT IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IF THERE IS ANYTHING IN THE WORKS.
WAY OVERDUE REPLACEMENT OF CLAY LINES THAT WE HAVE NO IDEA.
>> ONE THING I WOULD SUGGEST IS THAT IT IS NOT CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR SERVICE LINES THAT YOU PERHAPS CONSIDER HIRING A PLUMBER TO USE A CAMERA AND FIND OUT WHERE THE SERVICE LINES RUN FROM THE EXISTING BUILDINGS.> I HAVE DONE THAT. I JUST DON'T REMEMBER WHICH WAY
>> ONCE WE KNEW THAT INFORMATION, THEN WE MIGHT BE ABLE ÃYOU GUYS MIGHT BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH A PLAN TO ACCOMMODATE ABANDONMENT OF THE CITY'S LINE.
TO ME, THAT WOULD BE THE BEST PATH FORWARD IF WE COULD COME UP WITH AN OPTION TO ALLOW ABANDONMENT OF THAT LINE AND HALF A BLOCK ON WEST SIDE OF YOUR SUBJECT PROPERTY.
>> IF YOU AND THAT LINE, WHERE DOES IT GO?
WHAT IS THE SEWAGE GO? >> YOU WOULD HAVE TO DIVERT IT.
>> THAT WOULD BE THE PART THAT I WOULD THINK, HOPEFULLY, MICHAEL, THE CITY COULD INVESTIGATE ENOUGH TO SEE IF IT IS FEASIBLE TO DIVERT THE PUBLIC SEWER FROM NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY THAT ELM STREET.
>> I RECOMMEND TABLE THIS AND ALLOW APPLICANT TO WORK WITH WATER UTILITY SPECIFICALLY. NOT A PLANNING ISSUE.
LOOK AT ME WITH THEM. TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS. THERE'S GOING TO BE COST THEM ALL. TALK ABOUT WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR WHAT, DEPENDING UPON WHAT OPTIONS ARE VIABLE.
SOME WE TALKED ABOUT, THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BE.
YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT, WE DO NOT KNOW THE WITHOUT ADDITIONAL
INVESTIGATION. >> NORTHWEST CORNER OF EXISTING APARTMENTS, THAT IS NOT OVER THE SEWER LINE IN THIS PHOTO.
SHOWS IT'S OUTSIDE IT. >> NO, YOU'RE RIGHT.
TECHNICALLY FROM WHAT I SEE, THAT BUILDING IS STILL CLOSE ENOUGH. COMMENT MADE THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE ROOM IF THERE WAS FAILURE TO WORK. I STILL DO NOT SEE ROOM FROM
THAT BUILDING FOR ROOM TO WORK. >> INCLUDE IN YOUR DISCUSSION SHOULD BE WHETHER THAT IS A PROBLEM THERE IN THAT CORNER.
NORTHWEST CORNER LEXICOGRAPHIC OR, DIGGING NEXT FOUNDATION.
IF AT ALL. >> I MEAN, NOT ONLY DOES IT OPPOSE AN ISSUE TO THE STRUCTURE THAT YOU GUYS ARE WANTING TO BUILD, I MEAN, I SEE RIGHT THERE TO THE NORTH OF EXISTING BUILDING. ALSO AN ISSUE IF THERE IS SEWER
FAILURE OF THAT LINE. >> I WOULD NOT ENCOURAGE YOU TO RELY ON ACCURACY
[LAUGHING] >> POINT WELL TAKEN, I CAN VOUCH FOR THAT.
>> I THINK WE ARE AT A POINT WHERE WE NEED MORE DISCOVERY.
THE PROPER THING TO DO WOULD BE TO TABLE THIS ISSUE.
POSTPONEMENT SLIGHTLY PREVENTED FROM BEING, YOU KNOW, TURNED A WAY OR HAVING TO COME BACK AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.
I WOULD RATHER HANDLE NOW AND GET IT SQUARED AWAY FOR US ALL.
LET YOU GUYS MOVE FORWARD AND DO A BEST USE OF THAT FACILITY AND ALLOW IMPROVEMENTS. THAT IS WHAT MY PERSONAL OPINION WOULD BE. IT SEEMS EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD ALLOW THAT IF WE COULD WORK OUT A COMPROMISE HERE. A WAY TO SOLVE THE ISSUE OF THE
PUBLIC SEWER UNDER BUILDINGS. >> TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER A BETTER PORTFOLIO BEFORE COME NEXT TIME.
[LAUGHING] >> YOU GUYS DID FINE.
>> A GOOD EXAMPLE. THAT'S GREAT.
>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
[00:45:03]
>> IF I MAY ADD ONE ADDITIONAL? >> YES COSTS TO.
>> THAT THE INTERESTS. BEFORE APARTMENT BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED IN EARLY 1980S, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS REPLANTED.
20 FOOT WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT RESERVED AT THE REAR OF THE
>> THE SEWER MAIN DOES REMAIN IN UTILITY EASEMENT, ONE CREATED WITH SUBDIVISION APPROVAL.
>> EXCEPT UNDER SUBJECT BUILDING.
>> VERY DEFINITELY, UNDER THE BUILDING.I REITERATE, MENTIONED BRIEFLY IN STAFF REPORT I CAN'T FIND A PERMANENT
RECORD FOR THE BUILDING. >> RIGHT.
>> ABSENCE OF ME BEING ABLE TO FIND ONE DOES NOT MEAN IT DOES NOT EXIST. BUT I CAN FIND NO PAPER RECORD
PERMIT ISSUED FOR THE BUILDING. >> THANK YOU, BRAD, FOR YOUR THOROUGH REVIEW. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? ANYONE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY DISCUSSION? >> OBVIOUSLY THINK WE TABLE THIS THING. GIVE EVERYBODY A CHANCE TO WORK IN THE RIGHT ATMOSPHERE WITH EXPERTS AROUND US.
AND A>> I BELIEVE THERE ARE SOM ISSUES AS THE BOARD NEED TO ADDRESS. I THINK IT WOULD MAKE A LOT
BETTER DECISIONS IN THE FUTURE. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION.
>> BEFORE YOU DO THAT, I HAVE A COMMENT, BEFORE YOU DO THAT.
> PLEASE, GO AHEAD. >> PERTINENT TO THIS BOARD DOES. IT IS STILL ZONED HEAVY COMMERCIAL, CORRECT, SAID HE DOES NOT LIKE RESIDENCES IN HEAVY COMMERCIAL. STILL AN ISSUE FOR US TO DECIDE ON. NOT SAYING EITHER WAY IS APPROPRIATE, THAT IS PART OF OUR DECISION.
KIND OF GOT LOST IN DETAILS A LITTLE BIT.
IT IS STILL A QUESTION. >> IN MY OPINION, THE CITY WAITED ON THAT IN THE REPORT. ON THE EDGE OF HEAVY COMMERCIAL JOINING RESIDENTIAL. THEY SEEM TO BE OKAY WITH THAT GIVEN THE PRESENTATION. THAT IS MY PERSPECTIVE.
>> THAT IS A DECISION FOR US. >> CORRECT.
>> OKAY. >> JOHN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING?
>> I MOVE WE TABLE THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST.
>> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE
THIS REQUEST, MR. THOMAS. >> YES.
>> YES. >> MOTION TO TABLE CARRIES.
>> THAT IS THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.