[00:00:03]
[CALL TO ORDER]
WE DON'T HAVE A CHAIRMAN AT THIS.WE HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM TO ELECT AN OFFICER TO, TO RUN THIS MEETING AND AND FUTURE MEETINGS, AND A VICE VICE CHAIR AND OTHER OFFICERS THAT THE BOARD IS, IS REQUIRED TO APPOINT.
[2. Chairman, Chairman Pro-Tem, Secretary, Sergeant at Arms]
AND I CAN GIVE A LITTLE THE OFFICERS BINDER.WHOEVER IS ELECTED TO BE THE CHAIR, THE BINDER IS, IS SITTING RIGHT THERE FOR, FOR THE CHAIRMAN TO READ, READ THE SCRIPT THE CHAIRMAN HAS, INCLUDING WHEN WE GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
BUT JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE JUST BRIEF.
SO YOU KNOW WHAT THESE OFFICES ARE.
THE CHAIRMAN RUNS THE MEETING, CALLS THE MEETING TO ORDER CALLS.
EACH ITEM CALLS FOR A MOTION, A SECOND FOR EACH ITEM AND A VOTE THE CHAIRMAN WOULD OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR FOR EACH ITEM, FOR THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND JUST BASICALLY RUN THE MEETING.
AND THE OTHER THING THE CHAIRMAN WOULD DO, OR THE CHAIRPERSON WOULD DO, WOULD BE TO SIGN THE ORDERS OF THE BOARD, WHICH AFTER EVERY MEETING, MELISSA PREPARES AN ORDER REGARDING THE DECISIONS THE BOARD HAS MADE, AND THEN THE CHAIR SIGNS THOSE.
AND SO THAT'S REALLY THAT'S REALLY WHAT THE CHAIR DOES.
AND THEN THE CHAIR PRO TEM SERVES WHEN THE CHAIR IS NOT AVAILABLE.
AND THE SECRETARY AND THE SERGEANT AT ARMS ARE JOBS THAT WE BY, BY THE BYLAWS, WE STILL ELECT THEM.
SO WE DON'T HAVE THE SECRETARY.
THERE'S NOT A NEED FOR A SECRETARY TO REALLY KEEP THOSE MINUTES.
AND SO IT'S MORE OF IF THE CHAIRMAN IS ABSENT AND THE PRO TEM IS ABSENT, PROBABLY WE WOULD ASK THE SECRETARY TO RUN THE MEETING AND, AND SERGEANT AT ARMS HAS NEVER REALLY BEEN NEEDED.
BUT I GUESS IF, IF, IF, IF, IF THAT WAS EVER NEEDED, WE WOULD HAVE A SERGEANT AT ARMS. BUT THOSE ARE REALLY.
WE HAVE THOSE. THOSE OFFICES ARE ELECTED BY THE BOARD ACCORDING TO THE BYLAWS.
BUT TYPICALLY THERE'S NOT ANYTHING PARTICULARLY THAT THEY THOSE ARE THOSE POSITIONS DO FOR THE SECRETARY AND SERGEANT AT ARMS. SO DOES THAT HELP? OKAY. YES, I, I WAS TOLD THAT THE BOARD HAD, YOU KNOW, SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT THE OFFICERS DO AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS.
I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE JOHN LOUDERMILK.
I'LL SECOND THAT, JUST IN CASE.
YEAH, I GUESS WE CAN GO AHEAD AND CALL FOR A VOTE.
YES, MR. WHITLOCK? YES, MISS SPARKS? YES. AND THE MOTION CARRIES.
NOW WE'LL TAKE NOMINATIONS FOR A CHAIRMAN PRO TEM.
WHO ALSO BY DEFAULT, RUN THIS MEETING UPON ELECTION.
ARE YOU? ARE YOU INTERESTED? SURE I'M SCARED OF HIM.
DON'T KNOW WHAT. I'LL DO IT. I GOT TO LEARN SOMEHOW.
OKAY. I'LL MAKE A NOMINATION THAT SHONDA BE ELECTED TO CHAIRMAN PRO TEM.
MR. THOMAS. YES, MISS ELEANOR.
YES, MISS RITCHIE? YEAH. YOU COULD ALWAYS VOTE NO.
MR. WILLOCK. YES, MISS SPARKES? YES. AND THE MOTION CARRIES.
[00:05:03]
WE STILL HAVE A COUPLE MORE POSITIONS.THINKS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE ON WITH THE SERGEANT AT ARMS AND THE SECRETARY, THE SECRETARY AND SERGEANT AT ARMS. BEFORE WE BEFORE YOU GO INTO, CAN WE GET A NOMINATION FOR SECRETARY? CHIP. OH I CAN'T.
OH. WELL, THEN OKAY. THAT WOULD LEAVE MELISSA.
ENJOY. AND THE OTHER MISSING MEMBER WHOSE SALINGER.
SO I NOMINATE LOSING TO LOSE INTACT.
A SECOND. MR. THOMAS? YES, MISS SELINGER? YES, MISS RIXEY? YES. MR. WHITLOCK? YES.
NOMINATIONS FOR SERGEANT AT ARMS. WHO IS MELISSA'S PERMANENT? YES. I THINK MELISSA SHOULD DO IT.
OKAY. LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A NOMINATION AND A SECOND FOR MELISSA FOR SERGEANT AT ARMS. MR. THOMAS? YES, MISS ELLINGER.
YES, MR. WHITLOCK? YES, MISS SPARKS? YES. AND MISS RIXEY.
BUT IF YOU CAN READ, THERE'S THIS KIND OF THE STATEMENT AT THE BEGINNING AND THEN THEN GO IN.
AND I CAN I CAN COME DOWN AND HELP, HELP NAVIGATE THAT NOTEBOOK IF YOU NEED HELP.
DEFINITELY. BECAUSE YOU'RE KIND OF ON THE SPOT RIGHT NOW.
DIDN'T. OKAY, SO OPENING STATEMENT, THEN SKIP TO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
OKAY. WELCOME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS HAS FIVE MEMBERS, FOUR OF WHICH MUST BE PRESENT.
THE APPLICANT HAS 180 DAYS FROM THIS DATE TO OBTAIN A BUILDING PERMIT.
IF ONE IS REQUIRED, A LONGER PERIOD OF A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS BOARD.
IF THE REQUEST IS DENIED, IT MAY NOT BE RECONSIDERED BY THIS BOARD UNTIL 12 MONTHS FROM THIS DATE.
APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD MAY BE.
MAY BE MADE TO A COURT OF RECORD, IN THIS CASE THE DISTRICT COURT, WITHIN TEN DAYS FROM THIS DATE.
WE NEED TO SWEAR IN ANYONE WHO'S GOING TO COME FORWARD AND PRESENT A CASE TODAY.
IF YOU PLAN TO COME TO THE LECTERN AND SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ANY CASE, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
IS ANYBODY ELSE GOING TO BE COMING UP AND TALKING? OKAY. DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH?
[EXECUTIVE SESSION]
AS CHAIRMAN PRO TEM OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, I HEREBY ADVISE YOU THAT WE ARE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT.PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE AND ANNOTATED SECTION 551 .071 OF THE OPENING MEETINGS ACT TO SEEK THE ADVICE OF OUR CITY ATTORNEY WITH RESPECT TO.
[00:10:02]
REGARDING THE AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD AND STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS.PENDING AND CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION, SPECIFICALLY ON A PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM AND.
THE PURPOSE OF EXECUTIVE SESSION IS NOT PENDING.
LITIGATION. THERE'S NO PENDING LITIGATION.
AND SO I THINK YOU'VE COVERED IT.
SO IT TALKS ABOUT RECONVENING.
WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A TIME SET FOR THAT YET ALREADY.
OKAY. AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION, WE'RE RECONVENING AT 913 AND THERE WAS NO ACTIONS TAKEN.
JUST TO MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND HIS VARIANCE.
YOU CAN TAKE IT FROM CALL TO ORDER.
[MINUTES]
WE NEED TO HAVE A PUBLIC APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING.I MOVE. WE APPROVE THE MINUTES.
YES, MR. WHITLOCK? YES, MISS SPARKS? YES. AND MISS RIXEY.
FAVORABLE VOTES ARE REQUIRED TO APPROVE ANY REQUEST UNDER CONSIDERATION.
A BUILDING PERMIT MAY BE APPLIED FOR THE DAY THE REQUEST IS APPROVED AFTER THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
IF THE REQUEST IS DENIED, IT MAY NOT BE RECONSIDERED BY THIS BOARD UNTIL 12 MONTHS FROM THE DATE.
SWORN EVERYONE IN AGENDA BUSINESS.
OKAY. THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM IS BE A 2020 4-04.
[4. BA-2024-04: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a request from Bryce Davis for a Variance to allow for a 0’ front setback (25’ required) and to allow for a 17’ rear setback (25’ required) located at 1326 Walnut Street (Mason Teegardin)]
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS MASON TEAGARDEN.I'M A PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE.
TODAY I'M GOING TO BE PRESENTING CASE BA 2020 4-04.
THE AGENT IS BRYCE DAVIS, AND THE REQUEST IS A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A ZERO.
ZERO FOOT FRONT SETBACK WHERE 25FT IS REQUIRED AND A 17 FOOT REAR SETBACK WHERE 25FT IS ALSO REQUIRED AT 1326 WALNUT.
HERE WE HAVE THE AERIAL LOCATION MAP.
AND WE HAVE SOME VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
STAFF REVIEWED THIS PURSUANT TO SECTION 1.4.4.2 D OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND STAFF DETERMINED THAT THERE ARE NO APPARENT CONDITIONS WITHIN THIS PROPERTY THAT CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP.
GRANTING THE REQUEST WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST OR INJURIOUS TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND IT WOULD MATCH THE EXISTING BUILDING SETBACKS OF BUILDINGS IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF THE SUBJECT SITE.
THE PROPOSED BUILDING MAY NOT BE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ADDRESSES MODERN HEAVY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT BUT DOES NOT ADDRESS TRADITIONAL HEAVY COMMERCIAL AREAS.
HOWEVER, THE VARIANCE REQUEST MAY BE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH PROMOTES VISUALLY APPEALING COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS THAT HAVE OUTDOOR STORAGE, AND THE APPARENT HARDSHIP MAY NOT BE CAUSED BY THE PETITIONER.
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UNDER HEAVY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CODE.
WHY WAS THIS NOT LOOKED AT UNDER THE PINE STREET CORRIDOR CORE? LAND DEVELOPMENT. BECAUSE THIS IS NOT ON PINE STREET.
[00:15:04]
OKAY. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE CORRIDOR IS THAT IT EXTENDS EAST AND WEST OF THE CENTER LINE OF PINE STREET BY ONE BLOCK.AND THE ONLY REASON I'M BRINGING THIS UP IS I'M ASSUMING THAT THE HC ZONING AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT IN THE HC IS MORE LENIENT THAN THE CORRIDOR WOULD BE. IS THAT WOULD THAT BE CORRECT, OR WOULD YOU ANYBODY HAVE A KNOWLEDGE OF THAT? I'M NOT SURE. OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.
I THINK I THINK THE PINE STREET CORRIDOR WAS FOCUSED MAINLY ON MAKING SURE THAT THAT THE, THE LOTS ALONG PINE STREET AND, OR THAT ARE IN THE VICINITY OF PINE STREET LOOK, LOOK ATTRACTIVE.
SO WE HAVE A NICE GATEWAY CORRIDOR INTO THE DOWNTOWN.
I THINK IT WAS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THAT, OF THAT STUDY TO CONSIDER THINGS LIKE THE TRADITIONAL SCALE OF LOTS AND THE USES THAT WERE ALLOWED ON LOTS.
I JUST THINK I JUST THINK THAT WAS THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE DIRECTION OF THAT STUDY.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
BUT IT WAS BEYOND THAT WAS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THAT STUDY.
I WAS HERE 40 YEARS AGO WHEN THAT WAS DONE.
AND THEY WEREN'T LOOKING AT, AT THOSE KIND OF CONSIDERATIONS BACK IN THOSE DAYS.
OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION, MR. ANDERSON. THANK YOU.
EXACTLY. SO THE REQUEST IS A ZERO FOOT FRONT SETBACK AND A 17 FOOT REAR SETBACK.
SO ALONG WALNUT AND THEN ALONG THE ALLEY.
WALNUT WILL BE ZERO IN THE ALLEY WILL BE 17.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
THAT HELPS. YES, SIR. THANK YOU.
AND YOU MIGHT LEAVE IT ON THE CRITERIA SO THAT THEY CAN SEE.
YEAH. PLEASE. GO BACK TO THE PICTURES WITH ALL FOUR.
IS THE ZERO FRONT SETBACK WHERE THAT FENCE LINE IS? OR WOULD THAT BE ALL THE WAY TO THE STREET WITHOUT A SURVEY? I WOULD SAY YEAH, WE'RE THE FENCE IS IS ROUGHLY ZERO FEET.
YOU WON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
YOU KNOW, I WOULD LIKE THEM TO GO BACK TO THE CRITERIA, THOUGH.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AFTER THE STAFF REPORT, THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP.
THE NEXT TALKS ABOUT THE PROPONENT.
OH, WELL, EITHER WAY, YOU CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE PROPONENT CAN STEP FORWARD.
SO I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE PROPONENT OF THIS PROPERTY.
Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME AS FAR AS HOW IT LAYS OUT AS OPPOSED TO WALNUT STREET? THE MY WIFE AND I RECENTLY PURCHASED CITY LUMBER.
IT'S BEEN AN ESTABLISHED LUMBER YARD SINCE 1947 FROM THE FAIRCLOTH FAMILY.
THE THE TWO BUILDINGS THAT THEY SHOWED THE RED BUILDING IN THE CENTER BUILDING ARE AT A ZERO OFFSET.
MASON, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE WHAT'S THE LAY DOWN? IS IT 31.5FT FROM THE CURB? THERE'S A LAY DOWN FOR PARKING IN THE FRONT THAT'S EXISTING THERE.
SO IT'S NOT A TRUE ZERO SETBACK FROM THE CURB.
IT'S 31, I BELIEVE IT'S 31.5FT.
OUR CENTER STRUCTURE IS PRETTY OLD.
IT WAS BUILT ORIGINALLY, AND WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE SOME PRODUCT OVER THERE SO WE CAN REMODEL ALLOWING THIS, THAT THAT TRADITIONAL STOREFRONT TO BE IN PLACE IS KIND OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF ROOM WHERE WE'RE AT.
AND WE REALLY DON'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT.
WE WANT TO TRY TO LEAVE IT AND PRESERVE IT.
WE ALSO HAVE THE THE NORTH SIDE LOT IS OWNED BY HARDIN-SIMMONS AND IT'S A PARKING LOT.
[00:20:06]
I'VE SPOKEN WITH HARDIN-SIMMONS.THEY'RE THEY'RE FINE WITH US BUILDING, WHICH WE HAVE A ZERO OFFSET ON THAT LINE ALSO.
SO IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL TO THEM.
BUT YEAH, THAT WAS IT'S JUST FOR A PROPOSED BUILDING TO STORE LUMBER IN.
IT'LL BE A THREE SIDED BUILDING.
I DON'T THINK WE GOT YOUR NAME, BUT COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME? MY NAME IS BRYCE DAVIS.
DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR BRYCE.
I KNOW. I THINK THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTIONS AND THAT THAT FRONT CHAIN LINK FENCE IN THAT PICTURE IS THE IS THE ZERO OFFSET LINE, JUST TO GIVE CLARITY. SO ANYTHING ELSE WAS THAT THE FRONT OR BACK, THAT CHAIN LINK THAT THAT WAS THE FRONT.
WHEN THEY WHEN THEY BUILT THE OH.
THE IT'S THEIR PHYSICAL THERAPY IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
HARDIN-SIMMONS PHYSICAL THERAPY DEPARTMENT.
WHEN THEY REDID THAT ALLEYWAY, WE PUT OUR DUMPSTER IS INSET AT AN ANGLE.
SO. AND IT WAS IT WAS A LITTLE LESS THAN 17FT.
SO WE JUST WENT TO THAT POINT.
SO. AND THIS STONE STRUCTURE IS THE HARDIN-SIMMONS BUILDING.
THE STONE STRUCTURE IS THE HARDIN-SIMMONS BUILDING.
YES, IT IS ON THE FAR RIGHT PICTURE.
SO THAT BACK WOODEN FENCE THAT SEPARATES US FROM THE NORTH PARKING LOT OF HARDIN-SIMMONS ON OUR NORTH SIDE WOULD BE THE WOULD BE THE NORTH WALL OF OUR OF OUR STRUCTURE.
AND IT'S SET BACK FAR ENOUGH TO WHERE IT WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH THE TRASH TRUCKS DRIVING IN.
SO. I'M LOOKING AT A TIMER BECAUSE WE GIVE YOU THREE MINUTES.
AND HERE. I GUESS YOU CAN SIT DOWN.
THANK YOU. PERFECT. THANK YOU.
ANYBODY ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO STEP UP AND.
THEN I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD.
I HAVE NO. MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED. AREN'T YOU? YEAH. I'M GOOD. OKAY.
DOES SOMEBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION OR IS THERE ANYTHING TO DISCUSS? LET ME SEE IF I CAN WORD THIS CORRECTLY.
GRANTING THE REQUEST WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST OR INJURIOUS TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND WOULD MATCH THE EXISTING BUILDING SETBACKS OF BUILDINGS IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF THE SUBJECT SITE.
OH, CAN I CAN I STOP YOU? YES, MA'AM. YOU MAY.
IF THERE ARE NO APPARENT CONDITIONS THAT CREATE A HARDSHIP, IT WOULD NOT SUPPORT A VARIANCE.
IF THERE IS SOME CONDITION THAT WOULD CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP, THEN IT WOULD SUPPORT A VARIANCE.
OKAY, LET'S SCRATCH THAT AND SAY I.
I AM UNSURE HOW TO HOW TO PROCEED WITH THIS RIGHT HERE.
[00:25:02]
CAN WE JUST. CAN WE JUST MAKE THIS REAL? SIMPLY? I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS ON THE BASIS OF THE.WILL THAT SUFFICE? WELL, THE THE FIRST CONDITION.
SO THE STAFF HAS FOUND THAT GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND THAT THERE IS SOME SUPPORT THAT THE VARIANCE COULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THAT SECOND SENTENCE OF THE LAST CRITERIA, AND THAT IF THERE IS A HARDSHIP, IT'S NOT CAUSED BY THE PETITIONER, BUT STAFF IS NOT REALLY STATED WHAT THAT THAT THERE IS A HARDSHIP OR WHAT THE HARDSHIP IS.
BUT IF THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT THERE IS A HARDSHIP, THE BOARD MAY MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
THOSE ARE THE KIND OF THINGS THAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER BASING YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON.
WOULDN'T IT CREATE A HARDSHIP IF HE COULDN'T? DEVELOP. THE ENTIRE LOT.
WITH THE HARDSHIP IS THAT IF HE FOLLOWS THE CURRENT CURRENT CRITERIA OF THE HC DISTRICT, WHICH IS DESIGNED FOR NEW, LARGER SCALE LOTS ON A, ON A, ON A LOT THAT'S ZONED HC ON A AS A SMALLER SCALE LOT.
IT'S NOT ENTIRELY DEVELOPABLE.
HISTORY. HE'S TRYING TO. HE'S TRYING TO.
I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH.
I MEAN, SOUTH OF THE LOT AND ACROSS THE STREET AND FURTHER NORTH, YOU SEE, THAT'S YOU KNOW, WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR IS SOMEWHAT IN THE TRADITIONAL IN THE TRADITIONAL SCHEME OF HOW THIS AREA WAS DEVELOPED.
THAT'S MY THAT'S WHAT IF I WERE ON THE BOARD, I MIGHT CONSIDER AS BEING A HARDSHIP.
BUT THAT'S FOR YOU TO DETERMINE.
SO THEN, WOULD YOU WHEN YOU'RE MAKING YOUR MOTION TO.
TO APPROVE BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND THE STAFF REPORT.
THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING OF. BUT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF, WE FIND THE.
I THINK THE CONSISTENCY OF THE LAND THERE WAS THE FOURTH ONE BECAUSE IT IS, I THINK, A HARDSHIP IF WE DO NOT GO BACK TO THERE IT IS RIGHT THERE.
SO. YOU CAN ALSO YOU CAN ALWAYS SAY SOMETHING LIKE IT WOULD MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER.
SO, SO IF YOU LOOK DOWNTOWN, THAT'S HOW EVERYTHING WAS DEVELOPED BACK IN THE OLD DAYS.
IT WAS RIGHT UP TO THE STREETS, DIDN'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF SETBACKS.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING YOU CAN CONSIDER.
DOES SOMEBODY WANT TO TRY IT AGAIN FROM THE BEGINNING WITH LET'S TRY IT AGAIN.
IT IS HARD. SO YOU CAN TELL WE GOT IT.
LET'S TRY IT. OKAY. SO WE'LL TRY THIS AGAIN.
SO BASED ON THE FIND I'LL MOVE THAT.
WE APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE.
I WOULD BE CAUSED BY NOT APPROVING IT, BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT ALLOW HIM TO CONTINUE AND MATCH THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE TRADITIONAL COMMERCIAL AREAS SURROUNDING HIS BUSINESS. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.
WELL DONE, WELL DONE. I'LL MOVE.
MR. THOMAS? YES, MISS ELLINGER.
YES, MR. WHITLOCK? YES, MISS SPARKS? YES. AND MISS RIXEY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR BAILING ME OUT HERE.
OKAY, SO THE NEXT TIME THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM TO CONSIDER IS BA DASH 2020 4-05.
[5. BA-2024-05: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a request from JKK Properties, LP for a Variance to allow for a 10-foot setback (50 foot is required) along the rear property line for an accessory structure located at 2598 EN 10th Street. The applicant is also requesting a variance for an alternative plan for calculating the points required for the landscaping buffer along the east north and south west interior side property]
HI, I'M KILEY HANNA.I'M A PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE.
[00:30:01]
AND I'M HERE TO PRESENT CASE BA 2020 4-05.THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, JC PROPERTIES.
AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A TEN FOOT SETBACK WHERE A 50 FOOT IS REQUIRED ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE FOR AN ACCESSORY BUILDING, AND ALSO TO ALLOW AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD TO CALCULATE THE POINTS REQUIRED TO SATISFY THE LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS ON THOSE PORTIONS OF THE LOT THAT ADJOIN.
LOTS THAT ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES.
THE LOCATION IS 2598 EAST NORTH 10TH.
HERE IS AN AERIAL LOCATION MAP.
GENERAL COMMERCIAL. VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
HERE IS THE ALTERNATIVE LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR THE SECOND PORTION OF THE VARIANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD TO CALCULATE THE POINTS REQUIRED FOR THE LANDSCAPING.
WE SENT OUT NOTIFICATIONS IN A 200 FOOT BUFFER AND WE RECEIVED FIVE IN FAVOR.
STAFF HAS REVIEWED THIS CASE PURSUANT TO SECTION 1.4.4.2 D OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL.
WE HAVE DETERMINED THE IRREGULARITY IRREGULARLY LONG LOT CALLS OUT FOR A LARGE AMOUNT OF BUFFER YARD DUE TO THE WEST PROPERTY LINE ABUTTING A POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL USE BEING AGRICULTURAL OPEN CAUSING A POTENTIAL HARDSHIP.
GRANTING THE REQUEST WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC BECAUSE THE IRREGULAR, IRREGULARLY LONG LOT IS ABUTTING A POSSIBLE RESIDENTIAL ZONING USE THAT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN.
AS A RESULT, THE HARDSHIP WAS PARTIALLY SELF-CREATED.
AND BASED OFF OF THE SETBACK, THE IRREGULAR LOT SHAPE POTENTIALLY CAUSES A HARDSHIP.
GRANTING THE REQUEST WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC, BECAUSE THE ALTERNATIVE PLAN SATISFIES THE INTENT OF THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, CONSIDERING THE ABUTTING PROPERTY MAY BE ZONED COMMERCIAL IN THE FUTURE, THE PROPOSED VEHICLE WASH MAY BE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, DUE TO ADEQUATE BUFFERING THAT MAY BE PROVIDED WITH THE TEN FOOT SETBACK AND THE IRREGULAR LOT SHAPE AND DEPTH OF THE SUBJECT.
PROPERTY WAS EXPRESSLY PLATTED INTO THIS FORM BY THE APPLICANT.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I HAVE A QUESTION. I KNOW THAT WAS A LOT.
I WAS READING IT LAST NIGHT AND I TOOK NOTES BECAUSE IT IS A BIG CASE.
IT IS. MY FIRST QUESTION IS THE LOCATION.
IS THAT THE ADDRESS OF THE BUILDING? YES. HERE, LET ME PULL.
SO I ASKED THAT BECAUSE IF THAT'S THE ADDRESS.
THEN THE REAR WOULD TECHNICALLY BE FACING I-20.
SO WE HAVE NOT FINISHED THE SITE PLAN PROCESS YET.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN ISSUED AN OFFICIAL ADDRESS.
CURRENTLY IT IS ADDRESSED OFF OF EAST NORTH 10TH.
HOWEVER, I DO BELIEVE THAT THEY WILL HAVE AN INTEREST OFF OF THE FRONTAGE ROAD.
WOULD THAT? TURN THAT INTO THE FRONT THOUGH.
NO. SO THEIR FRONT BUILDINGS, THEIR BUILDINGS IN GENERAL WILL BE FACING THE I-20. SO THE ENTRANCE OFF OF EAST NORTH 10TH WILL BE A BACK ENTRANCE USED FOR TRUCKS TO PULL IN.
IT WON'T BE LIKE CUSTOMERS, AND EVERYTHING ELSE WILL ENTER OFF OF THE FRONTAGE ROAD OFF OF I-20.
[00:35:10]
HERE, LET ME PULL UP THE SITE PLAN.YOU CAN SEE THE ENTRANCE UP TOP OFF OF I-20.
EQUIPMENT IN THE CAR WASH ITSELF.
AND SO IT'S A TRUCK WASH THAT'LL BE SITTING KIND OF IN THE REAR OF THEIR MAIN BUILDING.
NO, I DO HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I'M PRETTY SURE THAT WHEN THE STAFF IS NOT HERE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, BUT WHEN EAST NORTH 10TH WAS REPAVED.
WHAT SPECIFICATIONS WAS IT DESIGNED TO HANDLE THIS TYPE OF TRAFFIC? THAT WOULD BE MY BIGGEST QUESTION.
AND THAT'S WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT BASICALLY THE STATE SPECIFICATIONS.
ISN'T THAT RIGHT OR WRONG? NOT THE STATE SPECIFICATIONS.
AND WHAT THE RIGHT OF WAY WOULD BE 120 120FT.
IT'S BUILT TO AN ARTERIAL STANDARD.
YEAH. OKAY. IT'S MORE THAN ADEQUATE FOR THIS.
I MEAN, IT'S A GATEWAY ROAD INTO THE COMMUNITY TO THE NORTH SIDE, OFF OF THE LOOP.
IT WAS DEFINITELY ANTICIPATED THAT THERE WOULD BE TRUCK TRAFFIC DOWN THE ROAD.
THE 25 POINTS? YES. WHAT IS THE.
WHAT DOES THE CODE SAY IT NEEDS TO BE.
SO THE POINTS ARE MADE UP BY ADDITIONAL TREES, BLANKS, OPEN SPACE FENCING.
THERE'S MULTIPLE COMPONENTS THAT CAN GO IN TO MAKE THAT 25 POINTS.
SO WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING IS ON YOU CAN SEE THAT SIDE WHERE IT'S PRETTY MUCH JUST ALL GREEN OPEN SPACE ALONG THAT SIDE PROPERTY LINE THAT A FENCE AND THAT GREEN OPEN SPACE IS ADEQUATE FOR THAT SIDE TO MEET THOSE 25 POINTS BY EXTENDING MORE TREES AND A NICER OPENING OFF OF EAST NORTH, 10TH AND MORE TREES AND SHRUBS THAN ARE REQUIRED, PER THE LDC.
AND OTHER LOCATIONS, BECAUSE THAT ONE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE, I BELIEVE IS OVER 800FT LONG.
SO IT WOULD CALL FOR AN EXTREME AMOUNT OF TREES AND SHRUBS AND THINGS TO MEET THOSE 25 POINTS.
BUT WHAT? BUT WHAT THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T DO IS PROVIDE EXTRA CREDIT FOR SPATIAL SEPARATION.
I MEAN, THE POINT OF A BUFFER IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS USE DOESN'T AFFECT THAT USE NEXT DOOR.
AND IF YOU CAN SEPARATE THEM BY, BY BY A BIGGER DISTANCE, THAT IS THIS THAT IS ESSENTIALLY A BUFFER.
THAT'S A USE BUFFER TO AMEND THIS.
TO AMEND THIS WOULD PROBABLY GO GOING BACK THROUGH THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
SO I MEAN THEY'RE COMMITTING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS AMOUNT OF SPACE OPEN.
AND SINCE THE LAND ON THE WEST IS A FLOODPLAIN ON TOP OF ALL THAT WE WE JUST FELT LIKE THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T FULLY GIVE THE WEIGHT NECESSARY FOR SOMEBODY WHO'S GIVING A BIGGER SPACE FOR, YOU KNOW KYLIE, THE SPACE BY THE CODE IS TEN FEET. YES, FOR A BUFFER, THEY'RE GIVING, LIKE, 400FT.
I MEAN, TO ME, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, AS A STAFF PERSON, THAT'S THAT'S THAT THAT'S A BUFFER.
THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER.
AS AS THE ALTERNATIVE SPACE VERSUS A LITTLE SPACE WITH A LITTLE LOT OF TREES IN IT.
CAN WE GO TO THE ZONING, PLEASE? YES. MAYBE IF I CAN FIND IT.
YES. RANDY. I THINK WE I UNDERSTAND AND I AGREE WITH YOU ON.
THE MORE WESTERN PART OF THAT AND THE OPEN SPACE.
[00:40:02]
IS IT RESIDENTIAL? IT'S ON THE EASTERN PART OF THE PROPERTY, AS IT WERE.SO TO STAFF'S BELIEF IS THAT THAT WILL ALL EVENTUALLY BE COMMERCIAL.
FOR THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE LAND USE MAP, IT IS EXPECTED TO ALL BE COMMERCIAL.
THEY HAVE BUILT COMMERCIAL ON IT.
YES. AM I MISINTERPRETING WHERE I WOULD BE CONSIDERED, BASICALLY.
CARRY THE SAME PRECEDENCE AS RESIDENTIAL.
IN THIS CASE IT DOES ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL USES.
IT IS A LOWER INTENSIVE ZONING DISTRICT.
BUT THE LDC DOES SPECIFICALLY CONSIDER IT.
YES, THAT IS LISTED IN THERE PER THE CODE.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
AND THAT'S THE FIRST VARIANCE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THAT'S WHY THERE ARE TWO SLIDES.
SO DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION ON EACH ONE.
YOU COULD TECHNICALLY YOU COULD DO IT EITHER WAY.
IT MAY BE SIMPLER TO OR IT MAY BE CLEARER TO HAVE TWO VOTES.
OKAY. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S ANOTHER CASE ON THIS AGENDA, I BELIEVE, WHERE THERE'S TWO VARIANCES.
AND IN THAT CASE IT MIGHT BE EASIER TO VOTE.
BUT IT REALLY JUST DEPENDS ON CASE BY CASE.
MORE QUESTIONS. OKAY, I'M GOING TO.
MY NAME IS JOHN JENKINS WITH SIMS ARCHITECTS AND AMARILLO ON BEHALF OF JC PROPERTIES.
THAT'S FINE. I'LL PASS ON MORELLI.
DON'T GIVE ME THE WHOLE BUNCH.
I THINK WE'RE. AM I LIMITED TO THE THREE MINUTES? YES, SIR. AND IT HAS ALREADY STARTED.
THAT YELLOW YELLOW HOUSE IS GOING TO BUILD AN ATTRACTIVE FACILITY ON I-20, AND THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT HAS REALLY ASSIGNED AN I-20 ADDRESS.
THAT'S JUST NOT IN THE THING YET.
THE THE GREEN AROUND THE PERIMETER AT THE FRONT IS WHAT IS REQUIRED BY YOUR ORDINANCE.
THAT KIND OF YELLOW ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE IS THE BUFFER THAT WILL BE REVEGETATED THROUGH THE. S3P AND THEN WE WERE ASKED TO ENHANCE THE LANDSCAPE AT THE WHERE THE 10TH STREET ENTRANCE IS.
[00:45:01]
AND THAT ENTRANCE IS PRIMARILY FOR DELIVERY TRUCKS FOR PARTS.IT IS NOT THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE POINT FOR THE HEAVY EQUIPMENT.
IS THE THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU SHOWED OR THAT I SHOWED EARLIER.
AND IT SHOWS A LITTLE BETTER DETAIL OF THE SITE AND THE CIRCULATION.
EXCUSE ME, THE HEAVY EQUIPMENT COMING OFF OF I-20.
IF YOU CAN FOLLOW AROUND THE SITE TO THE BACKSIDE, THAT IS ALL THOSE CLEARANCES ARE DICTATED BY THE SIZE OF THAT TRACTOR TRAILER.
IT REQUIRES 120FT TO MAKE A U-TURN.
AND THEN THE WASH BAY THAT'S SET BACK ON THE WASH BAY THERE ON THE INTERMEDIATE PROPERTY LINE.
IT DOES NOT. THEY DON'T OFFER EQUIPMENT WASHERS FOR SALE.
SO THE ENHANCED LANDSCAPE AT 10TH STREET, WE'VE GOT TWICE AS MANY TREES AND TWICE THE AREA REQUIRED BY THE ORDINANCE AND THE BUFFERING.
ON THE I'M LOOKING AT THE OVERALL SITE PLAN.
CAN YOU. YES. DO YOU KNOW THE DISTANCE FROM, LIKE, THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE BUILDING FROM THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE TO THE SOUTH OF THE BUILDING? YES, SIR. 40.
HE'S CARRYING ON THE SIDEWALK SQUARES.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS GENTLEMAN? I ASK THIS QUESTION, YOU'LL CONTINUE TO ASK AS MANY QUESTIONS AS YOU WANT.
MY QUESTION IS IT MENTIONS IN THE HARDSHIP ABOUT AN ALTERNATE PLAN.
THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED AN ALTERNATE.
IS THERE ANOTHER PLAN BESIDES THIS, OR IS THIS THIS? BOTH OF THEM YOU'RE SEEING TODAY ARE THE ALTERNATE.
OKAY. THANKS FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THIS. THIS.
THIS REALLY MAKES SOME THINGS CRYSTAL CLEAR HERE.
THANK YOU. I DON'T MEAN TO WASTE YOUR TIME, BUT THE PEOPLE, THE YOUNG PEOPLE IN MY OFFICE LOADED ME UP WITH THUMB DRIVES AND OFFERED TO SEND ME DOWN HERE WITH THE LAPTOP COMPUTER.
I GET THAT ALL THE TIME, BELIEVE ME.
OH, WE'RE DONE WITH QUESTIONS FOR RIGHT NOW FOR YOU.
SO YOU HAVE A SEAT IF YOU LIKE.
YOU HAVE A SEAT. AM I THROUGH? YES. YOU'RE DONE. THANK YOU.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO TALK IN OPPOSITION OR FAVOR OF THIS? OKAY. THEN I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION BY THE BOARD.
SO WHAT'S GOING ON IN Y'ALL'S MINDS? WELL, THE MAIN BUILDING MEETS THE SETBACK.
IT'S JUST THE WASH. IT'S JUST THAT ONE SINGLE AUXILIARY BUILDING.
AND THE LOT DOESN'T REALLY GIVE YOU A LOT OF ROOM.
[00:50:09]
BUFFER. YEAH, YEAH, TO BE FAIR.I'LL MAKE A MOTION ON THE SETBACK THAT AS PER THE STAFFS.
I'M GOING TO CLICK IT TO THE NEXT REPORT.
WE ACCEPT THIS VARIANCE BASED ON THE IRREGULARITY OF THE LAND.
REPORT ISSUES THAT THE STAFFS PRESENTED.
AND THAT WAS JUST FOR THE TEN FOOT, THIS TEN FOOT BACK.
DID YOU INCLUDE THE VARIANCE FOR THE 25 POINTS IN THERE AS WELL, OR ARE WE GOING TO DO THAT SEPARATE? I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO DO THAT AS A SEPARATE ONE EITHER WAY, ACCORDING TO WHAT KELLY WAS SAYING.
SO SHE SAID IT'D BE BE CLEARER, I THINK, TO DO BOTH SEPARATE.
SO WITH THAT, I'LL SECOND MELISSA'S MOTION.
YES, MR. WHITLOCK? YES, MISS SPARKS? YES. AND MISS RUTSEY.
DOES SOMEBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE VARIANCE TO.
I'LL TAKE A STAB AT IT AFTER OUR LESSON TO SEE AND I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT.
WE APPROVE. THE VARIANCE FOR THE.
LET'S SEE. DO I NEED TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE IN THAT? KELLY? IT IT LOOKS LIKE ALL OF THE CRITERIA AS ANALYZED BY STAFF.
IF YOU WANT TO RELY ON THE FINDINGS AND THE STAFF REPORT, THOSE ALL SUPPORT A VARIANCE.
OKAY. BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE ALSO GO ALONG WITH THE VARIANCE.
YES, MR. WHITLOCK? YES, MISS SPARKS? YES. AND MISS RIXEY.
OKAY. NEXT ON THE AGENDA, CONSIDER BA CASE BA 2020 4-06.
[6. BA-2024-06: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a request from Karon Bingaman and Harley Hall for a Variance to allow for an additional 5’ 6” in height, for a carport that was built to 17’ 6” (12’ allowed) located at 3834 Kady Ridge. An additional Variance is required for a 5’ street side setback (8’ required). (Kiley Hannah)]
HI, KYLIE. HANNAH AGAIN HERE TO PRESENT.BA 2020 4-06, THE OWNER OF HARLEY HALL AND KAREN BINGAMAN.
THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW A 17 FOOT, SIX INCH CARPORT WITH A SIDE YARD SETBACK OF FIVE FEET.
HERE IS THE AERIAL LOCATION MAP.
JUST THE ONE HERE ON THE CORNER.
YES. VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
STAFF REVIEWED PURSUANT TO SECTION 1.4.4.2 D OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL.
THE SUBJECT LOT DOES NOT HAVE A CONVENTIONAL RECTANGULAR SHAPE DUE TO THE.
CURVATURE OF THE ADJOINING STREET.
THE LOT SHAPE LIMITS WHERE THE CARPORT MAY BE CONSTRUCTED.
THE CARPORT MAY BE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH REQUIRES ADDITIONAL SETBACK SEPARATION FOR TALLER BUILDING DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND ALLOWS FOR A MAXIMUM 12 HEIGHT FOR CARPORTS.
[00:55:10]
FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.THE INEQUITIES SUFFERED BY THE PETITIONERS.
BUT THOSE ERRORS DO NOT AFFECT ANY ADJOINING OWNER.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
LET'S GO BACK TO A PICTURE OF THE STRUCTURE I THINK HE WAS SHOWING.
SO. FROM THIS, THEY WOULD WANT TO IMPROVE WHAT'S ALREADY UP.
AND CAN CONTINUE TO CONSTRUCT IT.
SO IN YOUR FINDINGS, YOU TALK ABOUT HOW Y'ALL MISTAKENLY HAD DIRECTED THIS PROPERTY OWNER IN A DIFFERENT WAY. AND SO THIS IS THE RESULT.
WAIT. SO THIS IS WHAT Y'ALL LIKE SAID MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS.
SO ORIGINALLY THEY HAD COME IN AND IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE 14FT TALL.
SO WE STAFF HAD AGREED ON A FIVE FOOT SETBACK.
WHICH IS TYPICALLY FOR CARPORTS, A THREE FOOT SETBACK AND THEN EVERY FOOT OVER A CERTAIN HEIGHT, IT GOES UP A FOOT WITH IT BEING A STREET SIDE, STREET SIDE.
WE HAD DECIDED ON A FIVE FOOT SETBACK FOR A 14 FOOT IN HEIGHT.
HOWEVER, THEY STARTED BUILDING AND CAME BACK IN AND REALIZED THEY NEEDED A TALLER THAN THAT.
SO WHEN THEY CAME BACK IN, THEY WERE.
AND IT WAS EVEN TALLER THAN THAT.
IT MEASURED AT 17FT, SIX INCHES.
SO IT DID NOT MATCH WHAT THEY HAD APPLIED FOR.
WAS THE PEAK AT 17 OR THE EDGE.
AND THAT'S MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR THE OWNER.
DO WE KNOW WHAT THE EDGE IS AT WHAT THAT ELEVATION IS? I'M NOT SURE THAT WE DO.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? JUST WANT TO THANK YOU.
WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I'M COLE MASSEY, I OWN MPG HOMES.
SO MR. HART HIRED ME OUT FOR THIS JOB HERE.
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE OF THE METAL FRAME, OUR OUT, TOBIAS GONZALEZ.
ORIGINALLY, THE PERMITS THAT WERE PRESENTED TO US WAS 14 HEIGHT.
BUT THEN ALSO THEN WE CHANGED IT TO 15.6, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE UNDERSTANDING IS WHICH SHOWED HERE IS ACTUALLY THE ENTRY POINT AND THAT ACTUALLY THE STRUCTURE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING THEY SAID THAT IT WOULD WORK AND THAT WOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM.
HOWEVER, THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT MAY HAVE JUST BEEN A MISUNDERSTANDING, BUT THEN WHEN IT WAS INSPECTED, IT WAS ACTUALLY TALLER THAN 15 SIX, WHICH AGAIN IS THE ENTRY POINT AND NOT THE STRUCTURAL HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING.
WHEN YOU SAY ENTRY POINT, DO YOU MEAN LIKE THE SIDE WALLS OR.
[01:00:01]
YES, MA'AM. SO WE'RE THE YOU CAN SEE IN THE TOP LEFT WHERE THE RV GOES IN THOSE POSTS, THERE ARE 15, SIX RIGHT THERE.AND THEN THE PEAK OF THE ROOF ARE I BELIEVE THEY SAID 16 OR 17.
SIX IS WHERE THE TOP OF THE ROOF WILL BE.
WHAT'S THE WIDTH OF THE STRUCTURE? THE STRUCTURE IS 16 SIX, SO 16.5FT WIDE.
THEY WOULDN'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
CAN I ACTUALLY SEE THAT PIECE OF PAPER? YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU.
IF WE COULD GET A COFFEE, WOULD YOU MIND HANDING THAT TO THE STAFF? AND THEN WE CAN MAKE A COPY OF IT FOR OUR FILES AND THEN DO YOU NEED THAT COPY BACK? OKAY. THANK YOU. CAN IT COME DOWN ANY FURTHER? HOW MUCH WOULD YOU THINK WOULD WORK? WELL, WHAT CAN PASS THE RV THROUGH IT AND NOT HIT ANY OF THE ELEMENTS ON TOP? WE PROBABLY COULD COULD DROP IT.
MAYBE A FOOT. POSSIBLY A FOOT.
THERE'S AN AC UNIT ON TOP OF THE RV.
WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T HIT THAT.
AND. AND WE HAVE NO MORE QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
WAS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WANTS TO COME UP AND IN FAVOR OR OPPOSE? OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND HAVE A DISCUSSION THROUGHOUT THE WITHIN THE BOARD.
CAN YOU GET BACK TO THE THE FOUR QUESTIONS? THERE YOU GO. OR STATEMENTS RATHER.
ARE WE AT KELLY? ARE WE ALLOWED TO ASK? LIKE, DOES THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION WITH.
WELL, THE CITY DOES NOT ENFORCE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION RULES.
SO THAT'S A PRIVATE MATTER AND IT REALLY ISN'T.
SO WE CAN'T TAKE THAT. IT'S IT'S I MEAN, I GUESS YOU COULD, YOU COULD ASK, BUT AND IT MIGHT AS IT, AS IT RELATES TO THE CRITERIA, IT MIGHT RELATE TO YOUR CRITERIA WITH REGARD MAYBE TO THE SECOND CRITERIA.
BUT THE CITY DOES NOT ENFORCE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION RULES.
YEAH. AND YOU CAN REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
OKAY. CAN YOU OPEN THE PUBLIC PUBLIC HEARING A QUESTION OR.
I'M THE HOMEOWNER, MY WIFE AND I, KAREN BINGAMAN HALL.
ANYWAY I DID TALK TO THE HOA PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT BEFORE WE BUILT SHOWED THEM WHAT THE PLANS LOOK LIKE PER CODE. AND THEY HE HAD NO ISSUE WITH IT AT ALL, SO THEY, THEY DON'T HAVE TO APPROVE IT, LIKE SHE SAID.
BUT I WANTED THEM TO LOOK AT IT TO MAKE SURE THEY FELT IT WAS OKAY.
AND THE ONLY THING HE ASKED ME WAS TO MAKE IT LOOK ESTHETICALLY PLEASING, YOU KNOW, WHICH IT WILL, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE THE POST WILL BE WRAPPED PAINTED THE SAME COLOR AS THE HOUSE.
THE SHINGLES ON THE ROOF WILL BE THE SAME AS THE HOUSE.
AND THE PICTURES DON'T QUITE SHOW IT.
IF YOU TAKE A PICTURE FROM A DISTANCE, THE HOUSE PEEK IS WAY ABOVE WHAT THIS IS.
[01:05:08]
AND SO EVEN THAT HEIGHT OF THE ROOF IS HIGHER THAN THIS STRUCTURE ITSELF.SO ANYWAY, OKAY, SO I DO HAVE A QUESTION.
OKAY. ARE YOU GOING TO CLAD THE WALLS OR JUST PAINT THE STRUCTURE AND ADD ROOFING TO IT? NO, NO, THE THE.
THAT'S THE SAME AS GOES UNDERNEATH THE EAVES OF THE HOUSE.
OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN.
THERE A DISCUSSION OR WHAT'S PEOPLE THINKING? TYPICALLY THE HOT AFFECTS THE SETBACK, BUT THERE'S NO PROPERTY ON THE OTHER SIDE, SO I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT'S A BIG CONCERN IN THIS HEATING THAT.
OKAY. SOME WANT TO MAKE A STAB AT MAKING A MOTION.
AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS I'M GOING TO GO TO SOMEBODY.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT EVERYTHING THAT IS LISTED HERE IN THIS REPORT IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THE VARIANCE FROM THE CITY, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
YES, MR. WHITLOCK? YES, MISS SPARKES? YES. AND MISS RITZI.
[7. BA-2024-07: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a request from Zach Sitzes, represented by Grant Abston, for a Variance to allow for a rear setback of 16’, where 30’ is required located at 2334 Innisbrook Drive (Mason Teegardin)]
HELLO, MY NAME IS MASON TEAGARDEN.I'M A PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE.
TODAY I'M GOING TO BE PRESENTING CASE BA 2020 407.
LOCATED AT 2334 INNISBROOK DRIVE.
HERE WE HAVE AN AERIAL LOCATION MAP.
AND THEN WE HAVE SOME VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
WE SENT OUT NOTIFICATIONS WITHIN A 200 FOOT BUFFER.
WE DID RECEIVE ONE OPPOSITION AND ZERO IN FAVOR.
STAFF REVIEWED THIS PURSUANT TO SECTION 1.4.4.2 D OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND WE DETERMINE THAT THERE ARE NO APPARENT CONDITIONS WITHIN THIS PROPERTY THAT CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP.
GRANTING THE REQUEST WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC, BECAUSE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE FULLY LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, AND SETBACK REQUESTED WOULD ONLY PERTAIN TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
MAY. ARE WE ALLOWED TO ASK WHY 16FT INSTEAD OF GOING THE FULL 30FT? THERE'S A. FOR THE THE OLDER QUESTION.
YES, MA'AM. COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE PROPOSED.
AND THE SETBACK REQUIRED IS FOR THE MAIN BUILDING, NOT NECESSARILY LIKE.
SO BECAUSE THE GARAGES BACK THERE ARE ATTACHED, IT WOULD BE FOR THE WHOLE THING.
AND IS THE VARIANCE ON THE REAR SETBACK? IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.
[01:10:15]
SO IT LOOKS LIKE THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.WILL THE PROPONENT PLEASE COME FORWARD TO THE MICROPHONE STATE THEIR NAME AND WHY THEY'RE REQUESTING THE VARIANCE? THANK YOU. MY NAME IS GRANT ABSON AND I AM THE BUILDER.
SO YEAH, I, I REACHED OUT AND I CAN PROVIDE THIS DOCUMENTATION, BUT TO MY ARCHITECT AND JUST WANTED TO STATE SOME OF THE, HIS OVERVIEW AND SOME OF THE REASONS AND THE ARCHITECTURAL CHALLENGES WE HAD WITH THE SETBACKS AND WHAT WE CAME UP WITH.
EXCUSE ME. SO THE VARIANCE WOULD BE REDUCING TO 16 ISH FEET FROM THE 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK.
THE HOA DOES HAVE A REQUIREMENT OF 2500FT².
AND SO WITH THE 30 AND THE 25 FRONT SETBACK WITH THOSE 55FT OF SETBACKS, IT PRESENTED A FEW ARCHITECTURAL CHALLENGES OF MEETING BOTH THE HOA REQUIREMENTS AND ALSO MEETING SOME OF THESE SETBACKS.
IN ADDITION, THE AMOUNT OF CONCRETE FLAT WORK REQUIRED TO NOT TURN THE GARAGE FACING THE STREET AND PROVIDE THE PROPER TURNING RADIUS FOR JUST VEHICLES PREVENTED SOME CHALLENGES AS WELL.
AND SO APPROXIMATELY 94, EXCUSE ME, 94% OF THE PROPOSED RESIDENTS DOES RESPECT THE 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK, INCLUDING THE MAIN CONDITION LIVING SPACES 358FT² OF A SINGLE STORY UNCONDITIONED GARAGE SPACE IS WHAT DOES ENCROACH ON THAT SETBACK, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY THE TOP RIGHT PORTION OF THAT RENDERING.
AND I DO HAVE THAT AS A PRINTED COPY, IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO SEE.
SO, YEAH, THAT'S THOSE ARE THE MAIN FACTS OF THAT.
AND SO I THINK WITH OUR ARCHITECTURAL CHALLENGES AND THE WAY WE'VE TRIED TO REARRANGE THIS PROPERTY AND ALSO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE HOA, THIS IS THIS IS THE PLAN THAT WE HAVE ARRIVED AT AND ARE REQUESTING THAT ESSENTIALLY THE THIRD CAR PORTION OF THAT GARAGE EXTEND JUST BEYOND THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. YOUR HOA REQUIRES THE HOUSE TO BE 2500FT².
THAT'S A MINIMUM. YES, MA'AM. MINIMUM.
WHAT IS YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE? WE ARE AT.
I LEFT MY PHONE AT. I THINK WE'RE AT JUST UNDER AROUND 3500 SQUARE FOOT.
THE THE SINGLE STORY PIECE PORTION OF THAT, I THINK IT'S UP THERE IS JUST AROUND 2600FT² FOR THE FIRST FLOOR, WITH THE REMAINING SQUARE FOOTAGE BEING SECOND FLOOR.
SPECIFIED LIVABLE SPACE VERSUS GARAGE SPACE, OR JUST SQUARE FOOTAGE AND PERIOD.
I THINK IT'S JUST TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE.
DO THEY ALL REQUIRE THE HOA, REQUIRE REAR FACING GARAGES OR YOU SAID 94% HAD.
SORRY. THEY THEY DO NOT ALLOW STREET FACING GARAGES.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WITH FACING THE REAR IS THAT ABILITY TO TURN VEHICLES AND NOT IMPOSE ON THAT FENCE LINE WITH THEIR AMOUNT OF TURN RADIUS NEEDED FOR THE FOR THE DRIVEWAY.
IF WE TRIED TO REARRANGE THAT AND TRY TO AVOID THAT UTILITY EASEMENT AS WELL.
THANKS. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION ON THIS CASE? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME.
ALONG WITH THE 2500 SQUARE FOOT REQUIREMENT.
THEY ALSO REQUIRE A THREE CAR GARAGE.
WHICH IT'S THAT THIRD CAR THAT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS JUST NOT THAT BIG COMPARED TO A LOT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. FITTING ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS FROM THE HOA WITHIN THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY PROVED CHALLENGING.
BASICALLY, NOT TO HAVE JUST A BIG BOX GOING STRAIGHT UP.
AND, AND HAVE A ESTHETICALLY PLEASING HOUSE.
[01:15:09]
I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK.CAN WE GO TO THE PLAN THAT SHOWS? THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM.
SO, LIKE I SAID, I LIVE ON INNISBROOK A COUPLE DOORS DOWN.
ONE THING THAT I WOULD SAY IS THE LOT'S BEEN VACANT, OBVIOUSLY.
I WOULD PREFER SOMETHING BE BUILT THERE.
I KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR A LONG TIME.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S BECAUSE SOME OF THESE REQUIREMENTS, BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS I WOULD RATHER IT BE BUILT ON AND SOMETHING THAT LOOKS NICE RATHER THAN, YOU KNOW, IF YOU JUST FOLLOW ALL THE GUIDELINES THAT ARE CURRENTLY SET, YOU COULD PROBABLY BE PROBABLY BUILD A PRETTY GOOFY LOOKING STRUCTURE PRETTY QUICK, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? SO IF THAT DOES MEAN GO INTO THAT SETBACK A LITTLE BIT, BUT THE STRUCTURE LOOKS NICE.
I THINK AS FAR AS MY OPINION GOES, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD PREFER THAT VERSUS, YOU KNOW, LIKE HE SAID, JUST BUILDING A GIANT BOX JUST TO STAY WITHIN THOSE SETBACKS. SO ANYWAYS, THANK YOU ALL.
OKAY, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION BY THE BOARD.
WELL, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
YOU'RE GOING TO DO SO MUCH WITH THE STRUCTURE THERE.
SO I FEEL LIKE THAT THEY'RE KIND OF STUCK.
UNDER THE HOA SHOULD JUST START LOOKING AT LIKE, THESE SITUATIONS.
YEAH. SO BASED ON THE HOA AND THE LAND SIZE, IT DOES LOOK LIKE THERE IS A HARDSHIP FOR HIM.
CAN WE CONSIDER THAT? KELLY? BECAUSE IT SAID THERE IS NO APPARENT HARDSHIPS.
BUT BASED ON WHAT THE HOA IS DOING, IT KIND OF CAUSES.
I THINK YOU COULD THINK OF IT AS CONSISTENCY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, MAYBE.
I DON'T SEE ANY KIND OF A NEGATIVE EFFECT ON PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE, EITHER BY.
AND IT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO. AND LIKE THE GENTLEMAN WAS SAYING EARLIER, IT'S BETTER TO HAVE A HOUSE THAN.
EMPTY LOT, RIGHT? FOR THIS ONE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH OUR OWN.
OKAY, SO THEN KELLY GOT ME ON THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S APPROVED.
I MOVE THAT THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR A REAR SETBACK OF 16FT OR 30FT IS REQUIRED.
LOCATED AT 2334 INNISBROOK DRIVE.
BASED ON FINDS IN THE STAFF REPORT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF HARDSHIP THAT WHERE THE CITY STAFF DID SAY THERE WERE NO APPARENT HARDSHIPS, THAT THERE IS A HARDSHIP BASED ON HOA REQUIREMENTS AND THE CITY REQUIREMENTS.
AS WELL. THIS WITH THE SIZE OF THE LOT, ENTER INTO THE SIZE OF THE LOT BEING.
CONSISTENCY. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THESE ARE CREATED BY HIM. RIGHT.
THE HARDSHIPS ARE NOT CREATED BY HIM AS WELL.
RIGHT. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.
YEAH, YEAH. CHIP. JUST SECOND.
SO IT'S THE MOTION I'M FOLLOWING.
OKAY. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ALREADY.
I DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE TO TRY TO REPEAT THAT.
YEAH I DON'T. MR. THOMAS. YES, MISS ELLINGER.
YES, MR. WHITLOCK? YES, MISS SPARKS? YES. AND MISS RIXEY.
[8. BA-2024-08: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a request from SignTex for a Variance to allow a separation of 90-feet from an existing off-site advertising (billboard) sign on the same side of the street (a 250-foot separation required) and a 90-foot radial separation from an existing off-site advertising sign (a 750-foot radial separation is required) located at 2479 S. Treadaway Boulevard (Adam Holland]
[01:20:04]
CONSIDERING A CASE.GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS ADAM HOLLAND.
I'M A PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE.
I'LL BE PRESENTING CASE BA 2020 408.
THIS IS OWNED BY TMAC PROPERTIES LLC.
THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW A 90 FOOT SEPARATION FROM AN EXISTING OFF SITE SIGN, WHERE 250 FOOT SEPARATION IS REQUIRED FROM ALL EXISTING OFF SITE SIGNAGE, AND 750FT IS REQUIRED FROM AN EXISTING OFF SITE SIGN ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET.
THIS IS LOCATED AT 2479 SOUTH TREADWAY BOULEVARD.
THIS IS THE SIGN TEXT BUILDING.
THAT'S CORRECT. AND THIS IS LOCATED OFF OF SOUTH TREADWAY.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY SOME EXISTING OFF SITE SIGNAGE NEARBY.
THERE WAS ONE EXISTING BILLBOARD ON THE LOT WHERE THIS REQUEST IS BEING CONSIDERED.
JUST ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF THIS TRIANGLE.
HERE IS A ZONING MAP SHOWING THE EXISTING ZONING OF THE PROPERTY.
HERE ARE SOME VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO PLACE THIS ON THE FRONT FACING SOUTH TREADWAY BOULEVARD OF THIS BUILDING THAT THEY OWN OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE TWO NEARBY OFF SITE SIGNS, ONE KIND OF ACROSS THE STREET ON SOUTH TREADWAY, AS WELL AS ONE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
WE SEND OUT NOTIFICATIONS AND RECEIVED NONE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED TO THIS REQUEST.
AND IT WAS REVIEWED PURSUANT TO SECTION 1442D OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
STAFF HAS FOUND THAT THERE ARE NO APPARENT HARDSHIPS PRESENT.
ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION IS THAT THIS SIGN IS PROPOSED TO BE A SIX BY EIGHT LED SIGN TO SHOW OFF SITE ADVERTISING, SUCH AS LOCAL BUSINESSES AND THE SORT.
OUR STANDARDS FOR OFF SITE SIGNAGE ONLY INCLUDES TWO, WHICH IS TYPE ONE, WHICH IS A MAXIMUM OF 700 672FT² AND A TYPE.
I MEAN A TYPE ONE THAT ALLOWS 672FT² AND A TYPE TWO THAT ALLOWS A 372 SQUARE FOOT.
NOW, THE GRANTING THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC, BECAUSE THE SIGN IS LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN PRIVATE PROPERTY AND DOES NOT IMPOSE INTO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
THE LED SIGN HAS ADJUSTABLE BRIGHTNESS, SO PROBLEMS WITH THE SIGN CAN BE ADDRESSED.
GRANTING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS CONSISTENT WHETHER OR NOT THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS SET IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ARE SPECIFIED TOWARDS A LARGER BILLBOARD TYPE SIGNS. AND THE LDC DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY STANDARDS FOR A SMALL LED SIGN OF THIS TYPE BECAUSE OF THE SMALL SIZE AND THE PROVISIONS IN THE LDC.
STAFF FINDS THIS REQUEST TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE LDC.
NOW I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE FOR ME.
ON SITE ADVERTISING ADVERTISES BUSINESS THAT IS LOCATED ON THE SAME PROPERTY AS THE SIGN SHOWS.
OKAY, SO WOULDN'T THIS SIGN IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE BUILDING.
BE ON SITE? NO, BECAUSE THIS WILL BE DISPLAYING SIGNAGE FOR OTHER BUSINESSES, SUCH AS LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOT LOCAL TO THIS PARTICULAR ADDRESS.
NOW, YOU SAID THIS WAS A SIX BY EIGHT FOOT LED SIGN, RIGHT? CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT.
AND YOU'RE CALLING. AND UNDER WHAT CLASS IS THIS? UNDER THE UNDER THE LDC.
BY OUR LDC STANDARDS, THIS WOULD BE A TYPE TWO SIGN BECAUSE IT IS LESS THAN 372FT².
[01:25:03]
IT ONLY MAKES STANDARDS FOR BILLBOARDS IN THIS TYPE.THIS IS STILL AN OFF SITE ADVERTISING SIGN, AND THE VARIANCE IS A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE STANDARDS OF SEPARATION FOR AN OFF SITE ADVERTISING SIGN. OKAY, I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT RIGHT THERE.
IT'S JUST THAT I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A PROBLEM WITH THIS AFTER REED VERSUS GILBERT.
THERE'S BEEN A THERE HAS BEEN CASE LAW SINCE THAT TIME WHERE THE SUPREME COURT HAS SAID THAT WENT BASICALLY IT WENT TOO FAR AND AND IT'S NOT CONSIDERED WELL WE ARE NOW ALLOWED TO, TO REGULATE THE ON SITE VERSUS OFF SITE DISTINCTION.
SO THE CASE LAW HAS CHANGED SINCE THAT TIME.
OKAY. STILL, WE HAVE NO NO REAL DEFINITION OF YOU OTHER THAN THIS BEING A CLASS TWO OFFSIDE.
AND THAT'S THAT'S THE ONLY THING WE'RE LOOKING AT.
OKAY. HOW TALL WILL THIS BE? THIS WOULD BE AFFIXED TO THE BUILDING.
SO IT WOULD NOT BE POKING OFF THE TOP.
IT WOULD BE AFFIXED TO THE BUILDING.
OKAY. THE 90 FOOT THAT THEY'RE WANTING IS THAT FROM, LIKE, THE BASE OF THE SIGN OR IS THAT ALSO VERTICAL DISTANCE? IT IS JUST EXCUSE ME THAT IT IS JUST A MEASUREMENT FROM THE SIGN ITSELF TO WHERE, ROUGHLY WHERE THE SIGN WILL BE AFFIXED TO ON THE BUILDING. I'M.
OTHER SIGNS SUPPOSED TO BE LOCATED.
IF YOU LOOK DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET, THERE IS A SIGN ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE.
ARE THEY PUTTING IT? YEAH, YEAH.
SO IS THAT THE BILLBOARD THAT IT'S THAT ONE THAT WE'RE.
CAN YOU KIND OF DESCRIBE ON THE OVERHEAD JUST SO EVERYBODY ELSE CAN SEE WHAT YOU'RE INDICATING? I KNOW THAT'S I KNOW THAT'S.
OH, THE LITTLE L STICKING OUT TOWARDS TREADAWAY.
IT'S ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THAT FACING SOUTH.
WOULD THIS AFFECT HIS ON SITE SIGNAGE? I DO NOT BELIEVE SO, BUT THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING HIS PERSONAL ON SITE ADVERTISING.
WOULD IT KNOW HIS ON SITE SITE? I MEAN. SEPARATE THE TWO GANGS.
TO. WE'RE GETTING CONFUSED WITH WITH THE OFFSITE ADVERTISING AND OFF AND ON SITE.
HE'S HE HAS HE HAS ON SITE SIGNAGE.
HE HAS ON SITE SIGNAGE ON THE ON THE BUILDING FACADE.
CORRECT. THAT THE ADVERTISE THE BUILDING.
HE'S GOT A LEGAL HE'S GOT A LEGAL BILLBOARD ON HIS PROPERTY.
IF THIS IS GRANTED, IT WILL NOT HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THOSE ON THOSE EXISTING SIGNS.
THEY WERE ALL LEGALLY PERMITTED.
THIS VARIANCE WOULD JUST GIVE HIM THE RIGHT TO INSTALL ONE ADDITIONAL SIGN, THAT IS ADVERTISING SERVICES OR BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOT LOCATED ON THIS PROPERTY, WHICH THE ORDINANCE CLASSIFIES AS A BILLBOARD SIGN.
SO IF YOU IF YOU GRANT THIS, IT DOESN'T PUT ANYTHING ON HIS PROPERTY IN JEOPARDY.
IT DOESN'T CREATE ANY NONCONFORMITY ON THE PROPERTY.
I WAS NOT READING THAT IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BUT OKAY.
YEAH, THAT'S GOOD CLARIFICATION.
THANK YOU. ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR ADAM?
[01:30:02]
IN THE DISTANCE DESIGNATION IS FROM THE BILLBOARD.STAFF DOES HAVE A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE SIGN OWNERS CONTACT INFORMATION BE ATTACHED TO THE SIGN SO THAT IF THERE ARE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE SIGN, THE SIGN OWNER CAN BE REACHED TO ADDRESS ANY ISSUES.
DOES THAT HELP WITH THE INTENT OF THAT? THAT'S LIKE 250 FOOT DISTANCE.
THAT IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION.
SO THAT IF THE LED SIGN MALFUNCTIONS, IT CAN BE ADDRESSED QUICKLY.
IT'S BASICALLY THE SAME REQUIREMENT AS ON PORTABLE SIGNS, SO THAT IF IT'S INVOLVED IN SOME TYPE OF INCIDENT THAT THE PROPER OWNER NOTIFICATIONS THERE. MORE QUESTIONS.
YES. HE WAS ABSENT WHEN YOU DID THE OATH, SO WE NEED TO SWEAR HIM IN.
THANK YOU FOR THAT. THANK YOU.
SURE. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU.
I REPRESENT JEFF BRANNON AS THE OWNER OF TMAC PROPERTIES THAT OWNS THE BUILDING.
AND TIM SMITH IS THE OWNER OF THE LED SIGN, AND WE'RE NEEDING TO MOVE IT FROM ELSEWHERE.
AND SO WE CAME UP WITH THIS IDEA TO JUST PUT IT ON THE SIDE OF MY BUILDING.
IF IF I WAS JUST SHOWING ADS FOR SIGN PACKS ON SITE, BUT BECAUSE TIM IS SELLING ADS ON THESE SIGNS.
SO HE'S SUPPORTING THE LOCAL COMMUNITY WITH THESE SIGNS.
AND SO BECAUSE IT'S THEN THEREFORE OFF SITE SIGNAGE THAT WILL BE FLASHING ON THERE, WELL, THEN IT THERE'S A THAT BILLBOARD ON THE CORNER AND I DIDN'T REALIZE THERE WAS ONE ACROSS THE STREET TOO.
I LOOK OUT THAT WINDOW ALL DAY, EVERY DAY.
BUT I WOULD BE THE ONE FIXING THE SIGN IF THERE WAS ANY ISSUE WHEN I PARKED THERE EVERY DAY.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S BUT ANYWAY, EITHER EITHER WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO IS FINE, BUT.
BUT THAT'S THE WHOLE THING IS IT'S JUST KIND OF A GRAY AREA FOR US TO BE ABLE TO SHOW ADS IN THAT SPACE WITH IT BEING 90 FOOT FROM THAT BILLBOARD AND APPARENTLY FROM ANOTHER ONE I DIDN'T REALIZE WAS OVER THERE.
SO. ANY QUESTIONS? I DON'T HAVE ANY. I DON'T HAVE ONE.
GO AHEAD. THE BILLBOARD THAT'S ON THE CORNER OF YOUR PROPERTY.
I'M NOT. I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT BILLBOARDS.
SO IS IT OWNED BY, LIKE, SOMEBODY ELSE? AND YOU HAVE, LIKE. NO.
YES. IT'S I THINK IT'S A LAMAR BILLBOARD.
AND I THINK RIGHT NOW IT'S ADVERTISING.
I THINK HAWK PAINTING, WHICH IS JUST ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ABOUT 100FT AWAY OR SOMETHING.
MANY YARDS AWAY. MAYBE, BUT BUT NO, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE BILLBOARD.
IS THERE. DO YOU KNOW IF TIM CONTEMPLATED.
PUTTING HIS OWN ADVERTISEMENT.
CAN THEY CAN WE PUT LED ADVERTISEMENT ON THE BILLBOARD AND.
THERE ARE. THERE ARE SIGNS IN TOWN THAT ARE LED ON TREADWAY.
I THINK HE'S TALKING ABOUT A SEPARATE SIGN.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE SIGN WOULD ALLOW THIS TECHNOLOGY TO BE INTEGRATED WITH IT.
I MEAN, THAT'S A TECHNICAL QUESTION THAT I CAN'T ANSWER.
IF YOU GO TO LAS VEGAS OR NEW YORK CITY LED LIGHTS ARE LIKE EVERYWHERE.
IT'S NOT NOT ANYTHING THAT'S THAT'S UNUSUAL FOR THAT TECHNOLOGY TO, TO SUPPORT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE SIGN THAT'S ALREADY THERE WAS ALLOWED THE SECOND SIGN TO GO WITH IT.
ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE BILLBOARD? YEAH. YEAH. SO I WAS WONDERING IF HE CAN IF TIM AND Y'ALL'S GROUP CONSIDERED TRYING TO PUT SOMETHING UP ON THE BILLBOARD, AND I KNOW THAT Y'ALL ARE WANTING TO, LIKE, RUN SOMETHING, SO Y'ALL WOULD WANT IT TO BE THAT.
WE HAVEN'T. WE'RE ACTUALLY JUST MOVING THIS SIGN FROM ELSEWHERE.
SO I ALREADY HAD PURCHASED THE SIGN, AND IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER THAN THE BILLBOARD.
[01:35:04]
IT'S ONLY SIX FOOT BY EIGHT FOOT, SO IT'S JUST GOING TO GO OVER THAT WINDOW IN THE PICTURE.THAT BILLBOARD IS, I DON'T KNOW, 30FT WIDE OR SOMETHING.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS? I HAVE NONE.
OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
ANYBODY KNOW? OKAY, I GUESS I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL DISCUSS AMONGST OURSELVES.
THE ONLY PART PROBLEM IS THE FOURTH CRITERIA.
THAT THE VARIANCE WAS CREATED BY THE APPLICANT.
WELL, I AGREE THAT THIS REALLY DOESN'T.
FALL UNDER WHAT THEIR INTENT WAS FOR OFFSITE BILLBOARDS BECAUSE IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER.
THEY DON'T ADDRESS THOSE, RIGHT.
THERE'S NO ACCOMMODATION FOR A SEPARATE TYPE.
IF THE RANDY IF THE THIS GENTLEMAN'S.
ADVERTISEMENT OR PROPERTY INFORMATION WAS IN THE MIX, COULD IT BE CONSIDERED ON SITE? SIGNAGE. OH, YEAH.
IF HE WAS ADVERTISING ANY USE AVAILABLE ON THAT SITE.
WE'RE NOT EVEN HAVING A DISCUSSION.
BUT IF YOU CAN ADD HIS STUFF TO IT AND JUST HAVE LIKE A ROLODEX WITH HIM INCLUDED, AS LONG AS HE'S AS LONG AS HE'S GOING TO HAVE OFF SITE CONTENT, IT'S IT'S CONSIDERED AN OFF SITE SIGN. AS LONG AS IT'S OFF SITE, AS LONG AS HE I MEAN, IF HE HAS 85% OF HIS OWN BUSINESS GOING UP THERE AND ADVERTISING, BUT HE HAS SOMETHING OFF SITE, IT'S AN IT'D BE CONSIDERED AN OFF SITE ADVERTISING SIGN.
IT IS WHAT IT IS, UNFORTUNATELY.
I MEAN, I THINK I THINK HE'S I THINK HIS PRIMARY USE OF THE SIGNS IS FOR OFFSITE FOR OTHER EVENTS, OTHER EVENTS AND SERVICES AND BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOT LOCATED ON THAT PROPERTY. I THINK.
ONE THING THAT THAT IS WORTH BEING SAID IS, IS THAT AND THIS WAS IN THE STAFF REPORT, IS THAT SIGN? SIGN TECHNOLOGY IS EVER EVOLVING.
WHEN THIS WHEN THE, WHEN THE LDC WAS WRITTEN, I DON'T THINK AT THE TIME IT WAS ENVISIONED THAT SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE BE ABLE TO PUT UP A SIGN THAT LOOKED LIKE A, LIKE A COMPUTER MONITOR. BE OF THAT SIZE, LIKE A LARGE SCREEN TV, BASICALLY ON THEIR PROPERTY.
TECHNICALLY, THAT'S A BILLBOARD, BUT TECHNICALLY IT'S NOT THE TRADITIONAL BILLBOARD.
EVEN THE SMALLER TYPE TWO, IT'S JUST IT'S IF IT'S PUT ON THE WALL, IT WOULD LOOK.
IT WOULD LOOK JUST LIKE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT HERE ON OUR DESK.
MOST MOST PEOPLE HAVE HAD THAT SIZE SIGN IN THEIR IN THEIR LIVING ROOM.
I MEAN, THAT IT'S IT HAS THE SAME INTENT AND PURPOSE.
SO FOR THE SO FOR THE FIRST AND FOURTH CONDITIONS OUR CRITERIA HERE, THAT'S SOMETHING YOU CAN CONSIDER IS THE TECHNOLOGY HAS ADVANCED TO THE POINT WHERE THE SIGN ORDINANCE WE HAVE RIGHT NOW DOESN'T REGULATE.
SO THAT CAN THAT CAN BE YOU CAN CONSIDER THAT AS A FINDING TO SATISFY THOSE TWO CRITERIA.
RANDY, I GUESS JUST TO SATISFY ME, IS THERE ANY INTENTION BY THE CITY TO START LOOKING AT THAT IS TO START REGULATING THAT IN THE FUTURE? YES. WE'RE AT THE VERY INITIAL STAGES OF UPDATING OUR OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND THE SIGN ORDINANCES ARE PART OF THAT CODE.
CITY COUNCIL HAS TOUCHED ON OTHER ISSUES WITH THIS TYPE OF SIGNAGE IN, IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA.
BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE REALLY DON'T.
[01:40:01]
THE CITY REALLY DOESN'T ADDRESS THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF ISSUE THEN, RIGHT? YEAH. I MEAN, WE'RE WE'RE ONLY ABLE TO ADDRESS IT THROUGH THE BILLBOARD STANDARDS, AND IT'S JUST NOT REALLY THE SAME THING AS A TRADITIONAL BILLBOARD IN THIS.OKAY. THAT'S ALL WE HAVE THE ISSUE.
KILLING AND I DO HAVE TO EXCUSE MYSELF.
I AM RUNNING LATE. SO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN FOR MEMBERS SO WE CAN CONTINUE? THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE VARIANCE FOR A 90 FOOT SEPARATION BASED ON THE CITY'S FINDINGS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE TWO HARDSHIP.
CATEGORIES. BUT I'D LIKE TO CONSIDER THE FACT THAT THE CITY CODE DOES.
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DOES NOT ADDRESS SIGNS OF THAT NATURE.
ARE YOU HAPPY AT WORK? WELL HOW CAN YOU TIE THAT TO THE PHYSICAL SURROUNDING SHAPE, TOPOGRAPHY? I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT YOU WERE MISSING, THAT THE THE SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY DOESN'T LEND ITSELF TO A 250 FOOT SETBACK TO BE ABLE TO KEEP IT ON THE PROPERTY.
YOU DON'T. OR 250 FOOT SEPARATION.
YOU DON'T HAVE THAT TYPE OF DISTANCE TO ON THAT PROPERTY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
AND TO ME, THAT WOULD BE HOW I WOULD TIE THAT IN TO THAT 90 FOOT.
VARIANTS. SO ARE YOU INCORPORATING THAT WITH YOUR.
WE HAVE A MOTION. WE NEED A SECOND.
YES, MR. WHITLOCK? YES. MISS SPARKS? YES. AND MISS RIXEY.
THANK YOU. AND I BELIEVE WE ARE DONE WITH ALL OF THE AGENDA ITEMS. SO. LET'S.
MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THAT.
WE'RE ADJOURNED. OH, I WILL MAKE THAT MOTION.
THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.