[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:10]
830. SO WE WILL CALL THIS MORNING'S BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MEETING TO ORDER.
[MINUTES]
FIRST ORDER OF AGENDA IS TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING.SO I WILL ENTERTAIN COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS AND ASK FOR A MOTION A SECOND FOR THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING.
MOTION. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
THAT'S ALL IN FAVOR FOR THAT ONE.
AYE. OKAY. OKAY. MOVING FORWARD, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IS A FIVE MEMBER BOARD, FOUR OF WHICH MUST BE PRESENT AT EACH MEETING FOR FAVORABLE.
FAVORABLE VOTES ARE REQUIRED TO APPROVE ANY REQUEST UNDER CONSIDERATION.
IF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR VARIANCE IS GRANTED BY THIS BOARD, THE APPLICANT HAS 180 DAYS FROM THIS DATE TO OBTAIN A BUILDING PERMIT.
IF ONE IS REQUIRED, A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS BOARD IF REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT AT THIS HEARING.
A BUILDING PERMIT MAY BE APPLIED FOR THE DAY THE REQUEST IS APPROVED AFTER THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED. IF THE REQUEST IS DENIED, IT MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED BY THIS BOARD UNTIL 12 MONTHS FROM THIS DATE.
APPEALS FROM THE DECISIONS OF THIS BOARD MAY BE MADE TO A COURT OF RECORD WITHIN TEN DAYS FROM THIS DATE. IF YOU PLAN ON SPEAKING DURING THIS MEETING, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
OKAY. DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? OKAY. VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT, LET'S SEE HERE.
[2. BA-2025-02: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a variance request by Nathan Franco. The subject property is located at 1758 Oldham Lane, Abilene, Texas. The variance request is to allow a 20’ rear setback, where a 25’ minimum is required. (Kera Valois)]
OKAY. FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA WE ARE TO CONSIDER BY CASE 2020 502.WILL THE PROPONENT PLEASE COME FORWARD TO THE MICROPHONE, STATE THEIR NAME? AND WHILE THEY'RE REQUESTING THE EXCEPTION. GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS KIRA VALOIS. I'M A PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE.
TODAY, I'M REPRESENTING CASE BA 2020 502.
THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK WHERE A 20 FOOT 25 FOOT IS REQUIRED. LOCATED AT 1758 OLDHAM LANE, WE RECEIVED ZERO IN FAVOR, IN ONE IN OPPOSITION. HERE IS THE AERIAL LOCATION MAP.
THE ZONING MAP. VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
WE SENT OUT NOTICES IN A 200 FOOT BUFFER.
ONE WAS RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION.
STAFF HAS 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, BECAUSE THE RESIDENCE IS LOCATED FULLY ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, AND THE SETBACK REQUESTED WOULD ONLY PERTAIN TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
THE REQUEST IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND THERE ARE NO APPARENT HARDSHIPS.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO DO? SO, LIKE IF YOU SEE IN THE FIRST PICTURE HERE, THEY BUILT THE HOUSE, THE REAR SETBACKS OF 25 FOOT AND THEY BUILT IT AT 20 FOOT. OH, SO IT'S THE HOUSE THAT IS.
YES. OKAY, SO THEN IF WE DON'T LET THEM HAVE THE 20 FOOT VERSUS THE 25, THEY HAVE TO MOVE THE WHOLE BUILDING.
CORRECT. OH. OKAY. DID THE PLANS GO BEFORE THE CITY? BEFORE THE HOUSE WAS BUILT OR.
YES. THEN IT WAS ON THE PERMIT AT 25FT.
I MEAN. DURING ANY OF THE INSPECTIONS, NOBODY CAUGHT THAT.
IT WAS TOO CLOSE. I'M NOT SURE FOR THAT PART.
WE'RE NOT SURE. THE APPLICANT JUST CAME IN AND SAID, HEY, I BUILT THIS INTO MY PROPERTY LINE.
WHAT DO I NEED TO DO? AND SO WE'RE HERE ASKING FOR THAT.
SO HE SELF-REPORTED. YES, SIR.
OKAY. SO WE MAY NOT HAVE CAUGHT IT IF HE WOULDN'T HAVE BROUGHT IT UP.
I'M NOT SURE. OKAY. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE QUESTION?
[00:05:03]
THE LIST OF THE FOUR? YES, PLEASE.YOU SAID THERE WAS ONE. UNFAVORABLE.
NO, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY IN FAVOR.
WHAT WAS THE OPPOSITION? OKAY, I GOT THAT. THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT HOW CLOSE IT WOULD BE TO THEIR PROPERTY LINE BEING CLOSER.
THEY WERE CONCERNED FOR LOSS OF PRIVACY.
NEGATIVE IMPACT ON PROPERTY VALUE.
HOW MUCH OF THE STRUCTURE IS AT THE THE STRUCTURES 20FT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE? RIGHT. BUT IS IT JUST THE GARAGE AREA OR IS IT THE.
IT'S THE WHOLE REAR WHOLE STRUCTURE.
WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO IF THERE IS ANYONE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THIS PLEASE COME UP AND SPEAK. AND AS YOU DO BEFORE YOU GET INTO IT, IF YOU WILL TELL US YOUR NAME AND AND WHERE YOU LIVE, PLEASE. YES.
I'M MARIA CRONAUER, AND I LIVE ON 1771 CROOKED BRANCH CIRCLE DIRECTLY WHERE THE HOUSE IS BUILT. OKAY. KIND OF IN IT, OUT TO THE SIDE.
YEAH. AND MY NAME IS VERONICA.
I'M A DAUGHTER, AND I'M JUST HERE TO HELP HER OUT A LITTLE BIT.
ALL RIGHT. WE WERE THE ONES WHO WROTE THE THE LETTER IN OPPOSITION.
AND BEFORE WE WROTE THE LETTER, WE INTERPRETED THIS NOTICE AS IT AS IT BEING ABOUT BUILDING A FUTURE STRUCTURE BEHIND DIRECTLY BEHIND MY MOTHER'S PROPERTY.
NOT. IT'S IT'S I MEAN, IT IS BEHIND HER PROPERTY, BUT IT'S MORE YOU KNOW, IT'S MORE A LITTLE BIT TO THE SIDE.
SO THAT'S NEW INFORMATION TO US.
BUT THAT OTHER HOUSE THAT Y'ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT, THE ONE THAT WERE JUST BUILT.
YES, MA'AM. WHEN THEY WERE BUILDING, AND I THOUGHT I WAS TOO CLOSE TO MY FANS.
YOU KNOW, AND THEN THEY TOLD ME THEY WERE GOING TO, THAT I WAS GOING TO HAVE TO SHARE THE FENCE WITH THEM. AND I'M LIKE, OKAY.
WHY DO I HAVE TO SHARE MY FRIENDS WITH THEM? YOU KNOW, THAT DIDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. AND I THOUGHT, OH MY GOSH, WHY IS THIS HOUSE SO CLOSE? I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK OF THAT.
YES, MA'AM. IT WAS IT WAS JUST TO ME.
SO. AND I AND I WILL TELL YOU YOU KNOW, I, I'M ALSO A HOME BUILDER, SO. AND WE KIND OF DEAL WITH THAT ON, ON DIFFERENT OCCASIONS WHERE MOST RESIDENTS ARE GOING TO SHARE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE LIVING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU'RE GOING TO SHARE, YOU KNOW, YOUR FENCE WITH SOME OTHER NEIGHBOR. YEAH. WHICH IS FINE.
BUT I FEEL THAT ALSO, IF THEY'RE GOING TO SHARE, YOU ALSO SHOULD CONTRIBUTE TO PAY FOR THAT FENCE TOO.
YES, MA'AM. AND I CAN DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT I'M I'M JUST IT DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK OUT THAT WAY. YEAH. I MEAN, EVEN US AS BUILDERS, I MEAN, IF, YOU KNOW, THERE MIGHT BE ONE HOUSE BEING BUILT HERE AND ANOTHER HOUSE BEING BUILT THERE, AND WHOEVER GETS TO THE PART WHERE THEY BUILD THE FENCE, THOSE ARE THE.
THAT'S THE ONE THAT PAYS FOR THAT FENCE FOR THE MOST PART.
AND IT'S THE SAME THING WHEN THERE'S AN EXISTING FENCE. BUT THAT'S THE LEAST OF MY PROBLEM. YES, MA'AM. YES.
SO YEAH. SO, I MEAN, DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS AND, AND THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, THESE CODES ARE ARE ARE IN PLACE, PUT IN, PUT IN PLACE. SO.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION? OKAY. IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND WHERE YOU LIVE, PLEASE.
I'M EDWARD WAITE. I LIVE IN THE AREA, BUT NOT ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY.
AND I'M A LITTLE HEARING IMPAIRED, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE THING? THE PROBLEM IS THEY BUILT THE HOUSE A LITTLE TOO CLOSE TO THE LINE.
YES. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. I'M SURE YOU KNOW MRS. MRS IS DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY IT.
YEAH. I'M NOT, BUT I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND.
[00:10:06]
IF THERE IS NO ONE ELSE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION.OKAY. SEEING NO ONE. PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.
DISCUSSION. THE HOUSE IS ALREADY BUILT.
AND NORMAL PROCESS WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR SOMEONE TO GO OUT THERE AND INSPECT IT AND SAY, HEY, YOU'RE RIGHT NEXT TO THE LINE.
YOU NEED TO MODIFY THE PLANS IN THAT.
BUT AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF NOBODY CALLED IT OR WHAT THE WHAT THE ISSUE IS, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU COULD HAVE A PERSON TEAR DOWN THE HOUSE THAT THEY'VE ALREADY BUILT SINCE THIS IS KIND OF FALLING THROUGH THE CRACKS.
SO I ACTUALLY WOULD SAY THERE WOULD BE A HARDSHIP HAVING TO REBUILD IT BECAUSE THAT'S EXCESS MONEY. OH, ABSOLUTELY.
MOST DEFINITELY THAT THEY WEREN'T PLANNING ON DOING.
AND AND PER THE DISCUSSION WITH THE CROWN OVERS THERE, THEY THOUGHT THAT SOMETHING ELSE WAS GOING TO BE BUILT ON THE PROPERTY.
SO THE REASON THAT THEY WANTED TO OPPOSE IT WAS BECAUSE OF THAT REASON.
YEAH. THEY THOUGHT SOMETHING ELSE WAS GOING TO BE CLOSER THAN THE HOUSE IS ALREADY RIGHT.
AND WHEN THEY FOUND OUT IT WASN'T, THERE WEREN'T MUCH OPPOSITION.
RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT WE UNDERSTAND.
MAY I ASK SOMETHING REALLY QUICK? WELL, THIS. IF Y'ALL WERE TO VOTE IN FAVOR, WILL THAT SET PRECEDENCE FOR THE PROPERTY THAT IS BEHIND MY MOTHER'S HOUSE? NO. THAT'S IT. THERE WAS A I'M SORRY IF THERE WAS A STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT BEHIND MY MOTHER'S HOUSE. NO. NO.
ANYTHING. ANYTHING ELSE THAT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED ON ANY OF THOSE LOTS IN THAT AREA, YOU WOULD HAVE TO CONFORM WITH THE CODE.
YES. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? CONCERNS? I MEAN, I THINK I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU GUYS.
YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS CAUGHT WHEN YOU'RE FORMING UP THIS LAB, RIGHT? YOU KNOW, SHOULD HAVE BEEN CAUGHT AT SOME POINT.
YOU KNOW, WHEN IT WAS INSPECTED IN MY OPINION.
YES. AGREED. I AGREE IT WOULD.
LIKE YOU WERE MENTIONING CAUSE OF HARDSHIP. NOW THE ADDITIONAL CALLS TEARING IT DOWN AND REBUILDING IT. SAY WE APPROVE THE VARIANCE.
WHAT CAN WE ANSWER THESE FOR? I FEEL LIKE THE BOTTOM ONE IS GIVEN.
WE DO SEE A HARDSHIP IN THEM AND NOT ACCEPTING IT.
YEAH, I CAN SEE. WELL, AT THIS POINT, EXCEPT FOR CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT, WHICH, YOU KNOW.
WE'RE JUST A FEW FEET OFF HERE WHICH BY TAPE MEASURE IS GOING TO BE A BIG DEAL, BUT BY SIGHT, IT'S IT'S NOT YOU KNOW, PERSONALLY, IN MY OPINION, GRANTING IT IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE TWO FEET AWAY FROM THE FENCE LINE. YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT A HUGE VARIANCE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A LARGE AREA LOT.
YOU KNOW, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, IT'S LIKE SIDE. PROPORTIONALLY.
PROPORTIONALLY SPEAKING, IT'S.
YEAH. YOU KNOW, THOSE, YOU KNOW, SMALLER LOTS, YOU KNOW, WITH LESS SQUARE FOOTAGE BUILT IN THE LOT, I THINK. I THINK FIVE FEET MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
I MEAN, GOING BACK TO LOOKING AT THOSE PICTURES, IT'S A LOT. IT'S A IT'S A REALLY GOOD SIZED LOT.
SO. I JUST NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND TO I MAKE A MOTION.
I WOULD SECOND IT. YOU ALL HAVE DONE.
YEAH. WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET MAD AT.
YEAH. SO WE HAVE TO HAVE YOU KNOW, I MEAN THERE HAS TO BE CRITERIA THAT IT'S BASED ON THE FOR THE HARDSHIP DUE TO THE HARDSHIP OF HAVING TO REMOVE THE RESIDENCE AND REBUILD IT. AND I WOULD SAY THE WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO SAY IT? THE PERSONALLY SPEAKING, THE INTENT IS STILL THERE.
[00:15:01]
YEAH. OF THE BUILDING SIZE AND THE LOT SIZE.AND THE FACT THAT IT WAS NOT CAUGHT DURING INSPECTIONS.
SO IF ANYBODY CAN PUT THAT INTO WORDS, IT'D BE AWESOME.
WE JUST HAVE TO HOWEVER YOU WANT TO WORD THAT, JOHN. OH. THANK YOU. YES, SIR.
AND, MANAGER. AS A RESULT OF THE BUILDING, DURING THE BUILDING PROCESS BEING MISSED, THAT THE PROPERTY WAS IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE. NOW, IT WOULD CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP WITH THE AMOUNT OF MONEY IT WOULD COST TO TEAR DOWN AND REBUILD THE STRUCTURE.
THAT SATISFY YOU, KELLY? ALMOST. I WILL TRY TO PUT THAT INTO WORDS FOR THE ORDER.
AND IF YOU HAVEN'T, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, WE CAN ALWAYS GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
AND IF BUT IF HOWEVER YOU WRITE, HOWEVER YOU STATE THE MOTION.
I'M GOING TO TRY TO PUT THAT INTO THE ORDER AS BEST I CAN.
OKAY. YOUR VERBIAGE, NOT OURS.
WELL, NO, I TRY TO USE YOUR VERBIAGE.
I GO AND I TRY TO USE YOUR VERBIAGE.
AND SO THAT'S, BUT THAT'S ONE.
AND SO WE NEED, WE NEED WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE EVERY ONE OF THESE, YOU KNOW, ANSWERED IN THE POSITIVE IN ORDER TO HAVE A VARIANCE.
OKAY. SO I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE YOU'RE REFERENCING NUMBER ONE FOR THE THE CONDITION OF THE LAND WOULD BE CORRECT.
WHAT YOU JUST STATED. CORRECT.
SO YES. SO BASED OFF OF YOUR COMMENTS, THAT'S ANSWERING NUMBER ONE.
THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
AND SO THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDED INTO OUR OUR STATEMENT THAT IT'S NOT IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND IT WOULD NOT BE INTEREST TO ANY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
THAT'S ALSO DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN AS IT IS.
THAT IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST ALREADY AS THE WAY THAT ELEMENT IS WRITTEN.
AND THEN GRANTING THE VARIANCE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF ABILENE'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. WHICH I FEEL LIKE THE FIVE OF US FEEL LIKE IT IS CONSISTENT.
BY GRANTING THIS, WE WOULD MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY.
AND THEN THE HARDSHIP OR INEQUITY SUFFERED BY THE PETITIONER IS NOT CAUSED WHOLLY OR IN SUBSTANTIAL PART BY THE.
AND THAT, TO ME, IS WHERE THE INSPECTIONS COME INTO PLAY.
CORRECT. YOU KNOW, AS AS JOE HOMEOWNER, THEY'RE TYPICALLY NOT AWARE OF OF THEY GO BY WHAT THEIR BUILDER TELLS THEM.
YEAH, YEAH. OR WHAT THEY WHAT THEIR FINDINGS ARE IN AN INSPECTION.
RIGHT. SO SO THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.
SO I WOULD SAY BASED ON OUR FINDINGS THROUGH THROUGH THE CITY'S PRESENTATION AND, AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST THAT WE CAN SAFELY ANSWER ALL FOUR OF THESE QUESTIONS DUE TO THE LOT SIZE, DUE TO THE INSPECTIONS AND AND THAT WE ARE GRANTING IT BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND WHO MADE THE MOTION? IS. I MADE THE MOTION.
SECONDED. ARE YOU ADOPTING THOSE? YES. I'M ADOPTING THOSE CHANGES TO THE VERBIAGE.
[00:20:10]
OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.[3. BA-2025-03: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a variance request by Kartavya (Kevin) Patel. The subject property is located at 1441 Barrow Street, Abilene, Texas. The variance request is to allow one (1) parking space, where ten (10) are required. (Kera Valois)]
NEXT UP, WE WILL CONSIDER BA CASE 2020 503.COME UP AND PRESENT THIS CASE FOR US, PLEASE.
MY NAME IS KARA. I'M A PLANNER WITH THE CITY OF ABILENE.
TODAY I'M REPRESENTING CASE BA 2020 503.
THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW FOR ONE PARKING SPACE WHERE TEN ARE REQUIRED.
LOCATED AT 1441, BARROW WILL RECEIVE ZERO IN FAVOR AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
HERE WE HAVE THE AERIAL LOCATION MAP.
THE ZONING MAP. HERE IS THE CURRENT DRAFT SITE PLAN.
NOTIFICATIONS WERE SENT OUT IN A 200 FOOT BUFFER, AND ZERO WERE IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSITION.
STAFF HAS DETERMINED THERE ARE NO APPARENT CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THE LAND WHICH CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
GRANTING THE VARIANCE AS PRESENTED WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE PARKING, ESPECIALLY FOR EMPLOYEES.
THE REQUEST IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THERE ARE NO APPARENT HARDSHIPS. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
YES. COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN? SO IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE ADDING A DOUBLE DRIVE THRU.
SINCE THIS IS ALREADY AN EXISTING PAPA JOHN'S. PAPA MURPHY'S.
I'M SORRY. CORRECT. SO IT'S GOING TO BE SEVEN BRU. OH, SO THEY'RE WANTING TO DEMOLISH IT. YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE NEW BUILDING IS GOING TO BE.
OKAY. SO IT'S GOING TO CHANGE OCCUPANCY.
YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT MAKES MORE SENSE.
I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY YOU WOULD ONLY NEED ONE PARKING SPACE. WILL THERE NOT BE ANY EMPLOYEES THAT WILL BE THERE SAYING THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM TO PUT PARKING SPACES FOR THE EMPLOYEES? THEY TRIED TO GET.
YOU CAN SEE THE NINE NINE SHARED PARKING SPACES THEY TRIED TO GET AN AGREEMENT WITH WALGREENS THAT FELL THROUGH.
IS THAT AGREEMENT BEEN APPROVED YET? DO WE KNOW IT DIDN'T GO THROUGH? WALGREENS WOULDN'T SIGN IT.
SO WHAT IS THIS PART THAT'S ON THE BOTTOM OF THE PLAN ON THAT? IS THAT A LITTLE SIDE BUILDING? THERE'S THE BOTTOM THAT'S THERE.
I BELIEVE THEY'RE COOLER STORAGE.
BASED ON THE KNOWLEDGE I KNOW OF THE CURRENT SITE.
ALL THE PARKING IS ALREADY ON, LIKE THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SEVEN BREWS.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE GETTING RID OF THAT, AND THEY'RE ADDING NEW SIDEWALKS.
YES. AND THEY'RE WANTING TO DO THE LONGER DRIVE THRU LANE WITH, I BELIEVE, 25 CARS FOR STACKING.
YOU GO BACK TO THE SITE IMAGERY PLEASE.
CURRENTLY THERE IS PARKING FOR THE EMPLOYEES AND THEY'RE GOING TO DO AWAY WITH THAT AREA.
YES, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO DEMOLISH THE CURRENT BUILDING THERE AND REBUILD.
OKAY. YOU MAY NOT KNOW THIS ANSWER, BUT FOR THE OTHER LOCATIONS OF SEVEN, BRUCE, THEY'VE GOT SIGNIFICANT.
THEY HAVE ENOUGH PARKING RIGHT WITH THE SURROUNDING PARKING SPACES OF THE EXISTING PARKING LOT. THEY HAVE TO MEET THE MINIMUM OF TEN PARKING REQUIRED.
YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN IF YOU WILL.
OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR HER?
[00:25:05]
SEEING NONE. THANK YOU MA'AM.IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR AGAINST.
2020 503. PLEASE COME FORWARD.
SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
BOARD DISCUSSION. I THINK PARKING IS VERY IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY FOR THE EMPLOYEES.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE ASKED. LIKE, WHAT IS THEIR CURRENT PLAN FOR THE EMPLOYEES TO PARK AT? IF THEY DON'T HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH WALGREENS? YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SAY. WELL, PARK FOUR BLOCKS AWAY AND WALK TO WORK.
YEAH. THERE'S ONLY ONE EMPLOYEE.
HOW ARE THEY GOING TO SERVICE 25 PEOPLE IN THE STACK ANYWAY? CORRECT. IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE TO DO AWAY WITH ONE OF THOSE LANES AND PUT YOUR PARKING IN. NOT TO THEM. THERE ARE WAYS TO MODIFY IT TO WHERE THERE COULD BE THE PARKING AND STILL OPEN THE BUSINESS.
IT MAY HAVE BEEN HELPFUL TO HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE EXPLAIN THAT TO US.
YES. WHAT? THEY'RE WHAT THEY'RE THINKING.
CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE CRITERIA? AND, KELLY, IF WE WERE TO DENY THE REQUEST.
WELL, OUR ANSWERS ARE RIGHT THERE.
RIGHT. LIKE, WE WOULDN'T REALLY IF YOU WERE TO DENY THE REQUEST, YOU COULD DO IT BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT.
OKAY. IS THAT. YEAH. ANY OF THE VARIANCE WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING FOR THE FACILITY THAT'S BEING CONSTRUCTED.
CORRECT. I KNOW HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT IT.
WELL, TELL US HOW YOU FEEL AND SEE IF THERE'S SOMEBODY ELSE.
OKAY. I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE REQUEST BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF THE STAFF.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY THE REQUEST.
MISS. FRITZY. YES. MISS SPARKS? YES. AND MR. LOUDERMILK.
YES. AND THE MOTION TO DENY CARRIES.
ALL RIGHT. THAT IS THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA.
SEEING NOTHING ELSE. MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
AYE. MOTION CARRIES. WE ARE ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU GUYS. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.