AGENDA ITEMS

[2. (BA-2026-06): Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on A Request for a Variance to Allow a 240' Separation Between an On-Premise Liquor Store and a Public School, Where 300' is Required. Located at 833 S 1st Street. (Mason Teegardin)]

WE ARE TO CONSIDER BA-2026-06. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION I STATED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING AND PROPERTY IN QUESTION, WHICH IS

[00:05:02]

LOCATED AT 833 SOUTH FIRST STREET.

>> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS MASON TEEGARDIN GOING TO BE PRESENTING CASE BA-2026-06. THE OWNER IS ON INGRID AVENUE AND A REQUEST IS A VARIANCE OF THE SEPARATION BETWEEN A LIQUOR STORE IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL WITH 300 FEET REQUIRED LOCATED AT 83 SOUTH FIRST STREET. HERE WE HAVE AN AREA LOCATION.

AND THE ZONING MAP, IT IS ZONED FOR PLAN DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS CENTRAL BUSINESS ZONING THAT ALLOWS THE PRODUCTION AND MANUFACTURING OF ALCOHOL. WE HAVE -- THE SEPARATION DISTANCE AND WE HAVE SOME USE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND WE HAVE SOME VIEWS OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL IN QUESTION THERE IF WE DID SEND OUT NOTIFICATION WITHIN THE 200-FOOT BUFFER AND WE RECEIVED ONE IN FAVOR.

STEP HAS REVIEWED THE REQUEST PURSUANT TO SECTION OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND HAVE DETERMINED THERE IS NOT A HARDSHIP ATTRIBUTED TO CHARACTERISTICS TO THE PROPERTY.

STAFF FINDS THAT THE VARIANCE I CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST OR AND THE ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC AND NATURE OF THIS CLASS PRESEN PRESENT ADDITIONAL CONCERNS RELATED TO THE INTENT OF THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENT. THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND SEPARATION REQUIREMENT AND SPECIFICALLY ATTENDED TO PROTECT SCHOOLS FRO THE PROXIMITY OF ALCOHOL TO SCHOOL.

THE HARDSHIP WAS NOT CAUSED BY THE PETITIONER HOWEVER THE DELA IN APPLYING FOR THE PERMIT CONTRIBUTED IN PART TO SEEKING THE VARIANCE. I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR MASON AT

THIS POINT? >> DO WE KNOW FOR SURE THAT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS RECEIVED NOTICE?

IS IT JUST ONE IN FAVOR? >> THAT IS ALL BUT CAME BACK.

WE NOTIFY THE PROPERTY OWNERS S IF THERE IS TENNIS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THEY WON'T GET THE. OR JUST THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> THANK YOU.

WILLED WILL THE PROPONENT PLEAS COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAM AND WHY YOU ARE REQUESTING THIS SPECIAL EXEMPTION VARIANCE.

>> I MTM CONDON COME THE OWNER AND WE ARE EXCITED TO BE HERE I ABILENE. THE BUSINESS HAS HAD TWO LIQUOR LICENSES BEFORE AND THERE IS A SCHOOL THAT HAS SINCE MOVED IN JUST DOWN THE STREET AND WE'VE HAD FULL COMMUNICATION WITH EVERYONE INVOLVED. WE ARE SUPER EXCITED TO BE THE CORNERSTONE OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT ADVERT LOOKING FORWARD TO GETTING ANGRY CACTUS UP AND RUNNING.

WE'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS SINCE 2016 AND HAVE A GREAT TRACK RECORD. OUR PASSION IS SERVING FOOD IN CREATING AN EXPERIENCE. THAT IS WHAT WE DO.

WE ARE SUPER EXCITED AND I AM NOW OFFICIALLY LIVING IN ABILEN AND THIS IS ALSO MY NEW HOMETOWN .

ANY QUESTIONS? >> THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANY PERSONS THAT WANT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION.

SEEING NONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

DISCUSSION? >> QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS AND

CONCERNS? >> YOU MIGHT PULL YOUR

MICROPHONE A LITTLE CLOSER. >> WAS THERE ANOTHER SCHOOL THERE AT ONE TIME. IT IS NOT THERE BUT PRIOR TO THAT. POSSIBLY.

>> NOT THAT I RECALL. >> APRIL OFFICE USED TO BE THER YEARS AGO BUT THERE IS A CHURCH THERE.

[00:10:02]

>> THERE IS A CHURCH NEXT DOOR. >> THE CHURCH HAS BEEN THERE FO QUITE A WHILE. IT'S BEEN NONCONFORMING SINCE SPRING OF 2023. IN MARCH 2023 -- THAT WOULD'VE BEEN A CONTINUATION.

>> THE PREVIOUS BUSINESS HAS BEEN CLOSED SINCE 2024 SO IT LOSES ITS GRANDFATHER STATUS FO THE EXISTING NONCONFORMITY.

>> THE SCHOOL WENT IN AT 24, WHICH CHANGES THE RULES OF THE MEASUREMENT. AND THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT.

WHAT KIND OF SCHOOL IS THAT? IT SAYS PUBLIC SCHOOL.

>> IT IS A CHARTER SCHOOL IS WHAT IT IS.

I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT OTHERS, WHICH MAKES THEM EXISTING A NONCONFORMING.

STAFF HAS TALKED ABOUT A VARIANCE PROCESS.

THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY T POSSIBLY GRANT A VARIANCE FOR THE MEASUREMENT. I KNOW ON THE PAST BEING CONSIDERED A RESTAURANT AND PUT THE REQUIRED SALES UP ALCOHOL, THERE WILL BE MORE FOOD SALES THAN ALCOHOL SALES.

THIS DIFFERENT WAYS TO LOOK AT IT, KIND OF THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THERE IS A NEW ONE WE ARE WORKING ON RIGHT NOW. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF TH

WAY IT IS MEASURED. >> THE VARIANCE IS BASICALLY --

OF. >> IT IS BASICALLY FIRST STAFF BECAUSE THE WAY THE DEVELOPMENT CODE IS READING TODAY, IT IS A STRAIGHT LINE, A PROPERTY LINE. FRONT DOOR TO HER FRONT DOOR.

>> I THINK THAT MAKES A VERY BI DIFFERENCE.

THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT STOOD OUT TO ME WHEN LOOKING AT IT.

WHICH TIM JUST KIND OF MENTION. ONE IS HOW IT IS MEASURED, IT'S MEASURED FROM THE BACK PROPERTY LINE TO THE TOP PROPERTY LINE.

IF YOU WENT FROM FRONT DOOR TO HER FRONT DOOR, IT IS WELL OVER 300 FEET. THE FACING UP OF THE BUILDIN TO ME, IN MY OPINION, MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

IT IS FACING AWAY FROM THE SCHOOL AND BACK TOWARD SOUTH FIRST AND NOT TOWARDS THE SCHOOL .

FACT THAT THERE IS MORE OF A RESTAURANT AND IT IS A BAR TYPE THING, AND THEN THE FACT THAT YOU DO HAVE DIFFERENT ESTABLISHMENTS THAT ARE MUCH CLOSER TO THE SCHOOL THEN BROUGHT THE ANGRY CACTUS WOULD BE.

WHICH I ASSUME THERE'S NOT ANY ANYONE THAT IS FROM THE SCHOOL THAT ATTENDED THIS MORNING. I DON'T SEE ANY PEOPLE FROM THE SCHOOL OR THE CHURCH. I WOULD HAVE TO BE UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT IF YOU MOVED OR STARTED A CHARTER SCHOOL KNOWIN YOU WERE SURROUNDED BY, YOU WER IN AN AREA WHERE THERE WERE ALREADY ALCOHOLIC ESTABLISHMENTS , THAT THAT IS NOT

A CONCERN. >> AND 78 WHEN THEY CHANGE THE LAW, THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT AT THIS

TIME. >> YES, SIR.

>> THOSE WERE MY INITIAL THOUGHTS REVIEWING THE CASE FRO THAT STANDPOINT. WHAT ARE SOME OTHER AREAS OF

CONCERN. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HOURS OF THE RESTAURANT ARE GOING TO BE.

SCHOOL WILL BE PROBABLY GOING O AT THAT TIME, PRIMARILY THE

[00:15:04]

DINNER CROWD. I GUESS IF THEY RUN DURING

NORMAL SCHOOL HOURS. >> CANNOT GET YOU TO COME BACK UP TO THE PODIUM FOR A SECOND. I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

YOU HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE SCHOOL COME UP WITH THE OFFICIALS AS FAR AS WHAT THOSE PLANS ARE AND WHAT THE ISSUE IS.

>> THERE IS A GROUP IN THE DISTRICT THAT I WILL GET TOGETHER WITH END AND IN COMMUNICATION WITH.

>> HAVE THERE BEEN ANY CONCERNS ON THEIR PARK.

>> I HAVE NOT HEARD A SINGLE CONCERN AT ALL.

>> I THINK I AM GOOD WITH THAT. THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT. WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. >> NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

>> WE NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND .

TO PUT THIS THING THROUGH. OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE CRITERIA THAT WE NEED TO ABIDE BY WIDTH OF THIS.

DO WE NEED TO WORK THROUGH THAT CRITERIA JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT

WE KNOW? >> SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE OR CONDITION. IT INDICATES FROM THE CITY THAT THERE IS NO HARDSHIP CHARACTERISTIC TO THE PROPERTY.

IT APPEARS PEOPLE ARE MAKING SURE THAT THIS THING IN ABILENE WENT THROUGH. THERE ARE EXISTING FUNDS THERE WITHIN THE GUIDELINES, I THINK IT IS A HARDSHIP AND AMENDED TH IMPRESSION THAT DUE TO THE EXISTING CLIENTELE AND BUSINESSES IN THE AREA THAT IT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.

THIS WAS NOT DISCOVERED UNTIL AFTER THE FACT.

I THINK THAT IS A HARDSHIP. >> YES.

>> I CAN AGREE WITH THAT. >> SINCE WE HAVE THAT, GRANTING THE VARIANCE IS NOT INTENDED -- THEY INDICATED THAT THEY ARE LOOKING THAT THEY'RE INTERESTED IN CHANGING THAT BUT HASN'T BEE CHANGED IT SO WE HAVE TO LOOK A IT THROUGH THE PROXIMITY OF THE ALCOHOL AND SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS AND WE'VE ESTABLISHED THERE ARE AT LEAST MORE THAN I CAN THINK OF THAT ARE CLOSER THAN THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION TO THE SCHOOL.

ACROSS THE ALLEY. >> YES, ACROSS THE ALLEY.

>> THAT SEEMS TO BE AN INCONSISTENCY ON THEIR VARIANCE SINCE IT IS ALREADY THERE. WERE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING.

THE INDICATION OF HARDSHIP AND THE LAY OF THE ALCOHOL PERMIT, YOU PROBABLY DID NOT REALIZE THIS WAS GOING TO BE REQUIRED T BE CHANGED DUE TO REQUIREMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION.

BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE AREA.

>> AGAIN, NOT HAVING ANYONE FRO THE CHURCH ARE THE SCHOOL HERE TO REPRESENT THEMSELVES, YOU KNOW, THE PROPERTY WAS PURCHASE AND THINGS WERE PUT IN PLACE TO GET TO A POINT WHERE YOU COULD GET A LICENSE BETWEEN THEM AND YOU HAVE A CHURCH THAT IS GOING TO LEASE PART OF THEIR BUILDING TO A SCHOOL.

THAT TO ME AS PART OF GOES INTO THAT ASPECT OF IT WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO BE UNAWARE THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.

IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED PRIOR TO THE PURCHASE

OF THE PROPERTY. >> OF THE ESTABLISHMENT, YES.

[00:20:04]

>> AS FAR AS HOW WE DRAFT THIS ORDER, I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE TIMELINE BUT MY UNDERSTANDING I WHEN THE BUSINESS GOES OUT IN THE NEXT ONE COMES IN, EVEN IF IT WAS, I'M MISSING THE TIMELIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND SO EVEN IF THE ANGRY CACTUS HAD APPLIED SHORTLY AFTE THE OTHER ALCOHOL IS DISCLOSED AND THEY WOULDN'T BE GRANDFATHERED SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ON THAT

TIMELINE. >> IF THEY WOULD'VE LEFT THE LICENSE ON IT, THEY BROUGHT UP LEFT AND IT WOULD'VE BEEN FINE.

BUT TO KEEP IT -- >> THEY WOULD HAVE OBTAINED IT MORE THAN SIX MONTHS AFTER THE BUSINESS CLOSED AND THEY WOULD'VE BEEN GRANDFATHERED IN THAT IS THE ONLY ISSUE.

STICK THAT IS THE QUESTION I HAD .

>> I AM GOOD WITH THAT, KELLY. WE NEED TO WORD THIS INTO A MOTION. WE ARE AT THAT POINT.

>> THAT IS WHAT I WAS LOOKING FORWARD TO.

>> WE DETERMINED THERE WAS NOT HARDSHIP.

>> AS FAR AS SUPPORTING THE MOTION, ALL WE ARE LOOKING FOR IS APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE. IT IS JUST A BASIC APPROVAL, UP VARIANCE THEN ONCE YOU GUYS HAL SIGNED OFF ON THAT, T ABC CAN PROCESS OUR LIQUOR LICENSE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THOSE JUST APPROVING THE VARIANCE, I BELIEVE.

>> THE CRITERIA THAT YOU SEE UP ON THE SCREEN, EACH OF THE CRITERIA ARE BUT THE BOARD HAS TO FIND TO APPROVE YOUR VARIANCE

. >> WHICH ALL OF THEM SEEM TO BE

THE CASE. >> THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING T FIGURE OUT. THAT'S WERE TRYING TO LOOK AT.

IT IS NOT WHETHER OR NOT WE WAN ANGRY CACTUS TO BE ON SOUTH FIRST OR WHETHER WE AGREE IT IS 300 FEET FROM THE SCHOOL.

THERE'S THIS CRITERIA THAT WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER TO AN IT IS UP TO THE FINDINGS REALLY OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU ANSWE AND PLUS WHAT THE CITY COMES UP WITH DURING THEIR PROCESS THAT HELPS ALLOW US TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.

SO WE HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISIO BASED OFF OF THAT.

THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS THAT ARE ARISING FRO PHYSICAL SURROUNDINGS SHAPED TOPOGRAPHY, YOU KNOW, AND TO ADD , I THINK IT IS THEY POSITIVE THAT YOU HAVE SEVERAL BUILDINGS THAT ARE IN BETWEEN YOUR ESTABLISHMENT AND THE SCHOOL.

WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO TURN THAT INTO SOME SORT OF SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE OR HARDSHIP. WE CAN SEE THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND OBVIOUSLY WE CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION BECAUSE THERE ARE OTHER ALCOHOLICS SERVING ESTABLISHMENTS THAT ARE MUCH CLOSER THAN YOURS ARE.

SO IT IS NOT GOING TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC IN AN WAY OR THE CHILDREN THAT WILL B ATTENDING.

THE SCHOOL CHOSE THAT LOCATION KNOWING THERE WERE OTHER ESTABLISHMENTS SO I FEEL LIKE W ARE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT ONE, WHETHER IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE ABILENE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IS WHERE THE MEASUREMENT COMES INTO PLAY, WHERE WE ARE MEASURING THE

[00:25:09]

NEAREST PROPERTY LINE TO NEARES PROPERTY LINE THAT PUTS YOU AT 240 FEET, WHEREAS IF WE MEASURE FRONT DOOR AT THE FRONT DOOR, I JUST DEPENDS ON HOW WE PULL THE TAPE ON THE STEAL, YOU WOULD BE WELL OVER 300 FEET, WELL WITHIN YOUR RANGE TO DO THAT.

AND ACCORDING TO CITY STAFF, THAT IS A PRACTICE THAT HAS NOT YET BEEN ADOPTED BUT SHOULD SOO BE ADOPTED.

AND THEN THE HARDSHIP AND INEQUITY SUFFERED SUFFERED WHOLLY OR IN PART BY THE PETITIONER, YOU KNOW, THE ONLY CONCERN THE CITY HAD IN THAT ASPECT WAS THE DELAYING AND THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE -- IN ADDITION TO BEING HERE TODAY.

WHEREAS COMMON SENSE, YOU KNOW, TO ME SETS WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THAT PROPERTY, YOU MAY HAVE BEEN MORE FOCUSED ON GETTING HERE, GETTING MOVED HERE, GETTING ALL OF YOUR TEXT IN ORDER BEFORE YOU WERE APPLYING FOR YOUR ALCOHOL PERMIT, KNOWIN THAT IT IS PROBABLY NOT GOING T BE THAT BIG OF AN ISSUE BECAUSE YOU HAVE FOUR OR FIVE OTHER ESTABLISHMENTS THAT ARE SURROUNDING YOU THAT HAVE THEIR PERMITS AND YOU ARE A MAJORITY FOOD -BASED ESTABLISHMENT RATHE THAN MAJORITY ALCOHOL -BASED ESTABLISHMENT AND THEN DURING THAT TIME WE HAD A SCHOOL APPEAR , WHICH CREATED THE ISSUE. SO THOSE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO ANSWER AND PUT INTO A WELL WORDED SENTENCE IN ORDER T PROCEED. THANK YOU.

>> OF THE MOTION HAS TO INCLUDE LIKE AN ARGUMENT THAT WE ARE

MEETING ALL THIS CRITERIA? >> SO STAFF ASSESSMENT IS THAT IT IS NOT A HARDSHIP ATTRIBUTED TO THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THIS PROPERTY. AND SOME OF WHAT YOU HAVE SAID IN YOUR OPINION, YOU'RE SAYING THINK THERE IS A HARDSHIP BECAUSE -- AND I HAVE TRIED TO WRITE SOME OF THAT DOWN THINKING MAYBE THI IS THE MOTION BUT MAYBE THAT WASN'T A MOTION. SO IF YOU SAY THERE IS A HARDSHIP ATTRIBUTED TO THE CHARACTERISTICS, PHYSICAL SURROUNDINGS, THAT WOULD MEET ONE OF THE CRITERIA AND THEN YO WOULD JUST GO DOWN AND MEET THE OTHER CRITERIA AND IPO SAY IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS IT MORE, THERE IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO EXECUTIVE SESSION IF YOU WANT M TO ADVISE YOU FURTHER ON THAT.

>> WE ARE WORKING ON IT. EVERYBODY LOVES THE SILENCE.

I WILL TRY TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER HERE AND HOPEFULLY I CAN GET ALL OF THAT AND IT WILL BE SATISFACTORY TO YOU.

SO BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT, I FEEL THAT THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES RELATED T THIS CASE ARE NOT ARRIVING FROM THE PHYSICAL SHAPER TOPOGRAPHY, BUT THEY ARE ARRIVING FROM THE INABILITY TO ANTICIPATE THAT A SCHOOL WOULD BE MOVING IN DURIN

[00:30:05]

THE TIMELINE OF PULLING THIS PERMIT.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION? I WOULD BE HAPPY TO DISCUSS WIT YOU.

>> YES, LET'S DO IT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GET THIS RIGHT AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE W ARE LOOKING AT THIS THE RIGHT WAY BECAUSE IT IS, TO ME, THIS IS ALL PUT IN PLACE FOR A SPECIFIC REASON SO I WOULD LIKE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[ EXECUTIVE SESSION]

>> SO WOULD YOU READ THE NOTICE FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION?

>> SO AS CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD HEREBY ADVISE YOU THAT WE ARE GOING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

IT IS 9:04:00 A.M. PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS GOVERNMEN SECTION CODE 550171 OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT TO SEEK THE ADVANC -- ADVICE OF OUR CITY ATTORNEY IN REFERENCE TO BA-2026-06 CONTEMPLATING LITIGATIONS SPECIFICALLY ON THE PETITION OF --

>> JUST SEEKING THE ADVICE OF COUNCIL IS ALL WE ARE READY TO MOVE FORWARD. THERE WERE NO DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE WHILE WE WERE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

WE ARE READY TO MOVE FORWARD AN MAKE A DECISION HERE.

AGAIN, LIKE WE DISCUSSED, THIS IS A VERY SPECIAL CASE.

BASED ON THE CRITERIA THAT WE HAVE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO MAKE A DECISION AND I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE FOUND A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE THAT HELPS US TO MAKE A DECISION HERE.

DOES ANYONE WANT TO CREATE A MOTION BASED OFF OF THIS CASE

AND WHAT WE FOUND? >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT DUE TO THE HARDSHIP ATTRIBUTED TO THE CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY, THERE IS A HARDSHIP IN REGARDS TO THE WAY THIS THE SIGN IS SET UP AND HAVING A MULTISTORY BUILDING IN BETWEEN THE TWO LOCATIONS THAT ARE ADDRESSED, THUS BEING THE SCHOOL AND THE ANGRY CACTUS. I BELIEVE THAT DUE TO HAVING TO COME IN ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TH BUILDING, DUE TO THE PIT BUT YOU HAVE TO WALK THROUGH THAT I FARTHER THAN 240 FEET AWAY, WHICH IS NOTED, THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE BUILDING ALLOWS WHAT CAUSES THAT HARDSHIP AND NEXT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST IN NEIGHBORING POLICIES WITH THE OTHER FACILITIES BEING IN THE PROXIMITY CLOSER THAN THAT OF THE SCHOOL, THAT SERVED ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR CONSUMPTION AND THIS BEING MORE OF A RESTAURANT THAN A QUOTE/ UNQUOTE BAR, THAT IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, MINIMUM SEPARATION AS DISCUSSED, THE CHARACTERISTICS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS AND THE PI PIT. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE AT AND THOSE ITEMS AND THE DELA SHOULD'VE BEEN TAKEN CARE OF

[00:35:10]

PRIOR BUT IT WAS NOT DONE BECAUSE OF THE GRANDFATHER CLAUSE NOT BEING APPLIED DURING THE GRANDFATHER CLAUSE.

I MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE IT AS SUCH.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

[3. (BA-2026-07): Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a Request for a Variance to Allow for a 0-Foot Setback Along China St, S 5th St, and The Alley, Where 25-Feet Is Required. Located at 433 China Street. (Clarissa Ivey)]

NEXT ON THE AGENDA THE CASE BA-2026--07.

>> MY NAME IS CLARISSA -- CLARISSA IVEY.

I BRING CASE BA-2026--07. TO REQUEST VARIANCE TO ALLOW ALONG CHINA STREET SOUTH SECOND STREET IN AN ALLEY.

THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 433 CHINA STREET IN THE NORTHEASTER CORNER OF SOUTH SMITH AND CHINA. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. THIS IS AN IDEA OF WHAT HIS CONCEPT MIGHT LOOK LIKE WITH TH SETBACKS ALONG CHINA AND SOUTH FIFTH STREET. THESE ARE SOME OF THE PROPERTY VIEWS AS WELL AS SOME OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROPERTIES ARE MOSTLY INDUSTRIAL IN USE.

WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO AND OPPOSITION N0 IN FAVOR WITHIN THE ALLOTTED TIME FOR THIS MEETING.

THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, WE FOUND THERE ARE NO SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES RELATED TO THE PHYSICAL SURROUNDINGS, TOPOGRAPHY OR FEATURES OR UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS THAT PREVENT COMPLIANCE WITH TH LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THERE FOR THE STREET SETBACK REQUIREMENT WOULD NOT DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND. STAFF ALSO FINDS THAT IT WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES AS WELL AS THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AS PROPOSED FOR THE PROPERTY TO BE USED FOR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONIN AND KEEPING ALL TRAFFIC MANEUVERING WITHIN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE HARDSHIP IS CAUSED BY THE PETITION. I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> YES, IS NOT AN ALLEY? >> IT IS AN ALLEY.

IT HAS NOT BEEN ABANDONED. >> IT HAS NOT BEEN ABANDONED.

I WASN'T SURE THE WAY THE GROWT WAS AROUND IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

WITH THE PROPONENT PLEASE COME FORWARD TO THE MICROPHONE AND

STATE YOUR NAME? >> MY NAME IS JACK HALL.

AS FAR AS THE LAYOUT? >> YES.

>> IT IS A LITTLE CONFUSING IF WE ARE NOT ON THE SAME PAGE.

I ALONE HAVE BUILT -- I'M SURE YOU ARE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AT TH MIDDLE.

THERE IS AN EXISTING BUILDING THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR 70 YEARS.

AS A SHORT OVER STORY. THIS PROPERTY WAS ORIGINALLY OWNED BY TEXAS PACIFIC AND THEN WENT FROM MISSOURI PACIFIC AND UNION PACIFIC IS OWNED IT SINCE THE '70S.

THAT BUILDING TO THE SOUTH, THI IS WHERE IT GETS HARD.

SLUMBER J LEASES THAT FOR 70 YEARS AND THIS LITTLE BUILDING

[00:40:08]

ON THE PROPERTY IS USED AS A BUNKHOUSE AND DISPATCH CENTER.

IT WAS OCCUPIED 24 HOURS A DAY FOREVER.

I CAN REMEMBER THAT WAS -- WENT IRON HORSE OR THE SOUTHERN STATIONS, SWITCHING STATION ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO DECIDED THEY WERE GOING TO MOVE THEIR HEADQUARTERS TO CHINA, THEY DIDN'T NEED THIS PROPERTY ANYMORE AND SO LOCAL BUSINESSMA CAME AND PURCHASED IT. HE SOLD ONE OF THE PROPERTIES T ANOTHER GENTLEMAN AND I WANTED TO BUY THIS PROPERTY IN MY SITUATION IS THE BUILDING TO TH SOUTH WHICH IS 20,000 SQUARE FEET, I HAVE LEASED TO ONE OF THE VENDORS AT THE DATA CENTER.

THERE GOING TO DO MAINTENANCE O THE POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM SO I NEED TO MOVE MY INVENTORY OUT O THERE WITHIN THE NEXT 7-8 MONTH AND THE MOST LOGICAL SITUATION FOR ME IS TO HAVE AN OPTION ON THAT PROPERTY RIGHT NOW CONTINGENT ON ME BEING ABLE TO BUILD A 20,000 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING AND ONE WAY, BECAUSE I IS CUT UP SO MUCH, THE AUDIT WE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT IS TO GET A VARIANCE FROM THAT ALLEY, WHICH IS THE OLD ROAD THROUGH. THAT ORANGE AREA.

I'VE TALKED TO THE CITY AND IT IS VERY COMPLICATED.

YOU CAN SEE SOUTH FIRST STREET WORK CROSSES CHINA STREET, IT JUST KIND OF ENDS THAT AS A VER IMPORTANT AREA AND WATER JUST FLOWS THROUGH THAT AREA. I THINK THE CITY OWNS THAT.

DOES THE CITY OWN IT OR DO THEY JUST MANAGE IT.

>> IT IS JUST RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> OR YOU DON'T OWN IT.

YOU JUST CONTROL. IS NOT A GOOD WAY TO PUT IT?

>> YES. OF IT IS PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.

WHAT I WANT, ALL THE BUILDINGS ARE BUILT ON THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE BUILDING ON THE ADJACEN PROPERTY IS BUILT ON THE PROPERTY LINE AND ALL OF MY BUILDINGS ARE BUILT ON THE PROPERTY LINE SO WHAT I'M WANTING TO DO, I WANT THE ABILITY TO DO THAT SO I CAN BUILD A 20,000 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING. IT IS MINE IS A HARDSHIP TO ME.

I HAVE A COMPANY WITH TRAVELING EXHIBITS AND IN MY BUILDING I HAVE 100 TRUCKLOADS OF EXHIBITS AND I WOULD MUCH RATHER BE ABLE TO FORKLIFT THEM TO A NEW BUILDING INSTEAD OF HAVING TO SHIP THEM BY TRUCK TO ANOTHER BUILDING.

I KNOW THAT IS DIFFICULT FOR YO TO UNDERSTAND BUT THAT IS MY HARDSHIP AND I GUESS MY OPINION IT IS BECAUSE THERE IS AN EXISTING BUILDING BUILT ON THE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE FOR MANY YEARS AND IT WAS FLUCTUATING UNTIL ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO AND DON'T SEE HOW IT IS GOING TO HURT ANYBODY.

UNION PACIFIC OWNS THAT LAND AN I WOULD ON THE FRONT LAND AND THAT FRONT LAND. TO ME IT IS HARD TO GRASP YOUR HANDS AROUND EVERYTHING. DID I PRESENT MY CASE WELL

ENOUGH? >> YES, SIR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. THERE IS A LOT GOING ON RIGHT HERE. I DO THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TRY TO WRAP OUR BRAINS AROUND AND UNDERSTAND YOU ALL

HALF ANY INITIAL QUESTIONS? >> SO IF YOU ELIMINATE THE SETBACK, THAT IS GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO ADD ON TO THE EXISTING BUILDING TO GIVE YOU MORE SQUAR FOOTAGE?

>> NO, I WOULD BUILD A NEW BUILDING.

>> I HAVE OTHER PROPERTY IN TOW BUT THIS IS MY NUMBER ONE PRIORITY BECAUSE OF HIS CONTINUOUS AND IT WOULD BE

EXTREMELY CONVENIENT. >> WOULD YOU TAKE DOWN, ARE YOU GOING TO DO AWAY WITH THE EXISTING BUILDING AND THAT

[00:45:03]

PROPERTY? >> YES.

>> SO THAT WILL GO AWAY AND BASICALLY WITH THE SCREEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT THERE, THE ORANGES GOING TO BE THE FRONT O

THE BUILDING. >> THIS COMPLICATES IT EVEN MOR BECAUSE THAT IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT DRAINAGE AREA, IF I WANT TO DO ANYTHING ON THAT LAS LOT, I AM GOING TO HAVE TO GET AN ENGINEER TO LOOK AT IT. I'VE GOT TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE CITY AND THERE'S EVEN TALK ABOU [INDISCERNIBLE] ALL THAT IS IS A UTILITY POLE EASEMENT.

>> WE ARE TALKING THERE RIGHT A THE END OF SELF FIFTH WERE KIND

OF TURNS TO GRASS. >> AT A COUPLE OF ISSUES, SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED BECAUSE AS HE CAN SEE I OWN THE FIRST SET UP LOTS BUT THERE IS HUGE DITCH DEVELOPMENT AND THAT DITCH IS CUTTING INTO THE ACTUA ROAD, WHICH IS ROAD STREET.

IT'S STICKING OUT ABOUT 3-4 FEE BUT YOU CANNOT DRIVE STRAIGHT DOWN ROAD STREET BECAUSE OF THE EROSION THAT IS BEING CAUSED.

SO WHAT I HOPE TO DO IS GET PERMISSION TO BUILD THAT BUILDING AND PROCES -- I'VE GOT TO GET WITH THE CITY, WHICH IS ANOTHER BIG ISSUE ON THE LOADING DOCKS AND THE CITY HAS BECOME, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, VERY STRINGENT TO GO O TO YOUR LAND. YOU CANNOT GO FROM A CITY STREE ONTO A LOADING DOCK. SO THERE IS A LOT OF OUTSTANDIN ISSUES THAT I DON'T HAVE RESOLVED YET AND THE NEXT STEP FOR ME IS THE ZERO LOT LINE PERMISSION THAT WILL GIVE ME TH CONFIDENCE TO BUY THE PROPERTY. AND THERE'S BEEN SOME MONEY AND I NEED TO KNOW WHAT MY OPTIONS ARE.

>> ONE QUICK QUESTION. YOU DON'T OWN THIS RIGHT NOW.

>> SO THAT BUILDING ON CHINA STREET COME IS THAT THE ONE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT UNDER 433? IS THAT OUTSIDE THE SETBACKS?

>> NO, IT IS RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE.

IT IS JUST FLOWS LIGHTED HOOKS. I LOOK AT IT FROM HERE AND I THINK IT IS ACTUALLY VERTICAL WITH MY BUILDINGS.

WHICH ARE ON THE NEXT BLOCK. >> THE PROPERTY LINES ON THE IMAGE ARE APPROXIMATE. SO ESSENTIALLY WHERE THE ORANGE IS WHERE A NEW STRUCTURE WOULD GO.

THAT AREA BUT NOW BECOME THE AREA OF WORK YOU WOULD UTILIZE TRUCKS TO BACK INTO YOUR LOADIN DOCKS.

IS THAT CORRECT? >> ALL OF THAT IS TO BE

DETERMINED. >> CASH IF I CAN GET DECENT WRECK AND BUILD A 20,000 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING.

ITS CONTINGENT CYCLE UPON GETTING APPROVAL FOR THE

VARIANCE. >> HOW BIG IS THAT LOT?

>> 27,000 IS THE FRONT PART AND 17,000 IS BEHIND ROSE STREET.

AND THEN THAT LAST PART, UNION PACIFIC STILL OWNS.

>> THE ONE LABELED 410. >> 410 IS CASH TANKERS.

I WOULD BE PURCHASING THAT AREA BEHIND.

>> SO IT IS THE SAME AS WHAT WE HAVE DEALT WITH BEFORE.

>> WE HAVE CERTAIN AREAS THAT W HAVE TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER TO.

[00:50:02]

SO IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO CRITERIA.

SO NUMBER ONE IS, AND THESE ALL HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE

PROPONENT. >> THE STAFF FINDS THERE WERE N SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONSTRAINTS.

WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS ALL THE OTHER BUILDINGS ARE LOT LINE BUILDINGS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER AREAS WITHI THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE SHAPE OF THE TOPOGRAPHY AND ANYTHING TO BREAK YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CREATE A 20,000-FOOT BUILDIN

WITHOUT THOSE PROPERTIES. >> YOU MEAN IF I DIDN'T GET THE

VARIANCE, COULD I BUILD IT? >> CORRECT.

>> NO. I WOULDN'T WANT TO.

IF I CAN'T GET THE VARIANCE, IT IS NOT JUST THE ACTUAL BUILDING IT IS ACCESS TO THE LOADING DOCKS AND IT IS MORE THAN JUST

THAT ISSUE. >> WOULD YOU SAY THAT THE FIFTH STREET DRAINAGE AS PART OF THE ISSUE THAT YOU HAVE?

>> YES. >> A LOT OF THAT IS BECAUSE OF HIS COMING ROSE STREET. AT IS NO LONGER AN ACCESS.

YOU COULDN'T DRIVE A TRUCK ON I RIGHT NOW.

I TALKED OF THE CITY ABOUT DOIN SOMETHING ABOUT IT BECAUSE THEY DON'T OWN IT. OBVIOUSLY BASED ON YOUR REQUEST ANY OF YOUR NEIGHBOR PROPERTIES THEN WELFARE, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.

>> ALL THE BUILDINGS ACROSS FRO ME, REALLY THAT SERVES AS AN ALLEY. I HAVE TALKED TO A LOT AND THEY DON'T MIND. I OWN THE PROPERTY WHICH IS SOUTH OF THAT. STICK YOU AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'R

DOING. >> I THINK I AM FINE.

>> OKAY. YOUR REQUEST IS THE INTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ALL THAT.

AND SO ON YOUR LAST ONE, AND YO MENTIONED EARLIER AND I WANT YO TO EXPAND ON THAT. YOU ARE GOING TO BE HOUSING WHA

IN THERE. >> THIS IS WHERE I WISHED JOSH WAS WITH US. I HAVE A VERY UNUSUAL BUSINESS.

AND I'VE BEEN IN THE TRAVELING MUSEUM BUSINESS FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS AND I LEASE DINOSAURS TO MUSEUMS, ZOOS, WHATEVER, FOR PERIODS OF TIME. AND THAT PROPERTY, GOT 28,000 SQUARE FEET OF EXHIBIT TREAT AN FOR ME TO HAVE TO MOVE THAT BY TRUCK WOULD BE A NIGHTMARE. I HAVE SOLD PART OF MY PROPERTY AND IS GOING TO TAKE 27 TRIPS T MOVE NEXT MONTH SO TO BE ABLE T FORKLIFT IT OVER TO A NEW BUILDING WOULD BE IDEAL FOR ME.

CERTAINLY SAVING ME TENS OF THOUSANDS OF LOADS.

UNFORTUNATELY FOR US, THE MONEY-SAVING ASPECT DOESN'T COM INTO PLAY AND I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT BUT THE POTENTIAL TO DAMAGE THESE THING DURING THE MOVING, WHETHER IT I MOVING BY TRUCK OR FORKLIFT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE HAVING TO

[00:55:01]

DEAL WITH AT THAT POINT. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN COME

INTO PLAY HERE? >> THEY ARE VERY EXPENSIVE.

AND YOU WOULDN'T BE TRANSPORTIN DINOSAUR ON THE WEEKENDS.

>> THERE IS A BAR RIGHT THERE. THEY MIGHT JUST GO AROUND AND G RIGHT BACK IN. DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, SIR. ANY DISCUSSION?

>> IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN FAVOR IN OPPOSITION BUT THIS. PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE

YOUR NAME. >> MY NAME IS GARY GRISHAM AND OWN PROPERTY RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM HIS ON CHINA STREET THREE LOTS I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC ON THIS STREET BECAUSE IT FLOODS SO BADLY. I AM AFRAID OF THE BLOCKS THAT OFF, WERE GOING TO HAVE SO MUCH WATER IN OUR BUILDING THAT WE CAN'T OPERATE AND WE'VE BEEN THERE 30 PLUS YEARS.

SO IF HE'S GOING TO KEEP IT DRAINED AND KEEP IT FROM FLOODING OUR BUSINESS, SOMETIME THE RATS GET DEEP ON BOTH SIDES FROM GOING THROUGH THERE. SO THAT IS OUR BIGGEST CONCERN IS TRAFFICKING AT 18 WILLIS GOING ACROSS THEIR NATIVE IS ALREADY PRETTY CONGESTED. PEOPLE USE THAT STRIP ALL THE TIME AND IT IS GOING TO BE HARD FOR US TO GET AROUND AND WORRY

ABOUT THE WATER. >> DO YOU HAPPEN QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR HIM. DID YOU RECEIVE THE NOTIFICATION

? >> YES, I DID.

THAT IS FINE. THAT IS FINE.

I'M JUST ASKING. >> I HAVE GOT IT IN MY POCKET.

AND I AM NOT TRYING TO KNOCK HI BUSINESS.

EVERYBODY HAS A RIGHT TO DO THINGS.

I'M JUST WORRIED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC.

>> ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THAT.

I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MR. HOLT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COM

BACK UP TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE? >> GARY HAS BEEN OPERATING A BUSINESS THERE FOR 30 YEARS. HE LINES THE STREET AND HE WOUL GET A TRUCK OR A CAR AND IT WIL SIT THERE FOR MONTHS, SIX MONTH TO A YEAR SOMETIMES. AND THE CONGESTION IS CAUSED BY HIS BUSINESS OPERATION, NOT ME. I HAVE DINOSAURS IN THERE THAT DON'T DRIVE SO ANY PROBLEM WITH CONGESTION IS NOT MINE.

THE PROBLEM WITH FLOODING IS GARY ALLOWS TO TURN TRUCKS TO B PARKED ALL ALONG THAT STREET, WHICH IS AGAINST THE CITY CODE MUST STRICTLY ON THE PART ABOUT DRAINAGE AND I HAVE NEVER COMPLAINED ABOUT IT EVER. BUT HE COMES UP AND COMPLAINS ABOUT ME. SO IF THERE IS AN WITH TRAFFIC AND FLOODING, IT IS BECAUSE OF HIM AND NOT ME.

>> WE DEFINITELY APPRECIATE YOU SPEAKING ON THAT.

WE DEFINITELY WANT TO MAINTAIN NEIGHBOR OF THE SITUATION FOR YOU CAN ALL CONDUCT YOUR BUSINESS PROPERLY.

AND DO IT WITHIN THE ABILENE CODES AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT ON THAT. DISCUSSION FROM THE BOARD?

[01:00:06]

>> ONE OF MY ONLY QUESTIONS IS IF WE GRANT THIS VARIANCE TO MAKE IT A ZERO LOT LINE COME IS THAT TO HIM OR THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER THAT IS NOT HERE OR IS IT CONTINGENT UPON HIM BUYING THE PROPERTY, I'M JUST NOT CLEAR.

>> I AM KIND OF IN THE SAME BOAT .

>> IT IS FROM NOW ON. EVEN IF WE GRANT THIS VARIANCE, IT IS NOT A GUARANTEE THAT MR. HOLT TAKES OVER THE PROPERTY IT IS BY THE PROPERTY OWNER WIT THE INTENT TO PRESENT THIS WITH THEIR PLANS. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG BUT IT GOES WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.

IF HE DECIDES NOT TO DO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT-

>> I THINK DOES IT IN EXPIRE IN THREE MONTHS IF THE PERMIT IS

NOT APPLIED FOR? >> YES.

SO THAT THE OWNER CONSENTING TO ALLOW THIS BUT THE PERSON WHO I SEEKING TO BENEFIT AS THE POTENTIAL OWNER SO IF THAT IS NOT PULLED IN SIX MONTHS, THE VARIANCE GOES AWAY.

IF YOU GRANT ONE. >> ANY KIND OF DEVELOPMENT ON THIS PROPERTY WILL BE ADDRESSED IN THAT PROCESS.

>> THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY NEXT GUESTS.

>> THERE IS OBVIOUSLY SOME DRAINAGE ISSUES AND ADDING A LARGER FOOTPRINT. IS THAT GOING TO BE SOMETHING

THAT YOU ALL LOOK AT QUICK. >> THAT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL LOOK AT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> SO THAT 25-FOOT SETBACK ON EACH SIDE, I DON'T KNOW HOW LON THAT LOT IS BUT IT WILL ADD SO MANY SQUARE FEET THAT WE COULD BUILD OR THE BUILDING COULD BE. IS THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE SETBACK? IS THAT WHY YOU ARE WANTING THE SETBACKS, THE NEED TO BUILD ON THAT PROPERTY?

>> I'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO HEAR YOU, SIR.

I AM SORRY. >> IF YOU HAVE TO BE 25 FEET FROM THAT ON BOTH SIDES, YOU AR BASICALLY TAKING ABOUT A QUARTE OF THE PROPERTY. IT MAKES IT WHERE IT IS NOT USABLE TO MAKE THAT BIG OF A BUILDING.

AND IS NOT JUST THAT ISSUE. IT IS THE ISSUE OF THE LOADING DOCKS AT I'VE GOT TO GET WITH THE CITY.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DRAINAG ISSUE BUT IT'S JUST BEEN SITTIN THERE FOREVER AND NOT ADDRESSED. IT NEEDS SOME ATTENTION TO IT.

I DON'T MIND PAYING FOR IT. I THINK IT IS SOMEWHAT IRRELEVANT TO THE CASE BUT IT I PART OF THE CASE, UNDERSTANDING THAT DRAINAGE IS AN ISSUE AND I NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.

THAT WAS MY QUESTION, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, IS ADDING A FOOTPRINT, I NOTICE A CONCERN FOR GARY.

IS THAT GOING TO BE A REALITY THAT IT CREATES MORE OF A PROBLEM FOR GARY OR ARE WE GOIN TO BE ABLE TO COME TO THE TABLE

AND FIND A SOLUTION. >> MY INTENT IS TO SOLVE THE ISSUE FOR ALL OF US. AND I HAVE TALKED TO THE CITY FOLKS SEVERAL TIMES. WE WANT TO BE INVOLVED TO GET SOMETHING THAT IS AGREEABLE TO EVERYBODY.

[01:05:03]

>> ANY QUESTIONS. >> WHERE IS ROSE STREET THAT HE

KEEPS REFERRING TO. >> ROSE STREET IS ON THAT OLD PLAT. IT HAS A FRONT BUILDING IN A BACK BUILDING AND AWARD A WOOD AREA THAT THEY COULDN'T BUILD O IT PICKS UP BACK ABOUT SOUTH EIGHTH STREET.

YOU SEE WHERE THE ORANGE ENDS. I HAVE GOT MY MAP PULLED UP HERE . IN HE OLDEN DAYS IT RAN THROUGH HERE. AND THAT IS THE SUBJECT PROPERT THAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT. AND THEN COOKS ROOFING IS JUST TO THE NORTH OF THAT PROPERTY. THE CITY WATER LINE THAT GOES BACK TO THE OTHER BUILDING, IT RUNS ON FIFTH STREET.

SO IT IS A WATER UTILITY. MOTION OR DISCUSSION? I DON'T SEE THAT IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE VARIANCE.

>> OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HALF ANY DISCUSSIO

ON THAT? >> WHY DO YOU SAY THAT?

>> IT DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERI APPEAR THERE'S TOO MANY OPEN ENDS TO THE SNAKE, SO TO SPEAK. HE WANTS TO PUT BOATING TEXAN THERAPY AND YOU CAN'T USE LOADING DOCKS ON FIFTH STREET O CHINA COME EITHER ONE. THAT CAUSES A PROBLEM.

WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER PLAN FOR THE BUILDING EXCEPT WE'VE GOT HERE. IT DOESN'T SHOW ME WHETHER THEY ARE TRYING MAKE THAT, WHETHER IT'S A 20,000 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING THAT IS FIT. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?

>> SO THE TRUCKS LOADING OR UNLOADING [INDISCERNIBLE] HAVE TO BLOCK ONE OF THOSE STREETS IN ORDER TO GET IN.

YOU'VE GOT OTHERS IN THE AREA THAT ARE DOING THAT AND THEY AR GETTING AWAY FROM THAT. THAT IS WHAT IT STATES IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. IN THERE IT STATES THAT THEY CA GO IN AND BE STUCK IN THE MIDDLE-OF-THE-ROAD.

I HAVE NO INTENT OF GOING OFF THE ROAD.

I AM VERY AWARE OF THE PROPERTY. THE LOADING DOCK OF THE DRIVE

WILL GO ON MY PROPERTY. >> SO THERE IS ENOUGH ROOM TO

TURN THE TRUCK AROUND. >> I'VE GOT 19 BUILDINGS THAT

HAVE LOADING DOCKS. >> WE DO NOT ACT CONCEPTUAL PLAN

. >> I DIDN'T INTO LAKE AT THE VARIANCE ON THE PROPERTY. I DISAGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU

SAID. >> IT IS JUST HARD TO ENVISION.

>> THE FIRST STEP IS THE ABILIT TO BUILD THE BUILDING THAT IS BIG ENOUGH. I'VE GOT TONS OF PROPERTIES.

>> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

[01:10:06]

>> THANK YOU. SO BASED ON MR. HALL'S PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSIONS, CAN WE FIND ANY SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES ARISING FROM THE SURROUNDING SHAPED TOPOGRAPHY.

CAN WE FIND ANY SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES?

>> I DO NOT. >> I MAKE A MOTION WE DON'T

APPROVE THIS VARIANCE. >> I SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY.

>> AND THE MOTION CARRIES. >> NEXT WEEK BOOK CONSIDER CASE

[4. (BA-2026-08): Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on A Request for A Variance to Allow 60% Lot Coverage Where 50% is Allowed, a 5-Foot Rear Setback Where 25-Feet is Required, and a 5-Foot Side Setback Where 7.5-Feet is Required. Located at 44 Pinehurst. (Kera Valois)]

BA-2026-08. >> YOU ARE UP.

>> GOOD MORNING. I AM REPRESENTING CASE BA-2026-08. AT THE REQUEST OF THE PARENTS T ALLOW 60% LOT COVERAGE WERE 50% IS ALLOWED IN A 5-FOOT REAR SETBACK BAR 25 IS REQUIRED AND 5-FOOT SIDE SETBACK WHERE SEVEN-POINT BY PETE IS REQUIRED LOCATED AT FOR 45 PINEHURST.

HERE WE HAVE THE AERIAL LOCATION .

, THE ZONING MAP. HERE IS A CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE POOL HOUSE THAT THEY HAVE ADDED ON.

HERE ARE THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. WE DID RECEIVE FOUR IN FAVOR AN ZERO IN OPPOSITION. PURSUANT TO SECTION ONE POINT FOR POINT FOR POINT TO HAVE THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, THERE ARE NO CURRENT CONDITIONS OF UNDUE HARDSHIP GRANTING THE REQUEST WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC OR ANY PROPERTY SAID THE REQUEST IS NOT CONSIST OF THE THELMA CODE AND THERE ARE ARE N HARDSHIPS. I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS?

>> IT WOULD BE LIKE ON THE- >> IT WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO -- THAT IS ON THERE ON THE BACK. THOSE ARE ALL IN THE AREAS THAT ARE IN THE BACK PATIO THAT EXIST .

IT IS A LIGHT BLUE AREA BUT IT IS JUST THE POOL HOUSE THAT IS

IN THE YELLOW. >> THE POOL HOUSES WHERE THEY WERE REQUESTING WHERE IT IS GOING OVER THE SETBACKS.

>> IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS ATTACHIN TO THE GARAGE.

>> SO THERE'S ALREADY A STRUCTURE THAT IS WITHIN THIS

PARAMETER. >> SO ALL WE ARE ADDING BASICALLY AS WE ARE EXTENDING THIS TO THE BACKSIDE OF THE GOL

[01:15:03]