Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:07]

>> BUILDING PERMIT MAY BE APPLIED FOR, THE DAY THE REQUEST IS APPROVED AFTER THE MEETING HAS ADJOURNED.

IF THE REQUEST HAS DENIED, IT MAY NOT BE RECONSIDERED BY THE BOARD UNTIL 12 MONTHS TO THE DATE.

APPEALS FROM THE DECISIONS OF THE BOARD MADE BE MADE IN THE COURT OF RECORD WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THIS DATE.

OKAY. EACH PERSON WHO WISHES TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING SHALL TAKE THE FOLLOWING OATH.

IF YOU WOULD STAND, INTENT TO SPEAK AT THE MEETING AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.

[2. BA-2020-07: Receive a Report and Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing on a request from owner B.R. Forest Enterprises LLC, agent Stephen Moody for a request of an approval of a Special Exception to alter the front garage setback of a residence in a Medium Density (MD) District by less than 10 percent. Legal description being Lot 18 in Section 2 of Cordova Place, neighborhood to the City of Abilene, Taylor County, Texas]

SEATED? OKAY. NEW BUSINESS FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS BA2020-07. WE WILL RECEIVE A REPORT, HOLD A DISCUSSION AND PUBLIC HEARING ON OWNER BR FARR ENTERPRISES LLC.

FOR A REQUEST OF AN APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO OFFER THE SETBACK OF A RESIDENT IN A MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICT BY LESS THAN 10 PERCENT. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING LOT 18 IN SECTION 2 OF CORDOVA PLACE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE CITY OF

ABILENE TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS. >> I'M CURRENTLY HAVING DIFFICULTIES WITH UPLOADING THE PRESENTATION.

IF YOU COULD HOLD OFF WHILE ONE OF OUR STAFF MEMBERS UPLOADS

THAT. >> I'M SORRY, I MISSED THAT.

YOU COULD SAY THAT AGAIN. >> DIRECT HOLD FOR A MINUTE, UNTIL THEY CAN FIX THE PRESEN

PRESENTATION. >> WE APOLOGIZE MY NAME IS NICK LOTS AND I SERVE AS A CITY PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF ABILEN

>> REQUEST IS A SPECIAL SESSION. AND WE SENT OUT NOTIFICATIONS IN THE CASE, FOR EVERYONE WITHIN A 200 FOOT BUFFER.

WE RECEIVED 22 IN FAVOR AND 0 IN OPPOSITION.

THIS IS AN AERIAL LOCATION MAP, SHOWING THE SPECIFIC PROPERTY, HIGHLIGHTED AND STROKED IN YELLOW.

THIS IS A ZONING MAP, INDICATING A PARTICULAR ZONING OF THE AREA.

YOU COULD SEE THE AREA AND THE REST OF THE AREA WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS CURRENTLY ZONED AS MEDIUM DENSITY.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE NORTH IS RS6 AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE ACTUAL PROPERTY TO THE WEST IS AGRICULTURAL OPEN SPACE.

JENNINGS DRIVE IS ALSO A COLLECTOR ROAD.

THIS IS A PLOT IN THE SECTION TWO.

IT IS THE SUBDIVISION IN QUESTION AND THE LOT IN QUESTION IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. IT IS LOT 18.

THERE'S 17 OTHER LOTS WITHIN THE PLOT.

IN MOST CASES, ALTERING A RESIDENTIAL SETBACK REQUIRES AN APPLICANT TO PURSUE A VARIANCE. HOWEVER, WHEN AN ALTERNATE, BY 10 PERCENT OR LESS THAN THE MINIMUM REQUEST REQUIREMENT, THE

[00:05:02]

ADVOCATE MAY RECEIVE A SPECIAL SESSION.

AND THEY WERE FORMALLY PLOTTED IN DECEMBER OF 2016, IN LOT 18, IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN FOR LOT 18, EXHIBITS, THE SOUTH CORNER OF THE GARAGE WILL ENCROACH TO THE SETBACK BY 1.8 FEET, SPANNING A TOTAL DISTANCE BY TWO FEET ALONG THE NORTH GARAGE WALL.

THE REMAINDER OF THE STRUCTURE WILL CONFRONT TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS. AND THEY ARE REQUESTING THE FRONT SETBACK BY APPROXIMATELY 1.8 FEET FROM THE MINIMUM SETBACK OF 25 FEET, TO BE 23.2 FEET.

THIS REQUEST IS A DECREASE OF APPROXIMATELY 7 PERCENT FROM THE MINIMUM FRONT FACING GARAGE SETBACK.

ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT, THIS SPOT HAS 2 SITE DEVELOPMENT DETERMINANTS, AND TO CONSTRUCT A DUPLEX AND THE ALL MD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. THEY ARE INHIBITS, DETERMINANTS PROCLAIMED AS FOLLOWS. APPROXIMATELY 15 FOOT CUL-DE-SAC, DECREASES THE EXTENT OF DEVELOPMENTAL LAND OR FRONTAGE. AND THEN AN 8 FEET ACCESS EASEMENT THAT EXTENDS THE ENTIRETY OF THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE. THIS INCREASES THE NORTH SIDE SETBACK FROM A 6 FOOT MINIMUM TO AN 8 FOOT MINIMUM.

THESE ARE VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

AS YOU COULD TELL, IT'S UNDEVELOPED, BUT THEN I BELIEVE IT IS LOT 19, IS CURRENTLY BEING DEVELOPED.

YOU COULD SEE LOT 19, THE GARAGE CORNER.

IT'S THE BOTTOM RIGHT PHOTO. YOU COULD SEE THAT LITTLE GARAGE CLIP. THAT'S GOING TO BE THE PORTION THAT'S GOING TO ENCROACH WITHIN THE SETBACK RIGHT THERE.

ONCE AGAIN, WE SENT OUT NOTIFICATION AREA LETTERS TO EVERYONE WITHIN A 200 FOOT BUFFER.

THERE'S 22 IN FAVOR AND IT ALL CAME FROM BR FORCE ENTERPRISES.

WE REVIEWED THE PERCENT, SECTION 1.4.1 OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL. WE FOUND IT'S THE OPINION OF STAFF, THAT THIS REQUEST WILL HAVE MINIMUM IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AS THEREFORE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE REGULATION.

THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. YOU HAPPEN TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS? >> QUESTIONS ANYONE?

THERE'S NO QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU.

WILL THE PROPONENT COME FORWARD TO THE MICROPHONE, STATE YOUR NAME AND WHY YOU ARE REQUESTING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR

VARIANCE. >> GOOD MORNING..

MY NAME IS STEPHEN MOODY. I'M ONE OF THE AGENT AND I'M ALSO ONE OF THE PARTNERS. WE OWN THE DEVELOPMENT THERE.

WHEN WE BOUGHT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, IT WAS ALREADY PLANTED. WE CAN ATTEMPT TO REPLANT BUT THAT GETS MORE INVOLVED. WE DON'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING, THAT WILL DECREASE OUR VALUE OR DETRACT FROM THE PROPERTY OUT THERE. WE'RE DEVELOPING ALL THE LOTS, TRYING TO PUT CONSISTENT PROPERTIES OUT THERE, GOOD SIZE THAT WILL PROVIDE NICE RES RESIDENCES FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE AREA. AND RATHER THAN GOING THROUGH A REDESIGN, WE HAVE A GOOD TEMPLATE THAT WILL WORK WITH A MAJORITY OF THE LOTS. THERE'S A COUPLE, THAT WILL HAVE TO GO TO A TWO-STORY. RATHER THAN DEVELOP A THIRD DESIGN, THIS ONE IS SO CLOSE. IT'S CRAZY.

I COULD HOLD THE EXCEPTION AND FOLLOWED IT UP IN MY FOLDER.

THIS IS ABOUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

IT DOESN'T DETRACT OR CHANGE THE NATURE OF ANYTHING WE'RE DOING.

WE'RE REQUESTING THE SPECIAL, SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THIS CASE.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> COUPLE OF COMMENTS.

>> GO AHEAD. >> THANKS FOR THE VISUAL.

AND ALSO, I THINK THANK YOU FOR COMING FORWARD AND BEFORE YOU BUILD IT AS OPPOSE TO AFTER YOU IT.

[00:10:03]

>> SURE. >> AND THAT GETS MORE PROBLEMATIC. WE HAVE RUN INTO THOSE SITUATIONS AND TRY TO AVOID THEM.

EVERY NOW AND THEN, YOU MISS SOMETHING BUT IT'S OUR FIRST DEVELOPMENT OUT HERE AND WE'RE HAPPY TO BE OUT HERE AND

ENJOYING THE PROCESS SO FAR. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WANT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL? ANYONE HERE WANTS TO SPEAK

OPPOSED TO THE PROPOSAL? >> OKAY, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC MEETING. THE DISCUSSION ITEMS?

>> IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. I AGREE WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT AND IT'S VERY LITTLE ENCROACHMENT, IF ANYTHING ELSE, AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE

NEIGHBORHOOD. >> IT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> AND ESPECIALLY BEFORE IT'S

BUILT. >> GET A MOTION?

>> MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR THIS ITEM, APPROVE

THE VARIANCE. >> SPECIAL.

>> SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE VARIANCE.

>> SECOND. >> AND YOU'RE BASING THAT WITH THE INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT?

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A FIRST AND SECOND TO APPROVE THE REQUEST.

MR. BARMAN. MR. ODDEL?

>> YES. >> MR. THOMAS?

>> YES. >> COLONEL LANGHOLD?

[3. BA-2020-08: Receive a Report and Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing on a request from owner First National Bank, agent Jacob & Martin, to seek a 57.7-foot variance from the minimum side setback of 77.9-feet required for freestanding on-site advertising signs within the Buffalo Gap Corridor Overlay. Additionally, the applicant is seeking an 8-foot variance from the minimum 10-foot front setback applicable to freestanding on site advertising signs within Neighborhood Retail (NR) Zoning. Legal description being Lot 101, Block A of Cactus Addition within the City of Abilene, Taylor County, Texas]

>> YES. >> MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIES.

>> SECOND AND FINAL ITEM IN THE AGENDA IS BA2020-08, RECEIVE A REPORT, HOLD A DISCUSSION AND PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST FROM OWNER FIRST NATIONAL BANK, AGENT JACOB & MARTIN TO SEEK A 57.7 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK OF 77.9 FEET REQUIRED FOR FREE STANDING ON SITE ADVERTISING SIGNS WITHIN THE BUFFALO GAP CORRIDOR OVERLAY.

ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING AN 8 FOOT VARIANCE, FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK APPLICABLE TO FREE STANDING ON SITE ADVERTISING SIGNS WITHIN NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL ZONING. LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING LOT 101, BLOCK A OF CACTUS ADDITION WITHIN THE CITY OF ABILENE,

TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS. >> THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN.

MY NAME IS BRAD STONE AND I'M ON THE STAFF ON THE PLANNING SERVICES DIVISION HERE IN ABILENE.

AS THE CHAIRMAN MENTIONED, THERE'S TWO VARIANCES AT ISSUE HERE. BOTH OF WHICH CONCERN A PARTICULAR PROPOSED SIGN AND BOTH OF WHICH STEM FROM THE SITE'S LOCATION IN THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE.

HERE'S AN IMAGE OF AN AERIAL IMAGE OF THE SITE'S LOCATION.

THE SITE, OF COURSE, IS HIGHLIGHTED BY THE CROSS HATCHING IN THE CENTER OF THE PHOTOGRAPH.

IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH FROM TWO SUMMERS AGO, THE SITE WAS SUBSTANTIALLY VACANT. I THINK THERE'S ONE HOME REMAINING IN THIS PICTURE, BUT THAT HOME HAS SINCE BEEN REMOVED. AND IN ITS PLACE, THERE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION, ALMOST COMPLETE, A BRANCH BANK BUILDING AND THE PROPOSED SIGN WILL ADVERTISE OR PROMOTE OR IDENTIFY ACTUALLY THE LOCATION OF THIS BRANCH BANK BUILDING.

THE SITE DOES BACKUP TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, THAT IS A RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS THE FAIRWAYS. THE SITE, OF COURSE, HAS FRONTAGE ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD, ACROSS FROM WHICH IS A FIRE STA STATION.

THIS MAP SHOWS THE ZONING OF THE SITE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS.

THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN WHAT'S KNOWN AS A NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE ZONING DISTRICT WHICH AS THE NAME IMPLIES IS RESTRICTED PRIMARILY TO BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES AND IS INTENDED FOR VERY CLOSE COMPATIBLITY WITH ADJACENT AND

[00:15:04]

NEARBY RESIDENTS, THAT'S INDICATED BY THE LIGHT COLORED BLUE, WHICH IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE DISTRICT.

THERE'S RESIDENTIAL ZONING ACROSS THE STREET AND THERE'S RESIDENTIAL ZONING IN THE FAIRWAYS BEHIND THE PARTICULAR SITE. THE SITE IS ALSO LOCATED IN THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE. AND THAT'S WHERE THE REGULATIONS AFFECTING TODAY'S VARIANCES STEM FROM.

MORE THAN 25 YEARS AGO, ABILENE CITY COUNCIL CREATED A CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE EXTENDING 600 FEET ON EITHER SIDE FROM THE CENTER LINE OF BUFFALO GAP ROAD. FROM WINTERS FREEWAY ALL THE WAY SOUTH TO FM707. IT, OF COURSE, INCLUDES THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AN OVERLAY ZONE, IS OFTEN IMPOSING REGULATIONS IN ADDITION TO THOSE REQUIRED BY THE UNDERLYING OR BASE ZONING DISTRICT.

IT, AS THE NAME IMPLIES, OVERLAYS THE REGULATIONS ON TOP OF THOSE THAT ARE ALREADY THERE BY THE UNDERLINE OR BASE ZONING.

IN THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE, FREE STANDING BUSINESS IDENTIFICATION ZONES, SUCH AS THAT PROPOSED, MUST BE PLACED A MINIMUM DISTANCE EQUAL TO ONE-FOURTH OF THE TOTAL FRONTAGE FROM ANY ONE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. IN THE CASE OF THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY FOR FIRST NATIONAL BANK, ONE-FOURTH OF THE SITES TOTAL FRONTAGE IS EQUAL TO 77 FEET 9 INCHES.

AND THAT'S THE DISTANCE THAT THIS PROPOSED SIGN BY VIRTUAL REGULATIONS, MUST BE SETBACK OR SEPARATED FROM THE SITE NORTH SIDE AND SOUTHSIDE BOUNDARIES. AND ALL FREE STANDING SIGNS IN THE CORRIDOR ZONE MUST ALSO BE SETBACK, A MINIMUM OF 10 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. WE NOTIFIED ALL OWNERS OF PROPERTY WITHIN 2 HUNDRED FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND WE RECEIVED THREE WRITTEN RESPONSES.

ONE, IN FAVOR, AND TWO, IN OPPOSITION.

I'D LIKE TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO POINT OUT AN IMPORTANT FEATURE OF THE SITE AND THAT IS THE LOT LOCATED TO THE NORTH. ORIGINALLY, THAT LOT WAS A TRY A ANGULAR SHAPED LOT AND HAS BEEN SPLIT IN THREE SPOTS. AND EVEN IN ITS SHAPE, IT WAS VERY ODD, ALMOST UNWORKABLE AS A BUILDING SITE, BECAUSE IT IS BASICALLY THE SHAPE OF A TRIANGLE.

IT HAS SINCE THEN SPLIT INTO THREE PARTS.

THE CENTER PART IS NOTHING MORE THAN A GAS STATION REGULATION STATION FOR @ -- ATMOST ENERGY. THE OTHER THREE SPOTS, JUST REMAIN AN OPEN SPACE. AND HERE WE SEE THE PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND ITS SURROUNDINGS.

IN THE UPPER LEFT WE CAN SEE FROM THE STREET KNOWN AS MARIANNE, WE'RE LOOKING SOUTHWEST ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD TO THE RIGHT. WE CAN SEE THE NEW BACK BUILDING IN THE MIDDLE GROUND AND IN THE FOREGROUND, JUST BEYOND THE STREET PAVEMENT ITSELF, IS THIS OPEN SPACE IN THE VERY ODDLY SHAPED LOT. AND JUST OUT OF THE PICTURE TO THE LEFT IS THE GAS PRESSURE REGULATING STATION THAT I MENTIONED. IN THE UPPER RIGHT, THERE'S ALSO AN IMPORTANT FEATURE THAT I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT.

AND THAT IS THE EXTRAORDINARY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY -- WELL, BETWEEN THE STREET CURB ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY'S FRONT BOUNDARY.

THAT FRONT BOUNDARY LIES JUST A LITTLE BIT BEYOND THE SIDEWALK.

THERE ARE 42 FEET BETWEEN THE FACE OF THE CURB AND THIS PROPERTY'S FRONT BOUNDARY. THE LOWER LEFT PICTURE SHOWS THE FIRE STATION ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE LOWER RIGHT PHOTO SHOWS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF IN THE MIDDLE GROUND AND, AGAIN, I WOULD POINT OUT THE EXTRAORDINARY LONG DISTANCE BETWEEN THE FACE OF THE CURB ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD AND THE PROPERTY'S FRONT BOUNDARY,

[00:20:01]

APPROXIMATELY WHERE THE UTILITY POLE IS LOCATED.

HERE'S A PICTURE OF THE SIGN THAT THE PRO OPPONENTS WANT TO INSTALL IN FRONT OF THE NEW BANK BUILDING.

AS YOU COULD SEE, IT'S A MONUMENT-TYPE SIGN.

IN EVERY OTHER RESPECT, IT DOES COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS OF THE OVERLAY ZONE. IT'S NO MORE THAN 8 FEET IN HEIGHT AND ENCOMPASSES NO MORE THAN 50 SQUARE FEET OF SIGN AREA. HERE'S A PICTURE -- WHAT IT IS, IT IS AN EXCERPT FROM THE SITE PLAN OF THE PROPOSED WIELDED.

NOW EXISTING NEW BUILDING FOR THE BRANCH BANK.

THE SIGN IS INDICATED BY THE ROUGHLY DRAWN RECTANGLE NEAR THE PROPERTY LINE. IT SHOWS A 42 FOOT SEPARATION BASICALLY FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND THE PAVEMENT ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD. THERE'S ALSO A 137 FOOT DISTANCE BETWEEN THE PROPOSED NEW SIGN AND THE STREET KNOWN SIMPLY AS MARIANNE. AND THERE ARE, AS I MENTIONED AT THE OUTSET, TWO VARIANCES, WHICH I WILL DESCRIBE AS VARIANCE NUMBER ONE AND VARIANCE NUMBER TWO.

AS I'VE DESCRIBED IT, VARIANCE NUMBER ONE IS A 57 FOOT 9 INCH VARIANCE, FROM THE 77 FOOT.9 INCH SEPARATION, REQUIRED BETWEEN THE PROPOSED NEW SIGN AND THE PROPERTY'S NORTH SIDE BOUNDARY. APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE WOULD PERMIT THE SIGN TO BE LOCATED WITHIN 20 FEET FROM THE NORTH SIDE BOUNDARY, WHICH IS WHAT IS ILLUSTRATED ON THE SITE PLAN.

ALSO, AS I MENTIONED, THIS 77 FOOT 9 INCH DISTANCE IS EQUAL TO THE CORNER OF THE FRONTAGE ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE AJOINING LOT TO THE NORTH, IS REALLY TO ODDLY SHAPED TO BE EFFECTIVELY USED AS A BUILDING SITE. ALSO AS I MENTIONED, ATLAS ENERGY ALREADY MAINTAINS A GAS PRESSURE REGULATING STATION IN ONE PORTION OF THE TRY ANGULAR LINE.

AND THE FACT, NO SUBSTANTIAL BUILDING COULD BE FIT IN THE REMAINDER OF THE LOT AND THE FRONTAGE ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD SO THAT TRI ANGULAR SHAPED LOT SEEMS DESTINED TO BE USED FOR DECORATIVE OR LANDSCAPING PURPOSES.

ASSUMING THIS ESSENTIALLY UNBUILDABLE LOT NORTH OF THE PROPERTY REMAINS SUBSTANTIALLY VACANT AS EXPECTED, THEN THERE SHOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET OF OPEN SPACE LEFT NORTH OF THE PROPOSED NEW SIGN. AND THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SPACING AND SEPARATION OBJECTIVES OF THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE. VARIANCE NUMBER TWO, IS AN 8 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT SETBACK, REQUIRED BY THE PROPOSED NEW SIGN AND THE SIGN'S FRONT PROPERTY LINE.

APPROVAL WOULD ALLOW THE SIGN TO BE SETBACK, JUST TWO FEET FROM THE SITE'S FRONT PROPERTY LINE. AS AMENTIONED EARLIER, NO FEW TIER THAN 42 FEET SEPARATE THIS SITE'S FRONT PROPERTY LINE FROM THE PAVEMENT ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD AND ALSO, AS I MENTIONED, THIS IS AN EXTRAORDINARILY WIDE MARGIN OF SPACE.

EVEN IF THIS ADJOINING SEGMENT OF BUFFALO GAP ROAD, IS SOME DAY EXPANDED TO THE SAME 92 FOOT WIDTH, THAT'S PLANNED FURTHER NORTH ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD, THERE STILL MIGHT BE AS MUCH AS 25 FEET SEPARATING THE FRONT'S BOUNDARY FROM THAT EXPANDED PAVEMENT, IF THAT EXPANDED PAVEMENT EVER HAPPENS.

AND THAT'S MORE THAN THE LIFE THAT SMALL AUTOMOBILES AND SMALL TRUCKS. AS A RESULT, MOTORISTS APPROACHING, FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WOULD NOT HAVE HIS OR HER VIEW OF ON-COMING TRAFFIC IMPEDDED BY THE PLANNED PLACEMENT ON THE PROPOSED SIGN ONLY TWO FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. SETBACK STANDARDS FOR SIGNS, ESPECIALLY MONUMENT-TYPE SIGNS, WHICH IS SOLID, THOSE SETBACK STANDARDS ARE DRIVEN PRIMARILY BY A NEED TO HAVE THEM POSE NO POSSIBLE IMPEDIMENT, MOTORISTS, VISIBILITY AND SAFE DRIVING.

[00:25:02]

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, GIVEN THE EXTRAORDINARILY WIDE MARGIN, SEPARATING THE BUILDING SITE FROM PAYMENT ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD, RELAXING, THE ORDINARY SIGN SETBACK AS REQUESTED, SHOULD NOT IMPED THE ABILITY OF MOTORISTS, APPROACHING THE STREET PAVEMENT. SO IN SHORT, THE CITY PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF BOTH REQUESTED VARIANCES.

DUE TO THE PRACTICAL AND PROBABILITY OF ANY SUBSTANTIAL BUILDING DEVELOPMENT OCCURRING IN THE LOT LOCATED NORTH OF THIS SITE, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE REQUIRED SEPARATION, WELL, IT SEEMS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. BY THE SAME TOKEN, GIVEN THE EXTRAORDINARILY WIDE MARGIN SEPARATING THE PROPERTY FROM THE STREET PAVEMENT NOW AND IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE TEN FOOT SETBACK WOULD CREATE, AGAIN, UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP FOR SOMEPLACEMENT.

IN SHORT, CITY PLANNING STAFF, RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BOTH REQUESTED VARIANCES AND THEY WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS THAT THEY MAY HAVE >> I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.

>> YES. >> THERE WERE TWO MAIL-INS THAT WERE NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS. ARE ANY COMMENTS ON THOSE?

>> NO, THEY WERE NOT. THEY SIMPLY INDICATED THEIR

OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST. >> OKAY. AND THE SECOND QUESTION CONCERNS THE VISIBILITY FROM THE ROAD.

I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS AREA.

THAT'S MY PRIME IN AND OUT. AND THE RESPONSE AS WRITTEN AS YOU ILLUSTRATED VERY WELL, TALKED ABOUT THE THE SPACING AND SIGN WHEN SOMEONE IS LEAVING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

I'M CLEAR THAT'S GOING TO BE FINE, HOWEVER, HAS ANYONE LOOKED AT THE SITE LINES DOWN BUFFALO GAP ROAD FROM MARIANNE, FROM THE STOP SIGN OF MARIANNE AND BUFFALO GAP ROAD.

THERE HAVE BEEN DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE THING, THERE'S VARIOUS SIGNS POPPING UP AROUND THE PROPERTY AND IN THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. AND MANY OF THOSE THINGS WERE PROBLEMATICAL IN THE SAFETY OF THE PULLING OUT OF MARIANNE BECAUSE OF THE THE TRAFFIC ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD.

HAS ANYONE LOOKED AT THAT PLACE AS OPPOSED TO THE DRIVEWAY EXIT

FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY? >> WELL, WE CAN TAKE A STEP BACK AND LOOK AT THE PHOTO. WE DO HAVE A PHOTO IN THE UPPER L LEFT.

THE STREET KNOWN AS MARIANNE IS IN THE FOREGROUND.

AND OF COURSE, BUFFALO GAP ROAD IS ON THE RIGHT.

THE PROPOSED SIGN SHOULD BE BEHIND THE SIDEWALK.

AGAIN, WE'RE NOT FORESEEING ANY IMPEDIMENT TO MOTORISTS VIEW TO ONCOMING TRAFFIC. AGAIN, IF YOU'RE STOPPED PRECISELY WHERE THE PHOTOGRAPHER IS TAKING THE PICTURE AND LOOKING SOUTHWEST AND TO THE LEFT --

>> I THINK THE PICTURE IS FORWARD OF THE STOP SIGN POSITION WHERE AN AUTOMOBILE WOULD BE WHEN IT'S PARKED ON APPROACHING THE STOP SIGN ON MARIANNE.

IT'S A CONCERN BECAUSE OF THE VISIBILITY AND WE DON'T HAVE A PICTURE OF THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE SIGN VERSUS THE BUILDING.

AND THE ONE WE CAN SEE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S TOUGHED CLOSE TO THE BUILDING. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S REALLY

THE WAY IT'S GOING TO LOOK. >> WELL, THAT'S A SUBSTANTIAL PARKING AREA BETWEEN THE BUILDING -- PARKING AND MANEUVERING AREA BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE PROPOSED SIGN.

THE SIGN ITSELF, WILL BE SET BACK A FEW FEET FROM THE SID SIDEWALK.

AND, AGAIN, WELL AWAY FROM THE PAVEMENT ON BUFFALO GAP ROAD.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. >> I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

[00:30:06]

THE ORIGINAL TRIANGLE SHAPED TO THE NORTH.

>> YES, SIR >> YOU SAID IT WAS PLOTTED INTO

THREE. >> NOT PLOTTED.

>> THE MIDDLE PART. >> ATLAS HAS A PLANT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT, WHERE THE THREE LINES ARE DRAWN.

WHO OWNS THE WESTERN-MOST PART, THE ACTUAL CORNER?

WHO IS THE OWNER? >> THE AGENT CONFIRMED THIS, BUT THE CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORDS INDICATE THE PRO

OPPONENT OWNS THAT PROPERTY. >> SO THE BANK OWNS IT.

>> FIRST NATIONAL BANK ALBANY IN BRECKENRIDGE.

>> I DON'T THINK THAT'S CORRECT. I THINK ATLAS STILL OWNS IT.

UNLESS IT'S BEEN RECENTLY TRANSFERRED.

IT'S NOT ABOUT -- THE PRO OPPONENT.

>> ATLAS OWNS THE CENTER PORTION.

>> YEAH. >> AND FIRST -- AGAIN, ACCORDING

TO THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT. >> I JUST LOOKED IT UP.

THAT TOP PORTION IN THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW, 49 IS OWNED BY FIRST

NATIONAL BANK. >> I DON'T THINK THAT CORNER -- I KNOW THE FOLKS INVOLVED SO IT'S OKAY. IT'S A MUTE POINT.

THEY ALL WORKED IT OUT. IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL.

>> I'M JUST ASKING FROM THE STANDPOINT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, FUTURE ACTIVITY IN THE LOT, IN THE CORNER, IN THE PROPERTY. THAT'S THE REASON FOR MY QUESTION. SO --

>> THE BANK OWNS IT, THEY CONTROL THAT.

>> THEY CAN, EXACTLY. THAT'S MY REASONING OR MY THOUGHT PROCESS. YEAH, IF THE BANK OWNS IT, THEY CAN CONTROL THAT, AS FAR AS WHAT'S DONE THERE.

IF IT WAS SOMEONE ELSE, IT COULD BE DEVELOPED AND/OR SOLD AND

SOMETHING DONE WITH IT. >> I THINK WE CAN AGREE, IT'S DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS SEEMS QUITE SMALL.

>> THE BANK OWNS IT. >> EVEN IF THEY WERE TO SELL IT TO ANOTHER PARTY, THERE'S NOT MUCH.

>> THE CARROT SHOWS EVEN ON THE SMALL TRIANGLE.

WITH THE ENERGY CORPORATION, WITH THE LITTLE SECTION.

THAT'S WHAT THE CARROT SHOWS. >> AND IF IT WERE OWNED BY SOMEONE ELSE, THE CITY WOULD CONTROL ANY DEVELOPMENT OF THAT

AREA OR IMPACT; IS THAT CORRECT >> ZONING WOULD PREVAIL.

RIGHT NOW IT'S ZONED -- WELL, TECHNICALLY IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT THAT EMBRACES THE FAIRWAYS.

THE RESIDENTIAL IS GUIDED PRIMARILY BY R8 ZONING

>> OKAY. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU. >> WILL THE PROPONENT PLEASE COME FORWARD TO THE MICROPHONE, STATE YOUR NAME, AND WHY THEY ARE REQUESTING VARIOUS VARIANCES.

>> TOOIL, AGENT FOR FIRST NATIONAL BANK.

AND THE VARIANCES IS TO SUPPORT A SIGN FOR THIS PROPERTY.

I'LL TACKLE THE SIDE VARIANCE SETBACK VARIANCE BEING REQUESTED FIRST. THE PROPERTY AS IT WAS INITIALLY PLOTTED DIDN'T ENCOMPASS THE LAND TO THE NORTH, CORNER OF MARIANNE. AT THE TIME IT WAS NOT FOR SALE AND COULDN'T BE OBTAINED. THE PROPERTY WAS PLOTTED.

THE DEVELOPMENT MOVED FORWARD. ONE THING THAT WAS NOT MENTIONED, TL1XL0DOT HAS ACCESS CONTROL, DRIVEWAY LOCATION.

FOR THE PROJECT, THE DRIVEWAY HAD TO SIT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY. BASED ON THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY SIGN VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS THAT BRAD MENTIONED A COUPLE OF TIMES, WOULD HAVE FELL RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DRIVE.

SO WE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO TRY TO SLIDE, TO HAVE A SIGN AT ALL.

WE HAD TO SLIDE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER AND PURSUE A VARIANCE.

ONCE THE PROJECT HAD HAD STARTED FORTHWITH CONSTRUCTION, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT TIME, THE BANK WAS ABLE TO PURCHASE A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH.

SO THEY DO, IN FACT, OWN THAT LITTLE BITTY TRIANGLE IN THE

[00:35:05]

CORNER AND THE PORTION, ABUDDING BUFFALO GAP ROAD.

THEIR INTENT FOR THAT TO BE A LANDSCAPE AREA FOR THE BANK'S PURPOSES. I DON'T REMEMBER THE DIMENSIONS OF THE LOT, BUT WHEN BRAD MENTIONS UNBUILDABLE OR UNDEVELOPABLE, EVERY ZONING DISTRICT HAS A CERTAIN LOT SIZE THAT YOU ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE TO EVEN PLOT THE PROPERTY.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT LOT IS LARGE ENOUGH TO PLOT AND DEVELOP ON ITS OWN. AND ONE THING THAT COULD HAPPEN, AND HAD THE BANK OWNED THE PROPERTY WHEN THE INITIAL PLOTTING. IT WAS ABOUT THREE RESIDENTIAL LOTS THAT WE PIECED TOGETHER. WE COULD HAVE PLOTTED THE PIECE HAD THEY OWNED IT IN AND WE WOULD NOT NEED A VARIANCE.

WE WOULD MEET IT WHERE IT'S CURRENTLY LOCATED WITH THE 137 FEET, PLUS THE 120 WOULD BE 157. THERE ARE NO VARIANCES NEEDED.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, LIKE THE CASE BEFORE, LIKE THE PRO OPPONENTS, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A PROCESS, TO REPLOT THAT AT THIS STAGE AT THE JUNCTURE OF THE PROJECT AND GIVEN THAT THEY OWN THE PROPERTY, WE FELT LIKE PURSUING, THE SIDE SETBACK IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE WAY MOVING FORWARD. THE FRONT SETBACK, ONE THING THAT'S NOT MENTIONED BY STAFF, ALL AROUND THE BUFFALO ROAD, THE RIGHT OF WAY IS NOT THE SAME WIDTH FOR A HANDFUL OF DIFFERENT REASONS. I WON'T GET INTO THE BORING DETAILS. AT THIS LOCATION, IT'S ONE OF THE WIDER LOCATIONS. WE CALL IT THE PARKWAY, BETWEEN THE EDGE, BETWEEN THE PAVEMENT AND THE PROPERTY OCCURRED.

THE PARKWAY IN THE CASE IS 42 FEET.

ANOTHER GOOD EXAMPLE THAT YOU MAY KNOW ALONG BUFFALO ROAD, IS FIRST FINANCIAL BANK, JUST NORTH OF THIS LOCATION.

THEIR SIGNS SITS APPROXIMATELY 22 FEET OFF THE PAVEMENT.

SO THEIR TWICE AS CLOSE TO THE ROAD AS THIS SIGN WOULD BE, THIS -- THEY ARE 22 FOOT OFF WITH THEIR SIGN, WHICH THEY RECEIVED A VARIANCE FOR THE SETBACK FROM THE SAME BOARD.

I DON'T REMEMBER WHEN EXACTLY. SO WE'RE 42 FEET OFF AND THAT'S PART OF THE REASON THAT WE'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE TEN FOOT REQUIREMENT TO THE TWO FOOT REQUIREMENT.

AND I COULD SPEND A LITTLE TIME TALKING ABOUT THE DEPTH OF THE LOT AND HOW THE PARKING IS SITUATED.

AGAIN, THAT TIES BACK TO THE TEXDT DRIVEWAY AND WHY EVERYTHING IN THE SITE SITS THE WAY IT DOES.

TO PUT IN THE SIGN, AGAIN, AS STAFF MENTIONED, IT MEETS ALL THE SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS OTHER THAN SETBACKS AND IN TERMS OF SIZE. IT'S NOT THE DIGITAL SIGN.

IT'S A STATIONARY NONMOVING SIGN.

TO GET THE WIDTH THAT WE NEED TO GET THE SIGN IN PLACE, WE NEED A VARIANCE OF 8 FEET. I WISH I COULD TAKE OUT THE PIECE OF PAPER, ILLUSTRATION, AND ONE OF THESE DAYS, MOVING FORWARD. UNFORTUNATELY, IF I WERE TO ROLL OUT 150 FEET, THAT'S A REALLY LONG WAYS.

I THINK THE REALITY IS, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE REQUESTING A LARGE VARIANCE, WE DO MEET THE INTENT. AND I THINK THAT'S WHY STAFF IS SUPPORTING THIS. THE REASON THAT CORRIDOR OVERLAY AND IT'S ONLY A CORRIDOR OVERLAY THAT'S TRIGGERING THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. THE REASON THAT'S IN PLACE, IS TWOFOLD. ONE IS FOR VISIBILITY, TO MAKE SURE IT'S SAFE AND I'LL COME BACK TO THAT, BECAUSE I KNOW, YOU CURRENTLY HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

TWO, IT'S AESTHETTICS. THE FACT WE OWN THE PIECE CORNER OF MARIANNE AND BUFFALO GAP ROAD.

WE MEET THE AESTHETICS COMPONENT.

WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO AVOID WITH THE LARGE SETBACK IS HAVING SIGNS, BACK-TO-BACK TO BACK DOWN THE ROAD DOWN THE CORRIDOR.

YOU WANT THE CORRIDORS TO BE VERY NICE.

I HOPE WE HOLD TRUE OF THAT. IN TERMS OF VISIBILITY, I DID -- I HAVE SAT AT THE INTERSECTION MYSELF, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE VISIBILITY. I DO NOT BELIEVE IT WILL OBSCURE ANY VIEW OF TRAFFIC BACK TO THE SOUTH DOWN BUFFALO GAP ROAD.

SO ON THE EXHIBIT THAT'S ON THE SCREEN ON MARIANNE, YOU COULD SEE RIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION OF BUFFALO GAP AND MARIANNE, THAT'S

[00:40:02]

CONCRETE RIGHT THERE. IT STARTS ASPHALT, VALLEY GETTER. AND ANYTIME YOU WILL PULL UP -- YOU WILL PULL UP TO THE CONCRETE PORTION.

I FELT PRETTY CERTAIN AT THAT WHEN I SAT IN THE INTERSECTION AND LOOKING BACK DOWN THE ROAD. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOU'RE EVEN GOING TO SEE THAT SIGN ALMOST IN YOUR PERIPHERY AS YOU'RE LOOKING TO ONCOMING TRAFFIC. WITH RESPECT TO SOME OF THE SIGNS DURING CONSTRUCTION, UNFORTUNATELY, THERE MAY BE A HANDFUL OF MATERIALS OR CONSTRUCTION SIGNAGE THAT WAS PUT OUT IN THE PARKWAY. I THINK THAT'S SINCE BEEN REMOVED BUT THAT MAY HAVE OBSCURRED THE VIEW ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT, I BELIEVE THE RAMP THAT IS AT MARIANNE, WHEN YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE VIEW, WHEN BRAD PULLED UP, LOOKING DOWN BUFFALO GAP, THE SIDEWALKS ARE NOT -- THEY ARE NOT LINED UP. SO WHERE YOU SEE THAT RAMP, WHICH ARE THE RAMPS, I BELIEVE THAT TXDOT BUILT, WITHOUT ANY CONNECTIVITY, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY LINE UP.

AT SOME POINT, IF WE ARE CONNECTED, IT HAD TO BE MOVED BACK. AND WE SAY, WE'RE GOING TO COMPARE SIDEWALKS, JUST KNOW THAT THIS SIGN IS BEHIND OUR PROPOSED SIDEWALK. OUR PROPOSED SIDEWALK IS BEHIND OR EAST OF WHERE THAT RAMP IS AT THAT LOCATION.

I THINK THAT'S ALL THE POINTS, THAT WE NEED TO HIT.

LIKE STAFF, WE BELIEVE THIS TO BE AN APPROPRIATE VARIANCE, GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND WE ASK FOR YOUR APPROVAL.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS I MAY HAVE.

>> ANY QUESTIONS? THAT'S GREAT.

I THINK YOU DID A FINE JOB IN ANSWERING THE QUESTION.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK OPPOSED

TO THE PROPOSAL? >> >> THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLO CLOSED.

>> THERE WASN'T HAS BEEN MENTIONED ON THE PROPERTY, THERE'S TWO POWER LINE POLES. AND FROM A SIGNED VISIBILITY STANDPOINT, THIS IS REALLY THE ONLY LOGICAL PLACE TO PUT THE SIGN BECAUSE OF THE POLES BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO BLOCK VISIBILITY, IF IT IS GOING TO BE SET ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PARTICULAR LOT. TO ME, IT'S A LOGICAL APPROACH AND IT'S ESPECIALLY THEM OWNING THAT LOT NOW, IT'S --

>> I WASN'T AWARE OF THAT LEGALLY, HAS CHANGED.

I KNOW THERE'S A GENTLEMAN, GOING INTO THE AGREEMENT OF THE THING. I ENDED UP FULLY BUYING.

I'M HAPPY. >> A COUPLE OF THINGS, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT ABOUT THIS, IF I MAY.

FIRST AND FOREMOST, IF BUFFALO GAP ROAD IS WIDENED, EXCUSE ME, WIDENED TO 92 FEET, I STILL BELIEVE IN LOOKING AT THE INGRASSES HERE FROM STATE TO THE CITY STREETS, THEY ARE STILL GOING TO BE AMPLE ROOM OR AMPLE VISIBILITY TO THE SOUTH ON THE SIGN, RIGHT THERE. ALSO, ONE OF THE THINGS, I'M LOOKING AT, TOO, IS -- I JUST LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT ON THAT ONE. OKAY. NOW I'M BACK ON.

IF YOU NOTICE, THE STREET SLIGHTLY CURVES AS IT PROGRESSES NORTH, I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO NOTICE THAT SIGN IS JUST GOING TO ALMOST DISAPPEAR, WE HAVE ABOUT 600-700 FEET.

I THINK IT'S A PRETTY GOOD MATCH.

AND THAT HAS BEEN MY EXPERIENCE OUT IN THE AREA RIGHT THERE AS FAR AS SIGNAGE GOES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, PRIOR TO IT BECOMING A CORRIDOR. THANK YOU.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? >> MOTION?

>> YOU STILL HAVE RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE VISIBILITY?

>> OH, NO. NO.

MY WIFE MADE ME DO THAT. >> THAT'S A GOOD TEST.

I'LL GO AHEAD AND -- I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE BOTH VARIANCES AND I'LL PUT THEM TOGETHER, SINCE THEY ADDRESS A SINGLE SIGN AND

[00:45:01]

I'LL PUT THEM BOTH IN THE SAME MOTION.

IN ACCORDANCE TO THE STAFF REPORT AND THE DISCUSSION WE'VE

HAD HERE >> COULD I SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. >> WE HAVE A 1ST AND A 2ND MOTION TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST. MR. BEARMAN.

>> YES. >> MR. ODDLE?

>> YES IF I COULD ASK ONE QUESTION AS FAR AS THE PROCESS.

DO WE NEED TO APPROVE, REQUEST NUMBER ONE AND REQUEST NUMBER TWO SEPARATELY OR COULD THAT BE DONE AS ONE.

>> YOU COULD DO IT TOGETHER. >> OKAY. YES.

>> MR. THOMAS? >> YES.

>> COLONEL LANGHOLD? >> YES.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE BOTH VARIANCES, AND BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION HELD WITH THE BOARD, IS CARRIED.

>> ANY FURTHER BUSINESS, MOTION TO CLOSE THE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.