[00:00:20]
[1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL]
FIVE O'CLOCK, DEPENDING ON THE WALL UP THERE.LEMME CALL THIS MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ORDER.
UM, AND, UH, ASK NAY TO DO A ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
LOOKS LIKE WE GOT A QUORUM HAVING ESTABLISHED THE ROLL CALL.
UM, WHAT WE'VE GOT TODAY IS A, UH, PUBLIC HEARING AND A CON, AND TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE.
UH, SO RELATIVE TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, LET ME READ THE RULES.
PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE HELD FOR THE PURPOSE OF GIVING ALL INTERESTED PERSONS THE RIGHT TO SPEAK AND TO BE HEARD.
AND EVERYONE DESIRING TO SPEAK TODAY, UH, SHOULD HAVE SIGNED IN.
AND I HAVE THE SHEET HERE, AND THAT'LL PROVIDE OUR SPEAKING ORDER.
UH, I WOULD ASK THAT EACH SPEAKER GIVE HIS OR HER NAME AND ADDRESS TO PROVIDE A PROPER RECORD OF THE HEARING.
UH, THE RULES THAT APPLY TO EACH SPEAKER ARE THREE MINUTES, UH, TO PRESENT YOUR INFORMATION.
UM, HOWEVER, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO BE CONCISE IF YOU DON'T NEED THREE MINUTES.
AND, UH, IF THERE'S A GROUP OF YOU HERE THAT WANNA SELECT SOMEBODY TO REPRESENT THEM, JUST LET ME KNOW AND WE'LL, WE'LL DESIGNATE YOU AS THE SPOKESPERSON FOR THE GROUP.
[2. MINUTES]
TO ITEM TWO A, NO, YES.UM, I'D, UH, ASK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR MINUTES OF OCT OF THE OCTOBER 11TH, 2022 MEETING.
THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES ON THE OCTOBER 22 MEETING.
[a. Conduct a public hearing and consider a request for a variance from the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) to allow a carport to encroach through the minimum front yard setback of 15 feet and into the public right-of-way on the property located at 117 North Holly Drive. ]
THREE A IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND TO CONSIDER REQUESTS FOR VARIANCE FROM THE ULDC, UH, TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO ENCROACH THROUGH THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 15 FEET AND INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT ONE 17 NORTH HOLLY DRIVE HERE IN BAYTOWN.AND IF I COULD ASK, UH, STAFF TO GIVE US A SUMMARY OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
BOARD MEMBERS, MY NAME IS LAIA SALEM PLANNER TWO.
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY APPROXIMATELY 0.45 ACRE OF LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LAZY LANE AND, UH, NORTH HOLLY DRIVE.
THEY SHOULDA HAVE ALL BEEN HERE, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
AND IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED AS LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SF SF ONE, WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, ALSO SHOWING, UH, THE, THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD AS LOW AGAINST RESIDENTIAL.
SO THIS IS THE GOOGLE STREET VIEW IN 2011 THAT SHOWS THE, UM, THE SUBJECT, UM, THE ORIGINAL CARPORT STRUCTURE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, WHICH WAS BUILT IN 1966 AND, UM, WAS, UH, WAS BUILT UP TO THE, UH, FRONT LOT LINE ON NORTH HOLY, UH, ON NORTH, NORTH HOLY DRIVE, WHICH MEANS THAT THE, UM, THE ORIGINAL CARPORT ENCROACHES ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
A STRUCTURE THAT OLD, UM, IS CONSIDERED AN ENCROACHES ON THE FRONT LOT LINE IS CONSIDERED A NON COMPLYING STRUCTURE.
THE, UH, ULDC, UM, ON THE NON-CONFORMITY, UH, SECTION, UM, STATES THAT A NON-COMP COMPLYING STRUCTURE THAT LOCALLY OCCUPIED A LAND SITE ON APRIL 13TH, 2013, THAT DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS FOR FRONT SETBACKS, SIDE SETBACK, REAR SETBACKS, ET CETERA, UH, MAY BE USED AND MAINTAINED SUBJECT TO THE STANDARDS AND THE LIMITATION IN THIS ULDC IN TERMS OF REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF AN NONCOMPLIANT
[00:05:01]
STRUCTURE.THE CODE STATES THAT THAT IMPROVEMENT, MAINTENANCE, OR REPAIR FOR ANY PART OF STRUCTURES THAT ARE INSIDE THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT OF AN NON-COMPLIANT STRUCTURE THAT DO NOT INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF EXISTING NON-COMPLIANT, UH, NON-COMPLIANT STRUCTURE CAN ALSO BE, UH, MAINTAINED.
FURTHERMORE, ANY NON-COMPLIANCE STRUCTURE MAY BE REPAIRED, MAINTAINED, OR ALTERED, PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT NO SUCH REPAIR, MAINTENANCE, OR ALTERATION SHALL EITHER CREATE ANY NEW NON-COMPLIANCE OR INCREASE THE DEGREE OF EXISTING NON-COMPLIANCE OF ALL, OR ANY PART OF SUCH STRUCTURE.
THIS IS A MAP IN 2018 THAT SHOWS THE, UM, EXISTING OR THE ORIGINAL CARPORT STRUCTURE.
UM, KEEP IN MIND THAT LOT LINE HERE ARE NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT ACCURATE, BUT THIS IS WHAT THE, UM, THE FOOTPRINT OF THE ORIGINAL CARPORT.
IF WE GO TO 2021, WE SEE THAT THE CARPORT STILL THERE, THE ORIGINAL ONE IN 2020, 2022, UM, THE CARPORT WAS NEWLY CONSTRUCTED, AND A LITTLE BIT, WE SEE SOME ENCROACHMENT ON THE RIGHT OF WAY.
THIS IS A RECENT SURVEY THAT WAS DONE IN AUGUST, 2022 THAT SHOWS, UM, THE ENCROACHMENT TO THE RIGHT OF WAY, UH, THE ENCROACHMENT OF THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CARPORT ON THE RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THE APPLICANT HAS DEMOLISHED THE ORIGINAL CARPORT AND ERECTED A NEW ONE WITHOUT HAVING, WITHOUT OBTAINING ANY BUILDING PERMITS.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS IMAGE AND THE ONE IN 2011, THE APPLICANT CHANGED THE HEIGHT OF THE NORTHERN SEGMENT OF THIS CARPORT, THE HEIGHT OF THE NORTHERN SEGMENT.
YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT EXCEEDED THE HEIGHT OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
THIS IS ANOTHER IMAGES OF THE, UM, THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CARPORT.
AND, UM, BECAUSE THE, THE SUBJECT VARIANCE DID NOT MEET NINE OUT OF 10 CRITERIA, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL.
UM, WE RECEIVED TWO, UH, PROPERTY OWNER SUPPORTS, UM, FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS IN SUPPORT OF THIS VARIANCE.
AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT AND, UH, OTHER PEOPLE ARE SIGNING IN TO, TO SPEAK.
LEMME NOW CALL UPON THE FOLKS THAT WANNA SPEAK TODAY, AND I'VE GOT THE SHEET HERE.
UM, AND WE'LL START WITH, UH, MR. BRATTON.
BILL BRATTON, IF YOU COULD GO TO THE MICROPHONE, GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
I LIVE AT 1 1 7 NORTH HOLLY DRIVE.
I'M THE ONE THAT DID THE CARPORT OR HAD IT DONE, AND I PAID A CONTRACTOR TO BUILD THE THING, SO I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T KNOW.
I THOUGHT HE WAS SUPPOSED TO DO THE PERMITS AND THEY DIDN'T.
THAT'S HOW I FOUND OUT ABOUT THE PERMITS.
BUT I DIDN'T KNOW YOU NEEDED THE PERMIT TO REBUILD AN OLD CARPORT.
AND IT'S IN THE SAME PLACE THAT THE OLD ONE IS.
IT DON'T EXTEND NO FURTHER OUT THAN THE OLD ONE DOES.
IT'S ACTUALLY ABOUT A FOOT SHORTER THAN THE OLD ONE, JUST ONE SIDE.
I, I RAISED IT SO I COULD PUT MY CAMP, PUT MY CAMPER UNDER THERE, BUT I STOPPED WHEN Y'ALL STARTED GIVING ME GRIEF OVER IT.
SO I HADN'T DONE ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT IT, AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU CAN MAKE ME TAKE IT DOWN WHEN IT'S BEEN THERE SINCE, LIKE SHE SAID, THE SIXTIES.
THAT'S IT,
[00:10:02]
AND I APOLOGIZE IF I SAID THAT WRONG, BUT CORRECT ME.MARK WHI MAR MADELINE, MARK WOULD.
I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET AT 1 1 6 NORTH HOLLY, AND I'M HERE TO RECOMMEND THAT YOU APPROVE THIS VARIANCE.
UH, I DON'T SEE IT AS A PROBLEM TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT ONLY EXTENDS OUT FROM THE GARAGE, SO, UH, LENGTH SUFFICIENT TO PUT A PICKUP TRUCK UNDER IT AND THE THINGS HE STORES.
AND SO I'M, AND I, AGAIN, IT'S AN IMPROVEMENT TO AN OLDER PROPERTY, SO I RECOMMEND THAT YOU APPROVE IT.
I LIVE AT 1 0 8 NORTH HOLLY, AND I'VE LIVED THERE SINCE 1968.
AND, UH, I SEE THIS AS AN IMPROVEMENT FOR OUR STREET AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UH, THIS REPLACING SUCH AN OLDER STRUCTURE, THERE WOULD, IN MY OPINION, BE MUCH SAFER FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR ANY EVENT OF ANYTHING HAPPENING.
AND I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ABOUT THE CARPORT THAT IS A PROBLEM FOR ANYTHING THAT SHOULD COME UP.
I LIVE AT 1 0 3 LAZY LANE, WHICH IS ADJACENT TO HIS LOT.
UH, PERSONALLY, I THINK IT'S A BIG IMPROVEMENT OVER WHAT WAS THERE.
UH, I SEE NO REASON TO NOT APPROVE IT.
HE TAKES CARE OF HIS PLACE, AND IT'S NOT LIKE HE BUILT SOMETHING SHODDY OR UNSIGHTLY OR UNSAFE.
AND, UH, I RECOMMEND Y'ALL GIVE THE VARIANCE.
I ALSO CAME TO SUPPORT THE VARIANCE.
UM, LIQUID IS AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WHEN IT WAS DEVELOPED, EACH HOUSE HAD DIFFERENT PLANS.
UH, NO, NONE OF THEM WERE THE SAME.
AND A LOT OF US HAVE THE CONVENIENCE OF HAVING A LONG DRIVEWAY, WHICH HE DOES NOT.
HIS CARPORT, ALMOST THE OLD ONE, CAME ALMOST TO THE PROPERTY LINE, SO YOU CAN'T PARK A PICKUP TRUCK WITHOUT HAVING GOING TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO, AND I THINK WHAT HE DID WAS AN IMPROVEMENT LIKE EVERYONE ELSE HAS SAID, AND I SUPPORT HIS VARIANCE.
THERE BEING NO OTHER, UH, SPEAKERS TO TALK TO US TODAY.
AND NOW CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND MOVE ON TO THE SECOND PART OF, UH, ITEM THREE A, WHICH IS TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE.
IF WE COULD GET STAFF'S REPORT, UH, REMINDING EACH OF US THAT WE HAVE 10 CRITERIA TODAY.
UM, AND, UH, SPECIFICALLY WE ARE CHALLENGED TO SEE THAT ALL 10 ARE MET, UH, IN ORDER TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE.
SO PLEASE, YES, MR. CHAIR, CAN I MAYBE JUST MAKE A REMINDER TOO, THAT ACCORDING TO THE SURVEY THERE, PART OF THE STRUCTURE DOES EXTEND INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THIS BOARD DOESN'T ACTUALLY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ALLOW IT IN THE RIGHT OF WAY ITSELF.
SO, UM, CRITERIA NUMBER ONE, IT'S ABOUT, UH, ENSURE THE SAME GENERAL LEVEL OF LAND USE COMPATIBILITY AS THE OTHERWISE APPLICABLE STANDARDS.
UM, THE, UH, THE EXISTING, THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED, UH, CARPORT IS ENCROACHING AS MR. SCRIBNER SAID, IS ENCROACHING ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
AND, UM, THIS ENCROACHMENT ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WILL GRA WILL GRANT A GREATER LEVEL OF LAND USE, UM, THAN WHAT IS INTENDED BY THE APPLICABLE, UM, STANDARDS IN THE ULDC AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
UH, IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A CORNER LOT AND THE APPLICANT COULD HAVE A, UM, A DRIVEWAY AND A CARPORT FROM LAZY LANE.
[00:15:03]
APOLOGIZE.THE SECOND CRITERIA IS ABOUT IT'S NOT A HARDSHIP OF THE APPLICANT'S OWN MAKING, UH, PLANNING STAFF ARGUES THAT THIS IS A, UM, A HARDSHIP OF THE APPLICANT'S OWN MAKING, THE DEMOLITION OF THE ORIGINAL CARPORT, THE ERECTION OF THE NEW, UH, CARPORT, UM, AT THE SAME LOCATION WITH THE, UH, ENCROACHMENT ON THE RIGHT OF WAY.
HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE THE CHANCE TO, UM, TO BRING, UH, A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A CARPORT AND A DRIVEWAY FROM THE, UM, THE OTHER STREET, WHICH IS THE LAZY LANE.
UH, STREET DOES NOT, UH, THE THIRD ONE IS, DOES NOT, UH, ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND USES IN THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER, UH, OF USES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE SEE THAT, UH, THERE IS NO PRECEDENT OF, UH, HAVING A CARPORT THIS HEIGHT, UH, OR ENCROACH ENCROACHMENT, UH, ENCROACHMENT OF A CARPORT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK OR THE, UH, RIGHT OF WAY.
SO WE SEE THIS AS, UH, ALSO, UH, A CRITERIA THAT THAT'S NOT MET.
UH, THE FOURTH CRITERIA WAS MET, UH, SINCE IT WAS TALKING ABOUT DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES IN, IN ANY MATERIAL WAY.
AND WE THINK THAT THIS IS, UH, THE ONLY CRITERIA THAT WAS MET SINCE THE CARPORT WAS THERE SINCE 1966.
SO NO ONE CAN ARGUE THAT IT'S GOING TO, UH, AFFECT THE, UH, PROPERTY VALUES.
UM, IN TERMS OF CRITERIA FIVE, FURTHERS THE GOALS AND VISION OF THE CITY AS SET FORCE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
UH, WE THINK THAT, UM, A CARPORT STRUCTURE, UH, THAT IS ERECTED WITHOUT OBTAINING THE NECESSARY BUILDING PERMIT.
AND WE DON'T KNOW IF IT MEETS THE BUILDING CODE.
UM, THE, THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE THAT SHOULD APPLY TO ALL STRUCTURES, ALL NEW STRUCTURES IN THE CITY, AND IT DOESN'T, UH, ALSO, UH, PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT IT MEETS THE, UH, THE 150, UH, WIND SPEED.
SO, UM, CRITERIA NUMBER SIX IS GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE AND THE INTENT OF THE ULDC.
UM, THE CODE ALLOWS THE APPLICANT TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING, UH, ORIGINAL CARPORT SINCE IT, UH, PREDATED THE ULDC.
IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT, UM, DEMOLISHED THE WHOLE, THE ORIGINAL ONE AND ERECTED A NEW ONE.
AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT, THAT THE, UM, THE NEW, UH, THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CARPORT IS WITHIN THE EXACT FOOTPRINT OF THE OLD ONE.
UH, BUT WE SEE THAT IT'S, UM, IT HAS DIFFERENT HEIGHT.
SO THE APPLICANT INCREASED THE, UH, THE DEGREE OF NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE, UM, THE EXISTING, UH, OF THE NON-COMPLIANCE, UH, STRUCTURE.
SO WE ARGUE THAT, UM, IT DOES NOT, UM, COME TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE BUILDING CODE.
UH, CRITERIA NUMBER SEVEN IS NEEDED AS SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT ARE, UH, PARTICULAR TO THE LAND OR STRUCTURE THAT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LAND OR STRUCTURE IN THE SAME DISTRICT AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL.
UM, AGAIN, WE, WE MENTIONED THAT THIS IS A CORNER LOT AND THE APPLICANT HAD THE CHANCE TO, UM, TO APPLY FOR A DRIVEWAY ON LAZY LANE AND ERECT A NEW CARPORT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE, THE DWELLING.
NUMBER EIGHT IS NECESSARY AS LITERAL INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THE DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS WOULD DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY LANDOWNER IN THE SAME DISTRICT AND WOULD CAUSE AND UNNECESSARY, UH, AND UNDUE HARDSHIP.
WE DON'T THINK THAT A HARDSHIP WILL BE, UH, CAUSED, UH, BY REFUSING, UH, BY DENIAL OF THIS VARIANCE BECAUSE THE APPLICANT CAN, UM, AS I SAID, APPLY FOR, UM, A NEW CARPORT ON THE OTHER SIDE, OR, UH, WOULD'VE
[00:20:01]
REPAIRED THE EXISTING, THE ORIGINAL, UH, CARPORT THAT WAS ON THE PROPERTY.NUMBER NINE IS THE MINIMUM ACTION THAT WILL MAKE POSSIBLE THE USE OF LAND OR STRUCTURE, WHICH IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND WHICH WOULD CARRY OUT THE SPIRIT OF THIS ULDC AND WOULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, UH, WITH THE ENCROACHMENT ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
WE THINK THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO CARRY THE SPIRIT OF THE ULDC AND, UM, AND ALSO BECAUSE THE, THE APPLICANT DID NOT APPLY FOR ANY BUILDING PERMIT, AND WE DON'T KNOW IF THE, THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CARPORT ADHERES TO THE BUILDING CODE OR WIND SPEED.
UM, NUMBER 10 WILL BRING THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED STRUCTURE CLOSER INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING REGULATIONS OF THE ULDC OR WILL OTHERWISE IMPROVE OR ENHANCE PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY OR WELFARE WITH THE ENCROACHMENT ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, WE, UH, WE KNOW THAT IT'S NOT IN THE PUBLIC, UH, IN IT'S NOT GOING TO ENHANCE OR IMPROVE THE, UH, THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY, UH, OR WELFARE IN THIS AREA.
AND THAT'S, UH, CONTAINS THE, UM, THE CRITERIA.
LET ME OPEN IT UP TO THE BOARD FOR QUESTIONS OF STAFF, PLEASE.
YOU'VE GOT A WHOLE LIST OVER THERE.
WELL, I WAS JUST MAKING NOTES.
MY QUESTION IS, THE ORIGINAL CARPORT, DID IT, WAS THERE A VARIANCE ENCROACHMENT IN THE ORIGINAL CARPORT? THE ORIGINAL CARPORT PREDATED THE, UM, THE ULDC AND WE, IT'S, UM, IT WAS NOT, UH, IN OUR RECORD THAT WHEN YOU SEE THE, UM, THIS IS THE ORIGINAL PLA OF THE PART OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH THE ORIGINAL BUILDING LINE OF 20 FEET.
SO THE BUILDING ITSELF ADHERES TO THE BUILDING LINE SETBACK.
HOWEVER, UM, THE CARPORT WAS NOT IN, UM, IT WAS NOT IN THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BACK THEN TO HAVE THE CARPORT, UM, ADHERE TO THE SETBACK AS WELL.
HOWEVER, WE HAVE FOR, UM, FOR A NEW CARPORT APPLICATION RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE ALLOWANCE OF FIVE FEET TO GIVE TO THE APPLICANT THAT THEY CAN ENCROACH FIVE FEET INTO THE, UH, THE FRONT YARD SETBACK.
AND BECAUSE THIS SUBDIVISION, UH, HAS A BUILDING LINE OF 20 FEET, IF WE WERE TO APPLY OUR, UH, STANDARDS TODAY, WHICH IS 15 FEET IN SF IN SF ONE 15 FEET FRONT YARD SETBACK.
SO IN INSTEAD OF 20, WE ARE GOING TO SAY THAT THE APPLICANT CAN HAVE 15 FEET OF FRONT YARD SETBACK, AND THEREFORE WITH THE ALLOWANCE OF FIVE FEET OF THE ENCROACHMENT OF THE CARPORT, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE ABOUT 10 FEET, UH, SETBACK FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
THIS IS ADHERING TO, TO TODAY'S STANDARDS.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE CURRENT NEW CARPORT DOESN'T ENCROACH ON THE SETBACK ANYMORE THAN THE OLD CARPORT DID THE CHANGE IS THE HEIGHT? IS THAT THIS IS WHAT THE FACT IT WASN'T, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE PERSPECTIVE.
SO THIS IS WHAT APPEARS FROM THE, UM, THE, THE MAPS THAT WE HAVE ON 2018 AND 2000 THOUSAND.
SO IT'S HARD TO TELL BASIC, AND I SAID, YEAH, AND I SAID ALSO THAT IT'S NOT, UM, IT'S NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT ACCURATE.
THE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE, UM, THE PROPERTY, THE FENCES OF THE, THOSE PROPERTIES ARE A LITTLE BIT SHIFTED THEN THE WHAT WE SEE AS PROPERTY LINE IN HERE.
RIGHT? SO, GIVE OR TAKE, UM, THIS IS THE, UM, THE CARPORT IN 2021, AND THIS IS HOW FAR BACK WE CAN GO ON THE MAPS, UM, TO 2018.
LAMI, COULD YOU TAKE IT BACK TO THE, THE SURVEY? SO TO TRY AND HELP ANSWER YOUR QUESTION A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
ONCE, ONCE THE CARPORT IS TORN DOWN, THE CODE BASICALLY SAYS IT'S GONE FOREVER.
THAT WAS A NON-CONFORMING PART OF THE STRUCTURE BECAUSE IT'S IN THE SETBACK AND SPECIFICALLY AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE SURVEY, IT EXTENDS OVER INTO THE RIGHT OF
[00:25:01]
WAY THAT'S PUBLIC, THAT'S PUBLIC, UH, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY CITY PROPERTY, RIGHT? AND SO WE, WE CAN'T ALLOW IT INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.I, I, AGAIN, I I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S WITHIN THE, THE AUTHORITY OF THIS BOARD TO ALLOW IT TO BE THERE, RIGHT? EVEN IF THE OLD ONE WAS.
THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS IT'S, I DON'T WANNA SAY IT'S IRRELEVANT, UM, WHERE THE OLD CARPORT WAS, BUT ACCORDING TO THE CODE, IT'S KIND OF IRRELEVANT WHERE THE OLD CARPORT WAS.
WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS WAS A PROPERTY OWNER TRYING TO MAKE, TRYING TO IMPROVE THEIR PROPERTY AND MAKE IT LOOK BETTER AND MAKE IT FUNCTION BETTER FOR THEM.
AT THE SAME TIME, THE CODE, AS YOU GUYS KNOW, THE THE CODE HAS CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.
UM, IF WE'D HAVE HAD A, A CONVERSATION, YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO A BUILDING PERMIT, WE WOULD'VE KIND OF SUSSED ALL THAT OUT.
BUT WE, WE DIDN'T GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.
SO, UM, WE WERE REALLY LEFT WITHOUT MUCH OF A CHOICE.
IT IT WAS NON-COMPLIANT BEFORE, BUT SINCE THEY CHANGED IT GAVE IT GREATER HEIGHT, UH, THAT'S NOT ALLOWED TO BE EVEN FURTHER NON-COMPLIANT, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND, AND REALLY WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO WHERE THE OLD ONE WAS AND HOW IT WAS PRETTY MUCH LEFT ALONE FOR 60 YEARS, ALMOST, WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO IS WHEN THE, AND, AND WE, WE, WE HAVE THESE ALL OVER THE CITY WHERE WE MIGHT HAVE OTHERWISE NOT EVEN BEEN AWARE THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE, BUT THEN WHEN CONSTRUCTION IS DONE, OUR ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ARE TRAINED TO LOOK FOR THINGS LIKE THAT AND SEE, OKAY, THERE'S NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND THEN WE GO, OKAY, THERE'S NO PERMIT FOR THAT.
SO AS SOON AS THERE'S NOT A PERMIT, WE KNOW THERE'S NOT A PERMIT, THEN, THEN WE HAVE TO DIG DEEPER INTO IT.
AND THAT'S KIND OF, THAT, THAT'S HOW THIS CAME ABOUT.
SO, MR. MARTIN, COULD YOU CLARIFY, SO THE PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW ONE, THE, THE EXISTING ONE, THE ONE THAT WAS THERE, IF, IF THE HOMEOWNER HAD MADE REPAIRS TO IT, IMPROVEMENTS TO PUT A, PUT A NEW SURFACE ON TOP OF IT OR REPLACE PART OF IT, THAT WOULD BE OKAY BECAUSE IT WAS AN EXISTING NON-COMPLIANT STRUCTURE.
AM I RIGHT? UM, IF IT WASN'T IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, YES, BUT OTHERWISE THEY WOULD'VE COME IN AND, AND REQUESTED A BUILDING PERMIT AT WHICH TIME WE WOULD'VE DONE THE REVIEW AND SAID, UH, THIS IS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY BECAUSE IT IS, WE CAN'T ISSUE A PERMIT.
AND THEY WOULD'VE ENDED UP BACK HERE IN FRONT OF YOU.
BUT, BUT WHAT WE WOULD'VE TRIED TO DO WAS, WAS HELP THEM WORK THROUGH, OKAY, YOU HAVE A SPOT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE WHERE YOU COULD HAVE THE ROOM TO DO THIS AND YOU WOULDN'T NEED ANY OTHER APPROVALS THAN THE BUILDING PERMIT GARAGE ON THIS SIDE.
YOU TELL THEM, HAVE THE CARPORT ON THAT SIDE, SO THERE'S A FIVE FOOT OTHER SIDE, PLEASE, PLEASE, GUYS.
SO THE ISSUE HERE IS NOT SETBACK, IT'S RIGHT ENCROACHMENT, IT'S BOTH, IT'S NOT THE SET, IT'S BOTH, BUT, BUT THE, WE COULD ADDRESS SETBACK OR IF IT MEETS CERTAIN CRITERIA, BUT THE RIGHT OF WAY IS THE RIGHT OF WAY.
THE, THE THE RIGHT OF WAY IS KIND OF DEAL BREAKER IN IN THOSE TERMS. YES.
IT'S THE, THE BIGGER ISSUE, CORRECT.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S A LITTLE DECEIVING HERE IS THE 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY OF NORTH HOLLY.
THE, UH, THE HOMEOWNER'S PROPERTY LINE.
THE HOMEOWNER'S DRIVEWAY IS SO FAR OFF THE ROAD, IT GIVES THE APPEARANCE OF A LOT OF ROOM BETWEEN THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE STREET.
BUT BASED ON THE SURVEY, WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THAT THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF, IN FACT, IT'S SHOWN AS A ROCK DRIVEWAY, UM, FROM THE ROAD TO THE, TO THE HOMEOWNER'S DRIVEWAY.
UM, AND SO YEAH, IT, IT GIVES THE APPEARANCE THAT IT'S A NICE, PLEASANT ADDITION TO THE PROPERTY.
UM, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION THAT I HAD WHEN REVIEWING THIS PACKAGES ENCROACHING INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
WE ALWAYS DEAL WITH PROPERTY LINE AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
AND SO LIKE YOU MENTIONED, HAD THE PROPERTY OWNER LOOK TO OBTAIN A PERMIT, A LOT OF THESE THINGS WOULD'VE COME UP AT THAT TIME.
AND, AND I, I WOULDN'T SAY THAT WE'LL GO BUILD ANOTHER DRIVEWAY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE IS AN EASY, IS AN EASY ANSWER, BUT, UH, BUT BUILDING A CARPORT TODAY, YOU, YOU CAN'T DO IT BY TODAY'S STANDARDS.
THERE'S MANY NEWER NEIGHBORHOODS AS WELL THAT HAVE, HAVE EVEN LESS, I MEAN, VEHICLES PARK IN THE DRIVEWAY AND BLOCK THE SIDEWALK, AND WE KNOW THE SIDEWALKS ON THE PUBLIC SIDE OF, OF THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND SO IT, IT, AND THIS BEING SUCH AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD, IT, IT'S SURPRISING TO ME THAT THERE'S THAT MUCH MM-HMM
[00:30:01]
TO THE PROPERTY LINE, AND THEN SUCH A SHORT SETBACK ON THIS SIDE OF THE HOUSE.AND IT ALSO APPEARS TO ME WHAT'S UNUSUAL IS TYPICALLY THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE HAS THE FARTHER SETBACK THAN THE SIDE DOES.
APPARENTLY THE HOUSE FACES HOLLY DOES NOT FACE, UH, LAZY, LAZY, AND TYPICALLY YOU HAVE THE FARTHER SETBACK IN THE FRONT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DRIVEWAY POTENTIAL CARPORT.
IN THIS CASE, THE WAY THE HOUSE IS POSITIONED ON THIS PROPERTY, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE HAS THE SHORT 20 FOOT BUILDING SETBACK, WHICH DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME, BUT THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS DONE TO BEGIN WITH.
RIGHT? SO, SO IT ALMOST GIVES YOU NO OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY TYPE OF CARPORT ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE IN FRONT OF THE GARAGE ON THAT SIDE THAT'S ON THAT SIDE.
THE, SO WHEN THIS WAS DONE, AGAIN, BACK IN THE EARLY SIXTIES, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY ZONING CODE, RIGHT? AND SO THIS WOULD'VE BEEN DONE, AND THOSE BUILDING LINES THAT ARE MARKED ON THE SURVEY WOULD'VE BEEN PART OF THE PLAT.
NOW, WE DON'T, ORDINARILY THERE IS A, THERE IS A SUBTLE DISTINCTION BETWEEN A BUILDING LINE AND A SETBACK LINE.
I'LL SPARE YOU GUYS THAT, RIGHT, RIGHT.
BUT THE 35 FOOT BUILDING LINE ON ONE SIDE AND THE 25, 20 FOOT BUILDING LINE ON THE OTHER SIDE WOULD'VE BEEN PURELY ABOUT THE SUBDIVISION PLAT AND WOULD'VE BEEN RECORDED.
THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE WOULD EVEN KNOW IT'S THERE.
AND, AND AS, UM, AS LAME WAS SAYING, WHAT WE WOULD DO IS, IS TRY TO BE AS, AS GENEROUS AS WE CAN AND SAY, WELL, NOW YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO 20 FOOT ON THAT SIDE.
AND THEN WE, THE CURRENT CODE DOES ALLOW FOR FIVE FOOT ENCROACHMENT, WHICH WOULD TAKE YOU TO 10.
THAT'S, THAT'S US STRETCHING IT AS FAR AS WE CAN TO THE CODE.
AND SO, SO WE GET, WE GET THE, UH, YOU KNOW, A 10 FOOT CARPORT DOESN'T DO A LOT OF GOOD FOR A 20 FOOT LONG VEHICLE.
BUT, BUT AGAIN, WHAT, WHAT IS A LITTLE UNIQUE ABOUT THIS AND THE WAY IT WAS PLOTTED AND NOBODY'S FAULT, BUT TYPICALLY THE HOUSE ON THIS CORNER WOULD'VE BEEN FACING LAZY WITH THE BUILDING SETBACK OF 35 FEET, LIKE ALL THE OTHER HOUSES DOWN THAT STREET AND, AND WOULD'VE EITHER PUT THE GARAGE IN FRONT OR STILL WOULD'VE HAD IT ON THE SIDE AT A CORNER LOT LIKE YOU SEE A LOT OF TIMES.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WOULD'VE MADE A DIFFERENCE, BUT, UH, IT, IT, YOU KNOW, OUR STRUGGLE AS WE'VE STRUGGLED BEFORE IS, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE 10 CRITERIA AND WE DON'T GET TO DECIDE BECAUSE IT LOOKS GOOD, WHETHER IT MEETS THE CRITERIA OR NOT.
AND TYPICALLY WHEN WE HAVE ONE OR TWO CRITERIA THAT THE STAFF MAY FEEL ARE NOT MET, WE CAN HAVE A LITTLE ROBUST DEBATE.
WE CAN LOOK AT ALTERNATIVES, WE CAN LOOK AT SOME, SOME SORT OF WAY TO, TO NOT MEET THE CRITERIA, BUT TO MASSAGE IT, TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GIVING EVERY BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT TO THE HOMEOWNER WHO'S REQUESTING THIS VARIANCE.
AND I KNOW OUR ATTORNEYS IN THE PAST HAVE SAID, WE DON'T HAVE LATITUDE TO JUST SAY, HEY, IT LOOKS GOOD, LET'S LET IT FLY.
THAT'S NOT IN OUR ABILITY TO DO EITHER.
SO I DON'T WANNA MAKE IT SOUND LIKE WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, BUT WE ALSO DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY IN THE SETBACK IF IT DOESN'T MEET THE CRITERIA.
AND BECAUSE WE'RE DEALING WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF WE DIDN'T AGREE WITH ONE OR TWO WITH STAFF, WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT SEVEN OR EIGHT CRITERIA THAT ARE NOT MET, CLEARLY NOT MET.
AND FOR ME, UNFORTUNATELY, IT TAKES AWAY OUR ABILITY TO LOOK AT THIS FROM A PURELY AESTHETIC IMPROVEMENT, NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT PERSPECTIVE, AND FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, REMINDING OURSELVES, AND I THINK OUR ATTORNEY WOULD HAVE TO, TO, TO TELL ME IF I'M CORRECT IN RECALLING THAT WE JUST CAN'T SAY IT LOOKS GOOD AND EVERYBODY LIKES IT AND THERE'S NO COMPLAINTS AND WE'RE GOOD WITH IT.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S NOT, UM, IN YOUR AUTHORITY TO BASE IT ON THAT, UH, THE AESTHETICS UNFORTUNATELY.
SO, SO WE REALLY, WE REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY OPTIONS HERE THAT WOULD BE POSITIVE FOR THE, UH, THE HOMEOWNER.
WHETHER, WHETHER WE LIKE IT, IT LOOKS GREAT, GREAT IMPROVEMENT.
I, I CAN SEE ALL THE BENEFITS.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S JUST IN THE PERFECT SPOT.
BUT PROPERTY LINES, UH, PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS, WHICH THE CITY OWNS, UM, WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY IN THAT AREA.
AND THEN CRITERIA NOT BEING MET, SO MANY OF THEM, UM, WE DON'T HAVE THAT AUTHORITY EITHER.
AND SO I, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE SORT OF HUNG RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE CAN GO BACK TO WHAT IF THEY WOULD'VE LOOKED, YOU KNOW, FOR A PERMIT.
IT WAS A NON-COMPLIANCE STRUCTURE.
WE KNOW THAT LIKE ANY OTHER RENOVATION IN THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, EVEN IN NEWER NEIGHBORHOODS, IF YOU'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE AND YOU'RE RENOVATING TO A CERTAIN LEVEL, YOU HAVE TO COME IN COMPLIANCE, WHETHER IT'S A DA FOR PUBLIC ACCESS, WHETHER IT'S ELECTRICAL CODE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S CHANGED SINCE THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION.
ALL THESE KIND OF THINGS HAVE TO BE UPGRADED.
AND THIS NON-COMPLIANT CARPORT FALLS INTO THIS, THE SAME CATEGORY.
SO A PERMIT WOULD'VE STOPPED THIS FROM HAPPENING, AND THEN
[00:35:01]
THE OWNER COULD HAVE JUST PUT A NEW TOP ON HIS EXISTING CARPORT, MAINTAINED IT DIDN'T CHANGE, IT DIDN'T NOW INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WOULD'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, CUT, CUT A CORNER OFF OR SOMETHING.BUT, BUT BECAUSE IT WAS ALL TORE DOWN AND IT, IT'S BASICALLY NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT IS CORRECT.
AND THE, AND THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE DOESN'T MATTER IN THIS CASE.
SO I DID SUBMIT, AND, YOU KNOW, MY, MY COMMENTS, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH, WITH GILBERT, UM, UM, EVEN THOUGH, 'CAUSE IT'S KIND OF UNUSUAL FOLKS TO GET SUPPORT, BUT ON OUR SIDE HAVE OUR HANDS TIED TO WHERE WE CAN'T VIOLATE THE LAW.
'CAUSE UH, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG COUNSELOR, BUT IF WE APPROVED THIS AND OVERRULED WHAT IS DEFINITIVE FAILURES OF THE CRITERIA, WE AS A BOARD ARE IN TROUBLE.
AND, UH, OUR COUNCIL WON'T LET US DO THAT, AND I WON'T LET US DO THAT.
UM, SO GILBERT, TOTALLY AGREE.
AND, AND LIKE I SAID IN THE PAST, WE'VE HAD SOME LATITUDE IN SOME AREAS HERE AND THERE, AND STAFF IS ALWAYS VERY HELPFUL WHEN THAT LATITUDE IS THERE.
SO THEY'RE WILLING TO, TO HELP US WORK THROUGH THIS.
THERE'S, UM, LIKE I SAID, FUNDAMENTALLY THE ENCROACHMENT IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IS OUT OF OUR HANDS.
SO WE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SETBACK PART JUST, I DON'T SEE HOW, I DON'T SEE HOW WE HAVE ANY OPTIONS COMES IN MATERIAL.
UH, I I, THE, THE WHOLE ISSUE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY ENCROACHMENT, IT MAKES IT A, A DIFFERENT ANIMAL.
THAT'S UNFORTUNATELY, I, YOU KNOW, WE, WE DON'T HAVE, I DON'T SEE A, A WAY THAT WE CAN, AS GILBERT SAID, YOU KNOW, VIGOROUSLY DEBATE AND FIND A WAY THROUGH THE SETBACK ISSUES BECAUSE IT'S NOT AN ISSUE OF SETBACK.
AND, AND, AND WHEN WE TALK RIGHT AWAY, WE ARE TALKING PROPERTY LINES AND OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT LINE.
AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE IN THIS CASE.
I, BUT YEAH, IT'S, IT, YEAH, IT'S, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU BUILD ON YOUR LAND, YOU DON'T BUILD ON RIGHT AWAY, AND IF YOU DO, YOU'RE IN TROUBLE.
CAN BE ANYTHING ELSE OR I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.
IT'S JUST UNDERSTANDING FOR ME, IS THERE A WAY FOR HIM TO PURCHASE RIGHT OF WAY PROPERTY? UH, THAT IS HIGHLY DOUBTFUL.
I I, I WON'T SAY DEFINITIVELY, BUT I'LL SAY I JUST WAS CURIOUS.
USUALLY WHEN THERE'S MORE RIGHT OF WAY THAN WHAT THE ROAD IS, IS BECAUSE THERE'S IMPROVEMENTS PLANNED FOR SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT ROAD WELL ENOUGH TO TELL YOU THAT DEFINITIVELY THERE IS, IT DIDN'T COME TO MIND TO ME UNTIL GILBERT MADE HIS POINT ABOUT HOW FAR THAT SETBACK WAS OR THAT RIGHT OF WAY IS.
AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M JUST CURIOUS.
MY, MY KNEE JERK REACTION WOULD BE TO SAY PROBABLY NOT.
BUT I, I DON'T KNOW DEFINITIVELY I TRIED AS A GAUGE FOR ME AND, AND UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFICULTY WITH THIS IS MY PARENTS OWN A HOME IN AN OLDER PART OF TOWN, AND THERE'S A LONG WAY FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO THE STREET, BUT ON THE, ON THE PLOT OR THE, THE, THE, UH, SURVEYS, THE CITY RIGHT OF WAY COMES 15 FEET TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
AND I REMEMBER MY DAD ARGUING THAT HE WOULD BUILD A CARPORT BY GOD IF HE WANTED TO, BUT, YOU KNOW, UH, HE, HE, HE DID, YOU COULDN'T GO, HE DIDN'T OWN THE PROPERTY 15 FEET FROM THE HOUSE, EVEN THOUGH IT APPEARED THAT HE, HE MOWED IT AND KEPT IT UP, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS UTILITY.
AND, AND, AND MAINLY BECAUSE ONCE YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE YOUR PROPERTY LINE IS, THAT'S ALL YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH.
THERE, THERE IS A SYSTEM DITCHES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TOO, THAT ARE MAINTAINED BY THE CITY.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S PROBABLY MAINLY WHAT THAT RIGHT OF WAY IS FOR AT THIS STAGE.
IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION, I WOULD, UH, REQUEST A MOTION FROM SOMEBODY ON THE BOARD TO, UH, DENY THE VARIANCE.
WELL, I MOVE THAT WE DENY THE VARIANCE BASED ON, UH, NOT MEETING THE, UH, 10 CRITERIA THAT WE ARE GIVEN TO APPLY TO THIS, UH, REQUEST.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT ALL IN FAVOR OF DENYING THE REQUEST, UH, SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? VERY GOOD, THANK YOU.
[a. Receive a report from the Director of Planning and Development.]
ON TO ITEM FOUR A PLEASE, UH, DIRECTOR.SO, UH, THERE ARE A FEW ITEMS THAT HAVE, UH, BEEN APPROVED BY COUNSEL SINCE THE LAST TIME YOU GUYS HAVE MET.
UH, THE FIRST ONE WAS AT 8,200.
UM, CAN YOU GO AHEAD AND LAMI, CAN YOU PUT THOSE THERE? THANK YOU.
UM, SO THE FIRST ONE'S AT 8,200 NORTH MAIN.
[00:40:01]
REZONED FROM OPEN SPACE RECREATION TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL.THIS IS 15 ACRES AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH MAINE IN VILLE.
THIS WAS A SPECULATIVE COMMERCIAL, UM, SORT OF CORNER COMMERCIAL TYPE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIALLY.
THIS IS, IF YOU REMEMBER LAST YEAR, UH, WE ANNEXED AND ZONED FOR THE FIRST PIECE OF BAY CREEK, WHICH IS, UH, THAT'S CASTLE ROCK, ISN'T IT? CASTLE ROCK DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THEY HAVE COME BACK WITH THE PIECE JUST TO THE NORTH OF THAT.
SO THIS IS ON NORTH MAIN, ON THE EAST SIDE, JUST NORTH OF VILLE.
AND THEY ADDED 55 MORE ACRES TO THAT, WHICH IS, REMEMBER IT WAS ABOUT 170 OR SO NEW, MORE ADDITIONAL LOTS.
THAT WAS REZONED FROM OPEN SPACE REC, UH, RECREATION TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL.
THIS IS ON THE I 10 FRONTAGE ROAD, BASICALLY, UM, EAST OF NORTH MAINE.
THIS IS ANOTHER SPECULATIVE COMMERCIAL.
AND THEN 7 0 6 EAST CEDAR BY LYNCHBURG IS TWO ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CEDAR BY LYNCHBURG IN BARLOW.
UM, THIS IS A HOUSE, THIS IS, UH, TWO ACRES.
THERE'S A HOUSE ON THAT PROPERTY THAT WAS CONVERTED TO, UH, AN INSURANCE AGENCY THAT WAS REZONED, UM, TO NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING COMMERCIAL.
UM, AND THAT WAS ALSO APPROVED BY COUNCIL.
SO AT THIS TIME, THAT IS ALL I HAVE FOR YOU.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS FOLKS? IF NOT, UM, SEEK A MOTION TO ADJOURN.