[00:00:03]
HOW'S THAT? SO WE MAY BE JOINED BY.
[Call to Order]
OKAY. WAYNE MAY BE HERE OR NOT.WELL, HAVING A QUORUM, WE CAN PROCEED ANYWAY.
ALL RIGHT. OUR FIRST ITEM IS TO.
CHECK IF DEDRA AND EARL CAN HEAR YOU. DEDRA AND EARL, CAN YOU HEAR US? YES. YES.
OKAY. OUR FIRST ITEM IS TO SEEK THE NOMINATION OF A VICE CHAIRMAN FOR OUR BOARD.
[ITEM 1: Board is selecting a member to serve as Vice-Chairman of the Board.]
YOU WANT TO PROVE MINUTES FIRST? WHERE DO WE DO THIS? I THINK WE'LL DO THAT SECOND.OKAY. I'M LOOKING AT OLDER ONES THEN.
AND SO I WOULD MAKE A MOTION RECOMMENDATION THAT WE ASK MARTIN WOODRUFF IF HE WOULD BE WILLING TO ACCEPT THIS ROLE. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ACCEPT THAT POSITION.
ALL RIGHT. I WOULD SECOND THAT NOMINATION.
OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
THANK YOU, SIR, FOR BEING WILLING TO SERVE AS OUR VICE CHAIR.
ALL RIGHT. ITEM TWO IS TO DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON THE SEPTEMBER 20, 2021 MINUTES.
[ITEM 2: Discuss and take appropriate action regarding September 20, 2021, Minutes.]
THOSE ARE PART OF YOUR PACKET.BEFORE WE DO THAT, I'D LIKE TO LET YOU GUYS KNOW YOU'RE AWARE THAT YOU HAVE A NEW MEMBER ALSO.
ACTUALLY A NEW MEMBER AND A PREVIOUS MEMBER, PRIOR MEMBER WE HAVE [INAUDIBLE] AND I BELIEVE WE PROBABLY WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH CHERYL BEFORE THE MEETING.
AND THEN YOU ALSO HAVE WAYNE STONE.
GREAT. TO COME BACK AND HELP US OUT.
WE HAVE WELCOMED [INAUDIBLE] TODAY, AND WE'RE SO GLAD THAT THAT WAYNE STONE IS WILLING TO SERVE AGAIN. AND WE'LL WELCOME HIM IF HE ENDS UP ATTENDING THE MEETING.
I WOULD OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
OR IF YOU BELIEVE THEY'RE ACCURATE, THEN WE CAN GO FORTH THE MOTION TO APPROVE.
WE HAVE A SECOND. I'LL SECOND IT.
WE HAVE A SECOND FOR [INAUDIBLE].
AYE. OPPOSED. I'M JUST ABSTAINING SINCE I WASN'T IN THE PRIOR MEETING.
I UNDERSTAND. SO THE MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 20, 2021 ARE APPROVED.
THIS IS AN IN-PERSON AND VIDEO CONFERENCE MEETING.
ANYONE MAY JOIN THE MEETING VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE AT WWW.ZOOM.US/JOIN OR VIA TELEPHONE BY CALLING 13462487799 MEETING ID 91255952930 AND PASSWORD 976527.
IF YOU JOIN THE MEETING VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING AND WANT TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON AN AGENDA ITEM, YOU WILL NEED TO HAVE YOUR CAMERA ON AND HOLD UP YOUR HAND WHEN THE CHAIRMAN CALLS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND YOU WILL BE RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN TO ADDRESS THE BOARD AND WILL BE ALLOWED A TOTAL OF 3 MINUTES TO PROVIDE COMMENTS REGARDING THE POSTED AGENDA ITEM FOR WHICH THE REQUEST TO SPEAK WAS SUBMITTED.
AND YOU MAY SPEAK DURING THIS ITEM OR DURING THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION OF INDIVIDUAL ITEMS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE.
THE THREE MINUTE TIME PERIOD WILL BE EXTENDED TO 6 MINUTES IF A TRANSLATOR IS REQUIRED FOR A NON-ENGLISH SPEAKER TO COMMUNICATE HIS OR HER COMMENTS REGARDING THE POSTED AGENDA ITEM FOR WHICH THE REQUEST TO SPEAK WAS FILED.
YOU MAY ALSO EMAIL YOUR COMMENTS TO BE READ AT THE MEETING TO [INAUDIBLE] AT DECATURTX.ORG OR [INAUDIBLE] AT DECATUR.ORG BEFORE AND DURING THE MEETING ON MONDAY, MAY 16TH.
PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER.
[00:05:05]
PLANNING DIRECTOR RAGLAND DO WE HAVE ANY EMAILS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO US? I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY.OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY THAT'S ATTENDING THIS MEETING REMOTELY? RYAN [INAUDIBLE] IS HERE.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY THAT'S REMOTE? AND DO WE HAVE ANYBODY THAT MAY BE REMOTE BUT HAVE NOT SIGNED IN YET? OKAY. SO WE'RE AWARE OF EVERYBODY THAT IS IN ATTENDANCE.
OKAY. WELL, THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM THREE, WHICH IS ZDA 2022-01, WHICH IS
[ITEM 3: ZBA2022-01—The Board to hold a public hearing, consider and take action on a request for a variance from the City of Decatur’s Zoning Ordinance regarding parking for the property identified as Lot 1, Block 1, Rose Avenue Addition and more commonly referred to as 1555 W. US Highway 380, City of Decatur, Wise County, Texas. The request is for a variance to the City of Decatur Code of Ordinances, Appendix B, “Zoning,” Article 7, “Development Standards,” Section 7.3, “Off Street Parking and Loading Regulations,” Subsection 7.3.3, “Parking Requirements Based Upon Use.” The following parking requirements apply to the property located in the MF, Multiple-Family Residential District: Two and one-quarter (2 ¼) spaces for each dwelling unit within the apartment complex, pursuant to section A of subsection 7.3.3. The variance request seeks to reduce the minimum calculated parking space requirement from five hundred and forty (540) parking spaces to four hundred and forty-four (444) striped parking spaces. Additionally, pursuant to section B of subsection 7.3.3., the property also must comply with the following minimum parking space regulations: Recreational, Private or Commercial area or building (other than listed): Standalone: One (1) space per one hundred (100) square feet. This variance request seeks to reduce the minimum calculated parking space requirement from sixty-five (65) parking spaces to nineteen (19) parking spaces. (ZBA Application 2022-01 – Ryan Voorhees, on behalf of Decatur OZF, LLC)]
A VARIANCE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM CALCULATED PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENT FROM 540 PARKING SPACES TO 444 PARKING PLACES, AND THEN REDUCING THE COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING FROM 65 TO 19.AND WE'LL HEAR PLANNING DIRECTOR RAGLAND STAFF REPORT ON THAT.
ALL RIGHT. AS MARK NOTED, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND BASICALLY FOR THE USES THAT HE'S PROPOSING, WHICH IS MULTI-FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL.
THERE IS A REQUIREMENT OF 605 PARKING SPACES AND THEY ARE WANTING TO PROVIDE US A TOTAL OF 480 PARKING SPACES.
THAT'S A DIFFERENCE OF 125 PARKING SPACES.
THE PROPERTY ADDRESS IS 1555 WEST U.S.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND ALSO THE INFORMATION WITH REGARDS TO THE PARKING THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.
NEXT SLIDE. [INAUDIBLE] NEXT SLIDE.
WE WERE REQUIRED TO NOTIFY 13 PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THIS PROPOSED VARIANCE.
WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSES BACK.
NEXT SLIDE. IN TERMS OF OUR FINDINGS ON THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXEMPTIONS DO NOT VIOLATE THE INTENT AND SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE.
PARKING IS PART OF THIS PARTICULAR PARKING, PART OF A PRIVATE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY SUBJECTED TO PUBLIC ACCESS.
SO THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE AN ISSUE WITH PARKING AS WOULD BE EXPECTED FOR A BUSINESS OR FOR AN APARTMENT COMPLEX. THE DEVELOPMENT AT THIS TIME IS EXPECTED TO BE A GATED COMMUNITY, WHICH THE APPLICANT SAYS WILL FURTHER LIMIT PUBLIC ACCESS.
PARKING WILL NOT OCCUR OR SHOULD NOT OCCUR OUTSIDE OF THE GATED DEVELOPMENT.
NUMBER TWO, THERE ARE SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF RESTRICTED AREA SHAPE, TOPOGRAPHY AND PHYSICAL FEATURES THAT EXIST PECULIAR TO THE SUBJECT PARCEL AND NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER PARCELS OF LAND IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT.
FIRST AND FOREMOST, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE, AND THAT BEING THIS HIGHWAY 380 AND SOME OF THE PROPERTIES ON THE WEST SIDE AND SOUTH SIDE IS IN THE 100 YEAR [INAUDIBLE].
AND THE APARTMENT COMPLEX SITE LAYOUT PROHIBITS THE PROPERTY OWNERS ABILITY TO PROVIDE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED BY CITY ORDINANCE AND KEEP THE PROPOSED GREENSPACE AND AMENITIES AND TO KEEP THE PARKING OUTSIDE OF THE [INAUDIBLE] NEXT SLIDE.
[INAUDIBLE], THE HARDSHIP IS NOT A RESULT OF THE APPLICANT'S ACTION.
IN THIS ONE IS KIND OF A GRAY AREA.
NOW THEY PROBABLY COULD REARRANGE THE WHAT ARE THE BUILDINGS
[00:10:10]
TO FIT A DIFFERENT LAYOUT.BUT AS THEY HAVE IT, BUILDING LOCATION IN THE 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAN, PROHIBIT THE INTRODUCTION OF MORE PARKING SPACES WITHOUT TAKING AWAY FROM THE GREEN SPACE THAT'S REQUIRED AND THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING PROVIDED.
FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS IN THIS ORDINANCE COULD DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF RIGHTS COMING IN THE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME ZONING TO COMPLY WITH THE SAME PROVISIONS.
THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED FOR A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION WHICH IS CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW.
IF THE VARIANCE ISN'T GRANTED, THE PARKING FOR THE PROJECT WILL NEED TO BE REDESIGNED AND THAT'S GOING TO DELAY THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION, OBVIOUSLY, AND WILL COST THE APPLICANT ADDITIONAL FUNDS.
AS YOU ARE AWARE, THE STATE HAS CHANGED THE REGULATIONS WITH REGARDS TO YOU GUYS CONSIDERING FINANCIAL CONCERNS.
AND SO YOU ARE ALLOWED TO CONSIDER THAT AS PART OF YOUR DELIBERATION.
OTHER MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS ARE CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION.
AN APPLICANT DOESN'T WANT THE MARKET SATURATED WITH [INAUDIBLE] DEVELOPMENTS.
AND THERE WILL BE A SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT NEEDED TO FILL THE LOWER AREA IN THE BACK OF THE LOT TO ACCOMMODATE THE ADDITIONAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND IS VERY COSTLY.
STORMWATER RUNOFF MAY ALSO CAUSE ADDITIONAL CONCERN FOR STAFF IF NEW PAVEMENT IS REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE ADDITIONAL PARKING. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND OVERVIEW WAS BASICALLY NO COMMENT.
YOU MAY HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENT SINCE THIS DOES RELATE TO PARKING.
BASED ON THE QUESTIONS YOU GUYS MAY HAVE.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
DEDRA HAD A LITTLE TROUBLE HERE IN THE LAST PART OF THAT.
EARL, YOU SAY YOU JUST HAD NO COMMENTS.
BASED ON THE INFORMATION WE RECEIVED, YOU HAD NO COMMENTS UNLESS YOU GUYS HAVE QUESTIONS FOR HIM.
OKAY. SO EITHER WAY, IF THIS GETS APPROVED, SO IS THIS ALREADY APPROVED, IT'S GOING TO BE DONE.
WHO'S THINKING THIS IS 1000 SOUTH [INAUDIBLE] RESIDENTS.
MARK, ARE YOU READY FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? WE HAVEN'T OPEN IT UP TO A PUBLIC HEARING YET, BUT WE'RE ABOUT TO.
OKAY. SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.
SO WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING UP AT 3:46.
COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF ONE MORE TIME? RESIDENT FOR 1000 [INAUDIBLE].
ARE YOU? I'M NOT SURE I'M FAMILIAR WITH WHERE YOUR ADDRESS IS OR YOU'VE JUST.
ACROSS THE STREET. I'M ACROSS THE STREET, YES.
OKAY. AND WHAT'S YOUR COMMENT? IS THIS BUILDING ALREADY BEEN APPROVED OR IS THIS IN CONTRACT? WHAT IS THIS ALL? WHAT IS THIS GETTING STARTED OR WHAT'S GOING ON? SO YOU GUYS CAN RESPOND WITH FACTUAL STATEMENTS, BUT IF YOU WISH.
[00:15:06]
OKAY. ANGIE, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE APARTMENTS? YEAH. OKAY.ON US 380? NO, ABOUT THE RIGHT THERE OFF [INAUDIBLE].
OKAY. WE HAVE NOT COME TO THAT ITEM YET.
SO THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
NO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER ONE.
WE WILL. THAT WILL BE THE NEXT.
AND WE'LL GET THERE IN JUST A MINUTE.
OKAY. ALL RIGHT, [INAUDIBLE] WOULD YOU WANT TO COMMENT? RYAN [INAUDIBLE] I THINK MY ENGINEER FILLED OUT THAT APPLICATION.
I THINK HE KIND OF MISSED SOMETHING.
I MEAN, TO ME, IT'S A REAL SIMPLE ISSUE.
OUR PROJECT, YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS WERE WELL TO ME, THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT DATED, BUT THEY'RE DESIGNED FOR PROJECTS THAT HAVE ONE, TWO AND THREE BEDROOM AND A MIX OF ONE, TWO AND THREE BEDROOM. WE DESIGNED OUR PROJECT WITH 80% ONE BEDROOM UNITS, AND THEY JUST DON'T HAVE THAT PARKING NEED.
WE'VE GOT A ONE BEDROOM PROJECT AND I THINK HE'S GOT THAT PARK LIKE 1.7 SPACES PER ONE BEDROOM UNIT, TWO SPACES FOR HIS TWO BEDROOM UNITS PLUS YOUR ADA UNITS.
TYPICALLY THE ARCHITECT OR ENGINEERS DISCOVER THIS DURING THE PLANNING STAGE OF DUE DILIGENCE DAYS.
I'M NOT SURE WHY IT GOT MISSED, BUT IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE LEARNED ABOUT LATE IN THE GAME.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE.
ANY QUESTIONS? WELL, I WAS WONDERING WHY IT GOT THIS FAR ALONG WITHOUT THIS BEING ADDRESSED.
I WAS WONDERING WHY DO SO? BECAUSE. YEAH.
I'M SORRY. YOU GOT ANOTHER ONE OVER THERE.
JUST REPEAT. YOU'RE SAYING 1.5 FOR THE ONE BEDROOM? WELL, FOR INSTANCE, FORT WORTH, THEIR STANDARD IS ONE SPACE PER BEDROOM, AND WE PROVIDED 1.7 SPACES FOR THE ONE BEDROOM UNITS, AND I THINK TWO SPACES FOR THE TWO BEDROOM PLUS THE ADA UNIT.
SO WE DESIGNED THE PROJECT TO WORK AND NOBODY'S REALLY WATCHING THE COUNTS AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.
BUT THE CITY COUNCIL WORKS FOR A PROJECT THAT HAS AN EVEN MIX OF ONE, TWO AND THREE BEDROOM UNITS.
AND WE JUST WE'RE JUST NOT PROVIDING THAT PRODUCT RIGHT NOW.
I THINK YOUR UNIT MIX IS 80%, ONE BEDROOMS, 20%, TWO BEDROOMS, 192 ONES AND 48 TWOS.
BUT THE DEMOGRAPHICS HAS CHANGED.
I MEAN, WHAT YOU BUILD NOW IS A DIFFERENT PRODUCT THAN YOU HAD BUILT TEN OR 20 YEARS AGO.
IT'S JUST THERE'S MORE SINGLE PEOPLE THAT ARE LOOKING FOR APARTMENTS.
SO JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, IS THIS GATED AS WELL? IT IS GATED, YES.
TELL ME WHAT YOUR YOUR THINKING IS ON THE CLUBHOUSE OR THE COMMON BUILDING.
REDUCING THAT NUMBER FROM 65 TO 19.
WELL, BECAUSE THE ONLY USE IS FROM INSIDE.
I MEAN, ALL THE PEOPLE THAT USE THE CLUB ALSO FROM WITHIN.
THEY'RE NOT. THEY DON'T COME IN PARK IN FRONT.
SO. SO IT WON'T BE USED FOR SPECIAL EVENTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
IT WILL, BUT SPECIAL EVENTS AGAIN, FROM TENANTS THAT ARE FROM INSIDE.
AND SO THERE'S JUST NO NEED TO HAVE A LOT OF PARKING UP FRONT.
LOOKS LIKE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE OUT FOR PUBLIC ACCESS OR USES.
YEAH. THE PEOPLE USING THE CLUBHOUSE ARE WALKING THERE FROM THEIR APARTMENTS.
THEY'RE NOT DRIVING. SO HOW DO YOU FACTOR IN THE GUEST OF THE TENANTS? IT STILL WORKS WITH THAT NUMBER THAT AT 1.7 TO ME, STILL A LITTLE OVER PARKED.
BUT THE EXPERIENCE TELLS ME THAT 1.7 SPACES FOR EVERY ONE BEDROOM IS MORE THAN ENOUGH.
SO TO BE CLEAR, WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING IS 1.7, 1.75.
THERE IS A TABLE THAT WE INCLUDED AND I.
YOU HAVE THAT. I THINK THAT EXPLAINS THAT.
IT ALSO SHOWS NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES AND THEIR PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND IT KIND OF SHOWS THEM WHERE DECATUR SITS IN COMPARISON TO OTHER COMMUNITIES. AND IT SHOULD BE IN STAFF REPORT WHEN THEY HAVE HAVING A HARD TIME SEEING IT ON THE SCREEN.
[00:20:24]
HERE WE GO. IF I CAN SEE IT.SO THE CITY OF FORT WORTH, THAT'S ONE SPACE PER BEDROOM.
WE GO BACK TO THE ONE AND A HALF SPACES FOR ONE BEDROOM.
WE'RE A LITTLE OVER THAT HERE DECATUR.
ALL RIGHT. ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR [INAUDIBLE] ? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND LET ME ASK YOU THE ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTION.
OUR ROLE IS EITHER TO APPROVE OR DENY, NOT TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE NUMBER.
IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, YOU COULD APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR YOUR MOTION COULD SAY YOU COULD BE MORE SPECIFIC THAN JUST A BLANKET APPROVAL OR DENIAL WITH YOUR MOTIONS.
DOES EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THEN WHERE WE ARE? WILL YOU LIST THE TIME THAT WE'RE COMING OUT OF PUBLIC HEARING? OH, I'M SORRY. AT 3:54.
WE'LL COME OUT OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO WE'LL. LET ME OPEN IT UP FOR US TO DISCUSS THIS OR ASK QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS.
AND THIS IS JUST FOR UNDERSTANDING, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN PROJECTS LIKE THIS HAVE COME UP IN DENTON.
SINGLE BEDROOM MIGHT HAVE THREE CARS.
YOU KNOW, I HAVE A FRIEND ON THE COUCH.
I MEAN, DENTON HAS FOUND LIKE A TOTALLY DIFFERENT PARKING DYNAMIC.
AND FOR DECATUR, THOUGH, IT DOESN'T IT'S NOT A COLLEGE TOWN LIKE DENTON.
AND I THINK SINCE IT'S A GATED COMMUNITY.
WHAT THEY'RE SHOWING HERE DOESN'T SEEM TOO UNREASONABLE, BUT.
I WOULDN'T. THAT WOULD CHANGE IF IT WASN'T GATED.
I'D BE CURIOUS WHAT DENTONS WAS, JUST FOR COMPARISON, BUT IT DOESN'T APPLY TO HERE.
I DON'T THINK IT WAS ON THAT LITTLE ONE.
I DON'T THINK IT WAS ON THAT TABLE.
HE HAD SOME OTHER CITIES, BUT HE DIDN'T ONCE YOU GET INTO SOME DIFFERENT DYNAMICS.
AND SO AS THIS WAS GOING TO COME UP MORE AND MORE, I THINK, INDICATOR.
AND SO PEOPLE WORKING REMOTE AND TAKING TYING UP MORE OF THOSE PARKING SPACES IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE, I THINK, FOR THIS IT DOESN'T SEEM UNREASONABLE.
ALL RIGHT. THEN I THINK MY QUESTION TO BUILD ON THIS WOULD BE WHAT KIND OF PRECEDENT WITH THIS SET? SO SAY THE NEXT PROJECT COMES ALONG AND IS AT 1.6 SPOTS PER UNIT OR BED HOWEVER YOU WANT TO CALCULATE IT.
IF WE APPROVE 1.7, DOES THAT MEAN ARE AT THE LINES NOW 1.7? AND WE HAVE TO START CONSIDERING 1.6 AND 1.5 AND.
WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING, THOUGH, THROUGH YOUR DISCUSSION IS PUTTING, YOU KNOW, IN THE MINUTES ON THE RECORD, YOUR REASONINGS WHY? SO THE MORE YOU'RE ABLE TO GIVE, YOU KNOW, WE APPROVED 1.75 BECAUSE TOPOGRAPHY OR WHATEVER.
[00:25:03]
SO I THINK IT'S GOOD IF WHEN YOU GUYS ARE JUST CLEAR ABOUT YOUR REASONS WHY YOU'RE AGREEING TO THOSE THINGS THAT WAY THERE IN THE MINUTES AND EVERYTHING.SO IT'S A FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES SITUATION EACH TIME.
YEAH, I WOULD CERTAINLY FEEL THAT WAY.
WHATEVER DECISIONS WE MAKE ON THINGS LIKE THIS ARE GOING TO OUR PRIMARY CONCERN IS THIS SPECIFIC APPLICATION AND THE SITUATION REGARDING THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT.
I'M KIND OF I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THE COMMENTS I'VE HEARD SO FAR THAT GIVEN THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A GATED COMMUNITY AND THAT THE IT'S NOT A PUBLIC ACCESS SITUATION, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF, YOU KNOW, IF WE APPROVE THIS AND IT GETS FINISHED AND DOWN THE ROAD, THE TENANTS DECIDE THAT OR COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING SPACES IN THIS PLACE.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO LIVE THERE.
AND THE PRIMARY, IF THERE'S ANY NEGATIVE TO THIS IN THE FUTURE, IT'S GOING TO COME BACK ON THE PROPERTY OWNER MAKING WITH HIS APARTMENTS BEING MORE DIFFICULT TO MARKET IF YOU KNOW, THERE'S A CONCLUSION THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING SPACES OUT THERE.
I LIKE THE I THINK THAT THE STAFF'S FINDINGS ARE WELL DEVELOPED AND TO ME I FIND THEM PRETTY COMPELLING, ESPECIALLY ITEMS ONE AND TWO ON THE ON THEIR FINDINGS.
THIS IS AN UNUSUAL, UNUSUALLY LAID OUT SITUATION.
HE'S GOT TO DEAL WITH A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAIN AND THE TOPOGRAPHY AND ALL.
IT KIND OF LIMITS WHAT HE WHAT HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO THERE.
BUT I THINK HE'S GOT TO HE'S GOT A PROPOSAL THAT LOOKS REASONABLE TO ME AND WELL DESIGNED AND DEVELOPED, GIVEN THE CONSTRAINTS HE'S GOT TO WORK UNDER THERE.
I WOULD ADD THAT THE UNIT MIX IS DIFFERENT THAN OTHER APARTMENT YEARS. YES. YEAH. IT ALSO IS THAT IT'S FRONTING 380.
BUT HERE SOMEONE GOING TO THAT IS GOING TO BE PURPOSELY GOING DOWN THE SERVICE ROAD OF 380.
AND THAT'S ANOTHER DISTINGUISHING OF THIS PROPERTY.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
FROM THE EVIDENCE, TESTIMONY AND PLANS PRESENTED, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD GRANT THE REQUEST ZDA 2022-01 ONE TO ALLOW THIS VARIANCE IN THE CITY'S ORDINANCE REGARDING PARKING TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM CALCULATED PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS FROM 605 SPACES TO 480 PARKING SPACES, AS PRESENTED IN ATTACHMENT THREE OF THE STAFF REPORT.
380, CITY OF DECATUR, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS.
ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE MOTION FROM MR. WOODRUFF. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND FOR [INAUDIBLE].
AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALRIGHT. ITEM THREE IS APPROVED.
THANK YOU. WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM FOUR, FIVE AND SIX.
[Items 4 - 6]
AND WE WILL HEAR THE STAFF REPORT.ONE STAFF REPORT ON ALL THREE.
BUT THEN WE'LL TAKE ACTION SEPARATELY AFTER THAT.
THIS IS MISS STEPHANIE [INAUDIBLE] REQUEST FOR SETBACK ENCROACHMENT, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDES 22 AND [INAUDIBLE] ALONG SOUTH [INAUDIBLE] STREET.
THEN THERE IS A DETACHED GARAGE, TO ENCROACH AND 7/10 ALONG SOUTH PENN STREET.
THE PROPERTY'S IN THE DESCRIPTION IS LOT [INAUDIBLE] BLOCK 37 APPLICATOR EDITION,
[00:30:01]
AND THE ADDRESS IS 905 PENN STREET.THESE ARE THE ENCROACHMENT EXHIBITS THAT ARE ALSO FOUND IN THE STAFF REPORT.
FOR ALL THREE APPLICATIONS, WE HAVE NOTIFIED 19 PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WERE WITHIN 200 FEET.
WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY NOTIFICATION FOR ANY OF THE APPLICATIONS.
NEXT SLIDE. IN TERMS OF MY FINDINGS.
THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE, INCLUDING A DETACHED GARAGE, HAVE BEEN IN EXISTENCE SINCE 1930, AND THIS IS BASED ON THE WISE COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT INFORMATION.
THIS IS A SETBACK FOR THE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND DO NOT APPEAR TO ADVERSELY IMPACT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY, SINCE THIS IS HOW IT'S BEEN FOR THE LAST FEW DECADES.
THEREFORE, THESE SPECIAL EXEMPTIONS OR ARE NECESSARY FOR THERE TO BE A BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED.
THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AND DETACHED GROUNDS, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, HAVE BEEN IN THEIR CURRENT CONFIGURATION AND LOCATION FOR MANY FOR OVER 90 YEARS.
PRIOR TO [INAUDIBLE] PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY IN 2022, THEY WERE NOT AWARE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT OR SETBACK ISSUES.
THEY'RE LOOKING TO SPLIT THE LOT INTO TWO LOTS.
BUT IN ORDER FOR THEM TO DO SO, THEY SET BACK ENCROACHMENTS THAT NEED TO BE RECTIFIED.
AND THE WAY TO RECTIFY THEM IS FOR THE BOARD TO CREATE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
THE HARDSHIP IS NOT A RESULT OF THE APPLICANT'S ACTIONS.
THE UNION PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN 2022, UNAWARE OF THE EXISTING ENCROACHMENTS.
FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS IN THIS ORDINANCE COULD DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT THAT COMPLY WITH THE SAME PROVISIONS.
THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AND DETACHED GARAGE AGAIN HAVE BEEN IN THEIR CURRENT CONFIGURATION FOR 92 YEARS, WITH NO COMPLAINTS BY THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS, AT LEAST NOT TO THE CITY.
THEY ARE ATTEMPTING TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S REGULATIONS.
BUT FOR THESE ENCROACHMENTS BY THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AND GARAGE AGAIN BEFORE THE APPLICANT CAN REPLANT THE PROPERTY, THESE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS WILL NEED TO BEGIN BY THE ZDA.
NEXT SLIDE. AND SETBACKS AREN'T NECESSARILY AN ENGINEERING ISSUE.
BUT [INAUDIBLE] DID HAVE A FEW COMMENTS.
ACCORDING TO [INAUDIBLE], THE HOUSE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT IN 1930, WHICH PREDATES THE CITY'S FIRST SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, WHICH WAS DATED MAY 1977. THE STRUCTURE HAS PEACEFULLY EXISTED SINCE THEN.
ALL UTILITIES ARE EXISTING, AND THE LOCATIONAL STRUCTURES, AS INDICATED ON THE SURVEY, CAUSE NO KNOWN PROBLEMS. AND THE ABOVE COMMENTS ONLY APPLY TO PROPERTY CURRENTLY KNOWN AND SHOWN IN WHY CAD IS NOT FIVE AND PART OF THREE [INAUDIBLE] THE DATA, WHICH I DID INDICATE THAT THEY WERE PROPOSING TO REPLANT THIS PROPERTY.
[00:35:07]
IF THE CURRENT STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY WERE TO BE RENEWED OR DEMOLISHED, NEW STRUCTURES WILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT RULES OR SETBACKS.NEXT SLIDE. LOOKING MORE [INAUDIBLE] AND LOOKING SOUTH ON [INAUDIBLE] STREET SLIDE.
THIS IS LOOKING EAST AMONG THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE AND LOOKING WEST ALONG THE PROPERTY.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:09.
AND [INAUDIBLE] WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON.
THE PROPERTY ALREADY IS DIVIDED INTO TWO.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS CLEAR.
IT'S LIKE A FULL LOT AND A HALF.
WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS TO FLIP IT AND GO NORTH, SOUTH TO CREATE.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, CURRENTLY, THE LOT LINES GO RIGHT UNDERNEATH THE STRUCTURE.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT TO ACTUAL USABLE LOTS.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT OUR OUR POINT WAS AND WE BOUGHT IT INTO IN 2021.
OKAY. THE ONLY THING THAT WAS OFF.
GOTCHA. AND YOU'RE PROBABLY HERE TODAY BECAUSE YOU'RE TRYING TO REPLANT THIS THESE TWO LOTS.
SO IT'S A GOOD SIZE LOT. I THINK THAT'S LIKE 0.3 OF AN ACRE.
THE GENTLEMAN WHO WE'RE WORKING WITH, HIS NAME IS MIKE, AND I CAN'T SAY HIS LAST NAME.
THANK YOU. NOBODY ELSE CAN SAY HIS NAME EITHER.
IT'S A REALLY CUTE AREA. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH IT.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAD ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
HOW MUCH BACKYARD DOES THAT LEAVE YOU WITH BEHIND THE EXISTING HOUSE? I BELIEVE HOW HE HAS IT.
I WISH MY HUSBAND IS ON THE PHONE, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF HE.
DO YOU SEE HIM LAST? 7883791. OKAY.
HE SPOKE WITH HIM AND THEY WENT OVER.
AND I'M HOPING THAT MY HUSBAND COMES IN TO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BECAUSE HE WAS THE LAST PERSON TO TALK TO MR. MIKE. WAS THAT THE LOT WILL BE, I THINK, 7000 SQUARE FEET.
IS THAT THE PROPOSED? OKAY. OH, I SEE.
BUT IT WOULD BE FOR US TO THEN HAVE A GOOD SIZE.
OUR THOUGHT WOULD BE TO HAVE A SIDE YARD VERSUS A BACKYARD.
THAT MAKES SENSE. THAT WAY TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE SETBACK FROM THE BACK.
AND YOU YOU ARE AWARE THAT IF ALL THIS IS GRANTED, THESE VARIANCES FROM THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS WILL ONLY APPLY AS LONG AS THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE IN PLACE.
YES, SIR. BUT IF YES, IF YOU WERE TO IF THOSE STRUCTURES WERE TO BE REMOVED FOR WHATEVER REASON, DEMOLITION, A FIRE, WHATEVER, AND YOU WANT TO REBUILD, THEN ANY REBUILDING WILL HAVE TO MEET THOSE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO PUT THEM RIGHT BACK IN THE LOCATION WHERE THEY CURRENTLY ARE.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF CONCERNING THIS.
[00:40:04]
ADDRESSED AND CURED BESIDES THESE THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO US TODAY TO ALLOW HER TO CONTINUE WITH THE REPLANTING PROCESS? THE LOT TO THE EAST AND I FORGET WHAT THE STREET NAME IS.HER NAME IS [INAUDIBLE] THERE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE A RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION ALONG THAT STREET.
LANE STREET. I SPOKE TO MIKE ABOUT THAT, THE SURVEYOR.
THERE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE LIKE A 15 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION FOR THAT LOT ALONG THE LANE, WHICH WILL IMPACT THE WHAT'S CALLED ON THAT PLAT, A FRONT YARD SETBACK THERE ALONG THAT SIDE.
HOWEVER, HE SPOKE WITH HIS CLIENTS AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT.
SO BUT FOR THE ZBA, THE MY ONLY COMMENTS HAD TO DO WITH THE LOCKS ON THE BUILDINGS ON [INAUDIBLE].
AND SO AND I'LL ADDRESS THE COMMENTS ABOUT RIGHT WAY DEDICATION WHEN THE PLATS CONSIDER.
OUR JOB TODAY IS JUST TO DISCUSS 5R2.
OKAY. AND TO BE CLEAR, WHAT YOU SEE ON THIS IS THE EXISTING STRUCTURES WHICH ARE OBVIOUSLY CLOSER TO SOUTH PERRIN AND CLOSER TO HILL STREET.
AND THEN THE OTHER RECTANGLE IS WHERE THE TYPICAL SETBACKS WOULD BE IF YOU WERE STARTING OVER.
AND BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER, HER HUSBAND HAS HIS HAND RAISED.
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. I THINK MY WIFE PUT IT UP AS FAR AS THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
WE'RE NOT EVEN MESSING WITH AS FAR AS THAT GOES.
SO WE UNDERSTAND THE SETBACKS GOING TO PLAY IF WE START DEMOING OR DOING ANY KIND OF WORK ON THOSE.
I THINK MORE SO THE PROPERTY VARIANCES FOR THE BACK TO PUT THE PROPERTIES UP AND SPEAKING WITH MIKE THE SURVEYOR AND HE DID BRING THAT 15 FOOT UP TO US AND WE WERE OKAY WITH THAT.
AND I KNOW YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT THE BACKYARD.
OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? NO. THAT'S ALL I HAVE, SIR.
[INAUDIBLE], ARE YOU STILL? ON THIS CALL. DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? NOW THAT WE'RE. YES, I AM.
AND NO, I'M GOOD. SORRY ABOUT EARLIER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR [INAUDIBLE]? AND WE WILL GO OUT OF PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:16.
AND I'LL ASK FOR ANY COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? OR A MOTION IF YOU'RE READY.
AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. LET ME GO BACK.
WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO ITEM FOUR.
ITEM FOUR IS THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE FRONT YARD SETBACK ON HALE STREET, WHICH IS GOING TO BE THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A DECISION ON FIRST.
WELL, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS ENCROACHMENT OR THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SETBACK ENCROACHMENT FOR THE EXISTING PROPERTY OR EXISTING STRUCTURE.
SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND FOR [INAUDIBLE].
HAVING AN UNOPPOSED ITEM FOUR PASSES.
ITEM FIVE IS THE SET BACK ENCROACHMENT.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR SOUTH PERRIN STREET FOR THE MAIN STRUCTURE.
[00:45:07]
SO IT'S GOING TO BE THE FRONT YARD SET BACK ON SOUTH PERRIN.YOU SEE IN THIS PICTURE, IT'S OBVIOUSLY WITH THE TREE IN THE FRONT YARD.
AND THAT IS A 22.3 FOOT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
NOW, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THAT.
CAN WE OPEN AND CLOSE ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING JUST SINCE IT'S LISTED FOR EACH ONE? WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM FIVE AT 4:18.
ANY COMMENTS? WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:18.
AND NOW WE CAN DISCUSS OR PROPOSED MOTION ON ITEM FIVE.
[INAUDIBLE] I THINK I DID SUCH A GOOD JOB AND I FORGOT TO TURN THE.
I'M NOT SURE I CAN REPEAT IT, BUT WE'LL GIVE IT A WE'LL WE'LL GIVE IT A SHOT.
YOU GOT TO GET TO WARN ME OF THAT FASTER, YOU GUYS.
OKAY, WELL, I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WAS MY SYSTEM OR IF IT WAS.
OH, THIS ONE WAS DEFINITELY MINE.
OKAY. ONCE AGAIN, MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD MOVE THAT THAT WE APPROVE THE REQUEST THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED HERE ZBA 2022-03 FOR A SETBACK ENCROACHMENT.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO OUR ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING THE PROPERTY AT 905 SOUTH PERRIN STREET AND DECATUR LOT 5R-2 BLOCK 37 OF THE SOUTH DAKOTA EDITION TO APPROVE THE ENCROACHMENT OF THAT STRUCTURE INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT A DISTANCE OF 22.3 FEET ALONG THE FRONTAGE WITH SOUTH PERRIN STREET FOR THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE.
THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE.
WE HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND.
I'LL SECOND. SECOND FROM JULIE.
ALL RIGHT, 2022-3, IS APPROVED.
OH, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:20.
ANY COMMENTS? HEARING NONE. WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:20 AND NOW I WILL ASK FOR COMMENTS OR A MOTION.
AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PICTURES IN FRONT OF US.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION? OKAY. SOMEBODY ELSE WITH THEIR MIC TURNED ON.
IF WE TRUST MARTIN, TO DO THIS ONE MORE TIME.
YEAH. I WOULD MOVE TO ACCEPT ITEM SIX AS WRITTEN ZBA 2022-04 REGARDING THE DETACHED GARAGE FOR THE VARIANCE EXCEPTION ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION FROM WILL.
WE HAVE A SECOND. I'LL SECOND THAT.
SECOND FROM MASON. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. ZBA 2022-02 IS APPROVED.
MOVING ON. THANK YOU, [INAUDIBLE].
ITEM SEVEN IS TO DISCUSS AND APPROVE THE 2022 MEETING SCHEDULE THAT IS ON THE SCREEN BEFORE US.
[ITEM 7: Discuss and approve 2022 Meeting Schedule.]
DOES IT MEAN THAT WE WILL BE MEETING ON ALL THOSE DATES? BUT THOSE ARE THE DATES THAT WE'D LIKE YOU TO RESERVE.IN THE EVENT THAT THERE ARE APPLICANTS.
ALL RIGHT. I DON'T THINK THIS IS A THIS IS JUST FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES.
[00:50:02]
IS THAT TRUE? I DO HAVE TO APPROVE THAT.NORMALLY, MARK, WE HAVE.[INAUDIBLE] WHATEVER DEDRA SAYS ON THIS ONE.
NORMALLY WE DO HAVE YOU GUYS TAKE ACTION ON IT JUST SO THAT IT'S IN THE RECORDS.
YEP. YEP. YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MEETING SCHEDULE.
WE HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVE MOTION FOR MR. WOODRUFF. A SECOND FOR [INAUDIBLE].
AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. THE MEETING SCHEDULE IS APPROVED.
AND THEN MOVING ON TO ITEM EIGHT.
[ITEM 8: New and/or future business items.]
THERE IS NO NEW BUSINESS.THERE IS, AT THIS POINT, ZERO APPLICANTS FOR THE JUNE 20, 2022 MEETING, AND THAT DEADLINE IS 5:00 IN 30 MINUTES FOR 30 OR 40 MINUTES.
SO NOT LIKELY THAT WE'LL HAVE THAT MEETING IN JUNE.
AND AT THIS POINT, AT 4:25, WE STAND ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.