[III.1. WAV-25-0003. Public hearing, discussion, and action regarding a request by Stephanie Jimenez, property owner, pursuant to the City of Decatur Subdivision Ordinance, Section 702, Major Waivers; and Chapter 4: Subdivision Regulations, Section 403, Dimensional Standards, Subsection 403.2, Right-of-Way, to waive the required fifteen foot (15’) right-of-way dedication, in order to replat the property located at 905 S Perrin Street, Decatur, Wise County, Texas. ]

AND WHEN THE COMMISSION GOES INTO A PUBLIC HEARING THE COMMISSIONERS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO ASK QUESTIONS RESPOND TO QUESTIONS OR COMMENT DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS. THE COMMISSIONERS WILL RESERVE ALL QUESTIONS UNTIL AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED AND THE DISCUSSION ITEM IS OPENED.

SO THE PUBLIC HEARING IS GOING TO BE OPENED NOW AT 5:32.

AND I GUESS, WAYNE, TAKE OFF. GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.

WAYNE SMITH ON BEHALF OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, I AM PRESENTING FOR A WAIVER REQUEST AT 905 SOUTH PERRIN STREET.

AND SO THIS IS WAIVER 26-0003 SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SECTION 702 ALLOWS FOR MAJOR WAIVERS.

AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OR DENIALS.

THE PROPERTY OWNER, STEPHANIE JIMENEZ, IS ATTEMPTING TO REPLAT THE PROPERTY AT 905 SOUTH PERRIN.

IN ESSENCE, SHE'S SPLITTING THE LOTS. THE LOT IN TWO SO THAT SHE CAN DEVELOP A NEW HOME ON THE BACKSIDE OF THAT PROPERTY, WHICH IS ALONG LANE STREET. THIS DURING THE PLAT REVIEW, WE DID DISCOVER THAT THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT BY SECTION 403.3 OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO REQUIRE DEDICATION OF ROADWAY FOR FUTURE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND STREET WIDENING WHEN PLATTING A PROPERTY.

AND THAT THIS IS REQUIRED BY THE DESIGN STANDARDS.

LANE STREET IS CONSIDERED A TWO LANE MINOR ARTERIAL, WHICH CALLS FOR A MINIMUM OF A 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY BY THE ADOPTED STANDARDS.

THE CURRENT RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH FOR LANE STREET IS 20FT, REQUIRING 15 FOOT OF ROADWAY DEDICATION TO GET TO THAT MINIMUM OF 50 FOOT OF RIGHT OF WAY. LANE STREET IS AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S PRIMARILY BUILT OUT.

ANY WIDENING OF THIS STREET WOULD REQUIRE MORE RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND THAT ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO LANE STREET ARE NOT INCLUDED IN ANY CURRENT THOROUGHFARE PLAN OR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN THAT WE HAVE. AND DEDICATING THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR THE FRONT YARD SETBACK WOULD BE MOVED ON THIS LOT.

SO IT WOULD ADD AN ADDITIONAL 15 FOOT TO THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY DEDICATING 15 FOOT OF RIGHT OF WAY AND MOVING THAT 25 FOOT SETBACK FURTHER INTO THE PROPERTY.

AND SO MS. JIMENEZ IS REQUESTING A WAIVER FROM THAT RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION.

SECTION 702 TWO OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE DOES ALLOW FOR A MAJOR WAIVER TO BE REQUESTED ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER AND PNC TO MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.

SOME OF THE FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED IN APPROVING OR DENYING THE WAIVER OR THE PURPOSE AND THE INTENT OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, WHICH DOES. SO THE PURPOSE DOES ALLOW FOR THE APPLICANT TO DIFFER FROM A PARTICULAR STANDARD OR REQUIREMENT OF THE ORDINANCE AND REQUEST THIS WAIVER IN ORDER TO DO THAT.

AS LONG AS IT STILL MEETS THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE.

THE PROPOSED LAND USE IN THIS AREA IS SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, AND ALL THE PROPERTIES ADJOINING THIS PROPERTY ARE ALSO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. CONSIDERATION OF THE IMPACT ON ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.

[00:05:04]

THE PROPOSED REQUEST WILL STILL ALLOW FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY AND TO ALLOW FOR THE EXISTENCE, SETBACKS AND PROPERTY LINES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

CONSIDERATION OF THE EFFECT ON PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, TRAFFIC, HEALTH AND SAFETY, CONVENIENCE, WELFARE IN THE VICINITY. THE PROPERTY THAT'S THERE.

WE LOOK BACK AS FAR AS WE COULD. IT APPEARS IT'S BEEN THAT WAY FOR OVER 50 YEARS, AND NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT HAS BEEN OBSERVED DURING THAT TIME THAT THE PROPERTY IS IN THE CONFIGURATION. SO BY NOT. BY GRANTING THE WAIVER.

IT SHOULD NOT IMPACT THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE IN THE VICINITY.

THERE WE GO. ADDITIONAL CRITERIA. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE LAND.

SO THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS PRIMARILY BUILT OUT.

THERE IS THIS ONE LOT THAT'S UNDEVELOPED ON THERE.

IT'S PART OF A LARGER LOT RIGHT NOW THAT THEY ARE WANTING TO SPLIT INTO TWO AND DEVELOP.

THE DEDICATION OF THIS SINGLE PORTION OF RIGHT OF WAY WOULD NOT BE SUFFICIENT FOR WIDENING LANE STREET AND WOULD REQUIRE OTHER ACQUISITION OF RIGHT OF WAY ALONG LANE STREET. GRANTING THE WAIVER IS NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND ENJOYMENT OF THE PROPERTY.

OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, GRANTING THE WAIVER WILL ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.

BUT IF WE REDUCE THIS PROPERTY BY THIS 15 FOOT SETBACK, IT'S GOING TO DEDICATE ABOUT 1500FT² OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR ROADWAY. AND THAT WOULD REDUCE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE LOT TO 6,502, WHICH WOULD BRING IT DOWN BELOW THE MINIMUM OF 8,000FT². SO THEY'D HAVE TO HAVE A VARIANCE IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THE LOT.

ALSO, GRANTING THE WAIVER WILL NOT, IN EFFECT, WOULD NOT AFFECT THE ORDERLY DIVISION OF OTHER LAND IN THE AREA.

AGAIN, THE SUBDIVISION IS SUBSTANTIALLY BUILT OUT AND THIS LOT WOULD NOT DIFFER FROM ANY OTHER LOT THAT'S IN THAT AREA.

THIS HARDSHIP IS NOT A MERE INCONVENIENCE. FINANCIAL HARDSHIP DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A HARDSHIP IN ITSELF.

SO AGAIN, THE DECREASE OF THE LOT SIZE BY OVER 1,500 SF WOULD CREATE A NONCONFORMING LOT AND REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL VARIANCE IN PLACE ON THAT. WE DID NOTIFY 17 PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT.

NO RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF WAV-26-0003.

THAT'S IT? THAT'S IT. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? DO WE HAVE ANYONE ONLINE? OKAY. HEARING NONE, THEN I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING MEETING AND IS NOW 5:39.

COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? YES. I'M NOT SAYING THAT I'M GOING TO BE OPPOSED TO THIS, BUT I'M JUST CURIOUS. I MEAN, THE WHOLE THE WHOLE REASON FOR THAT REQUIREMENT IN THE SUBDIVISION STANDARDS WAS BECAUSE THESE SMALLER STREETS PROBABLY WILL NEED TO BE WIDER THAN THEY ARE SOMEDAY.

SO YOU'RE. RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS WAIVER ON THE GROUND THAT IT REALLY DOESN'T NEED IT RIGHT NOW.

WELL, NONE OF THEM NEED IT RIGHT NOW. THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT WHY THE STANDARD WAS PUT INTO THE INTO THE REQUIREMENTS, BUT THE STANDARDS. I UNDERSTAND IT'S A SMALL LOT AND I UNDERSTAND THAT I THINK 50FT IS PROBABLY EXCESSIVE FOR A LITTLE STREET LIKE LANE STREET ANYWAY. BUT I'M JUST CURIOUS WAS, WAS ANY THOUGHT GIVEN TO SOME SORT OF A COMPROMISE? I REALIZED THE 25 FOOT SETBACK WOULD REALLY BE A PROBLEM THEN.

BUT THE OTHER CHOICE IS TO GRANT A WAIVER TO REDUCE.

I GUESS IT'S GOT TO GO BEFORE THE ZBA THEN, BUT TO REDUCE THE SETBACK.

RIGHT. LIKE, LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND GRANT US 5FT OF EXTRA RIGHT OF AWAY AND REDUCE THE SETBACK FROM 25 TO 20.

AND IT GETS THEM TO THE SAME PLACE. AND IT STILL GETS US FIVE MORE FEET RIGHT AWAY FROM THE STREET, WHICH I CAN SEE IT NEEDING TO BE A 30 FOOT STREET RATHER THAN A 20 FOOT STREET.

I'M JUST CURIOUS, DID ANYBODY TALK ABOUT THAT? THINK OF THAT OR? WHENEVER THIS WHEN THIS WAS REVIEWED THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS, WE TALKED WITH OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

[00:10:09]

ABOUT WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE ON THIS. AND THEY SAID, WE HAVE NO PLANS ON WIDENING THAT STREET.

AND IF WE GO IN TO WIDEN THAT STREET, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GAIN ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY FROM ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS DOWN THROUGH THERE.

YEAH. BUT THEN YOU'VE GOT TO BUY IT FROM ALL THOSE OTHER PEOPLE.

AND IF IT'S DEDICATED HERE, THIS PIECE IS TAKEN CARE OF.

THAT'S I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE SAYING, BUT IT'S.

THAT ALWAYS APPLIES TO WHEN WE'RE DOING THINGS NOW WHILE WE'RE STILL FAIRLY LITTLE THAT COULD BE PROBLEMATIC WHEN WE GET BIGGER.

BECAUSE NOW IF WE DECIDE 20 YEARS FROM NOW THAT WE NEED TO WIDEN THAT STREET, IT'S GOING TO BE MORE PROBLEMATIC FOR THE CITY TO DO IT.

SURE. I UNDERSTAND THEY DON'T HAVE PLANS TO WIDEN THE STREET RIGHT NOW, BUT AGAIN, THAT THAT'S NOT WHERE THOSE DESIGN STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS CAME FROM.

IT CAME FROM A THINKING AHEAD PLANNING THAT SOMEDAY WE CONTEMPLATE THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO DO THAT, NOT NEXT WEEK OR NEXT YEAR, BUT SOMEDAY. SO THAT'S WHY WE TRIED TO ACQUIRE THAT RIGHT AWAY, PIECEMEAL AS WE CAN, SO THAT WHEN THE TIME COMES, WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE RIGHT OF WAY AND WE CAN DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO.

AND I JUST THINK THAT WOULD BE A BETTER WAY TO LOOK AT IT.

I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS PERSON'S LIFE DIFFICULT.

I'M GLAD TO SEE THE DEVELOPMENT. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING.

WE NEED TO SEE THE LOT DEVELOPED IN THE [INAUDIBLE] ON IT.

BUT AGAIN, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, IT WOULD HAVE MADE MORE SENSE TO APPROACH IT AND SAY, WHY DON'T WE? WHY DON'T YOU GIVE US 5FT AND WE'LL GO TO ZBA AND RECOMMEND THAT THEY REDUCE THE SETBACK BY 5FT.

AND YOUR HOUSE CAN STILL BE IN THE EXACT SAME PLACE.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD MAKE IT A NONCONFORMING LOT IN THAT CASE, BUT THAT'S THERE'S LOTS OF THOSE IN THAT PART OF TOWN TOO.

SO THAT CAN ALL BE DEALT WITH AND STILL GET US A LITTLE BIT EXTRA RIGHT OF WAY FOR SOME FUTURE.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CAN APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS.

COULD CHANGE WHAT WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING HERE.

AND WE CAN. OF COURSE, THAT MEANS SHE'S GOT TO GO BACK AND BEAR SOME ADDITIONAL SURVEYING EXPENSE TO GET THIS PROPERTY RESURVEYED.

AND I HATE TO IMPOSE THAT BURDEN ON HER AT THIS TIME THAT WE HAVE NOT GONE THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS WE'RE WORKING ON, ON GETTING THIS TO A GOOD SPOT. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A SURVEY.

WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS. SO AT THIS POINT, WE CAN STILL HAVE THAT ON THE PLAT.

IS. THEY'RE GOING TO DELAY ANYTHING? LET'S GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND GET THIS RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH BUILDING ON THAT LOT.

OKAY. SO I DO HAVE A KIND OF A SIDE NOTE OF THAT.

IF THE WAIVER IS APPROVED, CAN WE COME BACK AND GET THE RIGHT OF WAY LATER? AND HOW DIFFICULT WOULD THAT BE? SURE. SO GOING BACK WITH WHAT MASON WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT THERE.

SO AT A LATER DATE, WE WOULD HAVE TO PURCHASE THE RIGHT OF WAY FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER.

SO YOU COULD GET THAT AT A LATER DATE. IF THERE WAS A PROJECT THAT WENT ON THAT THE CITY COULD GO IN AND PURCHASE RIGHT AWAY ON THAT.

SO THAT'S WHAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN WITH THE OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE ON THAT, IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT BORDER, THAT STREET, FOR EXAMPLE. THERE ARE SOME STREETS IN THE CITY THAT HAVE A PLANTED RIGHT OF WAY OF MAYBE 50FT, SOME OF THE MAJOR STREETS, BUT MAYBE ONLY HAVE 25 OR MAYBE 30 AT MOST PAVED.

AND SO IT'S REALLY EASY TO LOOK AT THAT AND THINK THAT STREET'S NOT. BUT BUT WE ALREADY HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY BECAUSE IT WAS DEDICATED WHEN THE PLAT WAS APPROVED.

SO IF WE CAME IN AND WANTED TO WIDEN THAT STREET, WE AT LEAST DON'T HAVE TO BEAR THE EXPENSE OF ACQUIRING THE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY BECAUSE IT BELONGS TO US. AND THAT'S THAT'S MY POINT.

IF WE AT LEAST GOT HER TO DEDICATE 5FT NOW, THEN WE OWN 5FT EXTRA RIGHT OF WAY ALONG THAT SIDE OF THE STREET, EVEN IF THE OTHER EVEN IF THE PERSON ON THE OTHER SIDE NEVER HAS TO REPLANT, AT LEAST WE COULD HAVE A 25 FOOT STREET INSTEAD OF A 20 FOOT STREET.

AND I CAN FORESEE, I CAN FORESEE POTENTIALLY A NEED FOR A STREET LIKE THAT TO BE WIDENED, SOME TO PROVIDE, FOR EXAMPLE, MORE PARKING ON THE SIDE OF THE STREET WITHOUT INTERFERING WITH TRAFFIC FLOW.

SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES, IF WE WERE TO WIDEN TO THE 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY THAT ARE IN THERE.

THAT PUT THE STREET RIGHT UP AT THE PERSON'S FRONT DOOR.

SECOND FOLLOW UP QUESTION. IS THERE A RECENT PRECEDENT? HAVE WE SET THESE WAIVERS RECENTLY? WE HAVE NOT.

AND SO THIS IS A PROCESS THAT WAS ESTABLISHED WITH THE NEW SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE THAT WAS ADOPTED IN 2022,

[00:15:05]

SO IT'S A FAIRLY NEW SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND THESE WAIVER PROCESSES WERE PUT IN PLACE HERE.

AND SO THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAS SEEN ON A REGULAR BASIS WITH THIS.

THIS IS ALSO PART OF THE INFILL POLICY THAT WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR RESIDENTIAL INFILL SO THAT WE CAN TAKE SOME OF THESE PROCESSES.

THERE ARE THESE PROPERTIES THAT ARE UNDERDEVELOPED AND GET THEM BACK ON THE TAX ROLL.

GET THEM DEVELOPED AND THROUGH THERE. MS. JIMENEZ WILL BE SUBMITTING FOR AN INFILL APPLICATION.

ON THAT. I'VE GOT SOME MORE INFORMATION ON THE INFILL PROCESS FOR YOU GUYS LATER ON IN THIS MEETING.

LISA. YES, SIR. THE CITY ATTORNEY ASKED ME TO SAY A COUPLE OF THINGS.

SHE SAID HER CONNECTION'S UNSTABLE. SHE LIKES COMMISSIONER WOODRUFF'S APPROACH TO HOW HE IS SUGGESTING IT MOVE FORWARD.

THAT'S US LAWYERS STICKING TOGETHER. [LAUGHTER]. YEAH.

I'M NOT. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO GRANTING THE WAIVER, BUT I PERSONALLY THINK IT WOULD BE PREFERABLE TO DO WHAT I SUGGESTED, WHICH IS GET HER TO DEDICATE 5FT AND THEN ASSIST HER IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE TO GET THE SETBACK REDUCED FROM 25 TO 20 SO THAT IT DOESN'T AFFECT HER IN ANY OTHER WAY.

BUT I AM. I'M OPEN TO ANY COMMENTS OR DIFFERENT OPINIONS THAT ANY OF THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS MAY HAVE.

THIS. THIS IS SAMER.

IF WE DEDICATE 5FT AND MAYBE THIS IS A QUESTION TO MR. SMITH. DO YOU KNOW IF THIS PUTS A BURDEN ON THE OVERALL DESIGN AND BUILD OUT OF THE SECOND HOME? SO IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE SOME ADDITIONAL THOUGHT ON HOW THIS LOT IS DEVELOPED.

COMMISSIONER WOODRUFF JUST HAD A REALLY GOOD IDEA ABOUT REDUCING THE FRONT YARD SETBACK SO THAT THE HOUSE IS STILL ABLE TO MEET THE CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD LAYOUT. SO WE'D NEED TO LOOK AT THAT VERY CLOSELY IN THERE WHENEVER WE DO THAT, IT'S GOING TO PUSH THROUGH SOME, SOME ADDITIONAL VARIANCES THAT WOULD NEED TO BE IN PLACE FOR THIS PROPERTY TO DEVELOP.

THANK YOU. AND I WOULD SAY THAT THE CITY CAN WAIVE SOME OF THE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE VARIANCE APPLICATIONS AS A WAY OF ENCOURAGING HER TO GO THAT ROUTE RATHER THAN THIS ROUTE.

AGAIN, THE INFILL PROCESS, AND WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT LATER IN THIS MEETING DOES ALLOW FOR SOME OF THOSE THINGS TO HAPPEN WITH.

IT AS EASY FOR HER TO DO THIS WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL HEADACHES.

COMMISSIONERS ANY OTHER COMMENTS, CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS? I COULDN'T TELL YOU RIGHT OFFHAND. DOWNHILL? BUT I WOULD THERE STILL WOULD BE A UTILITY EASEMENT FOR THAT.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE UP ON THAT PROPERTY, BUT THERE WOULD BE A UTILITY EASEMENT WHEREVER THAT WATER LINE IS AT.

GENERALLY, IT IS IN THE ROADWAY. JOHN. I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM IT WOULD BE ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE? IS THAT RIGHT? IT IS CREATING A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME ON THAT LOT.

YES. OKAY. SHE'S WANTING TO SPLIT THAT LOT. THAT LOT CURRENTLY RUNS FROM PERRIN STREET OVER TO LANE STREET AS A SINGLE LOT.

SHE'S WANTING TO SPLIT IT INTO TWO LOTS AND THEN DEVELOP WITH A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME ON LANE STREET.

OKAY. IT JUST SAYS IN HERE. THE DEVELOPMENT IS EXPECTED TO HOUSE APPROXIMATELY 4 TO 8 RESIDENTS, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WASN'T A DUPLEX OR FOURPLEX.

NO. SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

SHE HAD CONSIDERED A DUPLEX TO DO A ZONING CHANGE TO A 2F, BUT THEY'RE WORKING THROUGH THIS.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE WITH THE WAIVER FIRST. OKAY.

BEFORE WE GO THROUGH ANY PLATTING OR POTENTIAL REZONING OF THAT, THE REZONING TO A 2F WOULD BE CONSISTENT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ANYWAY.

WE STILL HAVE LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS AND EVERYTHING FOR ALL THAT.

SO WE'RE NOT REAL SURE WHAT, WHICH WAY SHE IS GOING TO GO, WHETHER IT'S SINGLE FAMILY OR DUPLEX.

THEY'RE WEIGHING THEIR OPTIONS. AND OF COURSE, PART OF THIS IS HOW THE HOUSE CAN BE LAID OUT,

[00:20:04]

WHETHER SHE HAS TO DEDICATE ALL THIS RIGHT AWAY OR NOT.

OKAY. AND IT WOULD NOT BE ANY MORE THAN A DUPLEX.

IT WOULD BE A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME OR A DUPLEX.

OKAY. AND I'M SORRY. FOLLOW UP. IS THERE ANY TALK ABOUT HILL STREET GOING COMMERCIAL WITH BUSINESS 287 ON ONE END.

OTHER BUSINESSES SCATTERED QT, THE BANK.

DEVELOP INTO THAT AS IT MOVES THROUGH THAT. THIS IS STILL MOVING THIS.

IT'S STILL ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AT THAT SPOT.

THERE ARE SOME HOUSES UP THERE THAT ARE SAYING THAT THEY'RE IN A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.

THEY WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE THEIR ZONING ON THAT IN ORDER TO DEVELOP AS A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.

OKAY. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, BOTH PROPER TO BE BOTH PROPERTIES WILL BE UNDER THE MINIMUM, CORRECT? THEY WILL. YES. IF WE IF WE DEDICATE RIGHT OF WAY OFF OF THIS, IT WOULD DROP THEM BELOW THE 8,000 SQUARE FEET. IS SHE. SHE'S OVER THE 8,000 IF WE DO NOTHING? IF WE DO. IF WE, NO. IF WE GRANT THE WAIVER SHE COULD MEET 8000FT².

IF WE IF WE DEDICATE ANY RIGHT OF WAY, IT'S GOING TO DROP IT BELOW THE 8,000FT², RIGHT ON THE LINE.

YES SIR.

YES. OKAY. YES. MOST OF THE LOTS WOULD BE CONSIDERED NONCONFORMING TODAY.

NOW I SEE WHY YOU LOST THE BET. YES. [LAUGHTER].

COMMISSIONERS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ONE QUICK SIR. GO AHEAD JOHN YOU'RE FINE. HOW? HOW LARGE IS THE REMAINING LOT WHERE THE HOUSE EXISTS NOW? IF SHE BREAKS OFF THIS BACK HALF, IS THAT UNDER 8000FT²? IF SHE BREAKS THAT IN HALF, YES, IT'S STILL GOING TO BE.

IT'S GOING TO BE 7001 SQUARE.

YEAH. SO WE'RE CREATING TWO LOTS THAT ARE BELOW THEIR STANDARD? WE WOULD RUN THOSE CONCURRENTLY IF WE DID THOSE ANYWAY.

BUT IN THE INFILL PROCESS, WE HAVE A, WE HAVE APPROVED LOTS LIKE THIS A NUMBER OF TIMES IN THE PAST? YES. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. HEARING NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL FOR CITY. WELL, ACTUALLY, I GUESS I HAVE A QUESTION FOR PAM.

WHAT'S IF I WANT TO SEEK. DOING WHAT I SAID THAT COMPROMISE.

HOW DO WE GO ABOUT THAT? DO WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU ALL GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND COME BACK TO US? OR DO WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE MODIFICATIONS THAT I'VE SUGGESTED? IN MY. UNLESS PAM CAN JUMP ON, I DON'T KNOW HOW HER CONNECTION IS, BUT HAVING DONE SUCH IN THE PAST, I WOULD MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION. MAKE A MOTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH THE MODIFICATIONS THAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING.

RECOMMEND, YOU KNOW, APPROVAL WITH ONLY DEDICATING FIVE FOOT OF RIGHT.

OR RIGHT OF WAY. WELL, WE'RE APPROVING IT AND IF THEY GO BACK AND COMPLY WITH THAT, THEN IT'S APPROVED. OKAY.

5FT OF RIGHT OF WAY INSTEAD OF 15FT OF RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS REQUIRED BY THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.

OKAY. I WILL OFFER THAT YES. I'M AT A CLASS IN CONROE AND THIS INTERNET CONNECTION IS UNSTABLE.

AND I HATE THAT. I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO SEE HOW THESE PIECES FIT TOGETHER FOR SURE. IF SHE GOES AND GETS THE VARIANCES, DOES SHE HAVE TO DEDICATE ANY.

SO SHE. SO OUR REQUIREMENT IS 50. SHE WANTS 15.

NO.

15. OH OKAY. YEAH.

WE HAVE A CURRENT RIGHT OF WAY OF 20FT. AND SO THAT WOULD BE DEDICATION OF 15 FOOT ON EACH SIDE OF THE STREET.

HER PORTION OF THAT RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION WOULD BE 15FT.

OKAY. WE NEED TO, TO MASON'S POINT WE NEED TO NOT GO BACKWARDS AND CREATE A SITUATION WHERE THINGS CAN'T DEVELOP AS THEY

[00:25:07]

POTENTIALLY COULD IN THE FUTURE, GIVEN THE GOALS OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.

BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A LOT OF YOU KNOW, DIFFICULT REALITIES ALL OVER THE CITY.

AND, YOU KNOW, CURB AND GUTTER IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT.

AND EVEN THOUGH IT MAY NOT FIT IN A CERTAIN YOU KNOW, STREET THE WAY IT IS CURRENTLY, WE'RE.

OR SIDEWALKS, I SHOULD SAY, AND CURB AND GUTTER.

WE'RE WORKING TOWARD HAVING THE CITY BE SET UP FOR THE FUTURE, NOT JUST REFLECTING AND STAYING WITHIN WHAT IT IS RIGHT NOW.

SO GIVEN THOSE COMMENTS WHAT, WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO PROCEED TO, TO MAINTAIN THE POTENTIAL FOR WHAT WE MAY NEED IN THE FUTURE? I'M SORRY, PAM, IS THAT A QUESTION? YES. OKAY.

I THINK THE BEST WAY TO PROCEED IS WHAT I SAID.

BECAUSE BY HER DEDICATING 5FT, THAT GIVES US SPACE TO, FOR EXAMPLE, CURB AND GUTTER SOMEWHERE DOWN THE LINE AND ALLOW SOME PARKING ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET WITHOUT DISRUPTING THE TRAFFIC FLOW ON THE STREET, WHICH IS THE KIND OF THING THAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE PLANNING FOR.

OKAY. AND I LIKE THAT VERY MUCH. SO YOU COULD MAKE THAT MOTION, YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH YOU'RE APPROVING THE WAIVER TO THAT EXTENT. AND THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE OTHER THE SETBACK PROCESSES WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.

OKAY. LET ME SEE WHAT I CAN COME UP WITH. I WILL OFFER A MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND TO THE COUNCIL THAT WE APPROVE THE WAIVER AS TO 10FT OF THE REQUIRED 15FT, AND REQUIRE HER TO DEDICATE 5FT OF ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY WITH THE STRONG RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZBA. AND THAT THEY ALSO GRANT A.

VARIANCE. VARIANCE. THANK YOU LOCATION THAT IT IS CONTEMPLATED WITH HER CURRENT PLANS.

OKAY. I'VE GOT A MOTION WITH CONDITIONS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

I NEED A SECOND. OKAY, I'VE GOT A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HICKS.

ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. AYE. OKAY. WE'RE GOING BACK INTO A PUBLIC HEARING.

[III.2. SUP-25-0003. Public hearing, discussion, and action regarding an ordinance for a Specific Use Permit (SUP), in accordance with Appendix B, “Zoning”, Section 7.6 “Accessory Structure Regulations,” Subsection 7.6.5, (A) “Residential Uses,” (8) to allow a second carport at the property addressed as 600 N Trinity Street, which is in an SF-2, Single-Family Zoning District, Decatur, Texas. ]

IT IS NOW 5:58. LISA. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, LISA HANNON, PLANNING DIRECTOR.

WE'LL ENTER OUR STAFF REPORT INTO THE RECORD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE.

SO THIS IS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR 600 NORTH TRINITY STREET FOR A SECOND CARPORT.

SO THE CODE ALLOWS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL OR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. SO THE PROPERTY IS SINGLE-FAMILY CARPORTS ARE PERMITTED.

THEY HAVE TO MEET ALL THE SETBACKS. THIS ONE IS SET BACK BEHIND THE HOUSE.

SO IT'S MORE THAN 30FT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.

SO IT'S THE SECOND CARPORT ON THE PROPERTY. YOU CAN SEE IT'S NUMBER 2.

NOTE IT IS ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE. BEEN THERE MANY, MANY YEARS.

THE OTHER CARPORT IS THE NUMBER 1 CARPORT. AND IT REQUIRES A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO HAVE MORE THAN ONE CARPORT ON THE PROPERTY.

PER GOOGLE EARTH IMAGERY IT'S BEEN THERE SINCE AT LEAST 1995.

THAT'S AS FAR BACK AS I COULD GO. THIS ONE WAS DESTROYED BY THE WINTER STORM FERN, THE ICE STORM WE HAD.

AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS JUST WANT TO REPLACE IT IN THE SAME PLACE AND THE SAME SIZE.