[00:00:02]
IT'S THREE THIRTY ON FEBRUARY THE 2ND GROUNDHOG DAY.[1. Call Meeting to Order]
AND WE'LL CALL THIS MEETING OF PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER.[2. Attendance]
LET'S TAKE ROLL PLEASE.DIRECTOR TIM TIETJENS, MYSELF CATHERINE GORMAN, THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER.
PLANNING MANAGER ADRIEL MONTALVAN WILL BE JOINING US LATER FOR THE DISCUSSION ITEM, SPECIAL PROJECT COORDINATOR PETE MILBURN AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY DONNA FAIRWEATHER.
I'D LIKE TO FIRST SAY WELCOME BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI.
HE'S STUCK WITH US AGAIN THIS TERM.
AND WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING WITH US AND BRINGING YOUR PERSPECTIVE TO OUR MEETINGS.
CATHERINE, IF YOU'LL JUST MAKE A NOTE OF THE TIME WHEN COMMISSIONER ANTONELLI AND COMMISSIONER COOK ARRIVED, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
COMMISSIONER ANTONELLI IS SIGNING IN RIGHT NOW.
OK, THERE'S COMMISSIONER ANTONELLI AT 3:32 AND NOW I'LL ASK IF ANYONE HAS ANY
[3. Conflict of Interest]
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AT THIS MEETING? SEEING NONE WE'LL MOVE ON.DID ANYONE HAVE ANY CORRECTION, CHANGES, ADDITIONS TO THE JANUARY 5TH
[4. Approval of the January 5, 2021 Minutes]
2021 MINUTES? SEEING NONE, THOSE WILL GO INTO THE RECORD, CATHERINE.[5. Meeting Format (Staff)]
WILL YOU PLEASE ADDRESS MEETING FORMAT, PLEASE? I SURE WILL.GALLERY VIEW IS THE BEST WAY TO VIEW THE MEETING, AND IT'S HOW THE MEETING IS SHOWN TO THE PUBLIC.
THAT ENABLES YOU TO SEE ALL THE COMMISSIONERS AT THE SAME TIME.
IT'S BEST TO KEEP YOUR MICROPHONE MUTED UNLESS [INAUDIBLE] TO CUT DOWN ON BACKGROUND NOISE.
WE ASK THAT YOU PHYSICALLY RAISE YOUR HANDS TO GET THE CHAIR'S ATTENTION BEFORE SPEAKING OR MAKING A MOTION.
COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE HERE BY PHONE TO PRESENT THEIR STAFF REPORTS AND THE APPLICANTS ARE ALSO HERE BY PHONE.
AND WE'LL BE TAKING THE VOTES BY ROLL CALL.
AND CATHERINE, WE HAD A GLITCH WITH ONE OF OUR CASES, 21 P DASH, ZERO ZERO THREE.
AND THE STAFF REPORT WAS NOT SHOWING UP ONLINE.
AND I CHECKED RIGHT BEFORE THE MEETING AND IT'S STILL NOT SHOWING UP.
WILL THAT BE CORRECTED FOR THE RECORD JUST GOING FORWARD? YES.
YES, I'LL BE SURE TO GET WITH THE CITY SECRETARY AND CORRECT IT.
I'VE BEEN UNABLE TO CORRECT IT ON MY OWN.
AND JUST A REMINDER, IF YOU'RE FOLLOWING ALONG USING THAT LINK, YOU'LL HAVE TO GO TO YOUR EMAIL TO GET THE STAFF REPORT THAT WAS SENT INDIVIDUALLY.
I KNOW YOU HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO DO BUT MAKE SURE THAT THAT GETS POSTED ONLINE, BUT I APPRECIATE YOU DOING IT.
AND WE DIDN'T SEE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS EMAILED TO US TODAY PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
DOES THAT MEAN WE RECEIVED NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON ANY OF OUR CASES OR ANY NON AGENDA ITEMS? WE DIDN'T GET ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON AGENDA ITEMS. WE GOT SOME STANDARD PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATIONS THAT THE CASE MANAGER WILL REPORT ON.
MOVING FORWARD, WE'LL START WITH TWENTY P DASH ZERO FOUR TWO.
[7.A. 20P-042 (Adjacent To 2427 Market/Avenue D)]
WE HAVE A STAFF REPORT, PLEASE.OK, I'LL TRY TO SPEAK AS LOUD AS I CAN.
OK, SO CASE TWENTY P ZERO FOUR TWO.
THIS IS OLD BUSINESS THAT WE'RE REVISITING AND THIS IS ADJACENT TO THE ADDRESS TWENTY FOUR TWENTY SEVEN MARKET STREET.
THIS IS THE REQUEST FOR A LICENSE TO USE THE RIGHT OF WAY IN ORDER TO INSTALL PUBLIC ART IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON SIDEWALK RIGHT AWAY.
AND I'M GOING TO READ FROM THE MEMO HERE AT THE DECEMBER EIGHT TWENTY TWENTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
THE ABOVE REFERENCED REQUEST WAS DEFERRED UNTIL TODAY'S MEETING IN ORDER FOR THE APPLICANT TO DETERMINE THE FINAL LOCATION OF THE TURTLE SCULPTURE.
[00:05:05]
THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE A REVISED SITE PLAN.AND WE HAVE THAT IN OUR PHOTOS AND INCLUDED IN THE MEMO.
THERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC CONDITIONS TO THIS REQUEST, AS WELL AS SOME STANDARD CONDITIONS TO GO ALONG WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
PETE, DO WE HAVE ANY OF THE PHOTOS, UPDATED PHOTOS TO SHOW? WE DO.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE SHOWN HERE WHEN WE HAVE THE PHOTOS SHOWN HERE.
OK, THIS IS JUST THE MEMO I INCLUDED IN THE PHOTOS.
NOTE THAT THE PALM TREES HAVE BEEN REMOVED, IF YOU RECALL, FROM THE ORIGINAL PRESENTATION OF THE STAFF REPORT.
HERE'S A PHOTO OF TYPICALLY WHAT THE TURTLE STATUES LOOK LIKE.
AND HERE'S THE CURRENT CONDITION, I WOULD SAY AS OF YESTERDAY AFTERNOON, AND I DON'T I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S CHANGED MUCH TO OUR CURRENT TIME, BUT THE PALM TREES HAVE BEEN REMOVED.
AND I'VE BEEN INFORMED THAT THE PLAN IS TO REPLACE THAT AREA WHERE THE PALM TREES WERE WITH CONCRETE AND THE TURTLE WILL THEN BE PLACED ON CONCRETE BASE.
AS SHOWN IN THE SITE PLAN, IF WE CAN GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE, PLEASE.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
AND AGAIN, NICE TO HAVE YOU WITH US.
AND WE APPRECIATE YOU PINCH HITTING THERE WITH PLANNING TO GET US TO THIS POINT.
MY QUESTION AND THEN WE'LL GO TO QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION IS NOW IT SEEMS LIKE THE ORIGINAL EXHIBIT A THAT CAME WITH THIS STAFF REPORT THAT'S GOING TO BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE PERMANENT DOCUMENTATION IS OFF BECAUSE IT HAS PALMS IN THOSE TWO PLACES BY THE HANDICAP RAMP.
SO I HAVE A QUESTION, I GUESS THAT'S FOR DONNA TO ANSWER AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO ASK THEM TO SUBMIT A DIFFERENT A DIFFERENT EXHIBIT.
I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE UP TO PLANNING.
I'M NOT QUITE SURE IF THEY WOULD NEED TO SUBMIT AN ENTIRELY NEW EXHIBIT JUST BECAUSE A PAIR OF TREES HAVE BEEN REMOVED.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, I CAN HEAR YOU, DONNA.
I MEAN, PETE? WOULD THEY NEED TO SUBMIT A WHOLE NEW EXHIBIT? WELL, WE HAVE THE ONE THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED AND IT DOES NOT SHOW PALM TREES IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD SUFFICE.
I HAVE THE I HAVE THE ONE THAT'S IN THE THAT SHOWS THE PALMS. BUT ANYWAY, WHATEVER.
THE OTHER MY OTHER QUESTION IS, SOME MENTION WAS MADE OF AN AWNING BEING EXTENDED THERE YESTERDAY IN MY CONVERSATION WITH CATHERINE.
IS THE RESTAURANT GOING TO EXTEND THEIR AWNING? WELL.
CATHERINE WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE THAT? [INAUDIBLE] THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS GOTTEN AN APPROVAL TO DO A POLL SUPPORTED CANOPY.
IT WOULD COME OUT AT THIS LEVEL AND RUN THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING.
AND SO THEY HAVE AN LTU, AN ADMINISTRATIVE LTU AND A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THAT WORK.
AND THAT'S MAYBE WHY THEY HAVE TAKEN OUT THE PALM TREES AND ARE GOING TO BE PUTTING THE CONCRETE IN.
IT WOULD BE A WHOLE NEW BUILDING WIDE CANOPY.
OK, SO A BUILDING WIDE CANOPY.
AND THEN YOU SAID CATHERINE ON THERE POLL SUPPORTED.
WOULD IT BE A POLL LIKE WE'RE SEEING ON THE.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN, LIKE POLLS LIKE WE SEE THERE ON THAT LITTLE CANOPY? RIGHT, THAT THE CANOPY WOULD EXTEND OUT AND THEN BE SUPPORTED BY POLES THAT COME
[00:10:01]
DOWN AND ATTACH TO THE SIDEWALK.OK, I'M NOT TRYING TO BE DIFFICULT, BUT WHAT I'M JUST TRYING TO ENVISION IS IF WE HAVE POLES COMING DOWN FROM A CANOPY AND THEN WE HAVE THE POLES COMING DOWN FROM A CANOPY AND THEN WE HAVE THE TURTLE, OK, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT'S HAPPENING ON MY COMPUTER.
OK, SO IF THE POLLS ARE COMING DOWN AND THE TURTLE'S THERE, I'M JUST TRYING TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S ADEQUATE, ADEQUATE SIDEWALK FOR THEM TO WALK ON .
THE POLES WOULD BE VERY NARROW AND WOULD BE LOCATED ABOUT TWO FEET FROM THE CURB.
OK, SO THERE WOULD STILL BE WITHIN WHEN THE TURTLE IS PLACED, THEN, WOULD WE STILL HAVE ENOUGH ROOM BETWEEN WHERE THE TURTLE IS AND WHERE THE POLES COME DOWN, WOULD WE STILL HAVE FIVE FEET? THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, CATHERINE.
YES, I THINK THE ANSWER IS YES.
SOMETHING HAS HAPPENED ON MY SCREEN, SO I CAN'T SEE IF I CAN'T SEE WHO'S GOT THEIR HANDS UP.
WHO ELSE HAS QUESTIONS? OH, NOW I'M BACK.
I LIKE TO KIND OF REPHRASE WHAT YOUR YOUR CONCERN IS, I THINK IT'S A GOOD ONE.
I THINK WE NEED TO BE SURE THAT THE LOCATION OF THE TURTLE IS COORDINATED WITH THE LOCATION OF THE POSTS FOR THE NEW FOR THE NEW CANOPY.
IN FACT, I'LL EVEN GO SO FAR AS TO INCLUDE THAT IN A MOTION WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT.
THAT MAKES ME FEEL BETTER THAT I WASN'T JUST OFF ON A TANGENT.
OK, SO NOW INSTEAD OF INTERFERING WITH THE PALM TREES WE HAD ORIGINALLY CONSIDERED.
NOW WE'RE INTERFERING WITH THE POLLS.
WE'VE INTRODUCED A DIFFERENT PROBLEM.
RIGHT? THAT'S NOT COVERED IN THIS CASE IN THE CASE REPORT, BUT I WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD GIVE THE APPLICANT THE DISCRETION TO MAKE THE BEST CHOICE AND TO BE GUIDED BY PLANNING, PLANNING STAFF.
AND IF I MAY AND CATHERINE, PLEASE JUMP IN IF I MISSTATE.
THE LTU IS NOT GOING TO ALLOW FOR IMPEDING THE SIDEWALK, EVEN WITH THE POLES.
SO THERE ARE SOME LIMITS THAT WOULD STILL HAVE TO BE SOME STANDARDS THAT WOULD HAVE TO REMAIN IN PLACE EVEN WITH THE LTU.
THERE'S AN LTU FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
SO, DONNA, ARE YOU TELLING ME THAT THAT'S STATED AS PART OF ONE OF OUR STANDARD CONDITIONS? FOR AN LTU IN GENERAL, UNLESS IT'S SPECIFICALLY, I GUESS, AS AN ENCROACHMENT, THAT TYPE OF SITUATION.
BUT IF WE TALK ABOUT AN LTU FOR PLACEMENT IN THIS RIGHT OF WAY, THERE'S STILL GUIDELINES THAT THEY CAN'T THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FEET THAT HAS TO BE LEFT FOR [INAUDIBLE], FOR WALKING ALONG AND FOR PEDESTRIANS.
AND THERE'S ALSO AN ADA RAMP THERE THAT HAS STATUTORILY GUIDELINES AS WELL IN TERMS OF HOW MUCH THEY CAN IMPEDE THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC.
EVEN WITH AN LTU, THERE'S THEY STILL HAVE THE APPLICANT STILL HAS TO MEET THOSE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
AND SO I THINK IF THAT HELPS THE COMMISSIONERS TO KNOW THAT THE TURTLE WILL NOT BE PLACED SO AS TO BE A VIOLATION OF OUR CODES AND OR STATE LAW, THAT MAY BE THE WAY TO GO.
IT THE TURTLE WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO BE PUT IN PLACE IN SUCH A WAY.
OK, BUT I MEAN, IT'S NOT SOMETHING I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND, DONNA, THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'RE MAKING UP OR THAT WE'RE CONJURING UP.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE EXHIBIT A, IT SHOWS THAT IT'S ABOUT SIX AND A HALF FEET.
IT SHOWS SIX AND A HALF FEET FROM THE WALL TO THE POLE THAT'S THERE BY THE HANDICAP RAMP.
AND THEN IT SHOWS A TOTAL OF TEN AND A HALF FEET FROM THE BUILDING TO THE TURTLE.
WELL, IF THE SIX AND A HALF FEET IS WHERE THE RAMP IS, THEN WE JUST GOT FOUR FEET CLEAR.
[00:15:01]
NO IT'S NOT NEAR IT.ANYWAY, IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO NEED TO MAKE SURE IS ADDRESSED AND IF WE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW IT'S A.
IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT WILL BE ADDRESSED AS PART OF THE REGULAR CONDITIONS, I'M FINE WITH THAT OR WE CAN ADD A SPECIFIC CONDITION.
COMMISSIONERS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? SEEING NONE, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:45.
IS THE APPLICANT ON THE PHONE? THERE ARE TWO APPLICANTS ON THE PHONE.
OK, WAS THERE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY TO TH COMMISSION AND PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF? MY NAME IS VICTORIA NEWSOME.
I AM ONE OF THE PARTNERS AT [INAUDIBLE].
FIRST LIKE TO THANK THE COMMISSION FOR ITS TIME AND ASSURE YOU WITH REGARD TO THE TURTLE PLACEMENT, IT IS GOING TO BE PARALLEL WITH THE POLLS AND IT WON'T BE ENCROACHING WITH THE POLL ONTO THE SIDEWALK.
OK, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D CARE TO ADDRESS WITH THE COMMISSION, OR IS THERE ANOTHER APPLICANT ON THE LINE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS POINT? YES, MY NAME IS [INAUDIBLE].
AND I'M THE OWNER OF [INAUDIBLE].
I'M SORRY, MR. HYATT, THIS ISN'T YOUR CASE.
WE WILL GET TO YOUR CASE IN A MOMENT AGO.
JOANIE STEINHAUS, YOU'RE ON THE LINE.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING, YOU CAN PRESS STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.
STAR SIX AND CATHERINE JUST I THINK ALL THE APPLICANTS ARE UNMUTED RIGHT NOW.
OK, JOANIE, I THINK YOU HAVE TO START SIX NOW.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES, EXCELLENT.
JOANIE STEINHAUS, TURTLE ISLAND RESTORATION NETWORK.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF FOR YOUR TIME.
AS VICTORIA SAID, SHE'S BEEN COORDINATING WITH THE OWNER FOR THE PLACEMENT OF THE [INAUDIBLE] TO HOLD THE CANOPY AND THE TURTLE PLACEMENT.
WE WILL ALSO ENSURE THAT THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR THE CITY, THE REQUIRED 10 FEET WILL BE THERE AND THE TURTLE WILL ALSO BE PLACED NOT TO IMPEDE ANY TRAFFIC OR PARKING ON 25TH STREET.
SO IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER CONCERNS, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS APPROPRIATE, WE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THEM BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE'RE VERY ANXIOUS FOR THIS TO BE APPROVED.
I UNDERSTAND, JOANIE, AND THANK YOU.
COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS? YES, COMMISSIONER WALLA.
I'D JUST LIKE TO THANK THE BUSINESS OWNER AND THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR SUPPORTING THE ARTS.
I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING THAT.
I'M ALL FOR THIS EVERY CHANCE WE CAN.
THANK YOU FOR INVESTING IN DOWNTOWN.
YOU GUYS ARE SPENDING SOME MONEY THERE.
THANK YOU, I'M GLAD YOU SAID THAT, COMMISSIONER WALLA, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR THE APPLICANTS? AND NO OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE PUBLIC ON THIS APPLICATION, SO WE'LL CLOSE THE HEARING FOR THIS CASE AT 3:48 P.M.
I'LL MAKE I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE PLACEMENT OF THE TURTLE AS HAS BEEN REQUESTED AND, YOU KNOW, THE MY COMMENT WELL THAT'S MY, MY MOTION IS THAT WE THAT WE APPROVE THE PLACEMENT OF THE TURTLE IN THE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY AS REQUESTED.
OK, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PENA.
DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER BROWN, DID YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE? NO, IT'S FINE.
WE'LL CALL THE VOTE ON THIS ONE, PLEASE.
BEFORE WE CALL THE VOTE WITH THE MOTION.
ARE WE ALSO APPROVING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND THEIR CONDITIONS? COMMISSIONER WALLA? I'D LIKE TO AMEND MY MOTION TO APPROVE THE REQUEST AS PRESENTED WITH THE STAFF
[00:20:01]
RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEIR APPROVAL.SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND STANDARD CONDITIONS? YES.
AND COMMISSIONER PENA, DO HOLD ON YOUR SECOND? COMMISSIONER PENA HOLDS ON HIS SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR, THE MOTION PASSES.
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT WE WILL AS STAFF, EVEN THOUGH WASN'T PART OF THE MOTION, WE WILL HAVE STAFF ENSURE THE ISLAND.
THAT THE TURTLE ISLAND, OUR WORK DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH THE COASTS AND THE CANOPY.
I'M SURE THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF INTRICACIES IN THERE THAT WE DON'T UNDERSTAND ABOUT.
YOU KNOW, HOW THINGS HAVE TO HAVE ENOUGH, YOU KNOW, MEASUREMENT.
AND NEXT UP, WE'LL CALL CASE TWENTY ONE P DASH ZERO ZERO TWO.
[8.A.1. 21P-002 (3503 Bernardo De Galvez/Avenue P)]
THIS IS THIRTY FIVE ZERO THREE AVENUE P IS THE REQUEST FOR DESIGNATION OF THE GALVESTON LANDMARK.STAFF IS REQUESTING THE ABOVE REFERENCE REQUEST BE DEFERRED UNTIL THE MARCH 2ND 2021 MEETING IN ORDER FOR THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
THIS IS THE FIRST REQUEST FOR DEFERRAL AND THERE NO COST ASSOCIATED WITH THE REQUEST.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
FOR COMMISSIONER PENA AND COMMISSIONER WALLA.
I DON'T BELIEVE WE'VE HAD OR REQUESTED DEFERRAL SINCE YOU ALL HAVE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT WE'LL STILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MATTER BECAUSE IT WAS A POSTED AGENDA ITEM AND THEN WE WILL HOLD A VOTE ON THE DEFERRAL, THE REQUESTED DEFERRAL.
SO DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? NO QUESTIONS OF STAFF.
WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
PUBLIC HEARING ON 21 P DASH ZERO ZERO TWO AT 3:52 IS DID WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE, CATHERINE? NO, WE DO NOT.
AND NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS.
SO WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:52 PM AND I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS CASE.
I MOVE THAT WE DEFER TWENTY ONE P ZERO ZERO TWO AT STAFF'S REQUEST.
ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION.
CHAIRPERSON BROWN OR HILL, I'M SORRY.
ALL IN FAVOR, THE MOTION PASSES.
NEXT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO AN LTU ON TWENTY ONE P DASH ZERO ZERO ONE.
[8.B.1. 21P-001 (1801 25th Street/Rosenberg)]
CASE TWENTY ONE P ZERO ZERO ONE IS ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY ADDRESSED EIGHTEEN ZERO ONE TWENTY FIFTH STREET.AND OF THE PUBLIC NOTICES WE SENT TWENTY FOUR, WE HAD FOUR RETURNED AND THOSE FOUR WERE IN FAVOR.
THE CITY DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATIONS, WE HAVE AN UPDATE AND THIS UPDATE IS COMING FROM THE BUILDING DIVISION.
AND THE UPDATES STATE, THE COMMENTS STATE MUST COMPLY WITH CHAPTER 32 OF THE 2012 IBC, AND IT SAYS ENCROACHMENTS INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY SPECIFICALLY.
OK, IN THE SUMMARY HERE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A LICENSE TO USE THE RIGHT OF WAY IN ORDER TO ADD A CANOPY TO A BUILDING'S FRONT ENTRY FACADE ALONG 25TH STREET.
THAT WILL PROJECT INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
OK, THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS, THE PROPOSED CANOPY DECK WILL EXTEND THREE FEET AND TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND RUN NINE LINEAR FEET ALONG THE FRONT WALL ABOVE THE BUILDING ENTRY DOOR.
THE SEMICIRCULAR DESIGNED CANOPY DECK IS SHOWN TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO ALLOW EIGHT FEET OF CLEARANCE FROM GRADE AS REQUIRED BY CITY CODE.
STAFF HAS CONCERNS ABOUT ALLOWING THE TOP OF THE CANOPY DECK TO BE USED AS OCCUPIABLE SPACE.
THIS TYPE OF CANOPY DECK IS NOT FOUND IN THE VICINITY.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR A LICENSE TO USE THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR A CANOPY THAT IS USED EXCLUSIVELY AS A DOOR COVERING AND NOT INCLUDE THE
[00:25:04]
USE AS A DECK SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.AND WE HAVE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AS WELL AS THE STANDARD CONDITIONS, THE STAFF REPORT.
OK, THIS PHOTO IS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AS WELL AS THE SUBJECT OF THE REQUEST.
HERE'S ANOTHER VIEW OF THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING, YOU CAN SEE THE PROJECTION OF THE CANOPY INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
OK, HERE ARE TWO PHOTOS OF THE CANOPY THAT'S BEEN REQUESTED WELL TO YOUR APPROVAL.
THESE ARE THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, EAST AND SOUTH.
AND I'VE INCLUDED THE APPLICANT'S ATTACHMENTS, WHICH ARE THE I BELIEVE THE DRAWINGS THAT WERE ENGINEERED, PROVIDED WITH THE APPLICATION.
AND HERE'S THE SITE PLAN SLASH SURVEY OF THE SITE.
THE DIFFERENCE IN THE SITE PLAN, AS IT'S SHOWN ON THE THAT WAS JUST SHOWN ON THE SCREEN, IS THAT THE CANOPY IS A SEMICIRCULAR DESIGN, AS OPPOSED TO THE RECTANGULAR DESIGN SHOWN.
AND THIS IS AN AERIAL OF THE SITE.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
OK, THANK YOU, PETE, I APPRECIATE THAT.
REAL QUICKLY, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS IS A CASE WHERE THERE, I MEAN, IT'S ALREADY BUILT.
IS THAT CORRECT? IT DOES APPEAR TO BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
OK, AND WHAT CAN YOU TELL WHEN YOU TOOK THOSE PHOTOS, PETE, THE IS THAT A DOOR OR A WINDOW ALREADY CUT THERE ABOVE IT? I COULD NOT FOR CERTAIN TELL IF IT WAS A DOOR OR A WINDOW OPENING, BUT THERE IS CERTAINLY AN OPENING.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HOLLAWAY.
COULD WE GO BACK TO THAT PHOTOGRAPH, PLEASE? THE PHOTOGRAPH OF ITS CONSTRUCTION.
SO THIS IS THIS IS A CANTILEVERED PROTUBERANCE, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY VERTICAL SUPPORTS, RIGHT, PETE? THAT WILL EXTEND INTO THE EXTEND INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY? CORRECT.
OK, BUT IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THEY HAVE A DOOR CUT FOR ACCESS.
WHAT'S THE LOAD ON THAT? OH, I'M NOT SURE.
WELL, THEY DIDN'T TELL YOU IN THE CASE REPORT? I MEAN, IN THE APPLICATION THAT THEY INTENDED TO USE IT AS A DECK.
THEY NEED TO HAVE A LOAD, DON'T THEY? RIGHT.
AND SO THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION IN THE SUBMITTAL.
THE APPLICATION SAID THAT THEY WERE REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR A CANOPY.
OK, BUT THEN WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE DRAWINGS THAT WERE PROVIDED AS THE APPLICANT'S ATTACHMENTS, THERE WERE SOME PAGES THAT SAID DECK, INSTEAD OF CANOPY, SO AND SPEAKING WITH THE APPLICANT, THE APPLICANT SAID THAT THEY WANTED TO USE THE AREA THAT'S BEING REQUESTED THE LTU AS A CANOPY TO COVER THE DOOR AND NOT AS A DECK FOR OCCUPANCY.
IS OUR IS OUR APPLICANT HERE TODAY? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT ABOUT? SURE.
DID I DO BELIEVE I HEARD THE APPLICANT SPEAK EARLIER ON A PREVIOUS CASE, SO I BELIEVE OK, GOOD.
WELL, WHEN WE COME UP TO THAT, WE'LL ASK THAT.
MR. HOLLAWAY, I INTERRUPTED YOU.
I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT I WAS CONTACTED BY SOMEONE WHO HAD GOTTEN ONE OF THE VICINITY LETTERS FOR COMMENT.
THEY HAD COMPLETELY MISCONSTRUED THIS CASE.
THEY THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE AN AESTHETIC CANOPY OF, YOU KNOW, NOT USED AS A DECK.
AND THEY HADN'T SEEN WHAT I GUESS WHAT THE CONSTRUCTION HAS REVEALED.
BUT I THINK THE LETTERS THAT WENT OUT TO THE TO THE LOCAL TWO HUNDRED FOOT RADIUS MIGHT HAVE BEEN MISUNDERSTOOD BY THE BY THE BY THE PUBLIC.
[00:30:04]
SO I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT.ALONG THE LINES OF THE OF THE COMMENT'S LEADING DRAWINGS, I GUESS THE DRAWINGS DID HAVE AN ENGINEER STAMP ON IT AND THEY HAD LABELED ALL OF THE INDIVIDUAL PARTS, BUT LIKE COMMISSIONER HOLLAWAY POINTED OUT, DIDN'T REALLY HAVE ANY LOADS.
SO IT'S DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE WHAT TO WHAT DESIGN APPLICATION THE THING'S DESIGNED, BUT ALSO IF THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING PEOPLE UP THERE, THEY NEED TO HAVE A HANDRAIL WAS DESIGNED ACCORDING TO CODE.
THERE WERE NO HANDRAIL DETAILS UP THERE IN THE WITH THE DRAWING PACKET THAT I SAW.
SO NO INDICATION OF HOW THEY INTEND TO DO THAT.
SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S ENOUGH INFORMATION IN THERE TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR WHAT THEIR INTENT IS IN TERMS OF OCCUPYING IT.
AND MAYBE WE'LL GET THAT CLEARED UP, BUT IF WE WERE TO APPROVE WITH STAFF SPECIFIC CONDITIONS, IT WOULD BE TO JUST USE THAT AS A AS A COVERING AND NOT TO EVER ALLOW PEOPLE OUT ON IT.
I THINK IN ONE OF STAFF'S, IN STAFF REPORT, THEY MENTIONED THAT AS PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY MIGHT ALLOW A DECORATIVE RAILING ON THERE.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY GOT A DOORWAY CUT IN THERE AND THEY PUT A DECORATIVE RAILING UP THERE, THEY MIGHT IN SOME WAYS BE CREATING AN ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE BECAUSE IF THAT RAILING IS A DECORATIVE RAILING AND NOT BUILT TO CODE.
SOMEBODY MIGHT STILL STEP OUT THERE AND THAT RAILING MIGHT NOT SUPPORT THEM BECAUSE IT WAS A DECORATIVE RAILING AND NOT ONE BUILT TO CODE TO SUPPORT PEOPLE.
SO, PETE, HAVE YOU HAD ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT WITH THE APPLICANT? ABOUT THE RAILING? YES, SIR.
AND WHAT THE APPLICANT INFORMED ME IN OUR PHONE CONVERSATION IS THAT.
THE DOORWAY OR THE OPENING WOULD BE THERE AS A DECORATIVE FEATURE.
SO WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE IN LINE TO HAVE A DECORATIVE RAILING ALONG WITH A DECORATIVE OPENING.
YES, SIR, COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI.
SO IF I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE RIGHT, YOU'RE OK WITH THE DECORATIVE HANDRAIL AND DOOR, BUT YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE ON TOP OF THE BALCONY? THAT IS THE CONVERSATION THAT I HAD WITH THE APPLICANT.
AND THE APPLICANT WAS OK WITH THAT.
WHY WOULD YOU PUT SOMETHING DECORATIVE OUT THERE IF IT'S NOT YOUR ARGUMENT HERE IS THAT THERE'S NOT OTHER SITUATIONS LIKE THIS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WHY WOULD YOU CREATE THAT SITUATION BY DOING A DECORATIVE HANDRAIL AND A DOOR AND MAKE IT LOOK LIKE IT'S A FUNCTIONING BALCONY? THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.
WE WERE TRYING TO MEET THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, WHICH IS TO PROVIDE THE CANOPY.
AND SINCE HE HAD AN OPENING TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT COULD CONFORM WITH THE DECORATIVE FEATURES THAT THEY WERE HOPING TO ADD TO THE BUILDING.
AND THEN SO FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON THAT WOULD BE IF THAT'S APPROVED LIKE THAT AND SOMEONE ACTUALLY USES THAT DOOR AND GOES OUT THERE.
I GUESS THE OWNER, THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF HIS LICENSE, USE OF RIGHT OF WAY IF THERE WERE PEOPLE ALLOWED TO GO ON TO IT? YES, OK.
WHAT WAS THE LAST PART, JOHN PAUL, I INTERRUPTED YOU.
VERY INTERESTING SITUATION HERE.
YES, I'M VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS, THERE'S JUST WAY TOO MUCH VAGUENESS, I THINK THAT STAFF OR WE NEED TO MAKE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE DRAWINGS ARE VERY SPECIFIC.
DECORATIVE RAILING COULD BE, YOU KNOW, TWO FOOT TALL OR IT COULD BE EIGHT FOOT TALL.
YOU KNOW, I WOULD NOT BE COMFORTABLE ON APPROVING ANYTHING.
THAT DOESN'T GIVE ME A CLEAR DEFINITION OF WHAT THAT OPENING IS.
AND I WAS CONFUSED BY ONE OF THE PHOTOS THAT THEY SHOWED.
IT LOOKED LIKE THEY WERE REQUESTING A DECK THAT WENT THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING.
SO THERE WAS NO CLARITY FOR ME IN THAT.
SO I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS A LOT OF WORK TO DO.
[00:35:06]
AND I JUST NEED A LOT MORE CLARITY ON THIS ONE.OK, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ANTONELLI.
SORRY I PUSHED THE WRONG BUTTON.
HEY, PETE IT LOOKS LIKE THE DOOR COVERING IS THERE IN EXISTING.
IS THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION OR WAS THAT ALREADY THERE PRIOR TO THESE GUYS DOING THEIR? WHAT LOOKS TO BE A REMODEL? DO YOU KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT? WE BELIEVE THAT THE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT WAS THERE PRIOR TO THE APPLICANT OBTAINING OWNERSHIP OF THE BUILDING.
IT WAS PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT CAME UP DURING AN INSPECTION AND WE'RE TRYING TO HELP THEM FIX IT.
AND COMMISSIONER WALLA, WE CAN CLARIFY THAT WITH THE APPLICANT HERE IN JUST A MINUTE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE PUBLIC HEARING? YES, COMMISSIONER PENA.
SORRY, I MUST HAVE MISPLACED IT IN HERE OR SOMEWHERE IN THESE NOTES, IT'S A THREE FOOT PROTRUSION FROM THEM, FROM THE BUILDING AND NINE FEET WIDE, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.
IT'S NINE FEET AND IT'S LONGEST AS ITS LONGEST DIMENSION, BUT IT IS SEMICIRCULAR IN SHAPE.
THAT WAS MY THAT WAS MY QUESTION.
ALL RIGHT, ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:07 AND BELIEVE OUR APPLICANT IS ON THE LINE .
GREAT, THANK YOU, WELCOME, PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE, SIR.
I'M [INAUDIBLE], I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
THANKS FOR YOUR TIME AND IF THERE'S ANY QUESTION I'M WILLING TO ANSWER.
YES, SIR, HAVE YOU BEEN LISTENING TO OUR CONVERSATION WHILE YOU'VE BEEN IN THE HOLDING PATTERN AND SO I THINK PROBABLY SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT THE COMMISSION HAS, MAYBE YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THOSE RIGHT OFF THE BAT AND THEN WE CAN ASK SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THAT? SURE.
SO THE USE IS GOING TO BE THE CANOPY ONLY WE'RE NOT GOING TO OCCUPY THE TOP PART.
IF YOU SEE ANY OPENING, WE'RE GOING TO BE LIKE A FRENCH DOOR, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE FUNCTIONAL AS A PATIO AT ALL.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BAR IN FRONT OF THE DOOR, WHICH IS GOING TO BE FLUSH WITH THE DOOR.
AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE RAIL AROUND THIS CANOPY.
THE MAIN PURPOSE IS JUST THE LOOK OF IT AND THE COVER COVERAGE OF THE DOOR.
BUT AS FAR AS THE THE WAY WE MAKE SURE IF BY ACCIDENT SOMEBODY GOES OVER THAT CANOPY, IT WILL HAVE A.
YOU KNOW, I THINK FROM WHAT I REMEMBER, WE WENT INSIDE LIKE NINE FOOT AND ACCORDING TO THE BOOKS, YOU KNOW, AND THE ENGINEER PLAN.
BUT THE PURPOSE OF THESE IS JUST THE CANOPY, NOTHING ELSE.
AND FROM OUTSIDE, IF YOU LOOK AT IT, IS JUST A DECORATIVE THING.
WE TRYING TO MAKE A NICE BUILDING THERE.
AND I APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING MONEY INTO THIS PART OF THE CITY AND WORKING ON THIS BUILDING AND FIXING IT UP.
COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE I KNOW WE HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS BEFOREHAND FOR STAFF.
DO WE WANT TO ADDRESS THESE SPECIFICALLY WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER? YES.
WE'LL START WITH COMMISSIONER HOLLAWAY, PLEASE.
SINCE YOU HAVE AN ENGINEER APPROVAL OF THIS, WHAT IS THE LOAD, THE MAXIMUM LOAD ON THIS CANOPY? I DON'T HAVE THIS IN FRONT OF ME.
I CAN GET IT FOR YOU, BUT AS FAR AS THE BEAM, I THINK IT'S THREE FOOT, IT'S SIX FOOT IN THREE FOOT OUT.
SO IT CAN, YOU KNOW, TAKE ANY LOADS, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THE ENGINEERING CONCEPT.
BUT I'M NOT SURE AS FAR AS THE WEIGHT THAT YOU'RE ASKING RIGHT NOW.
OK, WHAT I SEE IN GOOGLE EARTH IS THAT BEFORE YOU CUT A DOOR THERE, YOU CUT A DOOR OVER THE CANOPY TO ACCOMMODATE WHAT LOOKS LIKE A DECK.
SO, I MEAN, THAT WOULD FUNCTION AS A DECK.
[00:40:01]
WHEN I'M LOOKING AT GOOGLE EARTH, I'M LOOKING AT THE OLD BUILDING AND I SEE THERE WAS JUST A WINDOW THERE.SO NOW YOU'VE MADE A BIGGER CUT.
LIKE I SAID, THE DOOR IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE A FRENCH DOOR AND IT'S JUST A DECORATIVE DOOR, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT GOING TO COME TO OVER THE CANOPY AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE [INAUDIBLE] BAR IN FRONT OF THE DOOR SO NOBODY CAN MOVE THERE.
YOU KNOW, TO GO OVER THE CANOPY.
IT'S JUST A DECORATIVE THING FROM OUTSIDE.
WHEN YOU [INAUDIBLE] BUT THE DOOR, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE A FRENCH DOOR.
OK, COMMISSIONER ANTONELLI, DID I SEE YOUR HAND GO UP, SIR? YES, YES.
AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR INVESTMENT IN THE ISLAND AND ON 25TH STREET, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THE PREMIER STREETS IN GALVESTON, ESPECIALLY FOR THE ACTIVITIES LIKE MARDI GRAS AND THE THINGS THAT GO ON THERE.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR INVESTMENT.
ONE THING THAT COULD REALLY SEAL THE DEAL AND WRAP THIS UP IS YOU CONTINUE TO SAY IT'S STRICTLY DECORATIVE.
AND WHAT WOULD ASSURE ME THAT IT WAS DECORATIVE, IF YOU WOULD, YOU KNOW, NOT USE THE TERM FRENCH DOOR BECAUSE DOOR, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU SAY IT'S EGRESS AND EXIT, SO IT GIVES IT THE ABILITY FOR SOMEBODY TO GO OUT ON THAT.
AND IF IT WERE ME AND I WERE RENTING IT OR SOMETHING, THE LIABILITY THERE WOULD BE TREMENDOUS AS A PROPERTY OWNER.
SO I THINK IF YOU COULD HAVE IF YOU'RE WILLING TO CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, JUST MAKING THAT A LARGE, YOU KNOW, WINDOW LIKE, YOU KNOW.
NOT OPERABLE, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT SAYS INOPERABLE, YOU KNOW, THEN THAT WOULD JUST MAKE THIS, YOU KNOW, GO REALLY SMOOTH.
SO DO YOU HAVE ANY FEELINGS TOWARD THAT OR ARE YOU, YOU KNOW, JUST WANTING TO FIGHT TO HAVE A DOOR? NO, NO, NO.
WE CAN WE CAN MAKE IT NONFUNCTIONAL DOOR, YOU KNOW, BUT JUST LOOK LIKE A DOOR FROM OUTSIDE, YOU KNOW, BY THE NONFUNCTIONAL.
BUT TO ADD TO THAT, YOU KNOW, EVEN WHEN WE ADD THAT TO THE DOOR TO BE OPEN, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD PUT THE BAR IN FRONT OF THE DOOR SO NOBODY CAN GO FARTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, DOOR OPENING.
YOU KNOW, THAT WAS LIKE THREE FOOT BAR IN FRONT OF THE DOOR.
ELIMINATING THE DOOR AND ANY SEMBLANCE OF A DOOR AND JUST GO WITH, YOU KNOW, A NICE PICTURE WINDOW OR SOMETHING? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF THAT HAPPENS TO BE A HALLWAY OR SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LAYOUT IS.
YOU WOULD STILL GET LOTS OF SUNLIGHT AND THE BEAUTIFUL VIEWS OF TWENTY FIFTH STREET WITHOUT THE CONCERN OF, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY SNEAKING OUT THERE.
AND IF IT WERE MY PROPERTY, I WOULD BE VERY CONCERNED BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT'S PARTY TIME, SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GO OUT THERE.
YEAH, WELL, I CAN MAKE SURE THAT IT WOULD BE NONFUNCTIONAL DOOR, YOU KNOW, IF YOU OK IT WOULD LOOK LIKE A DOOR.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'LL MAKE SURE THERE'S NOT OPENING.
I MEAN, NONFUNCTIONAL DOOR, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU.
I MEAN, ME PERSONALLY, JUST ME PERSONALLY.
I WOULD NOT BE COMFORTABLE WITH ANYTHING THAT HAS THE TERM DOOR.
NONFUNCTIONAL, THEN WE CALL IT A WINDOW.
OK, SO WE'LL WORK THAT OUT IN OUR SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.
JUST LISTENING TO THIS, I THINK IT CAN BE CLARIFIED WHAT WHAT THE MR. [INAUDIBLE] I THINK IS TRYING TO GO FOR IS THE LOOK OF A FRENCH DOOR, YOU KNOW, WHICH IS A DOOR WITH ABOUT FIFTEEN LIGHTS IN IT AND THAT KIND OF THING, MAYBE A LITTLE DECORATIVE BALCONY IN FRONT OF IT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND NOBODY HERE WANTS ANYBODY TO WALK OUT ON THAT CANOPY.
AND YOU CAN STILL HAVE ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
AS LONG AS YOU PUT NO HARDWARE, NO OPERABLE HARDWARE ON THAT DOOR, YOU CAN INSTALL THE DOOR WITH NO HINGES, NO HANDLES AND HAVE EXACTLY WHAT THAT MR. [INAUDIBLE] IS LOOKING FOR AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR ALL THE SAME TIME, I THINK.
AND MAYBE WE MAYBE WE SPECIFIED THAT IN THE MOTION THAT WE HAVE NO OPERABLE OPENING IN THAT ABOVE THAT CANOPY.
THAT MY ONLY CONCERN THERE IS CODE WISE.
IF THERE'S ANY BEDROOM OR ANYTHING BACK THERE THAT REQUIRES AN INOPERABLE OPENING, WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT.
[00:45:02]
WE CAN MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING THAT'S CODE.AND MAYBE STAFF CAN TELL US THAT, I THINK OR GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THAT.
BUT IN OTHER WORDS, AS LONG AS THAT OPENING IS NOT OPERABLE, I THINK I THINK I THINK WE'RE FINE.
SO I THINK PERHAPS VICE CHAIR BROWN, THE APPLICANT COULD ADDRESS THAT FOR US NOW IS WHAT IS ON.
IS THAT A HALLWAY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS CANOPY, SIR? YES.
YES, THERE IS A HALLWAY THAT'S MAYBE ABOUT 10, 12 FOOT HALLWAY AND THEN IS GOING TO BE THE BUILDING.
I MEAN, ONE OF THE APARTMENTS.
YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THE QUOTE FROM WHAT I KNOW, BECAUSE THE DOOR, YOU KNOW, THE ENTRANCE DOOR IS CLOSED BY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YES, SIR, COMMISSIONER WALLA.
WOULD YOU BE IF YOU JUST HAD A COVER OVER YOUR DOOR WITH NO DECORATIVE RAILING ON IT? WOULD THAT WORK FOR YOU? WELL, WE WERE HOPING TO DO THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A FOCAL POINT OF THE BUILDING IS GOING TO MAKE IT LOOK GOOD.
AND I'M GLAD I MEAN, I'M SURE YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO LIKE IT, TOO, THAT, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO COMPLY WITH YOU GUYS, WHATEVER YOU TELL ME.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO LIKE IT TOO, IS JUST THE DECORATIVE THING.
AND I THINK WHERE IT'S GOTTEN A LITTLE CONFUSING IS THAT I THINK THAT STAFF IS TRYING TO HELP YOU GET WHAT YOU WANT.
SO, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AN IDEA.
WHAT'S USED? YOU WOULD LIKE THAT AT A MINIMUM, HAVE SOMETHING DECORATIVE THERE.
AND NO PROBLEM AT ALL, BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT WHEN WHATEVER WINDOW DOOR, WHATEVER YOU CALL IT, ACTUALLY WOULD NOT BE A DOOR AND YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PUT THAT THERE.
YES, AND YES, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET THAT PASSED THROUGH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND THE BUILDING INSPECTORS.
SO JUST BE AWARE THAT WHEN YOU PUT IN SOME OF THESE GUYS, BOB IS A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL.
HE KNOWS THAT IF YOU PUT A DOOR THERE, IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE AT A CERTAIN SPECIFICATION AND THE BUILDING GUYS ARE.
SO ALL THAT'S GOOD WITH YOU AND HELPS YOU GET TO WHERE YOU WANT TO BE.
ANYTHING ELSE, ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE APPLICANT? OK, THANK YOU.
AND WE HAD NO OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS EXCEPT FOR OUR NOTICES THAT WERE RETURNED.
SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS CASE.
SO I'M CLOSING, THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:18, NOW I'LL ENTERTAIN ON THE CASE.
VICE CHAIR BROWN, YOU WANT TO? I PROPOSE WE APPROVE THE PROJECT PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
IN ADDITION, THE DOOR OR WINDOW BE OPERABLE.
SO THAT THE THAT THE DOOR OR WINDOW THAT'S INSTALLED BE INOPERABLE.
I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY, VICE CHAIR BROWN, IS TO ADD ANOTHER SPECIFIC CONDITION, A SPECIFIC CONDITION SIX, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE BASICALLY COVERED THAT SAME THING IN CONDITION ONE WHERE WE SAY IT SHALL NOT BE ACCESSED FROM THE BUILDING STRUCTURE, WE WANT TO ADD A BELT AND SUSPENDERS BY ADDING A SPECIFIC CONDITION SIX THAT WOULD SAY WHAT EXACTLY? THAT THE DOOR OR WINDOW THEN.
THE DOOR OR WINDOW, THAT IS SOMEBODY ON PLANNING HELP ME OUT HERE.
INSTALL THE DOOR INSTALLED OVER THE ENTRY, BE INOPERABLE.
OK, YOU COULD SAY THAT BEFORE INGRESS, EGRESS, WHATEVER IT HAPPENS TO BE, IS INOPERABLE.
BUT IF IT'S A IF IT'S INOPERABLE, IT WOULDN'T BE A FORM OF INGRESS OR EGRESS.
IT'S NOT IT'S NOT IT'S NOT INGRESS AND EGRESS OF ANY KIND.
THE PENETRATION IS INOPERABLE.
OK, SO COMMISSIONER ANTONELLI SECONDS THAT MOTION.
[00:50:03]
YES SIR.SO WHEN WE DO THIS, HE'LL BE ABLE TO HE'LL BE ABLE TO PUT HIS DECORATIVE FEATURE ACROSS THE FRONT OF THIS OVERHANG AND [INAUDIBLE].
WE'LL JUST KEEP IT WHERE IT'S FIXED.
NOBODY WOULD BE ABLE TO GET OUT THERE.
THAT'S RIGHT IF YOU LOOK AT SPECIFIC CONDITION TWO C=COMMISSIONER WALLA.
THE CANOPY MAY INCLUDE RAILINGS AS A DECORATIVE FEATURE.
NO ONE'S NO ONE'S MAKING A MOTION TO STRIKE THAT.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHTY, THEN, LET'S HAVE A VOTE ON THIS, PLEASE, CATHERINE.
ALL IN FAVOR, THE MOTION PASSES.
AND THANK YOU AGAIN TO THE TO OUR APPLICANT, [INAUDIBLE].
OK, AND NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO CASE 21 P DASH 003, ANOTHER LTU.
[8.B.2. 21P-003 (2121 Ave D/Market)]
CORRECT.CASE 21 P DASH ZERO ZERO THREE IS ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY ADDRESS 2121 MARKET STREET, OR AVENUE D.
THE PUBLIC NOTICES WE SENT 78 AND WE DID RECEIVE SEVEN IN FAVOR, AND I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE THE NOTE THAT SIX OF THOSE SEVEN WERE FROM ONE PROPERTY OWNER AND THAT WAS MR. [INAUDIBLE].
CITY DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATIONS, WE'D LIKE TO UPDATE THAT HERE WITH COMMENTS FROM THE BUILDING DIVISION AND THOSE COMMENTS STATE NOT ALLOWED PER 2012 IBC.
I CANNOT APPROVE THIS REQUEST.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE PRESENTED TO THE BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS FOR A POSSIBLE VARIANCE.
AND THOSE ARE FROM THE BUILDING DIVISION.
IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PERMANENT LICENSE TO USE THE CITY RIGHT OF WAY IN ORDER TO PLACE AN ADA ACCESSIBLE RAMP IN THE 22ND STREET SIDEWALK RIGHT OF WAY IS BEING REQUESTED, AND THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO GAIN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ADA ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.
OK, THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS.
THIS REQUEST IS PROPOSED TO EXTEND THREE FEET, ONE INCH INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND RUN 31 LINEAR FEET, AND IT WOULD OCCUPY APPROXIMATELY NINETY THREE SQUARE FEET OF THE SIDEWALK RIGHT OF WAY.
THE BUILDING CURRENTLY FEATURES A SIZABLE ELEVATED OPEN-AIR PLAZA THAT INCLUDES TWO PARK AREAS.
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING FEATURES AN EXTENSIVE SET OF PRIMARY STAIRS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE CONVERTED INTO A WATER FEATURE.
AN APPROXIMATELY SEVEN FOOT WIDE EXISTING STAIRWAY ON THE MARKET STREET SIDE WILL BECOME THE PRIMARY ACCESS POINT.
YOU CAN NOTE THE DESIGN IN THE APPLICANT SUBMITTAL.
STAFF RECOMMENDS CASE 21 P ZERO ZERO THREE REQUESTS FOR A LICENSE TO USE THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY BE DENIED.
STAFF FINDS THAT GIVEN THE AVAILABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE ON SITE AND THE AREA OF THE PROPOSED ADA RAMP, AS WELL AS THE SIZE OF THE OPEN AIR PLAZA, THAT AN ADA RAMP CAN BE CONFIGURED IN A MANNER THAT THE ENTIRETY OF THE STRUCTURE IS INCORPORATED WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINES OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
SHOULD THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHOOSE TO APPROVE THE REQUEST, STAFF RECOMMENDS CASE 21 P ZERO ZERO THREE REQUESTS FOR A LICENSE TO USE THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY BE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
WE HAVE SPECIFIC AS WELL AS STANDARD CONDITIONS AND WE HAVE PHOTOS.
OK, HERE'S A VIEW OF THE SUBJECT SITE FROM THE MARKET STREET RIGHT OF WAY.
THIS IS THE AREA OF THE PROPOSED ADA RAMP.
THIS IS ANOTHER VIEW OF THE RIGHT OF WAY WHERE THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE ADA STRUCTURE.
THIS IS THE APPLICANT'S SITE PLAN.
THE PORTION SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING THE ADA RAMP.
AND HERE WE HAVE A TAPE MEASURE, AND THIS IS JUST TO SHOW THAT FROM THE IN THE EXISTING PLANNERS TO THE WHAT WE BELIEVE THE PROPERTY LINE TO BE WHERE THE WALL IS, THAT THERE IS APPROXIMATELY THAT.
THERE'S ROUGHLY EIGHT FEET AND THE THREE FEET INTRUSION INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY WOULD
[00:55:06]
LEAVE THE REMAINING FOUR FEET, 11 INCHES.BUT THE APPLICANT SAID THAT HE COULD MOVE THE STRUCTURE OVER TO ALLOW THE FIVE FEET OF PEDESTRIAN RIGHT OF WAY THAT'S REQUIRED WITH LTU REQUESTS.
OK, THESE ARE THE PROPERTIES TO THE WEST, NORTH AND SOUTH.
OK, AND SINCE YOU WERE SINCE YOU RECEIVED THE STAFF REPORTS, THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED US WITH AN UPDATED SITE PLAN SHOWING THAT HE HAD REDUCED THE INTRUSION INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY DOWN TO, I BELIEVE IT IS ONE FOOT, THE APPLICANT COULD EXPLAIN FURTHER.
AND I BELIEVE THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
OK, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS, WHO HAS A QUESTION FOR PETE, FOR STAFF ON THIS? COMMISSIONER PENA.
YEAH PETE, IS IT SO THIS ADA RAMP IS THIS SOMETHING THAT'S REQUIRED OF HIM TO PUT IN TO BRING IT UP TO CODE OR OR IS THIS JUST SOMETHING THAT [INAUDIBLE]? I BELIEVE THE ANSWER IS YES.
THE APPLICANT IS TRYING TO GAIN CONFORMANCE WITH ADA ACCESSIBILITY.
COMMISSIONER ANTONELLI, YOU WERE NEXT.
YES, PETE, IS THERE AN ALTERNATIVE LIKE A LIFT, YOU KNOW, ON THE STRAND I'VE SEEN THAT BUILDING THAT HAS THAT LIFT THAT'S THERE.
WOULD THAT BE AN ALTERNATIVE? YOU KNOW, I'M NOT COMPLETELY CERTAIN IF I KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT AND I DID SPEAK ABOUT POSSIBLY USING A LIFT FOR ADA ACCESSIBILITY.
I'M NOT COMPLETELY SURE IF THAT WOULD SATISFY ADA REQUIREMENTS, BUT THE APPLICANT DID.
COMMISSIONER BROWN, VICE CHAIR BROWN.
NOW THERE'S AN ELEVATOR SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS RIGHT, JUST KIND OF ADJACENT TO THE RAMP.
DOES THAT GO DOWN TO THE PARKING BELOW THE BUILDING? IS THAT HOW THEY'RE CURRENTLY HANDLING ACCESSIBILITY? THE ELEVATOR DOES GO DOWN TO THE PARKING LOT.
SO IF THAT ELEVATOR SERVES THE PARKING AND THAT'S THEIR CURRENT WAY OF ADDRESSING ACCESSIBILITY, I'M JUST WONDERING WHY THEY'RE PUTTING A RAMP IN? CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ADDRESS WITH THE APPLICANT, BOB.
AND ALSO THERE, THE REVISED RAMP, IS IT AS DOES THAT MAKE TEXAS ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS? HAS THAT ALREADY BEEN REVIEWED BY SOMEBODY TO MEET TEXAS ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS, DO YOU KNOW? WELL, THE REVISED DRAWING HAS NOT BEEN REVIEWED BY OUR BUILDING DIVISION.
WHO HAD THE OBJECTION TO THE INITIAL SUBMITTAL.
I WOULD I WOULD THINK THAT THE OBJECTION WOULD REMAIN BECAUSE THE APPLICANT I BELIEVE THE OBJECTION WAS RELATED TO SOME HEIGHT ISSUE, AND I BELIEVE THAT THE REVISED DRAWING WOULD STILL HAVE THAT CONFLICT WITH THE HEIGHT.
IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE SQUEEZED BETWEEN THOSE TREES AND THE RAMP.
THE TREES ALREADY TAKING UP QUITE A BIT OF RIGHT OF WAY.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HOLLAWAY, DID I SEE YOUR HAND? RIGHT.
I THINK IT'S BEEN REFERENCE MY QUESTION MAY HAVE BEEN ANSWERED, THE WHEN YOU GAVE YOUR STAFF REPORT, YOU SAID THIS WAS NOT ALLOWED PER THE 2012 IBC.
DOES THAT WHAT DOES THAT REFERENCE? I'M NOT SURE IT'S THE IBC IS THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE.
IS WHAT THE BUILDING DIVISION WOULD USE IN THEIR REVIEW PROCESS TO APPROVE OR DENY THE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT ADA RAMP.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER WALLA? HEY PETE.
SO THESE GUYS KIND OF REVISED THEIR PLAN AND NOW THEY'RE WANTING A FOOT IN AND I'M ASSUMING THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION IN YOUR STAFF REPORT WAS ONE THEY WANTED THREE.
WHAT IS YOUR WHAT'S YOUR READ ON THE ONE FOOT VERSUS THE THREE FOOT WOULD STILL BE SOMETHING YOU WOULD NOT RECOMMEND? CORRECT.
[01:00:01]
STAFF WOULD MAINTAIN THE RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL.STAFF STILL BELIEVES THAT THERE COULD BE FURTHER CONFIGURATION TO GAIN THE ACCESS WITH WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINES.
OK, COMMISSIONER, I MEAN, VICE CHAIR BROWN, YOU.
THE STAFF HAS SOME SPECIFIC IDEAS ABOUT HOW THAT THE REST OF THAT PLAZA MIGHT BE CONFIGURED TO GET THE WHOLE RAMP ON THE PROPERTY, OR WAS IT JUST A GENERALIZATION? I THINK IT'S SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN THE TWO.
GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF SPACE IN THAT PLAZA.
AS WELL AS THE AMOUNT OF SPACE WHERE THE APPLICANT IS WANTING TO PLACE THE PART OF IT THAT IS WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINES.
THERE MAY NEED TO BE POSSIBLY A LITTLE BIT OF DEMO TO THE EXISTING WALLS THERE WHERE THE STAIRS ARE.
I LOOKED AT IT IN ABOUT FIVE MINUTES.
I COULD SEE HOW THEY COULD DO IT.
BUT I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF Y'ALL SAW THE SAME THING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:31 AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND THEN YOU'RE WELCOME TO GIVE A STATEMENT OR START ADDRESSING THE QUESTIONS YOU'VE HEARD.
HI, I'M STEVE PENLINGTON, REPRESENTING THE OWNER IN THIS APPLICATION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
APPRECIATE YOU REVIEWING THIS WITH ME.
SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, THE SIZE OF THE PLAZA ITSELF IS WE THE FRONT STAIRCASE IS CONVERTED INTO A WATERFALL THAT'S BEEN PERMITTED AND THE WORK HAS BEGUN ON THAT.
THE ACCESS TO THE ADA, ACCORDING TO THE RAS PDLR, REQUIRES THAT WE NEED TO GAIN ACCESS TO THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF THE BUILDING.
AND THAT WAS OUR THAT WAS A STATEMENT UNDER THE REVIEW THAT THEY GAVE US ON THE ON THE PROPERTY.
THE ELEVATOR THAT YOU NOTED DOES NOT COMPLY TO THE CURRENT ADA ACCESSIBILITY DUE TO THE SIZE OF IT.
AND SO REPLACING OR TRYING TO TEAR OUT THE ELEVATOR SHAFT AND EVERYTHING ELSE WAS JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS FEASIBLE.
WE LOOKED AT BOTH OPTIONS AND THE SIZE OF THE PLAZA ITSELF AND THE ACCESSIBILITY.
WALKING OR ANYBODY YOU NEED TO ACCESS, WHETHER A WHEELCHAIR WALKER OR JUST NEED THAT EXTRA ACCESS, WOULD ALLOW US TO KEEP THAT FLOW OPEN BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY TWO ENTRANCES NOW TO THE PLAZA AND ONE'S NINE FEET, THEIR BOTH ABOUT SEVEN FEET WIDE.
WE LOOKED AT DOING THE REWORKING IT, SQUEEZING IT IN, AND IT'S ABOUT ONE FOOT FOUR INCHES PROTRUSION INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
ON THE LAST PICTURE IN BOTH PLANS, WE HAVE OUR WATER MAIN COMING IN ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE RAMP ITSELF, WHICH IS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID HAVING TO RELOCATE ALL THE WATER SUPPLIES AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND TRY TO HAVE THIS THING MOVE IN.
TO TRY TO DEMO SOME OF THE WALL STRUCTURES.
WE DO HAVE AN UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGE, SO THEY ALL [INAUDIBLE] AROUND THAT ITSELF.
THE GARAGE GOES DOWN ABOUT THREE AND A HALF FEET BELOW STREET LEVEL, ABOUT THREE FEET.
AND ALL THE BEARING WALLS AND EVERYTHING ELSE SURROUNDING THAT IS SOMETHING THAT STRUCTURALLY WISE.
IT'S NOT THAT WE DIDN'T WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT POSSIBLY DOING THAT AS FAR AS THE FEASIBILITY, MAINLY BECAUSE WE'D HAVE TO RECONSTRUCT THAT WHOLE CORNER OF THAT WALL THAT RUNS AROUND ON THE PICTURE UP IN THE COURTYARD AREA, AND THEN THE STRUCTURE WHERE THE BUILDING PART ITSELF THAT WOULD JUST WE DON'T HAVE ANY ACCESS.
THEY RAN A STAIRCASE BEHIND IT AND THEN WE HAVE THE ELEVATOR BEHIND IT.
I HOPE THAT ADDRESSES SOME OF THE QUESTIONS.
I THINK SO, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT THEY WANT TO ASK THE APPLICANT? WE'LL START WITH COMMISSIONER BROWN.
SO THEN, DID YOUR RAS REVIEW YOUR REVISED RAMP PLAN?
[01:05:01]
NO, WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS NOW TO LOOK AT THE RAMP AND HAVE THAT REVIEW.HE DID SAY IT'S EITHER THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED ACCESS PERIOD ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, WHATEVER YOU END UP DOING, RAMP OR NOT.
YOU KNOW, WE DO NEED TO MEET THE TDLR CURRENT CODES TO GET THAT ACCESS [INAUDIBLE] LEVEL.
ANOTHER QUESTION WAS YOU TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO AVOID INTRUSION INTO THAT PARKING GARAGE STRUCTURE, BECAUSE I THINK WHAT STAFF IS THINKING IS YOUR PLAZA IS SO BIG, WHY DON'T YOU JUST PUT SOME OF THE RAMP UP INTO THE PLAZA? IS THAT SOMETHING CONSIDERED? FOR THE RUNS AND THE WIDTHS THAT WE HAVE TO CONTEND WITH FROM THE BUILDING TO THE PROPERTY LINE, WE ARE ACTUALLY SOME OF THE RUNS.
THE END OF THE RUN ON THE PICTURE SHOWS THAT WE KIND OF PLATEAU ABOUT A FOOT BACK FROM THE PLAZA ITSELF AND IT GOES LEVEL THERE, BUT TO MAINTAIN A THREE FOOT WIDE PATHWAY ON EACH RAMP AND THAT ALSO WE HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE THE HANDRAILS, YOU KNOW, AN INCH AND A HALF PROTRUSION OR SORRY, INCH AND A HALF OFF THE WALL IN THE OFF THE BUILDING AND THEN AN INCH AND A HALF OFF THE POST ON THE HANDRAILS.
SO ALL THESE LITTLE MEASUREMENTS START TO ADD UP TO A FOOT OR SO THERE.
SO WE'VE TRIED TO EVEN ELONGATING THIS EVEN FURTHER.
IF WE STILL ARE LIMITED TO THE ACTUAL WIDTH OF THE EGRESS ITSELF AND WE'VE DONE MULTIPLE DESIGNS TO SEE HOW WE CAN, YOU KNOW, LET'S SEE IF WE CAN MOVE IT THIS WAY, MOVE THAT WAY, GO IN, GO OUT, MAKE LONGER, RUN SHORTER RUNS, DO A SMALL RUN HERE.
THE ONLY THING THAT WE POSSIBLY DO TO SHORTEN THE AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE ON THE WALKWAY ON THE RIGHT OF WAY ITSELF IS TO MAKE THE MID RAMP AND THE THE TWO ONE TWO RAMPS, ONE CLOSE TO THE BUILDING AND THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE, MAKE THOSE A LITTLE LONGER AND THEN REDUCE THE THE BOTTOM RAMP, WHICH IS ACTUALLY IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND WE AND THEN WE LOOK AT DOING THIS OTHER PLAN THAT THE LAST ONE HE SHOWED, WHICH GIVES US SIX FEET, SEVEN INCHES THE TREE BEDS.
SO IT ALLOWS EGRESS THERE BY REDUCING THE PROTRUSION INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND SO WE BELIEVE WE CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN AS FAR AS HAVING THE WIDTH, MAKING IT MINIMALIZE, MINIMIZING THE IMPACT ON TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND STILL COMPLYING WITH THE THREE FEET BETWEEN THE HANDRAILS ON EACH ON EACH FRONT.
JUST WHERE I WAS HEADED WAS THIS WAS, YOUR RAMPS ARE TWENTY FOUR, YOU HAVE FOUR RAMPS, THREE OF THEM ARE TWENTY FOUR PARDON? YEAH.
WE HAVE THREE RAMPS AT TWENTY FOUR FEET AND THEN WE HAVE A.
YOU HAVE ONE THAT ABOUT SIX FEET UP AT THE TOP.
THAT'S THE LAST ONE AT THE TOP IS ABOUT SIX FEET.
SO YOUR RAMPS CAN BE UP TO THIRTY FEET LONG IF YOU WANT.
WHAT I'M WHAT I'M SUGGESTING WAS IF YOU GET RID OF THE ONE THAT'S IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, MAKING YOUR TWO RAMPS 30 FEET LONG, YOUR RAMP AT THE TOP.
WHICH IS THE LAST ONE COULD BE 18 FEET LONG AND YOU'D HAVE IT DONE, BUT YOU WOULD PUT YOUR 18 FOOT RAMP ON, 18 FOOT RAMP AT THE TOP.
THE LAST ONE THAT GOES UP TO THE PLAZA AND YOU'D BE OUT OF THE RIGHT OF WAY ALTOGETHER.
YEAH, THE TOP OF THE PLAZA IS THE BULKHEAD WALL FOR THE PARKING GARAGE.
SO AS THAT AS THAT, THE STAIRCASES THAT ARE EXISTING TRANSITION INTO THE COURTYARD.
THAT'S THE MAIN BULKHEAD WALL OR THE PARKING GARAGE BELOW.
SO CUTTING IT, TAKING THAT OUT, PLUS ALL THE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF THE SUSPENSION OF THE PARKING GARAGE CEILING, THAT LITERALLY WOULD WE'D HAVE TO CUT INTO ALL THOSE CARRYING BEAMS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND THAT JUST WOULD JEOPARDIZE THE INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING ITSELF, THE COURTYARD AND THE WALLS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
OK, WELL, LET'S SAY THAT MAY THAT MAY HAVE BEEN WHAT STAFF WAS THINKING.
BUT THAT LOOKS LIKE THE PATH TO MAKE YOUR RAMP, USE UP THAT SPACE IN THE PLAZA AS STAFF [INAUDIBLE].
AND THAT'S LITERALLY [INAUDIBLE] PARKING GARAGE.
[01:10:01]
SO THAT GETS INTO THE PARKING GARAGE STRUCTURE, THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THAT'S CORRECT.THAT COULD BE A THAT COULD BE A PROBLEM.
SO COULD WE HAVE THE REVISED DRAWING BROUGHT UP AGAIN, PLEASE, PETE? I'LL BRING IT UP TO TAKE ME A MINUTE.
THANKS, CATHERINE, BECAUSE IT'S A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION.
AND YES, WHILE SHE'S DOING THAT, COMMISSIONER HOLLAWAY, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? RIGHT.
WELL, NOW THAT WE'RE GETTING DOWN INTO THE WEEDS, I'M LOOKING AT THE WALL ON MARKET.
DID YOU CONSIDER TAKING THAT WALL OUT AND BUILDING THE RAMP FROM THERE, YOU'VE GOT LIKE TWENTY EIGHT FEET OF WALL RIGHT THERE.
I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND WHICH WALL WE'RE LOOKING AT.
OK, YOU HAVE YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE YOUR MAIN PLAZA AND IT'S JUST TO THE NORTH.
WHERE THE WHERE THE PALM TREE IS? THAT WALL UP THERE.
OVER HERE ON MARKET, LIKE, I'M LOOKING AT THE WALL FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE.
OK, SO THAT WALL BEHIND THE [INAUDIBLE], BEHIND THE TRAILER, CORRECT? YES, YES.
SO THAT'S A CONCRETE BULKHEAD AND IT'S ALSO ALL CONCRETE ABOVE.
SO THEY PROTRUDE OUT TO THE PROPERTY JUST SHORT OF THE PROPERTY LINE, THAT ACTUALLY PUTS US IN THE SAME SITUATION, THE LENGTH THERE, AND THEN THE PLATFORMS ARE WHAT THE RETURNING PLATFORMS ARE WHAT ACTUALLY CREATE THE ISSUE THAT EVERY SINGLE TIME WE REACH A CERTAIN DISTANCE, WE HAVE TO DO A CUTBACK TO CREATE A PLATFORM FIVE FEET FIVE FEET.
AND EACH TIME THAT WE INCREASE, WE NEED TO MEET THE THIRTY SIX INCHES FROM HANDRAIL TO HANDRAIL DISTANCE, THEN WE HAVE TO ALLOW FOR POST WIDTH ON EITHER SIDE TO SUPPORT THAT.
SO THEN IT STARTS TO GROW TO ABOUT SIX FEET, FIVE INCHES.
SO WE'VE STRETCHED IT, MOVED IT.
I'VE PROBABLY GOT ABOUT 10 VARIATIONS OF TRYING TO MEET THIS.
AND HAVE Y'ALL HAVE Y'ALL EVEN EXPLORED THE IDEA OF A HANDICAP LEFT TO THE EXTERIOR OUT THERE? IT SEEMS LIKE YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO THAT AND STILL HAVE ENOUGH ON EITHER SIDE TO HAVE STAIRS.
SO YOU STILL HAVE TWO ENTRANCES TO THAT PLAZA AREA.
SO THE LIFT ITSELF LIMITS ARE EGRESS.
IF WE PUT THE LIFT IN, IT MINIMIZES OUR EGRESS AND ONE OF THEIR CURRENT TENANTS THAT IS LOOKING TO OCCUPY THIS IS THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND THEN I BELIEVE THEY'RE HOLDING THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING THE VISITOR CENTER ALSO.
SO IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF TRAFFIC.
IF WE GET WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF PEOPLE AT A TIME PUT IN THE LIFT AND THE LIFT ITSELF HAS BEEN PRONE THE LIFTS.
I'VE DONE A LITTLE RESEARCH ON THOSE TALKS TO SOME PEOPLE HAVE THEM.
IF ONE OF THEM SHUTS DOWN OR WE HAVE A POWER OUTAGE, IT MINIMIZES THE EGRESS OR ACTUALLY ELIMINATES THE EGRESS ITSELF IN THE WEATHER CONDITIONS ON THE ISLAND AND THE ROT AND DECAY.
THEY HAVE A TENDENCY TO BREAK DOWN MORE OFTEN THAN NOT.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO TRY TO MEET BOTH ASPECTS TO GAIN THE ACCESS AND TO ALLOW, IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY, AMPLE EGRESS OFF THE PLAZA ITSELF AND AWAY FROM THE BUILDING.
COMMISSIONERS, ANYTHING ELSE? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING TO ME AND THE REPRESENTATION THAT YOU'RE MAKING TO THIS COMMISSION, MR. PENLINGTON, IS THAT YOU HAVE TRIED ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING THAT YOU COULD.
YOU HAVE REWORKED THESE DRAWINGS.
YOU HAVE TRIED ANY AND EVERYTHING.
AND THIS IS THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN MAKE THIS WORK.
IS THIS WHAT YOU'RE REPRESENTING TO THIS COMMISSION? THIS IS YES, WHAT WE BELIEVE IS THE ONLY WAY TO MAKE THIS WORK AND TO MEET ALL YOUR EGRESS AND ACCESS TO THE MAIN ENTRANCE.
ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONERS? AND WE HAD NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS OTHER THAN THE SEVEN NOTICES THAT WERE RETURNED
[01:15:07]
AND SO WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:45 AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK FOR A MOTION.WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS? WELL, WE'LL START IT OUT LIKE THIS, THEN I WILL MOVE.
I'D LIKE I'D MAKE A MOTION JUST SO WE CAN HAVE SOME DISCUSSION.
I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PLAN THAT EXTENDS A FOOT INTO THE TO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
SO I DON'TIT'S A LITTLE BIT OVER A FOOT.
I THINK IT'S ONE FOOT FOUR INCHES.
OK, JUST SO WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE HIS DRAWING THAT HE HIS REVISED DRAWING THAT HE SUBMITTED THAT WOULD GO A FOOT ONE FOOT FOUR INCHES INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? SO I'LL SECOND IT SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION.
COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR BROWN.
I THINK WE'RE ALL WE'RE ALL KIND OF HEADING IN THE DIRECTION OF THE REASON THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING APPROVING THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE END FEASIBILITY OF PUTTING IT ANYWHERE ELSE AND END FEASIBILITY BASED ON CONSTRUCTION, CONSTRUCTION PROBLEMS, I GUESS.
AND I DON'T I DON'T I DON'T KNOW.
IF STAFF WAS CONSIDERING THAT OR NOT.
YOU KNOW, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS WELL, WE GOT PLENTY OF PLAZA THERE.
WHY DON'T THEY JUST PUT IT ON THE PLAZA? AND WE'VE KIND OF GONE THROUGH A PROCESS THAT KIND OF IDENTIFIED THE FEASIBILITY OF DOING THAT.
AND I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'VE LANDED.
IS THAT WHAT EVERYBODY'S THINKING? I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S LEADING US TO THIS DISCUSSION FOR SURE.
I WOULD SAY THAT MY PERSONAL FEELING IS THAT WE USUALLY APPROVE THESE LTUS ON HUNDRED YEAR OLD BUILDINGS, BUILDINGS THAT ARE A FEW INCHES OVER, YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE THAT.
RARELY IS IT ON A MAGNITUDE OF THIS SCALE, YOU KNOW, AND ESPECIALLY WHEN.
WE THINK ABOUT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE WILL THINK WHEN WE ALLOW THEM TO GO INTO THE LTU, I MEAN, INTO THE CITY'S PROPERTY IN THIS SITUATION, AND SOMEBODY WILL SCRATCH THEIR HEAD AND SAY, WELL, WHY DIDN'T THEY JUST USE THAT GIGANTIC PLAZA? THE SAME THING THAT WE'RE THINKING RIGHT NOW.
SO I THINK WE ALL JUST HAVE TO GET OUR HEADS AROUND THE FACT THAT THERE'S NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE OR IS THERE AN ALTERNATIVE? AND IF SOMEBODY ON THIS COMMISSION CAN SEE AN ALTERNATIVE AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE BUILDERS, WE HAVE ENGINEERS, WE HAVE BUSINESSMEN, WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, ALL KINDS OF PROFESSIONALS HERE.
DOES ANYONE SEE AN ALTERNATIVE? REALLY IS JUST ABOUT IN FEASIBILITY IS ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING IT COST TOO MUCH BECAUSE YOU CAN DO IT JUST COST YOU A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY.
CUTTING INTO ALL THAT CONCRETE.
SO, WHO, COMMISSIONER HOLLAWAY.
THIS BECAUSE WE'VE JUST BEEN GIVEN THIS REVISED PLAN AND NOW WE'RE ASKED TO ACT ON IT.
I WOULD REALLY RATHER THAT WE SEND THIS BACK TO THE APPLICANT AND ASK FOR MORE COMPLETE DRAWINGS AND A DEMONSTRATION OF END FEASIBILITY, BECAUSE I DON'T YOU KNOW, WE WERE GOING INTO THIS CASE TODAY PREPARED.
TO ACCEPT WHAT STAFF HAD RECOMMENDED OR I WAS BECAUSE OF THE DRAWINGS THAT HAD BEEN SUBMITTED AND AFTER MY PERSONAL VISIT TO THAT AREA, THAT IMPACT AREA, I THOUGHT THERE'S NO WAY WE CAN GIVE UP THREE FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY.
THE SIDEWALK IS IMPINGED UPON ANYWAY BECAUSE OF THE TREE LOCATIONS.
WE WOULD BE TRIPPING OVER SOMETHING OR RUNNING INTO A TREE.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT WAS JUST SO CHAOTIC IN THAT AREA THAT I COULDN'T IMAGINE GIVING UP THREE FEET.
NOW WE'RE ASKED TO GIVE UP ONE FOOT AND I'M NOT SO SURE I'M READY TO DO THAT, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT.
I MEAN, MAYBE I'M MAKING A MISTAKE AND I'D REALLY RATHER DEFER THIS SO THAT WE CAN SEE IT AGAIN AND WE CAN CONTEMPLATE WHAT THE REVISED DRAWINGS OFFER US.
[01:20:03]
I UNDERSTAND.THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT.
WHO ELSE HAS SOMETHING THEY'D LIKE TO SAY? YES, GO, JEFF FIRST, THEN JOHN PAUL.
I MEAN, MY CONCERN IS, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER WE COME UP WITH AND I THINK THERE IS A SOLUTION AND I THINK THIS IS A WONDERFUL PROJECT, BUT I THINK IT GOES BACK TO STAFF'S CONCERN ABOUT THE BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
IF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO APPROVE THIS, IT SEEMS LIKE UNTIL THEY'RE ON BOARD THEN WHATEVER WE DECIDE IS IRRELEVANT UNLESS WE CAN OVERRIDE THEM.
I'M NOT CLEAR ON OUR AUTHORITY TO DO THAT.
AND JEFF FOR THAT SITUATION, I THINK WE'RE INTO THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'VE HAD.
LET'S THINK BACK TO A BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE IT PRIOR TO THE CITY SAYING THAT THEY HAVE THAT THEY CAN TIE INTO THE SEWER LINE.
WE HAVE TO GIVE OUR APPROVAL TO GET THAT BALL ROLLING, BASICALLY.
SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT OUR PART OF THE PUZZLE, IRRESPECTIVE OF THEM, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE THE BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS.
SO WE NEED TO STAY IN OUR LANE AND THEN LET THEM DO THEIR THING.
AND DONNA, AM I CORRECT IN THAT? THAT IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
OK, I WAS JUST CONCERNED BECAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE SEEN STAFF COME UP WITH THIS TYPE OF STATEMENT.
AND I HAD TO ASK THE SAME QUESTION, COMMISSIONER ANTONELLI, YESTERDAY, TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD IT CORRECTLY TOO.
OK, SO COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI.
YEAH, I DON'T HAVE A VOTE HERE, BUT I'LL JUST WEIGH IN ON A LITTLE BIT.
YOU KNOW, IF A DEFERRAL IS WHAT THE COMMISSION WANTS TO DO, I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT.
BUT I THINK THE OUTCOME IS GOING TO IS GOING TO BE THE SAME WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US.
I MEAN, I THINK THEY HAVE REALLY LOOKED INTO THIS SITUATION AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
AND LIKE WE DISCUSSED I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IT IS A MATTER OF WHAT IS MORE FEASIBLE.
AND SOMETIMES PROJECTS JUST DON'T WORK BECAUSE SOME THINGS COST TOO MUCH MONEY TO DO.
AND I'M SURE THEY COULD GO IN AND START CUTTING CONCRETE AND REDOING SOME STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF THE BUILDING.
BUT AT THE END, IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE FINANCIAL SENSE.
AND THE PROJECT MIGHT DIE BECAUSE OF THAT.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THEY'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF TRYING TO REDUCE THIS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
YOU KNOW, THE CITY WOULD BE GIVING UP ABOUT A FOOT FIVE INCHES, IT LOOKS LIKE, ON THE DRAWINGS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE WIDE SIDEWALKS IN THIS AREA.
AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE TREES NEED TO BE MOVED.
YOU KNOW, THAT MIGHT BE AN OPTION AS WELL.
BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE GETTING OUR DISTANCES THAT WE NEED ON THE SIDEWALK WITH THAT ONE FOOT, FIVE INCH INTRUSION.
AND I'D BE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT TO GET IT MOVING ALONG AND GET THAT BUILDING BACK UP AND OCCUPIED.
I THINK MY PROBLEM WITH IT IS THAT I SPENT A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT THIS, REVIEWING IT UNDER ONE SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES.
AND NOW A SIGNIFICANT, SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE PUZZLE HAS BEEN CHANGED THAT WE'VE HAD A CHANCE TO SEE FLASHED UP ON THE SCREEN FOR THREE MINUTES OR LESS.
AND I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT IT A LITTLE MORE CLOSELY.
I'M NOT GOING TO SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET THE SAME OUTCOME, BUT I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US TO LOOK AT IT MORE CLOSELY.
I DON'T EVER MAKE SNAP DECISIONS IN THESE MEETINGS.
I MEAN, MY DECISIONS ARE CONSIDERED AND I'VE LOOKED AT THEM FOR A LONG TIME.
I THINK IT MAY BE THAT WE COME TO THE EXACT SAME SITUATION.
BUT I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT IT A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN TO JUST MAKE A DECISION ON THE FLY.
YOU KNOW, RUSTY, YOU GOT THE BALL ROLLING JUST SO THAT WE COULD HAVE A DISCUSSION AND I THINK THAT I WOULD FALL DOWN ON THE SIDE OF I MIGHT JUST FALL DOWN, I WOULD FALL DOWN, COME DOWN ON THE SIDE OF DEFERRAL SO THAT WE COULD KNOW THAT WE'VE STUDIED IT AS AS MUCH AS WE SHOULD HAVE.
WHAT MORE INFORMATION DO WE THINK WE WOULD ASK STAFF TO GO GET FOR US OR.
I JUST LIKE TO LOOK AT THE DRAWING FOR MORE THAN 30 SECONDS.
YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE WE CAN'T.
[01:25:05]
IF WE ASK AN APPLICANT.TO TURN IN DRAWINGS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION WITH THEIR APPLICATION X AMOUNT OF TIME AHEAD OF TIME, IT'S SO STAFF CAN HAVE TIME TO LOOK AT IT AND STUDY IT.
AND IT'S SO WE CAN HAVE TIME TO LOOK AT IT AND STUDY IT AND HAVE A NEW DRAWING DROPPED ON US THE DAY OF THE MEETING.
I DON'T THINK FITS THE REQUIREMENTS.
I AGREE WITH YOU AND I WOULD LIKE, YOU KNOW, IF WE LOOKED AT THIS, IF WE DEFERRED IT, THEN STAFF MAY COME BACK WITH A DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATION.
I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT UPON ALL OF US TO LOOK AT THIS AGAIN.
AND BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE HELD UP BY THIS OTHER ISSUE, WHAT PROBLEM WOULD THAT BE? I MEAN, IF WE ASKED FOR A DEFERRAL TILL NEXT UNTIL MARCH, I MEAN, I DON'T SEE THAT THAT'S GOING TO HOLD UP CONSTRUCTION NECESSARILY.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU THINK THAT THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND BE WORKING SIMULTANEOUSLY, GETTING ON THE AGENDA FOR THIS BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS? YEAH, THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME FROM STAFF, BUT THAT'S MY EXPECTATION.
LET ME HEAR FROM COMMISSIONER BROWN AND THEN LET'S HEAR FROM STAFF.
ONE THING THAT IF WE DID THE DEFER THIS FOR MORE INFORMATION, ONE THING I THINK STAFF COULD DO IS CONFIRM THE END FEASIBILITY OF THEIR ASSUMPTION, PREVIOUS ASSUMPTION THAT THERE WERE PLENTY OF PLAZA TO BUILD ON.
YOU KNOW, I JUST I JUST THREW OUT WHAT I THOUGHT.
BUT I MEAN, YOU KNOW, AND THEN MR. PENLINGTON KIND OF WALKED ME THROUGH IT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE STAFF CAN RUN THAT DOWN, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER OPTIONS.
OK, THAT'S A THAT'S A VALID POINT TOO.
WOULD WE HAVE TO WAIT, WOULD THEY HAVE TO WAIT TO COME BACK ONTO OUR AGENDA IN MARCH? I'M LOOKING AT [INAUDIBLE].
THE NEXT MEETING IS FEBRUARY 15TH.
SO A TWO WEEK DEFERRAL IS WOULD BE WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR TO HAVE THEM RUN THOSE TRAPS.
AND I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE.
AND I ALSO THINK THAT IT'S REASONABLE FOR THIS SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE APPLICATION ITSELF.
SO DOES ANYONE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? WE HAVE THEM.
SO I'M KIND OF ON BOARD BOB'S FIRST STATEMENTS WHERE WHAT ELSE ARE THEY GOING TO BRING US? I THINK IF IT WAS HEY, THEY WERE ASKING FOR THREE FOOT.
NOW THEY NEED THREE FOOT SIX INCHES.
BUT THESE GUYS HAVE REALLY GONE THE OTHER WAY.
I THINK THE APPLICANT DID A GREAT JOB OF EXPLAINING THIS TO US AND PRETTY MUCH TELLING US, HEY, WE DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER OPTIONS THAN WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING.
HE STILL HAS TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
AND, YOU KNOW, IN THE WORLD OF REAL ESTATE, TIME IS MONEY.
AND I THINK THESE GUYS HAVE SHOWED UP, SPENT SOME MONEY, BOUGHT A GREAT BUILDING, INVESTED IN OUR COMMUNITY.
AND I JUST THINK WE NEED TO PRESS ON.
I DON'T I DON'T THINK THAT ANYTHING THERE'S GOING TO BE GREAT NEW REVELATION IF WE PUT THIS OFF FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
SO THAT'S WHERE I WOULD STAND.
ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE AND MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER WALLA.
I SECONDED IT AND IT WAS FOR APPROVAL OF THIS OF THE REQUEST FOR THE LICENSE TO USE.
SO THIS VOTE IS FOR APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE TO USE.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, DOES COMMISSIONER WALLA WANT TO ACCEPT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO AMEND YOUR MOTION TO SAY WITH THE REVISED DRAWINGS, COMMISSIONER? I THINK MY MOTION HAD IT WITH THE REVISED DRAWINGS THAT ENCROACHED ONE FOOT FOUR INCHES OR WHATEVER IT WAS.
I THINK IT DID, TOO, NOW THAT YOU MENTION IT.
OK, SO WE'LL HAVE A VOTE ON THAT.
[01:30:02]
IN FAVOR.THE VOTE WAS THREE TO THREE WITHOUT FOUR VOTES.
ALL RIGHT, SO NOW, COMMISSIONER HOLLAWAY.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER 21 P ZERO ZERO THREE UNTIL FEBRUARY 16TH MEETING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DIRECTION FROM STAFF.
SO ANY DISCUSSION? WE'RE ALL DISCUSSED OUT, OK, SO NOW WE'LL HAVE THE VOTE, PLEASE, CATHERINE.
WITH FOUR IN FAVOR THE MOTION PASSES.
SO WE'LL GET SOME MORE INFORMATION ON THAT.
AND THEN I THINK WE'LL BE ABLE TO TAKE ACTION ON IT IN TWO WEEKS.
AND IF THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND SIMULTANEOUSLY BE PURSUING THIS BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS ROUTE, THAT WAY THEY WON'T LOSE ANY TIME.
YEAH HEY, WHILE WHEN STAFF'S LOOKING AT THIS.
AND I WAS STARTING TO ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY HAVE SOME GREEN SPACE THAT THEY'RE PUTTING IN THEIR PLAZA AND WHAT MOVING THOSE TREES LOOKS LIKE.
SO IF YOU GUYS ARE LOOKING AT THIS KIND OF CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE AS WELL SO WE COULD DO THAT, THAT'D BE GREAT.
SO, PETE, THAT WOULD BE IF YOU COULD DISCUSS THAT WITH THEM.
AND I ASSUME, COMMISSIONER WALLA, WHEN YOU SAY THOSE TREES, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TREES ON THE SIDEWALK? LOOKS LIKE THERE'S TWO TREES RIGHT BY WHERE THEIR RAMP WOULD BE.
THERE ARE TWO MORE FURTHER DOWN, BUT I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE ONES RIGHT BY WHERE THE RAMP IS.
[9.A. Discussion Of Accessory Dwelling Units And Definition Of “Subordinate” In The Land Development Regulations (Listowski/Hill)]
ALL RIGHT.WE'VE COVERED OUR LTUS AND NOW WE'RE ONTO OUR DISCUSSION ITEMS. AND WE HAD A DISCUSSION OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND DEFINITION OF SUBORDINATE IN THE LDRS.
CATHERINE, DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS ONE OR IS IT PETE OR SHOULD I? ADRIEL'S ON THE LINE AND HE'LL BE SUMMARIZING THE DISCUSSION FOR US.
[INAUDIBLE] SO, YES, SO BASICALLY AT THE LAST MEETING, WE STARTED THIS CONVERSATION ON ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND THE DEFINITION OF SUBORDINATE AND HOW WE CURRENTLY HANDLING THOSE SITUATIONS.
SO ESSENTIALLY, WHAT IS HAPPENING, AS WE DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING.
SOME FOLKS ARE WANTING TO BUILD A NEW ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
AND THEIR PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS LOW TO THE GROUND AND OUR REGULATIONS CALL FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THE NEW ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE SUBORDINATE, WHICH MEANS IT HAS TO BE SMALLER IN SIZE, SQUARE FOOTAGE, ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE, ET CETERA.
SO THAT'S REALLY THE ISSUE AS WE TALKED LAST MEETING.
IN OTHER WORDS, THERE ARE THERE WERE SEVERAL SUGGESTIONS ON HOW WE COULD POSSIBLY APPROACH THIS ISSUE.
BUT THAT'S PRETTY MUCH SUMS IT UP.
AND COUNCIL MEMBER, LISTOWSKI WE AGREED TO PUT THIS OR WE I ASKED TO HAVE IT BACK ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T HERE AT OUR LAST MEETING.
AND I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S OF PARTICULAR INTEREST TO YOU.
AND I WANTED YOU TO BE ABLE TO MAYBE DIRECT OUR COMMISSION AS TO WHAT COUNCIL IS THINKING AND WHAT DIRECTION COUNCIL WANTS US TO TAKE.
AND THEN WE'LL FIGURE OUT IF WE NEED TO WORKSHOP THIS OR WHAT WE NEED TO DO.
SORRY, I MISSED THAT LAST MEETING.
I WAS OUT OF TOWN ON VACATION, BUT, YOU KNOW, I DID WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS MEETING AND I'M NOT SURE THIS IS SO MUCH A COUNCIL ISSUE AT THIS POINT.
IT'S MORE OF SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS I'VE HAD WITH THE LOCAL ARCHITECTS IN TOWN AND SOME HOMEOWNERS AND THEM WANTING TO DO SOMETHING LIKE A GARAGE APARTMENT.
AND THE ONE THING IN THE CODE THAT REALLY IS THROWING UP THE FLAG WITH MOST OF
[01:35:06]
THESE PEOPLE I'M TALKING TO IS THE HEIGHT ISSUE.THE SUBORDINATE STRUCTURE SHOULDN'T BE HIGHER THAN THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY, AND AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT IT CURRENTLY STATES IN OUR LDRS.
AND SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A SLAB ON GRADE HOUSE OR [INAUDIBLE] HOUSE AND THEN THEY WANT TO DO A GARAGE APARTMENT BEHIND IT, THAT ELIMINATES THAT POSSIBILITY BECAUSE THE WAY THAT THE REGULATIONS ARE CURRENTLY WRITTEN AND THEN WE HAVE FLOOD ZONE ISSUES AS WELL.
AND SO WE'RE ELEVATING OUR STRUCTURES HIGHER THAN WE HAVE BEFORE TO MEET NEW BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS.
AND THAT CAN ALSO ELIMINATE THE POSSIBILITY OF DOING THESE SECONDARY STRUCTURES.
AND SO I THINK THERE IS SOME ROOM TO POSSIBLY CHANGE SOME LANGUAGE HERE AND OUR LDRS TO ALLOW FOR THAT TYPE OF STRUCTURE BE BUILT AND STILL BE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND THINGS LIKE THAT AND BUT YET BE A LITTLE HIGHER THAN THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
SO THAT'S KIND OF THE BASIC GIST OF THE CONVERSATION AND JUST KIND OF WANT TO SEE WHAT Y'ALL HAD WHAT Y'ALL THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.
WHAT STAFF THOUGHT ABOUT THAT AND SEEING HOW WE COULD MAKE THAT ACCOMMODATION.
I THINK THAT AT OUR LAST MEETING, I DON'T KNOW IF, YOU KNOW, YOU KIND OF HAVE A LOT GOING ON.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO GO BACK AND LISTEN TO THE DISCUSSION.
BUT A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMISSION CENTERED AROUND BFE AND MAYBE MAKING SOME KIND OF ALLOWANCES FOR THAT, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE THE BUILDINGS TALLER IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THAT AND STILL KEEP THINGS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
MY UNDERSTANDING FROM STAFF IS THIS MIGHT NOT BE SOMETHING THAT COMES UP SUPER OFTEN, BUT IT YOU KNOW, IT CAN AND DOES COME UP.
AND SO I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT WE COULD WORKSHOP AND FIGURE OUT SOME LANGUAGE AND ADAPT THE LANGUAGE AND ADRIEL WOULD WE JUST DO THAT AS A AS AN AMENDMENT OR A CHANGE TO THE LDRS? EXACTLY YEAH, THAT WOULD BE A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE TO THE LDRS.
WOULD WE LET'S GO AHEAD AND ADRIEL, YOU WANT TO WORK UP A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE LDRS THAT WOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT BASE FLOOD ELEVATION, STAYING IN CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THEN WE COULD DO A WORKSHOP ON THAT PRIOR TO WHAT MEETING? HOW FAR OUT? I'M LOOKING AT OUR MEETINGS ARE ON, WHAT THE 6TH, THE 16TH.
AND THEN HOW LONG WOULD THAT TAKE ADRIEL? WELL, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, AS YOU VERY WELL STATED, THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T COME UP VERY OFTEN.
I MEAN, THE LDRS HAVE BEEN IN PLACE NOW FOR OVER FIVE YEARS AND OR JUST ABOUT FIVE YEARS.
AND I'M ACTUALLY GOING ON SIX.
IT DOESN'T COME UP VERY OFTEN.
AND IN MOST CASES, MOST FOLKS ARE ABLE TO WORK WITHIN THE WITHIN THE REGULATIONS.
BUT I MEAN, WE'RE OPEN TO BRINGING THIS FORWARD AGAIN TO YOU GUYS AND AND WORKING OUT THAT LANGUAGE.
I MEAN, I'D SAY PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WITHIN THE NEXT TWO MONTHS OR SO JUST TO GIVE US SOME BREATHING ROOM AND OTHER TASKS THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON.
I'D BE HAPPY TO COME UP THE LANGUAGE AND BRING IT BACK SOONER THAN THAT.
IF, WORK WITH ADRIEL, BRING HIM SOME BRING THEM SOME LANGUAGE AT THE STAFF LEVEL, SEE IF THEY WERE THAT SATISFIED THEM.
AND THEN WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SPEED UP THAT PROCESS A LITTLE BIT.
MAYBE IF YOU PITCH IN THERE AND HELP COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI, I THINK PLANNING IS KIND OF RUNNING ON EMPTY RIGHT NOW.
SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT ARE HAPPENING PERHAPS IN YOUR FAMILY RIGHT NOW.
SO I THINK AND OTHER PRESSING MATTERS, LIKE TO GET CERTAIN PROJECTS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE MOVING THAT ARE ACTUAL, YOU KNOW, THINGS THAT THEY GOT TO GOT TO GET GOING.
LET ME I'LL GET SOME LANGUAGE IN AND GET THAT OVER TO ADRIEL.
AND IF THEY HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH IT, THEN WE CAN DISCUSS IT MORE.
AND I'LL GET WITH ADRIEL TO PUT IT BACK ON THE AGENDA SOMETIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
[01:40:04]
OK, THAT'S GREAT.VICE CHAIR BROWN, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? YEAH.
JOHN PAUL, ARE YOU HEARING THESE KIND OF COMMENTS FROM PEOPLE IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS OR FROM WHAT NEIGHBORHOODS IN PARTICULAR? YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY WERE ACTUALLY TRYING TO DO THIS.
I PERSONALLY I HAD BUILT PROBABLY THREE GARAGE APARTMENTS OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, BUT THEY ALL HAD TWO STORY HOUSES ON THE PROPERTY ALREADY.
AND THEN I'VE ACTUALLY TALKED TO TWO ARCHITECTS WITHIN THE LAST TWO MONTHS.
AND THEN A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL.
AND THEY BROUGHT THAT UP WITH ME AS ALL THREE OF THOSE PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT SCENARIOS BROUGHT IT UP WITH ME.
AND SO IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT I'VE HEARD OVER THE LAST COUPLE MONTHS OR LAST SIX MONTHS AND THOUGHT I'D BRING IT TO THE COMMISSION.
AND IF I MAY ADD TO THAT VICE CHAIR BROWN, I WILL SAY THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S NOT IT IS NOT EXCLUSIVE TO HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
THIS HAPPENS PRETTY MUCH ALL OVER TOWN WHERE OUR REGULATIONS ALLOW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS SUCH AS [INAUDIBLE] AS COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI JUST EXPLAINED.
OK, ONE OF THE REASONS I BRING IT UP IS BECAUSE IF WE DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, YOU MIGHT WANT TO COORDINATE IT WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR HISTORIC PROPERTIES, BECAUSE WE GO INTO GREAT DETAIL ABOUT [INAUDIBLE] AND RELATIONSHIPS OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
AND WE DON'T WANT TO CONTRADICT WHAT'S IN THERE.
SO JUST THOUGHT I'D BRING THAT UP.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE A PLAN ON THAT NOW.
WE GOOD ON THAT? OK, SO WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.
AND THEN ADRIEL, WHEN Y'ALL GET IT READY, WE'LL PUT IT BACK ON THE AGENDA.
AND I THINK WE PROBABLY NEED TO WORKSHOP IT TO DISCUSS IT OR EVERYBODY KNOW WHEN YOU SEE IT COME UP AS A DISCUSSION ITEM AT A MEETING THAT IT'S GOING TO BE MORE THAN JUST A TWO MINUTE DISCUSSION, PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THAT.
WE'LL WORK CLOSELY WITH COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI.
AND WHENEVER WE'RE READY TO PUT IT BACK ON THE AGENDA, WE WILL LET YOU GUYS KNOW.
[9.B. Update On Concession Regulations (Hill)]
ALL RIGHT.THEN WE HAVE UPDATE ON CONCESSION REGULATIONS, AS I RECALL ON THAT ONE, CATHERINE, WE WANTED TO HAVE INPUT FROM COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI AS TO THE DIRECTION THE CURRENT COUNCIL WANTS TO TAKE ON THAT.
OK, SO COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI, WE BROUGHT UP AND GOT AN UPDATE FROM DANIEL ON THE CONCESSION REGULATIONS AND WE KNEW THAT IN THE PRIOR COUNCIL, PARTICULARLY COUNCIL MEMBER HARDCASTLE HAD REALLY WANTED US TO LOOK AT THE CONCESSIONS REGULATIONS AND WE DIDN'T KNOW IF THE CURRENT COUNCIL WANTED TO TAKE THE SAME DIRECTION AND IF THIS WAS A PRIORITY FOR THEM.
AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION AS TO HOW YOU ALL WANT US TO PROCEED.
NOW THAT YOU HAVE A NEW COUNCIL MAKE UP.
YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE PRIORITY OF IT, I THINK IT WAS DEFINITELY A TOPIC IN THE LAST COUNCIL.
I HAVE WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED THIS ON OUR CURRENT COUNCIL.
I THINK WE MY FEELING IS THAT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'D LIKE TO DISCUSS.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KIND OF STAND ALONE FOOD TRUCKS.
AND THE FOOD TRUCK PARK KIND OF ISSUE AND THE DIFFERENCE THERE IS, IS IT SEEMED LIKE IT MADE MORE SENSE THE WAY OUR CURRENT REGULATIONS ARE WRITTEN THAT.
IT IS CHEAPER FOR THE FOOD TRUCK OPERATOR TO HAVE A STAND ALONE VENUE, AND YOU'RE SEEING THIS THROUGHOUT THE THROUGHOUT THE TOWN, WE HAVE FOOD TRUCKS IN OUR GAS STATIONS ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS.
BUT THERE IS NO PLACE IN TOWN WHERE THERE'S KIND OF A GATHERING OF THESE FOOD TRUCKS BECAUSE ONE, IT WOULD COST MORE MONEY FOR THAT FOOD TRUCK TO OPERATE IN A, YOU KNOW, FOOD TRUCK PARK RATHER THAN ON ITS OWN IN A STANDALONE LOCATION.
AND I MEAN, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IN YEARS PAST, THAT'S WHERE WE WANTED TO WE WANTED TO SEE MORE OF THE CONSOLIDATION OF THESE FOOD TRUCKS THAN THEM JUST HAVING THE ABILITY TO SCATTER OUT THROUGHOUT TOWN AND PICK ANY PROPERTY THAT WAS ZONED PROPERLY AND RENT A SPOT FROM THE OWNER AND PLACE A FOOD TRUCK THERE.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE VERY LIMITED ABILITY TO KIND OF REGULATE HOW THAT LOOKS IN
[01:45:03]
THAT TYPE OF SITUATION.AND SO I THINK THAT IS REALLY THE THING THAT REALLY SPURRED THIS TOPIC PREVIOUSLY.
AND MY FEELINGS ARE THAT'S THE DIRECTION I WANT TO GO, IS TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, EITHER HAVE MORE AUTHORITY OR SAY SO IN THE LOOK OF THESE INDIVIDUAL LOCATIONS OR TRY TO MAKE IT MORE FEASIBLE TO CONSOLIDATE SOME OF THIS INTO A CERTAIN AREA.
OR, YOU KNOW, IF A PERSON WANT TO TURN THEIR PROPERTY INTO A FOOD TRUCK PARK, IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE FOR THE FOOD TRUCK VENDORS TO GO THERE INSTEAD OF JUST SCATTERED OUT HERE AND THERE.
BUT SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING AND CHANGES THAT WOULD INCLUDE CHANGING A FEE STRUCTURE AND EVERYTHING, YOU KNOW, AND A LOT OF REGULATIONS, I WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU WOULD MAYBE WORKSHOP THIS WITH COUNCIL AND SEE OR GET A DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL.
AS YOU KNOW, IF THEY WERE THINKING THE SAME WAY YOU ARE BEFORE WE EMBARK DOWN A LONG TRAIL AND COME UP WITH SOME GREAT PLAN, AND THEN THEY ALL SAY, WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? SO IF YOU COULD GET IF YOU COULD TAKE THE PULSE OF COUNCIL, WORKSHOP IT WITH THEM, YOU KNOW, AT WORKSHOP, GET THEIR INPUT AS TO WHAT THEY WANT AND THEN SEND US ON OUR MERRY WAY.
WE'RE HAPPY TO TACKLE THE TASK.
OK, AND IF I CAN ASK STAFF, I MEAN, I THINK THAT WAS THE DIRECTION OF OUR PREVIOUS COUNCIL.
DO I NEED TO GO BACK TO THIS CURRENT COUNCIL AND DO THAT AGAIN? I MEAN, WE HAD A DISCUSSION AND I BELIEVE A VOTE TO LOOK AT THIS ISSUE AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION LEVEL.
NOW THAT WE HAVE A NEW COUNCIL, DO I NEED TO DO THAT AGAIN? MADAM CHAIRMAN, I JUMP IN HERE FOR A MINUTE? YES, SIR.
PLEASE, CAN YOU HEAR ME ALL RIGHT? YES, TIM.
OK, I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT MY MICROPHONE MAKES IT SOUND LIKE IT'S SORT OF A, YOU KNOW, IN THE TUNNEL OR SOMETHING.
APOLOGIZE FOR THESE AUDITORY SITUATIONS.
BUT COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI IS RIGHT WHEN THE IMPETUS FOR THIS WAS ABOUT SORT OF GENERATING A BETTER PROGRAM AND INCENTIVES AND OR REDUCTION OF THE INCENTIVES FOR THE FOOD TRUCK PARK SITUATIONS.
BUT AS WE STARTED LOOKING INTO THE ISSUE, WE REALLY FOUND THAT IN A COMPREHENSIVE MANNER.
WE FOUND THAT THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT PROBABLY OUGHT TO BE ADDRESSED.
AND SO WHILE WE'RE COMING UP WITH POSSIBLY SOME THINGS THAT MIGHT MAKE IT MORE ADVISABLE OR DESIRABLE FOR SOMEBODY TO DO A TRUCK A FOOD TRUCK PARK, WE'RE ALSO BEING RECOGNIZING AND SEEING ISSUES THAT EVEN ON THE STAND ALONES AND BETWEEN DIFFERENT FORMS OF SALES, YOU KNOW, ICE CREAM IS ONE THING AND YOU CAN DO THAT KIND OF ANYWHERE, BUT YOU CAN'T DO IT WITH FOOD.
AND SO THERE'S AND THEN THERE'S REGULATORY LAYERS THAT DEAL WITH THE COUNTY.
SO WHEN WE'RE PACKAGING ALL THIS TOGETHER, I THINK IT STILL SHOULD PROBABLY BE THE SET WITH THE STAFF COMING UP WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AND GETTING IT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR YOUR THOUGHTS BEFORE WE TAKE IT BACK TO COUNCIL, BECAUSE THAT'S I THINK COUNCIL WAS PRETTY MUCH OF THE OPINION THAT YOU HEARD WHAT OUR CONCERNS WERE ABOUT SORT OF THE FOOD TRUCK PARK SIDE OF IT.
BUT AS TO OTHER THINGS, I THINK THEY WERE OPEN.
SO I WOULD RATHER THE STAFF SORT OF CONTINUE ON WITH OUR RESEARCH FROM WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
AND BY THE WAY, DANIEL [INAUDIBLE] KIND OF TAKING THAT ON, HE HAPPENS TO NOT BE AVAILABLE AT THE MOMENT DUE TO THINGS BEYOND HIS CONTROL AND ANYHOW, IF WE CAN, WE CAN MAYBE DO THAT.
I'M NOT NECESSARILY SAYING THAT YOU GUYS NECESSARILY HAVE TO WEIGH IN WITH A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION, BUT AT LEAST SORT OF HEAR WHAT WE'VE GATHERED AND HAVE THE DISCUSSIONS.
AND THEN PERHAPS I THINK WE CAN GO BACK TO COUNCIL.
AND THEN IF THEY DISAGREE WITH THAT DIRECTION, THEN WE COULD WE COULD COME BACK.
WELL, OBVIOUSLY, WE HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ANYHOW, BECAUSE THAT'S LEGALLY [INAUDIBLE].
I JUST THINK WE NEED TO TAKE SOMETHING NEEDS TO GO BEFORE COUNCIL BECAUSE THE COUNCIL IS SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED FROM THE LAST TIME.
AND IF WE EMBARK ON THIS, YOU KNOW, THIS JOURNEY.
[01:50:01]
SO.IF I MAY, MADAM CHAIR, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST, BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO SITUATIONS.
AND I DO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO GET THE TEMPERATURE OF THE NEW COUNCIL TO SEE, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S GOING TO BE A HOT OR COLD ISSUE FOR THEM.
AND SO I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT OUR EX OFFICIO TRY AND GET THAT TEMPERATURE FROM THE NEW COUNCIL.
BUT WHAT I'M ALSO HEARING IS THAT STAFF HAS ALREADY AND ARE ACTIVELY WORKING ON CHANGES TO CONCESSIONS AND CONCESSIONERS BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT THEY NEED TO BE UPDATED AND THEY NEED TO ADDRESS CERTAIN ISSUES AS HOW THEY ARE, AS HOW THEY'RE FUNCTIONING IN THE CITY.
SO I THINK WE'RE ACTUALLY JUST DOING A DUAL TYPE OF THING.
I WOULD ASK FOR THE EX OFFICIAL TO, YOU KNOW, GET THE TEMPERATURE OF COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, A FIVE, 10 MINUTE CONVERSATION ON THE WORKSHOP AGENDA, IF THAT'S.
SOMETHING THAT HE WANTS TO DO AND THEN WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET THE FEEDBACK FROM THAT COUNCIL TO HELP MODIFY WHAT STAFF IS ALREADY WORKING ON.
AND THEN WE CAN GET THEIR INPUT, PUT IT INTO WHAT DANIEL IS WORKING ON, THEN COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI CAN TAKE IT BACK TO COUNCIL, SEE IF THEY'RE HAPPY WITH THAT GENERAL DIRECTION, AND THEN WE'LL GET DOWN INTO THE NITTY GRITTY OF IT AND RECOMMEND WORDING UP TO THEM.
AM I GETTING THE FLOW RIGHT TIM? YOU CERTAINLY CAN ENDEAVOR INTO THAT.
I THINK I THINK EITHER WAY, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD WORK.
I WAS AT THAT COUNCIL MEETING AND WAS PART OF THAT DISCUSSION.
EVEN IF THERE ARE CHANGES, I THINK THEY STILL WANT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON WHAT MIGHT GO FORWARD.
I WASN'T IN ANY WAY SUGGESTING, OF COURSE, THAT THIS NOT GO THROUGH COUNCIL.
BUT SIMPLY, YOU KNOW, I THINK THEY'RE LOOKING TO THE COMMISSION AS SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS, YOU KNOW, AS IT'S AS IT'S REVIEWED.
AND I DO THINK THAT IF YOU COULD JUST GET THEIR PULSE ON IT, JOHN PAUL, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
COMMISSIONER WALLA, YOU HAD SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO SAY.
YEAH, I, LOOK, I'M KIND OF NEW TO SOME OF THIS.
I'M SO I'M SURE THERE'S A PECKING ORDER AND ALL THIS STUFF.
BUT MY THOUGHTS ARE, WHY CAN'T WE WORKSHOP IT AND JUST COME UP WITH OUR SHORT LIST AND GO AND WE CAN SEND THAT WITH JOHN PAUL.
AND IT'S LIKE, HEY, HERE'S WHERE THESE GUYS ARE.
THIS IS A DIRECTION THEY'RE HEADED IN.
IS THIS THE DIRECTION WE WANT TO GO? I WOULDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
AND I KIND OF SEE SOME THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE FOOD TRUCKS ARE GREAT, BUT I THINK WE COULD DO A LITTLE BETTER JOB OF MANAGING THE WAY THAT WE'RE HANDLING THAT.
SO I WOULDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM SPENDING A LITTLE TIME PUTTING IN A WORKSHOP.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH A RULE.
BUT I THINK A, YOU KNOW, A SHORT LAUNDRY LIST OF THINGS THAT A DIRECTION THAT WE SEE IT THAT WE MIGHT THINK WE NEEDED TO GO, MIGHT HELP THE MIGHT KIND OF GET THINGS OFF THE FENCE.
I WANT TO ASK HIM, HOW FAR ALONG ARE Y'ALL ON THIS TOPIC ALREADY WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT Y'ALL NEED SEE THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
I THINK THAT WE ARE PROBABLY FAR ENOUGH ALONG TO COME UP WITH THAT LAUNDRY LIST AS MR .
WALLA LISTED OR STATED, STATED IT.
I WILL SAY THAT PRIOR TO DANIEL'S ABSENCE, I WAS OUT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN FOR THE SAME KIND OF THING RIGHT BEFORE THAT.
SO IT'S BEEN BASICALLY SEVERAL WEEKS SINCE I TALKED TO DANIEL.
SO BUT I THINK WE'RE TO THE POINT OF AT LEAST HAVING AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE LAST MEETING THERE WAS A SPREADSHEET PRESENTED.
OK, THEN I THINK I THINK THAT'S OUR NEXT STEP WAS WE WERE GOING TO DO A SPREADSHEET WITH THESE VARIABLES IN IT AND SORT OF TO WEIGH IN ON THE PULSE OF WHAT WOULD WAY YOU ALL THOUGHT EACH OF THESE VARIABLES OUGHT TO GO.
PERHAPS A LITTLE BIT A LITTLE BIT OF WORK YOU TO GO.
OK, I'M HAPPY TO PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA FOR OUR WORKSHOP ON OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, WHICH IS THE END OF NEXT MONTH.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOMETHING TO BRING TO THE COUNCIL.
A LITTLE, YOU KNOW, LIST OF THINGS THAT Y'ALL ARE LOOKING AT.
[01:55:02]
AND THEN I CAN KIND OF GO OVER THAT LIST WITH THE OTHER MEMBERS OF COUNCIL.SEE, IF THEY HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD OR MODIFY TO THAT.
AND THEN I CAN BRING YOU BACK A LITTLE BIT BETTER DIRECTION FROM THERE.
AND I MEAN, WE YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS HAS THEIR HANDS FULL, YOU KNOW, AND SO EITHER WAY, WE CAN EITHER CONTINUE ON THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE THAT MEETING JUST TO BRING THE COMMISSION UP TO UP TO SPEED ON THE CHANGES THAT THE STAFF WANTS TO PUT IN THERE.
OR YOU CAN WAIT A MONTH AND A HALF AT LEAST TO GET SOME KIND OF INPUT FROM COUNCIL .
AT THE RISK OF HAVING A RECURRING AGENDA ITEM, A DISCUSSION ITEM.
LET'S INSTEAD OF HAVING UPDATE ON CONCESSION REGULATIONS AT OUR NEXT MEETING IN TWO WEEKS, LET'S GIVE OURSELVES A DIFFERENT A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT TITLE.
AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL HAVE DANIEL WITH US TO GIVE US SOMETHING MORE TO DISCUSS AS A COMMISSION.
AND THEN THAT WOULD GIVE YOU TIME COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI BEFORE YOUR MEETING, IF WE MEET ON THE 16TH, WE'D HAVE A PRETTY GOOD MATRIX AND DISCUSSION OF WHAT WE WANT TO WHAT YOU COULD DISCUSS WITH COUNCIL AND THEN GET OUR GO AHEAD FROM THEM.
COULD I INTERJECT ONE THING ABOUT ABOUT THE TWO WEEK FORMAT, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GENERATE [INAUDIBLE] THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BY THAT TIME.
AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF DANIEL'S GOING BACK FOR THAT.
AND I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST TIM., COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI IS FREE TO DISCUSS WITH STAFF PRIOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
TWO WEEKS REALLY ISN'T A LONG TURNAROUND TIME WHEN THERE'S SO MANY OTHER ISSUES THAT HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED AS WELL WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT ESPECIALLY BEING SHORT OF STAFF.
SO I WOULD AND I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT PLANNING COMMISSION COULD DO ON THE 16TH TO.
OTHER THAN TO HAVE A DISCUSSION DONNA.
INPUT IT MAY NOT IT MAY NOT BE THE BEST DISCUSSION ON THE 16TH I GUESS IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
OK, WELL I'D LIKE TO GO COUNCIL I MEAN COMMISSIONER HOLLAWAY.
I MEAN WITH ALL THE UNCERTAINTY AND HEALTH ISSUES THAT PEOPLE ARE GRAPPLING WITH, ESPECIALLY IN GALVESTON COUNTY RIGHT NOW, WE MAY NOT BE AROUND FOR THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
IF WE CAN GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME.
YOU KNOW, I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO THAT SINCE THIS IS NOT A PRESSING ISSUE.
IF JOHN PAUL DIDN'T IF WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO PRESENT UNTIL THE MARCH COUNCIL MEETING, MAYBE THAT'S OK.
I JUST I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE FOLKS A CHANCE TO THINK ABOUT THIS AND CATCH UP AND GET WELL.
I MEAN, THAT'S MY OPINION ABOUT THAT.
OK, ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER ANTONELLI, DID I SEE YOUR HAND? YES, SIR.
I THINK ONE THING THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR US IS IF STAFF COULD EMAIL TO EACH OF THE COMMISSIONERS THE CURRENT APPLICATION PROCESS, THE CURRENT RULES, FEES AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
SO THEY CAN KIND OF HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING AND OF WHERE WE ARE TODAY AND MAYBE DESCRIBE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TYPE OF PERMITS, YOU KNOW, LIKE THERE IS TEMPORARY PERMITS FOR MARDI GRAS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
AND THEN ALSO THE UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL'S RESPONSIBLE FOR, AS OPPOSED TO THE PARKS BOARD, BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF REGULATIONS THAT THEY PUT ON VENDORS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
AND AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE CURRENT DEFINITION OF THE TRAILER, THE FOOD TRAILER PARK? THIS MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE ONLINE.
AND, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL CAN ALL RESEARCH IT.
BUT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE SENT TO US, YOU KNOW, TO REVIEW, IT MIGHT IT MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL THAN SOMEBODY FORGETTING TO GO, OH, I FORGOT TO LOOK IT UP.
I WAS JUST LOOKING UP JUST TO SEE IF I COULD SEE IF DANIEL HAD EMAILED THAT TO
[02:00:03]
US BEFORE OUR LAST DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS, WHICH WAS IN SEPTEMBER.AND I CAN'T FIND IT RIGHT OFF THE BAT, BUT MAYBE JUST THEY COULD JUST SEND US THAT STUFF AGAIN, TOO.
PARDON TIM? WE CAN DO THAT SORT OF AS A REFRESHER TO YOU ALL.
WE'LL BRING IT BACK WHEN PEOPLE ARE BACK IN ACTION AGAIN.
AND THEN JOHN PAUL, MAYBE YOU CAN GET A READ FROM CURRENT COUNCIL.
OK, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS, FOLKS? SEEING NONE.
THANK YOU ALL.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.