[00:00:02]
UH, I AM ANDREW GALLETTI, CALLING THE ZONING BOARD MEETING TO ORDER.
[Zoning Board of Adjustments on August 3, 2022.]
IT IS WEDNESDAY 3:30, AUGUST, 3RD.DOES ANYBODY HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST ? WE HAVE THE MINUTES [INAUDIBLE] MOTION.
[INAUDIBLE] OH, WE'RE JUST BACK TO OUR REGULAR MEETING FORMAT, BUT BILL CLEMENT WILL BE PARTICIPATING VIA ZOOM.
WELL, I GUESS I'M OPENING THE FLOOR TO ANY PUBLIC FOR ANY NON-AGENDA ITEMS. SEEING NONE. MOVING ON TO [INAUDIBLE] FIRST CASE.
THIS IS A VARIANCE REQUEST LOCATED AT 2453 103RD STREET.
IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE GALVESTON LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ARTICLE THREE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY R-1 ADDENDUM REGARDING MINIMUM STANDARDS, INCLUDING WIDTH, DEPTH AND AREA.
IN ORDER TO DIVIDE ONE LOT INTO FOUR, YOU SEE YOUR ATTACHED EXHIBIT C FOR THE PROPOSED LOT RECONFIGURATION. NOTE THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS ON PAGE TWO OF YOUR REPORT, AS WELL AS IN THE REQUESTED VARIANCE SECTION OF THAT SAME PAGE, YOU WILL HAVE A BREAKDOWN OF EACH VARIANCE PER LOT ONE THROUGH FOUR.
[INAUDIBLE] THE APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION ON PAGES TWO.
AN AERIAL IMAGE OF THE SUBJECT SITE.
THIS SURVEY [INAUDIBLE] CONFIGURED.
THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN SHOWING THE, UM, PROPOSED BOUNDARIES, UM, PER EACH LOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE VARIANCES THAT'S BEING REQUESTED.
THESE ARE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
[INAUDIBLE] CURRENTLY RESIDING AT AT 1508 AT PALM VIEW CONDOMINIUMS. [INAUDIBLE] OKAY, WELL, CAN YOU BRING BACK UP THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION? [INAUDIBLE] SO FIRST WE POINT OUT.
SIR. YOU NEED TO SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE FOR THE RECORDING.
SORRY. MINIMUM LOT DEPTH IN AREA R-1 IS 100 FEET.
YOU'LL SEE THAT MY LOT IS 96 AND A HALF FEET DEEP.
FOR LACK OF THREE AND A HALF FEET.
I WOULDN'T EVEN NEED TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD.
[00:05:06]
WHAT IS MY OPTIMAL USE OF THE PROPERTY THAT WILL NOT MATERIALLY CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD? AND FRANKLY, THE SMALLER LOTS WITH A HOUSE THAT SUBSTANTIALLY FILLS THE LOT WILL RESULT IN HIGHER TAX REVENUES FOR THE FOR THE CITY OVER TIME, BUT SO THAT'S WHERE I START THAT ONE.I REALLY I STARTED OUT ONLY NEEDING A VARIANCE FOR THREE AND A HALF FEET.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IF THAT WAS THE ONLY THING I ASKED YOU FOR, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD WOULD CONSIDER? BUT THAT IS NOT THE CASE BEFORE YOU TODAY.
OKAY, SO ANYWAY, SO I COULD HAVE DIVIDED THE LOT INTO THREE OR FOUR PIECES JUST HAVING THE LOTS FACE [INAUDIBLE] AS OPPOSED TO FACE 103RD, AND THEN I WOULD ONLY NEED THAT BARE MINIMUM VARIANCE.
BUT BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK ON THE, ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, THERE IS A DEEDED PROPERTY SETBACK.
THERE'S A DEEDED PROPERTY SETBACK OF 25 FEET ALONG ALONG 103RD STREET, AND WITH THAT IN MIND, I THEN SAID, OKAY, NOW THE BEST USE OF MY PROPERTY, OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE TO HAVE TWO SMALLER LOTS THAT FACE 103RD AND THEN TWO LARGER LOTS THAT FACE [INAUDIBLE], AND THAT'S KIND OF MY CASE, I THINK.
BOARD, ANY QUESTIONS? [INAUDIBLE] AWKWARD OVER THERE.
[INAUDIBLE] YES, I COULD DIVVY UP, BASICALLY MAKE FOUR LOTS, ALL WITH FACING [INAUDIBLE], AND THEN THEY WOULD BE ALL BE OF A MORE UNIFORM SIZE, BUT MY PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THEN I'M WASTING A LOT OF SPACE ALONG 103RD BECAUSE OF THAT DEEDED 25 FOOT SETBACK.
BASICALLY IF I SAY THAT THE CORNER LOT THAT FACES BOTH [INAUDIBLE] AND 103RD IF I MAKE THAT 50 FEET WIDE WELL HALF OF IT IS TAKEN BY THAT 25 FOOT SETBACK.
THREE FEET IS TAKEN BY THE MINIMUM SEPARATION PROPERTY LINE TO BUILDING, AND NOW THE HOUSE THAT CAN FIT ON THAT 50 FOOT WIDE LOT IS ONLY 22 FEET WIDE.
SO THAT'S NOT REALLY A VIABLE THING.
WE REALLY JUST NEED TO STAY WITH YOU KNOW YOU PRESENTED THE CASE TO WHERE YOU [INAUDIBLE].
YES, SIR. I MEAN, THERE'S ALWAYS OPTIONS HERE, BUT IS THERE ANY MORE THAT YOU'D LIKE TO ADD TO THIS? OH, THE ONLY THING IS THAT BY HAVING LOTS THAT FACE [INAUDIBLE] YOU DO PICK UP A VERY SCENIC VIEW TO THE SOUTH OVER OVER THE SUBDIVISION LAKE.
IF YOU GO BACK TO THE VERY FIRST SLIDE.
THE OVERHEAD. EVEN FROM A PROPERLY ELEVATED HOME WHICH IN THIS AREA IS VE14.
EVEN FROM A PROPERLY ELEVATED HOME, YOU CAN'T SEE OVER THE ROOFS OF THOSE CONDOMINIUMS THAT LINE THE LAKE, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE LAKE OVER THE PARK, AND SO THOSE HOUSES THAT FACE SHAFER WILL HAVE A VERY SCENIC, VERY PLEASANT AND VERY SCENIC VIEW OF THE LAKE TO THE
[00:10:03]
SOUTH. LIKE DOES ANYBODY ELSE ON THE BOARD HAVE A QUESTION? THANK YOU, SIR. IS ANYBODY ELSE ON THIS CASE IN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? [INAUDIBLE] TO KEEP YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT 3 MINUTES.[INAUDIBLE] STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
MY NAME IS AMY [INAUDIBLE] AND WE OWN THE [INAUDIBLE] AND I JUST.
[INAUDIBLE] FROM THE LETTER WE GOT IN THE MAIL, BUT THE MAIN QUESTION I HAVE IS [INAUDIBLE] YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF ONE [INAUDIBLE] I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU, THOUGH.
WHICH LOT DID YOU SAY YOU OWN? IT'S THE [INAUDIBLE]. RIGHT ABOVE IT.
THANK YOU. RETURN THE MEETING, THEN NOBODY ELSE [INAUDIBLE] THE BOARD.
[INAUDIBLE] I HAVE A QUESTION.
[INAUDIBLE] SURE YOU CAN ASK A QUESTION.
SO WE HAVE REQUESTED VARIANCE FOR ALL FOUR LOTS.
LOT ONE AND LOT TWO 100 FEET DEPTH REQUIREMENT.
PROPOSED VARIANCE 96.5 [INAUDIBLE] IT'S NOT MUCH, ON LOT THREE AND FOUR, THE REQUIREMENT IS 5000 SQUARE FEET AND THE PROPOSED VARIANCE IS ONLY 3000.
YES. THAT'S ABOUT 60% OF THE [INAUDIBLE].
GIVE OR TAKE. IT LOOKS LIKE BILL HAS A QUESTION.
IT FITS THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE THERE CURRENTLY, AND IN ONE OF THE ONE OF THE COMMENTS, HE NOTES THAT IT IS IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE VALUE AND REALLY FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PART OF THE CONSIDERATION.
SO THIS SLIDE IS SIMILAR TO ALL THE OTHER LOTS ON 103RD ST, SO THE MOTION IS THAT WE DENY THE VARIANCE BASED ON THE FACT THAT THERE ARE NO SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT DON'T EXIST ON OTHER PROPERTY, AND I'LL SECOND THAT, AND THEN I'D LIKE TO COMMENT ON MY MOTION.
I WAS TRYING TO COMMENT AS I MADE IT THAT WASN'T APPROPRIATE.
SO THERE ARE ABOUT FOUR THINGS HERE.
THE LOT, AS IT'S CURRENTLY CONFIGURED, IS SIMILAR TO ALL OTHER LOTS ON 103RD, AND IT DOESN'T DO TO COMPARE THEM TO THE LOCKS ON [INAUDIBLE] BECAUSE THOSE ARE CONDOMINIUMS. NOW THAT'S A TOTALLY SEPARATE ISSUE IN MY MIND.
SO I DON'T SEE, NUMBER ONE, A SPECIAL CONDITION.
NUMBER TWO, LOTS THREE AND FOUR, JUST DON'T EVEN COME CLOSE, AND TO ME THAT MAKES IT A SITUATION WHERE IT'S JUST NOT APPROPRIATE.
SUBDIVISION AND FINALLY TO COMMENT ON [INAUDIBLE] HOUSES IN THE VIEW
[00:15:06]
I DON'T SEE THE [INAUDIBLE] THERE TO CREATE ADDITIONAL DENSITY, AND SO FOR THAT REASON, I MADE THE MOTION TO DENY, AND I'LL VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO DENY AND NOT BE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING A VARIANCE.[INAUDIBLE] DISCUSSION OR IN THE ACTUAL MOTION.
OKAY, [INAUDIBLE] THAT YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER TURNING YOUR VIDEO OFF.
WE COULD POSSIBLY HEAR YOU BETTER JUST WITH THE I MEAN, TURNING YOUR VIDEO OFF.
WE CAN STILL HEAR YOU WITH THE AUDIO, I HOPE.
YEAH, THE VIDEO HAS TO REMAIN ON.
YOU SOUNDED PRETTY GOOD THERE.
GOOD. WE'LL TRY IT ONE MORE TIME.
THREE POINTS. NUMBER ONE, THE LOT IS SIMILAR TO ALL OTHER LOTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I CONSIDER TO BE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND NOT RELATED TO CONDOMINIUMS. TWO, TWO OF THE LOTS FALL SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW REQUIREMENT.
SO IT'S NOT JUST A SMALL VARIANCE, BUT THOSE ARE TWO SIGNIFICANT VARIANCES.
AND FINALLY, IN MY OPINION, IT'S DESIRABLE TO HAVE LESS DENSITY IN THAT PART OF THE ISLAND IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THE VIEW REALLY SHOULDN'T BE A CONSIDERATION FOR A VARIANCE THAT WAS MUCH MORE CLEAR.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS [INAUDIBLE].
WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO DENY FOR THE REASONS JUST STATED.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. OKAY, [INAUDIBLE] WELL, THE MOTION WAS FOR DENIAL. IT WAS UNANIMOUS, AND SO IT PASSED.
THANK YOU, SIR, FOR YOUR TIME.
AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE SOMETHING [INAUDIBLE].
DO YOU HAVE AN ACTION ITEM? DO YOU WANT TO INTO THE ACTION ITEM? THANK YOU. SORRY.
I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT BEING HERE AT LAST MONTH'S MEETING, BUT I THINK I NEED TO STAY HERE BECAUSE APPARENTLY WHEN I'M GONE, THINGS HAPPEN OR DON'T HAPPEN, BUT I WAS REVIEWING THE TAPE AND LISTENING, AND I REALIZED THAT WHEN THE CASE THAT WAS BEING DISCUSSED, WHICH WAS IN ACTUALITY 22Z-005.
I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBER, BUT THE STAFF REPORT HAD A CASE NUMBER OF 22Z-004. WHEN THE MOTION WAS MADE, THEY REFERRED TO THE 22Z-004.
SO THAT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED ON THE RECORD THAT IN FACT, THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE REGARDING THE CASE OF LAST MONTH WAS, IN FACT, FOR CASE NUMBER 22Z-005.
WE HAVE A [INAUDIBLE], BUT WE NEED TO CORRECT THE MOTION AND MAYBE IT CAN BE MOTION TO CORRECT THE NUMBERING OF LAST [INAUDIBLE].
[INAUDIBLE] REFLECT THAT IT [INAUDIBLE] 22Z-005.
[00:20:12]
WE HAVE CORRECTIONS OF THE MINUTES.I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION IF WE CORRECT THE MINUTES LAST MONTH IN REGARDS TO THE NUMBERING OF THE CASE FROM WHAT IT WAS AT 22Z-004 TO 22Z-005 I.E. 5401 AVENUE [INAUDIBLE].
THAT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE'RE AT THE MINUTES RIGHT NOW, BUT WE NEED TO CORRECT THE RECORD TO REFLECT THE CASE IN ACTUALITY SHOULD HAVE BEEN 22Z-005.
SUBSTITUTE MINUTES FOR RECORD.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT BE CORRECT THE RECORD TO REFLECT PROPER NUMBERING OF LAST MONTH'S CASE TO 22Z-005 KNOWN AS 5401 AVENUE [INAUDIBLE].
FOR THE RECORD. THANK YOU ALL.
THANK EVERYBODY FOR COMING, AND NOW WE CORRECT THE MINUTES, HAD THE CORRECT CASE NUMBER.
THEY JUST NEED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
[INAUDIBLE] ALREADY BEEN MOVED.
SO MOVED, AND I'LL SECOND THAT BILL.
THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, FOR COMING.
DO WE HAVE CASES FOR NEXT MONTH? TODAY IS THE DEADLINE.
SO WE'LL KNOW AT THE END OF THE DAY TODAY.
YOU CAN LOOK AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING.
WE MAY HAVE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION.
[INAUDIBLE] NOTHING'S BEEN SUBMITTED, BUT WE HAVE UNTIL THE END OF THE DAY TODAY TO ACCEPT THE CASE.
THANK YOU, EVERYBODY.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.