6.A. 22BF-101 (17207 FM 3005) Notice of mitigation for disturbance of dunes and vegetation. Property is legally described as Sandy Shores (2003) ABST 121, Lot 1, Acres 2.310 a subdivision in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Li LiProperty Owner: John Reger

[6.A. 22BF-101 (17207 FM 3005) Notice of mitigation for disturbance of dunes and vegetation. Property is legally described as Sandy Shores (2003) ABST 121, Lot 1, Acres 2.310 a subdivision in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Li LiProperty Owner: John Reger ]

WE WILL NOW GO INTO OUR PUBLIC HEARING SECTION.

REMINDER THAT THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

THERE ARE NO VOTES THAT WILL BE TAKEN ON THESE TWO ITEMS UPCOMING.

WE WILL HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT.

CANNOT DO A QUESTION AND ANSWER, UNFORTUNATELY, ON THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS.

FIRST, WE WILL GET STARTED WITH 22BF-101.

ALL RIGHT. HOW DO YOU PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

THIS IS A NOTICE OF MITIGATION FOR PROPOSED DISTURBANCE OF DUNE VEGETATION.

FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF A SHARED DUNE WALKOVER.

THE ADDRESS IS 17 207 FM 305.

THE PROPERTY IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS SANDY SHORES 2003.

ABSTRACT 121.

LOT ONE.

A SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE SANDY SHORE SUBDIVISION.

SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS ARE LOCATED TO THE EAST AND WEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND A BEACH AND DUNE SYSTEM ARE LOCATED TO THE SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

ACCORDING TO THE BUREAU OF ECONOMIC GEOLOGY, THIS AREA IS ERODING AT A RATE OF 5 TO 6 FEET PER YEAR.

STAFF HAS PREPARED PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR YOUR VIEWING.

FIRST, WE HAVE THE FIRM AND BEG MAP SHOWING THE SITE IN QUESTION BETWEEN TWO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

THE PROPOSED WALK OVER, NECESSITATING THIS INDICATION IS SIMILAR TO THOSE TO THE WEST.

ARE WE ABLE TO DO PRESENTATION? OH PRESENTATION VIEW.

THANK YOU. ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS THE MITIGATION LAYOUT MAP ILLUSTRATING THE PROPOSED WALKOVER AS WELL.

THAT'S ALSO FINE. WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO WITH THIS ONE.

THAT'S RIGHT. THE NORTH TOW OF THE CRITICAL JUNE AREA HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THIS SITE AS SEAWARD EDGE OF THE WETLAND AREA ON THE PROPERTY SEEN HERE IN GREEN.

HOWEVER, THE APPLICANTS HAVE VOLUNTEERED VOLUNTARILY INCLUDED PORTION OF THE WALKOVER WITHIN THE WETLAND AREA AS WELL AS THE CITY'S MINIMAL REGULATION AND REGULATORY OVERSIGHT REGARDING WETLANDS MEANS THIS WOULD OTHERWISE NOT BE NECESSARY.

YOU MAY SEE THE PROPOSED WALKOVER AS THE PURPLE LINE MOVING FROM THE TOP LEFT TO THE BOTTOM, RIGHT ACROSS THE PROPERTY IN BLUE.

YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THE PROPOSED AREA FOR THE VEGETATION MITIGATION AS WELL.

ON THE NEXT SLIDE, WE HAVE PHOTOS OF THE SITE.

FROM THE TOP LEFT, MOVING CLOCKWISE, YOU HAVE THE NORTH VIEW ALONG THE DUNE WALK OVER ALIGNMENT.

THE WETLAND IS THE TALLER VEGETATION IN THE BACKGROUND.

NEXT ON THE RIGHT IS THE EAST VIEW.

[00:05:01]

THE HOME TO THE EAST IS SEEN IN THE UPPER LEFT.

BOTTOM RIGHT SOUTH VIEW ALONG THE DUNE.

WALK OVER ALIGNMENT LOOKING TOWARDS THE BEACH.

AND THEN BOTTOM LEFT THE WEST VIEW AS SEEN FROM THE DUNE WALKOVER ALIGNMENT AND THE NEIGHBORS VERY SIMILAR DUNE WALK OVER IS SEEN IN THE PHOTO AS WELL.

ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS PHOTOS FROM THE BEACH AS WELL, LOOKING FROM THE LINE OF VEGETATION AND LAND ON PROPERTY ON THE TOP RIGHT. LOOKING TO THE NORTHWEST.

BOTTOM RIGHT IS THE EAST VIEW OF LINE OF VEGETATION AND THE MARKER THERE IS THE APPROXIMATE SEAWARD TERMINUS OF THE WALK OVER.

AND THE SAME TO THE BOTTOM LEFT.

THIS CONCLUDES STAFF SUPPORT AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. COLE.

LET'S GO. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. SEEING THAT THERE ARE.

HOLD ON A SECOND.

IF THERE'S NONE FROM Y'ALL, I DO HAVE A COUPLE FOR THE STAFF.

SO STAFF IN THE PACKAGE THAT WAS SENT TO TO US A&M WETLAND CONSULTING SERVICES REFERS TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENCES ON THIS LOT AS WELL AS THERE'S A COUPLE OF EXHIBITS, ONE THAT SHOWS A SITE PLAN SHOWING FIVE UNITS ON THIS LOT AND THE OTHER ONE SHOWING THREE UNITS.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS OUTSIDE OF THE PURVIEW OF THIS REQUEST, BUT ALSO STAFF MEMBER COLE REFERENCED A SHARED DUNE WALKOVER.

CAN STAFF PLEASE EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT.

HOW WE GO ABOUT OR IF THIS IS PRESENTED PROPERLY.

AND BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THIS IS ZONED R ONE BUT WE'RE SHOWING POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF 3 TO 5 UNITS ON THIS LOT.

SURE. SO THE SCOPE OF THIS PRESENTATION IS THE MITIGATION OF THE VEGETATION DUE TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WALKOVER.

THIS IS A SHARED DUNE WALKOVER BECAUSE THERE ARE THREE UNITS BEING PROPOSED ON THE SITE.

ORIGINALLY THERE WERE FIVE, BUT DUE TO ZONING RESTRICTIONS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WAS REDUCED DOWN TO THREE WITHIN THIS BEACHFRONT PERMIT.

CASE NUMBER 22BF-101.

IT INCLUDES THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE THREE STRUCTURES ON THE SITE, THE DRIVEWAY AND PARKING AREA, AS WELL AS THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS DUNE WALK OVER AND MITIGATION FOR THE IMPACTS TO THE VEGETATION ON SITE.

WHAT IS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S PURVIEW HERE IS JUST THE MITIGATION HEARING, BECAUSE CAN WE GO BACK TO THE MAP? DUE TO THE LOCATION OF THE NORTH TOW OF THE DUNE, THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF THE STRUCTURES AND EVERYTHING LANDWARD OF THAT IS GREATER THAN 50 FEET FROM THE DUNE PROTECTION LINE, MEANING THAT IT IS ALL WITHIN THE STAFF'S REVIEW AND PERMITTING ONLY IF THE NORTH TOW OF THE DUNE HAD BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ON THE SEAWARD LANDWARD EDGE OF THE WETLAND, THEN THAT WOULD BE COMING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A VOTE.

BUT BECAUSE IT'S SEAWARD OF THAT, IT IS JUST HERE AS A MITIGATION HEARING.

THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE MULTIPLE LOTS, MULTIPLE HOUSES ON THE LOT AND THE ZONING STANDARDS ARE OUTSIDE OF THE BEACHFRONT PURVIEW AND ARE QUESTIONS THAT MAY BE BETTER DIRECTED TOWARDS THE PLANNING DIVISION.

SURE. NO, I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION, RUSSELL, AND THE REASON I BRING THAT UP, IT'S ONE IT WAS PART OF THE PACKAGE AS WELL AS WE RECEIVED ONE PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE EFFECT THAT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE QUANTITY OF PROPERTIES ON THE PARCEL.

BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THE REQUEST OF X.

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:40 P.M..

SO ANYBODY ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE? OH, I'M SORRY. LET'S FIRST TALK TO THE APPLICANT.

IS THE APPLICANT IN THE ROOM FOR THIS CASE? NO. ALL RIGHT, THEN.

THE PUBLIC HEARING ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE, PLEASE STEP FORWARD.

SEE, NO MOVEMENT.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:41 P.M.

AND. BEINGS THAT THERE IS NO VOTE OR ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY THE COMMITTEE WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD TO OUR NEXT CASE

[00:10:10]

PLEASE. ALRGHTY I BELIEVE THAT'S 22P-080, WHICH IS AT 1515 AND 1519 BAYOU SHORE.

[6.B. 22P-080 (1515 and 1519 Bayou Shore) Request for a replat to increase the number of lots from two to three. The properties are legally described as Tracts I and II, Emily Root Addition No. 2 (2020), Abstract 121, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicants: Jennifer Grant Property Owners: Suresh and Paresha Shah]

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR RE PLAT FROM TWO LOTS TWO, THREE BECAUSE BY STATE LAW WE ARE INCREASING DENSITY LOT DENSITY IN R ONE ZONING. THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING PER SECTION 13.80 LANDFILL REGULATIONS AND STATE LAW WRITTEN PUBLIC NOTICE OF THIS REQUEST IS REQUIRED.

26 PUBLIC NOTICES WERE SENT AND THAT WENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FOOT OF THE SUBJECT SITE ON.

PER THE ADDRESS IS ON FILE WITH THE GALVESTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT.

SO PRIOR TO 2019, THE SUBJECT PARCEL SHOWN WAS ONE LARGE INDIVIDUAL LOT.

THE PREVIOUS OWNER SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION IN 2019 TO REPLANT THE LOT INTO THE CURRENT TWO LOT CONFIGURATION.

THE APPLICANT, WHICH IS NOW THE CURRENT OWNER, IS REQUESTING RE APPLIED TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LOTS FROM 2 TO 3.

THE LOT ARE ALL CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED.

SEE EXHIBIT A.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE AREA ZONED FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENCES IS MOSTLY DEVELOPED ACCORDINGLY WITH A FEW VACANT LOTS IN THE GENERAL VICINITY.

MOST OF THE LOTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER IN AREA AND LENGTH THAN THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION.

ALL LOTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO EXISTING MUNICIPAL WATER AND SANITARY SEWER.

NEITHER ENGINEERING NOR PUBLIC WORKS PROVIDE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED REPLAY.

NO DEPARTMENTS ACTUALLY PROVIDED OBJECTIONS IN THIS CASE.

THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY R-1 ZONING DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS IN THIS AREA ARE A MINIMUM OF 2500 SQUARE FOOT.

THE STANDARD APPLIES TO ALL R ONE ZONED LOTS SOUTH OF BROADWAY, NORTH OF SEAWALL, WEST OF 25TH STREET AND EAST OF 61ST STREET, WHICH THIS LOT JUST IS.

THE PLAT THEREFORE EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR LOTS AND THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT.

ARTICLE THREE ADDENDUM IN OUR LDR ALL LOTS WILL BE AT LEAST 50 FEET WIDE, AT LEAST 100 FOOT LONG AND AT LEAST 17,543 SQUARE FOOT IN AREA. AS SHOWN THE STAFF REPORT.

NOTE THE PLAT APPROVAL CRITERIA IN YOUR STAFF REPORT AS WELL.

THE PLAT WILL BE APPROVED WITH SPECIFIC CONDITION ONE AND STANDARD CONDITIONS TWO THROUGH THREE.

AND WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS.

SO FIRST WE HAVE THE VICINITY MAP THERE IN THE LOWER CORNERSTONE WHERE THESE TWO EXISTING LOTS ARE LOCATED.

AND HERE WE SEE THE PROPOSED RE PLAT OF THE TWO LOTS INTO THREE.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND HERE WE HAVE AN OVERLAY SHOWING THE TWO LOTS THAT EXIST NOW WITH YOU CAN JUST BARELY SEE THE OVERLAY SHOWING WHERE THE PROPOSED THREE LOTS WOULD BE.

AND YEAH, WE'RE BASICALLY THERE.

APPLICANT IS BASICALLY DISPLAYING THIS INTO THREE INDIVIDUAL EQUAL LOTS MORE OR LESS.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOOKING SOMEWHAT, I GUESS IT WOULD BE SOUTHWEST AND THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, THE PROPERTIES TO THE EAST, THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH. AND THIS INCLUDES S AIRPORT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DANIEL.

COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER HUMPHRIES THE THE SIZE IS THE SIZE OF THE ORIGINAL LOT. WAS.

HOW MUCH CAN YOU [INAUDIBLE].

I THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN AN ERROR IN THE STAFF REPORT.

THE ORIGINAL LAW MAY HAVE BEEN THE 17,000 SQUARE FOOT.

HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE, THE ONLY STANDARDS FOR THIS PARTICULAR PART OF OUR ONE ZONING IT DOES CHANGE FURTHER WEST IS 2500 SQUARE FOOT IN AREA.

SO IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT HAS GOT AT LEAST 50 FOOT OF WIDTH.

THEY'RE ALL EXACTLY 50 FOOT WIDE, OVER 100 FOOT OF LENGTH AND WELL OVER THE 2500 SQUARE FOOT.

THANK YOU. RIGHT.

ANYBODY ON THIS SIDE? ALL RIGHT.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE IN THE ROOM WITH US FOR THIS CASE? NO APPLICANT HERE.

ALL RIGHTY, THEN.

WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PUBLIC COMMENT AT 3:45 P.M.

PLEASE NOTE THAT ONCE YOU COME FORWARD, PLEASE SIGN IN.

PUT YOUR NAME AND YOUR INFORMATION THERE ON THE SIGN IN SHEET.

ADJUST THE MICROPHONE ACCORDINGLY, SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE.

AND CLEARLY FOR THOSE WHO ARE WILL BE LISTENING TO THIS ON THE RECORD AND EACH PUBLIC SPEAKER WILL HAVE 3 MINUTES TO ADDRESS TO BRING FORWARD THEIR CONCERNS ON THIS MOMENT.

ALL RIGHT. LET'S START OVER HERE ON THIS SIDE.

ANYBODY WISHES TO COMMENT ON THIS NOTICE? ALL RIGHTY, THEN. WE'LL GO OVER HERE TO THIS SIDE.

[00:15:01]

I'D LIKE TO COME UP FIRST. YES, MA'AM.

MY NAME IS DEBORAH POLING.

I'M WITH THE BAYOU SHORE DRIVE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IF YOU COULD LOWER THAT.

AND THERE WE GO.

SORRY. I'M WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH AND THERE ARE SEVERAL NEIGHBORS HERE WITH ME.

AND THEY OBJECT TO THIS PROPERTY BEING SPLIT INTO THREE LOTS.

MAINLY BECAUSE AND I FILED IT THIS MORNING, NUMBER ONE, WITH THREE MORE HOUSES, THERE'S GOING TO BE AN INCREASE IN TRAFFIC, WHICH WE'RE ALREADY HAVING A PROBLEM WITH TRAFFIC.

INCREASE IN UTILITY USAGE, WHICH IS OUR SEWER SYSTEM.

WE'RE ALREADY HAVING A PROBLEM WITH BACKED UP SEWERS WITH DURING HEAVY RAINFALLS INCREASING OUR FLOOD RISK.

IF IT'S NOT CONSTRUCTED CORRECTLY, WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE NEW HOUSE BEING BUILT AND WE'RE HAVING FLOODING ISSUES ON THE STREET.

ANOTHER THING IS THE SHOTGUN HOUSES, WHICH IS BASICALLY ALL THAT'S GOING TO FIT IN A 50 FOOT WIDE PROPERTY AND IT'S GOING TO DIMINISH THE NEIGHBORHOOD VALUE LOSS OF FOLIAGE THAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE LOTS.

IN ORDER TO PUT THAT MUCH HOUSES THERE, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BASICALLY RIP OUT ALL THE FOLIAGE THAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY.

WE'RE AFRAID THAT EVENTUALLY IT'S GOING TO BE TURNED INTO SHORT TERM LEASES OR AIRBNBS.

THE TAX INCREASES ON OUR ALREADY RETIRED RESIDENTS ARE ALREADY STRUGGLING.

WE JUST FEEL THAT THE SHOTGUN HOUSE IS NOT IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND. NOT ALL THE NEIGHBORS AFFECTED BY THE SPLIT WERE NOTIFIED BY THE CITY. I KNOW YOU SAID YOU SENT OUT 26, BUT THERE'S A COUPLE OF PEOPLE HERE THAT DID NOT RECEIVE NOTICE.

SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HERE TODAY.

AND THERE WAS A SWIMMING POOL ON THAT LOT.

AND ANOTHER CONCERN WE HAVE IS SINCE IT WAS FILLED IN WITH THE DEMOLISHED DEBRIS BUILDING HOUSE, FROM THERE, IT'S GOING TO CAUSE MORE ISSUES.

SO WE'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT ADDRESSED.

IF YOU DO APPROVE IT, WHICH WE HOPE YOU WANT.

OKAY. AND I WILL SIGN YOUR PAPER.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SHE. YEAH.

I'LL JUST STAND HERE. BESIDES, I'M READY.

WELL, BEFORE WE GO ON WITH THE NEXT COMMENT, MAYBE A EXCLAMATION EXPLANATION A LITTLE BIT BY MS. FAIRWEATHER, IF YOU COULD GIVE US A AN INSIGHT AS TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE MINISTERIAL RE PLAT PROCESS OF WHAT WE ARE GOING THROUGH AND THE PROCESS OF WHAT WHAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO TAKE ACTION ON AND WHAT WE ARE NOT.

OKAY. EVEN BETTER.

SURE. SO BASICALLY, AND THIS IS PARTIALLY DUE TO CHANGES IN STATE LAW, WHICH OF COURSE NO ONE IN THE CITY HAS ANY REAL CONTROL OVER.

WHEN A REPLAY COMES UP IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, IN THIS CASE, R ONE IS STRICTLY RESIDENTIAL, WHICH MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE CITY'S MINIMUMS, WHICH IN THIS CASE IT DOES.

THE CITY HAS NO POWER TO ACTUALLY DENY THE REPLAY.

AND ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS BASED ON STATE LAW.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE FOR THE FOLKS PRESENT THAT AT THE TIME, OUR PLANNING COMMISSION THEN HAD A VERY DIFFICULT DECISION OF DECIDING, WELL, DO WE NOTIFY PEOPLE SO THEY AT LEAST KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON OR DO WE NOT? AND OUR PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE TIME DETERMINED THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER TO NOTIFY PEOPLE OF WHAT'S GOING ON, AT LEAST EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT AN ACTIONABLE ITEM.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

YES, MEANING IT'S NOT AN ACTUAL ACTIONABLE ITEM MEANS THAT IT'S GOING TO BE GRANTED NO MATTER WHERE, WHETHER WE'RE HERE OR NOT.

THAT'S CORRECT. LET ME JUST.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LET ME JUST ADD TO THAT A LITTLE BIT.

IT'S NOT JUST THAT IT'S APPROVABLE AS SUBMITTED.

IT'S UNDER STATE LAW.

IN CHAPTER TWO, 12 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, WHICH DEALS WITH PLATTING.

THE PLAT CAN ONLY BE DISAPPROVED OR APPROVED.

THERE IS NO CONTINGENT APPROVAL.

THERE IS NO CONDITIONAL APPROVAL.

IT EITHER IS APPROVED IF IT MEETS OUR GUIDELINES OR IT IS DISAPPROVED AND NOT ALLOWED TO GO FORWARD.

[00:20:08]

SO IF THEY SUBMIT A PLAT THAT IS THAT MEETS ALL OF OUR STANDARDS.

NEITHER THIS COMMISSION REALLY NOR EVEN STAFF HAS THE ABILITY TO DENY IT AND APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

AND SO AND WE HEAR THIS QUITE A BIT, AND I AM ADDRESSING THE GALLERY.

AND WHY ARE WE BRINGING THESE CASES AND WHY ARE WE NOTIFYING THE FOLKS IN THE AREA? PART OF WHAT THE PREVIOUS COMMISSION MEMBERS FELT WAS THAT PEOPLE IN THESE SPECIFIC AREAS SHOULD KNOW WHAT POSSIBLY COULD BE COMING SO THAT THEY CAN BE MADE AWARE AND THEY CAN COME AND ADDRESS QUESTIONS AND MAKE THEIR COMMENTS.

OFTENTIMES AT THESE HEARINGS, WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE APPLICANTS PRESENT AS WELL, AND THEY HEAR THOSE COMMENTS.

AND THAT BUILDS A COMMUNICATION BRIDGE, SO TO SPEAK, SO THAT THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE AREA CAN DISCUSS WITH THE POSSIBLE DEVELOPER IF IT'S A DEVELOPER AND FIGURE OUT EXACTLY HOW IS THIS GOING TO WORK.

I DON'T BELIEVE THE DEVELOPER IS HERE TODAY, BUT AGAIN, OFTENTIMES THEY ARE PRESENT, THEY HEAR THE COMMENTS AND IT BUILDS A COMMUNICATION BRIDGE.

SO THE COMMISSION BEFORE THIS ONE FELT THAT WAS IMPORTANT.

AND IT'S CONTINUED TO THIS POINT.

WE'VE ASKED I BELIEVE WE'VE ASKED THESE COMMISSIONERS WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO CONTINUE THAT TYPE OF COMMUNICATION BUILDING AND INFORMATION DELIVERY SYSTEM.

AND THE COMMISSIONERS STILL WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

SO THAT'S THE REASON BEING IT'S NOT A WASTE OF TIME.

PEOPLE DO HEAR THE COMMENTS.

EVERYTHING IS OUT ON THE SOCIAL MEDIA AS WELL.

SO IT'S NOT A WASTE OF TIME YOU'RE COMING HERE.

WELL, I APPRECIATE THAT WE GET TO AT LEAST SPEAK.

YES. I'M STEPHANIE JINKS, FORMERLY OF PURSUIT, AND I'VE LIVED ON BAYSHORE SINCE 2002.

I LIVE ON THE WATER SIDE.

EVERY PLOT OF LAND ON THE WATER IS THAT LARGE WITH A LARGE HOME ON IT.

TO HAVE THIS ONE LOT SPLIT INTO TWO, WHICH A DECENT SIZED HOME COULD HAVE BEEN PUT ON THOSE TWO.

BUT TO HAVE IT NOW SPLIT INTO THREE LOTS WITH THREE SMALL HOMES, WHEN ALL OF THE HOMES ON THAT SIDE OF THE WATER ARE NOT THAT SIZE CHANGES THE WHOLE DESIGN AND ORIGINAL CONCEPT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

ALSO, AS SHE WAS SAYING TO WE HAVE OLD SEWER SYSTEM.

THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WAS STARTED, I THINK, IN THE FORTIES.

OUR SEWER SYSTEM IS ALREADY STRAINED, OUR PLUMBING STRAINED.

I HAD CLAY PIPES IN MY YARD STILL THAT WERE JUST I HAD TO HAVE REPLACED.

ONE OF THE THINGS TOO, THAT UPSETS ME ABOUT THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL LOT.

AND IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD DURING IKE, WE LOST ALMOST ALL OF OUR MATURE OAKS.

AND IF YOU GO LOOK AT THIS LOT, THERE ARE OVER 100 YEAR OLD OAKS ON IT THAT WILL HAVE TO BE CUT DOWN.

AND I CANNOT EVEN IMAGINE SEEING THAT HAPPEN AFTER WE LOST SO MANY TREES ON OUR ISLAND AND ESPECIALLY OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WAS ANNIHILATED DURING IKE AND THAT'S WHY THERE ARE SO MANY EMPTY LOTS STILL THERE, BECAUSE IT WAS AN OLDER COMMUNITY AND A LOT OF THEM JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE ENERGY TO REBUILD.

SO I AM AGAINST THIS AND LIKE I SAID, IT CHANGES THE WHOLE DESIGN OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT IS A SINGLE RESIDENT.

NEIGHBORHOOD. AND IN ORDER TO GET AROUND THAT, NOW THEY'RE SPLITTING THIS INTO THREE TO MAKE THREE SMALL HOMES ON A SIDE OF THE STREET WHERE ALL OF THE HOMES ARE OVER 5000, 4000, 5000 SQUARE FEET.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

THANK YOU.

RIGHT. NEXT PERSON, PLEASE.

IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? ALL RIGHT. YES.

COME ON. FORTUNATELY, I JUST HAD THE DIMENSIONS.

COME ON UP, SIR. UNFORTUNATELY, YOU CAN'T ASK THE COMMISSION QUESTIONS.

IT FITS. YOU CAN STATE IT AND A MEMBER OF STAFF CAN MAY ADDRESS THAT AFTER OR WITHIN THE.

YES, PLEASE SIGN IN.

HE SHOWED SOME DIMENSIONS EARLIER OF THE LOTS OF WHAT IT IS NOW AND WHAT THEY PLAN ON DOING.

I COULDN'T SEE THE NUMBERS.

BUT IT LOOKS LIKE EACH LOT IS 20 FEET WIDE.

50. EACH OF THE THREE.

[00:25:04]

BUT THAT WOULD MAKE THAT LOT 150 FEET.

THAT WAS MY QUESTION.

SO EACH ONE WOULD BE.

AND THAT DOESN'T REALLY ALIGN WITH WITH WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET.

NO, THAT'S FINE. ALL RIGHTY.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ONE MORE THING, TOO, ABOUT THESE LOTS IS THAT I DON'T.

I CAN'T SEE BECAUSE THE DRAWINGS.

HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

OH, ONE SHOT. ONE. YES.

SORRY. IT IN THE WATER.

CAN SOMEBODY ELSE SPEAK FOR YOU IN YOUR.

SO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THAT LOT IS ALSO LET'S I'M SORRY, ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THAT HAS NOT SPOKEN PREVIOUSLY TO MY DIMENSIONS.

IF IT DOESN'T GO AGAINST CITY CODE, I THOUGHT THERE WAS A CODE THAT SAYS THAT YOU COULD NOT BUILD A HOUSE OUTSIDE OF LIKE I COULDN'T BUILD A CONTEMPORARY HOUSE DOWNTOWN IN A HISTORICAL DISTRICT.

IS THERE A CODE THAT SAYS YOU CANNOT BUILD OUTSIDE OF.

YEAH. YES.[INAUDIBLE] . THE COMMISSIONS ARE REALLY NOT THE ANSWER THAT WE ALREADY HAVE ANYMORE WITH THE ELECTIONS ACT, BUT STAFF IS ALWAYS AVAILABLE.

ALWAYS CONTACT. [INAUDIBLE], . SURE I'LL DO THAT.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MS. FAIRWEATHER. YES, PLEASE, SIR.

HOW YOU DOING? MY NAME IS JOSE FLORES.

I LIVE IN 1601 BAYOU SHORE DRIVE NEXT TO THOSE.

PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU SIGN IN.

I WILL. AND MY CONCERN IS SOMETHING LIKE EVERYBODY.

THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT YOU GUYS MENTIONED BEFORE, YOU GUYS INCLUDE WITH THE WATER.

I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOUSE WATERS, WATER.

PLEASE, JUST MAKE CONCERN.

THEY CONCERN WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY.

PLEASE. I'M ON THE SIDE OF THAT LOT ON THE WATER SIDE.

THANK YOU MUCH.

I WILL SIGN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. ANYBODY ELSE ON THIS SIDE HERE? ALRIGHT IN THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:59 P.M..

I BELIEVE COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI WOULD LIKE TO.

I'VE GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF REAL QUICK, IF I COULD ASK AND I UNDERSTAND THIS IS THE PROPERTY OWNER HERE IS MEETING ALL OF THE CITY REQUIREMENTS ON SQUARE FOOTAGE AND SIZE.

AND THAT'S WHY THIS IS MORE OF A MINISTERIAL TYPE OF PROCESS IN THIS CASE.

I'VE GOT TWO QUESTIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BY THE PUBLIC COMMENTS WITH REGARDS TO THE TREES ON THE PROPERTY.

SO WE HAVE A TREE ORDINANCE.

CAN YOU JUST REMIND ME OF WHAT THAT THREE ORDINANCE IS AND HOW THAT MIGHT AFFECT THIS PROPERTY? GENERALLY SPEAKING, IF SOMEONE REMOVES A TREE OVER, I BELIEVE IT'S SIX INCHES IN DIAMETER, THAT HAS TO BE MITIGATED.

OBVIOUSLY, THE INTENT OF THAT ORDINANCE INITIALLY WAS TO PROTECT THE TREES TO THE DEGREE POSSIBLE.

KNOWING FULL WELL THAT IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES SOME TREES WILL BE WHERE DEVELOPMENT WILL OCCUR AND IT CANNOT BE PROTECTED.

SO IN THOSE CASES IT HAS TO BE MITIGATED.

SO WHERE THESE TREES ARE GOING TO BE REMOVED, IF THEY'RE REMOVED, THEY WILL HAVE TO BE MITIGATED WITH AN AGGREGATION OF THAT SIZE TREE.

SO I'M ASSUMING IT'S THEY'RE QUITE LARGE TRUNKS.

SIGNIFICANT IN SIZE THAT KATHERINE IS IT CORRECT THAT THEY HAVE TO THAT TRUNK SIZE IS AGGREGATED.

[00:30:02]

SO IT'S GENERALLY A 1 TO 1 REPLACEMENT OR YOU CAN PAY INTO A TREE MITIGATION FUND AND THE MONIES GO TO THE PARKS DEPARTMENT FOR PLANTING NEW TREES.

IT'S JUST LOOKING WHAT THE CODE IS THERE'S A POINT AT WHICH THE MITIGATION BECOMES MORE THAN 1 TO 1.

THAT'S 12 INCHES OR OVER.

DANIEL SAYS IT'S 12 INCHES OR OVER.

OR KEEP AN EYE ON THOSE TREES.

AND THEN THE OTHER THING I HAD WAS, DOES A PUBLIC WORKS LOOK AT THESE REPORTS WHEN IT'S ONE OR TWO LOTS LIKE THIS.

THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE THEY'RE SENT TO THEM.

THEY'RE ASKED FOR COMMENT.

AND I HEARD SOME STATEMENTS EARLIER THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE'S OLDER LINES OUT THERE THAT ESPECIALLY GET BACKED UP WHEN THERE'S RAINS.

THE CITY DOES HAVE WHAT THEY CALL AN EYE AND EYE PROBLEM INFILTRATION PROBLEM INTO OUR SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM, WHICH THE CITY IS PROBABLY PUTTING MORE EFFORT INTO NOW THAN WE HAVE IN MANY YEARS, INCLUDING NOT ONLY OUT WEST, BUT, YOU KNOW, THESE AREAS AS WELL.

SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO A SPECIFIC ISSUE THAT MIGHT BE OCCURRING IN THIS SUBDIVISION, BUT I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT WE WOULD HAVE HEARD OF IT BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IF THERE WAS AN ISSUE THAT THEY COULDN'T GET OVER.

SO DO YOU THINK IF THE.

PUBLIC WORKS WILL REVIEW THIS.

AND IF THEY FIND A PROBLEM BY ADDING AN ADDITIONAL SEWER TAP INSTEAD OF THE TWO TAPS.

AND IF THEY THOUGHT THERE WAS CAPACITY ISSUE, THEY WOULD HAVE SAID SOMETHING.

WHEN YOU ALL SUBMITTED THIS OR WHEN THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THIS.

THAT'S THE INTENT OF THE PROCESS.

YES, SIR. IF I MAY.

IF THERE WAS AN HOA IN PLACE.

THAT WOULD SUPERSEDE WHAT THE CITY REQUIRES.

WELL, AND IF, IN ESSENCE, IF THEY HAD IN THEIR HOA OR THEY HAD AN HOA THAT STIPULATED MINIMUM WIDTH AND SQUARE FOOTAGE, THAT WOULD HAVE MITIGATED ALL THIS ISSUE.

YOU'RE REFERRING TO DEED RESTRICTIONS, IN PARTICULAR THAT AN HOA WOULD ADMINISTER ON BEHALF OF THE SUBDIVISION AS A WHOLE.

THOSE RESTRICTIONS ARE APPLICABLE IF THEY HAVE GREATER RESTRICTIONS.

THEY'RE APPLICABLE TO THE EXTENT THAT THE SUBDIVISION IS WILLING TO ENFORCE THEM.

THE MINIMUMS IN CITY CODE ARE JUST THAT THEY'RE MINIMUMS. MANY SUBDIVISIONS ARE PLATTED WELL BEYOND THOSE MINIMUMS, AND AS A RESULT, WE HAVE LARGER SUBDIVISION LOT SIZES IN CERTAIN AREAS THAN IN OTHERS.

BUT THE TWO ISSUES ARE DISTINCT IN THAT ONE IS A CITY, LOCAL LAW, AN ORDINANCE, AND THE OTHER IS A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN EACH OWNER IN THE SUBDIVISION AS A WHOLE.

IF THEY CHOOSE TO ENFORCE ANY GREATER RESTRICTIONS THAN OUR CITY REQUIRES, THEY ARE CERTAINLY AT LIBERTY TO DO SO.

MM HMM. AND WOULD THAT HAVE TO BE ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION ON THE LOT OR BEFORE THE PLANNING? WELL, IT REALLY IT ONLY HAS TO BE ESTABLISHED TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO ENFORCE IT, IF IN FACT IT EXISTS, THAT THEY HAVE A STANDARD THAT'S GREATER THAN OUR STANDARD.

THERE ARE INSTANCES WHERE, YOU KNOW, IT MEETS THE CITY STANDARD, THE PLATS GO FORWARD, AND NO ONE IN THE SUBDIVISION, YOU KNOW, OBJECTS, SO TO SPEAK, OR FILES LAWSUIT IS PROBABLY MORE THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO PUT IT.

AND THEN THOSE GO FORWARD IN THAT MANNER.

SO I JUST REALLY WANT TO CLARIFY.

THE CITY DOES NOT REGULATE OR ENFORCE DEED RESTRICTIONS, RIGHT? WELL, WE DON'T DEAL WITH THE HOA IF THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH A FUTURE HOMEOWNER OR DEVELOPER AND THERE'S A DEED RESTRICTION OR A COVENANT OR WHATEVER IT IS ON THAT PROPERTY, THAT'S BETWEEN THEM.

WE JUST NEED THE CITY, MAKE SURE THAT PROPERTY STRUCTURE, WHATEVER IT MAY BE, MEETS THE CITY STANDARD.

CORRECT. UNDERSTOOD.

RIGHT. YES, GO AHEAD.

[00:35:02]

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR DANIEL.

IS THE 50 BY 100 A BUILDABLE LOT? WELL, IN THAT ZONING DISTRICT ARE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACKS.

THERE'S THREE FOOT OR MINIMUM FRONT.

SETBACK IS 20 FOOT.

THERE IS NO MINIMUM REAR SETBACK IF IT'S ABUTTING THE WATER, AS THESE LOTS ARE.

SO WITH A 50 FOOT WIDE LOT AND A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LENGTH, EVEN NOT COUNTING THE WATER, WE SAY THAT YOU CAN BUILD WHAT FITS.

AND SO IN THIS CASE, IT COULD BE FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT.

IF YOU IMAGINE A 50 FOOT WIDE LOT WITH THREE FOOT MINIMUM SETBACKS ON THE OTHER SIDE, YOU WOULD CONCEIVABLY HAVE A 40 FOOT WIDE HOUSE, FOR EXAMPLE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS CASE AND MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA.

THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING AND AND SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THIS ITEM.

[7.A. 22P-079 (3128 Avenue L) Request for designation as a Galveston Landmark. Property is legally described as M.B.Menard Survey, Part of Lots 4 and 5 (4-4), Block 91, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Wendy Holley Property Owner: JW Holley MF Investments, LLC.]

NEXT IS 22P-079, PLEASE.

ALL RIGHT. 20 2-079.

THIS IS AT 3128 AVENUE L.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR DESIGNATION AS A GALVESTON LANDMARK.

THERE WERE 40 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT, FIVE RETURN, AND ALL FIVE OF THOSE WERE IN FAVOR.

THE HOUSE WE'RE CALLING THE BENDIXEN HOUSE OR CORNER STORE.

REALLY? IT DATES BACK TO 1892, 1899.

INSURANCE RECORDS. NOTICE TWO STORY FRAME BUILDING WITH A ONE STORY WAREHOUSE ADDITION BEING ON THE PROPERTY.

THE WAREHOUSE EDITION WAS DEMOLISHED LONG AGO.

THE TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL WING AND CORNER BUILDING STILL REMAIN.

THE ARRANGEMENT OF MERCANTILE STORE BELOW AND PRIVATE RESIDENCE ABOVE, SITUATED ON A CORNER LOT WITH AN ANGLED ENTRY VERY COMMON TO A CORNER STORES IN GALVESTON.

GEORGE BENDIXEN WAS BORN IN GERMANY, CAME TO THE UNITED STATES IN 1877.