[Zoning Board of Adjustments on September 3, 2025.]
[00:00:04]
GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME TO THE SEPTEMBER 3RD, 2025 MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF GALVESTON. AT THIS TIME, 3:30, I AM CALLING THE MEETING TO ORDER.
IN ADDITION, OUR EX-OFFICIO WILL NOT BE JOINING US TODAY.
SO WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET. AND I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING.
AT THIS POINT, I'M GOING TO ASK IF THERE'S ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH TODAY'S CASE AMONG THE BOARD? NONE? SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON. I'M GOING TO ASK IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES, EDITS OR ADDITIONS TO THE JULY 9TH, 2025 MINUTES. NONE.
SEEING NONE, WE'LL ACCEPT THEM AS THEY ARE WRITTEN.
THANK YOU. AT THIS POINT IN THE AGENDA, WE'RE GOING TO ASK.
I'M ASKING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ANY COMMENTS THAT ARE NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY CASE THAT WE'RE HEARING TODAY. SINCE WE HAVE NO ONE IN THE AUDIENCE BESIDE OUR APPLICANT, I AM GOING TO ASSUME THAT THERE ARE NO, THERE'S NO INTEREST IN A PUBLIC COMMENT OUTSIDE OUR AGENDA.
THANK YOU. NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO NEW BUSINESS.
WE HAVE A CASE TO HEAR TODAY. ONE CASE 25Z-015 (4217 LAS PALMAS).
STAFF'S REPORT, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
WE DO THE STAFF REPORT. LET ME JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT IS AWARE THAT THE BOARD HAS FOUR MEMBERS PRESENT TODAY, AND ALL FOUR MEMBERS HAVE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST.
OTHERWISE, YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD TODAY WITH WHAT THE FOUR MEMBERS THAT WERE PRESENT. THANK YOU. ALRIGHTY. SO YEAH, THIS IS IT FOR 217 LAS PALMAS.
THERE WERE 37 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT, FOUR RETURNED.
THREE OF THOSE IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED. NOTE THERE WERE NO OBJECTIONS RAISED BY CITY DEPARTMENTS OR PRIVATE UTILITIES WHO REVIEWED THIS? THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM ARTICLE THREE ADDENDUM IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK FROM 20FT TO 14.3FT.
UPON REVIEW OF THE AS BUILT SURVEY SUBMITTED FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY PLANNING DISCOVERED THAT THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT APPROXIMATELY 3.3FT PAST THE FRONT SETBACK. THE APPLICANT WAS NOTED AND SUBMITTED THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 12.401 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, THE FRONT YARD EXCEPTION MAY BE REQUESTED WHEN THE FRONT YARD SETBACKS OF ANY TWO OR MORE LOTS IN THE SAME BLOCK DO NOT MEET THE FRONT YARD REQUIREMENTS OF THE LDR. PLEASE SEE EXHIBIT A FOR EXAMPLES OF OTHER STRUCTURES IN THE SUBJECT BLOCK CONSTRUCTED WITH A LESSER SETBACK THAN PRESCRIBED BY THE CURRENT REGULATIONS. SO IN THIS CASE, THE PROPOSED SETBACK WOULD BE 14.3FT, WHICH WOULD MATCH ONE OF THE OTHER NON-CONFORMANCES ON THAT BLOCK.
HOWEVER, NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT'S STRUCTURE IS ACTUALLY FURTHER BACK THAN THAT.
ALSO NOTE THE APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION. THE STAFF REPORT, AND WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS.
SO HERE WE HAVE AN EXCERPT FROM THE AS BUILT SURVEY SHOWING THAT THE FRONT CORNER OF THE THE PORCH THERE ENDED UP ABOUT 16.7FT AWAY FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. SO THEREFORE BIT WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK THAT WOULD NORMALLY BE APPROVED.
[00:05:02]
PHOTO OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THERE TAKEN FROM THE STREET.NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND HERE WE HAVE LAS PALMAS LOOKING NORTH, LAS PALMAS LOOKING SOUTH TOWARD THE BEACH, AND THEN THE PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH AND THE WEST.
AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT. THANK YOU.
ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? I HAVE A QUESTION. YOU HAD SAID SOMETHING, DANIEL, IN YOUR PRESENTATION, THAT THERE WAS ANOTHER STRUCTURE THAT HAS NONCONFORMING SETBACK.
WHICH ONE IS THAT, PLEASE? HOW DID YOU DETERMINE THAT? THAT WOULD BE AT 4227. AND IN THIS CASE WE RELY ON THE APPLICANT'S INFORMATION TO ESTABLISH THOSE SETBACKS.
I WILL NOTE THAT ON THIS PARTICULAR EXHIBIT, THE PARCEL LINES ARE SHIFTED A BIT.
SO THAT KIND OF MAKES THINGS LOOK A LITTLE BIT OFF.
BUT IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY, YOU CAN SEE THAT 14.3FT IS NOTED AS THE EXISTING SETBACK AT 4227, WHICH IS JUST A LITTLE BIT DOWN FROM THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY.
OKAY. SO IF I'M READING THE CASE CORRECTLY, IT SAYS HERE THAT AN EXCEPTION MAY BE REQUESTED WHERE THE FRONT YARD SETBACK OF ANY TWO OR MORE LOTS IN THE SAME BLOCK DO NOT MEET THE FRONT YARD REQUIREMENTS.
THAT'S CORRECT. AND THEN ALSO AN EXCEPTION MAY BE GRANTED IF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK OF THE ADJACENT LOT DOES NOT MEET THE FRONT YARD SETBACKS OF THE LDR. SO ARE ANY ARE THESE TWO EXAMPLES PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT ADJACENT TO, WHAT IS THE ADDRESS? 4217 LAS PALMAS. THEY ARE NOT, BUT THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE.
IF THERE IS A PATTERN, IT CAN BE EITHER OR, SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THE ONE ADJACENT.
IT CAN ALSO BE A PATTERN THAT EXISTS OF MORE THAN OR LIKE TWO OR MORE PROPERTIES.
IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT HAS POINTED OUT 4221 AT 16 FOOT FOR NO, IT'S WHAT'S 4227 AT 14.3FT AND THEN 4235 HAS A VARIANCE FOR A TEN FOOT FRONT SETBACK, WHICH WAS APPROVED A FEW YEARS AGO.
I DON'T SEE A BUILDING ON 4225. CORRECT. BUT THE ZBA DETERMINATION DOES NOT EXPIRE THAT I KNOW OF.
OKAY. WHERE IS 4217 IN RELATION TO THIS? IT IS AT.
PROPERTIES. IT IS AT THE TOP OF THIS MAP HERE.
THIS IS AN OLDER AERIAL OF COURSE BUT OF COURSE THE STRUCTURE HAS SINCE BEEN BUILT.
SO WE'RE NOT SEEING A RELATIVE COMPARISON VISUALLY BASED ON THE PRESENTATION OF THIS INFORMATION COMPARED TO THE APPLICANTS FRONT SETBACK.
CORRECT. THE ONLY THING WE HAVE IS THE AS BUILT SURVEY THERE.
RIGHT, RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? SEEING NONE. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OPEN. I'M SORRY. I'M NOT ACCUSTOMED TO DOING THIS VERY OFTEN.
WE'RE GOING TO OPEN NOW OUR HEARING FOR 25Z-015 TO THE PUBLIC FOR COMMENT.
FIRST OF ALL, I'M GOING TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME AND ADDRESS US.
WOULD YOU PLEASE SIGN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME? YES, MA'AM. I'M JAMES CASEY. ARE YOU THE OWNER? THE BUILDER? THE WHAT? I'M THE BUILDER. OKAY.
WHEN YOU SUBMITTED YOUR SITE PLAN, ORIGINALLY, YOU WERE CONFORMING.
WHAT HAPPENED? WELL, MADAM CHAIRMAN, CAN HE PRESENT HIS.
YEAH, FIRST. AND THEN YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS. OKAY.
THANK YOU. SIR. PRESENT. WHY YOU'RE HERE TODAY.
[00:10:07]
I'VE BEEN DOING THIS 22 YEARS ON THE WEST END OF THE ISLAND, AND THIS IS THE FIRST FOR ME AS WELL.SO WHAT I USUALLY DO IS WE TAKE THE SURVEY AND WE GET ENGINEER TO DO SITE PLAN AS HE DOES ENGINEERING AND THE ARCHITECTURAL FOR THE CITY OF GALVESTON'S REVIEW, THIS PLAN WAS HAD TO BE REVIEWED BY THE LIKE THE GLO AND THE ENTIRE COASTAL CONSERVATION.
AS THIS LOT IS A, IT'S ACTUALLY A DOUBLE LOT.
AND THAT'S REALLY NOT A GREAT PICTURE, BUT THE STREET TURNS RIGHT THERE.
SO NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A RADIUS YOU KNOW.
AND THEN SO THE RADIUS INTERSECTED INTO THE AERIAL EASEMENT.
SO WE TOOK OFF A FOUR FOOT WRAP AROUND DECK. AND THEN I ACTUALLY PUSHED THE HOUSE A FOOT IN, ABOUT A FOOT AND A HALF BACK. AND I THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE EASY PEASY.
BUT THAT ONE SOUTHERN CORNER ENCROACHED. AND SO I JUST I'VE NEVER HAD THIS EITHER. YOU KNOW THE GENTLEMAN'S A THREE TIME CANCER SURVIVOR.
HE'S LEAVING THIS HOUSE TO HIS KIDS, AND I WAS JUST TRYING TO DO MY DUE DILIGENCE, AND I FAILED, EVIDENTLY. SO I'M PLEASED ASKING YOU TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION.
AS YOU CAN NOTE THAT 4235 A BEACHFRONT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED AS A TEN FOOT SETBACK BY THE CITY AS PRECEDENCE, BUT THE HOUSE HAS NOT BEEN BUILT.
SO I WAS JUST HOPING AND PLEASED WOULD ALLOW US TO MAINTAIN WHAT WE HAVE, OR IT WOULD COST ME QUITE A BIT TO MAKE IT INTO CONFORMITY. THAT'S ALL. SO THIS IS REALLY MORE YOUR PROBLEM THAN THE OWNERS.
IT'S REALLY MORE THE ENGINEER'S PROBLEM. BUT I TOLD HIM, LET ME TRY THIS SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO, LIKE, STIR UP AN ANT PILE AND ASK FOR ERRORS AND OMISSIONS INSURANCE AND THE WHOLE NINE.
BUT I'M ASKING TODAY TO PLEASE HUMBLY ALLOW THE EXCEPTION.
HOW DID YOU DETERMINE THE SETBACKS OF THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU PRESENTED ON, ON? IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE OF 4223 IT'S A HOUSE THAT'S ON A DOUBLE LOT THAT'S KIND OF CATTY CORNERED.
THAT GENTLEMAN HAD JUST HAD HIS ENTIRE LOT SURVEYED.
SO ALL SURVEY STAKES WERE THERE SO THAT I COULD MEASURE THE TOP 16 FOOT CIRCLED ONE AND THE 14.34227 LAS PALMAS. HOW DID YOU DO THAT? HOW DID YOU MEASURE IT? A SURVEY COMPANY HAD SURVEYED WITH SURVEY STAKES ON THE CENTER PROPERTY.
SO THEN I TOOK FROM THE BUILDING EDGE OF THE PILING OF THOSE HOMES TO THAT SURVEY STAKE.
YOU DIDN'T HAVE THIS SURVEYED. NEGATIVE. IT HAD ALREADY BEEN SURVEYED.
SURVEYED? NO, NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE EXAMPLES YOU'RE USING.
IT'S ONE OF THE OLDEST, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE GOT CONTAINER HOUSES OVER THERE THAT ARE RUSTING.
ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE APPLICANT? OH. OKAY, SIR.
THANK YOU. NO. YOU CAN SIT. THANK YOU. NO. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT? YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO MAKE A STATEMENT.
[00:15:03]
BOARD FOR A MOTION, PLEASE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION.YEAH, I CAN MAKE ONE AS WELL. SO YOU GO. YEAH, I'LL JUST MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
I'LL SECOND THAT. DON. IS THAT A SUFFICIENT MOTION? IT IS. ALL THAT'S REQUIRED IS 1 OR 2 OR BOTH.
FALLING ON THIS. WOULD YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE? I JUST DON'T I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THE CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH FALLS ON THIS GENTLEMAN HERE.
THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT LEVELS AND THINGS YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH WHEN GETTING TO THIS STAGE.
AND OBVIOUSLY BEING RIGHT ON A CURVATURE HERE PRESENTS A, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF DIFFERENT CHALLENGES DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THIS TYPE OF THING. AND SO WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT A LITERALLY THREE FEET.
I THINK THEY'RE ASKING FOR MORE JUST TO, YOU KNOW, COVER, YOU KNOW, THEMSELVES.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE I MEAN, JUST THE CONSTRUCTION OVERALL, THE ENTIRETY, THE TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES, I THINK IT'S IMPROVING THE VALUE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IMPROVING THE ESTHETIC AS WELL.
SO I THINK IT CAN GO AHEAD AND PASS MUSTER. ANYONE ELSE HAVE A STATEMENT? I'M CONCERNED THAT IF THIS DOESN'T PASS, WE'VE JUST SHUT THINGS DOWN.
AND BEFORE WE, I, YOU KNOW, YOU SEEM TO HAVE SOME CONCERNS.
I DON'T KNOW, AND IF YOU DO, I'D LIKE TO HEAR THEM.
I DO HAVE CONCERNS. OKAY. BUT I DIDN'T MAKE THE MOTION, SO BUT YOU YOU'RE ALLOWED TO COMMENT, AND I WANT TO GIVE YOU MY CONCERNS FIRST. OKAY? WE'VE HAD SITUATIONS LIKE THIS BROUGHT TO US BEFORE.
AND IN THE INTEREST OF CONSISTENCY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING MORE THAN AN AERIAL PICTURE WITH A CIRCLE DRAWN AROUND IT AND NUMBERS POINTING TO IT. THESE ARE AERIALS.
THE LOT LINES ARE NOT EXACT BECAUSE THERE THERE'S A CERTAIN MARGIN OF ERROR WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT AN AERIAL AT THIS AT THIS GRADE. AND SO I HAVE REAL CONCERN THAT WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO MAKE A DETERMINATION. IF I WERE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION, I WOULD HAVE ASKED FOR A DEFERRAL GIVING THE APPLICANT ANOTHER MONTH TO GIVE US MORE CONVINCING EVIDENCE. BUT THE MOTION IS ON THE TABLE, SO UNLESS SOMEONE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN MODIFYING THE MOTION WE'LL HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT.
AND I CAN UNDERSTAND YOUR HESITATION WITH THE EVIDENCE BEING BROUGHT SOLELY ON THE APPLICANT.
AND THAT'S WHY I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT ENHANCED AERIAL FOOTAGE ON MY PHONE, AND I CAN CLEARLY SEE IF YOU IF YOU TAKE AWAY THE PRESENTING EVIDENCE THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT PUT ON THE TABLE, ACTUALLY.
BUT IT'S IT'S READILY AVAILABLE EVIDENCE WITH ANYBODY WITH A MAPS ON THEIR PHONE.
AND YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THAT THE PROPERTIES IN QUESTION ARE CLOSER TO THAT STREET THAN THE ONES ON A GRAINY FOOTAGE LIKE THIS. AND THAT'S, THAT'S. NO, BUT WE'RE BASING IT ON.
I'M SEEING THIS HERE JUST FOR CLARITY. BUT AS FAR AS OUR CONSIDERATION GOES, I THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT WE CAN ONLY. NO, SIR. YOU'RE.
THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
AND I TO HAVE THAT THAT CONCERN. THAT IS WHY I WOULD PREFER TO DEFER FOR A MONTH.
THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE HAVING TODAY IS WE HAVE A QUORUM.
[00:20:01]
THERE'S ONLY FOUR OF US. CORRECT. AND I REALLY DON'T WANT TO BE THE ONE TO PUT THE KIBOSH ON THIS. WELL, IT APPEARS THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE.YES. OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION. IS, HOW DID YOU KNOW? I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS FOR THE STAFF OR FOR THE APPLICANT.
OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN. WELL, WHY DON'T YOU ASK A QUESTION? WELL, YOU'RE ASKING. WELL, I JUST I DON'T KNOW WHO I NEED TO ASK.
OKAY. ASK STAFF. HOW IS IT MADE? HOW DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE TEN FOOT ONE THAT HASN'T BEEN BUILT YET? WAS THAT JUST ON? RECORD? YEAH, THAT'S PART OF OUR THAT'S PART OF OUR YOU KNOW RECORD THAT WE KEEP AND STAFF'S, STAFF LEVEL, AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ALL STILL IN THE OLD AGENDA CENTER, SO WE CAN GO TO OLD AGENDA CENTER AND HUNT THROUGH THESE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND GO, OH, HERE'S ONE THAT WAS APPROVED. SO, YEAH. AND IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S ALSO ON A CURVE.
WELL IT'S ERODING. THAT'S WHY YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE LOT THE WAY IT'S POSITIONED.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT 4235? IT'S ERODING SO BADLY THAT THAT'S THE ISSUE THERE.
BUT THERE'S ALREADY A TEN FOOT. THERE'S A VARIANCE THERE.
THERE'S A SPECIAL EXCEPTION THAT WAS GRANTED BY ZBA IN 21.
YEAH. SO YOU ALREADY HAVE, YOU HAVE ONE, CLEARLY BUILDING'S NOT THERE, BUT IT'S BEEN APPROVED TO DO A TEN FOOT SETBACK. SO YOU ALREADY HAVE THAT FOR SURE.
WHICH IS ONE. THAT'S ONE. AND THEN. BUT WE NEED ANOTHER ONE.
LOOKING AT THE PHOTOS YOU CAN TELL. CAN I, CAN YOU CAN I INTERRUPT YOU SECOND.
I GUESS YOU CAN'T REALLY TELL. THEY JUST SEEM AWFULLY CLOSE.
I'M SORRY, CHAIRMAN, CAN WE SEE? OR IS IT POSSIBLE TO GET THE REASONINGS BEHIND THAT 2021 SPECIAL EXCEPTION? BECAUSE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS ONLY GRANTED UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.
ARE YOU LOOKING FOR EVIDENCE? NO, NO, THAT WOULD THAT WOULD APPLY HERE.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS THIS THE COMMENT WAS THERE'S ALREADY A SPECIAL EXCEPTION THAT THE ZBA GRANTED IN 2021. AND AS FAR AS I'M AWARE, THE REQUIREMENTS OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION HAVE NOT CHANGED SINCE 2021.
THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE THAT THERE WAS AN EXCEPTION, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
AND SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDED, THAT WAS PROVIDED.
I WILL ALSO SAY THAT THIS BOARD IS MADE UP OF FOLKS THAT WILL DELVE INTO THEIR EXPERIENCES, THEIR KNOWLEDGE, AND BRING IT TO THE TABLE DURING DISCUSSION.
IT'S NOT ALWAYS WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED BY AN APPLICANT.
WE RELY ON WHAT THE BOARD BRINGS TO THE TABLE FOR DISCUSSION.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN THERE. ARE YOU? SO WHEN THE COMMISSIONER SAID, HEY, I'M ABLE TO GOOGLE AND SEE ON MY PHONE, I DIDN'T WANT IT TO BE RECEIVED THAT HE'S BEING SHUT DOWN BECAUSE HE'S USING THAT MECHANISM TO IMPART INFORMATION TO THE BOARD.
DURING HIS PART OF THE DISCUSSION, AND I THINK THE RESPONSE WAS, WELL, THE APPLICANT DIDN'T BRING THAT, BUT THAT'S, HE'S THIS IS WHAT I'M BRINGING TO THE DISCUSSION IS WHAT I WAS HEARING.
SO. WELL, I'M SORRY, DONNA, BUT MY EXPERIENCE BEING ON THIS BOARD AND ON IS THAT, I WAS TOLD, I WAS TRAINED BEFORE I TOOK THIS POSITION ON THE BOARD, AND THAT I WAS TOLD THAT ONLY THE INFORMATION THAT'S PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT CAN BE CONSIDERED FOR THESE CASES BECAUSE IT IS CONTRARY TO THE LDRS.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S STAFF'S JOB IT'S THE CITY'S JOB TO PASS THE LDRS AND IMPLEMENT THEM.
RIGHT. AND IF WE ARE OUT THERE, I WAS TOLD NOT TO GO LOOK AT THOSE SITES.
BUT IF WE ARE OUT COLLECTING OUR OWN EVIDENCE, THAT THAT WAS CONTRARY TO THE PURPOSE OF THIS BOARD.
[00:25:07]
NOT SURE IF YOU'RE GOING OUT THERE COLLECTING EVIDENCE.THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS HEARING DURING THE DISCUSSION PART.
IT IS TRUE THAT THIS BOARD TAKES WHAT IS BEING BROUGHT TO THEM, EITHER BY STAFF OR THE APPLICANT, OR ANY OTHER PEOPLE THAT DECIDE TO PRESENT AT THE HEARING.
AND THEN THEY TAKE THAT, THEY MAKE THEIR MOTION AND THEN THEY DISCUSS IT ALL.
THAT'S WHAT I'M REALLY IMPRESSING UPON THE GROUP IS THAT YOU TAKE IT ALL AND YOU DISCUSS IT.
CLEARLY THE APPLICANT IS NOT. I'M SORRY. THE REASONS FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION EXIST.
SAME PROCESS. I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT THERE'S ALREADY A SPECIAL EXCEPTION THAT WAS PRESENTED.
AND I ALSO WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS CAN BRING WHAT THEY CAN TO AN OPEN DISCUSSION.
IT'S JUST TO BUILD THAT OPEN DISCUSSION AMONGST THE FOUR THAT'S PRESENT TODAY.
YOU GUYS DISCUSS IT HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DISCUSS IT.
I HAVE SOMETHING MORE TO SAY. AND THAT IS. I MEAN, I THINK THAT THERE'S REASONABLE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO US, AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS WE'RE ASKING THE APPLICANT TO GO AWAY AND COME BACK WITH THE SAME INFORMATION THAT WE'VE ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED, SO THAT IN A MONTH WE CAN APPROVE IT. AND TO ME, THAT JUST SEEMS SORT OF ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS ON OUR PART.
SO BUT I HEAR THAT THIS ISN'T GOING TO PASS. SO THEREFORE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEFER IT.
AND THEN IF YOU'RE. IT MAY NOT PASS NEXT MONTH EITHER.
WELL, I WOULD THINK IT WOULD PASS NEXT MONTH BECAUSE I TRUST WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD THIS MONTH.
AND YOU DON'T, BUT I DO SO. RIGHT. BECAUSE WE'VE HAD THESE SITUATIONS WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT AERIALS, AND I'M JUST BECAUSE I'M AWARE OF GIS IN MY EXPERIENCE WITH IT, I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE MARGIN OF ERROR IS ON THESE, AND IT'S MORE THAN THREE FEET, I CAN PROMISE YOU THAT.
SO WHEN SOMEONE BRINGS ME AN AERIAL AND THEIR POINT, I MEAN, I CAN'T.
I'M SORRY. I JUST CAN'T ACCEPT THAT AS CONVINCING.
SO ANYWAY SO WHAT ARE WE, I WOULD ADD, WHAT WHAT I WAS I'M INTERESTED IN IS MORE CONVINCING INFORMATION IN A MONTH. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING.
THAT'S WHERE. THAT'S WHERE I'M SITTING. DO WE HAVE TO? I NEED HELP FROM DONNA. DO WE NEED TO TO DO THIS VOTE OR DO WE NEED CAN WE WITHDRAW THE THE MOTION AND THEN GO FOR A DEFERRAL? BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HEADED? WELL, THERE'S AN ACTIVE MOTION ON THE TABLE, SO WE NEED TO VOTE ON IT.
CHAIRWOMAN CAN CALL FOR THE VOTE. OKAY. WHOEVER MADE THE MOTION CAN WITHDRAW IT.
BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, EITHER WAY. WELL. MY CONCERN.
OKAY, I GOT YOU. IF WE DON'T PASS IT, THOUGH, DONNA, HOW CAN WE BRING ANOTHER MOTION TO THE TABLE? BECAUSE IT'S BEEN DECIDED. SO THERE'S FOUR. IN ORDER FOR ANY MOTION TO PASS, THERE NEEDS TO BE UNANIMOUS.
FOR IF YOU DON'T GET FOUR, THEN YOU MAKE ANOTHER MOTION.
OKAY. THAT MOTION WOULD FAIL FOR LACK OF FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES.
YOU MAKE ANOTHER MOTION HOPING TO GET FOUR. GOT IT.
OKAY. ANY MORE DISCUSSION? THANK YOU. DONNA. ANY MORE DISCUSSION? I'M GOING TO CALL THE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? ALL OPPOSED? THE MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A QUORUM.
LACK OF FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES. FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE ANOTHER MOTION. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THIS CASE BE DEFERRED UNTIL OCTOBER 8TH, 2025, WHERE WE HOPE TO SEE FROM THE APPLICANT MORE PRECISE INFORMATION REGARDING HIS CONTENTION THAT THESE PROPERTIES ON THE BLOCK DO NOT CONFORM AS WELL TO THE 20 FOOT SETBACK. I'LL SECOND THAT DISCUSSION.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? THE MOTION PASSES.
[00:30:01]
THANK YOU. OUR NEXT. LET'S SEE. WHERE ARE WE NOW? OH, WE HAVE EXHAUSTED OUR BUSINESS FOR THE DAY.I'M GOING TO CALL THIS MEETING ADJOURNED AT 4:00.
THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.