[Zoning Board of Adjustments on October 8, 2025.]
[00:00:06]
GOOD AFTERNOON. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
IT'S 3:30 P.M. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 8TH. WELCOME TO THE GALVESTON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING OF OCTOBER 8TH, 2025. THIS MEETING IS RECORDED AND AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
PLEASE SPEAK CLEARLY AND DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONES.
THE ATTENDANCE HAS BEEN TAKEN ON THE SIGNING SHEET AND KARINA HAS IT.
OKAY. WE HAVE A QUORUM AND EVERYBODY'S PRESENT.
IS THERE ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR ANY OF THE CASES TODAY? CONFLICT OF INTEREST? NO? OKAY NONE. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS WELCOMING THE NEW MEMBER, NICK LANGFORD, WELCOME. THANK YOU AND THE NEXT ITEM IS ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON.
I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN NOMINATIONS FROM THE FLOOR.
ANY MEMBER CAN BRING FORTH A NOMINATION. MADAM CHAIR AS CHAIR, PLEASE. THANK YOU. WE NEED A SECOND DOES NOT, DOES NOT NEED A SECOND. DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER NOMINATIONS? MADAM CHAIR, I MOVE THAT NOMINATIONS CLOSE. THANK YOU.
NOMINATION CLOSED. AND NEXT IS MOTION FOR ELECTION.
I MOVE THAT WE ELECT LIDIJA. PLEASE HELP ME WITH YOUR LAST NAME [LAUGHTER].
BIKOVA. [LAUGHTER] YES. AS OUR CHAIR. YOU NEED A SECOND? THANK YOU. I'LL SECOND THAT NEXT IS WE NEED TO VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OKAY NOMINATION PASSES THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND NOW WE DO THE SAME FOR VICE CHAIR. IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. WE NEED I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE FLOOR FOR NOMINATIONS FOR VICE CHAIR, PLEASE.
WE NEED NOMINATIONS FROM, ANY MEMBER OR FROM THE FLOOR.
IN THAT CASE, I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE MS. CARROL AGAIN FOR VICE CHAIR.
WE DON'T NEED. AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO MAKE MS. CARROL HOLLAWAY DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND OKAY. NOMINATION PASSES AND THAT'S ALL UNDER ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON.
OKAY, NEXT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON AGENDA ITEMS WITHOUT PUBLIC HEARING OR NON-AGENDA ITEMS? WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO OLD BUSINESS. CASE NUMBER 25Z-015, PLEASE.
THANK YOU SO 25Z-015. THIS IS AT 4217 LAS PALMAS.
AS MENTIONED, THIS IS OLD BUSINESS. A DEFERRAL WAS RECOMMENDED FOR THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, WHICH WE WILL GO OVER HERE IN JUST A BIT. THERE WERE 37 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT, 4 RETURNED, 3 IN FAVOR, 1 IN OPPOSITION. NOTE THAT THERE WERE NO OBJECTIONS FROM C DEPARTMENTS OR OUTSIDE UTILITIES WHO REVIEWED THIS REQUEST.
IN SEPTEMBER 2024, THE APPLICANT WAS APPROVED TO BUILD A HOUSE AT THE SUBJECT TRACKED.
[00:05:05]
UPON REVIEW OF THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY SURVEY, PLANNING DISCOVERED THAT THE STRUCTURE WAS INADVERTENTLY BUILT A LITTLE BIT PAST THE FRONT SETBACK. APPLICANT WAS NOTIFIED AND SUBMITTED THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST ACCORDINGLY, THE APPLICANT IS NOW REQUESTING TO MATCH THE EXISTING FRONT SETBACK AT 4227 LAS PALMAS, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 14.3FT. THIS WOULD MAKE THE STRUCTURE AT 4217 LAS PALMAS CONFORMING BY THE SAME.SO YOU CAN SEE ALSO EXHIBIT A FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
SO THE SETBACK THEN WOULD ONCE AGAIN BE 14.3FT.
THAT WOULD BE A 5.7FT VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
BUT THAT WOULD MATCH A ONE STRUCTURE ON THE LOT ON THE STREET.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS PROVIDED WHEN THESE WHEN THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FINDS THAT SUCH A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT AFFECT ADVERSELY THE VALUE AND USE OF ADJACENT AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, OR BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTERESTS.
NOTE THE APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND THE STAFF REPORT AND WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS HERE.
SO HERE WE HAVE ON THE LEFT WE HAVE THE APPLICANT'S SITE PLAN AND A SUMMARY OF ADDITIONAL SITES THAT THE APPLICANT HAS IDENTIFIED THAT ARE SIMILAR TO MEET OR EVEN ARE CLOSER TO THE STREET THAN THE STRUCTURE THAT WAS BUILT.
NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE WE HAVE THE FIRST OF, I BELIEVE, THREE VIDEOS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED THAT SHOWS HIS PROCESS OF DETERMINING THESE DISTANCES. 4221 LAS PALMAS, THIS IS THE HOUSE. THIS FENCE IS EXACTLY EVEN WITH THAT FIRST PYLON THAT TAPE MEASURE IS ALL THE WAY TO THAT FENCE POST.
THIS IS THE SURVEY STAKE. AND YOU CAN PLAINLY SEE THAT THAT IS 15FT, SIX INCHES I HOPE THIS CONCLUDES THE PROGRESS OF THE LAS PALMAS SITUATION NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE WE HAVE THE SECOND VIDEO THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT.
LAS PALMAS STREET, RIGHT BY THE BEACH. THIS IS ONE OF THE HOUSES THAT I'M SHOWING FROM THIS TAPE.
THAT'S THE PYLON. THIS IS THE TAPE FULL LENGTH.
THERE'S SURVEY STAKE. AND THIS IS 14 THREE INCHES AND THIS IS, I BELIEVE, THE THIRD OF THREE VIDEOS THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED TO JUSTIFY THE REQUEST.
4234 LAS PALMAS SURVEY STAKE 11FT, NINE INCHES NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND HERE WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS OF LAS PALMAS LOOKING NORTH FROM APPROXIMATELY LEVEL WITH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LAS PALMAS LOOKING SOUTH FROM ABOUT THE SAME LOCATION.
YOU CAN JUST SEE THE APPLICANT STRUCTURE THERE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE UPPER RIGHT HAND PHOTO.
AND THEN THE PROPERTIES TO THE WEST AND TO THE SOUTH.
AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT. THANK YOU.
DOES THE COMMISSION HAS ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I DO. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THIS BECAUSE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS ONE BEFORE.
[00:10:03]
THE IDEA HERE IS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE FRONT YARD SETBACK OF ANY TWO OR MORE LOTS IN THE SAME BLOCK DOES NOT MEET THE FRONT YARD REQUIREMENT OF THE LDR.IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO CLARIFY.
THANK YOU. OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE 25Z-015. IT´S NOW OPEN AND THE STAFF REPORT IS MADE A PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME.
THANK YOU. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TELL US A LITTLE ABOUT THE CASE.
I'M [INAUDIBLE]. WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW? IF YOU WOULD LIKE, JUST TO GIVE US A QUICK UPDATE OR OVERVIEW FROM YOUR END, AND THEN WE'LL SEE IF ANYBODY HAS QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
AS PLAINLY AS I CAN SHOW FROM THE FIRST MEETING TO THIS ONE, I'VE SHOWN BLATANTLY THAT THE STREET OR THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT ONLY DERELICT, AND DOESN'T EVEN CONFORM.
SO I'VE SHOWN THREE ON THE SAME BLOCK ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET, AND NOT EVEN THE FOURTH ONE, WHICH IS A LOT THAT A HOUSE HAS NOT EVEN BEEN BUILT YET, THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY GRANTED A VARIANCE WHICH SHOULD SHOW THAT THEY HAVE A TEN FOOT OR LESS SETBACK FOR THE VARIANCE THAT'S ALREADY GRANTED FOR A HOUSE THAT'S NOT EVEN BUILT YET.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY. YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN UP ALL NIGHT.
MY WIFE HAS CANCER. I FOUND OUT YESTERDAY, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO ANYMORE.
I JUST WANT TO GET OUT OF HERE AND GET THIS THING DONE. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.
I SHOWED YOU THE VIDEOS. THIS IS WHAT WE GOT.
AND I GOT A CT SCAN TOMORROW, AND I JUST WANT TO GO HOME.
THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO DO. THIS IS FOR MY CLIENT.
THIS AIN'T EVEN MY HOUSE. LOOK AT THE HOUSE. IT'S $585,000 WE SPENT RIGHT THERE.
IT'S GOING TO HELP THE CITY OF GALVESTON'S TAX REVENUE.
WE'VE DONE NOTHING BUT HELP THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THE HOUSE IS ON A CURVE OF A STREET. THE TWO LOTS THAT THE MAN BUILT, THAT HE'S GOT.
SO I MISSED IT BY JUST THE CORNER OF THE OVERHANG PORCH.
THAT'S IT. SO, I MEAN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.
I'LL BE DONE. I'LL REBUILD THE FUCKING GODDAMN PORCH.
I DON'T CARE ANYMORE. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? I REALLY DON'T.
SO CAN WE VOTE? I'M SERIOUS. I GOTTA GO. I MEAN, I'M SPENDING $14,000 ON A CT SCAN TOMORROW, SO LET ME KNOW WHAT WE GOTTA DO NOW. I'M SORRY TO HEAR THAT.
I'VE BUILT IT. IT'S DONE. IF YOU TELL ME TO REBUILD IT, I'LL REBUILD IT.
ALRIGHT. OKAY. IS THERE ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? NO? OKAY. PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE 25Z-015 IS CLOSED AND THE CASE IS RETURNED TO THE COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I DO. GO AHEAD.
I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE REQUEST WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE VALUE AND USE OF ADJACENT AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, AND WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
I SECOND THAT. THANK YOU. DISCUSSION? ANYTHING? OKAY. IN THAT CASE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL THOSE OPPOSED? THANK YOU. THAT'S FOUR IN FAVOR.
OKAY. CASE 25Z-016, PLEASE. CAROL, YOU SHOULD STEP DOWN IMMEDIATELY.
OKAY. CASE 25Z-016. ADDRESS 3201 KLEINMAN AVENUE.
[00:15:06]
THIS IS A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR LOT DEPTH AND LOT AREA.PUBLIC NOTICE, 21 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT AND ONE OPPOSED.
THE PARCEL IN QUESTION IS LEGALLY NONCONFORMING IN REGARD TO LOT DEPTH AS IT IS, AND NO OTHER LOTS IN THE VICINITY HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN SUBDIVIDED FURTHER THAN ONE HALF OF AN ORIGINAL LOT. THE REGULATION FOR LOT DEPTH IS 100FT, AND REGULATION FOR LOT AREA IS 5000FT. PROPOSED VARIANCE DEPTH IS 70FT, AND PROPOSED VARIANCE FOR LOT AREA IS 4200FT².
PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS.
AND WE ALSO HAVE EXHIBITS AS SHOWING THE PROPERTY AS IT STANDS NEXT.
AND TO THE TOP WE HAVE THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH AND TO THE BOTTOM WE HAVE THE LOT AND THE SPACE, THE LOT NEXT TO IT, WHICH IS THE JUST THE LOT AS IS, WHICH IS THE EAST.
AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF REPORT. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I DO. COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, PLEASE? THE EAST LABELED SLIDE OR PICTURE IS THE LOT IN QUESTION, IS IT NOT? YES. OKAY. SO THIS IS. IT IS COMBINED WITH THE PROPERTY THAT YOU SHOW THE BLUE HOUSE, RIGHT? YES. RIGHT NOW? YES. OKAY. SO WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS THAT, OR THE APPLICANT IS ASKING IS THAT WE DIVIDE THIS BIG LOT INTO TWO SMALLER LOTS.
YES. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE'RE HERE, BY THE WAY.
YES. YOU'LL GET YOUR OPPORTUNITY. OH, OKAY. SORRY.
I HAVE A QUESTION, TOO. IT SAYS THE PARCEL IS LEGALLY NON-CONFORMING TO LOT DEPTH AS IT IS.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS. SO WITH THE LOT DEPTH, IT IS.
WITH THE LOT DEPTH, IT IS ALREADY CONFORMING TO THE STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE.
IT LEGALLY NON CONFORMS, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT EITHER.
OKAY. AND SO IT'S GRANDFATHERED BECAUSE? BECAUSE IT WAS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE REGULATIONS.
IT'S ALLOWED TO REMAIN. SO THE LOT DEPTH RIGHT NOW IS 100FT, IS THAT RIGHT? SO CURRENTLY THE LOT DEPTH RIGHT NOW IS. [INAUDIBLE].
140. 140. YES. AND THEN SPLIT. IT WOULD BE 70.
OKAY. BUT SO RIGHT NOW, ISN'T IT LEGALLY CONFORMING? IT'S CONFORMING RIGHT. YES. YES. SO THAT MAY JUST BE A MISTAKE IN THE STAFF REPORT.
OKAY. GREAT I THOUGHT I WAS CRAZY, WHICH IS ALSO POSSIBLE, BUT.
OKAY. GOT IT. OKAY. DO WE HAVE MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SHE'S ASKING IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. I'M TRYING TO ASSOCIATE THESE PICTURES WITH THE OTHER PICTURES IS ON. WHAT THE OTHER PICTURES ARE PROVIDED AN AERIAL VIEW.
BUT. OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE 25Z-016. CASE IS OPEN AND STAFF REPORT IS MADE A PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[00:20:01]
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND SIGN IN AS WELL.I'M [INAUDIBLE], AND THIS IS MY WIFE, [INAUDIBLE].
AND ACTUALLY, WHAT WE'RE JUST TRYING TO DO FOR THIS PROPERTY IS GET TWO ADDRESSES SO THAT WE'RE ABLE TO SELL ONE OF THE PROPERTIES AND BUILD A NEW PROPERTY, BECAUSE IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO SELL TWO PROPERTIES TOGETHER IN AN AREA SUCH AS THIS.
IT WOULD BE OVER $1 MILLION TO TRY TO SELL THAT.
AND IN THE FUTURE, THAT'S NOT GOING TO WARRANT THE SALE.
AND IF YOU. THE GRASS THAT I TAKE CARE OF IS ALL ON THE EASEMENTS AS WELL AS OUR PROPERTY LINE.
AND IF YOU MEASURE ALL THE WAY TO THE EASEMENTS, IT'S 13,860FT², RATHER THAN ONLY 10,000FT².
SO IT HAS A DIFFERENT. IT'S VERY UNIQUE. SO IT'S A VERY LARGE PIECE OF PROPERTY.
AND I WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THE THE REST OF IT.
OKAY. PLEASE DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN. OKAY. YES.
AND HE'S MY NEIGHBOR AND HE CAN. YEAH. OKAY. OKAY.
HE'S SAYING THAT THAT'S THE WRONG HOUSE. YEAH, IT IS THE WRONG HOUSE.
NO THEY DON'T. WELL, IT'S THE WRONG HOUSE. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COULD YOU CLARIFY AGAIN WHAT YOU JUST SAID ABOUT THE HOUSE, THIS PHOTOGRAPH THAT YOU.
IS IT PART OF THE CASE REPORT? IT'S NOT EVEN ON THE PROPERTY.
OKAY. I WAS SHOWING IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE THAT, THIS IS THE WAY WITH THAT MUCH PROPERTY, SOMEONE BUILDS A SMALL HOUSE AND THEN THEY BUILD, LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF, LIKE, SHABBY GARAGES TOWARDS THE BACKS THAT ARE FALLING DOWN.
WE BUILT THAT HOUSE AND IT'S KIND OF THE GATEWAY INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I THINK IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
ESPECIALLY IF YOU DRIVE DOWN KLEINMAN. THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE MORE QUESTIONS? SO YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD A ONE STORY, 1600 FOOT STRUCTURE? WELL, THAT DEPENDS ON WHERE THE SETBACK IS, WHICH IS GOING TO BE SET BY THE CITY OBVIOUSLY.
I MEAN, THIS SHOWS PROPOSED 20 FOOT SETBACK WITH TWO FOOT, TEN FOOT SIDES AND TEN FOOT REAR, WHICH LEAVES A 1600 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE. RIGHT.
AND THAT'S GOING TO BE ONE STORY? YES. WE'RE LOOKING AT A ONE STORY.
YEAH. IT'S GOING TO BE ELEVATED? OH YEAH. DEFINITELY.
IT WILL BE ELEVATED THE SAME AS. LIKE THAT ONE.
THE EXISTING HOUSE. OKAY. WHICH IS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 18 AND 19.
THAT'S WHY YOU'RE PUTTING THE.
DO WE HAVE MORE QUESTIONS? DID YOU NEED MY NEIGHBOR? I THINK HE WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT HAD THE OPPOSING PAPERWORK.
THAT'S NEXT ON THE AGENDA. SO IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, THEN YOU CAN BE SEATED.
WELL, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? YES. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, SIGN IN AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES LIMIT.
MY NAME IS WE HAVE TWO PROPERTIES. IF YOU GO BACK TO THE OTHER, I'M LIKE THE GREEN HOUSE.
THAT'S RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET, LIKE WE LIVE IN THAT ONE.
AND THEN OVER TO THE RIGHT, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO SEE ANOTHER HOUSE.
WE GOT THAT ONE. BUT THE LOT NEXT DOOR TO THAT IS RAISED ABOUT FIVE, SIX FEET.
AND THEN THE NEXT THING I KNOW, IT'S UP FOR SALE.
SO THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS. AND I DIDN'T GET THIS STRAIGHT UNTIL THEY WALKED IN AND SAID, WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE? BUT ANYWAY, SO I'M NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THIS.
I JUST WANT TO SAY ABOUT THIS GUY HERE, LIKE THIS COUPLE, I'M NOT CALLING HIM A MUSHROOM, BUT HE'S A FUN GUY. HE'S GOOD FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY ARE BUILDING NICE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I WOULD SAY, YEAH, GO AHEAD AND APPROVE ANYTHING.
[00:25:08]
AND ANOTHER THING, MISS REBECCA, WHEN I WAS GOING THROUGH THIS, SHE HELPED ME A LOT.SHE WAS VERY GOOD, VERY FRIENDLY, VERY NICE. SO GIVE HER A RAISE, NO.
THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. LET ME GET MY ADDRESS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE 25Z-016 IS CLOSED AND THE CASE IS RETURNED TO THE COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION. OH. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC? OKAY. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? YEAH. I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE REQUEST WILL NOT HAVE ADVERSE EFFECT, ADVERSELY, THE VALUE OF USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTY NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, OR WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THIS IS A VARIANCE REQUEST. PREVIOUS CASE WAS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
AND THEY HAVE TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF STANDARDS.
SO YOU SHOULD USE THE MOTION GUIDE FOR VARIANCES.
SHOULD BE THE LAST PAGE IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
COMMISSIONER FAGAN, FOR THIS TYPE OF REQUEST, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME SPECIFICITY AS TO THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW THIS VARIANCE. SO WE NEED TO BE SPECIFIC WITH THAT AS WELL.
ALL COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU'RE MAKING THE MOTION. OKAY.
OKAY. I CAN MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL DUE TO THE FOLLOWING THE SPECIAL CONDITION OF THE LOT, AS IT'S PLATTED, DOES NOT GENERALLY EXIST ON OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT.
THE SPECIAL CONDITION IS THE LOT IS OVERSIZE LOT, AND IT WOULD BE.
I'M GOING TO SAY, THAT IT ALLOWS FOR MEETING SETBACK LINES, IN THAT AREA FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. I GOTTA READ ALL THIS, DONNA, TO THE SPECIAL CONDITION. ENFORCEMENT OF THE STRICT TERMS OF THESE REGULATIONS WOULD IMPOSE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP ON THE APPLICANT. THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND THAT THE HARDSHIP IS NOT SELF-IMPOSED.
IT'S NOT BASED SOLELY ON FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS, CONVENIENCE OR INCONVENIENCE.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE DOES NOT HAVE A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT UPON THE CURRENT OR FUTURE USE OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES FOR THE PURPOSES, FOR WHICH THEY ARE ZONED PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES AND PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
THE DEGREE OF VARIANCE ALLOWED FOR THESE REGULATIONS IS THAT IT IS THE LEAST THAT IS NECESSARY TO GRANT RELIEF FROM THE IDENTIFIED UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE USED TO CIRCUMVENT OTHER PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS OF THESE REGULATIONS THAT COULD BE USED FOR THE SAME OR COMPARABLE EFFECT, AND BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THESE REGULATIONS IS PRESERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE IS DONE.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND THAT. MOTION. SORRY.
WE HAVE DISCUSSION NEXT. I TOOK THE LIBERTY OF DRIVING DOWN KLEINMAN.
[00:30:05]
AND I THINK THIS PROPERTY IS PROBABLY THE BEST LOOKING PROPERTY ON THE STREET.AND GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN INFILLING OUR URBAN CORE, I FIND THIS TO BE A REALLY FAVORABLE CASE. THANK YOU.
I THINK THAT MR. FAGAN HAS INDICATED THE SPECIAL CONDITION IS THE OVERSIZE NATURE OF THE LOT.
I GOT THAT. OKAY. SO. OKAY. DONNA, I WAS JUST.
I WAS LOOKING AT IT AS THE PROPERTY LENDS ITSELF BECAUSE IT'S THE SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY.
IT LENDS ITSELF TO DIVIDING IT INTO TWO. AND THEN IT'S SHOWN ON THE PLOT, THE SETBACKS.
TEN FOOT ON EACH SIDE, 20 FOOT BACK FROM KLEINMAN STREET.
THAT TO ME IT SHOULD BE APPROVED BASED ON THOSE THINGS.
I'LL BE THE NEGATIVE COMMENT ON THIS ONE, BECAUSE THIS IS AN INSTANCE THAT IT SEEMS TO ME WHERE SOMEONE BOUGHT THE LAND AND YOU HAD PLANS FOR IT, AND YET THE REGULATIONS REALLY DON'T ALLOW IT.
AND NOW YOU'RE ASKING FOR AN EXCEPTION. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR INTENTIONS ARE ALL GOOD.
IT'S JUST KIND OF LIKE, WHY DO WE HAVE THE REGULATIONS IF IT'S OKAY TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD AND THEN GET APPROVAL ON THE BACK END? SO THAT'S MY $0.02 WORTH.
I WAS ALSO THINKING ABOUT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS WE HAVE ON THIS CASE, AND IT MAY NOT BE AS STRONG AS WE WANT TO HEAR IT. BUT I WOULD AGREE THAT DUE TO THE SIZE AND SHAPE ON THAT LOT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BENEFIT PROBABLY.
BENEFIT BY PUTTING ANOTHER BRAND NEW HOUSE VERSUS BASICALLY HAVING A YARD THAT IS NOT BUILDABLE. AND I THINK THAT IF THERE'S OTHER LOTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE THE SAME THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD SHOULD BE GETTING THIS SAME VARIANCE.
AND I THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR TAX PURPOSES IN GALVESTON AND THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD IN GENERAL.
ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. IN THAT CASE, WE CAN VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OKAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU.
BEFORE WE ADJOURN, STAFF HAS AN ANNOUNCEMENT.
CONGRATULATIONS. AND IF THAT'S ALL, THEN MEETING ADJOURNED AT 4:04.
THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.