Mar 28, 2024 P&Z Commission

[1. Call to Order.]

[00:00:04]

OKAY, THE TIME IS NOW 6:00 PM IN THE MEETING OF THE ER, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

WILL NOW COME TO ORDER, LET THE RECORDS SHOW THAT

[2. Roll Call.]

NUMBER

[3. Director's report to the Planning & Zoning Commission on action taken by City Council on the March 21, 2024, meeting.]

UM, GOOD EVENING.

I'M REPORTING ON ITEMS THAT WERE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL DURING THE MARCH 21ST MEETING THAT WERE AFFORDED FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

UM, WE DID COMPLETE THE SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE TITAN LEANDER MINOR PUD, AND THAT WAS APPROVED.

UM, WE ALSO COMPLETED THE SECOND READING FOR THE HILL COUNTRY BIBLE PUT AMENDMENT, AS WELL AS THE SPILLERS PROJECT, MINOR PUD.

UM, WE DID GET NOTICE, UH, TODAY OR MAYBE YESTERDAY FROM OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON A UPDATE TO THEIR TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS ON RONALD REAGAN AT PALMER.

SO THEY'RE GONNA, UM, DO AN ADDITIONAL STUDY TO LOOK AT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THAT AREA.

AND, UM, DAN HAS ALSO OFFERED TO COME MAKE A PRESENTATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AT THE NEXT MEETING TO TALK ABOUT DIFFERENT TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS THEIR DEPARTMENT'S BEEN WORKING ON.

SO, I'M, I'M VERY EXCITED THAT HE WAS WILLING TO COME OUT AND TALK TO US ABOUT THAT.

THAT'S IT FOR MY REPORT.

VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OKAY.

[ CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION]

THERE'S ONE ERROR UNDER, UM, COMMISSIONER COSGROVE.

WHICH CASE NUMBER WAS THAT? IF IT WAS THE CASE, YOU RE ACCUSED YOURSELF.

HOWEVER, ITEM DON'T.

ITEM 12 LAST WEEK.

ITEM 12 FROM LAST WEEK.

ITS SHOWS ME VOTING YES.

AND I RECUSED.

SO WITH THAT CHANGED, DO I HEAR MOTION TO APPROVE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE, UH, WITH THE AMENDMENT.

OKAY, SECOND.

OKAY.

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COSGROVE.

SECONDED BY ADVICE CHAIR.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OKAY.

MOTION PASSES.

OKAY.

WE'LL

[7. Conduct a Public Hearing regarding Subdivision Case CP-23-0021 to adopt the Valor Schools Concept Plan and Preliminary Plat on one (1) parcel of land approximately 13.79 acres ± in size, more particularly described by Williamson Central Appraisal District Parcel R430223; generally located northwest of the intersection of Kauffman Loop and CR 267, Leander, Williamson County, Texas.  ]

ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SUBDIVISION CASE.

CCP DASH 23 DASH 0 21 TO ADOPT THE VALOR SCHOOL'S CONCEPT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAN, THIS IS GENERALLY LOCATED NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF KAUFMAN LOOP AND COUNTY ROAD 2 67 STAFF PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU, KARINA CASTILLO WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

THIS REQUEST IS THE FIRST AND SECOND STEPS IN THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS PURSUANT TO SECTION TWO 12 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE APPROVAL BY MUNICIPALITIES REQUIRED SINCE THE CONCEPT PLAN SATISFIES THE APPLICABLE REGULAT REGULATIONS WITHOUT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES, THERE HAS BEEN AN UPDATE THAT WAS SENT OUT TO THE COMMISSION EARLIER THIS WEEK.

UM, THERE WAS A TYPO ON THE WATER LINE THAT'S GOING NORTH, SHOWN HERE WITH THE RED BOX.

I'LL BE AVAILABLE IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

IS THERE AN APPLICANT PRESENTATION? SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC HEARING.

WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? SEE NONE.

WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ENTER DISCUSSION.

WE'LL START WITH COMMISSIONER MAHAN.

UH, NOTHING EXCEPT FOR, I'LL BE GLAD WHEN WE NO LONGER HAVE TO SEE THESE.

ONCE, UH, IT GETS REVIEWED AND CAN BE DONE BY, APPROVED BY STAFF.

SO THAT'S IT.

THAT WOULD BE NICE.

COMMISSIONER COSGROVE? NO, I'M FINE.

COMMISSIONER MAY.

I'M GOOD.

COMMISSIONER MOSS? I'M GOOD.

VICE CHAIR.

I HAVE NO COMMENTS.

COMMISSIONER KALO? I HAVE NOTHING AND I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING.

THIS IS AN ACTION ITEM.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

OKAY.

MOTION TO APPROVE BY THE VICE CHAIR.

SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAY MOSS.

COMMISSIONER MOSS.

SORRY.

MOSS.

MAY MAYHAN.

THERE'S TOO MANY M'S.

OKAY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OKAY.

MOTION CARRIES.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON

[8. Conduct a Public Hearing regarding Ordinance Case OR-24-0017 to amend the Subdivision Ordinance to adopt updates to the Parkland Dedication, Park Improvement, and Parkland Fee-in-Lieu regulations and requirements, and to provide for related matters; Williamson & Travis Counties, Texas.]

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING ORDINANCE CASE OR DASH 24 DASH 0 0 1 7 TO AMEND THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO ADOPT UPDATES.

UPDATES TO THE PARKLAND DEDICATION, PARK IMPROVEMENT AND PARKLAND FEE IN LIEU REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS.

STAFF PRESENTATION DIRECTOR THOMAS, WELCOME BACK.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

GOOD EVENING, CHAIR LAND TRIPP AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

I APPRECIATE BEING ABLE TO BE IN FRONT OF YOU AGAIN TWO WEEKS LATER.

UM, TWO WEEKS AGO WE SHARED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES TO ARTICLE FOUR OF THE LEANDER CODE OF ORDINANCES, IN PARTICULAR SECTION 61 PARKLAND DEDICATION AND PARK IMPROVEMENTS, AND ARE BACK TONIGHT, UH, FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.

UM, AS WAS SHARED PREVIOUS, PREVIOUSLY, STAFF WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH THE CITY COUNCIL PARKLAND DEDICATION SUBCOMMITTEE.

DURING THIS PAST SEVERAL MONTHS.

WE RESEARCHED NUMEROUS OBJECTIVES, DISCUSSED THEM WITH EXPERTS AND REAL REANALYZED OUR PREVIOUS PROPOSAL FROM LAST YEAR.

UM, WE BELIEVE PARKLAND IS AN ESSENTIAL CITY SERVICE THAT AFFORDS WELL-DOCUMENTED

[00:05:01]

UM, THE US SUPREME COURT OFFERED NO SPECIFIC GUIDANCE WHEN IT THEY HEARD THROUGH THIS, WENT THROUGH THIS ON ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY, UM, BUT ESSENTIALLY STATE THE CITIES MUST MAKE AN EFFORT TO QUANTIFY ITS FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF THE DEDICATION THAT THE REQUIRED DEDICATION IS RELATED TO BOTH IN NATURE AND EXTENT TO THE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE ATTEMPTED TO DO.

INSTEAD OF ARBITRARILY SELECTING A FIGURE OR NUMBERS, WE HAVE LOOKED AT THE BEST DATA THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE TO GUIDE US IN MAKING DECISIONS.

I APPRECIATE YOUR POSITIVE COMMENTS YOU PROVIDED TWO WEEKS AGO.

YOU ALSO HAD A COUPLE OF INQUIRIES AS WELL.

I WANTED TO ADDRESS THOSE BEFORE, UH, WE GET INTO THE ACTUAL PUBLIC HEARING.

SO DURING THAT Q AND A PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION, IT WAS, UH, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, IT WAS ASKED ABOUT DATA RELATED TO THE 50% CREDIT OR OFFSETS OR SPLITS BETWEEN PRIVATE PARKLAND AND PUBLIC PARK LAND.

UM, OF COURSE, IN OUR RESEARCH AND OUR DISCUSSION INTERNALLY, IT WAS NOTED THAT THE MOST REASONABLE CREDIT LIMIT TO ADOPT FOR AMENITIES IS 50%.

IF I'M FOLLOWING YOUR TRAIN OF THOUGHT, YOU MAY BELIEVE THAT THE CITY PUBLIC PARKLAND SHOULD BENEFIT MAYBE MORE SO THEN THE PRIVATE PARK LAND.

THEREFORE, A 50 50 SPLIT COULD BE PERHAPS 60 40 OR 80 20 OR SOME VARIATION IN, IN THAT, IN FAVOR OF PUBLIC PARKLAND.

AND THAT WAS ONE OF OUR ORIGINAL THOUGHTS WHEN WE FIRST, UH, BEGAN THIS, UH, OVER A YEAR AGO.

UM, HOWEVER, AND TO THEIR CREDIT, THE COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE AND STAFF BELIEVED A MORE EQUITABLE SPLIT WOULD BE FAVORABLE.

AND IN THE SUB SUBSEQUENT THREE YEAR REVIEWS, THIS IS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT COULD BE ANALYZED EVEN FURTHER.

AND IF CHANGES ARE TO BE MADE, THAT WOULD BE THE IDEAL TIME.

THE SECOND INQUIRY WAS, WHAT ARE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES DOING WITH OUR PARKLAND DEDICATION? UH, WE ESSENTIALLY, HOW DO THEY CONDUCT THEIR PROCESS? A CHART WAS PROVIDED TO YOU FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING TO YOU IDENTIFY, FOR YOU TO IDENTIFY SEVERAL OTHER TEXAS COMMUNITIES AND THE BASICS OF THEIR ORDINANCES.

UM, MOST HAVE NOT RECENTLY UPDATED THEIR ORDINANCES.

HOWEVER, I HAVE HAD PERSONAL CONVERSATIONS WITH MOST OF THOSE DIRECTORS, UM, UH, ESPECIALLY IN OUR LOCAL AREA.

UH, IN, IN THOSE PERSONAL CONVERSATIONS, THEY ALL SHARE THE SAME ANSWER ESSENTIALLY, WHICH IS THEIR ORDINANCE IS IN NEED OF BEING REVIEWED AND MOST LIKELY UPDATES SHOULD BE MADE BASED ON CURRENT GROWTH AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS.

MOST ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 2018, 2019, MAYBE EVEN 2020 AT THE VERY LATEST IN THE LAST THREE OR FOUR YEARS.

MOST HAVE NOT EVEN DONE THAT.

SO WE'RE, WE'RE SORT OF IN UNIQUE POSITION.

UM, AND, UM, UH, SO I, I THINK THAT'S REALLY A, A, A BENEFIT TO US IN, IN A LOT OF WAYS.

BUT I ALSO WANNA SHARE THAT THE SUPREME COURT IN THEIR RULING ALSO MADE IT CLEAR THAT USING THE LEVEL OF SERVICE IN PEER CITIES IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE APPROACH, BUT THE BENCHMARK SHOULD BE OUR OWN LEVEL OF SERVICE, WHICH WE HAVE DONE WITH THIS NEW, UH, THIS REVISED ORDINANCE.

AND THEN THE THIRD INQUIRY THAT WAS MADE WAS CONCERNING AN APPEAL PROCESS.

I RESEARCHED SEVERAL OTHER ORDINANCES AND COULD NOT LOCATE AN APPEAL PROCESS IN THEIR, IN THEIR ORDINANCES.

UH, MOST GIVE GREAT LEEWAY FOR MAKING DECISIONS TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR AND OR THE PLANNING DIRECTOR.

UM, AND I BELIEVE THAT IS DUE TO USING EMPIRICAL DATA AND LIMITING POTENTIAL DISAGREEMENTS.

THROUGH THESE REVISIONS, WE'VE TAKEN STEPS TO ENSURE THERE'S LITTLE ROOM FOR DISPUTES.

OUR MAIN GOAL IS REALLY TO ESTABLISH BETTER RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE DEVELOPERS, UH, THAT ARE, THAT ARE THERE AND WORK WITH THEM TO FIND EQUITABLE SOLUTIONS THAT, UH, REALLY MEET THE NEEDS OF THE CITIZENS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

LASTLY, LASTLY, I JUST WANNA SHARE WITH YOU THAT, UH, AND I APPRECIATE TAYLOR BEING HERE TONIGHT FROM THE HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION.

WE'VE, WE'VE RECEIVED INFORMATION BACK FROM THEM PERIODICALLY THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS, AND IT'S BEEN A REALLY GOOD RELATIONSHIP.

UH, AND SO I, I DO APPRECIATE THEM.

UH, BUT THEY ASKED, UH, LAST WEEK, UM, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND I WANTED TO SHARE THOSE WITH YOU AS WELL, SO WE CAN BE, UH, BECAUSE THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE AS WELL.

AND ONE OF THOSE WAS TO INCREASE THE, THE ACRES, THE THREE AND A HALF ACRES PER DA HUNDRED 100 DU TO SEVEN AND A HALF ACRES OF LAND DEDICATION PER 100 S.

AND THEIR, THEIR QUESTION WAS, WHY NOT JUST INCREASE FROM THREE AND A HALF TO FIVE AND A HALF, OR FROM THREE AND A HALF TO FIVE ACRES

[00:10:01]

HOWEVER, BEAR IN MIND, THE NUMBER OF ACRES PER DUDU DO NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE FEE IN FOR FEE IN LIEU FORMULA AS IT DOES CURRENTLY.

THE ACREAGE PER A HUNDRED S AS IS A STATISTIC TO CITY, UH, TO ASSIST THE CITY IN PROVIDING MORE, UH, PUBLIC PARK LAND PER 1000 RESIDENTS.

WE CURRENTLY SIT AT 4.78 PUBLIC PARK LAND ACRES PER 1000 RESIDENTS.

THE NATIONAL STANDARD, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED BEFORE, IS 11.2 PUBLIC, UH, 11.2 PUBLIC PARK ACRES PER THOUSAND RESIDENTS FOR CITIES OF OUR POPULATION.

THAT'S A DIFFERENCE OF 6.42 PUBLIC PARK ACRES PER THOUSAND OR A 72% DEFICIT.

I SHARED THAT WITH THE HBA, THAT, UH, AT MINIMUM I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE RECOMMENDING YOU PLANNING A ZONING AND CITY COUNCIL AT SIX ACRES PER THOUSAND DU THAT'S, UM, UH, THAT MEETS THAT 72% DEFICIT.

HOWEVER, I ARRIVED OR STAFF ARRIVED AT THE SEVEN AND A HALF ACRES BY ADDING AN ADDITIONAL 25% FOR A TOTAL OF 7.5, BELIEVING THAT MOST LIKELY 50 WOULD GO TO A PRIVATE PARK, 50% TO A PUBLIC PARK.

AND THIS WOULD HELP US SLOWLY CHIP AWAY, UH, AT THE PUBLIC PARK DEFICIT.

I SHARED THAT WE HAVE INROADS TO MAKE, IT WON'T BE DONE OVERNIGHT.

AND WE RECOGNIZE THE CITY WON'T REALLY EVER REACH THAT NATIONAL AVERAGE, AND CERTAINLY NOT THROUGH PARKLAND DEDICATION.

'CAUSE IT DOES TAKE, AS WE'VE LEARNED AND RESEARCHED AND TALKED WITH NUMEROUS OTHER EXPERTS, IT DOES TAKE CITY PURCHASE CONDITIONAL PARK PROPERTY, UH, OUTRIGHT OBTAINING PARKLAND THROUGH REDUCED PROPERTY SALES OR AUCTION PROPERTY LAND OR FINANCIAL DONATIONS AND EASEMENTS, UH, TO HELP US, UH, GET CLOSER, SEVEN AND A HALF ACRES.

ALSO ASSIST THE DEVELOPER IN CITY TO LOOK AT PARKLAND MORE HOLISTICALLY, UH, RATHER THAN JUST THE SUBDIVISION ITSELF.

HOW CAN WE CREATE LINKAGES? HOW CAN WE HELP CONNECT THOSE TRAILS, THOSE GREEN BELTS, THOSE WILDLIFE CORRIDORS? UM, AND BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENTS BETWEEN PARKS, SCHOOLS, AND RETAIL, FOR EXAMPLE, CURRENTLY A 500 DU DEVELOPMENT IS TO PROVIDE RIGHT NOW SEVEN AND 17 AND A HALF ACRES OF PARK LAND.

UNDER THE PROPOSAL OF 7.5 ACRES, IT WOULD BE 37 AND A HALF ACRES.

AND IF SIX, IT WOULD BE, UH, IT WOULD BE SIX ACRES PER HUNDRED DU IT WOULD BE 30 ACRES MINIMUM.

SO IT'S ONLY A DIFFERENCE OF ABOUT SEVEN ACRES FOR 500 UNITS.

UM, I WOULD PREFER TO KEEP IT AT SEVEN AND A HALF, BUT WE'LL LISTEN TO YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS AND COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL.

UM, AND THEN, UH, THE HOME BILL ASSOCIATION FURTHER ASKED THE, THEY, THEY HAD THE ORIGINAL $145,000 PER ACRE FIGURE THAT WE INITIALLY PROPOSED LAST YEAR AND SWITCHED TO BE IN FAVOR OF FAIR MARKET VALUE APPRAISAL METHOD AND SIM.

WE, WE RESPONDED THAT, THAT, THAT WAS MENTIONED A YEAR AGO WAS UNVERIFIABLE NUMBER.

AND WE EVEN SHARED AT THAT TIME WITH YOU AND WITH CITY COUNCIL THAT THE 105,000 145,000 NUMBER COULD BE DECREASED OR INCREASED AS SEEMED FIT SINCE THE TIME WE DETERMINED THAT USING A FIGURE LIKE THAT IS REALLY NOT EMPIRICAL.

UM, AND I USE THAT WORD A LOT, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO, TO GET TO, IS THE RAW DATA.

WE, ALONG WITH OUR SUB COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE, BELIEVE THAT THE BEST METHOD IS USED A FAIR MARKET VALUE APPROACH.

SIMPLY THE DEVELOPER WOULD ENGAGE A CERTIFIED GENERAL APPRAISER AND TEXAS APPRAISER LICENSING CERTIFICATION BOARD, UH, PERSON WHO IS IN GOOD STANDING WITH A NATIONAL REGISTRY LIST OF CERTIFIED AND LICENSED APPRAISER.

THEY WOULD PRODUCE AN APPRAISAL REPORT REFLECTING THE FAIR MARKET OF VALUE ON THE PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED.

STAFF IN THIS COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE BELIEVE THE ORIGINAL APPROACH COULD BE CONSIDERED CONFUSING.

AND THIS WAS MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD.

I HOPE I, I KNOW I READ A LOT, BUT I HOPE THIS, UM, HELPS CLARIFY A FEW ITEMS WITH YOU.

I, UH, AND, AND OF COURSE WITH CITY COUNCIL AS WE HOPEFULLY MOVE FORWARD NEXT WEEK, AND OTHERS WHO MAY HAVE HAD SIMILAR THOUGHTS.

SO I THINK MY PRESENTATION IS OVER AND THEN YOU GO INTO PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS POINT.

SO I'LL BE GLAD TO COME BACK FOR QUESTIONS IN A LITTLE BIT.

THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU.

OKAY, WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, SCENE? NONE.

WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INTER DISCUSSION STARTING WITH COMMISSIONER KLUM.

UH, NO COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? LAST CHAIR? UH, YEAH, I MEAN, OVERALL GREAT WORK.

YOU KNOW, AS WE TALKED ABOUT, UM, I, I REALLY LIKE, I ACTUALLY LIKE THE THREE AND A HALF TO SEVEN AND A HALF, SO I, I THINK YOU SHOULD KEEP IT SEVEN AND A HALF.

I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T CHANGE THAT.

UH, I ALSO LIKE HOW YOU REDUCE THE FLOOD PAIN, THE FLOODPLAIN PERCENTAGE FROM 50% TO 33% WITH A THREE TO ONE RATIO.

THAT WAS A GOOD CALL OUT AS WELL.

UM, I DID SOME, YOU KNOW, GENERAL MATH, AND I, I, I THINK THAT WE'VE GOT A GOOD RATIO AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU PUT A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON A SMALLER ACREAGE, THEY STILL HAVE TO PAY A, A, A LARGER FEE.

'CAUSE QUITE FRANKLY, THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT GONNA DEVELOP ANY PARKLAND

[00:15:01]

AND MOST APARTMENT COMPLEXES OR MULTI-FAMILY AREN'T GONNA HAVE PUBLIC SPACES AVAILABLE TO THE COMMUNITY ANYWAY.

SO I LIKED HOW, YOU KNOW, THE PROPORTION THERE WORKED OUT WELL, UM, CERTAINLY IN OUR FAVOR.

UM, BUT OVERALL, YEAH, I THINK GREAT WORK AND, AND, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M DEFINITELY, YOU KNOW, READY TO MOVE FORWARD AND, AND APPROVE THIS.

SO, COMMISSIONER MOSS, UH, NO COMMENT.

OKAY, COMMISSIONER MAG, I'LL MAKE A QUICK, UM, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE THAT IF, IF THE DEVELOPERS ARE DOING 50% DEDICATION, THAT IT'S ACTUALLY DEVELOPED INTO SOMETHING OTHER THAN A GRASS FIELD WITH THE IRRIGATION.

I KNOW THEY CAN ONLY USE 50% NOW BECAUSE OF THE ORDINANCE, BUT, UM, MAKE IT SOMETHING USEFUL TO THE COMMUNITIES THAT'S ACTUALLY BEING USED.

UH, IF NOT, UH, GOING THE FEE IN LIEU OF, UH, TO PUT IT FOR PUBLIC PARKS.

WE, WE DON'T NEED MORE GRASS FIELDS IN THE CITY.

COMMISSIONER COSGROVE, I, UM, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT'S GONE, UH, GONE INTO THIS.

UM, THE IDEA OF, OF OF BEING ABLE TO, TO USE EMPIRICAL DATA TO COME UP WITH DECISIONS IS IMPORTANT TO ME.

WHICH, WHICH BRINGS ME TO MY, MY ONLY QUESTION FOR THE DIRECTOR, AND I THINK IT'S ON 61 43, WHERE, UM, WHERE I BELIEVE THE LANGUAGE SAYS THAT IT WILL SERVE A, A, UH, IT, IT MUST BE WITHIN A CONVENIENT DISTANCE OF THE MAJORITY OF RESIDENTS SERVED.

HOW DO WE QUANTIFY A CONVENIENT DISTANCE? AND IF THERE'S A DISCREPANCY, WHO THEN AT THAT POINT IN TIME IS THE, UM, AUTHORITY ON, ON WHETHER IT MEETS THE CRITERIA.

BUT, BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, I, I, I, I AM IN, I'M IN FULL FAVOR OF SEVEN AND A HALF.

WE, WE, UM, WE'VE BEEN FAR TO, I THINK, LENIENT IN TERMS OF, OF THAT METRIC GOING FORWARD.

BUT I APPLAUD THE CITY'S STAFF AND, AND SUBCOMMITTEE FOR ALL THEIR WORK.

COMMISSIONER MAHAN, I'M GOOD.

OKAY.

AND I JUST HAD A FEW COMMENTS.

UM, I, ON, UH, I GUESS IT WAS PAGE THREE, ART, ARTICLE FOUR B ONE, WHERE IT'S TALKING ABOUT, UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'RE BASICALLY TELLING THE DEVELOPERS OF THE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS THAT WE WOULD PREFER THE FEE IN LIEU.

IS THAT CORRECT? DIRECTOR CUMMINS? RATHER THAN THE DEDICATION OF PARKLAND.

SO WE'RE ENCOURAGING THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE OPTIONS, BUT WE'RE ENCOURAGING THAT ONE.

THAT'S CORRECT.

CORRECT.

OKAY.

AND THEN I, I DID LIKE, UM, HOW YOU DESCRIBED AND DEFINED WHAT WAS, WAS ACCEPTABLE, PARKLAND, I THOUGHT THAT WAS REALLY GOOD.

ESPECIALLY LIKED THE, UH, PREFERENCE FOR SITES WITH HERITAGE TREES.

THAT ONE I, I REALLY LIKED.

I HAD, UM, A QUESTION ON PAGE FIVE.

LET ME FIND WHAT NUMBER THAT WOULD BE FOR YOU.

UM, SO IT'S, I JUST WANTED A LITTLE CLARIFICATION ON THAT SECTION NUMBER SEVEN, WHERE IT'S TALKING ABOUT IF THE CITY HAS, I, I GUESS IT, THE WAY I WAS READING IT, MAYBE THAT'S WHY I JUST WANNA CLARIFICATION WAS THAT IF THE DEVELOPER HAS, UM, MORE LAND AVAILABLE THAT COULD BE DONATED, BUT HE IS ONLY REQ, HE OR SHE OR IS ONLY REQUIRED TO DONATE A PORTION OF IT, THAT THEY COULD DONATE THE REST OF IT AND GET CREDIT.

COULD YOU EXPLAIN OR KIND OF CLARIFY THAT SECTION FOR ME? WE DIDN'T WANT TO LIMIT AND JUST SAY, THIS IS JUST THE AMOUNT THAT YOU, THAT YOU CAN, UM, THAT YOU PROVIDE IN BASED ON THE ORDINANCE.

SO IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL LAND THAT YOU WANNA PROVIDE, WE WILL LOOK AT A POTENTIAL CREDIT.

IT COULD BE THAT LINKAGE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

MM-HMM.

.

UM, AND I KNOW, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, MAY MENTIONED ABOUT NOT HAVING GRASSY FIELDS.

AND, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE, THE KEY COMPONENTS IS WE, WE'D ALSO IN YOUR EXPERIENCING THAT.

UM, BUT HOWEVER, IF IT'S LINEAR CORRIDORS THAT WE CAN EVENTUALLY PUT A GREENWAY OR TRAIL OR COM CONNECT WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOT HAVING TO GET ON ROADS OR THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT HOW THAT WILL BE THERE.

GIVES US A LITTLE BIT OF FLEXIBILITY.

GIVES THE DEVELOPER A LITTLE BIT OF FLEXIBILITY.

I HOPE THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION A LITTLE BIT.

IT DOES, IT DOES.

UM, BUT IT'S, IT, IT'S ALLOWING US TO WORK CLOSELY WITH THOSE DEVELOPERS.

OKAY.

AND I ALSO DO LIKE THE SEVEN AND A HALF, BUT, UH, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR HIM WHILE HE'S AT THE PODIUM BEFORE WE VOTE? OKAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT.

THIS IS AN ACTION ITEM.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

GO AHEAD.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

I'LL SECOND.

MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER KALO.

SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER

[00:20:01]

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OKAY.

MOTION PASSES.

WE'LL

[9. Discuss and consider action on an appeal of an administrative decision regarding Article VI, Section 14 (c) of the Composite Zoning Ordinance pertaining to standards associated with utility lines on one (1) lot, approximately 22.27 acres in size, more particularly described by Williamson Central Appraisal District Parcel R031208, commonly addressed as 10930 E Crystal Falls Pkwy; Williamson County, Texas.  ]

ITEM NINE, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ACTION ON AN APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION REGARDING ARTICLE SIX, SECTION 14 OF THE COMPOSITE ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO STANDARDS ASSOCIATED WITH UTILITY LINES ON ONE LOT, APPROXIMATELY 22.27 ACRES IN SIZE, LOCATED AT 1 0 9 3 OH EAST CRYSTAL FALLS PARKWAY STAFF PRESENTATION.

HELLO.

THE TEXAS HUMANE HEROES IS PROPOSING AN EXPANSION TO THEIR SITE.

THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT WAS ISSUED IN JULY OF LAST YEAR.

DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS, THE DEVELOPER CAME ACROSS ISSUES REGARDING EXTENDING POWER THROUGHOUT THE SITE THAT CAUSED AN AN INCREASED COST.

THE COMPOSITE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES REQUIRE THAT NEW UTILITIES BE UNDERGROUND.

IT ALSO INCLUDES THAT THE CITY ENGINEER MAY GRANT AN EXCEPTION IF THE EXCEPTION IS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES OR FOR SAFETY PUBLIC SAFETY REASONS.

TEXAS HUMANE HEROES IS PROPOSING TO PLACE TWO POWER POLES ON THEIR PROPERTY TO BRING POWER TO THEIR NEW ANIMAL SHELTER BUILDING.

AND WE DO HAVE AN EXHIBIT OF WHERE THOSE ARE LOCATED ON THE SITE.

UM, DUE TO THE COST DIFFERENCE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN EXCEPTION TO PLACE A UTILITIES OVERHEAD.

STAFF HAS MADE THE DETERMINATION THAT THE REQUEST DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE EXCEPTION PROCESS.

SINCE THE PROPOSED EXCEPTION IS NOT REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES OR FOR PUBLIC SAFETY REASONS AND IS BASED ON FINANCIAL REASONS, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE REQUEST.

THANK YOU.

IS THERE AN APPLICANT PRESENTATION? OKAY.

ALRIGHT, WE WILL ENTER INTO DISCUSSION.

START DOWN HERE WITH COMMISSIONER MAHAN.

YEAH, SO THIS IS A LITTLE BIT INTERESTING ONE FOR ME.

AND, UM, I, I WAS KIND OF SURPRISED THAT I, I I, I APPRECIATE LEARNING MORE ABOUT OUR EXCEPTIONS PROCESS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

'CAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WE, WE RECEIVED THESE TYPES OF THINGS.

SO, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THAT.

I THINK THAT, UH, LOOKING BACK AT THE CORE OF WHAT I, I FEEL THAT, THAT MY ROLE IS HERE, IT'S REALLY TO CALL BALLS AND STRIKES AND TO TAKE MY EMOTIONS AND MY FEELINGS OUT OF IT.

UM, AND I'M NOT SURE WHO DID THE, UH, INITIAL ELEC ELECTRICAL MASTER PLAN, BUT I THINK THEY DROPPED THE BALL, WHICH KIND OF CREATED SOME OF THIS PROBLEM.

BUT NOW, UM, WE AS A CITY THEN HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS.

AND I THINK THAT IF WE ALLOW THIS HERE, WE'RE SETTING A BAD PRECEDENT WHEN OTHER FOLKS WANT TO COME.

AND SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M LEANING.

SO I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BUT THAT'S JUST KIND OF MY THOUGHTS ON IT.

WHERE YOU GUYS ARE GONNA SEE ME HEAD TOWARDS TONIGHT.

COMMISSIONER COSGROVE.

UM, YEAH, I HAVE, UH, I SPENT DAYS, LITERALLY DAYS LOOKING AT THIS, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY THAT WE COULD POSSIBLY CREATE A CARVE OUT TO, TO APPROVE THIS APPEAL.

UM, BECAUSE A, I THINK IT'S A WORTHY CAUSE BI THINK IT'S A WORTHY ORGANIZATION.

UM, HOWEVER, WITHOUT A CHANGE IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF, I CANNOT FIND A WAY TO APPROVE THE APPEAL IN A WAY THAT WOULD PREVENT SOMEONE ELSE FROM WALKING IN HERE AND SAYING, WELL, YOU DID IT FOR THEM.

AND AS MUCH AS I WANT TO DO IT FOR YOU, UM, I CAN'T FIND A WAY TO, TO VOTE.

YES.

SO, SADLY, THAT'S MY, THAT'S MY POSITION.

COMMISSIONER MAY, UH, I LOVE THE WORK THEY DO THERE, BUT I AGREE WITH THE OTHER TWO COMMISSIONERS.

THERE'S NO WIGGLE WIGGLE ROOM FOR US IN THE ORDINANCE.

THAT'S ALL.

COMMISSIONER MOSS.

UM, I AGREE WITH MY FELLOW, UH, COMMISSIONERS AND IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST A HARD CALL BECAUSE IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE PARAMETERS AND IF WE LET ONE, AND I'M A FAIR PERSON, IF YOU LET ONE, YOU GOTTA LET EVERYBODY ELSE, AND WE ARE NOT IN THE POSITION TO DO THAT.

SO I WOULD HAVE TO VOTE NO VICE CHAIR.

YEAH.

I'M GONNA ECHO THE, THE SENTIMENT OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS.

UM, I MEAN, AUSTIN, I'M A FAN OF THIS PROJECT.

I LOVE WHAT Y'ALL ARE DOING.

YOU PROVIDE GREAT SERVICE TO THE CITY, BUT YOU KNOW, ABSOLUTELY THE PRECEDENT, YOU KNOW, CANNOT BE SET TO DO THIS.

AND THEN WE HAVE OTHER APPLICANTS COME IN AND WANTING THE SAME.

BUT LISTEN, I MEAN, I, I'VE, I'VE DONE SOME BACKGROUND AND LOOKED AT, Y'ALL HAVE RAISED $4 MILLION

[00:25:01]

AND SO YOU'VE GOT A, A GREAT LIST OF DONORS OUT THERE APPARENTLY WHO ARE WILLING TO HELP FUND THIS PROJECT AS A, AS A NONPROFIT.

SO, UM, AND WITH ANY INDUSTRY STANDARD CONSTRUCTION, YOU KNOW, CONTINGENCIES ARE USUALLY THREE TO 10%.

AND YOUR, YOU KNOW, 60 5K THAT I SAW WITHIN THE PACKET WAS ABOUT 1.2%.

SO I THINK YOU'VE GOT SOME WIGGLE ROOM TO WORK WITH, HOPEFULLY WITHIN YOUR CONTINGENCY.

AND I CERTAINLY FEEL CONFIDENT THAT MAYBE Y'ALL HAVE SOME OTHER OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO YOU.

THIS IS OBVIOUSLY OPTION ONE, I'M ASSUMING, BUT, UM, I'M THINKING, YOU KNOW, AS A SMART ORGANIZATION, AS I THINK YOU ARE, YOU'VE GOT 2, 3, 4, 5 ALREADY LISTED IF THIS DOESN'T WORK OUT.

AND SO I, I DO HAVE FAITH THAT Y'ALL WILL FIGURE THIS OUT, BUT I THINK FROM A PRECEDENT STANDPOINT AS A CITY, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE TO HOLD FIRM TO OUR ORDINANCE.

THAT'S IT.

COMMISSIONER KALO.

AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT , UM, LOOKING AT THE ORDINANCE, UH, IT IS CLEAR TO ME THAT THE, THE ENGINEER, UH, HAS TO MAKE A DECISION ACCORDING TO A TWO-PRONG TEST.

UH, EITHER BUILDING CODES REQUIRE THE POLL OR PUBLIC SAFETY REQUIRES THE POLL.

UH, I DO NOT READ IN THIS ORDINANCE THAT THIS COMMISSION IS SIMILARLY CONSTRAINED, UM, THE LANGUAGE IN THE, IN, IN THE ORDINANCE.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO READ IN UNIQUE OR UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

AND APPLICANT MAY REQUEST AN EXCEPTION TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION BY SUBMITTING THE WRITTEN REQUEST.

SO THE ENGINEER MAY GRANT AN EXCEPTION ACCORDING TO THAT TWO-PRONG TEST, WHICH FAILED HERE.

THAT DECISION CAN THEN BE APPEALED TO US AND THEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, AT BEST, THE ORDINANCE IS A LITTLE AMORPHOUS OR AMBIGUOUS ON WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE HANDCUFFED BY THE TWO, THE SAME TWO-PRONGED TEST THAT THE, UH, THAT THE ENGINEER IS.

AND SO I JUST WANNA SET OUT FIRST OF ALL THAT I, I, MY POSITION IS, IS THAT WE DO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS.

AND I THINK THERE'S SOME COMPELLING ARGUMENTS HERE IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, WELL, YOU DID IT FOR THEM, WHY CAN'T YOU DO IT? DO IT, DO IT FOR US.

UM, I THINK OUR ANALYSIS SHOULD PROPERLY, ACCORDING TO THIS ORDINANCE, UH, BE MORE HOLISTIC THAN THAT AND TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

UH, THE, THE, THE PROBLEM WITH THE, UH, THE, THE INITIAL ELECTRICAL PLAN AS COMMISSIONER MAHAN OBSERVED, UM, THE FACT THAT SO MUCH OF THE ORDINANCE, I DON'T WANNA SAY SO MUCH, BUT THIS ORDINANCE REALLY MY UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIRING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES IS ROOTED IN TWO THINGS.

UM, AESTHETICS AND SAFETY.

UM, IF THERE ARE NOT, UH, IF THERE ARE NOT, YOU KNOW, MAJOR SAFETY CONCERNS WITH THE ENGINEERING ON USING A POLE, THEN I LOOK AT THE, THE AESTHETICS PORTION.

THIS, THESE POLES ARE GONNA BE 400 FEET OFF OF, OFF OF CRYSTAL FALLS PARKWAY, ESSENTIALLY IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS PROPERTY.

NOT A LOT OF SIGHT LINES VISIBILITY TO ANYBODY, UH, RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS OR VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AND PUT IT IN TEXAS TERMS. THIS IS 1.33 FOOTBALL FIELDS FROM, FROM CRYSTAL FALLS PARKWAY.

UM, SO THE AESTHETICS ISSUE KIND OF GOES OUT THE DOOR FOR ME.

UM, IS THE CITY ENGINEER HERE TONIGHT? NO, SHE'S NOT.

ARE THERE, OKAY, MAYBE STAFF CAN ANSWER THIS.

ARE THERE ANY SAFETY CONCERNS, YOU KNOW, VERY OVERT SAFETY CONCERNS WITH USING THE POLE TO RUN THIS? NO, THE DECISION WAS JUST MADE BECAUSE OF THE PARAMETERS, LIKE YOU MENTIONED, RESTRICTING THAT VARIANCE.

OKAY.

THAT EXCEPTION.

OKAY.

UM, YEAH, IT WAS BAD.

I MEAN, I, I ASSUME THREE PHASE WOULD GO IN HERE, BUT I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY CAN ONLY DO ONE.

UH, SO YEAH, THE POLE'S 400 FEET AWAY.

UM, IF THE, IF THE DECISION DOES NOT GO IN THE APPLICANT'S DIRECTION OF THIS COMMISSION TONIGHT, UM, IS THERE AN ADDITIONAL FEE FOR APPEALING TO CITY COUNCIL? NO, THEY WOULD JUST GO AHEAD AND GET AT IT TO THE NEXT AGENDA FOR CITY COUNCIL.

OKAY, GOOD.

UM, STAFF COMMENTED IN, IN, IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THAT THAT KIND OF CHARACTERIZING THIS APPEAL AS BEING FOR FINANCIAL REASONS.

AND I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE THAT AS THE CASE EITHER HERE.

UM, THIS IS A NONPROFIT WITH A SPECIFIC MISSION.

AND YOU KNOW, WHEN I THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA OF, UH, UH, OF OUR CITY'S BRAND, WELL, FIRST LEMME MENTION JUST THE IDEA OF THE CITY'S BRAND IS EVERYTHING, EVERY ORGANIZATION IN THIS CITY

[00:30:01]

AND THE TOTALITY OF EVERYTHING WE DO HERE ADDS UP TO A BRAND.

AND WHENEVER WE TALK TO RESIDENTS, WHETHER IT'S IN SURVEYS FOR, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT THINGS, UH, AND WE ASK THEM WHAT THEY LIKE ABOUT THIS CITY, INVARIABLY WHAT WE HEAR IS THIS CITY HAS A SMALL TOWN HEART.

AND THAT'S EVERY SINGLE TIME.

AND YOU KNOW, THE CONCEPT OF DOMINION OVER, OVER, YOU KNOW, THE, THE FISH IN THE SEA, THE BIRDS IN THE AIR, AND THE ANIMALS ON THE GROUND.

IT'S MORE THAN DOMINANCE.

IT IS IT, IT'S IT'S STEWARDSHIP.

AND THIS IS AN ORGANIZATION THAT PRACTICES, UH, THOSE TYPES OF VALUES, LITERALLY DEL SAVING LIVES AND DELIVERING LOVE INTO HOMES.

AND I THINK THOSE THINGS ALONE, THOSE THINGS ALONE DO NOT WARRANT AN EXCEPTION IN THIS CASE.

BUT TO ME, THEY ARE PART OF THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES HERE THAT, THAT WE CAN LOOK AT.

AND I DO THINK WE ARE EMPOWERED BY THIS ORDINANCE TO DO.

UM, I HONESTLY CAN'T THINK OF A BIGGER CONTRIBUTOR TO OUR BRAND AS A, HAVING A SMALL TOWN SOUL AND HEART THAN WHAT TEXAS HUMANE HEROES DOES AND WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING FOR DECADES NOW.

UM, SO I THINK IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS WHERE I AM ON THIS AND, AND HOW I'M GOING TO VOTE.

I DON'T KNOW IF I WAS PERSUASIVE ENOUGH TO MANY, ANY OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, IF I WAS GREAT.

IF NOT, IF IT DOES NOT GO YOUR WAY, I HOPE YOU WILL APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

UH, I DON'T THINK ANYONE WOULD ARGUE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL LACKS THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE, UH, AN EXCEPTION IN THIS CASE.

AND, UH, I THINK THAT'S IT FOR ME.

THANK YOU.

I KIND OF AM IN THE SAME, UH, FRAME OF MIND AS COMMISSIONER KALAM IF, BECAUSE OF WE ARE ASKED TO MAKE EXCEPTIONS ON VARIOUS CASES.

AND THIS ONE, BECAUSE I'VE BEEN THERE SO MANY TIMES, YOU KNOW, JUST TO BRING LINENS AND TOWELS AND THINGS, IT'S SUCH A LONG, DEEP, NARROW LOT.

IF, IF THESE POLES WERE CLOSER TO THE STREET, I WOULD BE A NO VOTE BECAUSE IT'S, IT IS NOT FAIR TO REQUIRE OTHER PEOPLE TO BURY THEM AND THEN, YOU KNOW, ALLOW THAT BECAUSE OF THE DEPTH OF IT.

YOU KNOW, I WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION IN THIS CASE.

I THINK IT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST CONSIDERING THAT PIECE OF LAND AND, AND, AND HOW DEEP IT IS.

SO, UM, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M COMING FROM.

SO CAN I HAVE ONE MORE THING? SURE.

, WHEN I THINK ABOUT THAT, THE PERCEPTION OF OUR SMALL TOWN HEART, AND, AND YOU JUST KIND OF MADE ME THINK OF THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, IT, OUR DECISION IN THIS CASE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS CASE AND SOMEONE ELSE WHO COMES ALONG AND SAYS, YOU DID IT FOR THEM, WHY NOT US? I CAN LOOK AT THIS CASE AND SAY WITH PRETTY GOOD CERTAINTY THAT MOST PEOPLE, IF WE WERE TO EXPLAIN A NO VOTE ON THIS, UH, THEY WOULD, THOSE PEOPLE WHO, WHO VALUE THAT SMALL TOWN HEART, THEIR CONSCIENCE WOULD BE A LITTLE SHOCKED, I THINK, AND, AND THAT THEY, THEY WOULD THINK, OH, OH GOSH, THAT'S, THAT'S JUST NOT RIGHT.

UM, YOU KNOW, NOT A FOR-PROFIT, UM, NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING SPECIAL AND $65,000 CAN GO, THAT CAN BUILT BY A LOT OF DOG FOOD AND, AND, AND A LOT OF BEDDING AND, AND A LOT OF ELECTRICITY.

SO, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO BE AS OBJECTIVE AS WE CAN BECAUSE IT IS, IT IS A, A NON-PROFIT, BUT IT'S RUNNING, YOU KNOW, RUN LIKE A BUSINESS.

AND, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO WOULD LIKE EXCEPTIONS, BUT I, I JUST THINK THAT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE WAY THE LOT'S LAID OUT, THAT IT IS A REASONABLE REQUEST, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE.

SO, UM, THIS, DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING THEY WOULD LIKE TO ADD? I WAS GONNA ADD REAL QUICK THAT THERE IS ALSO AN ADJOINING LOT THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE BORDER OF WHERE THIS IS, WHERE THESE TWO POLES ARE GONNA GO, THAT'S, I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR THAT IS TO THAT, THAT, THAT OTHER LINE TO THE, TO THAT LOT.

IT COULD BE 20 FEET, IT COULD BE 50 FEET.

I, I'M NOT QUITE SURE EXACTLY HOW FAR THAT IS, BUT IT'S WELL WITHIN THE SITE LINE OF THAT ADJACENT LOT, IT'S A COMMERCIAL LOT.

UH, I DON'T THINK ANYTHING'S DEVELOPED THERE AT THIS POINT.

IT MIGHT BE USED KIND OF INTERMITTENTLY RIGHT NOW, BUT EITHER WAY, WHENEVER AND WHENEVER SOMETHING GETS DEVELOPED THERE, THEN YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THESE POLES THAT ARE GONNA BE WITHIN THEIR SITE LINE.

AND SO I DO THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT INTO CONSIDERATION AS WELL WITH WHATEVER WE DECIDE HERE TONIGHT.

THAT'S IT.

OKAY.

THIS IS AN ACTION ITEM.

I WILL REGRETFULLY MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE APPEAL.

I'LL SECOND MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COSGROVE TO DENY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER OLIVER.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? OKAY.

MOTION'S DENIED.

ALRIGHT, THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM NUMBER 10

[00:35:01]

SECONDED THAT ONE.