May 22, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission

[00:00:04]

ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. THANKS FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT.

06:32PM HERE IN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE CITY HALL.

THIS IS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR MAY 22ND.

MY NAME IS DAN KUBIAK, CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE. APPRECIATE EVERYBODY BEING HERE.

WE'LL START GOING THROUGH OUR AGENDA IN ORDER.

THE ONE THING I WANTED TO ANNOUNCE AT THE VERY FRONT OF THE MEETING IS THAT IF YOU ARE HERE THIS EVENING FOR THE ITEM NUMBER SIX CONSIDERATION AND ZONING CHANGE AND

[4. Chairman Comments]

SO THAT ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD THIS EVENING. IT'S BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE DISTRICT, SO WE WILL BE SKIPPING OVER THAT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA AS IT DOESN'T EXIST ANYMORE.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT.

SO HOPEFULLY YOU CAN GO OVER TO MI CASINO AND ENJOY A NICE DINNER AND SOME REFRESHMENTS.

WITH THAT MAYBE I'LL PROBABLY. SINCE WE DON'T HAVE TOO CROWDED OF A GALLERY, I'LL JUST EXPLAIN THE RULES OF THE ROAD, MAYBE AS WE GO RATHER THAN NOW. BUT ARE THERE ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS FROM STAFF?

[3. Administrative Comments.]

ALRIGHTY. WITH THAT, I GUESS WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE.

[5. Approve: Minutes for the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held on May 8, 2025.]

ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION. WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON OUR AGENDA. WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. GO AND VOTE, PLEASE. MOTION PASSES SEVEN ZERO.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AS PREVIOUSLY STATED, ITEM NUMBER SIX ON OUR AGENDA THE ZONING CHANGE SITE PLAN FOR CARROLL SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN.

[6. Consider: ZA25-0028, Zoning Change and Site Plan for Carroll Senior High School on property described as Lot 1 , Block 1, Carroll Senior High School Addition, and located at 1501 W, Southlake Blvd. Current Zoning: "S-P-I" Detailed Site Plan District. Requested Zoning: "S- P-1" Detailed Site Plan District. SPIN Neighborhood #10. PUBLIC HEARING]

[7. Consider: ZA25-0029, Plat Revision for Linmar Estates on property described as Tract 3D01, Rees D. Price Survey Abstract No. 1207 and Lot 3, Joel W. Chivers No. 350 Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 2665 and 2735 N White Chapel Blvd. Current Zoning: "R-PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development. SPIN Neighborhood #1. PUBLIC HEARING]

A PLAT REVISION FOR 2665 AND 2735 NORTH WHITE CHAPEL.

SO CURRENTLY ZONED R-PUD. LOOKING AT TEN SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON JUST A LITTLE OVER TEN ACRES.

SO AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTIES. LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS THE FUTURE LAND USE AND SF- 1A IS THE OR MY APOLOGIES RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IS THE ZONING.

SO HERE IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. PRELIMINARY PLAT TREE CONSERVATION ANALYSIS AND THE REVISION. SO A COUPLE OF STREET VIEWS OF THE SITE FROM WHITECHAPEL LOOKING NORTH AND SOUTH. ONE ACTUALLY NO RESPONSES RECEIVED FROM SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS AND ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE.

OKAY. SO CONSISTENT WITH ALL PRIOR APPROVALS.

CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THE APPLICANT HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? DOES ANYONE WISH TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? I THINK WE'RE GOOD. IF YOU'RE GOOD. I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT BE.

ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ON OUR AGENDA DOES CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND COMMENT ON THIS ITEM IS MORE THAN WELCOME TO AND SEEING NO ONE COME FORWARD, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? ALL RIGHT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION. WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ON OUR AGENDA.

ZA25-0029, SUBJECT TO OUR STAFF REPORT DATED MAY 16TH, 2025 AND ALSO SUBJECT TO THE PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER ONE DATED MAY 16TH, 2025. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. GO AHEAD AND VOTE, PLEASE. PASSES SEVEN ZERO.

CONGRATULATIONS. GOOD LUCK AT THE NEXT LEVEL.

ALL RIGHT. JUST CRUISING ALONG HERE. EFFICIENT CITY GOVERNMENT.

WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO THE LAST ITEM ON OUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA.

[8. Consider: ZA25-0037, Zoning Change and Site Plan for 401 Keen Ct., on property described as Lot 6, Block A, Keen Homeplace, and located at 401 Keen Ct. Current Zoning. "SF-IA" Single Family Residential District. Requested Zoning: "SF-IA" Single Family Residential District. SPIN Neighborhood #2. PUBLIC HEARING]

KING CIRCLE. SORRY. COURT THREE TIMES. GOT IT RIGHT.

GOOD TO SEE EVERYBODY AGAIN. LONG TIME NO SEE.

GOING TO GO OVER ITEM EIGHT NOW. A SITE PLAN CHANGE FOR 401 KING COURT.

SO HERE IS THE AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY. SO YOU CAN SEE RIGHT OFF OF RIDGECREST A LITTLE BIT NORTH OF DOVE.

[00:05:04]

SO HERE IS THE SITE PLAN. WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT DOING IS CHANGING THE DIRECTION THE HOUSE FACES FROM WEST TO NORTH.

ELEVATIONS OF THE HOME. TREE PRESERVATION TREE PRESERVATION PLAN.

A LITTLE MORE ZOOMED IN VERSION OF THAT. SO, SOMETHING TO NOTE.

WHEN THIS WAS APPROVED BACK IN 2021, IT WAS NOTED THAT LOTS ONE, SIX AND SEVEN WILL BE FACING RIDGECREST DRIVE AND SO THAT'S THE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO CHANGE HERE.

SO STREET VIEW FROM RIDGECREST THAT YOU CAN SEE THE LOT THAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO BUILD ON RIGHT OVER HERE AND THE VIEW OF THE SAME LOT FROM KING COURT ONE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNER HAS EXPRESSED OPPOSITION WITHIN 200FT.

LET'S SEE RIGHT HERE. 2640 RIDGECREST. ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL HAVE ON THIS ONE? YEAH, I MIGHT JUST ASK STAFF. I THOUGHT I REMEMBERED THIS ONE HAD YOU KNOW, A HEALTHY AMOUNT OF CONVERSATION AROUND IT, I GUESS AND I WAS TRYING TO REMEMBER THE PRECISE KIND OF CONTEXT BEHIND, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE, I GUESS LOTS ONE, SIX AND SEVEN FACING RIDGECREST AND I KNOW THAT I REMEMBER THAT'S KIND OF ONE OF THE COMPROMISE AREAS THAT IT WAS SETTLED OUT, I GUESS. IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL CONTEXT JUST TO KIND OF PUT AROUND THAT REGARDING KIND OF HOW IT SETTLED OUT THAT WAY? SURE. I THINK THE PRIMARY PURPOSE BEHIND IT WAS TO HAVE THE HOME FRONTS FACING RIDGECREST RATHER THAN A SIDE YARD. OKAY. AND THAT WAS KIND OF THE COUNCIL MOTION.

O KAY. I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO NOTE WE HAD A MISTAKE ON THAT SLIDE BACK THERE ABOUT THE OPPOSITION AND SUPPORT WE DID HAVE.

WE DID RECEIVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT WITHIN 200FT OF 405 KING COURT.

THAT'S JUST NOT REFLECTED ON THAT MAP. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

CAN YOU GO BACK A SLIDE THERE? THIS ONE? YEAH.

SO JUST A QUESTION AFTER THE HIGHLIGHTED PART.

IT SAYS LOT ONE WILL HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO RIDGECREST.

LOT SIX AND SEVEN WILL HAVE THE OPTION TO ACCESS OFF RIDGECREST DRIVE AND OR TO THE CUL DE SAC DRIVE, WHICH I PRESUME IS THE OTHER STREET IN QUESTION.

IS LOT SIX CORRECT? AND SO I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.

IT SAYS IT'S SUPPOSED TO FACE RIDGECREST DRIVE, BUT IT ALSO SAYS THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO ACCESS OFF.

THE OTHER ONE. SO YEAH, THE ANSWER TO THAT IS THEY HAVE THE OPTION OF WHERE THE DRIVEWAY AND HOW THE EVEN POTENTIALLY THE GARAGE MIGHT BE ORIENTED IN THAT REGARD. BUT THEY COULD HAVE EITHER DRIVE ACCESS ONTO RIDGECREST DIRECTLY OR COULD HAVE THE BUILDING AND GARAGE SITUATED WHERE IT HAD ITS DIRECT ACCESS OFF OF.

SO TONIGHT I THINK IT'S WHICH BUT IT DID NOT SPACES.

YEAH. IT DID NOT DICTATE THE THE LANGUAGE AHEAD OF THAT IS WHAT DICTATED WHERE THE FRONT OF THE HOME.

GOT IT. OKAY. THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. GOT IT.

AND I MIGHT ADD JUST, YOU KNOW, AS AND I KNOW THE APPLICANT WILL KIND OF COVER SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY ENCOUNTERED THAT PROVIDED SOME DISCREPANCIES TO THIS. BUT IT WAS IN THE ZONING.

AND THEN IT WAS ALSO ON THE RECORDED PLAT THAT WAS FILED IN THE COUNTY.

PLAT RECORD NOTATION OF THAT STIPULATION OF THE ZONING WAS A REQUIREMENT WHEN THE FINAL PLAT WAS APPROVED TO HAVE THAT NOTE ON THE PLAT. AND SO THAT'S WHY IN THE APPLICATION TONIGHT, LIKE THE DRIVEWAY ACCESSES THE NOT RIDGECREST, THE OTHER STREET. SO THAT'S WHY THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE THIS EVENING.

CORRECT. THAT'S THE DIRECTION OF THE HOUSE ONLY.

YES. THAT IS CORRECT. YES. GOOD DELINEATION. OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT TO HERE THIS EVENING.

YOU MIND COMING UP AND STATING NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.

AND WE CAN JUST KIND OF DO A Q&A. HELLO THERE, PAUL ROSTRON, CALAIS CUSTOM HOMES.

WE'RE AT 1206 NORTH CARROLL SOUTHLAKE. OUR CLIENTS, THE PATELS ARE WITH US IN THE BACK HERE, AND THEY HAD PURCHASED THIS LOT FROM THE DEVELOPER BACK IN.

THEY SIGNED A CONTRACT WITH THE DEVELOPER IN JANUARY OF 2022 TO PURCHASE THIS LOT.

[00:10:03]

WAS THERE A THE ORIGINAL PLAT THAT HAS THE ADDRESS ON IT THAT WAS UPLOADED AS A PDF? I CAN PULL IT UP. [INAUDIBLE].

PERFECT. SO THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL PLAT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.

LOT NUMBER SIX YOU CAN SEE IS SHOWN WITH AN ADDRESS OF 401 CHENE COURT.

YOU CAN ALSO SEE AT THE BOTTOM LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE PLAT.

THERE IS NO REFERENCE WHATSOEVER TO THIS LOT.

ONE. LOT SIX. LOT SEVEN NEED TO FACE RIDGECREST AND THE DATE OF THAT PLAT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE LOWER RIGHT HAND SIDE IS JANUARY OF 22.

SO THIS WAS THE PLAT THAT THE DEVELOPER HAD GIVEN TO THE HOMEOWNER AT THE TIME THEY CONTRACTED TO PURCHASE THE LOT.

SOMETIME AFTER THIS, I THINK WHEN THE PLAT MUST HAVE BEEN FINALLY RECORDED.

THAT NOTE SOMEHOW GOT ADDED. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS A P&Z MEETING AND THEN COUNCIL OR IT JUST GOT ADDED THROUGH COUNCIL, BUT AT SOME POINT LATER IT WAS ADDED. OUR CLIENTS SPECIFICALLY BOUGHT THIS LOT BECAUSE IT WAS A NORTH FACING LOT.

THEY HAVE VASTU DESIGN PRINCIPLES THAT THEY FOLLOW.

SO THE HOUSE HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO FACE NORTH.

THE OTHER THING, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS LOT, THE SETBACKS ARE CLEARLY SET UP SO THAT THE FRONT OF THE LOT IS NORTH, BECAUSE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE LOT, IT'S A 20 FOOT SETBACK.

IF THE LOT WAS TO FACE RIDGECREST, YOU'D HAVE A 40 FOOT FRONT, 40 FOOT BACK, AND YOU WOULD HAVE A 20 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK.

SO CLEARLY THIS PLAT WAS SET UP TO BE NORTH FACING, OR THIS LOT WAS SET UP TO BE NORTH FACING.

SO THEN SO THEY CONTRACT IT IN IN JANUARY. WE WERE THEN WE CALAIS AND THE HOMEOWNER WERE GIVEN A SET OF CC&R'S FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IN APRIL OF 22 FROM THE DEVELOPER.

[INAUDIBLE] WHO WAS THE DEVELOPER OF THE PROPERTY THAT HAD THIS PLAT ALSO ATTACHED, WHICH WAS PART OF THEIR CLOSING DOCUMENTS ON THE LOT.

SO THEN, UNFORTUNATELY, OBVIOUSLY, MR. MAKUS PASSED AWAY SHORTLY THEREAFTER, AND THE HOUSE EVENTUALLY GOT DESIGNED.

THE PLAT, I GUESS HAD THAT 167 NOTE ADDED AT SOME POINT.

THIS IS THE LAST HOUSE TO BE COMPLETED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ALL THE OTHER ONES ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION. EVERY NEIGHBOR INSIDE THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN YOU DO YOU MIND TOUCHING ON THAT FOR A SECOND? BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO PULL UP GOOGLE MAPS, WHICH I THINK OF COURSE IS ABOUT A YEAR BEHIND.

BUT YOU MENTIONED THE OTHER HOMES ARE ALL UNDER CONSTRUCTION, I GUESS.

CAN YOU TALK ABOUT LIKE LOT SEVEN IS THAT HOME FACING RIDGE CREST BUT HAS A DRIVEWAY? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. SO THAT PARTICULAR CLIENT, THE [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE SAME VASTU REASONS, THEY WANTED A LOT THAT HAD THE ABILITY TO FACE WEST.

SO THAT LOT ACTUALLY FACES WEST AND DRIVEWAY ACCESS IS ON WHICH STREET? IT ACTUALLY HAS ITS DRIVEWAYS COMING IN OFF OF KEENE, BUT IT IS FRONTING AGAINST RIDGE CREST.

OKAY AND THEN SAME THING, SAME QUESTION FOR LOT ONE.

YEAH, LOT. YEAH. LOT ONE WAS ALWAYS INTENDED.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT LOT ONE YEAH THAT'S OKAY. IT'S BOXED IN. NEVERMIND. IT DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO TO KEENAN. YOU CAN SEE IT'S GOT A I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE HOW THE REST OF THEM DEVELOPED OUT OKAY. THANK YOU. KEEP GOING. SORRY.

SO ANYWAY SO THAT'S KIND OF THE THAT'S THE CONUNDRUM THAT WE ARE IN.

THE CLIENTS HAVE SPENT, YOU KNOW, A YEAR DESIGNING A HOME.

LITERALLY WE'RE IN FOR PERMIT. EVERYTHING'S BEEN COMPLETED READY TO GO.

AND THEN WE GET THIS LEFT FIELD ISSUE THAT SAYS SOMEHOW A NOTE GOT ADDED THAT THEY WERE NEVER AWARE OF.

WE WERE NEVER AWARE OF THAT SAYS IT CAN'T, OR THAT THIS LOT IS SUPPOSED TO FACE THE OTHER WAY WHEN CLEARLY THE SETBACKS DON'T DON'T MATCH THAT AND REALLY QUICKLY MAYBE FOR STAFF, I'M ASSUMING IF WE WENT BACK AND WE WATCHED THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING FROM THAT DATE AND WE, YOU KNOW, HEARD THE MOTION BEING MADE WITH THE MOTION, I'M ASSUMING INCLUDE THIS COMMENT, THE COMMENT ABOUT. YES. YEAH. SO IT WAS IN THE MOTION AND I GUESS WHAT YOUR POINT IS, THERE'S FROM THAT POINT ON THERE WERE VARYING I GUESS, VARYING ABILITIES FOR THAT COMMENT TO BE DOCUMENTED IN AND OUT OF SOME OF THESE, LIKE PLATS OR I GUESS.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? I GUESS BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE IT WAS IN THE MOTION, BUT IT'S JUST YOU'RE SAYING.

YEAH. SO WHAT OCCURRED IS AT SOME POINT WHEN THAT PLAQUE GOT FILED, IT WAS AFTER THESE FOLKS HAD ALREADY,

[00:15:07]

THE SAME PLAT WAS USED WITH THE ARCHITECT AND AGAIN, THERE'S THE NOTE I GUESS WAS ADDED NUMBER, I GUESS IT WAS NOTE NUMBER SEVEN. IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK EIGHT, 7 OR 8 AT THE BOTTOM LEFT HAND SIDE WHERE THE HIGHLIGHTING IS.

SO I IF IT GOT SENT TO US, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE ANY RECORD THAT WE EVER GOT IT.

WE AS THE BUILDER AND CERTAINLY THE HOMEOWNER.

THIS WAS THE DOCUMENT THEY GOT AS PART OF THEIR CLOSING WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE LOT.

BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WAS GIVEN TO THE TITLE COMPANY BY THE BY THE DEVELOPER.

SO THEY'RE IN A TERRIBLE SITUATION, RIGHT? BECAUSE THEY'VE SPENT MONEY, BOUGHT THE LOT BECAUSE IT WAS NORTH FACING, DESIGNED A HOME SPENT, YOU KNOW, 50, $60,000 LITERALLY HAVE CONTRACTED TO GET IT BUILT AND NOW WE'RE STUCK.

YEAH AND I'M JUST TRYING TO KIND OF NARROW THAT DOWN BECAUSE THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS THAT ARE THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION AND CERTAIN THINGS THAT AREN'T AND SO I THINK THE BOTTOM LINE OF ALL OF THAT. WELL, IT'S, YOU KNOW, HELPFUL CONTEXT IS EFFECTIVELY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE BEING ASKED TO CHANGE SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL KIND OF REACHED ON A COMPROMISE.

SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT I JUST WANT TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND.

YEAH, SURE. YEAH. I JUST DON'T HAVE ANY UNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHAT THE DRIVER WAS FOR.

WHY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN. YEAH. WELL, I MEAN, I CAN TELL YOU I CAN'T REMEMBER THE SPECIFIC DETAILS, BUT YOU CAN GO BACK AND YOU CAN WATCH THE COUNCIL MEETING, AND IT WAS FAIRLY CONTENTIOUS MEETING WITH THE RESIDENTS AROUND IT.

AND SO MY GUESS IS THIS IS ONE OF THE COMPROMISES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OVERALL.

GETTING APPROVED WOULD BE MY GUESS, ALTHOUGH STAFF COULD ALWAYS JUMP IN AND CORRECT ME.

BUT THE VIDEO IS ALL. I MEAN, IT'S ALL OUT THERE ONLINE, SO, EVERYONE CAN WATCH IT AND SEE, BUT I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS FOR.

SO EXPLAIN THE SETBACK ISSUE AGAIN? I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AT THIS KIND OF WALK ME THROUGH THAT AGAIN.

SURE. SO IN ANY ONE ACRE LOT IN SOUTHLAKE, THE STANDARD ZONING IS THAT YOUR FRONT YARD SETBACK IS A MINIMUM OF 40FT, YOUR BACKYARD SETBACK IS A MINIMUM OF 40. YOUR SIDE YARD SETBACKS ARE 20FT ON A ONE ACRE LOT.

SO THIS LOT HAS ONLY ONE 20 FOOT SETBACK, WHICH IS ON THE SIDE LOT.

RIGHT? SO ANY ARCHITECT, ANY BUILDER, ANY HOMEOWNER WOULD TYPICALLY WOULD LOOK AT THIS AND SAY, THERE IS NO QUESTION. THE FRONT OF THE LOT FACES KEEN.

IT HAS AN ADDRESS FROM THE CITY OF 401 [INAUDIBLE].

AND SO THE BACKYARD SETBACK WOULD BE 40. AND BECAUSE IT'S AGAINST A MAIN ROAD THAT'S GOT A 40 FOOT SIDE YARD, YOU KNOW, AGAINST RIDGECREST. SO THAT IS THE WAY SETBACKS ARE SET UP IN SOUTHLAKE.

RIGHT AND SO I'M FOLLOWING YOU AND SO POINT BEING WE HAVE A COMMENT IN THE PLAT ABOUT WHICH DIRECTION THE HOUSE FACES.

BUT THE PLAT ITSELF CONTRADICTS THAT. RIGHT. AS DOES THE ADDRESS.

CORRECT. OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS. ALL RIGHT.

I THINK WE'RE GOOD. ALL RIGHT. APPRECIATE IT.

ITEM. APOLOGIES. I LOST MY AGENDA SOMEWHERE. ITEM NUMBER ONE.

THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING DOES CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND COMMENT ON THIS ITEM IS WELCOME TO DO SO AND THE ONLY MAYBE THING I'LL JUST READ INTO THE RECORD, EVEN THOUGH I DON'T SEE ANYBODY WHO DESIRES TO SPEAK, IS THAT WE DID RECEIVE A RESPONSE FORM FROM KAREN BROOKS AT 2640 RIDGECREST DRIVE, WHO IS OPPOSED AND LEFT. I GUESS ALL OF US KIND OF A NOTE EXPLAINING WHY.

SO PUTTING THAT ON THE RECORD. SO I GUESS SEEING NO ONE ELSE TO SPEAK.

GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I GUESS.

OH, WAS THERE ANOTHER ONE? OH, THERE'S ANOTHER ONE IN SUPPORT, I THINK.

WAS THAT RIGHT? OR ANOTHER ONE IN SUPPORT OF MAKING SURE THAT THE HOME WAS FACING NORTH? 405 KEEN. OKAY. DULY NOTED FOR THE RECORD FROM ROBERT AND MONICA GARDNER.

LOOKS LIKE OKAY, SO ONE IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED.

SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING I GUESS.

THOUGHTS? COMMENTS I JUST HAD ONE COMMENT IN READING THIS.

CAN I? IN READING ONE OF THESE FEEDBACKS, I THINK THEIR MAIN CONCERN IS HAVING THE GARAGE FACING RIDGE CREST,

[00:20:02]

I MEAN THEY COULD PUT THEIR GARAGE FACING RIDGE CREST EITHER WAY BECAUSE THEY CAN HAVE THEIR DRIVEWAY GOING ON TO EITHER ROAD.

SO I THINK THAT THEY BY RIGHT, COULD STILL DO WHAT THIS CONCERN IS EITHER WAY.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE. YEAH. MAYBE GAIN THAT PERSON'S SUPPORT BY ALLOWING THE HOUSE TO BE TURNED, BUT YET NOT HAVING THE GARAGE FACE THAT DIRECTION.

YEAH., MAYBE. ANY OTHER. I DROVE THE PROPERTY YESTERDAY JUST TO BE FAMILIAR WITH IT.

AND I THINK THE MOST DISTINGUISHING THING ABOUT THE LOT IS THE IT IS SET UP DIMENSIONALLY.

AND WITH THE SIDE YARD SETBACK AND THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, IT IS SET UP TO LOGICALLY BUILD THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE FACING NORTH.

AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A SHAME, QUITE FRANKLY, JUST TO TRY TO FORCE THE HOUSE TO FACE TO THE WEST, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO PRETTY MUCH ELIMINATE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A BACKYARD, A PROPER BACKYARD A PROPER FRONT YARD. AND I UNDERSTAND WHY IT WAS DONE BACK THEN, BUT I PERSONALLY THINK IT WAS A MISTAKE TO FORCE THAT HOUSE TO FACE WEST.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I THINK I'M GOING ALONG WITH WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, DAN.

IT'S LIKE THE COUNCIL OBVIOUSLY APPROVED THIS THE WAY THAT IT IS, AND I HAVE A HARD TIME GOING AGAINST THAT RIGHT NOW.

YEAH, I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET MY ARMS AROUND IS I MEAN, AGAIN, I KNOW THAT WAS GOING TO BE OUR PREVIOUS ITEM NUMBER SIX, WHICH THANKFULLY WAS WITHDRAWN. YOU KNOW , WE WORK HARD TO REACH THESE AGREEMENTS AND THEN WHEN SOMEBODY COMES BACK AND TRIES TO PIECEMEAL, OPEN PART OF IT AND DOESN'T HAVE FULL SUPPORT, IT GETS TOUGH.

SO ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS ONE? I THINK I COULD BE IN FAVOR OF IT.

I MEAN, I AGREE WITH THE OTHER COMMISSIONER THAT I THINK IF THEY DIDN'T CHANGE THE SETBACKS TO THE RIGHT ORIENTATION OF WHAT THEY PUT ON THE PLAT.

THEN IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE DOING THEM A DISSERVICE TO HAVE A 20 FOOT SETBACK FOR THEIR BACKYARD.

IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM TO FIT THERE. AND I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WAS SOME KIND OF MISCOMMUNICATION IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY WERE LEGALLY HANDED WHEN THEY CLOSED ON THE HOME AND WHAT THEY WERE UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO.

AND SO THAT GIVES ME A LITTLE MORE WILLINGNESS TO TRY AND DEVIATE FROM WHAT THE COUNCIL DID, BECAUSE IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT WAS COMMUNICATED TO THE BUILDER OR THE BUYER AT THE TIME OF SALE. YEAH, I WOULD TEND TO AGREE, BECAUSE I THINK THE PLAT SEEMS TO INDICATE THAT'S WHERE IT BELONGS AND I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY ON THE EAST SIDE IS FURTHER TO THE WEST THAN LOT NUMBER ONE AND LOT NUMBER SEVEN, WHICH IS A, YOU KNOW, IF THEY WERE LINED UP THE WAY ONE AND SEVEN ARE CLOSE TO BEING LINED UP, THEN YOU MIGHT GAIN SOME SPACE BACK ON THE EAST SIDE, BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO WITH THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY.

SO TO ME IT MAKES SENSE TO GO WITH THE HOUSE FACING KING STREET STAFF, I GUESS.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER CONTEXT TO HOW THAT WAS PART OF THE COUNCIL MOTION? BUT YET THE SETBACKS WERE SET UP THE WAY THEY WERE IN A LITTLE BIT OF CONFLICT WITH THAT.

YEAH. I DON'T HAVE ANY CONTEXT TO THAT OTHER THAN I DON'T BELIEVE THE MOTION REALLY ADDRESSED HOW THE LOTS WERE ORIGINALLY CONFIGURED AND BY THE CHARACTER OF THE WIDTH AND THEN THE DEPTH OF THE LOT, THE DEFINED FRONT LOT LINE WOULD BE THE NORTH LOT LINE ON THIS. AND SO THAT'S WHY YOU'RE BUILDING LINES ARE SET LIKE THIS.

YOU MAY RECALL A SIMILAR CASE THAT WENT THROUGH ON BOB JONES 500.

BOB JONES, WHERE THERE WAS CONCERN OVER HOW ONE OF THE HOMES MIGHT FACE.

WELL, THAT FACED BOB JONES OR THE NEW STREET BEING CONSTRUCTED BASED ON THE DIMENSIONS OF THE LOT.

I THINK THERE WAS SOME IDEA THAT IT MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO FACE THE LOT TOWARDS THE NEW STREET, WHERE SOMEONE'S THE REAR OF THE HOME IS SET UP MORE TO BENEFIT FROM THE CORE PROPERTY AND SO THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION HAD AROUND THAT.

BUT THE ONE THING THAT STILL REMAINED IN PLACE, HOWEVER, IF A CONDITION WAS PUT IN PLACE SIMILAR TO THAT, WOULD DICTATE HOW THE FRONT OF THE HOME WOULD BE ORIENTED.

[00:25:06]

SO, OKAY WOULD THE APPLICANT MIND COMING BACK UP HERE REAL QUICK AGAIN? JUST ONE. QUICK QUESTION. AND THIS IS A I GET A DUMB QUESTION FOR EVERYBODY.

IS THIS A ONE ACRE LOT? YEAH. ONE ACRE. OKAY.

EFFECTIVELY, I GUESS HOW IT'S BEING PRESENTED, I GUESS.

IS THERE ANY FLEXIBILITY IN, IN KIND OF WHAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN FRONT OF US IN TERMS OF MAYBE COMMISSIONER FALLON'S COMMENT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FRONT FACING, BUT YOU MODIFY THE WAY THE GARAGE IS POSITIONED TO MAYBE HELP WITH SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO TALK TO THE NEIGHBOR, I GUESS.

HAS THERE BEEN ANY CONVERSATION WITH THE NEIGHBOR THAT'S OPPOSED? WELL, IN TERMS OF, THE HOUSE ITSELF WAS DESIGNED WITH CERTAIN ROOMS AND CERTAIN PLACES.

STAFF, CAN YOU MAYBE GO TO THAT? I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THE SITE PLAN OF THE.

MAYBE JUST I WAS JUST TRYING TO VISUALIZE THE ACTUAL HOUSE PLAN.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A. YEAH. THANK YOU. WE DIDN'T WE DIDN'T PUT THE. YEAH. OH, YOU DON'T HAVE THAT. OKAY. THAT'S FINE, THAT'S FINE. YOU I MEAN WE'VE GOT IT IN OUR MATERIALS HERE.

SO YEAH. SO THE HOUSE WAS DESIGNED VERY SPECIFICALLY WITH CERTAIN ROOMS AND CERTAIN QUADRANTS BASED ON VASTU DESIGN PRINCIPLES.

SO THE MASTER OR THE OWNER'S BEDROOM SUITE NEEDS TO BE IN THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS THE BACK LEFT HAND SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY.

KITCHEN HAS TO BE IN CERTAIN PLACES, YOU KNOW, FIRES IN CERTAIN PLACES.

ET CETERA. SO FLIPPING THE HOUSE REALLY DOESN'T WORK.

THE WHOLE REASON THEY BOUGHT THE LOT WAS SO THAT THEY COULD PUT THESE ROOMS IN CERTAIN QUADRANTS BASED ON THEIR VASTU PRINCIPLES.

AND THAT WAS THE BIG. SO THE NORTH FACING IS A BIG PIECE OF IT.

BUT THEN ROOM PLACEMENTS WITHIN THE LOT ITSELF ARE ALSO IMPORTANT.

SO WE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH DENNIS AND OTHERS ONCE THIS ISSUE POPPED UP ABOUT COULD WE TRY TO CHANGE THE FACADE OR TRY TO CREATE A FRONT FACING FACADE ON THE RIDGECREST SIDE? AND IT JUST IT DOESN'T IT JUST DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE OF ALL THESE INTERDEPENDENT PRINCIPLES WITHIN THE VASTU GUIDELINES. AND SO IT JUST REALLY WASN'T DOABLE.

OKAY. I MIGHT I MEAN, HOWEVER, THIS ENDS UP GOING, I THINK I WOULD MAYBE TRY TO REACH OUT TO THAT NEIGHBOR JUST TO SEE IF THERE IS ANYTHING THAT I DIDN'T REALIZE THERE WAS ANYBODY WHO WOULD OPPOSE.

I MEAN, EVERYBODY WHO'S IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PATELS WHO ARE ON LOT ONE ARE SUPPORTIVE.

YOU KNOW, THE CHEROKEES ON LOT SEVEN ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE FEELING. I MEAN, IF YOU WATCH THE OLD COUNCIL CASE, YOU'RE GOING TO FIND, I MEAN, IT'LL BE PROBABLY PRETTY CLEAR WITHIN THAT WHY IT WAS OPPOSED OR WHY? I MEAN, THEY DIDN'T JUST PICK IT OUT OF THIN AIR. I MEAN, THEY PROBABLY HAD A PUSH FROM NEIGHBORS FOR THAT.

SO NOW THERE'S A REQUEST TO UNDO IT, AND I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO REACH OUT AND OBVIOUSLY HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

I SUPPOSE WE CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON IT. I GUESS I'M PROBABLY NOT SUPPORTIVE, GIVEN IT'S A ONE ACRE LOT THAT HAS A LOT OF ROOM.

IT'S THE SPIRIT OF AGREEMENT THAT WAS CUT SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

AND I FEEL LIKE THERE'S MAYBE SOME FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THAT TO TRY TO AT LEAST TRY TO MATCH SOME OF THE NEIGHBOR CONCERNS.

AND SO I'D PROBABLY JUST DEFER TO COUNCIL TO CHANGE IT MYSELF.

BUT I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW OTHERS MIGHT FEEL DIFFERENTLY.

MR. CHAIRMAN, FORMALLY OPEN PUBLIC HEARING. WE DID.

YOU DID. OKAY. I'M SORRY. THAT'S OKAY. I'M JUST.

JUST CHECKING I DID. DON'T WORRY, BUT IT'S GOOD TO KEEP AN EYE ON ME, AS THE VICE CHAIR USUALLY DOES A GOOD JOB OF THAT'S JUST MY $0.02. I AGREE WITH YOU, DAN. I HEAR YOU ON THAT FRONT.

BUT THERE'S ALSO THERE'S A PRETTY SEVERE FINANCIAL HARDSHIP HERE ON THIS.

I MEAN, IT'S I DON'T DISAGREE. YEAH. YOU KNOW, I DON'T DISAGREE.

SO ENTERTAIN A MOTION. YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE.

[00:30:03]

WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? OKAY, LET'S GO AND VOTE PLEASE. AND PASSES 4 TO 3.

AND I THINK HOPEFULLY STAFF CAN KIND OF CONVEY TO COUNCIL SOME OF THE SENTIMENT BEHIND THAT.

I THINK MAYBE ULTIMATELY I KIND OF DEFER TO COUNCIL.

COUNCIL IS THE ONE WHO KIND OF PUT IT IN THERE. I'M GUESSING IF STAFF GOES AND LOOKS BACK, I'M GUESSING THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN PART OF A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STIPULATION.

MORE A COUNCIL STIPULATION. SO MAYBE I THINK COUNCIL IS THE ONE TO WEIGH IN ON DOING IT SO THAT MOTION WAS APPROVED, IT WOULD GO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING, DENNIS WOULD TELL ME THAT IT WILL BE ON JUNE 3RD.

THAT IS TUESDAY. SO GOOD LUCK AT THE NEXT LEVEL, KIND OF TELLING YOUR STORY, AND HOPEFULLY YOU CAN REACH OUT TO THE NEIGHBOR IN THE INTERIM AND GET THAT FEEDBACK BECAUSE COUNCIL WILL ASK ABOUT THAT.

SO AND WITH THAT ADJOURNS OUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

BUT DON'T GO HOME YET.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.