[4) Consider approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a warehouse building, located at 161 Weldon Johnston Way. (Amazing Ice Designs - CUP-24-0109)]

THANKS. OKAY. NEXT UP WE HAVE ITEM 5.4. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A WAREHOUSE BUILDING LOCATED AT 161 WELDON JOHNSTON WAY. AMAZING. ICE DESIGNS CP 240109.

MR. LUTZ. YES. SO THE APPLICANT TONIGHT IS LOOKING TO DEVELOP A 1.14 ACRE LOT. THIS IS ONE THAT HE'S LOOKING TO DEVELOP IS 181 WELDON JOHNSON WAY PROPERTY IS ZONED WAREHOUSE. IT'S IN THE I 35 OVERLAY DISTRICT. AND SO THIS IS A CUP FOR THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS FACADE AND LANDSCAPING. SO HERE ON THE SITE PLAN SORRY THERE WAS A TYPO ON THAT SLIDE THAT I DIDN'T FIX.

IT'S 161 WELDON JOHNSON WAY IN RED. THAT IS THE BUILDING HE'S LOOKING TO CONSTRUCT. THIS BUILDING HAS A SISTER BUILDING AT 181 JOHNSON WELDON JOHNSON WAY. SO I WANTED TO CALL THESE OUT BECAUSE THE TWO BUILDINGS HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY TOGETHER THAT I KIND OF WANT TO GO OVER WITH YOU ALL TONIGHT. SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS PROPERTY, IT BEGAN IN 2015 AS A22 LOT DEVELOPMENT. BOTH ADDRESSES 161181. THEY WERE DESIGNED TO ORIGINALLY FACE EACH OTHER. AND THAT CAME UP WITH THAT DESIGN WAS APPROVED IN 2015, BUT ONLY 181 WAS CONSTRUCTED. SO 161 WAS THEN TO BE DEVELOPED. IN 2019, THE BUILDING WAS ACTUALLY REORIENTED TO BETTER MATCH THE I-35 OVERLAY, FACE THE FRONT, AND THEN PNC APPROVED THAT CUP. HOWEVER, DUE TO COVID, THE PROJECT WAS PLACED ON HOLD AND THAT CUP DID EXPIRE AT THAT TIME. SO THEN IN 2023, THE APPLICANT BEGAN HAVING PROJECT DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY STAFF REGARDING THE BUILDING, SPECIFICALLY THE PERCENTAGE OF MASONRY THAT IS REQUIRED IN THE I-35 OVERLAY. SO THAT WAS WHEN WE GOT THAT SITE PLAN. I COMMENTED ON THAT AND MADE THOSE COMMENTS, AND SO HE WANTED TO KIND OF DISCUSS THOSE OPTIONS. SO THE APPLICANT EXPRESSED EXPRESSED HIS DESIRE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ORIGINAL DESIGN. AGAIN, IT WAS APPROVED A COUPLE OF TIMES, SO STAFF CONSIDERED THE REQUEST. THE APPLICANT DID AGREE TO INCREASE THE MASONRY TOTALS ON WHAT HE WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSING, BUT AGAIN, HE WANTS TO ENSURE THAT THE BUILDINGS WOULD WOULD SOMEWHAT MATCH EACH OTHER. HAVE THAT CONSISTENT LOOK. AGAIN, THESE ARE BOTH KIND OF BROTHER SISTER BUILDINGS, SO TO SPEAK. SO AGAIN, THE ORIGINAL BUILDINGS THAT WERE APPROVED HAD APPROXIMATELY 20% MASONRY. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO INCREASE THAT NUMBER TO APPROXIMATELY 30%. ALL OTHER ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT DO MEET THE I-35 OVERLAY. SO ESPECIALLY LANDSCAPING ORIENTATION, THE ONLY DEFICIENCY WOULD BE ON, OH, THE OVERHEAD DOORS, WHICH REQUIRE 50% SEGMENTED GLASS. SO I THINK YOU GUYS ARE ALL FAMILIAR KIND OF WITH THAT ISSUE OF REGARDING SOME OF THESE BUILDINGS, I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT SEGMENTED GLASS DOORS WERE NOT REQUIRED ON THE ORIGINAL BUILDING AT 181. SO THIS IS THE ORIGINAL BUILDING.

THESE ARE THE ELEVATIONS THAT WERE APPROVED. THIS IS WHAT WAS CONSTRUCTED. AND THIS IS WHAT YOU'LL YOU'LL SEE IF YOU DRIVE OUT THERE TODAY. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO MATCH THIS. I WILL SAY THE RENDERING DOESN'T QUITE MATCH THIS ONE, BUT I WILL TALK Y'ALL THROUGH THAT. SO Y'ALL DON'T THINK THAT THEY'RE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BUILDINGS. SO IF YOU'LL NOTE, YOU WILL FIND NOTES DURING ON THE RENDERINGS AS PART OF THIS SUBMITTAL THAT SAYS HE WILL BE MATCHING THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS ON PAINT COLOR AND MATERIAL. SO EVEN THOUGH IT LOOKS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT IN COLOR WISE, IT WILL MATCH THE SAME BUILDING. SO YOU CAN SEE HERE HE'S GOT SOME MASONRY ON THE FRONT AND SIDES, SMALL PILASTER IN THE MIDDLE. I BELIEVE HE'S ACTUALLY INCREASED THE OVERHANG ON THIS STRUCTURE A LITTLE BIT TO GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE ARTICULATION AND A COVER. BUT AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE BACK DOES NOT HAVE ANY OF THE SEGMENTED GLASS. AGAIN, THIS IS MATCHING THE KIND OF ORIGINAL DESIGN. IT DOES HAVE A WAINSCOTING ON THE FRONT, BUT IT DOES NOT EXTEND ALL THE WAY DOWN DOWN THE SIDES. IT'S MORE TO KIND OF FILL THOSE SPACES BETWEEN THE WINDOWS. SO AGAIN, I SAID THE SITE PLAN DOES MEET OUR REQUIREMENTS. THE I-35 ELEVATIONS DO NOT MEET JUST SPECIFICALLY MASONRY AND OVERHEAD DOORS. SO THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL ARE BEING ASKED TO CONSIDER TONIGHT. SO STAFF HAS A COUPLE OPTIONS FOR YOU GUYS.

APPROVE AS REQUESTED. APPROVE WITH MODIFICATIONS AND DENY THE REQUEST. SO WHEN WE LOOKED AT

[00:20:07]

THIS WE WANTED TO TAKE INTO THE HISTORY ON THIS PROJECT INTO ACCOUNT. WE ALSO WANTED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THOSE PRIOR APPROVALS, CONSISTENCY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AND THEN THE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT. THIS ONE DEFINITELY MORE IN LINE WITH WITH OUR CURRENT REGS, BUT MODIFICATIONS ARE AT THE DISCRETION OF PNC AND CAN COVER ITEMS LIKE BUILDING MATERIALS OR LANDSCAPING. SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER THOSE. BUT WE ARE RECOMMENDING OPTION TWO JUST TO GIVE YOU GUYS THAT OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THOSE CONSIDERATIONS AGAIN. WHEN WE TALKED LAST TIME, STAFF ALWAYS WANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN RECOMMEND APPROVAL ON THINGS THAT THAT ARE MEETING 100%. IN THIS CASE, WE DO FEEL COMFORTABLE APPROVING RECOMMEND RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH SOME MODIFICATIONS IF YOU CHOOSE TO, TO GO THAT ROUTE. SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU. I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR HIM AS WELL. I HAVE SOME OBSERVATIONS BETWEEN 181 AND 161. THE NEW 161 WOULD BE SMALLER. WE. SO A COUPLE DIFFERENT THINGS WITH THAT. YES, SIR. THANK YOU I APPRECIATE YOU CATCHING THAT. BY THE WAY, ON THE HISTORY REPORT, ONE THING HE LEFT OUT IS WHEN I FIRST CAME DOWN AND VIEWED THE DIRT HERE, I ACTUALLY TURNED LEFT AT THE DAIRY QUEEN AND DROVE DOWN THE FRONTAGE ROAD, WHICH WAS TWO WAY AT THE TIME. SO WE'VE CHANGED A LOT SINCE THEN. A COUPLE OF THINGS OF WHY THE ORIENTATION WE SQUEEZED THE SHAPE AND TO STILL MAINTAIN THE 9000 FOOT PRINT. WITH ROTATING THE BUILDING THAT CAUSED THE FIRE LANE ISSUES. SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S A SERIES OF MOVING PIECES AND PUZZLES. SO THAT THEN CAUSED ADJUSTING THE DRIVE LANE, THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER WHERE THE FIRE LANE, WHAT WE HAD TO DO THAT. AND YOU ULTIMATELY SEE THAT WITH FIRE APPROVAL FOR THAT. WE'RE PUTTING A GATED FENCE ON 158 SO THEY HAVE THEIR FIRE THINGS MET. SO YES, THAT WAS AGAIN ADJUSTING PIECES AND PARTS TO MAKE IT FIT.

SO. YOU'LL HAVE A ONE SIDE FACING 158. YOU'LL HAVE ONE OTHER SIDE FACING ROUGHLY TO THE NORTH, SAME ORIENTATION AS IT ORIGINALLY WAS. SO I-35 WILL BE OFF TO THE NORTHWEST WITH THE 58 WILL BE TO THE TO THE EAST, THE DOORS. HAVING LOOKED AT THAT, MY ONE CONCERN I KNOW THIS IS A WAREHOUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. MY ONE CONCERN IS SOME KIND OF I KNOW YOU PROBABLY NEED SOME PROTECTION FOR YOUR SITE, BUT APART FROM A FENCE. WELL, AS REGARDS A FENCE, HAVE YOU THOUGHT OF A FENCE FOR THAT LOCATION? I'M SORRY. HAVE YOU THOUGHT OF A FENCE FOR THAT LOCATION? YES. THAT'S REQUIRED IN IN THE PLOT CODE? YES, YES. SO THERE IS A FENCE THAT. EXCUSE ME. I'M SORRY. YEAH, WE'LL HAVE TO. THAT'S. I GUESS IT DIDN'T SHOW UP ON THERE OR WHATEVER, BUT I COULDN'T SEE IT. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I DON'T, I GUESS, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NOTICED THAT THE OTHER THING THAT THAT WE DID ADJUST IN THERE AND AFTER HAVING BUILT THE FIRST ONE, THE EAVE HEIGHT, THE FIRST BUILDINGS IN ALL OF OUR OTHER COMPANION SISTER BUILDINGS IN THE TEN PLOT LOT ARE 20 FOOT EAVES. SO WE FOUND THAT REALLY WAS NOT AN EFFICIENT USE OF SPACE FOR THE TENANTS WE HAVE CURRENTLY. SO WE'VE DROPPED THAT TO 16. SO AS FAR AS A LOOK AND A VIEW, IT'S GOING TO BE A LOW PROFILE, ESPECIALLY ONCE THE TREES MATURE. IT'LL HIDE EVERYTHING A LOT BETTER. ALL RIGHT. SO ARE YOU PLANNING TO PUT A FENCE AROUND IT THOUGH. OH YEAH WE HAVE TO. IT'S REQUIRED. HAVE WHAT KIND? WELL THE CURRENT EVERYTHING. THE CURRENT ONE IS A WOOD SLATTED FENCE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT MATCHES EVERYTHING. AND I MEAN, IT'S CURRENTLY STOPPED AT ONE. THE PLOT REQUIRES EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT TO BE FENCED BETWEEN NEIGHBORS. SINCE WE BOUGHT BOTH OF THESE LOTS, THERE'S ACTUALLY A COUPLE DIFFERENT THINGS WHERE WE HAVE SHARED USE. FOR INSTANCE, THE DRIVE IS ALREADY IN ON 161, SO THERE IS A JOINT ACCESS AGREEMENT ON RECORD FOR THE DRIVE. I'LL. SORRY, I CLOSE MY EYES. I HAVE TO GO BACK AND REMEMBER IMPORTANT DETAILS, BUT. SO WE'VE GOT A JOINT ACCESS ALREADY ON RECORD THERE. AND THEN EVEN WAY UP ON THE NORTH END OF THE PROPERTY, BECAUSE 161 WAS PUT IN BEFORE CITY SEWER WAS IN. SO IT'S ON SEPTIC. OUR SEPTIC. WE ALLOWED A LITTLE BIT OF THE LOT FROM 181 TO BE USED BY 161. SO THERE'S A JOINT ACCESS ON BOTH ENDS OF THE PLOT THAT'S RECORDED. SO ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS THAT THE VIEW FROM 158 AND FROM I-35, WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT NOW, THIS IS A

[00:25:07]

WAREHOUSE MOSTLY. IT'S GOING TO BE A FENCE. YEAH, MOSTLY IT'S GOING TO BE A FENCE. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT. WHAT I WOULD OBSERVE, THOUGH, LOOKING AT 181 IS IT'S A TYPICAL PRIVACY FENCE THAT WAS PUT IN THERE, A PRIVACY FENCE, A WOOD PRIVACY FENCE, SIX SIX FOOT WOODEN FENCE. YES. YEAH, YEAH. SO MY OBSERVATION WOULD BE THE ONE AT 181. DIDN'T WORK OUT TOO WELL IN MY OPINION. YOU KNOW IN TERMS OF ITS WHERE I'M NOT SUGGESTING YOU BUILD SOMETHING MORE DURABLE, BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THERE BEING SOME MORE SCREENING ON THAT SIDE WHERE THE GARAGE DOORS ARE. THE DOORS ARE NOT FACING THERE, THEY'RE FACING ONE 181. SO THEY WILL BE FACING THAT WAY.

THEY'RE NOT FACING 180. THEY'RE NOT FACING EITHER ROADWAY. THEY'RE FACING THE EXISTING BUILDING. OKAY. THE TOP ELEVATION ON THIS EXHIBIT IS FACING TOWARDS THE EXISTING BUILDING OKAY. SO IT'S FACING I-35 IS THE. SO YOU'RE REALLY NOT GOING TO SEE THE GARAGE DOORS OKAY. YEAH. THE WHAT'S FACING I-35 IS THE IS THE PEDESTRIAN DOORWAYS WINDOWS AND THE MASONRY WALLS. AND SO THAT'S THE PORTION YOU'LL SEE FROM I-35, WHICH IS WHERE WE ADDED THE ADDED MASONRY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, LIKE YOU TALKED ABOUT. WE'RE GONNA HAVE A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE, WOODEN FENCE WITH PERIMETER LANDSCAPING TO KIND OF HELP SCREEN THE DEVELOPMENT FROM THAT SIDE. REALLY, THE ONLY SIDE THAT DOESN'T HAVE SCREENING IS THIS PART BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS WHERE WE HAVE OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, BOX TRUCK DROP OFFS AND DELIVERIES FOR THE WAREHOUSE USE? WELL, I HADN'T I MISSED SOMETHING THEN. I THOUGHT THE BUILDINGS WERE ACTUALLY FACING EACH OTHER. SO THE ORIGINAL OKAY, THAT WAS PART OF THE AMENDMENT THAT WE ■MADE WITH THIS ADJUSTMENT AS KIND OF A CAN WE GO BACK TO STAFF SAYING, HEY, LET'S MAKE THIS A LITTLE MORE COMPLIANT WITH THE CURRENT I-35 OVERLAY, AND LET'S ROTATE THE ■BUILDING, WHICH LED TO SOME OF THE SITE MODIFICATIONS NEEDED TO ADDRESS FIRE LANES, AS WELL AS AS WELL AS THE I-35 OVERLAY. SO KIND OF MULTIPLE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT CHANGED. SO IF YOU LOOK YEAH, IF YOU GO TO THE SITE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE ORIGINAL, THERE IT IS. THERE WE GO. SO IF YOU LOOK THERE, YOU CAN SEE YOU HAVE THE PARKING ON THE SIDE FACING I-35, THE VISITOR AND EMPLOYEE PARKING. AND SO THAT'S WHERE YOUR MAIN DOORS ARE, YOUR WINDOWS, YOUR MASONRY FACING I-35. AND SO WE FLIPPED THAT ORIENTATION FROM THE ORIGINAL APPROVED BACK IN 2019. AND THAT'S WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE DRIVE AISLE IS ALREADY IN. YEAH. SO WE'RE TYING INTO EXISTING DRIVEWAY THAT WAS THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED WITH THE FIRST PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN TO JASON'S POINT, THIS PRESENTATION, THE DEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE WAS DESIGNED TO BE DEVELOPED TOGETHER. AND JUST FROM FUNDING AND PERMITTING TIMELINES WITH COVID KIND OF NIXED IT. SO WE'RE COMING BACK TO YOU ALL WITH, YOU KNOW, A SLIGHT MODIFICATION TRYING TO ADDRESS AND KIND OF MODERNIZE IT BACK TO THE CURRENT CODE WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT ONE, WE WANT IT TO MATCH THE EXISTING BUILDING THAT'S NEXT DOOR. IN ADDITION, THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENTS AND PROPERTIES THAT ARE THERE WERE BEFORE THE I-35 OVERLAY REQUIREMENTS. AND SO NONE OF THEM HAVE A LOT OF MASONRY. SO FOR COMPARABLE RENTS, COMPARABLE LEASES, COMPARABLE JUST CONSTRUCTION COSTS IN THAT DEVELOPMENT, TRYING TO NOT HAVE TO GO COMPLETELY TO THE 90% TO ALIGN MORE WITH WHAT'S THERE CURRENTLY. WELL, AND I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL REMEMBER OR NOT, BUT EVEN I DIDN'T FIND THIS OUT UNTIL AFTER WE BUILT THIS. BUT THERE APPARENTLY WAS CITY FUNDS TO ASSIST IN THE ADDING OF MASONRY ON THERE, WHICH WE DIDN'T GET UNTIL AFTER THE FACT, AND I DON'T THINK YOU'VE INCLUDED THAT. SO, I MEAN, I APPRECIATE THE DESIGN AND WHAT THE CITY WANTS TO DO WITH OUR LOOK. IT'S JUST IT'S AN UNDUE BURDEN AND AN EXTRA COST THAT WILL HAMPER THE PROJECT. A COUPLE OTHER THINGS ON THIS PROJECT THAT ARE SOME ADDED COSTS TO CONSIDER, WHICH IS PART OF THE REASON WHY WE'RE A LOWER MASONRY. WE'VE DONE A LOWER WASTEWATER TIE IN TO FOR AN EXTENSION TO SERVE SOME UPGRADING OR UPGRADING AREAS.

THAT WAS A REQUEST FROM PUBLIC WORKS AND CITY ENGINEER. SO WE'VE GOT SOME MORE EXPENSIVE WASTEWATER LINE CONSTRUCTION. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION WAS DESIGNED FOR DETENTION TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR EVERYTHING. WITH THE MODIFICATION, CITY STAFF REQUESTED US TO ANALYZE IT. WITH ATLAS 14 FLOWS THROUGH THAT. THROUGH THAT ANALYSIS, WE DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS NOT PROPER DETENTION IN THE EXISTING POND, AND SO WE HAD TO PROVIDE ATTENTION ON SITE. AND SO THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL COST THAT HAS COME UP SINCE THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL IN 2019 AND 2015 THAT'S BEEN ADDED TO THIS PROJECT. SO A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE'VE HAD TO KIND OF WORK WITH, WITH CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE KIND OF PREVENTED US FROM BEING ABLE TO PUT THAT MONEY TOWARDS THE BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS. YEAH. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOUR OFFERING THIS, ESPECIALLY SINCE I HAD SOMEHOW GOTTEN TURNED AROUND ON THE ORIENTATION TO THE 181 BUILDING. IT SEEMS TO ME I VISITED THE SITE AND IT'S IN A WAREHOUSE DISTRICT. IT HAS A THE NEIGHBORING BUILDINGS, PARTICULARLY 181, HAVE A CERTAIN KIND OF LOOK. I CAN SEE WHAT

[00:30:03]

YOU'RE SAYING. WELL, WE'D LIKE TO MATCH THAT LOOK IN PARTICULAR. AND GIVEN THE LOCATION AND GIVEN MY FUTILE CONCERNS ABOUT GARAGE DOORS IN THE PAST REGARDING OTHER BUSINESSES, I BELIEVE THAT ESPECIALLY IF IT'S TURNED AROUND THE WAY YOU'VE GOT IT, THERE'S I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THIS REMAINING THE SAME, ACTUALLY, BECAUSE THE BUILDING PROFILE IS LOWER, THERE WILL BE SCREENING AND DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WILL BE APPROPRIATE THERE. I PERSONALLY, I THINK IF YOU ADDED STONE OR ROCK OR BRICK OF ANY KIND THERE, IT WOULD LOOK OUT OF PLACE ACTUALLY, AND NOT BE A MATCH FOR ITS TWIN BUILDING, MORE OR LESS TWIN. SO WITH WHAT I SEE, THIS WOULD BE ONE OF THESE CASES WHERE I'D SAY THERE'S A LONG HISTORY HERE, THERE'S A LONG HISTORY OF THE CITY INVOLVED WITH THIS LONG HISTORY OF YOU GUYS TRYING TO DEVELOP THIS. AND IT'S, IT'S WAREHOUSE OFFICES, HARDLY EVEN LIGHT INDUSTRY, I WOULD SAY. SO I PERSONALLY WOULD APPROVE THIS PARTICULAR PLAN BECAUSE IT'S JUST A FIT HAS ITS LIMITATIONS.

I UNDERSTAND THE LIMITATIONS. SO HERE WE ARE. WE APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE HEARING YOU DROVE BY AND TOOK THE TIME TO LOOK AT IT. THAT MEANS A LOT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. IN THE SPIRIT OF KEEPING THINGS LOOKING CONSISTENT, I KNOW THAT THE ELEVATIONS THAT WERE GIVEN TO US, THE DRAWINGS, ARE NOT THE COLOR OF THE OTHER BUILDING, BUT THERE'S THE COMMENT THAT THEY WILL EVENTUALLY MATCH IT. SO.

RIGHT. I MEAN, OTHER THAN FADING IT AS BEST WE CAN, WILL ORDER THE SAME MATERIAL. I TRUST YOU ON THAT ONE. I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THAT. BUT MY QUESTION WAS THEN GOING TO BECOME, ON THE ORIGINAL DRAWING, THERE WERE AWNINGS OVER THE DOORS ON THE FRONT AND THE BACK, AND I WAS CURIOUS, WAS THAT PLANNED FOR THE NEW BUILDING TO MATCH WITH THE WITH THE DROP IN THINGS? THE, THE IT'S A FOUR FOOT OVERHANG THAT THEY EAT. SO THAT ACTUALLY SHIELDS, YOU KNOW, FROM RAIN AND WHATNOT. NO, WE DIDN'T PLAN ON THAT WITH THE ADDITIONAL DROP THAT NOW COMES CLOSE ENOUGH. THE AWNING ON THAT OTHER ONE, THE THOUGHT WAS THAT WITH IT WAS THAT THAT WAS A WATER SHIELD. AND IT TURNS OUT EVEN AT 20 FOOT, HAVING LIVED THERE AND WORKED THERE, YOU KNOW, I REASON IT'S NAMED AMAZING ICE IS THAT WAS A BUSINESS I OWNED AT THE TIME IS TO MOVE IT IN THERE. SO I'VE LIVED ON THE PROPERTY. SO WHEN IT RAINS, EVEN AT 20 FOOT EAVES, THE 16 THE FOUR FOOT OVERHANG ON THE CURRENT BUILDING. AND BY THE WAY, WE'RE THE ONLY ONE THAT DID THAT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AND NONE OF THE OTHER ONES HAVE IT. SO IT DOES LOOK A LITTLE NICER, BUT IT DOES KEEP WATER OFF THE SIDEWALK. LET'S, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE COME AND GO A LITTLE EASIER, BUT WITH 16 FOOT, YOU KNOW, I HAVEN'T, I GUESS DON'T HAVE ANY SCIENTIFIC DATA TO BACK IT UP. BUT THE THOUGHT IS KNOWING THAT AT 20 FOOT IT WORKS FINE. AT 16 FOOT IT SHOULD WORK JUST AS WELL. SO MY QUESTION WOULD BE TO KEEP THE TWO PROPERTIES MARRIED BECAUSE WE ARE WE ARE TRYING TO GET THE COLORING AND THE STYLE OF THE TWO BUILDINGS TO MATCH. WOULD IT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER ADDING JUST FOR THE ESTHETIC PAIRING OF THE BUILDINGS? I GUESS SO IF THAT'S KIND OF OUR ONLY ONLY HANGUP, I DON'T KNOW WHAT VALUE IT WOULD ADD OR DO. THE QUESTION WOULD BE, I GUESS, WHERE WOULD YOU WANT THEM ADDED? SO WOULD YOU WANT THEM ADDED OVER THE MAIN DOORS JUST TO ALIGN WITH WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY GOT ON YOUR EXISTING PROPERTY? BECAUSE IT IS. THEY WERE MEANT TO BE BUILT TOGETHER AND YOU JUST COULDN'T.

SO I GUESS THAT'S THAT'S UP TO YOU WHETHER YOU'RE I WISH WE COULD HAVE DONE THAT AND WE WOULDN'T BE HERE TONIGHT AND ALL THE CHANGES IT WOULD HAVE BEEN, I WISHED WE COULD HAVE. YEAH, YEAH, I UNDERSTAND IT WAS A WEIRD FEW YEARS. THE BANK SAID, NO, WE'RE ONLY GOING TO GO FUND ONE. YEAH. YOU KNOW, I'VE ENJOYED LIVING HERE AND BEING A RESIDENT AND OWNING OWNING A HOME HERE. IT'S A GREAT PLACE. CAN YOU GO BACK TO OUR CURRENT LOCATION, JASON? SO ON THIS ELEVATION, WE'VE GOT TO YOUR POINT. COULD WE DO IF THAT'S THE CASE, WOULD THE CONDITION BE TO ADD THE AWNINGS OVER THE ELEVATION FACING 35? SO IT BASICALLY COVER THE BUILDINGS, THE WINDOWS BASICALLY FOR THE FRONT ON 35 BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY WINDOWS ON EITHER NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATION. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE MAIN DOORS ONLY ON THE BACK SIDE. AND SO WITH THAT, PROVIDING THE AWNINGS ALONG 35 TO MIRROR THE IMAGERY FOR THE TWO BUILDINGS, WOULD THAT WORK FOR YOU? YEAH, I THINK SO. I THINK THAT WOULD WORK. I WAS JUST WHEN I WAS LOOKING ON AT THE STREET VIEW OF THE PROPERTY, I SAW THE AWNINGS ON THE FRONT AND BACK OF THE OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDING. SO THAT HAD BEEN WHAT I HAD. BEING CANDID ON IT. LIKE, THESE TYPE OF FABRIC AWNINGS ARE NOT GREAT BECAUSE THEY'RE JUST KIND OF MAINTENANCE. THEY THEY RIP, THEY FADE, THEY THEY'RE

[00:35:04]

KIND OF THEY'RE NOT MAINTENANCE. THEY'RE IT'S A CONCESSION. I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY WILLING TO MAKE I THINK SO AT THIS POINT, IF THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY THING. BUT IT'S PURELY COSMETIC. IT'S WORTHLESS. OKAY. YEAH. WELL SOME OF US LIKE PRETTY COSMETIC. THAT'S FINE. I UNDERSTAND IT'S I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I COULD UNDERSTAND I COULD BE MORE SUPPORTIVE OF IT PERSONALLY IF THIS WAS IN A RETAIL AREA. BUT AGAIN, WORKING IN A WAREHOUSE AREA. YEAH. I MEAN, THE PEOPLE I MEAN, IF, IF I MAY, I MEAN PEOPLE I SAID IF I MAY, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WORK THERE. RIGHT? THOSE PEOPLE DESERVE SOMETHING THAT LOOKS NICE. BUT I MEAN, IF WE'RE GOING TO KEEP IT CONSISTENT AND LESS ABOUT IT BEING PRETTY OKAY, THE CONSISTENCY OF IT, I THINK IS IMPORTANT. AGAIN, JUST I, I'M AN AVERAGE JOE WORKER AND COME FROM THAT POINT OF BUT TO BUT TO BUT TO YOUR POINT, I DON'T THINK IT'S UNREASONABLE TO HAVE IT JUST FACE THAT 35 SIDE. YEAH.

YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR WILLING TO TALK WITH US ABOUT ABSOLUTELY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE? I'M HERE. YEAH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR HIM. OKAY.

SO TO PROCEED WITH THIS ONE WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE ANYTHING BURNING FOR PEOPLE OR SHOULD I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE WAREHOUSE BUILDING AT 161 WELDON JOHNSTON WAY? OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND? IS THAT IS THAT AS PRESENTED? AS PRESENTED? OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT? ALL SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION FROM VICE CHAIR SIEGEL AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER WEBB TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. IS THERE A DISCUSSION ON THAT? YEAH I THINK WE WANT TO HAVE THAT THAT ONE AWNING ON THE SIDE. WE WANT THAT MODIFICATION ON THERE OKAY. SO WHAT YOU WHAT YOU COULD DO IS YOU COULD PROPOSE A TO MODIFY THE AMENDMENT. AND WE WOULD VOTE ON THE MODIFICATION FOR THE AMENDMENT. THEN I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO MODIFY MOTION TO AMEND. MOTION TO AMEND. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SIEGEL'S MOTION. OKAY. TO ADD THE AWNING FACING 35 ON THIS ON THE STRUCTURE. TO MATCH THE SISTER BUILDING. YES, I WOULD SAY ESSENTIALLY AN AWNING OVER THE SET OF TWO WINDOWS AND DOORS.

TIMES, TIMES KIND OF THE THREE, THE THREE AWNINGS TO MATCH THE ADJACENT BUILDING. YEAH. SO MOTION TO AMEND. RIGHT. OKAY. I THINK I'M NOT GOING TO RESTATE ALL THAT, BUT I THINK WE'RE CLEAR ON ON WHAT IT WAS. YEAH. NOW IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY MOTIONS TO AMEND. DO THEY ALSO NEED A SECOND. YES OKAY I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION SO WE CAN MOVE INTO DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION TO AMEND. ARE THERE ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT. MY THOUGHT HAD JUST BEEN GIVEN OUR DISCUSSION, WHETHER IT IS A QUESTION OF DURABILITY WITH THE PARTICULAR ION USEFULNESS OF AN AWNING IN THOSE LOCATIONS, AND IF IT'S GOING TO BE ANYTHING LESS THAN, YOU KNOW, STANDING SEAM METAL OR SOME CONFIGURATION LIKE THAT, I REALLY DON'T SEE THE POINT. THIS AREA, THESE BUILDINGS ARE SO UTILITARIAN, I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH YOU CAN DRESS THEM UP IF THEY SEEM TO SERVE THE PURPOSE.

SO THAT WOULD JUST BE MY OBSERVATION ON IT. IF THEY YOU ALL WANT TO WORK OUT SOMETHING ABOUT AWNINGS, THAT'S FINE, BUT IT'S JUST A UTILITARIAN SPACE, YOU KNOW, AND THERE'S NOT MUCH NEED OR ROOM. IT SEEMS TO ME TO DRESS IT UP AND PASS, SCREENING IT, PASS SCREENING IT. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THAT? YEAH. I MEAN, I ECHO THE SAME CONCERNS THERE. I THINK I'M HAPPY TO REQUIRE SOME ADDITIONAL KIND OF VISIBLE, VISUALLY APPEALING FEATURES. IF THERE'S A PURPOSE OR A FUNCTION THERE. BUT IN THIS AREA I DON'T THINK IT SERVES ONE. SO I DON'T I DON'T SEE ANY VALUE IN IT.

OKAY. SO MY THOUGHTS ON THAT ARE THIS IS FACING I-35. AND AS PEOPLE ARE DRIVING INTO THE CITY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE LOOKING OUT THE WINDOW AND YOU SEE TWO BUILDINGS THAT ALMOST MATCH, BUT THEN THEY DON'T QUITE MATCH, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S IF IT'S A REASONABLY AFFORDABLE CHANGE TO MAKE. I, I THINK IT'S FAIR THAT WE, WE ASK FOR IT, BUT THAT'S WHY WE EXIST AS A BODY IS

[00:40:05]

TO VOTE AND SAY SOME PEOPLE MIGHT SAY, NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE NEED. AND OTHER PEOPLE WOULD SAY, YEAH, IT IS. SO THAT'S MY THOUGHT. I MEAN, MY THOUGHT IS THAT THE ARGUMENT WAS TO NOT, YOU KNOW, HAVE A DEVIATION BECAUSE AND TO TRY TO MAKE THE BUILDINGS MATCH THE AWNINGS WOULD BE THE ONE THING THAT DOESN'T MAKE A MATCH. BUT ALSO, I'M KIND OF WITH YOUR OPINION IF THEY DON'T REALLY SERVE A FUNCTION OR A PURPOSE, AND EVENTUALLY IN A COUPLE OF YEARS, THEY'RE GOING TO BE FADED AND NEED REPLACED. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY REALLY ADD ANY VALUE. THEY LOOK GENERALLY SIMILAR. DOES THE AWNINGS MAKE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE? PROBABLY NOT. AND TO YOUR POINT, THEY DON'T REALLY SERVE MUCH OF A PURPOSE. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I STAND WITH IT.

SO I WOULD KEEP IT AS IT'S PRESENTED. OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO AMEND? OKAY. WE'LL VOTE ON THAT. NOW, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO AMEND, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE AYE. ALL OPPOSED. SAY NAY. NAY. NAY. OKAY. MOTION FAILS. SO WE MOVE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION FOR APPROVING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OF THE WAREHOUSE BUILDING. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? OKAY. I'M JUST THANKFUL FOR THE PATIENCE OF THE APPLICANT OVER THE YEARS. I KNOW IT'S BEEN QUITE FRUSTRATING. AND WE APPRECIATE THE, YOU KNOW, THE SMALL BUSINESS AND KYLE AND YOUR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO STICK IT OUT AND WORK WITH US. SO WITH THAT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THAT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY OKAY. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. YEP. ALL RIGHT

[5) Consider an appeal of the City Engineer's decision regarding overhead electric service in accordance with Sec. 50-1 for property located at 200 Veterans Drive. ]

5.5 CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S DECISION REGARDING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 51 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 200 VETERANS DRIVE, MISS SHARP. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, KAYLA SHARP, SENIOR PLANNER. SO TONIGHT WE HAVE A REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL TO ALLOW OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE AT 200 VETERANS DRIVE. SO THIS IS A VERY SMALL LITTLE TRIANGLE LOT OFF OF VETERANS NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF WEST CENTER. AND VETERANS DRIVE. PER SECTION 51 OF THE CITY'S CODE, ALL NEW ELECTRIC SERVICES MUST BE UNDERGROUND UNLESS THEY MEET CERTAIN CRITERIA IN WHICH THE CITY ENGINEER CAN ALLOW OVERHEAD SERVICES TO CONTINUE. THE CITY ENGINEER REVIEWED THIS REQUEST AND DETERMINED IT DID NOT MEET THE CRITERIA REQUIRED TO ALLOW THE OVERHEAD SERVICE TO CONTINUE AND DENIED THE REQUEST. SO SINCE THE REQUEST WAS DENIED, THE APPLICANT IS APPEALING TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

SO THIS IS THE CODE SECTION. SECTION 51. BASICALLY, ANY NEW SERVICES MUST BE UNDERGROUND UNLESS THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, A GAS LINE OR SOMETHING RUNNING WHERE THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WOULD BE GOING, SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD ALLOW THE CITY ENGINEER TO ALLOW OVERHEAD LINES, AND THE CITY ENGINEERS OPINION THIS DID NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS TO ALLOW THE OVERHEAD LINES. SO STAFF ANALYSIS NO HARDSHIP HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED THAT WOULD PREVENT THE SERVICE TO BE INSTALLED UNDERGROUND. AND THE CITY CODE DOES REQUIRE ALL OVERHEAD SERVICES TO BE INSTALLED UNDERGROUND. ALSO, JUST TO POINT OUT IF ANY FUTURE PROJECT INITIATED BY THE CITY OR PEAK TO UNDERGROUND EXISTING UTILITIES.

IF THE UTILITIES ON THIS PROPERTY WERE TO STAY OVERHEAD, WE WOULD THEN HAVE TO PAY OUT OF THE CITY'S POCKET TO UNDERGROUND THOSE SERVICES. AND THEN ALSO IN THE PAST TWO YEARS, ONLY TWO PROJECTS HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO UTILIZE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE, AND THOSE WERE ON A TEMPORARY BASIS DUE TO VARIOUS CITY PROJECTS. AND INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION THAT WAS ONGOING AND NOT ALLOWING FOR IMMEDIATE UNDERGROUNDING OF ELECTRIC. SO YOUR OPTIONS TONIGHT ARE TO APPROVE THE APPEAL AS REQUESTED OR DENY. AND THEN BASED ON THE FACTORS OUTLINED IN THIS PRESENTATION, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL. ANY QUESTIONS. AND WE DO ALSO HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE AS WELL IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM. MY NAME IS JOHN PAUL. I AM THE APPLICANT AND I DESIRE TO BE HEARD. COULD YOU SPEAK IN THE MICROPHONE? GO TO THE MICROPHONE

[00:45:05]

SO IT CAN PICK UP YOUR VOICE JUST FOR RECORDING PURPOSES? HI, MY NAME IS JOHN HALL. I'M AN ATTORNEY HERE IN KYLE AND I'VE BEEN IN THIS AREA SINCE JUNE 1ST, 1986, AND I BUILT A HOME OUT IN MOUNTAIN CITY AT THAT TIME. I STILL LIVE IN THAT HOUSE. I BUILT MY SON'S HOUSE OVER IN HIDDEN OAKS. I BUILT HIDDEN OAKS, IF YOU NOTICE, OVER IN HIDDEN OAKS, IF YOU KNOW WHERE THAT IS, I HOPE YOU DO. IT'S BETWEEN HERE AND HAYS HIGH SCHOOL. YOU NOTICE HALL PROFESSIONAL CENTER. THAT'S THE STREET I BUILT. YOU'LL NOTICE MERRICK DRIVE. THAT'S THE STREET I BUILT AND NAMED AFTER MY IN-LAWS. YOU'LL NOTICE PRINCESS JENNIFER, WHICH IS MY DAUGHTER.

SHE DIDN'T LIKE HAVING A STREET NAMED AFTER HER, BUT I COULDN'T HELP MYSELF. TED NAIL COURT NAMED AFTER MY IN-LAWS, JOHNNY HALL DRIVE, WHICH IS MY SON, AND JEANETTE DRIVE, WHICH IS MY WIFE. AND MY SON LIVES ON ON A COURT, WHICH IS MY MOTHER, WHO PASSED AWAY IN 2005. SO I LIKE DOING THINGS RIGHT. I LIKE PRETTY WORK, TOO. AND THE BUILDING I'M BUILDING ON, 200 VETERANS DRIVE IS GOING TO BE 100% MASONRY, LIMESTONE, KIND OF A TEXAS LOOK, I GUESS. STARS IN THE FRONT RAISED TEN RAISED METAL ROOF, ETC. AND THE BUILDING IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM ONE OF THE CITY FACILITIES. AND YOU CAN TELL THAT BECAUSE IT SAYS KYLE CITY OF KYLE, AND YOU NOTICE THE CHARACTER OF THE ELECTRICITY SERVICE TO IT ALL. OVERHEAD.

OVERHEAD, OVERHEAD, OVERHEAD, OVERHEAD. OVERHEAD. OVERHEAD OVERHEAD. MY LOT IS TRIANGULAR IN NATURE. PARDON ME. AND THE LOT IS SURROUNDED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BY NOTHING BUT OVERHEAD SERVICE. HERE'S THE FOR. PARDON ME. HERE ARE THE FORMS THAT ARE IN PLACE RIGHT NOW. YOU'LL SEE. OVERHEAD. OVERHEAD. OVERHEAD OVERHEAD OVERHEAD AGAIN. OVERHEAD HERE.

OVERHEAD HERE. OVERHEAD OVERHEAD OVERHEAD. THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY IS OVERHEAD. MORE PICTURES OF OVERHEAD ALL AROUND ME. OVERHEAD ON MY LOT ARE THREE THREE UTILITY POLES BECAUSE THIS LOT HAS HAD PREVIOUS OVERHEAD SERVICE. THERE USED TO BE A BUILDING THERE AND IT'S GONE NOW. BUT IT HAD OVERHEAD SERVICE, OVERHEAD SERVICE, OVERHEAD SERVICE, OVERHEAD SERVICE. THE CITY WANTS ME TO BE THE ONLY. DEVELOPMENT ONLY LOT IN THIS AREA WITH UNDERGROUND, AND THAT WOULD CAUSE ME CAUSE US TO PUT A, AN, AN UNDERGROUND UTILITY. AND ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS YARDS GO UNDER TWO SIDEWALKS, GO INTO TWO DRAINAGE DITCHES, CUT THROUGH A STREET AND BRING THE ELECTRICITY THERE. UNDERGROUND. MAYBE LOOKS BETTER, BUT I WOULD SAY THERE IS NO TREMENDOUS SAFETY VALUE IN IT. AND IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT ESTHETICS, LET'S LOOK AT THE CITY OF KYLE. THIS ESTHETIC SITUATION IS FAR FROM WHAT I WOULD CALL PRETTY. IF IT'S DANGEROUS, WHY HASN'T IT BEEN REDONE? SO WE HAVE TO RULE OUT BEING DANGEROUS. IF IT WAS, THE CITY WOULD BE OBLIGATED TO REDO IT. AND WE HAVE TO RULE OUT ESTHETICS. THERE'S NO PARTICULAR ESTHETIC CHARM TO WHAT YOU SEE HERE. WHEN YOU PUT SOMETHING UNDERGROUND, YOU EXPOSE IT TO CONDENSATION, WHICH LEADS TO MOISTURE, WHICH LEADS TO DETERIORATION, WHICH LEADS TO ROT, WHICH LEADS TO FAILURE. I'VE HAD OVERGROUND, I'VE HAD UNDERGROUND IN HOUSTON, I HAD UNDERGROUND. AND THE PROBLEMS THERE AND THE SOIL IS A LITTLE BIT MORE ACIDIC, POSSIBLY, AND IN HOUSTON, BUT CONSTANT PROBLEMS. THE CONDENSATION LEADS TO MOISTURE, WHICH INVADES ALL THE ALL THE UNDERGROUND MATERIALS, THE SPLICES, THEY GO FAST, THE JOINTS, THE CONNECTIONS. THEY GO UNDERGROUND. UTILITIES ARE GOING TO LAST ABOUT 30 YEARS. OVERHEAD IS GOING TO LAST ABOUT 50 YEARS. SO HERE ARE SOME PICTURES OF I WAS JUST HEARD THAT WE DON'T HAVE GAS LINE, BUT WE SURE DO HAVE A GAS LINE. HERE'S A PICTURE I TOOK THE OTHER DAY.