* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:01:20] OKAY. OKAY. SO FIRST [2) Consider a request by Denecia Clark for exceptions from Chapter 41 (Subdivisions) of the City's Code of Ordinances related to minimum width at the front property line (Chapter 41, Article V, Sec. 136, (a) (2)), access requirements (Chapter 41, Article V, Sec. 136, (a) (3)), and lot depth to average width ratio (Chapter 41, Article V, Sec. 136 (c)), for the proposed final plat of a property located at approximately 1776 Satterwhite Road in the City of Kyle Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, and make a recommendation to the City Council to either approve or deny the request. (VR-25-0011) Public Hearing ] [3) Consider approval of a final plat for the Haberer Family Subdivision, contingent upon approval of exceptions by the City Council, for approximately 35.37 acres of land out of the Edward Burleson Survey, Abstract 36, and the Jesse B Eaves Survey No. 5, Abstract No. 166, located at approximately 1776 Satterwhite Road in the City of Kyle Extraterritorial Jurisdiction. (SUB-26-0384)] WE'LL GO THROUGH ITEMS TWO AND THREE. UH, CONSIDER A REQUEST BY DANIA CLARK FOR EXCEPTIONS FROM CHAPTER 41, SUBDIVISIONS OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATED TO MINIMUM WIDTH AT THE PROPERTY AT THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE ACCESS REQUIREMENTS, AND LOT DEPTH TO AVERAGE WIDTH RATIO FOR THE PROPOSED FINAL PLAT OF A PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1776. NICE SATTERWHITE ROAD IN THE CITY OF KYLE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION, AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL TO EITHER APPROVE OR DENY THE REQUEST. SO THIS IS VR DASH 25 DASH 0 0 1 1. UM, AND THEN ITEM THREE IS CONSIDER APPROVAL FOR THE FINAL PLAT FOR THE HABER FAMILY SUBDIVISION CONTINGENT UPON APPROVAL OF EXCEPTIONS BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROXIMATELY 35.37 ACRES OF LAND OUT OF THE EDWARD BURLESON SURVEY, ABSTRACT 36, AND THE JESSE B EVES SURVEY, NUMBER FIVE, ABSTRACT NUMBER 1 66, LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1776 SATURDAY WHITE ROAD, AND THE CITY OF KYLES EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION, SUB DASH 26 DASH 0 3 84. THAT'S A LOT. UM, I'M GONNA HOLD OFF ON PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL AFTER YOU'VE DONE YOUR PRESENTATION IN CASE ANYONE HAS COMMENTS ON THAT. OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING. I'M ANGEL IANI, SENIOR PLANNER. UM, SO I'M GONNA BE, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, I'LL BE DOING ONE PRESENTATION FOR THESE TWO ITEMS FOR 1776 SATTER WHITE ROAD FOR A VARIANCE, UH, REQUEST OR EXCEPTION REQUEST, AND A SUBDIVISION PLAT. SO HERE'S THE GENERAL LOCATION MAP OFF OF SATTER WHITES. UM, YOU CAN SEE THE LOTS IN QUESTION HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE. UM, SO THE APPLICANTS IS BASICALLY, UH, PROPOSING TO SUB LEGALLY SUBDIVIDE THEIR PROPERTY. THEY'RE MAINTAINING THE SAME CONFIGURATION THAT IT'S IN RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S IN THE SORT OF, UH, IT'S IN AN ABSTRACT, IT'S NOT PLATTED AT THE MOMENT. UM, AND THEY'RE SEEKING TO PLAT IT TO FULFILL THE WISHES, UM, OF THE REVOCABLE TRUSTS SLASH FINAL WILL AND TESTAMENTS OF MARTHA AND WILLIAM HABER, WHICH ARE THE, THE PARENTS, UM, THE ORIGINAL OWNERS OF THE PROPERTIES. UM, THE PROPERTIES ARE LOCATED IN THE ETJ, UM, AND IT'S NOT SUBJECT TO ANY ZONING REGULATIONS OR ANY, UM, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. UM, THE PROPOSED LOTS WILL REMAIN IN THE SAME CONFIGURATION. UM, AND IN ORDER TO KEEP THE LOTS IN THOSE SAME CONFIGURATIONS, THEY ARE HAVING TO ASK FOR, UM, A FEW EXCEPTION REQUESTS. UM, JUST A FEW DETAILS IN THE LOTS. UM, LOT ONE IS A LITTLE OVER 12 ACRES. LOT TWO WILL BE A LITTLE OVER 16 ACRES. AND THEN LOT THREE, UM, IS ALMOST SEVEN ACRES. SO THESE ARE ALL, UM, LARGE LOTS. UM, THIS IS WHAT THE PROPOSED, UH, PLAT LOOKS LIKE. AND THEN GOING INTO EACH OF THE REQUESTED EXCEPTIONS FOR NUMBER ONE, UM, THE MINIMUM WIDTH AT THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE IS REQUIRED TO BE 130 FEET. LOT ONE COMPLIES WITH THE CODE, HOWEVER, LOT TWO IS A FLAG, KIND OF IRREGULAR SHAPED LOTS. UM, I WISH I COULD SHOW YOU THE, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE ON THE SCREEN AT THE SAME TIME. UM, BUT IT ONLY HAS, UH, 60 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON SATELLITE ROAD. UM, AND ADDITIONALLY LOT THREE DOES NOT HAVE ANY DIRECT ACCESS. AND IT, UM, IT TAKES ITS ACCESS FROM A JOINT USE EASEMENT, UM, ON THE FLAGPOLE PORTION OF LOT TWO, [00:05:03] UH, REQUESTED EXCEPTION NUMBER TWO. UM, THIS IS, UH, THE CODE REQUIREMENT IS TO BE DESIGNED SO THAT ACCESS IS PROVIDED FROM A LOCAL STREETS, UM, EXCEPT THAT IT MAY BE PERMITTED FROM A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE OR STREET STATE HIGHWAY FARM TO MARKET ROAD, RANCH ROAD, OR NUMBERED NAMED COUNTY ROADWAY IF MINIMUM DRIVEWAY CENTER LINE SPACING OF 200 FEET IS PROVIDED. UH, IN THIS CASE, AGAIN, LOT ONE MEETS THE CODE REQUIREMENTS AND LOT TWO HAS DIRECT ACCESS THROUGH THE FLAGPOLE PORTION, BUT LOT THREE DOES NOT HAVE THAT DIRECT ACCESS AND REQUIRES THE, UH, THE JOINT ACCESS EASEMENT TO ACCESS SATTER WHITE ROAD. AND THEN THE THIRD AND FINAL REQUESTED EXCEPTION. UM, THIS ONE IS BASICALLY, I DON'T WANNA READ ALL OF, UH, ALL OF THAT ON THE SLIDE, BUT THIS IS ESSENTIALLY TRYING TO PREVENT AND DISCOURAGE IRREGULARLY SHAPED LOTS. SO THERE'S A SORT OF RATIO IN HERE. I'M NOT THE BEST AT MATH, SO I TRIED CALCULATING SOME RATIOS. UM, LOT ONE IS FINE, BUT AGAIN, LOT TWO AND THREE, UM, DON'T COMPLY BECAUSE OF THE FLAGPOLES BASICALLY. AND THEN WITH THE STAFF ANALYSIS, UM, THE CITY STAFF HAVE REVIEWED THE REQUESTED EXCEPTIONS AND PLAT UNDER THE SUBDIVISION CODE, AS WELL AS OTHER APPLICABLE, WELL REALLY THE SUBDIVISION CODE, UM, CHAPTER 41 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. AND ASIDE FROM THE EXCEPTIONS, WE HAVE FOUND THAT THE REQUESTS, UM, THE REQUESTED PLAT MEETS CITY CODES, UM, THE PROPOSED LOTS WILL REMAIN IN THEIR CURRENT EXISTING CONFIGURATION. THEY'RE NOT SUBDIVIDING IT INTO SMALLER LOTS OR, YOU KNOW, DOING ANY KIND OF DEVELOPMENT. IT'S REMAINING IN THE FAMILY. SO OUR OPTIONS, UM, THE P AND Z OPTIONS FOR TONIGHT FOR THE EXCEPTION QUEST. UM, OPTION ONE, APPROVE THE REQUESTED EXCEPTIONS AS PRESENTED. OPTION TWO, APPROVE WITH MODIFICATIONS OR CONDITIONS, OR OPTION THREE, DENY THE EXCEPTIONS. AND THEN WE HAVE YOUR OPTIONS FOR THE PLATS. UM, APPROVE THE PLAT IS PRESENTED. OPTION TWO IS APPROVED WITH MODIFICATIONS OR CONDITIONS, AND OPTION THREE IS TO DENY THE PLATS. AND THEN I'M GONNA GO THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, FOR EACH. SO FOR THE EXCEPTION REQUEST, STAFF RECOMMENDS OPTION ONE TO APPROVE THE EXCEPTION REQUEST AS PRESENTED. AND THEN FOR THE, UH, PLAT STAFF RECOMMEND OPTION TWO, APPROVE THE PLAT CONDITIONED UPON CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE EXCEPTIONS, WHICH ARE SCHEDULED FOR THE SEPTEMBER 15TH, UH, 2026, UH, CITY COUNCIL MEETING. AND THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION. AND IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PERFECT. UH, BEFORE WE DO QUESTIONS FROM US, I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. UH, SO OPENING THAT NOW AT 6 38. OKAY. SEEING NONE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. UH, CHAIR, IF I CAN, WE WILL REQUEST A SEPARATE VOTE ON THE EXCEPTIONS IN THE PLAT. YOU GOT IT. UH, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS ON THIS ONE? YEAH. QUICK QUESTIONS. UM, YOU SAID THERE'S AN E JOINT EASEMENT IN PLACE ALREADY FOR LOT THREE TO GET ACCESS TO THE ROAD THAT WILL BE PLATTED, UM, WITH THIS SUBDIVISION PLATS. UM, CURRENTLY IT'S NOT PLATTED. I DON'T, FROM OUR RESEARCH, IT DIDN'T LOOK LIKE THERE WAS A, AN ACCESS EASEMENT, BUT THIS IS ALL OWNED BY THE SAME FAMILY. MM-HMM . DID YOU SAY THAT THE PLOT COMPLIES WITH CITY CODE OR ORDINANCES? YES, I MEANT FOR THE SUBDIVISION CODE, YES. OH, FOR THE SUBDIVISION. OKAY. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? JUST IS THE PLAN FOR THIS, FOR RESIDENTIAL, NOT THAT WE CAN HAVE ANY CODING? YES. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THIS IS JUST RESIDENTIAL. UM, IT'S THE EXISTING FAMILY MEMBERS, THE CHILDREN OF, UM, MARTHA AND WILLIAM HABER, THE, THE ORIGINAL OWNERS OF THE LAND. SO THEY'LL BE CONTINUING TO LIVE ON THIS PROPERTY UNLESS THEY . OKAY. SO, YES. YEAH, PREVIOUSLY THE ONLY, UH, FLAGPOLE, THE LOTS I SAW WERE, UH, ACTUALLY WENT TO COMMERCIAL AND THERE WERE PROBLEMS REGARDING SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND SO FORTH, BUT THAT WAS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. SO I GET WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU'RE WORKING WITH, WITH THE FLAGPOLE. OKAY. UM, THREE QUICK QUESTIONS. UH, THE FIRST IS MOSTLY PROCEDURAL. I THINK ON THE PLAT. OPTION TWO WAS RECOMMENDED WHERE WE APPROVE THE PLAT CONDITION UPON CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE EXCEPTIONS. UM, DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO JUST APPROVE IT OUTRIGHT OR IS IT CONDITIONAL EITHER WAY? IT STILL NEEDS TO BE CONDITIONAL, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, BECAUSE THE VARIANCES ARE KIND OF PART OF THE PLAT, YOU CAN'T REALLY APPROVE THE PLAT WITHOUT, OR SORRY, EXCEPTIONS. YOU CAN'T REALLY APPROVE IT WITHOUT HAVING THE EXCEPTIONS APPROVED, AND THE EXCEPTIONS HAVE TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL [00:10:01] FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL. GOT IT. MAKES SENSE. UM, QUESTION TWO, UH, FOR THE EASEMENT, IS THERE, WHICH LOT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING IT? UM, LET ME SEE IF I CAN GO, BUT DO I HAVE THAT ON HERE? LEMME SEE. SO THE EASEMENT WOULD BE FOR LOT THREE TO ACCESS THROUGH LOT TWO. UM, AND I BELIEVE I DON'T HAVE THE PLAT NOTES ON HERE, SO I WOULD HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK ON THE PLAT. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HAPPENS TO HAVE IT OPEN, BUT I BELIEVE IT'S, IT LOOKS LIKE IT SHOWS LOT TOO. PROPERTY OWNERS. YEAH. OKAY. UM, AND THEN THIRD, USUALLY THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SPENCER COPELAND WOULD'VE DONE, BUT HE IS NO LONGER ON P AND Z. UM, SO THE CITY ORDINANCE SAYS, UM, THAT NO EXCEPTION SHALL BE GRANTED UNLESS THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE MET. SO I'VE GOTTA GO THROUGH THE THREE CONDITIONS REAL QUICK. . THE FIRST IS THAT THERE'S SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE LAND, UM, INVOLVE, UH, INVOLVES SUCH THAT THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER WOULD HAVE SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE APPLICANT'S REASONABLE USE OF THEIR LAND. I THINK THAT CONDITION HAS BEEN MET. UM, SECOND, GRANTING THE EXCEPTION WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC HEALTH. I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS. UH, AND THIRD, GRANTING THE EXCEPTION WILL NOT HAVE THE EFFECT OF PREVENTING THE ORDERLY SUBDIVIDING OF OTHER LAND IN THE AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER. AND I DON'T THINK IT DOES EITHER. SO HERE WE GO. ALRIGHT, THAT ONE'S FOR YOU. SPENCER , THANK YOU FOR THAT THOROUGH QUESTIONING. YEAH. ALL, ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD HAVE BEEN, HAVE BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED, SO, UM, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTION. OKAY. WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR ITEM TWO? MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM TWO WITH THE, UH, UH, APPROVAL OF COUNSEL AS, UH, AS NECESSARY? OKAY. SO FOR, FOR ITEM TWO, I THINK WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO COUNSEL. YEAH, I THINK ITEM THREE WAS THE ONE THAT NEEDED COUNTS, THAT WAS CONDITIONED ON COUNCIL'S APPROVAL, I THINK. YEAH. OKAY. SO I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. OKAY, I'LL SECOND. SECOND. OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE EXCEPTION REQUEST FROM VICE CHAIR STEGEL AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER WEBB. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. OKAY. THAT ONE'S CLEARED. SO THE NEXT ONE IS THE FINAL PLAT. UM, THIS ONE IS ALSO, UM, THIS IS THE ONE THAT WOULD BE CONDITIONAL ON CITY COUNCILS. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, CONDITION CONDITIONED UPON CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF THE EXCEPTIONS. OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT? SECOND? OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ON THE CONDITION OF COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COMMISSIONER WEBB AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER CFI. ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. A AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. OKAY. MOVING TO ITEMS [4) Consider a request by Albino and Olga Lopez for an exception from Chapter 41 (Subdivisions) of the City's Code of Ordinances related to minimum lot size for lots served by on-site septic (Chapter 41, Sec. 41-136(a)(1)), for the proposed replat of a property located at 706 Green Pastures Drive in the City of Kyle Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, and make a recommendation to City Council to approve or deny the request. (VR-26-0016)  Public Hearing ] [5) Consider approval of a replat of Lot 1, Block Z, Section 3 of the Green Pastures Subdivision, contingent upon approval of exceptions by the City Council, located at 706 Green Pastures Drive in the City of Kyle Extraterritorial Jurisdiction. (SUB-25-0378)] FOUR AND FIVE, I'M GONNA DO THESE THE SAME WAY, KIND OF READ THEM BOTH OFF TOGETHER. UM, ITEM FOUR, CONSIDER A REQUEST BY AL ALBINO AND OLGA LOPEZ FOR AN EXCEPTION FROM CHAPTER 41. SUBDIVISIONS OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATED TO MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR LOTS SERVED BY ONSITE SEPTIC FOR THE PROPOSED PLT OF A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 0 6 GREEN PASTURES DRIVE IN THE CITY OF KYLE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION, AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE OR DENY THE REQUEST. ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A REPL OF LOT ONE, LOT ONE BLOCK Z SECTION THREE OF THE GREEN PASTURES SUBDIVISION CONTINGENT UPON APPROVAL OF EXCEPTIONS BY THE CITY COUNCIL, LOCATED AT 7 0 6 GREEN PASTURES DRIVE IN THE CITY OF KYLE, EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION. THIS IS SUB DASH 25 DASH 0 3 78. ALRIGHT, GOOD EVENING, ANGELINA SENIOR PLANNER. AND ONCE AGAIN, I'LL JUST BE DOING ONE PRESENTATION FOR THESE, UM, TWO ITEMS. UM, SO THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A, AN EXCEPTION AS WELL AS A REPL FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE ETJ AT 7 0 6 GREEN PASTURES DRIVE. UM, HERE IS THE GENERAL LOCATION. THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS HIGHLIGHTED IN THAT, UM, KIND OF AQUA COLOR IN THE MIDDLE. UM, JUST A QUICK SUMMARY. SO THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING THIS REPL TO RE, UH, TO SUBDIVIDE THEIR EXISTING SINGLE LOT INTO TWO LOTS. UM, BOTH OF THE LOTS ARE GOING TO REMAIN WITHIN THE SAME FAMILY, THE LOPEZ FAMILY, UM, PRIMARILY SO THAT THEIR SON CAN HAVE HIS OWN HOME ON ONE OF THESE TWO LOTS. [00:15:01] UM, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE ETJ AND IT'S NOT SUBJECT TO ANY OF THE CITY'S ZONING REGULATIONS. UH, GREEN PASTURE SECTION THREE WAS ORIGINALLY PLATTED AND APPROVED BACK IN 1972. UM, AND UPON OUR RESEARCH, UM, THIS PROPERTY HAS REMAINED IN THE SAME CONFIGURATION SINCE THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL PLATS PER CITY CODE, UM, SECTION 41 DASH 1 36 A ONE LOTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE OVER ONE ACRE IN SIZE IF THEY'RE SERVED BY ONSITE SEPTIC. UM, HOWEVER, WITH HAYES COUNTY AND TCAQ REGULATIONS, UM, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE A LOT SERVED BY ONSITE SEPTIC TO BE AS LITTLE AS ONE HALF ACRE IF THEY'RE SERVED BY WATER UTILITY. UM, THE EXISTING LOTS IS 1.378 ACRES, AND THE PROPOSED LOT SIZE LOT SIZES WOULD BE, UH, 0.689, UM, FOR EACH LOT. UM, HERE'S THE LIST OF UTILITY PROVIDERS. UM, THEY DO HAVE, UM, WATER PROVIDED BY TEXAS WATER UTILITIES. WASTE WATER, OF COURSE IS OSSF, ELECTRICITY IS PEC. UM, AND STAFF HAVE APP, UH, REVIEWED THE ORIGINAL PLATS AND HAVE NOT FOUND ANY RESTRICTIONS OR PLAT NOTES THAT WOULD PREVENT, UM, THE PROPOSED RE PLATS. AND CITY STAFF HAVE REVIEWED THE REPL UNDER THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, WHICH IS CHAPTER 41 OF OUR CODE. AND ASIDE FROM THE EXCEPTION REQUEST, UM, WE HAVE OTHERWISE FOUND THE PROPOSED PLAT TO, UH, COMPLY WITH, UM, THE CITY CODE. UM, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE THAT, BUT HERE'S THE PROPOSED PLATS, AND THEN ON THE NEXT SLIDE I HAVE IT, UM, KIND OF ZOOMED IN A BIT. SO THAT'S THE PROPOSED CONFIGURATION, JUST PUTTING A LINE STRAIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE AND SPLITTING THAT EXISTING LOT INTO TWO. UM, THE PNZ OPTIONS, UM, OPTION ONE ARE TO APPROVE THE, UM, EXCEPTION REQUEST AS PRESENTED. OPTION TWO, APPROVE WITH MODIFICATIONS OR CONDITIONS, OR OPTION THREE TO DENY THE EXCEPTION. AND THEN FOR THE PLATS, OPTION ONE, APPROVE THE PLATS AS PRESENTED. AND OPTION TWO, UM, APPROVE WITH MODIFICATIONS OR CONDITIONS. AND OPTION THREE, DENY THE PLATS AND THEN THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. UM, FOR THE EXCEPTIONS, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS OPTION ONE TO APPROVE THE EXCEPTION REQUEST AS PRESENTED. AND THEN FOR THE PLATS, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS OPTION TWO TO APPROVE THE PLAT CONDITIONED UPON CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE EXCEPTION. UM, AND THAT'S SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 15TH. AND THAT'S IT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I'M HERE. I HAVE A QUESTION. WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. PUBLIC HEARING? OH YES. OH, PUBLIC HEARING. GOTTA LET THE PEOPLE TALK. LOTS OF PEOPLE HEAR. I MISSED THAT. OKAY, WE'RE GONNA OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING AT 6 48. SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE IT AT 6 48. OKAY. FIRE AWAY WITH YOUR QUESTION. , UM, THE EXISTING LOT IS SERVED WITH A SEPTIC SYSTEM, CORRECT? YES. WILL THE, WHEN IT'S SUBDIVIDED, WILL THE NEW LOT WHERE THE PROPOSED, UH, SUN IS GONNA LIVE, IS IT GOING TO GET A NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM OR IS IT GONNA TIE INTO THE EXISTING THAT'S THERE? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. I WOULD HAVE TO ACTUALLY DEFER TO THE APPLICANT'S. UM, I'M NOT THE APPLICANT , UM, BUT THEY WILL HAVE TO, THEY WILL HAVE TO GO FOR WITH A SECOND, UM, UNLESS HAYES COUNTY PERMITS SOME KIND OF JOINT SEPTIC SYSTEM. BUT GENERALLY THAT'S NOT THE CASE. UM, ANYTIME YOU HAVE, UH, SERVICE LINES CROSSING PROPERTY LINES, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO TIE INTO THE SAME HOUSE. JUST IN CASE THERE WAS AN OVERFLOW OR BACKUP IN ONE, IT WOULDN'T AFFECT THE OTHER. UM, IF FOR SOME REASON THE HAYES COUNTY WERE TO DECIDE TO ALLOW A KIND OF JOINT USE, UM, SEPTIC ON THAT SITE FOR WHATEVER REASON, UM, THEY WOULD HAVE TO FILE SOME, SOME TYPE OF, UH, EASEMENT ON THE SERVICE LINE WHERE IT CROSS THOSE PROPERTY LINES FOR MAINTENANCE AND ACCESS. UM, BUT WE DO NOT, UM, WE DO NOT PERMIT THOSE SEPTICS, UH, THAT IS A COUNTY REGULATION. OKAY. SO I I I IMAGINE THE SAME FOR ELECTRICITY AND WATER AS WELL. YES. UH, IT'S ALL THE SAME. SO ANY, THEY ALL HAVE TO BE SPLIT MM-HMM . UM, THIS IS NOT A, A SEPARATE GUEST HOUSE, SO TO SAY. GOT IT. I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD. SO, UH, I, I GET A MOBILE PHONE AND THEY ARE, COULD YOU, SORRY SIR, COULD YOU PLEASE COME UP AND, UM, OH, I'M SORRY. MICROPHONE. IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR, I'M ALVIN LOPEZ, THE OWNER OF 7 0 6. I DID. I AM PURCHASING A NEW MOBILE HOME AND PART OF THE AGREEMENT IS THAT THEY ARE INSTALLING A BRAND NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM. OKAY. IT'S UPDATED. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. SO EVERYTHING IS, AND THERE'S A UTILITY THAT'S BEEN INSTALLED TWO YEARS AGO, AND OF COURSE THEY'RE GONNA COME DIS UM, DISCONNECT AND, UH, RECONNECT AT THE NEW MOBILE HOME. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION, UHHUH, , ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE HAVE, WE'RE NOT DOING THE COPE ONES. NO, I WAS GONNA SAY I'LL, YEAH, WE'LL DO THE COPELAND SPECIAL REAL QUICK. [00:20:01] . OKAY. UM, BUT THE ONLY ONE, I MEAN, STARTING AT NUMBER TWO, NOT DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY, I DON'T THINK IT IS, UH, GRANTING THE EXCEPTION WILL NOT, UM, PREVENT THE ORDERLY SUBDIVIDING OF OTHER LAND IN THE AREA. I DON'T THINK IT WILL. UM, THE ONLY ONE THAT'S UP FOR A LITTLE BIT OF INTERPRETATION IS THAT THERE ARE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE LAND THAT WOULD HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE APPLICANT'S REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND. BUT I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING SUBSTANTIAL THERE. IT'S PRETTY CUT AND DRY. RIGHT. AND, AND, AND, UH, I THINK IT'S THE COUNTY AND TCEQ HAVE A DIFFERENT STANDARD FOR SEPTIC, SO IT FALLS UNDER THEM. YEP. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE EXCEPTIONS AS PRESENTED. SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE EXCEPTIONS TO CITY COUNCIL FROM, UH, COMMISSIONER WEBB AND A SECOND FROM VICE CHAIR SIEGEL. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. OKAY. SO OUR NEXT ONE IS ITEM FIVE, WHICH IS THE, UH, THE REPL. I, I CAN MAKE A MO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REPL CONDITION ON CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A, A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER CFU TO, UH, APPROVE THE PLAT CONDITIONAL UPON CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF THE EXCEPTION FROM COMMISSIONER CFU AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WEBB. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT ONE? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? NA. OKAY. THAT ONE'S CLOSED OUT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND WITH THAT, WE HAVE COMPLETED ALL THE ITEMS OF BUSINESS ON OUR AGENDA, SO THERE'S NO FURTHER BUSINESS THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED. SO WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 6 52. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.