Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

>> ALL RIGHT.

[Item I]

[00:00:02]

WELCOME, EVERYONE, IN CALL MEETING TO ORDER.

I DECLARE THAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE LAW, NOTICE OF THIS MEETING WAS POSTED 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING.

IN ADDITION, THIS MEETING WAS POSTED ONLINE AS BEING HELD VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DECLARATION MADE BY TEXAS GOVERNOR, GREG ABBOTT, WHICH TEMPORARY SUSPENDS CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE TEXAS OPEN MEETING ACT TO HELP REDUCE THE POTENTIAL TRANSMISSION OF COVID-19.

DETERMINATION OF THE QUORUM REQUIRES THAT AT LEAST FOUR OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS BE IN ATTENDANCE TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM FOR CONDUCTING BUSINESS.

I WILL ASK EACH OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO INDICATE YOUR PRESENCE BY RESPONDING WITH SOME AUDIBLE SOUND OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT AS I CALL THE ROLL.

WALT LISIEWSKI HERE. ROBERT HEINEMAN?

>> HE'S HERE.

>> HERE.

>> JOHN ANTHONY BROWN? JOHN ANDERSON?

>> HERE.

>> ARTHUR BREDEHOFT?

>> HERE.

>> ROB ADAMS?

>> HERE.

>> MARY FUNDERBURG?

>> HERE.

>> BY CALL OF THE ROLL, IT'S DETERMINED THAT WE HAVE SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF MEMBERS ARE PRESENTED TO YOU AND I DECLARE THAT WE HAVE A QUORUM.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 2; PUBLIC COMMENTS.

ON MARCH 16TH, 2020, TEXAS GOVERNOR, GREG ABBOTT, TEMPORARY SUSPENDED CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE TEXAS OPEN MEETING ACT TO HELP REDUCE THE POTENTIAL TRANSMISSION OF COVID-19.

THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE BEGAN USING VIDEO CONFERENCING FOR THEIR MEETINGS ON APRIL 3RD, 2020.

THE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES WILL BE USED TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETING ACT AND THEY HAVE BEEN MODIFIED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMITTEE MEETING HELD BY THE VIDEO CONFERENCE.

PARTICIPATION BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THROUGHOUT THE MEETING IS WELCOME AND ENCOURAGED.

NES, CAN YOU READ WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, PLEASE?

>> SURE. A PUBLIC COMMENT AGENDA ITEM IS INCLUDED AT THE BEGINNING OF ALL REGULAR COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDAS TO PRODUCE THE MOST EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE PROCESS FOR ALLOWING CONSTITUENTS TO ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE.

THE COMMITTEE ACCEPTS PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW AND THE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES FOR PARTICIPATING IN PUBLIC MEETINGS, WHICH HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED DUE TO THE USE OF VIDEO CONFERENCING DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC EMERGENCY.

INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH TO MAKE GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ADDRESS A TOPIC THAT'S NOT INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA OR WHO WISH TO ADDRESS SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEMS MUST DO SO DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AGENDA ITEM AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.

INDIVIDUALS WILL BE LIMITED A TOTAL OF THREE MINUTES, REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF TOPICS, AND INDIVIDUALS WHO PROVIDE AND UTILIZE A TRANSLATOR WILL BE LIMITED TO A TOTAL OF SIX MINUTES.

SPEAKERS WILL BE TAKEN IN ORDER WHICH THEY CALL IN.

STATE LAW PROHIBITS THE COMMITTEE FROM FORMALLY ACTING ON SPECIFIC ITEM OR PUBLIC COMMENT, UNLESS IT APPEARS ON THE POSTED AGENDA.

THEREFORE, ANY COMMITTEE DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT INCLUDED ON THE POSTED AGENDA IS LIMITED TO QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION AND WHETHER OR NOT THE ITEM SHOULD BE PLACED ON A FUTURE COMMITTEE AGENDA.

SPEAKERS MAY EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS AND VIEWPOINTS ON AN ISSUE, BUT ARE NOT PERMITTED TO PARTICIPATE AND DEBATE ON AN ISSUE.

SPEAKERS WILL NOT USE PROFANITY.

COMMENTS FROM SPEAKERS CAN BE MADE TO THE COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE OR TO INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS.

CONSISTENT WITH IN-PERSON MEETINGS, THE PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL ONLY BE TAKEN DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT AGENDA.

ADDITIONAL NOTES, WHEN CALLING IN, YOU'LL BE PLACED IN A QUEUE, AND YOU'LL BE CALLED UPON IN THE ORDER IN WHICH YOUR CALL IS RECEIVED, AND ONLY DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AGENDA ITEM.

IF YOU'RE ACTUALLY CALLING IN ON AN ITEM THAT'S ON THE AGENDA, WE'LL PUT YOU IN QUEUE AND CALL ON YOU DURING YOUR ITEM, AND YOU'LL INDICATE IT THAT YOU WANT TO SPEAK BY HITTING STAR NINE, I BELIEVE.

IF YOU RECEIVE A BUSY SIGNAL WHEN YOU'RE CALLING IN AND THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD HAS NOT CONCLUDED, PLEASE HANG UP AND CALL BACK.

THAT COMMITTEE WILL MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO ENSURE THAT ALL CALLERS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

IF YOU'RE WATCHING THE VIDEO OF THE MEETING WHEN YOU CALL, PLEASE MUTE THE VOLUME OF YOUR COMPUTER BEFORE SPEAKING TO AVOID AUDIO FEEDBACK.

ALSO, THERE'S A BRIEF LAG BETWEEN THE VIDEO AND THE CALL.

AFTER YOU'VE BEEN CALLED UPON, YOU MAY DISCONNECT FROM THE PHONE CALL AND CONTINUE TO WATCH THROUGH THE LIVE STREAM BROADCAST AT THE LINK THAT IS ON THE AGENDA.

THERE ARE PHONE NUMBERS GIVEN ON THE AGENDA FOR YOU TO CALL IN.

ONCE YOU'VE CONNECTED, YOU'LL NEED TO ENTER THE ID NUMBER AND IT WILL CONNECT TO THE MEETING.

THAT'S THE PROCESS FOR THE CALL-INS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.

[00:05:06]

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

DO WE HAVE ANYONE IN THE QUEUE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS?

>> WE DO HAVE EIGHT PEOPLE IN THE QUEUE RIGHT NOW.

>> OKAY. BUT IS THERE ANYONE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS?

>> TWO HAVE THEIR HANDS RAISED.

>> OKAY.

>> CALLER ENDING IN 1708, YOU HAVE YOUR HAND RAISED.

DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC COMMENT OR ON AN ITEM THAT'S ON THE AGENDA?

>> NO, I'M SORRY. ON THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

>> OKAY. WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU.

>> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. CALLER NUMBER THAT ENDS IN 1135.

ARE YOU CALLING ABOUT AN AGENDA ITEM OR A PUBLIC COMMENT?

>> AGENDA ITEM.

>> OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO MUTE YOU AND WE'LL UNMUTE YOU WHEN IT'S YOUR AGENDA ITEM. THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO THERE'S NO ONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS?

>> NO, IT DOES NOT APPEAR SO.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 3;

[Item III]

CONSIDERATION AND ACTION REGARDING THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING, MAY 20TH, 2020.

HAS THE COMMITTEE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MINUTES?

>> YES, SIR. WE'D MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF MAY 20 AS PRESENTED.

>> DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO MAKE A MODIFICATION TO ITEM D REGARDING MASONRY.

THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE MASONRY SHOULD ACTUALLY BE FINISHED WITH EITHER AN ETHOS COVER OR IT NEEDS TO BE A SPLIT FACE CMU.

THAT'S THE ONLY MODIFICATION I HAVE.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> WE ACCEPT THAT MODIFICATION AS A GREAT CLARIFICATION TO THE MINUTES.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 4;

[Item IV]

CONSIDERATION AND ACTION REGARDING THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS, CHARGES, AND LIENS IN THE WOODLANDS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

I THINK EVERYBODY IS FAMILIAR WITH WHAT THAT IS.

IS THERE ANY UPDATE OR ANYTHING ON THE RDRCS GETTING BACK AS WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT JULY, MAYBE?

>> DID WE LOSE HENNIE? I THOUGHT HE WAS ON THE CALL.

>> I THOUGHT HE WAS ON THE CALL. YEAH.

>> I THOUGHT HE WAS. THERE HE IS.

>> I'M HERE. I'M SORRY.

WHAT WAS THE QUESTION PLEASE, WALT?

>> WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER 4, HENNIE, THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY.

ARE THE RDRC STILL LOOKING AT MAYBE COMING BACK IN JULY?

>> WE DON'T THINK THAT THE BUILDING WILL BE OPEN IN JULY, SO AT THIS POINT, WE WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE IT AS IT IS.

IF WE NEED TO, THE DSC MEETING IS BEFORE THE NEXT RDRC MEETINGS SO WE CAN ALWAYS ADDRESS IT THEN.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> WALT, IF I COULD. I THINK WE HAVE TO REALLY PLAN.

WE MAY NOT PLAN FOR A PHYSICAL, BUT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME THAT WE WOULD EITHER BE IN THE BUILDING WITH SOCIAL DISTANCING, WHERE THEY WOULD BE ON A ZOOM CALL.

WE'RE GETTING THE RDRCS MAKING COMMENTS THAT THEY WANT TO GET STARTED.

SO WE REALLY NEED A PLAN TO CONTINUE TO DELAY THE RDRCS, WHICH REPRESENTS THE PEOPLE AND ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE, IS NOT GOOD GOVERNANCE GOING FORWARD.

I'VE HAD CONTACT FROM SOME THE RDRCS THAT THEY WANT TO GET STARTED IN JULY.

THEY WANTED TO HOLD THEIR OWN ZOOM MEETING AND GET STARTED.

HENNIE WAS ABLE TO QUASH THAT AND SAID WE HAD A PLAN FOR JULY.

SO I WOULD JUST SAY WE REALLY NEED TO GET A PLAN TOGETHER, EVEN IF IT'S IN AN E-ENVIRONMENT WITH ZOOM AS THE WAY GOING FORWARD.

>> DISCUSSIONS THIS MORNING WITH WOODLAND'S TOWNSHIP LEADERSHIP, EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT STAFF, AND I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER JUST YET, BUT I WILL GET BACK WITH EVERYONE ON THE PLAN FOR THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. THAT'S A GOOD POINT, ARTHUR.

>> WALT, I THINK WE AGREE BEYOND THAT.

>> WELL, WALT, WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS GET THESE RDRCS STARTING TO TAKE THEIR OWN INITIATIVE AND REALLY CREATING AN ISSUE OUT OF SOMETHING WE DON'T NEED AN ISSUE.

WE KNOW HENNIE WILL GET BACK AFTER DISCUSSION WITH THE TOWNSHIP LEADERSHIP AND I KNOW GOING FORWARD, WE'LL FIND A WAY TO GET A PLAN THAT MEETS EVERYONE'S REQUIREMENTS.

[00:10:01]

THANK YOU FOR THE TIME.

>> OKAY. I DON'T THINK WE NEED A MOTION OR ANYTHING ON THIS, SO WE'LL MOVE ON.

THANK YOU, HENNIE AND ARTHUR.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 5,

[Item V]

CONSIDERATION AND ACTION REGARDING THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTION DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

I GUESS WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME, I THINK WE'RE STILL GOING TO LET SIGNS BE UP, ALTHOUGH I THINK SOME OF THEM ARE GETTING A LITTLE BIT RAGGED AT SOME PLACES, SO I DON'T KNOW.

MAYBE WE CAN SEND THEM A PHONE CALL OR A NOTE ON SOME OF THEM THAT THEY ARE STILL ALLOWED TO KEEP THE SIGNS OUT, BUT THEY NEED TO BE IN DECENT ORDER.

>> WE CAN FOLLOW UP WITH THOSE PROPERTIES TO MAKE THEM AWARE OF ANY MAINTENANCE THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO THOSE SIGNS.

>> ANYBODY HAVE OTHER COMMENTS ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES?

>> ACTUALLY, YES, SIR. IF I MAY, THE CSC AND DRC WILL BE GOING THROUGH A COUPLE OF SIGNAGE CRITERIA THAT WOULD SPECIFICALLY APPLY TOWARDS THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC SITUATION.

MAINLY, SIGNAGE THAT IS OCCURRING IN THE RIGHT OF WAYS, AND TO HELP PATRONS UNDERSTAND AND CLARIFICATION FOR WHAT SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR THEM.

WHAT WE HAVE IN THE DISCUSSION NEXT WEEK, WE HOPE TO BE ABLE TO BRING ALL OF THIS INFORMATION TO THE DSC ON OUR NEXT MEETING.

>> ALL RIGHT. GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> YES, SIR.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON ITEM NUMBER 5?

>> WALT, WHERE I THINK YOU SEE SOME OF THE SIGNS REALLY GETTING BEAT UP IS ON 242.

WITH THE TRAFFIC AND JUST BEING MORE OPEN, SOME OF THOSE BIGGER SIGNS, THEY START TO CAVE IN.

IF THE OWNERS COULD GO OUT, TIGHTEN THEM UP, AND MAKE THEM LOOK A LITTLE SHARP, IT WOULD HELP EVERYBODY.

>> YEAH, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT, ARTHUR.

I THINK AT 242 ALSO ON RESEARCH I'VE SEEN SOME OUT THERE THAT ARE WIND BLOWN AND EVERYTHING ALSO.

OKAY. WE'LL LEAVE THAT ITEM ON THERE ALSO.

WE MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 6,

[Item VI]

CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON THE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION AND COVENANT VIOLATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR SUMMARY.

DOES ANY OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE SOME OF THE ITEMS YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE REMOVED?

>>

>> NO, SIR.

>> ALL RIGHT. KIM, CAN WE GO THROUGH THE COMMERCIAL PLEASE FIRST?

>> CERTAINLY. FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS, I HAVE ITEM C, WHICH IS 61 CARLTON WOODS DRIVE, WHERE THE CONCEPTUALLY-PROPOSED BUILDING AND PARKING ADDITION.

IF ANYONE WHO IS IN THE CALL QUEUE IS CALLING IN FOR 61 CARLTON WOODS DRIVE, IF YOU CAN PLEASE HIT STAR 9 SO THAT I KNOW THAT YOU'RE PRESENT FOR THAT ITEM? THE NEXT ITEM I HAVE ON THE AGENDA FOR SUMMARY IS 6801 WOODLANDS PARKWAY FOR THE QUICK CAR LUBE AND REPAIR.

IF I HAVE ANYONE ON THE CALL PRESENT FOR 6801 WOODLANDS PARKWAY, IF YOU'LL HIT STAR 9, I CAN MAKE SURE THAT I HAVE YOU PRESENT FOR THE ITEM.

WE DID SPEAK WITH BOTH OF THESE INDIVIDUALS AND THEY WERE AWARE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UNLESS YOU FEEL THE NEED FOR ME TO RECITE THE RECOMMENDED MOTION THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED.

I DO HAVE ONE PERSON WHO'S RAISED THEIR HAND.

LET ME SEE WHAT ITEM THEY'RE HERE FOR.

>> HI. I THINK IT'S NUMBER 18 FOR 27 VILLA CANYON PIACE.

>> CERTAINLY. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND PUT YOU ON HOLD AND WHEN THAT ITEM COMES FORWARD, IF YOU WILL HIT STAR 9 ON YOUR PHONE, WE'LL KNOW THAT YOU'RE THE CALLER IN THE QUEUE FOR THAT SPECIFIC ITEM.

CURRENTLY, WE'RE ON THE COMMERCIAL ITEMS THAT ARE ON SUMMARY.

>> THANK YOU. I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH MY STUFF.

I APPRECIATE YOU CALLING BACK.

>> I UNDERSTAND. NO WORRIES.

WE'LL JUST PUT YOU ON HOLD FOR NOW.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. BYE.

>> I DO NOT SHOW THAT I HAVE ANY ONE PRESENT FOR THOSE TWO ITEMS.

>> ALL RIGHT. CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT COMMERCIAL SUMMARY ITEMS, PLEASE?

>> I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION.

>> DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND, ANDERSON.

>> ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN THE FAVOR SAY, AYE.

>>

>> ANY OPPOSE? THE MOTION CARRIES.

CAN WE GO THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL ONES PLEASE?

>> SURE. IN THE RESIDENTIAL ITEMS, I HAVE ITEM NUMBER 2, 11 HITHERVALE COURT.

IS THERE ANYBODY PRESENT THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON 11 HITHERVALE COURT?

[00:15:04]

I ALSO HAVE 11 SOUTH BRISTOL OAK COURT, ON A PROPOSED FENCE.

ITEM NUMBER 5, 95 EAST SLATESTONE CIRCLE OF A PROPOSED TREE REMOVAL.

ITEM NUMBER 6, 11 SERENITY WOODS, A HOME BUSINESS RENEWAL.

ITEM NUMBER 7, 6 BANWICK, A HOME BUSINESS.

ITEM NUMBER 8, 26 RED MOON PLACE, A LANDSCAPE AND DRAINAGE ACCEPTANCE FOR A POOL.

ITEM NUMBER 9, 119 NORTH CONCORD VALLEY CIRCLE, LEGAL ACTION.

146 SOUTH STAR RIDGE CIRCLE, LEGAL ACTION.

30 NEW DAWN PLACE, LEGAL ACTION.

39 NORTH STAR RIDGE CIRCLE, LEGAL ACTION.

I SEE SOMEBODY WITH THEIR HAND UP.

HOLD ON. HELLO.

ITEM ARE YOU CALLING IN REFERENCE TO?

>> ITEM NUMBER 4.

>> ITEM NUMBER 4, WE HAVEN'T GOT TO YET.

I'M GOING TO PUT YOU WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU. OKAY? THANK YOU.

>> OKAY.

>> WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER 11, 30 NEW DAWN PLACE.

ITEM NUMBER 12, 39 NORTH STAR RIDGE CIRCLE.

I PROBABLY ALREADY SAID THAT.

SORRY. ITEM NUMBER 13, 27 WOODMOORE PLACE, LEGAL ACTION.

ITEM NUMBER 14, 38 SOUTH BACOPA DRIVE, LEGAL ACTION.

ITEM NUMBER 15, 3 SIGNATURE CREST COURT, PROPOSED POOL AND DECKING.

ITEM NUMBER 17, 26 BURGESS BEND WAY, PROPOSED DECKING.

IS ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THOSE ITEMS? CHAIR, I DO NOT HAVE ANYBODY PRESENT TO SPEAK ON THOSE SUMMARY ITEMS.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS FOR SUMMARY?

>> MOVE TO ACCEPT RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

>> CAN I HAVE A SECOND?

>> I SECOND IT. MARY.

>> OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY "AYE".

>> AYE.

>> ANDERSON, AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 7; CONSIDERING AN ACTION OF THE COMMERCIAL APPLICATIONS OF COVENANT VIOLATIONS.

>> ABSOLUTELY. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY,

[Item II]

THERE WAS A CALLER THAT WAS CALLING IN ON PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT I AM AWARE HAS CALLED IN A LITTLE LATE, BUT HAD IDENTIFIED VIA TEXT THAT THEY ARE REALLY CALLING FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

>> YES, WE CAN DO THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. I WILL GO AHEAD AND ENGAGE THAT CALL.

HI. CALLER NUMBER ENDING WITH 4464?

>> YES, MA'AM. THIS IS ME ON YOUR LINE.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WERE CALLING FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK WITH THE DSC?

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> ABSOLUTELY. YOU CAN GO AHEAD.

>> HELLO. MY NAME IS DEACON NORRIS AT THE IMPACT CHURCH OF THE WOODLANDS.

WE WERE ON THE DOCKET FOR LAST MEETING ON THE GRAPHICS ON THE DOOR FOR IMPACT CHURCH OF THE WOODLANDS.

WE RESUBMITTED IT, WE REMOVED THE SIGNS OFF OF TWO DOORS, AND WE WERE ASKING FOR A VARIANT TO THE REGULATIONS.

BECAUSE THE TWO DOORS THAT WE HAVE THERE, WHEN YOU COME UP, YOU WASN'T ABLE TO SEE THE SIGN.

SO WE PUT IT ON TWO DOORS AND WE WOULD LIKE TO GET ON THE DOCKET FOR THE NEXT MONTH'S MEETING.

>> SIR, CAN YOU MUTE YOUR COMPUTER?

>> YES.

>> WELL, I KNOW THE COMMITTEE DOES NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE.

YOU'RE CERTAINLY WELCOME TO ASK QUESTIONS.

THE DEACON IS CORRECT.

THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY ON AN AGENDA FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST AND THE REASON FOR THAT WAS AS A RESULT OF

[00:20:01]

A BOARD MEMBER REQUESTING THAT ITEM BE PLACED ON AN AGENDA.

AS THE COMMITTEE IS AWARE, THEY PROMULGATED A RULE THAT THEY WILL NOT HEAR VARIANCES FOR WINDOW VINYL GRAPHICS.

SO WHEN THE DEACON CAME FORWARD AND REQUESTED THE ITEM B REHEARD WITH THE MODIFICATIONS, WE ADVISE THAT THEY SHOULD PROBABLY CALL IN AND CONTACT THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE TO SEE IF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE WOULD ALLOW THE ITEM TO BE HEARD.

SINCE YOU DO HAVE A RULE IN PLACE RIGHT NOW TO NOT HEAR VARIANCES ON DOOR OR WINDOW VINYL GRAPHICS.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO PLACE IT ON A FUTURE AGENDA, I'M HAPPY TO DO SO.

>> ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS?

>> NO.

>> NO.

>> NO COMMENTS, BUT I DON'T SEE WHY WE WOULDN'T DO IT.

BUT IT'S UP TO THE CHAIR AND THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE.

>> WE'VE HEARD THIS. HASN'T THIS BEEN ON THE AGENDA A COUPLE TIMES NOW?

>> THE VINYL GRAPHICS WERE JUST ON THE LAST AGENDA.

THEY WERE PLACED ON THE AGENDA TO BE HEARD AS A RESULT OF A REQUEST FROM A COMMITTEE MEMBER TO HEAR THE ITEM OUTSIDE OF THE CURRENTLY PROMULGATED RULE NOT TO HEAR VARIANCES.

THEY'RE NOW ASKING AGAIN TO BE HEARD WITH MODIFICATION.

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OBJECTION IF WE PUT IT ON THE AGENDA AND HEAR IT AGAIN?

>> NO, SIR.

>> ALL RIGHT. DO

>> YOU DON'T HAVE TO. YOU CAN JUST DIRECT THE STAFF TO PLACE IT ON THE NEXT AGENDA.

SO, DEACON NORRIS, BASED ON THE PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED AND THE DIRECTION FROM THE CHAIRMAN AND OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS, WE WILL PREPARE YOUR REQUEST TO BE PLACED ON THE JULY 1ST DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE, AND OUR STAFF WILL BE WRITING OUT TO YOU REGARDING THAT ITEM.

>> OKAY. WE'LL PUT THAT ON FUTURE AGENDA?

>> ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU, DEACON NORRIS.

I'LL GO AHEAD AND DISCONNECT YOUR CALL NOW.

>> THANK YOU,

>> THANK YOU.

>> BYE BYE.

>> ANYBODY ELSE FROM PUBLIC COMMENT, KIM?

>> WELL, SOMEBODY ELSE DOES HAVE THEIR HAND RAISED.

>> I BELIEVE THAT'S THE NUMBER 20.

>> I SHOW FOUR PEOPLE WITH HANDS RAISED AND THEY RAISED THEIR HAND AT THE END OF THE RESIDENTIAL SUMMARY ITEMS.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SPEAKER WITH A TELEPHONE NUMBER.

YOUR LAST FOUR DIGITS ARE 2030.

WHAT ITEM ARE YOU CALLING IN REFERENCE TO?

>> IT WAS ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, A RESIDENTIAL.

I WASN'T SURE IF YOU'RE CALLING OUT THE ITEMS TO ROLL-CALL OR YOU WERE JUST CALLING THEM OUT IN GENERAL. SO I JUST RAISED MY HAND.

>> ITEM NUMBER EIGHT WAS A SUMMARY ITEM.

IS THIS MR. GARCIA?

>> YES.

>> OKAY. MR. GARCIA, THIS IS NESTLE HAN.

I TALKED TO YOU EARLIER TODAY AND THAT'S THAT MOTION THAT WE DISCUSSED.

THE COMMITTEE DID MAKE A MOTION AND ACCEPT THAT.

>> OKAY. LOOK, I SAID I JUST RAISED MY HANDS BECAUSE I WASN'T SURE IF IT WAS A ROLL ALL ANNOUNCEMENT. OKAY.

>> I'M GOING TO PUT YOU ON MUTE NOW.

OR YOU CAN HANG UP AND WATCH THE REST OF THE MEETING.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> BYE BYE. ALL RIGHT.

SPEAKER WITH THE LAST DIGITS 1425.

WHAT ITEM ARE YOU CALLING IN REFERENCE TO?

>> ITEM NUMBER 18.

>> HIDDEN VARIANCES.

>> THE VARIANCES.

>> EIGHTEEN HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED YET.

WHEN THAT COMES UP, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AT THAT TIME.

OKAY. I'M GOING TO MUTE YOU RIGHT NOW.

>> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. CALLER WITH THE LAST FOUR DIGITS 7525, WHAT ITEM ARE YOU CALLING IN REFERENCE TO?

>> I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO NUMBER 16.

>> OKAY. NUMBER 16 HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED YET.

I'M GOING TO MUTE YOU AND WHEN IT'S TIME FOR THAT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AT THAT TIME. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. WE'RE BACK IN ITEM NUMBER SEVEN NOW.

>> I HAVE ONE MORE WITH THEIR HAND RAISED.

>> HELLO.

>> YES. WHAT ITEM ARE YOU CALLING IN REFERENCE TO.

[00:25:04]

>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE ITEM NUMBER IS.

THE LINK I GOT TOOK ME TO A BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING.

>> WHAT ADDRESSES IS IT?

>> 36 VIOLET SUNSET LANE.

>> I BELIEVE 36 VIOLET SUNSET LANE HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED YET.

>> OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M IN THE RIGHT PLACE.

>> YEAH, YOU ARE IN THE RIGHT PLACE.

>> OKAY. I'LL LISTEN IN THE LINE.

I CAN'T FIND THE VIDEO ONLINE, BUT I'LL LISTEN ALONG.

>> OKAY. WHEN YOU GO TO THAT LINK, IT SAYS LIVE MEETING AND YOU CLICK ON THAT TO WATCH THE MEETING.

>> OKAY. YEAH. THAT PULLED UP THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING WHICH IS NOT THIS ONE.

>> IT SAYS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING, I THINK, BUT IT SHOULD BE THIS MEETING.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

WELL, I THINK THAT'S EVERYBODY.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE'RE BACK ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

>> YES.

>> ALL RIGHT. KIM?

>> ABSOLUTELY. LET ME JUST SWITCH SCREENS FROM NES.

ALL RIGHT. CAN EVERYONE SEE THE SCREEN?

>> YES.

>> PERFECT.

>> IT'S A GOOD PICTURE.

>> THANK YOU. ALTHOUGH I DID NOT TAKE IT.

WHICH IS THE CONSIDERATION AND ACTION FOR PROPOSED SMALL CELL NETWORK STAND-ALONE POLE.

THIS IS FOR AT&T IN 12468 SAWMILL ROAD.

DO I HAVE ANYONE PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA? IF YOU'RE CALLING ABOUT THIS ITEM, PLEASE HIT STAR NINE ON YOUR PHONE SO THAT I CAN SEE THAT YOU'RE PRESENT FOR THE ITEM.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I DO NOT HAVE ANYONE PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM.

WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO GO IN THE ORDER OR WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO SKIP DOWN TO THE NEXT ONE?

>> THE NEXT ITEM, FOR WHICH I BELIEVE I HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT,

[Item VII B]

IS 1660 LAKE WOODLANDS DRIVE, WHICH IS ITEM B FOR THE CHICK-FIL-A OFF OF LAKE WOODLANDS DRIVE.

I DO HAVE A HAND RAISED, SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND GO WITH THAT AGENDA ITEM.

AGENDA ITEM NUMBER B IS THE CONSIDERATION AND ACTION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE TEMPORARY METAL CANOPY SYSTEM WHICH WOULD BE AT THE DRIVE-THROUGH AREA FOR THE CHICK-FIL-A ON 1660 LAKE WOODLANDS DRIVE, REPRESENTED HERE.

IT'S OFF OF LAKE WOODLANDS IN BETWEEN SIX PINES AND PINECROFT DRIVE.

HERE'S THE AERIAL VIEW OF THAT CHICK-FIL-A CENTER.

AS YOU KNOW, THE DRIVE-THROUGH FOR CHICK-FIL-A HAS A SECTION IN FRONT OF IT, WHERE THEY WOULD LIKE TO PLACE A DRIVE-THROUGH TENT.

THIS IS TO TRY AND ALLOW FOR SOME SECURITY FROM THE ELEMENTS OF WEATHER AND ACCOMMODATE THE STAFF THAT ARE IN THE PARKING LOT AREA DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS.

THIS IS PROPOSED AS A TEMPORARY, IT IS ALSO BECAUSE CURRENTLY, THE DINING AREA FOR THE RESTAURANT ITSELF IS NOT OPEN.

THEY ARE MAINTAINING STAYING CLOSED AND DOING DRIVE-THROUGH PICKUP ONLY.

THIS WILL ACCOMMODATE FOR THE ADDITIONAL DRIVERS IN THE QUEUE AS WELL AS THE SHADE FROM THE ELEMENTS.

IT ALSO INCORPORATES FANS AND LIGHTING THAT ARE PROPOSED.

IT IS 32 BY 50 FEET.

HERE ARE SOME OF THE EXAMPLES OF THE TENT THAT THEY HAVE PROPOSED AT OTHER CHICK-FIL-A LOCATIONS.

IT IS THE LARGER TENT THAT HAS SOME CONCRETE BLOCKS THAT ARE COVERED FOR THE TENT BALLASTS SO THAT THE BLOCKS ARE ABOUT 750 POUNDS EACH SO THAT THEY KEEP EVERYTHING FOR THE SIZE OF THE STRUCTURE SECURE.

HERE ARE SOME OTHER EXAMPLES.

THE CHICK-FIL-A ALSO PROVIDED US WITH A NIGHTTIME RENDERING, SO THAT YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE LIGHTS ARE INSIDE ONE OF THE TENTS.

THIS IS NOT INSTALLED AT A PLACE.

THIS IS THE SPECS FROM THE TENT COMPANY IN REGARDS TO THE LIGHTS.

THIS WAS PROVIDED BY CHICK-FIL-A.

IT'S THE CORPORATE STATEMENT NOTING THAT THE RESTAURANTS ARE LOCALLY OWNED AND FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES OF THE INDIVIDUAL COMMUNITIES.

WE FOUND THIS OFF OF THE WEBSITE.

HOWEVER, THE REPRESENTATIVES FOR CHICK-FIL-A HAVE IDENTIFIED THAT THEY ARE STILL REMAINING CLOSED FOR THEIR DINING AREAS.

[00:30:01]

SO AS A RESULT OF THAT, THEY WANT TO MAINTAIN THE TENT FOR THE OUTSIDE ACCOMMODATIONS.

HERE ARE YOUR LIGHTING SPECIFICATIONS.

ONE THING I DID WANT TO QUESTION CHICK-FIL-A ABOUT WAS THE NUMBER OF LIGHTS WHICH IN THE LIGHTING SPECIFICATIONS SEEMS A BIT SIGNIFICANT FOR THE NUMBER OF LIGHTS, AND I'M SURE THAT THEY CAN ACCOMMODATE ANSWERING THAT QUESTION, IN REGARDS TO THE NUMBER OF LIGHTS.

THERE IS A PROPOSAL FOR FOUR FANS.

THESE ARE THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THOSE FANS THAT WOULD BE INSTALLED INSIDE THE TENTS.

THIS IS THE LOCATION WITH THE TENT BEING IN THAT PARKING ENTRANCE AREA.

WHILE THERE IS NO DINE-IN, THIS WOULD BE SEEN FROM THAT DINE-IN PARKING ENTRANCE.

CURRENTLY, THERE ARE SOME SMALL UMBRELLAS AT THE PODIUMS FOR THE STAFF THAT AID IN THE ASSISTANCE OF THE DRIVE-THROUGH, AS WELL AS ANOTHER SMALLER TENT FOR STAFF TO MAINTAIN THEIR BELONGINGS, WATER, ETC.

THEY DID MENTION THAT THOSE ARE REMOVABLE BUT STILL WOULD LIKE THE TENT.

THIS IS TO GIVE YOU OTHER ANGLES AS YOU'RE ENTERING.

SO AS YOU'RE COMING INTO THAT LAKE WOODLANDS PINECROFT SHOPPING CENTER AREA, THIS WOULD BE ONE ENTRANCE IN WHICH YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THE TENT AS YOU'RE COMING ALONG THAT STREET.

THIS WOULD BE RUNNING PARALLEL TO WHERE THE PROPOSED TENT WOULD BE LOCATED.

AS YOU MAKE THE TURN AND LOOK BEHIND YOU WOULD BE A ROSS, AS IN PROXIMITY TO ADJACENT PLOTS THERE.

THEN THIS WOULD BE THE PHOTO OF THE ELECTRICAL PANEL AT THE REAR OF THE BUILDING TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE PROXIMITY OF THE TENT AND JUST A BEARING WHERE YOU'RE LOCATED ONSITE.

MORE PHOTOS OF THE SHOPPING ITSELF OR FACILITY ITSELF.

WE DID NOTICE THAT ONE OF THE CHICK-FIL-AS NOT CORRELATED WITH THIS FRANCHISEE OFF OF SAWDUST HAS A LOCATION THAT'S NOT WITHIN THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP, BUT IT DOES GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF A NEARBY ONE OFF OF SAWDUST ROAD, WHERE THE INSTALLATION OF THE TENT HAS OCCURRED.

YOU CAN SEE THE FOUR FANS AT EACH CORNER OF THE TENT AND IN THIS ONE, THERE ARE THREE LIGHTS THAT RUN ACROSS THE TOP OF THE CANOPY ITSELF.

ANOTHER VIEW FROM ANOTHER ANGLE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THAT INSTALLED TENT AND THEN WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE MEDIANS OFF OF SAWDUST.

THIS WAS SUBMITTED TO YOUR COMMUNITY STANDARDS COMMITTEE, TO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATION PRIOR TO THE ACTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE.

THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMUNITY STANDARDS COMMITTEE WAS TO DISAPPROVE.

THEY DID WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE CHALLENGES THAT BUSINESSES HAVE FACED DURING THE PERIOD OF COVID-19.

THEY UNDERSTAND TAKING THE TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE STANCE KIOSKS, FOOD ORDERS, AND PICKUPS.

BUT THEY HAVE IDENTIFIED THE DISAPPROVAL TO INSTALL THE TEMPORARY 32 BY 50-FOOT METAL VINYL EVENT TENT ON THE PROPERTY.

THEY IDENTIFY ORDERING ONLINE IS AVAILABLE, THAT CAN REDUCE CUSTOMER AND STAFF TIME SPENT IN LINE AND THEN THEY ALSO IDENTIFY RESTAURANT DINING ROOMS IN THE AREA HAVE BEEN PERMITTED TO OPEN AT AN OCCUPANCY, WHICH CAN REDUCE THE VOLUME OF CUSTOMERS IN THE DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE LANES.

I WILL NOTE THAT IF THE INSTALLATION OF THE TENT WAS TO OCCUR, AND I WAS GOING TO TRY AND GO BACK TO THAT VIEW FOR YOU.

IT WOULD BLOCK THE MAJORITY OF THE PARKING FOR THAT SITE ON THIS SIDE.

SO IF THE DINING AREA WAS AT SOME POINT TO BE OPEN, IF THE TENT IS IN PLACE, YOU'LL IMPEDE THE AMOUNT OF PARKING NEEDED FOR THE DINING AREA TO OPEN UP, AND I DO HAVE WHAT I BELIEVE IS THE CHICK-FIL-A REPRESENTATIVE PRESENT.

IF I CAN GO AHEAD AND ENGAGE THE CALL, UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME PRIOR TO THAT.

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO.

>> WHY DON'T YOU GO AHEAD AND ADDRESS THIS THEN.

>> CERTAINLY. SIR, THE CALL ENDING IN 6982, ARE YOU REPRESENTATIVE FOR CHICK-FIL-A? CALLER ENDING IN 6982, CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> I APOLOGIZE. I AM HERE. YES, MA'AM.

>> ARE YOU THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR CHICK-FIL-A?

>> SURE I AM. MY NAME IS ALLEN FISHER.

>> ABSOLUTELY. YOU NOW ARE ENGAGED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE, SO YOU CAN SPEAK WITH THEM.

>> GREAT. I WAS WONDERING IF YOU HAD ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME.

>> JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

DO YOU HAVE ANY TIME FRAME ON HOW LONG YOU THINK THIS TENT WOULD BE REQUIRED?

>> WELL, THE TENT WOULD GO UP ON A SUNDAY, WE'RE CLOSED ALREADY,

[00:35:04]

AND WE WOULD KEEP IT MONTH-TO-MONTH UNTIL WE WERE GOING TO OPEN THE DINING ROOM, IS THE PLAN OR AS LONG AS THE WOODLANDS WOULD ALLOW US TO KEEP IT UP.

>> SO IF YOU OPEN THE DINING ROOM AREA THING THEN YOU'LL TAKE THE TENT DOWN?

>> ABSOLUTELY. WE WOULD TAKE IT DOWN THE FOLLOWING SUNDAY PRIOR TO OPENING THE DINING ROOM.

>> OKAY. THIS IS THE ONE THAT'S ON LAKE WOODLANDS, CORRECT?

>> YES, SIR. IT SURE IS.

>> OKAY. ARE YOU ASSOCIATED WITH THE ONE THAT'S ON RESEARCH OUT ON ALDEN BRIDGE?

>> NO SIR, I'M NOT.

>> OKAY. SO WE HAVEN'T HAD A REQUEST FOR ANYTHING THERE, RIGHT KIM?

>> NO. THE OWNER AND REPRESENTATIVE FOR THIS ONE IS THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE CHICK-FIL-A HERE IN THE MALL AND ACTUALLY EVEN ON SAWDUST, BUT NOT FOR THE ONE OFF OF RESEARCH FOREST.

>> OKAY.

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> SO WHEN WOULD YOU ANTICIPATE OPENING THE DINING ROOM?

>> I COULDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION. I APOLOGIZE.

>> WHEN DO YOU ANTICIPATE OPENING THE DINING ROOM?

>> AT THIS POINT, WE DON'T HAVE A DATE IN MIND YET.

WE'RE REALLY WAITING ON CHICK-FIL-A, INC TO MAKE A DECISION, CHAINWISE.

>> SO OPENING THE DINING ROOM IS PART OF THE CORPORATE DECISION, NOT THE LOCAL FRANCHISEE, WAS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, SIR.

>> THANK YOU.

>> COULD USE A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL UMBRELLAS FOR THE PODIUMS INSTEAD OF THE TENT?

>> CALLER, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HEARD OUR COMMITTEE MEMBER.

JOHN, YOU MIGHT NEED TO TURN UP THE VOLUME A LITTLE BIT.

BUT I THINK WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY IS, "IS IT POSSIBLE TO USE SOME ADDITIONAL UMBRELLAS LIKE THE ONES THAT ARE AT THE PODIUMS IN PLACE OF THE PROPOSED TENT?" IS THAT CORRECT?

>> CORRECT.

>> THE TEAM MEMBERS ARE MOVING FROM CAR TO CAR, SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PUT A STATIONARY OR I GUESS I'M NOT SURE IF HE'S ASKING IF THEY COULD CARRY AN UMBRELLA. GO AHEAD.

>> I WAS JUST WONDERING IF YOU COULD HAVE A COUPLE OF MORE PODIUMS WITH UMBRELLAS ON THEM, SO IT WASN'T AS BIG A FOOTPRINT AND IT WASN'T AS HIGH A STRUCTURE.

>> GOT YOU. YEAH. GOOD. THERE'S NOTHING THAT HAS BEEN INVENTED OR MADE FOR THAT PURPOSE YET.

>> THE QUESTION THAT I'VE GOT IS, AS YOU KNOW, YOUR DRIVE-THROUGH IS VERY BUSY EVEN BEFORE THIS CORONAVIRUS EVENT.

I WAS THINKING IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THESE LONG QUEUE LINES AND NOW YOU NEED MORE OF A PERMANENT SOLUTION FOR YOUR DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE.

>> YES. WE WERE JUST RECENTLY RENOVATED AND UPDATED AND REMODELED, BUT BECAUSE A PERMANENT STRUCTURE WOULD CUT INTO THE AMOUNT OF PARKING WE HAVE, IT WAS DISAPPROVED OR NOT APPROVED IN ORDER TO PUT SOMETHING MORE PERMANENT UP.

>> GUYS, I GUESS, FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE SUMMER COMING UP AND THERE'S STILL A TON OF PEOPLE THAT EVERY TIME YOU DRIVE DOWN THERE, THERE'S A TON OF CARS IN THE QUEUE THERE, I THINK THE RECOMMENDED MOTION, THE OPTION ABOUT ALLOWING THEM TO GO AHEAD AND DO THIS BUT HAVE IT REMOVED WHEN THE DINING ROOM OPENS, I THINK IT'S A PRETTY GOOD MOTION IN LIEU OF WHAT'S STILL GOING ON OUT THERE.

>> IT'S A GOOD MOTION TOO, WALT, AND IT HELPS CREATE BUSINESS, WHICH WE WANT TO SEE BUSINESS BECOME HEALTHY AND RECOVER.

BUT I THINK ALSO TOO THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE ABOUT LOOKING AT A PERMANENT STRUCTURE, I DON'T THINK THE NEED OF PROTECTION FOR EMPLOYEES THAT SERVICE THE CARS ARE GOING TO GO AWAY BECAUSE YOU LOOK AT THE CHICK-FIL-A IN ALDEN BRIDGE, THEY'RE USING IPADS TO TAKE ORDERS.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO STILL NEED PROTECTION FROM WEATHER,

[00:40:01]

SO LOOKING AT A PERMANENT STRUCTURE DOWN THE LINE IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE ALSO LOOKED AT.

>> YEAH.

>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THAT IF YOU APPROVE THIS AT THIS LOCATION, EVERY SINGLE FAST FOOD RESTAURANT THAT EMPLOYS THIS TYPE OF WORKFLOW IS GOING TO BE ASKING FOR TENTS AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE POPPING UP EVERYWHERE.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SAY NO.

>> I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT, JOHN, BUT ALSO AS WE ALL DRIVE AROUND THE WOODLANDS AND SEE THESE RESTAURANTS, I DON'T THINK I'VE SEEN THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC LIKE YOU DO AT THIS PARTICULAR FACILITY.

>> YEAH. I WOULD SAY THAT OUR RECORD RIGHT NOW IS 250 CARS IN ONE HOUR AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYBODY THAT CAN MATCH THAT.

>> WELL, THEN WHAT'S THE LITMUS TEST? WHAT'S THE CUT-OFF FOR NUMBER OF CARS IN AN HOUR TO BE ABLE TO GET A TENT?

>> I'M NOT SURE OF THAT ANSWER, BUT I BET YOU OUR COMPETITORS AREN'T DOING MORE THAN 100.

>> I KNOW I HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING THAT COMPARES TO WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING.

>> THAT HAVE THEIR EMPLOYEES OUTSIDE TAKING ORDERS IN THE QUEUE.

BUSY OR THEY JUST HAVE THEM OUT THERE WAITING FOR THE NEXT PATRON, YOU STILL HAVE THE SAME SITUATION.

>> WELL, I GUESS I'LL JUST HAVE TO KEEP GOING BACK TO WHAT I'VE SAID.

I THINK IN LIEU OF WHAT'S GOING ON, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE DON'T LIKE THAT'S OUT THERE WITH THE SIGNAGE AND SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS GOING ON.

BUT I THINK WE NEED TO DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO TRY TO HELP THE RESTAURANTS OUT HERE.

>> THE AIM IS NOT TO OPENING THE DINING, I'M ALL RIGHT.

SO IS THAT YOUR MOTION, WALT?

>> YEAH. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDED MOTION, OPTION 1.

YES, I THINK EVERYTHING IS ON THERE, ALTHOUGH THE, "REMOVE NO LATER THAN SEPTEMBER 28TH," I GUESS WE CAN SEE IF IT NEEDS TO BE REVISITED AFTER THAT.

HOPEFULLY NOT THOUGH. BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S WHAT MY MOTION IS.

>> WALT, OR YOU COULD TIE IT TO REOPENING THE DINING ROOM.

WHAT IF THEY DO THAT IN THE MONTH OF AUGUST? THEN THIS THING CAN COME DOWN IN AUGUST.

>> WELL, THE MOTION IS: IN AN EVENT THAT CHICK-FIL-A OPENS A DINING AREA PRIOR TO THIS DATE, THE TENT MUST BE REMOVED.

>> OKAY. I'M GOOD.

>> WE'RE BASICALLY COVERING THAT.

>> ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS IF CHICK-FIL-A SAYS, "OKAY, EVERYONE CAN OPEN UP THEIR DINING ROOMS," AND IT'S STILL HELD BY A LOCAL MANAGEMENT AND THEY ELECT TO NOT OPEN THE DINING IN AND KEEP THE FACILITATION OF DRIVE-THROUGH PERMANENT.

WHAT STOPS THAT?

>> I GUESS WE STOP IT.

>> YEAH, WE PULL IT.

>> UNDER WHAT? THEY'RE STATING THAT THEIR DINING SERVICES ARE CLOSED.

THEIR INTERIOR SERVICES ARE CLOSED.

>> I'M SORRY.

>> I GUESS IT GOES BACK TO ONE OF THE AGENDA ITEMS ON THERE ABOUT SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE TEMPORARY HAVE INITIATED TO HELP THE RESTAURANTS AND I WOULD SAY WOULD FALL UNDER THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF BRENT'S ON THE LINE, BUT THERE'S NOTHING STOPPING US FROM GOING BACK AND SAYING, "HEY, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO OPEN UP YOUR DINING AND WE WANT THIS TENT REMOVED." IT'S A TEMPORARY TENT, SO IT'S NOT A PERMANENT DEAL.

>> THE RECOMMENDATION DOES ACCOMMODATE FOR A HARD DEADLINE DATE REGARDLESS OF THE DINING OPENING UP.

IT DOES, AT THE CLOSE OF SUMMER, SAY THAT THE TENT STILL WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE REMOVED, BUT MOVE

>> A QUESTION FOR THE FRANCHISEE.

IF YOUR CORPORATE OFFICE DECLARES DINING OPEN UNDER CERTAIN GUIDELINES, CAN YOU TAKE ACTION THAT'S INDEPENDENT AND SAYS, "I'M NOT GOING TO OPEN MY DINING AREA?"

>> NO, SIR. WE WOULD NEED FOLLOW SUIT WITH WHATEVER CHICK-FIL-A WANTS US TO DO.

[00:45:04]

>> OKAY. SO YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW CORPORATE POLICY.

IF THEY SAY IN TWO WEEKS DINING IS OPEN, YOU HAVE TO OPEN THE DINING WITH THE PROPER PRECAUTIONS ACCORDING TO THEIR POLICY.

>> YES, SIR, ABSOLUTELY.

>> THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

>> WALT, ON THE MOTION, THE DATE IS END OF SEPTEMBER.

>> SEPTEMBER 28TH, 2020.

>> IS THERE A REASON FOR THAT DATE SINCE THE END OF AUGUST?

>>

>> IN AUGUST, BECAUSE SEPTEMBER I KNOW IT'S WARM IN SEPTEMBER.

>> OKAY. LET'S MAKE IT AUGUST 31ST THEN.

>> SECONDED.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>> WALT, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT, MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> WE APPRECIATE THE CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> OKAY.

>> THAT IS THE LAST COMMERCIAL ITEM FOR WHICH I HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT.

WE HAVE ONE OTHER COMMERCIAL ITEM TO COMPLETE THE COMMERCIAL ITEMS OR I CAN GO TO THE FIRST RESIDENTIAL ITEM FOR WHICH I KNOW WE HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT.

>> LET'S JUST FINISH THAT LAST COMMERCIAL ITEM.

>> WILL DO.

>> A SIDE NOTE, WHO OWNS THAT

>> I WILL HAVE TO LOOK.

>> BECAUSE THAT'S THE SAME THING OVER THERE, THEY ARE AROUND THE SUN THERE.

>> RIGHT.

>>

>>YEAH.

>> WE COULD ALSO SEE BECAUSE THEY'RE OUT IN THE OPEN ALL THE TIME AND THEY'VE GOT A PRETTY HEAVY TRAFFIC IN THAT LOCATION.

>> I THOUGHT THEY MODIFIED THE DIDN'T THEY PUT SOMETHING TEMPORARY OR SOMETHING PERMANENT UP KEN?

>> WE DID HAVE CANOPIES THAT WERE APPLIED, BUT THEY'RE AS YOU ROUND THE CORNER, ON THE DRIVE-THROUGH SIDE, THEY'RE NOT IN THE QUEUE.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> OKAY. THE FIRST ITEM ON THE COMMERCIAL AGENDA IS ITEM A,

[Item VII A]

WHICH IS THE CONSIDERATION ENACTION FOR A PROPOSED SMALL CELL NETWORK STAND-ALONE POLE.

THIS IS PROPOSED BY AT&T AND IT WOULD BE LOCATED IN THE VILLAGE OF GROGAN'S MILL, CLOSEST TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAWMILL AND SAWDUST.

HERE'S AN AERIAL MAP THAT WAS PROVIDED IF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE CIRCLE K AND VALERO THAT YOU HAD PREVIOUSLY ACTED ON.

THE CELL NODE THAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS A MONOPOLE, IN THIS GENERAL LOCATION.

IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS, YOU WILL SEE IT LOCATED BETWEEN TWO LIGHT POLES, BUT AS ITS OWN INDIVIDUAL MONOPOLE NOT INCORPORATED INTO A LIGHT POLE.

IN THIS GENERAL VICINITY, YOU CAN SEE THE ELECTRICAL LINES THAT ARE RUN TO THE SIDE OF SAWMILL AND VALERO AND CIRCLE K ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE.

THE PLACEMENT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.

THEY ACTUALLY WANTED TO PUT IT ON THE BUILDING, AND THAT WAS DENIED WHEN IT WENT FORWARD THROUGH THE DEVELOPER BECAUSE OF A LAND USE ISSUE.

IN THE DESCRIPTION FOR LAND USE, IT WOULD NOT BE AUTHORIZED, SO THEY WANTED TO RELOCATE IT, ONE FROM THE BUILDING, STILL AN ISSUE OF LAND USE TO MOVE IT OFF TO THE SIDE.

WHEN AT&T WENT FORWARD TO SUBMIT THE PROPOSAL FOR A CELL NODE, THEY ALSO HAVE TO COORDINATE WITH OTHER ENTITIES IN REGARDS TO STUDIES THAT ARE PERFORMED TO OBTAIN COUNTY APPROVAL.

PART OF THAT STUDY ALLOWS THEM TO MOVE THE CELL NODE WITHIN 50 FEET WITHOUT HAVING TO REDO ALL OF THE STUDIES AND COME FORWARD.

SO THEY SUBMITTED IT TO BE PUT IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH IS THE OPTION HERE, AND THAT WOULD ALLOW IT TO REMAIN WITHIN 50 FEET OF THEIR PREVIOUS LOCATION, WOULD ALLOW THEM TO NOT HAVE TO REDO THE STUDIES THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED BY THE COUNTY.

HOWEVER, PLACING IT HERE MEANS THAT IT WOULD BE ITS INDIVIDUAL POLE AND WOULD NOT BE INCORPORATED INTO ONE OF THE LIGHT POLES LIKE YOU COMMONLY SEE FOR THE OTHER CELL NETWORK NODES, SUCH AS THE ONES THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY CROWN CASTLE.

HERE ARE THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THOSE CELL NODES.

IT IS THE STANDARD METAL POLE WITH AN AT&T ANTENNA.

HERE IS THE ELEVATION.

THE OVERALL HEIGHT OF THE POLE IS 30 FEET.

[00:50:04]

YOU HAVE SEEN RANGES OF THESE BETWEEN 28 AND 34, SO IT'S WITHIN THE RANGE OF WHAT YOU HAVE PREVIOUSLY ALLOWED.

THE SPECIFICATIONS IN REGARDS TO THE SMALL CELL SCHEMATIC, AND THEN ALSO THE INFORMATION THAT THEY WOULD PROVIDE WHICH INCORPORATES OWNERSHIP, CONTACT NUMBER, INFORMATION RELATED TO AT&T, AND THE REQUIRED CAUTIONARY INFORMATION.

ALL OF YOUR SPECS FOR THE NODE ITSELF, WHERE THE EQUIPMENT BAY IS LOCATED, THE PORT, AND WHERE THE INFORMATION FOR THE POLE IS.

HERE ARE THE RENDERINGS THAT WERE PROVIDED.

HERE'S YOUR CURRENT VIEW.

YOU CAN SEE THE CIRCLE K IN THE DISTANCE.

HERE'S THE VALERO GAS STATION FRONT.

YOU CAN SEE ONE DOUBLE LIGHT POLE HERE, AND THE PROPOSAL IS TO PUT THE MONOPOLE JUST IN FRONT OF THAT AREA, RUNNING ADJACENT TO WHERE THAT FIRE HYDRANT IS, AND IN THE MEDIAN IN THE CENTER.

THIS IS THE VIEW IF YOU WERE LOOKING TO THE NORTH, BOTH WHAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE AND THEN IF THE ALLOWED AS PRESENTED WAS TO BE INSTALLED, THEN IT WOULD BE RIGHT IN THIS AREA HERE.

THOSE ELECTRICAL LINES THAT I HAD MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, THEY'RE A LITTLE DECEIVING IN THIS PHOTO, BUT THESE ARE ACTUALLY ON THIS SIDE OF THE MEDIAN, THEY RUN ALONG THIS SIDE OF THE ROAD.

HERE'S ANOTHER VIEW, GIVES YOU A BETTER EXAMPLE OF THOSE LINES WHERE THAT MONOPOLE IS PROPOSED AND THE PROXIMITY OF BOTH THE INTERSECTION, STREETLIGHTS AND ADJACENT POLL LOOKING FROM THE OPPOSITE SIDE.

HERE IS THE INFORMATION FROM TXDOT THAT WAS REFERENCED FOR THE INSTALLATION AND HOW THEY WOULD ACCOMMODATE THE ACTIVITY FOR THAT INSTALLATION.

HERE ARE SOME PHOTOS MORE CURRENTLY IN JUNE, JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE ADJACENT POLL THAT IT WOULD BE NEARBY, AND THE INTERSECTION THAT IT WOULD BE NEARBY.

SO IT WOULD BE SOMEWHERE AROUND THIS AREA HERE.

THESE JUST GIVE YOU VIEWS AS YOU'RE GOING ALONG SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THE SURROUNDING AREA WHERE THAT MEDIAN LOOKS, THE LIGHT POST IN FRONT OF IT.

THESE ARE SOME AT&T STANDALONE POLLS THAT THE DSC APPROVED IN FEBRUARY OF 2020.

IT HAD THE SAME HEIGHT, IT HAS THE SAME REQUIREMENTS IN REGARDS TO DESIGN, INSTALLATION, WHEN TO ADDRESS ANY DAMAGE THAT MIGHT OCCUR, THE IDENTITY AND RELEASE THAT THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO SIGN, WHICH IS ONE THAT IS REVIEWED AND EDITED BY OUR LEGAL COUNSEL, THE STRONG FIRM, AND THE COMPLIANCE THAT IS REQUIRED WITH THE COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS.

THOSE TWO THAT WERE APPROVED ARE THE ONES THAT ARE IDENTIFIED HERE.

THE ADDRESSES 3002 RESEARCH FOREST DRIVE AND 9502 NORTH PANTHER CREEK DRIVE.

THESE ARE POLES PREVIOUSLY APPROVED THAT ARE NOT INCORPORATING A LIGHT POLE.

HOWEVER, THEY ARE ALSO NOT IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO A LIGHT POLE THE WAY THIS ONE CURRENTLY IS AT SAWMILL AND SAWDUST.

THE ONE AT 9502, PANTHER CREEK DRIVE, IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR, IS CLOSEST TO THE INTERSECTION OF LAKE WOODLANDS AND PANTHER CREEK DRIVE WHERE THAT LIVING WORD LUTHERAN CHURCH IS, AND YOU DO NOT HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM.

>> ALL RIGHT. COMMENTS?

>> THIS IS BOB, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO GO WITH OPTION NUMBER TWO TO DENY THE MONOPOLES AS PRESENTED IN FAVOR OF THEM REVISING AND RESUBMITTING TO UTILIZE AN INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY OF BOTH THE MONOPOLE AND EXISTING LIGHTS.

THIS IS TO MITIGATE THE AMOUNT OF UTILITY STRUCTURES THAT WE HAVE IN ANY MEDIUM.

>> I SECOND THAT MOTION.

>> ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AUTHUR, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE. ANY OPPOSE? ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, KIM.

>> JUST GIVE ME ONE SECOND TO TAKE DOWN SOME NOTES.

OKAY.

>>

>> THE NEXT ITEM FOR WHICH WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS PRESENT IS FOR

[Item VIII 1]

RESIDENTIAL ITEM NUMBER 1 ON THE AGENDA.

FOR THE CALLERS WHO ARE CALLING IN FOR RESIDENTIAL ITEM NUMBER 1, IF YOU COULD GO AHEAD AND RAISE YOUR HAND AT THIS TIME AND THEN I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL UPON YOU AFTER I HAVE PROVIDED THE COMMITTEE WITH THE PRESENTATION.

[00:55:04]

PERFECT. THANK YOU.

ITEM NUMBER 1 IS A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR AN EXISTING POOL BARRIER FENCE AND PARTIAL REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT THAT INCLUDES PORTIONS THAT ARE LOCATED OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE AND REPAIRS THAT HAVE THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE MEMBERS FACING OUTWARD TOWARD THE NEIGHBORING LOT.

THIS IS AT THE PARKER RESIDENCE, WHICH IS AT 14 BOUGH LEAF PLACE, REPRESENTED HERE ON YOUR MAP.

IT IS A CUL-DE-SAC OFF OF CAPSTONE CIRCLE IN BOUGH LEAF PLACE, AN INTERIOR LOT THAT BACKS UP TO THE CUL-DE-SAC OF CANDLE NUT.

HERE'S ANOTHER VIEW OF THAT SECTION.

THE OWNER DID SEND THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNICATION FORMAT TO ITS ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND THERE WAS OPPOSITION TO THAT.

IN ADDITION, WE HAVE RECEIVED OPPOSITION PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED BY THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR WHO REQUESTED THAT INFORMATION BE PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEE.

SO THE INFORMATION WAS COMPILED OVER THE COURSE OF A YEAR AND A HALF OF THE PHOTOS AND CORRESPONDENCE AND WAS FORWARDED TO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE PRIOR TO THIS MEETING FOR YOUR REVIEW.

HERE IS THE AERIAL VIEW OF THE HOME OF 14 BOUGH LEAF.

THEN THIS IS THE VIEW OF THE PROPERTY SURVEY.

THERE IS AN EXISTING SIX-FOOT FENCE THAT WAS INSTALLED HERE BY DAVID WEEKLEY HOMES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPERTY OF 14 BOUGH LEAF.

THIS WAS DONE IN APRIL 27TH OF 1994, WAS THE DSC'S APPROVAL FOR BOTH THE HOUSE AND THE FENCE ON THE BUILDING PERMIT THAT WAS APPROVED.

THE FENCE WAS INSTALLED AND THE OWNER, WHO IS THE CURRENT OWNER OF THE HOME, RECALLS PAYING ADDITIONAL TO DAVID WEEKLEY FOR THAT FENCE TO BE INSTALLED.

ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, AND, BRET CHIME IN, IF I HAVE THAT WRONG, THERE WAS SOME CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT FORWARD TO THE STAFF AND LEGAL COUNSEL IN REGARDS TO REPAIRS THAT WERE NEEDED FOR PORTIONS OF THAT FENCE.

THE REPAIRS WERE BROUGHT FORWARD AND THERE WAS SOME CONCERN IN REGARDS TO THE OWNER'S ABILITY TO MAKE THOSE REPAIRS WITHOUT ENTERING THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER'S LOT IN ORDER TO MAKE THE REPAIRS, AND THERE WAS TRESPASSING CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT FORWARD AT THAT TIME, AND THERE WAS ALSO CONCERNS THAT THE ENTIRE FENCE WAS IN NEED OF REPLACEMENT.

AS A RESULT, THE STAFF WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ENGAGED WITH THE NEIGHBORS, AND THE OWNER OF THE FENCE MADE NECESSARY REPAIRS, AND AN INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THAT THE REPAIRS THAT WERE MADE WERE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CODE AND PASSED A FINAL INSPECTION.

FAST-FORWARD, QUITE SOME TIME, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, THE PORTION OF THE FENCE RIGHT HERE, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED, HAD TWO PANELS THAT FELL DOWN DURING THE STORM.

AS A RESULT OF THOSE PANELS FALLING DOWN, THE OWNER MOVE FORWARD TO MAKE SOME QUICK REPAIRS IN ORDER TO HAVE A COMPLIANT POOL BARRIER AND NOT HAVE AN EXPOSED FENCE.

THAT'S THE PORTION THAT WOULD BE REPRESENTED HERE BETWEEN 14 BOUGH LEAF AND 18 BOUGH LEAF.

THAT FENCE, WHICH SERVES AS A POOL BARRIER FENCE FOR BOTH PROPERTY OWNERS, SITS BETWEEN THOSE TWO LOTS.

14 BOUGH LEAF SUBMITTED A FENCE APPLICATION AND IDENTIFIED THAT AT THIS MOMENT THEY WOULD BE REPAIRING TWO SECTIONS OF THE FENCE THAT WERE KNOCKED DOWN IN THE STORM.

THESE ARE THE HIGHLIGHTED SECTIONS THAT YOU SEE.

MARKED ON THE SURVEY IN YELLOW, IT'S IDENTIFIED TO BE A J-STYLE, WHICH IS OUR WOOD PICKET FENCE WITH THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE FACING ME.

HIS NOTES, THAT BECAUSE HE'S NOT ALLOWED ON HIS NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY, HE WILL BE FORCED TO INSTALL WHAT THE FINISHED SIDE TOWARDS HIM FOR A TOTAL OF 12-14 FEET AND THE OWNER CAN EXPOUND ON HIS ENGAGEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBOR.

I BELIEVE INVOLVEMENT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE FOR TRESPASSING AND ABILITY TO ENTER, AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBOR CAN IMPART HIS INFORMATION IN REGARDS TO ABILITY TO ACCESS AND NEED FOR REPAIR FROM HIS SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

HE WOULD LIKE TO REPLACE THE EXISTING FENCE MARKED IN ORANGE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE YARD.

THIS IS ALL IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STANDARD.

SO IF YOU WILL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND FOCUS ON THIS SIDE HERE WHERE THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS INVOLVED, BOTH BECAUSE IT MEASURES 3-5 INCHES OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE AND HAS PORTIONS THAT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTION SIDE FACING OUTWARD AS A RESULT OF THE OWNER'S TRESPASSING CONCERN

[01:00:03]

AND CONCERNS FOR THE ABILITY TO REPAIR AND REPLACE PICKETS MOVING FORWARD.

THIS WOULD BE JUST THE EXISTING FENCE.

NO CHANGE IN THE DIRECTION OF THE FINISHED SIDE FOR THIS SECTION HERE.

SO AGAIN, THAT'S THE PORTION THAT'S COMPLIANT.

HERE ARE THE TWO PROPERTIES, AND THE FENCE BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES.

THE RED BRICK IS 14 BOUGH LEAF, WHICH IS THE PARKER RESIDENTS.

THE LIGHTER TAN BRICK IS 18 BOUGH LEAF, WHICH IS THE YAKUBOVICH PROPERTY.

HERE IS THE PHOTO THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE OWNERS AND NEIGHBORS IDENTIFYING THOSE TWO PANELS THAT FELL DOWN BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES.

HERE'S THE PHOTO PROVIDED SHOWING THAT THE POSTS WERE BEING REPAIRED FOR NEWLY INSTALLED POSTS IN THE SAME LOCATION AS THE OLD FENCE AND THE OWNER'S DESIRE TO PUT THE FENCE UP QUICKLY TO HAVE A POOL BARRIER.

THE OWNER DID ALSO, AT THE SAME TIME AS THE APPLICATION FORM, SUBMIT A VARIANCE REQUEST, NOTING THAT HE HAS NO ACCESS TO HIS NEIGHBOR'S YARD THAT IS NEEDED TO INSTALL THE FENCE PICKETS ON THAT SIDE.

HIS NEIGHBOR HAS CALLED THE SHERIFF TWICE WHEN HE THOUGHT HE STEPPED ONTO HIS PROPERTY.

"HE CALLED THE SHERIFF WHEN MY REPAIR GUY PUT ONE FOOT ON HIS PROPERTY.

WITH THE FEAR OF BEING ARRESTED FOR TRESPASSING.

I CANNOT PUT THE PICKETS UP ON HIS SIDE OF THE FENCE.

I REQUESTED VARIANCE TO ALLOW ME TO REPAIR THE FENCE AS NEEDED, EVEN IF IT MEANS I HAVE TO PUT THE PICKETS ON MY SIDE." HE IDENTIFIES THAT THIS IS FOR THE TWO SECTIONS OF OF THE FENCE 12-14 FEET THAT FELL OVER DURING THE RECENT STORM.

HE DID HAVE TO FIX THE FENCE AS SOON AS HE COULD BECAUSE IT IS THE POOL BARRIER.

HIS FENCE GUY PUT THE TWO POSTS AND PICKETS IN FACING HIS SIDE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BARRIER WAS INTACT.

HE NOTES THAT THE INSTALLATION OF THE FENCE AND THE REPAIRS WERE ALL AT THE OWNER'S EXPENSE, WHICH WOULD BE THE PARKER'S AT 14 BOUGH LEAF.

HERE IS THE INSTALLATION OF THE FENCE.

THEN THE OWNER ALSO WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT THIS IS THE AREA WHERE THE POST WAS REPAIRED LAST YEAR.

THIS IS THE VIEW OF THE FENCE FROM THE INSIDE OF THE OWNER'S BACKYARD.

YOU'RE LOOKING OUT TOWARD THE THIS IS IN THE WAY, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE SURVEY, THERE IS A MARK FROM THE CORNER OF THE FOUNDATION OF THE HOUSE OUT TO THE PROPERTY LINE THAT IDENTIFIES THAT THERE IS FIVE FEET FIVE INCHES FROM THE HOUSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE, OR 65 INCHES.

THE MEASUREMENT OF WHERE THE FENCE TO THE WALL IS LOCATED IN THE AREA THAT WAS REPAIRED MEASURES AT 68.5 INCHES, AND THEN FURTHER BACK IN THE CORNER IT GOES ABOUT 70 INCHES.

SO THERE IS A 3-5 INCH DISCREPANCY WHERE THE INSTALLATION IS ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY LOFT.

THE FOLLOWING IS PHOTOS THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY THE OWNER, KEN PARKER, AND I DO HAVE HIS PRESENTATION AVAILABLE FOR YOU, AND THEN FOLLOWING THAT, I ALSO HAVE ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US BY THE NEIGHBOR, YACOBOVICH.

I CAN GO THROUGH THAT OR I CAN STOP AT THIS POINT, SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND THEN BE AVAILABLE TO GO THROUGH THIS WHEN THOSE CALLERS ARE ON THE LINE.

>> ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

>> WELL, FOR KIM. IT LOOKS LIKE SOME OTHER REPAIRS WERE DONE IN CERTAIN PICKETS, THAT THE PICKETS ARE HIGHER THAN THE ORIGINAL FENCE.

ARE WE SEEING THAT ALSO IN SOME OF THE PICTURES?

>> IN THE CURRENT PHOTOS THAT I HAVE SEEN, BOTH FOR THE TWO PANELS THAT WERE REPLACED, AND AS YOU GO DOWN THE RUN OF THE FENCE, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY ARE ALL AT CONSISTENT HEIGHT.

BRET MAY NEED TO CHIME IN ON THIS ONE FOR ME, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE PICKETS THAT WERE REPAIRED PREVIOUSLY, WHICH WERE SHOWN TALLER WERE INSTALLED AT THAT HEIGHT AND THEN CUT TO MEET THE HEIGHT OF THE OTHER PICKETS.

IS THAT CORRECT, BRET, DO YOU RECALL?

>> I BELIEVE THAT TO BE THE CASE, THERE HAVE BEEN OVER THERE, I GUESS A YEAR AND A HALF AS KIM MENTIONED, THAT WE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS, THERE HAVE BEEN PICKET SET THAT HAVE FALLEN OFF.

THERE'S BEEN ONGOING DISPUTES RELATED TO HOW THOSE PICKETS WOULD BE REATTACHED.

AS KIM MENTIONED, THERE IS SUCH A ACRIMONIOUS DISPUTE BETWEEN THESE TWO OWNERS THAT ONE WILL NOT ALLOW THE OTHER ANYWHERE NEAR THEIR PROPERTY.

[01:05:02]

SO WHEN PICKETS FALL OFF, THE NEIGHBOR WHOSE YARD THEY FALL INTO ISN'T REALLY INTERESTED IN PUTTING THEM BACK UP, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A POOL BARRIER.

THEY'VE BEEN ATTACHED FROM THE REAR SIDE FROM THE 14 BOUGH LEAF BACK.

MY GUESS IS THERE HASN'T BEEN REAL EXACTING MEASUREMENTS MADE WITH REGARD TO HOW TALL THOSE ARE.

SO YOU'RE CORRECT, THERE'S PROBABLY SOME INCONSISTENCIES, AN INCH OR TWO ALONG THE WAY, AND SOME CUTS THAT WERE MADE TO TRY TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT.

>> THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT ALL THESE PICTURES AND YOU READ THE STORY BEHIND THIS, IS THIS FENCE REALLY HAVE INTEGRITY SINCE IT'S SO OLD AT 25 YEARS? THAT'S THE IMPRESSION I WALK AWAY WHEN I LOOK AT ALL THE DATA THAT STAFF HAS PROVIDED AND HAVE READ THE STORY.

>> IF I MAY, AND BRET, PLEASE SAY IF THIS IS ACCURATE.

THAT QUESTION WAS BROUGHT FORWARD IN 2018-2019 WHEN REPAIRS WERE NEEDED TO PORTIONS OF THE PICKETS.

THE QUESTION FROM THE NEIGHBOR CAME ABOUT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE FENCE WAS INTACT.

RELYING ON THE STANDARDS, WE USE THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE FENCE TO MEET CODE AND PASS FINAL INSPECTION.

SO THE OWNER OF 14 BOUGH LEAF, AFTER THE REPAIRS WERE MADE, ENGAGED WITH AN INSPECTOR, AND THE INSPECTOR DID PROVIDE US WITH A FINAL INSPECTION, NOTING THAT THE FENCE MET CODE AND PASSED FINAL INSPECTION.

NOW, ALL OF THAT WAS PRIOR TO THIS MOST IMMEDIATE MODIFICATION TO THE TWO PANELS AS A RESULT OF THE STORM BLOWING IT DOWN.

BUT THE QUESTION OF THAT OVERALL FENCE PRIOR TO THOSE TWO GOING DOWN WAS BROUGHT FORWARD AND WAS PASSED WITH A FINAL INSPECTION FROM A THIRD PARTY QUALIFIED INSPECTOR.

FOLLOWING THE ACTION ON THIS FENCE PERMIT, THE OWNER WOULD NEED TO GO FORWARD AND OBTAIN A QUALIFIED INSPECTION AS A SECURE POOL BARRIER.

ACTUALLY, ANYONE WHO USES THIS FENCE AS A PORTION OF A POOL BARRIER WOULD NEED TO OBTAIN A CURRENT INSPECTION REPORT TO IDENTIFY THAT IT MEETS CODE AND PASSES FINAL INSPECTION.

HE HAS TO FIRST GET THE PERMIT, WHICH IS WHY IT'S COMING FORWARD HERE.

>> THANK YOU

>> YEAH. KIM DID A GREAT JOB OF EXPLAINING THIS EXACTLY RIGHT.

THERE HAVE BEEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY THE OWNER AT 18 BOUGH LEAF AS TO THE OVERALL INTEGRITY OF THIS FENCE.

THERE HAD BEEN REPAIRS MADE OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS AS WE'VE BEEN INVOLVED AND AS KIM MENTIONED, THERE WAS AN INSPECTION A YEAR AND A HALF AGO THAT DID INDICATE THAT IT WAS A COMPLIANT POOL BARRIER FENCE AT THAT TIME.

NOW, AS WE ALL KNOW, WE CAN'T BE OUT THERE AND DON'T SEND INSPECTORS OUT EVERY WEEK TO DETERMINE WHETHER THAT CONTINUES.

THERE'S ONGOING DISPUTE BETWEEN THESE TWO NEIGHBORS AS TO THE INTEGRITY OF THIS FENCE,

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT UPDATE AND SUMMARY.

>> OKAY. KIM, I THINK YOU'VE EXPLAINED TO US VERY WELL, IS THE HOMEOWNER PRESENT AND IS THE OPPOSING NEIGHBOR PRESENT ALSO?

>> YES. I HAVE BOTH CALLS AND I WILL GO AHEAD AND ENGAGE WITH WHAT I BELIEVE IS THE HOMEOWNER FIRST.

>> WITH THE HOMEOWNER GO FIRST, THREE MINUTES, IN ORDER FOR US TO HEAR HIS SIDE OF IT.

>> DOUBLE CLARIFICATION.

I'M KIM PARKER, 14 BOUGH LEAF.

YOU TALKED ABOUT THE FENCE INTEGRITY.

THE ONLY REPAIRS THAT WERE MADE WAS ONE BROKEN POST, PRIOR TO THE STORM BLOWING THESE TWO SECTIONS DOWN.

YEAH, WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE PICKETS JUST COME LOOSE AND FALL TOWARDS MY NEIGHBOR'S, WHO REFUSES TO NAIL THEM BACK IN.

SO I HAVE TO KEEP A POOL BARRIER, PULL THEM ON MY SIDE AND PUT THEM IN FROM MY SIDE, AND ARE ALL THE SAME HEIGHT AS THEY WERE BEFORE.

BRET MENTIONED IN DIFFERENT HEIGHTS.

MY NEIGHBOR HAS NAILED PICKETS ON HIS SIDE, AND THEN CUT THEM DOWN AND THEY ARE FOUR INCHES TALLER.

BUT NOW THIS NEW SECTION HE SAYS, "FELL DOWN AND IT DID GET KNOCKED DOWN.

PUT IT IN THERE WITH THE WIND GUSTS WERE.

PUT IT RIGHT BACK UP. THE NEXT WITHIN TWO DAYS HAD SOMEONE AFTER DO IT." BUT I CANNOT STEP ON HIS PROPERTY TO DO ANYTHING.

HE'S CALLED THE COPS ON ME, THEY'VE TOLD HIM TO MAINTAIN HIS SIDE.

BUT HIS FIRST INITIAL PROBLEM WAS HIS FENCE WAS DIRTY, AND IT IS, IT'S BLACK, MOLD, AND MILDEW.

SO WHEN I POWER WASH MINE EVERY TWO YEARS, MY FENCE LOOKS BRAND NEW.

THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE STRUCTURE PART OF IT, IT'S STRICTLY COSMETIC.

HE TALKED ABOUT NAILS STICKING OUT.

THERE ARE THE HEADS OF THE NAILS ON HIS SIDE AND THEY'RE NOT EVEN CONNECTED TO A RAIL,

[01:10:04]

THEY ARE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM, SOMEONE PUT THEM THERE.

I DON'T THINK THEY ARE STILL THEY THERE, I THINK THE POLICEMEN TOLD ME HE PULLED THEM OUT.

BUT HE TOLD ME I CANNOT GO ON HIS PROPERTY, HE'S TOLD THE TOWNSHIP I CAN'T GO ON HIS PROPERTY, SO I CANNOT MAINTAIN PICKETS ON HIS SIDE GOING FORWARD, BUT THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH HIS FENCE.

>> KEN, I DO HAVE YOUR PRESENTATION.

SO IF YOU WANT ME TO GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH THE SLIDES, YOU CAN JUST TELL ME WHEN TO GO INTO THE NEXT ONE AND I'LL JUST GO STRAIGHT THROUGH IT.

>> I CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT NUMBERS BECAUSE IT'S WAY BEHIND ON YOUR DEALINGS.

>> SO OKAY. START ON NUMBER 2.

>> NUMBER 2.

>> I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. THE DELAY BETWEEN THE LIVE FEED.

>> THIRTY SECONDS.

>> ABSOLUTELY. THE CURRENT PHOTO THAT I'M SHOWING IS THE PHOTO THAT HAS THE TAG, "THIS IS MY DILAPIDATED FENCE AS SEEN FROM MY BACKYARD AFTER I POWER WASHED IT." IT'S A VIEW

>> OKAY. HE FIRST NOTIFIED ME THAT HIS FENCE WAS IN BAD SHAPE AND DIRTY.

YOU CAN SEE MY SPOT RIGHT THERE, AND THE FENCE HE'S TALKING ABOUT IS JUST RIGHT OF THAT TREE ON HIS SIDE.

YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE AT THE CLOSE-UP FOR THIS SECTION, THAT'S ACTUALLY THE POST THAT WAS BROKEN AND WE DIDN'T KNOW IT.

>> "THIS IS MY NEIGHBOR'S VIEW OF THE SAME SECTION OF FENCE.''

>> THAT'S NUMBER 4, THAT'S HIS VIEW.

HE DOES NOT POWER WASH OR CLEAN HIS SIDE OF THE FENCE AND IT DOES LOOK UGLY.

THAT'S NOT MY PROBLEM.

GO TO NUMBER 5 AND TELL HER REASONS THREE MONTHS

>> I'M ON THE NEXT ONE FOR NUMBER 5 THAT CIRCLES THE AREA OF THE

>> THAT SHOWS YOU THE POST THAT WAS BROKEN.

A SATELLITE JUST FELL DOWN THERE, IN THE SAME SPOT.

NOW, IT'S LIKE THREE SECTIONS OVER TO THE LEFT AFTER THAT WAS REPAIRED. GO TO NUMBER 8.

>> CURRENTLY SHOWING THE REPAIRED POST IN 2019.

>> NOW, GO DOWN TO NUMBER 8, IT SHOW HOW FAR OVER THERE THE NEW PART THAT FELL DOWN WAS FURTHER DOWN.

>> HERE'S THE INSPECTION REPORT THAT PASSED FINAL INSPECTION IN APRIL 2019.

>> GO TO NUMBER 8.

>> NEXT ONE SAYS, "STORM DAMAGE AREA," WHICH IS THE IDENTIFIER WITH THE ARROW TO THE LEFT.

>> OKAY. NOW, IT SHOWS YOU THE TWO PANELS THAT WENT DOWN, NOT THE SAME ONE THAT WAS REPAIRED BEFORE, DIFFERENT SECTIONS.

>> TWO PANELS THAT WENT DOWN FURTHER DOWN.

NOW, IT'S ON THE PHOTO ON MAY 27TH OF THE TWO PANELS THAT ARE DOWN.

>> OKAY.

>> NOW, I'M AT THE

>> PUT THEM BACK UP.

>> OF THE STORM, AND THE TEMPERATURE, AND PRECIPITATION, AND WINDS.

>> OKAY. IN 12 IS ALL I ASK FOR.

YOU'VE ALREADY READ THAT, THAT I ASKED FOR PERMISSION TO PUT IT UP IN A HURRY AND THEN GO TO NUMBER 13, THAT'S THE FENCE UP THERE.

>> THERE'S THE INSTALLATION.

>> IT'S SIX-FOOT PICKET. IT'S JUST OUR ALL PICKETS ARE JUST SHORT.

ALL I KNOW, THEY PUT FIVE-AND-A-HALF INCH OR WHATEVER.

>> THEN HERE'S THE FURTHER

>> THE THREE MINUTES ARE UP.

>> OKAY.

>> IT'S COSMETIC ON HIS SIDE.

YOU CAN GO DOWN TO THE NUMBER 19.

THAT'S WHAT HE WAS COMPLAINING ABOUT PICKETS COMING IN.

SLOW DOWN AND BACK UP, THE SECOND PHOTO TO THE RIGHT ON 19 SHOWS THE NAILS STICKING OUT, THE LOWER OF THE HORIZONTAL RAILING.

>> HERE IT IS.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHY THOSE WERE THERE.

THAT'S ON HIS SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

SOMEBODY WAS PUTTING BALLOON OR SOMETHING.

I GOT NO IDEA. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL PHOTO OF WHAT I WAS TOLD THAT.

THE SHERIFF'S DEPUTY PULLED THEM OUT WITH HIS HAND.

IF YOU GO TO NUMBER 20 AND THAT IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT TREE THAT YOU SEE, WHERE THE POST THAT GOES TOWARD THE SIDE, NUMBER 18 SIDE.

THE REST OF HIS FENCE IS NOT BLACK.

IT'S JUST WHERE ONE SPRINKLER HEAD HITS AN OLD WATER IN THERE SO IT JUST STAYS WET ALL THE TIME.

IT'S LIKE NOTHING I CAN DO ABOUT THIS SPRINKLER SYSTEM HERE.

>> NOW, WE'RE ON THE HIGHLIGHTED PORTION OF THE STANDARDS SLIDE.

>> I JUST SAID THAT PEOPLE ARE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN INSIDE OF THEIR PROPERTY.

YOU ALL HAVE STUFF ON THEIR SIDE ABOUT, DEALING WITH MILDEW OUT HERE IN THE WOODLAND.

THE PEOPLE HAD TOLD HIM, THE SHERIFF TOLD HIM TO PUT BLEACH ON WHICH WATER OR TO GET IT POWER WASHED.

AGAIN, HE REFUSES. HE EVEN IN FACT, ON HIM FOR CUSSING ON THE FENCE WHEN THEY HAD A PARTY GOING ON WITH PEOPLE OUTSIDE.

THE SHERIFF CAME BACK OVER AND BORROWED THE HAMMER FROM ME AND WOULD NAILED THE PICKET FENCE IN FOR HIM.

>> NOW, WE'RE ON THE SLIDE WITH THE CRIMINAL TRESPASS.

>> ALL RIGHT, MR, PARKER, CAN I

>> WHAT? ONCE I'VE BEEN NOTIFIED THAT THEY TOLD ME THAT'S ALL IT TAKES, NOTIFIED THE FENCE THAT YOU CAN'T GO ON THAT THING.

WHEN HE THOUGHT I'VE BEEN ON THE PROPERTY, HE CALLED THE COPS.

[01:15:01]

>>

>> YEAH, THE REST OF IT IS FOR THE OTHER FENCE, THAT'S NOT FOR

>> OKAY. THAT IS THE CONCLUSION FOR MR. PARKER'S FENCE.

>> THAT'S IT.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. PARKER.

OKAY, THE OPPOSING RESIDENT.

>> YES.

>> YEAH, BORIS?

>> CALLER,

>> YEAH, YOU MUTED ME THAN UNMUTED ME.

>> I APOLOGIZE. HOLD ON.

OKAY, CALLER ENDING IN 1,1,3,5.

ARE YOU MR. YACOBOVICH?

>> YES, I AM.

>> OKAY. I HAVE THE PRESENTATION THAT YOU PROVIDED AND IF YOU WANT TO LET ME KNOW, WE CAN GO THROUGH FROM THE START.

I'M ON YOUR FIRST SLIDE WHICH SAYS, "DEAR BOARD."

>> OKAY. GO AHEAD.

>> OKAY. GO AHEAD. THIS IS YOUR PRESENTATION.

I'M ON YOUR FIRST SLIDE WITH THE BULLET POINT ADDRESSING THE BOARD.

>> I THINK THERE IS A DELAY.

I'M WATCHING ON THE NEWS.

I JUST WANT TO SAY, "GOOD EVENING, ESTEEMED MEMBERS OF THE BOARD." I JUST HEARD KEN PARKER PRESENTATION.

I STILL SEE PRESENTATION SUBMITTED.

I THINK THERE'S A DELAY, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SAY, FIRST OF ALL, EVERYTHING KEN PARKER SAID IS A LIE.

THE FIRST THING THAT THE BOARD ADDRESSED, HOW UNSAFE THE FENCE WAS? TO FOOL THE BOARD, HE ACTUALLY PRESSURE WASHED ON HIS SIDE.

IF YOU SEE THE PICTURE, HE TOOK IT FROM FAR AWAY, AND HIS WHOLE POINT WAS THAT, "HEY, LOOK HOW FINE IT IS ON MY SIDE AND WHAT IS HE COMPLAINING?" HE JUST PUT A LIPSTICK ON A PIG.

I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS FENCE IS 26 PLUS YEARS OLD.

OH, I NEED TO MENTION THAT I AM A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, LICENSED AND REGISTERED IN TEXAS.

I AM MECHANICAL WITH SPECIALTY OF THERMODYNAMICS.

ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO, I WOULD NOTICE THAT THE FENCE WAS LEANING.

THERE WERE NUMBER OF NAILS, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM OUR PICTURES, JUST STICKING OUT AND IT WAS NOT SAFE.

MY SON IS HERE.

HE CAN ATTEST TO IT AND SAY SOMETHING IF YOU WANT.

>> WE NEED A SAFE FENCE.

>> HE SAID, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HEARD IT.

WE NEED A SAFE FENCE.

THREE YEARS AGO, THE FENCE BECAME JUST COMPLETELY UNBEARABLE.

IT'S NOT A COSMETIC.

IT'S JUST 26 YEARS OLD, COMPLETELY DILAPIDATED, ROTTED OUT ON THE BOTTOM.

ALSO, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE FENCE HEIGHT.

SO OVER THE 26 YEARS, KEN PARKER'S FENCE HAD LOST ABOUT HALF A FOOT TO A FOOT IN HEIGHT DUE TO THE ROT.

IT JUST ROTTED OUT ON THE BOTTOM AND IF YOU CAN SEE IT FROM SOME OF THE PICTURES, IT JUST COMPLETELY HAS PIECES MISSING.

IT'S CHEWED UP ON THE TOP OF IT.

ALSO, I WANT TO ADDRESS THAT WE BOUGHT THIS HOUSE FOR 10 YEARS, AND WE WERE NICE NEIGHBORS.

FOR YEARS, I ACTUALLY HAMMERED THE NAILS BACK INTO THE FENCE.

WE DID THAT PART BECAUSE WHAT WE WERE HOPING THAT COMES WHEN WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE, IT WAS ALREADY VERY DILAPIDATED.

WE WERE HOPING THAT KEN PARKER WOULD TAKE OWNERSHIP OF IT.

SO ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO, I LOOKED AT THE FENCE.

IT WAS LEADING ON OUR SIDE.

IT HAD A BROKEN POST.

IT HAD A MULTIPLE NAIL STICKING OUT.

I SAID, "THIS IS NOT GOOD FOR MY CHILDREN." IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THIS FENCE IS ABOUT SIX FEET AWAY FROM OUR POOL BARRIER.

IT'S VERY CLOSE, THE FINISHED SIDE.

EVERY TIME I HAD TO REMIND MY CHILDREN, "HEY, CAN YOU PLEASE BE CAREFUL AROUND THE FENCE BECAUSE THERE ARE NAILS." WE'D PUT THE NAILS BACK IN BUT THE WOOD IS ROTTED AND NAILS WOULD NOT STAY IN THE WOOD.

THOSE FENCE ARE TYPICALLY ON THE TEXAS SUN.

THEY ARE MEANT TO BE MAYBE 10 TO 15 YEARS AND THEN YOU GOT TO REPLACE IT.

THIS ONE IS ABOUT 26 YEARS OLD.

BASED ON THE FEEDBACK THAT I GOT FROM LOOKED AT THEIR REGIONAL PICTURES.

KEN PARKER MIGHT HAVE CONSTRUCTED IT OUT OF USED MATERIALS BECAUSE ON THE PICTURES IT LOOKS VERY USED.

I DON'T KNOW WHO PUT IT IN.

I NEED TO MENTION ONE MORE THING.

IN MY PRESENTATION, YOU CAN SEE THAT IN 2017, I FINALLY SEND THE E-MAIL TO KEN PARKER AND I ASKED KEN,

[01:20:02]

PLEASE REPLACE IT AND WE'LL NEGOTIATE AT VERY GOOD RATE.

IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ONLY $900, INCLUDING THE GATE TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE FENCE.

KEN PARKER CHOSE TO IGNORE OUR E-MAIL, DID NOT REPLY.

THEN LATER I ASKED HIM VERBALLY.

HE SAID, "HEY, I'M SAVING MONEY FOR WEDDING.

CAN WE JUST POSTPONE IT FOR THREE MONTHS?" WE SAID OKAY.

FEW MONTHS LATER, I REALIZED THAT I ASKED AGAIN.

KEN PARKER SAID, "BECAUSE LAST TIME I PAID FOR THE WHOLE FENCE MYSELF," WHICH IS I DON'T THINK THAT'S TRUE, "BUT THIS TIME I WANT YOU TO PAY FOR THE ENTIRE FENCE AND PICK THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE TOWARDS YOU." WELL, IT WOULDN'T BE SAFE BECAUSE THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE WOULD BE ONLY SIX FEET AWAY FROM OUR POOL AND IT JUST WOULDN'T BE SAFE FOR MY CHILDREN.

HONESTLY, WHY WOULD HE NOT PROPOSE SUCH AN UNEQUITABLE PREPOSITION? US, TO PAY FOR THE ENTIRE FENCE AND ALSO, TAKE THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE TOWARDS OUR SIDE.

I MEAN, COME ON.

SO I STARTED RESEARCHING THE SUBJECT.

I REACHED OUT VICKY, WELL, TO HER OFFICE AND I WAS LIKE, "WHAT ARE THE RULES?" THAT'S HOW I LEARNED THAT APPARENTLY THE FENCE BELONGS TO KEN PARKER.

THIS WAS ON HIS PROPERTY AND HE OWNS IT.

SEE, IF WE OWNED IT, WE WOULD HAVE REPLACED IT YEARS AGO.

BUT HE, KEN PARKER, REFUSED TO REPLACE IT.

HE CHOSE TO FOOL THE BOARD, HE PRESSURE WASHED IT, PUTTING LIPSTICK ON THAT PIG AND MADE IT LOOK LIKE, "OH, YEAH, THIS WAS GREAT ON MY SIDE." IT'S ALL HIS FAULT.

HE SHOULD BE THE ONE PUTTING NAILS IN IT.

HE SHOULD BE THE ONE PUTTING SCREWS IN IT.

SO YOU SEE HOW HE PLAYED THE WHOLE PICTURE AND

>> CAN I GET YOU INTERRUPTED, PLEASE?

>> YES, SIR.

>> I JUST WANTED TO FINISH UP, AND MAY I SAY JUST ONE MORE THING.

DURING THE LAST REPAIR, WE DID ALLOW THE CONTRACTORS ON OUR SIDE.

WE DIDN'T KNOW THEY WERE COMING, BUT AFTER TALKING TO SHERIFF, BECAUSE I WANTED THE CONTRACTORS TO BE BONDED AND INSURED, BECAUSE IT'S A HEAVY CONSTRUCTION AND HEAVY LIFTING.

WE DIDN'T WANT ANYONE INJURED ON OUR PROPERTY.

THEY CAME IN. AT FIRST, THEY PRETENDED NOT TO SPEAK ENGLISH, BUT THEN THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE NOT BONDED AND INSURED.

I ASKED TO STOP THE CONSTRUCTION.

BUT THEN AFTER TALKING TO THE SHERIFF, I ALLOWED THE CONSTRUCTION.

BUT KEN PARKER (PHONETIC) REVERSED HIS SIDE OF THE TERMS PURELY OUT OF HATE.

>> OKAY.

>> I'M SORRY, BUT WE'RE DEALING WITH ANTI SEMITES.

ANYWAY, NONE OF THIS IS RELEVANT OR IRRELEVANT. I JUST WANT TO SAY

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU.

COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, GUYS?

>> DO WE HAVE A RECOMMENDED MOTION?

>> YES, WE DO. STAFF AND LEGAL.

>> I GUESS TO CLARIFY ONE ITEM JUST TO MAKE SURE WHEN MR. PARKER SUBMITTED HIS APPLICATION, HE PROVIDED A SURVEY, WHICH I THINK KIM POINTED OUT IN HER RUNNING THROUGH THIS, THAT THIS FENCE IS LOCATED ON MR. YACOBOVICH'S (PHONETIC) PROPERTY BY SOMEWHERE, KIM, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, 5-6 OR SEVEN INCHES OVER THE ENTIRE LENGTH. YOU'RE MUTED KIM.

>> SORRY ABOUT THAT. BASED ON THE MEASUREMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE HOMEOWNER, WHICH HE IDENTIFIED HERE, IT APPEARS AS THOUGH IT'S BETWEEN 3 AND 5 INCHES, IS WHAT IT ENDED UP BEING.

THE SURVEY SHOWS IT ABOUT A FOOT OFF, BUT KEN DID TAKE MEASUREMENTS WHICH YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT BRING IT TO JUST A LITTLE OVER 68.5 IN THE MIDSECTION.

THEN THE NEXT PHOTO IS JUST ABOUT 70 AT THE REAR, AND THEY'RE 65 INCHES FROM THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

>> TO BE CLEAR AND MAKE SURE THE COMMITTEE UNDERSTANDS THIS, WHEN THIS FENCE WAS CONSTRUCTED IN THE MID '90S, IT WAS CONSTRUCTED BY THE HOME BUILDER.

MR. PARKER SAYS HE PAID FOR IT.

IT APPEARS HE DID BECAUSE THE APPLICATION IS UNDER HIS NAME FOR THIS FENCE.

HIS HOUSE WAS THERE BEFORE THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE.

IT WAS CONSTRUCTED A FEW INCHES INTO MR. YUKOBOVICH'S YARD,

[01:25:05]

SO I THINK MR. YUKOBOVICH SAID IT'S ON KIM PARKER'S PROPERTY.

THAT IS FALSE. IT IS NOT.

IT IS ON MR. YUKOBOVICH'S PROPERTY.

ALSO, THE OTHER THING I WOULD POINT OUT BEFORE THE COMMITTEE CONSIDERS THIS IS, THIS IS A POOL BARRIER FOR BOTH PROPERTIES.

IT WAS CONSTRUCTED ORIGINALLY BY ONE HOMEOWNER, BUT IT DOES SERVE AS THE POOL BARRIER FOR BOTH.

AS WE ALL KNOW, IN 99.99 PERCENT OF THE CASES IN THE WOODLANDS, THERE'S ONE COMMON POOL BARRIER BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO HAVE POOLS AND THEY WORK IT OUT, AND FIGURE IT OUT, AND BUILD A FENCE ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE IN A MANNER, THESE TWO NEIGHBORS FOR, AT LEAST, A YEAR AND A HALF, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THIS, HAD BEEN UNABLE TO DO SO.

>> IT'S COSTING THE TOWNSHIP A LOT OF MONEY TOO

>> I AGREE, AND TIME.

>> THIS IS THE TIME AND MONEY.

HAS EVERYBODY ON THE COMMITTEE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO READ THE RECOMMENDED MOTION?

>> READING IT RIGHT NOW.

>> HELLO?

>> WE'RE TRYING TO FIND IT.

>> KIM, WILL YOU READ THE RECOMMENDED MOTION, PLEASE.

>> THE RECOMMENDATION, WHICH WAS REVIEWED BY YOUR STAFF AND LEGAL COUNSEL, WAS TO DENY THE VARIANCE AS PRESENTED AND REQUIRE THE OWNER REVISE AND RESUBMIT AN APPLICATION WITH A MARKED SURVEY THAT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REGARDING HEIGHT, DESIGN, AND LOCATION.

THE COMMITTEE WILL GRANT A VARIANCE FOR THE FACE ORIENTATION OF THE FENCE TO BE CONSTRUCTED SMOOTH SIDE IN AND ALLOWING THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE MEMBERS TO FACE OUTWARD FROM THE LOT ON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: THE RESIDENT PAYING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FENCE MAY HAVE THE SMOOTH SIDE FACING THEM TO REMOVE ANY TRESPASSING CONCERNS DURING INSTALLATION AND FOR EASE OF FUTURE REPAIRS TO ANY PICKETS, NO PORTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE MEMBERS MAY BE VISIBLE TO THE STREET, AND THE FENCE MUST MEET CODE AND PASS FINAL INSPECTION.

THEN THERE'S ALSO AN INCLUSION, WHICH IS PART OF YOUR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BUT A GOOD REMINDER IS, "PLEASE BE ADVISED A PORTION OF THE EXISTING SHARED FENCE IS DESIGNATED AS THE SECURITY BARRIER FOR MORE THAN ONE PROPERTY.

ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WHO USE A PORTION OF SHARED PROPERTY LINE FENCING AS THEY'RE SECURE POOL BARRIER ARE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A NEW CODE INSPECTION BY A THIRD PARTY QUALIFIED INSPECTOR.

ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WILL BE ADVISED TO OBTAIN A NEW CODE INSPECTION FOR THEIR ADDRESS AND THEIR POOL TO DETERMINE THAT THE SHARED FENCE MEETS CODE AND PASSES A FINAL INSPECTION.

ADDITIONALLY, IT IS ADVISED THAT ANY OWNER OF A POOL BARRIER BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL TEMPORARY SECURITY BARRIER FENCING ANYTIME A PORTION OF THE PERMANENT SECURE BARRIER FENCING IS COMPROMISED, REMOVED, OR REBUILT." THAT'S JUST A NOTATION FROM THE STANDARD WHICH WILL AID IN ANY FUTURE CONSTRUCTION.

>> KIM, I'M OKAY WITH MOST OF THE RECOMMENDED MOTION.

BUT WHY CAN'T A CONTRACTOR BUILD THE FENCE SO THAT THE SMOOTH SIDE IS TO THE NON-OWNER OF THE FENCE AND INSTALL IT IN PANELS?

>> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT EVEN IF YOU WERE TO WHAT? MARY, WHAT'S WRONG? MARY'S HAVING TROUBLE WITH HER

>> AUDIO?

>> YEAH, HER AUDIO.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE IS ISSUES WITH TRESPASS AND IN ORDER TO INSTALL A FENCE WITH THE SMOOTH SIDE OUT, THE INSTALLER HAS TO ACCESS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT INSTALLATION.

>> WELL, YES, THAT'S IF YOU BUILD IT IN A CONVENTIONAL WAY.

>> THAT'S THE EXPERIENCE THAT WE'VE IT WAS RECENTLY FOR TWO PROPERTIES THAT YOU REVIEWED WERE A STORAGE SHED WAS INVOLVED AND IT WAS A SIMILAR SCENARIO OF BEING ABLE TO ACCESS THE -

>> WE HAD ONE ABOUT A YEAR AGO OR TWO, WHERE THE OWNERS COULDN'T AGREE AND THIS WAS THE SOLUTION.

>> OKAY.

>> RIGHT APPROACH. I'M GOING TO SEE THESE TWO HOMEOWNERS ARE NOT GOING TO WORK TOGETHER TO TRY TO GET THIS UP, SO I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDED MOTION.

[01:30:05]

>> I'LL SECOND THAT. IF THE NON OWNER OF THE FENCE WANTS A SMOOTH SIDE, THEN HE CAN PUT HIS OWN PICKETS UP SINCE THEY CAN'T WORK IT OUT AS TWO NEIGHBORS.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY , AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES.

>> JUST TO COMMENT, I'D LIKE TO THANK STAFF AND OUR ATTORNEY FOR ALL THE WORK THAT THEY HAD TO PUT IN THIS TO GET US TO THIS POINT.

IT SURE IS DEMONSTRABLE THAT IT'S BEEN VERY TIME CONSUMING TO GET THIS RESOLVED.

SO WE THANK YOU FOR THAT EFFORT.

>> YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR EFFORT ON THIS.

>> APPRECIATE IT, COMMITTEE.

>> ALL RIGHT. CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT ONE?

>> YES, SIR.

OKAY. NEXT ITEM WOULD BE ITEM NUMBER 4,

[Item VIII 4]

WHICH IS 106 SOUTH BANTAM WOODS CIRCLE, ARE YOU ALL SEEING THE POWERPOINT ON YOUR SCREEN?

>> YES.

>> OKAY.

>> BEFORE WE GO TO THAT, BRET IS THERE ANY OTHER ISSUE YOU WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN OR?

>> I WAS JUST TEXTING KIM ON THAT FRONT.

I THINK THAT IS THE LAST ONE.

JUST MENTIONED, KIM, THERE WAS A TRADEMARK ISSUE.

DID THAT ISSUE GET RESOLVED BEFORE THE MEETING?

>> I THINK IT DID.

>> YEAH. BRET, THANK YOU FOR ASKING.

WE WERE ABLE TO COORDINATE WITH BRIAN ALBERT, AND WITH CONLEY ROSE AND COME WITH AN AGREEMENT THAT WAS BOTH IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMMITTEE'S NEEDS AND WITH THE QUICK CAR SO, WE'RE GOOD TO GO ON THAT ONE. THANK YOU.

>> PERFECT. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT, GENTLEMEN HAVE A GREAT EVENING AND I WILL SIGN OFF.

>>

>> THANK YOU.

>> MARY, ARE YOU ABLE TO COME BACK?

>> YES I AM BACK.

>>ALL RIGHT, WELL, I'M GLAD EVERYBODY IS ONBOARD NOW.

>> ALL RIGHT, 106 SOUTH BANTAM WOODS CIRCLE, IT'S IN THE VILLAGE OF STERLING RIDGE, AND THIS WAS A COLOR CHANGE TO A DRIVEWAY.

IT'S ALREADY EXISTING.

HERE IS YOUR SECTION MAP AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE PURPLE IS THE LOT OF THE STAIN DRIVEWAY.

WE DID RECEIVE ONE LETTER THAT SUPPORTS THE VARIANCE, AND ANOTHER HERE'S YOUR AERIAL PHOTO.

IT DOES BACK UP TO BRANCH CROSSING.

THIS IS THE SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY, AND YOU CAN SEE THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED AREA IS THE DRIVEWAY.

THIS DRIVEWAY, ORIGINALLY BACK IN 2010, WAS APPROVED TO BE PAINTED A TAN OR GRAY COLOR, AND THE CURRENT OWNER PAINTED IT GRAY.

THEY WERE ATTEMPTING TO SELL THEIR PROPERTY, AND THE REALTOR ADVISED THEM TO PAINT THE DRIVEWAY.

THIS IS A FRONT VIEW OF THE HOME, YOUR LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE, MORE VIEWS OF THAT, AND THIS PHOTO SHOWS YOU THE OLD DRIVEWAY.

YOU CAN SEE HOW PATCHY IT IS WHERE THE OLD PAINT WAS PEELING, OR FADING, AND THIS IS THE NEW DRIVEWAY.

ONE THING I FORGOT TO DO WAS TO ASK AND SEE IF THERE WAS SOMEBODY HERE IN REGARD TO THIS ITEM.

IS THERE A RESIDENT HERE IN REGARD TO THIS ITEM? 106 SOUTH BANTAM WOODS? HIT STAR NINE, PLEASE? YES, I DO SEE ONE.

WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO GO AHEAD AND HAVE THE HOMEOWNER SPEAK, OR THE CALLER SPEAK? COMMITTEE?

>> YES.

>> IS IT OKAY TO LET THE CALLER-

>> YES.

>> YES.

>> OKAY.

ARE YOU THE HOMEOWNER OR AFFECTED NEIGHBOR FOR 106 BANTAM WOODS?

>> I'M THE HOMEOWNER.

>> OKAY. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE, THEY ARE LISTENING.

>> YEAH. OKAY, WELL THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THE CASE.

MY NAME IS WE MOVED TO THE WOODLANDS FIVE YEARS BACK, AND AS KIM WAS SAYING THE ORIGINAL OWNER HAD PAINTED THE DRIVEWAY.

THE FIVE YEARS AS THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWED EARLIER THAT THE DRIVEWAY WAS WEARING OUT DUE TO WEAR AND TEAR AND IT WAS HAVING A PATCHY LOOK.

WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF RELOCATING DUE TO JOB MOVE,

[01:35:03]

AND NEEDED TO PUT THE HOUSE ON THE MARKET SO SOUGHT ADVICE FROM THE REAL ESTATE AGENT WHAT TO DO OF THE PATCHY DRIVEWAY, AND THEN HE SAID SINCE THE ORIGINAL THING WAS PAINTED, GO AHEAD AND PAINT.

HE SUGGESTED A CONTRACTOR, AND HE PICKED THE COLOR THAT CLOSELY MATCHES FRESH CONCRETE, AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PHOTO THAT'S DISPLAYED, IT LOOKS LIKE FRESH CONCRETE.

WE HAVE TALKED TO QUITE A FEW OF OUR NEIGHBORS AND THEY HAVE MENTIONED THAT IT LOOKS NICE AND GIVES THE LOOK OF NEW CONCRETE.

AGAIN, I DID NOT KNOW THAT WE NEEDED A PERMIT SO AS SOON AS WE WERE ALERTED, NEITHER THE REAL ESTATE AGENT OR THE CONTRACTOR ALERTED THAT WE NEEDED A PERMIT AS SOON AS I FOUND OUT, SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION IN GOOD FAITH AND ALL THE PRESENTATION IN TERMS OF THE PHOTOS AND ALL THAT WERE SUBMITTED AS WELL.

JUST TO MAKE SURE, I DO BELIEVE THAT IT PRESERVES THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DOES NOT CREATE ANY NEGATIVE NEIGHBOR IMPACT.

OUR INTENTION WAS NOT TO DO SO.

THE COLOR IS LIKE FRESH CONCRETE.

I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT THIS IS THE BEST, WAS THE BEST AVAILABLE OPTION, GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND I WOULD REQUEST THE COMMITTEE TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE, AND AGAIN, WE'RE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> ALL RIGHT,

>> DO WE HAVE OTHER DRIVEWAYS PAINTED?

>> WE DO BUT NOT IN THIS AREA.

>> AS THE RECOMMENDED MOTION IS TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED, MAINTAIN, REPAIR TO KEEP IN GOOD CONDITION?

>> YES, SIR.

>> AM I READING THAT CORRECTLY?

>> YES, SIR.

>> WE WILL TREAT THIS NO DIFFERENT THAN PAINTING ON A SIDE OF A HOUSE THAT NEEDED TO BE PAINTED.

WE WILL TREAT IT THE SAME WAY, CORRECT?

>> THAT'S TRUE.

>> OKAY.

>> I WOULD MAKE TO RECOMMEND A MOTION AS PRESENTED BY STAFF, MOTION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED, MAINTAIN, REPAIR TO KEEP IN GOOD CONDITION.

>> ALL RIGHT, DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> WOULD WE HAVE APPROVED THIS IF HE HADN'T ALREADY PAINTED IT? IF IT WAS AN UNPAINTED DRIVEWAY, WOULD WE HAVE APPROVED PAINTING A DRIVEWAY?

>> WELL, THERE'S OTHERS THAT HAVE BEEN PAINTED.

>> THAT HAD BEEN APPROVED BEFORE THEY DID IT?

>> I BELIEVE SO. WE HAVE HAD A COUPLE WHERE PEOPLE WANTED TO PAINT THEIR DRIVEWAYS.

>> ONE WAY BACK THAT WAS PAINTED A RED BRICK COLOR THAT WAS TOO BRIGHT.

WE BUT TO ME IF THE PHOTOGRAPH IS ACCURATE, LOOKS PRETTY GOOD.

>> LOOK, IN THE 19 YEARS I'VE BEEN ON OUR DRC, WE'VE HAD A FEW, NOT MANY.

MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO PAINT THE DRIVEWAY, BUT IF IT WAS PRESENTED AND MADE TO STANDARDS, WE WOULD APPROVE IT.

BUT IT DOES TAKE MAINTENANCE. YOU GOT TO MAINTAIN IT.

>> YEAH, IT'S TRUE.

>> A LOT OF WORK.

>> ALL RIGHT SO WE HAVE A MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSE?

>> NAY.

>> WHO'S THAT?

>>ANDERSON.

>> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER 16, 2 ARCHER OAKS.

[Item VIII 16]

IS THERE ANYBODY HERE WAITING TO SPEAK TO THE COMMITTEE FOR 2 ARCHER OAKS?

>> I WANT TO REMIND THEM HOW TO RAISE THEIR HAND.

>> PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

HIT STAR 9 IF YOU'RE HERE FOR 2 ARCHER OAKS.

OKAY. I DO NOT SEE ANYBODY FOR THAT, SO DO YOU WANT TO SKIP TO THE NEXT ONE?

>> NO, IT'S ALL RIGHT.

>> OR DO YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD WITH 2 ARCHER OAKS?

>> YEAH.

>> 2 ARCHER OAKS ACTUALLY WAS ON YOUR MEETING LAST MONTH FOR THE ISSUE OF WHETHER DOG BREEDING WAS ACTUALLY A BUSINESS OR WAS IT SOMETHING THAT SHE DID NOT NEED A PERMIT FOR.

[01:40:04]

THE COMMITTEE DETERMINED THEY DO NEED A PERMIT TO HAVE A DOG BREEDING BUSINESS, AT LEAST SHE DID.

SHE HAS SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION FOR THE DOG BREEDING BUSINESS.

THIS, AS YOU REMEMBER, IS IN STERLING RIDGE.

IT'S 2 ARCHER OAKS.

THIS IS YOUR SECTION MAP AND THEN YOUR AERIAL PHOTO.

THERE'S THE FRONT VIEW OF THE HOME.

THAT'S BETWEEN THE SIDES.

THE HOMEOWNER SUBMITTED THIS PHOTO.

SHE SAID TWO AREAS OF HER HOME WOULD BE USED WHEN SHE'S BREEDING THE DOGS.

THIS IS WHERE THE PUPPIES WILL BE WHELPED AND RAISED.

FOR THE FIRST 3-4 WEEKS, THIS BOX WILL BE IN HER BEDROOM, AND THEN THEY GET MOVED TO THE LIVING ROOM, AND IT'S IN A ROVER PIN.

SHE KEEPS THEM THERE ABOUT FOUR WEEKS.

THEN SHE SAID THAT THE DOGS ARE ONLY BROUGHT OUT ONTO THE PATIO TO BE POTTY-TRAINED.

THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL PHOTOS THAT WERE SENT IN BY AN AFFECTED NEIGHBOR OF ALL THE DOGS THAT WERE OUTSIDE.

IF YOU REMEMBER, THERE WERE ABOUT 12 OR 13 DOGS OUTSIDE AT ONE TIME AND YOU DETERMINED THAT WAS A VIOLATION OF THE STANDARDS.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THE HOMEOWNER IS ONLINE TO SPEAK.

SO THIS IS JUST FOR THE HOME BUSINESS OF DOG BREEDING.

>> NES, I DO SHOW THAT WE HAVE ONE CALLER ENDING IN 7525 THAT'S RAISED THEIR HAND.

>> OKAY.

>> I CAN UNMUTE THEM, IF YOU'D LIKE.

>> I GOT IT. CALLER 7525, ARE YOU CALLING IN REFERENCE TO 2 ARCHER OAKS?

>> I AM. THANK YOU.

SOMEHOW MY PHONE GOT WHERE I COULDN'T GET TO DO THAT.

>> IS THIS MS. DOWNEY?

>> IT IS, YES.

>> OKAY. GO AHEAD YOU CAN ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE.

>> I REALLY DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY, BUT I FELT LIKE I SHOULD BE HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS SHOULD THERE BE ANY.

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO, SIR.

>> ANY COMMENTS?

>> I GUESS A COMMENT OR A QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS, HOW MANY DOGS WILL BE OUTSIDE AT ANY ONE TIME? BECAUSE I THINK THAT WAS AN ITEM THAT CAME UP ON OUR LAST REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. YOU TOLD ME NOT TO HAVE ANY MORE THAN TWO AT A TIME, WHICH IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW NOW.

I WILL TELL YOU THIS TOO, AS A BREEDER, I ONLY HAVE THREE GIRLS THAT COULD BE BRED SO I WOULD NEVER HAVE MORE THAN THREE LITTERS AT THE MOST IN A GIVEN YEAR.

>> HOW MANY DOGS ARE IN A LITTER?

>> THREE, FOUR, FIVE, DEPENDING.

I'VE GOT SHELTIES, SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO USE LITTERS.

>> WITH THAT SIZE LITTER, YOU'RE STILL GOING TO BE ABLE TO KEEP TO THE TWO DOG MINIMUM AT ANY ONE TIME OUTSIDE?

>> CORRECT, YES, BECAUSE I NORMALLY WILL SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S SHOW-WORTHY, BECAUSE I DO SHOW DOGS.

IF SO, I MIGHT KEEP A DOG OUT OF THE LITTER.

IF THERE ARE MORE THAN THE OTHERS, I WILL SELL THEM AS SHOW DOGS TO POSSIBLY OTHER SHOW PEOPLE OR POSSIBLY PERFORMANCE PEOPLE OR PETS.

BUT NO, I DON'T KEEP MESSY DOGS.

I DO KEEP GOOD QUALITY SHOW DOGS.

I HAVE FIVE DOGS RIGHT NOW.

>> YOU HAVE FIVE DOGS NOW AND IF YOU HAVE A LITTER, YOU CAN HAVE FIVE MORE DOGS, SO YOU'LL HAVE 10 DOGS?

>> YEAH, BUT I WOULDN'T KEEP THEM, I MIGHT KEEP ONE OUT OF A LITTER, IF THEY'RE VERY WORTHY.

>> AT LEAST FOR EIGHT WEEKS, YOU COULD HAVE AS MANY AS 10-12 DOGS IN YOUR HOUSE?

>> THAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE IF I HAD A BIG LITTER, CORRECT.

>> OKAY. NES, DID YOU SEND OUT AFFECTED LETTERS?

>> I DID, YES.

>> YES.

[01:45:01]

>> DID YOU GET ANY BACK?

>> NO, WE DID NOT.

>> IT COULD BE A LOT OF DOGS AT ONE TIME, BUT THAT TWO-DOG MAXIMUM REALLY HAS TO BE MAINTAINED OUTSIDE.

>> YES, AND IT WOULD BE BECAUSE THOSE PUPPIES, IF I WERE TO PLACE THEY WOULD BE GONE BY 10 WEEKS ANYWAY.

>> HEY, I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

MY NEIGHBOR WHO LIVES NEXT DOOR TO ME, THEY'VE BEEN IN THE HOUSE FOR QUITE SOME TIME, BUT THE PEOPLE BEFORE THEM, WE FOUND OUT THEY HAD A DOG AND THEY DIDN'T DISPOSE OFF THEIR DOG'S BUSINESS VERY WELL.

THEY ACTUALLY DUG SOME POOL IN THE BACKYARD, IT POISONED THEIR YARD.

YOU ARE PROPERLY DISPOSING OF EVERYTHING, CORRECT?

>> OF COURSE, YEAH.

>> GOOD QUESTION, MARY.

>> IT'S REALLY AFFECTED MY NEIGHBOR'S A LOT.

THEIR YARD, THEY'VE HAD TO REDO IT THREE TIMES.

IT WAS THAT BAD.

>> WOW.

>> THAT WAS ONLY ONE DOG, SO THAT MADE ME THINK ABOUT THAT.

>> NO, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND.

BUT BECAUSE I DO SHOW DOGS, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT I MAINTAIN A GREAT ENVIRONMENT SO THAT THEY ARE TOP QUALITY FOR SHOWING.

>> CORRECT, AND FOR HEALTH TOO.

>> FOR HEALTH. AMEN. YOU'RE RIGHT.

>> WELL, NORMALLY, WE WOULD DO A TWO-YEAR IF WE WOULD APPROVE THIS.

DO WE WANT TO DO ANYTHING LESS THAN TWO YEARS?

>> TWO YEARS IS THE MAX.

>> WE DON'T REALLY HAVE TO DO TWO YEARS.

THERE'S NOT A REQUIREMENT TO DO TWO YEARS.

>> START OFF WITH SIX MONTHS.

>> YEAH, AND SEE HOW IT GOES,

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE A MOTION?

>> NES, THE RECOMMENDED MOTION?

>> WELL, THAT WAS COMMITTEE REVIEW, BUT WE CAN RECOMMEND THAT YOU MOTION TO CONDITIONALLY PROVE ON A SIX-MONTH BASIS ON A CONDITION THERE ARE NO COMPLAINTS AND NO MORE THAN TWO DOGS OUT OF THE HOUSE AT ONE TIME

>> I'D MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION FOR THE COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER.

>> I'M SORRY. WHAT WAS YOUR MOTION AGAIN, ARTHUR?

>> IT WOULD BE TO MAKE SURE THERE'S ONLY TWO DOGS OUT AT ONE TIME TO APPROVE THE BUSINESS FOR SIX MONTHS AND PROVIDED THAT THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS FROM NEIGHBORS.

>> OKAY. REMEMBER THE LAST ONE THERE.

WHAT'S THE OBJECTION FROM OTHER NEIGHBORS ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> THE MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF SECOND THEN.

>> WELL, A QUESTION.

DO WE HAVE OTHER BREEDERS IN THE WOODLANDS? THIS IS THE FIRST THAT I KNOW OF.

>> I DON'T KNOW.

>> WELL, I KNOW OF SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT DO BREEDING.

BUT I'M PROBABLY THE FIRST ONE MAYBE THAT'S EVER BEEN ASKED TO BE A HOME BUSINESS.

>> KIM OR NES, HAS SOMETHING LIKE THIS COME BEFORE US BEFORE?

>> I DON'T RECALL ONE.

>> WELL, I THINK WITH THE OTHER ONES, WE MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN AWARE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD THE ISSUE WITH THAT MANY DOGS OUT AT ONE GIVEN TIME.

SO THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE MORE THAN TWO DOGS.

THERE'S PEOPLE THAT HAVE, I KNOW EIGHT OR MORE DOGS, BUT THEY COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS.

THIS IS WHY THIS ONE CAME UP AS AN ISSUE AND WHY THIS HOMEOWNER IS BEING MADE TO APPLY.

>> SINCE I'VE WORKED WITH THE TOWNSHIP AND THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE, I AM ONLY AWARE OF ONE.

IT WAS QUITE SOME TIME AGO, ROBERT MIGHT REMEMBER, IN THE LATE '90S, A HOMEOWNER IN PANTHER CREEK, CLOSE TO ST. SIMON AND JUDE, WHO HAD FOUR AFGHAN HOUNDS THAT WERE SHOW DOGS. SHE HAS SINCE MOVED.

>> THAT'S WHY WITH A LIMITED TIME FRAME, GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE IF ANY CONCERNS DEVELOP AND THAT THERE'S PROPER DISPOSAL OF THE BUSINESS.

[01:50:04]

THERE'S NO MORE THAN TWO DOGS OUT AT ANY GIVEN TIME AND TO SEE IF ANY COMPLAINTS COME IN FROM THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS.

AS SANDY SAYS, WE ASKED FOR AN APPLICATION ON THIS BECAUSE IT WAS INDICATED THAT THIS IS CONSIDERED A HOME BUSINESS.

>> OKAY. THERE'S A MOTION ON THE TABLE. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> WE'VE BUT I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH

>> THE MOTION WAS FOR SIX MONTHS REVIEW?

>> YES.

>> YES, CORRECT.

>> I'LL SECOND IT.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION THEN, AND A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY, ''AYE''.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>> MARY, AYE.

>> ANDERSON, AYE.

>> NAY FOR WALT. MOTION CARRIES.

>> OKAY. MS. WE'LL BE SENDING YOU THE PERMIT BY E-MAIL.

>> OKAY. THEN I NEED TO REAPPLY IN SIX MONTHS? IS THAT WHAT I UNDERSTAND?

>> YES. MA'AM.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM

[Item VIII 18]

IS 27 VILLA CANYON PLACE.

LET ME CHECK AND SEE IF I HAVE ANYBODY.

DID YOU WANT TO JUST GO THROUGH ALL THE ITEMS, EVEN IF THERE'S NOT ANYBODY THERE? OH, I SEE TWO PEOPLE HAVE RAISED THEIR HANDS, SO WE'LL MOVE AHEAD WITH THIS.

THIS IS IN THE VILLAGE OF INDIAN SPRINGS.

THEY SAY GENERATOR THAT DOES NOT RESPECT THIS SIDE EASEMENT.

YOU COULD SEE THAT WE DID HAVE ONE OBJECTION TO THE ADJACENT SIDE THROUGH YOUR AERIAL PHOTO.

THE SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED GENERATOR IS ON THIS SIDE, RIGHT HERE.

IT ENCROACHES FOUR FEET INTO THE LEFT EASEMENT.

ACCORDING TO THE STANDARDS, A GENERATOR CAN ACTUALLY ENCROACH THREE FEET INTO THE EASEMENT.

THIS ACTUALLY ENCROACHES ONE ADDITIONAL FOOT INTO THE EASEMENT THEN ALLOWED BY THE STANDARDS.

THIS IS YOUR PUZZLE AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IT IS LOCATED IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE, AND IT'S DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THIS WALL OF THIS DWELLING NEXT DOOR.

THAT IS THE NEIGHBOR THAT HAS ISSUED AN OBJECTION DUE TO THE PROXIMITY.

HOMEOWNERS SUBMITTED THIS DRAWING SHOWING THAT THE PROPOSED LOCATION WAS ALONG THE SIDE OF THIS HOUSE, WHICH IS RIGHT HERE.

THERE'S THE PROPOSED LOCATION AND THAT'S THE CARPORT AND GARAGE OUT FRONT.

CURRENTLY, THERE ARE TWO AC UNITS ON DIRECTLY BEHIND THE AREA WHERE THE GENERATOR IS PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED, AND THOSE AC UNITS ARE ACTUALLY FOUR FEET INTO THE EASEMENT ADDITIONALLY.

THIS IS THE HOMEOWNERS REQUEST.

HE STATES THAT THEY WISH TO INSTALL THIS EMERGENCY GENERATOR AND THERE ARE SOME REASONS.

ONE, THE LOCATION IS A DEAD SPACE ADJACENT TO THE GARAGE THAT'S NOT REALLY USED.

IT'S IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT.

IT DOES NOT ENCROACH ON THE EASEMENT ANYMORE THAN THE AC EQUIPMENT.

IT'S NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.

IT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY DIGGING OR CUTTING OF TREE ROOTS FOR THE LOCATION, AND IT'S WITHIN 20 FEET OF THE ELECTRICAL METER AND THE BREAKER BOX.

DUE TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR WHEN A GENERATORS INSTALLED, IT HAS TO BE 18 INCHES FROM THE HOUSE WALL AND IT REQUIRES 36 INCHES OF OPEN SPACE ON THE OTHER THREE SIDES.

THAT IS THE REASON WHY THEY HAVE TO MOVE IT OUT FROM THE WALL OF THE HOUSE A LITTLE BIT.

THEY ALSO STATE THAT THEY PICK THIS LOCATION BECAUSE, OF COURSE,

[01:55:01]

IT'S NEXT TO THE AC UNITS AND SR, WHICH IS ALREADY ENCROACHING INTO THE EASEMENT.

IT'S NOT REALLY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.

HOWEVER, IT IS VISIBLE FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES IN REGARD TO THE TREE ROOTS AGAIN.

THIS IS THE FRONT VIEW OF THE HOME AND THIS IS THE VIEW FROM THE STREET LOOKING TOWARD THE AREA WHERE THE GENERATOR WOULD BE LOCATED.

THIS IS STANDING IN THE LOCATION OF THE AREA WHERE THE PROPOSED GENERATOR AND RIGHT BEHIND THIS ALLELE INNER BUSHES, ACTUALLY THE TWO AC UNITS THAT ARE LOCATED RIGHT HERE.

YOU CAN SEE HOW FAR THEY PROJECT INTO THE EASEMENT.

THE PROPERTY LINE IS ABOUT HERE, AND THAT'S ABOUT A FOOT AWAY.

ANOTHER VIEW LOOKING TOWARD THE FRONT.

NOW, THIS VIEW LOOKING TOWARD THE FRONT, YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THE NEIGHBOR'S ADJACENT HOME.

YOU CAN TELL THAT THIS AREA HERE IS THE BED AND BATHROOM.

THE HOMEOWNER NEXT DOOR HAS INDICATED THAT THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE NOISE THAT WILL HAPPEN FROM THE GENERATOR IN THEIR ADJACENT BEDROOM AND BATH.

JUST ANOTHER VIEW TOWARD THE FRONT IMPACT AND THAT'S DIRECTLY OPPOSITE.

IT'S JUST A SOLID WALL THERE, BUT THE BATHROOM WINDOW IS DIRECTLY TO THE LEFT OF THAT.

OF COURSE, THERE'S ROOMS UPSTAIRS TOO.

I BELIEVE WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE TO SPEAK ON THIS.

WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO GO TO THE HOMEOWNER?

>> THE HOME OWNER FIRST?

>> I'M NOT SURE WHICH ONE IT IS, HOLD ON A MINUTE.

CALLER WITH THE LAST TWO NUMBERS 7525, ARE YOU THE HOMEOWNER OF 27 VILLA CANYON? MUTE YOU AND GO TO THE NEXT ONE.

WE'RE NOT GETTING YOU, YOU MIGHT WANT TO HANG UP AND CALL BACK.

LET ME ASK THIS OTHER PERSON.

>> HELLO.

>> HELLO. ARE YOU THE HOMEOWNER FOR 27 VILLA CANYON PLACE?

>> NO, WE'RE NEIGHBORS.

>> YOU'RE ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS.

WALT, IS IT OKAY IF THE NEIGHBOR GOES BECAUSE I CAN'T GET THE HOMEOWNER.?

>> YES, LET'S LET THE NEIGHBOR GO.

>> OKAY. SURE, GO AHEAD.

>> SO JUST SPEAK TO ME.

>> WE ARE THE NEIGHBORS OF 23 VILLA CANYON.

WE GOT THE LETTER AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE CALLED IN, WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU GOT THAT GOOD.

THE TWO AIR CONDITIONING UNITS ARE RIGHT BY OUR MASTER BEDROOM, MASTER BATH AND IN THE COVID-19 AREA, WHAT IS NOW MY HOME OFFICE.

WE DO HEAR THEM ALL THE TIME, SO WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DENY BILLY AND DALE A GENERATOR.

WE JUST ASK THAT THEY PUT IT IN ANOTHER LOCATION.

>> LET ME SEE IF THAT OTHER PERSON

>> OKAY. ARE YOU ABLE TO HEAR US, THE HOMEOWNER? CAN YOU SPEAK?

>> HELLO.

>> HELLO. IS THIS THE HOMEOWNER?

>> NO, THIS IS STILL THE NEIGHBOR.

DID YOU HEAR WHAT I SAID EARLIER?

>> YES, WE HEARD YOU.

>> OKAY.

>> THE HOMEOWNER? I THINK YOU NEED TO HANG UP AND CALL BACK.

I DO HAVE ANOTHER PERSON ON LINE FOR THIS, HOLD ON.

HELLO.

>> HELLO.

>> ARE YOU CALLING IN REFERENCE TO 27 VILLA CANYON?

>> YES, I'M THE HOMEOWNER.

>> OKAY, GOOD. ALL RIGHT.

GO AHEAD, YOU CAN ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE.

>> WELL, YOU COVERED IT.

THE REASON WE RECOMMENDED THAT IS BECAUSE IT'S BY THE OTHER EQUIPMENT AND THE PROXIMITY TO THE METER.

I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD AND I WAS TRYING TO DIAL BACK IN, SO I DIDN'T GET TO HEAR WHAT ANYBODY ELSE SAID.

I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD.

[02:00:02]

YOU GOT QUESTIONS, I'LL ANSWER THEM.

BUT YOU COVERED MY REASONS FOR PUTTING IT WHERE WE PROPOSED IT.

>> OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE COMMITTEE WHO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

>> ON A GENERATOR, HOW MANY TIMES BECAUSE THERE IS A SCHEDULE, I GUESS, THAT A GENERATOR FOLLOWS TO MAKE SURE IT'S FUNCTIONING.

>> IT RUNS EVERY SEVEN DAYS FOR 11 SECONDS TO KEEP IT ACTIVE.

>> OKAY. SO OUTSIDE OF ACTUALLY BEING EMPLOYED IF THERE'S A POWER OUTAGE, THEN THE AMOUNT OF RUNNING TIME IS EVERY SEVEN DAYS FOR ABOUT 11 SECONDS, JUST TO CYCLE THROUGH IT?

>> YEAH.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> IS THERE A PROBLEM PUTTING ANY SCREENING WITH THAT, NES?

>> THE ISSUE WOULD BE THAT HE ONLY HAS ONE FOOT TO WORK WITH, AND IT'S A GENERATOR AND I BELIEVE THEY HAVE TO HAVE A

>> ABOUT SCREENING IN FRONT OF IT, TOWARDS THE STREET WHERE ALL THE ADDRESS FROM NOW

>> THAT COULD BE A POSSIBILITY, YES.

>> THAT'S PLANNED.

>> IT IS PLANNED?

>> YES.

>> OKAY. LET THEN MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDED MOTION.

>> I SECOND THAT, AS PRESENTED.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> MARY, AYE.

>> ANDERSON, AYE.

>> ROBERT, AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSE? AYES HAVE IT.

THANK YOU. MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE SCREENING IN FRONT.

>> YES SIR. I'VE ADDED THAT.

>> OKAY.

>> DID WE READ THE MOTION?

>> THE RECOMMEND MOTION HAS ABOUT THE SCREENING TALKS ABOUT EVERGREEN VEGETATION, AND IT ALSO INDICATES THAT ALL CONDITIONS MUST BE MET WITHIN 150 DAYS OF APPROVAL.

>> I THINK WE NEED TO READ THAT OUT, I'M SORRY.

>> THE MOTION TO APPROVE ON THE CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT MUST MEET CODE AND STANDARDS AND PASS ALL INSPECTIONS.

TIMING OF SELF-TESTING CYCLES OF POWER GENERATOR SHOULD BE SET TO OCCUR DURING DAYTIME HOURS SO AS NOT TO ADVERSELY IMPACT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.

REQUIRED ADDITIONAL REMEDIES TO REDUCE THE NOISE LEVELS TO ACCEPTABLE LEVELS WILL BE DETERMINED AS NEEDED.

THE GENERATOR MUST BE SCREENED FROM VIEW OF THE STREET WITH EVERGREEN VEGETATION.

ALL CONDITIONS MUST BE MET WITHIN 150 DAYS OF APPROVAL.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY.

>> YOU HAVE TO EDUCATE ME, THE RESIDENTS CAN'T SEE WHAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE SCREEN, IS THAT RIGHT?

>> THEY CAN SEE WHAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE SCREEN, IF THEY'RE WATCHING THE LIVE STREAMING VIDEO.

>> OKAY.

>> THOUGH SOMETIMES THERE'S A LITTLE DELAY.

MR. BERNARDO, DID YOU HEAR THE MOTION?

>> YES, I DID. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. WE'LL BE SENDING YOU THAT PERMIT BY E-MAIL. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> LET'S GO TO OUR NEXT ITEM.

IT'S 36 VIOLET

[Item VIII 19]

AND I BELIEVE SOMEBODY WAS ON THE QUEUE.

THIS IS A PATIO COVER THAT DOES NOT RESPECT THE REAR 20 FOOT SETBACK.

THIS IS IN THE VILLAGE OF CREEKSIDE PARK WEST.

THIS IS THE FRONT VIEW OF THE HOME AND YOUR SECTION MAP AND SEE THAT IT'S A CORNER LOT.

THE AERIAL PHOTO, THE SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY, AND YOU CAN SEE THIS IS THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THIS PATIO COVER.

THIS LINE MARKS THE REAR 20 FOOT SETBACK AND THE PATIO COVER IS ABOUT 10 FEET INTO THAT SETBACK, SO RIGHT UP AGAINST THE REAR 10 FOOT EASEMENT.

THERE IS A LARGE TREE LOCATED RIGHT HERE THAT WOULD HINDER MOVING THIS PATIO COVER CLOSER TO THE HOUSE AND FURTHER OUT OF THE SETBACK.

[02:05:03]

BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE THE TREE TO BE REMOVED IF THAT WAS THE CONDITION OF THE COMMITTEE.

THERE IS WROUGHT IRON FENCING ALONG THE CORNER, THOUGH IT WON'T BE VISIBLE.

HERE IS YOUR PUZZLE.

A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF THE SITE PLAN, YOU CAN SEE THE LOCATION OF THE PATIO COVER.

PATIO COVER IS 14 BY 14, AND IT'S ABOUT 12 FEET TALL.

AS MENTIONED BEFORE, IT'S ABOUT 10 FEET INTO THE REAR SETBACK.

IT'S A CEDAR FRAME, STAINED BROWN, HAS A LOW WALL, AND COMPOSITION ROOF TO MATCH THE DWELLING.

THIS IS THE ELEVATION OF THE POOL AND THE PATIO COVER, YOU CAN SEE IT HERE TOO.

I BELIEVE THAT'S ONE OF THE COLUMNS.

I'M NOT REALLY SURE, THE HOMEOWNER SUBMITTED THAT, BUT MAYBE THEY CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

A DIAGRAM SHOWING YOU THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE.

THAT'S THE LEFT AND THE RIGHT OF THE HOUSE, AND YOU CAN SEE THIS IS THAT LARGE TREE WE WERE DISCUSSING A MINUTE AGO.

SO THE PATIO COVER IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE BEHIND THIS TREE, IN THIS LOCATION HERE.

IT'D BE 10'8" FROM THE REAR AND 12'8" FROM THE SIDE.

THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE A POOL IN THIS LOCATION.

THIS IS ANOTHER VIEW.

THIS IS FROM THE STREET SIDE LOOKING TOWARD WHERE THE PATIO COVER IS GOING TO BE IN THIS LOCATION RIGHT HERE.

OF COURSE, WE WOULD ADD SCREEN ALONG THE STREET IF IT IS APPROVED.

ANOTHER VIEW LOOKING TOWARD THE SIDE STREET, AND THAT'S FROM THE BACK CORNER LOOKING TOWARD THE HOUSE.

WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY NEIGHBOR RESPONSES.

IT IS MOSTLY, ENTIRELY, EXCEPT FOR 4' OF THE STRUCTURE IS LOCATED IN THE SETBACK.

>> HAS THE POOL ALREADY BEEN APPROVED?

>> THE POOL HAS BEEN PERMITTED.

>> OKAY. THAT'S ALREADY IN THE SETBACK.

>> WELL, POOLS ARE ALLOWED TO BE IN THAT TYPE OF SETBACK, YES.

IT'S JUST A BUILDING SETBACK.

>> OKAY.

>> STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS FOR COMMITTEE REVIEW, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, MOTION TO DENY IS PRESENTED. IS THAT CORRECT NES?

>> YES, WE WERE FOLLOWING THE NORMAL CONDITIONS THAT YOU-ALL HAVE MOVED ON THESE ITEMS BEFORE.

WHEN IT'S THAT FAR INTO THE SETBACK IN AN AREA WHERE IT BACKS UP TO ANOTHER LOT, NOT A RESERVE WITH A BUNCH OF DENSE WOODED, EVERGREEN VEGETATION AND, OF COURSE, OFF TO THE SIDE, THERE'S NO EVERGREEN VEGETATION THERE, IT'S JUST ALL SHORT AND YOU CAN SEE ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE FENCE.

BUT IT WOULD BE UP TO THE COMMITTEE TO DETERMINE IF THAT IS A BETTER OPTION THAN MOVING IT FORWARD OUT OF THE SETBACK AND HAVING TO REMOVE THAT PINE TREE.

>>

>> YOU HATE TO TAKE OUT THE ONE BIG TREE THAT'S IN THE BACKYARD AND I NEED ALMOST THE ENTIRE LOT.

>> WE WILL BE SPRAYING IT WITH VEGETATION NOT ONLY ON THE SIDE, BUT ALSO ON THE REAR BECAUSE YOU GOT A NEIGHBOR ON THE REAR FENCE.

>> RIGHT.

>> REALLY THE MOST AFFECTED PARTY.

>> KIM, THERE'S ALSO INDICATION IF IT GOES IN A SETBACK, THAT THE FLAT ROOF SHOULD BE APPROVED, NOT A GABLE ROOF. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT'S TRUE,

>> IS THE FLAT ROOF, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT, WITH NO MORE THAN 10 DEGREES SLOPE.

>> THANK YOU.

>> I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THE SCREENING BECAUSE MOVING IT IS I'D HATE TO SEE THAT TREE COME DOWN.

>> RIGHT.

[02:10:01]

>> WE CAN DENY AS PRESENTED AND ONLY THIS, I'M SORRY.

IS THE HOMEOWNER HERE?

>> I BELIEVE THE HOMEOWNER'S HERE. LET ME CHECK.

I BELIEVE THEY CALLED IN EARLIER WHEN WE WERE TALKING.

HELLO, IS THIS THE HOMEOWNER FOR 36 VIOLET SUNSET?

>> HELLO. IT IS. YES, MA'AM.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE?

>> YES, PLEASE.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'VE BEEN LISTENING IN ON YOUR CONVERSATION. THAT IS CORRECT.

I THINK THE BEST SPOT FOR THE SHADE STRUCTURE IS AS DEPICTED IN BETWEEN THE TREE AND THE WOOD FENCE.

THERE'S NOT A LOT OF LEEWAY FOR MOVING IT AND HONESTLY, MOVING IT WHERE THE TREE IS RIGHT NOW, I DON'T THINK WOULD HELP A WHOLE LOT.

I KNOW SOMEBODY ALREADY INTERJECTED THAT IN TERMS OF VISIBILITY FROM THE STREET.

WE ARE GOING TO HAVE SCREENING VEGETATION ALONG THE STREET AND ALSO ALONG THE BACK FENCE TO PROVIDE SCREENING AND ALSO MUTUAL PRIVACY.

THE OTHER THING IS WE ARE PLANNING ON HAVING A STRUCTURE THERE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE GET THE VARIANCE OR NOT.

THE VARIANCE I'M REQUESTING IS JUST FOR THE SHAPE OF THE ROOF THAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR.

WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A GABLED STYLE ROOF BECAUSE I THINK IT IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING THAN A FLAT ROOF STRUCTURE IN THAT AREA.

IT WOULD BLEND IN BETTER AND MATCH THE STYLE OF THE HOUSE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD BETTER AND ACTUALLY GIVE A LOWER PROFILE THAN A FLAT ROOF.

I THINK THAT HAVING A GABLED ROOF STRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE A REASONABLE USE OF THAT AREA.

I'VE DONE A FACE-TO-FACE CONVERSATION WITH ALL MY AFFECTED NEIGHBORS.

THEY HAD NO OBJECTIONS TO THIS PLAN.

>> ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> ON THE SCREENING, WHAT'S THE MINIMUM HEIGHT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO START WITH ON THE SCREENING?

>> I WOULD THINK THE TREES TYPICALLY COME FROM THE NURSERY, ABOUT 8' TALL.

>> OKAY.

>> THEN OBVIOUSLY THEY GROW RELATIVELY QUICKLY.

SO BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT TO HAVE PRIVACY TOO, SO THAT'S GOING TO BE ONE OF OUR FIRST PRIORITIES AFTER THE POOL IS COMPLETE IS TO GET THAT VEGETATION IN THERE FOR OUR PRIVACY.

THAT WOULD ALSO HAVE THE BENEFIT OF SCREENING OUR POOL AND OUR STRUCTURE.

>> THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

>> ANY ARGUMENT? ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR ANY COMMENTS?

>> WALT, I SEE SOMEBODY ELSE HAS THEIR HAND UP.

I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MUTE MR. TEAL AND SEE IF THIS OTHER PERSON HAS TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE, OKAY

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> HELLO. CALLER WITH THE LAST NUMBERS 1426, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON 36 VIOLET SUNSET LANE?

>> NO. WE ARE WAITING TO SPEAK ON THE LAST ONE, WHERE THE NEIGHBORS

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> YOU DID NOT READ OUR E-MAIL AND WE FELT WE DID NOT GET TO SPEAK.

WE HAVE A NOISE ISSUE WITH THE GENERATOR, AND WE SPOKE TO THAT NEIGHBOR TODAY AND SAID IT WOULD BE A PROBLEM.

YOU MAY PUT IT ON THE OTHER SIDE AND THEY SAID IT WOULD BE A

>> MA'AM WE ALREADY RULED ON THAT, I'M SORRY.

>> I WROTE AN E-MAIL WHICH YOU SHOULD HAVE A COPY OF.

I ALSO CALLED MARY

>> MA'AM, HOLD ON.

WHEN WE FINISH THIS ONE, I'LL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK.

>> THANK YOU.

>> LET'S FINISH THIS.

>> OKAY.

>> ROBERT, WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE GABLE ROOF VERSUS THE FLAT ROOF?

>> WELL, IF IT'S THE REAR NEIGHBOR CALLING IN, THEY WOULD BE THE ONES MOST AFFECTED BY THE ROOF.

SO IF IT'S THEM CALLING IN, I WOULD HEAR.

THAT'S ON THE OTHER

>> THAT'S ON THE GENERATOR.

>> YEAH, SHE WAS CALLING ABOUT THE GENERATOR.

>> CAN I SEE A SLIDE OF THE ROOF AND THE PLACE FOR

>> GOT TO GO BACK AGAIN.

[02:15:03]

>> IS THIS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR?

>> YEAH. GO BACK TO THE VIEW FROM THE STREET ALONG THE SIDE.

>> YOU JUST WANT THE PHOTO?

>> YEAH.

>> OKAY. THERE.

>> THAT'S PROBABLY THE BEST ONE YET.

SO THAT THE NEIGHBOR IN THE BACK THERE WOULD BE THE ONE MOST AFFECTED.

>> SO DOES THE FLAT ROOF WORK THE BEST TO REDUCE EFFECTIVENESS TOWARDS THE REAR NEIGHBOR, ROBERT?

>> WELL, IT WOULD UNLESS YOU WERE TO GO IN AND PLANT TREES AND ALL THERE THAT WOULD BE IN SHRUBS THAT WOULD BE HIGHER THAN THE STRUCTURE.

RIGHT NOW THERE'S NOTHING THERE, BUT THE SLOPED ROOF MIGHT WORK.

>> THE STRUCTURE IS TALL.

>> ISN'T RESPONDING.

>> THE HEIGHT OF THIS STRUCTURE IS 12'.

MOST FLAT ROOF STRUCTURES ARE GOING TO BE BETWEEN 10 AND 12.

>> ANYBODY HAVE A RECOMMENDATION?

>> MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

ARE YOU OKAY WITH A GABLE ROOF, AT A HEIGHT OF 12 FEET?

>> LIKE I SAID, I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE SCREENING, AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE ADEQUATE SCREENING, AND THAT EITHER WE HAVE IT PRESENTED TO US OR JUST HAVE IT PRESENTED TO THE STAFF AND GIVE STAFF APPROVAL ON THE SCREENING.

BUT IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF SCREENING, I THINK.

>> TO DO THE GABLE ROOF IT'S DEFINITELY GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF SCREENING.

AESTHETICALLY, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT WOULD FIT IN BETTER WITH THE HOME A LOT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD VERSUS THE FLAT ROOF.

NASSER ALSO INDICATED THE FLAT ROOF WOULD BE ANYWHERE FROM 10-12 FEET DEPENDENT UPON THE STRUCTURE, AND THE GABLE WOULD BE ABOUT 12.

>> MEANING IF ADEQUATE SCREENING WERE DONE, IT WOULD PROBABLY ENHANCE THE NEIGHBORHOOD, REALLY, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S JUST MINIMUM VEGETATION THERE ALONG THE STREET.

>> I WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED TO GRANT THE VARIANCE, PROVIDED THAT THERE WAS A SCREENING PLAN THAT WOULD ADEQUATELY SCREEN THE STRUCTURE BOTH FROM A PRIVACY STANDPOINT AND IMPACT TO THE REAR NEIGHBOR, AND THAT THE HOMEOWNERS SHOULD WORK WITH THE STAFF ON A SCREENING PLAN.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> THEN STAFF TO APPROVE UPON COMPLETION?

>> YES.

>> REVIEW THE LANDSCAPING AFTER IT'S PLANTED?

>> YES, AND MAKE SURE IT MEETS THE INTENT OF THE COMMITTEE AND MAKE SURE IT MEETS THE INTENT OF MINIMIZING IMPACT TO THE REAR NEIGHBOR.

>> OKAY.

>> DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND IT.

>> AYE.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ARTHUR, OKAY.

>> ROBERT, AYE.

>>

>> MARY, AYE.

>> WALT, AYE.

>> ALL RIGHT, MOTION CARRIES.

>> WAS THERE ANY OPPOSED?

>> NO.

>> I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH ONE WAS THE HOMEOWNER.

I THINK IT WAS THIS ONE.

HELLO, IS THIS THE HOMEOWNER FOR 36 VIOLET SUNSET?

>> IT IS.

>> OH, OKAY. DID YOU HEAR THE MOTION?

>> I DID. THANK YOU FOR THAT, AND OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS A BRAND NEW NEIGHBORHOOD.

THINGS ARE STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF VEGETATION, BUT ABSOLUTELY WHEN THE FULL CONSTRUCTION IS DONE, WE PLAN ON HAVING THAT SCREENING PUT IN RIGHT AWAY.

>> OUR STAFF WILL CONTACT YOU IN REGARD TO THE AND WE'LL BE SENDING YOU A PERMIT.

[02:20:02]

>> EXCELLENT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> BYE BYE.

>> BYE.

>> THERE WAS A LADY PREVIOUSLY.

LET'S LET HER COME BACK ON.

>> I THINK IT WAS THIS ONE.

THAT'S CALLING ABOUT THE GENERATOR, MA'AM? HELLO, ARE YOU THE CALLER THAT'S CALLING ABOUT THE GENERATOR? I DON'T THINK THAT PERSON'S THERE ANYMORE. LET ME SEE.

HELLO, ARE YOU THE CALLER THAT'S CALLING ABOUT THE GENERATOR?

>> I AM, YEAH.

>> OH, OKAY. YOU WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE, BUT I DID WANT TO TELL YOU THAT THE COMMITTEE DID RECEIVE YOUR E-MAIL.

>> BUT OUR E-MAIL WASN'T READ.

I THINK THINGS GOT CONFUSING AND I TRIED TO START IN AGAIN, BECAUSE THE HOMEOWNER YOU COULDN'T HEAR THEM.

THEN WE SPOKE AND THEN YOU WENT TO THE HOMEOWNER AND WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TIME TO REALLY TALK ABOUT IT.

IT IS A REAL NOISE ISSUE FOR US.

THEY BUILT THOSE AIR CONDITIONING UNITS IN THE VARIANCE.

WE CAN HEAR THEM IN OUR BEDROOM, IN THE MASTER BATHROOM.

PLUS WE HAVE A OFFICE THAT MY HUSBAND WORKS OUT OF AND MY CHILDREN STUDY OUT AT NIGHT, WE CAN HEAR THEM.

NOISE IS AN ISSUE ON THIS SIDE OF THE HOUSE.

I DID CALL THEM AND SAID, "HEY, WE'RE GOING TO ENFORCE THE VARIANCE BECAUSE IT WILL BE NOISY FOR US." I SAID THAT, "IF YOU WANT TO PUT A GENERATOR ON THE OTHER SIDE, YOU CAN DO THAT, THAT'S FINE." THEY SAID IT WILL BE TOO LOUD FOR THEM BECAUSE THEIR BEDROOM IS ON THAT SIDE, AND THEIR NEIGHBORS BEDROOM ON THE OTHER SIDE.

BUT THEY WERE FINE PUTTING IT ON THE GARAGE AND IN FRONT OF OUR BEDROOM.

WE WANT TO ENFORCE THE VARIANCE.

THAT'S WHY WE SENT THE E-MAIL IN ADVANCE BECAUSE WE WERE HAVING TROUBLE WITH ZOOMING.

WE WANTED OUR VOICE AND YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE NOISE IS AN ISSUE.

WE DON'T WANT THE GENERATOR AND WE DO WANT TO ENFORCE THE VARIANCE.

THAT'S WHY WE MOVED TO THE WOODLANDS.

WE WANTED RESTRICTIONS.

>> I THINK YOUR PROBLEM IS THE EXISTING AIR CONDITIONERS.

AREN'T ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT. THEY'RE ALREADY THERE.

>> MA'AM, THE GENERATOR IS ONLY ON ONCE A WEEK FOR 11 SECONDS AND OUR RULING WAS THAT HE CAN ONLY DO THAT DURING THE DAY TIME, SO THERE WOULD BE NO AFFECTED NIGHTS.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 11 SECONDS THERE.

THE OTHER THING IS, THE GENERATOR IS NOT GOING TO BE ON EXCEPT WHEN POWER IS OUT.

>> I KNOW, BUT IT'S STILL BEHIND OUR BEDROOM.

>> MA'AM, WILL YOU LET ME FINISH.

I'LL LET YOU SPEAK.

>> I'M SORRY.

>> THE GENERATOR WILL ONLY BE ON WHEN POWER IS OUT, WHICH IS NO DIFFERENT THAN IF HE HAS A PORTABLE GENERATOR THAT HE PULLS OUT INTO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ON 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.

>> WE UNDERSTAND THAT BUT THE

>> THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT HE WON'T RUN IT MORE.

WE WILL HEAR IT IN THE HOUSE.

A TEMPORARY GENERATOR IS ANOTHER ISSUE, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO ENFORCE THE VARIANCE.

WE'RE NOT ASKING TO MOVE THE AIR CONDITIONING UNIT.

WE'RE ASKING NOT TO FURTHER COMPLICATE OUR NOISE ISSUE BY PUTTING THE GENERATOR THERE.

>> I DON'T THINK THE GENERATOR IS GOING TO MAKE THAT MUCH MORE NOISE THAN WHEN THE POWER IS OUT IF THERE WAS A PORTABLE GENERATOR THERE.

>> IS IT A REQUIREMENT THAT IT CAN ONLY RUN DURING POWER OUTAGES? IS THAT PART OF THE VARIANCE YOU'RE GIVING THEM?

>> HOW IS HE GOING TO USE IT WHEN POWER IS ON.

I MEAN, ITS GOT A TRANSFER SWITCH, SO WHEN THE POWER GOES OUT THE TRANSFER SWITCH SWITCHES TO ANOTHER BREAKER WHICH THEN TURNS THE GENERATOR ON.

YOU CAN'T RUN YOUR POWER AND YOUR GENERATOR AT THE SAME TIME.

>> NO.

>> I'M SORRY, IS IT MY TURN TO SPEAK OR NO? SORRY.

>> I'LL GIVE YOU ONE MORE MINUTE. GO AHEAD.

>> WELL, IT IS GOING TO BE EVERY WEEK GOING OFF AND IT COULD BE MORE OFTEN THAN NOT.

YOU DON'T KNOW, THEY COULD DO THAT.

THE REASON THEY DON'T WANT TO PUT IT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE.

IT WILL DISTURB THEM, IT WILL BE TOO LOUD.

BUT THEY'RE PUTTING IT ON THIS SIDE BECAUSE THEY ARE BUFFERED BY THEIR GARAGE AND IT WILL ONLY DISTURB US.

I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR THAT IT'S BEING PUT IN OUR VARIANCE.

THEY HAVE OTHER PLACES THEY COULD PUT THE GENERATOR.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANKS VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

>> WHAT DID YOU SAY?

[02:25:05]

>> ALL RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ON.

>> OKAY. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS 19 NORTH BANTAM WOODS.

[Item VIII 20]

THIS IS IN THE VILLAGE OF STERLING RIDGE.

IT'S A PATIO COVER THAT DOES NOT RESPECT THE REAR 25 FOOT SETBACK.

THERE'S YOUR SECTION MAP AND YOUR AERIAL PHOTO, THAT'S THE INTERIOR LOT.

HERE'S THE SURVEY ON THE PROPERTY, YOU CAN SEE THE LOCATION OF THE PATIO COVER IS IN THIS LOCATION RIGHT HERE.

IT'S 15 FEET INTO THE SETBACK AND IT IS 27 FEET LONG, AND 20 FEET WIDE, AND 16 FEET FOUR INCHES TALL.

HERE'S YOUR PUZZLE, AND HERE YOU CAN SEE THE DEPICTION OF THE ATTACHED PATIO COVER IN THE REAR.

ANOTHER VIEW. HERE ARE THE PLANS, THIS IS THE FLOOR PLAN, IT'S THE STRUCTURE RIGHT HERE.

I REMEMBER THIS AS 16 FEET, FOUR INCHES.

THIS IS YOUR ELECTRICAL AND THE JOIST AND RAFTERS.

THAT IS THE FRONT VIEW OF THE HOME, THE SIDE VIEWS.

SO IN THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED PATIO COVER IS A EXISTING PERGOLA, WHICH WAS ACTUALLY APPROVED BY THE DSC BACK IN 2011.

ACTUALLY IT WENT TO THE DSC BECAUSE THIS STRUCTURE HAD A CUPOLA ON TOP AND IT WAS PROPOSED TO BE A HEIGHT OF 13 FEET.

THAT WAS DISAPPROVED AND I BELIEVE THIS IS A PREVIOUS OWNER, WENT AHEAD AND JUST BUILT A FLAT ROOF PERGOLA IN THIS LOCATION.

THIS IS THE VIEW FROM THE RIGHT SIDE LOOKING TOWARD THE PROPOSED LOCATION.

THIS WOULD BASICALLY COME OUT THIS WAY WITH THE PATIO COVER AND EXTEND THIS ROOF LINE HERE DUE TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE AND FROM THE SIDE OF THE PERGOLA ARE PROPOSED PATIO COVER LOOKING TOWARD THE OPPOSITE SITE.

IN THE REAR, THERE IS SOME EXISTING EVERGREEN VEGETATION FOR SCREENING, WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY NEIGHBOR RESPONSES IN OPPOSITION OR IN AGREEMENT.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> SO NES, OPERATING AS AN RDRC, YOU DISAPPROVED IT BECAUSE IT DIDN'T RESPECT THE 25 FOOT SETBACK AND VILLAGE COMMENTS WERE REDUCED TO SIZE, AND THEN IT'S RECOMMENDED COMMITTEE REVIEW NOW AT OUR LEVEL?

>> CORRECT. BECAUSE IT IS 15 FEET INTO THE SETBACK, WHICH IS NOT A NORMAL ALLOWANCE GRANTED BY THE COMMITTEE ON A INTERIOR LOT.

SO BASICALLY THAT'S WHY WE PUT COMMITTEE REVIEW.

>> THE STRUCTURE, HAS THERE BEEN ANY NEIGHBOR COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE STRUCTURE OVER TIME?

>> THE PERGOLA, NO.

>> THANK YOU.

>> IS THE HOMEOWNER ON

>> WELL, LET'S CHECK AND SEE.

THE HOMEOWNER, PLEASE STAR NINE IF YOU'RE HERE.

OKAY. I DID NOT GET A STAR NINE FROM THE TWO CALLERS I HAVE LEFT ON THE AGENDA.

>> SO BASICALLY IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME DIMENSION AS THAT PERGOLA, RIGHT?

>> BASICALLY, YOU SEE THE ROOF LINE RIGHT HERE?

>> YES.

>> THIS IS GOING TO EXTEND ALL THE WAY BACK HERE AND IT'S GOING TO BE ALMOST IN THAT SAME LOCATION.

I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO

[02:30:01]

SO THAT MEANS IT'S 10 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, SO RIGHT UP TO THAT EASEMENT.

IT'S GOING TO GO RIGHT EXACTLY WHERE THAT PERGOLA ENDS, ALL THE WAY TO HERE.

>> THAT'S A BIG STRUCTURE.

>> THAT IS A BIG STRUCTURE.

>> SO NES, DID THEY SHOW ANY PLANS FOR THEIR COOKING ETC.

I'M GUESSING WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO IS COMBINE THE TWO LOCATIONS THAT THEY HAVE INTO ONE, IS THAT RIGHT?

>> RIGHT. YEAH.

>>

>> WELL, THEY DO NOT SHOW THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.

>>

>> LET'S GO BACK TO THE PLAN.

SEE THE FLOOR PLANS DO NOT SHOW THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING THAT AS A SUMMER KITCHEN, THEY DIDN'T APPLY FOR IT.

THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE APPLICATION IF THEY CAME IN LATER.

>> SO THIS

>> ADDITIONALLY, I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THIS STRUCTURE, THIS IS THE LOCATION WHERE THAT PERGOLA IS.

I BELIEVE THE NEW STRUCTURE IS ACTUALLY GOING TO GO UP A LITTLE BIT FARTHER TOWARD THE POLE.

SEE THIS AREA HERE? LET'S LOOK BACK AT THE, RIGHT HERE, SEE, IT STARTED IN BETWEEN THIS AREA HERE IS THAT LONGER SECTION THAT'S GOING TO BE ADDED.

SO IT WILL ACTUALLY START FROM, I GUESS, THIS LOCATION AND THEN COME BACK TOWARD THE BACK.

FROM HERE, INSTEAD OF OVER HERE.

SO IT GOES ALL THE WAY FROM HERE.

IT'S MUCH WIDER, COVERS A WIDER AREA, AND OF COURSE MUCH TALLER.

>>

>> EXCUSE ME.

>> PROBABLY 10 FEET FROM THE FENCE?

>> YES.

>> WHICH MEANS A NEIGHBOR IS BEHIND THEM, MAYBE THEY DON'T REALIZE WHAT'S GOING TO BE BUILT THERE.

THAT'S A BIG STRUCTURE IN YOUR BACKYARD.

>> EVEN IN A MOCK-UP, IT SHOWS TO BE A VERY BIG STRUCTURE, MASS-SCALE TOO, BOTH IN HEIGHT AND WIDTH.

>> IF YOU LOOK OF THAT ROOF LINE COMING STRAIGHT OUT THERE.

>> I MEAN, IT IS 15 FOOT.

THE COMMITTEE COULD REDUCE THAT ENCROACHMENT AND SEE IF THE HOMEOWNER WANTED TO OR DENY HIS AND REDUCE IT AN ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET OR WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER.

>> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CAN DENY UNLESS PRESENTED AND HAVE THE OWNER RESUBMIT A SMALLER SIZE.

>> I'D SECOND THAT MOTION.

>> I WOULD THINK ON RE-SUBMISSION, ROBERT HAD A GOOD QUESTION.

IS THERE AN INTENT TO COMBINE THE ANOTHER AREA INTO THIS AREA.

SO IF THE HOMEOWNER CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IN OUR NEXT REVIEW.

>> OKAY.

>> I MAY ALSO WANT TO CONSIDER DOING A HIP ROOF ON THE BACK RATHER THAN A GABLE, SO IT'S NOT AS HIGH AS TOWARDS THE FENCE LINE.

>> SO WHEN YOU SAY SMALLER, DO YOU MEAN LESS ENCROACHMENT AND LESS HEIGHT, CORRECT?

>> YES.

>> CAN YOU START TO GIVE US AN IDEA OF THE ENCROACHMENT THAT YOU MIGHT ALLOW?

>> I DON'T KNOW. ROBERT, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEAS?

>> NO.

>> YOU'RE ASKING PERFECT TEAM.

>> I'M GUESSING THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO GO OUT TO WHERE THEIR I DON'T KNOW WHY BUT LOOKING ON THEIR ROOF TIER, SO THEY GOING TO REDO THE ROOF ON THE HOUSE?

>> THIS AREA HERE, IT DOES LOOK LIKE IT.

>> YEAH. IT LOOKS LIKE THAT WHOLE ROOF IS GOING TO BE CHANGED.

>> THIS WOULD BE COMING OUT TO HERE.

>> YEAH.

>> THIS AREA HERE WOULD BE GONE.

>> BUT IT'S NOT CLEAR FROM THEIR CURRENT PRESENTATION THAT THAT'S REALLY THE INTENTION, RIGHT?

>> WELL, I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT DRAWING SHOWS.

>>

>> SHEDDING THE POOL.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT, YOU CAN SEE IT'S SHADING THE POOL, SO IT'S GOT TO EXTEND OUT THERE QUITE A BIT.

>> IS THIS A BIG TREE RIGHT HERE? ARE THESE THE COLUMNS ON THE, WHAT IS THAT?

[02:35:05]

>> LET ME GO TO THIS BACK PICTURE.

THESE ARE THE COLUMNS THAT YOU'RE SEEING.

THE ONLY TREES ARE, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S SOME WAX MYRTLES AND MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW.

>> IT'S NOT TOO THICK, IT LOOKS SPARSE.

>> IT IS. IT IS SPARSE.

THEY ONLY HAVE 10 FEET THERE TO PLANT SOMETHING.

>> YEAH. IT'S KIND OF STRANGE, WHAT THEY'VE GOT IS REALLY NICE.

THE WAY IT IS BUT

>> THEY COULD CHANGE IT TO A FLAT ROOF WITH LESS THAN 10 DEGREE SLOPE. AWESOME.

>> THEY CAN DO THAT AND ALMOST LEAVE THEIR STRUCTURE THE WAY IT IS AND JUST MAKE SOME MINOR MODIFICATIONS ON THE TOP.

>> SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO WORK WITH STAFF FOR THE RE-SUBMISSION?

>> YEAH. OKAY. IT'S FOR THE MOTION. DO I GET A SECOND?

>> SECOND, AS PRESENTED.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>>

>>

>> AYE.

>> YES.

IF THEY SLOPED TOWARD THE BACK WHERE THE PHOTOGRAPH IS NOW, TOWARD THE SIDE, THE YARD.

PROBABLY JUST MODIFY THOSE JOISTS SLIGHTLY AND GET A SLOPE ON IT, MAYBE REUSE A LOT OF THEIR MATERIALS ACTUALLY.

CUT THEM A LITTLE BIT WITH A LITTLE BIT OF SLOPE ON IT OR SCAB ON, THEY CAN DO EITHER ONE. I DON'T KNOW.

>> ALL RIGHT.

THE NEXT ITEM IS 38 LIBERTY BRANCH, WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER 21.

THIS IS ALSO IN THE VILLAGE OF THIS IS A TRELLIS ON A FENCE.

IT EXCEEDS THE HEIGHT AND IT'S BASICALLY MAKES THE FENCE A DIFFERENT DESIGN BECAUSE IT'S ATTACHED TO THE FENCE.

HERE'S YOUR SECTION MAP, YOUR AERIAL PHOTO.

SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE TRELLIS THAT WAS ADDED TO THE FENCE.

IT'S ABOUT 45 FEET LONG, AND FOUR FEET ADDED TO THE WOOD FENCE.

A TOTAL OF NINE FEET. THERE'S YOUR PUZZLE.

THE HOMEOWNER STATED THE REASON THEY PUT IT THERE WAS PROXIMITY OF THE HOMES, LACK OF VEGETATION.

THEY'VE ADDED VINES TO GROW ON IT TO INCREASE THEIR PRIVACY AND AESTHETICS, AND INSTALLING VEGETATION JUST FOR SCREENING, THEY SAY, WOULD CAUSE THEM A SIGNIFICANT COSTS BECAUSE THEY'D HAVE TO REMOVE THAT EXISTING LANDSCAPING AND REPLANT NEW TALLER PLANTS.

THIS IS THE TRELLIS THAT WAS ADDED TO THE FENCE, AND YOU CAN SEE THEY ALREADY PLANTED THE VINES.

ANOTHER VIEW OF THE TRELLIS.

IT'S BASICALLY FRAMED IN WITH A WIRE MATCH.

THAT'S THE FRONT VIEW OF THE HOME.

RIGHT AND LEFT SIDES.

YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT SIDE, THERE'S THAT TRELLIS RIGHT THERE.

THAT'S THE VIEW FROM THE BACK.

YOU CAN SEE THE TOTAL HEIGHT IS NINE FEET, AND 45 FEET LONG.

WE DIDN'T KNOW 39 WOODBOROUGH HAS A COMPARABLE TRELLIS THAT THEY ATTACHED TO THEIR FENCE AND THEN 46 LIBERTY BRANCH ALSO DID THE SAME THING.

I BELIEVE THOSE WILL BE CONTACTED FOR APPLICATIONS. ANY QUESTIONS?

>> THOSE TWO WERE JUST CREATIVE OVERSTEPS WITH NO APPLICATION AT THIS TIME?

>> YES.

>>

>> WE HAVE TURNED IT DOWN BEFORE.

SOME PEOPLE WILL ADD A TRELLIS, BUT THEN HOMEOWNERS, OF COURSE, MAINLY FOR PRIVACY, HAVE ASKED TO KEEP IT.

I THINK, IN ONE LOCATION, WE LET THEM KEEP IT WITH AN MOA.

[02:40:05]

I BELIEVE THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO PUT SOME SCREENING THERE FOR A PATIO COVER THAT THEY BUILT.

INSTEAD OF SCREENING, THEY ADDED A TRELLIS, BUT IT WAS SEPARATE, THEN THE FENCE.

I BELIEVE THEY RECEIVED THE MOA TO LEAVE THAT THERE FOR A WHILE.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T RECALL US GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A TRELLIS.

>> NO, I DON'T THINK

>>

>> SORRY?

>> FORTY-TWO BUT THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT I COULD RECALL.

>> THE ONE WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW IS DIFFERENT? IT'S NOT THIS ONE, RIGHT?

>> THE ONE THAT YOU SEE RIGHT NOW, 38 LIBERTY BRANCH, THE ONE WITH THE NEWER WOOD AND THERE'S NO VINES ON IT?

>> YEAH.

>> THAT'S IT.

>> THAT'S THE CURRENT ONE, RIGHT?

>> THAT IS THE ONE THAT IS BEING APPLIED FOR NOW.

>> WILL YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDES?

>> TO THE ONES WHERE THE VINES ARE?

>> YEAH.

>> OKAY. THIS IS A DIFFERENT PROPERTY.

>> GO BACK A LITTLE MORE.

>> THEN THIS IS ANOTHER PROPERTY.

>> THAT ONE IS GROWING UP PRETTY WELL.

IS THAT SECURED TO THE FENCE THE SAME WAY AS THESE OTHERS?

>> WE DO NOT KNOW THAT BECAUSE WE WEREN'T IN THIS BACKYARD.

>> NOW, SINCE YOU'RE GOING TO SEND OUT NOTICES, SHOULD WE GROUP ALL THREE AND LOOK AT ALL THREE TOGETHER?

>> THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.

>> BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW THOSE OTHER TWO STRUCTURES ARE SECURED.

TO ROBERT'S QUESTION, IF WE LOOK AT ALL THREE

>> THE CHICKEN WIRE ON THIS ONE IS THE SAME AS ON THE OTHER ONE OR NOT.

>> YEAH.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO TABLE THIS?

>> I'D MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE IT AND GATHER ALL THREE UP TOGETHER, PRESENT IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.

BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT AN MOA FOR ANY ONE OF THESE, IF THEY SELL THE HOUSE, IS SOMEONE REALLY GOING TO REMOVE THIS? WHAT IF THE NEW OWNER SAYS, "I LIKE THAT.

I WANT THAT FOR PRIVACY," AND THEY WANT IT THEN REAPPLIED TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

I LIKE THE FACT OF LOOKING AT ALL THREE TOGETHER, SO WE GET AN IDEA OF STRUCTURE, MATERIAL, AND WHAT'S THE IMPACT.

>> OKAY.

>> MR. CHAIR, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT?

>> YEAH, I AM, AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA, ARTHUR.

BUT I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT THE STANDARD AND DECIDE WHAT TO DO BECAUSE WE HAVE TURNED THESE DOWN BEFORE AND WE'RE EITHER GOING TO ACCEPT THEM OR WE'RE NOT GOING TO ACCEPT THEM.

BUT IF WE ARE GOING TO ACCEPT, WE NEED TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF STANDARD OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ACCEPT AND WHAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO EXEMPT.

>> WELL, MY REMARKS TO DO ALL THREE IS NO INDICATION OF APPROVAL.

IT'S JUST TO LOOK AT THEM AS THREE OF THEM.

>> YEAH.

>> I THINK IT'S A TRICKY THING, AND WHAT THE IMPACT IS.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND IT.

>> THANK YOU VERY

>> ALL IN FAVOR, SAY 'AYE.'

>> AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANDERSON, AYE.

>>

>> OKAY.

DID I CHECK TO SEE IF THERE WAS SOMEBODY HERE FOR THAT ONE? NO, I DIDN'T.

>> WE STILL HAVE TWO CALLERS WITH HER.

>> I KNOW. THEY DIDN'T RAISE THEIR HAND.

OKAY. LET ME CHECK ON THEM.

HELLO, CALLER ENDING IN 7483.

WHICH ITEM ARE YOU HERE FOR?

>> YES, MA'AM. IT'S FOR ITEM NUMBER 2.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED IT, 11 HEATHER WAY.

>> ITEM NUMBER 2 WAS ALREADY VOTED ON EARLIER IN THE MEETING.

>> OKAY. PROBABLY, I'VE MISSED THAT.

>> IF I LOOK AT IT REALLY QUICK FOR YOU, I THINK THAT WAS A SUMMARY ITEM.

WHAT ADDRESS WAS THAT?

>> 11 HEATHER WAY.

>> OKAY. THAT WAS A SUMMARY ITEM AND IT WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED.

THE PROJECT NEEDS TO PASS INSPECTION, MEET CODE STANDARDS, IS REQUIRED FOR SCREENING UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, AND IF REQUIRED, PLANNING MUST BE EVERGREEN TREES OR SHRUBS AT LEAST SEVEN

[02:45:01]

FEET TALL IN HEIGHT AT THE TIME OF PLANTING.

A PATIO COVER MAY NOT APPROACH INTO THE EASEMENT.

YOU MUST VERIFY ALL THE CENTERPOINT EASEMENT AS THEY MAY DIFFER FROM THE COVENANTS, AND ALL CONDITIONS MUST BE MET WITHIN A 150 DAYS OF APPROVAL.

HE WILL BE BEING CONTACTED BY STAFF BY EMAIL WITH YOUR PERMIT, OKAY?

>> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. YOU'RE WELCOME. CALLER 6190, ARE YOU HERE FOR THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA?

>> THAT'S CORRECT, MA'AM. IT WAS ME.

>> OKAY. WE'LL BE GOING TO THAT RIGHT NOW,

[Item VIII 22]

WHICH IS 27 FLORAL VISTA DRIVE.

IT'S IN THE VILLAGE OF CREEKSIDE PARK WEST, AND IT IS A DRIVEWAY THAT EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM WIDTH AND THE DESIGN DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARDS.

THIS IS YOUR SECTION MAP.

IT BACKS UP TO ZION LUTHERAN CEMETERY.

HERE IT IS.

HERE'S YOUR AERIAL PHOTO, WHICH OF COURSE WAS A LITTLE WHILE AGO.

THE HOUSES AREN'T EVEN ON IT YET.

THE SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS WHAT WAS APPROVED WHEN THE HOUSE WAS BUILT.

THREE CAR GARAGE WITH THE DRIVEWAY COMING LIKE THIS AND COMING OUT HERE WITH A PLANTER AND A BED THERE.

ARE THERE SOME ISSUES WITH THE APPLICATION? IT SAYS 4-6 FEET IN LENGTH.

IT'S ACTUALLY QUITE A LOT MORE THAN THAT.

THIS IS YOUR PUZZLE.

THE APPLICANT SAID THE DRIVEWAY LEADS TO THEIR THREE-CAR GARAGE, THE DRIVEWAY THAT LEADS TO THEIR THIRD CAR WAS TOO NARROW, AND THE CAR USUALLY RAN OVER THE GRASS AND DAMAGED THEIR SPRINKLER SYSTEMS. IT WAS DIFFICULT TO USE THEIR THIRD CAR GARAGE BAY.

THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO REMOVE A TREE OR ANYTHING TO DO THIS.

THEY STAINED THE BORDERS BECAUSE THE TIRES WERE LEAVING MARKS ON THE EDGES OF THE CONCRETE.

>> ONCE AGAIN, THERE'S THE SURVEY.

THIS WAS WHEN IT WAS APPROVED BY THE DEVELOPER, THAT THIS LANDSCAPE BED HAD TO BE HERE.

THIS IS BEFORE THE DRIVEWAY WIDENING, AND THIS IS AFTER THE DRIVEWAY WIDENING.

AS YOU CAN SEE IT'S IN PROCESS OF ALONG THE DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF THE DRIVEWAY, BUT THIS WHOLE SECTION HERE WAS ADDED TO THE DRIVEWAY.

THIS IS 33 FEET WIDE AND THE LITTLE BORDERS ARE 18 INCHES.

THE 18 INCHES ARE ALLOWED, BORDERS ON THE DRIVEWAY ON BOTH SIDES.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT WIDER THAN ALLOWED.

I THINK IT'S THREE FEET, IF I'M CORRECT, FOR A THREE-CAR GARAGE.

YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS ADDITION WAS NINE FEET OR 9.3 INCHES.

>> YEAH, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT I MENTIONED. CORRECT.

>> THIRTY-THREE AND A HALF THERE.

THIS IS A VIEW FROM THE FRONT, FROM THE SIDES AND THIS IS, WE TOOK SOME PICTURES AT A LATER DATE WHERE THE TAPE HAS BEEN REMOVED AND YOU CAN SEE THE STAINING OF THE BORDERS, BUT WE'VE NOTICED THAT THE PAINT IS ALREADY STARTING TO PEEL IN THESE LOCATIONS ALL ALONG HERE.

>> CHIPPED OUT.

>> YEAH. THIS IS JUST THE VIEW FROM THE DRIVEWAY DOWN FLORAL VISTA ON THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT.

IT IS A THREE-CAR GARAGE, SO THAT'S ALLOWED TO BE 21 FEET WITH AN ADDITIONAL THREE FEET FOR BORDERS, AND THAT WOULD BE 24 INCHES BUT IT'S SUPPOSED TO TAPER DOWN TO 21.

SO IT IS QUITE A BIT WIDER THAN ALLOWED, AND I DON'T BELIEVE WE'VE EVER APPROVED A DRIVEWAY OF THIS CONFIGURATION.

>> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDES THAT SHOW WHAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY LOOK LIKING,

[02:50:04]

AND THEN WHAT IT IS NOW AGAIN?

>> OKAY. YEAH. I HAVE ONE PHOTO OF THE ORIGINAL, WHICH IS THERE.

>> SO THAT'S THE ORIGINAL?

>> THAT'S THE ORIGINAL.

SO BASICALLY WHAT THEY DID IS THEY CAME HERE, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF A PLANTING, AND ADDED A SEPARATE DRIVEWAY ON THAT SIDE.

>> FLIP OVER TO THE NEW ONE. IS THE HOMEOWNER ON?

>> YES, HE IS.

>> OKAY. CAN I SPEAK NOW?

>> YES, SIR.

>> THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, SORRY, I APOLOGIZE THAT I NEVER ADMITTED ON THE FIRST PLACE TO GET AN APPROVAL, SO THAT'S A MISTAKE ON MY SIDE.

BUT IN THE MEANTIME, THERE'S NO NEIGHBORS, THERE WAS NO GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR ME BECAUSE WE JUST MOVED IN, AND THERE WAS NO OTHER PEOPLE TO EDUCATE ME IN TERMS OF HOW I SHOULD DO ANY KIND OF MODIFICATION AT ALL, SO IT'S A MISTAKE ON MY SIDE SO I COMPLETELY APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

AT THE SAME TIME, I WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE TO HEAR MY CONCERNS.

SO THE CONCERNS ARE IF YOU LOOK INTO THE PREVIOUS PHOTO WHERE MY BACK OUT OF MY THIRD CAR GARAGE AND I DIRECTLY GO AND HIT MY SPRINKLERS OR I DIRECTLY GO AND HIT THE TREES.

SO I WAS TRYING TO FIND OUT A WAY.

ON TOP OF THAT, I NOW HAVE TWO YOUNG KIDS WHO STILL GO ON THE CAR SEATS, AND I ALSO HAVE AN ELDERLY MOTHER-IN-LAW WHO IS DISABLED.

SO THERE'S BEEN SOME LEVEL OF DISCOMFORT FOR ME TO GO AND MAKE SURE I TAKE THE RIGHT CURVE AND GO INTO THAT PARTICULAR GARAGE BECAUSE SHE WANTS TO GO INTO THAT PARTICULAR VEHICLE.

WITH THAT SAID, AT THE SAME TIME, I THOUGHT IN THAT THERE'S NO IRRIGATION SYSTEMS THAT I'M TRYING TO BREAK IT DOWN AND AT THE SAME TIME I DON'T WANT TO MOVE THE TREE AS WELL.

SO I THOUGHT I'LL JUST EXTEND THIS TO A LITTLE BIT AND THAT HELPING ME TODAY FOR SURE, 100 PERCENT, THIS IS HELPING ME, THE FAMILY, TO A GREAT LEVEL OF COMFORT.

IF THAT'S NOT BEING A SITUATION I WILL HAVE TO PARK MY VEHICLE MOST PROBABLY ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD.

THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I CAN REALLY OPERATE THE FAMILY TO GO AND ENTER INTO THE CAR, AND ESPECIALLY WITH A DISABLED PERSON.

THOSE ARE THE PAIN POINTS, AND THOSE ARE THE DATA POINTS THAT I HAD.

THAT'S ONE OF THE REASON I HAD TO TAKE THIS OTHER MITIGATION.

COMING BACK TO MY POINT, IT WAS MY MISTAKE, I SHOULD HAVE ASKED THIS.

I GOT RELOCATED FROM DALLAS TO THIS WOODLAND.

THIS LEVEL OF TOWNSHIP WAS NOT THE SAME LEVEL OF TOWNSHIP THAT I WAS DWELLING IN.

THIS, AGAIN, A MISTAKE ON MY SIDE.

I WOULD POLITELY REQUEST YOU GUYS TO SEE IF YOU CAN APPROVE THIS, SO THAT WAY IT WILL BE EASIER FOR THE ELDERLY PEOPLE, THE KIDS, AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T BREAK ANYTHING.

AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T WANT TO MOVE THOSE TREES OR ANYTHING.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I NEVER WAS INTENDED TO IT EITHER.

WITH THAT SAID, I LEAVE IT TO THE COMMITTEE, AND SEE IF YOU GUYS CAN APPROVE THIS.

IF YOU DON'T WANT TO APPROVE THIS, AND AT THIS MOMENT THE COVID AND STUFF, MY JOB HAS ALSO TAKEN A HIT.

I DON'T HAVE SOME MEANS TO GO AND SPEND MORE MONEY TO HAVE SOME PEOPLE TO GO AND REMOVE THIS.

I WILL LEAVE IT TO YOUR DISCRETION, GENTLEMENS AND LADIES.

>> SIR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE HOMEOWNER?

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU. ANY COMMENTS?

>> THIS WOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN APPROVED ORIGINALLY IN A NEW CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE IT HAS TO TAPER DOWN.

IT HAS THAT VEGETATION SCREENING RIGHT THERE WHERE IT TAPERS IN ORDER TO HELP GIVE SOME SCREENING AND BREAK UP THE VIEW CORRIDOR TO THE HARD SURFACE AREA.

ADDING THAT AREA TO THE LEFT NEGATES THAT.

MY OPINION, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED.

>>

[02:55:07]

>> NO, IT'S A MASSIVE STRUCTURE, AND THE WAY IT'S BEEN MODIFIED, IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD.

YOU GOT THIS FLOWER BED HERE, THEN YOU GOT A SEPARATE WHOLE DRIVEWAY ON THE LEFT SIDE OF IT.

IT JUST DOESN'T FIT IN WITH THE CHARACTER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE ISSUE IS ALSO THE PAINTING.

THE PAINT'S ALREADY FADED OUT, SO IT REALLY LOOKS BEAT UP, ALL THAT STRIPING THAT WAS PAINTED GRAY.

WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM THAT WE'VE REALLY EVER APPROVED ON A DRIVEWAY WIDTH, ON A VARIANCE?

>> WELL, THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST, THIS WOULD DEFINITELY BE THE MOST EVER.

BUT I WOULD SAY NORMALLY THEY WOULD ADD IN THE BORDER DIMENSION AND THAT WOULD BE 24 FEET, AND MAYBE UP TO TWO OR THREE FEET MORE THAN THAT, THAT'S BEEN ALLOWED, BUT NOT VERY OFTEN.

THOSE ARE USUALLY THOSE HOOK-IN DRIVEWAYS THAT HAVE TO HAVE THE EXTRA WIDTH FOR MANEUVERING.

>>

>> APPROVAL OF THIS, THE IMPACT IS LARGE.

WE START APPROVING THIS KIND OF STUFF, PEOPLE WILL POINT TO AND SAY, "HEY I LIKE THAT, THAT'S WHAT I WANT." THE WIDTH ON THE ORIGINAL DRIVEWAY AT THE TOP IS WITHIN A STANDARD

>> ORIGINAL DRIVEWAY'S ALLOWED TO BE THE WIDTH OF THE GARAGES.

>> OKAY.

>> CAN I SEE A PHOTO OF THE ORIGINAL, PLEASE?

>> SORRY, WE'RE USING THE WRONG MOUSE.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> NO, SIR.

>> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY IT AS PRESENTED AND HAVE THE HOME OWNER COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ROB, AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>>

>> MARY, AYE.

>> WALT, AYE.

>> CAN I ASK A SIMPLE QUESTION IF IT IS

>> SURE.

>> YEAH. SURE.

>> HOW SOON DO YOU EXPECT ME TO GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL ONE BECAUSE WITH THE COVID AND JOB IMPACT, I DON'T HAVE THE EXPENSE TO DO ALL THIS STUFF AT THIS.

IS THERE A TIMELINE? AGAIN, FOR SURE, MY COMPANY HAS TOLD FOR THE NEXT ONE YEAR, I'M NOT ABLE TO FIND ANOTHER JOB.

I DON'T HAVE THE EXPENSE TO DO IT, BUT I WILL CERTAINLY OBLIGE TO YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS AND WILL GO FOR IT.

BUT DO YOU HAVE A TIME FRAME THAT THIS HAS TO HAPPEN IN THIS PERIOD OF TIME?

>> IT'S SIX MONTHS. ANY ADVICE?

>> WELL, THE NORMAL TIME THAT WE'VE BEEN TELLING PEOPLE IS 150 DAYS.

>> LET'S GIVE HIM 180.

>> OKAY.

>> WE CAN REVIEW IN 180 DAYS WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE PROJECT TO SEE IF IT'S BEEN RETURNED TO THE ORIGINAL DESIGN AND CONDITION.

>> SURE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THE OTHER THING PUT OF THE NEXT ONE YEAR, I HAVE A JOB IMPACT THAT QUALIFIES FOR ME TO DO NO MORE EXPENSE.

I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW IN ADVANCE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> AND I BELIEVE THAT'S THE END OF THE AGENDA.

>> GO TO ITEM NUMBER 9, MEMBERS COMMENTS?

[Items IX & XI]

>> SORRY. I THINK I MADE THOSE COMMENTS ABOUT THE RDRC.

I'M ANXIOUSLY AWAITING A GOOD PLAN SO WE CAN RESUME OUR RDRCS BACK REPRESENTING PEOPLE.

>>

>> NO COMMENTS.

>> JOHN ANDERSON?

>> THANK YOU STAFF, AND THANK EVERYBODY FOR BEING HERE.

>> THANK YOU. BOB ADAMS?

>> THE MORE I THINK ABOUT IT, I KNOW THAT WE'VE ALREADY RULED ON ITEM B, THE CHICK-FIL-A,

[03:00:04]

IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE CAN MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS TO THAT APPROVAL?

>> WE HAVE TO HAVE TO BE PUT BACK ON THE AGENDA.

>> OKAY.

>> WE'RE STILL IN THE SAME SESSION THOUGH.

>> WE'VE ALREADY ACTED ON IT. KIM?

>> WE'VE HAD THIS COME UP BEFORE WITH THE COMMITTEE.

SOMEONE CAN MAKE A MOTION TO RESCIND THAT ACTION.

IT WOULD NEED TO BE SECONDED, AND YOU WOULD ALL NEED TO ACT ON IT, AND THEN YOU WOULD REHEAR THAT ITEM AGAIN.

HOWEVER, THE DIFFICULTY WITH DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS YOU ACTUALLY HAD THE INDIVIDUAL PRESENT ON THE AGENDA, AND HE HEARD THE ACTION, SO IT WOULD NOT ALLOW HIM FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE PRESENT FOR THE COMMITTEE'S DISCUSSION IN REGARDS TO IT.

I CAN REACH OUT TO OUR LEGAL COUNSEL IF NEED BE.

I KNOW THAT WE HAVE RESCINDED AN ACTION DURING A MEETING, BUT THERE'S ALSO THE CHALLENGES OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO'S NO LONGER PRESENT.

>> IN LIGHT OF YOUR COMMENTS, KIM, IS THAT THE RESIDENT OR THE OWNER OF THE BUSINESS IS NOT HERE TO PARTAKE IN ALL OF THIS, AND HEAR ALL OF THIS.

>> JUST CURIOUS, WHAT IS YOUR THOUGHT BOB?

>> WELL, HAD I KNOWN THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO TURN THIS DIRECTION, AND I GUESS I NEED TO PLAN FOR IT AT ALL TIMES.

I DON'T LIKE THE WIDE OPEN SIDE, IF YOU WILL.

I BELIEVE THAT A GABLE LAND FLAP WOULD BE IN ORDER.

IT WOULD ALSO BLOCK THE LIGHT AT NIGHT TIME, AND A BRIGHT WHITE IS REALLY NOT NECESSARY.

I THINK A LIGHT TAN OR SOMETHING TO JUST TONE IT DOWN BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY CLOSE TO HALF THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING.

I'M NOT PLEASED WITH THE WAY THIS HAS GONE, BUT I UNDERSTAND.

>> KIM, CAN YOU MAKE A REQUEST NOT AN OFFICIAL THING, BUT JUST A REQUEST FROM THE COMMITTEE THAT THEY SEE IF A TAN TOP IS AVAILABLE AND POSSIBLY THE END COVERS THAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT.

NOTHING REQUIRED, BUT JUST A REQUEST.

>> WE CAN HAVE TO AWARE OF A COMMITTEE SUGGESTION OR A CONCERN, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY.

BOB, BASED ON WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, IS YOUR PREFERENCE TO HAVE SIDE FLAPS?

>>

>> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE END OF THE GABLE FOR THE ROOF.

>> CORRECT. AT THE END OF THE GABLES BECAUSE WHEN THE LIGHTS ARE ON AT NIGHT, THAT LIGHT IS GOING TO SPILL OUT, SO ANYONE ON A PARKING LOT IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO DIRECTLY SEE THOSE LIGHTS.

>> I FOLLOW YOU NOW. WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR IS FOR THAT TRIANGULAR SHAPE OF THE CANOPY THAT'S CURRENTLY OPEN TO BE CONCEALED?

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> AT A MINIMUM, MAKE SURE THAT THE LIGHTS THAT WOULD BE IN PLACE ARE SHIELDED.

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> IF I MAY, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THIS COMMITTEE MAY NOT FEEL THE SAME WAY, AND THEY CANNOT SPEAK TO THAT RIGHT NOW.

I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S FAIR TO REQUEST THAT.

>> IT'S ONLY A REQUEST.

>> NO. I UNDERSTAND.

>> I GUESS THE WAY I LOOK AT IT GUYS, THIS IS NOTHING THAT'S PERMANENT.

LIKE I SAID, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO WORK WITH THESE RESTAURANTS.

THIS THING COULD BE OVER WITH NEXT WEEK AND THEY COULD COME OUT WITH SOME VACCINE, FOR GOD'S SAKE, THAT'S GOING TO ALTER EVERYTHING.

IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE GIVING THEM SOMETHING PERMANENT.

>> WELL, KIM, CAN YOU AT LEAST PUT A NOTE ON THE FILE THAT WHEN IT COMES BACK AT THE END OF AUGUST, AND THEY TRY TO EXTEND THAT WE AT LEAST ARE MADE AWARE OF THAT NOTE AT THAT TIME?

>> YES. I CAN STILL REACH OUT TO THEM TO JUST IDENTIFY THAT AFTER THE FACT IN MEMBER COMMENTS THERE WAS A SUGGESTION IF HE'D LIKE TO CONSIDER.

>> THAT'S NOT A DIRECTIVE.

[03:05:02]

>> RIGHT.

>> IT'S BEEN TEMPORARY, BUT WHO KNOWS?

>> YOU COULD GO UP TO HIM KIM AND SAY, "HEY, THE BOARD WORKED WITH YOU, BUT WHY DON'T YOU TRY TO WORK WITH US ON THIS?"

>> WE'VE WORKED WITH THAT REPRESENTATIVE IN THE PAST.

I DON'T HAVE A CONCERN REACHING OUT TO HIM AFTERWARDS AND MENTIONING IT AS A SUGGESTION, AND THEN GOING FROM THERE.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU GUYS TO SEE WHAT INFORMATION OR FEEDBACK I GET FROM HIM.

>> IT SEEMED REASONABLE, KIM, IN HIS WHOLE APPROACH, HIS COMMENTS TO THE COMMITTEE, SO HE MAY BE VERY OPEN TO THOSE TWO SUGGESTIONS.

>> UNDERSTOOD.

>> LIKE I SAID ALSO, IT'S CORPORATE MIGHT COME BACK NEXT WEEK AND SAY, "WE'RE GOING TO OPEN UP THE DINING ROOM AND AS SOON AS

>> THERE'S A LOT OF PRESSURE

>> THANK YOU, BOB.

>> APPRECIATE IT.

>> ANYTHING ELSE?

>> NO, SIR. THANK YOU.

>> MARY?

>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

ON THIS LAST ONE WHERE THIS CONSTRUCTION ON THIS DRIVEWAY OF MODIFICATION WAS DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT, DO WE EVER ASK OR SEND A LETTER TO A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND SAY, "HEY, PLEASE NOTIFY IF YOU DO WORK IN THE WOODLANDS YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE A PERMIT?

>> YES. WE DO IF WE CAN FIND OUT THE NAME OF THE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.

WE LET THEM KNOW ACTUALLY, THE DSC PROMULGATED A RULE THAT IF WE CATCH SOMEBODY DOING WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT, WE WILL SEND A NOTICE TO THAT CONTRACTOR.

A LETTER BASICALLY SAYING THAT THEY HAVE ONE STRIKE AGAINST THEM, AND IF THEY GET TWO, THEY'LL BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE DSC, AND THE DSC WILL DECIDE WHETHER TO REQUIRE A $5,000 COMPLIANCE DEPOSIT ANYTIME THAT CONTRACTOR SUBMITS AN APPLICATION.

>>

>> A GOOD QUESTION.

>> STAFF COMMENTS?

>> I HAVE NONE.

>> ALL GOOD. THANKS TO THE COMMITTEE.

>> HENNIE?

>> NO, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYBODY.

CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN?

>> I LIKE THAT MUCH.

>> THEY'LL MOVED.

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HAVE A SAFE WEEK. BE SAFE OUT THERE.

>> THANK YOU.

>> EVERYONE, THANK YOU.

>> HAPPY FATHER'S DAY TO EVERY FATHER.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. THANK YOU.



* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.