Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Alrighty. So, uh, it is 6:01 p.m. and I'm going to open up this meeting of the city of Sagenov's planning and zoning commission and we're going to do a roll call. Um, Vivian Anderson, place one present. Uh Benjamin Guty place two present. Peter Drle. Melinda Julian present. Valvesus present.

John Hardy. Rebecca Arrington. Okay. Let the record show we have the both alternates are not here this evening but we do have quorum. Now I am going to open up uh audience participation 1B at 6:02 p.m. Uh we have the microphone up here. Anyone that's in the audience that would like to speak on an agenda item and is not listed uh as a representative for that item, uh please proceed to fill out one of these forms and hand it to the city staff over there to speak on that item. Um, and we will call you up at that time. Yeah. And then looks like now I'm going to do 1 C, approval of minutes.

Susie, so there's no one signed up for public comment. We do have two. We have two for public comment or for public hearing? Public hearing. Yeah. Thank you.

Good. All righty. So, the minutes are from the meeting that was held on December 9th, 2025. I know last time we had a couple of uh notes. Did anyone see anything from this last meeting that needs to be mentioned or changed? And if not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that the minutes be approved from December 9th as standing. All right. And do I have a second? A second.

All righty. We're all going to vote. All right. And the motion passes unanimously. Uh now we are going to move to number two business.

There's no business this evening. All right. Now we're going to go to number three public hearing uh 3A. Consideration and action regarding a textural amendment to the zoning ordinance to appendix A, zoning, article 86, section D relating to carports. Mr. Chairman and Commission, before you, you have a proposed textual amendment to the zoning ordinance in regards to carports. Just as a refresher, we have seen carports in the past within the few years, a couple months ago as well. Um, but before you, you have a textual amendment for two pieces of the most recent proposed ordinance and it is in regards to setbacks. So, I just wanted to present to y'all in regards to what a setback is, just so that y'all can have a definition. A sideyard setback is the minimum required distance a building or structure must be from a property's side lot. Creating an open space for light, air access, and safety between buildings and boundaries. And some reasons why this is important is that it creates fire breaks between homes, allowing for emergency access and reducing fire spread. It prevents houses from feeling stacked. It ensures natural light and air flow is brought by so that the spacing allows for that. It provides space for maintenance and repairs of utilities located near property lines. And it protects property rights and prevents developments that could negatively impact surrounding property values. And we also have the chief of fire here. And so he's going to present a little bit more about what the actual proposed amendment is, what that entails, and then if y'all have any

questions for either one of us, we will open that up and then we will open up the public hearing, but that's all I have for y'all in terms of definitions. Okay. Thank you. All right. Howdy, Chief.

Good evening, Chairman God and PNZ Commission. I think this is the first time I've had an opportunity to speak to y'all in a formal setting. As she mentioned, I'm your fire chief here at the fire department. kind of my role with ordinances and codes. I'm uh currently the director for the building department and code compliance. So, that's how I'm involved with this. I think this is probably the third ordinance relating to carports that's been back since 2022. So, this is a minor modification to the carport ordinance that's being sought. uh worked closely with some council members and legal counsel to try to uh propose something that's a viable solution for uh what the intent we're trying to achieve is. U as she mentioned the setbacks for buildings that includes residential homes. Uh the fire code plays a lot into that. Uh but the solution that's being presented here and hopefully you had a chance to read my memo and some information that was attached to that. uh that doesn't interfere or this is a solution that takes into account any fire safety related issues. I want to be clear staff is remains neutral on this. My my role here is to provide you information, provide you some clarifications and answer any questions that you may have. But what's presented before you staff doesn't have any issue with what's being presented. that that doesn't pose any special challenges for staff if if you decided to go forward with uh what's being proposed in the ordinance. And with that, I'll I'll answer any questions or anything that you have. So, I I did some building the last five, six years or so at my house and we built a pergola in our backyard. It was a cedar wood pergola. This ordinance would only affect carports in the front of the house. So

meaning just as an example, me or my neighbor wouldn't be able to build a larger pergola that touches the property line or touches a wood fence or something like that because of this ordinance. Because this ordinance is only talking about carports. That's correct. as a carport is defined, your pergola doesn't meet that that definition. Okay. Now, the one stipulation, we don't have any in town, but there feasibly could be a house with some side entry or back entry where they could build a carport in the backyard.

I'm just throwing that out there. There's not one today, and I couldn't point out one that exists, but there could be a carport in the backyard. But, yeah, your pergola doesn't meet the definition of a carport. It is strictly for a carport. And the reason being there are some as I put in the memo there are some unique circumstances and uh both you city council and staff doesn't have any flexibility to try to some address some of those unique ones. There are some that exist today or one in particular that exists today. There's some unique shaped lots in town where it may be feasible to have a bigger carport or encroach into the sideyard. The the safeguard of that is an SUP. There's a process to do that. the cost would go back to the regular 750 cost. So, there's a hurdle there. Somebody would really want to have to do that. And in applying for an SUP, all staff gets to weigh in if there was one that caused a fire safety concern in particular. The fire chief would certainly speak to that. And it's highly unlikely that would get approved if it was causing a safety concern. So, there's some safeguards in there to consider if somebody approached that and wanted to go into the sideyard approach or bigger than the 600 square f feet. Did I ask there's there's nothing that's going back to the current I saw something mentioned in here about referencing old sagenov some of these of old sagen none of this is going to be referencing to make them come up to standard or change standard for what they already have. Correct.

That's correct. There's nothing retroactive to make somebody go change something that currently exists today. If somebody had an old carport, they tore it down, wanted to remodel or do something to it, they would have to bring it up to the current standard. But for instance, if if somebody had a carport that was over 600 square ft, they wanted to tear that down and rebuild it for whatever reason, a storm today, they couldn't do that. They couldn't build it beyond that 600 square f feet, even though they might have had one before. What's being proposed here today gives an avenue for consideration for that. And I've learned this recently, but evidently old Sageno references kind of the neighborhood around here. Yeah. Um

some of the original areas and most of those had like maybe a single driveway with a onecar garage and that's where the carport overlay district originally came from to give people an opportunity to have extra coverage for their car because it was they're smaller lots. They didn't have a dual car uh driveway or even a a dualc garage. But that but that is a good point. If we have a storm, god forbid, and you're out of you're out of uh you're you're over the 600 feet 600 square feet or some other issue, you can't put it back. You won't be going back to what you had unless you have an SUP. Correct. Okay.

Great. Okay. And so just to be clear from fire chief's perspective, y'all are neutral on this. But as written now, there is no fire safety issues currently with this proposed. You said that correctly. Yes, sir. Okay. Just wanted to be clear. Okay. All righty.

Mr. Chairman, I do just want to summarize um to go back on Mr. Um, so the only thing that is being proposed today is carports for B and D. So if a carport wanted to exceed the 600 ft or if they wanted to or weren't able to maintain that required side yard setback, that's what would instigate or initiate the specific use permit. So all other permits would not come before you for an SUP because I know that was brought back before. So I just want to make sure that we understand that this would only be for people that wanted to exceed more than 600 square foot in roofed area and then people who wanted to have a more minimal sideyard than what is currently required.

Correct. So if this So just to somewhat translate, so if this uh ordinance is passed tonight, everybody in the city, unless they live in an HOA that that doesn't allow it, but everybody else in the city would be allowed to build a carport with no city input, building input, fire input unless it's above 600 square ft or needs to go into the sideyard or something like that. So any carport still has to go through permitting and contain all regulations and requirements, the regular permit.

However, if they wanted to apply to not meet those requirements in regards to the 600 square foot and the setbacks, then they're eligible to apply for a specific use permit. Okay. That specific use permit would come before y'all. Y'all would the BA It' go before the BOA. Oh, I'm sorry. It would go to the BOA. Okay. So, it wouldn't be a regular SP.

It would. Yeah. So, it would be it would go in front of the BOA for them to vote on. And at that point, So, as a reminder, your BOA is much more of a quasi judiciary um finding a board. So, at that point, staff would be able or your fire chief or um surveys or whatever, people would be able to come forward and say, "Hey, this causes safety concerns." Okay,

for SUS to be approved in the city, they they have certain elements they have to hit. And if they're not, if there's safety concerns that are coming up like fire spreading between properties or the inability of emergency workers to be able to access a property because of a structure, that SUP is going to get denied. So that's I believe what the fire chief is referencing when he talks about these safeguards. It's not that staff would be preventing the SUP from going in front of the BOA. It's that the staff could then go to the BOA meeting and say, "Hey, these are our safety concerns with this and the BOA would be evaluating it from there." And again, this is just all of your you are you guys passed a carport ordinance,

right, last year. All this changes is if someone has a carport or wants to build a carport that is greater than 600 square feet or if they want it to encroach into their sideyard. So you currently in Sagenol you have setbacks for behind and on the sides of your houses, right? Correct.

This allows them to disregard with with an SUP with approval from the BOA and any other surveys or drainage plans or whatever else might be required. um allows the carport to be closer to a side fence or a side property line than it would without the SUP. So that's all it's it's the size of the carport and it's how close to the side property lines that that carport can reach. If I may ask a question,

so how much bigger are we talking about carports? Are we talking about trying to put three cars underneath now? I mean, where is this going to stop? Well, I guess that's that's open and that's what would be up to approval in the SU by the BA and ultimately the city council. I think it goes to both of those uh deciding entities. Do you know what's precipitating this request for change? I think that solve some solve some issues and potential issues to come in the come in the future. my understanding. Okay. Thank you, Chief.

And thank you, chief. Um, if you wouldn't mind hanging around Sure. because we might have a couple more just like clearance questions. My thing is like, you know, I've been on this commission in a one form or another for several years now, and I I generally don't like government telling me what to do on my property. That being said, I listen to the experts and so I just want to be clear on some of the safety stuff because I've heard I've heard a couple of times now, not not um differing statements, but I I just want us to understand what we're doing here like because I don't I don't want that accident to happen, you know, or like that kind of thing. So, I mean, if you're if you're telling me that your crews can get into the sideyard to the the neighbor's house that's on fire or something, you know, then then I listen to you, you know. Um, but

each each one of those this gives us an opportunity for each one of those to be on a case by case bas. Yeah. And who who is the BOA um attorney? Is how many people is that? Is that a public council? Is that BOA? Sorry, let me m up. Your BOA is appointed. It's just like you. Okay. They're they're they're a board that's appointed. They don't meet very often in Sagenov. Only if there's a reason to meet, right? That that that is going to be changing a little bit. I think they're going to be meeting more often, but they they met like one time last year. They met six times the year before. Um they they don't they are not brought together very often, but they are just like y'all. They're appointed and nominated and okay,

they run. Even for my own clarification, the board of adjustments normally handles variances, but they are the organization that does SUPs as well. Okay. All righty. I appreciate it. Thank you, Chief. You bet. One Susie hit on that, but just to clarify, any any carport that goes on the city goes through a regular permitting process through the building department just like any construction project would. So, there's safeguards for that. And in the existing ordinance as it exists today, there's design criteria. there's several components that have to be uh met in order to build a carport. So, there are some some things that they have to do, but it goes through a regular permitting process.

We're we're basically just and some of this might be for our our building staff or city staff, but we're if we pass this tonight, we're basically just saying that according to these guidelines, this can actually be done now because right now it cannot be done. And then we're reducing the amount of um of permitting fees because a SUP would normally be $750 and they just have to go through the regular permitting which is less like not correct. I'm just trying to fully understand. I don't

So right now it's not right now there was not a possible way in Sagenol to build a carport in excess of 600 square ft and it be a conforming structure. Okay,

there are some that exist either because they weren't caught properly or because they pre-exist the ordinance and they are a legally non-conforming structure. Um, but currently, right, so a non-conforming a lawfully non-conforming structure, we touched on this a little earlier, if something happens to that structure, normally the cut off is 70%, might be 60%. If if that structure burns down or is torn down in a storm or something and the majority of that structure is damaged, that structure cannot be repaired because it's a non-conforming structure, right? That the code sees that as building a new structure that's non-conforming. So there is not a legal way currently unless it pre-exists the ordinance to build a carport that encroaches into your sideyard or into the side setback or is in excess of 600 square feet. This ordinance makes it expensive because they have to go through that permitting fee or that SU application fee, but it makes it possible for someone who pays that permitting fee and is able to satisfy

the the BOA that they need that SG to then have that support and it's not automatic. It's a consideration. They have to come forward and ask to do that with all the facts and then a decision is made whether it's approved or not. And as she mentioned, the the permitting fee still applies, but the SUP is an additional fee and it's $750. So that that's paid regardless if it's approved or not. They're spending that money to go through that process.

Additionally, uh also states the way that the amended ordinance states that they could be made to get a drainage survey, obtain a drainage survey or obtain a a survey of the property if there are certain concerns. So that um if you've ever bought a house, you know how expensive the surface is. Oh yeah, I know.

So encroaching into the sideyard setback with any kind of building structure has the potential to uh create some drainage issues. Sagenol's flat so we have drainage issues everywhere. So that was put in there as a safeguard. The building official being the expert to decide whether we need to address that. If it's a known issue, it's got to be addressed. If it has a potential to create a drainage issue, we're going to address it. if it if it's clear that it doesn't there's not any extra expense or effort they have to do and also if the if the property line is not clearly known to certainty is how I worded that in that then they're responsible for getting a property survey to make sure where that is in reference to the property line

so I'm a I'm a scale person I I work in jewelry so 5 karat diamond that's a dime a 10 karat diamond that's a penny 20 karat diamond that's a nickel on your wife's finger what is a 600 square f foot carport. Is that a twocar garage? Is that a threecar car? Like I don't understand what it's typically the width of a twocar driveway. Okay. Would that be accurate? Okay. Approximately. Go ahead. Commission. I'm so sorry. I have been misspeaking. Variances go to the VA. SGPS come to PC.

See, that's that's what I that's the way I understand. I was so confident and then I was like as I kept saying it, I was like my rhythm's wrong. That doesn't feel right. I apologize for any confusion from that variances. So yeah, the BOA is out of this. It comes to you. Got it. I had never even heard of board of adjustments until just a minute ago. So that's why I was like, who is on that? Like I'm so sorry. Everyone they deal more with uh variances for hardships and stuff like that. Okay. Coming to you for an SU is not a hardship. That's a different thing. If they can't meet the intent of the code or something, that's a variance that goes to the BOA. So SUPs do come to to this entity for decision making.

Yes. So to summarize that that would we would receive the application through the building division and department. They would transfer them to us to apply for the SUP. We would receive the application and based off conversations with the building department and the applicant, they're trying to, you know, come up with the best solution. Once we receive that application, we'll notice it for a public hearing. It'll come before y'all. Y'all make a decision and then it'll go to council and then that decision will be made.

So, it's still if it's still going to go through all these things, I just don't like what I don't I mean, why are we printing all this paper and doing all these like, you know what I mean? Like, what is the point of this of of this ordinance tonight if it still is going to go through all these things? There's really just one section that's the change and that's J and as mentioned it gives you the capability to build a carport beyond 600 square ft or encroach into the sideyard. That's really the only two right now no matter how today you could do it and how many meetings they went to and what they still can't do it. Staff couldn't do it. Council couldn't approve it. It's just not possible. This gives an avenue for consideration to do that. So,

and having it as an SUP allows it on a case- by case basis instead of everybody still going to have oversight. Okay. So, how big is big? Where is 600 ft going to expand to? How much bigger can a carport be? There's no overlap. There's no limit in the ordinance as written. Um the the limit as written would be either the backyard setback because it doesn't that doesn't change the back property line setback um or the property line as far as the sideyard's concerned. But we keep referring to 600 ft. Yes, that's the area. Roof.

So So you've got two different measurements. You've got the area of the roof and that's the 600 ft. But 600 feet I mean if their property is big enough they can that carport can keep expanding. Well, and remember building code and support cuz square footage just means like underneath. So it it could be long, it could be narrow and like wide, you know, like depending on what they're laying that out. If if you drive through town, there's there's plenty of homes that have a threecar garage. Yeah. And there are some carports that cover that. There's some carports that cover over the walkway. Their walkways covered up to their front door

and the carport extends to cover that, too. So that that it typically what you see exceeding your 600 square ft or if they have like a separate garage on like the backside part of their house, it could be in between that little onecar side garage and their house or something like that. Okay. And how big is big is for ultimately y'all to decide when they bring the SU. Got it. Thank you, Chief. Thank you. You bet. All right. So

that is actually a good point from the chief. When the item comes before you, then remember it could be 10 years from now that it comes. It might not be all on the on the commission at that point. When the item comes before you, they don't it's not a it's not a a free pass, right? You don't have to just go with whatever they bring before you. there standards set in your ordinance that essentially you guys have evaluated many times before, but is it does it make sense? Does it does it impact the neighboring properties? Does it fit in with the the character of the neighborhood? Right? There's there's all these considerations that would be coming in where in theory if someone were to come forward with a, you know, 2,000 square foot carport that covers the entirety of their backyard, y'all could be like, "No, you don't you don't need a special use permit for that. Um, that doesn't comport with the neighborhood. That doesn't fit in with standards. That creates a a fire safety risk or a drainage uh risk or a flooding risk, excuse me. So those safeguards do exist at the SUP level. However, you are a recommendation board. If you wanted to recommend anything with this but put limitations on this, you can. Um it sounds like the bigger the bigger concern I'm hearing from you all is how big is big? How what what is the the maximum maximum

um area they could put on one of these carports? Let me make Can I make one other comment? Yes, sir. Is when this comes up they somebody is my next door neighbor and they're going to go for this SUP. Am I going to be No, you you would recuse yourself. I mean if No, no, no, no. I'm not saying me specifically. I'm just think hypothetically if you're going to put up the chief is going to put up something I think it's a monstrosity and I don't want it next to my my house. Do I get a chance to come up and say wow?

Absolutely. There'd be a public hearing on it. It's like any other zoning item where there'd be a public hearing. If it is your neighbor, you're within those 200 square feet and you'll get mailer. Um so you you would know at that point. Um but it would have to be a posted item. It would have to be publicly heard just like something like the SU requirement requires it to be advertised so people get the notice out public hearing so neighbors anybody can come speak for or against that that provides them that process and it doesn't supersede um HOAs. So correct nothing we do interfere with an HA. They're totally HOAs can do their own thing. Yep.

There's a reason I moved to one. So, no, but ju just like you were mentioning earlier, there might like uh I mean over COVID, we had a couple metal roof sheds pop up that were in the backyard, didn't see them. Do we really want to spend residents money on fighting people to take them down, so they're just kind of there now, you know? So, HOAs are only as uh uh what's the word? uh they only work if there is a board and a management company that pays attention and cares. So yeah. Okay. Um before I read off audience participation or ask you know open that section up do we have any more city staff that wants to speak on this or is that is that presentation city? Yep.

I'm good with it. All righty. So, at 6:29 p.m., I'm going to open up the audience participation part of this uh section 3A. And I think first I have to read off these really quickly, guys. So, um I have two. One of them is from I believe Chris Thomas. Um or is Chris Thomas in the audience tonight? Howdy. Would you like to come speak, sir?

Okay. All righty. I'm gonna do Deborah Thomas. Uh, would you like to come speak, ma'am? All right. And if you wouldn't mind, because we record this for the other people at home and the folks down in Austin, if you'll just say your name and where you're from.

Yes. My name is Deborah Thomas and I live in the city. I'm a a resident. Um, 617 Fox Run Trail. This ordinance has been in front of you guys several times this last couple of years. I am in a neighborhood that was carports were not allowed. I've lived there 26 years. Never even occurred that carports were going to be an issue in my neighborhood. This ordinance passed. I'm not happy about it. Um I I was told by a council member then I should have I should have bought a house in HOA. Well, I've lived there 26 years and it wasn't a it was an ordinance. So, I get it. Ordinances change. things changed, but I didn't think that was a very I didn't appreciate that. Um, as I went to the meeting, the council meeting last time when this was and spoke to them, they referred it back down to you. So, I'm here to speak to you. As one of the council members stated at that meeting, we should not be changing ordinances for one resident. Um there was a case a resident had a carport over the over the 600 square feet and all the way up to the property line. It was that's how it was when he purchased his house. I understand that he from my understanding he contacted the building department and was told if you take that down you will not be able to rebuild it the same way. You will have to meet the ordinance. and he took it down anyway. And now we're trying to come back and change the ordinance and change the ordinance and change the ordinance. He asked for a variance to the BOA. He was denied. Um, so now we're bringing it back to the council, back to the PNZ so he can get what he

wants because he wants what he wants. And it's it's not a good ordinance for the whole city. This this is not what we want for the city. The ordinance that's in place right now is good. It's fine. It's it's Yes, it allows it in in the in the the newer neighborhoods. That's when that, you know, they made the carport overlay district when they started really picking up building in the in the late 80s, mid 80s, I guess, around this area. Um, sorry. I get nervous. Um, I hear you. You're fine. Take your time.

There are, it was mentioned in the council meeting that there are some carports that do not meet the ordinance. They are not legal non-conforming because the sideyard setback has been in the ordinance since the 50s. I don't think any of those carports have been here before that. I could be wrong, but there's about 20 to 25 of them. The city is not similar to your HOA on your COVID. The city is not interested in going after those people and having them come into compliance. They're they are just considered, you know, con non-conforming. We're not code enforcement isn't trying to get them to to to conform. However, if those come down, they would need to be built back according to the ordinance, which is reasonable. I don't want my neighbor to be able to build their carport up to my property line. I don't want it to be a first come, first serve. If if if my neighbor goes to my property line, then I can't go to my property line. That's not fair. That doesn't make any sense. It's it's just we issued a permit for a gentleman to basically concrete in his entire front yard except for his 5 foot setbacks on the sides with this ordinance with no limitation on total square footage. What is going to prevent him to come in here and say, "Well, I y'all let me put a driveway in to park cars in my entire front yard. Now I need a car report to cover them. I just I don't think that's the direction we need to be going. It's and I get not having too much oversight, but we need to have some. If we're going to let carports go up to the parking line, what's to prevent the next person to come in here and say, "Well, I want my back patio to go all the way up to the

property line." Oh, what if I don't I make my carport go all the way around my house? I'm going to call it a carport. It's all one structure. It's all connected. unlimited square footage. It's just I think we're headed the wrong direction with that. I appreciate your time. Thank you, Miss Thomas. All righty. Um, uh, I also have one from Chris Thomas. Would you like to speak, sir? Thank you. All right. And again, I know I read off your name, but if you could say your name and where you're from and the speaker, please.

Chris Thomas, 617 Foxrun Trail, Sagenol, Texas. Been resident for 26 years. Uh, our home doesn't have a HOA, our neighborhood doesn't. Our community are 50 yard 50 foot lots, five yard setback. So, I just want to bring that up. If I wanted to build a carport up to my five foot sideyard setback, I could build a 600 ft covered structure under the current ordinance with the exception of getting the SUP for the 5yard setback. My next door neighbor, so we have a middle driveway driveway. He could do the exact same thing. You have a 1,200 square foot covered area connected together or pretty close touching. So you're talking about size right there. Besides the legal language to protect the city and get them to decide and make decisions that this isn't safe or this isn't aesthetic or whatever, that language is going to be in there. Other than that, pretty much the city would decide if they wanted to not allow it or not on on the SUP. So, the money be paid. But again, that's just hitting the current market, current footage at 6 foot. You're looking at 12T right in front of you. So, it's looking pretty much like a Sonic. If you keep going down the street, they keep doing it more and more houses. You could have 12 foot structure or 1,200 foot covered structures in the front of these houses covering this this the fiveyard setbacks as long as we met the drainage requirements and all that kind of stuff which would be very easily met especially in our neighborhood. I know which way the there's a gas line.

There's all kinds of stuff. On top of that, like my wife said, if you did it for your whole yard, concreted your whole yard, even without the five foot set book back, I'm looking 800 square foot in front of my in front of my yard that I could sit there and cover with the cement pad and anybody could do this. There wouldn't be any drainage issues because you already have it from your house covering. It's not the drainage areas on the side. The only problem would probably be the fire access to the backyard at that point if you had so many of them. It's just a very bad precedent that would be set after all of this has been said and done to allow these larger uh carports. I don't think there's a need for it. People are going to start working on I'm not sure what they're going to do. I can't speak to that. It's not a fact. I can just look at the square footage and say because I've actually talked to my neighbor And we would probably go ahead and spend the money just to see if we could do it and see how it looks. Back of this corner, this lot right here, this building, there's a three car, three parking structure. Take a look at it when y'all leave. Picture two sections. That's what a neighborhood's going to look like. You're going to have a roof with a open walls to park under. And that could be anywhere in the neighborhood in all over town. And back to what my wife said, uh, how would you approve one of them and then not be able to approve the other one? Again, you have the legal language that you're going to put into this ordinance to protect you, but there's no fairness to it. It wouldn't have to be, it wouldn't be an aesthetic thing at that point. You granted one and not the other. What if uh someone has an issue with somebody in the town and they have pool in the town? you know, a big business owner doesn't

want their neighbor to have something or something like that and just wants to cause a problem. Well, and I know I know in our uh specific well my neighborhood there are several families that have two or three houses right next to each other. They moved down mom and dad from New York and they got the kids just graduated from college next door. So that that's another uh I guess instance where it would be feasible that several properties could work in concert um if they wanted to or like you and your neighbor said y just just to try it.

One of my co-workers, her and her mother live next to each other and they've pretty much made gates and doors in their back fence to get to each other's backyard and stuff. So it's not necessarily a carport, but it's the same same thing. they they have access back and forth. And again, it's going to you can have 1,200 square foot real quick and it's going to meet the requirement at 600. Yeah, that's all I had. Thank you, Mr. Thomas. Um, if I uh So, one, we're we're open and Yes. Yes, Miss Thomas. Yeah, please. I'm sorry. I just No, you're fine. Thank you asked about the square footage. Yeah.

Um, I did pull up some permits that we've issued, three or four of them that I've just randomly pulled up. The twocar garage was around the 400 square foot mark. Okay. So, 600 foot is going to be, you know, a three car. Yeah. Or a twocar with like a like a overhang or something around all four corners

walkway. Um, so I mean I I'm I'm not sure why we need more than three cars in a in a carport and two in your garage. Okay. Yes, ma'am. Um, all right. We are open for public hearing. So, if anybody else in the audience wants to come uh speak on this, please feel free to. And I guess to to the city um or the city attorney, I think it might be helpful for us. I I know that if an SUP came in front of us, we would have renderings of that specific SUP, but whenever we're kind of considering things like this, I think it might be helpful in the future for us to have some kind of visual scale just because I I don't know if it's the way that I learn or the way that I see things, but I'm I'm I was having a hard time picturing what this is, you know, and and and I don't know if it's I don't know how I don't know if you just have up a like maybe like a past permit that was done where hey this is 600 square f feet or this one was 480 on the lot. So that way we just understand kind of what we're talking about. Um, the only reason why I even know some of the lingo that's being said here tonight is because I built a pool with a big deck and a pergola and and and I had the city at my house every week, you know, and we had to make sure we were this from this and we we live backed up. There's a court behind us. So, we have like five neighbors that touch our backyard and we had to, you know, French drain drainage, got to put rocks over here, got, you know, move the sprinklers, all this kind of stuff to stay away from everybody else's property line. Um, I know that's in the backyard, so I know that's different than this, but just Yeah, that's why I know about a little bit about this.

Okay, so um we're uh audience, we're Yeah. All right. Um, so I guess if nobody wants to come up at this time, I'm going to for this moment I'm going to close the audience uh participation at 6:43 p.m. and then I'm going to open up 3A for the panel to discuss. So um, yeah, please anybody? Yeah, I would like to say I I understand you're saying that there could be a domino effect, but somehow

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Charlie, can you please speak into your mic?

Oh, sorry. Sorry. I understand how you're saying that, you know, there could be a domino effect, but I think we as a city need some sort of opportunity to have some sort of variance because everything is not cookie cutter. Uh and in the event that you had to take a structure down uh how you can go back with something that's going to be workable for your for your uh your home and your your area, your square footage that you have available. Um I I agree. I don't I guess the city doesn't care if in certain areas that everybody on the whole street has a uh you know ha has an additional extension off their garage because there are places light streets like that. Um ju just but I think it is ne I think we should have something that says that we could work have some sort of variance and workaround if somebody should need something like that.

For sure. Mr. Chairman, just want to clarify. It wouldn't be considered a variance because a variance would require hardship. This is a specific use permit.

Right. And I did want to correct I wanted to just correct one thing you said, Peter. So, if somebody did need to replace what they had because of their law or whatever, whatever they'd be replacing would would be illegal already. because what we're talking about here is um items that are not allowed but we're going to kind of I guess grandfather them and or in the future if somebody wants to build bigger like this they can cuz I think what was was mentioned was there was one that like somebody bought a house that had a bigger carport report talked to the city. The city said, "Well, hey, that's actually not allowed. Don't take this down, otherwise you won't be able to replace it." And for whatever reason, I don't know if lightning hit it or wind or whatever, it it got tried to get replaced and the city said no. You know, that's that's what I understood at least.

But they have but they have an opportunity to put something back something back, but not as big as it was. may not be as big as it was, but we may they maybe have had to work within some sort of variance. And that's the way I see this is that we give them some opportunity to say something about, hey, I'm I'm a little different here and we work with this, but the original structure was non-conforming, right? I understand that. And I'm going to go back to the original structure. So, I just we keep going back to one reference. I want to make sure the record's clear. Okay. for the for the one in particular we keep mentioning he didn't contact the city before he tore it down. He tore tore it down was going back with a new one and then it was noticed by the building official. Okay.

So he wasn't told don't take it down you can't build it back. That's not accurate. And you do keep referencing variance to her point. It's not variance. It's it's a discretionary decision. Maybe more appropriate variance. So we get our facts straight. Variance is the BOA when they have a hardship. That's correct. Okay. Can I ask requires a hardship and so that's that's when the judiciary board has to come in, right? Because they have to show that there is a hardship

whether it's um a weirdly shaped property or something that is requiring that additional uh size um for and then that comes from the PNZ. It's not as strict, right? You still have elements you have to consider, but it's more discretionary when it comes. What's the recommendation? And and if let's say that we did pass this tonight and then somebody comes to I got one question for you chief and then uh a resident wants to build something that kind of goes along with this. They file the permit they go through the city. It comes to us as a SUP. We deny it or whatever or we approve it. It still would go to council or it does SUPs stop here?

No, because you're a recommendation board. Um everything that you do is a recommendation to the council. Okay. It would not end with y'all. It would go up. If you recommend denial, it triggers a super majority at the council. Right. Okay. So everything you're you're always a pass through council. Okay. Um but you shape the proportion of votes that is needed at the council level. Got it. And maybe we get legal counsel thing. I know for some things if if you denied SUP and it goes to city council, I think that kicks in a higher majority that they would have to approve it, not just your standard majority. So there's other safeguards built into that process as well.

It would trigger a majority at the council level. So right now with the current um equipment that you have and the current training that your staff has, if let's just as an example, because it was said, let's say Mr. Thomas and his neighbor decide to build two carports and our our our building people, you know, everything it passes and it's for for lack of a better word connected even though it's not going to be physically connected, but it's, you know, two posts next to each other or whatever. your staff with your equipment. If the tree that's at the fence line behind those two things gets hit by lightning, y'all can get back there. Y'all can shoot water at it. Y'all got a ladder. Y'all like that's my whole thing is safety. There's a couple couple things into that, right? We got to meet the definition of a carport. It's made to park your car under. So if you want it extended over your grass and they come to ask you for greater than 600 square f feet to me if I'm making your decision I'm saying no it's it's to meet its intent is to park the car. Is it covering concrete there? Are you meeting the intent of the carport? So you already got to have concrete there. If that's in if that's encroaching in the easement that's that's one issue, right? Yes, sir.

If the electrical panels on that side of the house, there's an easement there where they may not be able to pour concrete or put anything over the easement. That comes into play. There's other factors part of that, but as a general rule, the fire department requires 10-ft separation between uh most structures. Now, whether the fire code applies to residential, it does in some avenues and some it doesn't. The fire department would wouldn't want any carports within 10 ft of each other. So, theoretically, one could go uh come and appeal to you and build it into the sideyard. And when we say sideyard, the minimum we have is five. The sideyard for a particular house could be 15 ft. they want to build a 700 foot carport and it only encroaches into the sideyard for seven feet uh or two more additional feet and there's still plenty of sideyard. That's that scenario too. So that's discretionary decision you have allows you to do that, right?

But as a general rule rule, we're not you're going to hear the fire chief up here saying, "No, we don't want any carports touching each other or within 10 foot." Okay? Cuz like I mean in our neighborhood we uh I believe we live north actually the neighborhood right north of where Mr. and Miss Thomas live like we have a gas line coming through but some of the houses there's like a driveway and their yard and then there's a yard and their driveway. Correct.

You know and so there's like a bigger spot in between it and then we only have one big gas line going through and it's everybody's kind of backyards in this one street. So there are some areas where I could see like if we didn't have an HOA in ours where people could build two next to each other because there's other houses where it's yard driveway driveway yard where you know where it could be two carports next to each other. So what you're suggesting they if that situation exists today without an SU they couldn't do it because the minimum sideyard setback we have is 5T that provides 10 ft.

Okay. If they wanted to come and encroach into that, you're going to need to look at the lot size they have and make that decision. Why are they wanting to build an additional 5 ft carport into that lot encroaching to that other driveway that's super close to me? That's another decision or tool y'all use in your decision making. Okay. All righty. I'm tracking. I appreciate you, Chief. Uh I was going to say one other thing as far as uh Well, it'll it'll come back to me. If it does, I'll come over here and Okay. as all good things do.

So, I my I guess I'm wondering to uh especially if we're a recommendation board. Um well, it sounds like this things like this are needed really only on special lots. You know, it's if you're if you're a planned development, if you're a neighborhood that's been built since, I don't know, 1985 or something like that in the city, you've had defined lot lines. Like, at a certain point, the city of Sagenov said, "If you Dr. Horton, Fox and Jacobs, you know, whatever Meritage Homes, whoever it is, you want to build a neighborhood in the city of Sagena, it has to meet these 120 foot long, 60 foot wide, whatever. There might be some on courts or whatever. But in general, places where this could be built is really sounds like very narrow areas of the city and mainly in older parts of the city.

Well, I'm going to agree with you here. The thing is we've got a good ordinance in. We've been talking about car ports for I don't know how many meetings have we talked about carports. Like my third we've got it. It's already there. It's good. If we have some odd duck come up and it needs to do it on a hardship, get a variance and just move on. But this is enough. We don't need to change anything else. The city is good. Trust our inspectors. Trust our safety people. The city is there. They have our best interest in mind. I just don't see any reason to do any more changing.

Yeah. So I I think uh my my concern there is is also safety. Um so last few years ago I did like you some work in the backyard and I had to go back and forth with the city uh on on the you know what what I could do on the whole easement and and set back stuff and I was really I was really mad at them. But um um we got it done eventually. And last year um we had utility come by and they had to do some work. And just

the space between the fence and that where we ended the the work and I was just watching from above and how they were like struggling with their equipment coming through just that little space which is in compliance with the the city um regulation now. And and when I saw this this uh request um to you know go beyond that that setback I was just thinking like what if what if those guys were you know a fire department or something coming by to do that work right they just don't have um the room and you know if if the neighbor has that and I have that. So for me it's just um to to Mel's point I think I think we've given enough I think it's it's good as it is. Um, and if I just can't imagine this being um, safe enough if we have a string of uh, or two neighbors who have this encroachment on the set setback and then we have the it just doesn't sit right sit right

and and if I could just in that in that sense and so and I haven't been here as long as you to understand that some of these things I didn't realize we had an opportunity for a variance. I thought this was the opportunity for a varian if it's a hardship. Okay, for hardship. Provide another point of clarification because I'm getting well versed in this. So the BOA does variances.

They have some pretty strict criteria to approve variances. It's not discretionary in most cases. So if somebody wanted to build a carport bigger than 600 square feet, it's going to be a rare circumstance when they're going to get a variant. So decision no is is you're shutting it down where no carport is going to be built over that square feet. Just I want I'm neutral but I want you to have the best information. There is not another avenue for somebody to build a carport over 600 square feet outside of this SU. A variance is not going to allow because we've went through that process before. They made the right decision based on their criteria that they have to go by. There are certain things to to uh allow a variance.

Okay. But building a building a replacement carport over 600 square feet there I can't think of a circumstance where they'd be able to do that. Okay.

I agree with that. What the point of a variance is I mean the classic example is when you have a triangle-shaped lot or you have a like for some reason the lot is cut off or there's a flood plane that intersects the lot so building can't happen. Um, I can't imagine a hardship that would require you to expand the size of something. Um, I've seen it very rarely when maybe a driveway gets expanded a little bit due to some sort of an ADA concern where a wheelchair needs to access it, but that's such a minute specific fact pattern. there would be I can't imagine any other hardship that would require a bigger um uh carport as far as the setback encroachments maybe, but you're again it's it's that has to do more with like the lot is such a weird size. There's not a way for them to have a car. There's no possible way, right? Yeah. Or a flood plane or a easement cuts through the property for some reason and it got missed when you know the survey happened. Um, there would have to be a a a pre-standing re a pre-existing reason that the carport of a regular size and with proper conforming setbacks wouldn't work on the property. Um, so but that's a variance. That's for the B that is for the BOA. For y'all, this is not a hard this will not be a hardship evaluation. This would be a are we okay with this happening variation, right? It's discretionary. They would have to convince you to do it. So the hardships would go to the BOA and they can still go to the BOA regardless of this, right? And it sounds like maybe they have gone to the BOA for a variance and been denied. That is a very specific property. I would ask when y'all are considering this, this is big picture, correct? So, while it sounds like there

may be some we've learned some history, but that's happening here. This is something, you know, in theory this ordinance could sit for 50 years. So, we're less concerned about that specific property than we are how this could affect the entirety of Sagenol and your comp plan going forward, you know, everything else that

So, while I know you've heard a lot about a specific property tonight, that is not what you're considering today. Right. I have two kind of legally questions. So one of them is th this would only be so when Susie earlier you mentioned some letters you were like it's this is only for B and J or something like that. So I just want to well like this would not be for any kind of commercial property like uh just as an example I'm thinking of like like Val's daycare where like it's in like a house or a building that used to be a house you know but like now it's operated as a business like this would be just for residential properties.

This doesn't modify your use chart in any way. Okay. So the permit um sorry when I was referring to B&J that's because I included the proposed ordinance. So if you go to that section I highlighted under section one item B the only portion that is changing from that is except as provided in subsection J below and that's in regards to if a carport may exceed more than that 600 square foot. And then D says that it shall maintain the required sideyard setback for the property lines according to the applicable zoning district. So that one also the highlighted portion which is the proposed change in that one is except as provided in subsection J. So if you turn the page subsection J is what is being proposed be changed within the ordinance. So that includes that it may exceed that 600 square foot in roofed area, it does not have a a maximum, however. And then it does state that if they were to try to apply for that, then if a known drainage problem exists or if the CBO believes that there may be a drainage problem, then that would require an engineered drainage study for mitigation and then that you would be able to apply for an SCP. Additionally, to answer your question, chair, um this does not modify the if you're allowed to have a carport currently, this does not change who is allowed to have a carport only size. But if a commercial property, you know, is allowed to have a carport currently, this would allow that property through an SGP to potentially have a larger property or a reduced setback.

Okay. Um it just depend but the but the use chart itself is not changing um as a result of Gotcha. I think to answer that it is citywide within the below permissible zoning designations. It's not just residential it's yeah if a carport is currently allowed then they would be able to apply for that SC if they wanted to exceed it. So it could be industrial it could be city facility it could be agriculture right. Um yeah, so it's your A, your all your entire residential, your community, your CF designation, and your heavy and light industrial as well.

Okay. And then my second question is we heard a couple of times tonight like um you know, let's say somebody did want this, they applied for it, it got approved, and they built it up to the property line or whatever. And I think fire chief and maybe building had said, "Well, we're not like we still require 10 feet in between two structures." Well, what if that second property owner that's next door wants to apply? Would this like open up the city to like legal like challenges or something, you know? But what would happen is they would come in front of it's like whoever comes first gets it.

You're correct. It would be first come first serve on that because if they build to the property line, right, the concern is is fire moving from one property. Yes. I assume is what the concern is. Popping popping from wooden roof or whatever structure to structure. So yes, it would be if property A built up to that line, they were pushing a set back into their neighbors property. So they even if the city in its code only requires five feet or whatever in effect they are pushing a setback into that property for where a structure can be built which is pro you know policy wise that's why setbacks exist in the first place is to yeah that from

occurring. Okay. Um that was my uh questions. Um, Miss Anderson or anybody else on the commission, do y'all have any other things to note, point out, talk about? Um, no, I said all I had to say. All right. Well, then um do I need We were in our like session, so I don't need to close out that time. No, it's just You've already closed the public hearing, right? So, you are good now. Um, you can just ask for a motion. All right. If if somebody wants to propose a motion, you may.

We do need a mention though. Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I propose that we deny this at this time, but All right. Is there a second? I second that. Okay. All right, the motion passes. All right, now we're going to go to section four, uh, staff report, project updates. Give me one second, then I don't have it on the screen. What was the count on that?

It was 41. 41. Thank you. All right, Mr. Chairman. So, we don't have a lot of um different updates from our December meeting because of the holidays, but I don't know if your mic's on. I can't hear you. Sorry.

Sorry about that. Okay, there you go. So because of the holidays, we didn't have a lot of updates. Some of the projects are in the same um yes they are um at the same place that they were in December.

So the only um thing that I do want to note is that for Opel Joe Jennings and Brian Schwingler parks those are about to be opened. So we have OPA Joe Jennings was um briefly open. So it is open for people to go in but we have an official opening scheduled either at the end of January or the beginning of February. And for Brian Shringler the same. Um and then we also have our sidewalks project that was completed and for Wayside Middle School they were allowed to go into the building. So um now they're going to start phase two of that. God. Um, yes. Wayside Middle School. It's like 5 years late, but it's done. Um, I saw a bunch of plants up at the old uh senior log cabin uh in the parking lot. There's like 250 300 potted plants in the parking lot there. Is that a city thing or is that for the split rail Jake burgers? 287%.

Okay. So, they're city plants. No, is redoing the along the roadway. Cool. Some of that work that they did, they're redoing that's what those where the little where the trees are and the river rocks are along the Okay, cool. All right. Yeah. All right. All right. Sounds good. Well, thank you staff for the update. Um five, uh executive session. Are we going into executive session this evening? Nope. All righty. Well, then it is uh 6 or excuse me, section 6. Uh it is 7:07. Uh do I have a motion to end the meeting? Mr. Chairman, I move that we close this meeting.

Is there a second? Second. I second. All righty. All right, y'all. 7:07 p.m. This meeting of PNZ is closed. I know. I got my gavvel back.