[00:00:05]
OKAY, EVERYBODY, IT IS TWO O'CLOCK.
WE'RE GONNA CALL THE, UH, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25TH, 2026.
PLANNING, COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER.
WOULD STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL? COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ PRESENT.
CAN WE THE SPANISH ENGLISH INTERPRETER, PLEASE.
[Plats ]
ALL RIGHT.TODAY WE'RE GONNA HAVE TWO AGENDAS.
UH, FIRST HEARING IS A COMBINED HEARING AGENDA.
CASES ON THE COMBINED HEARING AGENDA ARE CASES WHERE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOESN'T REQUIRE ANY FURTHER DETAILED DISCUSSION, AND NOBODY IN THE AUDIENCE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
ALL CASES ON CONSENT WILL BE READ INTO THE RECORD IN ONE UNIFORM MOTION.
UM, THE SECOND AGENDA IS AN INDIVIDUAL HEARING AGENDA.
EVERYTHING ON INDIVIDUAL WILL BE HEARD SEPARATELY BEFORE THE COMMISSION TAKES ACTION.
UM, SO THE, THE WAY I SEE IT RIGHT NOW IS EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR ITEMS 10 AND 11 ARE ON CONSENT.
AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE COMMISSIONERS, BUSTA MONTE AND COMMISSIONER ETTE RECUSE FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SO IT IS 2 0 2 AND COMMISSIONERS BUSTA AND ETTE HAVE LEFT THE MEETING.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? OR WE WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION? MOVE TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA.
HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER PROFIT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MILAM SOUTH.
YOU CAN CALL THE COMMISSIONERS BACK IN.
IT IS 2 0 2 AND COMMISSIONERS BUS AND ETTE HAVE REJOINED THE MEETING.
[Comprehensive Master Plan Amendments ]
WE'LL MOVE ON WITH ITEM 10.COMMISSIONER ZUKI HAS TO RECUSE IN THIS ITEM.
IT IS 2 0 2 AND COMMISSIONER ZUKI HAS LEFT THE MEETING.
GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS AT EITHER GOMEZ SENIOR PLAN WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 10 IS A REQUEST FOR AN APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AMENDING A NORTH SECTOR PLAN FROM SUBURBAN TIER TO REGIONAL CENTER, LOCATED AT 13 4 0 6 WESTERN OAK.
THERE WERE 32 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED THE BAVARIAN FOREST.
HOA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE.
THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT IS FROM SUBURBAN INTERIOR TO REGIONAL CENTER, IS REQUESTED TO REASON ON THE PROPERTY FROM C3 TO C3.
THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO REGIONAL CENTER DESIGNATION IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED LOCATIONAL CRITERIA FOR REGIONAL CENTERS.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER AND INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS OF REGIONAL CENTERS.
THESE CENTERS ARE DESIGNED FOR LARGE SCALE OPERATIONS, INCLUDING SHOPPING MALLS, HOSPITALS, AND WHOLESALERS THAT SERVE A REGIONAL MARKET RATHER THAN A A NEIGHBORHOOD ONE.
WHILE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CURRENTLY SUPPORTS USES SIMILAR TO THE ONE BEING REQUESTED, IT'S IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY TO AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD SHOULD REQUIRE MORE SENSITIVE APPROACH.
THE ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE ZONING PORTION ON THE REQUEST ON MARCH 17TH.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL ON THE REQUEST AND THE APPLICANT SHOULD ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THE APPLICANT LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, JOHN COOLEY, 7 1 1 9 PARKSIDE PLACE.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU GUYS HAVE ABOUT THE APPLICATION.
UH, NOBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS.
WE'LL START ON THE LEFT WITH COMMISSIONER BUSANTE.
I THINK THE, THAT THE, I UNDERSTAND STAFF'S POSITION ON THAT, BUT THIS USE SEEMS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH, WITH WHAT WE'RE SEEING ALONG WITH, UH, WESTERN OAK.
[00:05:01]
SAME.ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION MOVE TO APPROVE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
I SECOND YOU HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST BY COMMISSIONER PROFIT AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MILAM STAFF.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO, UH, SOMEBODY, LET COMMISSIONER ZUKI KNOW HE CAN COME BACK AND WE'LL
[Other Items ]
MOVE ON TO ITEM 11.COMMISSIONER ORIAN HAS TO RECUSE FROM THIS ITEM.
AND COMMISSIONER ZUKI HAS REENTERED THE MEETING AND COMMISSIONER ORIAN HAS LEFT THE MEETING.
DON'T HOLD BACK AS A ALL RIGHT.
WELL, GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY.
UH, CLAYTON WALLACE, INTERIM PLIN PLANNER WITH, UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
SO ITEM NUMBER 11 IS AN APPEAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION.
SO, UM, JUST TO RUN Y'ALL THROUGH SUPER HIGH LEVEL.
SO I'M GONNA START HIGH AND WE'LL GET LOWER.
SO, PLATTING, WHEN IS A PLAT REQUIRED? 35 4 30 A ONE.
SO IT STATES THE OWNER OF A TRACT OF LAND, UH, WITHIN SAN ANTONIO CITY LIMITS, OR THE ETJ MUST MAKE A PLAT A VARIABLE, UH, AVAILABLE WHENEVER THEY ARE REQUESTING NEW UTILITY SERVICES OR MAJOR BUILDING PERMITS.
SO MAJOR BUILDING PERMITS, NEW CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONS, UM, BUT, BUT THOSE ARE THE TWO PLA TRIGGERS.
WE HAVE 18 REASONS WHY YOU DON'T HAVE TO PLA 35 4 30 C LISTS.
UH, THE 18 REASONS WHY A PROPERTY OWNER CAN GET A PLAT EXEMPTION.
MOST COVER SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED USES NON INHABITABLE USES, UH, PARKS, UH, CELL TOWERS, SECURITY FENCES, STUFF LIKE THAT.
I MEAN, THERE, THERE'S A, THERE'S A LOT OF 'EM, UM, OR OTHER TYPES OF LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT, BUT THERE ARE ONLY TWO THAT GENERALLY ALLOW FOR NEW UTILITY CONNECTIONS AND BUILDING PERMITS FOR, UM, NON DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND COMMERCIAL USES.
SO NOW WE'RE GONNA GET TOWARDS THE ACTUAL APPLICATION.
SO THIS APPLICATION WAS FILED ON FEBRUARY 6TH.
UH, IT IS REQUESTING NEW UTILITY CONNECTIONS AND BUILDING PERMITS FOR A PARCEL MADE OF ANTIQUATED LOTS 37 AND 38.
SO THIS LITTLE SCREENSHOT DOWN HERE FROM THE BOTTOM IS WHAT WAS REQUESTED.
AND BILL A SAY SO THEY'RE REQUESTING WATER SERVICE, SEWER SERVICE, ELECTRIC SERVICE, AND BUILDING PERMITS.
SO WITH THAT INFORMATION, STAFF THEN REVIEWED THIS PERMIT OR THIS APPLICATION UNDER 35,430 C 17.
AND THIS EXEMPTION STATES THAT A COMMERCIAL OR MULTIFAMILY LOT, UH, IS LOCATED IN THE ORIGINAL 36 SQUARE MILES OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
AND IT WAS ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO JUNE 14TH, 1927.
AS LONG AS IT'S IN ITS ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION, UM, IT CAN BE ENTITLED TO, UM, THAT PLAID EXEMPTION THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY COMMERCIAL SINGLE FAMILY USES.
UM, SO A COUPLE THINGS WITH THIS ONE, IT SPECIFIES LOT.
AGAIN, IF YOU REMEMBER THIS SUBJECT, PROPERTY IS MADE UP OF TWO LOTS.
IT'S A PARCEL MADE UP TWO LOTS.
SO THIS IS SPECIFICALLY FOR ONE.
SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ISSUE THIS FOR TWO PARCELS 'CAUSE IT HAS TO BE ON ONE LOT.
AND THEN, UH, ALSO 35 5 15 A TWO BA BUILDING BUILT OR MAY NOT BE BUILT OVER A COMMON PROPERTY LINE IN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
AND NUMBER TWO IS, UNDER NO CONDITIONS SHALL LAY DUPLEX, TRIPLEX, FOURPLEX, OR ANY OTHER MULTIFAMILY DWELLING BE PERMITTED WITHOUT REZONING AND PLATTING.
SO THIS, UH, CODE SECTION 35 5 15 COMES INTO EFFECT WHEN THEY'RE REQUESTING NEW THINGS.
AGAIN, THEY'RE REQUESTING NEW UTILITIES AND BUILDING PERMITS.
SO THEY NEED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH 35 5 15 A TWO B.
SO STAFF FOUND THAT THEY DO NOT MEET EXEMPTION 17.
SO THEN WE REVIEWED IT UNDER 15.
SO 15 ALLOWS FOR SEWER AND WATER SERVICE TO EXISTING BUILDINGS IF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE MET.
CONDITION A, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT THE SINGLE FAMILY OR NONS SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT OR WHATEVER THE USE IS, UM, HAS HAD ELECTRICAL SERVICE FOR MORE THAN FIVE YEARS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF APPLICATION.
SO THAT'S FIVE YEARS FROM FEBRUARY 6TH, 2026.
UH, SO THEY HAVE TO HAVE PROVIDED THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE PROVIDED FROM CPS THAT STATES THAT THE METERS HAD BEEN THERE FOR EXISTING PRIOR FOR FIVE YEARS.
SO THAT'S KIND OF FLAT OUT THERE.
UM, BUT THEY'VE ALSO SUBMITTED AN ADDRESS VERIFICATION VERIFICATION ON, UH, JANUARY 27TH, UH, FOR THE ADDRESSES.
SO IN GENERALLY, CPS WILL ONLY REQUEST THIS WHEN YOU'RE REQUESTING NEW SERVICES.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA HAVE YOU COME GET AN ADDRESS VERIFICATION FOR A METER YOU'VE HAD ON YOUR HOUSE FOR 20 YEARS, 10 YEARS, FIVE YEARS.
[00:10:01]
NEW, IS WHAT THEY'RE, WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THIS ADDRESS VERIFICATION.SO AUTOMATICALLY THEY, THEY DON'T MEET A, SO, UM, AND BASED ON THEIR REQUESTS, THEY'RE ALSO REQUESTING BUILDING PERMITS.
THEY'RE ALSO REQUESTING ELECTRIC SERVICE.
SO THIS WOULD'VE ONLY GRANTED SEWER AND WATER.
AND AGAIN, 35 5 15 A TWO B, A BUILDING MAY NOT BE BUILT OVER A COMMON LOT LINE IF THEY'RE TRYING TO DO A DUPLEX REZONING AND PLATTING WILL ALWAYS BE REQUIRED.
SO BASED ON THOSE FINDINGS WE DID, UM, THEY DID NOT QUALIFY FOR THIS EXCEPTION.
SO WITH THE APPLICATION, UM, IT WAS DENIED ON ITS, UH, UH, ON ITS INABILITY TO QUALIFY UNDER ANY OF THE PLOTTING EXEMPTIONS AND WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, WHICH WAS UTILITY CONNECTIONS AND BUILDING PERMITS.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT YOU UPHOLD THE DENIAL OF THE, UH, CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION.
UH, I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOMEONE HERE FROM CPS IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE.
THANK YOU, UM, AS THE APPLICANT.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? I DID BRING MY SPEECH TO PASS OUT IF, IF THAT'S OKAY.
THAT WAY I'M, I'M KIND OF NEW TO THIS, SO IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME A LITTLE BIT, BUT IN CASE SOMETHING GETS MISSED, UH, GOOD AFTERNOON.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT TODAY.
UH, MY NAME'S JAMIE LITTLE WITH A DA CONSULTING GROUP, 2 2 1 WEST RHAPSODY, SUITE 1 0 2, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 6.
AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER OF 4 39 BARRETT PLACE.
TO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE APPROVAL OF OUR APPEAL REGARDING THE DENIAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION, 26 DASH 1 0 6 0 0 0 5 5.
SO JUST TO JUMP RIGHT IN, THIS IS, THIS PROPERTY IS AN EXISTING OCCUPIED DUPLEX BUILT IN 1940 ON LOTS 37 AND 38 OF AN ANTIQUATED 1913 PLAT.
THE DUPLEX HAS CONTINUOUSLY OPERATED AS TWO INDEPENDENT DWELLING UNITS FOR DECADES WITH ONE SAUCE WATER METER AND TWO CPS ELECTRIC METERS SERVING THE STRUCTURE.
IMPORTANTLY, CITY COUNCIL FORMALLY RECOGNIZED THIS DUPLEX IN 1992 THROUGH ORDINANCE 7 6 3 6 8, WHICH REZONED THE PROPERTY TO R SEVEN WITH THE SUPPLEMENTAL USE PERMIT SPECIFICALLY FOR A DUPLEX, DESPITE DUPLEX ALREADY BEING ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN R SEVEN AT THAT TIME, THE ACTION IS CLEARLY ACKNOWLEDGED AND LEGITIMIZED THE LONGSTANDING DUPLEX USE ACROSS THE TWO LOTS.
OUR APPLICATION SOUGHT RECOGNITION OF THE PROPERTY'S NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS UNDER UDC 35 7 0 2, WHICH ALLOWS LAWFUL EXISTING USES TO CONTINUE AND BE EXTENDED THROUGHOUT THE BUILDING BECAUSE THIS DUPLEX PREDATES THE 1987 UDC AND WAS LEGALLY CONSTRUCTED ACROSS AN ANTIQUATED LOT.
LINE UDC 35 7 0 2 WOULD FURTHER DEEM THIS EXISTING DUPLEX A LEGAL EXISTING BUILDING, THUS APPLYING UDC PLAT EXCEPTION 35 4, 30 C 15 AND 16.
UH, COULD STAFF PLEASE BRING THOSE UP ON THE, THE, UM, THE COMMON MONITOR PLEASE? UH, 35 4, 30 C 15 AND 16.
DO YOU HAVE THE EXCEPTIONS BY CHANCE AND 16 PLEASE? FROM I HAVE IT.
SO WHILE HE PUTS THAT UP, I'D JUST LIKE TO COMMENT THAT THESE TWO PLAT EXCEPTIONS ALLOW FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS TO BE RE REPAIRED REGARDLESS OF THEIR PLAT STATUS BECAUSE OF REASON 16 AND THE ABILITY TO ATTAIN WATER OR SEWER SERVICE.
UH, AND THAT'S THROUGH REASON 15.
SO SPECIFICALLY REASON 15, I'M SORRY, EXCUSE ME.
REASON 16, THE PROPERTY QUALIFIES IF THE REQUEST FOR PERMITS WITHIN A LAWFULLY PERMITTED EXISTING BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT INCLUDES REMODELING, GENERAL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE.
ROOFING AADA A'S DISABILITY TRADE PERMITS AND SIMILAR IMPROVEMENT SHALL NOT REQUIRE A SUBDIVISION PLAT.
THESE EXCEPTIONS WILL ALLOW THE OWNER TO OBTAIN THEIR NECESSARY REPAIR AND TRADE PERMIT, PARTICULARLY AN ELECTRIC PERMIT TO ADDRESS A COMPROMISE PANEL AND IF DESIRED IN THE FUTURE, PURSUE A SEPARATE WATER METER.
IN THE PAST, WE'VE APPLIED FOR A COD USING 35 7 0 2 AND STAFF CORRECTLY APPLIED THE APPROPRIATE SECTION OF 35,430 AS THEY'RE OBLIGATED TO DO.
BUT IN THIS CASE, STAFF DENIED THE COD BASED PRIMARILY ON UDC 35 5 15, WHICH PROHIBITS A BUILDING, EXCUSE ME, BUILDING A DUPLEX ACROSS A LOT LINE.
[00:15:01]
THIS SECTION APPLIES ONLY TO NEW CONSTRUCTION OR CONVERSIONS, NOT TO EXISTING LAWFUL NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES.THE DUPLEX AT 4 3 9 BARRETT PLACE IS NOT BEING BUILT, CONVERTED, OR EXPANDED.
IT ALREADY EXISTS AND HAS OPERATED IN THIS CONFIGURATION FOR OVER 80 YEARS.
APPLYING MODERN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RETROACTIVELY IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF 35 7 0 2, WHICH PROTECTS LONG STANDING USES LIKE THIS.
STAFF ALSO DECLINED TO APPLY PLA EXCEPTION 15 AND 16, DESPITE BOTH BEING DIRECTLY APPLICABLE, AND I CAN'T STRESS THIS ENOUGH.
EXCEPTION 16 IS ESPECIALLY CRITICAL AS IT ALLOWS REPAIR, MAINTENANCE AND TRADE PERMITS FOR ANY EXISTING LAWFUL BUILDING REGARDLESS OF LOCK CONFIGURATION.
WITHOUT IT, THE OWNER CANNOT PULL A TRADE PERMIT TO REPAIR AN UNSAFE ELECTRICAL PANEL.
OUR APPLICATION MET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER 45, I'M SORRY, EXCUSE ME, 35,430 D.
AND STAFF'S OBLIGATION WAS TO DETERMINE WHICH EXCEPTION APPLIED NOT TO REQUIRE A SUPPLEMENT SEPARATE APPLICATION FEE OR, OR SEPARATE, UH, APPLICATION AND FEES.
SO IN SUMMARY, STAFF ERRED BY APPLYING THE INCORRECT UDC SECTION BY NOT RECOGNIZING THE PROPERTY'S NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS AND BY DECLINING TO ISSUE A COD UNDER EXCEPTIONS THAT CLEARLY APPLY TO THE LONG ESTABLISHED DUPLEX.
SINCE WE QUALIFY FOR THESE INSPECTION, THESE EXCEPTIONS, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE PLANNING COMMISSION GRANT THIS APPEAL AND ISSUE A COD UNDER 35,430 C 16, AND IDEALLY ALSO 15.
SO THE OWNER CAN OBTAIN NECESSARY REPAIR PERMITS AND CONTINUE LAWFUL USE OF THIS HISTORIC COMPLEX DUPLEX.
IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME? ALL THANK YOU.
UH, NOBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
SO LETTER TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS.
WE'LL START ON THE RIGHT WITH COMMISSIONER ZUKI.
UM, I WISH I HAVE ACCESS TO ALL THESE, UH, GUIDELINES EARLIER JUST TO GO OVER THEM, BUT LET ME ASK YOU THIS.
IS THERE IS AN EXISTING DUPLEX ON THE LOT RIGHT NOW? CORRECT.
I BELIEVE IT IS, BUT I'M NOT SURE.
I BELIEVE THE, THE METERS HAVE BEEN IN EXISTENCE FOR OVER 60 MONTHS, SO, BUT I'M, I'M NOT SURE.
SO THERE IS NO POWER ALREADY? UH, NO, THEY HAVE, SO THE DUPLEX HAS TWO ACTIVE WATER METERS AND ONE, LET'S SEE, I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE.
ONE ACTIVE WATER ME METER THAT SERVES BOTH THE UNITS AND TWO CPS ELECTRIC METERS.
SO IT HAS TWO OF THE ELECTRIC, ONE OF THE PANELS BEHIND THE METERS NEEDS REPAIR.
THAT ONE, THEY'VE ALL BEEN IN USE FOR OVER 60 MONTHS.
HAVEN'T BEEN USED FOR OVER SIX.
NO, THEY HAVE BEEN IN, THEY HAVE BEEN USED, YES, SIR.
SO THIS IS AN ACTIVE ACCOUNT, CORRECT? FOR CPS ON SIZE? YES.
ONE OF THE ELECTRIC METERS IS IN NEED OF REPAIR.
I DON'T, I MEAN, I BELIEVE IT'S THE PANEL BEHIND THE METER AND THAT ONE I BELIEVE HAS BEEN IN DISREPAIR SINCE I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT DATE.
I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS, IT HASN'T BEEN SIX MONTHS YET.
IT'S BEEN LESS THAN SIX MONTHS.
AND THE REQUEST HERE IS TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT FOR UTILITIES, UH, A TRADE PERMIT TO FIX TRADE, TO FIX THE NON-WORKING CPS, I'M SORRY, THE, UM, THE ELECTRIC PANEL BEHIND THE METER THAT NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED.
THAT'S WHAT THE TRADE PERMIT IS, WAS FOR.
AND THAT'S WHERE YOU REQUEST TO GET THAT? CORRECT.
SO YOU WERE NOT ABLE TO GET THAT FROM THE CITY? CORRECT.
YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, LIKE THE ACTUAL ADDRESS? I DON'T KNOW THE ADDRESS.
I'M TOM MENON WITH CPS ENERGY.
I I REALLY DON'T HAVE THE ADDRESS.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED THAT.
I CAN GET IT FOR YOU LATER DATE.
UH, SO CPS IS PROVIDING SERVICE FOR THIS DUPLEX? YES, THERE ARE TWO ACTIVE METERS AT THIS ADDRESS.
UH, IS CPS IN ANY OBJECTION TO THIS? UH, NO.
BASED ON THE INFORMATION I HAVE, I DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS.
NO OBJECTION WITH THIS, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT TO PULL PERMIT TO MAKE THE REPAIR? NO, SIR.
UH, NO FURTHER QUESTION BEFORE YOU LEAVE.
UM, WE HEARD THAT CPS REQUESTED AN ADDRESS.
UH, WOULD YOU REPEAT THAT QUESTION? SO YEAH, SO THE, THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT WE HAVE SO FAR IS THAT THERE IS AN OPEN ADDRESS VERIFICATION STATING THAT CPS REQUESTING ADDRESS VERIFICATION FOR, UM, THE LOT.
THEY, AND AGAIN, THEY DID NOT PROVIDE ANY DOCUMENTATION AT THE TIME OF EITHER OF THESE
[00:20:01]
THAT THERE ARE ACTIVE METERS FOR THE PROPERTY.SO, YOU KNOW, I NOT TO DOUBT THAT THERE, THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE.
BUT FOR STAFF, WE, WHEN WE REQUEST THIS INFORMATION, CPS PROVIDES, IT'S ON LETTERHEAD AND OFFICIAL THIS METER AND IT, THIS METER HAS BEEN AT THIS ADDRESS FROM THIS DATE TO THIS DATE.
AND IT'S A STANDARD LETTER THAT WE GET FOR ANYBODY REQUEST TYPE OF EXEMPTION.
AT THIS TIME, WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN THAT.
SO THAT PROOF OF THE, THE 60 MONTHS HAS NOT BEEN SUBMITTED.
CAN CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT? UH, YEAH, IF YOU NEED SOME VERIFICATION, UM, THEY, I MEAN, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT PROCESS IS.
I'M WITH THE SERVICE AND METERING DEPARTMENT, SO I DON'T DEAL WITH THAT SIDE.
UM, I'M SURE I CAN GET SOMEONE TO VERIFY THAT IF WE NEED TO.
UM, I JUST KNOW I LOOKED, WHEN I LOOK IN THE SYSTEM AND I LOOK FOR THIS ADDRESS, I SEE TWO ACTIVE METERS AT THE ACCOUNT.
SO THERE'S ONLY ONE ACTIVE WATER METER? ARE ARE YOU REQUESTING ANOTHER ONE? I, WELL, WE'RE REQUESTING THAT THE, OUR COD APPLICATION GET APPROVED UNDER 15 AS WELL IN CASE THE, AT SOME POINT IN TIME THE OWNER WANTS TO ADD ONE IF IT'S PERMITTED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER TRADE PERMITS REQUESTED OTHER THAN TO REPAIR THAT METER? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
SO FOR STAFF, AGAIN, THE REQUEST, I, I, I'M GUESS I'M SO, SO THE REQUEST THAT THE, AGAIN, THE REQUEST THAT WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED, JOSE, CAN YOU PULL BACK UP? SORRY, CAN I JUMP IN HERE REAL QUICK? SO, SO THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION WAS FOR, UM, THE NEW UTILITY REQUESTS AND BUILDING PERMITS IN PRACTICE, YOU KNOW, A A LOT OF THINGS EITHER DON'T NEED A PERMIT OR YOU CAN COME GET A COUNTER PERMIT.
TRADE PERMITS ARE, ARE GENERALLY NOT A PLA TRIGGER, IT'S MAJOR BUILDING PERMITS, SO NEW CONSTRUCTION AND ADDITIONS OR NEW UTILITY CONNECTIONS.
SO WHEN THEY'RE REQUESTING SERVICES, WE'RE NOT GONNA REVIEW IT UNDER THE, THE, THE EXEMPTION THAT ALLOWS FOR TRADE PERMITS, INTERIOR REMODEL, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING.
SO THAT'S WHAT OUR DENIAL IS BASED ON.
UM, AND, AND WE'VE COMMUNICATED AS WELL, AND I BELIEVE SHE SAID IN HER PRESENTATION, THEY CAN, THEY'RE WELCOME TO REAPPLY IF THEY FEEL LIKE THERE'S ANOTHER EXEMPTION THAT THEY QUALIFY FOR.
UM, THIS IS NOT A FLAT, YOU CAN NEVER REQUEST THIS AGAIN, BUT WITH THE INFORMATION THAT YOU PROVIDED AND THEN THE FOLLOWING APPEAL, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GONNA CHANGE OUR DENIAL.
SO HAD YOU AND THE APPLICANT TALKED? CORRECT.
SO WHEN THEY, WHEN WE ISSUED THE DENIAL, THEY HAD REACHED OUT AND WE HAD EXPLAINED IT, AND THEN THEY FILED THE APPEAL AND THEN THERE WAS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUBMITTED THAT SAID, OH, WELL WE'RE JUST GONNA DO A REMODEL.
AND THEN THE COMMUNICATION WAS, WELL, THEN YOU CAN RESUBMIT FOR A NEW CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION AND WE WILL RE-REVIEW IT WITH THE INFORMATION THAT'S REQUIRED.
SO I MEAN, THEY, THEY STILL NEED TO PROVIDE THAT.
WHAT THEY'RE DOING MEETS THAT QUALIFICATION FOR THE, CAN YOU PULL UP, UH, THE UDC OR PUT THE SCREEN BACK UP FOR 16.
SO ON 16 IT'S REMODELING GENERAL REPAIR MAINTENANCE.
SO AGAIN, THEY, THEY NEED TO SUBMIT THE DOCUMENTATION THAT SHOWS THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO AND WE'LL RE-REVIEW IT.
AND IF WE FEEL THAT IT MEETS THAT QUALIFICATION, THEN WE CAN RE THEN WE CAN ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION FOR THAT REQUEST.
BUT AGAIN, AT THE TIME, THIS WAS NOT WHAT THE REQUESTED FOR THIS APPLICATION REQUESTED.
NEW UTILITY CONNECTIONS AND BUILDING PERMITS, WHICH WE ARE ASSUMING IS EITHER NEW CONSTRUCTION OR ADDITION.
IT DIDN'T MENTION I WANT TO DO A REMODEL OF MY EXISTING HOUSE, I'M GONNA FIX A, A PANEL FOR THE ELECTRIC METER.
AND GENERALLY WITH MEPS THEY CAN GO PULL THOSE OVER THE COUNTER.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IS A MAJOR PLA TRIGGER.
IT'S NEW UTILITY CONNECTIONS AND MAJOR BUILDING PERMITS.
SO IS THAT, DOES THAT ANSWER IT? I'M SORRY, THAT MORE THAN ANSWERS.
CLAY, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER PROPHET, DO YOU, DO YOU WANNA SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? OKAY.
I, I THINK WHAT OUR ISSUE IS IS THAT UNDER, UM, 35 4 30 D OUR APPLICATION PROVIDED EVERYTHING IT WAS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE.
WE WEREN'T REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ANYTHING ELSE.
AND REALLY IT SHOULD BE UP TO, UP TO STAFF TO DETERMINE WHAT EXCEPTIONS WE WE APPLY FOR OR THAT WE QUALIFY FOR.
SO WHEN THEY TELL US THAT THEY'RE GONNA DENY US ON SOMETHING THAT'S NOT EVEN APPLICABLE TO WHAT WE'RE DOING AND THEN MAKE US PAY MORE MONEY TO DO ANOTHER APPLICATION, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE FRUSTRATING.
WE'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH WITH THEM ON THIS.
SO HE'S SHOWING HERE THAT YOU REQUESTED WATER SERVICE, SEWER SERVICE, ELECTRICAL SERVICE.
[00:25:01]
THE TRADE PERMIT IS TO FIX THE PANEL AND THAT WAS WHERE WE WOULD USE THE EXCEPTION, UH, 16 I BELIEVE.AND THEN IF LATER ON THE OWNER WANTS TO PROVIDE A SEPARATE SA WATER METER, THEY COULD.
SO THAT WAS WHAT THE REQUEST WAS FOR.
SO TO BE CLEAR, THE REQUEST IS WHAT IS SHOWN ON YOUR SCREEN.
IT WAS A REQUEST FOR WATER SERVICE, SEWER SERVICE, ELECTRIC SERVICE, AND BUILDING PERMIT.
SO WE ARE GOING TO REVIEW IT UNDER WHAT IT WAS SUBMITTED FOR.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO REV ASSUME WHICH POSSIBLE COMBINATION OF THOSE THINGS YOU ACTUALLY NEED NOW, AND THEN HAVE SOME OPEN-ENDED REVISITING OF THE DISCUSSION SOMETIME DOWN THE ROAD BASED ON HOW PLANS MAY CHANGE.
SO IF THE REQUEST CHANGED BETWEEN THE INITIAL SUBMITTAL AND WHEN THE DECISION WAS MADE, THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE APPLICATION FOR STAFF TO CONDUCT THAT REVIEW.
SO, OKAY, SO THIS LOGAN, MAYBE YOU CAN ANSWER THIS FOR ME.
I MEAN I'VE ACTUALLY HAD THE FUN EXPERIENCE OF GOING AND, AND GETTING A, UH, A COUNTER PERMIT AND FOLKS THERE REALLY HELPED ME THROUGH WHAT I SHOULD ASK FOR AND WHAT I SHOULD REQUEST.
HOW, HOW DID THIS REQUEST COME AND, AND IS AND IS THIS ALL IT SAYS, IS THIS THE ENTIRETY OF THE REQUEST? SO THE, THE APPLICATION SPECIFICALLY STATED, UH, THERE, THERE, UM, IT'S 35 7 0 2.
THEY'RE SAYING IT'S A NON-CONFORMING, YOU KNOW, WE QUALIFY AS NON-CONFORMING, BUT IT'S NOT NON-CONFORMING.
IT'S A, IT'S A PER A DUPLEX PERMITTED BY ZONING.
THERE'S NO NON-CONFORMING APPLICATION.
THIS ISN'T A NON-CONFORMING REQUEST.
IT'S SO, YEAH, I, I THINK TO SUMMARIZE THE APPLICATION WHEN IT WAS SUBMITTED, INCLUDED A SECTION OF CODE THAT THEY WANTED THE APPLICATION REVIEWED UNDER.
WHEN WE FOUND THAT THAT WAS NOT APPLICABLE, WE TRIED TO FIND A SOLUTION THAT WOULD WORK.
WE REQUESTED FIVE CONSECUTIVE YEARS OF CPS INFORMATION, WE WERE NEVER PROVIDED IT.
SO WE WERE NOT ABLE TO SHOW THAT THE CRITERIA WAS MET IN ORDER FOR THAT APPLICATION TO BE APPROVED UNDER ANY OF THE CRITERIA.
AND THEN WE RAN INTO THE SECONDARY ISSUE OF THE CODE SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING THAT WHAT THEY'RE SEEKING IS NOT PERMITTED IN THAT SUBSECTION B I'M KIND OF CURIOUS THAT WE COULDN'T FIND FIVE YEARS OF CPS RECORDS IF IT'S BEEN CONTINUOUSLY OCCUPIED.
IT IS INCUMBENT ON THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO STAFF.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DOES NOT HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO CPSS INFORMATION.
I GUESS I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.
MR. PROPHET? I THINK MILAM EXPRESSED A LOT OF THE SAME QUESTIONS THAT I HAD.
UM, I KNOW SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, THINGS CAN SEEM VERY BUREAUCRATIC AND, AND, UH, BURDENSOME AND DOING THE APPLICATIONS, BUT, BUT IT JUST SEEMS, UM, THE CODE SEEMS PRETTY CLEAR, ESPECIALLY YOU'RE REQUESTING ADDITIONAL SEWER LINE, RIGHT? SO THAT THE REQUEST IS FOR EX NEW SER NEW SEWER, NEW SEWER SERVICE AND ELECTRICAL SERVICE, WHICH UNDER THE CURRENT UDC, UM, PERMITTED EXEMPTIONS OR WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED AN EXEMPTION UNDER THE CURRENT UDC.
IS THAT, AM I INTERPRETING THAT CORRECTLY? STAFF? I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? SO HYPOTHETICALLY, IF, IF THE PROOF OF THE ELECTRICAL SERVICE WAS DETERMINED, THEN THERE WOULDN'T BE A NEED TO SEEK AN EXEMPTION, RIGHT? BECAUSE SO THEY WOULD STILL NEED TO, IF THEY'RE WANTING SEWER AND WATER, THEY WOULD NEED TO REAPPLY AND PROVIDE THAT DOCUMENTATION TO SEE IF THEY QUALIFY FOR THAT.
I MEAN, WE, WE HAVE, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO, TO GET TO THE OTHER, UH, CRITERIA.
WE WEREN'T ABLE TO REVIEW THIS, THIS EXEMPTION COMPLETELY BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT PROOF.
SO IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE THAT PROOF AND REAPPLY, UM, THEY'RE WELCOME TO.
BUT AGAIN, 35, 4 30, UM, OR I'M SORRY, NOT FOUR 30, IT WAS 35 5 10 B TWO, UH, IT'S A DUPLEX CROSSING AN INTERIOR LOT LINE.
SO IT WOULD BE DENIED AGAIN FOR THAT CRITERIA.
UM, NOW THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING NEW, THEY NEED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE OF, WITH THAT SECTION.
SO THE STRUCTURE'S NOT BEING FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED? NO, IT'S BEEN ARGUABLY DUPLEX SINCE 1940, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
[00:30:01]
WAY FOR 80 YEARS WITH THE SUPPLEMENTAL, SO IT WAS ZONED CORRECTLY MM-HMMBUT THE TRIGGER NOW IS THE UDC HAS CHANGED IS, WELL THE TRIGGER NOW IS NEW CONNECTIONS.
SO WHEN YOU, IT'S ALLOWED TO EXIST AS IT IS RIGHT NOW MM-HMM
WITH NO, WE'RE NOT GONNA GO OUT AND SAY, HEY, YOU'RE A DUPLEX.
YOU NEED A, THEY'RE WANTING NEW UTILITY CONNECTIONS, THEY'RE WANTING NEW THINGS AND SO THEY NEED TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH OUR CURRENT DEVELOPMENT CODE.
IT MAY HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT IN 1992 THAN IT'S TODAY.
UM, AND DOING A DESK PERMIT PERHAPS WOULDN'T HAVE TRIGGERED, SO AGAIN, THE, THE PLA TRIGGERS ARE MAJOR BUILDING PERMITS, SO NEW CONSTRUCTION AND ADDITIONS OR NEW UTILITY CONNECTIONS.
SO COUNTER PERMITS INTERIOR REMODEL UNDER, SO INTERIOR RE MODEL IS UNDER 50% OF THE TOTAL STRUCTURES.
SO AS SOON AS YOU BREAK THAT, IT'S CONSIDERED NEW CONSTRUCTION.
BUT IN GENERAL, MEP WORK, YOU, YOU, YOU, I'M NOT GONNA MAKE YOU PLA TO HAVE A PLUMBER COME OUT AND RE-PLUMB LIKE A, LIKE A WATER SOFTENER.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE REALLY THE, THE, THE TRIGGER IN THIS REQUEST IS THE NEW UTILITY SERVICES.
I, I MIGHT MUDDY THE WATERS, BUT, UM, I'M JUST CURIOUS.
SO THE APPLICATION WAS FOR THE ELECTRICAL PANEL TO BE REPAIRED, IS THAT CORRECT? BEHIND THE METER? CORRECT, YES.
WHAT WHAT PART, UM, OF THIS, UM, CONNECTS THE DOTS TO SEWER AND WATER SERVICE? I THINK THE IDEA WAS THAT WE COULD APPLY FOR WHATEVER WE WOULD QUALIFY FOR, SO THAT IF IN THE FUTURE WE WOULD ALREADY HAVE THIS ON THE BOOKS, IT WOULD JUST BE SOMETHING FOR THE OWNER TO HAVE BECAUSE THEY TECHNICALLY WOULD QUALIFY FOR IT.
AND IF I MAY, IF I MAY ADD, I WOULD JUST STATE THE, THE REPAIR OF A PANEL WAS NOT PART OF THE STATED REASON FOR APPLYING.
SO IT WAS NOT IN THE DESCRIPTION.
THEY, THEY'RE WELCOME ON THE APPLICATION.
THEY CAN PROVIDE A NARRATIVE OF WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING.
I, I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.
SO THEY, THEY, YOU DIDN'T STATE NUMBER ONE WHAT YOU ACTUALLY WANTED AND THEN THEY ALSO TOOK IT AS YOU WANT NEW UTILITY SERVICES AND WATER AND SEWER.
BUT THAT WAS MORE LIKE A FUTURE PLANNING, LIKE FROM BEING, BUT NOT, NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE EXIST POTENTIALLY SIMPLY BECAUSE WE WOULD'VE QUALIFIED FOR IT.
AND I JUST WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT UNDER 35, 430 D WHEN YOU APPLY THOSE ITEMS ARE NOT REQUIRED IN, IN SECTION D FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION IS WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR.
NOW, OUR OFFICE DID GO BACK AND FORTH WITH THEM WITH THE INFORMATION THEY ASKED FOR, AND THEY DID TELL US THAT SIX, UH, EXCEPTION 16 COULD BE APPLICABLE, BUT THEY WANTED US TO RESUBMIT AFTER THEY DENIED US FOR SOMETHING THAT'S NOT EVEN APPLICABLE TO OUR PROJECT.
I, I WOULD LIKE TO CHIME IN ON THAT IN THE ASPECT OF AFTER THE DENIAL WAS ISSUED AND THE APPEAL WAS REQUESTED, THAT IS WHEN COMMUNICATION VIA EMAIL WAS ESTABLISHED, KIND OF DISCUSSING THE CASE.
I GAVE THEM THE OPTION, WELL, IF YOU WOULD LIKE US TO REVIEW IT UNDER AN A DIFFERENT EXCEPTION, THAT WAS WHEN WE PROVIDED INFORMATION THAT THERE WAS A-A-C-P-S METER, THEN THAT, OKAY, WELL THEN PLEASE SUBMIT A NEW APPLICATION AND WE WILL REVIEW IT.
UNDER THAT EXCEPTION, THE INFORMATION THAT WE WERE GIVEN AT THE BEGINNING OF THE APPLICATION WAS ASKING FOR, AGAIN, TO REITERATE ALL UTILITY SERVICES AND BUILDING PERMITS.
THAT WAS THE INFORMATION THAT WE WERE GIVEN AND THAT IS WHAT STAFF REVIEWED IT UNDER.
ANYTIME WE GET A REQUEST FOR A NEW REVIEW TO REVIEW IT UNDER SOMETHING ELSE, WE ALWAYS REQUEST THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS A NEW APPLICATION.
IF WE HAVE ALREADY MADE A DETERMINATION BECAUSE THE STAFF HAS ALREADY DONE THE WORK AND PUT IN THAT TIME AND EFFORT INTO THAT INITIAL APPLICATION, I JUST, I, I DON'T WANNA BEAT A DEAD HORSE HERE, BUT THERE ARE 17 DIFFERENT PLANT EXCEPTIONS, EACH OF WHICH REQUIRE INDIVIDUALIZED CRITERIA TO QUALIFY FOR THAT EXCEPTION.
YOU KNOW, WE TRY TO MAKE THESE PLANT EXCEPTIONS ACCESSIBLE.
YOU KNOW, IT IS NOT A FEE THAT COVERS THE, THE WORK OF STAFF TO GO THROUGH ITERATION ON ITERATION ON ITERATION OF, WELL I WANT EVERYTHING NOW.
I ONLY WANT TWO OF THE FOUR THINGS OR THREE OF THE FOUR THINGS.
SO YEAH, WE ARE GOING TO CONDUCT A REVIEW.
AND WHEN WE CONDUCTED THAT REVIEW BASED UPON WHAT WAS SUBMITTED, WHICH IS DISPLAYED ON YOUR SCREEN NOW, IT DIDN'T QUALIFY AND WE ISSUED THE DENIAL.
AND THEN WHEN ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATION TOOK PLACE, WE ADVISED THAT THERE
[00:35:01]
MAY WELL BE A PATH FORWARD UNDER A A DIFFERENT EXCEPTION.IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT THEY PROVIDE DIFFERENT INFORMATION AND A NEW APPLICATION FOR US TO CONDUCT THAT REVIEW.
BUT WE DO NOT HAVE A PLAT EXCEPTION FOR WHAT THEY SUBMITTED THIS APPLICATION FOR.
SO I UNDERSTAND YOU HAD BROUGHT UP THE COST.
IS IT, UM, IS IT MORE OF AN ISSUE WHERE WE DON'T MEET THE OWNER OR, OR YOUR, YOUR TEAM DOES NOT WANNA RESUBMIT, YOU DON'T WANNA GO THROUGH ALL THAT AGAIN? UM, IS IS THERE, IS DOES THAT, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? IF THEY GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND IF THEY REVISE THAT SCOPE, WHAT ARE THEIR CHANCES? SO THEY, OH, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA ADVISE ON CHANCES IN THE MIDDLE OF A PUBLIC MEETING, BUT CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, CODS ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S KINDA LIKE A PLAT.
IF THEY MEET THE CRITERIA, IT GETS APPROVED.
IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT A, YOU KNOW, A RECOMMENDATION.
SO IF THEY MEET THE CRITERIA FOR ANY ONE OF THOSE 17 EXCEPTIONS, THEY WILL GET A PLAT EXCEPTION.
WE ISSUE HUNDREDS OF PLA EXCEPTIONS EVERY YEAR.
HAS THAT BEEN EX I MEAN IT SOUNDS SIMPLE.
I MEAN MAYBE IT, MAYBE IT ISN'T, BUT IT SOUNDS, IS THAT, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE OR? WELL, I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM IS, IS THERE WAS A BUNCH OF COMMUNICATION RIGHT AFTER THE DENIAL WHERE THEY KEPT GOING ON ABOUT A REASON THAT WASN'T APPLICABLE TO OUR PROJECT.
AND WHEN IT GOT BROUGHT UP THAT WE COULD USE EXCEPTION 16 AND THAT THEY WOULD MOST LIKELY APPROVE IT, THEY WANTED US TO REAPPLY, WHICH DOESN'T SEEM APPROPRIATE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT FOUR 30 D SAYS THAT WE SHOULD, THAT WE, IT SHOULD BE OUR BURDEN.
AND I, LIKE I POINTED OUT, THEY'VE ACTUALLY DONE THAT BEFORE.
WE HAVE PROJECTS WHERE WE'VE APPLIED FOR SOMETHING AND THEN THEY TOLD US, NO, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU YOUR, UM, APPROVAL ON, WHICH WAS NOT WHAT THE APPLICATION INITIALLY SAID, THE AUTOMATIC, I WOULD JUST REITERATE THAT IT IS INCUMBENT ON THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE THE MATERIAL THAT IS REQUIRED.
IF WE HAVE READY ACCESS TO MATERIAL THAT IS IN A CELL, WE WILL ACCESS IT.
WE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO CPSS INFORMATION.
AND TO BE HONEST, I DON'T THINK IT WAS STRICTLY MONETARY BECAUSE A NEW APPLICATION IS $200 AND THE APPEAL FEE IS 350.
COMMISSIONER LOPEZ? NO QUESTION.
OH, I WAS HOPING LOPEZ WOULD BE THE LAWYER.
UM, NOT THAT I'M ACTING AS A LAWYER IN THIS CAPACITY TODAY, THAT IS THE CITY ATTORNEY'S JOB.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, FROM THAT EXPERIENCE, YOU KNOW WHAT THE NUB IS, AND THIS WILL BE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICES IS WHAT IS THE RECORD BEFORE US TODAY? THE REC THE RECORD BEFORE US TODAY IS IN TERMS OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION.
IS WHETHER OR NOT THE, THE STAFF HAS ADEQUATELY REVIEWED THIS APPLICATION AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY BEEN IN ERROR IN THE DETERMINATION OF A DENIAL.
THEY'RE APPEALING THAT DENIAL AND, AND BASED ON THE APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED AT THE TIME, NOT THAT WAS ATTEMPTED TO BE CHANGED AFTER THE FACT FACT OR AS, AS CONVERSATIONS CHANGED, BUT HOW IT WAS RECORDED AT THAT TIME.
SO ONCE THE DETERMINATION WAS ISSUED, NO FURTHER INFORMATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED BY THIS PANEL TODAY.
AND I THINK THAT'S THE PRIMARY ISSUE.
UH, PROCEDURALLY FOR ME, THIS IS A PROCEDURAL PROBLEM IN MY MIND.
SO TO ME, THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS HERE, BUT I THINK IT BOILS DOWN PRETTY SIMPLY.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED WAS FOR VARIOUS THINGS, NONE OF WHICH WAS THE REAL REASON THAT YOU, THE REAL THING THAT YOU NEEDED TO DO, WHICH WAS THE REPAIR OF THE ELECTRICAL METER.
IN MY MIND, IF YOU HAD REQUESTED THE REPAIR FOR THE ELECTRICAL METER, BASED ON WHAT I KNOW ABOUT THE UDC AND THAT'S ALL YOU NEEDED, I THINK THAT YOU PROBABLY COULD HAVE GOTTEN AN APPROVED CERTIFICATE OF TERMINATION.
AGAIN, I'M NOT GONNA PUT WORDS IN STAFF'S MOUTH, BUT THAT'S WHAT MAYBE I WOULD UNDERSTAND.
THE REST OF IT POLLUTED THE WATERS WITH THE SEWERS, WITH THE UTILITY SERVICES AND WHATEVER ELSE THERE WAS.
BUT AGAIN, GOING THROUGH THE SECTIONS OF THE CODE THAT ARE APPLICABLE HERE, THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT MUDDIED THE WATERS, WHICH PRECIPITATED THE DENIAL OF THE REQUEST.
UM, I THINK ANYBODY'S, YOU KNOW, CAN, CAN READ THE THING AND SAYS THAT IF YOU'RE GOING FOR AN MEP PERMIT, WHICH ESSENTIALLY REPAIRING YOUR ELECTRICAL METER IS, I DON'T THINK ANYONE
[00:40:01]
HAS A PROBLEM WITH THAT.IT'S THE OTHER, IT'S THE, IT'S THE NEW SERVICES OR THE REQUEST FOR SERVICES FROM SAWS AND OTHER UTILITY PURVEYORS THAT CAN REALLY COMPLICATE THE WATERS.
'CAUSE YOU'VE ALREADY GOT SERVICES.
SO THEN DO YOU END UP WITH MULTIPLE SERVICES ON A LOT OR HOW DOES THAT WORK? AND THEN IT TRIGGERS THE REVIEW ABOUT THE DUPLEX AND OVER THE COMMON LOT LINE, WELL OVER THE LOT LINE.
SO TO ME, THE SOLUTION IS PRETTY SIMPLE.
EITHER SUBMIT A NEW APPLICATION FOR THE ELECTRIC SERVICE ONLY AND SEE IF YOU CAN GET IT BASED ON THAT.
THAT'S MY OPINION ON WHAT THEY'VE DONE.
SO CORRECT ME STAFF IF I'VE SAID ANYTHING WRONG, BUT I I I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
I JUST, I'M A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED IT GOT HERE.
IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN CARE OF PREVIOUSLY BETWEEN STAFF AND THE APPLICANT.
JUST GONNA PUT THAT COMMENT OUT THERE.
UH, I'LL MOVE TO, UH, HOLD THE DENIAL BY STAFF.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER PROFIT TO UPHOLD STAFF'S DENIAL OF THE, UH, APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
SECOND AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BUS STA UH, YEAH.
STAFF PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL.
MOTION PASSES FOR UPHOLDING THE DENIAL.
[Director’s Report ]
UM, IS THERE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT TODAY? MAYBE AN UPDATE ON PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION OR INTERVIEWS OR WHATEVER? LIZ ORIAN GOING TO RETURN.DO WHAT? ORIAN HE RECUSED HIMSELF.
SO FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER ORIAN LEFT THE MEETING PERMANENTLY WHENEVER IT WAS THAT HE EXITED THE MEETING.
I I DO NOT HAVE AN UPDATE FOR YOU AT THIS TIME.
ANY OTHER DIRECTOR'S REPORT? WELL, JUST A CONFIRMATION FOR, UM, FOR THE, THE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINATION.
THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION INTERVIEWS WILL BE HELD NEXT THURSDAY AT CITY COUNCIL NEXT THURSDAY AT THE, A SESSION AT 9:00 AM EVERYBODY THAT'S ALREADY GOING IN FOR INTERVIEWS HAS ALREADY BEEN COMMUNICATED WITH AND THEY'VE, THEY'VE REQUESTED QUESTIONNAIRES, UH, OR RESPONSES TO THEIR QUESTIONNAIRES.
SO IT'S NOT GOING TO GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE? THAT'S CORRECT.
THEY'RE CHANGING IT THIS YEAR.
IT'S GOING DIRECTLY TO CITY COUNCIL IN FRONT OF THE A SESSION AND ALL THE INTERVIEWS WILL BE HELD THERE.
YOU SAID EVERYBODY'S BEEN CONTACTED ABOUT THE INTERVIEWS, CORRECT? I HAVEN'T BEEN CONTACTED.
I'LL, I'LL SPEAK WITH YOU AFTER THE MEETING.
JUST TO ADD TO THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER ORIAN REENTERED THE ROOM AT 2 43
AND THAT MEETING IS, WHEN IS THAT COMPLAINT COMMISSION? YEAH, THAT'S NEXT THURSDAY.
IS IS, THAT'S THE BIG CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
YEAH, IT'S, IT'S THE MAIN A SESSION MEETING IN THAT MEETING, HUH? MM-HMM
SO THE, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR WILL BE THERE TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE POTENTIAL APPLICANTS.
THERE WERE 30 SOME ODD APPLICANTS THAT WERE WHITTLED DOWN TO 13TH AND THOSE 13 WILL BE THERE IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS.
IT IS 2 44 AND WE'RE ADJOURNED.