[I. Call to order]
[00:00:10]
GET STARTED? WE HAVE A ONE AGENDA ITEM TODAY. UM FIRST LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE BORDERS ZONING APPEALS MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 25TH 2023. THE CLERK. PLEASE READ THE ROLL CALL. YES AND I'LL JUST MENTION THAT, MISS . UM MISS SAMUELS CALLED ME EARLIER AND LET ME KNOW SHE WAS UNDER THE WEATHER. SO THANKS. YOU ALL FOR COMING TONIGHT? FORWARD TO BEING WITH YOU NEXT TIME. MR LOGIN IS PRESIDENT. MR SMITH PRESIDENT, MR JACOB PRESIDENT SAMUELS. MR SCHELL COUNCIL MEMBER SHOW HERE. WE HAVE FOUR VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT. WE HAVE A CORN OKAY.
[III. Action on minutes]
THANK YOU. UM THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ACTION OF MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING. MOTHER ANY OBJECTIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MEETING MINUTES FROM LESS. MR CHAIRMAN, I MOVED TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES FROM THE BOARD MEETING TAKING PLACE IN AUGUST. 21ST 2023 SECOND. MR JACOB? YES MR SMITH? YES, MR SCHELL? YES MR LOGAN S FOUR VOTES TO APPROVE THE MINUTES. OKAY. THANK YOU.[IV. Additions or corrections to agenda]
THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS ANY CORRECTIONS OR ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT? NONE FROM STAFFS. OKAY? UM WE HAVE A VISITOR TONIGHT. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TONIGHT? SIR WE NEED TO SWEAR YOU IN FIRST, SO IF YOU COULD STAND UP AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DIDN'T THANK YOU. HAVE A SEAT. UM THE NEXT ITEM ON THE[VI. Cases]
AGENDA STAFF REPORT. HELLO. AND, UM. THIS EXPERIENCE. IT'S CITY SPONSORED VARIANCE AND PRIOR TO THE REQUEST THE PROPERTY OWNER FOLLOW THE APPROPRIATE SUBMITTAL AND PERMITTING PROCESS. THE CITY APPROVED THE PERMIT FOR A BUILDING AND PATIO ON THE EASINESS TO WHICH THE HOMEOWNER BUILT PER PLANT. AND A REVIEW CONDUCTED BY THE CITY SEVERAL MONTHS AFTER IT WAS CONSTRUCTED.IDENTIFIED A MISTAKE IN THE APPROVAL PROCESS. THE CITY CONTACTED THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO AGREED TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO SUBMIT THIS EXPERIENCE APPLICATION. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE NEW ALBANY LINKS OF DIVISION AND HIS OLD RESIDENTIAL PD. THE HOME IS LOCATED EAST OF EVIL, HEIMER RUDE. AND NORTH OF MARJORAM, BEN. SO HERE IS OH, HI, MARIE.
HERE, MARGARINE BEND. THE BUILDING AND PAVER PATIO OR FULLY CONSTRUCTED AND THE BUILDING IS IN ADDITION TO, UH, THAT EXTENDS ABOUT 16 FT FROM THE BACK OF THE HOME AND IT'S 16 FT WIDE AS SEEN HERE. AND THE PAVER PATIO EXTENDS 16 FT FROM THE BACK OF THE HOME AND IS ABOUT 36 FT WIDE, AND THAT'S RIGHT NEXT TO THE BUILDING. SO IT KIND OF SCRIPTURES THIS WHOLE AREA. THE REAR YARD IS ABOUT 40 FT. WIDE IN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT EXTENDS 28 FT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE TOWARDS THE HOME. SO IT ENCROACHES ABOUT 4.5 FT. EXPERIENCE IS TO ALLOW THE BUILDING EDITION AND PAPER PATIO TO REMAIN IN THE EAST AS CONSTRUCTED WITH THE 4.5 FT ENCROACH. ACCORDING TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS FOR THIS SUBDIVISION, THIS EASEMENT WRONG . THIS EASEMENT RUNS ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE OF 12 HOMES ALONG THIS SECTION OF LARGE, JUMP IN AND PROVIDES STORMWATER RUNOFF TRAIN NICHE FOR THE NORTHERN FOR THE PROPERTIES NORTH. THE SURFACE RUNOFF DRAINS ALONG A PORTION OF THE REAR TO THE FRONT OF THE HOME AND INTO THE STREET AND THERE ARE NO IMPACTS OF STORM WATER TO THEIR NEIGHBORS. AS A RESULT, THE VARIANCE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE APPLICANTS. PROPERTY LOT 4 36 SITS AT THE HIGHEST GRADE. OF THE EASEMENT, WHICH DOES NOT OBSTRUCT THE CONVENIENCE OF STORM WATER FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. SO THAT WOULD BE THIS LOT RIGHT HERE. AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE FROM LIKE THE ARROWS RIGHT HERE ON THE CORNERS, BUT THE WATER CAN RUN DOWN TO THE FRONT BOARD. RUNS ALONG THE REAR HERE. NOT TO MENTION THE ENGINEERING PLANS ALSO REVEALED
[00:05:09]
THE 28 FT WIDE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS OVERSIZED. THE ENGINEERING PLANS FOR THE STORMWATER COLLECTION AND CONVENIENCE SHOWS IT IS DESIGNED TO BE WITH AN ATTEMPT TO EASEMENT OF THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT HINDER THE DELIVERY OF GOVERNMENT SERVICE SAYS, AND THERE'S STILL 23 FT OF ROOM FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT THE HOMEOWNER ENTER INTO A HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT SPECIFYING THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER AND NOT THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE BUILDING OR PATIO IN THE EVENT THAT A PRIVATE UTILITY PROVIDER NEEDS ACCESS. NEEDS TO ACCESS THE EASEMENT AREA. AS YOU CAN SEE THE BUILDING EDITION AND PATIO OR SIMILAR IN STYLE AND CHARACTER TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE THE NEIGHBOR HAS THE NEIGHBORS HAVE SIMILAR RECREATIONAL AMENITIES IN THE REAR. IN SUMMARY. THERE'S VARIANCE REQUEST IS NOT SUBSTANTIAL. THERE ARE NO PUBLIC UTILITIES AND THE EASEMENT SO THE ENCROACHMENT DOES NOT IMPACT CITY SERVICES. IN ADDITION, THE IMPROVEMENTS DO NOT HINDER THE CONVENIENCE OF STORMWATER THAT DISTRIBUTES ALONG THE REAR OR SIDES OF THE PROPERTY. THE EASEMENT IS OVERSIZED AND COMPARISON TO THE EASEMENT DESIGN INCLUDED ON THE ENGINEERING PLANS. AND AT THIS TIME, SEVEN QUESTIONS THANK YOU , IS IT MR JEFFREY? DO YOU WANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO ADD TO WHAT WAS ALREADY SAID. THAT IS ALL OKAY. I JUST WANT TO GIVE IT UP TO ME. OKAY ALRIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FOLKS? PER STEP FOR THE WITNESS, EITHER. UM DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTS IN OBJECTIONS TO A CONDITION REGARDING HOLD HEART AT HOME? HER? HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT AND GOT IT OUT IF WE PUT THAT AS PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS NO, I THINK I WOULD. QUITE FROM UNDERSTANDING THAT IT DOESN'T SEEM. FUTURE THAT'S GOING TO PROBLEM MIGHT BE ABLE TO CONSENT. UNDERSTAND BREEDING.I WOULD JUST SAY PROBABLY COME, MAYBE COME UP THE MIC STATE YOUR NAME AND WHERE YOU LIVE, SO WE CAN GET IT ON RECORD THAT YOU HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. UM, IT'S DAVID GEOFFREY ROAD CAMP 68 80 MARJORAM BEND. AND I GUESS A QUESTION WITH YOU. ARE YOU OKAY? WITH HARMLESS AGREEMENT? THANKS.
THANK YOU. WHATEVER QUESTION FOR STAFF SO THEY HAD THE PLANS SUBMITTED. WE WERE AWARE THAT IT WAS GOING TO ENCROACH INTO THE EASEMENT. AND WE APPROVED THE PLANS CORRECT. WHICH WOULDN'T STEPHEN. STOPPING RIGHT THERE WOULDN'T THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO COME TO BE EASY. A FOR THE VARIANCE AT THAT POINT OR NO. YES SO THE BUILDING PLANES ARE APPROVED ERRONEOUSLY, AND I SHOULD SAY ACCIDENTALLY BY STAFF TO BE WITHIN THIS PLANET DRAINAGE EASEMENT, SO TYPICALLY THAT WOULD BE CAUGHT DURING THE PERMIT PROCESS, UNFORTUNATELY, WAS NOT CAUGHT. IN THIS INSTANCE . SO THE BUILDING AND PATIO WERE FULLY CONSTRUCTED AT THE TIME WHEN IT CAME TO STAFF'S ATTENTION. AND SO THAT'S WHY THIS VARIANCE IS COMING IN AFTER THE FACT. SO I GUESS MY ONLY COMMENT WOULD BE THE LINKS. DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN THERE. 23 YEARS 24 YEARS. WHEN I SAT ON THIS BOARD FOR 14 YEARS, EVERY YEAR WE HAD SOMETHING FROM THE LINKS SIMILAR TO THIS SITUATION.
SO I GUESS MY COMMENT WOULD BE THAT I WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULD CATCH THESE THINGS EARLIER IN THE PROCESS, KNOWING THAT THIS UNFORTUNATELY IS ALWAYS A SITUATION JUST BY THE WAY THEY'VE YOU KNOW, DEVELOPED THE LINKS OVER THERE. SO I'M HOPING THAT WE DON'T HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS. COME AGAIN IN FRONT OF THE BOARD. IN THIS SCENARIO, HAVING A VARIANCE, WE SEE THOSE ALL THE TIME. THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE, BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE MISSED IT ON THIS ONE. BUT I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE HERE TODAY. BUT THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY RECOMMENDATION IS YEAH.
HOPEFULLY WE CAN CATCH THOSE THINGS EARLIER RATHER THAN LATER AND UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, BE SITTING HERE WITH THIS. ABSOLUTELY WE COMPLETELY AGREE. THIS IS A GREAT LEARNING OPPORTUNITY, AND WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING TO IMPROVE OURSELVES AND WE'LL CERTAINLY, UM, MAKE SURE THAT WE IMPROVE OURSELVES AS PART OF THIS. TO PIGGYBACK ON THE COUNCILMAN'S QUESTION TO
[00:10:01]
STAFF. WITH WHAT YOU LITERALLY JUST SAID ABOUT HOW THIS IS CONSTANTLY. I WILL EVEN SAY FOR THE SHORT TIME I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD. IT SEEMS TO BE WHEN WE'VE GONE TO THE LINKS COMMUNITY THERE HAVE BEEN JUST BECAUSE OF HOW THE STRUCTURES OF THE SUBDIVISION HOW THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS ARE BECOMING WORK IS HAS HAS THERE BEEN AN EXAMINATION TO AMEND, I GUESS THE WAY WE'RE DOING THINGS, SO WE'RE NOT HAVING TO CONSTANTLY ALMOST REPEATED OVER AND OVER BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO BE A CONSISTENT REQUEST THROUGH THE BUSY APE PROCESS ON WAY. IS THERE ANY CONVERSATIONS OF REEVALUATING THE WAY IT IS CURRENTLY IN THE ORDINANCE, SO I WOULD SAY WE'RE ALWAYS LIKE REEVALUATING OR EVALUATING THE CODE REQUIREMENTS AND LOOKING FOR PATTERNS, I WOULD SAY AT THIS TIME STAFF'S OPINION IS THAT WE DON'T SEE ANY NEEDED CHANGES. I THINK CERTAINLY WE'RE GONNA TAKE A LOOK AT OUR INTERNAL PROCESSES FOR THIS TYPE OF INCIDENTS, HOWEVER, AS FAR AS LIKE CODE REQUIREMENTS AGO FOR THE LINKS AS A WHOLE IN THE CITY, YOU KNOW WE'LL KEEP AN EYE ON THOSE THINGS, BUT WE DON'T THINK WE'RE SEEING ENOUGH VARIANCES THAT ARE SORT OF SIMILAR, EVEN THOUGH THEY STILL HAPPEN TO BE IN THE LINKS THAT WOULD WALK INTO CHANGE IN OUR EYES, BUT CERTAINLY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THESE THINGS. WE'RE ALWAYS OPEN TO ANY FEEDBACK AS WELL, SUCH AS THIS. THIS IS MORE OF A FAILURE. PROCESS RIGHT? IT WAS INITIALLY A CODE OVER. WE DIDN'T GUESS WE OVERLOOKED CODE REQUIREMENT. BUT SO, STEVE, YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT. ARE WE PUTTING ADDITIONAL QUALITY ASSURANCE MEASURES IN PLACE OF THIS DOESN'T CONTINUE TO HAPPEN. THIS IS THE SECOND ONE THAT I KNOW OF. SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD, I THINK WITHIN THE LAST YEAR SO I'M JUST CURIOUS IF WE'RE LOOKING AT OUR PROCESSES, MAKING SURE THAT THIS DOES NOT CONTINUE TO HAPPEN. YEAH ABSOLUTELY. AND I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. THIS IS THE SECOND OF THE YEAR. YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALWAYS LIKE VIA THE RE EVALUATING OURSELVES TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN IMPROVE OURSELVES. AND YEAH, AND CERTAINLY WE'RE TAKING A LOOK INTO THAT CURRENTLY NOW ANOTHER QUESTION I HAD IS THERE. IS THERE ANY PRECEDENTS WHERE WE ACCEPTED SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN THE LINKS BEFORE? YEAH. I KNOW THAT THERE HAVE BEEN OVER THE YEARS SINCE MY 10 YEARS HERE. YEAH LIKE VARIOUS LIKE PAPERS AND DECKS, UM, THAT HAVE ENCROACHED INTO SETBACKS. WHAT'S UNIQUE ABOUT THIS INSTANCE IS THAT IT'S MEETING ALL OF LIKE THE BUILDING AND PAVEMENT SETBACKS. IN THIS CASE, IT'S JUST AN EASEMENT. AND SO IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT, AND THAT'S WHY LOOKING AT THE PROCESS WE'RE LOOKING AT HOW TO MAKE SURE SO WE CAUGHT ALL THE BUILDINGS, SETBACKS AND PAVEMENT SETBACKS.IT'S JUST THIS. DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT SORT OF GOTTEN THIS IN THIS CASE. UM, AS FAR AS LIKE EASTMAN'S GO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE LINKS SPECIFICALLY, BUT CERTAINLY THIS BOARD AND OTHER BOARDS HAVE IMPROVED THESE TYPES OF ENCROACHMENTS INTO THESE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS WHERE IT HASN'T BEEN A MAJOR FLOOD ROUTES. I WOULD SAY THE ONLY TIME THAT THESE VARIANCES HAVE BEEN IMPROVED IS WHERE THERE'S BEEN AN ENCROACHMENT AND A MAJOR FLOOD ROUTES. AND IN THIS CASE THAT'S NOT TRUE. THE MAJOR FLOOD ROUTE IS ACTUALLY ALONG THE STREET HERE, SO I WILL SAY THAT THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH PAST VARIANCES. AND THAT'S AND I WAS GOING TO ACTUALLY MENTION THAT I KNOW WE HAVE SOME OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, ONE IN PARTICULAR THAT I THINK I WAS ON PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THAT ONE THAT WAS A MAJOR DRAINAGE ISSUE OVER IN THE MOUNTAIN AREA THAT YOU JUST COULDN'T THEY DID NOT GET APPROVED FOR THAT. THAT REASON I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR WORKING WITH THE CITY. THROUGH ALL OF THIS. YOU DID ALL THE RIGHT THINGS. SO YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR DOING ALL THAT IS SIMPLE. YEAH. I DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT WHEN HE FIRST NOT SUPPOSED TO, BUT EXPLAINED IT AND, UH AND I THINK MY CONTRACTOR WENT THROUGH THE RIGHT CHANNEL. AND SO I KNEW THAT IT WAS NOT ANYTHING THAT WE DID. YEAH, IT EASIER. CAN I KNOW THERE'S A MISTAKE ON THE CITY, BUT HAD THERE NOT BEEN ANYWAYS. I THINK THE OUTCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SAME. THAT'S WHY I WAS JUST ASKING THE QUESTIONS JUST TO TRY TO CATCH IT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER, BUT I THINK THE OUTCOME PROBABLY WOULD HAVE ENDED UP GRANTING. WELL WE HAVEN'T YET BUT, UM, POTENTIALLY GRANTING THE VARIANTS AS NEEDED , BUT, YEAH, THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH THEM. APPRECIATE IT. ANOTHER QUESTIONS, FOLKS. OKAY. ZERO MOVEMENT TO ACCEPT.
GOVERNANCE. NO, NO. YOU KNOW THAT? I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. CAN WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE STAFF STAFF? THAT WAS? YES. THAT'S THE WORD. YEAH. I'LL MOVE TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORT. SECOND. MR SMITH? YES, JEANETTE. MR JACOB. MR. SCHELL FOUR VOTES TO ADMIT THE DOCUMENTS. THANK YOU. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE VARIANCE 80 TO 2023. I WILL. SECOND THAT ARE WE. WHERE ARE WE GOING WITH YOU ? THE STATED CONDITIONS. THE HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT SIGNED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER SECOND UP. MR SMITH? YES MR SCHELL. MR JACOB? YES WE HAVE FOUR VOTES IN
[00:15:13]
FAVOR. OF THE VARIANTS WITH THE CONDITION AS STATED IN THIS REPORT. THANK YOU.CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. OKAY, UM YOU ARE FREE TO STAY OR YOU CAN LEAVE. 27. YEAH. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY? IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS TONIGHT? AND THEN FROM STYLE. NO IT IS NOT COMMENTS. QUESTIONS. CONCERNS OKAY. IS THERE A MOVEMENT TO IT DURING THE MEETING? SEE EVERYBODY THAT GO OVER 1ST 2ND 2ND SORRY. JAKE. MR SMITH? YES MR JACOB. MR SCHELL? YES? YES IN FAVOR OF ADJOURNMENT. THANKS, GUYS.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.