* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:01] STARTED OFF, KICKED IT OFF WITH, AGAIN, BRIEFING THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 2ND, AND NOW HERE WITH Y'ALL TODAY. AND THEN TOMORROW I WILL BRIEF ZONING COMMISSION AND ON THE 18TH PLANNING COMMISSION. AND THEN WE HAVE, UM, PLANNED A SERIES OF VIRTUAL COMMITTEE INPUTS SESSIONS TO BE HOSTED DECEMBER 1ST, SECOND, AND THIRD FROM SIX TO 7:30 PM AND THAT'LL BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO HEAR FROM, UM, OUR ASSOCIATIONS, OUR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, AND REALLY ANYBODY WHO PARTICIPATES IN, IN THOSE SESSIONS AND GET THEIR FEEDBACK AS WELL. DECEMBER 4TH WILL ISSUE A SURVEY TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO COULD NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE VIRTUAL MEETINGS. SO WE CAN DEFINITELY GET THEIR INPUT. AND WHAT WE'VE TOLD THE CULTURE AND NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES COMMITTEE, COUNCIL COMMITTEE IS WE WILL COME BACK IN JANUARY WITH THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED, THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY, AND IN DEVELOP, YOU KNOW, PRESENT RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON ALL THE, THE FEEDBACK AND RESULTS THAT WE RECEIVED. NEXT SLIDE. SO SOME QUESTIONS THAT, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, DEFINITELY HEAR YOUR RESPONSES TO IS HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO USE THE REGISTRY? WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON OVERLAPPING BOUNDARIES? SHOULD ONLY ONE ASSOCIATION BE ALLOWED TO RES REPRESENT THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA? SHOULD THERE BE A RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT FOR OFFICERS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? MEANING, YOU KNOW, THEM LIVING WITHIN THE ASSOCIATION'S BOUNDARIES AND WHAT TYPES OF TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO ASSOCIATIONS AND REGULATORY AGENCIES? AND ARE THERE ANY OTHER PROGRAMS THAT WE MIGHT BE MISSING THAT WE SHOULD OFFER TO, UM, OUR ASSOCIATIONS? AND THEN I HAVE ONE MORE SLIDE, UM, BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THOSE QUESTIONS. SO NEXT STEPS. SO AGAIN, OUR, OUR TO FINISH OUT THE BRIEFINGS WITH THE REG REGULATORY BODIES, OUR COMMUNITY, EXCUSE ME, OUR VIRTUAL COMMUNITY INS INPUT SESSIONS, WHICH I MENTIONED WILL KICK OFF IN JANUARY IN OUR SURVEY AS WELL. AND THEN WE HAVE DISCUSSED DEVELOPING A EXPANDED OPT-IN NOTIFICATION SYSTEM, UM, WITH D S D AND I T S D, WHERE ANYONE COULD OPT IN TO RECEIVE THE SAME NOTICE THAT WENT TO, IF I HAVE AN INTEREST IN EVERYTHING THAT'S GONE OUT FOR DISTRICT TWO. UM, AND THAT'S JUST AN EXAMPLE. AGAIN, WE, WE HAVEN'T WORKED OUT THE DETAILS, BUT THEN I COULD GET THAT SAME INFORMATION. AND THEN, UM, AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, WE PLAN TO RETURN IN JANUARY TO PROVIDE, UM, THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE, THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AND, UM, HOPEFULLY, HOPEFULLY MOVE FORWARD WITH SOLIDIFYING, UM, AN UPDATED, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY. AND IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO MY PREVIOUS SLIDES WITH THE QUESTIONS, UM, WE CAN JUMP IN. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MYSELF OR EDWARD, WE CAN DEFINITELY JUMP INTO THOSE. BUT DEFINITELY, I, I WANT TO WALK AWAY FROM THIS WORK SESSION HAVING, UH, GOT YOUR FEEDBACK AND ANY RECOMMENDATIONS YOU HAVE. 'CAUSE WE, I HAVE TO GO BACK AND, AND DEFINITELY PRESENT THAT TO OUR COUNCIL COMMITTEE. THANK YOU. CAN YOU GO TO SLIDE NINE PLEASE? THANK YOU. THANK YOU, BARBARA. THIS, AGAIN, THIS IS EDWARD GONZALEZ WITH THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT. I'D LIKE TO, UM, OPEN UP THE FLOOR AGAIN FOR ANY QUESTIONS ON BARBARA'S PRESENTATION. AND THEN IF NOT, WE GET, UH, RESPONSES ON THE QUESTIONS ON THE SLIDE. CRUZ, GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, BARBARA, TWO QUESTIONS. ONE IS ON THE VIRTUAL MEETINGS THAT YOU ALL ARE PLANNING FOR DECEMBER 1ST, SECOND, AND THIRD ARE, HOW ARE THE ORGANIZATIONS GONNA BE NOTIFIED ABOUT THAT THEY'RE BEING NOTIFIED VIA EMAIL? AN EMAIL WENT OUT TODAY. SO WE ARE EMAILING ALL THE ASSOCIATIONS AND COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE ON OUR LIST, BUT OUR DEPARTMENT ALSO KEEPS A SEPARATE LIST OF, UM, THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT MAY NOT BE ON THE REGISTRATION. AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR OUR PARTNERS TO DEFINITELY SHARE THAT WITH ANY AND EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO PARTICIPATE. OKAY. SO HOW ARE WE'RE GONNA GET, HOW ARE WE GET NOTIFIED WHEN THE MEETINGS ARE GONNA ACTUALLY BE, WHAT DATE, TIME, AND EVERYTHING ELSE? IF, IF YOU PROVIDE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS, WE CAN SEND YOU THAT INVITE. OKAY. WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL GET THAT AS WELL. OKAY. AND WE'LL, AND WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS. OKAY. WELL, IT'S JUST THAT I RUN THROUGH MY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, COMMITTEES AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT BETWEEN MYSELF AND THE PRESIDENT KNOW [00:05:01] WHAT'S GOING ON AND HOW WE CAN LOG IN. OKAY. OKAY. AND THEN ON THE OVERLAPPING BOUNDARIES, UM, IT'S BEEN A WHILE, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG YOU'VE BEEN THERE, BUT BEFORE, WE HAVE TWO ORGANIZATIONS THAT OVERLAP, WHICH IS AND THE, UH, . SO HOW CAN WE DISTINGUISH THAT OR HOW CAN WE KNOW WHETHER THAT'S STILL GOOD OR WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION? OKAY. ON THE OVERLAPPING BOUNDARIES MM-HMM. , OKAY. WE'VE HAD AN OVERLAP BOUNDARY FOR YEARS ALREADY BETWEEN PALM HEIGHTS AND SOUTH BEND. SO HOW CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT'S STILL GOOD? WE NEED TO PUT IN SOMETHING NEW ON THAT, OR WHAT? WELL, THIS IS THE THING, IF, IF YOU, IF BACK IN THE DAY, IF YOU AGREE TO THAT OVERLAP, THEN THAT STILL EXISTS UNTIL YOU TELL US THAT IT DOESN'T. IF THERE, IF Y'ALL AGREED LIKE, NO, WE'RE NO LONGER GOING TO, WE ARE NOT GONNA CHANGE THAT. WE, WE DEFINITELY, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE, WE TAKE THE GUIDANCE FROM Y'ALL, IF YOU CAN SEND IT TO IT, THEN IT, IT STANDS, SO IT SHOULD STILL BE IN PLACE. OKAY. WELL, I NEED AND I KNOW ALL THIS IS ACCESSIBLE ONLINE, YOU KNOW, UM, MAPPING WISE, BUT IF YOU, YOU KNOW, NEED ME TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT AND LOOK AT THAT, I, I DON'T MIND DOING THAT. OKAY. I'LL DOUBLE CHECK WITH THE OTHER PRESIDENT FOR SOUTH SIDE AND SEE WHAT HE TELLS ME. AS FAR AS I KNOW, I'M STILL GOOD, BUT, OKAY. WE'LL, WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU, BUT IF NOT, LIKE I SAID, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT ONE OF US IS, IS ONLINE TO LOOK AT WHAT Y'ALL ARE GONNA BE DISCUSSING THE IN DECEMBER. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, BARBARA. YES. UM, WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS IT TO KEEP THE CONTACT INFORMATION UP TO DATE? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE GONNA BE DOING PERIODICALLY? SO OUR, OUR GONNA BE UPDATED, OUR DEPARTMENT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING THE REGISTRATION UPDATED, BUT THAT'S A TWO-WAY STREET. SO WE PERIODICALLY, SO CURRENTLY WE REQUIRE, UM, AN UPDATE EVERY YEAR, AND WE GOT TOLD THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH. SO WE WERE GONNA PROPOSE EVERY TWO YEARS, BUT LAST YEAR WE SENT OUT EMAILS TO ALL THE ASSOCIATIONS TO PLEASE UPDATE, YOU KNOW, THEIR CONTACT INFORMATION. AND IN ALL HONESTY, SOMETIMES PEOPLE DO AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE DON'T. SO WE HAVE A LOT OF DATED INFORMATION ON THE REGISTRY AND IT, BUT IT'S NOT A LACK OF US NOT TRYING TO GET THAT CURRENT INFORMATION. AND SO, UM, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HOW DO WE KIND OF BUILD IN, YOU KNOW, BETTER SYSTEMS IN PLACE TO, TO HOPEFULLY PROMPT BROAD AND, AND POLITELY AND, AND CONSISTENTLY ASK FOR THAT. BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALSO TALKED ABOUT MAYBE THE CONSEQUENCES WHEN WE DON'T GET, YOU KNOW, A RESPONSE BACK. OKAY. THANK YOU. I I KNOW THAT THAT'S A CHALLENGE, FISHER. UM, I WONDER ON THE RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICERS OF NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, I WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WOULD BE WITHIN THE BYLAWS OF EACH INDIVIDUAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UM, UNLESS IT'S A CITYWIDE, UH, DOCUMENT AND FORMAT. WHAT TYPE OF CONFLICTS WOULD YOU FORESEE WITH THAT? OR WOULD EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE TO PUT THAT IN THEIR BYLAWS SO THAT THAT'S JUST AN ISSUE THAT'S JUST BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION RECENTLY? IT'S NOTHING THAT OUR POLICY SPEAKS TO. AGAIN, WE DON'T ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, WE, WE, WE TRUST THAT EVERYONE'S GOT THEIR BYLAWS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY, YOU KNOW, UM, THE ASSOCIATION AND THEY'RE ADHERING TO IT. NOW, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY WHAT'S HAPPENING. AND SO WE'VE JUST POSED THE QUESTION OF, YOU KNOW, SHOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THE POLICY SHOULD, SHOULD REQUIRE? SO IT'S NOTHING THAT WE CURRENTLY REQUIRE, WE'RE JUST ASKING THE QUESTION BECAUSE WE'RE HEARING MORE AND MORE, YOU KNOW, THAT, UM, THIS X PERSON HAD X PERSONS ON THIS, YOU KNOW, ASSOCIATION'S BOARD, AND THEY DON'T EVEN LIVE HERE. SO HOW ARE THEY SHOWING UP TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OR ZONING AND SPEAKING ON, YOU KNOW, SAID CASE WHEN THEY DON'T LIVE HERE? AND, AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALWAYS WALKING THIS VERY FINE LINE BECAUSE WE, WE DON'T, DO NOT, SHOULD NOT, AND GET INVOLVED IN THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, UM, THE WORKINGS OF A NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, YOU KNOW, ASSOCIATION. WE'RE NOT INVOLVED IN THEIR BYLAWS. WE DON'T HELP THEM DEVELOP IT. WE DON'T, WE DON'T, WE KNOW MANDATE, OH, WE, WE WE LOOKED AT YOUR BYLAWS AND YOU'RE NOT FOLLOWING THEM. WE DON'T DO THAT. WE DON'T GET INVOLVED IN THAT PIECE, THE GOVERNANCE. WE STAY OUT OF THAT CLEARLY. AND, AND REALLY, AGAIN, IT'S A TRUST FACTOR. WE TRUST EVERYBODY'S FILING, [00:10:01] FOLLOWING THEIR BYLAWS, BUT AGAIN, WE BRING THIS TO, UM, WE BRING THIS TO THE COMMISSION'S, UM, ATTENTION BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S COME UP SEVERAL TIMES AS A, A CONCERN FROM, UM, THE ASSOCIATIONS AND, AND, AND PUSHING. MAYBE THE POLICY SHOULD ADDRESS IT. YEAH. BARBARA, WELL, THANK YOU . BARBARA? YES. HEY, UH, THIS IS DONALD. UH, I HAVE A HAVE Y ALL CHECKED TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY CONFLICT WITH THE TEXAS PROPERTY CODE REGARDING SOME OF THESE, UM, THESE, UH, STANCES THAT Y'ALL HAVE. UM, NO, WE HAVEN'T DONE A, A CHECK. UM, BUT WHEN WE INITIALLY, UM, SENT OUT A DRAFT OF A POLICY, UM, WE HEARD QUITE A BIT FROM THE HOAS. AND SO I THINK GOING FORWARD, WE'RE GONNA CLARIFY IN THIS POLICY THAT IT, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T, IT'S NOT SET UP TO REALLY KIND OF TELL HOAS WHAT TO DO BECAUSE WE DEFINITELY KNOW THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE GOVERNED SEPARATELY. IT'S MORE TO PROVIDE MORE GUIDANCE FOR OUR VOLUNTEER VOLUNTARY, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. BUT WE'LL, WE'LL DEFINITELY, UH, MAKE SURE WE CLARIFY THAT SO THERE'S A, A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE WE, WE, WE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR FROM THE HOAS. YEAH, I, I ONLY SAY BECAUSE I'M PRESIDENT OF MY H O A AND I KNOW THE TEXAS PROPERTY CODE SOMETIMES OVERRIDES THINGS THAT WE MAY WANT TO DO, UH, SPECIFICALLY WHO CAN BE A MEMBER WHO'S ALLOWED TO RUN, WHO'S ALLOWED TO BE MM-HMM. AN OFFICE, AN OFFICER. SO THAT JUST, THAT'S SOMETHING JUST TO POINT OUT THERE. YEAH. AND, YOU KNOW, UM, PER THE U D C ASKING US, YOU KNOW, GUIDING US AND, AND REALLY REQUIRING US TO COLLECT THE, THE BYLAWS WHEN THERE'S MEETINGS, ALL THAT IS ABOUT IS JUST MAKING SURE THIS IS A LEGIT ORGANIZATION, YOU KNOW, A LEGIT ASSOCIATION. YOU KNOW, GOD FORBID, YOU KNOW, TWO PEOPLE GET TOGETHER AND JUST CALL THEMSELVES AN ASSOCIATION AND SAYING THAT THEY'RE REPRESENTED THE AREA. AND, AND SO I THINK OFTENTIMES BECAUSE WE COLLECT THE BYLAWS, THERE'S THIS ASSUMPTION WE MIGHT BE LIKE GOING THROUGH THEM AND, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, UM, MAYBE, OH, WE NOTICED YOU DID THIS. NO, NOT AT ALL. WE, WE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE CURRENT, THEY'RE ASSIGNED, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, DEFINITELY APPROVED IN SOME SHAPE OR FORM, AND WE HAVE THEM ON FILE. AND IT'S NOT FOR US TO POLICE ANYBODY, IT'S JUST TO SAY, LOOK, WE'VE GOT SOME DOCUMENTATION THAT'S ADDS SOME CREDIBILITY TO THIS ASSOCIATION SAYING, YOU KNOW, THEY ARE ONE VERSUS IF WE MAY HAVE NOT COLLECTED THAT INFORMATION, WE WOULD PROBABLY GET A LOT OF PEOPLE LIKE, HEY, LET'S GET TOGETHER AND SAY WE'RE IN ASSOCIATION BECAUSE THIS, THIS CASE IS COMING UP AND WE NEED TO, YOU KNOW, REALLY SPEAK AGAINST IT. SO IT'S JUST, YEAH, DOCUMENTATION. I GET IT REAL QUICK, DONALD, THIS IS ZEKE. UM, WE CAN HEAR YOU, SIR. IT'S JUST REALLY LOW. I DON'T THINK YOU CAN GET CLOSER TO THE MIC. I AM GOING TO, I JUST BOUGHT A NEW TABLET. IT OBVIOUSLY ISN'T WORKING SO WELL, SO I'M USING MY PHONE. I'M GONNA GO RUN THE AUDIO THROUGH MY COMPUTER AND SO SOUNDS GOOD, SIR. THANK YOU. SO I, I'M, I'M CURIOUS, UM, FOR THE MEMBERS, LIKE HOW WOULD YOU, I MEAN, HOW ARE YOU CURRENTLY USING THE REGISTRY? AND WHEN I, I'LL ASK A VERY DIRECT QUESTION ABOUT THAT. WHEN YOU HAVE, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SIGN UP TO SPEAK ABOUT A PARTICULAR CASE AND THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THEMSELVES AS I AM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ON THE REGISTRY LIST, VERSUS MAYBE ANOTHER GROUP THAT IDENTIFIES THEMSELVES AS AN ASSOCIATION IN THAT SAME AREA, ARE YOU, IS THE ONE ON THE LIST A LITTLE BIT LIKE, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA LISTEN TO THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THE OTHER. I MEAN, HOW, WHAT DOES THAT, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU HEAR THAT OR IF YOU HAVE HEARD THAT MANNA? SO ACTUALLY, SO HI BARBARA. UM, HI. I'LL TALK A WHOLE LOT. UM, YEAH, I HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF INPUT ON A LOT OF THESE THINGS, AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE AN EXTENDED DIALOGUE AT SOME POINT WITH YOU ON SOME OF THESE THINGS. UM, SO I'VE BEEN IN A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS HERE FOR A YEAR, BUT I'VE BEEN A NEIGHBORHOOD PRESIDENT FOR 40 YEARS OR SO, SO, OR SO I'VE BEEN ENGAGED IN A LOT OF THESE, A LOT OF THESE QUESTIONS. ONE OF THE THINGS I HAVE SEEN WITH REGARDS TO THE REGISTRY IS ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION, WE'VE HAD MORE THAN ONE GROUP COME IN TO REPRESENT A COMMUNITY. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK, UH, IN THE DIALOGUE THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSION WITH REGARDS TO WHO WAS THE LEGITIMATE, LEGITIMATE INPUT FOR THE COMMUNITY VERSUS NOT THE LEGITIMATE INPUT. THAT'S THEN ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, SECOND INPUT WAS, WAS THE PERSON REPRESENTING THE TRUE INPUT OR A COMMUNITY WHEN THEY'RE PROVIDING IT? SO WE'VE HEARD THAT AS WELL AS LIKE SOMEONE THAT WOULD COME UP AFTERWARDS SAY, YOU TRULY ARE NOT REPRESENTING ME. UM, AND SO, SO I THINK THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONFLICTS WITH REGARDS TO THAT MINISTRY PERSPECTIVE. UM, YOU KNOW, BUT THAT SAID, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, SPEAKING FOR MYSELF FROM A, FROM HOW I LISTEN TO THE BOARD IS THAT WHEN SOMEONE DOES SPEAK, WE LISTEN TO ALL OF THE CITIZEN'S INPUT, AND WE'LL TAKE IT AS EITHER CITIZEN OR AS A NEIGHBORHOOD AND TRY TO DIFFERENTIATE THE TWO. [00:15:01] AND I THINK THEY'RE ALL EQUALLY WEIGHED, UH, UH, PROSPECTIVELY. UM, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE FOR OVERLAPPING BOUNDARIES IS, IS A GOAL OF THE CITY TO HAVE EVERY SINGLE RESIDENT COVERED BY A COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVE. AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE A VERY GOOD GOAL, BECAUSE REGULARLY WHAT WE SEE IS, UH, A BOARD CASE WILL COME ACROSS THAT DOESN'T HAVE REPRESENT REPRESENTATION FROM THE COMMUNITY. AND SO I THINK A GOAL OVERALL WOULD BE TO HAVE THAT REPRESENTATION FROM THE COMMUNITY ITSELF. UM, I REPRESENT TWO THINGS. ONE, A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND A COMMUNITY PLAN. AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN, YOU KNOW, HAS A QUESTIONABLE STATE WITH REGARDS TO THE U D C AS FAR AS WHERE IT SITS. THE COMMUNITY PLAN IS A PRETTY LARGE AREA THAT FOR MINE ENCOMPASSES TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HOMES. UM, AND SO WHENEVER, YOU KNOW, UM, WHENEVER I SPEAK, YOU KNOW, I TRY TO REPRESENT THAT WHOLE COMMUNITY, BUT THERE MAY BE AN INDIVIDUAL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS REPRESENTED IN THERE AND BY, YOU KNOW, BY LARGE, YOU KNOW, LET THEM SPEAK. HOWEVER, ALL THOSE THAT DON'T HAVE A COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVE, I TRY TO REPRESENT THEM, YOU KNOW, SO I TRY TO WEAR TWO HATS IN THOSE DIALOGUES. SO CERTAINLY WOULD LET ANYBODY SPEAK FOR THE COMMUNITY IF IT, IF IT TRULY EXISTS. BUT FOR ALL THOSE HOMES THAT DON'T HAVE A COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVE, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW THOSE ARE, HOW THOSE PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE REPRESENTED. AND SO, SO I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT'S TWO DIFFERENT HATS THAT WE TRY TO FIGURE OUT. THERE'S TWO LAYERS, A LARGER COMMUNITY REPRESENTATION, YOU KNOW, FOR THOSE THAT ARE NOT REPRESENTED. AND IT MAY BE TWO PEOPLE THAT SIT IN A ROOM AND SAY, HERE'S HOW WE SEE THIS AREA BE, YOU KNOW, BEING DEVELOPED. AND, YOU KNOW, IF THEY TAKE AN INTEREST IN THE COMMUNITY, HATS OFF TO THEM BECAUSE WE NEED TO ENCOURAGE THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. UH, AND THEN AS RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE HAVE A FEW COMMUNITIES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE IT'S PROFESSIONALLY MANAGED AND THE OFFICERS ARE PART OF THAT PROFESSIONALLY MANAGED ORGANIZATION, WHICH MAY NOT LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY. AND, YOU KNOW, SO WHEN I REACH OUT TO THEM, YOU KNOW, MY EMAILS GO TO WHO KNOWS WHERE, UH, TO TRY TO GET THEIR INPUT, YOU KNOW, FROM THAT LARGER THING, AND YOU JUST KIND OF DEAL WITH IT. AND SO, I DON'T KNOW, YOU, YOU KNOW, JUST I HAVE SEEN IT IN THAT REGARDS WHERE IT IS PROFESSIONALLY MANAGED, WHERE THE OFFICERS ARE PART OF SOME LARGER ORGANIZATION AND, AND, YOU KNOW, IT IS A LITTLE BIT COMPLICATED TO DEAL WITH, BUT YOU KNOW, THEY ARE REPRESENTING THEIR ASSOCIATIONS HOWEVER THEY'RE MANAGING IT. AND IF THEY AREN'T MANAGING APPROPRIATELY, THEN THAT DIALOGUE WITHIN THE ASSOCIATION. SO I'LL TAKE IT OFF MY HAT NOW AND STEP BACK. I HAVE, I HAVE, OH, I, I JUST HAVE A FOLLOW UP, UM, QUESTION. UM, PHILIP, SINCE YOU MENTIONED SOME THINGS, DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE SOMETHING, DO YOU THINK IT'D BE IMPACTFUL FOR A STATEMENT TO BE READ BEFORE THE MEETING THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT JUST CLEARLY SAID, YOU KNOW, WE RECOGNIZE AND ACKNOWLEDGE EVERYBODY'S FEEDBACK, WHO SHOWS UP TODAY, YOU KNOW, WHETHER YOU'RE WITH AN ASSOCIATION OR NOT, SOME SORT OF JUST STATEMENT THAT JUST ACKNOWLEDGES, UM, THAT THERE IS AN EQUITABLE LIKE PLATFORM FOR HEARING EVERYBODY'S RESPONSE? I, SO, SO TWO ANSWERS TO THAT. ONE, I THINK THAT'S IMPLIED IN THE DIALOGUE THAT WE HAVE IN THE OPENING STATEMENTS AND, AND IT'S KIND OF TALK ABOUT CITIZEN SPEAKING MM-HMM. . UM, SECOND THOUGHT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, ONE THING THAT WE SEE REGULARLY AND, AND THE THOUGHTS TODAY IS THAT WE'LL HAVE, AND IT'S A, UH, PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTED AND THERE IS NO INPUT PROVIDED FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND MAYBE ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS TO HAVE A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION IS THAT IF THERE IS A CASE THAT COMES ACROSS, THERE HAS TO BE AT LEAST FEEDBACK PROVIDED THAT SAYS WE HAVE NO OPINION OR FOR AGAINST ON A GIVEN CASE AND, AND PUT SOMETHING BACK ON THE OWNERS TO MAKE IT ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS. SO THAT WAY YOU KIND OF GET ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT THEY ARE TRULY PAYING ATTENTION, UM, YOU KNOW, TO THEIR COMMUNITY AND YOU KNOW THAT YOU'RE GETTING PINGING BACK THAT THEY'RE STILL ALIVE. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES, THANK YOU. UM, UM, I, I KNOW BARBARA, THAT WE'VE TALKED BEFORE, UM, ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND I'M REALLY GLAD TO SEE, UH, THE PROGRESS THAT'S BEING MADE HERE. UM, I FOR ONE, ABSOLUTELY THINK THAT OVERLAPPING BOUNDARIES SHOULD BE ALLOWED. UM, AND I THINK THAT FOR MULTIPLE REASONS, UM, I AM SPEAKING, UH, FROM A PLACE OF, UM, BEING, UH, ON THE BOARD OF MY ASSOCIATION, BUT ALSO, UM, PARTICIPATING IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND SEEING A LOT OF OTHER, UM, COMMUNITIES TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THIS ISSUE. UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE, UM, SOMETIMES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS GO DEFUNCT OVER TIME. THEY JUST MAYBE DIE OUT THE, THEY BECOME LESS ACTIVE AND THERE SHOULD BE THE ABILITY [00:20:01] FOR ANOTHER ASSOCIATION TO BE ABLE TO BE FORMED WITHOUT HAVING TO GET PERMISSION FROM SOMEONE ELSE. SOMETIMES THERE ARE DIVERGING IDEAS, UM, AND I, I BELIEVE THAT ALL CITIZENS SHOULD HAVE AN EQUAL SAY. AND SO IF UM, THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO REACH CONSENSUS, I THINK, AND THEY CAN FORM ANOTHER GROUP, I THINK THAT'S OKAY. I'VE ALSO SEEN ASSOCIATIONS WHERE THEY, UM, KIND OF DIVIDE UP HOMEOWNERS VERSUS RENTERS AND THEY TRY TO GIVE RENTERS LESS OF A SAY IN THEIR COMMUNITY. AND I THINK THAT IF RENTERS WANT TO BAND TOGETHER AND AN ASSOCIATION, THAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED AS WELL. WE DEAL WITH SO MANY ISSUES IN THE CITY, NOT JUST, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT SO MANY WITHIN THE CITY THAT AFFECT ALL OF THE RESIDENTS. I THINK THAT EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE REPRESENTATION, UM, AS FAR AS SHOULD THERE BE RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICERS OF NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. WHILE I THINK THAT'S IDEAL, UM, BECAUSE YOU'VE EXPRESSED THAT THE CITY DOES NOT WANNA GET INTO GOVERNANCE, UM, OR DICTATING BYLAWS, EDITING BYLAWS, ANYTHING LIKE THAT, I THINK, UM, IT'S PROBABLY, UH, IF I WERE IN YOUR POSITION, I WOULD STAY MUTE ON THAT. UM, ALTHOUGH I THINK IT IS IDEAL PERSONALLY, AND I THINK IT'S MORE BENEFICIAL THAT RESIDENTS FROM THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD ARE THE ONES ON THE OFF ON THE BOARD. UM, THERE, THERE ARE SITUATIONS WHERE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN. AND I KNOW EVEN IN MY OWN ASSOCIATION WE HAVE, UM, A STRONG BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND SO OUR OFFICERS ARE MADE UP OF A MIX AND THAT IS DICTATED IN OUR BYLAWS, YOU KNOW, WHAT THAT MIX IS AND WHO CAN BE PRESIDENT, LIKE THE PRESIDENT MUST BE A RESIDENT. UM, AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE TWO BUSINESS BOARD MEMBERS ON OUR BOARD, BUT THAT'S ALSO, THAT'S OUR BYLAWS AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT OUR COMMUNITY HAS AGREED TO. I THINK YOU SHOULD BE REALLY CAREFUL ABOUT GETTING INTO DICTATING WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WANT TO, I THINK YOU SHOULD BE CAREFUL AROUND THAT ISSUE, IS WHAT I'M SAYING, . UM, BUT I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT, UM, DIFFERENT GROUPS ARE, ARE ALLOWED TO FORM. UM, I, I KNOW THAT, UM, THROUGH WORK WITH VARIOUS COMMUNITY GROUPS THAT I'VE DONE, THERE IS A LOT OF CONFLICT OVER THAT ISSUE. UM, BUT THE JOB OF THE CITY AND THE ROLE OF THE CITY, UM, LEGALLY IS TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE IS INFORMED AND HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE INPUT, UM, DURING THESE KINDS OF HEARINGS AND WHEN THESE DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE. AND SO I THINK THAT THAT IS, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THE BEST WAY TO GO. ALRIGHT. THIS IS EDWARD AGAIN. I HAVE A, A FOLLOW UP QUESTION FOR ANISE. UH, I BELIEVE SO. I, WE HEARD, I HEARD YOU LOUD IN CLEAR IN TERMS OF THE, UM, YOU KNOW, PARTICIPANT, UH, PARTICIPATION IS CRITICAL. UM, BUT I ALSO HEARD ABOUT DEFUNCT KIND OF NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, AND THAT'S KIND OF IN TWO AREAS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT. ONE IS THE AREA ABOUT OVERLAPPING BOUNDARIES, OBVIOUSLY, AND, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE, DO WE ALLOW, YOU KNOW, DO WE, DO WE ALLOW THAT? DO WE NOT ALLOW THAT? HOW DOES WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT? WE'LL GET, I THINK WE GOT YOUR INPUT ON THAT, BUT THE OTHER I WANT TO GET YOUR OPINION ON IS OF, ABOUT, UM, ASSOCIATIONS THAT ARE NOT PRESENT, RIGHT? SO THEY MAY HAVE, YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT DISSOCIATION THAT MAY HAVE BEEN AROUND A LONG TIME, BUT MAY NOT BE, UM, UPDATING THEIR INFORMATION. SO THEY MAY BE NON-EXISTENT ANYMORE AND WE WOULDN'T KNOW, RIGHT? SO I THINK THAT GOES TO OUR SECOND POINT ABOUT HOW OFTEN SHOULD WE UPDATE AND WHAT ARE THE, WHAT ARE, WHAT SHOULD WE FOLLOW AS STAFF IF THEY ARE NOT UPDATED, RIGHT? SO MAYBE WE DO, AND I'M JUST GONNA, AND I'M JUST THROWING DO IT MOVING FORWARD AFTER THAT. UH, IS IT TWO YEARS? SO THE FIRST YEAR THEY DON'T UPDATE, THEN THAT MEANS THAT THEY, THAT ASSOCIATION WOULD BE SOMEHOW SUSPENDED ON THE REGISTRY. UH, AND THAT I JUST MAYBE SOME THOUGHTS AROUND PEOPLE THAT ARE NONRESPONSIVE TO OUR UPDATES AND HOW DO WE ADDRESS THAT? UM, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. I DEFINITELY THINK REACHING OUT YEARLY SHOULD BE THE MINIMUM. UM, I ON MY ASSOCIATIONS BOARD AND I GET THOSE EMAILS, UM, FROM Y'ALL WHEN YOU SEND THEM OUT AND SAY, HEY, WE'RE UPDATING, GIVE US YOUR NEW INFORMATION. AND I CAN ALSO TELL YOU, I GET SO MANY EMAILS THAT THINGS SOMETIMES FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS. SO, UM, PROBABLY [00:25:01] YEARLY AND MAYBE A FOLLOW UP IF YOU HAVEN'T HEARD BACK WITHIN A YEAR. BUT ALSO MAKING SURE THAT WHEN YOU GET INFORMATION, YOU HAVE CONTACT INFORMATION FROM MORE THAN PERSON ON THE BOARD BECAUSE, UM, SOMETIMES, LIKE WHAT IF THE PERSON THAT WAS IN CHARGE OF THAT MOVED AWAY OR FOR WHATEVER REASON IS NO LONGER GETTING THOSE EMAILS, HAVING ANOTHER WAY TO CONTACT ANOTHER PERSON ON THE BOARD WOULD BE GOOD. ALSO, MOST OF THESE ASSOCIATIONS HAVE SOME SORT OF MAILING ADDRESS. I KNOW WE'VE NEVER, PERSONALLY, I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVER RECEIVED A NOTIFICATION LOOKING FOR AN UPDATE IN THE MAIL. SO I THINK MAYBE UTILIZING ALL THE TOOLS YOU HAVE BEFORE ELIMINATING SOMEONE FROM THE REGISTRY, UM, THOUGH, BECAUSE IT'S A CONTACT LIST, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S, I DON'T KNOW HOW NECESSARY IT IS FOR YOU TO ELIMINATE PEOPLE FROM THE REGISTRY. MAYBE IF IT HAS BEEN TWO YEARS AND YOU HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING, UM, YOU KNOW, SEND OUT A, SEND OUT A NOTICE LIKE, HEY, WE DON'T HAVE ANY UPDATED INFORMATION. IF WE DON'T GET THAT, THEN WE'RE GOING TO ASSUME THAT YOUR ASSOCIATION IS NO LONGER ACTIVE OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. I'M NOT SURE. I KNOW ANOTHER ASSOCIATION IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD DOESN'T DO VERY MUCH VIA EMAIL. UM, THEIR, UH, BOARD IS MADE UP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE, UH, DOING THINGS THROUGH, UH, DIRECT MAIL. SO MAKING SURE I THINK THAT YOU'RE REACHING OUT. PLUS WE ALSO KNOW IN OUR CITY, A LOT OF PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE REGULAR ACCESS TO THE INTERNET. UM, SO MAKING SURE THAT YOU'RE US UTILIZING ALL THE CONTACT INFORMATION, UM, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. THOSE ARE GREAT POINTS. WE'RE GONNA TAKE THOSE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S HELPFUL. MANNA. I, UM, ALSO I'D LIKE TO ADD ON TO THAT, UM, I THINK THAT THE CITY SHOULD BE DOING EVERYTHING IT CAN TO ENCOURAGE TO GET MORE COMMUNITIES ENGAGED. AND ANYTHING YOU DO TO REMOVES THE COMMUNITY IS THE WRONG DIRECTION. AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, GOING BACK TO THE POINT THAT SHOULD BE THE CASE THAT EVERY HOUSE HAS IDENTIFIED REPRESENTATIVE, UH, REPRESENTATION, YOU KNOW, IN SOME GROUP. AND SO AS SOON AS THE HOUSE GOES DARK, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S AGAIN THE WRONG DIRECTION. AND, YOU KNOW, GOING TO, LIKE IN OUR COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, IT'S VERY QUIET AND, AND NOT VERY MUCH GOES ON UNTIL SOMETHING HAPPENS AND THERE'S SOME KIND OF THING, AND THEN PITCHFORKS AND, AND TORCHES COME OUT AND THE WHOLE COMMUNITY GETS TOGETHER AND STORMS A CASTLE AND SAYS, NOT THIS IS NOT GONNA HAPPEN. AND THEN THAT CASE CLOSES AND THEN EVERYTHING GOES QUIET AGAIN. AND SO IT'S FEAST AND FAMINE. AND I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY TRUE FOR A LOT OF COMMUNITIES AND OURS IS A VOLUNTEER ASSOCIATION, AND I THINK THOSE ARE WHERE YOU'RE GONNA FIND A LOT MORE DIFFICULTY TRYING TO MAINTAIN, YOU KNOW, THEIR, THEIR COMPONENT OF BEING ACTIVE OR NOT. AND SO, UM, SO I, I THINK THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE CHALLENGES AND I THINK ONCE YOU GET A CONTACT, YOU KNOW, YOU KEEP RELYING ON THAT CONTACT AND THEN IF THEY, IF THEY GIVE WAY, THEN YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHO THE NEXT CONTACT'S GONNA BE. SO I THINK PHILIP, AND I THINK FOR US, YOU KNOW, OUR INTENT IS TO GET, YOU KNOW, THE REGISTRY IS INTENDED TO BE A COMMUNICATION TOOL, SO WE WANT TO HAVE AS MANY FOLKS ON THE COMMUNICATION TOOL AS POSSIBLE. UM, SO THAT'S THE INTENT. I THINK I, I REALLY SUPPORT MR. MAN'S COMMENTS ON THIS. UM, WE ALSO ARE A VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATION AND, UM, IT, IT CAN BE DIFFICULT AND LIKE PE THINGS CHANGE. PEOPLE'S LIFE PRIORITIES CHANGE. IF THERE'S NOT A MAJOR PROJECT COMING UP, UM, PEOPLE SOMETIMES DON'T ENGAGE AT THE SAME LEVEL. AND SO, UM, I THINK IF YOU CAN CAPTURE, YOU KNOW, THE PRESIDENT, THE VICE PRESIDENT AND THE SECRETARY, YOU KNOW, GET LIKE AT LEAST THREE POINTS OF CONTACT SO THAT IF SOME SOMEONE DROPS OFF, YOU HAVE AN A WAY TO STAY IN TOUCH WITH THAT GROUP DOWN THE ROAD. THAT WOULD BE IDEAL. I'M JUST DOING A QUICK TIME CHECK WITH, UH, WITH OUR D S D STAFF. ARE WE, ARE WE STILL OKAY? SHOULD WE BE WRAPPING UP? FINAL COMMENT? YOU SHOULD BE WRAPPING UP. IT'S ALMOST ONE. YES, SIR. CORRECT. OKAY, SO WE ARE WRAPPING UP. WE WILL WRAP UP. I THINK WE HAVE SOME GOOD DISCUSSION HERE. UM, IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE FINAL COMMENT, I THINK WE HAVE ONE MINUTE LEFT AND THEN WE, IF NOT, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO CHAIR AT THIS TIME? YES, IF YOU WANNA TAKE A QUICK FIVE MINUTE BREAK, WE CAN. ALL RIGHT, , GO AHEAD. ALL RIGHT. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. MY NAME IS DONALD ORIAN. I AM THE VICE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT [00:30:01] OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULARLY NOTICE MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN SESSION. CAN WE HAVE OUR INTERPRETERS TO READ THE INTERPRETATION SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR THIS MEETING, PLEASE? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, STAFF PLEASE CONDUCT THE ROLL CALL. MICHELLE, PRESENT. MR. MANCHACA? PRESENT. MS. CRUZ? HERE. MR. TEAL? PRESENT. MR. MANNA PRESENT. MS. BRAGMAN? PRESENT. MR. DELMER? PRESENT. MS. FISHER? PRESENT MR. BATTLE? MR. BATTLE SEEMS LIKE WE'RE HAVING ISSUES WITH MR. BATTLES PRESENT. OH, THERE YOU, UH, MR. OZUNA? YES. PRESENT CHAIR ORIAN AND I'M ALSO PRESENT. WE HAVE A QUORA. FANTASTIC. UM, LET'S SEE. BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION. THE BOARD IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW. WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELIEF SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATOR IN SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY'RE CLEAR, CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 35, THE HERE AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. WE ALSO SERVE IN AN ADVISORY AND AN APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES AND REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28. EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS. EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY. IT REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES, THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN GRANTING THE RELIEF SAW REST WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS ON WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S. DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. PRIOR TO STARTING WITH OUR ITEMS, I WOULD LIKE OUR STAFF TO REVIEW OUR MEETING FORMAT. STAFF, PLEASE PROCEED TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THE PUBLIC AND LIMIT THE POTENTIAL SPREAD OF CVID 19. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS HOLDING MEETINGS VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE. THESE MEETING STANDARDS ARE BASED UPON THE VARIOUS SUSPENDED PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT ISSUED BY THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT IN RESPONSE TO THE C OVID 19 CRISIS AND OR IN PLACE UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IN WATCH AND LISTEN TO THIS MEETING BY VISITING SAN ANTONIO.GOV/DSD OR BY CALLING IN FOR AUDIO ONLY AT 2 1 0 2 0 6 5 4 8 3. TO INCORPORATE PUBLIC COMMENTS, UH, THERE ARE FOUR OPPORTUNITIES. THESE INCLUDE EMAIL OR MAIL OF COMMENTS, DROPPING OFF COMMENTS, LEAVING VOICEMAIL, OR ASKED TO, UH, ASKING TO BE CALLED DURING THE MEETING. STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO TO TWO MINUTES FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT. STAFF WILL READ INTO THE RECORD ANY EMAILS OR LETTERS RECEIVED RECEIVED. STAFF WILL ALSO PLAY ANY MESSAGES RECEIVED BY VOICEMAIL. LASTLY, FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO RECEIVE A CALLBACK, UH, WE WILL CALL THEM TO STATE THEIR TWO MINUTE COMMENTS. SPANISH INTERPRETERS ARE ON STANDBY AS NEEDED. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT WITH FOR REBUTTAL WITH A TWO MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG. NEXT SLIDE, ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS. CHAIR? YES. LET'S BEGIN WITH OUR INDIVIDUAL INDIVIDUAL HEARING ITEMS. UH, THE FIRST ITEM IS, UH, CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 20 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 8 6 YES FOR THE ADDRESS OF 4 3 0 EAST MYRTLE STREET COUNSEL, DISTRICT ONE APPLICANT IS LISA LIN. HAS REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT. ON THE [00:35:01] BLOCK PHASE ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY TOWEN HILL HISTORIC AIRPORT HAZARD DISTRICT A SUMMARY. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED MID-BLOCK ON EAST MYRTLE STREET BETWEEN MCCULLOUGH AND NORTH ST. MARY'S. THE CURRENT PROPERTY HAS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE PROPERTY OWNER AND APPLICANT CURRENTLY RESIDE ON THE ABIDING PROPERTY TO THE WEST. THIS DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR A TYPE ONE PERMIT BECAUSE WE DO NOT RESIDE ON SITE. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR THE OPERATION OF A SHORT TERM TYPE TWO RENTAL UNIT ON A PROPERTY WITH THE TOLL OF ONE DWELLING UNIT IN THIS CASE, THE BLOCK FACE IS DEFINED AS A SOUTH SIDE OF EAST MYRTLE STREET BETWEEN MCLA AND NORTH ST. MARY'S STREET. THERE ARE 33 LOTS ALONG THIS BLOCK FACE. AND ACCORDING TO V RECORDS, THERE ARE 40 UNITS ON THE BLOCK. FACE RESULT RESULTING IN FIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNITS MID BY RIGHT SIX GRANDFATHERED. TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT PER PERMITS HAVE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY RIGHT ON THE BLOCK FACE. IF THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVED, THERE'LL BE A TOTAL OF SEVEN TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS ON THE BLOCK FACE RESULTING IN 17.5% OF THE BLOCK PHASE. THIS IS THE FLOOR PLAN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA IS THE PERMITS ISSUED WITHIN THE VICINITY. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF BO O A 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 8 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE. THERE ARE CURRENTLY SIX TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNITS ON THE BLOCK FACE, 37 NOTICES NINE IN FAVOR, TWO IN OPPOSITION, ONE IN FAVOR, OUTSIDE 200 FOOT NOTIFICATION AREA. AND TOKEN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED. AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT LISA LIN ON THE LINE. LISA, BE SURE TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE WE SPEAK. ELISA, ARE YOU THERE? WHICH ONE IS THE SEVEN FIVE MS. ROBLIN? UH, DO YOU HAVE YOUR, UH, YOU'RE MUTED ON THE COMPUTER. THERE'S A DELAY. OKAY. I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S GOING ON NOW. CAN'T HEAR ME NOW. I THINK YOU'RE, YOU'RE UNMUTED NOW. OKAY. OH, WONDERFUL. WONDERFUL. UM, ALFONSO ROBLINE PROPERTY ADDRESS IS FOUR 30 EAST MYRTLE. FIRST AND FOREMOST, I WANTED TO THANK YOU ALL FOR ALLOWING US TO GIVE YOU A MORE COMPLETE PICTURE OF, UH, OF EVERYTHING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN BEEN STATED. UM, UH, FIRST AND FOREMOST, WE'RE NOT INVESTORS. UH, THE FOUR 30 EAST MYRTLE HAS BEEN IN MY FAMILY SINCE THE 1940S AS WELL AS THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR WHERE WE LIVE, 4 2 8 EAST FERNAL. SO WE DID NOT, UH, WE'RE JUST NOT INVESTORS. UM, WE ARE PART OF THE COMMUNITY AND, UM, WE BELIEVE THAT OUR SITUATION IS UNIQUE ENOUGH WHERE AN EXEMPTION, UH, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. UM, WE, WE HAVE HAD THE PROPERTY FOR, FOR QUITE SOME TIME, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, AND WE'VE LONG-TERM RENTED IT IN THE PAST, BUT IT'S BEEN REALLY, REALLY HARD TO MAINTAIN TO THE STANDARDS THAT WE WOULD LIKE AND THAT I THINK WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR, FOR THE COMMUNITY. SO, UM, THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE WOULD LIKE TO USE IT AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL INSTEAD OF A LONG-TERM RENTAL. UM, WE COULD ALSO USE IT FOR FAMILY AND FRIENDS AND NOT NECESSARILY HAVE IT OCCUPIED ALL THE TIME. UH, AND QUITE FRANKLY, FINANCIALLY, IT'S, IT IS JUST A LITTLE BIT BETTER. IT'S NOT SO MUCH ABOUT THE INCOME, BUT IT'S REALLY ABOUT THE WEAR AND TEAR ON THE PROPERTY. WE'RE INVESTING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF RESOURCES INTO BRINGING IT UP TO STANDARDS, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY. AND BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE, IT'S, IT'S A LOT EASIER TO DO. SO WHEN YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY AS NEEDED. UH, WE'VE ADDRESSED SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN VOICED ABOUT THE PARKING. UM, WE ORIGINALLY PUT EIGHT OCCUPANTS IN THAT HOUSE. WE'D BE HAPPY TO BRING IT DOWN TO SIX, BUT WE THINK THAT WOULD ADDRESS MANY OF THE ISSUES. THERE IS NO, UH, WE HAVE A, A LONG DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD FIT FIVE CARS. SO WE THINK MR. ROBLIN, ARE YOU STILL THERE? YES. THE SYSTEM KEEPS MUTING. I HOPE I I HOPE YOU CAN HEAR ME AGAIN. OKAY. BUT I'D LIKE TO PASS IT OFF TO MY WIFE AND HAVE HER GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION. AND ONCE AGAIN, WANTED TO THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO TELL MY STORY ABOUT THE PROPERTY. THANK YOU. UH, MS. HI, MRS. MRS. ROBLIN, YOU STILL HAVE TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, UH, PRIOR TO SPEAKING. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THIS IS LISA MCCORD [00:40:01] ROBLINE ADDRESS, 4 2 8 EAST MYRTLE. CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME OKAY? YES, MA'AM. OKAY, GREAT. UM, IF YOU COULD GO, I DON'T KNOW WHO'S CONTROLLING THE SLIDES, BUT I'D LOVE TO GO BACK TO THAT SUPPORT SLIDE WHERE THE CHECK MARKS ARE. AND THEN I JUST WANT TO, UM, KIND OF REITERATE A FEW THINGS MY HUSBAND SAID AND, AND BRING UP A FEW EXTRA THINGS. , UM, AGAIN, WE ARE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE PROPERTY, PROPERTY THAT WE'RE REQUESTING OUR SPECIAL EXEMPTION FOR. IT'S ABOUT THE CLOSEST THING YOU COULD GET TO A T ONE WITHOUT BEING ONE. SO, UM, INSTEAD OF A PROPERTY BEING IN BACK OF OUR HOUSE, IT'S BESIDE OUR HOUSE. WE WOULD, UM, ARE REALLY HOPING TO GET THIS EXCEPTION. IT'S, IT IS WHAT WORKS BEST FOR US AND, AND OUR FAMILY. AND, UM, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A, A LOT OF SUPPORT. ALL IF YOU LOOK DIRECTLY AROUND THE HOUSE, THE FOUR 30 IN, IN, UM, THAT WE'RE REQUESTING THE EXCEPTION FOR YOU SEE ALL THOSE CHECK MARKS. WE KNOW THESE PEOPLE, THEY KNOW US, THEY TRUST US. THEY ARE, UM, COMPLETELY FINE AND UNDERSTAND THAT WE WILL BE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THIS PROPERTY IF IT IS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL OR RENTAL. AND, UM, IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE LOWERED, LIKE MY HUSBAND SAID, WE ACTUALLY DID LOWER THE LIMIT FROM EIGHT PEOPLE TO SIX PEOPLE. UM, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HA HAPPENS, WE, YOU KNOW, WE, WE NEED THIS PROPERTY. IT WILL BE RENTED. WE, YOU KNOW, WE WANT IT TO STAY IN OUR FAMILY. OUR INTENTIONS ARE LONG-TERM, LIKE HE SAID, WE ARE NOT INVESTORS. WE WANT WHAT'S BEST. UM, SO THAT WE CAN PROPERLY CARE FOR BOTH 4, 2 8 AND FOUR 30 EAST MYRTLE AND PASS IT ON TO OUR KIDS, OUR FAMILIES. WE'RE GOING TO RETIRE SOON AND WE WANNA BE HERE AND TAKE CARE OF THIS AND, AND HAVE THESE, UM, AND THE BEST KEEP THEM UP THE BEST WE CAN SO THAT WE CAN PASS THEM ON. AND UM, ADDITIONALLY, YOU KNOW, WE, LET ME, SORRY, LET ME LOOK AT MY NOTES HERE. UM, WE REALLY JUST, JUST WANT WHAT'S BEST, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS, UM, THE TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION. WE ALSO ARE ACTIVE MEMBERS OF THAT ASSOCIATION AND MANY OF THE PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT US DIRECTLY AROUND US ARE ALSO ACTIVE MEMBERS OF THAT ASSOCIATION. SO, UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THAT AND YOU KNOW, ANY OF THE SUPPORT OR OR OPPOSITION AROUND THIS, YOU KNOW, LET ME KNOW. BUT BASICALLY WE'RE JUST ASKING, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU GRANT US THIS EXCEPTION, WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE REALLY GOOD CANDIDATES. WE WILL, UM, WE TAKE THE TRASH IN AND OUT EVERY DAY JUST LIKE WE DO AT OUR HOUSE BECAUSE IT'S ONLY A FEW MORE FEET AWAY, . AND, AND WE'LL TAKE GOOD CARE OF IT, BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. AND WE'RE, WE'RE JUST ASKING THAT YOU GRANT THIS EXCEPTION. OKAY? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. STAFF. IS THERE ANYBODY, UM, REGISTERED TO SPEAK? NO, THERE'S NOT, BUT WE DO HAVE LETTERS. OKAY. PLEASE, UH, UH, CONTINUE WITH THE RIGHT. OUR FIRST LETTER IS FROM MARTIN KUSHNER. IT READS, I LIVE DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM A ONE STORY S T R THAT ADVERTISE AN OCCUPANCY OF UP TO 11 PEOPLE. OFTEN THE SHORT TERM OCCUPANTS DRI ARRIVE IN THREE OR MORE VEHICLES WHILE THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS ADEQUATE DRIVEWAY PARKING. IT WOULD REQUIRE THE STACKING OF VEHICLES. PEOPLE WILL CHOOSE ON STREET PARKING RATHER THAN CONSTANTLY MOVING CARS AROUND. IN ADDITION, BECAUSE THE FREQUENT TURNOVER IN OCCUPANCY, WE OFTEN SEE OVERFLOWING GARBAGE BINS ON THE STREET DAYS PRIOR TO SCHEDULED CITY PICKUP. THIS IS UNSIGHTLY AND PUT PRESENT A HEALTH HAZARD. THE NORTH SIDE OF MYRTLE STREET IS ONE CONTINUOUS BLOCK ALLOWING FIVE STR DUE TO GRANDFATHERING SIX ARE CURRENTLY APPROVED. ON THE SOUTH SIDE THERE ARE THREE INTERSECTING STREETS ALLOWING FOUR STR. IF THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS APPROVED, THERE'D BE A TOTAL OF 11 STRS ON OUR STREET ACCOUNTING TO 17.5% OF ALL UNITS. WHEN THE ISSUE OF REGULATING SHORT-TERM RENTALS FIRST CAME UP, I PARTICIPATED IN MEETINGS THAT RESULTED IN REGULATION THAT TO RETAIN THE RESIDENTIAL NA NATURE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD BY SETTING LIMITS ON THE NUMBER OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS. WHILE I REAL REALIZE THE REQUESTERS ARE FINE PEOPLE AND IT WILL BE EXCELLENT NEIGHBORS, THE FACT IS THAT 11 F T R UNITS CLEARLY EXCESSIVE CONTINUED APPROVAL EXCEPTIONS WILL ONLY ENCOURAGE OTHERS TO SEEK EXCEPTIONS. FOR THAT REASON, I ASK THE COMMISSION TO REJECT THIS REQUEST AND LETTER. NEXT ONE IS FROM EMMA AND DANIEL EKER. IT READS KAYLA, WE ARE WRITING TO SUPPORT THE S T R EXCEPTION REQUISITION, UH, FOR 4 3 0 EAST MYRTLE. BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE OWNERS LIVE NEXT TO DOOR, NEXT DOOR, I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT THEY WILL CONTROL THE TRAFFIC, PARKING, AND TRAFFIC SINCE THEY RESIDE NEXT DOOR. THE HOUSE HAS BEEN A RENTAL IN THE PAST, NO CONSEQUENCES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. END OF LETTER. NEXT ONE IS FROM WILLIAM HOOVER. [00:45:02] HE IS IN OPPOSITION. NEXT IS FROM CODY. IT READS MS. AL. MY NAME IS CODY AND I OWN 4 1 2 EAST MYRTLE. I ALSO OWN TWO TYPE TWO STR WITHIN TO HILL TOBIN HILL HISTORIC. I RECEIVED A NOTICE OF SPECIAL EXEMPTION REQUEST AS A PROPERTY OWNER FROM 200 FEET OF THE SUCH PROPERTY. I HAVE BEEN OPERATING TWO TYPE TWO STRS FOR THREE YEARS AND HAVE BEEN AMAZING EXPERIENCED BY THE CULTURAL EXPERIENCE OF GUESTS FROM NEAR AND FAR. I UNDERSTAND THAT PARKING IS OF CONCERN AND THE APPLICANT HAS AMPLE ON STREET PARKING WITH NO WILL NOT INHIBIT THE STREETS. I SUPPORT THIS REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION AS THE HOST NEXT DOOR TO THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION LETTER. NEXT ONE IS FROM CHAD WALLING. DEAR AL, I'M REACHING OUT TO RECORD, UH, IN REGARDS TO CASE BO O A 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 86. A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE TYPE TWO S T R UNIT ON THE BLOCK FACE. I'M IN IN SUPPORT OF THE SS T R BEING PROPOSED BY THE BOARD BY A G R PROPERTIES. L L C RECEIVED NOTICE OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST OF THE PROPERTY KNOWN FOR 200 FEET OF DOUG PROPERTY. I OWN AND OPERATE TWO STRS IN THE AREA AND FEEL THEY WILL BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE S T R IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. A G R PROPERTIES IS CONSIDERED THE PARKING PARTS FOR THIS PROPERTY AND WILL BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE UP TO FOUR VEHICLES FOR OFF STREET PARKING IN SIMILAR STR. WITH EQUAL OCCUPANCY, WE NOTICE THE GUESTS TYPICALLY DRIVE TWO CARS OR LESS. I FEEL THAT A G R PROPERTIES WILL HAVE ENOUGH ROOM FOR OFF STREET PARKING TO AVOID ANY ANTICIPATED STREET CONGESTION. WE RECOGNIZE THE VALUE THAT ST BRING TO THE COMMUNITY. ACCOUNTABILITY WITHIN AIRBNB DUE TO THE RATING SYSTEM MEANS THAT IT IS IN THE OWNER'S BEST INTEREST. TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE PROPERTY AND THE COMMUNITY THAT OPERATES AND MAINTENANCE STR IN IS PARAMOUNT TO GOOD REVIEW AND CONTINUED SUCCESS. IN MY EXPERIENCE, THE OVERALL UPKEEP TO AN S T R IS AS OPPOSED TO A LONG-TERM RENTAL, IS NOTICEABLY BETTER. I BELIEVE THE SIMPLE FACT THAT THE OWNERS WILL BE LIVING NEXT TO THEIR RENTAL WILL ALLOW THEM TO COME CLOSELY MONITOR THEIR GUESTS, THE RULES OF OPERATION AND THE OVERALL EXPERIENCE IN RELATION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ABSENTEE OWNERS ARE UNABLE TO. END OF LETTER NEXT FROM KEL AND MARCELLA BATES. DEAR MS. AL, WE ARE SUBMITTING OUR POSITION ON THE CASE MENTIONED ABOVE. WE ARE IN FAVOR. I KNOW THE OWNERS LIVE NEXT DOOR FROM THIS PROPERTY AND THAT SHE'LL BE VIGILANT AND MAKE SURE ALL RULES ARE KEPT AND UNDER CONTROL FOR SHORT-TERM RENTAL. AND A LETTER NEXT IS FROM FREDA KUSHNER. I OPPOSE REQUEST AN ADDITIONAL S T R ON THE BLOCK WILL EXCEED THE MAXIMUM LIMIT FOR STR. ON BLOCK FACE. THERE ARE TWO TYPE TWO STR ON THE 300, 400 AND 500 BLOCK OF EAST MYRTLE STREET. ALSO, THE STREET IS NARROW AND ALREADY HAS PROBLEMS WITH PARKING CONGESTION, MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO DRIVE DOWN THE STREET. PARKING IN THE DRIVEWAY WOULD ALLOW ONE OR TWO CARS AT MOST WITH OTHERS BEING FORCED INTO THE STREET. THERE'S NO ROOM ON THE STREET FOR CARS FOR EIGHT GUESTS. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD APPRECIATES LONG-TERM RENTERS WHO HAVE BECOME OUR NEIGHBOR AND FRIENDS, BUT USING HOUSING FOR SHORT-TERM RENTAL SUBTRACTS, JUST THAT MANY NEIGHBORS FROM OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. END OF LETTER. NEXT IS FROM RACHEL O'HERN. THIS AL MY NAME IS RACHEL O'HERN AND I LIVE IN N OH 5 0 3 EAST MYRTLE. I RECEIVED A NOTICE OF THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION REQUEST AS A PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. WHILE AS A GENERAL RULE, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS ON THE DYNAMICS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IN THIS CASE, I SUPPORT THIS REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION AS THE HOUSE RESIDE NEXT DOOR TO THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. NEXT IS FROM THE TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION. IT READS, WE HAVE SEEN THE DRAWINGS IN THE REQUEST FOR HIS TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL TO ACCOMMODATE UP TO EIGHT GUESTS AT THE ONE STORY BUNGALOW AT 4 3 0 EAST MYRTLE STREET IN TOBAN HILL. WE OPPOSE AN ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON THAT BLOCK FACE BECAUSE ONE, THE DENSITY REQUIREMENT FOR SHORT TWO, UH, FOR TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS ON THE BLOCK FACE HAS BEEN MET. THERE ARE ALREADY STR OF 300, 400 AND 500 BLOCK OF EAST MYRTLE STREET. TWO, THE HOUSE IS TOO SMALL TO ACCOMMODATE EIGHT GUESTS. THREE, THE STREET IS NARROW, ONE WITH CARS REGULARLY PARKED ON BOTH SIDES. AND THE ADDITION OF YET ANOTHER POSSIBLE EIGHT VEHICLES WERE OVER THE OWN, THE SMALL AMOUNT OF PARKING ASSOCIATED WITH THE HOUSE AND ADD TO THE STREET CONGESTION. FOUR. THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTAINS MANY RENTAL PROPERTIES MOST FILLED WITH LONG-TERM RENTERS WHO HAVE BECOME NEIGHBORS. WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE NEIGHBORS IN THAT SMALL HOUSE, NOT A CONSTANT FLOW OF VISITORS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION TO THIS CASE AND LETTER. NEXT IS FROM BO BROCKMAN KAYLA. THIS IS REQUEST FOR SIGN MY OPPOSITION TO BO CASE 21 0 3 0 0 0 8 6 THAT I EXPRESSED [00:50:01] AN EARLIER EMAIL TO YOU RECENTLY. I HAD GOOD, INFORMATIVE CONVERSATION WITH ONE OF THE OWNERS WHO REQUESTING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. THERE WERE EDITS TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED INITIALLY, THOSE ADJUSTMENTS ADDRESS MOST OF MY CONCERNS. HOPEFULLY THIS INPUT WILL MAKE IT TO THE NOVEMBER 16TH HEARING AND NOT HAVE REVERSE IMPACT EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF THE PROCEEDINGS. REGARDS BOB AND OF LETTER NEXT IS FROM RICHARD GALIK. MS. LEO, PLEASE ALLOW ME TO WITHDRAW MY OPPOSITION THROUGH 4 3 0 EAST MYRTLE. I DO NOT OBJECT TO A SHORT TERM RENTAL WHERE THE OWNERS RESIDE NEXT DOOR. AS IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE. I DO OBJECT TO REMOTE MANAGEMENT OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS. NEXT ONE. I HOPE THIS MESSAGE FINDS YOU WELL AND ENJOYING YOUR WEEK. I'M WRITING TO EMAIL TODAY THE EMAIL SUPPORT FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE B O A 21 0 3 0 0 0 8 6. MY HUSBAND AND I LIVE, LIVE NEXT DOOR TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AT 5 0 2 EAST MYRTLE. AND WE ARE FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THE EXCEPTION SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 4 3 0 EAST MYRTLE. UH, PLEA. PLEASE LET US KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL DETAILS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. NEXT IS FROM DAVID MEDFORD. I, DAVID MED MEDFORD OWN THE RESIDENCE AT FIVE 11 EAST MYRTLE STREET AND I SUPPORT THE EXCEPTION FOR THE FOLLOWING PROPERTY OF 4 3 0 EAST MYRTLE STREET. AND THAT IS THE LAST OF THE LETTERS. OKAY. UH, BEFORE I OPEN THIS UP TO, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, UH, STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, PULL UP THE, UH, THE MAP THAT SHOWS THE EXISTING SDRS ON, ON EAST MYRTLE. YOU, UH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE, I JUST WONDER IF YOU COULD DENOTE WHERE THE, UH, EXISTING ONES ARE. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S MISSING SOME ON THIS MAP. AND WHILE THEY'RE DOING THAT, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO, UH, UH, BEGIN SOME QUESTIONS? SO, ZUNA, I WAS JUST COMMENTING ON THE FRONT FACE OF THAT BLOCK. I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE HOW MANY RESIDENT RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE ON THAT, THAT BLOCK COMPARED TO THE BLOCK? THE BLOCK RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT THAT ARE MORE BROKEN DOWN. WHEN YOU LOOK AT PERCENTAGE OF UNITS WITHIN THE BLOCK, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A VERY EXTENDED BLOCK TO RUN THE CALCULATION. RIGHT. YEAH, THEY'RE SAYING THERE WAS, THERE'S 40, ACCORDING TO RECORDS, THERE'S 40, UH, DWELLING UNITS. UH, BUT THE MAP THAT THAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE SCREEN, UH, IS SHOWING THREE. AND I'M TRYING TO SEE, WEREN'T THERE THREE OTHERS? SO THERE, THERE'S TWO PER, UH, PER DOT, SIR. OH TWO PER DOT. I APOLOGIZE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO, UH, COMMENT? SO THAT WOULD, WOULD, SO WHAT WOULD THE PERCENTAGE THEN BE OF, OF, UH, STR WITHIN THAT BLOCK? UH, IT'S LIKE 15%. 15%? IS THAT CORRECT, JEFF? 17.50. WITH, WITH THE, WITH THE, YEAH, IF IT, IF IT GETS ADDED. RIGHT. IF IT'S OKAY, KEEP IN MIND THE ONES THAT ARE EXISTING WERE, UH, GRANDFATHERED. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE EXCEEDING ALREADY, BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE GRANDFATHERED. OKAY. UH, ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? AND THOSE FATHER, DO YOU, THEY WOULD COME BACK FOR A SECOND APPROVAL RIGHT? AT SOME, AT SOME POINT OF TIME? UH, ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE EXISTING ONES, SIR, OR THE, OR THE , THE EXISTING ONES? THE EXISTING ONES. THE, SO PERMITS ARE GOOD FOR EVERY THREE, EVERY THREE YEARS. RIGHT. OKAY. AS LONG AS THE GRANDFATHERED PROJECTS REMAIN AND IT'S THE SAME OWNERSHIP, WE SIMPLY REVIEW THE PERMIT AS A GRANDFATHERED PROJECT. HOWEVER, IF THEY DO SELL, THE NEW APPLICANT WOULD'VE TO START OVER AS A NEW PROJECT AND THEN WE'D HAVE TO RECALCULATE EVERYTHING. OKAY. GOT IT. THANK YOU. AND ZE, ZEKE, ON THAT NOTE, IF THERE IS ANY VIOLATIONS, DOES THAT ALSO PUT THEM IN A CATEGORY TO BE REVISIT REVISITED? YES, SIR. WITHIN THE CODE, THERE'S A SECTION THAT BASICALLY STATES YOU CAN HAVE, UH, SO MANY CITATIONS, CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR, UH, ARREST DUE TO THE SHORT TERM RENTAL ITSELF AND WITHIN SIX MONTHS. UH, THEN AT THAT POINT, IF, IF IT IS A PROBLEM LOCATION, [00:55:01] THE DIRECTOR HAS THE ABILITY TO, UH, REVOKE THE PERMIT IF, IF IT'S DEEMED NECESSARY. BUT OF COURSE, THEY HAVE TO BE CONFIRMED CITATIONS. OKAY. THEY CAN'T BE, THEY CAN'T BE, UH, YOU KNOW, POLICE ARE CALLED OUT DUE TO A BURGLARY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT'D HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC TO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? YES, FISHER, UH, GO AHEAD, FISHER. YES. CAN YOU PULL THE, UH, MAP, WHICH INDICATES THE EXISTING SHORT-TERM RENTALS? AGAIN, IT APPEARS THAT THERE'S TWO MORE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE STREET. IF THERE'S THREE ON THE SOUTH SIDE, IS THAT TRUE? I MEAN, I PROCEEDING THAT CORRECTLY. SO MS. FISHER, EACH BLOCK FACE, UM, WILL BE REVIEWED DIFFERENTLY. SO IN THIS CASE IT'S A, IT'S A RATHER LONG BLOCK. SO WE'LL REVIEW THE ODD SIDE VERSUS THE EVENS. OKAY. YEAH. EACH, EACH LITTLE BLOCK SECTION WILL BE REVIEWED ON ITS OWN. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THE, THE BLUE, EXCUSE ME, THE BLUE ONE ON THAT WOULD BE ONE OR TWO, THAT BLUE DOT, DOES THAT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE? SO BLUE IS TYPE ONE, WHICH IS OWNER OCCUPIED OR, OR THE OWNERS HAVE A LONG-TERM TENANT THAT'S RENTING OUT SHORT TERM RENTAL, WHICH IS ALLOWED AS A TYPE ONE. WE DON'T HAVE TYPE ONES AT ALL. IT'S JUST THE TYPE TWOS, WHICH IS STRICTLY RENTAL. OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MAANA, UH, GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, ONE, LET'S SEE, TWO WEEKS AGO OR THREE WEEKS AGO WHEN WE REVIEWED THIS CASE, UM, THERE WAS SOMEONE WHO CALLED IN AND LEFT COMMENT OR, OR NOT CALLED IN, BUT ACTUALLY SPOKE ON THE CALL. UH, I BELIEVE IN OPPOSITION. DO WE KNOW IF THAT PERSON, UH, WAS ONE OF THE EMAILS READ OR, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE STATUS OF THAT, THAT PERSON WAS? YES, SIR. HE DID CALL IN, UM, I SPOKE WITH HIM LAST WEEK. SO HIS EMAIL BASICALLY WAS SUFFICIENT FOR HIM AS MARTY KUSHNER. THAT WAS THE FIRST LETTER WE READ IN, OR ONE OF THE FIRST ONES. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. UH, SECOND QUESTION IS FOR THE APPLICANT. UM, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU MENTIONED WAS HAVING CHALLENGES WITH, UH, I GUESS THE LONG-TERM RENTAL. AND SO I WANTED TO HEAR MAYBE SOME MORE DETAIL WITH REGARDS TO WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS THAT, THAT YOU ARE HAVING WITH REGARDS TO LONG-TERM RENTALS? UH, YES. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR. OKAY. YEAH. SO IN THE PAST, UM, WE'VE HAD LONG-TERM RENTERS NOT REPORT THINGS THAT NEED TO GET REPAIRED. SO WATER LEAKS, JUST THINGS THAT GET BROKEN. AND SO THEY, THEY, IT TENDS TO, IT TENDS TO EXASPERATE OR, OR MAKE THE, MAKE THE REPAIRS EVEN WORSE. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE A, WE'VE HAD A HARD TIME GETTING ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY, SO WE NEED TO CALL, ASK TO GET ACCESS. WE CAN'T JUST BARGE IN. AND THE PAST WE HAVEN'T HAD, UH, JUST EASY ACCESS. AND WITH THE SHORT TERM RENTAL, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT. THE OTHER THING IS WE FOUND, UH, TENANTS THAT WE WERE HIDING PETS BECAUSE WE LIKE A NO PET POLICY, SO THEY WOULD HIDE PETS AND WHEN THEY LEFT, IT WOULD JUST BE HORRIFIC. WE'D HAVE TO REPAINT EVERYTHING, REDO WOODEN FLOORS, RESURFACE DOORS, FLOORS THAT ARE HISTORIC. SO THAT'S THE TYPES, THOSE ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MACHACA UH, COMMISSIONER MACHACA, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT IN GENERAL. UH, IS THIS HOUSE BE CRIME SEASONAL? LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, MAYBE DURING SOME, ALL THE OTHER RENTALS, UH, AND THE STREET JUST NARROWED BY ALL THE PARKING? UM, YES. I BELIEVE YOU WERE ASKING IF IT WOULD BE SEASONAL. I COULDN'T COMPLETELY HEAR, CORRECT. YEAH, I MEAN THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE, WE'RE CONSIDERING AND LOOKING AT BECAUSE ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WE WANT TO DO THIS IS TO KEEP IT OPEN DURING CERTAIN TIMES FOR OUR FAMILY. WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT CALENDAR WOULD LOOK LIKE YET, BUT THE PARKING WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE, UM, UH, WE FEEL LIKE IT'D BE THE SAME OR LESS THAN IF THERE WERE LONG-TERM RENTERS THERE. AND ALSO WHEN YOU, IF YOU CONSIDER THE, WE, WE REALLY CONSIDER THESE TWO HOUSES, THEY GO TOGETHER TO US BECAUSE THEY'VE ALWAYS BEEN LIKE THAT IN OUR FAMILY. AND THE HOUSE, LARGE HOUSE THAT WE'RE LIVING IN AT NEXT DOOR USED TO BE THREE UNITS, AND NOW WE TOOK THAT BACK DOWN TO ONE. SO WE REALLY HELPED THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE PARKING IN THAT SENSE. SO WE'RE, WE'RE REAL HAPPY ABOUT THAT AND PROUD ABOUT THAT. BUT YES, WE WOULD, UM, WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE EXACT CALENDAR, BUT CONSIDERING SEASONAL FOR SURE. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, WHO WOULD LIKE TO GO NEXT? UH, HEARING NOBODY, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS OFF. SO [01:00:01] STAFF, UH, WE HEARD COMMENT FROM THE, UH, APPLICANT THAT THEY REDUCED THEIR OCCUPANCY FROM EIGHT TO SIX, UH, FROM THE TOBIN HILL NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION. THEY, THEY, THEY HAD COMMENTED ON EIGHT, UH, OCCUPANTS. WERE THEY NOTIFIED ABOUT THE REDUCTION IN OCCUPANCY? NO, SIR. ULTIMATELY, WITH THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL, WE ARE NOT GOING TO REVIEW THE OCCUPANCY LOAD. THAT'S UP TO THE APPLICANTS AS FAR AS IDENTIFYING THOSE NUMBERS. AND BASED ON BEDROOMS, OF COURSE, UM, WE'RE JUST SIMPLY LOOKING AT THE UNIT, UH, BUT THEY WEREN'T NOTIFIED OF ANY CHANGES. OKAY. AND MAY I, UM, UM, ONE QUICK, UH, UH, BEFORE I LET YOU SPEAK, MRS. UH, ROLAND, UH, SO IF, IF, UH, THE APPLICANT WANTED TO SELF REDUCE DOWN TO SIX, IS THERE ANY WAY TO TIE THAT TO THE PERMIT APPLICATION OR IS THAT COMPLETELY, UH, SELF ENFORCED? SO THAT'S SELF ENFORCED. SO THE PERMIT ITSELF DOESN'T IDENTIFY A NUMBER OF UNITS. UH, WHEN IT COMES TO THE RENTAL PERMIT, WE SIMPLY IDENTIFY THE ADDRESS, WE'LL IDENTIFY THE CONTACT PERSON AND, AND THEIR PHONE NUMBER AND SO FORTH. AND THE TYPE OF PERMIT IT IS, BUT NOT THE NUMBER OF UNITS WITHIN THAT, THAT RENTAL. OKAY. UM, MR. OBERLIN, DID YOU WANNA SPEAK ON THAT? OH, WE HAD, UM, NOTIFIED THE, UM, THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE OF THE TOBIN HILL ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS THE COMMITTEE OF FIVE PEOPLE WHO, WHO ARE ABLE TO SPEAK ON THAT ASSOCIATION'S BEHALF. AND, UM, UM, OF COURSE, WHO THE CHAIR IS, MRS. KUSHNER. MR. AND MRS. KUSHNER HAD SENT THOSE TWO LETTERS OF OPPOSITION. OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU. SO WE LET THEM KNOW MM-HMM. . OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, UH, AS, UH, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT ANY STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE, UH, TO PROVIDE, TO PROVIDE A CLOSING STATEMENT. SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE THEY TURN IT OVER TO THE APPLICANT? HEARING NONE, UH, SO, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT EITHER MR. AND MRS. ROBLIN, PLEASE, UH, PROVIDE A CLOSING STATEMENT IF YOU WISH. SURE, SURE. AND I THINK WE'VE REALLY, WE'VE COVERED EVERYTHING. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE TREMENDOUS SUPPORT. UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE WANTED TO DO FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. WE'RE KICKING OURSELVES THAT THIS, UM, LAW CAME ABOUT WITHOUT US KNOWING WE WERE RENTING OUT THE TWO HOUSES WHILE WE HAD OUR KIDS GRADUATING SOMEWHERE ELSE, UM, FROM HIGH SCHOOL IN A DIFFERENT PART OF TOWN. BUT, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE JUST REALLY, WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS EXCEPTION. WE DID. WE WILL BE GOOD STEWARDS. WE WILL SELF, UM, REGULATE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE, THE PARKING, AND WE REALLY JUST, UM, THINK, FEEL LIKE THIS IS BEST FOR US. AND AS FAR AS THE OPPOSITION LETTER, TWO OF THEM WERE RESCINDED BECAUSE THEY FOUND OUT OUR INTENTIONS AND THEN THE OTHER OPPOSITION, OR THERE WERE TWO FROM THE SAME HOUSEHOLD. AND, UM, SO REALLY THAT'S, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THEY, I, WHILE I EMPATHIZE WITH THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE HAD BAD EXPERIENCES WITH ONE ACROSS FROM THEM, WE ASK THAT YOU PLEASE CONSIDER THAT EACH EXCEPTION CASE IS AN EXCEPTION, AND THIS IS OUR INDIVIDUAL REQUEST AND THAT YOU CONSIDER IT AS SUCH. AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. WE'RE HOPING THAT YOU WILL GRANT US THIS EXCEPTION. GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. PLEASE SHALL, UM, COMMISSIONER SHELL PLEASE PROCEED. SORRY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 20 DASH 0 3 0 0 0 8 6, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT FOUR 30 EAST MYRTLE STREET. APPLICANT BEING LINDA, UM, I'M SORRY ABOUT BUTCHERING YOUR LAST NAME, MCCORDY ROBLIN. UH, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWED THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PRE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIALIST EXCEPTION WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO OPERATE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR, OR WELFARE. THERE IS NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY. B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THERE ARE A TOTAL OF 40 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THIS BLACK FACE, AND THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD PERMIT A TOTAL OF SEVEN TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS, RESULTING IN 17.5% OF THE BLACK FACE. THE PERCENTAGE IS NOT MUCH GREATER THAN WHAT IS PERMITTED. AND WITH THE APPLICANT RESIDING ON THE ABUTTING PROPERTY, THIS ALLOWS REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE SEEMS UNLIKELY TO BE CREATED. SEE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSISTENT CONSIST OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, [01:05:01] AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR OF NORTH ST. MARY'S AND MCCULLOUGH AVENUE. THE APPLICANT ALSO RESIDES ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY TO THE WEST. THIS UNIQUE SCENARIO DOES NOT CAUSE REASON TO BELIEVE IT WILL BE SUB, IT WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. D, ADEQUATE UTILITIES, ACCESS, ROADS, STORM DRAINAGE, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND OTHER NECESSARY FACULTIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE. E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT-TERM RENTAL LICENSES. CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR EDUCATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION. THE APPLICANT DOES NOT CURRENTLY HOLD A SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT AND DOES NOT HAVE ANY HISTORY OF REVOCATION, CITATIONS, OR CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16 F. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEAR NORTH ST. MARY STREET AND IN CLOSES PROXIMITY TO COMMERCIAL, RECREATIONAL, AND OTHER RESIDENTIAL USES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING OFF STREET PARKING AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION OF WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION END OF MOTION. SECOND, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER. SECOND WAS BY, UH, BRAGMAN, MS. BRAGMAN. OKAY. LET'S SEE HERE. ALL RIGHT. AND COMMISSIONER, SHE, IF YOU'D LIKE TO PLEASE, UH, START OFF THE CONVERSATION, THAT'D BE GREAT. SURE, YES. UM, SO, UM, I JUST WANT TO, UH, COMMEND THE APPLICANTS FOR REALLY, UM, TALKING TO THEIR COMMUNITY TO GET SUPPORT ON THIS. UM, WHEN THIS WAS FIRST PRESENTED TO US, I WAS, UM, PLANNING TO, UH, OPPOSE IT JUST DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT WOULD BE, UM, SO MUCH OF A, OF AN EXCEPTION, UH, BEING TWO MORE UNITS THAN, UM, IT WOULD BE THE 12.5%. UH, AND BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION HAD OPPOSED IT, UM, HOWEVER, UH, THE SUPPORT THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO PROVIDE, UM, HAS CHANGED MY MIND. UH, IN ADDITION TO YOU BEING NEXT DOOR, I DO THINK THAT, UM, WHEN THE HOST IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR, IT UM, ENCOURAGES GUESTS TO BE ON THEIR BEST BEHAVIOR. AND THEN THINGS LIKE PARKING AND TRASH AND NOISE, UM, ARE ALL, UH, MITIGATED BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT THEIR HOST IS WATCHING. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. THANK YOU. YES, I'M, UH, GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION AS WELL AS MY COLLEAGUE POINTED OUT. THE, UM, THE OWNER, UH, LIVES NEXT DOOR. AND I DON'T THINK YOU CAN ASK FOR ANYTHING BETTER IN A TYPE TWO RENTAL AS OPPOSED TO A TYPE ONE. THEY, THEY ESSENTIALLY ARE LIVING ON THE PROPERTY. SO, UM, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO SPEAK? YES, FISHER, MR. FISHER? YES. I WILL BE OPPOSED TO THIS, UH, AS I STILL, EVEN THOUGH, UH, I DO FEEL THAT THE APPLICANTS, UH, HAVE A, UH, DO LIVE NEXT DOOR. AND, AND I DO AGREE THAT MOST LIKELY, UH, THE PROSPECTIVE SHORT-TERM RENTALS WOULD PERFORM AT A MORE, UH, RELIABLE WAY. I STILL FEEL THAT WE'VE DONE A LOT OF COMMUNITY, UM, EXTENSIVE RESEARCH IN SHORT TERM RENTALS, AND THAT THE, UH, OUR CURRENT REQUIREMENTS ARE, UH, REALISTIC. I BELIEVE IN ESPECIALLY THESE AREAS THAT ARE CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN, WE DO RUN INTO A LONGER TERM EROSION OF THE COMMUNITY. SO FOR THAT REASON, I, I DO, I WILL BE UNSUPPORTIVE. I ALSO FEEL LIKE, UH, DUE TO THE FACT THAT THEY ARE LIVING NEXT DOOR, THE SAME TYPE OF, UH, CONCERN ABOUT MAINTENANCE, TRASH, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, WOULD APPLY TO LONG TERM RENTALS AS WELL AS SHORT TERM. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, A LOT CAN BE WRITTEN IN A LEASE THAT WOULD PROTECT THE, UH, CURRENT OWNERS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? HEARING NONE, I'LL CLOSE OFF WITH, UM, I, I, I'M, I WAS HESITANT. I THINK I'M GONNA END UP SUPPORTING THIS, UH, ONLY BECAUSE [01:10:01] IT'S JUST A LARGE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE IN SUPPORT, THE FACT THEY LIVE NEXT DOOR AND THE FACT THAT THEY'RE GONNA SELF-REGULATE DOWN TO SIX PEOPLE, UH, WHICH I THINK IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF SHOULD, UH, THINK ABOUT. IF THERE'S EVER ANY, UH, REVISIONS TO THE, UH, S D R ORDINANCE, THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING TO ADD IN THERE AS A, AS JUST SOME WAY TO, UH, GET PEOPLE TO EITHER BE SUPPORTIVE OR, OR NOT OF A REQUEST. BUT, UH, I, AND BECAUSE THIS IS IN EXCESS, I KNOW IN THREE YEARS IF THEY DON'T KEEP IT WELL MAINTAINED AND, AND DON'T LIMIT THE OCCUPANCY TO SIX, AS THEY SO STATED, UH, THEY MIGHT HAVE A, A MORE DIFFICULT TIME GETTING THEIR PERMIT RE-UPPED. SO WITH THAT, UH, STAFF, IF YOU COULD PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MR. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA, I SUPPORT THE APPLICANT. CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA, I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. DOMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. FISHER. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. BATTLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND YOUR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. THE VOTE IS NINE TO TWO MOTION PASSES. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. THIS IS FOR B O A 21 3 8 9. THE ADDRESS IS 6 1 1 9 BAYER BRANCH DISTRICT TWO. APPLICANT IS DONALD SMITH. A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW PRIVACY FENCE TO BE UP TO EIGHT FEET TALL ON THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY ZONING AS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN A VICINITY WHICH IS PREDOMINANTLY SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. THERE IS CURRENTLY A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO AN ORDER TO MAINTAIN AN EIGHT FOOT TALL SOLID SCREEN WOOD FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT DID NOT OBTAIN AN APPROPRIATE PERMIT AND THERE IS A CODE ENFORCEMENT RECORD ON FILE FOR THIS PROPERTY. A SLIGHT SLOPE HAVING LESS THAN TWO FEET IN HEIGHT IS PRESENT ON THE LOT. THE GROUND HAS BEEN EVEN OUT AND THE EIGHT FOOT HIGH FENCE HAS BEEN UTILIZED IN BOTH THE SIDE AND REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THEREFORE, THE FENCE APPEARS TO HAVE HIGHER ELEVATION ON THE REAR SIDE. THE APPLICANT STATES CONCERNS OF SECURITY AND PRIVACY ASSOCIATED WITH LIVING ON THE UNLEVEL LOT. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE BO O A 20 0 3 0 0 8 9 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT FENCE WILL REMAIN IN HARMONY WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT BY BEING A SOLID SCREEN WOOD FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR LOT. UH, TWO. THE ADDITIONAL TWO FOOT WALL WILL PROVIDE SECURITY AND PRIVACY TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE UNEVEN GROUND. WE MAILED 32 NOTICES FOR IN FAVOR TO AN OPPOSITION. NO RESPONSE FROM LAKESIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE APPLICANT DONALD SMITH IS ON THE LINE. DONALD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD BEFORE WE BEGIN. MR. SMITH BEAR BRANCH. UH, MR COULD YOU REPEAT YOUR NAME AGAIN? I'M 6 1 1 9 BEAR BRANCH. AND UH, YEAH, THAT'S WHAT YOU WANTED IS JUST THE NAME AND THE AND THE ADDRESS? YES. . SORRY. UH, MY, MY WIFE IS ALSO HERE. DO YOU WANT HER TO, TO, UH, TO SPEAK AS WELL? IT'S UP TO YOU, SIR. OKAY. MY NAME IS SHIRLEY SMITH AND I LIVE AT 61 19 BAYER BRANCH, UH, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 2 2. AND I'M JOINT OWNER WITH MY HUSBAND. OKAY. PLEASE, UH, BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. UH, AS I SAID LAST TIME, UH, WE HAD THE, THE FENCE THAT WE HAVE IS ONLY ON THE TWO SIDES AND THE FRONT, IT IS NOT ON THE BACK. I, I HEARD SOMETHING ABOUT THE BACK EARLIER, BUT THE BACK IS NOT, HAS NOT BEEN TOUCHED BY, BY THE EIGHT. IT STILL HAS A SIX FOOT FENCE 'CAUSE IT WAS PUT UP BY THE [01:15:01] PREVIOUS OWNER. UH, SO IT'S ONLY THE TWO SIDES AND THE FRONT, UH, THAT HAVE THE, THE EIGHT FOOT. UH, WE WERE TOLD THAT IT, THAT BECAUSE OF OUR SLOPE, WE, UH, NEEDED TO USE THE, THE EIGHT FOOT THING TO, BECAUSE THE, THE, THE FENCE, UH, THE PEOPLE WHO SET UP THE FENCE, UH, WANTED TO USE THREE CROSSBAR ALONG, ALONG THE, UH, ALONG THE FENCE TO HOLD IT UP, TO KEEP IT FROM FALLING ON WITH THE SLOPE. SO, UH, BASICALLY THAT'S WHY WE WENT AHEAD WITH THAT. AND, OH, UH, ONE OTHER THING THAT, UH, THIS IS THE THIRD TIME THAT WE'VE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE FENCE, UH, BECAUSE, UH, BEFORE THAT THEY WERE, THEY WERE FALLING, UH, PARTS OF IT WERE FALLING OVER. NOT THE WHOLE THING, BUT, BUT PARTS OF IT. PLUS OUR GATE WAS, WAS BLOWN DOWN IN ONE OF THE, UH, IN A STORM THAT CAME THROUGH. AND, UH, SO WE, WE ALSO HAD TO FIX THAT. AND, UH, WE, WE MOVED THE GATE TO THE OTHER SIDE ON, ON THE FRONT SIDE, ON THE, UH, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE GARAGE. OKAY. IS IT, UM, IF I MAY, GO AHEAD, MR. SMITH? IF YES, MA'AM. YES SIR. UH, IF I MAY STATE, THIS IS, UH, THE THIRD TIME THAT WE, UM, LIKE MY HUSBAND MENTIONED, THAT WE HAVE OUR FENCE, UH, REDONE, UH, PART OF IT BECAUSE, UH, WE ARE IN A DEEP SLOPE INCLINE. AND UNFORTUNATELY THE HOME BUILDER DID NOT THROW ENOUGH, UH, DIRT. AND THE, WE EVEN HAD A, WHAT THEY CALL, UM, A BARRIER, SOME TYPE OF BERM. THEY CALL IT A BERM, UH, TO TRY TO HELP WITH THE ELEVATION OF THE GROUND, WHICH THE BERM DID NOT WORK. IT, UH, WE'RE STILL IN A, A VERY UNEVEN LAND. AND THAT WAS DUE TO OUR HOME BUILDER, WHICH WE'VE LIVED HERE, UH, 24 YEARS. WE MOVED IN THE END OF JULY OF 1996. AND THEY MADE US A BER, WHICH DID NOT HELP BECAUSE THE GROUND, IT, IT RESIDES DOWN EVERY TIME WE HAVE A THUNDERSTORM, WE, WE'VE HAD SEVERAL TIMES GRASS. AND WE'RE THEY, WE JUST DON'T HAVE ENOUGH DIRT, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE HAD DIRT THROWN. AND THE BER MADE, THIS IS A THIRD TIME. AND SO OUR, THE PEOPLE THAT HIT THE FENCE, THEY RECOMMENDED, LIKE MY HUSBAND MENTIONED, TO HAVE THE TWO BY FOURS, A TOTAL OF THREE BECAUSE THEY SAID IT WOULD REINFORCE, UH, KEEPING THE FENCE FROM GOING SIDEWAYS. 'CAUSE WE'RE GOING, IT'S GOING DOWN DOWNHILL. AND, UH, THIS IS THE THIRD TIME. AND WE'VE, EVERY TIME WE'VE HAD THAT EXPENSE, WE DON'T ASK OUR NEIGHBORS, UH, FOR ANY HELP ON THE FENCE. WE ACCOMMODATE BY US, UH, PAYING OUT THE MONEY. AND OUR NEIGHBORS ON BOTH SIDES HAVE BEEN, UH, FINE WITH THAT. AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, THEY MENTIONED THAT IT WAS A COMPLIMENT TO THEM BECAUSE OF THE EXPENSE AND THAT THE CEDAR, UH, FENCE LOOKS VERY WELL AND THEY, ON BOTH SIDES, THEY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM. AND THEN WE TALKED TO TWO OTHER NEIGHBORS, ONE ACROSS THE STREET AND ONE THAT LIVES NEXT DOOR TO OUR OTHER NEIGHBORS. THEY WERE IN AGREEMENT THAT IT WAS VERY NICE AND THEY WERE IN FAVOR. SO WE HAD FOUR NEIGHBORS AND THE TWO ON THE SIDE OF US THAT WERE IN AGREEMENT AND IN FAVOR. UH, THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND HERE'S MY HUSBAND. THANK YOU. OKAY, MR. SMITH? YES. YES. UH, DID YOU WANNA MAKE ANOTHER STATEMENT? YOUR WIFE TURNED IT BACK OVER TO YOU? UH, I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. MAYBE SOMETHING MIGHT POP UP LATER, BUT I CAN'T RIGHT NOW. I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING. OKAY. YOU'LL HAVE A, YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A CLOSING STATEMENT, UH, STAFF. IS THERE ANY, UH, COMMENTS TO READ IN THE RECORD OR ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? YES, WE DO HAVE A LETTER. NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK THOUGH. OKAY. ALRIGHT. FIRST LETTER IS FROM CHRISTOBAL OLIVERAS. I RECEIVED A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST FOR BO O A 2 1 0 3 8 9 OR 6 1 1 BEAR BRANCH. I'M IN FAVOR OF THE FENCE. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT. AND A LETTER NEXT FROM PHILLIP HOPPER. UH, 6 1 2 6, BEAR BRANCH DRIVE. I HAVE BEEN LY OPPOSED GATE DEFENSE ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 1 1 9 BYER BRANCH, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS FOR FOLLOWING REASONS. NUMBER ONE, THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT ADDRESS THE FRONT PORTION OF THE FENCE, WHICH DOES NOT MEET THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. FENCE, HEIGHT, RESTRICTION OF SIX FEET, TWO, NO OTHER FENCE, NEW OR OLD. AND ALL SURROUNDING SUBDIVISIONS OR IN SAN ANTONIO EXCEEDS THE SIX FOOT HEIGHT RESTRICTION. THREE. THE FENCING COMPANY DID NOT APPLY FOR A PERMIT BECAUSE THEY KNEW THAT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF FENCES WOULD BE SIX FEET AS REQUIRED BY THE CHART BELOW. THEY ALSO DID NOT GET A PERMIT, EVEN THOUGH THEY REPLACED THE ENTIRE FENCE SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY. A PERMIT IS [01:20:01] REQUIRED IF OVER 25% OF THE FENCE IS REPLACED ACCORDING TO THE SAN ANTONIO FENCING CODE. FOUR, THE INFORMATION ABOUT FENCE RESTRICTIONS EASILY OBTAINABLE, OBTAINED EITHER BY CALLING THE CITY, VISITING THE PERMIT OFFICE, OR SEARCHING THE INTERNET OUT OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. FENCE RESTRICTIONS, FIVE. THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY BLATANTLY IGNORED THE PERMITTING AND HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS FOR THE FENCE REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. SIX. WHEN I REPLACED PART OF MY FENCE AND OBTAINED A PERMIT FROM THE CITY, I WAS TOLD THAT THE FENCE CANNOT EXCEED SIX FEET IN HEIGHT. IF THEIR EIGHT FOOT FENCE IS ALLOWED, THEN I SHOULD BE ALSO ALLOWED TO ERECT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE WHEN I PLACED MY FENCE. AND OF LETTER. NEXT IS FROM DEHA MILLS. I LIVE AT 6 1 1 4 BAYER BRANCH. I'M WRITING A REFERENCE TO CASE B O A 2 1 0 3 0 0 8 9. THE ADDRESS IS 6 1 1 9. MR. AND MRS. DONALD AND SHIRLEY SMITH AND THEIR FENCE, I AM NOT AFFECTED BY THEIR FENCE AND FEEL IT IS NECESSARY FOR THEM TO CHANGE ANYTHING. I FEEL IT IS NOT NECESSARY. I APPROVE THEIR OFFENSE AND IT DOES NOT HINDER MY WIFE IN ANY WAY. AND OF LETTER. NEXT IS FROM MINA R CHRISTOPHER. I AM IN FAVOR OF REQUEST FOR B O A 21 0 3 0 0 0 8 9 FOR DONALD AND SHIRLEY SMITH AT 6 1 1 9 BEAR BRANCH. THANK YOU. END OF LETTER. NEXT IS FROM EDA, EDDIE PENA LIVES AT 6 1 2 3 FOSTER TRAIL DRIVE. THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON 6 1 1 9 BEAR BRANCH. I AM OPPOSED TO THIS IDEA, THIS FENCE HAS ALREADY BEEN INSTALLED. WHAT GOOD IS IT TO ASK FOR SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE PERMISSION IF IT'S ALREADY IN PLACE? THE FENCE INSTALLATION COMPANY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN AND MADE THE HOMEOWNER AWARE OF THE SIX FOOT MAXIMUM FENCE ON THE SITE PLAN THAT I RECEIVED. IT SHOWS THE FENCE BEING INSTALLED IN FRONT OF THE GARAGE. I HOPE THAT'S A MISPRINT. THE CITY ORDINANCE OF A MAXIMUM SIX FEET HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. AND IF WE START ALLOWING EIGHT FOOT FENCES, THEN EVERY HOMEOWNER IS GOING TO WANT ONE. I SEE NO REASON TO JUSTIFY THIS HOMEOWNER PERMISSION TO INSTALL AN EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE AND RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD THAT THEY ENFORCE THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT ORDINANCE. THANK YOU. TEDDY. NEXT IS FROM ROBERT AND VANESSA, THEY ARE IN FAVOR. IN OUR OPINION. WE ADMIRE THE STRUCTURE AND I BELIEVE IT TO BE A DEFINITION OF THE PRIMARY FENCE, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE SIT ON A HILL. IT COMPLIMENTS THE INCLINE. AND THAT IS THE END OF LETTERS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE GONNA, UH, OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. ANYBODY LIKE TO, UH, START OFF MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO, YOU KNOW, UH, IN OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSION WE TALKED ABOUT THE SLOPE, UH, PROVIDED, YOU KNOW, PROVIDING A JUSTIFICATION, WE'LL SAY FOR THE, FOR THE SIDE HEIGHT. BUT ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS HERE SUGGESTED, UH, DURING THE LAST MEETING THAT, UH, WE LOOK AT SETTING UP A SIX FOOT HEIGHT ON THE FRONT FACING FENCE. AND SO FROM THE APPLICANT'S PERSPECTIVE HERE, I'D LIKE TO HEAR YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON REDUCING THE FRONT HEIGHTS TO SIX FOOT AND WHAT THAT WOULD IMPLY OR WHAT, WHAT CHALLENGES YOU SEE WITH THAT. UH, AND MR. AND MRS. SMITH? YES. UH, I'M HERE. I'M SORRY. UM, WE THINK THAT, UH, THE, THAT THE FRONT FENCE IS, IT, IT'S STILL SLOPING DESPITE THE FACT THAT THIS IS, UH, THE PART OF THE FENCE FACING THE, THE STREET, IT'S, IT, IT'S STILL, UH, A PROBLEM OF THE SLOPE. AND IT'S, UH, AND, AND, AND, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE MOVED THE GATE OVER TO THE OTHER SIDE BECAUSE THE, THE, THE SEVERITY OF THE SLOPE ON THE, UH, EAST SIDE, UH, MADE. WE WERE AL WE WERE ALWAYS HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE GATE. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE MOVED IT TO THE OTHER SIDE. UH, BUT THE, BUT THE SLOPE IS STILL THERE, REGARDLESS OF WHICH SIDE WE'RE ON. SO WE, WE FEEL THAT, THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO REMAIN EVEN ON THE FRONT PART. OKAY. SO I GUESS A, A QUESTION I WOULD HAVE THEN, YOU KNOW, IS, UM, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE APPROXIMATE SLOPE DIFFERENCE IS? WE'LL SAY THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE. UM, WE'LL SAY ON THE, UM, I DON'T KNOW THE EAST SIDE HERE, IF I'M LOOKING AT IT HERE TO THE FACING THE HOUSE TO THE LEFT, WHAT THE HEIGHT DIFFERENCE IS BETWEEN, UM, THE CURRENT FENCE, UH, THE, I GUESS THE NEIGHBOR'S FENCE, UH, LYING TO THE SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE. AND THEN, AND THEN LIKEWISE ON THE OTHER SIDE, WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IN HEIGHT IS. SO THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT, UH, TRULY WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IN HEIGHTS BETWEEN THE TWO FENCES ARE OR YOUR PROPERTY LINES ARE. I WOULD HAVE, I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT TO DETERMINE [01:25:01] THE EXACT AMOUNT. I THINK IT'S ROUGHLY A FOOT OR FOOT AND A HALF MAYBE. I, I, I, I WASN'T THINKING ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF, OF THE OTHER FENCES, BUT, UH, I'M THINKING THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT IT IS. I'M NOT, BUT AGAIN, I HAVEN'T CHECKED THAT OUT TO BE SURE WHAT THE ACTUAL, UH, HEIGHT DIFFERENCE DIFFERENTIAL IS BETWEEN THE TWO FENCES ON EACH SIDE. AND THEN NOW THE, NOW THE, NOW THE ONE, THE ONE ON THE E OH, EXCUSE ME. I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT THE ONE ON THE, UH, ON THE EAST SIDE, MR. UH, OLIVARES, UH, WHERE HIS FENCE IS BECAUSE OF THE SLOPE, IT PROBABLY IS A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO HIS FENCE. BUT AGAIN, I HAVEN'T LOOKED TO, TO MEASURE IT. SO BECAUSE THE SLOPE IS HEADING DOWN TOWARD HIS, TOWARD HIS, UH, PROPERTY LINE. AND THE FINAL QUESTION IS, DO YOU KNOW OF ANOTHER HOUSE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS AN EIGHT FOOT FRONT FACING FENCE? UM, I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE OTHERS. THERE'S A, THERE'S A, THERE'S A HOUSE UP AT THE TOP OF THE HILL THAT HAS A FENCE THAT WE THOUGHT LOOKED LIKE IT AT, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABOUT SEVEN FEET, SEVEN OR EIGHT FEET. BUT WE, YOU KNOW, WE NEVER MEASURED IT OR ANY, OBVIOUSLY, 'CAUSE IT'S NOT OUR PROPERTY, BUT, BUT IT JUST, JUST THE, THE WAY IT'S BUILT, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S AT LEAST SEVEN, AT LEAST SEVEN FEET. BUT, UH, I CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT WITHOUT HAVING MEASURED IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, BEFORE WE GO TO ANOTHER, BEFORE WE GO TO ANOTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTION, UH, STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, HAVE, UH, FIGURE ONE OUT OF U D C 35 5 14 REGARDING FENCES AND, AND SLOPES, UH, FROM ONE ABUTTING PROPERTY TO ANOTHER? UH, IT'S READY, PLEASE. IT'S, IT'S FOUR FEET, SIR. THERE HAS TO BE A FOUR FOOT D UH, DIFFERENTIAL. I KNOW, BUT CAN YOU BRING UP, CAN YOU JUST BRING UP THE FIGURE? UH, JUST HAVE IT READY. I'M GONNA GO TO THE NEXT QUESTION, BUT I'LL, I'D JUST LIKE IT ON WHEN I END THIS, UH, NEXT COMMISSIONER QUESTION, PLEASE. SHE, YES, COMMISSIONER, SHE, UM, I JUST WANNA, THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT. I JUST WANNA CLARIFY. SO, UM, WHAT I, THE WAY I HEARD YOU ANSWER, UM, THE PREVIOUS QUESTION IS THAT YOU DO NOT FEEL LIKE YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO BRING THE FRONT FACING FENCE ADJACENT TO YOUR GARAGE ON EITHER SIDE DOWN IN HEIGHT, UM, IN ORDER TO KEEP THE REST OF YOUR FENCE AT EIGHT FEET. IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, UH, WELL, THE, THE, UH, I, WE, WE, WE NEVER ASKED THEM ABOUT THAT. SO THAT'S NOT, UH, THE OTHER NEIGHBORS. BUT I DON'T, I, UH, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW HOW, HOW TO ANSWER THAT. UH, FROM THE WAY I HANG. MY WIFE IS TRYING TO, IF I, IF I MAY ANSWER THAT QUESTION. UM, THE NEIGHBORS THAT LIVED DIRECTLY, UM, ACROSS THE STREET, UH, DEISHA MILLS AND ADAM MILLS, UM, THEY'RE NOT OPPOSING THE HEIGHT. UM, THE S WHICH ARE ABUTTING RIGHT NEXT DOOR, THEY'RE ABUTTING TO US. AND MR. OLIVAREZ THAT ARE ABUTTING OUR PROPERTY LINE. THEY'RE, THEY'RE IN FAVOR OF THE FRONT AND AS WELL AS THE SIDE OF THE CEDAR PICKET FENCE. AND WE DID NOT DO THE BACKSIDE. THAT ONE STAYED FROM, FROM THE PREVIOUS OWNER, MR. MCRAY, UH, UH, MIKE MCRAY, HE HAD A SIX FOOT AND, UH, ACTUALLY IT'S OPENED, IT'S A SIX FOOT OPEN, UH, PICKET FENCE. UM, 'CAUSE HE DIDN'T PUT IT RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER, BUT, UH, THE NEIGHBORS ACROSS AND THE NEIGHBORS ON THE SIDE AND, UM, FURTHER DOWN, THEY'RE NOT, UH, OPPOSING TO THE, UH, BUDDING LINE IN THE FRONT OR THE SIDE. AND THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY. THEY LIVE ACROSS THE STREET. OKAY. THANK, THANK YOU CHAKA. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER MANCHACA. UH, I, I, I'LL GO ALONG WITH A QUESTION. UH, MICHELLE ASKED, I THINK THAT THE LAST MEETING, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS PROPOSED TO THE APPLICANT CONSIDERATION OF THE FRONT BOTH SIDES. I'M NOT, UM, I'M SORRY. SORRY. COULD I, COULD, COULD HE REPEAT THAT? I DIDN'T HEAR, HEAR WHAT HE WAS SAYING, WHAT HIS QUESTION WAS OR WHAT HIS STATEMENT WAS? YES, SIR. I THINK AT THE LAST MEETING WE DISCUSSED THAT, AND WE HAVE CONTINUANCE FOR REVIEW OF LOWERING THE, ON BOTH SIDES ON THE LEFT AND RIGHT AND OR REPLY ON THAT. [01:30:01] AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE LAST RESPONSE YOU GOT FROM ME THAT HE RECEIVED THAT CLARIFICATION. UH, SO THE APPLICANT, HE WAS INQUIRING ABOUT, UH, REDUCING THE FENCE HEIGHT ON THE LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE, EAST AND WEST SIDE OF THE, UH, FACING THE STREET. I, I, UM, COMMISSIONER MENCHACA, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M INCORRECT, BUT I I DON'T THINK THAT, UH, THE RESPONSE WAS, WAS, UH, ANSWERING THE, THE, THE QUESTION AS WAS DISCUSSED DURING THE LAST MEETING. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. OKAY. YES, SIR. UH, SO MR. MR. SMITH, CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE LOWERING OF THE EAST AND WEST, UH, SIDE, UH, FENCE THAT FACES THE STREET? UM, I MEAN, WOULD YOU BE OPPOSED TO THAT OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, UH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU DON'T WANT TO, TO ENTERTAIN? I PERSONALLY, IF YOU ASKING MY OPINION, I PERSONALLY, UM, DO NOT WANT TO BECAUSE, UM, WE'VE TALKED, UH, THE PERSON THAT'S OPPOSING IT, UM, MR. HOPPER MM-HMM. , HE HAS THREE LOTS AND HE'S DONE A LOT OF WORK. I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S GONE IN THERE AND GOTTEN CONSTRUCTION PERMITS ON THROWING CEMENT. HE'S HAD BUILDINGS BUILT ON ALL THREE LOTS. I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S GOTTEN PERMITS. UH, THAT MAN, UH, HAS A PROBLEM WITH A LOT OF NEIGHBORS. THE OTHER MAN NAMED MR. PENA DOESN'T EVEN LIVE ANYWHERE NEAR US. HE LIVES ON A STREET BEHIND OUR HOME AND HE'S UP, HE'S UP THE HILL ON A STREET THAT LIVES BEHIND US. OKAY. AND HE'S NOT EVEN ANYWHERE CLOSE TO US. UH, ERIC TENIA GENTLEMAN THAT RESPONDED. OKAY. AND MR. HOPPER HAS HAD, LIKE I MENTIONED, SEVERAL THINGS, UM, YEARS AGO, HE, UH, CAME, UH, 15 YEARS AGO, HE WOULD COME AND STAND ON OUR FRONT LAWN. AND THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT I HAVE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE EIGHT FOOT FOR THIS VERY REASON. IF I MAY SAY, HE TOOK US TO COURT 15 YEARS AGO FOR OUR OUTSIDE DOGS. WE HAD TWO OUTSIDE DOGS. MR. PHIL HOPPER WOULD COME AND STAND ON OUR FRONT YARD AT FOUR 30 IN THE MORNING RIGHT IN FRONT. AND THEN HE WOULD GET OUR DOGS TO START BARKING. AND THEN HE WOULD COME AND RING THE DOORBELL AFTER HE HAD SET OFF OUR DOGS, BECAUSE DOGS ARE GONNA BARK. AND WE DO STILL HAVE AN A DOG AT, WHICH IS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE. AND FOR THAT VERY REASON, I WOULD FAVOR TO KEEP THE EIGHT FOOT BECAUSE HE SETS OFF ANIMALS AND HE COMES TO DISRUPT SO THAT THEY CAN START BARKING. THOSE DOGS HAVE PASSED AWAY. AND WE WENT TO COURT, CITY COURT AND WE WON THE HEARING BECAUSE OUR NEIGHBORS ON BOTH SIDES SAID, IF A NEIGHBOR IS, UH, FROM ACROSS THE STREET IS GONNA COME AND STAND IN YOUR FRONT YARD AND MAKE YOUR DOG BARK, THEY SEE A REASON THAT A DOG WILL BARK. OKAY. AND MR. HOPPER HAS A HABIT OF DOING THAT. OKAY. AND WE WANT OUR, WE WON OUR CASE WITH THAT. SO THAT'S WHY I'M OPPOSED TO HAVING IT CUT DOWN FOR THAT VERY REASON. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, HEARING NONE, UH, I HAVE A QUESTION. STAFF, IF YOU CAN BRING THAT FIGURE, FIGURE UP PLEASE. UM, THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT, UM, WAS ALLUDED TO, I THINK BY COMMISSIONER MANA AMANA. BUT YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS SKETCH ALLOWS, UH, IF THE, THE DISTANCE AND HEIGHT IS A FOUR FEET CHANGE FROM THE FENCE LINE TO THE FOUNDATION OF THE HOME, YOU COULD, YOU GET AN EXTRA TWO FEET. AND SO WHAT I WAS CURIOUS IS, UH, DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHAT THAT MEASUREMENT IS? IS IT NEAR FOUR FEET? IS IT, UH, STAFFING? NO, SIR. IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT HALF OF THAT, SIR. OKAY. WHEN WE WERE OUT AT, AT THE SITE, WE, WE DID LOOK FOR THAT. AND IT, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S A, A DECENT SLOPE, IT, IT WASN'T QUITE THE FOUR FEET. UM, WE WOULD'VE GONE THAT DIRECTION AS WELL. UH, IF WE DID HAVE THIS WORK, I ONLY ASK BECAUSE ON THE, ON THE PICTURE THAT SAYS ADJACENT PROPERTY EAST SIDE, IT JUST SHOWS A VERY SUBSTANTIAL DROP. AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. UM, SO MY QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT IS, YOU HAD MENTIONED DURING YOUR TESTIMONY THAT THE REASON WHY YOU WANTED AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THE SIDE IS BECAUSE YOU WANTED THREE CROSSBARS FOR ADDITIONAL SUPPORT. UM, YOU KNOW, THE TALLER THE FENCE YOU PUT IN IT, IT'S YOU, WHAT MAKES IT STURDY IS NOT THE CROSSBARS AS MUCH AS THE, THE DEPTH OF, OF POSTS. AND SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY COULDN'T YOU JUST PUT THREE CROSSBARS ON THE SIX FOOT FENCE, IF THAT WAS THE REASON? UH, AND, UH, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK TO THAT? UH, ALL WE WERE GOING ON IS WHAT THEY TOLD US, UH, WHEN THEY WERE THE, THE, THE FENCE, UH, THE PEOPLE WHO WERE FIXING THE FENCE. UH, WE, I MEAN, I, I DID NOT, [01:35:01] THAT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT THAT HAD EVEN CROSSED MY MIND UNTIL THEY SAID IT. AND SO THEY WERE, THAT'S WHY HE SAID IN ORDER TO KEEP THE FENCE, UH, LEVEL AND FROM SLIDING OVER ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, HE WANTED TO PUT IN THREE CROSSBARS. UH, SO, UH, THAT COST US A LOT. THAT COST US MORE MONEY 'CAUSE WE HAD TO BUY MORE, UH, CROSS BEAMS. UH, BUT WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE? WELL, I'M JUST, LIKE I SAID THAT I'M, I'M JUST GOING ON WHAT THE, THE GUY TOLD US AND I DIDN'T, UH, I DON'T THINK THAT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH, UH, SIX OR EIGHT. I THINK IT, THAT'S WHAT, BUT IT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT HAD OCCURRED TO ME AND UNTIL HE SAID THAT, SO. OKAY. UH, YEAH, I'M JUST, I I, MY, MY LINE OF QUESTIONING IS JUST THAT WHEN I HEARD THAT AS IT SEEMED LIKE THAT WAS YOUR MAIN REASON, AND I'M TRYING, I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY, WHY THAT WAS A REASON. THAT'S ALL. UM, SO, WELL, I, WE WERE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT WE'D HAD, LIKE WE SAID, WE'D HAD MORE, WE HAD PREVIOUS EPISODES WHERE THE SIX FOOT FENCES THAT WE'D HAD BEFORE HAD HAD FALLEN OVER. UH, SO WE WERE CONCERNED AND, AND JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN AGAIN. IF WE COULD AVOID THAT. SO THAT'S OKAY. BASICALLY, I GUESS WE DID THAT. WELL, THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, WELL, NOW THAT YOU'VE HEARD, UH, OUR QUESTIONS IN THE PUBLIC COMMENTARY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A CLOSING STATEMENT BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? YES. UM, IF I MAY SAY, UM, UH, FOR PRIVACY REASONS, I WOULD HOPE THAT THE COUNCIL, UH, COMMISSIONERS WOULD BE IN OUR FAVOR TO KEEP IT, UH, THE HEIGHT THAT WE HAVE, UH, FOR THE SLOPE AND AS WELL AS FOR MR. HOPPER, UM, COMING INTO OUR PROPERTY AND, UH, SETTING OFF OUR DOG THAT WE HAVE, UM, AS WELL AS PRIVACY. AND FOR THE, THE, THE COST OF WHAT AS CUTTING IT DOWN BECAUSE IT WAS A COSTLY EXPENSE, WHICH WE DID NOT, UH, UH, WE DID NOT HAVE. BUT WE CAME UP WITH THAT MONEY AND IT WAS VERY COSTLY. 'CAUSE WE ORDERED CEDAR, UM, ELM, CEDAR ELM AND THE POST, UH, AND THE, THE, UH, THREE BY FOURS OR TWO BY FOURS, WE PUT THREE OF 'EM. IT WAS A VERY EXPENSIVE, UM, COST ON OUR FINANCIAL, UM, UH, UH, MONEY. AND NOW TO HAVE IT CUT DOWN AND, UH, IT WOULD BE ANOTHER EXPENSE THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO PROBABLY BORROW MONEY TO HAVE IT CUT DOWN IN ORDER, UH, WITH THIS MR. HOPPER, PHILLIP HOPPER, WHO WE'VE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THAT, LIKE I MENTIONED ABOUT THE DOG FOR HI TO SUSTAIN HIM SO THAT HE CAN COME AND, AND SET OFF OUR OTHER DOG FROM BARKING THAT WE NOW HAVE. 'CAUSE THE OTHER TWO HAVE PASSED ON. 'CAUSE THAT WAS 15 YEARS AGO. AND LIKE I MENTIONED, UM, OUR NEIGHBORS WERE IN FAVOR OF THE DOGS BARKING BECAUSE THEY KNEW THAT HE WAS COMING AND GETTING ON OUR FRONT PROPERTY TO SET OFF. BUT I APPRECIATE THAT. AND IF THE ADJUSTERS, THE COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU COULD, UH, BE IN FAVOR, I WOULD GLADLY APPRECIATE THAT, UH, FOR THAT, FOR THAT VERY REASON. I APPRECIATE Y'ALL LISTENING TO US. AND I'M GONNA PASS THE PHONE BACK TO MY HUSBAND. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. UH, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING MORE, UH, TO ADD TO THAT OTHER, UM, WE JUST, UH, WE, IT'S JUST THAT WE, THIS ALL IS A, A SURPRISE TO US, UH, THAT PEOPLE THAT WE, THAT WERE, THAT ARE. AND OH, AND ALSO THE OTHER THING IS, UH, I READ SOMETHING NOW. I READ SOMETHING IN ONE OF THE ABOUT FROM THE CITY, LIKE ORDINANCES OR SOMETHING. I, I'M NOT PRECISELY SURE WHERE IT CAME FROM, BUT IT SAYS THAT, UH, NO FENCE OVER SIX FEET HIGH SHALL BE BUILT ON IN CITY UNLESS ALL OWNERS OF PROPERTY ABUTTING THE PARCEL WHERE THE FENCE IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED HAVE BEEN CONTACTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND HAVE EXPRESSED NO OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED FENCE. SO IF THAT'S THE CASE, OUR TWO NEIGHBORS THAT HAVE THAT, THAT ARE ABUTTING OUR SIDE, TWO SIDE FENCES HAVE, HAVE ALREADY EXPRESSED THAT THEY HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT. SO, UH, IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THE CITY ORDINANCE IS CLEAR THAT, UH, UNLESS, UNLESS THEY WERE IN OPPOSITION, UH, YOU COULD GO WITH WHAT, WITH THE EIGHT FOOT. SO ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST MY LAST STATEMENT THERE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, I'M LOOKING, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE MOTION WOULD BE READ TO, UH, NOT ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT [01:40:01] FOR THE FRONT FENCE. SO IF THERE'S ANY COMMISSIONER THAT WANTED TO PROCEED THAT DIRECTION, UH, JUST JUST BE AWARE THAT THAT, UH, WAS OUT THERE. SO WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA, PROCEED. SO REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH TWO ZERO DASH 0 3 0 0 0 8 9, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A PRIVACY WOOD FENCE, UH, TO BE, UH, EIGHT FOOT TALL ON THE SIDE PROPERTIES AND A SIX FOOT FENCE, UH, TO BE ALONG THE FRONT SIDE, UH, SITUATED, UH, ON, UH, STREET FACING FRONT SIDE, SITUATED AT 6 1 1 9 BEAR BRANCH APPLICANT BEING DONALD SMITH. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS ADMITTED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE HEIGHT MODIFICATION UP TO EIGHT FEET. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHTS ON THE SIDE IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE PRIVACY TO THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. IF GRANTED, THIS REQUEST WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE, UH, WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED. THE PUBLIC WELFARE CONVENIENCE CAN BE SERVED BY A MAX BY MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. A EIGHT FOOT TALL WOODEN FENCE ALONG THE SIDES AND REAR OF THE PROP OR SIDES OF THE PROPERTY LINE WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PRIVACY FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY AND THE SIX FOOT WILL KEEP IN HARMONY WITH THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY. THIS IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. DEFENSE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THE MATERIAL AND STYLE OF FENCE IS SIMILAR TO OTHER FENCES UTILIZED WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY. FURTHER, THE CONSTRUCTIVE FENCE DOES NOT VIOLATE A CLEAR VISION. STANDARDS. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION OF WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE FENCE HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISTRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE FENCING IS IN LINE WITH OTHER PRE-EXISTING FENCING MATERIAL WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEARING ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS FOR THE CURRENT USE, UH, OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. AND THE MOTION. YOU SECOND SHALL SECOND. MR. SHALL SECOND. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER MANO, WOULD YOU PLEASE, UH, LEAVE THE DISCUSSION? SURE. I, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE SLOPE OF THE PROPERTY, IT IS, YOU KNOW, IT, IT IS, IT DOESN'T MEET THE GUIDELINE FOR WHAT IT IS. UH, THAT I GUESS IT, IT PROVIDES, UH, THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO PUT IN A FENCE, BUT I THINK IT'S LOOKS TO BE GREATER THAN FOUR FEET ACROSS THE, THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY. AND THEREFORE I THINK THE SIDES SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAVE THE EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE. UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE FRONT, I THINK PROVIDING A CONSISTENT VIEW, UH, THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AS I DRIVE DOWN THE STREET USING GOOGLE, IT LOOKS LIKE SIX FOOT IS MORE APPROPRIATE, UH, FOR THE FRONT HEIGHT. AND THAT'S WHY I DID NOT SUPPORT HAVING EIGHT FOOT FENCE THERE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. SHELL. UM, YES, I AGREE WITH WHAT MY COLLEAGUE HAS, UH, ALREADY SAID. I THINK THAT THIS IS A GOOD COMPROMISE. UM, AND CONSIDERING THAT, UH, THE, THEIR OPPOSITION WAS FROM A NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE STREET, UM, I THINK LOWERING THE FRONT FACING FENCE TO SIX FEET, SO IT'S MORE IN LINE WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, IS A GOOD COMPROMISE WHILE STILL PROVIDING YOU PRIVACY ON THE SIDES AT EIGHT FEET. SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. GREAT. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT'D LIKE TO WEIGH IN? ALL RIGHT. UH, I'LL CLOSE THE DISCUSSION WITH, UH, STATING THAT, UH, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS READ BECAUSE, UM, THE NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE, UH, WERE NOT OPPOSED TO THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE. THERE IS SOME SLOPE DIFFERENTIAL. SO I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHY A SLIGHTLY HIGHER FENCE, UH, WOULD BE IN ORDER. UH, BUT I ALSO THINK THAT, UH, UH, HAVING A SIX FOOT ON THE FRONT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE. SO, UH, STAFF PLEASE TAKE THE ROLL COUNT PLEASE. MICHELLE, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. MR. MANCHACA SUPPORT THE MOTION. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. THI? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. FISHER. [01:45:01] YES, I CONCUR. MR. BATTLE? YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR AND SHARE ORIAN. UH, I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. AND, UH, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR, UH, WITH YOUR, UH, OFFENSE MOVING FORWARD. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. FOR BO O A 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 9 8. THE OF 3 1 4 EAST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE CAMPBELL. DISTRICT ONE APPLICANT BEING KI GRIFFIN AND FAIRMONT IS A REQUEST FOR ONE A SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE, THE MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK DISTANCE, UH, 10 FEET TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY. LINE THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW TWO, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A PRIVACY FENCE TO BE WITHIN THE CLEAR VISION FIELD. THREE, A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 20 FOOT GARAGE ENTRANCE TO ALLOW GARAGES TO BE THREE FEET FROM PROPERTY. LINE FOUR, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW SOLID SCREEN FENCE TO BE SIX FEET, FOUR INCHES AWAY WITHIN THE FRONT PROPERTY. UH, ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY MONTE VISTA. HISTORIC CASE SUMMARY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK IN ORDER TO EXPAND THE CURRENT GARAGE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. CLEAR VISION REQUEST IS DUE TO THE TRASH RECEPTACLE FENCE. THE PROPERTY IS ONE OF THE FEW FRONTING PROPERTIES ON EAST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE. THE PROPERTY HAS MANY ATYPICAL FEATURES THAT ARE UNIQUE TO THE SURROUNDING AREA, SUCH AS FRONT YARD. COOL BUILT IN 1967 THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. FRONTING ON AN APPROVED NAME ALLEY AND LOT CONFIGURATION IS BOTH NARROW AND LONG. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN RENDERINGS. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE FENCE, EAST HOLLYWOOD, THE CORNER LOT AND ALLEY ALI. RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF VARIANCE IN BO O A 21 0 3 0 0 0 9 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF THE FACTS. NUMBER ONE, DUE TO A UNIQUE COMPACT LAYOUT OF PROPERTY AND CORE LOT LOCATION VARIANCES FOR THE EXPANSION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES WILL NEED TO BE REQUESTED REGARDLESS OF CIRCUMSTANCES. TWO, ADEQUATE SPACE WE UTILIZE TO PREVENT STORMWATER RUNOFF AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE WITHOUT TRESPASS. AND THREE, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES. DO NOT DISTRACT THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT MAILED 16 NOTICES. ZERO IN FAVOR. THE IN OPPOSITION, NO RESPONSE TO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE APPLICANT IS KILLING GRIFFIN OF FAIRMONT. EMILY, IF YOU'RE IN LINE, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, UNMUTE YOURSELF, UH, BEFORE TALKING, SPEAKING. UH, THANK YOU DOMINIC. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. MY NAME IS EMILY WEISLER, UM, AND JAMES GRIFFIN IS HERE WITH ME AS WELL. WE ARE WITH LEN GRIFFIN AND FAIRMAN 100 NORTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10, SUITE SIX 50 HERE, REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER, MS. SUSAN HERD. UM, STAFF SHOULD HAVE OUR PRESENTATION. IF WE COULD GO AHEAD AND START WITH SLIDE TWO PLEASE. UM, AS DOMINIC MENTIONED, UM, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS THREE 14 EAST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE. THIS IS MS. HERD'S RESIDENCE IN MONTE VISTA, AND IT'S ON TWO TENTHS OF AN ACRE LOT. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R FIVE H A H O D AND INCLUDES A SINGLE STORY MID-CENTURY MODERN HOME BUILT IN 1961 AND PURCHASED BY MS. HERD IN 2016. UM, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS KIND OF AERIAL VIEW, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS VERY LONG AND A NARROW LOT WITH A UNIQUE CONFIGURATION ORIENTATION AND STYLE. UM, WHILE THIS HOME IS ADDRESSED ON EAST HOLLYWOOD, THE HOME ITSELF AND ITS FRONT DOOR IS ORIENTED FACING AN UNNAMED ALLEY THAT REALLY IS AN EXTENSION OF CONNECTION FROM SHRINER PLACE TO EAST HOLLYWOOD. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY ONLY ONE OF TWO HOMES ADDRESSED ON EAST HOLLYWOOD AND SINGULARLY THE ONLY HOME FRONTING THE UNNAMED ALLEY. SO ITS ORIENTATION ALONE IS ENTIRELY UNIQUE, UM, TO THE STREET AND AREA OF ADDITIONAL IMPORTANCE IS THE FUNCTIONALITY OF EAST HOLLYWOOD. UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THREE 14, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY N THREE 20 NEXT DOOR, WHICH ARE THE ONLY HOMES ADDRESSED ON EAST HOLLYWOOD. THE REMAINDER OF THE STREET, UM, REALLY IS REAR AND SIDE ACCESS ONLY TO THE EXISTING HOMES. ALL OTHER HOMES ARE ADDRESSED, FACING AND ACCESSED FROM SHRINER, ROSEWOOD OR SHOOK. SO THIS SIGNIFICANTLY ALTERS THE FUNCTION OF FEEL IN EAST HOLLYWOOD, WHICH REALLY DOES SERVE AS A BACK ALLEY BETWEEN MCCULLOUGH AND SHOOK AVENUE. SLIDE THREE, PLEASE. SO AS STAFF MENTIONED, WE HAVE FOUR VARIANCES, UM, IN CONNECTION WITH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BEFORE YOU ALL TODAY. THE FIRST TWO, UH, THE MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK AND MINIMUM [01:50:01] GARAGE SETBACK ARE TRIGGERED BY THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF MS HERD'S EXISTING GARAGE, WHICH I WILL SHOW IN JUST A SECOND. THE PROPOSED GARAGE EXPANSION WILL RESULT IN THE STRUCTURE BEING THREE FEET FROM EAST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE, WHICH PER STAFF IS TECHNICALLY THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, BUT AS I MENTIONED, IS NOT ACTUALLY FUNCTIONING AS THE FRONT OF THE HOME, BUT AS THE SIDE, AS THE HOME FRONT, THE UNNAMED ALLEY. BASED ON THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN ALONG EAST HOLLYWOOD AND ITS KIND OF BACK ALLEY FUNCTION, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE HOMES ARE REALLY WITHIN A FEW FEET OF THE REAR PROPERTY LINE OR ON THE REAR PROPERTY LINE IN EAST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE. THE PROPOSED GARAGE EXPANSION, UM, ACTUALLY WILL IN FACT BRING THE STRUCTURE MORE ALIGNED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, UM, AND THE CHARACTER OF EAST HOLLYWOOD THAN IT EVEN STANDS NOW. THE SECOND TWO VARIANCES ARE FOR EXISTING FEATURES ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT WE NEED TO CLEAN UP. THERE IS A TRASH RECEPTACLE FENCE STRUCTURE THAT TECHNICALLY BENDS TWO INCHES INTO THE CLEAR VISION FIELD, WHICH IS EXISTING AND WILL REMAIN, UM, ADDITIONALLY THE SOLID SCREEN FENCE, BUT IS MORE OR LESS THE BACK OR SIDE YARD, DEPENDING ON WHICH WAY YOU LOOK AT IT. UM, IT'S SIX FEET, FOUR INCHES. SO WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THAT. UM, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES ARE MINIMAL IMPACT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ONLY, AND IN FACT ALLOW FOR A FULL BETTER USE OF THE EXTREMELY NARROW, UNIQUE PHYSICAL CONFIGURATION AND LAYOUT OF THIS LOT. UH, SLIDE FOUR PLEASE. THIS IS A SITE PLAN OF THE PROPOSED GARAGE EXPANSION. KIND OF COVERS THE ENTIRE LOT, UM, LAYS EVERYTHING OUT SO YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND KIND OF CONSUME SPACES, WHICH GIVES A BETTER VISUALIZATION TO THE, THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THIS LOT AND HOME, WHICH IS EXTREMELY RESTRICTED, LIKE I SAID, BY ITS ORIENTATION, SIZE AND SHAPE. THERE IS A POOL WHICH WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1967, WHICH IS TECHNICALLY FRONTING EAST HOLLYWOOD. UM, SO FROM AN ADDRESSING PERSPECTIVE, THE POOL WOULD BE IN THE FRONT YARD. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS SITE PLAN WITH THE THE FRONT ENTRY TO THE HOME ON THE UNNAMED ALLEY, THE POOL REALLY IS FUNCTIONALLY IN THE BACKYARD OF THIS HOME. UH, THE GARAGE WILL BE EXPANDED ABOUT 530 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW FOR A SHIFT IN STUDIO SPRAY, UM, AND DIFFERENT GARAGE SPACE, WHICH WILL BRING THE HOME'S OVERALL FOOTPRINT MORE ALIGNED WITH THE THE SETBACK PATTERN ALONG EAST HOLLYWOOD. THERE'LL BE A NEW CONCRETE DRIVEWAY AND CONCRETE WALL AS NOTED IN O P'S STAFF REPORT FOR THE H D R C CONSIDERATION OF THIS SITE AND PROPOSAL. EAST HOLLYWOOD IS PRIMARILY CHARACTERIZED BY COVERED PARKING CANOPIES, REAR PRIVACY FENCES, AND REAR ELEVATIONS OF PRIMARY AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITH OVERHEAD GARAGE DOORS. SO THESE SETBACKS ARE EXISTING CONDITION AND ARE VERY COMMONLY REALLY SHALLOW JUST WITHIN A FEW FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE, IF NOT ON TOP OF THE PROPERTY LINE. SO THE PROPOSED SETBACK AND GARAGE STRUCTURE AS SHOWN IN THE EXPANSION FORM IS THOROUGHLY CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED PATTERN OF THIS BLOCK. SLIDE FIVE PLEASE. THIS IS JUST REALLY A ZOOMED IN VERSION OF WHAT YOU JUST SAW, UM, TO BETTER SHOW THE NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE GARAGE EXPANSION. AGAIN, THIS IS ONLY ABOUT 530 SQUARE FEET. UM, AS I MENTIONED, H D R C DID CONSIDER THIS REQUEST. THEY HEARD IT ON OCTOBER 21ST, SO JUST A FEW WEEKS AGO AND GAVE THEIR APPROVAL. SLIDE SIX, PLEASE. THIS EXHIBIT SHOWS THE ELEVATIONS OF THE SITE. THE WESTERN ELEVATION WILL BE THE VIEW FROM EAST HOLLYWOOD APPROACHING SHOOK AVENUE. THE NORTHERN ELEVATION WILL BE WHAT IS SEEN FROM EAST HOLLYWOOD DIRECTLY LOOKING AT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THE EASTERN ELEVATION IS FROM EAST HOLLYWOOD HEADED TOWARDS MCCULLOUGH. THE PROPOSED EDITION IS ONE STORY AND OVERALL HEIGHT WITH A SIDE SLOPING ROOF ELEMENT THAT BRINGS THE OVERALL HEIGHT VISUAL TO 101 AND A HALF STORIES. EXCUSE ME, THE ADJACENT HOME AT THREE 20 EAST HOLLYWOOD IS TWO STORIES AND THERE'S A ONE TO TWO STORY HEIGHT VARIATION THROUGHOUT THE BLOCK. SO, UM, ADDITIONALLY THE SCALE IS APPROPRIATE AND CONSISTENT, UM, WITH THE OVERALL CHARACTER. SLIDE SEVEN, PLEASE. UH, THIS IS MY FAVORITE EXHIBIT TO SHOW THE OVERALL VARIATIONS AND UNIQUE CHARACTER OF EAST HOLLYWOOD. THERE IS A HIGH DENSITY VARIATION ALONG EAST ROSEWOOD IN ALL OF THOSE RESIDENTS FRONTS. EAST ROSEWOOD WITH HOLLYWOOD BEING THEIR REAR ALLEY, ESSENTIALLY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF EACH HOLLY OF EAST HOLLYWOOD WHERE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS THE MAJORITY OF THAT BLOCK FRONTS ON SHRINER PLACE WITH THEIR REAR YARDS AND GARAGES BEING ACCESSED FROM EAST HOLLYWOOD. CONTINUING THE TREND OF THE ALLEYWAY FUNCTION HERE. SO BOTH SIDES OF EAST HOLLYWOOD, NORTH AND WEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, UM, HAVE THIS REAR ALLEY FUNCTION. THE REMAINDER OF THE SOUTH SIDE ACTUALLY HAS PRIMARY ACCESS AND AN ADDRESS ON SHOOK. SO IN ADDITION TO BEING, UH, A GENERALLY A CUT THROUGH STREET, UM, EAST HOLLYWOOD TRULY IS A REAR ALLEY MORE THAN A TRADITIONAL STREET. SO THE REQUESTED VARIANCE PROVIDE EVEN BETTER ALIGNMENT, UM, WITH [01:55:01] THE SETBACK AND GENERAL FUNCTION OF EAST HOLLYWOOD. SLIDE EIGHT PLEASE. THE NEXT SEVERAL SLIDES ARE JUST PICTURES OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS IT EXISTS CURRENTLY TO SHOW ITS UNIQUE ORIENTATION, SIZE, AND SHAPE. THE FIRST OF WHICH, UM, IS FACING EAST ON EAST HOLLYWOOD TOWARDS SHOOK. YOU CAN SEE THE FENCING, THE EXISTING GARAGE STRUCTURE AND A A LITTLE BIT OF THE RECEPTACLE. UH, SLIDE NINE PLEASE. THIS, YOU CAN BETTER SEE THE RECEPTACLE AND PRIVACY FENCE. UM, THAT RECEPTACLE STRUCTURE EXTENDS JUST TWO INCHES INTO CLEAR VISION FIELD. UM, BUT YOU CAN GET A BETTER IDEA OF HOW THIS PROPERTY REALLY IS ORIENTED WITH ITS SIDE AND THE REAR FACING EAST HOLLYWOOD, UM, RATHER THAN IT ACTUALLY BEING FRONTING FACING EAST HOLLYWOOD. SLIDE 10, PLEASE. UH, THIS IS JUST A CLOSEUP OF THAT EXISTING, UM, FENCE AND RECEPTACLE AREA AS WELL AS THE EXISTING GARAGE. SLIDE 11, PLEASE. UH, THIS IS ACTUALLY THE FRONT OF THE HOME. SO THIS IS FROM EAST HOLLYWOOD FACING TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE HOME, UM, WHICH FRONTS THAT UNNAMED ALLEY. SO YOU CAN SEE THE FRONT DOOR, THIS KIND OF MAC COVERED FRONTING. UM, THIS IS THEIR FRONT YARD, UM, AND THEIR FRONT DOOR THAT FACES THAT UNNAMED ALLEY. SLIDE 12 PLEASE. UH, JUST A CLOSER UP VIEW OF THAT FRONT DOOR. AND YOU CAN SEE THE GRAVEL AREA, WHICH ACTUALLY IS A CIRCULAR DRIVE, UM, FROM THE NAMED ALLEY IN AND OUT OF THAT ALLEY TO THE FRONT OF THE HUB. SLIDE 13. AGAIN, THIS IS, UM, THE FRONT OF THE HOME AND THAT UNNAMED ALLEYWAY. SO YOU CAN SEE HOW IT'S KIND OF, UM, ORIENTED, SINGULARLY UNIQUE TO EVERYTHING ELSE. UM, THE ACROSS THE ALLEY IS A, A SIDE YARD FROM A HOME THAT FACES SHRINERS. SO, UM, VERY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES HERE FOR THREE 14 EAST HOLLYWOOD. SLIDE 14 PLEASE. THESE ARE THE VIEWS ALONG EAST HOLLYWOOD, WHICH ARE, UH, VERY IMPORTANT WHEN UNDERSTANDING THE BACK ALLEY FUNCTION. UM, THIS SHOWS THE PROXIMITY OF STRUCTURES TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND THAT THIS IS PRIMARILY REAR ACCESS, UM, IS WHAT EAST HOLLYWOOD IS USED TO, TO ACCESS THOSE OTHER HOMES THAT FRONT OTHER STREET. SO THE HOME ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THIS SLIDE IS WITHIN JUST A FEW FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. UM, AND THE PROPOSED GARAGE EXPANSION FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL MOST CLOSELY MIRROR THIS HOME'S ORIENTATION AND SETBACK. UM, AS WELL AS THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER HOMES WITH THIS SIMILAR, UH, LAYOUT AND FOOTPRINT. SLIDE 15 PLEASE. THESE ARE JUST SOME MORE VIEWS OF OTHER HOMES ALONG EAST HOLLYWOOD. YOU CAN SEE THESE BACK IN REAR EXIT. UM, WHILE AGAIN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND ADJACENT HOME ARE ADDRESSED ON EAST HOLLYWOOD. THE STREET'S ESSENTIAL CHARACTER IS REALLY THAT OF A REAR ALLEY RATHER THAN A TRADITIONAL STREET. SLIDE 16 PLEASE. THIS IS, UH, JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE FINDING OF FACTS ASSOCIATED WITH OUR CUMULATIVE REQUEST. THE PROPOSED GARAGE EXPANSION AND REQUESTED VARIANCES ARE NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST AND BETTER ALIGNED WITH THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND CHARACTERS OF THIS UNIQUE STREET. AS STAFF NOTED, ANY EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THIS PROPERTY WOULD REQUIRE VARIANCE RE REGARDLESS OF THE CIRCUMSTANCE DUE TO THE EXTREMELY UNIQUE AND RESTRICTIVE SIZE, SHAPE, AND ORIENTATION OF THIS SITE. UH, THE PURPOSE OF ARTICLE THREE IN THE CODE IS A PROMOTION AND MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY IN GENERAL WELFARE. AND FURTHER THE BUILDING REGULATIONS SPECIFIC TO THE SITE ARE DONE SO TO PRESERVE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THIS COMMUNITY. AS SUCH, THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU ARE WELL ALIGNED, CONSISTENT, AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE CONDITIONS EXISTING, UM, IN THIS AREA AND FOR THE DISTRICT IT'S WITHIN. MOREOVER, THIS SITE IS WITHIN THE MONTE VISTA HISTORIC DISTRICT, WHICH CONSISTS OF UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES UNLIKE ANY OTHER IN THE CITY. VARIED SIZE, LOTS, VARIED, LOT SIZES, CONFIGURATIONS, AND ORIENTATIONS. NO TWO HOMES OR TWO STREETS IN MONTE VISTA ARE ALIKE. GRANTING THESE VARIANCES DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THAT ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF EAST HOLLYWOOD OR MONTE VISTA, BUT ACTUALLY GOES TO SUPPORT THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF THIS DISTRICT AND COMMUNITY. THE HOME IS ZONED FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND NO OTHER USE WOULD BE PERMITTED ON THIS SITE BY WAY OF THE VARIANCE APPROVAL. AND FINALLY, THE CONDITIONS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER. A RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OR MERELY FINANCIAL. THE UNIQUE CONDITIONS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WERE ESTABLISHED MORE THAN 60 YEARS AGO AND ARE ENTIRELY UNIQUE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. IT LOOKS NOTHING ELSE LIKE ANYTHING ON EAST HOLLYWOOD APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCES, PRESENTS NO HARM, HINDRANCE OR SUBSTANTIVE INJURY TO THE CONTINUATION OF USE OR ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, EAST HOLLYWOOD OR THE LARGER COMMUNITY. SLIDE 17, PLEASE. OUR TEAM HAS DONE OUR OWN OUTREACH TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, WHICH HAS RESULTED IN [02:00:01] A FEW LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM THE REQUESTED VARIANCES. I BELIEVE DOMINIC DOES HAVE THOSE ON HAND. UM, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN BEFORE H D R C H D R C DID GIVE THEIR APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSAL. AND O H P STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. IN ADDITION TO, OF COURSE, BO O A, UH, DSDS RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR THE VARIANCES DUE TO THE, AGAIN, EXTREMELY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES AND EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. SLIDE 18, PLEASE. JUST TO RECAP, WE ARE REQUESTING A TOTAL OF FOUR VARIANCES. THE FIRST TWO OF WHICH ARE DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED GARAGE EXPANSION, AND THE LAST TWO ARE ESSENTIALLY A CLEANUP OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. WE DO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT FOR THESE VARIANCES BEFORE YOU TODAY AS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A SINGULARLY UNIQUE LOT WITH RESTRICTIVE SIZE, SHAPE, AND ORIENTATION. APPROVAL OF THESE VARIANCES ALLOW FOR FULL USE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITHIN THOSE RESTRICTIVE PARAMETERS OF ITS EXISTING CONDITION AND DEFINITELY DOES NOT DISTRACT FROM THE OVERALL ESSENTIAL CHARACTER. UH, WE ARE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, IS THERE ANY, UH, ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? WE HAVE NONE. OKAY. UH, LET'S BEGIN WITH COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. WHO WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST? EXCUSE ME. MAD, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, WAS THERE OUTREACH TO, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FROM MONTE VISTA? THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT. SO DID YOU REACH OUT TO MONTE VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? EMILY, YOU STILL THERE? OH, IT SEEMS THAT WE LOST OUR APPLICANT. UH, BUT YEAH, WE, WE BOTH, UH, REACHED OUT TO THE HISTORIC, I'M SORRY, THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UH, WHO YOU SPEAKING? OH, THIS IS DOMINIC SILVA. UH, B O A STAFF. OH, OKAY. WE'RE CALLING HER. WE ARE CALLING HER BACK RIGHT NOW THOUGH. AND WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR A PHONE CALL, UH, I HEARD DURING THE PRESENTATION THAT THIS HAD RECEIVED A V O A APPROVAL PREVIOUSLY FOR SOMETHING 1967, UH, FOR THE FRONT YARD POOL. WOW. OKAY. THANK YOU. I GUESS WHILE WE HAVE SOME DEAD AIR, UH, I'M JUST GONNA ASK, UH OH, APOLOGIZE. IT LOOKS LIKE YOU GOT HIM. HI. YES, I'M HERE. SORRY, WE GOT DISCONNECTED. OKAY. DID YOU HEAR THE QUESTION? I DID NOT. WOULD YOU PLEASE REPEAT IT, MR. MANNA. SURE. MY QUESTION IS, IS, UH, DID YOU ALL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REACH OUT TO THE MONTE VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND IF SO, WHAT WAS THEIR FEEDBACK AND INPUT INTO THIS, UH, INTO YOUR PROJECT? YES. SO OUR ARCHITECT, UH, DID REACH OUT TO MONTE VISTA. UM, I DON'T THINK THAT THEY HAD A FORMAL RESPONSE, UH, TO THE REQUEST. UM, BUT WE DID RECEIVE SEVERAL LETTERS FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS, UM, WITHIN MONTE VISTA, UM, GIVING SUPPORT TO THE PROJECT, BUT I DO NOT HAVE A FORMAL RESPONSE FROM MONTE VISTA. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. UH, I JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. UH, ONE FOR STAFF, UH, TO, TO, UM, EXPAND ON COMMISSIONER MANNAS QUESTION BECAUSE THEY HAD TO GO TO THE, UH, H D R C AND THEN AS WELL AS THE B O A MONTE VISTA WAS NOTIFIED, CORRECT? YES, THEY WERE. OKAY. AND THEN FOR, SO WE SENT OUT, SEND OUT WRITTEN NOTICE AS WELL AS AN EMAIL TO THE ASSOCIATIONS. OKAY. AND TO THE APPLICANT, UH, THE, THE CLEAR VISION REQUEST IS JUST FOR THAT RELATIVELY SHORT, UH, SCREEN AGAINST THE TRASH RECEPTACLES. I DIDN'T SEE IT ON THE SITE PLAN, BUT I SAW IT IN ONE OF THE PICTURES. IS THAT, THAT'S TO REMAIN CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND STAFF, UH, IF, IF THE MOTION IS READ, UH, AS, AS, AS, UH, IN THE SUGGESTED TEMPLATE, WOULD IT ONLY APPLY TO THAT, THAT SMALL SCREENING FENCING, OR WOULD IT GIVE THEM THE ABILITY TO PUT A TALLER FENCE? THAT IS, IS A LITTLE BIT MORE SO, UH, THAN THE, THAN THE TRASH RECEPTACLE SCREEN. IT WAS ONLY FOR THE TRUST RECEPTACLE, UM, OKAY'S, NO OTHER FENCES WITHIN THE CLEAR VISION. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, SO IF THERE'S, UH, NO OTHER QUESTIONS, UM, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION FISHER, UH, COMMISSIONER FISHER, THANK YOU. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 9 8, [02:05:02] I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR ONE A SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK DISTANCE OF 10 FEET TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. TWO, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A PROPERTY FENCE TO BE WITHIN THE CLEAR VISION FIELD. AND THREE, A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 20 FOOT GARAGE ENTRANCE TO ALLOW A GARAGE ENTRANCE TO BE THREE FEET AND FOUR, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A SOLID SCREEN FENCE TO BE SIX FEET, FOUR INCHES WITHIN THE FRONT PROPERTY, SITUATED AT 3 1 4 EAST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE. APPLICANT BEING KILLING GRIFFIN. AND BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC IN THIS CASE, DUE TO THE UNIQUE CONFIGURATION OF THE CORNER LOT, AS WELL AS THE POOL BEING A BUFFER BETWEEN THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO ESPEC DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO THE UNIQUE CONFIGURATION AS A NARROW CORNER LOT, AS WELL AS FRONTING OFF A NAMED ALLEY. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. AS ANY EXPLANATION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES, WE'LL NEED VARIANCES DUE TO THE COMPACT NATURE OF THE LOT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE AS THE PROPOSED EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING GARAGE AND WILL LEAVE ADEQUATE ROOM FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE WITHOUT TRESPASS, AS WELL AS ADEQUATE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT CONTROLS. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT TO BE LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON A NAMED ALLEY WITH THE MAJORITY OF THE HOMES FRONTING STREETS OTHER THAN EAST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE OTHER CONFORMING PROPERTIES OR ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER AND ARE NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE. DUE TO THE COMPACT NARROW DESIGN OF THE LOT, AS WELL AS THE LOCATION OF THE LOT, AS CORNER PROPERTY VARIANCE WILL NEED TO BE REQUESTED ANYTIME THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WILL BE EXPANDED. THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? THI SECOND. ALL RIGHT. UH, WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND. AS, UH, COMMISSIONER FISHER WOULD LIKE TO PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. YES, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION OR THESE MOTIONS OF THE VARIANCES. UH, MONTE [02:10:01] VISTA IS ONE OF THE OLDER SUBJECT OR OLDER AREAS OF THE CITY, AND I BELIEVE THAT THE VARIANCES REQUESTED ACTUALLY MAXIMIZE THE USE OF THE LOT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AND CONFORMED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND FOR THAT, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. GREAT. UH, COMMISSIONER THIEL? UH, YES. UH, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A, A VERY UNIQUE SITE AND A VERY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND I, I, I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THESE VARIANCES ARE FOR, SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. GREAT. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO COMMENT? ALL RIGHT. UH, HEARING NONE, UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH FINDING CHUKA. I CONCUR WITH THE FACTS. MS. CRUZ KERR. MR. THIEL. MR. THI GUESS I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. SMITH. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DOMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. FISHER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. BATTLE? YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR ORIAN. UH, I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UM, CONGRATULATIONS. JUST GO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE. UM, UNLESS SOMEBODY NEEDS A BREAK, I'D LIKE TO KEEP GOING. DON, CAN WE HAVE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK? ABSOLUTELY. UH, WE'LL CONVENE AT 2 54. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE ALL HERE. WE ARE HERE, YES. ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S BEGIN ON THE NEXT CASE, PLEASE. OKAY. THIS IS FOR BO O 8 21 0 3 0 0 1 0 4. ADDRESS OF 1 3 3 0 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE. COUNSEL IS ONE. APPLICANT IS JOSE ROLANDO GARZA FOR A ONE, UH, A ONE A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER YARD TO ALLOW BUFFER TO BE FIVE FEET ALONG THE EAST WEST PROPERTY LINES, AND TO A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT SIDE SETBACKS LOSS STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE EAST AND WEST. PROPERTY LINE ZONING IS LIGHT COMMERCIAL CASE SUMMARY. UH, THIS CASE IS A REHEARING OF B O A 18 0 6 7 DURING THE MARCH 16TH, 2018 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CYCLE. NO DETAILS HAVE BEEN MODIFIED. ALL REQUESTS ARE THE SAME, AND IT WAS AN APPROVAL. UM, THEY'RE RENEWING THEIR APPLICATION FOR THE BO O A 18 0 6 7 BECAUSE IT HAS EXPIRED. THE IS REQUESTING A BUFFER YARD AND SETBACK VARIANCE FOR THE EAST AND WEST SIDE OF THE COMMERCIAL ZONE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO I 10 AND HAS BEEN VACANT FOR NUMEROUS YEARS. THIS IS THEIR SITE PLAN. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY I 10 I 10. THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES STAFF RE APPROVAL. THE VARIANCE REQUESTED BO O A 2 3 1 0 4 BASED ON FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS. NUMBER ONE, REQUEST DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS, DOES NOT SIGNIFICANTLY ALTER THE APPEARANCE OF THE DISTRICT. AND TWO, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEW BUILDING MAINTAINS THE ROUGHY YARD LANDSCAPE SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY. OKAY, NOW, 13 NOTICES, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE TO THE KEYSTONE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND, AND THE ONLY REASON WHY THEY'RE HERE IS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T, UH, THEY DIDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PERMIT WITHIN TWO YEARS. IT'S ACTUALLY ONE YEAR, SIR. SO ONE YEAR. OKAY. YES, SIR. THE APPLICANT, JOSE ROLANDO GARZA IS ON THE LINE. JOSE, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE WE BEGIN. MR. GARZA. I HELLO GARZA, CAN YOU PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF? MR. GARZA? CAN YOU HEAR US? HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR. OKAY. SORRY. I, I WAS, I GUESS ON, ON MUTE. UM, UM, OKAY. SO I'M, UH, JOSE ROLANDO GARZA. I LIVE, MY HOME ADDRESS IS 17 9 22. BELLA [02:15:01] LUNA WAY, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 5 7. UM, SO THIS, UH, UH, PROPERTY, I, I HAD PUT A REQUEST FOR THIS VARIANCES, UH, BACK IN 2018. UM, UNFORTUNATELY, I WAS LIKE, I GUESS IT'S THE FIRST, UH, UH, COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT I ATTEMPT TO DO FOR OURSELVES. AND, UM, WHEN, WHEN I GOT THOSE APPROVALS BACK THEN, UM, I DIDN'T REALIZE HOW LONG IT WAS GONNA TAKE ME TO FIND THE RIGHT CONTRACTOR. AND, UM, UH, AND O OBVIOUSLY SECURE THE FIN, THE, THE MORE IMPORTANT THING, WHICH IS THE FINANCING OF THE, OF THE PROJECT, WHICH I ALREADY HAVE. AND, UM, UH, FINALLY, UH, YOU KNOW, I OWN A BUSINESS, WHICH IS WHAT WE WANT THIS OFFICE BUILDING FOR. UM, I'VE BEEN LEASING FOR THE, SINCE, UH, NOVEMBER OF 2000, UH, OF 98, I'M SORRY. AND, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE HOPING TO BUILD THIS OFFICE BUILDING IN ORDER, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR US AND, UH, FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR BUSINESS. UM, AND, UM, I, I MEAN, I HOPE, UH, AND, AND HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, UM, UH, IMPROVE THE, THE VIEW ON 2000, UH, ON, ON I 10. RIGHT. I KNOW THEY'RE MOSTLY THEIR HOUSES. UM, HOPEFULLY THIS WILL GET OTHER PEOPLE TO START, UH, BUILDING OFFICE BUILDINGS AS WELL. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, STAFF. IS THERE ANY, UH, PEOPLE REGISTERED TO SPEAK OR ANY DOCUMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED? THERE IS NONE. OKAY. UH, GREAT. UH, WELL THEN I'M GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. ANYBODY'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION OF MR. GARZA. ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. UM, UH, MR. GARZA, IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO A MOTION? UM, NO. UH, I JUST, UH, THANK, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND FANTASTIC. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. UH, MAY I, IS THERE A MOTION PLEASE? OH, ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OH EIGHT DASH 20 DASH 0 3 0 1 0 4. I BELIEVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANTED REQUEST FOR ONE, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER YARD TO ALLOW A BUFFER YARD TO BE FIVE FOOT FIVE FEET ALONG THE EAST AND WEST PROPERTY LINES. AND TWO, A FIVE FOOT VARIANT FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE EAST AND WEST PROPERTY LINES SITUATED AT 1330 WEST MULBERRY, APPLICANT BEING JOSE ROLANDO GARZA, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAD DETERMINED SHOWED THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR THE BUFFER YARD AND SETBACK REDUCTIONS IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. AS THE APPLICANT HAS ENOUGH SEPARATION FROM NEIGHBORHOOD STRUCTURES FROM NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD MAKE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE OR WOULD REQUIRE VERY SMALL STRUCTURE, WHICH MAY NOT SATISFY THE NEEDS OF THE TENANTS. THE LOT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED FOR RESIDENTIAL USES. HOWEVER, WITH THE ADDITION OF THE, OF THE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY, THE PROPERTY IS NO LONGER SUITABLE FOR RESIDENTIAL USE. THE COMMERCIAL USE IS MORE APPROPRIATE AND DESERVES SOME RELIEF. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND A SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE ATTENDED OF THE SETBACK IS TO CREATE AN OPEN AREA WITHOUT CROWDING OF STRUCTURES AND TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM, UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS. IN THIS CASE, THE PROPOSED SETBACKS AND LANDSCAPE BUFFERY YARD REDUCTIONS WILL NOT INJURE THE RIGHT OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OF OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED TO THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. PRIOR SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUCH VARIANCE, WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE FIVE FOOT SETBACKS FOR A NEW BUILDING AND THE FIVE FOOT BUFFER YARD WOULD ONLY ENHANCE THE OVERALL APPEARANCE OF THE SITE. STREETSCAPE AND NEIGHBORHOOD SIX APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE SAW IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND, AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES IN THIS CASE IS A CORNER CONFIGURATION LOT, WHICH RESTRICTS THE OWNER'S ABILITY ABILITY TO, TO DEVELOP IT WITHOUT REDUCING SETBACKS IN LANDSCAPE, BUFFER YARD, AND A MOTION. JUST A SECOND. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER UNA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO, UH, SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ? UH, NO OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTY. IT PROVIDES [02:20:01] THE BEST USE, UH, TO PUT THE PROPERTY INTO COMMERCIAL USE AND, AND, UH, HELPS THE APPLICANT, UH, MOVE FORWARD WITH HIS, UH, WITH THE RELOCATION OF HIS BUSINESS AND TO SUPPORT HIS BUSINESS. AND THEREFORE, I SUPPORT THE MOTION. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. I THINK YOU HAD THE SECOND. YES. UM, I CONCUR WITH MR. OZUNA. I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GREAT, UH, ENHANCEMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I'M SURE THAT, UH, THE NEIGHBORS WON'T MINE A NEW BUILDING IN THAT AREA. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTARY? ALL RIGHT. I WILL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT. IT ALREADY GOT APPROVED, UH, UH, PREVIOUSLY, AND I SEE NO CHANGE HERE. SO, UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE THE ROLE. MICHELLE, I CONCUR WITH, WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. KEEL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRACKMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DOMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. FISHER. YES, I CONCUR. MR. BATTLE? YES, I CONCUR. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR AND SHARE ORIAN, UH, I ALSO CONCUR. IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS MR. GARZA. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. FOR B O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 1 4. THE ADDRESS OF 4 4 0 2 SOUTH NEW BRAUNFELS AND COUNTS DISTRICT THREE APPLICANT JOHN ROBINSON. REQUEST FOR ONE A NINE FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER YARD TO BE FIVE FEET AND FIVE INCHES ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY. LINE TWO, A 10 FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER YARD TO ALLOW BUFFER YARD TO BE FOUR FEET AND FOUR INCHES ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. THREE, A 10 FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER YARD TO ALLOW A BUFFER YARD TO BE FOUR FEET AND FOUR INCHES ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE. AND FOUR, A 11 FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE FI 15 FOOT TYPE C BUFFER YARD TO ALLOW BUFFER YARD TO BE THREE FEET AND SIX INCHES ALONG THE SOUTH. PROPERTY LINE ZONING IS GENERAL COMMERCIAL CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF HIGHWAY IH 37, SOUTH AND SOUTH NEW BRAUNFELS AVENUE, THE AREA SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES. THERE IS CURRENTLY A COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE ON SITE BUILT PRIOR TO ENACTMENT OF THE CURRENT CODE THAT HAS BEEN PREDOMINANT OR PERMANENTLY CLOSED. THE APPLICANT WILL BE DEMOLISHING THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, CONSTRUCT A NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING. THE APPLICANT REQUESTS RELIEF FROM ENFORCEMENT OF SECTION 35 5 10 OF THE U B C, WHICH REQUIRES A 15 FOOT BUFFER YARD LANDSCAPING ON ALL FOUR SIDES OF THE PROPERTY. AND THIS IS THEIR SITE PLAN. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHICH WILL BE DEMOLISHED. THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF BO O A 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 4 BASED ON FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT. ONE, THE REQUEST OF BUFFERY YARDS WILL ENHANCE THE EXTERIOR IFICATION OF THE COMMUNITY. AND TWO, THE INTENDED REDEVELOPMENT WILL INTRODUCE BUFFER YARD LANDSCAPING, WHICH CURRENTLY DOES NOT EXIST ON THE PROPERTY. MAILED 12 NOTICES. ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION. NO RESPONSE FROM THE HOT WELLS MISSION REACH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE HIGHLAND HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE APPLICANT, JOHN ROBINSON IS ON THE LINE. JOHN, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE YOU BEGIN. JOHN ROBINSON. 1 4 6 0 7 SAN PEDRO AVENUE, SUITE 200. GO AHEAD, SIR, YOU CAN START. DID Y'ALL NOT HEAR THAT? NO, WE HEARD, SIR. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, THE, IT, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS, UH, IS VERY SMALL. IT'S, UH, SLIGHTLY UNDER 56 HUNDREDS OF AN ACRE. UM, THERE'S AN EXISTING BURGER KING RESTAURANT ON IT THAT'S BEEN CLOSED FOR QUITE A WHILE. UM, OUR CLIENT PROPOSES TO PURCHASE THE TRACTOR LAND AND TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING, UH, VACANT BURGER KING AND BUILD A NEW, UH, APPROXIMATELY 2,500 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT FACILITY ON IT. UM, WE'VE GONE THROUGH A NUMBER OF ITERATIONS THAT PRETTY MUCH AS MANY AS POSSIBLE THE SITE PLANNING ITERATIONS. THAT IS, UM, WITH THE, UH, THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND THE ARCHITECT, UM, AND OUR, [02:25:01] AND IN ORDER TO FIT THE PROPOSED NEW RESTAURANT BUILDING AND ALL OF THE PARKING AND, UH, UM, UTILIZE THE TWO EXISTING DRIVEWAYS, WE'RE UNABLE TO MEET THE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS. UM, THE EXISTING PROPERTY APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED BEFORE ENACTMENT OF THE CURRENT BUFFER ORDINANCE. UM, UH, YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE AERIAL PHOTO OF THE EXISTING, UH, ATTRACTIVE LAND. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. HELLO? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. YEAH, WE'RE THERE NOW. OKAY. OKAY. THERE MIGHT BE A LAG ON MY SCREEN. I'VE BEEN ON, UH, PART OF THE CONFERENCE CALL, BUT IF I'M NOT , YES, IF YOU'RE WATCHING ONLINE, THERE WILL BE A LAG. SO JUST LET US KNOW AND WE'LL GET TO THAT SLIDE RIGHT AWAY. OKAY, GREAT. ALRIGHT. IF Y'ALL GO TO THE, TO THE AERIAL PHOTO SLIDE SHOWING THE EXISTING FACILITY, THE EXISTING BUILDING, PLEASE. WE'RE THERE, SIR. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS THE RIGHT ONE, UH, THAT'S THE INTERSTATE 37 RIGHT OF WAY. YOU CAN SEE IT'S ACTUALLY THE, THE, THE PROPERTY ISN'T ACTUALLY ADJACENT TO I 35, OR I'M SORRY, THE I 37 PROPER. IT'S ADJACENT TO THE CLOVER LEAF THERE. UM, THE, THE CURRENT FACILITY, THE, THE CURRENT BURGER KING RESTAURANT, UH, UM, UH, WHICH WAS CONSTRUCTED UNDER A PREVIOUS ITERATION OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, UM, UH, UH, BUILT THE PARKING LOT ALMOST TO THE, TO THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE. UM, UH, ON THE TOP, UH, ADJACENT TO SOUTH CROSSROAD. UM, SAME THING THERE. THERE'S APPROXIMATELY, UH, LOOKS LIKE A, ABOUT A TWO FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE STRIP TO THE SOUTH CROSS BOULEVARD RIGHT OF WAY, LINE, UM, ON THE PLAN LEFT SIDE, WHICH IS THE WEST SIDE OF THE, OF THE EXISTING SITE, UM, ALONG, UH, UH, NEW BRAUN. UM, ABOUT THE SAME, ABOUT A TWO OR TWO AND A HALF FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE STRIP, UH, UH, EXISTING LANDSCAPE STRIP THAT IS, UM, ON THE INSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND ON THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE ON, ON THE, THE BOTTOM OF THE, OF THE PLAN. UM, THE, THE SITE ABOVE TWO EXISTING RESIDENCES, UM, UH, THE PARKING LOT WAS ALSO BUILT APPROXIMATELY TO THE, UH, TO THE, THE, THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE THERE. SO THERE'S EFFECTIVELY NO LANDSCAPE STRIP THERE. UM, THERE IS AN EXISTING FENCE ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE THAT SEPARATES THE BURGER KING FROM THE ADJACENT RESIDENCES, WHICH OUR CLIENT WOULD PROPOSE TO KEEP. UM, SO IN GOING THROUGH THE, THE NUMBER OF DIFFERENT GYRATIONS WITH THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND THE ARCHITECT ON THE, THE SITE PLANNING, UM, WE WERE ABLE TO COME UP WITH A CONFIGURATION THAT WE BELIEVE APPROXIMATES THE, THE, THE BUFFER REQUIREMENT. IT CERTAINLY MEETS THE, THE INTENT OF THE BUFFER REQUIREMENT. UM, IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN SLIDE PLEASE. WERE THERE, THERE, SIR. OKAY. UM, UH, ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE DID IN ORDER TO TRY TO ACCOMMODATE BOTH ALL, UH, NOT ONLY ALL OF THE, THE REQUIRED SITE IMPROVEMENTS, THE PARKING THAT'S REQUIRED BY CODE AND THE DRIVE AISLES TO ACCOMMODATE THE, THE, THE DRIVE-THROUGH LANE, BUT ALSO THE, THE BUFFER REQUIREMENT. UM, WE HAD THE CIVIL ENGINEER, UH, UTILIZE ANGLE PARKING ON THREE SIDES ON THE, THE EAST SIDE, THE WEST SIDE, AND THE SOUTH SIDE. AND THEN I GOT INTO, OR I, I ASKED HIM TO, TO, UH, INSTEAD OF PAVING, UH, UH, RUNNING THE, THE, THE, THE PARKING LOT PAVEMENT PARALLEL TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES INTO THE PROPERTY LINE, WE LEFT, UH, LANDSCAPE TRIANGLES, UM, WHERE THE, THE, THE PARKING, I GUESS ZIGZAGS, IF YOU WILL, IS PROBABLY A, A, A PRETTY GOOD, UH, DESCRIPTION THERE. UM, SO WE CAN ALMOST MEET THE REQUIRED BUFFER AREA, UM, OR THE REQUIRED AREA THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE, THE, THE BUFFER ORDINANCE. UM, MADE SURE I NEED READING GLASSES FOR THE FIRST TIME. SO LET ME GRAB THOSE ALONG THE, UH, THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE, WHICH BUS? THE INTERSTATE 37 RIGHT OF WAY. THERE IS CURRENTLY, UM, UH, 2,640 SQUARE FEET OF BUFFER AREA THAT'S REQUIRED. THERE. WE'RE PROPOSING 1,885 SQUARE FEET OF BUFFER AREA, WHICH IS JUST OVER 71% OF THE REQUIRED BUFFER AREA THERE. UM, ON THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE, WHICH ABOVE SOUTH CROSS BOULEVARD, THERE IS, UH, 1,275 SQUARE FEET OF BUFFER AREA REQUIRED THERE. UH, WE'RE PROPOSING, UH, 1020, SO THAT'S, UH, RIGHT AT 80% OF THE, THE REQUIRED BUFFER AREA THERE ALONG SOUTH CROFT ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE SITE, ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH NEW BRAUNFELS AVENUE RIGHT OF WAY. UM, THERE'S 1,980 SQUARE FEET OF BUFFER AREA REQUIRED. WE'RE PROPOSING 1,882 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS 95% OF THE BUFFER AREA THAT'S REQUIRED THERE. AND THEN ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE, THERE IS 2200 OR 2,220 SQUARE FEET OF BUFFER AREA THAT'S REQUIRED THERE. AND WE'RE PROPOSING 1,705 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS JUST UNDER 77%. [02:30:02] UH, WE WOULD ALSO PROPOSE TO INSTALL ALL OF THE REQUIRED, UH, LANDSCAPE PLANTING MATERIAL, UH, THAT'S, UH, REQUIRED BY THE DIFFERENT, UH, UH, BUFFERS THAT ARE REQUIRED, WHICH I BELIEVE, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THEY'RE ALL B UM, WHICH IS BASICALLY FOUR TREES PER A HUNDRED LINEAL FEET. AND, UM, APPROXIMATELY 20 OR 22 SHRUBS PER A HUNDRED LINEAL FEET, DEPENDING ON THE, ON THE SIZE OF SHRUBS. SO, UH, IN ADDITION TO, TO PROVIDING THE MAXIMUM BUFFER AREA THAT WE CAN, OUR CLIENT WOULD ALSO, UH, UM, PROPOSE TO INSTALL ALL OF THE REQUIRED, UH, LANDSCAPE MATERIAL IN ALL FOUR OF THE BUFFERS. ALL RIGHT. UM, UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, UH, UH, STAFF. IS THERE ANY, UH, ANYBODY SIGNED TO SPEAK ANY DOCUMENTS? WE DO HAVE ONE LETTER TO READ. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. ALRIGHT. READING THIS EMAIL IS TO INFORM YOU THAT WE, THE OWNERS OF 6 5 7 MONTICELLO COURT ARE IN OPPOSITION TO CHANGING THE ORIGINAL VARIANCES TO THE PROPERTY. THE MAIN REASONS FOR THE DECISION TO OPPOSE CHANGING THE VARIANCES ARE AS FOLLOWS, THE PROPERTY ALONG THE WEST OFF SOUTH NEW BRONSVILLE IS CONCERNING. SOUTH NEW BRONSVILLE IS AN EXTREMELY BUSY STREET. SEVERAL ACCIDENTS HAVE OCCURRED. AT LEAST THREE ACCIDENTS HAVE OCCURRED ON MY PROPERTY, SOME IN THE DAYTIME AND OTHERS DURING THE NIGHT. IF IT HAPPENS DURING THE NIGHT, THE CAR DOES DAMAGE, IT BECOMES A HIT AND RUN DAMAGE HAS OCCURRED TO MY FENCE, REQUIRING US TO REPLACE THE FENCE OFF SOUTH NEW BRAUNFELS. A SECOND INCIDENT OCCURRED DURING THE DAYTIME. A CAR RAN OVER THE CURB AND WOULD'VE HIT THE CENTER OF THE HOME OFF SOUTH NEW BRAUNFELS, THE LARGE TREE SHRUNK ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, PREVENTED DAMAGE TO THE HOUSE. A POLICE OFFICER WAS CALLED TO MAKE AN INCIDENT REPORT SHORTLY AFTER WE EXPERIENCED BROKEN WATER, POTS, PIPES AND GAS PIPES. THE WATER PIPES, WATER WERE UNDERNEATH THE TRUCK WHEN IT LANDED ON THE WATER PIPES UNDERGROUND. ANOTHER UNEXPECTED EXPENSE FOR THE HOMEOWNER. THE THIRD INCIDENT OCCURRED. PRIOR TO OWNING THE PROPERTY, A VEHICLE RAN INTO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE AND PHYSICALLY MOVED THE HOUSE CAUSING THE BACK, BACK PORCH TO MOVE ANOTHER EXPENSE FOR THE OWNER. IT WAS A MIRACLE THAT THE PART OF THE HOUSE DID NOT FALL. THE REPAIRS NEEDED UNFORTUNATELY, WERE NOT ADDRESSED. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT SOUTH NEW BRAUNFELS IS A VERY BUSY PLACE, AND BY DECREASING THE VARIANCE, IT PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE ACCIDENTS ON THE PROPERTY THAT IS REQUESTING THE DECREASED VARIANCES. DECREASING THE VARIANCES ALLOWS VERY LITTLE SPACE TO ENTER ON SOUTH NEW BROILS AS WELL. ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AS THERE ISN'T A MIDDLE LANE WHERE CARS CAN TURN, IN ADDITION WAITING TO TURN INTO THE BURGER KING WILL HOLD UP TRAFFIC WHICH CAUSES, WHICH WILL CAUSE THE TRAFFIC JAM IN THE MORNING. WHEN INDIVIDUALS ON THE WAY TO WORK IN THE AFTERNOON, WHEN PEOPLE ARE ON THE WAY HOME, THE PROPOSED DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC ON THE PROPERTY ASKING FOR THE VARIANCES DOES NOT ENSURE THAT THE DIRECTIONS PROPOSED WILL FOLLOWED. THE SPACE ALLOTTED FOR GOING AROUND THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN COMPROMISED BECAUSE IT IS VERY NARROW FOR TWO CARS TO PASS, SHOULD TWO CARS GO IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION AT IS TIME. OKAY. UM, AND THAT IS THE ONLY LETTER. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, FROM COMMISSIONERS TO THE APPLICANT? SHALL SURE. SHELL, UM, I SEE THAT THERE, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A BILLBOARD CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY, UM, THAT YOU ARE PLANNING TO DEMOLISH THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? NO, MA'AM, WE ARE NOT, UH, UNFORTUNATELY, WE GOT THE SURVEY AFTER WE DREW THE SITE PLAN. UM, THE, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, PLEASE? WE'RE THERE? OKAY. UM, ON THE, THE SOUTH END OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING WHERE THE, THERE'S A LITTLE MAN DOOR THERE WHERE THE, THE DRIVE THROUGH LANE TURNS AROUND, TURNS BACK TO THE NORTH AROUND THE CORNER. THE POST THERE, UH, IT'S NOT A POST, I GUESS THE, THE PYLON WHERE THE, THE EXISTING, UH, BILLBOARD IS LOCATED, FALLS IN THAT LANDSCAPE AREA THERE, RIGHT THERE. OH, OKAY. SO THAT WILL, UM, REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING JUST RIGHT NEXT TO THE BUILDING? UH, YES MA'AM. THE, THE, THE, THE, THE EXISTING BILLBOARD FALLS WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE AREA THAT'S ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING, NOT PART OF THE BUFFER YARD. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND, AND TO BE HONEST, BASED ON THE LAND USE, UH, WITH THE AMOUNT OF FOOT TRAFFIC THAT'S COMING OUT OF THAT END OF THE BUILDING, THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE CONCRETE ANYWAY. OKAY. IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA? YEAH, THIS, THIS QUESTION'S FOR THE CITY. UM, SO, SO A WHILE AGO WAS BEING QUOTED WAS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF BUFFER SPACE AND [02:35:01] THE REDUCTION OR THE PERCENTAGES OF THEREOF. BUT, UM, ISN'T IT THE CASE THAT ARE, THE BUFFER SPACE IS BASICALLY LINEAR FEET WIDTH AWAY FROM, UH, THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. AND SO, SO, SO BECAUSE THE, BECAUSE OF THE ANGLE PARKING, THAT'S KIND OF, UM, I GUESS REALLY NOT REALLY IDENTIFYING WHAT THE TRUE DISTANCE IS FROM THE SIDE SPACING HERE. IS THAT CORRECT? AS FAR AS THE BUFFER YARD, SO THERE'S TWO, THERE'S TWO SEPARATE THINGS THAT THERE'S SETBACK, WHICH THEY'RE WELL WITHIN THE SETBACK. I MEAN, THEY'RE, THEY'RE FINE THERE. THE BUFFER YARD IS GONNA BE A 15 FOOT, UH, BUFFER LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENT ALONG THAT SIDE. THEY'RE SIMPLY REDUCING THE SIZE OF IT, BUT THEY'RE MAINTAINING THE LANDSCAPE ITSELF TO, WELL, THE MAJORITY OF IT ANYWAY. BUT AS FAR AS THAT 15 FOOT DISTANCE BASICALLY THAT, UH, THEY'RE NOT COMPLYING WITH THAT. UM, UM, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THE VARIANCE ON, BUT THE PERCENTAGE THAT THEY'RE QUOTING IS, IS BASICALLY ALLOWED FOR THAT JAGGED LINES OF THE, OF THE DIAGONAL PARKING VERSUS BASICALLY A STRAIGHT THAT'S CORRECT. PARKING. RIGHT. SO, YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. EXACTLY. AND THEN, UM, I GUESS THE SECOND QUESTION THEN, IS THIS FOR THE APPLICANT IS AS FAR AS THE SIGNAGE ON THE PROPERTY ITSELF, YOU KNOW, SO, SO IS, IS THERE GOING POTENTIALLY, UM, CAUSING VISION CONCERNS, UH, THAT THE NEIGHBOR PRESENTED, UH, WITH REGARDS TO RE CHALLENGES THAT THEY'RE OBSERVING ON, UH, NEW BONS DUE TO THE, TO THE, THE SIGNAGE ON THE BUILDING? YEAH, SIGNAGE ON THE BUILDING, OR ACTUALLY SIGNAGE ON, I GUESS, UH, ON THE, LIKE I SAID, STREET LEVEL, SO ALONG THE PARKING LOT ON THAT. SO IS THERE ANYTHING THAT'S GONNA IMPACT, UH, I GUESS THE, UM, RESIDENTS THERE ON SOUTH NEW BON FALLS? WELL, THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION. UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE NOT VERY FAR ALONG IN THE DESIGN PROCESS. THE OWNER HAS ASKED EVERYBODY TO ALL OF THE OTHER DESIGN PROFESSIONALS TO SIT TIGHT UNTIL WE CAN, UH, RESOLVE THE BUFFER ISSUE. UM, SO AS FAR AS I KNOW, WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED SIGNAGE OR BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTAL OR ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES. UM, I DO KNOW THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, UM, DOWN IN THE, I GUESS GUESS IT'S SORT OF THE MIDDLE LEFT, UH, SECTION OF THE BUILDING, THERE'S A MENU BOARD THERE. UM, AND THAT'S THE ONLY PROPOSED SIGNAGE THAT'S, THAT'S SHOWN ON OUR CURRENT SITE PLAN. OKAY. THANK YOU. I, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT FULLY ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER ZU? YEAH, THE QUESTION IS FOR, FOR STAFF. SO THE LETTER OPPOSITION THAT WAS, WAS READ INTO TESTIMONY WAS REGARDING KIND OF THE THROAT, UM, KIND OF STACKING ONTO SOUTH NEW BRAUN FOOLS. UM, IT, WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF THE BUFFER, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE, IF HE WERE TO COMPLY WITH, WITH THE REQUIRED BUFFER, WOULD THAT ALLOW FOR MORE STACKING OR, UM, OR NOT? I MEAN, IS IS THERE ANY ANYTHING WITHIN THE CURRENT DESIGN THAT WOULD IMPACT THE, THE STACKING OF TRAFFIC ONE WAY OR THE OTHER? IT GOES BACK TO THE DESIGN, SIR. BY REDUCING IT, I MEAN, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE DESIGN OF THE, UM, THE DRIVEWAY APPROACHES, IT ALLOWS MORE VEHICLES TO BE IN LINE INTERIOR. UM, AS THE OVERALL STACKING GOES, ENGINEERING WILL HAVE TO, UH, LOOK AT THAT, UH, DURING THE PERMIT PROCESS. SO WHEN ENGINEERING LOOKS AT IT, THEY WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH ANY OF THE STACKING REQUIREMENTS, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT THE BUFFER VARIANCE, IF WE GRANT THE VARIANCE, THEY STILL WOULD HAVE TO MEET, YOU KNOW, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ONSITE STACKING TO, TO KEEP, YEAH. SO THAT GOES, GOES, THAT GOES TO ANY SECTION OF THE CODE. UM, THEY'LL, THERE, THERE'LL BE RELIEF AS FAR AS LANDSCAPE BUFFER YARD, HOWEVER THEY'LL SET TO MEET ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS, PARKING AND SO FORTH. SO THEY'LL STILL BE REVIEWED FOR ALL OF THAT. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CONTACT THE STAFF? YES, COMMISSIONER MINCHA, UH, THAT IS TRUE THAT, UH, CO RIGHT THERE IS A VERY BUSY CORNER THERE. THERE ARE A LOT OF INCIDENTS THAT, UH, THAT I'VE HEARD ABOUT AND SEEN AND IN DESIGNING SOMETHING LIKE THIS, IS THERE LIKE SOME SORT OF, UH, UH, RECOMMENDATION THAT SAYS ON CERTAIN SIDE OF APP PREMISES THAT MAYBE CERTAIN TYPE OF, UH, A BARRIER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO A ROCK OR WHATEVER, TO PLACE TO SLOW DOWN HOW MANY PEOPLE GOING THE PROPERTY FLY OVER THE, THE DRIVEWAY AND ALL THAT KIND OF BUSINESS? BECAUSE THAT IS ONE AREA WHERE THEY TURN REAL FAST AND IGNORE THE LIGHT. MR. MOONKA, I'M HAVING A LOT OF DIFFICULTY HERE, UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE FENCING REQUIREMENT. YEAH. SO SINCE IT IS NEW CONSTRUCTION, THAT WILL HAVE TO BE ALL SECTIONS OF CODE BEYOND THIS VARIANCE. ULTIMATELY, [02:40:01] THAT WOULD REQUIRE FENCING, UH, PRIVACY FENCING ALONG THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION, UM, AND, AND SO FORTH LIGHTING, ALL OF THAT WILL, WILL COME INTO PLAY. UH, I'M, I, I DO APOLOGIZE, BUT I COULDN'T MAKE OUT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR BEYOND THAT , WHAT I WAS ASKING IS THAT, UH, SOMETIMES SOME OF THESE PLACES HAVE LIKE BARRIERS, UH, SOME CUBES ON THE GROUND THAT FALLS OVER TO PREVENT PARTS FROM GOING ANY FURTHER. OR SOMETIMES THEY HAVE STONES OR WHATEVER DECORATED THINGS THEY HAVE TO PREVENT PARTS FROM CONTINUING ON THE PATH OF ALL DRIVING RECOMMENDATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO THOSE WILL HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE APPLICANT AS FAR AS WHAT TYPE OF MATERIAL THEY'RE GONNA USE FOR THE, THE PARKING, IF THAT'S GONNA BE A, SOME SORT OF PARKING POSTS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT THAT WILL BE WITHIN THE DESIGN. I SEE. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? I'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS. SO, UM, THIS IS, UH, AN EXIST. THE DRIVEWAYS ON THE PROPOSED SIDE PLAN LOOK LIKE THEY MATCH THE EXISTING LOCATION OF THE DRIVEWAYS. UH, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S, IS THAT CORRECT, UH, MR. ROBINSON? YES, IT IS. OKAY. AND THEN, UH, AS FAR AS THE LANDSCAPING IT FROM, I'M LOOKING ON GOOGLE MAPS, IT SURE LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE, UH, GENEROUSLY INCREASING THE PROVISION OF LANDSCAPING THEN WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE. IS THAT TRUE? THAT IS CORRECT. WE, AND GOING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE ARCHITECT AND THE CIVIL, WHEN THAT WE, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS PROJECT IN THE SUMMER, THE ORIGINAL INTENTION WAS TO UTILIZE THE EXISTING PAVING. UM, OKAY. HOWEVER, IT JUST BECAME A, THAT, THAT WE WEREN'T, WE WERE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO DO THAT. SO IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE A DEMO AND REPAY. THAT'S, THAT'S FINE. UM, AND THEN ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS, UH, WITH SOUTH B BROTHELS AND EAST SOUTH CROSS, BOTH BEING, UM, THOROUGHFARES, UH, THE DRIVEWAYS WOULD HAVE TO BE LOCATED AS, AS PER FURTHER BACK FROM THE CORNER AS POSSIBLE. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THE DESIGN AND WHY YOU ENDED UP WITH THE BUFFERS. YOU HAVE THE, THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE, AND THIS IS, UH, FOR YOU, AND THEN I'D LIKE STAFF TO, TO QUICKLY CHIME IN. SO WHEN YOU PUT THE JAGGED PARKING IN, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GRANT A BUFFER TO GO DOWN TO 3.6 FEET, LET'S SAY ON THE SOUTH SIDE, UH, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT, THAT THAT JAG IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTED BECAUSE IT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE. UH, IN, IN MY ANALYSIS OF THIS, UH, I, WHAT I WOULDN'T LIKE TO SEE IS IF WE GRANTED THE THREE SIX, AND THEN YOU JUST PUT A STRAIGHT CURB LINE ACROSS. SO FOR STAFF, UM, IS, IS IT, IS, IS IT, UH, APPROPRIATE FOR US TO MAKE A MOTION AND SOMEHOW INCLUDE THE PROVISION OF THE JAGGED PARKING AS, AS, AS IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE LANDSCAPING? BECAUSE THE ONLY, THE ONLY ROUTE WE WOULD HAVE, UH, OPPOSITE THAT IS TO, UH, MAKE THE BUFFER REQUIREMENT A LITTLE MORE AND THEN HAVE THE APPLICANT PURSUE THE, UH, THE, THE WEIGHTED AVERAGE OF LANDSCAPING THROUGH THE LANDSCAPE REVIEW. UH, YES, SIR. YOU CAN DO THAT. ULTIMATELY, YOU CAN, UM, ADDRESS THE SITE PLAN THAT'S PROPOSED. OKAY. AND THEN, UH, PROPOSE IT THAT WAY IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANNA DO. OKAY. BECAUSE THAT, AND, AND THAT GOES TO THE, THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS, WHOEVER MAKES THE MOTION, UH, YOU KNOW, IF YOU, IF YOU JUST GIVE, GIVE THE APPLICANT A REDUCTION DOWN TO THE NUMBERS THAT ARE, WITHOUT REFERENCING THE SITE PLAN, IN THEORY, THEY, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO THE JAG, THEY COULD JUST DO A STRAIGHT CURVE AND, AND IT WOULD BE A LOT LESS LANDSCAPING. SO, UM, AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S, UH, THAT'S NOT GONNA BE A, A PROBLEM WITH THE APPLICANT, IF THAT'S THE WAY THE MOTION WAS READ? YEAH, I SEE YOUR POINT. UH, THAT, THAT MAKES ACTUALLY PERFECT SENSE BECAUSE THE WAY THAT THE, THE, THE VARIANCE, I GUESS, APPLICATION AND THE, AND THE AGENDA IS WRITTEN, IT DOES IMPLY THAT WE COULD GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE MINIMUM. SO, UM, OKAY. YEAH, I, I AGREE WITH YOU. GREAT. THANK YOU. UM, SO IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, UM, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION, PLEASE. MANANA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 4, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT A REQUEST FOR ONE A NINE FOOT SEVEN INCH, UM, VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER YARD TO ALLOW A BUFFERY YARD TO BE FIVE FOOT FIVE INCHES ALONG A NORTH PROPERTY LINE TO A 10 FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFERY YARD TO ALLOW A BUFFERY YARD TO BE FOUR FOOT FOUR INCHES ALONG THE EAST BUFFER PROPERTY LINE, UM, THREE A 10 FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 15 TYPE B BUFFER YARD TO ALLOW A BUFFERY YARD TO BE FOUR FOOT FOUR ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE. AND FOR A 11 FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE WITH A 15 FOOT PIPE C BUCKY YARD, KAUI BUCKY YARD TO BE THREE FOOT SIX ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE WITH ALL, UM, UM, WITH ALL OF THE VARIANCES, TAKING ACCOUNT ANGLED [02:45:01] PARKING AS PRESENTED IN THE PRESENTATION, SITUATED AT 4 4 0 2 SOUTH NORTH BRAUNFELS AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING JOHN ROBINSON, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE REDUCTION IN THE BUFFER YARDS ON THE FOUR SIDES AROUND THE PROPERTY IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST, AS IT DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT ANY SURROUNDING PROPERTY OR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ABANDONED PROPERTY WILL BE BENEFICIAL AND A NET IMPROVEMENT TO THE SURROUNDING VICINITY. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD NOT ALLOW THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY AS PROPOSED DUE TO THE LOT SIZE CONSTRAINTS AND ESTABLISHING NEW BUFFER YARDS AS REQUIRED. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE, RATHER THAN THE STRICT LETTER OF, OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE BUFFY YARD REQUIREMENTS IS TO PREVENT FIRE SPREAD, INCREASED PRIVACY, AND SEPARATE, SEPARATE USES WITHIN THE DISTRICT. UH, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE MEETS THE INTENT OF THE CODE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE INTRODUCED BUFFER YARDS TO THE PROPERTY LINES WOULD ENHANCE THE OVERALL APPEARANCE OF THE SITE, STREET SCAPE AND NEIGHBORHOOD. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES. SIX, SUPPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCES SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON PROPERTY AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, AND WERE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING HERE IS NOT THE FAULT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, NOR IS IT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE COMMUNITY, UH, IN WHICH, UH, IS LOCATED. BECAUSE OF THE SMALL SIZE OF THE TRACK, THE PROS DEVELOPMENT CANNOT BE CONSTRUCTED AS INTENDED. END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S MO MOVED ON. MR. COMMISSIONER AMANDA, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SHELL, UH, COMMISSIONER MANOCK, PLEASE PER, UH, DIRECT THE CONVERSATION. SURE. UM, I WILL BE VOTING IN THIS, UM, UH, VOTING FOR THIS, UH, UM, RECOMMENDATION HERE BASED UPON THE SLIGHT ADJUSTMENT THAT YOU, UH, SO APLY RECOMMENDED WITH REGARDS TO ACCOUNTING FOR THE ANGLED PARKING. SO I THINK I TAKE THAT INTO CON CONSIDERATION AS WELL AS THEM COMMITTING TO, UM, HAVING ALL OF THE LANDSCAPING I THINK WILL IMPROVE THIS LOT OVERALL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER. UM, I'M ALSO GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION ON, UM, BECAUSE, UH, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. UM, I THINK OVERALL THIS IS GONNA IMPROVE THE PROPERTY AND, UM, RATHER THAN IT BEING VACANT, I'M HOPING, UH, IT, I, I WOULD THINK THAT THERE'S GONNA BE ACTUALLY, UM, BETTER TRAFFIC CONTROL WHEN THERE'S SOME DIRECTION, UM, ON THIS A LOT. UH, SO I THINK THE NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR IS PROBABLY GONNA ALSO FIND THAT THIS IS IMPROVED AS WELL. FANTASTIC. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT? UH, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND ALSO, UH, SAY THAT I, UM, WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, AS READ, UH, AS A JOGGED, UH, JAGGED, UH, PARKING WILL BE PART OF THE VARIANCE. UH, SO WITH THAT, UH, STAFF, IF YOU COULD PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DAHMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. FISHER. I CONCUR. MR. I CONCUR. SORRY, CHAIR ORIAN. UH, I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, UH, WITH A UNANIMOUS VOTE. MOTION PASSES. UH, MR. ROBINSON, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT. [02:50:03] NEXT CASE IS FOR BO 21 0 3. 0 0 1 0 3. THE ADDRESS OF 13 7 5 9 CEDAR CANYON IN COUNCIL DISTRICT EIGHT, APPLICANT BEING PRESIDIO ROOFING. L L C IS REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A ONE OPERATOR BEAUTY BARBER SHOP ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY . THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF CEDAR CANYON AND MUSHROOM TRAIL. THE APPLICANT IS OPPOSING TO OPEN A ONE OPERATOR BEAUTY BARBERSHOP IN ORDER TO PROVIDE SINGLE OPERATOR SHOP. THE ENTRANCE TO THE SHOP WILL BE LOCATED ON THE SIDE NEAR THE FRONT YARD AND WILL BE LOCATED IN THE REAR OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. THIS WILL BE THE FIRST TIME THE APPLICANT APPLIES FOR A ONE OPERATED BEAUTY SHOP. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF BO O A 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 5 FOR A PERIOD OF 24 MONTHS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS. NUMBER ONE, THE BEAUTY BARBERSHOP WILL BE OPERATED BY ONE PERSON AND THE REQUEST MEETS ALL CRITERIA FOR GRANTING THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION. WE MAIL 31 NOTICES ONE IN FAVOR FOR AN OPPOSITION, ONE OPPOSED OUTSIDE THE 200 FOOT RADIUS AND NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. OKAY, THE APPLICANT, LINDA MARLOW IS ON THE LINE. LINDA, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD BEFORE YOU BEGIN. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS LINDA MARLER. MY ADDRESS IS 1 3 7 5 9 CEDAR CANYON, SAN ANTONIO, 7 8 2 3 1. I'VE BEEN A HAIRSTYLIST FOR 32 YEARS AND A SINGLE PARENT FOR MOST OF THOSE YEARS. SO I HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, WORKING TO SUPPORT MYSELF. I AM NOW APPROACHING RETIREMENT AGE. MY KIDS HAVE MOVED ON. HOWEVER, COVID HAS CAUSED IT A SERIOUS PROBLEM IN OUR INDUSTRY. WE WERE CLOSED ON FOR TWO SOLID MONTHS, SO I HAD ZERO INCOME, AND NOW WE'RE RUNNING AT ABOUT 40 TO 50%. THE RENTALS ON A SALON IS APPROXIMATELY 1200 A MONTH. THAT'S WHAT I AM PAYING. AND DUE TO THE SLOWDOWN AND THE POSSIBLE FUTURE CLOSURES, I WOULD LIKE TO WORK OUTTA MY HOUSE IN ORDER TO AVOID OTHER WAYS OF BRINGING ME AN INCOME. I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE ROOMMATES. I REALLY LOVE THE QUIET, THE BEAUTY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SEVEN OF MY CLIENTS LIVE WITHIN A BLOCK OF MY HOUSE. I CAN ASSURE THE BOARD THAT THERE'LL BE NO CARS ON THE STREET, NO ADDED TRAFFIC. I WILL PARK THE CARS IN MY DRIVEWAY. THEY WILL HAVE A SAFE, SECURE WALKWAY TO THE SALON AREA. WITH SECURITY, I ONLY DO THREE TO FOUR CLIENTS PER DAY. SINCE I AM IN SLOWDOWN MODE AND GETTING READY TO RETIRE, THERE'LL BE NO WEEKENDS. AND THERE IS PRECEDENCE SINCE A GUY ABOUT FIVE DOWN DOORS DOWN FOR ME. HIS NAME IS GEORGE TY AT 1 3 7 3 1 CAESAR CANYON WAS ALLOWED TO SEE, UM, A HAIR SALON. AND, UM, I'M JUST HOPING THAT YOU GUYS WILL GRANT ME THIS. I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, STAY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, KEEP MY HOME BEAUTIFUL, AND TRY TO KEEP IT AS QUIET AND PEACEFUL FOR MY NEIGHBORS AS POSSIBLE. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, UH, STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, UH, ANYTHING TO READ INTO THE RECORD OR ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? WE DO HAVE A LETTER. THREE. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE PROCEED. FIRST LETTER READING TO THE B O A. MY HUSBAND AND I LIVE AT 13 18 13, 810 CEDAR CANYON. WE ARE AGAINST ALLOWING A BUSINESS NO MATTER HOW SMALL TO OPEN INTO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, IT SETS A BAD PRECEDENT THAT WE FEEL WILL NEGATIVELY AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES. ALSO, THE STREETS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE NOT SET UP FOR INCREASED TRAFFIC, INCLUDING THE INEVITABLE PARKING PROBLEMS. PREVIOUSLY, I LIVED ON A STREET WITH A BUSINESS ON THE CORNER, AND WE HAD TO DEAL WITH CARS PARKED UP AND DOWN THE STREET, WHICH PREVENTED VISITORS TO OUR HOME FROM PARKING IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE. IT ALSO MADE IT DIFFICULT TO GET OUT OF OUR DRIVEWAY WHEN WE NEEDED TO LEAVE FOR WORK OR SCHOOL. THERE WERE ALSO OCCASION WHEN CARS WOULD BLOCK OUR DRIVEWAY AND WOULD HAVE TO WALK TO THE BUSINESS AND ASK THE PEOPLE TO MOVE THEIR CAR SO WE COULD LEAVE OUR HOUSE. SO WE ARE ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO SEEING SOMETHING SIMILAR. LOUDER NEIGHBORHOOD. SINCERELY, LUCY AND WARREN JOHNSON. NEXT LETTER. MS. LEE. I'M SUBMITTING MY OPPOSITION TO THE ABOVE-MENTIONED CASE. I'M CONCERNED THAT IF ONE BUSINESS IS ALLOWED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, MANY MORE WILL FOLLOW. THERE ARE PLENTY OF UNOCCUPIED COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AVAILABLE THAT ARE BETTER SUITED FOR [02:55:01] THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS. BETH MORRIS NEXT FROM DAVE. MY NAME IS DAVE KEITH, MY WIFE TONY AND LI. TONY AND I LIVE AT 13 75 5 CEDAR CANYON NEXT DOOR TO 13 7 5 9 CEDAR CANYON, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF THE CASE. MY, WE ARE IN FAVOR OF GRANTING THIS REQUEST. WE BELIEVE THIS WILL HELP OUR NEIGHBOR AND CERTAINLY WON'T ADD SIGNIFICANT FOOT TRAFFIC OR VEHICLE TRAFFIC TO HER HOME AND SHOP. NEXT LETTER IS FROM GERALD SCOTT IN THE CASTLE HILLS FOREST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. KAYLA AL FOR THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A ONE OPERATOR BEAUTY BARBERSHOP AT 13 7 5 9 CEDAR CANYON. ON BEHALF OF THE H O A BOARD, WE ARE IN OPPOSITION. NEXT LETTER FROM MARGARET AND CHRISTINE REGARDING REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPT TO ALLOW A ONE OPERATOR BEAUTY SHOP AT 13 759. I OWN AND HAVE LIVED AT 2 6 2 2 MUSHROOM TRAIL FOR 32 YEARS. MY HOME IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ON THE CORNER OF MUSHROOM TRAIL IN CEDAR CANYON. I HAVE ATTACHED A REPORT I RECENTLY SENT TO TEXAS STATE CONCERNING WHAT I OBSERVED AT THE MARLOWE PROPERTY WHEREIN SALONS WERE CLOSED DUE TO COVID 19. MY DAUGHTER AND I CO-OWN 13,000 8 0 7 CEDAR CANYON SINCE 2010. ONE HOUSE IS BETWEEN THE MARLOWE HOUSE AND 13 8 0 7 CEDAR CANYON, BOTH 26 22 MUSHROOM TRAIL AND 13 8 0 7 SENIOR CANYON ARE FREE OF MORTGAGE. I AM 71 YEARS OLD. AND MAINTAINING OUR PROPERTY'S VALUES ARE IMPORTANT TO OUR ESTATE. ALLOWING A BUSINESS AT 13,000 705 9 SIERRA CANYON WILL JEOPARDIZE THE VALUES OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY. NOTE IN MY ATTACHED REPORT TO THE STATE THAT MS. MARLA IGNORED SALON CVID 19 CLOSURES BY MOVING HER CLIENTS TO HER HOME. THIS BROUGHT MANY NON RESIDENCES TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AND MS. MARLOW'S SALON WAS NOT SUBJECT TO REQUIRED LICENSE OR INSPECTION. IF THIS B O A REQUEST IS GRANTED ACCESS TO THE SALON WOULD BE THROUGH THE RESIDENCE AND STATE INSPECTION COULD BE LIMITED OR DENIED. AND THAT IS THE END OF LETTER. OKAY. UM, MAY I, UH, RESPOND? UH, YOU'LL HAVE A, UM, YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS AND THEN PROVIDE A, UM, A STATEMENT, UH, CLOSING STATEMENT AFTER THE END. BUT AS AT THIS POINT IN TIME, ARE THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? NO QUESTIONS. WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION. UM, DID, WERE YOU OPERATING THE SALON OUTTA YOUR HOME, UM, PRIOR TO THIS APPLICATION? I KIND OF GOT THAT IMPRESSION FROM MS. MARGARET'S LETTER OPERATING FOR INCOME. ABSOLUTELY NOT THE NEXT DOOR. OKAY. SHE DOES NOT LIVE STRAIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME. HER SIDE YARD IS TO THE STREET FROM ME. OKAY. STRAIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM HER WOULD BE THE DRIVEWAY OF ANGELA CRAWFORD. OKAY. NOW, YOU CAN LOOK INTO OUR HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION IF YOU'D LIKE TO, BUT CHRISTINE HAS BEEN A CAUSE OF MUCH TROUBLE IN OUR ASSOCIATION FROM BUILDING ILLEGAL BUILDINGS AND ACTUALLY HEADING THE CITY, DEMAND HER TEART DOWN TO ANGELA WHEN SHE DIVORCED HER HUSBAND, WHO SHE WAS DIVORCING AT THE TIME, APPARENTLY MADE A DEAL WITH CHRISTINE. UM, WELL, MISS MS. MARTIN, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE KEEP THIS GERMANE. OKAY. WHAT I'M, I AM I AM WHAT I'M SAYING IS THIS IS ALL RELEVANT. THIS IS ALL RELEVANT. OKAY. SO THIS WOMAN STARTED ALL KINDS OF LAWSUITS AGAINST MS. CRAWFORD AS FAR AS HARASSING HER, THROWING BURNING BLOCKS IN HER YARD, DRAWING PENTAGRAMS, THERE'S EVEN TICKETS FOR HER HEADING UNLAWFUL FIGHTERS FOR DOING VOODOO. AND ANGIE AND HER DAUGHTERS CAME TO MY HOUSE AS MY FRIENDS. AND YES, I CUT HER DAUGHTER'S HAIR AS A FRIEND, NOT AS A LEGAL BUSINESS. OKAY. THAT IS WHAT SHE'S BASING IT ON. OKAY. AND, UH, I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE STATE. I HAVE APPLICATIONS FOR A LICENSE AND I'M WORKING IN SALON BOUTIQUE AS A LICENSED PERSON. OKAY. NO, I HAVE NEVER OPERATED A SALON OUTTA MY HOME. THAT IS WHY I'M SEEKING THIS PERMISSION. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY, I BELIEVE THAT SHE'S ANGRY AT ME, THAT THAT'S, I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, NANA AND MY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONER ARMANA. GO, GO AHEAD. I, I, I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU'RE PATIENT. GO AHEAD. WELL, I, I JUST WANTED TO ASK IT, HAVE YOU GOT, HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANY DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS FROM THE STATE OF, UH, OLOGY? NEVER. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEVER. I HAVE A PRISTINE RECORD. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD WAS YOUR PLAN TO OUR HOURS OF OPERATION. UM, SO, SO THAT, AND THEN WILL THERE BE ANY SIGNAGE INDICATING THAT YOU'RE, THAT YOU ACTUALLY DO HAVE A BUSINESS, THEY'RE ON THE [03:00:01] PROPERTY ITSELF. AND THEN THIRD QUESTION WOULD BE, UM, WILL YOU HAVE MORE THAN ONE CUSTOMER AT A TIME? MY HOURS OF OPERATION WILL BE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY. THAT'S AT MAXIMUM. I WILL NEVER START BEFORE 9:00 AM I WILL NEVER TAKE A CLIENT AFTER 6:00 PM AT THIS POINT, I'M WORKING THREE AND A HALF DAYS AT THREE TO FOUR CLIENTS PER DAY, ONE AT A TIME. I DO NOT REALLY SEE, UM, GEARING UP MY, UM, BUSINESS BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, I'M TRYING TO RETIRE. I HAD PLANNED ON DOING THAT IN ABOUT TWO YEARS. ANYWAY, THAT COVID WENT AHEAD AND TOOK CARE OF THAT. AND JUST, JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOUR APP, UH, UH, MA'AM, YOUR APPLICA YOUR APPLICATION, UH, TO THE B O A IS FROM MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 9:00 AM TO FIVE. UH, YES. THANK YOU. THAT'S OKAY. YEAH. AND I DON'T EVEN WANNA WORK THAT LATE. THAT'S MAY OKAY. I'M JUST, I USUALLY TRY TO FINISH UP AROUND THREE OR FOUR O'CLOCK WITH MY LAST CLIENT. OKAY. AND, AND I DO ABOUT TWO OR THREE A DAY. OKAY. ONLY ONE AT A TIME. AND I PUT SUFFICIENT TIME IN BETWEEN EACH ONE, SO THERE'LL NEVER BE A CROSS OF TRAFFIC. ALSO, TO KEEP SANITARY FOR THE COVID ISSUES AND THE SIGNAGE, I WANNA DO THE MINIMAL REQUIRED BY LAW AS TO NOT BE OFFENSIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT ALSO FOLLOWING THE T D L R PROTOCOL. OKAY. WHICH I BELIEVE I CAN EITHER HAVE A SMALL SIGN ON THE SIDE GATE, WHICH I WILL HAVE A BEAUTIFUL GATE BUILT IN WITH A LOCK, AND I WILL HAVE, UM, CAMERAS AND SECURITY ALL THE WAY AROUND. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA THAT ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS AND THEN JUST, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A CONCERN WITH REGARDS TO NEIGHBORS, UH, EXPRESSING CONCERN OVER PARKING. AND SO AGAIN, YOU COMMITTED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO PARKING IN, IN THE STREET. THERE WILL NEVER BE A CLIENT OF MINE PARK IN THE STREET. NOT ONCE. I WILL NOT ALLOW IT. IT WILL BE IN MY DRIVEWAY ONLY. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND CHAIR, THIS IS STAFF. IF I COULD ALSO CHIME IN. YES. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS RULE. NEVER ALLOW MORE THAN ONE CHAIR AT A TIME. SO YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE LIMITED TO ONE CUSTOMER AT A TIME. AND, UH, THE SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS IS ONLY ONE SQUARE FOOT THAT'S ALLOWED. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR PROVIDING THAT INFO TO US. UH, WERE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? UH, DELMER, COMMISSIONER DELMER, UM, ARE, ARE YOU A PART OF THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION? DID I SEE A LETTER IN THERE FROM A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION? WE HAVE A VOLUNTARY HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION AND MY C P A WHO WAS ALSO AN ATTORNEY, I WENT TO HIM BEFORE I EVEN FILED FOR THIS, UH, PERMIT. AND HE SAID THAT THEY HAD NO BEARING ON IT BECAUSE IT WAS A VOLUNTARY, SO IT'S A VOLUNTARY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND, AND NOT A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. IT'S A VOLUNTARY, IT'S $50 A YEAR AND IT'S VOLUNTARY. UM, INTERESTING. BUT THEY DID NOT SET, YEAH, IT'S, IT'S STRANGE HOW THEY SET IT UP. BUT, UH, HE SAID BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT WAS SET UP THAT THERE WOULD BE NO ISSUE WITH THE HOMEOWNERS. AND THE HOMEOWNERS THEMSELVES ACTUALLY DID APPROVE A SALON ABOUT SIX YEARS AGO, UH, FOR A, UH, WHAT HIS NAME HERE, UH, GEORGE STEADY AT 1 3 7 3 1 CEDAR CANYON ALSO. WELL, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY NEXT QUESTION. OH, SORRY. GO AHEAD. I APOLOGIZE. OH, NO, THAT'S OKAY. I WAS DONE. I MEAN, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY NEXT QUESTION. IS THAT AGAINST THEIR RULES TO, TO HAVE A BUSINESS, UM, IN YOUR HOME? OKAY. NO, DOES NOT. THANK YOU. BECAUSE HE'S ALREADY ALLOWED IT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. AND I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION FOR STAFFORD. UH, BEHIND THE PROPERTY. IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE RIGHT OF WAY CALLED, UH, VOLER ROAD. IS THAT, IS THAT PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY? WHAT THAT IS, IS THE, UM, THE HARBERGER PARK IS BEHIND MY NEIGHBORHOOD. OKAY. SO VOLCKER IS AN OLD ROAD THAT HAS BEEN SINCE CLOSED AND GATED OFF. SO IT'S USED AS AN ALLEYWAY BY THE CITY TO GET BACK TO DO WORK IN THE, UM, CREEK, GREENWAY AREA. OKAY. SO THERE'S NOBODY BEHIND ME. OKAY. I WAS, I WAS SENT, I WAS STAFF. YEAH, IT'S THE STAFF. GO ANSWER. UM, SO IT IS LOOKS TO BE LIKE A PAPER STREET. IT'S NOT A, UH, PAVED ROADWAY. UH, SO IT LOOKS JUST LIKE CITY RIGHT OF WAY, BUT JUST NEVER HAS BEEN, UH, PAVED OVER. I WAS ONLY WONDERING IF IT WAS A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE WOULD, WOULD PARK AND TAKE AWAY FROM STREET PARK. OH, NO, NO, NO. IT'S SHADED OFF. THERE ARE NO VEHICLES ALLOWED THERE. OKAY. ARE ONLY CD VEHICLES FOR MAINTENANCE IN THE PARK. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS, UM, I'LL GO AHEAD [03:05:01] AND, UH, GIVE YOU THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A CLOSING STATEMENT BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC UNIT. ALL RIGHT. HOPE SO. GONNA, YEAH. SO IF YOU, IF YOU HAVE ANY, UH, REMARKS YOU'D LIKE TO ADD BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE, UM, PLEASE DO SO. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU GUYS WEIGH IN THAT, UH, CHRISTINE ASH AND BETH MORRIS, BOTH ARE THE TWO PEOPLE WHO WENT AGAINST ME. AND I DO BELIEVE THAT A BIG CHUNK OF THE REASON THEY WENT AGAINST ME IS BECAUSE THEY TRIED TO SUE ANGIE AND THEY HARASSED HER AND HASSLED HER. AND THEY CAME AND THEY KNOCKED ON MY DOOR AND THEY SAID, WE'RE TIRED OF HER STUFF. WE'RE DOG BARKS. WE WANT YOU TO JOIN OUR LOW LAWSUIT AGAINST HER. AND I SAID, NO, I CAN'T DO THAT. I HAVE NOT WITNESSED ANYTHING THAT YOU GUYS ARE TELLING ME SHE'S DONE. SO I DECLINED AND I REMAINED FRIENDS WITH HER, AND NOW I BELIEVE THEY'RE RETALIATING AGAINST ME. OKAY. BUT I HAVE FOUR OR FIVE OTHER PEOPLE ON THE STREET WHO ARE ACTUAL CLIENTS OF MINE WHO COME TO THE SHOP AND ARE THRILLED THAT I'M WANTING TO DO THIS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THIS. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION, PLEASE. CRUZ. UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. OKAY. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 21 0 3 0 0 1 0 3, I MOVE AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRAND SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A ONE OPERATOR BEAUTY BARBERSHOP SITUATED AT 1 3 7 5 9 CEDAR CANYON, APPLICANT BEING PRESIDIO ROOFING, L L C. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT, THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE PURPOSE OF THE REVIEWS, THE REVIEW IS TO ENSURE THAT THE OPERATION OF ONE OPERATOR BEAUTY BARBERSHOP DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE APPLICANT HAS FULFILLED ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR A ONE OPERATOR SHOP AS, AS, AS ESTABLISHED IN THE U D C. AS SUCH, STAFF FINDS THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. PER HOURS OF OPERATION HAS BEEN CONFIRMED AS MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY FROM 9:00 AM TO 5:00 PM THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED. PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SERVED AS IT WILL PROVIDE A VALUABLE SERVICE TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SEE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL BE PRIMARILY USED AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. THE BEAUTY BARBERSHOP WILL OCCUPY ONLY A SMALL PORTION OF THE MAIN STRUCTURES REQUIRED BY THE U D C AND THE FACT THAT A BEAUTY SHOP IS BEING OPERATED FROM THE HOME WILL LIKELY BE IN THIS ARABLE TO PASS A BUYERS AS SUCH, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY OR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS A PROPERTY STILL USED AS RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE PRIMARY USE OF THE DWELLING REMAINS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE GRANTING OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE PURPOSES OF THE RESIDENTIAL SONY DISTRICT AND A MOTION. THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. COMMISSIONER AMANDA, COMMISSIONER CRUZ, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. UH, YES, SIR. I GOING TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THIS. I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD, UH, INCOME FOR THE OWNER AND ALSO IT WOULD IMPROVE THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD MAYBE, UH, THAT WILL GIVE HER A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY ON WITH HER INCOME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MANNA. UM, I, UH, PER PRIOR DIALOGUE THAT WE'VE HAD IN THIS COMMISSION, I THINK THAT SMALL BUSINESS IS A BACKBONE, UH, OF, OF ANY HEALTHY COMMUNITY. SO I WILL BE FLOATING IN SUPPORT OF THIS. I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE, MS. CRUZ, AND I THINK THAT THE COMMITMENTS OF, YOU KNOW, THE, THE MONEY THROUGH FRIDAY NINE TO FIVE, UM, IS UH, APPROPRIATE HERE FOR THIS COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS, UH, BY THE COMMISSIONERS I'M GONNA SUPPORT AS WELL? I MEAN, THE, THE MERE FACT IS THAT, UH, SHE'LL HAVE TO COME UP FOR A REAPPLICATION WITHIN WHAT IS IT, LIKE A TWO YEAR PERIOD OR SO. AND THAT'LL BE A CHANCE FOR, [03:10:01] UH, THE NEIGHBORS TO, TO WEIGH IN IF THERE'S ANY, UH, OPERATING ISSUES WITH IT. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. VERY GOOD POINT. UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE SHALL, UH, MICHELLE, I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THIS. UM, I THINK, UH, SOMETHING THAT REALLY HELPED ME DECIDE IS THAT THIS IS NOT GOING TO, UM, ALTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN ANY WAY. UM, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO BE OBVIOUS. UM, AND, AND I THINK THAT THIS IS A, A GREAT CREATIVE SOLUTION, UM, FOR THIS APPLICANT TO HAVE SOME INCOME, UM, AND TO DO IT SAFELY AND IN A WAY THAT WILL NOT MAKE ANYONE AROUND HER. FANTASTIC. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? UH, HEARING NONE THIS, UH, UH, STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL THOUGH, MICHELLE? I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. FISHER. YES, I CONCUR. MR. BATTLE? YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. AND CHAIR ORIAN. YES. AND I ALSO CONCUR THAT IT MAKES IT UNANIMOUS. UH, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR BEAUTY SALON. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, CHAIR, SOMEBODY STEP IN. MR. BATTLE'S ABOUT TO DROP OFF THE, THE CALL. SO FOR THE RECORD, UH, MR. BATTLE, YOU DROPPING NOW, SIR? YES SIR, I AM. THANK YOU, LEE. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME, SIR. THANK YOU. OKAY, WE'RE DOWN TO 10. LET'S TRY TO GET THROUGH THIS AS QUICK AS WE CAN. . ALRIGHT, NEXT CASE. THIS IS FOR B O A 2 1 0 3 0 0 1, 0 1 FOR THE ADDRESS OF 400 MONTANA AND CANCELED DISTRICT TWO, THE APPLICANT BEING ALBERT QUA. I REQUEST FOR FROM THE MEDIUM DENSITY INFILL DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS FOR A FOOT, FOOT, FOUR FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT PERIMETER REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE NEW STRUCTURE TO BE ONE FOOT AWAY FROM THE SIDE. PROPERTY LINE ZONING IS I D Z TWO MEDIUM DENSITY INFILL ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS. CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MONTANA AND SOUTH MESQUITE STREET. 520 FEET EAST SIDE OF THE ALMA DO. THE APPLICANT WAS REQUESTING A FOUR FOOT SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDING BE WITHIN THE SIDE SETBACK THE PROPERTY RE REZONED TO I DZ TWO WITH THESE PERMITTED FOR TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN JULY OF 2019. AND THAT DEVELOPMENT OF THE TWO DWELLING UNITS WITH THE MAXIMUM FOUR STORES IS ALLOWED ON THIS LOT. THERE'S CURRENTLY A THREE STORY HOUSE BUILT ON THE PROPERTY AND THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO BUILD THE SECOND THREE STORY HOUSE ON OCTOBER 7TH, 2019. TWO VARIANCE REQUESTS TO ALLOW BOTH STRUCTURES TO BE WITHIN THE SIDE. SETBACKS IN THE EAST AND WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE RECEIVED APPROVAL FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE CURRENT REQUEST HAS BEEN FILED FOR THE NORTH SIDE. THE SITE PLAN ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL REFLECTS 1500 SQUARE FOOT AS THE LIVING SPACE FOR BOTH STRUCTURES. BUT THE PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE NEW BUILDING IS 1,820 SQUARE FEET. AND THE APPLICANT IS IN THE PROCESS OF SUBMITTING A MINOR AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR THE NEW SITE PLAN TO SUPPLY WITH CODE REQUIREMENT. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH THE CURRENT THREE STORY STRUCTURE AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES OF SOUTH AND EAST AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. FERMAN RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF VO O A 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT NUMBER ONE, THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE WILL NOT DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. AND TWO, ADEQUATE SPACE TO UTILIZE FOR IN STORM WATER. ONE-OFF MAINTENANCE OF PROPERTY AND MAINTENANCE OF STRUCTURE WITHOUT TRESPASS. WE MAILED 35 NOTICES. YOU'RE IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE ALAMO GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND IS ALBERT FUQUA. ALBERT, UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD BEFORE YOU BEGIN. YES, MY NAME IS ALBERT FUQUA, 400 MONTANA, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 3. [03:15:01] GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD. ALBERT, YOU CAN START. YES, I AM REQUESTING, UM, IF POSSIBLE A VARIANCE FOR, UH, THE BUILDING TO BE, THE STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT WITHIN, UM, WITHIN THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK, WHICH WOULD BE ONE FOOT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON MONTANA, UH, THE PROPERTY LINE ON MONTANA STREET SIDE. UM, AND THAT IS THE REQUEST TO WHICH I'M TRYING TO GAIN FROM THE, THE BOARD TODAY. OKAY. IS THERE, UH, ANY, UH, INFORMATION YOU'D LIKE TO ADD TO, UH, UH, PROVIDE TO JUSTIFY YOUR REQUEST? YES. THE, THE LOT ITSELF WAS, UH, 25 FEET WIDE BY 92 DEEP. UM, SO IT WAS, IT WAS, UH, QUITE A BIT OF DIFFICULTY IN, UH, FORMULATING A PROJECT ON THIS, ON THIS, ON THIS SIZE LOT. BUT, UH, WE WERE ABLE TO DO IT NONETHELESS. AND ESSENTIALLY THE, THE HARDSHIP TO WHICH HAS BEEN BEEN, UM, OR THERE IS, IS ESSENTIALLY KIND OF, UM, AN ORGANIC ONE IN THE SENSE OF THIS IS SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE NON-CONFORMING, UH, LOT SIZE. UM, I DON'T FEEL AS, UM, IF THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED THAT IT WOULD BE, UM, A HARDSHIP OR A, UH, A DIFFICULTY FOR ANYONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE COMMUNITY, UM, ON MONTANA STREET SIDE. UM, IT'S OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A ROAD THERE ON BOTH SIDES AND, UM, I DON'T SEE IT ANY ISSUE, UM, HOPEFULLY, UH, FOR THE VARIANCE TO BE GRANTED ON MONTANA AS IT WAS ON MESQUITE, UH, SIMPLY BECAUSE, UH, THE PROPERTY ABUTS, UM, UH, A PUBLIC STREET OKAY. IN THE SENSE OF FIRE AND SAFETY STUFF. OKAY. UM, STAFF, IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? ARE THERE ANY DOCUMENTS TO READ INTO THE RECORD? THERE IS NONE. OKAY. SO WE'LL OPEN THIS UP TO, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. AND, UM, AND BEFORE WE DO, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT ON THE SITE PLAN IS, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT SAID TWO FEET FROM SOUTH MESQUITE. IS THAT TRUE? THAT'S NOT PART, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE WITH THIS STAFF? NO, NO, NO. UM, IF YOU'RE ASKING ME, UM, I DON'T BELIEVE , NO, I WAS JUST CLARIFYING THE STAFF. 'CAUSE WHEN SOMETIMES WE GET APPLICATIONS FOR, UH, FOR VARIANCES AND THERE MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT IS NOTICED ON A SIDE PLAN THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED AS WELL. SO I JUST WANTED STAFF TO CHIME IN AS WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S A, AN ISSUE AS WELL. SO WE'RE LOOKING INTO IT RIGHT NOW. BUT THIS ONE WENT TO THE BOARD BEFORE AND I BELIEVE IT WAS A FOOT FROM THE SOUTH MESQUITE THAT WAS GRANTED AS WELL AS THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. THIS ONLY CAME UP WHEN THE, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS ACTUALLY RECONFIGURED TO FACE MS. KEITH. THAT'S WHY THE, UM, SETBACK BECAME AN ISSUE ALONG MONTANA. OKAY. WELL JUST KIND OF THINK ABOUT THAT AS A, I'LL MOVE FORWARD THE COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, 'CAUSE THAT'S GONNA BE ONE OF MY QUESTIONS. UH, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS, I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT. UH, CHER? YES, COMMISSIONER, IT APPEARS THAT THERE'S A TREE, UH, ADJOINING THE, A LOT OF ADJOINING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND IT'S A LITTLE AMBIGUOUS TO SEE IF THAT'S ON THE SITE PLAN. CAN YOU ENLIGHTEN ME ON THAT? ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, 400 MONTANA STREET? YES. THE TREE ACTUALLY IS, UM, ACTUALLY ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. IT'S ACTUALLY THE NEIGHBORS PROPERTY SIDE, THE NEIGHBORS TREE, BUT THE BRANCHES COME OVER, UM, TO, TO MY PROPERTY. OKAY. SO THE, IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO SEE ON THAT SITE PLAN. SO ACTUALLY THE TREE IS GREATER THAN 20 FEET BACK, OR CAN WE PULL OUT THE, THE, THAT PICTURE? YEAH, IT LOOK, I SEE YOU COMING. I, I JUST, IT, IT JUST, IT LOOKS, UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE OF THAT. THANK YOU STAFF. IF YOU BRING UP THE GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE, UM, IT DOES SHOW THE, THE STRUCTURE THAT'S, THAT'S A LITTLE FURTHER AWAY FROM, FROM, UM, MONTANA THAT'S BUILT AND IT HAS THE FENCE LINE ESTABLISHED. AND, AND IT, YOU CAN SEE HOW THAT TREE IS JUST ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, UH, IF THAT ALIGNMENT OF THE FENCE IS HELD, SO THAT THAT MAY VISUALLY ANSWER. COMMISSIONER [03:20:01] FISHER'S QUESTION, IS THERE ANY DESIGN WITH ROOT SYSTEMS OR IS THERE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT TREE BEING RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE POP A STREET VIEW ON MAN MONTANA? I SEE IT. OH YEAH, THERE YOU GO. UH, IS THAT QUESTION FOR ME? I I APOLOGIZE FOR THE SILENCE. UH, YEAH, THAT'S A, I I MEAN, DID TAKE IT INTO CONSIDERATION TO TURN IT OFF. YEAH, I WASN'T SURE IT WAS. I APOLOGIZE. UM, THAT'S QUITE ALL RIGHT. THE TREE IS THERE. UH, THE TREE IS IS IS THERE ON THE NEIGHBORING, IT'S ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THE BRANCHES GO OVER TO OUR PROPERTY. UM, WE HAVE TO DO A, WHAT THEY CALL A, ESSENTIALLY LIKE A ROOT SHIELD FOR THE RIGHT FOUNDATION. OKAY. ON THAT SIDE, ON, ON THAT BACK, UH, CONCRETE BEAM IF YOU WANNA CALL THAT'S IN THE GROUND, UH, HAS TO BE DUG DEEPER. THAT HAS TO BE DUG DEEPER. UM, THAT TREE RIGHT THERE, I WANT TO SAY IS PROBABLY AT LEAST LIKE 30 OR 36 INCHES IN DIAMETER, I WANNA SAY MAYBE MM-HMM. , SO IT'S A PRETTY OLD TREE. SO THE ROOT SYSTEM IS PRETTY, IT'S PRETTY FAR DOWN AND DUG DOWN. UM, PRIOR TO, UH, THE ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY, THE TREE HAD BEEN, UM, CHOPPED A COUPLE OF TIMES BY, UM, ITS PREVIOUS OWNERS. AND, UM, WE ESSENTIALLY ASSURED, OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT ON OUR PROPERTY, SO WE CAN'T, YOU KNOW, TOUCH THE TREE OR DO ANYTHING TO IT. BUT WE ARE, UM, DESIGNING OR IT HAS BEEN DESIGNED, UH, WITH ENGINEERING, UH, FOR THE FOUNDATION TO BE, UH, TO BE BUILT WITHIN THAT AREA. UM, WE ALSO WOULD NOTE THAT THE ACTUAL SLAB IS, UH, IT SHOULD PROBABLY, IT END UP PROBABLY BEING SOMEWHERE AROUND SEVEN FEET. WELL, NO, NO, ACTUALLY NO, I TAKE THAT BACK. NO FIVE, ABOUT FIVE FEET. APOLOGIZE. THERE'S FIVE STEPBACK OBVIOUSLY RIGHT THERE. FIVE FEET AWAY FROM MORE OR LESS THE, THE, THE LEAST FIVE FEET FROM THE TREE. THE TREE, UM, ABOUT THE BRANCH. I MEAN, UM, TRUMP. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, STAFF, DID YOU, UH, HAVE ANY, UH, RESOLUTION TO THE SETBACK QUESTION I POSED EARLIER? BECAUSE THE SITE PLAN LOOKS, AND THE STATEMENT JUST MADE BY THE APPLICANT, THEY'RE GONNA STAY FIVE FEET OFF THE REAR. UH, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO, THEY'RE DOING ONE FOOT OFF MONTANA AND THEN TWO FEET OFF OF MESQUITE. UM, YES, ACTUALLY THE VARIANCE IS APPROVED FOR THE SIDES THAT, UH, THE SIDE THAT IS ON A GATE WAS ACTUALLY ONE INCH. UH, SO THIS SITE PLAN IS, THEY'RE ACTUALLY A LITTLE FURTHER BACK THAN THE VARIANCE THEY WERE APPROVED FOR. OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SURE. UM, IS IT, IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS, I'D LIKE TO OFFER THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A CLOSING REMARK BEFORE WE, UH, ENTERTAIN A, A MOTION. I, UH, UH, I, I HAVE NO, NO MORE. NO, I HAVE NO MORE, UH, REMARKS, SIR. AS OF RIGHT NOW, SIR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO, WITH THAT IN MIND, I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THIS. IF THERE'S A, UH, ANYONE WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TEAL, UH, COMMISSIONER TEAL REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A TWO ZERO DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 1. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FROM THE MEDIUM DENSITY INFILL DEVELOPMENT I D Z TWO DESIGN STANDARDS FOR A FOUR FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT PERIMETER REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW NEW STRUCTURE TO BE ONE FOOT AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 400 MONTANA STREET, APPLICANT BEING ALBERT FUQUA. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE HEARD HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. IN THIS CASE, REDUCING THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE TO ONE FOOT WOULD LEAVE ADEQUATE SPACE FOR LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE AND FIRE SPREAD SEPARATION. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITTLE RE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. BY CREATING DIFFICULTIES IN REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPABLE SPACE ON THE SITE, THE APPLICANT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AS INTENDED. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE, RATHER THAN THE STRICT LETTER OF THE LAW, THE INTENT OF THE SETBACK LIMITATION TO PREVENT FIRE SPREAD, ALLOW ADEQUATE SPACE FOR MAINTENANCE AND ENCOURAGE PROPER STORMWATER DRAINAGE. ALL INTENTS OF THIS LAW WILL BE OBSERVED IF APPROVED. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE AN OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS [03:25:01] LOCATED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT PERMIT A USE NOT AUTHORIZED WITHIN THE DISTRICT. IT IS LOCATED IN FIVE. SUCH A VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE OR ALTER THE USE OR CHARACTER OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SPECIFICALLY, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT PLACE THE STRUCTURE OUT OF CHARACTER WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER, OF, OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE WAS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THIS PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER AND IS NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE. DUE TO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES OF THE MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENT, THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPABLE SPACE IS REDUCED. END OF MOTION THERE. SECOND. UH, ANYONE LIKE TO SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. ORMAN? SECOND. OKAY. COMMISSIONER RAGMAN. . OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER THIEL, PLEASE LEAD THE, LEAD THE DISCUSSION. UH, YES, I, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. UH, I, I RECALL WHEN, UH, MR. KOA WAS HERE LAST TIME. UM, VERY, VERY TINY SITE. LOT OF RESTRICTIONS. UM, I JUST, UH, I THINK INFILL DEVELOPMENT IS, IS GREAT. AND, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST HAPPY THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO IDEALLY HELP HIM OUT IN THIS SITUATION AND HAVE A INCOME PRODUCING PROPERTY THERE AGAIN. GREAT. UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? YES, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'RE FACING A HOUSING AFFORDABILITY CRISIS IN OUR CITY, AND WE NEED TO LOOK OUTSIDE THE BOX AND COME UP WITH CREATIVE IDEAS TO CREATE MORE HOUSING. AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THEM. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. FANTASTIC. UH, ANY OTHER REMARKS FROM COMMISSIONERS? SHELL, UH, COMMISSIONER, SHELL, UM, I AM NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION. I THINK THAT THIS, UM, LAW IS GETTING REALLY FULL AND WITH THAT VARIANCE IT'S GOING TO, I DO THINK IT WILL HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I DO THINK IT'S OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THIS AREA. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? HEARING NONE? UH, I, I DON'T TAKE ISSUE WITH THIS 'CAUSE HE'S HOLDING THE FIVE FEET. UM, FROM WHAT I CONSIDER THE, FROM THE ABUTTING PROPERTY, UH, I DON'T TAKE AN ISSUE WITH THE, THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE ON THIS SMALL OF A LOT BEING AS CLOSE TO THE PUBLIC STREET SINCE THESE STREETS DO LOOK LIKE THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT SUBSTANDARD, UH, FROM THE AERIAL PICTURE. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION. STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MICHELLE. UH, NO. I DO NOT SUPPORT MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE POINT IS THE FACT I SUPPORTED MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA, I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR WITH FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. FISHER. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. BATTLE. I, I APOLOGIZE. UH, MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN. UH, I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT WITH A VOTE OF SEVEN TO THREE MOTION, IT FAILS. UH, UH, WILL THE APPLICANT, UH, MR. QUA, PLEASE GET LIST STAFF DISCUSS YOUR OPTIONS. UM, NEXT CASE PLEASE. OKAY, FOR BO, A 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 5 FOR THE ADDRESS OF 1 2 0 7 WEST HUTCHINS PLACE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE, APPLICANT BEING RENEE LU ENTENTE HAS A REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE ONE FEET WITH OVERHANG ONE INCHES PER WAY FROM THE SIDE. PROPERTY LINE ZONING IS MULTI-FAMILY CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEAR THE CORNER OF WEST HUTCHINS PLACE AND LOCKWOOD AVENUE. THERE IS CURRENTLY A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON THE PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO DECIDE SETBACK FOR A NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CARPORT THAT IS ATTACHED TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. THE APPLICANT RECEIVED A CODE VIOLATION FOR BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT AND HAS STOPPED WORKING ON THE CARPORT. THE POSTS ARE ONE FOOT AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE WITH OVERHANG OF CARPORT BEING ONE INCH FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CUT THE OVERHANG FURTHER BACK AND PLACE GUTTERS TO MITIGATE DRAINAGE. [03:30:01] THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ALONG WITH CARPORT, THE CARPORT AND THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE MEASUREMENTS, THE OVERHANG MEASUREMENTS, AND THE CARPORT ATTACHED. AND ADJACENT PROPERTY STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF THE REQUESTED FOUR FOOT AND FIVE INCH VARIANCE TO THE FIVE FOOT MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE SEVEN INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF A TWO FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE IN BO O A 2 1 0 3 0 0 0. UH, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE CARPORT HAS A WIDTH OF 15 FEET AND EIGHT INCHES. THERE IS A ONE FOOT SPACE BETWEEN THE POSTS AND DRIVEWAY, AND THE ADJUSTED WIDTH OF THE CARPORT WILL BE 13 FEET AND THREE INCHES. MAILED 17 NOTICES, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION WITHIN THE AREA AND THE APPLICANT. RENEE LA FUENTE IS ON THE LINE. RENEE, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD BEFORE YOU BEGIN. UH, RENEE LA FUENTE. 12 7 25 APPLEWHITE ROAD, SAN ANTONIO TECH 7 8 2 2 4. UM, YEAH, KIND OF EXACTLY WHAT THE GENTLEMAN JUST SAID, THAT WE ARE PROPOSING JUST TO CUT ALL THE OVERHANG COMPLETELY ALL AND JUST PUT GUTTERS UP ALONG THE EDGE OF, OF THAT OVERHANG JUST SO WE WON'T GET ANY WATER TOWARDS THE NEIGHBORS. UH, I WAS INVOLVED IN THE DESIGN OF BOTH OF THESE PROPERTIES. THAT'S THE RE REASON WHY I WAS, UH, CONTRACTED TO HELP 'EM OUT GET THIS VARIANCE. SO I DID THE ORIGINAL DESIGN FOR BOTH HOUSES AND FOR THE BUILDER. THEY'RE TWO NEW HOMES THAT RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER. AND THE NEIGHBOR DOES NOT HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH, WITH ANY OF THE CARPORT. UH, IF WORST CASE SCENARIO, I, I, I, I BELIEVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDED, UM, MOVING IT OVER A FOOT. IF WORST CASE SCENARIO, THAT WOULD BE THE CASE. WE'RE, WE'RE ABLE TO DO THAT, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE HOPING KEEP IT AT THE ONE FOOT AND COMPLETELY REMOVE ALL, ANY OVERHANG AND, AND PUT GUTTERS UP ALONG THE WHOLE AREA. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OKAY, I HAVE A QUESTION. UH, FOR, FOR STAFF FIRST, UH, AS ADVERTISED, THIS WAS FOR A FOUR FOOT VARIANCE ON THE FIVE FOOT PERIMETER TO ALLOW A NEW STRUCTURE ONE FOOT AWAY WITH, UH, FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UH, CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, I SAW, I THOUGHT I SAW IN YOUR DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION THAT THERE WAS A, UH, A SEVEN INCH DEVIATION. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF I'M READING THIS CORRECTLY, BUT GO TO THE, OH, OKAY. ARE YOU ASKING OKAY, STAFF, RIGHT? I'M SORRY. YES. YES, SIR. YEAH, THE OFFER RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE FOR A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE, UH, FIVE FOOT. AND, AND HOW DOES THAT ADDRESS ANY OVERHANG OF YOUR GUTTERS? EVERYTHING WOULD'VE TO BE TWO FEET. YEP. OKAY. UH, THAT'S ALL I HAD. SO I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT THERE. AND SO ON, ON THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS PROVIDED, UH, THERE'S A DIMENSION OF, UH, 11 FOOT WIDE FOR THE CARPORT THAT EXTENDS OFF THE EXISTING HOME. AND THEN YOU HAVE YOUR ONE FOOT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, UM, IS THE, THE CARPORT LOOKS LIKE IT'S, IT'S ATTACHED DIRECTLY TO THE HOME. AND YOU'RE PUTTING FOUR BY FOUR POSTS ON THE OUTER SIDE, SIR. RIGHT. OKAY. AND SO WHAT, UH, CURRENTLY, WHAT IS IT CLEAR WIDTH FROM THE WALL TO THE, UH, SIDE OF THE POST? WHAT DO YOU GOT IN THAT, IN THERE AT THIS POINT IN TIME? WELL, YOU KNOW, ON THE DESIGN WHEN I DID THE SITE PLAN, BUT YOU HAVE SIX FOOT SIX ON THE OTHER SIDE JUST TO NOT PROTECT THE SOFFIT ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE. MM-HMM. , SO THE HOUSE IS 30 FOOT, SO WE HAVE, UH, A TOTAL OF 36 6. SO WHATEVER IS REMAINING SHOULD BE 13 SIX CLEAR, UH, CLEAR BETWEEN THE POST. I KNOW, I KNOW. YEAH, NO, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE FENCE NOW TO THE POST, IT'S GONNA BE 12 SIX. OKAY. AND THAT'S TO THE INSIDE PART OF THE POST. UH, BECAUSE I, THE STAFF IS ASKING FOR, UH, EVERYTHING TO SHIFT OVER, UM, YOU KNOW, [03:35:01] A COUPLE FEET LOOKS LIKE, AND IF THAT WERE THE CASE, YOU'D 11 AND A HALF WIDE CLEAR. RIGHT. JUST BARELY JUST TO GET A VEHICLE THROUGH YEAH. WITH MIRRORS AND STUFF. YEAH, THAT'D, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE BARE MINIMUM. YES. AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE IT WHERE IT'S AT AND, AND JUST CUT ALL THE SOFFIT ALONG, LIKE I SAID. BUT IF S IS RECOMMENDING THAT, WE COULD PROBABLY DO THAT, JUST MOVE IT OVER A FOOT MORE. SO IT'D BE TWO FEET AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. AND THEN, AND THEN TWO OTHER QUESTIONS. SO THE, THE, THE BUDDING PROPERTY ON THE, ON THE CARPORT SIDE, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE THEIR PARKINGS IN THE REAR AND THEY PROVIDED A, A, A SMALL COVERED AREA WHERE THEY COULD POTENTIALLY PARK A CAR UNDER IT. I'M TRYING TO, UM, ASCERTAIN IF THEY'RE, IF THEY'RE, THEY HAVE AN INTENT TO, TO BUILD ANYTHING BETWEEN YOUR CARPORT AND THEIR EXISTING HOME. THAT'S ONE QUESTION. AND THE SECOND QUESTION IS, DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY, UH, EMAILS OR LETTERS FROM THE NEIGHBOR SAYING, UH, THAT THEY'RE OKAY WITH WHAT YOU'RE DOING? OR IS IT JUST A, A VERBAL CONVERSATION? NO, THE GENTLEMAN PERSONALLY KNOWS 'EM. AND HE TOLD ME, LOOK, I'VE TALKED TO THE NEIGHBORS AND THIS IS WHAT I'VE DISCUSSED WITH HIM. UH, I DIDN'T GET ANYTHING IN WRITING FOR MY, I COULD, YOU KNOW, I COULD'VE, I MEAN, I JUST DIDN'T, I DIDN'T THINK OF IT. 'CAUSE I TALKED TO STAFF AND THEY SAID, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING. SO WE SAID, WELL, I GUESS WORST CASE SCENARIO WOULD MOVE IT OVER A FOOT. SO OKAY. HE KIND OF WANTS TO KEEP IT RIGHT THERE AND JUST CUT. HE GOES, I'LL CUT IT ALL OFF AND I'LL PUT IT A, A SS I MEAN, I'LL PUT A A A GUTTER ALL THE WAY ALONG THAT WAY. THERE'S NO WATER TO THE NEIGHBOR SIDE AT ALL. YEAH. WELL, I, I'M BRINGING THIS UP BECAUSE WHEN I GO, WHEN I GO TO GOOGLE EARTH, IT APPEARS THAT THERE'S SOME BASE MATERIAL THAT MAY HAVE BEEN LAID BETWEEN THE ACTUAL, YOUR NEIGHBORING HOME AND THE FENCE LINE. AND I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THEY HAVE AN INTENT TO ALSO, OR THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF ATTEMPTING TO BUILD SOME SORT OF A COVER THAT WOULD BE BETWEEN YOUR CARPORT IN THEIR HOME. I'M JUST, NO, NO, THAT'S WAY IN THE BACK. THESE, THESE LOTS ARE REALLY LONG. I, I SEE. EXACTLY. OKAY. JUST PULLED IT UP IT'S WAY IN THE BACK. 'CAUSE THIS, THIS, THIS LOT. I WAS INVOLVED AND ALSO WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF IT. OKAY. THERE WAS NO WAY TO PUT A DRIVEWAY BECAUSE OF THE, OF THE SIDE OBSTRUCTIONS. WHEN YOU PULL UP TO THE STOP SIGN, THERE'S A STOP SIGN RIGHT THERE MM-HMM. . SO YOU COULDN'T PUT A DRIVEWAY EVEN IF YOU WANTED TO ON THAT FIRST HOUSE. SO WE HAD TO PUT THE DRIVEWAY IN THE BACK. OKAY. BECAUSE THEN YOU PULL OUT AND YOU WERE WITHIN, I GUESS, 50 FEET OF THE, OF THE STOP SIGN AND THEN YOU COULD CAUSE AN ACCIDENT. SO THEY TOLD NO, NO DRIVEWAY'S THERE. OKAY. YOU HAVE TO PUT IT IN THE BACK. SO, AND THEN, AND THEN FINALLY, IF YOU WERE TO, IF YOU WERE TO CUT DOWN ALL THE SOFFIT OF THE, OF THE OVERHANG, YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD BE HOW FAR AWAY FROM THE, UH, PROPERTY LINE? TWO FEET. TWO FEET? NO, RIGHT NOW. ONE FOOT. ONE FOOT. RIGHT NOW, THE WAY IT IS RIGHT NOW, IT'S ONE FOOT. BUT IF YOU CROP THE SOFFIT, YOU'D BE AT TWO? NO, IF WE CUT THE SOFFIT WE'D BE AT RIGHT NOW, SHE'S SAYING, OR THE STAFF IS SAYING IT'S ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE PROPER LINE WITH THE SOFFIT, BUT WE, WE TAKE THE SOFFIT COMPLETELY OFF, SO IT WOULD BE ONE FOOT AWAY. WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT WITH IS WITH GUTTER, I'M TRYING TO YEAH. WITH GUTTER. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD? ALL RIGHT. SO, UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'M GONNA, UH, ASK FOR A MOTION AND I'D LIKE, UH, WHOEVER MAKES IT TO BE AWARE THAT THAT STAFF IS ASKING FOR, UM, A, A TWO, UH, TO ALLOW UP TO TWO FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT IF HE CUTS A SSA DOWN AND ADDS GUTTERS, HE'LL BE ONE FOOT OFF THE PROPERTY LINE. SO IS THERE A MOTION, PLEASE? ANYONE? NOBODY. MANNA UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA, UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 5:00 AM MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR A, UM, FOUR FOOT, LET'S SEE IF I'M GONNA READ THIS RIGHT HERE. YEAH. FOUR FOOT VARIANCE, UH, FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT WITH, UM, WITH NO OVERHANG, I GUESS FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 2 0 7 WEST HUTCHINS PLACE. APPLICANT BEING BRENE, UH, LAPUENTE BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR, FOR THE SIDE SETBACK, ENCROACHMENT OF THE CARPORT IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. AS THE APPLICANT HAS ENOUGH SEPARATION FROM NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES AND WILL ALLOW WATER DRAINAGE ONTO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, THE LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT IN ANY SPECIAL CONDITION THAT IF ENFORCED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF SPACE FOR THE WIDTH OF THE CARDBOARD REQUIRES IT TO BE BUILT INTO [03:40:01] THE SIDE SETBACK. THE GRANTING BY GRANTING THE THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS IS PROVIDE SPACING BETWEEN NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES. THE APPLICANT WILL STILL MAINTAIN SPACE BETWEEN STRUCTURES FOR THE VARIANCE, WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PERFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE SIDE AND REAR SIDE SETBACKS, UH, DOES NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIAL BY SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX, APPLY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH A VARIANCE TO SIDE IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER AND ARE NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE. THE CHARACTER OF REDUCED SIDE SETBACKS DUE TO BUILDING ORIENTATION WITHIN THE DISTRICT IS UNIFORM, LEAVING LITTLE ROOM FOR PROPER BUILDING SETBACKS. AND THE MOTION, IS THERE A SECOND? HEARING? NO SECOND TE TEAL. SECOND. OKAY. TE'S GOT THE SECOND RIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONER AMANDA, PLEASE LEAVE THE DISCUSSION. SO, UM, I WOULD BE OPEN TO A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IF I DIDN'T READ THAT CORRECTLY PER KIND OF THE, THE DIALOGUE THAT WE HAD WITH REGARDS TO THE GUTTERING THAT I GOT A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED. AND SO HOPEFULLY I CAPTURED THAT CORRECTLY. AND IF I DIDN'T, UH, PLEASE LEMME KNOW, SIR. UM, OUTSIDE OF THAT, I THINK THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CUT IT BACK AS FAR AS WE CAN, UM, WITHOUT SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTING THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT. UM, UH, THE CURRENT PROJECT AS IT IS, UH, IS WHY IT IS THAT I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS READ. OKAY. AND, AND, UH, I JUST WANTED TO ADD COMMISSIONER MANNA THAT EVEN THE STAFF'S ALTERNATE MOTION CALLED FOR TWO FOOT WITH AN OVERHANG, ONE FOOT ONE INCHES. I MEAN, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, THE MOTION YOU READ WAS FOR A, UM, A ONE FOOT GROWTH SETBACK, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE EVERYTHING OVERHANG POST. IS THAT TRUE? YES. OKAY. SO, AND THIEL, UM, MR. THIEL? YES, SIR. UH, I THINK, UH, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MR. MANNA. UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE REDUCTION THAT, THAT HE'S PROPOSING THAT WAS PROPOSED, I THINK STILL MAINTAINS PERSONALITY, UM, WITHOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, SACRIFICING SAFETY. FANTASTIC. UH, ANY OTHER, ANY, UH, STATEMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, I'LL CLOSE THIS OFF WITH SAYING THAT, UH, THE MOTION THAT WAS READ IS, IS BASICALLY WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING EXCEPT THAT THERE'S, WE'RE GIVING ANOTHER INCH, UH, TO THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNER BECAUSE, UH, HIS TESTIMONY EXPRESSED THAT IT WOULD BE A ONE FOOT, HE ONE FOOT WOULD, WOULD BE WHAT WOULD REMAIN AFTER HE WOULD ADD GUT. SO, AND, AND I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS READ BY COMMISSIONER MANNA, UM, STAFF, IF YOU COULD PLEASE TAKE A, UH, ROLL CALL VOTE. MICHELLE. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. TEAL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MENA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DOMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. FISHER. I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UNANIMOUS, UH, MOTION PASSES. UH, BEFORE WE MOVE TO THE NEXT CASE, DOES ANYBODY NEED A SHORT BREAK? AND CAN WE PRESS ON AND, ALL RIGHT, LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE. OKAY, THIS IS FOR BO O A 21 0 3. 0 0 1 0 6 FOR THE ADDRESS OF 2 6 3 5 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN, APPLICANT IS JUAN SANCHEZ. YOUR VARIANCE REQUEST FROM THE JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN REGARDING YOUR REGULATIONS TO ALLOW, ONE, THE CARPORT MATERIAL TO BE METAL. TWO, TO ALLOW THE CARPORT TO BE WITHIN THE 10 FOOT STRUCTURE SEPARATION. AND THREE, A THREE FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE STEPBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE ONE FEET AND FIVE INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND FOUR, THE CARPORT ROOF TO BE FLAT. ZONING IS [03:45:01] RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. OKAY, SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS MID-BLOCK, LOCATED BETWEEN MORNING GLORY AND ST. CLOUD FACING THE CEILING CHANNEL WHERE THE MULTI-PHASE FLOOD PLAN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT IS IN PROGRESS. THE APPLICANT IS SE REQUESTING VARIANCES FROM THE JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ATTACHED CARDBOARD. THE APPLICANT BUILT A METAL CARPORT TO BE ONE FEET AND FIVE INCHES AWAY FROM THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE WITHOUT OBTAINING THE PERMIT. THE ATTACHED CARPORT REQUIRES TO BE MADE OF THE SAME BUILDING MATERIAL, MAINTAINING THE SAME SCALE AND ROOF LINE AS THE MAIN STRUCTURE DIVIDED BY THE NCD SEVEN REQUIREMENTS DURING SITE VISITS, STAFF RECOGNIZED WOOD BEING THE PRIMARY BUILDING MATERIAL FOR A PITCHED ROOF DWELLING UNIT. WHILE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A FLAT ROOF METAL STRUCTURE, THE NEIGHBOR'S GARAGE HAS BEEN BUILT ON THE PROPERTY LINE AND ITS OVERHANG IS WITHIN THE PROPERTY. THE CLOSENESS OF THE CARPORT AND ADJACENT GARAGE PUTS BOTH NEIGHBORS WITHIN THE 10 FOOT STRUCTURE SEPARATION AND LEAVES LESS THAN ONE FOOT DISTANCE IN BETWEEN BYLINING THAT NCD SEVEN GUIDELINE. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THE CARPORT. THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, ADJACENT PROPERTY ON THE WEST SIDE, SUBJECT PROPERTY AND MEASUREMENTS, MEASUREMENTS, CARPORT, CARPORT ATTACHED TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF. GOVERNMENT'S DENIAL THE SPECIAL, UH, VARIANCE IN BO O A 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 6 BASED ON FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS. NUMBER ONE, THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN REGULATIONS OF THE JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT. TWO, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE CREATE CONFLICT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAUSED BY INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT AND DISTRACTS THE UNIFORMITY AND COHESION OF THE COMMUNITY. AND THREE, THERE'S LACK OF ADEQUATE SPACE, PREVENT STORM WATER RUNOFF, MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPERTY AND MAINTENANCE OF STRUCTURE WITHOUT TRESPASS, WE MAIL 22 NOTICES. YOU'RE IN FAVOR, YOU'RE IN OPPOSITION AND JEFFERSON HEIGHTS. UH, JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS AN OPPOSITION. AND THE APPLICANT JUAN SANCHEZ, IS ON THE LINE. ONE, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE YOU BEGIN AND PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF. I HELLO? YES, MR. SANCHEZ IS JUAN. YES, SIR. MY, MY NAME IS JUAN SANCHEZ. UH, I LIVE AT 26 35, UM, MULBERRY, UH, AVENUE. AND I, I BUILD A, A CORE PORT. UM, WELL, I DIDN'T DO IT, SO I HIRED SOMEBODY TO BUILD A CORE PORT 'CAUSE OF, UM, IN CASE OF, UH, DAMAGE BY THE HIGH WINDS OF HELL AND ALL THAT STUFF THAT HAS HAPPENED BEFORE AND DAMAGE, UH, A NEW CAR THAT I HAD BEFORE. SO, UH, THAT'S WHY, UM, I DECIDED TO HAVE A CORE PORT BUILT. AND SINCE IT WAS ALREADY BUILT, I, I WISH I COULD, UM, KEEP THE CORE PORT. 'CAUSE IT'S NOT, IT'S METAL AND IT'S NOT, UH, GONNA BURN DOWN THAT IT'S GONNA AFFECT THE OTHER PEOPLE NEXT DOOR TO, TO, TO THE FENCE WHERE IT'S BUILT, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE OVERLAPPING A LITTLE BIT ON, ON THE SIDE OF MY FENCE, YOU KNOW. BUT I JUST WANTED TO SEE, UH, UH, 'CAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF IT WHEN, ABOUT THE, THE HOUSE, THEY DIDN'T GIVE ME THE JEFFERSON, UM, ASSOCIATION OF HOUSING OR HOUSING ASSOCIATION. THEY DIDN'T, UM, GAVE ME A LIST OF WHAT I THINK THAT I COULD DO OR NOT DO. SO I JUST WENT, HAD AND BUILT, UH, HAD, HAD IT BUILT. AND THAT'S, UM, I DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA HARM NOBODY, BUT IT'S LIKE A DEMOCRATIC ISSUE. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S, UH, I THINK THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO, UH, SAY, AND I'LL PROBABLY LET YOU ALL DECIDE TO, UM, BE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, AT THE END OF THIS, UH, UM, WHATEVER, UM, COURT ORDER OR WHATEVER IT IS, UH, THE HEARING, YOU KNOW, NOT A COURT ORDER YEAH. OF THIS HEARING, UNLESS YOU ALL DECIDE WHAT COULD BE, UH, MORE CONVENIENT, I GUESS. UM, ARE YOU THERE? YES. UH, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? UH, FOR MI MR. SANCHEZ? UH, QUESTION? YEAH. YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I'M SORRY. OKAY. SO, UM, FIRST QUESTION, I HAVE THIS FOR CITY. [03:50:01] SO WITH REGARDS TO THE N D C GUIDELINES, ARE THOSE BINDING, UM, WITH REGARDS TO, AS, YOU KNOW, IF WE MAKE, UH, I GUESS, UM, PHYSICIANS HERE AS FAR AS A VARIANCE, IF WE LEAVE OUT ONE OR TWO, UH, UH, WOULD THE N D C GUIDELINE DIRECT WHAT IT IS, SAY, MATERIAL AND OR DISTANCES OR WHAT HAVE YOU, UM, UH, THAT THE, UH, OWNER HERE CAN HAVE WITH REGARDS TO THE STRUCTURE? SO THAT'S THE PURVIEW OF THE, THE COMMISSION TO GRANT A VARIANCE FOR ALL OF THEM, PORTIONS OF THEM. IT'S, IT'S ENTIRELY YOUR CALL, BUT THE STANDARDS ARE, UM, WELL WITHIN THE U D C, THEY ARE ADOPTED BY, BY COUNCIL. UM, AS FAR AS THAT GOES, IT, IT'S REALLY GONNA COME DOWN TO WHAT DIRECTION Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO TAKE. WELL, SPECIFICALLY, LIKE IF, IF IT IS THAT, UM, IF THE MU IS RED SUCH THAT IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE METAL ROOF SINCE THEIR N D C DOES NOT SUPPORT HAVING A METAL ROOF OR LIKE STRUCTURE, THAT, THAT WOULD IMPLY THAT IT'S NOT SUPPORTED, UM, UM, THAT WOULD NOT BE PERMISSIBLE PER THE N D C. RIGHT. SO THE N C D BASICALLY LIMITS THE TYPE OF MATERIAL FOR THE ROOFING, ALSO THE ROOF PITCH. UM, IT HAS REQUIREMENTS FOR THE 10 FOOT SEPARATION. THOSE ARE PART OF THE N C D. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE, THAT'S WHY STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL, UM, BECAUSE OF THE STANDARDS. HOWEVER, AGAIN, IT IS YOUR PURVIEW IF, IF YOU DECIDE TO APPROVE PORTIONS OF THEM, BUT THEY ARE PART OF THE REGULATIONS. UM, THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE ALSO FOR CITY IS THAT THE NEIGHBOR, YOU KNOW, IF, IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, HAS BUILT OVER THE PROPERTY LINE OR HAS BUILT, YOU KNOW, ZERO PROPERTY LINE TYPE STRUCTURE. AND SO, SO THAT APPEARS TO BE IMPACTING THIS RESIDENT HERE. AND SO, UM, IS THE CITY, YOU KNOW, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD ALSO CONSIDER IN THIS DIALOGUE OR SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERING? SO THAT SECOND PROPERTY, IT'S ALSO PART OF A CODE INVESTIGATION AS WELL. THE, AS FAR AS THE STRUCTURE SETBACK, UM, THEY'RE REVIEWING THAT THE OVERHANG, THAT PROP THAT APPEARS TO CROSS PROPERTY LINE, THAT BECOMES A CIVIL MATTER. SINCE IT IS, IT APPEARS TO CROSS PROPERTY LINE. THAT'S WHERE THE APPLICANTS WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO GO SURVEY TO IDENTIFY THE EXACT PROPERTY LINE. THE FENCING IS ONLY SOMETHING WE CAN KIND OF GO OFF OF, BUT WE DON'T KNOW FOR SURE THAT THAT'S THE PROPERTY LINE ITSELF. BUT CODE COMPLIANCE IS ACTUALLY INVESTIGATING BOTH SIDES. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, THIS QUESTION IS FOR THE ACCIDENT ITSELF. UM, SO WITH REGARDS TO THE CURRENT STRUCTURE, UM, HOW MUCH SPACE IS THERE THAT YOU HAVE WITH REGARDS TO THE STRUCTURE? HOW MUCH SPACE IS IT COVERING? UM, AND WHAT WOULD YOU SAY IS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT THAT YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE COVERED MR. SANCHEZ? OH, UM, UM, WE HAVE, UM, YES. UM, I COULDN'T FIND THE, UM, UH, THE PORT ON THE PHONE BECAUSE IT, I JUST GRABBED A, A NEW PHONE AND IT'S ALL BLANK, LIKE DARK AND I CAN'T SEE THE READINGS OF TO LOWER YOUR, OR TO PUT IT ON MUTE. BUT THE THING IS THAT, UM, ABOUT THE, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION ABOUT THE REQUIREMENTS OF WHAT, SO, SO FIRST, FIRST QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THE CURRENT WIDTH OF YOUR CARPORT? AND THE SECOND IS, WHAT WOULD BE THE MINIMUM AMOUNTS THAT YOU COULD, THAT YOU COULD SUCCESSFULLY USE THE CARPORT FOR YOUR VEHICLES? OH, UM, WELL, UM, LET'S SEE. I THINK IT WOULD BE LIKE, UH, IT WOULD BE KINDA REAL NARROW FOR IT. IT'S, UH, FOR THE CAR, YOU KNOW, TO LIKE PUT IT IN THERE AND IT, I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO SHO THE, UH, A TREE, A BIG TREE AND PROBABLY MOVE THE CURB PORT TOWARD THE, UH, LIKE A SIDEWALK GOING INTO THE FRONT DOOR OF THE HOUSE. BUT THEN I WOULD HAVE TO TEAR DOWN THE, THE GRASS AND HAVE IT MORE TOWARD THE, UH, OPPOSITE SIDE FROM THE FENCE. OKAY. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? SHELL, YES. COMMISSIONER, SHELL, UM, UM, THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, JUST BY LOOKING AT THE PICTURES, UM, I'M CURIOUS IF THE POSTS ARE ACTUALLY SET IN THE GROUND RIGHT NOW, OR IT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE ON ONE OF THEM THAT THERE'S A CONCRETE BLOCK, UM, AROUND ONE OF THE POSTS. SO IS IT, IS IT IN THE GROUND OR IS IT ON THE GROUND? WELL, IT, IT'S A, UM, THE, UM, IT, IT'S BUILT IN INTO THE, UM, CONCRETE, SEE THE CONCRETE DID AROUND ON [03:55:01] THE GROUND. SO IT'S NOT JUST PUT STEAM TO THE GROUND, IT'S, UM, HOLDING IT WITH CONCRETE LIKE, UM, LIKE A REGULAR HOUSE LEVEL. IT HAS INSTEAD OF THOSE CEDAR POSTS THAT ARE CONCRETE POSTS THAT ARE LIKE TWO FEET DEEP DOWN ON THE GROUND. OKAY. OKAY. WHO IS NEXT? UH, OZUNA. MY QUESTION IS TO STAFF AND HOW THIS CASE WAS ORIGINATED, IT WAS CODE ENFORCEMENT. SO CODE EN CODE ENFORCEMENT WENT BY AND SAW THE, UH, THE IMPROVEMENTS AND, AND BASICALLY REALIZED HE'S BUILDING OVER THE, THE NEXT QUESTION IS IF, IF THE VARIANCE WERE TO BE GRANTED, HE WOULD HAVE TO THEN COME IN AND GET PERMITS, RIGHT. AND HAVE THE STRUCTURE INSPECTED TO MEET, UM, ANY CITY REQUIREMENT TO CITY PERMITTING? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND I JUST WANNA MAKE MR. SANCHEZ AWARE OF THAT, THAT YOU STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE CITY PERMITTING PROCESS, EVEN IF THE VARIANCE WAS TO BE, UM, PASSED TODAY, JUST TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT. UM, YES, BUT, UH, I THINK THAT THOSE PERMITS WERE, UH, PAID FOR ALREADY, AND I, I, WELLS, I UNDERSTAND IT'S PAID AND THE, UH, UH, WE DID CHECK THAT OUT, BUT A, AFTER I, THE, THE CO PORT WAS BILLED. AND FOR THE RECORD, DO YOU KNOW WHO BUILT YEAH. WHO THE CONTRACTOR WAS, BECAUSE THEY OBVIOUSLY BUILT IT WITHOUT COMPLYING, WITH PERMITTING OR WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIANCES REQUIREMENTS. OKAY. UM, I DON'T KNOW, UM, IS MY DOG DAUGHTER, MY DAUGHTER, HER CAR, IT'S PARKED RIGHT THERE AND SHE WAS THE ONE THAT, UM, HAD BUILD IT AND SHE SHOULD KNOW THE, UH, THE PHONE NUMBER OF THOSE PERSONS THAT, UH, WE CAN CONTACT THEM IN CASE. MM-HMM. , JUST IN CASE, YOU KNOW, UH, THE PREACHER, UH, FOR REFERENCE, YOU KNOW, SHE HAS THEIR, THEIR PHONE NUMBER. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. SANCHEZ. ANY MORE QUESTIONS? MANNA? YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO THIS QUESTION'S FOR CITY. UM, SO, UM, IN THE, UH, THE VARIANCE REQUEST NUMBER TWO TALKS ABOUT, UH, CARPORT BEING WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE, UH, STRUCTURAL SEPARATION. AND SO, SO, UM, ESSENTIALLY BECAUSE THE NEIGHBOR IS, UM, ON THE PROP CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY LINE, UH, THIS WOULD ONLY ALLOW, IF I SAW THE TAPE MEASUREMENT CORRECTLY, UH, SHOWED THAT THE ONE POST WAS 15 FOOT OUT WOULD IMPLY THAT HE COULD ONLY HAVE A FIVE FOOT CARPORT THERE BECAUSE OF THE 10 FOOT, UM, STRUCTURE SEPARATION. UM, IF A MOTION WAS READ THAT DID ALLOW FOR THAT VARIANCE, BUT, UH, BUT UM, BUT HAD A SIDE SETBACK RESTRICTION, UM, BASICALLY THOSE TWO COULD WORK TOGETHER. CORRECT? SO, SO OTHER WORDS, I STILL CAN HAVE A, UH, THE ALLOW FOR THE, UM, ALLOW FOR THE CARPORT TO BE WITHIN 10 FOOT SEPARATION, BUT STILL DRIVE, DRIVE THE SIDE, UM, SEPARATION BY THE, UH, UM, MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK, IS THAT CORRECT STATEMENT? STANDBY. SO THE REQUIREMENT IS DEFINITELY FOR A 10 FOOT, IF IT'S DETACHED, WE'RE LOOKING INTO THAT NOW. NUMBER THREE. NUMBER THREE IS ABOUT SIDE STEP BACK. THE 10 FOOT IS FROM THE N C D RIGHT STAFF? THAT'S CORRECT. THE N C D HAS A 10 FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN STRUCTURES. OKAY. 10 FOOT REQUIREMENT. THERE'S VARIANCE NUMBER THREE, THAT'S SIDE STEPBACK REQUIREMENT, RIGHT. OKAY. YEAH. THREE FOOT SEVEN. YEAH. SO BASICALLY THE THREE FOOT SEVEN, UH, SETBACK ALONG THAT IS U D C REQUIREMENT. UH, THE BUILDING SETBACK IS N C D. OKAY. OKAY. SO THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? I GOT SOME FISHER. YES. COMMISSIONER FISHER. ARE THERE ANY OTHER METAL CARPORTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE KNOW OF? NO, THAT'S DIDN'T SEE ANY. OKAY. THANK YOU. WELL, THERE'S NO OTHERS. I'D LIKE TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS. UM, UH, I, SO WHAT IS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE EDGE OF THAT TREE AND THE PROPERTY LINE, [04:00:02] UH, TO THE APPLICANT? UH, MR. SANCHEZ? DO YOU, DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW? UH, UM, I THINK IT DOES A LITTLE CURVE, YOU KNOW, AROUND THE TREE. YES. PROBABLY LIKE, LIKE TWO MORE FEET INSIDE THE TREE BECAUSE, UH, IT HAS TO CURVE AROUND IT. WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT IS IF THE TREE WASN'T THERE, THAT IT WOULD BE LIKE TWO FEET MORE. WELL, WHAT, WHAT I'M TRYING TO, WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT IS IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE, YOU HAVE A, A REQUIREMENT TO DRIVE PAST THE TREE AND THEN YOU VEER THE VEHICLE TO THE LEFT AS A CARPORT GOES TOWARDS THE HOME. SO, YOU KNOW, IT, AS THE BOARD DISCUSSES, DISCUSSES WHAT SORT OF SETBACK COULD BE BETWEEN THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND THE, AND THE POST OF THE CARPORT. THERE COULD BE A, UM, A SIZABLE REDUCTION JUST TO GET YOU PAST THE TREE. IT JUST, FROM THE PICTURES, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU GOT ABOUT 13 OR SO FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE EDGE OF THAT TREE. UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THE CARPORT COULD BE REDUCED, UM, AS YOU PASS THROUGH THE TREE AND THEN, YOU KNOW, COME TOWARDS THE HOUSE. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT. OKAY. UM, UH, YOU KNOW. OKAY. UH, WHAT DO THE BOARD DECIDES? UM, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A WRITTEN, UM, LIKE A DOC LETTER DOCUMENT. OKAY. SO, UH, BECAUSE I, I, I FORGET THINGS THAT, UH, LIKE OVER THE PHONE. OH, YES. AND LIKE IN LIKE BY TONIGHT, I, I WOULDN'T EVEN REMEMBER. I MEAN, NO, THE ONCE THE, ONCE THE BOARD, I WAS TRYING TO REMEMBER, ONCE THE BOARD MAKES A DECISION, YOU'LL BE PROVIDED THE, THE, THE RENDERING AND WRITING. UH, IS, IS THIS STRUCTURE, I NOTICED THAT YOU HAVE A, A DRIVEWAY ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE. THE THE ZONING IS FOR SINGLE FAMILY. IS THIS A DUPLEX? NO, IT, IT JUST, UM, THAT'S WHERE, UM, MY BEDROOM LIKE THAT. OKAY. WELL, IT'S, IT, IT, IT, IT'S ANOTHER CORE PORT, BUT THAT'S THE WAY I BOUGHT THE HOUSE LIKE THAT. WELL, WHY, WHY I'M ASKING DUPLEX, BUT IT'S, IT'S ONLY ONE FAMILY HOUSE. OKAY. THE REASON WHY I ASK IS AS, AS I, AS I GO DOWN THE STREET USING MAPPING, IT LOOKS LIKE YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS SET UP TO WHERE MOST HOMES HAVE TWO DRIVEWAYS WHERE ONE IS, IS RELATIVELY OPEN. YEAH. AND THE OTHER SEEMS TO HAVE CARPORTS. YES. AND, AND THE WHERE, WHERE THIS CARPORT IS LOCATED, IT'S, IT SEEMS TO BE ON THE SIDE OF THE HOME WHERE IT, THE OTHER HOMES UP AND DOWN THE STREET DO NOT PROVIDE A CARPORT TO PROVIDE THE 10 FOOT SEPARATION. SO THAT'S, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT LIKE, IS, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT ADDRESSES HERE, BUT YOU'RE SAYING IT'S JUST ONE? IT IT IS THE SAME ADDRESS, THE WHOLE HOUSE. OKAY. THE RED TRUCK IS MY, MY TRUCK. OKAY. BUT I, I, I'M ACTUALLY DON'T NEED A CAR FOR ME. OKAY. BUT IT'S ONLY MY DAUGHTER'S, UH, BECAUSE SHE WANTED A CORPORATE, I GUESS. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR, HE, HE'S GOT TWO DRIVEWAYS, LIKE ONE FOR HIS TWO TRUCKS. YES. AND THEN HIS WIFE HAS A, A, A, A COMPLETE CO PORT, I MEAN, UH, DRIVEWAY FOR HER. YES, SIR. UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF TWO, LIKE TWO PARKINGS FOR, FOR THEM, LIKE ONE FOR THE WIFE AND THE OTHER SIDE FOR THE HUSBAND, THE TWO TRUCKS THERE? YES. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. UM, A QUESTION FOR STAFF IS, AS I GO UP AND DOWN MULBERRY, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF HOMES THAT ARE BUILT REALLY CLOSE TO ONE SIDE, AND THEN A LOT OF THE HOMES THAT HAVE TWO DRIVEWAYS AND THEN VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE TODAY. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE, IS THIS, DO YOU KNOW IF THERE'S A ZERO LOT LINE, UH, REGIME IN THIS? NO, THERE'S NOT. YEAH. WE LOOKED AT THE, THE PLOT ITSELF, THE STRUCTURES WERE BUILT IN APPROXIMATELY THE FIXED, THE FIFTIES OR SO. IT'S THE NNC D STANDARDS THAT WEREN'T ADOPTED TILL 2009. SO UNLESS YOUR HOME IS BUILT AFTER THAT OR ANY MAJOR CHANGES, UH, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE N C D STANDARDS. THEY'RE CREATED BASICALLY TO CREATE A ATD LEAST BASICALLY AN OVERALL LOOK WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO MAINTAIN CERTAIN CHARACTERISTICS. OKAY. BUT IT WASN'T UNTIL TWO, 2009. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? MANNA? YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, AS FAR AS NUMBER FOUR AND, UH, THE CURRENT VARIANCE, IS THAT ALSO PART OF THE N C D DIALOGUE? SO IF LEFT OFF, UH, THEY WOULD'VE TO COMPLY WITH REGARDS TO THE FLAT LOPING OF THE ROOF? YES, IT, IT'S OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, ANY MORE QUESTIONS? A HEARING? NONE. I'M LOOKING FOR, UH, UH, A CLOSING STATEMENT FOR THE APPLICANT. MR. SANCHEZ, IS [04:05:01] THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE US TO, UH, UH, TO ADD BEFORE WE RENDER A DECISION? UH, WELL, UM, I'M NOT TOO SURE LIKE THE, THE CORPORAL, IT'S OKAY IF IT'S FLATTER OR THEN I COULD HAVE TO BUILD IT LIKE A, LIKE A, LIKE A V LIKE A V SHAPE, BUT UPSIDE DOWN. OKAY. UH, YEAH, THE, THE WATER, THE WATER STILL RUNS TOWARDS THE STREET. WHATEVER WATER, IT, IT WON'T GO OVER TO THE FENCE LINE. IT'LL JUST RUN ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE STREET. YES, SIR. YES, SIR. UH, YEAH, THAT, THAT'S JUST, IT'S PART OF THE VARIANCE BECAUSE THERE'S A, THERE'S AN, THERE'S AN OVERLAY, UH, ON YOUR AREA THAT REQUIRES A CERTAIN PITCH ON THE ROOF, THAT'S ALL. SO, UM, IS THERE, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD, SIR, BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH A, WITH A, A VOTE? UM, WELL, UM, I, I GUESS WISH I COULD KEEP THE, THE CORE PORTS IS ALREADY BUILT. YES, SIR. UM, UH, UH, SINCE, UH, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT, UH, THAT I DID HAVE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, GO THE, HI, I MEAN THE, THE, THE PERSON THAT HI, I HIRED THE PEOPLE WAS MY DAUGHTER, BUT SINCE I'M THE OWNER, I HAVE, I'M THE ONE THAT HAS TO, UH, BE QUESTIONS ABOUT ALL THESE ANSWERS. YES. I'M NOT SIR. UH, QUESTION. YES SIR. SO I HAVE TO ANSWER FOR THEM. YES, SIR. I UNDERSTAND. UM, SO WITH THAT, IS THERE A, UH, ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? UH, MANNA. YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. OKAY. UM, SO REGARDING CASE NUMBER B O A 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 6, I MOVE AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST OF ZONING VARIANCE FROM THE JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN REGULATION TO ONE, UM, ALLOW THE CARPORT TO BE WITHIN 10 FEET, 10 FOOT STRUCTURAL SEPARATION, AND TWO, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOWED ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE THREE FOOT AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UH, LET'S SEE. UM, FOR THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 2 6 3 5 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING JUAN SANCHEZ, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDMENT WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. IN THIS CASE, THE VARIANCES ARE NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE CARPORT IS CONSTRUCTED SUCH THAT, UM, LET'S SEE, TWO CARS COULD BE ACCOMMODATED INSIDE IT, WHERE THE CARPORT BECOMES WIDER TOWARDS THE BACK. UM, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY FINANCIAL HARDSHIP DUE TO THE STRUCTURE ALREADY BEING CONSTRUCTED. UM, ALTHOUGH WE ARE ASKING, YOU KNOW, FOR THAT, FOR THAT REDUCTION IN SIZE, UM, THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE, UM, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN STRICT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE JEFFERSON N D C IS TO AESTHETICALLY PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY. THE BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE CONSTRUCTED CARPORT, UM, AS CONSTRUCTED, DOES NOT, UH, MATCH THE CONTEXT OF THE JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD CON CONSERVATION DISTRICT, AND, UH, CAN BE DESIGNED TO FIT WITHIN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES. UH, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT TWO, WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PERFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE OR ALTER THE USE OR CHARACTER OF THE ADJACENT CONT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SPECIFICALLY, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT PLACE A STRUCTURE OUT OF CHARACTER WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. UH, AS ADJUSTED. UH, THE APPLIED TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THIS VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON PROPERTY AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN WHICH THE DISTRICT WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THIS PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITION OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER AND IS NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE. GIVEN THE OTHER DESIGN STANDARDS BEING CONSISTENT, UH, WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT, THE REQUEST IS ADJUSTED, UM, ARE IN FINE, ARE IN LINE WITH THE CHARACTER [04:10:01] OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND A MOTION. GREAT. IS THERE A SECOND? OH, ZUNA. OKAY. A SECOND GOES TO UNA ANNA, PLEASE LEAVE THE DISCUSSIONS. SO, UM, UM, I'M, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY AND LOOKING AT, UH, THE JEFFERSON N C D, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THE DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO THE, UH, STRUCTURAL SEPARATION REALLY IS NOT APPROPRIATE IN THIS CASE. AND SO THEREFORE I THINK THAT, UH, IT SHOULD BE OKAY TO, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, TO ALLOW THE, UM, TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE WITHIN THAT 10 FOOT SEPARATION. UM, UM, 'CAUSE OTHERWISE THERE'S REALLY NOTHING THAT COULD BE PUT THERE. UM, AND THEN I THINK BY ALLOWING FOR THE TWO FOOT VARIANCE ALLOWS FOR A STRUCTURED TO BE PLACED THERE, UM, AND ALLOW FOR THE SEPARATION. AND THEN ONCE IT IS THAT THE OTHER PROPERTY'S REVIEWED, THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL SEPARATION PROVIDED. UM, AND SO BECAUSE OF THOSE TWO, UH, BECAUSE I'VE ONLY RULING ON THOSE TWO PERSPECTIVES, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS ADJUSTED. OKAY. COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH, I THINK, I THINK THE MOTION AS, AS READ, PROVIDES A SOLUTION FOR HIM TO, TO PROVIDE, UH, BUT, BUT STILL NEEDING TO COMPLY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT WITHIN THE JEFFERSON AREA. I THINK ALL OF THIS COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED, HAD THE APPLICANT, UH, JUST MERELY APPLIED FOR A BUILDING PERMIT. AS YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S THE PROCEDURE AND HE COULD HAVE, UH, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, THWARTED A LOT OF THIS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE VARIANCE BEING US EVEN PRESENTING THE VARIANCE TODAY. SO I CONCUR WITH THE MOTION AS READ. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? CHAKA AND, UH, COMMISSIONER MIN CHAKA, I, UH, I GO A DIFFERENT WAY ON THIS ONE BECAUSE WHEN I'VE SITTING AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY STICK THE YARD AND CONVERT IT INTO DRIVING LANE PARKING AREAS THAT ARE ALREADY PART OF THAT, WHICH THE HOME IS ALREADY PROVIDED WITH. SO I'LL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. OKAY. UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT, I'M GOING TO ADD THAT, UH, I THINK, UH, WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA READ, UH, IS A GOOD COMPROMISE. UH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT ONLY BECAUSE AS I WENT UP AND DOWN THE STREET, IT SEEMS LIKE MOST OF THE HOMES HAVE TWO DRIVEWAYS AND TWO PARKING AREAS. SO I THINK THIS, UH, WOULD BE A SOLUTION FOR, TO PROVIDE A COVER FOR THAT SIDE OF THE HOME. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT AS READ. UM, AND, UH, WITH THAT, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MICHELLE? YES, I SUPPORT THE MOTION AS READ. MR. MANCHACA. I DO NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION. MS. CRUZ. NO, I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN, I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. DOMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR AS READ MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR AS READ CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR AS READ THE VOTE IS SEVEN TO THREE IF ANYBODY, UH, ON THE, ON THE, UH, UH, UH, WHO VOTED NO. WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A, UH, COMPROMISE ON THE MOTION. PERHAPS A LITTLE MORE OF A SETBACK. ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, UH, MOTION FAILS. UH, MR. SANCHEZ, PLEASE, UH, GET WITH STAFF ABOUT, UH, WHAT CAN BE DONE TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE. NEXT ITEM IS A CONSIDERATION APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 2ND MINUTE. DOES ANYBODY, UH, HAVE ANY AMENDMENTS? NO. OKAY. STAFF, YOU TAKE A VOTE ON THE MINUTES, PLEASE. MICHELLE, NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION. HOLLY? I, I MOVED THAT THE MINUTES BE APPROVED AS WRITTEN. CONCUR. TWO SECOND . WHO MADE THE MO? I I GOT CRUZ AS THE SECOND WHO MADE THE MOTION? I THINK MS. FISHER DID. OKAY, WELL I THINK A CRUZ MIGHT HAVE SLID IN THERE. . . SO COMMISSIONER . SO IT'S OKAY. FISHER. FISHER GETS, GETS THE MOTION. CRUZ GETS THE SECOND. YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S, UH, AND IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION OR CHANGES, LET'S TAKE A VOTE PLEASE. MICHELLE? YES, I APPROVE MR. MENCHACA. I APPROVE MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES. MR. MENA? I APPROVE. [04:15:02] MS. BREGMAN? YES, I APPROVE MR. DOMER. I APPROVE MS. FISHER? YES, I APPROVE MR. UNA? YES, I APPROVE CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO APPROVE MOTION PASSAGE UNANIMOUSLY. AND WITH THAT, UH, AND BEFORE WE ADJOURN, I JUST WANTED TO THANK EVERYBODY. THIS IS THIS. WE HAVEN'T HAD NINE CASES IN A LONG TIME, AND IT'S FIVE O'CLOCK, SO NOT SO BAD. STAFF. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU NEED TO ADD? NO, NOTHING TODAY, SIR. THANK YOU FOR, UH, STICKING BY A LONG MEETING SHOW, INCLUDING WITH THE WORK SESSION. FANTASTIC. I WAS LOOKING FOR THE COOKIES. THERE'S NO COOKIES. . I KNOW. SORRY DON. YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO BUY YOUR OWN. I THINK STAFF SHOULD UBER. SOME, SOME OVER HERE. OVEREAT THEM TO EVERYBODY. TIFFS TREATS OR SOMETHING. ARE YOU TRYING TO GIVE A HINT? ? IT'D BE A, IT'D BE, IT'D BE A NICE CHANGE. IT'S BEEN A WHILE. OKAY. WELL, THANKS EVERYBODY. HOPE YOU ALL HAVE A GREAT REST OF THE WEEK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BYE-BYE. BYE. Y'ALL HAVE A GOOD WEEK. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.