* 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. [00:00:04] WE ARE LIVE NOW, SIR. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. [Call to Order] MY NAME IS DONALD ORIAN AND I'M THE VICE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULARLY NOTICE MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INTO SESSION. CAN WE HAVE OUR INTERPRETERS READ THE INTERPRETATION SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR THIS MEETING, PLEASE? YES, SIR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE CONDUCT THE ROLL CALL MICHELLE. PRESENT. MR. MACHACA? PRESENT. MS. CRUZ? STILL NOT ON MR. TEO PRESENT. MR. MENA? PRESENT. MS. RAGMAN? PRESENT. MR. DELMER? PRESENT. MR. LOVE? HERE. MS. FISHER? HERE. MR. OZUNA PRESENT AND CHAIR ORIAN. I AM ALSO PRESENT. DO WE HAVE A QUORUM? 10. YES, WE DO. 10. OKAY. SO BEFORE WE, 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 RELEASE SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY TEXAS LEGISLATOR AND THE CITY SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY ARE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN AN ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 35 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. WE ALSO SERVE AS AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FROM 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 RECURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND GRANTING THE RELIEF STOCK RESTS 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 COURT 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 AND OF THE PUBLIC AND LIMIT THE POTENTIAL SPREAD OF C OVID 19. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS HOLDING MEETINGS VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE. THESE MEETING STANDARDS ARE BASED UPON THE VARIOUS SUSPENDED PROVISIONS AND OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT ISSUED BY THE TEXAS GOVERNOR RESPONSE TO C OVID 19 CRISIS AND ARE IN PLACE UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN 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, THERE ARE FOUR OPPORTUNITIES. PLEASE INCLUDE EMAIL OR MAIL OF COMMENTS, DROPPING OFF COMMENTS, LEAVING VOICEMAIL OR ASKING TO BE CALLED DURING THE MEETING. STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT'S STAFF WILL READ INTO THE RECORD ANY EMAILS OR LETTERS RECEIVED. STAFF WILL ALSO PLAY ANY MESSAGES RECEIVED BY VOICEMAIL. LASTLY, FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO RECEIVE A CALLBACK, CALL THEM, UH, TO STATE THEIR TWO MINUTE COMMENTS. SPANISH INTERPRETERS ARE ON STANDBY AS NEEDED. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL WITH A TWO MINUTE TI UH, TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS. THAT CONCLUDES THAT, SIR. FOR THE FIRST ITEM ITEM ON [1. 21-1404 Election of Officers] THE AGENDA, WE'RE LOOKING AT ELECTIONS. AS SOME OF YOU ALREADY KNOW, UH, CHAIR MARTINEZ DID RESIGN AND MR. DELMORE DID STEP IN, UM, AS DISTRICT 10, UH, REPRESENTATIVE. HOW ARE THE VACANCIES ON THE, ON THE ALTERNATES COMING ALONG THAT THEY ACTUALLY CLOSED, UH, CLOSED I THINK AT THE END OF JANUARY. I BELIEVE THEY'RE BEING REVIEWED BY COUNSEL AT THIS TIME. OKAY. HAS MARIA JOINED US YET? NO, [00:05:01] SIR. SHE JUST EMAILED ME A LITTLE SEC, UH, LITTLE WHILE AGO. SHE'S HAVING TROUBLE GETTING ON. SHE'S NOT SURE WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE SYSTEM. OKAY. WELL, I MEAN, UM, YOU KNOW, I I'D REALLY WOULD LIKE EVERYBODY TO BE PRESENT FOR THE ELECTION. UM, IF THERE'S NO, IF THERE'S NO MEMBERS WHO ARE IN CONTEST, BUT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND BEGIN WITH THE FIRST CASE. ROGER THAT. WE'LL DO THAT. AND JUST A REMINDER, WHEN YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING, MAKE SURE TO HIT MUTE BECAUSE IT'S PICKING UP ALL OF ANYBODY'S PAPER, WRESTLING OR TYPING. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY, FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA. [2. 21-1317 BOA-20-10300127] UH, D O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 2 7. IT'S 4 31 ADAMS STREET, DISTRICT TWO APPLICANT IS HODA CUMAN DUCK CUMMINGS. REQUEST FOR ONE, AN APPEAL OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S DECISION TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND TWO, A 16 FOOT VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM CLEAR VISION OF 25 FEET TO ALLOW A FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE NINE FEET AWAY FROM THE STREET. ZOIA IS RMM FOUR HISTORIC A H O D. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A CORNER LOCK, UH, RESIDENTIAL LOOK LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF ADAMS AND BARB STREET AND SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. THE APPLICANT IS WANTING TO INSTALL A FOUR FOOT TALL CATTLE PANEL STALL FENCE, UH, IN THE FRONT YARD AND HAS SUBMITTED A REQUEST FOR A CERTIFICATE OF PURPOSE TO THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION ON OCTOBER 21ST, 2020. THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION DENIED THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO ISSUE A C O A DUE TO THE PROPOSED FENCING MATERIAL NEEDED TO BE ALTERED. THE APPLICANT IS APPEALING THE H C R C DECISION AND REQUESTING THE APPROVE TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED FENCE PER SECTION 35 5 14 2 A TO INSTALL A FENCE ON A RESIDENTIAL LOT WHERE THE STREET INTERSECTION EXISTS. U T C REQUIRES 25 FEET, UH, SPACE IN, IN EACH DIRECTION FROM THE STREET CURB DURING THE, UH, FOR CLEAR VISION DURING THE SITE VISIT. STAFF NOTICE THAT THE FENCE WOULD BE NINE FEET AND 12 INCHES AWAY, UH, FROM ADAMS AND BARB STREET, RESPECTIVELY. D S D TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, UH, STAFF DID MAKE A, A FIELD VISIT ON JANUARY 21ST TO VERIFY PROPOSED FENCE LAYOUT AND, UH, TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH 5 0 6. STAFF DID FIND THAT THE PROPOSED FENCE LAYOUT MEETS INTERSECTION SITE DISTANCES AS LONG AS THE LAYOUT IS WITHIN THE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES AND DOES NOT ENCROACH THE CITY'S RIGHT OF WAY. UH, TRAFFIC HAS NO RESERVATION FOR THE FENCE LAYOUT TO HAVE CLEAR VISION. UH, AREA OF 35 5 14 IN 2018. V O A APPROVED THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACK VARIANCES FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. HERE'S THE SITE PLAN. AS, AS DELINEATED, THE MARKINGS ARE FOR THE FENCING, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, THE CORONER SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. WE DO HAVE, UH, O H P ON THE LINE WHO WILL PROCEED WITH THEIR PRESENTATION ON THE CASE. THANK YOU. HI, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS STEPHANIE PHILLIPS. I'M A SENIOR SPECIALIST WITH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND SERVED AS THE CASE MANAGER FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE. SO I'LL GO OVER, UM, WHAT HAPPENED AT THE H D R C. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO, A BIT OF A CLARIFICATION. SO THE REQUEST, UM, FROM THE APPLICANT THAT WAS HEARD BY THE H D R C ON OCTOBER 21ST OF LAST YEAR WAS FOR A FRONT YARD FENCE AND THE H D R C DID APPROVE A FRONT YARD FENCE WITH AN ADDITIONAL STIPULATION THAT THE, UH, MATERIAL OF THE FENCING BE MODIFIED FROM THE PROPOSED CATTLE PANEL FENCING TO ONE THAT WAS MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE DISTRICT, SUCH AS WOOD PICKET OR WR IRON. SO THE APPLICANT IS APPEALING THIS PARTICULAR STIPULATION TODAY. NEXT SLIDE. SO AS ZEKE NOTICED, THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE LOT IS AT THE CORNER OF ADAMS AND BARBIE STREET. NEXT SLIDE. HERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL PHOTOS TAKEN FROM GOOGLE STREET VIEW. LEFT IS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, UM, THE TOP RIGHT IS THE CORNER VIEW. AND THEN YOU SEE, UM, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, WHICH HAS WR IRON FENCING. NEXT SLIDE. SO THESE ARE THE APPLICABLE CITATIONS THAT, UH, STAFF AND THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION USES WHEN REVIEWING NEW FRONT YARD FENCES. UM, IT INCLUDES, UH, CITATIONS ON DESIGN, LOCATION, HEIGHT, AND APPROPRIATE MATERIALS. NEXT SLIDE. AND HERE ARE THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED FOR, UH, THE H D R C REQUESTS. SO THESE ARE THE ONES THAT, UM, [00:10:01] THE H D R E H D R C, EXCUSE ME, REVIEWED VERBATIM. UM, AND YOU CAN SEE THE SKETCH OF THE PROPOSED HOG WIRE CATTLE PANEL FENCING. NEXT SLIDE. SO I'LL BRIEFLY GO OVER THE FINDINGS. SO AS I MENTIONED, THE APPLICANT REQUESTED A NEW FRONT YARD FENCE ON OCTOBER 21ST OF LAST YEAR AT THE H D R C. OUR STAFF REPORT RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE NEW FRONT YARD FENCE WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE, THAT THE FENCING MATERIAL BE MODIFIED TO BE MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE FENCE STYLES THAT ARE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE DISTRICT, SUCH AS WOOD PICKET OR ROT, IRON AS NOTED IN FINDING B. UM, AND THEN THE APPLICANT, IF THEY CONCURRED WITH THAT STIPULATION, WOULD NEED TO JUST SUBMIT THEIR UPDATED MATERIAL SPECIFICATION. STIPULATION TWO WAS THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED AN UPDATED SITE PLAN THAT INDICATED THE EXACT LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED TRANSITION FROM THE FOUR FOOT TALL FRONT YARD FENCING TO SIX FOOT TALL PRIVACY FENCING. AND THEN THE THIRD STIPULATION WAS OUR STANDARD STIPULATION THAT WE INCLUDE FOR ALL FRONT YARD FENCING REQUESTS, WHICH IS, UM, THAT ALL FENCING MUST BE PERMITTED TO MEET U D C SECTION 35 DASH FIVE 14. SO AS I MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PRESENTATION, THE ONLY STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT IS APPEALING TODAY IS STIPULATION NUMBER ONE, OUR STAFF AND THE H D R C DID CONCUR THAT A FRONT YARD FENCE IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS LOCATION. THE DIFFERENCE IS IN MATERIAL. NEXT SLIDE. THERE WE GO. . SO THE APPLICANT DISAGREED WITH STIPULATION ONE REGARDING THE FENCING MATERIAL, AND I HAD MENTIONED IN THAT STIPULATION THAT THERE WAS A FINDING THAT WE REFERENCED. SO HERE IN THIS FINDING IN STAFF'S REPORT, IT TALKS ABOUT, UM, IT DESCRIBES THE, THE FENCE THAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, WHICH IS A HOG WIRE CATTLE PANEL FENCING. SO WOOD FRAME, UM, METAL, METAL PANELS, UM, AND AT THE BOTTOM IT SAYS, ACCORDING TO THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, FENCES SHOULD FEATURE DESIGNS AND MATERIALS THAT ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE STRUCTURE OR USE HISTORICALLY IN THE DISTRICT WHERE FENCING IS PRESENT OR COMMON IN KING WILLIAM, INCLUDING THIS PARTICULAR BLOCK OF ATOMS, THE MATERIAL THAT IS MOST COMMON IS ROT, IRON, OR WOOD PICKET. SO THAT KIND OF NECESSITATED OUR RECOMMENDATION. AND AFTER DISCUSSION, THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVED THE FRONT YARD FENCE WITH ALL THREE OF STAFF STIPULATIONS, INCLUDING THE REQUIREMENT TO ALTER THE FENCING MATERIAL TO ONE THAT IS MORE HISTORICALLY COMMON IN THE DISTRICT, SUCH AS WROUGHT IRON OR WOOD PICKET, WHICH CHARACTERIZES ADAMS STREET. NEXT SLIDE. SO OUR RECOMMENDATION TO YOU ALL IS THAT, UM, THE, UH, THE APPEAL IS NOT RECOMMENDED AND THAT THE ORIGINAL RULING OF H D R C BE UPHELD. THANK YOU. I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT PLEASE? HI THERE. THIS IS , THE, UM, PROPERTY OWNER OF 4 31 ADAMS. UM, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, MA'AM. WE CAN HEAR YOU. OKAY, PERFECT. UM, I DO WANNA MAKE A CORRECTION TO, UM, MS. PHILLIPS IS DESCRIPTION OF THE FENCE. IT WOULD NOT BE A WOOD FRAMED FENCE, IT WOULD BE A METAL FRAMED FENCE WITH THE WIRE PANELING. UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CORRECTION REALLY QUICKLY. UM, IT IS WRITTEN IN THE SLIDE THAT SHE SHOWED. UM, I DO HAVE A PRESENTATION TO SHOW YOU, UM, REGARDING THIS FENCE. UM, SO I HAVE MY PRESENTATION SPLIT UP INTO TWO SECTIONS, ONE FOR THE APPEAL OF THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DECISION. UM, BY THE END OF THE PRESENTATION, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THAT WIRE PANEL OR S MS. PHILLIPS WAS CALLING IT HOG PANEL. PADDLE PANEL. UM, FENCES ARE ACTUALLY EXTREMELY COMMON IN KING WILLIAM. UM, THERE ARE WELL OVER 50 FENCES, UM, IN THE, IN KING WILLIAM ALONE, UM, SHOWING IF WE HAD EVEN CONSIDERED LA BACA THE NEIGHBORING HISTORIC, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT NUMBER WOULD'VE EASILY DOUBLED. UM, SO IF WE COULD GO TO THE NEXT SITE SLIDE PLEASE. OKAY. IF YOU'RE WATCHING IT ONLINE, MA'AM, IT'S GONNA BE A DELAY. SO WE'RE ALREADY ON THAT SLIDE, SO JUST LET US KNOW THE PAGE NUMBER OF THE SLIDE YOU'D LIKE TO SEE, AND THEN WE'LL GET IT ON THERE FOR YOU. OKAY. UM, SO THE FENCE DESCRIPTION HERE IS IT IS, UM, A METAL FRAMED FENCE. SO IT'S ONE BY THREE TUBING ACROSS THE TOP. UM, AND THERE ARE TWO BY TWO INCH. YOU'RE GOING REALLY FAST [00:15:01] . UM, SO IT'S TWO BY TWO INCH, UM, METAL POSTS, UM, WITH THE PANELING IN THE CENTER. UM, WE CHOSE THIS FENCE DESIGN, UM, BECAUSE WE HAVE DOGS AND WE FOSTER FOR A COUPLE NON-PROFITS, ONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THAT TYPE OF FENCING IS MOST CONDUCIVE TO ALL ANIMAL SIZES. SO WE FOSTER PUPPIES, BIG DOGS, SMALL DOGS, AND A ROT IRON WOULD PICK IT, WOULD NOT HOLD A PUPPY INSIDE OR, UM, YOU KNOW, A VERY SMALL SIZED DOG. SO THAT'S WHY WE REALLY WANT THAT SIZE, THAT TYPE OF FENCE. UM, SO IF WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. UM, THIS IS A HANDS DRAWN, UH, DIAGRAM OF WHAT THE FENCE WOULD LOOK LIKE. I KNOW IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT IT, UM, KIND OF GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. AND THIS ACTUALLY BECOMES RELEVANT, UM, WHEN I COMPARE IT TO ANOTHER FENCE THAT WAS APPROVED BY H D R C. UM, OKAY. SO THE NEXT SLIDE IS JUST A COPY OF THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION, UM, RULING WHERE THEY'RE DISPUTING THE MATERIAL. OKAY. AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH WOULD BE, UM, SLIDE FIVE. IT IS ACTUALLY TAKEN OUT OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO'S GUIDELINES FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS. UM, IN HERE IT SAYS THAT THE PROHIBITED MATERIALS ARE ACTUALLY THE EXPOSED CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS, WALL SYSTEMS, CONCRETE BLOCKS, VINYL FENCING, AND CHAIN LINK FENCING. UM, NOWHERE ON HERE DOES IT SAY THAT, UH, CATTLE PANEL, HOG PANEL WIRE PANEL FENCING IS UNACCEPTABLE. IRONICALLY, ON THE NEXT SLIDE, SLIDE SIX, YOU WILL SEE TAKEN OUT OF THE SAME GUIDELINE BOOK. THE HIGHLIGHTED TOP, UM, LEFT PHOTO SAYS, PRESERVED HISTORIC FENCING SUCH AS AN UNUSUAL ORNAMENTAL WIRE FENCE WITH WOOD COAT. SO A WIRE PANEL FENCE IS USED TO ILLUSTRATE AN APPROPRIATE FENCE ACCORDING TO THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINE BOOK. SO, UM, I JUST FOUND THAT EXTREMELY RELEVANT TO THE FACT THAT THAT'S ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THE FENCE THAT I'M TRYING TO PUT UP. UM, THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH IS SLIDE SEVEN. UM, THERE ARE CURRENTLY 62 IDENTICAL OR SIMILAR FENCES TO OUR PROPOSED FENCE DESIGN. UM, IF THIS WERE A CASE OF A HANDFUL OF FENCES, UM, THAT WERE SIMILAR, THEN MAYBE I WOULD UNDERSTAND, BUT TO SAY THAT 52 PEOPLE, RESIDENTS, PROPERTY OWNERS CAN HAVE A FENCE DESIGN, BUT I CANNOT, UM, DOESN'T BODE WELL. LET'S SEE. SO NINE OF THEM ARE ACTUALLY IDENTICAL TO OUR PROPOSED FENCE DESIGN. UM, 12 ARE CORNER LOTS. UM, I JUST, WHEN I HAD GONE TO H D R C, ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAD SAID, I DON'T THINK BECAUSE YOU'RE A CORONER LOT, THAT THAT FENCE IS APPROPRIATE THERE WHILE THERE ARE 12 WITH THAT ACTUAL, UH, FENCE. UM, SO THE NEXT SLIDE, SLIDE EIGHT, IS THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, UH, ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION TO 1 27 PROTON. 1 27 PROTON HAS THE EXACT FENCE WE ARE TRYING TO BUILD. AND IF YOU READ O H P FINDINGS, IT SAYS IN REGARDS TO THE MATERIAL THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED FOR THE FENCE TO INCLUDE MINIMUM TWO INCH SQUARE STEEL TUBE FENCE FRAME AND WELDED WIRE MESH FENCE PANELS THAT WILL FEATURE TWO INCH OPENINGS. THAT FINDS THE PROPOSED MATERIAL AND DESIGN APPROPRIATE AND CONSISTENT WITH GUIDELINES. SO 1 27 TON IS TWO STREETS OVER FROM US. YOU CAN WALK THERE IN A MATTER OF FIVE MINUTES. WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS HOW IS IT THAT 1 27 IS ABLE TO HAVE THE EXACT SENSE THAT I AM NOT, WE'RE BOTH IN KING WILLIAMS, UM, ON CROTON. IT IS THE ONLY METAL FRAMED WIRE PANEL FENCE. SO IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE ALL LITTERED DOWN THE STREET. THERE'S A COUPLE THAT ARE WOOD FRAMED, BUT IT IS THE ONLY METAL FRAMED FENCE. IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, [00:20:01] THIS IS WHAT THEY SUBMITTED TO O H P AS THEIR PROPOSED DESIGN. UM, SO THAT SLIDE EIGHT, IF YOU, OR I'M SORRY, SLIDE 10. IF YOU GO TO SLIDE 11, YOU CAN SEE THEM SIDE BY SIDE. I WILL ADMIT THEIRS IS DRAWN MUCH NICER THAN OURS, BUT THEY ARE IDENTICAL DRAWINGS AND ONE WAS APPROVED AND ONE WAS NOT. UM, AND THEN IF YOU GO TO SLIDE, SLIDE, EXCUSE ME, SLIDE 12, UM, THIS IS JUST A LIVE PHOTO OF WHAT THE FENCE LOOKS LIKE. UM, LET'S SEE, AND THEN YOU CAN SEE IT ON SLIDE 13, JUST WANTED TO SHOW YOU EVERY ANGLE OF THIS FENCE. SO AT SLIDE 15, YOU HAVE 4 4 15 ADMISSIONS. THIS FENCE WAS APPROVED THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE, UM, ADMINISTRATIVELY. SO THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO SIT BEFORE THE H C R C O H P WAS CONFIDENT ENOUGH THAT THIS WAS A GOOD INVESTMENT FENCE TO JUST ISSUE THE C O A. AGAIN, THIS GENTLEMAN REMOVED, UM, A CHAIN LINK FENCE. THIS ONE IS WOOD FRAMED, UM, BUT VERY SIMILAR TO THE FENCE WE WANT TO INSTALL. UM, SLIDE 16 IS JUST THE LIVE PHOTO OF THE FENCE. UM, SLIDE 17, IT'S SIX 13 FEEDER. THIS ONE IS ACTUALLY PRETTY INTERESTING IN THAT THIS IS, AGAIN, AN IDENTICAL FENCE TO THE FENCE WE WOULD LIKE TO INSTALL. UM, O H P ACTUALLY CAME FORWARD AND WANTED TO DENY THE FENCE, UM, AND SAID THAT A TRADITIONAL DESIGN, INCLUDING WROUGHT IRON WOOD PICKET OR WOOD FRAME CATTLE PANEL AS OPPOSED TO THE METAL FRAME CATTLE PANEL, THE COMMISSION DECIDED TO APPROVE THE FENCE. UM, HOWEVER, THEY ASKED THAT THE FRAMING OF THE FENCE BE PAINTED TO MITIGATE THE APPEARANCE OF METAL MATERIAL. SO THIS IS JUST ANOTHER SITUATION WHERE O H T HAS CONTRADICTED ITSELF. SO THEY GAVE 1 27 THE EXACT SAME FENCE THEY WANTED SIX 13 SEATER PROPOSED ALMOST AN IDENTICAL FENCE. AND O H P DECIDED, OKAY, WE'LL GIVE YOU THE FENCE, BUT YOU HAVE TO PAINT IT. SO THESE DECISIONS ARE NOT, UM, THE SAME FOR EVERYBODY. SO THEY SEEM TO BE CHANGING AND IT'S NOT REALLY A PATTERN OR A REASON WHY THEY'RE MAKING THESE DECISIONS. UM, SO IF YOU LOOK AT SLIDE 17, IT'S JUST A PHOTO OF THE FENCE. UM, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IT LOOKS LIKE THERE, UM, THE, LET'S SEE, SLIDE 18 IS 1 46 FEEDER. AGAIN, THIS WAS GIVEN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, SO THEY DID NOT NEED TO GO BEFORE AN H D R C MEETING. UM, AND IF YOU LOOK TO THE SIDE, THE THIRD PICTURE ON THE BOTTOM ROW IS A METAL SWEAT FRAMED WIRE PANEL FENCE. UM, THEY FOUND EVERYTHING TO BE APPROPRIATE USING TO HAVE THAT FENCE. UM, HERE'S A PICTURE OF 1 46 FEEDER. UM, LET'S SEE, THAT'S SLIDE 20 IS ALSO ANOTHER PHOTO. AND THEN LET'S SEE IF WE GO TO SLIDE 22, I'M SORRY, 21. THIS IS 4 26 ADAMS STREET. UH, THIS IS THE FENCE THAT IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME. NOT A SINGLE PROPERTY ON ADAMS STREET OR IN ALL OF DEAN WILLIAMS HAS A FENCE THAT LOOKS LIKE THIS, BUT THIS FENCE WAS APPROVED BY THE H B R C AND THE O H P. SO IF WE ARE HANGING ON OUR HAT, OUR HAT ON THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO OTHER FENCE LIKE THIS ON ADAMS STREET, WHY WAS 1 4 26 ADAMS APPROVED? BECAUSE IT'S NOT BEING HELD TO THE SAME STANDARD. UM, LET'S SEE, THE NEXT SLIDE 23 IS 2 35 PE THE CORNER LOT AND IDENTICAL FENCE. THE NEXT SLIDE IS THREE 10 AND THREE 12 EACH ARSENAL. AGAIN, METAL PANEL FENCE. IT'S A CORNER LOT. UM, YOU'RE LOOKING AT SLIDE 26. IT'S A GOOD KIND, IT'S A BUSINESS. UM, THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME FENCE WE DO. UM, SLIDE 28 IS TWO 15 WEST JOHNSON [00:25:01] IDENTICAL FENCE. UM, 6 22 CEDAR. UM, THAT IS TWO STREETS AWAY FROM US. AN IDENTICAL FENCE TO THE ONE WE WANT TO PUT UP. UM, 6 43 CEDAR. UM, IT'S NOT IDENTICAL, BUT IT IS FAIRLY SIMILAR AND IT'S A CORNER LOT. UM, YOU'RE LOOKING AT SLIDE 34, UH, 1202 SOUTH ALAMO. UH, IT'S A CORNER LOT WITH A WIRE PANEL FENCE. SAME WITH 7 36 DUMPER. UM, WIRE PANEL FENCE, MA'AM, I'M SORRY. WE'RE TRYING TO BRING UP THE POWERPOINT, BUT IT KEEPS FREEZING. IT'S SO LARGE THAT, UH, SOME OF THE IMAGES ARE TAKING A LONG TIME TO POP UP. OKAY, DO YOU WANT ME TO WAIT? UM, WE'RE TRYING TO SHUT IT DOWN AND BRING IT BACK UP AGAIN. SEE IF IT'LL WORK. REALLY, THE MORAL OF THE STORY IS THERE ARE 52 OF THESE FENCES AND I HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF ALL 52 OF THEM. UM, AND ALL OF THESE FENCES ARE WITHIN A STONE'S THROW OF OUR HOUSE. SO, UM, I, IT WAS INTERESTING BECAUSE WHEN I SPOKE WITH MS. PHILLIPS ABOUT WHEN, WHEN I FOUND OUT THAT THEIR STIPULATION WAS IT HAD TO BE WROUGHT IRON OR WOOD TICKET, I HAD REACHED OUT TO MS. PHILLIPS AND I SAID, LOOK, I HAVE FOUND WELL OVER 50 FENCES, UM, THAT HAVE THIS THAT HAS THE SAME EXACT FENCE. AND SHE SAID, GREAT, THIS IS EXCELLENT, HODA, SUBMIT THAT INFORMATION TO THE O H P. AND WHEN I WENT TO MY H D R C MEETING, UM, WE ALSO HAD TECHNICAL ISSUES. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT PLAYED A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THEM DENYING IT. UM, BUT THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO SEE ALL OF THE PHOTOS OR THE STREET ADDRESSES. UM, BUT WHAT I FOUND INTERESTING IS WHEN THE COMMISSIONERS KEPT COMING UP WITH A REASON TO TRY TO DENY THE FENCE AND THAT THEY KEPT SAYING, OH, WELL, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER CORNER LOTS DON'T HAVE FENCES. UM, I THINK THE MOST SHOCKING RESPONSE THAT I RECEIVED FROM A COMMISSIONER AT H D R C WAS WHEN ONE OF THEM SAID, I JUST DON'T FEEL LIKE A FENCE BELONGS THERE. UM, I WAS PRETTY MUCH RENDERED SPEECHLESS AT THAT POINT. UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT FEELINGS LED THIS COMMISSIONER TO THINK THAT I CAN'T HAVE THAT FENCE, BUT 52 OTHER PEOPLE COULD. UM, MY OTHER ISSUE IS THIS ISN'T MY FIRST TIME BEFORE THE H D R C. I'VE LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR OVER SEVEN YEARS. UM, AND IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME O H P HAS MADE DECISIONS THAT I FELT LIKE WERE NOT, UH, CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD. UM, THE FIRST TIME IS WHEN WE PUT IN OUR BACKYARD FENCE, UM, O H P CAME BACK AND SAID, OH, WELL THERE AREN'T ANY, UM, HORIZONTAL FENCES, HORIZONTAL CEDAR, BACKYARD FENCES. AND I CAME FORWARD AND GAVE THEM A LIST OF JUST 10 PROPERTIES AND THEY WERE LIKE, OH, OKAY, THAT'S FINE. AND THEY GRANTED THE REQUEST. UM, THE SECOND INSTANCE WAS WHEN WE WERE BUILDING OUR GARAGE, I WAS TOLD WE HAD TO UPGRADE OUR GARAGE DOOR TO BE WOOD INSTEAD OF ALUMINUM BECAUSE WE LIVED ON A PROMINENT VISIBLE CORNER OF KING WILLIAMS. UM, AS YOU KNOW, WOOD GARAGE DOORS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE. THEY REQUIRE MORE ACCESSORIES TO LIFT, UM, AND THEY REQUIRE MORE MAINTENANCE. UM, NEVERTHELESS, I AGREE TO THAT STIPULATION AND I PUT IN A WOOD GARAGE DOOR ONLY TO FIND, NOW FIND OUT THAT A NEAR IDENTICAL STRUCTURE AT 800 EAST EAST GUNTHER WAS APPROVED TO INSTALL ALUMINUM GARAGE DOORS. BOTH PRODUCTS OR UH, PROJECTS WERE APPROVED MONTHS APART, AND CONSTRUCTION WAS HAPPENING SIMULTANEOUSLY. 800 EAST GUNTHER IS ALSO A CORNER LOT. UM, AND THEY'RE ALSO IN A VERY PROMINENT VISIBLE CORNER OF KING WILLIAMS. SO WHY IS IT THAT 800 GUNTHER IS HELD TO A DIFFERENT STANDARD THAN I AM? UM, SO MY INTENTION IN BRINGING UP THESE PAST INCIDENCES IS TO ILLUSTRATE THE FAILURE BY THE O H P AND THE H D R C. I UNDERSTAND, AND I'M HAPPY THAT A PROCESS EXISTS TO MAINTAIN OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS. IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE MOVED HERE. UM, I'M JUST ONE RESIDENT IN ONE OF OUR MANY HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS AND CAN PROVIDE YOU THREE INSTANCES WHERE O H P AND H D R C HAS BEEN INCONSISTENT, UNINFORMED, AND ALMOST ARBITRARY [00:30:01] IN THEIR DECISION. UM, I PERSONALLY THINK IT'S AN ISSUE OF INADEQUATE STAFFING. UM, BUT IN THE END OF ALL OF THIS, I'VE LOST $600, TWO DAYS OF WORK AND COUNTLESS HOURS RIDING AROUND ON A BICYCLE, TAKING PHOTOS OF FENCES. UM, SO I JUST WAS HOPING, YOU KNOW, THIS WOULD HELP YOU IMPROVE H C R C. I'M NOT HERE TO BASH IT. I THINK THEY'RE VERY IMPORTANT. UM, I JUST WANT THEM TO BE CONSISTENT. I WANT THEM TO APPROVE ONE FENCE AND APPROVE THE OTHER FENCE BASED ON PAST FENCES, YOU KNOW, KEEP THE STANDARDS THE SAME FOR EVERYBODY. UM, AND MS. MS. CUMMINGS, UH, CAN WE, UH, KIND OF WRAP IT UP A LITTLE BIT? WE'VE, WE'VE GOT TO SEE ALL THE PICTURES. UM, WE DO HAVE TO HAVE TIME FOR QUESTIONING. OKAY. WELL, AS YOU'RE GOING THROUGH THOSE OTHER PICTURES, THOSE OTHER PICTURES WERE JUST THERE TO HIGHLIGHT CORNER FENCES THAT ARE WITHIN THE 25 FOOT, UM, VARIANCE. SO THAT WAS THE SECOND PART OF OUR APPEAL WAS TO GET THE, UM, THE VARIANCE. AND THE ONLY REALLY IMPORTANT SLIDE OUT OF THAT, UM, IS, UM, LET'S SEE, SLIDE 88. IT'S A LIST OF ALL CORNER LOTS, UM, WITH FENCES OVER THREE FEET THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, BREAK THAT VARIANCE IF YOU WILL. AND IF YOU GO TO SLIDE, UM, 90, YOU CAN SEE EXACTLY WHERE THAT FENCE WOULD BE. AND IF YOU GO TO SLIDE 91, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE GENTLEMAN STANDING THERE SIGNIFIES WHERE THE CORNER OF THAT FENCE WOULD BE. SO YOU CAN STILL EASILY SEE DOWN THE ROAD. UM, AND ALSO SEEING A WIRE PANEL FENCE IS SEE THROUGH. SO IT SHOULD NOT CAUSE ANY SORT OF OBSTRUCTION AT THAT STOP SIGN. SO, AND I THINK THE CITY AGREED, SO. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU ALSO SAID THERE WAS A COMPONENT OF YOUR PRESENTATION, THEY DEALT WITH THE CLEAR VISION. YES, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS TALK, I'M SORRY, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. UM, SLIDE 90, YOU CAN SEE THE FIRST, UM, THE CORNER LOT IS NOT EXACTLY, UM, SQUARE. SO TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, THE VARIANCE THERE IS THE, THE BIGGEST AT 16 FEET INSTEAD OF 25. SO YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE GENTLEMAN IS STANDING THERE, THAT WOULD BE THE CORNER OF THE FENCE. AND WHERE THE PHOTOGRAPH WAS TAKEN WAS FROM THE STOP SIGN. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE FENCE WOULD, WOULD NOT IMPEDE VISION AT ALL. UM, AND IT'S LIKE I SAID, SEE THROUGH, SO. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEP. UH, IS, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, UH, PEOPLE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? NOBODY SIGNED UP, BUT I DO HAVE FOUR, UH, 14 LETTERS TO READ INTO THE RECORD AND FOR THE RECORD AS WELL. UH, MS. CRUZ DID JOIN THE MEETING AT 1 32. GREAT. THANK YOU. SO THERE ARE 13 LETTERS ALSO. YES, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY. I HAVE 13 NEIGHBORS WHO WERE KIND ENOUGH TO SIGN UP AND SAY THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF OUR FENCE. AND THESE ARE ANY, ALL THE NEIGHBORS WITHIN 200 FEET OF OUR HOME. SO THEY'RE THE ONES WHO REALLY HAVE TO STARE AT IT AS MUCH AS I DO. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY, I'M GONNA READ THESE INTO THE RECORD, UH, FROM THE KING WILLIAM HISTORIC, UH, DISTRICT FOR ASSOCIATION, UH, THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THE PROJECT, AND DO NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED FENCE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS. ALTHOUGH THERE ARE SEVERAL FRONT YARD FENCES ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE 400 BLOCK OF ATOMS, THERE ARE VERY FEW ON THE EAST SIDE. THERE'S ONLY ONE FRONT YARD FENCE IN THE 500 BLOCK OF ATOMS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET. THE GUIDELINES STATE THAT NEW FENCES, UH, SHOULD BE NOT BE INSTALLED WHERE THERE HISTORICALLY WAS NO FENCE, PARTICULARLY FRONT YARD FENCES. 4 31 ADAMS IS A CORNER LOT. NONE OF THE OTHER THREE RESIDENCES AT THIS INTERSECTION OF BARB AND ADAMS HAVE FRONT YARD FENCES, NOR DO THEY, UH, DO THEIR SIDE YARD, BACKYARD FENCES EXTEND FORWARD TO THE BACK CORNER OF THE HOME. ALTHOUGH THE GUIDELINES ALSO ALLOW FENCES IF THERE ARE PRESENT IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. IT ALSO SAYS THE APPROPRIATENESS IS DEPENDENT ON THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. IN OUR OPINION, THIS FRONT YARD FENCE, UH, WILL CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE INTERSECTION. CATTLE OR HOG PANEL FENCES ARE NEVER APP APPROPRIATE IN THE KING WILLIAMS STORE DISTRICT. THAT'S FROM MICKEY CONRAD CHAIR ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE [00:35:01] AND JOHN DOKI, PRESIDENT. NEXT ONE IS FROM NANCY DEAL FROM AT 4 22 ADAMS STREET. I'M RIGHT IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR THE FRONT YARD FENCE AT 4 31 ADAMS, UH, WITH, ON MY PERSONAL PREFERENCES WOULD BE, OR PICKETT OR ROTTER FENCE. I BELIEVE THAT WHEN THEY, UH, APPEAR BEFORE THE H R C, THE APPLICANT'S MADE A STRONG CASE FOR, FOR USING A METAL HOG WIRE FENCE BASED ON THE LARGE NUMBER OF SUCH FENCES, UH, ALREADY, ALREADY IN EXISTENCE IN THE PORTION OF KING WILLIAM THAT LIES SOUTH OF SOUTH ALAMO. ALSO, THEIR, UH, FRONT YARD FENCES ALREADY ON THREE OF THE FOUR HOUSES ON ALL ODD SIDES OF THE 400 BLOCK TWO LONG, LONG TERM AND ONE RELATIVELY RECENT. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE H C R C ALLOWED A FULL MIDDLE BAR, UH, FRONT YARD FENCE AT THE HOUSE AT 4 26 ADAMS. NOT ONLY, UM, IS THIS THE ONLY HOUSE ON THE, THE EVEN SIDE OF THE 400 BLOCK OR 500 BLOCK, BUT THE FRONT YARD FENCE. BUT IT IS THE STYLE NOT PRESENT ON ANY OTHER HOUSE IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AS FAR AS I CAN DETERMINE. ALTHOUGH I AM EASILY IN AGREEMENT WITH THE ACTIONS OF H C R C, I FEEL THAT DENYING THE STYLE OFFENSE AT 4 31 EVIDENCE WAS ARBITRARY. I WOULD HOPE THAT THE BO O A WOULD AGREE. NEXT ONE IS FROM KEVIN BROWN AT FOUR 17 ADAMS REGARDING THE PROPOSED FENCE, UH, FRONT YARD FENCE, UH, REQUEST FOR 4 31 ADAMS. I'M FULLY IN FAVOR OF THEIR, UH, FENCE PROPOSAL. ALL FRONT YARD FENCES IN THE, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD APPEAR TO BE NINE FEET FROM THE STREET. THE PROPOSAL, UH, PROPOSED FENCE LINE, UH, UP WITH THOSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTIES, ONE IN WHICH IS MY OWN. NEXT IS FROM MARNA, UH, PETERSON ROCKNEY AT 4 27 WICKERS W I'M A NEIGHBOR NEAR 4 21 ADAMS, AND I'M IN FAVOR OF THE RESIDENT RESIDENCE REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION TO TO LOCAL ZONING. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THEIR REQUEST TO HAVE A FRONT YARD FENCE AND WOULD, UH, FAVOR ANY APPEAL EXCEPTION THAT ALLOWS THEM TO DO SO. MARIA RODRIGUEZ AT FOUR 19 WIX SIMPLY SAYS SHE'S IN FAVOR. THIS IS FROM LAURA, UH, JENSEN AT 5 0 6 ADAMS ALL ALSO IN FAVOR. THIS FENCE, UH, WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH SEVERAL OTHER EXISTING FENCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH A CLEAR VISION AT THE STREET INTERSECTION. UH, THIS IS FROM RAM MATA BARRA AT FIVE 10 ADAMS. IN FAVOR, WE'LL LOOK FORWARD, UH, TO THE HOME IMPROVEMENTS. BILLY JOE GUTIERREZ AT 4 26 ADAMS, UH, IN FAVOR. THEY'RE DIRECTLY, UH, THEY'RE DIRECT LINE SITE FROM OUR HOUSE. WE DO NOT SEE AN ISSUE WITH THIS, THIS FENCE. I FEEL IT WOULD MAKE IT, UH, MORE SECURE. JACOB DIAZ AR UH, 5 0 1 WIX DEFENSE WOULD BE GREATLY, WOULD BE A GREAT ADDITION IN FAVOR, UH, LORI, I CAN'T READ HER LAST NAME. 4 23 WIX. SHE'S IN FAVOR, UH, GREAT HOMEOWNERS, UH, NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE DEMONSTRATED EXCELLENT DECISION MAKING IN THEIR HOME. MARIA BARGER, F 5 0 2 ADAMS IN FAVOR, JAKE AT 4 34 ADAMS STREET, ALSO IN FAVOR EXCUSE. AND, UH, MICHELLE MAXWELL AT 5 0 7 ADAMS, A FAVORABLE IMPROVEMENT ALSO IN FAVOR. AND THAT CON, OH, THERE'S ONE MORE. RICKY EL ELAINE LUTTON AT 4 27 ADAMS IN FAVOR. WE THINK DEFENSE IS APPROPRIATE AND NECESSARY, SO THEIR BACKYARD IS, IS VERY SMALL. THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE COMMENTARY. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. WE'RE GONNA, UH, OPEN THIS TO COMMISSIONER OF QUESTIONS. IS THERE, UM, ANY COMMISSIONER? I'D LIKE TO GO [00:40:01] FIRST. NO QUESTIONS. OKAY. I HAVE A, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. UH, AND THIS IS FOR, UM, UM, O H P STAFF. SO AFTER SEEING ALL THESE PICTURES AND HEARING, UH, A LOT OF THE DOCUMENTATION IN FAVOR, UH, AS WELL AS SPECIFICALLY THE ITEM THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE, UM, UH, FROM HISTORIC GUIDELINES THAT SEEM TO ALLOW CATTLE STYLE FENCING, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO COMMENT TO THAT? UM, SURE. SO I WILL, I'LL WE'LL JUST NOTE THAT THE EXTENSIVE PRESENTATION SHARED TODAY WASN'T PROVIDED TO THE H D R C AND THEIR DELIBERATION OF THE CASE. IT WAS JUST THOSE IMAGES I SHOWED IN MY PRESENTATION BEFOREHAND. SO, UM, THAT'S ALWAYS PROVIDED AT THE TIME. WE DID WALK THROUGH SOME EXAMPLES THAT HODA HAD SHARED WITH US ON STREET VIEW. UM, OKAY. YEAH, WELL, I, I WAS JUST, JUST WONDERING, UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER, UH, QUESTIONS BEFORE, UH, WE OPEN FOR REBUTTAL? YES, FISHER? YES. PROCEED. YES. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE HAVE BEEN ANY REVISIONS IN THE HISTORIC GUIDELINES, UM, SINCE LIKE SEVERAL OF THAT, THOSE LETTERS OR THE HISTORIC GUIDELINES WERE PULLED FROM 2016 TO A QUESTION FOR CITI. SURE. HAS THERE BEEN ANY REVISIONS SINCE 2016 ON THE HISTORIC GUIDELINES CONCERNING THE FENCES? YEAH. THANK YOU MS. FISHER. UM, WE DO HAVE A POLICY DOCUMENT THAT PROVIDES FURTHER GUIDANCE FOR THE, UM, HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, SPECIFICALLY FOR FENCING, WHICH IS A DRAFT AT THIS STAGE, IT WAS PART OF THE 2020, UM, U D C UPDATES THAT ARE, ARE STILL POSTPONED, UM, DUE TO COVID. BUT WE DO HAVE A DRAFT, UH, POLICY DOCUMENT THAT PROVIDES FURTHER GUIDANCE THAT ELABORATES ON, UM, STYLES BASED ON, UH, THE DISTRICT, UH, THAT WE'RE REVIEWING FENCES IN. AND I DO WANNA OFFER ONE CLARIFICATION. SO IN REFERENCE TO THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, THAT IMAGE THAT SHOWED, UM, AN APPROPRIATE QUOTE UNQUOTE CATTLE PANEL FENCE THAT WAS SHOWN. SO THAT IS A GARDEN LOOP STYLE FENCE. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS USED IN THE EARLY 19 HUNDREDS. AND IT DOES HAVE WOOD, UM, POSTS. IT'S NOT FULLY METAL, SO THAT IS A DIFFERENT KIND OF FENCE STYLE COMPARED TO CATTLE PANEL. UM, SO JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT CLARIFICATION. BUT, UM, YES, WE DO HAVE A DRAFT POLICY DOCUMENT. OKAY. BUT THAT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED YET? CORRECT. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, UH, STAFF ? YES, UH, COMMISSIONER BRA. GO AHEAD. UH, SO FOR O H P, ANOTHER QUESTION, UH, YOU HAD SAID THAT THE, UH, PICTURE THAT SHOWED THE WOOD FRAME ON THE FENCE WAS APPROPRIATE. SO ARE, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE WIRE MESH WITH A WOOD FRAME WOULD BE APPROPRIATE, BUT A WIRE, UM, FENCE WITH A METAL FRAME WOULD NOT BE, IS THERE A DISTINCTION THERE? SO THE, THE IMAGE THAT I WAS SPECIFICALLY REFERRING TO ON OUR HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES IS A GARDEN LOOP. SO IT'S NOT EVEN HOG WIRE, IT'S, UM, A, A GARDEN MESH TYPE LOOP, WHICH REALLY ISN'T IN PRODUCTION ANYMORE. SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONE THAT I'M REFERRING TO AS APPROPRIATE. OKAY. SO IT'S THE, IT'S THE, THE WIRE ITSELF, NOT THE FRAME, THAT'S THE ISSUE. WELL, IN OUR, UM, PARTICULAR RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS CASE, WE WERE ENCOURAGING EITHER ROT, IRON OR, UM, UH, WOOD PICKET AS THE PREFERRED MATERIAL. SO REALLY IT'S BOTH IN THIS CASE THAT WE'RE NOT SUPPORTING. OKAY. THANK YOU. MACHACA, ANNA, COMMISSIONER MACHACA, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE, UH, O H P. UH, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THESE, UH, UH, YOUR GUIDELINES WERE REVIEWED OR UPDATED OR THEY REVIEWED LIKE EVERY TWO YEARS, THREE YEARS, OR JUST WHEN AN ISSUE COMES UP? SO THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES WERE ADOPTED IN 2012, AND THEY'VE NEVER BEEN FORMALLY UPDATED. THE POLICY DOCUMENT THAT I REFERENCED THAT IS PENDING APPROVAL AS PART OF THE U D C UPDATES ARE NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE NEW GUIDELINES, BUT JUST TO PROVIDE MORE PREDICTABILITY IN THE PROCESS. SO, UM, TO ANSWER YOUR SPECIFIC QUESTION ABOUT LIKE WHOLESALE REVISIONS OR CORRECTIONS, UM, THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY UPDATE SINCE 2012. THANK YOU, [00:45:01] COMMISSIONER AMANDA? SO THIS IS FOR H UH, UH, H P. SO QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT HERE PROVIDED A PLETHORA OF PHOTOS SHOWING LOTS OF HOMES IN THE COMMUNITY THAT HAVE, WE'LL SAY SIMILAR FENCING. SO, SO I GUESS A QUESTION FOR YOU WOULD BE, HOW IS IT THAT THESE OTHERS, UH, WERE APPROVED OR THERE, YOU KNOW, AND, AND JUST LOOKING TO SEE WHAT THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHAT WAS ALREADY INSTALLED, I GUESS, THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY VERSUS WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE HERE WITH THIS PARTICULAR FENCE? SURE. UM, THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT VARIABLES. SOME ARE NEW CONSTRUCTION, SOME HAD EXISTING FENCES PRIOR TO THE GUIDELINES. AND, UM, I I ALSO NOTE WHAT I MENTIONED EARLIER, THAT ALL THIS EXTENSIVE 90 PAGE, UM, POWERPOINT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT H D R C HAD TO CONSIDER. UM, SO SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT YOU'RE SEEING TODAY FROM THE APPLICANT IS NEW AND WASN'T PART OF THEIR APPLICATION TO THE COMMISSION? WELL, I GUESS, SO MY QUESTION WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, SO AS YOU ALL DID YOUR DUE DILIGENCE TO, TO LOOK THROUGH THE COMMUNITY, I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU SAW EITHER APPLICANTS COME THROUGH, SO YOU MENTIONED NEW, NEW CONSTRUCTION. SO IS NEW CONSTRUCTION TREATED DIFFERENTLY THAN EXISTING CONSTRUCTION? RIGHT. SO OUR GUIDELINES, UM, ENCOURAGE, UH, THE APPLICANT TO LOOK AT THE STYLE OF THE HOME AND THE EXISTING BLOCK AS KIND OF THE PRECEDENT FOR WHAT FENCES ARE APPROPRIATE. SO FOR US, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE STYLE OF THE HOME, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN NEW CONSTRUCTION, AS WELL AS THE IMMEDIATE BLOCK. AND, YOU KNOW, WE RADIATE OUT FROM THERE. SO ON ADAMS, YOU KNOW, BROUGHT IRON AND WOOD PICKET ARE THE MOST PREVALENT, AND THAT'S CITED IN OUR, IN OUR, UM, FINDINGS. IT'S THE MOST PREVALENT. SO OUR RECOMMEND RECOMMENDATION IS ALWAYS BASED ON THE PREDOMINANT HISTORIC PATTERN VERSUS USING NEW KIND OF ONE-OFF EXAMPLES IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY IS KIND OF THE, UM, JUSTIFICATION FOR A NEW FENCE. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE COMING FROM. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, SO LET'S DO, UH, LET'S GO THROUGH THE REBUTTALS. I BELIEVE THAT, WHO'S THAT? I'M THE APPLICANT. OH, UH, I BELIEVE ON THESE, UH, WE GO TO THE APPLICANT FIRST AND THEN TO THE CITY. UH, SO IF YOU COULD PLEASE PROCEED, MS. CUMMINGS? YES. UM, SO MY, UM, MY QUESTION WOULD BE THAT IN 2016 THEY APPROVED 1 27 CROSSIN. THAT THAT HOUSE IS NOT NEW CONSTRUCTION. UM, THE HOUSE AT FOUR 15 MISSION, ALSO NOT NEW CONSTRUCTION, SIX 13 FEETER, NOT NEW CONSTRUCTION. UM, SO I, I DON'T THINK THAT WHETHER IT'S NEW CONSTRUCTION OR AN OLDER HOME HAS REALLY SET A PRECEDENT FOR HAVING A CERTAIN TYPE OF FENCE. UM, THERE IS NOTHING COHESIVE HERE, THERE, IT'S, IT'S, LIKE I SAID, ALMOST ARBITRARY IN THE WAY THAT THEY APPROVE THESE FENCES. UM, THE OTHER THING I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT IS THE PICTURE THAT IS IN THE U UM, IN THE GUIDELINES BOOK. UM, AS MS. PHILLIPS SAID, THEY DON'T MAKE THOSE ANYMORE. ALSO, WOOD FRAMED FENCES, UM, DON'T LAST AS LONG AS THE METAL FRAMED ONES. UM, SO PUTTING UP A WOOD FRAMED FENCE, YOU KNOW, IS, YOU KNOW, OUR FRONT YARD SITS IN DIRECT SUNLIGHT. UM, THAT WOULD MAKE IT, YOU KNOW, REALLY HARD TO MAINTAIN. UM, AND I'M JUST GONNA REITERATE THE FACT THAT AT SIX 13 MISSION, UM, THEY ALLOWED THAT FENCE THE EXACT SAME FENCE WE WANT, AND IN ORDER TO MITIGATE THE METAL PANELING, THEY, OR THE METAL FRAME, THEY ASK FOR IT TO BE PAINTED. LOOK, IF YOU WANT ME TO PAINT THE FENCE GREEN, JUST LIKE THIS ONE, I WILL HAPPILY PAINT IT WHATEVER COLOR THEY WANT ME TO PAINT IT. IF THEY WANT ME TO COVER IT IN IVY SO IT LOOKS BETTER, I'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. I'M WILLING TO WORK WITH THEM. UM, IF THIS WERE A CASE OF, LIKE I SAID, A HANDFUL OF FENCES, I CAN UNDERSTAND, BUT TO SAY THAT 52 FENCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, ARE PRESENT, BUT IT'S NOT APPLICABLE. THAT'S TWO MINUTES. MS. C*****G, DO YOU HAVE, THAT'S YOUR TWO MINUTES. UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, NOW FOR STAFF FOR A REBUTTAL. SURE. UM, HODA REFERENCED A NUMBER OF FENCES ON DIFFERENT BLOCKS. WE MENTIONED WE'RE USING ATOMS AS OUR KIND OF GUIDING, UM, RECOMMENDATION. AND THIS INCONSISTENCY, WE'RE AWARE OF IT. WE'VE WORKED VERY HARD IN THE PAST FEW YEARS TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE WITH CONSISTENCY, AND THAT'S [00:50:01] PART OF THE REASON WHY WE DRAFTED THE POLICY DOCUMENT THAT'S ON THE TABLE FOR CONSIDERATION. UM, SO WE'RE WORKING ON IT. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION THI MR. THIEL, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 7. I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE APPEAL OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S INCLUSION OF THE FOLLOWING, STIPULATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE NEW FRONT YARD FENCE, THAT THE FENCING MATERIAL BE MODIFIED TO BE MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE FENCE STYLES THAT ARE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE DISTRICT, SUCH AS WOOD PICKET OR ROT IRON FOR THE PROPERTY OF FOUR THREE RUNS ADAM STREET, APPLICANT BEING HODA COMICS. END OF MOTION. IS THERE SECOND? SECOND. OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PROCEED WITH DISCUSSION. UH, YES. YES, SIR. UM, UH, I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS GONE, UH, ABOVE AND BEYOND ON ILLUSTRATING THE FACT THAT THIS TYPE OF FENCE DOES EXIST. I'VE SPENT THE MAJORITY OF THE LAST DECADE LIVING IN SOUTHTOWN, UH, AND WELL VERSED IN THIS AREA, WALKED MY DOG UP AND DOWN ADAM STREET MANY, MANY TIMES. UH, THERE ARE PLENTY OF EXAMPLES AS SHOWN. UM, I AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT'S SUMMATION OF A ARBITRARY APPLICATION OF THESE GUIDELINES, ESPECIALLY THE ONES THAT ARE, UH, BASICALLY IT, YOU KNOW, DRAFT NOT APPROVED, YOU KNOW, SO IF NOTHING'S BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2012, THIS PERSON RUNS OFF THE GUIDELINE AND THEN IS DENIED AS A RESULT OF THAT. UH, NOT ONLY DID I FIND THAT PUNITIVE, IT'S UNFAIR. UH, SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE APPEAL, UM, AND I, UH, HOPEFULLY MY COLLEAGUES WILL BE AS WELL. THANK YOU. I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER SCHNELL HAD A SECOND. YES. UM, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE I THIS A THE APPLICANT HAS REALLY SHOWN THAT, UM, THIS DECISION WAS NOT REALLY, UM, FAIR AND I THINK THAT THE, UM, THERE'S OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE THAT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE FENCE FOR, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SHE HAS THE SUPPORT OF HER COMMUNITY AS WELL. SO I WILL BE IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICANT. FANTASTIC. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT LIKE TO, UH, CHIME IN? ZUNA? UH, UH, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER Z. YEAH, AND I CONCUR, UH, MS. CUMMINGS PROVIDED OVERWHELMING DOCUMENTATION OF THE, UH, THE STATUS THAT THE, THE SITUATION OF, UH, FENCES THAT DO, UH, PURPORT TO WHAT SHE'S, SHE'S BUILDING. ALSO THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS MOST AFFECTED ALL HOW ALL HAVE HER SUPPORT. SUPPORT. SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE APPEAL AS WELL. FANTASTIC. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING? DELMER COMMISSIONER DELMER. I, I, UH, CANNOT AGREE MORE WITH EVERYBODY. I THINK SHE DID A FANTASTIC JOB PRESENTING HER CASE AND TO HAVE THAT MANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF THOSE FENCES IS KIND OF OVERWHELMING FROM THE , THE HISTORIC DESIGN AND COM, YOU KNOW, REVIEW COMMISSION. SO I THINK THEY NEED TO, TO LOOK AT THIS A LOT MORE CLOSELY. UM, AND I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? KEVIN? UH, COMMISSIONER LOWE? YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT, UH, AGAIN, LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE HAS SAID, THIS LADY HAS, HAS DONE A GREAT JOB. SHE SHOULD POSSIBLY, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT A, DOING THIS POSSIBLY FOR OTHER PEOPLE PART-TIME. SHE DID, I THINK SHE DID SUCH A GREAT JOB. ANYWAY, JUST, UH, HATE TO SEE THIS TIME, MUCH TIME SPENT, UH, FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS. UM, I'VE BEEN AROUND THAT AREA QUITE A BIT AND I I DO AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU. IS ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. UM, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING I'VE HEARD FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL, CALL VOTE. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA, I SUPPORT THE APPLICANT. THE APPEAL. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. THI YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MENA, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE APPEAL. SO, YES, MS. BREGMAN, I SUPPORT THE APPEAL. MR. DOMER. I CONCUR. MR. LOVE I CONCUR. MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. UNA? YES, I SUPPORT THE APPEAL AND CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO SUPPORT THE APPEAL. UH, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION REGARDING THE, UH, CLEAR VISION TEAL COMMISSIONER THIEL? YES, SIR. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O EIGHT DASH 20 DASH 0 3 1 27, MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE REQUEST FOR 16 FOOT VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM CLEAR VISION OF 25 FOOT TO ALLOW A FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE NINE FEET AWAY FROM THE STREET SITUATED AT 4 3 1 ADAMS. APPLICANT BEING HODA CUMMINGS, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE [00:55:01] HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS SPECIFICALLY TO FIND THAT ONE. THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC IN THIS CASE, DUE TO THE UNIQUE CONFIGURATION OF THE LOT, AS WELL AS BOTH TYPES OF MATERIALS BEING PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. THE REQUEST FOR THE CLEAR VISION IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST AND DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT IMPACT ANY OF THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTS OR USES. D S D TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DOES NOT HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THE CLEAR VISION ENCROACHMENT AS LONG AS PROPO, AS THE PROPOSED FENCE DOES NOT GO BEYOND THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND DOES NOT ENCROACH IN THE CITY'S RIGHT OF WAY, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD NOT ALLOW THE FENCE TO BE BUILT AS PROPOSED. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE ER, 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 THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE CLEAR VISION IS TO INCREASE THE VISIBILITY WHEN ENTERING AND EXITING PROPERTIES AND LIMIT HARM TO PASSERS BY THE PROPOSED FENCE MEETS INTERSECTION SITE DISTANCE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SUPPORT, EXCUSE ME, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED OR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USE IS SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE 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 CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPOSED PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE TO HAVE NINE FOOT CLEAR VISION WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ENTER OR ALT OR ALTER THE USE OR CHARACTER OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY APPLIED OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON A 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 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 IT'S NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE DUE TO THE LOCATION OF THE LOT AS A CORNER PROPERTY, THE CLEAR VISION VARIANCE NEEDS TO BE REQUESTED TO INSTALL A FENCE. END OF MOTION. SECOND. THIS A SECOND. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. UH, I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER, SHE HAVE A SECOND AGAIN, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. FANTASTIC. UH, WE MOVE ON TO DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER THIEL. UH, YES, SIR. UH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS AS WELL. UH, IT'S A VASTLY PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE AND THE FACT THAT, UH, THE CITY, UH, D S D TRAFFIC ENGINEER DOES NOT HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT AS LONG AS IT REMAINS THAT WAY. UM, AS DESIGNED, UH, I FEEL LIKE THAT IT'S, IT'S A NON-ISSUE. UH, I OWNED A PROPERTY THAT HAD A CORNER LOT SIMILAR TO THIS IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND, UM, IT, IT, IT'S SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL SCRUTINY, UM, WHICH TO ME, I FIND TO BE UNFOUNDED, UH, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE SUCH AS THIS. SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT. GREAT COMMISSIONER. SHE, UM, I TOO WILL BE IN SUPPORT. THE PROPOSED MATERIALS ARE, UM, INCREDIBLY SEE-THROUGH. I DON'T THINK THERE'S GONNA BE ANY ISSUES, UM, WITH VISIBILITY. AND THE APPLICANT DID BRING, UH, SUPPORT FROM HER SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS FOR THIS ISSUE AS WELL. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. FANTASTIC. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD COMMENTARY? MANANA. HI, COMMISSIONER MANANA. SO, UH, LOOK ON GOOGLE MAPS. IT DOES SHOW AT ADAMS SERE THAT THERE IS A SIMILAR FENCING ON A CORNER LOT, ACTUALLY BOTH SIDES OF THE CORNER LOT. SO ON THE SAME STREET, YOU KNOW, WE DO SEE THAT THERE IS THE SUMMER FENCING, SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MICHELLE. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE APPEAL. THIS WOULD BE THE VARIANCE, MA'AM, I'M SORRY, I MISSPOKE THE VARIANCE. I CONCUR. MR. MIN SUPPORT OF THE VARIOUS CONCUR, MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. THI 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. DELMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. LOVE CONCUR, MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND SHARE. ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT, UH, VARIANCE OF, UH, PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, UH, STAFF. WE'RE GONNA GO, UH, BACK TO ITEM NUMBER ONE, THE AGENDA ELECTION OF OFFICERS, [01:00:01] UH, WHICH, WHICH, UH, STAFF MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO TAKE OVER, UH, THE REIGNS OF THE MEETING FOR THAT ITEM. TEAL. STANDBY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. STAFF. OH, SO THIS IS KAT. UM, WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL CALL FOR NOMINATION AND, UM, WE'LL TAKE NOMINATIONS FROM THE FOURTH STARTING WITH CHAIR, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW A COUPLE OF THINGS. UM, IF THERE ARE MULTIPLE NOMINATIONS AND WE WILL DO A ROLL CALL VOTE IF THERE'S ONLY ONE NOMINATION THAT WE CAN DO A VOICE VOTE. IF WE DO HEAR A NAYYY, THEN WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL VOTE. SO FIRST WE'LL START WITH, UM, CHAIR. I'LL ASK FOR NOMINATIONS, AND THEN I'LL NEED A SECOND FOR EACH OF THOSE, UH, NOMINATIONS. TEAL CREW. CATHERINE, DO YOU WANT ME TO PARTICIPATE AT ALL OR ARE YOU GONNA RUN THIS THING? OH, UM, WELL, THE CHAIR NEEDS TO, WELL, THE VICE CHAIR NEEDS TO HAND IT OVER TO ME. ALRIGHT, SO YEAH, I HAND IT OVER TO YOU. . YEAH. MR. YOU SAID YOUR NAME FIRST. DID YOU WANNA, UH, MAKE A NOMINATION? YES, I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE DONALD ORIAN FOR CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. I SECOND TAKE CRUZ SECONDS. IT. DO YOU HAVE, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FOR CHAIR? ALRIGHT. UM, AND THEN WHAT I'LL DO IS WE'LL DO MY VOICE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR. WHAT YOU'LL DO IS YOU'LL RESPOND WITH AYE OR, YES. AND THEN I'LL ASK FOR THOSE OPPOSED, YOU'LL SAY, YAY OR NO. SO, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE NOMINATION FOR SERVE OF MR. ORIAN. UH, PLEASE SAY AYE OR, YES. AYE. AYE. AYE. YES. ANYONE OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. CONGRATULATIONS MR. ORIAN, YOUR CHAIR. . THANK YOU EVERYBODY. , I'LL DO MY BEST. . ALRIGHT. SO NOW WE'LL TAKE NOMINATIONS FOR VICE CHAIR BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY HIM MOVING UP CREATES A VACANCY FOR VICE CHAIR. UH, SO I'LL TAKE NOMINATIONS FROM THE FLOOR. CRUZ. OKAY. MS. CRUZ, WHO DO YOU NOMINATE? UH, I NOMINATE OZUNA FOR RICE. SECOND. OKAY. AND THAT'S A SECOND BY MR. ORIAN? MM-HMM. . OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR OF MR. OZUNA. SAY AYE OR, YES. AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. CONGRATULATIONS MR. OZUNA, YOU'RE VICE CHAIR. YAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MUCH. ALL RIGHT. NOW WITH HIS MOVING UP TO VICE CHAIR, THAT CREATES A VACANCY IN OUR PRO TEM. UH, SO RIGHT NOW WE'LL TAKE NOMINATIONS, UH, FROM THE FLOOR FOR PRO TEMP. IS THERE ANYBODY THAT'S INTERESTED IN BEING PRO TE? IT'S OKAY JUST TO RAISE YOUR HAND. WHAT'S THE REQUIREMENT? UH, IF MOTION ONLY TAKES OVER, IF BOTH CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR ARE ABSENT, ABSENT FOR THE MEETING, SETH, TO I'M HAPPY TO DO IT. OR, OKAY. SO WE HEARD MULTIPLE PEOPLE TALKING, BUT I THINK I HEARD MR. LOVE MAKE A NOMINATION FOR SETH TEAL. IS THAT CORRECT? I SECOND THAT. THIRD. THIRD. OKAY. SO FOURTH, SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY YES OR AYE. AYE. AYE. BE OPPOSED. ALL. CONGRATULATIONS MR. TEEL, YOU'RE APPROACHED HIM AND NOW I HAND IT BACK OVER TO OUR NEW CHAIR. UH, MR. ORIAN. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE, PLEASE. ITEM NUMBER THREE ON THE AGENDA. OKAY, THIS [3. 21-1314 BOA-20-10300070] CASE 1 0 3 0 0 0 7 0. THAT'S 1253 EAST PROPERTY. APPLICANT FERNANDO DEL LEON REQUEST FOR A 1900 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW, ALLOW A LOT TO BE 2100 SQUARE FEET. CURRENT ZONING IS RMM FOUR, HISTORIC, A H O D. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A, IS A CORNER LOT LOCATED WITHIN THE, THE HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. THE PROPERTY IS A SHALLOW, UH, DEPTH LOT AND CURRENTLY VACANT. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE OF THE MINIMUM LOCK SIZE TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP A TWO STORY RESIDENCE ON THIS LOT. UH, THE H C R C HAS REVIEWED AN APPROVED PROPOSED SITE PLAN. THE APPROVED SITE PLAN IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH BC SETBACK REQUIREMENTS SITE PLAN ITSELF. SUBJECT PROPERTY SURROUNDING AREA. [01:05:06] STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ZONING IN BO A 21 0 3 0 0 0 7 0 PATIENT WITH FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE LOT SIZE OF THE, UH, PROPERTY IS 2100 SQUARE FEET SQUARE. AND THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE WILL MAINTAIN THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK ONCE DEVELOPED. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL REMAIN IN HARMONY WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. SLIDE 26 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I DO HAVE FERNANDO DEON ON THE, ON THE LINE. MR. DEON, WHEN YOU'RE READY, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. OH, THANK YOU. UH, MY NAME IS FERANDO DEON. MY ADDRESS IS 1650 WEST ATCH, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78 2 0 1. AND I AM THE APPLICANT FOR THIS CASE. AND, UH, WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A LOT THAT'S, UH, ONLY 2100 SQUARE FEET. THE ZONING IS RN 4,000, MEANING THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT A LOT. UM, THE LOT AS FAR AS I I I COULD SEE IT RESEARCH, UH, IT'S BEEN IN THIS CONFIGURATION SINCE TWO, UH, 1993, AND I DIDN'T GO ANY FURTHER BACK . BUT AS OF 19 THREE, IT WAS IN THIS CONFIGURATION. UH, THERE WAS A PREVIOUS AND EXISTING HOME HERE, AND I BELIEVE IT WENT THROUGH SOME TYPE OF A FIRE ISSUE. AND THE CITY ENDED UP DOING A EMERGENCY DEMOLITION IN, UH, 2016. NOW THE OWNERS ARE LOOKING INTO, UH, UH, REBUILDING AND, UH, PROVIDING PLANS THROUGH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO STRUCTURE. SO WE ARE GOING THROUGH ALL THIS, UH, UH, STEPS IN ORDER TO GET A PROPER ADDRESSING THE PLANNING. UM, AND OF COURSE, THE BUILD PERMIT. UH, SO THIS IS ONE OF THE FIRST STEPS THAT, UH, THAT WE HAVE TO DO IS GET THE, UH, APPROVAL FOR A 2100 SQUARE FOOT LOT. UH, WE WILL RESPECT THE, UH, THE RMM, UH, UH, SETBACKS. UH, WE DID PRESENT THIS TO THE H D R C. THE H D R C WAS MAINLY CONCERNING IN A KEEPING UP WITH THE, UH, WHEN WE SUBMIT PLANS TO THEM, THAT WE AT LEAST ALIGN THE HOUSES THROUGH CROCKETT, UM, THROUGH CROCKETT ROAD, ALIGN THOSE HOUSES. SO IF BY ALIGNING UP, YOU WILL MEET THE, UH, R FOUR SETBACKS. SO, UM, IF I'M HERE, IF YOU WANT, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, I'D BE GLAD TO RESPOND TO 'EM. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH STAFF. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTARY? NO, SIR. NONE AT THIS TIME. ALL RIGHT. SO, UH, IS THERE ANY OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UM, YES, MR. DEON? UM, JUST A HIGH QUESTION OF PROPERTY IS ONLY, OR THE BUILDING'S ONLY GONNA BE 21 SQUARE FEET, DOES THAT LEAVE ENOUGH SPACE FOR, FOR SOME KIND OF BACKYARD OR ADDITIONAL BUILDING IF YOU NEED IT? WELL, WE, OUR BUILDING, UH, THE BUILDING PROBABLY WILL BE ABOUT, UH, ABOUT THE FIRST FLOOR, MAYBE ABOUT 700 SQUARE FEET. UH, WE STILL DON'T KNOW. WE'RE GONNA GO A TWO STORY ON THIS, UH, BUT WE WILL HAVE APPROXIMATELY 10 FOOT BACKYARD. OKAY. UH, YES. OKAY, BECAUSE I COULDN'T TELL WITH THE PICTURE IS SHOWING, DO YOU HAVE ANY KIND OF, UH, UH, GREEN BELT AREA IN THAT AREA, WOULD THERE NO, I DON'T. ANY, THERE'S, THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD, YOU WOULD SAY YOU WOULD NEED TO KNOCK DOWN A TREE OR ANYTHING? TH THIS, THIS SIDE REALLY HAS NO TREES. THERE'S A FEW AGAINST THE, AGAIN, AND SOME OF THE PICTURES DO SHOW THAT THERE'S A TREE, UH, PROBABLY RIGHT AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE. UH, BUT NOT IN OUR, IN OUR, UH, LOT. OKAY. SO WE WOULD PLAN ACCORDING TO THE U D C. ALRIGHT. SO, SO IT WOULD, IT WOULDN'T BLOCK ANYTHING FROM BEING FROM GREENVILLE. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANNA MAKE SURE. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? ALRIGHT, UH, MR. DA LEON, UH, THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY, UH, UM, PUBLIC COMMENTARY AGAINST, BUT IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A QUICK, UH, UH, REBUTTAL STATEMENT, THAT'D BE FINE. UH, CLOSING STATEMENT, LOOK FOR YOUR YES, SIR. LOOKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN THIS. THIS IS A REALLY SMALL LOT TOUGH TO DESIGN, BUT I THINK WE WILL, UH, WITH YOUR APPROVAL, WE WILL COME BACK WITH A NICE DESIGN, UM, THAT, UH, [01:10:01] H D R C WILL LOVE TOO. UH, AGAIN, UH, IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR ABOUT FIVE YEARS AND WE WOULD LIKE FOR SOMETHING TO BE BACK INSTEAD OF JUST LIVING IN, UH, DAYCARE. SO YOUR SUPPORT WILL REALLY HELP US OUT IN, IN, UH, PUT IN A BRAND NEW HOUSE IN THIS, UH, IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. FISHER COMMISSIONER FISHER. YES, I, UH, THIS ADJUSTED TEMPLATE FOR A MOTION GRANTING OF VARIANCE REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 21 0 3 0 0 0 7 0. I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRAND REQUEST FOR A 1900 SQUARE FEET VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW A LOT TO BE 2100 SQUARE FEET SITUATED AT 1 2 5 3 EAST CROCKETT STREET, APPLICANT BEING FERNANDO DE LEON. 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 WILL 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 APPLICANT IS DEVELOPING A VACANT LOT IN THE PROPOSED DESIGN, HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY WOULD BE PRESERVED TOO DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINARY ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED, WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AND THE APPLICANT CANNOT BUILD ON THIS SMALL LOT SIZE BY THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE OR ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIATED JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE PROPOSED DESIGN IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. THE H R C D ALSO DETERMINED ITS CONSISTENCY. ITS CONSISTENCY WITH THE SURROUNDING HISTORIC PROPERTIES. BY GRANTING THE VARI THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE OP 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 THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THE REQUESTED VARIANCE, WILL NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES, AND DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT DUE TO THE SUBDIVIDED PARCELS. THERE ARE SIMILAR PROPERTIES WITH SMALL LIGHTS WITH SMALL LOT SIZE WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS 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 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 OWNER, NOR DUE TO FOR FINANCIAL. THE REDUCED SIZE OF LOT IS A COMMON CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND APPLICANT FOLLOWED THE HISTORIC GUIDELINES AND RECEIVED APPROVAL FROM THE H D R C BEFORE STARTING TO CONSTRUCT. UH, I WILL BE IN, UH, FAVOR OF, UH, THIS POSITION. UM, THIS, THE HOUSE, THE, IT APPEARS THAT THERE ARE OTHER SMALL LOTS, UH, THAT ARE CONSTRUCTED. EXCUSE ME, WE, UH, YEAH, WE NEED TO GET A SECOND ON ON THE RECORD. RECORD PLEASE. SECOND. SECOND. [01:15:01] IS THAT, UH, BAGMAN? YES. OKAY, FANTASTIC. YES. UH, PLEASE, PLEASE PROCEED. COMMISSIONER FISHER. OH, THANK YOU. UH, THERE'S OTHER SMALL LOTS WITHIN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED ON, AND I FEEL LIKE THE, UH, DESIGN AND SCOPE AND THE THOROUGHNESS IN WHICH THE, UH, OWNER HAS PLANNED, UH, THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS HAS BEEN A THOROUGH, AND I THINK THAT THAT WILL BE A BENEFIT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER RACKMAN? YES. I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. UM, SAN ANTONIO IS FACING A SEVERE CRISIS AND SURE WHEN IT COMES TO HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, AND IF WE DON'T LOOK OUTSIDE THE BOX AND TRY AND BUILD ON SMALLER LOTS THAT ARE AVAILABLE, IT'S JUST GOING GET WORSE. SO I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS' LIKE TO ADD COMMENTARY? OH, ZUNA, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA. YEAH, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. ALL ANYONE ELSE, UH, STAFF APPROVED OF THE FACIL OF THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE APPROVAL. AND THEN THE SETBACK LINE WILL ALSO, UH, BE IN, IN UNIFORMITY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ALRIGHT, FANTASTIC. UH, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO GO ON RECORD? SHELL, UH, COMMISSIONER, SHELL, UM, I ACTUALLY, IF IT'S NOT TOO LATE, I HAD A QUESTION, JUST A CLARIFICATION. UH, WE CAN, UH, PAUSE WHERE WE'RE AT AND GO BACK INTO A PUBLIC MEETING FOR A QUESTION. THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. I APOLOGIZE. YEAH. OKAY, LET'S DO THAT. WE'RE GONNA, UH, GO BACK TO THE OPEN UP THE PUBLIC MEETING AGAIN, STAFF, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, UH, FROM COMMISSIONER SHELL, UM, MY QUESTION IS, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW HOW MANY UNITS WERE BEING PROPOSED FOR THE NEW RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE, UM, BECAUSE R M FOUR IS A MULTI-FAMILY ZONING. UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY IF THIS WAS GONNA BE A SINGLE FAMILY, IF IT WAS PLANNING TO BE A DUPLEX OR HOW MANY UNITS THE APPLICANT WAS PLANNING ON. DID, DID Y'ALL HEAR MY QUESTION? STAFF? THIS IS THE APPLICANT. MAY I ANSWER? UH, WELL, LET'S, UH, THE QUESTION IS FOR STAFF. UH, STAFF, WAS THERE ANYTHING ON THE APPLICATION? THE QUESTION IS SINGLE FAMILY. SO ULTIMATELY, UH, THIS FIRST CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION, UH, AND IT'S GONNA BE ONLY A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN ON THAT, BECAUSE THE DENSITY FOR AN RM FOUR IS 11 UNITS, UH, PER ACRE AT A 2100 SQUARE FOOT LOT, THEY, THEY'D HAVE TO COME BACK TO US FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. IS THAT CORRECT? UH, THEY'D HAVE, THEY'D HAVE TO REZONE IT. UM, STANDBY. OKAY. SO THE PROPERTY IS ZONED ARMED FOUR, WHICH IS A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND ALLOWS UP TO FOUR UNITS SO LONG AS IT MEETS A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE. UM, SO RIGHT NOW, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, AND, AND, UH, MR. DELEON CAN CHIME IN IF HE, IF HE WANTS TO, UH, IT'S A, IT'S A PROPOSED FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE ONLY TIME THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WOULD NEED, UH, TO, UH, SEE IT IS IF, UH, PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION IS ENCROACHING INTO STEP BACK. OKAY. UH, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT. MR. DE LEON, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO QUICKLY ADD TO THAT? UH, I GUESS THAT THIS WILL BE A SINGLE FAMILY. IT'S ALREADY A SMALL LOT, UH, SO THE HOUSE IS STILL, IS GONNA BE SMALL, AND SO THERE'S NO ROOM FOR MORE THAN A SINGLE FAMILY. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN, AND WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE MOTION THAT IS ON THE TABLE. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS OR, UM, COMMISSIONER? SHE WAS THAT, WAS THAT IT FOR YOUR, UH, FOR YOUR COMMENTARY? YES. THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION AND I WILL BE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. FANTASTIC. IS THERE ANOTHER COMMISSIONER THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADD? HEARING NONE. STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MICHELLE. YES, I SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. TEAL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRECKMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. LOVE I CONCUR, MS. FISHER? YES, I CAN CONCUR. MR. UH, OZUNA. HELLO, MR. OZUNA? UH, YES, I CONCUR WHAT THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF, UH, FACT, UH, THE UNANIMOUS MOTION PASSES. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. [01:20:05] NEXT CASE IS [4. 21-1315 BOA-20-10300120] D O A 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 0 AT 3 26 RIVERSIDE DRIVE COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE APPLICANT IS PATRICK CHRISTENSEN TO REQUEST FOR A 40 FOOT VARIANCE, THE MINIMUM RIVER, UH, RIO OVERLAY SETBACK OF 50 FOOT TO ALLOW NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS TO BE 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. CURRENTS ONLY IS I D Z ONE HISTORIC 3 0 5 MC ONE A H O D, UH, WITH USES PERMITTED IN M MS 18. AND NEXT SLIDE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 3 26 RIVERSIDE DRIVE, 84 FEET AWAY FROM ROOSEVELT AVENUE AND NORTH OF SAN ANTONIO RIVER. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS SURROUNDED BY MIXED USES, INCLUDING HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY VACANT AND ITS SOUTHEAST CORNER IS WITHIN THE FEMA FLOODPLAIN. THE APPLICANT IS WANTING TO RE REDEVELOP A FORMER MOBILE HOME PARK AND CONSTRUCT 25 INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE PROPERTY AND REHAB. THE EXISTING HOME SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE RIO FIVE AND THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT AND ITS REAR SIDE IS FACING THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION IN RIO FIVE MAINTAIN A 50 FOOT SETBACK, UH, FROM THE TOP OF THE BANK. THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION HAS ONLY 10 FEET, UH, REAR SETBACK. THE SHORT AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND FINDS THAT DUE TO THE SITE CONDITIONS THAT INCLUDED NARROW SITE AND THAT LOW SCALE OF, UH, DEVELOPMENT, SMALL INDIVIDUAL FOOTPRINTS, THE PROPOSED SETBACK ON THE RIVER SIDE ARE APPROPRIATE. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, UH, FOR CHANGE OF ZONING FROM THE COMMERCIAL ZONED PROPERTY TO THE INFILL DEVELOPMENT ZONE, RECEIVED APPROVAL FROM CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 21ST, 2021. THIS IS A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN SUBJECT PROPERTY IN ADJACENT AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE ZONING VARIANCE FOR BO O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 20 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS EFFECT. THE LOT IS SMALL AND HAS AN ODD SHAPE, AND IT, IF THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED, THERE STILL WILL BE A 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK AND A 50 FOOT SETBACK WILL REDUCE THE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES ON THE LOT. SLIDE ONE. NOTICE RECEIVED IN FAVOR IS ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION AT THIS TIME. WE DO HAVE PATRICK ON THE LINE. PATRICK CHRISTENSEN, WHEN YOU'RE READY, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND START YOUR PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. PATRICK CHRISTENSEN, THREE 10 SOUTH ST. MARY SUITE 2,700. UH, THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN A, A LONG PROCESS. WE HAD TO GO TO THE HISTORIC DESIGNER REVIEW COMMISSION FOR, TO REQUEST APPROVAL OF A COUPLE OF OUTBUILDINGS. UH, WE DID RECEIVE THAT APPROVAL. AS PART OF THAT, WE'RE AGREEING TO REHAB AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY THAT HAD BEEN CUT UP INTO A DUPLEX. WE WILL RESTORE IT AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. AND THERE'S AN INTERESTING TWO STAR GAR TWO STORY GARAGE, UH, LOCATED BEHIND THE HOUSE THAT WE'RE GOING TO REHAB AS SORT OF A COMMUNITY CENTER FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. NOW, AS ZEKE SAID, WE'RE PROPOSING 25 NEW CONSTRUCTION SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. TWO STORY, TWO BEDROOM, TWO BATH. UH, EACH EACH UNIT WILL HAVE TWO PARKING SPACES. AND AS PART OF THIS PROCESS JUST BEING IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, WE HAD TO GO TO THE H D R C FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN APPROVAL. WE DID RECEIVE THAT. AND NOW WE'RE COMING TO YOU, OF COURSE, WITH THE SUPPORT OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE FOR, TO REQUEST A 40 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 50 FEET. THIS PROPERTY THAT'S NARROWEST IS ONLY ABOUT 160 FEET DEEP AND CUTTING IN 50 FEET WOULD REALLY HAMPER ITS DEVELOPMENT AND, AND THE AFFORDABILITY OF THE UNITS. AND THAT'S KIND OF BEEN THE GOAL ALL ALONG IS TO, TO MAKE UNITS THAT ARE AFFORDABLE IN THIS AREA. THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY NEW HOUSING, SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING CONSTRUCTION IN THIS PART OF TOWN IN, IN DECADES. UH, WE'VE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY. THEY ARE NOT PROPOSING TO BUILD A SIDEWALK ON THIS STRE ON THIS SIDE OF THE RIVER BANK ON, ON, IN THIS STRETCH OF THE RIVER. THEY BELIEVE THAT IT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT TOO STEEP THERE FOR THAT. UM, BUT IF THEY DO, WE HAVE, WE HAVE AGREED WITH THE COUNCILMAN'S OFFICE TO WRITE A, A PUBLIC ACCESS GATE TO, TO A RIVER WALK IF IT IS EVER BUILT. UH, WE BELIEVE THE, THE NARROWNESS OF THE PROPERTY CERTAINLY WARRANTS A, A VARIANCE. AND WE WAS RE WE, UH, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU WOULD APPROVE SUCH A VARIANCE OF ANY QUESTIONS. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE AND LIKE I SAID, WE WOULD, UH, REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? [01:25:05] UM, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MANCHACA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANCHACA, UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. I, I'VE SEEN THESE QUITE A BIT, UH, WELL, QUITE A, UH, FREQUENCY. AND THE ONLY THING THAT CONCERNS ME WHEN YOU HAVE SUCH AN AGGREGATE OF SO MANY UNITS TOGETHER, UH, THE FIRE CODE SAFETY, UH, CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT ISSUE? ACCESSIBILITY? UH, ABSOLUTELY. SO WE HAVE A CIRCUIT IF YOU, IF I'M NOT SURE WHAT SLIDES YOU'RE LOOKING AT AT THE MOMENT, CLIFF, I'M, I'M, I'M A LITTLE DELAYED, BUT, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, WE'VE GOT A CIRCULAR LOOP WITHIN THE PROPERTY THAT CERTAINLY FIRE TRUCKS CAN DRIVE THROUGH. UM, THERE IS A FIRE HYDRANTS LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY THAT WE'LL HAVE ACCESS TO, SO OUR ARCHITECT BELIEVES IT'LL COMPLY WITH THE, THE FIRE CODE. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR, THE FIRE HYDRANTS. THANK YOU. YEAH, THERE, THERE IS ONE ON RIVERSIDE. UM, ALSO NONE OF UNITS WILL BE, WILL BE CONNECTED, IF YOU WILL. THERE WILL BE A CARPORT BETWEEN EACH PROPERTY, BUT THEY WILL NOT BE CONNECTED UNITS. EACH UNIT WILL BE ON ITS OWN PLATTED LOT WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION. A LITTLE BIT OF SPACING IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY. THANK YOU, SIR. FANTASTIC. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT. UH, STAFF. I KNOW I, I SKIPPED OVER THE PUBLIC COMMENTARY BECAUSE I, I SAW THAT THERE WAS ONE IN FAVOR. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THERE WEREN'T ANY, UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE APPLICANT. THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE, WE'D WANT TO HEAR FROM FIRST. CAN WE HEAR THE PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE? IT WAS JUST, UH, IN FAVOR FROM JAMES LI CHUS. ALRIGHT, SO IF I CAN PIPE IN. JAMES LIPITZ OWNS THE, THE BUILDING NEXT DOOR, WHICH HE'S CONVERTED INTO SORT OF A FRIENDLY STAR, FRIENDLY SPOT, NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, RESTAURANT AND BAR. OKAY, GREAT. UH, WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. UM, I NOTICED AT THE BOTTOM CORNER OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE FLOODPLAIN, AND I, I, I WAS WONDERING HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT, UM, WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP HERE. GREAT QUESTION. SO IN, IN WORKING WITH THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY, THEY GAVE US, BASICALLY WE HAVE TWO OPTIONS. EITHER REMOVE THE, THE, THE ONE STRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE LOCATED IN THE FLOODPLAIN OR REQUEST A A, A LOANER FROM FEMA. AT THIS POINT, WE'RE THINKING WE'LL PROBABLY JUST REMOVE THAT ONE UNIT, JUST HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE OPEN SPACE. UM, IT'S JUST CERTAINLY NOT WORTH THE COST AND, AND, UM, TIME INVOLVED IN A LOANER FOR JUST ONE UNIT. SO WE'LL JUST KEEP THAT BOTTOM CORNER AS OPEN SPACE. AND IS THIS GONNA BE INDIVIDUAL LOTS, UH, FOR FEE SIMPLE SALE? YEAH. OR ONE OWNER THERE? IT'S OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS? FEE SIMPLE. LOTS FOR, FOR SALE. OKAY. OKAY. IS, UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, HEARING NONE, I'D LIKE TO CALL FOR A MOTION, PLEASE. NO, ZUNA. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO BOA DASH 20 DASH THREE 20, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT A REQUEST FOR A 40 FOOT VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY SETBACK AT 50 FEET TO ALLOW THE NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS TO BE 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 3 2 6 RIVERSIDE DRIVE. APPLICANT BEING, UH, WAS THAT THE RIGHT ONE? UH, OKAY. UH, APPLICANT BEING, UH, MR. CHRISTIANSEN, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY READ, PRESENTED TO US THE FACTS THAT WE HAD DETERMINED SO THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITER LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. UH, SPECIFIC SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, UH, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY, UH, TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUEST VARIANCE FOR THE SETBACK ENCROACHMENT OF THE NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO BUILD A PEDESTRIAN SCALE MIXED USE NODE THAT IS IN HARMONY WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. UM, TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, THE LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF A FORCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AND THE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES WOULD BE LIMITED. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT, THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS TO ENSURE THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN APPROPRIATE SCALE AND DESIGN OR PLACED ALONG THE RIVER. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT RECEIVED APPROVAL FROM H D R C. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED FOR THE VARIANCE, WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATIONS OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE PERMITTED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE FOR A LESSER STEPBACK DOES NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIAL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURY, INJURING THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES, AND DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THERE WOULD BE A 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK THAT WOULD CREATE A BUFFER SPACE BETWEEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE RIVER. SIX APPLY [01:30:01] TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR THE VARIANCE OF SALT 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 THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN UTILIZED AS MANUFACTURED HOME RESIDENTIAL LOTS FOR MANY YEARS. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE OWNER, NOR DUE TO, DUE TO THE FINANCE. DUE TO FINANCIAL, UH, BOARD FINDS THAT A SMALL AND ODD SHAPE OF THE LOT SHALL WARRANT THE GRANTING OF THIS REQUEST AND A MOTION. SECOND, UH, I GOT A, A MOTION AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, PLEASE START OFF RIGHT. SO I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS VARIANCE REQUEST. UH, FIRST OF ALL, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. WE HAVE OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FROM, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, FROM THE NEIGHBORS, THE NEIGHBOR. UM, IT PROVIDES FOR ECONOMIC ACTIVITY AND DEVELOPMENT IN AN AREA THAT'S BEEN HEAVILY UNDER INVESTED IN FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. AND, UH, IT, IT PROVIDES, YOU KNOW, FOR MUCH NEEDED HOUSING, UH, WITHIN, WITHIN, UH, YOU KNOW, THE DOWNTOWN AREA. SO I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION. FANTASTIC. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. THANK YOU. YES, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS WELL, UH, FOR A LOT OF THE SAME REASONS COMMISSIONER UNA SAID, AND GOING BACK TO MY PREVIOUS STATEMENT, THAT WE NEED TO LOOK OUTSIDE THE BOX WHEN IT COMES TO CREATING MORE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY IN SAN ANTONIO. AND I THINK THIS IS GONNA DO IT NICELY. SO YES, I'M SUPPORT. AWESOME. UH, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO PROVIDE DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, UH, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, UH, VOICE MY OPINION. I THINK THIS IS A GREAT IDEA. I'M GONNA BE IN FULL SUPPORT OF IT. I LIKE THE FACT THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE CONSTRUCTING THE FLOODPLAIN AND, AND WILL MOST LIKELY ACCOUNT FOR IT DURING THE PLANNING AND, AND, AND AS THEY MOVE FORWARD WITH DEVELOPMENT. SO, UH, WITH THAT IN MIND, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MS. HIL. UM, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. TEAL. 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 FACTS. MR. ER, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. LOVE CONCUR, MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND SHARE, OR I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UH, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UM, LET'S GO ON TO THE NEXT CASE. IT'S ONLY BEEN AN HOUR AND 36 MINUTES, SO I THINK WE'RE CRUISING ALONG PRETTY GOOD HERE. THIS [5. 21-1310 BOA-20-10300135] IS BO O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 3 5 ADDRESS AT THREE 13 NORTH PINE STREET DISTRICT TWO. THE APPLICANT IS ARCHITECT ARCHITECTURE. WE REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR STEPBACK AS DESCRIBING THROUGH 10 TO ALLOW TWO STRUCTURES TO BE FIVE FEET AWAY AT THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. CURRENT ZONING IS R M FOUR HISTORIC A H O V. NEXT SLIDE. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO WITHIN THE SINGLE FAMILY AREA IN THE DIG DIGGITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO A PORTION OF THE REAR SETBACK. APPLICANT'S RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION ON NOVEMBER 18TH, 2020 IN WHAT YOU INCLUDED THE VARIANCE REQUEST. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN PRESENTED SUBJECT PROPERTY CORNER LOT SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF BO O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 3 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE REAR OF THE TWO PROPOSING FAMILY RIGHT STRUCTURES WILL BE FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE, FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY. AND THE STRUCTURES WILL MAINTAIN A 10 FOOT SEPARATION FROM THE ADJACENT STRUCTURE. NEXT SLIDE. 22 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR. FIVE WERE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION WITHIN THE AREA. WE DID RECEIVE QUITE A FEW, UH, VOICE MESSAGES IN OPPOSITION FROM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS FROM AROUND THE CITY. WE'LL BE PLAYING THOSE VOICE MESSAGES IN THE WALL, AND THERE'S NO RESPONSE FROM THE DEITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION APPLICANT. UH, FELIX, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON. UM, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE BOARD, UH, MY NAME IS FELIX ZIGA. I'M THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT. MY OFFICE ADDRESS, 1 1 7 2 3 WHISPER VALLEY STREET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 3 0. [01:35:02] UM, THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN AN INTERESTING ONE. UM, IT'S, IT, WE WENT BACK AND FORTH OR GOING THROUGH THE HISTORIC PROCESS. IT TOOK US, I THINK AROUND FOUR TO FIVE MONTHS. UM, WE, UM, WE, UM, UM, WHAT'S IT CALLED? SO, YEAH, IT TOOK US ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS. UM, WE, WE REQUESTED, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE SEEING THE TWO HOUSES TO BE BUILT ON ONE, ONE SINGLE, UH, ONE RMM FOUR LOT. UM, WE, WE HAD, UH, CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. UM, WE GOT THAT APPROVED. UM, WE WENT, THEN WE WENT BACK AND REQUESTED FINAL APPROVAL. UM, AND WE, WE WERE, UM, NOTIFIED, UH, WE, THEY SENT US TO D R C, WHICH IS LIKE THE INFORMAL REVIEW TO WORK OUT SOME KINKS. THEIR MAIN CONCERN WAS THAT THE HOUSES WERE TOO CLOSE, UH, TO PINE STREET. UM, THERE. I SEE THAT, THAT I, I, I KNOW THERE'S A LAG ON THE PRESENTATION. UM, I SEE THERE'S, THERE'S, UH, COULD YOU PLEASE MOVE, GO TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS, UM, THE STEAD BACK DIAGRAM, UM, THAT WE SUBMITTED TO HISTORIC, UH, PLEASE. YEP. WE HAVE THE SITE PLAN. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. UM, SO THE SET, THE SITE PLAN DIAGRAM SHOWS, OR THE, THE SETBACK DIAGRAM SHOWS THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS FROM STAFF. UM, UH, NOT THAT SITE PLAN, I'M SORRY, FROM, FROM THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, UH, UH, APPROVED DOCUMENTS. THERE WAS A SITE PLAN THAT HAD, UM, THE ADJACENT SETBACKS WERE THERE. NO, SIR. I LIKED IT. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. UM, SO YEAH, THE, THE, ONE OF THE CONCERNS, UH, ONE OF THE ONGOING CONCERNS WITH THE HISTORIC APPROVAL PROCESS WAS THE SETBACKS, RIGHT? AND THAT THESE HOMES ALONG PINE STREET WERE TOO CLOSE TO THE STREET. SO IT WAS REQUESTED THAT WE ALIGN THESE HOUSES A LOT BETTER. AND, AND, UM, SO WE, THAT WAS ONE OF THE, THE ISSUES. UM, THERE'S ALSO A HISTORIC SANBORN MAP THAT SHOWS THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN ALONG PINE STREET, AND THERE'S MANY HOUSES FACING PINE STREET. SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS NOT, UM, IT, IT DEFINITELY FITS THE CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE URBAN FABRIC, RIGHT? AND WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, TWO SMALLER HOMES, UM, PROVIDE HOUSING OPTIONS TO SAN ANTONIO. UM, DURING THAT HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS, WE, WE FINALLY GOT FINAL APPROVAL. THERE WAS A SMALL GROUP OF NEIGHBORS THAT, THAT OPPOSED US, BUT WE HAD THE OVERALL SUPPORT FROM THE, FROM THE, THE GREATER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, I, I, I DON'T MEAN TO SAY IT, YOU KNOW, IN, I DON'T SAY LIGHTLY, BUT, YOU KNOW, ON FRIDAY WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS MUCH OPPOSITION ON THIS PROJECT FOR THIS VARIANCE. AND, UM, THEN FIVE, THEN FIVE MINUTES BEFORE THE MEETING, I WAS NOTIFIED THAT WE HAD THIS MUCH OPPOSITION. SO IT, IT DOES FEEL A LITTLE BIT LIKE AS A, AS A, THEY'RE TRYING TO SABOTAGE THE PROJECT IN A WAY. UM, 'CAUSE YOU KNOW, WE, WE'VE ALREADY BEEN PUT THROUGH THE RINGER GOING THROUGH THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS. UM, AND LASTLY, UM, THE, UM, SO WE HAVE, OKAY, SO WE, I TOUCHED BASED ON THE SETBACKS. UM, THE OTHER THING, WE, WE WEREN'T AWARE THAT WE NEEDED THIS VARIANCE WHEN WE WERE SUBMITTING OUR DOCUMENTS TO HISTORIC BECAUSE WE, WE KNEW WE WERE GONNA HAVE TO REQUEST ADDRESSES. AND WHEN, WHEN WE WERE CREATING THESE DOCUMENTS FOR HISTORIC, UM, AND, AND OUR DESIGN DOCUMENTS, UM, WE WERE WORKING UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE 50 FOOT WIDE LOT, YOU KNOW, WAS GONNA BE ADDRESSED OFF OF POTOMAC. 'CAUSE TECHNICALLY THAT'S THE FRONT OF THE LOT, RIGHT? PINE IS A SIDE STREET. SO IF WITH THAT SETBACK ANALYSIS, THIS PROJECT WORKS, UM, EVEN AFTER THE BACK AND FORTH WITH, UM, THROUGH THE O H P AND H D R C PROCESS, UM, WHEN WE STARTED, YOU KNOW, AFTER WE GOT OUR FINAL APPROVAL FROM HISTORIC, WE, WE REQUESTED THE ADDRESSES. AND THAT'S WHEN WE WERE NOTIFIED THAT THESE BUILDINGS, BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA BE ADDRESSED OFF OF PINE STREET. 'CAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE FRONT DOOR SPACE, THAT'S WHAT'S ACTUALLY, UH, CHANGING THE WAY THE, THE REAR SETBACK, UH, RE REQUIREMENT IS GONNA BE INTERPRETED. SO WE DO AGREE WITH, UH, THE, THE ZONING STAFF AND, AND GRANTING THIS VARIANCE BECAUSE WE DO FEEL THAT IT MEETS THE SPIRIT OF THE CODE. UM, I AM CURIOUS, YOU KNOW, TO KNOW WHAT, WHAT, WHAT THE CONCERNS ARE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND HOPEFULLY WE HAVE A GOOD, UH, RESPONSE TO THOSE, UM, THAT, THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE'VE WORKED, WE'VE DONE OUR JOB. YOU SEE THAT THE DATE ON, ON THAT LAST DIAGRAM THAT'S BACK IN SEPTEMBER. YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A WHILE, UM, AND WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING. UM, BUT YEAH, THERE'S [01:40:01] A LOT OF REQUIREMENTS ON, ON, ON URBAN DEVELOPMENT, UM, CLOSE DOWNTOWN IN HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS. I APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS, UH, OF THIS CASE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, STAFF, CAN WE PLEASE GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC COMMENT? SURE. THERE'S ONE LETTER AND THEN WE'RE GONNA PLAY THE VOICEMAIL SOON AFTER THAT. OKAY. OKAY. I'M WRITING TO YOUR, UM, TO YOU AS A PROPERTY OWNER AND RESIDENT ACROSS THE STREET FROM AND WITHIN THE 200 FOOT AREA OF THE PROPERTY CITED ABOVE, I OPPOSE A REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE OF THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK, UH, BELOW. AS MY RESPONSE TO STAFF'S EVIDENCE FOR APPROVING THE VARIANCE VERSUS ON THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CONTAINS MISLEADING SUB UH, STATEMENTS REGARDING PREVIOUS CITY APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT. FOR EXAMPLE, THE ZONING CASE STATES THAT THE O H P C O A ISSUED, UH, NOVEMBER, 2020 INCLUDED A VARIANCE REQUEST. THIS IS NOT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT. ITEM NUMBER TWO, FURTHER STATES THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD DIRECTLY IMPACT THE FEASIBILITY OF THE NEW PROJECT AS ENVISIONED BY THE OWNERS AND AS APPROVED BY O H P H C R C. THIS ALSO IS NOT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT. IN FACT, O H P H E R C IS NOT TASKED TO CONSIDER FEASIBILITY OR MINIMUM SETBACKS AS THEY RELATE TO ZONING. THAT'S NOT THEIR PURVIEW ISSUE, UH, ISSUED. C O A FOR THE PROJECT ADDRESSES ONLY AREAS WITHIN THE OFFICE OFFICE'S RESPONSIBILITY. AND THERE'S NO MENTION OF THE REAR SETBACK IN ANY O H P REVIEWS OR APPROVALS. IN FACT, THE O H P A C O A STATES THAT THE APPROVAL DOES NOT AUTHORIZE THE USE OF PROPERTY BEYOND WHAT IS ALLOWED BY THE U D C, WHICH IS A CASE, UM, R OF THE MINI SETBACKS AS REQUIRED BY THE RM FOUR ZONING, UH, DESIGNATION. THE O H P C O A ALSO REFERS TO THE HOUSE IMMEDIATELY SOUTH, UH, FOR SETBACK GUIDANCE. HOWEVER, THE ZONING REVIEW STATES THAT THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH IS VACANT. THIS IS NOT, UH, CORRECT OBSERVATION OF THE ZONING REVIEW AND OBSCURES THE CO A'S INTENT STIPULATION THAT ADDRESS ONLY FRONT SETBACK, UH, THE ADDRESS ONLY FRONTS, UH, FRONT SETBACK. SECOND CV ATTACHED P P D F FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX. I HAVE VERY REAL CONCERN WHEN THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT BURDEN AN OWNER, UH, AND INITIATE THE NEED FOR VARIOUS AND ACTUALLY THE RESULT OF THE OWNER'S ACTIONS. ONE WOULD EXPECT A DEVELOPER WHO'S ALREADY BUILT A GOOD AMOUNT OF DECONSTRUCTION IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WOULD AVOID PURCHASING SIX MONTHS AGO, A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT HE COULDN'T BUILD, UH, SUCCESSFUL BUILD ON. THERE'S, THAT'S TWO MINUTES. IT'S FROM MONICA SAVINO 1120 EAST CROCKETT. SHE ALSO LEFT A VOICEMAIL AS WELL. THERE'S SOME AND WE'LL GO AHEAD THE VOICEMAILS. MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA. I LIVE AT TWO FORTY THREE EAST ATCH. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (312) 213-2842. I'M OPPOSED TO THE REQUEST FOR VARI VARIANCE FOR, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE TWO ZERO DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 5. THE DEVELOPER AND ARCHITECT AT THE MINIMUM SHOULD MEET THE BUILDING STANDARDS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE VARIOUS REQUESTS FOR CASE, UH, 1 3 5. THANK YOU. HELLO, MY NAME IS ETTE COLE. I LIVE AT 1 0 5 RENO STREET. I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO CASE D O A 20 DASH 1 3 5 AT 3 1 3 NORTH PINE. I'M IN OPPOSITION AND RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO DENY THE VARIANCE REDUCTION REQUEST FOR THIS PROPERTY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. HI, TERRY CASTILLO, 5 21 31. UM, LAST THREE NUMBERS OF THE AGENDA ITEM ARE 1 3 5 4, 3 1 3 NORTH PINE. UM, I WANTED TO EXPRESS, UM, THAT I DON'T SUPPORT THE VARIANT FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS CASE 20. UM, THERE'S NOT, UM, [01:45:08] HI, I AM TERRY CASTILLO, 5 21 31, UM, AGENDA ITEM 20 FOR THREE 13 NORTH PINE. I'M CALLING TO STATE THAT I DON'T SUPPORT THE VARIANT AND THAT THE DWELLING UNIT SHOULD NOT BE SO CLOSE TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, ESPECIALLY FOR THE TWO STORY UNIT. THANK YOU. MY NAME'S JAMES GIBSON CALLING IN RESPONSE TO, UH, THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THREE 13 NORTH PINE. IT'S DISH NUMBER 1 35. WE HAVE PROPERTY WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF THAT PROPERTY. AND, UH, SIX SEVEN ELEVEN CENTER. MY CELL PHONE NUMBER IS TWO ONE OH SEVEN EIGHT NINE OH EIGHT HUNDRED TWO ONE OH SEVEN EIGHT NINE OH EIGHT HUNDRED. THIS IS FOR, UM, A, A VARIANCE ON THE SETBACK. SAYS TO BUILD A DUPLEX. I'M CONFUSED BECAUSE THERE'S OTHER DOCUMENTATION ON MINE THAT SAYS IT'S FOR A HOUSE. SO I AM NOT QUITE SURE WHAT'S GOING ON. I'M DEFINITELY AGAINST A DUPLEX. I DON'T THINK A GOOD IDEA TO CHANGE THIS THAT EITHER. SO I WOULD BE AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BYE. YES, MY NAME IS MARY JOHNSON AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE MONTE VISTA TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND A MEMBER OF THE TIER ONE STEERING COMMITTEE. I LIVE AT 1 25 WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT AND I'M CALLING ABOUT, UH, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE, 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 5 FOR A THREE 13 NORTH PINE. UM, I'M CALLING IN OPPOSITION. I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS VARIANCE AND ASK THAT THE BOARD NOT SUPPORTED. WELL. THIS VARIANCE WAS NOT PRESENTED HONESTLY AT ZONING. UH, THIS VARIANCE COULD CREATE A PRECEDENT THAT COULD FURTHER CORRODE OUR LEGACY NEIGHBORHOOD INTEGRITY, WHICH SHOULD RESPECT THE ESTABLISHED SETBACKS THAT WITHIN OUR U D C. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS REGARDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE NUMBER 2 0 0 3 0 0 1 3 5 AT 3 1 3 NORTH PINE STREET AND DISTRICT TWO. THIS IS MARK EY. UH, MY PHONE NUMBER IS (713) 231-7869. I LIVE AT 1120 EAST CROCKETT AND I OWN ONE 19 POTOMAC ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE APPLICANT. I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUESTED VARIANCE FOR A REAR SETBACK REDUCTION TO FIVE FEET. I MOVED TO THIS HISTORIC AREA, CONFIDENT THAT THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN WOULD PROTECT THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF MY NEIGHBORHOODS FROM SUITABLE DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES WHILE ENCOURAGING RESPONSIBLE INFILL. THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND ITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND WAS ADOPTED DECEMBER 3RD, 2009. ACCORDING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THE APPLICANT'S LAND USE CLASSIFICATION IS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND RECOMMENDS THAT ALL INFILL HOUSING MATCH EXISTING HOUSING AND CHARACTER LOT LAYOUT IN SIZE, ALLOWING THIS REQUESTED VARIANCE SETBACK WITH ERODE. WHAT IS PREDICTABLE INCOMPATIBLE BETWEEN NEW DEVELOPMENT AND THE EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURES. THANK YOU, MARK ZI. MY NAME IS CYNTHIA SPILLMAN AT 900 WEST WOODLAWN. UM, 2 1 0 3 9 6 3 6 8 8. AND I'M SERVED AS PRESIDENT OF THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE VARIANCE FOR CASE NUMBER 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 5 AT 1 35 NORTH PINE. IT'S A STRUGGLE TO PROMOTE COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT IN OUR IT INNER CITY NEIGHBORHOODS WHEN A PRESIDENT IS SET TO HAVE TWO, TWO STORY HOMES. SO CLOSE TO THE LOT LINE ON A SUBDIVIDED LOT. UM, ALTHOUGH ONLY HALF OF THAT SUBDIVIDED LOT IS BEING PRESENTED TODAY, PLEASE VOTE NO TO THE REQUEST FOR VARIANCE. THANK YOU. THIS IS MARGARET LEEDS. I LIVE AT 3 0 8 KING WILLIAM IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 393-5223. AND I'M CALLING [01:50:01] IN OPPOSITION TO THE BO A 20 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 5 4 3 1 3 NORTH PINE. I AM OPPOSED TO OFFERING THAT VARIANT, SO PLEASE DENY IT. THESE BUILDINGS SHOULD NOT BE SO CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE BEHIND THEM. THERE IS PLENTY OF ROOM ON THE OTHER PART OF THE LOT TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS. THANK YOU. HI, THIS IS STEVE SIG, 1 0 5 RENO STREET. I'M CALLING, UH, IN OPPOSITION OF THE VARIANCE, UH, FOR B O A CASE 1 35 AT THREE 13 NORTH PINE. I AM OPPOSED TO THE VARIANCE ON THE SETBACK. THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF THE MESSAGES, SIR. ALRIGHT, UH, LET'S OPEN THE, UH, UH, OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, WHO WOULD LIKE TO START OFF? MINKA, UH, COMMISSIONER MINKA. UH, MAYBE I, I THOUGHT I UNDERSTOOD IT, BUT, UH, COULD YOU CLARIFY THE, THE, WHAT'S GONNA GO BACK THERE IN THE FIVE FEET? WHAT IS HE PUSHING BACK THERE? IS IT A GARAGE OR WHAT? UH, OR THERE'S THE STRUCTURE OR BOTH. I, I, I NEED CLARIFICATION ON THAT BESIDES THE SITE MAP, PLEASE. SO THE REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT, SIR, IS A 10 FOOT, AND THE STRUCTURE'S PUSHED BACK A LITTLE BIT. SO THEY NEED A, UH, FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK. THAT'S WHAT IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO. AND THE APPLICANT IS ON THE LINE THAT HE CAN CLARIFY WHAT PART OF THE STRUCTURE IS IN SETBACK. YES. HI, UM, THIS IS FELIX ZIGA, THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT. UM, I CAN CLARIFY THAT THE, THE, THE ENTIRE STRUCTURES ARE GONNA BE WITHIN THE FIVE FOOT VARIANCE THAT WE'RE SEEKING. UM, THIS WAS, UM, A COMBINATION DRIVEN BY, YOU KNOW, O H P AND THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS. THEN RE REQUESTING THAT WE'VE SET BACK THE HOUSES AS FAR BACK AS POSSIBLE. SO THIS IS, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THIS WASN'T, WE WEREN'T TRYING TO BE DECEIVING, UH, BY ANY MEANS. WHEN WE DEVELOPED THIS DESIGN, WE, WE THOUGHT THE, THE, THE, WE THOUGHT WE WERE DOING THE SETBACK ANALYSIS CORRECTLY, UH, BASED OFF OF POTOMAC STREET. RIGHT. UM, IT WAS AN ADDRESSING WHEN THIS BECAME, WE, WE WERE AWARE OF THIS ISSUE. UM, I, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS, IF I MAY, UM, ONE OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE PHONE CALLS, CALLS, YOU KNOW, A LOT, A LOT OF THE MAJORITY OF THOSE PHONE CALLS WERE IN OPPOSITION, YOU KNOW, FOR THE SAKE OF BEING IN OPPOSITION IS WHAT IT SEEMED LIKE. UM, THEY, WE, WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS LEVEL OF OPPOSITION WHEN WE WERE DESIGNING THE PROJECT. UM, THERE WAS MET MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THAT LEVEL OF OPPOSITION TO BE VOICED. UM, WE, WE, ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE PHONE CALLS MENTIONED THAT WE HAVE SPACE ON THE REST OF THE LOT. THE REALITY IS THAT WE DON'T, BECAUSE OF THE HISTORIC SETBACKS THAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO KIND OF, UH, ACCOMMODATE AND FOLLOW, AND THAT IS WHAT WE'RE CLAIMING IS, IS A CONDITION THAT WE DIDN'T CREATE. UM, AS FAR AS THE PHONE CALL THAT MENTIONED THAT IT WAS A DUPLEX. I THINK THAT MAY HAVE BEEN A, UH, MIS MISREADING OR MISUNDERSTANDING ON, ON THE STAFF. UM, IN TERMS OF THE APPLICATION, IT'S TWO BUILDINGS ON ONE PROPERTY, BUT IT'S, THEY'RE BOTH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, UH, STRUCTURES. SO, UM, THE ZONING IS RMM FOUR, WHICH ALLOWS UP TO FOUR UNITS. AND WE ARE TARGETING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ONLY DOING TWO HOUSES, IS THE INTENT. SO IF, YOU KNOW, AND A LOT OF THE OTHER PHONE CALLS HAD TO DO WITH DESIGN AND, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE CORRECT FORUM FOR DESIGN. I THINK THAT'S WITHIN, YOU KNOW, THE, THE H D C'S PURVIEW. UM, WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T APPLY FOR A VARIANCE WITH H D R C. AND I THINK THAT WAS ANOTHER MISCOMMUNICATION. UM, YOU KNOW, WITH H D R C, THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU'RE SEEING IS WHAT WAS APPROVED. AND AGAIN, WE WERE, WE, WE WENT BACK AND FORTH WITH THEM FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR THE GOOD, A GOOD, THE GOOD PART OF FIVE MONTHS. UM, AND THIS IS WHAT WAS DETERMINED TO BE, UM, ACCEPTABLE AND, AND DESIRED, UH, FOR THIS PROPERTY BASED ON, UM, THE BOTH THE OWNER'S GOALS AND, AND SIR, THE NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT, SIR? YES, SIR. UH, UH, WE, WE REALLY NEED TO STICK TO THE, THE QUESTION AND, AND IT WAS WHAT EXACTLY IS GONNA BE PUT IN THAT REAR SETBACK? UM, AND SO YOU CYCLE, I APOLOGIZE, THE TWO STRUCTURES ARE GONNA BE WITHIN THE SETBACK OR, OR THE, WE WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE REQUESTING TO PUSH THE STRUCTURES OF FIVE FOOT AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE. ARE YOU GONNA HAVE ROOF OVERHANGS INTO THE SETBACK? [01:55:02] UM, YEAH. AND THAT'S, THAT'S PRETTY STANDARD ON, ON MOST ON, ON SITE SETBACKS AND SUCH. IT USUALLY GOES TO THE WALL OF, WELL, WE'RE, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO ASCERTAIN, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO ASCERTAIN WHAT EXACTLY EXISTS WITHIN THE FIVE FEET. SO YOU, THE STRUCTURE WILL BE FIVE FEET AWAY AND YOU'LL HAVE A SMALL ROOF OVERHANG UP TO 18 INCHES? YES, SIR. OKAY. THAT'S THE INSIDE. AND THOSE, THOSE TWO AC UNITS THAT ARE SHOWN IN FRONT OF THE PARKING DRIVEWAY, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE IN THE FIVE FOOT, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S THE INTENT AS WELL. OKAY. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUE I I EVEN, I FORGOT WHICH COMMISSIONER ASKED THAT QUE POSED THE QUESTION. IS THAT MS. CHAKA? CORRECT. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, SIR? YES, SIR. THAT'S WHAT I WAS ALLUDING TO. WHO ARE THE UNITS GONNA BE? THE ROOF OVERHANG AND THE, THE, UH, THE FAMOUS ONE, THE, UH, PRIVACY FENCE THAT'LL BLOCK THE OTHER GUY AND HE GETS EXCITED. THAT KIND OF THING. SO YOU CLARIFIED FOR US. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION? BRAGMAN, UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UH, THIS IS FOR STAFF. UM, COULD YOU PUT UP ON THE SCREEN FOR US AGAIN, THE MOST RECENT, UH, UH, OPPOSITION FROM, UH, THE NEIGHBORS WITHIN THE 200 FEET BOUNDARY? BECAUSE THE ONE THAT WE WERE SENT SHOWS NO RESPONSES. SO COULD YOU PUT UP THE MOST CURRENT ONE? WE'RE GETTING THAT UP FOR YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. IT, IT APPEARS THAT THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS BEHIND TO THE RIGHT AND TO THE LEFT OF THE PROPERTY WERE NOT IN OPPOSITION, NOT IN SUPPORT, BUT NOT IN OPPOSITION. THAT IS CORRECT. IT, MOST OF THE CALLS WERE OUTSIDE THE TUNA FOOT AREA. MANANA, UH, COMMISSIONER. WHO WAS THAT? MANANA, NANA MANANA. UH, PLEASE GO. SO ONE OF THE, UM, OPPOSITION LETTERS TALKED ABOUT A ZONING CASE, AND SO THEY, THEY TALKED ABOUT, I GUESS, SO LOOKING AT THIS PROPERTY, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING TO, TRYING TO, UH, CORRELATED TO WHAT I SEE ON THE, UH, GSD WEBSITE, YOU KNOW, SO IS THIS PROPERTY DIVIDED? HOW'S THIS PROPERTY DIVIDED, I GUESS? AND SO THE BACKSIDE, WE'LL SAY ON THE POTOMAC SIDE, IS THERE A PROPERTY, A STRIP OF PROPERTY GOING ALONG THE BACKSIDE THERE THAT SEPARATES IT FROM 1 22 ADDRESS? OR HOW IS THIS, HOW IS THIS LOT, I GUESS, DIVIDED? SO THE IMAGE YOU'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW IS ACTUALLY TWO LOTS. THEIR LOT IS THE CLOSEST TO PINE STREET. IT'S, IT'S CUT RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE. UH, SO THEY'RE BUILDING THE TWO HOMES ON THAT LOT. UM, ANY OTHER HOMES BUILT ON THE NEIGHBORING LOT WOULD BE FRONTING, UH, POTOMAC, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA, I, I DID DO SOME RESEARCH I'D LIKE TO ADD TO THAT. SO THIS IS LOT SEVEN AND EIGHT. UH, AND THEY, AND THEY, THEY HAVE APPROXIMATELY 25 FEET FRONTAGE ON POTOMAC. THE NEIGHBOR BEHIND AT 1 22. UH, POTOMAC HAS, UH, A HAS LOT SIX AND A VERY SMALL PORTION OF LOT FIVE CREATING A 38 FOOT WIDE LOT. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY, UH, OTHER COMMISSIONERS' LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION? SHALL I ACTUALLY HAVE TWO QUESTIONS? YES, PLEASE PROCEED. UM, JUST ACTUALLY, UH, CHAIR, COULD YOU CLARIFY WHAT YOU JUST SAID OR, OR REPEAT WHAT YOU JUST SAID? OH, SURE. THAT THE NEIGHBORING, THE NEIGHBORING OWNER AT 1 22 POTOMAC OWNS, UM, LOT SIX, FIVE AND SIX. YEAH. UH, WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW THAT IS REFLECTED AS 1 22 POTOMAC, UH, ON THE COMMON LOT LINE WITH THE APPLICATION IS ALL OF LOT SIX AND THEN THE EAST 13, UH, SOME ODD FEET OF LOT FIVE. OKAY. AND SO, YOU KNOW, AS YOU MOVE TOWARDS PINE, THE LOT NUMBERS GROW TO FROM ONE TO EIGHT, WHEREAS SUBJECT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SEVEN AND EIGHT. GREAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. UM, I HAD ANOTHER, UH, QUESTION, UH, ACTUALLY JUST FOR STAFF, UM, THE FIRST LETTER THAT WAS RED, IT SAID THAT THERE WAS A P D F ATTACHED TO HAVE THAT, SO WE CAN SEE WHAT WAS SENT IN. WE'RE LOADING THAT NOW. AND FOR CLARIFICATION, THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY IN, IN RED IS LOT SEVEN AND EIGHT, BUT THEY'RE ONLY BUILDING ON LOT EIGHT. OKAY. UM, DOES THE APPLICANT OWN LOT SEVEN ALSO? THAT IS CORRECT. ACTUALLY, UM, , JUST IF YOU CAN CLARIFY THAT, UM, THE, I HAVE THE OWNER ON THE LINE AND, UM, HE CAN SPEAK TO THAT. I, I, I BELIEVE IT'S STILL IN COMMON OWNERSHIP AND IT'S JUST NOT GONNA BE DEVELOPED AT THIS TIME. UM, BRETT? [02:00:03] YES. WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? UM, I WAS ASKING IF YOU ALSO OWNED LOT SEVEN AND DO YOU HAVE INTEND TO DE DEVELOP THAT IN A SIMILAR WAY, OR WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR THAT LOT? NO, THAT WOULD BE A ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. OKAY. THANK YOU. WE'RE SHOWING THAT THE ATTACHMENT FROM THE OPPOSITION LETTER. OH YEAH, HERE WE GO. SO TO CLARIFY, STAFF, WHEN HE'S ASKING FOR A FIVE FOOT SETBACK, HE'S, IT'S GONNA BE FIVE FEET FROM HIS OWN PROPERTY THAT HE'LL BE INTENDING TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY LOT. THAT IS CORRECT. BRAGMAN, UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. SO JUST A FOLLOW UP ON THAT. SO ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST THAT FACES POTOMAC? THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S THE ONE RIGHT AT THE CORNER OF POTOMAC AND PINE ON THE LEFT IMAGE, YOU CAN SEE IT KIND OF CLOUDED OVER, THAT'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY. RIGHT. SO I'M TALKING ABOUT THE PROPERTY AT, I THINK IT'S NUMBERED 1 22 POTOMAC THAT THE DEVELOPER THAT DOES NOT OWN THAT AS WELL, CORRECT? NO, THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S JUST THIS ONE HERE WITH THE, UH, LOT SEVEN AND EIGHT. OKAY. AND SO JUST TO FOLLOW UP, COMMISSIONER, UH, CHAIR ORIAN, COULD YOU, CAN YOU TELL FROM YOUR RESEARCH, UM, HOW WIDE THE SIDE SETBACK IS ON 1 22 POTOMAC? THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY THE, THE 1 22 HOUSES BACK UP TO, WELL, WE DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT 1 22 TOME THAT DOES HAVE A HOME ON IT, THAT IS, THAT IS LOCATED CLOSER TO THE WEST THAN IT IS MUCH CL IT'S ALONG THE EAST, UH, WEST LINE. SO THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF ROOM BETWEEN THE EXISTING HOME AND THE, AND THE PROPER LINE OF LOT SEVEN, WHICH IS PER THE APPLICANT TO BE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IN THE FUTURE. OKAY. THANK YOU, ANA. UH, COMMISSIONER ANA. SO, SO THIS QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT. SO, SO, UH, YOU STATED THAT THERE WERE LOTS OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMUNITY INPUT, UM, AND I GUESS I'D LIKE TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON WHAT THAT WAS. UM, AND THEN BEING THAT THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF OPPOSITION NOW, I GUESS, HOW WAS THAT MISSED? UM, AND THEN, UM, SHOULD, YOU KNOW, SHOULD THERE BE ANY CONSIDERATION TO GO BACK AND SPEAK WITH THE PEOPLE TO FIND OUT IF, IF, YOU KNOW, IF SOMETHING CAN BE DONE ABOUT THAT, I GUESS. RIGHT. UM, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. THIS IS FELIX ZIGA, THE ARCHITECT. SO WHEN I SAID THAT THERE WAS OPPORTUNITIES FOR NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT IS, IS GOING THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROCESS WITH, UH, THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION AND O H P, UM, THERE, WHEN WE WENT FOR CONSTRUCTIVE APPROVAL, WE DID NOT HAVE THIS LEVEL OF OPPOSITION WHEN WE WENT, UM, FOR FINAL APPROVAL TWICE, WE DID NOT HAVE THIS LEVEL OF OPPOSITION. UM, SO THAT'S WHAT I MEANT IS THAT THERE WAS A PUBLIC FORUM BEFORE THIS WHERE A LOT OF THESE ISSUES WERE HASHED OUT AND THIS DESIGN PROPOSAL WAS DETERMINED TO BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE SOLUTION FOR THIS PROPERTY. AT LEAST THAT WAS WHAT THE COMMISSION DETERMINED. UM, AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, I KNOW IT, IT'S, THIS IS A SURPRISING, UH, THIS IS SURPRISING TO US BECAUSE WE WEREN'T AWARE OF THIS LEVEL OF OPPOSITION UNTIL FIVE MINUTES BEFORE THE PHONE CALL TODAY. UM, THE, UM, WE, UM, YOU KNOW, I I THINK HALF OF THE RESIDENT, HALF OF THE PEOPLE THAT CALLED OR A, A GOOD PORTION OF THE PEOPLE THAT CALLED DIDN'T EVEN LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND, AND IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT, UM, THE MAJORITY WERE NOT EVEN WITHIN THE 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY. SO, UM, I I THINK IT'S, I I DON'T KNOW WHAT, WHAT HAPPENED. UM, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE, WE, WE WENT THROUGH THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS. WE, WE GOT, WE HAVE STAFF, WE HAVE A STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, FOR APPROVAL. UM, AND YES, SO, AND I THINK I, AND I'M SORRY, UH, I THINK THE OWNER WANTED TO SAY SOME WORDS AS WELL, UH, REGARDING THIS, THIS, UM, THIS, THIS QUESTION. YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE WHAT , SIR, CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE, UH, FOR THE OWNER? CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? UH, BRETT HEKE. UM, AND YOUR ADDRESS? UM, YEAH, THE APARTMENT. UM, SIR, YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE YOUR ADDRESS. YOUR [02:05:01] ADDRESS. YEAH. COULD BE YOUR OFFICE ADDRESS, BUT MY, OKAY. 1 4, 1 DAN U DRIVE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 3. THANK YOU. PLEASE PROCEED. UM, YEAH, WE HAD SPENT LIKE FIVE MONTHS THE H C R C PROCESS. WE MADE MULTIPLE ADJUSTMENTS ON THE, ON THE PROJECT, AND LIKE FELIX SAID, WE HAD THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR PEOPLE TO VOICE THEIR OPPOSITION. I THINK WE ONLY HAD LIKE ONE OR TWO PEOPLE IN. OFFICER MONICA WAS WALKING. UM, SHE LIVES ON , A BLOCK OVER, UM, AT, WHEN AVIS WAS PRESIDENT OF THE H G R, UH, DIGNITY, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, WE HAD SUPPORT DURING THE H R C PROCESS. UM, DURING THE PROCESS WE HAD, WE, I MEAN, A LOT OF PEOPLE HAD VERY POSITIVE FEEDBACK ABOUT THE PROJECT THEY LIKED. UM, BUT, UM, YEAH, THAT, THAT WAS PRETTY MUCH IT. I MEAN, WE, WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THIS AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE ALL THIS OPPOSITION, KIND OF LIKE FELIX SAID, KIND OF SHOCKING. OKAY. WELL WE MAY HAVE MORE QUESTIONS TO THAT EFFECT. IS THERE ANY, UH, OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO THIS QUESTION GOES TO THE CITY. SO, UM, FOR A STANDARD H D R C MEETING, UM, DO THEY STILL FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE SAME 200 FOOT GUIDELINE FOR SOLICITING FEEDBACK AND INPUTS? SO DO THEY SEND OUT APPROPRIATE, I GUESS, MAILINGS TO THE COMMUNITY SO THAT, UH, SO THAT THE SAME PEOPLE ARE NOTIFIED? AND THEN IF SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WAS THERE SIMILAR FEEDBACK PROVIDED AT THE H C R C MEETING? SO AS, AS THE FEEDBACK FROM THE H C R C, UH, WE'RE CHECKING ON THAT NOW, BUT AS FAR AS PUBLICATION, ALL THE REQUIREMENTS ARE THE SAME FOR NOTIFICATION. SO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN CENTER FEED, UH, THE ASSOCIATION, THE, ACTUALLY DO YOU WANT, I CAN GO AHEAD AND ANSWER THAT. UM, THIS IS COREY EDWARDS, DEPUTY HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER WITH O H P. UM, IT ACTUALLY IS A DIFFERENT, UH, NOTIFICATION, STANDARD REQUIREMENT. UH, WE DON'T DO A MAIL NOTICE FOR HT R C CASES, IT'S JUST A POSTED SIGN ON THE PROPERTY. UM, WE ALSO DO A, UM, E-BLAST. SO WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT RECEIVE NOTICE THAT WAY. UM, SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE SAME PEOPLE THAT RECEIVED NOTICE FOR THE PROJECT. UH, I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON THAT. UH, THIS, UH, FOR, FOR THE O H OFFICE OF THE O H P, DID, DO YOU SEND NOTIFICATION TO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? UH, SPECIFICALLY, YES. SO THE, WHOEVER IS THE REGISTERED ASSOCIATION CONTACT WILL RECEIVE NOTICE ELECTRONICALLY. ELECTRONICALLY THE AGENDA ELECTRONICALLY, YEAH. AND, AND DID YOU, DID YOU RECEIVE A RESPONSE TO PERHAPS ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY RECEIVED THAT NOTICE? I BELIEVE WE DID RECEIVE COMMENTS. UM, I, I DON'T HAVE THEM WITH ME, BUT I BELIEVE YOU DID. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER MANEZ, SO YOU HAVE THE FLOOR STILL? UM, I THINK THAT'S GOOD. SO I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. I DID, THANK YOU. WHO WAS THAT? OKAY, SO JUST TO CLARIFY ONE MORE TIME, THE, SO THE COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED WERE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS OUTSIDE OF DIG HILL, FROM OTHER PARTS OF, OF TOWN. UH, THAT WAS THE MAJORITY OF THE CALLS THAT WE RECEIVED. AND I, I THINK THAT THEY ALSO JUST MENTIONED RIGHT BEFORE COREY SPOKE WAS THAT OUR STANDARD IS TO SEND A NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET AND THE REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH WOULD BE DIGNITY HILL, UH, WITHIN 200 FEET OF THAT OR, OR, OR WITH WHERE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WITHIN AND, AND THAT WE DID. OKAY. UH, BUT LIKE HE DID SAY EARLIER, A LOT OF THAT VOICEMAIL OPPOSITION YOU HEARD OTHER THAN, UM, MS. SAVINO AND, UH, HER HUSBAND WERE OUTSIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. OKAY. UH, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER SOA UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA, DO YOU HAVE THE FLOOR? SO, UM, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, MOST OF THE FEEDBACK THAT CAME IN FROM AREAS OUTSIDE WERE, UM, PRESIDENTS OF OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY. IS THAT A TRUE STATEMENT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY. WHICH IS RELATIVE, I THINK. ARE THERE ANY MORE COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? ZUNA, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, AND THIS QUESTION IS FOR STAFF. I MEAN, THE REMEDY FOR THIS POSSIBLY WOULD BE KIND OF A RELAID IF HE OWNS THE, THE LOT, UM, THAT IS AFFECTED BY THE FIVE FOOT, THE MOST AFFECTED BY THE FIVE FOOT, UH, COULD HE MERELY JUST RELAID STILL COMPLY WITHIN THIS, THE LOT SIZE TO BUILD ON, UH, FOR THAT FIVE FOOT STRIP? OR COULD HE DO, I KNOW THERE'S NO CONDITIONS TO VARIANCE APPROVALS, BUT IF THERE WAS LIKE A, A A, AN EASEMENT, LIKE A FIVE FOOT NON, NO, NO BUILD EASEMENT ON THE TRACK THAT HE OWNS, COULD THOSE, UH, BE UTILIZED TO SATISFY THE FIVE OR THE 10 FOOT, 10 FOOT SIDE REAR, UH, REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT? HE WOULD'VE TO GO THROUGH THE FIGHTING PROCESS. NOW, AS FAR AS AN EASEMENT GOES, IT WOULDN'T SATISFY THE FIVE FOOT EASEMENT SETBACK WITHOUT REPLAYING THE NEIGHBOR LOT. NOW, IF YOU WANNA KEEP THE NEIGHBOR LOT IN WHOLE, UH, THAT, THAT'LL ALLOW HIM TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY OR, OR UP TO FOUR UNITS, UH, LATER [02:10:01] DOWN THE ROAD. SO THAT'S DISCUSSION OF REFIGHTING WAS NOT, UH, BROUGHT UP SINCE HE DIDN'T HAVE TO AT THE TIME. RIGHT, RIGHT. I'M JUST, IF IT WAS DENIED HERE TODAY, I MEAN, IT'S STILL DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT HE WOULD HAVE. YES, SIR. UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, SO RIGHT NOW, THE LOT THAT HE'S CURRENTLY BUILDING ON, UH, JUST BY RUNNING 95 FEET BY 51 95 COMES OUT TO 4,935 SQUARE FEET. SO AN RMM FOUR, HE, IT'S A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM. IT'D BE CLOSE, BUT THAT'S POSSIBLE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OKAY, SO I HAVE A IF, GO AHEAD. IF I MAY, UM, ON THAT LAST QUESTION, THIS IS FELIX, THE APPLICANT. WELL, NO, UH, WELL, YOU'LL HAVE A CHANCE FOR REBUTTAL. UM, I'M JUST, RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST TAKING, SORRY, BOTH. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE A QUESTION? OKAY. UH, SO I, I HAVE A QUESTION. UM, DID YOU, UH, AND THIS IS TO THE APPLICANT. DID YOU HAVE ANY SORT OF A FORMAL MEETING OR VOTE BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR PERHAPS THE, UH, ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION? UM, THIS IS FELIX ZIGA, THE ARCHITECT. I'M GONNA LET THE OWNER SPEAK TO THIS ONE BECAUSE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY, UM, WORKING, UH, IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, BRETT. OKAY. UH, WELL IF WE, WE DID HAVE, UH, APPROVAL WHENEVER AVIS WAS PRESENT, BUT SINCE THEN THE PRESIDENTS HAVE CHANGED AND WE HAD NOT REACHED OUT. WE THOUGHT, WE THOUGHT THIS WAS GONNA BE THE EASY PART AND SO WE NEVER REACHED OUT. BACK TO THE DIGNITY PHIL HISTORIC ASSOCIATION, WHEN DID THAT, WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN? UM, IT WAS PROBABLY TWO, TWO AND A HALF MONTHS AGO. THAT THREE MONTHS AGO THAT WE REACHED OUT TO ARGO AND WE GOT APPROVAL. WE GOT A LETTER OF, UH, UM, UM, WHATEVER THE ACCEPTANCE OR WHATEVER FROM DIGNITY HILL, UM, FROM FROM, FROM THE BOARD OR FROM THE, AN ARCHITECTURAL SUBCOMMITTEE? NO, THAT WAS FROM THE DIGNITY HILL ASSOCIATE. OKAY. NOT, NOT THE ARCHITECT, I THINK. DO THEY? I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE THE ARCHITECT, THEY DON'T HAVE THE ARC ANYMORE. I, I DON'T KNOW. SO THAT'S WHY I WAS WONDERING WHO, WHO WAS FROM, THEY REMOVED THE ARC. I USED TO LIVE IN NUITY, SO YEAH, THEY RE THEY, UH, DID, I THINK THEY, LIKE, GOT RID OF THE ARC. UM, AND DO YOU HAVE A, DO YOU HAVE, DID YOU PROVIDE ANY OF THAT DOCUMENTATION AS PART OF YOUR APPLICATION? UM, FELIX, DO YOU HAVE ANY, IS THAT IN ONE OF OUR, IN ONE OF OUR APPLICATIONS, I THINK IT WAS THE SECOND, THE FIRST OR SECOND TIME WE HAD THE, THE LETTER FROM DIGNITY HILL, OR THEY JUST SENT IT TO THE, TO THE BOARD MEETING. I THINK THEY SENT THE, THE LETTER IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT FOR, FOR THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION WAS SENT DIRECTLY TO O H P STAFF. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, FOR O H P STAFF, IF YOU'RE STILL ON THE LINE, DID YOU, DID YOU SEE SUCH DOCUMENTATION DURING THE PROCESS? YEAH, I CAN CONFIRM. WE RECEIVED A VERY BRIEF LETTER OF SUPPORT IN NOVEMBER, NOVEMBER 18TH. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE I OFFER, UH, UM, THE ABILITY FOR THE APPLICANT TO REBUT? SHE OKAY. YES. COMMISSIONER SHELL. UM, SO WHEN I'M LOOKING, UH, ONLINE AT THIS LAW, IT, IT DOESN'T EVER SHOW IT AS TWO LOTS, LIKE AS SEVEN AND EIGHT. IT SHOWS IT AS ONE SINGLE. SO WHEN WAS THIS RE PLATTED OR WAS THIS RECENTLY REP PLATTED INTO TWO? ARE YOU LOOKING AT BCA? I WAS LOOKING AT BCA. I'M PULLING IT UP ON THE ONE STOP MAP RIGHT NOW. YEAH. D AD WILL REFLECT IT AS WHAT, WHAT THE TAXING ENTITY IS. YOU KNOW, THE TAXING, UH, PROPERTY IS RIGHT. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE DESCRIPTION, IT SHOWS THAT THERE'S LOT SEVEN AND EIGHT. I SEE THAT. IT'S ALSO, I MEAN, ALSO ON THE ONE-STOP MAP THOUGH, IT'S SHOWN AS ONE PARCEL. RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S IT'S OWNED BY ONE. THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. OKAY. UM, SO IF NOTHING ELSE, ANYONE ELSE BEFORE I GIVE THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO PROVIDE A REBUTTAL? OKAY. APPLICANT, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. UH, PLEASE. UH, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES FOR A REBUTTAL STATEMENT BASED ON THE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTARY YOU'VE HEARD SO FAR. UM, I THINK, UH, THANK YOU. THIS IS FELIX VIGA, THE ARCHITECT. UM, I THINK THE BOARD AND THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE BROUGHT UP SOME REALLY GOOD POINTS IN THE DISCUSSION. UM, I DO APPRECIATE ALL THE POINTS, UM, REGARDING THE PLATT. SO THIS, THIS, THIS PROPERTY, UH, WAS ALREADY PLATTED AS TWO LOTS AS A, AS A COMMISSIONER OR, OR CHAIR. OREN HAS A, UM, UH, COMMENTED A COUPLE OF TIMES. UM, SO THE, THE WHAT, THE, WHAT THE, WHAT THE PROPERTY OWNER DID, THEY ACTUALLY REQUESTED A C O D SO THAT THE TWO LOTS COULD BE DEVELOPED SEPARATELY. UM, AND BECAUSE EACH LOT, UH, MEETS THE 4,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR RMM FOUR. SO THAT'S THE INTENT. UM, AND THAT KIND OF CLARIFIES, OR I HOPE THAT CLARIFIES, YOU KNOW, THE PLATT STATUS OF THE PROPERTIES IS THAT THEY, THEY'VE ALWAYS BEEN PLATTED [02:15:01] AS TO LEGAL LOTS, THE SEPARATE. UM, AND BRETT, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY CLOSING REMARKS. UM, YEAH, I JUST WANTED, I JUST WANTED TO TOUCH ON, UH, THE, THE AMOUNT OF OPPOSITION THAT WAS OUTSIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, I, WE'VE WITNESSED IT BEFORE, UH, FROM MONICA. UM, WILL I, I DON'T MEAN TO GET ALLY, BUT, UH, WE'LL GET PEOPLE TO SEE NOS AND THEY RUN OPPOSITION FOR, FOR SOME TO GET. SO THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S WHY WE HAVE SO OUTSIDE OF, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, SO I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'M, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE. MANANA. COMMISSIONER MANNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 5. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ED REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE TO MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 35 DASH THREE 10 DASH ZERO ONE, TO ALLOW TWO STRUCTURES TO BE FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 3 1 3 NORTH PINE STREET, APPLICANT BEING ZIGA ARCHITECTURE STUDIO P L L C. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWED THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE 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 REAR SETBACK VARIANCE OF FIVE FOOT ZERO INCHES IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. UH, TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD DIRECTLY IMPACT THE FEASIBILITY OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECT AS ENVISIONED BY THE OWNERS AND DESIGNED, UM, AND AS APPROVED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE BY GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. THIS VARIANCE REQUEST ONLY AFFECTS THE MINIMUM REAR SETBACK AND ALLOWABLE BUILDING AREA, UH, BUILDABLE AREA, AND DOES NOT IMPACT THE OPERATION OF A USE, NOT SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE RRN FOUR ZONE. 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 REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PERFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. MANY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES HAVE REDUCED REAR SETBACKS DUE TO THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AN EVOLUTION OF THE U URBAN FABRIC AND SUBDIVISION OF A LOT PARCELS THROUGH THE YEARS. SIX, THE PLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SAW IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE 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 THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, UH, OF THIS PROPERTY THAT CREATED THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER ARE THE OWNER LOT CONDITION OR THE CORNER LOCK CONDITION, HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES AND PROJECT DESIGN AS APPROVED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND HISTORIC OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE CURRENT OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH IS PROPERTIES LOCATED AND A MOTION. SO, GOOD. UH, COMMISSIONER MANOCK, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. CAN YOU PLEASE BEGIN WITH THE DISCUSSION? SURE. SO I'M, I AM KIND OF WORKING THROUGH THIS. I'M A LITTLE BIT TORN HERE BECAUSE, UM, WHEN I HEAR COMMUNITY OUTREACH COME OUT LIKE IT HAS, UM, AND WITH AS MANY VOTING AGAINST IT, UM, I, I, I STRUGGLE WITH IT, YOU KNOW? UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, I I, YOU KNOW, I DO TAKE NOTE THAT DIGNITY HEALED DID, DID SUGGEST YES. BUT AS BEING A MEMBER OF A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE PEOPLE CALL ME TO GIVE MY INPUT FOR NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. I DO, YOU KNOW, WEIGH IN, YOU KNOW, AND BASED UPON FEEDBACK THAT I GET FROM, YOU KNOW, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ITSELF. SO, UM, SO I, I GUESS I'M A LITTLE BIT SURPRISED AT THE DIFFERENCE OF OPINION HERE FROM NEIGHBORING ASSOCIATIONS, UH, WITH THIS. UM, SO, SO RIGHT NOW I'M TENDING TO VOTE AGAINST THIS AT THIS POINT, UNLESS I HEAR SOME BETTER DISCUSSION THAN WHAT I JUST PROVIDED. COMMISSIONER BRACKMAN, YOU HAVE A SECOND? YES, I DID. THANK YOU. UM, I'M ACTUALLY GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. FROM WHAT I CAN SEE, THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS TO THE, UH, [02:20:03] SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY, UH, WERE NOT IN OPPOSITION. UM, AND APPARENTLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WAS NOT IN OPPOSITION TO IT EITHER. THE THINGS THAT I HEARD FROM, UM, THE FOLKS THAT CALLED IN, UM, IT REALLY SOUNDED LIKE THEY WERE IN OPPOSITION OF TWO HOUSES BEING BUILT ON THAT PROPERTY. NOT SO MUCH THE FIVE FOOT VARIANCE, UH, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE USING AS AMMUNITION. UM, I REALLY THINK THAT THEY WERE OPPOSED TO THE TWO PROPERTIES, THE TWO DWELLINGS BEING BUILT ON THE PROPERTY. SO, UM, I, I JUST FEEL LIKE, UM, THE PEOPLE THAT IN THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS, UM, WERE NOT IN OPPOSITION. AND I THINK THAT OUTWEIGHS PEOPLE FROM OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, THAT DON'T LIVE THERE. SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER? SHE, UM, I DISAGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BREGMAN. UM, BE, JUST BECAUSE THERE WAS NO RESPONSE, DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE IN SUPPORT. THERE WAS NOT OPPOSITION DIRECTLY ADJACENT, BUT THERE WASN'T SUPPORT EITHER. UM, AND THIS APPLICANT DIDN'T BRING ANYBODY IN FAVOR. WE DIDN'T RECEIVE SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR THIS VARIANCE, AND WE DIDN'T RECEIVE SUPPORT FROM ANYONE WITHIN THE 200 FOOT. UM, BUT WE DID RECEIVE FIVE OPPOSED, UM, AND THAT'S NOT COUNTING ALL OF THE PHONE CALLS. AND WHEN I WAS LISTENING TO THE PHONE CALLS, I MARKED DOWN HOW MANY I HEARD FROM NUITY, AND I DID HEAR, UM, AT LEAST THREE THAT WERE OPPOSED THAT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND THREE OF THEM DID. AND THOSE THREE DID APPEAR TO BE WITHIN THE 200 FEET. UM, I DON'T THINK I CAN SUPPORT THIS. I, I FEEL LIKE THERE IS OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS APPLICANT TO REACH OUT TO THE NEIGHBORS, UM, AGAIN AND SEE IF THEY CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT. BUT I, I JUST FEEL LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF OPPOSITION HERE. UM, AND SIMILAR TO WHAT COMMISSIONER MANNA SAID, UM, I'M ON THE BOARD OF MY AS WELL. AND WE DO GET ASKED FOR INPUT AT TIMES ON OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, ESPECIALLY THOSE OF US THAT ARE CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN, BECAUSE WHAT ONE, WHAT HAPPENED OFTEN AFFECTS WHAT HAPPENS IN ANOTHER. AND, UM, I THINK THAT IF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS RALLIED THE SUPPORT OF OTHER COMMUNITIES SURROUNDING THEM, UM, THEY, THEY DE THEY DESERVE TO BE HEARD OUT ON THAT. SO I'M, I'M GONNA BE OPPOSED TO THIS ONE. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS, TE SURE. TEAL, UH, COMMISSIONER TEAL? UH, YES. UH, I'M, UH, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH, UH, MS. BRAGMAN IN DISAGREEMENT WITH MICHELLE. I DON'T THINK THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD DID RALLY, UH, IN, UH, OPPOSITION TO THIS. IN FACT, THEY SUPPORTED IT GOING THROUGH H D R C WITH THE CURRENT ITERATION. UM, AND IT WAS APPARENT FROM THE PHONE CALLS THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMEBODY SENT OUT SOMETHING TO THEIR PHONE TREE. AND I DON'T THINK, UH, DEVELOPERS, ESPECIALLY INFILL DEVELOPERS IN AND AROUND DOWNTOWN, SHOULD BE SUBJECT OR BEING HELD AT BAY BY A PHONE TREE OF PEOPLE THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE THE USUAL SUSPECTS CALLING IN FOR EVERY CASE. THAT SLIGHTLY GOES AGAINST WHAT THEY FEEL IS RIGHT FOR THE CITY. UM, YOU KNOW, THE PROCESS IS GOING THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS IN ORDER TO GET SOMETHING DONE. GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS IS IMPORTANT. AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. THIS IS A UNIQUE SITE, UH, WITH UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE VARIANCE. UH, ARBITRARILY JUST DECIDING TO GO WITH WHAT WAS WRITTEN DOWN, UH, TO ME DOESN'T SEEM LIKE MOVING ANYTHING FORWARD, WHETHER THAT'S ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT OR OUR CITY AS A WHOLE. SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT. OKAY. WHO IS, WHO ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK MENCHACA? UH, COMMISSIONER MENCHACA. I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER THIEL ON THAT BECAUSE, UH, I FEEL AND, AND HEARD MORE THAN HEARD AND, AND BASED MY, UH, MY DECISION ON, UH, SUPPORTED THE APPLICANT BECAUSE OF THE DUE DILIGENCE THEY'VE DONE. AND, UH, WORKING WITH THE, UH, OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND OTHER BACK AND FORTH, BACK AND FORTH. I DON'T THINK THE SITE STEPPED ANYTHING. IF THEY MISSED ONE CALLING AND THEN, UH, GETTING INTO, UH, OUTSIDE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, SUPPORT FOR SOME LITTLE THINGS, I, I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE APPLICANT. OKAY. UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CHIME IN. UH, I, I, I'M GONNA BRING A, SOME DIFFERENT, UM, POINTS UP ON THIS. SO THIS IS A, THIS SITE IS IN A ANTIQUATED PLATTED COMMUNITY, SO THAT'S WHY THEY GOT A CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION. THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I TOOK FROM IT. BUT ONE THING THAT, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED, POTOMAC IS SHOWN TO BE A 41.25 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY. AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE, THE STRUCTURE IS SET BACK QUITE A GOOD DISTANCE FROM THE STREET. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THERE'S OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES. AND SO THEY WERE FORCED TO, TO STAY A GOOD DISTANCE AWAY FROM THAT SIDE, AS WELL AS, UH, FROM PINE, UH, LEAVING ONLY SO MUCH LAND TO [02:25:01] DEVELOP. AND, YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT THIS ONE LOT DOES EXCEED THE 4,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM, UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE ATTEMPTING TO HAVE, UH, VERY SUITABLE VEGETATION, UH, TWO CAR PARKING, UH, FOR EACH, FOR EACH UNIT. I MEAN, I THINK THAT THIS IS, UH, DONE RESPONSIBLY. AND I DO LIKE THE FACT THAT THE, UM, THE OFFICE OF O H P DID VERIFY THAT THEY DID SEE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FROM THREE MONTHS AGO, UH, GIVING THEIR SUPPORT. SO I'M, I'M, I'M GOING TO BE IN SUPPORT OF THAT 'CAUSE I FELT LIKE THIS IS, UH, RESPONSIBLE FOR THE AREA. AND, AND LASTLY, THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK, WHICH IS THE ISSUE BEFORE US, IS A SETBACK TO A LOT THAT THE APPLICANT ALSO OWNS. SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, HE CAN MAKE APPROPRIATE PLANNING AS HE BUILDS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THAT LOT, UH, TO MAKE IT INTO A, A WELL, UH, BUILT AREA. SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY 2 CENTS. IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING, UM, UH, DELMER, UH, COMMISSIONER DELMER, UH, I, I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU A HUNDRED PERCENT ON, ON, UH, YOUR POINTS THERE. AND I WILL BE IN SUPPORT, UH, OF THE APPLICANT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? OH, ZDA. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT DID A GOOD JOB WORKING WITH H D R C. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IN COMPLYING WITH THE H D R C, HE GOT INTO A, A GOTCHA SITUATION AND MORE OF A TECHNICALITY IN THE FACT THAT TO COMPLY WITH H D R C, HE HAD TO THEN REORIENT OR USE AN ADDRESS, UM, ON PINE, WHICH THEN TRIGGERED THE FIVE FOOT. UH, THAT'S MORE OF A TECHNICALITY AND IT SEEMS TO BE USED AS A CURMUDGEON OR A GOTCHA BY, UH, THE, UH, OPPOSITION TO TRY TO OPPOSE ANY DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS SUSTAINABLE. IT'S GOOD, IT, IT, IT'S WITHIN, YOU KNOW, CREATING THAT, THAT, UH, MUCH SEATED HOUSING, AFFORDABLE DOWNTOWN AREA. AND I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE VARIANCE REQUEST. THANK YOU. FANTASTIC. IS THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. ALRIGHT. UM, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MICHELLE. NO, I DON'T SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MACHACA. I SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF FACT THE APPLICANT. MS. CRUZ. NO, I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. THI YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE BINS OF FACT. MS. RACKMAN. I CONCUR WITH FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. GILMER. I CONCUR. MR. LOVE I CONCUR. MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE VOTE OF EIGHT TO THREE. THE MOTION FAILED, UM, TO THE APPLICANT. PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND DISCUSS YOUR OPTIONS. MR. CHAIR? YES. I'M GONNA CALL FOR A BREAK IF THAT'S WHERE EVERYONE'S GOING. , I WAS GONNA ADD THAT AND THEN LOOK FOR A, UH, POTENTIAL FOR CONTINUANCE OR TO SEE IF WE COULD, UM, TAKE A REVOTE ON THE PRIOR TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO SEEK MAYBE SOME, UM, SOME SUPPORT FROM THE COMMUNITY ON THE VARIANCE REQUEST. I HAVE NOT. UM, I'M GONNA HAVE TO ASK, UH, STAFF, IS IT TOO LATE TO OFFER SUCH A THING OR IS, OR IS IT NOT? YOU'LL NEED A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. AND THEN, UH, AN ALTERNATE WOULD BE, UH, PRESENTED. JUST TO CLARIFY, MOTION TO RECONSIDER WOULD COME FROM SOMEBODY WHO'S WHO VOTED NO. MOTION MASTER COMMISSIONER MANUS. I WOULD LIKE TO VOTE TO RECONSIDER, UM, GRANTED, UH, UH, UH, PER THAT DIALOGUE THAT MR. REINO PROVIDED. YES, SIR. IS THERE A SECOND? A SECOND? YES. SECOND TO COMMISSIONER ZUNA. UH, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL, ROLL CALL. VOTE. UH, FOR A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. MICHELLE? YES, I A MOTION TO RECONSIDER COMM MACHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MR. SHIELD? YES. MR. MANNA? YES. MS. BRACKMAN? YES. MR. DOMER? YES. MR. LOVE? YES. MS. FISHER? YES. MR. UNA? YES. AND CHAIR, OR IN, UH, I ALSO VOTE YES. MOTION TO RECONSIDER UNANIMOUS. AND IT PASSES. UH, SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I'M LOOKING FOR, UH, A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE STAFF, UH, MOTION STAFF. CAN YOU PLEASE PROVIDE A DATE THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD WORK? I THINK IT WOULD COME DOWN TO THE APPLICANT AS FAR AS WHAT, HOW MUCH TIME THEY NEED TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THEN WE CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION FROM THAT. OKAY. UH, SO WE HAVE, UH, SO FOR THE APPLICANT, IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A MEETING ON THE 15TH OF FEBRUARY, AND THEN THE NEXT MEETING AFTER THAT WOULD BE, UM, [02:30:01] UH, IF I'M GETTING THIS RIGHT, MARCH 1ST? THAT'S CORRECT. MARCH 1ST AND MARCH 15TH AFTER THAT. SO FOR THE APPLICANT, IS THERE A DATE THAT YOU WANT US TO, UH, CONSIDER? IS HE THERE, SIR? MR. ZIKA SHOW? HE'S STILL ON. HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO UNMUTE SIX STAR SIX TO UNMUTE. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES. YES. HEY, SORRY ABOUT THAT. UM, I WAS ON MUTE, APPARENTLY. UH, SO EVEN THOUGH WE HAD THE MAJORITY, WE, WE, THE MOTION DIDN'T PASS, WE NEED NINE AFFIRMATIVE VOTES TO PASS, UH, FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. SO WE'RE, THERE'S, WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE IS NOW IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE THIS SO YOU CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT WITH THE OPPOSITION AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UH, IS THERE A, A DATE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO OFFER? WE HAVE, UH, MARCH 1ST. MARCH 15TH OR FEBRUARY 15TH. BRETT, DO YOU THINK, UH, BY THE 15TH WE CAN GARNER ENOUGH SUPPORT? OR WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE 30 DAYS? UM, I PROBABLY NEED 30 DAYS. RIGHT. I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO WHAT, UH, WHAT, WHAT, AS FAR AS SUPPORT, WHAT ARE Y'ALL LOOKING FOR? UM, SOMETHING MORE THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY PRESENT. WE HAVE, UH, YEAH, THE VOTE WAS EIGHT TO THREE. YOUR, YOUR JOB IS TO, UH, THERE'S THREE COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE, UH, COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOR SUPPORT. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . SO, UM, WITH THAT IN MIND, WE, WE HAVE A TARGET DATE OF MARCH 1ST. CAN I HAVE A MOTION? PLEASE SHALL FOR CONTINUANCE TO, I'M SORRY. OH, GO AHEAD. NO, MICHELLE. THAT, THAT'S FINE. I THINK IT NEEDS TO COME FROM YOUR SIDE. OKAY. UM, I MOVE THAT WE, UH, CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL MARCH 1ST. SECOND. I SECOND, UH, I'M GONNA GIVE THAT TO MANNA. CORRECT. I BELIEVE THAT WAS MANNA THAT SPOKE UP. AND, UM, SO WITH THAT, UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MICHELLE? YES. MR. MANCHACA? YES. MR. CRUZ? YES. MR. THI? YES. MR. MENNA? YES. MR. BRAGMAN? YES. MR. DOMER? YES. MR. LOVE? YES. MS. FISHER? YES. MR. OZUNA? YES. AND CHAIR ORIAN? YES. UH, MOTION UNANIMOUS. UH, CONTINUE TO MARCH 1ST. AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER UNA AND, AND THE REST OF THE COMMISSION FOR, FOR LOOKING OUT FOR THE APPLICANT IN THE CITY. UH, SO WITH THAT IN MIND, I'M GONNA CALL FOR A FIVE MINUTE BREAK UNLESS SOMEONE WOULD, UH, NEED MORE TIME. WE'LL RECONVENE AT 3 43 PLEASE. WE'RE LIVE NOW. OKAY. SO K [6. 21-1316 BOA-20-10300126] C O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 2 6 AT 1 26 PAUL STREET COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO APPLICANT IS TRAVIS LOUIS' TO REQUEST FOR A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK OF FIVE FEET TO ALLOW AN ADDITION WITH NO OVERHANG TO BE THREE FEET EIGHT INCHES AWAY FROM THE SITE PROPERTY LINE. THERE'S A CODE ENFORCEMENT RECORD FOR THE PROPERTY FOR BUILDING WITHOUT PERMITS CURRENT ZONING, R M FOUR A H O D. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED, UM, THE EAST OF THE OD DO MID BLOCK ON PAUL STREET. NEIGHBORHOOD IS PREDOMINANTLY SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. VIEW 500 SQUARE FOOT STORY MASTER BEDROOM AND BATHROOM ADDITION WAS BUILT ATTACHED TO THE REAR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. OUR PRIMARY STRUCTURE. AND FOLLOWING THE EXISTING SIDE SETBACK, THE ANGULAR ORIENTATION OF THE STRUCTURE CHANGED THE FRONT AND REAR DIMENSIONS OF THE SIDE SETBACK. ORIGINAL STRUCTURE HAS AN OVERHANG WITH TWO FEET, FIVE INCHES, UH, OF THE SIDE SETBACK IN THE FRONT AND A THREE FOOT EIGHT INCH IN THE BACK. THE NEW ADDITION IS WHAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON TODAY, HAS NO OVERHANG. INSTEAD, THREE FEET, EIGHT INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. COPY THE SITE PLAN, SUBJECT PROPERTY ADJACENT. THAT'S THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY TO THE WEST. SO SETBACK IS WELL OVER 10 FEET. SIDE MEASUREMENT WITH, THAT'S THE MEASUREMENT OF THE OVERHANG THAT'S EXISTING ANYWAY. AND TO THE REAR. THAT'S THE ADDITION PORTION WITH NO, WITH NO OVERHANG [02:35:02] SURROUND NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND B O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 2 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. OF FACT, THE CONSTRUCTED ADDITION WILL BE THREE FEET, EIGHT INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND THE NEW ADDITION WAS BUILT IN LINE WITH THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE. AND THERE IS ENOUGH SPACE BETWEEN THE SUBJECT STRUCTURE AND THE ADJACENT, UH, NEIGHBOR'S BUILDING. NEXT SLIDE. 45 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND, UH, DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION. TRAVIS, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. OKAY, GREG, GUYS, I REALLY APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S TIME AND DOING THIS, ESPECIALLY DURING OUR TIMES NOW. UM, MY NAME IS TRAVIS LOUIS AND I'M ACTUALLY REPRESENTING THE OWNERS, UH, OR THE INVESTMENT GROUP THAT THIS PROPERTY BELONGS TO. UH, AND THE PROPERTY IS 1 2 6 PAUL STREET. SO, UM, DO I, DO I JUST GIVE A QUICK PRESENTATION OF THE SITUATION WITH THE PROPERTY? WOULD THAT BE OKAY? YES, SIR, THAT'S FINE. OKAY, GREAT. SO, UM, MY NAME IS TRAVIS LOUIS. THE NAME OF MY COMPANY IS RE CONSTRUCTION. UM, WE'RE ACTUALLY, WE WERE BROUGHT IN AFTER THE ADDITION WAS DONE. SO BASICALLY WE WERE KIND OF THE CLEANUP. WHAT HAD HAPPENED WAS THEY, THE ORIGINAL INVESTORS HAD HIRED A CREW AND THEY WERE JUST TRYING TO IMPROVE THE LOCATION AND THAT'S WHEN THEY DID THE ADDITION TO IT. UNFORTUNATELY, THEIR FORMER CONTRACTORS WEREN'T REALLY FOLLOWING EVERYTHING BY THE BOOK. AND THAT'S WHERE, THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THAT, UM, THE, IT IT'S ACTUALLY ON THE STRIKE TEAM FORCE RIGHT NOW AS FAR AS THEIR PERMITS. SO WHEN I TOOK OVER THE ACTUAL PROJECT ITSELF, I HAD NOTICED, HEY, LISTEN, THESE SETBACKS DON'T LOOK CORRECT. AND THAT'S WHEN WE DECIDED TO GO AHEAD AND BRING IT UP TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTERS TO SEE IF WE WERE GONNA BE OKAY WITH THOSE SETBACKS OR NOT. 'CAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE WANTED TO DO EVERYTHING CORRECTLY WITH THE CITY. SO WHEN THEY DID THEIR INVESTIGATION, THEY FOUND OUT THAT WE WERE AT THE THREE FOOT EIGHT INCHES. AND REALLY, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. WE DIDN'T TOUCH, OR THE ORIGINAL, UM, REMODEL HAD NOT CHANGED THE ELEVATION OF THE FRONT OR THE ORIGINAL BUILDING. THE ORIGINAL BUILDING WAS 782 SQUARE FEET, I BELIEVE. AND SO TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE MARKETABLE FOR A FAMILY TO LIVE IN THERE, THEY DECIDED TO GO AHEAD AND DO ABOUT A 400, 450 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION, WHICH INCLUDES A LAUNDRY ROOM, A MASTER BEDROOM, AND A MASTER BATH. IT WAS IN THE BACK. SO REALLY WE'RE HERE TODAY, UH, SPECIFICALLY JUST SEEING IF IT'S OKAY, INSTEAD OF CARRYING DOWN THAT ADDITION THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE, BUT LET ME BRING IT UP TO CODE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GOOD WITH THE CITY. IF WE COULD JUST LEAVE IT THERE. 'CAUSE IT'S NOT ENCROACHING ON ANY PATHS. IT, IT'S, IT'S FAR ENOUGH AWAY THAT WE BELIEVE FROM THE OTHER HOUSES THAT IT'S NOT A FIRE HAZARD. AND REALLY FROM THE FRONT, IT REALLY DOESN'T CHANGE THE ELEVATION MUCH AT MU I MEAN, AT AT ALL. IF YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THE FRONT, YOU STILL HAVE THE ORIGINAL FRONT OF THE HOUSE, EVERYTHING WAS DONE TO THE BACK. UM, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO SEE IT FROM THE, THE, THE SIDE VIEWS, BUT I MEAN, AGAIN, IT, IT'S NOT REALLY NOTICEABLE FROM THE FRONT. SO WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE PLEADING WITH YOU GUYS, IF POSSIBLE, IF YOU GUYS COULD GRANT US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT. UM, AND BASICALLY JUST BRING EVERYTHING BACK UP TO CODE, WHICH WE'RE ALREADY WORKING WITH THE STRIKE TEAM, WITH THE STRUCTURE'S ALREADY BUILT, UH, WE'RE GONNA MAKE SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO, OF, OF COURSE, UH, TO CODE, UM, TO BRING IT BACK INTO WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE A A, A SAFE BUILDING, A SAFE WELL. AND THAT'S REALLY OUR GOAL HERE. OKAY. UM, IS THERE, FOR STAFF, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC, UH, DOCUMENTATIONS FROM THE DENVER HEIGHTS YOU LIKE THAT NEED TO BE READ IN? YES, SIR. SO, DEAR CASE PLANNER, UH, THE DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION EXECUTIVE BOARD WORKING TOGETHER IN TO BETTER OUR COMMUNITIES OVER OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSE THE ABOVE REFERENCED BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE AT 1 26 FALLS STREET. THE REQUEST, THAT REQUEST FOR A ONE FOOT, UH, FOUR INCH VARIANCE IN THE, IN THE MINIMUM SITE SETBACK BY FEE TO ALLOW POSITION AND OVER INCHES AWAY FROM THAT PROPERTY LINE REQUEST, IS HEREBY DENIED BY DENVER HEIGHTS UNIVERS ASSOCIATION, UH, SIGNED BY AUBREY LEWIS PRESIDENT. AND THAT IS THE ONLY COMMENT THAT WE RECEIVED. OKAY. UM, I'M SORRY, YOU GUYS ARE GONNA KILL, YOU GUYS ARE GONNA KILL ME. SO WHAT EXACTLY WAS ? HOLD ON, MR. MR, HOLD ON, MR. OH, I'M SORRY. YEAH, SO WHAT HAPPENS NOW IS, I'M SORRY GUYS. NO, THAT'S OKAY. SO WHAT HAPPENS NOW IS, UM, THE, THE, UM, THE COMMISSIONERS WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A CLOSING STATEMENT AND OR REBUTTAL. SO AT THIS TIME, IS THERE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA, [02:40:01] UM, THIS QUESTION'S, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT. SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE REQUEST HERE AS I, AS I SEE IT. DID YOU BRING UP THE, THE, UH, SITE PLAN, UM, THAT SHOWS KIND OF THE MEASUREMENTS? AND THE QUESTION I HAVE IS CURRENTLY, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, THE, THE HOUSE IS, IS SLOPED ON A PROPERTY WHERE THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS CLOSER THAN THE REAR OF THE HOUSE AND THE LINE OF THE NEW ADDITION FOLLOWS THE HOUSE, SO THEREFORE CONTINUES TO GET FURTHER FROM THE PROPERTY, UM, UH, THE PROPERTY LINE. SO ESSENTIALLY, UH, THE NEW ADDITION IS, IS DOING BETTER TO MOVE AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. YES SIR. IT DOES FOLLOW IN LINE WITH, UM, WITH THE ORIGINAL PROPERTY ELEVATION, AND THAT IS CORRECT. IT DOES SLOPE AWAY, THE ADDITION DOES SLOPE AWAY, UM, WHEN YOU'RE FOLLOWING THAT INLINE OF THAT ELEVATION ON THE SIDE. THAT IS CORRECT. AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION, UM, IS THAT, UM, IT LOOKS LIKE WAS THERE ANY COMMUNICATION WITH DENVER HEIGHTS AT ALL BECAUSE THEY JUST KIND OF SAID NO TO IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, WITH ANY DIALOGUE. AND DID YOU HAVE ANY DIALOGUE WITH THEM WITH REGARDS TO WHAT IS THAT'S TRIED TO BE DONE HERE OR THE CHALLENGES THAT YOU'RE FACING? NO, SIR. ACTUALLY WE JUST FOUND OUT THAT DENVER HEIGHT WAS OPPOSING IT. UM, WHEN MY CASE MANAGER INFORMED US OF THAT, I BELIEVE IT WAS YESTERDAY, IT WAS TODAY OR YESTERDAY, SHE INFORMED US OF THAT. UP UNTIL THAT POINT, WE, WE WERE UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE STAFF HAD APPROVED IT, WHICH WAS GREAT. WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT THERE WAS ANY OPPOSITION UNTIL THE LAST 24 OR 48 HOURS. OKAY. THEN FINAL QUESTION HERE FOR THE CITY, DID YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK FROM DENVER HEIGHTS OUTSIDE OF JUST, JUST THE NOTE? UH, NO SIR. IT WAS JUST THE NOTICE ITSELF. OKAY. THANK YOU. BRAGMAN A COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO, UM, THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT. SO I'M LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN. AND SO WHERE IT SAYS THAT THE FRONT OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE IS TWO FEET, FIVE INCHES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE THAT IS WIDTH OR WITHOUT THE, UH, OVERHANG ON THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, I BELIEVE THAT'S WIDTH. OKAY. SO THEN FOLLOWING THE LINE BACK TO THE ADDITION, SO WHERE IT BECOMES THREE FEET, EIGHT INCHES IS FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, IS THAT WITH OR WITHOUT AN OVERHANG? THAT, THAT IS, THAT IS WITH THE OVERHANG, I BELIEVE ACCORDING TO THE NOTES THAT WE READ WHEN THE, UH, INVESTIGATION WENT OUT, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTERS WENT OUT THERE. OKAY. SO THE SITE PLAN IS NOT, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THE SITE PLAN IS NOT REALLY ACCURATE. SO THE, IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AT THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, IT'S ACTUALLY, THERE'S AN OFFSET BECAUSE OF THE OVERHANG. SO THIS SITE PLAN IS NOT REALLY ACCURATE. IT DOESN'T FOLLOW IT, IT EITHER THE, IT FOLLOWS THE OVERHANG OR IT FOLLOWS THE, THE STRUCTURE ITSELF. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH THAT IS THE SIDE, THE SIDE OF THE LANE. YES, MA'AM. SO THE, THE SITE PLAN FOLLOWS THE STRUCTURE, NOT THE OVERHANG, THE STRUCTURE? THAT IS CORRECT. IT FOLLOWS THE STRUCTURE, NOT THE OVERHANG. THAT IS CORRECT, MA'AM. OKAY. SO, SO THEN JUST TO CLARIFY, SO THEN AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WHERE IT'S THE TWO, AND I'M SORRY THE, THE GRAPHICS CHANGED, BUT WHERE IT ORIGINALLY WAS TWO FEET, FIVE INCHES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE ORIGINAL FRONT OF THE HOUSE, THAT IS WITHOUT THE OVERHANG. SO IT'S ACTUALLY CLOSER THAN TWO FEET, FIVE INCHES? I, I BELIEVE SO. IF YOU READ THE, I BELIEVE THE NOTES THAT WE GOT SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT IT WAS WITHOUT THE OVERHANG. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS? OKAY. UM, I'M, I'LL JUST, UH, I'M GONNA ASK A, A QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, EVERYONE HAS THEIR DRIVEWAY AND GARAGES ON, ON, ON THE SIDE OF THE HOME THAT EXTEND DOWN THE SIDE OF THE HOME. SO, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH YOU MAY HAVE A SLIGHT SETBACK, YOU, YOU ARE A VERY GENEROUS DISTANCE FROM THE NEIGHBORING HOME, CORRECT? THAT THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. OKAY. SO IT'S, YOU HAVE EASILY ANOTHER 10 TO 15 FEET BEFORE YOU ENCOUNTER ANOTHER STRUCTURE, BUT THAT, THAT ACTUALLY IS VERY ACCURATE? CORRECT. AND THAT'S FROM BOTH SIDES? UH, IF, IF, IF NOT MORE THAN 15 FEET. OKAY. FROM STRUCTURE TO STRUCTURE. AND IS YOUR DEVELOPMENT GONNA INCLUDE ANY, ANY, UH, FENCING IN THE, IN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY? NO. NO, SIR. IT REALLY WASN'T UNLESS YOU GUYS TELL ME TO. [02:45:01] WELL, WELL I'M JUST, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AN IDEA. 'CAUSE ONE OF, ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT, UH, COME WITH THE REDUCED SETBACK IS WHETHER OR NOT IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S SAFE IN CASE EMERGENCY PERSONNEL HAVE TO GET AROUND OR DOWN THE SIDE OF THE HOME FOR SOME REASON. AND SO I WAS JUST, I WAS JUST KIND OF CURIOUS. I MEAN THIS, UH, I NOTICED IT OPENING UP, WHICH IS GREAT, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS, AN AC UNIT OR SOMETHING ELSE THAT MIGHT BE, NO, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NO, SIR. NOT ON THAT SIDE, NO SIR. OKAY. UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE, UH, ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO RE PROVIDE A REBUTTAL STATEMENT? SHELL, UH, COMMISSIONER, SHELL, UM, JUST LOOKING UP THE, I I WAS LOOKING UP ON THE MAP, UM, THE HOUSE THAT DIRECTLY ADJACENT, UM, WHILE THERE IS THE DRIVEWAY BETWEEN, BETWEEN, UM, THIS PROPERTY AND THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, IS UM, THEIR GARAGE STILL THERE? I'M WONDERING HOW CLOSE, LIKE TOWARD THE BACK, IS THERE OVERLAP BETWEEN THE NEW ADDITION AND THE NEIGHBOR'S GARAGE AND HOW ARE, IS THE GARAGE RAJ, FROM THE ADDITION? SO, SO, OH, I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT. UM, SO NO, THAT'S OKAY. THE GARAGE, THE, THE GARAGE TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY SEPARATE FROM THE HOUSE ITSELF. UM, IF I WAS ACTUALLY FACING THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE FROM THE STREET AND I WAS LOOKING AT THE FRONT, THE GARAGE WOULD BE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE, STEP BACK AND, UH, AT THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE. RIGHT. I'M ASK, YEAH, I'M ASKING ABOUT THE NEIGHBORING GARAGE. UM, BECAUSE THIS ADDITION IS RUNNING ALONG, UM, THE NEIGHBOR'S DRIVEWAY AND THEN THEIR GARAGE IS BUILT AT THE BACK OF THEIR PROPERTY. AND SO JUST FOR WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT SETBACKS, IT LOOKS LIKE IF I LOOK ON GOOGLE RIGHT NOW, IT DOESN'T SHOW THE ADDITION, UM, BECAUSE IT'S TOO NEW. BUT IT DOES SHOW THAT THE NEIGHBOR HAS A GARAGE AT THE BACK OF THEIR PROPERTY. AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN THE NEIGHBOR'S STRUCTURE, NEW ADDITION AND, AND, AND YES, MA'AM. THERE, THERE IS. SO IF I WAS FACING THE HOUSE, ARE YOU, ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE HOUSE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE THAT HAS THE GARAGE OR THE HOUSE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE? WHEN YOU SAY ADJACENT, UH, I'M ASKING ABOUT THE HOUSE AT 1 22, SO DIRECTLY WEST. OKAY. SO YES, SO THERE IS, THERE IS THE GARAGE. UM, AND I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW FAR FROM OUR GARAGE TO HIS GARAGE IS, BUT I KNOW THAT IT, IT, IT'S GOTTA BE AN EXCESS OF BETWEEN EIGHT AND 10 FEET IS WHAT I WOULD GUESS. I DID NOT TAKE THAT MEASUREMENT. OKAY. OKAY. UH, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA EXPAND ON THAT QUESTION. SO, SO FROM YOUR, FROM THE PROPOSED ADDITION TO ANY STRUCTURE, IS THERE ANYTHING WITHIN, YOU KNOW, FIVE FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE? NO, SIR. OKAY. AND THIS IS, IS THIS ADDITION GOING TO BE A NEW GARAGE OR IS IT A HOME PART OF THE RESIDENTIAL AREA? NO, NO, IT, IT, IT WAS, IT WAS ACTUALLY BUILT ON THE BACK OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, WHICH WAS ABOUT 780 SOMETHING SQUARE FEET. UM, AND WHAT IT IS, IT'S A MASTER BEDROOM AND IT'S A MASTER BATH, INCLUDING A LAUNDRY ROOM. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? YES, COMMISSIONER, UH, I JUST WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION. IT APPEARS THAT THIS, UH, UH, STRUCTURE HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. AND THAT, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THEY GOT IN TROUBLE WITH IT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T PERMIT FOR, THEY THEY DIDN'T OWN IT CORRECTLY. THAT'S WHY THEY BROUGHT MY COMPANY IN TO KIND OF WORK WITH EVERYBODY TO BRING IT IN, UH, COMPLIANT. RIGHT. SO IT'S NOT IN, IT'S NOT PROPOSED, IT IS CURRENTLY IN PLACE. THAT THAT IS CORRECT. THAT'S ALL. I JUST WANTED SOME RIGHT. IT JUST TO CLARIFY, THAT WASN'T US . THAT'S, I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT. SO, UM, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LOOK AT AS, UH, AS WE LOOK AT VARIANCES IS WATER RUNOFF. AND CURRENTLY, UM, YOU KNOW, BEING THAT CLOSE WITH THE OVERHANG THAT'S PUTTING WATER ONTO NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. AND GENERALLY WE, WE, UH, DISCOURAGE THAT. AND SO THE BACK PROPERTY OR THE, THE, THE, THE NEW ADDITION CURRENTLY IS FLAT ROOF. AND SO IS THE ROOFING ON THAT GOING TO CHANGE TO BE MORE ALIGNED WITH THE CURRENT HOUSE? AND IF SO, THEN THE SAME QUESTION WOULD APPLY WITH REGARDS TO THE WATER RUNOFF. AND SO I GUESS MY OVERALL QUESTION IS, IS ARE YOU GONNA BE DOING ANYTHING TO MITIGATE THE WATER RUNOFF AND THEN, UM, AND THEN I GUESS, YOU KNOW, IN ADDITION TO THE BACK, UH, FRONT PIECE AS WELL AS THE BACK PIECE? YES, NO, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. AND YES, THAT WAS DEFINITELY A CONCERN FROM US WHEN WE ACTUALLY STARTED LOOKING AT THE ADDITION. [02:50:01] IT WAS A FLAT ROOF AND SO BY CODE WE'RE REQUIRED TO AT LEAST HAVE A, A A TWO INCH BASICALLY DROP OFF FROM ELEVATION. SO IF YOU CAN IMAGINE IF YOU WILL, UH, FROM WHERE IF I WAS STANDING IN BACK OF THE HOUSE, FACING THE STREET, OKAY, THAT'S LOOKING AT THE ADDITION, WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE ACTUALLY GONNA SLOPE IT TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. WE'RE GONNA SLOPE THE, WE'RE GONNA TRY AND SLOPE THE WATER DRAIN TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, MEANING THAT WE'RE GONNA INCREASE THE ELEVATION ON THE BACK WHERE, WHERE THE ORIGINAL AND THE ADDITION STARTED, IF THAT MAKES ANY SENSE. AND THEN SLOPE IT DOWNWARDS AND GIVE IT A DECLINE TO WHERE IT ALL DRAINED TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. THANK YOU. UH, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I WANTED TO, I WANTED TO ASK A FOLLOW UP TO THAT. UH, SO IT WAS STATED THAT THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED, BUT YOU JUST MENTIONED THAT YOU WERE GOING TO TRY THE SLOPE. THE, I MEAN, IS THIS, IS IT, IS IT COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION? IT IS. IT IS COMPLETED, YES SIR. IT IS. SO HOW DOES THE ROOF, HOW DOES THE ROOF DRAIN? HOW DOES THE ROOF DRAIN NOW? IT DIDN'T, THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIG THINGS THAT WE HAD ON THIS. IT, IT DIDN'T DRAIN, IT BASICALLY SAT FLAT. UH, OKAY. A LOT OF THE WATER DIDN'T EVEN DRAIN OFF. IT JUST PULLED UP ON TOP OF YOU ROOF. SO YOU HAVE A FLAT, CURRENTLY HAVE A FLAT ROOF THAT YOU'RE GOING TO REMEDIATE TO MAKE SURE THE WATER DRAINS TO THE REAR AND NOT TO THE SIDE? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER MANEZ, COMMISSIONER MAN. IS THERE ANY, UH, DID THAT I WAS, I WASN'T TRYING, I WAS TRYING TO, UM, I SAW SOMETHING I THOUGHT NEEDED TO BE CLARIFIED BASED ON YOUR QUESTION. WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WANTED TO ADD OR THAT'S, THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, SIR. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? ALRIGHT. UM, SO WITH THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A SHORT REBUTTAL BASED ON WHAT YOU'VE HEARD. UM, SO YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. OKAY. AND THERE'S REALLY NO REBUTTAL. UM, I JUST HOPE THAT YOU GUYS ARE, UM, SENSITIVE TO THE FACT THAT AGAIN, IT IS BEEN BUILT. YES, IT WASN'T DONE CORRECTLY, BUT THAT'S WHY MY COMPANY IS HERE AND WE'RE TAKING ALL PRECAUTIONS TO BRING THAT, THAT THAT ADDITION UP TO CODE INCLUDING, UH, Y'ALL'S CONCERN WITH THE, THE WATER DRAIN AND THE RAIN. OF COURSE, THAT WAS A BIG ISSUE FOR US. WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE CORRECT THAT AS WELL. UM, BUT WE, I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AND SEE WHAT THE ORIGINAL INTENT WAS FOR THESE INVESTORS, THEY WANTED TO BRING, I MEAN, IF YOU CAN LOOK, THEY'RE BUILDING RIGHT DOWN THE STREET, NEW BUILDS. UM, THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO BRING SOMETHING MARKETABLE TO HELP IMPROVE THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION. AGAIN, IT WAS AN 800 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE. UM, THEY WERE TRYING TO BRING IT TO, TO ENTICE BIGGER FAMILIES TO MOVE INTO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. 'CAUSE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD REALLY IS GROWING BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS, WHICH IS GREAT. AND SO AGAIN, IT WAS DONE WITH THE, THE SPIRIT OF TRYING TO IMPROVE THINGS. THERE WAS NO MAL-INTENT. IT WAS JUST DONE ORIGINALLY WITHOUT ENOUGH, UM, STUDY. IT WAS, IT WAS DONE WITHOUT ENOUGH, UH, REGARDS TO COMPLIANCE AND CODE. AND AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. UM, SO WHATEVER YOU GUYS RECOMMEND, OF COURSE I'M, I'M BLESSED TO BE HERE WITH YOU GUYS, SO WHATEVER YOU GUYS RECOMMEND, I WILL FOLLOW. UM, AND IF THERE'S ANY WAY WE CAN WORK THIS OUT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT BECAUSE IF, IF NOT, WE WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE TO TEAR DOWN THAT BUILDING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN BUILT, UM, WHEN IT'S NOT REALLY HURTING ANYBODY. OKAY. AND THAT'S WHAT I GOT. I, I REALLY APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S TIME. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, UNLESS THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I'M CALLING FOR A MOTION. PLEASE. WHO WAS THAT? CRUZ COMMISSIONER CRUZ. PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU KATE. UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER, UM, BO 8 21 0 3 0 0 1 2 6, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST FOR ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK OF FIVE FEET TO ALLOW AN ADDITION WITH NO OVERHANG TO BE THREE FEET EIGHT INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 2 6 PAUL STREET, APPLICANT BEING TRAVIS LOUIE BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SO THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION FOR THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE CONSTRUCTED ATTACHED ADDITION IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST, AS IT DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT ANY SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS OR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. THE ADDITION IS IN LINE WITH THE ORIGINAL BUILDING AND APPROACHES ONE FOOT FOUR INCHES INTO THE SIDE SETBACK. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. STAFF FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE APPLICANT ALREADY CONSTRUCTED THE NEW ADDITION. AND IF THE VARIANCE IS NOT GRANTED, THE STRUCTURE WOULD HAVE TO BE DEMOLISHED. TWO THREE. [02:55:01] BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE OF THE ORDINANCES 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 SIZE OF CONSTRUCTED ADDITION NOT OVERWHELMING COMPARED TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE. IT ALLOWS ADEQUATE SPACE OR MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE WITHOUT TRESPASS OR THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO, NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE PERMITTED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THE VARIANCE BY SUCH VARIANCE, WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALL THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE SITE SETBACK DOES NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING THE USE OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO ALTER THE, THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT SIX APPLIED TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS 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 NOT, AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF A GENERAL CONDITION TO 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 ARE DUE TO THE OWNER AND IT'S NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE. GIVEN THE NEW ADDITION BEING IN LINE WITH THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, THE REQUESTED VARIANT IS IN HARMONY WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING VICINITY AND A MOTION. SECOND, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ, WOULD YOU LIKE TO BEGIN THE DISCUSSION? OKAY. UM, I WILL BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT. UH, THE OTHER STRUCTURES ARE FAR ENOUGH APART THAT, THAT IT WOULDN'T INTERFERE WITH ANYTHING. AND I THINK, UH, IT WOULD LOOK LOVELY ONCE IT'S COMPLETELY REDONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. MANON. YEAH, SO, SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, BY, I WON'T BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS, AND SO BY LOOKING AT THE WAY THE LOT WAS ORIGINALLY LAID OUT, THE HOUSE WAS KIND OF BUILT, UM, WE'LL SAY ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH LOOKING AT THE OTHER LOTS OR OTHER HOMES AND NEIGHBORHOOD ALSO KIND OF, UH, MIMIC THE SAME CHALLENGES. UM, ALSO, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT OTHER NEARBY HOMES I SEE WHERE SEVERAL OTHERS HAD ADDITIONAL ADD-ONS BUILT TO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. SO THAT'S NOT, UM, SO THAT'S NOT OUT OF CHARACTERISTIC FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD EITHER, SO, SO I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT'S REALLY OUT CHARACTERISTIC. SO, UH, I'LL VOTING IN FAVOR. FANTASTIC. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THIS TO THE DISCUSSION. UH, HEARING NONE, UH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND PUT MY 2 CENTS IN. I'LL BE FOR THIS AS WELL. I'M A BIG FAN OF THE FACT THAT THE ROOF IS GOING TO BE REMEDIED TO ENSURE THAT IT DRAINS TO THE REAR. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, STAFF, PLEASE CALL A RULE. MICHELLE. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. THI YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MENNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRACKMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ER I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. LOVE I CONCUR. MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR AND CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT THIS IS, UH, MAKES IT UNANIMOUS. UH, SO LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE. YOU GUYS ARE AWESOME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. CASE NUMBER [7. 21-1311 BOA-20-10300132] 21 0 3 0 0 1 3 2. LOCATED AT 59 27. IRIS IS CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO. THE APPLICANT IS CAROLYN RANDALL. TO REQUEST FOR ONE THAT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FRONT YARD FENCE AND SIDE YARD FENCE EIGHT FEET TALL AND TWO, A THREE FOOT, TWO INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT OF 15 FEET TO ALLOW A FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE 11 FEET, 10 INCHES AWAY, UH, FROM THE STREET. CURRENT ZONING IS R FIVE M L O D THREE MLR TWO. NEXT SLIDE. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO WITHIN A NEW SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION, THE APPLICANT IS, IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FENCE [03:00:01] ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERN PORT PROPERTY LINE TO BE EIGHT FEET TALL. THE FENCE WILL BE 11 FEET, 10 INCHES FROM THE EDGE OF THE CURB. SO VARIANCE TO THE CLEAR VISION STANDARDS IS ALSO BEING REQUESTED. THE DEVELOPMENT SOURCES TRAFFIC DIVISION HAS REVIEWED THE REQUEST AND HAVE STATED THE PROPOSED LAYOUT AND FENCE SITE AT THIS CUL-DE-SAC DOES NOT SEEM TO PROPOSE, UH, ANY CLEAR VISION OR SITE CONSTRAINT UPON REVIEW SITE. PLAN, THE REQUESTED FENCE, THAT'S THE SUBJECT, PROPERTY ITSELF, WHERE THE FENCE WOULD BE GOING, MEASUREMENT OF THE CLEAR VISION AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD 42, UH, NOTICES WERE SENT OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE NEIGHBORS. UH, NEIGHBORHOOD CROSSING UH, ASSOCIATION. UM, AFTER THIS WAS ACTUALLY DONE, WE DID RECEIVE A, A VOICE MESSAGE THIS MORNING FROM THE H O A MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION. THEY ARE OPPOSED. AND WE'LL BE PLAYING THAT MESSAGE IN THE WALL. NEXT SLIDE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 3 2 BASED ON THE FOLLOW FACT DATE, FOOT FENCE WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE SOUTHEASTERN PROPERTY LINE AND THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WILL PROMOTE THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. FINE AND OF THE CLEAR VISION STAFF GIVEN APPROVAL OF, OF THE CASE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING UPON NEWS FACTS FENCE WILL REMAIN 1110 INCHES FROM THE EDGE OF THE CURB. MS. RANDALL, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. YES, MY NAME IS CAROLYN RANDALL. I LIVE AT 5 9 2 7 IRISH IS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 8. UM, I'VE BEEN LIVING THERE SINCE NOVEMBER THE 16TH, 2017. UM, THINGS WENT TO THE WAYSIDE BACK IN 2017, UM, WHEN WE HAD SOME NEW NEIGHBORS CAME INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND STARTED, UM, DOING ALL THESE DIFFERENT FALSE ACCUSATIONS. UM, I HAVE DEVELOPED A SOLID CONTINGENCY PLAN TO STOP THE FALSE ALLEGATIONS AND ALL THE FRIVOLOUS COMPLAINTS THROUGH SS A P D, THE H O A AND THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. I DO HAVE TWO FAMILY MEMBERS THAT ARE SPECIAL NEEDS THAT RESIDE WITH ME. UM, THEY ARE, UM, I D D FORMERLY KNOWN AS MENTALLY RETARDED, UM, AND DOWN SYNDROME. THE RESIDENTS, UM, TO OUR EAST DID A 5 5 9 31. UH, THAT WOULD BE THE ROSE FAMILY HAVE CALLED ALL KIND OF FALSE ACCUSATIONS THROUGH A P S H O A NONSTOP NONSTOPS DO. UH, SS A P D CALLING, CALLING, CALLING. WE EVEN WENT TO SMALL CLAIMS COURT, SAID I WAS CALLING A PRIVATE NUISANCE UP UNTIL 2007 TO 2017. WE NEVER HAD ANY COMPLAINTS WITH THE NEIGHBORS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THE LADY'S AFRAID TO COME OUTSIDE. UM, A CAMERA IS FACING OUR PROPERTY IN THE FRONT AND IN THE BACKYARD. SO THAT FORCES THE LADIES TO JUST STAY INSIDE ON MY, ON MYSELF. I HAVE TO SNEAK IN AND OUT OF MY PROPERTY BECAUSE IF, UM, THIS FAMILY IS AWARE THAT I'M IN THE HOUSE, THEY WILL CALL THE POLICE BANGING ON THE DOOR. UM, IT'S A TOTAL HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT. THERE'S NO PEACE. SO, UH, PART OF THE CONTINGENCY PLAN WAS THIS EIGHT FOOT FENCE. UM, IT WAS COMPLAINTS OF THE PROPERTY, UM, NOT BEING UP TO PARK. SO WE, WE REPAIRED THE ROOF, WE PAINTED THE EXTERIOR ALL WITH, UH, PERMISSION WITH THE H O A. UM, NOW THE FENCE NEEDS TO BE IN PLACE. WE PUT 80 TREES AROUND THE PROPERTY JUST TO UH, KIND OF CALM DOWN THE COMPLAINTS AND, UM, FOR US TO MORE PRIVACY. WELL, IT'S TAKING A WHILE FOR THE EVERGREEN TREES TO GET UP IN HEIGHT. AND THEN, UM, THE POLICE WAS CALLED AGAIN IN OCTOBER AND THE POLICE OFFICER TOLD ME, WELL, WHAT'S THE PLAN WITH THE MAINTENANCE? ALSO WITH THOSE TREES? 'CAUSE ONCE THEY GET UP HIGH, YOU ARE GONNA HAVE TO TRIM, YOU KNOW, TRIM THEM AND DO MAINTENANCE. AND WE WOULD NEVER GET ANY PERMISSION FROM THE OTHER SIDE TO DO SO ALSO. SO WE JUST CAME UP WITH A STRONGER CONTINGENCY PLAN WITH THE APRIL FENCE. I PRESENTED SOME INFORMATION WITH THE CITY. UM, SOME OF YOUR COLLEAGUES HAVE BEEN GREAT WITH COMING OUT, VIEWING THE PROPERTY, BEING ON THE FENCE. UM, THEY TALK TO SEVERAL, THE SPECIAL NEED LADIES, ONE THAT CAN TALK, UM, WHAT SHE HAS EXPERIENCED WHEN THEY'RE GETTING ON THE VIA TRANS. UM, DIFFERENT DRIVERS HAVE HEARD ACTIVITIES BEING CALLED OUT, HARSH NAMES, UM, DEFORMED MAD DOGS. YOU NEED TO GO BACK TO THE STATE SCHOOL. AND THEY'RE COMING OUT FROM THE AIR. SO THEY REALLY DON'T SEE ANYBODY. THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE IT'S COMING FROM. UM, WE HAVE CONTACTED PRIMARY DOCTORS AND THE PSYCHIATRIST FOR HELP. WE DID GET LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THEIR DOCTORS SAYING THAT THEY HAVE BEEN HARASSED, THAT THE GIRLS HAVE SOUGHT COUNSELING [03:05:01] AND TALKED ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE NEIGHBORS. UM, THIS IS A HOMESTEAD. IT'S NOT AN OPTION FOR US TO MOVE. UM, WE JUST WANNA LIVE IN PEACE, THAT'S ALL. SO WE'RE ASKING THE CITY TO HELP US, UM, WITH THIS CONTINGENCY PLAN AND LET'S MOVE FORWARD. LIKE IF WE CAN ALL JUST BE PROACTIVE AND LIVE IN PEACE. THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS. THE TREES WILL BE THERE. UM, THEY SHOULD HAVE PICTURES ON RECORD OF ALL OF THE EVERGREEN TREES THAT HAVE BEEN PUT THERE TO HELP WITH THE PEACE. SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW. I WOULD LIKE TO READ A STATEMENT I PUT ON HERE THAT THE MR. AND MRS. ROSE HAVE BEEN EXCESSIVELY ENTANGLED IN OUR DAY-TO-DAY LIVING FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS. LIVING IN A HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT HAS BEEN HARD. UM, WE HAVE BROUGHT FORTH THIS CONTINGENCY PLAN TO MAINTAIN PEACE TO THE TWO COHABITING, UM, PROPERTIES. WE REPAIRED THE ROOF. UM, IN OCTOBER, 2020. WE PAINTED THE EXTERIOR OF THE HOME PART OF THE CONTINGENCY PLAN. NOW WE'RE ASKING TO PUT, UM, THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN. WE ALSO PUT CAMERAS ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE HOME, UH, ALL THE WAY AROUND, INCLUDING THE BACKYARD. 'CAUSE WE'VE BEEN ACCUSED OF THROWING THINGS OVER THE FENCE IN THE SWIMMING POOL. SO WE DO HAVE A CAMERA IN PLACE THAT WE'RE NOT, UM, THROWING ANYTHING OVER THE FENCE. THE LADIES ARE AFRAID TO GO OUTSIDE BECAUSE OF ALL THE POLICE COMING OR THE NEIGHBORS TAKING PICTURES AND RECORDING THEM AND SAYING HARSH, YOU KNOW, COMMENTS TO THEM. BUT THEY TRULY DO NOT GO OUTSIDE. I DID SEE A, UM, A RESPONSE FROM THE ROSES AND THEY STATED THAT THE LADIES DO NOT COME OUTSIDE. ALL THEY DO IS GO AND GET IN THE VAN TO BE TRANSPORTED. THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE LIVING IN A HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT. UM, BUT THEY'RE NOT WANTING TO LEAVE THEIR HOME. THEY JUST, THEY JUST WANT PEACE. UM, ON MY ATTACHMENTS THAT I'VE PRESENTED, UH, WITH THE VARIANCE I PUT ON THERE THAT I AM A PASSIONATE ADVOCATE FOR SPECIAL NEEDS. UM, I LOVE ALL SPECIAL NEEDS. UM, IT SAYS THAT THIS PRIVATE, UM, PROPERTY IS A RESIDENT OF THREE SPECIAL NEEDS LADIES IN MY HOMESTEAD. UM, WE'RE COVERED UP UNDER THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES TAC CODE 40, UM, SUBCHAPTER NINE, SUBCHAPTER D WHICH WE'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THEM BECAUSE, UH, A P S HAS BEEN CALLED OVER AND OVER AGAIN FROM MR. AND MRS. ROSE. I HAVE SEVERAL CASES, UM, THAT PRESENTS THAT ALONG WITH CASE NUMBERS. ALL OF THOSE WERE FOUND UNCONFIRMED THAT THERE WAS NO ABUSE OR NEGLECT GOING ON. UM, PART OF THAT T CODE SAYS THAT WE ARE TO, UM, TRY TO PUT THINGS IN PLACE TO PREVENT REOCCURRING CALLS. UM, SO THAT IS A PART OF THIS CONTINGENCY PLAN. UM, THAT CASE NUMBER IS 4 8 1 1 3 3 7 3, WHERE MR. AND MRS. ROSE WENT ON AND ON IN THE MIDST OF THIS CASE, TALKING ABOUT, UM, WHERE I LIVE, WHERE I SLEEP, THE SPECIAL NEED LADY, ALONG WITH, UH, TWO OF OUR OTHER NEIGHBORS THAT'S ON THE H THE BOARD OF H O A, UM, THAT WE FILED A COMPLAINT FOR ABUSE OF POWER AND EXCESSIVE ENTANGLEMENT AND MENTAL AND VERBAL ABUSE ALONG WITH CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL THAT THE SPECIAL NEEDS LADIES CANNOT COME OUTSIDE. THEY'RE AFRAID TO SIT ON THE FRONT PORCH. THEY'RE AFRAID TO GO OUTSIDE IN THE BACKYARD. UM, THAT THE CAMERA, THE CAMERA AND YOU KNOW THAT THE ROSES ARE ALWAYS TAKING PICTURES AND THEY JUST DO PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE THINGS TO THE LADIES THAT PLAYS ON THEIR PSYCHE. AND, UH, CENTER FOR HEALTHCARE SERVICES ARE SEEING ALL OF THE LADIES WITH THE PSYCHIATRY. SO THEY WILL, UM, BACK UP. WHAT'S GOING ON THERE? UM, WE PUT THE TREES IN PLACE. UM, LET ME SEE, I'M JUST TRYING TO SCAN OVER. I ONLY HAVE TWO MINUTES. WE HAVE A PEACE OFFICER THAT HAS BEEN, UM, WORKING WITH US AND HE ALSO GOT VERY AGITATED IN OCTOBER AND SAID, IT'S TIME FOR THIS TO STOP. IT'S BEEN GOING ON SINCE 2017 TO 2020. ALL THE CALLS, VERY FRIVOLOUS COMPLAINTS OR WHATEVER. I TOLD HIM, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA TRY AND SEE IF WE CAN WORK OUT SOMETHING WITH A CONTINGENCY PLAN. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY IS ASKING FOR MORE SUPPORT TO PREVENT, UM, FUTURE ACCUSATIONS AND HARASSMENT FROM OUR NEIGHBORS. LIKE WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO WORK THIS OUT. THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU STAFF. IS THERE ANY, UH, PUBLIC, UH, DOCUMENTS TO READ TO THE RECORD? YES SIR. WE DO HAVE ONE LIVE CALLER WE, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH RIGHT NOW, THEN ONE VOICE MESSAGE AND TWO UH, LETTERS OFF OF THE GRID. GREAT. THANK YOU. PLEASE PROCEED. ALRIGHT. UH, JEFFREY ROSE IS ON THE LINE. MR. ROSE, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR TWO MINUTE PRESENTATION. YES. MY NAME IS JEFFREY ROSE. I RESIDE AT 5 9 3 1. IRIS IS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 8. IN REFERENCE TO THIS, UM, CASE HERE, THE FENCE ALONG THE REQUESTED SIDE OF THE SHARED FENCE. AND IN 2017, WE OFFERED TO REPLACE SAID FENCE FOR THE PRIVACY OF BOTH PARTIES AND CAROLYN RANDALL REFUSED. SO WE OFFSET THE FENCE OFF THE PROPERTY LINE AND DID IT FROM THE CORNER OF OUR HOUSE TO THE BACK TO ATTACH TO THE OLD FENCE THAT'S ALREADY THERE. AND THEN IT RAN A THREE FOOT TALL FENCE TO THE FRONT, UH, BY CITY CODE. [03:10:01] WE HAD ASKED FOR A EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE IN THE PREVIOUS, BUT THEN THE H O A HAD ACTUALLY SAID WITHIN THE COVENANTS, WE COULD NOT DO A EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE, BUT ALSO FOR AIR QUALITY. THERE'S A REASON WHY THERE'S NOT EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCES IN AND AROUND SUBDIVISIONS BECAUSE THE AIR FLOW, WE ENJOY A BREEZE FROM THE SOUTH AND THE NORTH THROUGH OUR PROPERTY. AND, UH, FENCE THAT TALL WOOD, UH, PRETTY MUCH SUFFOCATE OUT THE AIR IN THE BACKYARD. AND AS FAR AS MS. RANDALL'S STATEMENTS AS TO, UH, HARASSMENT AND EVERYTHING ELSE, 2015 WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE AND WE HAD STARTED HAVING PROBLEMS WITH STUFF BEING THROWN IN OUR BACKYARD, FOOD AND EVERYTHING BY A YOUNG MAN NAMED FRANKIE. WE ASKED HER TO HAVE IT STOPPED, STOPPED NOW, AND SHE TOOK IT AS WELL, I'M NOT GONNA DO NOTHING WITH FRANKIE. SO WE HAD TO TAKE HER TO SMALL CLAIMS COURTS BECAUSE WE HAD PICTURES AND DOCUMENTS THAT SHOWED THAT THE CONSTANT HARASSMENT AND THE SIGNS THAT SHE WOULD DISPLAY, CALLING MY WIFE A PIG, A COW, AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO THE JUDGE, UH, AWARDED US A, UH, MONETARY SETTLEMENT, WHICH MS. RANDALL REFUSES TO PAY AND, BUT SHE'LL DO ALL THE UPGRADES TO HER HOUSE AND HER PROPERTY. NOBODY'S GONE OUTSIDE AND SAID ANYTHING TO MS. RANDALL OR THE, OR THE CLIENTS OR ANYTHING ELSE BECAUSE MY SON IS, UM, AUTISTIC AND I DON'T BELIEVE IN BADGERING ANYBODY. AND MY WIFE HAS NOT SAID ANYTHING TO ANY OF THEM BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO SMALL CHILDREN IN THE HOUSE. AGED, AGED THREE AND A HALF AND SEVEN. THAT'S, THAT'S TWO MINUTES. I'LL, I'LL GIVE YOU 10. I'M GONNA GIVE YOU, UH, 15 MORE SECONDS IF YOU JUST TO WRAP IT UP. BUT WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO MOVE ON. SO THAT'S SHORTER THAN TWO MINUTES. BUT ANYWAY, UNDER THE QUIET ENJOYMENT OF THE TEXAS LAW, UM, WE HAVE TO, WE, WE, UH, WE ASK THAT THIS NOT BE, UH, DONE BECAUSE IT WILL, UH, DEFLECT THE AIR. MS. CAROLYN RANDALL DOES NOT EVEN LIVE IN THE HOUSE. SHE SENT US EMAILS AND TEXTS ABOUT, I DON'T EVEN LIVE THERE. YOU WONDERING WHERE I'M SLEEPING AT NIGHT? NOBODY'S EVER QUESTIONED WHERE SHE'S LIVED AT. NOBODY'S EVER ASKED WHERE SHE'S LIVED AT. AND ALSO UNDER THE REQUEST FOR, UH, UNDER SECTION 35 DASH 5 0 6 B 35 DASH 5 0 6 R, TO INCLUDE TABLE 5 0 6 DASH 7 35 DASH FIVE 10 OF THIS CHAPTER, WHERE DUE SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT, WHICH WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO INHERENT, CONSISTENT, INCONSISTENT IN MEASURES OF PROPERTY LINES AND HEIGHTS FROM UNLEVEL SURFACES. IF YOU DO THIS, IT WILL NOT HAVE CONFORMITY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND IF I GO TO RESELL MY HOUSE, MY PROPERTY VALUE WILL DROP. THANK YOU. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS ON. WE HAVE, SIR, WE HAVE TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT, UH, UH, SPEAKER NOW. OKAY. WELL, I APPRECIATE IT, EVEN THOUGH I DIDN'T GET MUCH. YES, THANK YOU. WE'RE GONNA PLAY THE VOICE MESSAGE AT THIS TIME. OKAY. HI, THIS MESSAGE IS FOR CASE NUMBER, A TWO ZERO DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 2. ADDRESS, 59 27 IRIS ISLE. MY NAME IS JOSETTE AL, COMMUNITY MANAGER WITH SPECTRUM ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT. WE ARE THE MANAGING AGENT FOR NORTHEAST CROSSING H O A. WE ASK THAT YOU PLEASE CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING WHEN MAKING YOUR DECISION TO GRANT A VARIANCE TO MODIFY THE CURRENT SIX FOOT FENCE TO AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. THE DECLARANCE COVENANTS CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS STATE THE FOLLOWING, NO BUILDING STRUCTURE, PAVING, POOL, FENCING, HOT TUB OR IMPROVEMENTS OF ANY NATURE SHALL BE ERECT AND PLACED OR ALTERED ON ANY LOT UNLESS THE APPROVALS REQUIRED BY THE DECLARANCE HAVE BEEN OBTAINED FROM THE A C COMMITTEE. THE A C C OBJECTIVE IS TO PREVENT UNUSUAL, RADICAL, UNCOMMON, CURIOUS, ODD, EXTRAORDINARY, BIZARRE, PECULIAR, OR IRREGULAR DESIGN OR APPEARANCE FROM BEING BUILT ON AND OR WITHIN THE PROPERTIES. AND TO EXTEND POSSIBLE, ENSURE THE HARMONIOUS DEVELOPMENT ON THE PROPERTY IN CONFORMITY WITH A COMMON PLAN AND DESIGN. SHOULD YOU REQUEST, I'M SORRY. SHOULD THIS REQUEST BE PRESENTED TO THE A C C FOR APPROVAL, IT WOULD BE DENIED ON THE BASIS THAT IT WOULD NOT BE HARMONIOUS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONFORMITY AS REQUIRED BY THE DECLARANCE COVENANT CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS OF THE H O A. SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CALL ME DIRECTLY. (210) 507-1557. AGAIN, MY NAME IS JOSEPH AL, COMMUNITY MANAGER FOR NORTHEAST CROSSING, H O A I CURRENTLY WORK FOR SPECTRUM ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO WE'RE GONNA READ IN, UH, TO THE RECORD TWO SMALL, UH, SHORT [03:15:01] COMMENTS. SHIRLEY R. HALL, 7 2 19 HIBISCUS FALLS NEITHER IN FAVOR OF SUPPORT, CANNOT MAKE A DECISION UNTIL DETAILS ARE PROVIDED. EXPLAIN THE PURPOSE OF THIS FENCE, WHICH, UH, WHICH HEIGHT EXCEEDS CURRENT CITY, UM, AND SUBDIVISION, UH, GUIDELINES. NEXT ONE IS FROM GREG, UH, HUON 59 31, UH, BRIDAL BEND. UH, I DO NOT APPROVE THE EXCEPTION TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE IN THIS AREA. AND THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF THE COMMENTARY. AND, OKAY. SO WE'RE GONNA, UH, OPEN THIS TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. WHO WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN? CARLOS CRUZ. UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ, PLEASE PROCEED. UM, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS WOULD BE FOR CITY OR FOR THE, UM, APPLICANT, BUT THE H O A YOU HAVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IS IT, UM, VOLUNTARY OR IT'S, UH, YOU PAY DUES? UH, WE PAY DUES. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. UH, I'M GONNA ASK A QUESTION. SO THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, WE HEARD, UH, FROM, FROM SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT THAT IT WOULD MOST LIKELY NOT PASS AN A C C APPROVAL, BUT HAVE YOU EVEN REQUESTED ONE YET? OR IS THIS YOUR FIRST STEP? UH, THIS IS MY FIRST STEP WITH THE CITY. I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ON THIS. AND, UH, ONCE WE, UH, FINISH WITH THE CITY, WE ARE GOING TO THE H O A. OKAY. THAT'S, THAT'S OKAY. UH, SECOND ITEM IS, IS, UH, I NOTICED THAT YOU, YOU ON SOME OF THE PICTURES THAT THERE'S A PLANTING OF EVERGREEN TREES. I SEE THAT DOWN THE SIDE, BUT IT, HOW IMPORTANT IS IT TO HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE SIDE OF YOUR HOME? IT SEEMS LIKE THE REAL ISSUE IS FROM THE REAR CORNER ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK. CORRECT. THE EVERGREEN TREES ARE GOING TO END UP PROTRUDING IN ALSO ON THE, UH, FIVE NINE, UH, 5 9 31 PROPERTY LINE. MM-HMM. . SO, UH, THE OFFICER, WHEN HE CAME OUT IN OCTOBER, HE ASKED ME WHAT IS THE PLAN, UH, ONCE THOSE EVERGREENS GET UP HIGH ON MAINTENANCE, BECAUSE, UM, AS YOU HEARD WITH MR. ROSE, THERE'S NOTHING, NOTHING. WE WOULD NEVER GIVE PERMISSION TO GO ON THE OTHER SIDE ALSO TO DO THE MAIN MAINTENANCE ON THOSE TREES. SO ALSO THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE WILL PREVENT THAT CALLING THE POLICE TO DO THE MAINTENANCE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THOSE EVERGREENS. THAT EIGHT FOOT FENCE WILL MAKE THOSE EVERGREEN STAY ONLY ON OUR SIDE, AND WE WILL BE DOING THE MAINTENANCE ONLY ON OUR PROPERTY SIDE. AND THEN, AND THAT JUST THE PIECE. OKAY. AND THEN AS THE FENCE LINE GOES DOWN THE SIDE, IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, SINCE THE SURVEY THAT YOU PROVIDED IN 2017, IS THERE A SMALL SHED THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED WITH A FENCE THAT GOES AROUND IT? NO, THERE'S NO FENCE AROUND IT. UM, I BELIEVE IN THE BACKYARD WE HAVE A FENCE, UH, IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR YARD. WE USED TO HAVE DOGS THERE. SO THAT WAS . THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING. YEAH. THERE'S A PICTURE THAT, THAT APPEARS TO HAVE, UH, SOME SORT OF A SHED OR A SMALL OUTBUILDING STRUCTURE THAT IT'S IN YOUR REAR YARD, BUT, BUT IT LOOKS TO BE SURROUNDED BY THE FENCE. UH, NO. THERE'S A SHED IN THE BACKYARD. YEAH, I'M LOOKING, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING STAFF. I'M LOOKING AT, UM, I'M LOOKING AT THE PICTURE, UH, FROM THE ATTACHMENTS. IT'S, IT SAYS, OKAY, UH, LOCATION OF PROPOSED FENCE, AND IT, IT'S A SHOT LOOKING DOWN THE FENCE LINE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE SMALL EVERGREEN TREES. AND, AND THEN NEAR THE END IT LOOKS, I'M LOOKING RIGHT AT A FENCE. AND I'M, I'M CURIOUS TO KNOW, IS THAT INTENDED TO REMAIN OR IS THAT TO BE REMOVED, OR, OR WHAT IS, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE METAL FENCE, SIR? NO, IT'S, IT'S WOOD. LOOKS LIKE IT. IT'S IT'S WOOD. OKAY. SO THE WOOD, THE WOOD FENCE IS ON THE EAST SIDE OF THAT PROPERTY. WE PLAN TO REPLACE THAT ENTIRE FENCE. OKAY. YES. THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR AION FOR. OKAY. AND THEN, UM, SO, AND CAN YOU EXPLAIN, YOUR SURVEY SHOWS THAT YOU HAVE A TWO FOOT UNIVERSAL EASEMENT. UH, IS, CAN YOU EXPLAIN, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THAT'S FOR? I'M, I'M NOT USED TO, I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT UNIVERSAL EASEMENT. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT ITS PURPOSE IS AND WHETHER A FENCE WOULD OBSTRUCT IT. I'M SORRY. I, I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT STAFF. HAVE YOU, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THAT MEANS? NO, SIR. WE ACTUALLY DON'T. WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THAT RIGHT NOW. I MEAN, I . OKAY. AND THEN WHAT IS, I'VE NEVER DONE THAT BEFORE. AND THEN FOR THE APPLICANT, DO YOU HAVE A, A PLAN IN PLACE? SO THERE'S A FIVE FOOT WATER DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT RUNS ALONG THE REAR. IF YOUR EIGHT FOOT FENCE WERE TO GO ALL THE WAY DOWN THAT SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND, AND GO TO THE BACK, ARE YOU GONNA KEEP IT OPEN UNDERNEATH TO ALLOW FOR DRAINAGE TO FLOW UNDER THE, UNDER THE FENCE? SO WE WERE PLANNING TO DO JUST THE SAME EXACT [03:20:01] FENCES THERE. WE'RE JUST GONNA REPLACE IT TO EIGHT FEET HIGH. SO IT WOULD BE EXACTLY INSTALLED THE SAME WAY. IT'D JUST BE A EIGHT FEET HIGH FENCE. OKAY. SO IT, THE DRAINAGE AND EVERYTHING SHOULD BE ALL THE SAME. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS STAFF? BY THE WAY, IF I'LL ADD ONE THING, PLEASE. UH, ONE, ONE SECOND. YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A CLOSING STATEMENT. UH, IS THE, IS THE NEIGHBOR STILL ON THE PHONE? UH, NO, SIR. HE'S NOT. OKAY. CAN NEED A CALL BACK? NO, I WAS JUST WONDERING IF ANY COMMISSIONERS HAD A HAD A QUESTION FOR THE NEIGHBOR BEFORE WE ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO MAKE A CLOSING STATEMENT. MANCHACA COMMISSIONER MANCHACA, UH, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WHAT YOU JUST SAID. SO IS THE APPLICANT SAYING THAT THE FENCE IS THERE, WE'RE GONNA REMOVE THE BOARDS AND REPLACE IT WITH EIGHT FOOT BOARDS VERSUS PUTTING ANOTHER FENCE A BUTTED NEXT TO IT? IS THAT CORRECT? UH, FOR THE APPLICANT? CORRECT. CAN YOU PLEASE ANSWER? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. UM, IT'S, IT'S TIME TO REPLACE THOSE BOARDS ANYWAY, . AND ONE MORE QUESTION ATTACHED TO THAT. WHO OWNS THAT FENCE? THAT'S MY FENCE. 5 9 2 7. THANK YOU, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, HUMANA? THANKS, MR. MANA. SO, SO ONE QUESTION I GUESS THAT I HAVE IS, NORMALLY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT FENCES GOING TOWARDS THE FRONT, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I GUESS IT BECOMES A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT DIALOGUE FOR THE HEIGHTS AND, UH, OR THE HEIGHT ALLOWANCE. AND SO, UH, IF A, IF A FENCE IS, UM, EVEN WITH A FRONT FACADE, THEN, YOU KNOW, SO SOMETHING IN FRONT OF THAT FACADE BASICALLY HAS A DIFFERENT KIND OF DIALOGUE THAN BEHIND THAT FACADE. AND SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT FROM THE LINE HERE, IF IT'S GOING TO START EVEN WITH THE FACADE. UM, IS THAT THE INTENT OR IS IT GONNA GO IN FRONT OF THE FACADE OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE? UM, IS THAT YOUR INTENT? I'M, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION. SO HOW FAR FORWARD OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WERE YOU PLANNING ON PUTTING THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE? SO RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A THREE FOOT FENCE THERE THAT GOES ALMOST ALL THE WAY TO THE SIDEWALK. AND SO, SO HOW FAR FORWARD WAS YOUR INTENT OF PUTTING IN AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE? YES, SIR. I WAS PLANNING ON DOING THAT. UH, I BELIEVE THEY SHOULD HAVE A PICTURE THERE OF WHAT'S THERE NOW. WELL, WELL, LET ME, LET ME CLARIFY THAT QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. YOUR, THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU PROVIDED, THAT SHOWS A HIGHLIGHT OF WHERE YOU WOULD LIKE, THE FENCE SHOWS IT GOING PAST THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. IT ALSO CALLS IT OUT TO BE 150 FOOT LONG, BUT YOUR PROPERTY LINE IS REFLECTED TO BE 147 FEET LONG, WHICH WOULD MEAN THAT IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE ATTEMPTING TO PROVIDE THE FENCE ALL THE WAY TO THE, THE DRIVEWAY APRON FLARES. IS THAT CORRECT? COMMISSIONER MANN? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? YES. OKAY. SO WE'RE, SO HOW FAR FORWARD, HOW FAR FORWARD ARE YOU BRINGING IT TO THE FRONT, FRONT OF THE HOUSE? TO THE STREET? WHAT IS YOUR INTENT THERE? I, I BELIEVE IT SAYS TO ALLOW THE FRONT FENCE TO BE 1110 FROM THE, THE STREET LOCATED AT 5 9 2 7. SO THAT WOULD BE VERY CLOSE TO THE CURB FIVE HALFWAY UP THE DRIVEWAY, THEN. OKAY. OKAY. UM, UM, THAT'S BECAUSE WHEN THE LADIES ARE LOADING INTO THE VAN, THAT'S WHEN THEY EXPERIENCE A LOT OF THE HARSH, UM, COMMENTS OR NAME CALLING. OKAY. AND VIA TRANS TRANSPORTATION SAID THAT THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PULL INTO THE DRIVEWAY. OKAY. UM, THAT IS JUST TO REDUCE THE SITE, THE, THE SITE OF THE ROSES WHEN THEY'RE LOADED INTO THE VEHICLE. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, THANK, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MANNA, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONING? THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OKAY. UH, WELL, SO FOR THE APPLICANT, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE A SHORT TWO MINUTE CLOSING STATEMENT, YOU CAN DO SO NOW. UM, I, I WOULD JUST LIKE SOME SUPPORT INTO, UM, LET'S BE PROACTIVE THIS, ALL THE CALLS HAVE BEEN ESCALATING OVER THE YEARS, AND IT'S, IT'S JUST TIME TO, FOR MYSELF AND THE LADIES TO GET BACK TO LIVING IN PEACE. WE HAVE A RIGHT TO ENJOYMENT OF OUR HOME TOO. SO JUST PLEASE CONSIDER THAT, UM, SPECIAL HAVE RIGHTS AND PEOPLE THAT CARE FOR THEM ALSO HAVE RIGHTS. AND I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO TRY TO TAKE US BACK INTO THE FORTIES AND THE FIFTIES WHEN THE SPECIAL NEEDS WAS PUT AWAY AND HIDDEN. YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T WANT US TO GO BACK TO THAT. SO PLEASE CONSIDER THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO WITH THAT, UM, I'M [03:25:01] GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND, UH, THE COMMISSIONERS THAT WE CAN POSE THE MOTION TO LIMIT THE FENCE TO BE ONLY IN THE REAR YARD OR, OR PROVIDE SOME SORT OF LIMITATION, HOW HIGH THE FENCE COULD RUN, UH, EXTENDING DOWN THE SITE PROPERTY. SO WITH THAT, UM, WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? ZUNA, UH, COMMISSIONER UNA. OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 20 DASH 0 3 32, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT TO REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT TWO VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM. UH, WAIT, LET ME DO, LET DO THE, UH, THE, UH, HEIGHT FIRST. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 20 DASH 3 32, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT WON A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FRONT YARD, A FRONT YARD FENCE AND SIDE YARD FENCE EIGHT FOOT TALL. SO I'M GONNA LIMIT IT TO A EIGHT FOOT TALL, UH, FROM THE FRONT OF THE, OF THE RESIDENCE TO THE REAR, AND SIX FOOT TALL FROM THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE. UH, FORWARD, UH, TO PUT THE PERMITTABLE BY THE CLEAR VISION, UH, STATUTE SITUATED AT 5 9 2 7 IRIS ISLE, APPLICANT BEING CAROLYN RANDALL, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE 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 A NECESSARY HARDSHIP. A THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES THAT THE BORDER SHALL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE HEIGHT MODIFICATION, THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT, FENCE HEIGHT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE, UM, FRONT TO THE REAR SIDE, AND SIX FOOT FROM THE FRONT, FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE FORWARD WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. THIS WILL SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE. C, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY THE SUCH PROPOSED USE DEFENSE WILL CREATE AN HAND SECURITY TO PROVIDE FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. D 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. UM, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE FENCE HEIGHTS DOES NOT DIS DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, EITHER. SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS THE CURRENT USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT AND OF MOTION THERE A SECOND. WHO, WHO WOULD LIKE, WHO, WHO WOULD LIKE, WHO WOULD LIKE TO CLAIM CREDIT FOR THAT? SURE. , IS THAT, IS THAT COMMISSIONER MICHELLE? YES. OKAY. I'LL GIVE YOU THE CREDIT FOR THE SECOND. ALL RIGHT. SO COMMISSIONER ZUNA, PLEASE LEAVE THE DISCUSSION. YEAH. SO THIS IS NOT THE FINAL. SO, SO I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE, THE, THE MOTION AS READ AND, AND THE REASONING BEING IS THAT, I MEAN, THIS IS THE FIRST STEP. THE APPLICANT STILL NEEDS TO GO FORWARD IN FRONT OF THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, WHICH I THINK IS GONNA BE THE MORE, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, A VOCAL, UH, PART OF THE, OF THE, OF THEIR, THEIR, UH, SUPPORT. AND IT WOULD NEED THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION'S APPROVAL. UH, THIS IS JUST ONE STEP, AND I THINK WE'RE DOING, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT AND, AND THE NEIGHBOR A FAVOR BY, YOU KNOW, TALL FENCES, MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE EIGHT FOOT TO THE REAR, AND THEN SIX FOOT TO THE FRONT IN ADDITION TO THE, UH, TO TREES THAT SHE PLANTED. WE'LL PROVIDE, I BELIEVE, A GOOD BUFFER BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES AND HOPEFULLY HAVE SOME HARMONY BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORS. OKAY. UH, OKAY. COMMISSIONER, SHELL, UM, YES, UH, HE, YOU BASICALLY WORDS OUTTA MY MOUTH. I THINK, UM, THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE A GOOD FENCE IS GONNA HELP BOTH NEIGHBORS. UM, AND I DO THINK THE H O A DISCUSSION IS GONNA BE MORE CHALLENGING. AND SO, UM, THE, UH, MOTION AS READ, I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTING IT. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO, UH, PROVIDE DISCUSSION? KEVIN? OH, UH, COMM LOVE, I JUST LOOKING AT THAT FENCE, AND IF IT GOES TO EIGHT FOOT TALL, IT LOOKS COMPLETELY OUTTA CHARACTER. UM, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE SEEN A SITUATION LIKE THAT IN MY LIFE. UM, BUT, UM, I'M ALSO NOT SO SURE. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE NOT GETTING ALONG AND THEY, YOU KNOW, WANT THE FENCE, BUT I, YOU KNOW, I, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S NECESSARILY A HARDSHIP. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, I'M GONNA ADD MY 2 CENTS HERE. UM, WHAT I'M NOTICING ABOUT THIS, I, I, I TAKE NO ISSUE WITH AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE [03:30:01] REAR YARD AT ALL BECAUSE, UH, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY HAS A POOL, AND IT IS AT A, AT A SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER ELEVATION, UM, THAN, THAN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND I THINK THAT THAT EIGHT FOOT FENCE WOULD PROVIDE PRIVACY FROM THE POOL. AND, AND BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT, IT BEING ON THE CUL-DE-SAC, IT WOULD BLEND IN REALLY WELL. THE ISSUE WITH ME IS WHAT'S GOING ON THE FRONT. UM, I, I'M GLAD COMMISSIONER ARUNA REDUCED IT TO A SIX FOOT FENCE. UM, AND, AND I CAN LIVE WITH THAT. UH, BUT 'CAUSE I KNOW THAT THE H O A IS GOING TO BE THE BIG HURDLE. SO, UM, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, AS, AS, AS READ, UH, UNLESS THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. UH, STAFF, IF YOU COULD PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MICHELLE. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. 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. DELMER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. LOVE. DO NOT CONCUR, MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. AND CHAIR ORIAN CHAIR. YOU'RE MUTED. UH, CHAIR. SORRY ABOUT THAT. UH, NEXT ITEM IS THE, UH, CLEAR VISION, UH, PART OF THIS COMPONENT OF THIS. IS THERE ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? SIR, WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T CATCH YOUR MO YOUR, UH, YOUR VOTE ON THE LAST ONE. OH, I VOTED IN THE, UH, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, UH, WITH A VOTE OF 10 TO ONE MOTION PASSES. OKAY. OKAY. AND LET'S, UH, HAVE A LOOKING FOR A MOTION FOR THE CLEAR VISION ELEMENT. I'LL TAKE THE MOTION AS WELL. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 20 DASH 0 3 32, I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANTED REQUEST FOR A THREE, TWO VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT OF 15 FEET TO ALLOW A FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE 11 FEET, 10 INCHES FROM THE STREET, SITUATED AT 59 27 IRIS AISLE, APPLICANT BEING CAROL RANDALL. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY HAS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C HAS AMEND A GOOD RESULT IN 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. THE VARIANCE REQUESTED TO ENCROACH INTO THE CLEAR VISION HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY D D S DS TRAFFIC STAFF, AND IS NOT EXPECTED TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE, WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF A ENFORCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF 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 EX EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE FENCE IS TO PROVIDE, IS PROTECT RESIDENTIAL, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY, WHICH IS BEING OBSERVED WITH THIS REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED TO THE DISTRICT, AND WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE, THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UH, THE BOARD FINDS A REQUEST TO REDUCE THE 15 FOOT CLEAR VISIONARY DOES NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THIS HAS NOT SEEMED LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, AND SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE OF SOLID IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY OR, AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO, OR THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER AND IS NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE. END OF MOTION. THERE A SECOND. SECOND. COMMISSIONER CRUZ, DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNO, PLEASE LEAVE THE LEAD. THE, UH, LEAD, UH, THE DISCUSSION WELL, I'M JUST GONNA SUPPORT THE VARIANCE GIVEN THAT THE RE GIVEN THE REVIEW BY D S D TRAFFIC STAFF AND NOT BEING IN THE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND THAT THE CLEAR VISION, UH, WILL BE APPROVED AND REVIEWED BY D S D ST. TRAFFIC STAFF COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UH, YES, I CONCUR WITH MR. OZUNA. I I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT SPECIALTY. UH, THE FENCE SHOULDN'T BE HIGHER THAN SIX FEET, SO THERE SHOULD BE NO PROBLEM WITH THE CLEAR VISION. THANK YOU. [03:35:01] OKAY, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT'D LIKE TO PROVIDE TO DISCUSSION? SHALL, UH, COMMISSIONER MICHELLE? UM, I'M ALSO GOING TO SUPPORT THIS AND I THINK THAT, UM, AGAIN, THE, THE LARGER CHALLENGE IS GOING TO BE WITH THE H O A. AND SO I THINK BY, UM, SUPPORTING THEM AS RED, THAT AT LEAST GIVES THE APPLICANT SOME LEEWAY TO NEGOTIATE WITH THEIR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? UH, HERE, UM, I'M GONNA, I'M JUST GONNA ADD THAT, UM, BECAUSE THIS IS ON A CUL-DE-SAC, IT'S, IT'S, THE CLEAR VISION IS NOT AS IMPACTFUL AS IF IT WAS ON A STRAIGHT SHOT STREET. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS READ. UH, WITH THAT IN MIND, STAFF, COULD YOU PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE MICHELLE. YES, I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? 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. DELMER. I CONCUR. MR. LOVE I CONCUR. MS. FISHER FISHER. YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR AND SHARE ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR, UH, WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND, UH, THAT MAKES IT UNANIMOUS 11 TO ZERO. SO LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE. MR. YEAH, MR. CHAIR. I HAVE A HARD STOP AT FIVE O'CLOCK AND I DIDN'T WANNA GET INTO THE NEXT CASE. UM, NO PROBLEM. WITHIN HAVING TO EXCUSE MYSELF. SO I, I LET STAFF KNOW EARLY THAT OF MY HARD STOP REQUIREMENT. OKAY, UH, LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT COMMISSIONER ZUNA IS, UM, LEAVING THE MEETING AT 4 49. UH, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT [8. 21-1312 BOA-20-10300139] CASE IS D O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 3 9. ADDRESS IS 30 27 NANTUCKET DRIVE COUNCIL, DISTRICT NINE. APPLICANT IS ANGEL MARTINEZ. REQUEST FOR ONE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE SIX FEET TALL, FOUR INCHES, UH, IN THE FRONT YARD. AND TWO, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW CORRUGATED METAL AS A FENCING MATERIAL. THREE, A FOUR FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT OF 15 FEET TO ALLOW A FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE 10 FEET, FOUR INCHES FROM THE FRONT OF THE STREET. IS R SIX RESIDENTIAL. NEXT SLIDE. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON NANTUCKET DRIVE AND IS DIRECTLY ABIDING A DRAINAGE DITCH. THE APPLICANT INSTALLED A, A SOLID SCREED FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD TO PROVIDE MORE SECURITY, UH, FOR THEIR CHILDREN. SINCE THE FRONT YARD IS EXPOSED TO THE SUNKEN DRAINAGE DITCH, THE FENCE IS SIX FEET, FOUR INCHES TALL, AND IT HAS A CORRUGATED METAL GATE WITH PROTECTED BORDERS ON TOP AND BOTTOM. CODE ENFORCEMENT CONTACTED THE APPLICANT 'CAUSE THE DEFENSE PERMIT WAS NOT PULLED. DEVELOPMENT SERVICE, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING REVIEWED THE REQUEST AND HAS STATED THE PROPOSED LAYOUT HAS ENOUGH HEIGHT, INTERSECTION, DISTANCE, AND THE TRAFFIC TEAM DOES NOT SEE ANY CLEAR VISION ISSUES. HOWEVER, REGARDING THE PROPOSED GATE, IT DOES, IT DOES NEED TO BE EVALUATED IN THE FUTURE IF PARTICULAR TRAFFIC IS SEEN JUMPING THAT EXISTING CURB. NEXT SLIDE. COPY OF THE SITE PLAN, SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THE FENCE. I, THE DRAINAGE THAT IT, IT ABUTS AND THE FENCE A SEEN IT HAS A PROTECTIVE ORDER ON ALL SIDES SURROUNDING AREA. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND B O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 39, BASED ON THE FOLLOW FINDINGS OF FACT FENCE WILL BE SIX FEET, FOUR INCHES TALL IN THE FRONT YARD, AND THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WILL PROMOTE THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. AS THE VARIANCE AFRICAN'S APPROVAL OF THE SAME CASE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, DEFENSE WILL REMAIN 10 FEET FOUR INCHES FROM THE EDGE OF THE CURB. THE CORRUGATED METAL HAS PROTECTIVE EDGES AND THE CORRUGATED METAL IS ONLY USED FOR THE GATE. 24 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT. ONE IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE'S NO RESPONSE FROM THE VINCE JACKSON NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION. WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT ON LINE, MS. MS. ANGEL MARTINEZ. WHEN READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. HELLO, GOOD DAY. MY NAME IS ANGEL MARTINEZ AND I LIVE WITH MY WIFE JENNIFER AND SONS AT 30 27 NANTUCKET. AND, UM, I JUST LIKE TO READ, UH, THE STATEMENT INTO THE RECORD. MY WIFE JENNIFER REED MARTINEZ, AND I DIDN'T THINK WE WOULD EVER BE HOMEOWNERS AGAIN AFTER [03:40:01] WE LIVED THROUGH THE GREAT RECESSION IN OUR PRIOR PRIMARY RESIDENCE IN KNOX COUNTY, TENNESSEE WAS A CASUALTY OF OUR FINANCIAL STRUGGLES. AFTER I LOST MY JOB, I WAS OUT OF MEANINGFUL WORK FOR ALMOST TWO YEARS. GOD BLESS ME, TO RETURN TO MY TEXAS. I'M MARRIED TO TENNESSEE, AND I'M A FIFTH GENERATION. TEJANO PROVIDED ME EMPLOYMENT HERE IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, AND I'VE BEEN HERE NINE YEARS NOW, UH, WITH A LOCAL NONPROFIT, THE BOY SCOUTS AMERICA. MY WIFE IS A TEACHER AT ROOSEVELT HIGH SCHOOL. AND WE ARE BLESSED AGAIN TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE A HOME, UM, RIGHT AS THE PANDEMIC HIT. WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT NONE OF US DID IN APRIL OF 2020, AND THAT WAS MINUTES FROM MY WORK. UNFORTUNATELY, WE WERE NOT AWARE OF THE FENCE PERMIT AND HAD REQUIREMENTS WHEN WE ENGAGED A WORK MINISTRY THAT OFFERED TO HELP US, UH, WITH FENCE BILL. UH, OUR HOME HAS A LARGE, AS, AS A STATEMENT OF FACT AND, AND RECORD, ARE THERE A LARGE STORM WATER RUNOFF DRAINAGE SYSTEM THAT RUNS BEHIND OUR HOME AND BENDS AROUND TO OUR SIDE YARD THAT CONNECTS TO THE FRONT OF NANTUCKET, UH, STREET WHERE IT FLOWS UNDERNEATH IT WHEN WATER DOESN'T FLOW IN IT. WE'VE NOTICED WHEN WE FIRST MOVED IN, NOTICED SEVERAL FOR SEVERAL DAYS ON END, THE CHILDREN CUT THROUGH OUR SIDE AND FRONT YARD TO FIND AN EASIER PATH TO SCALE DOWN THE SIX FOOT DROP TO THE DITCH. BESIDES PRIVACY CONCERNS THAT IS VERY DANGEROUS FOR THE KIDS AND MAY ALSO PRESENT A LIABILITY FOR US OR EVEN THE CITY OR OTHERS, UM, THAT, AND THIS IS OUR MAIN CONCERN RIGHT HERE, IS, UH, IS SAFETY PRIMARILY AFTER THE FENCE WAS BUILT FOR THE CONCERNS THAT I JUST READ, I, AND TO KEEP OUR DOG IN. WE'VE HAD OVER 20 OF OUR NEIGHBORS WALK PAST THEIR HOME AND POSITIVELY COMMENT ON HOW VISIBLY PRETTY IT WAS AND HOW WELL CONSTRUCTED. WE'VE ALSO NOTICED AND ALMOST COMPLETE ELIMINATION OF ANY CHILDREN GOING DOWN TO THE DITCH. UH, WE STILL HEAR NOISES AT NIGHT, BUT IT'S PROBABLY CRITTERS OR DEER. UH, WE THOUGHT ALL WAS WELL UNTIL WE RECEIVED NOTICE FROM CODE OFFICER MICHELLE VASQUEZ DURING THANKSGIVING. UH, AFTER A VERY POSITIVE PHONE CONVERSATION WITH, WITH OFFICER VASQUEZ VELASQUEZ, WE FELT ENCOURAGED TO APPLY FOR THIS FENCE VARIANCE. AS AN ASIDE, I WANT TO JUST KEEP PRAISES ON MICHELLE AND HOW FRIENDLY AND PATIENT SHE WAS IN EXPLAINING THE VIOLATION AND THE OPTIONS WE HAD AVAILABLE AND, AND JUST, JUST WONDERFUL WOMAN IN TERMS OF A HEART OF SERVICE OF TO, TO DO WHAT SHE DID. UH, SO I, I JUST WANNA PUT IN THE RECORD, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS IN THE COMMUNITY, UH, TO, UH, CONSIDER APPROVING THIS VARIANCE REQUEST. OKAY? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT TO READ INTO THE RECORD? YES. WE HAVE THREE COMMENTS AND ONE VOICE MESSAGE. WE CAN PLAY THE VOICE MESSAGE NOW. THIS IS MICHAEL BINSON. I LIVE AT 30 30 COLONY DRIVE SAN ANTONIO. UH, MY PHONE NUMBER'S (210) 722-8252. I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE NUMBER B O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 3 9, UH, 30 27 NANTUCKET DRIVE. AND I THINK LETTING THE FENCE GO ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE, THAT CLOSE TO THE STREET SETS A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT THAT OTHER PEOPLE WILL DO IT. AND YOU'LL START BLOCKING THE VIEW OF THE STREET, WHICH WINDS AROUND QUITE A BIT THROUGH THIS WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD, INCLUDING THAT HOUSE THE STREET'S AT AN S AND WE HAVE NO SIDEWALKS HERE, SO PEOPLE WALKING THE STREET. AND SO I'M CONCERNED THAT IT'LL START BLOCKING THE VIEW OF DRIVERS AND EVEN PEOPLE WALKING IF WE START ALLOWING FENCES ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE, THAT FAR OUT TO THE FRONT YARD. AND THANK YOU. GOODBYE. OKAY, FIRST COMMENT THAT I'LL READ IN RECORDS FROM ANNE-MARIE MULLEN AT 30 26 NANTUCKET. IT JUST SIMPLY SAYS SHE'S IN FAVOR. THE NEXT ONE IS FROM RON RENO. NEXT 30 23 NANTUCKET. I HAVE TALKED TO MY NEIGHBORS AND EVERYONE IS CONCERNED ABOUT 30 27 NANTUCKET. THE FENCE IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU WILL SEE, UH, SEE AROUND JUNK YARDS. SUPPOSEDLY THE FENCE WILL PROVIDE COVER, UH, FOR FRONT YARD PARTIES. THERE MAY ALSO BE PLANS FOR A DANCE OPERATION OF SOME SORT. WE ARE VERY MUCH AGAINST THE PROPOSAL. THE NEXT LETTER WAS NEITHER IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITIONS, KIND OF, UH, ARE READ. IT'S FROM A, I BELIEVE MICHAEL'S ON PROPERTY ADDRESS THIRTY TWENTY SEVEN TEN SIX FOUR. OKAY. COULD YOU, THE DESCRIPTION FENCE OVER SIX FEET IS OKAY TO CORRUGATED METAL LOOKS TACKY. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT, [03:45:01] UH, WHAT IT CAN BE REPLACED BY. THAT IS LIGHT, DURABLE AND, AND GOOD LOOKING. PERHAPS THE FRAME NEEDS, UH, TO BE STRONGER TO ACCOMMODATE SOMETHING ELSE. THREE FENCE MUST ABIDE BY A 50 FOOT SETBACK. IT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD RULES. THANKS, MICHAEL CONCLUDES ALL THE COMMENTARY. OKAY. UH, WITH THAT, UH, OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. UH, THIS IS, CAN I INTERRUPT? THIS IS ANGEL MARTINEZ. NO, SIR. CAN I HAVE A REBUTTAL? UH, YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A CLOSING REMARK OR REBUTTAL AFTER WE HAVE A SERIES OF QUESTIONS. UH, SO FOR, IS THERE A COMMISSIONER WHO'D LIKE TO START OFF? MIN CHAKA, COMMISSIONER MIN CHAKA. UH, JUST WANT FOR STAFF, CAN I SEE THE, UH, PICTURE AGAIN OF THE FENCE NEXT TO THE DITCH, PLEASE? THERE YOU GO, SIR. THANK YOU. AND THE SETBACK IS FROM THE CURB TO THE FIRST WALL. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. UH, ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, I HAVE A QUESTION, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, WHAT IS THE IT, WHEN I FIRST SEE THIS, THE FIRST IMPRESSION I GET IS THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ENLARGE YOUR REAR, YOUR REAR YARD. UH, AND IT JUST LOOKS LIKE A HUGE EXTENSION OF THE REAR YARD AND THE, THE GATE, UH, GOING OUT TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS AND HELPING THAT, UH, DETERMINATION. CAN YOU PLEASE EXPAND ON THAT A LITTLE BIT, PLEASE? UH, ANGEL, YOU HAVE TO GO AHEAD. UNMUTE YOURSELF. IT SIX. MR. MARTINEZ. I BELIEVE HE'S MUTED. MR. MARTINEZ, PRESS, PRESS STAR SIX. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES. YES, SIR. I'LL, I'LL REPEAT. YES, I'LL, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO REPEAT THE QUESTION? UH, NO. I, I THINK I HEARD THE QUESTION. I JUST COULDN'T COMMENT IN. UM, OKAY. ALTHOUGH, UH, SAFETY IS OUR MAIN PRIORITY FOR DOING THAT, THE GATE CAME UP BECAUSE MY WIFE IS A GARDENER AND LIKES TO, TO DO TOMATOES AND, AND MULCH AROUND THEM AND STUFF. AND THE, THE GATE WAS SUGGESTED BY THE PEOPLE THAT WERE INSTALLING IT AS AN EASIER WAY TO, UH, TO GET STUFF TO SUPPORT GARDENING. UH, IN NO WAY. UH, I KNOW THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A QUESTION ABOUT THERE'S NO PLANS TO USE THE GATE AT A DRIVEWAY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AH, IT'S ONLY MET FROM A, A GARDENING STANDPOINT. YEAH. AND THERE ALSO APPEARS TO BE A, ON, ON THE PICTURE THAT'S SHOWN RIGHT NOW ON THE SCREEN THERE, THERE APPEARS TO BE SOME SORT OF A, A COVERING THAT, THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S TIED TO SOME OF THE TREES. WHAT IS THAT? UH, THAT IS A SCREEN SHADE. UH, IT, IT, IT COULD BE TAKEN DOWN WHEN IT GOT REAL HARD, UH, HOT. UH, IT BURNT THE TOMATOES UNTIL WE, SOMEONE SUGGESTED THAT WE PUT A SCREEN SHADE UP TO NOT BURN THE TOMATOES. OKAY. IT BLOCKS OUT LIKE 50% OF THE SUN'S RAISED. AND STAFF IS THAT, IS, IS THE PROVISION OF A SCREEN SHADE, YOU KNOW, REGARDLESS OF, OF WHAT FENCING IS UP, THAT'S NOT A VIOLATION OF ANYTHING, CORRECT? NO, SIR. THAT'S NOT, IT'S A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE, TEMPORARY TARP, BASICALLY. ALRIGHT. AND, UM, I HAVE A, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. IS, IS, UH, A LOT OF THE TIMES, UH, THESE DRAINAGE DITCHES NEED, UH, CERTAIN ACCESS TO FOR MAINTENANCE, FUTURE MAINTENANCE, IS THIS, IS THIS SENT ON THE PROPERTY LINE? I MEAN, IS THERE A, THERE'S NO ENCROACHMENT INTO THE, THE DRAINAGE RIGHT OF WAY IS THERE BASED ON WHAT WE'RE ABLE TO SEE OUT THERE? IT WAS, IT WAS ON THE PROPERTY LINE ITSELF. OKAY. WITHOUT A SURVEY, SOME OF THOSE THINGS, IT'S HARD TO HELP. OKAY, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY MORE, UH, QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO, UM, SO SAN ANTONIO, YOU KNOW, HAS, UM, A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCING RESTRIC OR, OR GUIDELINES WITH REGARDS TO TYPES OF FENCES THAT COULD BE PUT IN. AND SO HAD THIS BEEN A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE, SOME OF THIS DIALOGUE WOULD NOT BE HAPPENING. UM, AND SO MY ONE QUESTION WOULD BE IS WHAT'S DRIVING, UH, THAT, UH, YOU'RE USING, I GUESS A CLOSED SEATER FENCE, YOU KNOW, IN THIS AREA, AND THEN IT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE IT STOPS TOWARDS THE BACK THERE. SO THE SAFETY, YOU KNOW, THE, SO THE SAFETY THING'S A LITTLE BIT OF A QUESTION THERE, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE, YOU'RE SAFE FOR 40 FEET OR SO, THEN IT BECOMES UNSAFE AGAIN. SO I GUESS JUST TRYING UNDERSTAND THE DISPARITY THERE IS THAT THE [03:50:01] QUESTION IS, UH, WOULD IT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE, UH, BE SUITABLE HERE? UH, AND, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, RATHER THAN THE, THAN THE, UH, SOLID FENCE? WELL, UH, I DID WANNA SAY WITHIN THE, THE, THE THEME, THE LOOK OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE'S ACTUALLY OTHER FENCES SIMILAR TO OURS THAT RUN THEIR BOARDS LONG WAYS LIKE THAT, THAT ARE, THAT ARE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. AND, UH, THE REASON IT STOPPED WHERE IT IS, IS BECAUSE THERE IS A NATURAL BARRIER AROUND THE REST OF THE, UH, AROUND THE REST OF THE DITCH AND OUR PROPERTY OF TREES. SIR, UM, I GUESS I'D ASK, UM, FOR THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, DO THEY HAVE IT WHERE THEY BRING THE FENCE FORWARD OF THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY LINE? UM, I, I GUESS, ARE THERE EXAMPLES, UH, IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THEY ACTUALLY DID RUN THE FENCE ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE STREET? I'M, I'M NOT, I'M NOT CA CATCHING AND, AND, AND IT'S KIND OF, UH, SO AT LEAST IN MY HEAD AND MAYBE IN, MAYBE IT, MAYBE IT'S IN SOME OTHER PEOPLE, THEY LOOK AT IT AS SORT OF LIKE THE SIDE YARD VERSUS IT BEING LIKE THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. UM, AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S OTHER EXAMPLES OF FENCING, ACTUALLY, MR. RON WHO COMMENTED IN THERE ABOUT DANCING AND, AND FRONT YARD PARTIES. WHAT MR. AND I, I KNOW MR. RON, HE'S A NICE OLDER GENTLEMAN AND HE'S FAMILIAR WITH OUR FENCE. AND I, I JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT HIS COMMENTS TODAY, SO I DIDN'T A CHANCE TO READ OUT, REACH OUT TO HIM TO SEE IF HE COULD CHANGE HIS COMMENTS BECAUSE WHAT HE TALKS ABOUT SOUNDS EXACTLY DESCRIBING, UH, ANOTHER PROPERTY AROUND THE CORNER 30 18 CHARTER CREST THAT HAS A 10 FOOT TALL FRONT YARD FENCE THAT THOSE NEIGHBORS HAVE BEEN OPEN. AND, AND SAYING THAT THEY ARE BUILDING THAT WITH THE PURPOSE OF ENTERTAINING FRIENDS AND GUESTS THAT MAY ALSO INCLUDE DANCING. SO THAT'S NOT US. I LIKE TO DANCE, BUT THAT'S NOT US. SO I GUESS GOING BACK TO THE QUESTION IS, UM, WHAT IS DRIVING THAT IT BE PREDOMINANTLY CLOSED VERSUS THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE? I GUESS KIDS, A LITTLE KID CAN STILL SQUEEZE THROUGH A, IF I, I GUESS IF I REMOVE SOME SLASH SO IT WAS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, THEN MY LITTLE KID COULD STILL CLIMB THROUGH IT. WELL THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE LIKE BROAD IRON TYPE FENCES WHICH HAVE FOUR INCH PACING SO THAT, YOU KNOW, IT KEEPS KIDS FROM GETTING THROUGH AND KEEPING PET INSIDE. SO, SO THERE ARE I GUESS, OPTIONS AVAILABLE. AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING. YEAH, WELL, RI RIDE IRON IS CONSIDERABLY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN, THAN, UM, WHAT WAS, UH, RECOMMENDED TO US BY THE FOLKS THAT HELPED US STALL IT. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OKAY. UM, SO MR. MARTINEZ, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, TWO MINUTES TO PROVIDE A CLOSING STATEMENT AND OR REBUTTAL TO ANY OF THE COMMENTARY YOU HAD HEARD. WELL, THE MAIN REBUTTAL IS TO MR. RON. UH, IF I HAD MORE TIME, I WOULD GET MR. RON GET CLARITY THAT THE FENCE, HE'S MAKING COMMENTS ON SOUND LIKE THE ONE AT 30 18 CHARTER CREST, BECAUSE THAT'S THE STORY WITH THOSE FOLKS. AND THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT US. UH, WE, WE DID ALL THIS WITH, WITH THE RIGHT INTENTION AND, AND, AND WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR, UH, THE OPPORTUNITY, UH, FOR YOU GUYS AND EVERYONE HERE IN THE TEAM AND THE COMMUNITY TO, UH, TO CONSIDER ALL THE STATEMENTS OF FACT AND SUCH AND THEN, AND COME UP WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, WITH THE DECISION AND WE RESPECT YOUR DECISION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, SO WITH THAT, I'LL BE CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING. UM, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. UH, THE FIRST ONE IS REGARDING THE, UH, OFFENSE ITEMS BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 20 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 9. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT ONE A SPECIAL TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE SIX FOOT FOUR INCHES TALL IN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT 3 0 2 7 NGA DRIVE, APPLICANT BEING ANGEL MARTINEZ. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PROVIDED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFYING DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, YOU FIND THAT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO INCREASE THE FRONT YARD FENCE HEIGHT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE SITE [03:55:01] WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B, THE SPECIAL, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED. THE BOARD FINDS THE PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO A DRAINAGE DITCH. THE SIX FOOT FOUR INCH FRONT YARD FENCE ON ONE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY AND IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND IS NOT DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO ANOTHER SINGLE FAMILY HOME. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. D 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 SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE FENCE HEIGHT DOES NOT DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS, THE SUR CURRENT ZONING PERMITS THE CURRENT USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. I'LL GIVE A SECOND TO CRUZ BRAGMAN, CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN CAN PLEASE LEAD THE, LEAD THE DISCUSSION? YES. THANK YOU. UM, SO I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND WHERE, UH, THE APPLICANT IS COMING FROM WITH THE DRAINAGE DITCHED, UM, TO THE RIGHT OF HIS PROPERTY. UM, IT'S UNSIGHTLY AND UNSAFE, ESPECIALLY IF HE HAS YOUNG CHILDREN. SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UM, YES, I CONCUR WITH, UH, MS. BERGMAN, EXCUSE ME. AND I THINK THE DEFENSE WOULD STILL BE GREAT WHERE IT'S AT AND HOPEFULLY, UH, HE'LL, UH, HE'LL HAVE SOME BETTER LUCK WITH IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION? MINKA? COMMISSIONER MINKA? I, UH, I'LL HAVE TO GO AGAINST THE GRAIN ON THIS ONE. UH, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S BECAUSE THE CONTINUITY OF THE FENCE TOWARD THE BACK. SECOND OF ALL IS, UH, USE OF SHEET PEDAL IN THE FRONT IS WAY OUTTA CONTEXT COMPARED TO ANYBODY ELSE AROUND THERE. AND THIRD IS THE USE OF, UH, THE PLANKS. THE OTHER FENCES THAT I'VE SEEN AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE MORE VERTICAL AS OPPOSED TO THIS ONE. SO I'M NOT, UH, I'M NOT, UH, IN AGREEMENT WITH THIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WHO ELSE WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE COMMENTARY? SHE, UH, COMMISSIONER SHELL, UM, I CONCUR WITH MR. MANCHA. UM, I, I FEEL LIKE THIS FENCE COULD HAVE BEEN BUILT, UM, ONLY GOING UP TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND NOT ALL THE WAY INTO THE FRONT YARD. UM, AND I, I THINK, I MEAN, WHILE IT'S A NICE LOOKING FENCE, UM, I, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARILY STRICTLY FOR SECURITY GIVEN THE GAPS THAT ARE IN THE FENCE, UM, AND THAT THE REST OF THE PROPERTY ISN'T FENCED ALONG THE DITCH LINE. UM, AND I AGREE THAT THE CORRUGATED METAL IS NOT REALLY, UM, CONSISTENT WITH THE LOOK OF THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, I, I WOULD BE OPEN TO AN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW THE HEIGHT IF IT DID NOT EXTEND PAST THE FRONT OF THE HOME. BUT, UM, GOING SO FAR I CAN'T SUPPORT. THANK YOU. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT? MA'AM? I HAVE A FOLLOW UP COMMENT. UH, LET'S HEAR FROM COMMISSIONER MAN AND THEN, UH, WE'LL GIVE THE FLOOR TO COMMISSIONER BRETT. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . WELL, I THINK, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE DIALOGUE FOR THAT WAS MENTIONED FOR THE HARDSHIP HERE WAS SAFETY. AND I THINK THAT A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE WOULD HAVE, WOULD'VE BEEN A SOLUTION FOR THAT. AND SO I, I THINK THAT THIS DOES KIND OF BLOCK THE VIEW, THE ONGOING VIEW AS YOU DRIVE DOWN THE STREET. UM, AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I PROBABLY WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS. OKAY. COMMISSIONER RAGMAN. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THE MOTION THAT WE ARE CONSIDERING RIGHT NOW ONLY HAS TO DEAL WITH THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE. THE, UH, CORRUGATED METAL IS ADDRESSED IN THE, UM, NEXT VARIANCE REQUEST COMING UP. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND, AND I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A, UH, A STATEMENT OR CLARIFICATION WITH STAFF THAT THE MOTION, UH, GIVEN TO US IS FOR SIX FOOT FOUR INCH TALL IN THE FRONT YARD. BUT THE SKETCH THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US, UH, REFLECTS THE FENCING TO EXTEND 46 FEET TO THE REAR. UM, IS THAT, IS THAT A SIX FOOT FOUR FENCE BEHIND THE FRONT OF THE HOME? IS THAT, IS THAT COVERED IN THIS VARIANCE? IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE, SO THE SIX, THE FENCE IS ONLY IN THE FRONT YARD AT THIS STAGE. THEY DIDN'T EXTEND IT BEYOND, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THAT ONE PHOTO. IT, [04:00:01] IT KIND OF ENDS AT THE DRAINAGE. SO WE MEASURED IT IN THE FRONT. IT WAS AT SIX FOOT FOUR IN THE FRONT YARD AT THE HIGHEST POINT. OKAY. SO IT DID, IT DID NOT EXTEND PAST THOSE. THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, THERE'S THAT ONE PHOTO, IT BASICALLY STOPS RIGHT THERE. OKAY. YEAH, IT WAS, IT, I'M LOOKING AT THAT DRAINAGE DITCH, ABUTTING PROPERTY PHOTO AND IT, AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WENT, 'CAUSE WHAT YOU'VE GOT IS YOU'VE GOT SIX PANELS, AND IF THEY'RE EIGHT FEET, THAT WOULD BE YOUR, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT, THAT WOULD BE CLOSE TO 46, BUT, UH, BE 48. BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT DIDN'T GO PAST THE FRONT OF THE HOME. 'CAUSE THEN THAT, WOULDN'T THAT BE ANOTHER VARIANCE FOR THE SIDE OF THE, OF, UM, AS WELL? WELL, THE SIX, NO, IT WAS JUST REALLY THE FRONT. OKAY. AND THERE'S A PHOTO OF UNIT AND I'M, I'M TWO INCHES SHOT BEING A HOBBIT. SO IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE SOLID OF ME. OKAY. UH, WELL, SO I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA ADD MY, MY COMMENTARY ON THIS. I MEAN, THIS AREA OF TOWN, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY AS YOU OVER THERE, THEY HAVE VERY OPEN FRONT YARDS. UH, HOWEVER, THIS IS NEXT TO A DRAINAGE DITCH, A GOOD SIZABLE DRAINAGE DITCH. SO IT'S, I MEAN, WE HAVE THESE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW, I'M ON MY H O A AND, AND, AND, AND IT'S, IT'S A DIFFERENT SORT OF LIVING WHEN YOU HAVE THIS, THIS DRAINAGE, UH, REUS NEXT TO YOU. YOU WANT TO, YOU WANT TO PROTECT IT. BUT I, I AM NOT A FAN OF THIS GOING THIS FAR FORWARD. I DON'T THINK IT'S CONDUCIVE TO THE LOOK OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S JUST, IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE STREET. UM, IF IT WAS MOVED BACK 16 FEET OR SOMETHING, THAT'D BE DIFFERENT. UH, IT'D STILL BE IN THE FRONT, YOU KNOW, BUT NOT ALL THE WAY, UH, AND BE OPEN, YOU KNOW, TO ANY SORT OF AN AMENDMENT. BUT, BUT AS, AS SUBMITTED, I, I CAN'T GET BEHIND THIS. IT'S GOING TOO FAR FORWARD TO THE STREET. SO, UH, WITH THAT, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR COMMENTARY COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP? MANNA, COMMISSIONER, MANNA, SO ON, SO, UH, ON THE SITE PLAN, UM, IT DOES APPEAR TO SHOW, UM, UH, SEVERAL, I GUESS, POSTS THAT ARE PAST THE FRONT FACADE. YEAH. UH, YOU KNOW, SO, SO IT DOES SEEM LIKE IT DOES GO PAST THAT FRONT FACADE. SO, SO IT, IT COULD BE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE DIALOGUE WOULD INCLUDE THAT. 'CAUSE THERE'S PART OF THE DIALOGUE. WELL KEEP IN MIND ON THE SIDE YARD THERE, YOU'RE ALLOWED SIX AND AS IN THE, WITHIN THE CODE, THERE IS A SIX INCH EXCEPTION THAT THE, YOU KNOW, UH, STAFF EXCEPTION THAT WE COULD DO. OKAY. SO AN A E V R. SO PERFECT. THAT WOULD BE OKAY. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTARY BEFORE WE CALL FOR A VOTE? UM, DELMER, SORRY, GO AHEAD. KIM. DELMER. NO, I JUST WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY THAT THAT, THAT THE DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW CLOSE IT IS TO THE, THE FRONT, UM, AND THE CORRUGATED METAL IS NOT PART OF THE MOTION THAT'S JUST BEEN READ. IT'S, IT'S A SEPARATE MOTION. SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE ONLY DISCUSSING THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE. OKAY. THEN I'M, I'M GONNA CHANGE MY DISCUSSION. I'M, I'M, I, I'M OPPOSED TO THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE THAT FAR IN. I, I, I CAN'T, I, I CAN'T SEE IT AND NOT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. I MEAN, I'M GOING DOWN GOOGLE STREET MAPS. I JUST CAN'T GET BEHIND, CAN'T GET BEHIND HAVING A FENCE, UH, HIGH THIS CLOSE TO THE STREET. SO, UH, I DO. OKAY. IS, UH, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD A, A REMARK BEFORE WE GO TO A VOTE? I'VE GOT A QUESTION. YES. DID THEY EXTEND THIS FENCE ALL THE WAY AROUND THE ENTIRE BACKYARD OR IS IT STOP? I MEAN, IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS RIGHT HERE, IT STOPS RIGHT THERE. IT STOPS RIGHT THERE. HMM. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. UH, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, THIS IS AN ANSWER. THIS IS AN ANSWER TO THAT. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT SAID IT'S BECAUSE THE TREES THAT YOU CAN SEE TOWARDS THE END THERE. MM-HMM. NO LONGER NECESSITATE HAVING A TALL FENCE BECAUSE THE TREES, UM, BLOCK. WELL, THEY, NOW, I, I WILL LIKE TO SAY THAT THE APPLICANT MENTIONED THAT A CONCERN OF HAVING, OF HAVING CHILDREN GO THROUGH OF, OF, UH, A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE. BUT IT, YOU KNOW, JUST HAVING TREES IS MUCH MORE OPEN THAN NOT HAVING A FENCE. I DUNNO IF ANYONE ELSE SEES IT LIKE THAT. I NOTICED THAT MYSELF AND THAT WAS MY, I MEAN, THAT WAS MY QUESTION, SO, OKAY. WELL, WE, WE'VE BEEN, WE'RE DANCING AROUND THE SUBJECT. I MEAN, THE ISSUE OF BAY HERE IS WHETHER OR NOT, UM, A FENCE TALLER THAN THAN THREE FEET CAN EXIST IN THE FRONT YARD. AND SO THAT'S A MOTION BEFORE US, UH, STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL FOR A VOTE, MICHELLE? NO, I COURT. MR. MANCHACA? NO. MR. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. KEEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. [04:05:01] MANNA, I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. LOVE? NO. O MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. UH, CHAIR ORIAN? UH, I DO NOT CONCUR. UH, THE VOTE IS SIX TO FOUR. UH, MOTION FAILED. THE NEXT ITEM BEFORE US IS GOING TO BE THE ISSUE REGARDING THE, UM, CORRUGATED METAL AS A USE FOR A GATE, WHICH IS STILL BEFORE US BECAUSE THEY COULD THEORETICALLY PUT A SHORTER FENCE, UH, AS WELL AS A, UH, A VARIANCE FROM THE CLEAR VISION. UM, SO IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THAT, ON THAT, THOSE TWO ISSUES, HEARING NONE GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE. UH, THERE'S NO MOTION ON THE ISSUE. SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE, UH, WE'RE GONNA CONSIDER THAT CLOSED. UH, NEXT [9. 21-1349 Consideration and approval of January 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment meeting minutes] ITEM UP IS, UH, ITEM NUMBER NINE. UH, REGARDING MINUTES FROM JANUARY 11TH. I DID NOT SEE ANY DELTAS FROM MY NOTES, BUT PRELUDES NOTES OKAY. HERE, IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, UH, WE CAN, UH, NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES. MOTION. WE APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AS, UH, WRITTEN. UH, OKAY. IT'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. SECOND. SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANON. LET'S GO TO A VOTE, PLEASE. MICHELLE. I, I APPROVE MR. MANCHACA. I APPROVED MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. GI? YES. MISS, UH, OR MR. MANNA? I APPROVE. MS. RAGMAN? YES, I APPROVE MR. DOMER. I APPROVE MR. LOVE. YES, MS. FISHER? I APPROVE AND SHARE ORIAN. I ALSO APPROVE, UH, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. SO BEFORE WE ADJOURN, I JUST WANTED TO THANK EVERYBODY, UH, FOR YOUR VOTE OF CONFIDENCE TODAY. I'LL, I'LL DO MY BEST AND NOT TO LET YOU DOWN. UH, AND, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, TO STATE THAT, UH, I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD NOW FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, THREE, A LITTLE OVER THREE YEARS. AND, UH, SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU GUYS, UH, FEEL LIKE, UH, YOU WOULD NEED FOR, TO HAVE ANY KIND OF, UH, TRAINING OR, OR ANYTHING, UH, FOR A WORKSHOP, UH, THAT, THAT IS, IS, IS, UH, THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO THE BOARD MEMBERS. YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD LOOK AT POSSIBLY THIS SUMMER. UM, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK STAFF, UH, THERE WAS A COUPLE YEARS AGO THERE WAS AN INFO GOAL ATTEND OR SOME SORT OF, UM, UM, PRINTOUT THAT TALKED ABOUT CARPORTS AND HOW THE RULES WORKED ON CARPORTS. AND I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY INFORMATIVE. AND SINCE WE HAVE A LOT OF NEW MEMBERS, IT MIGHT BE NICE TO, UH, REDISTRIBUTE THAT TO EVERYBODY. WILL DO. I'LL GO AHEAD AND, UH, I'LL PULL THAT AND I'LL SEND IT TO THE BOARD MEMBERS. GREAT. UM, SO THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. UH, MOVE MACHACA. YEAH, COMMISSIONER MACHACA. UH, MR. IAN, I DO AGREE WITH YOU, SIR, ON THAT PART OF THE TRAINING. UH, I THINK THAT REFRESHERS AND REVIEWS AS MY EXPERIENCE AS A PROJECT MANAGER, THAT IT'S HELPFUL TO REVIEW SOME OF THESE SETBACKS AND SOME OF THESE LITTLE NUANCES THAT TEND TO SHOW UP THAT'LL HELP ON OUR, UH, GIVE MORE AN INFORMATIVE JUDGMENT OR DECISION ON SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT ARE SO UNIQUE THAT WE CAN SAY THAT WE HAVE SOME SORT OF REFERENCE AS OPPOSED TO, UH, A FEELING. UH, WE DON'T WANNA OPERATE OFF OF FEELINGS, WE WANNA OPERATE OFF SOME DATA OR SOME INFORMATION. AND I THINK SOME SORT OF TRAINING ON A YEARLY BASIS OR QUARTERLY FOR REVIEWS WILL BE MOST HELPFUL TO EVERYBODY. SURE. AND, AND SO I'M LOOKING FOR THE, THE, THE COMMISSIONERS JUST TO SEND ME AN EMAIL, JUST GIMME A COUPLE SUBJECTS AND YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T HAVE ONE EVERY MONTH, BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'D BE NICE TO HAVE A TARGET FOR MAYBE, MAYBE, UH, WELL MAYBE IN APRIL OR, OR IN JUNE OR SOMETHING. YES, SIR. YOU KNOW, JUST SOMETHING, UH, TO BRIEF AND TO THE POINT. SO YEAH, SEND 'EM MY WAY. I'LL WORK WITH STAFF TO SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING WE CAN DO THAT WILL HELP YOU. HELPFUL TO EVERYBODY. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. UH, SO I'M GOING TO HEREBY ADJOURN THE MEETING AND Y'ALL HAVE A GREAT REST OF THE EVENING. THANK YOU. HAVE A GREAT WEEK. [04:10:01] THANK YOU. * 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.