* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:01] ROLLING LIVE, SIR. ALRIGHT, GREAT. SAY WHEN. OH, WE ARE LIVE, SIR. GREAT. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES [Call to Order] AND GENTLEMEN. MY NAME IS DONALD ORIAN. I AM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULARLY SCHEDULED NOTICE MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN SESSION. UH, CAN WE HAVE THE INTERPRETERS READ, UH, THE SERVICES PLEASE? THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, STAFF. LET'S GO ON. MOVE ON WITH THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE. MICHELLE, I CAN'T HEAR YOU. MICHELLE, PRESENT. THERE YOU GO. ALRIGHT. MR. BATTLE WE KNOW WON'T BE HERE UNTIL TWO 30. MR. MANCHACA PRESENT. MS. CRUZ? HERE. MR. MANNA PRESENT. MS. BRAGMAN? PRESENT. MR. DELMER? PRESENT. MS. FISHER? PRESENT. MR. TEALS PRESENT? MR. ZUNA PRESENT AND CHAIR ORIAN? I AM ALSO PRESENT. WE HAVE A QUORUM, SIR. ALRIGHT, GREAT. UH, SO BEFORE WE PRE 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 WE DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES FOR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATOR AND THE 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 THE DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE 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 IN 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 CONCURRENT VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN GRANTING THE RELEASE SOC RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS ON WHICH THE REQUESTED RELEASE CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISIONS 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 THEIR ITEMS. I WOULD LIKE OUR STAFF TO REVIEW OUR MEETING FORMAT. UH, STAFF, PLEASE PROCEED TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THE PUBLIC IN LIMIT THE POTENTIAL SPREAD OF COVID 19. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS HOLDING MEETINGS VIA VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE. THESE MEETING STANDARDS ARE BASED UPON THE VARIOUS SUSPENDED PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT ISSUED BY THE TEXAS GOVERNOR IN RESPONSE TO THE 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 COMMENT, THERE ARE FOUR OPPORTUNITIES. THESE 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, UH, TWO MINUTES FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT. STAFF WILL READ INTO THE RECORD ANY EMAILS OR LETTERS RECEIVED. STAFF WILL ALSO PLAY ANY MESSAGES RECEIVED BY VOICEMAIL. LASTLY, FOR THAT, THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO, TO RECEIVE A CALLBACK, WE WILL THEN CALL THEM 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 TIME LIMIT WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSIONED QUESTIONS. GREAT. UM, WELL THE FIRST, OUR FIRST ITEM WAS POSTPONED. [2. 21-2027 (Continued from December 21, 2020) BOA-20-10300119:] SO STAFF WAS, BEGIN WITH THE SECOND ITEM, UH, ITEM ONE 19. YES, SIR. THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 21. UH, THE MAJORITY OF THE LOT WAS APPROVED BY THIS BOARD. WE DID PULL OUT THREE LOTS, UH, TO BE HEARD BY THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION. [00:05:01] UM, DURING THAT TIMEFRAME, THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DID DETERMINE THAT THIS PROJECT DID NOT NEED TO GO TO H D R C AND DID NOT, WAS NOT SUBJECT TO THE RIO STANDARDS. SO THIS IS AT 1508 SOUTH ST. MARY'S COUNCIL. DISTRICT ONE APPLICANT IS PATRICK WILLIAM CHRISTENSEN. REQUEST FOR ZONING VARIANCE FROM THE SOUTH PRESA AND SOUTH ST. MARY'S NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN REGULATIONS TO ALLOW ONE, A NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE THREE STORIES AND 38 FEET IN HEIGHT AND TWO ATTACHED REAR FACING GARAGES TO BE CONSTRUCTED. KERN ZONING IS IDZ TWO NCD ONE RE OH FOUR. OKAY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS PART. GO AHEAD, SIR. UH, NO, I THOUGHT YOU WERE FINISHED. GO AHEAD. SO, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS PART OF THE LARGER DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ALONG THE ENTIRE BLOCK FACE OF, UH, PLAYMORE STREET BETWEEN SOUTH PRESTA AND ST. MARY'S STREET. THE APPLICANT RECEIVED APPROVAL FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PART, UH, FOR THE PROPERTY OUTSIDE THE RIO FOR THE SAME VARIANCE REQUEST ON DECEMBER 21ST, 2020. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING VARIANCES FROM THE SOUTH PRESTA AND SOUTH ST. MARY'S CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS THAT LIMITS RESIDENTIAL HEIGHT TO 35 FEET OR TWO AND A HALF STORIES AND ONLY ALLOWS REAR DETACHED GARAGES. THAT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL SERVE AS A BUFFER BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL USES TO THE NORTH AND THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY TO THE SOUTH. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ENTIRELY IN THE NCD ONE ZONING OVERLAY WITH PORTION RIO FOUR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAN ANTONIO UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEWS, UM, ALL DEMOLITION APPLICATIONS FOR ANY PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF SAN ANTONIO. THE APPLICATION FOR 1508 SOUTH ST. MARY'S WAS RECEIVED OCTOBER, UH, 12TH, 2020, AND THE DEMOLITION REVIEW WAS COMPLETED AND APPROVED BY ON NOVEMBER 12TH, 2020. ANY PROPOSED EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSAL WILL REQUIRE APPROVAL AND IN THIS CASE, WE DID. WE, WE DETERMINED THAT O H P DOES NOT NEED TO REVIEW, NOR DOES THE H D R C. NEXT SLIDE. WE HIGHLIGHTED THE, THE RED AREA THAT INDICATES THOSE THAT WERE THE RIO THAT WE DID, UH, PULL FROM THE LAST MEETING, UH, IN DECEMBER. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF VARIANCES IN B O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 1 9. BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT VARIANCE ARE GRANTED. THE, THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE IN HARMONY, UH, WITHOUT PUTTING THE COMMUNITY OUT OF CHARACTER. AND THE H C R C REVIEW REVIEWED THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND FOUND IT NOT SUBJECT TO THE REAL GUIDELINES. 37 NOTICES ARE SENT OUT. ONE IN FAVOR, JUROR IN OPPOSITION, UH, WITHIN WITH KING WILLIAM. NO RESPONSE. CONSERVATION SOCIETY DID, UH, SUBMIT OPPOSITION, WHICH WAS READ INTO THE RECORD IN DECEMBER. LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD IS IN FAVOR. WE DO HAVE PATRICK CHRISTENSEN ON THE LINE. PATRICK, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. PATRICK CHRISTENSEN, THREE 10 SOUTH ST. MARY'S 3 2700. UM, ZEKE PRETTY MUCH SAID IT ALL. WE, WE PULLED THREE LOTS OR THREE UNITS OUT OF THE PREVIOUS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DECISION DUE TO, UH, IT BEING DECIDED THAT WE NEEDED TO GO TO THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION AND GET THEIR RECOMMENDATION ON THE PROJECT. BUT IN, IN RESEARCHING THE CODE A LITTLE BIT FUR FURTHER, AS BE SAID, THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DECIDED THAT SINCE WE HAVE FEWER THAN FIVE UNITS IN THE RIO, WE DO NOT HAVE TO GO V H D R C. SO WE WOULD REQUEST, YOU KNOW, THE SAME VARIANCE THAT WE RECEIVED IN DECEMBER FOR, FOR, FOR THREE UNITS. UM, BASICALLY THAT WE CAN HAVE REAR FACING GARAGES. AND THAT INSTEAD OF BEING LIMITED TO TWO AND A HALF STORIES AND 35 FEET, WE CAN HAVE THREE STORIES AT 38 FOOT HEIGHT LIMITATION. WE DID REACH OUT TO LAVACCA, THEY WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PROJECT. THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC FOR RESERVATION IS ALLOWING US TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING STRUCTURES. THEY DECIDED THEY WERE NOT HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT. UH, MR. CHRISTENSEN, BEFORE I OPEN THIS UP TO QUESTIONS, BUT CAN YOU PLEASE CLARIFY, UH, ON YOUR, ON THE OUTLINE IN RED ON THE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED THAT, THAT YOU WERE PUTTING IN, UH, THREE UNITS? IS THAT WHAT I'M SEEING WHERE THE, THE ONE, THE STUFF WELL, YEAH, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THE ONE THAT'S ON THE, YEAH, GO AHEAD. UNDERSTOOD. THE, THE STRUCTURE AT THE BOTTOM, UH, DOES NOT REQUIRE VARIANCE 'CAUSE IT WILL BE TWO STORIES AND HAVE A SEPARATE DETACHED GARAGE AS IS ALLOWED UNDER THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT GUIDELINE. SO TECHNICALLY THE VARIANCE WE'RE REQUESTING ONLY APPLIES TO THE THREE UNITS THAT ARE, THAT ARE MORE OF AT THE HARD CORNER OF SOUTH ST. MARY'S AND PLAYMORE. THEY'RE THE TWO THAT ARE ATTACHED AT THE HARD CORNER. THEN ONE MORE THAT'S JUST INSIDE THE RIO BOUNDARY. OKAY. SO THREE UNITS. YEAH. UH, THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. ARE THERE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? [00:10:04] MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO, UM, YES, COULD, COULD THERE BE SOME DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY POSITION AND, AND WHAT WAS THEIR OPPOSITION? UH, CAN YOU REMIND US ABOUT THAT PLEASE? APPLICANT? SO BASICALLY YOU ASKING US FROM APPLICANT OR STAFF, I'M SORRY, APPLICANT, PLEASE. YES. UH, I BELIEVE THEY WANT, THEY WANTED US TO SAY TO THE 35 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT, BUT LIKE I, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE ONLY ASKING FOR THREE ADDITIONAL FEET. UM, THEY DID NOT OPPOSE THE DEMOLITION OF THE STRUCTURE. SO REALLY, I BELIEVE IT HAS TO DO WITH THE HEIGHT, BUT WE DO NEED THAT, THAT THREE EXTRA FEET. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MANNA? MENCHACA, UH, COMMISSIONER MENCHACA? UH, I THINK, UH, THE LAST TIME WE DISCUSSED WAS THAT, UH, WAS THERE STILL GONNA BE A REARRANGEMENT OF THE OVERHEAD LINES IN FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE? CORRECT. YES. SO WE HAVE HAD FURTHER MEETINGS WITH, UH, CITY PUBLIC SERVICE SINCE THE LAST HEARING, AND, UM, THEY ARE GOING TO ALLOW US TO, TO BURY THOSE LINES ON PLAYMORE STREET. WE HAVE CONFIRMATION OF THAT. WE JUST HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. . THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? ALL RIGHT. UH, SO WITH THAT, UM, MR. CHRISTENSEN, UH, IS THERE ANY CLOSING REMARKS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE? NO. COMMISSIONERS. UM, I WOULD JUST APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT. LIKE I SAID, WE'VE REACHED OUT TO, TO ALL THE NEIGHBORS AND TO LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND WE DO HAVE THEIR SUPPORT. WE FEEL THIS WILL BE A GOOD PROJECT FOR THIS, FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT WILL, UM, CREATE NEW HOUSING AND, AND BASICALLY ALLOW FOR SOME DILAPIDATED STRUCTURES TO BE DEMOLISHED. GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO, UNLESS THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION, PLEASE. MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 9. I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED THE REQUEST FOR A ZONING VARIANCE FROM THE SOUTH PRESA AND SOUTH ST. MARY NEIGHBORHOODS CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN REGULATIONS TO ALLOW ONE, A NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE THREE STORIES AND 38 FEET IN HEIGHT AND TWO ATTACHED REAR FACING GARAGES TO BE CONSTRUCTED, SITUATED AT 1 5 0 8 SOUTH ST. MARY STREET, APPLICANT BEING PATRICK WILLIAMS CHRISTENSEN. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. DISTINCTLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES ARE NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST, AS IT DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT ANY SURROUNDING PROPERTIES OR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. SAME VARIANCES FOR THE LARGER PORTION OF THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FOR GRANTED BY THE BOARD OF AND BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. AND THESE REQUESTS WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE REST OF THE PROJECT. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN HARDSHIP TO ACCOMMODATE THE SUIT SUITABLE DENSITY FOR THE REST OF THREE LOTS AND BUILD THEM WITH A DIFFERENT PATTERN. THREE, GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS IS TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENTS THAT PRESERVES THE CHARACTER AND THE CULTURE OF LAVACCA COMMUNITY. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD COMPRISE THE ENTIRE BLOCK PHASE BETWEEN TWO MAJOR CORRIDORS. THEREFORE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT PERMIT A USE NOT AUTHORIZED WITHIN THE DISTRICT. IT IS LOCATED IN FIVE SUCH VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES, WHICH INCLUDE THE BRACKEN RIDGE HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS, SEVERAL COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES ALONG THE REAR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCES IS SOUGHT 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 EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER AND IS NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE. THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO DEVELOP THE WHOLE BLOCK PHASE IN THESE THREE LOTS. WE AWAITING THE H D R C REVIEW AND A MOTION. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MAN AND THE, AND THE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UH, MR. MANNA, PLEASE START THE DISCUSSION. UM, I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS. UH, [00:15:01] SO ONE, SIMPLY BECAUSE THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN BEFORE THE BOARD AND WE ARE WAITING FOR THE H C R C COMMENT AND H C R C SAYS IT'S FINE. SO THEREFORE, I, I THINK THAT I'M FINE WITH THIS AS WELL. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UH, YES, I CONCUR WITH, UH, MR. MANNA. I, MR. MINCHA, I'M SORRY. UH, AND I THINK THIS WILL BE A GREAT IMPROVEMENT FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO, UH, ADD TO THAT? I, I'M SUPPORTING, UM, MR. CHAIR, I ASSUME WE DON'T HAVE, WE DID NOT HAVE ANYBODY SPEAKING IN SUPPORT FOR THE, THE MOTION OR, NO, WE HAD, WE HAVE, UH, TWO, TWO COMMISSIONERS IN SUPPORT AT THIS POINT. AND, UH, OH, NO, NO, I, I'M MEANT JUST PUBLIC, UH, PUBLIC, UH, UM, COMMENTS, THE BOARD, SO, OKAY. I DID NOT SEE ANY STAFF. COULD, CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, VERIFY THAT THERE WAS, THERE WAS NO DOCUMENTATIONS OR CALLINS FOR SUPPORT? UH, NO, SIR. THERE'S NOTHING NEW, ESPECIALLY, UH, SINCE THE LAST MEETING, THE ONLY LETTER THAT WAS UPDATED WAS FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY, AND IT WAS JUST, AS PATRICK MENTIONED, ALL THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT WAS A 35 FEET IN HEIGHT. OKAY. BUT THERE'S NOTHING. THANK YOU. I'M, I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION FOR THE, FOR THE, UM, FOR THE STATED PURPOSES. THANKS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. MICHELLE, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. MACHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. MS. CRUZ, THANK, YOU'RE ON MUTE, MA'AM. I WILL COME BACK TO YOU, MS. CRUZ. MS. BREGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. NOTHING YET, MA'AM. I'LL, I'LL TRY COMING AGAIN. BACK TO YOU AGAIN, MR. DOMER. I CONCUR. MS. FISHER. I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. AND MS. CRUZ STILL NOT HEARING ANYTHING? MS. CRUZ, DO YOU, CAN YOU GIVE HER A CALL? YES, WE'LL DO THAT. UM, OKAY. AND CAN YOU, AND ALSO FOR THE, UH, BOARD ATTORNEY, WE HAVE NINE VOTES TO APPROVE. IS IT POSSIBLE TO, TO CLOSE THIS AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM? OR DO WE NO, WE CAN DO THAT. SO WE IT DID, YEAH, WE DID MEET THE MINIMUM. SO IT, IT DID PASS. OKAY. UH, LET'S DO THAT. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT. UH, FOR, FOR PURPOSES OF ACCOUNTING FOR A VOTE, WOULD IT SHOW UP AS A RECUSAL OR, OR A NO VOTE. I'LL JUST SHOW IT AS A TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. YEAH, IT'LL BE, I'LL HEAR HER. SHE DOES A THUMBS UP, BUT WE CAN RECORD THAT. SHE DOES A THUMBS UP, BUT WE CAN RECORD THAT SHE TECHNICAL. HOW ABOUT THAT, MS. CRUZ? THUMBS UP FOR APPROVAL. THE THUMBS DOWN APPROVAL. OKAY. I'LL NOTATE THAT MS. CRUZ DID APPROVE, APPROVE WITH A THUMBS UP. OKAY, FANTASTIC. AND, UH, IF YOU CAN HEAR ME, MS. CRUZ, UH, IF YOU HAVE A A, A, A SPARE, UH, PHONE, MAYBE YOU CAN CALL IN AND, AND TALK TO US THAT WAY. LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE, PLEASE. OKAY. [3. 21-2063 BOA-21-10300004] CASE NUMBER 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 4 LOCATED 53 38 VISTA RUN COUNCIL, DISTRICT 10. APPLICANT IS MARIANNE, UH, BAREZ TO REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A BACKYARD FENCE INSIDE YARD FENCE TO BE EIGHT FEET TALL. CURRENT ZONING IS R SIX. NEXT SLIDE. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 53 38 VISTA RUN WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY WITHIN THE SINGLE FAMILY DIVIS, UH, SUBDIVISION. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND BACKYARD PROPERTY LINE TO BE EIGHT FEET TALL. THERE IS A CHANGE OF ELEVATION IN THE REAR YARD. THE APPLICANT STATES, UH, CONCERNS OF PRIVACY WHEN USING THE PORCH LOCATED WITHIN THE REAR YARD. HERE'S A SITE PLAN, SUBJECT PROPERTY FENCE IN QUESTION FROM THE PORCH OR THE DECK, I SHOULD SAY. [00:20:02] AND SURROUNDING AREA 31. NOTICES WERE SENT OUT, THREE WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, INCLUDING ONE OUTSIDE THE 200, UH, NOTIFICATION AREA. THERE ARE TWO IN OPPOSITION. THE VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR. NEXT SLIDE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF BO O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 0 4 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, DEFENSE WILL BE CONSTRUCTION ON THE BACK INSIDE PROPERTY LINES, AND THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WE'LL PROMOTE THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE, MS. MARIANNE, UH, PERES. MA'AM, WHEN YOU'RE READY, UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS MARYANNE REES. MY ADDRESS IS 53 38 VISTA RUN DRIVE IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, 7 8 2 4 7. THE REASON I NEED, UH, MY FENCE, UH, TO BE HIGHER THAN SIX FEET IS BECAUSE ME, MY FAMILY, AND I DON'T FEEL SAFE AND SECURE IN THE BACKYARD, AND NO PRIVACY FROM THE NEIGHBORS ON ALL SIDES. I SPEND A LOT OF MY TIME IN MY BACKYARD WORKING IN THE YARD OR WORKING ON PROJECTS. AND, UH, I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT WITH, UH, THE FENCE AT, AT SIX FEET BECAUSE I FEEL I'M ALWAYS BEING WATCHED. I CAN SEE MY NEIGHBORS, SO I KNOW THEY CAN SEE ME, AND I'M VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THAT. MY DAUGHTER AND GRANDKIDS WHO LIVE WITH ME HAD TO RESORT TO USING TILTED UMBRELLAS TO GET PRIVACY IN THE BACKYARD. RAISING THE FENCE TO EIGHT FEET WOULD GREATLY IMPROVE THE SAFETY AND SECURITY AND GIVE US THE PRIVACY WE NEED. UM, IN THIS AREA THERE, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF, UH, SOIL EROSION, ESPECIALLY IN MY BACKYARD THAT HAS REALLY LOWERED THE FENCE EVEN AT SIX FEET WHEN IT RAINS REALLY HARD, WHERE THERE IS FLOODING, RAIN FLOWS DIRECTLY THROUGH MY YARD FROM THE STREET IN FRONT OF US, AND ALONG MY BACK FENCE THAT HAS CAUSED THE SOIL EROSION. UM, I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE, UH, YOUR CONSIDERATION, UH, FOR A FAVORABLE DECISION, AND I THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO HEAR ME OUT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, THANK YOU. AND, UH, BEFORE WE OPEN THIS TO QUESTION STAFF IS, SIR, CAN YOU PLEASE COMMENT ON THE PERMITTING STATUS OF THIS FENCE? PERMIT? STANDBY, SIR. SO SHE DID REQUEST A PERMIT AND WE WERE WAITING FOR THE, THE OUTCOME OF THIS MEETING. UM, OKAY. TO DETERMINE IF SHE CAN KEEP IT AT THE EIGHTH FIRST, DROP IT BACK TO SIX. GREAT. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. WHO WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST? OH, ZDA. UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA. UH, UH, MY QUESTION IS SIMPLY HOW WAS THIS, UH, CASE ORIGINATED? WAS THIS, UH, A CALL IN OR THIS A A DRIVE BY BY THE SITE INSPECTOR? WAS THAT FOR ME? IT'S ZE IT WAS CODE COMPLIANCE, SIR. THANK YOU. FULL COMPLIANCE CHAIR. BEFORE WE GO FURTHER, WE DO HAVE SOME COMMENTS THAT TO READ INTO THE RECORD. OKAY. WE HAVE NO CALL-INS, BUT WE DO HAVE SOME, UH, ITEMS TO BE READ IN. PLEASE PROCEED. UH, WE DO HAVE, UH, IN FAVOR FROM VERONICA SALANA AT 53 27 VISTA RUN. ANOTHER IN FAVOR FROM CURTIS EVANS, 54 0 2 VISTA RUN. AND THEN WE HAVE, UH, ONE OPPOSITION. THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE SHOULD BE DENIED. WE HAVE RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT HAVE TO, THEY HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED. THERE'S NO NEED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR OFFENSE THAT HIGH FROM, UH, MARIA BACHMAN AT 54 0 6 SISTER RUN. AND THEN FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, I RECEIVED THIS NOTICE NOTIFICATION. SINCE I'M THE VICE, UH, VISTA PRESIDENT FROM JENNIFER OATES, UH, I AM IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING THE EXCEPTION. UH, THE TERRAIN IN VISTA IS STRANGE AND, AND A HIGHER FENCE IS NECESSARY IN AREAS DUE TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, THE FENCES FOR THE SIZE AND BACK FROM THE HOUSE, UM, AND WILL NOT BLOCK THE FRONT OR ANY RIGHT OF WAY. AGAIN, THAT'S FROM JENNIFER OS, UH, VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT. AND THEN ANOTHER IN FAVOR FROM A DENNIS, UH, FROM 53 35 VISTA GLENN, I THINK THE PROPERTY OWNER SHOULD BE ABLE TO KEEP THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE, AND THEN A LETTER THAT'LL BE READ INTO THE RECORD [00:25:01] AS WELL. UH, WE HAVE PROUDLY OWNED OUR HOME AT 53 34 VISTA RUN FOR 37 YEARS. THE ADJACENT HOMEOWNER AT 53 38 VISTA RUN INFORMED US OF HER PLANS TO REPLACE A SIX TALL, UH, SIX FOOT TALL WOOD FENCE AT THE BACK OF HER, OF HER PROPERTY WITH AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. SHE STATED THAT SHE DID NOT PLAN TO REPLACE THE SHARED SIX FOOT TALL FENCE ALONG OUR PROPERTY LINE. SHE ALSO STATED THAT SHE WAS NOT REQUESTING A PERMIT OR VARIANCE IN THE CITY TO BUILD THE BACK FENCE. UPON RETURNING HOME FROM THE A TRIP ON NOVEMBER 20TH, WE DISCOVERED THAT THE SHARED SIX FOOT TALL FENCE, OUR PROPERTY LINE, WAS INDEED REMOVED WITHOUT OUR, OUR PRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND REPLACED WITH AN EIGHT FOOT, TWO FOOT, UH, INCH FENCE. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FENCE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH ANY WOOD FENCE IN OUR IMMEDIATE OR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, WITH REGARDS TO MATERIALS, HEIGHT, DESIGN AND OR STYLE. FURTHERMORE, THE FENCE FACING OUR PROPERTY IS UNFINISHED, FEATURING MATERIALS INCLUDING BLACK STEEL POSTS, SILVER METAL TRIMS, UH, CONCRETE BLOCKS AND REBAR SPIKES. THE FENCE IS, UH, GRADUATED AND ATTACHED TO A SIX FOOT SIDE, SIDE FENCE EXPOSING THREE ENDS, WHICH ACCURATELY, UM, THEY MOVE UPWARD BY TWO FEET AND ARE LEFT STRANDED IN THE AIR. UH, THIS FENCE, WHICH IS MERE 15 FEET BY, UH, 15 FEET TO 18 FEET FROM OUR LIVING AREA, IS VISIBLE FROM OUR, FROM SEVERAL WINDOWS, THE SLIDING GLASS DOOR LEADING TO THE BACKYARD, AND FROM OUR BACKYARD. THIS HAS FORCED US TO ENDURE, UH, AN INTIMIDATING CLOSED IN HARDSHIP AND GREATLY DIMINISHES THE VIEW FROM INTO OUR BACKYARD. THE FENCE ALSO GREATLY IMPOSES UPON THE SIDEWALK LEADING TO OUR FRONT DOOR SERIOUSLY INTERFERING WITH OUR HOME CHARACTER AND CURB APPEAL. THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IS NOT UNIQUE AND IS UNREMARKABLE IN COMPARISON TO ANY HOME IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE EXISTS THREE FOOT HIGH PATIO DECK AND HER BACKYARD, WHICH IS SELF-IMPOSED HARDSHIP NOT SHARED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE AFA TWO FENCE EXHIBITS AN EVIDENT LACK OF REASONABLE CONGRUENCY, SERENITY, AND HARMONY, WHICH GREATLY IMPAIRS OUR, UH, EXPECTED ENJOYMENT FROM OUR PROPERTY. THIS IS DETRIMENTAL TO OUR WELLBEING AND POTENTIAL LESSONS, UM, LESSONS OUR HOME VALUE. WE APPRECIATE THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION DENYING THE FENCE MODIFICATION REQUEST OF THE SHARED FENCE LINE, PAULA AND DAVE O DOCKERTY. AND THEIR ADDRESS IS 53 34 VISTA RUN DRIVE. THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF THE COMMENTS, RIGHT? UH, COMMISSIONER, CONTINUE WITH COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. OKAY. WELL, I HAVE A ANA COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER MINKA, MINKA, AND THEN NANA. I HAVE, UH, TWO QUESTIONS. IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THE FENCE WAS ERECTED DUE TO THE ELEVATION OF THE REAR PORCH THAT'S ELEVATED, UH, AT THE LEVEL OF THE HOUSE. THEY EXIT FROM THE REAR, AND THAT RAISES THE FENCE UP, WHICH BRINGS A QUESTION OF PRIVACY, UH, THAT WAS IN SELF-IMPOSED. SORT OF THE QUESTION I HAVE IS THESE SPIKES THAT ARE STICKING UP ON THE REBAR, UH, I'M NOT, I'M ASKING THIS QUESTION TO STAFF. DID YOU SEE THAT? AND WHAT IS THE ISSUE WITH THOSE SPIKES? NO, SIR. WE DIDN'T SEE ANY REBAR. WE, WE DID SEE THE, THE CONCRETE BLOCKS ON THE ONE, THE FURTHER, UH, ENDS OF IT, YOU'RE FACING THE STRUCTURE BETWEEN THE RIGHT, UH, THE DROP IN ELEVATION WAS, IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS ABOUT THREE FEET, AND THAT'S WHERE WE NOTICED THE BLOCKS THERE AT THE BOTTOM OF IT. BUT THAT WAS ABOUT IT. I DIDN'T SEE ANY REBAR. I SEE. I'M QUESTIONING IT. THE SAFETY OF THE WHOLE THING. UH, THE SAFETY LOOKS FINE. ULTIMATELY, IT WAS NOTHING THAT STOOD OUT FOR US WHEN WE WERE OUT ON SITE. I SEE. WA WAS THIS FENCE UNDER CONSTRUCTION WHEN THE, OR IT HAS A PERMIT BEFORE IT WAS CONSTRUCTED, IS WHAT I'M ASKING NOW? NO, SIR. IT STARTED OUT UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND SHE CAME BACK IN TO GET A PERMIT AFTERWARDS. YEAH. SO, OKAY. SO IT'S A VIOLATION THEN. THANKS. YES. OKAY. COMMISSIONER, MAN. SO I, I GUESS FOLLOWING ALONG THE LINES OF MR. MANCHACA IS, YOU KNOW, THE PRIOR, UH, OR THE LAST, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT THAT YOU READ IS THERE, IS THERE A NEIGHBOR, AND THEY KIND OF TALKED ABOUT A DISTANCE THERE BETWEEN THEIR HOUSE AND THE FENCE. SO, UM, IS THE OTHER HOUSE, YOU KNOW, IS THE SENSE TRULY ON THE PROPERTY? YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY TALKED ABOUT INCHES, 18 INCHES, AND THAT'S DOESN'T SOUND, UM, YOU FROM THE PICTURE, DOESN'T LOOK, DOESN'T LOOK CORRECT, NOR DOES IT SOUND LIKE THAT WOULD BE WITHIN CODE. SO I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET A POSITION THERE ON THAT. WHEN WE WERE OUT THERE, WE DIDN'T NOTICE, UM, ANY CLOSE PROXIMITY OF HOMES. UH, FIRE CODE IN ITSELF WOULDN'T, WOULDN'T ALLOW IT TO BE THAT CLOSE. IT [00:30:01] IS AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD. WELL, SOMEWHAT, BUT WE DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT STOOD OUT. DIDN'T, CAN YOU BRING THE LETTER BACK UP? CAN YOU PUT THE LETTER ON THE SCREEN WHILE YOU, WHILE YOU'RE DISCUSSING THIS, PLEASE? OKAY, GO AHEAD. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT THAT INFORMATION FROM THE NEIGHBOR IS ON THERE WHILE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IT. YES, SIR. YEAH, SO PICTURES GO, I'M SORRY. THERE ARE TWO PICTURES, UH, ATTACHED WITH THE LETTER. WE'RE GONNA BRING THOSE. OKAY. OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, SO I GUESS, UM, AND THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE THEY'RE LOOKING TO BRING TO THE COMPLETE, I GUESS TO THE FRONT OR EVEN WITH THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, IS THAT CORRECT? ALONG THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE? YES, SIR. EXACTLY. AND, AND THEN ON THE FRONT EDGE, IS THAT GONNA BE AT SIX FOOT THEN, OR IS THAT GONNA BE AT EIGHT FOOT AS WELL? IN, IN FRONT OF THE FACADE? THERE'S NO FENCING. RIGHT, BUT THE QUESTIONS YES, GO AHEAD. I'M, I WAS GONNA SAY THE, THE QUESTION, SO THAT PICTURE YOU HAD, YEAH. THE LAST PICTURE YOU HAD THERE SHOWED A FENCE AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY THAT LOOKED AT BE EIGHT FOOT IN HEIGHT. AND SO IS THE FRONT FACING FENCE PART OF THE FENCE GOING TO BE EIGHT FOOT OR IS IT GONNA BE SIX FOOT? PLEASE HOLD IT STILL. YOU'RE, YOU'RE GOING, WE'RE TRYING TO PULL UP A PHOTO OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. THIS IS ONE OF THEM RIGHT THERE. MICHELLE, I KNOW YOU'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF ANSWER ANSWERING ANOTHER QUESTION, BUT THAT WEST SIDE VIEW RIGHT THERE, IS THAT THE NEIGHBOR'S FRONT DOOR? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THE, THE, BASICALLY THE FRONT DOORS ARE KIND OF THE, A LITTLE PUSHBACK ON ALL OF THESE HOMES ARE THE ONES THAT WE DID NOTICE. THANK YOU. AND, AND ZEKE, AS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE, THE SIX, THAT'S ALL FENCE ON THE SIDE PLAN SUBMITTED, THEY SHOW A VERY SHORT SECTION THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN LIGHT BLUE THAT TALK, THAT WOULD BE A SIX FOOT FENCE WHERE IT GO, IT GOES FROM EIGHT TO SIX. IS THAT, IS THAT PART OF THE, THE QUESTION COMMISSIONER MANN? YES. OKAY. YEAH, SO THAT PHOTO YOU'RE SEEING RIGHT THERE, IT'S THE SIX FOOT, AND THEN IT, IT JUMPS UP TO EIGHT. UM, THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE ON THE OTHER YARD OR THE, I GUESS THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, UH, IS THE ENTIRE EIGHT FOOT. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OKAY, UH, I HAVE A QUESTION. UM, SO THE MAY APPLY FOR, UM, FOR THIS, UH, THIS PERMIT. DID THEY, DID THEY, THEY WERE PROPOSING ON THE PERMIT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE? YES, SIR. THEY WERE. OKAY, BUT NOT TALLER THAN EIGHT. CORRECT. WELL, STANDBY, SIR. AND THEN ALSO, DID THEY, DID THEY BRING INTO ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT ANY SORT OF CHANGE AND FINISH FOR BETWEEN THEM AND THEIR NEIGHBOR? THAT MIGHT LEAD TO ONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS? WE LOOKED AT THE PROPERTY, WE LOOKED AT THE, THE ELEVATIONS. THERE'S A SECTION OF THE CODE THAT SAYS IF THERE'S A FOUR FOOT DROP IN ELEVATION BETWEEN YOU AND THE NEIGHBOR, YOU'RE ALLOWED AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. MM-HMM. , UH, THE PROBLEM IS THE ELEVATION DROPS BACKWARDS AND KIND OF TO THE BACK CORNER. UM, STANDING AT THE BOTTOM END OF IT, IT DID LOOK LIKE IT WAS ABOUT THREE FEET. SO IT WASN'T QUITE THERE FOR THAT EXCEPTION TO FIT. UM, AND THERE'S NO ALLEY TO THE BACK EITHER, SO WE COULDN'T FIND AN EXCEPTION THAT WOULD'VE ALLOWED THE FENCE BY. RIGHT. AND ALSO, THERE'S ANOTHER PART OF THE CODE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO MAINTAIN THE FENCE SIDE AS LONG AS THE DEVIATION DOESN'T EXCEED TWO FEET. UH, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT HOW THIS WOULD, UM, IF THIS WERE TO, TO BE DENIED, [00:35:01] HOW THEY, HOW SOMEONE, HOW AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE FENCE WERE MAYBE THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO GET RID OF EVERY SINGLE PANEL WOULD COME INTO PLAY. SO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, IT WOULD START AT SIX FEET. AND THAT'S ALLOWED BY RIGHT. AS WELL AS YOU, AS YOU MENTIONED. SO THE WAY IT WOULD DROP IS IF THERE'S A DROP IN ELEVATION TO THE BACK, YOU CAN MAINTAIN THAT SAME HEIGHT UP TO EIGHT FEET AT THE MOST. ONCE YOU GET TO THAT EIGHT FEET, THE NEXT SECTION WOULD DROP AND COULD MAINTAIN THE EIGHT FEET ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK. OKAY. BUT IT WOULD BE A GRADUAL CHANGE ON ONE OF THE SKETCHES THAT LOOKS LIKE THE FENCE IS DROPPING, I DON'T KNOW, SIX INCH, SIX INCHES OF PANEL MM-HMM. , UH, SO IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE FOR HER TO MAKE THE FIRST TEN SIX AND THEN HOLD THAT FOR AT LEAST FOUR PANELS AND, AND MAINTAIN THAT HEIGHT AND THEN DO ANOTHER DROP. SO IT WOULD BE A, A WAY FOR, NOT A WAY, BUT IT WOULD, IT WOULD ALMOST, IT WOULD BE CLOSE OR SOMEWHAT CLOSE TO WHAT SHE'S DOING NOW. IT JUST WOULDN'T BE AS JAGGED. UM, RIGHT. SO THERE'D BE SOME MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED, UH, TO GET THERE TO, TO MAINTAIN THAT SIX FOOT TO EIGHT FOOT, UH, ELEVATION. OKAY. SO WAS THAT, THAT WAS IN THE NEIGHBOR'S LETTER, CORRECT. THAT THEY WERE, THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE WAY THAT LOOKED ABOUT IT BEING JAGGED. WAS THAT A PART OF THAT? YES, SIR. AND ALSO IT WAS OUTSIDE THEIR WINDOW. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SHELL, UH, COMMISSIONER SHELL, WOULD THE APPLICANT BE OPEN TO, UM, THE, SO LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN WHERE IT SHOWS THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE EXTENDING, UM, ALONG THE SIDE YARDS, THAT'S LABELED SIDE YARD IN THE KIND OF GRAY AREA, WOULD THEY BE OPEN TO LIMITING THAT TO SIX FEET ON THE SIDE FROM THE NEIGHBOR THAT HAS THE OPPOSITION? UM, SINCE THEIR FRONT DOORS AREN'T TECHNICALLY ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, THEY ARE ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, THEY, THEIR FRONT DOOR IS FACING THAT FENCE. SO I'M WONDERING IF THEY WOULD BE OPEN TO, ON THAT SIDE, KEEPING IT SIX FEET UNTIL IT'S IN THE REAR. THAT'S A QUESTION FOR, FOR THE APPLICANT. IS SHE, IS, UH, MS. FER EZ ON THE LINE? YES. YES, I AM. UH, THE, WHERE YOU SEE, WHERE YOU SEE THE, UH, THE METAL POLE ON THE OP OPPOSITION NEIGHBOR SIDE, THE, THE REASON THAT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S STICKING OUT IS BECAUSE THE, THE ORIGINAL PLAN WAS TO GRADUALLY, YOU KNOW, MAKE IT COME DOWN TO WHERE THE OLD FENCE IS AT SIX FOOT TO GRADUALLY BRING IT DOWN. BUT THE NEIGHBOR WAS VERY, I IRATE HER AND HER HUSBAND BOTH, YOU KNOW, ATTACK ME AS SOON AS THEY CAME BACK FROM THEIR TRIP. THE FENCE WAS, UH, ORIGINALLY TO DO THE BACKYARD, THE BACK, THE BACK END FROM, FROM ONE END TO THE OTHER. BUT WHEN WE STARTED REMOVING THE BACK FENCE, THE, THE FENCE ON THE OPPOSITION NEIGHBOR'S SIDE WAS FALLING DOWN, WHICH I HAD ALREADY FIXED TWO TIMES BEFORE BECAUSE THEY NEVER TOOK, MADE THE EFFORT TO FIX IT. SO I HAD TO FIX IT A COUPLE OF TIMES. THE FENCE WOULD'VE WAS FALLING TO MY SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO SINCE IT WAS SO BAD, SOME OF THE POLES WEREN'T EVEN, UH, IN THE GROUND, I HAD TO REPLACE THE, THAT WHOLE SIDE UP TO THE EDGE OF THE HOUSE. BUT WHEN THEY CAME BACK FROM THE, WHEN THEY CAME BACK FROM THEIR TRIP, THEY WERE IRATE AND WE NEVER GOT TO FINISH. UM, THE BUILD THE FENCE CONTRACTOR COULDN'T FINISH THAT PART. FOR THE LAST POLE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S STICKING OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB BECAUSE WE WERE GONNA GRADUALLY LOWER THE BOARDS UNTIL IT MET THE SIX FOOT, SO IT WOULDN'T LOOK SO OBVIOUS. BUT SHE ALSO COMPLAINED BECAUSE SHE GOT THE, THE UGLY SIDE OF THE FENCE, WHICH SOMEBODY'S ALWAYS GONNA GET THE UGLY SIDE AND SOMEBODY'S GONNA GET THE OTHER NEIGHBOR'S GONNA GET THE PRETTY SIDE. I REPLACED IT AT NO COST TO THE OPPOSITION NEIGHBOR. NEVER ASKED HIM FOR A PENNY, BUT SHE WAS IRATE BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T GET TO PICK THE STYLE OF THE FENCE. SO THAT'S WHAT WE WERE GONNA DO. BUT WE, WE DIDN'T GET TO FINISH BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, SHE WAS UPSET. SHE CALLED CODE COMPLIANCE AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO IT WOULD'VE, IT WOULDN'T HAVE LOOKED, YOU KNOW, SO, SO OBVIOUS THAT IT WAS EIGHT FOOT DROPPING DOWN ALL THE WAY TO SIX FOOT. OKAY. UM, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? BUT ARE YOU, IT WOULD BE GRADUALLY, THE QUESTION, THE QUESTION I HAD THOUGH IS, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO KEEP IT AT SIX FEET, UM, ON THAT PART INSTEAD OF EIGHT FEET? WELL, IT'S AT, WELL IT'S AT SIX FEET NOW. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, WHEN, WHEN, WHEN I'M OUTSIDE [00:40:01] I CAN SEE THEM, YOU KNOW, I CAN SEE HER HUSBAND 'CAUSE HE'S TALL. AND WHEN I'M OUT THERE, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, MS. EZ. SO DO YOU, SO YOU TAKE NO EXCEPTION TO, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. YOU TAKE, YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH MAINTAINING A SIX AND, AND THE SIDE PLAN OF YOUR HOME. OKAY. I THAT SIDE IS SIX FOOT. YES. THAT, THAT WAS THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU, IS THAT, IS THAT ACCEPTABLE? YES, THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, SHELVA, THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES. THANK YOU. FANTASTIC. IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? OKAY. WELL, UH, WITH THAT, UH, IS THE, UH, APPLICANT YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A VERY SHORT, UH, CLOSING STATEMENT BEFORE WE, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION? UM, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS TAKING THE TIME TO, UH, TO REVIEW ALL THIS. UM, I'M SORRY THAT I DIDN'T HAVE TO COME TO THAT. I, I KNOW THAT THERE'S RULES AND I BY NO MEANS AM TRYING TO BREAK THE RULES OR, OR, UH, DISAPPOINT ANYBODY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I JUST NEED MY, I HAVE A CONDITION THAT, UH, MAKES ME VERY ANXIOUS AND I, AND I JUST NEED IT. I NEED THE PRIVACY AND THE SECURITY ALSO FOR ME AND MY FAMILY. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. SO WHAT, WHAT I'M DOING NOW, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT, UH, PLEASE BE, UH, KEEP IN MIND THAT THE APPLICANT DID, UM, UM, ACCEPT, UH, KEEPING IT AT A SIX FOOT ALONG THE SIDE OF THE HOME. UH, AND, UH, ALSO THE CODE DOES ALLOW IF YOU, IF, AS HER BACKYARD DROPS TO MAINTAIN THE TOP UP TO AN EIGHT FOOT HEIGHT. SO WE HAVE THOSE, THOSE TWO TOOLS, UH, FOR THOSE WHO, WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER, GO AHEAD. MICHELLE. COMMISSIONER MICHELLE, GO AHEAD. OKAY. UM, BEFORE I, UH, READ THE MOTION, CAN I JUST VERIFY THAT THE, UM, NEIGHBOR THAT WAS OPPOSED IS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY? DID I REMEMBER THAT CORRECTLY? STAFF, STAFF PULLING UP, PULLING UP THE ADDRESS RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. SO THEY'RE AT 53 34. THAT'S WEST SIDE? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 4, I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, ONE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW OFFENSE ON THE BACKYARD AND EAST SIDE TO BE EIGHT FEET TALL AND SIX FEET ON THE WEST SIDE, SITUATED AT 5 3 3 8 VISTA RUN, APPLICANT BEING MARYANNE PARED. DEZ, I'M SORRY. 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 PRES PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE PRIVACY OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. IF GRANTED, THIS REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY, AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE BACKEND SIDE, PROPERTY LINES WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PRIVACY AND SECURITY FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. THIS IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. C, THE NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE DEFENSE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS UNLIKELY TO INJURE ADJACENT 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 ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR THE SECTION OF THE SIDE AND BACKYARD FENCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND WILL PROVIDE SECURITY OF THE DISTRICT. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THIS SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS THE CURRENT USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION [00:45:01] WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. END A MOTION. SECOND. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. SHELL. BEFORE WE, UH, I'LL, I'LL GIVE THE SECOND TO COMMISSIONER MANNA, BUT I WANTED JUST TO CLARIFY WHAT YOUR, WHAT YOUR MOTION WAS FOR. YOU'RE ASKING FOR, UH, EIGHT FOOT ON THE REAR, EIGHT FOOT ON THE EAST SIDE. AND, AND ARE YOU SAYING SIX FEET ALONG THE ENTIRE WEST SIDE OR, OR SIX, UH, UM, OR A LIMIT OF SIX ALONG THE PLANE OF THE HOME ONLY, OR, OR HOW DID YOU I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, UM, LIMIT OF SIX ALONG THE PLANE OF THE HOME ON THE WEST SIDE AND, AND EIGHT FOOT IN THE BACKYARD. NOT IN THE PLANE OF THE HOME? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND, AND COMMISSIONER MANNA, THAT'S, THAT'S ACCEPTABLE AS A SECOND FOR YOU? YEAH. YES, THAT'S AS I UNDERSTOOD WHAT SHE WAS STATING, SO. FANTASTIC. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. UH, ARE THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, UH, OR DISCUSSION? LET'S LET, LET COMMISSIONER SHELL LEAD THIS OFF, PLEASE. SURE. UM, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ. UH, HOPEFULLY THIS IS A COMPROMISE THAT WILL GIVE SATISFACTION TO BOTH THE APPLICANT AND THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR. UM, I THINK IF THE APPLICANT WISHES TO DO THIS KIND OF PROJECT IN THE FUTURE, THEY SHOULD DEFINITELY SPEAK WITH THE NEIGHBOR BEFORE REMOVING A SHARED FENCE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MANNA? UM, YES, I WILL ALSO BE SUPPORTING, UH, UH, THIS MOTION IS READ. UM, AND THEN ALSO, YOU KNOW, JUST A REMINDER THAT NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION DID, YOU KNOW, WAS, WAS OKAY WITH THIS. UM, AND THEY MAY NOT HAVE RECEIVED, YOU KNOW, ALL THE INPUT NECESSARY, BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THIS IS A GOOD COMPROMISE. SO THANK YOU. GREAT. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? MACHACA, COMMISSIONER SHANKA? I, UH, I, I'M NOT, I WON'T BE IN FAVOR OF THIS BECAUSE THE TOP OF MATERIAL ON THE FENCE IS WAY OUTTA CONTEXT OF OTHER MATERIALS THAT ARE ON THE FENCE. AND THE EIGHT FOOT ON THE EAST SIDE, I WOULD, UM, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MUCH BECAUSE OF THE ELEVATED PORCH. SO BECAUSE OF THE TOP OF MATERIAL THAT, THAT, THAT THE WAY THE, THE, THE ELEVATION I DO UNDERSTAND, UH, WON'T BE, UH, IN, IN CONCURRENCE WITH THIS MOTION. OKAY. UH, ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. WELL, I'M MY, I'LL PUT IN MY 2 CENTS. UH, I, I'M GONNA BE FOR THE MOTION AS RED. I THINK IT'S, UH, A NICE COMPROMISE. UH, I ALSO, UH, WAS OKAY WITH IT 'CAUSE THE HOMES WEREN'T NECESSARILY TOO CLOSE TO THE SIDE FENCE AND I WAS SQUISHED TOGETHER, AS I'VE SEEN IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS. BUT, UH, SO WITH THAT, UH, PLEASE TAKE THE ROLL CALL VOTE STAFF. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. CRUZ, HOW'S YOUR AUDIO STILL? NO. ALL WE COULD DO IS A THUMBS UP FOR, FOR AN APPROVAL OR A THUMBS DOWN FOR DENIAL. THUMBS UP FOR THE RECORD. MS. MS. CRUZ DID THUMBS UP FOR APPROVAL. MR. MENNA, I APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. BREGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DOMER. I CONCUR. MS. FISHER. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. THIEL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. UNA. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UH, THE VOTE IS, UH, 9 2 1. MOTION PASSES. UH, LET'S HEAR THE NEXT CASE, PLEASE. OH, AND, UH, STAFF BEFORE, JUST AS YOU GO THROUGH THE AGENDA, UH, ANY ITEM THAT CONCERNS FENCING, CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, REMARK ON THE PERMITTING STATUS AND, UH, WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS ANY, UH, CO COMPLIANT ISSUES? UH, YES, SIR. WAS THERE BEFORE YOUR PRESENTATION? THANK YOU. YES, SIR. ALRIGHT, [4. 21-2062 BOA-21-10300005] SO WE'RE AT BO O A 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 5. THE LOCATION OF 62 14 SPRING VALLEY COUNCIL DISTRICT 10. APPLICANT TU IT'S REQUEST FOR ONE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE SIX FEET TALL. AND IT'S A PRIVACY FENCE. TWO, A 10 FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE FOUR FEET EIGHT INCHES FROM THE STREET. CURRENT ZONING IS OUR SIX A H O D. THIS WAS BUILT WITHOUT PERMIT AND THERE'S CURRENTLY UNDER A CODE COMPLIANCE INVESTIGATION. NEXT SLIDE. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO WITHIN A SINGLE FAMILY AREA IN THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE RAISE, SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE FRONT YARD AND CLEAR VISION, UH, FIELD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. TRAFFIC. REVIEWED THE REQUEST AND HAS STATED THE PROPOSED LAYOUT AND FENCE HEIGHT DOES NOT SEEM TO PROPOSE ANY CLEAR VISION OR SITE CONSTRAINTS UPON REVIEW. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE THE SITE PLAN, THEY BUILT THE FENCE ON ONLY ONE SIDE ALONG THE FRONT YARD. [00:50:03] SUBJECT PROPERTY. HERE'S THE FENCE THAT WAS BUILT. THE POSTS, UH, ARE THE NEIGHBORS FENCE, HEIGHT, CLEAR VISION, AND THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. IN THIS CASE, D RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A ONE, UH, 21 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDING OF FACTS, 6 CENTS WILL BE, UH, IT WAS CONSTRUCTED ON THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE AND THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WILL PROMOTE THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. NEXT SLIDE. THE CLEAR VISION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, UH, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FROM THE FACT DEFENSE WILL REMAIN FOUR FEET, EIGHT INCHES FROM THE EDGE OF CURB. IT IS AT THE END OF A HALF CUL-DE-SAC. AND THIS THE LAST PROPERTY ON THE CUL-DE-SAC. THERE WERE 32 NOTICES SENT OUT, ZERO IN FAVOR, SEVEN IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ELMWOOD H O A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT WAS WITHIN 200 FEET. WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT, SYLVIA CANTU IN THE LINE. MS. CANTU, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. YES. UM, IT'S SYLVIA AND DANIEL CANTU. OUR ADDRESS IS 6 2 1 4 SPRING VALLEY, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 4 7. UM, WE ARE ASKING, UM, I GUESS THIS FOR THIS FENCE FOR THE REASON THAT, UM, IT'S BASICALLY FOR PRIVACY REASONS. UH, WE, WE ACTUALLY BUILT THIS FENCE AND I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I NEEDED TO HAVE A PERMIT. AND SO THE NEIGHBORS HAD REPORTED THE FENCE, WHICH IS PERFECTLY FINE. AND SO CODE COMPLIANCE CAME OUT AND HE EXPLAINED TO US LIKE WHAT WAS GOING ON AND LIKE, IT ONLY COULD BE A CERTAIN HEIGHT AND YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SEE THROUGH IT AND WHATNOT. AND I SAID, OKAY, THAT'S FINE. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, I, I WASN'T TOO SURE LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHAT I NEEDED TO DO. HE SAYS, WELL, WHY DON'T YOU JUST GO OVER TO, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND SEE WHAT THEY CAN DO TO HELP YOU AND ALSO MAKE AN, UH, DO THE APPLICATION FOR THE FENCE. I FOR, UM, THE PERMIT. I SAID, OKAY. SO WE DID THAT AND THEN Y'ALL, I WENT OVER TO ZONING AND I DID THE APPLICATION FOR THE VARIANCE. AND THE FENCE IS REALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF SAFETY FROM THE NEIGHBORS. UM, UNFORTUNATELY IT'S BECOME A REALLY, UM, CRAZY SITUATION. UM, THEY'RE EXTREMELY IRATE AND VERY, VERY, VERY NOSY. I MEAN, AS SOON AS WE OPEN OUR GARAGE DOOR, THEY OPEN OUR GARAGE DOOR. UM, WE HAVE NO PRIVACY WHATSOEVER. ME AND MY DAUGHTER BOTH HAVE, UM, CANCER AND WE KIND OF NEED OUR PRIVACY. AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT, YOU KNOW, JUST OVERWHELMING AT ALL TIMES. WE CAN'T TAKE THE TRASH OUT 'CAUSE THEY'RE STARING AT US. WE CAN'T WALK OUTSIDE 'CAUSE THEY'RE STARING AT US. AND, UM, IT'S JUST REALLY, REALLY, IT'S A NUISANCE NOW. UM, NOW THEY'VE ALSO THREATENED TO SHOOT MY DOGS 'CAUSE MY DOGS HAVE GOTTEN OUT. AND SO WE TRIED TO PUT THIS FENCE UP SO THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, I COULD AT LEAST PREVENT THE DOGS FROM GOING OVER, UH, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO CATCH THEM. 'CAUSE SOMETIMES THEY DO GET OUT AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATE. BUT, UH, THE NEIGHBORS ALREADY TOLD ME THAT IF WE STEPPED FOOT ONTO THEIR YARD THAT THEY'RE GONNA SHOOT US 'CAUSE HE IS GOT A CONCEALED LICENSE. AND, UM, OFF, YOU KNOW, THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE GONNA SHOOT MY DOGS AND IT'S JUST REALLY, REALLY BIG BAD SITUATION. AND, AND THEY'RE CONSTANTLY CALLING THE POLICE ON US. AND, UM, JUST FOR THE SAFETY AND WELLBEING OF MY FAMILY, YOU KNOW, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE, WE WANT THIS PRIVACY, WE NEED THIS PRIVACY. AND UNFORTUNATELY, THEY EVEN STARE AT US. WE HAVE A POOL IN THE BACKYARD AND THEY LOOK AT US THROUGH THEIR BACK WINDOW. I MEAN, IT'S JUST REALLY, REALLY CRAZY. SO, UM, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, AT THE MERCY OF Y'ALL ASKING FOR Y'ALL TO AT LEAST LET US KEEP THIS FENCE. UM, AND AGAIN, IT'S FOR THE SAFETY AND WELLBEING OF OUR FAMILY BECAUSE IT'S JUST, IT'S REALLY, REALLY CRAZY. UM, I'M GONNA LET MY HUSBAND SPEAK TO YOU JUST REALLY QUICK. HOLD ON. HI, THIS IS DANIEL CANTU. UM, I'M SORRY. SO, YEAH, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD SOME ISSUES THAT, WHICH I, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT OKAY, WE CAN'T, I'M SORRY. HELLO? WE CAN HEAR YOU. OH, OKAY. SO THEIR FRONT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I CAN'T, WE CAN'T CHANGE THE HOUSES AND HOW THEY FIT AND ALL THAT, BUT I MEAN, I COME HOME, WE ALL COME HOME AND THERE'S THEIR GARAGE GOES UP AS SOON AS WE'RE DRIVING BY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE OUT, WE'RE TAKING OUR GROCERIES OR, YOU KNOW, GETTING THE KIDS OUTTA THE CAR EVERYDAY LIFE. AND IT'S JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AROUND. UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT INITIALLY SAYING ANYTHING TO US, BUT I MEAN, IT, IT IS LIKE THEY'RE LOOKING AT US, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S LIKE, COME ON. I MEAN, AND, AND IT'S, IT'S ALMOST EVERY DAY. UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE'VE HAD THE ISSUES WITH THE DOG. UM, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE WAS VIDEOS PRESENTED THAT, YOU KNOW, HE THREATENED TO SHOOT OUR DOGS. UM, AND IT, IT'S, THEY KNOW OUR DOGS AND WE'VE BEEN HERE GOING ON NINE YEARS NOW. [00:55:01] AND, UM, NOW IT'S JUST AN ISSUE EIGHT YEARS LATER. YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S RIDICULOUS. BUT THAT'S WHY WE PUT UP THE FENCE, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST TO HAVE SOME, SOME SENSE OF PRIVACY ON OUR END, YOU KNOW, AND, AND SECURITY. BUT, UM, BUT THAT'S WHY THE FENCE WAS ERECTED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. UH, BEFORE WE OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, UH, STAFF, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT, UH, THE, THE POSTS WITH THE NO TRESPASSING SIGNS, WHETHER OR NOT THOSE ARE, UH, ALLOWED BY THE CODE THAT I SEE IN THE PICTURE. AND, UH, CAN YOU, WERE THERE ANY POLICE REPORTS THAT WAS MENTIONED BY THE APPLICANT THAT YOU CAN SHARE WITH US? THERE'S, THEY JUST BASICALLY USED BY THE LOOK OF IT. THE, WHEN WE WERE OUT THERE, THE POSTS WERE UP WITH NO TRESPASSING SIGNS ON THEM. IT DIDN'T APPEAR LIKE THEY'RE GONNA BUILD A FENCE. SO UNLESS THEY'RE GONNA BUILD A FENCE, IT WOULD BE, THEY'D BE IN THE SAME BOAT AS, AS THE CURRENT APPLICANT. OKAY. AND, AND FOR THE REST OF THE COMM, GO AHEAD SIR. UH, FOR THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS, UH, IF I, I JUST WANNA LET YOU KNOW THAT, UH, JUST FOR EFFICIENCY OF THE MEETING, IF I, IF I SEE SOMETHING THAT I THINK NEEDS TO JUST BE BROUGHT UP BEFORE WE, YOU KNOW, ENTERTAIN QUESTIONS JUST AS, AS A WAY TO HELP, UH, MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE AND, AND GET THAT INFO OUT THERE. I'M, I'M JUST GOING TO DO IT DURING THIS, DURING TODAY'S MEETING. SO WITH THAT, UH, ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? BRAMAN, UH, COMMISSIONER BRAMAN IN THAT SAME PICTURE THAT SHOWS THE POST WITH THE NO TRESPASSING SIGN, IT LOOKS TO BE A SURVEY FLAG, IS THAT CORRECT? I SEE IT AS WELL. BUT THAT DIDN'T COME UP DURING THE CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANTS. I KNOW THEY WERE ARGUING OVER A PROPERTY LINE, UH, TO THE APPLICANT. DID YOU, WAS THIS PROPERTY RECENTLY SURVEYED? UH, YES, IT WAS BECAUSE, UM, THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I HAD PUT THEIR, I DIDN'T PUT THE FENCE ON THEIR PROPERTY LINE AND I PUT IT ON MY PROPERTY LINE AND, AND AS COMMISSIONER BRAMAN. SO SURVEY COME OUT AND DO THAT. AS COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN HAS MENTIONED, IS THAT A SURVEY FLAG THAT WE'RE SEEING OUT THERE? IT IS. THEY HIRED THEIR OWN PRIVATE SURVEY, UH, COMPANY. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, YOU HAVE THE FOUR? YEAH, THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION. SO IT APPEARS THAT THE FENCE THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED IS WELL WITHIN THE, UH, APPLICANT'S PROPERTY LINE? YES, SIR. WE DO HAVE SOME LETTERS, UH, TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD. UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY LIGHT FOLLOWERS. OKAY. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. YES, SIR. A FEW OF THESE, THEY'RE ALL THE SAME TYPE, UH, WRITTEN MESSAGES, SO I'LL JUST READ OFF THE NAMES. FIRST ONE IS GEORGE WHITE, 62 10 SPRING VALLEY. NEXT ONE IS CHRISTOPHER DAVIS, 62 0 6 SPRING VALLEY, EVERETT, UH, FIS OR FI 6 2 0 3 SPRING VALLEY. AND THEN THE NEXT ONE IS 62 10 SPRING VALLEY, AUSTIN DOWNS. THESE ARE IN OPPOSITION ACTUALLY. AND THERE'S ONE MORE WITH THE SAME, UH, INFORMATION. JAMES GRAHAM, 62 11 SPRING VALLEY. AND THEY ALL SAY THE EXACT SAME THING. I ALSO AGREE WITH, WITH ALL OF THE CONCERNS AS LISTED WITH THE ATTACHED, UH, LETTER CONCERNING HAVING THE FENCE REMAIN ERECTED AS IS THEY ARE IN OPPOSITION. AND AGAIN, THE SAME TYPEWRITTEN MESSAGE. ANOTHER IN OPPOSITION 62 0 7 SPRING VALLEY IN SPANISH. FORGIVE ME, I'M GONNA HAVE TO GET THE TRANSLATORS. UH, GA LUNA 62 0 2 SPRING VALLEY. THIS FENCE IS AN EYESORE. NO ONE IN THE, IN THE SUBDIVISION HAS A FENCE LIKE THIS. THE OWNER HAVE BRAGGED THAT THEY HAVE, UH, FRIENDS ON THE BOARD AND WE'RE ASSURED THAT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO TAKE DOWN THE FENCE. AND WE'RE GONNA READ THIS ONE FROM THE SPANISH TRANSLATION, THE BOTTOM ONE. I AM ALSO, I AM ALSO, I ALSO AGREE WITH ALL THE CONCERNS THAT ALIGNED WITH THE LETTER ABOUT THE DEFENSE. AND I ASK YOU TO PLEASE LEAVE IT, LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS. I'M SORRY. THE HANDWRITING. HANDWRITING IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. OKAY. AND THERE'S ONE LETTER. [01:00:02] IT IS THREE PAGES LONG, SO WE WILL HAVE A, A TIMER ON THIS ONE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO THIS IS FROM 62 14 SPRING VALLEY. UH, THIS IS FROM GEORGE AND TONY WHITE. I'M A PROPERTY OWNER THAT RESIDES NEXT DOOR. I HAVE LIVED AT MY RESIDENCE SINCE 1995 AND I'M THE ORIGINAL OWNER. I PURCHASED PROPERTY WITH IT FOR THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WAS, WERE RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE TO KEEP THIS NEIGHBORHOOD VISUALLY PLEASANT. WHEN YOU DRIVE ON THE STREET IN SPRING CREEK FOREST, IT IS VERY OBVIOUS THAT ALL RESIDENTS FEEL THE SAME WAY. AT THE TIME OF THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY, I WAS PRESENTED A DECLARATION OF RESTRICTED COVENANTS FOR SPRING CREEK FOREST UNIT 10. I WAS TOLD THE COVENANT WOULD RESTRICT ISSUES AND GIVE GUIDANCE, UH, TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS. UH, IN THE THIS, IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, ISSUES WITH DEFENSE. DEFENSE HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED WITH THE BACK OF THE FENCE FORWARD, UH, FACING FORWARD THE INCOMING TRAFFIC HOMES AND PEOPLE WALKING DOWN THE STREET. THE BACK OF THE FENCE APPEARS TO BE UNFINISHED, NOT PAINTED, AND IS VISUALLY UGLY. IN A SHORT TIME, THE FENCE WILL TURN BLACK THE SAME AS THE REST OF THEIR FENCE. THE FENCE HAS BEEN USED TO HANG, UH, MOPS AND BROOMS, WHICH IS VISUALLY UGLY. THE BACKSIDE OF THE FENCE HAS BEEN, UM, USED TO POST SIGNS THAT PEOPLE WILL SEE THAT, UH, FROM TRAFFIC DRIVING INTO THE, THE CUL-DE-SAC HOMES AND, UH, PEOPLE WALKING DOWN THE STREET, BEING THE ONLY PROPERTY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH A FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD AT SIX FOOT, SIX INCHES TALL, UH, WILL REDUCE THE PROPERTY VALUES FOR ALL AND MAKE, UH, THEM HARDER TO SELL. NO ONE WANTS TO LIVE IN THE CUL-DE-SAC WITH THIS. THE FENCE EXTENDED, UH, TO THE STREET WILL BE A TRAFFIC HAZARD DUE ABUNDANCE OF CARS TURNING AROUND AT THE END OF THE CUL-DE-SAC. KIDS ON BIKES AND PEOPLE WALKING AND JOGGING THAT WILL NOT, UH, BE SEEN WHEN THEY ARE BACKING OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY. 20 SECONDS. THE COVENANT STATES THAT, UH, NUMBER THREE, NOR SHALL ANYTHING BE DONE, WHICH MAY BE OR MAY BECOME AN ANNOYANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, OR 15 NO SIGN OR ANY KIND OF SHALL BE DISPLAYED IN THE PUBLIC VIEW. AND THAT'S THE TWO MINUTES. AGAIN, THIS IS THREE PAGES LONG. OKAY. AND THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF THE, UH, COMMENTARY. THANK YOU. UH, ANY, UH, FURTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? BRAGMAN? COMMISSIONER BRACKMAN? UH, JUST A QUESTION. THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT. IF THEY, THEY KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS, UM, FROM THE TRANSLATION FROM THE ONE COMMENT. UM, WAS THERE A LETTER PASSED AROUND TO YOUR NEIGHBORS, UH, REGARDING, UH, YOUR APPLICATION FOR, UM, A VARIANCE ON THE FENCE OR THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF? SO, UM, OUR NEIGHBORS, THE, ONCE WE PUT THIS FENCE UP, ALL THE NEIGHBORS HATED IT. SO, AND THEN THEY'RE MAD 'CAUSE THEY GOT THE UGLY SIDE OF THE FENCE. UM, YOU'VE OBVIOUS SEEN MY SIDE, WHICH WE'VE PAINTED BROWN AND, AND MADE IT, UH, APPEALING FOR US 'CAUSE IT'S OUR FENCE. BUT THEY DID HAVE A A CUL-DE-SAC MEETING AT THE WHITE HOUSE AND DETERMINED THAT THEY WERE ALL GONNA SEND IN A LETTER SAYING THAT THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE FENCE. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? YEAH, ZANA. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, THEN COMMISSIONER MANANA. SO IF, IF THE VARIANCE IS APPROVED AS REQUESTED, WOULD BE SIX FOOT HEIGHT BE EXTENDED FROM THE FRONT BASE OF THE RESIDENCE TO THE PROPERTY LINE? IS THAT THE REQUEST? OR WOULD THE FENCE BE APPROVED? BUT THEY'D STILL HAVE TO MEET A FOUR FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT ON THE, ON THE FENCE SECTION FROM THE FRONT FACE FORWARD TO THE PROPERTY LINE. SO THERE ARE TWO REQUESTS AT THIS TIME. ONE IS THE CLEAR VISION, WHICH IS THE FOUR FEET AND CHANGE FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, AND THEN THE FENCE HEIGHT. OKAY. SO IF IT, SO THEY WOULD'VE TO MEET, THE CLEAR VISION WOULD BE THE FOUR FOOT FROM THE FRONT FACE TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE SIX FEET BACK TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, IF APPROVED AS REQUESTED. IF NOT, IT WOULD BE A 15 FOOT FOR CLEAR VISION. THANK YOU, MR. MANNA, THIS QUESTION'S FOR THE APPLICANT. SO BY RIGHT, YOU CAN HAVE A SIX FOOT FENCE, UH, TO THE FRONT FACADE OF YOUR, YOUR HOME. AND SO THE QUESTION THERE WOULD BE, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, EXTENDING A FOUR FOOT FENCES FROM THE FRONT FACADE TO THE CURRENT, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY TO REDUCE THE, THE, UH, FENCE IN FRONT OF THE FACADE OF THE HOUSE, THE FOREFOOT. WHAT KIND OF, UH, ISSUES WOULD THAT CAUSE? OR WOULD THAT, WOULD THAT HELP AT ALL? OR, OR IS THAT AN OPTION FOR YOU? IT REALLY ISN'T IT, WE ACTUALLY WENT, UH, ME AND MY HUSBAND WENT OUT THERE WITH THE RULER OR THE MEASURING TAPE OR WHATEVER TO FIGURE OUT LIKE WHAT WE WOULD SEE. AND, UM, IT, IT, THE FOUR FEET, UH, IS, IT'S NOT GONNA WORK. I MEAN, WE'VE, WE'VE REALLY TRIED, I MEAN, LIKE [01:05:01] THIS FENCE IS MAINLY FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR, OF OUR FAMILY AND JUST HAVING JUST SOME SORT OF PRIVACY. UM, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WHEN THE, UH, CODE COMPLIANCE GATE GUY CAME OUT AND WE, I MEAN, WE VISITED FOR A REALLY LONG TIME AND HE TALKED ABOUT ALL THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND LIKE WHAT WE COULD DO. AND, UM, BUT REALISTICALLY, I MEAN, THEY LITERALLY OPENED THEIR GARAGE WHEN WE WALK OUTSIDE THE DOOR. AND RIGHT NOW SHE, THE OTHER DAY SHE COULDN'T SEE ON THIS SIDE OF THE FENCE, SO SHE PULLED INTO MY CUL-DE-SAC AND KIND OF PARKED THERE SO THAT SHE COULD SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON AND THEN DROVE INTO HER DRIVEWAY. I MEAN, THIS IS HOW CRAZY IT IS. SO, I MEAN, I JUST, WE JUST NEED SOME SORT OF PRIVACY AND, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WE ARE AT YOUR MERCY AND, YOU KNOW, IF YOU TELL US THAT WE CAN'T HAVE IT, WE CAN'T HAVE IT, BUT WE ARE REALLY, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU WOULD'VE PROVEN IT FOR US. OKAY. THANK YOU FISHER. COMMISSIONER FISHER, AS I JUST HAD A QUESTION I I DON'T THINK WAS EVER ANSWERED, AND I BELIEVE YOU HAD INDICATED IT IN YOUR INTRODUCTION. HAS THERE BEEN ANY, UH, RECORDATION OF ANY POLICE CALLS CONCERNING THAT? UM, SO I WAS GONNA GO DOWN TO, UM, DOWNTOWN TO GET THE POLICE REPORTS, BUT I FOUND OUT THAT IT'S CLOSED, SO I'M SUPPOSED TO REQUEST ALL OF THE POLICE REPORTS ONLINE. AND, UM, THAT KIND OF TAKES A BIT OF A TIME. BUT THERE ARE HOW MANY? I THINK THERE WAS LIKE 10 POLICE REPORTS JUST FOR VARIOUS REASONS. THE FIRST ONE, UM, OUR DOG TOOK GOTTEN OUT AND THEY, UM, WERE WALKING IN THE CUL-DE-SAC AND THE POLICE DROVE BY AND THEY HAD ASKED THE, UH, POLICE OFFICER TO CALL THE POUND ON OUR DOGS. AND, UM, AND THEN TO SHOOT THEM. AND HE JUST TOLD THE POLICE OFFICER, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU CAN'T JUST SHOOT THOSE DOGS. AND THEY'RE TWO LITTLE SHIP DUDES. AND, UH, AND MY, MY DAUGHTER ACTUALLY HAS LEUKEMIA AND SHE HAS A, IT'S ONE OF THE DOGS IS ACTUALLY HER SERVICE DOG. AND THE OFFICER WAS LIKE, THIS IS CRAZY. WE'RE NOT GONNA SHOOT SOMEBODY'S DOG. AND SO THEY REFUSED TO TELL THEM THE OFFICER WHERE THE DOG BELONGED. AND SO FINALLY, UM, THEY WERE LIKE, HE'S LIKE, THEY LIVE HERE, OBVIOUSLY THEY LIVE HERE. SO HE PUT THEM IN THE FENCE. THEY FINALLY TOLD THEM WHERE THEY LIVE. I MEAN, THIS IS HOW PETTY IT IS. IT'S JUST CRAZY. BUT THERE'S VARIOUS, THERE'S ANOTHER POLICE REPORT. UM, ACTUALLY ANYTIME THAT SHE FEELS THE NEED, SHE CALLS THE POLICE AND SHE CALLS 9 1 1. AND NOW THE POLICE COME TO OUR HOUSE AND THEY'RE VERY FRUSTRATED 'CAUSE THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY SHE KEEPS CALLING 9 1 1. AND THEY, THEY KEEP COMING AND THEY'RE LIKE, WHAT IS GOING ON? AND, BUT SHE HAS, I DON'T KNOW, SHE'S JUST LIKE TO CALL THE POLICE FOR VARIOUS THINGS. I DON'T EVEN KNOW ANYMORE WHY SHE CALLS THE POLICE. BUT THERE, UM, THE DOGS GOT OUT THE OTHER NIGHT BY ACCIDENT AND IT WAS LIKE NINE O'CLOCK AT NIGHT. SO I KNOW SOMEBODY MUST HAVE TOLD HER THAT THE DOGS WERE OUT BECAUSE THEY WERE INSIDE THEIR HOUSE. AND THEN THE POLICE SHOWED UP AT OUR DOOR SAYING THE DOGS WERE OUT. SO I JUST, IT'S JUST CRAZY. OKAY. AND, UH, MAY I ASK ANOTHER QUESTION? OF COURSE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. IS THERE A AND I AND I, SORRY, I DIDN'T RECALL. IS THERE A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION LETTER THAT WE DON'T HAVE? WE DON'T HAVE AN H O A. OKAY. THANK YOU. UHHUH , UH, STAFF. UH, BEFORE WE MOVE TO THE NEXT QUESTION, UH, WE HEARD A COMMENT THAT THERE WERE, UH, D CCRS AND THE APPLICANT JUST SAYS THAT THERE'S NO H O A, IS THERE A REGISTERED H O A OR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR THIS? NO, SIR. IT WAS WITHIN 200 FEET, BUT THAT WAS ABOUT IT. NO ONE FOR THIS AREA. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, ANY UH, FURTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? UH, THIS IS AGAIN, UM, COMMISSIONER, IF, IF THE VARIANCE, IF THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED, I IMAGINE THERE'S CCNRS THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. SO EVEN IF WE GRANT THE VARIANCE, WOULD THERE STILL BE KIND OF THE CC N R ISSUE THAT THEY'D HAVE TO COMPLY WITH? THAT THERE'S ANY RESTRICTIONS AGAINST THE, UH, FRONT FOOT, UH, THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD? THIS IS SOMETHING FOR THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER. HA HAVE Y'ALL REVIEWED THE CCNRS OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY I DON'T RESTRICTIONS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS. THAT THAT'S JUST, UM, RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT ARE BUILDING GUIDELINES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S A PRIVATE ISSUE WITHIN THE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUT THAT'S SEPARATE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. SO WE, WE COULD GRANT THE VARIANCE FOR THE FENCE, BUT IF IT'S CONTRARY TO THE, UM, RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE PART OF THE COVENANTS IN THE SUBDIVISION, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T GET INVOLVED IN. BUT IT WOULD BE A DISSERVICE IF WE GIVE THE VARIANCE. BUT YET THE COVENANTS RESTRICT THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE IN THE FRONT, THEN YOU'RE, YOU'RE BACK IN THE SAME CONDITION OF HAVING THE RESTRICTION AGAINST THE FENCE. EVEN IF WE DO GRANT THE VARIANCE SO THAT SOMETHING FOR Y'ALL, WHERE DO I GET THAT INFORMATION? IT WOULD'VE BEEN PART OF YOUR, UM, PART OF YOUR CLOSING PACKAGE. OR YOU CAN GO, THE COUNTY DEED RECORDS WOULD HAVE IT RECORDED. UM, OR, YOU KNOW, YEAH. SO SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO CONSIDER AS WELL. [01:10:01] 'CAUSE WE CAN, WE ONLY HAVE SO MUCH POWER ON THE PUBLIC SIDE VERSUS WHAT'S A, A PRIVATE DEEDED REATION ON THE PROPERTY. OKAY. UM, IS THAT SOMETHING LIKE I JUST, I MEAN, LIKE I, I'M GONNA FIND THAT INFORMATION OUT AND THEN WHAT, WHAT DO I DO WITH THAT INFORMATION? SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WHEN Y'ALL BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, THOSE ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT Y'ALL AGREED TO, BECAUSE THEN IT BECOMES A PRIVATE MATTER BETWEEN THE, UH, BETWEEN THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND I MEAN, I MEAN, THEY COULD HAVE YOU COMPLY OR TO THOSE RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE IN THERE, THAT'S LIKE PREVENTING, UM, YOU KNOW, THE MATERIAL ON THE, ON THE, THAT YOU CAN USE ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE OR, YOU KNOW, THE COLORS OF THE ROCK, WHATEVER RESTRICTIONS ARE THE, THE SETBACKS OF THE HOUSE AND OTHER RESTRICTIONS THAT THE DEVELOPERS WOULD'VE PUT IN PLACE AT THE TIME THAT THE DEVELOPMENT WAS, WAS UM, CONSTRUCTED. OKAY. SO IF THERE ARE RESTRICTIONS, I MEAN, CAN THEY JUST, I LIKE, SO YOU'RE LIKE, SAY FOR INSTANCE YOU GRANT ME THIS FENCE THINGY, THEN IS THAT SOMETHING LIKE THEY WOULD HIRE AN ATTORNEY TO ADJUST YEAH. TO, TO, TO DO THAT EXACTLY. PART AND LIKE TO ME, LIKE, OKAY, I SAW YOU YEAH. WANT TO, I DIDN'T WANT TO. THEN IF WE GRANT THIS APPROVAL AND YOU, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE FANS THINKING THAT THAT'S KIND OF THE END ALL AND BE ALL THAT THERE ARE RESTRICTIONS AGAINST LIMIT WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 'CAUSE THAT THAT WOULDN'T BE THE END, END OF THE UH, OKAY. SITUATION. BUT THEN LIKE, SO THEN LIKE THAT WOULD BE LIKE, SO SAY THEY HIRED AN ATTORNEY OR WHATEVER, AND THEN WE WENT TO LIKE, WE WENT TO LIKE A COURT, LIKE A CIVIL COURT. IS THAT WHERE LET ME, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA STEP IN HERE. SO WHAT, WHAT HE'S, WHAT THE COMMISSIONER'S REFERRING TO IS THAT YOU, YOU, YOU MIGHT HAVE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS TIED TO YOUR HOME. YOU DON'T HAVE A REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BUT YOU MIGHT DON'T HAVE, YOU NEED TO CHECK YOUR DEEDED, CHECK YOUR CLOSING DOCUMENTS. OKAY. THERE MAY BE PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS THAT A NEIGHBOR COULD ENFORCE THROUGH LAWSUIT, WHETHER THEY DO OR NOT. OKAY. I MEAN, THAT'S ALL. OKAY. OKAY. I UNDERSTAND. OKAY. OKAY. SO I JUST CAUGHT THAT BIG WHEN I GET THERE. , UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? I'M SORRY. I'M SO CLUELESS. I'M SORRY. OKAY, APOLOGIZE. WE DO, WE'RE HERE, WE'RE HERE ALL THE TIME. WE SEE THIS STUFF ALL THE TIME. UH, MS. CRUZ, WE NEED YOU TO, IF YOU CAN, MS. CRUZ, WE NEED YOU TO TURN ON YOUR CAMERA AND STAR SIX FOR YOUR PHONE SO YOU CAN, SO WE CAN HEAR YOU. SO MY CAMERA SHOULD STILL BE ON, UM, YEAH, HER CAMERA TURNED OFF ON US. SHE'S TRYING TO GET EVERYTHING FIXED UP. I OKAY. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? WE CAN. OKAY, WE'RE GOOD. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY MORE COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OKAY, I HAVE SOME, SOME QUESTIONS. AND SO THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT. SO IT WAS BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE SURVEY FLAG. CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY YOU BUILT YOUR FENCE SO FAR AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE? IS IT, WAS THERE A REASON FOR THAT? UH, SO THAT WAY IT WOULDN'T INTERFERE BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE WAS, SO I JUST WANTED, IF YOU SEE LIKE, IT'S LITERALLY LIKE TWO FEET FROM MY DRIVEWAY, SO I DIDN'T WANT ANY QUESTIONS. AND SO THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, AND THAT WAY WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. AND THEN ESPECIALLY IF WE WERE BUILDING IT, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T WANNA STEP ON THEIR PROPERTY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AND SO THEY, THAT'S WHEN THEY REQUESTED TO HAVE THAT SURVEY DONE. OKAY. WELL, I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO, UH, TO ASK, AND SO THE POSTS THAT SAY NO TRESPASSING, UH, IS, DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT WHY THERE'S FOUR OR FIVE OF THOSE POSTS WITH NO TRESPASSING SIGNS ON EACH ONE? NO, I DON'T. BUT YOU DIDN'T PUT THAT IN YOUR NAME. SEE HOW THEY, THEY POSTED, UH, THEY PUT NO TRESPASSING SIGN ON THERE. YEAH, I JUST, IT JUST SEEMED FUNNY. I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIGURE, FIGURE THAT OUT. AND SO YOU'RE, YOU, YOU'RE, THE PREMISE OF THIS REQUEST IS, IS JUST ALONG THE SIDE YARD. YOU'RE NOT PUTTING A LARGER FENCE IN THE REAR JUST ALONG THE SIDE? NO, NO, NO. YEAH, JUST THE FRONT. OKAY. AND, AND, UH, SO WE HAVE TWO ISSUES AT BAY HERE. ONE THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ABOVE THE FOREFOOT REQUIREMENT, UH, AND THE OTHER ONE IS A CLEAR VISION. SO CLEAR VISION IS, IS REALLY A SAFETY ISSUE. SO WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS A, UH, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY YOU IT'S NEEDED TO HAVE A FENCE EXTEND ALL THE WAY TO JUST BEHIND THAT SIDEWALK AND NOT A LITTLE FURTHER BACK? UH, I MEAN, WE CAN MOVE IT A LITTLE BACK, BUT I JUST, LIKE I SAID, THEIR, THEIR DRIVEWAY AND OUR DRIVEWAY ARE LITERALLY THE SAME. AND WELL, BUT YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT THE REASON THE FENCE WAS THERE WAS, WAS, UH, YOU KNOW, PRIVACY, SECURITY. HOW MUCH FURTHER BACK, UH, COULD YOU MOVE THE FENCE BACK TO WHERE IT'S STILL FUNCTIONING FOR THAT HARDSHIP [01:15:01] THAT YOU'RE CLAIMING? I JUST, WE JUST, WE, I MEAN, WE'VE JUST PRI LIKE, 'CAUSE IT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO YOU. THE DRIVEWAY, MY DRIVEWAY. LIKE WE PARKED TWO CARS THERE MM-HMM. . AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GET OUT OF THE CAR, THEY LITERALLY WILL COME OUT OF THEIR, THEIR DRIVEWAY. SO IT'S BASICALLY, IF IT COVERS MY WHOLE DRIVEWAY, THEY CAN'T SEE US WHEN WE GET OUT OF THE CAR. OKAY. AND THEY WERE, THAT'S BASICALLY WHY WE HAVE IT ALL THE WAY TO THE SIDEWALK. ARE THE LIGHTS OR, AND I KNOW THAT THE LIGHTS YOU HAVE ON TOP OF THE FENCE, IS THERE A, A PURPOSE FOR THAT? NO, I JUST PUT 'EM ON THERE BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE COME HOME AND IT'S DARK. OKAY. WE FORGET TO TURN THE LIGHTS ON . NO, THAT'S, THAT'S FINE. I WAS JUST WONDERING. AND, UH, YOU HAVE, AND YOU, YOU HAVE, YOU, YOU SAID THE SAFETY OF, OF YOUR CHILDREN. UH, I I NOTICED YOU HAVE FOUR CARS IN THE DRIVEWAY. ARE YOUR CHILDREN A DRIVING AGE? UH, ONE IS, BUT I HAVE A, UH, 16 YEAR OLD, A 14 YEAR OLD AND A NINE YEAR OLD. AND THEN ME AND MY HUSBAND HAVE A BUNCH OF PAID OFF CARS. . OKAY. THAT WE'RE GONNA DONATE TO THE CHILDREN. . . OKAY. UH, IF, IF THERE'S UH, NO OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, I'LL, I'LL RETURN THIS TO THE APPLICANT FOR A REBUTTAL STATEMENT. OKAY. SO, UH, APPLICANT, YOU'VE HEARD, YOU'VE HEARD OUR VARIOUS QUESTIONS AND COMMENTARY AND WHAT YOUR NEIGHBORS HAVE WRITTEN IN. UH, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD, UH, OR STATE TO THE BOARD BEFORE WE, UH, MOVE, UH, CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING AND, AND ASK FOR A MOTION? NOTHING, THANK YOU. JUST, I MEAN, JUST HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, JUST THIS IS MAINLY FOR THE FAMILY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE JUST NEED PRIVACY AND, AND UNFORTUNATELY WE JUST, THIS DEFENSE, I MEAN, IT LOOKS PRETTY TO ME, BUT, UH, WE JUST REALLY WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU COULD APPROVE OUR FENCE. BUT THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. BUT WE APPRECIATE YOU TAKING YOUR TIME ON, ON OUR LITTLE SITUATION WE HAVE HERE. OKAY. UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND BEFORE WE, I ASK FOR A MOTION, I JUST WANTED TO ASK ANY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, UH, THERE WAS A REMARK BY ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT, UH, THERE WAS A, A CLAIM THAT THEY KNEW THAT SOMEBODY MAY KNOW SOMEBODY ON THE BOARD. DOES ANYBODY HERE NEED TO RECUSE? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. SO, LET'S, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. UNA MY COMMISSIONER UNA? YES. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 21 DASH 0 3 0 0 0 5, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, GRANTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE SIX FOOT TALL PRIVACY FENCE SITUATED AT 62 14 SPRING VALLEY APPLICANT BEING SYLVIA CANTU BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACT THAT WE DETERMINED SHOWED THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY AS SUCH THAT A LITTLE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION FOR THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE, WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE MODIFICATION. THE ADDITIONAL CONSENTED TO PROVIDE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. IF GRANTED, THIS REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. UH, THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE HIDES TO BE, UH, TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. A SIX FOOT FENCE ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE WILL BE, WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. UH, THIS IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, SEE OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED, BUT SUCH PROPOSED USE DEFENSE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND UNSOLVED UNLIKELY TO, TO INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. DE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF SOUGHT THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR THE SECTION OF SITE FENCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACT OF THE DISTRICT AND WILL PROVIDE SECURITY OF THE DISTRICT EITHER. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE IN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIED DISTRICT. UH, THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS THE CURRENT USE OF SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT REQUEST A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL RECORDS OF THE DISTRICT ACCORDING TO SECTION 35 DASH 4 8 2, UH, E OF THE U D C. IN ORDER FOR VARIANCE TO BE GRANTED, THE APPLICANT MUST DEMONSTRATE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING. DO I HAVE A FOLLOWING? OKAY, SO STAFF, I DON'T HAVE THE REST OF THAT MOTION. IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE I NEED TO PROVIDE, PROVIDE ON THAT, UH, E D C SECTION. IF YOU CAN READ IT IN FOR ME, I'D APPRECIATE IT. FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. WHERE DID IT STOP AT FREEZER, SIR? SO RIGHT AT THE END OF, UH, ITEM NUMBER E ON THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, IT SAID, UM, IN ORDER FOR THE VARIANCE TO BE GRANTED SPECIAL, EXCEPT THE APPLICANT MUST DEMONSTRATE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING. AND THAT'S WHERE IT ENDED FOR ME. THERE WAS NOTHING ELSE PRINTED OUT. OH YEAH, I JUST, IT DOESN'T EXACTLY SHOULD BE THERE. 'CAUSE IT'S NOT A VARIANCE, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO I THINK WHAT HAPPENED WAS WE HAVE THE VARIANCE [01:20:01] OF THE NEXT PAGE. IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS PRINTED. YEAH. SO THAT'S SO END OF MOTION THEN. OKAY. THERE'S A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? TEAL? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TEAL. UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, WILL YOU PLEASE LEAVE THE DISCUSSION? SO WE WERE PROVIDED MUCH TESTIMONY TODAY ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE USE OF DEFENSE FOR THE PRIVACY. UM, WE HAVEN'T CONSIDERED, UM, THE, UM, THE CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT YET, SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE THAT UP SEPARATELY. BUT I DO THINK THERE'S SOME RELIEF THAT'S NEEDED HERE BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS. AND I THINK THE FENCE IN WHATEVER CAPACITY, AS FAR AS WE CAN EXTEND IT OUT, WOULD PROVIDE SOME RELIEF TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS. CLEARLY WE HAVE A SITUATION HERE OF, UH, DISHARMONY BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORS AND IN ORDER TO PROVIDE SOMEWHAT OF A, UH, LIVABLE SITUATION, I THINK THE, UH, EXTENSION OF THE FENCE SIX FEET BEYOND THE FRONT BASE, HOWEVER DISTANCE WE CAN ALLOW WOULD BE ONE REMEDY FOR THAT. UM, IRRESPECTIVE FROM, YOU KNOW, WE SAW THE OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORS, I THINK OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE, UM, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHAT, YOU KNOW, CAN KIND OF GATHER TOGETHER. THE SECOND PIECE OF THIS IS THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S STILL THE CCNRS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH. SO THIS IS JUST ONE PIECE OF THE PUZZLE THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO PUT TOGETHER IF WE CAN PROVIDE SOME RELIEF TO THEM AND ONE, GET ONE STEP CLOSER TO, YOU KNOW, PROVIDING SOME RELIEF ON SUPPORT OF THAT. SO THAT, THAT'S WHY I WOULD SUPPORT THE MOTION. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER THIEL? UH, YES, I'M, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MY, UH, COLLEAGUE. UM, I THINK THERE IS SOME, SOME RESPITE THAT NEEDS TO BE, UH, PROVIDED FOR PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE. AND I THINK THIS WILL, UM, WILL HELP MAYBE QUELL SOME OF THE ANIMOSITY BETWEEN THE TWO NEIGHBORS. SO I'LL VOTE, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT AS READ. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? MIN CHAKA, COMMISSIONER MIN CHAKA. I ALSO WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION AND, UH, EVEN THOUGH THE OPPOSITION HAS A CREDIBLE, UH, UH, INPUT ON THIS, UH, I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION. ALL RIGHT. UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. I'M GONNA ADD MY 2 CENTS. UH, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THIS MOTION AS WELL. UM, I THINK THAT, UM, THE, THE REAL ISSUE IS GONNA BE REGARDING THE CLEAR VISION AND THE EXTENSION IS CLOSE TO THE STREET, BUT AS FAR AS HAVING A SIX FOOT FENCE ON THE SIDE, UH, ESPECIALLY AT A, AT THE LEFT HOUSE OF A DEAD END CUL-DE-SAC, WHERE THE ONLY PERSON THAT REALLY AFFECTS IS, IS THE HOMEOWNER AND THEIR, AND THEIR DIRECT NEIGHBOR. AND THE FENCE FACT THAT THE FENCE IS BUILT APPARENTLY A COUPLE FEET INTO THEIR PROPERTY, WELL WITHIN THEIR PROPERTY. UH, I, I, I SEE NO ISSUE WITH THIS MYSELF. SO, WITH THAT, UH, PLEASE STATE THE ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. MENA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. DOMER. I CONCUR. MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. TEAL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. UNA. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR ORIAN. UH, I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF, UH, FACT, THIS MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION REGARDING THE CLEAR VISION. OH, ZINA COMMISSIONER ZUNA. OKAY, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 21 DASH 0 3 0 0 0 5. SEE, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, GRANT A THIS IS WHERE I'M GONNA NEED SOME HELP HERE. 'CAUSE I MEAN, I, I THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME ACCOMMODATION FOR THE SAFETY ISSUE HERE, AND THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY ON THE SIDEWALK GOING DOWN THE CUL-DE-SAC WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SEE A CAR BACKING OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY. UM, AND IT IS, I THINK, A, A SOMEWHAT OF A SAFETY ISSUE. IF THERE'S SOME LEVEL OF SETBACK, MAYBE THAT'S A, UM, SIX FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION. SO AT LEAST WE CAN GET ONE CAR LENGTH, UM, VISUAL, UH, FOR A CAR BACKING OUT. UM, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SUPPORT. THAT SOUNDS GREAT. OKAY. AND SO FOR CLARIFICATION, SIR, THAT WOULD BE NINE FEET FROM CURB, SO AT LEAST WE CAN GET ONE CAR LENGTH. SO MAKE IT NINE FEET BACK SO THAT THERE WOULD, I GUESS FOUR FEET WAS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT FOR THAT, UM, FENCE UP TO THAT DISTANCE. SO BE A, A NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FRONT FENCE YARD TO BE HELP WITH THE MATH HERE. I KNOW IF THAT'S SMART. NINE FEET FROM THE STREET. OKAY. NINE FEET FROM THE STREET SITUATED AT 6 2 1 4 SPRING VALLEY APPLICANT BEING SYLVIA CANTU BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US [01:25:01] AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWN THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C S AMENDED WILL RESULT IN A UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A SIX. WELL, THERE'D BE A FOUR FOOT FOR THAT SECTION AND SIX FOOT FOR THE REMAINING UP TO THE FRONT, UH, TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPOSED FENCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE OF THE RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, STAFF FINDS THAT, THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF DEFENSE IS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY, WHICH IS BEING OBSERVED WITH ITS REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OF THE NOTES ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THIS VARIANCE BY SUCH VARIANCE, WILL WITHOUT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UH, THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION, UM, I GUESS WILL BE REVIEWED BY D S B TRAFFIC. AND THEY HAVE TO DETERMINE, AND WE'LL DETERMINE THAT THE PROPERTY DOES NOT PROPOSED ANY SIDE CONSTRAINTS. UH, SIX, THE FLIGHT TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE SAW IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, AND THEY'RE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, ARE THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS. SO THE DISTRICT, ONCE THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED A STAFF LINE TO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO INSTALL. UH, THIS FENCE, UH, HAS INSTALLED THE FENCE. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT OF MOTION. SECOND, SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER FISHER? IS THAT YOU? YES. ALL RIGHT. SECOND. COMMISSIONER FISHER. GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER ZENA, PLEASE LEAD THE, LEAD THE DISCUSSION. RIGHT? I MEAN, SO WHILE NOT BEING A, A TRAFFIC ISSUE, I SEE IT AS SOMEWHAT, YOU KNOW, SAFETY IF ANYBODY'S BIKING OR WALKING DOWN THE, THE SIDEWALK, BUT THEY'D HAVE SOME VISUAL, UM, CLUES OF, YOU KNOW, CAR BACKING OUT OR SOMETHING SO THEY CAN SEE AND PROVIDE JUST SOME KIND OF SAFETY ON THAT, BUT YET STILL PROVIDE THAT FENCE THAT THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING. AND IF WE'RE ONLY LOOKING FOR THAT NINE FOOT, SO EVERYTHING FORWARD WOULD PROVIDE THE SIX FOOT, UH, UH, BUFFER BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, THE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING. SO THAT'S WHY I SUPPORT THE MOTION. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER FISHER? YEAH, I WILL AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I FEEL LIKE I, IT'S MY OPINION THAT THIS IS A GOOD COMPROMISE AND DOES ALLOW FOR THE, A CLEAR VISION, UH, FROM THE TR FOR THE TRAFFIC AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORS. ALRIGHT, FANTASTIC. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD TO THAT? ALL RIGHT. UH, I ALSO, UH, HEARING THAT I'LL PUT IN MY, UH, 2 CENTS. I ALSO HAVE, UH, LIKE THE WAY THE MOTION WAS WRITTEN, SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THAT. AND WITH THAT, UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MSA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. DELMER. I CONCUR. MS. FISHER. YES, I CONCUR. MR. KE. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. UNA. YES, I CONCUR AND CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR, UH, WITH THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, UH, AND TO THE APPLICANT, UH, JUST WANTED TO REMIND YOU, BE CAREFUL PARKING OVER PUBLIC SIDEWALKS. IT'S, UH, NOT ALLOWED, UH, AS YOU, UH, MOVE FORWARD WITH YOUR, WITH YOUR PROPERTY. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. I, I HAVE, I KNOW YOU'RE, HELLO? OH, YES, I JUST HAD A QUESTION I THOUGHT THAT, UH, YOU COULD BUILD TO YOUR PROPERTY LINE. UH, THERE IS A CLEAR VISION PART OF THE CODE WHERE, UM, AS, AS YOU'RE BACKING OUT A VEHICLE FROM YOUR DRIVEWAY, UH, IT'S, YOU NEED TO CREATE, UH, THE ABILITY FOR CARS WHO MAY BE TRAVELING ON A ROAD NEAR YOU TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT. CURRENTLY, THE CODE REQUIRES 15 FEET, UH, OF CLEAR VISION, UH, OF WHICH YOU ONLY HAD, UH, UM, UH, FOUR, FOUR FOOT EIGHT INCHES. SO THAT'S THE SIDEWALK AND THE EIGHT INCHES OF GRASS. SO WE, WHAT, WHAT HAPPENED WAS, WELL, GUY TOLD ME THAT HE LOOKED IT UP. WE'LL, WE'LL WORK WITH THE, WELL, YEAH, YOU NEED TO, UH, FOR THE OPERATOR, IF YOU COULD PLEASE GET WITH STAFF, UH, FURTHER EXPLAIN WHAT, WHAT JUST HAPPENED AND WHAT THAT MEANS FOR YOU TO MAKE, UH, ANY CHANGES TO YOUR FAMILY. OKAY? THANK YOU. UH, NEXT CASE. [01:30:03] ALRIGHT, D OA [5. 21-2026 BOA-21-10300006] 21 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 6. THE ADDRESS IS 1 0 5 LUX LANE COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE. APPLICANT IS PHILLIP SCHULMAN. IT'S A REQUEST FOR ONE A 1,480 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 4,000 TO ALLOW A LOT TO BE 2,520 SQUARE FEET. AND TWO, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE 15 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. CURRENT ZONING IS R FOUR M L O D. SUBJECT, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS A PORTION OF A LARGER LOT, WHICH WAS SUBDIVIDED IN 2016 AND CREATED A SUBSTANDARD LOT WITH AN AREA OF 2,520 SQUARE FEET. UH, AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A LOT SIZE VARIANCE THAT THERE CURRENTLY EXISTS A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE ON THIS LOT, AND THE APPLICANT WANTS TO PROVIDE SOME NECESSARY REPAIRS, REMODEL, REMODEL THE STRUCTURE, AND BRING IT UP TO CODE AND KEEP THE EXISTING SQUARE FOOTAGE UNCHANGED. AS THE PROPOSED ADJUSTMENTS WILL BE MORE THAN 50% OF THE VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE, THE VARIANCE MUST BE OBTAINED. THERE'S AN ALLEY ON THE, THE SIDE YARD, UH, THAT COVERS THE SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. THE STRUCTURE HAS A 15 FOOT REAR SETBACK AND A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE REAR SETBACK IS ALSO NEEDED. IF THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED, THE APPLICANT WILL REPL THE LOT. HERE'S A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN, THE SUBJECT STRUCTURE. THAT WAS THE MAIN STRUCTURE THAT THIS WAS A ACCESSORY DWELLING ASSOCIATED WITH THAT STRUCTURE. ORIGINALLY THE ALLEYWAY TO THE SIDE YARD REAR SETBACK. THIS IS LUX LANE AFRICAN'S APPROVAL OF D O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. FACT, THE INTENDED REDEVELOPMENT WOULD ENHANCE THE STRUCTURE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THIS DISTRICT. 29 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT TO YOU IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE'S NO RESPONSE FROM THE HIGHLAND PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT, MR. PHILLIPS SCHULMAN ON THE, ON THE LINE. SIR, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. MY, MY NAME IS PHILLIP SCHULMAN. WHAT, UM, I'M SORRY, WHAT'S THE NEXT QUESTION? MY ADDRESS? YES, SIR. UH, 1446 WEST WOODLAWN AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, 7 8 2 0 1. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED WITH YOUR, UH, WITH YOUR CASE. OKAY. UM, I, UM, I'M, I'M, I THANK, UH, YOUR, UH, UM, WHAT'S THE WORD? UM, EXCUSE ME. I'M VERY NERVOUS AND I IT'S OKAY. I DON'T, I SEE THIS ALL THE TIME. UH, YEAH, I DIDN'T REALLY, UM, OKAY. UH, SO IN FACT, OKAY, SO THIS IS A RELEVANT THING, BUT THREE YEARS AGO, THREE MONTHS AGO, YEARS AND THREE MONTHS AGO, I WAS HIT BY TRUCK AND MY BICYCLE, IT'S RELEVANT IN A WAY, BUT, UM, AND I'M DOING AMAZINGLY WELL. I AM, I AM COMPETENT. I'M INTELLIGENT. I HAVE SPEECH PROBLEM MAKING ME PROBABLY YEAR, I HAD SOME PHYSICAL ISSUES, BUT I'M VERY, AND THEY, I WANTED TO, UM, SO I WANTED TO DOWNSIDE. I USED TO LIVE IN HIGHLAND PARK AND, UM, I HAVE A LOT OF FRIENDS THERE, LIKE, UM, AND I, I'M NOT REALLY, THIS IS, I SHOULD HAVE THE APPLICATION, BUT I THINK YOU HAVE MY, UM, THAT YOU HAVE THE APPLICATION AND EVERYTHING. I WOULD SAY I'M NOT REALLY QUALIFIED. I DON'T KNOW IF I SHOULD HAVE A LAWYER TO BANK THIS PRESENTATION. I COULDN'T EVEN, UH, AFTER THREE MONTHS, I DIDN'T EVEN GET THE REQUEST. RIGHT. THE BOARD ADJUSTER HELPED ME WITH, I MEAN, POINTED OUT THE FIVE FEET PART. I JUST KNEW IT WAS SMALLER, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW THAT. AND I'M, I'M NOT SAYING TO ACCUSE ANY CITY, BUT ESPECIALLY NOT THE BOARD ADJUSTERS, BUT IT'S LIKE, I, FIRST TIME I BOUGHT A, I GOT A REALTOR TITLE COMPANY AND STUFF. PROPERTIES WERE MOVING VERY FAST AT THE TIME, I HAD THOUGHT, AND I LOOKS LIKE IT'S, THE HOUSE HAS BEEN THERE SINCE 1930. UH, I, I, I THOUGHT [01:35:01] IT, YOU KNOW, I JUST, UM, I, WE WENT TO MOVE PRETTY QUICK AND I TO, UM, I DIDN'T, I LOOKED AT THE TAXES. I PAID THE TAXES, AND IT WASN'T UNTIL I PUT WAS TRYING TO MOVE REALLY QUICK IN TERMS OF, I BOUGHT IT IN OCTOBER AND HOPED TO GET IN WITHIN A FEW MONTHS. AND I STARTED RIGHT AWAY. THEY HAD THE ELECTRICIAN PULL THE PERMIT. AND THAT'S WHEN WE FOUND OUT THAT THIS SITUATION, WHICH IS JUST DESCRIBED, WHICH I, I COULDN'T UNDERSTAND. AND I, I'M, I, IT TOOK ME A FEW MONTHS. I DO UNDERSTAND NOW, AND I, I GUESS, I MEAN, THE FULL OF MY PRESENTATION REALLY OFF TO SAY ABOUT IT IS LIKE, UM, THAT I, AND THAT THE HOUSE ISN'T, AND MASON MAY SEEM SHAPED CONSIDERING, I THOUGHT IT WAS IN VACANT FOR A COUPLE YEARS. IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR A LONG TIME. I NOW KNOW THE NEIGHBORS AND STUFF. AND, UM, IT, THE, UM, I FORGOT, OH, YEAH. UH, THAT, UM, THAT I, YEAH, YOU KNOW, JUST THAT, UM, IN TERMS, IT'S NOT A NEW DEVELOPMENT, IT'S JUST AS BEST AS I CAN UNDERSTAND IT IS SOMETHING THAT WASN'T HANDLED VERY WELL. I KNOW SURE. EXACTLY. HAPPENED, HAPPENED. AND I KNOW MY RESPONSIBILITY AND IS OBVIOUSLY THIS, I DIDN'T DO ENOUGH RESEARCH AND THEN MY REALTOR DIDN'T. AND I DON'T KNOW IF MY BROTHER SAYS IT'D BE TITLE INSURANCE, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. BUT, YOU KNOW, I, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT A NEW DEVELOPMENT. I WAS TALKING ABOUT, UM, JUST FIXING UP THE HOUSE TO MEET REQUIREMENTS AND, UM, OKAY. AND, UH, AND I WILL, I, AS HAS BEEN SAID, THERE'S NO OPPOSITION. EVERYTHING, BUT TALK IS PRETTY, THEY WOULD BE PRETTY HAPPY TO HAVE ME AND I WOULD BE HAPPY. 'CAUSE I, WOODLAWN IS GREAT. I LOVE IT. BUT, UM, IT'S GATHERED VERY LOUD OVER THE YEARS AND NOW, UM, SINCE MY HEAD INJURY, I, I THAT'S, I WAS BOTHERED BY THE NOISE AND IT'S QUIETER OVER THERE. I DON'T KNOW. I HOPE, SORRY IF I MAY LEFT OUT, UH, GIVE YOU A NO, THAT'S OKAY. ISSUE. THAT'S OKAY. MR. SCHULMAN, THE QUESTIONS? YEAH, WHAT'LL HAPPEN IS WE'LL HAVE SOME, UH, IF THERE'S ANY COMMENTS THAT PEOPLE SUBMITTED, WE'LL HAVE THEM READ IN. BUT, UH, AND THEN WE WILL OPEN IT TO COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS. SO IF YOU COULD PLEASE, UH, STAY ON, STAY ON THE LINE, UH, STAFF, WAS THERE ANY, UH, COMMENTS SUBMITTED? YES, THERE'S TWO LETTERS TO BE READ IN. OKAY. UH, THE FIRST ONE IS FROM EVA AND SHE'S AT 8 23, UH, CATON AVENUE. I SPOKE TO PROPERTY ON LUX LANE, AS I MENTIONED, UM, TO YOU FOR OUR CONVERSATION. THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN VACANT FOR A VERY LONG TIME, HAS BEEN VACANT SINCE I BOUGHT MY HOUSE IN THE 1980S. I AM GLAD THAT FINALLY SOMEONE BOUGHT THE, THE PROPERTY AND TO GIVE IT THIS PORTABLE HOUSE LIFE. I JUST PRAYED. THIS PROPERTY WILL NOT BE, UH, A RENTAL AND THE OWNER WILL LIVE IN THE PROPERTY IS, IT HAS BEEN NICE AND QUIET. UH, ON THIS SECTION OF L LANE, I DO NOT PLAN TO WATCH, UH, THIS MEETING THROUGH LIVESTREAM FOR A FACE-TO-FACE MEETING. NEXT ONE IS FROM ALBERT MARY LOU, UH, AT EIGHT 15 CATON. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE THAT WE RECEIVED ON THE ABOVE-REFERENCED, UH, NOTE THAT WE ARE IN FAVOR OF THIS, THIS HOME HAS BEEN IN ISO FOR AT LEAST THE LAST 30 YEARS. WE ARE IN FAVOR OF HAVING THE ADJUSTMENTS MADE, UH, SO THAT SOMEONE CAN MAKE THIS NECESSARY PRAYERS AND IMPROVE THE, THE STRUCTURE AND LIVE THERE. OKAY. PRESENT COMMENTS. OKAY. UH, SO, UH, MR. SCHULMAN, UH, NORMALLY WE GIVE THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ANY SORT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR REBUTTAL, BUT IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE ANYBODY WAS OPPOSED. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO SAY BEFORE WE ASK SOME QUESTIONS? NO, NO, I'M GOOD. OKAY. UH, AND, UH, BEFORE I OPEN IT TO COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT ACCORDING TO BCA D RECORDS, THIS HOUSE WAS, UH, CONSTRUCTED IN 1931. UH, AND, UH, WAS WAS SUBDIVIDED BY DEEDED IN, IN 2016 AS STATED BY STAFF. SO, BUT IS THERE ANY APP, UH, ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, HEARING NONE, UH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND, UH, UH, JUST POINT OUT TO STAFF THAT THERE'S NO SIDE SETBACK ISSUE BECAUSE THEY GET HALF OF THE ALLEY, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT, SIR. GREAT. UH, SO WITH THAT IN MIND, UM, ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? CRUZ, UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. OKAY, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 21 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 6, [01:40:03] I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT. THE REQUEST FOR A ONE A 1,480 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 4,000 TO A LOT TO BE 2,520 SQUARE FEET, AND TO A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FEET REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE 15 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 0 5 LUX LANE, APPLICANT BEING PHILLIP TRUMAN. 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 ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE VERY VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE, THE APPLICANT WANTS TO REMODEL AN EXISTING STRUCTURE LOCATED IN THE SET STANDARD LOT. THE COMMUNITY IS PERMANENTLY SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND UPGRADING. THIS OLD HOUSE WILL ADD TO THE WELLBEING OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. THE INTENDED DEVELOPMENT IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST TO DUE TO THE PUBLIC CONDITIONS. A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE LOT SQUARE FOOTAGE IS BELOW THE MINIMUM CODE REQUIREMENT, AND IF FIVE FOOT LEFT REAR SETBACK WILL STILL PROVIDE ENOUGH SPACE FOR LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. AND IF THE VARIANCES ARE NOT GRANTED, THE LOT WILL REMAIN VACANT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE IS OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RUN IN THE STRICT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL HELP TO GIVE LIFE TO OH NO STRUCTURE AND REVITALIZE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE SONY DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT PERMIT A USE NOT AUTHORIZED WITHIN THE DISTRICT. IT IS LOCATED IN, EXCUSE ME, SUCH VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES TO REQUEST THE LOCK SIDE AND THE REAR SETBACK WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE OR ALTER THE USE OR CHARACTER OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR HARMONY OF THE DISTRICT. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH SEVERANCE ASSAULTS IS USED TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND THE UNIQUE SPEC CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO OR RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE PLY RESULTED FROM THE EXCEPTIONAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS ITS SIZE AND BEING USED IN A NEGLECTED RESIDENTIAL RESIDENCE. THE APPLICANT AIMS TO REFI STRUCTURE AND RETURN IT TO OCCUPANCY AND OF MOTION. SECOND, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. WHO GOT WHO? WHO SENT THE SECOND? I THOUGHT I HEARD TWO NAME. TWO NAMES. FISHER. FISHER. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER CRUZ, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. OKAY. UH, YES, I WILL CONCUR WITH THIS. I THINK IT'LL BE A GREAT ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND ESPECIALLY SINCE SOME OF THE NAMES SHANE, THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN EMPTY FOR SO LONG. I THINK IT'D BE GREAT THAT SOMEBODY WILL START TAKING CARE OF IT. THANK YOU. GREAT. COMMISSIONER FISHER? YES. UH, I BELIEVE THIS RENOVATION WILL BE VERY DESIRABLE TO THE LOT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE. IT APPEARS THAT IT DOES HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT AND REFLECTS A POSITIVE, UH, A POSITIVE ATTITUDE AND A, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY OF LIFE OVERALL. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS I'D LIKE TO SPEAK? ALL RIGHT. UM, I WILL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. UM, I CAN TELL FROM THE AERIAL VIEW THAT THE PROPERTY JUST ABOVE IT, UH, THE LOT, THAT LOT LINE WAS PLACED IN A, IN A MANNER DUE TO EXISTING STRUCTURES, JUST ABOVE IT. AND SINCE THE HOUSE HAS BEEN THERE SINCE 1931, I, I SEE NO REASON WHY IT CAN'T REMAIN. SO, UM, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. [01:45:01] MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. DELMER. I CONCUR. MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR OREO. I ALSO CONFER WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UH, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. I THINK WE CAN MAKE THROUGH ONE MORE BEFORE WE HAVE A, A BREAK UNLESS ANYONE WANTS ONE. NOW, UM, NEXT CASE PLEASE. [6. 21-2064 BOA-20-10300142] THE OA 21 0 3 0 0 1 4 2 ADDRESS IS TWO 30 AND 2 32 BELKA COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE. APPLICANT IS, UH, CAUGHT IN THIS REQUEST FOR A 96 97 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 35% MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT TO ON ATTACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT TO BE 800 SQUARE FEET. CURRENT ZONING IS R FIVE M L O D. NEXT SLIDE. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE SOUTH OF THE SAN ANTONIO. UM, IT'S RIGHT ALONG THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER WITH A, WITHIN A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. THE MAIN STRUCTURE IS A TOTAL OF 2008 SQUARE FEET LINE ATTACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT TO BE 703 SQUARE FEET WITHOUT REQUIRING A VARIANCE, THE REQUESTED INCREASE TO 800 SQUARE FEET WOULD BE 40% OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE. HERE'S A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN THAT IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THE DRIVEWAY HAS BEEN, UH, REVIEWED BY, UH, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING. THEY DO HAVE APPROXIMATELY 13 TO 14 FEET, UH, FOR A CURB CUT, WHICH IS ENOUGH TO GAIN ACCESS NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. AND THAT IS THE CLIFF INTO THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 4 2. BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE INCREASED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. AND THE INCREASED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IS FOR THE HEALTH AND PRIVACY OF ITS HAP INHABITANTS. NEXT SLIDE. 26 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT. ZERO, UH, FORWARD RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AT THIS TIME. WE DO HAVE A FEW LETTERS AND ONE VOICEMAIL TO BE HEARD. UH, THEY ALL ARE IN FAVOR. UH, WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT ES ON THE LINE. WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. HELLO EVERYONE. MY NAME IS COTTON ES. MY ADDRESS IS 6 0 6 DAWSON STREET, 7 8 2 0 2. UM, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION TODAY. UH, BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE, UM, A QUICK AND IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION ABOUT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BOUNDARIES. UM, IT IS ACTUALLY THE TWO LOTS TO THE RIGHT OF THE LOT THAT'S IDENTIFIED IN THE PRESENTATION. AND, UM, WE'VE COME ACROSS THIS CONFUSION, UM, AS WE GO THROUGH THE PERMITTING AND RETTING, UM, PROCESS. NOT, NOT PERMITTING YET, BUT SPEAKING WITH, UM, C P S AND SAWS ENGINEERS ABOUT DELIVERING UTILITIES TO THE SITE BECAUSE IT IS AN UNUSUAL, UH, DEAD END STREET WITH, UM, A, A NARROW ACCESS POINT AT THE VERY END OF SCA STREET. SO IN THOSE SITE PHOTOS, UM, THAT WERE SHARED, IT IS NOT THE FENCED PROPERTY. IT IS THE PROPERTY WHERE YOU SEE THE, UM, DRIVE AND ENTERING THE FORESTED LOT. UM, I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S POSSIBLE POSSIBLE TO GO BACK TO THOSE SITE PHOTOS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO, TO CLARIFY. YEP. ON THAT SITE MAP, IT'S THOSE, THE TWO PROPERTIES AT THE VERY END, UM, I'M ASSUMING IN NOW. SO THEY'RE LABELED 2 32 AND 2 34 ON THIS MAP. AND, UM, THEY DO NOT HAVE A CHAIN LENGTH FENCE. IT'S JUST A SMALL CUT INTO A FORESTED LOT. SO, UM, TODAY WE'RE RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR AN 800 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT THAT'S ATTACHED TO THE MAN HOUSE BY A COVERED PORCH. SO THE SECTION THAT CONNECTS THE 2000 SQUARE FOOT MAN HOUSE AND THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IS COMPLETELY OPEN AIR. UM, IT'S A DECK AND A [01:50:01] ROOF THAT'S SPAM TO INDEPENDENT STRUCTURES. UM, SO I, I KNOW THAT FROM A FIRE CODE PERSPECTIVE, THESE WOULD BE SEEN AS A SINGLE STRUCTURE. UM, BUT IT'S, IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME, UH, FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE WHETHER THIS IS CONSIDERED ATTACHED OR DETACHED. UM, IF IT WERE CONSIDERED DETACHED, UH, 800 SQUARE FEET THAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT WOULD BE PERMITTED. SO I JUST JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT, UM, DOUBT I HAD OR QUESTION I HAD, UH, STRAIGHT OFF THE BAT. UM, SO YOU CAN SEE FROM THE SITE PLAN, UM, I PROVIDED THAT THE MAIN HOUSE IS INTENTIONALLY SMALL. IT'S ONLY 12,000 SQUARE FEET OF CONDITIONED SPACE FOR A YOUNG COUPLE. AND THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IS INTENDED FOR THEIR PARENTS, UM, TO LIVE IN LONG-TERM WHEN THEY RETIRE. UM, THE YOUNG COUPLE IS, IS KIND OF LURING THEIR, THEIR PARENTS FROM OUT OF STATE TO, TO SPEND MORE TIME HERE, . UM, SO WE FEEL THAT 800 SQUARE FEET IS, IS A COMFORTABLE SIZE, UM, FOR TWO SENIOR, UH, RESIDENTS OF THE PROPERTY. SO OVERALL, WE'RE PROPOSING, UM, ABOUT 2000 SQUARE FEET OF CONDITIONED LIVING SPACE FOR A FAMILY OF FOUR. UM, AND THIS IS A DOUBLE LOT. IT'S TWO COMBINED FULL FIVE LOTS FOR A TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 15,000 SQUARE FEET. SO IT'S, UM, DOES NOT SEEM TO BE OVERCROWDING THE SITE AT ALL. UM, AND YOU'LL ALSO SEE ON THE SITE PLAN THAT THERE ARE VERY FEW IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS. UM, BORDERING TO THE LEFT ON THE SITE PLAN. HERE IS A DOUBLE LOT THAT SAWS HAD PREVIOUSLY OWNED, WHICH IS, UH, VACATED AND POPULATED WITH, UM, SOME MANHOLE COVERS. SO IT SEEMS TO BE UNDEVELOPABLE. UM, THERE'S A LOT TO THE, A LARGE LOT TO THE RIGHT ON THE SITE PLAN, WHICH IS LANDLOCKED. UM, TURNS INTO A PAPER STREET AND YOU SAW THE PHOTO OF THE, THE CLIFF THERE AT THE END OF THE STREET. THERE'S A STORMWATER CAP THAT PREVENTS EXTENSION OF THAT STREET. UM, AND THERE ARE TWO NEIGHBORS IMMEDIATELY BOARDING TO THE, UM, SOUTH SIDE. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE PROPOSED MAIN HOUSE AND ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT SIT WELL INSIDE THE, UM, SETBACKS. AND, UH, THE ONE STORY STRUCTURES CONNECTED BY A SERIES OF THESE COVERED PORCHES, WHICH TOUCH, TOUCH THE MAIN HOUSE AS WELL AS THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. UM, PART OF THAT STRATEGY IS IN ORDER TO PRESERVE, UM, SEVERAL OF THE, THE MAJOR HERITAGE TREES ON SITE TO THE SOUTH AND TO THE NORTH. UM, FINALLY I'LL, I'LL MENTION THAT I THINK THIS VERY MUCH SERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, WHICH IS FOR THE STABILITY, AFFORDABILITY, DIVERSITY, AND MULTI, MULTI-GENERATIONAL LIVING. UM, SO I DO THINK THIS ACCESSORY WILLING UNIT FOR THE INHABITANTS PARENTS, UH, WILL, WILL DEFINITELY SERVE THAT PURPOSE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, STAFF, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS TO READ IN? YES, SIR. AND THEN AFTERWARDS WE'LL PLAY ONE VOICEMAIL THAT WAS PLAYED AS WELL. THIS IS FOR TWO 30 TELCO. SO THE ADDRESS IS 42 15 WOODBRIDGE WAY. CHESTER SPALDING IN FAVOR. HE OWNS A PROPERTY THERE ON LORRAINE, UH, RUDOLPH GONZALEZ, OWNER AT 3 0 4. LORRAINE, UH, DEAR ADDRESS, MY NEIGHBOR'S STEVE, UH, STEVEN HOLLAND AND PAIGE PANTHER ARE SEEKING A VARIANCE FOR THEIR, UH, PROPERTY AT TWO 30 ALCA SO THAT THE GUEST HOUSE, THEIR BUILDING CAN BE 800 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS JUST SLIGHTLY OVER THE CITY'S REQUIREMENT THAT A GUEST HOUSE IS, UH, BE LESS THAN 35 SQUARE, 35% THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE MAIN HOUSE. PLEASE KNOW THAT AS A A NEIGHBOR, I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE SIZE OF, OF THE GUEST HOUSE THEY PLAN TO BUILD. I UNDERSTAND THEIR DESIRE FOR THE GUEST, UH, HOUSE IS FOR THEIR PARENTS TO LIVE ON THE PROPERTY WITH THEM, A GREAT USE OF SPACE AS MORE AND MORE OF US, UH, CARE FOR THE NEXT GENERATION. I PURPOSELY MOVED INTO THIS HOUSE TO CARE FOR MY AGING GRANDPARENTS, 9, 7, 9 4 YEARS OLD WHO LIVE NEXT DOOR AT 3 0 2 LORRAINE. I GREATLY RESPECT AND SUPPORT THEIR ATTEMPTS TO SECURE THIS VARIANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR ELDER ELDERS TO THEN IN SUPPORT, UH, SYLVIA LIMAS AT 1 38 AND 2 28 . AND THEN WE DO HAVE THE ONE VOICEMAIL THAT WE'LL, WE'LL PLAY INTO THE RECORD AT THIS TIME. [01:55:01] 1 0 2 OH. THIS IS MARTHA HENRY. I AM AT 2 1 0 2, SORRY, FOUR ONE FIVE SIX NINE SIX NINE. THAT'S MY PHONE NUMBER. I'M CALLING ABOUT THE PROPERTY AT TWO 30 FCA STREET. AND THE NUMBER IS TWENTY TEN THREE HUNDRED ONE FOUR TWO. I HAVE A PROPERTY VACANT LOT IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY. IT IS AT TWO 50 FCA AND I AM VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THEIR REQUEST, UH, TO ALLOW FOR A 97 FOOT VARIANCE. THEY'RE DOING A VERY THOROUGH, THOUGHTFUL, AND BEAUTIFUL PROJECT. THEY'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THINK, AND THEY'RE DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB. SO PLEASE, AS A NEIGHBOR, UH, DO TAKE MY REQUEST INTO CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. BYE-BYE. THAT'S IT, SIR. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. UH, ARE THERE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? SHE, UH, COMMISSIONER, SHE, UM, I JUST WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION FROM THE APPLICANT. I'M LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN AND IT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE TWO HOUSES TO ME, UM, WITH IT THAT ARE SHADED GREEN. UM, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE A D U IS THE BLUE SHADED, BUT THE GREEN IS TWO DIFFERENT STRUCTURES CONNECTED BY A COVERED PORCH. IS THIS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. UM, IF WE GO BACK TO THE PLAN, UM, THE CIRCULATION BETWEEN THE LIVING SPACES AND THE BEDROOMS IS OPEN AIR. UM, SO THIS IS A FULL-TIME RESIDENCE FOR TWO FOLKS WHO LOVE BEING OUTDOORS AND THEY DON'T MIND, UH, WALKING OUTSIDE UNDERCOVER BETWEEN THE BEDROOMS AND THE LIVING SPACES. THANK YOU. FISHER COMMISSIONER FISHER? YES, I'M, CAN YOU PUT THE, UH, LOT PLAN OR THE SURVEY UP AGAIN OR NOT SURVEY, BUT THE, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED INTO WHICH LOT WE'RE LOOKING AT JUST BECAUSE THE, UH, OWNER INDICATED THE, THE SITE PLAN WASN'T ACCURATELY REFLECTED, SO IT WOULD BE, WELL, WELL, CURRENTLY THERE'S TWO LOTS. SHE'S GOING TO BE PLANTING THEM INTO ONE. UH, OKAY. SO IT WOULD BE THE TRIANGULAR AND THIS, THE TRIANGULAR PIECE, THIS SHOWS IN RED. SO THAT'S, YOU WOULD BE GREATER THAN THE ONE SHOWED IN RED, IS THAT CORRECT? NO, THAT'S INCORRECT. THE, UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE THE TRIANGULAR PIECES. IF YOU LOOK AT THAT RED SQUARE GO DOWN 1, 2, 3 LOTS, THAT'S THE BEGINNING OF THE PROPERTY. OKAY. IT'S THE TRIANGULAR PIECE. UM, I'M SORRY, THIS IS THE APPLICANT. MY COMPUTER IS A LITTLE SLOW LOADING THE SIDE YOU'RE SHOWING, BUT AS THE LOCKS ARE NOT TRIANGULAR. UM, WHAT? YEAH, NO, I DIDN'T THINK SO. NO, I'M GONNA STEP IN HERE. WHAT, WHAT, WHAT THE, I THINK THE, THE, THERE WAS A STATEMENT MADE ABOUT SOME LANDLOCK LOTS THAT ARE, THAT ARE ABUTTING THE, THE RIVERWALK. UH, AND THEN THERE'S A LOT AT THE END THAT DOES HAVE ACCESS. THAT'S TWO 30, UH, TWO 50, I'M SORRY. AND THEN, BUT THE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HERE, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS TWO PAPER PLATTED LOTS MM-HMM. THAT IS GOING TO BE PLATTED TOGETHER AS ONE LOT. IT'S JUST PART OF THE PROCESS. AND IS THAT CORRECT STAFF? YES OR YES, THAT'S EXACTLY CORRECT. SO ON THIS MAP, UM, SHOWN IN RED 2 32 AND THE LOT TO THE RIGHT, 2 34 WILL BE RE PLATTED AS ONE. OKAY. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MANA? THANKS, COMMISSIONER. SO THE NOTICE HERE SAYS ADDRESS TWO 30 AND 2 32 . MM-HMM. . UM, AND WE'RE HEARING THAT IT'S ACTUALLY 2 32 AND 2 34. UM, IS, IS, IS THERE, IS THIS MISPRINTED HERE ON OUR PRESENTATION OR WAS A PUBLIC ADVERTISEMENT A DIFFERENT ADDRESS? NO, IT'S, UM, IT'S INCORRECT IN B C A. UM, SO, SO THIS SLIDE IS SHOWING THE SAME INFORMATION THAT B C A SHOWS. IT'S, IT'S CAUSED A LOT OF CONFUSION. I WISH I COULD EXPLAIN WHY, UH, THAT'S THE CASE, BUT, AND, AND IS IT BECAUSE THE CITY IS, IS GIVING YOU A DIFFERENT ADDRESS [02:00:01] THAN WHAT DCA IS ASSIGNING? UM, I BELIEVE WE'LL USE TWO 30 AS THE RE PLATTED ADDRESS. UM, OKAY. SO TWO 30 AND 2 32 ARE HOW IT SHOWS ON PROPERTY SURVEYS. UM, C P S SEEMS TO HAVE DIFFERENT ADDRESSES COMPLETELY. SO I, I'M NOT SURE IF THINGS GOT A LITTLE FUNNY DONE AT THE END OF THE STREET HERE, BUT I HOPE HOPEFULLY THAT RE PLATTING WILL CLEAR UP ALL THIS CONFUSION AND WE SHOULD HAVE THAT IN A WEEK OR TWO. SO STAFF, IS THERE ANY ISSUES WITH NOTIFICATION REGARDING THIS CASE? UH, NO SIR. WE WERE LOOKING AT THAT AS WELL. NO, WE, WE WERE FINE WITH THE, THE NOTIFICATION WE HAD TO, UH, CORRECT. OKAY. BECAUSE THE AIRCRAFT REMEMBER ALSO TO THE, TO THE EAST IS ALL THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER, RIGHT? YEAH, THAT'S, I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE THIS, THIS, UH, WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE, WE'RE, WHEN WE ONLY DEALING WITH CASES THAT WERE PROPERLY NOTIFIED. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, UH, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. UH, AND THIS IS, UH, A BUILD ON A PREVIOUS QUESTION FROM THE COMMISSIONER, UH, WITH THE COVERED PORCH. UM, YOU'RE COUNTING THE TWO GREEN STRUCTURES WITH A COVERED PORCHES AS THE MAIN DWELLING, BUT THEN THERE'S ANOTHER COVERED PORCH THAT SEEMS TO CONNECT AND TIES TO THE AREA IN BLUE ON THE SITE PLAN. HOW CAN THIS NOT JUST LOOKED AT AS ONE BIG LARGE MAIN HOUSE? THAT'S, THAT'S A REALLY GREAT QUESTION. UM, IT'S SERVING ONE, ONE FAMILY. UM, WELL, IT'S FOR STAFF. I MEAN, I'M WONDERING STAFF, WHY WAS THIS EVEN YES, SIR. PROCESSED LIKE THIS, IT'S BEING CONSIDERED ONE MAIN HOUSE, BUT YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, UM, IT'S EITHER ATTACHED OR DETACHED SINCE THEY HAVE THE COVERED PORCH CONNECTING THE, THE, THE ACCESSORY DWELLING THAT MADE IT, UH, SUBJECT TO THE 35% RULE. IF THE NO MA I'M WONDERING WHY CAN'T IT BE CONSIDERED JUST ONE LARGE MAIN RESIDENCE AND, AND NOT AN ACCESSORY AT ALL? WHAT, WHAT MAKES IT AN ACCESS? IT'S GOT IT, IT'S GOT ITS OWN KITCHEN AND BATHROOM. IT MAKES IT ITS OWN HABIT HOLE SPACE. OKAY. I JUST, I'VE SEEN HOUSES THAT HAVE MORE THAN ONE KITCHEN, AND I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS THE, UH, THE GOLDEN RULE. . . OKAY. I, I HAD THE SAME QUESTION. SO I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE HEDGING ON, YOU KNOW, A CONSERVATIVE INTERPRETATION, BUT WE JUST WANTED TO BE SURE BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD. OKAY. . ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO, JUST WANTED TO ASK, UM, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE IS, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE WE CAN, UH, MOVE FORWARD WITH A MOTION. TEAL, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMISSIONER TEAL? CAN YOU, UH, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH, SORRY. BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, UH, TO MAKE SURE I HAVE THE ADDRESS CORRECT, IT IS 2 32 AND 2 34 ELCA. IS THAT CORRECT? OR SHOULD I READ IT AS WRITTEN STAFF? WHAT DO YOU THINK? YOU CAN READ IT AS WRITTEN. 'CAUSE ULTIMATELY ONCE SHE, SHE PASSED IN, BILL, SHE'S GONNA GET RE-ADDRESSED ANYWAY. OKAY, PERFECT. THANK YOU. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH TWO ZERO DASH 0 3 0 1 42, I MOVED TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, GRANTED A REQUEST FOR A 97 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 35% MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING TO BE 800 SQUARE FEET SITUATED AT TWO 30 AND 2 32 ALCA APPLICANT BEING CAUGHT IN ESTES 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 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE 97 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD CREATE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THREE. BY GRANTING A VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE AN OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE REQUEST ONLY AFFECTS THE LOT AND WILL NOT IMPACT THE OPERATION OF A USE, NOT SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE R FIVE ZONING DISTRICT. THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT WILL BE PART OF CONSTRUCTION, BUILT ON TWO LOTS, RE PLATTED INTO ONE LARGER LOT. 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 PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY AND ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF 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 DUE TO, [02:05:01] OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO A UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND WE'RE, WE'RE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. HOWEVER, THEY'RE, THEY ARE FOR SAFETY AND PRIVACY PURPOSES. END OF MOTION THERE. SECOND. SECOND I, A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THIEL. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. UH, COMMISSIONER THIEL, PLEASE LEAD THE, THE DISCUSSION. YES. UH, I, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. I THINK THIS IS A, A, A UNIQUE AND WELL THOUGHT OUT, UH, BOTH SITE PLAN AND, AND DESIGN OF A HOME, UM, PROVIDING SOMETHING FOR A FAMILY THAT, THAT IT'S THEIR LIFESTYLE. UM, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT THEY'VE REACHED OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND, AND ASKED FOR INPUT AND DONE ALL OF THEIR DUE DILIGENCE. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT AND, UH, HOPEFULLY MY COLLEAGUES WILL BE AS WELL. GREAT. UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE, UH, COMMISSIONER GILER. AND I DO, UH, THINK THAT, UH, A LOT OF, UH, CHAIRING OF, UH, THEIR PLAN, UH, HAS BEEN WELL DOCUMENTED HERE. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. FANTASTIC. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT. I'M I'LL. UM, WE'LL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT. I THINK IT WAS A WELL PRESENTED CASE. AND, AND KUDOS TO, UM, THE COMMUNICATION AS POINTED OUT BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. UM, STAFF. PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR. MS. FISHER. I CONCUR. MR. TEO. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. UNA. YES. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR, OR I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UH, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. UM, DOES ANYBODY NEED A BREAK OR CAN WE PRESS ON MUCH? THANK YOU. ALL. FIVE MINUTE BREAK. UH, FIVE MINUTE BREAK WOULD BE FIVE. YEAH, WE'LL RECONVENE AT THREE 15. ALL RIGHT, LET'S START ON THIS, ON THE NEXT CASE. ALL RIGHT. [7. 21-2029 BOA-21-10300002] SO THE CASE D OA 21 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 10 14 WEST ELSA DRIVE, UH, COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE APPLICANT IS BARR ENGINEERS AND ASSOCIATES TO REQUEST FOR ONE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THE FRONT FENCE TO BE SIX FOOT FOUR INCHES, UH, TALL, TWO, A SEVEN FOOT, EIGHT INCH VARIANCE, AND THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION FIELD REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE FRONT. SIR. YE, I THOUGHT I HEARD SOMEBODY SAY SOMETHING. MA'AM, UH, PLEASE HOLD, UH, A REQUEST FOR ONE, LET ME START OVER. ONE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THE FRONT FENCE TO BE SIX FOOT FOUR INCHES TALL, TWO A SEVEN FOOT, EIGHT INCH VARIANCE, AND THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION FIELD REQUIREMENTS, ALLOW THE FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE SEVEN FEET, FOUR INCHES AWAY FROM THE STREET. THREE ZONING VARIANCES FROM THE ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE ARCHITECTURAL APPEARANCE NOT TO, UH, MAINTAIN THAT OF THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE AND BE THE PARKING SPACE TO BE LOCATED WITHIN THE FRONT YARD. KERN ZONE IS R FOUR A H O D. NEXT SLIDE. NEXT SLIDE. STANDBY. WE'RE HAVING TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES ON THIS END. OKAY. THAT'S A NOTE HERE. UM, WHILE THEY, THEY'RE WORKING ON THAT, THE, UM, SUGGESTED TEMPLATE HAS THE WRONG ADDRESS LISTED FOR THESE, FOR THIS CASE HERE. SO, UM, JUST REMEMBER THAT YOU COULD READ IT. OH, THANK YOU. THAT'S RIGHT. THEY, THEY GRABBED THE ONE FROM THE PREVIOUS ONE, SO THAT'S TEN FOUR. WHOEVER MAKES A MOTION, IT'S 10 14 WITH GOOD STAFF. [02:10:01] ARE WE STILL LIVE AND BEING RECORDED, OR IS IT JUST POWERPOINT? WE'RE, WE'RE LIVE. IT'S JUST OUR, OUR HOST COMPUTER IS, UH, DISCONNECTED FOR SOME REASON AND NOT SHARING WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SHOW. IS THERE, IS THERE A, CAN YOU READ ANYTHING INTO THE RECORD WHILE WE'RE WAITING COMMENTS, OR LET ME NO COMMENTS AND NO CITIZENS. HAVE YOU HEARD ON THIS ONE? OKAY. TEST, TEST ON THE AUDIO. I CAN HEAR YOU. ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU SEE THE NEW SCREEN NOW? UH, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE? YES, SIR. THAT'S IT. ALRIGHT. OKAY. CASE SUMMARY. HERE WE GO. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS PREDOMINANTLY SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THE APPLICANT HAS INSTALLED A FIVE FOOT THREE ROD, IRON AND FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND FRONT PROPERTY LINE, UM, AND AN AUTOMATIC SLIDING DRIVEWAY, UH, GATE, WHICH IS SIX FOOT FOUR INCHES TALL. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION TO PULL A PERMIT TO BUILD AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IN THE REAR YARD. THIS D S D BUILDING REVIEW, UH, STAFFED DENIED UH, THE PROPOSAL, UH, DRAWINGS TWICE. THE APPLICANTS, UH, STARTED TO CONSTRUCT THE A D D U WITHOUT OBTAINING AN APPROVED PERMIT. UH, THE A D D U IS A TWO STORY STRUCTURE WITH ONE BEDROOM ON THE SECOND FLOOR MEASURING 368 SQUARE FEET, WHICH MEETS THE CODE SQUARE FOOTAGE IN TOTAL FLOOR AREA REQUIREMENT FOR SECTION 35 3 71 B. WHEN BUILDING A D U, THE ROOF PITCH AND WINDOW PROPORTIONS, UH, HAVE TO BE IDENTICAL TO THE, TO THAT OF THE PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE. IN THIS CASE, THE PRIMARY BUILDING HAS A GABLE ROOF, BUT THE A D U WAS BUILT WITH A SHED. ROOF CODE ALSO REQUIRES THE, UH, ACCESSORY DWELLING PARKING SPACE TO BE LOCATED BEHIND THE FRONT YARD. AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO REQUESTING FOR A VARIANCE TO USE THE EXISTING PARKING AREA LOCATED WITHIN THE FRONT YARD FOR THAT SPACE. UH, D S C TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STAFF REVIEWED THE CLEAR VISION REQUEST AND APPROVED IT AS THE PROPOSED LAYOUT AND FENCE HEIGHT, UH, DOES NOT SEEM TO POSE ANY SITE CONSTRAINTS. HERE'S A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN SUBJECT PROPERTY IN THE GATE, CLEAR VISION, AND HERE'S THE ACCESSORY DWELLING. AS YOU NOTICE, THE SHED ROOF NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES FOR THE FENCE GATE HEIGHT. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS FOR APPROVAL OF BO O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. IN EFFECT, THE TALLER, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN GATE IS NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD CLEAR VISION AND PARKING SPACE. VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS ALSO APPROVAL, UH, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THERE IS ENOUGH PARKING SPACE IN THE FRONT YARD THAT CAN BE USED BY THE A D U UH, OCCUPANT, AND A LESSER CLEAR VISION AREA WILL NOT CAUSE TRAFFIC HAZARDS. AS TO THE ROOF PITCH OF THE, UH, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, THE VARIANCE THAT RECOMMENDS DENIAL BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS EFFECT, UH, THE CONSTRUCTED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ROOF DESIGN IS OUT OF CHARACTER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THE A D U IS HIGHLY LIKELY TO BE NOTICED FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, UM, AS IT IS TWO STORIES, 33 NOTICE WERE SENT OUT, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE CENTRAL LOS ANGELES [02:15:01] HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE DO HAVE THE A, UH, APPLICANT ON THE LINE FROM BARRON ENGINEERS AND ASSOCIATES. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. UH, HI. THIS IS ADAM FROM BARRON ENGINEERS AND ASSOCIATES. THE ADDRESS IS 7 0 4 2 ALAMO DOWNS PARKWAY, SUITE 5 5 0. ZIP CODE 7 8 2 3 8. GO AHEAD AND START YOUR PRESENTATION. OH, OKAY. I, WE, THERE'S A BIG DELAY, UH, SO I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN, UH, BUT, UH, WE WERE ENGAGED BY THE OWNER. UH, SHE, SHE BUILT A STRUCTURE, A CONTRACTOR, I BELIEVE SHE HIRED A CONTRACTOR TO BUILD A DWELLING FOR HER HANDICAP SON. I BELIEVE HE HAS SOME KIND OF A, A MUSCLE MULTIPLE FLUOROSIS OR SOMETHING. SHE CAN, SHE CAN SPEAK TO THAT, BUT HE'S, UH, HE'S VERY LIMITED IN MOVEMENT AND WILL BECOME MORE LIMITED AS THE, AS THE YEARS GO BY. AND SHE WANTED TO BUILD THE DWELLING TO BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF HIM. HE WAS SEEKING SOME INDEPENDENCE. HE WANTED TO LIVE, UM, A LITTLE MORE INDEPENDENT THAN BEING IN THE, IN THE MAIN HOUSE. SO, UH, SHE DECIDED TO BUILD THIS FOR HIM. UM, AS, AS I SAID, SHE HIRED A CONTRACTOR. UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR KNEW EXACTLY ALL THE REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OR ORDINANCES, OR THIS IS WHY WE'RE HERE NOW. UM, ONCE THE CITY GOT INVOLVED, UH, SHE CAME TO US SEEKING HELP. SO WE ARE TRYING TO HELP HER AS MUCH AS WE CAN WITH THESE VARIANCES. UM, UH, THE PICTURES THAT, LIKE I SAID, WE WERE IN A BIT OF A DELAY, BUT THE, STARTING FROM THE, THE FENCE, WHICH WERE, AGAIN, WE WERE NOT AWARE OF THE FENCE HEIGHT AT THE TIME, UH, BUT IT SEEMS TO BE JUST A PEAK, SOME KIND OF DECORATIVE GATE THAT'S, UM, I DON'T THINK IT'S ANY KIND OF CLEAR VISION SINCE IT'S NOT A COMPLETED, IT'S NOT WOOD OR ANYTHING OBSTRUCTING, YOU CAN SEE THROUGH IT. UM, THE SECOND THING WAS THE, UM, I GUESS THE MAJOR THING, IT'S THE ROOF PITCH. AGAIN, THIS WAS, UH, SOMEHOW THE CONTRACTOR, MAYBE HE'S THE DESIGNER, I DON'T KNOW, UH, DECIDED TO PUT THAT PITCH ON IT. AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSION THAT IT'S NOT WITHIN THE, IT'S NOT THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT ALIKE, BUT IT, UH, WE KIND OF DROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND. WE DID FLY THE DRONE OVER THE PROPERTY. WE DIDN'T CROSS ANY RIGHT OF WAY LINES. UH, WE DID SEE SOME OTHER METAL ROOFS STOPPED, I THINK, AT THE INTERSECTION. AND THERE IS A MEDITERRANEAN STYLE HOME NEXT TO IT. SO THERE OTHER THING, THERE'S LIKE A REALLY CONCISE OR, UH, SOME KIND OF NEIGHBORHOOD CONSISTENCY. AS FAR AS THE DEVELOPMENTS, UM, AGAIN, I'M JUST TRYING TO HELP THIS PERSON OUT. I, I THINK IT, IT WOULD STILL, IT WOULD STILL BE OKAY. THE STRUCTURE LOOKS NICE. IT'S MODERN, UH, THAT WE HAVE BEEN INFORMED BY THE OWNER OR THE APPLICANT. AND, UH, MAYBE SHE CAN SPEAK TO THIS, UH, THAT THERE ARE PLANS TO REPLACE THE, THE ROOF ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. I, I DON'T THINK THEY'VE DONE ANYTHING YET, BUT, UH, THEY ARE SPEAKING ABOUT, UH, MATCHING THE, WHAT THEY ADDED. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO DISCUSS WITH THE CITY, WITH PERMITTING, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD HELP THEM OR NOT, UH, TO GET THIS STRUCTURE APPROVED SOON AS THEY'RE TRYING TO GET THE ROOF TO MATCH WHAT THE, THE NEW CONSTRUCTION. UM, OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK THE PICTURES SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. UH, WE FEEL THAT, THAT, I THINK SHE'S TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR HER SON, AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO SEE IF, UH, TRYING TO HELP HER AVOID HAVING TO REROOF THE, THE, THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED BUILDING SINCE, UH, IT WOULD BE A, A, A, OBVIOUSLY A MUCH HIGHER COST. AND AGAIN, I THINK SHE WAS KIND OF MISGUIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR OR, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SAYING THE CONTRACTOR'S BAD OR GOOD, I'M JUST SAYING MAYBE HE JUST, IT WAS JUST A BAD DECISION ON BOTH ENDS. AND, UH, WE'RE TRYING TO COME IN HERE AND TRY AND HELP HER AND HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS CAN, UH, CAN HELP US RESOLVE THIS AND HELP HER GET HER SON THERE AND MAKE HIM FEEL A LITTLE MORE INDEPENDENT. AND THAT'S ABOUT IT. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, THANK YOU STAFF. UH, BEFORE I OPEN THIS, UH, UP TO QUESTIONS, I, I NEED YOU TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION ON THE APPLICATION ITSELF. UH, IN THE APPLICATION, IT STATES THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH, UH, THE A D U HAVING A ROOF PITCH, NOT IDENTICAL TO THE RESIDENTS. UH, IT, IS IT PITCH ONLY OR IS IT ROOF STYLE? 'CAUSE YOU HAD MENTIONED IT'S PITCH. SO INITIALLY WE WERE LOOKING AT THE BUILDING MATERIAL, BUT THE STATE DID CHANGE. UM, THE STATE LAW CHANGED. THE CITY COULD NO LONGER DICTATE BUILDING MATERIALS ON NEW AREAS, OLDER NONCONFORM OR NCDS, YOU CAN, ANYTHING ADOPTED AFTER, I THINK IT WAS APRIL OF 2019, UH, WE CAN NO LONGER DO THAT. SO ANY, ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION, THAT SECTION OF THE CODE NO LONGER APPLIES. SO THE ONLY FOCUS FOR US AS FAR AS THAT WAS CONCERNED [02:20:01] WAS THE ROOF PITCH. WELL, THE ROOF AND STORE ROOF STYLE ITSELF IS, UH, YEAH. IS IT, IS IT GABLE VERSUS SHED OR IS IT PITCH ONLY? YES, CORRECT. SO THIS IS THE ONLY STRUCTURE THAT WE FOUND, UM, THAT HAD A SHED ROOF. ALL OTHER RESIDENCES AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD A GABLE ROOF, INCLUDING THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. SO IT'S, IT'S NOT JUST ROOF PITCH, IT'S ROOF PITCH AND ROOF STYLE, WHETHER IT'S GABLE OR SHED. YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR BECAUSE I, I WAS CONFUSED WHEN I READ THAT IN THE, UH, IN THE AGENDA. AND THEN I HEARD COMMENTARY REGARDING SHED VERSUS GABLE. OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANY, UM, ANYTHING YOU NEED TO READ INTO THE RECORD BEFORE WE OPEN THIS UP TO QUESTIONS? NO, SIR. THAT WAS IT. GREAT. UH, ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? SHELL, UH, COMMISSIONER SHELL, UM, YES. JUST BUILDING ON, UH, WHAT MR. ORIAN HAD ASKED. UM, THE CODE ALSO MENTIONS WINDOW PROPORTIONS. UM, IS THAT BEING CONSIDERED AS WELL SINCE, I MEAN, THAT'S NOT A MATERIAL ISSUE, THAT'S A, A, A SIZE ISSUE. SO WE, WE NOTICED THE WINDOWS WERE TWO TO ONE, UH, WHICH MATCHES THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. OKAY. THERE TWO TO ONE RATIO, ONE OVER ONE LIGHT. WHAT ABOUT THE WINDOWS ON THE SIDES AND THE REAR? IT WAS THE ONES FACING THE FRONT? YEAH. THE FACE, THE, THE FORWARD FACING, UH, WINDOWS WOULD MATCH THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, WHICH THEY DO. OKAY. DOES THE CODE SPECIFY JUST THE FORWARD FACING WINDOWS OR ALL THE WINDOWS ON THE STREET? STANDBY. THANK YOU. IT'S STREET FACING. STREET FACING. BUT IN THIS CASE, WOULD THAT BE THE ALLEY OR WOULD YOU, ARE YOU LOOKING AT HERMOSA? THERE'S NO ALLEY IN THIS CASE. UM, IT'S A REAR PROPERTY. WE'RE LOOKING AT A MOSSA IN THIS, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE. AND JUST TO HELP, UH, CHIME IN, THE, UH, THE, THE CODE IS NOT SPECIFIC AS TO WHICH SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE, BUT THE INTENT OF THE CODE IS TO MAKE THE, UH, WINDOW PROPORTION SIMILAR TO THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE WHEN YOU'RE FACING IT FROM THE STREET IN WHICH IT'S ADDRESSED OFF OF. THAT'S THE INTENT. AND THAT'S, THAT IS APPLIED TO, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS AS WELL. OKAY. SO IS THERE, IS THERE AN ALLEY IN THE REAR OR, OR NOT? NO, SIR. THERE'S NO ALLEY TO THE REAR. OKAY. THERE'S JUST A VACANT LOT TO THE REAR. NO, I'M ASKING 'CAUSE ON THE MAP THAT YOU PROVIDED WITH THE AERIAL PICTURE, IT, THE PROPERTY LINES ARE SHOWING THAT THERE IS SOME KIND OF AN ALLEY BETWEEN THIS ONE FISHER COMMISSIONER FISHER? YES. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO CONFIRM WHAT MATERIAL THE SECONDARY DWELLING IS CONSTRUCTED OF. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S METAL, UM, BUT I COULD BE IN ERROR FOR THE APPLICANT. CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM THE MATERIALS? YES. THAT, THAT'S METAL. AND UH, YES. I WANTED ALSO CLARIFY. THERE IS AN ALLEY ON THE REAR, UH, SMALL ELLIOT, IT'S ONLY 12 FEET. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OH, ZUNA, UH, COMMISSIONER UNA. YEAH, QUESTION FOR STAFF. WOULD, WOULD ALL OF THIS HAVE BEEN PICKED UP IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS, WHETHER IT'S THE FRONT PARKING SPACE, THE PITCH OF THE ROOF, OR WHAT HAVE YOU? AND IF THEY DID NOT PULL A BUILDING PERMIT, CLEARLY THEY'D HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE FIRE CODE SAFETY ISSUES NOW. RIGHT. THEY DID ACTUALLY PULL PERMITS, SIR. AND, UH, DURING REVIEW IT WAS DENIED TWICE FOR THAT VERY PURPOSE. AND THEN THEY CAME TO THE, THEY STILL BUILT IT AND THEN CAME TO US FOR THE VARIANCE. SO THE, YOU DE DENIED IT TWICE AND THEY BUILT IT ANYWAY. THAT YES, SIR. DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. SO DID, DID THE CONTRACTOR FOR GOING FOR THE BUILDING PERMITS OR DID THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER AND WAS THE PROPERTY OWNER INFORMED THAT THEY WERE DENIED TWICE AND THAT UNCLEAR, UH, PLAN REVIEW, ONCE THEY DENY IT WOULD GO TO THE APPLICANT, WHETHER IT BE THE CONTRACTOR, THE HOMEOWNER, I DON'T KNOW WHO THE APPLICANT WAS IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, BUT THEY WOULD'VE BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE DENIALS. AND AGAIN, IT WAS DENIED TWICE. AND SO HERE WE HAVE THE APPLICANT BEING BEER ENGINEERS AND ASSOCIATES WITH ABOUT THE SAME APPLICANT AS THE ORIGINAL, UH, BUILDING PERMIT. I, I, I WONDER IF THEY HAVE ANY INFORMATION THEY CAN PROVIDE SOME INSIGHT ON THAT. THIS CLEARLY THAT WOULD'VE, YOU KNOW, PREVENTED US FROM EVEN HAVING EXPERIENCES IF THEY WOULD'VE BEEN NOTIFIED AT THAT VERY TIME THEY WERE PUTTING INTO . WE, WE WERE, WE WERE [02:25:01] NOT THE, THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT WAS THE CONTRACTOR. WE WERE ENGAGED AFTER THE, I BELIEVE AFTER THE DENIAL. UH, THE LADY CAME TO US, UH, AND I THINK SHE'S ON THE LINE SOMEWHERE, BUT SHE CAME TO US AFTER THE CITY PRETTY MUCH, UM, TOLD HER SHE COULDN'T, UM, EITHER DEMO IT OR BRING IT, UM, TO COMPLAINT. AND SO WITH THE BUILDING PERMITS THAT WERE ISSUED, DID THEY REVIEW PLANT SAFETY, PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, JUST NOT THE, THE PITCH OR, UH, AT WHAT LEVEL OF REVIEW, IF ANY, UH, OCCURRED WHILE THE PROJECT WAS BEING COMPLETED FOR INSPECTIONS? IS THAT A QUESTION FOR ME? UH, JUST FOR STAFF. ZEKE, YOU, YOU DIDN'T EVEN MENTION THEY RECEIVED THE PERMIT? NO, THE PERMITS WERE NEVER APPROVED. THE PERMITS WERE NEVER APPROVED AT THAT POINT. SO THERE WAS NO INSPECTIONS TO BE HAD, UH, UNTIL THOSE ISSUES WERE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE. AND ZEKE, WHEN YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT THEY HAD START, THEY BUILT IT ANYWAY, WERE THEY IN THE PROCESS OF CONSTRUCTION THEN? THEY APPLIED AND AFTER BEING DENIED, THEY CONTINUE BUILDING IT OR THEY NOT DONE ANYTHING AT ALL UNTIL AFTER THEY GOT DENIED? DO CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT, THAT, THAT INFORMATION? I DON'T KNOW THAT I'D HAVE TO CHECK WITH THE OWNER, UM, TO SEE AT WHAT STAGE THEY CONSTRUCTED THE STRUCTURE. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, UM, AND CHUCK, I BELIEVE YOU STILL HAVE THE, THE FLOOR? NO, BUT I WANNA ASK A QUESTION. OKAY. I APOLOGIZE. I, WHO WAS THE PREVIOUS, UH, COMMISSIONER? IS THAT UNA? THAT WAS ME. YEAH, THAT WAS ME. I GUESS MUCH AS THEY WERE GONNA ANSWER, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD BEFORE I, UH, GO THE FLORIDA COMMISSIONER MINKA? NO, OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, JUST IF THERE WAS TO BE APPROVED, I MEAN, THE PROPERTY CLEARLY WOULD HAVE TO BE INSPECTED AND BROUGHT UP TO CODE OR EVEN THAT'S SOME MINIMAL CODE REVIEW. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT THAT INCLUDES REMOVING DRYWALL TO INSPECT OR WHAT HAVE YOU. SO THERE WOULD BE SOME COST INVOLVED. RIGHT, RIGHT. YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONER MIN CHAKA? YES, SIR. THANK YOU. UH, QUESTION TO STAFF. I'M, I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED ON THE CLARIFICATION OF THE PARKING SPACE IN THE FRONT YARD. IS THAT ALLOWED BECAUSE THE A D D U IS UNACCESSIBLE BY A CAR PARKING IN THE BACK, OR WHAT IS THE RULE FOR THAT? SO IN THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT SECTION UNDER 3 71, IT, IT DOES STATE THAT IF YOU HAVE AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, YOU MUST PARK ON THE SIDE OR REAR YARD FOR THAT STRUCTURE. UM, UNFORTUNATELY THE HOME ITSELF DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH SQUARE FOOTAGE OR ANY ENOUGH AREA, UH, TO GET A VEHICLE BACK THERE. UH, SO WHEN WE WERE OUT THERE, WE DID NOTICE THAT THEY HAD ENOUGH PARKING AREA IN THE FRONT TO PARK. UH, SO AT THE TIME WE DIDN'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT. WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE. MEANING THERE'S NO CODE AGAINST IT NOW? NO. THAT'S WHY THE VARIANCE IS BEING REQUESTED, SIR. UM, OKAY. ULTIMATELY, THAT PARKING WOULD NORMALLY BE REQUIRED, UM, IN THE SIDE OR REAR, BUT AGAIN, THEY, THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH, UM, AREA TO GET A VEHICLE BACK THERE. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SHELL, ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER SHELL, UM, THE CODE REQUIRES A FIVE FOOT SETBACK FOR DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. UM, BUT THE SITE PLAN IS ONLY SHOWING TWO FOOT SIX INCHES. WAS THAT VERIFIED WHEN D S D WENT OUT THERE? WELL, WITH THE ALLEYWAY ITSELF, REMEMBER YOU CAN USE HALF OF THAT ALLEYWAY TOWARDS YOUR SETBACK. OKAY. THE SIDE YARD SEEMED FINE WHEN WE WERE OUT THERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION. YEAH. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO I THINK STAFF SAID THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE DIALOGUE HERE IS THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THE BUILDING FROM THE FRONT. UM, SO DO YOU HAVE A PICTURE OF THAT WHERE YOU ACTUALLY CAN SEE THE BUILDING FROM THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY? UM, UM, YOU SEE THE ROOF LINE, WHAT HAVE YOU, 'CAUSE PICTURES THAT YOU SHOWED? I COULDN'T SEE THE, THE, THE END. NO, SIR. AND GOOGLE DOESN'T HAVE IT YET, SO, OKAY. YEAH. AND FROM THE FRONT END YOU COULDN'T REALLY SEE IT, BUT THE BACK END YOU COULD, UM, THERE'S VACANT LOTS BEHIND IT. YOU COULD SEE THE STRUCTURE FROM THE OTHER STREET FROM THE NEIGHBORING, UH, STREET. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, UH, ZIKA, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT A PICTURE OF THE MAIN HOUSE OR THE, OR THE ACCESSORY. RIGHT. SO THE, THE IMAGE THAT WE'RE SHOWING NOW IS THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE MM-HMM. THE ACCESSORIES BEHIND IT. SO WE SAW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SEEING THERE. WE, WE COULDN'T SEE THE ACCESSORY UNTIL WE GOT TO THE BACK. OKAY. GOT IT. UH, I THINK I HAVE A QUESTION. SO ON THE SITE PLAN, IT, IT SHOWS THAT THIS IS, UH, IS THIS TWO ADUS OR IS THIS JUST ONE? BECAUSE THIS, THE KITCHEN, IT'S ONE. WE ACTUALLY VISITED THE SITE. UH, IT IS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION. UH, THEY ALLOWED US TO GO IN AND IT APPEARS THE BEDROOM WILL BE UPSTAIRS. SO [02:30:01] IT'S, IT'S A ONE BEDROOM. WELL, BECAUSE ON THE PLAN IT SAYS FIRST FLOOR, SECOND FLOOR, AND THERE'S KITCHEN AREA. THERE'S A KITCHEN AREA. IT LOOKS LIKE TWO EFFICIENCIES IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE WITH, WITH THE ENTRY LIMITED FROM WITHIN THE FIRST FLOOR. SO WHEN WE WALKED IN, THE STAIRWAY TOOK UP A, A CHUNK OF THAT, OF THAT LEVEL. MM-HMM. , UM, IT LOOKED LIKE THE PLUMBING WAS FOR THE KITCHEN DOWNSTAIRS AND MAYBE A LITTLE LIVING AREA, OR NOT LIVING AREA, BUT A, A, UM, LIVING ROOM AREA. BUT THEN WE WALKED UPSTAIRS AND IT WAS JUST ENOUGH ROOM FOR A, A BEDROOM. SO THEY DON'T HAVE, AS, AS THE PLAN SHOWS, THEY DON'T HAVE A SEPARATE KITCHEN ON THE SECOND FLOOR? NO, SIR. THERE WASN'T ENOUGH ROOM UP THERE. ALL RIGHT. I'M, I'M JUST SAYING 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT, I'M GETTING THE IMPRESSION THAT'S WHAT IT SHOWS UP THERE, BUT OH NO. WAIT, I'M, I, I APOLOGIZE. I WAS LOOKING AT THE WRONG PICTURE. OKAY. UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APP. UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, YOU HAD STATED THAT THE, THE PURPOSE OF THIS WAS FOR A, A DISABLED PERSON? YES, SIR. HER SON IS, UM, AND I, I, HE HAS SOME KIND OF MUSCLE DISORDER. HE'S GONNA, UH, I, FROM WHAT WAS DESCRIBED TO ME FROM HIS MOM, UH, WHO'S THE ACTUAL OWNER IS, HE'S LOSING MOBILITY ALMOST MONTHLY. SO THERE'S GONNA BE A POINT, BE A POINT WHERE HE'S NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF HIMSELF. SHE, SHE HAS AN EX-HUSBAND, A RELATIVE THAT LIVE OUT OF TOWN, AND WHENEVER SHE NEEDS TO GO SOMEWHERE, SHE WANTED THEM TO COME OVER AND TAKE CARE OF HIM AND, WELL, I WAS, I WAS JUST SO HE DOESN'T LIVE IN THIS 'CAUSE I WAS, I WAS JUST WONDERING 'CAUSE THERE'S STAIRS AND YOU NO, NO. HE DOESN'T LIVE IN THERE YET, BUT HE, HE WANTS TO LIVE IN NOW. YEAH. THE STAIRS TO ME, I DON'T, I'M GUESSING IT'S GONNA BE HARD FOR HIM. I, I DIDN'T HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT. OKAY. BUT I, I THINK HE'S GONNA BE PRETTY MUCH BEDRIDDEN AFTER, UH, PRETTY SOON. UNFORTUNATELY. I, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK OUT. THIS IS NO, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO, I DON'T WANNA GET INTO IT. I WAS JUST, YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT IT WAS FOR SOMEBODY WITH MOBILITY ISSUES AND YET THE BEDROOM'S UPSTAIRS, THAT'S ALL. YEAH. YEAH. THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR THEM THAT I COULDN'T ANSWER THAT. AND THEN AS FAR AS THE DRIVEWAY GOES, UH, WHERE THE PARKING IS THERE IS, IT DOESN'T DRIVE, THERES A, IT IS A TWO CAR DRIVE AND THEN A, A GARAGE AS WELL, CORRECT? THERE'S A GARAGE, YES. AND THEN THERE'S, UH, I BELIEVE TWO CARS CAN FIT THERE OUTSIDE. AND AS I MENTIONED, UH, SHE, HE'S NOT ALLOWED TO DRIVE MEDICALLY. I JUST WANTED TO, UH, THE ISSUE OF WHETHER THE PARKING'S ALLOWED IN FRONT, UH, I JUST WANTED TO ENSURE THAT THERE WAS ADEQUATE PARKING FOR THE, FOR THE TWO STRUCTURES. SURE. ALL RIGHT. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. UM, FOR THE APPLICANT, YOU, YOU, YOU CAN TAKE A, A FEW MINUTES IF YOU WISH TO, UH, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFO OR PROVIDE ANY SORT OF, UH, REBUTTAL TO ANYTHING YOU'VE HEARD. UM, I, I GUESS IF THE OWNER'S ON, I THINK THEY HAD, SHE WAS ON, ON THE LINE FOR A LITTLE BIT. I DON'T KNOW IF SHE WANTS TO SAY ANYTHING. SHE'S CERTAINLY WELCOME TO MA'AM. IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE ON, IF YOU'RE ON MUTE, PRESS STAR SIX AND THEN I'LL UNMUTE YOU. IT SEEMS THAT WE DON'T HAVE HER ON. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU SPEAKING, I GUESS, CAN I JUST SAY A FEW THINGS? I'M SORRY. SURE, GO AHEAD. YOU GOT TWO MINUTES. I KNOW THAT, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE PERMITTING PROCESS. I BELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR SUBMITTED A PERMIT AND IT STARTED THE REVIEW PROCESS. AND THEN WHEN THE INSPECTOR WENT OUT THERE AND SAW SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM HIS PLANS, WHICH IS WHAT'S BUILT, THEN THIS STARTED THE DENIAL PROCESS. AND THEN AFTER THAT THEY'VE, THEY'VE BEEN HAVING INSPECTIONS AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY'VE BEEN PASSING INSPECTIONS AND THAT'S IT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, ALL RIGHT. SO I'M LOOKING FOR RIGHT NOW WE HAVE, UH, TWO MOTIONS ONE'S. ONE HAS TO DEAL WITH A FENCE HEIGHT EXCEPTION, AND THE OTHER ONE HAS TO DEAL WITH THE VARIOUS VARIANCES. WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, PLEASE? ZUNA ZUNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 21 DASH 0 3 2, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT WON A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THE FRONT FENCE TO BE SIX FOOT FOUR TALL, SITUATED AT 10 14 WEST HERMOSA, APPLICANT BEING BARE ENGINEERS AND ASSOCIATES, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. ADDITIONAL HEIGHT IS RELATED TO THE ORNAMENTAL SLIDING DRIVEWAY GATE. IF GRANTED ITS REQUEST WOULD BE A HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS [02:35:01] CASE. THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY, THE WR IRON FENCE WITHIN THE FRONT YARD IS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. UH, THIS IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. C, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE MATERIAL AND STYLE OF THE GATE IS SIMILAR TO OTHER FENCES USED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED. C THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND THE LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE FENCING DOES NOT DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE FENCING IS IN LINE WITH OTHER PRE-EXISTING FENCING WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY. EITHER SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THIS DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS FOR, UH, THE, THE 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. I, WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, IS THERE A SECOND, JILL? SECOND. UH, COMMISSIONER TILL GETS A SECOND. UH, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO, UH, DISCUSSION, I JUST WANTED TO ASK STAFF, DOES, DOES THE MOTION HAVE TO STATE THAT THIS IS A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN RELATION TO THE HEIGHT, OR, OR IS THAT ALREADY IN THERE DUE TO DUE THE LETTER A THAT WAS WRITTEN STAFF, IT MUST STAY PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. OKAY. SO I WOULD, I WOULD, YEAH, I MODIFY THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO STATE THAT IT IS A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE. 'CAUSE THAT'S IMPORTANT IN GRANTING THE VARIANCE SHOULD HAVE PASSED. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER THIEL, WILL YOU ACCEPT THAT CHANGE THE SECOND? YES. YES. YES. GREAT. UH, WE'LL START THE DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER ZUMAN. YEAH, SO I, I'M SUPPORTING, I MEAN, WE SAW EVIDENCE OF THE PICTURES THAT STAFF PROVIDED SHOW THAT THE, THE VARIANCE REALLY ONLY AFFECTED THE PEAK OF THE ORNAMENTAL PIECE OF THE GATE. OTHERWISE THE FENCE, UH, IS O PROBABLY OPEN, PROVIDES FOR FIRE SAFETY WHERE HOSES CAN GET THROUGH. AND VISUALLY THERE'S NO, UM, YOU KNOW, ISSUE WITH THE FENCE BLOCKING, UH, YOU KNOW, SIDE CARS MOVING OUTTA THE DRIVEWAY OR ANY OTHER, UH, ISSUES THERE. SO I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION THAT'S READ. GREAT. COMMISSIONER THIEL. I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ANY ISSUES, UH, PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD TO ME, SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT. AWESOME. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT? UH, I WILL. I WILL ALSO ADD ON THAT, UH, GOING DOWN GOOGLE, UH, MAP VIEW, THERE'S A OF AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF HOMES UP AND DOWN THE STREET AND A BUDDING STREETS THAT HAVE FENCING ALONG IN THE, IN A VERY SIMILAR POSITION, UH, AS THIS, AS THE APPLICANT. SO WITH THAT STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ? YES, MR. CHAIRMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRECKMAN. MS. BRECKMAN. HELLO? UH, MS. BREGMAN, ARE YOU STILL THERE? I SEE HER. I'LL COME BACK TO YOU. MS. BRECKMAN. UM, MR. DELMER? I CONCUR. MS. FISHER. I CONCUR. MS. BREGMAN, LET'S TRY THIS AGAIN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. THERE WE GO. ALL MR. THIEL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, THE NEXT MOTION BEFORE US IS RELATED TO THE, UH, CLEAR VISION AND THE VARIANCE, UH, ZONING VARIANCE FOR THE A D U UH, STAFF. UH, BEFORE MOTION IS MADE, UH, UH, CAN YOU PLEASE SPECIFY WHY THIS IS A CLEAR VISION ISSUE? IF IT'S A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE, UH, WHEN YOU ANGLE A, A WR IRON FENCE, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT A CERTAIN ANGLE, THAT WR IRON FENCE BECOMES ONE SOLID FENCE. UM, OKAY. SO JUST TOOK A LOOK AT IT AND THEY WERE FINE WITH IT. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP BEFORE MOTIONS ENTERTAINED IT. WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION? I'LL TAKE THE MOTION FOR THIS AS WELL. OKAY. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2, I MOVED UP THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS. ONE, A SEVEN FOOT EIGHT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION FIELD REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE SEVEN FEET FOUR INCHES AWAY FROM THE STREET. TWO ZONING VARIANCES FROM THE ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT REQUIREMENTS TO ALLOW A ROOF PITCH AND FORM NOT IDENTICAL TO THE PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE. AND B, THE PARKING SPACE TO BE LOCATED WITHIN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT OR MOSA DRIVE, I FORGET THE ADDRESS HERE. 10 14 WEST HERMOSA. APPLICANT BEING BEAR ENGINEERS AND ASSOCIATES. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY [02:40:01] PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC IN THIS CASE, GIVEN FENCE AND A D D U PLACEMENT. THE VARIANCE ASSISTS TO CLEAR VISION AND A D D U REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT CONTRARY TO THE GENERAL HEALTH AND SAFETY OF PASSERBY AND WILL NOT DISTRACT THE UNI FROM THE UNIFORMITY OF THE COMMUNITY. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. STAFF FINDS THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD CREATE 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, IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE STRICT LETTER OF A LAW. THE INTENT OF THE CLEAR VISION IS TO INCREASE VISIBILITY WHEN ENTERING EXIT, EXIT, UH, ENTERING, I GUESS EXITING PROPERTIES AND LIMIT HARM TO THE PLANT. SURVIVE THE CONS. THE CONSTRUCTED FENCE WITHIN THE CLEAR VISION WOULD CAUSE A SITE ISSUES. THERE IS ADEQUATE SPACE AVAILABLE IN THE FRONT YARD TO ACCOMMODATE TWO CARS THAT CAN BE USED AS PARKING SPACE FOR THE ACCESSORY YELLING, ACCESSORY DETACHED WELDING UNIT. THE PITCHED ROUTE WILL NOT PUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WILL NOT PUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE VARIANCE. WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED TO THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OF THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THE VARIANCE. FIVE VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE SUBSTANTIAL CARE OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UH, THE BOARD FINDS THAT HAVING LESSER CLEAR VISION WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF AN ADJACENT PROPERTY. THE REQUEST TO HAVE A PITCH ROOF INSTEAD OF GABLE ROOF TO THE A D D U DOES NOT SEEM TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THE EXISTING FRONT YARD PARKING AREA COULD NOT PROVIDE, UH, AREA COULD PROVIDE PARKING SPACE FOR THE A D D U RESIDENT WITHOUT DISTRACTING THE CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, SIX APPLIED. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR A VARIANCE OF 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. THEY'RE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. ANYBODY WANT A SECOND TEAL? SECOND. OKAY. MOTION. UH, COMMISSIONER Z IS SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THIEL. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, PLEASE LEAVE A DISCUSSION. UH, SO BY FIRE ALARM IS GOING OFF IN MY BUILDING RIGHT NOW. UM, I'M GONNA , I I GOTTA, I SUPPORT THE MOTION. HOLD ON. I'M GONNA GO, UH, KIND OF TRAVELING WITH MY PHONE IF THAT WORKS. 'CAUSE I'M LEADING TO EVACUATE. CAN Y'ALL SEE ME STILL? I'LL BE IN, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS WELL. I, I DON'T THINK THAT THE BUILDING IS, ASIDE FROM THE MATERIAL, WHICH IS NOT UP FOR DEBATE, UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY OUT THAT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE'S A QUITE A DIVERSITY OF HOUSING STOCK IN THAT AREA AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PROJECTS THERE, UH, THEY'RE GONNA BE SUBJECT TO THE PERMITTING PROCESS AND THEREFORE I THINK WE SHOULD, I, I BE IN SUPPORT. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO, UH, CHIME IN? SHELL, COMMISSIONER SHELL? UM, I KI I KIND OF WISH THIS MOTION WAS SPLIT UP BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE CLEAR VISION ON THE FENCE. UM, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE VARIANCE FOR THE A D U, UM, EITHER VARIANCE FOR THE A D U, UH, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THEY WENT, UM, AND APPLIED FOR A PERMIT AND WERE DENIED A PLAN REVIEW. UM, BUT ALSO IT DOES NOT MATCH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING. OKAY. UM, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE COMMENTARY? UH, IF COMMISSIONER MAY MM-HMM. . SO, UM, I AGREE WITH, UH, MY COLLEAGUE MICHELLE THERE, AND SO I, YOU KNOW, AGREE THAT IT SHOULD BE SPLIT UP. AND, UM, BUT I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE SECOND, THE SECOND ONE, UH, MINIMALLY FROM, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THE, THE ROOF LINE IN THAT. UM, AND SO I THINK, I THINK THAT CAN BE CORRECTED SO THAT IT IS MORE CONSISTENT. I THINK THE PITCHES IN AN ISSUE. BUT, BUT REALLY THE, THE SHED STYLE, UH, THERE ARE SEVERAL HOMES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT, THAT DO HAVE SEAT, WHICH IS, THIS HOUSE DOESN'T, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW THAT'S AS BIG OF ISSUE AS THE SHED FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER MAN, ARE YOU, ARE YOU, UH, ALSO OPPOSED TO THE PARKING SPACE IN FRONT YARD AS WELL, OR JUST THE, THE SHED? OH, I'M OKAY WITH, I'M OKAY WITH THE PARKING SPACE, THAT'S WHY. YEAH. SO THAT PART'S FINE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, BUT I THINK THE, THE, THE, UH, THE, THE ACCESSORY DRAWING ITSELF IS OKAY. I, I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM, UH, ANY COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD ALSO BE AGAINST, UH, THE PARKING SPACE BECAUSE IF WE DO, YOU KNOW, UH, IF, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA BREAKS UP THE MOTION, UH, HE HAS THE OPTION TO KEEP THAT IN THERE OR TAKE THAT ONE [02:45:01] A AND B OUT REGARDING THE A D U. IS THERE ANYONE, MINKA COMMISSIONER MINKA? YES. I'M AN OPPOSED TO THE FRONT PARKING. OKAY. AND, UH, IT'S TOTALLY, UH, IT'S NOT A CHARACTER FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPLETELY ALL NEIGHBORHOODS REALLY. OKAY. OKAY. WELL, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, WILL YOU BE, CAN YOU, WILL YOU BE WILLING TO, UH, AMEND YOUR MOTION TO REMOVE ITEM TWO IN ITS ENTIRETY FROM THE MOTION REGARDING THE A D U? YES. UH, I AM IN FAVOR OF THAT TEAL COMMISSIONER TEAL. YOU ALSO ACCEPT? YES. YES. OKAY. SO WE, SO WE HAVE IT A, A REVISED MOTION THAT EXCLUDES ITEM NUMBER TWO FOR REGARDING ZONING APPEARANCES FOR THE A D U, FOR THE ROOF PITCH AND THE PARKING SPACE IN THE FRONT, UH, LEAVING ONLY THE CLEAR VISION ISSUE, UH, AT HAND. SO IS THERE ANY, UH, ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER COMMENTARY REGARDING THE CLEAR VISION? SO, OH, ZONA. SO I THINK WE SAW WHERE STAFF WOULD SUPPORT THE, UH, VARIANCE REQUEST ON THE CLEAR VISION, UH, ON THEIR REVIEW. OKAY. YEAH, I, I, I AGREE. UH, WITH THAT, UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL, VOTE ON, UH, THE, THE MOTION, WHICH IS NOW LIMITED TO ITEM NUMBER ONE IS READ. YES, SIR. ALRIGHT, MICHELLE, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. MS. CRUZ, MOVE ON. ALRIGHT, I'LL COME BACK TO YOU, MS. CRUZ. UH, MR. MENA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. RAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. DOMER. I CONCUR. MS. FISHER. I CONCUR. MR. KEEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ, MS. AGAIN, UNMUTE HER PHONE. UNMUTE SIX ON YOUR PHONE, MS. CRUZ. OKAY, I CONCUR. AND THEN CHAIR ORIN. I ALSO CONCUR. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, THERE'S STILL TWO OUTSTANDING ITEMS. WE HEARD, UH, THAT THERE WERE TWO COMMISSIONERS NOT IN FAVOR OF THEM. UH, IS, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT, UH, THOSE TWO, THOSE TWO COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO PERHAPS READ A MOTION OR, OR JUST SOMEONE, WOULD THEY BE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION AT ALL? SHE, MR. SHE, UM, BEFORE I READ A MOTION, UM, THE, WHAT I'M SEEING ON THE, UM, SLIDE THAT STAFF IS TYPING IN THE VOTE JUST NOW WAS FOR THE CLEAR VISION ONLY, NOT FOR THE PARKING SPACE. YEAH, THE PARKING SPACE, YES. WE'RE, WE'RE CORRECT IN THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, I'M SORRY, LET, I LOST MY PLACE HERE FOR A SECOND. LET ME FIND THE, AND WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS IS, IS THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO COMMISSIONERS WHO, WHO, UH, HAVE EXPRESSED, UM, THAT THEY ARE AGAINST AND THERE'S 10 OF US PRESENT, UH, IS THIS, I'M, I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO, UH, TO CONTINUE THIS PORTION OF IT, UH, TO A FURTHER, IS THERE ANYTHING THE APPLICANT COULD DO, UH, UH, UH, TO REVISE A MOTION, UH, IN ANYONE'S OPINION THAT WE WE'RE EVEN, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE SHOULD ENTERTAIN? UM, SO CHAIR, I'M GONNA KIND OF CHIME IN AT LEAST ON THE PARKING SPACE ISSUE. MM-HMM. . UM, SO THE CODE WAS CREATED FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AT A TIME WHEN THE CITY WAS DEVELOPED WITH, UM, THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT AND THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES INTERFERE. OH. UM, I THINK MS. CRUZ, UH, NEEDS TO BE MUTED. THERE YOU GO. UM, SO IT WAS EASIER TO PROVIDE PARKING IN THE SIDE AND REAR PAST THE FRONT FACADE IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO, UH, RENOVATE, UM, A ACCESSORY GARAGE, IF YOU WILL, INTO, UM, AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. NOW, WE KNOW AS THE CITY HAS GROWN, THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE BUILT WITH, UH, VERY LITTLE SPACE TO HAVE A DRIVEWAY LEAD TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. UM, AND SO WE'RE DEALING WITH AN, AN OLDER CODE REQUIREMENT AND NEWER DEVELOPMENT, WELL, I SHOULD SAY DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE SINCE PROBABLY AT LEAST 60. UH, SO AS A RESULT, WE HAVE A TASK FORCE THAT IS, UH, REVIEWING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, UH, PROVISION. AND THIS IS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT THEY ARE TACKLING FOR A PROPOSED REVISION TO NOT REQUIRE PARKING IN THE REAR. UH, SO THAT WAY THEY WON'T HAVE TO REQUEST VARIANCES [02:50:02] EVERY TIME IN ORDER TO ALLOW PARKING, UM, IN THEIR NORMAL PARKING AREA. 'CAUSE RIGHT NOW WHAT THEY HAVE, AND YOU MIGHT WANNA SHOW THE PICTURE OF SPACE FOR TWO CARS, A RESIDENTIAL HOME, A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT IS ONLY REQUIRED TO HAVE ONE SPACE, WHICH IS WHY WE RECOMMENDED, UM, APPROVAL OF THE ADDITIONAL OF, OF, OF THE WAIVER OF THE PARKING, UH, TO BE IN THE REAR BECAUSE THEY CAN FIT PARKING. IF NOT ALL IT IS GOING TO DO IS JUST PUSH PARKING ONTO A PUBLIC STREET. SO I WANTED TO GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT AS TO HOW THE CODE WAS CREATED AND THE ISSUES THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH, WITH NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WERE NOT BUILT, UH, THE SAME WAY AS THEY WERE BEFORE. OKAY. AND, UH, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, THE SITE PLAN AND WHAT THE PICTURES ARE SHOWING, IS THERE EVEN ENOUGH ROOM ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE PROVIDED TO DRIVE TO THE REAR? NO, SIR, THERE'S NOT. OKAY. AND IS THE ALLEY IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY A DRIVABLE ALLEY? THAT I DON'T KNOW, BUT IF YOU WERE TO UTILIZE THE ALLEY, YOU'D HAVE TO IMPROVE IT UP TO THE HOUSE. YEAH, I KNOW THAT MUCH. UH, OKAY. OKAY. SO, UH, HEARING ALL THAT IS THERE, UM, IS, IS, IS, IS THERE A COMMISSIONER I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON AT LEAST THE PARKING ISSUE. OKAY. AND HEARING NONE, UH, THAT'S THE, UH, THE REST OF THE ITEMS ARE MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA? YES. I, I'M, I'M GOING AHEAD AND READ, UM, FOR THE PARKING ISSUE, SO WE CAN BRING THAT TO A VOTE. YES. UM, OKAY. SO, UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 2, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE PARKING SPACE TO BE LOCATED WITHIN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT 1 0 1 4 WEST HERMOSA, PPLICANT BEING, UH, BEAR ENGINEERS AND ASSOCIATES. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PROVIDED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWED THE PHYSICAL CHARACT TO THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC IN THIS CASE. UM, LET'S SEE, GIVEN FENCE AND A D U PLACEMENT, THE VARIANCE IN CLEAR VISION AND A D U REQUIREMENT IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC TO GENERAL HEALTH AND SAFETY OF PASSERBY AND WILL NOT DISTRACT THE UNIFORMITY OF COMMUNITY. UH, LET'S SEE. DO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS. THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. STAFF FINDS THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD CREATE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. UH, THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED. THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. UM, UH, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE, RATHER THAN THE STRICT LETTER OF THE LAW. UH, THERE IS ADEQUATE SPACE AVAILABLE IN THE FRONT YARD TO ACCOMMODATE TWO CARS THAT CAN BE USED AS PARKING SPACE FOR THE ACCESSORY DETACHED, DWELLING THE PITCH OR STOP THERE. UH, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT, UH, FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH IS, IS LOCATED. KNOW THE USES, UH, THE NOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE, UH, SUB SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PERFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UM, LET'S SEE. THE EXISTING FRONT YARD PARKING AREA COULD PROVIDE PARKING SPACE FOR THE A D U RESIDENT WITHOUT DISTRACTING THE CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOOD SIX APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, FOR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UH, STAFF FINDS THAT UNIQUE, UH, CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST ON THE PROPERTY AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL IN A MOTION. I'LL SECOND IT. OKAY. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN, UH, FAVOR OF ALLOWING FOR THE, UH, PARKING, UH, IN THE FRONT TO, UH, ALLOW, I GUESS FOR THE, UH, AS, AS THE PARKING BILL FOR THE A O U, UM, PARTLY BECAUSE OF THE DIALOGUE THAT WAS HAD, UH, WITH STAFF WITH REGARDS TO THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY ITSELF. AND TWO, UM, YOU KNOW, DRIVING DOWN THE STREET, THERE ARE, UM, A COUPLE OF, ACTUALLY SEVERAL HOMES THAT DO HAVE, UH, TWO PARKING SLOTS WITHIN THE FRONT YARD. SO I DON'T THINK IT'S, UH, HAVING A WIDER DRIVEWAYS OUTTA CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND SO I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, GIVEN, UH, THAT THIS IS THE ONLY PLACE THAT SOMEBODY CAN PARK AT LEAST FROM OFF THE STREET, I, I'M OKAY WITH PASSING THIS, [02:55:01] UH, THE WAY I READ IT. COOL. THANK YOU. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT, I MEAN, I, IF THEY, IF IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO BUILD THE DRIVEWAY TO THE BACK AND, YOU KNOW, THEN NOT, NOT APPROVING THE, THE, THE PARKING ASPECT OF THIS IS, IS SAYING IT'S, YOU CAN NEVER HAVE AN A D U AT ALL. AND I THINK THAT THAT'S A LITTLE MORE OF AN OVERREACH. UM, AND IT'S, IT'S, SO I I, I'M GONNA BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. UH, IF THIS, IF THIS DOESN'T PASS, I THINK THAT AT, AT A MINIMUM IT SHOULD BE, THIS ONE SPECIFIC ISSUE SHOULD BE TABLED, UH, TO A MEETING WHERE WE HAVE 11 MEMBERS SEATED. UH, WITH THAT IN MIND, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER COMMENTS, MACHACA, UH, COMMISSIONER MACHACA, UH, VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE ADDITIONAL AND EXTENSIVE EXPLANATION THAT STAFF GAVE US, AND REVIEWING THE TIGHTNESS OF THE, UH, AREA AND THE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH, UH, I, I APPRECIATE WHEN THEY TELL US AT THE BEGINNING, RATHER THAN WAITING TILL THE END TO FIND THIS INFORMATION, I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD A COMMENT? SHE, COMMISSIONER, SHE, UM, I'M STILL GOING TO BE OPPOSED TO THIS. I'M ACTUALLY ON, UH, THE TASK FORCE THAT IS REVIEWING OUR A D U CODE THAT KAT MENTIONED EARLIER, AND PARKING IS A SERIOUS ISSUE FOR A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOODS. UM, WITH THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, THEY DID COME TO D S D BEFORE THEY STARTED CONSTRUCTION. UM, THEY HAD EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO BE MADE AWARE OF THE SITUATION FOR PARKING OR TO LOOK FOR VARIANCES AHEAD OF TIME. AT THIS POINT, THEY'VE CREATED THE HARDSHIP THEMSELVES BY, BY BUILDING THIS WITHOUT PROPER PERMITS, UM, OR APPROVED PLANS. SO, UM, I AM GOING TO CONTINUE TO OPPOSE IT. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY COMMISSIONER UNA? RIGHT. SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I MEAN, I THINK THE HARDSHIP WOULD THEN BE PUSHED ONTO THE NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE THE PARKING IS JUST GONNA BE MOVED TO THE ON TO OFFSITE, UH, PARKING ALONG THE CURBS. AND HERE WE HAVE A CHANCE TO CONTAIN THE PARKING ON SITE AND NOT IMPACT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I THINK CONTRARY IT, IT'LL EXACERBATE THE SITUATION BY PUSHING THE PARKING ONTO THE ROAD IF IT IS DENIED. AND SO I'M SUPPORTING THE VARIANCE FOR THAT REASON. OKAY. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? UH, MENCHACA. COMMISSIONER MENCHACA? I'LL JUST ASK, UH, LIKE TO ASK A SMALL QUESTION, IS THERE EVER LIKE A TIME LIMIT ON PARKING ON THE FRONT THAT'S EVER REVIEWED LIKE YOU DO FOR, UH, RESIDENTIAL, UM, LIMITATIONS THAT SAYS AFTER FIVE YEARS, WE'LL REVIEW THIS AGAIN, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? NO, SIR. THERE'S NOT. AH, OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THERE'S NO ONE ELSE. UH, LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MS. SHOW. NO, I DO NOT SUPPORT FISHERMAN CHAKA. I CONCUR WITH FINANCE OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. STAR SIX. MS. CRUZ. IT DID WORK. TRY IT AGAIN. I'LL COME BACK TO YOU. MR. MENA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ, LET'S TRY THIS AGAIN. ALL RIGHT, I'M GONNA TRY IT ONE MORE TIME. ALL RIGHT. MS. FISHER, I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES, I CONCUR. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN? YES, I CONCUR. AND MS. CRUZ, START SIX. START SIX. MS. CRUZ, IT'S NOT WORKING. SHE'S TRYING. OH. TELL HER TO DO A THUMBS UP OR THUMBS DOWN. DO A THUMBS UP OR THUMBS DOWN. THUMBS UP. THUMBS UP. MOTION PASSES. NINE TO ONE. THERE WE GO. OKAY. SO IT, IT'S, UH, IF THERE'S NO MOTION ON THE ROOF PITCH THAT THAT PART WILL DIE. THAT'S CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE. OKAY. ALL [8. 21-2025 BOA-20-10300141] RIGHT. SO WE'VE GOT, UH, BO O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 4 1 25 10 CINCINNATI AVENUE COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN. APPLICANT IS ROSA VALEZ. IT'S REQUEST FOR ONE A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE, TO THE MINIMUM SIZE SETBACK REQUIREMENT OF FIVE FEET TO ALLOW A NEW ADDITION, HAVING A ONE FOOT TWO INCH OVERHANG TO BE THREE FEET, EIGHT INCHES [03:00:01] AWAY FROM THE SIDE ENGINEER, AND TWO, A FOUR FOOT NINE INCH VARI. SIR, HOLD ON, PLEASE. UH, TWO, A FOUR FOOT NINE INCH VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT OF FIVE FEET TO ALLOW THE DETACHED CARPORT TO BE THREE INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. CURRENT ZONE IS R FOUR M L O D. NEXT SLIDE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED A FEW BLOCKS AWAY FROM THE ST. MARY'S UNIVERSITY. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS PREDOMINANTLY, UH, SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES. APPLICANT BUILT A NEW ADDITION ON THE SIDE OF THE EXISTING HOUSE TO USE A STORAGE AS STORAGE BUILT WITH A ONE HOUR FIREWALL. UM, THERE ARE THREE CARPORTS ON THE PROPERTY BUILT AS TEMPORARY STRUCTURES. THEY ARE NOT BOLTED DOWN, SO THEY'RE JUST SITTING ON TOP OF THE SOIL. UM, NAILS USED TO ANCHOR THE, THE METAL CARPORTS AS THE EXTENT OF IT. UH, ONE OF THE CARPORTS LOCATED IN THE REAR YARD IS WITHIN THE SIDE SETBACK AND IS THREE AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE APPLICANT IS USING THAT CARPORT AS A PATIO AND STORAGE AREA. THE APPLICANT OBTAINED A PERMIT TO BUILD A NEW ADDITION. HOWEVER, DURING INSPECTION, UM, THE INSPECTION APPROVAL IS PENDING THE VARIANCE. THAT'S WHEN THEY ACTUALLY CAUGHT IT WAS AT INSPECTION. HERE'S A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT PORTION FROM THE GUTTERS TO, TO THE, UM, TO THE RIGHT. THAT IS THE ADDITION PORTION THAT IS WITHIN THAT SETBACK. THAT CARPORT IS THE ONE THAT IS THREE INCHES AWAY FROM THAT SIDE PROPERTY LINE, AS YOU CAN SEE THERE. FOR THE CARPORT, SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE FOUR FOOT NINE INCH VARIANCE TO ALLOW DETACHED CARPORT TO BE THREE INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF A TWO FOOT NINE INCH VARIANCE THAT'S ACTUALLY INCORRECT. UM, FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING OR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, YOU CAN DROP IT TO THREE FEET, UM, WITH NO OVERHANG OR EXTEND IT, OR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES THAT EXTEND OUT. UH, SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING A TWO FOOT VARIANCE TO HAVE IT THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UH, SO THEY CAN ACTUALLY RELOCATE THAT CARPORT BY BY MOVING IT OVER. NEXT SLIDE. THE NEW ADDITION SETBACK STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT OF FIVE FEET TO ALLOW THE NEW ADDITION TO BE ONE FOOT TWO INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND B O A 21 0 3 0 0 1 4 1. BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE NEW ADDITION IS NOT OVERWHELMING IN SIZE COMPARED TO THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE. UH, THE NEW ADDITION WAS BUILT WITHIN OUR EXTERIOR FIRE-RATED ASSEMBLY, WHICH PROVIDES FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS. AND THE NEW ADDITION ALLOWS ADEQUATE SPACE, UH, FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE WITHOUT TRESPASS. THIS STRUCTURE IS APPROXIMATELY 15 OR SO FEET FROM ANY NEIGHBORING BUILDING. NEXT SLIDE. 23 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE UNIVERSITY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT, UH, ON THE LINE. UH, JESSE . SIR, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN. MEMBER PERMISSION. MY NAME IS JESSE ZUNIGA HERMES GROUP AT 55 11 SAN PEDRO AVENUE HERE REPRESENTING THE HOMEOWNER R VALDEZ. AND WE ARE HERE, UH, TO SPEAK TO THE, UH, TWO FINDINGS THERE. WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CARPORT, SO WE HAVE NO ISSUE TO MOVE THAT TEMPORARY STRUCTURE. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO RUN THROUGH THE, UH, OVERALL DESIGN? UH, YOU CAN, YOU CAN, UH, PRESENT YOUR CASE AS YOU SEE FIT, UM, WHATEVER YOU THINK WOULD BE A BENEFIT TO US. OKAY. UH, AS STAFF, AS, AS STAFF HAS PRESENTED, THIS WAS A, UH, FIVE FOOT ADDITION TO AN EXISTING HOUSE. UM, WE ARE OVER 15 FEET AWAY FROM ANY OTHER EXISTING STRUCTURE, AND WE HAVE PROVIDED A ONE HOUR UL ASSEMBLY [03:05:01] ON THIS, UH, ADDITION. AFTER WE WERE NOTIFIED THAT WE'RE INFRINGING WITHIN THE PROPERTY, OR EXCUSE ME, WITHIN THE SETBACK, WE WERE UNAWARE THOUGH OF THE CAR OR ISSUE. HOWEVER, LIKE I SAID, WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. ANY QUESTIONS? UH, ARE THERE ANY, UH, UH, BEFORE WE DO THAT, UH, STAFF, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE THAT NE NEEDS TO BE READY TO THE RECORD? NO. UM, NOTHING SENT IN, UH, TO READ FOR THE RECORD. SORRY. GREAT. UH, ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT. UM, I, I HAVE ONE QUESTION. UH, STAFF, YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT THERE WERE THREE CARPORTS ALREADY ON THE, ON THE SITE. ARE THE, CAN YOU POINT, CAN YOU KIND OF EXPLAIN WHERE THOSE ARE? I'LL BE CORRECTION. THERE'S TWO CARPORTS ON THE SITE. OKAY. AND I JUST, I DON'T KNOW WHY. I THOUGHT I HEARD THERE WERE THREE. I'LL JUST CHECK TWO CAR. THERE'S THREE CARPORT IN THE BACK. THERE'S TWO IN THE BACK, ONE IN THE FRONT. OKAY. AND, AND YOU CAN GET THERE VIA VEHICLE? OR IS IT ONE OF THE CARPORTS BEING USED AS JUST A, NOT THAT THE CARPORT PER SE IS, BUT MORE AS THE MEETING, UH, MEETING AREA. OKAY. UH, YEAH, WHEN WE WERE OUT THERE, IT APPEARED IT WAS BEING USED FOR STORAGE AND MAYBE, UH, UH, SOME SORT OF USE, BUT, BUT NOT FOR VEHICLE. OKAY. I JUST REFERRED TO IT AS A CARPORT. WAS JUST KIND OF THROWING ME OFF. IS, IS THERE ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? UH, HEARING NONE. IS THERE A, UH, KNOWING THAT THE APPLICANT, UH, IS, UH, IS ACCEPTING STAFF'S, UH, RECOMMENDATION, WOULD SOMEBODY'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO I'M GONNA READ THE, UH, FIRST UH, FOR THE, UM, FOR THE ADDITION HERE. SO REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 1, I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS A REQUEST FOR A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT OF FIVE FOOT TO ALLOW A NEW ADDITION TO BE ONE FOOT TWO INCH OVERHANG TO BE THREE FOOT EIGHT INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 2 5 1 0 CINCINNATI AVENUE, APPLICANT B AND R VALDEZ. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT FOR 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 PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE CONSTRUCTED NEW ADDITION IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST, AS IT DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT ANY SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS OR THE PUBLIC OR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. THERE IS PLENTY OF SPACE BETWEEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT BUILDING. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A 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 NEW ADDITION HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT, AND IF THE VARIANCE IS NOT GRANTED, THE STRUCTURE WOULD HAVE TO BE DEMOLISHED. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE LETTER OF THE LAW. THE NEW ADDITION HAS ONE FOOT TWO INCH OVERHANG AND IS TWO FOOT SIX INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE THAT LEAVES ADEQUATE SPACE FOR LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE TRESPASS. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE PERMITTED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. 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 REQUEST TO REDUCE THE SIDE SETBACK DOES 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 IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE ATTACHED ADDITION WAS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN AN OUR EXTERIOR FIREWALL ASSEMBLY. SIXTH APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT REALLY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE CON GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER AND IS NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE. THE NEW ADDITION MAINTAINS THE ARCHITECTURAL APPEARANCE OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL NOT DISTRACT THE HARMONY OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. END OF MOTION. IS [03:10:01] THERE, IS THERE A SECOND? I CAN SECOND. THIS IS FISHER. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MANN AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FISHER. SO I'LL BE PROVING THIS MOTION AS READ. UM, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, IT IS AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD AND I THINK THAT'S, UH, THAT, UM, THIS IS NOT, UH, INCONSISTENT WITH HOW SOME OF THEIR HOMES ARE BUILT WITH REGARDS TO ITS DISTANCE FROM, UH, WITH THAT SETBACK. SO, SO I'LL BE FINE WITH THIS MOTION. OKAY. COMMISSIONER FISHER? YEAH, I, UH, AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I FEEL LIKE, UH, THE, UH, MIX OF THE VARIOUS TYPES OF STRUCTURES WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, IS, WOULD NOT POSE ANY DIFFICULTIES. AND THE FACT THAT THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE AGREES TO SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, WILL, UH, HONOR MY SUPPORT. THANK YOU. GREAT. UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO'D LIKE TO, UH, AT THEIR POINT OF VIEW, UH, HEARING NONE, UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. THERE YOU GO. KEEP GOING. . SHE MUTED HERSELF. STAR SIX, MS. CRUZ. ALRIGHT, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA GO DOWN THE LINE AGAIN. MR. MENA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR. MS. FISHER. I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ZUNA. MR. ZUNA. STAR SIX. STAR SIX AS WELL, SIR? YEAH, I CONCUR. UH, CHAIR IAN, I ALSO CONCUR A MOTION YOU PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, NOW WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, REGARDING THE, UH, CARPORT, SETBACK AND COMMISSIONER MAN, UH, REGARDING PACE NUMBER BO A 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 1. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM SITE SETBACK REQUIREMENT OF FIVE FOOT TO ALLOW THE ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE TWO FOOT AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 2 5 1 0 CINCINNATI AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING R VALDEZ BECAUSE OF TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE FISCAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE THE VARIANCE DOES NOT, 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 VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR THE SIDE SETBACK, ENCROACHMENT OF THE CARPORT IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LIBERAL 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 ANCHORED THE CARPORT TO THE GROUND, BUT IT'S TEMPORARY ANCHORS SO IT CAN BE MOVED EASILY. UH, THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIALLY 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 INTENT OF THE SIDE SETBACK AS TO PROVIDE SPACING BETWEEN NEIGHBORS STRUCTURING NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES. THERE IS ADEQUATE SPACE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE WITHOUT TRESPASS. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN IN ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO OTHER USES THEN THOSE PERMITTED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED FOR THIS VARIANCE. 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 REQUEST TO REDUCE THE SIDE SETBACK DOES NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTY AND DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACT OF THE DISTRICT SIX PLY. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SAW IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO A RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR SPEAK TO THE OWNER AND ARE NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE. THE APPLICANT HAS USED THIS CARDBOARD AS A PATIO AND STORAGE AREA FOR A LONG TIME. END A MOTION THERE. SECOND SHALL SECOND. UH, ALRIGHT. UH, THAT'S A MOTION BY MANIC SECOND BY SHALL, UH, COMMISSIONER, [03:15:01] PLEASE, UH, LEAD, LEAD TO DISCUSSION. I'LL BE VOTING IN SUPPORT OF THIS AS, UH, AS A, AS AMENDED. UM, AND SO ONE IS, UH, DOESN'T APPEAR THAT ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS, UH, HAVE TAKEN ISSUE WITH THIS. TWO IS THAT IT ACTUALLY LINES WITH THE FIRST, UH, MOTION THAT WE HAD SO THAT THE STRUCTURE WILL NOW BE ALIGNED WITH IT. AND SO PER THE ONE PICTURE WHERE IT DID LOOK OUT OF PLACE, THIS NOW PUTS IT IN ALIGNMENT. SO BECAUSE OF THOSE TWO THINGS, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. OKAY. COMMISSIONER HAW. UM, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. UM, AND IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THAT IT CAN BE MOVED EASILY AND WILL NOT CREATE ANY KIND OF HARDSHIP TO DO SO, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY, UH, OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD THEIR COMMENTS? ALL, UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE THE ROLL CALL VOTE. MICHELLE. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MECHA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. MENA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DOMER. I CONCUR. MS. FISHER. I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. AONA? YES, I CONCUR. AND CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR. A MOTION PASSES. UH, THE NEXT, UH, MOTION, UH, REGARDS THE, UH, I'M SORRY. THE NEXT CASE, UH, REGARDS. UH, ITEM NUMBER NINE, PLEASE. ALL [9. 21-2065 BOA-20-10300140] RIGHT. WE'RE AT VO A 21 0 3 0 0 1 4 0. THE ADDRESS IS 5 35 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY AND 3,500 BLOCK OF NORTH FLORIDA STREET COUNCIL DISTRICT. THIS SHOULD SAY ONE. UH, THE APPLICANT IS SCOTT DYE. REQUEST FOR ONE, A ONE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE FIVE FOOT, UH, MINIMUM SIZE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT WITH A SIX INCH OVERHANG TO BE FOUR, FOUR FEET FROM SIDE PROPERTY. LINE TWO. A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A SIDE DIRECT FENCE TO BE EIGHT FEET TALL. THREE. A TWO FOOT VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT MINIMUM SIDE. THAT CURRENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. FOUR, A SIX FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT STEPBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE FOUR FEET SIX INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. FIVE. A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A SOLID WOOD FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE FOUR FEET, TWO INCHES TALL IN THE FRONT YARD. SIX. A VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM PARKING STANDARD AND SEVEN VARIANCES FROM THE OFFICE AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO INCLUDE, UH, A CARPORTS MAINTAINED THE SAME ROOF LINE AS A PRIMARY STRUCTURE. B, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A SOLID WOOD FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE FOUR FOOT TWO. WHICH TALL CURRENT ZONING IS R THREE NCD TWO FOR CLARIFICATION, JUST SO YOU CAN GET A CLEAR PICTURE. UH, THERE WAS AN ACCESSORY DWELLING IN THE BACKYARD. UH, THEY DID REZONE TO R THREE TO ALLOW THE, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY BE SPLIT, UH, THROUGH PLATTING. SO THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS OF PLOTTING THE PROPERTIES INTO TWO, THUS CREATING THE HARDSHIPS WITH SETBACKS AND AND SO FORTH. NEXT SLIDE. SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF WEST KINGS HIGHWAY AND NORTH. WHAT A STREET. THERE ARE TWO STRUCTURES ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, INCLUDING ONE FACING WEST KINGS HIGHWAY AND THE SECOND FACING NORTH FLORIDA STREET. THE STRUCTURES FACING NORTH FLORIDA STREET USED TO BE A DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING, BUT THE APPLICANT IS CURRENTLY RELIGHTING THE PROPERTY, WHICH WOULD CAUSE THE STRUCTURE TO BE A PRIMARY STRUCTURE ON ITS OWN LOT. THE REQUEST IS FOR, UH, VARIANCES TO THAT SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR BOTH STRUCTURES UPON THE SITE VISIT, UH, CONDUCTED BY B O A STAFF. OTHER VARIANCES WERE OBSERVED INCLUDING THE SIDE SETBACK FOR THE ATTACHED CARPORT AND A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE SIDE YARD FENCE FOR THE WEST KINGS HIGHWAY STRUCTURE. UM, ALSO A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE FRONT YARD FENCE TO THE NORTH FLORIDA STREET STRUCTURE VARIANCES ARE ALSO REQUESTED TO, UH, TO THE ALT VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT. HERE'S A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN AND HOW THE PROPERTIES WILL BE SUBDIVIDED. HERE'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. I'M GONNA WALK IT, UH, SLOWLY TO GIVE YOU A BETTER PICTURE OF WHAT'S GOING ON. THERE WAS PREVIOUSLY A CARPORT IN THE SAME, UH, FORMAT AS, AS THE ONE THAT THEY'RE BUILDING NOW, SINCE IT WAS DEMOED THAT CAUSED THE ISSUE WITH THE SETBACK AND THE, UH, VARIANCE OF THE M C D, AGAIN, IT DID MATCH THE PREVIOUS CARPORT. THEY JUST SIMPLY REPLACED IT. WHEN WE WERE OUT THERE, WE DID NOTICE THAT THE CARPORT WAS A LITTLE CLOSER TO THAT SIDE YARD. ALSO, ALONG THAT SIDE YARD, THERE'S AN OLD EIGHT FOOT FENCE, [03:20:01] UNCLEAR WHETHER IT WAS, SAY WHO BUILT IT OR THE NEIGHBOR, AND IT'S ONLY A SMALL PORTION THAT BASICALLY ALIGNS THAT CARPORT. UH, WE ADDED THAT EIGHT FOOT FENCE TO MAKE IT A CLEANER, UH, A CLEANER APPROACH. NEXT PHOTO. BEYOND THAT, IT DOES MEET ALL THE N C D STANDARD REQUIREMENTS. AGAIN, THAT IS THE FRONT STRUCTURE FACING WEST KINGS HIGHWAY AND THE CARPORT. AS, AS WE MENTIONED, THAT'S THE FENCE THAT I WAS REFERRING TO, JUST THAT PORTION HERE. THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO THE BACK. BECAUSE IT IS ON FLOODED STREET, WE ARE NOW LOOKING AT A FRONT SETBACK ISSUE. AND IF YOU'LL NOTICE THE FENCE ITSELF WAS IN LINE WITH THE BACK FENCE OR SIDE YARD FENCE, THE MAIN STRUCTURE. BUT BECAUSE IT IS BEING SUBDIVIDED, THAT NOW BECOMES THE FRONT YARD. IT'S A LITTLE SEMANTIC, BUT IT IS, UM, WHY WE'RE HERE. NOW. THE N C D DOES LIMIT THE, THE SOLID FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD TO TWO FEET. WE'RE AT FOUR FOOT AND CHANGE AND IT ONLY GOES OUT OF CERTAIN DISTANCE. THERE IS CURRENTLY NO PARKING FOR THAT REAR STRUCTURE. SO THAT IS THE OTHER VARIANCE THAT WE'RE REQUESTING AS WELL. THE VARIANCE FROM THE PARKING STANDARD. AND THAT'S THE FENCE SIDE OF FOUR FOOT TWO. THAT'S THE MAIN HOUSE ON WEST KINGS HIGHWAY, ALONG WITH THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES SURROUNDING AREA FOR THE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES AND PARKING WAIVER STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF VOA 21 0 3 0 0 1 4 0 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF EFFECT, THE ATTACHED CARPORT WILL BE FOUR FEET AWAY FROM THE EASTERN SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE STRUCTURE FACING NORTH WATER STREET WILL BE THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE NORTHERN SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND ON STREET PARKING IS AVAILABLE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA SIDE YARD FENCE. AND, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS ACCRUAL BASED ON THE SIGNS OF FACT. THE ADDITIONAL TWO FEET IN HEIGHT IS REQUESTED FOR A PORTION OF THE ISSUANCE SIDE YARD FENCE. AND THE ADDITION, THE ADDITIONAL TWO FEET IN HEIGHT WILL PROVIDE MORE PRIVACY AND SECURITY, WHICH, UH, PROMOTES HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE, FRONT YARD FENCE, SPECIAL EXCEPTION, AND N C D VARIANCES. UH, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND DENIAL BASED ON THE FOLLOW UPON THIS FACT. THE FRONT YARD FENCE IS FOUR FOOT TWO INCHES TALL. FRONT YARD FENCE HAS DESIGN ASPECTS THAT ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN REGULATIONS OF THE ALT VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD. CONSERVATION DISTRICT CARPORT HAS DESIGN ASPECTS THAT ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN REGULATIONS AS WELL. NEXT SLIDE. 27. NOTICES WERE SENT OUT. ONE WAS RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION. UH, THE ALT VISTA NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION CONCURS WITH STAFF. RECOMMENDATION, UH, WE DO HAVE SCOTT ON THE, ON THE LINE, SCOTT, UH, UH, BEFORE, BEFORE THE APPLICANT SPEAKS. UH, THIS IS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE BOARD. WE HAVE EIGHT THINGS ON THIS ONE. AND, AND CAN YOU PLEASE READ OFF THE ITEMS NUMBERS THAT YOU ARE RECOMMENDING? APPROVAL. IS IT ITEMS 1, 2, 4, 5, AND SEVEN? LET ME GET THERE, SIR. MAY WE CAN LET THE APPLICANT TALK. I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE REALLY CLEAR ON THIS SO WE DON'T PLEASE. WE'RE GOING TO THE, THAT SECTION NOW SO I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU. WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR ONE, UH, [03:25:01] TWO, NOT THREE, FOUR, OR RECOMMEND APPROVAL. OR RECOMMEND APPROVAL. FIVE, UH, NOT SIX, SEVEN. WE ARE RECOMMEND APPROVAL, WHICH IS A WAIVER TO THE PARKING AND AN EIGHT WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING. OKAY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL GOT THAT ON THE BACK OF OUR MINDS AS WE, UH, GET OUR QUESTIONS READY. UH, SO IT IS RATHER CONFUSING. SO IF ANYBODY NEEDS CLARIFICATION, LET ME KNOW AND I CAN WALK YOU THROUGH IT. THANK YOU. UH, UH, MR. DI, PLEASE PROCEED WITH YOUR CASE. GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD. UH, THIS IS , ACTUALLY. UH, I THINK, UH, UH, DI WAS THE ENGINEER WHO SUBMITTED THE PAPERWORK. I'M THE PROPERTY OWNER. UM, AND THE PRESENTING, UH, UH, I, I, WE, UH, WE GET THE NAME, ADDRESS OF THE APP OF THE APPLICANT, PLEASE. PARDON, SIR. CAN WE GET YOUR NAME, YOUR ADDRESS, NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE? OH, DEFINITELY ARNOLD, A N A N D. LAST NAME IS BACHTA, B AS IN BOY, H A K T A. MY HOME ADDRESS IS 8 8 0 3 MONARCHY ROW, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 5 5. THANK YOU. PLEASE PROCEED. UM, WE, UH, UH, WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION FOR ITEMS 1, 2, 4, 5, AND SEVEN. UH, WE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY. WE HAVE NOT, UH, MADE ANY CHANGES TO IT EXCEPT FOR DOING THE RENOVATION. SO THE SETBACKS AND THE, UH, FENCES WERE ALREADY IN EXISTENCE. AND AS, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WERE BUILT WHEN, ORIGINALLY, WHEN THEY WERE BUILT IN 1930 OR BUILT AFTER THE FACT. UH, BUT, UH, WE, UH, WE ARE IN THE PRO, WE HAVE THE REQUEST WAS TO RENOVATION TO DO THE, UH, YOU KNOW, SEPARATE THE PROPERTY AND SELL IT. UH, I, I DON'T WANT TO TAKE A LOT OF THE BOARD'S TIME. I DO WANT TO DISCUSS, TALK ABOUT ITEMS THAT WERE DENIED, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, WE CAN, UH, IF I, IF I HAVE ANY REBUTTAL TO THOSE CASES. IF YOU GIMME ONE SECOND. I, I AM OKAY WITH NUMBER THREE BECAUSE AGAIN, THAT, THAT WAS IN EXISTENCE. WE ARE, UH, WE, WE ARE STILL IN THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE, SO WE CAN SHAVE DOWN A LITTLE BIT OF THAT CARPORT. UH, NUMBER SIX WAS DENIED. NUMBER SIX IS, UH, WE, WELL, THE, THE FENCE WAS THERE, BUT WE WILL REMOVE THE FENCE AND BRING IT DOWN TO THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT OF TWO FEET OR, UH, OR PUT A CHAIN LINK FENCE, UH, UH, UH, AS REQUIRED AS WHICH IS APPROVED. AND NUMBER EIGHT IS . OH, THAT'S ABOUT THE FENCE AS WELL. UH, THAT'S ALL I REALLY HAVE ON THE CASE. UH, I DON'T WANNA TAKE ANY MORE OF THE, UH, COMMITTEE'S TIME. OKAY. UM, ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THIS COMMISSIONER MANNA? YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA PROPERTY LOOKS FAMILIAR FOR SOME REASON. HAVE, HAVE WE, WAS IT, WAS THIS, HAS THIS BEEN REVIEWED BEFORE WITH, UH, WITH THE B O A? WAS THERE A PRIOR DIALOGUE ABOUT THIS, YOUR PROPERTY? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF, SIR. UM, THIS ONE JUST RECENTLY WENT THROUGH REZONING, BUT NOT ANYTHING DEALING WITH B O A ISSUES. OKAY. SO THAT'S ALL I HAD, SO I JUST LOOKED VERY FAMILIAR, SO, OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? M CHAKA, COMMISSIONER MIN CHAKA, UH, EARLIER SUGGESTION? ANY, UH, KIND OF PERMIT ISSUES ON THIS BEFORE? NO, SIR. NO PROBLEMS THERE. UH, THESE, THESE ISSUES REALLY POPPED UP WHEN WE WENT OUT TO THE SITE TO, UM, TO LOOK AT THE, THE VARIANCE REQUEST, WHICH IS REALLY FOCUSED ON THE REAR STRUCTURE AT THAT TIME IS WHEN WE NOTICED THE OTHER ISSUES AND WE WRAPPED THEM UP INTO ONE APPLICATION AND BROUGHT THEM FOR YOU. I SEE. THANK YOU. SO BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I I, I WAS THINKING ABOUT WHAT THE APPLICANT SAID, UH, UH, MR. BTA, YOU WERE, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, UH, AGREEING WITH SOME OF THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. UH, CAN, CAN, CAN YOU DISCUSS WHAT, WHAT YOU WOULD BE A AMICABLE TO? WELL, UH, THE ONLY REAL QUES UH, AMICABLE TO SIR WOULD BE THE, THE, THE FENCE THAT THEY'RE TALK, THE STAFF IS TALKING ABOUT. THEY WOULD LIKE A, UH, FENCE THAT'S NOT AS, UH, SHORTER THAN THE, [03:30:01] IT'S RIGHT NOW, CURRENTLY IT'S FOUR FEET, TWO INCHES ON THE NORTH FLORIS SIDE, UH, OF THE, OF THE HOME. THIS, THAT HAS THE FRONT YARD. NOW, ORIGINALLY IT WAS A CHAIN LINK FENCE, AND, UH, WELL, WE PUT ICE, WE PUT A, WE PUT A, A, A WOOD LITTLE WOOD FENCE UP. UH, BUT IF, IF THE STAFF WANTS TO GO BACK TO THE CHAIN LINK FENCE, WE'RE WELCOME TO DO IT. BUT I THINK THE WOOD FENCE DOES LOOK BETTER. UH, UH, AND IT IS NOT OBSTRUCTING ANY TURN, UH, AS IT IS NOT AT A HARD CORNER. UM, AGAIN, IF, IF, IF, IF WE HAVE TO CHANGE IT, WE'LL CHANGE IT. BUT IF THE STAFF, IF IF THE COMMITTEE DECIDES TO LET US LEAVE WHAT WE HAVE IN PLACE HAVE IN PLACE, UH, THAT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. UM, AND THAT, AND THAT WOULD BE ITEM, UH, SIX AND EIGHT AS IT, IT DISCUSSES THE, UH, UH, SAME ITEMS, UH, THE, THE WOOD FENCE THAT'S AT THE 35 10 NORTH FOREST HOME ADDRESS. UH, OKAY. AT, WELL, I WANTED TO ASK BECAUSE IN, IN, IN RECORD PICTURES, THE FENCE WAS A, A WHITE PICKET FENCE THAT WASN'T, UH, SOLID. IT, IT, IT, IT WAS STAGGERED EVERY OTHER PICKET. UH, BUT IT'S SOLID NOW. YES, SIR. OKAY. AND, AND THIS WAS DONE BY MY TENANT. UH, WE HAVE A TENANT IN THE HOUSE AND HE DECIDED TO DO SOME UPGRADES. SO HE ACTUALLY, UH, DECIDED TO BUILD A BRAND NEW FENCE INSTEAD OF LEAVING IT UP AS AN ALTERNATE TENANT, UH, TENANT. UH, SO WE, WE WOULD PROBABLY GO BACK TO THE SAME SIMILAR LOOK THAT WE HAD AS YOU RECOMMENDED, OR AS YOU REFER TO AS AN ALTERNATED. I THINK HE DID IT TO JUST ENCLOSE OFF THE AREA BECAUSE THEY HAVE A DOG ON PROPERTY. SO THEY HAVE A SMALL, I THINK TWO SMALL DOGS AND THEY DIDN'T WANT 'EM TO ABLE TO GET OUTTA THE FENCE. OKAY. THAT WOULD BE MY GUESS, SO, OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS, UH, LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION AT THIS TIME? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER FISHER IS, WHEN WILL THE REPLANNING PROCESS BE COMPLETE? THAT I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION? NO, THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS. IT WENT THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS TO GET THAT DONE. I JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE IN THE PLANNING PROCESS, BUT THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO FINISH THE PLA PROCESS UNTIL THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PROCESS. OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO KNOW. THANK YOU. AND TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT THE FENCE EARLIER ABOUT CHANGING IT BACK, UM, SO THE N C D LIMITS A FRONT YARD FENCE TO TWO FOOT IN HEIGHT. IF IT'S A SOLID MATERIAL, IF IT'S PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, UM, THEY WOULD BE LIMITED TO FOUR FEET. AND I DON'T BELIEVE HE CAN GO BACK TO A CHAIN LINK. WELL, THERE, THERE, UH, I WAS LOOKING AT A PICTURE. IT SHOWED IT TO BE, UH, LIKE A, A WHITE PICKET FENCE WITH ALTERNATING SLATS. EVERY OTHER SLATT WAS PUT IN. RIGHT. SO HE MENTIONED, HE MENTIONED GOING WITH A, UM, A CHAIN LINK. AND THIS N C D SPECIFICALLY SAYS, UH, THAT TYPE OF MATERIAL WOULD BE PROHIBITED. SO WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS. UH, IS WHEN WHOEVER MAKES THIS MOTION STAFF, UH, IF, IF THE APPLICANT WISHES TO GO BACK TO THE, UH, ALTERNATING PICKET WHITE PICKET FENCE, SORT OF A LOOK, IT'S NOT 70% PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, BUT ARE WE ALLOWED TO ENTERTAIN SUCH A, A, A VARIANCE TO SAY IT'S, IT CAN BE FOUR FOOT TALL WITH IT BEING LESS THAN 70%? OR DOES THAT HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC WITH THE, UH, WITH THE APPLICATION? UH, BECAUSE IT SAYS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A SOLID WOOD FENCE TO BE FOREFOOT TO, COULD IT COULD, COULD THE MAKER OF THE MOTION SAY A SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO ALLOW A, UH, A NONSOLID WOOD FENCE TO BE FOUR FOOT TWO? YEAH, YOU CAN ACTUALLY, YES, SIR. OKAY. WE CAN CALL IT OUT AND WE'LL PUT THAT IN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. IT'S LIKE A 50 WITH LIKE A 50% PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. THAT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO WHAT THEY HAD BEFORE. I'M JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE FOR WHOEVER GETS TO BE THE LUCKY ONE ON THIS ONE. THIS IS GONNA BE A LONG MOTION. UM, OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WELL, YOU NEED THE PHONE NUMBER. THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, SO GOING BACK TO THE MOTIONS HERE, AS THEY'RE CURRENTLY PRESENTED HERE, IF WE LEAVE OUT EACH OF THE, UM, UM, SECTIONS HERE THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED THAT, UH, THEY CAN KEEP A WORK WITHOUT, OR WORK OR WORK WITH, SO BASICALLY IF WE LEAVE OFF SIX AND THREE OUT OF OUR MOTION, UM, BASICALLY THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE GRANTED FOR THOSE AND THEREFORE IT WOULD MEET HIS NEEDS AND 7, 7 4, UH, READ. OKAY. IS THAT CORRECT? DOES THAT MAKE MAKE SENSE WHAT I'M READING OR SAYING? WELL, WE, WELL, SIX IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, HAS TO BE READ SEPARATELY THAN THREE, UH, REGARDLESS, RIGHT. BUT, UH, [03:35:01] BUT WE COULD LEAVE THREE OUT, UH, AND THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING, UH, AND THAT, AND THAT IS, UM, AND I ONLY PUT THAT OUT THERE ABOUT THE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WITH THE WOOD FENCE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1930 AND HISTORICALLY, IF IT HAD A, AN ALTERNATING PICKET SORT OF SENSE, I, I KNOW I PERSONALLY MAY NOT BE OPPOSED TO IT, BUT I, I'M, I'M JUST TRYING TO SEE, TRYING TO GET TO A PLACE WHERE MAYBE WE CAN GET PEOPLE HAPPY OR, OR AT LEAST GET TO AN ANSWER. BUT, BUT DEFINITELY, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GO THROUGH DISCUSSION, WHEN, WHEN THIS THING, WHEN A MOTION IS MADE ON THIS, UH, WE'LL START WITH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. AND THEN WHEN WE GO TO THE VARIANCE, WHAT I'M REALLY LOOKING TO HEAR FROM THE COMMISSIONERS ARE THINGS THAT THEY'RE, THAT THEY COULD, THAT THEY'RE HAPPY WITH, THEY WOULD ACCEPT, AND THINGS THAT, THAT, THAT THEY MAY BE, THAT WE MAY NEED TO, YOU KNOW, BEND A LITTLE OR, OR THINGS THAT WE JUST ARE NOT, NOT NEVER GONNA GET TO NINE VOTES. SO I'M JUST, IT'S JUST TOO MANY ITEMS HERE, BUT RIGHT. AND, AND I GUESS WHERE I WAS GOING IS, UM, SO, SO AN EIGHT WE'RE, SO RIGHT NOW THERE'S DIALOGUE ABOUT A SOLID WOOD FENCE, AND THEN ON THE OTHER MOTION THERE'S ALSO DIALOGUE ABOUT A SOLID, UH, WOOD FENCE. AND SO BOTH THOSE WOULD NEED TO BE AMENDED IF, IF WE'RE FOLLOWING THROUGH WITH, WITH YOUR THOUGHT, THEN, CORRECT? YEAH, YOU, YOU, YOU WOULD ALMOST HAVE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, SIX AND EIGHT ARE THE SAME FENCE CORRECT STAFF. RIGHT. IT'S JUST THAT WE'RE GETTING A VARIANCE FOR THE, THE REGULAR HEIGHT AND THEN A VARIANCE FOR THE N C D REQUIREMENT, WHICH IS VERY SIMILAR. OH, A HEIGHT ISSUE. YEAH. SO, SO THE, SO IF YOU, SO WHEN, WHEN THE MOTION IS MADE ON THE, ON SPECIAL, UH, ON THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, SIX AND AND EIGHT ARE SIMILAR, BUT THEY DO HAVE TO BE MADE SEPARATELY BECAUSE ONE'S A VARIANCE AND ONE'S AN EXCEPTION, BUT IT THE SAME SENSE. GO AHEAD, BRAGG. UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO I HAVE A QUESTION. UH, STAFF HAD SAID THAT THEY CAN'T PROCEED WITH THE RE PLATTING, UH, UNTIL ALL THESE ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED. UM, IT SEEMS TO BE THAT THERE'S ONE IN PARTICULAR THAT THERE MAY NOT BE ANY OPTIONS TO, BUT I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. AND THAT'S REGARDING THE PARKING WELL, THAT, THAT WOULDN'T BE, THAT WOULDN'T BE A PART OF THE PLAING RIGHT? STAFF? YES, IT WOULD, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THEY'RE PLATING THAT, THAT REAR AREA WITHOUT A PARKING SPOT. OKAY. UM, I, I THINK THAT QUESTIONS TO ME, RIGHT? UH, SO WE DO HAVE A OPTION TO MAKE A PARKING ON THE REAR HOUSE WHERE THE FENCE IS. IF YOU GUYS, IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PICTURES, THE FRONTAL VIEW OF THE 35 10 HOME, WHICH IS THE BACK SECONDARY RESIDENCE MM-HMM. , UH, AGAIN, WHEN IT WAS BUILT IN THE 1930S, THERE WAS NO PARKING. UH, AND, AND THE, AND, AND PRIOR TO US TAKING IT OVER THERE, THERE, THOSE HOMES HAVE BEEN BEEN RENTED INDIVIDUALLY. SO THE TENANT THAT WAS, THAT HAS BEEN STAYING, OR THAT IS STAYING CURRENTLY IN THE 35 10 NORTH FLORES HOUSE HAS ALWAYS PARKED ON THE STREET. UH, IF, IF A REQUIREMENT IS PUT ON US, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO PUT A SINGLE CAR PARKING SPOT, UH, UH, ON THAT LOT WHERE YOU, WHERE YOU SEE THE FOUR FOOT TWO PI, UH, INCH SOLID FENCE, THERE IS ENOUGH ROOM FOR A SINGLE CAR. UH, AND IT, THE DRIVEWAY COULD BE MADE LONG ENOUGH FOR TWO CARS TO GO IN THERE, BUT A SINGLE CAR SPOT COULD BE CUT. UH, A CURB COULD BE REQUESTED FROM TXDOT AND A SINGLE CAR SPOT COULD BE MADE THERE. BUT WE WOULD PREFER NOT TO CHANGE THE, UH, AESTHETICS OF THE HOUSE THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR YEARS. UH, AND THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, BEEN RENTING TENANTS OUT AND CARS HAVE BEEN PARKED ON THAT STREET FOR YEARS AS WELL. OKAY. STAFF, PLEASE BRING UP THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS PROVIDED ON THE SCREEN. SO AS PART OF A FOLLOW UP QUESTION, THEN, DOES THAT CHANGE THE REQUEST FOR THE FOUR FOOT TWO FENCE? THEY WOULD STILL HAVE A, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE A PORTION FROM THE HARD CORNER GOING ALONG THE FRONT. WHAT, WHAT THE APPLICANT WAS MENTIONING IS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, THE HOUSE THAT'S SHOWN ON TOP WHERE IT, WHERE IT SAYS ONE STORY, UM MM-HMM. SIDING AND FRAME BELOW THAT, THERE'S A PORCH KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE. THE APPLICANT IS SAYING WE COULD PUT, CUT A DRIVEWAY FROM FLORES AND, AND, AND PARK ON THE SIDE OF THE HOME, AND THAT'S HOW THEY WOULD MEET THAT REQUIREMENT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR PLAT. UH, BUT THE RED, THAT, THAT AREA, THAT RED LINE THAT GOES ABOVE THE WALKWAY THAT GOES TO THE ENTRYWAY OFF THE FLOOR, IS THAT THAT WOULD STILL BE A, UH, SOME SORT OF A FENCE, WHICH WE WOULD BE ENTERTAINING. UM, IT WOULD JUST BE EXCLUDED WHERE THE DRIVER WOULD BE GOING BETWEEN THE HOME AND THE, AND THE COMMON FENCE BETWEEN THE TWO HOMES. OKAY. SO THERE IS A FENCE ALL THE WAY TO THE CORNER OF THE PROPERTY ON NORTH FLORES, UH, FROM WHAT, NOT FROM WHAT I CAN SEE FROM THE STREET VIEW, [03:40:01] BUT THEY DEMOED THAT AND BUILT ANOTHER ONE. STAFF. CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, ENLIGHTEN US ON WHAT THEY, WHAT, WHAT YOU OBSERVED OUT THERE? SO WE'RE ADDING A PHOTO RIGHT NOW, UM, THAT SHOWS WHERE THE FENCE BASICALLY STOPS AT THEIR FRONT DOOR, RIGHT WHERE THAT SIDEWALK IS. THAT'S WHERE IT STOPS, SO IT DOESN'T GO ALONG THE SIDES TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. IT JUST STOPS. OH. SO YEAH, THAT FENCE WOULD PRIMARILY GO AWAY. THERE MIGHT BE SMALL REMNANTS OF IT, BUT PRIMARILY IT WOULD BE GONE IF, IF A DRIVEWAY WERE TO BE INSTALLED. RIGHT. SHELL, SO, UH, COMMISSIONER SHELL, UM, I JUST WANNA SAY THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, I, IT'S REALLY TYPICAL TO HAVE STREET PARKING, UH, FOR THE ADUS IN THESE OLDER HOUSES. UM, AND SO THE APPLICANT'S CORRECT WHEN HE SAYS THAT PEOPLE HAVE PROBABLY BEEN PARKING ON THAT STREET FOR YEARS FOR THAT BACK HOUSE, UM, I THINK THESE ADUS WERE BILLED BEFORE OUR CODE EVEN ADDRESSED THEM. I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, STAFF COULD SPEAK TO THAT, BUT, UM, I DON'T THINK IT'S UNUSUAL TO HAVE STREET PARKING FOR THIS SCENARIO, ESPECIALLY ON A CORNER. AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT ON THE, ON THE STREET VIEW, THERE'S, THERE'S SOME NICE TREES THAT IF HE HAD TO PUT A DRIVE IN, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE KNOCKED DOWN. I AGREE. UH, IT WOULD TAKE AWAY FROM THE LITTLE GREEN SPACE THAT HAS GOT IN THE FRONT HAD IN A CAR IN FRONT OF IT. YEAH. OKAY. WELL, UM, SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE START DELVING INTO, UH, THESE MOTIONS? AND SO MANANA AGAIN, COMMISSIONER MANANA. SO, SO ESSENTIALLY, UH, I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LINE ITEM SEVEN HERE WITH REGARDS TO WAIVER FOR THE MINIMUM PARKING STANDARD. AND SO IF THEY LEAVE THAT OUT OF THE DIALOGUE, THEN IT'S, THERE'S NO, UH, OR NO, ACTUALLY WE NEED TO LEAVE IN THERE. SO THERE IS A WAIVER, RIGHT? YES. OKAY. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LISTENING. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN, UH, STAFF, UH, I DIDN'T BRING THIS UP, BUT WAS THERE ANYTHING YOU NEED TO READ? PUBLIC COMMENTARY? YES, SIR. THERE IS, LEMME GRAB THAT REAL QUICK. UH, THIS, THIS IS FROM CHRISTINA WRIGHT, PRESIDENT OF VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU KAYLA. AN CALLED WITH ME THIS MORNING AND WE CLEARED ALL OF THE AGENDA ITEMS. HE PROVIDED A THOROUGH EXPLANATION AND MOST OF THE ITEMS WERE FOR FEATURES OF THE PROPERTY THAT WERE ALREADY THERE. MY ONLY REMAINING CONCERN IS, IS THAT THE AGENDA ITEMS STILL READS. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION. A D N A WILL CHANGE OUR RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE CONTINGENT UPON THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION, NOT KNOWING WHAT THAT IS, THEN I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT MIGHT BE, UH, DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS WHAT IS ON THE AGENDA ITEM. BUT TO BE CLEAR, EVERYTHING THAT IS IN THE DESCRIPTION ON THE AGENDA ITEMS, WE ARE GOOD TO MOVE FORWARD WITH. UH, NEXT ONE IS SIMPLY AN OPPOSITION FROM A THOMAS GSON AT 5 23 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY. NEXT ONE IS FROM MICHAEL, UH, ENRIGHT, PROPERTY OWNER AT 5 37 WEST SUMMIT. UH, DEAR KAYLA, I AM RESPONDING TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REQUESTS THAT I RECEIVED RECENTLY REGARDING 5 35 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY. CASE NUMBER, I HAVE NO CONCERNS EXCEPT FOR QUESTION REGARDING ITEM SEVEN B EXCEPT FOR A SOLID WOOD FRONT YARD FENCE, UH, FOUR FOOT, TWO INCHES TALL. WOULD THE SOLID WOOD FENCE BE 50% OPEN AS CURRENTLY REQUIRED BY CITY CODE I E TICKET FENCE WHEN WITH OPENINGS BETWEEN TICKETS? IF SO, THEN I HAVE NO CONCERNS. IF NOT, I REQUEST THAT THE BOARD CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE IMPACT THAT A HUNDRED PERCENT CLOSED SOLID WOOD FENCE A WOULD HAVE ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE ARE NO OTHER 100% CLOSED SOLID WOOD, UH, FRONT YARD FENCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I'M AWARE OF. THE A HUNDRED PERCENT CLOSED FENCE, UH, CAN BE FOUND IN INDUSTRIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH A HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE ALTA VISTAS NEIGHBORHOOD. UNLIKE 50% OPEN FENCES THAT ARE TYPICALLY PAINTED WHITE AND HENCE, UH, AND ENHANCE THE HISTORIC APPEARANCE A HUNDRED PERCENT. CLOSED FENCES ARE COMMONLY UNPAINTED PINE OR CEDAR THAT RAPIDLY DETERIORATE WITH TIME. THIS WOULD HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND MAY AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES. AND THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE COMMENTS. OKAY. UM, IF THERE'S NO, UH, NO OTHER, UH, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, I, I'D LIKE TO OFFER HIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A CLOSING STATEMENT. OKAY. UM, MR. BACHTA, YOU FEEL FREE TO, UH, IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD OR STATE BEFORE WE HAVE A MOTION? UM, NO, I WOULD, I, I APPRECIATE THE BOARD'S TIME AND WE, UH, WE, UH, LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE TENANT BUILT THAT FENCE AND WE WILL, UH, MOVE THE FENCE [03:45:01] TO A 50%, UH, WITH PLANKS AND A WHITE PICKET FENCE, UH, PER THE RECOMMENDATION. UM, I, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, SO WHOEVER READS THE MOTION, WE, THE, THE FIRST ONE IS REGARDING THE VARIANCE, VARIOUS VARIANCES, AND THE SECOND ONE IS FOR THE, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS. UM, FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, THEY WOULD EXCLUDE ITEM NUMBER THREE IN ITS ENTIRETY FROM THE P PARAGRAPH. AND THEN, UM, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, HOWEVER, FOR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, UM, FROM WHAT WAS DISCUSSED AND WHAT WE HEARD IN COMMENTARY, IT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO, TO ALLOW A 50% OPEN WOOD FRONT YARD FENCE, UH, AS, AS OPPOSED TO A SOLID WOOD FENCE IF WHOEVER THE MAKER WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT IN THERE. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, ANYBODY WANNA TAKE A STAB AT THIS? COMMISSIONER UNA? SO I'M GOING TO READ THE VARIANCE FIRST AND ON THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, IF THAT'S FINE, YOU GOT IT. OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 20 DASH THREE, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR ONE, A ONE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE FIVE FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE FRONT STRUCTURE FACING WEST KINGS HIGHWAY TO HAVE AN ATTACHED CARPORT WITH SIX INCH OVERHANG TO BE FOUR FEET FROM THE EASTERN SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND I'M JUST GOING TO STAY WITH THE NUMBERING SYSTEM. NUMBER FOUR, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE TO THE FIVE FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE NORTH SIDE PROPERTY LINE. FIVE, A SIX FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE FOUR FEET SIX INCHES FROM THE, FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY. LINE SEVEN, A WAIVER FROM THE MINIMUM PARKING STANDARDS AND EIGHT, UM, A VARIANCE FROM THE VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT, UH, TO ALLOW A 50%, UH, ALTERNATING WHITE PICKET FENCE, UH, FRONT YARD FENCE, UH, SITUATED AT 5 3 5 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY AND THE 3,500 BLOCK OF NORTH FLORIDA STREET APPLICANT BEING DIED. UH, D SCOTT DIED BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN THE NECESSARY HARDSHIP. UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WITH THE, UH, MODIFICATION TO THE FENCE, THE NON SALE, THE 50% ALTERNATING WHITE TICKET, THAT THE FOUR FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, UH, REQUIREMENT WOULD, WOULD, WOULD BE ENFORCED OR WOULD, UM, COMPLY WITH THE, UM, PROVISIONS OF A HIGH REQUIREMENT OF THE FENCE. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR THE SIDE SETBACK ENCROACHMENT OF THE CAR OF THE CARPORT FOR THE STRUCTURE FACING THE WESTING HIGHWAY, IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE APPLICANT HAS ENOUGH SEPARATION FROM THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES. THE SIDE STEP BACK TO THE STRUCTURE FACING NORTH FLORIDA STREET IS ALSO REQUESTING A REDUCTION TO THREE FEET, WHICH DOES NOT POST ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS. THE VARIANCE TO THE ALVI N C D DESIGN STANDARDS ARE MINIMAL AND NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE RESULT OF UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED, WOULD RESULT IN A UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP FOR THE APPLICANT. 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 EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE SIDE SETBACK IS TO PROVIDE SPACING BETWEEN NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES AND THE INTENT OF THE ALTA VISTA N C D DESIGN STANDARDS IS TO PROMOTE UNIFORMITY IN IN THE COMMUNITY. THE APPLICANT WILL MAINTAIN SPACE BETWEEN STRUCTURES AND THE DESIGN OF THE CARPORT IN THE FRONT YARD FENCE ALONG NORTH BOY STREET WILL NOT STRAY FROM THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. ON STREET PARKING IS ALSO AVAILABLE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AND IS, UH, CONDITION PRECEDENT ON PROCEEDING ON THE PROPERTY. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE OF SOUGHT IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT FIVE SIX EXPERIENCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE SITE SETBACK TO THE EASTERN AND NORTHERN AND NORTHERN PROPERTY LINES AND THE REQUEST FOR VARIANCES FROM THE N C D DESIGN GUIDELINES DO NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND DOES NOT SEEM UNLIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX. THE FLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE 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, ARE THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS AND THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY ARE NEEDED DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT WHEN DUE TO THE OWNER AND IS NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE GIVEN THE OTHER DESIGN STANDARDS BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE NE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT THROUGH REQUESTED VARIANCES ARE IN LINE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND [03:50:01] OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SO A SECOND GOES TO COMMISSIONER SHELL AND BEFORE WE PROCEED ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, STAFF, UH, EASE. I DON'T RECALL IF HE, IF THE WORD OR I GUESS I'LL JUST ASK YOU, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, DID YOU SPECIFY A WOOD FENCE AND I DID THAT. SO I I WOULD ADD THAT A WOOD FENCE WOULD BE AN APPLIC, UH, WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE MATERIAL. OKAY. AND I, BUT I DID HEAR YOU SAY WHITE TICKET 'CAUSE I KNOW THAT'S WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. ARE WE ALLOWED TO SPECIFY COLORS AND THAT'S FOR STAFF? IS THAT SOMETHING I DON'T THINK WE CAN, I MEAN ULTIMATELY THEY PREDOMINANTLY OPEN THE PERCENTAGES. YES. OKAY. UM, BUT ONCE YOU START JUMPING INTO COLORS. OKAY. OKAY. SO A FAN TONE NUMBER 10 WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE. UH, SO NON SAL ALTERNATING KICK FENCE, 50% OPENNESS FOR WOOD FOR A WOOD PICKET FENCE. WOOD FOR WOOD FENCE. YES. OKAY. SO IS THAT OKAY, COMMISSIONER, SHELL, YOU MAY THE SECOND? YES, THAT'S FINE. OKAY, FANTASTIC. UH, COMMISSIONER, AND FOR MY RECORDS AND FOR MY RECORDS, LEMME JUST MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR. IT WAS ITEM 1, 4, 5, 7, AND EIGHT WAS 50% FRONT YARD WOOD, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE. YES. WAS THERE A HEIGHT STIPULATION? DO WE NEED TO PROVIDE A HEIGHT STIPULATION OR IS IT OR NOT YOU'RE, YOU'RE AT FOUR FEET? UM, HE DID SAY FOREFOOT. HE DID OKAY. F YOU FOUR FEET. OKAY. NO, THAT'S GREAT. SO THAT'S, UM, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, PLEASE LEAVE THE DISCUSSION. WELL, SO I AM SUPPORTING THE VERY, THE, THE, THE VARIANCES AS READ. UH, THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, MADE A SIZABLE INVESTMENT IS BRINGING THE PROPERTIES UP TO A NICE CONDITION. I THINK IT BEAUTIFIES AND PROVIDES INVESTMENT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO KIND OF CONTINUE ON WITH, UH, WITH KIND OF IMPROVING THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK ALL THE, ALL THE VARIANCE REQUESTS ARE, ARE IN LINE AND HAVE SUPPORT. AND WITH THE CHANGES TO NUMBER EIGHT, I AM IN SUPPORT OF THE VARIANCES AS REQUESTING. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER, SHE, UM, YES, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND I WILL BE SUPPORTING, UH, THE MOTION AS AMENDED. GREAT. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD THIS TO THE DISCUSSION? BRAGMAN, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, DID WE ADDRESS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN WITH A MINIMUM PARKING? YES, THAT WAS INCLUDED, BUT IT WAS INCLUDED AND THE, MY COMMENT THERE IS THAT THE HISTORICAL USE OF THE PROPERTY HAS ALWAYS INCLUDED KIND OF THE OUTSIDE PARKING. I DON'T THINK IT, IT WOULD PROVIDE ANY OUTSIDE, UH, BURDEN TO CONTINUE WITH THE OFFSITE PARKING. OKAY. AND SO THAT DOESN'T, BY RETTING THAT DOESN'T TRIGGER, UH, A NEED FOR, UM, OFF STREET PARKING? I GUESS THAT'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF. SO DURING THE, IF THIS WERE TO BE GRANTED THE WAIVER, IT'D BASICALLY BE ATTACHED TO THE FLAT, UM, DURING THAT PLATTING PROCESS. SO COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU PLANT LAND ON SOMETHING WHERE THERE'S EXISTING USE AND OCCUPANCY, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CREATE A CONDITION THAT'S A VIOLATION OF THE CODE. SO BY THEM PUTTING THAT LOT LINE THERE, THAT'S, THEY WOULD EITHER HAVE TO CREATE A ONSITE PARKING SPACE OR GET A VARIANCE. UM, AND NORMALLY YOU WOULDN'T SEE THAT ON A VACANT LOT BECAUSE YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE, YOU CAN DO ALMOST WHATEVER YOU WANT, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE IT'S A VACANT LOT. BUT IN THIS CASE, THERE'S ALREADY A STRUCTURE AND AN OCCUPANCY IS TIED TO IT. SO THEY HAD, THEY JUST CAN'T FLAT A CONDITION THAT VIOLATES THE CODE. WELL, ALL RIGHT. SO THEN THE QUESTION IS, IF DOES THE CURRENT CODE, WOULD IT REQUIRE A, AN OFF STREET PARKING SPEC? IT WOULD REQUIRE AN ON STREET. UH, I MEAN AN OFF IT WOULD, IT WOULD REQUIRE ONE SPACE FOR, FOR, UM, OFF STREET PARKING. SO THEY, SO WHAT WOULD HAPPEN WAS IF WE DID NOT PASS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE FORCED TO BUILD A DRIVEWAY OFF OF FLORES, KNOCK DOWN THOSE TWO TREES AND, AND PUT A, A PARKING SPACE RIGHT NEXT TO THE FRONT DOOR. OKAY, BUT ISN'T THAT GONNA BE THE SAME REQUIREMENT WHEN THEY REPL? NO, NO. THAT, THAT WILL BE A REQUIREMENT. THEY'LL HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEY'RE, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT THEY HAVE, THAT THESE ARE TO NOT HAVING TO DO IT BY VARIANCE OR THEY'RE GONNA MAKE A BILLBOARD. OKAY. SO BY PASSING THIS MOTION, IT ALLOWS THEM TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A REPLOTTING, AND THEN THE REQUIREMENT WILL, WILL KICK IN FOR THE OFF STREET PARKING SPACE. IS THAT IT WILL NOT BE A REQUIREMENT. THEY'RE, THEY'RE GETTING A WAIVER FROM THAT. THAT'S WHAT ITEM SEVEN IS FOR. OKAY. SO YEAH, IF, IF YOU WANT THEM TO NOT HAVE AN OFF STREET PARKING, IF YOU WANT THEM TO HAVE A DRIVEWAY IN A PARKING SPACE, THEN YOU WOULD BE AGAINST ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. AND ANY OTHER, UM, COMMENTARY? [03:55:01] THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. THANK YOU. YEAH, NORMALLY, LIKE I SAID, NORMALLY THIS WOULDN'T APPLY 'CAUSE MOST PLANTS ARE VACANT LAND, BUT IN THIS CASE, ANYTIME YOU HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT IS OCCUPIED, YOU CAN'T CREATE AN ILLEGAL CONDITION TO DO IT. YES. THANK THANKS AS WELL. YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT. NO PROBLEM. SO, UH, IS THERE ANY, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? YEP. MR. CHAIR, SO IT'S ALL UP OR DOWN, RIGHT? WE'RE VOTING FOR ALL THE VARIANCES OR YES, NO, YES, WE ARE AT THIS. SO ITEM THREE WAS A VARIANCE AS WELL FOR THE N C D STANDARDS FOR THE CARPORT THAT WAS EXCLUDED. CHARGE DENIED. YEAH, EXACTLY. THAT WAS EXCLUDED FROM THIS. SO IT'LL BE DENIED BY, BY VIRTUE OF NOT TAKING A STANCE OR MOTION ON IT, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. SO WITH THAT, UH, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE THAT I WILL HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE FOR THE VARIANCE COMPONENT OF THIS TRUTH. MICHELLE, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANCHACA CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, MS. MANNA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. DELMER. I CONCUR, MS. FISHER. I CONCUR. MR. THIEL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. UNA. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND SHARE ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FINDING OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT ITEM IS FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UH, FOR THE FENCING. UH, COMMISSIONER UNA, YOU MENTIONED YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE THAT ONE? YES. YES, SIR. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 20 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 4 0, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT NUMBER TWO, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A SIDE YARD FENCE TO BE EIGHT FOOT TALL. UM, AND NUMBER SIX WOULD BE, UH, EXCLUDED FROM THE EXCEPTION, UM, PROJECT LOCATED AT 5 3 5 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY AND THE 3,500 BLOCK OF NORTH FOURTH STREET. APPLICANT BEING, UH, D SCOTT DIED BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN A NECESSARY HARDSHIP. UM, NUMBER SIX WOULD BE AMENDED TO ALLOW A, UH, ALTERNATING WOOD PICKET FENCE, 50%, UM, SURFACE AREA. AND UH, SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT A, THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HIKE IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE SECURITY OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. THE REQUEST TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF A PORTION OF THE SIDE YARD FENCE ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE AND THE FRONT YARD FENCE ALONG NORTH FORD STREET WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE PURPOSE OF THIS ORDINANCE. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED AND A FOOT TALL FENCE ALONG THE PORTION OF THE EASTERN SIDE WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. AND A, UM, AND THE FRONT YARD FENCE WILL PROVIDE A SOMEWHAT ENCLOSED BASE FOR THE SMALL LOT. THIS IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. SEE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE DEFENSE WILL ENHANCE THE SECURITY AND PRIVACY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. NEITHER A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND THE LOCATION OF WHICH THE PROPERTY WILL. UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF ASSAULT. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE FENCE HEIGHT DOES NOT DETRACT FROM CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE RE REGULATIONS HERE IN ESTABLISHED IN THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. UH, THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS THE CURRENT USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXEMPTION WILL NOT REEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. UH, AND OF, UH, MOTION, END OF MOTION, UH, FOR SPECIAL EXEMPTION. OKAY. SECOND, SHE, UH, COMMISSIONER SHELL HAS THE SECOND. UM, BEFORE WE MOVE ON, UH, TO, UH, TO DISCUSSION STAFF, DOES, DOES, DOES A HEIGHT COMPONENT HAVE TO BE INCLUDED REGARDING ITEM NUMBER SIX OR AS RED? IS IT, IS IT OKAY FOR ITEM SIX? WE COULD EDIT IT, YOU KNOW, JUST FOR, UM, CLARIFICATION. FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES. SO THAT WOULD BE A FOUR FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT, RIGHT? WHICH WOULD BE ALLOWED BY CODE SUBJECT TO THE OPEN. OKAY, SO WHAT? FOUR FOOT FENCE AS AS WIDER EXISTING CODE. FANTASTIC. COMMISSIONER. SHE IS THAT ACCEPTABLE? YES, I AGREE. FANTASTIC. UH, SO COMMISSIONER ZUNA, PLEASE. WE LEAD THE DISCUSSION, RIGHT? SO, UH, SAME REASONING FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST. I THINK IT'S, UH, APPROPRIATE FOR THE, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION. I MEAN THE PROPERTIES CAN BE ALTER, THE FENCE WOULD BE ALTERNATING PICKET, UM, WOOD FENCE AND IT WOULD BE IN CONFORMITY [04:00:01] WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I BELIEVE. GREAT. COMMISSIONER? SHE, YES. UM, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. UM, AND IN ADDITION, UH, BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, SUPPORTED THESE RECOMMENDATIONS, IT MAKES IT EASY TO SUPPORT AS WELL. ALRIGHT? RIGHT. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, WELL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND SAY I'M IN SUPPORT AND, UM, LET'S HAVE A VOTE PLEASE. MICHELLE, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF ACT. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. MENNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DOMER. I CONCUR. MS. FISHER. YES, I CONCUR. MR. THIEL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. AONA. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND SHARE ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MATT. MOTION PASSES, UH, UNANIMOUSLY. UH, NEXT CASE. ALL [10. 21-2066 BOA-21-10300007] RIGHT, NEXT CASE. D O A 21. 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 7 300. QUEEN ANNE COURT COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO APPLICANT IS DAVE ISAACS. REQUEST FOR VARIANCES FROM THE THANK YOU PARK NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS TO INCLUDE A TRANSITION SPACE WINDOWS, UM, THREE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT, UH, REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A DETACHED CARPORT TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY. LINE THREE, A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A DETACHED CARPORT TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE FOR A THREE FOOT VARIANCE UP TO THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A DRIVEWAY TO BE 12 FEET FROM THE SIDE FROM THE STREET. ZOIA IS R FOUR N C D SIX. NEXT SLIDE. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF QUEEN ANNE COURT AND BELLEVUE STREET. THE APPLICANT PULLED A MINOR BUILDING, UH, REPAIR PERMIT, WHICH DOES NOT REQUIRE PLAN REVIEW. UPON INSPECTION VIOLATIONS OF THE MACKEY PARK NEIGHBOR CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS WERE NOTED. UH, SO IT DID NOT PASS INSPECTION. THE REPAIR PER UH, PERMIT WAS FOR INTERIOR WORK, UH, WALLS AND, AND WINDOWS AND DOORS. A LOT OF EXTERIOR STRUCTURE WORK WAS DONE TO INCLUDE THE DEMOLITION OF A REAR CARPORT AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW CARPORT. THE HOME DID NOT HAVE THE CORRECT TRANSITION SPACE AND DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE WINDOW DESIGN AS REQUIRED BY THE MINKE PARK. UH, N C D. UPON B O A STAFF VISITING THE SITE SETBACK ENCROACHMENTS WERE NOTICED, UH, FOR THE CARPORT BEHIND THE STRUCTURE. NEXT SLIDE. SITE PLAN OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE CARPORT TO THE BACK. PRIMARY STRUCTURE SIDE. YEAH, FENCE WAS ADDED IN LATER WITH FENCE PERMITS. AND HERE'S THE CARPORT AS SET BACK TO THE REAR FOR THAT CARPORT. THE OFFENSE THAT WAS ADDED IN, AGAIN, THEY DID HAVE A PERMIT FOR THAT AND IT WAS APPROVED VIEW FROM THE CARPORT AND THE SIDEWALK. OOH. AND NOW IT'S RIGHT PLATE LATE. I'M MEETING AND DRIVE IT WITH SURROUNDING AREA THAT ALL RIGHT. RECOMMENDATION VARIANCE FOR THE REAR SETBACK AND CLEAR VISION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 0 7 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. OF FACT, THE DETACHED CARPORT WILL BE TWO FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY IS 18 FEET, EIGHT INCHES, WHICH ALLOWS FOR TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES. UH, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DID REVIEW THE CLEAR VISION AND WE'RE OKAY WITH IT VARIANCES FOR THE N C D INSIDE SETBACK STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND [04:05:01] B O A CASE, UH, 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 7. THE DETACHED CARPORT IS ONLY ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND THE STRUCTURE HAS DESIGN ASPECTS THAT ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN REGULATIONS OF THE MANKEY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT. 36 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT. TWO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, UH, ONE IN OPPOSITION, NO RESPONSE FROM MANKEY PARK. AND THEN ONE IN FAVOR OUTSIDE THE TWO FOOT AREA. I DO HAVE SOME EMAILS THAT WERE SENT IN, BUT THE, AT THE MEANTIME, WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT, DAVE ISAACS ON THE LINE, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. UH, MY NAME IS DAVE ISAACS AND I LIVE AT 2 8 0 LOREN ROAD. WE HAVE YOUR PRESENTATION UP, SIR, SO WHEN YOU'RE READY, JUST LET US KNOW WHAT PAGE AND WE'LL, WE'LL CHANGE THAT PAGE NUMBER. OKAY. WELL, IT LAGGED ON MY END, SO I'M WAITING FOR EVERYTHING TO COME UP. I GUESS IT, SO IT, THERE'S GONNA BE DELAYED. LET JUST KNOW THE SLIDE NUMBER AND THEN WE'LL GET TO IT FOR YOU. OKAY. ALRIGHT, SOUNDS GOOD. UH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND START THOUGH. UM, I, MY NAME IS, LIKE I SAID, IT IS DAVE ISAACS. I'VE BEEN A HOME BUILDER FOR 20 PLUS YEARS NOW. I'VE BUILT IN AUSTIN AND SAN ANTONIO, TER HILLS, AL HEIGHTS. AND, UH, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME EVER GETTING IN TROUBLE. I, I'M USUALLY A TYPICAL RULE FOLLOWER. I DO A LOT OF THE, UM, UH, UM, HISTORICAL DISTRICT STUFF IN SAN ANTONIO AND, AND NEVER HAVE HAD AN ISSUE. UM, THIS IS A FLAT OUT HUMAN ERROR ON MY PART. I ADMIT I'D SCREWED UP MANY, MANY YEARS OF DOING IT. THIS ONE GOT ME, THIS WAS MY FIRST NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION. UM, AND, AND THE WAY THE PROCESS WENT WHEN WE, WE, UH, I WAS DOING THIS HOUSE FOR SOME INVESTORS. WE BOUGHT THIS HOUSE WITH THE, UH, I'M LOOKING AT THE, UH, THE ONE WHERE IT SHOWS THE BE, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE BOUGHT IT AND FINISHED IT, THAT'S WHEN WE BOUGHT IT. UH, SOMEBODY ELSE HAD, HAD IT HAD GUTTED IT INSIDE. AND SO WHEN I PULLED THE PERMIT, UM, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A MINOR REMODEL, LIKE IT WAS JUST SUPPOSED TO BE A PRETTY SIMPLE DEAL UNTIL WE FOUND OUT THERE WAS JUST A LOT MORE, UM, STUFF WRONG WITH THE HOUSE THAN WHAT WE, WE WE SAW UP FRONT. UM, SO ANYWAY, WHEN I PULLED THE PERMIT, THIS WAS AGAIN, MY FIRST NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION. I HAD NEVER EVEN HEARD A NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION BEFORE THIS POINT. AND I, I WENT IN AND, UM, MET WITH JOHN, SHOWED HIM THE PICTURE, UM, WHICH I THINK WAS ON THE NEXT SLIDE, UM, OF WHAT THE HOUSE WAS GONNA LOOK LIKE. AND, AND HE, HE, YOU KNOW, HE SAID IT LOOKED FINE TO HIM. AND, AND WE WENT AHEAD AND, UH, AND IF YOU SEE THE TWO SIDE BY SIDE, THEY LOOKED PRETTY MUCH IDENTICAL, UM, MINUS THE WINDOW GRIDS AND THE WINDOW GRIDS. I HAD A LOT OF PROJECTS GOING ON, AND ORIGINALLY THESE WINDOWS WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE WINDOW GRIDS. UM, AND I, IT WAS AN OVERSIGHT ON MY PART WHEN I DID THE PROOFING FOR THE, THE ACTUAL SPECS ON THE WINDOWS. I, LIKE, I WAS CHECKING FOR SIZES AND ALL, AND I JUST MISSED IT. SO WHEN THEY CAME IN, I WAS LIKE, WHERE ARE THE GRIDS? AND THEY WERE LIKE, WELL, YOU APPROVED THEM WITHOUT GRIDS. AND I, THAT WAS AN ERROR AGAIN ON MY PART. UM, JOHN HANDED ME A PAMPHLET AND, UH, BECAUSE LIKE YOU WERE SAID, LIKE I SAID, IT, IT WAS A MINOR, UM, LIKE A MINOR REPAIR PERMIT. SO I DIDN'T HAVE, THERE WAS NO PLANNED SUBMITTAL PROCESS, WHICH I FEEL LIKE, UH, I, WE'LL GET THAT IN A SECOND. BUT ANYWAY, SO I JUST, I, I LOOKED THROUGH THE PAMPHLET. MOST EVERYTHING I SAW WAS, UM, HAD TO DO WITH DRIVEWAY PLACEMENT AND SIDEWALK PLACEMENT AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. I, AND I, I JUST MISSED THE PAGE THAT HAD THE, UM, THE ENTRANCE AND WINDOW SECTION. IT'S A PRETTY SMALL SECTION. I THINK IT'S A PAGE SEVEN, IF I'M MISTAKEN. SO ANYWAY, IT'S MY FAULT, LIKE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO SAY. I'M, I'M HERE TO ASK BEG FORGIVENESS, I GUESS I, I MADE A MISTAKE ON THIS ONE. UM, I WILL SAY THAT I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THAT IF, UM, IF, IF A A IF SOMEONE'S A FEET ARE GONNA BE HELD TO THE FIRE WITH A NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION LIKE THIS, THEN I THINK THAT THIS, NO MATTER WHAT, IT SHOULD GO THROUGH THE REVIEW PROCESS JUST LIKE HISTORICAL DOES. BECAUSE, UM, YOU KNOW, A, IT WAS NEVER TOLD AT THE BEGINNING THAT, OH, WELL, IF IT DOESN'T PASS AT THE END, YOU DON'T GET, YOU KNOW, YOUR C O O, THEY, THEY, EVERYBODY KIND OF DOWNPLAYED IT. LIKE, IT'S KINDA LIKE HISTORICAL, BUT IT'S NOT QUITE AS SERIOUS. IT'S VERY SERIOUS. I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S AS SERIOUS, IF NOT MORE SERIOUS THAN HISTORICAL, BECAUSE IF YOU CAN'T GET A C O O AT THE END, I FEEL LIKE IT SHOULD HAVE A REVIEW PROCESS. YOU KNOW, IT'S SOMETHING THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH. I MEAN, WE GO THROUGH ALL THE ARCHITECTURAL BOARD REVIEWS FOR CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, ALMA HEIGHTS, SCALE HILLS, ALL THAT STUFF. AND THIS JUST WAS KIND OF PLAYED LIKE IT WAS NO BIG DEAL. UM, AND NOW HERE I AM IN THIS, YOU KNOW, BEGGING FORGIVENESS AT THE VARIANCE MEETING NOW, SO THAT, THAT'S FOR THE WINDOWS AND THE ENTRANCE. NOW, AS FOR THE CARPORT, IF YOU LOOK, YOU'LL SEE THAT, LIKE IT'S IN VERY SIMILAR POSITION. AND, BUT I DID, AGAIN, WE DID PULL IT TOO FAR FORWARD THAT CAN BE FIXED. UM, I WAS KIND OF UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT AS LONG AS THE STRUCTURE DIDN'T, DIDN'T, [04:10:01] UH, IMPEDE VIEW. THAT'S WHY YOU SEE LIKE THE POLES ARE WAY SET BACK AND THE ROOF COMES OUT. I WAS TRYING TO GET AS MUCH COVERED AREA THERE AND LEAVE THE, LEAVE THE BUYERS AS MUCH YARD AS POSSIBLE, UM, WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, IMPEDING INTO, INTO THE LINE OF VISION. RIGHT? AND SO THAT'S WHY ALL THE POLES ARE SET FAR BACK. BUT IF, IF THE ROOF LINE, 'CAUSE I, LIKE I SAID, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION IT WAS THE WALLS THAT THAT HAD TO BE A CERTAIN DISTANCE FROM THE, UH, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. BUT AGAIN, THAT, THAT CAN BE FIXED. THAT'S PRETTY EASY. UM, IT'S MORE THE ENTRANCE AND THE WINDOWS THAT WOULD COST ME AN ABSOLUTE ARM AND A LEG TO TRY TO FIX. AND THE FACT THAT THE INVESTORS THAT I WAS WORKING FOR HAD ALREADY SOLD THIS HOUSE TO THESE BUYERS WHO HAVE MOVED IN IT AND EVERYTHING, LIKE, I WOULD PROBABLY OPEN MYSELF UP TO A LAWSUIT IF I START KNOCKING DOWN FRONT DOORS AND MOVING STUFF. YOU KNOW, FOR AN ENTRANCE LIKE THAT, IT JUST, I JUST HAVE TO SAY, HEY, I MADE A HUGE MISTAKE HERE, GUYS, AND I'M ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS ON IT. OKAY. UH, I PLEASE READ INTO THE RECORD THE, UM, PUBLIC COMMENTARY. YES, SIR. SO THIS IS FROM TWO 11, QUEEN ANNE CAROLINE BALDEZ, UH, IN OPPOSITION. WHY IS THIS BEING DONE NOW? UH, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WAS IT NOT DONE WHEN THE HOUSE WAS BEING BUILT? AND THEN, LET'S SEE, THE NEXT ONE, CARLOS DE LUNA. I'M IN FAVOR OF THE ABOVE. UH, MY ADDRESS IS 3 0 3 QUEEN END COURT. THIS ONE READS, UH, FROM MARTIN WALLACE. I'M WRITING IN SUPPORT OF YOUR WORK IN DESIGN RE REHABBING THE HOUSE AT 300 QUEEN END. I WAS VERY INTERESTED IN PURCHASING THE HOUSE AT 300 MYSELF. WHEN I WAS ORIGINALLY ON THE MARKET. I TOURED IT WITH A REALTOR SEVERAL TIMES. I WAS INTERESTED IN BUYING IT, UH, TO REHAB AS A RENTAL, BUT I ALWAYS THOUGHT IT HAD, UH, THE POTENTIAL TO BE AN AMAZING SINGLE FAMILY HOME. I ULTIMATELY DECIDED THAT IT WAS JUST A, A BIG OF A PROJECT FOR ME. IT NEEDED, UH, SO MUCH WORK TO BE BROUGHT BACK, UH, TO LIFE FROM THE CONDITION THAT IT WAS IN. I LIVED NEARBY ON FUNDS IN PLACE, AND TAKE WALKS BY QUEEN END SEVERAL TIMES A WEEK. IT WAS EXCITING TO SEE YOUR PRO, UH, PROGRESS, TRANSFORMING THE PROPERTY OVER TIME AS WE WOULD WALK BY. WHEN I WAS CONSIDERING PURCHASING IT, I IMAGINED HOW I MIGHT RENOVATE IT. AND YOUR WORK SURPASS WHAT I WAS ENVISIONING. I LOVE, UH, THE MORE MODERN LOOK, UH, YOU WENT WITH, UH, FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. IT ADDS SOME INTERESTING VARIETY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT FITS WELL, UH, FOR THE PROPERTY SINCE IT, IT IS SUCH A LARGE HOUSE AND IS ON THE CORNER. WHILE IT WAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT FIRST, MY GIRLFRIEND AND I RAISED AN EYEBROW AT THE STYLE WE WERE, IT WAS TOO DIFFERENT FROM THE, SOME OF THE SURROUNDING HOUSES, BUT AFTER SEEING IT COME, UH, COME TOGETHER, I THINK UNIQUENESS OF THE PROPERTY ELEVATES THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ESPECIALLY WHEN COMPARED TO THE, THE SHOTGUN HOUSES SOUTH OF THE PARK. THAT FEELS SO COOKIE CUTTER, THOUGH I LOVE THE CRAFTED, UH, CHARM OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, FOR A 3000 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY HOME, I DON'T THINK IT WORKS AS WELL. MARTIN, UH, FROM MARIA MIXON 3 0 6 ELMHURST, UH, IN FAVOR, NO OBJECTION TO IMPROVEMENT. THIS ONE IS FROM GEORGE GRIMES. UH, THIS IS A FOLLOW-UP ON OUR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE, UH, TODAY REGARDING THE ABOVE MATTER REGARDING THIS SUBJECT REQUEST FOR THE CARPORT. THE CARPORT HAS ALREADY NOT, NOT READ THAT ONE. THERE'S A PHONE RESPONSE. OH, NO RESPONSE. DISREGARD THAT LAST ONE. THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE COMMENTARY. ALL RIGHT. UH, SO ARE THERE ANY, UH, ARE THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR, UH, THE APPLICANT? OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER FISHER? UH, YES. IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT WE HAVE ANY INPUT FROM MACKEY PARK, UH, HISTORICAL DISTRICT. YEAH, THAT, THAT'S LITTLE. DID DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY, UH, FEEDBACK WITH THEM OR, UH, CALL THEM TO HAVE ANY TYPE OF REVIEW DURING YOUR PROCESS? THEY HAD QUESTIONS. THEY HAD QUESTIONS ONLY, BUT NO RESPONSES OFFICIALLY FROM THEM. OKAY. IT IS JUST UNUSUAL IN WITH THAT TYPE OF HISTORICAL DISTRICT. THAT'S MY ONLY COMMENT. THANK YOU. OKAY. COMMISSIONER MICHELLE, I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY SOMETHING. YES, I, I DID. OKAY. GO. PLEASE, PLEASE PROCEED. MY QUESTION IS FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, YOU KNOW, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, UH, DENIAL FOR THE EXCEPTION ON THE [04:15:01] N C D STANDARDS FOR THE WINDOWS. UM, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW, UM, DID YOU, NOW THAT YOU KNOW HOW SERIOUS AN N C D IS, DO YOU, YOU PLAN TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS? I CAN'T AFFORD TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS, TO BE HONEST. THAT THAT WINDOW PACKAGE WOULD, IT WOULD COST ME PROBABLY NEAR $20,000 TO REPLACE ALL THOSE WINDOWS SO THAT EVERY ASH IN THAT PLACE WOULD'VE TO BE REPLACED. EVERY SASH WOULD'VE TO BE REPLACED IN ORDER TO GET THOSE GRIDS ON THERE. UM, AND THAT'S WHAT THE WINDOW PACKAGE COST WAS $20,000. SO DOING THAT, I I CAN'T AFFORD TO DO IT, ESPECIALLY NOT TO MENTION THAT THE INVESTORS THAT HIRED ME TO DO THE JOB NEVER DID PAY ME FOR THE JOB. SO IT'S NOT LIKE I MADE A PROFIT ON THAT. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. I HAVE A, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR, FOR STAFF. IT IT, ONE OF THE VARIANCES, UH, REGARDING THE N C D WAS FOR TRANSITION SPACES. CAN YOU, UH, EXPAND ON WHAT THAT IS, PLEASE? YES, SIR. THAT'S BASICALLY THE ENTRYWAY. UM, OKAY. THERE'S SOME PRESCRIBED, UH, ITEMS. SO YOU HAVE A PORCH, UH, A MINIMUM OF SIX FEET DEEP BY EIGHT FEET WIDE. NOW, IF YOU HAVE A STOOP, IT IS SIX WEST, SIX BY EIGHT PORCH, AS LONG AS IT'S SIX FEET DEEP. AND THEN THERE'S A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT, THAT ARE PROVIDED OUT THERE. DID THEY COME CLOSE TO ANY OF THOSE OPTIONS? NO, SIR. NOT AT THIS TIME. OKAY. THERE'S NO TRANSITION MADE AT THIS POINT. EVEN THERE'S EVEN ONE, UH, IF YOU WANTED TO, TO BUILD A, A NOOK GROUP, AN ALCOVE, YOU KNOW, THAT'D BE THREE BY FOUR. BUT UN UNFORTUNATELY AT THIS TIME WHEN, UM, OUR INSPECTOR WENT OUT THERE TO REVIEW FOR THE N C D STANDARDS, UH, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS HE CAUGHT OUT THERE. AND CAN YOU PLEASE BRING UP THE, UH, THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION HE HAD, HE HAD THREE SLIDES AND ONE OF THEM SHOWED, AND IT STATED WHAT I SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL AND THEN WHAT I BUILT. CAN YOU BRING THAT ONE UP PLEASE? IT WAS PREVIOUS, BEFORE THAT ONE. YEAH. SO THAT ONE, THE ONE ON THE LEFT WHERE IT SAYS THE PICTURE I SHOWED THE CITY AND GOT APPROVAL FOR THAT DOES INCLUDE A TRANSITION BECAUSE I CAN SEE AN ENTRYWAY, WHEREAS WHAT WAS BUILT DOES NOT, FOR ME, IT'S UNCLEAR WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO, UM, TO STAFF AT THAT POINT. IT'S THE STOOP THAT WOULD NEED TO BE A LITTLE BIGGER TO, TO SERVE AS A TRANSITION SPACE. SO IT'S POSSIBLE FOR, FOR HIM TO EXTEND THE STOOP OUT AND, AND, AND POUR OVER THOSE STAIRS AND THEN PROVIDE SOME NEW STAIRS DOWN THE SIDEWALK AND AT LEAST MEET THAT REQUIREMENT. WE'D HAVE TO GET WITH OUR N C D STAFF TO, TO CONFIRM. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT COULD BE, BECAUSE WHAT WHAT WHAT'S CONFUSING ME IS, IS THAT THE APPLICANT HAD MENTIONED THAT HE DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THE, THE REVIEW WAS ADEQUATE ENOUGH, ENOUGH TO CATCH SOME OF THESE THINGS. I MEAN, DIDN'T, WEREN'T PLANS SUBMITTED THAT THAT'S THAT. WELL, THAT'S THE PROBLEM. DURING A FULL CONSTRUCTION REVIEW, WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT THE PLANS. IN THIS CASE IT WAS A, IT WAS A MINOR PERMIT REPAIR. SO MINOR PERMIT REPAIRS, WE DON'T GET PLANS IN FOR THOSE. WE CONFIRM WITH APPLICANTS THAT WINDOWS ARE GONNA MATCH OR THEY'RE GONNA BE TWO OVER ONE. UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE DISCUSSED BUILDING MATERIALS, BUT AT NO POINT IN THAT PERMIT DOES IT MENTION ANY KIND OF FACADE WORK. OKAY. GO TO THE, GO TO THE PAGE, OR IN THIS CASE, THE ROOF. BRING UP THE PAGE BEFORE THIS ONE ON THE PRESENTATION, THE ONE PAGE UP THE OTHER DIRECTION. OKAY. SO HE WENT FROM, IT LOOKS LIKE HE MADE THE HOUSE SMALLER. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW. I WAS LOOKING AT, I'M SO SORRY I IT DROPPED THE CALL. IT'S OKAY. UH, I, I WAS AT, UH, MR. ISAAC, I WAS ASKING, UH, STAFF A BIT ABOUT WHAT WAS SUBMITTED BECAUSE THIS THING SAYS HOUSE, WHEN I BOUGHT IT, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A DUPLEX, AND THEN NOW IT'S, IT JUST LOOKS SMALLER, LIKE IT GOT THINNER. AND I JUST, I DON'T SEE HOW THE, IT DID A LITTLE ACTUALLY. SO WHAT I DID WAS I WENT BACK IN AND, AND FOUND THE ORIGINAL BECAUSE I, I ABSOLUTELY LOVE RESTORING OLD ARCHITECTURE. I MEAN, THAT WAS THE WHOLE DEAL WITH THIS THING. AND WHEN I WENT BACK IN AND THERE USED TO BE LIKE SOME ADDITION OFFICE THING, ALL STUCK TO THE SIDE OF IT. ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE, THERE WAS SOME WONKY ADDITION STUCK TO THE BACK OF IT. SO WHAT I DID WAS I WENT IN AND OPENED UP AND FOUND THE ORIGINAL BONES TO THE HOUSE AND JUST TOOK IT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE. SO THAT RIGHT THERE IS THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT OF WHAT IT WAS IN 1920. OKAY. BECAUSE IT, BECAUSE STAFF WAS COMMENTING THAT THE, THE SUBMITTAL FOR PERMIT DIDN'T INCLUDE SPECIFIC PLANS THAT, THAT MAYBE WOULD'VE FOUND SOME OF THE STUFF THAT WAS MORE MINOR, UH, RENOVATION PERMITS AND, AND SOME QUESTIONNAIRES. UH, WERE THERE PLANS SUBMITTED AT ALL TO THIS? [04:20:01] NO, THAT'S, THAT'S MY, THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT. NO, THERE WASN'T, UH, THE PROCESS AGAIN, WAS VERY DOWNPLAYED WHEN I WALKED IN AND THAT, AND THAT'S, I I, I REALLY DO STRONGLY SUGGEST IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A COMMISSION FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION, THEN I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE THE, THE SAME BASIC PROCESS AS HISTORICAL DOES REGARDLESS, REMODEL OR, OR ANYTHING MODEL, REMODEL, WHATEVER. IT NEEDS A PLAN PROCESS REVIEW. IT REALLY DOES WELL, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA SPEAK ON, I'M GONNA SPEAK ON STAFF'S DEFENSE. SOMETIMES THEY ONLY KNOW WHAT, WHAT YOU TELL 'EM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE PULLING MINOR PERMITS, UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT GONNA, THOSE THINGS AREN'T GONNA COME UP. AND THAT, THAT WAS JUST WHERE THIS FELL, FELL APART. BUT WHILE I HAVE YOU ON THE PHONE, UH, I WAS ASKING STAFF A QUESTION ABOUT TRANSITIONS, UH, AND THEY HAD MENTIONED THAT IT'S POSSIBLE TO CREATE A LARGER STOOP AT THE FRONT DOOR. UH, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING, UH, THAT YOU WOULD BE, THAT YOU COULD DO IS EXTEND THE STOOP OUT AND MOVE THE STAIRS BACK A LITTLE BIT? AT LEAST TO MEET THAT SECTION OF THE CODE? I THINK YOU'RE GONNA RUN INTO A SETBACK ISSUE AT THAT POINT BASED ON THE SURVEY. NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE FRONT ENTRY STOOP. I KNOW IT'S PUSHED AS FAR FORWARD AS IT COULD BE JUST THE CEMENT. SO JUST THE CEMENT. KEEP IN MIND IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE, YEAH, IF YOU'RE SENDING THAT OUT, UM, YOU COULD HALF THE STOOP, I'M NOT SURE I FOLLOW. WELL MAKE, MAKE THE STOOP BIGGER. YEAH. SO TAKE WHERE YOU HAVE THE STAIRS AND MOVE THEM BACK LIKE THREE FEET OR SOMETHING. MOVE THE STAIRS BACK THREE FEET, TAKE THE STAIRS THAT GO INTO YOUR FRONT DOOR. PRETEND YOU COULD TAKE THOSE STAIRS AND, AND MOVE THEM TOWARDS THE STREET. THREE FEET BACK. OH, TOWARDS THE STREET. YES. OKAY. I KNOW THAT THAT WOULD BE, IF, IF THAT'S OKAY. I DON'T KNOW. IS A, IS A PORCH FLAT, FLAT WORK? NOT FLAT WORK. YEAH. FLAT WORK IS NOT A SETBACK ISSUE. IT'S ONLY IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING WITH A COVER. OKAY. I'M, I'M, I'M BRINGING THIS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD WELL, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M DOING HERE IS, UH, THIS, THIS BOARD IS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION AND YOU HAVE FOUR DIFFERENT VARIANCES IN PLAY. STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED ITEMS NUMBER TWO AND FOUR. THEY'RE EXCLUDING ITEM ONE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TRANSITION IN THE WINDOWS. BUT THIS BOARD MAY, MAY GIVE YOU ONE OF THOSE TWO, OR NONE OF THOSE TWO OR BOTH OF 'EM. BUT THE, THE BOARD MEMBERS NEED TO KNOW THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT, OF, OF, OF HOW TO MAKE THESE MOTIONS. AND ONE OF THE ITEMS OF THE MOTIONS ITEM ONE A DEALS WITH THE TRANSITION SPACE, BASICALLY YOUR ENTRY. AND SO IF THAT'S NOT THE END OF THE WORLD TO MEET D N C D, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING FOR US TO, TO CONSIDER IF WE, IF WE NEED, I JUST, I BELIEVE ME, BEFORE I EVER EVEN APPLIED FOR THIS VARIANCE, I, I, I WRAPPED MY BRAIN WITH JOHN DOWN AT THE CITY AND EVERYTHING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. THAT, THAT, TO GIVE IT A TRUE, UM, TRANSITION. I COULD PROBABLY DO SOMETHING TO GET GRIDS ON THE FRONT WINDOWS IF THAT WOULD HELP OUT. UM, I THINK I FOUND A POSSIBLE SOLUTION TO THAT. UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT I COULD DO IT FOR EVERY WINDOW, BUT I THINK I COULD DO IT FOR THE FRONT WINDOWS TO TRANSITION WITHOUT, WITHOUT RUINING THE LOOK OF THE HOUSE. AND I WILL SAY THAT, UM, THIS HOUSE ACTUALLY IS NOW IS NOT A CONTENDER ANYMORE. IT'S, IT'S THE WINNER OF THE REMODEL OF THE YEAR FOR SAN ANTONIO. AND THE RESULTS, UH, WILL OFFICIALLY GO OUT TO THE PUBLIC ON THE 25TH. SO I REALLY HATE TO LIKE, I MEAN, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT LIKE IT. LIKE I SAID, IT'S, IT'S LITERALLY REMODEL OF THE YEAR FOR THE WHOLE CITY. OKAY. UM, BUT SO, I MEAN, I REALLY HATE JACKING WITH THE FRONT TOO MUCH BECAUSE THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT LIKE IT. BUT ARE YOU SEEING, I JUST DONT HAVE THE TRANSITION IN THE FRONT. SO, MR. ICK, ARE YOU LOOKING AT YOUR, AT AT THE, AT THE, AT THE, THE CASE ON THE INTERNET RIGHT NOW? YES, SIR. UH, SCREEN 1 52 IS WHERE I'M STANDING. YEAH. SO LOOK AT, LOOK AT THE, THE, THE THING THAT SAYS STOOP, YOU SEE THAT PICTURE? ALL THEY DID WAS JUST TAKE THAT CONCRETE PART AND JUST EXTEND IT BACK A LITTLE BIT, SIX FEET AWAY. RIGHT. I JUST MAKE THE PORTS BIGGER. YEAH, I COULD DO THAT. YEAH. WELL, I'M, IT'S, IT'D BE SOMETHING, SOMETHING FOR US TO, JUST TO CONSIDER WHILE WE'RE MAKING A MOTION. SO, UH, LIKE I'M, I'M TAKING UP TOO MUCH, TOO MUCH TIME ON THIS, ON THIS ONE ISSUE, BUT IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA ONE? YEAH. ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS MENTIONING WAS, I GUESS DIVIDED LIGHT DIALOGUE AND IF THAT WOULD WORK, YOU KNOW, TO SATISFY, YOU KNOW, I, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT THE DIMENSIONS OF THE WINDOWS, UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THE PICTURE SHOWED THE DIVIDED AND, AND THE APPLICANT TALKED ABOUT ADDING DIVIDED. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, FROM THIS, UM, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FULL N C D HAS IN IT, BUT WOULD THAT SATISFY THAT REQUIREMENT TO JUST ADD THE DIVIDED LIGHT OR, OR A PORTION OF IT THAT'S A [04:25:01] STAFF THAT QUESTIONS STAFF? YEAH. JOHN, JOHN AT THE, AT, AT N P D SEEMED TO THINK THAT, UH, THAT IF I DID SOME SORT OF DIVIDED LIGHT ACROSS THE CENTER OF EACH WINDOW TO MAKE IT ONE GIANT X, THAT, THAT WOULD PROBABLY SUFFICE TO GET A VARIANCE. UM, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. HEARING NONE. UM, SHELL, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER SHELL, I JUST WANNA FOLLOW UP ON MR. MANNAS QUESTION. UM, STAFF, COULD YOU, COULD YOU TELL US WHAT THE N C D FOR, UH, MICKEY PARK REQUIRES FOR THEIR WINDOWS? UM, JUST TO SEE IF WE COULD COME UP WITH A COMPROMISE. SURE. LEMME GET TO THE WINDOW STANDARD REAL QUICK NOW. THANK YOU. AND WHILE HE IS PULLING THAT UP, YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS, WHOEVER MAKES A MOTION, THEY, IF THEY WANTED TO ONLY LIMIT IT TO THE WINDOWS FACING THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, FACING THE STREET, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN ENTERTAIN TO DEPEND. SO IT'S A ONE OVER ONE LIGHT DIVISION OR A TWO TO ONE, UH, RATIO, OR WITH THE TWO TO ONE RATIO. OKAY. UM, FOR THE APPLICANT. IS, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU COULD, UM, THAT YOU WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE DOING, IS PUTTING IN, YOU KNOW, A, A DIVIDER TO MAKE IT AT LEAST APPEAR AS A ONE OVER ONE? I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD NOT FUNCTION IN THE SAME WAY, BUT IT MIGHT LOOK SIMILAR. IT, IT'LL LOOK LIKE, IT'LL LOOK EXACTLY LIKE ONE. YES, I COULD DO THAT. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT. SO WHO WOULD LIKE TO, UH, MAKE A MOTION ON THIS? UH, AND JUST FOR THE, JUST TO REITERATE, STAFF WAS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO AND FOUR FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE. IT HAS TWO COMPONENTS, THE ENTRY TRANSITION, AND THE WINDOWS. AND THEN, UH, ITEM THREE IS DEALING WITH, UM, STAFF WAS NOT RECOMMENDING WAS FOR THE, UH, VARIANCE TO THE, UH, SITE SETBACK OF THE DETACHED CAR REPORT. SO, UH, WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? SHALL I HAVE A QUESTION? ANOTHER QUESTION FOR STAFF. I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD. UM, JUST REGARDING THE, THE CLEAR VISION, UM, THAT WAS, UM, OH, THAT WAS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL. NEVERMIND. THANK YOU, . WELL, IF NO ONE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION, I, UH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION. I MEAN, I, I DON'T, I KNOW I DON'T WANT TO DO THIS, BUT I'LL, I JUST, I JUST WANT TO, I'LL, I'LL JUST MOVE THIS ALONG. UM, REGARDING, LET'S SEE HERE. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 7, UH, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR VARIANCES FROM THE MANKEY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, LET'S SEE. I'M NOT GONNA DO THAT ONE. GRANT A VARIANCE FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO. A THREE FOOT VARIANCE OF THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT REAR STEP BACK TO ALLOW A DETACHED CORAL PORT TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. UM, ITEM NUMBER THREE, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW WITH DETACHED CARPORT TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, AND FOUR, A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM AND 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FENCE TO BE 12 FEET FROM THE STREET SITUATED AT 300 QUEEN ANNE COURT. APPLICANT BEING DAVID ISAACS. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED, SHOWED THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY, SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE OF THE REAR INSIDE SETBACK, UH, FOR THE DETACHED CAR REPORT IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. UH, THE VARIANCE, UH, NUMBER TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE NECESSARY HARDSHIP, THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED, WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE SIDE SETBACK IS TO PROVIDE SPAC BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES. THE APPLICANT WILL STILL MAINTAIN ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN THE CARPORT AND THE REAR INSIDE PROPERTY LINES. UH, NUMBER FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. BUT SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ENTER THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE SITE AND WEAR STEPBACK DOES NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES, AND DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY AT ALL, DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF [04:30:01] THE DISTRICT. SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER FOR THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR 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. GIVEN THE OTHER DESIGN STANDARDS BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE N C D, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES ARE IN LINE, IN LINE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. END OF MOTION. SECOND. I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA, UH, WHO, GO AHEAD. A QUESTION. I HAVE A QUESTION BEFORE WE PROCEED. YES, PLEASE. OKAY. UM, SO ON, UH, THE FIRST ON, ON UH, ONE B, UM MM-HMM. REGARDS TO THE WINDOWS, DOES ANYTHING NEED TO BE STATED THAT WE'RE ACCEPTING THAT A DIVIDED LIGHT WOULD SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT? DOES THAT NEED TO BE STATED OR IS IT ASSUMED BY HAVING THAT DIVIDED LIGHT IT MEETS IT? I, I, I EXCLUDED IT BECAUSE, UH, UH, WE HEARD FROM STAFF THAT, UH, AND THE APPLICANT THAT BY DOING SO, WOULD MEET THE N C D, UH, FROM A DISCUSSION FROM THE, UH, FROM STAFF. SO I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS NECESSARY. OKAY. PERFECT. OKAY. I, AS LONG AS, YEAH, IF, IF WE AGREE WITH THAT, THAT'S GOOD THEN. OKAY. OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER, UH, ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT'D LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT? SHALL JUST, MR CAN YOU CLARIFY? CAN I, I ASK A NO, THE, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE, UH, THIS IS FOR THE COMMISSIONERS TO DISCUSS THE MOTION AND IT'S BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. SO WE, NOT FROM THE APPLICANT AT THIS TIME. UH, COMMISSIONER, SHE, UH, YEAH, I'M, I GUESS I JUST NEED CLARIFICATION. I'M CONCERNED THAT IF YOU DIDN'T SPECIFY THAT HE WOULD PUT IN A DIVIDED A DIVIDER FOR THOSE WINDOWS THAT HE WILL BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE N C B. LIKE IF WE DON'T GRANT SOME KIND OF VARIANCE. OKAY. UH, STAFF THE RULES WILL APPLY. IS THAT CORRECT STAFF? IF THE APPLICANT WERE TO PUT A DIVIDED LIGHT IN WITH IT? YEAH. SO THE INSPECTION AND INSPECTION, UM, JOHN WOULD'VE TO GO OUT THERE AND WORK WITH THE APPLICANT. IF HE DOES PUT, ADDED THE DIVIDED LIGHT JUST DISCUSSING IT, IT SHOULD BE FINE. UM, BUT AGAIN, HE WOULD BE WORKING DIRECTLY WITH OUR N C D, UH, STAFF AND INSPECTOR, UH, TO GO OUT THERE. BUT THAT'S SOMETHING WE, WE COULD LOOK AT. BUT YES, JUST TO CHIME IN, SO THE MOTION BASICALLY WOULD JUST, THE WINDOW, IT'S JUST GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE TWO, UH, OF THE VARIANCE TO THE TWO TO ONE. BUT WITHOUT SAYING ANYTHING RE UH, RELATED TO DIVIDED LIGHT, IT MEANS THAT HE HAS TO COMPLY WITH THE DIVIDED LIGHT. WELL, I, I EXCLUDED, I EXCLUDED ITEM NUMBER ONE FROM THE MOTION. RIGHT. SO THAT, WOULDN'T THAT MEAN THAT THE N C D THEN IS IN FULL FORCE, SO HE WOULD HAVE TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS COMPLETELY WITH TRUE DIVIDED WINDOWS? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. IF IT'S NOT INCLUDED, HE WOULD HAVE TO REPLACE THE DATE WITH THE TWO TO ONE AND A ONE OVER ONE LIGHT DIVISION. OKAY. THEN I, THEN I WILL, UM, REVISE MY MOTION TO INCLUDE ITEM NUMBER ONE B REGARDING, UH, WIN, UH, THE ADDITION OF A, OF DIVIDED LIGHT TO THE, TO FOR THE WINDOWS. AND I AGREE WITH THAT, THE TWO TO ONE, TWO TO ONE, AND THE TWO TO ONE RATIO AS WELL, AND THE TWO TO ONE RATIO. UM, ALSO, DID YOU WANT HIM, I'M SORRY? DID YOU WANT HIM TO POUR ANY STOOP? UH, I, I PURPOSELY LEFT OUT EITHER NUMBER A BECAUSE MM-HMM. HE'S ALLOWED TO EXTEND THE STOOP AND ADD STAIRS, UH, WHICH DIDN'T SEEM LIKE A, IT WAS A, A HUGE TASK TO ENTERTAIN. UM, I'M OPEN TO JUST EXCLUDE IT TO INCLUDING ITEM ONE A. UH, IF, IF A COMMISSIONER WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR AN AMEND, WELL, I, SO IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, I'M SORRY, I'M STEPPING IN A SECOND. UM, SO IF BY LEAVING IT OUT REQUIRES HIM TO HAVE A STOOP IN THE FRONT, WHATEVER MM-HMM. , WHATEVER, WHATEVER, IT'S, RIGHT. YEAH. AND SO, AND, AND THAT BRINGS IT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH REGARDS TO THE M C D. YES. AND WOULD JUST POURING THE NEW STOOP, AS YOU SUGGESTED, MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE N CD DAF STAFF AT THE, WITHIN THE LENGTH THAT IT'S REQUIRED? YES. SO WE, HE WOULD END UP WORKING WITH JOHN TO GET THAT EXTENDED OUT, UH, TO MEET THAT REQUIREMENT. OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANY, UH, OTHER COMMISSIONER COMMENTS, DISCUSSION, ANYTHING? OKAY. SO JUST TO RE-VERIFY, I'VE, I, I'VE CALLED FOR, UM, THE MOTION, UH, GIVES ITEM TWO AND FOUR AS PRESENTED IN THE TEMPLATE. ITEM ONE IS, UH, ONLY INCLUDES ONE B, THE WINDOWS FOR A TWO TO ONE DIVIDED LIGHTS. AND ITEM FOUR, UH, I CHANGED, I'M SORRY, ITEM THREE, I CHANGED THE VARIANCE. SO INSTEAD OF THE CARPET BEING ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, I WANTED IT TO BE AT LEAST TWO FEET. AND I DID SO BECAUSE THE APPLICANT [04:35:01] COMMENTED THAT IT WOULDN'T BE A BIG DEAL TO, TO CORRECT THAT CONDITION. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, UM, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A, UH, VOTE. MICHELLE, I CONCUR WITH THE MOTION AS AMENDED. MR. MANCA? I CONCUR WITH THE MOTION AS AMENDED. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR AS AMENDED. MS. RAMONA? YES, I CONCUR AS AMENDED. MS. BREGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE MOTION AS AMENDED. MR. DOMER? I CONCUR. MS. FISHER, I CONCUR WITH THE MOTION AS AMENDED. MR. TE? YES, I CONCUR. MR. ZUNA? YES. I CONCUR WITH THE MOTION AS AMENDED AND CHAIR OREO. AND I CONCUR WITH THE MOTION AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, MR. ISAAC, PLEASE GET WITH STAFF TO, UH, DISCUSS YOUR OPTIONS. WILL DO. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, UH, [11. 21-2133 Appointment of two Board of Adjustment Members to the Planning Commission Technical Advisory Committee for a two year term.] MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 11. APPOINTMENT OF TWO. UH, B O A MEMBERS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. UH, CURRENTLY THE, THE B O A, UH, HAS TWO MEMBERS, ONE, UH, REGULAR AND ONE ALTERNATE. UH, AT THIS TIME, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER THIEL IS THE, IS THE PRIMARY, AND I AM CURRENTLY THE ALTERNATE. SO, UH, WITH THAT, UH, IS THERE ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO THROW THEIR NAME IN THE HAT? SHE, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING. OKAY. UH, ANYONE ELSE? THI DID YOU STILL WANT TO DO IT? I CAN STAY ON IF NECESSARY. IF NOT, IT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME EITHER WAY. OKAY. AND, UH, THIS IS MANNA. YES, SIR. GO AHEAD. SO, SO I AM CURRENTLY A MEMBER OF, UH, PTAC AS WELL. UH, BUT I'M THROUGH THE, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD SIDE OF IT. AND SO THEY HAVEN'T MENTIONED THAT. THEY HAVE NOT TOLD ME THAT IT'S A CONFLICT. SO, SO MY, MY THOUGHT IS TO CONTINUE IN THE ROLE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVE. SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, SO I DO WANNA PARTICIPATE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD PART. OKAY. AS LONG AS IT'S NOT CONFLICTING. AND SO, AND JUST, SO, AND JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS, UH, THE WAY THIS PROCESS WORKS IS, YOU KNOW, THE TAC THEY USUALLY WILL MEET, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY MEET FOR FOUR HOURS, FIVE HOURS, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY ONCE OR TWICE A WEEK FOR A WHILE. UH, AND THERE'S A LOT TO GET THROUGH. UM, I'VE, I'VE BEEN ON THERE BEFORE AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT, UM, IT'S, ONCE IT GOES THROUGH TAC IT THEN GOES THROUGH THE ZONING COMMISSION, THE B O A, AND THEN BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION BEFORE IT'S VOTED ON TO SEND TO CITY COUNCIL. SO, YOU KNOW, IN, IN OUR, AND OUR COMMISSION IS GOING TO HAVE, UH, YOU KNOW, ANYBODY THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT GOES THROUGH ITEMS IN THE U D C AND THEY FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, DURING THE COURSE OF OUR MEETINGS, THINGS COME UP THAT MAYBE WE'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND. THE BOARD ITSELF CAN RECOMMEND ITEMS. SO THERE, THERE'S ALWAYS OPPORTUNITIES TO HAVE A VOICE. UM, IT'S JUST WHOEVER'S THE PRIME IS GOING TO BE PUTTING IN SOME REAL TIME ON THIS THING. SO, UH, JUST WANTED TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT , UH, SO IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD BE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING? OKAY, SO WHAT WE HAVE, WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER SHELL, COMMISSIONER TEAL. I, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I MEAN, I, I ENJOY IT, BUT YOU KNOW, I I, I'LL HAVE MY ABILITY TO PROVIDE MY COMMENTARY WHEN IT COMES BACK TO THE B O A. SO NO ONE'S GOING TO HURT MY FEELINGS IF I'M NOT THE ALTERNATE ANYMORE. UH, SO, UH, WITH THAT IN MIND, UH, DOES ANYBODY WANT, WOULD WANT TO BE THE PRIME? I AM WILLING TO BE THE PRIME. UM, I DON'T, I'M NOT TRYING TO TAKE IT AWAY FROM ANYONE THOUGH, EITHER. . WELL, IT'S A, AND I ALSO WANT TO LET EVERYONE KNOW THAT THE, A LOT OF THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE TAX HAS BEEN THERE FOR A REALLY LONG TIME. IN FACT, I WAS THERE IN 20 11, 20 12, BUT THERE'S LIKE, HALF THE PEOPLE ARE THE SAME . SO IT, IT CAN MOVE FAST. SO, UH, WITH, UH, WITH THAT, I GUESS WE CAN TAKE A VOTE. STAFF, WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND? WE'VE GOT THREE, TWO NAMES. I DON'T KNOW. UH, DO YOU WANNA JUST DO A VOTE FOR PRIME AND JUST SEE WHO GETS THE MOST? SO FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WE HAVE TWO NAMES. UH, COMMISSIONER, SHE AND COMMISSIONER, UH, TEAL, UH, FOR TWO SPOTS, CORRECT? YES. AND, AND, AND YEAH, AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I, I'M GONNA, I WILL PUT MY NAME IN THE HAT AS THE, AS THE, UH, NO, I DON'T, I I DON'T NEED TO . ALRIGHT, SO WITH THAT, IF IT'S ONLY WITH TWO SPOTS AND ONLY TWO AND [04:40:01] ONE HAS, UM, VOLUNTEERED TO BE THE PRIMARY, THEN YOU COULD DO ONE MOTION AND JUST STATE IN THAT MOTION THAT, UH, UH, BOARD MEMBER SHALL WOULD BE THE PRIMARY AND BOARD MEMBER. TIA WOULD BE THE ALTERNATE. AND THEN YOU CAN DO A VOICE VOTE. IF WE HEAR ANY NOS, THEN WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL VOTE. OKAY. OKAY. SETH, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? A HUNDRED PERCENT. OKAY. I, I'M A LITTLE LEERY OF THAT TIME COMMITMENT AFTER IT WAS DESCRIBED, SO I, I'D BE HAPPY TO BE OF A SUPPORT. OKAY. I MEAN, THEY, THEY'RE TALKING FOUR OR FIVE HOUR MEETINGS, YOU KNOW, EVERY WEEK. SO I KNOW. MR. DORIAN, COULD YOU ADDRESS THAT TACK? THAT'S FIRST TIME I HEARD THE TERM, OR I GOT THE WRONG TERM. WELL, IT IS A PLANNING COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMISSION. SO THERE'S 19 MEMBERS, AND I THINK THEY ADDED ONE AS AN EXPERIENCE MEMBER. AND THAT WAS, I'LL JUST SAY BECAUSE OF ME A LONG TIME AGO, . SO, UH, NOT BECAUSE THAT'S GOING BACK IN TIME, BUT UH, WHAT THEY DO IS, UM, ALL THE DIFFERENT CITY DEPARTMENTS PUB, THE PUBLIC AND, AND CERTAIN BOARDS CAN PRESENT AND, AND STAFF CAN PRESENT RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE U D C. AND THEY'RE, AND THEY GO THROUGH 'EM ONE BY ONE ON THAT, ON THAT COMMITTEE, RIGHT? THEY, AND THEY CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, ADDITIONS. I MEAN, THOSE CAN BE REALLY LONG MEETINGS. UM, I, YOU KNOW, IN 2015, I THINK I SUBMITTED 18 OF 'EM AS AN INDIVIDUAL, YOU KNOW, BACK THEN. SO THERE'S, IT'S, IT'S A HUGE SECTION OF CODE. YOU JUST NEVER KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GONNA GET. BUT IT'S BEEN, WE'RE ALREADY LIKE A YEAR AND A HALF, TWO YEARS PAST WHEN WE SHOULD HAVE ALREADY DONE THIS. THEY USED TO DO, WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS IN LATE 2019. SO, I MEAN, THERE COULD BE A LOT OF STUFF THIS TIME AROUND, BUT WE'LL SEE. THANK YOU, SIR. SURE. UM, SO WITH THAT, I MEAN, ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, UH, FOR COMMISSIONER SHELL TO BE THE PRIME AND, AND COMMISSIONER TEAL TO BE THE ALTERNATE MANA COMMISSIONER? MANA. SO I'VE, UH, NOMINATE COMMISSIONER, UH, SHE TO BE THE PRIMARY AND FEEL TO BE THE SECONDARY, UM, AND A MOTION. GREAT. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. ALRIGHT, A SECOND. UH, CALL FOR A VOTE, PLEASE. SENATOR. NO, YOU CAN DO A VOICE. VOTE. VOTE. OH, GREAT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES. NEXT ITEM. UH, [12. 21-2132 Discussion, consideration and possible action of current cases to determine need for a Board of Adjustment Special Meeting.] THE NEXT ITEM IS THE DISCUSSION ABOUT, UH, POSSIBLE ACTION OF CURRENT CASES DETERMINE NEED FOR A B O A SPECIAL MEETING. SO STAFF, WE'VE GOTTEN AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT OF APPLICATIONS WHERE SUCH AS AN EXTRA MEETING SHOULD BE WARRANTED AT THIS TIME. NO, SIR. NOT AT THIS TIME. THE NEXT MEETING, WE DO HAVE A FULL CASELOAD OF 10. UH, THE FOLLOWING, WHICH IS THE 19TH. AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE ONLY HAVE FIVE CASES FOR THAT MEETING. OKAY. OF COURSE THE, THE DEADLINE IS NEXT WEEK, BUT I THINK WE'RE DOING FINE. UH, WE'VE BEEN IN WORSE POSITIONS IN THE PAST WITH OTHER, YOU KNOW, CATASTROPHES OR WHAT, WHAT HAVE YOU, BUT WE'RE OKAY. ALRIGHT. ANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER . COULD, COULD I, UH, COULD WE TABLE THIS PICKER QUESTION FOR NEXT WEEK JUST TO, YOU KNOW, CLEAR UP BECAUSE IT'S AN EASY DIALOGUE AND JUST, JUST IN CASE, UH, WE NEED TO HAVE IT AGAIN. SO JUST IN CASE SOMETHING COMES IN, DOES THIS REQUIRE A TABLE OR IS IT SOMETHING WE WERE GONNA KEEP ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MONTH OR SO? JUST IN CASE WE CAN, WE CAN KEEP IT ON THE AGENDA. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO WITH THAT, UH, THE NEXT IS THE, UH, MINUTES [13. 21-2072 Consideration and approval of March 1, 2021 Board of Adjustment meeting minutes.] FROM MARCH 1ST. ANYBODY HAVE ANY, UH, ADJUSTMENTS? HEARING NONE? DID NOT SEE ANY. OKAY. I MOVED AT, UH, UH, WE, UH, AT SUPPLE MINUTES AS WRITTEN. SECOND. MOTION TO SECOND IS STAFF. PLEASE TAKE A VOTE. MICHELLE, I APPROVE THE MINUTES SUBMITTED. MR. CHUCA? I APPROVE MR. CRUZ. I APPROVE. MS. SHAMONA. I APPROVE MS. BREGMAN. YES, I APPROVE MR. GILMER? YES, SIR. I APPROVE MS. FISHER. I APPROVE MR. KE. YES, I APPROVE MR. UNA. YES. I APPROVE AND SHARE ORIAN. I ALSO APPROVE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY HALL. HALLELUJAH. HALLELUJAH. SO, , BEFORE, BEFORE I ADJOURN, I JUST WANTED TO THANK EVERYBODY. UH, THIS, THIS, THIS, UH, PARTICULAR MEETING HAD SOME REALLY THICK LOOKING, UH, [04:45:01] AND, UH, CASES. I MEAN, I DON'T THINK I'VE SEEN ONE WITH EIGHT VARIANTS, YOU KNOW, EIGHT ITEMS ON IT. SO THIS WAS, UH, I THINK WE DID PRETTY GOOD. SO CAN'T WAIT TO SEE YOU ALL IN TWO WEEKS. , OR ACTUALLY NO, NEXT MONTH. UH, APRIL 5TH. APRIL 5TH. SO WITH, SO WITH THAT, UM, I'M ADJOURNING THE MEETING. HAVE A GOOD WEEK. HAVE A GOOD WEEK GUYS. THANKS. GOOD WEEK. THANK YOU. BYE. BYE. * 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.