* 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. GOOD [00:00:01] AFTERNOON EVERYBODY. [Call to Order] UH, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. UH, CAN THE SPANISH INTERPRETER PLEASE COME FORWARD AND MAKE THEIR, UH, INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT? HI. GOOD MORNING, ENO. HI. SERVICES. INTERPRET. THANK YOU. SO IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE BE KIND ENOUGH TO SILENCE YOUR MOBILE DEVICES. UH, WE'RE GONNA GET STARTED. THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SHALL COME TO ORDER. STAFF, PLEASE CONDUCT THE ROLE. MR. ALBERT. PRESENT. MR. MENCHACA PRESENT. MS. CRUZ? HERE. MR. MENNA PRESENT. MS. BREGMAN? PRESENT. MR. DELMER? PRESENT. MS. KAPLAN? PRESENT. MR. CONROY? PRESENT. MR. TEAL? PRESENT. MR. OZUNA PRESENT CHAIR ORIAN. AND I'M ALSO PRESENT. UH, WE HAVE A QUORUM OF 11 PEOPLE. UH, SO IF WE COULD ALL PLEASE STAND AND, UH, JOIN US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC, WHICH STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. LET ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE ONE, ONE AND ANOTHER VISIBLE. OH, RIGHT. SO BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION. THE BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA, WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. THE CASES ARE LISTED BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND STREET ADDRESS. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT. LASTLY, AS CHAIR, I WILL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS. I ASK THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS THE CHAIR, AND I'LL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE MEETING. WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY'S ZONING CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THIS AREA. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW. WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELIEF SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. WE ALSO SERVE AS AN, IN AN ADVISORY AND AN APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 28 DASH FIVE. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR CASES AND OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. 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. THE APPLICANT OR ITS REPRESENTATIVES WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY WILL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ANY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER. AFTER EVERYONE HAS HEARD THE CASE, IT WILL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION. EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY A REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOFING, GRANTING THE RELIEF SOUGHT RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS IN WHICH THE REQUEST REQUESTED RELIEF 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. SO PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE. SO STAFF, IF YOU COULD, UH, PROCEED WITH YOUR LANGUAGE, STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST. PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT. PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND AN X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION. FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION IN ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THE REQUEST FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION. YOU WILL BE CALLED AN ORDER THAT YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION [00:05:01] WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION. YOU'LL BE INFORMED WHEN YOUR THREE MINUTES ARE UP. FOR THOSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER, THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE GIVING THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES. AND THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED IN TO SPEAK. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. CHAIR? YES. SO IF WE COULD PLEASE PROCEED WITH OUR FIRST [1. (Continued from 9/13/2021) BOA-21-10300100] UH, CASE, UH, ITEM NUMBER ONE. UH, IT'S BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 100. GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD MEMBERS. UM, THIS IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE. THIS CASE WAS CONTINUED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 13TH B O A MEETING. THE CASE NUMBER IS BO O A 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 100. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 27 23 CHIHUAHUA STREET WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE. THE APPLICANT IS DANIEL MORENO AND THE REQUEST IS FOR ONE A 25 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE. UM, TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE OF 3,975 SQUARE FEET. TWO, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND THREE, A FOUR FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK. UM, TO ALLOW A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO BE 15 FEET AND FIVE INCHES FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY IS OUR FOUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF CHIHUAHUA STREET AND SOUTH MINTER STREET. UM, THE LOT IS CURRENTLY VACANT, UM, AND THE APPLICANT IS WANTING TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THE PROPERTY. THERE IS, UM, ALREADY A FOUNDATION THAT IS ESTABLISHED ON THE PROPERTY, SO THEY'RE WANTING TO UTILIZE THAT. UM, THE FOUNDATION DID APPEAR TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND FOUR FEET SEVEN INCHES FROM THE REAR. OR IT ENCROACHES FOUR FEET, SEVEN INCHES INTO THE REAR SETBACK. UM, THE ZONING REQUIRES A 4,000 MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE LOT SIZE. UM, SO THEY'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THAT AS WELL. HERE'S AN IMAGE OF THE SITE PLAN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THAT JUST SHOWS THE 15 FOOT, 15 FOOT FIVE INCHES FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN B O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 100 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE THE LOT CURRENTLY MEASURES 3,975 SQUARE FEET. TWO. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON A CORNER LOT THREE. THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WILL BE SET BACK THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND FOUR, THE STRUCTURE WILL ALSO BE SET BACK 15 FEET AND FIVE INCHES FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. UH, STAFF MAILED 37 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. NONE ARE RETURN IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE EL CHATTO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND I THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MM-HMM. . THANK YOU. UM, IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? UH, PLEASE. YES, PLEASE COME FORWARD. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. UM, MY NAME'S MIGUEL PEREZ. UH, THE ARCHITECT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HERE. HE'S NOT HERE. HE'S THE ONE THAT'S IN THE APPLICATION. BUT I'M THE, YOU KNOW, I'M THE FATHER OF THE OWNER AND I JUST WANTED TO HEAR IF WE CAN BUILD OR WE CAN'T OR WHAT. OKAY. UH, DID YOU, CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR ADDRESS AND FOR THE RECORD, SIR? UH, 27 23 CHIHUAHUA. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, SIR. AND, UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER, UM, INFORMATION YOU'D LIKE TO OFFER THE BOARD? NO, I JUST WANTED TO BUILD ON, YOU KNOW, WE WANTED TO BUILD ON THE EXISTING THAT WE HAVE, YOU KNOW. OKAY. BUT IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER YOU ALL SAY. OKAY. IF YOU COULD PLEASE TAKE A SEAT, WE MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU, UH, STAFF. IS THERE ANY, UH, ANYTHING TO READ INTO THE RECORD OR ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE. OKAY. WELL, IS THERE ANY BOARD QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? , EXCUSE ME, MANNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA, AND THEN COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. SO, SO THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, IT TALKED ABOUT YOU'RE GONNA LEVERAGE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT'S THERE AS FAR AS THE FOUNDATION. SO IS THAT GOING TO BE A HUNDRED PERCENT OF WHERE YOUR NEW STRUCTURE IS GONNA BE, IS ON TOP OF THE EXISTING FOUNDATION? YES, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. MR. KAPLAN. UH, I THINK THAT JUST ANSWERED MY QUESTION. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS [00:10:01] THERE ANYONE ELSE? UH, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. UH, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, WHERE'S THE FRONT DOOR GOING TO BE ON THIS, UH, STRUCTURE? IT'S FACING, UH, CHIHUAHUA, THE FRONT DOOR. THAT'S WHERE THE FRONT DOOR'S. I, I JUST WANTED TO VERIFY THAT THAT'S WHERE THE ADDRESS IS GONNA END UP BEING. YES. 'CAUSE THAT'S HOW THEY APPLY SOME OF THE, WHAT'S THE REAR AND WHAT'S THE SIDE SETBACK, SO. ALL RIGHT. UM, IF THERE'S SOMETHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD FURTHER. NO, THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, ANYTHING ELSE? UH, COMMISSIONER MINCHA, MINKA, GO AHEAD. I HAVE A QUESTION. I CAN SEE THE DRIVEWAY NEAR THE FENCE, SIR, ARE YOU GONNA PUT A CARDBOARD NEAR THAT DRIVEWAY NEXT TO THAT HOUSE UP IN A CARPORT? THE, I HAVE AN EXISTING CARDBOARD THERE, AND IF I HAVE TO, I'LL JUST TAKE IT OFF. YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A GOOD STRUCTURE RIGHT NOW, BUT YOU KNOW, I CAN ALWAYS TAKE IT OFF. SO YOU ALREADY HAVE A CARPORT IN PLACE? THERE'S ONE THAT'S BEEN EXISTING THERE FOR YEARS MM-HMM. . OH, BUT YOU'RE TELLING ME IF I'M GONNA PUT ANOTHER CARPORT ON THE OTHER SIDE? WELL, YES. I I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ON GOOGLE. THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING. I MIGHT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S THE STRUCTURE AND YEAH, IT'S BETTER. I MIGHT JUST MAKE, YOU KNOW, A DRIVEWAY AND, YOU KNOW, ON THE, AND I HAVE PLENTY OF ROOM FOR A DRIVEWAY. THANK YOU, SIR. I, I GOT CLARIFIED. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE IS, UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT. UH, IS THERE A COMMISSIONER? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS TEAL COMMISSIONER TEAL REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH TWO ONE DASH 0 3 0 1 0 0. I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST FOR ONE A 25 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE LOT TO BE 3,975 SQUARE FEET TO A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE THREE, A FOUR FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO BE 15 FEET FIVE INCHES AWAY FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 2 7 2 3 CHIHUAHUA STREET. APPLICANT BEING DANIEL MORENO BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF 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 BUILDING. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES ARE FOR THE LOT SIZE, SIDE SETBACK AND REAR SETBACK. THE VARIANCE REQUESTS DO NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON A CORNER. LOT TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED, WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A DEMOLITION PERMIT WAS ISSUED AND NEW DEVELOPMENT AS PROPOSED TO BEING BUILT ON THE EXISTING FOUNDATION. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE RECOMMENDATION VARIANCE TO ALLOW THREE FOOT SIDE SETBACK AND A 15 FOOT FIVE INCH REAR SETBACK WILL MAINTAIN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE TO CREATE MORE SPACE AND, AND ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE SPACE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER NO USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DIS DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIS 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 REQUEST TO REDUCE THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS DO NOT SEEM LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DIS DISTRICT. THE DISTANCE FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND REAR PROPERTY LINE IS ADEQUATE SPACE AND DOES NOT APPEAR TO POSE ANY RISK FOR FIRE HAZARDS. 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, OR THE RESULTS OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SOUGHT DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS A SMALL AMOUNT OF AVAILABLE SPACE AND ITS LOCATION ON A CORNER. LOT. END OF MOTION. SECOND RECORD. WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER THIEL. PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. UH, YET WE SEE QUITE A FEW OF THESE. I MEAN, HE WOULD MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE, UH, THE, THE LOT SIZE, YOU KNOW, IF HE HAD 25 MORE SQUARE FEET. IT IS UNIQUE IN THE SENSE THAT IT IS A CORNER LOT. SO THOSE SETBACKS, UH, CAN BE KIND OF INVASIVE. UM, I DON'T THINK HE'S ASKING FOR TOO MUCH. AND IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO SEE SOME INFILL, ESPECIALLY IN A, A GOOD WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK OUTSIDE THE BOX. WE WERE FACING A HOUSING SHORTAGE, A HOUSING SHORTAGE, AND THIS IS CERTAINLY AN EASY WAY TO, UH, RESOLVE THAT. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. ARE THERE ANY OTHER, OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO'D LIKE TO ADD TO TO THE DISCUSSION? HEARING [00:15:01] NONSTOP, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN I CONCUR. MS. CONROY I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, CONGRATULATIONS. YOU CAN PLEASE GET WITH STAFF. THEY'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT YOUR NEXT STEPS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. UH, STAFF. NEXT CASE PLEASE. AGENDA ITEM [2. BOA-21-10300119] NUMBER TWO IS CASE BO A 2 1 103 0 0 109. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1815 NORTH FOSTER ROAD, UM, IN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO. THE REQUEST IS FOR A, FOR ONE, A 104 SQUARE FOOT SIGN VARIANCE TO ALLOW A MULTI-TENANT SIGN TO BE 754 SQUARE FEET AND TWO A 24 FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE, UM, FROM THE MAXIMUM 60 FOOT SIGN HEIGHT MAX MAXIMUM TO ALLOW THE MULTI-TENANT SIGN TO BE 84 FEET AND SEVEN INCHES. UM, THE APPLICANT WASN'T ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING TODAY AND IS REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE TO OCTOBER 18TH. OKAY. UH, IS THERE A COMMISSIONER? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A CONTINUANCE TO THE 18TH BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, I RECOMMEND WE, UM, MOVE B O A CASE BOA DASH 21 DASH 0 3 9 TO OCTOBER 8TH. SORRY, 18TH. OCTOBER 18TH. THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UH, WE'LL HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA? I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA? I CONCUR. MS. BREGMAN? YES, I APPROVE MR. DELMER. I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN I CONCUR. MR. CONROY? AYE. MR. TEO? YES. MR. OZUNA? YES. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR. CASES CONTINUE TO OCTOBER 18TH. UH, NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. OKAY, AGENDA [3. BOA-21-10300122] ITEM NUMBER THREE. THREE IS BO O A 21. 1 0 3 0 0 1 22. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 14,000 OSH ROAD WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT 10. THE APPLICANT IS, UH, THOMAS EGGERS. THE REQUEST IS FOR A FIVE FOOT SIGN VARIANCE FROM THE 40 FOOT MAXIMUM SIGN HEIGHT TO ALLOW A SINGLE TENANT SIGN TO BE 45 FEET TALL. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A ZONED C THREE GENERAL COMMERCIAL. SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED DIRECTLY EAST OF THE O'CONNOR ROAD AND NDOS ROAD INTERSECTION. UM, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A NEW SIGN ON THE PROPERTY, UM, USING AN EXISTING PYLON SIGN, WHICH IS ALREADY FIVE FEET OVER THE HEIGHT MAXIMUM. UM, SO THEY'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING WITH THE PYLON, JUST REPLACING THE SIGNAGE. UH, THEY DON'T NEED A, A VARIANCE AT ALL TO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWANCE. UM, D S D SIGN STAFF DID REVIEW THE REQUEST AND DID NOT HAVE ANY CONCERNS. HERE'S A IMAGE OF THE SITE PLAN, AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND B O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 1 22 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. OF FACT, THE PROPOSED HEIGHT OF THE SIGN IS 45 FEET AND TWO, THE SIGN WILL ABIDE BY THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, SIGN REQUIREMENTS. AND THREE D S D SIGN STAFF DID NOT FIND ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS CAUSED BY THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE. STAFF MAILED SEVEN NOTICES. TWO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. NONE ARE RETURN IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ALL RIGHT. THAT CONCLUDES STUFF. YEAH. THANK YOU. UH, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. OKAY. HI, MY NAME IS KATHY SONG AND I'M WITH TITAN SW COMPANY. AND SO THIS LOCATION IS LOCATED AT 14,000 NECHES ROAD. UH, BASICALLY IT'S A, UM, THE, THE CLIENT [00:20:01] IS A TEA COMPANY AND THEY'RE OPENING UP A LOCATION. UM, AND WE JUST WANT TO, UM, YOU KNOW, I GUESS DECREASE COSTS FOR THEM AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. UM, SO WE'RE REQUESTING THAT WE JUST INCREASE, UH, USE THE EXISTING PYLON SIGN SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO ANY KIND OF MODIFICATIONS ON THE CURRENT EXISTING PIPE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, STAFF. IS THERE ANY, ANYBODY SIGN TO SPEAK? ANYTHING TO READ INTO THE RECORD? NO, THERE'S NONE. OKAY. NO ONE'S SIGNED TO SPEAK. SORRY. ALL RIGHT. UH, SO IF YOU COULD, UH, WE'LL OPEN THIS UP TO QUESTIONS. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ZUNA, COMMISSIONER ZUNA? SURE. THE QUESTION ON THE CABINET, ARE Y'ALL KEEPING THE EXISTING CABINET OF THE SIGN OR JUST REPLACING THE FACING ON IT? NO, WE REPLACED THE WHOLE SIGNAGE, THE CABINET, EVERYTHING. YEAH. SO WE'RE JUST ONLY EX USING THE EXISTING PULL POLE, JUST THE POLE THAT'S ON THERE? YES. OKAY. MM-HMM. . AND, AND, AND, AND WITH THIS, OH, GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY. AND THEN THE REPLACEMENT CABINET, ARE YOU INCREASING OR ARE YOU KEEPING THIS, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE SIGN WITHIN THE REGULATORY LIMITS, RIGHT, OF THE SIGN FACE? YES. OKAY. YES. MM-HMM. . THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. ANYONE, COMMISSIONER MANNA. MANNA. UM, SO AS FAR AS, UH, LOOKING AT THE EXISTING POLE, HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST TO, TO WHACK IT DOWN? LIKE FIVE MORE FEET? SO COULD THAT BE DONE? AND HOW MUCH WOULD THAT COST ROUGHLY? UM, IT, UM, I CAN'T REALLY SAY EXACTLY, BUT PROBABLY IN THE THOUSANDS, MAYBE RIGHT BELOW 10,000 OR SO. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH. . ANYONE ELSE? I HAVE A QUESTION. RAGMAN STAFF, UH, DID THE, WAS THERE A PREVIOUS VARIANCE THAT ALLOWED THIS SIGN TO BE 45 FEET OR THE, DID THE CODE CHANGE SINCE THIS SIGN WAS INSTALLED? SO THE SIGN WAS NON-CONFORMING AS IT CURRENTLY WAS. AND SINCE THEY'RE REPLACING THE CABINET, THAT'S WHY THEY NEED THE VARIANCE. NOW. I, I THINK SHE WAS WONDERING WHEN IT WASN'T CONSTRUCTED, WAS IT LEGAL? IT, THE ASSUMPTION IS IF THEY GOT A, IF THEY GOT A PERMIT AT THAT TIME, THE HEIGHT AND THE, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS COMPLIANT WITH THE CODE AT THAT TIME WHEN THE NEW CODES WERE ADOPTED, IT THEN, UM, BRINGS IT INTO A NON-CONFORMING STATUS. AND THEN ANY CHANGES THEN HAVE TO EITHER RECEIVE A VARIANCE IN ORDER TO KEEP IT NON-CONFORMING OR EXCEED THAT NON-CONFORMING. UH, BUT YES, ASSUMING THAT THEY PULLED A PERMIT AND IT WAS LEGAL AT THAT TIME, YES. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO. ANYONE ELSE? NO. OKAY. UH, WITH THAT YOU HAVE, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A MINUTE AND PROVIDE ANY CLOSING REMARKS BEFORE WE DELIBERATE? YEAH. SO I, I THINK I JUST WANNA SAY THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S A NEW, NEW LOCATION, LIKE I SAID, FOR THE CLIENT, AND IT'S A KIND OF A DRINK LOCATION. IT'S KIND OF A NEW THING, UM, THAT IS, UM, KIND OF BRAND NEW. IT'S LIKE A, IT'S A FRANCHISE THAT'S, UM, GROWING REALLY RAPIDLY. UH, THERE'S A LOT OF RESTAURANTS AROUND THAT AREA. SO IT'S GOING TO, YOU KNOW, ADD TO THAT COMMUNITY. UM, UM, IT'S GONNA PROVIDE MORE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, UM, JOBS FOR THAT COMMUNITY. I THINK THE LOCATION ITSELF, THE BUILDING IS GONNA LOOK SUPER NICE INTERIOR WISE, EXTERIOR WISE. AND SO I THINK, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO REALLY REQUEST THAT, UM, WE COULD TRY TO NOT INCREASE ANY MORE COST TO THE CLIENT. RIGHT. THAT WAS THE OLD, UH, SECURITY SERVICE. F C U BUILDING, I THINK. YES. . GREAT. UH, SO THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. UH, STAFF PLEASE TAKE A ROLL. UH, WE NEED, I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. UH, COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO MAKE, MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 21 DASH 0 3 1 22. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT THE REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT SIGN VARIANCE FROM THE 40 FOOT MAXIMUM SIGN HEIGHT ALLOWANCE TO ALLOW A SINGLE TENANT SIGN TO BE 45 FEET TALL, SITUATED AT 14,000 NACODOCHES ROAD APPLICANT BEING TOMAS EGGERS, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY, SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND WHAT THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ARTICLE PROHIBITS ANY REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGNS ON THE SITE, CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF A SITE SUCH AS DIMENSIONS, LANDSCAPING, OR TOPOGRAPHY. AND I WOULD SAY A DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE WOULD PROBABLY CAUSE A CESSATION OF THE, OR THE MOST EFFECTIVE ECONOMICAL, ECONOMICAL USE OF THE PROPERTY. UM, THE PROPOSED SIGN WITHIN THE SAME AREA IS WARRANTED AND WILL CONFORM TO EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE COMMERCIAL AREA. THREE. AFTER THE SEEKING, UH, ONE OR MORE OF THE FINDINGS SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPHS ONE OR TWO, THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE DOES NOT PROVIDE THE APPLICANT WITH A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE, NOT ENJOYED BY OTHERS SIMILAR, SIMILARLY SITUATED OR POTENTIALLY SIMILARLY SITUATED. THE REQUEST IS NOT OUTTA CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. THE SIGN, UH, WILL NOT BLOCK ANY EXISTING BUSINESS. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE DOES NOT PROVIDE THE APPLICANT WITH A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE, AND B, GRANTING [00:25:01] THE VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, AS SURROUNDING PROPERTIES HAVE SIMILAR, SIMILAR SIGNAGE. FURTHER, THE PROPOSED SIGN WILL UTILIZE EXISTING PILOT ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, WHICH ALREADY FIVE FEET OVER THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT. AND C GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH THE STATED PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE. THE REQUESTED SIGN HIDE VARIANCE, WILL NOT CONFLICT WITH THE STATED PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER AND A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANO. UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, PLEASE LEAD TO THE DISCUSSION. YEAH, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION. UM, THIS IS, THIS IS A, UH, EXAMPLE OF A, OF A GOOD REDEVELOPMENT, REUSE OF THE PROPERTY. UM, IT PROVIDES ECONOMIC, UH, USE OF THE PROPERTY. UH, THEN NOT GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD BE A COST, AN UNDUE COST BURDEN TO THE APPLICANT. AND THAT WE HAD TESTIMONY ABOUT THE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IS TO CONFORM ON A FIVE, FIVE FOOT DIFFERENCE OF THE SIGN HEIGHT AND, AND THE NEW SIGN CABINET. AND EVERYTHING WOULD COMPLY WITH ALL THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SIGNAGE AND SUCH. SO FOR A MINIMAL AMOUNT, I THINK IT'S A VERY, UM, UM, BEST CASE FOR THIS PROPERTY AND GOOD USE OF THE PROPERTY. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA? UH, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. UM, UH, WE ACTUALLY LIVE ON HENER, WHICH IS MORE ONE OF THE FIRST ONES WENT UP. UM, AND SO IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE PEOPLE BUY TEA LIKE THAT , BUT THEY'RE LINED UP. AND SO I THINK THERE'S A GOOD BUSINESS AT THIS LOCATION. AND I THINK THE SIGN, YOU KNOW, UH, USING EXISTING POLL REALLY MAKES SENSE HERE. SO I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH THAT. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. GREAT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE? STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR WITH FINANCIAL FACT. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN? I I CONROY. I CONCUR. MR. TEO. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU SO MUCH, AND HOPE YOU GUYS GET TO TRY THE TEA . THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT CASE, PLEASE. LIKE 10 TIMES THIS, THIS SAME? YEAH, IT'S GONNA [4. BOA-21-10300095] BE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR, UH, B O A CASE. 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 9 5. SUBJECT ADDRESS IS 1 32 RAYMOND STREET COUNCIL. DISTRICT NUMBER ONE APPLICANT IS JOSEPH PALUMBO. UH, REQUEST IS FOR ONE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FOREFOOT 11 INCH WOODEN PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINES. AND TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE CLEAR VISION STANDARD TO ALLOW A SOLID SCREEN FENCE TO BE WITHIN THE CLEAR VISION FIELD. ZONING IS A SINGLE FAMILY RES RESIDENTIAL, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG RAYMOND STREET, UH, COSTA, NO GTOS. UM, EXISTING SOLID SCREEN FENCE MEASURES FOUR FOOT 11 INCHES IN HEIGHT EXISTING. UH, AND THEN, UH, EXISTING REAR SOLID FENCE ALSO MEASURES SEVEN FOOT EIGHT INCHES UPON SITE VISITS. STASH ALSO OBSERVED THERE WAS A CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT NOT BEING MET, MAKING THE INTERSECTION A LIFE AND SAFETY ISSUE. SITE PLAN, SUBJECT PROPERTY, UH, IT DOES SIT ON THE CORNER LOT. FOUR FOOT 11 INCHES IN HEIGHT FOR THE SOLID SCREEN FENCE IN THE FRONT. UH, SOLID SCREEN FENCE IN FRONT. UH, THAT'S A PICTURE OF THE CORNER WHERE THE STOP SIGN IS CURRENTLY LOCATED AT. IT'S A REAR, REAR SURROUNDING MAYBE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S ACTUALLY A, A HOUSE THAT'S ACROSS THE STREET THAT HAS A SIMILAR FENCE. UH, I BELIEVE THERE'S ONLY TWO STRUCTURES ON THE ENTIRE BLOCK THAT LOOK LIKE THIS. UM, FRONT FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 9 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE, THE FRONT YARD WOODEN PRIVACY FENCE MEASURES FOUR FOOT 11 INCHES IN HEIGHT. TWO. THE FRONT YARD FENCE DESIGN ASPECTS ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH HEIGHT REGULATIONS ACCORDING TO U D C 35 DASH 5 14 3. THE REQUEST WAS DENIED BACK IN 2019 THROUGH THE B O A FOUR FENCE HEIGHT. COULD BE THREE FEET IN HEIGHT WITH A SOLID SCREEN FENCE OR ALTERED TO A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE AT THE SAME HEIGHT. FIVE. THE FENCE DESIGN DOES NOT MATCH THAT [00:30:01] OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. CLEAR VISION VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 9 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE DEFENSE IMPEDES IN AN AREA DESIGNATED FOR CLEAR VISION, WHICH ALLOWS A 25 FROM FRONT AND SIDE PROPERTY LINES FROM THE CORNER TO THE D S D TRAFFIC STAFF DOES NOT HAVE CONCERNS FOR THE PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF THE FENCE. THERE WERE, UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS 30 NOTICES THAT WERE MAILED OUT. TWO CAME BACK IN FAVOR. UM, COLIN GARDEN'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION TO THE VARIANCE AND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. UH, BEFORE YOU LEAVE, UH, SO JUST JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR. IN 2019, WE, THE B O A DENIED THIS SAME REQUEST, THE EXACT SAME REQUEST, AND THEN HE, THE APPLICANT WAITED OUT THE TWO YEARS AND IS TRYING TO BRING IT BACK. I I, TO MY UNDERSTANDING, THIS IS ACTUALLY A NEW HOMEOWNER. OKAY. IT WAS A DIFFERENT PREVIOUS HOMEOWNER, BUT, UM, IT WAS NEVER CORRECTED. AND SO BACK IN 2019, DOES A, DOES A TWO YEAR RULE APPLY OR CHANGE WHEN THERE'S NEW OWNERS INVOLVED? IS THERE A RESET? SO THERE'S ONLY A ONE YEAR PENALTY WHEN THERE'S A DENIAL. OKAY. WHEN YOU, SO AFTER THAT, THEY'RE, THEY'RE ABLE TO COME IN AGAIN AND REQUEST. AND WHEN DID THEY APPLY FOR THE FENCE? LIKE IT'S BUILT? I MEAN, SO IN 2019, WAS IT BUILT AS WELL? SAME FENCE. IT'S THE SAME FENCE. THEY NEVER APPLIED. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU CRUZ. UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UH, I GOT A QUESTION FOR STAFF, UH, ON THIS PROPERTY. WASN'T IT FIRST RECOGNIZED AS DISTRICT FIVE AND NOT DISTRICT ONE? WHY IS THE DISTRICT ONE NOW? IT'S IN COUNCIL'S DISTRICT ONE, ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA. I HAD A QUESTION IN REGARDS TO THE D S D UH, RECOMMENDATION. UM, SO YOU WERE SAYING THAT IN, IN, IN THE APPROVAL PORTION OF THE VARIANCE THAT, THAT THEY WOULD APPROVE, IS THAT BASED ON SETTING THE FENCE BACK THE 25 FEET FROM THE FRONT? I, I WAS, CAN YOU BRING THAT SLIDE UP AGAIN WHEN YOU LOOKED FOR, OKAY. SO D S D TRAFFIC STAFF DOES NOT HAVE A CONCERN FOR THE PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF THE FENCE. ARE YOU SAYING PROPOSED PLACEMENT IF THEY COMPLY WITH THE 25 FOOT, NO APOLOGIES IF THEY COMPLIED WITH THE HEIGHT OR IS IT THEY'RE NOT OPPOSED TO IT BEING IN THE CLEAR VISION AT ALL? THAT'S CORRECT. THE CURRENT PLACEMENT OF THE FENCE. OKAY. IF, IF THEY COMPLY WITH THE HEIGHT? CORRECT. OKAY. GOT IT. ALL RIGHT. SO NOW NORMALLY WE, WE WAIT FOR THE APPLICANT PRESENTATION BEFORE WE ASK QUESTIONS, BUT BECAUSE THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN HERE FOR THE EXACT SAME THING, UM, THAT'S WHY WE'RE MOVING INTO QUESTIONS NOW. SO IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE THAT HAS A TECHNICAL QUESTION FOR STAFF BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE APPLICANT, MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA S SO, YEAH, I GUESS SO. UM, IF THE, IF IT WAS PREVIOUSLY DENIED AND THEN, UM, THERE WAS BASICALLY THE CITY, A CITY OR, OR A CITY, UM, GUIDELINE THAT SAYS THAT THEY NEEDED TO REDUCE IT AND THEY DON'T REDUCE IT, AND THEN THEY SELL IT. I MEAN, IS THAT, DOES THAT CHANGE RESPONSIBILITIES, YOU KNOW, FROM THE, FROM THE VERY FIRST READING, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE BASICALLY IT'S BEEN OUTTA COMPLIANCE FOR TWO YEARS NOW, RIGHT? SO REGARDLESS OF THE OWNERSHIP, THE PROPERTY HAS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE UNLESS THEY'VE RECEIVE A VARIANCE. SO AGAIN, WHETHER THE OWNERSHIP CHANGES, WHETHER THAT PERSON IS NOW INHERITING THE PROBLEM FROM BEFORE, IT STILL HAS TO BE RESOLVED. IS THERE A TIMELINE FOR, FOR, FOR WHEN THINGS LIKE THAT HAVE TO BE RESOLVED? AND SO IS THERE SOME KIND OF GUIDELINE, I'M, I'M SORRY, THIS IS PROBABLY OFF TOPIC, BUT JUST TRYING TO FOLLOW UP ON, YOU KNOW, AS WE MAKE THESE DECISIONS, YOU KNOW, IS, YOU KNOW, HOW IS IT THAT THE CITY FOLLOWS UP ON THESE KIND OF DIALOGUES? SO A VIOLATION CAN BE GIVEN TO A PROPERTY ANYTIME THAT IT'S IN VIOLATION. THERE'S NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. THERE IS A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT, UH, BASED ON THE CONSTRUCTION THAT OCCURRED. BUT, UM, A VIOLATION CAN ALWAYS HAPPEN EVERY DAY. SO IT, IT JUST NEEDS TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. WELL, I I THINK THE CRUX OF THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT IT'S BEEN IN VIOLATION. THEY, THEY EXERCISED THEIR RIGHT TO COME HERE TWO YEARS AGO IT WAS DENIED. AND IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, WHAT HAS THE CITY DONE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH GETTING THIS FENCE CORRECTED? WHAT IS, WHAT'S THE ENFORCEMENT, UH, BACKGROUND ON THIS? THERE IS A HISTORY OF, UH, THE CODE ENFORCEMENT HISTORY THAT'S IN THE STAFF REPORT. IT STARTS WITH, UH, IN 2018, UH, WHEN, UH, THEY WERE, UH, GIVEN A VIOLATION NOTICE, UH, FOR, UH, STRUCTURES WITHOUT A PERMIT. UM, AND IN 2018, THE SOLID WOOD FENCE CONSTRUCTED IN THE FRONT WITHOUT A PERMIT. UM, AND THEN AGAIN, IT WAS CHECKED IN, [00:35:01] IN FEBRUARY OF 2019. THE FENCE PERMIT STILL HAD NOT BEEN PULLED, UM, AGAIN IN DECEMBER OF 2019, NO FENCE PERMIT OBTAINED. UM, AND THEN IN JANUARY OF 2020, UH, STILL NO FENCE PERMIT OBTAINED, NO MODIFICATION TO THE FENCE. AND THAT, THAT'S WHAT THE HISTORY THAT WE HAVE TODAY. SO, SO WITH THE, IF THE BO O A DENIES SUCH AN APPLICATION AND THERE, AND THERE'S BEEN A, A CITATION, THE, IT JUST SEEMS ODD THAT THE CITY HASN'T TRIED TO FORCE A REMEDY OF THIS IN THE LAST TWO YEARS ON, SO THEY RECEIVE NOTE, THEY WILL, THEY DO RECEIVE NOTICES TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. UH, MANY OF THESE NOTICES GET, UH, TO WHAT WE CALL LIKE AN ADMINISTRATIVE COURT OR A MUNICIPAL COURT TO RESOLVE. UM, AND THEN THE JUDGE TAKES OVER AND DETERMINES, OKAY, YOU NEED TO RESOLVE THIS OR ASSESSES A, A PENALTY OR A FINE. THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THAT THE PENALTY AND FI AND FINE GIVEN MAY BE THE RESOLUTION, IF YOU WILL. AND THAT'S NOT THE RESOLUTION. UH, SO WHAT, WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNER? THE PREVIOUS OWNER DID NOT COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THAT CASE AT THAT TIME. NOW THIS PERSON IS COMING IN, UH, TO EITHER KEEP WHAT THEY HAVE BY ASKING THE BOARD TO KEEP IT OR, UM, DETERMINE WHAT THEY NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE, DEPENDING ON WHO. SO LEMME PUT THIS WAY. IS THERE ANY POINT OF TIME WHERE THE CITY WILL KNOCK THE FENCE DOWN? LIKE COULD IT STAY THERE FOR 10 MORE YEARS? I MEAN, AT WHAT POINT WILL THE CITY TRY TO ENFORCE, UH, YOU KNOW, COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE? WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION, BECAUSE AFTER THAT WOULD BE LIENS ON THE PROPERTY. OH, YOU STILL HERE? YEAH, . PERFECT. THAT'S WHAT I THINK THE QUESTION FROM THE COMMISSION IS. HEY EVERYONE, UH, MIKE SHANNON, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. SO WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE INTO THE ENFORCEMENT OF OUR CITY CODE. SO, UH, IN A CASE LIKE THIS, UH, WE WILL CONTINUE TO UTILIZE, UH, HIGHER FINES MM-HMM. THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE AND CRIMINAL COURTS UNTIL IT MAKES SENSE FOR THEM TO FIX IT. OKAY. UH, THE CITY ROUTINELY DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO KNOCK THE FENCE DOWN AND WE'LL UNTIL WE CAN TAKE IT TO PROBABLY DISTRICT COURT AND THERE WOULD'VE TO BE A, A, A LONG LIST OF OTHER ISSUES. UM, BUT WHAT KAT IS MENTIONING, WHAT'S UNIQUE ABOUT THIS CASE IS, UH, WHENEVER, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER, UH, CHANGES HANDS, A LOT OF OUR ADMINISTRATIVE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES WILL KIND OF GIVE THEM ANOTHER CHANCE. THE NEW OWNER, A CHANCE TO ADMIN ADMINISTRATIVELY RESOLVE IT THROUGH A B O A VARIANCE. SO WE WILL TRY TO GET COMPLIANCE THROUGH NOTICES AND FINES THAT START AT $300, $500, A THOUSAND DOLLARS. UH, BUT MOST OF THE TIME, IF WE, IF WE LEAVE HERE TODAY, NOT TO YOU, MAKE YOUR DECISION EITHER WAY, UM, IF THEY DON'T GET THEIR VARIANCE, UH, WE WILL THEN GO BACK TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT NORMAL STEPS OF THE 300, $500,000 FINES, UH, TO ENCOURAGE, UH, ANY PROPERTY OWNER TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPROPRIATE CODE. OKAY. OKAY. BRAGMAN, WHAT HO HOLD ON A SEC. UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN AND THEN BRAGMAN. YEAH. WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO WRITE A TICKET EACH AND EVERY DAY. UH, IN REALITY IT'S ABOUT MONTHLY. OKAY. UM, THAT'S WHAT THE COURTS HAVE ASKED US TO DO, TO GIVE PEOPLE A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME. UH, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT. WE WANT COMPLIANCE. RIGHT. UH, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE DO HAVE TOOLS IN THE TOOLKIT, UH, WHICH ARE USUALLY MONETARY AND ADMINISTRATIVE, CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CITATIONS. UH, THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE ON THE BOOKS. AND WE USE THOSE TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE AT SOME POINT, THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF FINES. NORMALLY MOST OWNERS DON'T THINK IT'S WORTH IT TO KEEP PAYING THOSE FINES. UH, BUT AGAIN, WE WILL, WE WILL GENERALLY NOT KNOCK DOWN THAT FENCE, UH, UNLESS THERE'S OTHER ISSUES INVOLVED. OKAY. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UM, SO MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WOULD FLAG IN THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY OWNERSHIP SO THAT, BESIDES ON THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WEBSITE, WHERE IT LISTS PERMITS, YOU KNOW, THAT HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLETED OR HAVE NOT BEEN CLOSED, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WOULD FLAG UPON THE YEAH, SO THE WORK WITHOUT PERMIT PENALTY, UH, CASES LIKE THE ONE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I THINK SOMEONE READ IT OUT. UH, MAYBE IT WAS KAT THAT READ IT OUT. THOSE ARE ONLINE, UM, UH, JUST LIKE THE CONSTRUCTION WORK WITHOUT PERMITS INSIDE OF HOMES. WE'VE WORKED WITH SABRE A LOT ON HOW TO RESEARCH THOSE. SO THOSE ARE ONLINE, SO YOU CAN REVIEW THOSE. AND IF YOU'RE A SELLER OR A BUYER, THAT INFORMATION IS THERE FOR YOU. UH, WE DO A LOT OF EDUCATION AND OUTREACH, UH, AND HAVE FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS WITH A LOT OF THE HOME REMODEL CONSTRUCTIONS, UH, TRYING TO LET PEOPLE KNOW WHERE TO FIND THAT INFORMATION. BUT, UH, IT'S DEFINITELY A USEFUL TOOL. SO YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T FIND YOURSELF IN THIS BEFORE YOU BUY AND OR SELL, WHETHER YOU'RE THE OWNER, FUTURE OWNER OR THE REP. AND I, JUST AS A FOLLOW UP, IF I COULD, SO IF THERE'S A FINE THAT'S LEVIED, WOULD THAT SHOW UP ANY PLACE FOR LIKE THE TITLE COMPANY THAT WOULD, IS THAT A LIEN THAT'S FILED ON THE PROPERTY OR IS THAT JUST A FINE? THAT'S [00:40:02] THE FINES THAT I'M REFERRING TO ARE GENERALLY THE, UH, TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE PERSON, UH, CIVIL AND CRIMINAL COURT, THOSE FINES, UM, I DON'T THINK THEY END UP BEING LIENS ON THEIR PROPERTY. UH, I'LL DOUBLE CHECK THAT FOR YOU, BUT IT'S NOT, IT, THEY'RE NORMALLY NOT A TITLE COMPANY SEARCH WOULD CATCH THAT. 'CAUSE THOSE ARE TO THE INDIVIDUAL, NOT NECESSARILY THE PROPERTY. I, I THINK WHERE THE QUESTION MAY BE, 'CAUSE SOMETIMES WHEN THE CITY DOES A FORCE MOW AND THERE'S A LIEN, THOSE WILL SHOW UP ON THE BEXAR COUNTY RECORDS, COUNTY CLERK RECORDS IF IT GOES THROUGH THE CITY'S ADMINISTRATIVE COURTS. I'M JUST WONDERING, WOULD THAT BE RECORDED IN THE COURT RECORDS OR IS IT CITY RECORDS ONLY? SO I'LL, I'LL, I'LL START WITH THE LIENS. LIENS ARE WHEN THE CITY ACTUALLY PAYS TO ACT CLEAN UP YOUR PROPERTY OR DO SOMETHING LIKE WE CUT YOUR GRASS. YEAH. UH, DANGEROUS STRUCTURES, WE HAVE TO DEMOLISH THROUGH THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARDS ONE OF YOUR COUNTERPART BOARDS. UH, IF WE PAY MONEY TO DO IT, WE TRY TO COLLECT THAT MONEY. IF WE DON'T GET THAT MONEY OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, IT BECOMES A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY. YEAH. THOSE YOU, THOSE YOU DO FIND, QUITE OFTEN WE WORK WITH TITLE COMP COMPANIES TO CLEAR THAT UP TO GET LIEN PAYOFFS, ET CETERA. UH, BUT AGAIN, THE COURT FINDS WHETHER IT BE THE CIVIL OR, OR THE CRIMINAL MUNICIPAL COURTS, UH, DON'T TEND TO TURN INTO TO LIENS BECAUSE AGAIN, TO THE, THEY'RE TO THE PERSON, NOT THE PROPERTY. WELL, I, I THINK THAT WAS VERY INFORMATIVE. UH, I HOPE, UH, ADDRESSES EVERYONE'S QUESTIONS. UH, WE GIVE CLASSES ON CODE ENFORCEMENT , UH, ON SATURDAY MORNINGS, UH, SIMILAR TO ZONING. SO WE'LL INVITE YOU ALL TO THEM. AND, AND REAL QUICK, THIS IS A CRASH COURSE, COMMISSIONER MIN CHAKA, WE, SO WE CAN KEEP MOVING ALONG HERE. I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. UH, HAS THERE A FINE BEEN ASSESSED ON THIS SINCE THE FI PAST FIVE VIOLATIONS SO FAR? I DON'T KNOW. UH, I'LL, WE'D HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK. UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE PROBABLY NO, ONLY BECAUSE THAT SWITCH IN, UH, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, IT REALLY FOR A LOT OF OUR JUDGES WILL RESET THE CLOCK FOR THEM. BUT I I, I'M GUESSING MORE THAN ANSWERING THE QUESTION DEFINITIVELY SO WE CAN FIND OUT FOR YOU. WELL, GREAT. I'M SURE THE APPLICANT CLEARED THAT. UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DIRECTOR SHANNON, UH, CAN THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD? UH, SIR, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. UH, IT'S JOSEPH PALUMBO, UH, 1 32 RAYMOND STREET. OKAY. AND YOU CAN PLEASE, UH, CONTINUE WITH YOUR, UH, PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. UM, SO GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, I WANNA START BY APOLOGIZING FOR INTRODUCING THIS LEVEL OF COMPLEXITY TO THIS BOARD MEETING. I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT I WAS GETTING INTO. UM, SO, UH, TO SPEAK TO A COUPLE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN ASKED, UM, AS THE, I PURCHASED THE HOME NOVEMBER, 2020, SO ROUGHLY ABOUT A YEAR AGO, UH, NONE OF THIS WAS DISCLOSED TO ME AS PART OF THAT PURCHASE PROCESS. UM, WE WERE TOLD OF ONE POTENTIAL CODE VIOLATION, UH, HAVING TO DO WITH THE STRUCTURE, UH, IN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH ONE I WAS INFORMED OF. I IMMEDIATELY, UM, DID THE WORK TO GET THAT INTO COMPLIANCE. UH, THIS FENCE WAS COMPLETE NEWS TO ME. IT'S WHAT I INHERITED, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S MY FENCE NOW AND I HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT. UH, AS FAR AS THE FORMER OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY, THOUGH, I HONESTLY CANNOT SPEAK TO WHY THEY DECIDED TO BUILD THE FENCE OUT OF CODE AND WHY THEY DIDN'T ADDRESS IT. WHAT I CAN SPEAK TO THOUGH IS, IS THAT I THINK THEIR SITUATIONS ARE QUITE DIFFERENT. UM, SO I'M THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY, UH, AND I'M HERE REALLY TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER RESIDENT OF THAT PROPERTY WHO WAS NOT ABLE TO BE HERE TODAY. UM, BUT IS REALLY, UH, THE MAIN REASON WHY I'M HERE TODAY. AND THAT IS MY ROOMMATE BUCKY. AND TO BE QUITE HONEST, MY BEST FRIEND, BUT DON'T TELL MY WIFE THAT. UM, SO , WHEN WE MOVED INTO THIS PROPERTY, WE THOUGHT THE FENCE WAS COOL. WHEN WE HEARD THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE A CODE PROBLEM, WE STARTED TO TAKE THE ACTION TO MAKE THE NECESSARY CHANGES. HOWEVER, SINCE THEN, WHAT WE'VE LEARNED IS THIS STREET HAS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF FOOT TRAFFIC, BOTH FROM THE STUDENTS AT KIPP, AS WELL AS A LOT OF TRANSIENT TRAFFIC FROM SOME HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS AROUND THE THE AREA. WHAT WE'VE OBSERVED, AND THE TWO PEOPLE THAT WERE IN FAVOR OF THIS VARIANCE HAVE ALSO OBSERVED IS PET OWNERS THAT HAVE FENCES THAT ARE EITHER LOW OR OPEN. UM, WE HAVE SEEN BOTH CHILDREN AND OTHER PEOPLE PUT THEIR HANDS THROUGH THE FENCE TO EITHER TRY TO PET THE DOG OR TO FEED THE DOG. UM, NOW MY DOG NORMALLY IS VERY DOCILE. IT'S GETTING A LITTLE OLDER AND HIS VISION IS NOW STARTING TO GO. SO HE HAS TROUBLE DETERMINING WHO IS A THREAT AND WHO'S NOT A THREAT. AND WHAT I'VE SEEN IS, UM, AS KIDS WILL WALK BY AND KIND OF REACH OVER THE LOWER PART OF THE FENCE, HE GETS KIND OF AGGRESSIVE AND TERRITORIAL. SO THE REASON WHY I'M ASKING FOR THIS VARIANCE IS REALLY TO PREVENT ANY PERSON WALKING ON THE STREET, PARTICULARLY THE, LIKE I SAID, THE YOUNG CHILDREN WHO ATTEND KIPP AND WALK BY MY HOUSE ON SCHOOL DAYS, UH, TO PUT THEIR HANDS THROUGH THE FENCE, POTENTIALLY GETTING BIT BY MY DOG. UM, AND ALSO TO PREVENT INJURY TO MY DOG FROM SOMEBODY GIVING HIM AN INAPPROPRIATE SNACK. UM, SO THAT'S THE REASON FOR MY REQUEST. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, IF YOU COULD JUST, UH, HOLD TIGHT FOR A SECOND. UH, YES, SIR. UH, STAFF. IS THERE ANYTHING, ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, ANYTHING TO READ INTO THE RECORD? NO ONE SIGNED IN TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE. OKAY. UH, [00:45:01] LET'S OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS? YES. UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, PUT A SIGN UP. DO NOT THIS DOG OR DO NOT. I IMAGINE, UH, EXCUSE ME, COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN IS YOUR, UH, SPEAKER. I IS THIS NOT? YOU HAVE TO HOLD IT DOWN. GOT IT. SORRY. IT'S OKAY. YOU DO THIS ONE. OKAY. SO HAVE YOU THOUGHT OF PUTTING A SIGN UP ON YOUR FENCE SAYING, DO NOT PET DOG? AS I SAID, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE IN TERMS OF LIABILITY, GIVING ADEQUATE NOTICE. AND IF SOMEBODY'S STUPID ENOUGH TO PUT THEIR HAND IN FOR YOUR DOG TO BITE, THEN IT'S THEIR RESPONSIBILITY AFTER THEY'VE BEEN GIVEN NOTICE. UH, I'M NOT A LAWYER EITHER. UM, OF COURSE, THAT WAS MY FIRST THOUGHT THOUGH. SINCE YOU, THERE ARE SIGNS A WARNING OF DOGS THAT I'VE SEEN AT PLENTY OF OTHER PROPERTIES. UH, AND SPEAKING TO OTHER RESIDENTS ON THIS STREET WHO HAVE THOSE SIMILAR SIGNS, KIDS DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO IT. AND THOSE ARE, HONESTLY, WITH ALL THE FOOT TRAFFIC WE HAVE, IT'S MOSTLY THE STUDENTS THAT WALK UP AND DOWN THAT WANT TO GIVE SNACKS AND PETS AND WHATEVER. THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT I'M MOST CONCERNED WITH. IF YOU'RE AN ADULT AND YOU KNOWINGLY DO SO, I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE KIND OF ASKING FOR IT. BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IN SHORT, YES, THAT WAS OUR FIRST THOUGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, SIR. UH, COMMISSIONER ALBERT, UH, WOULD A SIX FOOT CENT FENCE WORK TO, UH, KEEP YOUR DOG SAFE? UH, SIX FOOT SEVEN, NO. SIX FOOT. OH, SIX FOOT. UH, YES. BUT IF IT'S THE APPLICANT'S FENCE IS FOUR FOOT 11 TALL. FOUR. RIGHT. BUT IF IT'S OPEN AND SOMEBODY CAN SQUEEZE THEIR HAND THROUGH, ESPECIALLY A SMALL HAND, IT PRESENTS A PROBLEM STILL. RIGHT? RIGHT. WHAT I'M LOOKING AT IS THE, THE FRONT FENCE, UH, CORRECT. TO BE WITHIN CODE. AND THEN IF YOUR SIDE AND REAR FENCES, WHICH ARE ALLOWED TO BE SIX FOOT AND THE DOG WAS CONTAINED TO THE SIX FOOT FENCED AREA, THEN THAT, THAT WOULD PROBABLY SOLVE EVERYBODY'S PROBLEM. UH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE OPEN TO MAKING A CHANGE LIKE THAT OR, UM, SO ONCE AGAIN, WE'VE ALSO LOOKED AT THAT AS WELL. UM, CAN'T REALLY SEE IT FROM THESE PICTURES. WE DON'T HAVE MUCH OF A YARD. UM, SO IT WOULD REALLY BE JUST A VERY SMALL CORRIDOR, UH, THAT OUR DOG WOULD BE CONTAINED TO. AND HE'S A RUNNER , SO, UH, IT WOULD CERTAINLY NOT PROBABLY BE THE BEST THING FOR THE DOG, UH, JUST IN TERMS OF HIS OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ZUNA, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, HOW MUCH TRAFFIC IS ON THAT SIDE STREET? THAT AD? ADELA STREET? 'CAUSE THAT'S THE IMPACTED STREET AS YOU'RE TURNING ONTO REMAN AND THAT'S WHERE YOUR VISION IS BLOCKED. CLEARLY, IF YOU'RE STOPPED AT THAT STOP SIGN MM-HMM. AND YOU'RE, AND YOUR FENCE IS SOLID, THAT'S A VISION OBSTRUCTION. TRYING TO SEE IF ANY CARS ARE COMING DOWN ON RAYMOND STREET. I MEAN, THAT'S THE WHOLE ISSUE HERE. SO HOW MUCH TRAFFIC DO YOU DO YOU SEE ON THAT SIDE STREET? DURING THE SCHOOL DAYS? THAT IS WHERE A LOT OF THE OLDER STUDENTS WILL PARK THEIR CARS. SO FOR PICKUP DROP OFF MORNING AND AFTERNOON, THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF TRAFFIC THERE. UM, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE, WHICH IS NOT SHOWN IN ANY OF THESE PICTURES, I BELIEVE, AND WHEN I WAS A, UM, NOTIFIED, UH, OF THIS SECOND ISSUE, UM, MY GARAGE IS ON THE SIDE. I USED THAT CORNER VERY FREQUENTLY. UH, THE VISION ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET IS TWICE AS BAD AS WHAT IT IS ON MY SIDE. THAT'S A VACANT LOT. IT'S JUST OVERGROWN. UM, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THE, THE VISIBILITY ON MY SIDE, MAKING A RIGHT TURN, UH, IS SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER THAN THE VISION FROM THE LEFT SIDE. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MANNA? COMMISSIONER, MANNA? SO, SO ON THE PICTURE THERE THAT I SAW EARLIER, IT SHOWED TWO LEVELS OF FENCING ON THE FRONT YARD. SO, SO ONE A LITTLE BIT LOWER AT THE GATE ITSELF AND VERSUS THE SIDE. AND SO, SO WHAT'S THE HEIGHT OF THE SIDE? WE'LL SAY THE SIDE DIRECTLY IN THE CENTER MM-HMM. . UH, SO AT THE, AT THE MAILBOX ITSELF, WHAT'S THE HEIGHT OF THAT FENCE VERSUS THE HEIGHT TO THE FENCE RIGHT NEXT TO IT THEN? I BELIEVE IT'S APPROXIMATELY THREE FEET. IT'S SHOULD BE WITHIN CODE. SO, SO THREE FEET RIGHT THERE. SO, SO THAT PART'S, SO, SO THREE FOOT CODE OR THREE FOOT'S WITHIN CODE MM-HMM. . AND SO, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS ALLOWED IS BASICALLY AN EXTENSION OF THE FENCE ABOVE THE THREE FOOT LINE USING PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCING. AND SO THE QUESTION WOULD BE, IS THAT A POSSIBILITY THERE ALONG THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY SO THAT BASICALLY YOU HAVE BOTH THE SECURITY OF THE THREE FOOT SIDE VERSUS A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN TOP CAP ON TOP OF THAT? AND WOULD THAT BE SUFFICIENT? UH, SO I WAS ACTUALLY NOT AWARE OF THAT. UM, I THINK THAT THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE, UM, A SUITABLE ACCOMMODATION FOR WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE FOR. SO THEN SECOND QUESTION IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, THE WHOLE DIALOGUE THAT YOU PROBABLY HEARD WITH REGARDS TO THE, UM, UM, CLEAR VISION AND SO, SO SIMILAR DIALOGUE CAN BE HELD WITH THAT. AND SO, SO IF WE MOVE TO A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN AREA NEAR THAT SPACE, THEN THAT TAKES CARE [00:50:01] OF SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS WITH REGARDS TO CLEAR VISION AND SO, SO WOULD THAT BE AN OPTION AS WELL? UH, I THINK THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION, YES. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. UH, I NOTICED THAT THE INTERSECTION, UH, THE FENCE IS ANGLED ABOUT 45 DEGREES. THAT IS CORRECT ON THE CORNER. UH, COULD THAT ANGLE BE BROUGHT BACK A LITTLE BIT SO THAT IT WOULD INCREASE VISION? UH, YES. I THINK WITH ENOUGH MONEY, ANYTHING'S POSSIBLE. I'M JUST SAYING THERE'S A TREE, THERE'S A TREE IN THE WAY. I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T KNOW HOW CLOSE THE TREE WAS TO THE FENCE. THE PICTURE LOOKS LIKE IT'S PRETTY CLOSE. UH, THE TREE WOULD'VE TO BE REMOVED. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, SO IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, SO, UH, SIR, YOU'VE HEARD A LOT OF, OF YOU KNOW, COMMENTARY. UH, TAKE A COUPLE MINUTES, UH, GIVE US ANY CLOSING REMARKS YOU WANT US TO CONSIDER BEFORE WE DELIBERATE. UH, YES. THE ONLY CLOSING REMARK THAT I WOULD REALLY MAKE IS THAT, UM, QUITE HONESTLY, I AM SURPRISED AT ONLY HAVING TWO IN FAVOR, UH, OF THIS VARIANCE. UH, AS I'VE GOTTEN TO KNOW MY NEIGHBORS OVER THE LAST YEARS, THE MAJORITY OF THEM BEING PET OWNERS, UH, THIS IS A GROWING CONCERN. UM, LIKE I SAID, CERTAINLY THE STUDENTS, BUT ALSO, UM, AND I APOLOGIZE, I ACTUALLY MEANT TO BRING IT FOR THE RECORD. THE, UH, AMOUNT OF TRANSIENT TRAFFIC THAT I'VE CAPTURED IN MY SECURITY CAMERAS. UH, IT JUST SEEMS TO BE INCREASING DAY AFTER DAY. UM, SO WHILE CERTAINLY I THINK THERE ARE ACCOMMODATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED HERE THAT COULD BE MADE, UM, I THINK THAT THE FENCE AND ITS CURRENT STATE, UM, DOES OFFER MY FAMILY AND CERTAINLY MY PET, UH, THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF, UH, SECURITY AND PROTECTION FROM A INJURY OR ANYTHING ELSE HAPPEN THAT WE MIGHT BE LIABLE FOR. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE A COMMISSIONER? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS, MR. CHAIR. COULD WE CONDITION THAT? 'CAUSE I LIKE THE FACT THAT THE ANGLED FENCE THERE CREATES SOME VISION, RIGHT? AND IF WE GRANT THE VARIANCE, 'CAUSE WE STATE THAT THE FENCE CONDITION CANNOT CHANGE FROM WHAT IS CURRENT CURRENTLY THERE, SO THAT HE DOESN'T GO TO STRAIGHT TO THE CORNER AND BLOCK VISION EVEN MORE. UM, UM, SO, UH, YEAH, SO I, THIS MAY BE FOR THE, UH, BOARD ATTORNEY OR POSSIBLY FOR OR FOR CATHERINE. UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TWO ISSUES, THE HEIGHT AND THE CLEAR VISION. AND CAN WE, IS THERE, IS IT POSSIBLE TO, TO STATE THAT THE ANGLE THAT'S CURRENTLY IN PLACE CAN'T GET ANY CLOSER TO THE HARD CORNER OF THE PROPERTY? UH, OR IS IT AS, IS IS THERE A WAY TO, TO KEEP THE, AS IS CONDITION AS PART OF OUR MOTION? WELL, THE AS IS CONDITION IS, IS KIND OF RECORDED AS PART OF THEIR REQUEST BECAUSE THIS IS THE EVIDENCE THAT'S BEING PROVIDED TO YOU ABOUT HOW IT'S CURRENTLY BUILT. SO THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING IN YOUR MOTION, WHETHER LET'S JUST ASSUME THAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO APPROVE BASED ON HOW IT'S BUILT TODAY. MM-HMM. . SO IF THEY WANT TO REQUEST A PERMIT TO GO ANY CLOSER OR TO FURTHER ENCROACH, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR ANOTHER VARIANCE. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO READ THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE, YOU CAN READ AS, AS MENTIONED, BUT WITHIN THE SIX, WITHIN THE, WITHIN THE SIX TESTS, YOU CAN ALSO ADD THAT LANGUAGE TO MAKE IT PART OF THE RECORD IF YOU, IF YOU SO DESIRE. SO IF, IF THERE'S ANYBODY WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A TAKE A STAB AT THIS. UM, SO I'LL TAKE A STAB. UM, I'LL TAKE A STAB AT IT. ALRIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA. LET'S SEE. UM, SO REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 9 5, I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, I'M READING THE SECOND MOTION HERE. SO, UM, I'M GONNA DO THE, THE, THE DEFENSE HEIGHTS FIRST, UH, TO ADDRESS IT. 'CAUSE I THINK ONCE WE GET THAT RESOLVED THEN UH, WE'LL BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT, UH, THE, THE, UH, CLEAR VISION FOR OR SECOND. UM, SO I APOLOGIZE. UH, 0 0 9 5 I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FOUR FOOT 11 WOODEN PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 3 2, UH, RAYMOND STREET, APPLICANT BEING JOSEPH PALUMBO. UH, 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 U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN A NECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE HEIGHTS MODIFICATION. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE, ONE FOOT 11 IN FRONT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SAFETY FOR THE PROPERTY. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. A FOUR FOOT 11 SOLID SCREEN FENCE IN FRONT YARD DOES NOT POSE ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE, UH, PUBLIC WELFARE. UH, THE C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS UNLIKELY TO INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION, WHICH DO, WHICH [00:55:01] THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR THE SECTION OF FRONT YARD WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND WILL PROVIDE SECURITY FOR THE DISTRICT. AT D S C TRAFFIC STAFF DID REVIEW THE FENCE AND DID NOT FIND ANY ISSUES. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR, UH, WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIAL SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS THE CURRENT USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSES OF THE DISTRICT. AND A MOTION IS THERE A SECOND TEAL? UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TEAL. COMMISSIONER MANNA, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. SO, SO, SO WE, WE READ THIS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, BUT, UM, SO, SO IN MY DIALOGUE AND TALKING WITH YOU, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THE DIALOGUE ABOUT A THREE FOOT FENCE WITH, WITH EXTENDING IT WITH A OPEN, A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN TYPE FENCING WRAPPED AROUND THAT FRONT IS GONNA SOLVE A COUPLE OF PROBLEMS. AND SO, SO I'M GONNA BE VOTING ACTUALLY AGAINST THIS, AND HOPEFULLY FOR THE SECOND PART OF THE DIALOGUE, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO HAVE MORE DIALOGUE WITH IT WITH REGARDS TO THE CLEAR VISION. SO I WILL NOT BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS. OKAY. COMMISSIONER THIEL, RELATIVE TO A CLARIFICATION ON THAT, I THOUGHT PART OF A CLEAR VISION HAS TO DO WITH ITS ACTUAL DISTANCE FROM THE STREET RIGHT OF WAY, BUT YOU'RE STATING THAT IF YOUR PROPOSAL FOR THE OTHER MOTION THAT WILL ALLEVIATE THAT, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT I'M, THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING. OR THAT'S MY, MY THOUGHT PROCESS IS YES. EXCELLENT. THEN I'M, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND I THINK WE CAN ADDRESS IT THAT WAY. OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT, UH, WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? YES, MR. CHAIR? UH, YES. COMMISSIONER ALBERT? UH, I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT. OKAY. THAT ALL SIDE FENCES AND REAR FENCES THAT EXCEED SIX FEET, ESPECIALLY THE REAR SCREEN, BE BROUGHT DOWN TO SIX FEET. UH, THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH THE SECURITY OF THE DOG WITH SIX FEET AND SIX FEET WOULD BE CODE, SO I DON'T HAVE TO SEE THAT. WELL, NONE OF THE FENCES ARE SIX FEET THOUGH, SO THE REAR SCREEN IS SEVEN FOOT EIGHT. THE REAR SCREEN THAT WAS ALREADY APPROVED FOR STATE? YEAH. THAT, THAT WAS APPROVED, UH, BY THE B O A ALREADY, PREVIOUSLY, LIKE TWO YEARS AGO. SO WE CAN'T, WE, WE CAN'T, UH, THAT, THAT'S LOCKED IN PERMANENTLY NOW THAT'S TIED TO THE PROPERTY. OKAY. SO, UH, COMMISSIONER, UM, MINGO TO CLARIFY AND, AND BE IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU ALL WE'RE SAYING THAT THE FENCE SHOULD BE BROUGHT DOWN TO THREE FEET OR BE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, IS THAT RIGHT? THE THREE FOOT LEVEL? SO, AGREEMENT WITH THAT. SO JUST BEING COMPLIANT WITH CITY CODE IS REALLY WHAT I'M ASKING FOR THE FRONT PROPERTY. AND SO I THINK THREE FOOT WITH, UH, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN ON TOP OF THAT IS, IS ACCEPTABLE WITHIN CITY CODE, I BELIEVE. THEN I'M IN AGREEMENT. AND JUST FOR, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, UH, THE ADDRESS IS OFF, UH, OF, OF RAYMOND STREET. SO THE SIDE THAT HAS, UH, WHERE THE CURRENT GATE IS FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, FORWARD FROM THE FACE PLANE FORWARD, UH, WOULD HAVE TO BE REDUCED TO THREE FEET OR BE FIVE FEET PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. THAT THAT'S WHAT, IF YOU WERE TO VOTE AGAINST, IS THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT'S REALLY THE CRUX OF, UH, OF THE MOTION. UH, OR I'M SORRY, THE COMMENTARY FROM THE MAKER OF THE MOTION, IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. DOES, IS THERE ANYBODY HAVE ANY UH, UM, QUESTIONS ON, ON WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? YES. I, I DO HAVE A QUESTION. SO YES, IN THE FOLLOW-UP MOTION, ARE WE GONNA BE SAYING THAT IT'S GONNA BE SOLID THREE FEET WITH TWO FEET OF OPEN ABOVE THAT? UH, WELL, WELL, IF THIS MOTION GETS DENIED, WE'RE WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE GONNA SAY IS THAT HE CAN EITHER REDUCE IT TO THREE FEET OR MAKE IT FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN WITHIN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. THE SIDE WOULD STAY THE SAME. SO IF YOU VOTE AGAINST THE MOTION, UH, WE'LL, WE'LL TRY TO ADDRESS, UH, I IT'LL, ONCE IT'S CORRECTED, THE CLEAR VISION ALMOST GETS CORRECTED AS WELL. SO AT WHAT POINT DOES IT BECOME THE SIDE FENCE AS OPPOSED TO THE FRONT FENCE AT THAT? SO FROM THE, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE, THE VIEW, UH, IT'S THE SIDEWALK THAT HAS A FIRE HYDRANT ON THE CURB RAMP. THAT'S THE FRONT. AND SO FROM THE FRONT PLANE OF THE HOME, WHICH WOULD BE THAT, THE OUTERMOST FRONT IS THAT, I GUESS IT'S A TWO AND A HALF, THREE STORY KIND OF AREA THAT'S OF WOOD, UH, BROWN IN NATURE, IT'S FROM THERE FORWARD MANNA. SO THAT'D BE, IT LOOKS LIKE ABOUT 16 FOOT OF FENCING, IF YOU KNOW IF THOSE ARE EIGHT FOOT, UH, STUDS. RIGHT. SO THE FIRST 16 FOOT ON THE SIDE? YEAH. IF THOSE ARE EIGHT FOOT, YEAH, EIGHT FOOT, IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 16 FEET. THE HOUSE IS APPROXIMATELY 16 FEET FROM THE FRONT IF YOU, IF YOU, IF THEY'RE ON EIGHT FOOT CENTERS. AND, AND THAT SECTION WOULD EITHER HAVE TO BE DROPPED AT THREE FEET OR BE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. AND IF YOU LOOK, IF YOU, ANYBODY WHO HAS A STREET VIEW OPEN, IF YOU GO ACROSS FROM, UM, ALVALADE STREET, THERE IS A HOME THAT HAS A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN WROUGHT IRON FENCE, UH, WHICH WOULD BE SIMILAR TO WHAT IS, UM, BEING DISCUSSED. CHAIR. CAN YOU REPEAT WHAT THE MOTION IS? UH, THE, THE MOTION IS, IS A, IS AS READ FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, [01:00:01] BUT THE, THE COMMENTARY IS, UM, IS TO BE MOVING TOWARDS DENIAL. CONROY UH, COMMISSIONER CONROY. SO PROCEDURAL QUESTION THERE, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. MM-HMM. , I HEARD AN AMENDMENT, UH, THE AMENDMENT WAS, WAS WITHDRAWN. THANK YOU. YEAH. THERE, THERE, THERE'S A NUMBER OF US ON THE COMMISSION THAT WERE HERE BACK IN 2019. LOOK, LUCKILY ONE OF US REMEMBERED ABOUT THAT 'CAUSE I PERSONALLY DID NOT RECALL. THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WE APPROVED FOR THAT IT WAS THE ONLY, IT WAS THE ONLY THING THAT WE APPROVED. UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER TEAL. UH, SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE, ALL RIGHT. UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MR. SCOTT. I DON'T CONCUR, MR. MANCHACA. I DON'T CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. CONROY? NO. MR. TEAL. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR THE VOTE. UH, MOTION, UH, DIES NINE AGAINST TWO FOUR MANNA. UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 9 5. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT THE REQUEST FOR A SIX FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE CLEAR VISION STANDARD OF 25 FEET TO ALLOW A SOLID, TO ALLOW A PARTIALLY SOLID AND, UH, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN SCREEN, THREE FOOT, FOUR FOOT, UH, OR THREE FOOT, THREE FOOT WHATEVER, UM, TO BE WITHIN THE CLEAR VISION FIELD SITUATED AT 1 3 2 RAYMOND STREET, APPLICANT BEING JOSEPH PALUMBO BEING 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 OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUEST TO ALLOW A SOLID SCREEN FENCES TO BE WITHIN A CLEAR VISION FIELD ON A CORNER LOT IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. ASSUMING THAT IT DOES ALLOW FOR THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCING, UH, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT IN ANY SPECIFIC CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY, UH, HARDSHIP. BY IMPOSING A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT TO CLEAR VISION FIELD WOULD NEED TO BE CLEARED FROM ANY TYPE OF FENCING ADJUSTED TO WHICH WE'RE EXPECTING THREE FOOT IN HEIGHT FOR SOLID SCREEN FENCING. AND, UM, AND THEN, UH, HEIGHT ABOVE THAT FOR, UH, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. D S D TRAFFIC, UH, STAFF DOES NOT FIND ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS FROM THE EXIST, UH, FROM THE EXISTING, UH, SOLIDS FENCE CONSTRUCTED ALONG THE FRONT AND SIDE PROPERTY LINE. SO SPEAR OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL NOT BE DONE, UM, SHOULD THAT WILL BE DONE. UH, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUEST TO REDUCE A PORTION OF THE CLEAR FIELD 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. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THERE IS, UH, ONE OTHER NON-CONFORMING FENCE ON THE PROPERTY, UH, FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE IN THIS AREA. UM, SIX. THE PLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE PLY TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SOUGHT DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY DUE TO CLEAR VISION FIELD IS NOT AFFECTED AT THIS LOCATION. END OF MOTION. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND? THIEL? UH, COMMISSIONER THIEL HAS A SECOND. COMMISSIONER MANNA, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION WELL, UH, WITH THE, UH, WITH THE DENIAL OF THE PREVIOUS ONE SO THAT WE NOW WILL BE COMPLIANT WITH REGARDS TO THE, UH, FENCING STRUCTURE OF THREE FOOT OF SOLID AND THEN UP TO THE TWO FOOT LEGAL FOR PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. UM, I THINK WITH THAT, [01:05:01] I THINK THAT THAT WILL PROVIDE ENOUGH VISION, UH, ABILITIES. AND THEN THAT WAS KIND OF THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION AS WELL. AND SO I'LL AGREE WITH THEM. AND SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR FOR THIS TEAL. UH, FIRST I WANNA APOLOGIZE THAT YOU INHERITED THIS ISSUE, . THANK YOU. UM, WE ARE WORKING WITHIN OUR CONFINES TO TRY TO FIND YOU A, A REASONABLE SOLUTION, AND ALTHOUGH IT MAY NOT BE THE PERFECT SOLUTION, I, I THINK THIS IS A, A REASONABLE COMPROMISE AND I THINK IT WILL SERVE YOUR PURPOSE, UH, FOR YOUR PUP. SO I WILL BE, UH, SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ. ANYONE ELSE? UH, LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MENNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN? I CONCUR. MR. CONROY CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIENT. AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. SO IF YOU COULD PLEASE GET WITH STAFF, UH, THEY'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT, UH, WHAT TO DO NEXT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CHAIR. BEFORE WE GO ON, CAN WE TAKE A BREAK TO FIX SOME AUDIO ISSUES? SURE. HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU THINK, UH, TECH NEEDS? I DON'T KNOW YET. OKAY, SO WE'LL START WITH, UH, UH, I GUESS SEVEN MINUTES, MAYBE 10. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. WE'RE ON BREAK MEETING IS, UH, I'M CALLING THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER 2:56 PM UH, UH, COMMISSIONER DELMER, UH, HAS, HAS LEFT. WE'RE DOWN TO 10 COMMISSIONERS. UM, OH, OKAY. I COULDN'T SEE. SO NEXT CASE PLEASE. [5. BOA-21-10300080] ITEM FIVE. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS CASE BO A 21 103 0 0 8 0. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT TWO 20 LEBANON STREET WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE. THE APPLICANT IS HERBERT LOPEZ GARCIA, AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A SEVEN FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE TWO FEET EIGHT INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED, UH, R FOUR, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG LEBANON STREET. UM, THEY ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE FRONT SETBACK, UM, IN ORDER TO PULL A PERMIT FOR A CARPORT THAT IS CURRENTLY EXISTING AND HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED. THE CARPORT IS 20 FEET, 23 FEET IN DEPTH AND 18 FEET WIDE. UM, THERE WERE OTHER CARPORTS THAT WERE OBSERVED, UM, UPON OUR SITE VISITS, SO IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. HERE'S A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN. HERE'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. YOU CAN SEE IT IS ATTACHED TO THE, THE HOME, AND THAT IS SHOWING THE TWO FOOT EIGHT INCH MEASUREMENT TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE HERE, SHOWING THE DEPTH OF THE CARPORT AND THE WIDTH HERE IS THE SURROUNDING AREA, AND THEN SOME CARPORTS THAT WE OBSERVED, UM, DOWN THE STREET. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 21, 1 0 3 0 0 8 0 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE CARPORT IS SET BACK TWO FEET, EIGHT INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. TWO, THERE ARE OTHER CARPORTS WITH SIMILAR DESIGNS IN THE SURROUNDING AREA, AND THREE, THE CARPORT IS ABIDING BY THE SIDE SETBACK AND DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO CAUSE ADVERSE EFFECTS. STAFF MAILED 31 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. NONE. RETURN IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UH, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. HERBERT LOPEZ, ANTONIO, TEXAS. OKAY. MM-HMM. , HERBERT LOPEZ, TWO 20 LEBANON STREET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION. UH, WHAT IS IT THAT YOU WISH TO KNOW? OH, UM, SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKING [01:10:01] FOR A CARPORT, UH, TO BE TWO FOOT EIGHT INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. UH, PLEASE, UH, DISCUSS, UH, WHY WE SHOULD CONSIDER THIS REQUEST. UH, UH, WELL, I BUILT THIS WITH MY FRIENDS AND I WISH FOR YOU TO GRANT THIS FOR ME THAT, SO THAT I MAY KEEP IT, BECAUSE IT ALLOWS ME TO KEEP MY CARS THERE. OKAY. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO SAY. I DID NOT KNOW THAT THIS WOULD BE A PROBLEM IN MY PROPERTY. OKAY. UM, IF Y'ALL COULD JUST HOLD TIGHT FOR ONE SECOND, UH, STAFF, IS THERE ANY, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTARY OR ANYBODY SIGN UP TO SPEAK? NOT FOR THIS CASE, NO. OKAY. UH, ARE THERE COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? UH, COMMISSIONER SHANKA, UH, WAS IT BUILT, UH, WITH ANY KIND OF ISSUE PERMIT, ISSUE PROBLEMS? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. I'M NOT SURE IF THERE WERE ANY ISSUES. I JUST BUILT THIS CARPORT IN ORDER TO PROTECT MY CARS FROM THE RAIN AND THE SNOWSTORM THAT WE HAD BECAUSE THE SNOW DID DAMAGE MY VEHICLES. WAS THERE ANYTHING LIKE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, SINCE IT'S REALLY, UH, QUITE DIFFERENT AND NOTHING EXISTS THAT I COULD SEE? NO, NO, NO. NOT, NOT IN MEDICAL? NO. NOBODY SAID ANYTHING AND IT WAS ACTUALLY QUITE THE CONTRARY. MY NEIGHBORS ASKED WHO BUILT IT AND I TOLD THEM THAT IT WAS ME BECAUSE THEY WERE INTERESTED. OKAY. UM, JUST QUICKLY, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. WHAT IS THE PERMITTING STATUS OF THIS? WAS THERE A PERMIT APPLIED FOR ON THIS? THEY HAVEN'T APPLIED FOR THE PERMIT YET. UM, IT'S PENDING THE OUTCOME OF THIS HEARING. OKAY. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? YES. COMMISSIONER ALBERT? SIR, I SEE THAT YOU HAVE A GARAGE. UM, IS THE GARAGE NOT ADEQUATE TO PROTECT YOUR VEHICLES? YES, I HAVE THREE VEHICLES, BUT I KEEP SOME OF THEM UNDER THE CARPORT. THE THING IS THAT I CANNOT OCCUPY THE GARAGE BECAUSE I HAVE TOOLS AND BICYCLES IN THERE, AND IT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR A VEHICLE TO BE INSIDE ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. UM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, YOU MAY HAVE A SEAT. UH, IS THERE A COMMISSIONER THAT WOULD, UH, LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE? COMMISSIONER CRUZ GRANT. OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 0 8 0, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, GRANTED REQUEST FOR A SEVEN FOOT THREE INCH, I'M, I'M SORRY, SEVEN SEVEN FEET. FOUR INCHES VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK REQUIRED TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE TWO FEET, EIGHT INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, SITUATED AT 2 2 0 LEBANON STREET. APPLICANT BEING HERBERT LOPEZ GARCIA, 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 U D C AS AMENDED WOULD 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 THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE FROM THE FRONT SETBACK IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED, WOULD RESULT IN THE CARPORT BEING RELOCATED TO THE SETBACK 10 [01:15:01] FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THIS WOULD REDUCE THE DEPTH OF THE CARPORT TWO B ABOUT 16 FEET DEEP, WHICH WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE SPACE FOR THE LENGTH OF A VEHICLE. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE CARPORT IS SET BACK FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. IT WILL NOT AFFECT THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, SO THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE APPEARS TO BE OBSERVED. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IN WHICH PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD DOES NOT FIND THE REQUESTED VARIANCE TO SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. OTHER CARPORTS WERE OBSERVED IN THE AREA WITH SIMILAR DESIGN. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS USED TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO OR RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE P TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SOUGHT DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY IS, AND IT'S NOT NEAR MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? THIEL? UH, COMMISSIONER THIEL HAS A SECOND. COMMISSIONER CRUZ, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. UH, YES, SIR. UM, I WOULD, UM, RECOMMEND APPROVAL ON THIS. UM, THE CARPORT IS VERY WELL BILLED. IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THERE'S ANY PROBLEMS. AND SINCE NONE, NONE OF THE NEIGHBORS ACTUALLY COMPLAINED. I DON'T SEE ANY REASON OF WHY DENYING IT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER THIEL. I'M IN AGREEMENT. IT ALSO DOESN'T LOOK, LOOK LIKE IT, UH, INTRUDED INTO THE CLEAR VISION FIELD IN ANY WAY. UH, SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? I'M JUST GONNA CLOSE BY SAYING THAT, UH, THIS, THIS CASE IS UNIQUE BECAUSE FROM THE BACK OF SIDEWALK TO THE PROPERTY LINE IS MUCH LONGER THAN WE ARE TYPICALLY. SEE, IT'S PROBABLY MORE LIKE EIGHT OR 10 FEET JUST FOR THAT. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT, UH, WITH THAT STAFF. PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MR. HALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. CONROY CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UM, YOU COULD PLEASE GET WITH STAFF. THEY'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT TO DO. MM-HMM. , DO YOU NEED TO STATE ANYTHING REGARDING THE MR. ER DROPPING OFF? UH, YEAH, I THOUGHT I DID. STAFF, DID YOU, UH, JUST OUTTA CURIOSITY, DID YOU DENOTE THE TIME THAT DELMER UH, LEFT THE MEETING RIGHT WHEN YOU STARTED? OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT CASE PLEASE. IT'S GONNA BE ITEM NUMBER SIX, [6. BOA-21-10300113] BO 8 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 3. ADDRESS IS 41 26 41 30 41 34 MAJESTIC. ALSO INCLUDING 43 11 HORSESHOE BEND CITY COUNCIL. DISTRICT SEVEN APPLICANT IS MICHAEL PHILLIPS. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE NNC D THREE INGRAM HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARD TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN THE FRONT, UH, FACADE. CURRENT ZONING IS GONNA BE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. SORRY, I, YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT, SIR. OKAY. UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG MAJESTIC IN HORSESHOE BEND, UH, NEAR CALLAHAN ROAD CURRENTLY HAS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME CONSTRUCTED ON THE PROPERTY. AND THERE'S ALSO ONE, UH, PROPERTY THAT IS VACANT LAND CURRENTLY ASKING TO CONSTRUCT A FIVE FOOT WROUGHT IRON FENCE IN THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME. UPON SITE VISITS. STAFF ALSO OBSERVED THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN WROUGHT IRON FENCE TO MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTS ACROSS THE STREET. CURRENTLY, UH, CURRENTLY THERE'S AN AGREEMENT WITHIN THE N INGRAM HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. CONSERVATION [01:20:01] DISTRICT IS SET AT THREE FEET SITE PLAN. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS, UM, THEY'RE ALL PRETTY MUCH RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER. THIS IS THE ONE PROPERTY THAT'S VACANT, AND THIS IS THE ADDRESS ON HORSESHOE BEND. THIS IS THE STREET VIEW THAT IS THE MULTI-FAMILY RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THEM. NEIGHBORING FENCE PROPERTY HAS A FIVE FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL. AND BO O 21 DASH 103 0 0 1 3 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING, FINDING OF FACT ONE THE FENCE IS NOT CONSIDER, IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE STANDARDS OF THE INGRAM HILL NEIGHBORHOOD. ASSOCIA, UH, INGRAM HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT, AND TWO, THERE AREN'T ANY OTHER LOTS WITH FRONT YARD FENCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE AREN'T MANY LOTS. THERE'S A COUPLE HERE AND THERE, BUT PREDOMINANTLY IT'S JUST OPEN FENCE. THERE'S NO FENCE WHATSOEVER. IT'S JUST OPEN LOTS. THIS IS A NOTIFICATION PLAN. 19 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. WE GOT ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. THE INGRAM HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT IS IN FAVOR THAT SHOULD SAY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. YES. SORRY. UH, THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, WILL THE APPLICANT PLEASE, UH, COME FORWARD? UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. MY NAME'S MICHAEL PHILLIPS, AND I'M AT 5 2 2 7 WILDFLOWER IN DISTRICT SEVEN. SO I'M MIKE PHILLIPS. UM, HAVE BEEN ON THE INGRAM HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOARD FOR 20 YEARS AND PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR EIGHT. IN 2004, I LED THE EFFORT TO CREATE THE CITY'S THIRD NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT. AT THAT TIME, THE CITY CO CODE ALLOWED ONLY FOUR FOOT TALL FRONT YARD FENCES, SO WE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO LIMIT THE HEIGHT IN OUR N C D TO FOUR FEET. A FEW YEARS LATER, THE CITY COUNCIL CHANGED THE CODE TO ALLOW FOR FIVE FOOT FRONT FENCES. IN 2016, WE BEGAN NEGOTIATIONS WITH MIKE HOGAN'S HOME SPRINGING REALTY REALTY PARTNERS FOR A WORKFORCE HOUSING TAX CREDIT, 288 UNIT APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT ACROSS MAJESTIC FROM THREE NEWLY BUILT HOUSES ON LARGE LOTS. UM, I HAVE HERE A COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE DEVELOPER WHERE IT CALLS FOR HIM TO INSTALL FIVE FOOT TALL FENCES TO MATCH THE FENCING THAT'S ON THE, ON THE APARTMENT COMPLEX ACROSS THE STREET. UM, LET ME POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE NO OTHER FOUR FOOT FENCES ON THE OTHER MAJESTIC DRIVE PROPERTIES NEXT TO THE, ACROSS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT. AS ILLUSTRATED IN THE PHOTOS THAT, UH, D S D STAFF SHOWED YOU, I'M AWARE OF THREE RECENT CASES WHERE NEIGHBORS HAVE APPLIED FOR AND RECEIVED VARIANCES FOR FIVE FOOT FENCES WITHIN BLOCKS OF THIS, OF THIS CASE TODAY. OUR, UH, I H N A BOARD VOTED SEVERAL YEARS AGO TO SUPPORT ALL VARIANCE REQUESTS FOR FIVE FOOT FENCES, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO. I HAVE TALKED WITH D S D STAFF AT LENGTH ABOUT A PROCESS TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE FIVE FOOT HEIGHT, UM, HEIGHT LIMIT OR THE FOUR FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO MAKE IT FIVE FOOT. AND TODAY, KAT HAS ASSURED ME THAT THEY WILL WORK WITH US TO MAKE SURE THAT, UH, WE CAN GET THAT CHANGE PERMANENT. UM, I, I ASK THAT YOU HAVE COMPASSION FOR THE THREE YOUNG FAMILIES WHO WANT A SLIGHTLY TALLER FENCE BETWEEN THEM AND 288 NEIGHBORS AND GRANT THEM A VARIANCE. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, STAFF, IS THERE ANYTHING TO READ IN THE RECORD? THERE IS ONE PERSON SIGNED IN TO SPEAK. OKAY, SIR, IF YOU COULD PLEASE, UH, MR. PHILLIPS, YOU HAVE A SEAT. WE'RE GONNA LISTEN TO, UM, THE RE RESIDENT SIGN UP TO SPEAK. JENNIFER TORRES. YES. HI, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JENNIFER TORRES. I LIVE, UH, DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. UM, I LIVE AT 43 11 EAST HORSESHOE BEND. I RESIDED THERE FOR ABOUT EIGHT YEARS NOW. I ALSO SERVE AS THE VICE PRESIDENT OF OUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR ABOUT TWO [01:25:01] YEARS NOW. UH, WE'VE NEVER REALLY HAD A NEED FOR THE FENCE. THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S PRETTY QUIET. UM, UNTIL RECENTLY WHEN, UM, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT STARTED LEASING, SO NOW THERE ARE RESIDENTS ON THE, ON THE PROPERTY SINCE THEN. UM, I ALSO WANNA NOTE, LET ME BACKTRACK. I LIVE AT THE CORNER OF HORSESHOE BEND AND MAJESTIC. SO, UM, I'M RIGHT AT THE CORNER OF TWO INTERSECTING STREETS. WE HAVE A HORSESHOE DRIVEWAY THAT EXTENDS FROM HORSESHOE TO MAJESTIC. SO SINCE, UM, BUT THE, THE, THE LEASING OCCURRED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT, WE'VE NOTICED ISSUES THAT WE'VE NEVER HAD BEFORE. MY SONS PLAY ON INSIDE OUR PROPERTY ON THE HORSESHOE, UM, DRIVEWAY, ON THEIR BASKETBALL COURT. WE PUT UP MANY SIGNS. I THINK YOU BROUGHT THAT UP EARLIER, ONLY TO HAVE THEM STOLEN. WE PUT UP CONES, WE PUT UP BARRIERS, AND PEOPLE ARE LITERALLY DRIVING FROM ONE END OF THE HORSESHOE DRIVEWAY TO THE OTHER. WHILE MY KIDS ARE PLAYING. WE ALSO HAVE PEOPLE AS I TAKE OUT TRASH IN MY YARD, AS I'M TAKING OUT THE TRASH, WALKING THROUGH, AS IF THOUGH IT'S COMMUNITY PROPERTY AND IT'S NOT. UM, WE'VE ALSO HAD AN INCREASE IN, UM, NEVER HAD THIS PROBLEM BEFORE. PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO BREAK INTO OUR VEHICLES. WE HAD TO GET A, UM, GUARD DOG IS WHAT I WANNA CALL IT. WE HAVE IT IN THE BACKYARD, AND SHE HAS JUMPED THE YARD A NUMBER OF TIMES WHEN PEOPLE ARE IN OUR YARD. SHE'S THE ONE WHO ALERTED US, IN FACT, TO ONE OF THE ATTEMPTED, UM, CAR BURGLARIES THAT WE HAVE ON CAMERA. UM, I THINK THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. IT'S, IT'S JUST REALLY BEEN, UM, SOMETHING THAT WE NEVER THOUGHT WE'D EXPERIENCE. I SORT OF WELCOME THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE I WORKED FOR A NONPROFIT IN THAT FIELD. UM, BUT THESE ARE JUST REAL LIFE ISSUES THAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING NOW, AND I'M VERY SCARED FOR MY CHILDREN TO GET HIT. UM, I'M VERY SCARED OF ROBBERY. MY HUSBAND WORKS OUT OF TOWN A LOT, SO WE'RE ON OUR OWN. UM, THIS FENCE WOULD PROVIDE ME A SENSE OF SECURITY FOR MY HOME AND MY CHILDREN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO WE'LL OPEN THIS UP FOR COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. UM, MR. PHILLIPS MM-HMM. , UH, THIS MEMO OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT AND, AND AND YOUR NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION. UM, WAS THIS BROUGHT UP DURING THE ZONING HEARING? YEAH, WELL, IT WAS PART OF THE ZONING PACKAGE THAT WENT BEFORE COUNCIL. SO CITY COUNCIL ACTUALLY DID VOTE ON THIS AND APPROVED IT ALONG WITH THE ZONING, UH, CHANGE. OKAY. AND YOU HAVE A, AND YOU HAVE A CASE NUMBER FROM 2016, RIGHT? THIS IS SIGNED IN 2017, BUT YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT IN 2016 IT CHANGED FROM FIVE FOOT TO THREE FOOT, CORRECT? NO, IT, UM, IT, UH, IN MY UNDERSTANDING, CITY CODE HAS ALLOWED FOR FOUR FOOT FRONT, FRONT YARD FACES, FOUR FOOT. OKAY. BUT YOU'RE WANTING THE FIVE AND WE'RE WANTING THE FIVE. AND THAT WAS THE CITY CHANGE. AFTER WE DID THE N C D, THEY MADE THAT CHANGE. WE WOULD'VE SAID FIVE FOOT IN THE N C D IF WE WERE ALLOWED TO HAVE FIVE FOOT AT THAT TIME. BUT IF THE, BUT, BUT WHEN YOU BROUGHT UP FIVE FOOT DURING THE ZONING CASE MM-HMM. , DID STAFF MENTION THAT FOREFOOT WAS THE LIMIT OR NO, NOBODY TALKED TO US ABOUT IT. GO AHEAD, CATHERINE. SO IT'S A BIT OF A CONVOLUTED ONE. UM, SO THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY WAS FOR THE APARTMENTS, NOT FOR THESE HOMES. I KNOW. AND SO, UM, THE AGREEMENT, THE MERAN, THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING THAT'S BETWEEN TWO PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS, AND IN THAT CASE IT WAS THE DEVELOPER AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS ONLY IN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TWO. JUST LIKE DEED RESTRICTIONS, THE CITY DOES NOT ENFORCE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUMS OF UNDERSTANDING. SO AT THE TIME, OR WHAT HAP WHAT WOULD HAPPEN AFTER THE REZONING, IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO PUT UP THE FENCE AND THEY WANTED TO PUT UP A FENCE THAT EXCEEDED THE CODE REQUIREMENTS, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS. HE'S RIGHT. THE N C D AT THE TIME WA UH, ADOPTED WHAT WAS A STANDARD IN THE CODE LESS THAN FIVE FEET WAS PERMITTED BY RIGHT. UM, IN 2015, JUST LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, THAT U D C AMENDMENT, UM, MADE THE FENCE HEIGHT, UH, REQUIREMENTS BY RIGHT. OR THE ALLOWANCE FOR FENCE HEIGHT IN THE FRONT YARD, HIGHER. SO UP TO FIVE FEET. BUT THEIR STANDARDS REMAIN. THERE'S A PROCESS THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH IN ORDER TO AMEND THEIR N C D STANDARDS. TODAY IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE HEARD THIS CAT CALL ME TODAY BECAUSE I'VE BEEN TALKING TO THE CD, THE STAFF HERE ABOUT CHANGING IT, AND IT'S, THEY WANT US TO DO A VERY CONVOLUTED PROCESS THAT TAKES MONTHS TO CHANGE THIS ONE LITTLE AMENDMENT TO OUR, TO OUR N C D. OKAY. BUT WE'RE GONNA DO THAT. AND HE'S, HE'S CORRECT, HE'S CORRECT. IT IS A PROCESS BECAUSE AGAIN, THE N C D WAS CREATED, UH, THROUGH A PUBLIC MEETING PROCESS. THEY CREATED ALL THE STANDARDS, RIGHT? IT WAS THROUGH THAT PUBLIC MEETING PROCESS IN WHICH ALL OF THE NIG, ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THAT N C D WERE NOTIFIED, UM, ASKED TO PROVIDE INPUT [01:30:01] ON THOSE STANDARDS, AND THEN IT WENT THROUGH A REZONING PROCESS. ANY STANDARDS THAT ARE, UM, CHANGED AFTER THAT HAVE TO GO THROUGH A VERY SIMILAR PROCESS BECAUSE WE WANNA BE SURE THAT ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE NOTIFIED WHOEVER WAS PART OF THAT, UH, CREATION OF THE N C D AT THAT TIME, THAT THEY ARE, UH, THAT THEY PROVIDE THEIR INPUT AS WELL, AND IT GOES THROUGH AN ADOPTION PROCESS. YEAH, I, I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS. MY, THE WHOLE POINT OF MY QUESTION WAS IS THAT IF, IF, I'M ASSUMING THE ZONING COMMISSIONER AT THE TIME KNEW ABOUT THIS AGREEMENT. MM-HMM. , THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS HEAVILY DISCUSSED WITH THE ZONING COMMISSIONER, THE DISTRICT. IT JUST SEEMS ODD THAT NOBODY MENTIONED THAT. YOU, BY THE WAY, YOU CAN'T DO A FIVE FOOT FENCE. THAT THAT'S WELL, WE'VE BEEN, WE'VE BEEN, UM, UH, OFFERING SUPPORT FOR ANYBODY THAT WANTS A FIVE FOOT FENCE OKAY. FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE BUGGING THEM TO HELP US AMEND IT. I UNDERSTAND. AND OUR ONLY RELIEF IS THROUGH YOU GUYS NOW, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND, AND I, AND I, I, I, MY QUESTION'S BEEN ANSWERED ANY OTHER, AND IT IS SO FRUSTRATING BECAUSE THIS ONLY STARTED HAPPENING ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO. SIR. LET ME, LET ME JUST SEE IF THERE'S ANY MORE QUESTIONS. FIRST, YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO, TO MAKE CLOSING REMARKS. IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MIN CHAKA, UH, AND ACCORDING TO THE DRAWING, THE WAY THAT SHOWS THE RED LINE ALL THE WAY AROUND THE PROPERTY, AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A FRONT FENCE. SO THE FRONT FENCE REALLY IS FROM MAJESTIC, FROM WHERE THE 90 DEGREE, AND THEN IT WRAPS AROUND, IT GOES TO THE FRONT, NOT THE BACK RED. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ROY? COMMISSIONER ZUNA, UH, RIGHT HERE. I'M JUST CURIOUS, HAS THE DEVELOPER MET EVERY OTHER CONDITION OF THE MEMORANDUM OTHER THAN THE FENCING? NO. HE'S GOTTA DO SIDEWALKS AND HE'S GOTTA DO CURBS AROUND THE WHOLE THING. AND SO THIS IS THE FIRST ONE. HE'S ACTUALLY MET WITH US ABOUT WANTING TO START THE FENCING. HE'S GONNA GIVE US A PLATE, A PLAY SCAPE FOR OUR, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK. SO THIS, THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST THING THAT HE'S GONNA BE DOING. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER ALBERT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO A QUESTION I HAVE HERE IS, UM, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S TWO OTHER PROPERTIES THAT GO DOWN MAJESTIC AND, AND, AND WRAP AROUND. SO, SO THESE AREN'T INCLUDED IN THAT DIALOGUE. IS THERE A REASON WHY THEY WERE EXCLUDED? THEY HAVE FIVE FOOT FENCES. SO, SO, SO DID THEY ALREADY COME BEFORE THE BOARD FOR THE APPROVAL, OR, OR THEY JUST DID 'EM ON THEIR OWN. OKAY. LIKE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. NOW, WE DID HAVE A CASE LAST YEAR WHERE THERE WERE TWO PROPERTIES THAT GOT FLAGGED BECAUSE THEY BUILT FIVE FOOT FENCES. AND SO THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, OFFERED THEIR SUPPORT FOR THOSE BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER BEFORE YOU, YOU ALL. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND I GET CALLS ALL THE TIME, AND IT ONLY STARTED HAPPENING FOUR YEARS AGO BECAUSE AT THAT TIME, THE, THE CITY COMPUTER SYSTEM STARTED NOTING THAT WE HAD AN N C D CONTRACTORS WOULD COME DOWN HERE AND PULL A PERMIT, AND A LOT OF TIMES IT WOULDN'T GET FLAGGED, AND IT STARTED CONSISTENTLY GETTING FLAGGED WHEN THE CITY DID A, DID THIS UPDATE OKAY. OF THEIR COMPUTER SYSTEM. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER CONWAY, I, I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR COMING AND TRYING TO LEGALIZE YOUR STATUS INSTEAD OF JUST DOING IT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER CONY, IT'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF. UM, IN THE CASE SUMMARY, IT SAYS THE CUR, I'VE, I'VE HEARD TESTIMONY ABOUT WHERE A FIVE FOOT, WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FIVE FOOT FENCES. WHY? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOUR FOOT FENCES. IN THE CASE SUMMARY, UH, I QUOTE, CURRENT AGREEMENT WITH INGRAM HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT IS THREE FEET. WHAT'S THAT? I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT IS. I, I WROTE THE N C D AND IT WAS FOUR FEET AT THE TIME. CATHERINE. CATHERINE, WHAT IS THE OFFICIAL, WHAT IS THE N C D STATE? LET ME, LET ME PULL IT UP ALL ON HOLDMAN. OKAY. FEEL FREE TO ASK OTHER QUESTIONS WHILE I'M LOOKING IT UP. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS WHILE SHE'S LOOKING THAT UP? SO I BUILT A FIVE FOOT FENCE. I'M IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE, IN THE CONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT. AND IT WAS FIVE YEARS AGO, AND THE CONTRACTOR THAT I HAD CAME DOWN HERE AND PULLED A PER PERMIT NO PROBLEM, BECAUSE IT WASN'T NOTED THAT IT WAS IN A CONSERVATION DISTRICT NEIGHBORHOOD. SOMETIMES IT TAKE A, TAKES A LITTLE WHILE FOR THAT STUFF TO SHOW UP. YEAH. SO I'M LOOKING AT THEIR STANDARDS RIGHT NOW. I'M NOT SURE WHY IT SAYS THREE UNLESS THAT'S A IT'S ALWAYS BEEN FOUR. YEAH, IT'S FOUR FOOT. SO PARCELS I SHOULD, THE IS I SHOULD'VE SAID WHATEVER HOLD CODE IS, SIR, HOLD ON, HOLD ON A SECOND. GO AHEAD, CATHERINE. OKAY, SO, UM, SO THE STANDARD FOR THE IN, FOR THE INGRAM HILLS N C D IS, IS TWO PARTS. ONE IS NO FENCES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN THE FRONT YARD AND SIDE YARD OF CORNER LOT ON PARCELS WITH RESIDENTIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS OTHER THAN R 20 AND RE ON PARCELS WITH, WITH AN R 20 OR RE A FOUR FOOT TALL FENCE MAY BE CONSTRUCTED WITH THE REQUIRED TRANSPARENCY RATIO PER THE U D C. SO PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO [01:35:01] IF, IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, UH, MR. PHILLIPS, YOU HAVE A COUPLE MINUTES, YOU CAN, ANY CLOSING REMARKS YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE BEFORE WE DELIBERATE? I, I JUST, I JUST THINK I CAN GET OVER A FOUR FOOT FENCE, BUT I CAN'T GET OVER A FIVE FOOT FENCE. MY DOG CAN GET OVER A FOUR FOOT FENCE. I, AND HE CAN'T GET OVER A FIVE FOOT FENCE. SO I THINK THESE, THESE PEOPLE ARE GETTING FREE FENCES WITH FROM THE DEVELOPERS. SO THEY WANT FIVE FEET. I THINK YOU SHOULD GIVE HIM FIVE FEET. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AS A COMMISSIONER, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE. MANNA, YOU COMMISSIONER MANNA. WE LIFT TILL HAVE, SINCE I'VE BEEN TAKING ALL THE REST OF 'EM. EXCUSE. GO AHEAD. OKAY. OKAY. UM, SO, UM, IT WAS DISTRICT SEVEN, SO THAT'S WHY I SPOKE QUICKLY. SORRY. UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 3, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE N C D THREE INGRAM HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT 4 1 2 6 4 1 3 4 4 3 1 1 MAJESTIC AND 4 3 1 1 HORSESHOE BIN APPLICANT BEING, UH, MICHAEL PHILLIPS. 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 U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN THE NECESSARY 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 REQUEST TO ALLOW A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FIVE FOOT FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT SPECIAL, UH, THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITION THAT IF FORCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BY IMPOSING A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT DEFENSE, WOULD NOT BE CONSTRUCTED OR WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED TO THREE FOOT HEIGHT AND WOULD REDUCE THE SAFETY FOR PROPERTY OWNERS. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPEAR 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 EXACT LITTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE FENCE HEIGHT IS TO PROVIDE SPACING BETWEEN NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES, WHICH IS OBSERVED. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APP, THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUEST TO INCREASE THE FENCE HEIGHT 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. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE ARE OTHER NONCONFORMING FENCES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. SIX. THE PLIGHT TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SAW IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE PLY TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SOUGHT DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY DUE TO THE NEIGHBORING MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND THE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC THAT COMES WITH IT AND A MOTION. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MANNA, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THIEL. COMMISSIONER MANNA, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. SURE. UH, UM, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS AND, UM, SO FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. ONE IS THAT, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT DEVELOPED THE, UH, THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT IS HERE SAYING THAT THEY'RE IN FAVOR OF THIS. SO, SO, SO THAT'S MY BIG FEATHER RIGHT THERE. SECOND IS THAT, UH, THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT, UH, THEY'RE WORKING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ACTUALLY UPDATING THIS AND, UM, AND SO, SO, AND IN THE FUTURE CASES IT WILL BE AT THE HEIGHT AND SO THIS WILL NO LONGER BE A DIALOGUE. UM, AND THEN THE THIRD THING I THINK IS THAT THEY PRESENTED SOME GOOD CASES. WHY IT MAKES SENSE HERE IN THIS CASE. SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MEASURE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER THIEL. YES, I'M IN A HUNDRED PERCENT AGREEMENT WITH MY COLLEAGUE. UM, I ALSO COMMEND YOU FOR COMING ON BEHALF OF YOUR NEIGHBORS IN ORDER TO, TO TRY TO SEE THIS THROUGH. AND I ALSO COMMEND YOU ON, UH, WORKING WITH THE CITY IN ORDER TO GO AHEAD AND, AND RECTIFY THIS SO WE WON'T SEE ALL HERE AGAIN. GOOD. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE. STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MS. MENNA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. CONROY. I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT MOTION PASSAGE UNANIMOUSLY. UH, YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF AND THEY'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT YOUR NEXT STEPS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. STAFF. UH, NEXT CASE [01:40:05] AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, [7. BOA-21-10300114] BO A 21 DASH 1 0 3 1 4. ADDRESS IS 1713 WEST MULBERRY CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER SEVEN, APPLICANT IS KEITH WEN REQUESTING ONE A THREE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO BE ONE FOOT, ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE WESTERN SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND TWO, A TWO FOOT 10 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIRED TO ALLOW A DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE TWO FEET, TWO INCHES AWAY FROM THE EASTERN SIDE PROPERTY LINE. CURRENTLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG WEST MULBERRY DRIVE NEAR ZAMORE STREET. CURRENTLY HAS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME CONSTRUCTED ON THEIR SUBJECT PROPERTY. UM, THEY'RE REQUESTING A THREE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE TO A FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK FOR A ROOM ADDITION TO BE ONE FOOT ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UH, THE ROOM ADDITION HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED YET. THEY'RE COMING PRIOR TO TWO A 10, A TWO FOOT 10 INCH VARIANCE FROM A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK FOR A DETACH ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE TWO FEET, TWO INCHES AWAY FROM THE SITE PROPERTY LINE UPON SITE VISIT. STAFF ALSO OBSERVE OTHER DETACH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO REAR OF YARDS SITE PLAN. UM, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN? IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, THE, UH, THE, UH, ROOM ADDITION IS GONNA BE TO THE BACK ON THE LEFT SIDE. AND THEN THE DETACHED STRUCTURE IS NOT SHOWN HERE, BUT IT'S TO THE RIGHT ON THE RIGHT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY LINE. SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT'S THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THIS IS WHERE THE, UH, ROOM ADDITION IS GONNA BE ALONGSIDE THAT FENCE. IT'S BACK OF THE STRUCTURE. THIS IS THE FRONT SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE IS, IS IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THIS PICTURE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE FENCE IS NOT EXACTLY ON THE PROPERTY LINE. IT'S A LITTLE BIT SET INTO THE PROPERTY LINE . THIS IS THE, UH, MEASUREMENT FROM THE, UH, DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. IT'S TWO FEET, TWO INCHES AWAY. UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS CURRENTLY FIRE RATED. THERE'S NO OVERHANG, NO OPENINGS, AND THERE IS ATTACHED GUTTERS ON THAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. SURROUNDING AREA SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR THE ADDITION STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL AND BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION FOR A TWO FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO BE THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE ROOM ADDITION WILL BE THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY. LINE. TWO, THE ADDITION WILL NOT HARM ANY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES OR AFFECT THE VALUE. AND THREE, THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY ISSUE WITH WATER RUNOFF DUE TO MAINTAINING A THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY. LINE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL IN BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE DETACH ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS TWO FEET, TWO INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY. LINE TWO, THE DETACHED STRUCTURE IS ALREADY FIRE RATED AND THERE ARE NO OPENINGS AND NO OVERHANG OF THE ROOF. AND THREE, THE STRUCTURE IS SIMILAR TO OTHER DETACHED STRUCTURES IN THE LOCAL AREA. THERE WERE 28 NOTICES MAILED OUT. THREE WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR, THERE WERE ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO RESPONSE FROM THE JEFFERSON WOODLAWN LAKE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF, UH, PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. IS APPLICANT PRESENT? ALL RIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. MY NAME IS KEITH WEIDMAN. I RESIDE AT 1713 WEST MULBERRY. UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND HEARING OUR CASE. AND, UM, WE ALSO APPRECIATE ALL THE SUPPORT AND GUIDANCE THAT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN IN THIS PROCESS. IT'S A FIRST FOR MY WIFE CORINNE AND I, UM, AS EXPLAINED, UM, THE, UM, THE ADDITION WILL FOLLOW THE, THE CURRENT, UM, UH, LINE OF, OF THE WEST SIDE OF THE HOUSE. UM, AND IT WILL ALSO, [01:45:01] UM, BE FIRE RATED. UH, THERE WILL BE NO WINDOWS OR DOORS, UM, ON THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE. UH, AND IT WILL ALSO HAVE, HAVE RAIN GUTTERS TO KEEP, UH, WATER FROM THE ROOF, UH, FLOWING INTO OUR NEIGHBOR'S BACKYARD. UM, I APOLOGIZE FOR THE, UM, DETACHED STRUCTURE IN THE BACKYARD. THAT WAS MY COVID PROJECT. UM, AND I DID NOT REALIZE THAT, UM, I WASN'T ALLOWED TO BUILD IT THAT CLOSE TO MY NEIGHBOR'S FENCE. UM, THE, UH, TWO NEIGHBORS THAT WEIGHED IN FOR US ARE THE, THE TWO NEIGHBORS WHO ARE DIRECTLY, UH, IMPACTED BY, UM, THE ADDITION AND, UM, UH, AND THE DETACHED STRUCTURE. UM, THEY BOTH, UH, CAME TO BAT FOR US. UM, WE, WHEN, UH, CORINNE AND I BOUGHT THE HOUSE ALMOST FIVE YEARS AGO, IT WAS WITH, UM, THE EXPRESS INTENT OF ADDING THIS FAMILY ROOM TO THE BACK SO THAT WE WOULD HAVE A VIEW ONTO THE BACKYARD AND, AND, UH, UH, BE ABLE TO ENJOY THE PROPERTY. UM, DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S MY GLASS, IT'S NOT MY MASK. I'M FUMBLING FOR HERE. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE AT THE MOMENT, UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. UH, YES SIR. IF YOU COULD JUST, UH, UH, ONE MOMENT. STAFF. IS THERE ANY, UM, BODY SOUNDED TO SPEAK, ANYTHING TO READ INTO THE RECORD? WE DO HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL. OKAY. SO IF SIR, IF YOU COULD TAKE A SEAT, UH, WE WILL LISTEN TO A VOICEMAIL AND THEN WE'LL SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. HELLO, MY NAME IS ROGER VALDEZ. I LIVE AT 17 0 5 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE. I LIVE TO THE EAST OF KEITH AND KAREN'S WIN WHITEMAN'S HOME. I HAVE, UH, JUST CALLING TO LET Y'ALL KNOW THAT I HAVE NO ISSUES OR COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE DISTANCE OF THEIR SHED THAT HAS BEEN BUILT. UH, UH, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO, TO CONTACT ME WITH ANY QUESTIONS. 2 1 0 3 5 5 19 37. THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, MR. WEIDMAN, IF YOU COULD PLEASE COME BACK UP. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE, UH, FOR MR. WEIDMAN CRUZ? COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UH, SIR, HOW OLD IS THE ORIGINAL HOME, DO YOU KNOW? YES, IT'S 93 YEARS OLD. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I NEED TO KNOW. AND, AND ALSO I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT, UH, EXCUSE ME, SORRY SIR. WE HAD A COMMISSIONER LEAVE, UM, COMMISSIONER ZUNA STEPPED OUT AT 3 28. UM, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND PROCEED. YES, I, I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT, THAT OUR HOUSE BEING BUILT, UH, SO CLOSE TO A NEIGHBOR'S, UH, UH, PROPERTY LINE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER HOUSES ON OUR BLOCK. UM, THEY'RE ALL, UM, THE HOUSES ARE ALL, UM, THEY HUG ONE PROPERTY LINE IN ORDER TO, UM, PROVIDE SPACE FOR A DRIVEWAY ON THE OTHER. UH, ALL THE LOTS ON OUR SIDE OF OUR BLOCK ARE QUITE NARROW, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE VALDEZ'S NEXT DOOR WHERE, UH, TWO HOUSES WERE KNOCKED DOWN AND THEY BUILT A A TWO STORY HOUSE ON THE DOUBLE LOT. UH, UH, ALSO I WANTED TO MENTION THAT WITH THE FAMILY ROOM, UM, WITHOUT, IF, IF THE VARIANCE IS DENIED AND WE NEED TO MOVE, UM, THE WALL, UH, FURTHER IN, AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, IT WILL, UM, CREATE A SPACE THAT IS REALLY TOO NARROW FOR A FAMILY ROOM. UM, AND THEREFORE, UM, CREATING A HARDSHIP FOR US , WE WILL HAVE A VERY NARROW FAMILY ROOM. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, THANK YOU. UH, YOU SAID THAT YOU PUT A STRUCTURE IN THE BACK DURING YOUR COVID WEIRS OF PICTURE OF THE STRUCTURE THAT YOU PUT ON THERE. UM, THERE, THERE IT IS. UH, IT WAS ACTUALLY, AND IT'S JUST A FIBERBOARD SHED, UH, A COMPANY CAME OUT, BUILT IT IN AN AFTERNOON, AND, UM, I ADDED THE SHINGLES AND THE GUTTERS AND, AND BASICALLY DRESSED IT UP. UM, I GUESS WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS HOW CLOSE IS THAT TO THE EXISTING HOUSE STAFF? CAN YOU BRING UP THE SIDELINE PLEASE? SO ON, IN THIS DRAWING, IT'S THE RECTANGLE, UH, TOWARD THE TOP ON THE RIGHT, IT JUST DIDN'T GET HIGHLIGHTED YELLOW, [01:50:01] BUT IT'S THERE LABELED AS EXISTING SHED, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. AND THEN DO I UNDERSTAND THEN WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IS BASICALLY FILL IN, UM, THERE'S A ROOM, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A ROOM PROJECTING OUT TO THE YARD AND YOU JUST WANNA FILL IN THAT SPACE TO THE FENCE AND THEN BACK. YES. UH, IT ACTUALLY, UM, TO THE, THE RIGHT OF THE HOUSE IN THE REAR IS, IS A MASTER BEDROOM AND MASTER BATH WALK-IN CLOSET. THE FAMILY ROOM WOULD NOT EXTEND QUITE AS FAR TO THE BACK AS THAT IT WOULD GO BACK 19 FEET, I THINK. UM, THE MASTER BEDROOM AND BATH, UH, ARE A TOTAL OF ABOUT 24. SO IF YOU CAN LOOK, THE SITE PLAN IS REFLECTING THE ADDITION TO BEING YELLOW WITH THE, WITH THE ACCESSORY SHED IN THE BACK, UH, WHICH IS NOT HIGHLIGHTED TO BE 20, 20 FEET OFF OF THE ALLEY. AND THEN IT LOOKS LIKE APPROXIMATELY 35 TO 40 FEET OFF OF THE HOME. SO IS THERE, UM, MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO, UM, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALK ABOUT, UM, IS WATER RUNOFF AND, AND HOW TO MITIGATE THAT AND, AND JUST LOOK AT THE PICTURE HERE, YOU KNOW, WITH THE, WITH THE PROPERTIES LINED UP SO CLOSELY, IT, IT, IT APPEARS, UH, ON SOME OF THE PICTURES THAT YOUR ROOF LINE ACTUALLY EXTENDS POTENTIALLY OVER THE PROPERTY LINE INTO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. YES, IT, YES, AND IT HAS FOR 93 YEARS, THE RUNOFF HAS BEEN GOING ONTO THEIR DRIVEWAY. AS SOON AS WE BUILD OUR ADDITION, WE WILL ALSO ADD RAIN GUTTERS TO THE EXISTING HOUSE ON ALL SIDES. SO, SO IS THAT A, A, UM, I GUESS FROM A BOARD PERSPECTIVE, IS THAT A A YOU KNOW, IT'S A COMMITMENT CAN BE MADE WITH REGARDS TO THAT DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF GUTTERS THEN ON THAT SIDE? YEAH, THE UM, AND, AND THIS GOES, UH, WE DON'T HAVE A SURVEY THAT SHOWS WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE IS CORRECT, NO, WE DO NOT PERMITTING ANYWAY, IT'LL GO THROUGH PERMITTING. OKAY. SO YEAH, SO IT'S WHAT'S HAP MR. WEIDMAN, THE, THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT YOU'VE MADE A STATEMENT THAT YOU'RE PUTTING GUTTERS ON THE SIDE OF THE ADDITION, BUT DID YOUR APPLICATION STAFF, DID THE APPLICATION INCLUDE THE, INCLUDE GUTTERS AS PART OF THE APPLICATION? I, UH, THE GUTTERS ON THE, THE GUTTERS FOR THE FAMILY ROOM OR THE, FOR THE FAMILY ROOM? UM, I DON'T, IT DIDN'T GO INTO THAT. OKAY. SO THAT GREAT OF DETAIL. BUT, SO SIR, WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS IS, UM, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO, UH, AMEND YOUR APPLICATION TO STATE THAT IT WILL INCLUDE GUTTERS. WE CAN'T IMPOSE CONDITIONS AND WE CAN'T REQUEST. BUT IF YOU, AS THE APPLICANT WERE TO STATE AND AMEND YOUR, YOUR APPLICATION HERE WHILE YOU'RE AT THE PODIUM, THAT IT WILL INCLUDE GUTTERS, UH, THEN THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER WHEN WE DELIBERATE. YEAH, IT WILL DEFINITELY HAVE GUTTERS. SO LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, AMENDED HIS APPLICATION THAT THE FAMILY ROOM ADDITION WILL INCLUDE THE PROVISION OF RAIN GUTTERS, MANA COMMISSIONER, MANNA. SO, SO ANOTHER QUESTION THEN IS, AND IT'S KIND OF HARD TO TELL BY THIS DIAGRAM HERE. AND, AND SO WITH REGARDS TO THE, THE, THE PLOT OF THE PROPERTY AND SO, SO IS THERE A WIDER, AND SO IT, UH, IS THERE, UM, I GUESS A LARGER GAP WITH REGARDS TO THE DISTANCE OF THE HOUSE AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY VERSUS THE PROPOSED, UH, ADDITION? OR IS IT PRETTY MUCH A STRAIGHT LINE ALL THE WAY DOWN WITH REGARDS TO THE DISTANCE BETWEEN, UH, YOUR PROPERTY AND IT, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S A STRAIGHT LINE. UM, AND AGAIN, WE HAVEN'T, UM, THE, THE SURVEY THAT WE WERE PROVIDED WHEN WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE IS, IS RATHER PRIMITIVE. UM, THE, UM, HERE IT LOOKS LIKE THE, THE FENCE LINE GOES STRAIGHT TO THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE, BUT THAT'S JUST BECAUSE, UH, THE CONTRACTORS WHO FLIPPED THE HOUSE BEFORE SELLING IT TO US FOUND IT EASIER JUST TO CONNECT IT TO THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE THAN, UH, TO CREATE A LITTLE L THERE. THANK YOU. OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MANCHACA? I HAVE TWO, ONE. WHEN THE PRESENTATION WAS BEING GIVEN, YOU STATED THAT THE FENCE, THE CHAIN LINK FENCE IN THE FRONT WAS NOT IN THE PROPERTY LINE. IS THERE A SURVEY ISSUE HERE? NO, SIR. WE DON'T HAVE A SURVEY. THE SECOND ONE IS WHEN YOU STATED THAT THE, THE ADDITION THAT YOU'RE GONNA ADD, THAT THERE WERE NO WINDOWS ON THE SIDE OF THE ADDITION. IS THAT AN EGRESS ISSUE? THAT'S FIRE READING. JUST BEEN CLARIFIED OVER HERE. THANK YOU. YEAH. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA AND THEN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO, SO THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, [01:55:01] UM, IS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU MOVED THAT ADDITION THREE FEET IN, AND SO THE QUESTION WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, WHAT KIND OF HARDSHIP IS THAT GONNA CAUSE YOU TO DO THAT? SO IS, SO IS THAT, IS THAT GONNA BE PROBLEMATIC IF THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE BOARD SHOULD CHOOSE TO GO DOWN THAT PATH? YES, IT IS BECAUSE IT WOULD JUST CREATE A ROOM THAT IS, IS TOO NARROW TO BE OF MUCH USE. THANK YOU. SO JUST AS A FOLLOW UP SO THAT IF, IF MY CALCULATIONS ARE CORRECT, THEN THAT ROOM WOULD GO FROM 14 FEET WIDE TO 10 FEET WIDE? NO. WELL IF IT, IF IT WERE TO MOVE INTO THE FIVE FOOT, BUT IF IT WERE TO MOVE IN TO THE THREE, UH, THREE FOOT VARIANCE, IT WOULD KNOCK OFF TWO FEET. BUT, UH, SO IT WOULD BE 12 FEET WIDE. 12 FEET WIDE, WHICH, UM, IT, IT WOULD STILL BE A HARDSHIP IN THAT, UM, WHEN WE ADD THE FAMILY ROOM, THE, THE WALL WILL COME DOWN BETWEEN, UM, THE KITCHEN AND THE FAMILY ROOM TO CREATE AN OPEN SPACE AND, UM, YEAH, IT, IT WOULD JUST CREATE A MESS. SO MEANING THE EXISTING FLOW FROM ONE ROOM TO THE NEXT? YES. OKAY. AS WELL AS JUST CREATING A VERY NARROW ROOM. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH. I WANNA GET BACK TO THE, UM, THE WATER RUNOFF. YOU SAID YOU'D PUT THE DRAINS THERE. WOULD THE DRAINS GO TO THE FRONT OR WOULD YOU BE DRAINING IT? WOULD THE WATER BE FLOWING INTO THE BACKYARD? NO, THE, THE, THE GUTTERS WILL EMPTY INTO THE BACKYARD INTO A SWALE THAT BRINGS THE WATER AROUND, UH, ACROSS THE BACKYARD AND DOWN THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. STEPHANIE, IF YOU CAN BRING HIM TO THE SIDE PLANE PLEASE. HE HAS THE FLOW ARROW SHOWING YOU, YOU ARROW. YEAH, YOU CAN SEE A, AN ARCING. THE, THE ARROWS. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. UH, SO SIR, YOU'VE, YOU'VE HEARD A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS FROM THIS COMMISSION AND, UH, WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU A, A COUPLE MINUTES TO, UH, PROVIDE ANY, UH, CLOSING REMARKS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE BEFORE WE DELIBERATE. I THINK I'VE GIVEN IT MY BEST SHOT. AND THANK YOU, YOU AGAIN? YES, SIR. YES SIR. . OKAY. IS THERE A COMMISSIONER WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA, UM, I'M GONNA BE READING THE CASE AS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT HERE, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER B O A 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 4. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR ONE A THREE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW ADDITION TO BE ONE FOOT ONE INCHES AWAY FROM THE WESTERN SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND TWO, A TWO FOOT 10 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE TWO INCH, TWO FOOT EL TWO TWO FOOT TWO INCH AWAY FROM THE EASTERN SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 7 1 3 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING KEITH WILLIAM, KEITH WEIDMAN 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, UH, THAT, UM, UH, OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUEST TO ALLOW A ROOM ADDITION AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SIDE SETBACK IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE APPLICANT HAS ADEQUATE SPACE FROM THE ADJACENT STRUCTURE. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITION THAT IF ENFORCED, WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BY IMPOSING A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT. THE ROOM ADDITION WOULD NOT BE IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING HOUSE, THUS REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF LIVABLE SPACE, UH, FOR THE ROOM ADDITION. AND THE OWNER WOULD NEED TO MOVE OVER, UH, MOVE OVER DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OVER A MINIMUM OF TWO FOOT, TWO INCH AWAY FROM THE FIVE FOOT FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED IN 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 SETBACKS IS TO PROVIDE SPACING BETWEEN NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES, WHICH IS OBSERVED. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY, UH, FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUEST TO REDUCE A PORTION OF 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. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD, AND [02:00:01] THERE ARE OTHER NONCONFORMING LOT LINES WHERE EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE BUILT, AND ALMOST ALL THE HOMES IN THIS AREA HAVE A DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. LINES SIX. THE PLOT TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, FOR WHICH THE 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 AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE PLY TO THE OWNER, THE PROPERTY OWNER, IS SOUGHT DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY DUE TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AND ARE ALMOST BUILT ON THE LOT LINES AND WITH ATTACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE REAR. AND THE MOTION IS THERE A SECOND, TEAL. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TEAL. COMMISSIONER MANNA, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. SO, UM, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS AND SO TAKING A LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN DRIVING THROUGH, YOU KNOW, THIS IS HOW THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WAS BUILT AND SO, UH, YOU KNOW, IT IS VERY NARROW AND, YOU KNOW, I GUESS APPRECIATING THE DRIVEWAYS ON THE OTHER SIDE, UM, AND, AND, AND TAKE A LOOK ALSO AT MANY OF THE HOMES AROUND HERE, UH, THEY, THEY DO, UH, KIND OF EXTEND BACK A LITTLE BIT FURTHER. SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE EXTENDING THIS HOME, UH, YOU KNOW, ANY FURTHER THAN, THAN WHAT'S ALREADY EXISTENCE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND, UM, AND THEN WITH THE, UM, UM, I GUESS THE, THE NOTICE THAT THE APPLICANT IS GONNA PROVIDE THE GUTTERING, I THINK THAT RESOLVES A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE WITH REGARDS TO THE WATER MANAGEMENT. SO I'LL, WE'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER THIEL. I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I'LL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT. UH, I THOUGHT IT WAS A PRETTY GOOD CASE AS FAR AS, UH, THAT EXISTING SIGHT LINE THERE HAS BEEN THERE FOR 93 YEARS. SO FOLLOWING IN LINE WITH THAT, UH, EXISTING WALL SEEMED TO MAKE THE MOST SENSE FOR BOTH FLOW AND USABILITY. I WILL BE IN SUPPORT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO'D LIKE TO ADD HEARING? NOTICE THAT PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MR. MENNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. CONROY? I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UM, IF YOU COULD PLEASE GET WITH STAFF, THEY'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT, UH, WHAT TO DO NEXT. NEXT CASE, PLEASE. UM, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER [8. BOA-21-10300117] EIGHT IS GONNA BE BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 7. ADDRESS IS 4 0 0 5 SKY RIDGE AVENUE CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER THREE, APPLICANT IS JESUS TREVINO REQUESTING ONE. A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE SIX FOOT MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT SOLID FENCE ALONG THE SIDE. AND REAR PROPERTY LINES ZONING IS GONNA BE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY CASE SUMMARY. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG SKY RIDGE AVENUE NEAR GLOVER STREET. CURRENTLY HAS A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, RESIDENCE BUILT UPON IT, REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. SITE PLAN, SUBJECT PROPERTY SIDE OF THE PROPERTY SIDE, UH, EIGHT FOOT FENCE. IT'S THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, REAR OF THE FENCE, SURROUNDING AREA, SIDE AND REAR YARD FENCE. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O 8 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 7 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE ADDITIONAL TWO FEET AND HEIGHT DOES NOT POSE ANY DANGER TO THE PUBLIC AND WILL NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES. TWO. THE ADDITIONAL TWO FEET AND HEIGHT WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY AND, UH, SAFETY AND SECURITY TO THE PROPERTY. AND THREE, THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PRIVACY FOR THE SWIMMING POOL TO THE REAR OF THE OF THE PROPERTY. 27 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR. ZERO IN OPPOSITION. THAT CONCLUDES STAFF AGENDA, STAFF PRESENTATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES. [02:05:01] OH, HELLO SIR, IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. OKAY. JESSE ENO. F 4 0 0 5 SKY RIDGE. I MEAN, I JUST, I, DURING THIS PANDEMIC, WHEN IT ALL STARTED, I, I ENDED UP PUTTING THE POOL IN THE BACK FOR, FOR THE FAMILY TO KEEP US HOME. AND, UM, I MEAN I JUST NEEDED MORE SAFETY AND PRIVACY 'CAUSE OF THE POOL. AND MY NEIGHBOR TO THE RIGHT OF ME HAS AN AIRBNB, I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU CALL IT, WHERE PEOPLE COME ALL THE TIME AND STUFF LIKE THAT. AND WE JUST WANTED MORE PRIVACY AND THERE WAS AN ADDITION, UH, A SIX FOOT FENCE THERE, BUT IT WAS ALREADY FALLEN. BUT, UM, FROM THEIR WINDOW, THE NEIGHBOR TOLD ME THAT THEY COULD SEE OVER OUR SIX FOOT FENCE WITH THEIR SIX FOOT FENCE. SO IT WAS ALREADY FALLEN. I DECIDED JUST TO, YOU KNOW, REPLACE IT WITH AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. AND WHEN WE BUILT THE DECK IN THE BACK, WHEN WE PUT THE DECK AROUND THE POOL, THERE WAS A CHAIN LINK FENCE BACK THERE. BUT WHEN THAT DECK WAS BUILT, I MEAN THE FENCE WAS ONLY LIKE THREE FEET HIGH, A CHAIN LINK FENCE. SO AGAIN, I JUST PUT A EIGHT FOOT FENCE BACK THERE. SO THAT'S, I MEAN, ALSO THAT STREET IS VERY, IT'S VERY BUSY. THERE'S A LOT OF, WELL THE BUS RUNS THROUGH THERE, THERE'S A BUS STOP, BUS STOP ON THE RIGHT OF ME, ONE ON THE LEFT OF ME, AND THEN THE HIGH SCHOOL IS DOWN THE STREET. THERE'S A LOT OF FOOT TRAFFIC, THE BUS, AND I MEAN, PRETTY MUCH THAT'S IT, I GUESS. I DON'T KNOW. OKAY. WELL WE'RE GONNA SEE, UH, LET ME ASK, UH, SIR, LET ME SEE IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC COMMENTARY. ANYONE SIGNED IN TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? NO ONE SIGNED IN ON THIS CASE. OKAY. SO, UM, WE'RE GONNA SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UH, SIR, THE ONLY THING I WAS GONNA ASK YOU, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS A POOL AND HAS AN, CAN YOU TALK CLOSER TO THE MIC, MA'AM? OH, I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. SORRY, SORRY. IS THERE ANYBODY IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD OR CLOSE TO YOU THAT HAS A POOL AND HAS AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE? UH, I THINK THERE'S A LADY DOWN THE STREET. I DON'T VENTURE OFF TOO MUCH FROM THE HOUSE, BUT I THINK SHE HAS A POOL. I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF FENCE SHE HAS IN THE BACK. I KNOW THERE'S AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE, THERE'S A GENTLEMAN DOWN THE STREET. I THINK A 39 3, THEY HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE A POOL. I DON'T KNOW. I'M NOT SURE. OKAY. I'M JUST WONDERING BECAUSE I'M JUST SURPRISED THAT YOUR NEIGHBORS DIDN'T COMPLAIN, ESPECIALLY YOUR NEIGHBOR THAT HAS AN AIR B A M B A B AND B. NO, HE WAS ALL FOR IT. YEAH, SO THAT'S WHY I AM, I'M JUST CHECKING. THANK YOU. YES. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OH, ZUNA, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, I JUST, IF YOU COULD SPEAK, IS THERE ANY TOPOGRAPHY DIFFERENCE, GREAT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY? THAT'S KIND OF THE, ON THAT ONE SIDE YOU SHOWED THE PICTURE OF THE POLE WHERE IT KIND OF SETS OFF ON ONE SIDE. IS THERE, THAT WOULD HELP? I MEAN THE, WELL, THE, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? THE WAY THE PROPERTY RUNS? YES SIR. BECAUSE THE PROPERTY RUNS WHERE WE LIVE. THE PROPERTY RUNS AT AN ANGLE DOWN. RIGHT, OKAY. SO TOWARDS THE BACK, I MEAN IT'S, SO YOU'RE SITTING UP HIGHER, RIGHT? YEAH, I'M SITTING UP HIGHER UP FRONT. SO YOU WOULD NEED THAT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT TO, TO BLOCK THE VIEW FROM PRETTY MUCH, YES. FROM YOUR VIEW OUT AND THEIR VIEW IN YES. COULD, COULD I REMIND Y'ALL TO SPEAK A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE MIC? IT'S KIND OF HARD TO HEAR Y'ALL. THANK YOU. NOW ON, ON ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MANNA, COMMISSIONER MANNA? UM, SO, SO THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, YOU KNOW, DRIVING AROUND, I I DID NOT SEE THAT MANY, UH, EIGHT FOOT FENCES ALONG THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. AND THE QUESTION I WOULD ASK IS, UH, RIGHT AT YOUR, UM, I GUESS AT THE GARAGE DOOR, YOU KNOW, GOING OVER OR, OR ON THAT SIDE, IT, IT, THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR FENCE AND THE NEIGHBORING, THE NEIGHBORING FENCE. UM, AND SO A QUESTION WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, IS, IS IS SIX FOOT OKAY AT THAT SIDE AND THEN EIGHT FOOT EVERYWHERE ELSE? AND SO THAT WAY IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I GUESS. I GUESS, I MEAN, TOWARDS THE BACK THERE IS A SIX FOOT FENCE ON THAT SIDE. I MEAN, I JUST PUT A, I ALREADY HAD EIGHT FOOT FENCE. I JUST WENT AHEAD AND MADE AN ADDITIONAL EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THAT SIDE. BUT THAT'S THE SIDE WHERE THE AIRBNB NEIGHBOR IS, RIGHT? NO, THE OTHER SIDE WHERE THE AIRBNB IS, THAT'S ALL THAT SIDE IS, IS A EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE. I THINK IT'S JUST LIKE 40 FEET OF, OF UH, PRIVACY OF A EIGHT FOOT FENCE. COULD I, COULD I HAVE STAFF GO BACK FOR THE, FOR THE ONE PICTURE SO THAT WHERE IT SHOWS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE? THERE YOU GO. SO, SO ON THE, SO FACING THERE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE AND, AND I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER PICTURE THAT SHOWED, UM, THAT SHOWED ACTUALLY, UM, I GUESS THE CORRIDOR BETWEEN THE TWO FENCES THERE. AND REALLY THE QUESTION WAS JUST, [02:10:01] YOU KNOW, THAT IS A PRETTY TALL FENCE THERE IN THE FRONT. THERE YOU GO. GREAT PICTURE. AND SO, SO UM, YOU KNOW, UM, I GUESS THE DIALOGUE ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, MAKING THAT ACTUALLY SIX FOOT ON THIS SIDE HERE, UM, SO IS THERE A CHALLENGE OR, OR IS THERE SOME KIND OF QUESTION WHY THAT WORKED OUT MORE FOR YOU? NO, IT'S JUST THAT MY BEDROOM AND MY BATHROOM ON THAT SIDE AND, UH, I MEAN IT'S JUST A SMALL FENCE. THE WAY THE, THESE HOUSES ARE BUILT, NOT, NOT TOO HIGH ON THIS TOWARDS THE FRONT, IT'S ON THE HIGH SIDE, BUT I MEAN, I JUST WENT AHEAD AND JUST DID THE EIGHT FOOT ON, ON THAT SIDE. 'CAUSE MY BEDROOM AND MY BATHROOM. AND IF, I MEAN, THESE HOUSES ARE OLD, SO WHEN YOU TAKE A SHOWER AND STUFF, ALL THAT STEAM IS STAYS IN THERE. SO WE OPEN OUR BEDROOM, OUR BATHROOM WINDOW TO LET EVERYTHING OUT. SO I JUST WANTED MORE PRIVACY. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO I HAVE A QUESTION, UM, ON THE, UH, STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE BRING UP THE SIDE PLAN, UH, THE SURVEY SLIDE SITE? UH, THERE YOU GO. SO THE APPLICANT IS ONLY ASKING FOR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THE RIGHT SIDE, BUT NOT ON THE LEFT SIDE AND THE REAR RIGHT. THEIR APPLICATION DOES NOT INCLUDE AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE BACKYARD ON THE LEFT SIDE. LIKE I KNOW THERE'S A CURRENTLY A FENCE THERE, BUT THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. UH, AND SIR, DID YOU HAVE AN, DID YOU HAVE A FENCE AT ALL THAT EXISTED ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE ACTUAL HOME? ON THE FACING THE HOUSE ON THE LEFT SIDE? WELL NEXT TO WHERE YOUR BEDROOM AND BATHROOM WAS, WAS THERE A FENCE THERE BEFORE? NO, THERE WAS NO FENCE THERE. IT WAS THERE. OKAY. THERE WAS NOTHING. AND, AND, UM, YOU HAVE, YEAH. OKAY. IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE, UH, SITE PLAN PLEASE. SO, YOU KNOW, MY CONCERN WAS WHEN I WAS GOING DOWN GOOGLE EARTH DOWN THE STREET, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO DO HAVE FENCES, A LOT OF THEM DIDN'T START UNTIL THE, THE BACK CORNER OF THE HOME. MM-HMM. , UH, AND, AND THIS FENCE IS, IS ALMOST TO THE SOFFIT OF THE ROOF. AND IT JUST SEEMED, YOU KNOW, HOW TALL IS THE WINDOW THAT GOES INTO YOUR BATHROOM AND BEDROOM? IS IT, IS IT AT THE VERY TOP OF THE, OF THE WALL OR IS IT MIDWAY LIKE A STANDARD, LIKE MAYBE FIVE FEET, SIX FEET, SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE. THE TOP OF THE WINDOW OR THE BOTTOM? THE BOTTOM OF THE WINDOW. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, OKAY. AND I, I MEAN I, I DID THAT ALSO BECAUSE I KIND OF USED IT, IT WAS JUST LIKE DEAD SPACE. SO I KIND OF USED IT LIKE FOR STORAGE, YOU KNOW, I PUT NO, I I I UNDERSTAND. I WAS JUST, IT JUST DIDN'T SEEM, UH, SIMILAR TO THE, TO THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, BUT I GET THE, I, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A POOL AIRBNB NEXT DOOR. I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULD WANT AND DESIRE AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT YEAH, FIND OUT MORE ABOUT WHY YOU HAVE ONE ON THE SIDE IN THE, ON THE LEFT SIDE IN THE FRONT. OKAY. UM, I HAVE NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, BUT IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO. SO SIR, YOU HAVE A, UM, WE'RE GONNA GIVE A COUPLE MINUTES TO PROVIDE ANY CLOSING REMARKS, ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU WANT US TO BE AWARE OF BEFORE WE DELIBERATE? YEAH, WELL, NO, NOT REALLY. JUST A LOT OF IT WAS, IT WAS JUST DONE FOR OUR PRIVACY AND SAFETY PRECAUTIONS. I MEAN, LIKE I WAS SAYING, THERE'S A LOT OF FOOT TRAFFIC. THE POLICE HAVE BEEN TO MY HOUSE TWICE ALREADY 'CAUSE UH, THE ALARM KEEPS GOING OFF. UM, WE'VE HAD PACKAGES STOLEN OFF OUR PROPERTY IN THE FRONT, YOU KNOW, AMAZON STUFF. NOT ONLY US, BUT ACROSS THE STREET TO, AT OTHER HOUSES. OKAY. I MEAN, HE WAS JUST, I ONCE CAUGHT A GUY AT MY FRONT DOOR. HE SAID HE WAS LOOKING FOR A CERTAIN STREET. IT'S NOWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. . RIGHT. IT WAS LIKE . I ASKED HIM WHAT HE WAS DOING. HE GOES, OH, DO YOU KNOW WHERE THIS STREET IS? I SAID, NO, . OKAY. AND THEN HE JUST WALKED OFF, GOT INTO A CAR AND TOOK OFF. I KEPT AN EYE ON HIM. I JUST, BUT I MEAN, OTHER THAN THAT IT'S JUST, JUST FOR SAFETY AND PRIVACY. YES SIR. UM, WITH THAT, UH, WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS, UH, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND DELIBERATE AND ASK FOR A MOTION. SO IF YOU CAN PLEASE TAKE A SEAT. OKAY. IS THERE A COMMISSIONER? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE. THANK YOU. O ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 21 DASH 0 3 0 7. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW A SOLID SCREEN FENCE TO BE EIGHT FEET TALL ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 4 0 0 5 SKY RIDGE AVENUE APPLICANT BEING JESUS TRAVINO. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR FENCE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE TWO FEET OF HEIGHT IS, IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SAFETY FOR THE PROPERTY, BE THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY THE FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND A FOOT SOLID FENCE, SCREEN FENCE ALONG THE REAR AND SIDE YARD DOES NOT POST ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE. C THE PROPERTY, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PUR PROPOSED USE. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS [02:15:01] UNLIKELY TO INJURE ADJACENT TIES. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THIS DISTRICT AND THE LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR THE SECTION OF THE SIDE AND REAR YARD SET, UH, YOUR REAR YARD 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 THIS DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE AND ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIED DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PER PERMITS, THE CURRENT USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THIS DISTRICT. END OF MOTION. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SECOND. SECOND, SECOND. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. YES, I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS, AS READ. UM, YOU KNOW, THE FENCE IS BEHIND THE FRONT FACE OF THE PROPERTY. UH, WE SAW EVIDENCE ABOUT THE POLE AND THE AIRBNB AS BEING KIND OF A, A NUISANCE NEIGHBOR. UH, AND SO I THINK THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT OF THE FENCE ALLOWS THE SECURITY AND UM, UH, AND UM, PROVIDES THE REMEDY FOR WHICH THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UH, YES, I DO CONCUR WITH MR. OZUNA. I I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GOOD, UH, PROPERTY FOR THAT, UH, ADJUSTMENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? MANNA ROY, COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO YEAH, I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE, WITH THE LEFT SIDE THERE AND, AND YOU KNOW, AND JUST LOOKING THROUGH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GARAGE WALL SO THERE'S NO WINDOWS ON THE OPPOSITE WALL. UM, AND, AND IT IS KIND OF OUT OF CHARACTER WITH, WITH THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY AND, AND SO I AM STRUGGLING WITH THAT FENCE BEING SO TALL ACROSS THE FRONT AND THEN GOING BACK TO THE BACK. 'CAUSE IT DOES MAKE KIND OF A LONG TRAFFIC, YOU KNOW, KIND OF A LONG CORRIDOR THAT'S KIND OF TALL. SO, SO I AM STRUGGLING WITH THAT PIECE. OKAY. UM, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER ALBERT? UH, YES. UH, BASICALLY THE SAME COMMENT. THE, THE FENCE FROM THE REAR OF THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE FORWARD TO BE EIGHT FOOT. IT'S NOT PROVIDING ANY MORE SAFETY OR SECURITY OR PRIVACY FOR THE POOL AREA OR FOR THE AIRBNB. SO I DON'T SEE ANY REASON FOR THE BE THAT HIGH AND IT, IT DOES DETRACT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. OKAY. SO, UH, FOR THE MAKER OF THE MOTION, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO ACCEPT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT FOR THAT? THE EIGHT FOOT, UH, HEIGHT IS, EXCEPT SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS ONLY FOR THE REAR OF THE HOUSE TO THE, TO THE BACK. AND, AND, AND WELL ON BOTH SIDES. WELL, THE ONE SIDE, UH, I, NONE OF THE EIGHT, NONE OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD APPLY TO ANY FENCING FROM THE BACK OF THE HOME FORWARD, BACK OF THE, YEAH MAN. SO, SO, AND ACTUALLY I THINK AN EIGHT FOOT ACROSS THE BACK ON THAT ONE SIDE, I'D BE OKAY WITH THAT. I THINK IT JUST COMING ALL THE WAY FORWARD. SO IF THEY WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, ALONG THE BACK SIDE OF THE HOUSE, HAVE IT EIGHT FOOT ON THAT ONE SIDE WOULD BE FINE WITH THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. BUT I THINK BRINGING IT FORWARD IS WHERE WE'RE GONNA GONNA DEFINE, DEFINE THE LIMITS OF THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE FROM THE BACK FORWARD TO THE FRONT FACE OF THE HOUSE. FROM THAT, THE MOTION WOULD BE TO ALLOW FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE FOR THE SIDE AND REAR LIMITED ONLY TO THE BACK PLANE OF THE HOME BACKWARDS. SO THE, SO THE REAR YARD, THE, FOR THE REAR YARD ONLY? YES. WELL REAR NOW. RIGHT. THE REAR GET RID OF THIS. HE'S ONE, ONE PORTION IS ON THE SIDE YARD. YEP. AND SO I WOULD ASK, I MEAN THE APPLICANT WOULD'VE A CHANCE TO, WOULD, WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE TO YOU, SIR, TO HAVE THE EIGHT FOOT FROM THE, SO THE, THE, THE MOTION AS BEING AMENDED WOULD BE FROM EIGHT FEET, FROM THE, FROM THE BACK OF YOUR PROPERTY TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE EIGHT FEET TO PROVIDE THAT SCREENING THAT YOU WOULD WANT. AND THEN SIX FEET FROM THE, FROM THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY TO THE FRONT FACE OF THE HOUSE. ON, TOWARDS THE BACK THOUGH, OR THE SIDE? IT WOULD BE EIGHT FEET. IT'D BE EIGHT FEET FROM THE REAR OF YOUR HOUSE? YEAH, BACK AND SIX FEET FROM THE REAR OF THE HOUSE FORWARD. OKAY. WELL THERE THAT, THAT IS A SIX FOOT FENCE ALREADY AND IT'S, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NEXT TO YOUR BEDROOM AND BATHROOM. YEAH, I MEAN, IT'D BE KIND OF HARD TO KNOCK IT DOWN 'CAUSE IT'S GOT STEEL POLES AND STUFF. WELL, IF, IF, UH, IF THREE, IF TWO COMMISSIONERS DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS, THE ENTIRE MOTION FAILS. SO WE, WE'VE HEARD COMMENTARY FROM TWO COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE HESITANT. SO WE JUST, WE JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHAT YOUR OPINION WAS, UH, REGARDING THAT. UM, I MEAN, I DON'T, I WAS HOPING IT WOULD JUST STAY AS IS FOR, LIKE I SAID, FOR SAFETY AND PRECAUTION. HOW, OKAY. WANT ME MAKE, YOU CAN MAKE SURE. CAN I SAY SOMETHING? UH, UH, ONE SECOND. UM, SO WE'VE GOT, THERE'S A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. IS THAT ACCEPTED BY THE MAKER OF THE MOTION? I'VE ACCEPTED THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. AND BY THE SECOND COMMISSIONER CRUZ. YES, I ACCEPT. OKAY. UM, COMM COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, YOU WANTED TO ADD, I JUST WANTED TO ASK THE APPLICANT, ISN'T IT POSSIBLE TO CUT FROM THE TOP CUT DOWN TWO FEET? NO, 'CAUSE THERE'S A, THERE'S A METAL POLE THAT GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP. ON, ON EVERY, ON AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. YOU WOULD TYPICALLY HAVE FOUR [02:20:02] RUNNERS CONNECTING THE POST. SO YOU HAVE, HE HE'S SAYING THAT THERE MIGHT BE A RUNNER WITHIN THE, THE TWO FEET ON THE TOP, WHICH CAN STILL BE REMEDIED. IT'S JUST NOT, IT'S JUST, IT'S NOT AS EASY. IT'S NOT AS EASY, BUT IT'S, THEY'LL HAVE THE, UH, IT CAN BE, IT CAN BE DONE, BUT IF THE MOTION WERE TO FAIL AS RED, THEN THERE WOULD BE NO EIGHT FOOT FENCE. SO THIS IS, YEAH, YOU WOULD HAVE TO GET RID OF ALL OF IT. SO THIS IS KIND OF A COMPROMISE, COMPROMISE POSITION. SO IT GIVES YOU THE SCREENING YOU NEED, BUT STILL PLACATES THE, YEAH, SO WE HAVE A, WE HAVE AN AMENDED MOTION ON THE TABLE, UH, FOR AND FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE REAR YARD ONLY. SO IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTARY FROM COMMISSIONERS CONROY, UH, COMMISSIONER CONROY, THEN COMMISSIONER SHANKA. YEAH, I, I I REALLY AM STRUGGLING WITH THE, THE HEIGHT AND THE MASS OF FACING OF THAT FENCE. UM, STRIKES ME, IT'S BEEN, THE MOTION'S BEEN AMENDED. OH, HIT YOUR MIC AGAIN. AND THE AMENDMENT I THINK ADDRESSES THAT. SO I JUST WANTED THE APPLICANTS TO HEAR THAT. YES, SIR. UH, COMMISSIONER MS. SHAKA, SAME THING. OKAY, SO WITH THAT, LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. CONROY, I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. TEO? YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR THE MOTION FOR A, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE REAR YARD ONLY PASSES NINE TO ONE. SIR, YOU PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND THEY'LL, THEY'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT YOUR NEXT STEPS ARE. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYBODY NEED A BREAK OR CAN WE KEEP GOING, MOVING FORWARD? YEAH. TWO PIECES LEFT. LET'S GO. LET'S KEEP GOING. OKAY. SO NUMBER, NUMBER, UH, 10, UH, NINE, PLEASE. [9. BOA-21-10300118] AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE IS CASE BO A 21 103 0 0 1 1 8. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 4 2 7 GUANAJUATO STREET WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE. THE APPLICANT IS JUAN CERVANTES AND THE REQUEST IS FOR JUAN, A 15 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A PORTION OF SOLID SCREEN FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE SIX FEET TALL. THE, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED R FOR A SINGLE FAMILY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG GUANAJUATO STREET, UM, JUST NORTH OF HIGHWAY 90. THEY ARE REQUESTING THE REAR SETBACK VARIANCE TO ALLOW A, THEIR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. UM, THE RESIDENCE WAS BUILT IN 2007 ACCORDING TO B C AD. AND, UH, CITY RECORDS SHOWED THAT THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT WITHOUT PERMITS. AN INVESTIGATION WAS OPENED IN 2014 FOR A BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT. UM, AND THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE. UM, IT WENT THROUGH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SHORTLY AFTER THAT. IN 2014, THE BO O A DID APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST. UM, HOWEVER, THE TIME DID EXPIRE WHERE PERMITS WERE NOT PULLED. UM, SO NOW HE IS THE APPLICANT'S TRYING TO PULL PERMITS AGAIN AND IS GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS AGAIN. UM, UPON THE SITE VISIT, STAFF DID NOTICE THE, A PORTION OF FENCING ALONG THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE THAT IS SIX FEET TALL. UM, THAT WILL SHOW HERE IN A BIT. HERE IS THE SITE PLAN IN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. SO THAT, UM, SECTION OF FENCING ALONG THE SIDE IS, WAS NOTICED UPON THE SITE VISIT. AND THERE IS THE, THAT FENCE. AND HERE'S THE REAR SETBACK AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL FOR THE REAR SETBACK VARIANCE, UM, IN BO O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IS FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, THERE'S ADEQUATE, ADEQUATE SPACE IN THE FRONT YARD TO PROVIDE A 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK FOR THE FRONT YARD. SP FENCE SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE SIX FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE IS ALONG [02:25:01] A PORTION OF THE WESTERN SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, THE FENCE IS ALONG THE SIDE YARD OF THE WESTERN ABUDDING PROPERTY. STAFF MAILED 34 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS. UM, NONE IN RETURN IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE WESTWOOD SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS APPLICANT PRESENT? SURE, SIR. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. MY NAME'S JUAN CERVANTES, UH, 4 27 JUAN HU . AND I RAN OUTTA MONEY AT THAT TIME, SO THAT'S WHY I STOPPED. BUT I PAID FOR THE, UM, THE OTHER PERMIT, WHICH IS A BUILDING PERMIT AND EXPIRED. SO I'M HERE AGAIN, HOPING Y'ALL PASS IT. I'VE BEEN LIVING OFF THE GRID FOR ABOUT TWO MONTHS FROM THE COVID. UH, MY WIFE IS ANGRY. SHE DESPISES ME 'CAUSE SHE'S COOKING OUTSIDE . BUT, UH, UH, AS IT IS, I'VE BEEN LIVING THERE FOR 14 YEARS, PAYING ALL MY TAXES UP TO $25,000 IN TAXES ALREADY. UM, THAT LITTLE LIFELINE FROM MY BROTHER THAT I WAS GETTING FOR THE LIGHT, WELL HE CUT IT ALREADY OFF, SO I'VE BEEN OFF THE GRID. SO NOW IT'S UP TO YOU. HOPEFULLY YOU PASS IT. UH, I GOTTA KNOCK IT DOWN. UM, LIKE I SAID, UH, FOUR YEARS AGO, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS Y'ALL, BUT IT PASSED, YOU KNOW, AND I WAS SO HAPPY, BUT I DIDN'T GO FORWARD. SO I'M HERE AGAIN. OKAY. I'LL NEVER DO IT AGAIN. NEXT TIME IF I PUT A TREE, I'M GOING TO COME TO THE CITY FIRST, GET ALL PERMITS. SO PLEASE DO WHAT YOU CAN. YES, SIR. UH, STAFF. IS THERE ANYBODY CENTER TO SPEAK OR PUBLIC COMMENTARY TO READ IN? WE HAVE A VOICEMAIL TO PLAY. ALL RIGHT. HI, I'M MARTHA GOMEZ, FOUR 14 TIAGO TWO TEN FOUR THREE FIVE FOUR FIVE FOUR SIX. THE CASE NUMBER LAST THREE DIGITS IS 1 1 8. UM, THE THINKING IS IF THE PERSON, UH, AT 4 27 GUANAJUATO STREET ALREADY HAS THESE STRUCTURES UP, UH, IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED. IF THEY ARE NOT CURRENTLY UP AND THEY'RE LOOKING AT BILL, ADDING ON, UH, I THINK YOU SHOULD STAY WITH THE, WITH THE CITY POLICY. SO IN A WE'RE IN OPPOSED TO THIS. UH, THANK YOU. BYE. ALL RIGHT. UH, MR. TREVINO, UH, IF YOU COULD, MR. VINNO, IF YOU COULD PLEASE, UH, COME BACK UP. UH, MR. OH, I'M SORRY. MR. CERVANTES. OKAY. YES, SIR. HAD THE NAME FROM THE PREVIOUS. OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. CERVANTES? I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF. UH, WHAT WE APPROVED, UH, FOUR YEARS AGO, IT, WAS IT EXACT SAME REQUEST THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY, OR IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCES TO IT? JUST THE FENCE. IT WAS THE, THE REAR SETBACK VARIANCE. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW HOW FAR THE FENCE EXTENDS FROM THE FRONT PLANE OF THE HOME? JUST TO MAKE SURE I KNOW, I KNOW THAT YOU'RE NOT AGAINST, UH, STAFF WAS, UH, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE GRANT, UM, UH, APPROVAL FOR A SIX FOOT, UH, FRONT YARD FENCE, HOW FAR EXTENDS? I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE THAT MEASUREMENT. OKAY. MR. CERVANTES, DO YOU, DO YOU HAVE ANY RECOLLECTION OF HOW FAR YOUR FENCE ACTUALLY EXTENDS IN FRONT OF YOUR HOME? THE, MY FRONT FENCE? YES, SIR. IT'S THE, UH, FROM THE HOUSE TO THE FRONT, RIGHT? YES. THE FRONT OF YOUR HOME IS ABOUT 67 FEET FROM THE STREET? YEAH. YEAH. BUT THE, THE PICTURE SHOWS THE FENCING TO EXTEND, UH, NOT ANY PAST A TREE THAT YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE IN THE FRONT YARD. DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW HOW FAR THAT STICKS OUT? THE, THE TREE FROM THE HOUSE OR THE TREE FROM MY HOUSE TO THE, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE TREE? UH, STEPH, CAN YOU BRING UP SLIDE 1 38, UH, ON THE PRESENTATION OR THIS FENCE RIGHT HERE? THERE'S A WOOD FENCE. THAT'S, YEAH. AND SO, DO YOU KNOW HOW FAR THAT STICKS? THAT THAT'S A, WHAT IS IT, A FIVE FOOT? YES. COMES UP TO ABOUT RIGHT HERE? YES. DO YOU KNOW HOW FAR IT PROJECTS FROM MY HOUSE TO THAT ONE? IT'S ABOUT FIVE FEET. AND THEN MY BROTHER'S HOUSE IS OVER HERE, SO THERE'S NOBODY ON THAT SIDE. SO THE WATER DROPS FROM THE EAST TO THE WEST. THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR DOESN'T MIND. SO EVERYBODY'S, EVERYBODY LOVES ME OVER THERE. HOW, HOW, HOW LONG IS THE FENCE? HOW LONG? UH, I WOULD SAY FAR, FAR AWAY. HOW? IT'S ABOUT 30, 35 FEET. 35 FEET FROM THE FENCE OVER HERE. MM-HMM. , THAT'S ANOTHER ABOUT 40 FEET, 50 FEET. OKAY. FAR AWAY. I WOULD NEVER PUT A FENCE TOO CLOSE TO WHERE SHE'S COMING OUT AND SOMEBODY'S GONNA GET INJURED. DO YOU THINK YOUR FENCE IS 30 FEET AWAY FROM THE [02:30:01] OH, FAR? YEAH. YEAH, IT IS. OKAY. THAT'S, THAT'S CLOSE ENOUGH FOR ME. SO, UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. THANK YOU, SIR. UH, SO IF THERE'S A COMMISSIONER, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS DEAL. COMMISSIONER THI REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 21 DASH THREE EIGHT, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR GRANT, A REQUEST FOR 15 FOOT VARIS FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURED TO BE FIVE FOOT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 4 2 7 GUANA STREET. APPLICANT BEING JUAN CERVANTES. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUEST TO ALLOW AR REAR SETBACK VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. SINCE THE STRUCTURE IS EXISTING TOO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED, WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BY IMPOSING THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT DWELLING WILL, WILL NEED TO BE RELOCATED FURTHER FROM THE REAR PROPERTY. LINE. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. SPIRIT ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE MEETS ALL OF THEIR SETBACKS, SO THE SPIRITED ORDINANCE IS OBSERVED. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE AN OPERATION OR USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH A VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT FORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REAR SETBACK DOES NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING. THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX. BLOOD 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 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 BOARD FINDS THAT THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SOUGHT DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. ALRIGHT, WHO WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A SECOND PLEASE? SECOND. UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANANA. UH, MR. COMMISSIONER THIEL, PLEASE LEAVE THE DISCUSSION. YES, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. SO I DON'T SEE THERE'S A, A GOOD REASON TO KNOCK DOWN THE STRUCTURE, UM, IN ORDER TO MOVE IT FORWARD. UH, WE ALSO DID APPROVE THIS PREVIOUSLY AND THEREFORE I'D LIKE TO UPHOLD THAT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. FANTASTIC. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS I'D LIKE TO ADD? HEARING NONE. UH, STAFF PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. CONROY? I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES 10 TO ZERO. UH, NOW FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, TEAL COMMISSIONER TEAL REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 21 DASH THREE EIGHT, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A ONE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE FIVE FOOT MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT IN THE FRONT YARD TO ALLOW A PORTION OF A SOLID SCREEN FRONT YARD FENCE SITUATED AT 4 2 7 GUANA JUNTO STREET APPLICANT BEING JUAN CERVANTES. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS, WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY YOU FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR FENCE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT IN THE FRONT YARD IS IN IS INTENDED, APPEARS TO BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE CHAPTER B. THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED. SMALL PORTION OF THE FRONT YARD FENCE WILL SUBSTANTIALLY SERVE THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE AND IS LOCATED ALONG THE SIDE YARD OF THE ABUTTING PROPERTY. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE FENCE WILL NOT FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS UNLIKELY TO INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR THE SECTION OF THE FRONT YARD FENCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND WILL PROVIDE SECURITY OF THE DISTRICT. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT [02:35:01] WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. 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. SECOND. I'M GONNA SECOND THAT ONE. UM, COMMISSIONER TEEL LIKE TO OFFER FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO LIMIT THE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO NO CLOSER THAN 30 FEET FROM THE STREET. I ACCEPT. I ALSO ACCEPT, UH, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER, IF THERE'S ANY, UH, UH, COMMERS LIKE TO, UH, COMMISSIONER TEAL, PLEASE, UH, LEAD THE DISCUSSION. YES. UM, I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE FENCE IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION. THE SETBACK OF THE FENCE AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS SO FAR FROM THE STREET. THERE'S NO CLEAR VISION ISSUES. UM, IT'S APPARENT THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE NO ISSUE WITH THE NEIGHBOR. UM, SO I WILL BE SUPPORT OF THIS AS WELL. UH, I AM ALSO IN SUPPORT AS AMENDED. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UH, FOR A ONE FOOT, UH, HEIGHT INCREASE TO FIVE FEET SOLID FENCE, NO CLOSER THAN 30 FEET FROM THE STREET. UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. CONROY? I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES 10 TO ZERO. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. THANK YOU ALL. THANK YOU MR. CERVANTES. OKAY, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10 [10. BOA-21-10300120] IS CASE B A 21 1 0 3 0 0 1 20. KAYLA, YOUR MIC. OH, IS THAT BETTER? CAN YOU HEAR? IT'S ON HELLO? HELLO? HELLO? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU OKAY THERE. IT'S OKAY. UM, CASE BO A 21 1 0 3 0 0 1 20. THE ADDRESS IS, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1 4 3 RE MOUNTAIN DRIVE WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO. THE APPLICANT, UM, ON THE APPLICATION IS JENNIFER GONZALEZ. THE REQUEST IS A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 30 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 25 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY IS I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL. SO THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG REMOUNT. UM, THE I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT DOES REQUIRE A MINIMUM 30 FOOT FRONT SETBACK. UM, THEY'RE REQUESTING A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW A WAREHOUSE TO BE 25 FEET FROM THE FRONT SET FRONT PROPERTY LINE. ALL OTHER SETBACKS AND LANDSCAPE BUFFERS ARE GONNA BE MET WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT. HERE'S A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 1 20 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE PROPOSED WAREHOUSE WILL BE SET BACK 25 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. TWO, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL MEET ALL OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. AND THREE, THE REQUESTED SETBACK WILL ALLOW FOR THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. STAFF MAILED 11 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. NONE RETURN IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION. AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UH, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION. MM-HMM. , UH, WAS THERE AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE GRANTED FOR THE FOUR PARKING SPACES COMING OFF OF THE STREET? I DIDN'T THINK YOU COULD HAVE MORE THAN TWO. I WAS JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE. NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, BUT I CAN LOOK INTO IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. CERTAINLY. ANDREW BARBOSA WITH CALEB OF ENGINEERING. UH, WE HAVE SUBMITTED THIS APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER, WHICH IS C N S ENTERPRISES, WHICH IS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE EAST. UH, THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION, UM, IS ZONED I ONE. MR. BARBOSA, COULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? MY APOLOGIES. MY ADDRESS, THE WORK ADDRESS IS 2 2 6 10 US 2 81 NORTH SUITE 2 0 4. THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. UH, THE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS, UM, IT HAS VARIOUS ZONING ALONG THE ROADWAY, UH, INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL. UH, THE LOT IN QUESTION WAS PLATTED BACK IN 1983 AND PREVIOUSLY WAS OCCUPIED BY A HOME. [02:40:02] UH, THE ADJACENT, UH, LOT OWNER HAS SINCE IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, PURCHASED, PURCHASED SEVERAL OF THE PROPERTIES ADJACENT AND BEHIND THEIR CURRENT BUSINESS AND EFFORTS TO INCREASE THEIR, UM, STORAGE EQUIPMENT MATERIAL YARD WITH THE HOPES OF EXPANDING THEIR BUSINESS. UH, THIS PROJECT IN QUESTION WAS, UH, DESIGNED KIND OF IN A VACUUM WHERE THE ARCHITECT AND THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER WE'RE TRYING TO MAXIMIZE THE ENTIRE LOT. THE LOT IS ONLY 100 FOOT BY ONE 50, SO THEY WERE TRYING TO MAXIMIZE THE ENTIRE BUILDING AREA FOR A WAREHOUSE. UM, UNBEKNOWNST TO THEM, THEY WERE NOT AWARE OF THE 30 FOOT SETBACK. UH, THIS FIVE FOOT VARIANCE OF GRANTED ALLOWS THE, UH, THE LANDOWNER TO BASICALLY MAXIMIZE HIS USE FOR HIS BUSINESS. UH, THE ADJACENT USES, UH, WHICH AT ONE POINT WERE HOMES HAVE ALL KIND OF BEEN PURCHASED UP AND AGAIN, UH, DEMOLISHED AND USING IT AS A EMPTY STORAGE LOT YARD EQUIPMENT, WHICH THAT NOW ALLOWS ACCESS TO COME OFF OF REMOUNT, DRIVE INTO THE YARD AND ACTUALLY EXIT DOWN TO THE ADJACENT STREET, WHICH I BELIEVE IS DIDN'T DRIVE TO THE SOUTH. UM, THUS REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF ACCESS, APPLYING, APPLYING A ONE-WAY ACCESS FROM THE NORTH THROUGH THE LOT TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS ACTUALLY BENEFICIAL FOR THE, FOR THE, UH, THE BUSINESS OWNER. UM, UH, THE STREET IN QUESTION, UM, DOES NOT HAVE A RAISED CURB OR SIDEWALKS. UH, THERE IS TWO VARIANCES THAT WE HAVE APPLIED FOR ON THE PROJECT. ONE WAS FOR A SIDEWALK VARIANCE. UH, WE ARE PROVIDING SIDEWALK, WHICH IS ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING. UH, THE OTHER VARIANCE WAS FOR THE PARKING OFF OF THE STREET. UH, I, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT IS IN, IN DSDS, UH, CURRENT QUEUE, UNFORTUNATELY. UH, BUT THOSE WERE THE TWO VARIANCES TIED TO THE PERMIT OF THE BUILDING PROJECT. UH, THIS B O A FOR THE, THE SETBACK IS, IS THE ONLY, UH, ITEM BEING SUBMITTED FOR THIS, FOR, FOR REVIEW, UH, FOR THE FACT THAT THE ARCHITECT AND THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, THEY HAD LINED UP THE FRONT FACADE WITH THEIR EXISTING BUILDING TO THE EAST ON THIS PICTURE TO THE LEFT, WHICH IS NOT VERY SHOWN VERY CLEARLY. SO THE FRONT DOOR, FRONT OF THE BUILDINGS ARE ALL IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE CURRENT STRUCTURES ON THAT SIDE. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE, UH, IF YOU COULD JUST PLEASE TAKE A SEAT. IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK OR ANYTHING TO READ INTO THE RECORD? NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. ALRIGHT. RIGHT. UH, MR. ZA, WE MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? HEARING NONE. UM, WELL, OKAY, I GUESS YOU, UH, ADDRESSED, EVERYBODY ADDRESSED EVERYTHING. SO WITH THAT, IS THERE A COMMISSIONER LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE? CRUZ COMMISSIONER CRUZ REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 21 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 0. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS A REQUEST FOR FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 30 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 25 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 4 3 RIGHT MOUNT DRIVE, APPLICANT B AND JENNIFER GONZALEZ, 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 PROBATION TO THE U D C AS AMENDED WILL 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 REQUESTED VARIANCE TO THE FRONT SIDE BACK TO ALLOW A WAREHOUSE TO BE CONSTRUCTED 25 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE SETBACK WILL STILL ALLOW FOR PARKING AND DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT HAVE ENFORCED WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT IN CONSTRUCTING THE WAREHOUSE 30 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, WHICH WOULD REDUCE THE SPACE BEHIND THE WAREHOUSE. 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 THE, THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL MEET ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND WILL ALLOW FOR SPACE IN THE REAR FOR THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BUFFER, WHICH OBSERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE VARIANCE, WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR [02:45:01] WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SAW IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET CLOSER TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE VARIANCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX. 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 NOT, 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. STAFF FINDS THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE FOR THE FRONT SIDE BACK IS THOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THEN IT'S NOT MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANCHACA. UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. UH, YES, SIR. UM, I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THIS SINCE IT IS A BUSINESS. I, IT SHOULD, UH, HAVE NO PROBLEMS IN GETTING ALL THAT DONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MANCHACA. I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. ALL RIGHT. UH, THERE'S ANY OTHER COMMISSION YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? HEARING NONE. STAFF PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. CONROY. I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES. 10 TO ZERO. UH, CONGRATULATIONS. UM, PLEASE MEET WITH STAFF IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. UH, LAST CASE PLEASE. ITEM NUMBER 11. [11. BOA-21-10300121] AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11, BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 1 21. ADDRESS IS 5 1 0 PRINCE DRIVE, CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER NINE, APPLICANT IS ROBERT STOVALL REQUESTING ONE, UH, REQUESTING A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE SIX FOOT MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. CURRENTLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG PRINCE DRIVE, NEAR LOCK HILL SELMA ROAD. IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. SITE PLAN, SUBJECT PROPERTY, UH, SIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE THE LEFT SIDE FENCE IS CURRENTLY EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT. ON THE LEFT SIDE, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A TINY BIT OF A ELEVATION TOWARDS THE BOTTOM. IT ACTUALLY SITS UP A LITTLE BIT HIGH. UH, THE ELEVATION MEASURED AT ONE FOOT THREE INCHES. THAT'S THE RIGHT REAR YARD OF THE PROPERTY. SURROUNDING AREA SITING REAR FENCE. SPECIAL EXCEPTION. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN B O 8 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 21 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE ADDITIONAL TWO FEET AND HEIGHT DOES NOT POSE ANY DANGER TO THE PUBLIC AND WILL NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES IN THE AREA. TWO, THE ADDITIONAL TWO FEET AND HEIGHT WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SAFETY AND SECURITY TO THE PROPERTY. AND THREE, THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PRIVACY FOR THE SWIMMING POOL TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THERE WERE 29 NOTICES MAILED OUT. ONE WAS RETURNED IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE GREATER HARMONY HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. UH, IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. AND YOU. GOOD EVENING. UH, MY NAME IS ROBERT STOVALL. I AM THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION. UM, I'M REQUESTING, UM, THE ADDITIONAL [02:50:01] TWO FEET ON THE FENCE SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY, UH, FOR SAFETY REASONS. UM, I, UM, HAVE A, UH, SWIMMING POOL IN THE BACK AS WELL AS THE, UH, EXTENDED DRIVEWAY WHERE MY GRANDCHILDREN, MY GRANDDAUGHTERS, UH, PLAY IN THE, IN THE DRIVEWAY, AS WELL AS, UM, MY, UH, WIFE AND DAUGHTERS AND, AND GRANDDAUGHTERS WHO SWIM IN THE BACK IN THE, IN THE BACKYARD SWIMMING AREA. UM, FROM MY GARAGE, I ACTUALLY CAN LOOK OVER TO THE NORTH, UM, THAT, UM, AND I CAN SEE THE NEIGHBOR'S SWIMMING POOL, UM, FROM MY GARAGE. AND BEFORE I BUILT THE FENCE, I WENT AROUND AND I TALKED TO MR. AND MRS. OR KERCHER AND TOLD THEM MY PROPOSAL AND THEY WERE FINE WITH IT BECAUSE, UM, LIKE ME, THEY WOULD LIKE PRIVACY IN THEIR SWIMMING AREA. AND THEN ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE PROPERTY, UM, THAT FENCE, I ALSO TALKED WITH THAT, UH, NEIGHBOR. AND HE INITIALLY, UH, UM, APPROVED IT AND THEN LATER ON TOLD ME THAT HE DIDN'T LIKE IT BECAUSE HE DIDN'T HAVE A VIEW ANYMORE OF THE SKY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT THE, UH, REST OF IT ON, ON THE, UM, UH, ON THE BACKSIDE WHERE THE PROPERTY IS, I HAD, UM, BAMBOO THAT WAS GROWING IN THAT AREA FOR THE PRIVACY. AND IT'S ABOUT 12, 14 FEET HIGH. BUT OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, UM, IT'S BEEN DYING. UH, I HAD A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT LOOK AT IT AND HE SAID THAT THERE SEEMED LIKE, UM, IT WAS BEING POISONED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND MAYBE, MAYBE 'CAUSE OF THE WAY THE BAMBOO RUNS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, PEOPLE MAY HAVE, YOU KNOW, PUT SOME STUFF. BUT I GOT A LOT OF HOLES AND GAPS IN, IN BETWEEN THERE. AND THE FENCE IS FALLING DOWN ON THE BACKSIDE. THERE WAS NO PICTURES OF THAT. BUT ON THE BACKSIDE WHERE THAT POOL AREA, THE FAN, THE FENCE NEEDS TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE IT LITERALLY, YOU CAN, THERE'S GAPS THIS WIDE ON THE BACKSIDE NOW THAT YOU CAN SEE THROUGH THE BAMBOO THAT'S VERY VISIBLE. UM, WE LIKE EVERYBODY, I MEAN, DO YOU LIKE TO HAVE THE PRIVACY OF YOUR HOME IN YOUR BACK, IN YOUR BACKYARD AND WITH A SWIMMING POOL AND WITH, UH, MY GRANDDAUGHTERS, WHICH I HAVE FOUR, UM, THEY'RE PLAYING IN THAT, UH, UH, IN THE DRIVEWAY AREA AND IN THE BACKYARD. UH, I, I HUMBLY ASK THAT YOU WOULD APPROVE THE EXTRA TWO FEET OF THE FENCE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UM, STAFF, UH, YOU, ME, TAKE A SEAT. STAFF, IS THERE ANY ON SILENT TO SPEAK OR ANY YOU WANT? YES. YES. THERE'S SOME, A GENTLEMAN IN THE BACK THAT WANTS TO SPEAK. ALL RIGHT. YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME ON UP AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. MY NAME IS STUART LENO AND I LIVE AT TEN THREE FIFTEEN MOUNT MICHELLE, RIGHT WHERE THE X IS. MM-HMM. AND I HAVE NO OPPOSITION TO THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HIS PROPERTY, ONLY ON THE SMALL SECTION BEHIND MY HOUSE. UM, I MET WITH HIM WHEN THE ORIGINAL SIX FOOT FENCE WAS IN NEED OF REPLACEMENT, AND WE EACH AGREED TO PAY 50% FOR THE REPLACEMENT. HOWEVER, WITHOUT ANY NOTIFICATION. A FEW DAYS LATER I CAME HOME FROM WORK TO FIND THE OLD FENCE BEING TORN DOWN IN PREPARATION FOR THE NEW INSTALLATION. AND I ASSUMED IT WAS GONNA BE SIX FOOT JUST AS THE OLD ONE WAS, AND JUST LIKE THE OTHER NEIGHBORS HAVE. BUT WHEN IT WAS COMPLETE, I SAW IT WAS EIGHT FEET. THIS WAS NEVER DISCUSSED. NOW I'VE LIVED IN MY HOUSE FOR 18 YEARS AND I'VE ENJOYED A VIEW OUT MY BACK WINDOW TO SEE THE TREES AND THE SKY, UH, OUT, OUT MY BACKSIDE. HOWEVER, I HAVE A, AN OVERHANG. AND WHEN HE BUILT THAT ADDITIONAL TWO FEET, THE AREA THAT I USED TO BE ABLE TO SEE THROUGH HAS NOW BEEN COMPLETELY OBSCURED. UH, I, I INFORMED HIM OF MY OPPOSITION TO THAT EIGHT FOOT HEIGHT AND HE EXPRESSED NO DESIRE TO BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE. AND IN FACT, HE INFORMED ME THAT IF, IF IT WERE LOWERED, HE WOULD TRY TO CONSTRUCT SOMETHING ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE, EIGHT FEET OR HIGHER. UH, AN ADDITIONAL TWO FEET ABOVE SIX FEET IS NOT GONNA PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR ANYBODY WHO'S PLAYING IN THE DRIVEWAY. SO I'M RESPECTFULLY ASKING THAT THE CITY CODE BE UPHELD SINCE I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED AND THAT HE'D BE REQUIRED TO LOWER THAT SECTION TO SIX FEET. OKAY. UH, SO WHY DON'T YOU STAY THERE IF, UH, SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU WHILE YOU'RE, WHILE YOU'RE UP AT THE PODIUM, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS RESIDENT? CONROY? COMMISSIONER CONROY, DO YOU HAVE TO SHARE WITH US TODAY EITHER A, UH, A WRITTEN AGREEMENT OF ANY KIND THAT SPECIFIES THE PROPOSED ORIGINAL SIX FOOT FENCE [02:55:01] HEIGHT OR FOR PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE VIEW? WELL, THE FENCE WAS SIX FEET BEFORE, AND SO I ASSUME THAT WHEN IT WAS GOING TO BE REBUILT, IT WOULD REMAIN AT SIX FEET. SINCE THAT CITY CODE AND ALL THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD FENCES ARE SIX FEET. I DID TAKE A PICTURE FROM INSIDE MY HOME. UH, I DIDN'T EMAIL IT, BUT I HAVE IT IN MY PHONE HERE SHOWING, UH, WHAT, WHEN I LOOK OUT NOW ALL I SEE IS FENCE. IS IT, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING OTHER THAN FENCE. IS IT POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO, UM, EMAIL THAT TO FROM YOUR PHONE? SURE. OR YOU CAN JUST PUT THE PHONE AND WE CAN, THERE'S A PROJECTOR. WE CAN LOOK AT IT. OKAY. IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE, BUT THAT TOP HORIZONTAL BOARD, ABOUT THREE INCHES, TWO INCHES ABOVE THAT, PUT A BLUE PIECE OF TAPE. MM-HMM. , THAT'S WHERE SIX FEET. SO I ESSENTIALLY USED TO HAVE FROM THAT HORIZONTAL BOARD. CAN YOU GO, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE MICROPHONE? PRIOR, PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS FENCE? RIGHT WHERE THAT BLUE TAPE IS JUST SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE, THE TOP HORIZONTAL BOARD. I HAD VIEW OUT THAT, UH, TO THE OTHER SIDE. AND IN, IN THE EVENING WHEN THE SUN SETS, I WOULD HAVE SUNSHINE COMING IN TO MY HOME. NOW I HAVE NOTHING. YOU WANT ME TO TURN THAT BACK ON? OKAY. OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS, UH, UH, RESIDENT? OKAY. UH, SO I HAVE A QUESTION AS YOU, UM, HOW FAR DOES YOUR COVERED, UM, PORCH EXTEND OUT FROM THE HOME? I SUPPOSE APPROXIMATELY 12 FEET. 10. 12 FEET OKAY. BUT IN THE VIEW THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, UH, IN BRINGING UP, IS IT FROM ONLY WITHIN THE HOME OR DO YOU HAVE A RESTRICTED VIEW WHEN YOU'RE ON YOUR, UH, BACK PORCH AS WELL? WELL, THERE'S A RESTRICTED VIEW IN THE BACK PORCH AS WELL. MM-HMM. . OKAY. AND, AND I KNOW CITY CODE IS, UH, SIX FEET, UNLESS THERE'S NO OPPOSITION TO ANY NEIGHBOR, A BUDDING THAT FENCE. AND IS THERE ANY CHANGING GRATE? I, I KNOW FROM, UH, THE PICTURES THAT WE DO HAVE THAT THERE IS A, THERE'S A SLIGHT, UH, RETAINING COMPONENT ALONG THE SIDE, ALONG, UH, THE APPLICANT'S DRIVEWAY. IS THERE A CHANGE IN GRADE THAT'S ABRUPT BETWEEN YOUR YARD AND HIS YARD? WELL, THERE'S THAT SLIGHT RETAINING WALL THAT'S ABOUT A FOOT, A FOOT AND A HALF FEET TALL. SO YOU, YOU DO HAVE A, A SLIGHT RETAINING WALL IN YOUR REAR YARD? WELL, IT'S BETWEEN, IT'S ON THE PROPERTY, THAT BACK FENCE. MM-HMM. , MY HOUSE IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT. OKAY. THAT FENCE IS SITTING, MY YARD IS ABOUT THIS MUCH HIGHER. OKAY. THEN THE, SO TAKING THAT INTO ACCOUNT, THE OLD FENCE WAS SIX FEET FROM THAT ELEVATED OKAY. PORTION UP. SO FROM YOUR YARD IT'S EIGHT FEET, BUT FROM THE APPLICANT'S REAR YARD, IT MIGHT BE NINE FEET. RIGHT FROM HIS SIDE, IT'S PROBABLY A LITTLE OVER NINE FEET. FROM MY SIDE, IT'S EIGHT FEET. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTION. I'M ASKING FOR SIX FEET MANNA. YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, SO THE DISTANCE FROM THE BACK OF YOUR HOUSE TO THE, TO THE BACK PROPERTY LINE, WHAT IS, WHAT IS THAT IN GENERAL? MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW. 12, 15 FEET APPROXIMATELY. OKAY. AND THEN, AND THEN YOU HAVE A CAR PORTED OR, OR A, A PATIO COVERED PATIO IN ADDITION TO THAT THEN? UM, WELL, THAT INCLUDES FROM, INCLUDES THAT, OKAY. FROM THE BACK OF MY HOUSE TO THE FENCE IS 1215 FEET. OKAY. WHICH INCLUDES THE PATIO AND THE OVERHANG. SO PATIO'S ACROSS THE WHOLE BACK OF THE YARD THEN, OR BACK OF THE HOUSE THEN. RIGHT. AND THEN THE, FROM THE EDGE OF THE PATIO TO THE FENCE, IT MAY BE ABOUT FIVE, FIVE FEET OR SO. AND, AND THE NEIGHBOR TO THE LEFT OF YOU, SO FACING YOUR HOUSE TO THE LEFT IS SIMILAR, SIMILAR SCENARIO FOR THEM AS WELL WITH REGARDS TO THEIR BACKYARD? SIMILAR CONFIGURATION OR YOU MEAN A NUMBER 85 OR R 5 3 15 OR, OR 3 3 11. THREE 11. YEAH. WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT HER SITUATION IS WITH HIM, BUT NO, BUT I WAS JUST TALKING TO THE BACKYARD IN, SO IN GENERAL, SO IS A SIMILAR, SIMILAR [03:00:01] BUILT BACK TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY WITH THE SAME KIND OF SPACING BETWEEN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE TO THE, TO THE BACK FENCE LINE. I, I COULDN'T REALLY HEAR YOU, BUT, OKAY. SO BETWEEN MY HOUSE AND HER HOUSE, IT'S, THERE'S A SIX FOOT FENCE. SO YOUR HOUSE IS KIND OF, KIND OF PUSHED TO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY AND YOU HAVE 12 FEET, ESSENTIALLY FROM YOUR, FROM YOUR AWNING TO THE BACK FENCE. AND I WAS WONDERING IF THE SAME CONFIGURATION IS IN YOUR NEIGHBOR AS WELL, SO THAT THEY'RE KIND OF PUSHED TO THE BACK AND HAVE KIND OF CLOSE TO FENCE LINE AS WELL? I THINK IT'S ABOUT THE SAME, YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. ALRIGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MANCHACA? IS THERE LIKE A, AN ISSUE WITH THE FENCE BEING LOWERED AND THE POOL NOISE COMING INTO YOUR HOUSE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? HIS, HIS POOL ACTIVITY HAS NEVER BOTHERED ME. THE NEIGHBOR'S POOL ACT, THE OTHER NEIGHBOR'S POOL ACTIVITY HAS NEVER BOTHERED ME. UM, IT'S JUST KIDS HAVING FUN. OKAY. RAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, IS, IS THE POOL NEWLY CONSTRUCTED OR IT'S BEEN THERE WHILE BOTH POOLS HAVE BEEN THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S, THAT'S NEVER BEEN A ISSUE. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ON THE SPEAK? NO ONE ELSE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO WITH THAT, UH, WE'RE GONNA BRING THE APPLICANT BACK UP AND IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, HEARING NONE, UM, IF YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER MINCHA, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY ONE SOMETHING. THE WAY THIS THING IS WRITTEN, IT SAYS, FROM THE, FROM THE REAR AND THE SIDE WE'RE TALKING, HE MENTIONED SIDES. BOTH SIDES. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT IT, IT, UH, FROM THE, FROM THE SIDE PLAN THAT'S PROVIDED, UH, IN THE PACKAGE, IT'S SHOWING THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE NOT TO EXTEND BEYOND THE FRONT PLANE OF THE HOME. SO IT'S WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE TRUE SIDE YARD AND THE REAR YARD ONLY. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY CONROY? YES. COMMISSIONER CONROY, COULD YOU COMMENT? IT APPEARS THAT, UH, THE, UH, WHERE THERE'S A DISPUTE, THAT LENGTH OF FENCE BETWEEN, UM, 1 0 3, 1 5 MOUNT MICHEL AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE, THE FENCE LENGTH THAT, OR THE, SORRY, THE, THE, THE LENGTH OF THE FENCE THAT IS BEING OBJECTED TO ISN'T ACTUALLY ADJACENT TO THE POOL. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ADJACENT TO A DRIVEWAY. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S, THAT IS CORRECT. SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. I MEAN, I HAVE A, I HAVE A SUB SUBSTANTIAL SIZED DRIVEWAY. I CAN FIT THREE CARS ALL THE WAY IN THE BACK THERE. AND USUALLY WHEN MY GRANDCHILDREN COME OVER, IT'S A BIG PLAY AREA. THEY HAVE BICYCLES AND TRICYCLES AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. AND I MEAN, IT'S, I MEAN, I'M BUILDING THIS FOR PRIVACY ISSUE. MY , MY, UH, GRANDDAUGHTERS AND, AND, UH, GRANDCHILDREN ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO ME AND AS WELL AS THE PRIVACY THAT GOES ON, WHETHER IT'S IN THE BACKYARD OR IN THAT AREA. AND THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY BEEN THE WHOLE, UM, REASON FOR THAT CONSTRUCTION. UM, WHEN I INITIALLY TALKED TO, UM, MR. LENO THAT HE WAS OKAY WITH IT, MATTER OF FACT, UH, IT WAS UP FOR A WHILE, AND THEN HE TEXTED ME AND HE SAYS, I CHANGED MY MIND THAT I CAN'T SEE MY VIEWS, YOU KNOW, HAS CHANGED AND I, I THINK I WANNA CHANGE MY MIND ON THAT. AND, UM, SOME THINGS WENT BACK AND FORTH AND HE THREATENED TO TAKE A CHAINSAW TO IT AND CUT IT DOWN TO THE SIX FOOT. AND I SAID, PLEASE DON'T DO THAT. 'CAUSE I'VE SPENT THE MONEY TO BUILD A FENCE. WE, UH, I PAID FOR THE FENCE WHOLLY. WE DID NOT SPLIT THE FENCE. I PAID FOR IT WITH MY MONEY. AND, UH, SO THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THE THING WENT. AND, AND , UM, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE IS, I MEAN, I JUST HAVE THAT AREA FOR THE PRIVACY. IT'S, I HAVE MY GRANDCHILDREN, I'VE GOT QUITE A FEW OF THEM, AND THEY'RE ON ALL AREAS OF THAT, OF THAT, UH, BACKYARD AND THE DRIVEWAY. AND SO, UM, THAT'S WHY I PUT THAT FENCE UP IN THAT AREA. AND WHY THE CONSISTENCY THAT'LL GO ALONG THE WHOLE BACKSIDE OF THAT FENCE IF I WAS JUST TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE THIS LITTLE L CUT AND THEN IT GOES UP LIKE THIS. IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE FOR THAT. OKAY. UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO, I HAVE A QUESTION. WHAT IS THE ACREAGE OF YOUR PROPERTY? IT'S 0.6. POINT SIX. SO YOU'RE, I MEAN, YOU'RE NO POINT. EXCUSE ME, IT'S NOT, NO, IT'S NOT. POINT SIX, 0.4. POINT FOUR 0.4. CLOSE TO HALF ACRE. OKAY. UM, AND UH, DID YOU, DID YOU EVER HAVE A, UH, YOU TRADITIONALLY HAD A SIX FOOT FENCE BEFORE, BUT YOU'RE PUTTING IT AN EIGHT FOOT? YES. I, LIKE I SAID, I HAD A SIX FOOT, BUT I HAD ABOUT AT LEAST 10 TO 12 FEET TALL. UM, BAMBOO THAT RUNS ALONG THE BACKSIDE. THAT IS, AND WAS THERE, WAS THERE A BAMBOO IN THE AREA IN QUESTION WITH THE AREA THAT GOES OVER TO THAT FENCE? NO. OKAY. JUST CONSISTENCY AND PRIVACY. OKAY. AND, AND AS FAR AS A VIEW GOES, UM, IT'S THE COVERED [03:05:01] PORCH THAT THE, THAT THE, THE, THE RESIDENT HAD MENTIONED THAT EXTENDS, YOU KNOW, 10 FEET OR SO PAST THE HOUSE, THAT THE HOUSE IS 12 FEET AWAY. IS THAT COVERED PORCH ALLOWED TO BE THAT CLOSE TO THE BACK FENCE? UM, SO IF A PATIO IS ATTACHED TO A HOUSE, IT HAS TO COMPLY WITH THE REAR SETBACK. UH, BUT WE DON'T, WE WOULD HAVE TO DETERMINE, UH, WHAT POINT THE, UH, STRUCTURE WAS BUILT AND AT WHAT POINT DID THE PROPERTY COME, UH, WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY WHERE THOSE RULES WOULD APPLY. OKAY. SO IF IT IS IN THE SETBACK TODAY, IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED NON-CONFORMING. OKAY. I WAS JUST CURIOUS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. WELL, I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. UM, JUST A QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF. YES. COMMISSIONER ZU. SO IF THE, IF THE APPLICANT WERE TO PLANT AGAIN THE BAMBOO AS A SCREEN, THERE WOULD BE NO HEIGHT LIMIT ON THE SCREENING? THE THE PLANT, NO VEGETATION CAN GO AS HIGH AS THEY WANT. RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION BRAGMAN. OH WAIT, UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION? GO AHEAD. I'LL AFTER YOU. OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 21 DASH 1 0 3 21, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW A SOLID SCREEN FENCE TO BE EIGHT FEET TALL ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 5 1 0 PRINCE DRIVE, APPLICANT BEING ROBERT STOVALL. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND THE PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR FENCE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE TWO FEET OF HEIGHT IS EXTEN IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SAFETY FOR THE PROPERTY, BE THE SPECIAL WELL, 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 SOLID SCREEN FENCE ALONG THE REAR INSIDE YARD DOES NOT POSE ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE BOARD FINDS THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS UNLIKELY TO INJU INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR THIS SECTION OF THE SIDE AND REAR YARD FENCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND WILL PROVIDE SECURITY OF THE DISTRICT. A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. 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. IS THERE A SECOND? OKAY. I'LL SECOND IT. OR ORIAN HAS A SECOND. COMMISSIONER BRACKMAN, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. UM, I'M ACTUALLY NOT GONNA BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. UM, I FEEL LIKE SIX FEET, WHICH IS THE STANDARD HEIGHT ALLOWED, PROVIDES, UH, PLENTY OF PRIVACY, UM, FOR THE PURPOSE. UM, AND IT DOES NOT IMPEDE UPON THE NEIGHBOR'S, UM, VIEW. UH, SO I, I'M NOT GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. OKAY. UM, I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT I, I, UH, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT ON THE SIDE, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE, THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR DOESN'T HAVE A PROBLEM. AND BECAUSE IT IS A LARGE LOT AND BECAUSE THERE'S A SWIMMING POOL, UH, THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE REAR DOESN'T BOTHER ME. ALTHOUGH I AM A LITTLE TROUBLED BY THE, UM, UM, UH, THE NON-ACCEPTANCE BY, BY ONE OF THE REAR NEIGHBORS. I MEAN, I, I I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE, WHEN YOUR HOUSE IS BUILT, THAT CLOSE TO THE BACK AND, YOU KNOW, EVERY LITTLE BIT OF VIEW MATTERS. SO I'M LOOKING TO HEAR FROM MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS, UM, MANNA. GOOD JOB COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO, YOU KNOW, TAKE A LOOK AT THE GOOGLE VIEW. THE THREE HOMES THAT ARE LINED UP ON THE BACKYARD, ALL OF 'EM ARE AS CLOSER, CLOSER, YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOK AT IT. AND, AND, AND THEY LOOK LIKE SUBSTANTIAL ROOF STRUCTURES, SO IT'S NOT ADD-ONS. AND SO, SO THE ONE THAT'S FURTHER SOUTH, UM, WHICH WOULD BE AT THE, UH, 3 0 7 ADDRESS, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT ONE HAS A SUBSTANTIAL ROOF, SO IT LOOKS LIKE THEIR YARD IS ONLY 10 FOOT DEEP IF THAT ON THE BACKSIDE. SO, SO TO ME IT IS PRETTY, PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL WITH REGARDS TO, UH, WHAT THAT FENCE IS DOING. AND SO I WOULD CONCUR WITH YOU, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE SIDE. I THINK THAT THE SIDE WOULD PROBABLY BE APPROPRIATE, BUT ALONG THAT BACKSIDE, I DO HAVE CONCERNS OVER IT. RIGHT. WELL, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, WELL, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO ALLOW THE EIGHT FOOT, OTHER THAN [03:10:01] THE LOT THAT'S BEING, UH, CAN YOU SPEAK CLOSER TO THE MIC? I'M SORRY. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO ALLOW THE, THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE OTHER THAN THE, THE SECTION OF FENCE THAT IS IMPACTED MOSTLY BY THE, BY THE NEIGHBOR. I THINK, UH, THAT WOULD BE THE BEST CHANCE OF SUCCESS HERE WITH THE MOTION OF GETTING SOME PARTIAL RELIEF ON THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE REQUEST. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO IF I CAN JUST CLARIFY. SO ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT JUST THAT ONE SECTION THAT'S, UM, UM, THAT, THAT THIS, UM, SPEAKER YOU TALKING ABOUT THE ENTIRE BACK PASS? YEAH. THE, THE MOTION IS BEING REQUESTED TO BE AMENDED TO, TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT ON THE SIDE YARD AND IN THE REAR, EXCEPT FOR WHEN ABUTTING 1 0 3 1 5 MOUNT MICHEL MACHACA, UH, COMMISSIONER MKA, UH, I, THE, THE SIX FOOT FENCE AND THE REAR SOUNDS, UH, FEASIBLE, BUT, UH, IT'S ALREADY HIGH ENOUGH WITH THE ELEVATION IN THE BACK THAT'S PROPPED UP AND TAKES IT UP ENOUGH, SET UP ANOTHER FOOT. I DON'T KNOW WHY SIX FOOT ALL THE WAY ACROSS WILL BE AN ISSUE INSTEAD OF THAT LITTLE, UH, UM, IT WOULDN'T LOOK TOO GOOD. OKAY. HALF OF THE SECTION OF IT, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, I, I WOULD AGREE WITH WHAT WE'RE SAYING ABOUT THE EIGHT FEET ON THE SIDE AND THE SIX FEET IN THE BACK, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE NEIGHBORS ARE OBJECTING TO IT AND IT IS CAUSING THEIR PROPERTY HARM. OKAY. UM, IT, IT'S, WE'VE GOT TWO COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE AGAINST, WOULD, WOULD, UH, IS, IS SIX FEET THE ANSWER OR DO Y'ALL WANT TO SHOOT FOR SEVEN? COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UM, YEAH. UM, YEAH, THE AMENDMENT SOUNDS GOOD. IF, UH, SIX FEET IN, IN THE BACK IN THE REAR YARD AND THE EIGHT FEET ON THE SIDES, I THINK THAT WOULD BE AGREEABLE WITH EVERYBODY. OKAY. COMMISSIONER BRACKMAN, YOU'RE THE MAKER. UH, YEAH, I WOULD AGREE TO COMMISSIONER CRUZ'S AMENDMENT. OKAY. AND I'LL ALSO AGREE, I, I THINK, UH, SO THE MOTION IS HEREBY AMENDED FOR EIGHT FOOT ON THE SIDES. UH, AND, AND, AND THEN IN THE REAR, WITH EXCEPTION OF ALONG THE BACK PROPERTY LINE WHERE IT'S A SIX FOOT TALL FENCE, IT'S IS THE BACKYARD WHERE THE POOL IS LOCATED? UH, YEAH. WHAT, WHAT'S HAPPENING IS SINCE THERE'S, THERE'S 10 MEMBERS HERE, IF TWO PEOPLE VOTE AGAINST AND THE WHOLE THING DIES MM-HMM. , AND SO WE WERE, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS, IS WE MADE A MOTION TO AMEND, TO ALLOW EIGHT ON THE, ALL THE WAY DOWN ON THE SIDES WITH A SIX FOOT HIGH IN THE REAR, WHICH IN ADDITION TO THE EXTRA FOOT WOULD RESULT IN A SEVEN FOOT FENCE. AND THE REAR FUR, THE, ALL THE THREE NEIGHBORS, UH, AND A SIX FOOT FENCE ON YOUR SIDE, THE, THE, UH, OTHER NEIGHBORS ARE NOT ELEVATED. IT'S JUST A RETAINING WALL IS ONLY ON THE DRIVEWAY. SO THOSE ARE ALL, THOSE ARE ALL LEVEL ACROSS, ACROSS THERE. DOES THAT MAKE ANY ADJUST? DOES THAT MAKE ANY, UH, CHANGES TO ANY OF THE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS OR THE AMENDMENTS? CONROY, UH, COMMISSIONER CONROY, UM, AT THE OUTSET, I, I WOULD SUPPORT SIX FEET ALL THE WAY ACROSS, BUT I DON'T THINK I'D HAVE A HARD TIME SUPPORTING SIX FEET ONLY. UM, ABUTTING 1 0 3, 1 5 MOUNT MICHELLE. UH, AND I SUPPOSE PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE AS I'M LOOKING AT THIS, I SEE THE DRIVEWAY HAVING ONE SET OF PRIVACY AND SECURITY ISSUES MM-HMM. , I SEE A POOL AREA HAVING A DIFFERENT SET OF THOSE ISSUES. UM, THE REASON I WOULDN'T GO EIGHT FEET ALL THE WAY ACROSS IS WE HAVE THREE PRIVATE HOMES, A BUDDING IN THE REAR. WHAT WE DON'T HAVE IS A BAR. WE DON'T HAVE AN ICE HOUSE, WE DON'T HAVE A FACTORY. WE DON'T HAVE A PARKING LOT THAT'S OPEN AT NIGHT. I THINK THAT MITIGATES A LOT OF THE PRIVACY AND SECURITY ISSUES. OKAY. SO CURRENTLY THE, THE MOTION HAS BEEN FRIENDLY, AMENDED TO BE SIX FEET ACROSS THE REAR AND EIGHT FOOT ON THE SIDES. WE HAVE, UM, WE'VE HEARD SOME DISCUSSION, UH, TO LIMIT IT ONLY TO THE ONE RESIDENT THAT CAME TO SPEAK, BUT IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE YOU THAT'S GAINING SUPPORT UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS TO CHIME IN. I WOULD SUPPORT THAT SEEMS REASONABLE. I'M ALWAYS A BIG ADVOCATE ACTUALLY, FOR EIGHT FOOT FENCE WHEN THERE'S A POOL INVOLVED. YEAH, ME TOO. AND SINCE THIS AREA IS NOT, UH, WHERE THE POOL IS AND WE DO HAVE A NEIGHBOR THAT'S, UH, IN CONCERN WITH THEIR VIEW SHED, THEN I THINK THAT'S A, A REASONABLE COMPROMISE. OKAY. SO HERE'S WHAT, HERE'S WHAT I'M GONNA DO JUST TO KEEP THIS MOVING ALONG. UH, WE'RE GONNA SWITCH THIS FROM A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. UH, OR, UH, I TAKE THAT BACK. I MOVE TO FORMALLY AMEND FOR AN EIGHT FOOT ON THE SIDE, EIGHT FOOT IN THE REAR WITH SIX FOOT ONLY. UH, WE'RE AT ABUT 1 0 3 1 5. MOUNT MICHEL. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. THERE'S A SEC. A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR A FORMAL AMENDMENT. WE'RE GONNA SEE HOW THIS, WHERE THIS LIES. UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. PASS. [03:15:02] WHAT WAS, WHAT WAS PASSED? OH, PASS. OKAY. MR. MENNA. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. BREGMAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. CONROY. I CONCUR. MR. TEAL. I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. AND I ALSO CONCUR THE, UH, THE, THE MOTION FAILS. 6 4 3 AGAINST AND ONE ABSTAIN. SO WITH THAT, WE'RE BACK TO THE MOTION THAT IS ON THE TABLE, AND THAT'S FOR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE SIDES AND A SIX FOOT ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. SO LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THAT PLEASE, MR. CHAIR, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, IF THIS VARIANCE A SECOND VARIANCE FAILS, THEN HE HAS TO DO SIX FOOT ON BOTH THE SIDES AND THE REAR, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'M WILLING TO GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT MOVES THE, TO SIX FEET AND ALONG THE ENTIRE BACK AND EIGHT FOOT ON, ON BOTH SIDES. NO, THAT, THAT IS WHAT THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON. OKAY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. YEAH, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, THE MOTION WAS, WAS, WAS FRIENDLY, AMENDED, UH, TO BE EIGHT FOOT ON THE SIDE, SIX IN THE REAR. I MADE A MOTION FOR WHAT WE JUST VOTED ON JUST TO SEE WHERE IT LIES IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS WITHOUT HAVING TO RE KEEP REREADING THE ENTIRE MOTION IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN. SO, SO WE'RE VOTING RIGHT NOW ON EIGHT FOOT ON THE SIDES AND SIX FOOT ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. UH, ROLL CALL PLEASE. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MENNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. CONROY? I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES 10 TO ZERO. UH, MR. STOVALL, UH, IF YOU CAN PLEASE GET WITH STAFF, THEY'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT TO DO NEXT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM IS THE MINUTES. [12. Approval of the minutes from the Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting on September 20, 2021.] UM, IF EVERYONE, IS THERE ANY LAST MINUTE CHANGES? UH, I HAD SENT SOME TO STAFF EARLIER TODAY. UH, THE TWO ITEMS THAT I HAD ASKED TO BE CORRECTED WAS ON ITEM NUMBER THREE REGARDING A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE SIDE SETBACK WITH TWO INCH GUTTERS. THE MINUTES READ TO BE THREE INCHES FROM THE SIDE. SHOULD READ THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE. THAT WAS JUST A TYPO. AND THEN THE OTHER ITEM THAT I WAS ASKING TO BE, UH, CORRECTED WAS ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, WHERE IT WAS FOR A, UH, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR A FENCE SITE TO BE SIX FOOT SEVEN INCHES TALL IN THE FRONT YARD. BUT, UM, I RECALL A DISCUSSION IN THE MOTION ACTUALLY BEING ALONG THE, IN THE FRONT YARD, BUT ALONG THE SIDE ONLY, AND NOT ALONG THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, UH, BUTTING THE ROAD. AND SO IF THERE'S ANY OTHER COMMENTARY TO THAT, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A VOTE ON THE MINUTES HEARING. NON-STAFF ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. SECOND. OH, SORRY. I MOVE TO SECOND ACCEPT MINUTES AS AMENDED. AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. , MR. HALBERT? I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I APPROVE. ROLL CALL MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I APPROVE MS. KAPLAN. I WASN'T HERE, SO I ABSTAIN. MR. CONROY? I ABSTAIN. MR. THIEL? YES. MR. ENA? YES. CHAIR ORIAN? UH, I, UM, I, I VOTE TO APPROVE, BUT BEFORE I ANNOUNCE A VOTE, UH, WE'RE GONNA NEED ONE OF THE NATIONS TO VOTE. YES. OH, WE DON'T. THAT'S JUST A, THIS IS ADMINISTRATIVE. JUST THE MAJORITY. OKAY, SO THE MOTION PASSES. 8 8 4 2 NATION THINK THAT'S, SO WITH THAT, IS THERE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS BY STAFF? NOPE. AND I JUST HAVE ONE QUICK THING. WHEN DID, CAN WE GO BACK TO JUST PASSING MINUTES BY, YOU KNOW, PROCLAMATION [03:20:01] HERE, OR, OR DO WE HAVE TO TAKE A ROLL CALL? VOTE. I KEEP, SO THE ROLL CALL VOTE STARTED PRIOR TO THE PANDEMIC. UM, AND IT WAS STARTED BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME, UM, DISCUSSION AMONGST BOARD MEMBERS AND THE ACTUAL RECORDING OF THE VOTE. UH, SO EVER SINCE THAT TIME, WE'VE ALWAYS DONE ROLL CALL VOTES. UM, I, I MEAN, I LEAVE IT UP TO THE CHAIR, UH, BUT IT, IT HELPS TO RECORD IT, I GUESS, AS LONG AS WE UNANIMOUS. YAY. IF WE HEAR A NAY, WE COULD DO IT THAT WAY. IF WE HEAR A NAY, THEN WE WOULD NEED TO DO A ROLL CALL VOTE, EXCEPT JUST LOOK OUT FOR THEN IN TWO WEEKS AND I'LL BE, I'LL BE ASKING FOR, UH, ALL IN FAVOR, . OKAY. OKAY. IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I, I HEREBY, UH, ADJOURN THE MEETING. * 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.