* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:07] OKAY, SO BEFORE WE GET BEGIN, I'M GONNA INVITE THE SPANISH INTERPRETER TO COME UP AND MAKE A BRIEF, UH, STATEMENT. HELLO. GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS ANNOUNCEMENT IS TO INFORM YOU THAT WE DO HAVE SPANISH INTERPRETATION SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR, UH, ANYONE THAT'S, UH, NEEDING THESE SERVICES. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO APPROACH THE INTERPRETER'S CABIN WHERE THE RED CURTAINS ARE AT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO BEFORE WE BEGIN, I'D LIKE TO ASK EVERYBODY TO PLEASE SILENCE OR TURN OFF THEIR CELL PHONES. AND WITH THAT STAFF, IF YOU COULD PLEASE CALL, ROLL MR. AL. OH, I'M SORRY. MR. ALBERT. PRESENT. MR. MANCHACA PRESENT. MS. CRUZ? HERE. MR. MANNA PRESENT? MS. BRAGMAN? PRESENT. MS. KAPLAN? PRESENT. MR. VASQUEZ? PRESENT. MS. LYNN? PRESENT. MR. THIEL? PRESENT. MR. OZUNA? OH, WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING. OKAY. THANK YOU. WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL GET THAT FOR YOU. AND CHAIR ORIAN? UH, I AM PRESENT. A QUORUM IS PRESENT. THANK YOU. UH, THERE'S A, UH, UH, MS. BECKMAN ARE, ARE YOU USING THAT MIC I TESTING? YES. TESTING. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. SO IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE STAND AND JOIN US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. ALL RIGHT. SO BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I'D 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 THE STREET ADDRESS. UH, 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. SO, WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY 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 WE DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATOR 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 THE DECISIONS OR DETERMINATIONS 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 IN AN ADVISORY AND 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 HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY'LL 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. IT REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND GRANTING THE RELEASE SOUGHT RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS IN WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISIONS OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS [00:05:01] FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW. BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S. DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. SO PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION OR REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE STAFF. SO STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH THE 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 INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND AN X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION. FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION AND 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 IN ORDER THAT YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION. FOR THOSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GIVE, 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, CHAIRMAN. YES. UH, WE'LL BEGIN WITH OUR FIRST CASE. IT'S [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items  ] GONNA BE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO, BO O A CASE 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 5 7. ADDRESS IS FIVE 19 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY CITY COUNCIL. DISTRICT NUMBER ONE APPLICANT IS A FELICE DENOVO, UH, REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT SOLID SCREEN PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. CURRENT ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. UH, APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE TO MARCH THE 21ST. ALRIGHT, ARE THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? NO, SIR. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO MARCH 21ST. TEAL COMMISSIONER TEAL. I MOVE THAT, UH, EXCUSE ME. WE POSTPONED THIS CASE TILL MARCH 21ST, 2022. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UH, ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE, BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 5 9. ADDRESS IS 1118 SOUTH MESQUITE STREET CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER TWO. APPLICANT IS RAY GUTIERREZ. REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT MINIMUM REAR SET, REAR END SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, A 2,164 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 4,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A 1,836 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE. CURRENT ZONING IS A RESIDENTIAL MIX. UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG SOUTH MESQUITE STREET NEAR FLORIDA STREET AND IS CURRENTLY A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE REQUESTING ONE A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE TO THE SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND TWO, A 2,150 SQUARE FOOT, UH, VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE ON A UH, LOT SIZE OF 1,850 SQUARE FEET. UPON SITE VISITS, STAFF OBSERVED THAT THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE APPEARS TO BE CLOSE OR POSSIBLY ON THE PROPERTY LINE. UH, THIS IS AN ACTUALLY AN OLDER SITE PLAN. I'LL, UH, PULL UP AN UPDATED SITE PLAN. SUBJECT PROPERTY. IT'S, UH, IT'S A TWO STORY DWELLING UNIT. UM, THE, UH, THE CONCERN WAS OVER THE LEFT PROPERTY LINE AND THEN THE REAR, THAT'S A VIEW FROM THE NEIGHBORING. UM, IT'S A MEASUREMENT. IT'S THE TOP OF THIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. UM, THIS IS SHOWING THAT IT'S DETACHED FROM THE, UH, THE, UH, PRIMARY STRUCTURE. THIS IS THE ROOF OF THE REAR OF THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. THIS IS A, A PHOTOCOPY, OR I'M SORRY, NOT A PHOTO. A PHOTO OF THE ACTUAL REAR. UM, WE'RE TRYING TO SHOW THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AS, UM, WHERE THE DWELLING UNIT, UM, COMES IN LINE WITH THAT. IT'S A DOOR LEADING TO THAT DWELLING UNIT IN THE REAR SURROUNDING [00:10:01] AREA. SIDING REAR BACK, UH, SIDING. REAR SETBACK VARIANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF A TWO FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDING REAR PROPERTY LINES IN BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 15 9 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT SITS ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. TWO. THE STRUCTURE APPEARS, APPEARS TO BE ALTERED. THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND A THREE FOOT SETBACK WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AND PROVIDE ADEQUATE SPACING FROM THE ADJACENT STRUCTURE. SURE, MINIMUM LOT SIZE VARIANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 1 59 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THERE WERE SIMILAR LOTS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA, AND TWO, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THERE WERE 34 NOTICES MAILED OUT. ONE WAS RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? UH, COME ON UP. UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION PLEASE. HELLO, UH, I'M RAY GUTIERREZ, UH, 1118 SOUTH MESQUITE. THIS IS MY WIFE ROSEMARY. UH, I'D LIKE TO THANK ROLAND AND THE CITY, AND I LIKE TO THANK ALL OF Y'ALL, UH, FOR BEING HERE TODAY AND TAKING YOUR TIME TO HEAR THIS CASE. UM, IS THE POWERPOINT? YEAH, I'M OKAY. IF YOU WANT, YOU PULL. OH, OKAY. IS THAT BETTER? YEAH. SO THERE'S A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR 1118 SOUTH MESQUITE. UH, JUST A LITTLE INTRODUCTION. UM, THAT'S A PHOTO OF, UH, OUR FAMILY. UM, AND, AND WE'RE ALSO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE VERY CLOSE TO THE NEIGHBORS ON MESQUITE. WE GO TO, LIKE, WE'RE GOING TO THE SUPER BOWL PARTY. UM, WE GO TO ALL THEIR BIRTHDAY PARTIES, GRADUATIONS, AND THEY COME TO ALL OF OURS. SO IT'S A VERY CLOSE, CLOSE, TIGHT-KNIT COMMUNITY. UM, HOPEFULLY, I THINK, I THINK A FEW OF THEM CALLED IN AND, UH, REPRESENTED THEIR APPROVAL OF OUR VARIANCE. UH, SO YEAH, SO THE WHOLE, LIKE THE, THE WHOLE STORY OF THE BACKGROUND IS ESSENTIALLY WE HAD A OLD DILAPIDATED LAUNDRY ROOM, WHICH WAS, WHICH WAS ALREADY THERE EXISTING. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IT ALREADY ENCROACHED ON THE SETBACK. UM, IT BECAME INFESTED OF RATS AND IT WAS ALSO LEANING. AND, UH, I CAN, I CAN SAY THAT, UH, NONE OF THE NEIGHBOR, NONE OF THE NEIGHBORS LIKED IT. I DON'T THINK THAT WAS IN LINE WITH THE, THE NEIGHBORHOODS. SO WE LOOKED TO, UH, ESSENTIALLY UPGRADE IT. UM, ALSO PLEASE NOTE THAT, UM, UH, THAT, YEAH, IT WAS INFESTED WITH RATS. IT WAS A 10 BY 10 STRUCTURE AND, UH, IT WAS ALREADY, UH, VERY CLOSE TO, UM, OUR EXISTING MAIN, UH, HOME. AND, UH, JUST NOTE THAT LIKE, THE LOT IS ONLY, UH, 33 FEET WIDE BY 43. SO UNLIKE, YOU KNOW, MANY OTHER LOTS, UH, WE WERE VERY, UH, LANDLOCKED AND, UH, WITH THIS EXISTING STRUCTURE, UH, YOU KNOW, WE THOUGHT WE WERE GRANDFATHERED. AND ALSO NOTE, UM, I THINK HE HAD THAT, UH, PREVIOUS EXISTING, UH, SURVEY. AND WHEN WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE, WE GOT THAT, THAT PREVIOUS EXISTING SURVEY, AND THEY DIDN'T INDICATE ANY SETBACKS. SO WE WERE UNDER THE, UH, WE WERE UNDER THE, UM, THOUGHT THAT IMPRESSION THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE A SETBACK. UH, SO THAT'S KIND OF THE BACKGROUND. AND THEN YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. UM, SO YEAH, THIS IS, IT'S A, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ONLY ONE STORY. I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW, IT'S, IT JUST HAS LIKE A LITTLE STORAGE LOFT. UM, BUT YEAH, SO WE, UH, WE UPGRADED IT. IT'S, IT'S, IT IS, IT'S MUCH NICER. UH, WE'VE GOTTEN SEVERAL COMPLIMENTS FROM NEIGHBORS AND THEY ALL, THEY ALL REALLY LIKE IT. UH, AND WE FEEL LIKE IT TIES IN WITH THE AESTHETIC LOOK OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND ALSO, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN SEE IN THE BACK LEFT THERE'S THAT THEY ALSO HAVE AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, UH, ACROSS THE STREET. THERE'S ANOTHER, UH, HOUSE WITH AN ACCESSORY DOWING UNIT. SO I DON'T, I DON'T FEEL, I FEEL LIKE THAT'S AN OPINION, UM, TO STATE THAT, UH, HAVING AN ACCESSORY DOWING UNIT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS, IS NOT IN KIND WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 'CAUSE MANY OF THE HOUSES WITHIN, UH, THE EAST SIDE ON THIS, IN THIS AREA HAVE MANY, UH, ACCESSORY TOING UNIT. SO I JUST, I DISAGREE WITH THAT. UH, ASSESSMENT, UM, ONCE AGAIN, THE EXISTING, UH, STRUCTURE BUT FROM BEFORE ALREADY, UH, ESSENTIALLY, UH, ENCROACHED ON THE SETBACK. AND SO ESSENTIALLY WE'RE JUST REQUESTING THAT THE SAME IN KIND, UH, [00:15:01] YOU KNOW, VIOLATION OF THE EXISTING OR OF THE SETBACK. UM, BE, UH, ACCEPTED. UH, YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. UH, SO THIS IS THE, UH, THIS IS THE, UH, UPDATED SURVEY. SO, UH, I BELIEVE HE SHOWED THE PREVIOUS SURVEY AND IT HAD THE, UH, EXISTING STRUCTURE, UM, IN KIND AND, AND GENERALLY THE SAME LOCATION. UM, ALSO, IF YOU KNOW, UM, SO WE'RE, IT'S, IT'S RIGHT UP ON THE PROPERTY LINE. UM, AND ALSO IF YOU KNOW, BETWEEN THE EXISTING MAIN HOME AND THE, AND, AND THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE AND THE NEW STRUCTURE, UH, THERE'S ONLY PROBABLY ABOUT THREE FEET OF CLEARANCE. SO, UH, ONCE AGAIN, UH, IT'S THE, UNFORTUNATELY, THE, THE LAND, IT IS THE PROPERTY'S LANDLOCKED. UM, SO IN ORDER FOR THAT REAR DOOR TO EXIT TO THE LEFT, TO THE DRIVEWAY, UM, IT WAS, IT WAS UNFORTUNATELY PRESSED UP, UM, AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE IN THE BACK IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN A, A SAFETY AWAY TO EXIT. UM, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO GET A, YOU KNOW, A, A VARIANCE OF SO CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE VERSUS MAYBE ONE OR TWO FOOT, THREE FOOT SETBACK. UM, ALSO, UM, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANNA POINT ON? THE SURVEY? OH, OKAY. OH, OKAY. IIA. OH, IT'S NOT WORKING. UM, YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. UH, I THINK THE NEXT, THE CITY HAD JUST REQUESTED THAT WE ENSURE THAT, UH, THE SURVEY INDICATED THAT WE WERE NOT OVER THE PROPERTY LINE. AND SO, SO HERE, SO HERE YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THAT WE'VE GOT, UH, 0.2, 0.2 FEET ON THE NORTHERN, UH, BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY LINE. AND THEN THIS IS 0.1. THIS 0.3 IS ACTUALLY LIKE THE FENCE. UH, AND THAT'S NOT PART OF THE STRUCTURE. SO THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S THE NEIGHBOR'S, UH, FENCE. UH, AND THEN AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS KIND OF A BLOWN UP VIEW. SO RIGHT HERE, UH, THIS SHOW, THIS SURVEY SHOWS ABOUT FOUR FEET, BUT, SO THIS IS ABOUT THREE FEET RIGHT HERE. SO IF WE WERE TO MOVE THIS STRUCTURE TOWARDS THE WEST, IT WOULD ENCROACH ON THE ABILITY, THERE'S A DOOR RIGHT HERE. SO IT WOULD ENCROACH ON THE ABILITY FOR PEOPLE TO EXIT TOWARDS THE DRIVEWAY. UH, WE DO HAVE A DOOR, WE DO HAVE A, A FENCE DOOR RIGHT HERE, SO THEY COULD POSSIBLY EXIT THIS WAY. UM, BUT ONCE AGAIN, THE DOOR IS RIGHT HERE. SO IF THIS MOVED TO THE WEST, UM, IT WOULD, IT WOULD, IT WOULD INFRINGE ON THE ABILITY TO, UH, SAFELY, UH, EXIT THE HOME. UH, AND I GUESS YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS JUST AN EMAIL CONFIRMING FROM THE SURVEYOR. UH, WE JUST, THE CITY ASKED US TO ENSURE THAT WE WERE NOT ENCROACHING THE PROPERTY LINE. SO YOU GO, YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. UM, YEAH, SO THE, ONCE AGAIN, UH, WE'RE JUST, UM, YOU KNOW, THANKFUL THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO Y'ALL TODAY. AND WE JUST ASKED FOR LENIENCY. UH, IT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY, UH, FINANCIALLY, UM, ALMOST CRIPPLING. WE TALKED TO, WE TALKED, I CALLED LIKE PROBABLY FIVE OR SIX, UM, FOUNDATION AND, AND MOVERS. AND, UM, UH, UNFORTUNATELY SINCE THE, THERE'S A STRUCTURE DIRECTLY BEHIND US, AND THEN WE HAVE THE HOME DIRECTLY, LIKE RIGHT NEXT TO US. IT'S NOT, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A HUGE OPEN LOT WHERE THEY CAN JUST BRING IN THEIR EQUIPMENT AND MOVE IT EASILY. UM, SO IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO MOVE IT. AND SO WE JUST ASKING THAT WE BE GRANDFATHERED ESSENTIALLY. UM, IT WAS THE PREVIOUS BUILDING, UM, WAS THERE, AND IT, AND IT, AND IT WAS, UM, IT WAS JUST A HAZARD AND IT, IT WAS A EYESIGHT TO THE COMMUNITY. IT WAS RAT INFESTED, AND WE ESSENTIALLY JUST UPGRADED THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. UM, ONCE AGAIN, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS JUST, UH, WE JUST ASKED FOR ENCY AND, YOU KNOW, BEG FOR, UM, ENCY ON THE BOARD'S PART. UH, WE JUST, WE'D HATE TO HAVE TO DEMOLISH THIS OR RELOCATE THIS. UM, AND YEAH, I'M HOPEFUL. I THINK, UH, MOST OF THE COMMUNITY, THEY ALL CAME AND, OR A LOT OF THE, MOST OF THE FOLKS THAT WE ALL TALK TO, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE KIND OF SHY OF THE CITY TO BE HONEST. UM, THEY JUST KIND OF JUST THAT. AND, UH, BUT THEY WERE ALL, UH, EVERYONE WE TALKED TO WAS IN FAVOR. SO HOPEFULLY WE GET SOME CALLS IN AND SOME VOICEMAILS WITH SUPPORT. I DUNNO IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE. YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE VERY CLOSE TO THE COMMUNITY THERE. UH, WE KNOW ALL OUR NEIGHBORS, UM, AND, UH, LIKE, LIKE RAY SAID, WE, WE ARE INVITED [00:20:01] TO THEIR BIRTHDAY PARTIES. AND, UM, IT'S ACTUALLY A LOT . IT'S, IT'S LIKE A FAMILY ON THE EAST SIDE, UH, UM, OUR EXTENDED FAMILY. AND, UM, I LIKE, AGAIN, WE'RE ASKING FOR LENIENCY, SO THANK YOU. OH, I WOULD JUST, AND THEN I'LL JUST ADD, UH, THE, UH, THE NEIGHBOR, UH, ON THE NORTH SIDE, UH, HE WAS ORIGINALLY GONNA COME. HE SAID, YOU KNOW, I REALLY, I REALLY WANNA SUPPORT YOU. AND HE'S, HE'S THE AJA ADJACENT NEIGHBOR RIGHT NEXT TO US. HIS NAME IS CARLOS. AND, UH, HE HAD SAID THAT HE WAS WILLING HE WAS GONNA COME TO THE FIRST MEETING, BUT ONCE AGAIN, WE RESCHEDULED. AND SO HE SAID HE WAS APOLOGIZED. HE SAID HE WAS UNABLE TO MEET THIS MEETING, UM, BUT THAT HE HAD, HE SAID HE'D CALL IN. AND THEN, UH, SO THAT'S ONE, THAT'S 1114 AND THEN 1110. UM, YOU KNOW, THEY SAID THEY'D CALL AND THEY WERE IN SUPPORT 1104. I KNOW THE GRANDSON, RAY, AND THEY SAID THEY, THEY WERE IN SUPPORT. AND THEN ALSO 1111, UH, SAID THEY WERE IN SUPPORT AND THEN WE'RE CLOSE WITH, UH, SARAH AND JOSE WHO LIVE IN 1 0 1 WHO LIVED DIRECTLY BEHIND US. UM, AND THEY, AND THEY SAID THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH IT, AND WE'VE WORKED WITH THEM IN THE PAST. SO I JUST THANK YOU FOR HEARING US OUT AND I'M HOPEFUL. SO THANK YOU GUYS. THANK YOU. IF WE'RE GONNA SEE IF ANY OF ANYONE SIGNED UP, IF THERE'S ANY VOICEMAILS, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU STAFF. IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE SIGNED UP? WE DO HAVE, UH, SOME VOICEMAILS TO PLAY, SO IF YOU COULD PLEASE TAKE A SEAT AFTER YOU HEAR THE VOICEMAILS, YOU CAN COME BACK UP. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS JUAN C MONTELONGO. I LIVE AT 1114 SOUTH MESQUITE 7 8 2 10. I'M CALLING TO THE CASE NUMBER OF B O A 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 5 9. I'M WITH AN, I'M, UH, MY NEIGHBOR IS THE 1118 SOUTH MESQUITE. AND I WAS JUST CALLING TO, UH, OFFER SOME SUPPORT TO THOSE PEOPLE, UM, THAT, UH, WE'RE OKAY WITH, UH, WHATEVER THEY'RE DOING AND, UH, WE'RE STAND BEHIND THEM. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS, I LIVE SOUTH MESQUITE 1 7 6 4 4 9 3. OR CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 1 5 9. WITH OUR NEIGHBORS AT 1118 SOUTH MESQUITE. WE ARE IN SUPPORT. HI, THIS IS SIMON ROJAS I'M CALLING ABOUT, UH, WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF 1118 SOUTH MESQUITE. WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH WHAT, WHAT THEY'RE DOING THERE. UH, MY PHONE, MY NAME IS SIMON ROJAS FROM 1109 SOUTH MESQUITE, AND MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 689-5047. PLEASE GIMME A CALL IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS VANESSA REYES. I LIVE ON 1110 SOUTH MESQUITE. AND CASE NUMBER LAST 3 1 5 9. AND WE'RE ALL IN SUPPORT FOR, UM, 1118 SOUTH MESQUITE. THANK YOU. THIS CONCLUDES VOICEMAILS. GREAT. THANK YOU. UH, MR. GUTIERREZ, IF YOU PLEASE COME BACK UP. SO WE'RE GONNA SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS? KAPLAN, UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, AND THEN RAGMAN. HI. UH, THIS PICTURE MAY OR MAY NOT BE DOING IT JUSTICE, BUT, UM, LOOKS LIKE IT'S A LOT TALLER THAN YOUR PRIMARY RESIDENCE. IS THAT TRUE? YOU SAID IT'S A ONE STORY GARAGE. IT'S, I BELIEVE THE, I BELIEVE THE MAIN, THE MAIN STRUCTURE IS 16 FEET. AND THIS ONE'S 14. IT'S, IT SAYS PERHAPS THE PICTURE DOESNT YEAH. AND THEN THE, YEAH. 'CAUSE THE, THE APEX OF THE CENTER IS KIND OF COVERED BY THE TREE. OKAY. NOW, UH, FROM YOUR, THE PLANS, IT LOOKED LIKE IT'S ABOUT, WHAT, 300 SQUARE FEET? IT'S, IT'S HOW MANY SQUARE FEET? IT'S 10. IT'S, IT'S LIKE EIGHT AND A HALF BY 18 AND A HALF. SO IT'S A LITTLE UNDER 200 SQUARE FEET. OKAY, BUT YOU SAID 14 FEET HIGH. THAT'S TWO STORIES, ISN'T IT? ALMOST TWO STORIES THERE. I MEAN, THERE'S NOT A SECOND FLOOR IF, IF THERE'S A, SO IT'S JUST LIKE ONE BIG SPACE. THERE'S LIKE A LOFT SPACE, THERE'S LIKE A LOFT STORAGE AREA ABOVE THE, UM, ABOVE THE BATHROOM. OKAY. AND THEN WE WERE JUST PLANNING ON HAVING LIKE A LADDER TO WHERE YOU COULD PUT STORAGE AND STUFF UP THERE. OKAY. WE JUST, WE TRIED TO HAVE IT HIGH SO THAT IT FELT BIGGER. 'CAUSE IT'S SUCH A SMALL SPACE. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER GMAN. THANK YOU. UM, THE STRUCTURE THAT WAS TORN DOWN, THE, THIS IS REPLACING, WAS IT ON A SLAB? [00:25:01] IT WAS. DO YOU REMEMBER IF IT WAS ON A SLAB? I BELIEVE IT WAS, UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS ON A SLAB, YES. SO, SO DID YOU POUR A NEW SLAB FOR THIS STRUCTURE OR USE THE EXISTING SLAB? UH, WE USED, SO WE HAD TO POUR, UM, A FEW NEW PUR BEAMS. AND PART OF THE FOUNDATION IS EX IS STILL THERE EXISTING. IT'S UNDERNEATH THE, THE NEW, THE STRUCTURE. OKAY. SO IT, THIS IS A PUR BEAM STRUCTURE, NOT, NOT A SLAB. YES. AND WHAT'S THE USAGE FOR THE, THE DWELLING? WE'RE JUST GONNA USE IT FOR LIKE A WORK FROM HOME, LIKE AS AN OFFICE. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UM, I WANTED TO FIND OUT WHEN, UH, EXACTLY DID YOU GET THIS BUILT AND DID YOU HAVE SOMEONE BUILD IT FOR YOU? UH, WHAT WE, SO, UM, BUILT, WE PROBABLY, WE STARTED IT PROBABLY IN APRIL OR MAY. AND, UH, WE GOT LIKE THE LETTER JUST, IT WAS, IT'S ESSENTIALLY PRETTY MUCH DONE, BUT WE GOT THE LETTER TO JUST LIKE STOP, I BELIEVE, IN JULY. UM, BUT YEAH, THE, UM, A FRIEND OF A FRIEND OF MINE AND I, WE BUILT IT LIKE, SO YEAH, I USED, UM, LIKE WE DUG THE HOLE, I HAD PEOPLE HELP ME DIG THE HOLES AND UM, I PICKED UP THE HAMMER AND, AND THE SCREWDRIVER AND DID A LOT OF IT MYSELF. WE, WE BOOTSTRAPPED IT 'CAUSE THE, THE COST OF LIKE REGULAR CONTRACTORS IS JUST TOO MUCH. OKAY. UM, AND THEN I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. WAS THIS, UH, NOTICE SENT TO US BY SOMEONE ELSE? OR WAS THIS A COMPLAINT? IT WAS A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION THAT WAS OPENED, UM, ON AUGUST 20TH. HOW IT CAME ABOUT. I'M NOT SURE. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER MANA. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO, UM, SO, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALK ABOUT A LOT, UM, IS WATER RUNOFF AND MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T, UH, IMPACT SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY. AND SO, SO LOOKING AT THE, LOOKING AT THE ROOF LINE IS A LITTLE BIT HARD TO DISCERN WHERE THE WATER GOES FROM THE STRUCTURE. UM, AND IT, IT APPEARS THAT IT FLOWS TO THE BACK, UH, THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO, UM, SO THE LINE THAT WAS MEASURED, UH, WHEN YOU SAID, UH, SO WHERE YOU SIT, WAS THAT THE MEASURE OF THE WALL ITSELF OR THE ROOF LINE THAT YOU'RE PROVIDING THE MEASUREMENTS FOR? UH, I'D HAVE TO THE, OH, LIKE THE, THE SETBACK. I'D HAVE TO REFER TO THE SURVEY. I LIKE, I JUST KNOW THAT THEY SHOWED IT, THAT IT WAS, I JUST KNOW THEY SHOWED IT THAT IT WAS 0.1 FEET AWAY. RIGHT. SO COULD, BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A, UM, A, A LIP ON THE BACKSIDE OF THAT, YOU KNOW, ON, ON THE ROOFING THERE. AND SO THE QUESTION I GUESS IS THAT ROOF EXTEND OVER THE PROPERTY LINE. 'CAUSE YOU KNOW, THAT'S A ONE, A LITTLE BIT OF A CHALLENGE. AND THE SECOND WOULD BE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, WHAT TYPE OF THINGS WOULD YOU, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT FOR MITIGATING THE WATER RUNOFF? SO, UH, THIS HAS BEEN A, UM, WHEN WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE, IT'S BEEN A LONG STANDING ISSUE. UM, IT'S ALWAYS HAD FOUNDATION, FOUNDATION, UH, ISSUES. IT'S CLAY, UM, MUCH LIKE MANY OF THE, UH, THE HOMES IN THAT AREA. AND SO IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE, UM, TO THE PHOTO OF THE STREET, UM, WELL, THAT'S FINE. WELL, THE BIRD'S IV SO WELL, THAT'S FINE TOO. I CAN, I CAN COMMENT ON THIS TOO. SO SEE RIGHT HERE, UH, WE ACTUALLY HAD TO, I'LL GO, I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE MAP OF THE, OF THE BUILDINGS, BUT WE ACTUALLY HAD TO INSTALL A FRENCH TRAIN ALL THE WAY FROM HERE ALL THE WAY ACROSS. AND THEN WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE A PUMP AND UH, IF YOU TAKE THIS AREA, LIKE OUR, OUR PROPERTY IS, I, IT'S 33 BY 43. IF YOU TAKE LIKE THE, THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD AND YOU MULTIPLY THAT TIMES LIKE AN HOUR, IT, LIKE THIS PUMP IS DOING LIKE 20 TIMES THAT. SO IF YOU GO BACK TO THE STREET VIEW OR, OR YEAH. OR YOU COULD, OR JUST THE OVERVIEW OF THE OVERVIEW OF THE, UM, PROPERTY. IT SHOWS LIKE THE OTHER RESIDENTS. YES. OKAY. SO, OH, SO WHERE DO I START? SO, OKAY, SO HERE, UH, LET'S SEE. SURE, THAT'S FINE. UM, SO, SO ELTO WAS REPLACED. I, I AM, WE DID A LOT OF RESEARCH ON THIS. SO ELTO ON THIS, SO EL ALFREDO WAS REPLACED AND WHAT HAPPENED WAS IS THAT THE, I IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE EAST SIDE, NONE OF THESE STREETS WERE DESIGNED WITH SIDEWALKS, RIGHT? SO THIS IS ALL FLAT ELEVATION AND, AND CURRENTLY ALL THE DRAINAGE COMES THIS WAY AND IT COMES THIS WAY, RIGHT? SO WHEN THE CITY BUILT THIS NEW STREET [00:30:01] ON TOP OF THE EXISTING, THEY BUILT ON TOP OF THE EXISTING SIDEWALK AND THEY BUILT ON TOP. SO WHAT USED TO DRAIN THIS WAY ALL COMES TO OUR HOUSE. SO WHEN I DID THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD CALCULATION, THERE WAS MORE THAN THE WATER THAT WOULD RAIN ON THIS, ON THIS, ON THIS LOT, ON THIS ENTIRE SECTION OF THE, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS PUMPING OUT OF OUR, UH, FRENCH DRAIN. AND THEN ALSO WHAT WE DID. SO IF YOU CAN SEE HERE, UH, OUR NEIGHBORS, UH, I THINK IT'S 1 0 4, BUT THEY HAVE A CARPORT AND THEN HALF OF THEIR HOUSE DRAINS TOWARDS US. SO WE ACTUALLY, UH, WE ACTUALLY BOUGHT A, UM, GUTTER. WE ACTUALLY BOUGHT A GUTTER AND THEY INSTALLED IT SO THAT ALL OF THAT WOULD RUN TO THE STREET. SO I BELIEVE IT'S LIKE 30 BY 30 BY 25 IS WHAT IS WHAT? SO WE HELP BUY THAT GUTTER THAT'S OFFSETTING 20 BY 35 OF RAIN. AND THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, OR THE STRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE IS, IS LIKE 10 BY 20. SO YOU KNOW, ROUGHLY LIKE 200 SQUARE FEET VERSUS 700 SQUARE FOOT OF, OF RAIN DRAINAGE, IF THAT. SO IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, YOU PROVIDED GUTTERING ON THE ADJACENT HOUSE TO PREVENT THEM FROM FLOODING YOUR PROPERTY. CORRECT. OKAY. BUT, BUT SINCE THEN YOU'VE ADDED THIS NEW STRUCTURE WHICH SLOPES BACK TOWARDS THEIR HOUSE. SO HOW ARE YOU PREVENTING THAT WATER FROM GOING ONTO THEIR PROPERTY? NOW WE ALSO, WE ALSO HAVE A, A FRENCH DRAIN. OKAY. SO, SO IT'S ON THE GROUND. SO, SO BASICALLY WATER DRIPS OFF YOUR ROOF, FLYING FRENCH DRAINS OUT ON THAT SIDE? YES. IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER ALBERT? YEAH, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND ALSO FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, FIRST THE APPLICANT, UH, THE NEW STRUCTURE, IS IT LARGER FOOTPRINT WISE THAN THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE WAS? IT IS. AND DID I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY THAT THE NEW STRUCTURE SITS ON BOTH SOME OF THE OLD SLAB AND ALSO SOME NEW PEERS? CORRECT? LIKE THE, IT'S THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS UNDERNEATH IT. CORRECT. SO THE, THE TWO TYPES OF FOUNDATIONS ARE UNDER THE NEW STRUCTURE? CORRECT. OKAY. AND THEN FOR STAFF, STAFF, ARE WE CONSIDERING THIS, UH, AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT? AN ACCESSORY UNIT, UH, AN ADDITION SINCE IT'S ATTACHED BY A BREEZEWAY, THEY'RE PHYSICALLY CONNECTED TO EACH OTHER. AND IS THERE A FIRE CODE PROBLEM WITH THE NEW STRUCTURE AND THE OLD STRUCTURE BEING THREE FEET AWAY FROM EACH OTHER? UM, IT DIDN'T SEEM CONNECTED TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. SO IT'D BE AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. DETACHED DWELLING UNIT. THEY'RE NOT CONNECTED? NO, THEY'RE NOT CONNECTED. I THOUGHT I SAW A BREEZEWAY. ARE THEY CONNECTED WITH A BREEZEWAY, SIR? OR THERE'S LIKE A, THERE'S LIKE AN ALLEY THERE. THE ROOF LINES ARE NOT DIRECTLY CONNECTED. SO THE TWO STRUCTURES AREN'T CONNECTED BY A SMALL BREEZEWAY, A SMALL CONNECTOR. THERE'S, WHEN YOU GO FROM ONE TO THE OTHER, YOU'RE OUTSIDE. CORRECT. OKAY, GOOD, GOOD. AND TO EXPAND ON HIS QUESTION, IS THERE A HE MINIMUM DISTANCE THAT TWO STRUCTURES HAVE TO BE A PART TO BE CONSIDERED DETACHED? NOT, NO. OKAY. JUST CHECKING. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, BRAGMAN? JUST IF THE FIRE CODE IS, IS A PROBLEM, DO WE NEED TO MEET THAT? THAT'S CORRECT. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UH, SO THAT LITTLE STRUCTURE THERE IN BETWEEN THE TWO LARGER STRUCTURES, IS THAT LIKE A WATER HEATER SHED OR WHAT IS THAT? YEAH, IT'S STORAGE. SO THERE'S, THERE'S LIKE, IT'S HARD TO SEE, BUT YOU CAN WALK AROUND THIS TO GET TO THE REST OF THE BACKYARD. OKAY. SO THE THEY ARE NOT CONNECTED THERE? NO, MA'AM. OKAY. SO THE, THE STORAGE IS JUST CONNECTED TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE? CORRECT. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY, SO I HAVE A QUESTION. UH, YOUR NEIGHBOR HAS A DRIVEWAY THAT GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE SIDE OF THIS NEW STRUCTURE. IS THERE A, UH, GARAGE DOOR OPENING THAT, THAT WOULD KEEP HIM FROM POSSIBLY BUILDING OR DOING SOMETHING HIMSELF IN THIS AREA? OR DO YOU, UH, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE I'M, I'M TRYING TO, PART OF THE FIRE PREVENTION IS, IS MAKING SURE THERE'S ROOM IN CASE A FIREMAN NEEDS TO GET BACK THERE. I KNOW THAT'S NOT ON YOUR PROPERTY, BUT THE POTENTIAL FOR YOUR NEIGHBOR TO DO SOMETHING AND CLOSE OFF THAT AREA IS SOMETHING I, I WANT TO CONSIDER. SO WHAT I'M WONDERING IS, AS HE'S DRIVING THROUGH, IS THERE A, IS THERE A, UM, APPENDS THAT HE'S GOING TO PERHAPS LIKE A GARAGE OR A COVER OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD, WELL, I GUESS HELP ME UNDERSTAND, ARE YOU, ARE YOU TALKING TO ABOUT THIS HOUSE OR THE TALKING, UH, WHEN FACING YOUR HOUSE IS TO THE LEFT. OH, TO THE LEFT? MM-HMM. . OH, UM, YEAH, HE'S GOT A DRIVEWAY. UM, IT'S, HE JUST, HE DRIVES, HE DRIVES BACK THERE AND, BUT HE DOESN'T HAVE, UH, I'M TRYING TO, I'M TRYING TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S A REASON WHY IT WOULD BE KEPT OPEN AS TIME GOES BY AND NOT, YOU KNOW, HIM NOT WANTING TO PUT HIS OWN DWELLING UNIT BACK THERE NEXT TO YOURS. UM, DOES HE HAVE A GARAGE THAT, THAT, THAT IS AT THE END OF HIS DRIVEWAY? YES. SO YOU CAN SEE HE'S GOT A, HE'S GOT A GARAGE BACK TO YOU. IT'S HIS GARAGE. UHHUH. . OKAY. AND THEN YOUR ROOF PITCH COMPLETELY SLANTS TO THE REAR, CORRECT? CORRECT. AND THEN YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT THE DRAINAGE THAT LANDS ON THE BLOCK [00:35:01] RUNS TOWARDS YOUR LOT ON ITS WAY TO THE, TO THE STREET THAT WAS REPAIRED? IT, IT, IT, IT COMES TO HEAD, IT COMES AHEAD DIRECTLY AT OUR HOUSE. AT THE HOUSE OR THE NEW UNIT THAT YOU BUILT? IS THAT THE, IS YOUR HOUSE THE LOW? THIS SO THAT, SO THE, SO THE FRENCH DRAIN AND THE DRAINAGE ISSUES WE HAD WHEN WE HAD THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE. OKAY. BUT THE, I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THE NATURAL LOW ON YOUR PROPERTY IS. IS IT, IS IT AT THE MIDPOINT OF YOUR HOME? CLOSER TO THE FRONT STREET TO MESQUITE OR TO THE REAR? SO IT DRAINS FROM THIS STRUCTURE TO FLE STREET AND FROM THIS STRUCTURE TO MESQUITE STREET. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MINKA MINKA? ONE MORE SIR. HOW DID YOU SAY YOU WERE GONNA USE THIS, UH, AS AN OFFICE, LIKE WORK, WORKING FROM HOME? A QUESTION TO STAFF. WHAT IS AMENDMENT SPACE REQUIREMENT FOR AN OFFICE WITH NO EGRESS LIKE THAT? CAN YOU REPEAT THAT MR. MANCHACA? IF YOU'RE USING A SPACE FOR AN OFFICE, THAT MEANS YOU'RE LIVING IN IT OR HAVE OTHER ACCOMMODATIONS, RIGHT? ISN'T THERE A MINIMUM SPACE FOR LIVING OR OPEN, YOU KNOW, FOR EGRESS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT? LIKE WINDOWS FOR EGRESS? I THINK IT DEPENDS ON WHETHER OR NOT HE HAS EMPLOYEES. IF IT'S JUST HIM WORKING THERE OR ONE OF THE RESIDENTS, IT'S VIEWED DIFFERENTLY OF, YEAH, IT'S LIKE ESSENTIALLY JUST AN EXTRA ROOM. THE PROPERTY CODE REQUIRES LIKE A BEDROOM TO, TO MEET, UH, A MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 70 SQUARE FEET. UM, SO, UH, THIS IS JUST AN EXTRA ROOM. IT'S NOT CONSIDERED A DWELLING UNIT BY ITSELF. UH, SO THEY CAN UTILIZE IT AS AN EXTRA BEDROOM. THEY CAN UTILIZE IT AS AN OFFICE, BUT IT'S NOT A OFFICE. AS IN YOU CAN HAVE OTHER EMPLOYEES. THAT'S NOT ALLOWED. THE ZONING DOESN'T ALLOW FOR THAT. UH, SO, UH, IT'S JUST AN EXTRA SPACE. BUT BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S HABITABLE, IT'S CONSIDERED AN ACCESSORY, AN ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT, WHICH HAS THE LARGER SETBACK RATHER THAN JUST AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, LIKE A STORAGE SHED. I SEE. I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT IT WAS UTILITY THAT YOU HAD THE WATER HEATER IN THERE, OR DID I MISUNDERSTAND THAT? IT, THE WATER HEATER IS IN THE, IT'S ON THAT LIKE LITTLE BACK, UH, STORAGE OF THE HOUSE. SO BREEZEWAY ONE THAT HAD THE DOOR, THAT, THAT PIECE THAT LOOKS CONNECTED, THAT'S WHERE THE WATER HEATER. BUT THAT WATER HEATER SERVES YOUR HOUSE OR THE, OR THE ACCESSORY UNIT? BOTH. OKAY. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. SO, SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE, 'CAUSE YOU SAID YOU BUILT THIS YOURSELF. UH, IS THIS HEATED AND AIR CONDITIONED? IS THERE ELECTRIC AND, UH, HEAT IN THERE? IT, IT HAS, IT HAS ELECTRIC AND IT HAS WATER, AND IT JUST, RIGHT NOW WE JUST HAVE LIKE PORTABLE, LIKE WINDOW UNIT, LIKE A PORTABLE WINDOW UNIT AND JUST LIKE A PLUGIN, ELECTRIC HEATER. SO DID YOU HAVE A LICENSED ELECTRICIAN PUT IN YOUR ELECTRIC LINE? WE WE'RE, AFTER, AFTER THIS WE ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE, THE PLUMBING AND THE ELECTRIC CODE INSPECTIONS. CORRECT. MR. BAGMAN, THANK YOU. UH, DID I HEAR YOU SAY THAT THE, UH, UM, ACCESSORY UNIT HAS A BATHROOM? YES, MA'AM. DOES IT HAVE A KITCHEN? NO. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF STOP, DOES THAT CHANGE ANYTHING THAT IT'S GOT A BATHROOM? NO. NO. OKAY. IS THERE, UH, ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE MOVE ON? ALL RIGHT, SO YOU, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU A COUPLE MINUTES IF YOU WANNA MAKE ANY CLOSING REMARKS BEFORE WE DELIBERATE. AND YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD, I WOULD RECOMMEND, SUGGEST THAT YOU'VE HEARD, YOU'VE HEARD, UM, YOU'VE HEARD FROM THIS COMMISSION THAT THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT DRAINAGE, FIRE PROTECTION, SAFETY. SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO REMARK ON THAT, THAT'D PROBABLY BE IN YOUR BEST INTEREST. OKAY. SO TAKE A COUPLE MINUTES AND THEN TALK. OKAY. LIKE YOU CAN, I'M GIVING YOU A COUPLE MINUTES IF OH, THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT US TO KNOW, UH, THAT YOU WANT TO CLARIFY. YEAH, I WOULD JUST SAY SO, UH, SO THERE'S THAT, THERE'S THAT DOOR, AND THEN ALSO ON THE BACKSIDE THERE'S TWO PATIO DOORS FOR EGRESS. SO THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO, UH, THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO, UH, PLACES WHERE YOU CAN EXIT THE, THE DWELLING UNIT. YEAH, IT'S ON THE, IT'S ON THE BOTTOM LEFT. UM, SO YOU COULD, YOU COULD EXIT, YOU HAVE TWO, UH, PLACES OF EGRESS, WHICH IS I BELIEVE WHAT YOU WOULD NEED. UM, UH, AND THEN YEAH, I WOULD JUST LIKE, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT, UH, AS FAR AS LIKE, AS FAR AS LIKE THE, THE DRAINAGE THAT WE, WE GET BOTH OF OUR, BOTH OF MY NEIGHBOR IN THE BACK AND MYSELF, WE GET, WE GET LIKE PROBABLY 20 TIMES THE AMOUNT OF DRAINAGE FROM OTHER, FROM OTHER, YOU KNOW, FLOWING WATER. THAT, AND SO A 10 BY 20 STRUCTURE IS [00:40:01] VERY INSIGNIFICANT WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU TAKE IN EFFECT THAT LIKE, I HAVE A ONE AND A HALF HORSEPOWER PUMP THAT, THAT CONSISTENTLY JUST, I MEAN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IT'S LIKE, IT'S, I THINK IT'S LIKE 50 GALLONS PER MINUTE AND THAT'S WAY, THAT'S WAY MORE THAT'S DRAINING. SO LIKE, SO THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD IS, IS COMING. SO THE, SO THE OFFSET OF THIS SMALL AMOUNT OF DRAINAGE IS VERY MINUSCULE IN COMPARISON TO THE REST. OKAY. ALSO, UM, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO UM, SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, I JUST ASK FOR LENIENCY. LIKE IF WE HAD TO DO THIS AGAIN, WE WOULD JUST, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE, WE JUST WENT UP PROBABLY HAVE GONE A DIFFERENT ROUTE, UH, FOR SURE. UM, BUT YEAH, I, LIKE, ONCE AGAIN, I JUST ASKED FOR MERCY AND, AND COMPASSION FROM THE BOARD, UM, AS WE WERE KIND OF STUCK IN A VERY, UH, IN A, IN AN AWKWARD SITUATION. AND I LIKE JUST TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE, YOU KNOW, WE HAD, I THINK IT WAS FOUR OR FIVE CALLS OF PEOPLE THAT WERE IN FAVOR AND NOBODY ACTUALLY SEEMS TO HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT LIVES NEARBY US. OKAY. UM, AND THEN ALSO THAT, UH, IT IS, IT'S VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE ARE MANY, UH, STORAGE UNITS AND GARAGES THAT DO END UP GETTING CONVERTED TO ACCESSORY DOORING UNIT. UH, YOU KNOW, LIVING COST OF LIVING HAS GONE UP AND PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR EXTRA WAYS TO FIND SPACE THAT'S COST EFFECTIVE FOR EVERYONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ESPECIALLY ON THE EAST SIDE. OKAY. UH, DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING? OH, UM, WE, WE HAD LOOKED AT DRAINAGE BEFORE. UH, IN FACT WE FILED A KIND OF A COMPLAINT WITH THE CITY BECAUSE, UM, THE, THE GRADE FOR, FOR, FOR THE NEW PAVING AND FLOOD THOUGH WAS HIGHER THAN, THAN OUR ACTUAL LOT. UM, AND WE DID, WE DID PUT THAT IN. UM, WHEN WE HAD THE ENGINEER LOOK AT IT, HE SAID, WELL MAYBE YOU COULD PUT A, UM, RETAINING WALL ON YOUR PROPERTY UNDERNEATH YOUR, THE, THE BIG HOUSE. AND UH, AND HE SAID THAT WOULD BE YOUR SOLUTION. BUT WE, WE HAVEN'T, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD ACTUALLY RESOLVE ANYTHING. WE STILL ARE GETTING ALL OF THAT RAINWATER AT THAT CORNER LOT. IF, IF YOU WERE TO THINK OF IT AS A FUNNEL, WE WERE ALSO EVERYTHING, WE WERE ALSO WORRIED THAT THAT WOULD CAUSE AN ISSUE FOR THE OTHER NEIGHBORS BECAUSE THEN IT WOULD BASICALLY JUST PUSHING THE WATER TO THEIR HOUSES. RIGHT. UM, AND THE CITY ENGINEER DID SAY, OH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOMEBODY LOOK AT CUTTING THIS SIDEWALK RIGHT HERE SO THAT IT DOESN'T BOTTLENECK. 'CAUSE WHEN THEY BUILT THIS SIDEWALK RIGHT HERE, IT STOPS. AND THE BOTTLENECK'S RIGHT HERE AND A BOTTLENECK'S RIGHT THERE. THAT'S YOUR RETAINING WALL. YEAH. THEY PUT A, THEY PUT A SIDEWALK DRAIN IN. OKAY. THEY NEVER CALLED, THEY NEVER CALLED US BACK ON THAT. BUT, UM, YEAH, I JUST THANK Y'ALL FOR YOUR TIME. YEAH. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. SO, UH, WITH THAT, IF YOU COULD TAKE A SEAT, WE'RE, UH, LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND THE, AND THE, THE STAFF HAS, UH, HAS, UH, RECOMMENDED AN ALTERNATE, BUT SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION O ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 59. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT TO REQUEST FOR ONE A FOUR FOOT 11 VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE IN REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES AND TWO A 2,100 AND TO A 150. IS THAT NO, THAT'S 2000. YEAH. 2001 50. THERE'S A SPACE IN THERE, A SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE TO A MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO BUILD A STRUCTURE ON A 1850 SQUARE FOOT LOT SITUATED AT 1 1 1 8 SOUTH MESQUITE STREET. APPLICANT BEING RAY GUTES. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT TO BE ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE SITE. PROPERTY LINE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN A UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BY IMPOSING A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT, THE OWNER WOULD HAVE TO MOVE THE ACCESSORY DWELLING FIVE FEET FROM THE ASIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINE, OR REMOVE THE STRUCTURE ALTOGETHER. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE SETBACK IS TO PROVIDE, IS TO PREVENT SUFFICIENT SPACE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY LINES. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS OBSERVED THERE AS THERE ARE SIMILAR STRUCTURES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA FOR THE VARIANCES 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 USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT VIA SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUEST IS TO HAVE A SIDE SETBACK ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES DOES NOT POSE [00:45:01] A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING. THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN AN OLDER, ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD AND CO AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA AND SETBACKS. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS VARIANCE OF ASSAULT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER, UH, BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT NEW AND ARE NOT DUE TO, ARE THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE P APPLY TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SOUGHT IT DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY DUE TO THE OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD AND SMALLER LOT SIZES IN GENERAL. AND THERE ARE OTHER SIMILAR STRUCTURES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA WITH THE SAME SIMILAR SETBACK FROM THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES AND A MOTION. SECOND, UM, UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THIEL. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. YES. SO I, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE, UH, THE MOTION AS READ. UM, YOU KNOW, WE SAW TESTIMONY FROM THE NEIGHBORS, UH, UH, THAT ARE MOST IMMEDIATELY IMPACTED BY THIS. UH, WE, WE, WE'VE HEARD THE TESTIMONY, UH, THE APPLICANT WILL BE SEEKING, UM, BUILDING PLAN, UH, BUILDING, UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT AND ALL THE APPLICABLE CODES WILL BE MET AS HE INDICATED TO US REGARDING THE WATER. I MEAN, HE HAD SHOWN US WHAT HE'S DOING WITH THE FRENCH DRAIN AND ACTUALLY GOING OVER AND ABOVE AND, AND TO ACCOMMODATE THE DRAINAGE FROM HIS NEIGHBORS. SO I THINK THE APPLICANT IS DOING ALL THE RIGHT THINGS TO KIND OF, UM, REMEDIATE THIS, THIS, THIS SITUATION. OBVIOUSLY IN A PERFECT WORLD HE WOULD'VE PULLED A BUILDING PERMIT AND THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN HERE. UH, BUT THAT'S KIND OF, UH, UH, WATER, UH, LITERALLY WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE HERE. SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS CREATE THE BEST SITUATION AND I THINK, UH, APPROVING THE VARIANCES AS REQUESTED IS A BETH BEST PATH FORWARD FOR THIS APPLICANT. MR. TEAL? YES, I'M IN AGREEMENT. I'LL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT. UM, YOU KNOW, OF NOTE WAS THERE WAS AN EX A STRUCTURE THAT HAD ENCROACHED INTO THE SETBACK PREVIOUSLY. UM, THEY ARE COGNIZANT OF THE WATER DRAINAGE ISSUES AND IT SEEMS LIKE THEY ARE MAKING ACTIVE STEPS TO, TO TREAT THAT. AND UH, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY IT WOULD BE FINANCIALLY DETRIMENTAL FOR ANYONE EITHER TO HAVE TO RAISE THIS STRUCTURE AND I DON'T THINK IT'S PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE FOR IT TO BE MOVED. SO I I SEE NO OTHER, UH, WAY TO BE THAN TO SUPPORT THIS. ANYONE ELSE? MENCHACA, COMMISSIONER MENCHACA? I SEE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THE WATER ISSUE HERE. UH, THERE ARE TOO MANY FLAGS THAT WENT UP ON THIS ONE. THERE'S NO DOUBT THE APPLICANT IS WELL INFORMED AND DID A LOT OF RESEARCH AND UH, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HE DID WERE WELL INTENTIONED, BUT I THINK THAT THE THINGS STILL OUTSTANDING IN TERMS OF THE PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, AND THE ACTUAL BUILDING THE STRUCTURE AND KNOWING ABOUT SOME OF THE TECHNICALITIES IS, IS A POINT THAT I'M HAVING PROBLEMS WITH. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, YEAH. AND I GUESS I, I HAVE A QUESTION HERE AND SO, AND, AND I APOLOGIZE I DIDN'T ASK THIS EARLIER, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I WAS TRYING TO ASK THE QUESTION WITH REGARDS TO THE ROOF LINE. IF THE ROOF LINE SITS OVER THE PROPERTY LINE, DOES THAT PRESENT A PROBLEM, UM, FROM A COATING PERSPECTIVE? SO IF WE APPROVE IT, YOU KNOW, DO THEY HAVE, IF IT'S OVER THE PROPERTY LINE, DOES SOMETHING HAVE TO BE DONE ABOUT IT? OR IS THAT KIND OF THING ALLOWED TO CONTINUE? STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE BRING UP THAT MORE DETAILED SURVEY ON THE SCREEN WHILE AS WE DELIBERATE THIS SPECIFIC ITEM? ZOOM IN AGAIN, PART OF THE QUESTION WAS, YOU KNOW, THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING MEASUREMENT VERSUS THE ROOF LINE MEASUREMENT AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS NOT AWARE OF, YOU KNOW, AND SO IF THE ROOF LINE GOES OVER, DOES THAT PRESENT A PROBLEM, YOU KNOW, FROM A, FROM A RIGHT PERSPECTIVE? SO, UM, STAFF, IS IT CORRECT THAT IF THIS WERE TO PASS, HE WOULD HAVE TO SHAVE THE ROOF LINE SO THAT IT DOES NOT GO MORE THAN ONE INCH CLOSER THAN THE PROPERTY LINE DOES? UH, THAT'S CORRECT. AND THAT'LL BE, UM, DETERMINED BY THE INSPECTION. SO THAT WILL BE PART OF THE INSPECTION ALONG WITH THE ELECTRIC AND PLUMBING, RIGHT? SO THEY'LL HAVE THE VARIANCE REQUESTS WHENEVER THEY, UH, GO DO THE INSPECTION FOR THE STRUCTURE ITSELF. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION. VARIANCE FOR SOMETHING. UM, ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER, UH, KAPLAN GO AHEAD KAPLAN. OKAY. UH, THE, I I DO FEEL SYMPATHY FOR THE, UM, HOMEOWNER AND YOU HAVE DONE A LOT TO ADDRESS A LOT OF THE ISSUES. UH, ONE OF THE CONCERNS I REALLY DO HAVE IS FIRE AND HOW CLOSE YOU ARE TO THE ADJACENT, UM, A GARAGE AND HOW CLOSE THAT IS TO YOUR HOUSE SO THAT IF THERE WERE A FIRE, UM, THERE'S REALLY NO FIRE BREAKS AND IT COULD NOT ONLY JUST DO SET UP YOUR HOUSE, YOUR GARAGE, BUT YOUR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE. SO I'M NOT, UM, NECESSARILY IN FAVOR OF THIS BECAUSE OF THAT. SO I'M GONNA CHIME IN. I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. UH, THE REASON WHY FOR ME WAS, UH, ALTHOUGH I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF STRUCTURES THAT CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE, THERE WAS A STRUCTURE THERE. UM, I I, AND THEN THE DRAINAGE THING, HE LOOKED WITH THE FRENCH DRAIN. HE'S FIXING DRAINAGE FOR THE WHOLE BLOCK AND, AND HE'S NOT HURTING [00:50:01] ANYBODY BEYOND HIM 'CAUSE IT'S THE STREET. SO WITH THAT, UM, I WASN'T, I WAS GONNA BE IN SUPPORT, UM, FURTHER, UH, BECAUSE HE PUT GUTTERS IN ON HIS NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY OR PARTICIPATED IN THAT. I MEAN, HE'S, HE'S DEFINITELY NOT TRYING TO AVOID ANY ISSUE. SO I, I REALLY FEEL THAT AS HE GOES THROUGH THESE CITY RE PERMIT REVIEWS, UM, THERE'S GONNA BE SOME, SOME THINGS HE'S GONNA HAVE TO FIX I'M SURE. AND IT'S ONLY GONNA GET BETTER. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO CHIME IN BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE? COMMISSIONER ALBERT? UH, YES, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF IT. UM, THE BIG THING FOR ME IS THE, THE NEIGHBORS SUPPORT IT AND THAT'S WHAT A STRUCTURE LIKE THIS DOES IN A REALLY DENSE NEIGHBORHOOD IS IT AFFECTS YOUR NEIGHBOR'S, UH, QUALITY OF LIFE. AND, AND WE HEARD THE CALLS AND, AND THEY SEEM TO BE IN SUPPORT, ESPECIALLY THOSE NEARBY. SO THAT'S, THAT'S GOOD. UM, AND I'M ALSO HAPPY THAT THE HOME WILL NOW, UH, BE INSPECTED AND HAVE TO MEET CODE. UH, AND I JUST WANT TO, I GUESS CAUTION THE APPLICANT THAT THE CODE INSPECTORS ARE GONNA NEED ACCESS TO ALL OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, ITEMS IN YOUR HOME THAT THEY NEED TO LOOK AT. IT COULD GET EXPENSIVE AND IT COULD GET TO BE A BIT OF A HASSLE, UH, DURING THE INSPECTION. SO, UH, YOU HAVE THAT TO LOOK FORWARD TO. BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, I THINK I'LL SUPPORT THIS. YES, IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. UNA. YES, I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. KAPLAN. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA, I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. LIND, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. UH, I ALSO CON I ALSO CONCUR, BUT BEFORE I READ, UH, I WANNA REMIND, UH, THE COMMISSIONERS THAT, UH, THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO THINGS HERE. ONE IS A LOT SIZE. UM, WAS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO THAT? I'M NOT HEARING IT. OKAY. SO, UH, FOR THE, FOR THE ATTORNEY, BECAUSE I HAVEN'T READ YET, IS THERE A WAY TO, TO AMEND THIS, TO BREAK OUT THE LOT OR DO WE HAVE TO RECONSIDER THE WHOLE THING TO JUST TO HEAR THE LOT IF THIS THING FAILS, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE, DO YOU WANNA TAKE THE VOTE ON WHAT THE MOTION THAT'S IS AND THEN MAKE A SECONDARY MOTION FOR THE OTHER PORTION? OKAY. I DIDN'T KNOW IF THEY WERE TIED TOGETHER AND, OKAY. THANK YOU. SO MOTION DIES. I HAVE A SIX TO UH, I'M SORRY, SEVEN TO FOUR. SO IF THERE'S A MOTION FOR THE LOT SIZE BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND READ THIS MOTION FOR THE LOT SIZE. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 5 9. I MOVED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A 22,150 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE TO A MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO BUILD A STRUCTURE ON AN 1850 SQUARE FOOT LOT SITUATED AT 1 1 8 1 1 1 8 SOUTH MESQUITE STREET. APPLICANT BEING RAY GUTIEREZ. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE IS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PROVISION OF A LOT, UH, SIZE, UH, OF, OF 1850 IS, IS, UH, SIMILAR TO OTHER LOTS IN THE AREA. NUMBER TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. UM, THE LOT IS ALREADY SITUATED AND THEREFORE ANY, ANY CHANGE TO NOT ALLOWING, UH, A REDUCTION IN THE LOT SIZE WOULD BE A HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT. 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 DESERVED TO THERE. SIMILAR LOTS, UM, THAT ARE, THAT ARE BELOW THE 4,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM IN THE AREA. 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 SPEC SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALSO THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT OF WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UH, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN AN OLDER ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONS IN AND IS, UH, REDUCED. LOT SIZE WOULD IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER LOTS IN THE AREA. SIX, THE PLIGHT TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. FIRST VARIANCE OF SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR NOT DUE TO OR THE RESULT OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE P TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY REGARDING THE SIZE OF THE LOT DUE TO THIS BEING IN AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD [00:55:01] AND, AND ALL MULTIPLE LOTS IN THE AREA ALSO HAVE REDUCED SIZE. END OF MOTION. CHAIRMAN OAN, MAY I MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER OUR FIRST MOTION? YES. UH, LET'S VOTE ON THIS ONE AND THEN THAT WAY IT WILL ONLY HAVE THAT ISSUE LEFT. UH, IS THERE A SECOND TO MY MOTION? SECOND. SECOND. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. BRAG. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. LIND. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF OF FACT MOTION PASSES. UH, WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER KAPLAN WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER SINCE MY VOTE AGAINST IT WAS PRIMARILY FOR SAFETY, FIRE SAFETY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I WOULD CONSIDER APPROVING IT IF IT WERE THREE FEET. IF THE BUILDING WERE THREE FEET FROM THE FENCE LINE. IS THAT REAR OR SIDE? BOTH. . OKAY. SO HO HOLD ON A SECOND. I WAS GONNA SEE IF I CAN ADD ABOUT THE GARAGE. JUST ONE SECOND. UH, SO THERE WERE FOUR PEOPLE, UH, ON THE PREVAILING SIDE OF THE FIRST MOTION. UH, WOULD ANY OF THE OTHER THREE LIKE TO ADD THEIR THOUGHTS? COMMISSIONER MENCHACA MENCHACA? YES, I CONCUR WITH MY, UH, COLLEAGUE THERE. WHAT SHE WAS SAYING ON THAT, UH, ASPECT, IT'S JUST, UH, TOO MUCH POTENTIAL ON THINGS JUMPING FROM ONE TO THE HOUSE TO THE NEXT. AND AS MANY PEOPLE STORE GASOLINES AND STUFF IN GARAGES, THE GENTLEMAN WITH ALL THE INVESTMENT HE MADE COULD CONTINUE HIS HOUSE BY AN ACCIDENT NEXT DOOR. SO NOT SO MUCH HIM, BUT THE OTHER ALSO. SO WE HAVE THIS, THIS STRUCTURE IS CLOSE TO THE REAR AND TO THE SIDE. UH, THE, THE, THE SIDE IS A BUDDING, UH, AN ESTABLISHED DRIVEWAY THAT GOES TO A GARAGE. UH, UM, WOULD Y'ALL BE ENTERTAINED, UH, ALLOWING THE ONE INCH ON THE SIDE AND NOT THE REAR? REPEAT IT AGAIN, SIR. UH, WOULD THOSE, UH, I'M, I'M WONDERING IF THOSE IN THE, ON THE PREVAILING SIDE WOULD BE OPEN TO ALLOWING ONE INCH ON THE SIDE DUE TO THE WIDE DRIVEWAY THAT GOES TO A GARAGE BEYOND THE STRUCTURE AND ONLY, UM, LOOK AT THE THREE FOOT SETBACK FROM THE REAR ONE. CAN YOU BRING THE SURVEY BACK UP PLEASE? STAFF? UM, THERE'S A ONE THING TOO, I I JUST WANNA POINT OUT THERE IS A PICTURE OF THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND THAT'S THE GARAGE THAT'S ADJACENT ISN'T IT? TO THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THE IMAGE OF THE SIDELINE. IT'S UP HERE. UH, THE, IF YOU LOOK AT WHERE THE GARAGE IS IN THE BACK CORNER. YEAH. YEAH. SO TO THE NORTH OF THAT PLAN, NORTH OF THAT THERE, THE NEIGHBOR HAS A 10 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY THAT GOES BEYOND, THAT GOES FROM THE STREET PAST THE STRUCTURE IN QUESTION. SO HE, HE, IT IS OPEN ON THAT SIDE. WHERE IS THIS? OKAY, IT SAYS REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND YOU SEE THERE'S A, THERE'S A GARAGE IN THE BACK. YEAH, THAT'S THE NEIGHBOR'S GARAGE. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. IF HERE'S THE PICTURE OF THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SHOWS AN OPEN GARAGE WITH A LOT OF JUNK IN IT. EXCUSE ME. CHAIR ADJACENT. THERE WAS A, THERE WAS A MOTION FOR RECONSIDER, BUT WAS THERE A SECOND IN A VOTE? UH, ARE YOU, ARE YOU GOING BACK TO DISCUSSING THE, THE MERITS? RIGHT. SO WE HAD A MOTION TO RECONSIDER WAS WHO MADE BY KAPLAN. WHO SECONDED THAT? COMMISSIONER SECONDED. SO WE'RE IN, WE'RE JUST IN DISCUSSION ON, ON THE RECONSIDER, AM I NOT SEEING THIS PICTURE CORRECTLY? BECAUSE IF IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS 10 FEET ON THE SIDE, YOU KNOW, IF THEY, IF THEY SIDE, IF I MAY, CAN WE, CAN I INTERRUPT? YES. SO YOU NEED TO HAVE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER IT IN ORDER TO OPEN UP THIS DISCUSSION. YEAH. THE MOTION'S BEEN MADE ALREADY, BUT YOU NEED TO VOTE ON IT. UH, WE CAN'T HAVE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. THE ONLY DISCUSSION WOULD BE ON THE RECONSIDERATION AT THIS POINT. AND THEN ONCE YOU RECONSIDER, THEN YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE MERITS. GOT IT. SO, UM, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, UH, STAFF PLEASE, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE TO RECONSIDER. MS. KAPLAN. I APPROVE MR. MANCHACA. I APPROVE MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MR. MANO. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I APPROVE MS. LIND. I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES. MR. OZUNA? YES. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR. A MOTION PASSES. UH, WE NEED TO START OFF WITH A MOTION [01:00:01] TO RECONSIDER ITEM ONE. SO IF, IF I, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER ITEM ONE. OKAY. DO WE HAVE TO REREAD THE WHOLE THING? SO YOU ALREADY MADE A, A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. SO NOW YOU JUST NEED A MOTION. MOTION. WHAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING, YOU NEED MOTION. SO YEAH. DO WE HAVE TO READ THE WHOLE THING OR CAN WE JUST, UH, READ THE, THE JUST READ THE MOTION BECAUSE WE UNDERSTAND FROM THE PREVIOUS MOTION WHAT WAS CONSIDERED. YES. OKAY. PLEASE READ THE BEGINNING. I, I WOULD LIKE TO RECONSIDER, UH, CASE NUMBER B A 21 DASH 1 0 3 DASH OH 1 59. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUEST FOR A, UH, A FOUR FOOT 11 VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE, UH, FOOT SIDE AND REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY, DETACHED DWELLING UNIT TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES SITUATED AT 1 1 1 8 SOUTH MESQUITE STREET. OKAY. WHO'S THE SECOND, SECOND. SECOND. BY WHO SAID THAT? COMMISSIONER AMANDA SECOND. SO I WAS GONNA OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THAT. YES. COMMISSIONER MANEZ. SO I WAS, UM, I WAS WONDERING IF YOU WOULD CONSIDER A, UM, UM, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REAR SETBACK, UM, UM, TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. SO, SO TO ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT, 'CAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TWO FOOT PIECE. SO I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. YES. SO, 'CAUSE YOU READ THE MOTION KIND OF AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY READ. YEAH. SO, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND I AGREE WITH YOUR, WITH YOUR FRIENDLY. SO, AND, AND AS COMMENTS. SO I DID NOT STATE ANYTHING ALONG THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, SO I WAS OKAY WITH THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UM, SO, SO WE'LL DELIBERATE ABOUT THAT. SO THAT'S WHAT I WANTED. SO FRIENDLY. SO MAKE THAT POINT IS I MADE IT FOR THE REAR ONLY. SO THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IS FOR A, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE REAR. THE ONE INCH ON THE SIDE, WHICH IS THE NORTH SIDE OF THE LOT, UH, STAYS. SO LET'S START DELIBERATION. OKAY. LET ME ASK YOU THIS. OKAY. NOW, MAYBE THESE PICTURES ARE NOT SHOWING WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING ON THE SITE, RIGHT? AND THAT'S WHY I WANNA CLARIFY WHAT I'M SEEING. IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK, IF YOU LOOK UP HERE AND THEN, UH, YOUR PICTURE, SO WHEN YOU GO INTO THE DRIVEWAY AND YOU, YOU TERMINATE AT THE GARAGE AND THAT THE GARAGE IS THE LOCATION OF, OF THE STRUCTURE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY. YEAH. YEAH. SO TO THE NORTH OF THAT, THERE'S A 10 FOOT DRIVE ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY ON THE NORTH THAT GOES WELL PAST. AND SO STAFF PLEASE BRING UP THE ZONING IMAGE. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORING LOT, HOW IT GOES, IT SPANS THREE LOTS. SO THAT DRIVE GOES WELL PAST THE GARAGE IN QUESTION. UH, WE, WE NEED TO HAVE YOU ON THE MICROPHONE. OKAY. SO IT'S NOT THE COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, CAN YOU PLEASE USE YOUR MICROPHONE? ALRIGHT. IT'S, IT'S LOOKING FROM HERE. OKAY. THAT WAY IT'S NOT LOOKING. DO WE HAVE A PICTURE OF WHAT'S OVER GOING ON HERE? 'CAUSE THAT WOULD BE, I'M SORRY. YEAH, BRING UP GOOGLE MAPS PLEASE. WHAT'S, UH, THAT'S THAT. SO , SO I FIND THIS, THE REAR SETBACK SHOULD BE THREE FEET. THE SIDE IS OKAY. YEAH, THE MICROPHONE PLEASE. THE REAR SETBACK. I THOUGHT WE SAID THREE FEET. YEAH, THE TWO FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE SET, FOR THE REAR STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY. THREE FEET FROM THE REAR. YES. TWO FOOT VARIS. THAT'S THE MOTION, THAT'S THE MOTION THAT'S IN PLACE FOR, THAT'S RIGHT. AND I'M FINE WITH THE SIDE SETBACK BEING AN INTRO, WHATEVER THEY WERE. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT MAY THAT WAS IN, UH, AGAINST THE ORIGINAL READING? WE'D LIKE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS. UH, SIR, PLEASE REPEAT THAT AGAIN. I COULDN'T HEAR. YEAH, SO THE, THE MOTION THAT'S CURRENTLY IN PLACE IS FOR ONE INCH ON THE SIDE, THAT'S THE NORTH SIDE OF THE LOT, WHERE THE NEIGHBOR HAS A DRIVEWAY RUNNING PAST THE, UH, THE STRUCTURE AND THEN FOR A TWO FOOT VARIANCE WITH A THREE FOOT SETBACK THAT WOULD RESULT IN A THREE FOOT SETBACK ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW. AND WE'RE WONDERING IF THAT IS ACCEPTABLE, UH, AS PART OF THIS DISCUSSION. OKAY. IS WOULD ANYBODY BE OPEN TO A THREE FOOT VARIANCE? LOVE TO BE TWO FEET AWAY. I'M JUST ASKING BUT NO MORE THAN THAT. I'M, I'M [01:05:01] OKAY WITH THAT. SO AS, AS A SECOND, UM, I WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, IS THAT ACCEPTABLE TO YOU? TWO FEET INSTEAD OF THREE FEET? WELL, I'M JUST TRYING. IT'S, THEY HAVE SO LITTLE ROOM. I'M JUST TRYING TO SEE WHAT I CAN DO FOR 'EM. OKAY. OKAY. ANYONE, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? ALRIGHT, SO NOW WE HAVE A MOTION. I OFFERED A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WAS ACCEPTED BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN AND COMMISSIONER MANNA, THE MAKER, AND THE SECOND OF THE MOTION SO THAT IT'S ONE INCH ON THE NORTH, THREE FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE TWO FEET ON THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. SO STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ, I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. LIND. I CONCUR. MR. THIEL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, MS. AGUSTI, PLEASE GET WITH STAFF, THEY'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT ALL THIS MEANS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT CASE PLEASE. THEY'RE JUST GETTING COFFEE. OH, OKAY. OKAY, GO AHEAD. OH, I'M SORRY. COMMISSIONER ZUNA LEFT. WE'RE GONNA TAKE A, UH, FIVE MINUTE BREAK. OKAY, IT'S TWO 13. I'M CALLING THE MEETING BACK IN SESSION. UH, ITEM FOUR, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR, BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 5. ADDRESS IS 2023 BABCOCK ROAD CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER EIGHT. APPLICANT IS JOHN ROBINSON. REQUEST FOR A 14 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT REQUIRED TO ALLOW A LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO BE ONE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. CURRENT ZONING IS, UH, COMMERCIAL. SORRY, I'M OUT OF BREATH. I RAN OVER HERE. UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG BABCOCK ROAD AND CURRENTLY IS A VACANT LOT. APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 14 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT REQUIRED, UH, REQUIRED TO ALLOW LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO BE ONE FOOT FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE UPON SITE VISITS. STAFF OBSERVED THAT A SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A VACANT LOT WITH IT ALMOST BEING A HUNDRED PERCENT IMPERVIOUS MATERIAL. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED, UH, AT A VERY BUSY INTERSECTION OF MEDICAL CENTER AND NORTHWEST SAN ANTONIO. UH, THIS IS GONNA BE THE SITE PLAN. SUBJECT PROPERTY. SUBJECT PROPERTY. IT'S THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THERE'S THE LEFT SURROUNDING AREA, SURROUNDING AREA, UH, LANDSCAPE SIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER VARIANCE. UH, STAFF RECOMMEND APPROVAL IN BO O A 21 DASH 103 0 0 1 95 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE. THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN HAS GONE THROUGH PLAN REVIEW AND NO CONCERNS WERE FOUND BY THE TRAFFIC OR THE TREE TEAMS. TWO, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS BEING REQUESTED DUE TO THE SMALL SIZE OF COMMERCIAL LOT AND WILL ONLY AFFECT THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG LEWIS PASTURE DRIVE. THREE OTHER LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS WILL BE MET ALONG BABCOCK ROAD AND FOUR. UM, THE REDESIGN PLAN ALLOWS MORE PERME PERMEABLE COVERAGE THAN CURRENTLY EXIST. THERE WERE 10 NOTICES MAILED OUT. NONE WILL RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE DREAM HILLS ESTATE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JOHN ROBINSON. I'M A, AH, BETTER. I'M JOHN ROBINSON. I'M A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. UH, OUR CLIENT IS DUTCH BROTHERS COFFEE HOUSE, WHICH IS A, UM, YEAH, UH, ADDRESS, PLEASE. OH, I'M SORRY. MY OFFICE ADDRESS IS 14 6 0 7 SAN PEDRO AVENUE, SUITE 200. UM, UH, OUR CLIENT IS A PORTLAND-BASED, UH, UM, COFFEE HOUSE DEVELOPER. UM, THAT, UH, HAS DONE A LOT OF WORK, UH, [01:10:01] UH, NOT JUST HERE IN SAN ANTONIO, BUT STATEWIDE. UM, THEY PURCHASED A, UH, AN EXISTING ABANDONED VALERO GAS STATION, WHICH I BELIEVE HAS SINCE SINCE BEEN DEMOLISHED, AT LEAST SINCE THE MOST RECENT AERIAL PHOTO ROLLING. CAN YOU PULL UP THE AEL PHOTO AGAIN, PLEASE? YOU HAVE THE AERIAL I GOOGLE MAPS. THE PROPERTY WAS AN EXISTING GAS STATION FOR, I, I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED. UH, DEMO WAS NOT IN OUR SCOPE OF WORK. SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT SINCE THE AERIAL PHOTO WAS, UH, WAS TAKEN, OR SINCE THIS IMAGE ON GOOGLE MAPS WAS TAKEN, THE BUILDING HAS BEEN DEMOLISHED. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S VIRTUALLY A HUNDRED PERCENT, UH, IMPERVIOUS, UM, WITH A DRIVEWAY ON LOUIS PASTE AND ESSENTIALLY A LONG DRIVEWAY ALL THE WAY DOWN THE BABCOCK ROAD FRONTAGE THE WAY DEVELOPMENT USED TO BE DONE. UM, UH, OUR CLIENT PURCHASED THE PROPERTY AND HIRED US TO, UM, TO, ALONG WITH THE ENGINEER AND THE ARCHITECT, TO, UM, TO PERMIT THE BUILDING. WE ORIGINALLY HAD, OR THE, THE CIVIL ENGINEER ORIGINALLY HAD ONE DRIVEWAY ON LOUIS PASTEUR AND ONE ON BABCOCK ROAD. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT DURING PLAN REVIEW OR P P R, THE TRAFFIC, UH, DEPARTMENT, UH, REJECTED THAT. UM, UH, AND DIDN'T LIKE THE, UH, THE, THE ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY IN LOUIS PASTE. SO, UM, WE COMPLETELY REDID, OR THE ENGINEER COMPLETELY REDID THE SITE. THEY TURNED THE BUILDING AND CHANGED THE, THE, THE INGRESS EGRESS TO JUST ONE DRIVEWAY ON BABCOCK ROAD. IF ANY OF Y'ALL HAVE EVER BEEN OUT THERE BY THE MEDICAL CENTER, YOU KNOW WHAT THIS INTERSECTION IS LIKE. IT'S A, IT'S A MESS, UM, EVEN ON A GOOD DAY. UM, SO THAT FORCED THE BUILDING TO BE PUSHED TOWARDS LOUIS PASTEUR, WHICH IS THE, THE PLAN LEFT SIDE, UM, AND ENCROACHED ON THE, ON THE REQUIRED BUFFER. LOUIS PASTEUR IS, I GET A LITTLE CONFUSED ON ROAD CLASSIFICATIONS, BUT I WANNA SAY IT'S, UH, UM, UH, IT'S AT LEAST A COLLECTOR. IT'S, IT'S PROBABLY A MINOR ARTERIAL FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF LANDSCAPE BUFFER. IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER. THERE'S A LANDSCAPE BUFFER THAT'S REQUIRED ON BOTH BABCOCK ROAD AND LOUIS PASTE. THE ORIGINAL PLANS PROVIDED BOTH LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, BUT WITH THE REDESIGN, JUST THE, THE, THE ONE DRIVEWAY AND THEN THE LOOP ALL THE WAY AROUND THE BUILDING TO PROVIDE FOR THE DRIVE-THROUGH LANES AND THE, UM, THE CHICKEN LANE TO GET, AR TO GET AROUND WITH THE SHALLOWNESS OF THE, OF THE TRACTOR LAND AND THE O AND ONLY THE ONE DRIVEWAY. WE WERE NOT ABLE TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG LOUIS PASTE. UM, UH, WE KNEW THIS WAS GONNA BE AN ISSUE DURING PLAN REVIEW. SO MY STAFF WORKED WITH, UH, UM, THE ASSISTED CITY ARBORIST ON COMPLYING WITH THE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE AND THE, UH, PROVIDING ALL OF THE REQUIRED BUFFER, UH, PLANT MATERIAL. WE JUST CAN'T PROVIDE THE, THE, THE REQUIRED WIDTH DUE TO THE SHALLOW NATURE OF THE SITE AND THE FACT THAT WE COULD, WE'RE NOT, UH, ABLE TO HAVE A DRIVEWAY ON LOUIS PASTEUR. ALL RIGHT. UH, IF YOU COULD SIT TIGHT FOR ONE SECOND. STAFF, ANYTHING, UH, READING TO THE RECORD? ANY VOICEMAILS? ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? NO, NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. ALL RIGHT. UH, BEFORE WE OPEN THIS UP TO QUESTIONS, I JUST WANTED TO ASK A COUPLE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS, UH, JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMISSION. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU'RE PLANTING ALL THE TREES YOU NORMALLY WOULD HAVE, UH, WHICH COMES UP OFTEN ON THESE AND, UH, ARE YOU GETTING ANY OTHER, UH, LANDSCAPE VARIANCES THAT ARE ADMINISTRATIVE ON THIS PROJECT? WE DID NOT HAVE TO DO ANY OTHER VARIANCES, RIGHT? NO. ALRIGHT. SO WE DID NOT, WITH THAT, I'LL OPEN IT UP THE QUESTION. I'M SORRY. COULD YOU REPEAT WHAT YOU JUST ASKED HIM? UH, I WAS ASKING IF THERE WERE ANY ADMINISTRATIVE LANDSCAPE RELATED VARIANCES AND THE ANSWER WAS NO. AND THE FIRST QUESTION WAS, OH, UH, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT HE'S IN FACT PLANTING THE, THE REQUIRED PLANTINGS. HE JUST DOESN'T HAVE THE, PER THE PERVIOUS COVER THAT WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUFFER. UH, SO IS THERE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE LOOKING FOR A MOTION. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER B O A 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 5. I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUEST FOR A 14 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO BE BE ONE FOOT ALONG THE LOUIS PASTURE DRIVE, SITUATED AT 2 0 2 3 BABCOCK ROAD, APPLICANT B AND JOHN ROBINSON, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE THE, OR THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW A 14 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER SO THAT, UH, IT CAN BE ONE FOOT WIDE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED, WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. BY IMPOSING A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT, THE OWNER WOULD HAVE TO REDESIGN THE PROPERTY, AGAIN, REDUCE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE STRUCTURE TO MEET THIS LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENT, OR POSSIBLY [01:15:01] NOT BE ABLE TO CONTINUE WITH CONSTRUCTION PLANS AS A LIMITED AMOUNT OF AVAILABLE SPACE RESTRICTS THE ABILITY TO FUNCTION AS A BUSINESS. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF BUFFER IS TO ALLOW ADEQUATE PERMEABLE LAND AND PROVIDE SAFE SAFETY FOR BOTH CUSTOMERS AND PEDESTRIANS. THERE IS SUFFICIENT SPACE BETWEEN THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND THE PROPOSED BUSINESS. THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS ARE ALSO BEING MET ALONG BABCOCK ROAD, SO THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE APPEARS TO BE 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 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 THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THIS LANDSCAPE EFFORT DOES NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES. IT DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT SIX APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES 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 P TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SOUGHT DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, IN THAT THE CURRENT LOT IS ALMOST MADE OUT OF A HUNDRED PERCENT IMP PERMEABLE COVER. AND ANY IMPROVEMENT TO INCREASE GREEN SPACE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL. THE OWNER PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH A CURRENT LOT SIZE AND IS REDESIGNED THE DEVELOPMENT TO BE BENEFICIAL TO BOTH THE TRAFFIC AND TREE TEAMS. AND TO MOTION. SAY I SECOND, WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA. UM, YES, I'LL BE, UH, IN VOTING FOR, UH, SUPPORT OF THIS. UM, YOU KNOW, JUST A WHOLE NOTION OF, I THINK THIS IS A, IS A DRASTIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE CURRENT IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE THERE. AND SECOND IS THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE MEETING THE MATERIAL PORTION REQUIREMENT OF THE BUFFER IS JUST THAT THEY DON'T HAPPEN TO HAVE THE SPACE AND IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE TRYING TO OPTIMIZE THE CORNERS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE BEST THEY CAN AS WELL. SO, SO PER THE DESIGN, IT ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE THIS IS APPROPRIATE USE OF THIS PROPERTY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UH, YES, I CONCUR WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT IMPROVEMENT TO THAT AREA, EVEN THOUGH THE PARKING IS AL IS ALWAYS A PROBLEM, BUT I THINK THEY'RE GONNA GO AROUND, UH, SOLVE THAT REAL EASILY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? I'D JUST LIKE TO CLOSE BY SAYING I LOVE TO SEE THEY CRAMMED A WHOLE BUNCH OF NICE PLANTING SHRUBS AND TREES IN THIS OTHERWISE COMPLETELY IMPERVIOUS SLOT. SO I'M IN SUPPORT, UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YE YES, I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAMAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. LIND. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. THIEL. 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. CONGRATULATIONS. UM, NEXT CASE, PLEASE. OH, THAT'S BAD. OKAY. I'M NOT GONNA, CAN'T EVEN SEE THAT. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON. RICHARD BIZ VASQUEZ PLANNER HERE WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BO O A 22 103 0 0 1 8 2. UM, ADDRESS AT SIX NINE WEST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE ON DISTRICT ONE, UH, APPLICANT BEING, UM, MARIO. UM, A REQUEST FOR A 1% VARIES ON THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION, UM, DESIGN STANDARDS REQUIREMENT OF THE 25 MINIMUM OF THE SURFACE AREA OF EACH STORY FROM THE FRONT FACADE SHALL BE DEDICATED TO THE WINDOW COVERING TO ALLOW 24% OF THE SURFACE AREA OF THE FRONT FACADE TO BE TO WINDOW COVERINGS AND TO A TWO FOOT EIGHT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW IN ADDITION TO BE TWO FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UM, THE ZONING IS CURRENTLY OUR FORESTING, UH, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. OKAY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON WEST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE AND IS WITHIN THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT HAS CONSTRUCTED AN ADDITION TO THE REAR OF THE HOME TO COVER THE WA A WATER. HERE. THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED A SURVEY WHICH HA, WHICH SHOWS THE ADDITION OF A TWO FOOT FOUR INCH FROM THE PROPERTY SIDE PROPERTY LINE. ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT HAS RENOVATED, REMOVED SEVERAL WINDOWS ON THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME IN ORDER TO RELOCATE THE FRONT DOOR. AND THE PROPOSED THE FRONT DOOR, THE, THE PROPOSED FRONT DOOR IS TO BE PLACED IN THE AREA WHERE SOME OF THE WINDOWS WERE PREVIOUSLY LOCATED. THE REMOVAL OF THE WINDOWS CAUSED THE PERCENTAGE OF THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED WINDOW COVERINGS OF THE FRONT FACADE TO FALL BELOW THE REQUIRED 25% SURFACE AREA BY 1%. [01:20:03] UH, WE'VE GOT A SITE PLAN RIGHT THERE, UH, THAT'S CURRENTLY THE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHEN STAFF WENT OUT. UM, THE SIDE OF MEAN, THE FACADE OF THE, OF CURRENTLY, EXCUSE ME, WHAT NUMBER IS THIS? WE'RE ON NUMBER FIVE. MM-HMM. , IT'S, IT'S NOT ON THE POWERPOINT. IT IT'S NOT COMING UP AT ALL. 180 2, I APOLOGIZE. I DOWNLOAD THE ATTACHMENTS FROM THE, UH, FROM THE WEBPAGE. UM, SO IF YOU GO TO THE MEETING, UH, THE PRIME, THE PRIME GOV WHERE YOU CAN ACCESS THE AGENDA, THEN YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO DOWNLOAD THE, THE DOCUMENTS THAT WAY. AND THEN THE POWERPOINT WE HAVE UP ON THE OTHER SCREEN, IF YOU WANNA LOOK AT THOSE PICTURES OR IF YOU HAVE YOUR EMAIL UP, IT WILL BE IN YOUR EMAIL. I KNOW. I WAS LIKE, OKAY. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT, THAT ARE HAVING ISSUES FINDING THE RIGHT WEBSITE? IS IT THAT YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO SEE THE WHAT, WHAT'S ON THE POWERPOINT? OKAY. JUST FOLLOW IF YOU CAN'T, YOU SHOULD HAVE, THEY SHOULD BE UP ON YOUR SCREENS ON THE, ON THE SHARED SCREENS? YEAH. OKAY. I LOOKING FOR HERE. OKAY. SO IF WE CAN JUST FOLLOW ALONG ON THOSE MUTUAL SCREENS, THEN WE CAN KEEP GOING BECAUSE THE AGENDA'S NOT GONNA HAVE THE POWERPOINT. THAT'S WHY THE AGENDA'S ONLY GONNA HAVE THE STAFF REPORT. AND, UH, AND THE ATTACHMENTS, AM I CORRECT IN SAYING IT'S, UH, CASE NUMBER ONE ENDING IN 180 2? OKAY. YEAH. YEAH. SO THEN DID EVERYBODY FIND IT? NO. OKAY. THE SHARED SCREEN WILL DO. OKAY. YEAH, IT SHOULD BE ON THE SHARED SCREEN BETWEEN Y'ALL. JUST REAL FAST. ALRIGHT, GO AHEAD, CHAIR. UH, WHERE WAS I? PLEASE CONTINUE. I'M JUST CONTINUE. OKAY. UM, SO THAT'S CURRENTLY THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME RIGHT THERE. UH, THERE'S THE DOOR OF THE FRONT. YEAH, THERE'S THAT WATER HEATER THAT, UM, IS WITH THE SETBACKS, SOME SIDE MEASUREMENTS. OKAY. WE DID THAT ONE ALREADY. THERE'S MORE SIDE MEASUREMENTS. THERE'S A SIDE OF THE HOME RIGHT THERE, A FURTHER BACK VIEW OF THAT. UM, SO THIS IS THE FRONT FACADE IN 2018. SO I ASKED THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE ME ONE OF THE OLD HOW IT USED TO LOOK, AND THE NEXT PICTURE SHOULD BE HOW CURRENT, I MEAN BEFORE RESERVATION AS WELL. AND THEN THE NEXT ONE SHOULD BE THE MOST UP-TO-DATE ONE OF HOW IT IS NOW. SO THAT'S WOULD BE FOR THE, THE UNDER 20, MINIMUM 25% PERCENTAGE. UM, SO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 21 103 0 0 1 0 180 2 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTS. FOR THE SIZE SETBACK VARIANCE, UM, THE STRUCTURE WOULD NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THERE APPEAR TO BE NO, UH, RUNOFF ISSUES AS WELL. AND STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL. AND BO O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 180 2 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTS FOR THE BEACON HILL N T D DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCE, UM, THE VARIANCE IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS. UM, SO THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. SO THERE IS ONE IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION. AND BEACON HILL IS, CAN YOU STATE THE ADDRESSES THAT ARE IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION? THIS IS PLEASE LOOKING THAT UP. UM, STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE CLARIFY THE, THEY'RE ASKING FOR A 1% VARIANCE ON THE 25%, BUT DOES, DOES THIS N C D REQUIRE ANY SPACING REQUIREMENTS OR IS IT SIMPLY JUST A PERCENTAGE? IT'S JUST FOR THE MINIMUM PERCENTAGE REQUIREMENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS IS B 6 31 WEST HOLLYWOOD. IS THAT THE RIGHT ONE? THE ABUTTING NEIGHBOR TO THE, TO THE WEST IS IN OPPOSITION OR APPROVAL. SO THERE'S ONE IN OPPOSITION. OKAY. AND THE ONE THAT WAS APPROVED, AND THERE'S ONE IN, UM, BECAUSE [01:25:01] IT DOESN'T SHOW THERE. I'LL GET BACK TO YOU ON, THAT'S ON MY DESK RIGHT NOW. OKAY. SO HE'LL, HE'LL LET US KNOW HOW THAT TURNED OUT IN A MOMENT. SO IF THAT'S IT, WE CAN BRING THE APPLICANT UP. . HELLO SIR, IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. MY NAME IS MARIO NEROS. I, UH, OWN THE PROPERTY AT 6 2 9 WEST HOLLYWOOD, ALONG WITH MY WIFE CHARLOTTE. I WANNA APOLOGIZE TO THE COMMISSION FOR THAT GLITCH YOU HAD. THAT'S MY FAMILY CURSE. UH, NOTHING IS EVER EASY , AND SO THAT'S WHY THAT HAPPENED. UH, WE MOVED IN, I BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN 1995, AND AS OUR FAMILY GREW, UH, WE HAD BAND-AID MAINTENANCE, JUST KEEPING THE HOUSE INTACT OR TOGETHER AS, AS MUCH AS WE COULD IN, UH, 2020. WE WERE FINANCIALLY ABLE TO START RENOVATIONS. AND SO WENT THROUGH HOME ADVISOR, BOUGHT, GOT, GOT CONTRACTORS THAT WERE LICENSED AND BONDED SO THAT WE WOULD GET EVERYTHING TAKEN CARE OF THE WAY WE'RE SUPPOSED TO. OUT OF THE FOUR CONTRACTORS I GOT, 'CAUSE WE DID THE PLUMBING, THE ELECTRICAL, UM, THE FOUNDATION WORK AND THE SIDING. UH, WE HAD PROBLEMS WITH TWO OF THE CONTRACTORS, THE SIDING AND THE FOUNDATION WORK, EVEN THOUGH, YOU KNOW, ZONING HAD BEEN OUT THERE, ALL THEY DIDN'T PULL THE PERMIT. ZONING SAID HE WORRIED THE PERMITS, EVEN WITH THE FOUNDATION PEOPLE, THESE ARE ESTABLISHED CONTRACTORS. SO, UH, ONCE ALL THAT WAS FINISHED AND PAID OFF, WE ENDED UP HAVING TO, YOU KNOW, BACKTRACK ZONING CAME AND SAYS THIS, THIS HASN'T BEEN UP TO CODE BECAUSE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING COMMISSION AND OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, UM, UH, ASSOCIATION. ASSOCIATION. UH, SO, UM, THE FRONT WE'RE ACTUALLY NOT FINISHED. UH, THE, IF WE WERE, WE'RE GONNA ADD, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS, UH, FRAMED FOR A DOORWAY. MY WIFE HAS, UH, MEDICAL ISSUES THAT SOMETIMES REQUIRE HER TO GO TO THE HOSPITAL THE LAST TIME BECAUSE OF COVID. AND GETTING IN AND OUT OF THAT LITTLE SIDE DOOR WAS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. WE HAD TO WALK HER OUT 'CAUSE THERE WAS NO WAY THE AMBULANCE COULD, THE STRETCHER COULD GET IN. SO EVENTUALLY WE WANTED TO TRANSFORM THAT FRONT DOOR IS TO THE MAIN ENTRANCE, WHICH WOULD HAVE SIDE PANELS FOR LIGHTS. UH, IN ORDER TO MEET THE 25% REQUIREMENT FOR, UH, WINDOWS, WE ACTUALLY ADDED WINDOWS. THOSE TWO PEAKS WERE WINDOWS THAT WE ADDED THAT WERE ACTUALLY VENTS AT ONE TIME. WE MEET 24%, BUT WE COULD ADD A SIDE WINDOW OVER THE BATHROOM TOWARDS THE RIGHT AND THAT WOULD PUT US OVER THE 25 MINIMUM. 25%. SO WHERE YOU SEE THAT SMALL PEAK TO THE RIGHT, UH, THAT'S A BATHROOM. WE COULD ADD ANOTHER WINDOW THERE. AND IT'S THE LASER POINT. OH, I'M SORRY. WHERE'S THAT? SEE, THERE WE GO. SO THIS IS, THIS IS A, UH, A BATHROOM AND WE COULD ADD A TWO BY TWO WINDOW, WHICH WAS PUT OUR PLANS. ANYWAY, THIS RIGHT HERE, THIS LITTLE, UH, SPACE IS ALREADY FRAMED INTERIORLY FOR A DOOR. UM, IF I HAVE A, YOU HAVE A SIDE SHOT OF THIS RIGHT HERE. I TOOK A PICTURE OF THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. YEAH, TECHNICALLY WE ADDED THIS WINDOW AS WELL. SO EVEN THOUGH YOU CAN'T SEE IT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS, UH, UH, WINDOWS ON THE SIDE. AND THIS IS THE, THE ENTRANCE THAT IS A VERY SMALL, SAY, TWO BY TWO, UH, INTERIOR OR WAY INTO, WHICH IS THE, THE, UH, UH, WAY INTO THE HOUSE IN THE SIDE. THAT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO, UM, UH, MANEUVER IN. SO WE'RE NOT FINISHED YET. I MEAN, WE STILL HAVE THE SKIRTING AND ALL THAT. I PLAN TO RETIRE IN JULY OF THIS YEAR, AND HOPEFULLY WITH MY MUSTER OUT PAY, THAT'LL TAKE CARE OF THE REST OF THIS, UH, THE, UM, UH, WATER HEATER IN THE REAR. WE, WE, WE ADDED THAT BECAUSE WE, UH, UM, RESTRUCTURED THE ENTIRE, THIS WAS THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. WE MADE THAT INTO A LAUNDRY ROOM, BUT WE, THE WATER HEATER WAS IN HERE. SO WE MOVED IT OUT, UH, JUST TO GET IT OUT OF THE WAY. UH, IT DOESN'T ENCROACH ON THE PROPERTY LINE. UH, IT JUST, AND, AND THE, UM, THE WATER RUNOFF IS THE SAME BECAUSE WE'RE MAINTAINING THE SAME TYPE OF, OF, UH, ROOF LINE THAT WAS ORIGINALLY THERE. UH, THE NEIGHBOR THAT COMPLAINED AT 6 31 WE'RE ACTUALLY IN A LEGAL PROPERTY LINE DISPUTE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THEY WANT TO PUT UP A FENCE AND WE'RE SAYING THAT YOU'RE TOO CLOSE TO OUR PROPERTY. AND SO SURVEYORS WERE HIRED. AND ACCORDING TO OUR ATTORNEY OR MY ATTORNEY, HE SAYS, THE COURTS DON'T DECIDE PROPERTY LINE DISPUTES, SURVEYORS DO. SO RIGHT NOW, THE SURVEYORS ARE SAYING OUR, THEIR SURVEYORS SAY, THIS IS OUR PROPERTY. AND [01:30:01] WE'RE SAYING, NO, OUR PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY BIGGER, MORE THAN WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. SO, UH, ACCORDING TO OUR SURVEY, THIS IS OUR SUR THIS IS, THIS IS THEIR SURVEY LINE. THEY PUT IN OUR SURVEY SHOWS. THIS IS OUR PROPERTY ACCORDING TO THIS CONCRETE STRIP. AND THIS IS ALWAYS BEEN THERE SINCE WE MOVED IN. AND IT'S ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE THAT YOU CAN SEE HERE. THIS WHOLE CONCRETE STRIP WAS PART OF THE PLANNING. IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE. THE OWNER OF THIS HOUSE IS A, UM, ABSENTEE OWNER. SHE BOUGHT IT IN 97, I BELIEVE, AND THEN MOVED TO CALIFORNIA. SHE LIVED THERE ONE YEAR. SHE'S BEEN RENTING IT OUT EVER SINCE, UH, A YEAR AGO THEY DECIDED TO RENOVATE IT, AND THAT'S WHEN THEY SAID, WELL, WE'RE GONNA PUT A FENCE UP AND WE'RE GONNA PUT IT UP RIGHT HERE. IF YOU CAN SEE, CAN YOU SHOW A PICTURE OF THE REAR WHERE THE MEASUREMENTS ARE? SO ANYWAY, IF A FENCE GOES UP, THIS IS WHERE THE FENCE LINE'S GONNA BE. AND THIS IS OUR HOUSE. I HAVE A, I HAVE A PLUMBING CUT, UH, CLEAN OUT THERE THAT I CANNOT GET TO IF THEY PUT A FENCE UP. UH, I'M GONNA PAUSE YOU FOR ONE SECOND. SORRY. GO AHEAD. STAFF, UH, WE HAVE A, THIS CASE BEFORE US ON THE SIDE SETBACK AT 2.8 FEET. UM, IF, IF A FENCE GETS PUT IN, THAT DOESN'T AFFECT ANY OF THIS, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S ALL BASED ON HIS SURVEY. I MEAN, THEY LOOK LIKE THEY'RE ALMOST A FOOT DIFFERENCE. THAT'S CORRECT. WHAT IF THEY PROVIDED A SURVEY? THAT'S WHAT WE UTILIZE TO PROCEED WITH THE CASE. UM, SO BECAUSE THEY'RE PUTTING IT ON, UH, ON RECORD AND IT'S ALSO, UH, SIGNED AND SEALED BY EITHER A LICENSED SURVEYOR OR A LICENSED ENGINEER. SO THEN IF THE NEIGHBOR GETS ASYLUM AND SEALED SURVEY AND SUBMITS IT TO THE CITY, BECAUSE THAT CONTRADICTS HIS, THAT DOESN'T AFFECT THIS CASE TODAY? NO, IT DOES NOT. OKAY. BECAUSE YOU'RE ONLY GIVING A VARIANCE BASED ON WHATEVER THAT, UH, OUTCOME OF THE PROPERTY LINE IS. OKAY. AND, AND THE NEIGHBOR CAN SUBMIT IT TO THE CITY, BUT WE'RE NOT GONNA RESOLVE THAT FOR THEM. THAT'S A PRIVATE MATTER THAT WOULD BE RESOLVED THROUGH COURT. I JUST, JUST WANNA MAKE SURE RIGHT AT PLEASE CONTINUE, SIR. SURE. SO THE MEASUREMENTS THAT YOU SAW FROM THE, UH, UM, THE INSPECTORS SHOW THEIR ME, THIS IS THEIR, UM, THERE ARE MARKERS. OUR MARKERS ARE, ARE SAY OUR PROPERTY LINE. WE'RE SAYING OUR PROPERTY LINE IS RIGHT HERE THAT EXTENDS ALL THE WAY BACK. SO WE WERE WELL WITHIN OUR, OUR LIMITS, UH, THE REAR OF THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, IT SH IT DOESN'T, DOESN'T SHOW ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE, UH, IN THE STRUCTURE OF THE HOME. IT LOOKS LIKE A CONTINUOUS, LIKE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE, UH, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE GOING AFTER. UM, THE, LIKE I SAID, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ONLY 1%, WHICH WE'RE ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE IN TIME, THAT'S GONNA CHANGE TO WAY ABOVE THE, THE, THE, UH, THE REQUIREMENT. OKAY. THAT THE, THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, WANTS. OKAY. SO THANK YOU. UM, WE'RE GONNA SEE IF THERE'S ANY, UH, IS ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK OR ANYTHING TO READ INTO THE RECORD STAFF? IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? YES, WE HAVE SOME VOICEMAILS TO PLAY. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. GOOD MORNING. SIMA COLVIN, 8 1 7 WEST MAGNOLIA AVENUE, DISTRICT ONE ON BEHALF OF THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. DEAR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS, THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ZONING AND URBAN DESIGN COMMITTEE WAS NOT CONTACTED BY THE APPLICANT AND HAS NOT MET WITH HIM. WHEN WE INITIATED THE CASE WITH 3 1 1, IT WAS BECAUSE WE BELIEVED THAT OUR N C D FIVE WINDOW DESIGN STANDARDS PROHIBITED THE ABANDONMENT OF STREET FACING WINDOWS. IT WAS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT WHERE IT STATES, AND I QUOTE, WHEN REPAIRING, REPLACING ORIGINAL WINDOWS, THE ORIGINAL WINDOW OPENING SIZE AND SHAPE SHALL BE MAINTAINED OR MAY BE ENLARGED, PROHIBITED THE REMOVAL OF EXISTING WINDOWS. IT IS DISAPPOINTING TO KNOW THAT AN EXISTING HOME CAN BASICALLY HAVE HALF OF THE FRONT FACADE WINDOWS REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH SIDING. BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD IS THE CASE BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT STAFF. WHILE IT IS OUR POLICY TO DEFEND OUR N C D FIVE DESIGN STANDARDS AND WHY WE APPRECIATE STAFF SUPPORT OF OUR N C D, WE WILL NOT OPPOSE A VARIANCE REQUEST OF 1%. WE DO OPPOSE THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO THE SI SETBACK REQUIREMENT. THE VARIANCE BEING REQUESTED IS OVER 50% OF THE SETBACK REQUIRED BY CITY CODE. THERE IS GOOD REASON FOR THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT, ESPECIALLY WHERE IT INVOLVES AN ENCLOSURE FOR A WATER HEATER. IT IS ONE THING TO ACCEPT NON-COMPLIANCE STRUCTURES THAT HAVE BEEN IN EXISTENCE FOR DECADES, BUT THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THIS. WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION, THE PERMITTING PROCESS IS IN PLACE TO AVOID EXACTLY THIS TYPE OF INFRINGEMENT AND TO GRANT THE VARIANCE NOT ONLY AFFECTS THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, BUT ALSO ENCOURAGES OTHERS TO SKIP THE PART ABOUT GETTING PERMISSION AND JUST ASK FOR FORGIVENESS. WE KNOW THAT IT IS HARD TO DENY A REQUEST WHEN A STRUCTURE IS ALREADY IN PLACE. AND WE KNOW THAT THE FACT THAT THE EXISTING HOME IS ALREADY NON-COMPLIANT RELATIVE TO [01:35:01] THE SETBACK MAKES THAT CHOICE EVEN MORE DIFFICULT. BUT IT IS THE JOB OF THIS BOARD TO MAKE THAT ASSESSMENT AND DETERMINATION. AND WE BELIEVE THAT ANY HARDSHIP THE APPLICANT IS CLAIMING IS SELF-INFLICTED. SINCERELY, DANIEL HUBING, BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS JENNIFER DEGRAFF. I'M CALLING FOR 6 31 WEST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE IN SAN ANTONIO. MY NUMBER IS 5 1 0 5 2 1 5 5 9 4. AND THIS IS REGARDING THE CASE FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NUMBER 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 1 8 2. I'M READING INTO THE RECORD THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE ALREADY SUBMITTED IN WRITING. IN 2019, WHEN I STARTED THE PROCESS TO REHABILITATE MY HOME NEXT DOOR AT 6 31 WEST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE, THE NEROS MADE SURE THAT I WAS AWARE OF THE N C D DESIGN GUIDELINES IN OCTOBER. I ALSO PROVIDED THEM WITH MY SURVEY SHOWING THE PROXIMITY OF THEIR HOUSE TO THE BOUNDARY. THIS WAS BEFORE THEY BEGAN THE REMODELING OF THEIR OWN HOME. THEY HAVE CHOSEN NOT TO FOLLOW THE VERY RULES THEY TOLD ME ABOUT WITH REGARD TO THE WINDOWS. THEIR RECONFIGURED FRONT FACADE IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE INTENT OF THE N C D DESIGN GUIDELINES TO REINFORCE THE CHARACTER AND CONSISTENCY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE GUIDELINES ARE NOT MEANT TO CONSTRICT CHANGE ENTIRELY, BUT BECAUSE THIS HOMEOWNER PERFORMED THIS WORK WITHOUT PERMITS, AND WHILE KNOWINGLY NEGLECTING TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES, I OBJECT TO ALLOWING THEM LEEWAY IN FAILING TO MEET THE MINIMUM OPENING REQUIREMENT. WITH REGARD TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, THE NEROS WERE AWARE FROM MY 2019 SURVEY THAT THEIR HOME WAS CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE THAN THEY THOUGHT I AM IN THE PROCESS OF SUING THE NEROS OVER THE LOCATION OF THIS PROPERTY LINE. THE DIFFERENCE IN OUR, IN OUR SURVEYS IS SIGNIFICANT. THE HOME AT 6 29 IS AT AN ANGLE WEDGING THEIR NEW ADDITIONS CLOSER THAN THE ORIGINAL REAR CORNER. BEFORE THEY ADDED THE LAUNDRY ROOM AND WATER HEATER CLOSET. MY SURVEY SHOWED NINE INCHES OF SPACE AT THE PREVIOUS REAR CORNER. THE NEW REAR CORNER IS NOW APPROXIMATELY SIX INCHES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. ACCORDING TO MY SURVEY, I BELIEVE MY SURVEY TO BE MORE ACCURATE FOR MANY REASONS, THE MAIN ONES BEING THAT THEIR SURVEY FAILS TO MEASURE FROM COUNTY PERMANENT MONUMENTS AS A STARTING POINT AND IT FAILS TO MAINTAIN A 90 DEGREE ANGLE TO THE STREET. AS ADVISED, I SENT PROOF OF THE FILING OF MY LAWSUIT AGAINST SCENARIOS. I UNDERSTAND THAT SMALL DISCREPANCIES CAN BE ADJUSTED LATER, BUT I ARGUE THAT THIS VARIANCE IS FAR FROM WHAT THEY ACTUALLY NEED TO GET BE FORGIVEN FOR THE NEW CONSTRUCTION. I APPRECIATE THAT THE VARIANCE PROCESS IS A USEFUL TOOL TO RELIEVE UNDUE HARDSHIPS. I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE NEROS NOT BE AFFORDED THEIR DESIRED OUTCOME. THE NEROS KNEW THAT THESE RULES WERE IN PLACE AND OUR REQUEST, SORRY, WE WE'RE ONLY SUPPOSED TO RUN 'EM UP TO THREE MINUTES. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE, UH, ANY ANY OTHER VOICES? THIS CONCLUDES VOICE, SIR. THAT CONCLUDES THE VOICEMAIL. OKAY. OKAY. BEFORE WE, UH, BRING THE APPLICANT BACK UP, I HAVE A, UM, I JUST HAVE TO CLARIFY A COUPLE THINGS. UM, BEFORE WE ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT, HE HAD MADE MENTION THAT THERE WAS A, A SMALL WINDOW ON THE SIDE IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. DOES THAT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS PERCENTAGE CALCULATION BECAUSE IT IS NOT FACING THE STREET? THAT'S CORRECT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO DO WITH THE PERCENTAGE CALCULATION. IT'S ONLY THE FRONT FACADE THAT'S PARALLEL TO THE STREET. AND, AND A DOOR THAT IS ADDED, IS THAT EXCLUDED FROM THE, FROM THE, UH, CALCULATION? IS THAT CONSIDERED PART OF THE FRONT FACADE OR IF THERE'S A WINDOW OR, OR A SIDELIGHT ON THE DOOR, DOES THAT COUNT? SO IT'S WINDOWS WITH THE TWO TO ONE RATIO. OKAY. SO IF YOU WERE TO PUT A DOOR IN, I'M JUST SAYING THAT IT STILL, THE GROSS AREA OF THE FRONTAGE OF THE HOME OR IS THAT EXCLUDED FROM THE GROSS AREA WHEN YOU MAKE THAT PERCENTAGE CALCULATION? IT'S THE GROSS AREA. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. UH, SIR, IF YOU CAN COME BACK UP, UH, WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. OH, YES. UM, DANIEL, YOU HAD, OH, I'M SORRY. UH, IT WAS, CAN YOU STATE WHO WAS IN FAVOR? THERE WAS ONE IN FAVOR. WE KNOW WHO'S AGAINST THE, THE OPPOSITION WAS AT 6 31 AND THE ONE IN FAVOR WAS AT 6 36. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WEST ROSEWOOD? YES, SIR. SO WHO'D LIKE TO GO FIRST? COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, SO I GUESS THE FIRST QUESTION, THIS IS, UM, UM, MAYBE FOR [01:40:01] THE CITY, UM, IF, IF WE, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THAT, UH, THEY'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING IN MORE WINDOWS, UM, ON THE FRONT FACADE AS PART OF THEIR DESIGN, IF WE DO NOT SUPPORT THAT PART OF THE AMENDMENT, DOES THAT MEAN THAT, YOU KNOW, HE'S EXPECTED TO DO THAT, THEN HE'S, HE'LL HAVE TO BE COMPLIANT THEN FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, IF THE VARIANCE DOESN'T PASS TODAY, HE'LL HAVE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE AND ADD THAT 1%. OKAY. SO, UM, THANK YOU. OH YEAH, THE SECOND QUESTION. OKAY, SO THE SECOND QUESTION IS, UH, THERE'S DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO I GUESS A SIDE SETBACK AND I GUESS THERE'S A, AN OUTCROPPING FOR, I DUNNO IF IT'S A WATER HEATER OR, YES. SO, SO, UM, WHAT'S THE ABILITY TO MOVE THAT TO ANOTHER, UH, LOCATION ON THE HOUSE? SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE VERY, CAN YOU SHOW THE BACK OF THE HOUSE? UH, SO IN ORDER TO REBUT EVERYTHING SHE SAYS, WE DIDN'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, WE HIRED CONTRACTORS SO THAT THEY WOULD FIND THIS OUT. AND SO THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION NEVER CONTACTED US, NEVER SAID WE HAD TO GO BEFORE THE BOARD. WE DIDN'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, SO WE WERE HOPING TO HANDLE THIS ALL THE WAY WE'RE SUPPOSED TO, AND WE ENDED UP WITH THIS MESS. UH, IF YOU NOTICE THEY WANT IT FIVE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, THAT, THAT MEANS PUTTING IT AS A INDEPENDENT BUILDING SOMEWHERE. I MEAN, I CANNOT EVEN ATTACH IT TO THE HOUSE BECAUSE THERE'S, MY PORCH IS RIGHT THERE. FIVE FEET WOULD PUT IT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT WALL WHERE THAT DOOR IS. AND THAT MEANS RESTRUCTURING ALL THE PLUMBING, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE PLUMBING IS GOING, I HAD THE PLUMBING REDONE IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THAT, UM, THAT WATER HEATER AND THE ROOF AND THE VENTS AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. SO, UH, AS FAR AS THE UM, THE SIDE SETBACK, YOU KNOW, SHE'S SAYING, WELL, WE MOVED CLOSER TO HER PROPERTY LAND. WE DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I HAVE TWO SURVEYS SHOWING THAT MY ORIGINAL SURVEY IN 94 MATCHES UP WITH MY SURVEY THAT I TOOK IN 2021. AND THEY'RE SAYING THEY FOUND ALL FOUR PINS. IN FACT, MY ATTORNEY, SHE IS RIDING ONE ASPECT. THE, THE PROPERTY LIGHTS ARE NOT SQUARE, BUT THEY'RE SAYING THAT WE HAVE A 50 FOOT FRONT. WE DON'T, WE HAVE A 51 FOOT FRONT AND FROM THE SOUTHEAST PIN, 51 FEET TAKES US ONTO THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT CONCRETE, UH, STRIP THAT WE SHOWED, WHICH WAS ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED OUR PROPERTY. YOU TAKE THAT CONCRETE STRIP AND IT GOES DIRECTLY IN, IN LINE WITH THE PIN THAT'S SET IN THE BACK IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER. SO THIS IS WHAT WE'RE IN, IN, IN, IN, UH, IN, IN A LEGAL MESS ABOUT, OKAY, YOU KNOW, SHE'S SAYING THIS, SHE'S SAYING WE'RE ENCROACHING, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING THE, SO, SO ACTUALLY THAT BRINGS ANOTHER QUESTION HERE IF I COULD, UH, PLEASE. SORRY. UM, SO, SO, SO WAS THERE, SO WHAT PART OF, OF, UM, THE HOUSE WAS ADDED TO FROM THE INITIAL, UM, FROM THE INITIAL HOUSE? SO, SO WHAT PART IS THIS BEEN ADDED? JUST A WATER HEATER THAT, THAT LITTLE, THAT WATER HEATER. JUST THAT WATER HEATER. SO JUST THAT SMALL GREEN SECTION IS THE ONLY PIECE THAT'S BEEN ADDED TO THE PROPERTY THAT'S, UM, RIGHT THERE FROM THE ORIGINAL DESIGN. SO YOU DIDN'T CHANGE, SO THE SIDING DIDN'T EXTEND OUT ANY FURTHER? NO. YOU'RE ON THE SAME PYRAMID BEAM, SO, OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER, BANG. UM, A QUESTION, YOU SAID YOU HAVE TWO SURVEYS. ONE FROM WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE PROPERTY AND THEN A NEW ONE? YES. IN 2021? YES. WERE THEY BOTH DONE BY THE SAME SURVEYING COMPANY? NO, THE, THE ORIGINAL SURVEYOR, MR. FISHER WENT OUT OF, UH, HE RETIRED AND THEN WE HAD, UM, DO YOU REMEMBER THE NAME OF THE SURVEY? UH, G, GE AND GE AND C I BELIEVE IT'S A OH C E C OR GE REEVES. GE REEVES. THAT'S IT. GE REEVES. OKAY. SO THEY WERE SEPARATE COMPANIES. SO SEPARATE COMPANIES. GREAT, THANK YOU. YES. AND THEY CONCURRED WITH EACH OTHER. OKAY. UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. UM, THE, THE, THE VARIANCE REGARDING THE SITE SETBACK THAT'S BEFORE US, IS THAT ONLY, IS THAT FOR THE, ARE YOU TRYING TO GET THE ENTIRE HOUSE IN THERE OR ARE WE JUST READING THIS SOLELY FOR THE WATER HEATER? REMEMBER WHAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING IS WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO YOU. HE'S JUST TRYING TO BRING INTO COMPLIANCE WHAT IS ENCROACHING. SO LITERALLY THE ONLY THING THAT IS ENCROACHING IS THAT WATER HEATER. OKAY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. 'CAUSE WHEN I READ THE MOTION, IT, IT, IT DOESN'T SPECIFY TWO OR THREE FEET. IT DOESN'T SPECIFY A WATER HEATER. IT KIND OF IMPLIES THE ENTIRE SIDE. THAT'S WHY I WAS WONDERING THE, THE VARIANCES FOR THE ENTIRE SIDE, BUT IT'S BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT'S PRESENTED TO YOU TODAY. OKAY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR THAT IF IF THE, IF THE SITE SET BACK WERE TO PASS, IT'S NOT GIVING HIM A VARIANCE FOR THE ENTIRE EXISTING HOME. IT'S ONLY JUST FOR THE SMALL WATER HEATER. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? NO. COMMISSIONER ALBERT QUESTION FOR STAFF. N C D IS KIND OF AN ODD BIRD, UH, SIMILAR TO AN H D R C, BUT WHAT WOULD BE THE NORMAL PATH OF APPROVAL, SAY FOR THE FENESTRATION CHANGES FOR AN N C D VERSUS A HISTORIC DISTRICT? UH, NCDS IS JUST AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL PROCESS. UH, IF HE MET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS BY, YOU KNOW, MEETING THAT, UH, MINIMUM REQUIREMENT BY THAT 1%, UH, HE WOULD BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY AND THE, THE PERMIT AND INSPECTION ISSUED AND WHO'S THE APPROVAL AUTHORITY, UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS. OKAY. AND YOU WOULD NORMALLY CATCH IT WHEN HE WAS IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS? CORRECT. AND, AND AS FOR THE, THE PART, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT [01:45:01] MENTIONED THAT THE, UH, THE N C D STATES THAT THE FENESTRATION SHOULDN'T BE CHANGED A LOT AND THAT THE FRONT FACADE SHOULD REMAIN THE SAME TO THE PUBLIC VIEW. IS THAT AN ENFORCEABLE PART OF THE NCDS OR JUST THE 25%? SO IT, IT, IT IS THE DESIRE OF THE, OF THE COMMUNITY TO, UH, LOCK IN WHAT'S ALREADY THERE. AND SO THERE'S, THERE'S TWO PROVISIONS. THERE'S PROVISIONS FOR, UH, WHEN THEY ARE REPLACING A WINDOW WITH A NEW WINDOW AND THEY WOULD LIKE FOR THAT PERCENTAGE TO REMAIN THE SAME. SO IF IT EXCEEDS THE, THE REQUIREMENT, THEY WANNA KEEP IT. UM, BUT WHICH MEANS THEY CAN'T DECREASE THAT SIZE. BUT IN THIS CASE, HE WASN'T JUST REPLACING IT ONE FOR ONE, HE WAS DOING A FULL FRONT FACADE RENO. UH, SO IT'S TREATED AS THE NEW CONSTRUCTION AND THEY HAVE, UH, A REQUIREMENT FOR THE NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT HAS THAT MINIMUM PERCENTAGE. UH, AND SO THAT'S WHY THAT PROVISION APPLIES. BUT THE PROVISIONS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO LOCK IN FOREVER WHAT WAS BUILT ON THE GROUND. IT'S JUST THAT IF YOU'RE TAKING OUT A WINDOW, THEN YOU NEED TO REPLACE, KEEP THE SAME PERCENTAGE THAT YOU HAD OR, UM, OR INCREASE IT, BUT NOT DECREASE IT. BUT IN THIS CASE, THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT WHAT, WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE. AND DO WE KNOW WHAT THE PERCENT DECREASE WAS? 1%. SO AGAIN, HE WASN'T REPLACING, SO WE WEREN'T ASKING FOR THAT, UH, PERCENTAGE. WHAT HE WAS DOING WAS HE'S DOING NEW CONSTRUCTION ON THE FACADE. HE HAS TO MEET THE NEW MINIMUM. HE'S LESS BY 1%. RIGHT. RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND. I WAS JUST CURIOUS TO, WAS HE AT LIKE 55% AND WENT DOWN TO 24% AND WE, WE DIDN'T ASK FOR THAT PERCENTAGE. 'CAUSE THAT PROVISION DIDN'T APPLY. ANY, ANY IDEA SIR, WHAT? WELL, I MEAN THEY ASKED ME FOR MEASUREMENTS OF THE FRONT AND UH, YOU KNOW, I GAVE THEM THE, THE MEASUREMENTS OF THE WINDOWS AND WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE. AND IT COMES OUT TO, YOU KNOW, WE WERE 1% SHORT OUT OF THE, OUT OF THE, I I DON'T REMEMBER THE FRONT, THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE FRONT, BUT IT, IT CAME OUT TO, UH, 89% AS OPPOSED TO 9% ASKING. HE'S ASKING WHAT IT WAS BEFORE YOU DID ANYTHING. WHAT PERCENTAGE WERE, OH, I HAVE NO IDEA. I MEAN, CAN YOU BRING UP THE OLD ONES? THE OLD WINDOWS WERE ROTTEN AND THEY WERE SINGLE PANED AND THEY WERE LITERALLY FALLING APART. OKAY. THEY WERE, THE WHOLE HOUSE WAS BOWING BECAUSE OF THE FOUNDATION. SO THAT'S WHAT THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS LOOKED LIKE. AND THEY WERE, I COULDN'T OPEN THEM. I MEAN THEY, THEY WERE INOPERABLE. NO, THAT'S, WE, WE WERE JUST QUESTION. YEAH. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE, THE PERCENTAGE WAS OF THE FRONT. YES SIR. YEAH. COMMISSIONER ALBERT ANYMORE. ANY MORE? ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OKAY, SO I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. STAFF, IF HE, IF HE INSTALLS A NEW DOOR, UH, AND PUTS GLAZING ON IT, DOES THAT COUNT TOWARDS A PERCENTAGE? WE WERE ALSO PLANNING ON PUTTING, HOLD ON, HOLD ON. OH, SORRY. SO THE CODE IS TALKS ABOUT WINDOW COVERINGS, SO THE DOOR DOESN'T, UH, QUALIFY TOWARDS THAT. IF HE HAS WINDOWS ADJACENT TO IT, THOSE WOULD, UM, THOSE WOULD QUALIFY. OKAY. AND WHERE, WHERE IS THIS APPLICANT ON THE PERMITTING PROCESS? IS HE HE WAS CITED. DID HE SUBMIT AND IT WAS REVIEWED AND IT'S IN DENIAL RIGHT NOW? IT UNTIL THIS, IT GETS RESOLVED. OKAY. SO WHAT I'M CURIOUS IS, IS THAT USUALLY A PERMIT HAS A SIX MONTH DORMANCY SHELF LIFE, CORRECT? TYPICALLY, YES, BUT WE RENEW IT IF THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS. THE REASON WHY I ASK IS, UM, IF HE IS GOING TO ADD A WINDOW, LIKE HE MENTIONED, COULDN'T HE JUST KEEP THE PERMIT OPEN IF HE'S GONNA ADD IT IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS? I THINK YOU'D MENTIONED JULY AND THEN YOU COULD GO OUT THERE, INSPECT IT, AND THEN HE MAY NOT EVEN NEED TO COME BEFORE US. IS THAT A TRUE STATEMENT? YES, BUT WE WANT TO, BUT SIX MONTHS IS A WAYS AWAY AND WE NEED TO CLOSE OUT THESE PERMITS AND WE NEED TO CLOSE OUT OUR INSPECTIONS. SO ARE, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL WORK THAT IS SUBJUGATED TO THE PERMIT THAT YOU HAVE UNDER APPLICATION AT THIS TIME OR ARE YOU DONE WITH WHAT YOU NO, I DON'T. OKAY. SO I JUST, JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMISSION, I WANTED TO JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL CLEAR ABOUT WHAT HIS INTENT TO DO MAY BE IN THE FUTURE, UH, AND, AND WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE? UH, COMMIT MANNER, BUT, SO, SO YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE MY POINT. IF WE LEAVE IT OFF, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO COMPLY, WHICH HE'S ALREADY SAID HE'S GONNA DO ANYWAYS. AND SO IF WE DON'T READ THAT AS PART OF THE MOTION, THEN THAT PART BECOMES MANDATED. SO DOES THAT CHANGE ANY TIMELINES FOR DAYS TO DO SO? SO STAFF, IF HE APPLIES FOR ANOTHER APPLICATION, BILLING FIRM APPLICATION TO INSTALL A WINDOW, LIKE HE HAD MENTIONED IN HIS APPLICATION, DOES HE STILL HAVE TO MEET THE 25% BURDEN FOR THE TOTAL FACADE OR IS THERE ANOTHER CODE THAT KICKS IN? NO, THE, UH, THE WINDOW REQUIREMENT IS ONLY APPLICABLE TO THE, TO NCDS. IF, IF THIS, IF THEY CREATE THEIR N C D WITH THAT. SO THERE'S NO OTHER, UH, CODE REQUIREMENT THAT REQUIRES THAT CERTAIN PERCENT? NO, I MEAN HE, IT'S, HE WAS SUBJECT TO THE 25% 'CAUSE HE REPLACED THE WHOLE FACADE. ONCE HE CLOSES HIS PERMIT OUT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, WHETHER WE APPROVE IT OR WHETHER HE, HE, HE WOULD JUST BE FORCED TO PUT THE WINDOW IN IMMEDIATELY INSTEAD OF WAITING. 'CAUSE THE PERMIT DOES HAVE A SHELF LIFE. BUT WHAT I'M WONDERING IS, IS IF HE ADDS A, A WINDOW SIX MONTHS FROM NOW, HIS PERMIT'S CLOSED FOR WHATEVER REASON, IF HE, HE CAN'T CLOSE THIS PERMIT UNTIL THIS, HE CANNOT UNTIL [01:50:01] WE, WE DECIDE IT. SO EVEN IF WE VOTE NO, HE'S IN VIOLATION AND THEN IF HE GOES IN AND PUTS THE WINDOW IN, HE'D BE IN VIOLATION UNTIL THE WINDOW IS PUT IN, CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. AND HOW LONG DOES HE HAVE TO DO TO DO THAT TASK BEFORE HE COULD BE FINED OR SOMETHING? WELL, HE CAN BE FINED EVERY DAY. AHA. SO, OKAY, SO THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE THIS BOARD. SO, UH, I JUST WANTED TO SAY, UH, YES MA'AM. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND, AND, AND ADDRESS AND YOU CAN. CHARLOTTE RIO AT 6 2 9 WEST HOLLYWOOD. HE'S MY HUSBAND. CAN YOU PUT THE MIC DOWN A LITTLE BIT? UH, MOVE THE MICROPHONE DOWN A LITTLE. OKAY. NO, THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT NOT ONLY ARE WE GONNA BE ADDING A DOOR, BUT WE'RE GONNA BE PUTTING TWO WINDOWS ON EACH SIDE. THE ONLY REASON WE HAVEN'T PUT THE DOOR IN YET IS BECAUSE MY CHILDREN SLEEP IN THAT ROOM. SO I DON'T WANT ANYBODY KNOCKING ON THAT DOOR BECAUSE IT'S, UH, IT WOULDN'T BE, I WOULDN'T CONSIDER IT BEING SAFE. I STILL HAVE CHILDREN IN MY HOME. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YEAH, THANK YOU. SO MANNA, ASK COMMISSIONER ANOTHER QUESTION. SO IN THE PAST WE'VE HAD DIALOGUES LIKE GUTTERS AND ET CETERA FROM THE APPLICANT AMENDING THEIR, THEIR, UM, UM, UM, CASE TO INCLUDE THINGS AND SO, SO COULD THEY AMEND THIS APPLICATION SUCH THAT DOES NO, BECAUSE IF HE ADDS ANYTHING, HE DOESN'T NEED TO BE HERE. I KNOW, BUT WHAT I HEARD IS HE'S IN, HE'S IN VIOLATION RIGHT NOW AND, AND COULD BE FINED EVERY DAY. BUT, UM, AND SO UNLESS WE PASS IT, HE WAS BASICALLY IN VIOLATION, BUT RIGHT. BUT THE QUESTION IS IF THERE WAS, IF THE APPLICATION WAS AMENDED SUCH THAT IT WAS GOING TO INCLUDE THE WINDOWS, THEN YOU'LL BABY THAT SATISFIED SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE MAY HAVE. SO CAN THAT BE DONE? SO, RIGHT. SO ONE QUESTION IS, IF WE PASS THIS AND HE, HE'S CLEAR SIX FROM SIX MONTHS FROM NOW, IF HE APPLIES FOR A BUILDING PERMIT TO ADD ANOTHER WINDOW, HE CAN DO IT, IT SHOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM AT ALL. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND HE WOULD EXCEED THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE ALL KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER, DOES THAT THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? NO. SO WHAT I HEARD IS THAT YOU, SO IF WE SAY NO, HE'S IN VIOLATION. OKAY. IF WE SAY YES, THEN HE DOESN'T HAVE TO ADD ANYTHING. HE'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO IF WE, SO, SO I GUESS MY CONCERN IS ONE, TO ENSURE THAT SOMETHING'S GONNA BE ADDED AND SO CAN THE AMEND, CAN THE MOTION OR CAN THE APPLICATION BE AMENDED SO THAT HE COMMITS THAT HE'S GONNA BE ADDING SO WE NOTICE, YOU KNOW, IT'S GONNA BE FOLLOWED UP. THERE WOULDN'T, NO, THERE CAN'T BE. SO THE CHAIR'S CORRECT. IF HE AMENDS THE APPLICATION, THERE'S NO NEED TO BE HERE FOR THE PERCENTAGE. SO, UM, 'CAUSE HE WOULD, HE WOULD IN FACT MEET IT. I DON'T KNOW IF OF GIVING A PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT 1% EQUALS IN SQUARE FOOTAGE BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S NOTICEABLE TO THE NAKED EYE. SO WHAT I WOULD, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS FOR THOSE ON THE COMMISSION, IF, IF YOU WANNA MAKE HIM PUT A WINDOW IN RIGHT NOW, VOTE, YOU KNOW, VOTE AGAINST IT IF YOU WANT. THAT'S, GIVE HIM SOME TIME TO PUT IT IN, DON'T, YOU KNOW, VOTE, VOTE FOR IT. SO WITH THAT, UH, ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 1 8 2, I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR A 1% VARIANCE FROM THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DESIGN STANDARD REQUIREMENTS OF A 25% MINIMUM OF THE SURFACE AREA OF EACH STORY OF THE FRONT FACADE SHALL BE DEDICATED TO WINDOW COVERINGS TO ALLOW 24% OF THE SURFACE AREA OF THE FRONT FACADE TO BE WINDOW COVERINGS AND TO A TWO FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO BE TWO FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. ADDITION BEING, UH, THE, UM, UM, UH, THE ROOM FOR THE WATER HEATER, UM, SITUATED AT 6 29 WEST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING MARIO NIRO. 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 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 A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC THROUGH, UH, THE REQUEST VARIANCE FROM THE N C D STANDARDS AND THE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE DO NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO 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 UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE LED THE APPLICANT TO FOLLOW THE EXISTING LINE TO COVER THE WATER HEATER IN THE REAR YARD. THE RELOCATION OF THE FRONT DOOR HAS LED TO THE REMOVAL OF THE WINDOWS AND THE REQUEST IS ONLY FOR 1% LESS THAN THE REQUIREMENT. UH, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED, UM, 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 REQUESTED VARIANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO OBSERVE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE DO APPEAR TO OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE OF THE BEACON HILL N C D DESIGN STANDARDS AND THE SIDE SETBACK FOR 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 [01:55:01] 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 THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, NOR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, THE EXISTING HOME. HAD THE WATER HEATER EXPOSED AND ENCLOSURE ALLOWS THE SIDE, UH, FOLLOWS THE SIDE OF THE HOME. SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES 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 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, SUCH AS THE PLACEMENT OF THE EXISTING DWELLING, NOT CONFORMING TO THE CURRENT SIDE SETBACK CODE AND IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS. UM, YOU KNOW, I I, THE, THE LINE OF THE, THE HOME HASN'T CHANGED, UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE ORIGINAL, UH, STRUCTURE, UH, NOTHING WAS ADDED OUTSIDE OF THAT. UM, AND THEN AS FAR AS THE, UH, THE WINDOWS, YOU KNOW, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I'VE BEEN CONVINCED ENOUGH THAT THAT'LL BE RESOLVED AND SO, SO IT'S REALLY NOT AN ISSUE. SO, SO I'LL BE VOTING IN PAPER. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH, I AGREE. ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE TESTIMONY THAT YOU'LL BE ADDING THE DOOR AND THE SIDELIGHTS AND I THINK YOU'VE MADE A VERY, UH, SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT IN THE FACADE. SO I THINK IT'S A, A NICE PROJECT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD IN TE COMMISSIONER TE I MEAN IN SUPPORT AS WELL? UM, THE, THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SAID THEY WOULDN'T OPPOSE SOMETHING FOR A 1% VARIANCE AT ALL. SO I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. UH, 'CAUSE IT'S A TOUGH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO GET SUPPORT AT ALL. SO I, I TOO WILL BE IN SUPPORT. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, I'M GONNA JUST ADD IN THAT I LIKE THE FACT THAT THE DOOR'S ALREADY PRE-FRAMED OUT, SO IT'S NOT, I, I HAVE FULL FAITH THAT SOMETHING'S GONNA GO IN THERE WITH A SIDE LIGHT OR SOME ADDITIONAL, UH, OPENING OR GLAZES WITH THAT STAFF. PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. MENNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I GUESS I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR THE FINDING OF FACTS. MS. LYNN? I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES NINE TO TWO. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF, THEY'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE OF WHAT TO DO MOVING FORWARD, UH, WITH THAT NEXT CASE PLEASE. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX IS, UH, BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 8. ADDRESS IS 1 1 7 RAYMOND CITY COUNCIL. DISTRICT NUMBER ONE APPLICANT IS GONNA BE ADAM GATES. UH, REQUEST FOR A, UH, 15 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM AND 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FOOT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND TO A 3,119 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 6,000 SQUARE FEET REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A 2,881 SQUARE FOOT LOT. CURRENT ZONING IS A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY SUBJECT. PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG RAYMOND STREET AND CURRENTLY, UH, IS A VACANT LOT. APPLICANT IS REQUESTING ONE A 15 FOOT VARIANCE TO THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET, UH, FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND TO A 3,119 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 6,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT ON A VACANT LOT OF 2,881 SQUARE FEET UPON SITE VISITS. STAFF OBSERVED THAT THERE ARE OTHER SIMILAR LOTS WITH RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES BUILT ON THEM. THE LOTS ARE NOT IN THEIR ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION. THIS IS THE, UH, COPY OF THE, OF THE SITE PLAN. THIS IS ACTUALLY A THREE DIMENSIONAL, UH, FIGURE OF THE SITE PLAN. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS VACANT LOT. THE CONCRETE SLAB ON IT, LEFT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE, RIGHT SIDE, AND THEN SURROUNDING AREA, UH, MINIMUM LOTS SIZE AND REAR SETBACK VARIANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO O A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE THE CURRENT SIZE OF THE LOT IS 2,881 SQUARE FEET. TWO. LIMITED SIZE AND UNIQUE SHAPE OF THE LOT PROVIDED AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOT. THREE, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL ABIDE BY THE REQUIRED FRONT AND SETBACK FRONT, FRONT AND SIDE SETBACKS. AND FOUR, [02:00:01] THERE WERE OTHER NONCONFORMING LOT SIZES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA WITH SIMILAR REAR SETBACKS. SO THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR, DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE, UH, APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THERE WERE 36 NOTICES, UH, MAILED OUT. ZERO RETURN IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND COLIN GARDEN'S. COLIN GARDEN'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL. UH, THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? NO, THERE'S NO ONE SIGNED UP. ALRIGHT. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. CURRENT ADDRESS. DO YOU EVER ADDRESS YOU LIKE, UH, SURE. MY NAME'S ADAM GATES. MY CURRENT ADDRESS IS 3 4 6 HALLADAY AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 0. UH, I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO PRESENT. I THINK IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD OTHER THAN THE ONLY FACT I'LL ADD IS THE INTENT OF THIS REQUEST IS TO MATCH THE, UH, SETBACKS AND LOT SIZE FOR AN R TWO LOT. UH, CURRENT LOT IS ZONED R SIX, WHICH COMES WITH THE, UM, 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK AND A, UH, 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK AND A 6,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM. UH, MY LOT IS HALF THAT SIZE. IT MATCHES THE, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR AN R TWO LOT. AND SO THE, SO BOTH OF THESE VARIANCES ARE ESSENTIALLY TO UH, JUST MATCH WHAT'S IN PLACE FOR AN R TWO LOT. ALRIGHT. OH, AND I'LL OBVIOUSLY THE, THE SITE PLAN, THAT THREE D VIEW STUFF, THAT'S ALL JUST A CONCEPT I'M PLAYING WITH THAT IS AN EMPTY LOT. SO THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT THERE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. YEP. UH, IS ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? BRAGMAN? COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT. OH YEAH, NO, SORRY. UH, WHAT IS THE PROPERTY BEHIND THE LOT? IT APPEARS TO BE VACANT. IS IT DRAINAGE? WHAT WHAT IS THAT? IT IS A, IT IS, IT'S AN INDUSTRIAL LOT, BUT IT'S JUST EMPTY. UM, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT IT IS. IT'S OWNED, THIS IS ACTUALLY RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER. UM, IT'S OWNED BY THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE PECAN PECANS AND RECYCLING CENTER. YEAH. FRONTS ON UH, FRONTS. ON THE FRONTS ON NO GTOS. YEAH. YEAH. I, IF I HAVE TO GUESS, AND THEY'VE OWNED IT FOR A LONG TIME. I THINK MAYBE A LONG, LONG TIME AGO. THIS WAS A PECAN ORCHARD AND THIS IS WHERE THEY, 'CAUSE THERE'S A LITTLE DRIVEWAY IN THE BACK AND IT FRONTS NO GTOS AND SO, AND ALL THE HOUSES HAVE PECAN TREES IN THE YARDS. SO I'M GUESSING IT WAS SOME KIND OF PECAN OPERATION AND THEY COULD DRIVE ALL THE WAY THROUGH, BUT THAT'S JUST A GUESS. UH, KAPLAN QUESTION. HOLD ON, HOLD ON. UH, COMMISSIONER BECKMAN STILL HAS A FLOOR, THIS IS FOR STAFF. MM-HMM. SO DOES, DOES THIS LOT IN THE BACK IMPACT HIS REQUEST IN TERMS OF THE THE REAR SETBACK? YEAH. SO WHAT'S A SIDE SETBACK ON AN I TWO ABUTTING A, UH, RESIDENTIAL. I'LL CLARIFY THAT FOR YOU. SURE. AND, AND IF YOU COULD ALSO CLARIFY IF THERE'S ANY LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, ANYTHING THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD GIVE US ANY KIND OF SEPARATION NUMBERS, BUT HE WOULD NOT HAVE ANY MORE REQUIRED SETBACK. UM, NO, I KNOW IT'S A RESIDENTIAL LOT ADJACENT TO AN INDUSTRIAL LOT. I'M JUST CURIOUS IF SOMEONE WERE TO BUILD BEHIND THEM, I THINK THAT'S WHAT SHE'S GETTING TO IS WHAT THEIR OBLIGATION WOULD BE. SO WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING THAT UP, IS THERE ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH, UH, I SEE IN THE PICTURE, YOU'RE, YOU A PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION. IS THIS A TWO-FAMILY HOUSE BY ANY CHANCE? BECAUSE IT'S, UM, THAT'S, YEAH, THAT'S ONE OF MY CONCEPTS. I'M GONNA SEE IF I CAN GET A LITTLE DUPLEX ON IT. TWO ONE BEDROOMS. UM, IT'S MY READING OF THE ZONING SEEMS TO ALLOW THAT. UH, BUT I'M, I WAS GONNA HOP OVER TO ZONING AFTER THIS 'CAUSE IT'S ALL, THAT CONCEPT IS CONTINGENT UPON, UH, THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK. SO. OKAY. AND, AND I'M, I GUESS THIS IS GOING GETTING INTO, IS THIS WHY COLLINS GARDEN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OR DO WE KNOW WHY THEY'RE RECOMMENDING DENIAL? SO OWNERS HAVE A, UM, A PATH TO PROCEED TO DEVELOPMENT ONE OF TWO WAYS. EITHER THEY CAN REZONE, UH, FOR THE, UM, FOR THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT WOULD ALLOW THIS LOT SIZE. IT IS A MORE EXPENSIVE PROCESS THAN A VARIANCE. THE THE SECOND OPTION IS, AGAIN, YOU'RE ONLY, YOU'RE ONLY DOING ONE UNIT, UH, ON THIS PROPERTY. YOU'RE NOT ASKING TO, UM, SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO DO MULTIPLE UNITS. IT'S JUST FOR THE ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME. UM, AND SO THEY HAVE THIS, THEY CAN, HAS TO BE SINGLE FAMILY. R SIX. R SIX IS A SINGLE FAMILY. OH WELL, OKAY. NO DUPLEX. SURE. OKAY. UH, THEN I WAS READING IT WRONG. BUT E EITHER WAY, UM, WITHOUT, EVEN IF I DO SINGLE FAMILY, UM, I'D STILL LIKE THE FIVE FOOT, UM, JUST BECAUSE [02:05:01] I'M, I'M LEFT WITH NOT MUCH LOT AREA TO BUILD ON QUESTION. YES. SO THEY THINK THAT THE ONLY OPTION SHOULD BE TO REZONE. BUT THE, THE ISSUE IS, IS THAT HE, UM, THEY, THIS PROPERTY WAS ALREADY IN ITS CONFIGURATION IN THE 1940S. IT WAS ZONED AT THAT TIME IN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS. SO THERE WAS NO MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT. UH, WHEN IT WAS SUBDIVIDED OFF, NOT THROUGH A PLAT PROCESS. IT, IT HAS NOW THIS LEFTOVER, UH, LOT SIZE IN ORDER TO BUILD. UH, BUT THEN WE APPLIED ZONING A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN 2006. SO WE PLACED THE RULES UPON THEM. THEREBY HE, HE, HE BECAME A NON-CONFORMING LOT OF RECORD. UH, SO THE CITY IMPOSED THOSE RESTRICTIONS ON HIM, NOT HE CREATED THEM HIMSELF. SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THINKS THAT THE ONLY SOLUTION IS REZONING, BUT THE VARIANCE PROCESS IS ANOTHER SOLUTION, IS ANOTHER PATH TO UM, THIS ISSUE. YEAH. SO HE COULD, RIGHT NOW HE COULD ZONE TO R THREE. IT WOULD TAKE A LITTLE WHILE AND COST SOME MONEY. UH, OR HE COULD JUST COME BEFORE. SO YEAH, R TWO APOLOGIZE. 'CAUSE HE HAS HIS LOT'S 3000 SQUARE FEET. THAT'S WHAT I WAS ARE YOU SURE? YEAH. 28 80. I WAS, I WAS DOING 45 TIMES 60. OKAY. UM, I WAS GETTING 3017. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CRUZ? COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UM, I SAW THE LETTER FROM COLLINS GARDEN, BUT I DIDN'T GET TO READ IT. CAN YOU BRING IT BACK UP? YES. AND, AND TECHNICALLY ALL THOSE LOTS ON THAT BLOCK WOULD HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. YEAH, I KNOW THE AREA, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE OF WHAT THEY WERE DISCUSSING. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO QUESTION, UH, DID WE ASK THE CITY IF THERE WAS ANY, UH, ANYBODY THAT CALLED IN SO AND RECALL HEARING THAT? SO, UH, YES, THERE ARE NO VOICEMAILS LEFT AND THERE ARE NO OTHER LETTERS OUTSIDE OF THE ONE WE JUST SAW. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. GREAT. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. UH, DID WE GET AN ANSWER FROM STAFF ABOUT, OH, YEAH. UH, WE HAD A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT THE SETBACKS OR POTENTIAL, UM, YEAH, GO AHEAD. UH, YEAH, SO I TWO HAS A 50 FOOT SETBACK FROM ANY RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES. AND THERE IS A 40 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENT MAKING THIS LOT PRETTY MUCH UN UNUSABLE. MM-HMM. YEAH, THE LOT BEHIND HIM LOOKS LIKE IT'S ABOUT 80 FEET WIDE, SO HE, IT'S PRETTY MUCH UNUSABLE BACK THERE ZONING CHANGE UNLESS THERE'S HIS ZONING CHANGE. OKAY. GREAT. ALL RIGHT, SO WITH THAT, ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? TE COMMISSIONER THI REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 21 DASH 0 3 0 1 98, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THEY REQUEST FOR ONE OF 15 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT MINIMUM FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FOOT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND TWO, A 3,119 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 6,000 SQUARE FOOT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A 2,881 SQUARE FOOT LOT SITUATED AT 1 1 7 RAYMOND STREET, APPLICANT BEING ADAM GATES. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUEST TO ALLOW A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND ON A VACANT LOT THAT IS 2,881 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. AS THE APPLICANT HAS ADEQUATE SPACE FROM ANY ADJACENT STRUCTURE. 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. BY IMPOSING A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT, THE OWNER WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD A STRUCTURE DUE TO NOT MEETING THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS AS THEY WOULD BE SHORT BY 3,119 SQUARE FEET. AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO REDUCE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE FROM THE REAR BY 15 FOOT TO ACCOMMODATE THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE APPEARED TO THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE REAR SETBACKS AND MINIMUM LOT SIZE VARIANCE IS TO ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THERE IS SUFFICIENT SPACE BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND THERE WILL BE PLENTY OF SPACE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURES AS TO NOT POSE ANY FIRE OR LIFE SAFETY ISSUES 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 [02:10:01] 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 FOR A MINIMUM SIZE VARIANCE OF 3,119 SQUARE FEET AND TO HAVE THE REAR SETBACK VARIANCE OF 15 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE 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. 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 WERE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SOUGHT DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY IN THAT THE LOT SIZES ARE SIMILAR IN THE AREA AND OTHER RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ARE BUILT ON SIMILAR SIZE, SIMILAR LOT SIZES. THE OWNER PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH THE CURRENT LOT SIZE AND IS, AND IT WAS NOT ALTERED OR SUBDIVIDED BY THE OWNER. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER THIEL. YES, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF THESE SUBSTANDARD LOT SIZES. I THINK THE VARI VARIANCE PROCESS IS IMPORTANT, UH, AND GOING THROUGH THIS WITHOUT A REZONE ALSO, UH, WE, WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS MANY TIMES, BUT, UH, INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ESPECIALLY IF IT MIGHT BE A RENTAL PROPERTY. UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S SOMETHING BOTH THE CITY IS CHAMPIONING, CHAMPIONING, AND SOMETHING THAT I SUPPORT. SO COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UM, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND IF YOU LOOK AT OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA, THEY SEEM TO HAVE SIMILAR SETBACKS ALREADY. SO, UM, BY NOT GRANTING THIS VARIANCE, IT WOULD MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT TO BUILD ON THIS LOT FOR ANYTHING REASONABLY SIZED. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE. STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. TEAL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MS. MR. MENCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. LIND. I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYBODY NEED A BREAK OR CAN WE PUSH ON? OKAY, WE NEED A, WE'RE GONNA CALL A BREAK. UH, WE'LL SEE YOU ALL BACK AT THREE TWENTY FIVE, SEVEN MINUTES. CALL THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER. UH, NEXT CASE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. IT'S EASY. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON. RICH BATISTA HERE. I'M PLANNING HERE WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. UM, BO O 8 21. 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 LOCATED AT 1 3 5 J STREET IN COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE, THE APPLICANT BEING ARTURO RANGO. UM, THE REQUEST IS FOR A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE STEPPE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT WITH ONE FOOT TWO INCH OVERHANG TO BE TWO FEET AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY, THE LINE, AND TO A SEVEN FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT STEPBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT WITH A ONE FOOT TWO INCH OVERHANG TO BE TWO FEET SIX INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. UH, CURRENT ZONES ARE FOUR RESIDE OF SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH OVERLY REMAINING THE SAME. SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY LOCATED, UH, ALONG JADE DRIVE AND IT'S CURRENTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON THE PRO ON THE PROPERTY. UH, THE APPLICANT HAS CONSTRUCTED A CARDBOARD THAT ENCROACHES INTO THE SIDE OF FRONT SETBACK. AS IT STANDS, THE, AS IT STANDS, UM, STAFF MEASURES THE DIMENSION OF THE CARPORT, THE LENGTH BEING ON 30 FEET, 30 FEET, SIX INCHES, AND WIDTH BEING 14 FEET, 11 INCHES. UM, STAFF ALSO NOTED THERE ARE, THERE WERE NO CARPORTS ON JAY DRIVE, BUT THERE ON THE NEIGHBORING STREET CONWAY DRIVE, THERE WERE A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF CARPORTS. UM, THERE'S A, UH, CURRENT PICTURE OF THE SITE PLAN, UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE CARPORT ITSELF. UM, A SIDE VIEW OF IT, UM, CARPORT. NOTE THAT THERE ARE NO GUTTERS ON IT. UM, A CLOSEUP OF THE POST, UH, SURROUNDING VIEWS OF JADE, MORE SURROUNDING VIEWS. OKAY. UM, TO SIDE PROPERTY SETBACK VARIANCE, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION WITH TWO FEET VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SCIENTIFIC REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT TWO INCH OVERHANG TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND B O A 21 1 0 3 0 0 1 99. BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS, THE DRIVEWAY AND CARPORT APPEAR TO HAVE AMPLE [02:15:01] SPEED TO RELOCATE THE POST ON ONE OR ONE MORE FOOT FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND ADJUST THE CAR WIDTH OF THE CARPORT WOULD BE 13 FEET, 11 INCHES. UM, STAFF RECOMMEND ON, UH, 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 9. BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTS WERE THE FRONT PROPERTY'S SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE. UH, THE LENGTH OF THE CARPORT MEASURE TO BE 30 FEET SIX INCHES, AND THERE APPEARS TO BE SUFFICIENT SPACE FOR THE CARPORT TO BE MOVED TO MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 10 FEET. FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT. THERE WERE 34 37 NOTICES SENT OUT, UM, TOWING FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO REGISTERED HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? MY NAME IS, UH, ARTHUR ELL, 1 35. JADE, PLEASE, PLEASE PROCEED. WHEN I PUT THE CARPET UP, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I HAD TO HAVE A SETBACK SINCE THERE WAS NOTHING ON EITHER SIDE OF THE CARPORT. AND AS FAR AS THE PERMITTING, I DIDN'T THINK I HAD TO GET A PERMIT. SO IT WAS AN OPEN STRUCTURE. OTHER THAN THAT, THAT'S BASICALLY WHERE I'M AT. OKAY. UM, CAN YOU, I'M JUST GONNA ASK YOU A, A QUICK QUESTION. YES, SIR. UM, YOUR APPLICATION IS SHOWING A SERIES OF COLUMNS THAT EXTEND UP FROM YOUR EXISTING CARPORT, WHICH ALSO HAS SOME EXPOSED, EXPOSED, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT COLUMNS. ARE THOSE IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING COLUMNS? UH, THE, THE EXISTING COLUMN, I DON'T SEE, IT'S, NO, THE THREE THAT YOU SEE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE RIGHT THERE, THERE'S ONE MORE THAT'S IN ABOUT, 'CAUSE THE, I HAVE THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK FROM HOUSE TO HOUSE. OKAY. SO IT'S SETBACK AND FIVE FOOT. OKAY. NO, I WAS JUST, I WAS LOOKING AT THE SKETCH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE CLEAR ON THAT. OH, OKAY. OKAY. THERE'S SOME SHADOWS ON THE PICTURE, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, IS STAFF, IS THERE ANY, UH, VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? NO. ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S OPEN THIS UP TO QUESTIONS. WHO, WHO'D LIKE TO START? OH, ZUNA, COMMISSIONER ZUNA. HOW WAS THIS CASE ORIGINATED? DO WE KNOW STAFF? UH, IT'S UNCLEAR. THERE DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE A CODE ENFORCEMENT VIOLATION OR INVESTIGATION ON FILE, SO WE JUST DON'T KNOW. SIR, DID YOU APPLY FOR A BUILDING PERMIT? NO, SIR. OKAY. SO THIS MUST HAVE BEEN A COMPLAINT, UH, OR CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE? UH, IT MAY HAVE BEEN, BUT MAYBE AT THE TIME WHEN WE ACCESSED THE RECORDS, THERE WAS NO RECORD OF THAT ENFORCEMENT ACTION, BUT OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING LED HIM TO, UH, COME INTO US. ALL RIGHT. UH, WHO, WHO, ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, I HAVE A QUESTION, SIR. I HAD ASKED YOU ABOUT THE COLLINS THAT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE, UM, AN EXISTING CARPORT WITH TWO SUPPORT COLUMNS. UH, THIS IS, I'M ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE EXISTING ONE THAT'S TIED TO YOUR HOUSE STAFF. IF, CAN YOU BRING UP THE SITE PLAN THAT, UH, THAT, THAT SHOWS THE DIMENSION? THERE YOU GO. SO THE DASHED AREA TO THE LEFT OF THE EXISTING HOUSE IS, IS THE EXISTING CARPORT AND ON THE STREET VIEW IT SHOWS THAT THERE'S AN APPARENT FIVE FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK THAT WALKS ON THE SIDE OF THE COLUMNS THAT ARE UNDERNEATH THE ROOF LINE OF THAT, OF THAT EXISTING CARPORT. YES, SIR. GOING TO THE BACK ON THE SIDE. BUT THEN YOUR DRIVEWAY KIND OF HAD, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT HAS SOME CURVES TO IT WHEN THE SIDEWALK MATCHES IN. RIGHT. THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING IF ANY OF THE NEW COLUMNS ARE IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING COLUMNS, OR DO THEY, ARE THEY WIDER OUT, FURTHER OUT? THEY'RE FURTHER OUT. THEY'RE FURTHER ONTO THE NEIGHBOR'S SIDE. OKAY. YES SIR. AND SO DO YOU, DO YOU HAVE ANY INTENT TO DO, USE THAT EXISTING CARPORT AS A CARPORT? 'CAUSE YOU'RE, YOU'RE DIMENSIONING, THERE'S TWO THINGS BEFORE US. ONE OF THEM IS HOW FAR CLOSE YOU ARE TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. UH, AND, AND YOUR PROPOSED CARPORT IS 30 FEET DEEP AND YOUR EXISTING ONE LOOKS LIKE IT'S ABOUT 20 FEET DEEP. SO THAT'S 56 FEET OF COVER? YES, SIR. I HAVE A TRAILER THAT I OKAY. PUT UNDER. SO YOU NEED THE ENTIRE, THAT TAKES UP, IT TAKES UP THAT WHOLE, UH, IF YOU SEE THE OTHER PICTURE WHERE MY TRUCK IS PARKED, ACTUALLY SEE WHERE MY TRUCK, HOW FAR MY TRUCK COMES OUT. YES. THE REST OF THE CARPORT IS TAKEN UP. OKAY. MY TRUCK IS JUST NOT PARKED IN THE FRONT AND NOTHING BEHIND IT. IT'S ALL FILLED IN WITH THE, AND, AND I NOTICED THAT YOUR NEIGHBOR'S DRIVEWAY IS ALSO ON THE, ON THE WEST SIDE. YES, SIR. OF THE LOT, UH, IS, HAS YOU, HAVE YOU TALKED TO YOUR NEIGHBOR ABOUT DRAINAGES WITH YOUR ROOF PITCH? IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE HALF YOUR, THE DRAINAGE IS GOING RIGHT INTO HIS YARD. RIGHT. AND THE, ON THAT SIDE RIGHT THERE, THERE'S GONNA BE GUTTERS. ACTUALLY THERE'S GONNA BE GUTTERS ON BOTH SIDES. SO ARE YOU, ARE YOU BUT THE, THE DRAIN THE STREET IT OKAY. IT'S DRASTIC DROP WHERE, SO THERE'S A DRAINAGE AT THE END OF THE STREET. WE HEAR A NUMBER OF THESE CARPORT CASES, AND IN THOSE INSTANCES WHERE THERE'S A DRAINAGE GOING ON, UH, TO THE NEIGHBORING [02:20:01] PROPERTY, THERE'S TALK OF GUTTERS COME UP. UH, BUT WE CAN'T USE THAT IN OUR DECISION UNLESS YOU FORMALLY AMEND YOUR APPLICATION TO INCLUDE GUTTERS. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO AT THIS TIME? SURE. CAN YOU PLEASE STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT OF, OF THAT YOU ARE, THAT YOU ARE AMENDING YOUR APPLICATION TO INCLUDE GUTTERS? ABSOLUTELY. I WILL. CAN YOU, YOU HAVE TO STATE IT? YES. I, I AMEND MY APPLICATION TO PUT GUTTERS UP ON THE CARD PORT. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE TO A MOTION? ZUNA? COMMISSIONER ZUNA, I JUST WANNA SPEAK TO THE, TO THE HARDSHIP. IF YOU WERE HAVING TO COMPLY WITH WHAT THE STAFF IS, IS REQUESTING HERE FOR A, YOU KNOW, A RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE, WHAT KIND OF HARDSHIP WOULD THAT PLACE ON YOU? NONE. I MEAN, TO PUT THE, NO, IF, IF YOU WERE HAD TO HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE EXISTING SETBACKS OF FIVE FEET. OH, WELL CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT KIND OF HARDSHIP THAT WAS? THERE'S NOT FIVE FEET ONTO MY, ONTO MY DRIVEWAY. SO IT WOULD BE BLOCKING MY, MY DRIVEWAY TO GO UP AND THERE WOULD, IT WOULDN'T WORK. OKAY. I WOULD HAVE TO LITERALLY JUST TEAR IT ALL DOWN. OKAY. I COULDN'T, I COULDN'T SET IT BACK. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES SIR. ALRIGHT, ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. HEARING NONE. WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION SIR? YOU MAY HAVE A SEAT. COMMISSIONER MANON. SO REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 1 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 9, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT, UH, FOR A CARPORT THAT IS 31 FOOT IN LENGTH, UM, UH, WITH A ONE FOOT TWO INCH OVERHANG TO BE, UH, TWO FOOT AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND TWO, A SEVEN FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT WITH ONE FOOT TWO INCH OVERHANG TO BE TWO FOOT SIX INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 3 5 J DRIVE. APPLICANT BEING OTTO RUN BECAUSE OF 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 UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY YOU FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE VARIANCE, UH, REQUEST TO THE SIDE AND FRONT AND SETBACK DO NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THERE ARE, UH, OTHER SIMILAR CARPORTS IN THE VICINITY. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN APPLICANT HAVING TO MOVE THE POST OF THE STRUCTURE TO FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND 10 FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINES, UH, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE A POSSIBLE DEMOLITION OF THE CARPORT, UH, TO BUILD. 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 VARIANCE FOR THE CARPORT WAS CONSTRUCTED FOR PROTECTION OF THE VEHICLES THAT WERE PLACED UNDER THE STRUCTURE AND WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO THE IMMEDIATE, IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THESE VARIANCES LOCATED NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE, UH, ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UH, WITH THERE BEING SIMILAR CARPORTS IN THE AREA DOES NOT APPEAR AS THOUGH THE CARPORT WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES NOR CHANGE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. UH, THE APPLICANT HAS AMENDED THEIR APPLICATION TO INCLUDE GUTTERS ON, UH, ON THE SIDE FACING THE NEIGHBOR. UH, SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES 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 WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THAT APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE SMALL AMOUNT OF SPACE AVAILABLE FOR THE DRIVEWAY. END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? TEAL? COMMISSIONER TEAL HAS A SECOND. COMMISSIONER MANNA? YEAH, I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, SETTING, SETTING THE RESTRICTIONS, SO IT IS JUST THE LENGTH OF THE EXISTING CARPORT OR THE NEW, NEW CARPORT, UH, SATISFIES ONE OF MY REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN ALSO BECAUSE THE AMENDMENT WAS ADDED, UH, TO INCLUDE GUTTERS, UH, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. COMMISSIONER THI I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND ALSO THE, UH, OVERWHELMING NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT. FANTASTIC. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE. STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. TEAL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. LIND I CONCUR. MR. UNA I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. [02:25:02] ALL RIGHT, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE GET WITH STAFF. ALL RIGHT, NEXT CASE PLEASE. NUMBER EIGHT. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS FOR BO O A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 0 0 1. LOCATED AT 55 43, EXCUSE ME, ASPEN VALLEY WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR, THE APPLICANT BEING ERNESTO MARTINEZ IS FOR A REQUEST FOR A SIX 16 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIRED BY THE N P EIGHT NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION DISTRICT TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE FOUR FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE CURRENT ZONING IS, UM, N P EIGHT NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG ASPEN VALLEY DRIVE NEAR A LACKLAND AIR FORCE BASE. UM, THE APPLICANT WAS AWARE THAT THEY WERE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THE 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT, UM, REQUIRED BY THE N P EIGHT NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION DISTRICT. SO THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE PRIOR TO COMMENCING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CARPORT. THE PROPOSED CARPORT WOULD BE, UM, 620 SQUARE FEET, 31 BY 20 AND WILL MAINTAIN THE REQUIRED SIZE SETBACK OF FIVE FEET. THE REQUEST IS, IS TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE FOUR FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. DURING THE SITE VISIT CONDUCTED BY STAFF, STAFF OBSERVED NUMEROUS CARPORTS IN PROXIMITY OF THE SITE AND, UM, THEY DID NOT MEET THE MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT. AND THIS IS A SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT THAT DEPICTS THE NEW CARPORT AND THE SETBACKS. THIS IS A SUBJECT PROPERTY. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE CARPORT HAS NOT YET BEEN CONSTRUCTED OR BEGAN. AGAIN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE SURROUNDING AREA. SURROUNDING AREA, AND THEN THIS IS A SIMILAR CARPORT OBSERVED OFF OF ASPEN VALLEY DRIVE. AND THEN HERE'S ANOTHER CARPORT NEAR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEN ANOTHER CARPORT. SO FOR, UM, FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE FOR THE CARPORT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE STRUCTURE HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED. TWO, THE STRUCTURE WELL CONFORM TO THE SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND THREE, NUMEROUS CARPORTS WERE OBSERVED IN THE SURROUNDING VICINITY. THEREFORE, THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE WERE 33 NOTICES MAILED ONE IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. WE DID NOT RECEIVE A RESPONSE FROM VALLEY FOREST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR FROM PEOPLE ACTIVE IN COMMUNITY EFFORT. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. STAFF IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WILL THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD? HI. HI, CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? AND YOU CAN. SIA M MARTINEZ, 55 43 ASPEN VALLEY STREET, 7 8 2 4 2 IN SAN ANTONIO. THANK YOU. UH, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND PROCEED. UH, I WAS GONNA SAY, UH, WE HAVE BEEN, WE'VE LIVED IN THE, IN THE SAME HOUSE FOR ABOUT 35 YEARS. AND SINCE THEN WE'VE DONE A LITTLE BIT OF RENOVATIONS AND ONE OF 'EM WAS ALWAYS TO GET A CARPORT BECAUSE WE HA THE HOUSE ORIGINALLY CAME WITH A TWO CAR GARAGE, BUT BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF SPACE, WE CONVERTED THE GARAGE INTO ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS SO THAT, UM, THAT LEFT US WITHOUT ANY COVERING FOR THE CARS. AND SO I SAID, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA SAVE SOME MONEY AND, UM, GET OUR CARPORT BUILT. UM, BECAUSE WE SAW, LIKE I SAID, THAT, UH, A LOT OF THE OTHER HOUSES HAVE SIMILAR CARPORTS, LIKE THE ONES THAT WE WANT AT, AND THEY'RE VERY AESTHETICALLY NICE. UH, AND SO WHEN WE GOT READY TO BUILD A CARPORT, UH, WE CALLED THE, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION GUY AND HE SAID THAT OUR, OUR ZONING HAD CHANGED. AND SO THEY WERE GOING TO ONLY ALLOW US A VERY LIMITED, UM, NUMBER OF SQUARE FEET FOR THE CARPORT. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE EVENTUALLY. ONE OF THE REASONS TOO IS THAT EVENTUALLY I THINK THAT MY HUSBAND HAS A HANDICAP AND I'M NOT, AND HE'S HAVING TROUBLE WALKING AND I MEAN, I PRAY WE DON'T NEED, BUT MAYBE ONE DAY WE'LL NEED A LAR LARGER VAN FOR A WHEELCHAIR. AND I, I THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WE, WE JUST NEED A, A BIGGER, A, A LARGER CARPORT TO FACILITATE, UM, THAT NEED IN, IN TIME. NOT ANYTIME SOON. I HOPE NOT, BUT UM, BUT UH, BUT THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. [02:30:01] JUST WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT YOU HERE BEFORE YOU BUILT ANYTHING. YES, YES. IT'S ALWAYS A POSITIVE. SO, UH, STAFF, IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR? NO. OKAY. SO WHO'D LIKE TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS? ANYONE? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. WOW, THAT'S, THAT'S GREAT. SO IF Y'ALL COULD JUST TAKE A SEAT, WE'RE JUST GOING DELIBERATE A LITTLE BIT AND THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. UH, WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE? BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER B O A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 0 0 0 1. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR 16 FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW A COURT COURT WITHIN WITH FOUR FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 5 5 4 3 ASPEN VALLEY, APPLICANT BEING ERNESTO MARTINEZ. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THE 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 GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE FOUR FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP IMPOSING A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF A 20 FOOT SETBACK, A CARPORT COULD NOT BE BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS TO DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE BY ALLOWING THE COURT REPORT TO BE BUILT FOUR FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN FOR WHICH THE VARIANCES SOUGHT IS LOCATED. UH, 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 PROPOSED STRUCTURE DOES NOT CAUSE ANY CONCERN, DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES OR THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE CARPORTS ARE COMMONLY FOUND. SIX. THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIR UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY OWNER 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 THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. THE CONFIGURATION OF THE RESIDENCE ON A LOT PREVENTS THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CARPORT WITH A 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK. THEREFORE, CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UH, YES. I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. I, AS A CHAIRMAN ORIENT STATED, WE APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'VE COME IN BEFORE BUILDING THE CARPORT, UM, AND THE FACT THAT YOU'RE GONNA BE MAINTAINING THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK. UM, SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. UH, I ALSO WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION FOR THE SAME REASONS. ALRIGHT, ANYONE ELSE? AND I'LL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT. I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO ME THAT THE CARPORTS ARE A GOOD DISTANCE AWAY FROM SIDE PUBLIC SIDEWALK. SO WITH AT LEAST FOUR FEET OR MORE THAT'S, THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME. SO, UH, WITH THAT STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MR. MANO. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. LIN. I CONCUR. MR. THIEL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALONA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND WITH THAT WE HAVE OUR LAST CASE, . YEAH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE, SIR, FOR WAITING. UH, UH, ITEM NUMBER NINE. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON RICH ABOUTIS. THE PLANNING HERE WITH UM, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, UM, BO O A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 3. UM, LOCATED AT 4 1 9 MARSHALL STREET COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE APPLICANT BEING INSIDE FLORES. UM, REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXEMPTION FROM THE MINIMUM THREE FOOT FRONT YARD SOLID SCREEN FENCING REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A THREE FOOT 10 INCH SOLE THE SCREEN FENCE AND TWO, A TWO FOOT TWO INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX SIX FOOT FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO [02:35:01] ALLOW A AN EIGHT FOOT, TWO INCH SOLID SCREEN FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. UM, CURRENT ZONING IS R FOUR IS INTERESTING FAMILY. UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY LOCATED ALONG MARSHALL STREET AND CURRENTLY HAS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE BUILT ON IT. APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE FOUR FOOT NINE, UH, VARIANCE AND MINIMUM FIVE FOOT, FIVE FOOT FIVE REQUIREMENT. WHAT IS THIS? MY BAD. OKAY, MY BAD. UH, UPON SITE VISIT STAFF CONDUCTED BY STAFF, A SOLID SCREEN FENCE WAS OBSERVED TO BE PLACED IN THE FRONT YARD AT THE HEIGHT OF THREE THREE FEET, 10 INCHES, WHERE THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT. ADDITIONALLY, THE SIDE FENCES WERE MEASURED AT, UM, EIGHT FOOT TWO. THERE APPEARS TO BE NO NEGATIVE EFFECTS FROM THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS. SO THAT IS THE CURRENT SITE PLAN OF THE HOME. UM, THAT IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF. UH, THE SURROUNDING VIEW, THERE'S A SCHOOL ACROSS, UH, THE STREET ITSELF. UH, THAT'S CURRENTLY THE MEASUREMENT OF THE EIGHT TWO FENCE HEIGHT. UH, THE FRONT FENCE OF THE THREE FEET, 10 INCHES. AND THERE'S A VIEW OF THE SIDE FENCE RIGHT THERE, UH, THE OTHER SIDE OF IT. ALL RIGHT. UM, SO STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 BASED ON FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS. UH, THE FRONT YARD FENCE IS, LET'S SEE, THREE FEET, 10 INCHES. AND THE FRONT FENCE TO BE, APPEARS TO BE ALTERED THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THERE ARE MANY FRONT YARD FENCES ALONG MARSHALL STREET THAT ABIDE THE FRONT YARD FENCE REQUIREMENTS. THE SIDE AND REAR FENCE, HEIGHT VARIANCE, UM, SIGN RECOMMENDS DENIAL. AND BO 8 1 0 22 1 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS, THE SIDE FENCE IS MEASURED TO BE EIGHT FEET, TWO INCHES. IT APPEARS TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. AND THERE APPEARS TO BE NO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ON THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD JUSTIFY THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. SO THERE WERE 15 NOTICES MAILED, UM, ZERO FAVORS, ZERO OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE FIVE POINTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. UH, BEFORE YOU GO, CAN YOU CLARIFY WHERE THE FRONT FENCE IS? BECAUSE I SEE THE, THE RETAINING STRUCTURE. CAN YOU KIND OF POINT THAT OUT? SURE. CAN YOU GO AHEAD AND, LET'S SEE. IT SHOULD BE RIGHT TOWARDS THE FRONT RIGHT THERE. THAT ONE RIGHT THERE. UM, SO THAT FENCE IS THE ENTIRE FENCE THREE 10 OR IS IT JUST THE LEFT SIDE? THAT WAS THE HIGHEST POINT WE MEASURED. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, YOU CAN COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. HI, MY NAME IS SALVADOR FLORES. I RESIDE AT FOUR 19 MARSHALL. IT'S MY PERSONAL HOME. I RECENTLY RENOVATED THAT HOUSE, UM, MOVED INTO IT ABOUT A COUPLE MONTHS AGO. THE FRONT FENCE WAS THERE WHEN I, WHEN I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY. I PLAN TO ACTUALLY REMOVE IT AND PUT A ROT IRON FENCE HERE IN THE NEAR FUTURE. BUT IF I, IF WE'RE GONNA TACKLE THIS RIGHT NOW, I'D LIKE TO MEND MY APPLICATION TO INCREASE IT TO A FOUR FOOT, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE I'D REALLY LIKE TO PUT A FOUR FOOT A WR IRON FENCE IF I CAN DO THAT. UNDER THIS CURRENT APPLICATION, I THINK YOU COULD DO A FIVE FOOT WR IRON, CAN'T YOU? YEAH. YOU NEED FIVE FOOT. YEAH. UP, UP TO FIVE FEET. OKAY, SO THE THREE 10 IS JUST FOR LIKE, IT'S OKAY. IT'S SOLID. OH, IT'S SOLID SCREEN. WELL THAT, YEAH, THAT'S GONNA GO AWAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. THE PRIVACY FENCE, THE EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE THAT I'D LIKE TO HAVE, GO ALL THE WAY AROUND THE PROPERTY. UM, FOR ME IT'S BEEN SAFETY AND PRIVACY. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA, BUT I SIT BETWEEN THE SAMS MINISTRY AND THE SALVATION ARMY AND THERE'S A LOT OF, UH, HOMELESS PEOPLE COMING BY. AND WHEN I WAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION I HAD A LOT OF THEFT. UM, I ALSO LIVE IN A PIER AND BEAM HOME AS WELL AS MY NEIGHBORS TO THE RIGHT, WHICH IS A RENTAL HOME WITH A UNIT IN THE BACK. AND THERE'RE ALSO SOME NEIGHBORS THAT TEND TO GATHER AROUND THE BACK PATIO AND LOOK AT MY NIECES EVERY TIME THEY PLAY IN THE BACKYARD. AND I PLAN ON PUTTING SWIMMING POOL BACK THERE. I'M VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THEM, CONSISTENTLY LOOKING AT MY NIECES, UM, YOU KNOW, AND PUTTING THEM IN BATHING SUITS IN THE BACK AGAIN FOR SECURITY AND PRIVACY AND SAFETY. THAT'S THE REASON I WOULD LIKE TO INSTALL AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. THERE ARE ABOUT SIX PROPERTIES THAT DO HAVE EIGHT FOOT FENCES WITHIN TWO BLOCKS OF MY HOME. UH, IS THERE ANY, UM, VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE'S, WELL NO ONE'S HERE, BUT NO VOICEMAIL, NO. OKAY. UH, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MANNA, COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO SAW A PICTURE THAT SHOWED, UM, ON THE FRONT FACADE THAT YOU ACTUALLY HAD EIGHT FOOT UP THERE AS WELL ON FROM THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO THERE'S DIFFERENTIATION [02:40:01] BETWEEN SIDE AND FRONT. OKAY. SO, SO, AND SIDE BEING BASICALLY FRONT THE FRONT OF THE FACADE AND BACK. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE REGULARLY SEE IS THAT THE, UM, PORTION OF THE FENCE THAT LEAVES THE, THE FACADE OF THE HOUSE THAT GOES TO THE SIDE GENERALLY. UM, YOU KNOW THAT, THAT CERTAINLY WE'D LIKE TO SEE A, YOU KNOW, GENERALLY A LOT MORE STRUCTURE OR A LOT MORE CONSISTENCY WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO ONE QUESTION WOULD BE IS WOULD IT BE OKAY TO LOWER THAT PORTION OF THE FENCE, UM, SO THAT IT WAS, WE'LL SAY, COMPLIANT WITH THE SIX FOOT HEIGHT? UM, UM, AT LEAST THAT PORTION ON, ON BOTH SIDES OF, OF YOUR PROPERTY? I'D PREFER NOT TO BECAUSE MY HVAC SYSTEMS ON THAT SIDE, AND AGAIN, IN THE THEME OF TRYING TO PREVENT THEFT, YOU KNOW, I, I REALLY DON'T WANT TO HAVE PEOPLE BE ABLE TO TAKE A PEEK DOWN THERE. BUT I, I'D REALLY LIKE TO KEEP THE EIGHT FOOT AND JUST TAKE THAT ALL THE WAY AROUND. COMMISSIONER, MAN, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE, THE PART THAT JUST FACES THE STREET? YES. JUST THE PART THAT FACES THE STREET AND SO ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. SO ON THE, ON BOTH SIDES. 'CAUSE I THOUGHT, THOUGHT I SAW ON BOTH SIDES WHERE BASICALLY IT, IT WAS AT EIGHT FOOT HEIGHT, UM, AT, ON BOTH SIDES, UH, FACING THE STREET. AND SO GENERALLY WE'D, WE'D LIKE TO SEE THAT LOWER OR, OR THERE'S LOTS OF DIALOGUE GENERALLY WITH REGARDS TO THAT. SO. OKAY. BRAGMAN, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, ARE THERE ELEVATION CHANGES? IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT THERE ARE FROM THE FRONT TO THE BACK OF THAT. IT'S PRETTY FLAT. IT'S PRETTY FLAT OUT THERE. OKAY, THANK YOU. HOW ABOUT YOUR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSES? ARE THEY HIGHER OR LOWER THAN YOURS? THEY'RE ABOUT THE SAME. ABOUT A FOOT TO SAME TO TWO TO THREE FEET ABOVE. 'CAUSE IT'S APPEARING BEAM SLABS OUT THERE. SO THE HIGH HOUSES SIT WELL ABOVE THE, THE NATURAL GRADE. WHEN DO YOU PLAN ON PUTTING A POOL IN? I WOULD LIKE TO DO IT, UH, YOU KNOW, SOMETIME BETWEEN LATE SPRING AND SUMMER. OKAY. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO AS FAR AS THE PRUM BEAM, WHAT'S THE HEIGHT OF YOUR, THE PURE BEAM, UH, FOR I GUESS GROUND SPACE UNDERNEATH IT. SO WHAT, WHAT'S THE DISTANCE THERE FROM? ON MY HOUSE? YES. IT'S PROBABLY LIKE ALMOST THREE FEET. OKAY. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ALBERT? UH, YES. IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, THE FRONT FENCE IS EXISTING WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE HOME AND THE REAR FENCE IS NEWLY CONSTRUCTED? YEAH, THE, THE, SO THE, THE WHOLE, ALL THE FENCE ALL THE WAY AROUND IS EXISTING. WHAT I DID IS I TEMPORARILY FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES AND SAFETY AS I ERECTED TWO LITTLE SECTIONS OF FENCE JUST TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM GOING TO THE BACKYARD. 'CAUSE I HAD HAD A LOT OF LUMBER THAT WAS STOLEN. UM, SO, BUT ALL THE PERIMETER FENCING WAS EXISTING AND STILL IS TO THIS DAY, THE WAY WHEN I PURCHASED IT, INCLUDING THE EIGHT FOOT, TWO INCH FENCE? NO, THAT ONE I PUT THERE JUST, JUST FOR, FOR, UH, SAFETY FOR MYSELF JUST TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM GOING BACK AND TAKING MORE LUMBER. THANK YOU. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANCHU. SO, UM, SO QUESTION THIS QUESTION'S FOR CITY. SO, SO I THINK, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE COULD ONLY PROVE UP TO EIGHT FOOT. UM, AND SO THERE'S EIGHT FOOT TWO. AND SO, UH, WOULD THE APPLICANT THEN BE REQUIRED TO REMOVE TWO INCHES OFF THE FENCE? I THOUGHT WE COULD GO, I THOUGHT WE COULD GO TO 12, BUT IF IT EXCEEDS EIGHT, IT HAS TO BE ENGINEERED OR SOMETHING. NOPE, THOSE ARE EIGHT FOOT PANELS. I'M NOT TOO SURE WHERE THE TWO INCHES CAME FROM. IF IT WAS IT MEASURED FROM THE GROUND, WE, WE ADVERTISED A VARIANCE FOR UP TO EIGHT FOOT, EIGHT FEET, TWO INCHES. UM, ANYTHING EXCEEDING THAT YOU CAN'T, UH, YOU CAN'T HEAR. YEAH. YEAH. BUT IF HE WANTED TO, HE COULD HAVE ASKED FOR 10 FEET OR SOMETHING. CORRECT. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S EIGHT FOOTERS, RIGHT? BUT IF YOU EXCEED EIGHT, IS THAT WHERE YOU HAVE TO HAVE IT ENGINEERED? YES. OKAY, GREAT. UM, COMMISSIONER MENCHACA, UH, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY, ARE WE ASKING HIM TO MODIFY THE, UH, THE FRONT BOTH SIDES FROM THE FACADE OUT TO THE STREET? WELL, THE, THE QUESTION WAS ASKED, UH, WE CAN CERTAINLY DELIBERATE THAT. UH, BUT, UH, HE, THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT, UH, WOULD RATHER NOT, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE THAT ENDED UP. I I, I HEARD CAP COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, I HEARD THAT YOU WERE GOING TO BE PUTTING IN A FOUR OR FIVE FOOT BROAD IRON FENCE. UH, YEAH. FENCE IN THE FRONT. YEAH. REPLACE INSTEAD OF THIS, REPLACE THAT. SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT, THAT HE DOESN'T NEED A VARIANCE BECAUSE THAT'S OUT AS RIGHT? WELL, IT'S TODAY, SO HE'S HERE JUST TRYING TO CLEAN UP THE PROPERTY AND THE SIDE AND THE SIDE, BUT IF YOU WERE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE WR IRON TOMORROW, THEN YOU KNOW, YOU WOULDN'T, YOU WOULDN'T NEED IT. BUT HE NEEDS THE SIGN. BUT YOU DO NEED THE SIGN. OKAY. THE PURPOSES IS THE SIDES. ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, UH, IF YOU COULD TAKE A SEAT. WE'LL DELIBERATE. ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE? THI COMMISSIONER TEAL REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 3. I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, TENANT [02:45:01] SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT FRONT SOLID SCREEN FENCE FENCING REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A THREE FOOT TENANT SOLID SCREEN FENCE SITUATED AT 4 1 9 MARSHALL STREET. APPLICANT BEING SALVADOR FLORES. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT HAVE DETERMINED SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITTLE ENFORCEMENT, OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE WOULD RESENT, WOULD, EXCUSE ME, WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE OR THE A, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS FOR FENCE HEIST MODIFICATIONS. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT WAS OBSERVED UPON THE SITE VISIT, AND IF GRANTED, THE BOARD OF BOARD FINDS THE REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED. THE FENCE IS LOCATED ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND IS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT BY 10 INCHES. THE FENCE WILL SERVE, WILL SERVE THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH A PROPOSED USE. THE FENCE WILL CREATE AND ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS UNLIKELY TO SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ANY, ANY NEIGHBORING 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 FRONT YARD FENCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED TOWARD THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. CURRENT ZONING PERMITS. THE CURRENT USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME TO REQUEST A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE, PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT IN A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. COMMISSIONER THIEL? UH, YES. I, I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THIS FENCE, UH, FOR A COUPLE DIFFERENT REASONS. ONE, IT'S BEEN EXISTING THERE WITHOUT ISSUE FOR SOME TIME TOO. UM, YOU KNOW, IF AT A LATER DATE THIS GENTLEMAN WOULD LIKE TO, TO INSTALL, UH, A WR IRON FENCE, THAT WON'T REQUIRE THE VARIANCE AT ALL. SO THIS KIND OF GETS HIM TO WHERE HE NEEDS TO BE CURRENTLY TODAY WITHOUT HAVING TO TEAR IT DOWN TOMORROW. COMMISSIONER MANNA, I WAS WONDERING IF, UM, MR. THIEL WOULD ACCEPT A FRIENDLY MOTION TO, UH, LOWER THE FRONT FACING PART OF THE, UH, SIDE FENCE. SO DOWN TO SIX FOOT. I WAS WONDERING IF THAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE. THAT MOTION'S NOT A HAND RIGHT NOW I'M MOTION STANDS, SO NO, THE CURRENT MOTION IS ONLY REGARDING THE THREE FOOT 10 INCH FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. OKAY. OKAY. NOT THIS ONE. YEAH, WE HAVE TO READ SPECIAL, SPECIAL ACCEPTIONS. SORRY, SORRY, SORRY, SORRY. OKAY. YES, I, I, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. OKAY. UH, WITH THAT, UH, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, UH, STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MR. THI. YES, MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN? YES. I, MS. LYNN, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, TEAL COMMISSIONER THIEL REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 0 0 3. I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A TWO FOOT, TWO INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT, TWO INCH SOLID SCREEN FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES ONLY SITUATED AT 4 1 9 MARSHALL STREET. APPLICANT BEING SALVADOR FLORES. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT LITERAL ENFORCEMENT, OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN SPEC, EXCUSE ME, WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE PROPOSED FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT INSTALLING A SIX FOOT TALL FENCE, WHICH WOULD NOT PROVIDE ENOUGH SECURITY TO THE PROPERTY BEING THAT IS CLO IT'S CLOSE TO USES OTHER THAN RESIDENTIAL. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE TO SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WOULD BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE VARIANCE TO THE FENCE HEIGHT APPEARS TO OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS IT WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE PROPERTY, FOR 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 APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORM PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE [02:50:01] SIDE AND REAR FENCE THAT MEASURE UP TO EIGHT TWO DOES NOT APPEAR TO APPEAR OUT OF THE ORDINARY AND WILL NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE SURROUNDING AREA. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER FOR THE PRO OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. 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 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. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANANA. COMMISSIONER TEAL? UH, YES. I THINK, UH, IT WAS ADDRESSED SINCE THE FRONT FENCE, UM, IS THE MOTION WAS ONLY FOR THE SIDE AND, UH, REAR, I THINK THAT MET YOUR REQUIREMENT MANNA IN OUR, WE MAY, WE MAY AMEND IT JUST SO IT SAYS AND, AND NOT INCLUDE THE FRONT FACING, I SAID ONLY I ADDED THAT TO IT. OKAY. SO, SO IF THAT'S UNDERSTOOD, THEN I'M GOOD WITH IT. AND THEN WE'RE IN AGREEMENT. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT WITH THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THE SIDE AND REARS ONLY. I I WANTED TO ADD, UH, ON THAT, THE, THE, WHEN FACING THE HOME, THE WEST SIDE, I, I, THE SIX FOOT THING DOESN'T BOTHER ME, BUT ON THE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE, HE'S GOT SO MUCH SPACE THERE AND THAT'S SUCH A HUGE LOT. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE PROTECTIVE VIEW I HAVING AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE WOULDN'T BUG ME AT ALL. JUST ON THE, ON THE FRONT, FRONT FACING PART. IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN CHANGE? I'M SORRY, DID I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION? YEAH, WELL, I MEAN, YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT WANTING SIX ON THE PART FACING THE STREET, BUT I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE LOT WITH IT BEING EIGHT FEET ONLY BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE LOT'S POSITIONED WITH THE DRIVE GOING FURTHER DOWN IN THE BACK. AND IT, IT JUST SEEMS, IT'S SO WIDE THERE. I CAN SEE WHY HE WOULD WANT TO HAVE A VIEW PROTECTION GOING INTO THE BACKYARD. UM, WITH IT. WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH AN EIGHT FOOT, NOT JUST ON THE EAST SIDE? OH YEAH. SO THESE TWO PORTIONS ARE CONSIDERED SIDE YARD PERIOD. THEY'RE SIDE YARD FENCES. UM, UNLESS WE EXCLUDE IT. SO YES, UNLESS WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY IS THAT, UM, FOR THE, THE TWO PORTIONS THAT WENT PARALLEL TO THE STREET WOULD HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE SIX FOOT. THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT COMMISSIONER MANOR WAS ASKING FOR. AND COMMISSIONER THIEL ACCEPTED THAT. UM, BUT I'M, I'M ASKING FOR EIGHT JUST ON THE EAST SIDE ONLY TO PUT THE SIX ON THE WEST SIDE JUST BECAUSE OF THE, A LARGE AMOUNT OF WIDTH THERE. WHEN WE GET THESE IN THE PAST, I'M JUST FOR THE REST OF THE COMMISSION, WHEN WE GET THESE IN THE PAST, THEY USUALLY, THE LOTS AREN'T AS WIDE, A LITTLE MORE CONSTRAINED. BUT IN THIS CASE, HE'S GOT SO MUCH ROOM THERE ON THE RIGHT SIDE AND HE HAS A DRIVEWAY. IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S GONNA CROSS THE DRIVEWAY. I JUST, THE OTHER RIGHT ROLAND? PARDON ME? OH, THE OTHER, THE OTHER, RIGHT. ROLAND . OH YEAH, I AM LOOKING AT THE, I'M LOOKING AT THE PART ON THE, ON THE EAST SIDE. NO, THAT'S WEST. YEAH, I WOULDN'T MIND, I I, FOR SECURITY PURPOSES, IF HE'S GONNA PARK A CAR AND, AND IF YOU'RE WALKING DOWN THE SIDEWALK, IT JUST FOR VIEW INTO THE REAR YARD. I I REALLY THINK HE SHOULD HAVE EIGHT. THAT CONTINUITY THERE ON THE WEST SIDE. I MEAN, I COULD LIVE WITH THAT, BUT I JUST, IT'S JUST SO BIG. I AGREE TEAL, I, I, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH AMENDING THE MOTION TO THAT. UM, YOU KNOW, MOSTLY MY, UH, OLIVE BRANCH WAS EXTENDED IN, IN HOPES OF BEING ABLE TO GET THIS, THIS MOTION PASSED. I KNOW. OKAY. IS THAT OKAY? I'LL ACCEPT THAT. OKAY. IS THAT OKAY, MR. COMMISSIONER ALBERT? I HAVE A QUESTION ACTUALLY. YES, SIR. UM, WELL, WE'RE DISCUSSING WHETHER WE'RE SUPPORT THE MOTION OR NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION, AND I'M GOING TO NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION. I DON'T SEE ANY TOPOGRAPHICAL REASON FOR AN EXTENDED FENCE. UH, WE'RE NOT ABUTTING ANY COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. I JUST CAN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT I CAN GRAB ONTO TO JUSTIFY, UH, AN UPPER FENCE SIDE OTHER THAN SAFETY AND SECURITY AND PRIVACY. BUT THAT'S THE ENTIRE REASON WHY WE HAVE SIX FOOT FENCES IN THE CODE. SO I, UNLESS, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONERS CAN, WELL, HE'S GONNA BE PUTTING IN A POOL, WHICH, UH, THIS BOARD HAS APPROVED THAT YOU WOULD HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT BY. RIGHT. UH, IF THAT WERE TO PASS, WHICH I THINK NO, I WOULD, I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT THE HOUSE IS A PURE BEAM AND IT SITS THREE FEET ABOVE THE GRADE, JUST THE WAY IT'S BUILT. SO YEAH, IT'S, IT'S HIGHER THAN NORMAL. ADDITIONALLY, THE AREA IS OVERRUN WITH THE UNHOUSED FOLKS AND, UH, DOPE FIS. IT'S, UH, THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF BREAK-INS AND, AND TRANSIENTS AND THERE'S DEFINITE SAFETY ISSUE. AND THAT HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH ME TOO. 'CAUSE I MEAN, IF, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE KIND OF INVESTMENT HE PUT INTO THIS HOME, I JUST, I MEAN, I'D WANT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. SO I, I ALSO AGREE ABOUT THE SECURITY THAT I WOULD AGREE WITH THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. I MEAN, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO EIGHT FOOT AS INITIALLY RED. I'M ONLY GOING TO THE SIX FOOT ON THE WEST SIDE JUST TO TRY TO EXTEND AN OLIVE BRANCH, UH, FOR LOOK. BUT I REALLY THINK HE NEEDS TO HAVE EIGHT ON THE, ON THE EAST, ON THE EAST SIDE. SO THIS MANNA. SO, SO, YOU KNOW, AS [02:55:01] I GOOGLE DOWN THE DRIVE, GOOGLE DOWN THE STREET, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE REST OF THE YARDS ARE NOT EIGHT FOOT. AND SO THEY'RE ALL CLOSER TO SIX FOOT. AND SO, SO I'M WITH TREPIDATION ACCEPTING THE, THE EIGHT FOOT ON THE, ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE BECAUSE THERE IS A NEIGHBOR THERE THAT DOESN'T HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE, UH, ON THEIR FRONT SIDE. SO, SO, SO IT IS KIND OF WALLING IN THAT PERSON, BUT I COULD UNDERSTAND POTENTIALLY ON THE RIGHT, ON THE, UH, DRIVEWAY SIDE. BUT, BUT, UM, YOU, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO, TRYING TO KEEP CONSISTENCY SO THAT IT'S, IT'S NOT JUST A WALLED COMMUNITY AS YOU DRIVE DOWN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THE MOTION AS READ IS UH, EIGHT FOOT ON THE SIDE AND REAR, EXCEPT DOES NOT APPLY TO THE, TO THE PART THAT PARALLELS A STREET ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE HOME. SO WITH THAT STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. THE SECOND WAS MR. MANO. YEAH. UH, SECOND WAS MR. MANON COMMISSIONER MANOR. YES. MR. TEAL. YES. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANO. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. LIND, I CONCUR. MR. UNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES 10 TO ONE. UH, YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, SO NEXT ITEM [ Approval of Minutes  ] IS MINUTES. UH, I HAD ONE SMALL TWEAK THAT STAFF, UH, IS CHANGING. IT WAS REGARDING I THINK ITEM NUMBER EIGHT OR NINE. WAS THERE ANY OTHER CHANGES? ALL RIGHT. SO I HEREBY MOVE TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS AMENDED. IS THERE SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION PASSES. ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF BEFORE? WE, UH, UH, WE DO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL STAFF JOINING THE TEAM. SO I DID WANT TO INTRODUCE, UM, EVERYONE JUST KIND OF GO AROUND THE ROOM. . UM, SO ROLAND HAS BEEN PART OF THE TEAM, UM, JUST WANNA OFFICIALLY ANNOUNCE ROLAND . HE'LL BE MAINTAINING WITH THE TEAM. OKAY. HERE WE HAVE, UH, VINCENT TINO. HE JUST JOINED US, UH, LAST WEEK. AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE REBECCA RODRIGUEZ BACK HERE. ALRIGHT, FANTASTIC. AND WE HAVE RICHARD UP FRONT, WHICH HE STEPPED OUT, BUT THERE HE IS. OH, HERE HE IS. THOSE ARE ALL THE ANNOUNCEMENTS WE HAVE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. WITH THAT I HEREBY, UH, ADJOURN THE MEETING. IT'S FOUR 13. * 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.