* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:04] ALL RIGHT, IT'S ONE O'CLOCK. I HEREBY CALL THIS, UH, MEETING MAY 16TH, 2022 OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND ORDER. STAFF, PLEASE CALL ROLL. MR. SPIELMAN. HIT THE BUTTON AND SAY PRESENT. PRESENT. YEAH. MR. ALBERT? PRESENT. MR. MANCHACA PRESENT. MR. VASQUEZ? PRESENT. MS. CRUZ? HERE. MR. MANNA PRESENT. MS. BRAGMAN? PRESENT. MS. KAPLAN? PRESENT. MR. TEO? PRESENT. MR. OZUNA PRESENT. CHAIR ORIAN. AND I'M ALSO PRESENT. CAN WE HAVE THE SPANISH INTER INTERPRETER, UH, MAKE THE PRESENTATION PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND IF WE COULD PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. OKAY. SO BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, UM, I HAVE SOME, UH, I HAVE A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION. THE BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA, WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. THE CASES ARE LISTED BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND STREET ADDRESS. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT. LASTLY, AS CHAIR, I'LL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS. I ASK THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS THE CHAIR AND I'LL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE MEETING. WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THIS BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY'S ZONING CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THIS AREA. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW. WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELIEF SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. WE ALSO SERVE AS AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES AND 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, THE BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION. EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION. IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY 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 OUGHT RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS ON WHICH THE REQUESTED RELEASE CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS. 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 REMARKS OF THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE AND, UH, STAFF IF YOU COULD DO YOUR PRESENTATION PLEASE. STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST. PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATE, INDICATE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND AN X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION. FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION, IN ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THE REQUEST. FOR THOSE THAT SIGN UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION, YOU WILL BE CALLED AN ORDER THAT YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION 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 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 SIGN IN TO SPEAK. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE [00:05:01] SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, CHAIR. ALRIGHT, UH, SO THE [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items  ] FIRST CASE HAS BEEN POSTPONED. UH, SECOND CASE PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. AGENDA ITEM TWO, BO O A DASH 22 1 0 3 0 0 4 8. ADDRESS IS 2 3 0 1 0. SUMMIT CANYON COUNCIL DISTRICT NINE A REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A POOL TO BE TWO FOOT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND THE ZONING IS R SIX CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2 3 0 1 0 SUMMIT CANYON AND THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. A NEW POOL IS BEING INSTALLED AND THE INSTALLATION OF THE POOL IS WITHIN THE FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK SITE PLAN, SUBJECT PROPERTY REAR OF THE PROPERTY SURROUNDING AREA. RECOMMENDATION SWIMMING POOL SETBACK. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN VA BO 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 4 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE REAR PROPERTY LINE IS NOT STRAIGHT AND HAS AN ANGLE. THE MAJORITY OF THE LENGTH OF THE SWIMMING POOL MEETS THE FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT WHILE ONE CORNER OF THE POOL IS TWO FOOT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF, OH, SORRY. A NOTIFICATION PLAN. 36 NOTICES WERE MAILED. ONE IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF, UH, STASH PRESENTATION. OKAY. UH, BEFORE YOU GO, DO YOU THE SITE PLAN THAT'S IN THE ATTACHMENTS, DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE A CLEANER COPY OF THAT AVAILABLE? THAT, THAT NO SIR. I DON'T ZOOM INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALRIGHT. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES. ALRIGHT, COME IF YOU CAN PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. HOWARD RY, SORRY, AT THE MIC. HOWARD GUIDRY FROM BACKYARD VACATION NOISES. HOWARD GUIDRY FROM BACKYARD VACATION. OASIS, AS YOU CAN TELL WHAT THE, THE ANGLE OF THE PROPERTY THERE, THAT LEFT CORNER IS CLOSER TO THE FENCE LINE THAN THE OTHER SIDE IS. OKAY. UM, WELL, I'M JUST GONNA, UH, THE REASON WHY I WANTED STAFF TO BRING UP THIS A LITTLE, A LITTLE, UH, CLEARER IS BECAUSE I COULDN'T TELL WHAT THOSE DIMENSIONS WERE. AND IT APPEARS THAT IT, IT SAYS FOUR FOOT ON ONE CORNER, CORRECT. AND THEN FOUR FOOT ON THE OTHER CORNER. I DIDN'T, CAN YOU CLARIFY WHAT THE, HOW THIS GOES FROM AND WHERE IT HITS FIVE FEET? ABOUT FROM WHERE THE CURSOR IS RIGHT NOW. IF YOU WOULD GO OVER PAST THE BENCH ABOUT TWO FOOT. IT STARTS GETTING WIDER RIGHT THERE THE OTHER WAY TO THE RIGHT. THERE YOU GO. AND AT WHAT POINT DOES IT HIT FIVE FEET? NOT UNTIL RIGHT BEFORE THE SPLASH DECK. SO I'D SAY FROM THE, THE RIGHT SIDE COMING LEFT, RIGHT THERE WHERE THE CURSOR IS, WHICH IS ABOUT 12 FOOT OF THE POOL. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? A SILLY QUESTION. I GUESS. GO AHEAD. LOOKS LIKE IF YOU HAD STARTED FURTHER OVER TO THE RIGHT, THIS WOULD NOT BE A QUESTION. SO WHAT, WHY DID THAT HAPPEN IF WE DID? WE'RE ALREADY MOVING WHERE THE STAIRS ARE RIGHT NOW, COMING OFF THE BACK PORCH. THE BACK PORCH IS FIVE FOOT OFF THE GROUND. THE STAIRS ARE BEING MOVED TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PORCH. SO YOU'RE SAYING IT WAS SO THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO MOVE THE STAIRS? NO, WE HAVE TO MOVE THE STAIRS. THEY ARE WHERE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW. THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE AT. OH, WE'RE MOVING 'EM TO THE OTHER SIDE. IF I'D HAVE PUT THE POOL FURTHER OVER, YOU COULDN'T, THE STAIRS WOULD'VE WENT STRAIGHT DOWN INTO THE POOL. OKAY. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. BRAGMAN? NOPE. NOPE. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. UM, I, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. SO IT'S TWO FEET UP TO FIVE, BUT ARE YOU MEASURING FROM THE OUTSIDE EDGE OF, OF THE MOST EXTREME PART OF THE FLAT WORK? ARE YOU MEASURING TO THE WATER? SO FROM THE WATER'S EDGE, IT'S ACTUALLY, AND I HAVE A PICTURE OF MY PHONE. OKAY. I WANNA SEE IT. UH, YOU CAN ACTUALLY BRING IT UP. THEY CAN PROJECT IT, UH, RIGHT ON THE TABLE. SOME. SO I ACTUALLY DID SOME RESEARCH ON THIS. UH, AND WHAT I FOUND IS THAT YOU ARE IN A MANDATORY H O A, [00:10:01] UH, AND ONLY THE A C C CAN GRANT, UH, SETBACKS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT FOR OURS TO CONSIDER. WE'RE ONLY HERE TO CONSIDER THE CITY'S, UH, FIVE FOOT REQUIREMENT. BUT I DID FIND THAT, UH, YOUR, YOUR DECLARATIONS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD GRANTS, UH, TWO FOOT USE AND ACCESS EASEMENT TO EVERY NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. AND SO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY BEHIND YOU HAS A TWO FOOT EASEMENT FOR THEM TO WORK ON THEIR FENCE. AND SO I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT WHERE THIS POOL'S GOING TO LIE, AND IF THERE WAS ANY VIOLATION OF THAT TWO FOOT, UM, EASEMENT THAT'S GRANTED TO THE NEIGHBOR. SO IF YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS TO THE WATER'S EDGE, HOW THICK IS THE CONCRETE? THERE'S GONNA BE THREE FEET LEFT FROM THE OUTSIDE EDGE OF THE CONCRETE TO THE FENCE AT THE, AT THE NARROWEST PART. SO YOU'RE NOT MEASURING TO THE WATER'S EDGE. YOUR TWO FOOT IS ACTUALLY TO THE ABSOLUTE OUTSIDE PART OF YOUR CONCRETE? YES. OKAY. WELL THAT, THAT MAKES ME FEEL BETTER ABOUT THAT. YEAH. SO, ALL RIGHT. UH, SO I, I HAVE NO OTHER QUESTIONS. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? MANKA COMMISSIONER SHANKA, UH, DOES THIS WARRANT A RAISIN OF THE BACK FENCE OR AN ISSUE WITH THE BACK FENCE? THAT THE PEOPLE CAN SEE? THE PEOPLE IN THE POOL, THE BACKYARD PEOPLE CAN SEE THE PEOPLE WITH A POOL? I WOULD SAY IN EVERY ONE OF THOSE HOMES IN THAT SUBDIVISION, ANYBODY COULD SEE ANYBODY IN A POOL. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND DO YOU KNOW IF THE RESIDENT GOT APPROVAL FROM THE H O A TO BUILD THIS? YES. AND WE ALSO GOT APPROVAL FROM THE, YOU SHOULD HAVE THE LETTERS FROM THE TWO HOMEOWNERS BEHIND HIS HOUSE. THAT AGREED STAFF. DO YOU HAVE THAT, THOSE DOCUMENT DOCUMENTS? THEY WERE SENT IN, ALEX SENT THEM IN. IT WOULD'VE CAME FROM ALEX . UH, WE'RE LOOKING INTO THAT RIGHT NOW. OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? NO, SIR. UM, ALRIGHT. IF YOU, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THEM, I CAN GET HER TO THE EMAIL. 'EM AGAIN. I, HERE THEY ARE, RIGHT HERE. I DO, YEAH. HOPEFULLY . YEAH. AND WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS A, IS ACCEPTANCE BY THE H O A IF THEY'RE, IF THEY'RE OKAY WITH IT. THAT'S HOMEOWNERS. SO THESE LETTERS ARE SAYING THAT IT'S [00:15:01] FOR ONE FOOT CLOSER, BUT YOU'RE ASKING FOR THREE FEET? NO, I'M ONLY ASKING FOR ONE. IT'S LEAVING, IT'S LEAVING FOUR FROM THE WATER TO THE FENCE. SO YOU WILL HAVE FOUR. WELL, FROM THE INSIDE WATER'S EDGE TO THE FENCE. FOUR. AT THE NARROWEST? YES. FROM THE OUTSIDE. THREE. THE WALL, WHICH IS THICK. THAT'S WHY I WAS CONFUSED. I THOUGHT AT THE, AT THE WORST YOU WERE THREE AND IT OPENED UP TO FIVE, BUT YOU ONLY NEED ONE FOOT FROM THE WATER'S EDGE. CORRECT. OKAY. SO FOR THE MAKER OF THE MOTION, JUST SO YOU KNOW, YOU ONLY NEEDS ONE FOOT FROM THE WATER'S EDGE. SO IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. UH, YES SIR. UM, QUESTION FOR STAFF. IS THIS A SITUATION WHERE THE, THE, THE SETBACK WASN'T CAUGHT DURING THE PERMITTING PROCESS? OR DID, DID THE PERMITTING PROCESS GET A LITTLE BEHIND? UM, THE, THE SETBACK WAS DISCOVERED DURING THE, UM, THE INSPECTION. THE STAFF REPORT. THANK YOU. THE STAFF REPORT REFLECTED THAT THEY INTENDED TO MAKE IT FIVE FEET. IT JUST SO HA THAT THE INTENT, THAT PERMANENT APPLICATION, THEY WEREN'T ASKING FOR A VARIANCE, BUT IT TURNED OUT TO BE THAT THERE WAS A PORTION. CORRECT. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? ANYONE? SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT THE, WE'RE ONLY ASKING FOR ONE FOOT. ALRIGHT. WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? OMAN. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, OR COMMISSIONER. ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. THANK YOU. UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 22 DASH 0 3 4 8, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR A ONE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT, FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW POOL TO BE FOUR FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 2 3 0 1 0 SUMMIT CANYON. APPLICANT BEING HOWARD GUIDRY. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A ONE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW POOL TO BE FOUR FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE MAJORITY OF THE SWIMMING POOL MAINTAINS THE FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK. SO THE CORNER THAT ENCROACHES IN THE SETBACK DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO DID SPECIAL CONDITIONS. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN APPLICANT HAVING TO RELOCATE THE SWIMMING TOOL TO MEET THE FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT. THERE IS ONLY ONE CORNER THAT IS ENCROACHING INTO THE REAR SETBACK. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE LETTER OF THE LAW. THE SWIMMING POOL IS CURRENTLY FOUR FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE ON ONE END OF THE POOL. THIS OBSERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE MAJORITY OF THE POOL IS SET BACK, IT'S SET BACK THE REQUIRED FIVE FEET. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE R SIX ZONING. DISTRICT. FIVE SIX VARIS WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER, ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE PROPOSED VARIANCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES, NOR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, STAND ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE ROOF SETBACK VARIANCE REQUESTS APPEARS TO BE SOUGHT DUE TO THE SMALL SIZE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE ANGLED REAR PROPERTY LINE, WHICH ARE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE LOT AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. SECOND. IS THERE SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? UH, YEAH. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. I THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE REQUEST AND IT'S A VERY SLIGHT VARIANCE FROM THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. I AGREE. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF IT. ALSO, THERE IS NEIGHBORHOOD APPROVAL FOR IT AND, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S NOT A BIG, BIG ASK. GREAT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN. 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. MR. TE [00:20:01] YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. I AGENDA ITEM THREE BO O A DASH 22 1 0 3 0 0 0 6 6. ADDRESS IS 5 2 2 3 DAVID EDWARDS. APPLICANT IS MORGAN'S WONDERLAND. COUNCIL DISTRICT 10. A REQUEST FOR A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 40 FOOT SIGN HEIGHT ALLOWANCE AT DESCRIBED IN CHAPTER 28 TO ALLOW A 50 FOOT TALL SINGLE TENANT SIGN. ZONING IS ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON 5 2 2 3 DAVID EDWARDS. AND THIS IS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REMOVE THE E M C UNIT, WHICH NOW CLASSIFIES THE SIGN AS A SINGLE TENANT SIGN. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWANCE FOR A SINGLE TENANT SIGN IS 40 FEET. SO IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR PROJECT AND MAINTAIN THE EXISTING HEIGHT, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE IS REQUIRED. THE D S D SIGN TEAM HAS REVIEWED THE REQUEST AND DOES NOT HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE PROPOSED SIGN VARIANCE. THERE'S A SITE, SITE OF THE PICTURE OF THE SIGN SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. RECOMMENDATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 6 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE EXISTING FREESTANDING SIGN IS 50 FOOT TALL AND WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED AT THE HEIGHT DUE TO BEING A MULTI-TENANT SIGN. AND D S D SIGN STAFF HAVE RE HAS REVIEWED THE REQUEST AND DO NOT FIND ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS. NOTIFICATION PLAN 11 NOTICES WERE MAILED. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. GREAT. CAN THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD PLEASE? AND IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. HI, MY NAME IS KATHY SONG. I'M WITH TITAN SIGN COMPANY. AND, UM, SO WE'RE REQUESTING THE 10 FEET, UM, BECAUSE ONE OF THE MAIN THING IS THIS IS GOING TO COST A CLIENT ADDITIONAL COST TO LOWER BY 10 FEET AND THEN ALSO FOR THE TRAFFIC, UM, IT WILL CAUSE A LOT MORE ADDITIONAL DAYS TO CUT DOWN THE POLE. AND SO THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF DELAYS. 'CAUSE WE DO HAVE TO DO CLOSE OUT ONE OF THE, THE HIGHWAY, THE WORST BLOCK PARKWAY. SO WE'RE REQUESTING TO KEEP IT AT THE 50 FEET FOR THE CLIENT. ALL RIGHT. UM, ANYONE SIGN UP THIS DISPUTE? STAFF? NO. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, IT LOOKS LIKE FROM THE PICTURE OF THE BEFORE AND THE AFTER, YOU'RE REDUCING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE SIGNAGE WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE DIGITAL. DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH OF A SQUARE FOOT REDUCTION APPROXIMATELY THE YEAR? UH, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE REDUCTION. UM, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT INFORMATION, BUT WE'RE ACTUALLY INCREASING THE TOP PART BY, UH, BY THE, I THINK ABOUT 15%. SO THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE IS TO BE 227 SQUARE FOOT, WHICH IS IN, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWED BY THE CITY. OKAY. KAPLAN COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. UM, WOULD YOU, YOU GOT RID OF E M C, ARE YOU PLANNING AT ONE TIME IN THE FUTURE TO TAKE ANOTHER TENANT OR IS THIS GONNA BE PERMANENT? ONE TENANT. I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE PERMANENT. OKAY. FOR THE CLIENT? YES. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? CRUZ. COMMISSIONER CRUZ, OR MAYBE I'M THINKING OF THIS WRONG, BUT THE SIGN THAT USED TO BE THERE WAS AT 50 FEET, CORRECT. AND IT WAS TAKEN DOWN? NO, THE CURRENT SIGN IS, UH, AT 50 FEET AND WE JUST TOOK OUT THE E M C BOARD. OH, OKAY. THAT'S HOW YOU'RE REPLACING THEN. SO WE'RE JUST REPLACING THE TOP PART, BUT WE'RE MAKING IT A LITTLE BIT BIGGER. YEAH, I SEE THAT. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANNA MAKE SURE. THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? HEARING NONE. IS THERE ANY CLOSING REMARKS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE BEFORE WE, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION? WELL, SO THE THEME PARK HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE, I MEAN, FOR A LONG TIME. AND IT PROVIDES, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR KIDS WHO ARE DISABLED AS WELL AS KIDS WHO ARE NOT DISABLED. SO IT'S A THEME PARK THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S FOR THE COMMUNITY AND IT WOULD BE REALLY BENEFICIAL FOR THE CLIENT IF THEY GOT THE 50 FEET FOR VISIBILITY BECAUSE IT, IT'S, UM, IT'S BETTER FOR THE CLIENT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, AT THIS POINT I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FROM THE COMMISSIONER CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 0 6 6. I MOVED AT THE BOARD ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR A 10 FOOT, SORRY, MY COMPUTER'S ACTING UP. 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 40 FOOT SIGN HEIGHT ALLOWANCE TO ALLOW A 50 FOOT TALL SINGLE TENANT SIGNED, [00:25:01] SITUATED 5 2 2 3. DAVID EDWARDS, APPLICANT B MORGAN'S WONDERLAND. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT THE VARIANCE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ARTICLE PROHIBITS ANY REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGNS ON THE SITE. CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE SITE, SUCH AS ITS DIMENSIONS, LANDSCAPING OR TO, TO TYPOGRAPHY, OR A DENIAL OF VARIANCE WOULD PROBABLY CAU CEASE CAUSE A SUCCESSION OF LIMIT. LI LI UNDERSTANDING ACTIVE COMMERCIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY. THE SIGN WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED AS A MULTI-TENANT SIGN, WHICH IS PERMITTED TO BE 50 FEET IN HIGH. BUT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REMOVE A CABINET WHICH WOULD TURN THE SIGN INTO A SINGLE TENANT SIGN. THE REQUEST TO MAINTAIN THE HEIGHT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE EXCESSIVE IN NATURE. AND WITH THE SIGN BEING EXISTING, A DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE MAY CAUSE A SENSATION OF COMMERCIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY. THREE, AFTER SEEKING ONE OR MORE OF THE FINDINGS THAT FALLS IN SUBPARAGRAPH ONE AND TWO, THE BOARD FINDS THAT GRANTING THE VARIANCE DOES NOT PROVIDE THE APPLICANT WITH SPECIAL PRIVILEGE, NOT ENJOYED BY OTHERS. SIMILARLY SITUATED OR POTENTIALLY SIMILARLY SITUATED. THE PROPOSED SIGN VARIANCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO APPROVE, TO PROVIDE SPECIAL PRIVILEGE TO THE APPLICANT NOR OTHER SERIOUSLY SITUATED. B GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE A SUBSTANTIALLY ADVERSE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THE PROPOSED SIGN BARR DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AS THE SIGN IS CURRENTLY EXISTING. AND ALL THE PROPOSED AND THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE SIGNS ARE MINIMAL. C GRANTING THE REARS WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH THE STATED PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE THAT REQUESTED VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH STATED PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. END OF MOTION. ALRIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. COMMISSIONER MANDA AS A SECOND. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. YEAH, I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH THIS. IT, IT IS A GOOD SIGN. UH, THEM CHANGING IT TO ONE, ONE CABINET WOULD BE GREAT. AND, UH, AND IT IS A WONDERFUL PARK, SO I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH IT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE? STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANO. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. TEO? YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. GREAT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, NEXT CASE PLEASE. AGENDA ITEM FOUR, BO O 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 8 3. ADDRESS IS 12 7 8 AUSTIN HIGHWAY COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO. APPLICANT IS A E G ALLPRO CONSTRUCTION. A REQUEST ONE, A ONE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT BASED IN SECTION 35 5 14 TO ALLOW A SEVEN FOOT FENCE AND TWO, A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM FOUR FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT AS DESCRIBED IN MC THREE DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW FOR A SEVEN FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE WITHIN THE MC THREE THREE CORRIDOR OVERLAY. ZONING IS C THREE MC THREE. CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON 1278 AUSTIN HIGHWAY AND THIS IS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REPLACE AN EXISTING FENCE ON THE PROPERTY WITH A SEVEN FOOT FENCE WITHIN THE MC THREE CORRIDOR OVERLAY. THE CORRIDOR PLAN REVIEW WAS DENIED AND THE OPTION FOR A VARIANCE WAS PRESENTED TO THE APPLICANT. SITE PLAN, SUBJECT PROPERTY, SUBJECT PROPERTY SURROUNDING AREA. RECOMMENDATION FRONT AND SIDE YARD SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO 8 22 1 0 3 83 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, A SEVEN FOOT FENCE IS BEING, BEING PROPOSED IN A PORTION OF THE FRONT AND SIDE YARD OF THE PROPERTY AND THE FENCE WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SAFETY AND SECURITY TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. RECOMMENDATION VARIANCE MC THREE. DESIGN STANDARDS STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW A SEVEN FOOT ORNAMENTAL FENCE AND FRONT AND SIDE YARD AND BO O A 22 1 0 3 8 3 [00:30:02] BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE SEVEN FOOT, THE SEVEN FOOT HEIGHT OF THE FENCE IS BEING REQUESTED FOR MORE SAFETY AND SECURITY MEASURES OF THE PROPERTY. THE EXISTING CHAINING FENCE WILL BE REMOVED AND PROPOSED FENCE MATERIAL IN ONE PERMITTED BY THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY. A PROPOSED SEVEN FOOT ORNAMENTAL FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF THE AUSTIN HIGHWAY HARRY SBACK METROPOLITAN CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT NOTIFICATION PLAN 17 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. NO RESPONSE FROM TORO HEIGHTS OR WILSHIRE VILLAGE ASSOCIATION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. ALL RIGHT, UH, BEFORE YOU GO, CAN YOU PLEASE CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE AND AN ORNAMENTAL FENCE? OR ARE THEY ONE AND THE SAME? SAME. WE ACTUALLY HAVE A DEFINITION OF WHAT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, UH, MEANS IN THE CODE THAT'S IN APPENDIX A. UM, THE, THE ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE. UH, PRIOR TO 2015, WE USED TO HAVE MORE, UH, DEFINITIVE MEASUREMENTS THAT WERE, THE POST HAD TO BE, UH, SPACED FROM, BUT THOSE WERE TAKEN OUT IN THE 2015 ORDINANCE. UH, THE ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE IS JUST AN OPEN FENCE. OKAY. SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE 70%, IT'S JUST OPEN. CORRECT. OKAY. I'M JUST TRYING TO, I'M JUST TRYING TO LOCK DOWN THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. MAY IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? MAY I, I COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, I GUESS, THE FIRST OPTION AND WHAT'S BEING RECOMMENDED. SO I I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS. UH, SO COULD YOU HELP ME THERE, PLEASE? I DON'T EITHER. WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING IS FOR THE FRONT YARD FENCE TO BE O UM, THE OPEN IRON FENCE AS OPPOSED TO A SOLID SCREEN FENCE, BUT NOT NECESSARILY 70% OPEN. SO THAT'S, SO YOU'RE SAYING ONLY THE FRONT SHOULD BE OPEN. THE SIDES CAN BE SOLID. SO THE FRONT YARD, SO THE AREA IN THE FRONT YARD, WHAT THEY WANNA DO IS THEY WANNA, THEY WANNA SCREEN THE ENTIRE AREA. IF YOU CAN SEE THAT THE, THE BUILDING IS SET BACK JUST BEHIND THOSE RED AND GREEN LINES ON THE SCREEN, THAT'S CONSIDERED THE FRONT YARD. WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT, THAT AREA WE WOULD RECOMMEND TO BE, UH, THE ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE AS OPPOSED TO A SOLID SCREEN FENCE. THAT'S THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION. WE'RE RECOMMENDATION WE'RE OKAY WITH THE HEIGHT THAT'S PROPOSED JUST FOR THAT FRONT YARD AREA. JUST BEYOND THE FRONT FACADE IS WHAT WE RECOMMEND TO BE THE OPEN FENCE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DID THAT ANSWER EVERYONE'S QUESTION? MENCHACA COMMISSIONER MINKA? UH, I'M A LITTLE BIT, UH, CONFUSED ON THIS ONE HERE. UH, WHEN YOU USE THE WORD, UH, ADDITIONAL SAFETY, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT? SO THE, A APPLICANT COULD PROBABLY SPEAK TO THAT. OKAY. UH, CAN WE HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORTH? PLEASE? IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME AND BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. I'M PAUL GUERRERO WITH A A G L PRO CONSTRUCTION. UH, YOUR QUESTION IS THE, THE ADDITIONAL, YOU LOOK AT THE SIGN ON THE LEFT SIDE, THERE'S, THERE IS A CHAIN LINK FENCE THERE ALREADY WITH BARBED WIRE ALREADY. AND ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT SIDE THERE IS CHAIN LINK FENCE THERE ALREADY WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING JUST TO ENCLOSE THE, THE TOP CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. 'CAUSE WE'RE HAVING, THERE'S A CHARTER SPECTRUM BUILDING THAT'S CRITICAL TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE 9 1 1 AND TO THE CELL TOWERS. UH, THEY'RE GETTING HOMELESS PEOPLE OVER THERE RIGHT NOW. I DO HAVE PICTURES, UH, IN TWO CASES WHERE THE HOMELESS PEOPLE ARE STAYING THERE. SO WE, WE GET IN THAT ANYBODY GETS IN THAT BUILDING, WE'RE ALL GONNA BE CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE. ALL THE CABLE NETWORK SWIPE YOUR CARS GOES THROUGH THAT BUILDING. THERE'S 30 OF THOSE BUILDINGS HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. SO, SO WE'RE HAVING PROBLEMS AND SOME OTHER SITES WHERE SPECTRUM IS TRYING TO GET IT ALL APPROVED SO WE CAN CHAIN LINK THESE FENCES IN. THANK YOU. UH, UH OKAY. THE REASON I, NO, GO AHEAD. EXCUSE ME. THE REASON I ASKED THAT QUESTION, BECAUSE THE WAY THE BARBED WIRE IS POINTING OUT IS TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT, RIGHT? WHEN YOU HAVE THE BARBED WIRE POINTING IN, IT'S TO KEEP PEOPLE IN. SO IF YOU GO ONE FOOT HIGH AND YOU STILL HAVE THE SAME BARBED WIRE, WILL THAT GIVE YOU ADDITIONAL SAFETY? THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. YES. HE'LL GIVE US SOME, SOME SAFETY THERE. SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO KEEP THE PEOPLE OUT. WE HAVE, WE HAVE THE BARBED WIRE ON OTHER SITES AND SPECTRUM DUST HAS THE BARBED WIRE COMING IN AND OUT AND THEY'RE STILL CLIMBING OVER THE BARBED WIRES TO GET INTO THE BUILDING. SO THE CHAIN LINK FENCE WILL RUN OUT WITH THE BARBED WIRE OUT AND RUN INTO THE ORAL METAL FENCE. SO TWO CONTRASTING TYPE OF ARCHITECTURES [00:35:01] OR FENCE TYPES. ORIGINALLY I, WHEN I PROPOSED IT TO, TO SPECTRUM, WE THOUGHT WE CAN GO WITH CHAIN LINK FENCE ALL, WE'LL JUST TIE INTO THE OTHER ONE, JUST CLOSE IT IN. THEN I GOT INSTRUCTED THAT WE CANNOT PUT CHAIN LINK FENCE IN FRONT OF THIS PROPERTY. NOW WE HAD TO GO WITH ORIENTAL FENCE NOW. SO WHAT'S THE ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER NOW? SO WE'RE THANK YOU. WE JUST WANT TO SECURE THE PROPERTY. JUST TELL US WHICH WAY WE CAN GO. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CRUZ? COMMISSIONER CRUZ. OH, SO WHAT IS THE FENCE HEIGHT? RIGHT. AND RIGHT NOW A SIX FOOT CHAIN LINK FENCE PLUS ONE FOOT BARB WIRE. OKAY. AND YOU'RE STILL HAVING PROBLEMS, UH, HAVING PEOPLE GET INTO THE PROPERTY, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT WHERE NO, WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS, MA'AM. WHERE YOU SEE THE RED AND THE RED AND GREEN LINE? YES SIR. IT IS OPEN TO THE GENERAL. YOU CAN JUST WALK UP TO THE BUILDING RIGHT NOW. OH, OKAY. SO THERE'S NO SIR, THERE'S NO FENCE THERE AT ALL RIGHT NOW. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THE RED AND GREEN LINE? YES, SIR. AT THE ADDITIONAL WE WANT TO PUT IN. OKAY, BUT THERE IS A FENCE RIGHT NOW THERE. CORRECT. BUT IT'S ONLY SIX FEET. THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. BUT, BUT YOU CAN WALK TO THE BUILDING, WALK FROM THE AUSTIN HIGHWAY STRAIGHT TO THE, INTO THE BUILDING. HIT THE BUILDING. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SIR. YOU, UH, PLANNING ON PUTTING BARBED WIRE ON TOP OF THIS NEW SEVEN FOOT FENCE AS THIS GETS APPROVED, ARE YOU STILL GONNA HAVE BARBED WIRE ON THE FENCE IF IT GOES TO SEVEN FEET? WELL, IT, IT DEPENDS IF YOU, IF CHAINING FENCE WAS NOT AN OPTION NOW FOR US, SO CHAINING FENCE WILL GET BARBED WIRE. IF WE HAD TO GO ORIENTAL FENCE, WE CAN GO SEVEN FOOT WITH THE, WITH NO BARBED WIRE. WELL, THE, JUST SO YOU, JUST FOR THE REST OF THE COMMISSION KNOWS, BARBED WIRE IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF CAN APPROVE ADMINISTRATIVELY. UH, FOR, FOR FACILITIES SUCH AS THIS. I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THE FENCE WAS GONNA BE SEVEN FEET PLUS BARBED WIRE, IF THAT WAS YOUR INTACT. NO, IT'D BE SIX, SIX FOOT PLUS ONE FOOT ON BARBED WIRE. JUST SAME HEIGHT WE HAVE EXISTING NOW. SO YOU DON'T NEED A SEVEN FOOT FENCE? WE NEED A SIX FOOT FENCE PLUS ONE FOOT BARB WIRE. NO. OKAY. SO FIRST OF ALL, HE'S IN THE AUSTIN HIGHWAY CORRIDOR. SO THE AUSTIN HIGHWAY CORRIDOR HAS CERTAIN, UH, PROHIBITED MATERIALS FOR FENCES THAT INCLUDES CYCLONE FENCES AND THAT INCLUDES BARBED WIRE. YOU CANNOT DO BARBED WIRE. SO THE OPTION HE HAS IS A SOLID SCREEN FENCE, LIKE A WOODEN FENCE OR, UM, THE IRON, THE ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE AS WELL. SO THAT'S WHY WE, HE'S REQUESTING A SOLID SCREEN FENCE. 'CAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY MATERIAL THAT HE CAN DO, THAT HE CAN DO AT SEVEN FEET. OKAY. SO IF YOU WANTED BARBED WIRE, WOULD THAT COME TO US OR WOULD THAT, CAN THAT STILL BE DONE BY ADMINISTRATIVE EXCEPTION? NO, IT CANNOT. NOT FOR THE AUSTIN HIGHWAY. THAT'S PROHIBITED. OKAY. SO YOU'RE TELLING ME I HAVE TO GO SEVEN FOOT ALL THE WAY TO FOR RIDE IRON FENCE? NO. YES. IF SO, THAT'S OUR, OUR ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION. IF THE BOARD FEELS THAT THEY, THEY WANNA AGREE WITH THAT ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE A SEVEN FOOT FOR THE ORNAMENTAL IRON IN THE FRONT, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO UP TO SEVEN FEET TO DO THAT. BUT IF THEY APPROVE YOUR REQUEST AS REQUESTED THE SOLID SCREEN, THEN IT WOULD JUST BE THE SOLID SCREEN WOOD FENCE AT SEVEN FEET. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. SO, UM, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, HEAR A MOTION ON THIS. OKAY. UH, AND JUST SO EVERYONE KENT, CAN WE DO, UM, SEVEN FOOT ORNAMENTAL FENCE IN THE FRONT AND AND SIDE IS SEVEN FEET SOLID SCREEN. THAT'S THE STAS RECOMMENDATION. THAT'S RECOMMENDATION. YES. BUT I THINK HE HAS A CONCERN WITH THE ADDED COST TO MAKE THE, THE ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE AT SEVEN FEET. RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS TO CONSIDER. UH, THE APPLICANT'S ASKING FOR A SEVEN FOOT SOLID SCREEN STAFF IS RECOMMENDING SEVEN FEET, BUT WITH IT BEING ORNAMENTAL IN THE FRONT PORTION AND ORNAMENTAL DOES NOT MEAN 70% PREDOMINANTLY OPEN LIKE WE ARE WE HEAR ON OCCASION. IT CAN JUST BE ANY SORT OF, UH, ORNAMENTAL AS LONG AS IT IS OPEN OF SOME KIND. SO, UH, IS THERE A COMMISSIONER WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS? DO WE JUST NEED TO DESIGNATE THE AREA? I MEAN, I'M, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. ALRIGHT. MIGHT AS WELL. TEAL COMMISSIONER TEAL REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 8 3. I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED A REQUEST FOR ONE, A ONE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FOR A SEVEN FOOT FENCE AND TWO, A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM FOUR FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FOR A SEVEN FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE WITHIN THE MC DASH THREE CORRIDOR OVERLAY, SITUATED AT 1 2 7 8 AUSTIN HIGHWAY. APPLICANT BEING A A G ALL PRO CONSTRUCTION L L C, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE [00:40:01] DETERMINED TO SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR FENCE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST FOR A SEVEN FOOT TALL FENCE TO BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B. THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY AT THE SEVEN FOOT FENCE ALONG THE FRONT AND SIDE PORTION OF THE YARD MAY NOT POSE ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE. THE EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE WILL BE REMOVED IN ORDER TO INSTALL THE NEW FENCE. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. A NEW FENCE WILL CREATE AN ENHANCED SECURITY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ON THE FRONT AND SIDE YARD, AND IS UNLIKELY TO SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ANY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WILL SERVE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY TO THE PROPERTY. 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 FRONT AND SIDE YARD FENCING DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT IS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SAFETY. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE DIS THUS SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS THE CURRENT USE AND WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. END OF MOTION. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THIEL, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, UH, AND STAFF ON THE, ON THE MOTION, IT, IT APPEARS TO HAVE KEPT GOING WITH ADDITIONAL, UH, TEXT. IS THAT, IS THAT, SHOULD THAT BE READ IN AS WELL OR IS THAT SEPARATED? UH, THE ADDITIONAL TEXT WAS FOR THE VARIANCE. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO COMMISSIONER THIEL, WELL, I THINK WHAT I READ WAS, UH, BASICALLY GIVEN THE APPLICANT WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IN THE FRONT WITHOUT ANY ALTERATION. UM, AND SO I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION AS READ. UM, HOWEVER, IF THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE THAT SOMEBODY ELSE WOULD, UH, APPRECIATE, THEN I'M OPEN TO THAT AS WELL. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? UH, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE RECOMMENDATION WITH THE FRONT AND SIDE, THE, THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION WHERE WE HAVE THE ORNAMENTAL FRONT IN THE FRONT AND SEVEN FOOT FENCE, THE SOLID SCREEN ON THE SIDE. BUT I DON'T THINK WE READ THAT, DID WE? UH, NO, WE DID NOT. . OKAY. SO LET'S, I WANTED TO HEAR FROM THE REST OF THE COMMISSION SINCE WE HAVE A FULL COMMISSION. UH, WE'LL, COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO THE QUESTION I HAD WAS, UM, YOU AS READ, I GUESS I WOULD ASK HOW FAR BACK FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND SO THE, SO THE PICTURE RIGHT NOW SHOWS IT TO BE, UH, LOOKS LIKE 20 FEET FROM THE BUILDING FORWARD. AND I THINK IF THAT WAS ADDED, I'D BE MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE SOLID SCREEN SO THAT IT'S PUSHED WAY BACK OFF THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. UM, OTHERWISE I THINK I WOULD GO WITH MS. KAPLAN. BUT YOU'RE, ARE YOU ASKING, SO ON THE, THERE'S A, ON THE PICTURE, ARE YOU SAYING TAKE THE, THE RED AND GREEN LINE AND MOVE IT CLOSER TO THE BUILDING? NO, I'M SAYING, UH, SET THE DISTANCE, THE MAX, I GUESS THE MAXIMUM DISTANCE IT COULD BE IN THE FRONT FROM THE BUILDING. UM, SO THAT BASICALLY THEY, THEY CAN'T PUSH A FENCE ALL THE WAY TO THE, TO THE STREET. RIGHT. SO IS, UH, I JUST WANNA ASK THE APPLICANT, DO YOU KNOW THE DISTANCE FROM THE, FROM THE EDGE OF YOUR BUILDING, RIGHT? THERE'S ABOUT 45 FEET. I KNOW THE SETBACK IS 30 FEET FROM THE CURB LINE? NO, NOT FROM THE, NOT FROM THE CURB LINE, I MEAN FROM THE BUILDING, FROM THE BACK SIDE, FROM THE BUILDING, FROM THE, YEAH, FROM THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING TO THE, TO THE RED GREEN, RED GREEN DECK. THAT'S PROBABLY 10 FOOT, PROBABLY 10. YOU PARK A TRUCK RIGHT THERE. OKAY. SO COMMISSIONER ARMANA HAS, HAS ASKED FOR AN AMENDMENT, A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO GO TO A 20 FOOT MAX AWAY FROM THE FRONTAGE OF THE BUILDING. UH, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU'D ACCEPT? I, I WOULD ACCEPT THAT. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH. UM, SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MOVING THIS FENCE CLOSER TO THE STREET? HE, HE, THE, THE, THE MOTION, UH, A AMENDMENT WAS TO REQUEST THAT THE, THE FENCE COULD BE NO FURTHER THAN 20 FEET FROM THE BUILDING, NO FURTHER THAN 20 FEET FROM THE BUILDING. SIR, CAN YOU JUST REFERENCE A SITE PLAN WITH THAT, WITH THE EXHIBIT ON THE SITE PLAN? SURE. BECAUSE THERE MIGHT BE SOME, SOME MOVEMENT FROM A DEFINED 10 FOOT OR WHATEVER. YEAH. SO WHAT, YEAH. SO, AND THIS IS NOW WHAT, 10 FEET? IT'S CURRENTLY 10 FEET? OR IS WELL, IF IT'S 10 FEET, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE MY REQUEST IS WHATEVER THE MINIMUM, WHATEVER THE MAXIMUM WOULD BE, OR THE MINIMUM, WHATEVER THE MAXIMUM RESTRICTION WE PUT IN IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO PUT IN, I GUESS. AND SO IF IT'S ONLY 10 FEET, THEN I'D SAY 10 FOOT. BUT THE ONLY THING I, I WOULD CONCERN ABOUT IS SIGHT LINES, BECAUSE IF YOU MOVE THAT FENCE CLOSER TO AUSTIN HIGHWAY, UH, THEN WOULDN'T YOU BE CUTTING OFF THE SIGHT LINE? YEAH, THAT'S WHY HE'S SAYING HE'S USING THE BUILDING AS A POINT OF REFERENCE. CURRENTLY THAT FENCE AS PROPOSED IS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 35 AND 40 FEET. RIGHT. SO CHAIR, IF I MAY. YES. UM, 'CAUSE SINCE WE'RE NOT INCLUDING ANY OF THE CLEAR VISION REGULATIONS, WE ALREADY KNOW THAT FROM THE CORNER IT HAS TO BE 25 FEET, UH, SETBACK. AND FROM THE DRIVEWAY IT HAS TO BE AT LEAST 15 FEET SETBACK. [00:45:01] SO WE COULD, IF YOU WANTED TO READ IT ONE WAY, THE MOTION COULD BE AMENDED TO SAY NO CLOSER TO 25 FEET TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD CLEAR THE CLEAR VISION ISSUES AND THEN SET SOME TANGIBLE LOCATION THAT ISN'T DEPENDENT ON A BUILDING, OR YOU COULD JUST UTILIZE WHAT THE CODE DOESN'T ALLOW 'EM TO DO AND JUST SETTLE WITH THAT MINIMUM. YEAH. OKAY. WHAT DO YOU THINK COMMISSIONER? MANNA? ? I GUESS, I DON'T KNOW THE DISTANCE THERE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I'M JUST LOOKING FOR THE MINIMUM DISTANCE, UH, TO PUSH IT TO THE BUILDING. AND SO IF THAT'S 25 FOOT, THAT'S FINE. BUT, YOU KNOW, I GUESS I'M JUST LOOKING FOR AS CLOSE AS I CAN GET IT TO THAT DRIVEWAY AS POSSIBLE. AND SO WHATEVER THAT IS, THAT'S WHAT I'D BE ASKING FOR. ANOTHER VARIANCE. YEAH, SO IT'S, IT'S UH, CLEAR VISION'S, 25 FEET. IT'S APPARENTLY MORE THAN THAT NOW FROM THE CORNER AND THEN FROM THE DRIVEWAY AREA IT'S 15 FEET. YEAH. BUT SO HE COULDN'T PUT A SOLID SCREEN FENCE PAST THOSE, BEYOND THOSE LINES. SO MY, MY, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE THAT IT DOESN'T GO ANY FURTHER THAN WHAT'S DRAWN RIGHT NOW, WHATEVER THAT DISTANCE IS. OKAY. YEAH, WE DON'T HAVE A, A REFERENCE OF THAT. WE DON'T HAVE THAT. AND I, I WOULDN'T WANNA JUST THROW A NUMBER OUT THERE WITHOUT THOSE DEFINITIVE MEASUREMENTS, WHICH IS WHY I WAS OFFERING WE ALREADY HAVE THE CLEAR VISION RULE. YEAH. SO IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER. DOESN'T REALLY MATTER. YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER, UH, WHAT WE SAY ABOUT HOW FAR WE SHOULD JUST GO WITH THE VARI YOUR, YOUR VARIANCE RECOMMENDATION IF YOU WANNA SEE NO PUTTING ASIDE THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ABOUT THE MATERIAL, UM, WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT RATHER THAN TRYING TO COME UP WITH A NUMBER ABOUT WHERE THAT FENCE, UH, SHOULD START WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT EXACT MEASUREMENTS THEY ARE, YOU COULD JUST UTILIZE THE CLEAR VISION RULE THAT SAYS THAT YOU CANNOT PUT A SOLID SCREEN FENCE 15 FEET. RIGHT. AND THAT'S IMPLIED AND THAT'S IMPLIED ANYWAY. SO YES, EXACTLY. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A LET'S DEFINITIVE MEASUREMENT. LET YEAH, I THINK IT, IT, YEAH, WE'VE, IT WORKED ITSELF OUT. YEAH, IT, THANK YOU. IT'S WORKED ITSELF SO WE'LL, WE'LL CONTINUE HEARING FROM DIFFERENT COMMISSIONERS ASKING ANYWAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER, UH, REMARKS AND, AND JUST TO CLARIFY, WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE HIKE. CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO I'M, I'M GONNA CHIME IN. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THEM WITH THE, WITH THE CLEAR VISION HEIGHT OR THE VARIANCE ON THIS. AND, AND I ONLY SAYING THAT BECAUSE IT, IT IS A UTILITY, UH, THERE IS A NEED FOR SECURITY AND, AND IT, IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO SECURE THIS SORT OF PLACE. SO, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW I LOOK AT THIS. SO IF THE MOTION'S BEEN READ AS, UH, IN THE, AS THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED IT TO BE READ, IF THERE'S ANY COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE ADAMANTLY AGAINST THAT, PLEASE SPEAK UP. I, I GUESS I'M STILL, SO, I'M SORRY. AND SO IF I LOOK AT THE BUILDING NEXT DOOR, YOU KNOW, IT'S SET AT THE CURRENT FENCE HEIGHT AND OR THE FIR THE FENCE DISTANCE. AND SO IF WE MOVE AHEAD OF THAT, THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW WE'RE CUTTING VIEW FROM THAT, FROM THAT NEIGHBOR BUSINESS. YEAH. AND, AND I, I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ACCEPT 35 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. GOTCHA. SO, SO WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, SO WHATEVER THAT DISTANCE IS, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE AREN'T CUTTING OFF THE NEXT BUILDING NEXT TO IT. SO 15, RIGHT? HE WANTS MORE. I MEAN, CAN WE JUST, AND, AND RIGHT, SO THE CLEAR VISION RULES WOULD MAKE SURE THAT THAT WOULDN'T HAPPEN. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THOSE SETBACK DISTANCES OF 15 FEET FROM STAFF. IS IT POSSIBLE 25 FEET TO JUST SAY WHERE, UM, THE DEFENSE IS, WHERE THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING IT ON THE SITE PLAN? YES. THAT'S FINE. HOW'S THAT? ALRIGHT, THAT WORKS FOR ME. YES. AND I ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT. SO COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YES. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR, UH, AS READ, UH, AS, AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT AND AMENDED SO THAT IT IS IN LINE WITH THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED WITH THE APPLICATION. ALRIGHT, SO IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MR. THI YES, I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN, THIS IS JUST, I CONCUR. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR. 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. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR. UH, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. AND NOW ONTO THE VARIANCE. WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION? COMMISSIONER THIEL TEEL. ALL RIGHT. ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS FOR THE MC DASH THREE OVERLAY DESIGN [00:50:01] STANDARDS. IN REGARDS TO THE FENCE REQUIREMENT, THE MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT, FENCE HEIGHT PERMITTED IN THE CORRIDOR FOR A SOLID SCREEN FENCE IS THREE FEET FOR AND PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IS FOUR FEET. THE PROPOSED FENCE WILL BE A SOLID SCREEN SEVEN FOOT TALL. THE VARIANCE APPEARS TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE CORRIDOR WAS ADOPTED TO PRESERVE THE CORRIDOR. JUST READING IN THE, THERE IS AN EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REPLACE. THE CHAIN LINK IS NOT PERMITTED, IS NOT A PERMITTED MATERIAL BY THE MC DASH THREE OVERLAY DISTRICT. SO THE STAFF FINDS THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW A SEVEN FOOT ORNAMENTAL FENCE TO SERVE THE PUBLIC INTEREST 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 HAVING TO USE PROPER MATERIALS AS REQUIRED BY THE MC DASH THREE DESIGN STANDARDS AND ADD ADDITIONAL COSTS TO THE PROJECT. THE EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE IS TALLER THAN WHAT IS PERMITTED BY THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY AND IS NON-CONFORMING. THE REPLACEMENT OF THE FENCE WILL ALLOW FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO REPLACE THE MATERIAL AND MAINTAIN THE SECURITY TO THE PROPERTY. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OR OF THE ORDINANCE, IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE PROPOSED SEVEN FOOT SOLID SCREEN FRONT YARD FENCE WILL NOT OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE ESTABLISHED BY THE MC DASH THREE OVERLAY DISTRICT. HOWEVER, IT IS FOUND THAT AT A SEVEN FOOT ORNAMENTAL FENCE WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE USES ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS A REQUEST FOR A SEVEN FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION IS TO ALLOW A SEVEN FOOT ORNAMENTAL FENCE, WHICH DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS IT IS A MATERIAL PERMITTED BY THE MC DASH THREE OVERLAY DISTRICT SIX. THE PLIGHT 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, ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO WHERE THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THE P TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, INCLUDING THE CORNER LOCATION OF THE LOT, THE PREEXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE THAT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. AND IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THI SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD. UH, THE, THE HEADING OF THE MOTION WASN'T READ AND BECAUSE THIS IS FOR A VARIANCE, UM, YEAH, REREAD THAT. COMMISSIONER THIEL, COULD YOU PLEASE, UH, READ THE HEADING AND AND EX WITH THE NUMBER TWO? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT YEAH, LIKE YOU GOTTA READ THIS PART. SKIP ONE, JUST START. OKAY. REGARDING CASES NUMBER BO A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 83, I MOVED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR TO A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FOUR FOOT MAX MAXIMUM FOUR FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FOR A SEVEN FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE WITHIN THE MC DASH THREE CORRIDOR OVERLAY, SITUATED AT 1 2 7 8 AUSTIN HIGHWAY APPLICANT BEING A A G ALL PRO CONSTRUCTION L L C. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. OKAY, SO A MOTION ON THE TABLE IS FOR A MOTION FOR A THREE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE FOUR FOOT FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT OF THE, OF THE, UH, M C D. AND SO WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE IS, IS THAT NORMALLY YOU WOULD HAVE SIX FOOT FOUR FOOT, WE HEAR ALL THESE DIFFERENT HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR ZONING OVERLAY, IT'S A FOUR FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR A THREE FOOT VARIANCE TO GO TO SEVEN FOOT SEVEN FEET. AND, UH, COMMISSIONER TEAL, DID YOU READ THAT FOR A, UM, ORNAMENTAL FENCE OR FOR A, OR AS, UH, I READ IT AS AN ORNAMENTAL IN THE FRONT. OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR AN ORNAMENTAL FENCE IN THE FRONT AND A SOLACE GREEN FENCE, UH, ANYWHERE BUT THE FRONT, CORRECT, THE LINE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION. I'M FINE WITH THAT. ALL RIGHT. SO IS THERE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER COMMENTARY ON THE MOTION BEFORE US? ALL RIGHT. SO WITH THAT, UH, WE'LL HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MR. THI YES, I CAN COVER THE FINDINGS OF FACT MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ I CONCUR. MR. MANNA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN, 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. UH, WE DID PASS THE SEVEN FOOT HEIGHT, UH, AND WE DID, UH, PASS SEVEN FEET AS AN ORNAMENTAL ON THE FRONT AS STAFF RECOMMENDED. OKAY. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN JUST GET WITH STAFF AND THEY'LL, THEY'LL CONFUSING IT. IT IS [00:55:01] A LITTLE CONFUSING, BUT THEY'LL, THEY'LL HELP GUIDE YOU THROUGH THIS OVERLAY. THAT'S SO, YEAH. YES, SIR. ALRIGHT, SO, ALRIGHT, GOOD. THANK Y'ALL. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, NEXT CASE PLEASE. NEXT, NEXT CASE IS BO O A DASH 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 61 AT 2205 MONTEREY AND COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE APPLICANT IS GENCO AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE TYPE, UH, AN ADDITIONAL TYPE ONE OR TYPE TWO SHORTTERM RENTAL. UH, THE ZONING DISTRICT IS R FOUR. UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED NORTHWEST CORNER OF, UH, MONTEREY STREET AND SOUTH NAVIDA. UH, SURROUNDING USES ARE PRIMARILY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH COMMERCIAL UP TO THE NORTH. UH, THERE'S CURRENTLY ONE OTHER TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ISSUED DOWN THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THIS IS THE ONLY OTHER TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON THE BLOCK FACE. UH, APPLICANT SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UH, IN ADDITION TO THE ONE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PERMITTED. UH, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH THE, UH, SURROUNDING PERMITTED TYPE TWO AND OR PERMITTED SHORT-TERM RENTALS. UM, AND THIS IS THE PROVIDED SITE PLAN FOR THE RENTAL. UH, THIS IS SHOWING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET AND THEN ACROSS THE STREET, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UH, BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT THAT THERE IS CURRENTLY ONE OTHER ACTIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON THE BLOCK FACE. UH, 27 NOTIFICATIONS WERE SENT OUT, UH, ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION. AND THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MAY, IS THERE ANY, UH, ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS OR ANY, UH, VOICEMAILS? NO, THEY'RE DONE. ALL RIGHT. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. HELLO GUYS. HOW YOU DOING? UH, MY NAME IS MIKE GUTIERREZ AND THIS IS JENKO. UH, SO WE OWN THE PROPERTY TOGETHER. SO WE, WE WERE FILING FOR THE VARIANCE. I DID TAKE THE LIBERTY TO, TO DOOR KNOCK THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I SPOKE TO A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORS. I GOT SIGNATURES AND PHONE NUMBERS AND ADDRESSES TO THOSE. AND DO YOU GIVE THAT TO STAFF? THEY CAN PROJECT IT UP ON THE SCREEN FOR US? ABSOLUTELY. SO BASED ON WHAT THE CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORS, UH, THEY LOVE THE IDEA BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY ONE THERE. UM, THE HOUSE THAT WE PURCHASE IS FIXED UP PRETTY NICE, SO A LOT OF 'EM ARE SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, IT BRINGS UP THE VALUE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO, UM, I DID GET SOME PEOPLE THAT WERE A LITTLE HESITANT ON GIVING ME THEIR PHONE NUMBERS, SO I DIDN'T GET THAT. UM, BUT I WAS ABLE TO GET 17 SIGNATURES AND, UH, SURROUNDING, AND THAT'S MAINLY ON THE SAME STREET. AND THEN, UH, BASED ON, UM, A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT HAPPENED IS WE, WHEN WE FIRST ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY, I DID CAR AIRBNB AND THEY SAID THAT THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY ISSUES WITH THEIR ONE BEING NEXT TO US. I LATER FOUND OUT AFTER WE ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY THAT YOU GUYS DO HAVE A VARIANCE ON THE SAME BLOCK FACE. I THINK THE DISADVANTAGE HERE IS THAT THE BLACK FACE IS ONLY FIVE HOUSES, SO THAT KIND OF GIVES US A SMALLER WINDOW TO WORK WITH. UM, I ALSO FOUND OUT THAT THE GUY THAT LIVES NEXT DOOR IS FILED AS A TYPE TWO, BUT HE DOES LIVE IN THE PROPERTY AND BASED ON MY RESEARCH, IT TECHNICALLY IS SUPPOSED TO BE A TYPE TWO BECAUSE HE DOES LIVE IN THE PROPERTY AND IS NOT OCCUPYING IT. SO I FEEL LIKE THAT KIND OF MESSES WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, WHICH WE DON'T MIND IF THERE'S ANOTHER ONE NEXT TO US. HE HAS, BASED ON WHAT THE RESEARCH I'VE DONE ON HIS PROPERTY, HE DOES HAVE A DIFFERENT SETUP. SO I THINK THE DEMOGRAPHIC HE'S GEARING TO IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT AS WELL. UM, SO I THINK THAT'S A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT WENT ON. OKAY. UM, AND I'M JUST GONNA ASK IF YOU COULD PLEASE TALK ABOUT, UH, PARKING AND THEN ANY COMMUNICATION YOU HAD WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UH, SO I DIDN'T HAVE ANY, UH, COMMUNICATION WITH ANYBODY. UH, HOWEVER, THAT WHOLE DRIVEWAY, UM, IS ALL PARKING. YOU CAN FIT ABOUT FOUR CARS THERE, AND THEN YOU HAVE UP AN ADDITIONAL MAYBE TWO SPACES ON THE FRONT. I AM LOOKING TO BUY THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR FOR MYSELF TO LIVE THERE. I GREW UP IN THE AREA. I ALWAYS SPENT A FEW YEARS WORKING AT THE BILL MILLER DOWN THE STREET. UM, SO I'M, I LOVE THE AREA AND I THINK RIGHT NOW, BASED ON WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE EAST SIDE, IT'S VERY HEAVILY PROPERTY WITH AIRBNBS. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE WEST SIDE, I MEAN, ASIDE FROM THAT ONE, THERE'S MAYBE LIKE TWO MORE IN THE AREA. UM, SO I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE AREA JUST TO BRING UP THE VALUES AND MAKE THE STREET LOOK NICE. THERE IS, I DID NOTICE WHILE I WAS DOOR KNOCKING, THERE IS SEVERAL PROPERTIES THAT ARE VACANT, UH, THAT LOOK LIKE THERE'S NOBODY BEEN THERE IN A WHILE. UM, SO I THINK JUST BY BRINGING MORE ATTENTION TO THAT SIDE OF [01:00:01] TOWN, I THINK IT WOULD, IT WOULD HELP IT. OKAY. WELL, WE'RE GONNA, IS ANYONE DECIDED TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? NO. ALRIGHT. IS WE GONNA, THIS COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE A QUESTION? CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UM, YOU SAID THERE'S SOMEONE ELSE, UH, WITH A SHORT TERM, UH, RENTAL. IS THAT THE ONE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO YOU? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES, MA'AM. IT'S THE, THE ONE RIGHT NEXT DOOR. OKAY. BUT YOU ARE SAYING THAT IT'S REALLY NOT A SHORT TERM RENTAL BECAUSE SOMEONE LIVES THERE PERMANENTLY? BASED ON MY RESEARCH, WHAT I FOUND WAS THAT IN ORDER FOR YOU TO BE CONSIDERED A TYPE ONE, YOU HAVE TO LIVE IN THE PROPERTY AND THEN AIRBNB IT OR WHATEVER HAVE YOU. SO BASED ON MY CONVERSATION WITH, WITH, UH, THE HOUSE MANAGER AND A COUPLE OF THE NEIGHBORS, THE GUY LIVES THERE. I'VE SEEN HIM THERE MULTIPLE TIMES. I HAVEN'T GOT TO SPEAK WITH THEM. I DON'T HAVE HIS NUMBER. UM, SO BASED ON THAT, I THINK HE SHOULD BE A TYPE TWO AND I SHOULD WELL, HE, HE WOULD BE, YOU'RE THINKING HE SHOULD BE A TYPE ONE? I'M SORRY. YES. HE SHOULD BE A TYPE ONE AND I SHOULD BE A TYPE TWO. YEAH. THE NEIGHBOR IS REGISTERED AS A TYPE TWO. WHETHER HE LIVES THERE OR NOT IS IS IRRELEVANT. YEAH. BUT THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S ALWAYS ANOTHER PROBLEM THAT ALWAYS COMES UP. UM, OKAY. AND I KNOW IT'S A SMALL BLOCK, SO THAT DOESN'T HELP ANY EITHER. CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MANNA? YES. SO THIS FOR CITY, I HAVE A QUESTION. UM, WHEN I LOOK AT THE MAP, I SHOW THAT THIS HOME IS ALREADY A TYPE TWO AS WELL AS THE ONE NEXT DOOR. LET, LET ME EXPLAIN THAT. SO WHEN WE FIRST INITIALLY APPLIED FOR THE PERMIT, IT, IT DID GET APPROVED AND THEN JOSH CALLED US AND SAID THAT IT WAS A MISTAKE. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. SO IT, IT DID INITIALLY GET APPROVED. UM, SO THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED THERE. OKAY. COMMISSIONER ZUMA. YEAH, SO MY QUESTION IS THE HARDSHIP, UH, HAVE, HAVE YOU TRIED TO DO A LONG-TERM RENTAL? OR WHAT WOULD THE HARDSHIP BE FOR YOU GUYS? IF, IF, UH, FOR WHATEVER REASON, UH, YOUR, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UM, REQUEST WAS DENIED HERE TODAY? SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, I MEAN, WE, IT'S, IT'S OUR FIRST INVESTMENT PROPERTY, SO I'VE, MAN, JUST THIS WHOLE EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN GREAT JUST BECAUSE I AM A REALTOR IN SAN ANTONIO, SO I DO HAVE A LOT OF INVESTORS THAT I WORK WITH. SO JUST LEARNING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, AIRBNB AND SHORT-TERM RENTALS, IT HAS HELPED ME A LOT BECAUSE I MADE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THAT THERE'S, I MEAN, I COULDN'T EVEN TELL YOU HOW MANY SHORT-TERM RENTALS THERE ARE OUT THERE THAT ARE NOT EVEN REGISTERED, THAT ARE OPERATING WITHOUT PERMITS. UM, I JUST SAW, I JUST TORE TWO OF 'EM YESTERDAY WITH AN INVESTOR THAT CAME IN FROM CALIFORNIA. UM, THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT OPTION BECAUSE THE, I THINK THE ISSUE LIES THAT WE ALREADY SPENT SOME MONEY, YOU KNOW, WE DID SOME UPGRADES TO THE HOME. WE PUT A PERGOLA IN THE BACK, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS PICTURED THERE, BUT WE PUT A NICE PERGOLA IN THE BACK. WE ALREADY UPDATED THE FENCE, SO WE TOOK OUT THE CHAINLINK. THANKS. AND WE PUT, YOU KNOW, A NICER ONE THERE. UM, AND THEN ALSO, YOU KNOW, WE ALREADY FURNISHED A PLACE BOUGHT TV, SO IT'S READY TO GO, HONESTLY. UM, THE LONG-TERM RENTAL, I MEAN, IF THAT'S OUR ONLY OPTION, THAT'S THE WAY WE WOULD GO. HOWEVER, WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THE SHORT-TERM OPTION. OKAY. JUST 'CAUSE IT WOULD, FINANCIALLY IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR US. WELL, I, SO I HAVE A QUESTION. UH, DID YOU, DID YOU, UH, UH, MAKE YOUR APPLICATION, UH, WHEN YOU HAD MENTIONED IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED, BUT WHEN YOU MADE YOUR APPLICATION, WERE YOU STILL, UH, IN THE PURCHASE PROCESS? NO, SO WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY. UH, WE CLOSED ON IT, I BELIEVE, AT THE END OF JANUARY. AND LIKE I SAID, I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT PERMITS 'CAUSE I HAD ALREADY CALLED AIRBNB AND THEY SAID, 'CAUSE I, WHEN I FOUND OUT THAT THERE WAS ONE NEXT DOOR IN THE PROCESS, I CALLED AIRBNB AND THEY SAID IT DIDN'T MATTER WHO WAS NEXT TO US, I JUST DIDN'T KNOW THAT IT WAS A CITY REQUIREMENT VERSUS AIRBNB. AND DID YOU REACH OUT AT ALL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? 'CAUSE WE STAFF HAS, HAS PRESENTED THAT THEY DIDN'T, UH, CHIME IN ON THIS CASE. DID DID YOU HAVE ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THEM AT I DIDN'T HAVE. I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THERE WAS ONE ACTUALLY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? ALBERT? COMMISSIONER ALBERT, I SEE BY YOUR SITE PLAN THAT YOU HAVE, UH, PLANS FOR EIGHT BEDS, TWO EACH ROOM WITH THE BUILDING. IT'S A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE. UH, WE HAVE THREE BEDS IN THERE, AND THEN WE HAVE LIKE A SOFA BED TYPE IN THE LIVING ROOM. AND, AND HOW COMMITTED ARE YOU TO THAT SITE PLAN? NOT VERY COMMITTED. I THINK AS LONG AS WE HAVE THE THREE BEDS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE QUEENS IN EACH ONE, SO, I MEAN, I'M OKAY WITH THAT. SO YOU COULD HAVE UP TO SIX ABSOLUTELY. CASES AT ONE TIME? ABSOLUTELY. A HUNDRED PERCENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. ALL, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, UH, IF THERE'S ANY CLOSING REMARKS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? UH, I THINK THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WHERE MINORITIES JUST, YOU KNOW, INTENDING TO DO BETTER FOR OURSELVES AND OUR FAMILIES. AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE EVERY RIGHT INTENTION BY THIS PROPERTY, UH, TO NOT ONLY UPHOLD THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE COMMUNITY, BUT ALSO GIVE BACK. SO I THINK BY GRANTING THIS, THIS EXCEPTION, I THINK IT WOULD, IT WOULD HELP OUT IN GENERAL. AND LIKE I SAID, I'VE LEARNED SO MUCH DURING THIS PROCESS THAT I JUST THINK THAT A LOT OF, THERE'S A LOT OF MISCOMMUNICATION OUT THERE WITH WHAT THE LAWS ARE. AND I THINK FOR SOME PEOPLE THAT DON'T NECESSARILY TAKE THE TIME TO READ AND KIND OF LOOK THROUGH EVERYTHING, I MEAN, YOU'RE GONNA FIND A LOT OF DISCREPANCIES OR PEOPLE THAT JUST BREAK [01:05:01] THE LAW ESSENTIALLY. AND THAT'S JUST FROM EXPERIENCE OF, FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN SO FAR OF, OF OTHER UNITS OPERATING WITH NO PERMIT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. O ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA, SORRY, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 22 DASH 3 6 1. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE, UH, TYPE TWO SHORT TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT 2 2 0 5 MONTEREY STREET, A APPLICANT BEING, UH, JIM COE. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO OPERATE OF ONE ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE. THERE'S NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS ADDRESS, VIA THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THERE ARE A TOTAL OF FIVE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THIS BLACK FACE, AND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL PERMIT A TOTAL OF TWO TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS, RESULTING IN 40% OF THE BLOCK FACE. THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WOULD BE CREATED IF THESE PERMITS WERE APPROVED. UH, C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY, UH, WOULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSIST OF SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES. THERE WAS NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE ADDITIONAL, THE ADDITION OF A SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT WAS, WAS WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, A DE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS, ROADS, STORM DRAINAGE, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND OTHER NECESS AND OTHER NECESSARY FAC. UH, FACILITIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED. THE SUBJECT PROVI PROPERTY PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITY ACCESS IN OPEN SPACE. EITHER APPLICANT OR OWNER FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT-TERM RENTAL LICENSES. CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE, UH, WITHIN ONE YEAR OF THE ONE YEAR PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION. THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY HISTORY OF REVOCATION, CITATIONS, OR CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, AFTER THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THIS DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE, THE SPECIAL, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WITH SURROUNDING COMMERCIAL USES THAT ARE CONDUCIVE TO THE OPERATION OF A SHORT TERM RENTAL, UH, WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING OFF STREET PARK AND MAINTAIN AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND OF MOTION. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A, A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ZUNE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNE, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. YEAH, SO I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION AS READ. I MEAN, THEY, UM, WE'VE SEEN, UH, THE APPLICANT DID, I BELIEVE, DID HIS HOMEWORK. UM, IN TERMS OF, OF, UH, OF, UH, COMPETING OR SURROUNDING SHORT-TERM RENTALS, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S A, A WIDESPREAD CREEP OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS INTO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. I, UM, ADMIRE THESE GUYS FOR TAKING THE INITIATIVE TO, UH, TO, UM, REMODEL THE HOUSE. THE HOUSE LOOKS REALLY NICE. I MEAN, THAT'S KIND OF THE INVESTMENT THAT I'M SEEING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO MAKE A VERY NICE, UM, UH, PROPERTY, WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE THEY WOULD'VE PURSUED IF NOT FOR THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL OPPORTUNITY HERE. OF COURSE, THEY DIDN'T KNOW THAT IT WOULD, WOULD'VE BEEN THE VARIANCES THEY WERE SEEKING, BUT, UH, I THINK THAT'S THE POSITION WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW, AND FOR THAT I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER BREGMAN, SO I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS WELL. UM, THE FACT THAT 17 OF THE NEIGHBORS HAVE SIGNED AN AGREEMENT, UM, DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT. UH, AND THE FACT, AS COMMISSIONER OONA SAID, THERE ARE VERY FEW SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN THE, IN THE AREA COMPARED TO, UM, SOME OTHERS OF TOWN, WHICH SEEM TO BE INUNDATED. SO, UM, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? YES, I, I'VE, UH, COMMISSIONER SPIELMAN. YEAH, KIND OF AWARE OF THE WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORIC, UH, RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION. AND, UH, THEY'VE ACTUALLY BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT SHORT-TERM RENTALS GOING INTO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT'S A PRETTY BIG ISSUE FOR THEM. SO I'M SURPRISED THEY AREN'T HERE TO, UH, YOU KNOW, SPEAK TO THAT. BUT, UH, 40% OF A, YOU KNOW, FRONT FACE, I, I WOULD BE OPPOSED TO THAT. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? NO. COMMISSIONER ALBERT, I WON'T BE ABLE TO SUPPORT YOUR APPLICATION. I THINK 40% OF THE BLOCK FACE BEING TYPE TWO STRS IS TOO MUCH, UM, TOO MUCH FOR THE NEIGHBORS. AND THE FACT THAT IT IS A SHORT BLOCK FACE PUTS EVEN MORE PRESSURE ON THE NEIGHBORS, UH, CERTAINLY PUTS MORE PRESSURE ON THE PROPERTY OWNERS AS WELL. BUT IT'S THE NEIGHBORS, UH, THAT THIS CODE IS WRITTEN. YEAH, THAT'S, I SPECIFICALLY KNOCKED THE DOOR. WELL, HOLD ON, SIR, WE, IT'S, OH, GO. WE'RE GONNA CLOSE, RIGHT? BUT YEAH, I, I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT, UH, I THINK THE, THE CODE IS WELL WRITTEN BY THE CITY AND, UH, IT'S DOING EXACTLY WHAT IT'S MEANT TO DO. AND, UH, HOPEFULLY YOU'LL, YOU'LL NAIL THIS PROCESS DOWN. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? THI COMMISSIONER THIEL, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF, THE MOTION IS RED. UM, I THINK WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE WAS, IS, UH, BASED OFF A NOT COMPLETELY TESTED ORDINANCE, UH, AND YOU GET SOME UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES LIKE, SAY, TYPE TWO PERMIT SQUATTING ESSENTIALLY IS WHAT MAYBE WE'RE SEEING HERE. I ALSO [01:10:01] COMMEND Y'ALL FROM GOING OUT AND GETTING THE 17 SIGNATURES. IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE ANYBODY ON YOUR BLOCK FACE IS REALLY CONCERNED WITH IT, AND THEREFORE, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? WELL, OKAY, YOU KNOW WHERE I STAND. UH, I DO BELIEVE THAT THESE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, UH, DESTROY NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMUNITY, THAT WHEN YOU BRING IN PEOPLE WHO ARE ESSENTIALLY ON VACATION SHORT-TERM, THEY HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT ATTITUDE ABOUT NOISE, PARTYING, UH, TRAFFIC, UH, AND, AND TAKING CARE OF THE COMMUNITY. UH, WHEN YOU HAVE A LONG-TERM RENTAL, PEOPLE ARE THERE, THEY'RE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE NEIGHBORS. SO, UM, I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONER CHAKA? I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE KAPLAN. ALL RIGHT. UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? NO. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? YEAH, VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. OKAY. AND IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE, ALRIGHT, UH, I'M JUST GONNA CHIME IN AND SAY THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T, I'M NOT A FAN OF 40%. UH, WHAT I DID LIKE TO HEAR WAS, UH, THEY HAD ADEQUATE PARKING, UH, DOWN ALONG DRIVEWAY. UH, I ALSO LIKED THE NUMBER OF SIGNATURES AND, UM, NOTHING FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS VERY PECULIAR. UH, BUT, SO IN THIS CASE, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT FOR THE REASONS OF PARKING. UH, NO, NOTHING FROM THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION. AND, AND THREE, LOOKING AT THE MAP, THERE'S JUST NO OTHER S D R TYPE TWOS. I JUST THINK THE NEIGHBOR'S SQUATTING LIKE COMMISSIONER TEAL HAD MENTIONED. SO STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. OZUNA. YES, I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN, I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. ALBERT. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I DO NOT CONCUR, MR. VASQUEZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. KAPLAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN. I I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UH, MOTION FAILS. SIX TO FIVE, UH, SIX AGAINST FIVE FOUR. UH, SO WITH THAT, UH, YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF. I'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT YOUR OPTIONS. OKAY? YOU THANK YOU. NEXT CASE, PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. ITEM NUMBER SIX IS FOR CASE BO A DASH 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 87. GENERALLY LOCATED NORTHWEST OF ROGERS ROAD AND WISEMAN BOULEVARD WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT SIX. THE APPLICANT BEING PAP DAWSON ENGINEERS IS A REQUEST FOR 61 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 90 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 151 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED MF 33 MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG ROGERS ROAD AND IS CURRENTLY A VACANT LOT. THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED IN 2018, UH, TO MF 33 MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT, WHICH ALLOWS MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. AN APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON THE LOT. HOWEVER, DURING THE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT A SETBACK VARIANCE WOULD BE REQUIRED BASED ON THE PLANS THAT WERE SUBMITTED. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO ALLOW THE NEAREST STRUCTURE TO ROGERS ROAD TO BE 151 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND ROAD IFICATION, THE MAXIMUM FRONT SETBACK PERMITTED IS 90 FEET. NEXT SLIDE. HERE'S THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. AND YOU'LL SEE THAT THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE IS, UM, THE, THE CLOSEST STRUCTURE WOULD BE 151 FEET. AND THEN HERE'S THE VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS WELL, AND ANOTHER VIEW OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN THE SURROUNDING AREA, UH, ROGERS ROAD, AND THEN ANOTHER VIEW OF ROGERS ROAD. REGARDING THE FRONT SETBACK. VARIANCE, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT. ONE, THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE AREA. TWO, THE PROPERTY SUBSTANTIAL IN SIZE, SO A VARIANCE TO THE MAXIMUM FRONT SETBACK APPEARS TO OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. WE MAILED OUT SEVEN NOTICES. WE RECEIVED ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION REGISTERED FOR THIS AREA. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND WE DO HAVE, UM, THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE HERE. GREAT. THANK YOU. WILL THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND, UH, YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. SURE, YES. UH, I AM ZOE HASSA. I'M WITH PAPE DAWSON AND I'M HERE, UM, FOR THOMPSON REAL ESTATE GROUP THAT IS, UH, DOING THIS [01:15:01] CONSTRUCTION, UM, OR THIS DEVELOPMENT. UM, SO PART OF THE REASON WHY WE, UH, WENT FORWARD WITH THIS WAS THAT, UM, THERE'S SEVERAL SITUATIONS HERE. ONE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS A CULVERT, UM, UNDERNEATH ROGERS ROAD, UM, THAT CARRIES THE ENTIRE DRAINAGE AREA OF THE SITE AND UPSTREAM. UM, SO THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FLOW GOING THROUGH THAT. UM, THE CONCERN IS, IS PUTTING A BUILDING TOO CLOSE TO THAT SHOULD THAT EVER CLOG IT COULD CAUSE, UM, DAMAGE TO THE BUILDING STRUCTURE. UM, ADDITIONALLY, BECAUSE OF THAT WATER GOING THROUGH THERE, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S, UM, A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TOPO. IT EXCEEDS THE 10%, UM, IN THE ENTIRE 90 FOOT SETBACK THAT IS TYPICALLY USED IN THAT, UH, THAT IS REQUIRED FOR THAT ZONING. UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, ALSO, BECAUSE WE HAVE OFFSITE WATER COMING ONTO OUR SITE, WE ARE CONSTRUCTING, UM, A BYPASS STORM DRAIN STRUCTURE. YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED 20 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT, UM, AT THE COST OF THE DEVELOPER, UH, TO PROVIDE, UH, WATER ACCESS OR SORRY, DRAINAGE ACCESS FOR THE UPSTREAM SITE WHENEVER THEY GO INTO CONSTRUCTION. SO, UM, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE TO ROUTE THAT IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING, THAT DOES ALSO RESTRICT OUR USAGE THERE. UM, THIS PROJECT OR THIS PARCEL, UM, IS ALSO, UM, SORRY, WORDS . UM, IT IS PART OF THE 19 IS BEFORE THE 1997 TREE ORDINANCE. SO THEREFORE WE DO NOT HAVE TO, UM, COMPLY WITH CURRENT TREE ORDINANCES. HOWEVER, THERE ARE QUITE A FEW, UM, MATURE TREES ON SITE, WHICH WE DO NOT WANT TO, UM, CUT DOWN. UH, THE DEVELOPER HAS BEEN VERY ADAMANT ABOUT KEEPING AS MANY MATURE TREES AS POSSIBLE. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT'S WHY WE'VE ALSO MOVED THE BUILDING BACK. UM, THE BUILDING OR THE SITE ALSO HAS TWO ACCESSES OFF ROGERS ROAD AND 1 51. UM, IF WE HAD DONE THE ADDRESSING ON HIGHWAY 1 51, THEN WE WOULD HAVE MET THE 90 FOOT SETBACK. UM, HOWEVER, WE THOUGHT THAT ROGERS ROAD WAS A BETTER ACCESS BECAUSE IT IS A FULL ACCESS POINT, UM, AND NOT JUST A RIDE IN, RIDE OUT. AND SO, UM, THAT IS WHY WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH ROGERS ROAD ADDRESS. I BELIEVE THAT WAS ALL MY OKAY. UH, JUST HOLD TIGHT A SECOND. DOES ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. WHO'D LIKE TO START? CRUZ? COMMISSIONER CRUZ. WELL, JUST ONE MAIN QUESTION I GUESS IS HOW MANY APARTMENT BUILDINGS ARE YOU THINKING OF PUTTING IN THERE? BECAUSE I ONLY SEE ONE. SURE. UH, WE DO HAVE AN OVERALL SITE PLAN. UM, I CAN, I HAVE A, UH, I DRIVE, OKAY, SORRY. THIS IS JUST THE ZOOM UP VERSION ON ROGERS ROAD. OKAY. YEAH, THAT'S THE, UH, THAT'S THE ENTIRE SITE HERE. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE 10 BUILDING, UH, 11 BUILDINGS WITH THE CLUBHOUSE. UM, THEY'RE FAIRLY SPACED OUT. YOU CAN SEE HOW MANY TREES WE ARE TRYING TO SAVE ON THE SITE. YOU MM-HMM. , I SEE THAT. AND I, I COMMEND Y'ALL FOR THAT BECAUSE THAT IS A HUGE PROPERTY AND IT DOES HAVE LOTS AND LOTS OF TREES. I WAS WONDERING ABOUT THAT. OKAY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MENCHACA? YES. I HAD A SMALL QUESTION. YOU STATED THE ADDRESS, BUT THE PRESENTATION DIDN'T STATE THE, IT IS GENERALLY LOCATED. WHAT DOES GENERALLY LOCATED MEAN? UH, SO HAVE YOU HAVE HAD YOUR FORMAL ADDRESS ISSUED? UH, NO. RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF PLATING PROCESS RIGHT NOW. OKAY. SO WHAT HAPPENS IS THEY, WHEN THEY GO THROUGH PLATING, THEY'RE YOU, BUT YOU'RE REQUESTING OFFER OF ROGERS ROAD, NOT 1 51. YES. BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE, UM, THE CLUBHOUSE IS, AND WE'LL HAVE FULL ACCESS DRIVE THERE. THAT'S THE CLARIFICATION I WANTED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALBERT? COMMISSIONER ALBERT, I SEE THAT THE 90 FOOT SETBACK IS RIGHT ABOUT WHERE YOUR TRAFFIC CIRCLE BEGINS FROM YOUR ENTRANCES. MM-HMM. , UH, WILL YOU BE DOING ANYTHING ELSE LIKE LANDSCAPING OR, OR ANYTHING TO SORT OF CAUSE THE EYE TO PAUSE AT THAT 90 FOOT PLACE TO SORT OF, YOU KNOW, UH, ACKNOWLEDGE IT? UH, THERE WILL BE LANDSCAPING. WE DO HAVE [01:20:01] LANDSCAPING PLANS. UM, SO THERE WILL BE, UM, AN ENTRANCE, UH, SIGN AS WELL. UM, BUT THAT'LL BE ALONG EACH SIDE. UH, IT'LL BE TWO CITY STANDARDS. UM, WE ALSO THOUGHT, UH, THAT THE THROAT LINK WAS NICE BECAUSE ROGERS ROAD DOES HAVE A, A HIGHER SPEED. UM, IT GIVES MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR VEHICLES TO PULL IN AND YOU HAVE, UH, MORE QUEUING SPACE THERE INSTEAD OF STOPPING ALONG ROGERS ROAD IF IT DOES GET BACKED UP. THANK YOU. YES. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO COULD YOU BRING UP, UM, GOOGLE MAP THERE JUST TO SHOW, UM, I GUESS THE OUTLINE PROPERTY OF WHERE, OR THE OUTLINE OF WHERE IT'S THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SO WE CAN KIND OF GET A REALLY GOOD IDEA AS FAR AS THE WHOLE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES. AND THEN THE SECOND THING, YOU KNOW, SO THIS IS WE'RE LOOKING TO PUSH THE BUILDING BACK FURTHER THAN, THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED, UH, BY CODE. AND, AND, UM, IN THIS AREA, THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF BUILDINGS THAT ARE PUSHED BACK FURTHER THAN THIS EVEN. UM, SO I DON'T THINK IT'S UNCOMMON IN THAT AREA AT ALL, KIND OF THE DESIGN OF THAT, THAT AREA WAS TO KIND OF GIVE THAT RURAL FIELD, RIGHT? MM-HMM. SO, SO YOU'RE COMING IN THAT RURAL FIELD IS KIND OF WHAT I'M SEEING, RIGHT? YES, SIR. SO, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING, ANYONE ELSE? UH, AND I JUST GO AHEAD. IS THERE A MAP? SO YOU BRING IT UP. CAN YOU USE A MARKER TO POINT IT OUT PLEASE? YES. YEAH, SO YOU CAN SEE THAT ONE? YEAH, YOU CAN SEE THE, UH, SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TREES THERE. SO WHERE IS THE AREA THEN? UM, IT'S THE L-SHAPED, UH, MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT RIGHT THERE AT THE TOP OF THE SCREEN. IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO IT. SO JUST SOUTH OF IT? YEAH, RIGHT THERE. SO RIGHT THERE. OKAY. SO THAT TREE CAN THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MM-HMM. . ALL RIGHT. UH, I HAVE A QUESTION. SO YOU, YOU HAD MENTIONED THOSE, A GRAY DROPS, SO FROM THE STREET, HOW FAR DOES IT, HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK IT DROPS AT THE FIRST BUILDING AND, UM, IF WE GO BACK TO THE, UH, EXHIBITS IT, SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THE FIRST BUILDING, THERE'S ABOUT 15 TO 20 FOOT OF DROP. YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. SO IF THERE'S ANY OTHER, UH, REMARKS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? UM, NO, I THINK I'VE MADE MY POINT. GREAT. , APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S TIME. SO I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON THIS CASE. THI COMMISSIONER THI REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 22 DASH 3 8 7. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR A 61 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 90 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 151 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT ROGERS ROAD AND A WISEMAN BOULEVARD APPLICANT BEING PAP DOSS AND ENGINEERS, 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 WOULD ALLOW THE PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO HAVE A FRONT SETBACK OF 151 FEET IN LIEU OF THE MAXIMUM 90 FOOT SETBACK. THE STRUCTURE WOULD BE SITUATED AT A REASONABLE DISTANCE FROM ROGERS ROAD. THEREFORE, THE REQUEST IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. 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, IT WOULD RESULT IN THE REDESIGN OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO MAINTAIN THE MAXIMUM SETBACK PERMITTED OF 90 FEET. STAFF FINDS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO THE SUBSTANTIAL SIZE OF THE LOT AND THE STREET PHONE EDGE CLASSIFICATION. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE FRONT SETBACK IS TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S ADEQUATE SPACING BETWEEN THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND THE STRUCTURE. MAINTAINING THIS DISTANCE WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY AND SAFETY DUE TO THE FRONTAGE BEING OFF ROGERS ROAD. A SECONDARY ARTERIAL, A ROADWAY FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN 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. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REQUEST FOR A 61 FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 151 FEET FROM THE FRONT 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. NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES ALSO MAINTAIN A CONSIDERABLE DISTANCE FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY. LINE SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE, OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS [01:25:01] SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SOUGHT DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF THE LOT. THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THIEL, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. COMMISSIONER THIEL I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF, OF THIS. UH, I THINK THAT THE, THEIR THOUGHTFULNESS WITH REGARDS TO HERITAGE TREES AND HOW THEY CITED BUILDINGS ON, ON THE, THE PROPERTY, UH, IS EXCELLENT. AND IT'S, IT'S GREAT THAT THEY'LL BE MAINTAINING SOME OF THE CHARACTER THAT'S ALREADY THERE. COMMISSIONER MANNA, I WORKED IN THIS AREA FOR 20 YEARS AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS, UH, THIS AREA IS SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE. SO, SO I COMMEND THE APPLICANT. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. ANYONE ELSE? AND I'M GONNA BE IN FAVOR, UH, BECAUSE OF THE DRAINAGE CONCERNS. UH, AND, AND IT'S ALSO YOU'RE AT THE MERCY OF YOUR ADDRESSING. SO WITH THAT STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MR. THIEL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. 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 UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, NEXT CASE PLEASE. BEFORE WE BEGIN, I, I DO WANNA ASK IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE FOR, UM, THE CASE ON WEST VETTE. IS THE APPLICANT HERE FOR 1 0 1 0 1 1 WEST VETTE. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA TABLE THIS ONE AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE. CASE NUMBER EIGHT. UM, BO O 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 0 2 8. LOCATED AT 3 2 6 CLAY STREET IN COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE, APPLICANT BEING LAWRENCE SNYDER. UM, REQUEST FOR A FOUR 11 VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SET BY REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A DETACHED STRUCTURE WITH GUTTERS TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UM, CURRENTLY THE PROPERTY, ITS ZONE MF 18 I D Z. UM, SO THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT ENCROACHED INTO THE SIDE SETBACK. UM, THIS PROPERTY HAD A RE-ZONING CASE, UM, IN CITY COUNCIL, WHICH ADOPTED ORDINANCE, UM, 20 15 0 2 1 9 0 1 3 3. UM, THERE ARE CURRENTLY TOWN HOMES ON THE PROPERTY WHICH SERVE AS CONDOMINIUMS. UM, THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT IS FIVE FEET. AND THE APPLICANT IS AGAIN PROPOSING TO ENCROACH THE SETBACK BY FIVE FOOT 11 WITH THE PLAN OF GUTTERS BEING INSTALLED INTO THE DETACHED STRUCTURE TO REDUCE WATER RUNOFF ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES. UH, THERE'S A CURRENT PICTURE OF THE SITE PLAN WITH THE, THE SIDE SETBACK BEING ON THE LEFT SIDE, KINDA HARD TO SEE . UM, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF INTO THE SHIP PROPERTY, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT SITE AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS. UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION FOR TWO FEET VARIANCE TO ALLOW A DETACHED STRUCTURE WITH GUTTERS TO BE THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE IN BOA 22 1 0 3 0 0 0 2 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE STRUCTURE BEING ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, AND A THREE FOOT SETBACK WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE SPACE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND THE PROPERTY LINE AND WILL OBSERVE THE SPARE OF THE ORDINANCE. THERE WERE 33 NOTICES SENT. UH, ONE IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION. AND THE LONE STAR HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT. UM, THAT CONCLUDES A STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE PRESENT. OKAY. BEFORE YOU GO, UH, PLEASE SPEAK ON, UH, WHETHER, WHICH SIDE ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? THIS IS ON THE, THE WEST SIDE, CORRECT. I GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN. SO, UM, IF YOU WERE LOOKING FROM THE STREET, THE SEAT WOULD BE TOWARDS, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY THE NORTH, IF YOU WERE LOOKING TOWARDS IT, WOULD BE ON THE RIGHT SIDE. SO THAT WOULD BE, I GUESS IF GOING FROM THE SITE POINT, IF YOU WANNA SAY THAT'S THE WEST SIDE, BUT IF YOU WERE LOOKING FROM THE STREET, CAN YOU BRING UP THE AERIAL? YEAH, UM, I SHOULD HAVE, I HAVE A LASER POINTER RIGHT HERE. SO IT WOULD BE AROUND THIS AREA RIGHT HERE? YEAH. CAN YOU BRING UP THE AERIAL? THE, THAT YEAH, IT WOULD BE, SO IT'S ON THE WEST SIDE? YEAH, IT WOULD BE ON THE WEST SIDE. IF YOU WERE STANDING RIGHT HERE, IT WOULD BE ON KIND OF THIS AREA RIGHT THERE. OKAY. AND THIS ONLY [01:30:01] AFFECTS THAT ONE SIDE, NOT THE OTHER TWO BELOW IT? NO, JUST THAT SIDE IS THAT AND, AND THE REASON WHY, BECAUSE THE OTHER SIDE, UM, GO AHEAD, GO TO THE PICTURE WITH, UM, THE DRIVEWAY. THE REASON WHY I ASK IS USUALLY ON THESE ID ZS THEY'LL, THEY'LL ALL BE ADDRESSED OFF OF CLAY AND THEN, SO WOULDN'T ALL THREE OF THOSE BUILDINGS HAVE THE SAME ISSUE? SO, UM, FOR ID, SO IT WAS AN MF 18, SO THERE'S A CERTAIN, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE SIDE SET BACK FOR EXACTLY FIVE FEET, BUT IT'S DIFFERENT COMPARED TO LIKE AN MF 33. AND SINCE IT IS AN I D C, THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN SITE PLAN. UM, BUT GO, GO AHEAD, GO BACK TO WHERE THE, I GUESS THE UTILITY BOXES ARE AT RIGHT THERE. UM, SO RIGHT THERE ON THAT, WHERE YOU CAN SEE THIS PARTICULAR WALKWAY, THERE IS ALSO AN EASEMENT ON THERE AS WELL. UM, SO I KINDA WANNA MAKE THAT CLEAR JUST IN CASE. UM, THIS FENCE RIGHT HERE FROM WHAT, WHEN I WENT TO SITE VISIT IS A LITTLE BIT CLOSER THAN THE PROPERTY SIDE. IT SHOULD BE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER BACK, WHICH IS WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE IS AT. BUT SINCE WE COULDN'T MEASURE THAT FROM RIGHT THERE, WE TOOK THE MEASUREMENT FROM THE BOARD RIGHT THERE. SO TO MAKE IT KIND OF, YOU KNOW, PLAY IT SAFE, WE KIND OF DO FOUR FOOT 11. YEAH, I'M JUST TRYING TO SET BACK, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT LIKE HOW, 'CAUSE I D Z CARRIES WITH IT A FIVE FOOT EXTERIOR SETBACK. UM, AND, AND IS THIS I DZ LIKE ONE, TWO OR IS THIS THE OLD I DZ? THIS IS AN OLD I D Z, IT WAS 2015, I BELIEVE THE ORDINANCE WAS . YEAH. SO THAT WOULD BE THE, THE ORIGINAL I D Z THE ORIGINAL. SO THIS IS, I'M JUST, I'M JUST CURIOUS TO KNOW THAT WHEN THEY TURN IN SITE PLAN FOR THIS AND, AND YOU KNOW, Y'ALL ARE REVIEWING THIS, I MEAN, THEY'RE, THEY'RE ASKING FOR, FOR FOR FOUR A FOUR FOOT VARIANCE. IT'S ALREADY BUILT, CORRECT? I MEAN THIS, THE STRUCTURE IN QUESTION IS, IS CONSTRUCTED CONSTRUCTED ALREADY, RIGHT? NO, THE, THE STRUCTURE THAT'S GONNA BE CONSTRUCTED WOULD BE KIND OF LIKE A COVERED, WHAT DO YOU WANNA CALL IT? IT'S JUST LIKE A COVERED AREA, A COVERED PATIO ISH AREA. OKAY. WHICH WOULD BE GO BACK COVERING THIS ENTIRE PRETTY MUCH AREA RIGHT HERE. OKAY. THESE DONS ARE ALREADY THERE, SO IT'LL BE STARTING FROM OVER THERE. THERE'LL BE A, LIKE A HOT TUB KIND OF RIGHT THERE, COVER BEING COVERED BY THE, YOU KNOW, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. AND IT'LL BE JUST KIND OF GOING NORTH THE WAY THROUGH HERE. ALL RIGHT. THAT, THAT CLEARS THAT UP A LITTLE BIT. WE CAN HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT PROBABLY SHED SOME MORE LIGHT ON THIS. UH, IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. SURE. AND, UH, YOU CAN BRING YOUR PRESENTATION. MY NAME IS MICAH HARPER. THIS IS MY PERSONAL RESIDENCE. UM, AND WHAT I'M WANTING TO DO IS BUILD A COVERED PATIO IN THE BACKYARD. THIS IS AN URBAN PROPERTY ZONED I D Z IN A VERY DENSE NEIGHBORHOOD ALREADY. UM, THE, THE FENCE THAT YOU SEE ON THE RIGHT SIDE HERE IS ACTUALLY EIGHT FEET FROM THE SIDEWALK. SO THERE'S ALREADY EIGHT FEET BETWEEN THAT FENCE AND THE SIDEWALK AND THE STREET. ANYWAY. UM, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE IS MY NEIGHBOR'S DRIVEWAY. UM, AND I SPOKE WITH HER, SO I HAVE APPROVAL FROM MY H O A FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FROM THE NEIGHBOR THAT'S RIGHT THERE ACROSS THE FENCE. UM, EVERYBODY WAS IN SUPPORTIVE OF IT, AND IT'S JUST A COVERED PATIO. IT'S NOT A ADDITIONAL DWELLING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, JUST FOUR POSTS AND A, AND A ROOF TO COVER THE PATIO. SO I I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED WHEN I HEARD, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING THE SIDE. SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE BUILDING THIS STRUCTURE BETWEEN THE EXISTING BUILDING AND CLAY STREET, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. AND SO IT'S A SIDE SETBACK ISSUE, BUT IT'S, IT'S NOT FROM CLAY, IT'S FROM THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. AND IS YOUR EXISTING BUILDING FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE? YES, IT IS. SO, BUT YOU'RE WANTING TO BUILD IT OUT AND THEN OVER TO THE LEFT A LITTLE BIT. YEAH. SO BASICALLY, SO WHERE HE SHOWED THE WALKWAY THAT GOES BEHIND THE HOUSE, UH, RIGHT HERE. SO THE BACK DOOR TO THE HOUSE IS ALONG THAT WALKWAY. SO WHAT I'M WANTING TO DO IS COME OUT THE BACK DOOR AND COME TO THE RIGHT AND WALK UNDER THE COVERED PATIO OFF OF THAT EXISTING TO YOUR DOOR, DOWN THAT SIDE PASSAGEWAY? YES, CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT, SO, UH, WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER. I, I, UH, COMMISSIONER YOUR QUESTION. KAPLAN? YES. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. SO I'M, LOOK THE SITE PLAN, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE, THE SITE PLAN? UH, I JUST HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT I'M LOOKING AT THERE. UM, OKAY. SO ARE YOU GOING TO BE, IS IT GONNA BE GROUND OR ARE YOU GONNA HAVE A, A FLOORING ON THE BOTTOM? IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE, YES. WHAT ABOUT CONCRETE? I'M SORRY. CAN, IS THE FLOOR GOING TO BE DIRT? IS IT GOING, UH, CONCRETE? IT'LL BE CONCRETE. THE PLAN IS PUT A CONCRETE PATIO THERE? YES. OKAY. SO I'M LOOKING AT YOUR SITE PLAN AND YOU HAVE THESE SQUARES. IS THAT TURF? I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY. OH, NO, THOSE, THAT'S SHOWING. SO THERE'S A CONCRETE PATIO, IT'S SHOWING FURNITURE IN A HOT TUB, AND IT'S KIND OF, THAT'S THE FULL FROM THE ARCHITECT, THE FULL RENDERING OF THE, OR NOT RENDERING, BUT LAYOUT OF THE WHOLE BACKYARD SHOWING TABLES AND CHAIRS AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. OKAY. SO ESSENTIALLY YOU'VE GOT A CONCRETE, UH, FLOORING AND [01:35:01] FOUR POSTS AND COVERS AND A SHED ROOF WITH GUTTERS TO CONTROL THE WATER. OKAY. AND THE STUFF, THE REST OF THE STUFF IS WHERE THEY'RE PLACING YOUR FURNITURE? YES, MA'AM. GOT, OKAY. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, UH, SO THE, THE STAFF MADE AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE HARDSHIP IF THAT ALTERNATE, UM, RECOMMENDATION WAS TO BE HELD FOR YOUR, UH, DEVELOPMENT? SO THE YARD, IT'S AN URBAN PROPERTY. THE YARD'S NOT VERY BIG TO BEGIN WITH. AND SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS MAXIMIZE THE USE OF THE YARD AND IT, AND SINCE IT'S ALREADY BACK OFF THE STREET, A GOOD WAY IS A GOOD EIGHT FEET FROM THE SIDEWALK. I FELT LIKE UTILIZING THE YARD WAS FAIR, CONSIDERING THERE'S ALREADY BUFFER SPACE OUTSIDE OF THE FENCE LINE. SO, AND THE HARDSHIP THEN WOULD BE, YOU PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BUILD WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, OR IT WOULD, YEAH, IT WOULD MINIMIZE THE USE OF MY BACKYARD SIDE YARD. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT, I HAVE A QUESTION. STAFF PLEASE BRING OF THE PICTURE SHOWING THE, UH, UTILITY METERS IN THE BACK OR THE SIDE. YEAH, THAT PICTURE. OKAY. SO JUST, JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR, THOSE METER BOXES ARE ACTUALLY FACING THE STREET, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE THE REAL ISSUE AT BAY HERE IS THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO COVER THIS EXISTING WOOD DECKING? YES, BETWEEN THERE AND THE FENCE AND, AND I'VE GOTTA SAY OFF THOSE METER BOXES FAR ENOUGH WHEN I PUT A SCREEN UP SO THAT I DON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT THEM. OKAY. BUT I'VE GOTTA SAY FAR ENOUGH OFF TO GIVE ACCESS TO THEM. SO THAT'S PART OF WHAT ALSO MINIMIZES THE AVAILABLE SPACE TO USE. AND WHEN YOU'RE STANDING ON THAT DECK, HOW TALL IS YOUR BUILDING? IT IS A TWO, IT'S A TWO OR THREE STORY. IT'S TECHNICALLY A TWO STORY BUILDING, BUT I BELIEVE IT'S 35 FEET. IT HAS PRETTY HIGH CEILINGS ON BOTH FEET. AND HOW HIGH ARE YOU WANTING TO GO UP WITH YOUR STRUCTURE? 20. NO, HOW HIGH ARE WE GOING? I THINK 12 FEET ON ONE END AND 14 ON THE OTHER. BUT ON THE SIDE, ON THE SIDE WHERE THAT PASSAGEWAY IS? YEAH. YEAH. SO IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE 12 FEET. SHE ROOF, IT'D BE 12 FEET, I THINK, AT THE LOW END AND 14 FEET AT THE HIGH END. AND THEN YOU'RE, YOU'RE PROPOSING TO HAVE GUTTERS AND THEN COLLECTIVELY THE SHED PORTION IN THE GUTTERS WOULD BE ONE FEET AWAY FROM THE FACE OF THAT FENCE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT? CORRECT? YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CLEAR ON THAT. AND WE HAVE A FRENCH DRAIN ALONG THAT FENCE LINE ALREADY THAT COLLECTS THE GUTTERS FROM THE CURRENT ROOFS. OKAY. AND SO WE WOULD TIE INTO THAT DRAIN WITH OH, YOU WOULD BE DIRECT TIE IN? YES. AND THEN, UH, WHERE DOES, FROM THE, FROM WHERE THESE METERS TO THE STREET, WHERE DOES YOUR PROPERTY FALL? DOES IT FALL TOWARDS CLAY OR TO THE REAR? UM, THIS PROPERTY IS TOWARDS CLAY. IT IS IT WATER DRAINS TO, TO CLAY. OH, WATER. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THAT DRAIN DRAINS INTO THE SEWER SYSTEM OR IF IT DRAINS TO CLAY, BUT YES, THE PROPERTY DEFINITELY FALLS TOWARDS CLAY. OKAY. WELL THAT COMPLETELY ANSWERS MY QUESTIONS. IS THERE ANY, ANY OTHER, DOES, DOES ANY ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? NO. COMMISSIONER ALBERT, UM, YOU SAID THAT JUST FOR POSTS AND A ROOF, WILL THERE BE ANY SCREENING OR, OR ANYTHING? NO. AND, UH, DOES ANYBODY HAVE A COPY OF THE SURVEY STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? THE, THE SURVEY? UH, I SENT THEM ONE THERE, ONE EMAIL. I THINK I CAN PULL IT UP NOW. ALL I'M CONCERNED WITH, YOU POINTED OUT ALL OF THE METERS ON THE SIDE OF YOUR HOME AND IT, IT APPEARS THAT YOUR UTILITIES ARE BURIED THERE AND GENERALLY THEY'D BE BURIED INTO A UTILITY EASEMENT THAT YOU WOULDN'T WANNA SAY POUR SLAB ON TOP OF. AND I WAS CURIOUS IF, IF YOU HAD CHECKED THAT OR, OR HAD PROOF THAT THE UTILITIES GO ALONG THE BUILDING TO THE DRIVEWAY AND THEN OUT TO THE STREET THERE. UM, SO I CHECKED WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THE ARCHITECT, THE ARCHITECT WHO DESIGNED THIS DEVELOPMENT IS THE ARCHITECT THAT I HIRED TO DESIGN THE BACKYARD. UH, JUST TO MAKE SURE WE WEREN'T OVER ANY KIND OF ANYTHING UNDERGROUND OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. YEAH. JUST SO THE UTILITIES GO ALONG THE BUILDING TO THE, SO COMMISSIONER ALBERT, SO WHAT HAPPENS WITH ELECTRICAL? THE EASEMENT WILL STOP AT THE TRANSFORMER AND THEN ON ROUTE TO THE METER, THEY JUST HAVE AN ACCESS RIGHT ON THE PLAT. WE'LL GIVE THEM RIGHTS. AS LONG AS THERE'S AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE, YOU KNOW, A ROUTE TO GET THERE, THEY'RE FINE, BUT THERE'S NOT A TECHNICALLY AN EASEMENT PAST THE, THE RIGHT YEAH. ACCESSIBLE BEING THE KEY. YEAH. SO YEAH, AS LONG AS, YEAH, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SUPER CONVENIENT , IT JUST HAS TO BE ABLE TO GET BACK THERE. . YEAH. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE, UH, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION. SO ANY COMMISSIONER WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, I'M GONNA READ THE MOTION AS AS WRITTEN. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 22 DASH 3 2 8, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. GRANTED REQUESTS FOR A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A DETACHED STRUCTURE WITH GUTTERS TO BE ONE INCH FOR THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 3 2 6 CLAY STREET. APPLICANT BEING, UH, LOWER SNYDER BECAUSE OF THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US ON THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS, SO THE U D C HAS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE DOES NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOUR FEET, 11 INCH VARIS TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED STRUCTURE WITH GUTTERS TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, EXCUSE ME. TWO. DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN APPLICANT HAVING TO MOVE THE POST OF THE STRUCTURE FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES, WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW ENOUGH SPACE FOR THE COVERED, [01:40:01] UH, PAD TO BE BUILT AND FOR HIM TO UTILIZE THE PROPERTY, UH, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD 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. A FOUR FOOT 11 VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW DETACHED STRUCTURE TO WITH GUTTERS TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT ESSENTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THAT THE VARIANCE REQUIRE REQUEST DOES NOT LIKELY TO NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORING PROPERTY DUE TO THE ADDITION OF GUTTERS ON THE STRUCTURE. SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS VARIANCE OF SALT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR NOT NOT DUE TO ARE THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS. AND THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, STAFF FINDS THAT THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, UH, SUCH AS COVERED PATIO BEING ABLE TO COVER THE ENTIRE YARD AND OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER ZUNA? UH, YEAH, I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. I THINK THE, UH, THE APPLICANT IS TAKING THE RIGHT STEPS IN, IN PROVIDING GUTTERS, WHICH IS MY MAIN CONCERN. AND THE, THE OUTFALL OF THE, THE FLOW OF THE, OF THE, THE PARCEL IS TOWARDS CLAY STREET, WHICH KEEPS THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES FROM, UH, RAINWATER, UH, UTILITY AXMAN. HE'LL MAINTAIN ACCESS TO THE UTILITIES IF HE NEEDS TO GET IN THERE. UH, AND THEN THE, THE FRONT UH, IS 10 FOOT PLUS AWAY FROM CLAY STREET. SO THAT FENCE IS INSIDE, WELL WITHIN, INSIDE ANY KIND OF, UH, FRONT SETBACK. SO I AM GONNA BE RE UH, SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER BRAMAN, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? OKAY, HEARING NONE. STAFF PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH MM-HMM. . AND WE'RE GONNA TAKE A SEVEN MINUTE BREAK. WE'LL SEE EVERYBODY BACK AT TWO 50. BRING THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER. WE'RE ON CASE NUMBER SEVEN, UM, BO 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 0. UM, FIVE ZERO LOCATED AT 2 3 6 KING WILLIAMS COUNTY DISTRICT NUMBER ONE. WE ARE GONNA HEAR, I'M SORRY, WE'RE GONNA HEAR CASE SEVEN, THE APPLICANT'S BACKEND BACK. YEAH, IT ENDS IN 17. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE AT BO 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 7. UM, ADDRESS BEING 10 11 WEST VETTE. COUNSEL, OBJECTION NUMBER FOUR, APPLICANT BEING BERES A REQUEST FOR A ONE, A TWO FOOT NINE INCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT NINE SOLID SCREEN FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. AND TWO, A ONE FOOT 10 INCH SPECIAL EXEMPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT LARGE LOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN SCREEN FENCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A SEVEN FOOT 10 INCH PREDOMINANTLY OPEN SCREEN FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. UM, THE CURRENTLY THE LOT IT'S ZONED. R FOUR, UH, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. OKAY. THE APPLICANT HAS CONSTRUCTED A SOLID SCREEN FENCE AND PREDOMINANTLY OPEN SCREEN FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD WITHOUT PULLING FENCE PERMITS. AS IT STANDS, THE FENCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO IMPEDE ANY SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS AND THERE IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING EXISTING UNDER PROPERTY. SO A MAXIMUM HIGH ALLOW FOR SOLID SCREEN FENCE IS THREE FEET. DUE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY EXCEEDING 20,000 SQUARE FEET IN THE AREA, THE LARGE LAW IS PERMITTED TO HAVE SIX FOOT TOP, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE UPON EXAMINATIONS. THE FENCES DO NOT APPEAR TO VIOLATE ANY CLEAR VISION STANDARDS. UPON SITE VISIT, NOTICE THAT TWO GATES AT EACH DRIVEWAY THAT ARE PREDO, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN ONE AT EACH POINT OF, [01:45:01] UH, INGRESS, UH, THE EASTERN AND WESTERN SIDE OF THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. UM, SO THAT'S CURRENTLY THE SIDE PLAN. UM, YOU CAN SEE KIND OF LIKE WHERE THE HIGHLIGHTED PART IS, THE CLOSED PART OF IT, AND THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN SIDE FENCE ARE RIGHT THERE WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS THEY'RE AT NOW. UM, SO THAT IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OR PART OF THE SOLID STREET FENCE. UM, THE ONE SIDE OF THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE. THE OTHER GATE ON THE OTHER SIDE, A FEW OF THE MEASUREMENTS, ANOTHER MEASUREMENT, THE KIND OF LIKE A BIGGER VIEW OF THE AREA, KIND OF WITH THE FENCE ON THE EASTERN AND WESTERN YOU SEE DOWN TOWARDS THE BOTTOM AND THE OTHER SIDE. UM, SO THE RECOMMENDATION FOR SOLID SCREEN FENCE, FRONT YARD FENCE SPECIAL EXEMPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION FOR A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD FENCE IN BO O A 22 103 0 0 0 1 7 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE FRONT YARD, THE FRONT YARD SOLID SCREEN FENCE IS FIVE NINE AND THE SOLID SCREEN FENCE APPEARS TO BE OUT OF CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA FOR THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD FENCE. SPECIAL EXEMPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO O 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 7 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, UH, THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT FENCE IS SEVEN FEET, 10 INCHES TALL, AND THE OFFENSE DO NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. AND THE FRONT YARD FENCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO VIOLATE ANY CLEAR VISION STANDARDS. UM, THERE WERE 15 NOTICES SENT. THERE WERE ZERO IN FAVORS, THEY WERE IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED HOME UNDER ASSOCIATION. UM, THAT CONCLUDES SNAP PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE PRESENT. AND BEFORE YOU GO, CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY THAT THE, THE PILLARS ARE HOW TALL AND THEY'RE FINE, THEY'RE FINE. THAT'S WHERE WE MEASURE FROM THE PILLARS TO THE BOTTOM. YEAH. AND THEN THE, THE WALL, IF THE PILLARS WERE CUT DOWN TO THE WALL THAT THIS WOULD BE COMPLIANT TO, GO AHEAD, GO BACK STRAIGHT. VINCENT, I'M WONDERING IF IF THE, IF THE TOP OF THE, IF THE CAP ON THAT PILLAR WAS, WAS IN LINE WITH THE TOP OF THE WALL, WOULD THIS BE IN COMPLIANCE DOWN? I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT MEASURE OF THE WALL, BUT FROM THE PILLARS, I MEAN IT WAS A, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THE MEASUREMENT WAS. IT GO BACK TO THE FRONT PAGE MORE. WELL, IF THE SOLID SCREEN FENCE IS MORE THAN, UM, THREE FEET, IT WOULD BE IN THE FRONT. IT WOULDN'T BE IN COMPLIANCE. I'M JUST WONDERING HOW TALL THE WALL IS. THE WALL PORTION, UH, SANDS THE PILLARS, THAT'S ALL. YOU CAN CUT IT DOWN BEING COMPLIANCE. ALRIGHT, I'M JUST CURIOUS. ALL RIGHT. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? HELLO SIR, IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION, SALVADOR. SO WHEN WE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY, THERE WASN'T ANYTHING THERE. AND DUE TO SOME FRIENDS THAT WE HAVE OUR FRIENDSHIPS, THEY WERE ABLE TO SUPPORT US IN BUILDING THIS. UH, UNFORTUNATELY I DID NOT BRING ANY PROOF THAT I DID SPEAK TO SOME NEIGHBORS AND I DID NOT WANT TO BURDEN THEM WITH ASKING FOR SOME PROOF TO BRING. BUT WE DID HAVE A VERBAL AGREEMENT FROM OUR NEIGHBORS. WE HAD A VERBAL AGREEMENT WITH NEIGHBORS FROM TWO FROM THE FRONT AND TWO ON THE TWO ON THE SIDE THAT THEY WERE OKAY WITH ME BUILDING THIS. WE MAINLY BUILT IT, UH, OUT OF SECURITY, UH, DUE TO SECURITY REASONS BECAUSE I HAVE DAUGHTERS AND I HAVE GRANDDAUGHTERS, AND IT'S FOR THAT, UM, UH, SECURITY MEASURE. UH, UNFORTUNATELY WE ALSO WERE NOT AWARE THAT WE DO NEED PERMITS FOR THIS TO BUILD IT OR THAT THERE WERE, [01:50:01] UH, MEASUREMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR IT, BUT WE WENT AHEAD AND BUILT IT WITH THE HELP OF MY FRIENDS. OKAY. IS THERE, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO ADD? NO. ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? NO. OKAY. UH, WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? ZUNA? COMMISSIONER ZUNA? I'M JUST CURIOUS HOW THIS, THIS CASE, IT WAS ACTUALLY FOR STAFF, HOW THIS CASE WAS ORIGINATED. THIS WAS THE RESULT OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT VIOLATION. SO DID SOMEBODY CALL IN THE CODE VIOLATION OR WAS IT CODE ENFORCEMENT DRIVING BY OR, UH, WE DON'T HAVE THE SOURCE. UM, WE JUST KNOW THAT IT WAS INVESTIGATED. OKAY. AND THERE'S NO CLEAR VISION ISSUES ON THIS, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO. COMMISSIONER ALBERT? UM, QUESTION FOR STAFF, ARE WE PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH THE FENCE ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY OR THE FENCE AROUND THE ENTIRE PROPERTY? IT'S THE, THE FENCE AND THE FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. SO EVERYTHING THAT EX THAT IS PAST THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO FOLLOW UP ON, UH, COMMISSIONER ALBERT. SO, SO, SO LOOKING FROM GOOGLE, THERE'S AN EIGHT 10 FOOT FENCE ACROSS THE BACKYARD. AND SO I ASSUME AS, AS WE MAKE DIALOGUE ON THIS, WE'RE NOT ADDRESSING THAT FENCE, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. WE'RE ONLY LOOKING AT THE FRONT YARD FENCE. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. UH, HOW, HOW ABOUT COMMISSIONER SPIELMAN ON THE STREETSCAPE? ARE THERE ANY OTHER SIMILAR FENCES TO THIS, UH, UPON SITE SITE VISIT? UM, YES, STAFF DID OBSERVE, UM, SOME OTHER SIMILAR FENCES IN THE AREA. I'M SORRY, THERE ARE OTHER FENCES SIMILAR? UH, YES. OKAY. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, I HAVE A QUESTION. SO, UM, JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ON THIS, THE, THE, THIS RESIDENCE HAS TWO DRIVEWAYS? CORRECT. OKAY. AND DID YOU NOTICE THAT THE FENCE WAS MECHANIZED OR WAS IT MANUAL? IT, IT APPEARED TO BE ON A ROLLING GATE. A ROLLING TRACK? MM-HMM. OKAY. LIKE IT DID HAVE A MOTOR ON IT OR WAS IT HAND? I'M NOT SURE. I THINK THE APPLICANT MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER. SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, IS, IS THE GATE HAVE A MOTOR? DOES IT OPEN AND CLOSE AUTOMATICALLY? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. WELL, I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE LOOKING FOR A MOTION DEAL. COMMISSIONER THI REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 0 0 1 7. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, UM, A REQUEST FOR ONE, A TWO FOOT NINE INCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT NINE INCH SOLID SCREEN FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. AND TWO, A ONE FOOT TENANT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT LARGE LOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN SCREEN FENCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A SEVEN FOOT 10 INCH PREDOMINANTLY OPEN SCREEN FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT 1 0 1 1 WEST VETTE. APPLICANT BEING SALVADOR GUTIERREZ. 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 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND THE PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT FOR THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD FENCE AND SOLID SCREEN FRONT YARD FENCE WAS OBSERVED UPON THE SITE VISIT. AND IF GRANTED STAFF FI 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 IN THIS CASE. THESE CRITERIA REPRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. THE FENCE IS A MIXTURE OF COMPLETELY SOLID SCREEN AND PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE, WHICH STILL SERVES THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE. STAFF FINDS THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE AND SOLID SCREEN FENCE WILL SERVE THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE. C, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN GATE AND SOLID SCREEN FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND IT'S UNLIKELY TO SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ANY OF THE 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 PREDOMINANTLY OPEN SECTION AND SOLID SCREEN FENCE OF THE FRONT YARD FENCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT [01:55:01] E. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS THE CURRENT USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. COMMISSIONER THIEL. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS AS, UH, READ. UM, I DON'T TAKE ANY ISSUE WITH THIS AND SINCE THERE'S NO CLEAR, UH, VISION FIELD ISSUES, UM, AND THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES OF THIS STYLE OF OFFENSE IN THE AREA. I WILL BE IN SUPPORT. COMMISSIONER MANNA. UH, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. IT'S A RURAL ENVIRONMENT. I THINK THIS FENCE FITS IN FINE. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? KAPLAN, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? UH, I, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. I THINK THAT IT'S A, IT LOOKS LIKE IT WILL IMPROVE. UM, IT LOOKS LIKE A VERY NICE FENCE, AND I CERTAINLY DON'T THINK IT WILL, UH, UH, HARM THE PROPERTY VALUES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ALSO, THE NEIGHBORS SEEM TO BE, UH, FROM YOUR TESTIMONY, THE NEIGHBORS ARE IN FAVOR OF IT. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. UH, I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT ALSO BE IN SUPPORT. I ACTUALLY DID SOME WORK ON THE PROPERTY IN THE REAR OF THIS, UH, AND I NOTICED IT, AND I RECALL FROM THAT, THAT THIS WHOLE AREA IS VERY LARGE LOT DEVELOPMENT. UH, THIS FENCE HAS, IT'S, IT'S THE, THE PILLARS ARE, ARE, ARE, OR WHAT THE REAL HEIGHT ISSUE IS, AND THEN ON THE GATE, THEY KIND OF SLOOP UP AND COME BACK DOWN. AND IT JUST DOESN'T, IT LOOKS VERY COMPLIMENTARY TO THE SIZE AND SCOPE OF THE, OF THE SITE. SO STAFF, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. THIEL. YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANO. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. ALL RIGHT, ITEM NUMBER NINE, PLEASE. UM, ITEM NUMBER NINE, BO O A 2 2 103 0 0 0 5 0. LOCATED AT 2 3 6 KING WILLIAMS COUNCIL. DISTRICT NUMBER ONE, APPLICANT BEING EPIC REMODELING AND CONSTRUCTION, L L C A REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. CURRENTLY, THE ZONING, ITS R FOUR RESIDENTIAL MIXED. SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITIONAL ADDITION TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE IN THE REAR ON THE PRO STRUCTURE OF BEING THE REAR OF THE YARD OF PROPERTY. UM, IT WILL BE ENCROACHING THE FI, THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT. UM, THE ADDITION WAS HEARD BY THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION ON JUNE 17TH, 2021, AND IT WAS APPROVED. SO THAT IS CURRENTLY THE SITE PLAN WITH IT. ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT IS WHERE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT'S GONNA BE. UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF, THE REAR AND UH, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE. THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT, UM, THE, YOU CAN SEE THE SETBACK AND PROPOSED RIGHT THERE AND THEN SURROUNDING AREAS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE PROPOSED ADDITION IS IN THE REAR YARD OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT EASILY SEEN FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND THE PROPOSED EDITION WAS HEARD BY THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION AND WAS APPROVED, AND THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY ISSUES FOR WATER RUNOFF, AND THE STRUCTURE WILL NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THERE WERE 30 NOTICES. MAIL SENT. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE KING WILLIAMS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. UM, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, THE APPLICANT. PLEASE COME FORWARD. IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME, YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON AND THANK YOU. MY NAME IS SYBIL PC. I AM HERE REPRESENTING, UM, EPIC REMODELING AND CONSTRUCTION. THIS IS MRS. SUSAN KOVICH. SHE IS THE HOMEOWNER. AND, UM, I'M JUST GOING TO LEAD. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE AND FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. OUR REASON FOR REQUESTING THIS VARIANCE IS SIMPLY TO CAPTURE ADDITIONAL FUNCTIONAL LIVING SPACE FOR THE KOVICH FAMILY AT PRESENT IN THEIR ONE STORY STRUCTURE. THEY HAVE A HALF BATH THAT'S AVAILABLE FOR LAVATORY USE. IT DOUBLES AS ACCESS TO THE BASEMENT. SO THERE'S A LITTLE DOOR ON THE SIDE OF THAT SAME ROOM. UM, THERE IS NO PANTRY IN THE KITCHEN. THERE IS, UM, THE KOVICH IS MRS. KOVICH IS A RESCUE DOG. UM, AFICIONADO. THERE ARE NO FACILITIES TO CARE FOR THE DOGS. THERE [02:00:01] IS NO LAUNDRY ROOM. UM, THE FUNCTIONAL SPACE IS VERY LIMITED, SO WE BUILT OUT AS MUCH AS WE COULD AND THEN, UH, AT THEIR REQUEST FOUND AT PRUDENT TO MAKE THIS REQUEST TODAY. AND SO I'LL LET, UM, MRS. KOVICH, UM, GIVE YOU ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY, , SO I'M HAPPY TO BE HERE THOUGH. UM, I, I THINK CIVIL PRETTY WELL SUMMED EVERYTHING UP. OUR HOME, WE DO HAVE, UH, A GOOD SQUARE FOOTAGE IN OUR HOME. UH, FIVE OF THE ROOMS THAT WE HAVE ARE BASICALLY CAPTURED PORCHES. SO THEY'RE, UH, RECTANGULAR ROOMS THAT ARE SOMEWHAT AS SIMPLE SAYS, AND NOT REALLY FUNCTIONAL SPACE. I HAVE LIKE A DAY BED IN ONE ROOM THAT WE'VE NEVER USED. UM, SO I, I THINK ADDING THIS, UH, ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE IN THE BACK WOULD PROVIDE US A LAUNDRY ROOM. UM, I'D LIKE TO HAVE A PLACE WHERE I COULD WASH MY DOGS. I WOULD LIKE A LITTLE STUDIO THAT I CAN DO CRAFTS AND MAYBE FUNCTION AS A, A, A DOWNSTAIRS MASTER SUITE, IF EVER THAT NEEDED TO BE THE CASE. AND, UM, LIKE SYBIL SAID, A A PANTRY AND I, WE DON'T HAVE A GARAGE, SO I WAS HOPING TO MAYBE PUT SOME TYPE OF STORAGE IN THERE WHERE I CAN PUT GARDENING TOOLS AND, UH, LIKE A TABLE OR A SINK AND A TABLE THAT MAYBE DO PLANTINGS AND, AND OTHER, UM, STUFF. SO THEREIN LIES, UM, THE REQUEST FOR THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE. OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. IF WE'RE GONNA SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, ARE THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? KAPLAN? OF COURSE. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. SO I HAVE A QUESTION. THIS PROPOSED, THERE'S A PICTURE PROPOSED. WHAT IS, GO BACK, WHAT IS THAT? WELL, AND THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, , THAT'S WHERE I'M LIVING RIGHT NOW. THAT'S MY LAUNDRY ROOM. SO THAT AREA IS ONE OF SIX ENCLOSED PORCHES THAT WE HAD WHEN WE, WHEN MY HUSBAND AND I BOUGHT THE HOME IN 2003. AND THAT WAS APPROVED TO BE TORN DOWN. AGAIN, IT'S A KIND OF A NON-FUNCTIONAL, IT WAS A LAUNDRY ROOM. WE HAD A SHOWER. IT WAS VERY COMPACT. WE ALSO HAD AN AIR CONDITIONER, UH, ALL IN THAT ONE LITTLE ROOM. IT WAS A SEPARATE, IT WAS A SEPARATE BUILDING. IT WAS AN ADD-ON. IT WAS, WELL, IT WAS, IT WAS A PORCH. SO THE, THE ROOM THAT YOU SEE NOW AND THE WOODEN DOOR, THAT IS A FUNCTIONAL LIVING SPACE FOR US, UH, THAT I'VE GOT MY TV AND STUFF IN THERE. WHAT USED TO BE PASSAGE WHERE YOU SEE THE, THE WOOD RIGHT NOW WHERE IT'S ENCLOSED IN THAT WALL WAS A PORCH THAT SOMEBODY, AND I DON'T KNOW WHO A PRIOR OWNER HAD ENCLOSED THAT IN. AND WE, WE DIDN'T HAVE A LAUNDRY ROOM IN THE HOUSE, SO WE PUT IN I, UH, A SEWER LINE FROM THE STREET AND PUT IN A WASHING MACHINE AND DRYER AND SOME OTHER THINGS. SO, BUT, BUT THE FLOOR FELL THROUGH. THE ROOF WAS, WAS LEAKING. WE HAD A, A, A MULTITUDE OF WATER DAMAGE. SO WE JUST DEMOED THE BACK. SO WHAT YOU SEE RIGHT THERE, WHERE THE BOARD IS ON THE GROUND BASICALLY WAS MY LAUNDRY ROOM, WHICH WAS A PORCH AT ONE TIME THAT SOMEBODY ENCLOSED. I DON'T KNOW WHO. AND SO THAT IS ONE OF SIX PORCHES THAT I HAVE IN MY HOUSE NOW, THAT'S PART OF MY AIR CONDITIONED. BUT AGAIN, THERE'S A KIND OF, UH, OBSOLETE AND NON-FUNCTIONAL. WELL, I JUST WANT TO SAY, I, I DO COMMEND YOU FOR COMING FOR THE VARIANCE BEFORE YOU DID THE CONSTRUCTION, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. IT'S MY PLEASURE. I, I BOUGHT MY HOUSE IN 2003, UH, KIND OF JUMPED SHIP FROM NORTHWEST OF TOWN, DISCOVERED KING WILLIAM. AND I CAN APPRECIATE, UH, THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF THE AREA. I REALLY DO, UNLIKE SOME OTHER CITIES I'VE SEEN WHERE THEY JUST COME THROUGH, BULLDOZE EVERYTHING OUT. UM, I I, I'M HAPPY TO BE HERE IN THAT RESPECT. SO YEAH, IT'S MY PLEASURE. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ALBERT? UH, AND LOOKING AT GOOGLE MAPS, IT APPEARS THAT THE BUILDING BEHIND YOUR BUILDING, IT'S ALSO VERY CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S RIGHT OR NOT. AND IF IT IS, YES. WHAT WILL THE TOTAL DISTANCE BETWEEN THE TWO STRUCTURES BE? MY UNDERSTANDING, IF WE CAN GET IT WILL BE WHERE YOU SEE THE BOARDS RIGHT NOW TO THE, UH, THE CARRIAGE HOUSE OF MY NEIGHBORS. CAN, UH, WE NEED YOU TO SPEAK IN THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE. I APOLOGIZE. NO, IT'S OKAY. OKAY. SO FROM MY UNDERSTANDING WHERE YOU SEE THE, THE BOARDS RIGHT NOW ON THE SCREEN WHERE WE WOULD PURPORT TO POUR THE FOUNDATION AND THE HOME BEHIND US IS 10 FEET. SO IT WOULD BE 10 FEET AND, AND YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALL ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, UH, ANY CLOSING REMARKS BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? I, I DON'T THINK SO. I, I, I JUST APPRECIATE THE CONSIDERATION, SO, ALRIGHT. THANK [02:05:01] YOU. OKAY. AS A COMMISSIONER, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE. CRUZ COMMISSIONER BRAGDEN. RIGHT? SHE'S SO FAR AWAY FROM ME, A COMMISSIONER CRUZ. WELL, I, NOT MY FAULT. FALL . OKAY. UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO BO A 22 103 0 0 0 5 0, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 2 3 6 KING WILLIAM APPLICANT BEING EPIC REMODELING CONSTRUCTION. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAD DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITION, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LIT, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT BEING HAVING TO MOVE THE STRUCTURE FIVE FEET FURTHER BACK, WHICH WOULD REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE ADDITION. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD 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 CODE OF THE LAW OF FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW, IN ADDITION TO, TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT IN AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO, NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE 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, THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF BINDS THE REQUEST FOR FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW IN ADDITION TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND IT'S LIKELY NOT TO NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. SIX PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE ASSAULT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ON OUR, AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF BUYING SUPPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS VARIANCES. SALT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE SMALL AMOUNT OF SPACE LOCATED IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. AND A MOTION, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES. I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS AND I COMMEND THE OWNER FOR COMING TO US BEFORE ANYTHING WAS BUILT, WHICH IS ALWAYS GREAT. AND, UM, I THINK, UH, IT SHE'LL REALLY ENJOY HER NEW ROOM. THANK YOU. YOU'RE RIGHT. I'LL THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND IN ADDITION, H C R C ALSO REVIEWED AND APPROVED IT. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? ALBERT COMMISSIONER ALBERT? I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. UM, THE REASON I ASKED ABOUT THE DISTANCE TO THE OTHER BUILDING IS 'CAUSE WE OFTEN HEAR CASES HERE ABOUT, UH, PEOPLE'S PROPERTY, RIGHT? TO PRIVACY BEING, YOU KNOW, SHORTCHANGED BECAUSE OF PROXIMITY TO ANOTHER BUILDING. BUT 10 FOOT IS NOT AN UNCOMMON DISTANCE BETWEEN TWO BUILDINGS. SO THAT, THAT SEEMS ADEQUATE. UH, AS FOR H D R C APPROVAL, IT, I KNOW THAT THEY LOOK AT MASSING, THEY LOOK AT FORM, THEY LOOK AT, UH, MATERIALS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, AND THEY DON'T REALLY, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED REALLY TO PAY MUCH ATTENTION TO SETBACKS AND STUFF. THAT'S WHY YOU ENDED UP COMING HERE AGAIN. AND I APPRECIATE YOU GOING TO, TO TWO HEARINGS TO NO. TO GET THIS ONE DONE. THANK YOU. WELL, THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? HEARING NONE STAFF BE SICK. A ROLL CALL VOTE. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIEL. I CONCUR. SORRY, MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. TEAL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES [02:10:01] UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE GOOD LUCK ON YOUR PROJECT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT CASE PLEASE. ITEM 10. ITEM NUMBER 10 IS FOR CASE BO A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 6 5. LOCATED AT 2 2 8 ROCK HILL DRIVE WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT 10. THE APPLICANT BEING WESTON DEAN CUSTOM HOMES IS A REQUEST FOR ONE A NINE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE 19 FEET THREE INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND TWO, A THREE FOOT VARIANCE WITH AN EIGHT FOOT CREDIT FROM THE ALLEY, FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE NINE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPERTY IS ON NP 10, NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG ROCK HILL DRIVE AND IS CURRENTLY A VACANT LOT. THERE WAS A PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. HOWEVER, IT WAS DETERMINED DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS THAT A SETBACK VARIANCE WOULD BE REQUIRED BASED ON THE PLAN SUBMITTED. BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS ON NP 10 NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION DISTRICT, THE STRUCTURE IS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK AND A 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK. THE REQUEST WOULD ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE 19 FEET, THREE INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, AND NINE FEET FROM THE, FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND NINE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THERE IS AN ALLEYWAY LOCATED ALONG THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY THAT MEASURES 16 FEET AND WIDTH. THE OWNER IS ABLE TO UTILIZE HALF OF THE ALLEYWAY, EIGHT FEET TOWARDS THE REAR SETBACK. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. THIS IS THE ENTRANCE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IT'S LOCATED ON THE RIGHT. AND BECAUSE OF THE LAYOUT OF THE PROPERTY, WE KIND OF JUST HAD TO GET PICTURES OF THE SURROUNDING AREA, NOT NECESSARILY INSIDE OF THE PROPERTY. AND SO HERE IS ROCK HILL DRIVE AND THEN THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR. AND THEN ANOTHER VIEW OF THE SURROUNDING AREA REGARDING THE FRONT AND REAR SETBACK VARIANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ON THE PROPERTY, THE STRUCTURE CANNOT MAINTAIN THE REQUIRED 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK AND 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK. TWO, THERE ARE, UH, THERE WAS PREVIOUSLY A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON THE LOT, AND THREE, THE PROPERTY ABUTS AN ALLEY ALLEYWAY ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, WHICH GIVES THE REAR SETBACK A CREDIT OF EIGHT FEET. WE MAILED OUT 26 NOTICES. WE DID RECEIVE SIX IN FAVOR, ZERO POST. AND, UM, RIGHT BEFORE THE MEETING BEGUN, WE DID RECEIVE A RESPONSE FROM OAK PARK NORTHWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THEY ARE IN SUPPORT. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. WE DO HAVE THE, UM, APPLICANT AND THE OWNER HERE. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. HELLO. UH, MY NAME IS COLTON BARUM. I WORK WITH WESTING CUSTOM HOMES. UM, I'M HERE WITH, UH, CORY NE, WHO'S OUR PROJECT, UH, MANAGER. AND THEN DR. DYER, WHO IS, UH, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. UM, THE DYERS CAME TO US LAST YEAR TO DESIGN THEIR, YOU KNOW, UH, CUSTOM HOME. THIS IS GONNA BE THEIR DREAM HOME. UH, THEY HAVE A VERY UNIQUE LOT, UM, THAT WE ORIGINALLY THOUGHT THE FRONT WAS, UM, WHERE THE PREVIOUS HOME WAS. THE PREVIOUS HOME BURNT DOWN IN 2017, UH, DUE TO A FIRE. UM, SO WITH THE PREVIOUS LAYOUT IN MIND, WE HELPED THEM DESIGN THEIR FLOOR PLAN. UM, AND ONCE WE APPLIED TO THE CITY IS WHEN WE FOUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION ACT. UM, WHICH STATES THAT THE 20 FOOT FRONT AND 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK ARE ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED, UM, ABOVE THE DYERS LOT. AND THEN, UM, AGAINST THE REAR, WHICH IS LIKE A GREEN BELT. UM, WE'RE REQUESTING THE, THE, THE VARIANCE TO THE FRONT AND THE BACK. UM, AND I HAVE DOCUMENTATION NEEDED. SO YEAH, DR. DI, ANYTHING, AS COLTON MENTIONED, THIS IS GONNA BE OUR FOREVER HOME. THIS IS OUR DREAM HOME THAT I'M BUILDING WITH A FAMILY OF FIVE. MY WIFE IS PRESIDENT RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE, UH, THREE LOVELY CHILDREN AND A PUPPY, UM, . WE'RE BASICALLY BUILDING THE SAME STRUCTURE THAT WAS ON THE PROPERTY THAT BURNT DOWN IN IN 2017. I THINK YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS LOT WAS A EMPTY LOT FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS, AND I THINK IT WOULD ADD A LOT OF, UH, UH, PROPERTY VALUE AND, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD VALUE. YOU KNOW, ALL THE NEIGHBORS THAT WE WENT TO SAID THAT THEY DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH IT, AND THEY'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO A [02:15:01] STRUCTURE ACTUALLY BEING BUILT, UH, ON THAT SITE. SO WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO IT AS WELL. WE'RE READY TO BREAK GROUND. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I'M LOOKING AT WHAT'S UP THERE RIGHT NOW. SO THEN THE DRIVEWAY IS THAT LONG AND IT'S JUST WHERE YOU CAN'T PUT ANYTHING NEXT TO THE DRIVEWAY. IT HAS TO GO ALL THE WAY TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. YES, MA'AM. CORRECT. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE. THANK YOU. YEAH, SO IT'S, I JUST HAVE TO RE I WANTED TO MAKE A REMARK THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU'RE ADDRESSING US OFF OF ROCK HILL, EVERYTHING'S SORT OF TURNED MM-HMM. THE WAY THEY APPLY THE SETBACKS. UH, BUT YEAH. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION. SO WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. OH, WE DO? OH, I APOLOGIZE. UH, I, I THOUGHT THERE WASN'T ANY TODAY. SO , UH, THEY SIGNED IN WHILE THE MEETING WAS ONGOING, SO . OH, OKAY. UH, MY APOLOGIES. UM, WE HAVE, OH, WE'RE GONNA HEAR FROM, UH, A RESIDENT. SO COME ON. WALTER, IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, SIR. YOU CAN. I'M WALTER GLY. I OWN FOUR 19 AND 4 23 ON THE FIRST. CAN YOU TALK INTO THE FRIDAY OF MAY? THANK YOU. 19, UH, 2017. THAT, THAT HOUSE BURNED DOWN WITH A FEROCIOUS FIRE. IS THIS THING LIGHT UP? HOW'S IT WORK? OH, THERE, THERE IS ONE FIRE PLUG THERE. THE OTHER FIRE PLUG IS HERE. THEY DROVE A FIRETRUCK UP, POURED ABOUT A THOUSAND GALLONS OF WATER UNDER IT SANK THAT FIRETRUCK RIGHT BEHIND THAT EASEMENT. IT'S NOT AN ALLEY. IT'S A C P S EASEMENT DOWN THAT HALF MILE LONG. MY CONCERN IS IF HIS HOUSE CATCHES ON FIRE, MY HOUSE WILL CATCH ON FIRE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET A FIRE TRUCK. CAN, CAN YOU POINT WHICH LOT IS YOURS, SIR? OKAY. FIRE PLUG. FIRE PLUG. FIRE PLUG. NO, WHERE YOUR HOUSE IS RIGHT THERE. 4 23. THANK YOU. 4 19, 423. I OWN THOSE TWO. IT'S A HALF ACRE LOT. NO, 4 19, 4 23. I'D LOVE TO HAVE 'EM BUILD A HOUSE. I THINK IT'D BE WONDERFUL. BUT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY FOR NOT ONLY HIS PROPERTY, BUT ALL THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES REQUIRES THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO HOOK UP THERE TO SERVICE ANY OF THESE. SO IT'S SETBACK, MAKING IT NOT 30 FEET FROM MY PRO. WELL, 30 FEET OFF. 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT WELLMAKER HAD THERE. HE WAS 30 FEET BACK FROM THE FENCE LINE. MM-HMM. NOW YOU'RE MOVING IT CLOSER TO MY PROPERTY. AND FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE, SOMETHING HAPPENS AND THAT CATCHES ON FIRE. IT TOOK THE FIRE DEPARTMENT INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF TIME TO RUN THEIR HOSES AROUND BETWEEN FOUR 19 AND FOUR 15 TO GET TO THE FIRETRUCK TO HOOK IT UP, TO PUT THE FIRE OUT. AND THAT IS MY CONCERN. OKAY. AS THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? UH, WE ALSO HAVE SUSAN. OH NO, SHE'S MOVING. . YOU'RE GOOD. OKAY. UH, SO WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS BACK UP TO QUESTIONS. AND I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR, UH, THE DEVELOPER. OKAY. SO WE HEARD THE CONCERN FROM THE NEIGHBOR AT FIRE. NOW I KNOW THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, 356 FEET FROM THE PUBLIC STREET, IT'S OVER 350. ARE YOU GONNA SPRINKLE THIS HOUSE? NO, I DO NOT BELIEVE. LIKE, HAVE YOU ALREADY SECURED A PERMIT? WE WERE IN THE PROCESS WHEN THIS WAS FOG. HAVE YOU HAD A FIRE REVIEW YET? UM, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. OKAY. YEAH. 'CAUSE NORMALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS YOUR HOUSE HAS TO BE MEET THE FIRE PROTECTION CODE AND YOU, YOU KNOW, IT'S WITHOUT A SPRINKLER SYSTEM, IT'S 350 FEET AS A TRUCK DRIVES FROM A HYDRANT, WHICH FROM WHAT, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD MENTIONED, IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT THAT'S, THAT'S POSSIBLE UNLESS YOU ADD A NEW HYDRANT OR YOU, UM, UH, SPRINKLE THE HOME. AND THEN YOU ALSO HAVE TO HAVE A TURNAROUND IF YOU HAVE A DEAD END CONDITION MORE THAN 150 FEET. SO WITH THE FLAG LOT THAT LONG, I JUST WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF THAT HOUSE HAS TO BE PUSHED TO THE BACK JUST TO PROVIDE A T TURNAROUND FOR A FIRE TRUCK. SO, BUT ALSO CHAIR, TYPICALLY FIRE [02:20:01] TRUCKS WILL NOT GO ON TO PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOME. WHAT THEY'LL DO IS THEY'LL ANCHOR TO THE STREET, BUT YOU NEED AT LEAST A 300 FOOT HOSE LAY. YEAH. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU'LL HAVE TO CONFIRM WITH FIRE AS TO WHAT YOU'LL NEED TO DO TO MAKE SURE THAT, UH, IT'S MIGHT, MAYBE IT'S SPRINKLED OR, UM, YEAH, OR YOU HAVE TO ADD THAT EXTRA HYDRANT. AND, AND I'M BRINGING THAT UP FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE, OF THE CITIZEN THAT THAT SPOKE IS THAT WHILE THEY'RE IN PERMITTING, THEY'RE NOT GONNA JUST BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT A HOME AND NOT MEET THE FIRE CODE. THEY'RE, THEY'RE MOST LIKELY GOING TO HAVE TO EITHER IN WELL, THAT, THAT WAS AN OLDER HOME THOUGH. I'VE GOT THE I KNOW, BUT IT'S, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT IT'S JUST TO, TO GET A PERMIT, THEY WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT WAS CURRENTLY THERE. BUT WHAT WAS THERE? ACCESS? NOTHING. ACCESS. THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION. WELL, THAT'S AN ALLEY. IT'S A PLA ALLEY. NO. WELL, IT MIGHT BE A, IS IT, IS IT A PAVED ALLEY? NO, NO. IT LOOKS LIKE, IT JUST LOOKS LIKE A NO-NAME STREET, A PAPER STREET. OKAY. BUT AGAIN, THEY'RE GONNA BE, THEY'RE GONNA ANCHOR FROM THE MAIN STREET FOR HOUSES, RIGHT? YEAH. THEY'RE NOT GONNA GO THROUGH THE ALLEY. THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT THEY'RE MOST LIKELY ARE. WAY BIGGER THAN THAT'RE MOST LIKELY. I'M TRYING NOT TO GET OFF TOPIC FROM THE SETBACK ISSUE, BUT WHAT WILL MOST LIKELY HAPPEN IS THEY'LL ALLOW THE TRUCK TO GO 150 FEET BEFORE DEAD END CONDITION IS MADE, AND THEN THEY HAVE THE HOSE LAY FROM THAT POINT, WHICH THEY'LL HAVE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE FLOW AND HYDRANTS AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF. SO, UM, AGAIN, I'M GETTING OFF TOPIC HERE. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SETBACKS? ALL RIGHT. UM, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? UM, NO. WE, UH, JUST, UM, FOLLOWING THE CITY'S DIRECTION. SO WHATEVER THEY DO SAY AND COME BACK WITH, WE ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO, UM, MAKE WORK, YOU KNOW? OKAY. AS THIS MOVE FORWARD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION FROM A COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 0 0 6 5. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR ONE A NINE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT DID ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 19 FOOT THREE INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND TWO THREE FOOT VARIANCE WITH AN EIGHT FOOT CREDIT FROM THE ALLEY, FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE NINE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 2 2 8 ROCK HILL DRIVE, APPLICANT BEING WESTON DEAN CUSTOM HOMES, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE 19 FOOT THREE INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND NINE FOOT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE STRUCTURE MEETS THE MINIMUM SIDESTEP REQUIREMENTS AND WILL MAINTAIN ADEQUATE SPACING BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND THE PROPERTY LINES. THEREFORE, THE REQUEST IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, THE LITERAL 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 NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE MUST MEET 20 FOOT TO THE FRONT AND REAR PROPERTY LINES LEADING TO AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO THE IRREGULAR SHAPE LOT, WHICH WOULD PREVENT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A RE REASONABLY SIZED RESIDENCE AND REDESIGN OF PLANS. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE FRONT AND REAR SETBACKS IS TO ENSURE THERE'S ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND THE FRONTAGE ROAD WITH A REQUEST. THE STRUCTURE WILL CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN ADEQUATE SPACING BETWEEN THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND WILL NOT POSE ANY LIFE SAFETY ISSUES. FOR THE VARIANCE, WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR 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 VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE REQUIRES DO NOT POSE RISK OF THE 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 ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER, THE PROPERTY OWNER, IS SOUGHT DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY MAINTAINS A UNIQUE SHAPE, AND THE PROPERTY ZONING DISTRICT SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE MORE STRINGENT THAN OTHER RESIDENTIAL BASED ZONING DISTRICT'S. END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THIEL. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UM, SINCE WE'RE SPEAKING STRICTLY ON THE SETBACKS, UM, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION, UM, UNDERSTANDING [02:25:01] THAT OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE GONNA STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH, UM, FIRE REVIEW, RETENTION RETARDANT, UM, WHATEVER THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, BUT WE ARE STRICTLY SPEAKING ON THE SETBACKS. AND SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER THIEL. I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS' LIKE TO ADD COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? NO, I, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN THAT AS LONG AS THE FIRE, UM, ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE SETBACK. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? ANYONE ELSE? HEARING NONE? UH, THE STAFFERS HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. TEAL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN? YES, I CONCUR WITH CON THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA? I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN TALK TO STAFF. THANK YOU. THANK ALL RIGHT. NEXT CASE. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11, BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 8 5. ADDRESS IS 2347 SOUTHWEST 21ST STREET COUNCIL, DISTRICT FIVE. APPLICANT IS JACOB CASTRO. A VARIANCE FROM THE FENCE MATERIALS TO ALLOW A CORRUGATED METAL FENCE IN THE REAR YARD. ZONING IS R SIX CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON 2347 SOUTHWEST 21ST STREET, AND THIS IS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO KEEP A CORRUGATED METAL FENCE ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND A PORTION OF THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES. THE CORRUGATED METAL DOES HAVE PROTECTED EDGES AND IS BEING REQUESTED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY AND PRIVACY AS THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ABUTS AN ALLEY SITE PLAN IN SUBJECT PROPERTY REAR OF THE PROPERTY SHOWING THE FENCE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. AND THEN THIS IS THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. RECOMMENDATION FOR VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 85 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE CORRUGATED METAL FENCE MATERIAL IS IN THE REAR YARD AND DOES NOT ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THE FENCE IS ONLY PARTIALLY CONSTRUCTED OF CORRUGATED METAL AND THE FENCE IS PLACED IN THE REAR YARD ALONG AN ALLEY AND MEETS OFFENSE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, WHICH OBSERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. NOTIFICATION PLAN, 23 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE THOMPSON NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? NO, NOT FOR THIS CASE. JUST CHECKING. , IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. UH, PLEASE BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JACOB CASTRO. I'M THE, UH, CURRENT HOMEOWNER, UH, AT 2347 SOUTHWEST 21ST STREET. EXCUSE ME. UH, I STARTED OUT THIS PROJECT, UM, BY CALLING THE PERMITTING OFFICE. AND I EXPLAINED TO THE GENTLEMAN WHO ANSWERED THE PHONE, UH, THAT I WAS GONNA BUILD A, UH, SMALL PRIVACY FENCE IN THE BACK FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY OF MY HOME AND MY FAMILY. HE ASKED ME, UH, THE HEIGHT AND IF IT WAS GONNA BE LESS THAN 25% OF MY FENCE. I SAID, YES, IT'S LESS THAN 25% OF MY FENCE. AND, UH, IT'S ONLY GONNA BE A PARTIAL IN THE BACK. UH, I STILL HAVE A GATE THERE. AND, UH, I HAD GOTTEN, UM, THE OKAYS FROM MY NEIGHBORS, UM, AND I TOLD 'EM THAT IT WAS GONNA BE, UH, METAL, AND THEN IT WAS GONNA BE SURROUNDED BY THE, UH, CEDAR, THE FENCE, UH, OR I SHOULD SAY THE CORRUGATED TIN LIES SIDEWAYS, NOT STRAIGHT, UP AND DOWN, SIDEWAYS AGAIN FOR THE EDGES. AND THEN THEY'RE ABUTTED BY, UM, SIX BY SIX, UH, CEDAR. AND IT'S GOT TWO BY FOUR CEDAR ON TOP AND ON BOTTOM. AND IT'S, UH, SUPPORTED IN THE BACK BY, UH, CEDAR, WHICH, UH, YOU SAW WITH THE PHOTOS. ONCE I FINISHED TALKING TO THE PLANNING OFFICE OR THE PERMANENT OFFICE, THE GENTLEMAN TOLD ME, NO, YOU DID NOT NEED ONE BECAUSE IT'S LESS THAN 25% AND YOU'RE GONNA STAY WITHIN, UH, NO MORE THAN SIX FOOT HIGH. SO I CALLED MY CONTRACTOR AND HE AND I STARTED, UH, THE FENCE. UH, WE WERE ABOUT, I'D SAY ABOUT 95% COMPLETED. AND CODE COMPLIANCE SHOWED UP AND SAID, NO, YOU'RE GONNA NEED [02:30:01] A VARIANCE. NOBODY HAD EVER TOLD ME ANYTHING ABOUT A VARIANCE OR ELSE I WOULD'VE COME TO YOU GUYS BEFOREHAND. UM, SO WE STOPPED AT THAT POINT, AND THEN I STARTED THE PROCESS OF WHAT DO I GOTTA DO? SO I CAME TO, UH, UH, THE OFFICE HERE AND SPOKE WITH MR. TREVINO AND STARTED THE VARIANCE PROCESS. SO, UM, I ALSO GOT SOME PHOTOGRAPHS OF OTHER, UH, FENCES IN MY AREA. UH, I GOT, I DID GO TO THE THOMPSON COMMUNITY OR, OR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MONTH. AND, UH, I RECEIVED THEIR APPROVAL. UH, I DON'T KNOW IF THE LETTER GOT HERE IN TIME OR NOT, BUT, UH, THEY DID APPROVE IT. I ALSO GOT, UH, MY COUNCILMAN, UH, TERRY CASTILLO FROM DISTRICT FIVE TO COME OUT, AND SHE'S ALSO SUPPORTING MY FENCE. UH, AGAIN, I CAN SHOW YOU. I ALSO HAVE, LIKE I SAID, UM, STATEMENTS FROM MY NEIGHBORS ON, I GUESS IT WOULD BE THE SOUTH SIDE AND THE NORTH SIDE. MR. UM, UH, RODRIGUEZ. AND, UH, MR. ZAMORA, UH, THAT OKAYED, UH, THE FENCE. I WENT AHEAD AND TOOK ALSO PICTURES OF OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY AND ALSO MY NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, WHERE THEY ALSO HAVE THE CORRUGATED FENCES. UH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA START SOME, HE'S GOT SEVERAL OTHER PICTURES. AND SIR, IN REGARD TO THE PICTURES, UH, ARE THEY ALL, ARE THEY, WOULD YOU SAY THEY'RE WITHIN LIKE, ABOUT A MILE OF YOUR PROPERTY OR MUCH MORE? UH, THE, THE FIRST, I THINK IT'S FOUR, ARE WITHIN THE, THE BLOCK AROUND MY HOUSE ONE'S, UH, YOU GO TO THE END OF THE BLOCK, IT'S FOUR HOUSES UP. UH, THE OTHER ONE YOU GO TO THE OTHER END OF THE BLOCK, IT'S THE HOUSE BEHIND THERE. AND THEN, UH, A HOUSE CATTYCORNER THERE. AND THEN AT THE NEXT CORNER OF THE FIRST FOUR, LIKE THAT ONE THERE IS AT, UH, 7 0 2 DARBY, WHICH YOU GO TO DARBY. AND 21ST, MY HOUSE IS A SECOND HOUSE FROM DARBY. UH, YOU GO TO DARBY AND THEN YOU JUST GO EAST FOUR HOUSES. AND THAT'S THAT, THAT FENCE THERE. AND THAT ONE HAS IT ALL ALONG THE SIDE. AND ALL ALONG THE BACK, UH, THAT ONE IS IN THE 400 BLOCK OF MENIFEE FROM MY HOUSE. YOU GO DOWN 21ST TO MENIFEE, UH, AND YOU JUST GO EAST AGAIN. UH, AND IT'S ABOUT THE FIFTH HOUSE ON THE LEFT, AND IT HAS IT ALL ALONG THE SIDE. AND THE BACK ALONG HIGHWAY 90, AND THEN ACROSS FROM THAT ONE, THAT ONE'S GONNA BE ON SOUTH CROSS. THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ANOTHER ONE. YEAH. EXCUSE ME. YEAH, YEAH. THAT ONE THERE, UH, IT GOES ALL ALONG THE FRONT OF THAT HOUSE. THAT HOUSE IS AT FOUR 10 MENEFEE, WHICH IS AS, AS SOON AS YOU HIT 21ST AND MENEFEE, YOU, YOU GO EAST AND IT'S A FIRST HOUSE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE STREET. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YEAH. AND LIKE I SAID, I'VE GOT PLENTY MORE IF YOU NO, I NEEDED MORE. SO IT, IT, IT, NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. RIGHT? THERE'S NO, I I JUST, I'M JUST GONNA ASK, SO IF, UH, WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO SOME COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? MIN CHAKA, COMMISSIONER MINKA, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. IT'S SORT OF OBVIOUS, BUT, UH, I JUST WANT TO HEAR THE ANSWER. IF YOU PUT A FENCE INSIDE A FENCE AND THE FENCE IS CLOSER TO A STRUCTURE, OR YOU ENCROACHING ON THE SETBACK AT ALL, EVEN THOUGH THE STRUCTURE DIDN'T MOVE, NO, A FENCE WON'T ENCROACH IN A SETBACK. SO IF YOU PUT A FENCE ONE FOOT NEXT TO A BUILDING, IT WON'T MATTER. NO. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SETBACKS AND EASEMENTS ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. SO AS LONG AS IT'S NOT, UH, CLOSING OFF AN EASEMENT WITHOUT THAT ACCESSIBLE GATES. YEAH, YOU CAN, YOU CAN PUT A FENCE IN A STEP BACK. YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT WITHIN THE FENCE AND A FENCE, AND I SAID THE FENCES ARE, UH, I SEE SO MANY PEOPLE NOT BUILDING FENCES WITHIN A FENCE AND THEY'RE ENCROACHING UPON A STRUCTURE. AND THIS STRUCTURE, I THOUGHT IT HAD A WINDOW EXIT TO IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE USE OF THIS STRUCTURE IS FOR. SO I ASSUME IT'S A TOOL OR A SHED, NOT A LIVING AREA. CORRECT. AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED. OKAY. UM, WELL, THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. UH, SIR, IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD AS A CLOSING REMARK BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? NO, JUST TO, UH, UH, THE GENTLEMAN ON THE RIGHT? YES. IT'S A SHED. AND IT JUST HAS, UH, UH, EIGHT FOOT, UH, DOOR IN THE FRONT. THANK YOU, SIR. YES, SIR. AND, UH, BEFORE WE, UH, ASK FOR A MOTION, I HAVE A QUESTION, UH, FOR STAFF, UH, THE MOTION, THE RECOMMENDED MOTION, UH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT INCLUDED, UH, REFERENCES TO THE FACT THAT THE, THE METAL WAS CAPPED ON, ON ALL SIDES AND PROTECTED. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ADD, UH, TO THE MOTION OR THAT, OR PERHAPS SAY, AS CONSTRUCTED? UH, WHAT IS, WHAT WOULD YOU THINK THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT IS? SO LONG AS YOU'RE, UM, THE, THE [02:35:01] STATEMENTS WHEN YOU'RE DOING YOUR, UH, CRITERIA FOR REVIEW INCLUDE, YOU KNOW, HOW IT WAS SUBMITTED, HOW IT WAS CAPPED OFF. OKAY. AND SO THEREFORE IT'S NOT A CONDITION, IT'S JUST WHAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU AS PART OF THE APPLICATION. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE FOR WHOEVER WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION. ACTUALLY WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT IF I COULD. SO ISN'T IT BY, BY CODE REQUIRED TO BE CAPPED? I MEAN, REGARDLESS IF THERE'S SHARP EDGES, YES, BUT SOMETIMES SOME OF THOSE DON'T HAVE SHARP EDGES. IT JUST DEPENDS ON HOW IT'S DESIGNED. YEAH. 'CAUSE IN THE RE I'M SORRY. AND SO JUST 'CAUSE THERE'S LOTS OF PICTURES OF OTHER ONES THAT WERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WERE NOT CAPPED AND I'M FREAKING OUT. 'CAUSE 'CAUSE IT'S PART, I'M SURE IT'S PART OF THE SAFETY THING 'CAUSE PEOPLE CAN GET HURT AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, GOOD JOB ON CAPPING IT. SO NOT GOOD JOB FOR YOUR NEIGHBORS. YEAH, I'M SURE IF CO COMPLIANCE WANTED TO HAVE A, YOU KNOW, HAVE A FULL WEEK AHEAD OF THEM, THEY CAN JUST HANG OUT IN THAT AREA. . SO YEAH, SO, SO SEND ALL YOUR PHOTOS TO CODE COMPLIANCE 'CAUSE I'M SURE THEY'LL BE INTERESTING . SO, SO WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE? I CAN MAKE A MOTION. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER MANOR. SO REGARDING CASE BO 8 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, UH, GRANT A VARIANCE FROM THE FENCE MATERIALS TO ALLOW A CORRUGATED METAL FENCE IN THE REAR YARD SITUATED AT 2 3 4 7 SOUTHWEST 21ST STREET, APPLICANT BEING JACOB CASTRO. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS FOR CORRUGATED METAL FENCE IN THE REAR YARD AS SUCH A PROPERTY WITH CAPS ON ALL SIDES. UM, IT IS NOT EASILY DETECTED FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF VIEW AND HAS PROTECTED EDGES. SO THE VARIANCE DOES NOT APPEAR CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. 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 NEEDING TO REPLACE A MATERIAL OF THE FENCE AND MAY RESULT IN THE PROPERTY BEING MORE VULNERABLE DUE TO ITS PROXIMITY TO AN ALLEY. WITH THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY, A BUDDING AN ALLEY, THE VARIANCE WILL ASSIST IN ALLEVIATING THE HARDSHIP, THIS HARDSHIP. TWO, 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. DEFENSE MEETS THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS AND IS ONLY ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND A PORTION OF THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES. THIS VARIANCE OBSERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH A VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO OTHER USES THAN THOSE 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, UH, IN WHICH HIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF DOES NOT FIND THE REQUEST OF THE CORRUGATED METAL TO SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES DUE TO THE PROTECTED EDGES OF THE METAL. WITH THE LOCATION OF THE FENCE BEING IN THE REAR YARD. THE REQUEST ALSO DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THIS 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 OR NOT DUE TO, OR A RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES SUCH AS THIS LOCATION OF BUDDING AN ALLEY AND IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL IN NATURE. END OF MOTION. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. I. GOODBYE COMMISSIONER CRUZ. COMMISSIONER MANNA. YEAH. SO, SO, SO GOOD JOB ON, ON, UH, REACHING OUT TO THE CITY AND THEN ALSO, UM, REACH OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, WAY TO GO FOR REACHING OUT TO THE COUNCIL PERSON AS WELL. SO THAT'S A LOT OF SUPPORT, UH, IN YOUR FAVOR. I THINK CAPPING IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT. UH, KEEP YOUR NEIGHBORS SAFE AND, UH, IT LOOKS APPROPRIATE HERE IN THIS LOCATION. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UH, YES SIR, I'M, AND I CONCUR WITH MR. MANO. THIS IS, UH, VERY NICE FENCE. UH, IT'S VERY WELL MAINTAINED AND I THINK, UH, IT'S GONNA HELP THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? AND IT IS A VERY GOOD LOOKING FENCE, SO THANK YOU, HONOR. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. STEPH, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. TEO. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. YES, I CONCUR AND CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. LAST [ Approval of Minutes  ] ITEM, THE MINUTES. UM, I HAD SUBMITTED, UH, SOME, SOME, UH, CHANGES THERE. THERE IN THERE. OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER CHANGES OR, OR, [02:40:01] UH, AMENDMENTS FROM ANY COMMISSIONERS? NO. ALL RIGHT. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION MO MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES SECOND AS AMENDED. ALL RIGHT. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THIEL. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL RIGHT. ANY OPPOSED? AYE. AYE. I WASN'T HERE. OKAY, SO WE, WHAT WE HAVE IS, UH, NINE, FOUR AND TWO ABSENT, UH, UM, AS EXTENSIONS, ONE FROM COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN AND ONE FROM COMMISSIONER MENCHACA. BEFORE WE GIVE FINAL APPROVAL, I THINK MS. UH, TORY WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING, WHAT THE ABSTAINS WERE. MENCHACA AND WHO? AND BRAGMAN AND BRAGG AND COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. SO THAT MAKES IT EIGHT TO EIGHT, THREE TO ZERO. IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE. WE CAN, IT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE ONE. YOU CAN JUST NEED SIX. I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD, UM, IT WAS FROM THE EMAIL. IT WAS THE ONE, UM, I BELIEVE, I WANNA SAY IT WAS NUMBER 10 THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE, BUT I LIKE IN THE EMAIL, AFTER I LISTENED TO THE AUDIO AND TYPED UP AND SENT TO EVERYBODY WHAT HAPPENED? NOBODY RESPONDED TO ME. SO I JUST PUT IT IN THERE ASSUMING THAT EVERYBODY WAS AKAY WITH IT. I BELIEVE SO. AND THAT WAS, THAT WAS MY REMARK THAT YOU ADDRESSED. YES, I, I LOOKED UP YOURS LISTENED ALL THE WAY THROUGH AND THEN RESPONDED IN THE EMAIL, I BELIEVE TO YOU, KAYLA AND, OKAY. SOMEBODY ELSE. SOUNDS GREAT. SO WITH THAT, UM, MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO ZERO WITH THREE ABSENT PRESENTATIONS IS, THAT'S A WAY TO SAY THAT. UH, LAST ITEM IS [Director’s Report: Update on 2022 UDC Code Amendments  ] U D C AMENDMENT. JUST A QUICK REMINDER THAT WE WILL HAVE THE B O A WORK SESSION. IT'LL BE ABOUT A TWO HOUR WORK SESSION. WE'LL FEED YOU LUNCH IN JULY. I THINK IT'S THE JULY 18TH MEETING. AND THEN THAT'S ALSO THE DAY THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING THE AMENDMENTS. I THINK THERE'S ONLY ABOUT 15 AMENDMENTS THAT YOU'LL SEE. YOU'RE NOT GONNA SEE ALL 199 AMENDMENTS. IT'S ONLY THE ONES THAT FALL UNDER YOUR PERFUME. SO WE'LL PRESENT THEM, UH, WE'LL LET YOU KNOW WHAT THAT LANGUAGE, THAT PROPOSED LANGUAGE SAYS, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT WE'LL ALSO SEND IT TO YOU IN ADVANCE SO THAT YOU, THAT WAY YOU CAN PREPARE YOUR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY. ALL RIGHT. AND SO WE'LL BE MEETING AT 11. I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE START AT 11 SO THAT WAY WE HAVE THE FULL TWO HOURS BEFORE OUR REGULAR MEETING STARTS AT ONE. ALRIGHT, GREAT. AND QUESTION? QUESTION. OKAY. YES. SO PAT, SO, SO, UM, THE, UM, TACK TALKED ABOUT A LOT OF CASES THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'LL SAY EVENTUALLY OR SOMETIMES COME BEFORE THE BOARD. WILL WE BE TALKING ABOUT ALL THOSE OR JUST THE ONES THAT, THAT THE T KIND OF WORKED THROUGH? SO, SO BASICALLY THERE ARE CODE AMENDMENTS. LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE A GAS STATION ONE, UM, THAT, UH, COULD TRIGGER A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE IF, UM, IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN RELATED TO THE STRUCTURE OF, OF A BUILDING WITHIN, WITHIN A SETBACK, JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE OF IT. YEAH. UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, THERE ARE SOME OTHER ONES THAT DO RELATE DIRECTLY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. UM, THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WE ARE PRIMARILY FOCUSING ON FOR YOU BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS IN THE CODE THAT TRIGGER VARIANCES. WE DON'T NEED TO GO OVER ALL OF THOSE. YEAH. WE JUST WANNA FOCUS ON THE ONES THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY IMPACT THE BOARD. YEAH. AND, AND I LIKE TO ADD THAT WE HEARD A LOT OF THESE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, WHEN THEY WERE ORIGINALLY, UH, HEARD FOR SPONSORSHIP. UH, AND THERE'S, WE COULD, WE COULD SPEND QUITE A WHILE TALKING ABOUT THEM IF YOU KNOW, WHEN THE TIME COMES UP. SO MAKE SURE YOU, YOU READ THROUGH AND IF YOU HAVE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS YOU CAN ASK STAFF BEFORE THE WORK SESSION. UM, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE, BECAUSE WHEN WE HAVE THAT WORK SESSION, THERE'S GONNA BE SOME THINGS I'M, I CAN PRETTY MUCH FORESEE THAT ARE GOING TO BE, UH, IN THE AIR FOR A WHILE IF, FOR THOSE WHO, UH, WHO MAY BE SEEING IT FOR THE FIRST TIME. SO ALSO, UM, YOU KNOW, SO YOU ALL HAVE, UH, YOU KNOW, I GUESS A HISTORY HERE WITHIN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. AND SO YOU RECOGNIZE CASES AND, AND THOSE THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT WE WOULD HEARD. SO, SO I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU'D BE ABLE TO MARK SOME OF THOSE AND SAY, WE HAVE HEARD SOME OF THESE BEFORE, YOU KNOW, AND THESE WILL, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE NOW BEING IMPACTED BY THAT. YEAH. FOR EXAMPLE, THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL DECREASING, UM, THE, UM, HOW IT'S ROUNDED, IT'S NO LONGER ROUNDED UP. THAT'S ONE OF THE CODE AMENDMENTS. SO WE WOULD WALK THROUGH THAT BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW, THAT, UH, ROUNDING THAT LIMITATION ON THE BLOCK FACE COMES TO YOU GUYS FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. SO THOSE, THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WE'RE, UH, PRIMARILY TALKING ABOUT WHERE WE KNOW ULTIMATELY IT HAS TO COME TO YOU. RIGHT. AND, AND, AND WITH STR AND I WOULD APPRECIATE AS STAFF WOULD TALK ABOUT THE IMPLICATION STATEWIDE, [02:45:01] UH, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE'RE ONE OF THE, IT'S NOT THE ONLY MUNICIPALITY THAT HAS SUCH A, UH, DEFINED ORDINANCE THAT'S USED AS A, AS A COPY OR, OR AS A GUIDE TO OTHER PEOPLE IN THE STATE. AND, AND SO THERE'S SOME ITEMS FOR US TO CONSIDER, NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT SOUNDS GOOD OR BAD. IT'S, IT'S, THIS IS BRAVE NEW WORLD FOR THE STATE. AND SO WE WANT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE LOOK AT THIS STUFF. ALRIGHT. UH, IF THERE'S ANYTHING, ANY QUESTIONS, REMARKS. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GONNA ADJOURN THIS MEETING. IT IS FOUR O'CLOCK. * 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.