* 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. [00:00:08] IT IS ONE OH THREE. I'M GONNA CALL THE, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS INTO, INTO SESSION STAFF. YOU PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. MR. SPIELMAN. HERE. HERE. MR. ALBERT. PRESENT. MR. MANCHACA? HERE. MR. VASQUEZ? HERE. MS. CRUZ. SAY HERE. MS. CRUZ. MR. MANNA PRESENT. MS. BRAGMAN? PRESENT. MS. KAPLAN? HERE. MR. ZUNIGA? HERE. MR. OZUNA. PRESENT. PRESENT, CHAIR ORIAN. AND I'M ALSO PRESENT. WE HAVE A QUORUM OF 11. UH, BEFORE WE START, WE'RE GOING TO, UH, FIRST ADMINISTER THE OATH OF OFFICE UNDER MY AUTHORITY UNDER TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 2 11 0 0 8, UH, FOR COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. SO COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA, IF YOU COULD REPEAT AFTER ME, PLEASE. UH, I, JESSE GONZALEZ ZUNIGA JR. DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, THE TEXAS, AND WILL TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY, PRESERVE, PROTECT, AND DEFEND, PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES, THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THIS STATE. SO HELP ME, GOD. GOD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO FOR EVERYBODY IN ATTENDANCE, WE ARE GOING TO CONVENE TO A CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION. UM, THE TIME IS NOW 1:04 PM ON NOVEMBER 7TH, 2022. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY SAN ANTONIO NOW CONVENE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE ATTORNEY-CLIENT CONSULTATION SECTION 5 5 1 0 7 1. SO WE, WE WILL COME BACK, UH, SHORTLY, PLEASE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. IT. ALL RIGHT. IT'S 1 39. THE TIME IS NOW 1:39 PM ON 11 7 20 22, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. WE'LL NOW RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. NO OFFICIAL ACTION WAS TAKEN IN EXECUTIVE SESSION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. SO IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE JOIN ME FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. MY PLEDGE MEETING TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TWO YEARS STANDS NATION LIBERTY JUSTICE ALLEGIANCE TO BE TEXAS. TEXAS. ALRIGHT, WE CAN HAVE A SPANISH INTERPRETER COME OUT AND GIVE THEIR PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items  ] SO BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION. THE BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA, WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. THE CASES ARE LISTED BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND STREET ADDRESS. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT. LASTLY, ASK 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. UH, WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY, 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 PERTINENT TO THE RELEASE SOUGHT, AND WE DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATOR AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR, TO DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. [00:05:02] WE ALSO SERVE IN AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUEST FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 28 5. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR CASES AND OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS. THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY'LL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ANY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER. AFTER EVERYONE HAS HEARD THE CASE, IT WILL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION. EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION. IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY. IT REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND GRANTING THE RELIEF SOUGHT REST WAS THE WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS ON WHICH THE RELIEF REQUESTED RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT COURT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW. BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. SO PLEASE LEAVE ME YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE. STAFF. 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 INDIC INDICATE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND AN X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION. ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THE AND ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD. THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THE REQUEST FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION. YOU'LL BE CALLED AN ORDER THAT YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT IN 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. THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED IN TO SPEAK. GROUPS CONSISTING OF THREE OR MORE CITIZENS WILL BE, UM, ALLOTTED NINE MINUTES TOTAL TO ADDRESS THE BOARD TO ON THE ITEM. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. YES. SO ITEM NUMBER ONE HAS BEEN POSTPONED. BEGIN WITH ITEM NUMBER TWO ON THE AGENDA. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS BO O A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 1 61. UH, LOCATED AT 6 0 3 SOUTH MESQUITE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO. UH, THE APPLICANT IS STEVEN NZ. UH, REQUESTS, UH, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE, UH, TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UH, IN ADDITION TO THE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL LOCATED DOWN THE STREET IN THE R FOUR DISTRICT. UM, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED TWO BLOCKS EAST OF THE ALMO DOME AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH MESQUITE AND NEVADA. THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT AND SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND EVENTS, UH, EVENT CENTER AND A CONVENIENCE STORE LOCATED DOWN THE STREET. UM, THERE'S CURRENTLY ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ISSUED DOWN THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THIS IS THE ONLY TYPE TWO PERMIT, UH, ON THE BLOCK FACE. UM, AND THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR AN ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. UM, UH, UH, IN ADDITION TO THE ONE THAT'S CURRENTLY PERMITTED, UH, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IF YOU NOTE THE PURPLE ICON, UH, THERE, THAT JUST MEANS THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS PREVIOUSLY PERMITTED AS A TYPE TWO, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL. UM, SINCE THAT WAS, UH, GRANDFATHERED IN, A NEW OWNER IS TAKEN, UH, OVER THIS PROPERTY. SO, UM, IT'S NO LONGER PERMITTED. UM, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEN THIS IS A FRONT VIEW, UM, SHOWING THE CORNER OF NEVADA AND MESQUITE. THIS IS A SOUTH VIEW GOING DOWN THE STREET. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF BO O A 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 61 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, UM, THAT THERE'S CURRENTLY ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON THE BLOCK PHASE. UH, 37 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, ZERO RETURN IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ALMA DOME GARDEN, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND, UM, THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. OKAY, BEFORE YOU GO, UH, QUICK QUESTION. UH, SO THIS, THIS WAS A TYPE TWO, YES, IT SOLD, SO IT LOST THE TYPE TWO STATUS. AND IN THE ABSENCE OF, OF THERE BEING A TYPE [00:10:01] TWO IN THE BLOCK PHASE, THE PROPERTY AT 6 2 7, MESQUITE ACQUIRED THE ONLY ALLOWABLE TYPE TWO. IS THAT WHAT, HOW? THAT'S CORRECT, YES. OKAY. UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANKS. GREAT. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? UH, COME ON UP AND, UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR CASE. UH, MY NAME IS STEVE NUNEZ, 6 0 3 SOUTH MESQUITE. UH, THERE'S REALLY NOT MUCH TO IT. YOU, YOU HIT IT ON THE HEAD. THERE WAS, UH, THE GENTLEMAN I BOUGHT IT FOR HAD A, HAD A PERMIT AND, UH, THERE WAS ACTUALLY TWO PERMITS AT THAT POINT, GRANDFATHERED INTO, UM, PRIOR TO THE 12.5%. SO WHEN HE SOLD IT TO ME, OBVIOUSLY I APPLIED FOR ANOTHER PERMIT AND IT WAS DECLINED. 'CAUSE THE OTHER, THE 6 27 OR WHATEVER THAT IS ALREADY SIX 15 ALREADY HAD ONE. SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE GIST OF IT. OKAY. UM, HOLD, HOLD ON, HOLD ON A SECOND. OH, YOU CAN'T HEAR ME? I'M SORRY. THERE YOU GO. YEAH, THAT'S NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE. SO, UH, STAFF, IS THERE ANY, UH, VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? SO YES, WE HAVE, UM, A NUMBER OF VOICEMAILS, WELL, ONE VOICEMAIL THAT'S FOR ITEMS 2, 3, 4, AND FIVE ON THE AGENDA. OKAY. AND SO WE'RE GONNA PLAY THAT THIS ONE TIME. WE ARE HAPPY TO PLAY IT FOR YOU AGAIN IF YOU WANT, BUT THE, ONE OF THE FIRST ONES YOU'LL HEAR WILL APPLY TO ALL OF THOSE ITEMS, AND THEN WE HAVE AN ADDITIONAL FIVE OTHER VOICEMAILS. SO SIR, IF YOU COULD, UM, TAKE A, A SEAT AND WE'LL, WE'LL LISTEN TO THIS AND THEN WE'LL CALL YOU UP FOR QUESTIONS. AND HAS ANYONE, UH, SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN PERSON? OKAY, JUST THE VOICEMAILS. ALL RIGHT, LET'S, LET'S HEAR 'EM. HI, UH, THIS IS LETICIA SANCHEZ. MY ADDRESS IS 1710 VERA CRUZ, ZIP CODE 7 8 2 0 7. I'M CALLING, UH, REGARDING ITEMS NUMBER TWO AT 6 0 3 SOUTH MESQUITE STREET. ITEM NUMBER THREE AT 7 3 6 EAST MYRTLE. ITEM NUMBER FOUR AT 1 2 3 ALLENSWORTH STREET. ITEM NUMBER FIVE AT 1 1 5 0 6 WHISPER CIRCLE. AND ITEM NUMBER SIX AT 86 TRANQUIL TERRACE. I'M CALLING TO OPPOSE, UM, THESE, UH, CASES THAT ARE REQUESTING, UM, SHORT TERM RENTAL. UM, AND I CAN BE REACHED AT AREA CODE 2 1 0 3 6 3 5 8 9 5. THANK YOU. UH, MR. CHAIRMAN? UH, YES, COMMISSIONER, UH, WHO WAS THIS PERSON REPRESENTING? UH, SHE JUST LEFT A VOICEMAIL TO BE PLAYED, UH, FOR THAT MY RID OF CASES. SO SHE, SHE WASN'T REPRESENTING, UH, ANY ONE PARTICULAR AND STAFF DID, DID SHE, DID YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW, DID SHE WITH LIVE WITHIN 200 FEET OF ANY OF THE, THE CASES THAT SHE WANTED THE VOICEMAIL READ FOR? WE CAN LOOK UP HER ADDRESS. I, I THINK IT, WE'D LIKE TO KNOW IF SHE WAS WITHIN 200 FEET OF ANY OF THOSE ONE. AND I WAS ASKING BECAUSE IT'S SPREAD THROUGH ALL THE DISTRICTS. YES, THAT'S RIGHT. UM, LET'S, THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. LET'S MOVE ON WITH THE NEXT VOICEMAIL. GOOD MORNING. I'M RAY MORALES, RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 10. UH, TELEPHONE NUMBER (210) 727-9215. I'M CALLING REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS NUMBER TWO AT 6 0 3 SOUTH MESQUITE STREET. ITEM NUMBER THREE AT 7 36 EAST MYRTLE STREET. ITEM NUMBER FOUR AT 1 2 3 ALLENSWORTH STREET, ITEM NUMBER FIVE AT 11 5 0 6 WHISPER CIRCLE, AND ITEM NUMBER SIX AT 86 TRAN TERRACE. I'M REQUESTING THAT THE APPLICATIONS FOR S D R TYPE TWO AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ON THESE PROPERTIES BE DENIED. THE 12.5% BENEFIT LIMITATION WILL BE EXCEEDED IF THESE PROPERTIES ARE GRANTED SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS. PLEASE HELP PROTECT EXISTING HOUSE OF STOCK THAT HAS BECOME VERY LIMITED OR PERMANENT RESIDENTS OF SAN ANTONIO. AND PLEASE LIMIT ANY FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS OR PARKING AND NOISE ISSUES THAT SDRS ARE KNOWN FOR. DISTRICT ONE AND DISTRICT TWO ARE ALREADY HAVING THESE ISSUES WITH A SMALLER LOT AND NARROW EARTH STREETS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. MY NAME IS MARY JOHNSON AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE MONTE VISTA TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I LIVE AT ONE TWENTY FIVE WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 821-5917. I'M CALLING TODAY TO, TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION TO THESE VARIANCE REQUESTS FOR MORE TYPE TWO RENTALS. ITEMS 2, 3, 4, 5, AND SIX. WE NEED TO SUPPORT CITY STAFF'S. RECOMMENDATIONS [00:15:01] OF DENIAL. THE TYPE TWO RENTALS HAVE BECOME A BLIGHT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMUNITIES. THEY'RE EMPTY MUCH NEEDED HOMES FOR PEOPLE IN OUR CITY THAT CANNOT FIND HOMES TO RENT OR BUY. MANY OF OUR NEIGHBORS HAVE BEEN PRICED OUT OR EVICTED FROM HOMES THAT THEY HAVE LIVED IN FOR YEARS SO THAT INVESTORS CAN PROFITEER OFF OUR MUCH NEEDED HOUSING. THE HOUSING SHORTAGE IS IN PART DUE TO HOMES BEING USED AS HOTELS AND NOT HOMES. THIS COMMERCIALIZATION OF OUR HOUSING AND OUR NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE ALSO BEEN, IN MY OPINION, A MAJOR FACTOR IN THE OVERMARKET HOUSING COSTS THAT HAVE CREATED AN OVERBLOWN MARKET AND THUS HIGHER APPRAISALS AND TAX BURDEN FOR AVERAGE HOMEOWNERS THAT PLAN TO STAY IN THEIR HOMES. WE SHOULD BE DENYING THESE IN ANY FUTURE TYPE TWO RENTAL VARIANCES APPLIED FOR THAT WOULD EXCEED THE ALLOTTED 12.5% OF EACH BLOCK BASE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS STATEMENT IS FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER TWO AT 6 0 3 SOUTH MESQUITE. ITEM NUMBER THREE AT 7 36 EAST MYRTLE. ITEM NUMBER FOUR AT 1 23 ALLENSWORTH STREET. ITEM NUMBER FIVE AT 11 5 0 6 WHISPER CIRCLE, AND ITEM NUMBER SIX AT 86 TRANQUIL TERRACE. MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA. I LIVE AT 2 43 EAST ATCH AT AT SAN IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. THIS STATEMENT IS BEING READ ON BEHALF OF THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE. IN THESE FIVE CASES, THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A TYPE TWO PERMIT WOULD EXCEED THE 12.5% DENSITY LIMITATION SET BY CITY CODE AND WOULD DISPLAY SUPPORT AFFORDABLE AND LONG-TERM HOUSING INVENTORY, WHICH IS SORELY NEEDED IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. IN ADDITION FOR CITY CODE 36 DASH 3 9 9 0.03 FOR TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL TO OPERATE A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON A BLOCK BASE, WHICH EXCEEDS THE DENSITY LIMITATION MAY ONLY BE GRANTED IF THE APPLICANTS DEMONSTRATE IN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CONFIRMED THE FOLLOWING, THAT NEARBY STREETS WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED SHORT-TERM RENTAL TYPE TWO, THAT THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL NOT BE DISRUPTED IN A MANNER TO PREVENT THE ADJACENT OWNERS FROM THE QUIET ENJOYMENT OF THEIR PROPERTY, AND THAT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED VIEWS. TYPE TWO RENTALS CURRENTLY EXIST ON THE BLOCK BASIS, AND WITH THE ADDITION OF NON-OWNER OCCUPIED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITH MULTIPLE BEDROOMS TYPE TWO RENTALS, WE BELIEVE IT WILL BRING SUBSTANTIAL HARM TO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS INCREASED DENSITY WILL ELEVATE TRAFFIC AND PARKING ISSUES AND INCREASED NOISE AND DISTURBANCES IN THOSE RESIDENTIAL AREAS. FURTHERMORE, THESE HARMFUL CONDITIONS WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF A NEIGHBORHOOD IS AN ASSET TO HOMEOWNERS TYPE TWO DENSITY WILLFULLY DESTROYS THIS VALUE. WE SUPPORT THE CITY'S DECISION OF DENIAL FOR THESE TYPE TWO PERMITS. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE COMMISSION TO UPHOLD THE CITY'S DECISION AND DENY THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR 6 0 3 SOUTH MESQUITE, 7 36 EAST MYRTLE 1 23 ALLWORTH 11 5 0 6 WHISPER CIRCLE IN 86 TRANQUIL TERRACE. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. HI, MY NAME IS STEVE VERTE, 1 0 5 RENO STREET. I'M CALLING IN OPPOSITION OF ITEMS 2, 3, 4, 5, AND SIX. WE, UH, WE, WE SHOULD NOT SEE VARIANCES ON TYPE TWO ST UH, UH, THE, UM, CODE IS CLEAR ON THIS AND THERE THIS SHOULD NOT BE EXCEEDED. THERE'S, UM, THIS SHOULD BE HELD TO THE 12.5% DENSITY. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS MARGARET LEEDS. I LIVE AT 3 0 8 KING WILLIAM SAN ANTONIO, SEVEN EIGHT TWO ZERO FOUR. MY PHONE IS (210) 393-5223. I WISH TO GO ON RECORD IN OPPOSITION TO ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA. NUMBERS 2, 3, 4, 5 AND SIX REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE. PLEASE CONTINUE TO DENY ALL REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES TO THE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL [00:20:01] ORDINANCE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THIS ALL OF THEM. THAT IS ALL OF THEM. AND MS. SANCHEZ, THE VERY FIRST ONE ON THERE IS NOT WITHIN 200 FEET OF ANY OF THOSE, BUT NEITHER WERE ANY OF THOSE OTHER SPEAKERS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO, UH, IF THE APPLICANT CAN, CAN PLEASE COME BACK UP, WE'LL SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU. UH, WE'LL, ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YEAH, SO, UH, MANANA COMMISSIONER MANNA. YEAH, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE, I GUESS THE SEQUENCE OF WHAT TRANSPIRED. AND I GOT A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED AND I APOLOGIZE. UM, SO, SO THERE WAS A PERMIT, ISN'T A PERMIT, YOU KNOW, SO JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE BLOCK FACE DIALOGUE. IT'S A QUESTION FOR THE CITY MAYBE. YEAH. YES. FOR, SO FOR THE CITY, SO THERE WAS A PERMIT THAT WAS ISSUED PRIOR TO THE ORDINANCE COMING IN. UM, WHEN THE OWNERSHIP CHANGED, UM, THAT PERMIT WAS REVOKED OR CANCELED. UM, IN THE ABSENCE OF THAT PERMIT, THE ONE DOWN THE STREET WAS ISSUED. UM, AND THEN THIS, UH, THE, THE NEW APPLICANT, THE NEW OWNER CAME IN, UH, TO APPLY FOR A NEW ONE. OKAY. SO, SO, SO, UM, SO THERE WAS NOT A TYPE TWO RENTAL, UM, THAT WAS RENEWED WHEN IT IS THAT WE CHANGED THE, THE, I GUESS THE DIALOGUE FOR THE TYPE TWOS FOR THIS PARTICULAR BLOCK FACE. DID I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY? SO THERE WAS NOT ONE ISSUED FOR THIS PROPERTY AND NOW WE'RE TRYING TO ISSUE A, A NEW ONE, I GUESS? NO, THERE WAS ONE ISSUED, INITIALLY IT WAS ISSUED, HOWEVER IT EXPIRED, IT WENT AWAY, IT WAS GRANDFATHERED AND THEN THE RIGHT, AND THEN THE OWNERSHIP CHANGED AND THEY HAVE TO PULL THEIR OWN PERMIT IN THE TIME THAT IT TOOK HIM TO PULL HIS PERMIT. SOMEBODY ELSE ALREADY PICKED UP, GOT THEIR PERMIT. PERFECT. AND THEN, UM, AND THEN, UM, ON THE GO ON THE, UH, 7 21 STOP MAP, IT'S SHOWING NEW ICONS THAT I HAVEN'T SEEN YET, PURPLE ONES. AND SO THAT WAS CALLED OUT HERE IN THE DIALOGUE. AND SO ARE THOSE PERMITS THAT ARE, ARE EXPIRING AND SO THERE'S LIKE ONE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THIS ONE LISTED, AND SO IS THAT ONE ALSO EXPIRING? SO PURPLE ICONS ARE GRANDFATHER TYPE TWO PERMITS. SO THAT'S JUST SHOWING THAT THAT ONE AT ONE POINT WAS GRANDFATHERED IN. UM, IT, THE SYSTEM DOESN'T UPDATE THOSE AUTOMATICALLY. WE HAVE TO GO IN AND REMOVE THOSE. SO THOSE WILL SOMETIMES BE ACTIVE, SOMETIMES THOSE AREN'T THE, THE GRANDFATHER ONES AREN'T AS ACCURATE AS THE, THE ORANGE AND BLUE ONES THAT YOU NORMALLY SEE. PERFECT. THANK YOU. UH, SO I HAVE A QUESTION. UH, WHAT WAS THE TIME FROM THE MOMENT YOU PURCHASED THE PROPERTY TO THE MOMENT YOU APPLIED FOR THE PERMIT? UH, I BOUGHT THIS HOUSE AUGUST 15TH. I APPLIED SEPTEMBER 13TH. OKAY, SO IN, IN THE FOUR WEEKS YOU WERE ONE OF YOUR NEIGHBORS DOWN THE STREET SWOOPED IN, YOU GOT IT? YES, SIR. OKAY. AND DOES, UH, AND STAFF DOES, WHEN YOU HAVE A, UM, AN OPENING LIKE THAT THERE, THERE'S, IT'S FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE IS, IS IT THE MOMENT THEY APPLY, THE MOMENT THEY GET A HOT TAX PERMIT? I MEAN, WHAT IS THE, WHAT MAKES IT A COMPLETE APPLICATION OR, OR WHAT? RIGHT. SO, UM, THAT ONE WENT AWAY AND SO THERE'S ONE PENDING AND SO IT IS FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE. SO THEY SUBMITTED THEIRS AND THEY GOT EVALUATED, BUT IN THAT TIME HE PURCHASED THE HOUSE AND THEN IS APPLYING AGAIN. SO THAT WAS WELL AFTER THE TIME OF THE, THE SECOND PERMIT BEING ISSUED. SO THE, THE, SO THE BIG QUESTION IS THE ONE AT 6 2 7, DID THEY APPLY FOR A PERMIT PRIOR TO THE PURCHASE? SO THEY WOULD'VE HAD TO PROVIDE CLOSING DOCUMENTS OR A WARRANTY DEEDED THAT SHOWS THAT OWNERSHIP CHANGE? SO WHAT WE PROBABLY DID, AND I I CAN'T SPEAK TO EACH SPECIFIC, UH, SPECIFIC INSTANCE, BUT WHEN WE EVALUATED THE NEW PERMIT THAT CAME IN, WE PROBABLY CHECKED THE ONE UP AT THE TOP AND IT EITHER WENT AWAY BECAUSE WE HAD WITHDRAWN THAT PERMIT DUE TO THE OWNERSHIP CHANGE OR THE APPLICANT PROVIDED NEW WARRANTY DEEDS SHOWING THAT THE OWNERSHIP CHANGE IN THAT PERMIT SHOULD BE REVOKED. OKAY. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO I'M SORRY. SO GOING BACK FOR THE TIMELINE HERE, SO, UM, SO, SO IT WAS GRANDFATHERED IN WITH REGARDS TO THE EARLY DIALOGUE, AND THEN I THOUGHT I HEARD IT WAS REVOKED. UM, AND SO THERE WAS A PERIOD WHERE IT WASN'T A TYPE TWO AND THEN WHY IT'S SHOWN PURPLE. AND THEN I, I GUESS IS THERE A TIMELINE THERE WHERE IT REALLY WASN'T WE'LL SAY, AUTHORIZED AS A TYPE TWO? OR WAS IT A TYPE TWO ALL THE WAY UP TO THE POINT WHERE HE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY? SO, UM, AND I'M SORRY, I PROBABLY MISSPOKE WHEN I SAID REVOKED IT. IT, IT'S JUST CLOSED. IT'S JUST CLOSED OUT. IT'S, IT'S NO LONGER ACTIVE. UM, IN, IN OUR CASE, IT WASN'T DUE TO A CODE VIOLATION, IT WAS JUST BECAUSE THE OWNERSHIP CHANGED. SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A REVOCATION THE SAME WAY THAT, UM, A CODE VIOLATION WOULD BE A REVOCATION. UM, SO IT WAS GRANDFATHERED IN INITIALLY [00:25:01] AND THEN, UM, AND THEN WHEN THE PROPERTY SOLD IS WHEN IT WAS CLOSED, IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING? CORRECT, YES. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANY, STEPH, IS THERE, WAS THERE ANY COMPLAINTS FROM THE TYPE TWO, UH, AT, WHEN IT WAS ACTIVE AT 6 0 3? WAS THERE ANY ACTIVE COMPLAINTS? ANY, ANY, ANYTHING? WE'RE PULLING UP THE PERMIT NOW, JUST TO DOUBLE CHECK. I JUST FIND IT ODD THAT NONE OF THE NEIGHBORS ARE, THAT LIVE ON THIS BLOCK HAS HAVE CHIMED IN. UM, IT JUST OH, THE ONE, YEAH, THERE'S THE ONE. YEAH. UH, SO WE CHECK INDIVIDUAL APPLICANTS TO SEE IF THEY HAVE ANY PENDING, UH, CODE VIOLATIONS. UM, AS TO THIS PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY, MOST LIKELY THERE AREN'T. UM, OKAY. WE CAN DOUBLE CHECK THAT. ALL RIGHT. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, SIR. UH, WE'RE GOING TO, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DELIBERATE AND WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION. UH, IS THERE A MOTION FROM A, FROM THE COMMISSION, JUST TO CLARIFY THERE, WE VERIFIED THERE ARE NO CODE, THERE WERE NO CODE ISSUES OPENED, AND ALSO THE PERMIT THAT WAS PULLED FOR THE EXISTING TYPE TWO SS T R WAS IN MARCH OF 2022. OKAY. WAIT, THE ONE AT 67, WELL, THE ONE HE, THE, THE APPLICANT JUST, UH, MENTIONED AHEAD, THE ONE THAT'S ACTIVE ON THE BLOCK, THE ONE THAT NULLIFIED BEING ABLE TO GET A SECOND. YES. THAT, THAT WAS IN MARCH, YES, MARCH 20. BUT DIDN'T, BUT THIS APPLICANT DIDN'T PURCHASE THE PROPERTY TILL SEPTEMBER, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. AUGUST, BUT YES. OF THIS YEAR. OF THIS YEAR. SO HOW DID, HOW DID THE 6 2 7 GET A PERMIT IF THERE WAS ALREADY ONE ON THE BLOCK FACE? BECAUSE IT EXPIRED. SO THE ONE AT 6 0 3 DIDN'T, DIDN'T GO AWAY BECAUSE OF THE OWNERSHIP CHANGE? IT WENT AWAY BECAUSE OF AN EXPIRATION? YES. OKAY. DO WE HAVE THE DATE OF THAT EXPIRATION? YEAH. WHAT WAS THE DATE? THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON NEXT. ? YEAH, IF A COMMISSIONER WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO GET THAT PROCESS STARTED, I'D APPRECIATE IT. O ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 1 61, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT 6 0 3 SOUTH MESQUITE, APPLICANT BEING STEVEN NUNEZ. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE 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 SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT MATERIALLY CHA ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO OPERATE ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIAL MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE. THERE IS NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY. B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WOULD BE CREATED IF AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT WAS APPROVED. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WOULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSISTS OF SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AND INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSES. THIS UNIQUE SCENARIO DOES NOT CAUSE REASONABLE LEAVE. IT WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL, THE ADEQUATE UTILITIES, EXCESS ROAD STORM, DRAINAGE, RECREATION OF SPACE, AND OTHERS. NECESSARY, UH, FACILITIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED, SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS IN OPEN SPACE. E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT-TERM RENTAL LICENSES, CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR A ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE, UH, WITHIN ONE YEAR PRIOR TO THE DATE OF APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY HISTORY OF RELOCATION, CITATIONS, OR CON CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16 F THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT ALTER THE, THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THIS DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL USES OF VARYING INTENSITY WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING ALL STREET PARKING AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, PROPERTY. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE, UH, THE MOTION REQUEST HERE. I MEAN, THERE'S A, A HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY BEING OPERATED AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL, UH, WITH NO VIOLATION OR CAUSES. AND WE SAW, UH, JUST A MINIMAL, UM, YOU KNOW, INPUT FROM THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS. I DON'T THINK IT, IT'LL BE A DISTURBANCE TO THE NEIGHBORS AND, UM, UM, SUPPORTING THE MOTION COMMISSIONER MANNA. UM, I I WILL NOT BE, UM, UM, AGREEING WITH MY COLLEAGUE HERE. AND SO FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS, UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO THE TRANSITIONS, A SMALL BLOCK WITH ONLY EIGHT PROPERTIES ON IT. UM, ABUTTING THIS PROPERTY ON THE BACKSIDE IS A TYPE TWO, UM, WITHIN 200 OR 400 FEET, THERE'S [00:30:01] 12 MORE TYPE TWOS. SO THIS AREA IS PRETTY DENSE ALREADY AND I THINK THE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, THAT WORK NEXT DOOR NEED TO BE ABLE TO LIVE NEXT DOOR AND WE'RE TAKING ONE OF THOSE AWAY FROM THAT OPPORTUNITY. SO I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, STAFF, DID YOU FIND OUT ANYTHING ABOUT THE EXPIRATION? YES. SO THE ORIGINAL PERMIT FOR 6 0 3 SOUTH MESQUITE THAT EXPIRED JANUARY 31ST, 2022, AND THAT LED TO THE 6 27 SOUTH MESQUITE HAVING A PERMIT ISSUED MARCH 28TH, 2022. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? UH, LIKE TO CHIME IN? NO. COMMISSIONER ALBERT? YES, I WON'T BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. I THINK, UH, THE, THE ATTENTION THAT THESE CASES HAVE GOTTEN TODAY, UH, SORT OF SHOW WHAT'S HAPPENING NATIONALLY. IF YOU WATCH THE NEWS CITY AFTER CITY IS GOING THROUGH EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH, AND SOMEHOW SAN ANTONIO HAS MANAGED TO, TO MAKE A GUIDELINE THAT SORT OF THREADS THE NEEDLE. AND I THINK IT'S, UH, IN OUR BEST INTEREST THAT, EXCEPT WHEN IT REALLY MAKES SENSE TO TRY TO KEEP TO THOSE GUIDELINES, UH, AND KEEP BOTH SIDES, UH, OF THE S T R ISSUE, UH, SATISFIED AS POSSIBLE SO I WON'T BE IN SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER KAPLAN ? YOU SELL ME? YEAH, I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS EITHER BECAUSE THERE ARE WHAT, 426? THERE'S A HUGE NUMBER OF STR IN THIS DISTRICT AND THERE IS A CRYING NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OUR COMMUNITY. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT GO FOR A REGULAR RENTAL, SO AS FOR THAT, I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF THAT. ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? BECAUSE, UH, UH, THE HOUSING SHORTAGE IS SO SEVERE IN SAN ANTONIO AND WE NEED TO, UH, TO RESPOND TO THAT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? YEAH. SENATOR? YES. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. I'M GOING TO MAKE MY DECISION ACCORDING TO COL, THOUGH I DO TAKE, UH, INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT THE CALL INS CALLING ABOUT, BUT I MEAN, I I I WILL BE ONLY VOTED ON COURT, NOT ON MOTIONS. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, UH, HAVE A ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MR. AONA. I CONCUR. MR. MANNA, I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF MR. SPILLMAN. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I DO, DO NOT CONCUR, MR. MACHACA. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR WITH'S THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UH, MOTION FAILS. I'VE GOT UH, EIGHT TO THREE. FOUR TO SEVEN, OH SORRY. FOUR TO SEVEN. UH, WITH, SO IF YOU GET WITH STAFF, THEY CAN TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT TO DO MOVING FORWARD. GOT IT? ALRIGHT. UH, I'M GONNA BE MOVING ITEM NUMBER 10 UP TO BE HEARD NEXT. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, WHAT'S THE NUMBER? UH, ITEM 10. ITEM 10 IS LOCATED AT, UH, ONE 15 GORMAN STREET. IT WOULD BE 1 8 2 1 8. UM, ITEM NUMBER 10 ON BO. 8 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 180 2 LOCATED AT 1 1 5 GORMAN STREET IN COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER TWO, APPLICANT BEING CON, UM, BURIED ESTES AND REQUEST FOR A 10 FOOT VARIANCE IN THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SET BY REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. UH, CURRENT ZONING IS R FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY LOCATED ON GORM STREET AND CONTAINS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE APPLICANT'S SITE PLAN HAS PROPOSED A STRUCTURE, UH, TO THE STRUCTURE 10 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. UH, THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED TO THE VARIANCE PRIOR TO CONVENTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STRUCTURE. UM, BEHIND THE PROPERTY. THERE'S A COMMERCIAL LOT IN USE. UM, UPON SITE STAFF INCIDENT. UM, STAFF OBSERVED SIMILAR STYLE [00:35:01] HOMES WITH SIMILAR SETBACKS IN THE AREA. UM, THAT IS THE SITE PLAN WHERE THE HIGHLIGHTED AREA WOULD BE THE PROPOSED, UM, SETBACKS. UM, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF, UM, THE AREA WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT IS GONNA BE PROPOSED AT IS GONNA BE TOWARDS THE REAR. UH, ANOTHER ANGLE OF THE HOME. UH, SO ANOTHER PROPERTY IN THE AREA WITH ITS SIMILAR STOUT SETBACK ON THE COMMERCIAL, UH, PROPERTY BEHIND THE PROPERTY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND SOME OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF BO O A 22 103 0 0 180 2 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS EFFECT. THE STRUCTURE HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED. UH, THE STRUCTURE CONFORMS TO THE FRONT AND SIDE STEPBACK REQUIREMENTS, AND THERE IS A LIMITED AMOUNT OF SPACE AVAILABLE TO COMPLY FOR THE REAR SETBACK AND TO DEVELOP A STRUCTURE. UM, NOTIFICATION PLAN WAS 25 NOTICES, UH, WERE MAILED. THERE WERE ZERO IN FAVOR, THERE WAS ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE IN THE DIG, DIGNITY, WITTY HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. UM, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. CAN YOU, IS UH, ANYONE IN OPPOSED OPPOSITION WITHIN THE 200 FEET? NO. OKAY. AND, UM, DID, WAS THERE ANYTHING FROM HISTORIC? YES. UM, I LATER, YES, THEY, THEY, UM, THEY'RE OKAY WITH, UM, THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. IS IT CONCEPTUAL OR FINAL? THIS IS, THIS IS THE CONCEPTUAL ONE. CONCEPTUAL, OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES. HELLO, IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, UH, BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. YES. HELLO EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS KA NAUS. I'M THE ARCHITECT REPRESENTING THE OWNERS OF 1 1 5 GORMAN STREET TODAY. AND, UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. WE HAVE RECEIVED HISTORICAL FINAL APPROVAL, UM, ON THE PROPOSED EDITION AT THE REAR OF THIS 1935, UH, HISTORICAL HOME. SO THE, UH, EXISTING ZONING IS R FIVE AND THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR OUR SIZE. R FIVE ZONING IS 5,000 SQUARE FEET. UM, THIS LOT IS JUST A HAIR BIGGER THAN THAT AND THERE'S A 960 SQUARE FOOT HISTORICAL HOME, UM, BACK ABOUT 21 FEET INTO THE LOT. SO THE BACKYARD IS VERY SMALL, UM, KIND OF EXCEPTIONALLY SMALL LOT WITH AN EXCEPTIONALLY SMALL HOME. UM, THE OWNERS ARE, UH, A YOUNG FAMILY WITH TWO SMALL CHILDREN AND A 960 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE. SO, UH, THEY WOULD LOVE TO AGE IN PLACE. THEY LOVE THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, SO THEY'RE INTERESTED IN EXPANDING THEIR LIVABLE FOOTPRINT BY A MODEST 660 SQUARE FEET. UM, THE ADDITION WE'RE PROPOSING IS DETACHED. UM, IT'S CONNECTED TO THE, THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE BY A, A THIN CONNECTOR. BUT IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF THE HISTORICAL, UM, 1930S HOME, WE'VE PROPOSED A, A THIN CONNECTOR THERE, WHICH HISTORICAL REVIEW COMMISSION IS ON BOARD WITH, UH, THIS APPROACH. WE FEEL THAT GIVES THE EXISTING HOME, UH, SOME RESPECTFUL BREATHING ROOM AND PRESERVES WINDOWS, WHICH ARE CRITICAL TO DAYLIGHT. UM, THE OTHER OPTION WOULD BE TO KIND OF GLOM ONTO THE BACK OF THIS HISTORICAL HOME. UH, BUT THAT REALLY THREATENS A LOT OF THE ACCESS TO OUTDOORS, DAYLIGHT, BREATHE BREEZES, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY MODIFY THE HISTORICAL HOME. SO, UM, THIS DOES NOT AFFECT THE SIDELINE SETBACKS TO OUR NEIGHBORS, TO THE EAST AND THE WEST. UM, AS STAFF MENTIONED TO THE NORTH OF THE PROJECT, THERE IS A, AN ACTIVE, UM, COMMERCIAL USE, WHICH IS, UH, ZONED I D Z THREE, I BELIEVE FOR PERMITTED USE AS A PARLOR, UH, TATTOO PARLOR, BAR, TAVERN AND, UH, GUN SHOP. AND IT IS ALL OF THOSE THINGS. SO IT'S A HEAVILY, UM, UTILIZED COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WITH OUTDOOR SEATING, BAR SEATING IN THE, THE REAR YARD THERE. SO, UM, WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING A, AN ACOUSTICAL WALL THAT'S KIND OF BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS ZONING APPLICATION, BUT, UH, WE HAVE MET PRIVATELY WITH THE OWNERS OF THE BAR TO THE NORTH, OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH, AND THEY'RE UNDERSTAND OUR PROPOSAL AND HAVE EXPRESSED TO US AT LEAST THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE. SO I'LL UM, STOP IT THERE AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF I CAN. ACTUALLY, I'M GONNA, I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS ON THE SITE PLAN. IT SHOWS THAT THE, THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE IS ABOUT 12 FOOT EIGHT INCHES AWAY FROM THE BACK, OR, BUT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, FOR A 10 FOOT. UM, DO YOU, DO YOU NEED [00:40:01] IT TO BE 10 OR CAN IT GO DOWN TO 12? YES. UM, WE, WE COULD, UH, I COULD GET YOU AN EXACT DIMENSION SO WE MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT, UM, OKAY. AND THEN, UH, FOR STAFF, DOES THIS APPLICANT QUALIFY FOR AN AFOOT FENCE? 'CAUSE THEY'RE ABUTTING AN I TWO WITH AN ALLOWED USE FOR THOSE COMMERCIAL USES? YES, THEY DO. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMISSION QUESTIONS? UH, MR. MR. CATHERINE, I SEE, I SEE THAT YOU'RE GONNA BE REPLACING THE CARPORT. IS THAT GONNA BE A SEPARATE VARIANCE THAT'S NOT GONNA BE IN THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK? OH, NOT GONNA BE. HE'S NOT. OKAY. YEAH, WITHIN THE SIDE SETBACK. OKAY, GREAT. VANA, COMMISSIONER MANON, I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM WITH THE APPLICANT, SO, SO IF YOU HAD AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE THAT WOULD SATISFY YOUR REQUIREMENTS FOR WHAT IS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR? CORRECT. SO, SO IF WE GAVE YOU AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE THAT THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR ESSENTIALLY YOUR, UH, 12 FEET FROM THE BACK. YES. I'D LIKE TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT ON THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. UM, THOSE HAVE PROGRESSED SINCE THIS SUBMISSION, BUT I BELIEVE THAT'S THE CASE. UM, THAT A 12 FOOT, UH, WOULD, WOULD ABSOLUTELY WORK. IT'S DO YOU HAVE, DO YOU HAVE THOSE DOCUMENTS PRESENT OR DO YOU NEED A MINUTE? NO, THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE CHANGED BASED ON THIS. SO I BELIEVE A 12 FOOT SETBACK WOULD BE ACCURATE. UM, YEAH. OKAY. ? YES, I THINK WE CAN MAKE THAT WORK. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? HEARING NOW? I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, THANK YOU. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 0 180 2 A MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT OR REQUEST FOR A, IT WOULD BE EIGHT FEET, EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 1220 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE 12 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 1 5 GORMAN STREET. APPLICANT BEING COTTON BARRETT ESTEE, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. THE VARIANCE TO THE ROOST OF SETBACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE 12 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, THE STRUCTURE WILL MEET THE FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS AND DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. 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 THE APPLICANT HAVING TO MAINTAIN 20 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE STAFF FINDS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS SINCE THE LOT IS TOO SMALL TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A STRUCTURE FOR THIS REQUIREMENT. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE STRUCTURE HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND THE PROPOSED HEAD BACK IS EIGHT FEET FROM THE REAR, 12 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THERE WILL BE A REASONABLE SPACE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THREE. 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 ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FOUR. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED HAS SEVERAL SIMILAR SIZE LOTS. FIVE. THE PLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR 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. BECAUSE OF THE WIDTH OF THE LOT AND CONFIGURATION, MAINTAINING A 12 FOOT SETBACK IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA. THE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY A FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPPA. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UH, YES, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. I I THINK THAT THE, UH, APPLICANT'S AND THE, UH, UM, UM, ARCHITECT HAVE THOUGHT THIS OUT WELL, AND I THINK THAT THIS, THIS IS, UM, MINOR, UH, REQUEST. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. I WILL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION OF THE, I LIKE THE FACT THAT IT HASN'T BEEN BUILT YET AND YOU ARE COMING FOR APPROVAL TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. AND THE FACT THAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE IN SUPPORT OF IT IS FINE. GREAT. IS ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? HEARING NONE, MS. STAFF, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CON 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 [00:45:02] I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR. MR. AONA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, CONGRATULATIONS. SHE LEFT. OKAY, , WE WE'RE GONNA RETURN BACK TO OUR REGULARLY POSTED AGENDA. WE'RE ON NOW ON ITEM NUMBER THREE AT 7 36 EAST MYRTLE. OKAY, ITEM NUMBER THREE IS, UH, BO O A 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 7 LOCATED AT 7 36 EAST MYRTLE STREET. UH, COUNSEL DISTRICT ONE, THE APPLICANT IS NO LEE, AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE, UH, ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UM, IN THE R SIX ZONING DISTRICT. UM, THE APPLICANT DID REACH OUT, UM, AND THEY'RE REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE TO DECEMBER 5TH. DECEMBER 5TH, YES. ALRIGHT, LOOKING FOR A MOTION REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 9 7. I MOVE FOR A CONTINUANCE TO THE DECEMBER 5TH. UH, NEXT, UH, BO O A MEETING. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. SEVERAL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MR. OONA? YES, I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN I CONCUR. MR. SPILLMAN I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ? I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ I CONCUR. MR. MANNA I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION IS, UH, CASES CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 5TH. ALL RIGHT, ITEM NUMBER FOUR. OKAY, UH, ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS B O A, UH, 22 DASH 0 3 0 1 98. UH, LOCATED AT 1 23 ALLENSWORTH STREET IN COUNCIL. DISTRICT TWO APPLICANT IS JOHN NEUM. UH, THIS IS OUR REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE, UH, ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UH, IN THE R FOUR DISTRICT. UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF, UH, JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO FOR SAM HOUSTON NEAR THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BROADWAY STREET AND ALLENSWORTH STREET. UH, THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL USES. UH, THERE ARE CURRENTLY TWO OTHER TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMITS ISSUED DOWN THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. UH, PER THE ADOPTED CODE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS SHALL BE LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN ONE EIGHTH OR 12.5% OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX, TRIPLE OR QUADPLEX QUADPLEX UNITS ON THE BLOCK FACE. UM, AND AT LEAST ONE IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT. AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE ARE THE OTHER TWO, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMITS THAT HAVE BEEN ISSUED. UM, AGAIN, THE PURPLE WAS A, UH, GRANDFATHER PERMIT. UM, WHEN THE RENEWAL WAS ISSUED, IT CHANGED TO AN ORANGE ICON. THAT'S WHY IT APPEARS THAT THERE'S THREE, BUT THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO ACTIVE ONES. UM, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEN THE SURROUNDING AREAS, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS, UH, DENIAL OF BO O A 22 DASH 0 3 0 1 98 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, UM, THERE ARE CURRENTLY TWO ACTIVE, UH, TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMITS ON THE BLOCK FACE. UH, 81 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE MANKEY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND UH, THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. AND, UM, JUST WANTED TO, DID I HEAR THAT YOU SAID THERE WAS A NUMBER OF QUADPLEXES ON THAT BLOCK FACE? UH, THAT WAS JUST A CITING THE ORDINANCE. SO ANYTHING THAT'S A QUADPLEX OR UNDER IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF UNITS ADD TO THE BLOCK FACE. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, MY NAME'S JOHN NIJO. UH, THE OWNER OF 1 2 3 ALLENSWORTH. I WOULD RATHER NOT BE APPLYING FOR THIS, UM, THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION, BUT MY HOUSE IN ITSELF IS A LITTLE BIT OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. I DO HAVE ONE THING TO PRESENT ON THE SCREEN, UH, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. SO, UH, THE HOUSE AT 1 2 3 ALLENSWORTH, UH, UH, IS, IS A PRIMARY RESIDENCE FOR ME NOW. UM, YOU'LL SEE ITS UNIQUE LOCATION HAS MADE IT A LITTLE BIT, UH, LESS THAN DESIRABLE TO BE A LONG-TERM RENTAL OR A PRIMARY RESIDENCE. YOU SEE THAT THE HOUSE IS SURROUNDED BY PARKING LOTS, UH, DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. GIBSON [00:50:01] COSTUME SHOP, UH, GYM'S RESTAURANT. AND THEN THERE'S TWO MORE HOUSES ON THAT BLOCK. SO QUITE A BIT SEPARATED FROM THE REGULAR NEIGHBORHOOD. REALLY FEELS LIKE, UH, COMMERCIAL PROPERTY MORE THAN MORE THAN HOMESTEAD THESE DAYS. SO, UH, IT HAS BECOME DIFFICULT, UH, TO MAKE A LONG-TERM RENTAL, UH, LESS DESIRABLE, UH, TO LIVE THERE ACROSS FROM THOSE PARKING LOTS AND BEHIND AND AROUND THE PARKING LOTS. THOSE ARE ACTIVELY USED PARKING LOTS BY THE UNIVERSITY OF INCARNATE WORD. UH, STUDENTS PARK IN THOSE PARKING LOTS AND THEN ARE SHUTTLED OVER TO THE UNIVERSITY OF INCARNATE WORD AS WELL AS PARKING FOR CHEESY JANE'S RESTAURANTS, WHICH YOU'LL SEE IS JUST NORTH OF THAT. SO A LOT OF ACTIVITY THERE, UH, ON THAT BLOCK, UH, WHERE THAT HOUSE IS LOCATED. SO HOPING TO MAKE IT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL SO THAT, UH, THERE'S NO HARDSHIP, UH, ON ME AS IT'S BECOME DIFFICULT OTHERWISE. AND THERE WERE SOME OTHER PICTURES I SAW IN THE PRESENTATION, UH, WHERE, UH, THAT SHOWED THE FRONT AND THE SURROUNDING AREA, UH, WHERE YOU DIRECTLY LOOK ACROSS THE STREET TO A PARKING LOT, UH, IN A, IN A PRETTY BUSY TRAFFICKED, UH, ALLENSWORTH. SO THE SHUTTLE COMES IN AND OUT OF THERE, UH, AND THE NEXT PICTURE, AND YOU'LL SEE THE PARKING LOT DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET WHERE CARS ARE PARKED. AND THEN, UH, THAT'S, UH, A, UH, A BUSINESS PARK THERE ACROSS FROM IT AS WELL AS NEXT TO GIBSON COSTUME SHOP, WHICH ACTUALLY USES THEIR RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY FOR COMMERCIAL PARKING. SO IT'S PRETTY ACTIVE. OKAY. UM, IS THERE ANY, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTARY ASIDE FROM THOSE, THE VOICEMAILS? UM, WE DO HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL VOICEMAIL SPECIFIC FOR THIS CASE. GREAT. LET'S HEAR IT. HI, MY NAME IS VALERIE JENEN. UM, MY ADDRESS IS 4 67 ELEANOR AVENUE. UM, ZIP CODE 7 8 2 0 9. UM, I'M CALLING ON BEHALF OF THE LAND USE COMMITTEE FOR THE MINKE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR UM, CASE, UM, 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 8. THIS IS REGARDING THE, UM, 1 23 ALLENSWORTH REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE TYPE TWO S T R DENSITY REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO S T R ON THE BLOCK FACE. UM, THE LAND USE COMMITTEE IS IN OPPOSITION OF THIS REQUEST, UH, BECAUSE THIS, UM, NOT FOLLOWING THIS, UH, DENSITY REQUIREMENT REMOVES HOUSING FROM OUR COMMUNITY IN A DESIRABLE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH CONSTRAINED HOUSING SUPPLY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU CAN CALL ME BACK AT FIVE ONE TWO FOUR ONE SEVEN AND THAT CONCLUDES THE VOICEMAILS. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, NEIGHBORS NEXT DOOR THAT I GUESS SHARE I GUESS THE SIMILAR, UM, CHALLENGES THAT YOU, THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. DID YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT YOUR, YOUR PLANS HERE? YES. UH, THE, THE NEIGHBOR DIRECTLY NEXT TO ME, UM, WHICH I GUESS IS 4, 4 0 7 ALLEN'S WORTH MAYBE. SHE ACTUALLY HAS HERS ON A THREE MONTH RENTAL, UH, AS WELL. UH, SO SHE'S OPERATING THAT AS A THREE MONTH RENTAL. AND THEN THE NEIGHBOR DIRECTLY NEXT TO THEM, WHICH IS TWO HOUSES DOWN FROM ME, IS A BRAND NEW, UM, NEIGHBOR. BUT BOTH, BOTH WERE FINE WITH, UH, UH, WITH OPERATING AS SUCH. YEAH. KAPLAN, KAPLAN, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, IT, IT SHOWS THAT YOU PURCHASED THIS IN 2021. YES MA'AM. DIDN'T YOU KNOW THEN WHAT WAS NEXT DOOR OR WERE YOU PLANNING AT THAT POINT TO LIVE THERE? I WAS PLANNING TO LIVE THERE AND I DID LIVE THERE AND I REALLY, THE TRAFFIC WITH THE PARKING LOT AND SURROUNDING AREA HAS JUST MADE THAT MORE DIFFICULT TO DO. U I W USES IT AS THEIR PARKING LOT. THE WITTY MUSEUM USES IT DURING EVENTS TO VALET THEIR CARS THERE. AND I JUST WASN'T AWARE THAT THERE WAS GONNA BE SO MUCH ACTIVITY GOING ON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT MADE IT DIFFICULT. AND I HAVE ACTIVELY TRIED TO RENT THE UNIT. UH, AND THAT'S BEEN DIFFICULT AS WELL FOR LONG-TERM RENTAL. THAT IS. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO I HAVE A QUESTION. UM, THERE'S 12 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON THIS BLOCK FACE, OR I'M SORRY, UM, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. WELL, THE, UH, THE SECOND FROM THE END FROM NEW BRAUNFELS IS A VACANT LOT. THERE'S NO RESIDENTIAL THERE AND THE ONE ON THE CORNER HAS A NEW BRAUNFELS ADDRESS, BUT THE ONE THAT'S THE THIRD LOT OVER IS A DUPLEX. AND SO THAT, THAT MAKES IT [00:55:01] 13 DOESN'T IT? UNITS ON THE BLOCK FACE, WOULDN'T THAT MAKE IT OVER ONE AND A HALF? THAT WOULD, THERE'S ALREADY TWO THAT ARE, ARE PERMITTED ON THAT ONE. OH, THERE'S TWO? YEAH. THIS, THIS GENTLEMAN'S WASN'T ONE OF THEM. UH, NO, IT'S THE ONE RIGHT NEXT TO 'EM THAT'S PERMITTED AS A TYPE TWO RENTAL RIGHT NOW. OKAY. ALRIGHT. JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MANNA? SO COMMISSIONER MANNA, SO THE CITY, UM, WHICH, WHICH ONE WAS ALREADY TYPE TWO YOU SAID? NEXT DOOR, MEANING NEXT DOOR TO THE ONE HE WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT? OR, UM, NEXT DOOR TO, UM, THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, NEXT DOOR, THE PROPERTY QUESTION. YEAH, YOU CAN ON THE MAP THERE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 1 23. OKAY. 1 25 I BELIEVE IS, UH, THE ONE THAT WAS PERMITTED. PERFECT. THANK YOU. 2 0 1. I'M SORRY. 2 0 1. YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. UH, SIR, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL ASK FOR A MOTION. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON THIS CASE. THANK YOU OONA. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OH 8 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 98. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT 1 2 3 ALLENSWORTH STREET, APPLICANT BEING JOHN, UH, NEGAN. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US 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 A, THE SPEC SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY. THE BOARD FINDS THE REQUEST TO OPERATE ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE. THERE IS NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY. B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WILL BE CREATED IF AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT WAS APPROVED. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSIST OF SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AND INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSES. THIS UNIQUE SCENARIO SCENARIO DOES NOT CAUSE REASON TO BELIEVE IT. IT WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS A, AS A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT. DE ADEQUATE UTILITIES, ACCESS, ROADS, STORM DRAINAGE, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND OTHER NECESSARY, UH, FACILITIES HAVE BEEN, ARE, ARE BEING PROVIDED. UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING, APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE. EITHER APPLICANT OR OWNER FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUS REVOKED SHORT-TERM RENTAL LICENSES. CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22, THE CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR. PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY HISTORY OR OF REVOCATION, CITATIONS, OR CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16 APP. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATIONS OF WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL USES OF VARYING INTENSITY WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING ALL STREET PARKING AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YES. SO AGAIN, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION. I THINK THE, UH, UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES HERE IS THE, UH, COMMERCIAL USES SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY. UM, THE APPLICANT, UH, MADE A STATEMENT THAT, THAT HE DID ATTEMPT TO, UH, SEEK LONG-TERM LEASES, BUT JUST THE, UH, THE TRAFFIC AND THE COMMERCIAL USES ADJOINING THE PROPERTY JUST MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR THAT. I THINK A SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS A GOOD SOLUTION HERE. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH, ONCE AGAIN, I AM NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UM, THIS APPLICANT. UM, FOR REASONS THAT IT WOULD BE STATED BEFORE, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD BE ADDING TO THE SHORT TERM RENTALS. UM, WHEN THERE'S A NEED FOR HOUSING, MAN. ANYONE ELSE? I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CHIME IN. I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS ONE. UM, THIS IS SO MUCH DIFFERENT THAN WITHIN THE MIDDLE OF AN ESTABLISHED AREA, RESIDENTIAL AREA, I MEAN, SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL USES. UM, AND THE, THE STREETS THAT, THAT KIND OF TIE IN AT AN ANGLE AT, AT, AT ALLENSWORTH AND KIND OF BREAK IT UP. IT'S, IT'S A DIVISION BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND, AND SOMEWHAT RESIDENTIAL USES. I I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THIS PARTICULAR ONE. SO AT THAT, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN, I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. SPIELMAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. UM, I WILL CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ZUNIGA. I DO NOT CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION FAILS FIVE TO SIX. UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN PLEASE GET WITH STAFF. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER FIVE I. ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS BO O [01:00:01] A 22 DASH 0 3 0 2 1 LOCATED AT 1 1 5 0 6 WHISPER CIRCLE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT NINE. UH, APPLICANT IS ROBERT. UH, SE UH, REQUEST IS FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW, UH, ONE TYPE TURN TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. UM, IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER ONE ON THE CUL-DE-SAC LOCATED IN THE R SIX ZONING DISTRICT. UM, THE APPLICANT WAS PRESENT HOWEVER HE NEEDED TO LEAVE. SO HE IS REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE TO DECEMBER 5TH AS WELL. DECEMBER 5TH. YEP. ALRIGHT, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, I MOVE THAT WE, SORRY, THAT WE MOVE, UH, BO O A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 0 1 TO DECEMBER 5TH. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. I'LL HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MS. BREGMAN? YES, I APPROVE MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR. UH, CASES CONTINUE TO DECEMBER 5TH, SO THERE MAY BE, UM, SO WE MAY, IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT WE SHOULD ASK SOMEONE SPEAK? YES. WE HAD SOMEONE HERE TO SPEAK. OH, THERE ARE FIVE OF US HERE TO SPEAK. OH. OH, I APOLOGIZE. UM, WE HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. UM, IT'S JANICE WITT. THAT'S ME. ALL RIGHT. UH, MS. WHITT, PLEASE COME UP. WE NOT HAVE A RECORDING FROM OUR HOMEOWNERS VICE PRESIDENT. YES. WE ALSO HAVE THREE VOICEMAILS. OKAY, WELL, LET'S HEAR 'EM. THIS MESSAGE PROVIDES COMMENT FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD REGARDING BO O A CASE 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 1, WHICH SEEKS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VARIANCE FOR 1 1 5 0 6 WHISPER CIRCLE. MY NAME IS PETER LONDON. I SERVE AS THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE WHISPER OAKS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY RESIDES EARLIER THIS YEAR. OUR ORGANIZATION ALERTED THE PROPERTY OWNER AND HIS LOCAL MANAGEMENT THAT THE TYPE ONE PERMIT POSSESSED WAS INSUFFICIENT AND THAT A TYPE TWO PERMIT WAS REQUIRED. OUR REPEATED ATTEMPTS TO SWAY THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THIS FACT WERE REBUFFED. WHEN THE CITY CAUGHT THE PROBLEM MONTHS LATER, THE PROPER PERMIT WAS NO LONGER AVAILABLE FOR THIS BLOCK PHASE. IT'S NOT CLEAR WHETHER THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION HAD BEEN FILED ERRONEOUSLY OR FRAUDULENTLY IN AN ATTEMPT TO CIRCUMVENT CITY RESTRICTIONS AND OVERSIGHT. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT WHISPERING OAKS HAS SEVERAL SHORT-TERM RENTALS OPERATING CURRENTLY WITHOUT ISSUE. BUT THIS PROPERTY GENERATED NUMEROUS CODE CONCERNS AND SS A P D CALLS DURING ITS SHORT RUN. DUE TO POOR MANAGEMENT, A STEADY STREAM OF NEIGHBOR COMPLAINTS INCLUDE IMPROPER TRASH CONTAINMENT, NOISE DISTURBANCES, AND SAFETY VIOLATIONS STEMMING FROM THEIR SWIMMING POOL. THE PROPERTY ALSO APPEARED TO CONTINUE OPERATIONS AFTER BEING INSTRUCTED BY CITY STAFF TO CEASE. IN SHORT, THIS PROPERTY OWNER HAS NOT PROVEN HIMSELF TO BE A DILIGENT AND CREDIBLE OPERATOR WORTHY OF VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS. IN ADDITION TO THESE CONSIDERATIONS, OUR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION OPPOSES ANY VARIANCE THAT CIRCUMVENTS THE 12.5% BLOCK BASED LIMITATION FOR TYPE TWO PERMITS BECAUSE IT MAY SET AN UNDESIRABLE PRECEDENT FOR OTHER OPERATORS WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. HI, THIS IS ALICIA. I'M CALLING FOR CASE NUMBER D O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 1. I LIVE AT 11 5 0 3 WEST ROCK STREET, AND I'M CALLING TO BECAUSE I AM AGAINST, UH, R B AND D. I LIVED RIGHT BEHIND IT, AND THE CURRENT PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE AT THE TIME PLAYED MUSIC ALL NIGHT, ALL THE WAY TO THE MORNING, EARLY MORNING, PEOPLE YELLING, PEOPLE PLAYING THE MUSIC. UM, IT WAS A NONSTOP TWO DAYS ON A ROW. MY NUMBER IS 6 1 9 4 9 5 11 88. HI, MY NAME IS ADAM ALO, TBE IT, DIRECTOR OF FORT SAN ANTONIO. I RESIDE AT 1 1 5 0 3 WHISPER ROCK STREET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 3 0. I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO CASE LAST THREE DIGITS 2 0 1 REGARDING AN [01:05:01] V THAT IS TRYING TO, UH, REESTABLISH ITSELF ACROSS THE STREET FROM ANOTHER ONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I BELIEVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ADDRESSES 1 1 5 0 6 WHISPER CIRCLE. AND I'M CALLING BECAUSE TO VOICE MY CONCERN ABOUT, UM, OPENING THE OTHER AIRBNB IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M AGAINST IT AND THE REASONS ARE FOLLOWING SEVERAL INSTANCES OF LOUD PARTIES FROM YOUNG INDIVIDUALS BEING RENTED TO, UM, WELL INTO THE LIGHT NIGHT UNTIL THE EARLY MORNING. UM, SEVERAL POLICE REPORTS HAVE BEEN MADE BECAUSE OF THESE INSTANCES. DON'T HAVE THOSE CASE NUMBERS HANDY, BUT A QUICK SEARCH FOR THE DEPARTMENT, UH, OF OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT WILL, WILL SHOW THOSE CALLS AND THOSE COMPLAINTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE AGAINST THAT SPECIFIC PROPERTY THAT'S ALREADY AN AIRBNB THERE. LOTS OF TRAFFIC THROUGHOUT THE NIGHT ON THESE RENTALS. LOUD MUSIC, LOUD NOISE DISTURBANCES. UM, THIS SINGLE AIRBNB ALONE HAS CHANGED THE DYNAMICS OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD DRASTICALLY, UM, TO WHERE SOME OF US DON'T EVEN WANT OUR KIDS OUTSIDE DURING THOSE TIME PERIODS BECAUSE OF THE SPEEDING VEHICLES OF LOUD PARTIES AND WHATNOT. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WAS A VERY QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND VERY PEACEFUL. AND SO THIS AIRBNB OPENED AND HAVING THE OTHER ONE IMPLEMENTED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, IT WOULD BE JUST CATASTROPHIC FOR THE FAMILIES THAT LIVE HERE AND HAVE BEEN ROOTED HERE FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. UH, I'M AGAINST IT AND I HOPE THIS DOES NOT PASS, AND THEY ARE DENIED AN ACTUAL ADDITION OF ANOTHER AIRBNB IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. I APPRECIATE IT. DOES THAT HELP THE VOICEMAIL? UM, THAT CONCLUDES THE VOICEMAILS. WE DO HAVE A MS. JANICE WHITT HERE TO SPEAK ON THE CASE. OKAY. BEFORE SHE, BEFORE SHE COMES UP, I, I MOVE TO, UH, UM, TO, UH, RECONSIDER AND, AND, UH, UH, REOPEN THIS CASE TO RESCIND THE CONTINUANCE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. UH, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE CHAIR. ORIAN? YES. MR. MANNA? YES. MR. SPIELMAN? YES. MR. ALBERT? YES. MR. MENCHACA? YES. MR. VASQUEZ? YES. MS. CRUZ? YES. MS. BRAGMAN? YES. MS. KAPLAN? YES. MR. ZUNIGA? YES. MR. UNA? YES. ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES. WE ARE BACK TO AN OPEN CASE AND WE'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE CITIZEN. SIGN UP TO SPEAK. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. WHITT AND I LIVE IN WHISPERING OAKS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THIS HOUSE IS, UH, LOCATED. UH, I AM A VOLUNTEER FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND ONE OF MY VOLUNTEER JOBS IS TO CHECK PERMITS AND THINGS GOING ON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, NOTIFYING NEIGHBORS OF CODE VIOLATIONS OR DEEDED RESTRICTIONS FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I DON'T THINK I NEED TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE TO THE COMPLAINTS FROM THE NEIGHBORS. THOSE RECORDINGS WERE VERY, UH, CLEAR. EVER SINCE APRIL. THIS HOUSE HAS GENERATED DOZENS OF COMPLAINTS TO BOTH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND ALSO TO THE APPROPRIATE CITY AGENCIES. UM, TRASH BEING LEFT OUT, UH, RACCOONS, RODENTS HAVING A PARTY AFTER THE, THE PARTIER HAVE LEFT, UM, OPEN GATE TO A POOL AREA, AND THIS IS A STREET THAT HAS, UH, SEVERAL SMALL CHILDREN LIVING THERE. UH, ALSO AS YOU HEARD, NOISE COMPLAINTS, MULTIPLE NOISE COMPLAINTS. THE FIRST TIME WE REACHED OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, WE DID RESEARCH AND IT'S A GENTLEMAN NAMED CHAD DAR LIVING IN MICHIGAN. HE OWNS THE PROPERTY THROUGH, UH, AN L L C AND THAT L L C IS MANAGED HERE IN SAN ANTONIO BY MR. SIGNS. MR. SIGNS WAS HERE EARLIER, AND I DON'T KNOW IF HE LEFT BECAUSE HE SAW HOW MANY OF US WERE HERE TO COMPLAIN OR IF HE TRULY HAD SOMETHING ELSE TO DO, BUT MR. SES HAS LEFT AND THAT'S WHY HE REQUESTED THIS CONTINUANCE. UH, I REACHED OUT TO MR. SZ, ACTUALLY TO MR. DAR, THE OWNER IN MICHIGAN, UH, IN MAY, TELLING HIM WE HAD PROBLEMS. WE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK WITH HIM ABOUT HIS HOUSE. MR. DAR INSTRUCTED ME TO, UH, IN THE FUTURE, UH, TALK TO MR. SIGNS OF THIS PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY. I SENT SEVERAL EMAILS WHERE I OUTLINED BOTH THE ISSUES, UH, THE COMPLAINTS AS WELL AS OUR AWARENESS THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE THE PROPER TYPE PERMIT. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY APPLIED FOR THE CORRECT PERMIT ON PURPOSE OR BY ACCIDENT OR, UH, FRAUDULENTLY, BUT, UM, THEY HAD A TYPE ONE ISSUED. WE WERE TELLING THEM IN MAY THEY NEEDED A TYPE TWO AND TO PLEASE [01:10:01] OBEY THE RULES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CITY ORDINANCES. AND THIS, UH, WENT ON BACK AND FORTH. I HAVE PROVIDED COPIES OF THOSE EMAILS TO OUR CASE MANAGER WHERE WE SPECIFICALLY SAID, ON THREE DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT KIND OF PERMIT, YOU NEED TO GET A TYPE TWO. AND AFTER THEY, UH, DIDN'T DO THAT, AFTER A PERIOD OF ABOUT TWO MONTHS, WE STARTED COMPLAINING TO THE CITY. SO IT'S BEEN IN THE CITY'S HANDS EVER SINCE. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. SO WITH THAT, UM, LOOKING FOR A MOTION, BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 1. I MOVED TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT 1 1 5 0 6 WHISPER PER CIRCLE, APPLICANT BEING ROBERT STEIN. 'CAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWED THAT PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN 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 AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIAL ENDANG MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE. THERE IS NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY. B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WOULD BE CREATED IF AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT WAS APPROVED. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY, UH, BE INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSIST OF SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AND INDU INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSES. THIS RIGHT, UH, THE, THE SUGGESTED MOTION TEMPLATES ARE KIND OF SHATTERED IN THE, UH, OKAY. IN THE FILE. UH, LET ME SEE. UH, THIS UNIQUE SCENARIO DOES NOT CAUSE REASON TO BELIEVE IT IS SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED. IT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. D THE SUBSEQUENT THE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS ROAD, SHORT STORM, DRAINAGE, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND OTHER NECESSARY FACILITIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES OFFICER PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE. E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT-TERM RENTAL LICENSES, CONFIRMS CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED DEFENSE CONVICTIONS OF VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE, UH, 22 OF CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR. PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY HISTORY OF REVOCATION, CITATIONS, OR CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTERS 16 F THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT AL, WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER, THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL USES OF VARYING INTENSITY WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING OFF STREET PARKING AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER, THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, I'LL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. UM, WE'VE HEARD LOTS OF TESTIMONY FROM NEIGHBORS, UM, AS WELL AS, UM, UM, OPPOSITION, UH, WITHIN THE 200 FOOT PERIMETER. UM, SO I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. AND, AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN THAT IT'S, IT SOUNDS LIKE A VERY POORLY RUN OPERATION AND CERTAINLY A DETRIMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF IT IF THERE'S NOTHING, NO ONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD. WE CAN GO STRAIGHT TO A ROOM CALL VOTE COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, AND MAY HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD, UM, BUT ON, UH, ON, UH, YOUR TOPIC OF E THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY HISTORY OF CITATIONS AND IT SOUNDED LIKE THEY MAY HAVE. AND SO SHOULD WE DO A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WHERE IT DOES TALK ABOUT HAVING CITATIONS? I MEAN, IS THAT SOMETHING WE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC? BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE HEARD ANYTHING OFFICIAL FROM THE CITY. SO, UM, DOES THE CITY HAVE A POSITION ON THAT? UH, THE MAKER OF THE MOTION CAN, UH, ADJUST THE LANGUAGE TO SAY THAT IT'S QUESTIONABLE IF YOU WISHES. UH, SO THE APP APPLICANT DOES, DOES HAVE HISTORY OF REVOCATION, CITATIONS, OR CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MS. BRAGMAN, I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. KAPLAN. I DO NOT CONCUR MR. SPIELMAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. [01:15:01] I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ZUNIGA. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. UNA. I DO NOT CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO DO NOT CONCUR. MOTION FAIL. ZERO TO 11. IF STAFF COULD PLEASE INFORM THE APPLICANT. ALL RIGHT, NEXT CASE, ITEM NUMBER SIX. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER SIX IS BO O A DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 9. UH, LOCATED AT 86 TRANQUIL TERRACE AND COUNCIL DISTRICT SIX, UH, APPLICANT IS CARLOS MUNOZ. UH, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UH, ON THE BLOCK FACE. UM, ZONING FOR THIS ONE IS, UH, PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF THE SEAWORLD, UH, AM PARK NEAR THE NORTHWEST COAST CORNER OF SERENA VISTA AND TRANQUIL TERRACE. UH, THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS, UH, AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME. UH, THE SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS, AND A MULTITUDE OF COMMERCIAL USES. UM, THERE'S CURRENTLY ONE OTHER TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ISSUED NEXT DOOR TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. UH, AND THE APPLICANT IS, UH, SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR THE OPERATION OF AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UH, IN ADDITION TO THE ONE NEXT DOOR. UM, HERE YOU CAN SEE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AT 86 TRANQUIL TERRACE. UM, THIS IS THE FLOOR PLAN THAT WAS PROVIDED, AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. UM, AND THEN AS YOU CAN SEE IN, UH, PREVIOUS SLIDE, UH, THIS IS ACTUALLY BUILT OUT. UH, SO THERE ARE 11 UNITS IN WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE BLOCK FACE ON THIS CUL-DE-SAC, UM, THAT I DON'T THINK THAT WAS SHOWN IN THE ORIGINAL AERIAL PHOTO. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF BO O A 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 2 9. UH, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, UM, THAT THERE'S CURRENTLY ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON THE BLOCK FACE. UH, 26 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, ZERO RETURNED IN FAVOR TO AN OPPOSITION. UH, AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WHERE ARE THE, UM, THE WHAT ADDRESSES? OH, IT'S NOT SHOWING ON MINE. THANK YOU. SO THIS ISN'T A PRIVATE, GATED NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, IT IS NOT GATED. UM, OKAY. AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. GREAT. UM, IS THERE ANYBODY SIGNED TO SPEAK OR VOICEMAILS? NO ONE SIGNED IN OR NO VOICEMAILS. ALL RIGHT. IF THE APPLICANT CAN PLEASE COME FORWARD. HELLO, MY NAME IS CARLOS OZ. UM, I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER, ANA KISSNER, DR. ANA KISSNER. UM, SHE'S A DOCTOR IN LAREDO AND, UM, SHE CURRENTLY RESIDES THERE AND WHEN SHE DOES PRACTICE OVER HERE, SHE UTILIZES THEIR HOME AS WELL. HER PLANS ARE TO RETIRE AT HER HOME, SO SHE DOES NOT WANNA SELL HER HOME. UH, SHE WANTS TO RETIRE IN SAN ANTONIO. UM, HER, I'VE BEEN MANAGING NEXT DOOR TO HER AT 82 TRANQUIL TERRACE FOR THE PAST EIGHT YEARS, UH, GOING ON EIGHT YEARS. AND SHE WAS IMPRESSED WITH THE OPERATION AND THE WAY WE KEPT EVERYTHING. AND SHE REACHED OUT TO ME TO SEE IF I COULD, UM, MANAGE HER HOME. HER SON IS NOW IN, UH, A MED STUDENT AND WENT TO ANOTHER STATE THAT'S WHO WAS LIVING THERE PRIOR. AND SO THEY REACHED OUT TO ME PRIOR TO HIS LEAVING TO ASK IF I COULD, UH, MANAGE THE PROPERTY. UM, WHICH IS WHY WE'VE ASKED FOR A SPECIAL VARIANCE OR EXCEPTION. UM, IT ISN'T AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT. THERE ARE SOME SLIDES THAT WILL SHOW LIKE NUMEROUS HOTELS THAT ARE AROUND US. RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO US IS THE HYATT, UM, THE, THE HYATT HILL COUNTRY RESORT. UM, SEA WORLD'S ACROSS THE HIGHWAY FROM US. UH, THERE'S, UH, A LOT OF OUR PEOPLE COME FOR SEAWORLD OR LACKLAND AIR FORCE BASE FOR THE GRADUATES. UM, THERE'S COUNTLESS HOTELS THAT SURROUND US IN CORPORATE BUSINESSES OR OFFICES. OUR PROPERTIES BACK UP TO ROGERS ROAD. UM, IT IS A FOUR LANE WITH A, A MAJOR DIVIDER, AND THERE ARE CORPORATE OFFICES BEHIND US, UM, BECAUSE OF THE WESTOVER HILLS MEDICAL COMMUNITY THAT IS REALLY, UM, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, GROWING IN THE AREA. AND, UM, AGAIN, MORE HOTELS ON JUST ABOUT EVERY CORNER. UH, THERE'S ONE BEHIND THE, UM, THE RUDY'S BARBECUE. [01:20:01] THERE'S ONE OUT AT THE FACE, AND THERE'S ONE THAT BA THERE WAS A SLIDE THAT SHOWED ONE HOTEL THAT BACKS UP TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, IF YOU COULD GO BACK RIGHT THERE. SO BEFORE ALL THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS FILLED IN THAT FIRST STRIP OF HOMES WHERE THE RED IS CIRCLED AROUND THE ONE HOME, THAT FIRST STRIP WAS ALL THAT WAS THERE BEFORE A DEVELOPER CAME AND BOUGHT THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. NOW THOSE SWIMMING POOLS THAT YOU SEE THERE, THOSE, OH, I'M SORRY. OH, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. THESE SWIMMING POOLS RIGHT HERE, THE, THE HOTEL, UM, THEY HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT COME OUT AND HANG. THEY HANG AROUND AND, YOU KNOW, THE KIDS ARE RUNNING AROUND ENJOYING THEMSELVES. THEY'RE LOUD, THE PEOPLE ARE LOUD, AND SOMETIMES THEY HAVE A DJ OUT AT THE POOL. AND THERE'S LOUD MUSIC THAT, YOU KNOW, HAS COME OUT HERE INTO THIS AREA. OF COURSE, UM, AGAIN, THESE WERE THE FIRST ONES. THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T SEE ANYTHING HERE, BUT IT'S ALL FILLED IN NOW. AND THESE WEREN'T HERE IN THE BEGINNING EITHER. ALL THAT WAS HERE WAS THIS STRIP AND THREE OR FOUR HOUSES AT THE BACK. UM, BUT OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE UNDERSTAND THIS IS AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT. UH, HYATT IS, THIS IS THE WOODED AREA TO HYATT AND HYATT'S BACK IN HERE WITH GOLF COURSES AND, AND THE, UM, THE APARTMENT STYLE, UM, LODGING FACILITIES. AND SO LET ME GET TO MY OTHER NOTES. SO I'VE BEEN WITH, UH, EIGHT YEARS IN THE AREA WITHOUT INCIDENT OR CODE VIOLATIONS. I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A TOTAL OF 11 YEARS. UM, HOMES BACK UP TO ROGERS ROAD, WHICH LEAD TO VARIOUS BUSINESSES, HOTELS. UM, YEP. THE REST I ALREADY EXPLAINED WITHOUT THE NOTES. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH HERE. ANY QUESTIONS? IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? MAN, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN AND THEN COMMISSIONER MANNA. HAVE YOU TRIED TO RENT IT OUT LONG-TERM? IS THERE AN ISSUE WITH A LONG-TERM RENTAL? UM, SHE'S HAD SOME BAD EXPERIENCE WITH THE LONG-TERM RENTERS WHO DID NOT REPORT CERTAIN, UM, THINGS THAT WERE GOING WRONG INSIDE THE HOUSE. AND THE, UH, THE SINKS GOT MOLD BACK BEHIND THEM. UM, THEY WERE HARD ON THE CARPET, THE WALLS, AND SO SHE SAID, CARLOS, UM, I REALLY DON'T WANT TO GO LONG RENTAL WHEN I COME INTO TOWN TO DO MY MEDICAL PRACTICE. I HAVE A PLACE TO STAY WHEN I GO BACK TO LAREDO. I HAVE MY HOME THERE, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WHEN SHE RETIRES, SHE WANTS TO COME BACK HERE. HER SON'S A MED STUDENT AND HE ALSO COMES TO TOWN TO VISIT FAMILY, SO THEY WANT TO USE THE HOUSE IN BETWEEN, UM, THEIR TRAVELING BACK AND FORTH. OKAY. COMMISSIONER MANO. SO, UM, SO YOU STATED, UM, THAT SHE, UH, COMES BACK TO SAN ANTONIO REGULARLY AND USES THIS PROPERTY. DO YOU HOW, HOW OFTEN THAT IS? YOU KNOW, UH, IT'S, IT'S SELDOM THOUGH. IT'S ABOUT TWICE A YEAR, MAYBE FOR A WEEK OR TWO AT A TIME. AND THEN, UM, DO YOU KNOW WHAT, UH, WHAT HER TIMEFRAME IS FOR RETIRING HERE? UH, NO, I DO NOT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MINKA COMMISSIONER MINKA, UH, IT APPEARS TO HAVE A COMMON WALL BETWEEN THE GARAGES, DON'T YOU? UM, IT IS A TOWN HOME STYLE, SO YES, WE DO OUR, OUR GARAGE, UM, MEETS UP WITH ONE OF THEIR BEDROOMS, SO THE GARAGE ON THE FAR SIDE. SO WHEN YOU DRIVE IN THE, WHEN YOU COME OFF OF ROGERS ROAD AND YOU DRIVE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE FIRST UNIT YOU HIT IS OURS, THE ONE THAT I'VE BEEN MANAGING FOR EIGHT YEARS, THEN HERS IS NEXT DOOR, AND THEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT HER GARAGE MEETS UP WITH HER THE THIRD PERSON'S GARAGE. SO YOU WOULD SAY THAT, UM, BEHIND HER GARAGE IS THE KITCHEN. SO MOST OF THE BEDROOMS ARE OFF TO MY SIDE, THE, THE CORNER HOUSE THAT I'VE, I ALREADY MANAGE. I SEE. SO BEING SO CLOSE, THERE HAVEN'T BEEN ANY KIND OF ISSUES WITH THE NEIGHBORS? CORRECT. THERE'S BEEN NO ISSUES THAT I KNOW OF. UM, I'VE, UM, OUR HOMEOWNER THAT I MANAGE FOR, HE STAYS IN CLOSE CONTACT WITH A FEW NEIGHBORS DOWN. AND, UM, IF THERE'S EVER ANYTHING, DAVID WILL CALL ME AND SAY, UM, IF, IF THERE'S ANY, HE, HE KEEPS COMMUNICATION. HE LETS ME KNOW IF THE NEIGHBORS HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY, IF THERE'S ANY CONCERN. UH, THE ONLY CONCERN WE'VE HAD IS WHERE PEOPLE HAVE COME INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND BROKEN INTO EVERY SINGLE CAR. UH, BUT THAT WAS OUR OWN SAN ANTONIO KIDS RUNNING THROUGH THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD, BREAKING IN THE CARS, BUT THEY WERE DOING IT TO THE HOTELS, UH, ADJACENT AS WELL. AND NEXT DOOR. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. BRAGMAN, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UM, COULD STAFF PULL UP THE, UM, SLIDE THAT SHOWS [01:25:01] THE, UM, PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THEY WERE OPPOSED TO THE, SO IT APPEARS THAT THIS IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR, THE ONE, HAVE YOU SPOKEN WITH THOSE NEIGHBORS AT ALL TO I HAVE NOT. THEIR OFFICES, I HAVE NOT SPOKEN WITH THOSE NEIGHBORS, NO. I DIDN'T KNOW THEY WERE IN OPPOSITION. UM, BUT NO, I HAVEN'T SPOKE, I JUST IMAGINED THAT THERE'S, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING NEGATIVE TO SAY, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND. THEY THINK THAT WE'RE THE TYPE WHO'S GONNA BRING PARTY PEOPLE. WE'RE ABSOLUTELY NO EVENTS, NO PARTIES. AND I ADD IN MY, IN MY, UM, MY VETTING OF PEOPLE, I EVEN SAY NO FAMILY GET TOGETHERS OR, UM, OR GATHERINGS. UM, I'M PRETTY CLEAR ON THAT. OKAY. AND BUT YOU DID SAY IN YOUR EARLIER TESTIMONY THAT THIS IS A TOWN HOME STYLE, SO THERE'S A COMMON WALL BETWEEN THE UNITS, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER ALBERT, SIR, DO YOU YET, UH, DO YOU HAVE YET AN ESTIMATED MAX OCCUPANCY FOR THIS? UH, MAX OCCUPANCY WOULD BE 10. IT'S, THERE'S, IT'S FOUR BEDROOMS AND THEN THERE'S A PULLOUT COUCH. YES. ANYONE ELSE? SO I HAVE A QUESTION. UM, SO YOU, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU'RE UNDER THE WESTOVER HILLS PHASE THREE COVENANTS. HAVE YOU TALKED TO THAT BOARD AT ALL ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE, UH, ABOUT THIS CASE BEFORE TODAY? NO, SIR. OKAY. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTERS IS NEW FOR ME. OKAY. SO, UM, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE, UH, H O A, THE H O A? NO. OKAY. BECAUSE WE UNDERSTOOD THAT WE'RE NOT UNDERNEATH A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION IN OUR SMALL COMMUNITY. THERE, THERE'S NO, YEAH. YOUR, YOUR DEEDED REFERENCES, UH, YOUR SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS OF THE WEST RIVER HILLS, PHASE THREE. MM-HMM. , WHICH COVERS THE HOTEL, THE GOLF TRACK, AND ALL THE DIFFERENT RESIDENTIAL. IT'S LIKE A MASTER AGREEMENT. OKAY. BUT THEY ALSO HAVE THEIR OWN A C C AND RULES AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF. I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU TRIED TO REACH OUT TO THEM. NO, I HAVE NOT. NO, SIR. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU MR. UH, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA? YEAH. YOU HAVE THE COVENANTS. YOU HAVEN'T REVIEWED THEM TO SEE WHAT'S THERE. OKAY. UH, YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS A PARTY, UH, SECTION AND ENTERPRISE GOING AROUND? I, I ASKED, UM, JOSH. OH. OH, THAT'S WHAT THEY CALL IT? YEAH. I ASKED HIM ABOUT THE, THE ZONING, THE DISTRICT AREA. HE SAID IT'S AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT THAT'S NEW TO US, I GUESS. UH, YEAH. AND SO, YOU KNOW, HERE YOU ALREADY HAVE ONE TYPE TWO SHORT TERM RENTAL. YES, THAT'S ME. YES, SIR. THAT, THAT'S THE ONE YOU'RE, YOU'RE MANAGING? I SAY, YES, SIR. OKAY. AND, AND TO ADD ANOTHER ONE THERE, AND THAT IS PRESTIGIOUS TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW, THE HOTEL, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANNA MENTION THAT IT'S THERE HAS BEEN THERE FOR YEARS. OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, I, I'M, I'LL TELL YOU THE TRUTH, UH, IT IS WOULD BE VERY, VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO VOTE FOR ANOTHER ONE THAT THERE, PLUS WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS AND YOU HAVEN'T CHECKED THE COVENANTS, THE LIMITATIONS ON IT AND SO, BUT NO. UH, BUT I DON'T SEE RIGHT. WHAT ELSE YOU CAN DO ON THERE. BUT YOU MANAGE THE OTHER ONE YEARLY, RIGHT? RIGHT. IT'S ON A YEARLY TIME OR, UH, QUARTERLY OR, I'VE MANAGED IT FOR EIGHT YEARS. OKAY. I'VE BEEN MANAGING FOR 11, 11 YEARS TOTAL. THAT'S DIFFERENT. LIKE FOR RENTAL? YES, SIR. RENTAL? NO. SHORT-TERM RENTAL. IT'S BEEN SINCE BEFORE THE ORDINANCES. I WAS HERE FOR EVERY, UM, EVERY UH, SESSION WHEN THE ORDINANCE WAS BEING DRAFTED. OKAY. AND PUT IN I WAS HERE TO VOICE. VERY GOOD. YES SIR. AND I PAID MY TAXES. YEAH, YOU SHOULD BE COMMANDED ONE 11 YEARS AGO. I PAID. YOU SHOULD BE COMMANDED FOR BEING HERE AND STAY ON TOP OF IT. ABSOLUTELY. BUT, UH, THIS ONE CAN BE JUST WOULDN'T WORK. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE, UH, SIR, UH, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE WILL DELIBERATE AND WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON THIS. UH, THERE WAS NO, UM, NO ONE SIGNED HIS SPEAK. THERE'S NOTHING ELSE LOOKING FOR A MOTION. CRUZ. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 2 103 0 0 2 0 9. I MOVE THE ADJUSTMENT GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR A ONE TYPE TWO COURT UNTIL YOU APPLICANT BEING CARLOS MUNOZ. 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 LITTLE 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 [01:30:01] THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO OPERATE AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE. THERE IS NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY. BE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THERE HAS NOT APPEARED TO BE A REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WOULD BE CREATED IF AN ADDITIONAL SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT WAS APPROVED. SEE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIAL, SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSIST OF SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AND INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSES. THIS UNIQUE SCENARIO DOES NOT CAUSE REASON TO BELIEVE IT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS A TOP TWO TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. THE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS, ROAD STORM DRAINAGE, RE RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND, AND OTHER NECESSARY FACILITIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES ALL STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE. E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUS REVOKED SHORT TERM RENTALS, LICENSES, CONFIRM CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVENTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR. PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY HISTORY OF RE, RE, RE REGULATION, CITATIONS, OR CONVENTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16 F. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION OF WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL USES OF VARYING INTENSITY WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING OFF STREET PARKING AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANOCK? COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UM, I'M NOT TOO THRILLED ABOUT TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN ONE PLACE, BUT IN THIS INSTANCE I THINK I WOULD APPROVE IT NORMALLY BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION AND ALSO TOO THE AREA IS KIND OF BIG, SO THERE'S NOT, AND SINCE THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY VIOLATIONS, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER. UM, SO I WAS CLOSER TO THIS ONE, BUT AGAIN, I'M NOT GONNA BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF IT. AND SO, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IS THAT THE NEIGHBORS, YOU KNOW, ARE IN OPPOSITION. AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS DOES LOOK LIKE A NICE COMMUNITY THAT'S ESTABLISHED AND I GUESS, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE THAT. AND SO, UM, AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I WILL NOT BE VOTING IN FAVOR. ALRIGHT, ANYONE ELSE? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA, I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA? I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ, I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN? I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN? I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN? I DO NOT CONCUR. A MOTION FAILS THREE TO EIGHT. I'M GONNA CALL FOR A, A BRIEF BREAK. WE'LL SEE EVERYBODY BACK IN SEVEN MINUTES. IF THERE'S SOMEONE WHO IS NOT RETURNING, PLEASE LET ME KNOW SO THAT I CAN LET MS. INGLES KNOW. IT'S 3 24 CALLING THE BOARD MEETING BACK TO END OF SESSION. OKAY. AT THIS TIME I'LL BE TURNING THE MEETING OVER TO THE VICE CHAIR OZUNA, AS I WILL RECUSE MYSELF. RIGHT. [01:35:01] THANK YOU CHAIR. STAFF, WOULD YOU, CAN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PRESENTATION? OKAY. UM, BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 8 5 LOCATED AT 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 3 PEBBLE STREET CONTRADICT NUMBER A APPLICANT BEING A D A CONSULTING GROUP, UM, INCORPORATED, UM, REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT VARIANCE ON THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDESTEP REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UM, CURRENT ZONINGS ARE FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON PEBBLE STREET AND IT'S CURRENTLY A VACANT LOT. UH, THE FUTURE FOUR LOTS WILL CONTAIN ONE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING IN EACH LOT AND EACH WILL REQUIRE THE TWO FOOTS VARIANCE ON THE RIGHT SIDE. UM, THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED FOR THE VARIANCE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, COMMENCING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STRUCTURES AND THE LOT IS ALSO IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT PROCESS AS HONEYCOMB PLACE. UH, THAT IS CURRENTLY THE SITE PLAN, UH, OF THE LOTS AND EACH ONE WILL NEED THE VARIANCE. UM, THAT IS THE CURRENT PICTURE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS THAT IS A VACANT LOT. UH, THE, THE OTHER, UM, PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, UH, MORE TO THE NORTHERN SIDE OF IT. UH, ANOTHER FRONT FRONTAGE PICTURE OF THE PROPERTY. AND THEN THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, THAT ENTIRE LOT IS VACANT AND SOME SURROUNDING AREAS. UH, SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 8 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, UNDER STRUCTURED WILL HAVE A MINIMUM EIGHT FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN THEM AND THE STRUCTURE CONFORMS TO THE FRONT AND REAR ASSIGN SETBACKS REQUIREMENTS. AND THERE'S A LIMITED AMOUNT OF SPACE TO COMPLY WITH THE SIDE SETBACK AND TO DEVELOP A STRUCTURE. UH, THERE WERE 32 NOTICES MAILED OUT. THERE WAS ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE GREAT NORTHWEST COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. YEAH, THAT CONCLUDES OUR STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? COULD YOU, UH, PLEASE MAKE A PRESENTATION AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? YEAH, GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD LINDSAY THORN, THORN ARCHITECTS. I MEAN, COULD YOU RAISE THE MIC A LITTLE BIT HIGHER? YEP. SO IT'S, UH, LINDSEY THORNE THORNE ARCHITECTS. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, READY FOR YOUR PRESENTATION? YES. PERFECT, THANK YOU. UM, SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT NOW FOR, OH GOSH, NEARLY TWO YEARS, I WOULD GUESS. UH, THE SITE IS A, IS A INTERESTING SITE IN THAT IT IS OVER THE AQUIFER, UH, AND THE RECHARGE ZONE. SO WE'VE GONE THROUGH A LOT OF WORK DEALING WITH SOILS TO GET TO THE POINT OF WHERE WE ARE TODAY. SO PART OF THAT REQUIREMENT WITH SOILS IS SORT OF GIVEN US SOMEWHAT OF A SITE CONSTRAINT OF THE FLOOR PLAN AND WHAT CAN ACTUALLY SIT, UH, ON, ON THE PROPERTY. SO WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR, WE, WE'D LIKE TO HAVE THIS TWO FOOT BUMP OUT ON THE SECOND FLOOR FOR A COUPLE DIFFERENT REASONS IN THAT, UM, IT'S, IT'S STILL THE, THE PROPERTIES THEMSELVES, EVEN WITH THE BUMP OUT WILL GIVE US OVER EIGHT FEET BETWEEN THE ACTUAL, THE TWO FOOT BUMP OUT AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE EAST. IT'S 10 FEET OFF THE FLOOR. UM, IT ENABLES US TO HAVE WINDOWS NORTH AND SOUTH SO THAT WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE A WINDOW FACING THE, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. UM, AND JUST AESTHETICALLY, IT REALLY BREAKS UP THE, UH, THE, THE, UH, FRONT ELEVATION, UH, WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THE STREET. SO IT, WE THINK IT'S A UNIQUE, UM, OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY, UH, CREATE, UH, A VISUAL IMPACT FROM THE STREET. UH, ENABLES THE LIGHT TO GET INTO THAT, THAT MEDIA SORT OF FAMILY ROOM ON THE SECOND FLOOR. UM, BUT IT'S STILL, THERE'S PLENTY FAR ENOUGH AWAY FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. UH, WE'RE STILL MAINTAINING THE FIVE FEET ON THE GROUND FLOOR. UM, AND IT'S, AND IT'S AGAIN, THE BASE OF IT'S 10 FEET OFF THE GROUND, SO, UH, IT'S NOT A, AN IMPACT, UH, IN ANY WHICH WAY WE THINK TO THE PROPERTY ADJACENT, UH, NEIGHBORS. UH, WE HAVE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TO THE EAST, TO THE EAST, THE CIGAR STORE, UH, TO THE SOUTH, THE SOUTHWEST, WE HAVE A LARGE, UM, STORAGE FACILITY, UM, TO THE NORTH, UH, NORTHWEST. WE HAVE A, UH, AN UNDEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA. SO, UH, WE JUST LIKE TO CONSIDER THE VARIANCE IN OUR FAVOR. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE, THE BOARD. ANY QUESTIONS TO THE BOARD STAFF? DO WE HAVE ANY OPPOSITION? ANY COMMENTS FOR PUBLIC RECORD? NONE. THERE'S NONE. OKAY. ANY, ANY REBUTTAL? WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE ANY CLOSING REMARKS BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING? UH, NOT REALLY. I THINK IT, I THINK IT'S, UM, IT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE REQUEST. I THINK ON OUR, ON OUR, ON OUR, ON OUR END. UM, WE JUST THINK, I THINK IT WILL, IT'S GONNA GIVE A GREAT, UH, REALLY NICE IMPACT TO THE ELEVATION ON THE STREET. UM, WE DO A LOT OF HIGH AND RESIDENTIAL WORK, UH, IN, IN THE, IN THE CITY. AND I THINK, UH, I THINK IT'S A REAL, IT'S A REAL, UM, ADD TO THE, THE PROJECT DESIGN. THANK YOU. THAT CLOSES THE PUBLIC PORTION BOARD. I'LL MAKE [01:40:01] A GOOD CHALK. I JUST WANNA ASK A QUESTION. YES. UH, ARE THESE TWO STORY BUILDINGS? YES. AND, UH, THE, I WAS LOOKING AT THE, UH, ACCOUNTING FOR THE PARKING. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE PARKING? YES, WE HAVE, UM, WE HAVE, WE HAVE A DOUBLE PARKING GARAGE ENCLOSED, AND THEN WE HAVE ROOM FOR, UM, ALSO PARKING OUTSIDE ON THE FRONT DRIVEWAY AS WELL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. PROCEED WITH THE MOTION. OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 180 5 MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRAND REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FOR THE, TO BE THREE FEET FOR THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 2 1 0 3 PEBBLE STREET. APPLICANT BEING A D A CONSULTING GROUP, INC. BECAUSE OF THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOULD THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY AS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNITED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. THE VARIANCE TO THE SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, THE STRUCTURE WILL MEET THE FRONT AND REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. STAFF FINDS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP SINCE THE LOT IS TOO SMALL TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE STRUCTURE WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPARE OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE STRUCTURES HAVE NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND THE PROPOSED SETBACKS THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF FOUR UNITS WILL BE DEVELOPED IN THE SAME PROJECT, WHICH ALLOWS VERIFICATION OF A MINIMUM EIGHT FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN DWELLING STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THERE WILL STILL BE REASONABLE SPACE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. FOR 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 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 CENTRAL CHARACT OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THE FUTURE LOSS WILL BE DEVELOPED IN THE RECENTLY REZONED R FOUR STANDARDS. 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 IS LOCATED. BECAUSE OF THE WIDTH OF THE LOT AND CONFIGURATION OF THE PROPOSED DWELLING, MAINTAINING A THREE FOOT SIDE SETBACK IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA. THE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. SECOND. THANK YOU. ST. STAFF COULD ROLL CALL MS. BRAGMAN A SECOND. MANNA. SORRY. BRAGMAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME COMMENT ON THE REASONS WHY YOU'RE PROPOSING THAT? YES. AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION, UM, SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT IS A TWO STORY AND THE, THE BUMP OUT IS ON THE SECOND FLOOR, SO IT'S NOT GONNA IMPACT THE MAINTENANCE OF THE, UH, UNITS AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORING UNITS. UM, SO I DON'T SEE ANY ISSUE WITH IT. AND OBVIOUSLY WE, UM, LIKE TO SEE MORE INFILL BECAUSE OF THE HOUSING SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. THANK YOU. WE HAD A SECOND FROM MANNA. MANNA I WITH MY COLLEAGUE. THANK YOU. STAFF. WOULD YOU NOW LIKE TO TAKE A ROLL CALL? VOTE MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA. 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. MS. KAPLAN I CONCUR. MS. INGLES I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR. AND MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. UNANIMOUS. 11 TO ZERO. THE VARIANCE DOES PASS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, SOMEBODY WANTED TO CALL OUR CHAIR, PLEASE ASK . NO, I LIKE THE WAY YOU MOVE THINGS A LOT. THAT WAS FAST. CAN WE DO THAT AGAIN? [01:45:13] IT'S LIKE THIS IS IN THE CASE WHERE, WHERE ALL RIGHT. THE TIME IS 3 35. CHAIRMAN ORIAN IS BACK IN. I WAS LISTENING. , RIGHT? ALL RIGHT, NEXT CASE IS, UH, ITEM SEVEN. UH, OKAY. UM, BO 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 6. ADDRESS, UM, IS GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 8,700 BLOCK OF ESCAL PARKWAY. UM, COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER SIX, UM, APPLICANT BEING TAYLOR DAWSON. UM, REQUEST FOR A 107 FOOT VARIANCE ON THE MAXIMUM NINE FOOT 90 FOOT FRONT SET BY REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 197 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO REQUESTS FROM THE 21 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 35 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT TO ALLOW IS STRUCTURE TO BE 56 FEET IN HEIGHT. UH, CURRENT ZONING IS LOW DENSITY MULTIFAMILY ON THE SUBJECT. PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG ESCA PARKWAY AND IT IS NEAR SEA, NEAR NEAR SEAWORLD. UH, IT'S CURRENTLY A VACANT LOT AND THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED IN 2019 TO THE CURRENT MF 25 TO LOW DENSITY MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT, WHICH ALLOWS, WHICH WOULD ALLOW MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT THE MAXIMUM DENSITY OF 25 UNITS PER ACRE. UH, AN APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON THE LOT. HOWEVER, DURING THE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT A SETBACK VARIANCE WOULD BE REQUIRED. BASED ON THE CURRENT PLANS, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTED TO ALLOW THE NEAR STRUCTURE TO BE 125 FROM ESCAL PARKWAY FROM THE FRONT AND, UH, HEIGHT TO BE 56 IN HEIGHT. WRONG. UM, THAT IS THE SITE PLAN RIGHT THERE, UM, WHERE THE HIGHLIGHTED AREAS KINDA SHOW WHERE THE SETBACKS ARE AT, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTIES. UH, IT'S GONNA BE JUST THE VACANT LOT, UH, FOR THE MAXIMUM FRONT SETBACK AND BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCE. UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 46 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT. AND THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR OUTTA CHARACTER FOR THE AREA AND THE PROPERTY IS IN SUBSTANTIAL SIZE. SO A VARIANCE TO THE MAXIMUM FRONT SETBACK AND BUILDING HEIGHT APPEARS TO OBSERVE THE SPEAR OF THE ORDINANCE. UM, NOTIFICATION PLAN INCLUDES SIX MALE NOTICES. THERE WAS ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION IN THE AREA. UM, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK? NO, WE DON'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS CASE. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. HI, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. HI, UH, MY NAME'S TYLER COSMA. I'M THE, UH, APPLICANT'S ENGINEER. UM, YEAH, PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD, UH, CASE HERE. SO THE REASON FOR THE FRONT SETBACK REQUEST IS DUE TO A FEMA FLOODPLAIN RUNNING ALONG, UH, ES SCALA PARKWAY. UH, IT WOULD BE UNSAFE TO CONSTRUCT AN APARTMENT BUILDING IN THAT FLOODPLAIN. AND THE, UH, WIDTH OF THE FLOODPLAIN EXCEEDS THE 90 FOOT, UM, SETBACK FROM THE FRONT AND, UH, ALONG THE REAR. UM, IT'S NOT YOUR TYPICAL REAR SETBACK AS WE'RE, UM, ALSO FRONTING, UH, ELLISON DRIVE. SO, UM, AND WE'RE ALSO NOT NEAR ANY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OR, OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT, THAT BUILDING IS GOING TO BE, UH, TOWERING OVER OR BLOCKING THE VIEW OF, UH, IT'S PRETTY IN CHARACTER FOR THE AREA. YOU CAN SEE, UH, APARTMENT COMPLEXES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT. UH, HAVE BUILDINGS THAT SEEM TO BE AROUND THIS HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, THREE, FOUR STORY BUILDINGS. AND WE FELT THAT THIS REQUEST WAS IN CHARACTER WITH THE AREA. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? UM, IT'S HARD TO TELL FROM, UH, THE PICTURES, BUT THERE'S A PHOTOGRAPH OF A, UM, FAIRLY SUBSTANTIAL SLOPE. IT LOOKS LIKE PICTURE NUMBER 48 AND 49. IS THERE A DRAMATIC ELEVATION CHANGE IN THE, THE PROPERTY? YES, THERE'S SIGNIFICANT GRADE ACROSS THE SITE. SO COMPARED TO THE OTHER BUILDINGS, 'CAUSE I NOTICED THAT IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A THREE UNIT APARTMENT, UM, COMPLEX. SO YOURS [01:50:01] DIRECTLY ON THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE OKAY, SO YOURS WOULD BE LOWER THAN THAT? THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. , MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, EXCUSE ME, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE, UM, THE REQUEST FOR THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT. SO WITH THE MF 25, SO TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY IT IS THAT THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT IS REQUIRED, UM, WITH THE M MS 25, GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY. SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN, UM, UH, WHY IT IS YOU NEED THE HEIGHT? WELL, THE, I MEAN THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA IS PRETTY MUCH THESE THREE AND, AND FOUR STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX BUILDINGS. UM, PRETTY MUCH ANY BUILDING THAT WAS PROPOSED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD'VE EXCEEDED BECAUSE WE'RE ONLY, UH, 15 FEET AWAY FROM THE REAR RIGHT OF WAY LINE. UM, WE WERE ALSO TOLD THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THE ADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY WAS DIFFERENT WITH, UH, ELLISON BEING THE, UM, PRIMARY ADDRESS, THAT THAT WOULD BECOME THE FRONT SETBACK. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE, THAT SINCE AN ADDRESS CHANGE WOULD KIND OF RESULT IN A SIMILAR OUTCOME. WE CHOSE TO GO THIS ROUTE AS IT JUST MADE MORE, MORE SENSE TO, TO GO THROUGH THIS. WELL, I GUESS I'M STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. SO, SO, SO YOU'RE GOING FOR THREE STORY BUILDINGS, RIGHT? MM-HMM. . SO, UM, AND SO WITH MF 20 FIVES, ARE THESE LIKE HUGE APARTMENTS THEN THAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN ON THESE PROPERTIES? SO, BECAUSE THAT SEEMS LIKE PRETTY DENSE FOR WOOD THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, I GUESS, PER ACRE, SO YOU'RE STILL GONNA BE WITHIN THE MF 25, CORRECT? YES, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? YEAH, SO JUST TO CLARIFY, SO THE COMMISSIONER ZUNA, UH, DENSITY'S NOT CHANGING, WE'RE JUST CHANGING FOR, FOR EITHER ARCHITECTURAL REASONS OR WHATEVER. YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THAT EXTRA, UH, HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING MM-HMM. , BUT THAT'S CORRECT. IF YOU WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED THE DENSITY, WHETHER IT'S WHAT'S ALLOWED BY RIGHT. WHICH IS 50, 35 FEET OR 56 FEET, RIGHT? I BELIEVE SO THAT, THAT'S, YEAH. I'M SORRY. DIDN'T HEAR THE QUESTION. I APOLOGIZE. I WAS JUST CONFIRMING THAT THE, THE DENSITY DOESN'T CHANGE. SO THE ZONING THAT ALLOWS THE DENSITY WOULD NOT CHANGE WHETHER THE HEIGHT WAS 35 FEET, WHICH IS ALLOWABLE OR THE 56 FEET, WHICH THEY'RE REQUESTING IS MORE FOR ARCHITECTURAL, I GUESS DESIGN REASONS THAT THEY'D BE LOOKING, ASK THE QUESTION. YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO YEAH, SO THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THE QUESTION I TRIED TO ASK. THANK YOU. OKAY. OKAY. SO THEN I HAVE A QUESTION. THE, THE HEIGHT IS, IS ON MF 25 IS 35 FEET, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE, UM, UM, THAT RULE WHERE IF YOU GET AN EXTRA TWO FEET VERY FOOT, YOU'RE BEHIND THE SETBACK, BUT IF YOUR SETBACK HAS A LIMITATION, DOES THAT AFFECT HOW THAT'S INTERPRETED IN ANY WAY? BECAUSE YOU KNOW HOW, LIKE WE ARE HERE ABOUT A 90 FOOT SETBACK TO, SO THAT DOES, YOU DON'T START COUNTING IT UNTIL YOU'RE BEYOND 90 FEET. YOU'RE TA YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE, UH, FOOTNOTE IN YES. THE REGULATIONS BECAUSE IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A MAX SETBACK, IT'S MORE OF LIKE A CORRECT. YES, ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. IT'S NOT, BUT YOU START AT 90 AND SO EVERY FOOT THAT HE'S PASSED THE 90, THEY CAN GAIN AN ADDITIONAL FOOT OF TWO FEET OF HEIGHT, CORRECT? MM-HMM. . AND SO IS IT NECESSARY FOR THE APPLICANT TO EVEN REQUEST A HEIGHT VARIANCE? IT LOOKED LIKE THE BUILDING'S RELAT PRETTY FAR AWAY. TECHNICALLY. I MEAN, HE COULD USE THAT PROVISION, BUT THIS WOULD SOLIDIFY THE HEIGHT THAT THEY WOULD REQUIRE. OKAY. WITHOUT HAVING TO USE THAT APPROACH. ALRIGHT. I'M JUST, I'M, WE WERE TOLD THAT WE NEEDED TO APPLY BECAUSE WE'RE TECHNICALLY ON THE REAR, UM, SINCE OUR PRIMARY ADDRESS IS ON SALA RATHER THAN YEAH. I I, BUT IT'S KIND OF A WEIRD, OCCASIONALLY WE SEE THINGS THAT MAKE ME LOOK LIKE YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE HERE, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. SO, SO THAT'S ALL, THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 6. I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR 107 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 90 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW, UH, STRUCTURED TO BE 197 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, A REQUEST FOR A 21 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 35 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 56 FEET IN HEIGHT. GENERALLY LOCATED AT 8,700 BLOCK OF SALA PARKWAY, APPLICANT BEING TAYLOR DAWSON. UM, 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 FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WOULD ALLOW THE PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO HAVE A FRONT SETBACK OF 197 FOOT AND A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT OF 56 FOOT. THE STRUCTURE WOULD BE SITUATED A REASONABLE DISTANCE FROM A SCALA PARKWAY, UH, WHICH DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS THERE, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY [01:55:01] HARDSHIP. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, UH, WOULD HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE MAXIMUM SETBACK PERMITTED OF 90 FOOT AND MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 35 FOOT STAFF FINDS NO UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO THE SUBSTANTIAL SIZE OF THE LOT. BY GRANTING THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. 190 FOOT SETBACK WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. THE LOCATION AND SIZE OF THE PROPOSED EASEMENT WILL USE THE MAJORITY OF THE FRONT SETBACK. THE BUILDING MAXIMUM HEIGHT WILL BE 56 FOOT. MAINTAIN THIS DISTANCE AND HEIGHT WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY AND SAFETY DUE TO THE FRONTAGE BEING OFF A BUSINESS STREET. 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 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 THIS DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG SCALA PARKWAY, ALL MAINTAIN, EXIST AN EXTENDED DISTANCE AND HAVE TALLER BUILDINGS FROM THE STREET DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOTS. THEREFORE, THE QUEST WOULD NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SIX PLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF THE LOT THE REQUESTED. THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL END THE MOTION. SECOND MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MANNA, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS. UM, SO I THINK THAT ONE FOR HOW FAR THE PROPERTY'S PUSHED BACK IS, OR HOW FAR THE UNITS ARE PUSHED BACK IS, UH, MAKES THIS APPROPRIATE WITH REGARDS TO THE HEIGHT. UM, ALSO THE LIMIT, UH, MAINTAIN THE MF 25, SO IT ISN'T GONNA BE COMING DENSER. SO THESE APPEAR TO BE OR GONNA BE NICE APARTMENTS THERE. UM, AND THEN, UM, AND THEN AS FAR AS PUSHING IT BACK, IT MAKES SENSE WITH REGARDS TO THE, THE FLOOD INFORMATION. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER AMANA AND FOR THE SAME REASONS. SO I WILL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT OF IT. GREAT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE THIS HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MR. MANO. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ, I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR. MR. ZUNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF. ALL RIGHT, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. AND THAT'S A CASE NUMBER ENDING IN 1 5 3. GOOD AFTERNOON, BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 5 3. ADDRESS IS 1 4 1 3 5 IH 37 SOUTH COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE. APPLICANT IS BADRA AND COMPANY L L C A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TREES AND SHRUBS WITHIN A TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 35 5 10 TO ONE FOR EVERY 100 LINEAL FEET ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE ZONING. A C TWO, UH, CD COMMERCIAL, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A LANDSCAPE BUFFER VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TREES AND SHRUBS WITHIN A TYPE B BUFFER. THE BUFFER REQUIREMENT REQUIRES TREES AND SHRUBS ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE APPLICANT STATES THAT THESE TREES AND SHRUBS ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE WILL BLOCK THE VIEW OF MOBILE HOMES DISPLAYED FOR FOR SALE, THE SITE PLAN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS. RECOMMENDATION LANDSCAPE BUFFER VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 5 3 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE REQUIRED TREES AND STRIPS CAN BE LOCATED IN OTHER AREAS OF THE PROPERTY AND THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER WILL NOT ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT NOTIFICATION PLAN. THREE NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE ARE NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. THANK YOU. AND WHAT IS THE, UH, CURRENT, WHAT IS THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF TREES AND SHRUBS FOR EVERY 100 FEET? THAT ONE I HAD ON MY NOTES HERE. I I DON'T, I CAN'T THINK OF THAT RIGHT NOW. I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU RIGHT OFF THE TOP. OKAY. WELL, WE, WE WILL, UH, Y'ALL CAN LOOK THAT UP AND LET US KNOW, UH, AS WE MOVE FORWARD. SO IF THE APPLICANT'S PRESENT, UM, COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. MY NAME IS EDUARDO DE LORETO WITH PARA [02:00:01] AND COMPANY ENGINEERING APPLICANT ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER, ALBERTO PENA, C E O OF STON HOMES. ALSO HERE PRESENT, WHO IS GONNA SHARE THE, THE PRESENTATION? UM, IF WE CAN GO, UH, TO THE, UH, YOU SHOULD HAVE, UH, YOU HAVE THIS SLIDE ON THE PRESENTATION. CAN I BORROW THE MR. CHAIR? SO WE, UM, WE DETERMINED THAT FOR A LANDSCAPE BUFFER OR TYPE B, YOU ARE REQUIRED, UM, 15 FEET, WHICH INCLUDES TWO TREES, CANOPY, UM, TWO UNDERSTORY, EIGHT LARGE SHRUBS, 12 MEDIUM SHRUBS, AND THAT'S EVERY A HUNDRED FEET. THIS DOES NOT HAVE A DISTANCE, HOWEVER, THE, UH, REQUEST ITSELF IS ONE FOR EVERY A HUNDRED LINEAR FEET. OKAY. THANK YOU MINKA. COMMISSIONER MINKA, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. UH, WHAT IS THE, THE GIRTH OF THE TREE TO BE CONSIDERED A TREE? FOUR INCHES, FIVE INCHES? I BELIEVE IT'S TWO TO FOUR INCHES. IS WHAT, IS WHAT IS REQUIRED WHEN YOU DO, UH, PLANTINGS TWO TO FOUR INCHES? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND STAFF? I, I, I PULLED UP THE U D C. IT IS THAT, THAT COUNT YOU GAVE US IS PER EVERY A HUNDRED FEET. SO, ALL RIGHT, SIR. ? YES. SO, UM, THIS IS, UH, THE SIDE PLAN WITH, UM, JUST LET'S IMAGINE THAT, UH, THOSE, UH, DARKER GRAY, UH, SQUARES ARE RECTANGLES ARE MAYBE MANUFACTURE HOMES, RIGHT? SO IN NORTHEAST TO THE RIGHT, SOUTHEAST TO THE LEFT, THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS IN THE FLOOD PLAIN. SO BASICALLY IT'S NOT, UH, USABLE RIGHT NOW. AND JUST ALSO TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF THE PROCESS, SO WE STARTED WORKING ON THE PROPERTY ALMOST TWO YEARS AGO, RIGHT? UH, THROUGH THE DESIGN PROCESS AND PLOTTING PROCESS. AND, UM, SO DURING ALL THIS PROCESS, WE HAD TO DETERMINE, OF COURSE, UH, IT WAS REQUIRED ADDITIONAL FLOOD STUDY TO DETERMINE, UH, THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION AND, AND THE LIMITS OF THE ELEVATION, RIGHT? UH, IT BASICALLY, YOU, IT TAKES ALMOST, UH, A THIRD OR MAYBE MORE THAN A THIRD OF THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY. THE, ALSO, IF YOU DEDUCT THE, THE DRIVEWAY, SO THE, THE NET FRONTAGE THAT CAN BE USED FOR MANUFACTURE HOMES TO BE SHOWCASED IS, UH, IT'S ABOUT 200, 250, UH, LINEAR FE. SO, UM, UH, OUR CLIENT, UM, THE OWNER IS JUST PROPOSING, NOT REMOVING OR USING ANY, UH, NUMBER OF TREES, JUST RELOCATING THEM, UH, IN A MANNER THAT WON'T AFFECT THE SHOWCASE. BASICALLY THE, THE, THE, THE MAIN REASON WHY, UH, THEY PICK THE, THE, THE PROPERTY IS, UH, BECAUSE IT IS ON MINE, UH, HIGHWAY AND, AND, AND, AND THEY NEED TO SHOWCASE THE, THE, THE PRODUCT, RIGHT? SO AT THIS TIME, IT'S VERY, VERY LIMITED. THE AREA THAT CAN, THAT THEY CAN, UH, SHOWCASE THEIR PRODUCT. AND THAT IS THE MAIN, YOU KNOW, REASON, UH, OF THE, OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST, JUST TO RELOCATING ALL THE, UM, ALL THE PERMITS, UM, REVIEWERS HAVE APPROVED. THE PERMIT IS JUST PENDING FOR, UH, LANDSCAPE. THE PLATT HAS BEEN RECORDED, AND, UH, THE REST OF THE LANDSCAPE, UH, THE THREE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS ARE BEING MET. AND, AND IT'S JUST, UH, OF THAT I AM OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS, UH, ON THE TECHNICAL PART, , AND, AND, UH, THEN I'M GONNA LET THE WORD TO THE C E O OF FROSTING HOMES AND OUR CLIENT ALBERTO PENA. OKAY. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH. UH, ON YOUR SITE PLAN, THOSE CIRCLES THAT ARE RED, WHAT ARE THOSE? THOSE ARE THE PROPOSED LOCATION FOR THE TREE. IT'S JUST, UH, BASICALLY IT'S AS, INSTEAD OF HAVING ON THE, ON THE FRONT EDGE OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY, WE'RE JUST, UM, ASKING TO BE ABLE TO RELOCATE THEM ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH TREES, YES. THAT ARE BEING PLANTED. AND JUST FOR THE RECORDS ALSO, IT'S A VACANT LOT, WHICH DOESN'T HAVE ANY TREES. SO ALL THOSE ARE NEW TREES THAT HAVE BEEN PLANTED, PLUS ALL THE LANDSCAPE THAT WILL BE PLACED. YOU DIDN'T UNDERSTAND. I'M [02:05:01] JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE RED CIRCLES ARE. THE GREEN CIRCLES ARE THE TREES. WHAT? THE RED CIRCLES? THE, THE RED AREA IS WHERE PER THE, PER THE TREE ORDINANCE, IT'S CALLING FOR A NUMBER OF TREES IN THE FRONTAGE, RIGHT? THERE WILL BE TREES. MM-HMM. , THOSE RED CIRCLES ARE TREES. THERE WON'T BE OUR PROPOSAL. THE, THE PROPOSAL IS TO NOT HAVE THE TREES ON THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY. THE SMALL BRUSHES AND SMALL VEGETATION RELATED TO THE TREE ORDINANCE WILL BE PLACED ON THE MAIN FRONTAGE, BUT NOT THE TREES. THE TREES WE'RE PROPOSING TO HAVE IT ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH ALSO, UH, THE TREE KIND OF BEFORE THE PARKING? YES. IT, THEY'RE GONNA BE PLACED, UH, AROUND THE PARKING LOT FOR, YEAH. OKAY. I, I NEED TO INTERJECT HERE. SO IT, IT'S WHEN I HEARD THIS CASE PRESENTED, I, I, I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING TO, TO GO DOWN FROM TWO TREES AND AM IRID OF SHRUBS DOWN TO JUST ONE TREE AND SHRUB FOR EVERY 100 FEET, BUT IT STILL HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING PLANTED EVERY A HUNDRED FEET. THEY COULDN'T ALL JUST BE ON THE SIDE. IS THAT CORRECT? I AM NOT SURE WHAT YOU ARE. I BELIEVE WE HAVE A MEMBER OF STAFF THAT IS WELL VERSED IN THE LANDSCAPE CODE . I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. HERE WE GO. THERE'S STEVEN. SORRY. THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, THE, YOU WERE ASKING IF IT WAS JUST TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TREES PLANTED PER THE BUFFER. IT, IT SOUNDED LIKE WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED, IT WAS, WE WERE TOLD THAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR A REDUCTION IN THE REQUIRED PLANTING PER EVERY A HUNDRED LINEAR FEET TO GO DOWN TO ONE TREE AND SHRUB FOR EVERY 100 LINEAR FEET. AND DOES THAT MEAN THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE ONE TREE AND ONE SHRUB EVERY A HUNDRED FEET? OR DOES THAT MEAN THEY CAN PLANT THEM ALL JUST ON THE SIDE AND HAVE NOTHING IN THE FRONT? THE INTENT OF THE BUFFER IS TO STRETCH IT OUT ACROSS THERE. SO IT'S EVENLY SPACED ALONG WITH THE PLANTING. THIS INITIAL, AND, AND WHAT THEY WERE SHOWING WAS TRYING TO CLUSTER PLANT IN THE CORNERS, WHICH IS WHY WE MADE THEM COME IN AND, AND SEEK THIS. OH, SO THE, SO AS ADVERTISED, THIS SITE PLAN IS SOMETHING THAT CAN, IS PERMITTABLE, IF THIS GETS APPROVED TODAY, THIS WOULD NOT BE PER CODE, BUT IF YOU GUYS AS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS APPROVES THE CHANGE, THEN THAT, THAT'S WHY WE MADE THEM COME TO YOU BECAUSE THE FULL BUFFER LENGTH WAS NOT BEING MET BECAUSE IT, IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE EVENLY SPACED ACROSS THOSE MANY TREES PER A HUNDRED FEET. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT, 'CAUSE WHEN I SAW THE SIDE PLAN, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION WHEN WE FIRST HEARD THIS PRESENTED THAT THERE WAS GONNA BE SOMETHING EVERY A HUNDRED FEET INSTEAD OF JUST ALL BEING PUSHED TO THE SIDE FRAGMENT. SO BE SOME BUSH IN THE FRONT, THERE'LL JUST BE PLANTINGS ON THE SIDES AND IT'LL BE OPEN IN THE FRONT COMMISSIONER FRAGMENT. SO, UM, YEAH, SO, SO I ACTUALLY, FOR THE CITY, SO, UM, IF IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE ONE PER HUNDRED AND IT'S NOT BEING THAT AND, UM, YOU KNOW, TWO IS WHAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE THERE, THEN IF THEY ARE NOT GONNA PUT ONE PER HUNDRED, THEN, THEN THAT'S NOT WHAT GOT ADVERTISED WITH REGARDS TO, UH, I GUESS THE BLINE. AND SO WE'D BE GOING LESS RESTRICTIVE. YEAH. CAN YOU PULL, YEAH, CAN YOU CHECK TO SEE HOW THIS IS ADVERTISED JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT, AND THEN WE'RE ALLOWED? YEAH. SECOND QUESTION THEN FOR THE STAFF OR FOR THE, UH, APPLICANT HERE. SO I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. SO, SO WE HAD THE RED SECTION, WHAT'S THE WIDTH? DID THAT RED SECTION THERE, AND THEN WHAT ARE THE TWO, THE THREE RED BLOCKS THERE? AND YOU KNOW, I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT IS THAT THE TREES TAKE AWAY FROM THE BEAUTY OF THE HOMES VERSUS THE BEAUTIFUL TREES. YEAH, IF I CAN SPEAK TO THIS FROM AN OPERATIONAL LEVEL, IT'S, IT'S NOT THE BEAUTY OF, OF THE HOMES. THESE, THESE HOMES, UM, ARE ON WHEELS. WE, WE MOVE THEM IN AND OUT AS THEY'RE SOLD AND DISPLAYED. AND SO HAVING THESE TREES HERE WOULD NOT ALLOW US FROM AN OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT TO OPERATE THE WAY WE NEED TO, TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION OF, OF THIS PROJECT. UM, WHEREAS HAVING THESE ON, ON THE SIDE THERE, THERE'S A FOREST HERE. THIS IS A COMMERCIAL CAR WASH. UM, AND IF I CAN REFERENCE THE THREE COMPETITORS ON THIS HIGHWAY, THEY HAVE ZERO TREES PER A HUNDRED FEET, UM, AS YOU CAN, CAN SEE HERE. UM, SO WE'RE ACTUALLY GONNA BE BEAUTIFYING THIS PROPERTY, UM, IN COMPARISON TO WHAT'S, WHAT'S ACTUALLY OUT THERE. UM, FOR A REFERENCE, BRO, BRO'S HOMES STARTED FIVE YEARS AGO IN THE TECH DISTRICT OF DOWNTOWN. WE'VE CREATED 38 JOBS IN THE FIVE YEARS SINCE STARTING. UM, THIS PROJECT ALONE WILL ALLOW US TO CREATE ANOTHER 20 WITHIN 12 MONTHS OF, OF BUILDING. UM, BUT TO HAVE THE TREES WHERE IT'S NEEDED ON THE ORDINANCE WOULD NOT ALLOW US TO OPERATE THE PROPERTY THE WAY OUR BUSINESS NEEDS TO BUILD THE PROPERTY. WELL, WE UNDERSTAND THAT, ACTUALLY. I DO, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT PART, SO I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT. OKAY. SO, SO THIS IS ONE OF OUR COMPETITORS. SO ONE, THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE HERE. SO WITH REGARDS TO GOING BACK TO THE ONE MAP, UM, SO, UM, WHERE IS THE [02:10:01] BUFFER SPACE THAT IS BEING, I GUESS, ASKED ABOUT? AND IS IT TRULY THE RED SECTION OR IS IT IN FRONT OF THE RED SECTION? BETWEEN THE RED SECTION AND THE, AND THE ROADWAY. SO, 'CAUSE IT'S 15 FEET IS WHAT'S BEING ASKED. AND SO THE 15 FEET I THINK WOULD, WHEN I LOOKED AT THE MAP HERE WITH REGARDS TO THE DISTANCE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S IN FRONT OF THE RED SECTION. SO IS THAT NOT TRUE? SO I GUESS WHERE DOES THE SETBACK START AND WHERE THE 15 FEET STARTS? SO ALL, ALL THE SETBACKS ARE BEING MET. AND THIS IS A 14, IT'S 25 BUILDING SETBACK THAT IT'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, UH, RESPECTED THERE OR, OR CONSIDERED THIS. UM, THE, THE, THE RED, UH, YOU KNOW, THE RED AREA IS JUST TO, UM, TO IDENTIFY THE, THE, UM, THE, THE FRONTAGE OF THE AREA THAT, THAT CAN BE USABLE, BASICALLY EVEN IN THE MIDDLE, WE'RE FINE WITH, IT'S THE FIVE ON THE RIGHT THAT WOULD PREVENT US FROM MOVING OUR INVENTORY. EXACTLY. SO THE, THE, THE TREES THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE DRIVEWAY, THEY WILL BE PLANTED THE, BASICALLY THE, THESE, UH, NUMBER OF TREES ON THE NORTH CORNER AND THE, THE BIGGER TREES THAT, THAT, UM, MUST BE, YOU KNOW, UH, PLANTED OR REQUESTED. THAT'S THE AMOUNT OF TREES THAT WE ARE REQUESTING TO PLANT ON THE BACK ON, ON THE NORTH AND SOUTHERN PORTION. DOES THAT MAKE, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? NO. OKAY. LET ME, LET ME SEE IF I CAN HELP THIS. SO YOUR PROPERTY LINE IS LISTED AS 526 FEET LONG. YOU HAVE SUBSTANTIAL PORTION THAT'S IN, UH, THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT. IS, IS THIS PLAN SHOWING THAT THAT RED AREA IS WHERE THE 15 FOOT BUFFER IS TO BE? 'CAUSE IT'S BEHIND YOUR PROPERTY LINE AND IT'S ALSO APPEARS TO BE BEHIND A, AN A 14 FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT THAT'S USUALLY REQUIRED WHEN YOU PLA AND SO IS THAT, IS THAT RED STRIPE WHERE THE 15 FOOT OR THE BUFFER AREA IS, IS, IS, IS LIES ON YOUR PROPERTY? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE GETTING? IS THAT THE FIRST PART OF YOUR QUESTION, COMMISSIONER? YEAH, I GUESS SO. SO WHERE DOES, WHERE DOES THE 15 FOOT START FROM THE CITY STREET TO, I GUESS THAT'S RED SECTION. 'CAUSE THE QUESTION I GUESS I'M ASKING IS BETWEEN THE STREET AND THE RED, THE RED AREA, IS THAT ENOUGH DISTANCE TO, UM, I GUESS TO PROVIDE THE 15 FOOT BUFFER AND COULD YOU PUT TREES IN THAT SPACE THERE? AND THIS IS, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, UM, JUST TO AS A SIDE THAT WHEN, WHEN THE U D C CHANGES WENT THROUGH, REMEMBER WE HAD, IF YOU HAD A 14 FOOT EASEMENT AND YOU'RE NEXT TO THE HIGHWAY, YOU COULD DO FIVE FOOT BEHIND IT, THAT'S GONNA GO INTO EFFECT JANUARY ONE. UH, SO, BUT, BUT WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT WHERE YOUR BUFFER IS SUPPOSED TO BE ON YOUR PROPERTY AND THEN WHERE THE TREES ARE THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING TO ADD, THAT'S PART OF YOUR REQUEST. AND THEN ALSO JUST AS A NOTE, SO THAT, SO YOUR WHOLE FLOODPLAIN AREA, SO THAT WHOLE SIDE THERE, THAT WOULD BE AN EASY PLACE TO PUT TREES, YOU KNOW, TO QUALIFY FOR THE A HUNDRED FOOT. SO THAT ONE, SO THAT ONE'S PROBABLY NOT PART OF THE DIALOGUE, BUT JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, I GUESS HOW ANY TREES IN THAT, IN THE ONE SPACE EVERY A HUNDRED FEET WOULD IMPACT YOUR, I GUESS, THE MOVEMENT OF YOUR MATERIAL, YOU KNOW, IN AND OUT AS WELL. YEAH, IT, IT, IT'S TWOFOLD. UM, PART OF IT IS, IS WE NEED TO MOVE THE INVENTORY IN AND OUT. UM, THE OTHER PART IS WE'RE PAYING A PREMIUM FOR HIGHWAY FRONTAGE SO THAT THESE HOMES ARE VIEWED FROM THE HIGHWAY. UM, AND SO THAT WE'RE ABLE TO COMPETE WITH THE THREE COMPETITORS ON THIS HIGHWAY THAT HAVE ZERO TREES PER, PER HUNDRED FOOT. SO IT, IT'S TWO, IT'S OBSTRUCTING THE VIEW OF THE THREE HOMES WE, WE CAN PUT BECAUSE OF THE FLOODPLAIN. UM, AND THEN THE FIVE IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER ON THAT MAP THERE, UH, PREVENT OUR ABILITY TO MOVE PRODUCT IN AND OUT AS WE SELL IT AND, AND ARRANGE NEW DISPLAY MODELS. THE THE RED SQUARE THAT'S IN THERE THAT DELINEATES, UH, THE, THE, THE, THE HOME DISPLAY? UH, YES SIR. DISPLAY, DISPLAY DISPLAY MODEL. HOW WIDE IS, HOW WIDE IS NOT, NOT WHERE THE TREES ARE. HOW WIDE IS THAT? RED SQUARE? SO WIDTH, UM, 76 FEET LEFT. OKAY. SO IF YOU HAVE A TREE ON EITHER SIDE OF IT, YOU'RE, YOU ARE HITTING THE ONE PER HUNDRED. AND THEN TO MOVE THOSE WE WE NEED TO PUT A 18 WHEELER. YEAH. SO YOU NEED ABOUT A HUNDRED FOOT OF CLEARANCE TO MOVE PLUS THE TURN RADIUS. YES. UM, AND THOSE FIVE WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR THAT. OKAY. UH, ANYTHING STAFF WOULD LIKE TO ADD? CAN YOU SHOW THE PICTURE OF THE, AND AND I THINK THERE WAS A PENDING QUESTION AS FAR AS HOW THIS WAS ADVERTISED AND, AND THE APPLICATION OF THE, THEY'RE ASKING FOR ONE PER 100, BUT WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IS SOMETHING THAT WAS HOW IT WAS ADVERTISED AND WHAT YOU'RE AWARE OF. WHAT WE WERE AWARE OF IS, IS THEY HAD COME IN AND WE UNDERSTOOD THE HARDSHIP THAT THEY WERE EXPRESSING. UM, IT WAS ASKING FOR MORE THAN WE AS STAFF COULD JUST APPROVE. WHICH IS WHY IT'S IN FRONT OF YOU, THE ONE FOR EVERY A HUNDRED FEET. UH, HONESTLY, I'LL BE HONEST, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I SAW IT OR, OR SAW IT COME THROUGH. SO IF THAT'S THE HANGUP, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CAN BE AMENDED OR REMOVED, BUT IT WAS JUST THE MODIFICATION OF THE BUFFER TO THIS CONFIGURATION THAT THEY HAD. YEAH, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT IF THIS GETS APPROVED TODAY, THAT IT'S GOING TO SERVE ITS PURPOSE AND ALLOW THEM TO MOVE THROUGH [02:15:01] THE PERMITTING PROCESS AS ADVERTISED. YES. IT, IF IF THE THE BOARD APPROVES IT TODAY, WE WOULD ACCEPT THIS. 'CAUSE THIS IS WHAT WE, THE SITE PLAN THAT'S ON THERE THAT WE'VE ALREADY SEEN. OKAY. WELL THAT'S, THAT MAKES ME HAPPY. COMMISSIONER MANO OR ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. . I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. OKAY. KAPLAN COMMISSIONER KAPLAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A TWO TWO DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 53, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO REDUCTION NUMBER OF TREE SHRUBS WITHIN THE TIGHT LANDSCAPE AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION FIVE DASH FIVE TEN TWO ONE ONE HUNDRED LINEAL FEET ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED 1 4 1 3 5 37. APPLICANT BEING PARA AND COMPANY L L C BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT HAVE BEEN DETERMINED SHOWED 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. EXCUSE ME, I GOTTA MOVE THIS UP. SPECIFICALLY. WE FIND THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TREES AND SHRUBS WITHIN THE TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO ONE FOR EVERY 100 LINEAL FEET ALONG THE PROP FRONT PROPERTY LINE TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE IT WOULD RESULT IN THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF TREES AND SHRUBS BEING REQUIRED WITHIN THE TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER. THIS WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. HOLD A SECOND. UH, I GOTTA MOVE THIS UP. AS THE REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF TREES AND SHRUBS WITHIN THE TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO ONE FOR EVERY A HUNDRED LINEAL FEET ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AND WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT SURROUNDING PROPERTIES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED AS THE PROPERTY IS ZONE C TWO AND THE USE OF THE PROPERTY IS COMMERCIAL. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE PROPERTY USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS 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. STAFF FINDS THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF THE BUSINESS WOULD BE HINDERED BY THE EXISTING BUFFER STANDARD. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER AMANDA. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. YEAH, I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. UH, IT DOESN'T SEEM AS IF TO ALTER, THERE'S NO ALTER THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, AS YOU SAID, THERE'S OTHER PROPERTIES THAT DON'T HAVE TREES. TWO, I DO LIKE THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE ADDED A WHOLE BUNCH OF TREES ON EITHER SIDE, SO THERE IS ENOUGH, UM, TREE COVERAGE THERE. UH, AND THREE, THERE'S NO OPPOSITION. COMMISSIONER MANON. UM, I WON'T BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. AND SO, UM, YEAH, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE, THE REASON THE ORDINANCES EXIST IS TO, YOU KNOW, CONTINUE TO MAKE OUR AREA BETTER LOOKING AND BETTER LOOKING. AND, UM, AND I THINK THAT BY GROUPING, UM, AND APPROPRIATE PLACEMENT OF THE TREES IN THE BUFFER THAT IS AVAILABLE ON THE FRONT OF THIS PROPERTY WOULDN'T IMPACT THEM WITH REGARDS TO THE MOVEMENT OF THE, UM, COMPONENTS IN AND OUT. SO, UM, SO I DIDN'T HEAR A GOOD ENOUGH HARDSHIP FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, SO I WILL NOT BE VOTING IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONES? HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE. MS. KAPLAN? I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MENNA. I DO NOT 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. MS. BRAGMAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES 10 TO ONE. I HAVE THE NEXT CASE, PLEASE. UM, BO 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 6 7. [02:20:01] UH, LOCATED AT 4 0 3 AND 4 0 7, UH, LAVERNE AVENUE. UM, IN COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER SIX, APPLICANT BEING STEWART BLANTON. UM, A REQUEST FOR A 14 FOOT VARI FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE SIX FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. UM, CURRENT ZONING IS R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER, LOT OF LORRAINE AND CONTAINS A VACANT LOT. THE APPLICANT'S SITE PLAN HAS THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE SIX FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED TO THE VARIANCE PRIOR TO COMMENCING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STRUCTURE. THE PROPOSED BUILDING WILL BE 85 FEET IN LENGTH AND 50 FEET IN WIDTH PER SITE PLAN. UH, THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THERE 98 SEATS IN THE SANCTUARY PORTION OF THE CHURCH, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE 12 PARKING SPACE. UM, THE LOT THAT THE CHURCH IS IN WILL HAVE 22 PARKING SPACES AFTER ADDITIONS ARE MADE. UM, THAT IS A CURRENT PICTURE OF THE SITE PLAN OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. UM, IT IS A VACANT LOT RIGHT NOW. IT IS THE TRAFFIC PROPERTY. ANOTHER ANGLE FROM IT FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET, SOME MORE OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA. UM, FOR REAR SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO O A 22 1 0 3 1 0 0 6 1 6 7 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING, FINDING OF FACT, UM, THE STRUCTURE HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND THE STRUCTURE CONFORMS TO THE FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. AND THERE'S A LIMITED AMOUNT OF SPACE AVAILABLE TO COMPLY WITH THE REAR SETBACK AND TO DEVELOP STRUCTURES. UM, AND NOTIFICATION PLAN WAS SENT OUT. THERE WERE 45 NOTICES MAILED OUT. THERE WERE ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE COMMUNITY WORKERS COUNCIL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UH, THAT CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. OKAY. BEFORE YOU GO, UM, IS, ARE THEY PROPOSING A BUILDING ON TOP OF A LOT LINE? LET'S SEE. I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS, THE, THE, THE EXISTING BUILDING IN THE CHURCH HAS FOUR LOTS AND IT APPEARS THAT THE NEW FELLOWSHIP HALL MIGHT BE CROSSING THAT LOCK LOT LINE. I'M JUST, UH, CURIOUS. IT WOULD BE MORE LIKE THAT CORNER LOT. NO, IT'S NOT. OKAY, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? ALL RIGHT. IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME. UH, PLEASE BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. UH, MY NAME IS MICHAEL BUSTOS. I'M REPRESENTING THE CHURCH. AND THE CHURCH USED TO BE AN OLD BARRACKS FROM DONATED BY UNITED STATES AIR FORCE. UH, SERGEANT MAJOR MICHAEL AND ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DONATE THIS BARRACKS IN 1965. THEY PUT IT THERE IN EXACT FOOTPRINT THAT YOU SEE RIGHT NOW FOR THE NEW BUILDING. THE FOOTPRINT IS EXACT WHAT THEY WANNA PUT BACK IN THERE. SO THE GOVERNMENT CAME IN, TOOK OUT THEIR OLD BARRACKS, HAULED IT BACK OFF TO LACKING AIR FORCE BASE TO DO PROPER DEMOLITION OF IT, GET RID OF IT FOR THEM, AND ACTUALLY GOT RID OF THEIR $0 LEASE. SO WHAT THE CHURCH CAME IN, THEY WANT TO GO AHEAD AND PUT EXACTLY WHAT THE GOVERNMENT TOOK OUT, WHICH WAS A 50 BY 85 BARRACKS AND PUT BACK A, UH, MUELLER BUILT 50 BY 85, SAME THING BACK. SO THE FOOTPRINTS WILL STAY THE SAME. NOTHING CHANGES THE FOOTPRINT, FOUNDATION, EVERYTHING. EVERYTHING'S GONNA BE THE SAME FOOTPRINT. OKAY. THANK YOU. WE HAD ONE PERSON SIGN UP TO SPEAK, BUT IT APPEARS TO BE YOU. SO, SO THERE'S NO VOICEMAILS. NO VOICEMAILS. ALRIGHT. UM, WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. OKAY, SO MAYBE I, IT'S ME. I'M CONFUSED. SO ARE YOU DEMOLISHING WHAT'S THERE NOW OR ARE YOU JUST BRAND MAKING A BRAND NEW BUILDING? WE'RE MAKING A BRAND NEW FOUNDATION AND BUILDING THE DEMOLITION HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE BY ARMY CORPS ENGINEERS AND LACKLAND AIR FORCE BASE. OKAY. THEY TOOK THEIR BARRACKS, THEY ROLLED IT OFF AN 18 WHEELER, HAL IT OUT. OH, OKAY. SO THE BUILDING THAT'S THERE IS STILL GONNA GET TORN DOWN THOUGH? THE LITTLE PIECE THAT'S LEFT? UH, NO, NO, IT'S, IF YOU GO BACK, BACK TO THE PICTURES COMPLETELY UHHUH , WELL, ACCORDING TO WHAT IS SHOWING HERE, THERE, MM-HMM. . OKAY. THAT BUILDING TO THE LEFT THAT YOU SEE, THAT'S GOING TO GET TORN DOWN ALSO? NO, THAT'S THE EXISTING CHURCH THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE WITH THE BARRETTS WAS BUTTED UP RIGHT NEXT TO IT. OKAY. SO THE NEW BUILDING WILL BE BUILT RIGHT NEXT TO WHAT? SAME FOOT WHERE AT? OKAY. THAT'S WHERE I WAS CONFUSED. OKAY. YEAH, THE BEARS THAT THEY HAULED OFF, THIS IS GOING RIGHT BACK IN ITS PLACE. A MUELLER UH, METAL BUILDING. OKAY. AND SINCE I'M ASSUMING NONE OF THE NEIGHBORS ARE, ARE OPPOSED TO THIS PLAN AND NONE OF 'EM HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH YOU, UH, I GUESS THEY'RE STILL GOOD WITH THIS? YES, MA'AM. BECAUSE WE, UH, HOUSE AND HELP OUT THE COMMUNITY. WE DO, UH, MEALS ON WHEELS. WE DO A LOT OF EVENTS THERE FOR CHILDREN. MOST [02:25:01] OF THE EVENTS ARE ALL USED, SO THERE'S, THE KIDS DON'T DRIVE CARS. UM, THEY ONLY MEET ON SUNDAYS. THEY MEET TWO DAYS A WEEK. SO THAT, THAT SMALL BUILDING TO THE RIGHT IS REALLY GONNA BE DUE FOR FISCAL, THE, UM, COUNSELING OR YOUTH GROUPS. AND THEN THAT, THAT CENTER'S ONLY OPEN TWICE A WEEK, SO. OKAY. IT'S JUST MINIMUM, IT'S JUST A ONE TO ONE. I DO WANNA MAKE SURE, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, UH, I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO COME OUT AT THE LAST MINUTE AND SAY, WELL, THEY NEVER GOT OUR PERMISSION. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. THANK, LIKE I SAID, PRETTY MUCH EVERYONE THAT LIVES IN THAT AREA IS ACTUALLY PART OF THAT CHURCH AND HELPS OUT, SO. OKAY. YES. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? NO. COMMISSIONER ALBERT? UH, THE REAR SETBACK IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND LOOKING AT THE AERIAL PHOTO FROM THE SATELLITE, THE REAR SETBACK WOULD BE THE DISTANCE OR THE SPACE BETWEEN THE EXISTING CHURCH AND THE PROPOSED NEW BUILDING OR WHERE EXACTLY IS THE REAR OF THIS LOT? SO I USE THIS THING . OKAY. THIS IS THE REAR OF THE BUILDING, SIR. THE, OF THE MUELLER BUILDING RIGHT HERE, SIR, CAN THE CITY BREAK UP THE AERIAL VIEW PLEASE? AND YOU SEE THIS LINE, THIS IS EXACTLY WHERE THE CHURCH USED TO ALWAYS BE. SO WE'RE, WE'RE RIGHT IN LINE WITH THE CHURCH HERE AND RIGHT IN LINE WITH THE SAME, THE FRONT OF THE CHURCH. THIS USED TO BE THE, THE OLD BARRACKS. OKAY. SO THE REAR SETBACK IS BETWEEN THE PROPOSED BUILDING AND 4 0 2 ESTRELLA, THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE RIGHT HERE, SIR. YEAH. ALL THIS IS ALL CONNECTED. THIS IS, THIS IS THE OLD BARRACKS RIGHT HERE? YES SIR. AND IT'LL ACTUALLY BE BEHIND FOUR TEN FOUR. YEAH, THAT PART OF THAT ROOF LINE IS THE BUILDING THAT GOT DEMOLISHED. YEAH. YEAH. THE CHURCH OWNS ALL THESE RIGHT HERE. ALL THIS. AND THIS IS WHERE THEY HAVE ALREADY EXISTING PARKING LOT AND THEN ALL THE EXISTING PARKING LOT HERE WITH FOUR HANDICAP 10 HERE AND 22 SPACES HERE, SIR. SO IT'S JUST, LIKE I SAY, IT'S FOOTPRINT. FOOTPRINT, THEY NOTHING BIGGER, NOTHING SMALLER. SAME, SAME ONE FOR ONE BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, UM, IT BACKS UP TO A VACANT LOT, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. YES MA'AM. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . AND, AND THEN I HAVE A QUESTION ON YOUR SIDE PLAN. IT SHOWS A FIVE FOOT DISTANCE, BUT YOU'RE ASKING FOR A SETBACK VARIANCE TO GO DOWN TO SIX FEET. IS IS SIX FEET SUFFICIENT FOR WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO CONSTRUCT OR DO YOU NEED IT TO BE FIVE FEET? UM, ON OUR VARIANCE, I THINK YEAH, IT'S FIVE FEET, CORRECT. PUT FOUR. WELL, YOU, THE IS ADVERTISED, THEY, THEY WERE ASKING FOR VARIANCE TO GO DOWN TO AS CLOSE AS SIX FEET TO THE PROPERTY LINE. CORRECT. SO THAT MEANS THAT IF, IF YOU NEED TO GO DOWN TO FIVE AS SHOWN IN YOUR SIDE PLAN, THEN WE NEED TO RE ADVERTISE THIS THING, GET YOU BACK HERE. 'CAUSE WE CAN'T GO ANY LOWER THAN WHAT WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T ADJUST THAT. SO IF CORRECT, IT'S TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE SIX FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. SO CORRECT. BUT YOUR SITE PLAN SHOWS FIVE FEET. UH, I COULD, I COULD TELL THE ARCHITECT TO CHANGE THAT UP, SIR. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S YEAH, NO, IF WE NEED SIX, THAT'S, THAT'S WAS, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, WELL YOU CAN RE ADVERTISE AND COME BACK HERE IF, IF YOU NEED IT TO BE IN FIVE TO BE IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING BUILDING. IF YOU DO IT AT SIX, IT MAY NOT BE IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING BUILDING. NO, NO. WE SHOULD BE GOOD SIR, BECAUSE THAT FRONT WE'RE JUST, WE WERE, THAT'S JUST FOR A RAIN GUARD, FOR A CANOPY FOR WHEN THE, WHEN THE OH, THAT'S, ELDERS SAID YOU HAVE AN OVERHANG. THAT CORRECT. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT IT IS, SIR. WE COULD JUST ALWAYS TRIM THAT BACK. SO THAT'S ALL IT WAS. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MEET EVERYONE'S REQUIREMENTS. OKAY. OKAY. I MEAN, IF YOU'RE HAPPY WITH IT, I'M NOT GONNA CONTEST IT. I'M JUST, I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT OUT. THERE WE'RE, SO I HAVE NOTHING ELSE. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSION QUESTIONS? HEARING NOW? LET'S HAVE A MOTION PLEASE. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 6 7. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTOR REQUEST FOR A 14 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE SIX FOOT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 4 0 3 AND 4 0 7 LAVERNE, APPLICANT BEING STEWART BLENDON 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 E 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 VARIANCE IS, UH, VARIANCE TO THE REAR SETBACK. UH, TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE SIX FOOT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE STRUCTURE WILL MEET THE FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS AND DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE [02:30:01] APPLICANT HAVING TO MAINTAIN 20 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. STAFF FINDS THAT AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, UH, SINCE THE LOT IS TOO SMALL TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A STRUCTURED WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. THREE, BY GUARANTEEING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE STRUCTURE WAS, UH, HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND A PROPOSED SETBACK IS SIX FOOT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS THERE WILL STILL BE REASONABLE SPACE BETWEEN STRUCTURE AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THREE. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE CEASES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO OTHER USES THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FOUR. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR THEY ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED HAS SEVERAL SIMILAR SIZE LOTS. FIVE APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING IN THE PROPERTY. AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF PROPERTY AND NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN DISTRICT. WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE OF THE WIDTH OF THE LOT AND CONFIGURATION, MAINTAINING A SIX FOOT SETBACK FOR APPROPRIATE AREA. THE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. COMMISSIONER MANNA. UM, YES. I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS. UM, UM, PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE PROPERTY IS CONSUMING THE SAME FOOTPRINT AS THE PREVIOUS BUILDING, SO I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH THAT. AND THEN, UM, UH, THE PEOPLE, UH, I GUESS IN BACK IT WON'T BE A CHANGE FOR THEM. SO, SO IT'S NOT INFECTING ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. COMMISSIONER KA? YES, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER MANNER AND I WILL BE IN IN FAVOR OF THIS. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? YES. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. I'LL BE VOTING FOR IT. AND I WANNA THANK THEM FOR DOING SO MUCH WITH SO LITTLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE, UH, STAFF HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MR. MANNA. 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. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES 11 TO ZERO. UH, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A QUICK THREE MINUTE BREAK. WE'LL MAKE IT FIVE MINUTES. . COMMISSIONER CRUZ IS GOING TO BE LEAVING THE MEETING. WE'LL BE DOWN TO 10. I'M SORRY. COMMISSIONER ENGLES IS HERE. WE'RE BACK TO 11. SHE'S BACK. SHE'S BACK. OKAY, WE'RE ON CASE NUMBER 12. UM, BO 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 8 8. UM, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE 5,200 BLOCK OF EISENHOWER ROAD. UM, COUNCIL DISTANCE NUMBER TWO, APPLICANT BEING, UH, JEFF. UM, A REQUEST FOR A 15 FOOT TWO INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 30 FOOT HEIGHT BUILDING MAXIMUM WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF ANY PERIMETER ABUTTING A RESIDENTIAL USE TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 45 FEET WITH TWO INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UM, CURRENT ZONING IS BP BUSINESS PARK, UH, DISTRICT. UM, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY LOCATED ON EISENHOWER ROAD AND IT'S CURRENTLY A VACANT LAWN. THE APPLICANT'S SITE PLAN HAS PROPOSED STRUCTURE TO B 45, UM, TWO INCHES. THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED FOR THE VANTAGE PRIOR TO COMMENCING OF THE, OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE, UH, THE STRUCTURE. UM, THE PROPERTY RECENTLY UNDERWENT A REZONING, REZONING CASE BEING, UH, Z 20 22 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 7. UM, SO THAT IS CURRENTLY A PICTURE OF THE SITE PLAN OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. UM, THEY ARE EXCEEDING, UH, THEY WANT TO EXCEED THE, THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED. UM, THERE'S ANOTHER PICTURE OF THE SITE PLAN KIND OF SHOWING WHERE IT'S GENERALLY LOCATED AT. LOCATED AT, UM, THEY ARE A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINE. UH, ANOTHER KIND OF CONCEPTUAL PICTURE OF WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THE ENTIRE LOT IS VACANT. THEY CLEARED. OKAY. UM, STAFFER COMMITS APPROVAL AND BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 180 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING, FINDING OF FACT UNDER THE STRUCTURE HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND THE STRUCTURE CONFORMS TO THE FRONT REAR SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. AND THERE IS A UNIQUE PROPERTIES PRESENT ON THE LOT, SUCH AS TOPOGRAPHY. IN THE NOTIFICATION PLAN, THERE WERE, UH, 43 MAIL NOTICES SENT. UH, [02:35:01] THERE WAS ZERO IN FAVOR. THERE WAS ONE IN OPPOSITION WITHIN THE 200 FOOT. UM, THERE WAS NO FORMAL RESPONSE FROM THE NORTHWEST CROSS ASSOCIATION IN SAN ANTONIO, THE KAMALA ONE. AND, UH, BRYCE PLACED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. UM, THAT CONCLUDES, UM, STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. UH, CAN YOU BRING UP, UM, THE AERIAL, UH, WITH THE NOTIFICATION ON IT, PLEASE? THE FIRST ONE OR THE, UM, YEAH, THAT'S FINE. YEAH, THAT ONE. CAN YOU, UH, WHERE EXACTLY IS THIS ENCROACHMENT INTENDED? 'CAUSE THERE'S ALL THESE DIFFERENT WINDING, UM, IT'S KIND OF, THAT'S PROBABLY A BETTER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. . OKAY. NO, THAT'S FINE. YEAH, WE CAN, WELL, I'LL, I'LL ASK THEM. I I KINDA HAVE AN IDEA, BUT, UH, I'D RATHER HAVE THEM ANSWER THAT. ALL RIGHT. AND, UH, WE ALSO HAVE, UH, UM, FOUR PEOPLE SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS. SO, UH, IF THE APPLICANT'S HERE, WE, UH, COME ON UP AND BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME'S JEFF NEW. I'M WITH N I T INDUSTRIAL. WE'RE THE DEVELOPER AND OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. UM, ADDITIONAL TO ME, WE'VE GOT, UM, JOE YORK WITH, UH, JONES CARTER THAT'S GONNA SPEAK AND THEN ROBERT BURRELL WITH, UH, GORY ARCHITECTURE. THEY'LL PROVIDE SOME COMMENTARY, UM, AND CAN ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE. OKAY. SO WE'RE REQUESTING A HEIGHT VARIANCE, UM, BASED UPON SOME CODE IN THE, UH, A NUANCED CODE IN THE SUBDIVISION. IN THE GENERAL GIST, AND I'LL LET JOE GET INTO THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DETAIL, AND I'LL GIVE YOU SOME EXACT MEASUREMENTS. BUT FROM WHAT WE INTERPRET, THE SPIRIT OF THE CODE IS TO BE A HUNDRED FOOT SETBACK FROM A RESIDENTIAL LOT LINE FOR A HEIGHT RESTRICTION. IF YOU LOOK AT THE ACTUAL LOT LINE, THE RESIDENTIAL LOT LINE AND YOU MINUS OUT THE DRAINAGE DITCH AND, UM, ELECTRICAL EASEMENT THAT ALSO ABUT THE PROPER LINE. CAN YOU USE THE LASER POINTER AND KIND OF SHOW US WHERE ALL THIS IS GOING ON PLEASE? SO OUR PROPERTY HAS THREE BUILDINGS, TWO OF WHICH ARE HAVING IMPACT FROM THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION. SO WE HAVE A, A, A THIRD BUILDING. THIS IS BUILDING THREE IN THIS UPPER CORNER. WE HAVE BUILDING TWO IN THE MIDDLE. AND THEN BUILDING ONE IS DOWN HERE AT THE BOTTOM. BUILDING THREE HAS SOME HEIGHT RESTRICTION THAT WE'RE TOUCHING FROM THESE RESIDENTIAL LOTS. BUT YOU CAN SEE THE BACK OF THE LOTS. AND THEN THERE'S AN ALLEYWAY AND THEN A, UH, DRAINAGE DITCH THAT, UH, KIND OF IMPACT THIS DISTANCE. SO IF YOU MEASURE FROM THE ACTUAL LOT LINE OF THE RESIDENTIAL LOT TO OUR BUILDING, IT'S APPROXIMATELY A HUNDRED, 164 FEET. VERSUS IF YOU MEASURE FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS WHAT THE CODE KIND OF IS, KIND OF GRAY IN HOW YOU INTERPRET IT. IF YOU MEASURE FROM THE EDGE OF THE ZONING, WHICH IS OUR PROPERTY LINE, IT KIND OF CUTS INTO OUR BUILDING APPROXIMATELY 30 FEET. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR VARIANCE ON. AND THAT'S BUILDING THREE. BUILDING TWO IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY. AND AGAIN, SAME KIND OF CONCEPT APPLIES HERE. UH, THE ZONING ORDINANCE KIND OF CUTS INTO BUILDING TWO APPROXIMATELY NINE FEET. OKAY. SO FROM THERE, I'LL UH, INVITE JOE YORKWOOD JONES CARTER AND HE'LL GIVE SOME MORE EXPLANATION. SURE. AND BEFORE YOU GO ON STAFF, UH, IS THIS ALL THIS TIED TO THE BP ZONING DISTRICT? YES, IT'S COMPLETE. THIS IS A REQUIREMENT THAT IS SPECIFIC TO THE BP. AND IS IT, IS IT, UH, AS THE APPLICANT HAD MENTIONED, HOW DOES IT, HOW DOES IT SPECIFICALLY READ? IS IT TO THE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED LOT RESIDENT ZONED USE? AND, AND IF, AND DO YOU, IS THERE ZONING ON THAT LITTLE GREEN BELT SECTION THAT EXISTS BEHIND THE HOMES THAT WOULD ALSO TRIGGER IT? SO THE ANSWERS ARE YES, YES, YES. BUT I WILL, UM, GET YOU THAT SECTION AND READ IT TO YOU. AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS THAT THEY DO HAVE, AS PART OF THAT PROJECT, BECAUSE THIS WAS JUST RECENTLY WENT THROUGH A REZONING, UM, THEY HAVE A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF, UM, BUFFERING THAT THEY ADDED ALONG THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO, UM, TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS TO, TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL. SO, OKAY. AND YOU, YOU DON'T HAPPEN TO HAVE A SITE PLAN ON YOU THAT YOU CAN AT LEAST PROJECT ONTO THE SCREEN? WE CAN, WE CAN DO IT WITH THE CAMERA, I MEAN SOMETHING 'CAUSE WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING TO GO BY. AND ONCE THAT'S UP, PLEASE SURE. CONTINUE. UH, THANK YOU, UH, JOE YORK WITH, UH, LIQUIDITY ENGINEERING. UM, SO YEAH, LIKE JEFF SAID, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE PURSUING THIS BECAUSE THE, THE WAY THE CODE IS WRITTEN, IT, IT'S GOT TWO PIECES, RIGHT? SO THE SETBACK, UM, IS ESTABLISHED BY THE BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT BOUNDARY. SO THAT'S WHERE THIS IS COMING INTO, INTO EFFECT THAT WE'RE, WE'RE WITHIN THAT A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE DISTRICT BOUNDARY. BUT THEN FOR THE SPECIFIC HEIGHT SECTION, IT [02:40:01] REFERENCES 100 FEET FROM ANY ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL USE. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT IN MOST CASES THOSE WOULD BE IN ALIGNMENT. IN THIS CASE, IT'S NOT BECAUSE WE'VE GOT, UM, A DRAINAGE DITCH, UH, C P SS EASEMENTS FOR POWER AND A, UH, PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY BEING A, UH, AN ALLEY, UM, THAT ARE ALL TECHNICALLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL, BUT COULD NEVER BE A TRUE RESIDENTIAL USE BECAUSE THEY'RE BEING USED FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE. UM, SO WHEN YOU REALLY MEASURE FROM THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL LOT LINE THAT HAS A RESIDENTIAL USE, UH, FOR BUILDING THREE, I THINK YOU'RE NO CLOSER THAN A HUNDRED AND THIRTY FOUR HUNDRED THIRTY FIVE FEET. AND THEN FOR BUILDING TWO, IT'S EVEN FURTHER, UH, 190 SOMETHING I BELIEVE. UM, AND THEN AGAIN, PER THAT ORDINANCE, FOR EVERY ADDITIONAL FOOT YOU ARE SET BACK FROM THAT A HUNDRED FEET, YOU'RE GIVEN AN ADDITIONAL TWO FEET OF VERTICAL HEIGHT. SO AGAIN, IF WE'RE TRULY MEASURING FROM THE RESIDENTIAL USE THAT'S SPECIFIED IN THE CODE, WE WOULDN'T NEED THIS, THIS VARIANCE BECAUSE WE WOULD BE WITHIN THE LIMITS OF WHAT WE'D BE ALLOWED WITH FOR THE VERTICAL HEIGHT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SURE. CAN YOU TAKE THAT PLAN AND SPIN IT AROUND 180 DEGREES SO IT'S IN LINE WITH OUR, UH, 180 ANOTHER. THERE YOU GO. NOW, NOW IT MATCHES OUR NO, YOU, HE, HE WAS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME. THE SMALLER BUILDING FRONTS OFF OF EISENHOWER AND THAT LARGER BUILDING. APOLOGIZE. BUT YEAH, IF YOU, IF YOU DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE LEFT HAND SIDE, YOU CAN SEE, I THINK AT LEAST ON RIGHT THERE WHERE THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT KIND OF BUMPS OUT FROM. YEAH. WHERE'S EISENHOWER ON THERE? THE EISENHOWER IS, IS PLANNED SOUTH. IF YOU CAN, EXCUSE ME. STAND THAT UP A LITTLE BIT. MR. CHAIRMAN. COMMISSIONER, CAN WE HAVE THAT OUT ON, ON OUR COMPUTERS HERE? YEAH. IS IT POSSIBLE TO PROJECT THAT ON OUR SCREENS HERE OR IS THE ONLY OPTION IS OR ON THIS OTHER SCREENS ONE OF THE TWO? YEAH, ON OUR, ON WHAT WE HAVE, EISENHOWER IS AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE. THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING TO TRY TO MATCH THAT. YEP, I SEE IT. YEAH, I CAN SEE IT NOW. IT'S A LITTLE EASIER TO READ WHEN IT'S ON THE SCREEN. ALRIGHT, PLEASE CONTINUE. UH, WELL, AND THAT'S ALL I HAD SIR. JUST WANTED TO OPEN UP FOR QUESTIONS, MAKE SURE EVERYONE KINDA UNDERSTOOD WHAT I WAS TRYING TO RELAY AND, UH, ANSWER, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. BRAGMAN, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN AND THEN COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. UM, SO GOING BACK TO WHAT STAFF SAID, UM, THEY HAD SAID THAT YOU'D PLANTED SOME, UM, BUFFER ALONG THE, THAT RESIDENTIAL PIECE WHERE THE VARIANCES YES, THAT'S CORRECT. AND I THINK WE'RE GONNA GET YOU AN EXHIBIT HERE IN JUST A SECOND. OH, OH, SORRY. YOU WANNA TALK TO THAT? YES. SO IN, IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE PLANNINGS THAT WE DO HAVE THAT ARE REQUIRED FROM THE, UH, LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE, WE'VE ALSO KIND OF MET WITH SOME LOCAL NEIGHBORS WHERE THEIR RESIDENTIAL LOTS HAVE. BUT OUR DEVELOPMENT, I MEAN GRANTED IT'S, IT'S ACROSS THE OTHER EASEMENTS IN QUESTION, BUT WE'VE KIND OF COMMITTED OURSELVES, UM, TO PLANT ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING THERE TO THE FULLEST EXTENT WE CAN. NOW WE HAVE SOME, MY CIVIL KINDA INFORMED ME TODAY THAT C P S HAS AN EASEMENT THAT STRETCHES ONTO OUR PROPERTY AND THEY HAVE SOME REQUIREMENTS THEMSELVES, HEY LISTEN, YOU CAN ONLY PLANT TREES SO HIGH AND SHRUB SO HIGH. SO TO THE FULLEST EXTENT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, ABIDE BY THEIR PRINCIPLES, WE'LL ADD ADDITIONAL TREES OF MEDIUM HEIGHT THE FURTHER BREAK UP THE EYE LINE OF SIGHT, YOU KNOW, TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR. AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE KIND OF COMMITTED TO DO. IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT WITH SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS FROM C P S AND EVERYTHING ELSE ABOUT WHAT WE CAN ACTUALLY GET IN THERE, BUT IT'S OUR COMMITMENT AS DEVELOPERS TO ADD IN MORE TREES OF MEDIUM HEIGHTEN NATURE TO FURTHER BREAK UP THAT SIGHT LINE. SO IN ADDITION TO WHAT IS ALREADY KIND OF SITE PLAN AND WHAT WE'VE GOT INTO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO FOR PERMITTING, WE'LL COMMIT TO ADDING EVEN MORE. YOU HAD SAID THAT THERE WAS A C P S EASEMENT THERE. IS THAT, ARE THOSE ABOVE GROUND UTILITY LINES OR JUST AN EASEMENT? I THINK SO. THEY DO HAVE AN ABOVE GROUND UTILITY LINE, OVERHEAD LINE JUST ON, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THE OTHER SIDE OF OUR PROPERTY LINE. BUT C P S WANTED TO INCREASE THEIR EASEMENT BECAUSE THEIR EXISTING EASEMENT, I THINK IS ONLY, WHAT, 12 FEET, JOE, THEY WANTED TO ADD ANOTHER 12 FEET TO KIND OF GO TO THEIR STANDARDIZED, UH, EASEMENT SIZE. BUT THEY'RE OBVIOUSLY THE POWER LINES ARE ALREADY EXISTING, SO THEY'RE ALREADY EXISTING WITHIN THAT 12 FOOT. THEY'RE JUST GONNA HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 12 FOOT ON OUR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY JUST EASEMENT. SO MAYBE WE CAN WORK WITH C P S AND GET THEM TO KIND OF PLAY BALL A LITTLE BIT AND WE CAN PUSH ON THEM A LITTLE BIT, ADD SOME OF THOSE MEDIUM HEIGHT TREES THAT I THINK WILL MAKE EVERYBODY, UM, A LITTLE BIT HAPPIER AND WE'RE WILLING, ABSOLUTELY WILLING [02:45:01] TO DO IT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER, UH, KAPLAN. KAPLAN AND THEN ZINA, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE IS, UH, LIGHTING. SO I GUESS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT YOU DON'T WANT BUILDINGS TO BE TOO HIGH IS THAT THE LIGHTING ON THE BUILDING, ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT, MIGHT GO INTO, UM, DISTURBED THE RESIDENTIAL THING. ABSOLUTELY AGREE. SO WHERE ARE YOU GONNA PUT THE, WHERE'S THE LIGHTING GONNA BE? SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION. THAT WAS ANOTHER TALKING POINT THAT WE HAD WITH SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS. IT WAS TO KEEP THE LIGHT POLLUTION TO AN ABSOLUTE MINIMUM USE DOWN LIGHTING, NO UPLIGHTING ON THE SCOT AS ON THE PERIMETER OF THE BUILDINGS. I THINK WE'RE MAINTAINING THE SAME DESIGN KIND OF ELEMENTS THAT WE HAD IN, IN PREVIOUS PHASES RIGHT THERE IN THE IMMEDIATE LOCAL AREA. BUT I THINK WE CAN ABSOLUTELY COMMIT TO, UH, USING DOWNLIGHT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND SHIELD THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS FROM ANY POTENTIAL LIGHT POLLUTION THAT MIGHT HEAD THEIR WAY. ABSOLUTELY AGREE. WILLING TO DO IT. SO CHAIR, COULD THEY AMEND THEIR APPLICATION TO INCLUDE LIKE MILL SPEC LIGHTING ON OUR PROPERTY SO THAT THERE IS ZERO, UM, CAST? WELL, THE, THE, THE, THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS THAT WE'RE ONLY HERE TO TALK ABOUT A SETBACK, UM, AND HEIGHT. WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T PUT CONDITIONS ON IT. IN OUR SUBMISSION, WE HAVE UM, OUR PHOTO, OUR PHOTOMETRIC DRAWINGS THAT SHOWS THE LIGHT SCREENING OF OUR ZERO CUTOFF AT PROPERTY LINES. 'CAUSE THAT'S USUALLY WHAT MOST AREAS REQUIRE. SO WE CAN ADD THAT TO THE SUBMISSION IF, IF REQUIRED FOR THAT. I MEAN, WE DON'T HAVE, I THINK THAT'S ALREADY INCLUDED. SORRY, I APOLOGIZE. I THINK THAT'S ALREADY INCLUDED IN OUR PLANS THAT WERE SUBMITTED TO THE JURISDICTION CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. YEAH, BUT STILL WE, WE WE'RE ONLY HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE RIGHT. CORRECT. AND, AND SO IT'S, IT'S UM, WOULD IT BE NECESSARY TO RESUBMIT OR HAVE ANOTHER, UH, KIND OF, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MEETING IF THE PLAN OF THE CITY ALREADY INCLUDE KIND OF A ZERO LOT LINE WITH LIGHTING? WELL, IT ALSO DEPENDS. DID DID ANY OF THIS INFORMATION GET SUBMITTED WITH THIS APPLICATION QUESTION? NO. NO, IT DID NOT. SO IT, IT CAN'T BE APPLIED IN THIS CASE, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE CITY ALREADY HAS REQUIREMENTS ABOUT, AND IT GONNA BE MORE SO NEXT YEAR. CORRECT? YES. YEAH. IS IT, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, HEY, COMMISSIONER MANNA AND THEN COMMISSIONER ZUNA AND YEAH, IT, UH, AND THEN COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA, COMMISSIONER MAN IS FIRST. SORRY. SO THE QUESTION, THE QUESTION I HAVE DONALD, UM, ON THIS PROPERTY HERE IS, SO, AND JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE WITH REGARDS TO THE A HUNDRED FOOT. UM, AND, AND, UM, AND I GUESS THE, THE, THE QUESTION IS HOW CLOSE CAN, THEY'VE TALKED ABOUT THE PROPERTY OR THE BUILDING BEING 135 FOOT FROM, FROM THE, UM, I GUESS, UH, FROM THE ACTUAL RESIDENCE THEMSELVES AND THERE'S BUFFER SPACES IN THERE. AND SO WE KIND OF TALK ABOUT THE A HUNDRED FOOT. UM, AND SO, SO I GUESS THE QUESTION FOR YOU IS IT'S WHERE'S THAT A HUNDRED FOOT BEING MEASURED? UM, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW DO I ENSURE OR HOW DO, HOW, I GUESS HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT YOUR BUILDING IS GONNA BE AT THE RIGHT DISTANCE BACK AND IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN ADD TO THE LANGUAGE THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOESN'T GET ANY CLOSER TO THOSE, TO THOSE RESIDENCES? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE WHAT I'M ASKING? YEAH. SO CURRENTLY THE A HUNDRED FOOT, AND JOE CAN CONFIRM THIS, THE A HUNDRED FOOT IS MEASURED FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING STOPS, RIGHT? SO WE'RE ACTUALLY THE A HUNDRED FOOT FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE. UM, FURTHERMORE, WELL HOLD ON SIR. UH, YEP. THE U D C STATES THAT THE HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 30 FEET WITHIN A DISTANCE OF 100 FEET FROM ANY PERIMETER ABUTTING A RESIDENTIAL USE. IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT ZONE, IT JUST TALKS ABOUT RESIDENTIAL USE. SO AGAIN, I THINK THAT'S GRAY AREA IN HOW WE MIGHT'VE INTERPRETED. SO WE'VE GO FOR IT. YEAH. AND YEAH, AND I, AND IT'S, WE'LL, WE'LL GET TO THAT IN A SECOND. I WANNA MAKE SURE WE, I'VE GOT COMMISSIONERS LINED UP TO ASK QUESTIONS, BUT IT IS TO A RESIDENTIAL USE. AND IN THE, THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL USE AS PART OF THEIR SUBDIVISION DOES INCLUDE THAT GREEN BELT AREA OR ANY EASEMENTS THAT ARE BEHIND THE ACTUAL LOTS, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. SO COMMISSIONER MANEZ, THAT HELP. OKAY. COMMISSIONER ZUNA AND THEN COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. THANK YOU. UM, SURE. YEAH. SO MY QUESTION IS IN REGARDS TO THE HARDSHIP. UH, SO, UH, CAN YOU SPEAK ABOUT, UH, THE LIMITATION OF A 30 FOOT VERSUS YOUR NECESSITY TO BUILD A 45 FOOT? I KNOW KINDA THE MARKET OF INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION AND, UH, THE STACKING HEIGHTS AND SUCH, BUT WHAT IS A HARDSHIP IF YOU WERE TO LIMIT THE BUILDING TO THE 30 FEET AS REQUIRED BY CODE? SO I GUESS FROM A HARDSHIP PERSPECTIVE, OBVIOUSLY GIVEN THAT THE HEIGHTS, THE INTERNAL HEIGHTS OF THESE BUILDINGS KIND OF CLEAR 36 FOOT BY THE TIME YOU ADD, YOU KNOW, STRUCTURE AND ROOFING, EVERYTHING, YOU'RE AROUND 45 FEET. UM, IT'S IMPRACTICAL FOR US TO BUILD A BUILDING THAT ISN'T DIRECTED FOR THE MARKET USE. SO WHEN YOU TALK HARDSHIP, UM, YOU, ANYTHING LOWER THAN KIND OF THE 45 FEET IS OUTSIDE OF MARKET NORMS FOR OUR PRODUCT. TYPE ONE AND TWO, YOU KNOW, TRIMMING THE BUILDING, IF YOU WILL, IS LESS DESIRABLE, BECOMES AN OBLONG SHAPE AND ODD SHAPE THAT IS NOT CONDUCIVE [02:50:01] FOR, YOU KNOW, EASILY LEASING. OR IT WOULD REQUIRE US TO LOWER A SUBSECTION OF THE BUILDING, HAVE TWO DIFFERENT HEIGHTS, WHICH IS FAR MORE OR LESS OPTIMAL. SO THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT FOR THE BENEFIT OF MY BOARD. ABSOLUTELY. APPRECIATE IT. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA? UH, I GOT MY ANSWER, MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? UH, HEARING NONE, UH, YOU HEARD A BUNCH OF, UH, QUESTIONS FROM US. IS THERE ANY CLOSING REMARKS YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO UM, CUS UH, UH, CITIZEN SIGN UP TO SPEAK? NO, I, I THINK WE'RE GOOD. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. ALL RIGHT. SO I'M GONNA GO DOWN THE LIST. UH, THE FIRST NAME WE HAVE IS, UH, UH, UH, GORDON, UH, BIL REBEL. REBEL. THANK YOU. YES SIR. SECOND NAME OF THE LIST. JAMES NOLE HAS OFFERED ME HIS TIME. DULY NOTED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE CAMELOT ONE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UH, WE ORIGINALLY WERE INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT THROUGH THEIR ATTORNEY WHO'S NOT HERE TODAY. AND AT ONE TIME WE WERE PRO THIS PROJECT. NOW WE ARE NOT, AND WE ARE NOT FOR SEVERAL REASONS. THREE OF 'EM, IN FACT, ONE OF THEM, IF YOU TRAVEL DOWN WALHAM ROAD FROM IH 35 TO SA PRE-K, NONE OF THE BUILDINGS IN SAN ANTONIO ARE ABOVE 30 FEET. THEY'RE ALL, THEY'RE ALL LEASED, BUT THEY'RE NOT 45 FEET. WE DON'T NEED 45 FOOT BUILDINGS TOWERING OVER OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SECOND, IF YOU WERE IN ONE OF THOSE HOUSES ON CASTLE GLEN STREET, WHICH ABRUPTS THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, YOU DON'T WANNA LOOK OUT YOUR NEIGHBORS OR YOU'RE OUT YOUR WINDOW AND SEE A 40 FOOT BUILDING, WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING. IT'S NOT NECESSARY. THIRD, AS A BOARD, WE WERE PROMISED SEVERAL CONCESSIONS FROM THIS DEVELOPER THROUGH THEIR ATTORNEY. WE WERE PROMISED THAT WE'D GET A LETTER IN WRITING THAT WOULD CONFIRM ALL THE CONCESSIONS, WHICH WERE A BUFFER, WHICH WERE GARBAGE PICKUP ONLY DURING DAYTIME HOURS TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORS ALLOW THEM TO SLEEP. WE WERE PROMISED TREES ON TOP OF THE BUFFER. AND YOU KNOW, WE NEVER GOT ANY CONFIRMATION. NONE. THE DEVELOPER MADE PROMISES THEY DIDN'T KEEP. SO I'M ASKING YOU, WOULD YOU WANNA DO BUSINESS? THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T KEEP THEIR PROMISES. WE DON'T. THE DEVELOPER SAID 45 FEET IS THE NORM. I DON'T THINK SO. THERE'S PLENTY OF 30 FOOT BUILDINGS ON EISENHOWER ALREADY THERE. THE DEVELOPER SAID HE'S TALKED TO THE NEIGHBORS. HE'S NEVER MET WITH ME. NONE OF THE OTHER PRESIDENTS OF IN THE AREA SAID HE'D MET WITH HIM. I DON'T KNOW WHO HE'S TALKING ABOUT UNLESS LET'S SAY HIS ATTORNEY. HE SAYS, IN SPIRIT OF BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR, A GOOD NEIGHBOR SHARES HIS PLANS. AT FIRST, WHEN THE ATTORNEY CAME WITH THE PLANS, IT WAS FOR A TRUCK ENTRANCE ON THE FAR WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, NOT THERE ANYMORE. AND NOW THE ENTRANCE IS RIGHT BY OUR NEIGHBORS. SO IN THE SPIRIT OF GOOD NEIGHBORS, WE'D LIKE THIS DEVELOPER TO GO BACK TO THE TABLE, TALK TO US ABOUT CREATING A PLAN THAT MAKES SENSE FOR BOTH OUR NEIGHBORS AND US. RIGHT NOW IT DOES NOT. SO WHEN I STOOD HERE YEARS AGO OR LAST YEAR, I WAS FOR THE PLAN, BUT I CAN'T SAY I AM NOW. AND IT'S BECAUSE OF THE DEVELOPER. HE'S NOT TALKING, HE'S JUST DOING. SO THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME OUT, MANNA. THANK YOU. UH, HOLD ON, SIR, WE MAY HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO UM, SO YOU TALKED ABOUT THE THREE, I GUESS THE THREE ITEMS THAT YOU IDENTIFIED YES SIR. IN SESSIONS. YES SIR. AND SO, SO IF YOU WERE TO HAVE THAT, THOSE COMPONENTS, UM, WOULD YOU HAVE FELT DIFFERENTLY, UM, TODAY? UM, YOU KNOW, IF THEY, IF HE HAD GONE IN WRITING AND, AND THEY COMMITTED THOSE THREE THINGS, IF HE'D COMMITTED, IF THEY'D DONE WHAT THEY SAID THEY'RE GONNA DO, CERTAINLY I WOULD BE A DIFFERENT TONE, BUT THEY DIDN'T DO WHAT THEY SAID THEY'RE GONNA DO. AND IF THEY'LL DO IT TO ME, THEY'LL DO IT TO YOU. [02:55:01] BUT I GUESS, YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST REITERATING THE POINT. SO IF THEY HAD COMMITTED TO THOSE THREE POINTS, THEN YOU WOULD'VE BEEN OKAY WITH IT. SO THOSE, THOSE THREE CONCESSIONS, NO, I'M NOT OKAY WITH A 45 FOOT. IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU, IF THEY WERE AT 30 FEET, I'D BE FINE. RIGHT. IF THEY PUT THE BUFFER IN THERE, LIKE THEY SAID THEY'RE GONNA DO, I'D BE FINE. IF THEY PUT THE TRUCK PARKING AND THE TRUCK ENTRANCE ON THE FAR SIDE, LIKE THE ATTORNEY SAID THEY WERE GONNA DO, I'D BE FINE, BUT THEY DIDN'T. SO, SO, SO IT EVEN SAID THE 45 FOOT IS STILL A SHOWSTOPPER FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE? ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, NEXT UP TO SPEAK IS A MS. BETH MCGINNIS. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU. UM, I DIRECTLY HAVE AFFECTED BY IT 'CAUSE I BUTT UP STRAIGHT UP AGAINST IT. OUR CONCERNS HAVE BEEN, THE NOISE IS GONNA BE A PROBLEM WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, THE TRUCKS, THE BUFFER OBVIOUSLY IS A HUGE PROBLEM FOR US. WE'VE ENJOYED, THERE'S SCRUB TREES, BUT IT IS A BUFFER LINE. AND, UM, I DON'T THINK, I WAS WORRIED BECAUSE THE LAND GRADUATED UP THAT 30 FOOT, 45 FOOT ANY FOOT WOULD'VE BEEN OBSTRUCTED BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH TREES THAT YOU CAN GROW BIG ENOUGH TO, TO HIDE EVERYTHING, UM, IF THEY DO CONCESSIONS. AND I WAS UNDER THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE, THERE'S ONLY TWO CORNERS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN THIS PARTICULAR THING THAT THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT GETTING THE VARIANCE TO THE 45 FEET. UM, I APPRECIATE MR. GRABLE'S INPUT ON THE ENTIRE BUILDING AND YEAH, WHY CAN'T IT BE 30 INSTEAD OF 45? I WOULD PREFER THAT. BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ENJOYED IT BEING, UH, NICE AND QUIET THERE FOR THE LONGEST TIME. AND NOW WE'RE HAVING TO DEAL WITH THIS NO MATTER WHAT. IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S COMING OUR WAY. I DO WANNA BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR TO WHOEVER'S GONNA BE IN THERE AND WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO AND, UM, IF THEY'RE WILLING TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR AS WELL. UH, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M FOR THE ADDITIONAL TREES, HE'S OFFERED THINGS LIKE THIS TO MAKE IT, UH, MORE PLEASANT. THE LIGHTING AND THE ENTRANCE TO THE TRUCKS FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND NOW ARE COMING OFF OF EISENHOWER. AND ON THE FAR EXTERIOR PART OVER HERE, HOW THAT WILL IMPACT US. YOU KNOW, I I GUESS MR. GRABLE MAY KNOW MORE ABOUT WHAT WAS TOLD TO HIM IN THE PAST. UM, BUT THIS IS WHAT I'VE BEEN GIVEN TO LOOK AT. I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE ORIGINAL BOUNDARY MAP THAT THEY GAVE YOU BECAUSE WHAT THEY'RE SEEING PUTS MY HOME IN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND I BELIEVE THAT'S BEEN CHANGED. AND THERE SHOULD BE COPIES TO HAND OUT TO EVERYBODY THAT FIXED THAT. THE RED LINES ON THE FIRST MAP THAT THEY HAD SHOULD BE A DOTTED LINE WHERE MY HOUSE IS ON THE FRONT OF MY PROPERTY, BUT IT IS A SOLID RED LINE, WHICH MAKES THIS PART OF A SUBJECT PROPERTY LINE AND NOT THE NOTIFICATION BOUNDARY. SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO, I KNOW IT'S NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT, BUT IF IT'S GONNA BE SENT OUT TO US, IT NEEDS TO BE ACCURATE. RIGHT HERE, THAT OUTER LINE IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE THERE ON CASTLE GREEN, THAT'S, THAT'S A NOTIFICATION. I GET IT. BUT RIGHT THERE IS A SOLID LINE FOR SUBJECT PROPERTY, NOT NOTIFICATION BOUNDARY ACCORDING TO THE MAP. I MEAN, YOU'RE, UM, THE LEGEND. THANK YOU. OKAY. IT SHOULD BE A DOTTED LINE AND I BELIEVE THAT MR. BATISTA HAS CORRECTED THAT THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE HARD COPIES HERE FOR THE RESIDENTS OF ANYBODY WHO WANTED IT. OKAY. BUT THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY AS FAR AS WELL, I I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU, SIR. I NOTICED, SIR, SO YOUR ADDRESS IS 75 18 AND YOU, YOU, YOU ARE A BUDDING RIGHT UP, BUT THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT'S BEHIND YOU, THAT'S OWNED BY YOUR H O A I BELIEVE IT IS. I MEAN, IT'S SUPPOSED TO STAY THERE, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE DO WANT IT TO STAY THERE, THE TREES THAT ARE ON THEIR SIDE ARE WHAT ARE BUFFERING US RIGHT NOW. YOU KNOW. AND THEN, AND THEN IS THAT EASEMENT LINED? I KNOW THE AERIAL DOESN'T NECESSARILY SHOW IT, BUT IS IT, IT IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S SOME, A GOOD AMOUNT OF WATER THAT GOES FROM THE NORTH ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE SOUTH? IT WELL WHEN IT DOES RAIN AND, AND DOES IT, DOES IT, IS IT INUNDATED WITH TREES AT ALL OR IS IT RELATIVELY OPEN? THE, IT'S NOT A DANGER TO THE TREES, LIKE THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT COMES THROUGH THERE. ITS WORST CASE IS CRESTED THAT CREEK AND MAKES ITS WAY LITERALLY THROUGH THE LOTS NEXT TO ME. I DID HAVE SOME CONCERNS WHICH FIGURED WERE ADDRESSED WHEN THEY WERE PLANS WERE PUTTING TOGETHER THAT, YOU KNOW, THE ADDITIONAL CONCRETE, YOU KNOW, COMING IN PARKING LOTS AND WHAT HAVE YOU AND HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT, UM, THE DRAINAGE. WILL IT BE MORE, I MEAN, THAT'S CERTAINLY OF CONCERN, BUT YEAH, I'M ONLY ASKING 'CAUSE ON OUR, ON THE CITY MAPS, IT SHOWS A, A, A BLUE LINE IN THAT AREA, WHICH WOULD INSINUATE IT'S A DEDICATED LIKE TRIP OF SOME KIND, TRIBUTARY OF SOME KIND. BUT, UH, IT, AND IT ALSO DOESN'T APPEAR TO HAVE A LOT OF VEGETATION GROWTH THAT WOULD, WOULD GIVE YOU [03:00:01] A VISUAL BUFFER NO MATTER WHAT THEY BUILD. MM-HMM. SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT, WHAT IT REALLY LOOK LIKE. I MEAN, SOME OF THE, SOMETIMES THESE MAPS ARE, ARE NOT DESCRIPTION. YEAH, I MEAN IT'S, WHEN I LOOK OUT, I'VE GOT A GOOD BANK OF TREES THAT COVERS PRETTY MUCH LIKE THE TOP OF THAT HILL GOING BACK. 'CAUSE THERE'S A HUGE GRAD GRADUATION THAT GOES UP. YES. AND THE BUILDINGS THAT I CAN SEE BEHIND ME, UH, WHICH ARE, ARE NOT REPRESENTED HERE. THEY'RE, THEY'RE BACK IN THE OTHER SECTION HERE. UH, SO AS THIS IS COMING BIGGER AND CLOSER TO US, YOU KNOW, SO, SO THEIR PROPERTY PREDOMINANTLY HIGHER THAN YOURS? YES. OKAY. YES. SO, AND I GUESS THAT'S WHY WHEN WE'RE TALKING THE 30 FOOT, 45 FOOT, YOU KNOW, THE TREES THAT I HAVE THERE COVER JUST THE TOP OF THE LAND FROM WHAT I CAN SEE. BUT YOU GO BIGGER THAN THAT. THEY'RE OBVIOUSLY GONNA BE QUITE MORE PRESENT TO US THEN. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU THERE NOW. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MINKA? COMMISSIONER MINCHA MINKA TO THE LADIES SPEAKING? YEAH. QUESTION? YES. MS. MCGINNIS? YES SIR. UH, WE, WE MIGHT HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. SORRY. UH, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE LAND, THE YEAH, THE SLOW UPGRADE OR THE ELEVATION. YES, SIR. AND THE PAST RAINS THAT YOU'VE HAD, HAS THAT DITCH EVER BEEN FLOODED? THAT IT GOES, COMES UP THROUGH YOUR BACK OF YOUR FENCE? UM, IT HAS BEEN, UH, FLOODED SUCH THAT IT DOES CREATE PADDLING LIKE THE OPEN LOT NEXT TO ME. YOU'LL SEE SOME PUDDLING AND THE ONE NEXT TO THAT, IT GETS EVEN MORE SIGNIFICANT WHEN IT'S COMING THROUGH THAT AREA. SO YOUR CONCERN IS IF THIS GETS ALL PAVED NOW, THERE'S BE MORE WATER THAT IS A CONCERN, THE CONCRETE AND THE, THE PAVEMENT AND ALL. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. YEP. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE CITIZEN? YES, AGAIN, UM, HAS, UH, AS THE DEVELOPER SPOKE, SPOKEN TO YOU OR THEIR ATTORNEY? I'VE SPOKEN TO THE DEVELOPER. I'VE SPOKEN TO THE DEVELOPER, YES. OKAY. UH, AND WHAT WAS THE PROMISES? WELL, DIRECTLY IT WAS JUST THAT THE TREES WOULD, UH, YOU KNOW, BE, THEY WOULD DO THEIR BEST TO, UH, PROMOTE GOODWILL AND GIVE US A TREE BUFFER AS BEST THEY CAN ON THEIR PROPERTY. OKAY. CAN I SPEAK, I APOLOGIZE, I'D LIKE TO CLEAR EVERYBODY. UH, HOLD ON, SIR. WE'LL HAVE, WE HAVE, I THINK IT WOULD BE PERTINENT TO THE QUESTION THAT YOU ASKED. UH, WE, WE, YOU CAN COME BACK AND REBUT AFTER WE'RE DONE WITH THE, OUR LINE OF QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER ZUNI, YOU DONE ALL RIGHT. YOU KNOW, AND THEY DO SAY THAT THEY'RE GONNA BE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND DO THE LIGHTING AND THINGS OF THIS NATURE, SO, YOU KNOW, WE JUST WANNA STICK ON POINT. WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR IS A SET THE HEIGHT AND, YOU KNOW, SET BACK ISSUES. SO, AGREED. UM, IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS CITIZEN, NO. ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA ASK THE NEXT ONE. WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, UH, UHHUH. MISS, UH, JULIANA. UH, CLIVE, AM I GETTING THAT RIGHT? YES. ALRIGHT. UH, OKAY. HELLO. HELLO. SO, UH, MY ADDRESS IS 75 0 2 CASTLE GREEN. SO I ALSO ABUT RIGHT THE BUILDING, EVERYTHING WILL BE RIGHT BEHIND ME. AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS, IF THERE'S ANY WAY YOU COULD PUT THIS UP THERE, BUT JUST SO THEY CAN SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. JULIAN MACLE, UM, I, I ALSO AM A LITTLE CONFUSED. UH, SOMEONE MENTIONED THAT THERE IS A GREEN BELT THAT WILL REMAIN. UM, YEAH, WHAT HAPPENS IS, FOR, FOR THE LOTS, FOR ALL THE LOTS THATBUT THIS, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THERE IS A, A, A DRAINAGE EASEMENT RIGHT. SLASH GREEN BELT. THAT'S PROPERTY OF THE H O A. UM, IT, I, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT WIDTH. IT VARIES. IT LOOKS LIKE IT COULD BE ABOUT 50, 60 FEET WIDE. UH, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF YOUR, YOUR SUBDIVISION. OKAY. SO THE, THE DRAINAGE AND THEN THE, THE GREEN BELT WHEEL OR JUST THE DRAINAGE, I GUESS IS WHAT I'M WELL, IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A DRAINAGE EASEMENT. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW IT'S PLATTED OR ITS ENTITLEMENT, BUT IT, IT, IT IS, UM, IT'S NOT PART OF YOUR LOT. IT'S, IT'S JUST A RIGHT. WELL, UH, SOMEONE HAD ASKED WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, BEHIND, SO I ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE A FENCE. I'VE LEFT IT OPEN. YEAH. BUT I'VE ENJOYED THE WILDLIFE. OH. SO IF YOU WANNA SEE, UM, LIKE WHAT THE TREES LOOK LIKE, THAT'S VERY MUCH WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. UH, BECAUSE I HAVE NO FENCE. SO, UH, MY CONCERN IS THAT WE DON'T LOSE THE, WHAT WE HAVE, LIKE THE SMALL AMOUNT OF GREEN BELT THAT WE HAVE, BECAUSE OF COURSE THERE IS WILDLIFE AND LIKE OWLS AND THINGS THAT ARE, UH, SOMEWHAT MAYBE ENDANGERED TOO AS WELL. UH, HOWEVER, LIKE I I, SO I MISSED PART OF THE, I I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE ATTORNEY HAD SAID. SO, UM, AGAIN, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE THINGS THAT AREN'T IN WRITING THAT THAT IS A DEFINITE CONCERN. I MEAN, WE DO WANNA SEE THAT IN WRITING, UH, WHAT WILL BE PRESERVED. BUT YES, I DEFINITELY AM, UH, AS FAR AS IN THE INTEREST OF, UH, YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND THEY ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH US, THAT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE DO HAVE IT IN WRITING. RIGHT. I MEAN, THAT, THAT'S IMPORTANT TO ME AT LEAST FOR SURE. BUT, UH, [03:05:01] JUST BECAUSE WE BUTT UP TO IT, I, I DON'T KNOW, UH, THE 30 FOOT TO THE 45 FOOT, I'M STILL NOT SUPER CLEAR, BUT I THINK FROM AFTER MEETING WITH THEM, IF I UNDERSTAND THINGS CORRECTLY, THE ENTIRE BUILDING WILL BE 45. YES. YES. NOT JUST, SO AGAIN, THAT'S, I, I DIDN'T, UH, SEE THE INITIAL PLAN. RIGHT. SO I, I MISSED OUT ON THAT. AND, AND TO CLARIFY STAFF, IT'S, THERE'S ONLY ONE, IS THERE ONLY ONE BUILDING THAT'S IN CONFLICT AT THIS POINT? TWO, NO, IT'S TWO BUILDINGS, TWO OF THEM. OKAY. SO THERE'S, SO TWO OUT OF THE THREE HAVE A, A PORTION, NOT THE WHOLE BUILDING, BUT A PORTION OF IT. THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. SO, UM, YEAH, INITIALLY, LIKE I SAID, I, TO BE HONEST, AS YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND, NOT IN FAVOR OF A OF THE WHOLE THING, BUT I, I GET IT RIGHT. AND IT'S NOT GONNA STAY LIKE IT IS. SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO SAY OTHER THAN WE'RE TRYING TO, UH, WORK WITH, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE HAVE AND WHAT'S, WHAT'S COMING. BUT I DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS MUCH OF THE GREEN BELT AS POSSIBLE STAY, UH, AND NOT BE TAKEN AWAY, IF THAT MAKES ANY SENSE. UM, YEAH. AND THAT'S PART OF YOUR H O A, SO THEY, THEY, THEY CAN'T BUILD INTO THERE FOR SURE. WELL, YEAH. AFTER MEETING WITH THEM, I'M NOT SURE THOUGH IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY. LIKE WHERE, WHAT, WHAT THEY WERE SAYING AS FAR AS THAT GRAY AREA. THAT'S WHAT I'M NOT REALLY SURE. OH, SO, SO THE GRAY AREA IN QUESTION IS, IS THAT THE, THE ZONING SAYS THAT THEY HAVE TO, ARE LIMITED TO 30 FEET WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF A RESIDENTIAL USED PROPERTY LINE. MM-HMM. . SO THE ARGUMENT IS, IS THAT, DOES THAT START AT YOUR BACK LOT LINE, OR DOES IT START CORRECT AT THE 50 OR 60 FOOT GREEN BELT? CORRECT. UH, THAT OR DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT IS CORRECT. OR REFERRING TO IT TO, SO THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT IS WHERE DOES IT COMMENCE BEING A RESIDENTIAL USE STAFF? Y'ALL HAVE, UH, DECIDED THAT IT, IT IS PART OF THAT, UM, GREENBELT SLASH STRAIN EASEMENT AREA. AND BECAUSE IT IS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND SO THAT, SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HERE TODAY IS BECAUSE THAT IS NOT BEING COUNTED AS WHERE THE A HUNDRED FEET STARTS. IT'S STARTING AT THE OUTSIDE EDGE, FURTHEST AWAY FROM YOUR REAL OUTLINE. OKAY. SO THAT, 'CAUSE IT'S NOT THEIR PROPERTY. MM-HMM. IT'S MM-HMM. PART OF YOUR H O A WAY. OKAY. SO, OKAY. SO IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE CITIZEN COMMISSIONER? MIC CHAKA? I JUST HAVE ONE. DOES, DOES THIS, UH, SORT OF GIVE YOU A CONCERN TO PUT UP A PRIVACY FENCE FOR ME? OH YEAH, FOR SURE. I MEAN, AT THIS POINT, YES. MM-HMM. , I MEAN MM-HMM. , SADLY, YES. I MEAN, I'VE BEEN THERE FOR 30 YEARS AND NEVER PUT ONE UP BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, YEAH, WE'VE ENJOYED THE WILDLIFE A LOT, BUT AT THIS POINT, OF COURSE MM-HMM. , THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? BRAGMAN? COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? JUST CLARIFICATION. SO THE PRIVACY FENCE, IS THAT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE FACT THAT THERE'S GONNA BE, UH, A COMMERCIAL BUILDING BACK THERE, OR, BECAUSE WHAT CHAIR WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN IS THAT YOUR EASEMENT AND, AND THOSE TREES THAT YOU'RE SHOWING THE BACKGROUND, THEY'RE GONNA, THOSE ARE GONNA STAY. UH, YEAH, BUT AFTER MEETING WITH THEM THIS MORNING, I, I UNDERSTAND AND THERE'S ALREADY SOME TREES ARE MARKED, SO I THINK SOME ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE REMOVED, BUT NOT ON, BUT NOT ON THAT GREEN BELT STAFF. CAN YOU BRING UP THE ONE STOP MAT PLEASE? ACTUALLY, BEFORE, BEFORE, UM, SO THE, FOR THE, UM, RIGHT HERE, SO THE, THE BACK MM-HMM. TREES THERE MM-HMM. , FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, IS THAT IN THE EASEMENT OR IS THAT ON THE, UH, ADJOINING PROPERTY? SEE, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CONCRETE THERE, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DRAINAGE DITCH, UM, LIKE WE, WE CALL THAT THE GREEN BELT, JUST LIKE THE NEIGHBORS HAVE ALWAYS CALLED THAT THE GREEN BELT. RIGHT. BUT THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN BACK THERE AND SURVEYED AND THERE'S SEVERAL TREES THAT HAVE, UH, THEY'RE MARKED. RIGHT. SO I'M NOT SURE WHY THEY'RE MARKED, BUT OUR CONCERN IS THAT THAT CAN BE TAKEN OUT WELL, OPPOSITE THAT, THAT CONCRETE DRAIN, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT YOUR PROPERTY ANYMORE. RIGHT. SO THAT, THAT'S THEIR PROPERTY. AND IF THEY MEET THE, THE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE AND THEY, THEY CAN TAKE THE TREES OUT. RIGHT. IS IT, AND SO THAT THE C P S EASEMENT THOUGH, THAT THEY WERE REFERRING TO, AND THAT'S, AND THAT'S RIGHT NOW, WE'LL, WE'LL GET THE APPLICANT BACK UP AND HE CAN HELP CLARIFY SOME OF THIS STUFF. 'CAUSE I KNOW THEY HAVE A PRELIMINARY PLATE IN PLACE, SO WE COULD, IT'D BE NICE IF THEY COULD HAVE, IF THEY HAD THAT TO, TO SHOW UP ON THE SCREEN. SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ON THAT, YES, C P S WOULD BE ON THAT SIDE, UH, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CONCRETE DRAINAGE DITCH. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD BE, UH, CONSIDERED IN THERE. AND THERE'S, AND, AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, CERTAIN EASEMENTS, DEPENDING ON THE TREE SIZE, THEY'RE NOT PART OF THE PRESERVATION. SO IF IT'S A NON-HERITAGE TREE AND TECH, TECHNICALLY IT DOESN'T MEET THE PRESERVATION, CORRECT? MM-HMM. PERCENTAGES. SO THERE, IT, THERE'S, THERE'S A PRESERVATION PLAN THAT HAS TO GET TURNED IN MM-HMM. , AND THERE'S REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW, AND THAT'S MM-HMM. , THEY'LL DO THAT THROUGH PERMITTING, BUT THAT'S NOT OUR PURVIEW RIGHT HERE. SO, UM, SO IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE CITIZEN, UH, COMMISSIONER ALBERT? YES, MA'AM. SOMETHING THAT, UH, THAT I ALWAYS TRY TO DO IS CONSIDER THE RIGHTS OF EVERYBODY, RIGHT. THE [03:10:01] RIGHTS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE RIGHTS OF THE NEIGHBORS, ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS. UH, SO I'D JUST LIKE TO ASK YOU, IS THIS A HARD STOP? NO, I DON'T WANT THIS PROJECT TO HAPPEN NO MATTER WHAT. OR IS THIS A IF CERTAIN CONCESSIONS OF CERTAIN PROMISES, GUARANTEES COULD BE MADE, I UNDERSTAND THAT PROGRESS HAPPENS AND I COULD BE HAPPY. UH, WELL, I MEAN, THAT, THAT IS PART OF THE THING. I MEAN, WE UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT GONNA STAY EMPTY. RIGHT. , I MEAN, WE GET THAT. SO, I MEAN, I, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CONCESSIONS IN WRITING. I MEAN, THAT IS A CONCERN. LIKE I SAID, I, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO ALREADY HAVE CERTAIN THINGS IN WRITING FROM THE ATTORNEY ALREADY. THAT IS A CONCERN. I MISSED THAT MEETING APPARENTLY. SO YES, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT. IT IS A CONCERN THAT WE DON'T HAVE THAT. UM, BUT YES, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT. UH, DEFINITELY. UH, I, YEAH, I MEAN, FOR SURE, I, I WOULD DEFINITELY LIKE TO SEE THAT MM-HMM. . YEAH. IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT I'M HEARING IS A, A PROPERTY OWNER WHO WANTS TO TALK MORE WITH NEIGHBORS AND NEIGHBORS THAT WANT TO TALK MORE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER MM-HMM. , MAYBE COME TO SOME KIND OF, UH, AGREEMENT IN WRITING, IN WRITING SOMETHING TO MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY. SO MAYBE MORE TIME IS WHAT WE NEED. YEAH. I, I, I THINK SO. I THINK MORE TIME WOULD BE FAIR BECAUSE THEN IF WE HAD SOMETHING IN WRITING, I HONESTLY THINK EVERYBODY WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE FOR SURE. I MEAN, THAT'S PERSONALLY THE WAY I FEEL. OKAY. MM-HMM. . SO, UM, WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS HAVE THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP. WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF, UH, DISCUSSION. SO WE'RE GONNA SEE, GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO REBUT, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS PROBABLY FOR THEM. OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. HOLD ON. LET'S GIVE 'EM AN OPPORTUNITY TO, OH, GO FOR IT. SHOOT AWAY. MAKE SOME STATEMENTS, OR GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER Z. SHOOT AWAY. WHAT, WHAT CAN I DO FOR YOU? YES. AS IT SEEMS DOWN HERE, UH, THE GENTLEMAN SAID THAT THEY HAD A PLAN THAT THEY, UH, CONCESSIONS, ET CETERA. SURE. I HEARD IT. AND NOW, YOU KNOW, IT COMES BACK THAT MAYBE THE RIGHT PEOPLE WEREN'T CONTACTED OR THE HOME ASSOCIATIONS OR WHATEVER. UH, WOULD YOU BE AMENABLE TO MEET WITH 'EM AGAIN? BECAUSE THIS WAY WE CAN ONLY GO WITH WHAT YOU SAID AND THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, OR YOU WANT SOME, UH, TIME TO EXTEND SOME TIME, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD ASK THE CHAIRMAN THAT IF YOU WANT FOR YOUR CASE TO BE HURT AT A LATER DAY AFTER YOU MEET WITH THEM. I, I BELIEVE IN THE QUALITY OF LIFE, AND I GUESS YOU DO TOO, YOU KNOW? SURE. SO, I'LL, I'LL SAY THIS. FIRST OFF, UM, THE GENTLEMAN WHO DID COME UP AND SPEAK IS COMPLETELY INCORRECT. MY TEAM, NOR MY ATTORNEYS HAVE EVER, EVER CORRESPONDED WITH HIM OR ANYBODY WITH THE H O A OR ANY NEIGHBORS. MAYBE HE'S MISTAKEN. I THINK HE IS. HE MIGHT'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT SOMEBODY ELSE HE HAD DEALT WITH PRIOR TO US PURCHASING THE PROPERTY. SO, AGAIN, FOR THE RECORD, INACCURATELY, WE HAVE NEVER, NOR HAVE OUR ATTORNEYS OR ANYBODY ON OUR TEAM CORRESPONDED WITH THE H O A. WHEN DID YOU PURCHASE THE PROPERTY? SORRY, WE CLOSED JULY OR AUGUST. JULY OF AUGUST PRIOR TO OUR CLOSING. OKAY. YEAH, IT WAS THIS YEAR. HE WAS ZONED PRIOR TO US PURCHASING. SO AGAIN, WE HAVE NEVER CORRESPONDED WITH ANYBODY. SO EVERYTHING THAT HE SAID IS JUST NOT ACCURATE. WELL, IN, IN, IN THE, IN YOUR ZONING, UH, APPROVED ZONING ORDINANCE, ARE THERE ANY CON AGAIN, CONDITIONS AGAIN, WE PURCHASED IT PRO, PRO UH, POST ZONING, AND THERE'S NO CONDITIONS. WELL, I KNOW, BUT, BUT I'M SURE YOU GOT A COPY OF THE ZONING CHANGE. I MEAN, WERE THERE ANY, WERE THERE ANY, ANY CONDITIONS? NO, SIR. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO FIND OUT. ALL RIGHT. SO, UM, PLEASE CONTINUE. SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS ONE. UM, SO IF, IF YOU LOOKED AT THE IMAGE THAT SHE PUT UP SHOWING HER BACKYARD, THE LARGEST TREE IN QUESTION WAS ON HER PROPERTY. OKAY. THE SMALL SCRUB TREES IN THE BACK WERE PROBABLY LOCATED WITHIN THAT ELECTRICAL EASEMENT. RIGHT. SO PROBABLY MAJORITY OF THOSE TREES ARE NOT GONNA BE TOUCHED, AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF I'D REALLY CALL THOSE TREES. WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO IS WE'RE GOING TO BE ADDING ADDITIONAL TREES AT OUR EXPENSE ABOVE AND BEYOND THE BASELINE LANDSCAPE CODE. THAT'S US BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR. UM, SECONDLY, JOE AND OUR, OUR CIVIL ENGINEER CAN CONFIRM THIS, OUR PROJECT, THE DRAINAGE, THE SHEET FLOW, THE WATER DOES NOT DRAIN DIRECTLY IN THAT CREEK. WE DRAIN INTO DETENTION PONDS ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION AND THE NORTHERN PORTION OF OUR SITES, AND WE DRAIN INTO A DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT ABUTS EISENHOWER ROAD. SO THERE'S GONNA BE NO FLOW INTO THAT CREEK. SO OUR DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT HAVE ANY DIRECT IMPACT TO OUR NEIGHBORS OR THE DRAINAGE DITCH, YOU KNOW, ADJACENT TO OUR NEIGHBORS. THAT'S, THAT'S SECOND. UM, AND I ALSO WANT TO KIND OF CLEAN UP SOME LANGUAGE THAT'S BEEN SAID [03:15:01] ABOUT A GREEN BELT, UM, FROM OUR KNOWLEDGE AND FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE ON THE SITUATION. THERE'S NOT A TECHNICAL GREEN BELT THERE. THERE'S A DRAIN DITCH ELECTRICAL EASEMENT. CAN YOU TAKE THE LASER POINTER? SURE. STAFF. KEEP THAT PLATT UP. SO THIS IS THE PROPERTY THAT'S, THAT'S IN THE VICINITY OF THE CITIZENS AS SIGN UP TO SPEAK. CAN YOU POINT OUT SOME OF THE ITEMS AS YOU TALK ABOUT LIKE, THE ELECTRICAL EASEMENT THAT'S ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY? YEAH. SO THAT'S PROBABLY A BAD, UM, YOU WANNA PULL UP OUR SITE PLAN? DO YOU HAVE THAT AGAIN, ROBERT? WE STILL HAVE IT. YOU WANNA PULL THE SITE PLAN MIGHT BE EASIER. NEXT ONE. YEAH, THERE YOU GO. HEY GUYS, IT'S KIND OF ZOOMED OUT, SO I'LL DO THE BEST TO KINDA WALK YOU THROUGH IT. YOU GOTTA TURN IT OVER. THERE YOU GO. DID YOU EMAIL ANY OF THIS, THIS STUFF TO STAFF, THESE PDFS OF THE SITE PLAN, THE PLAID, ANY OF THAT STUFF? UM, I DON'T THINK SO. I, I DON'T, CAN'T COMMENT , SO I APOLOGIZE. WE, WE CAN GET IT TO YOU. I ALWAYS HOPE TO HAVE A, I MEAN, THE CITY SHOULDN'T HAVE EVERYTHING, BUT YES. I, I, I WOULD'VE HOPED. YEAH, PLEASE CONTINUE. ALRIGHT, SO OBVIOUSLY DARKENED LINE, DARKENED LINES, OUR PROPERTY LINE, RIGHT? UM, NO, I TAKE THAT BACK. OUTER LINES ARE PROPERTY LINE, DARKENED LINE WILL BE EDGE OF CONCRETE DRIVE, RIGHT? SO BETWEEN THERE YOU CAN SEE, WE HOPE TO ADD THAT'S, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF LOCATION FOR PLANTINGS ON OUR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. TREES, BUSHES, AS MUCH AS WE CAN GET IN THERE REALLY IS IDEAL. UM, THE SITE PLAN DOESN'T SHOW, BUT IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO OUR PROPERTY LINE HERE, THERE'LL BE A 12 FOOT ELECTRICAL EASEMENT. AND THEN I THINK IT'S A 50 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT I THINK THE NEIGHBORS ARE REFERRING TO AS THE GREEN BELT. SO OBVIOUSLY IN THAT AREA, IT'S NOT GONNA BE TOUCHED BY US, IT'S NOT ON OUR PROPERTY. AND ANY TREES THAT EXIST CURRENTLY ON THAT WILL STAY AS THEY PROBABLY, AS THEY SHOULD. THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE TOUCHED BY US. IT'S OFF OUR PROPERTY. CAN'T TOUCH IT. WON'T TOUCH IT. I HAVE, I HAVE NO DESIRE TO TOUCH ANYTHING THAT'S NOT ON MY PROPERTY. RIGHT? UM, SO I, I THINK A LOT OF THAT WILL STAY, THEIR EXISTING VIEW PROBABLY WON'T CHANGE THAT MUCH. NOW, OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOME BUILDINGS ON OUR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. WE COMPLETELY GET THAT, AND WE'RE GONNA ADD ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ON TOP OF THAT. SO I FEEL LIKE WE'RE, WE'RE DEFINITELY ACHIEVING THE INTENT OF THE COATINGS. OBVIOUSLY THIS, THIS ALL STARTED BY THE, THE HEIGHT ADJUSTMENT OF THE BUILDING. NOW WHAT I CAN TELL YOU WILL HAPPEN FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE IS, AND IF YOU DO, WE HAVE THE PLAN SHOWING THE TWO KIND OF RED HIGHLIGHTED SECTIONS. LET ME, LET'S BE CLEAR WITH SOMETHING I DON'T THINK WE'VE BEEN CLEAR WITH TO DATE SO FAR. CAN YOU THROW THAT UP THERE AND ZOOM IN ON THAT RED HIGHLIGHTED SECTION FOR ME? CAN YOU GRAB BUILDING THREE FOOTPRINT AS WELL? ALRIGHT, SO THIS IS BUILDING TWO. YOU SEE THAT SMALL SECTION RED MM-HMM. , THAT IS THE ONLY PORTION OF A BUILDING THAT IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE A HUNDRED FOOT, UM, REQUIREMENT. AND AGAIN, TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT A HUNDRED FOOT IS FROM OUR PROPERTY EDGE, THE DISTANCE FROM OUR BUILDING TO RESIDENTIAL LOT, JUST FOR EVERYBODY'S CLARIFICATION, IS ABOUT 160 FOOT AT THIS LOCATION. THAT IS THE ONLY PORTION OF OUR BUILDING ON BUILDING TWO THAT IS OBSTRUCTED BY THE A HUNDRED FOOT REQUIREMENT. THAT'S IT. I THINK IT'S EIGHT FEET, NINE FOOT, NINE FOOT, NINE FOOT. DO YOU HAVE BUILD THE, UH, BUILDING THREE? I WANT THE, UM, I WANT THE FULL BUILDING SIZE. I SHOULD HAVE IT BUILDING THREE. THERE YOU GO. THAT'S BUILDING THREE. YOU MIND PUTTING THAT ONE UP THERE? SO THIS IS BUILDING THREE. THIS IS OUR ONE BUILDING THAT HAS THE MOST CONFLICT, AND THAT'S THE SMALL PORTION OF OUR BUILDING THAT IS IN CONFLICT WITH A HUNDRED FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT. AGAIN, FROM EDGE OF OUR BUILDING TO RESIDENTIAL LOT IS APPROXIMATELY 130 FEET FROM OUR EDGE OF PROPERTY TO OUR BUILDINGS WHERE THE CONFLICT COMES FROM. RIGHT NOW, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO AS DEVELOPERS OF THIS PROPERTY IS IF THIS VARIANCE IS NOT PASSED, WE MIGHT JUST CUT THE BUILDING AT THAT PORTION, RIGHT? SO WE'RE NOT IN CONFLICT ANYMORE AND STILL HAVE OUR 45 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT. [03:20:01] I, I, I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT, NOT ACCEPTING THE VARIANCE IS REALLY INCREASING OUR NEIGHBOR'S VANTAGE POINT AT ALL. RIGHT? BUT AGAIN, WHAT WE'VE A WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED AS DEVELOPERS AND TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS AGAIN, IS WE'RE GONNA ADD SOME OF THOSE TREES IN ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS TO SHOW US BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR. WE'RE WILLING TO SPEND OUR MONEY TO MAKE THIS SITUATION BETTER FOR OUR NEIGHBORS. OKAY. GOOD. UH, STAFF, UH, QUESTIONS. THE TYPE C BUFFER THAT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE ON THE SIDE, UH, IS THERE ANY REDUCTION TO THAT? BECAUSE THERE'RE ABUTTING A DRAINAGE EASEMENT? NO. OKAY. IT'S THE 15 K. MM-HMM. . ALL RIGHT. WE DID JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. WE DID FIND A SITE PLAN, UM, AS WELL THAT WE CAN PULL UP FOR YOU. THAT GIVES YOU A BETTER SCALE OF THE WHOLE THING. IT WAS THROUGH THE PLANS THEY SUBMITTED ONLINE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BY THE WAY? UH, NO. IF WE HAVE SOME, I'LL ASK YOU TO COME BACK UP. PERFECT. UM, IS THERE ANYBODY FROM THE COMMISSION WHO WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, CAN YOU BRING UP THE, THE, UM, SIDE VIEW OF THE BUILDING ITSELF THAT SHOWS THE PARAPETS? THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE I WANNA TALK TO ABOUT THE PARAPETS. I MEAN, ANOTHER QUESTION, ANOTHER THING ON THAT IS THE ROOF IN QUESTION SITS BEHIND THE PARAPETS. LIKE YOU WOULD NEVER EVEN SEE THE ROOF. IT'S, AND PARAPETS ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THAT. SO, SO I GUESS ONE OF THE QUESTION PURPOSE YEAH. AND, AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS GONNA GO. SO, SO KEEP GOING. SO THERE'S A SLIDE THAT HAD THE, THE SIDE VIEW, THE ELEVATION VIEW OF THE PROPERTY. IT WAS A PART OF THEIR PRESENTATION. OH. SO THEY ACTUALLY, WITH THE, WITH THE SLOPE OF THE PROPERTY. SO I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS HERE ON THIS PARTICULAR MAP. SO YEAH, SO THERE, AND THEN, AND THEN ON THE VIEW THAT WAS THERE PREVIOUSLY. SO, SO, SO THE QUE SO TWO QUESTIONS COME TO, COME TO PLAY HERE. SO ONE IS THAT THERE'S A, THERE'S AN ELEVATION CHANGE, UH, ALONG THE SIDE THERE GOING TO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. AND SO, AND IT LOOKED, WHEN I LOOKED AT THE OTHER PICTURE, LIKE THAT WAS ALL PARAPET. UM, AND SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I GUESS IS, UM, YOU KNOW, SO, SO YOU KNOW, COULD THAT CORNER BE MOVED IN WITH REGARDS TO THE PARAPET? SO THAT THE BUILDING STILL, IS THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE, THE HEIGHT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR RIGHT THERE IS 34 FEET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? OR 30, 38 FOOT, I GUESS, TO THE ROOF. UH, WHEN I SAW, WHEN THE PREVIOUS PLAN. SO, SO 38 FOOT IS TO THE ROOF. THE ROOF HEIGHT, YES. AND THEN YOU HAD ANOTHER 12 FOOT FOR THE PARAPETS, RIGHT? YEAH, CORRECT. OKAY. LIKE THAT. OUR ROOF ACTUALLY HITS RIGHT HERE. SO THE PARAPET MAKES THE 40, THE 40 FEET, RIGHT. SO THE ROOF IS, IS ON A SLOPE. RIGHT. THERE'S GOING DOWN RIGHT THERE. SO, SO, SO I GUESS THE ONE QUESTION IS COULD THE PARAPET BE MOVED IN ON THOSE CORNERS? IS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS. SO, SO NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A 38 FOOT ROOF, UH, WITH THE PARAPETS MOVED IN. SO IT'S NO LONGER IN, I GUESS, IN THAT DIALOGUE. SO THAT'S THE FIRST QUESTION. SECOND QUESTION THERE IS THAT THERE IS AN ELEVATION CHANGE FROM, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THOSE ARE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE. UH, THE ROADWAY THERE, UM, WITH, WITH, UM, LOOKS LIKE MAYBE, UH, SIX FEET OR, UM, YEAH, ALMOST SIX FEET OR MAYBE EIGHT FEET THERE, UH, UH, FROM, UH, THE GARAGE THERE TO, UH, THE EDGE OF THE BUILDING THERE. AND SO COULD EXCAVATION BE DONE TO LOWER THAT PART OF THE BUILDING ALONG THAT PART? SO THOSE ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS. SO FIRST QUESTION, UM, OUR INTENT WAS TO KEEP THE BUILDINGS OF LIGHT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION AS PER THE OTHER PHASES THAT WE BUILT, AND TO ALSO MAKE THE CORNERS OF BUILDINGS TWO AND THREE REPLICATE AS THE OTHER BUILDINGS LOOKED. THAT'S ONE. UM, SO WE'D LIKE TO KEEP IT KIND OF THE WAY WE HAVE, THAT'S WHY WE'VE PRESENTED IN SUCH FASHION. AND TO ANSWER YOUR SECOND QUESTIONS, THIS IS DOCK HIGH BUILDING. SO THAT'S WHERE YOUR TRUCK WELL IS, OR NOT TRUCK? WELL, WHERE THE NATURAL GRADE ELEVATION IS, AND WE KIND OF RAMP UP SLIGHTLY TO THE END CORNERS WHERE THE OFFICE PODS ARE LOCATED. THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN TO THE ADJACENT GRADE. SO IT, IT'S, IT'S WRITTEN TO BE ADJACENT GRADE TO THE OFFICE POD WHERE YOU MEASURE, UM, THE VERTICAL HEIGHT. BUT SOMETHING I DO WANT TO CLARIFY IS THE CODE IS WRITTEN TO THE ROOF LINE TOP OF THE ROOF, RIGHT? NOT TOP OF THE PARAPET HEIGHT. SO EVEN WHEN WE'RE IN THE RESTRICTED HEIGHT OF 30 FEET FOR A ROOF LINE, OUR PARAPET WOULD STILL EXTEND IN OUR, IN OUR, IN OUR ABBREVIATED SUBSECTION. SHOULD THIS NOT GET APPROVED, WE'RE STILL GONNA HAVE A 37 FOOT PARAPET HEIGHT. I MEAN, THERE'S REALLY ONLY TECHNICALLY GONNA BE A SEVEN FOOT DIFFERENCE IN CONCRETE ELEVATION SHOULD THE VARIANCE NOT GET APPROVED, AND WE'RE STILL IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CODE. SO I, I WOULD LIKE TO THINK TODAY WE'VE DEMONSTRATED THAT ONE, WE'RE BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS, TWO, THAT THE CODE IS MAYBE SLIGHTLY ONEROUS ON US BECAUSE OF THE INTENT AND SPIRIT OF THE CODE VERSUS HOW IT'S KIND OF MEASURED OUT IN REALITY. UM, YEAH, WE, WE, WE THINK WE ARE HOPEFULLY BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS. WE WE'RE, WE'RE DEFINITELY TRYING TO BE. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS BY THE WAY? YEAH, I GUESS I GOT A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED WITH REGARDS TO THE WHOLE DIALOGUE ON THE, THE ROOF. SO THE, SO THE HEIGHTS OF THE ROOF IS ROUGHLY 38 FOOT, RIGHT? SO [03:25:01] AGAIN, I THINK ROOF IS, NEEDS TO BE DETERMINED HERE, IS IT'S THE TOP OF THE FLAT ROOF ON THE BUILDING VERSUS THE PARAPET HEIGHT, WHICH IS KIND OF A FALSE FRONT TO THE BUILDING THAT EXTENDS EVEN HIGHER, RIGHT? IT'S 12 FOOT FOR THAT ROUGHLY. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, TO GET TO YOUR, THE HEIGHT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. SO, UM, OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. SO I THINK WE'RE SET UP, UM, WE'RE GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I'M GONNA LOOK FOR A MOTION WHILE YOU YES. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA . YOU CAN ASK HIM IF YOU WANT BRING THEM UP. YOU CAN ASK HIM A QUESTION IF YOU'D LIKE TO BRING THEM UP. NO. YEAH, WE'RE NOT, THIS IS NOT A, IT DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT. SO IF THERE, IF, IF THERE'S A COMMISSIONER, I'D LIKE TO ASK ANYBODY IN THE GALLERY A QUESTION. YOU ARE WELCOME TO DO SO, MAYBE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY HERE. OKAY. SO, SO GOING BACK FOR THE 38 FOOT HEIGHT OF THE ROOF, SO, SO I'M GONNA STICK THERE FOR A SECOND HERE. UM, AND WITH THE, I GUESS THE DISTANCE OF THE, THE DISTANCE FROM THE PER, UH, THE PERIMETER, WOULD, WOULD THE 38 FOOT HEIGHT MEET THAT REQUIRE, OR WOULD THE 38 FOOT MEET THAT REQUIREMENT? IN OTHER WORDS, WOULD THAT BE WITHIN CODE FOR THE 38 FOOT? I BELIEVE THE CODE READS 30 FEET IS THE MAXIMUM. 30 FEET IS THE MAX WITH A PARAPET ON TOP OF IT. RIGHT. WAIT 30 FOOT WITH A PARAPET? NO, 30 FOOT PLUS THE PARAPET. SEE THE ROOF IS 30 AND THEN THE PARAPET DOESN'T COUNT, SO PARAPETS DON'T COUNT. SO ESSENTIALLY THEY'RE EIGHT FOOT OVER IS WHAT I JUST HEARD. RIGHT. SO IT'S NOT SO, SO WHILE, SO THEY'RE, 'CAUSE THE HEIGHT HERE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 45 FOOT, UM, INCLUDES A PARAPET. YES. OKAY. SO, SO, SO I GUESS THEY'RE REALLY ASKING FOR, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE SAYING THEY'RE ASKING FOR A SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE AND NOT A 50. THAT'S WHAT I'M GET, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO, I GUESS, EARLIER. OKAY. SO, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE REALLY ONLY ASKING FOR AN EIGHT FOOT, WELL, EIGHT FOOT VARIANCES ROUGHLY, UH, SEVEN FOOT FEW INCHES. SO IT'S AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE. IF IT WAS AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE, WOULD, UH, CAN PLEASE COME BACK UP IF IT WAS AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE ROOF TO BE 38, 38 FEET, WOULD THAT BE WITH, WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE? THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING. YEAH. I THINK THE ROOF, IF THE ROOF WAS 38 TO 39 FEET, AND LISTEN, WHEN WE PROPOSED THE DOCUMENTS, WE TOOK THE MOST CONSERVATIVE POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION MM-HMM. . RIGHT? WE DIDN'T WANNA COME IN FRONT OF THE BOARD AND BE TOO AGGRESSIVE OR TOO LIBERAL WITH OUR INTERPRETATION. RIGHT. I, I UNDERSTAND. COOL. SO I AM GOING TO ASK MR. GERBIL BACK UP. I'M GONNA GIVE YOU 30 SECONDS TO ASK A, TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS OR, OR, UM, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, UM, THIS IS, THIS IS NOT WHAT WE NORMALLY DO, BUT I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. YES, SIR, GO AHEAD. I THINK IN THE SPIRIT OF GOOD NEIGHBOR, THAT THIS GENTLEMAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY SHOULD MEET WITH THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATIONS LIKE HE SHOULD HAVE DONE AT THE FRONT END, SO THAT WE CAN WORK OUT THE AGREEMENTS WE NEED SO THAT WE CAN LIVE HAPPILY AS NEIGHBORS WITH HIM AS HE WANTS. HE WANTS GOOD NEIGHBORS. LET'S TRY TO DO THAT. YES, SIR. UM, THANK YOU. SO WHAT, WHAT, THERE'S A, WE HAVE 11 COMMISSIONERS HERE. IF, UH, WE NEED NINE TO PASS, IF THERE'S ANY COMMISSIONERS HERE THAT FEEL A CONTINUANCE WOULD BE IN ORDER TIME TO SPEAK UP, MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO I THINK ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WE'VE HAD HERE, SO MAYBE FOR THE APPLICANT HERE, SO, UM, IF IT DELAYED FOR LIKE, UM, YOU KNOW, TILL THE NEXT, I GUESS WE'VE BEEN USING THE NEXT MEETING HERE FOR A FEW TIMES, WOULD THAT PRESENT A, UM, YOU KNOW, I GUESS A SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGE FOR YOU SO THAT YOU HAD TIME TO MEET WITH THE COMMUNITY AND JUST GET THIS SECOND HALF OF THE CONVERSATION? WELL, JOSEPH, YEAH. YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW IF WE CAN MAKE ANY FORWARD PROGRESS OTHER THAN WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED TODAY. WE'VE PROPOSED TO ADD ADDITIONAL TREES IN THAT LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND MEDIUM HEIGHT TO THE, YOU KNOW, ALMOST THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE. I THINK THAT'S THE, WE'RE WE'RE WILLING TO MAKE THAT COMMITMENT TODAY. I THINK THAT'S THE SAME COMMITMENT THAT WOULD HAPPEN NOW AND THE SAME COMMITMENT THAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE. OKAY. BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE A POINT, I I WOULD SAY THAT I FOUND IT ENLIGHTENING WHEN YOU LAID OUT THE PLANS THAT SHOWED THE SMALL PORTION OF THE BUILDINGS THAT WERE REALLY IN CONFLICT WITH THE ORDINANCE. AND I'M JUST WONDERING IF THAT MIGHT HELP THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO HELP UNDERSTAND REALLY HOW SMALL PORTION, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE ENVISIONING THAT IT'S AN ENTIRE BUILDING, HALF A BUILDING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT, BUT I WOULD SAY IT WAS ENLIGHTENING TO ME TO BE SHOWN ON PAPER EXACTLY HOW SMALL THAT PORTION WAS THAT WAS IN CONFLICT. SO JUST A THOUGHT. THANK YOU. WELL, ALL RIGHT. UH, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? O ZUNA, COMMISSIONER ZUNA. AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, ARE WE LOOKING FOR THE EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FROM [03:30:01] THE 38 FOOT, UH, UH, I'M SORRY, THE EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FOR A 38 FOOT HEIGHT ON THE ROOF. OKAY, THAT'S, I'M GONNA READ THE MOTION REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 180 8. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 30 FOOT HEIGHT BUILDING MAXIMUM WITHIN A HUNDRED FOOT OF ANY PERIMETER ABUTTING A RESIDENTIAL USE TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE, LIKE I SAID, BE TO BE 38 FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, GENERALLY LOCATED THE 5,200 EISENHOWER ROAD APPLICANT BEING, UH, JEFF NUCCI BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAD DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH THAT A LITTLE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCES NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE STRUCTURE WILL HAVE A MA MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 38 FEET AND DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, NOT INCLUDING THE PARAPET. AS CODE ALLOWS TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCES WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. STAFF FINDS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO THE TOPOGRAPHY ISSUE THAT ARE PRESENTED PRESENTLY ON THE LOT. THREE, BY GRUNTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE STRUCTURE HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND THE PROPOSED MAXIMUM HEIGHT WILL BE 38 FEET. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS THERE, THERE WILL STILL BE RE REASONABLE SPACE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED NO USES OTHER, THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITHIN, WITHIN THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY ARE ALL TO THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACT OF THE DISTRICT. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES IS NEAR OF HAS A REASONABLE DISTANCE OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING SIX, APPLIED TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS VARIANCE OF SOUGHT AS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT NEARLY FINANCIAL, NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ON THE PROPERTY INCLUDE THE WIDTH AND LOT AND CONFIGURATION AND THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY ISSUES ON THE LOT. THE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND A MOTION. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ZUNA, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ZUNA. UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNE. WOULD, UH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT YOUR MOTION IS IN LINE WITH THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED AND YEAH, SO MY, UM, MY, UM, MOTION AS READ INCLUDES THE SITE PLAN INCLUDING THE, UM, LANDSCAPE BUFFER THAT THE, UM, APPLICANT SHOWS US ON THE SITE PLAN AND THE SITE, UH, SITE SETBACKS AS WELL. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER UNA, PLEASE LEAVE THE DISCUSSION. RIGHT. SO I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, THIS, UH, VARIANCE AS READ THE MOTION THAT'S READ. UM, WE SAW THE IMPACTED AREA, WHICH IS VERY MINIMAL. WE SAW THAT THE APPLICANT KID MOVE THE BUILDING BACK WHAT FIVE FEET AND STILL BEING INPUT ISSUE IS STILL THERE. SO EVERYTHING THAT THE OPPOSITION IS, UH, TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE BUILDING BEING, YOU KNOW, A LARGE BUILDING, THAT THAT STILL COULD BE THE CASE. THE, THE APPLICANT ALSO IS PROVIDING THE BUFFERS, THE SETBACKS WE SEE THE, THE PLANTING MEDIUMS THAT HE'S PROPOSING, UH, WITHIN THE ACCEPTED SITE PLAN. UM, I DON'T SEE WHERE THE REMEDY OF THE DENIAL WOULD CURE ANYTHING THAT THE, UH, OPPOSITION IS, IS AGAINST THIS PROJECT FOR. SO I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. I'LL CONCUR WAS EVIDENCE. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? NO. COMMISSIONER ALBERT? YES. I WON'T BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. UM, WHAT THE NEIGHBORS NEED AND WHAT THE NEIGHBORS WANT IS MORE DISCUSSION AND SOME, SOME LEGAL PROMISES. UM, AND THE APPLICANT'S AND THE APPLICANT'S UNABLE TO, TO AFFORD THOSE, PROVIDE THOSE PROMISES. SO I CAN'T SEE, UH, DEPARTING FROM THE CODE, UH, FOR THAT. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? MINKA, COMMISSIONER MINKA, UH, ALL BEING SUPPORTED OF THIS, BUT I THINK THAT, UH, DEVELOPERS CONTACT TAKE THE INITIATIVE JUST AS A GOOD NEIGHBOR TO CLARIFY MORE WITH A NEIGHBOR. SOME, SOME MAILING OR SOME DISPLAY OF, UH, OF, UM, WORKING WITH THEM, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE GONNA GET YOUR, YOUR BUILDING, UH, WOULD BE A POSITIVE THING TO REALLY SHOW THEM WHAT'S THERE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? UM, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS WELL. UM, I THINK THAT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF POINTS THE DEVELOPER MADE, UH, ESPECIALLY THE, UM, DRAINAGE THAT THE, UM, THE WATER WOULD FLOW OFF INTO, UM, DRAINAGE PONDS ON THE EISENHOWER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO IT'S NOT GONNA IMPACT THE NEIGHBORS, UM, TO THE SOUTH, I BELIEVE THAT IS IS THAT SOUTH? IT IT WOULD BE TO THE EAST, EAST, THE WEST. WEST, WEST, SORRY. UH, WON'T IMPACT THE NEIGHBORS TO THE WEST. UM, THE FACT THAT HE'S GONNA ADD, UH, ADDITIONAL TREES ALONG THAT BUFFER LINE, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY TO ME WAS THAT IT WAS A VERY MINOR PORTION OF, OF EACH OF THOSE BUILDINGS THAT, UM, IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE, [03:35:01] THE CODE, UM, THE 45 FOOT FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE BUILDING FOR I WOULD SAY PROBABLY 98% OF THE BUILDINGS, UM, ARE NOT GONNA BE IN CONFLICT. AND SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT THE NEIGHBORS BROUGHT UP THAT UNFORTUNATELY ARE, ARE, YOU KNOW, ARE NOT IMPACTED. SO, UM, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? RIGHT? HEARING NONE? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CAN COVER MR. ZUNIGA. MR. SPIELMAN? I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MS. INGLES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR. MOTION PASSES NINE TO TWO. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN PLEASE GET WITH STAFF. AND, AND, AND THAT ALSO GOES FOR ANY CITIZENS WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. UM, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN IS LEAVING THE MEETING. IT IS, UH, 5 33. WE'RE DOWN TO 10 MEMBERS. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IT'S FIVE 30. I KNOW THAT WE CAN GET ALL THIS DONE BY SIX. IF WE JUST PRESS ON ITEM NUMBER 13, PLEASE. OUR SCREEN HERE IS STILL ON THE OLD PICTURE. I TURN THIS A LITTLE BIT SO I CAN READ IT. OKAY, COOL. NO, UM, JUST TURN IT OFF. WE TAKING A, I DON'T WANNA BRING, I WANNA GET OUTTA HERE. I KNOW. YEAH. I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS WERE, OH, JUST GO. OKAY. I JUST, THE NEXT ITEM IS BO O A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 8 9. ADDRESS IS 7 1 4 SOUTH NAVIDAD COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE. APPLICANT IS ALEJANDRO MULO. A REQUEST FOR ONE A EIGHT EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY. LINE TWO, A REQUEST FOR A 20 FOOT AND FIVE FOOT THREE VARIANCE FROM THE 25 FOOT AND 15 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A SOLID SCREEN FENCE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY FROM THE CURB, AND NINE FEET NINE INCHES FROM THE DRIVEWAY. AND THREE, A REQUEST FOR A ONE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE FIVE FOOT MAXIMUM FIN HEIGHT TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. ZONING IS R FOUR. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON A CORNER LOT OF SOUTH NAVIDAD. THERE IS AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON THE PROPERTY, AND THE APPLICANT IS WANTING TO ADD AN ADDITION TO THE FRONT OF THE HOME. THE PROPOSED ADDITION OF THE HOME WILL BE TWO FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. UPON THE SITE VISIT CONDUCTED BY STAFF, A SOLID SCREEN FENCE WAS OBSERVED TO BE PLACED IN FRONT YARD [03:40:01] AT A HEIGHT OF SIX FEET, WHERE A MAXIMUM OF THREE FEET IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT. ADDITIONALLY, THE SOLID SCREEN FENCE WAS INSTALLED ALONG THE FRONT YARD AND WAS OBSERVED TO BE ENCROACHING FIVE FEET INTO THE CLEAR VISION FIELD SITE PLAN. AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE SIX FOOT FENCE, THE SIX FOOT FENCE, AND THE SIX FOOT FENCE WITH THE CLEAR VISION AND THE FENCE TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE YARD. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY RECOMMENDATION, FRONT SETBACK AND CLEAR VISION VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN B O A 22 1 0 3 0 180 9 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE LIMIT BASED ON THE LODGE WILL PRESENTS A HARDSHIP IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ADDITION AND TO DEFENSE WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION FRONT YARD FENCE. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE FRONT YARD FENCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. AND ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY NOTIFICATION PLAN. 30 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. AND QUICKLY BEFORE YOU GO THERE, YOU'RE ASKING FOR A ONE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE FIVE FOOT MAX FENCE SITE, BUT IT WAS FOR A SOLID SIX FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE RIGHT ON THE SIDE. SO THE MAX WAS THREE FEET FOR THAT IN THE FRONT YARD. ON THE FRONT YARD SHOULD HAVE BEEN FRONT. OKAY. I HAVE TO GET WITH RHYTHM, THE CASE MANAGER THAT WAS THIS HAD TO LEAVE, SO I WAS FILLING IN. OKAY, I'LL, I'LL FIND OUT FOR YOU. BUT IT'S, IT'S A FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN OPENS ALLOWED, THREE FOOT SOLID, CORRECT? CORRECT. SO THIS IS A THREE FOOT EXCEPTION ON THAT ONE SECTION? YES, IT IS. AND IS THAT A, IS THAT A, IS THAT A, A ADVERTISING ISSUE ON THIS THAT WILL BE AN ADVERTISING ISSUE? YES. OKAY. SO DO WE NEED TO POSTPONE THIS ONE BECAUSE THAT'S ALSO TIED TO THE CLEAR VISION? YEAH, WE CAN JUST TAKE 'EM ALL TOGETHER INSTEAD OF BREAKING 'EM UP. OKAY. NO, I MEAN, DO YOU, NO, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. IF YOU WANT TO JUST, UH, BECAUSE WE POSTPONE THE ITEM, WE CAN JUST TAKE 'EM ALL TOGETHER INSTEAD OF YEAH. BREAKING THEM INTO PIECES. SO WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD. YEAH, WE'RE GONNA POSTPONE THE WHOLE THING. DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT? NO, BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE READVERTISED. NO, YOU, IT'S, IT'S JUST POSTPONED. WE'RE GOOD. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. ITEM 13 HAS BEEN POSTPONED. ITEM 14. CAN I SAY SOMETHING? OH YEAH, THAT WASN'T WHAT I WANTED. THE SIX FOOT SOLID . OH, CAN YOU, CAN YOU COME UP TO THE PODIUM PLEASE? I DON'T KNOW WHY. UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF. OKAY. SO, UM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. ALEJANDRA MOREIRA. OKAY. AND, AND I'M THE OWNER OF THE SEVEN 14 SOUTH . AND SO YOU WERE ASKING FOR, UM, THE PICTURE SHOWS THAT YOU HAVE A SIX FOOT FENCE ON THE SIDE? YES. ON THE SIDE. OKAY. AND YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU CAN ONLY BE ALLOWED A THREE FOOT FENCE, THREE FOOT FENCE ON THE SIDE, SO IT'S SOLID ON THE FRONT. YEAH. IF IT, IF IT WAS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, THEN IT COULD BE UP TO FIVE FEET TALL. YES. IN THE FRONT. I DIDN'T WANT, UM, A SOLID WOOD FENCE. I WANTED THE, WHAT'S IT CALL LIKE, KIND OF LIKE A MESH TO OR CHAIN LINK? YES. OKAY. SO YOU BUT THE WOOD FENCE, WHEN YOU, ONCE THE FENCE GOES IN FRONT OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE MM-HMM. , IT'S CONSIDERED A FRONT YARD FENCE. AND SO THAT WOOD FENCE, IT'S IN THAT PICTURE RIGHT THERE IS, IS CAN'T BE HIGHER THAN THREE FEET IN FRONT OF THE HOME. OH YES, I KNOW. I DIDN'T WANT A WOOD FENCE. SO YOU'RE GONNA KNOCK THAT FENCE DOWN. THIS ONE IN THE FRONT. OH, SORRY. YES. THE ONE IN THE FRONT. YES. I DIDN'T WANT, I WANTED TO REPLACE IT, UM, BUT NOT WITH THE WOOD FENCE, BUT SOMETHING SIMILAR LIKE THAT. OKAY. BUT TO SIX THEN, THEN I GUESS WE CAN STILL HEAR THIS CASE. MAYBE. UH, NO, I DON'T THINK SHE'S UNDERSTANDING. SHE STILL THINK SO EITHER. SHE'S, SHE'S STILL TALKING ABOUT THE FRONT. SO YOU SEE THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, RIGHT? YES. OKAY. IF YOU LOOK TO THE RIGHT OF IT, THERE'S A SIX FOOT FENCE RIGHT THERE. MM-HMM. . OKAY. NOW, IF YOU COME FORWARD, RIGHT WHERE HE POINTED, YOU CAN'T HAVE A FENCE THAT'S SIX FEET HIGH RIGHT THERE. SLIDE ONE 14. ESTIMATE BE THREE FEET, THREE FEET, THREE FEET. LET'S CONSIDER RIGHT THAT PORTION RIGHT THERE. YEAH. AND SO IT'S IS, SO WHAT HAPPENED IS YOUR CASE WAS ADVERTISED WITH A ONE FOOT VARIANT, BUT BECAUSE ONLY, WE CAN ONLY ALLOW A THREE FOOT FENCE, A ONE FOOT VARIANCE WOULD GET YOU FOUR FEET AND IT DOESN'T SOLVE YOUR PROBLEM. AND SO WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO WAS RE ADVERTISE IT CORRECTLY WITH WHAT YOU ARE WANTING [03:45:01] AND THEN HAVE YOU COME BACK, UH, AND, AND, AND LET ME TELL YOU, WHEN, WHEN YOU DO COME BACK, WE'LL MOVE YOU UP. I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN WAITING HERE A VERY LONG TIME. THERE'S NO WAY I'M GONNA EXPECT YOU TO WAIT. WE'LL BRING YOU UP TO THE FRONT OF THE LIST. BUT IF YOU COULD PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND TALK TO THEM ABOUT, ABOUT A GOOD DATE. UH, 'CAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO VOTE ON THE DATE THAT IT'S REALLY UP TO, UP TO YOU AND, AND STAFF AND WHEN, WHEN IT'S, YOU KNOW, CONVENIENT FOR YOU. BUT, UM, OR WE CAN PROCEED NOW, BUT THEN WE CAN'T GIVE YOU WHAT YOU HAVE THERE. UM, I'LL JUST WAIT, . OKAY. PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND, AND WE WILL FIGURE OUT, THEY'LL FIGURE OUT A DATE THAT'S CONVENIENT FOR YOU AND, YOU KNOW, AND WHEN WE RECOGNIZE YOU, WE'LL MAKE SURE YOU BRING YOU BACK UP TO THE FRONT. SO YOU, YOU'VE ALREADY WAITED, YOU'VE TURNED YOUR TIME A LITTLE. SO ITEM 13 IS, IS, UH, POSTPONED. AND, AND IF YOU COULD PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND TALK TO THEM, OKAY? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN. YES, , WAS THIS ONE BUILT WITHOUT PERMIT? UM, I DON'T KNOW. WE'LL HEAR ABOUT THAT WHEN SHE COMES BACK. SHOULD BE INDICATED, RIGHT? SO WHEN THEY, WHEN THIS COMES BACK UP TO US, PLEASE TALK ABOUT THE PERMITTING STATUS. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 14, BO O A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 1 58 27 MAGNUS LANE COUNCIL DISTRICT SIX APPLICANT BEING BEN ENTENTE, A FOUR FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT WITH GUTTERS TO BE EIGHT INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, A SIX FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT WITH GUTTERS TO BE THREE FEET, FOUR INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE CURRENT ZONING IS R SIX. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG MAGNUS LANE, NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH CALLAHAN ROAD AND ENRIQUE M BARRERA PARKWAY AND CURRENTLY HAS AN EXISTING FAMILY RESIDENCE BUT WITHOUT A PERMIT. THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCTED AN ATTACHED CARPORT, WHICH ENCROACHES INTO THE SIDE AND FRONT SETBACK, RESULTING A ZONING U D C INVESTIGATION BEGAN ON JUNE 7TH FOR A PROPERTY SETBACK VIOLATION. THE SITE PLAN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE SIDE SETBACK, THE WIDTH OF THE CARPORT, THE SURROUNDING AREA. MORE PICTURES. STAFF RECOMMENDATION SIDE AND FRONT ATTACHED, UH, CARPORT SETBACK VARIANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN BOA 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 1 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE CARPORT WAS BUILT WITHOUT OBTAINING PERMITS. AND TWO, THE CARPORT IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION IS TOO CLOSE TO THE FRONT SIDE. PROPERTY LINES, THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MODE OUT 30 NOTICES, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE CABLE WESTWOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE. THANK YOU. IF THE APPLICANT CAN COME FORWARD PLEASE. HELLO? UH, MY NAME IS BEN DE FUENTE. UM, I'M A LITTLE NERVOUS RIGHT NOW. THIS IS MY FIRST TIME EVER DOING SOMETHING LIKE THIS. I'M NOT REALLY QUITE SURE WHAT'S EXPECTED OF ME, BUT, UM, HAVING SPOKEN WITH MY MOTHER, UM, SHE'S A RETIRED LADY, UM, WITH VERY LIMITED, UH, EDUCATION. SHE DID NOT KNOW THAT SHE NEEDED A VARI, UH, A, A PERMIT FOR THIS, UH, CARPORT. THEN AFTER GETTING IT DONE, UH, I REALIZED AT, UH, ABOUT A YEAR AFTERWARDS THAT SHE HAD GOT IT WITHOUT A PERMIT. UM, SHE GOT THE, UH, CARPORT BECAUSE HER HUSBAND, MY STEPFATHER, UH, IS A FISHERMAN BY TRADE AND HE NEEDS THE, UH, CARPORT TO, UH, PROTECT THE BOAT THAT HE USES TO FISH. UH, WE THOUGHT ABOUT, UH, HAVING IT PARKED ON THE STREET, BUT IT'S JUST TOO LONG. UM, I WOULD LIKE FOR TO BE GRANTED TO, UH, KEEP THE CARPORT IF WE DE IF WE MOVE THE CARPORT OVER TO THE, UH, TO THE RIGHT OF THE HOUSE. THE, UH, SUPPORTING, UH, POST AS, UM, IT WILL BE, EVEN IF WE MOVED IT OVER TO THE, A THIRD OF THE WAY, IT WON'T BE ENOUGH. [03:50:01] IT'S JUST, JUST, IT WOULD BE TOO SMALL. OKAY. SO I HAVE, UM, ON MY LIST THAT THERE IS NOBODY SIGN UP TO SPEAK. I'M SORRY, THERE'S NOBODY SIGN UP TO SPEAK. SO WE CAN JUST START ASKING YOU QUESTIONS. OKAY. I'M GONNA START ASKING YOU A COUPLE QUESTIONS THAT ARE VERY COMMON WHEN IT COMES TO CARPORTS. UM, HOW MANY CARS CAN YOU PARK UNDER THERE? IS THERE, YOU CAN PARK TWO OR THREE NEXT TO EACH OTHER. UH, THERE'S THREE PLUS THE, UH, BOAT, WHICH IS BEHIND THE PICKUP TRUCK. OKAY, SO YOU'RE, SO YOU BASICALLY GOT A PICKUP TRUCK, A BOAT, AND THEN SOME CARS ON THE RIGHT OF IT? I'M SORRY? UH, THE PICKUP TRUCK AND THE BOAT, AND THEN A COUPLE CARS IN FRONT OF EACH OTHER NEXT TO IT. YEAH, THERE'S A TOYOTA, UH, TOYOTA CAR, UM, CAMRY ON IN FRONT. OKAY. AND THEN, UH, WHICH WAY DOES YOUR CAR PORT, UH, SLANT AS FAR AS DRAINAGE? IS IT DRAINED TO THE FRONT OR TO THE SIDE? TO THE FRONT? IT DOES DRAIN TO THE FRONT. IS THAT HOW YOUR HOUSE PREDOMINANTLY DRAINS TO THE FRONT OR TO THE REAR? UH, NO, TO THE FRONT. THERE IS, THERE IS A, UM, UM, RAIN GUTTER. OKAY. AND, UM, HAVE YOU TALKED TO YOUR NEIGHBOR ABOUT THIS? UH, NO. I MEAN WE'VE, DID THEY, I'M, WE'RE WONDERING, I'M WONDERING PERSONALLY, DID YOUR, DID YOUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR IMMEDIATELY NEXT TO THE CARPORT EXPRESS? ANY OPPOSITION? NO. NO. IN FACT, UH, HE ACTUALLY ACTUALLY TRIMMED THE, UH, TREE, HIS TREE SO IT WOULDN'T GO. UH, OKAY. THAT'S, THAT'S GREAT. I'M GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO COMMISSIONER OF QUESTIONS. I TRIED TO GET THE COMMON ONES OUT OF THE WAY. GO AHEAD. UM, COMMISSIONER MANNA. AND SO, UH, QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU IS, UM, UM, ONE OF, SO WE DON'T VOTE. AND SO MY DAD WAS A MASTER OF BACKING IT UP. IT WAS WONDERFUL WATCHING HIM. UM, HE'S A WORK OF ART AND SO, SO YOU KNOW, IF YOU WERE TO MOVE THE POST IN TWO FEET, OKAY, UM, UH, WOULD YOU STILL BE ABLE TO BACK THE BOAT UP INTO THAT SPACE? UH, NO. TWO FEET? NO. UH, THAT WOULD LINE UP WITH THE, UH, WITH THE HOUSE. SO IF I GO, UM, WELL, IF IT, SO IF YOU BRING UP, UM, GOOGLE MAPS AND SHOWS, 'CAUSE IT, IT HAS THE VEHICLES NOT THERE. SO CAN YOU BRING UP THAT MAP PLEASE? THERE WE GO. SO, SO THERE, SO, SO LOOKING AT THAT, SO IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A, MAYBE A FOUR FOOT AND THEN PLUS THE, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A NINE FOOT APRON THERE. SO LIKE 13 FOOT. SO DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE WIDTH OF THAT WHOLE CARPORT IS? THE WIDTH? UH, NO, I DO NOT KNOW OFFHAND. OKAY. SO THERE'S A FOUR FOOT, WE'LL SAY AT LEAST A FOUR FOOT APRON THERE ON THE LEFT THAT LOOKS LIKE ADDITIONAL CONCRETE. AND THEN THE NINE FOOT, BUT YOU HAVE A CAR KIND OF EXTENDING OVER, SO IT ALMOST LOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW, IF IT WAS SCOOTED OVER LIKE TWO FEET THAT YOU KNOW, THAT YOU'D, YOU KNOW, I GUESS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT DISTANCE IS THERE, UH, TWO FEET THAT'S, UH, THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE A VERY, VERY TIGHT FIT. UM, 'CAUSE THE, UH, THE BOAT ITSELF IS A LITTLE WIDE WIDER THAN THE TRUCK. UM, AND HE, HE USUALLY HAS A HARD TIME TRYING TO PUT IT, UH, PUT IT IN THERE AS IS RIGHT NOW. UM, WELL AS A FOLLOW UP QUESTION, THE CONCRETE, SLIGHT LITTLE CURBING THAT RUNS DOWN THE SIDE ON EITHER SIDE OF YOUR DRIVEWAY, WAS THAT ALWAYS THERE OR DID YOU BUILD THAT AS PART OF THE CARPORT? NO, NO. THAT, UH, THE CONCRETE THERE HAS BEEN THERE FOR LONG TERM. OH, 10. NO, NOT EVEN 10. UH, OKAY. I WOULD SAY 15 YEARS. OKAY. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MANIS, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? NO. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, HEARING NONE, MAYBE NO MORE. SO, SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE'D ALSO TALK ABOUT IS HARDSHIPS. SO, SO IF WE WERE TO ASK YOU TO TRIM THE SIDE OF THE, THE, THE SIDE THERE, UM, WHAT HARDSHIPS WOULD REPRESENT, SAY IF WE ASKED YOU TO BRING IT IN TWO FEET? IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY HARD 'CAUSE UM, MY BROTHER AND I BOTH, UH, WE JUST DID THE ROOF. UH, SHE, SHE SHAVED UP A LOT FOR THE, UH, FOR THE CAR, FOR THE CARPORT ITSELF. UH, I HAD NO IDEA IF SHE WANTED TO DO THE CARPORT AND RIGHT NOW IT'S A FINANCIAL STRAIN ON HER, UH, TO EVEN, UH, TO MEET THE, UH, THE MEET THE CODE. [03:55:02] OKAY. IT WOULD BE EVEN A HARDER STRAND IF WE HAD TO TEAR IT DOWN. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. MIN CHAKA? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. I COULD SEE THE LEFT AND RIGHT NEIGHBORS BOTH HAVE THE SAME THING. ARE THEY IN VIOLATION? THERE'S ACTUALLY A LOT OF PEOPLE ON THE STREET THAT HAVE THE SAME THING. ? YEAH. SO I TOOK SOME PICTURES, UH, OF IT AND I, AND I, UH, SUBMITTED WITH MY APPLICATION. IT, IT COULD BE EX THEY WERE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING. WE WOULD HAVE TO RESEARCH IN ORDER TO GIVE YOU A TRUE ANSWER ON THAT. UM, AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, WHEN IT WAS CONSTRUCTED. AND, BUT AS FAR AS BEING COMPLIANT FOR TODAY'S STANDARDS, LIKELY MAYBE NOT . OKAY. THE REASON I ASKED THAT QUESTION IS 'CAUSE UH, I WENT UP AND DOWN THE STREET AND MOST OF THE HOUSES, ACCORDING TO THE AGE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WERE FOR SINGLE CAR DRIVES, ONE CAR AND THEN SOME TOOK THE ADVANTAGE OF DOING THIS DOUBLE CAR. THANK YOU. OKAY. THERE. I'M SORRY, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. ZUNIGA? WAS THIS ONE A PROACTIVE? EXCUSE ME, MS. FOREST? YES. WAS THIS WAS PROACTIVE? WHAT, WHAT, HOW DID YOU GET THIS COMPLAINT? THIS ONE IS A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION THAT WAS OPENED PROACTIVE, OR IT BEGAN ON JUNE 28TH. SOMEBODY PROBABLY CALLED IT IN WHAT, UH, SOMEBODY CALLED IT IN MM-HMM. NEIGHBOR. I, I'M NOT SURE. I JUST KNOW IT STARTED BACK IN JUNE. UM, AND THEY'RE WAITING TO GET THE PROPER PERMITTING AT THE OUTCOME OF THIS HEARING. OKAY. THE NEIGHBOR TOURNAMENT IN. OKAY. IS, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE COMMISSION? A HEARING? NONE. I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'RE GONNA ASK FOR A MOTION MANNA AND SHE MANANA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 1. I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS A REQUEST FOR ONE, A FOUR FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AND ATTACH CARPORT WITH GUTTERS TO BE EIGHT INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, A SIX FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SIDE BACK SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A ATTACHED CARPORT WITH GUTTERS TO BE THREE FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 5 8 2 7 MAGNUS LANE. APPLICANT BEING BEN DE LA FUENTE. 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 E D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN A NECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE IT WILL ALLOW THE EXISTING CARPORT TO BE EIGHT INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND THREE FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE IT WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT HAVING TO ALTER THE CARPORT TO BE 10 FEET AND FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE FRONT AND SIDE PROPERTY LINES OR REMOVING THE STRUCTURE ENTIRELY. THE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP IS A CARPORT BEING, UH, EXISTING. UH, THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS TO ALLOW THE CARPORT TO BE CLOSER TO THE SIDE AND FRONT PROPERTY LINES. BECAUSE OF THE CARPORT, UH, EXISTING, WE WILL, UH, 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 AS THE PROPERTY IS ZONED. R SIX. AND THE USE OF THE PROPERTY IS A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. 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 BECAUSE OTHER CARPORTS CAN BE SEEN IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. CONSEQUE. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WILL NOT BE ALTERED. SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO OTHER GEN RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. IT APPEARS TO APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR TO, UH, BE MERELY FINANCIAL AND A MOTION. I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER MANNA. UM, YES, I'LL BE, UH, VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS. AND UM, MY REASONING IS IT DOES APPEAR THAT THIS COMMUNITY, THAT'S KIND OF THE DESIGN FEATURE, [04:00:01] UM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR, UM, THEIR CARPORT'S BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 2007. SO, UM, AND THIS ONE'S BEEN HERE FOR UH, I GUESS AT LEAST, UH, TWO YEARS OR FOUR YEARS I GUESS. SO, UM, AND DRIVING DOWN THE STREET, IT'S EVERY OTHER HOUSE OR EVERY THIRD OR EVERY FIFTH HOUSE SEEMS TO BE, UM, YOU KNOW, MODEL THIS DESIGN. SO IT SEEMS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMUNITY. I'LL BE ONE IN FAVOR. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NUN? HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MR. MANO, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. INGLES I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UH, MOTION PASSES 10 TO ONE. I'M SORRY, NINE TO ONE. UH, CONGRATULATIONS. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF? UH, NO. BUT I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND, UH, WE DO APPRECIATE THIS. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 15 AND COMMISSIONER INGLES IS LOGGING OFF. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE DOWN TO NINE PEOPLE. UH, OKAY, GOOD. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER 15 IS FOR CASE B O A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 1 9 4. LOCATED AT 1 26 ADELPHIA WITHIN COUNCIL. DISTRICT THREE, THE APPLICANT BEING RACHEL JACINTO IS A REQUEST FOR ONE A ONE FOOT THREE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW SOLID SCREEN FENCE TO BE FOUR FEET, THREE INCHES TALL ALONG THE FRONT YARD. TWO A THREE FOOT, 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW SOLID SCREEN FENCE TO BE 11 FEET, ONE INCH FROM THE FRONT CURB. THREE A 16 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 25 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FENCE TO BE NINE FEET FROM THE SIDE CURB. AND FOUR ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE THREE FEET EIGHT INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED. R FIVE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN SOUTH CENTRAL SAN ANTONIO AND CONTAINS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCTED A NEW FOUR FOOT, THREE INCH WOOD PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE PAST THE FRONT FACADE OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE. THE FENCE WAS BUILT WITHOUT OBTAINING A PERMIT, WHICH LED TO A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION, WHICH WAS OPENED IN AUGUST, 2022. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED FOR A SOLID SCREEN FENCE IN THE FRONT IS THREE FEET WHILE CONDUCTING THE SITE VISIT FOR THE PROPERTY. STAFF ALSO OBSERVED A CARPORT THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 2017 THAT DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK OF FIVE FEET. THE CARPORT ONLY MAINTAINS THREE FEET EIGHT INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF OBSERVED THAT, UH, BOTH THE NEW FRONT FENCE AND THE EXISTING FENCE LOCATED ALONG THE REAR ARE ENCROACHING INTO THE CLEAR VISION FIELD. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN DEPICTING THE VARIANCE REQUEST. UM, JUST A COUPLE NOTES HERE. UM, THE CARPORT ON THE SITE PLAN SHOWS THAT IT'S ON THE SIDE, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY IN THE FRONT OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE. AND THEN A, UM, THERE'S JUST A MISPRINT THERE. IT SAYS WOOD FENCE. HOWEVER, THE REAR FENCE IS ACTUALLY A CHAIN LINK, UM, WITH SOME LATTICE ON TOP. YOU'LL SEE IN THE NEXT, UH, FEW PICTURES AND SLIDES. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. YOU'LL SEE THE NEW FENCE ON THE LEFT SIDE AND THEN THE CARPORT. AND THE REASON WE SAY IT WAS CIRCA BUILT IN 2017 IS THROUGH GOOGLE IMAGERY. AND THEN THIS IS THE NEW, UM, FOUR FOOT, THREE INCH WOOD PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE SIDE. THIS IS THE VIEW OF THE, UH, FENCE AND CARPORT, THE EXISTING FENCE ALONG THE REAR. AND THEN IT WAS CONCLUDED DURING THE SITE VISIT THAT THIS WAS ENCROACHING INTO THE 25 FOOT CLEAR VISION FIELD REGARDING THE SIDE SETBACK AND, UH, CLEAR VISION VARIANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. ONE, A SIDE SETBACK OF THREE FEET, EIGHT INCH, EIGHT INCHES WOULD PROVIDE ENOUGH SPACE BETWEEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. TWO, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE A GARAGE FOR PARKING. AND THREE, THE CARPORT IS IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING RESIDENCE. AND FOUR SIMILAR CARPORTS ARE OBSERVED IN THE MEDIA AREA. THEREFORE, THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. REGARDING THE FENCE HEIGHT VARIANCE, STAFF REP RECOMMENDS DENIAL BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. ONE, THE FENCE CAN BE REDUCED TO THREE FEET. TWO, A THREE FOOT FENCE WILL NOT IMPEDE IN THE CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENTS. [04:05:01] AND THREE, THE FENCE IS UNCHARACTERISTIC IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEREFORE, THE REQUEST DOES APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. WE MAILED OUT 22 NOTICES. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION. WE DID, HOWEVER, RECEIVE, UM, A LETTER FROM MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS IN SUPPORT, AND THEN THE FOLLOWING SLIDE WILL HAVE A COPY OF THEIR, UM, UM, WHAT THEY SUBMITTED REGARDING THE REQUEST. AND THIS DOES CONCLUDE STOPS PRESENTATION. AND WE DO HAVE THE REPRESENTATIVE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. AND QUICKLY, UH, THE, THE CLEAR VISION, I THOUGHT IT WAS 15 FEET. YOU HAVE 25 LISTED SO THAT THE 25 FOOT IS JUST FOR THE REAR FENCE. UM, THE 15 FOOT WOULD BE THE FRONT. UM, SO THAT FRONT CURB. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? HOW YOU DOING? UH, SIR, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT WE ARE DOWN TO NINE MEMBERS RIGHT NOW. PARDON? WE'RE DOWN TO NINE MEMBERS FROM 11. OKAY. OKAY. YOU NEED NINE VOTES TO PASS ANYTHING ON THE, ON THIS BOARD. IT MIGHT NOT WORK OUT FOR ME, HUH? WELL, UM, I DON'T KNOW KNOW, BUT I'M JUST SAYING EVERY TIME WE, WE HAVE, UH, WE GO DOWN TO NINE AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DISAPPROVAL, WE OFFER YOU THE ABILITY TO COME BACK. UM, IF, IF YOU'D RATHER HAVE, UH, A FULL PANEL OF 11, THAT'S TOTALLY UP TO YOU. MANNA COMMISSIONER, MAN. AND ONE THING THAT WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST IS, UH, AFTER DIALOGUE HAS HAPPENED, WE'VE HAD THE APPLICANT STATE THEIR POSITION ONCE THEY'VE HEARD QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE THEY'RE KIND OF SEEING WHERE THINGS ARE GOING. SO, SO, SO THAT MAY BE AN OPTION FOR YOU AS WELL. LET'S BE FINE. YES, SIR. CAN I EXPLAIN? PLEASE, PLEASE. PROCEED. OKAY, HERE YOU GO. UH, FOR THE PAST 30 YEARS, MY WIFE AND I, WE'VE OWNED THIS HOUSE. WE PLAYED BY THE RULES ALL THIS TIME. SO SOMETIME BACK, THIS COMMITTEE CLOSED A RESIDENCE ON 4 34 CLUTTER. OKAY? I DON'T KNOW YOU REMEMBER, BUT, UH, THAT'S, THAT, THAT'S A CANCER IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. SO ALL THEM PEOPLE WOULD GO OVER THERE. NOW THEY'RE COMING RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO ME. PROSTITUTES, DRUG DEALERS, UH, DRUG DRUGGIES, UH, UH, PEOPLE ARE NOW STEALING BICYCLES. NOW THEY'RE BRINGING ALL THESE BICYCLE PARTS NEXT DOOR, UH, LIKE A BUSINESS. AND THEY COME WITH YOU, YOU NAME IT. UH, BIKE PARTS. AND WHEN YOU CLOSE THAT, THAT HOUSE DOWN AT 4 34 CLUTTER A FEW DAYS LATER, UH, HERE COMES A GUY FROM ALL THESE BIKES, FROM STEVE'S FROM 4 34, TAKES HIM TO 1 22 ADEA, WHICH IS MY NEIGHBOR. AND FOR THE PAST 11 PLUS YEARS, THIS HOUSE HAS BEEN A DRUG HOUSE. ALSO 1 22 ADEA, MY NEIGHBORS. AND, UH, THE REASON I ERECTED THIS FENCE AT THAT HEIGHT, MY OTHER THIRD NEIGHBOR GOT THE SAME FENCE, SAME HEIGHT THAN THREE FEET FROM THE SIDEWALK. AND, AND PART OF THE REASON IS THAT THESE PEOPLE THAT HANG AROUND NEXT DOOR, WELL, THEY'LL CUT RIGHT THROUGH IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE. RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE. THIS IS A CORNER HOUSE. SO INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH THE SIDEWALK, MY, OUR CAMERAS WILL CATCH 'EM COMING RIGHT IN, IN FRONT OF THE DOOR. OKAY? AND FOR MY OWN, UH, I, I ERECTED THE FENCE. I HAD A ERECTED FOR SAFETY REASONS. MY WIFE AND I ARE BOTH SENIORS AND WE STILL WORK. SHE GETS UP EARLY, I GET UP EARLY. SOMETIMES SHE LEAVES EARLIER, SOMETIMES I LEAVE EARLIER. SO SAYING, SAYING THAT, WELL, THAT AT LEAST GIVES ME A, A HEAD START IN CASE I GOT A, UH, HOW CAN I SAY IT? A FOUR FOOT FENCE CHAIN LINK FENCE AIN'T GONNA HELP THERE. ALL THEY'RE GONNA DO IS, IS JUMP THE FENCE, DO DAMAGE TO OUR VEHICLE, TRY TO DAMAGE OUR HOUSE. AND THAT'S NONSTOP. THESE PEOPLE COME AND GO, COME AND GO BICYCLE. YOU GOT WALK-INS, YOU GOT VEHICLE TRAFFIC ALL HOURS OF THE DAY. ON THE WAY OVER HERE, TAKING OFF FROM THE FRONT. YOU HAD PEOPLE THERE ALREADY. AND THESE PEOPLE, I GUESS THIS LADY THAT, UH, ALAN TO ZABE LET MOVE IN. HE CAN'T GET 'EM OUT NOW. AND I OFFERED HIM MONEY TO EVICT HIM. HE WOULDN'T TAKE IT. AND ALSO I SAW THAT COMING WHEN THESE PEOPLE FIRST MOVED IN WITH HIM. SO FOR OUR OWN SAFETY, THAT'S WHY I BUILT THAT FENCE LIKE THAT. AND IT DOESN'T BLOCK THE, THE, THE VIEW FROM THE CORNER. IT'S FAR AWAY FROM THE CORNER. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THOSE CARS THERE ON YOUR LEFT, THAT'S A, THAT'S A SMALL APARTMENT OR [04:10:01] GARAGE APARTMENT RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. MY NEIGHBOR'S THE ONE THAT HAS THE SAME FENCE. AND, UH, WHAT CAUSES TRAFFIC THERE IS THAT THERE'S CARS PARKED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET. SO THAT'S A TRAFFIC PROBLEM RIGHT THERE. MY FENCE DOES NOT BLOCK THE VIEW OF GOING, UH, TRAFFIC GOING NORTH OR SOUTH ON ADELPHIA, EAST AND WEST ON, ON CONGRESS. OKAY? ANOTHER THING IT DOES, IT ENHANCES OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS THE ENTRANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD FROM, FROM ACROSS MISSION SAN JOSE. AND, UH, IT, IT COVERS THE TRASH THAT'S GOING ON NEXT DOOR. AND, UH, I'VE CAUGHT SEVERAL OF 'EM WALKING AND I'VE CAUGHT 'EM. AND MY WIFE CAUGHT 'EM ON CAMERA AND I CONFRONT HIM, HEY MAN, YOU GOT A SIDEWALK RIGHT THERE. HE, OH, NO, NO, WAIT A MINUTE. SO THAT'S WHY I HAD TO DO THIS. I HAVE TO DO WHAT I HAVE TO DO. AND I HOPE YOU SEE THINGS MY WAY, BECAUSE I DO NOT WANNA TAKE THE LAW INTO MY OWN HANDS. THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT OF THAT HOUSE. AND I'M REPEATING MYSELF. IT'S BEEN A DRUG HOUSE FOR A LONG TIME. OKAY? I SET MY SPEED, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I'VE GOT DIMENSIONS HERE, TOP NEW DIMENSION AND SIDE DIMENSIONS. BUT, UH, UH, IT'S, IT'S BAD. AND RIGHT NOW THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE STEALING. NOW THEY'RE STEALING FROM PORCHES, UH, PLANTS, PLANTERS. AND, UH, THEY STOLEN FROM ME BEFORE, FROM ALL MY NEIGHBORS. THEY GO TO THROUGH THE ALLEYS TO ANYWHERE THEY, ANY, ANYTHING TO TAKE, THEY'LL TAKE. THAT'S THE SIDE VIEW AND THE TOP VIEW'S ON TOP. AND IT TAPERS OFF FROM FOUR FEET TO SIX FEET, WHICH COVERS EVERYTHING AND HELPS ME KEEP HIM FROM, UH, ENGAGING WITH THEM. 'CAUSE IT, IT'S HAPPENED BEFORE. THERE'VE BEEN TWO ODS. I'VE GOT, UH, 11 AND A HALF YEARS OF POLICE RECORDS THAT SHOW HOW MUCH HAS GONE THERE ALL THESE YEARS. AND IT'S STILL GOING ON. AND I DON'T SEE AN END TO IT, YOU KNOW, COMING. SO IF YOU WENT, IF YOU WANT TO SCHEDULE ME AGAIN, I'LL HOPEFULLY BRING SOME MORE DOCUMENTATION. AND, AND I BUILT THAT FENCE WITHOUT A PERMIT. I CAME BACK, I GOT THE PERMIT. I PAID FOR THE BEARINGS. OKAY, WELL, WE'LL SEE WHAT KIND OF LINE OF QUESTIONING WE HAVE. AND WE HAD THIS, UH, CITIZEN SIGN UP TO SPEAK. UH, MS. JANE HENRY, YOU GOT MY PHOTOS. HI, MY NAME IS JANE HENRY AND I LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I LIVE JUST A FEW STREETS AWAY FROM ALBERT, AND I'M ALSO ON THE BOARD OF THE MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF HI, UH, HIS REQUEST FOR HEIGHT VARIANCE FOR HIS FENCE. UH, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR YEARS NOW, UH, ON, UH, RESOLVING THE PROBLEMS THAT EXIST RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM HIM. DO YOU HAVE THAT MAP AGAIN OF THE, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THERE? RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM HIM AT 5 75 CONGRESS. YOU CAN SEE ALBERT'S HOUSE OUT OUTLINED IN RED, UH, RIGHT TO THE LEFT, THE HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET THERE AT THE CORNER OF CONGRESS IN PHILADELPHIA. UM, THAT'S ONE OF A TRIO OF HOUSES THAT HAVE BEEN JUST A CONSTANT PROBLEM WITH, UM, UM, VA THEIR, WELL, THAT ONE IS VACANT. HAS BEEN VACANT FOR A VERY LONG TIME. UM, AND THEN RIGHT NEXT TO ALBERT AT 1 22 ADELPHIA. UH, THAT'S ANOTH, THAT'S THE SECOND HOUSE IN THE TRIO. AND THEN DOWN THAT ALLEY BETWEEN, UM, RIGHT BEHIND 5 75 CONGRESS, THE ALLEYWAY LEADS TO, UH, WELL, THE BACK OF A HOUSE ON CLUTTER STREET, 4 34 CLUTTER. UM, THOSE HOUSES WERE INHERITED BY, UH, THE CHILDREN OF, OF, WELL, THE PARENTS WHO, WHO OWNED THE HOUSES AND TWO OF THE HOUSES HAVE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN BACK TAXES. THEY'VE NEVER PAID THE TAXES. 5 75 CONGRESS, THEY DO. UM, 5 75 IS THE VACANT ONE. AND THE CITY HAS SPENT THE, THE OWNER LIVES FAR AWAY. UM, BUT THE CITY IS, IS CONSTANTLY HAVING TO GO TO CLEAN THE HOUSE. UH, UH, THE, THE YARD CLEAR. THE, THE OWNER IS JUST TOTALLY NEGLIGENT OF THE PROPERTY. UH, VAGRANT GOING IN ALL THE TIME. DRUG DEALS GOING ON, WHO KNOWS WHAT GOING ON. AND THEN THEY GO THROUGH A HOLE ON THE FENCE, DOWN THE ALLEY TO THIS OTHER HOUSE ON 4 34 CLUTTER, WHICH WAS [04:15:01] RECENTLY CLEARED WITH A, UM, UH, CASE BROUGHT BY THE DANGEROUS PREMISES OFFICERS, THE POLICE, AND, UM, TO THE, UH, BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD. THAT WAS IN MAY, JUNE. THE HOUSE WAS ORDERED, VACATED AND SCHEDULED, UH, VACATED, SECURED AND SCHEDULED FOR DEMOLITION. UH, IT'S STILL, UH, VACATED AND SECURED AT THAT VERY DAY. I, THAT THE MORNING AFTER THE VACATION ORDER, I JUST DROVE DOWN THE STREET IN THE MORNING TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON, SAW THESE POLICE CARS. UM, SO I WENT OVER TO ALBERTSON, ASKED IF HE KNEW WHAT WAS GOING ON. AND AS WE WERE SPEAKING, ALL THESE GUYS CAME THROUGH THE ALLEY, VACATING THAT HOUSE, AND WENT OVER TO ALLEN'S HOUSE. HIS, UH, 1 22 ADELPHIA, HIS NEIGHBOR, THEY JUST TOOK UP RESIDENCE ON THE CAR, UNDER THE CARDBOARD IN THE HOUSE AND EVERYTHING. UM, SO THERE, THERE'S A CASE. UM, SO THAT HOUSE IS SCHEDULED FOR DEMOLITION. IT'S, YOU KNOW, BOTH OF THOSE OWNERS ARE APPEALING AT, UM, AND 1 22 ADELPHIA. UH, ON WEDNESDAY, I WILL FIND OUT THE, UM, THE DATE THAT THAT HOUSE WILL BE SCHEDULED WITH THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD FOR, UH, VARIOUS CODE VIOLATIONS, WHICH WILL PROBABLY LEAD TO, UH, INSPECTION BY DANISH SUPREMACIST OFFICERS. AND THEN HOPEFULLY THAT HOUSE WILL BE CLEARED. IN THE MEANTIME, UM, ALBERT AND HIS WIFE, UM, HAVE BEEN HAVING TO SUFFER THROUGH ALL THESE THINGS GOING ON THERE FOR, FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS. AND WE HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, CONSTANTLY CALLING POLICE AND CODE ENFORCEMENT AND ALL THIS STUFF. UM, OKAY. BUT, UH, I THINK THEY ESPECIALLY GOT UPSET WHEN ONE NIGHT, UH, THEY, WELL, WE HAD, UM, THIS, UM, SOMEONE, A NEIGHBOR, A FRIEND OF 1 22 ADELPHIA WAS FOUND. HE PULLED HIS, HIS SS U V INTO THEIR DRIVEWAY AND, AND FELL ASLEEP OR CRASHED OR, UH, PASSED OUT OR SOMETHING. AND THEY HAD TO GET THE POLICE TO COME AND, AND GET HIM OUT OF THERE. SO IT WAS SHORTLY AFTER THAT THAT THE FENCE WENT UP. OKAY. AND I WAS CONCERNED WHEN I HEARD THAT IT'S, IT'S, IT WAS A VIOLATION. YOUR YOUR TIME IS WAY PAST. BUT IF YOU COULD PLEASE, UH, UM, WRAP IT UP A LITTLE BIT. WE'VE BEEN HERE ALL DAY. UM, UM, OKAY. SO WHEN I HEARD THAT, THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE HEIGHT, I, I THOUGHT, WELL, OKAY, I'LL, I'LL GO CHECK IT OUT. 'CAUSE IF IT'S A PROBLEM WITH VISION, THAT'S AN, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A SAFETY PROBLEM, THAT'S ANOTHER ONE. BUT WHEN I DRIVE DOWN ADELPHIA STREET FROM EITHER DIRECTION, UM, I, I SEE IT AND IT'S NOT A PROBLEM APPROACHING THAT CORNER. IT'S NOT A PROBLEM AT ALL. AND IF I'M COMING IN FROM ROOSEVELT ON CONGRESS AND I TAKE A RIGHT ON ADELPHIA PAST HIS HOUSE, IT'S NO PROBLEM IMPEDING, UM, VISION. OKAY. SO I THINK THERE'S NO SAFETY, I DON'T SEE ANY SAFETY CONCERNS WITH THAT. OKAY. AND THEN HIS NEIGHBOR ON THE OTHER SIDE BUILT A, UM, A FENCE, A WOODEN FENCE OF THE SAME DESCRIPTION YEARS AGO. IT'S VERY OLD. IT'S BEEN THERE A LONG TIME. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. OKAY. QUESTION. IS THERE, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA? YES. QUESTION? UM, QUESTION MS. HENRY? YES. YES. UH, WE HAVE QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR, UH, YOU DUE DILIGENCE, BUT HAVE YOU, UH, TALKED TO YOUR CONSULT PERSON OR HAVE YOU TALKED TO THE SAFE OFFICER? OH, YES, WE ARE IN CONSTANT, I, I COPIED CHRIS VIA FROM HER OFFICE ON ALL OF THESE. UH, YOU HAVEN'T SPOKE TO HER COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE, YOU HAVEN'T TALKED TO HER IN PERSON, DID YOU? YOU? NO, NOT ABOUT THIS. WE DEAL WITH, WITH CHRIS V ON THIS SUBJECT. WELL, THAT'S, NO, I'M ABOUT THIS AND BY THE SAFE OFFICERS, YOU DON'T WANNA DO THAT EITHER. YOU HAVEN'T DONE THAT. EXCUSE ME. YOU TALK TO THE SAFE OFFICER, THE POLICE. UH OH, YES, YES, YES. OH, OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SAFE OFFICERS, UH, THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, DANGEROUS PREMISES OFFICER, UH, VACANT BUILDINGS, PROGRAM PEOPLE, ALL OF THAT. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY, DEFINITELY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, WELL, HEARING NONE, I'M GONNA OPEN THIS UP FOR A MOTION COMMISSIONER MANAM, AND I'M GONNA MODIFY IT JUST A LITTLE BIT JUST TO STATE THE, THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO BETWEEN THE TWO J UH, THE TWO, UH, PROPERTIES. SO, UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 4, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT THROUGH REQUEST FOR ONE A ONE FOOT THREE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A SOLID SCREEN FENCE TO BE FOUR FOOT THREE INCH TALL ALONG THE NORTH FRONT YARD. AND TWO, A THREE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION, UH, REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A SOLID SCREEN FENCE TO BE 11 FOOT ONE INCH FROM THE [04:20:01] NORTH FRONT CURB. UH, THREE A 16 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 25 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE NINE FEET FROM THE SIDE. UM, LET'S SEE, FROM THE NORTH SIDE CURB AND, UH, ONE, UH, A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE THREE FEET EIGHT INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 2 6 ADELPHIA. APPLICANT BEING RACHEL JACINTO, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT AURAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE THE CARPORT SETBACK PROVIDES ADEQUATE SPACING BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THE REAR FENCE IS MADE OF PREDOMINANTLY OPEN MATERIALS THAT ALLEVIATE THE ENCROACHMENT INTO THE CLEAR VISION FIELD. AND A NEW SOLID SCREEN FENCE ALONG THE FRONT IS, UH, A PRACTICAL HEIGHT. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE IT WOULD RESULT IN HAVING TO DECREASE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND WIDTH OF THE CARPORT, UH, WHICH WOULD NOT ACCOMMODATE A VEHICLE. THE CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT, AND THE FRONT YARD FENCE WOULD NEED TO BE REDUCED IN HEIGHT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPARE OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS THE CARPORT AND REAR FENCE MEET ALL OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS. THE FRONT YARD FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED FIVE FOOT IN HEIGHT, THEREFORE THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR UNREASONABLE. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS VARIANCE IS LOCATED AS THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R SIX. AND THE USE OF THE PROPERTY IS A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY, OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. BECAUSE THE CARPORT SET SIDE SETBACK ALONG A FRONT AND REAR YARD, FENCES DO NOT APPEAR OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE AREA. SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH IS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THERE ARE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY AND A MOTION. ALRIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. COMMISSIONER MANNA? UM, YES, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS. UM, AND YEAH, I, I REALLY DON'T SEE ANYTHING, UH, UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE CLEAR VISION THAT WOULD IMPACT, UH, ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS THEMSELVES. UM, AND SO, SO THEREFORE I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA, I, I WILL BE VOTING FOR IT. THEY'RE DOING, THEY'RE DUE DILIGENCE, BUT THEY HAVEN'T COME TO A FUSION ON IT, BUT IT'LL TAKE A LITTLE TIME, SO THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, I'D LIKE TO, UH, ASK, UH, THE, THE SPECIAL, THE, THE FENCE SITE, SHOULD THAT HAVE BEEN READ IN AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION? IT WAS READ IN AS A VARIANCE. I, SO, UM, THE SECTION ABOUT THE FENCE HEIGHT MODIFICATION STATES SPECIFICALLY THAT THE FENCE HEIGHTS HIGHER THAN THOSE, UM, ALLOWED WOULD BE THROUGH A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. GIVEN THAT THE CHART OR THE, UM, SECTION OF THE CODE SAYS THAT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT WOULD BE, UM, FIVE FOOT IN THE FRONT AND SIX FOOT, UM, JUST IN GENERAL FOR FENCES, THIS WOULD BE CONSIDERED A VARIANCE JUST BECAUSE IT'S NOT EXCEEDING WHAT THE MAXIMUM IS PERMITTED IN GENERAL FOR. I JUST WANTED, I JUST WANTED TO VERIFY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER COMMENTS? LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MR. MANO. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPILLMAN. I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES NINE TO ZERO. CONGRATULATIONS. . I THOUGHT WE GOTTA WRAP IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, . THANK YOU. UH, NEXT ITEM IS THE, UH, CALENDAR. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. RIGHT. SO WE, UM, JUST GAVE YOU A SET OF DATES AND WE ADJUSTED FOR THOSE DATES THAT WOULD BE ON HOLIDAYS. AND SO WE JUST, UH, HOPEFULLY YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW. UM, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIRST PAGE, THAT'S THE PAGE THAT WE USUALLY GIVE THE PUBLIC WHEN THEY COME IN AND ASK US WHAT THE MEETING DATES ARE. AND THEN ON THE BACK YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENT, UM, JUST A GENERAL CALENDAR AND EVERYTHING THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED ARE, ARE, ARE DATES THAT ARE NOT THE FIRST OR THIRD MONDAY, [04:25:01] CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. WELL, THE, THE HIGHLIGHTS ARE ACTUALLY, THE CIRCLES ARE ACTUALLY THE DATES THAT ARE WOULD BE NORMAL. SO LIKE IF YOU LOOK AT JUNE, 2023, NORMALLY YOU WOULD HAVE JUNE 5TH AND JUNE 19TH. BUT BECAUSE OF JUNETEENTH, YOU WHAT WE, UH, ARE PROPOSING JUNE 26TH. NO, I MEAN, NOT, NOT THE, THE LIGHT PURPLE-ISH HIGHLIGHT. AND WHEN YOU DOWNLOAD IT FROM THE, UH, ONLINE AGENDA, THERE'S A YELLOW HIGHLIGHT ON THE NUMBERS THAT, THAT DON'T SEEM TO BE THE FIRST OR THIRD. THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING TO, BUT UNLESS YOU DOWNLOAD IT FROM THE, UH, ESSAY SPEAK UP, YOU'RE NOT GONNA SEE WHAT I'M SEEING. YES, YOU HAVE TO LOOK UP FROM ONLINE. YEAH, I, I DON'T MIND PASSING THIS AROUND, BUT IT'S THE DATES, UM, BASICALLY THE DATES THAT HAD TO BE ADJUSTED WERE, UM, JANUARY, MARCH, UM, WELL, NOT MARCH. I'M SORRY, NOT MARCH. UH, JUNE, UH, 26TH IS AN ADD. JUNE, UH, JULY 10TH IS IS THE CON COUNTER THE JULY 4TH HOLIDAY. CORRECT. UH, AND THEN SEPTEMBER, UM, 11TH IS FOR, UH, LABOR DAY. SO WE'RE, WE'RE, 'CAUSE NORMALLY WOULD'VE IN THE YEAR 2023, YOU WOULD'VE MISSED JUNE JUNETEENTH JULY 4TH AND LABOR DAY. SO BY MAKING THESE ADJUSTMENTS FOR GETTING TWO MEETINGS A MONTH, BUT IT'S NOT GONNA BE THE FIRST AND THIRD IN, IN JULY. IT'LL BE THE, IT'LL BE THE SECOND AND FOURTH. MONDAY IN SEPTEMBER, IT'LL BE THE SECOND AND FOURTH MONDAY. AND THEN IN OCTOBER IT'LL BE THE SECOND AND FOURTH MONDAY. SO EITHER WAY, IT MEANS THAT YOU HOPEFULLY DON'T HAVE TO MAKE UP ANY MEETINGS DURING THE YEAR AND IT KEEPS YOU ON ON POINT. YEAH. THAT'S AWESOME. SO IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER COMMENTARY? I DON'T HEARING NONE. UM, LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO ACCEPT. MOTION TO ACCEPT. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MIN CHAKA. UM, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. [ Approval of Minutes  ] NEXT ITEM UP IS A MINUTES. UH, I HAD SOME AMENDMENTS. UM, THIS ONE REFLECTS ANY, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER AMENDMENTS? I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS. MOTION. APPROVE. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ARMANA. IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER MANCHACA AGAIN. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. THE MINUTES PASS. [ Director’s Report  ] NOW WE'RE ON TO THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT. RIGHT. AND JUST VERY BRIEFLY, UH, GOING BACK TO THE CALENDAR, BUT FOR THIS YEAR, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GOOD AND ON TASK SO FAR. SO, UH, WE ARE GOING TO ELIMINATE THAT NOVEMBER 29TH MEETING, BUT WE ARE GONNA KEEP THE DECEMBER 12TH MEETING JUST IN CASE. UH, WE NEED IT. OKAY. SO, AND IF YOU DO THAT, HOW MANY CASES ARE WE HAVING ON THE AGENDA PER MEETING? STILL 15. IT'S STILL 15. YES. BECAUSE HERE'S ONE THING IS THAT I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT IS TODAY, YOU KNOW, IN THE, IN THE LAST FEW MEETINGS WE'VE BEEN HAVING TWO OR THREE POSTPONEMENTS, A GOOD NUMBER OF CONTINUANCES. TODAY WE ACTUALLY HEARD PROBABLY MORE CASES THAN WE'RE USED TO. OF COURSE, WE ALSO LOST 40 MINUTES WITH THE EXEC SESSION. SO, UH, AND IT'S ALMOST SIX 30. SO I'M, I JUST, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE WE PUT, WE MOVED A LOT TO DECEMBER 5TH. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT MAYBE WHEN'S THE LAST TIME YOU CAN GET RID OF IT BEFORE IT'S, UH, A PROBLEM FOR YOU GUYS? THE ONE IN DECEMBER OR NOVEMBER? I'M SORRY. UH, THAT, THAT WOULD BE THIS WEEK. WE WOULD HAVE TO PUBLISH FOR IT THIS WEEK IN MAIL FOR IT THIS WEEK. OKAY. WHAT DOES THE COMMISSION THINK ABOUT KEEPING IT OR REMOVING IT? WHAT'S THAT? IT JUST IN TERMS OF SAY IT AGAIN SIR. WELL, SO DOES IT, DOES IT, WOULD THE COMMISSION LIKE TO KEEP THAT, THAT EXTRA MEETING IN NOVEMBER OR DO YOU WANT TO JUST, UH, NOT HAVE IT? STAFF IS SAYING THAT IF THAT WE'LL PROBABLY BE OKAY. WE'LL STILL BE HEARING 15 PER MEETING. I JUST DON'T WANNA SEE 19 THINGS ON THERE. NO, WE WON'T DO THAT TO YOU, . SO IF, IF THERE'S NO OPPOSITION, DO WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE ON THAT OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT NO, NO. I JUST WANTED TO, UH, LET YOU KNOW ABOUT THAT, THAT WE WOULD PROBABLY NOT SCHEDULE THAT ONE. UM, BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT ON TASK AND WE'RE BASICALLY, UH, CAUGHT UP AS OF THE DECEMBER 5TH MEETING. SO I JUST, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE 'CAUSE WHEN WE VOTED TO ADD IT, I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE HAD TO VOTE TO REMOVE IT OR ANYTHING. NO, YOU DON'T. OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD TO ME. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? ANYBODY? I HAVE SOMETHING. YES. UM, MR. ALBERT, MR. MANCHACA, MS. CRUZ? MR. MANNA? MR. OZUNA? MR. ZUNIGA? NO, NOT MR. ZUNIGA. WHENEVER YOU FINISH THE TRAININGS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. [04:30:01] I WILL KEEP BOTHERING YOU. WHAT? TRAINING? THE ONLINE VIDEOS. THE, THE LITTLE EIGHT MINUTE VIDEOS AND THOSE A SHORT QUIZ. OTHER THAN THAT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO I DID LET CHAIRMAN, HOLD ON. MY NAME SHOULDN'T BE ON THAT LIST. I THOUGHT 'EM ALL. YOU DID. I'LL LET YOU KNOW THE RECENT FOR OCTOBER, NOVEMBER. OKAY, SO WE'RE, OH, THERE'S WHAT? UM, I SAW AN EMAIL THAT SAID IT WASN'T RELEASED YET AND YOU WERE WAITING TO RELEASE IT GOT RELEASED. SO HERE, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO. WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND ADJOURN THE MEETING AND COMMISSIONER MANIC CAN GO AND COMMISSIONER ZUNI AND, AND TALK TO STAFF. WHY DON'T WE GO SWEAR WE'RE IN MINUTE HEREBY ADJOURN THE MEETING. 6 27 . * 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.