* 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. [00:00:06] ALL RIGHT, IT'S ONE O'CLOCK. I'M GONNA CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER. IF WE COULD GET THE SPANISH INTERPRETER TO, UH, COME OUT AND DO THE PRESENTATION, PLEASE. HE MIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU. IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE SILENCE THEIR CELL PHONES AND, AND ELECTRIC DEVICES. UH, STAFF, IF YOU COULD START WITH THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE. MR. SPIELMAN. PRESENT. MR. ALBERT? MR. MENCHACA PRESENT. MR. MENA? PRESENT. MS. BRAGMAN PRESENT. MS. MICE PRESENT VICE CHAIR UNA. PRESENT BOARD MEMBER KAPLAN. PRESENT BOARD MEMBER VASQUEZ PRESENT AND CHAIR ORIAN. AND I'M PRESENT. DO WE HAVE, UH, BOARD MEMBER LIND? YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF YOU COULD ALL JOIN ME AND STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLAY ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE ISSUE UNDER GOD WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD ONE. AND INVISIBLE. OKAY, [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items  ] SO BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I'D LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION. THE BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. THE CASE IS LISTED BY A NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND THE STREET ADDRESS. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT. LASTLY, AS CHAIR, I'LL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS. I ASK THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS A CHAIR AND I'LL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE MEETING. WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF T, AND THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY'S ZONING CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THIS AREA. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW. WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELEASE SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE IN THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. WE ALSO SERVE IN AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 28 DASH FIVE. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR CASES AND OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED BY 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 WILL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION. EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY A REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN GRANTING THE RELIEF SAW RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS IN WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF COULD BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S. DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE STAFF. GOOD AFTERNOON. STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION AT A REQUEST. PRIOR PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXEMPTION AND PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHECK MARKS. INDICATE THOSE [00:05:01] PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE IN FAVOR X INDICATES PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION. FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION AND ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR QUE REQUEST. FOR THOSE THAT ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXEMPTION, YOU'LL BE CALLED OUT IN THE ORDER THAT YOU SIGN UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM UP TO 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, THE SPEAKER WILL GIVE UP, WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE GIVING UP THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES. THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED UP TO SPEAK GROUPS CONSISTENT OR THREE OR MORE CITIZENS WILL BE ALLOTTED NINE MINUTES TOTAL TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON THE ITEM. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS. CHAIRMAN. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. SO TODAY WE'RE GONNA BEGIN WITH, WITH, UH, ITEM, UH, ENDING IN 2 0 7. ITEM ONE ON THE AGENDA. BEFORE HE BEGINS, WE'RE JUST GONNA MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE CORRECT POWERPOINT UP. SO JUST GIVE US ONE MOMENT PLEASE. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD MO. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBERS. MY NAME IS AMIN THOMAS. I'M THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR HERE AT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. I OVERSEE CODE ENFORCEMENT AND INSPECTIONS, UM, AND I ACT AS THE DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL AS WELL. SO I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT, UH, CASE NUMBER ENDING 0 2 0 2 AT 0 2 0 7. IT'S LOCATED AT 34 42 BELGIUM LANE. BASICALLY, UH, THIS, THIS CASE IS AN APPEAL TO THE DECISION THAT I MADE, UH, IN REGARDS TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE OF INTENT TO REVOKE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY DUE TO OPERATING OUTSIDE THE SCOPE THAT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO, UH, UH, TO OPERATE THIS, UH, FACILITY AND THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL. IT'S NOT WORKING. OKAY, SO BRIEF CODE HISTORY. UH, MARCH 2ND, 2022. CODE ENFORCEMENT RECEIVED, UH, A COMPLAINT IN REGARDS TO ODOR AND SMELL AND NUISANCE FROM THIS PROPERTY. CODE ENFORCEMENT WENT OUT THERE, DID THE INSPECTION, AND THEY FOUND SOME VIOLATIONS. THEY ISSUED A 10 DAY NOTICE. UH, THAT'S OUR STANDARD PROCESS. BASICALLY, SOME OF THOSE VIOLATIONS ARE LISTED HERE. UH, THE FIRST ONE IS AGAIN, THEY'RE OPERATING OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THEIR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. JUST REALLY QUICKLY, UH, CHAPTER 10, BUILDING RELATED CODES, SECTION 10 12. IT'S ACTUALLY SPECIFICALLY IN REGARDS TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. ANY BUSINESS, ANY STRUCTURE NEEDS TO HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY TO OPERATE THE BUSINESS AND THEY HAVE TO OPERATE WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THAT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. SO THIS LOCATION, THEY HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ISSUED IN 2015, BUT THAT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUP OCCUPANCY STATES, SPECIFICALLY IT'S FOR CONSTRUCTION FACILITY AND TRUCK REPAIRS. WHAT'S HAPPENING TODAY IS THEY HAVE PORTA PARTY STORAGE AND WASTE DISPOSAL. SO THEREFORE THEY ARE OPERATING OUTSIDE THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THAT THEY HAVE TODAY. ALSO, UH, THE U D C UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION THREE 11, TABLE THREE 11 DASH TWO, NON-RESIDENTIAL USE MATRIX. AS YOU GUYS KNOW, I TWO OCCUPANCY WILL ALLOW YOU TO STORE. SO IF WE GO BACK TO WHAT THEY'RE DOING TODAY, THEY'RE STORING THOSE PORTA PARTIES. SO OBVIOUSLY THEY CAN DO THAT. THAT'S NOT VIOLATION AT ALL. THAT IS WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS. THE ISSUE THEY HAVE IS THEY'RE DOING WASTE DISPOSAL. AND IN THE U D C TO ALLOW FOR THAT, YOU NEED TO HAVE AN I TWO SS, WHICH IS A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR SANITARY LANDFILL TO PROCESS SANITARY WASTE. THAT IS THE ISSUE WE HAVE IN HAND. OOPS, HERE WE GO. FURTHERMORE. UM, SO OBVIOUSLY THE, THE 10 DAY NOTICE EXPIRED ON MARCH 16. WE ACTUALLY GAVE THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME. 'CAUSE WE, WE WANT COMPLIANCE. WE WANT THEM TO COMPLY. SO WE WENT OUT ON THE 24TH OF MARCH AND WE DID AN INSPECTION REINSPECTION AND THE VIOLATIONS TO REMAIN. ALSO, WE FOUND AT THAT TIME, UH, BASED ON THE U D C SECTION 5 26 F CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIAL IN REGARDS TO PARKING LOTS, UH, THE SURFACE WAS, UM, [00:10:01] INAPPROPRIATE. THEY'RE USING INAPPROPRIATE MATERIAL TO, UH, UTILIZE THE PARKING LOT AS WELL. SO WE GAVE THEM 10, 10 DAY NOTICE FOR THAT. AND THAT NOTICE EXPIRED ON APRIL 11. WE WAITED A COUPLE MORE WEEKS, WE WENT ON MAY 4TH, AND WE REINSPECTED AND ALL THREE VIOLATIONS REMAIN UNCHANGED. SO OBVIOUSLY, UM, BASED ON OUR CODES AND RULES THAT THE CITY HAS, WE HAD TO ISSUE CITATIONS. SO WE ISSUED THREE CITATIONS FOR THOSE THREE VIOLATIONS THAT I JUST MENTIONED. UH, THEY WERE SCHEDULED FOR SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING ON JUNE 7TH. UM, ACTUALLY THE, THOSE HEARINGS, UH, GOT RESET FOUR TIMES BY THE APPLICANT. SO, SO FAR THEY ARE SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 29TH. UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GONNA BE RESET AGAIN OR NOT, BUT FOR THE TIME BEING, IT'S SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 29TH. SO, TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT, UH, ZONING HISTORY, IF YOU NOTICED, I JUST MENTIONED THAT, UH, THE FIRST HEARING WAS SCHEDULED ON JUNE 7TH. WHAT THE APPLICANT DID, UH, THEY OR THE APPELLANT DID. THEY APPLIED FOR PLAN, AMENDMENT AND ZONING THE DAY PRIOR TO THAT, WHICH IS TOTALLY FINE. AGAIN, WE WANT COMPLIANCE. SO NORMALLY AS CODE OFFICERS, WHEN WE SET A CODE DATE, IF THE VIOLATOR, IF YOU WILL, IF THEY COME AND THEY APPLY TO CORRECT THAT ISSUE, WE ACTUALLY PULL BACK AND WE STOP ENFORCING. 'CAUSE NOW WE KNOW THEY'RE TAKING THE RIGHT ROUTE. SO ON THE 6TH OF JUNE, THEY APPLIED FOR, AGAIN, UH, PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONING. SO AT THAT POINT, WE STOPPED ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE WE WANT THEM TO GET INTO COMPLIANCE. SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2022, THE APPLICANT DECIDED TO PULL THEIR CASE. SO OBVIOUSLY AT THAT POINT, THEY'RE STILL IN VIOLATION. THEREFORE, WHAT I DID IS I ISSUED, UH, A NOTICE OF INTENT TO REVOKE C C O, WHICH IS CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ON SEPTEMBER 23RD, BASICALLY GIVING THEM ADDITIONAL TIME TO EITHER COME INTO COMPLIANCE OR TO SEIZE THAT OPERATION. IN REGARDS TO THE WASTE, UH, SPECIFICALLY SEPTEMBER 26TH, 2022, THEY APPLIED FOR AN APPEAL, SUBMITTED AN APPEAL TO YOU GUYS, UH, BASICALLY APPEALING MY DECISION OF ISSUING ISSUANCE OF THE INTENT TO REVOKE C F O. UH, THE DIRECTOR, MICHAEL SHANNON, HE ISSUED A LETTER OF EMINENT PER, UH, ON OCTOBER 6TH. AND AGAIN, BASICALLY HE SUBMITTED THAT TO THE CHAIR AND TO THE BOARD. UM, THAT LETTER IS BASICALLY STATING THAT THE SAFETY, HEALTH, AND WELLBEING OF, OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS ARE, ARE AFFECTED AND WE NEED TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. SO BASICALLY, IN SUMMARY, CODE ENFORCEMENT RESULTED FROM COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE UNPLEASANT SMELL AND HEALTH RELATED ISSUES FROM AIR POLLUTION. UNITED SITE SERVICES CONTINUES TO OPERATE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THEIR ISSUED CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THEY ALSO CONTINUE TO HAVE A ZONING VIOLATION FOR ONSITE SANITARY WASTE PROCESSING. THE SITE STILL HAS VIOLATIONS FOR INAPPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL FOR THE PARKING AREA. SO AGAIN, ALL THREE VIOLATIONS TO REMAIN UNITED SITE SERVICES HAVE BEEN, UH, GIVEN MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES TO RESOLVE THIS MATTER OR THOSE VIOLATIONS. TO DATE, NONE OF THOSE ISSUES HAS BEEN REMEDIED. THIS IS A SERIOUS MATTER THAT REQUIRES ACTION FOR HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO REVOKE C F O IS NECESSARY AND WARRANTED. HERE IS SOME PICTURES, UH, OF THE SIDE. THAT'S KIND OF THE ENTRANCE. THIS IS WHERE THEY DO SOME OF THE, UH, WASTE, I GUESS PROCESSING OR CLEANING DISPOSAL. AGAIN, JUST A COUPLE OF PICTURES THAT'S OUTSIDE. AND YOU CAN SEE THE SIGN ON THE LEFT, KIND OF, UH, NOT FULLY, BUT WHEN THEY APPLY TOONE, THEY HAD THE SIGN THERE FROM THE OTHER DIRECTION. JUST AGAIN, QUICKLY TO SHOW YOU THE STREET. SO AGAIN, UM, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, UH, YOU GUYS HAVE BASICALLY TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO REVOKE THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS WARRANTED PER INFORMATION AND EVIDENCE PROVIDED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER THE APPEAL, INVESTIGATE WEIGH EVIDENCE, AND DRAW COLU CONCLUSIONS. THE, THE BOARD MAY REVERSE OR AFFIRM IN WHOLE OR IN PART THE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION BROUGHT FORWARD BY THE APPELLANT AND DISCUSSION AND DISCUSSED IN THIS AGENDA ITEM. SO BASICALLY, AGAIN, THE CONCLUSION, OUR, OUR RECOMMENDATION STAFF CONCLUSION, BASICALLY THAT THE ISSUANCE OF THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO REVOKE THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS CORRECT. COURSE OF ACTION BASED ON THE [00:15:01] FOLLOWING FINDINGS. ONE, THERE ARE CODE VIOLATIONS AND EVIDENCE OF ACTIVITY OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF ISSUANCE ISSUED, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. NUMBER TWO, THERE IS AN ONGOING ZONING VIOLATION THAT'S STILL REMAINS. NUMBER THREE, THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN GIVEN NUMEROUS OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMPLIANCE AND THEY HAVEN'T. NUMBER FOUR, THERE IS A THREAT PO TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS AND, UH, RESIDENTS. WE MAILED 25 NOTICES. UH, WE GOT ZERO IN FAVOR. WE GOT TWO OPPOSITIONS, NO RESPONSE FROM UNITED, UH, HOMEOWNERS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, WILLWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UNREGISTERED, THEY'RE, UH, OPPOSED TO THIS. UH, THEN WE GOT FIVE OUTSIDE THE 200 FEET THAT THEY'RE OPPOSED TO THIS DECISION. THAT'S MY PRESENTATION AT THIS TIME. I'M OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS. UH, I I'D LIKE TO ASK, UH, UH, AT LEAST, UH, ONE OR TWO QUESTIONS. UM, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHAT IS THE BASIS, UM, OF WHAT IS BEING APPEALED? ARE THEY APPEALING THAT THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY NEED THE SS ZONING OR ARE THEY APPEALING? UM, I MEAN, JUST YOUR NOTICE TO REVOKE THEIR C O O OR WHAT IS, WHAT ARE THEY ACTUALLY APPEALING? THEIR, THEY'RE APPEAL SPECIFICALLY TODAY IS THEY'RE APPEALING MY DECISION OF ISSUANCE OF THE NOTICE, UH, OF INTENT TO REVOKE C F O. THAT'S REALLY WHAT THEY'RE APPEALING TODAY. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. NOW, OBVIOUSLY WHEN THEY PRESENT, WE WILL HEAR WHAT'S THE REASONING. OKAY. NO, I, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR. AND THEN, UM, THE, THE WILLOW WOODS NEIGHBORS ASSOCIATION IS THAT TO THE NORTH AND, AND I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE IN THE UNITED HOMEOWNERS IS THAT? I BELIEVE THEY ARE TO THE NORTH. IT'S TO THE NORTH. IT SHOULD BE THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE NORTH. IT'S JUST UNREGISTERED WITH THE CITY. OKAY. AND THEN THE, THE UNITED HOMEOWNERS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, WHERE IS THAT IN RELATION TO THE CITY? THAT IS MOSTLY TO THE NORTH AND THEN TO THE SOUTH. OKAY. OKAY. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE KEEP IT. WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND WE, I WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE HEARING IT FROM THE PERSON WE'RE ASKING IT OF, PLEASE. OH, WE JUST WANT, CORRECT. I UNDERSTAND. I UNDERSTAND. UM, I WILL, IF I, IF I NOTICE ANYTHING THAT SOUNDS A LITTLE OFF OR NOT COMPLETE, I WILL, I WILL GET TO THE BOTTOM OF IT, DON'T WORRY. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? UH, FOR, FOR THE DIRECTOR MENCHACA AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONER MENCHACA. THEN, UH, I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. UH, ONE IS, UH, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY IT? INAPPROPRIATE, UH, MATERIALS. IS THAT PERVIOUS VERSUS NON PERVIOUS? AND THERE COULD BE ABSORPTION TO THE GROUND C, CORRECT? THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES. THAT IS CORRECT. SO YOU'RE SAYING IT SHOULD BE LIKE ASPHALT OR CEMENT? UH, POTENTIALLY, YES. OR IT HAS TO BE IMPACTED, UH, GRAVEL, BASICALLY. THEY CAN'T JUST PUT GRAVEL ON TOP OF THE GROUND. IT HAS TO BE COMPRESSED. OKAY. I WISH IT WAS, WOULD'VE BEEN CLARIFIED. QUESTION NUMBER TWO IS, WHEN YOU USE THE WORD THREAT OF HEALTH, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT NOTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENT? UH, TEXAS ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY? ARE THEY INVOLVED IN THIS TO ASSESS AIR QUALITY? I DON'T BELIEVE THEY ARE INVOLVED AT THIS TIME, BUT DEFINITELY WE CAN REACH OUT TO THEM. OKAY. IN, IN MY OPINION, IF OBVIOUSLY THEY SEIZED THE OPERATION, THEN WE WILL NOT BE HERE AND WE DON'T HAVE TO CONTACT T C E Q, BUT IF WE HAVE TO, WE WILL TAKE THAT APPROACH. OKAY. COMMISSIONER MANNA QUESTION'S BEEN ANSWERED? I'M GOOD. ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING THE EXISTING ZONING ON THE PROPERTY, HOW LONG HAS THAT ZONING DISTRICT BEEN APPLIED TO THE PROPERTY? HAD IT EVER BEEN AN I TWO OR I TWO AS INDUSTRIAL, WHICH WOULD'VE THEY AT ONE TIME COULD HAVE BEEN, UH, COMPLIANT WITH CHRISTIE? DO YOU HAVE THAT BACKGROUND? THIS PROPERTY WAS, UH, REZONED IN 1957 TO THE FIRST MANUFACTURING DISTRICT, WHICH CONVERTED TO THE CURRENT I TWO AND THE 2001 CONVERSION. OKAY. IS, IS, UH, I JUST THOUGHT OF ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU GUYS. UM, IS THE ZONING CASE THAT THAT WAS APPLIED FOR, WAS IT WITHDRAWN OR POSTPONED? IT'S CURRENTLY POSTPONED. POSTPONED. OKAY. ALRIGHT. JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. IS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, COMMISSIONER Z UH, JUST A CONTINU CONTINUATION, THEY WILL NEED AN I TWO SS, IS THAT CORRECT? TO, THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THE SS IS THE DIFFERENCE WITH THE ZONING DISTRICT SPECIAL SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION FOR WASTE DISPOSAL? YES, SIR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . I WILL LET THEM PASS OUT [00:20:01] THE MATERIALS AND GET STARTED. READY. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE CAN'T BLOCK THE DOORWAY. THE EXITS HAVE TO BE UNBLOCKED SO YOU CAN LISTEN TO THIS, UH, HEARING OUT IN THE HALLWAY IF THERE'S NO ROOM FOR SEATING. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR. BOARD MEMBERS, UH, MY NAME IS ROB KILLEN. I'M A LAND USE ATTORNEY LAW FIRM OF KILLEN GRIFFIN AT FAIRMONT. OUR ADDRESS IS 1 0 1 0 1 REUNION PLACE HERE ON BEHALF OF UNITED SIDE SERVICES. I KNOW, UH, THAT IT IS THANKSGIVING WEEK. IT'S, IT'S COLD AND RAINY THANKSGIVING WEEK. UH, WE ALL HAVE, UH, SHOPPING, LAST MINUTE SHOPPING TO DO TURKEYS TO GET READY. AND SO MY PRESENTATION'S GONNA RUN ABOUT 30 MINUTES. ANOTHER BUNCH OF PEOPLE HAVE ALL SO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A LONG AFTERNOON FOR THAT. I APOLOGIZE, BUT, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION, FACTS AND BACKGROUND. I WANT TO GET ON THE RECORD AS WELL AS THE APPLICABLE LAW. SO I, I AM GONNA TAKE THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TIME, BUT, UH, SETTLE IT IN FOR, UH, FAIRLY LENGTHY, UH, PRESENTATION AND CONVERSATION. BUT APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE TIME TO HEAR US TODAY. THE REASON WE'RE HERE IS BECAUSE ON THE EVENING OF FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 23RD, THE CITY ISSUED A NOTICE TO OUR CLIENT, UNITED SIDE SERVICES, TELLING THEM THEY HAD 72 HOURS TO SHUT DOWN THEIR BUSINESS. WHY? BECAUSE WE WEREN'T PROPERLY ZONED. OUR POSITION IS WE ARE PROPERLY ZONED, AND WE DO HAVE ALL THE NECESSARY PERMITS FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, UH, ONE TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT UNITED SIDE SERVICES AND WHAT THEY DO, AND THEN GIVE YOU SOME OF THE HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OF THEIR PERMITTING. UH, BEFORE WE GET INTO THE, THE MAIN ISSUES, SO UNITED SIDE SERVICES NATIONAL COMPANY, THEY HAVE OVER A HUNDRED LOCATIONS ACROSS THE COUNTRY, OVER 115,000 CUSTOMERS. HERE'S OUR FACILITY IN SAN ANTONIO. UH, IT'S BEEN THERE SINCE 2015. UH, THEY RENT OUT, UH, PORTA-POTTIES, UH, TEMPORARY FENCE AND OTHER THINGS YOU USE AT CONSTRUCTION SITES. SO THEY HAVE CUSTOMERS ALL ACROSS THE CITY. INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, ONE OF THEIR CUSTOMERS IS THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WRENCH, PORTA POTTIES FROM UNITED STATES SERVICES. UH, YOU ASKED ABOUT THE ZONING. I'M GLAD YOU YOU STARTED THAT CONVERSATION. IT'S BEEN ZONED FOR INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING USE SINCE THE 1950S. OUR PROPERTY IS A PROPERTY WITH A STAR IN THE MIDDLE. YOU CAN SEE ALL THE PROPERTIES AROUND IT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PROPERTIES IN THE NORTH, WHICH ARE HOMES, AND THEY'RE ZONE SINGLE FAMILY. ALL THE PROPERTIES AROUND IT ARE ALSO ZONED I TWO. SO I TWO IS OUR MOST INTENSE ZONING DISTRICT. IT'S FOR USES THAT ARE HIGHLY HAZARDOUS, ENVIRONMENTALLY SEVERE IN CHARACTER, OR GENERATE HIGH VOLUMES OF TRUCK TRAFFIC. BY THE WAY, YOU'LL SEE AS WE GO THROUGH THIS SLIDESHOW, UH, SOMETIMES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SLIDE, THERE'LL BE A TAB NUMBER, A REFERENCE TO A TAB NUMBER. SO IF YOU WANNA FOLLOW ALONG IN YOUR BINDER, YOU'LL SEE THAT TAB REFERENCE ON THE SLIDE. SO YOU'LL, YOU'LL SEE THAT AS WE GO. SO WHAT DO YOU HAVE IN I TWO? YOU'VE GOT BATCHING PLANTS, RECYCLING FACILITIES, PACKING PLANTS, GUN RANGE STORAGE, WAREHOUSE, AUTO MANUFACTURING, UH, TRUCK REPAIR, VERY INTENSE KINDS OF USES IN I TWO, INCLUDING WHAT WE HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR, WHICH IS A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR FACILITY PERMITTED BY RIGHT, AND I TWO, UH, AS I NOTED, IT'S, IT'S BEEN INDUSTRIAL FOR A LONG TIME. THESE AERIALS FROM, UH, 2002, 2012. REMEMBER, WE DIDN'T GET OUT THERE UNTIL 2015, BUT IT'S ALWAYS BEEN USED, UH, FOR SOME SORT OF INDUSTRIAL OR INTENSE USE. 2016, WHICH IS THE PICTURE ON THE LEFT IN 2019 ON THE RIGHT, THAT IS AFTER UNITED SITE SERVICES, UH, MOVED IN, STARTED USING THE PROPERTY. SO LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE HISTORY OF PERMITTING FOR THE SITE. OUR FIRST PERMIT WAS ISSUED ON APRIL 22ND, 2015. THAT WAS OUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, UH, FOR CONSTRUCTION FACILITY AND TRUCK REPAIR. SO, SO HERE'S THAT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. NOW I'M GOING TO PAUSE FOR A SECOND ON THE PERMITTING SIDE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THEY DO WITH THEIR PORTA POTTIES. SO THEY OPENED UP IN 2015, STARTED PUTTING PORTA POTTIES OUT ON JOB SITES. AND IN 2015, FROM 2015 TO WHEN THEY DECIDED TO CHANGE, AND WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT IN A SECOND, WHAT THEY WOULD DO IS UNITED SIDE SERVICES SENDS TRUCKS OUT TO EACH OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITES OR WHERE THE PORTA PIES ARE LOCATED. THEY EMPTY THE PORTA-POTTIES ON SITE, AND THEY WERE TAKING THEM TO A SAWS FACILITY TO EMPTY OUT AT A SAWS FACILITY OFF SITE. AND THEN THEY SAID IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO EMPTY THAT OUT ON SITE, BASICALLY DISPOSE OF THE WASTE ON [00:25:01] SITE. SO THEY CAME TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, GOT A PERMIT FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ISSUED OCTOBER 8TH, 2019. AND THAT PERMIT WAS FOR DISPOSAL OF HALTED PORTABLE TOILET WASTE TO THE EXISTING SAWS CONVEYANCE SYSTEM. BASICALLY, IT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING, RIGHT? WE'RE DUMPING IT INTO THE SEWER, KIND LIKE FLUSHING THE TOILET IN YOUR HOME. AND SO THAT'S WHAT THEY, THEY GOT THE APPROVAL FOR IN 2019. THERE'S A COPY OF THE PERMIT, AND AGAIN, THERE ARE TAB NUMBERS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SIDES IF YOU WANNA LOOK AT THESE. SO THERE'S THE PERMIT. UH, THIS IS FROM THE ONLINE SYSTEM THE CITY HAS, AND THAT'S THE EQUIPMENT THAT THEY INSTALLED. YOU'LL SEE MORE PICTURES OF THAT AS WE GO ON. THEY ALSO WENT IN 2019, THE SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM AND GOT AN INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER PERMIT ISSUED FOR THE DISCHARGE OF INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER THROUGH THE DISCHARGE AND MONITORING POINTS. AND THERE'S THE APPROVAL FROM SAWS AS A PART OF THE APPROVAL FROM SAWS. THEY COME OUT AND THEY, THEY MONITOR THIS EVERY TWO MONTHS, EVERY OTHER MONTH THEY COME OUT. IT'S BIMONTHLY COMPLIANCE. THIS IS FROM MAY 24TH, 2022. ONE OF THE MOST RECENT VISITS BY SAWS. THEY SAID THEY CAME OUT, THEY TESTED IT. YOU'RE OKAY. SO SAWS COMES OUT THERE EVERY OTHER MONTH. WE TEND TO THINK OF SAWS AS THIS SEPARATE AGENCY. I THINK IT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO REMIND THE BOARD THAT SAS IS AN AGENCY OF THE CITY. SO WHEN WE GET A PERMIT FROM SASS, WE'RE GETTING A PERMIT FROM SAN ANTONIO WHEN SAS EMPLOYEES GO OUT ON SITE, THOSE ARE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO EMPLOYEES. SO, JUST IMPORTANT TO BEAR IN MIND THAT THE APPROVALS WE'RE GETTING THROUGH THE CITY INCLUDE THESE APPROVALS THROUGH SOS JULY, 2020. WE GOT, UH, THE PERMIT FOR THE ACTUAL EXTENSION OF THE SEWER LINE. THERE IT IS AGAIN, ANOTHER LOOK AT THE EQUIPMENT THEY USE. AND THEN SEPTEMBER OF 2020, ELECTRICAL PERMITS FOR WHAT ARE CALLED THESE, UH, DUMP STATIONS, BASICALLY TO POWER THE STATIONS WHERE THEY EMPTY IT. AGAIN, ANOTHER LOOK AT, UH, THE FACILITY COKE CO COMPLIANCE, UH, CITY TALKED ABOUT CO COMPLIANCE, RECENT CO COMPLIANCE, AND I'LL GET TO THAT IN JUST A FEW MINUTES. BUT LET'S TALK ABOUT HISTORY OF THE CITY'S VISITS TO THE PROPERTY. UH, THEY STARTED GETTING CITY OF SAN ANTONIO STARTED GETTING COMPLAINTS, UH, ABOUT ODOR AND OTHER ISSUES IN 2020. SO SAN ANTONIO STARTED SENDING OUT CO COMPLIANCE OFFICERS. UH, THIS IS FROM JUNE. THIS IS A, THESE ARE SCREENSHOTS THAT ARE A LITTLE HARD TO READ. SO, UH, YOU'VE GOT THIS AGAIN IN YOUR, IN YOUR BINDER, SO YOU CAN LOOK AT IT. BUT WHAT I DID IS I PULLED OUT THE LANGUAGE THAT'S A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO READ. SO THE FIRST VISIT THAT WE'RE AWARE OF WAS JUNE 8TH, 2020. UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THEY LOOKED AT WAS CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND ZONING. UH, NO VIOLATION FOUND, OR A COMPLAINT FOR OVERGROWN YARD AND TRASH COMPLIANCE OFFICER WENT OUT, LOOKED AT THE ODOR, NO STRONG ODOR FOUND AT THIS TIME. COMPLAINT REGARDING UN PERMITTED USE UNDER THE ZONING SAID, LOOKS SPECIFICALLY AT ZONING. HERE ARE THE SCREENSHOTS. AND AGAIN, I'LL GET TO THE TEXT BECAUSE IT'S A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO READ. UH, AGAIN, DIDN'T NOTICE ANY ODOR OF ANY KIND. AND THEN LOOK AT THIS ENTRY RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE. THIS IS JU THIS IS AUGUST 14TH, 2020. AFTER CONSULTING WITH ZEKE'S, ALISE AND CAT HERNANDEZ. IT WAS DETERMINED THE BUSINESSES WITHIN THEIR ZONING FOR THE CURRENT USE, THE CITY ALREADY LOOKED AT ZONING. ANOTHER COMPLAINT, CITY CAME BACK OUT AGAIN AND LOOKED AT IT. AND, AND AGAIN, THIS IS AUGUST 24TH, 2020, THE COMPANY WILL BE ALLOWED TO DISCHARGE THEIR SEWAGE INTO THE COMMERCIAL LINE ONCE IT IS TREATED. PERMIT ALLOWS THE COMPANY TO EMPTY THEIR TRUCK, VACUUM TRUCKS TO UNLOAD THEIR WASTE FOR TREATMENT. THEY'RE ALLOWED TO CLEAN OUT THEIR PORTA-POTTIES ON SITE. THE CITY'S ALREADY LOOKED AT THIS QUESTION AND BY, AND THEY'VE LOOKED IT OVER WHILE THEY'RE OUT THERE TOO. THEY'VE BEEN OUT THERE MULTIPLE TIMES. OWNERS COMPLIED BY MAINTAINING ODOR UNDER CONTROL. THEY WENT OUT AGAIN, UH, AND FOUND NO ADDITIONAL VIOLATION. AND SO THROUGHOUT 2020, THEY'RE OUT THERE. THEY LOOKED AT ZONING, THEY LOOKED AT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THEY CONCLUDED WE WERE OPERATING WITH A PROPER ZONING. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT RECENT EVENTS. I'M JUST GOING TO, YOU HEARD SOME OF THE MARCH, APRIL, MAY. THIS IS THE MAY 4TH CITATION. THIS IS REALLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE. SO WHAT THE CITY FOUND IS WE'RE VIOLATING PARKING STANDARDS. UH, GREAT QUESTION ABOUT WHAT THE, WHAT THEY WANT US TO DO WITH THE PARKING. BASICALLY, THEY WANT US TO EXPAND THE PARKING LOT, MAKE IT LARGER. NOW, WE'VE BEEN OPERATING IN SEVEN YEARS. ALL THESE VISITS, ALL THE CODE COMPLIANCE, ALL THE OTHER PERMITS. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THEY HAVE RAISED THE PARKING LOT ISSUE. AND UNITED SIDE SERVICES IS PREPARED TO EXPAND THE PARKING LOT. IT'S 200,000 LOT'S, $200,000 INVESTMENT. THEY WILL DO IT ONCE THE ZONING QUESTION IS RESOLVED. YOU CAN'T ASK 'EM TO SPEND $200,000, OR WE'RE STILL ARGUING OVER WHETHER THEY HAVE THE PROPER ZONING OR NOT, BUT THEY WILL TAKE CARE OF IT IMMEDIATELY. UH, BUT, BUT BASICALLY THEY WANT THE PARKING LOT TO BE THERE. FAILURE TO UPDATE THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. FAILURE TO HAVE A SPECIFIC USE FOR. NOW, HERE'S THE INTERESTING THING [00:30:01] IS THE CITATIONS THAT WERE ISSUED SAID FAILURE TO HAVE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR RENTAL AND STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT. NOT FOR SANITARY LANDFILL, BUT FOR RENTAL AND STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT. AND THIS IS ALL IN YOUR BINDER. IT'S HARD TO READ. YOU HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO SQUINT OR LOOK CLOSELY AT IT IN YOUR BINDER. IT'S LIKE RED INK ON PINK. SO THEY MAKE IT AS HARD AS POSSIBLE. BUT THEY WERE, THEY CLAIMED THAT OUR USE WAS RENTAL OF EQUIPMENT, NON SEDENTARY LANDFILL. THAT WAS IN EARLY MAY OF 2022. HERE'S ANOTHER INTERESTING THING YOU ASKED ABOUT T C E Q, UH, TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. T C E Q GOT A COMPLAINT. SO THEY WENT OUT THERE AND INVESTIGATED. THIS WAS MAY 17TH, 2022. T C E Q ISSUED A LETTER TO UNITED SIDE SERVICES. AND WHAT THEY SAID WAS, NO VIOLATIONS ARE BEING ALLEGED AS A RESULT OF THIS INVESTIGATION. THE T C E Q APPRECIATES YOUR ASSISTANCE IN THIS MATTER AND YOUR COMPLIANCE EFFORTS TO ENSURE PROTECTION OF THE STATE'S ENVIRONMENT. YOU ASKED ABOUT T C Q T C Q LOOKED AT THIS. SO THIS IS ABOUT THE TIME OUR FIRM GOT ENGAGED. UNITED SIDE SERVICES IS STRUGGLING WITH US. THEY CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT. THEY SAID, WE DON'T KNOW THE PROPER ZONING. THIS ROB CAN HELP US. UH, SO WE LOOKED AT THAT. WE TALKED TO STAFF, AND THAT'S WHEN STAFF SAID, WELL, WE THOUGHT ABOUT IT. WE THINK YOU'RE A SANITARY LANDFILL. NOW. WE DISAGREED WITH IT. WE SAID, WE'RE NOT A SANITARY LANDFILL. WE, WE'VE BEEN OPERATING UNDER OUR C OF O FOR SEVEN YEARS. WE'VE GOTTEN ALL THESE PERMITS WE NEED FOR THE, UH, DISCHARGE INTO THE SEWER SYSTEM. WE'RE NOT SANITARY LANDFALL. I SAID, LOOK, WE'RE GONNA SHUT YOU DOWN IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT ZONING. SO FILE A ZONING CASE, GET YOU C F L. SO WE DID THAT. WE FILED A ZONING CASE 'CAUSE STAFF SAID WE HAD TO FILE A ZONING CASE IF WE WANTED TO STAY IN OPERATION. WE WANTED TO STAY IN OPERATION. SO WE MET WITH THE COUNCILMAN. WE DON'T FILE A ZONING CASE UNTIL WE MEET WITH THE COUNCILMAN. MET WITH THE COUNCILMAN. UH, WE FILED THE ZONING APPLICATION A FEW DAYS LATER AND THEN REQUESTED A MEETING WITH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. FINALLY GOT A MEETING WITH 'EM ON AUGUST 18TH. AND GUESS WHAT? THEY DON'T LIKE OUR OPERATION. I THINK, I THINK A BUNCH OF 'EM ARE HERE TODAY TO SAY WE DON'T LIKE UNITED STATES SERVICES. UH, BEING OUT THERE, THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT UNITED STATES SERVICES. LIKE THEY SAID, THEY'VE GOT OVER A HUNDRED LOCATIONS ACROSS THE COUNTRY, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, WHEN THEY'RE IN DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE WORKING WITH NEIGHBORHOODS, THEY'RE WORKING WITH COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS. SO WHAT WE WANTED TO DO IS TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK THROUGH THE ISSUES WITH THE NEIGHBORS. AND SO, OF COURSE, WE DIDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH, FIRST OF ALL, WE DIDN'T THINK WE NEEDED TO REZONE, BUT WE DIDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ZONING CASE BECAUSE THERE ARE NEIGHBORHOOD STAKEHOLDERS WE HAD TO WORK OUT DETAILS WITH. AND, UH, SO THAT'S WHERE WE WERE AS OF THE EVENING OF SEPTEMBER 23RD, 2022 WHEN WE GOT THE NOTICE. REVOKING OUR CERTIFICATE. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. HERE'S THE NOTICE, THIS AGAIN, IS IN YOUR BINDER. WHAT SAID IS YOUR STRUCTURE IS DECLARED UNLAWFUL, IMPOSES A THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE SHALL BE VACATED AS ORDERED BY THE CITY CODE OFFICIAL WITHIN 72 HOURS. SO THIS IS A FRIDAY NIGHT AT 72 HOURS TO VACATE THE FACILITY. NOW, THE U D C DOES SAY, YOU CAN REVOKE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. YOU CAN REVOKE A PERMIT, YOU GIVE NOTICE AND SPECIFY A REASONABLE TIME FOR COMPLIANCE. WE HAD NOTICE ON A FRIDAY NIGHT THAT WE HAD 72 HOURS TO SHUT DOWN REASONABLE TIME FOR COMPLIANCE. SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE FILED AN APPEAL TO THIS BOARD, GET YOU, GIVE YOU THE CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THE ZONING ISSUES, TALK THROUGH WHAT'S HAPPENING, SHOW YOU SOME OF THE HISTORY, AND SHOW YOU THE PERMITTING. SO WE FILED THAT. AND WHAT HAPPENS, AS YOU ALL KNOW, WHEN YOU FILE AN APPEAL TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WHAT THAT DOES IS IT STOPS THE ACTION BY THE CITY. SO IT STAYS, THE TERM IS STAY, SO IT STAYS THE CITY ACTION. SO WE DIDN'T HAVE TO SHUT DOWN ON THAT MONDAY. AND THEN ON OCTOBER 13TH, WE RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE OF IMMINENT PERIL. I'VE BEEN DOING THIS A WHILE. I'VE NEVER SEEN A CERTIFICATE OF IMMINENT PERIL. AND HERE IT IS. AND AGAIN, THIS IS IN YOUR BINDER. AND WHAT THEY SAID, AND THIS WAS SIGNED BY MIKE SHANNON, UH, AS DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. I CERTIFY THAT IN MY OPINION, IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AUTOMATIC STAY, UH, ALLOWING FOR CONTINUED OPERATIONS WOULD CAUSE IMMINENT PERIL TO LIFE OR PROPERTY IMMEDIATE, UH, BASED ON THE FACTS SET FORTH BELOW. SO IMMINENT MEANS, IMMEDIATE MEANS IT'S ABOUT TO HAPPEN THAT THAT PERIL IS, IS PENDING AND IT'S GONNA HAPPEN. BUT HERE'S THE OTHER THING, INTERESTING THING. THE LETTER IS DATED OCTOBER 6TH. IT WAS DELIVERED INTERNALLY TO, TO CHRISTIE ON OCTOBER 11TH, AND THEN SENT TO ME ON OCTOBER 13TH. AND YOU CAN SEE HERE IN THE LETTER, THIS, THIS IS JUST SHOTS OF THE LETTER. OCTOBER 6TH WAS THE LETTER, UH, THE EMAIL TO CHRISTIE'S, UH, THE 11TH. AND, AND CHRISTIE, IF THAT WASN'T YOU, I APOLOGIZE, BUT I THINK THAT'S YOUR SIGNATURE. UH, AND THEN THE EMAIL TO ME WAS ONE WEEK LATER, THERE'S THIS IMMINENT PERIL AND THEY SIT ON THE LETTER FOR A WEEK. BUT WHAT THAT DID WAS IT LEFT, LIFTED THE STAY WOULD'VE LIFTED THE STAY, AND FOLKS AT THE PLACE WOULD BE OUTTA WORK. AND SO WENT DOWN [00:35:01] TO THE COURT AND GOT A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. AND THERE IT IS AGAIN. THIS IS ALL IN YOUR BINDER. WHAT THE JUDGE FOUND, THE JUDGE WAS PRESENTED WITH THESE FACTS, WAS PRESENTED WITH THE BACKGROUND AND SAID, UNITED SITE SERVICES WILL LIKELY SUCCEED ON THE MERIT. THAT MEANS THE JUDGE SAID, I'M LOOKING AT THE FACTS, YOU'RE GONNA SUCCEED. AND HE SAID THAT HARM IS IMMINENT. THE CITY WAS CLAIMING THAT HARM WAS IMMINENT TO THE CITY. THE JUDGE SAID, HARM IS IMMINENT TO UNITED SITE SERVICES. AND IF WE DO NOT ISSUE THE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, THEY'LL BE IRREPARABLY HARMED BY THE CLOSURE AND CESSATION OF THEIR BUSINESS OPERATIONS. SO THE JUDGE DID FIND IMMINENT HARM, BUT IT WAS IMMINENT HARM TO THE UNITED STATES SERVICES. SO NOW WITH THAT BACKGROUND, I WANNA TALK THROUGH REALLY THE FOUR ISSUES THAT WE'RE, UH, HERE TO DISCUSS TODAY. ONE, UH, CITY'S POSITION TODAY IS THAT WE ARE A SANITARY LANDFILL. WE ARE NOT TWO, UH, WE HAVE VALID PERMITS. THREE, THE CITY IS A STOP. NOW THAT MEANS THE CITY CANNOT REVOKE THE PERMITS. AND THEN FOUR, I WANNA TALK ABOUT THE IMMINENT HARM AND WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS FOR UNITED SITE SERVICES. IT'S A ONE. WE ARE NOT A SANITARY LANDFILL BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION. NO REASONABLE PERSON WOULD FIND THIS TO BE A SANITARY LANDFILL. UH, JUST A REMINDER, THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE SAYS YOU CAN ONLY HAVE ONE PRIMARY USE ON ANY LOT. SO IF THE CITY'S POSITION THAT WE ARE A SANITARY LANDFILL IS OUR PRIMARY USE, THEY'RE SAYING THAT IF YOU LOOK IN THE CENTER OF YOUR SCREEN, THAT ONE RED DOT THAT SAYS PUMP STATION, AND THE CINNAMON SCREEN IS OUR PRIMARY USE. AND THAT THAT USE IS A SANITARY LANDFILL. AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR. 'CAUSE ALL OF OUR OPERATIONS ARE HAPPENING RIGHT THERE ON THAT LITTLE RED DOT, NOT THE REST OF THE FACILITY. THESE, UH, WHITE BOXES, THOSE ARE THE PORTA BODIES. UH, UP IN THE UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER, YOU CAN SEE THE TEMPORARY FENCING THAT THEY RENT OUT FOR CONSTRUCTION SITES. AND THEN WE'VE GOT PARKING AND QUEUING AREAS FOR VEHICLES. UH, BUT THAT ONE RED DOT, THAT'S WHERE THE DISPOSAL HAPPENS, AND THAT'S WHAT THE CITY'S CLAIMING IS OUR PRIMARY USE AND REQUIRES CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR OUR LANDFILL. SO WHAT IS THE SAN ONTARIO LANDFILL? UNDER THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, IT'S A CONTROLLED AREA OF LAND UPON WHICH, UPON WHICH SOLID WASTE IS DISPOSED OF. SO THEY'RE SAYING YOU TAKE AN AREA OF LAND AND YOU PUT SOLID WASTE ON IT. SO ON THE LEFT IS WASTE MANAGEMENT'S A LANDFILL HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. IT'S AN AERIAL LAND. IT'S GOT WASTE PILED ON TOP. AND ON THE RIGHT AGAIN, IS OUR PROPERTY WITH OUR ONSITE, UH, PUMPING STATION. UH, A SOLID WASTE. BY THE WAY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DEFINITION OF SOLID WASTE, DOES NOT INCLUDE, UH, SOLID DISSOLVED MATERIAL AND DOMESTIC SEWAGE. UH, AND WE'RE NOT CERTAINLY NOT A SOLID WASTE FACILITY UNDER THE DEFINITION, UNDER THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. IT'S NOT JUST THAT WE'RE NOT A SANITARY LANDFILL UNDER THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. WE'RE NOT A SANITARY LANDFILL UNDER ANY DEFINITION OF SANITARY LANDFILL. AND SO, UH, THE CENTER, TAB 15, AGAIN, YOU'VE GOT ALL THIS MATERIAL SANITARY LANDFILLS. THIS IS FROM SANITARY LANDFILLS. DEFINITIONS AND ISSUES. SANITARY LANDFILLS ARE METHOD OF WASTE. DISPOSAL OR WASTE IS BURIED UNDERGROUND OR IN LARGE PILES. METHOD OF WASTE, DISPOSALS CONTROLLED AND MONITORED VERY CLOSELY. THIS PROCESS STARTS BY DIGGING LARGE HOLE IN THE GROUND THAT IS LINED WITH THICK PLASTIC AND A LAYER OF IMPERVIOUS. CLAY. CLAY, I JUST GOOGLED SANITARY LANDFILL. THESE ARE THE KINDS OF IMAGES THAT SHOW UP. THESE ARE SANITARY LANDFILLS, DUMPSTERS.COM. SANITARY LANDFILL WASTE IS SEPARATED FROM THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT USING A SYSTEM OF LAYERS TO ALLOW THE WASTE TO DECOMPOSE SAFELY. TO PUT IT SIMPLY, SANITARY LANDFILLS OPERATE BY LAYERING WASTE IN A LARGE HOLE. AGAIN, SANITARY LANDFILL. HOW SANITARY LANDFILLS WORK. MODERN SAN MODERN SANITARY LANDFILL IS A COMPLEX STRUCTURE THAT ISOLATES TRASH FROM THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT. BOTTOM LINER MADE FROM CLAY, DURABLE SYNTHETIC PLASTIC, BASICALLY JUST PILE THE GARBAGE UP ON TOP OF IT. SANITARY LANDFILL. YOU CAN SEE THE LINER SYSTEM ON THE RIGHT IS THE DEFINITION FROM THE ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA. A SANITARY LANDFILL IS A METHOD OF CONTROLLED DISPOSABLE OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE ON LAND. IT'S DEPOSITED IN THIN LAYERS AND IT'S COMPACTED BY BULLDOZERS. THOSE ARE SANITARY LANDFILLS. THIS IS THE EQUIPMENT THAT WE HAVE ON SITE. THIS IS THE EQUIPMENT THAT WAS PERMITTED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, PERMITTED BY THE SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM. INSPECTED EVERY OTHER MONTH BY THE SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM, AGAIN ON THE LEFT WASTE MANAGEMENT'S FACILITY. AND THEN HERE WE ARE. THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE. THAT LITTLE RED.IN THE MIDDLE CITY'S CLAIMING IS A SANITARY LANDFILL. SO WE'RE NOT A SANITARY LANDFILL. WE ALSO HAVE VALID PERMITS. UH, SO THE, THERE'S TWO TYPES OF PERMITS. THERE'S A COUPLE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PERMITS. WELL, WE HAVE WHAT CALLED MINISTERIAL PERMITS. IT'S A BUILDING PERMITS AND CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY. AND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE MENTIONS [00:40:01] IN A NUMBER OF PLACES THAT WHEN YOU SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT, THEY REVIEW IT AND THEN ONLY DO THEY REVIEW THE PERMIT. THEY REVIEW ZONING AS PART OF THAT PROCESS. NO USE SHALL BE PERMITTED UNLESS THE USE IS LISTED AS A PERMIT OR SPECIFIC USE IN THE USE MATRIX. ALL APPLICABLE PERMITS AND APPROVALS HAVE BEEN ISSUED BY THE OFFICIAL OR AGENCY WITH FINAL DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY. ANOTHER SECTION, NO BUILDING PERMITS SHALL BE ISSUED UNLESS A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CONFORMS TO DESIGN REGULATIONS PRESCRIBED WITHIN THE APPLICABLE ZONING DISTRICT. WHEN THE CITY ISSUES A BUILDING PERMIT, THEY CHECK ZONING. IT'S FROM ARTICLE FOUR. NO BUILDING SHALL BE ERECTED, UH, UNTIL A PERMIT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. OLD LANGUAGE. WHEN WE HAD PLANNING DIRECTED PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STILL COMBINED ALL APPLICATIONS SO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CHAPTER. ALL APPLICATIONS FOR APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT PERMITS SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE DIRECTOR FOR COMPLETENESS. EVERY PERMIT THAT COMES ACROSS THE DESK GETS REVIEWED. ZONING IS ONE OF THE THINGS THEY LOOK AT. AGAIN, 35 1 0 8 SHOWS THAT WE SUBMIT A PERMIT, THE CITY REVIEWS IT, AND THEY ONLY APPROVE IT IF WE COMPLY WITH THE CODE. TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 2 45, TALKS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT PERMITS. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THEY SAY IS THAT YOU CANNOT SHORTEN THE DURATION OF A PERMIT REQUIRED, UH, FOR A PROJECT. IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THAT DOESN'T HAVE AN EXPIRATION. IT'S GOOD AS LONG AS WE CONTINUE TO OPERATE, THE CITY CAN'T SHORTEN THE DURATION OF THAT PERMIT. HERE'S SOMETHING EVEN MORE INTERESTING, I THINK, AND THAT'S, IT'S, UH, CHAPTER 51 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. IT'S THE TEXAS VALIDATION STATUTE. AND WHAT IT SAYS IS THAT AN ACT BY A CITY IS CONCLUSIVELY, PRESUMED TO BE VALID. IF BY THREE YEARS AFTER THEY'VE TAKEN TAKEN THAT ACT, THERE HASN'T BEEN A LAWSUIT TO A NULL THAT ACT. OKAY? SO A CITY DOES SOMETHING THREE YEARS LATER. IT'S BASICALLY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATION. SO A CITY ISSUES A PERMIT, SOMEONE CAN'T CHALLENGE THAT PERMIT. AFTER A THREE YEAR MARK, WE GOT OUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, APRIL 22ND, 2015. NO ONE CHALLENGED THAT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. SO IT'S CONCLUSIVELY, PRESUMED UNDER THE LAW TO BE VALID. WE GOT OUR EQUIPMENT PERMIT FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICE DEPARTMENT NOVEMBER 8TH, 2019, OVER THREE YEARS AGO. NO LAWSUIT HAS BEEN FILED TO CHALLENGE OR INVALIDATE THAT PERMIT THAT IS CONCLUSIVELY, PRESUMED TO BE VALID. AND I WANNA BE CLEAR THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY IS NOT A LAWSUIT. SO THEY'RE TRYING TO REVOKE OUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, BUT THEY HAVEN'T ACTUALLY, NO ONE'S FILED A SUIT TO TAKE AWAY OUR PERMIT. SO AGAIN, THOSE PERMITS ARE CONCLUSIVELY, PRESUMED TO VALID TO BE VALID. I WANNA TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT A CONCEPT CALLED ESTOPPEL. ESTOPPEL MEANS THE CITY CAN'T DO SOMETHING. THIS IS A CASE THAT I THINK EVERY CITY ATTORNEY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS KNOW IT'S A TEXAS SUPREME COURT CASE. IT'S A WHITE SETTLEMENT. V V SUPER WASHINGTON, IN THAT CASE, THERE'S A CAR WASH. THEY WENT TO THE CITY OF WHITE SETTLEMENT, THEY GOT A PERMIT. CITY ISSUED THE PERMIT, AN ERROR. UH, A COUPLE DAYS LATER, A FEW DAYS LATER, THEY CALLED THIS CAR WASH AND SAID, HEY, WAIT, WE MADE A MISTAKE. YOU CAN'T RELY ON A PERMIT. WE'RE JUST WRONG. SORRY. AND SO THE SUPREME COURT SAID, THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT YOU CAN'T CLAIM THIS ESTOPPEL, UH, AGAINST THE CITY GENERALLY. BUT THEY ALSO SAID THAT A CITY MAY BE A STOP WHERE JUSTICE REQUIRES APPLICATION, EXCEPTIONAL CASES THAT CLEARLY DEMAND ITS APPLICATION TO PREVENT MANIFEST INJUSTICE. AND WHAT THE SUPREME COURT WAS CITING, THERE WAS A 1951 CASE OUTTA DALLAS CALLED DALLAS V ROSENTHAL, AND THAT DALLAS V ROSENTHAL CASE, WHAT HAPPENED? THEY HAD A MEAT STORAGE FACILITY THAT WAS OPERATING IN VIOLATION OF ZONING ORDINANCES. BUT THE CITY ISSUED TWO PERMITS OVER A YEAR AND A HALF, VISITED THE PROPERTY MULTIPLE TIMES, AND THAT PROPERTY OWNER HAD SPENT A LOT OF MONEY. AND WHAT THE COURT SAID, AND THIS IS THE SAME CASE THAT THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT REFERRED TO, IS THAT EXCEPTIONAL CASES. AND SURELY THIS IS ONE, A MUNICIPALITY IS SUBJECT TO THE RULES OF EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL OR RIGHT. AND JUSTICE REQUIRE IT. THEY ONLY HAD TWO PERMITS OVER A YEAR AND A HALF PERIOD, AND SPENT SOME MONEY. HERE'S SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE RECENT. THIS IS MCGUIRE OIL. MCGUIRE OIL GOT PERMITS FOR DRILLING FROM THE CITY OF HOUSTON. THEY DID EVERYTHING RIGHT. THEY GOT THE DRILLING PERMITS, AND THEN THE SAFE HOUSTON DECIDED TO REVOKE THOSE PERMITS. THEY DID EVERYTHING RIGHT. THE, THE PERMITS WERE VALID, NO QUESTION OF IT, BUT THE COURT SAID YOU CAN'T DO IT. JUSTICE REQUIRES APPLICATION OF ESTOPPEL. MCGUIRE PRESENTED EVIDENCE THAT AFTER OBTAINING PERMITS AND EXPENDED $190,000, PREPARING THE SITE, CLEARING AN AREA, BUILDING A ROAD, UH, REINFORCING BRIDGE, THEY, THEY MADE ALL THIS INVESTMENT. SO MCGUIRE RULE, THEY SPENT $190,000 ON THESE PERMITS AND RELIANCE ON THESE PERMITS. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT UNITED SIDE SERVICES [00:45:01] AND THEIR RELIANCE. SO WE'VE BEEN USING THE PROPERTY FOR SEVEN YEARS. WE'VE GOT A NUMBER OF PERMITS OF THOSE SEVEN YEARS. CO COMPLIANCE OFFICERS HAVE BEEN OUT THERE MULTIPLE TIMES, UH, AND SAID, HEY, LOOK, YOU'RE COMPLIANT WITH YOUR ZONE. YOU'RE COMPLIANT WITH YOUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY SAWS. LIKE I SAID, SAWS COMES OUT EVERY OTHER MONTH. WE RELIED ON THOSE ACTIONS. AND UNITED SIDE SERVICES SPENT OVER $330,000 INSTALLING THE DUMP STATION PER THE PROPERLY APPROVED PERMIT. IN FACT, THEY SPENT 130,000 $103. AND SO THAT'S THE BREAKDOWN OF WHAT THEY SPENT. THIS IS JUST ON THAT DUMP STATION THAT WE HAVE THE PROPER PERMITS FOR. SO AGAIN, JUST QUICKLY THE TIMELINE. WE GOT OUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, WE 2015 PERMIT IN 2019, ANOTHER PERMIT IN NOVEMBER OF 2019. CO COMPLIANCE COMES OUT THERE MULTIPLE TIMES, SEES NO PROBLEM WITH THE ZONING, NO PROBLEM WITH THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. AND THEN AFTER ALL THOSE VISITS, WE GOT YET ANOTHER PERMIT FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. AGAIN, THEY REVIEW THESE THINGS BEFORE THEY ISSUE A PERMIT IN SEPTEMBER OF 2020. AND AGAIN, SAWS FOLKS COMING OUT EVERY OTHER MONTH MONITORING. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT IMMINENT HARM. THE IMMINENT HARM IS TO UNITED SITE SERVICES BUSINESS IMPAIRMENT OF THEIR CONTRACTUAL AND BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS. SO THEY HAVE PORTA PIES AT CONSTRUCTION SITES ALL OVER THE CITY. THEY'RE SHUT DOWN. THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO EMPTY THIS OUT. REMEMBER, THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IS ONE OF THEIR CUSTOMERS. CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. IF THEY HAVE SITES THAT HAVE, UH, UNITED SIDE SERVICES ON THERE, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO EMPTY THEIR PORTA POTTIES. AND SO THEY'LL BE IN VIOLATION. UNITED SIDE SERVICES WILL BE IN BREACH OF THEIR CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS BECAUSE OF THE CITY'S ACTION. LOSS OF BUSINESS, OBVIOUSLY, LOSS OF BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY, ASCERTAIN PRESENT ECONOMIC LOSS AND CALCULABLE FUTURE ECONOMIC LOSS, AND THEN FURLOUGH OUR TERMINATION OF EMPLOYEES AT THE SAN ANTONIO SITE. NOW THIS, HERE WE ARE A FEW DAYS BEFORE THANKSGIVING. IF YOU UPHOLD THE CITY'S DECISION TODAY, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TELL THOSE FOLKS, UNITED STATES SERVANTS HAVE TO TELL THEM THEY WON'T HAVE JOBS COME CHRISTMAS TIME BECAUSE THERE'S NO OTHER PLACE FOR THEM TO GO. THEY WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS. BY THE WAY, THIS IS NOT ME. THIS, THIS IS NOT JUST ME COMING UP WITH THIS. THIS IS ACTUALLY FROM THE RULING FROM THE TEMPORARY RETURNMENT. THE JUDGE FOUND THAT THE TERMINATION, THE IMPAIRMENT, THE LOSS OF BUSINESS, BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY, ECONOMIC LOSS, THE JUDGE FOUND THAT THOSE WOULD HAPPEN IF UNITED SIDE SERVICES WAS SHUT DOWN. SO JUST TO SUM UP, WE ARE CORRECTLY ZONED. WE'VE HAD, WE HAVE, I TWO ZONING HAD, HAS I TWO ZONING ALL THROUGHOUT, AND EVEN BEFORE THAT, IT'S BEEN INDUSTRIALLY ZONED SINCE THE 1950S. WE'VE GOTTEN ALL THE PERMITS THAT WE NEED. CITY'S POSITION IS THAT WE'RE A SANITARY LANDFILL. NO ONE WOULD EVER CONCLUDE THAT WE'RE A SANITARY LANDFILL BY ANY DEFINITION OF SANITARY LANDFILL. OUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, WHICH THEY'RE TRYING TO REVOKE IS CONCLUSIVELY PRESUMED VALID BECAUSE IT'S OVER THREE YEARS OLD. OUR EQUIPMENT PERMIT FOR THE DISPOSAL OF WASTE IS ALSO CONCLUSIVELY, PRESUMED TO BE VALID PER STATE LAW. THEY'RE STOPPED, STOPPED IN OUR CASE LAW FROM REVOKING OUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY BECAUSE WE RELIED ON ALL OF THEIR APPROVALS AND SPENT A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY. AND THEN FINALLY, REVOCATION WOULD CAUSE IMMINENT IMMINENT HARM TO UNITED SIDE SERVICES. SO THAT WE JUST ASK YOU TO OVERTURN THE DECISION TO REVOKE THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO SOME QUESTIONS AND THEN WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO, UM, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTARY. UH, FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS HEARING, UH, WE'RE LIMITING IT. IT'S TWO MINUTES FOR EVERYBODY JUST AND FOR ALL CASES FOR THE REST OF THE DAY. KAPLAN BRAMAN, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, AND THEN BRAGMAN. FIRST, MR. KIEN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IT WAS A VERY, VERY COMPLETE, UM, PRESENTATION THAT YOU DID ANSWER A LOT OF QUESTIONS. HOWEVER, UH, YOU, OUR ATTORNEY OBVIOUSLY, AND YOU'VE PRESENTED THIS LIKE YOU WOULD BE PRESENTING THIS TO A LAWSUIT. AND WHAT I'M SEEING HERE, THE BUNCH OF COMMUNITY PEOPLE WHO ARE AGGRIEVED ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S VERY SIMPLE, WHICH IS THE SMELL. I THINK BEFORE 2020 WHEN YOU STARTED THIS PROCESSING OF THE PORTA-POTTIES, UM, YOU OBVIOUSLY DIDN'T HAVE THIS ISSUE. SO THERE ARE TWO THINGS I WANNA KNOW. ONE IS, WHY CAN'T YOU GO AND EMPTY THESE? IT WOULD BE SO EASY, THIS WOULDN'T HAVE GONE THIS FAR IF YOU JUST BROUGHT THE SMELL TO A SEWAGE PLANT INSTEAD OF EMPTYING THEM ON SITE. NOW. NOW THE SECOND THING QUESTION WOULD BE IF YOU REALLY CAN'T EMPTY IT AT A SEWAGE PLANT, IS THERE ANOTHER WAY THAT COULD MITIGATE THE STENCH? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE ARE NOT UPSET ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE AN I TWO OR AN I TWO SS OR WHATEVER. THEY'RE CONCERNED THAT YOU ARE HARMING THEIR ABILITY TO QUIETLY ENJOY THEIR PROPERTY. [00:50:04] THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTIONS. YOUR FIRST QUESTION WAS, CAN WE OBVIOUSLY UNLOAD THE SEWAGE OFFSITE, WHICH THEY WERE DOING PRIOR TO GETTING ALL THESE PERMITS? SO ONE, THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT COST, UH, DIFFERENTIAL, AND WE SPENT $330,000 BASED ON THE CITY ISSUING THESE PERMITS. SO WE'VE ACTED IN RELIANCE ON THAT, UH, THOSE APPROVAL. SO OUT A LOT OF MONEY FROM THAT SIDE. UH, TWO, UM, OBVIOUSLY IT'D BE A SIGNIFICANT, SIGNIFICANT SHIFT IN THE OPERATIONS. UH, SO I HOPE THAT ADDRESSES YOUR QUESTION. IT'S CLEARLY A, THE FIRST QUESTION, BUT YEAH, BUT, OKAY. WELL, I'M, I'M GONNA INTERJECT HERE. I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE LINE OF QUESTIONING AND WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR, THERE IS A APPEAL TO REVOKE A C OF O. THAT'S IT. THAT'S IT. IT HAS TO BE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY ACTED CORRECTLY OR NOT. AND, AND WHETHER YOU'RE OPPOSED TO THE WAY IT SMELLS OR THE WAY THEY'RE, WHAT THEY'RE DOING THING IS THAT IT, MAYBE IT SHOULDN'T GO AS FAR AS HAVING TO REVOKE THE C OF O IF THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY COULD BE MET IN ANOTHER WAY'S. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. WE'RE HERE. I I'M, WELL, I'M JUST, I I'M JUST, WELL, WE DIDN'T HAVE CALL HERE. NO, WE'RE NOT HERE. WE'RE NOT LISTENING TO ANY COMMENTARY FROM THE, FROM THE, UH, GALLERY YET. I WILL OPEN THAT UP IN A, IN A MOMENT, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THIS BOARD IS AWARE, AND I'VE TRIED TO MAKE THIS VERY CLEAR WHEN I, WHEN THIS CASE FIRST STARTED, THERE IS A APPEAL OF A, OF A RE, UH, INTENT TO REVOKE A C O. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. I WOULD, HERE, I WOULD HOPE THAT THE CI, THE BOARD MEMBERS WOULD LIMIT THEIR COMMENTARY TO THE ISSUE AT HAND AND THE ISSUE OF WHETHER THERE IS, UH, AN ISSUE WITH SMELLS OR AN ISSUE WITH ZONING VIOLATIONS, THAT'S BETWEEN THE T C E Q AND THE CITY AND IN CODE ENFORCEMENT THAT IS NOT BEFORE US TODAY. SO NEXT QUESTION, UH, WAS BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. THANK YOU. UH, SO I HAVE THREE QUESTIONS. UM, IS THIS THEIR ONLY LOCATION IN SAN ANTONIO? YES, MA'AM. OKAY. AND UM, SO YOU SAID THAT THE SEWER PORTION OF THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED IN NOVEMBER, 2019? YES, MA'AM. OKAY, SO THEY WERE NOT DOING THIS BEF PRIOR TO NO, NO. THEY WERE TAKING IT OFFSITE. OKAY. AND THEN THE LAST QUESTION IS, HOW FAR IS THAT DUMPING STATION FROM THE RESIDENCES? IT SEEMS TO BE SORT OF IN THE MIDDLE OF A RATHER LARGE PARCEL PROPERTY, AND THEN THERE'S A STREET AND THEN THERE'S THE RESIDENCES. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW FAR AWAY? I DON'T. WE HAVE SOMEONE FROM UNITED STATES SERVICES. HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ASK ME. COULD YOU JUST, JUST FOR A SECOND, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER STILL COME UP AND INTRODUCE YOURSELF, AND THEN JUST A, JUST A BALLPARK, IT'S QUITE A WAYS AWAY. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND PLEASE CONTINUE. YES, SIR. UH, NAME'S CHARLES BLUE. I'M THE AREA MANAGER FOR TEXAS FOR UNITED STATES SERVICES. UM, I'M OUT OF THE HOUSTON LOCATION, 19 9 50 HT SMITH CORALVILLE ROAD. UM, THE CENTER OF THE DUMP FROM THE RESIDENCE IS APPROXIMATELY 700 YARDS FROM THAT, FROM THAT SPOT. OKAY. AND SO LAST QUESTION. SO IS THERE, IN THE PROCESSING OR DUMPING, IS THERE EXPOSURE OF THE SOLID WASTE TO AIR AS OPPOSED TO, IS IT FUNNELED INTO THE SEWER SYSTEM? YES, MA'AM. SO WHAT IT DOES IS THAT IT ACTUALLY JUST, IT DROPS. WE ACTUALLY DROP IT DOWN INTO THE, UH, INTO THE, UH, EXCUSE ME, THE DUMPING STATION. THE DUMPING STATION ITSELF TAKES IT OUT THROUGH THE SEWAGE. SO ANYTHING THAT COMES OUT, OF COURSE, IN ALL ACTUALITY, ANYTIME YOU DUMP SOMETHING, RIGHT, EITHER EVEN IN THE TOILET OR IN THE SINK, IF YOU POUR, YOU KNOW, YOU POUR A SODA OR COFFEE IN THE SINK, YOU'RE ALWAYS GONNA GET SOME KIND OF FUMES BACK FROM IT, RIGHT? SO, AND IN THIS CASE, THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING WHEN WE'RE DOING THAT PART OF IT. IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT US TRYING TO, UH, CREATE THAT ODOR. IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST A NATURAL COURSE OF IT GOING INTO THE SEWER. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH. SO THERE'S NOT A PROCESS WHERE A, SO IF YOU ENVISION AN RV WHERE YOU'VE GOT A DUMPING STATION, IT, IT ESSENTIALLY, THERE'S A HOSE THAT GOES FROM THE, THE RV INTO THE, THE DUMPING STATION, AND IT'S ONE CONTINUOUS LINE. SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN. THERE'S ACTUAL EXPOSURE TO THE AIR? UH, YES MA'AM. YES. OKAY. AND THERE'S NOT A WAY TO RETROFIT? UH, YES MA'AM. I'M SURE THERE'S, WE'VE LOOKED AT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO IT. UH, COME UP WITH A, UH, A, A NOT A FANNING SYSTEM, BUT MORE OF A, UH, AIR DIFFUSER SCENARIO WHERE WE CAN BE ABLE TO TRY TO CAPTURE MOST OF THAT. AND WE'VE DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB WITH IT. WE'VE GOT SOME THINGS IN PLACE THAT'S HELPED WITH IT. IT DOESN'T GET RID OF ALL OF IT, BUT IT HAS, I MEAN, WE'RE PROBABLY 70, 80% MORE VIABLE THAN IT WAS WHEN IT FIRST OPENED. THANK YOU. YES MA'AM. COMMISSIONER MINKA. I JUST HAVE A MINOR ONE. WHEN YOU, UH, LIKE WHEN YOU HAVE A VENUE WITH THE CITY AND YOU GET THESE, OH, IS THAT FOR ME? OR LIKE OF A HUNDRED KIND OF PORTA POTTIES. HOW LONG DO THEY SIT BEFORE THEY GET EMPTIED? OH, QUESTION. HOW LONG DO THE PORTA POTTIES SIT BEFORE? ONE MORE TIME. I'M SORRY. 'CAUSE I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING, LIKE, WHEN YOU HAVE A VENUE WITH THE CITY AND YOU HAD LIKE A HUNDRED PORTA-POTTIES, [00:55:01] HOW LONG DO THEY SIT ON THE YARD BEFORE THEY GET EMPTIED? UH, IN MOST CASES WE TRY TO DO 'EM WITHIN THE, THE FIRST TWO DAYS OF GETTING PICKED UP, DEPENDING ON WHEN THEY GET PICKED UP. UM, SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF IT'S A WEEKEND EVENT, WE PICK 'EM UP ON MONDAY. NORMALLY BY WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY, EVERYTHING IS NORMALLY CLEANED UP AND BACKSTAGE. 'CAUSE WE NORMALLY HAVE OTHER EVENTS AND THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON. AND DO YOU TAKE, UH, CAUTION IN THE PREVAILING WINDS, LIKE FROM THE NORTH BLOWING SOUTH, THE, THE ODOR OR FROM THE SOUTHEAST BLOWING NORTH INTO, I, I WOULD LOVE TO SAY YES, WE DO, BUT YOU, WE ALL KNOW HOW THE WIND BLOWS AROUND HERE. SO, UM, I WOULD LOVE TO SAY THAT WE TRY TO, UH, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT. PART OF, MOST OF THE TIME WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET THE UNITS READY FOR THE NEXT OPPORTUNITY. ANYONE ELSE? UNA MANNA, COMMISSIONER UNA, THEN MANNA. SO I SEE IN THE I TWO SS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, IT, IT REQUIRES, UM, THE SANITARY PROCESSING AS A FUNCTION OF THE I TWO S. HOW IS THE CITY DEFINING THAT SANITARY PROCESSING? I MEAN, WE SAW EXAMPLES OF AN OPEN OR A, UH, OF A, YOU KNOW, OPEN, UH, DISPOSAL, WASTE DISPOSAL. IS THERE A DEFINITION OF SANITARY PROCESSING THAT THE CITY USES TO SHOW THAT THE WHAT PROCESS THE APPLICANT IS, IS USING ON THE PROPERTY? CORRECT. SO WHEN THIS ITEM FIRST CAME TO US, THAT IS WHAT WE LOOKED AT. WE LOOKED AT WHAT USES WE HAVE IN OUR TABLE THAT WOULD MOST CLOSELY RELATE TO THE ACTIVITY ON SITE. UH, THE ONLY ONE THAT WE DO HAVE IN OUR CODE IS THE SANITARY LANDFILL. BUT IF YOU LOOK IN THE CHART, UM, THERE WAS ONE IN THE STAFF REPORT, THERE IS A MENTION OF THE L B C S, WHICH IS THE LAND-BASED CLASSIFICATIONS, UH, SYSTEM FOR LAND USE. AND SO WE USE THAT CATEGORY, THE 4,300 THAT SPEAKS TO SOLID WASTE AND WASTE PROCESSING AS PART OF US CLASSIFYING THIS PARTICULAR, UH, PROCESSING FOR THIS SITE AS A SANITARY LA UH, LANDFILL SOLID WASTE FACILITY. IS THERE ANY OTHER EXAMPLES ACROSS THE CITY WHERE WE WOULD APPLY THAT SAME CLASSIFICATION TO ANY OTHER SIMILAR USE? THERE IS ONE OTHER LOCATION. UM, IT IS ACTUALLY STILL PENDING. A SIMILAR ISSUE. STILL PENDING. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO QUESTION FOR THE CITY FIRST. UM, SO, SO THE, THE HOLDING TANK THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS IT CONSIDERED MORE OF A SEPTIC KIND OF TANK AND THAT'S WHAT WAS PERMITTED, UH, FOR, FOR FOR HOLDING OF THE EFFLUENCE? CORRECT. IT'S LIKE A, UM, A SEWER LINE THAT WAS INSTALLED FOR THE PROCESSING OF THE WASTE. OKAY. AND THEN, UM, SO THE, UH, NEXT QUESTION. SO, UH, THE APPLICANT OR THE ZONING REQUEST WAS POSTPONED. UM, UH, WHY WAS IT POSTPONED? BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T HAVE TIME TO HAVE A DIALOGUE WITH THE NEIGHBORS. THE QUESTION ABOUT ODOR, IF THERE, IS THERE A WAY TO REDUCE WHATEVER ODOR THERE IS, WE WANNA FIGURE THAT OUT BEFORE WE GO THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS. AND SO THAT'S DIALOGUE WE WANTED TO HAVE, AND THAT WAS FORCED ALL BY THE CITY'S DECISION TO TRY AND SHUT US DOWN ON THAT FRIDAY NIGHT. SO, UM, ONE MORE QUESTION. SORRY. UM, AND SO THE QUESTION THEN, ACTUALLY I'D LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE DIALOGUE ON THE WORKFLOW THAT PREVIOUSLY EXISTED, UM, AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IT AND THEN WHAT CHANGED. AND SO IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY. WHAT WAS SAID WAS THAT, UM, UM, AS IT WAS LEAVING THE SITE, THE AFFLUENTS WERE, WERE PULLED OUTTA THE PORTA POTTIES AND THEY WERE JUST STORED ESSENTIALLY, UM, CLEAN AT THE FAC AT THE, UM, FACILITY BEFORE 2019. YEAH. UM, OKAY. OKAY. AND YOU, SO THE RE THE REQUEST WAS PRIOR TO 2019. UM, I, I THOUGHT I HAD HEARD THAT, UM, ESSENTIALLY WHEN THE PORTA POTTIES WERE PICKED UP FROM WHEREVER THEY WERE BEING UTILIZED, THAT THEY WERE PUMPED BEFORE, PUMPED CLEAN BEFORE THEY ARRIVED BACK TO THE STORAGE FACILITY. WELL, THEY'RE STILL PUMPED OUT. YES, THEY'RE PUMPED OUT BEFORE THEY BROUGHT BACK TO THE BACK TO THE FACILITY, BUT THE TRUCKS ITSELF WERE GOING OFFSITE TO BE DUMPED. SO IF, EVEN IF YOU BRING THE UNITS BACK, UM, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. SO IS IF WE DUMP IT, IF WE PULL IT FROM THE UNITS AND WE LEAVE IT IN THE TRUCK, IT DOESN'T CREATE ANY ORDER. CORRECT? IS THAT THE QUESTION? YOU'RE MORE OR LESS SAYING, UM, ACTUALLY, WELL, NO. SO, SO I THINK WHAT I JUST HEARD IS TODAY YOU'RE STILL PULLING THE AFFLUENCE OUT BEFORE THEY ACTUALLY COME BACK. YES. AND THEY'RE BEING, THEY'RE BEING STORED IN A, IN A HOLDING TRUCK. AND YOU'RE NOW, NOW DUMPING THE HOLDING TRUCK INTO THE TANK THAT YOU HAVE LOCALLY. WELL, IT'S NOT A TANK, IT'S ACTUALLY THE CITY. SO WE ACTUALLY DUMP IT INTO THE PIPELINE, INTO THE CITY, SO THERE'S NO HOLDING TANK. OKAY. SO, OKAY. UM, THAT'S IT FOR RIGHT NOW. I MAY COME BACK. CAP COMMISSIONER ABT, UH, KAPLAN? [01:00:01] YES, SIR. THE CO THE C O O IS FOR, UH, LET'S SEE, IS THAT FOR CONSTRUCTION FACILITY? YES. UM, BUT OBVIOUSLY THE MOST IMPACTFUL OPERATION THAT'S HAPPENING THERE IS THE WASTE DISPOSAL. UH, DID YOU EVER CONSIDER WHEN YOU CHANGED OVER FROM OFFSITE PUMPING TO ONSITE PUMPING TO AMEND OR RE REAPPLY A C O O THAT WOULD INCLUDE WASTE DISPOSAL? WELL, I'D, I'D GO BACK TO IN YOUR BINDER IN THE PRESENTATION THAT STAFF LOOKED AT THIS AND DETERMINED THAT WE HAD THE RIGHT C O O FOR THE ONSITE DUMPING. I MEAN, WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH WHAT STAFF SAYS, RYAN, AND THEY SAID THIS IS THE RIGHT C MY QUESTION WAS, DID YOU EVER CONSIDER, IS THAT NO, NO, BECAUSE WE WERE, WE THOUGHT WE WERE UNDER THE, UNDER THE, UH, PERMIT OF THE OCCUPANCY THAT WE HAD ALREADY SIGNED. OKAY. KAPLAN. SO I, SO I HEARD YOU JUST SAY THAT WHEN YOU WERE TALKING TO THE COMMUNITY, YOU WERE CONSIDERING OTHER OPTIONS THAT WOULD, WHICH WAS ADDRESSING MY SECOND QUESTION. YES. UM, CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT? WELL, IT STARTED A DIALOGUE, BUT AGAIN, UM, DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO CONTINUE IT. WE STOPPED EVERYTHING, OBVIOUSLY TO FOCUS ON THIS PURE ZONING QUESTION. OH, NO, I MEANT, CAN YOU ELABORATE ON WHAT YOU WERE GOING TO DO, UM, BEFORE THE CITY INTERVENED WITH THE ZONING QUESTION? YEAH, I, I THINK THIS, YOU, YOU GUYS HIRED AN EXPERT TO LOOK AT THIS, UH, IF YOU WANNA NOTE THAT. YES. EXCUSE ME. UH, YES. WE WERE, WE HAVE A EXPERT, WE HAVE A CONSULTANT THAT'S COMING THROUGH AND ACTUALLY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A DIFFERENT MECHANISM TO HELP WITH THE, UH, DISPOSAL OF THE, NOT THE DISPOSAL OF THE WASTE PER SE, BUT HOW WE CAN, AS I SAID EARLIER, TRY TO GET RID OF MOST OF THAT, THE AIR QUALITY ISSUE THAT YOU GUYS ARE STAYING, WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH. SO, UM, THEY ARE LOOKING AT IT AT, AS HE SAID, IT HAS BEEN PUT ON HOLD BECAUSE OF THE WHOLE ZONING THING. BUT WE DO HAVE SOMEONE THAT'S BEEN LOOKING AT IT OVER THE LAST, UH, 30 DAYS. AND HOW LONG WILL THAT TAKE TO RESOLVE? UH, DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY COME UP WITH. I MEAN, IF IT, IF WE HAVE TO ADD MORE EQUIPMENT, YOU KNOW, COME UP WITH A, A BETTER DIFFUSER, UH, PROCESS IT, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IT JUST DEPENDS. 'CAUSE WE GOTTA GET PERMITS AGAIN. SO ALL OF THAT STUFF STARTS OVER. IT STARTS DAY ONE WHEN YOU START TRYING TO DO ANYTHING OR ANY KIND OF ADDENDUM TO THAT FRAGMENT. COMMISSIONER SPIELMAN, AND THEN I CAN, CAN, IF I CAN ADD ON, OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. UM, OBVIOUSLY EVERYTHING DEPENDS ON YOUR DECISION TODAY. WE CAN'T START THAT PROCESS IF WE'RE, IF ULTIMATELY DETERMINED WE DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT ZONING, WHICH WE THINK AS WE'VE COVERED, I THINK IN GREAT DETAIL WE DO, AND THEN WE CAN START THAT PROCESS. SO, UM, JUST WANTED TO, AND THEN ON THE AIR QUALITY, OF COURSE, T C E Q WAS OUT THERE IN MAY AND DETERMINED THERE WAS NO PROBLEM. OKAY. COMMISSIONER, UM, SPIELMAN, UH, FOR THE CITY, THE, UH, ZONING THAT WOULD, UH, ALLOW, SIR, CAN YOU SPEAK INTO YOUR MICROPHONE? YEAH. THE, THE ZONING THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR STORAGE PORTA POTTIES, UH, IN THIS CASE IT'S THE STORAGE PORTA POTTIES FOR PROLONGED PERIOD OF TIME, A COUPLE DAYS WHERE THERE IS, YOU KNOW, LIKE THE LEFTOVER OF HUMAN REMAINS IN IT. DOES THAT POSE ANY THREAT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE NEIGHBORING AREAS? I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT'S LEFT IN, IN THE PORTA-POTTIES, HOWEVER, I CAN TELL YOU THAT, UM, I LOST MY COMPLETE TRAIN OF THOUGHT THERE FOR A SECOND. , IS IT, IS THE STORAGE OF PORTA-POTTIES ALLOWED UNDER AN I TWO ZONING? THAT, THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE IT WAS GOING. OKAY. SO THIS, THEIR C F O RIGHT NOW SAYS CONSTRUCTION FACILITY AND TRUCK REPAIR. UNDER CONSTRUCTION FACILITY, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO STORE MATERIALS ASSOCIATED WITH YOUR BUSINESS. WE REALIZE THIS IS AN I TWO, SO IT IS CLASSIFIED CORRECTLY. THE ISSUE WHERE THE ISSUE COMES IN IS THE PROCESSING, AND ON THE PROCESSING SIDE OF IT, THERE WAS THE SEWER LINE PERMIT. WE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THEY, THEY TRIED TO GET A PERMIT IN 2019, THEY DID GET THAT PERMIT. HOWEVER, AT THAT TIME, IT DOES NOT TRIGGER A ZONING REVIEW OF THAT PERMIT. SO WE WOULD NOT HAVE KNOWN THAT THEY WERE CHANGING THE CAPACITY OF THEIR USE AT THAT TIME. BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UM, I, I BELIEVE THAT YOU SAID THAT, THAT, UM, THE COMPANY HAS A HUNDRED OTHER SITES ACROSS THE COUNTRY, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. UH, DO ALL THE SITES USE THIS SAME TYPE OF METHOD OF, UM, DISPOSING OR OTHERS? YES, MA'AM. WE DO HAVE, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IS A VERY STRICT STATE. YEAH. CALIFORNIA'S, YEAH, THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT, I DON'T EVEN TALK ABOUT CALIFORNIA, BUT FOR, FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS, OF WHICH I WORK IN, UH, WE DO HAVE A, A CITY OF HOUSTON, FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE AN ON-SITE, UH, DUMPING SYSTEM THAT IS A PART OF THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE RESTRICTION, THE PERMITS THAT WE HAVE WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON. UM, THE CITY OF DALLAS ALSO HAS AN ONSITE DUMPING THAT IS ALSO PERMITTED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS. UM, SO WE DO HAVE MULTIPLE, UH, SITES THAT DO HAVE ONSITE [01:05:01] DUMPING. UM, AND, YOU KNOW, UM, IT'S, IT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. AND MOST OF THOSE ARE IN, YOU KNOW, UM, INDUSTRIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AS WELL. SO, UM, OR CLASSIFIED AS INDUSTRIAL, UM, AREA. SO, UM, AND DO WE HAVE SITES THAT ACTUALLY DO, UM, PUMP 'EM OUT OF THE UNISON, THEN TAKE 'EM TO THE SITES? YES, MA'AM. WE DO. SO WE HAVE, WE HAVE ABOUT 50 50 WITHIN THE STATE VASQUEZ. SO IT'S A SIMILAR, IT'S THE SAME PROCESS. SAME PROCESS, YES, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? UH, YES, SIR. FOR, FOR THE GENTLEMAN WHO THAT'S AT THE PODIUM. UH, SIR, UH, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU HAVE A, LET'S SAY FOR INSTANCE, THE PROCESSING IN, IN HOUSTON FACILITY. IN YOUR ESTIMATE, HOW FAR AWAY IS IT LOCATED FROM A RESIDENTIAL AREA? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. UM, ACTUALLY IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT THE SAME, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT CLOSER, BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY HAVE RESIDENCE RIGHT BEHIND THAT PROPERTY ON THE SAME STREET. SO I HAVE A, A FEW QUESTIONS. SO THAT THE, THE AGENDA LIST THAT THIS IS A NOTICE TO OF INTENT TO REVOKE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. CAN THE CITY PLEASE SPEAK ON, UM, MORE ON THE BASIS OF WHY THEY DECIDED TO REVOKE IT? WAS IT SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE AN SS AFTER THE USE, OR IS IT BECAUSE THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY DOESN'T INCLUDE THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE OF, OF, OF THE DISCHARGE OF THE, OF THE SEWAGE? IT'S ACTUALLY BOTH ISSUES. UH, THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY STATES, IT'S CONSTRUCTION FACILITY AND TRUCK REPAIR. SO THEY DON'T HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR PROCESSING AND THE ZONING BASED ON OUR INFORMATION AND THE U D C, WE BELIEVE THEY NEED TO HAVE AN S A SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION TO DO THE WASTE PROCESSING. SO IN 2019, WHEN THE, WHEN THE BUILDING PERMIT WAS ISSUED AND CLOSED, UM, AND THERE'S A DETAILED LIST OF THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT THEY'RE PUTTING IN A, UM, A WASTEWATER LINE, A CONCRETE PAD, UNDERGROUND INTERCEPTOR VAULT FOR DISPOSAL OF PORT OF PORTABLE WASTE. WHY, WHY DIDN'T ANY OF THESE ISSUES COME UP IN 2019? I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE CHRISTIE KIND OF TOUCHED ON THAT A LITTLE. SO TRADE PERMITS, THEY CAN BE APPLIED ONLINE AND THEY CAN APPLY FOR IT AND GET IT. THERE IS NO ZONING VERIFICATION OR ZONING REQUIREMENT. SO IF I HAVE A BUILDING ON MY PROPERTY AND I APPLY FOR A SIX INCH SEWER LINE, I CAN APPLY ONLINE, GET THE PERMIT, THE PLUMBERS WILL GO, GO DO THE INSTALLATION. YEAH, I MEAN, DEAL, IT DOESN'T TRIGGER A ZONING. I DEAL WITH, DEAL WITH THOSE. BUT, UH, ON THE PERMIT DETAILS, IT SAYS THE AP TYPE IS A COMMERCIALS SINGLE BUILDING, WHICH WOULDN'T BE A, A TRADE PERMIT. THE PERMIT IN 2019, BASED ON THE INFORMATION I HAVE, IS TECHNICALLY A SIX INCH SEWER LINE PERMIT. IT'S A TRADE PERMIT, NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. OKAY. SO, UM, IF Y'ALL COULD GO TO THE NOTEBOOK THAT WAS GIVEN TO US ON TAB FIVE, WHERE THE PERMIT DETAIL PRINTOUT SAYS COMMERCIAL SINGLE BUILDING. AND UNDER THE SCOPE OF WORK, WE, WE DON'T HAVE THE, THE BOOK. CAN YOU PLEASE GET A, A NOTEBOOK OVER TO STAFF SO THEY CAN LOOK AT THE SAME, 'CAUSE THAT, THAT, THAT'S WHERE I'M SEEING SOME CONFLICT IS THAT THIS IS A VERY DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF, OF WAY MORE THAN JUST A SIX INCH WASTEWATER LINE. UH, AND I, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, STAFF HAS, HAS THAT IN FRONT OF THEM BECAUSE THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF QUESTIONINGS ABOUT QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. UM, SECOND THING IS, UH, ON THE, ON THE DISPOSAL, YOU KNOW, THEY RECEIVE A PERMIT FROM THE T C E Q. UM, WHEN THOSE PERMITS ARE ISSUED, ARE THEY, IS SAWS OR THE CITY NOTIFIED LIKE THEY ARE WITH, UH, UH, EDWARD'S AQUIFER PERMITS? SORRY, CHAIR. UH, THAT'S OKAY. CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? YEAH. AND UM, SO WHEN, WHEN, WHEN PERMITS AND ARE ISSUED BY THE T C Q, THEY USUALLY CARBON COPY SAWS OR OTHER, UH, INDIVIDUALS WITH THE CITY, UH, DOES THAT HAPPEN WITH THE SORT OF PERMIT THAT THEY RECEIVE FROM THE T C E Q OR WITH SAWS? UH, FOR, FOR THE SYSTEM THAT WAS PUT IN, WAS THE CITY EVER CARBON COPIED ON ANY OF THAT? I DON'T, I DON'T THINK WE, WE GET COPIED ON THOSE PERMITS FROM T C E Q OR SARS. OKAY. 'CAUSE WE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT ABOUT, ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE A THREE YEAR WINDOW, UH, UM, AND, AND YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE EVERYTHING'S BEEN OUT IN THE OPEN ON THIS, AND IT CERTAINLY HAS BEEN THREE YEARS. SO I'M, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, LIKE, LIKE THIS, WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN NOW. I MEAN, HOW DID THIS GET PERMITTED AS A COMMERCIAL SINGLE BURNING PERMIT WITH THIS DESCRIPTION AND GET APPROVED IF THE ZONING WASN'T PERTINENT? I MEAN, IT JUST, I'M, I'M, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT. UH, BASICALLY BASED ON WHAT I'M LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW, AS YOU SAID, THE TYPE IS SINGLE, UM, COMMERCIAL, SINGLE BUILDING. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. IF YOU GO DOWN TO THE DESCRIPTION OF WORK, IT SAYS THE SCOPE OF WORK INSTALLATION OF 790 SQUARE FOOT CONCRETE PAD, AND A [01:10:01] 60 LINEAR FOOT OF SIX INCH WASTE LINE. SO REALLY THERE IS NO BUILDING, IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A PAD AND A TRADE PERMIT WITH IT. SO AGAIN, IT DOES NOT GO THROUGH FULL REVIEW BECAUSE THERE IS NO STRUCTURE, THERE IS NO WALLS OR, OR ROOF THAT NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED. AND, UH, BY, BY, BY OUR TEAM. YOU DON'T HAPPEN TO HAVE THE, UH, THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT METAL REVIEWS ASSOCIATED THAT PERMIT. DO YOU DO NOT, SORRY, I'M JUST CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT SORT OF REVIEW WAS UNDERTAKEN. UM, AND THEN, UH, IF THIS, IF WE, AND FURTHER OUR ATTORNEY, OUR B O A ATTORNEY, IF, IF, IF THIS APPEAL IS, UM, IF WE SIDE WITH THE APPLICANT ON THIS, IS, IS THE CITY NO LONGER GONNA, CAN REQUIRE AN SS FOR THIS TO TYPE OF USE? OR IS THAT, IS THAT PART OF THIS IN ANY WAY? OR IS IT SIMPLY JUST THIS REVOCATION OF THE CO AND THAT'S IT? YES, IT'S THE CO THE, THE ZONING IS A SEPARATE DEAL. OKAY. SO, UM, WHAT I'M GONNA DO NOW IS WE'VE RUN, WE'VE HAD, WE HAVE, WE'VE HAD SOME BACK AND FORTH, UNLESS THERE'S A COMMISSIONER WHO HASN'T ASKED A QUESTION YET, I, I'D LIKE TO GO TO THE PUBLIC COMMENTARY, KALAN, ALL THAT FOR THE CITY, WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THEM TO GET THE SS PERMIT? THEY'RE GOING, THEY WOULD HAVE TO FINISH THEIR REZONING PROCESS AND BE APPROVED AT COUNCIL FOR IT. UH, WHAT I MEANT WAS, UM, WHAT WOULD THEY HAVE TO DO TO THEIR SITE? IN OTHER WORDS, TO, UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER THINGS THAT THEY NEED TO DO TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SS OTHER THAN JUST, UH, GETTING THE APPROVAL? OBVIOUSLY, UM, APPROVAL WOULD BE CONTINGENT ON MEETING SOME THERE. UM, THE, THE S SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION DOES ALLOW FOR SOME STIPULATIONS OR CONDITIONS TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH IT. SO UPON THE REVIEW BY THE ZONING COMMISSION AND THE COUNCIL, THEY COULD, UM, THEY COULD APPROVE IT WITH CERTAIN CONDITIONS, MAYBE AN ENCLOSURE OR OTHER BUFFERING OR DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT. ALL RIGHT. LET'S, UH, LET'S START WITH, UH, WE HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL. WE HAVE VOICE. OH, A LOT OF VOICEMAILS. OKAY. AS STAFF. CHECK TO SEE IF, UH, ANYONE WHO LEFT A VOICEMAIL IS ALSO HERE IN PERSON WOULD LIKE TO TALK IN PERSON AS OPPOSED TO HAVING THEIR VOICEMAIL READ. UH, WE'LL CHECK AS THEY'RE PLAYING. SO WITH THAT, LET'S, UH, IF YOU HAVE WANNA START CALLING THE NAMES OUT, YOU WANNA DO THE VOICEMAILS OR THE, UH, LET'S START WITH THE PEOPLE IN PERSON. ALRIGHT. AND AS, AND AS THEY COME UP, IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE THE VOICEMAIL NAMES, YOU CAN CROSS 'EM OUT. ALL RIGHT. FIRST ONE IS SIGNED UP FOR THIS CASE IS BEVERLY TOWNS. MS. TOWNS BEVERLY TOWNS. SHE MAY HAVE STEPPED OUT. WE CAN CALL HER NAME AGAIN JUST TO MAKE SURE SHE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY. UH, I THINK I'M TAKING HER TIME. AND I'M NEXT. IT'S, UH, OSCAR VICKS. AND THIS GOES FOR EVERYONE WHO COMES UP. UM, PLEASE JUST TELL US YOUR NAME AND LET US KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS. UH, BEVERLY IS STATING SHE'S YIELDING HER TIME TO OFFICER. OKAY. IS BEVERLY HERE? YES, SHE'S RIGHT HERE. SHE'S IS ANYBODY ELSE YIELDING THEIR TIME? UH, TO MR. OSCAR? OKAY. YOU HAVE FOUR. YOU HAVE FOUR MINUTES, SIR. FOUR MINUTES. OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, MY NAME IS OSCAR VIX, AND I HAVE SERVED AS THE UNITED HOMEOWNERS PRESIDENT FOR OVER SIX TERMS. NOW, FIRST OF ALL, I WANT EVERYBODY TO STAND FROM THE UNITED HOMEOWNERS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION. EVERYBODY STAND. NOW YOU LOOKING AT PEOPLE THAT HAVE LIVED IN OUR COMMUNITY. I'VE BEEN THERE 46 YEARS. Y'ALL MAY BE SEATED. NOW YOU LOOKING AT PEOPLE HAVE LIVED IN THE COMMUNITY FOR 30, 40, AND 50 YEARS. WE HAVE NOT LIVED IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS FOR SOMEBODY ELSE TO TELL US WHAT WE WANT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE DECIDE THAT. NOW THIS LAWYER RIGHT HERE, HE SEEM TO BE A SMART GUY. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? IT SEEMED LIKE TO ME HE WOULD'VE, AS LONG AS, AS WE'VE BEEN ORGANIZED BEFORE, I TOLD 'EM THEY COULD BE THERE. YOU, I CAN'T SEE NO REASON TO WORLD WHY YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE CONTACTED UNITED HOMEOWNERS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION. AND IF WE DON'T WANT YOU THERE, WHY YOU WANT TO BE THERE. YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING? SIR, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? OKAY. I'M SPEAKING INTO MY MIC NOW. I CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY. IF WE WANT TO BUILD A PORTA PARTY RIGHT OUTSIDE OF THIS, THIS COMMISSION OFFICE, THEY OUGHTA COME IN AND ASK Y'ALL, DO YOU WANT IT THERE? THAT, THAT SEEMED LIKE THE MOST LOGICAL THING FOR ME TO, TO DO. AND Y'ALL HAVE TO GO ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE SAY WHEN THEY STAND UP HERE. NOW, THIS GENTLEMAN HERE, HE LOOKED LIKE A FOOTBALL PLAYER. I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE WAS OR NOT, BUT IF YOU SHOW THAT PICTURE OF WHERE THEY ARE AND WHERE WE ARE, THAT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET. THAT AIN'T HARDLY NO 700 YARDS. HOW LONG IS A FOOTBALL FIELD? A HUNDRED YARD. [01:15:02] SO NOW Y'ALL GOTTA GO BY WHERE PEOPLE COME UP HERE AND TELL Y'ALL, NOW WE SITTING HERE, Y'ALL CAN SIT HERE AND TALK ALL THIS TECHNICAL STUFF, ALL THAT, OR LEVERAGE STUFF TO US. BUT THE ONLY THING WE UNDERSTAND, IF WE GOING OUT IN OUR BACKYARD BARBECUING AND SMELLING THIS DOOO, OKAY? DOOO AND BARBECUE DO NOT GO TOGETHER. NOW Y'ALL CAN SIT HERE AND TALK ALL DAY, ALL THE NEXT SET OF YEAR AND COME UP WITH REASON WHY THEY OUGHT TO BE THERE. NOW, CAN Y'ALL PULL THAT LITTLE CONTRAPTION UP THAT YOU SHOWED THAT YOU DO THAT DO THAT? UH, WHAT, WHAT YOU CALL IT? THAT, UH, PUTTING THAT MAN, PUTTING THAT MANURE STUFF, TALKING. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE, UH, AERIAL PHOTO? THAT LITTLE, THAT LITTLE CONTRAPTION? YOU SAID THE ONLY THING HAD A RED MARK ON IT? PULL IT UP. CAN YOU PULL IT UP PLEASE? UH, PULL IT UP. IT'S ON OUR PRESENTATION. OH, STAFF. STAFF HAS, OKAY. IT WAS, IT WAS OPENED UP. IT WAS OPENED UP AND HAD SOME PIPES GOING IN IT. THAT MAY HAVE BEEN FROM THE APPLICANT'S. UH, OKAY. OKAY, OKAY. OKAY. THAT AIN'T WHAT I WANT, BUT THAT'S SIMILAR TO IT. NOW, NOW IT SEEMED LIKE TO ME, I AIN'T THE SMARTEST PERSON IN THE WORLD AND IN THE ROOM, BUT I ASKED THEM AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING THAT WE HAD WITH 'EM, ARE Y'ALL LEASING OR ARE YOU BUYING? THEY SAID, WE LEASING. I SAID, WELL, WHY YOU CAN'T GO AND LEASE SOMEWHERE ELSE? YOU KNOW, IT SEEMED LIKE TO ME YOU COULD TAKE THAT LITTLE CONTRAPTION RIGHT THERE AND PUT IT SOMEWHERE ELSE ON A LEASE PROBLEM AND THAT'LL SOLVE ALL OUR PROBLEM. NOW YOU LOOK AT, NOW SHOW A PICTURE OF THE WHOLE GROUND SHOW. THE PICTURE OF THE WHOLE GROUND OF THE WHOLE GROUND WHERE EVERYTHING IS THE, ALL THE PARTIES, ALL THE TRUCKS, ALL THE DRIVEWAYS, EVERYTHING. JUST SHOW A PICTURE OF THAT. NOW, WHEN I CAME THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I WAS RIDING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN 1975 ON MY BICYCLE. NOW, IF I WENT DOWN THAT STREET AND SMELLED THAT PORTA POT OF ME, YOU THINK I'D HAVE MOVED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD 46 YEARS AGO? AIN'T NO WAY IN THE WORLD. NOW Y'ALL COULD. THAT IS RIGHT THERE. THAT'S THE THING. HOLD ON. BACK UP, BACK UP. THAT'S THAT LITTLE CONTRAPTION RIGHT THERE. IF YOU LEASING THE PLACE, ALL YOU GOTTA DO IS MOVE THAT LITTLE THING NOW ON, ON SOME LEASING PROPERTY, AND THAT'LL SOLVE ALL OUR PROBLEM. SO WHY YOU JUST WANNA BE AROUND US AND WE DON'T WANT YOU TO BE AROUND US? THAT DON'T MAKE SENSE. JUST LET US JUST, JUST GET THAT LITTLE CONTRAPTION RIGHT THERE AND PUT IT ON SOME LEASE PROPERTY SOMEWHERE, ANYWHERE. I MEAN, WE OWN IT LIKE A, I'M TALKING ABOUT ACROSS THE STREET FROM US. WE GOT A SMELL THIS STUFF EVERY DAY. PEOPLE GOT HEARTBURN FROM SMELLING THIS STUFF. PEOPLE GOT LONG PROBLEM FROM SMELLING THIS STUFF. AND HERE WE ARE. MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN HERE, I'M 72 YEARS OLD, AND THEY WAS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN I MOVED OUT THERE, SO THEY GOT TO BE LIKE 80 OR 90. WELL, WHY SHOULD THEY HAVE TO COME OUT HERE AND ALL THIS COLD WEATHER, ALL THIS RAINY WEATHER, THE TE THEY DON'T WANNA SMELL THIS STUFF. AND Y'ALL SITTING HERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO BE AROUND US THAT DON'T MAKE SENSE. WHY DON'T WE JUST PUT TWO AND TWO TOGETHER? Y'ALL SUPPOSED TO BE DECIDING WHAT'S GOOD FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THEN THINK JUST A MAN, IF IT WAS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? THAT'S, THAT'S ALL WE ASKING FOR. AND TO SIT HERE AND TELL HER, WELL, THAT AIN'T WHAT WE COME HERE FOR TODAY. WE MIGHT AS WELL JUST GET UP AND GO HOME, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE COME TO TALK ABOUT. WE COME TO TALK ABOUT WHAT CAN WE DO TO KEEP FROM SMELLING THIS STUFF EVERY DAY. AND WE SMELLING IT EVERY DAY. WE PASSING BY IT EVERY DAY. ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS SAY WAS AT THE RED LIGHT AND THE TRUCK STOPPED AND THAT STUFF SLUSH, HE SAID, ALMOST HAD TO GET OUTTA HIS CAR AND JUST STAY AND LEAVE A CAR THERE TO JUST WALK OFF FROM IT. WHY SHOULD WE HAVE TO LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 30, 40, 50 YEARS TO PUT UP WITH STUFF THAT WE KNOW WE DON'T WANT? AND AS LONG AS I'M LIVING AT 1214 FOR CARTER, I'M GONNA TRY TO GET WHAT I WANT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT WHAT SOMEBODY ELSE WANT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THAT'S WHAT WE HEAR ABOUT TODAY, OKAY? AND THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THESE PEOPLE DONE CAME UP. WELL, YOU MAY NOT, SOMEBODY GAVE ME THEIR TIME OR YOU TRYING TO TELL ME I RAN OUTTA TIME. IT'S ALREADY, IT'S ALREADY GONE. IS ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SEE THEIR TIME TO THIS GENTLEMAN? I'VE BEEN TALKING FOR FIVE MINUTES. OH YEAH. WELL, THANK YOU. OKAY. YES SIR. NEXT ONE IS DOLORES WILLIAMS. THANK YOU. PULL THE MICROPHONE. MY NAME IS DOLORES WILLIAMS AND I LIVE AT 34 35 BELGIUM LANE. AND I AM KNOWN THROUGHOUT THE CITY, IN THE STATE AS MAMA D, BUT MY HUSBAND AND I WERE ONE OF THE FIRST RESIDENTS TO MOVE TO WILLWOOD SECTION 1962. AND I, WE'VE BEEN THERE 59 YEARS. I CAN RECALL WHEN THERE WAS A FARMHOUSE IN FRONT OF THE POTTY, PORTA, POTTERY, [01:20:01] PROPERTY, AND REST. AND THE LAND WAS A CABBAGE FIELD. WE HAVE HAD BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRY BUILT ALL AROUND US WHILE WE WERE IMPROVING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. MANY BUSINESSES HAVE BEEN VERY RESPECTABLE OF OUR WELLBEING, AND THERE HAS BEEN VERY LITTLE INTERFERENCE WITH OUR LIVELIHOOD. WE HAVE HAD A FEW ISSUES WITH A COUPLE OF COMPANIES, BUT THESE ISSUES WAS CORRECTED IMMEDIATELY. IT IS OFFERED TO LIVE MY OLDER 89 YEARS SMELLING THE ODORS THAT ARE COMING INTO MY HOME FROM THE COMPANY KNOWN AS THE UNITED SITE SERVICE. THIS IS A DAILY OCCUPANCY THAT IS CAUSING BREATHING ISSUES FOR ME AND MY FAMILY. I HAVE A BENCH THAT I HAVE TO SIT ON IN THE FRONT YARD. I LOVE TO WATCH THE TRAFFIC. I ALSO HAVE A BARBECUE IN MY HOME. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EITHER HAVE ANYONE THAT OFFERS SMELL OR COMING WHEN I ATTEMPT TO HAVE EITHER OF THESE FUNCTIONS. I'M HERE TODAY TO LET IT BE KNOWN THAT I DO NOT SUPPORT ANY ZONING THAT WOULD ALLOW UNITED PSYCH SERVICE TO REMAIN A NONSENSE IN A HEALTH HOUSING IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. NO ONE, INCLUDING YOU THAT ARE HERE TODAY ON THIS PANEL, WOULD WANT TO LIVE ACROSS FROM A COMPANY THAT BRINGS THE SMELL OF HUMAN WASTE AND DAMAGE ACROSS THE STREET FROM YOUR HOME. OR COME WITHIN 40 FEET OF YOUR FRONT DOOR AND SMELL DEBRIS ON THE STREET WHEN TURNING FROM PARCEL STREET TO BELGIUM LANE. THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. DON'T LET IT HAPPEN IN OURS. NEXT SPEAKER IS HAROLD WILLIAMS. GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, MY NAME IS HAROLD WILLIAMS AND, UH, I'M THE AREA ADMINISTRATOR, UH, OF THE, UH, ONE OF THE SUBDIVISION CALLED MEADOWVIEW PARK H UH, UNITED HOMEOWNERS COMPRISED OF THREE NEIGHBORHOODS, THREE DIVISIONS, WILLOW WOOD, UH, MEADOWVIEW NORTH AND MEADOWVIEW PARK. I'M THE EVERY ADMINISTRATOR OF EVERY, UH, MEADOWVIEW PARK. AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO, UH, OFFER MY TIME TO MR. JONES. OUR PRESIDENT, MR. JONES YIELD WANTS YIELD. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, GO AHEAD AND SIT DOWN SIR. WELL GUESS THE PROPER TERM IS IU MY TIME TO, UH, MR. JONES? YES, SIR. ALL IF YOU'RE GONNA GIVE YOUR TIME TO SOMEBODY, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU DO IT, UM, JUST BEFORE YOU GET UP THERE. ALRIGHT, NEXT SPEAKER IS MR. JONES. JOE MALONE. YES. CHAIRMAN AND BOARD. THANKS FOR HEARING OUR CASE. IF I LIVED IN CASTLE HILLS, UH, ALMOST BASIN, I WOULDN'T BE UP HERE TALKING ABOUT THIS, THIS GARBAGE, UH, WHATEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO CALL IT. IT, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S GIVEN A BAD, BAD, VERY BAD STENCH. I'M THE GENTLEMAN THAT WAS BEHIND THE TRUCK THAT STOPPED AT THE RED LIGHT, AND I ALMOST LEFT MY TRUCK THERE. IT, IT IS BAD. AND WHAT HAPPENED IS, THEY LOCATED THIS PLACE IN THE CENTER OF THREE NEIGHBORHOODS. THERE'S A SCHOOL LESS THAN TWO BLOCKS AWAY. THERE'S A WATER FUR PURIFICATION COMPANY RIGHT BEHIND IT. SO NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE MAKING SENSE, AND THE STENCH DON'T GO AWAY. WE'VE HAD SEVERAL, UH, MEETINGS SET UP WITH THESE, UH, WITH THIS COMPANY, AND MOST OF THEM NEVER COME TO. AND THEN WHEN IN ONE OF THE MEETINGS SOMEONE MENTIONED THAT THEY SHOULDN'T BE IN A LOCATION, AND THE GENTLEMAN TOLD US MAYBE WE SHOULD CONSIDER MOVING [01:25:01] MM-HMM. , I, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A RIGHT ATTITUDE TO, TO, TO TAKE. I'VE BEEN THERE 47 YEARS. UH, AND, AND THE BEST THING I CAN SAY IS THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO, UH, DO THESE KIND OF THINGS, YOU WOULD DO IT SO THAT THE ODOR WOULDN'T GO ALL OVER THE PLACE. IT'S, IT'S PRESENTING PROBLEMS FOR MY, UM, UH, RESPIRATORY, BECAUSE IF YOU JUST GET UP SOME MORNINGS AND THE WIND SHIFT, THERE IT COMES. AND IT'S NO SENSE THAT NO ONE HAVING TO LIVE THIS WAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MS. ROSE HILL. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS ROSE HILL AND I'M PRESIDENT OF THE D TWO PRESENCE ROUNDTABLE, WHICH CONSISTS OF 30 NEIGHBORHOODS IN DISTRICT TWO TODAY. ALL 30 NEIGHBORHOODS IN DISTRICT TWO ARE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS APPEAL REQUEST. I'M HERE TODAY ADVISING YOU WE ARE IN OPPOSITION TO THE APPEAL REQUESTS FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN A BIG BURDEN ON THIS COMMUNITY. THE SENIORS AND RESIDENTS ARE IN OPPOSITION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE AT HAND IS A MAJOR CONCERN FOR THE CHILDREN WHO ATTEND CAMERON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. THIS IS JUST A SHORT, SHORT DISTANCE FROM THIS BUSINESS. THE SENIORS AND RESIDENTS OF THIS COMMUNITY ARE CONCERNED FOR THEIR HEALTH AND THAT OF THEIR FAMILIES. WE, AGAIN, ASK YOUR CONSIDERATION AND ASK THAT YOU VOTE NO. IN THIS CASE TODAY, I HEARD A COUPLE OF THINGS WHERE THE ATTORNEY SAID, UM, THAT THERE IS IMMINENT HARM TO THE BUSINESS. TODAY. I ASK EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU TO CONSIDER AND SAY NO. WHAT ABOUT IMMINENT HARM TO THE SENIORS? WHAT ABOUT IMMINENT HARM TO THE NEIGHBORS? WHAT ABOUT IMMINENT HARM TO THE CHILDREN THAT ARE PLAYING ON THAT PLAYGROUND AND THEY COME OUT FOR RECESS EVERY DAY? WHAT ABOUT THE CHIL PEOPLE THAT HAVE, UH, ARE DISABLED AND HAVE MEDICAL ISSUES? I ASK YOU TO TAKE ALL THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AND VOTE NO TODAY. THANK YOU. THE NEXT ONE, NEXT ONE IS B GALLOWAY. IS THERE A GALLOWAY MS. GALLOWAY, YOU HAVE A VOICEMAIL. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK OR WOULD YOU LIKE YOUR VOICEMAIL PLAYED? I MY TIME TO MISS AND I, I I DON'T HEAR HER. SHE WOULD EXPLAIN EVERYTHING. I'M SORRY. DID YOU SAY P B GALLOWAY? SHE'S YIELDING HER TIME TO MISS OLIVE. OKAY. THANK AND WHAT'S YOUR NAME, MA'AM? ALI. THANK. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ONE IS VANESSA TATE. I'M YIELDING MY TIME TO, TO WHO ARE Y'ALL KEEPING TRACK OF ALL THE, UH, E OKAY, JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. ALRIGHT, NEXT ONE IS LJ BOMBER. CAN WE ASK YOU ALL TO PULL UP, UH, NUMBER 11 ON THE FRAME? GOOD EVENING. PICK UP NUMBER 11, RIGHT THERE AT THE EDGE OF THE DRIVEWAY. RIGHT THERE. RIGHT THERE. I'M NOT AS OLD AS THESE GUYS RIGHT HERE. UH, BUT I AM OLDER. I'M 64. MY WIFE IS 69. THIS DIDN'T USED TO SMELL LIKE THIS, BUT SOMETHING THAT THEY HAVEN'T TOLD YOU. I'M IN CONSTRUCTION. THESE THINGS GO OUT TO OIL FIELDS, CONSTRUCTION SITES, AND THEY PICK UP CRITTERS. THEY BRING HOME RATS, THAT BIG SNAKES, RACCOONS, POSSUMS. AND THEY COME TO OUR HOUSES. THEY EAT, THEY TEAR UP. HELL, YOU, YOU RUN, YOU KNOW, UH, THIS, THIS DIDN'T START OVERNIGHT. THIS HAS BEEN A FEW YEARS IN GOING, I'VE WATCHED THEM DRILL THAT HOLE. I'VE WATCHED THEM CONNECTED TO THAT MANHOLE OUTSIDE. UH, IT'S KILLING US. AND THAT'S ALL I GOT TO SAY. IT'S KILLING US. AND NEXT ONE IS MRS. PLUMMER. [01:30:01] THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TODAY. I, I NOTICE I HAVE TWO MINUTES, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. IT'S THREE NOW. 'CAUSE I HEARD YOU SAY TWO MINUTES EARLIER. IT'S, IT'S TWO MINUTES. TWO MINUTES. OKAY. UM, I WAS WATCHING A, UH, A VIDEO CLIP ON C B S AND THEY WERE INTERVIEWING A YOUNG, A PERSON BY THE NAME OF PEGGY SHEPHERD AND PEGGY SHEPHERD, UH, IS THE CO-FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ORGANIZATION, KNOWN AS WE ACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN NEW YORK. SHE'S A WELL-KNOWN TRAILBLAZER AND ADVOCATE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND HEALTH. SHE DEFINES ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM AS THE INTENTIONAL TARGETING OF POLLUTION IN COMMUNITIES OF COLOR, LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES, BECAUSE PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE LESS INFORMED, VOTE LESS, AND OFTEN LAND IS CHEAPER IN THOSE COMMUNITIES. THIS ENCOURAGES INDUSTRIAL GROWTH AND EXPANSION OF BUSINESSES WHICH POLLUTE WITHIN OUR U H I A COMMUNITY. YOU WILL FIND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL PROPERTIES, TRUCKING PROPERTIES, AND OTHER SUCH BUSINESSES, INCLUDING FACILITIES SUCH AS UNITED SITE RENTAL SERVICES, WHICH BRING WITH THEM ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION. ACCORDING TO SHEPHERD, THESE INDUSTRIES BRING HARM TO THE ENVIRONMENT, AFFECT THE HEALTH OF THOSE WHO LIVE WITHIN THESE RESIDENTIAL AREAS. ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM IS RACIAL AND DISCRIMINATION IN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY MAKING LAW, UH, LACKS ENFORCEMENT OF REGULATIONS AND LAWS DELIBERATE TARGETING COMMUNITIES OF COLOR FOR TOXIC WASTE FACILITIES SUCH AS THE ONE OF THE UNITED SITE RENTAL SERVICES AND OTHERS WHICH BRING HARM TO MY U H I O U H I A COMMUNITY. AND A FACTUAL THING, I DID CALL BECAUSE I COULDN'T GET THEM TO ANSWER THE PHONE OR OTHER U UH, RENTAL SERVICES SUCH AS THEIRS. I GOT SOMEONE TO ANSWER IN COLORADO AND I EXPLAINED TO THE LADY THAT ANSWERED THAT I'M LIVING EIGHT DOORS DOWN FROM ONE OF THEIR SISTER FACILITIES. AND SHE EXPLAINED TO ME THAT IN COLORADO, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE UNHEARD OF FOR SUCH A FACILITY TO BE IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT YET CITY OF SAN ANTONIO FOUND IT OKAY TO DO THAT. UM, I APPRECIATE DISTRICT TWO STAFF. I APPRECIATE CODE COMPLIANCE FOR TRYING TO WORK WITH US ON THIS ISSUE. I APPRECIATE THEM FOR TRYING TO BRING THE TWO PARTIES TOGETHER, UH, TO NO F L UNFORTUNATELY. AND I, I'M JUST ASKING YOU TO PLEASE REVOKE YOUR POSITION THAT THIS DECISION WAS UNJUST AND WRONG FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND ANY COMMUNITY FOR ANY NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT ONE IS JACQUELINE ALI. AND WE HAVE FOUR MINUTES, MA'AM. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JACQUELINE ALI AND I RESIDE AT 34 27 BELGIUM LANE. I HAVE SEEN MANY COMPANIES MOVE IN AND OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THROUGHOUT MY 33 YEARS OF AS A RESIDENT, BUT NONE HAS POSED A GREATER, GREATER THREAT TO US AS UNITED STATES SITE SERVICES. WITH THE ARRIVAL OF THEIR MOVING INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A VERY DISTINCTIVE, UNPLEASANT ODOR AND ODOR THAT PERMEATES THE PLUMBING IN MY HOME AND THE AIR SURROUNDING MY HOME. MANY RESIDENTS HAVE LIVED HERE FOR OVER 50 YEARS, AND DURING THE PAST TWO YEARS, WE HAVE BECOME INCREASINGLY AWARE OF THIS COMPANY. NOT ONLY RENTING PORTABLE TOILETS OUT, BUT REQUESTING TO BE REZONED TO HEAVY INDUSTRY, AS WELL AS BEING PERMITTED BY SAUCE TO BE A WASTE HAULER AND TO DEPOSIT WASTE ON LOCATION. I RECENTLY INQUIRED FROM A FEW OTHER PORTABLE TOILET COMPANIES TO FIRST ASKED ABOUT THEIR LOCATION AND SECONDLY, HOW THEY DISPOSE OF THE WASTE WHEN COLLECTED. TWO COMPANIES IN PARTICULAR, CORTEZ LIQUID WASTE SERVICES AND SOUTH TEXAS DUMPSTER ARE BOTH LOCATED ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF TOWN AND NOT NEAR NEIGHBORHOODS SUCH AS OURS. BOTH COMPANIES STATED THAT THEY USE TRUCKS THAT PUMP THE WASTE FROM THE PORTABLE TOILETS AND THE TRUCKS TRANSPORT THE WASTE TO A WASTE TREATMENT FACILITY THAT IS MAINTAINED BY SOURCE. AND THAT FACILITY IS ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF TOWN, NOT NEAR A NEIGHBORHOOD SUCH AS OURS. ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES ALSO STATED THAT WHAT IS HAPPENING IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD SHOULD BE ILLEGAL. THAT THIS IS A HEALTH HAZARD TO THE COMMUNITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, AND THAT WASTE SHOULD BE TREATED IN A CERTAIN WAY. UNITED STATES SITE SERVICES LITERALLY TRANSPORT THE TOES BACK TO 34 42 BELGIUM [01:35:01] LANE AND TANK TRUCKS RETURNED WITH WASTE TO THAT SAME LOCATION TO BREAK DOWN THE WASTE AND DEPOSIT IT INTO THE GROUND AND IN FRACK TANKS. WHY IS THIS COMPANY GIVEN A PASS TO DO SO IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHEN OTHER COMPANIES HAVE TAKEN ENVIRONMENTALLY SAFE METHODS TO DISPOSE OF WASTE AT OUR EXPENSE, UNITED SITE SERVICES IS BEING ALLOWED TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE WITH LITTLE REGARD TO THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF OUR ENVIRONMENT AND GROUNDWATER, REGARDLESS OF RACE, COLOR, ETHNICITY, OUR COMMUNITY DESERVES THE ENFORCEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL LOSS REGULATIONS AND POLICIES TO ENSURE THAT WE TOO ARE AFFORDED A SAFE AND HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT. SAS, T C E Q, WHICH THEY HAVE GONE OVER AND DONE SIX INVESTIGATIONS. SO WE HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THEM. AND DISTRICT JUDGE AARON HAAS AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAVE FAILED OUR COMMUNITY AND DOING JUST THE OPPOSITE BY ALLOWING UNITED SITE SERVICES PRIVILEGES THAT BENEFIT THEM, BUT ARE DETRIMENTAL TO US HISTORICALLY, MANY COMPANIES THAT POLLUTE AIR AND IMPLEMENT UNSAFE OPERATING PRACTICES ARE IN NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE PEOPLE OF COLOR RESIDE. THE BURDEN SHOULD NOT BE ON THE COMMUNITY TO PROVE UNSAFE ENVIRONMENTAL, UH, ISSUES THAT THEY POSE MAJOR THREATS TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, OUR PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT. BUT ON LOCAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS AND BOARDS SUCH AS YOURSELF TO IMPLEMENT AND MANDATE POLICIES, LAWS, AND REGULATIONS THAT LEAD TO A CLEAN AND SAFE ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL NEIGHBORHOODS, INCLUDING WILLOW WOODS ESTATES. THANK YOU. PATRICK JONES. HE'S OUTSIDE. HE'S OUTSIDE. IS THAT RIGHT MR. JONES? HE'S YIELDING THIS TIME TO ME. OKAY, SO THAT'S TWO YIELDING TO MR. JONES. SO IT, WHY DON'T WE JUST, WHY DON'T WE HAVE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK NOW? I, I'LL, I'LL LET THEM GO AHEAD AND ORDER THAT HE HAS FIRST. OKAY. MR. TOMMY CALVERT. MR. CALVERT DIDN'T MAKE IT OR COMMISSIONER CALVERT DIDN'T MAKE IT, BUT HE SAID THAT THE LETTER WAS SENT HERE. HE DID SEND A LETTER. WE, WE RECEIVED A LETTER. OKAY. ALRIGHT. I HAVE NO PROBLEM. IS UM, JESSE MEIS? YES. CAN Y'ALL NOT START MY TIME UNTIL I PROPERLY PRESENT MYSELF? YOU GOT IT? AND CAN I HAVE A TABLE HERE PLEASE? AND, AND WHILE HE'S PREPARING, CAN WE GO AHEAD AND PUT UP, UH, MR. CALVERT OR, UH, COMMISSIONER CALVERT'S, UH, LETTER SO THAT WE CAN SEE IT, PLEASE. I NEED A TABLE HERE OR CAN I PUT IT ON TOP OF THERE? UH, IT'S THE LAST, UH, SHOULD BE THE LAST ONE. POWERPOINT. SURE. I MEAN, I, SO, SO BEFORE Y'ALL START MY TIME, MY NAME'S JESSE MODELEZ. I'M AN INFLUENCER. I LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M IN FILMS. I'M IN TV. I'VE TRAVELED AROUND THE WORLD JUST, UM, TO DEAL WITH RACISM AND COLOR COMMUNITIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I AM AMAZED THAT OUR COMMUNITY'S GOING THROUGH THIS. THEY'RE KILLING US. THEY ALMOST KILLED ME. LITERALLY. THE PICTURE THEY HAVE, I'M GONNA SHOW YOU GUYS. UM, I KNOW MY HIPAA LAWS, I KNOW EVERYTHING, BUT I'M WILLING TO PUT IT IN PUBLIC RECORDS FOR MY COMMUNITY. IT'S A COLORED COMMUNITY. HERE. PASS THE LAW. THOSE ARE JUST SOME OF THEM. THOSE ARE THOUSANDS OF THEM RIGHT THERE. . I DON'T WANT TAKE TOO MUCH OF YOUR TIME. I ALMOST DIED LAST YEAR BECAUSE OF THE TOXIC THINGS. I COLLAPSED. I WENT TO THE HOSPITAL FOR VERTIGO. I WENT TO THE HOSPITAL AGAIN. THREE DAYS LATER WHEN THE SMELL HIT ME. UM, THEY GAVE ME MEDICATIONS. MY STOMACH BLED OUT. I WAS VOMITING BLOOD. I WAS RUSHED TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM THAT SMELLS. NOBODY LIKES THE SMELL OF S**T. NONE OF YOU GUYS, EVEN THEIR FANCY ATTORNEY. I'M AMAZED. LIKE WE'VE NEVER HAD TO DEAL WITH SOMETHING WHICH IS HAZARDOUS. IT'S CAR, CAR CARCINOGENIC. THE CHEMICALS THEY USE IN THAT. THEY'RE CANCEROUS. THEY'RE VERY CANCEROUS. MY, MY AUNT E WITH US IS AT STAGE FOUR CANCER. MY NEIGHBOR PASSED AWAY FROM CANCER. HER MOM [01:40:01] HAS CANCER IN THE PAST FOUR YEARS, THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING TO US. THINGS STARTED MOVING BECAUSE WE STARTED GETTING INVOLVED THE YOUNGER COMMUNITY. THIS IS NOT OKAY. IT'S RACIST. IT'S RACIST. IT CAN'T GET, IT'S NOT SIMPLER THAN THAT. NOBODY LIKES THE SMELL OF S**T. YOUR THINGS GIVING. YOU'RE GONNA ENJOY IT. WE'RE GONNA SMELL S**T IN THANKSGIVING, NOT JUST S**T. THE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL. I LOVE HOW HE BEAUTIFIES THAT BECAUSE HE'S GETTING PAID. OUR COMMUNITY DOESN'T HAVE THAT MONEY. IT'S A MINORITY COMMUNITY. BUT ALSO WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE VETERANS WHERE PEOPLE OF COLOR AND ALSO WITH GREAT JOBS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. ARE Y'ALL DOING THAT TO OUR VETERANS AND OUR MILITARY? CLIFF, AN OFFICER IN THE GUARD, VETERAN AFTER VETERAN. MY SISTER THAT'S IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S GONNA MOVE OUT 'CAUSE THE SMELL OF S**T. 'CAUSE IT'S EMBARRASSING. HE FANCIED THAT. NO, WHEN THEY WENT TO OUR COMMUNITY, THEY STOOD US UP FOUR TIMES. DIDN'T SHOW UP. UM, OUR CITY COUNCILMAN, EVERYBODY, OUR WITNESSES, THEY WERE AT ONE OF 'EM. YOU GUYS, UM, ONE OF Y ARE WHAT'S, WHAT'S HIS NAME? MIKKI OR MICHAEL? UM, YEAH, MICHAEL WAS THE OTHER GUY THAT ALSO WAS DISAPPOINTED. WE WANTED TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. THEY TOLD US, WELL WHAT IF WE DON'T LIKE YOU GUYS TO BE HERE? 'CAUSE WE'RE LIKE, GUYS, WE JUST DON'T LIKE THE SMELL S**T. WELL WHAT IF WE DON'T LIKE, WANT YOU GUYS HERE? IS THAT THE PROPER WAY TO COME AT US? NOW HE BEAUTIFIED EVERYTHING, BUT NO, THAT'S NOT THE PICTURE. I'M GONNA SHOW YOU THE EXACT SAME PICTURE. THESE WERE RECENTLY TAKEN. UM, THERE WAS EVEN THE CHANNEL FIVE NEWS THAT DID A DOC A WHOLE SERIES ON THIS. AND I AM LIKE IN DISBELIEF. IF I HAVE TO BRING ON MEDIA TO GET OUR LEADERS THAT FAILED US FIRED, PEOPLE NEED TO GO TO JAIL 'CAUSE THEY'RE KILLING US. LOOK AT MY MEDICAL RECORDS. LOOK, I'M ON FREAKING MELAINE. LIKE THIS IS NOT OKAY. I'M YOUNG BECAUSE OF THE VERTIGO THAT THAT GIVES YOU. PASS THEM AROUND. I'M PASS THEM AROUND. AND THAT'S NOT SOME OF 'EM. THERE'S SOME PRO PUMPS. IT'S DISGUSTING. THESE ARE THE PHOTOS. THIS IS HOW THAT PHOTO PULL OUT. THAT PHOTO THAT HE JUST SHOWED YOU GUYS. I THINK IT'S THE ONE OF WHERE THEY CLEAN AND HOW IT LOOKS NICE. THESE WERE RECENTLY TAKEN AND I WANT YOU GUYS TO PASS THESE AROUND. OH NO, BUT THESE ARE THE ACTUAL PHOTOS. YEAH, THEY CAN PROJECT THEM UP THERE. SO THAT ONE, THIS IS HOW THAT LOOKS. 24 7. NOT LIKE THAT. I, I WISH, BUT EVEN LIKE THAT, THIS IS ANOTHER ONE. OKAY, COOL. THIS IS ANOTHER ONE. THIS IS HOW IT LOOKS RIGHT NOW. ON MY WAY OVER HERE, THEY HAD A TRUCK WITH S**T FALLING OUT OF THE BACK ON OUR ROADS. Y'ALL WANNA SEE THAT VIDEO? I HAVE THE VIDEO ON MY WAY OVER HERE. IT IS WHAT IT IS. I'M SORRY I'VE NEVER BEEN IT'S S**T. IT'S S**T WITH, UM, CANCEROUS STUFF IN THERE. SO LET ME SHOW YOU ALL THE VIDEO. IT'S RIGHT HERE ACTUALLY. SO GO AHEAD. DON'T SHOW IT ON THE SCREEN IF YOU WANT, YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE TABLE. THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE ONE. IT'S DISGUSTING. IT'S DISGUSTING. IT'S POURING OUT IN OUR STREETS. THERE'S AN ELEMENTARY THERE. DO Y'ALL GUYS KNOW THE HISTORY OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD? IT WAS BUILT OFF OF RACISM BACK IN THE DAY WHERE THEY WOULD PUT, WE HAD THE STATE REPRESENTATIVE THAT LIVED THERE. THE, UM, AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY WAS ONLY ALLOWED TO BE IN A CERTAIN AREA. IT WAS A WEALTHY AREA. HAVE Y'ALL STUDIED? DOES ANYBODY KNOW THE HISTORY OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD? WHY ARE Y'ALL ALLOWING THIS TO STILL HAPPEN? IT'S NOT OKAY. I ALSO WANT TO SHOW YOU SOMETHING. OKAY, SIR, YOU'RE TWO MINUTES, SIR. WAY UP. CAN YOU PLEASE I'M TWO YIELD MY TIME. HE HAS FOUR MINUTES. THEY YIELD, THEY'LL THEIR TIME. ALL RIGHT. I WANT YOU TO SHOW, LIKE, I COME FROM A COMMUNITY OF MINORITY AND STUFF LIKE THAT. I, I, I GREW UP IN THE STREETS. I ATE OUT OF TRASH CANS. I NEVER DID DRUGS. I NEVER DID ANYTHING. AND I WORKED MYSELF REALLY HARD TO BE NOMINATED ON BILLBOARDS, LATIN ARTISTS ON THE RIDES FOR UNIVISION TO DO A DOCUMENTARY ABOUT ME. RIGHT NOW THERE'S A TV SERIES BEING WRITTEN ABOUT ME. I TRAVELED THE WORLD FOR SITUATIONS LIKE THIS, BUT THEY'RE DEALING WITH ALL OF 'EM. IT'S NEVER BEEN JU JUST I, EVERY TIME WE GO AND HELP OUT PEOPLE, IT'S ONE THING WE'RE DEALING WITH FOUR THINGS. IT'S KILLING ME. IT'S HAZARDOUS, IT'S RACIST. AND THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR TIME. UH, CLIFF [01:45:01] SINO. SORRY. THAT'S OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND TO OUR WONDERFUL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM WILLOW WOOD MEADOWVIEW AND TO EVERYONE WHO'S HERE SUPPORTING OUR HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION, THE CONTINUED BUSINESS OF UNITED SIDE SERVICES IS AFFECTING OUR HEALTH. WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'VE HEARD IT MANY, MANY TIMES. IT'S ALSO AN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH TOO. ALL OF US IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I LIVE AT 1314 FONTINE DRIVE DOWN. I'M ABOUT 10, 10 TO 12 HOUSES DOWN. I SMELL IT EVERY DAY, EVERY DAY. THE U H I A HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION MET WITH MIKE SHANNON, THE DIRECTOR OF CITY OF SAN ANTONIO FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING. WE ALSO MET WITH MARTIN MILLER, WHO IS THE SAS SUPERVISOR FOR INDUSTRIAL WASTE. WE ALSO HAD DISTRICT TWO WHO WAS THERE, WHO HAS BEEN VERY SUPPORTIVE IN THIS, THIS ISSUE WITH US. DURING THIS MEETING, HOMEOWNERS EXPRESSED THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT UNITED SITE SERVICES. MR. MILLER HAVE SAW US EXPRESSED THAT HIS OFFICE ISSUED THE PERMIT, SAW US ISSUED THE PERMIT FOR UNITED SIDE SERVICES SO THAT THEY CAN DUMP FECES DIRECTLY INTO THE SANITATION PIPES. MR. SHANNON OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO PLANNING DEVELOPMENT EXPLAINED THE PROCESS OF HOW A PERMIT IS GRANTED. HE SAID THAT THIS PERMIT APPLICATION WOULD'VE COME THROUGH HIS OFFICE THROUGH SEVERAL MEASURES AND TAKEN A PRIOR IT WOULD BE APPROVED. RIGHT. HE OPENED UP, EXPRESSED THAT, YOU KNOW, HAD HE SEEN THIS, THIS REQUEST COME THROUGH, HE WOULD'VE NEVER APPROVED IT. HE ALSO WENT ON TO EXPRESS THAT THIS REQUEST MUST HAVE JUST SLIPPED BY UNNOTICED. WHEN ASKED, WHAT DOES YOUR OFFICE DO WHEN AN ILLEGAL PERMIT IS ISSUED, HE EXPLAINED THAT HIS OFFICE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO PULL THE PERMIT UNTIL FURTHER INVESTIGATION. LET IT BE KNOWN THAT UNITED STATES SERVICES HAS BEEN ORDERED TO STOP ILLEGAL DUMPING INTO THE SANITATION PIPES BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. LET IT BE KNOWN THAT ALSO JUDGE AARON HAAS OF THE 285TH DISTRICT COURT OVERRULED THE CITY AND ALSO OUR DISTRICT TWO AND ALLOWED UNITED SITE SERVICES TO CONTINUE BUSINESS AS USUAL. WHY IN GOD'S NAME WOULD A JUDGE NOT ENFORCE THE LAW? LET IT BE KNOWN THAT JUDGE AARON HAAS OF THE 285TH DISTRICT COURT IS TO BLAME FOR THIS CONTINUED ACTIVITY. WE'RE ASKING FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE ILLEGAL PERMIT AND THE DENIAL OF THE REZONING APPLICATION TO TURN THIS SITE INTO A WASTE LANDFILL. JUST DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. IT'S RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. WE'RE ASKING FOR OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO DO THEIR JOBS AND ENFORCE THE ZONING AND LAWS STOP THE PREJUDICE ACTS TO OUR COMMUNITY BY ALLOWING FECES TO BE DUMPED ACROSS THE STREET FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND OUR CHILDREN AND OUR SCHOOLS. WE'RE NOT GONNA RELAX UNTIL JUSTICE IS SERVED AND UNTIL THE CITY HAS CORRECTED THIS ILLEGAL ACT. THANK YOU. IT IS JOHNNY VILLANUEVA. ARE YOU HERE? YEP. ALRIGHT. UH, THE FINAL SPEAKER IS ALONZO JONES. MR. JONES, YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES. GOOD EVENING. HOW ARE Y'ALL DOING? UH, I KNOW SOME TIME WAS YIELDED, BUT THERE ARE SOME FACTS ABOUT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT WAS ASKED THAT ARE NOT CORRECT OR JUST PEOPLE DIDN'T KNOW TO EXPAND ON THEM. THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AS YOU DID LATERALLY FIND OUT COMPRISED, IS COMPRISED OF THREE DIFFERENT SECTIONS. THAT'S MEADOWVIEW, MEADOWVIEW PARK AND WILLOW WOOD. THIS IS IN THE CLOSEST PROXIMITY TO WILLOW WOOD. OKAY. UM, THERE ALSO WAS A QUESTION ABOUT, UM, UH, T E C Q MAY HAVE SAID IT WRONG, BUT IN ANY EVENT, THEY HAD BEEN OUT, WHICH YOU HEARD MS. ALI SPEAK SIX TIMES. AND THERE ARE TWO VIOLATIONS THAT THEY HAVE SUPPOSEDLY FOUND. UH, I UNDERSTAND THIS GENTLEMAN'S JOB IS TO TRY AND KEEP HIS CLIENT IN BUSINESS, BUT WE LIVE THERE. I WAS BORN IN 1964 IN HEIDELBERG, GERMANY. MY PARENTS BROUGHT ME TO THAT RESIDENCE, WHICH I NOW OWN IN 1965. WE HAVE RAISED CHILDREN, GRANDCHILDREN, THE WHOLE NINE YARDS. MY OLDEST GRANDCHILD IS 11 YEARS OLD. SO HE WAS THERE BEFORE THEY CAME THERE. AND WE ARE TELLING YOU ALL, LETTING [01:50:01] YOU KNOW, JUST AS HE STATED, THAT THESE THINGS ARE BEING PUMPED DOWN THE DOWN THE DRAIN. WE ARE GETTING THE METHANE GASES THAT RISE ABOVE THEM AND THEY COME UP OUR SINK UP OUR TOILET IN OUR KITCHEN AND WE'RE SMELLING IT. WE WAKE UP IN THE MORNING AND WE'RE SMELLING IT. THIS IS HAZARDOUS. IT'S VERY HAZARDOUS. I, UM, I HAVE SOME, UH, DOCUMENTATIONS FROM SOME, QUITE A FEW DOCTORS WHO OF COURSE STATE THIS, BUT I THINK WE ALL KNOW THIS ALREADY, ABOUT MICRO BI, MICRO, MICRO, UM, UH, MICROBES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE THAT ARE HAPPENING. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH. UH, THIS GENTLEMAN STATES THAT, UH, THEY, THAT THEY SPENT TWO TO $300,000. WE'VE SPENT MILLIONS ON OUR HOMES. YOU KNOW WHAT? MILLIONS, SO HAVE A TWO, $200,000. THEY, IF YOU LIVE, THERE'S 300 AND SOME HOMES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK IF YOU JUST DO THE MATH ON WHAT THEY WERE PURCHASED AT 60 YEARS AGO, YOU WOULD BE IN THE MILLIONS. SO HE'S WORRIED ABOUT $200,000. AND WE HAVE BEEN THERE SINCE THE EARLY SIXTIES. YOU KNOW HIM, THE EARLY SIXTIES WHEN THERE WAS NO, I WATCHED AS A LITTLE BOY. I PLAYED OVER THERE. I WATCHED EVERY HOME BE BUILT. I WATCHED HOMES BE BUILT. WE HAVE HAD THIS COMMUNITY, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS HELPED BUILD THIS COMMUNITY ON THE EAST SIDE AND THE CITY FROM LAWYERS, DOCTORS, JUDGES, THEY'RE ALL, MOSTLY ALL AFRICAN AMERICAN AND HISPANIC. THESE WERE PEOPLE WHO DID VERY WELL. THEY WERE TEACHERS, LAWYERS, DOCTORS, AND A HOST OF MILITARY. MILITARY IS THE MAJORITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. MOST OF THE PEOPLE CAME HERE FROM OTHER PLACES, GOT HERE AND THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WAS BUILT. YEP. NOW I UNDERSTAND THERE'S SOME CODE AND SOME VIOLATIONS, THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED. I HAVE WORKED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR 29 YEARS AND THAT BUILDING THAT YOU SAW BROKE INTO ON THE, ON JANUARY 6TH, I PRINT MOST OF MY TIME IN AND OUT OF THERE. THE CAPITOL LOBBYING CONGRESSMEN AND SENATORS. AND I'LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, JUST LIKE SAN ANTONIO GOT IT WRONG TO ISSUE THOSE PERMITS, I'VE SEEN THE GOVERNMENT GET THINGS WRONG OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I WOULDN'T HAVE A JOB IF THEY DIDN'T GET IT WRONG. 'CAUSE I BRING FEDERAL CHARGES AGAINST GOVERNMENT AGENCIES. I'M TELLING YOU NOW THAT THE PERMITS THAT THEY WERE, THAT WERE GIVEN WERE POLITICALLY GOTTEN IN 2019. WE KNEW NOTHING ABOUT THIS. ALSO, WHEN THEY STARTED THIS AND GOT THOSE PERMITS, THEY WERE JUST STORING STUFF OVER THERE. THEN THEY START, THEN THEY START GOT THE PERMIT TO DUMP THE STUFF. THEN WE START SMELLING IT AND THE SMELL GOT WORSE AND WORSE AND WORSE AND WORSE. WE, WE LET THEM KNOW THROUGH THE CITY ABOUT A MEETING. THEY ASKED FOR A MEETING. WE LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THE MEETING. I HAVE THE EMAILS THEY DIDN'T SHOW, DIDN'T SHOW. THEN WHEN WE DO HAVE A MEETING, THE GENTLEMAN BY THE NAME OF, UH, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE AREA MANAGER, TYLER WRIGHT, TOLD US THAT WE NEED TO FIND ANOTHER PLACE TO LIVE. SO AFTER SIX YEARS OF MY GENERATION, MY FAMILY BUILT THAT HOME. NOW I OWN IT AND LIVE THERE AND EVERYONE ELSE, INCLUDING MAMA D AND EVERY, IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK, THE AVERAGE AGE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS 84. THEY'RE NOT DYING. THEY'RE NOT GOING NOWHERE. THEY LIVE HERE. THEY BUILT THIS COMMUNITY. NOW THEY ONLY DID THEY BUILD THIS COMMUNITY, THESE LEADERS THAT I SPOKE TO YOU ABOUT ARE ON RECORD FROM THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WITH A LOT OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS AND STRUCTURES THAT HAPPENED TO BUILD THIS CITY. A LOT OF AFRICAN AMERICANS IN THAT COMMUNITY HAD A LOT TO DO WITH IT. THAT'S ON RECORD IN THIS CITY. IT IS ATROCIOUS THAT AT THIS POINT IN THEIR LATTER YEARS THAT WE HAVE TO SIT HERE AND HAVE THEM SMELL THIS OVER AND OVER EVERY DAY, EVERY DAY, EVERY DAY. AND ALL THEY'RE WORKING ABOUT IS OPERATING. WELL, LEMME TELL YOU, I KNOW ABOUT LABOR. SO WITH HIM SAYING THAT IT'S GONNA COST THEM, WHICH IT IS, BUT THERE ARE, THERE ARE COMPANY THAT'S ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. SO THEY CAN EITHER SEND THEIR PEOPLE TO OTHER PLACES. THEY HAVE A CITY WITH THE CONTRACT, A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY, WHICH HE KEEPS BOASTING ON. MAYBE THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THIS ACTUALLY HAPPENED WHEN IT HAPPENED. OKAY. HE'S WORRIED ABOUT THAT CONTRACT WITH THE CITY. WELL I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THERE ARE FEDERAL CONTRACTS THAT ARE WAY BIGGER THAN THAT, THAT THE CITY HAS WITH THEM. AND THEY'RE NOT GONNA ALLOW TO DO THINGS WRONG JUST BECAUSE THEY WANT TO. THEY'RE GONNA DO THE RIGHT THING. AND THE RIGHT THING IS NOT STAYING IN SOMEONE'S AREA OR MOVING IN THEIR AREA AND THEN START DOING WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. AND THEN YOU SLIDE IN PERMITS, THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER. THE CITY GOT IT WRONG. YES. AND NOW THOSE PEOPLE IN THE POSITIONS IN THE CITY RIGHT NOW AS WE SEE ARE STANDING UP 'CAUSE THEY NOTICE IT'S WRONG. [01:55:02] LET'S GO THROUGH THE VOICEMAILS. HELLO, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS CASSANDRA AND I RESIDE AT 9 0 3 GIMLER ROAD AND I AM CALLING, I DO NOT HAVE THE CASE NUMBER, BUT I'M CALLING REGARDING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR UNITED SITE SERVICES, UM, AND THE WILLOW WOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, COMPLAINT AGAINST THE FILE ORDER THAT IS COMING FROM THE BUSINESS ACROSS THE STREET. I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, ALSO INCLUDE THAT I AM IN OPPOSITION TO THIS BEING NEAR OR ACROSS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR ANYWHERE WITHIN THE CORRIDORS OF I 35, 4 10, AND IH 37 WHERE SUCH FOUL SMELLS, UM, CAN BE DETECTED IN THE ATMOSPHERE BY ALL RESIDENTS ON THE EAST SIDE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS CHARLOTTE FORNEY. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 483-3743. AND I'M CALLING IN OPPOSITION TO THE PORTABLE TOILET COMPANY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PLACE OVER RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM WILLOW WOODS. UM, YOU KNOW, RIGHT BY THE RESIDENCE HOMES I'M IN, UH, COMPLETE OPPOSITION TO THAT BECAUSE THE OFFICE SMELL AND, UH, THAT'S GONNA BE IN THE AIR IN THAT AREA. AND, UH, THEY DON'T WANT THAT, UH, PORTABLE TOILET COMPANY THERE. NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD WANT A PORTABLE TOILET COMPANY PUT RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THEIR HOUSE OR IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, THOSE ARE MOSTLY, UH, BLACK, UH, NOW ELDERLY RESIDENTS WHO BOUGHT THEIR HOMES IN THAT AREA IN THEIR MID TWENTIES AND EARLY THIRTIES. AND NOW ALL OF THIS, UM, UH, JUNK AND UH, BUSINESSES LIKE A PORTABLE TOILET COMPANY ARE BEING PLACED OVER THERE. PUT IT SOMEWHERE ON THE NORTH SIDE, PUT IT BY THE MAYOR'S HOUSE, PUT IT ANYWHERE ELSE. BUT I'M IN COMPLETE OPPOSITION AND SUPPORT, UM, THE RESIDENTS IN WILLOW WOODS, MEADOWVIEW AND MEADOWVIEW NORTH TO NOT HAVE THAT PORTABLE TOILET COMPANY PLACED RIGHT THERE IN WILLOW WOODS. I DON'T HAVE THE DIGITS, THE LAST COUPLE OF DIGITS OF THE CASE NUMBER, BUT, UH, YOUR MEETING IS FOR 21 NOVEMBER AT 1:00 PM AND THE COMMENTS HAVE TO BE CALLED IN BEFORE. UH, 10:00 AM ON THE 21ST. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS JESSE. UM, THE CASE NUMBER IS B O A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 7. THIS IS IN INHUMANE. THIS IS RACIST AND THIS IS DANGEROUS TO OUR COMMUNITY. JOSEPH, WE ALREADY HEARD THAT ONE. YEAH, HE WAS IN THE AUDIENCE. YES. MY NAME IS JERRY HOOVER. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 663-1379. I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO CASE 2 0 7. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, JUDGE. MY NAME IS JERRY HOOVER. UM, I AM A MEMBER OF U H I A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING THOSE WHO ARE SPEAKING TO YOU IN PERSON OR BY PHONE CONCERNING THE FOUL ODOR COMING FROM THE BUSINESS, RELEASING WASTE INTO THE SEWER ACROSS THE STREET WHERE HOMES ARE LOCATED, KNOWN AS WILLOW WOOD. NOW I'D LIKE TO COMPARE OUR SITUATION WITH THE SITUATION THAT OCCURRED THIS PAST SUNDAY. THE RED LIGHTS WERE BLINKING STOPPING TRAFFIC IN ALL DIRECTIONS. WW WHITE AND LEY PARK AS A FEMALE HISPANIC DRIVER GOT CLOSER TO THE LIGHT. SHE PUT HER CAR IN PARK, GOT OUT OF HER VEHICLE, RAISED HER HAND TO HALT THE TRAFFIC, AND ESCORTED AN ELDERLY BLACK WOMAN ACROSS THE STREET. APPARENTLY SHE FELT LIKE THE PEOPLE DRIVING DIDN'T SHOW ENOUGH CONCERN ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THIS PERSON CROSSING ON HER WALKER WITH TRAFFIC COMING IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. BUT SHE DID. WHAT THIS MEANT TO ME IS THAT THIS LADY [02:00:01] GAVE HER ASSISTANCE TO A HUMAN BEING THAT OTHERWISE COULD HAVE EXPERIENCED AN INJURY HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR HER GIVEN ASSISTANCE. BUT SHE SAW TO IT THAT THIS SENIOR, USING A WALKER TO CROSS THIS VERY BUSY STREET, MADE IT SAFELY ACROSS AS IT WAS STATED IN OUR MEETING, UH, THIS PAST FRIDAY. WE WOULD LIKE HEALTHY BREATHING CONDITIONS LIKE OTHER HUMAN BEINGS AS S HI, MY NAME IS CLIFFS DANIEL. I RESIDE AT 1314 FONTINE DRIVE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS SEVEN EIGHT TWO ONE NINE. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (310) 272-3534. CALLING ON CASE NUMBER B OH A 22 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 7. GOOD MORNING TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND TO OUR WONDERFUL NEIGHBORHOOD OF WILLOW WOOD ESTATES AND MEADOWVIEW AND TO ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE U H I A HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION. THE CONTINUED BUSINESS OF UNITED STATES SERVICES IS AFFECTING OUR HEALTH OF OUR COMMUNITY AND IS ALSO AN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ISSUE TO THE QUALITY OF OUR HAIR INTO OUR DRINKING WATER. THE UNITED HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION MET WITH MIKE SHANNON, DIRECTOR OF CITY OF SAN ANTONIO FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING. MARK MILLER FROM SA, WHO IS A SUPERVISOR FOR INDUSTRIAL WASTE AND MET WITH THE CITY COUNCILMAN DISTRICT TWO OFFICE. DURING THIS MEETING, HOMEOWNERS EXPRESSED THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT UNITED SITE SERVICES. MR. MILLER EXPRESSED THAT HIS OFFICE ISSUED THE PERMIT FOR UNITED SITE SERVICES SO THEY CAN DUMP THESE FEES DIRECTLY INTO THE SANITATION PIPES. MR. SHANNON OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO PLANNING DEVELOPMENT EXPLAINED THE PROCESS OF HOW SUCH PERMIT WOULD BE GRANTED. HE SAID THAT THIS PERMIT APPLICATION WOULD COME THROUGH HIS OFFICE AND THROUGH SEVERAL MEASURES ARE TAKEN PRIOR TO PROVIDING AN APPROVAL, HE OPENLY EXPRESSED THAT HAD HE SEND THIS REQUEST TO COME BY HIS OFFICE, THAT HE WOULD HAVE NEVER APPROVED IT. HE ALSO WENT ON TO EXPRESS THAT THIS MUST HAVE JUST SLIPPED BY UNNOTICED. AND WHEN ASKED, WHAT DOES AN OFFICE, WHAT DOES YOUR OFFICE DO WHEN AN LEGAL PERMIT IS ISSUED, HE EXPLAINED TO HIS OFFICE, HAS THE AUTHORITY TO PULL THE PERMIT UNTIL FURTHER INVESTIGATION IS TAKEN. LET IT BE KNOWN THAT UNITED STATES SERVICES HAS ITS ORDER TO STOP THE ILLEGAL DUMPING INTO THE SANITATION PIPES BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. LET IT BE KNOWN ALSO THAT JUDGE AARON HAAS OF THE 286 DISTRICT COURT OVERRULE THE CITY AND DISTRICT TWO AND ALLOW HELLO? UM, THIS IS MR. AND MRS. RALPH FROM 1 3 0 2 TAIN DRIVE. UM, THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO CASE NUMBER BO A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 7. UH, WE WOULD LIKE TO, WE ARE IN OPPOSITION OF THE PORTABLE TOILET COMPANY, UNITED SITE SERVICES THAT IS IN OUR SUBDIVISION WILLOW WOOD. AGAIN, WE OPPOSE TO, UH, THE COMPANY STAYING IN OUR SUBDIVISION. THANK YOU SO MUCH AND WE HOPE FOR A VERY POSITIVE RESPONSE FOR THE COMMUNITY INSTEAD OF THE COMPANY. THANK YOU. YES, MY NAME IS DEBBIE ROBINSON. I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE NUMBER TO 2 0 7. CALLING IN OPPOSITION TO THE PORTABLE POTTY COMPANY THAT'S CONSIDERING PUTTING THIS BUSINESS IN, UH, THE EAST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD, WILLWOOD AND NORTH WILLWOOD, AND WILLWOOD BEING ONE OF THE MAIN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT I'M CALLING ABOUT AS I AM A FORMER RESIDENT OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS I WOULD LIKE TO ASK. ONE IS, WHY WAS THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD CHOSEN FOR THIS PORTABLE PARTY COMPANY SERVICES TWO. MY SECOND QUESTION WOULD BE, IS IT GOING TO HELP OR HARM THE RESIDENTS OF THAT COMMUNITY? IF IT'S GOING TO BE THE LATTER, IF IT'S GOING TO HARM THE COMMUNITY AND MOST OF THE RESIDENTS, IF NOT ALL, ARE IN OPPOSITION TO IT, I WOULD ASK THAT THIS COMPANY, PLEASE RECONSIDER ITS LOCATION OF ITS BUSINESS AND DO THE RIGHT THING. [02:05:01] THANK YOU. YES. MY NAME IS DEBBIE ROBINSON. I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE NUMBER KIMIA ROBINSON. ADDRESS 33 10 WILLWOOD, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS SEVEN EIGHT TWO ONE NINE. PHONE NUMBER (512) 826-5701. REFERENCE TO BO A DASH TWO TWO DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 7. I'M CALLING BECAUSE THERE IS A COMPANY CALLED UNITED SITE SERVICES. IT'S A PORTABLE PARTY COMPANY AND IT'S LOCATED IN THE WILLOW WOOD NEIGHBORHOOD. MY NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THEY HAVE BEEN EMITTING, UM, FILE ODORS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, THERE'S WASTE GOING OUT THAT'S DANGEROUS FOR THE RESIDENTS. WE WANT THIS COMPANY OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS A COMPANY THAT SHOULD NOT EVEN BE ALLOWED IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD TO BEGIN WITH. I DON'T KNOW WHY IT WAS EVEN ALLOWED TO BE THERE, BUT IT IS DANGEROUS. IT'S NOT SAFE. IT'S NOT HEALTHY. IT'S UNSANITARY. IT'S UM, THE ODOR IS TERRIBLE AND THIS IS A VERY LONGSTANDING NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THIS COMPANY NEEDS TO LEAVE. UM, THERE'S ALL SORTS OF VIOLATIONS, SAFETY CONCERNS, ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS THAT ARE JUST BEING NEGLECTED. I FEEL THAT IF THIS WAS ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD, IF THE DEMOGRAPHICS WERE DIFFERENT, THAT THIS COMPANY WOULD NOT HAVE EVEN BEEN ALLOWED TO TAKE ROOT TO BEGIN WITH. SO I AM RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING THAT THIS COMPANY BE REMOVED FROM WILLOW WOOD SUBDIVISION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M CALLING IN CONCERNING THE CASE NUMBER B OH A 2 2 1 0 3 0 2 7. IT'S CONCERNING THE UNITED SERVICES, A PORTABLE TOILET COMPANY LOCATED IN WILLOW WOOD SUBDIVISION. MY NAME IS REGINA WILLIAMS. I AM THE OWNER OF 38 0 7 AND 38 0 3 WILLOW WOOD BOULEVARD. THOSE ARE RENTAL PROPERTIES FOR ME, THAT SMELL IS UNFAVORABLE. IT CAN CAUSE CARLY A POSSIBILITY. HEALTH PROBLEMS, MY RENTALS. THAT IS MY BUSINESS. IT CAN CAUSE ME TO LOSE BUSINESS. IT IS UNFAVORABLE FOR THE RESIDENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES. I WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU ALL CONSIDER HAVING THIS PARTICULAR COMPANY MOVED. WE HAVE BEEN IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FOR YEARS AND MUCH LONGER THAN THAT COMPANY. I THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME AND TAKE IT SERIOUSLY IN CONSIDERATION. PUT YOURSELF IN OUR POSITION. WOULD YOU WANT THAT SMELL IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD? AND IT ALSO COME INTO THE HOME THROUGH THE PIPE. THINK ABOUT IT. NOW YOU HAVE A BLESSED DAY. THE HEARING IS TODAY AT 1:00 PM THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS KAREN AND I JUST THINK IT IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE LANDFILL TO, UM, DISRESPECT THE PEOPLE AND THE CITIZENS THAT RESIDE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. TRULY, THIS COMPANY IS FINDING A BAD LOCATION TO PLACE THAT, AND THEIR SERVICE IS NOT REALLY HELPFUL IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. SO PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP, KEEP OUR AREA JUST AS CLEAN AND GOOD AS WE CAN. AND THIS IS NOT HELPING THE AREA AT ALL. AND THERE TRULY CANNOT BE IN ANY CODE COMPLIANCE AND PLACE IN SUCH A, SUCH A, SUCH A THING AS THAT IN THE, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO UNITED RENTAL SERVICE, [02:10:01] UH, PLACE IN THE THAT IS JUST NOT RIGHT. THAT'S NOT RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HELLO, MY NAME IS REVEREND KIRSTEN HANCOCK. I AM A MINISTER AT TO, UM, ZERO ONE. MY PERSONAL ADDRESS IS 2 0 1 WEST CRAIG PLACE, APARTMENT LETTER O SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 2. I'M CALLING ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENCE IN THE WILLOW WOOD AREA AND, UM, HOPING THAT AT THE GOOD MORNING, GLADYS WILSON CALLING REGARDING THE WILLOW WOOD SUBDIVISION. MY ADDRESS IS 32 0 6 CRIPPLE CREEK, APARTMENT NINE C, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS SEVEN EIGHT TWO ZERO NINE. PHONE NUMBER (210) 473-2728. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS REGINA SRA AND MY ADDRESS IS 36 51 WILLOW WOOD AND I'M CALLING IN OPPOSITION TO THE TOILETRY, THE TOILET COMPANY, UH, EMPTYING THEIR WASTE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, FEEL FREE TO GIMME A CALL BACK. UH, MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 4 7 3 40 13 AND I DON'T HAVE A CASE NUMBER, BUT THAT'S, UM, UH, THERE'S A MEETING TODAY AT ONE. I'M UNABLE TO MAKE IT 'CAUSE I HAVE A DOCTOR'S APPOINTMENT, BUT AGAIN, MY NAME IS REGINA SIS TRUCK AND MY ADDRESS IS 36 51 WILLOW WOOD. AND I'M IN OPPOSITION TO THE TOILETRY COMPANY, DISPOSING OF WASTE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. MY PHONE NUMBER IS AREA CODE (210) 473-4013. HAVE A GREAT DAY. GOD BLESS. BYE-BYE. FOUR. UM, MY NAME IS LONDALE GALLOWAY AND I LIVE AT 36 55 WILLWOOD BOULEVARD. AND I'M CALLING, UH, ABOUT SEATING MY TIME TODAY, THE CASE NUMBER WAY FOUR. UM, MY NAME IS LONDALE GALLOWAY AND I LIVE AT 36 55 WILLWOOD BOULEVARD. AND I'M CALLING, UH, ABOUT, HI, THIS IS REGINA AND MY ADDRESS IS 36 50. HELLO, MY NAME IS LISA BROWN. I RESIDE AT 40 40 KEN MYRNA DRIVE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 9. AND I AM SENDING IN A MESSAGE IN REFERENCE TO AN OPPOSITION FOR PUBLIC HEARING. LAST THREE DIGITS, 2 0 7 UNITED SITE SERVICES OPERATING ON BELGIUM LANE WAS RECENTLY TOLD BY A SAN ANTONIO JUDGE DECEASED OPERATIONS DUE TO VIOLATIONS OF CODE, CODE AND ZONING. NOW, WE ALL KNOW THIS IS AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD. WILLOW WOODS AND UNITED SITE SERVICES HAPPENS TO BE ONE OF THEIR NEIGHBORS. NOW THEY SIT DIRECTLY NEXT TO THE HOMES OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY'RE JUST NOT DOWN THE STREET. THEY'RE A NEIGHBOR TO MANY PEOPLE WITHIN WILLOW. JUDGE AARON HAAS RECENTLY OVERTURNED THE INITIAL RULING AND ALLOWED UNITED SITE SERVICES TO RESUME BUSINESS AS USUAL, IS THIS COUNTRY, THE GOVERNMENT IN THIS COUNTRY. THE GOVERNMENT TELLS US THAT WE QUALIFY FOR SOCIAL SECURITY AT 65, WHICH MEANS TO ME THAT ALL THE NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE TO LIVE NEXT TO SLUDGE CONSISTING OF SEWAGE, ALSO KNOWN AS P AND POO ARE OF RETIREMENT AGE. BUT THEY NOW SIT AND FIGHT FOR OVER A YEAR OR TWO TO NOT BREATHE AND LIVE IN A, BASICALLY A SEWAGE HOLDING SPOT. THE COUNTY DUMP IS WAY OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS AND NOT NEIGHBORING ANY HOMES YET. WE HAVE THIS TOILET COMPANY, UNITED STATES SERVICES, OPERATING RIGHT NEXT TO HOMES, NEIGHBORHOODS IN AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. WHAT MORE DO WE EXPECT THESE NEIGHBORS TO DO? UNITED STATES SERVICES HAS LAWYERS. THE REASON THEIR JUDGMENT WAS OVERTURNED IS THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO TELLING [02:15:01] ITS RESIDENTS THAT NO MATTER WHAT A CITY CODE OR ZONING CODE OR WHATEVER BUSINESS VIOLATES THOSE CODES THAT IT'S ON THE NEIGHBORS TO FIGHT TO GET IT RIGHT. ARE THESE NEIGHBORS TO HIRE LAWYERS WITH FUNDS? THEY CAN BARELY GET TOGETHER FOR A NEWSLETTER, IS THE MESSAGE. WHOEVER HAS MORE MONEY AND RESOURCES WINS. THAT'S ALL THE VOICEMAILS. OKAY, SO, UH, WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS BACK UP TO SOME QUESTIONS. UM, I'M GONNA START BECAUSE I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR ON WHAT OUR CHARGE IS AND WHAT WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING AT. SO I, I, MY QUESTION IS, IS FOR DIRECTOR TOMAZ AND, AND FOR OUR ATTORNEY. UH, AND SO I I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE REAL, REAL CLEAR ABOUT WHAT WE'RE HERE TO ACCOMPLISH AND DECIDE UPON TODAY. SO WE'RE HERE FOR A, UH, NOTICE OF INTENT TO REVOKE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THAT NOTICE, UH, THAT WAS DATED SEPTEMBER 23RD, HAS THREE ITEMS IN IT. AND IF WE FIND THAT ANY ONE OF THOSE ITEMS, UH, IS, WAS, WAS CORRECT AND WITHIN THE CITY'S PURVIEW, WE CAN, UH, VOTE THE SITE WITH THE CITY. IS THAT TRUE TO THE ATTORNEY? YES. OKAY. SO THE, THE FIRST ITEM IS, IS THAT IT'S OPERATING OUTSIDE OF ITS INTENDED USE. UH, THE CITY IS, IS, IS STIPULATING AND THIS IS THEIR AUTHORITY TO DO SO, THAT WHETHER A SPECIAL, UH, USE PERMIT IS REQUIRED. THE SECOND CHARGE IS, UH, THAT THE PARKING AREA IS NOT CONSTRUCTED OF THE APPROPRIATE MATERIALS. AND THE THIRD CHARGE IS, IS THAT, UH, THAT ACCORDING TO THE SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, UH, THAT THE STRUCTURES DECLARED UNLAWFUL AS SUCH, POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY OR WELFARE. SO THOSE ARE THE THREE ITEMS BEFORE US. AND, AND I JUST WANT THIS COMMISSION TO KNOW, UH, AS, AS Y'ALL ARE, WE DELIBERATE AND CONTINUE TO ASK QUESTIONS, THAT THOSE ARE THE THREE THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO, UH, DETERMINE WHETHER THE CITY MADE AN ERROR OR NOT. ANY ONE OF THOSE THREE THINGS IS OPEN GAME. IF ALL, IF, IF ANY ONE OF THOSE IS, IS VALID IN YOUR OPINION, THEN THE CITY DIDN'T MAKE AN ERROR. AND SO, SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THIS. SO THEN IF WE VOTE AGAINST IT, IT MEANS YOU'RE CITING WITH THE CITY, WE'RE CITING WITH THE CITY, RIGHT. SO, SO, AND ON THE, AND, AND THE ONE ITEM THAT'S KIND OF OUT THERE, I WANTED TO CLARIFY HOW THE U D C IS READ. UH, AND I'D LIKE FOR STAFF, JUST TO LET ME KNOW IF I'M ON POINT OR NOT, IS THE ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S OPERATING OUTSIDE AS INTENDED USE. NOW, THIS USE, IT'S, IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY LISTED IN THE USE MATRIX AND THE U D C SPECIFICALLY UNDER 35 3 11, GRANTS THE DIRECTOR, UH, THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE A DETERMINATION OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S INCLUDED ANY USE. IF THAT USE IS NOT DONE, THEN THE DIRECTOR SHALL THEN MAKE A DE DECISION AS WHETHER IT WOULD CLOSE MOST CLOSELY FIT. AND THE DECISION WAS MADE THAT IT MOST CLOSELY FIT AN I TWO WITH A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, CORRECT? THAT THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THAT IS CORRECT. AND THAT, AND IN THE U D C IN, IN SECTION, UH, THIS IS SECTION THREE DOES SAY THAT, UM, SHOULD THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DETERMINE THAT A MATERIAL MATERIALLY SIMILAR, SIMILAR USE DOES NOT EXIST. THE MATTER MAY BE REFERRED, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, BUT IT MAY BE REFERRED TO THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THIS CHAPTER TO ESTABLISH A SPECIFIC LISTING. UNLESS AN APPEAL IS TIMELY FILED, UH, OF, UH, PURSUANT TO 35 40 81 OF THIS CHAPTER, A DECISION OF THE DIRECTOR, UH, PURSUANT TO THE SECTION IS DEEMED TO BE VALID. SO WHEN THE DECISION, WHEN THE DIRECTOR MADE THAT DECISION, WAS AN APPEAL TIMELY FILED AFTER THAT DECISION WAS FORMALLY MADE? YES, THE APPEAL WAS FILED APPROPRIATELY WITHIN TIMELY MANNER. SO THAT MEANS THAT, UM, THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DETERMINE IS WHETHER OR NOT, YOU KNOW, YOU, THIS COMMISSION AGREES WITH ONE, TWO OR ALL THREE OF THE ITEMS, UH, UNDER THE, UNDER THE NOTICE TO REVOKE. SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, I'D, I'D SURE LIKE FOR Y'ALL TO ASK OUR STAFF AND OUR ATTORNEY AT THIS TIME TO MAKE SURE YOUR QUESTIONS ARE GERMANE. COMMISSIONER COULD REPEAT, COULD YOU REPEAT NUMBER THREE? UM, THE, THE THIRD ONE IS PURSUANT TO THE, UH, SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE SECTION 1 0 8, UNFIT STRUCTURES AND UNSAFE EQUIPMENT, YOUR STRUCTURE IS HEREBY DECLARED UNLAWFUL, AND AS SUCH POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE. AND SO THAT WAS THE THIRD ITEM THAT THEY LISTED AS A REASON FOR REVOKING THE PERMIT. UM, AND SO I JUST, UH, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS OF, OF STAFF OR ATTORNEY AS FAR AS, UH, WHAT, WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE HERE TO, TO REVIEW AND, AND DECIDE UPON MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO QUESTION FOR STAFF. SO, SO IF WE WERE TO, UM, RULE, UH, WITH REGARDS TO, UH, I GUESS THE, THE APPLICANT HERE, UM, SO WOULD THEY CONTINUE TO BE ABLE TO PERFORM, [02:20:02] UM, THE, I GUESS THE, THE MANAGEMENT OF THE SANITATION OR THE, I GUESS THE WASTEWATER DUMPING, UH, THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY DOING? THAT'S UNDER QUESTION. NO. YES, YOU ARE CORRECT. IF YOU, UH, I GUESS SIDE WITH THE SIDE WITH THE APPLICANT, THEN YES, THEY CAN CONTINUE THE OPERATION. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. SECOND QUESTION ON THAT, THEN YOU, IT WAS A, I GUESS A, A SHORT NOTICE FOR, WITH REGARDS TO, UM, THE, THE CESSATION, THE ARGUS, THE REVOKING OF THEIR C O O. SO, SO, UM, ESSENTIALLY IF WE MOVE ALONG THAT PATH OF, OF DENYING IT, THEN THEY WOULD REMOVE THEIR, THEY WOULD HAVE THEIR C O O REVOKED. UM, WHAT IS THEIR PROCESS FOR, FOR REAPPLYING FOR A C O O THEN SAY, UNDER OUR DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES? SURE. SO LET ME ADDRESS TWO THINGS. ONE, ONE THING WAS MENTIONED THAT WE GAVE THEM ONLY 72 HOURS AS AN INTENT TO REVOKE C F O, AND THAT IS CORRECT, BUT IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM SINCE MARCH, SO SIX MONTHS TIMEFRAME THAT THEY DID NOT CORRECT THE ISSUE. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, UH, THE NEXT STEP, IF WE DO REVOKE THEIR C F O, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO REAPPLY AND PROVE THE TYPE OF OPERATION FITS INTO THE ZONING AND THE USE. SO THEY CAN REAPPLY IF THEY CHOOSE TO. UM, QUESTION COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, UH, ARE THEY ABLE TO OPERATE NOW, GIVEN, GIVEN WHAT YOU'VE DONE? IF, IF THEY DO CORRECT THE, THE ITEMS THAT THEY'RE IN VIOLATION, THEY CAN OPERATE AS THEY OPERATED PRIOR TO INSTALLING THIS, UH, EQUIPMENT. SO TO CLARIFY, IF THEY, IF THEY FIX A PARKING AND THEY GET RID OF THE, THE DISPOSAL AND THEY'RE JUST USING IT FOR STORAGE OF THE PORTA POTTIES, THAT IS WITHIN THEIR, THEIR THEIR RIGHTS? CORRECT. OKAY. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? SO MANNA COMMISSIONER, SO FOLLOW UP THAT, AND I GUESS I WAS GOING THERE BUT WASN'T QUITE CLEAR. SO IF WE REVOKE IT, UM, I GUESS AND THEY WISH TO CONTINUE THE PROCESSES THAT, THAT WERE, I GUESS THE TWO THAT WERE JUST MENTIONED, WOULD THAT BE A QUICK TURNAROUND OR, OR ARE THEY GONNA BE CEASE DOING BUSINESS FOR A WHILE AND LOSE MONEY REALLY AT THEIR OWN PACE? I MEAN, THEY CAN REAPPLY FOR A C CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WHENEVER THEY LIKE. OKAY. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. OKAY, I APOLOGIZE. COMMISSIONER UNA, THEN YOU'RE NEXT. SO REGARDING THAT, THAT SAME LINE OF QUESTIONING, UH, WOULD THEY BE, IF, IF WE, WE, CAN YOU HEAR ME? SO IF YOU DID NOT CONCUR, UH, WITH THE APPEAL, WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO THEN PURSUE THE ZONING DESIGNATION TO GET THE SS SPECIAL, UH, USE PERMIT? WOULD THAT 'CAUSE THEY WERE IN THE PROCESS OF GOING TO THE ZONING, PERMITTING, THE ZONING PROCESS, AND THERE WAS STOP TO PRESENT BEFORE THE BOARD. SO THE BOARD MAKES A CONCLUSION. DO THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO BACK TO STEP, TO JUST PROCEED FORWARD WITH THAT ZONING CASE? YES, THEY DO HAVE THAT ABILITY TO RESTART THE PROCESS AND, AND GO FORWARD WITH IT. AND WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, STATE OF THE JUDGE HAS ON THE CASE, WOULD THEY BE OPERATING DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME AS WELL? THE, I, I'M, I BELIEVE THE, UH, CURRENTLY IT'S, THERE'S A RESTRAINING ORDER, UM, SUBJECT TO WHAT HAPPENS TODAY. THAT WOULD BE A, A MATTER FOR THE, THE COURTS, WHATEVER THE, THE PARTIES, YOU KNOW, GO FORWARD WITH. OKAY. COMMISSIONER MENCHACA? UH, YES. UM, IN REFERENCE TO GETTING TO THE BASE OF SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT IT IS BROUGHT UP EARLIER THAT, UH, THE CITY MAY HAVE DROPPED THE BALL ON THIS AND I WAS CONCERNED, DO WE HAVE AN ISSUE OF INTERFACING WITH OTHER AGENCIES OR OTHER DEPARTMENTS OUTSIDE THE CITY THAT WE DON'T PROCEED? IF THIS THING WAS A SEWER ISSUE OR WATER ISSUE, WHY WASN'T THE INITIATIVE TAKEN TO CONTACT PROACTIVELY T C E Q OR WATER TO PROCEED? SEE IF THERE'S FURTHER USE OF THE FACILITY BEYOND WHAT IS STATED? DO WE NEED THAT INTERFACE TO BE A NEED FOR PROCESS IMPROVEMENT? WELL, WE, WE CERTAINLY SEE THAT THERE WAS A DISCONNECT HERE AND IT'S CERTAINLY A, A LEARNING, UH, PROCESS. AND SO I, I THINK FOR THE MOST PART, THE CITY DOES INTERACT ON MOST OF OUR PERMITS. THE THIS PERMIT IS VERY SPECIFIC TO THIS PARTICULAR WASTE PROCESSING. IT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT HAD BEEN SEEN BEFORE AND IT WASN'T CLEARLY NOTED AS PART OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. UM, IT WAS JUST PART OF A TRADE PERMIT AND THEY WERE GIVEN OTHER TRADE PERMITS AS WELL, SUCH AS AN ELECTRICAL PERMIT, UH, WHICH THEY WERE ISSUED. THOSE DON'T REQUIRE ZONING REVIEWS. SO, UM, [02:25:02] CERTAINLY, UH, WE WILL DEFINITELY WATCH FOR THAT TYPE OF LANGUAGE IN THE FUTURE. AND TO ADD ONTO THAT, WHILE, WHILE, UH, DURING THE COURSE OF THIS, OF THIS HEARING, I, I WENT ON THE OLD HANSSEN SYSTEM AND PULLED UP THAT AP NUMBER AND IT WAS A TRADE PERMIT. IT WAS, DID NOT UNDERGO A ZONING REVIEW, ALTHOUGH I'D GOT THAT IMPRESSION, UH, BASED ON SOME OF THE DESCRIPTIONS ON THE SPLASH SCREEN. UM, AND, AND I HAVE A, A FOLLOW UP ON THIS 2015 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. IT LISTS, UH, AMONG THE, THE TRUCKING USES, IT USES THE TERM B DASH 17 AND THEN S UH, I DASH THREE. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THAT MEANS? THOSE ARE OCCUPANCY DESIGNATIONS. THOSE ARE NOT RELATED TO ZONING. JUST GIVE US ONE SECOND. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THERE WASN'T A CODE FOR SOMETHING THAT I DIDN'T OKAY. THAT, THAT THE, THE S THE SS ONE IS BASICALLY BASED ON BUILDING CODES. THERE IS A SPECIFIC TYPE OF OCCUPANCY, DEPENDING ON THE BUILDING CODE. S ONE MEANS IT'S A STORAGE FACILITY. OKAY. SO YOU'RE ALLOWED TO STORE, THERE IS TWO TYPES OF STORAGE STORAGE FACILITIES, SS ONE AND S TWO, AND THE BUILDING RELATED CODES. UH, SO THEY GOT THE S ONE, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT THE HIGHER ONE. SO THEY'RE ALLOWED TO STORE DIFFERENT MATERIAL, UH, AT ANY GIVEN TIME. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CLARIFYING THAT. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MANANA, COMMISSIONER MANANA? SO, SO, UH, AND DURING SOME DISCUSSION THAT I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, UH, YOU KNOW, I GUESS WHAT ARE SOME ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES AND GUIDANCE? AND SO, SO THE T C E Q KIND OF TALKS ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THE STORAGE AND MANAGEMENT OF AFFLUENCE, BUT IT REALLY DOESN'T GO INTO DIALOGUE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FROM A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE, MOST OF IT'S, UH, ONSITE GENERATION AND THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF THE SIZING STUFF COMES INTO PLACE AND, AND THE PIPING. AND SO, UM, SO I GUESS IS THERE, IS THERE GUIDELINES OVERALL ON WHAT IT IS THAT YOU'RE RUNNING AS A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS? UM, YOU KNOW, IS, IS THERE, IS THERE RULES WITHIN SOME CODE SOMEWHERE THAT PROVIDES SOME GUIDANCE THERE ON WASTE FLUID MANAGEMENT FROM A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE, SAY, YOU KNOW, FOR INBOUND AND ACTUALLY USING IT, I GUESS THAT IS YOUR BUSINESS MODEL COMMISSIONER. THE, UH, REGULATIONS THAT THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ENFORCE ARE MUNICIPAL REGULATIONS. T C E Q IS THE STATE REGULATIONS, WHICH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO DOES NOT GET INVOLVED WITH. RIGHT. BUT I GUESS KINDA WHERE I WAS GOING IS, YOU KNOW, I, YOU WANT TO LOOK UP, SO WASTEWATER, YOU KNOW, THERE REALLY ISN'T A LOT OF DIALOGUE FOR WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT IN THE CITY'S CODE. UM, AND THEN WE KIND OF WRAPPED IT OVER INTO, UM, UM, I GUESS INTO THE, UM, OUR SEWAGE, I GUESS. AND THEN AS FAR AS LANDFILL KIND OF DIALOGUE. AND SO, SO KIND OF SAW HOW WE'RE TRYING TO COMBINE THE TWO THERE AND WAS JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY OTHER GUIDANCE THERE. YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF THAT, SO THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, SASS N C P S ARE PART OF SEVERAL DIFFERENT REVIEWS. UM, AND IN THIS SITUATION, SAS WAS A PART OF THE, THE, THIS PROPERTY'S REVIEW. HOWEVER, LIKE WE MENTIONED EARLIER, THE TRADE PERMIT DID NOT REQUIRE A ZONING REVIEW. AND THAT'S WHERE THE DISCONNECT OCCURRED. THANK YOU. SO THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS. UM, I'M LOOKING PERHAPS SO COMMISSIONER, CAPTAIN, I'M SORRY. THE APPLICANT GET REBUTTAL? YEAH. OKAY. UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 21 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 7, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT AN APPEAL REGARDING DECISION BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR IN CONNECTION WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO REVOKE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY SITUATED AT 3 4 4 2 BELGIUM LANE. APPLICANT BEING KILLED, GRIFFIN AND FAIRMONT, P L L C I, I APOLOGIZE, WE, WE GOTTA LET THEM DO A REBUTTAL, BUT, OH, YOU, NO, IT'S OKAY. UM, UH, WE'VE GOT THE MOTION READ AND WE'LL LOOK FOR A SECOND AFTER. BUT, UH, IF THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP, YOU'VE HEARD A SERIES OF QUESTIONS, A SERIES OF, OF, OF, UH, DIALOGUE WITH A, WITH A, A CITIZEN SIGN UP TO SPEAK AND, YOU KNOW, TAKE SOME TIME AND AND REBUT, PLEASE. YEAH. THANK, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR AGAIN. ROB KILLED 1 0 1 0 1 REUNION PLACE. SIR, IS YOUR MICROPHONE ON? I TURN IT ON. COME ON. THANK YOU. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, UH, BOARD MEMBERS, ROB KILLEN, 1 0 1 0 1 REUNION PLACE. UH, THANK YOU. THE OPPORTUNITY. UH, I'M NOT GOING TO, UH, ARGUE YOU DISAGREE WITH ANY OF THE COMMENTS I'VE HEARD, UH, FROM THE FOLKS WHO CAME UP TO SPEAK. UH, WE'RE HERE BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN OPERATING LEGALLY FOR SEVEN YEARS. WE'VE GOTTEN A SERIES OF PERMITS, UH, FROM THE CITY OF DO, SPECIFICALLY THE ONSITE WASTE DISPOSAL, AND MAY OF THIS YEAR. THE CITY TOOK THE POSITION THAT DESPITE ALL OF THE OTHER APPROVALS THAT WE ARE NOW OPERATING A SANITARY LANDFILL AS OUR PRIMARY USE, [02:30:01] WE HAVE PRESENTED FOR THE RECORD EVIDENCE THAT WE ARE NOT A SANITARY LANDFILL EITHER UNDER THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODES DEFINITION OF SANITARY LANDFILL OR UNDER THE COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF A SANTUARY LANDFILL. AND WITH THAT, I WOULD ASK YOU AGAIN, UH, YOU'VE HEARD FROM A LOT OF FOLKS, AND IT'S VERY EASY, I THINK WE LET YOUR EMOTIONS GUIDE YOU AND MOVE AWAY FROM THAT QUESTION. BUT OUR POSITION IS THAT, UH, WE'RE OPERATING LEGALLY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE OF COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. IS THERE A SECOND? CAN WE ASK QUESTIONS A SECOND? UM, I APOLOGIZE. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN HAS INQUIRED ABOUT QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, YES. UM, WE'RE GONNA, I'LL, THAT'LL BE FINE. THANK YOU. SO, UM, YOU HAD SAID THAT YOU'VE BEEN OPERATING FOR SEVEN YEARS, UH, WITHOUT ANY ISSUES. UM, AND SO WE'VE HEARD THAT THE THREE CONCERNS ARE, UH, OUTSIDE THE INTENDED USE PARKING MATERIALS, NOT APPROPRIATE AND UNFIT STRUCTURE. SO IF YOU, IF THE COMPANY WERE NO, IF THEY WERE TO FIX THE PARKING ISSUE, WOULD IT SOUNDS LIKE MORE PERVIOUS SURFACE OR ASPHALT, UM, AND STOP THE DUMPING OPERATION, WOULD THEY STILL BE ABLE TO, UM, CONDUCT BUSINESS? I WILL DEFER TO STAFF ON THAT. YEAH, THEY, THEY, I, YEAH, THAT, THAT ACTUALLY, THAT QUESTION WAS ASKED. UM, AND IT WAS, YES, THEY CAN, THEY CAN APPLY FOR A C OF O TO DO EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR THE ONSITE DUMPING. WELL, I WAS ASKING FROM THE STANDPOINT OF A BUSINESS OPERATION IF, IF, IF IT'S STILL A VIABLE OPERATION, GIVEN THOSE TWO, THAT'S, THAT'S A, THAT'S A BUSINESS QUESTION THAT SOMEONE AT A MUCH HIGHER LEVEL WOULD HAVE TO ANSWER. SO THEY'VE, I DO WANNA REITERATE THAT THEY'VE SPENT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THE INVESTMENT ON THE EQUIPMENT, ON SITE, AS WELL AS A SIGNIFICANT COST DIFFERENTIAL FOR OFFSITE DUMPING. SO THEY'D HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION DO. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND, UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SPIELMAN. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. OKAY. UH, SO WE'RE ISSU WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT, THE USES OR NOT, UM, UH, MEETING THE ZONING, THE I TWO, IT NEEDS TO BE I TWO SS, THE PARKING LOT NEEDED TO BE DIFFERENT MATERIAL AND, UM, THE ZONING VIOLATIONS. SO, UM, GIVEN THAT, AND IT, IT, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THIS IS A ISSUE ABOUT, UM, UNSAFE PRACTICES, UM, AND PERHAPS NOT, NOT RUNNING AS CLEAN A FACILITY AS SHOULD BE. AND THE, THE CONDITIONS COULD BE ADDRESSED. IT LOOKS, IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THE, THE, THE COMPANY IS AWARE OF THE CONDITIONS, AWARE OF HOW IT CAN BE MITIGATED, BUT WILL NOT DO ANYTHING UNTIL IT, IT FINISHED, IT FILLS OUT ALL OF ITS LEGAL, UM, ABILITIES TO GET AWAY WITH THIS. AND SO I AM GOING TO BE, UH, AGAINST THIS APPEAL BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM GET A ZONING, UH, WITH I TWO S, WHICH WOULD FORCE THEM TO, UH, RUN THIS CLEANLY BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT A HAZARD THIS IS AND HOW IT IS DISTRESSING THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS MITIGATED. I WOULD NOT LIKE TO SEE ALL THE JOBS LEAVE. I, IT'S A, IT'S A VALUABLE BUSINESS FOR OUR COMMUNITY, BUT I THINK THAT IT CAN BE RUN CLEANER. COMMISSIONER SPIELMAN, I HAVE SOME TROUBLES TOO. I, I THINK THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, OH, I'M SORRY. I THINK THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, UH, YOU KNOW, THE ZONING THAT REQUIRES THEM TO, UH, BE ABLE TO, OR THAT ALLOWS THEM RATHER TO STORE THINGS ON THE PROPERTY AND PROCESS, UH, HUMAN WASTE. I THINK THAT'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE. ALL RIGHT. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS' LIKE TO ADD? NO. OH, COMMISSIONER ALBERT, IF YOU ALL KNOW ME, YOU KNOW, FOR ME IT ALWAYS COMES DOWN TO RIGHTS. UH, THERE'S THE APPLICANT'S RIGHTS, THE NEIGHBOR'S RIGHTS, AND IN THIS CASE, THERE'S EVEN THE CITY'S RIGHTS. SO I BELIEVE THE APPLICANTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO LIVE THEIR LIFE FREE OF NUISANCES, THAT THAT AGGRAVATE THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE, THAT DEVALUE THEIR PROPERTY VALUES. UH, BASICALLY ANYTHING THAT TAKES AWAY FROM A GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE. UH, I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAS THE RIGHT TO COME TO THIS BOARD AND ASK FOR RELIEF, UH, IF HE FEELS THAT HIS RIGHTS TO DO BUSINESS ARE BEING INFRINGED ON. AND I BELIEVE THE CITY HAS THE RIGHT TO REVOKE THE C O O BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL C O O WAS FOR TRUCK AND TRUCK REPAIR, AND THAT SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED. UH, THERE WAS NO TRIGGER AT THE CITY TO HAVE THE CITY CONTACT THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT DIDN'T CONTACT [02:35:01] ANYBODY. THINGS WENT UNNOTICED. BUT NONETHELESS, THE C O O IS NOW NOT APPROPRIATE, UH, FOR THE USE OF THE PROPERTY. AND I WON'T BE IN SUPPORT ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. I BELIEVE THAT IF WE, IF THE VOTE HERE IS FOR NON CONCURRENCE AND THE A, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO THEN PURSUE THAT ZONING, WHICH IS MORE APPROPRIATE, UH, WHICH IS A YES TYPE DESIGNATION. IT GIVES THEM THE OPPORTUNITY AND PROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE INPUT WITH THEIR CITY COUNCILMEN, UH, AS, AS THEY PROCEED WITH THE POTENTIAL ZONING, UH, CASE HERE. ANYONE ELSE? MANNA, COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, SO I HAPPEN TO DISAGREE WITH THE APPLICANT HERE WITH REGARDS TO, UH, THE DIALOGUE ABOUT THE SANITARY LANDFILL, UM, AND A SEWAGE, UH, I GUESS E E EJECTION OR INTERCEPTOR VAULT AND THE TUBE. I THINK THEY'RE TWO. THEY'RE, THEY ARE ONE AND THE SAME PERSONALLY. AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, UH, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. WELL, I'M GONNA CLOSE THIS WITH MY THOUGHTS. UM, I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT, UM, THERE'S DIFFERENT COMMISSIONS, DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, DIFFERENT AGENCIES THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE, UH, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT TOUCHES ON, ON DEVELOPMENT. UH, IN THIS CASE THEY WENT, THIS APPLICANT WENT THROUGH THE VARIOUS PERMITTING PROCESSES. UH, BUT, UM, IT'S THE ZONING USE THAT IS, THAT IS TRIGGERING THIS FOR ME. SO THIS IS A BRAND NEW THING. THERE'S ONLY ONE OTHER ONE OFF OF WIDENER WIDENER ROAD. UM, I'VE GOT TO HEAR ABOUT THAT CASE WHEN I WAS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION. BUT, UH, WITH THIS ONE, I THINK THE ISSUE IS, IS THAT DISCHARGING INTO, UM, A, A SAWS MANHOLE, IF YOU WILL, IS ONE THING, BUT DISCHARGING IT INTO THE OPEN AND HAVING IT GO THROUGH A SKID, AND, AND IT OBVIOUSLY IS CREATING ODOR ISSUES, IS, IS JUST A NEW THING THAT NEEDS TO BE DEFINED AND, AND, AND REGULATED A LITTLE BIT. AND THE SS WOULD ALLOW, UH, COUNCIL, UH, AND, AND THE ZONING COMMISSION TO LOOK AT DIFFERENT, UM, YOU KNOW, REQUIREMENTS, REGULATIONS, CONDITIONS FOR SUCH AN APPROVAL. AND THAT MIGHT, THAT SEEMS LIKE APPROPRIATE. UM, WHEN I FIRST WAS, WAS HEARING THIS, WHAT I THOUGHT ABOUT WAS A, A, THEY MARIONETTE A QUARRY OFF OF 1604, WHERE THEY WERE HAVING A LOT OF DUST ISSUES AND THEY INVENTED A CLEANING FACILITY FOR THEIR TRUCKS TO GO THROUGH SO THAT THEY WOULDN'T HARM THE NEIGHBORING AREA OR THE ROADS OR WHATNOT. AND I THINK SOMETHING, SOME SORT OF INVENTION OR, OR PROCESS TO WHERE THEY COULD SEAL AND AND DISCHARGE INTO A MANHOLE INSTEAD OF IT BEING OUT IN THE OPEN MAY BE APPROPRIATE AS A WAY TO GET THAT, THAT SS BUT, BUT EVEN IF I WAS TEETERING ON THAT, UM, I MEAN TECHNICALLY, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A, A, THIS IS ALSO POSES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE. AND, AND ON THAT ALONE, I HAVE TO KIND OF SIDE WITH THE CITY AND LOOK TO THE APPLICANT TO MAKE SOME SORT OF REMEDY. UH, I ALSO, UH, KNOW THAT IF THIS THING DOESN'T PASS TODAY, UM, THE APPLICANT CERTAINLY HAS THE ABILITY TO, TO CONTINUE DUMPING IT. A SAW, UH, TREATMENT PLANT AND CEASE USES OF THE ONSITE, UH, DISPOSAL AND THEIR BUSINESS ACTIVITIES CAN CONTINUE. AND I'M SURE THE CITY WOULD WORK WITH THEM ON THAT ENDEAVOR. BUT, UM, I THINK WITH THE THREE THINGS THAT THE CITY DID, THEY WEREN'T OUTSIDE OF THEIR PURVIEW. UM, TECHNICALLY, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN, YOU CAN ARGUE WITH THE ZONING, BUT THE OTHER TWO DEFINITELY. SO I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPEAL. UM, SO WITH THAT, LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. 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. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. LIND? I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN? I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. MEESE? I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. OZUNA. I DO NOT CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO DO NOT CONCUR. MOTION FAIL. ZERO TO 11 AND TO THANK Y'ALL FOR, FOR COMING BY. UH, BUT, BUT PLEASE REMEMBER THAT WE'RE, WE'RE HERE ONLY TO LOOK AT ONE SPECIFIC THING. IF THEY WANTED TO PURSUE THIS FURTHER, IT'S GONNA GO TO THE ZONING COMMISSION, AND THAT'LL BE YOUR TIME TO, TO REALLY GET INTO THE WEEDS ON THIS THING. OKAY? I'M TAKING A 10 MINUTE BREAK. YEAH, THANKS. WHAT TIME IS IT? ALL RIGHT. 3 51. I'M CALLING THIS BACK TO ORDER. UH, WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER TWO AT 1136 WEST FRENCH. UH, GOOD, A GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 2. I'M LOCATED AT 1 1 3 6 WEST FRENCH PLACE. AND COUNCIL DISTRICT [02:40:01] NUMBER ONE, APPLICANT BEING GERALDO ORTEGA. UM, A REQUEST FOR A ONE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT, MAXIMUM FOUR FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE FENCE WITH THE GATE TO BE FIVE FEET IN THE FRONT YARD. UM, CURRENT ZONING IS R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. UM, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CURRENT CONTAINS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE APPLICANT HAS INSTALLED A FIVE FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE. UH, BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT HAS A MAXIMUM FOUR FOOT MAXIMUM, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE DESIGN STANDARD. UH, THE FRONT YARD FENCE CONTAINS A GATE IN FRONT OF THE DRIVEWAY, WHICH CAN BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY AS PART OF THE RE THIS REQUEST. UM, UPON SITE, UM, UPON STAFF SITE VISITS, STAFF DID OBSERVE OTHER SIMILAR FENCES IN THE AREA. UM, ADDITIONALLY, THERE WAS NO CLEAR VISION ISSUE OBSERVED. UM, THAT IS A CURRENT PICTURE OF THE SITE PLAN WHERE THE HIGHLIGHTED AREA IS CURRENT OF WHERE THE FENCE AND THE GATE IS LOCATED. GATE, UM, THAT'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF. UM, THE FENCE AND THE GATE THAT IS ALSO ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY. UM, SOME OF THE SURROUNDING AREA FENCES, THERE ARE OTHER SIMILAR FENCES IN THE AREA. AND THEN SOME OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS. UM, RECOMMENDATION FOR FENCE, PROFESSIONAL EXEMPTION, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF A REQUEST OF A ONE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION MAXIMUM FOUR FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO BE FIVE FOOT IN THE FRONT YARD. AND BO O 8 2 2 1 0 3 0 1 3 2 FACING FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ON THE CONSTRUCTIVE FENCE GOES AGAINST THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS. UM, THERE WERE 26 NOTICES SENT OUT. THERE WAS ONE FAVOR, THERE WAS ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND BEACON HILL IS OPPOSED. UM, THE FOLLOWING SIDE DOES CONTAIN THE LETTER RECEIVED FROM BEACON HILL, AND WE JUST LEAVE IT ON THERE, THAT WAY YOU GUYS HAVE A TIME TO READ IT? YEP, LEAVE IT UP THERE, PLEASE. SO THE ASSOCIATION WAS, WAS ONLY AGAINST THE GATE PORTION THOUGH, CORRECT? YES, YES. THE ONE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. YEAH, AND THAT CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT GREAT. AS THE APPLICANT. PLEASE COME FORWARD. HELLO AGAIN. UH, MY NAME IS GERARDO ORGA. I LIVE IN THE 1136 WEST FRENCH PLACE, AND THIS IS MY WIFE. HI, MY NAME IS MARTINO ORGA. UM, I'M GONNA KIND OF TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MORE FACTS AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I I I ASK EVERYBODY TO KEEP THEIR EMOTIONAL EMOTIONS, UH, ASIDE FROM THIS AND JUST KIND OF FOCUS A LITTLE BIT ON THE FACTS HERE. UM, WE, UH, WE MOVED HERE ABOUT A YEAR AGO, AND WE, UM, WE HAD A BIG PLAN AROUND, UM, TRYING TO MAKE, UM, THIS OUR, OUR PROPERTY LOOK BETTER. SO, YOU KNOW, WE BOUGHT THIS 1924 CRAFTSMAN HOME, AS YOU COULD SEE IN, IN THE, IN THE PREVIOUS PICTURE. AND WE HAD A BIG PLAN TO REDESIGN THE ENTIRE LANDSCAPING TO, UM, WHICH WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS TO PRESERVE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE HOUSE WE, WE, UH, WE ASKED FOR. WE GOT A LOT OF PERMITS, YOU KNOW, TO GET PERMITS FOR ALL THE FENCING ALL THE WAY AROUND AND, UM, THE ENTIRE HOUSE. AND WE THOUGHT THAT WE WERE, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS ALL WE WERE NEEDING TO DO. SO WE, WE MOVED ON WITH OUR PLAN TO MOVE, MOVE THE WOODEN FENCE WAS BLOCKING THE VIEWS OF THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE AWAY FROM THE HOUSE, AND TRY TO OPEN UP THE VIEW AND, UH, OF THE HOUSE SO WE COULD SEE THE ENTIRE PARAMETER OF THE HOUSE. 'CAUSE MOST OF OUR FEATURES AS YOU COULD, I, I DON'T KNOW, YOU COULD TELL ON THOSE PICTURES, BUT MOST OF OUR FEATURES ARE ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, NOT THE FRONT, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE HERE. OH, YOU, YOU COULD BARELY SEE IT ON THIS, ON THIS VIEW, BUT OUR HOUSE IS VERY ELONGATED, RIGHT? SO IT, IT GOES, IT'S, IT'S A RECTANGULAR IN SHAPE. SO YOU, YOU REALLY COULDN'T SEE, CAN'T SEE THE SIDE, ESPECIALLY WITH THE WOODEN FEST THAT THAT USED TO BE THERE. WE HAD TO PUT TAKE DOWN THE TREE THAT WAS BLOCKING IT AND THE WOOD FENCE ALL, UM, TO THE RIGHT. SO, SO THIS, THIS VIEW NOW KIND OF GIVES THE ENTIRE VIEW OF THE HOUSE. IT LOOKS BETTER. WE GOT A LOT OF COMPLIMENTS FROM OUR NEIGHBORS. BUT HERE'S THE THING, WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT THERE WAS, WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO PUT A GATE. WE THOUGHT GETTING THE, THE PERMIT WAS GONNA BE GOOD ENOUGH, BUT, UM, TO, TO OUR FAULT, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T INQUIRE ON IT FURTHER. SO WE OBVIOUSLY VIOLATED THE ORDINANCE HERE. AND, UM, AND WE'RE HERE TO, TO, TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE FACTS AROUND ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD JUST IN GENERAL TO CONSIDER. UM, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE, WE WANT TO BRING TO EVERYONE'S ATTENTION IS, YOU KNOW, AS EVERYBODY MAY KNOW, THAT THE CRIME RATE IN SAN, IN BEACON HILL IS VERY HIGH, RIGHT? WE'RE 485% HIGHER THAN THE, THE NA THE NATION'S AVERAGE, WHERE BACK IN 2020 F B I REPORTED, UH, ABOUT [02:45:01] 13,000 CRIMES IN BEACON HILL ALONE. NINE 9,000 OF THOSE WERE PROPERTY CRIMES. THAT'S COMPARED TO ABOUT 9,000 ALTA VISTA AND 5,000 IN MONTE IN MONTE VISTA, WHICH HAVE A SIMILAR ORDINANCE. SO IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT WE DO HAVE A BIG PROPERTY. YOU KNOW, THE PROPERTY CRIMES ARE VERY HIGH. WE REPORTED AT LEAST THREE OF 'EM IN THE LAST, NO, TWO OF 'EM. WE REPORTED TWO IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, BOTH NEIGHBORS, FRONT AND SIDE NEIGHBOR WHO WERE BEING, YOU KNOW, THEIR, THEIR PROPERTIES WERE BEING VIOLATED. OUR NEIGHBORS, UM, ON THE OTHER SIDE, UM, WERE GETTING THEIR PACKAGES STOLEN. AND THEN THE, THE OTHER NEIGHBOR IN FRONT OF THEM GOT THEIR LIGHTS STOLEN, ALL PROPERTY CRIMES. FORTUNATELY, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY, ANY VIOLENT CRIMES. BUT THE, THE REALITY IS, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE LIVE IN A STREET THAT, THAT IS, UM, IT'S, IT'S MORE POTENT. THERE'S MORE POTENTIAL OF GETTING PROPERTY CRIMES IN OUR STREET BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A WASHINGTON AND A CONVENIENCE STORE DOWN THE STREET. THERE'S ONLY 31 HOUSES ON OUR STREET. AND OUT OF THOSE 31 HOUSES, WE HAVE ABOUT 10 GATES. 10, 10 HOUSES THAT HAVE GATES ACROSS THEIR DRIVEWAY. THAT'S, WE COUNTED ALL THE GATES AND, WELL, MOST OF THE GATES, AT LEAST 90% OF BEACON HILL BETWEEN FREDERICKSBURG, HILDERBRAND AND BLANCO, WE KIND OF MAYBE ABOUT 16, MAYBE TO 18 GATES THAT WERE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY. MOST OF 'EM WERE ACTUALLY SIX FEET, UM, IN, IN HEIGHT, BUT I'M ASSUMING A LOT OF THOSE WERE GRANDFATHERED IN. BUT MY POINT IS THAT ABOUT 10 OF THOSE GATES ARE ON OUR STREET ALONE. SO THAT KIND OF TELLS THE STORY THAT THERE'S SOMETHING, THERE MUST BE A HIGHER PROPERTY CRIME OR MORE CRIME HAPPENING ON OUR STREET BECAUSE IT'S A THROWAWAY FOR A LOT OF, UH, I HATE TO SAY THIS, HOMELESS FOLKS THAT, THAT ARE COMING FROM THE SHELTER, UH, OR ON FREDERICKSBURG. AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE GOING TO THAT WASHER TEAR OR EVEN DOWN TO THE CONVENIENCE STORE, OR SAN SAN PEDRO PARK. SO IT'S A MAJOR THROWAWAY. WE, WE SEE PEOPLE WALKING THROUGH THERE ALL THE TIME. AND THERE'S A, AND WE ALSO HAVE APARTMENT COMPLEXES, NOT JUST TO THE SIDES OF US, RIGHT? THE, THE PROPERTIES TO THE RIGHT ARE WHERE BEING RENTED THE PROPERTIES TO THE LEFT, THEY HAVE 12 LEASES, RIGHT? AND THEN THERE'S RENTERS IN THE FRONT, AND THERE'S A WHOLE TWO APARTMENT BUILDINGS BEHIND US IF THAT EVEN MATTERS. SO WE HAVE A LOT OF RENTERS IN AROUND OUR HOUSE, WHICH MEANS THERE'S A LOT MORE CARS IN FRONT OF OUR PROPERTY, MORE LIKELY THAT SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN TO MY CAR OR ANY OF MY VISITORS THAT MAY BE PARKED ON MY DRIVEWAY. WE HAVE A THREE-YEAR-OLD. WE FEEL THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PROTECT NOT JUST PART OF OUR PROPERTY, BUT OUR ENTIRE PROPERTY. AND THIS, IF WE WERE TO CONSIDER THE RECOMMENDATION OF BEACON HILL, WHICH IS TO MOVE THE GATE BACK, IT WOULD COST US ANYWHERE FROM 2,800 TO ABOUT MAYBE $8,000. AND, UM, AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY WE ARE, WE DO HAVE A SOLAR PART GATE. AND THAT GATE, YOU DON'T JUST MOVE IT TO THE BACK, YOU HAVE TO CUT IT TO SIZE AND POSSIBLY EVEN MAKE IT A SWING GATE, MEANING THAT YOU HAVE TO BUY TWO SEPARATE SOLAR PANELS THAT SWING OUT. I COULDN'T USE, REUSE THE ORIGINAL SOLAR PANEL, AND THEN I HAVE TO PUT A GATE FROM THE FRONT ALL THE WAY TO MY PORCH, AND THEN PUT ANOTHER GATE TO GET ACCESS TO MY SIDEWALK. ALL OF THAT, IT'S, AND THEN CUTTING THE GATE, RIGHT? THAT GATE'S TOO LONG, EVEN IF IT, IF I, IF I'M SOMEHOW FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAKE IT ROLL SIDEWAYS, YOU STILL HAVE TO CUT IT, WHICH MEANS THERE'S A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ROT IRON, IT'S GONNA, IT'S A LOT OF MONEY. IT, IT'S VERY EVIDENT THAT IT'S GONNA COST ME A LOT OF MONEY. MY NEIGHBORS HAVE GOT THE BENEFIT OF A NEW FENCE ALL THE WAY AROUND THE ENTIRE PROPERTY. SO MY INVESTMENT IN MY OWN PROPERTY HAS GIVEN THE BENEFIT TO ALL THREE OF MY NEIGHBORS OF GETTING A NEW FENCE. IT USED TO BE A CHAIN LINK FENCE THERE. SO I'VE ACTUALLY IMPROVED, NOT JUST MY OWN HOME, BUT I IMPROVED MY NEIGHBORS. SO I WANT, I WOULD LIKE FOR THIS PANEL HERE TO GIVE CONSIDERATION OF MY INVESTMENT IN MY OWN PROPERTY TO, TO, TO AT LEAST OFFSET THE MISTAKE I MADE OF PUTTING A GATE UP WITHOUT DOUBLE CHECKING MY CONTRACTOR. AND, YOU KNOW, I'LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, I MEAN, THERE'S, I'M NOT ASKING THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT I, I'M NOT SAYING THAT I HAVE THE RIGHT TO JUST DO WHAT I WANT. 'CAUSE I DIDN'T DO THIS INTENTIONALLY, BUT, YOU KNOW, I, I SPENT AT LEAST 60 GRAND ON THIS PROPERTY, JUST ON THE LANDSCAPING. AND THE LAST YEAR, I'M STILL PAYING THE LOAN ON, ON THAT FENCING, AND I'M, YOU KNOW, AND NOW THEY'RE BEING, YOU KNOW, I'M BEING ASKED TO REMOVE IT AND SPEND MORE MONEY. AND I WOULD LIKE THIS PANEL TO AT LEAST CONSIDER THE INVESTMENT I'VE DONE TO THIS COMMUNITY AND NOT, AND LOOK PAST THIS, THIS ORDINANCE THAT I, YOU KNOW, THAT I INADVERTENTLY OVERLOOKED. UM, OKAY. DO YOU WANNA SAY ANYTHING? OR, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAD ALL POSITIVE INTENT FOR THIS. THERE WAS NO ILL INTENT TO DO ANYTHING, TO VIOLATE ANYTHING THAT'S NOT OUR PRACTICE. I MEAN, OUR BACKGROUND IS IN COMPLIANCE AND RISK MANAGEMENT. WE FOLLOW RULES, WE KNOW PROTOCOLS, WE KNOW REGULATORY REACTIONS AND THINGS [02:50:01] LIKE THAT. SO WHEN WE DID THIS, WE FOLLOWED WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS APPROPRIATE. WE WENT THROUGH A VENDOR, WE HIRED THEM, TOOK CARE OF ALL THE PAPERWORK THEY SIGNED, AND WE TOOK CARE OF IT. AND THAT'S ALL WHAT WE KNEW. SO WE DID NOT PURPOSELY DID ANYTHING THAT WE THOUGHT WE WERE DOING SOMETHING WRONG. WE UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF THE CONSERVATION, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO KEEP THE INTEGRITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE PROTECTION. BUT I, WHAT I DO WANNA QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, IS IT MORE WHAT THE CONSERVATION, UH, ASSOCIATION IS LOOKING FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT OR THE, ALSO THE, THE FACT THAT WE WANNA BE HELD, BE ABLE TO FEEL COMFORTABLE WITHIN OUR OWN HOUSE AND PROTECTED. SO I BELIEVE THAT THAT WOULD BE MORE IMPORTANT, THAT WE ARE MORE COMFORTABLE IN OUR OWN HOME SURROUNDING THE WHOLE DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS PART OF OUR HOME, AND FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE AND, AND, AND PROTECTED WITH THIS GATE. OKAY, NOW I WANNA, UH, I WANNA SAY ONE MORE THING. SO THE VARIANCE WE'RE ASKING FOR IS FOR OUR HOUSE, FOR ON OUR STREET. SO IF THE, IF BEACON HILL WANTS TO MAKE THIS, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THEY, I WISH THEY WOULD'VE SAID THIS TO OUR NEIGHBORS, BUT THEY SHOULD BE CONSIDERING THIS VARIANCE FOR MY HOUSE, NOT FOR THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY SAID AT THE MEETING WAS THAT IF THEY MAKE THIS EXCEPTION FOR ME, THEY HAVE TO MAKE IT FOR EVERY OTHER PERSON GOING FORWARD. THAT SHOULD NOT BE THE CASE. THEY SHOULD MAKE IT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. AND I WANT THEM TO, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST CON YOU TO CONSIDER THAT MAYBE THE WRONG CHOICE OF WORDS WERE USED THERE TO WIN THE VOTE OF THE NEIGHBORS. OKAY? SO, UH, UH, STAFF, HAS ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK VOICEMAILS? WE HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL. ALL RIGHT, LET'S HEAR IT. AFTER THAT, WE'LL HAVE, UH, PROBABLY SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING B O A CASE 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 1 2 3 AT 1136 WEST FRENCH. THIS IS DANIEL HUBING, CHAIR OF THE BEACON HILL ZONING AND URBAN DESIGN COMMITTEE. I RESIDE AT TEN TWENTY FIVE WEST ATCH. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 287-9025. DEAR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS, BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION TO MR. HERARDO ORGA REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR A FENCE FROM THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT IN CD FIVE, MAXIMUM FOUR FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO BE FIVE FEET AT 1136 WEST FRENCH. THIS FENCE INCLUDES A DRIVEWAY GATE THAT IS PROHIBITED IN THE, IN CD FIVE. A GATE IS NOT ALLOWED TO CROSS A DRIVEWAY BETWEEN THE STREET AND THE FRONT, THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. IT'S DIFFICULT TO SUPPORT A HEIGHT VARIANCE ON AN ILLEGAL GATE. FOR SOME REASON, THE LOCATION OF THE GATE, WHICH IS THE MORE PROBLEMATIC ISSUE, HAS BEEN OVERSHADOWED BY THE MATTER OF THE HEIGHTS. MR. TGA MET WITH THE ZONING AND URBAN DESIGN COMMITTEE ON NOVEMBER 7TH. HE THEN PRESENTED BEFORE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ON NOVEMBER 14TH, HAN NOTIFIED RESIDENTS THAT MR. TIAGO WOULD PRESENT ON THE FRONT PAGE OF THE BEACON NEWSLETTER, WHICH IS HAND DELIVERED TO 2,300 RESIDENCES. HE ASSEMBLY VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO NOT SUPPORT THE DRIVEWAY GATE. IF HE ADVISED US THAT IF THE HEIGHT IS DENIED, THE APPLICANT MUST MOVE OR REMOVE THE DRIVEWAY GATE. HOWEVER, IF THE ISSUE OF THE DRIVEWAY GATE COULD BE SEPARATED FROM THE FRONT FENCE, THE ASSOCIATION VOTED TO SUPPORT THE ADDED HEIGHT TO THE FENCE IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, ONLY BECAUSE THE EXTRA HEIGHT IS MERELY DECORATIVE. BUT THE ASSOCIATION WAS CLEAR THEN THEY DO NOT SUPPORT THE DRIVEWAY. GATE N C FIVE STANDARDS ARE THE RESULT OF COMMUNITY MEETINGS HELD OVER A YEAR IN 2004 TO DETERMINE WHAT STANDARDS ARE IMPORTANT TO OUR COMMUNITY. THEY'RE ALSO THE RESULTS OF MEETINGS FOR THE UPDATED 2017 AND ARE ADOPTED AS ORDINANCE BY CITY COUNCIL, THE APPLICANT, MR. RAGA, ACCORDING TO THE PERMIT, HOLD ON. 6 23 21, A RESIDENTIAL FENCE AFFIRMED QUOTE, BY SIGNING THE APPLICATION AS THE OWNER OR CONTRACTOR, I CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR FENCES IN THIS APPLICATION. I UNDER CERTIFY THAT THE FENCE INSTALLED WITH THIS PERMIT WILL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT. QUOTE, IF THE TWO PROBLEMS MUST BE CONSIDERED AS A SINGLE UNIT HANANA RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR HEIGHT VARIANCE TO THE NCD. FIVE. PLEASE HELP US MAINTAIN OUR NCD FIVE STANDARDS. HOWEVER, IF A MOTION COULD BE MADE TO SEPARATE THE ISSUE OF THE DRIVEWAY GATES LOCATION FROM THE FRONT FENCE ITS HEIGHT, WE ASK THAT YOU DENY THE REQUEST FOR THE DRIVEWAY GATE LOCATION AND THAT YOU APPROVE THE EXTRA HEIGHT ON THE FRONT FENCE, EXCLUDING THE DRIVEWAY GATE RESPECTFULLY. DANIEL HUBING, BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION. SO AN URBAN DESIGN COMMITTEE. ALL RIGHT. UH, SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS A, A VARIANCE FOR A FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN AGAINST THE FOREFOOT BEACON HILL. IF, UH, IF THIS VARIANCE FAILS, CAN THEY STILL PUT IN A FOUR [02:55:01] FOOT TALL GATE? THEY CAN DO, UH, SO THEY CANNOT DO THE GATE AT ALL UNLESS THE VARIANCE IS APPROVED FOR THAT. OKAY. 'CAUSE I JUST WANTED, I DIDN'T KNOW IF THIS, UH, AS ADVERTISED. IT DIDN'T INCLUDE THE PROVISION OF THE GATE. I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST A HIGH VARIANCE. RIGHT. WE ADVERTISED, UM, FOR THE FRONT FENCE, AND THE GATE IS LOCATED IN THE FRONT FENCE. UH, WITH THAT YOU COULD BREAK IT UP. OKAY. AND THEN ALSO, UH, IT SAYS FIVE FEET TALL. ONE OF THE PICTURES IN THE, IN THE STAFF REPORT SHOWS TO THE TOP OF THE, UM, UM, UM, SPHERICAL PART OF THE FENCE. IT'S 56 INCHES, 57 INCHES, BUT THE GATE LOOKS LIKE IT GOES UP MUCH HIGHER THAN THAT. IF WE, IF THIS VARIANCE WERE TO BE APPROVED AS UP TO THE 60 INCH, YOU KNOW, FIVE FEET, WOULD THEY HAVE TO STILL HAVE TO CUT THE GATE DOWN A LITTLE BIT SO THAT NONE OF IT WAS OVER 60? IF, IF IT'S ABOVE, UH, THE FIVE FOOT, UM, AND IF WE MISCALCULATE THAT, WE CAN DO A, IF, IF THIS IS APPROVED, WE CAN DO A SIX INCH ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT SOUNDS GREAT. ALL RIGHT. SO IS GONNA COMMISSIONER YOUR QUESTIONS. CAN, CAN I ASK OTHER REAL QUICK, IS MR. VIDA HERE VINUEVA? I THINK THEY LEFT. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. OKAY. COMMISSIONER PHELAN? YES. I HAVE A, A FEW QUESTIONS TO ASK. UH, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT, UH, YOU GOT THE, UH, PERMIT AND SIGNED THAT YOU HAD, WAS IT THE, UH, CONSTRUCTION COMPANY THAT, UH, SIGNED THIS PERMIT THEN, OR, OR DID YOU, IT WAS SAYING THAT YOU KNEW THE, WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS WERE FOR THE FENCE? YES, YES. WE HIRED SOMEONE TO DO OUR FENCING AND HE TOOK CARE OF ALL THE PERMITS FOR US. OKAY. AND SO THE CONTRACTOR SAID THAT HE KNEW WHAT THE, UH, PARAMETERS WERE, AND HE BUILT THIS FENCE AND IT'S GOT TWO MAJOR FLAWS IN THE, THE FENCE DESIGN. ONE IS THAT IT HAS A FENCE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY. UH, YOU HAD A SIX FOOT FENCE, UH, THAT WAS WOOD AND APPROPRIATELY PLACED INITIALLY. AND YOU SEE THAT ON THE, UH, GOOGLE MAPS, UH, THAT HAD BEEN THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. AND THE SIX FOOT SEEMS LIKE IT'D BE A BETTER BET THAN THE FOREFOOT YOU'VE GOT UP FRONT. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY, UH, WANTS TO PROHIBIT YOU FROM HAVING A, YOU KNOW, FENCE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, YOU KNOW, REQUIREMENTS, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY TROUBLE WITH YOU HAVING A FENCE. AND THEY'RE EVEN SUGGESTING THAT IF YOU WANTED IT A FOOT HIGHER, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH IT, UH, WHICH WOULD GIVE YOU EXTRA PROTECTION. BUT I DON'T SEE HOW, UH, HAVING A FENCE THAT'S, YOU KNOW, AND YES, IN THIS POSITION AS OPPOSED TO ONE THAT'S BACK A LITTLE BIT GIVES YOU ANY BETTER PROTECTION. HOW, HOW WOULD THIS CHANGE AND GIVE YOU MORE PROTECTION IF THE FENCE WAS MOVED BACK RATHER THAN WHERE IT IS NOW? YEAH, I, I AGREE, UH, WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT ALSO IF YOU LOOK AT IT FROM A DIFFERENT LENS, IF WE MOVE THE FENCE FURTHER BACK TO WHERE ORIGINALLY IT WAS, THAT LEAVES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEBODY TO WALK INTO OUR PROPERTY AREA, WHICH IS THEIR DRIVEWAY, AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO JUMP ON THE BALCONY ON THE PORCH AND JUMP OVER, WHICH IS MORE EASILY ACCESSIBLE, VERSUS THE GATE BEING FURTHER AWAY OUT, IT KEEPS PEOPLE AND DOES NOT INVITE UNWANTED PEOPLE GOING INTO OUR DRIVEWAY. WELL, THE, THE FOUR FOOT FENCE WOULD BE THE SAME NO MATTER WHERE IT'S LOCATED. IF IT'S IN THE FRONT, THEY COULD, YOU KNOW, ALL THEY HAVE TO DO TO GET AWAY FROM THE FIVE FEET IS MOVE OVER A FEW FEET AND THEY'VE GOT A FOUR FOOT FENCE. IF YOU MOVE THE, UH, UH, FENCE SO THAT IT GOES ALONG, LIKE MOST OF THE, UH, PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD DO THEY HAVE A, A, A FENCE THAT GOES FROM THE, UH, YOU KNOW, CUT THE CURB, CUT BACK UP TO THE HOUSE. I SEE. AND THEN THE GATES ARE, ARE BACK THERE. THAT'S, THAT'S MORE COMMON THAN, THAN WHAT YOU'VE GOT. YEAH. SO, AND, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT AS WELL. BUT IF WE HAVE IT OPEN, IT JUST INVITES MORE, THERE'S MORE OF AN OPPORTUNITY THAT SOMEBODY COULD WALK INTO OUR AREA, SO WE FEEL MORE SECURE IF WE HAD THE, THE GATE WHERE IT'S PLACED. HAD HAD ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU PRESENTED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, RECENTLY. UH, DID THEY HEAR YOU OUT AND GIVE YOU A FAIR, UH, OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS YOUR CASE? I, I KIND OF FEEL THERE WAS SOME BIAS IN THERE, UH, BECAUSE IT FEELS LIKE THERE'S, UM, RELATIONSHIPS IN THAT, IN THE, IN THAT ASSOCIATION WITH THEIR DIRECTORS AND THE DIRECTORS HERE ON THIS PANEL. AND THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW EACH OTHER THERE. SO WE FELT WE DIDN'T, WERE HEARD PROPERLY, WE'RE GIVEN FIVE MINUTES TO MAKE OUR CASE, AND THEY WERE GIVEN AN INFINITE AMOUNT OF TIME TO TALK IT OVER AND CONVINCE THE VOTERS THERE. AND ALSO THERE WAS NO ONE IN OUR STREET THERE TO REPRESENT US. SO IT WAS, AGAIN, MY POINT THAT I MADE EARLIER IS THAT THE, IM, THE, [03:00:01] THE, THE WORDS THAT WERE USED TO INFLUENCE THE VOTE WERE VERY TACTICAL IN NATURE. BY ONE SAYING IT WAS CRIMINAL KIND OF, OR SAYING IT'S ILLEGAL, INSTEAD OF SAYING OUT OF ORDINANCE, UM, IT'S NOT SENATE BILL 1588 ALLOWS, DOESN'T ALLOW HOAS TO, TO DISALLOW, UM, RESIDENTS FROM PUTTING GATES IN IN ENTIRE, IN THEIR ENTIRE, OR FENCING AROUND THEIR ENTIRE PARAMETER. SO IT'S NOT REALLY, TO USE THE WORD ILLEGAL, MAKES US LOOK LIKE CRIMINALS. SO THEY USE THE WORD LIKE THAT AND EVEN DID IT ON THE RECORDING AGAIN. AND, UM, THE OTHER THING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY USED THE WORD SAYING THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO APPROVE ALL THE CASES GOING FORWARD. AND THAT WAS A POOR CHOICE OF WORDS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO SAY THAT. BUT IT WAS ALL VERY TACTICAL IN NATURE AND IT WAS NATURALLY THEY'RE GONNA, THEY'RE GONNA SEE THE NEGATIVE PART OF MY CASE HERE AND NOT LISTEN TO ANYTHING THAT I HAVE TO SAY, WELL, THIS IS A ZONING ISSUE. THE, THAT, THAT STATE LAW WITH THE H O A, I MEAN, THEY, THAT DOES NOT, NOT, DOESN'T APPLY HERE, BUT, UM, APPRECIATE THAT IT'S A CITY ISSUE. BUT, UM, ANYTHING ELSE? YEAH. UH, THE, THE VOTE, UH, THEY UNANIMOUSLY, UH, VOTED TO DENY THE, THE, THE, UH, YOU KNOW, APPEAL. UH, WAS, UH, MEETING WELL ATTENDED? NO, IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE PERCENTAGE OF THE HOMEOWNERS WHO LIVE THERE OR THE RESIDENTS THAT THERE, IT WAS ONLY PROBABLY ABOUT 30 PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE. OKAY. 30 PEOPLE IS FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRETTY GOOD. YEAH. INCLUDING THE, ALL THE PANEL . THAT'S PRETTY, SO, SO THE IRONY WAS THAT THE BIGGER CASE THAT THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT THAT EVENING WAS ABOUT ALL THE CRIME HAPPENING IRONICALLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS WAS, AND THEY, THEY COMPLAIN BACK, THE RECORDING WAS SOMEBODY JUMPING OVER A FENCE AND GOING ACROSS THEIR YARDS. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE WAS CONTRADICTING INFORMATION THAT WAS DISCUSSED IN COMPLAINTS AFTERWARDS ABOUT SHELL CASINGS BEING ON THEIR YARDS AND SO FORTH. SO THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT OF JUSTIFICATION THAT THE CRIME IS THERE. IT HAPPENS ON FACEBOOK. THEY'RE POSTING PROPERTY CRIMES EVERY DAY JUST ABOUT, AND THEY'RE SHOOTINGS LIKE EVERY OTHER DAY HAPPENING AT NIGHT. SO THERE'S A CRIME PROBLEM HERE. AND I DON'T KNOW WHY NO, WHY THEY'RE NOT LOOKING AT THAT IN, IN THAT LENS. I'M SORRY, I DON'T WANNA INTERRUPT, BUT, UH, HOW DOES A CRIME PROBLEM AFFECT THE LOCATION OF THE GATE? IS, IS WHAT WE HAVE TO, TO DECIDE. UH, THE APPLICANT HAD MENTIONED THAT THEY, THEY WANTED IT, UH, IN FRONT OF THE PORCH INSTEAD OF BEHIND THE PORCH, CORRECT? YES. BUT WHERE IT WAS ORIGINALLY DONE, THE WOOD PART, THE WOOD PIECE OF IT, THEY WANTED IT AGAINST THE PORCH TO THE FENCE, TO THE NEIGHBOR'S FENCE. SO IT WOULDN'T GO PAST, IT WOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED FRONT YARD. YES. OKAY. SO STAFF, UH, SO THE BEACON HILL WAS AGAINST THE GATE. THEY DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE FENCE. DOES THAT CHANGE YOUR, UM, RECOMMENDATION? ARE, ARE Y'ALL OPPOSED TO BOTH ITEMS OR JUST THE GATE ISSUE? UH, OUR RECOMMENDATION IS FOR BOTH ITEMS. OKAY. SO WE HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT, UM, THEY HAVE A, A, UM, A GATE THAT'S, THAT'S JUST UNDER FIVE FEET ALONG, UH, WITH, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE, UH, I MEAN A FENCE THAT'S JUST BELOW FIVE FEET, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE GATE. UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS BEFORE WE ASK FOR A MOTION? MANNA COMMISSIONER, MANNA VENT? SO QUESTION I HAVE HERE. UM, AND SO, SO NORMALLY THE FRONT PORCH IS NOT CONSIDERED I GUESS THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE. AND SO, SO UM, UM, IS AN OPTION AVAILABLE WHERE, UH, THE GATE COULD BE PLACED AT, UH, I GUESS, UH, AT THE FRONT OF THE PATIO OR THE PORCH THERE? UM, AS AN OPTION AS WELL. UM, IF WE SO RULED, AS LONG AS IT IS BEHIND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME, IT COULD BE, UM, OUTSIDE THE, UH, N C D GOVERNANCE. BUT COULD WE INCLUDE IT, COULD WE INCLUDE VERBIAGE SO THAT, UM, IT COULD BE EVEN WITH THE FRONT OF THE PORCH AND, AND INSTEAD OF THE FACADE OF THE HOUSE? 'CAUSE THE PORCH IS NOT PART OF THE FACADE, RIGHT. LOOK LIKE THE PORCH IS ACTUALLY, I MEAN, FROM WHAT I'M LOOKING AT, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS PARTICULAR PORCH IS PART OF THE FRONT FACADE. OKAY. YEAH. AND THIS, I AGREE. OKAY. SO IT IS PART OF THE, OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MINKA? COMMISSIONER MINKA, THEN ALBERT, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. UM, WAS THE ISSUE OR THE ITEM BROUGHT UP ON 1225, UH, WEST FRENCH HAS A, AS A FENCE SIMILAR LIKE YOURS AS WAS THAT BROUGHT UP? IT'S GOES OUT TO THE, TO THE SIDEWALK? YEAH, WE, WE GOT THE IDEA, THE RECOMMENDATION WAS BECAUSE OUR KIND OF CAT CORNER TO OUR HOUSE, THERE'S A HOUSE THAT HAS ONE EXACTLY LIKE OURS EXCEPT THEIR, THEIR DRIVEWAY'S ON THE SIDE. SO WE LIKED THE, THE WAY IT LOOKED, IT HAD THE SAME EXACT HUMP, YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S WHERE WE GOT THE IDEA FROM AND THEY'RE LIKE, OH, WE BUILT THAT FENCE. WE COULD BUILD YOU ONE JUST LIKE IT. AND THAT'S WHERE WE GOT THE IDEA. SO WHAT DID THEY SAY WHEN YOU PRESENTED THAT TO THEM? NOTHING. THEY SAID IT'S [03:05:01] DOABLE. I MEAN, THEY, IT WAS, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS NOT A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ANY RESTRICTIONS THERE OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, WE COULD DO IT FOR YOU AND WE CAN DO IT BETTER AND A LITTLE BIT MORE, A BETTER, UM, MATERIAL. THAT WAS ABOUT IT. OKAY. YEAH. BECAUSE IT HAS A SLIDING FENCE AND IT LOOKS AT ABOUT FIVE FEET HIGH FROM WHAT I SEE IN GOOGLE. SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME. IT'S A ONE FOOT VARIANCE. RIGHT? THE HIGHEST PART OF THE FENCE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ALBERT. A QUESTION FOR STAFF. NORMALLY WHEN, UH, YOU GET A FENCE PERMIT, YOU HAVE TO DRAW A LITTLE PICTURE OF WHERE YOUR FENCE IS GONNA BE AND EVERYTHING. SUBMIT THAT FOR YOUR PERMIT. UH, DID THAT NOT TRIGGER THE, UH, SITE PLAN? HAD IT AT FOUR FEET? DID IT SHOW A DRIVEWAY GATE? IT DIDN'T. IT SHOWED JUST A FENCE. UM, I THINK THE DRIVEWAY GATE MUST HAVE GOT PAST WHOEVER REVIEWED IT, 'CAUSE THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A DRIVEWAY THERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, COMMISSIONER SPIELMAN. OKAY. UM, THE FENCE THAT IS ON THE SIDE IS PERMITTED. IT WAS A CORNER LOT. AND SO IF A CORNER LOT HAS A, UH, SIX FOOT FENCE ON IT, THAT'S PERMITTED BECAUSE UNDER THE, UH, YOU KNOW, N C D GUIDELINES, UH, IT ONLY APPLIES TO FRONT FENCES, NOT SIDE FENCES. AND THIS, THIS IS A, A FAIRLY NEW SIDE FENCE. MOST OF THE FENCES THAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT HAVE BEEN THERE LONG BEFORE THE N C D WAS EVER THOUGHT OF. AND, AND BASICALLY, UH, YOU KNOW, THE ISSUE IS WHEN THEY GET THE N C D STANDARDS, OBVIOUSLY THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE FENCES OVER THE DRIVEWAYS AND THEY, YOU KNOW, INCLUDED THAT IN FAIRLY LIMITED, UH, YOU KNOW, GUIDELINES THAT THEY'VE GOT. AND THEY DID IT BOTH IN, IN THE ORIGINAL ONE AND IN THE ADOPTION IN 2017. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? CAN I SAY SOMETHING IN HOLD ON ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? NONE. OKAY. SO WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU A MOMENT TO PROVIDE ANY, UH, A, A SHORT REBUTTAL AND THEN WE WILL DELIBERATE. OKAY. GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD, SIR. OH, SORRY. YEAH. YEAH. I JUST WANNA REMIND EVERYONE THAT THE ORDINANCE WAS PASSED IN 2017, SO THE CRIME RATES BACK THEN WERE PROBABLY VERY DIFFERENT THAN TODAY, SO JUST PLEASE CONSIDER THAT. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. UH, SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON THIS. A MOTION CAN EITHER BE, UH, FOR THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE, UH, AND THE GATE, OR JUST THE FENCE AND NOT THE GATE. OR, UH, IF SOMEONE ELSE WANTS TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT, FEEL FREE. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 2. I MOVED TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR A ONE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE BEACON HILL, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT, UH, MAXIMUM FOUR FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE DESIGN STANDARDS SITUATED AT 1 1 3 6 WEST FRENCH PLACE. APPLICANT BEING GERALDO UGA. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER, THIS PROPERTY, SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. UH, THE BEACON HILL FRONT YARD FENCE STANDARDS WAS ADOPTED TO MAINTAIN A CHARACTER OF THE AREA. THE VARIANCE OF THE N C D STANDARDS IS FOR THE FRONT YARD FENCE AND ARE NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS DUE THROUGH SPECIAL CONDITIONS. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. IT WOULD RESULT IN THE FENCE TO CONFORM TO FOREFOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT, AND A POSSIBLE DEMOLITION OF THE FENCE. THIS PRESENTS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS THERE ARE SIMILAR STYLE FENCES IN THE AREA. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO OTHER USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PERFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. DEFENSE IS NOT LIKELY TO NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS A FENCE NEIGHBORS, A LOCAL, AS A FENCE NEIGHBORS A LOCAL STREET WITH SIMILAR FENCES. SIX. THE PLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING IN THE PROPERTY. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO OTHER, THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE STYLE OF FENCE IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE SURROUNDING AREAS IN THE DISTRICT, UH, THAT THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER ZUNA. COMMISSIONER MANON. SO I READ THIS, [03:10:01] UH, WITH THE EXCLUSION OF THE GATE. UM, AND SO, SO UM, BEING THAT THE N C D UM, UH, GROUP FROM BEACON HILL ACTUALLY SAID THEY WERE OKAY WITH IT, THEN I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT AS WELL. SO, UH, SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF, OF THAT AS READ, BUT THE EXCEPT, YEAH. SO THE GATE WAS LEFT OFF OF THE, THE READING. AND SO, WHICH IS BASICALLY WHAT BEACON HILL SAID THAT THEY WERE FINED WITH. UH, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT PLEASE? I, I, I'M SURE. SO, SO PER BEACON HILL, I READ IT PER WHAT BEACON HILL SAID THAT THEY WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE WITH, WHICH IS BASICALLY THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE AS, AS THE, AS AS READ. UM, AND, BUT WITHOUT THE GATE. SO I EXCLUDED THE GATE IN THE DIALOGUE. DOES THAT MEAN THAT, UH, THEY'D HAVE TO MOVE THE GATE THEN? THAT WOULD MEAN THAT THE GATE IS NOT PERMITTED AND WE WOULD HAVE TO, UNLESS, UNLESS OF COURSE THE, UH, GATE IS BROUGHT UP AS A, AS A, A SECOND, UH, PIECE OF THE, UNLESS IT'S BROUGHT UP AS A SECOND PIECE. YES. YEAH. SO IT COULD BE BROUGHT UP AS A, IT COULD BE ADDRESSED AS A SECOND MOTION. AND THAT'S MY INTENT IS TO BRING IT UP AS A SECOND MOTION. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. UH, SO I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND JUST FOR THE FENCE AND NOT THE GATE. UH, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MR. MANO, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. AO I CONCUR. MR. SPILLMAN. I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA? I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIND I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MS. ME I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UM, IS THERE A MOTION FOR THE GATE? YES. MR. CHAIR? MR. SO I, DO I READ THE FULL OR CAN I JUST REFER BACK TO THE SAME, UH, UH, FOR LEGAL, CAN HE REFERENCE THE, THE FINDINGS OR DOES HE HAVE TO READ TO THEM ALL? YOU CAN, YOU CAN REFERENCE THE WHAT'S BEEN STATED AND AMEND THAT. PERFECT. OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OH EIGHT DASH 22 DASH 3 0 0 1 32, I'VE MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF JUDGE, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR, UM, ONE, A VARIANCE FROM THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT, UH, TO ALLOW A GATE TO BE FIVE FEET IN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT 1136 WEST FRENCH PLACE, APPLICANT BEING, UH, GERARDO ORGA BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US OF THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINE SO THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. AND I REFERENCE BACK TO THE FINDINGS OF FACT THAT MY COLLEAGUE PRESENTED FOR THE, UH, PRIOR MOTION. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER MANNA, A DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YES. SO I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE, UH, THE GATE. UM, WE, THE APPLICANT PROVIDED TESTIMONY TO US ABOUT THE CRIME IN THE AREA. OBVIOUSLY THIS, THEIR HOUSE APPEARS TO BE A, UH, ONE, ONE OF THE NICER HOUSES IN THE AREA, AND I WOULD IMAGINE IT'D BE KIND OF A TARGET. UH, HE PRESENTED, UM, TESTIMONY ABOUT, UH, THE, THE CRIME, WHICH IS A PREDOMINANTLY FACTOR IN THE AREA. UM, AND SO I, I DON'T SEE THE GATE AS BEING A MAJOR, UM, UM, IMPEDIMENT OR NOT IN, IN THE CONTINUITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION COMMISSIONER AMANDA. UM, I UNFORTUNATELY WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION IS READ, UM, SIMPLY 'CAUSE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE N C D. YOU KNOW, THEY DO WORK THROUGH LOTS OF DIALOGUE TO COME UP WITH THESE RULES. AND SO ONE THING THAT YOU KNOW, THAT DOES HAPPEN IS, YOU KNOW, THE COMMITTEES GET TOGETHER AND REVIEW EVERYTHING AGAIN AT SOME POINT TO DETERMINE, YOU KNOW, WHAT CADENCE NEED TO BE MADE. AND SO AT SOME POINT THEY LIKELY WILL COME BACK THROUGH MAYBE AND COME BACK TO SAY, OKAY, THEY COULD USE FENCE CHANGE. AND, BUT UNTIL THAT, UH, UNTIL THEN I WILL, WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS. ALRIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? YES. UH, COMMISSIONER SPIELMAN AND THEN ICE. UH, OH. COMMISSIONER MEESE. UM, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. I THINK THAT I AGREE WITH THE COMMISSIONER. ZINA. YEAH, ZINA, I, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER OZUNA. I THINK THAT IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WANTS TO REVISIT BECAUSE OF THE CRIME RATES AND THE ANY CHANGES, I DON'T THINK THAT THE PETITIONER SHOULD HAVE TO REMOVE THE FENCE JUST TO RE REINSTALL IT WHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UM, COMES UP TO DATE WITH THE NEEDS OF THEIR COMMUNITY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UM, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, YEAH. COMMISSIONER SMAIL. YEAH, I'LL, I'LL BE VOTING IN DENIAL FOR THIS ONE BECAUSE, UH, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO SUPPORT THE N C D STANDARDS. THEY'RE THE WORK OF YEARS OF, UH, UH, DELIBERATION. THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH, UH, APPROVAL BY CITY COUNCIL. AND IT IS NOT AN H O A, IT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE U D C CODE. AND I DON'T SEE ANY REAL OUTSTANDING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD, UH, YOU KNOW, SAY THAT THIS PROPERTY IS DIFFERENT THAN ANY OF THE OTHER ONES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. OKAY? UM, IF NOTHING ELSE, UM, I'M GONNA STATE THAT I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE GATE, UH, BECAUSE THE ALTERNATIVE IS WOULD BE TO CONSTRUCT ANOTHER FENCE DOWN THE SIDE, LOCKING OFF THE FRONT YARD AND THEN PUSHING [03:15:01] THE GATE FURTHER BACK. IT'D JUST BE, SEEM LESS FUNCTIONAL, BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MR. OONA? YES, I CONCUR. PLEASE, MR. MANO, 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. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIND, I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. MEESE, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION FAILS. SIX TO FIVE. SO YOU HAVE THE FENCE BUT NOT THE GATE. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN TALK TO STAFF PLEASE. UH, ITEM THREE. GOOD AFTERNOON. ITEM THREE IS FOUR. CASE BO A 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 54. LOCATED AT THREE 18 UTAH WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO, THE APPLICANT BEING ANTONIO MARTEL IS A REQUEST FOR ONE A 1 1160 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT. LOT SIZE TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE OF 2,840 SQUARE FEET TO A ONE FOOT NINE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET, THREE INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THIS IS FOR THE EXISTING PRIMARY STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY. THREE. A TWO FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT FIVE SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE TWO FEET SEVEN INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND FOUR 12 FOOT 10 INCH VARIANCE WITH A FIVE FOOT CREDIT FROM THE ALLEY, FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE TWO FEET, TWO INCHES FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THERE IS A CORRECTION ON THE LAST REQUESTED VARIANCE. SINCE THE PROPERTY IS ZONED RRN FOUR, THE REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT IS ONLY FIVE FEET. WITH THE FIVE FOOT CREDIT FROM THE ALLEY, IT IS A TWO FOOT 10 INCH VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE TWO FOOT TWO INCHES FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO AND CONTAINS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN AUGUST OF 2022, AN INVESTIGATION WAS OPENED BY CODE ENFORCEMENT. DUE TO THE STRUCTURE BEING DILAPIDATED AND FOR WORKING WITHOUT PERMITS, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 1,160 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE OF 282 28 40 SQUARE FEET IN LIEU OF THE REQUIRED 4,000 SQUARE FOOT SET FORTH IN THE RM FOUR BASE ZONING DISTRICT. ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REMODEL THE STRUCTURE AT A SECOND STORY ADDITION, CONSTRUCT A PATIO COVER TO THE REAR AND CON DUE TO THE CURRENT LOCATION OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. A ONE FOOT NINE INCH VARIANCE IS BEING REQUESTED DUE TO THE STRUCTURE ONLY BEING THREE FOOT THREE INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. A PROPOSED CARPORT WILL MAIN WILL MAINTAIN TWO FOOT SEVEN INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND A PATIO COVER STRUCTURE ATTACHED TO THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURES. PROPOSED TO MAINTAIN TWO FOOT TWO INCHES FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THERE IS AN ALLEYWAY LOCATED ALONG THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY THAT MEASURES 10 FEET IN WIDTH. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS ABLE TO UTILIZE HALF OF THE ALLEYWAY FIVE FEET TOWARDS THE REAR SETBACK. THE PROPERTY ZONE RM FOUR RESIDENTIAL MIX DISTRICT, WHICH REQUIRES A 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK, FIVE FOOT FIVE SETBACK, AND A 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK. THIS IS THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE CASE. THIS IS THE UPDATED SITE PLAN PROVIDED AFTER THE APPLICANT MET WITH DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN ITS CURRENT STATE SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE WHERE THE PROPOSED CARPORT WILL BE LOCATED. NOTE THAT ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS FOR DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOODS TO SUPPORT IS TO CHANGE THE SITE SETBACK TO THREE FOOT FOUR INCHES THE REAR YARD WITH THE LOCATION OF WHERE THE PROPOSED PATIO WILL BE LOCATED. ALLEYWAY IN THE REAR EXISTING RESIDENCE IN ITS CURRENT SIDE SETBACK, THREE FEET, THREE INCHES. THERE IS A SIMILAR CARPORT FOUND IN THE AREA AND ANOTHER SIMILAR CARPORT IN THE AREA. AND THE UPDATED RENDERINGS OF THE PROJECT. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE MINIMUM AND LOT SIZE VARIANCE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. THE LOT SIZE IS CURRENTLY 2,840 SQUARE FEET. THE PROPERTY WAS PLATTED IN 1923 AND THE LOT SIZE VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE LOT. STAFF AL ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACK VARIANCES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE CANNOT MAINTAIN THE REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK. TWO, THE SMALL SIZE OF THE CONFIGURATION OF THE LOT PRESENTS HARDSHIPS TO NEW CONSTRUCTION WITH THE U D C SETBACK REQUIREMENTS IN PLACE. THREE NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES NOT MEETING [03:20:01] THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS WERE OBSERVED IN PROXIMITY TO THE STRUCTURE SUBJECT SITE FOR THE PROPERTY ABOVE AN ALLEY ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, WHICH GIVES THE REAR SETBACK A FIVE FOOT CREDIT NOTIFICATION PLAN. WE MAILED OUT 37 NOTICES WITH NO RESPONSE IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION OF THE REQUEST. DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS SUPPORT ONLY IF THE CARPORT SETBACK IS MODIFIED. THE FOLLOWING SLIDE HAS DENVER HEIGHTS RESPONSE AND WE HAVE SINCE RECEIVED A, UH, UPDATED LETTER, UH, FROM DENVER HEIGHTS THERE IN SUPPORT 'CAUSE THE APPLICANT IS GONNA MAKE THE CORRECT CHANGES. WE'LL GET THAT ON THE SCREEN FOR YOU GUYS. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT. DOES, UH, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHAT WAS THE, UH, THE, THE CHANGE THAT THEY AGREED TO ON THE SIDE? UH, IT'S THREE FOOT, FOUR INCH IS WHAT I HEARD. IT IS. THEY AGREED TO, OH, IT'S NOT ON THE LETTER HERE. THEY, THEY JUST GIVE APPROVAL LIKE A ONE FOOT EIGHT. SO IT'S THREE FOOT FOUR, THREE FOOT. LEMME SEE HERE REAL QUICK. THREE FOOT FOUR? YES. YEAH. CORRECT. AND THIS IS THE UPDATED LETTER FROM DENVER HEIGHTS ASSOCIATION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YEAH. COME, UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. JOSE VALDEZ. UM, WE MET, I THINK ON THE 17TH OF OCTOBER. AND, UM, I HAD NOT PERSONALLY CONTACTED THE DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BUT MY, MY ARCHITECT DID. UM, THEY DID RESPOND, UH, THE DAY OF, WHICH WAS THE 17TH. AND UH, SINCE THEN WE COMMUNICATED AND WE DID MEET ON THE 14TH. I WENT WORK WITH HIM. I TOLD HIM I WANNA WORK WITH HIM. UM, I WAS ADVOCATING FOR THE CARPORT BEING THE WAY IT USED TO BE, WHICH WAS AT ABOUT TWO FOOT EIGHT INCHES FROM THE SIDES. AND ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE, UH, I GUESS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEMBERS, UH, WAS JUST MENTIONED THE FACT THAT HE, THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE IT AT THREE, THREE FEET IF THERE WAS ANY WAY THAT WE COULD DO IT. I SAID YES. I MEAN, DEFINITELY IF THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED FOR US TO GET APPROVAL, GET YOUR SUPPORT, I'M GONNA DO IT. SO WE DID, UH, ANTONIO RE THEY REVISED THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AND SO THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THE NEW PLANS WITH MEETING THEIR, THEIR REQUIREMENTS STAFF. CAN YOU BRING THAT NEW PLAN UP PLEASE? PRESENTATION AND BRING, UH, THE, BRING UP THE, I THINK IT'S THE SECOND ONE. THIS ONE? NO, NO, NO, NO. THE FIRST ONE. BUT THEN RIGHT THERE. YOU CAN ZOOM IN RIGHT THERE. THOSE ARE 3.42. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, RIGHT THERE. I BELIEVE YOU SEE THE 3.4 INCHES FOR THE CARPORT ON BOTH ENDS. ALL RIGHT. HOW WIDE IS THE CARPORT? IT STILL GONNA BE NINE FEET. SO IT'S USABLE. UM, NINE FOOT. OKAY. YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALRIGHT, HEARING NONE. UM, IS THERE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ANY VOICEMAILS? WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. OKAY. FIRST ONE IS JOSE VALETTE. ME. ME. OKAY. UM, NOPE, THAT'S IT. ALL RIGHT. UH, SO I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION MANAM BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER, UH, I'LL GIVE THIS ONE TO BRAGMAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 54. I MOVED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. GRANTED REQUEST FOR ONE IS A 1,160 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM OF 4,000 SQUARE FOOT. LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE OF 2,840 SQUARE FEET TO A ONE FOOT NINE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET, THREE INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE THREE, A TWO FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE FROM MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT. IS IT, UH, YEAH, IT'S A ONE FOOT EIGHT VARIANCE TO BE THREE FOOT FOUR. UH, OKAY. UH, ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE THREE FEET, FOUR INCHES FROM, UH, THE SIZE PROPERTY LINE FOR A 12 FOOT 10 INCH VARIANCE WITH THE FIVE FOOT CREDIT FROM THE ALLEY, FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE TWO [03:25:01] FEET, TWO INCHES FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 3 1 8 UTAH STREET. APPLICANT BEING ANTONIO MARTEL BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOWED THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE IT WOULD ALLOW THE REDEVELOPMENT OF EXISTING DILAPIDATED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON A SMALL LOT. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE IT WOULD RESULT IN THE INABILITY TO REDEVELOP THE PROPERTY OR ADD ANY NEW STRUCTURE AS THEY WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO MEET THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OR MINIMUM LOT SIZE. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE DISPARITY OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WOULD ALLOW THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY WHILE STILL MAINTAINING ADEQUATE SPACING TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. 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. RM FOUR. AND THE USE OF THE PROPERTY IS A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. FIVE SIX VARIS WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE ORIGINAL 36 SQUARE MILES OF SAN ANTONIO, WHERE SMALLER LOTS WERE COMMONLY FOUND, NUMEROUS NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES WERE OBSERVED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA THAT DO NOT MEET THE CURRENT SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, FIRST OF 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. THEY'RE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, MERELY FINANCIAL, AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. DUE TO CURRENT CONDITION OF THE LOT, IT CANNOT MAINTAIN THE MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS. THE SETBACK, REDUCTION OF THE SIDES IN THE REAR WILL HELP ACCOMMODATE A NEW CARPORT IN AND ADDITION TO THE RESIDENT'S. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER AMANDA. COMMISSIONER GREG? UH, YES. I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE MOTION, UH, GIVEN THE FEEDBACK FROM THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UM, AND THAT THEY'RE IN SUPPORT OF IT. UM, AND BESIDES THE FACT THAT AS, UH, I MET, I READ IN THE MOTION IT'S A VERY SMALL LOT AND WOULD PROBABLY, UH, END UP BEING FALLOW IF, IF, UH, NO, UH, VARIANCES WERE ALLOWED. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT COMMISSIONER MANON AND ONE OF MY FAVORITE THING ALWAYS TALKS ABOUT IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND OR, AND MORE OF IT. SO, SO I'LL AGREE WITH THAT POSITION TOO. SO, ALRIGHT. ANYONE ELSE HEARING NOW? SEVERAL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIND I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN I CONCUR. MS. MEESE I CONCUR. MS. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. ALL RIGHT. ITEM FOUR. BEEN UM, UH, BO O 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 5. ADDRESS AT 1 2 6 KANSAS STREET IN COUNTY DISTRICT NUMBER TWO, APPLICANT BEING SEAN SLAND. UM, A REQUEST FOR A ONE A FOUR FOOT SIX VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE STEP REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE SIX INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXEMPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT SOLID FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD. UM, CURRENT ZONE IS RM FOUR RESIDENTIAL MIX UNDER THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY LOCATED ON KANSAS STREET AND CURRENTLY HAS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON A LOT. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE CARPORT TO BE SIX INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED FOR THE VARIANCE PRIOR TO COMMENCING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STRUCTURE. THE CARPORT LINE IS GOING TO BE 11 FEET TWO INCHES AND THE WIDTH IS GOING TO BE NINE FEET, 11 INCHES UPON FIVE STAFF VISIT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE WAS OBSERVED ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. UM, STAFF OBSERVED OTHER SIMILAR STYLE OF FENCES IN THE AREA. UM, THAT IS CURRENTLY A PICTURE OF THE SITE PLAN WHERE THE HIGHLIGHTED AREA SHOWED THE CARPORT LOCATION AND THE HIGHLIGHTED AREA SHOWS THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE LOCATION, UM, AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE LOT ITSELF OR PROPOSED LOT. UM, SO THAT IS CURRENTLY THE HOME ITSELF. UM, THE FENCES WOULD BE LOCATED ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE. YOU CAN GET SMALL PEAK OF IT AND UH, ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE AS WELL. UH, YOU CAN SEE, UM, THE LOCATION OF THE CARPORT WHERE IT'S GONNA BE PROPOSED. THAT'S WHERE THE VEHICLE IS ON. AND THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE THAT IS TOWARDS THE BACKGROUND THERE ON THE OTHER SIDE WHERE THE OTHER EIGHT OTHER SECTION OF THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE IS CURRENTLY LOCATED. [03:30:01] UM, THERE'S HOME ACROSS THE STREET WITH AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE AND THEN THERE'S A CLOSER VIEW RIGHT THERE, UM, OF THE FENCE THAT IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. UM, SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS NOW IN BO O 8 22 1 0 3 1 0 0 1 7 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THERE'S ADEQUATE SPACE TO CONFORM TO THE SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND THERE'S POSSIBLE WATER RUNOFF TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. AND THEN STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIDE AND REAR FENCE SPECIAL EXEMPTION, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF BO A 22 103 1 75 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ON THE SIDE AND REAR YARD FENCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND THE FENCE WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR THE HOMEOWNER. UH, THE NOTIFICATION PLAN, UH, THERE WERE 36 NOTICES SENT. UH, THERE WAS ZERO IN FAVOR AND THERE WAS ZERO IN OPPOSITION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ALAMO DOME GARDENS AND DENVER HEIGHTS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. UH, THAT CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE PRESENT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, REAL QUICK, UH, WE DID GET A LATE LETTER FROM DENVER HEIGHTS. UM, IT'S ON THE UH, K DRIVE. THEY RECOMMENDED NOT APPROVAL FOR THE SIDE SETBACK AND APPROVAL FOR THE FENCE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. AND NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK OR ANYTHING? UH, ONE SPEAKER. OKAY. SEAN IS THE APPLICANT? YEAH, SEAN AUSTIN. ALL RIGHT. YEP. HI, DOING SIR. SO I LIVE IN PART OF THE OLDEST PART OF SAN ANTONIO AND UM, THE ONLY WAY TO HAVE A CARPORT IS TO ACTUALLY HAVE IT RIGHT UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE. 'CAUSE THERE'S, IT'S JUST THE WAY EVERYTHING WAS MADE, THERE'S NO PLACE TO PUT IT, UM, UNLESS IT'S UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE. SO IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT I WANTED, I WANTED TO HAVE JUST TO PROTECT MY CAR. UM, AND IT ALS YOU KNOW, IT ADDS VALUE TO THE PROPERTY. AND HAVING WALKED AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN, IN A 15 MINUTE WALK, I TOOK PICTURES OF, UH, SIX TO EIGHT DIFFERENT PROPERTIES THAT ALL HAD, UH, SIMILAR SITUATIONS WHERE THEY ACTUALLY BUILT A CARPORT RIGHT UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND INCLUDING THE $800,000 HOUSE AROUND THE CORNER FROM ME THAT WAS ACTUALLY FEATURED IN THE EXPRESS NEWS TODAY. AND, UM, I DON'T KNOW, SOME OF THEM LOOK COULD BE NEW. SOME OF 'EM ARE LOOK PRETTY, LIKE THEY'RE KIND OF AD HOC. UM, BUT THEY ALL KINDA SERVE THE SAME PURPOSE AS THE TRYING TO JUST PROTECT A VALUABLE ASSET IN OUR FIERCE TEXAS WEATHER. OKAY. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER BRADLEY? NO. UM, COMMISSIONER CAP, JUST, YEAH, SURE. UM, WHAT WOULD PREVENT, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S SOME ROOM WHAT, UH, IN YOUR FRONT YARD, WHAT WOULD PREVENT YOU FROM MOVING THAT CARPORT FOUR AND A HALF FEET TOWARDS YOUR DOOR? WELL, IT WOULD, YEAH, IT WOULD BE THEN RIGHT UP BUTTING UP AGAINST LIKE WHERE MY FRONT DOOR IS. IT WOULD BE BLOCKING THE FRONT WINDOW IF YOU LOOK. 'CAUSE THEY, WHERE WOULD END UP, SIR? THERE'S A POINTER, UM, LASER POINTER. YEAH. IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, WHAT IF I MOVED IT, THEN IT WOULD BE RIGHT HERE BECAUSE THERE, THIS IS LIKE MY, MY CURRENT DRIVEWAY HERE IS RIGHT NOW IS RIGHT, THAT'S THE PROPERTY LINE, RIGHT? OF THAT PIECE OF THAT CEMENT THERE. HOW FAR IS IT BETWEEN THE WINDOW AND THE HOUSE? OH, UM, THAT'S ABOUT PROBABLY THREE FEET. YEAH, IT WOULD, THERE'S NOT, IT WOULD END UP, IT WOULD BE RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE, OF THE WINDOW OR AT LEAST MOST OF IT WOULD PARTIALLY BLOCK, IF NOT ENTIRELY BLOCK THE WINDOW. OKAY. UM, FROM THE PIC, FROM YOUR SITE PLAN, IT SHOWS THAT YOUR, YOUR CONCRETE DRIVE IS NINE FOOT SEVEN, UH, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE HOME. AND SO, UH, IN THE, IN THE KIND OF POSTS YOU WOULD NEED FOR THE CARPORT ARE LIKE THE WHAT, SIX INCHES OR SOMETHING? FOUR, FOUR TO SIX INCHES. I WAS, LOOK, I WAS LOOKING AT A PREFAB ONE THAT WOULD, UM, BE, UH, TRYING TO LESS OBTRUSIVE, UM, THAN LIKE PUTTING IN, UM, LIKE, UH, PUTTING IN ACTUALLY WOOD POSTS. UM, 'CAUSE I, I, AND IT HAS BUILT-IN GUTTERS, UM, THE ONE I WAS LOOKING AT. SO IT WOULDN'T BE DRAINING ONTO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. IT WOULD, UH, I'D PREFER IT ACTUALLY TO DRAIN 'EM ONTO MY LAWN. UM, WHERE DOES THE WATER NATURALLY DRAIN ON YOUR PROPERTY? TOWARDS THE, DOES IT GO TOWARDS KANSAS? DOES IT GO TO THE REAR? IT GOES TO THE KANSAS. IT DOES GO TO KANSAS. EVERYTHING JUST GOES DOWN TO THE STREET. OKAY. THERE'S A SLIGHT INCLINE, YOU KNOW, UP [03:35:01] TO THE HOUSE. AND SO IT IS YOUR INTENT TO, UM, THIS SORT OF BE APPROVED TO, TO HAVE GUTTERS? OH YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. STAFF. WAS THIS, UH, ADVERTISED TO INCLUDE GUTTERS? THE, THE REQUEST WAS NOT MADE FOR GUTTERS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO AMEND YOUR APPLICATION TO INCLUDE GUTTERS? THEY CALLED ME AND ASKED ME ABOUT THAT. WELL, OKAY. AND I SAID YES, AND, UH, YEAH, AND ABSOLUTELY. I'LL GUT IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A FORMAL STATEMENT AMENDING YOUR APPLICATION TO INCLUDE GUT. OH YEAH, SURE. I'LL DO THAT. ? UH, YES. I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND MY APPLICATION TO INCLUDE GUTTERS IN OKAY. INTO THE DESIGN OF THE CARPORT. AND THE SPECIFIC SIZE OF THE CARPORT WOULD BE APPRO APPROXIMATELY THE WIDTH OF YOUR DRIVEWAY AND, AND HOW AND HOW DEEP, UH, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY IT'LL BE THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY AND IT'LL BE ABOUT NOT TO EXTEND PAST THE F THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. IT WOULDN'T GO PAST THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE INTO THE BACKYARD, RIGHT? NO, NO, IT WOULD START AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND GO FORWARD. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, COMMISSIONER MANON, SO JUST FOLLOW UP ON THAT QUESTION. SO IT'S ACTUALLY WILL, THE CARPORT IS GOING TO BE FORWARD OF YOUR HOUSE TOWARDS THE STREET. SO BETWEEN THE STREET AND SO, UM, AND SO THE ASSUMPTION THERE IS THAT I GUESS IT'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO VIOLATE, UH, THE FRONT PORTION, UH, 10 FOOT SETBACK. SO IT HAS TO BE AT LEAST, UM, IT WILL NOT, I, WHEN I MEASURED IT OUT, IT, IT MET THAT REQUIREMENT. OKAY. OKAY. YEAH. 'CAUSE YOU, YOU HAVE 28.1 FEET, YOU CAN HAVE, YOU HAVE TO STAY 10 FEET AWAY, BUT IT'S THE POST POST THAT HAS TO BE 10 FEET AWAY. MM-HMM. . OKAY. YOU CAN ACTUALLY GO FIVE PAST IT IF, IF IT WAS DESIGNED THAT WAY. BUT, UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? AND IT'S LIKELY 10 FEET FROM THE SIDEWALK, SO, RIGHT. SO, SO 10 FEET FROM THE SIDEWALK IS WHERE YOU CAN START THE CARPORT. OKAY. NOT FROM THE STREET. ALRIGHT. YEAH, I'LL, UH, MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS. GREAT. UM, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE LOOKING FOR A MOTION COMMISSIONER MANON REGARDING CASE NUMBER, UH, BO A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 5. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANITE REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE SIX INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 2 6 KANSAS STREET. APPLICANT BEING SEAN OLIN. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE E D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE VARIANCE TO THE SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE SIX INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE STRUCTURE WILL MEET THE FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. UM, STAFF FINDS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS, HENCE THE LOT IS TOO SMALL TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT. YEAH. UM, UM, WILL BE, LET'S SEE, DEVELOPMENT OF THE STRUCTURE, UH, WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. THREE, BY GRANTING THEIR VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE STRUCTURE WILL NOT HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND THE PROPOSED SETBACK OF SIX INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE ALONG WITH THE GUTTERS, UM, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS THERE WILL BE REASONABLE SPACE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THE AUTHORIZED, THE, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORED, AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO OTHER 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 THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, UH, SPECIFICALLY INCLUDING THE GUTTERS SIX PLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE OF THE WIDTH OF THE LOT. AND CONFIGURATION EXISTING RESIDENCE MAINTAINING A SIX INCH SIDE SETBACK AS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS AREA. THE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. AND TO BE CLEAR, IS YOUR MOTION FOR, UH, LIMITING THE CARPORT TO ONLY BE FORWARD OF THE HOUSE? I'M SORRY, IT'S, IT'S LIMITING IT TO BE ONLY FORWARD OF THE HOUSE. YES, PLEASE. UH, YES, PLEASE AMEND THAT SO THAT IT DOES INCLUDE THAT. SO, MOTION, UM, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER MANNA. AND THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. UM, SO, SO YEAH. SO I, I, YOU KNOW, KNOW DRIVING AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I DO SEE THAT THERE ARE OTHER, UM, UM, CARPORTS THAT ARE SIMILAR TO THIS. AND I THINK THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVING THE GUTTERS, UM, PREVENTING, UH, THE WATER RUNOFF ONTO YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY IS GOOD. AND SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER BAGMAN. UM, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS WELL. UM, WE ALL KNOW WHAT THE HAIL DAMAGE IS LIKE IN SAN ANTONIO, AND SO PROTECTING CARS AND THIS SEEMS LIKE A REASONABLE, UM, UH, REQUEST, [03:40:01] ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE SIZE OF THE LOT. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE OVER A RULE CALL VOTE PLEASE. MR. MANNA, 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 CONCUR. MR. VAZQUEZ I CONCUR. MS. LIND I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN I CONCUR. MS. MEESE I CONCUR. MR. OONA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUS UNANIMOUSLY. LET'S HAVE ONE ON THE FENCE. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 5. I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE SIX FOOT MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 35 5 14 TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD SITUATED AT 1 2 6 KANSAS STREET. APPLICANT BEING SEAN OSLAN BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE E D C ESTIMATED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT A THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE E D C STATES THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT, UH, WAS OBSERVED UPON THE SITE VISIT AND IT GRANTED STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B. THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THE CRITERIA FOR REP ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. THE FENCE IS LOCATED ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY AND IS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT BY TWO FOOT. THE FENCE IS SOLID SCREENED, WHICH SERVES THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY IN, WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, BUT IS UNLIKELY TO SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ANY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION SOUGHT THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHTS FOR THE SECTION OF SIDE AND REAR FENCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THERE WERE OTHER SIMILAR FENCE HEIGHTS IN THE AREA. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS THEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS THE CURRENT USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. AND A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, SO YEAH, I THINK, UM, I'LL, I'LL BE FOLLOWING CITY'S RECOMMENDATION ALSO, THERE'S A BUSINESS BEHIND THIS PROPERTY. SO I THINK THAT THOSE PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL SECURITY, UH, FROM THE UH, UH, A BUDDING, UM, COMMERCIAL ENTITY. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. YEAH, IT DOESN'T SEEM, IT SEEMS TO BE IN, IN, UM, COORDINATION WITH OTHER, UH, PROPERTIES IN THE AREA. SO IT'S, UH, I'M, I'M IN SUPPORT OF IT TOO. ALL RIGHT. IS NO ONE ELSE. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. BOARD MEMBER KAPLAN, UH, I CONCUR. BOARD MEMBER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT BOARD MEMBERS. FILLMAN, I CONCUR. ALBERT, I CONCUR. MINKA, I CONCUR. VASQUEZ, I CONCUR. LIN I CONCUR. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR. MICE. I CONCUR. OZUNA, I CONCUR. AND CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. THERE. YOU'RE CONGRATULATIONS. ALRIGHT, ITEM FIVE, PLEASE. UM, BO O 8 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 6. LOCATED AT 9 2 9 2 3 SOUTH MESQUITE STREET. UM, OH SHOOT, LEMME JUST TYPE THAT THERE. UM, COUNCIL DISTRICT IS IN THE BOTTOM TWO. YEAH, TWO BOTTOM. UM, AND THEN APPLICANT BEING MICHAEL PEREZ. AND THEN THE REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE IN THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REVERSE CORNER LOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UM, CURRENT ZONING IS R M FOUR. UM, THE APPLICANT'S SITE PLAN HAS PROPOSED A STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FOOT FROM THE SITE PROPERTY LINE. THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED FOR THE VARIANCE PRIOR TO COMMITTING THE STRUCTURE. UM, THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE WILL BE ADDRESSED OFF SOUTH ME STREET INSTEAD OF THE ADJACENT INDIANA STREET. UM, WHICH CR WHICH CREATED THE REVERSE CORNER LOT REQUIRING THE 10 FOOT SITE SETBACK ON SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE. UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF PRELIMINARY PLATT, UM, MP TWO MESQUITE SUBDIVISION LAST UPDATED 9 19 20 22. UM, SO THAT IS CURRENTLY A PICTURE OF THE SITE PLAN, KIND OF THE HIGHLIGHTED AREA SHOWS WHERE THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS CURRENTLY LOCATED. [03:45:01] UM, THAT IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. LOOKING AT IT, IT IS CURRENTLY A VACANT LOT, UM, THAT IS LOOKING AT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM SOUTH MESQUITE STREET AND THAT'S FROM INDIANA STREET. UM, SO THE CURRENT, UH, MAIL NOTICES THERE WERE 23 NOTICES SENT OUT. THERE WERE ZERO IN FAVOR TO AN OPPOSITION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE DENVER HEIGHTS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. UM, THAT WILL CONCLUDE STAFF PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. IF THE APPLICANT CAN PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR PRESENTATION PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON, MICHAEL PETTI, UH, THREE 30 MISSION STREET. AND, UH, I GUESS THE STAFF DID A REALLY GOOD JOB. I'M, UH, REQUESTING A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REVERSE CORNER LOT. UM, ACTUALLY I DO HAVE A HAVE A SIX SLIDE PRESENTATION JUST TO KIND OF SHOW YOU HAVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. SO HERE ARE A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES. I'VE A FEW OF MY COMPANY'S DONE IN, IN SOUTH TOWN DOWNTOWN AREA. BUT IF YOU GO TO SLIDE TWO, YOU CAN KIND OF JUST CATCH UP REAL QUICK. THIS IS THE SUBJECT LOT. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE RED STAR IN THE KIND OF BOTTOM RIGHT. UM, THAT'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. WE WENT AHEAD AND STARTED WITH DESIGN MET, UM, WITH THE FOLKS HERE AT THE CITY, OUR M FOUR, EVERYTHING'S GREAT. OUR UNDERSTANDING WAS WE WERE GONNA HAVE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACKS AND A 10 FOOT REAR, 10 FOOT FORWARD. WE WENT ALL THE WAY UP, WE'RE IN PLANNING REVIEW AND UH, IT POPPED UP THAT THERE WAS AN OVERSIGHT, UH, THAT WE HAD TO HAVE A 10 FOOT, UH, SIDE SETBACK ON INDIANA STREET. THAT RIGHT OF WAY. SO, UM, I'M HERE ASKING, UH, WE, WE'VE ALREADY PLANNED EVERYTHING AND AS YOU CAN SEE, 'CAUSE THERE'S CARPORTS PUT IN ALL ALONG INDIANA STREET, AND I KNOW WE DEAL WITH CARPORTS A LOT AT THE, UH, B OF A, BUT, UH, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE HAD A SUFFICIENT OFF STREET PARKING. IT'S FOUR UNITS. IT'S KIND OF THAT MISSING MIDDLE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING. THERE'S A NEED FOR DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, QUADPLEX FOR, FOR HOME RESIDENTS. AND IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE'RE ALREADY, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I'M JUST DOING SNAPSHOTS OF WHAT'S IN PLAN REVIEW, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE LOWER FLOOR PLAN AND THE UPPER FLOOR PLAN OF THE FIRST BUILDING. UM, ON THE, ON THE BOTTOM ONES, OF COURSE, UH, CAR CARPORT LIVING AREA. AND WE REALLY TRIED TO, TO GET THREE BEDROOMS IN THERE, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S A ZOOM ROOM OR IN-HOME OFFICE OR A GUEST ROOM. THAT WAS OUR WHOLE GOAL AS A SMALL 1300, 13 50, UM, QUADPLEX QUAD UNITS. BUT WE JUST NEED THAT FIVE FOOT SET SIDE SETBACK THAT, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHAT WE GOT. AND THE NEXT SLIDE JUST GOES ON THE ELEVATIONS. YOU CAN SEE THE FRONT ONE, THE SIDE ONE AT THE BOTTOM. IF WE CUT FIVE FOOT OFF OF THAT ONE, YOU KNOW, IT JUST GETS REALLY, REALLY NARROW AND IT, AND AGAIN, IT GOES, IT, IT JUST CUTS INTO THAT LIVING SPACE AND THAT OFF STREETS PARKING SPACE. YOU CAN, YOU CAN ZOOM THROUGH THE NEXT ONE AND THE NEXT ONE AFTER. THAT'S FINE. ON THE BOTTOM. AGAIN, THE SIDE SETBACK OF THE, OF THE SECOND BUILDING. UH, WE REALLY WANT TO GET THAT LIVING SPACE IN OFF STREET PARKING. SO, UM, I, UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU KAPLAN, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, ARE THESE RENTAL OR SALE? UM, AS OF NOW WE'RE HAVEN'T EVEN THOUGHT THAT OUT, BUT, UH, I GUESS THEY WOULD BE FOR SALE AND OR FOR RENT, BUT, UM, I'M JUST STILL AT THE GROUND FLOOR OF THIS JUST TO GET THE PERMITTING. ARE, ARE YOU PLANTED AS TWO LOTS OR ONE? SORRY? ARE YOU TWO LOTS OR ONE LOT? THIS IS ONE LOT. OKAY. THIS IS ALL ONE LOT. AND THEN YOU'RE NOT, AND YOU'RE DEFINITELY PUTTING CARPORTS NO GARAGE DOORS, RIGHT? CARPORTS. OKAY. YEAH, WE WANT THOSE DOORS TO OPEN. THAT'S WHY WE'RE KIND OF KEEPING 'EM OPEN ON, ON THE SIDE AND EVERYTHING. OKAY. SO YEAH. CARPORTS. YEAH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO. MR. ALBERT, UH, DOES THE CARPORT HAVE A, A BACK WALL? YES, IT DOES. AND THEN A, THAT'S ALSO THE HOUSE, SO, UH, YOU CAN JUST GO BACK UP ONE OR RIGHT THERE. TAKE THE, THE ONE, UM, YEAH YOU CAN. HOW DOES THIS WORK? SORRY. SO, UM, LET'S SEE A LOWER LO LEVEL PLAN. SO HERE'S A CARPORT RIGHT HERE. THEY'LL JUST GO ON IN FROM INDIANA. YOU HAVE A REAR WALL RIGHT HERE. AND THEN THE DOORS CAN OPEN UP RIGHT HERE. AND HERE'S THE FRONT. SO THEY CAN JUST SCOOT RIGHT INTO THE HOUSE RIGHT HERE. GO UP THE STAIRS AND, BUT YEAH. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. AND THE CARPORTS, IS [03:50:01] THAT TWO CARS OR ONE CAR? FOR, FOR NOW IT'S JUST ONE CAR. I THINK IT'S ONLY 10 FOOT BY 10. SOMETHINGS 10 AND CHANGE BY 19 AND CHANGE. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WELL, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. UM, UNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 22 DASH 3 76. I MOVE AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT AND REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REVERSE CORNER LOT SITE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 9 2 3 SOUTH MESQUITE DRIVE, APPLICANT BEING MICHAEL PETTIS. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE CRITERIA FOR REVIEW SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE ACCORDING TO SECTION 35 DASH 42 E OF THE U D C. IN ORDER FOR VARIANCE TO BE GRANTED, THE APPLICANT MUST DEMONSTRATE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING. ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE VARIANCE TO THE SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, THE STRUCTURAL WILL MEET THE FRONT AND REAR SET SETBACK REQUIREMENT. IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT HAVING TO MAINTAIN FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE. PROPERTY LINE STAFF FINDS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP SINCE THE LOT IS TOO SMALL TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A STRUCTURE WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED. THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE STRUCTURE HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED IN THE PROPOSED SETBACK OF FIVE FEET FROM THE SITE PROPERTY LINE. UH, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THERE THERE WILL STILL BE REASONABLE SPACE, UH, BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THE FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED. THE ZONING DISTRICT FOR ITS VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO OTHER USES OF THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED HAS SEVERAL SIMILAR SIZE LOTS AND SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS VARIANCE OF SALT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND NOT DUE TO OTHER THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS. THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED BECAUSE OF THE WIDTH OF THE LOT, BEING REV BECAUSE OF THE WIDTH OF THE LOT, AND IT BEING A REVERSE CORNER LOT MAINTAINING A TIE, A 10 FOOT SIDE SETBACK IS NOT ACHIEVABLE. THE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ERMAN. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. YEAH, SO I AM GOING TO, UM, UM, MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE MOTION. I'M GONNA SUPPORT IT AND, AND ALSO SUPPORT THE CITY'S POSITION AND THEIR APPROVAL, UM, WITH THE VARIANCE. UM, OBVIOUSLY WE SAW NO OPPOSITION FROM THE OPPOSING PROPERTY OWNERS OR FROM THE DENVER HEIGHTS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. I THINK IT PROVIDES, UH, FOR A, UH, A WAY FOR THE DEVELOPER TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND I KNOW THE, THE, WHAT IS CALLED THE THE MISSING MIDDLE PROVIDES AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AN AREA THAT'S MUCH NEEDED. SO I SUPPORT THE MOTION COMMISSIONER BANKMAN. UM, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. UM, I, WE LIKE SEEING INFILL, UM, AND THE BUILDING OF AFFORDABLE OR, UM, MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. UM, SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. ALL RIGHT, ANYONE ELSE? HEARING NONE? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. BOARD MEMBER BREGMAN. I CONCUR. OH, I, I READ THE MOTION. OH, GREAT. UH, VICE CHAIR OONA. I CONCUR. BOARD MEMBER BREGMAN. I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MEMBER SPIELMAN. I CONCUR. ALBERT, I CONCUR. MANCHACA CONCUR. VASQUEZ, I CONCUR. LYNN. I CONCUR. MANA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. ZUNIGA. WHAT? OH, SORRY. . UM, AND CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF ACT. AND EVERYONE GET A CHANCE TO VOTE? UH, COMMISSIONER ME DID NOT, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE YOU ON HERE. SORRY, COMMISSIONER. UH, MEESE. I CONCUR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. ALL RIGHT. ITEM SIX, BO O A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 8 1. ADDRESS, 5 1 6 POTOMAC STREET COUNCIL, DISTRICT TWO, APPLICANT BEING L N G CONTRACTING L L C A REQUEST FOR A ONE, A ONE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO BE 13 FEET ONE INCH WITH A FIVE FOOT SETBACK REDUCTION FROM THE ALLEY FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, A TWO FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ADDITION WITH OVERHANG TO BE TWO, TWO FEET, ONE [03:55:01] INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE CURRENT ZONING IS R FOUR. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG POTOMAC STREET, NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS AVENUE AND EAST HOUSTON STREET. THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCTED AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING RESIDENCE IN THE REAR AND SIDE YARD WITHOUT PULLING BUILDING PERMITS. ACCORDING TO SECTION 35 DASH 516 B. ADDITIONS THAT ARE IN LINE WITH THE AN EXISTING RESIDENCE, HAVING A SIDE YARD OF THREE OR MORE FEET MAY BE MAINTAINED. HOWEVER, BECAUSE THE PROPOSED DISTANCE IS LESS THAN MINIMUM THREE FEET, IT WOULD HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE FIVE FOOT MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. ADDITIONALLY, ADDITIONS ARE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 20 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THERE IS AN ALLEYWAY LOCATED ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE THAT MEASURES 10 FEET IN WIDTH. THE APPLICANT IS PERMITTED TO USE HALF THE ALLEYWAY, FIVE FEET TOWARDS THE REAR SETBACK. HERE IS THE SITE PLAN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE REAR SETBACK MEASUREMENT, THE SIDE SETBACK, THE REAR YARD AND THE SIDE YARD AND THE OVERHANG IN THE SIDE YARD. STAFF RECOMMENDATION, REAR AND SIDE ADDITION SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 8 1 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT. THE ADDITION IS CURRENTLY 13 FEET, ONE INCH AND TWO FOOT ONE INCH FROM THE REAR INSIDE PROPERTY LINES. AND TWO, THE SIZE OF THE LAW IS SMALL, WHICH PROHIBITS THE ADDITION TO BE ADEQUATELY CONTRACTED TO THE SIDE. AND THREE, THE ALLEY IN THE REAR YARD ALLOWS FOR AN ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET. AND LASTLY, FOUR. THE PLACEMENT OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE IS 66 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, WHICH WOULD PREVENT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIZABLE ADDITION IN THE REAR. STAFF. MAILED OUT 29 NOTICES. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE DIGNITY HILL, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE PROPOSED APPLICATION IS TO, WHAT ARE THEY CLOSING IN A, AN EXISTING REAR PATIO OR SOMETHING? I'M SORRY? THEY'RE THEY'RE ENCLOSING IN A REAR PATIO. IS THAT WHAT THE, THE JUST OKAY. IT'S FOR AN ADDITION. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR STAFF. YES. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. THERE'S DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WAS READ AND WHAT YES. UM, WE HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. GO AHEAD. SO ON, ON YOUR SLIDE NUMBER, THE, THE, OF THE RECOMMENDATION, IT SAID THE ADDITION IS CURRENTLY 13 FEET ONE INCH, AND THIS SAYS 18 FEET, ONE INCH. THAT WAS BEFORE THE, UH, ALLEY, UM, CREDIT, THE FIVE FEET ALLEY THAT WE TOOK OFF. SO IT IS 13. OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. ALL RIGHT. YES SIR. IF YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND AGAIN YOUR PRESENTATION. YES, SIR. ARE WE PURED UH, WE PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY AT AUCTION LAST YEAR, UH, ON FEBRUARY 22ND. AND THE HOUSE CAME THAT WAY, . SO, UH, THOSE, UH, YOU KNOW, WE TRIED TO WORK AROUND AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO TRY TO GET MAXIMIZED THE, THE LIVING SPACE. SO THAT WAS LIKE A, A LITTLE PATIO THERE THAT WE ENCLOSED. SO THE THING IS, WHEN WE DID THE, UH, THE, UH, THE FRAME INSPECTION, THEY TOLD US WE NEED TO GO GET A VARIANCE. SO WE STOPPED OUT CONSTRUCTION ON THE PROPERTY. WE'VE HAD IT SINCE. SO ON THE, UH, LIKE I SAID, I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY PUT THE HOUSEHOLD BACK FORWARD. THEY, UH, THEY HAVE A HUGE TREES IN THE FRONT AND I GUESS THAT'S WHY THEY PUSHED THE HOUSE TO THE BACK. BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO WHEN WE PURCHASED IT, WELL WE DIDN'T KNOW, YOU KNOW. OKAY. NORMALLY THE HOUSES ARE 25 FOOT SETBACKS, RIGHT? SO, UH, WERE, IS THERE ANYONE SIDE TO SPEAK ANY UH, VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO QUESTIONS. CAP KAPLAN, MR. KAPLAN, WHAT'S THE SIDE BACK FOR WHAT? WHY, UH, ARE YOU, WHAT IS, MA'AM? WE JUST SQUARED THE HOUSE OUT. IF YOU LOOK ON THE, UH, ON THE, UH, DO YOU HAVE THIS, UH, YEAH, IF YOU COULD BRING THE SIDE PLANE STAFF. THERE YOU GO. THE, UH, THE YELLOW PORTION WE JUST COVERED UP, SQUARED IT UP WITH THE BACK. SO THEY HAD A, THEY HAD A PATIO. HE'S JUST ENCLOSING IT IN MAKING IT PART OF THE HOUSE. OH, I SEE. SO THAT'S WHAT THAT'S ABOUT. YES, MA'AM. GREAT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE. LOOKING FOR A MOTION MANANA. COMMISSIONER MANANA? I'LL READ ONE. I DON'T MIND GUYS, I'LL MOVE. IT'S 180 1, RIGHT? I'LL, I'LL, I'LL DO A MOTION IF YOU WANT. , REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 180 1, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR ONE A ONE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO BE 18 FEET, ONE INCH FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND TWO, A TWO FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT [04:00:01] TO ALLOW AN ADDITION WITH OVERHANG TO BE TWO FEET, ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT FIVE 16 POTOMAC STREET. APPLICANT BEING L N G CONTRACTING BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWED THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE, THE PROVISION OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ADDITION OF 18 FEET, ONE INCH AND TWO FOOT, ONE INCH FROM THE REAR AND SIDE PROPERTY LINES. THERE'S STILL ADEQUATE SPACING BETWEEN THE ADDITION AND REAR AND SIDE PROPERTY LINES, WHICH 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 AN APPLICANT MOVING THE ADDITION 20 AND FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR AND SIDE PROPERTY LINES AS THE WIDTH OF THE LOT IS 53 FEET PROHIBITING THE ADDITION TO BE ADEQUATELY CONSTRUCTED IN THE SIDE. ADDITIONALLY, THE PLACEMENT OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE IS 65 66 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, WHICH WOULD PREVENT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIZABLE ADDITION IN THE REAR. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE ADDITION IS CURRENTLY 18 FEET, ONE INCH AND TWO IN TWO FEET, ONE INCH FROM THE REAR AND SIDE PROPERTY LINES, WHICH DOES OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE BY PROVIDING ADEQUATE SPACING BETWEEN NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A 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 THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT UPON SITE VISITS. STAFF OBSERVED THAT SMALL LOTS WERE FOUND IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA, INCLUDING THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. A REQUEST FOR 18 FEET, ONE INCH AND TWO FEET ONE INCH. REAR AND SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST WILL NOT INJURE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES. 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 CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL. END OF MOTION. UH, UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. SO THERE'S, UH, SOME DISCREPANCIES IN THE SUGGESTED TEMPLATE. SO THE MOTION IS FOR, UH, AS OPPOSED TO AN 18 FOOT ONE. IT'S A 13 FOOT ONE, AND THEN, UH, IT'S ONE FOOT 11 AND THEN, UH, SPORADICALLY. IT, IT LISTED AS, YEAH. SO 13 FOOT ONE FOOT 11. I, I WILL AMEND THAT ANYTIME I SET 18 FEET. ONE INCH TO 13 FEET ONE INCH, AND FROM TWO FEET ONE INCH TO ONE FOOT 11. IT'S A TWO FOOT 11. SO IT'S A TWO FOOT 11 VARIANCE, TWO FOOT 11 VARIANCE TO ALLOW IT TO BE TWO FOOT ONE. OKAY, SECOND. ALL RIGHT, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MADDEN, UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. SO I'LL, I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. UM, I'M IN FAVOR OF REPAIRING. OBVIOUSLY, YOU'RE, YOU, YOU ARE, UM, ENHANCING THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, YOU BOUGHT A HOUSE THAT NEEDED A LOT OF WORK AND IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE JUST MAKING IT BETTER. AND, UM, I SEE NO REASON NOT TO ALLOW THIS COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. UH, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NOW? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MRS. SPILLMAN, I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIND I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. MEESE. I CONCUR. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, CONGRATULATIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU GET WITH STAFF, UH, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A, UH, 20 MINUTE BREAK FOR, UM, UH, DINNER. SO WE WILL RECONVENE AT 5 36. IT IS FIVE THIRTY SIX. I'M GONNA CALL THE, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BACK INTO ORDER. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN HAS, UH, LEFT THE MEETING AND I'D LIKE TO MOVE [04:05:01] ITEM 13 UP. IF, IF A REP FROM 13 IS IN THE GALLERY, DO I GO OVER THERE OR DOES THE CASE MAKE? NO, YOU CAN JUST, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL PRESENTATION. OKAY. I'M STILL IN THE COMA. . OKAY. UM, UH, BO O 8 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 180 6 LOCATED AT 2 0 4 PARK 13. DRIVE 13 0 13. FIRST WE'RE GONNA GO SWITCH TO 13TH. GOOD AFTERNOON. ITEM NUMBER 13 IS FOR CASE BO 8 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 2 0. LOCATED AT 1609 SAN CARLOS WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE, THE APPLICANT BEING NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT IS REQUESTING FOR ONE A 250 FOOT SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM, MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT. LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE OF 3,750 SQUARE FEET. AND TWO, AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO BE 12 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS IN THE NEAR WEST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO AND CURRENTLY HAS A 900 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT WAS BUILT IN 1950. THE PROPOSED PROJECT INCLUDES DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE AND BUILT A NEW 1200 SQUARE FOOT HOME DUE TO THE INCREASE AND SQUARE FOOTAGE. THE 20 FOOT MINIMUM AND REAL SETBACK REQUIREMENT CANNOT BE MET. THE PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WILL MAINTAIN 12 FEET TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. OTHER SETBACK REQUIREMENTS WILL BE MET. ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 250 FOOT SQUARE FEET VARIANCE TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE OF 3,750 SQUARE FEET IN LIEU OF THE REQUIRED 4,000 SQUARE FEET SET FORTH IN R FOUR BASE ZONING DISTRICT. THIS IS THE SIDE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE REAR YARD, THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, THE SIDE YARD, AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN THE MINIMUM AND LOT SIZE VARIANCE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. THE LOT SIZE IS CURRENTLY 3,700 SQUARE 50 SQUARE FEET. THE LOT SIZE VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOT AND THE VARIANCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO NEGATIVELY AFFECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES. AND REGARDING THE REAR SETBACK VARIANCE, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. THE VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. THE SMALL SIZE AND CONFIGURATION OF THE LOT PRESENT HARDSHIPS TO NEW CONSTRUCTION WITH THE U D C SETBACK REQUIREMENTS IN PLACE AND THROUGH THE VARIANCE REQUEST, DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT NOTIFICATION PLAN. 37 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, THREE RECEIVED INFERIOR, ZERO OPPOSED, AND WE DID NOT RECEIVE A RESPONSE FROM THE EL CHARDO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE REPRESENTATIVE IS PRESENT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. , YOU CAN PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND BOARD. MY NAME IS JOANNA CIS. I'M A SENIOR MANAGEMENT CONSTRUCTION COORDINATOR FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT. I SUPPORT N H S Z, UM, HOUSING DIVISION OR HOUSING PRODUCTION DIVISION. AND, UM, OUR PROGRAM ASSISTS HOMEOWNERS WITH LOW TO MODERATE INCOME, REHABILITATE THEIR HOME, WHETHER IT'S MINOR OR MAJOR. UM, REHABILITATION IN THIS CASE, THIS PROPERTY 1609 SAN CARLOS WAS RECOMMENDED FOR A COMPLETE RECONSTRUCTION. UM, HERE, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD HAS. WE ARE REQUESTING A 250 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM, UM, THE PROPERTY LOTS REQUIREMENT OF 4,000 ON A 3750 37 50 SQUARE FOOT LOT ALONG WITH A VARIANCE OF EIGHT FEET FROM THE REAR SETBACKS. ALL RIGHT? YES. COMMISSIONER, CAPTAIN, UH, ARE YOU THE OWNER OF THIS OR ARE YOU DOING THIS ON BEHALF OF SOMEBODY? I'M DOING IT ON BEHALF OF MSS AND MRS. OLMOS PROPERTY OWNERS. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I JUST HAVE A QUICK ONE. YOU'RE WITH THE CITY THOUGH, RIGHT? YES, I AM. JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. YEAH, NO, THAT'S, THAT'S 'CAUSE WE HEARD SOMETHING SIMILAR IN THE PAST FROM HABITAT FROM HUMANITY. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. UH, THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS. UM, LOOKING FOR A MOTION. I MAKE A MOTION. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA 2 2 103 0 0 2 2 0. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT [04:10:01] A REQUEST FOR ONE A 250 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE OF 3,750 SQUARE FEET AND TWO, AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE IN THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO BE 12 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1609 SAN CARLOS STREET. IS THAT RIGHT? YES, MA'AM. SAN CARLOS STREET. YEP. OKAY. UH, APPLICANT BEING NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNI UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO MAINTAIN A 12 FOOT TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPERTY DOES NOT MAINTAIN THE MINIMUM 4,000 LOT, UH, SQUARE. UH, THAT SHOULD BE SQUARE FEET LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT. THE VARIANCE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO 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 INABILITY TO DEMO AND REBUILD A LARGER SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON THE LOT. STAFF FINDS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE PROPERTY WAS PLATTED IN ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION. DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PROPOSED RESIDENCE, THE STRUCTURE IS UNABLE TO MEET THE REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT. THREE. BY GRANTING THE, THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW, THE FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS WILL BE MET. THEREFORE, THE REQUEST APPEARS TO OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A 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 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 PROPERTY IS PART OF THE ORIGINAL 36 SQUARE MILES OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, WHERE SMALLER LOTS ARE COMMONLY FOUND. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES DO NOT MAINTAIN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT EITHER. THEREFORE, INJURY TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES IS UNLIKELY. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE HAS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY DUE TO THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION OF THE LOT, CANNOT MAINTAIN THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT. IN ADDITION, A SETBACK REDUCTION TO THE REAR WOULD HELP ACCOMMODATE A REASONABLE SIZED RESIDENCE ON THE LOT. THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR MERELY FINANCIAL. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MADDOCK. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH, I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS. UM, IT'S IN FILLED DEVELOPMENT. IT'LL CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? HEARING NONE? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MS. KAPLAN. I I'M IN FAVOR MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIND I CONCUR. MS. ME I CONCUR. MR. AONA I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR. UH, MOTION PASSES. 10 TO ZERO. CONGRATULATIONS. YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I'M SURE YOU KNOW WHO TO CALL. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, UH, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, UM, BO 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 1 8 6 LOCATED AT 2 0 4 PARKVIEW DRIVE AND COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER THREE, APPLICANT BEING ANITA SALAZAR. UM, MAY REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT VARIANCE IN THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK. UM, SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE ONE FOOT FROM THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. AND TWO, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE IN THE 15 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE FRONT DRIVEWAY. UM, CURRENT ZONINGS ARE FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. UM, THE APPLICANT HAS A SITE PLAN PROPOSED TO HAVE A STRUCTURE FROM THE REAR INSIDE ONE FOOT FROM THE REAR INSIDE. UM, PROPERTY LINES UPON UPON SITE STAFF VISIT, UM, STAFF OBSERVER, OTHER SIMILAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. UM, A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION FOR, UM, BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT WAS [04:15:01] CREATED ON 0 7 29 20 22. UH, ADDITIONALLY, STAFF OBSERVED FENCE ENCROACHING TO SECURE VISION REQUIREMENT BY THE FIVE FOOT. UH, MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT IS 15 FEET FROM THE DRIVEWAY. UM, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE, HIS MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT AND RIO FOUR, UH, UH, RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLEAF, DISTRICT FOUR. ANY EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS OR CONSTRUCTION WILL BE REQUIRED. APPROVAL FROM OFFICE OF ATORY PRESERVATION. UH, APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN OR MATERIAL SUBMITTED AS PART OF THE VARIANCE APPLICATION DOES NOT SUPERSEDE ANY REQUIREMENTS FOR NEED. DESIGN. REVIEW. REVIEW OUTLINED IN ARTICLE, UM, SIX OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO DATE, NO APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE TO THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOR WORK ON THIS PROPERTY. UM, SO THAT'S CURRENTLY A PATIENT OF THE SITE PLAN, UM, WHERE THE LOCATION OF THE STRUCTURES AT POSING ONE FOOT FROM THE SIDE AND THE REAR SETBACK. UM, SO THAT IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO THE LEFT SIDE AND ALSO WHERE THE FENCE, WHERE THE CLEAR VISION, UH, VIOLATION WAS OBSERVED. UM, THAT IS THE FENCE RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF THE HOME AND SOME OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS THAT HAVE SIMILAR, UH, UM, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE BACK. UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS NOW WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF A THREE FOOT REAR AND SIDE STEPBACK REQUIREMENT IN BO O A 22 101 0 3 0 1 8 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS EFFECT. UM, THE EXCEPTION STRUCTURE CAN ADEQUATELY BE SET BACK THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE AND REAR SIDE REAR AND PROPERTY LINES. AND THERE IS POSSIBLE WATER RUN OFF TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. AND THEN FOR THE CLEAR VISION VARIANCE, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 180 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, UM, THE CLEAR VISION DOES NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THERE WERE 31 NOTICES SENT OUT. UM, THERE WAS ZERO IN FAVOR AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ROOSEVELT PARK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. THAT CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALRIGHT, IF THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR CASE PLEASE. GOOD, GOOD EVENING. ANITA SZA. THERE YOU GO. GOOD EVENING. UH, MY NAME IS ANITA SALAZAR, SO, UM, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE TO START. UM, TALK RIGHT THERE. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH, YOU GOTTA GET REAL CLOSE THERE. OKAY. UM, MY NAME IS ANITA SALAZAR. OKAY. UM, WELL, EXACTLY, I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO START. I'M KIND OF NERVOUS 'CAUSE WHAT I GOT FROM, WELL, IT IS 'CAUSE OF HOME DEPOT. I BOUGHT A SHED FROM HOME DEPOT AND I DIDN'T KNOW I NEEDED A PERMIT FOR ALL THAT AND THEY DIDN'T TELL ME WHEN THEY INSTALLED IT FOR ME. SO I GOT KIND OF NER UH, WHEN I CAME HERE I GOT KIND OF NERVOUS 'CAUSE NO ONE TOLD ME ANYTHING ABOUT A PERMIT. OKAY. THIS IS A REAR STORAGE SHED? YES. UHHUH. . OKAY. AND, UM, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'LL JUST ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS. SURE. UHHUH. . OKAY. SO IS, UH, DO YOU KNOW WHICH WAY IS, IS IT A, A PITCHED ROOF OR IS IT A IT'S LIKE THAT. LIKE THAT? YEAH. AND, UH, DOES THE WATER DRAIN, UH, WHERE DOES THE WATER DRAIN? STRAIGHT DOWN TO THE GROUND TO DOES IT? I'M GONNA GET SOME, UH, BUT IT DRAINS TO THE LEFT AND TO THE RIGHT. YES. UHHUH THE SIDE. OKAY. THAT'S, WHAT DO YOU CALL THOSE GUTTERS? THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE. AND THERE YOU HAVE GUTTERS. YES. I'M GONNA GET SOME GUTTERS. OKAY? MM-HMM. , UH, WOULD YOU BE INTERESTED IN AMENDING YOUR APPLICATION TO INCLUDE GUTTERS ON THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE? SURE. UHHUH. . YOU JUST NEED TO STATE IT. YEAH. LIKE YOU HAVE TO. YEAH, I'LL SAY STATE IT. HUH? YOUR MY, YEAH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND STATE THE GUTTERS INTO GO AHEAD AND THE APPLICATION. RIGHT. OKAY. THAT'S FINE. THAT'S GOOD. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE STATING IT. IT'S, 'CAUSE I WAS ALL NERVOUS, LIKE, WHAT AM I GONNA DO IN THIS AND THAT, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ANYTHING ABOUT THAT. SO, SO, AND HOW, HOW LARGE IS THE, UH, REAR SHED? UM, I GUESS FROM THERE TO THE END, LIKE NOT TOO BIG ABOUT, I THINK IT'S ABOUT 10 BY 12. OKAY. UHHUH. AND THEN, UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE ONE FOOT, UH, BE CHANGED TO A THREE FOOT FROM THE REAR AND THE SIDE. MM-HMM. , IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S POSSIBLE? UM, IS ALREADY, WELL I HAVE IT ON BRICKS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, SO THAT'S THE WAY THEY PUT IT. UH, I'M NOT SURE WE CAN, OH, IT'S ALREADY BEEN INSTALLED? MM-HMM. . OKAY. UM, THEY HAVE IT ON BRICKS CONCRETE. IS THIS ON, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT'S MOVABLE? CAN THEY MOVE IT? WELL, THEY PUT IT ON, UM, LIKE BRICKS OR, I DON'T KNOW, CITY BLOCKS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. OKAY. AND, UM, AND LET'S CHAT A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE, THE FENCE. UH, SO YOU'RE ASKING TO PUT A FENCE, UH, YOU CURRENTLY HAVE A CHAIN LINK FENCE? IS THAT WHAT'S IN QUESTION OR IS THERE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED? NO, THAT'S THE FENCES NOT MINE. UM, THAT WAS OBSERVED ADDITIONALLY. OKAY. UM, THE FENCE HAS BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE. OKAY. SO WE JUST ADDED ON THERE. ALRIGHT. SO IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE US TO KNOW? OH, NO OFFENSE IS NOT MINE. NO. OH, NO, THAT'S FINE. WELL, UH, WE'RE GONNA SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY SIGN UP TO SPEAK ANY VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. AND COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. OKAY. WHAT THERE, [04:20:01] I SEE THERE ARE TWO STRUCTURES IN THEIR BACKYARD. YES. UHHUH . I WAS STARTING ON THAT, BUT I HAD STOPPED 'CAUSE THE ONLY REASON THAT WE GOT THAT, 'CAUSE WE, ACROSS WHERE Y'ALL SAW, WE HAD PROBLEMS BACK THEN. A LOT OF DRIVE-BYS SHOOTING. THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I TRIED TO GET THAT GOING. OH, I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T, I HAD SOME, I DID NOT. YOU HAD NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME THAT THERE WERE, FORGET IT. UH, A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH THE NEIGHBORS. THAT'S WHY I GOT THAT HOME DEPOT CHECK TO STAY OUTTA WAY AND GET TO THE BACK, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. LIKE BUNCH OF DR UH, THEY DID A, LIKE A LOT OF DRIVE-BY SHOOTING TO THAT HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET FROM MY HOUSE. OH. THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I GOT SAFETY. THEN I WENT TO THE BANK. SO WHAT IS THAT? SHED, OKAY, SO YOU, THERE'S AN EIGHT BY 12 SHED. YES, I WAS STARTING ON THAT, BUT I KNOCKED IT DOWN 'CAUSE IT WAS A GARAGE ALREADY THERE. IT WAS FALLING APART, SO I REDID IT. OKAY. BUT WHEN ALL THIS STARTED HAPPENING ABOUT DRIVE-BY SHOOTING ALL THAT, I WENT TO HOME DEPOT AND I GOT ONE A, A SHED FROM HOME DEPOT TO SIT UP REAL QUICK. 'CAUSE ACROSS THE STREET WHERE I LIVE AT, THERE WAS ALWAYS SHOOTING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. OKAY. SO, AND THAT'S NOT PART, I TAKE IT THAT SECOND SHED IS NOT PART OF THIS. OKAY. IS THAT THE PORTION WHERE IT SAYS NEW ON THE SIDE PLAN WHERE? YES. UHHUH . THAT'S A NEW ONE. YES. MM-HMM. . OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO TELL US? UM, NO, THAT'S ABOUT IT. OKAY. UM, AND WELL, I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION. THE NEW ADDITION THAT YOU DID MM-HMM. , UH, THAT'S TOUCHING YOUR HOUSE, HOW FAR AWAY IS THAT CORNER FROM THE CORNER OF YOUR SHED? MM. UM, LET SEE FROM THAT, LIKE, FROM THIS, FROM ABOUT HERE? MM-HMM. ? THIS, UH, YEAH, THIS SIDE, LIKE THE LIGHT ON LIKE THE GARAGE, THAT SIDE. WELL YOU SEE ON THE, YOU SEE HOW IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S, IT MIGHT BE FIVE OR SIX FEET AWAY. NOPE. PRESS RIGHT HERE. PRESS IT. UM, SECOND ONE. YEAH, THE DISTANCE ABOUT NOT KIND OF FAR APART, FAR APART, BUT FROM, YEAH, UP AND DOWN THE TWO, THREE BACK? NO, NOT THAT DIRECTION. UH, OR FROM WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT, IS IT, IF, IF THIS WERE TO BE MOVED FROM HOUSE, IF IT WERE TO BE MADE THREE FEET AWAY, WOULD THERE STILL BE A FIVE FOOT PASSAGEWAY BETWEEN THE TWO? OH YES. UHHUH. BECAUSE THERE'LL BE YES, BUT LIKE I SAID, ON ONS POST, THAT'S WHAT YOU CALL 'EM. THAT BIG OLD CONCRETE. OKAY, WELL THANK YOU. THEY'RE NOT THERE THAT CHECK THAT GARAGE AND THE NEW ONE, IT'S LIKE PUT TWO OF THESE TOGETHER. OH, OKAY. SO THAT'S PLENTY THE ROOM APART. ALRIGHT, THIS AND THIS TOGETHER. THAT'S HOW FAR APART THEY ARE. ALRIGHT, SO I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION THEN. OKAY. ZUNA. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. I'M GONNA READ THE, UH, THE MOTION AS PRESENTED. UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 22 DASH 0 0 180 6, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED A REQUEST FOR ONE A FOUR FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT REAR INSIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE ONE FOOT FROM ONE FOOT FROM THE SIDE IN REAR PROPERTY LINES AND TO A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE IN THE 15 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALL OFFENSE TO ALLOW OFFENSE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE FRONT DRIVEWAY SITUATED 2 0 4 PARK VIEW DRIVE APPLICANT BEING ANITA ALAZAR BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WILL RESULT UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRACT TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE VARIANCE FOR THE CLEAR VISION IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. SO THAT THERE ARE SIMILAR FENCES IN THE AREA WITH SIMILAR CLEAR VISION ENCROACHMENTS. THE STRUCTURE IS NOT CONTRACTED TO PUBLIC INTEREST. IT IS AS THERE WILL BE SUFFICIENT SPACE FROM THE STRUCTURE AND THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO CONFORM TO THE CLEAR VISION STANDARDS, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO DEMOLISH AND REPLACE THE FENCE TO CONFORM. THIS WOULD BE AN UNNEC UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. STAFF FINDS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP SINCE THE LOT IS TOO SMALL TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A STRUCTURE WITH THE FIVE FOOT SIDE MIRROR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE FENCE IS EXISTING IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE OF IS OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE IS DONE. THE STRUCTURE HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND THE CURRENT SETBACK IS ONE FOOT FROM THE REAR SIDE PROPERTIES, LINES. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THERE IS REASONABLE SPACE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES FOR THE VARIANCE WITHOUT AUTHORIZED THE OPERATION OF USE OF THE NO USE 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 THE, WITH THIS VARIANCE FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WITHOUT SUBSTANTIAL INJURY. THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE FENCES AS IS WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THE SIDE WHERE SETBACK VARIANCES ARE GRANTED, THE ADDITIONAL, THE ADDITION WILL MAINTAIN ONE FEET, ONE FOOT FROM THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. THE DISTANCE IS NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. IF THERE ARE SIMILAR STRUCTURES WITH SIMILAR SETBACKS IN THE AREA, SIX APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT [04:25:01] IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UH, STAFF FINDS THAT THE EXISTING FENCE MAINTAIN A 10 FOOT CLEAR VISION. WAS THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER BECAUSE OF THE WIDTH OF THE LOT OF THE CONFIGURATION OF THE EXISTING RESIDENTS. MAINTAINING A ONE FOOT REAR AND SIDE SETBACK IS ACHIEVABLE. THE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY, NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, BUT I'D ALSO, I'D LIKE TO INCLUDE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE A, UM, UH, HAS PRESENTED AS PART OF HER VARIANCE REQUEST TO INCLUDE GUTTERS ON THE, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. AND WHICH, UM, TO ME, UM, WELL, IT SOLVES THE ISSUE OF THE W WATER FALLING ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THE END OF MOTION IS THERE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. RIGHT. SO THE NO OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORS HAVE BE MOST LIKELY AFFECTED. NO OPPOSITION FROM THE, UH, A NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION. THE APPLICANT IS, IS, UH, MENTIONED THAT AS PART OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST, WE'LL INCLUDE GUTTERS ON THE STRUCTURE. AND I THINK IF SHE WERE TO MOVE IT OVER TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS AS, UH, THE CITY WAS SUGGESTING THAT IT WOULD KIND OF ENCROACH ON THIS WALKABLE SPACE TO USE HER BACKYARD. SO I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER ZUNA. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY, ANYBODY, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD MINKA? COMMISSIONER MINKA? UH, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. I I JUST WANNA KNOW, UH, THE SHED THAT WAS, THAT WAS SET UP FOR YOU. DID YOU, DID IT, WAS IT AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR OR A COMPANY? I COULDN'T HEAR. IT WAS, IT WAS FROM HOME DEPOT, THE EMPLOYEES. SO THEY NEVER OKAY. TOLD ME. I NEVER KNEW. I JUST WENT AND PURCHASED IT. THEY SHOULD HAVE TOLD ME RIGHT THERE. OKAY, I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. UHHUH. . WOW. OKAY. SO WE DON'T HEAR TOO MUCH LIKE PLACE, LIKE HOME DEPOT USUALLY GETS THEIR PERMITS AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF. ALL RIGHT. SO, UM, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER COMMENTARY? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, LET'S HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. OZUNA. YES, I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. SPIELMAN I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIN I CONCUR. MR. MANNA I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. ME, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORAIN. I ALSO CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 10 TO ZERO. CONGRATULATIONS. OKAY, THANK YOU. YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? UH, YOU CAN TALK TO STAFF. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU GOT IT? UH, ALL RIGHT. ITEM EIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, BO 8 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 0. ADDRESS IS 83 0 3 HY STREET COUNCIL, DISTRICT FOUR APPLICANT. APPLICANT IS ALFRED ALVAREZ. A REQUEST FOR ONE, A SEVEN INCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT HEIGHT TO ALLOW A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO BE FIVE FOOT SEVEN INCHES ON THE FRONT YARD AND TWO A 13 FEET, EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 25 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE 11 FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE CORNER CURB AND THREE, A SIX FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE EIGHT FOOT SIX INCHES FROM THE FRONT DRIVEWAY. THE ZONING IS RM FOUR RESIDENTIAL MIX DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF SAN ANTONIO AT THE INTERSECTION OF EE STREET IN OWASSO AND CONTAINS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCTED A FIVE FOOT SEVEN INCH, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE UPON A SITE VISIT. STAFF OBSERVED BOTH THE NEW FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND AN EXISTING FENCE ALONG THE FRONT SIDE PROPERTY LINE ARE ENCROACHING INTO THE CLEAR VISION. A RESIDENTIAL FENCE PERMIT WAS APPROVED, HOWEVER, DURING INSPECTION, THE FENCE WAS OVER THE FIVE FOOT REQUESTED FENCE PERMIT. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS IS THE FENCE HEIGHT. THIS IS THE CLEAR VISION FROM THE CURB. CLEAR VISION FROM THE DRIVEWAY. AND THIS IS A FENCE ALONG THE FRONT PROP, UH, FRONT PROPERTY LINE. AND THIS IS THE FENCE ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND WE SURROUNDING AREAS. RECOMMENDATION AND CLEAR VISION VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 200 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. OF FACT, THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE AND GATE IS 11 FEET, FOUR INCHES AND EIGHT FEET SIX INCHES FROM THE CURB. THE GATE IS ON A ROLLING TRACK AND WILL NOT FURTHER IMPEDE INTO THE CLEAR VISION. SIMILAR FENCE S WERE OBSERVED IN THE IMMEDIATE AIR FOR AREA. THEREFORE, THE QUEST DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. RECOMMENDATION FOR FENCE HEIGHT. SPECIAL EXCEPTION. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT, STOP SIGN ON KUI STREET CAN HELP SUBSTITUTE FOR REDUCED CLEAR VISION. SIMILAR FENCES WERE OBSERVED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA, THEREFORE, THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER A CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. NOTIFICATION PLAN, 30 NOTICES WERE MAILED [04:30:01] OUT, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE ARE NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, CAN THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD? HELLO, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, MY NAME IS ROLAND SALAZAR. MY ADDRESS IS 7 2 2 4 LIN CHRIS, I AM HERE ON THE BEHALF OF MY FATHER ALFREDO ALVAREZ, THE PETITIONER. MY FATHER IS 76 YEARS OLD AND IN THE KILLING HEALTH, MY FATHER HAS, UH, MANY TIMES ENCOUNTERED STRANGERS IN THE, UM, GOING THROUGH HIS BELONGINGS INSIDE HIS HOUSE AT OTHER TIMES, FINDING THINGS MISSING. FURTHERMORE, THERE HAVE BEEN, UH, ATTEMPTS TO BREAK INTO HIS HOUSE WHEN HE WAS NOT AT HOME. BECAUSE OF THIS, HE HAS ASKED A FRIEND OF HIS TO INSTALL A WROUGHT IRON FENCE ALONG THE FRONT AND THE SIDE CURVE OF THE PROPERTY. MY FATHER WAS NOT AWARE OR FAMILIAR WITH THE CITY BUILDING CODES AND ITS REQUIREMENTS. IGNORANCE IS NOT AN EXCUSE, BUT UNDER THE SAFETY CONCERNS, WELLBEING AND SAFETY FROM MY FATHER, I FORMALLY REQUEST THE FENCE VARIANCE BE GRANTED. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, UM, IS THERE ANY SIGN THAT WOULD SPEAK VOICEMAILS? THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL GREAT. UM, ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OKAY, I HAVE A QUICK ONE. SO IT, IT'S, YOU HAVE TWO, YOU HAVE TWO DIFFERENT DRIVEWAYS, ONE ON EACH STREET, RIGHT? YES. THERE'S A DRIVEWAY ON EACH STREET. OKAY. AND THEY BOTH HAVE GATES? NO, JUST ONE. JUST ONE HAS A GATE? MM-HMM. . OKAY. ALL RIGHT. UM, YEAH, THAT'S, THAT DOES IT FOR ME. UH, AND NOTHING ELSE. ALL RIGHT. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. MEESE. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER MEESE. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A TWO TWO DASH 1 0 3 2 0, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTOR REQUEST FOR ONE A, IS THIS CORRECT? A 13 FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 25 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FENCE TO BE 11 FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE CORNER CURB, AND TWO, A SIX FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW OFFENSE TO BE EIGHT FOOT SIX INCHES FROM THE FRONT DRIVEWAY, SITUATED AT 8 3 0 3 QUI HISTORY APPLICANT BEING ALFREDO ALVAREZ, BECAUSE THIS TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 13 FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 25 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FENCE TO BE 11 FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE CURB, AND SIX FOOT SIX INCHES VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW OFFENSE TO BE EIGHT FOOT SIX INCHES FROM THE FRONT DRIVEWAY. AND THESE VARIANCE REQUESTS ARE NOT 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 FENCE HAVING TO COMPLY WITH THE 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT FROM THE FRONT DRIVEWAY, AND TO COMPLY WITH THE 25 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT FROM THE CURB, WHICH CANNOT BE ACHIEVED DUE TO THE SIZE AND SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. A 13 FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 25 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW OFFENSE TO BE 11 FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE CORNER CURB AND SIX FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW OFFENSE TO BE EIGHT FOOT SIX INCH FROM THE FRONT DRIVEWAY OBSERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE DUE TO THE SIZE AND SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A 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 AT THIS VARIANCE. 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 ALSO FINDS, DO I READ THESE DESCRIPTIONS? I DO. UH, THE REQUEST FOR A 13 FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 25 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW OFFENSE TO BE 11 FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE CORNER CURB AND A SIX FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT MINIMUM CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW OFFENSE TO BE 8 6 8 FOOT SIX INCHES FROM THE FRONT DRIVEWAY WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. MM-HMM. . SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCES SAW IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. 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, SUCH AS THE SIZE AND SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND [04:35:01] BY COMMISSIONER MADDEN. COMMISSIONER MEESE, I'M, I'M GOING TO VOTE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. ALRIGHT. FANTASTIC. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. ALRIGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS' LIKE TO ADD? HEARING NONE. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MS. MEESE. I CONCUR. 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. LIND I CONCUR. MS. CAP? I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY AND I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE, UH, DEFENSE SITE. THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. THANK YOU. WE HAVE ONE MORE TO GO. OH, SORRY. CHAIRMAN. ME? YEAH, I'D LIKE TO READ IT. GREAT. GO AHEAD. OH, IT'LL BE, IT'LL YOU HAVE TO KEEP SCROLLING ON THE WORD DOCUMENT COURSE. GOT IT. OH, OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A TWO TWO DASH 0 3 0 0 2 0 0, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW IT. FOUR SEVEN INCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE INCH, FIVE FOOT HEIGHT TO ALLOW PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FANS TO BE FIVE FOOT SEVEN INCHES ON THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT 8 3 0 3 KEHE STREET, APPLICANT BEING ALFREDO ALVAREZ. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U D C STATES, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. THE ADDITIONAL OFFENSE HEIGHT WAS OBSERVED UPON THE SITE VISIT. AND IF GRANTED STAFF MINDS, THE REQUEST WOULD NOT BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B. THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY, THE FENCE IS LOCATED ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY AND IS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT BY SEVEN INCHES. THE FENCE IS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, WHICH SERVES THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE. C THE NEIGHBOR, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ANY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION IS SOUGHT. THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR THE SECTION OF THE FRONT YARD FENCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. E. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE AND ESTABLISH FOR A SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS THE CURRENT USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. SECOND, SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. COMMISSIONER MEESE. I'M IN FAVOR OF THE DEFENSE HEIGHT. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S ANYONE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NOW LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MS. MEESE. I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN I CONCUR. MRS. SPILLMAN I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIN, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA, I CONCUR CHAIR OR I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE, UH, WITH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, I APPROVE. UH, MOTION PASSES. 10 TO ZERO. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. FANTASTIC. UH, ITEM NUMBER NINE. ITEM NUMBER NINE, BO 8 22 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 2. ADDRESS IS 57 11 SOUTH IH 35 AND 9 3 0 FIT STREET COUNCIL. DISTRICT FIVE APPLICANT IS MERRICK ZINSKY. A REQUEST FOR ONE A 25 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURES TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY. LINE. TWO, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT REAR BUFFER TO ALLOW STRUCTURES TO BE FIVE FOOT FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND THREE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT SIDE BUFFER TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND FOUR, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER TO ALLOW PARKING TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE. PROPERTY LINE ZONING IS A C ONE LIGHT COMMERCIAL. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG SOUTH IH 35, JUST NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST SOUTH CROSS BOULEVARD AND IS CURRENTLY A VACANT LOT. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING SIDE REAR AND LANDSCAPE BUFFER VARIANCES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF MULTIPLE OFFICE BUILDINGS AND A SIDE BUFFER VARIANCE FOR PARKING IN THE NORTHERN LOT SITE PLAN LAND, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS. RECOMMENDATIONS SIDE AND REAR [04:40:01] SETBACK. AND THAT SCAPE BUFFER VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND B O A 22 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 2. BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, THE STRUCTURES HAVE NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND THERE'S A LIMITED AMOUNT OF SPACE AVAILABLE TO COMPLY WITH THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACK AND LANDSCAPE BUFFER VARIANCES TO DEVELOP MULTIPLE STRUCTURES. NOTIFICATION PLAN 40 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM TIERRA LINDA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. OKAY. BEFORE WE GO, UM, WHAT IS THE, THE OFFICIAL ADDRESS? AND THIS IS GONNA BE OFF OF, OF FITCH OR OFF OF, UH, I 35. I MEAN FOR YOU TO ASSESS WHAT, WHAT'S REAR AND WHAT'S SIDE. YES. SO IT'LL BE 57, UH, IH 35. AND THEN THE OTHER LOT IS THERE A LOT FOR THE PARKING ON NINE 30 FITCH. THE LOT TO THE NORTH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MM-HMM. , IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? HI, UH, IF YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME AND BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MERICK SISINSKY. I AM THE OWNER OF MERRICK SOLUTIONS AND, UH, I AM REPRESENTING AN OWNER AND MY COMPANY WAS HIRED TO DEVELOP THIS PIECE OF A PROPERTY. AND ON THE VERY BEGINNING WE JUST NOTICED THERE'S, UH, TWO HARDSHIPS THAT WE, UH, WOULD HAVE, ACTUALLY THREE. NUMBER ONE IS THE UNUSUAL SHAPE OF IT. NUMBER TWO FROM MCDONOUGH STREET, WE HAVE, UH, EASEMENTS SO WE CAN DEAL WITH THAT. AND OF COURSE, THESE LARGE SETBACKS, UM, WHICH IS 30 FEET, THAT MAKES THE, THE, THE PROPERTY COMPLETELY UNUSEFUL. UH, SO WE HAVE A PLAN FOR SMALL BUSINESS AREA, SMALL, UH, BUSINESS PARK OVER THERE WITH THE LEASE SPACES EACH ABOUT THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. AND AS OF, UM, AS OF NOWADAYS CAN BE DEVELOPED THE WAY IT IS RIGHT NOW WITH THE SETBACKS. SO WE, WE ASKING FOR VARIANCE ON THE SETBACKS ONLY. OKAY. UH, ARE YOU CURRENTLY UNDERGOING A ZONING CHANGE OR IS THE C D D WE, THE ZONING IS CORRECT. WE'RE NOT GONNA BE CHANGING ANYTHING WITH THE ZONING. WHAT DOES A CD ALLOW FOR YOU? UM, SMALL, UM, RETAIL, SMALL SHOP, SOMETHING WHO, WHOEVER WANTS TO DO SOMETHING THAT FITS THE ZONING. OKAY. SO ZONING. WE ARE GONNA LIVE THERE JUST THE WAY IT IS. SO I'M, I'M NOTICING THAT, UM, THE, THE FIRST VARIANCE, THIS IS FOR STAFF, IT'S A 25 FOOT VARIANCE AND THE MINIMUM 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK. IS THAT BECAUSE, UH, THE R FOUR CD, IT HAS A 30 FOOT SETBACK ON THE CD WHEN IT'S ABUTTING A RESIDENTIAL? CORRECT. AND SO THAT FIRST SECTION OF THE STRUCTURES ARE GONNA BE ADDRESSED OFF MCDONALD'S? CORRECT. AND THE WAY WE SITUATE THE BUILDING IS WE KIND OF WANT TO CREATE A NATURAL BARRIER AND, UH, AND A BUFFER FROM THE RESIDENTIAL, UH, AREA BECAUSE THE BUILDING KIND OF THE BACK OF THE BUILDING IS GONNA BE FACING THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. OKAY. AND, UH, I NOTICED THAT, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THAT, UH, THE, UH, LANDSCAPE DEPARTMENT, UH, REVIEW THIS, UH, IN CONJUNCTION WITH STAFF SINCE MOST OF ITS BUFFERS. YES. THE, UH, LANDSCAPE DEPARTMENT DID REVIEW THIS, UH, SPECIFICALLY FOR THE BUFFERS ON, UH, I 35 AND THE NORTHERN, UH, LOT. ALRIGHT, FANTASTIC. ALRIGHT. SO IS THERE ANY, UH, PUBLIC, UH, COMMENTARY ON WHEN SENATOR DISPUTE VOICEMAILS? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT. GREAT. UM, UM, JUST TO CLARIFY, I GUESS THAT'S A MAP ERROR. THE BOTTOM PROPERTY IS A C ONE. OH, I WAS WONDERING. YEAH, LIKE R IT HAS R FOUR CD. I I DON'T SEE THAT. R FOUR, WE DID CORRECT THAT, BUT, UH, I GUESS WE PUT THE WRONG MAP UP HERE. AND THE, THE CD THAT YOU SEE ON THE NORTHERN PROPERTY IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE CD. OKAY. THE ACTUAL ONE FOR PARKING. OKAY. CORRECT. ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OKAY. YEAH. MINKA. COMMISSIONER MINKA. THEN MANNA, I HAVE A QUESTION IN TERMS OF LIGHTING. YOU, YOU'RE SO CLOSE TO HOUSES. HOW ARE YOU GONNA HAVE THE LIGHTING ON THE BACK OF THE BUILDING OR THE SIDE THAT, BECAUSE YOU GOT SOME RESIDENTS RIGHT CLOSE TO IT. UM, SOMETHING NON-INTRUSIVE. BASICALLY THE WHOLE BACK OF THE PROPERTY IS NOT GONNA BE USED. WE MAY HAVE SOME KIND OF A, UM, EMERGENCY EXIT IF THE FIRE MARSHAL WILL REQUIRE, BUT THE BACK PROPERTY WAS NOT GONNA BE USED AT ALL. SO I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF WE WE GONNA PLAN ANY, ANY LIGHTING ON IT. YEAH. SO NO LOADING FROM THE BACK OR ANY KIND OF THING LIKE THAT? NO, NO. THAT'S WHY WE, WE GONNA LEAVE JUST FIVE FEET, UH, FOR THE FIRE MARSHAL. THANK YOU, SIR. AND IF THERE'S GONNA BE SOME, SOME KIND OF IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING, UH, UM, PERMIT APPLICATION, IF THE CITY WILL ASK US FOR SOME KIND OF A TOLL FANS LARGE, UH, LANDSCAPE BUFFER, WE WILL DO ONE OVER ANOTHER. OKAY. COMMISSIONER MANNA. [04:45:01] SO, UM, LET'S SEE. SO HAS ANY CONVERSATION BEEN HAD WITH THE NEIGHBORS, UH, THAT ARE BASICALLY BUDDYING THIS PROPERTY? UH, SPECIFICALLY THE TWO R FOURS THAT ARE OFF OF, OF FIT STREET? NO, WE, WE TRIED TO REACH THEM A COUPLE OF TIMES. THERE WAS NEVER NOBODY HOME AND WE WERE AFRAID THAT SOMEBODY MAY SHOW UP TODAY AND, UH, HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY AGAINST AND, UM, WE COULDN'T REACH ANYBODY. SO LOOKS LIKE THEY, THEY DON'T REALLY CARE. UM, 'CAUSE ALSO THE C TWO LOT THAT IS OFF FIT STREET IS ALSO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT, CORRECT. UH, ALTHOUGH HIS HIS OWN C TWO, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY THAT LIVES THERE. UM, SO, UM, SO CAN YOU, WITH YOUR POINTER, SHOW ME WHAT BUFFERS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND WHAT'S, WHICH, WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AS FAR AS THE, THE BUFFER SPACES AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO, I GUESS KIND OF WORK THROUGH. SO ON THE MAP HERE, PRESS THAT BUTTON. WHAT YOUR BUTTON OTHER WAY IT'S BETTER RIGHT HERE. OKAY. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO CREATE SOME KIND OF A BUFFER ON ALL, ALL ALL ACROSS HERE. AND, UH, AND MAYBE EVEN HERE TOO, BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING, IT'S, IT'S TALKING ABOUT, UM, SO FIVE FEET F SO WHERE IS THE REAR PROPERTY OF THIS? WHERE IS THE REAR PROPERTY LINE? THIS, THIS IS THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. SO THAT'S, SO, SO IT'S LOOKING FOR A FIVE FOOT BUFFER THERE. UM, HOW TALL ARE THESE BUILDINGS GONNA BE? UH, 14 FEET ON THE, IN THE FRONT AND 12 FEET ON THE BACK. SO THE BUILDING ITSELF WILL HAVE A KIND OF LIKE A NATURAL BUFFER THAT NOBODY'S GONNA BE THERE. IT'S GONNA BE SEPARATE, UH, IS GONNA BE BIG SEPARATION BETWEEN THE, UH, THE BUSINESS AREA AND THE, AND THE RESIDENTIAL AREA WITH THE BUILDING ITSELF? WELL THAT AREA BE PAVED ON THE BACKSIDE, IS IT GONNA BE PAVED? NO. SO, SO IT'S GOING TO REMAIN LANDSCAPING. OKAY. WHAT ABOUT COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? SORRY, WHAT ABOUT LIGHTING IN THE FRONT? BECAUSE I SEE THAT THERE'S RESIDENTIAL, UM, ALL AROUND IN THE FRONT AND THE SIDE. WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE, UH, SOME KIND OF A, UM, SECURE LIGHT IN JUST IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, BUT WE'RE NOT PLANNING TO PUT A HUGE LIGHTS ON THE PARKING WHATSOEVER. AND THE, AND THE BUSINESS IS GONNA BE JUST NINE TO NINE TO FIVE. UH, SO I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. WHERE'S, UH, IS THERE A DUMPSTER GONNA BE OUT HERE? YES. WE DIDN'T PLAN IT YET. IT DOESN'T SHOW YET, BUT YES, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO FIND A PLACE FOR IT. OKAY. I'M CURIOUS BECAUSE IF THEY, IF YOU PUT IN A DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT, UH, THE POTENTIAL FOR, UH, BUFFERS OR, OR ANYTHING THAT'S FORCED TODAY? WE ARE GONNA HAVE TO KIND OF A, WITH THE, WITH THE SIDE PLAN, WITH THE FINAL SIDE PLAN, BECAUSE THIS IS JUST A CONCEPTUAL AND WITH THE SIDE, FINAL SIDE PLAN, WE WILL, WE WILL, UH, WE'LL PROPOSE IT FOR THE CITY FOR THE APPROVAL. OKAY. ZUNA, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR PARKING RATIO IS FOR THE PROJECT? THE PARKING LOT'S REALLY TIGHT. I'M JUST WONDERING IF YOU NEED ANY KIND OF PARKING VARIANCES AS WELL, OR NO, WE, WE, WE GOOD WITH PARKING. WHAT, WHAT IS THE PARKING RATIO? I DON'T REMEMBER RIGHT NOW, BUT, UH, IT'S ALWAYS GONNA BE BASED ON THE, ON THE BUSINESS THAT WE, WE ARE GONNA BE LISTENING TO. SO SOME OF THEM, THEY'RE GONNA NEED, UM, 250 SQUARE FEET PER, UH, PER PARKING OR SOME OF THEM THEY'RE GONNA BE MORE, BUT AC ACCORDING TO FIRST CALCULATIONS, WE, WE SHOULD BE GOOD WITH PARKING. OKAY. OKAY. SO, SO I GUESS YOU'RE GOING BACK FOR THE, UH, MANNA. SORRY. SO, SO QUESTION I HAD. SO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONER ZENA'S POSITION ON THE, THE TRASH. IF WE PROVE THIS, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE THEN FOR THEM TO HAVE THE TRASH LOCATED ON THE, THE STREET BETWEEN THE TWO RESIDENCES? UM, 'CAUSE THAT SOUNDS AWFUL. DOES THE CD ZONING ON THAT R FOUR WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE PARKING, WOULD A DUMPSTER BE ALLOWED THERE? IT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED THERE EXCEPT FOR PARKING WOULD NOT, IT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED. OKAY. I DON'T THINK IT WOULD WORK ALSO FOR, FOR, UH, FOR THE BIG TRUCK TO GET THERE. THE ONLY PLACE THAT I SEE IT NATURAL KIND OF A, A PLACE IT WOULD BE ABOUT HERE, ESSENTIALLY HE WOULD'VE TO RECONFIGURE HIS PLAN TO MEET THAT. YEAH. OKAY. MAN, I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION, SORRY. SURE. SO ON THE PARKING STRIP [04:50:01] THERE, THAT IS BETWEEN THE TWO, UM, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, UM, THERE'S NOT A BUFFER REQUIREMENT THERE FOR A PARKING LOT NEXT TO, UM, A RESIDENT. IS THERE? UH, YEAH, THAT'S THE BUFFER THAT, UM, THE NUMBER, UH, I BELIEVE THE NUMBER FOUR, THE, UH, 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE E BUFFER THAT'S SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT PARKING LOT. SO QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT THEN. SORRY, ANOTHER QUESTION THEN IS, UM, CAN UM, CAN THAT BE MOVED OVER AT ALL, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THAT SPACE THERE AND STILL PROVIDE YOU ADEQUATE ACCESS OUT? I DON'T, I'M NOT SURE IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION. SO RIGHT NOW, UM, SO I GUESS WHERE THE CARS ARE, UH, HEADING INTO, UH, THE A BUDDING, UM, R FOUR PROPERTY, UM, I GUESS, UM, A LINE HERE THAT EXISTS IS YOU'RE ASKING FOR FIVE FOOT OR A 10 FOOT VARIANCE, RIGHT? UM, TO ALLOW A, UM, TO ALLOW A PARKING LOT TO BASICALLY HEAD IN RIGHT INTO THE NEIGHBOR'S FENCE. AND SO THE QUESTION IS, UH, CAN THAT BE BACKED OUT AT ALL? CAN LIKE A FIVE FOOT TO KEEP IT AT 10 FOOT VERSUS 15? UM, WOULD THAT PRESENT ANY OBSTACLES FOR YOU? UM, WOULD PROBABLY CREATE SOME HEADACHE FOR THE ARCHITECT, HOW TO FEED THE, HOW TO FEED THOSE, ALL THOSE SPACES THERE AND MAYBE CHANGE THE ANGLE WITH IT. UM, AT THIS POINT WE JUST MADE IT THE BEST SCENARIO, BUT I'LL, I'LL, I'M GONNA CHIME IN ON THAT. I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S TO MOVE IT OVER BECAUSE OF THE, THE DRIVE, UH, WIDTH LOCATION. YOU WOULD HAVE A, A, A DECENT PARKING LOSS BECAUSE OF THE ANGLE CHANGE, BUT CORRECT. ONE THING THAT THIS BOARD CAN DO, UH, IF, IF, UH, ON THE MAKER OF THE MOTION CAN STIPULATE THAT IT'S PARKING AS PROVIDED IN THE SITE PLAN. SO THERE'S, THEY'RE NOT GONNA RUN A STRAIGHT CURB LINE ON THAT LEFT SIDE. IT WOULD BE SERRATED TO MAXIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF GREEN SPACE BETWEEN THE PARKING AND THE, WE DID THAT ONE TIME YEARS AGO. UH, THAT'S ABOUT I THINK ALL WE COULD DO JUST OTHERWISE THE DRIVE JUST WOULDN'T BE WIDE ENOUGH. THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHT. THIS WAS ONE OF THE REASONS WE MADE IT A ONE-WAY STREET WITH THE ANGLE PARKING BECAUSE IT WAS NOT ENOUGH ROOM TO, TO KIND OF A TURNAROUND. YEAH, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU GOT ABOUT 6,600 SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING, PROPOSED BUILDING SPACE. UM, AND I, YOU KNOW, EVEN AT, ON A C ONE. AND WHAT IS THAT ONE TO 300 IS THE MINIMUM? UH, IT DEPENDS ON THE USE. IT'S USUALLY, MOST COMMERCIAL USES ARE ONE FOR EVERY 300. OKAY. SO THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE 20, LIKE 22 PARKING SPACES. I GOT 25 NOW, SO THEY COULD GIVE UP, YOU KNOW, A FEW AND STILL MEET THE MINIMUM, WHICH WOULD BE TOUGH. BUT, UM, THOSE ARE JUST THE THINGS THAT WE, WE NEED TO CONSIDER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, UH, ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD, SIR, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO A MOTION? YES. WE, WE CREATED THE MAXIMUM PARKING BECAUSE THE 300, IT'S A KIND OF AVERAGE, BUT IF SOMEBODY WANTS SOMETHING, UH, THAT IS GONNA HAVE A, A LARGER OCCUPANCY MM-HMM. , THEN WE WOULD NEED TO, UH, THIS, IT WILL LIMIT US VERY MUCH TO WHO, WHO CAN LEASE THIS SPACE. OKAY. WITH THAT, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND, AND PLEASE, UH, WITH THE MAKER IT WOULD BE, UH, YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO REQUEST THAT THE PARKING IS, IS DONE IN A MANNER AS PRESENTED ON THE SITE PLAN TO MAXIMIZE THE, UH, LANDSCAPING COMMISSIONER ZUNA UNA. YEAH, GO AHEAD. OKAY, THANKS. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 2 2, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED REQUEST FOR ONE A 25 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURES TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. TWO, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT REAR BUFFER TO ALLOW STRUCTURES TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE THREE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT SIDE BUFFER TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND FOUR, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE OF A MINIMUM 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER TO ALLOW PARKING TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UH, UH, AS AN ADDITIONAL ENHANCEMENT TO THE, UH, TO THE MOTION, I WOULD ADD THAT THE PARKING, UH, WOULD BE SITUATED AS PROVIDED IN THE SITE PLAN EXHIBIT THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE, TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. THE PROJECT IS SITUATED AT 5 7 1 1 SOUTH IH 35 AND NINE 35TH STREET. APPLICANT BEING, UM, UH, MARK, I WILL LET YOU PRONOUNCE YOUR LAST NAME, KY. UM, WHAT HE SAID, UH, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT [04:55:01] IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE VARIANCE FOR THE REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND THE SIDE BUFFER TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO BE FIVE FEET, DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST TOO. DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT HAVING TO MAINTAIN 30 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND 10 FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENT STAFF FINDS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP SINCE THE LOT IS TOO SMALL TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE STRUCTURE WITHIN THIS REQUIREMENT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED. THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE STRUCTURE HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED IN THE PROPOSED SETBACK OF FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, 10 FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND FIVE FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER FOR A PARKING LOT. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THERE STILL WILL BE REASONABLE SPACE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES, NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER TO THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE THAT THE SUB, THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THE AREA IN WHICH THE DI IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED HAS SEVERAL SIMILAR SIZED LOTS. SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE OF SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, NOT MERE FINANCIAL, AND NOT DUE TO OTHER THE RESULTS OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE OF THE WIDTH OF THE LOT AND CONFIGURATION OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY. THE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL IN A MOTION. I'LL SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA. YEAH. SO I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. A THERE IS NO OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORS THAT MOSTLY ARE, ARE AFFECTED BY THE PROPERTY. UH, THE PROJECT WOULD HAVE TO MEET ALL THE BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS AND SECOND, UH, GIVEN ITS LOCATION AGAINST, UH, A FREEWAY, UH, I THINK THAT THE, THE STRUCTURE WOULD PROVIDE A BUFFER TO THAT RESIDENTIAL, UM, UH, BUILDINGS IN THE BACK AND, AND, AND CREATE, UH, SOMEWHAT OF A NOISE BARRIER. AND IT'S A GOOD TRANSITION USE BETWEEN HIGH INTENSITY, YOU KNOW, FREEWAY USE AND THEN THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE BACK. AND GIVEN, YOU KNOW, WE MADE THE AMENDMENT ABOUT THE SITE PLAN AND PARKING AS PROVIDED THE SITE PLAN, UH, YOU KNOW, IF HE NEEDS A DUMPSTER, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE LOCATED UP FRONT, WHICH WOULD CONTAIN THE NOISE AND THE SMELL, UH, TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING AND NOT AFFECT THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO THE REAR. UH, FOR THOSE REASONS I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION. YEAH, AND I'LL, I'LL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION, BE, YOU KNOW, AS, AS, AS FOR THE REASONING, UH, THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED. LIKE THE IDEA THAT THE DUMPSTER WOULD HAVE TO BE ON THE, ON THE, UH, BULK OF THE SITE TO KEEP IT AWAY FROM, UH, FURTHER AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL AND THE AMENDMENT AND THE, UH, UM, AMENDMENT FROM THE, FROM THE TEMPLATE SO THAT THE PARKING IS IN LINE WITH THE SITE PLAN WHERE IT'S SERRATED IN NATURE AND, AND WITH THE OUTSIDE CORNERS BEING FIVE FEET AWAY. THAT'S, THAT MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, UH, LANDSCAPED. UH, THERE. SO WITH THAT, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER WHO HAS ANY, UH, LIKE TO ADD MANNA? COMMISSIONER MANNA? YEAH, I'M STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT WITH THIS AND, YOU KNOW, CHANGING, YOU KNOW, A ADJOINING PROPERTY, UH, WITHOUT, AS THE APPLICANT SAID, NOT, NOT TALKING TO THEM, YOU KNOW, IT'S GONNA CHANGE A PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT DOOR INTO A PARKING LOT. UM, SO CHANGE IT FROM A RESIDENTIAL PIECE OF PROPERTY TO, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, TO A PARKING LOT AND PUSHING THE, THE BUILDING RIGHT AGAINST THEIR PROPERTIES TOO. SO I AM STRUGGLING ON THIS ONE. SO COMMISSIONER MAN IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WOULD HELP YOU GET OVER THE STRUGGLE? YEAH, AND I JUST TRYING TO, I WAS TRYING TO WORK THROUGH IT AND I DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, I WAS, YEAH, I WAS STRUGGLING. OKAY. WELL, LET ME, UH, LET ME TRY THIS. UH, QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF. DID YOU NOTICE THAT THE RESIDENTIAL HOME SPECIFICALLY AT 9 34 FITCH, WAS THERE AN, UH, OCCUPIABLE STRUCTURE? IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S, UM, A STRUCTURE, BUT IS IT AN OCCUPIABLE STRUCTURE NEAR THE PROPERTY, BACK PROPERTY LINE? UH, I CANNOT RECALL SPECIFICALLY AT THIS TIME IF THEY WERE OCCUPIED. YEAH, THAT'S, I I SEE COMMISSIONER MANEZ, UH, CONCERNED, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S A STRUCTURE THERE THAT LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT BE OCCUPIABLE JUST BECAUSE OF THE ROOF LINE. UM, I'M GONNA, UM, I'M GONNA, UH, REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, SO DIRECTLY BEHIND, BEHIND YOU AT 9 34 FITCH, CAN YOU COMMENT ON, ON WHAT, WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT, UH, STRUCTURE THAT'S THERE CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE? I DUNNO, I'M NOT SURE WHAT IT IS. IT LOOKS LIKE, IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THERE IS SOME STORAGES, BECAUSE THE HOUSES ARE RIGHT NEXT, RIGHT NEXT TO, TO THE OCCUPIED HOUSES ARE RIGHT ON FITCH. YEAH. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A REAR ACCESSORY OR REAR GARAGE OR STORAGE SHED. COMMISSIONER, MINKA, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, CHAIRMAN, COULD YOU CLARIFY THAT? I'M TRYING TO GET THE IDEA HERE. SURE. IF YOU, IF YOU GO TO THE, UH, ON THE ATTACHMENTS WHERE IT SHOWS THE AERIAL PHOTO WITH THE SITE [05:00:01] OUTLINED IN RED, UH, AT 9 34 FITCH, UH, YOU CAN SEE A STRUCTURE VERY CLOSE TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND IT HAS, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, PITCH ROOFS, UH, AND IT JUST LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING, WHETHER IF IT'S OCCUPIABLE OR IF IT'S A SHED OR, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S AN OCCUPIABLE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, IT MAY RAISE SOME CONCERN AS TO BUILDING A COMMERCIAL BUILDING FIVE FEET AWAY. UM, UH, THAT I, I SEE COMMISSIONER MANNAS, UH, POINT AND PERHAPS INCREASING THAT PARTICULAR STICK OF THE BUFFER MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE. COMMISSIONER MANANA. IF, IF THE, IF THE BUFFER ON THE, ON THE WEST SIDE OF NINE 30 FITCH WERE TO BE INCREASED TO LET'S SAY 10 FEET, WOULD THAT HELP YOU OUT? YES. ALL RIGHT. UH, SO WE'RE GONNA CLOSE THE, UH, PUBLIC HEARING. GO BACK TO THE CLOSE HEARING. UM, COMMISSIONER ZENO, YOU'D BE WILLING TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT SO THAT THE WEST SIDE OF THE, OF ITEM FOUR, THAT REAR BUFFER, UH, BETWEEN, UH, THE PROPERTY AND 9 34 FISH BE INCREASED TO 10 FEET. CAN I ASK THE APPLICANT, IS THIS ACCEPTABLE? WOULD THE PROJECT WORK IF THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL BUFFER ON THE R FOUR? SO YOU WOULD BA BASICALLY MOVING SHIFT THE PARKING HERE'S, UH, YEAH, WE WE'RE VERY HARD. THE, THE THING IS, UH, WE, UH, WE, WE SITUATED THE PARKING IN THE FRONT ON THE, UH, SO IT WILL, CAN BE, UH, IN AND OUT. SO WE STARTED FROM, FROM MCDONOUGH GOING BACK, AND IN THIS CASE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO CUT THE WHOLE BUILDING, UH, ANOTHER FIVE FEET. THAT MEANS LESS SQUARE FOOTAGE. THAT MEANS THE WHOLE PROJECT. IT'S, UH, IT'S KIND OF SUFFER SOMETHING UN UN UNLESS YOU PUT IN ANGLE PARKING ONE WAY, CUT THE CUT, JUST ONE BUILDING AND HAVE IT GO THROUGH OUT TO THE NEXT STREET WOULD BE ONE WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THAT. BUT, UM, WHAT YOU WANNA SEE, TAKE A VOTES. SURE. UM, SO WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN, JUST SO YOU KNOW, UH, THERE'S CONCERNS FROM THE COMMISSION AND BECAUSE THERE'S 10 OF US HERE, AND IF TWO PEOPLE VOTE, KNOW THE THING DIES, THE MOTION DIES. NO, WE DON'T WANT TO COME BACK. SO WE, WE GONNA WE JUST GONNA GET WHAT WE CAN. WELL, UH, SO YOU HAVE TWO CHOICES. UH, WE CAN, WE CAN, UH, THREE CHOICES WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH. THE MOTION IS READ, UH, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR. UH, WE COULD, UH, AMEND THE, THE WEST SIDE, UH, SUCH THAT INSTEAD OF A FIVE FOOT BUFFER, IT'S 10 FEET BEHIND, NINE 30, UH, 9 34 FITCH. UH, OR WE CAN DO A CONTINUANCE AND, AND YOU CAN HAVE DIALOGUE WITH THAT NEIGHBOR AND SEE IF YOU CAN GET SOME SORT OF ACCEPTANCE OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO AND COME BACK. I WILL VOTE FOR NUMBER TWO. LET'S, LET'S, LET'S VOTE ON THE 10 FEET BUFFER. OKAY. AND THAT IS JUST GONNA HAVE TO, UH, REDESIGN THE BUILDING. AND THIS WHOLE PROJECT IS GONNA BE LESS PROFITABLE FOR THE OWNER, BUT, UH, BUT IT'S, SOMETHING IS GONNA HAPPEN. YES, SIR. ARE YOU WILLING TO, UH, SO THE, THE MOTION AND I ACCEPT, UH, AN AMENDMENT TO THE MO FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION SUCH THAT, UM, BEHIND 9 34 FITCH AND NINE 10 FOOT, YEAH. 9 34 AND NINE 40 FITCH, IT'S A 10 FOOT BUFFER INSTEAD OF A FIVE FOOT BUFFER ON THE REAR. YEP. SO ACCEPTED. OKAY. STAFF, YOU, UH, YOU CATCH THAT IT'S REGARDING, YEAH. OKAY. SO WITH THAT, UH, THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTARY. LET'S, UH, HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE. JUST POINT. AND SO THE 10 FOOT IS AT THE, IS THAT 'CAUSE THEY'RE SERRATED PARKING SPACES, RIGHT? THAT'S AT THE, THE LONGEST PARK. IT'S THE 10 FOOT. UH, SO IT'S THE, THE AMENDMENT IS TO HAVE A, A 10 FOOT BUFFER BETWEEN THE, UM, THE C ONE PORTION AND THE REAR OF 9 34 FITCH. AND THE REAR OF NINE 40 FITCH ONLY. NOT THE SIDE, JUST THE, THE SOUTH REAR PROPERTY LINE. SO IT WOULD JUST BE HERE? NO, JUST RIGHT HERE. OH, I SEE, I SEE. OKAY. YEAH. BECAUSE OF THE STRUCTURES. OKAY. WELL, HOW DOES THAT, I HAVE A QUESTION. UH, YES, SIR. SO THAT MEANS, UH, WE CAN STILL KEEP THE FIVE FEET BUFFER ON THE PARKING, ON THE ANGLE. PARKING. THE PARKING. AND HOW ABOUT THE, UH, THE PART THAT IS, UH, ADJUSTED TO, I MEAN, YEAH, SO IT WOULD THE C ONE. SO STAFF, CAN YOU SOMEONE SHOW, UH, THE APPLICANT WITH THE LASER POINTER? UH, IT'S, IT'S THE SOUTH OR REAR PROPERTY LINE OF NINE 40 AND 9 34 FITCH ONLY IS THE ONLY THING BEING ADJUSTED. YEAH. SO HE WOULD'VE TO READ THAT 10 FOOT STEP BACK YEAH. JUST RIGHT. NO. YEAH. NO, THE OTHER, YEAH. LEFT OR RIGHT. THERE YOU GO. JUST THAT AREA. [05:05:06] OKAY. I GUESS THAT WOULD WORK. YES, SIR. IT'S A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MR. ZUNO. I'M SORRY. YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. HOLD ON. UH, WE'RE VOTING ON THE 10 FOOT OR THE FIVE? FIVE. YES, WE'RE VOTING ON, UH, ALL OF IT, BUT WE'VE CHANGED THIS FROM BEING FIVE TO BEING 10. GREAT. OKAY. YEAH, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIN. I ALSO CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIND, I CONCUR. MR. MANO. I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. AND MS. MEESE, I CONCUR. ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY 10 TO ZERO. SO, UM, I DON'T MEAN TO MUCK THIS UP, BUT, UH, SO IF YOU REDUCE THE, THE, UH, BUFFER ON THAT REAR, THAT SETBACK IS KIND OF LINE IN LINE WITH IT. SO ARE YOU GUYS ALSO REDUCING THE SETBACK, THE 25 FOOT VARIANCE TO, UH, 20 FOOT VARIANCE TO HAVE THAT 10 FOOT SETBACK? COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, CAN YOU GRAB HER ? YEAH, SHE'S LEAVING. DID Y CATCH THAT? BOTH AND THE, UH, MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE SETBACK. 'CAUSE IT'S A FIVE FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND A 10 FOOT BUFFER. SO YEAH, IT WOULD BE A, UH, WE MIGHT HAVE TO HAVE ONE MORE THING. LOOK ON THIS. YEAH. A 20 FOOT VARI OR 20 FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURES TO BE 10 FOOT FROM THE LINE. WE ON THOSE ON THAT SIDE OF THE LINE? YEAH. SO, UM, I ALREADY ANNOUNCED IT. CAN I JUST RESEND AND RE RE UH, DO THE MOTION OR HOW DOES THAT MOTION TO RE RECONSIDER? YEAH, WE HAVE MOTION TO RECONSIDER. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ORING, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ZUNA TO RECONSIDER FOR CLARIFICATION STATEMENTS ON THE, ON THE MAIN MOTION. UM, LET'S TAKE A VOICE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR? A. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. UH, MOTION RECONSIDER. IS, IS DONE. UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, CAN YOU MAKE A MOTION? UH, CAN HE JUST REFERENCE THE PREVIOUS MOTION AND JUST MAKE A VERBAL ADJUSTMENT? SURE. YOU, YEAH. YOU CAN MAKE REFERENCE TO IT. YES. REGARDING THE SAME CASE, BO O A DASH 22 DASH 0 3 0 2 2. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE REQUEST FOR SOME DOING THE, THE 20 FOOT BUFFERS OR SETBACK? IT WOULD BE A, I WOULD, I WOULD READ, READ THE WHOLE THING AS NORMAL AND WE'LL MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT. 20 FOOT SETBACK ON THE NORTH, A 20 FOOT SETBACK ON THE NORTH, UH, UH, PROPERTY LINE. UM, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY MOTION I'M MAKING, RIGHT? YEAH, BECAUSE WE, WE HAVE, WE RECONSIDER THE ENTIRE THING. CORRECT. OKAY. YOU RECONSIDERED THE ENTIRE THING. I WOULD JUST READ THE WHOLE THING LIKE YOU DID, AND THEN WE'LL JUST MAKE THE ADJUSTMENT AT THE END REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 2 0 2. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTING GRAND REQUEST FOR ONE, A 25 FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. TWO, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT REAR BUFFER TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY. LINE THREE OF FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT SIDE BUFFER BUFFER TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND FOUR, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FI 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER TO ALL ALLOW PARKING TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 57 11 SOUTH I H 35 AND NINE 30 FIT STREET. UM, APPLICANT BEING MARKED, UH, KY BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED, SO THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY, SUCH A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS. SO THE U D C HAS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN NECESSARY HARDSHIP. I ALSO LIKE TO, UH, INCLUDE EXHIBIT THE PARKING, UH, EXHIBIT AS PROVIDED IN THE SITE PLAN. OKAY. AND I SECOND, AND THEN I ASK FOR A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. WE'LL DO IT THIS WAY TO ADJUST THE REAR SETBACK. UM, A, A ABUTTING THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE OF 9 34 AND NINE 40 FITCH STREET TO BE A 10 FOOT VARIANCE. UH, AND THAT THE FIVE FOOT BUFFER BE AMENDED AT THE REAR OR SOUTH PROPERTY LINE AT 9 34 AND NINE 40 FIT STREET TO BE A 10 FOOT BUFFER ACCEPTED. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. AONA. YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN? YES, I CONCUR THE FINDINGS EVENT. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT I CONCUR. MR. MANCHACA I CONCUR. MR. VAZQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIND I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR THE [05:10:01] FACT. MS. KAPLAN, I CONCUR. AND MS. MEESE, I CONCUR. MOTION PASSES 10 TO ZERO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. IT'S 6 41. UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN HAS LEFT THE MEETING. WE ARE DOWN TO NINE MEMBERS. SO WE'RE GONNA HEAR ITEM NUMBER 10. AND FOR THE, FOR THE REMAINING APPLICANTS HERE, IF, UH, BECAUSE WE HAVE NINE MEMBERS, UH, IF, IF ONE MEMBER OR MORE VOTES, UH, NO, THEN THE MOTION WILL WILL DIE. SO IF YOU ARE OF CONCERN, UH, I SUGGEST THAT YOU, YOU KNOW, PRESENT YOUR CASE, BUT IF YOU FEEL CONCERNED, YOU CAN ASK ME TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE SO THAT WE MAY HAVE MORE MEMBERS, UH, DEVOTE UPON YOUR CASE. SO I'M JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE. SO ITEM NUMBER NINE, I MEAN 10 BO A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 3 16 9 1 5. VISTA FOREST DRIVE COUNCIL, DISTRICT 10, APPLICANT BEING LEWIS FERLA. A REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK. THE ZONING IS R SIX, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG VISA FOREST DRIVE NEAR JUDSON ROAD. A ZONING U D C INVESTIGATION BEGAN BECAUSE THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCTED AN ATTACHED CARPORT WITHOUT PULLING BUILDING PERMITS. CARPORTS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A SETBACK OF 10 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND THE EXISTING CARPORT IS CURRENTLY FIVE. UPON SITE VISITS. STAFF OBSERVED THAT THERE WERE NO OTHER CARPORTS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. HERE'S THE SITE PLAN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THE FRONT SETBACK, THE SURROUNDING AREA, STAFF RECOMMENDATION SIDE OR FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN BOA 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 3. THE ONE OF THE CARPORT WOULD BE FIVE FEET FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK, WHICH DOES NOT PROVIDE THE ADEQUATE SPACING FROM THE STREET AND THE CURB. AND TWO, NO OTHER CARPORTS WERE FOUND IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. AND LASTLY, THREE. THE CARPORT WERE WILL INJURE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES AND MAY ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. HERE'S THE, UM, NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MAILED OUT 32 NOTICES. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND LASTLY, VISA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED OF THE REQUEST. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, IF THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME'S LOUIS OLIS. I'M AN ENGINEER HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. AND, UM, REPRESENT THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY. THEY CONSTRUCTED THIS THING WITHOUT PULLING PERMITS AND, UH, THE CODE COMPLIANCE, UH, CAME AROUND, SAW THE, UH, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE, UH, UH, OF THE CARPORT, AND, UH, INFORMED THEM OF THE FACT THAT THEY HAD TO GET A PERMIT. I TOLD THEM, CAN'T GET A PERMIT WITHOUT, UH, GETTING A VARIANCE. SO THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TRYING TO, UH, SEE IF WE COULD, UH, GET THAT VARIANCE IN ORDER TO GET THE PERMIT AND, UH, MAKE THIS ALL LEGAL. UM, I, I, UH, DO KNOW THAT THERE'S, I FOUND THREE DIFFERENT CARPORTS IN THE GENERAL, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD AREA, WHICH I SUBMITTED TO THE CITY. UH, NOT ONLY PICTURES, BUT ALSO, UH, UH, UH, LOCATIONS OF THEM, UH, WITH CARPORTS LIKE THIS. OKAY. YEAH, I'M, I'M GOING THROUGH GOOGLE MAPS MYSELF, . SO THERE, UH, I WENT THROUGH GOOGLE MAPS ALSO TRYING TO FIND IT. AND YOU'RE NOT GONNA SEE 'EM BECAUSE OF THE WOODED AREAS, BUT I DID, UH, UH, BY DRIVING THROUGH, UH, WAS ABLE TO, UH, LOCATE THREE OF THEM. OKAY. SO, UM, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTARY YOU WANNA SEND TO SPEAK? IT'S NO PROBLEM. OKAY. SO, QUICK QUESTION ON GOOGLE MAPS. NOW, THERE'S, THEY GOT FOUR CARS PARKING IN THIS DRIVEWAY, AND LIKE TWO OF THEM ARE PROFUSELY HANGING OUT INTO THE STREET. SO IS, IS THERE A, A, A, A LARGE NUMBER OF VEHICLES THAT ARE RESIDED? WELL, THERE'S, UH, I BELIEVE THERE'S, UH, UH, THE GENTLEMAN HAS, UH, AN AFFINITY FOR CERTAIN, UH, TYPES OF CARS AND HE LIKES TO COLLECT AND, UH, HIM ALONG WITH HIS SON. SO THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE THAT . OKAY. . [05:15:01] OKAY. UM, AND WHERE WERE THE OTHER CARPORTS YOU OBSERVED? I'M JUST WORKING MY, MY WAY AROUND WOULD, WOULD THEY BE WITHIN THREE OR FOUR BLOCKS OR THEY WERE, UH, WITHIN, UH, UH, THREE OR FOUR BLOCKS OF THE AREA. BUT YOU ALMOST HAVE, UH, THE WAY I WAS ABLE TO, UH, IDENTIFY 'EM, YOU HAVE TO LITERALLY, UH, BE ON THE STREET LOOKING BECAUSE THE, UH, UH, CANOPY COVERS, UH, YOU CAN'T SEE 'EM THROUGH AERIALS. YEAH. YEAH. I'M JUST DOING STREET VIEW. UM, OKAY. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YES, SIR. DO YOU KNOW IF, IF THE SUBDIVISION HAS ANY DEEDED RESTRICTIONS AGAINST, UM, CARPORTS LIKE THIS? 'CAUSE EVEN IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE, THE, UH, THE NEIGHBOR THERE WAS, THERE WAS NOTHING, UH, IN THE DEEDED RESTRICTION THAT I SAW THAT, UH, UH, KEPT THEM FROM HAVING CARPORTS. AND LIKE I SAID, THERE'S, UH, OTHER, THERE'S, UH, OTHER PEOPLE IN THE GENERAL VICINITY THAT DO HAVE CARDBOARDS. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA, UM, BY CHANCE, DID YOU HAPPEN HAVE AN, UH, OPPORTUNITY TO TALK WITH THE VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITH REGARDS? NO, SIR. I DID NOT SPEAK WITH THEM. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? YES. COMMISSIONER LYNN, YOU SAID YOU HAD THE ADDRESSES OF THE OTHER HOMES WITH CARPORTS? YES. YES, MA'AM. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THEY ARE? UH, I'VE GOT THE FILE. I, I SENT IT IN WITH THE, UH, APPLICATION ALONG WITH PHOTOS OF THEM. AND, UH, I, I'VE GOT THE FILE AT MY OFFICE. I WAS JUST TOLD TODAY THAT WE HAD, UH, THIS MEETING, I, I WASN'T AWARE OR I WOULD'VE, UH, COME PREPARED WITH ALL OF THAT. NOW WE DON'T HAVE ANY ON THE, UH, APPLICATION MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, SO RIGHT NOW, LOOKING AT THE CARPORT, IT EXTENDS OVER BY FIVE FOOT. CAN THAT BE REDUCED AT ALL WITH REGARDS TO THE EXTENT THAT IT'S HANGING OVER? I, UH, I PRESENTED THAT TO THE OWNERS AND, UH, IF YOU, UH, REDUCE THAT, YOU, UH, COME UP WITH A CARPORT THAT'S NOT, UH, WON'T EVEN COVER ONE CAR. IT'S NOT A VERY LONG, UH, DRIVEWAY. BUT THEY COULD, YOU COULD MOVE THE POST PACK AND HAVE IT CANTILEVER OVER. YES. AND I, I, UH, TOLD THEM THAT, OKAY, 'CAUSE THIS DOESN'T PASS. THEY MAY HAVE NO CHOICE TO DO SOMETHING. YEAH, I KNOW. OKAY, ANOTHER QUESTION, COMMISSIONER Z. SO DID, DID HE BUILD THIS HIMSELF OR WHO DID HE HAVE A OH, I HAVE NO IDEA WHO BUILT IT. I DON'T, WE ASK HIM. 'CAUSE IF IT WAS PROFESSIONALLY BUILT, I DIDN'T, HE, HE DOESN'T KNOW EITHER. HE'S, UH, THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE OWNER ON A, UH, PATIO THEY'RE DOING IN THE, UH, REAR OF THE PROPERTY. SO, UH, WE, AND I ASKED THE, UH, OWNER'S WIFE, UH, WHEN I WENT OUT THERE AND SHE HAD NO IDEA WHO HAD BUILT IT, BECAUSE I'M ALSO SEEING ELECTRICAL. IS THIS THE LIGHTS UNDERNEATH THE MM-HMM. PATIO. SO THERE'S ELECTRICAL WORK. YES, SIR. THAT WOULD'VE REQUIRED ELECTRICAL PERMIT PERMITS. AND THAT'S GONNA BE PART OF ALL THE, UH, PERMIT PERMITTING PROCESS PERMIT? YES, SIR. AND, AND YOU'RE HERE AS A TO, AS AN ENGINEER TO CERTIFY THE SUPERSTRUCTURE YES. MOVING FORWARD. OKAY. YES. OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONER MEESE? UM, WE'RE LOOKING AT GIGGLE MAPS HERE, AND WE FOUND THREE OR FOUR CARPORTS JUST DOWN THE STREET. YEAH. 10 HOUSES DOWN. YEAH. OH, THERE'S ONE. YEAH. I CAN SEE ONE AT, UH, IT'S OFF THIS, I GUESS. V COURT DRIVE. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSION QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. AND, UM, DID YOU WANT TO, UH, REQUEST A CONTINUOUS SO YOU COULD TALK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND POSSIBLY COME BACK IF THERE'S MORE THAN NINE MEMBERS HERE? SURE. OKAY. UH, STAFF ONE'S THE NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING, THAT'D BE THE, THE 12TH, UM, WOULD BE THE NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING. 12TH DECEMBER. OKAY. UM, SO WE'RE GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. UM, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION, BUT I'M LOOKING FOR A COMMISSIONER TO, IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE, FOR, YOU KNOW, AS, AS, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED AND KIND OF SEE IF, UH, HOW THE DELIBERATION [05:20:01] GOES. MY, YEAH. MY PREFERENCE IS TO READ THE MOTION AND SEE HOW, HOW THE DELIBERATION GOES. AND IF WE COULD PLEASE HAVE, UH, THE COURTESY, IF THERE IS ANY OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION THAT WE HEAR IT, UH, SO THAT WE COULD THEN PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE APPLICANT TO REPRESENT, UH, AT THE NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING. OKAY. UH, QUICK CORRECTION. UH, DECEMBER 5TH IS THE NEXT MEETING. I'M SORRY, IS THAT, WOULD THAT BE ENOUGH TIME? SURE. YEAH. OKAY. SO MY INTENT IS TO READ THE MOTION, MR. CHAIR. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 22 DASH ZERO THREE. YEAH. 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 3. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM, MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK, SITUATED AT 69 1 15 VISTA FOREST DRIVE, APPLICANT BEING LEWIS OLIS PE BECAUSE OF TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SO THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY AS SUCH, THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C HAS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS. SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE OF THE FRONT STEPBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE, UH, FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK. UH, THE SPACING PROVIDES SUITABLE SPACING BETWEEN THE CARPORT AND THE CURB, WHICH IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. LITTLE ENFORCEMENT. THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT BUILDING THE CARPORT 10 FEET FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK, OR DEMOLISHING THE CARPORT, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THERE IS LIMITED SPACING TO BUILD A SIZABLE CARPORT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE OF THE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WOULD BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE, RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW OF THE CARPORT WOULD BE FIVE FEET FROM THE BACKSIDE OF THE SIDEWALK, WHICH WILL BE, WHICH WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT WOULD PROVIDE ADEQUATE DISTANCE FROM THE SIDE, FROM THE SIDEWALK, UH, FOR THE VARIANCE, WOULD NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. UH, NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVES EXPERIENCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALL TO THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. IF GRANTED, THE CARPORT WILL MAINTAIN FIVE FEET FROM THE BACK SI BACK OF THE SIDEWALK. THE DISTANCE PROVIDES ADEQUATE SPACING, WHICH IS NOT LIKELY TO INJURE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALL TO THE ESSENTIAL CHARACT OF THE DISTRICT. SIX APPLIED THE PROPERTY OWNER, UH, FOR THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE OF SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS. THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, STAFF FIND, IS APPLIED TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE OF SOUGHT AS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS LIMITED SPACING IN THE FRONT. THE CIRCUMSTANCES APPEAR TO BE THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITION TO THE DISTRICT POINTS, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, AND A MOTION. I'LL SECOND THAT. UM, ANY DISCUSSION FROM ANY MEMBERS WHO MIGHT BE OPPOSED TO THIS MOTION? YEAH, I, I, MR. SALMAN, IT PROBABLY WILL CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S HARDLY ANY, YOU KNOW, CARPORTS. AND IF I WERE A NEIGHBOR, I PROBABLY WOULD BE OPPOSED TO SOMEBODY PUTTING A CARPORT LIKE THIS IN FRONT WHEN I, NO, MOST, MOST OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES DIDN'T, SO I'D PROBABLY VOTE AGAINST IT. EXCUSE ME. BUT I GOT, UH, LETTERS FROM THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORS AND THE NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET THAT HAD NO OPPOSITION TO IT. OKAY. UM, STAFF WAS THERE. WAS THAT PART OF THE, UH, WE DON'T HAVE THOSE LETTERS. I'LL, I'LL BRING THOSE WITH ME. OKAY. 'CAUSE I HAVE THEM. SO COMMISSIONER Z, DID YOU RESCIND YOUR MOTION? I RESCIND THE MOTION AND SEEK A CONTINUANCE OF THE, OF THE CASE UNTIL THE NEXT AVAILABLE, WHICH IS DECEMBER. DECEMBER 5TH. THE FIFTH. I SECOND. SO OF A MOTION FOR A CONTINUOUS TO DECEMBER 5TH, UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ORIAN. UH, HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MR. OONA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR. MR. SPIELMAN. I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIN. I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR. AND MS. MEESE, I CONCUR. ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES. UH, NINE TO ZERO. WE'LL SEE YOU ON THE FIFTH. UM, ONE COMMENT. CHAIRMAN. YES. COMMISSIONER. SO ONE OF THE THINGS I NOTICED, UM, SORRY SIR SPEAKING, UM, WAS THAT SEVERAL OF THE CARPORTS THAT WERE PICTURED ON THAT STREET HAD THE POLES PUSHED BACK BY SEVERAL FEET. SO YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE AN OVERHANG. YES. SO, SO SOME TO CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, AS A POSSIBILITY, UM, ON A SUBSEQUENT DIALOGUE. LIKE I SAID, I'VE ALREADY TALKED TO THE OWNERS ABOUT DOING THAT. WE JUST WANTED TO GET IT TO THIS POINT. OKAY? THANK YOU. THANKS. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. WE'RE GONNA HAVE A, UH, SEVEN MINUTE BREAK, [05:25:13] RIGHT? SEVEN O'CLOCK, UH, SIX O'CLOCK. OH, IT IS AT SEVEN. UH, ITEM 11. ITEM 11, BO O A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 6. ADDRESS IS 1751 AMANDA STREET COUNCIL. DISTRICT THREE APPLICANT MATTHEW MORALES. A REQUEST FOR 610 SQUARE FEET FROM THE 6,000 MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A LOT TO BE 5,390 SQUARE FEET. THE CURRENT ZONING IS R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG A AMANDA STREET NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF RIGSBY AVENUE AND ROLAND AVENUE. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO CONSTRUCT THE NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING. UPON SITE VISIT STAFF OBSERVED THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS ONE OF FOUR VACANT LOTS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. HERE'S THE SITE PLAN N THE SUB SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. OF FACT, THERE ARE LOTS WITH SIMILAR SIZE AND DIMENSIONS FOUND IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. AND TWO, THE VARIANT TO THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. AND HERE'S THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MOWED OUT 23 NOTICES. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM PASADENA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE HERE. OKAY. HELLO? YES. UH, COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION? UH, I'M MATTHEW MORALES. I AM A REAL ESTATE AGENT AND, UH, NEW DEVELOPER IN THE AREA. THIS IS THE FIRST OF TWO LOTS THAT I HAD PURCHASED IN THE SAN ANTONIO AREA TO DEVELOP. UH, I'VE SOLD HOMES FOR THE PAST, YOU KNOW, SIX, SEVEN YEARS. UM, I BOUGHT THE LOT WITH THE INTENT TO DEVELOP AN AFFORDABLE HOUSE FOR THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE I'VE OWNED SEVERAL PROPERTIES AROUND THE, UH, AREA AND I'VE REHABBED THE HOMES AND, UH, ENDED UP SELLING THOSE PROPERTIES AND DETERMINED THAT THAT'S NOT THE BEST WAY TO DO IT. THAT IT'D BE A LOT EASIER IF I BUILT THEM TO, I'D BUILD THIS HOUSE TO, UH, IDEALLY RENT OUT, UM, AND, AND KEEP LONG-TERM, UH, FOR TENANTS IN THE AREA. UH, AT, AT SOME POINT I WILL SELL IT BACK TO THE COMMUNITY AND LET SOMEONE GO AND INHABIT THAT HOUSE, YOU KNOW, AND OWN THAT PROPERTY. BUT FOR THE TIME BEING, I'D LIKE TO KEEP IT AS A RENTAL PROPERTY AFTER IT'S BUILT. UM, AND, AND THAT WAS THE, THE REASONING FOR, FOR WANTING TO BUILD. I DO HAVE ADDRESSES THAT I WAS GONNA BE ABLE TO PROVIDE ON MY PHONE, UH, OF SOLD COMPS. THERE'S SIX SOLD COMPS IN THE AREA THAT ARE, UH, THREE OF THEM WERE NEW BUILDS. THREE OF THEM WERE PRE-OWNED. UM, AND I, I, I UNFORTUNATELY DIDN'T WRITE DOWN THE ADDRESSES 'CAUSE I HAD THEM ALL WITH ME TO, YOU KNOW, PRESENT HERE. BUT I, I, MY PHONE DIED AFTER THE DELAY. SO, UM, THAT'S REALLY ALL THAT I HAVE. I HOPE THAT I DON'T HAVE TO GET A CONTINUATION AND I'D LIKE TO JUST BE ABLE TO BUILD AND BREAK GROUND. LET ME ASK YOU, UH, JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. I NOTICED THAT THIS AREA HAS R FOUR ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET. YOU'RE R SIX BECAUSE A LOTS ARE MOST LIKELY A LITTLE WIDER, BUT, UH, WAS THIS TRACK OF LAND IN THIS CONFIGURATION FOR QUITE SOME TIME OR IS THIS A, A NEW CONFIGURATION? IT'S, IT'S BEEN IN THAT CONFIGURATION. UM, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT DATE OF HOW LONG IT'S BEEN THERE, BUT AS FAR AS I'M AWARE, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN ZONED. UH, AND, AND STAFF, THIS DIDN'T PREDATE JANUARY, 2005 WHERE THEY WOULD MEET AN EXEMPTION, OR IS IT THE ZONING HAVE TO BE ABIDED BY AS ONE OF THE TESTS? UH, I CAN CHECK TO SEE IF I CAN FIND, UM, ANY, UH, DEEDS BEFORE 2005 IN THIS CONFIGURATION. OKAY. BUT I MEAN, IT'S CLEANER THIS WAY. SO IF THERE'S ANY, UH, ANYONE TIME TO SPEAK, ANY, UH, VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. SO IS THERE ANY COMMISSION QUESTIONS? ANA? SO JUST QUESTION. SO YOU TALKED ABOUT, UH, RENTAL, YOU TALKED ABOUT LONG-TERM RENTAL? YES. LONG-TERM RENTAL FRONT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. YEAH. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION MEESE COMMISSIONER ME, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 22 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 6. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTOR REQUEST 610 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 6,000 FOOT MINIMUM [05:30:01] LOT SIZE AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 35 DASH 3 0 0 1 TO ALLOW A LOT TO BE 5,390 SQUARE FEET SITUATED AT 1 7 5 1 AMANDA STREET, APPLICANT BEING MATTHEW MORALES. 'CAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR 610 SQUARE FEET FROM THE 6,000 MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO ALLOW A LOT TO BE 5,390 SQUARE FEET, WHICH DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCES WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT NOT BEING ABLE TO CONSTRUCT THE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. AS THE LOT SIZE DOES NOT MEAN THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIRED. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE PROPOSED VARIANCE OF 610 SQUARE FEET WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IN SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE SERVED AS THERE ARE OTHER PROPERTIES SIMILAR AND WITH SIMILAR LOT SIZES AND DIMENSION WERE OBSERVED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIAL INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WILL NOT BE ALTERED AS THE REQUEST FOR A 610 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE WILL BE HARMONIOUS WITH THE LOT, SHAPE AND SIZES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SIZE 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 SAW AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE SMALL AMOUNT OF AVAILABLE SPACE AND UNIFORM LOT SIZE IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY. CONCLUDING THE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER AMANDA. COMMISSIONER MEESE. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION COMMISSIONER MANOCK. I'LL QUOTE, UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN THAT WE'RE IN DIRE DEED OF HOUSING STOCK. AND THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF HAVING ONE. THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, AND THAT CONFIGURATION STARTED IN 2015. I I MEAN, I FOUND, I FOUND A DEED IN OH SEVEN. UM, I WAS LOOKING TOO, BUT, UM, THAT'S AS FAR BACK AS I CAN GO. BUT, UH, WITH THAT, UH, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. MEES. I CONCUR. 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. LIND I CONCUR. MR. ZUNO, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. NINE TO ZERO. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THE LAST CASE ITEM 12. APPRECIATE, THANK YOU SO MUCH, BO. A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 8 42 11 KATRINA LANE COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE APPLICANT BEING RIO DELBOSQUE. A REQUEST FOR A SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT WITH, UM, OVERHANG TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE CURRENT ZONING IS R AND FOUR RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG KATRINA LANE NEAR ROLAND AVENUE. THE APPLICANT IS PLANNING ON CONSTRUCTING AN ATTACHED CARPORT WITH NO GUTTERS. THE PROPOSED CARPORT IS ANTICIPATED TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. A CARPORT IS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN 10 FEET FROM THE PRO, FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. AND HERE IS THE SITE PLAN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. UM, RECOMMENDATION FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS SCENARIO IN BO A 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. OF FACT, THE CARPORT WOULD BE THREE FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, WHICH DOES NOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE SPACING. AND TWO, THE CARPORT WILL INJURE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES THAT MAY ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. AND HERE'S THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MAILED OUT 43 NOTICES. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND LASTLY, NO RESPONSE FROM THE PECAN VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS [05:35:01] CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. UH, QUICK QUESTION, THE CARPORT THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR REPORT IS, WAS THAT ONE, UM, LEGALLY PERMITTED OR IS THAT THE, WHICH ONE? THE, THE LAST PICTURE YOU HAD. YOU HAD ONE FROM A FEW HOUSES UP THE STREET. OH, THAT ONE IS, NO, I DID NOT FIND A PERMIT FOR THAT ONE. OKAY. HELLO. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME IN YOUR PRESENTATION. YES, THANK YOU. UH, RIO DEL BOSKIN. IF I MAY, SINCE IT'S ALL ON MINE, IT IS PERMITTED. UH, THE GENTLEMAN BUILT IT WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION AND HE RESIDES AT, UM, 42, 23. NO. YEAH, 42 23. HE CAME BACK AND HE GOT PERMISSION, SO IT IS PERMITTED. UH, UH, SO, UM, I'M SORRY FOR THAT, BUT CAN I HAVE THE, UH, THE SITE PLAN PLEASE? UH, I THINK THE SITE PLAN IS MAYBE A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO READ, BUT IT'S 20 FOOT ACROSS. THAT'S THE ELEVATION FROM THE GARAGE. THE FRONT, THE ACTUAL DIMENSIONS OF MY PROPOSED, UH, UH, CARPORT WILL BE MADE CONSTRUCTED OF METAL, AND IT'LL GO 18 INCHES ACROSS, LEAVING ONE FOOT ON EACH SIDE, THEREFORE, NOT ENCROACHING ON THE PROPERTY ON THIS SIDE, SINCE IT IS CORRUGATED METAL, I WILL NOT NEED GUTTERS, UH, BECAUSE THE, THE CORRUGATED METAL HAS LINES IN IT, AS YOU ALL ARE PROBABLY FAMILIAR WITH, SO IT'LL RUN DOWN THE STREET. UM, MY WIFE AND I MOVED THERE ABOUT 30 YEARS AGO WHEN THE KIDS WERE LITTLE. AND, UH, I'VE ALWAYS WANTED TO HAVE A CARPORT. AND NOW IT'S MORE ESSENTIAL BECAUSE BY THE GRACE OF GOD, MY WIFE HAS WON THE BATTLE WITH CANCER. BUT, UH, SHE STILL NEEDS TO TAKE MEDICATION AND, UH, SHE THEREFORE SHE CAN'T BE, I DON'T LIKE HER TO BE GETTING WET OR COLD LIKE WE'RE GONNA DO HAPPEN WHEN WE LEAVE HERE. BUT SHE'S TAKING MEDICATION AND SHE CAN'T REALLY BE IN THE HEAT. UH, ALSO ADDITIONALLY, I'M A DISABLED, DISABLED MARINE CORPS VET. I SUFFER, UH, THANKS TO THE MARINE CORPS FROM, UH, A BAD BACK. SEVERAL, UH, MULTIPLE BACK SURGERIES. AND, UH, I HAVE A LOT OF PROCEDURES THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, AND SHE BRINGS ME BACK HOME. I'M GROGGY. I HAVE, UH, DOUBLE VISION, UH, THANKS TO THE MARINE CORPS AS WELL. AND SO IT'S HARD FOR ME TO, UH, TRAVEL TO GETTING OUTTA THE CAR IN THE HEAT OR WHEN IT'S RAINING AND THEREFORE, UH, AND, AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO, UH, THE CARPORT WOULD REALLY, UM, ENHANCE OUR, OUR LIVING, UM, ADDRESS. CAN I HAVE THE NOTIFICATION, UH, PLAN? I WANT TO, UH, ADDRESS THE NOTIFICATION MAP. UM, THERE ARE TWO EXISTING ON THE, UH, FAR ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET. MY SUBDIVISION IS ABOUT THANKS. WHERE'S THE, UH, RIGHT HERE? MY SUBDIVISION IS MADE UP ABOUT THREE AND A HALF STREETS, SO IT'S RATHER SMALL. UH, LET'S SEE HERE. UH, THESE TWO HOUSES HAVE CARPORTS WITH THREE FOOT SETBACKS. UH, 42, 23. AS I MENTIONED, A HAS AN EXISTING CARPORT WITH A THREE FOOT, UH, SETBACK AS WELL. AND WHILE IT'S NOT HERE, THERE'S ANOTHER ONE HERE AT 43 18 THAT WAS JUST APPROVED BY THIS BODY, UH, EARLIER THIS SPRING. THIS ONE HERE WAS ALSO JUST APPROVED EARLIER THIS SPRING AS WELL. UM, SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS THERE'S ALREADY BEEN A SET OF PRECEDENTS. I NOTICED THAT THERE ARE 43 NOTICES. I BELIEVE I HAVE A, A PHONE MESSAGE AS ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS TOLD ME THAT HE CALLED IN. BUT IF THE 43 NOTICES, UH, WERE NOT MAILED IN, THEN THEY HAD THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, CONTACT THIS BODY. UH, IF THEY WERE IN DISAGREEMENT, UH, ALL THE HOMES, THE, THE, THE DRIVEWAYS ARE THE SAME LENGTH. UH, THEY'RE NOT COOKIE CUTTER, UM, HOUSES, BUT THE CARPORTS, WE ALL SHARE THE SAME ALIGNMENT ON THE SIDEWALK, WHICH IS OUR PROPERTY LINE. UM, AND SO, UM, I, I, I, I, I WOULDN'T, I, I I, I WOULDN'T [05:40:01] UNDERSTAND WHY THERE WOULD BE A DENIAL, UH, SINCE THERE IS ALREADY A PRECEDENCE. SO, UM, I'M ASKING FOR THAT SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE WITH A THREE FOOT SETBACK. AND I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A, UH, A UH, APPROVAL. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. I, WE'LL SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. ME? YES. THANKS. UM, DOES THE CITY HAVE CONFIRMATION OF THOSE OTHER, UH, VARIANTS? SO WE DO HAVE A CONFIRMATION OF 42 23 KATRINA. IT GOT APPROVED IN 2018 FOR A SEVEN FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE WORK CARPORT. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THE OTHER TWO ARE LOCATED ON, UM, GRECO, ON THE OTHER STREET. YOU, YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT IT WAS GONNA BE CORRUGATED METAL. UH, 'CAUSE WE DON'T, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY, ANY OF THE DESIGN IN FRONT OF US OTHER THAN THE RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT. SO CAN YOU KIND OF TALK ABOUT LIKE WHERE THE SUPPORT POSTS, YOU'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDEWALK? YES, SIR. BUT, BUT THE MEASUREMENT IS REALLY MEASURED FROM THE POST YOU. RIGHT. YOU HAVE A FIVE FOOT OVERHANG. ARE YOU GONNA HAVE ANY SORT OF OVERHANG? NO. NO. NO. SO YOUR POSTS ARE GONNA BE THREE FEET OFF. THREE FEET RIGHT THERE, RIGHT BEHIND, JUST LIKE ALL THE OTHERS? YES. SO YOU'LL, YOU'LL BE THREE FEET BEHIND THE BACK OF SIDEWALK? YES, SIR. OKAY. YEAH. AND YOU'RE, AND YOUR SITE DOES DRAIN TOWARDS THE STREET. SO YOUR, YOUR CARPORT IS GONNA BE SLANTED TOWARDS THE STREET. EXACTLY. YES, SIR. IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT GONNA BE PITCHED. AND I'M MEANT TO MENTION THAT. UH, FORGIVE ME. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MANA, MR. MANNA? SO, SO AS WE READ THE MOTION, CAN WE STATE THAT THERE'S ZERO OVERHANG THEN SO AS TO ENSURE THAT IT DOESN'T ENCROACH? THERE MIGHT BE JUST A, A LIP, BUT I, I'M NOT GONNA SAY A FOOT LONG. WELL, WHAT HAPPENS IS, UM, YOU'RE ALLOWED UP TO FIVE FEET FROM THE POST. SO IF YOUR POST WAS FIVE FEET AWAY OR 10 FEET AWAY, YOU COULD OVERHANG FIVE FEET. WHAT, AS THIS WAS ADVERTISED, YOU'RE ASKING FOR A SEVEN FOOT VARIANT SO THAT IN THEORY, YOUR POST COULD BE THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE SIDEWALK WITH NO OVERHANG, OR THREE FEET, TWO INCHES WITH A TWO INCH OVERHANG. COULD I MODIFY THE, AS LONG AS YOU DON'T HAVE THE POST CLOSER. NO, IT, IT'S GONNA BE PROBABLY, IT'S GONNA PROBABLY BE GREATER THAN THREE FEET. OKAY. INWARDS. SO THAT I DON'T, BUT THE TOP CAN'T GET TO EXACTLY. EXACTLY. SO THREE FEET. EXACTLY. YEAH. I DON'T WANT TO ENCROACH. UH, I'M A, UH, RETIRED FEDERAL RURAL PROPERTY OFFICER AND REAL ESTATE OFFICER. SO I UNDERSTAND ALL THE SPECIFICS AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I'M NOT ENCROACHING OR HAVE THE CITY ON MY BACK. SO JUST TO, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DESIGN, BUT CAN YOU STATE AS A CLARIFICATION THAT IT IS, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING FOR YOU TO STATE THAT I'M GONNA BUILD A CARPORT THAT'S CORRUGATED METAL, THAT'S GOING TO BE RIGHT UNIFORMLY SLOPED TO THE STREET. EXACTLY. YOU KNOW, AND, AND YOU KNOW, JUST SO THAT WE CAN REFERENCE THAT IN A MOTION. YEAH. THE, THE CONSTRUCTION WOULD BE CORRUGATED METAL WITH THE, WITH A FOUR INCH POST. MM-HMM. GREATER THAN THREE FEET IN TOWARDS MY HOUSE. OKAY. SO THEREFORE, IF THERE'S A TWO INCH OVERHANG, IT'S NOT GOING TO EXCEED THE THREE FEET. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. SO IS ANYBODY, UH, WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION? UH, JUST A QUESTION. YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER MENCHACA? UH, SIR, WHEN YOU PUT THIS CARPORT, THE, UH, THE ROOF WILL BE AT, LIKE, AT THE EDGE OF THE ROOF OF THE HOUSE, OR YES. I'M SORRY. YES, SIR. IT'LL BE ATTACHED. SO ABOUT EIGHT FEET BY WHAT? ABOUT EIGHT FEET TALL? HIGH. UH, I WANTED IT SLAMMED, SO, UM, I, I DIDN'T GET INTO, UH, YOU DIDN'T GET INTO, UH, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE NORMAL SIZE WITH, UH, WITH THE EXISTING, UH, FASCIA COMING DOWN. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? ME, COMMISSIONER ME. REGARDING CASE NUMBER VO A 22 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 8, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR A SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT WITH OVERHANG TO BE THREE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 42 11 KATRINA LANE. APPLICANT BEING LARIO DELBOSQUE BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT WHEN THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING [05:45:01] A VARIANCE TO THE FRONT STEPBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE THREE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE SPACING PROVIDES SUITABLE SPACING BETWEEN THE CARPORT AND CURB, WHICH IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT BUILDING THE CARPORT 10 FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, OR DEMOLISHING THE CARPORT, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THERE IS LIMITED SPACING TO BUILD A SIZABLE CARPORT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE PROPOSED CARPORT WOULD BE THREE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, WHICH WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT WOULD PROVIDE ADEQUATE DISTANCE FROM THE SIDEWALK. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A 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 THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. IF GRANTED, THE CARPORT WILL MAINTAIN THREE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THIS DISTANCE PROVIDES ADEQUATE SPACING, WHICH IS NOT LIKELY TO YOUR ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES AND ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SET 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 DUE 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 THAT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES SINK ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS LIMITING SPACE IN THE FRONT. THE CIRCUMSTANCES APPEAR TO BE THE RESULTS OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. SECOND, IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER, MADA. COMMISSIONER M I SUPPORT THE MOTION. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER MADDA. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I HAVE ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MS. MEES. I CONCUR. MR. MANO. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. SPILLMAN. I CONCUR. MR. ALBERT. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. VAZQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. LIND I CONCUR. MR. UNA I CONCUR. CHAIR ORANGE AND I CONCUR WITH THE NIES OF F*G. MOTION PASSES. NINE TO ZERO. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. I HAVE TO TELL YOU THIS, THIS IS ONE OF THE LONGEST MEETINGS THAT Y'ALL HAD TO, Y'ALL HAD TO SIT THROUGH. BUT THANKS. PURPOSE. THANK. THANK Y'ALL. OKAY, WE HAVE ONE, UH, ITEM 14 HAS BEEN POST, UH, WITHDRAWN ON, UNLESS WE WANT TO HEAR IT ANYWAY. , PLEASE KNOW. OKAY. AND THEN [Approval of Minutes  ] NEXT ITEM IS, NEXT ITEM IS THE, UH, MINUTES. UH, I HAD SOME ADJUSTMENTS. SO DID COMMISSIONER MANNA. I'VE, I'VE BEEN GIVEN A PRINTOUT. THEY'VE ALL BEEN MADE. SO IF THERE'S ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, AMENDMENTS. HEARING NONE. LET'S, UH, MOVE TO APPROVE. UH, PARDON ME. I THINK SOMEBODY MOVED TO APPROVE. MOVE TO APPROVE. OH, OKAY. WE'VE MOVED TO APPROVE. COMMISSIONER MANCHACA, DID YOU MOVE TO APPROVE? DID YOU MOVE TO APPROVE? WHO MOVED? WHO MADE THE MOTION? COMMISSIONER MANTO. SORRY. OH, YEAH, EVERY TIME I SEE, I KEEP THINKING YOU. OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MANEZ OR A SECOND? SECOND. COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER. ME. UH, AND UH, ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION PASSES. UH, IS THERE A STAFF REPORT? NO. NOTHING TO REPORT EXCEPT HAPPY THANKSGIVING. EVERYONE. HAVE A GREAT WEEK. THANK YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK. WE APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, ALLALL. AND THE NEXT MEETING IS THE 5TH OF DECEMBER, CORRECT? SEEMS LIKE AN ETERNITY AWAY. ALRIGHT, I HEREBY ADJOURN THE MEETING. IT IS 7 24. * 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.