* 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. CHRISTIE, [00:00:01] CAN I? ALRIGHT, GOOD, GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, THE TIME IS, UH, 1 0 3 AND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IN ORDER. I'D ASK IF THE SPANISH TRANSLATOR CAN COME FORWARD AND MAKE A QUICK PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU. PLEASE BE KIND ENOUGH TO SILENCE ALL MOBILE DEVICES. UH, THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS WILL COME TO ORDER. PLEASE CALL MISSING A ROLL CALLER. OH, SHE WENT. OKAY. THAT'S, UH, HANG ON, WE GOT, OKAY. CHAIR ORIAN HERE. VICE CHAIR ZUNIGA. I'M SORRY. OZUNA , PLEASE. MY APOLOGIES. SORRY. PRESENT. MS. BRAGMAN. PRESENT. MR. VASQUEZ. PRESENT. MS. KAPLAN? PRESENT. MR. MANNA PRESENT. MR. ZUNIGA HASN'T ARRIVED. MS. CRUZ? HERE. MR. DEAN HAS NOT ARRIVED. UH, MR. MENCHACA PRESENT AND MR. DALE PRESENT. YOU HAVE A QUORUM, SIR. THANK YOU. PLEASE STAND AND JOIN US FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES PLEDGE. ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES. OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA REFORM, WHICH STAND NATION, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE. LIBERTY, JUSTICE FOR ALL HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD ONE AND INDIVISIBLE FLAG INDIVISIBLE. BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items  ] CASES, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION. THE BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. THE CASES ARE LISTED BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND STREET ADDRESS. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT. LASTLY, AS CHAIR, I WILL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS. I ASK THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS CHAIR AND I'LL READ THEM AS THE APPROPRIATE TIME AT THE MEETING. WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE STAFF COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY'S ZONING CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THIS AREA. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW. WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELIEF SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY ARE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTERS 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 AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. WE ALSO SERVE AS ADVISORY AND, 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 IN ANY OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD MUST BE HER BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS. THE APPLICANT OR HIS, HIS OR HER REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY'LL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ANY OPPOSITION THROUGH REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER AFTER EVERYONE HAS BEEN HEARD IN THE CASE, IT WILL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION. EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION IN ORDER. IN ORDER FOR THE MOTION TO CARRY. IT REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT, ARE PRESENT OR NOT. AND THAT IS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN GRANTING THE RELEASE THOUGHT RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS IN WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S. DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE. UH, WE HAVE A NUMBER OF CASES HERE TODAY, AND SO I ASK THAT YOU BE RESPECTFUL OF EVERYBODY'S TIME AND, AND LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO THE SPECIFICS OF YOUR CASE. UH, LET'S MAKE A CONFIRMATION HERE IF ALL, IF EVERYBODY'S, UH, EVERY REPRESENTATIVE FOR CASES ARE PRESENT, UH, REGARDING, UH, CASE NUMBER 77. THIS IS TWO 10 CRAVENS AVENUE. DO WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE HERE? TWO [00:05:01] 10 CRAVEN AVENUE. OKAY. WE'LL MAKE A MOTION, UH, TO MOVE THAT TO THE, TO THE BACK. UM, THIS IS REGARDING, UH, CASE 20, UH, CASE NUMBER 95 26 27 SAN LUIS STREET. DO WE HAVE A, AM I READING THE RIGHT? YOU ARE. UH, SAN LUIS HAS INDICATED THAT THEY'RE GONNA POSTPONE. WE JUST NEVER GOT IT IN WRITING, SO. OH, OKAY. BUT CRAVEN SHOULD BE HERE. NOPE, THEY'RE NOT HERE. OKAY. OKAY. THIS IS REGARDING, UM, ADDRESS IS 1832 WEST CRAIG PLACE, CASE 97. WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE. THANK YOU. CASE 99. THIS IS, UH, THE ADDRESS AT, UM, LET'S SEE, WHAT DO WE HAVE THE ADDRESS HERE? 1 0 3 KANSAS STREET. THANK YOU. THIS IS, UH, CASE 102 28 RERA STREET. TWO 20. RERA. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, CASE 1 0 2. THIS IS SIX 6,005, 6,007 TESLA ROAD. THANK YOU. CASE 1 0 5. THIS IS 13 715 FM 1560 NORTH. OKAY. 1 0 5, UH, 13 715 FM 1560. NOPE, THAT ONE'S BEEN POSTPONED. OKAY. CASE NUMBER 1 0 6 IS A SEVEN 50 FULTON AVENUE. THANK YOU. CASE 1 0 7 2 2 22 22. BUENA VISTA STREET. THANK YOU. CASE 1 0 8. THIS IS, UM, AT, UH, 14,000 9 0 3 CA UH, CASINO GREEN, 1403 CASINO GREEN. OKAY. CASE 1 0 9. THIS IS, UM, SITUATED AT 8,000 1 1 8 LATIGO DRIVE, LETGO DRIVE. THANK YOU. CASE NUMBER 1 1 4. THIS IS, UH, 6 3 0 2 BIRCH VALLEY DRIVE. THANK YOU. CASE NUMBER 1 1 6. THIS IS 4 0 2 LTTE AVENUE. 4 0 2 LTTE AVENUE. OKAY. THIS IS CASE 1 1 6. UH, ADDRESS IS 4 0 2 LEVETTE AVENUE, I GUESS THE SAME. RENEE LA FUENTE? NOPE. OKAY. NOT HERE. UH, CASE NUMBER 1 1 7. THIS IS FIVE 11 CLOUD BLACK DRIVE CLOUD. CLOUD CLOUD BLACK DRIVE CLOUD BLACK CLOUD BLACK. THE APPLICANT, VILLA HAN UR. NO. AND THEN FINAL CASE NUMBER 1 1 8. THIS IS 1 0 7 HARDING PLACE. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO I GUESS WE'LL START WITH THE, UH, A QUESTION UP THERE. OKAY. DID WE CALL OUT EAST LOCUS? SO FIVE OH ONE EAST LOCUS. STAND BY. I GOTTA DO THE, UH, STAFF BRIEFING REAL QUICK. ALL RIGHT. STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF A REQUEST. PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE PROPERTY. WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR AND OF THE REQUEST AND X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD? THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THE REQUEST FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST A PROPOSED VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXEMPTION OR APPEAL. YOU'LL BE CALLED IN ORDER THAT YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED AT A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES FOR A SPEAKER, AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE A MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION FOR THOSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GIVE WITH THEIR TIME TO THE SPEAKER. THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED OF MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE GIVEN UP THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES. THOSE GIVEN UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD OF QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. I LET'S, UH, MOVE WITH THE FIRST CASE PRESENTATION, UM, SCHEDULE. IF YOU, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE ADDRESS 'EM OVER HERE PLEASE. CAN I ADDRESS 5 0 1 EAST ? YEAH, WE GOT THAT. YEAH, THAT'S THE ONE I JUST READ OUT. SO, SO I I DID COVER THAT, SO THAT'S WHY I ASKED. APOLOGIES. YEAH, THAT WAS, YES. APOLOGIES, WE CAUGHT THAT JUST RIGHT NOW. SO STAFF, LET'S PROCEED WITH THE FIRST CASE. SO NOT CRAIG. YEAH, CRAIG. AND WE'LL MOVE THAT TO THE, UH, WEST CRAIG. WELL, SAN LUIS IS THE APPLICANT FOR SAN LUIS HERE. 95. OKAY. WE'RE GONNA MOVE THAT TO THE, TO THE BACK AND WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT ONE. YEAH. LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH CASE 77. THAT'S, UH, A TWO 10 KRAVIS IS THE APPLICANT FOR TWO 10 KRAVIS. SO, SO THE FIRST CASE IS 97. IF [00:10:01] THE TWO CASES THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE A QUORUM FOR SHOULD BE ITEM THREE, ITEM FOUR. OKAY. THAT'S CRAVEN WASN'T HERE. YEAH. IS CRAVENS HERE? IS THE APPLICANT HERE FOR TWO 10 CRAVENS AVENUE? NO, THEY WEREN'T, WEREN'T THEY WERE NOT. I DON'T BELIEVE SO. MR. CHAIR, UH, WE COULD START WITH THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL CASE IF YOU'D LIKE. UH, YES. LET'S, WHAT NUMBER IS THAT? YEAH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL CASE AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO SEE IF THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE. IF NOT, WE'LL MOVE THOSE TO THE BACK OF THE AGENDA. THAT WOULD BE ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THE AGENDA. OKAY. WHICH ENDING IN ONE SIX? CASE NUMBER ONE. OKAY. ENDS IN 1 0 6. NUMBER SIX. 1 1 10. ONE 10. OKAY. EAST LOCUS? NO. EAST LOCUS? NO, IT'S, THAT'S NOT THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL. MM-HMM. . OKAY. OKAY. UH, PLEASE PROCEED. ALRIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD MEMBERS. MY NAME IS EMILY GARCIA, PLANNER WITH THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL TEAM. FOR THIS ITEM, BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 6 APPLICANT, GEOVANNA ALBRIDGE IS REQUESTING FOR A SPECIAL EXEMPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON THE BLOCK FACE PER THE U D C SECTION THREE FIVE DASH 3 7 4 0 1 C LOCATED AT SEVEN 50 FULTON AVENUE. PROPERTY IS ZONED R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, AND IT'S IN COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE FOR THE CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF AGNES COTTON ACADEMY MIDDLE SCHOOL AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF AGNE AVENUE AND FULTON AVENUE. THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS ONE EX EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND A MIDDLE SCHOOL. THERE IS CURRENTLY ONE OTHER TYPE TWO S D R PERMIT ISSUED NEXT DOOR TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS IS THE ONLY TYPE TWO S T R PERMIT ISSUED FOR THE BLOCK FACE. THIS IS A SITE PLAN, THIS IS A SUB SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE THE SURROUNDING AREAS. STEPH, I'M, I'M HAVING A, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME FINDING THE, UH, PRESENTATION ON THE, I DON'T SEE IT. SO IT APPEARS THAT OUR CASE FOR ONE 10, IT REFERENCES A DIFFERENT ADDRESS OF EAST LOCUST STREET. AND SO, UM, AT LEAST THE PAPERWORK THAT I HAVE. AND SO, WHICH IS ITEM SIX ON THE AGENDA. AND THEN, SO YEAH, SO I'M HAVING A HARD TIME AND I, THIS ITEM'S NOT EVEN ON THE, ON OUR PRESENTATION THAT WAS SENT OUT ON THE UPLOADED, I'VE GOT 1 0 6, I JUST DON'T SEE IT ON THIS PRESENTATION. SO YOUR SUGGEST IS WE'LL JUST FOLLOW ALONG TO THE PRESENTATION ON THE, ON WHAT YOU WERE DOING. YEAH. CAN WE GO BACK AND, BECAUSE I'VE, IT'S, NO, IT'S NOT ITEM FIVE. OH YES. ITEM FIVE. YEAH, IT IS ITEM FIVE. YES. ITEM FIVE, BUT IT'S NOT ON HERE. IT SHOULD BE NUMBER 1 0 6, NOT ONE 10. ONE 10 IS NEXT. OKAY. BUT I DON'T SEE 1 0 6, BUT WE'RE MISSING 1 0 6 COMPLETELY. OH, I SEE IT. OKAY. SO WE'RE GONNA FOLLOW ALONG. I GUESS, CAN WE FOLLOW ALONG JUST, WE'LL JUST FOLLOW ALONG ON THE, ON THE PRESENTATION OVER HERE. OKAY. AND SEE IT. OKAY. IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND KIND OF STARTING OVER BESIDES JUST KINDA LOOKING AT, YEAH. OKAY. SO START OVER FROM THE BEGINNING PLEASE, OR, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO MY NAME IS EMILY GARCIA, PLANNER WITH THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL TEAM. FOR THIS ITEM, BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH THREE SIX, APPLICANT GEOVANNA ALBRIDGE IS REQUESTING FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON THE BLOCK PHASE PER THE U D C SECTION THREE FIVE DASH 3 74 0 1 C, LOCATED AT SEVEN 50 FULTON AVENUE. PROPERTY IS ZONED R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND IS IN COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE FOR THE CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF AGNES COTTON MIDDLE SCHOOL AND THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF AGNE AVENUE AND FULTON AVENUE. THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS ONE EX EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND A MIDDLE SCHOOL. THERE IS CURRENTLY ONE OTHER TYPE TWO S T R PERMIT ISSUED NEXT DOOR TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THIS IS THE ONLY TYPE TWO S T R PERMIT ISSUED ON THE BLOCK FACE. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE THE SURROUNDING AREAS. THERE ARE NINE UNITS ON THE BLOCK FACE WITH ONE CURRENT S T R PERMIT TWO ALREADY ON THE BLOCK FACE. TYPE TWO ALREADY ON THE BLOCK FACE. THE BLOCK FACE IS CURRENTLY AT [00:15:01] 11%. AND IF THE SECOND S T R TYPE TWO IS APPROVED, THE BLOCK WILL BE AT 22%. THE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO O A DASH 23 DASH THREE SIX BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, PER SECTION 16 DASH OF THE CITY CODE STAFF FINDS THE APPROVAL OF AN INCREASE IN THE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT DENSITY WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE INTEGRITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PROPERTY OPERATES. HOWEVER, DUE TO SYSTEMATIC AND STAFF ERROR, THE CUSTOMER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF PENDING INFO THAT WAS NEEDED FOR THE RENEWAL AND WAS DENIED DUE TO NOT RESPONDING. ALSO, DURING OUR REVIEW OF THE NEW PERMIT APPLICATION, WE DISCOVERED A SECOND TYPE TWO PERMIT WAS APPROVED IN MARCH 22, DESPITE THE DENSITY BEING MET. FURTHER NOTIFICATION PLAN 24 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT AND WE RECEIVED ZERO. BACK IN FAVOR, ZERO BACK IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM, FROM THE BOARD. I DO SO I'M SORRY. TELL, TELL ME WHEN THIS PERMIT WAS ISSUED AND THEN EXPIRED. YOU SAID IT WAS OCTOBER, 2022? YES. SO THIS PERMIT WAS ISSUED IN OCTOBER OF 2019, AND IT EXPIRED IN OCTOBER OF 2022. THEY DID SUBMIT A RENEWAL APPLICATION, HOWEVER, DUE TO SYSTEMATIC AND STAFF ERROR, THE INFORMATION NEVER GOT TO THE APPLICANT. OKAY. AND THEN YOU SAID THE SECOND ONE WAS APPROVED ON WHAT DATE? UM, SO MARCH, 2022, MARCH, 2022. SO AT THE TIME THAT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY RECEIVED A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT, IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN WITHOUT COMING TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. AND IF NOT FOR THAT ERROR IN MARCH OF 2022, THE APPLICANT WOULD NOT BE HERE TODAY SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AT ALL. AND WHEN DOES THAT, UH, THE MS. KAMAN, I'M SORRY, WHEN DOES THAT SECOND, UH, PERMIT COME UP FOR RENEWAL THAT WILL EXPIRE IN MARCH OF 2025? I I ALSO WANNA OFFER A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION THAT, UH, AS YOU ARE CERTAINLY AWARE, UH, WHEN THE BOARD IS REQUIRED TO GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO AUTHORIZE A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL IN EXCESS OF THE DENSITY LIMITATION, THOSE APPLICANTS ARE REQUIRED TO RENEW THAT SPECIAL EXCEPTION AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY RENEW THE PERMIT, UH, BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY SECURED A TYPE TWO PERMIT WHEN THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE, AGAIN, THE APPLICANT TODAY, HER PERMIT WAS ACTIVE AT THE TIME THAT THAT PERMIT WAS APPROVED, WE WOULD NOT BURDEN TODAY'S APPLICANT WITH RENEWING THAT SPECIAL EXCEPTION EVERY THREE YEARS. MOVING FORWARD, THAT BURDEN WOULD FALL ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE RECEIVED THE PERMIT IN THE FIRST PLACE. THANK YOU FOR FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE THOUGH ORIAN MR. ORIAN? YEAH. SO FOR STAFF, UM, WHEN, WHEN THE CITY ISSUES A PERMIT AND THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE SO, ISN'T IT COMMONPLACE FOR THEM TO TAKE THE PERMIT AWAY? IT CAN BE HOWEVER MANY TIMES IN THE PAST WE'VE ALLOWED THE PERSON WHO SECURED THAT PERMIT TO FINISH OUT THE LENGTH OF THAT PERMIT SO AS TO BE ABLE TO RECOVER THE COSTS THAT THEY'VE INCURRED UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT THEY OBTAINED A VALID PERMIT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MACHACA? MACHACA? UM, IN REFERENCE TO THIS PERMIT BEING, UH, ISSUED OR WITHHELD, THE OTHER ONES ON THE BLOCK FACE THAT THEY SORT OF FALL BEFORE THIS ONE, WHILE SHE WAS GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS, UH, THEY APPLIED WHILE SHE ALREADY HAD AN ACTIVE PERMIT. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO IF, SO, IS IT POSSIBLE TO GIVE A SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT, UM, FOR UNTIL THE END INTO, WHAT IS IT, TWO MORE THREE YEARS INSTEAD OF A FULL THREE YEARS TO, BECAUSE UNTIL THE NEXT GUY'S, UM, PERMIT RUNS OUT, IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO A PARTIAL, LET ME LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE DONE THAT BEFORE, BUT THE BOARD HAS BEEN ABLE TO AUTHORIZE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS FOR SET TERMS BEFORE YOU COULD DO THAT BEFORE THE U D C AMENDMENT WITH SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS FOR BEAUTY OR BARBERSHOPS. SO LET ME TAKE A LOOK AT THE CODE LANGUAGE REAL QUICK AND SEE IF WE HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY. AND SECONDLY, WHAT WOULD BE THE PRO OTHER, WHAT WOULD BE THE COSTS TO TAKE AWAY THE OTHER SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT TO SAY THAT IT WAS AN ERROR SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN EVER ISSUED? WELL, THE, THE IMMEDIATE YOU MEAN COSTS TO THE DEPARTMENT OR, UH, YEAH, YEAH, BECAUSE YOU SAID IT'S THE COST, IT DOESN'T LOOK, THIS LOOKED LIKE IT WAS A FEW HUNDRED DOLLARS FOR [00:20:01] THIS PERMIT. IS THAT THE TOTAL COST? YEAH, SO IN, IN THEORY, IF WE WERE TO REVOKE THAT PERMIT AND THEY FILED AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION TO REVOKE THEIR PERMIT, THE COST FOR THE APPEAL WOULD BE $600. I THINK THAT WE ARE IN A SITUATION THAT IS OBVIOUSLY NOT IDEAL, UM, WHERE THERE'S NO ONE DECISION THAT'S GOING TO RIGHT ALL THE WRONGS. UM, WE DO, OF COURSE HAVE CONCERNS WHENEVER THERE IS A REQUEST TO EXCEED THE BLOCK FACE DENSITY. UM, BUT THE APPLICANT IS CORRECT AND, YOU KNOW, WE, WE PASSED OUT A PACKET, UH, THAT SHE SUBMITTED, UH, THAT IT IS A UNIQUE CASE THAT INVOLVES A COMBINATION OF SYSTEMATIC ERRORS THROUGH OUR BUILD SA SYSTEM AND STAFF ERRORS AS WELL. SO, SO WITH THAT, WITH THAT SAID, SO YOU'RE LOOKING AS THE BOARD FOR RELIEF FOR THE CITY'S ERRORS HERE OR WHAT THE THE, THE BOARD IS ALLOWED TO MAKE WHATEVER DECISION THE BOARD FEELS IS APPROPRIATE. OUR RECOMMENDATION, AS IT ALWAYS IS WHENEVER WE HAVE A REQUEST TO EXCEED THE DENSITY IS, UH, IS DENIAL. WE, WE DO NOT SUPPORT. HOWEVER, I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BOARD HAS THE FULL SET OF FACTS MANNA, MR. MANNA. SO QUESTION FOR STAFF. UM, SO, SO UH, SHOULD IT BE THAT WE GRANT THIS REQUEST HERE AND WE HAVE THE EXISTING REQUEST AS IT SITS, WHICH EXPIRES IN THREE YEARS, WHEN THAT ONE, WHEN THE OTHER ONE COMES UP, SHOULD THIS ONE BE EXIST AND WE'LL SAY VALID AND THE NEXT ONE COMES UP? UH, COULD IT BE THAT THE DIALOGUE FOR THE VALIDITY OF THE OTHER ONE, UH, HAPPENED WITH REGARDS TO THEM BEING ABLE TO RENEW AND BASICALLY NOT BE ABLE TO RENEW BECAUSE THERE, THERE WOULD BE EXCEEDING AND WOULD HAVE TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD AT THAT POINT? YES. WE, WE CERTAINLY DO NOT INTEND ON WAITING ANOTHER TWO YEARS TO INFORM THAT OPERATOR OF THIS ERROR. WE WANNA MAKE THEM AWARE OF IT. SO BASICALLY IT WOULD BE 600, I DON'T KNOW. OKAY. SO BASICALLY IT WOULD COST ABOUT $600, UM, FOR THE GUY, THE OTHER PERSON, IF WE REVOKED THE SECOND PERSON WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD THAT, THAT UH, S T R APPROVAL? YEAH, IF, IF WE, IF WE REVOKED THAT OTHER PERMIT, IT WOULD BE $600. WHETHER THAT OPERATOR DECIDED TO FILE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO EXCEED THE BLOCK FACE DENSITY, THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY, OR, UH, IT WOULD STILL BE A $600 FEE IF THEY CHOSE TO APPEAL OUR DECISION TO REVOKE THAT PERMIT AFTER A YEAR. AND DURING THAT PERIOD, THEY WOULD STILL BE OPERATING AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL WITH HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES AND SUCH, UH, RECOVERED BY THE CITY OR? THAT'S CORRECT. WAIT, SAY THAT AGAIN? THEY'D STILL BE COLLECTING, THEY'D STILL BE OPERATE DURING THE APPEAL PROCESS AND OH, DURING THE APPEAL PROCESS. OKAY. OKAY. AND WE ARE ALLOWED TO SAY REVOKE, ONE OF OUR OPTIONS IS TO REVOKE THE, NO, IT'S NOT, WHAT'S, WHAT'S, WHAT'S BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY IS WHETHER OR NOT TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION MANNA. SO ORIAN WAS FIRST, BUT MANNA, MR. ORIAN, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, SO A COUPLE QUESTIONS JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S CLEAR. IF WE PASS THIS TODAY, THAT AS MANNA HAD MENTIONED AT SEVEN 50, UH, FULTON, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY GONNA BE THE ONE WHO HAS TO KEEP ASKING FOR PERMISSION EVERY THREE YEARS. THEY'LL GO BACK INTO BEING THE AUTOMATIC, UH, FIRST ONE ON THE BLOCK, GUYS HAVE TO COME. SO THAT'S THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. OKAY. AND THE SECOND QUESTION IS, UH, WHAT WE DO TODAY COULD POTENTIALLY BURDEN, BURDEN ONE OR THE OTHER. ARE BOTH OF THESE ADDRESSES CURRENT ON THEIR HOT TAX TO BOTH OF THEM HAVE ANY COMPLAINTS? IS THERE, IS THERE, ARE THEY BOTH MODEL CITIZENS IN THE S T R WORLD OR WHAT? GOOD POINT. NEITHER PROPERTY HAS ANY HISTORY OF COMPLAINTS AND BOTH PROPERTIES ARE COMPLIANT ON THEIR HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX THAT WAS RECONFIRMED BY THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT THIS MORNING. SO IF WE APPROVE THIS THING TODAY, THE WORST THING THAT HAPPENS IS THAT THERE'S TWO ON THERE FOR 21 MONTHS AND THEN IN 21 MONTHS THE BOARD CAN DECIDE WHETHER THEY'LL ALLOW THE SECOND ONE WHO SHOULD HAVE GOT PERMISSION IN THE FIRST PLACE. OKAY. OKAY. YES. IF THE BOARD TODAY CHOSE TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, THAT WOULD BE THE END RESULT? YES. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, ANY OTHER QUESTION? OKAY. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? AND I KNOW YOU'VE MENTIONED NONE, BUT I WAS JUST NO PUBLIC COMMENTS. OKAY. AT THIS POINT I'D ASK FOR THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD AND LET'S PLEASE MAKE A PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON. AFTERNOON. UM, OF COURSE I'M CONCERNED. DID YOU START WITH YOUR NAME, PLEASE? OH, I'M SORRY. MY NAME IS JOVANNA OUTBREAK, SEVEN 50 FULTON AVENUE. THANK YOU. OF COURSE, I'M CONCERNED BECAUSE IT'S A BUSINESS THAT I HAD RUNNING AND IT GOT SHUT DOWN . SO I JUST HOPE THAT YOU GUYS CAN APPROVE THIS. [00:25:02] NOW, DO YOU CONCUR, UH, WE SAW YOUR PRESENTATION THAT THE CITY KIND OF ACKNOWLEDGED THAT IT WAS AN ERROR WITH THE CITY. AND, AND WHEN DID YOU FIRST DISCOVER THE ERROR IN MARCH THIS YEAR? I HAD PAID IN SEPTEMBER, MY RENEWAL LAST YEAR IN 22. I NEVER HEARD ANYTHING. I FEAR MY, MY, UM, PERMIT WAS STILL GOOD UNTIL MARCH. I HAD AN, UM, A CITY INSPECTOR GO AND LET US KNOW THAT WE WERE AT FAULT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE A PERMIT. NOW, THE LADY NEXT DOOR, SHE PURCHASED THAT PROPERTY LAST YEAR. UM, I KNOW WE HAVE, WE HAD THE SAME CLEANER FOR A LITTLE BIT AND I BELIEVE THEY'RE NOT RENTING IT ANYMORE, BUT I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE OF THAT. I THINK HER DAUGHTER MOVED IN THERE. GOT IT. OKAY. LET'S SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD. ANY QUESTIONS? WE NO QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, THAT WOULD CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION. I'D ASK FOR A BOARD MEMBER TO MAKE A MOTION. MS. BRAGMAN? YES. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 3 0 1 0 6, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNITS SITUATED AT SEVEN 50 FULTON AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING GIOVANNA ALBROOK BECAUSE OF THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS, WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DE DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT LOOK HEALTH OR SAFETY. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO OPERATE ON AN ADDITIONAL SHORT TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE. THERE'S, THERE'S NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY. B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. UH, THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WOULD BE CREATED IF AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT WAS APPROVED. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSIST OF SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES. THE SCENARIO DOES NOT CAUSE REASON TO BELIEVE IT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED. NEIGHBORING PROPERTY IS A SHORT, IS A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. D, ADEQUATE UTILITIES, ACCESS ROADS, STORM DRAINAGE, RE RECREATION, OPEN SPACES, AND OTHER NECESSARY FACILITIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING, APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE. E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY R SHORT-TERM RENTAL LICENSES. CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION. THE APPLICANT CURRENTLY HAS A CODE ENFOR ENFORCEMENT CASE PENDING ON MARCH 22ND, 2023, APPLICANT RECEIVED A NOTICE FOR A LICENSING PERMIT INVESTIGATION I N V PST I NV 2223 DASH 3 1 0 0 0 5 3 5 FOR OPERATING AN EXPIRED PERMITS. T R 19 1 3 5 0 1 2 77 CASE IS STILL OPEN PENDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. DECISION F THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO OTHER RESIDENTIAL WITHIN WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING OFF STREET PARKING AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. END OF MOTION. SECOND, SECOND, MS. CAPTAIN CAMP. MS. RECORD YOU ELISE, ON DISCUSSION? YES. UM, ON SEVERAL POINTS, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION. ONE THAT THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION NOR, UM, ANY OF THE, THE NEIGHBORS, UM, STAFF FULLY ADMITS THAT THERE WAS AN ERROR MADE ON THE BEHALF OF THE CITY. UM, SO I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO PENALIZE THE APPLICANT FOR A MISTAKE, UH, THAT WAS MADE, UM, BECAUSE SHE TRULY DID DO HER DUE DILIGENCE AND TRY TO RENEW HER PERMIT. UH, AND THEN THE THIRD THING IS THAT THE OTHER NEIGHBOR WAS GIVEN AN, UH, A, A PERMIT, UH, APPROVAL, UH, WHICH SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN MADE. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. OKAY. UM, I I DO FEEL THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL BE SUFFERING BECAUSE NOW YOU'LL HAVE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS FOR TWO FOR 20 MONTHS, WHICH I THINK IS REALLY WRONG. AND I WOULD'VE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN THE CITY REVOKE THE OTHER, THE OTHER PERMIT. BUT GIVEN HOW IT IS AND WHAT WE ARE GIVEN, UM, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS SHORT-TERM RENTAL APPLICATION AS LONG AS THE OTHER PERSONS WILL NOT BE RENEWED. BUT I, I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT THING. I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN, THE OTHER ONE SHOULD HAVE BEEN REVOKED MANNA. THANK YOU MR. MANNA. UM, I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS AND SIMPLY BECAUSE THIS WILL BE RESOLVED, UH, WHEN IT IS THAT THE NEXT APPLICANT COMES THROUGH AND THE BOARD, YOU KNOW, IF THEY DO DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD, [00:30:01] WILL BE FACED WITH THE DECISION THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN FACED WITH IN THE BEGINNING. AND THEN WE CAN MAKE THAT DECISION. SO, SO I THINK, UH, UH, MS. KAPLAN'S, UH, UH, CONCERNS WILL BE ADDRESSED AT THAT POINT. YEAH, I CONCUR IN THE MEANTIME, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ALRIGHT, UH, LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT, MS. BRAGMAN. WOULD I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. KAPLAN? I, FINDINGS OF FACT, DID YOU HEAR ME? NO, I DON'T. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. THIS IS NOT A GREAT MR. CODDLE CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR. WHAT IS THAT? UNANIMOUS NINE IN FAVOR? ZERO AGAINST THAT. 10 IN FAVOR? ZERO. UH, THE MOTION PASSES. UH, IT'S NINE AS SOON AS IT'S NOT HERE. YEAH, THERE'S NINE, RIGHT? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I COUNTED. NINE IN FAVOR? ZERO IN OPPOSITION. THE MOTION PASSES. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. NEXT CASE, PLEASE. WHAT IS THE NEXT CASE? EVERYTHING? YEAH. WHICH PAGE? WE DON'T KNOW. UM, ITEM NUMBER THREE. ITEM NUMBER THREE. WEST LAKE. IT'S 0 9 7 WEST. WEST CRAIG? YES. UH, CHAIR ZUNA? YES SIR. IF WE ONLY HAVE NINE MEMBERS, SHOULDN'T WE BE DOING A CASE THAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDING APPROVAL? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA MENTION, RIGHT? SO WE'RE LIMITED NOW HERE WITH NINE MEMBERS ON THE, ON THE BOARD. SO YOU NEED UNANIMOUS CONSENT HERE. SO I WAS GOING TO LEAVE IT UP TO THE APPLICANT IF THEY WANTED TO PROCEED OR POTENTIALLY POSTPONE TO THE NEXT MEETING WHERE WE HAVE MORE. 'CAUSE IT WOULD TAKE A HUNDRED PERCENT CONCURRENCE OF THE NINE MEMBERS HERE FOR THE VARIANCE TO PASS. AND AS A COURTESY, I WOULD JUST LEAVE THAT UP TO THE APPLICANT OF WHETHER THEY WANTED TO PROCEED NOW OR LOOK TOWARDS WHEN WE'RE MORE FULLY ED. MANNA. YES, SIR. SO, UM, IS CHAIRMAN'S OR, OR IS, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA COMING TODAY? IS HE PLANNING TO HE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HERE, YES. OKAY. SO WE'RE NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED. OKAY. AND WE ALSO HAVE MR. DEAN JOINING AND THEN OF COURSE WE HAVE OUR THREE O'CLOCK INDIVIDUALS COMING IN ALSO FOR, TO FILL IN FOR ANYONE WHO MAY NEED TO LEAVE OR JUST TO ADD EXTRA BODIES. SO STAFF, IS THERE ANY CASES THAT WHERE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AND THAT THERE'S NO OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS THAT WE COULD HEAR NOW? UH, RERA STREET ITEM NUMBER 10, ENDING IN 101 0 0. IT'S UP TO YOU. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, CHAIR ZUNA. SO I WOULD MAKE THAT, I, YEAH, LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT CASE. AND FOR THOSE APPLICANTS THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE, WE ONLY HAVE NINE MEMBERS HERE, WE WILL HAVE A SECOND GROUP COMING IN, WHICH WE'LL HAVE FULLY IN PANEL SO WE COULD HEAR THOSE CASES. IT'S NOT AS A COURTESY, JUST UNDERSTAND THAT IT WOULD TAKE A HUNDRED PERCENT CONCURRENCE AND TRYING TO PROVIDE SOME MOVE DOWN THE AGENDA. IF WE MOVE IT DOWN THE AGENDA WHEN WE'RE FULLY EMPANELED, YOU'D HAVE MORE PEOPLE TO HEAR IT. SO IT SHOULD BE ABOUT, UH, THREE O'CLOCK WE HOPE. . WE HOPE. OKAY, STAFF, LET'S PROCEED. MR. CHAIR, WE'RE TRYING TO GET MORE COMMISSIONERS TO COME IN SOONER THAN THREE O'CLOCK. SO, UM, WE'RE WORKING ON THAT. OKAY, ITEM NUMBER 10 IS 2 2 8 PEREIRA STREET IN CITY COUNCIL. DISTRICT NUMBER ONE APPLICANT IS JS AND W S HOLDINGS L L C A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS I D Z ONE. OKAY, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG BARRA STREET BETWEEN THE INTERSECTIONS OF MATAGORDA STREET AND INDIAN STREET. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A NEW TWO STORAGE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH REDUCED SETBACKS ON THE SIDES. THE PROPERTY WAS RECENTLY REZONED TO I D Z ONE, LIMITED INTENSITY INFO DEVELOPMENT ZONE, UM, PERMITTED WITH USES PERMITTED FOR ONE DWELLING UNIT AND FOR A MAJOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR A DECREASE IN THE PERIMETER BUFFER BETWEEN I D Z PLAN AREA AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THE CURRENT ZONING OF I D Z ONE REQUIRES SIDE SETBACKS OF FIVE FEET ON BOTH SIDES. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A PROPOSED SITE PLAN INDICATING THREE FOOT SETBACKS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE PROPERTY LINE AND I D Z ONE REQUIRES SIDE SETBACKS OF FIVE FEET ON BOTH SIDES. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A TWO FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE PROPERTY. AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN [00:35:01] AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THEN THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES ARE THESE SURROUNDING AREAS. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIDE STEPBACK VARIANT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. ONE, DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND THE PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE STRUCTURE. AND TWO, IT WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MAILED OUT 33 NOTICES. UM, STAFF RECEIVED FOUR IN FAVOR. CITE THE 200 FEET. UH, THREE IN FAVOR OUT OUTSIDE THE 200 FEET AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND LA VACA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT. AND THEN THIS IS THE LETTER FROM THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. UH, IT'S THEIR, IT'S THEIR, UM, RECOMMENDATION. AND THEN THIS IS THE LEVO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, LETTER THAT THEY SENT US EXPRESSING THEIR SUPPORT. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. THANK YOU. UH, LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. NO QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT. THE APPLICANT, I'D ASK FOR YOU TO PLEASE COME FORWARD AND HEAR YOUR PRESENTATION. MY POWERPOINT HANDY. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. PATRICK CHRISTENSEN, THREE 10 SOUTH ST. MARY'S, SUITE 2,700. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF JODY AND STEVE NEWMAN. AND I'VE GOT A LITTLE POWERPOINT THEY'RE TRYING TO PULL UP. BASICALLY WHAT HAPPENED WAS THEY WERE, UM, KIND OF CAUGHT IN THIS SITUATION WHERE THEY WENT TO THE ZONING COMMISSION BACK IN 2018 AND GOT A SITE PLAN APPROVED FOR THE OLD I D Z ZONING. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, COVID HITS 20 19, 20 20, THEY COME BACK TO H D R C BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE LAVACCA HISTORIC DISTRICT. THEY COME BACK TO H D R C WITH THEIR SITE PLAN AND BASICALLY H D R C SAYS, NO, WE DON'T LIKE YOUR DRIVEWAY ON THIS SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE, WE WANT YOUR DRIVEWAY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. SO THEN THEY HAVE TO GO BACK TO ZONING AND REZONE THE PROPERTY BECAUSE THEIR SITE PLAN SHOWED THE DRIVEWAY ON THE OLD, THE OTHER SIDE OF, OF THE, THE STRUCTURE. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. AND, UM, LEMME GO THROUGH MY POWERPOINT. SO THIS IS BASICALLY, YOU SAW A STAFF PRESENTATION. THIS IS THE PROPERTY RIGHT HERE, ZONED I D Z. THAT'S AN OLDER MAP. IT'S ACTUALLY I D Z ONE NOW. UM, LEMME SEE IF I'M IN CONTROL OF THIS. OH, YOU HAVE TO DO IT. OKAY, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND THIS IS THE PROPERTY. THIS IS AN AERIAL. AND WHAT'S GOOD ABOUT THIS, THIS WILL COME UP HERE IN A MINUTE, IS THE DRIVEWAY, THE PROPERTY SURROUNDED BY DRIVEWAY ON THE WEST SIDE AND THE EAST SIDE. SO IT'S GOT TWO DRIVEWAYS ON EITHER SIDE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND THIS WAS THEIR OLD SITE PLAN. THEY PUT THE DRIVEWAY ON THE EASTERN SIDE 'CAUSE THERE'S A CURB CUT RIGHT HERE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND THIS IS THE NEW SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE H D R C. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CREATE A NEW CURB CUT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY FOR THE DRIVEWAY OVER HERE. AND THEN THESE ARE THE ISSUES WITH THE, THE SETBACK. THEY WOULD LIKE A, A THREE FOOT SETBACK ON THE WEST SIDE FOR THEIR CARPORT. THAT'S ACTUALLY PART OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE HOUSE AND A PART OF THE PORCH. AND THEN THREE FEET ON THE EASTERN SIDE. AND LIKE AS I SAID, IT'S NICE THAT I, I UNDERSTAND WE'RE ASKING FOR A, A VARIANCE FROM THE BUILDING SETBACKS, BUT THERE'S DRIVEWAYS ON EITHER SIDE AND I DON'T THINK THIS STRUCTURE ON THE EASTERN SIDE IS BRAND NEW. I MEAN, NEWER LAST FEW YEARS, THAT'S NOT GONNA CHANGE. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THIS THE DRIVEWAY WOULD EVER CHANGE ON THIS SIDE. SO WE'RE ALWAYS GONNA HAVE AT LEAST 10 FEET ON EITHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE AS FAR AS ANY STRUCTURE BEING TOO CLOSE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND THEN THIS IS WHAT THEY JUST GOT APPROVED AT THE, UH, ZONING AT THE CITY COUNCIL A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO FOR THE, THE NEW I D Z ONE SITE PLAN SHOWING THE DRIVEWAY, UM, ON THE EASTERN SIDE. AND THAT'S BASICALLY IT. SO WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACK REQUIRED. NICE THING IS, LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE A DRIVEWAY ON EITHER SIDE, SO WE'RE NOT COMING UP CLOSE ANY KIND OF FIRE CODE ISSUES TO ANOTHER STRUCTURE. THANK YOU. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. KAMAN HAS A QUESTION? UH, JUST QUESTION LEFT MICROPHONE. UH, QUESTION ABOUT THE CARPORT. IS THERE AN OVERHANG ON THE CARPORT? WELL, UM, YOU CAN GO BACK. YEAH, WE GO, UH, NO OVERHANG. SO THIS IS NO OVER HANG THREE FEET RIGHT HERE. THAT'S THE END OF THE CARPORT. SO THREE FEET AND, AND WILL IT HAVE GUTTERS THAT I DON'T KNOW. UM, PROBABLY NOT. I GUESS LET'S JUST SAY CAN THEY PICK GUTTERS? ? IT WOULD DEPEND ON WHERE THE SLOPE IS, RIGHT? ON HOW IT, YEAH, I'M NOT SURE. I DON'T HAVE A YEAH, I I WOULD JUST ASK THAT THE ARCHITECT TOLD ME TO ASK FOR THE THREE FEET. LET'S JUST, I WOULD JUST ASK FOR THE THREE FEET. THE GUTTERS WOULD HAVE TO BE WITHIN THE THREE FEET. RIGHT. SO OKAY. I'LL MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTAND. YEAH. YEAH. I MEAN THE ONLY ISSUE IS OBVIOUSLY IT'S NICE THAT YOU'VE GOT DRIVEWAYS ON BOTH SIDES, WHICH, BUT THE THING IS THERE MIGHT BE RUNOFF, UM, [00:40:01] FROM THE CARPORT, WHICH IS, AND THERE, THERE IT JUST IS AN ISSUE OF RUNOFF. UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MS. KEVIN. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. ORIAN? MR. ORIAN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED? YES. OKAY. SO, UM, THE OLD I D Z PRE 2018 AND THE NEW I D Z BOTH HAD A FIVE FOOT PERIMETER SETBACK. THAT, THAT, THAT'S CORRECT. SO, SO WHY DO YOU NEED THREE FEET, UH, ON BOTH SIDES WHEN IT WAS, HAS ALWAYS BEEN FIVE FEET, REGARDLESS OF WHERE YOUR DRIVEWAY IS. YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S EXCELLENT QUESTION, DONALD. UM, I BELIEVE WHAT HAPPENED WAS, UM, CAN WE GO BACK A SLIDE TO THE, WHAT WAS APPROVED? ONE MORE? OH, LET'S SEE. OH, NOPE, RIGHT THERE. UM, SO I'M TRYING TO SEE, IT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE THE, THEY HAD TO ALTER SOME OF THE DIMENSIONS OF THE STRUCTURE WHEN THEY WENT TO H D R C. I WAS NOT THERE FOR THAT HEARING. I APOLOGIZE ON THE, THE ACTUAL DETAILS, BUT, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THEY HAD A CARPORT ON THIS SITE PLAN. SO THEY'VE ADDED THE CARPORT AND THEN THE BUILDING GOT CRUNCHED A LITTLE BIT. YEAH. SO THEY ADDED THE, THEY ADDED THE CARPORT. UH, AND, AND TO ADD ON TO WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN SAID THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE NEEDING THREE FEET ON THE CARPORT SIDE, BUT ARE THE POSTS MORE THAN THREE FEET AWAY? I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I MEAN, I, I BELIEVE I'M GONNA HAVE TO GO WITH WHAT THE ARCHITECT GAVE ME, WHICH WAS THREE, THREE FEET EVEN. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY ? DO YOU HAVE A RENDERING OF THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE? WHAT, WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE? NO, SIR. I DO NOT. I APOLOGIZE. I DIDN'T, I DID NOT BRING THAT. THE REASON I ASK THAT QUESTION IS, 'CAUSE WHEN I LOOK AT THE, AT THE, UH, PLAN THREE FEET TO THE RIGHT IS THE, IS THE BUILDING THE, IS THERE A TWO STORY BUILDING? IT'S TWO STORY IS THE TOP OF JETTY STICKS OUT MORE CLOSE TO WITHIN THE FIVE FEET? UH, THAT I DO NOT KNOW. COMMISSIONER, I APOLOGIZE. I DON'T HAVE AN ELEVATION. IT DID, IT WAS APPROVED BY H D R C. SO IT WENT THROUGH AT LEAST THAT VETTING PROCESS. TALKING ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. 'CAUSE I CAN'T TELL ON THE FLAT SURFACE IS THE WAY THAT THE DRIVEWAY IS. IT WAS BEFORE IT LOOKS LIKE YOU WERE, YOU MIGHT, THE JETTY DESIGN MIGHT BE IN EFFECT. I DON'T KNOW. COULD HAVE BEEN, COULD HAVE BEEN COMMISSIONER, I DON'T DUNNO. IS THAT AN ISSUE, STEPH? SO, SO I REMEMBER WHEN THIS CASE FIRST STARTED, UH, WE DID ASK HD ARE, OR WE ASKED O H P WHETHER THERE WAS AN ISSUE BETWEEN THE FIVE FEET OR THE, AND OR THE THREE FEET. AND THEY SAID NO, THEY WERE GOOD WITH EITHER THE FIVE FEET OR THE THREE FEET. UM, SO PROCEDURALLY WE JUST LET, UM, MR. CHRISTENSEN KNOW THAT HE HAD TO GET A VARIANCE IN ORDER TO ENCROACH INTO THAT REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SETBACK. UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY HE'S HERE TODAY. AS FAR AS, UM, OVERHANGING INTO THE, UM, THE SIDE SETBACK FOR THAT, THAT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE A, UH, JETTY OR AN OVERHANG BECAUSE IT IS PART OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UH, CARPORT. IT IS NOT LIKE A, IT, IT'S JUST NOT AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. IT'S JUST A, AN AN ADDITION TO THE HOME THAT FOR A CARPORT. SO IT DOESN'T MEET THAT REQUIREMENTS OF THAT. UH, WE HAVE LANGUAGE THAT TALKS ABOUT SILLS BELT COURSES, CORNICES, BUTTRESSES, EAVES. UM, SO IT DOESN'T QUITE FIT THAT DEFINITION. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU, JOANNA. WELL, I THINK MS. CRUZ WAS NEXT. AND THEN THANK YOU, SIR. I'VE JUST GOT ONE QUESTION AND IS BUGGING ME NOW, THIS IS GONNA BE A PRIVATE HOME, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES. THEY'RE BUILDING THIS HOME FOR THEMSELF YES. TO LIVE. OKAY. IT'S JUST THE DESIGN IS KIND OF THROWS YOU OFF FROM THE WAY THE PROPERTY LOOKS. IT'S LIKE, OKAY, IS THAT GONNA FIT IN THERE? BUT OKAY, THANK YOU. YES, IT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, MR. BENNETT, UM, SO THIS QUESTION FOR STAFF, AND SINCE WE DON'T HAVE, UM, SO AN ELEVATION OF, OF THE HOUSE ITSELF AND, UM, COULD IT BE ADDRESSED WHERE IF THE SLOPE IS, UM, SLOPING TOWARDS BOTH NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTIES, THAT THERE COULD BE ADDITIONAL DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO THAT? IN OTHER WORDS, UH, IN THE PAST WE'VE HAD, UH, THE APPLICANTS SUBMIT A REQUEST TO INCLUDE GUTTERS, FOR EXAMPLE. AND SO, SO IF, CAN WE, UM, STATE THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE THAT AS, AS PART OF, OF THE DIALOGUE HERE, UM, SO THAT, YOU KNOW, TO PROTECT THOSE NEIGHBORS, YOU KNOW, SINCE WE'RE MOVING IN ON THE THREE FOOT? ABSOLUTELY. SO, MR. CHRISTIAN, SO THE REQUEST WOULD BE IF THIS, IF THE PRO THE ROOF SLOPE IS TOWARDS THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES, THEN YOU'D AMEND YOUR APPLICATION TO INCLUDE GUTTERS ON THOSE SIDES? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. WE WILL DO THAT. AND YOU WOULD I'LL MAKE THAT COMMITMENT. THAT'S A AFFIRMATIVE YES. YES. . OKAY. YES. IS THAT SEPARATE? OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU FOR THAT. I'LL, I'LL KNOW THAT NOW GOING FORWARD. I APPRECIATE IT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT STAFF? DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE VARIANCE [00:45:01] REQUEST? NO PUBLIC COMMENTS. ALRIGHTY. ANY REBUTTAL YOU'D LIKE TO OFFER BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? NO, COMMISSIONERS, JUST LIKE I WAS SAID, THEY, THEY KIND OF GOT CAUGHT IN THIS BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE OFFICE OF, UH, H D R C AND THEIR SITE PLAN WITH THE ZONING AND, UM, THEY'RE TRYING TO BUILD THIS TO LIVE IN. THEY CURRENTLY LIVE ACROSS THE STREET. THEY LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS. THEY JUST WOULD LIKE TO BUILD A NEW STRUCTURE TO LIVE IN. THANK YOU SIR. WELL, THAT CLOSES THE PUBLIC PORTION. I'D ASK A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION MANA MR. MANNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 3 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 0. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT THE REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FOOT FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE TO INCLUDE GUTTERS SHOULD THE, UH, ROOF OR CARPORT SLOPE TOWARDS THE, UH, ABUTTING PROPERTIES SITUATED AT 2 2 8 RERA STREET. APPLICANT BE IN CHRISTIAN PC BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACT THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED THAT THE, AS THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE SETBACKS TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES, WHICH IS 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, IN THE APPLICANT BUILDING THE STRUCTURE FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS A STRUCTURE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE REDUCED THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, TO MEET THESE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. 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 STRUCTURE WILL BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES, WHICH OBSERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND THE PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE STRUCTURE. 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 THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCE ARE NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH IS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. IF GRANTED, THE STRUCTURE WILL BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND THE PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE STRUCTURE AND WOULD NOT ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACT OF THE DISTRICT. SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE AS SAW IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN DISTRICT WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS APPLY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH A VARIANCE OF SAW IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. END OF MOTION. SECOND. UH, SECOND MR. KAMAN. OKAY, SO, UM, I'LL BE VOTING FOR THIS. I THINK, UH, YOU KNOW, I I WITH THE APPLICANT, UH, COMMITTING TO INCLUDING THE GUTTERS, UH, SHOULD IT, UH, POTENTIALLY IMPACT THE, UH, JOINING OR THE BEDDING NEIGHBORS. UM, I'M A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE WHOLE DIALOGUE. UM, AND THEN OUTSIDE OF THAT, UH, WE DID HAVE A LOT OF, I GUESS A LOT OF PRIOR DISCUSSIONS WITH REGARDS TO THE, UM, OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. AND SINCE THEY'RE OKAY WITH THIS, I GUESS I'LL BE OKAY WITH IT TOO. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR MS. KAPLAN. UH, AND, AND I AGREE AS AMENDED. I AGREE WITH THE MOTION. THANK YOU. LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. CODDLE CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. UNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE UNANIMOUS NINE IN FAVOR. ZERO AGAINST THE, UH, VARIANCE DOES PASS. GOOD LUCK WITH THE PROJECT. THANK YOU STAFF. DO WE HAVE ANOTHER CASE WHERE THERE'S ZEL? WHAT'S THAT? ZEL. OKAY. ZEL? YEAH. RECOMMENDED. OKAY. YEAH. LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH CASE 1 0 2. THE BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 3 0 0 1 0 2 ADDRESS IS 6 0 0 5 AND 6 0 0 7 TESLA ROAD. UH, IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER SIX, THE APPLICANT BEING, UM, BREVITY COFFEE COMPANY. A REQUEST FOR A 120 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 200 FOOT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A MOBILE FOOD COURT TO BE 80 FEET FROM A SINGLE FAMILY LOT. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS C THREE. [00:50:01] THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG T ROAD NORTH OF COLLIBRA ROAD ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY A COFFEE SHOP WITH DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE WITH THE APPLICANT, SEEKING A VARIANCE TO PLACE THREE MOBILE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS LESS THAN 200 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINES OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE PER THE U D C A MOBILE FOOD COURT IS A PARCEL OR A GROUP OF PARCELS OF LAND WHERE THREE OR MORE MOBILE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS CONGREGATE, CONGREGATE TO OFFER FOOD OR BEVERAGES FOR SALE TO PUBLIC AND MUST BE LOCATED AT LEAST 200 FEET FROM ANY SINGLE FAMILY ZONING USE OR DISTRICT. THE 200 FOOT MINIMUM DISTANCE IS MEASURED FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE. IN THIS CASE, THE DISTANCE MEASURED TO BE 80 FEET FROM THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY USE LOCATED DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SUBJECT OR THE PROPERTIES REQUIRED TO HAVE A 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER ALONG TESSEL ROAD. OKAY. AND THEN THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. OKAY. AND THEN THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THIS IS JUST ANOTHER PHOTO OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THEN THIS IS THE PHOTO OF THE PROPOSED THREE MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS. AND THEN THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES ARE THE SURROUNDING AREAS. OKAY. FOR THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 2 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. UH, ONE AND 81 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY COMMERCIAL USE AND AN EXISTING 55 FOOT DRAINAGE RIGHT OF WAY. SEPARATE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL USES. AND TWO, WITHOUT THE VARIANCE, THE APPLICANT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE A MOBILE FOOD COURT AS SPACE IS LIMITED AND IMPOSES ON THE MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIREMENT ANYWHERE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THEN THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION. UM, PLAN STAFF MAILED OUT 17 NOTICES, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND THE GREAT NORTHWEST COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. SO MANNA, SO QUESTION FOR STAFF. SO, SO ON THIS PICTURE RIGHT HERE, UM, SO, SO TALKED ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE, UM, I GUESS THE, THE DRAINAGE DITCH, WHICH IS BEHIND, UH, THE, UH, BUDDING PROPERTY. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE C THREE R HERE. SO, SO WHAT IS A DISTANCE FROM THE BACK OF THOSE RESIDENCE, UH, TO I GUESS THAT PROPERTY LINE? SO GO BACK TO THE, YES, IT'S GONNA BE 173 FEET AND THEN SO ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE FRONT SIDE IS, AND THAT'S WHERE THE PROB THE PROBLEM LAYS ON ACTUALLY ON THE FRONT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO IT'S 'CAUSE IT'S ACROSS THE STREET, CORRECT? YES, IT'S GONNA BE CLOSER THAN THE, THE HOUSES BEHIND THEM. OKAY. PERFECT. THANK YOU, ORIAN. THANK YOU MR. ORIAN. YEAH. SO, UH, BECAUSE IT'S MOBILE VEHICLES THAT CAN PARK, ARE YOU MEASURING THE 200 FEET FROM THE, FROM WHERE THE NEAREST VEHICLE FOOD VEHICLE CAN BE? OR ARE YOU, MA ARE YOU CREATING LIKE A LEASE LINE THAT YOU'RE MEASURING IT TO? NO, WE MEASURE IT FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE. SO GOING BACK TO MANNAS QUESTION, IS THIS CORNER PARCEL A SEPARATE LOT? YES. SO THE, SO THE EXISTING, SO THE BUILDING WITH THE COFFEE SHOP IS, THAT'S A SEPARATE LOT, THAT'S WHY YOU'RE MEASURING 1 73, CORRECT? YES. AND IS THERE ANY PARKING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE EITHER BEING MET OR NOT BEING MET? THERE IS NO PARKING ISSUES THAT THE, UH, APPLICANT INDICATED, BUT THERE IS APARTMENT DEPARTMENT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY, MANO FOR ONE MORE FUN QUESTION. YEP. SO, UM, SO IT, IT, IT APPEARS, AND MAYBE MY PICTURE'S WRONG, THAT THERE MAY BE SOME UTILITIES OVERHEAD, UM, ON, ON THAT PROPERTY. AND SO WITH REGARDS TO WHERE IT IS THAT A VEHICLE CAN PARK AND I, I'M NOT AWARE OF FOOD TRUCK ORDINANCES HERE. SO CAN A FOOD TRUCK PARK IN A UTILITY EASEMENT AREA? UM, IF IT'S A, IF IT'S, UH, AN AVAILABLE PARKING SPACE? IN OTHER WORDS, I'M ASKING IF THERE'S A, IF THERE'S A REQUIREMENT THAT THE TRUCK HAS TO BE AWAY FROM THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, UH, 'CAUSE WE MEASURE FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE. AND SO IF THERE'S A REQUIREMENT TO BE NOT HAVE A TRUCK THERE, THEN YOU KNOW, DOES THAT DRIVE PART OF THAT DIALOGUE? DID MY QUESTION MAKE SENSE? YEAH. SO THEY ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A LANDSCAPE BUFFER. UM, BESIDES THAT, UM, THEY DON'T HAVE TO ABIDE BY ANYTHING ELSE. UM, I DON'T THINK ANY EASEMENTS, UM, I GUESS DID HAVE TO CROSS THAT PATH WHENEVER THEY GET THEIR PERMITS, IF THERE'S AN EASEMENT THERE. NO OTHER QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MACHACA? MR. MACHACA? UH, THIS QUESTION IS MORE FOR STAFF JUST FOR ME TO GET ACQUAINTED WITH SOME OF THESE, UH, FOOD TRUCKS. SO IF A FOOD TRUCK GOES AND PARKS SOMEPLACE ELSE, DOES HE ALSO HAVE A LIMIT FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINE OR CAN HE JUST PARK BY THE SIDE OF THE ROAD TO START HIS OWN BUSINESS? YOU, YOU HAVE TO HAVE PROPER ZONING IN [00:55:01] ORDER TO HAVE A FOOD TRUCK ZONING. C ONE, C TWO. WHAT? YES SIR. MM-HMM. , BOTH OF THEM. COMMERCIAL ZONING. I SEE. YES, C ONE AND C TWO WOULD ALLOW IT. C THREE ALSO ALLOWS IT. SO IF THERE'S A TRUCK AND A C ONE, C TWO AND BEHIND IT, THERE'S A PROPERTY, PEOPLE LIVE IN THERE, IT'S OKAY IF THERE'S A FOOD TRUCK PARK, THAT'S WHEN THE RULE KICKS IN THE 200 FEET. BUT IF IT'S ONLY ONE SINGLE TRUCK, THEY ARE ALLOWED. WOW. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MS. MACHACA. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS HERE? NONE. UM, LET'S SEE IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC COMMENT. THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU. I'D ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY WANNA PROVIDE SOME KIND OF REBUTTAL TESTIMONY. TESTIMONY. OH, WELL I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. UH, COLE MOUT BREVITY COFFEE. 6 0 0 7 TESLA ROAD. SO THE, TO ANSWER YOUR UTILITIES OVERHEAD, UH, WHEN WE RAN THAT POWER, C P SS IS WANTING US TO PUT A NEW UNDERGROUND IN IT WAS GONNA COST A FORTUNE. IT WAS EASIER, EASIER FOR US TO JUST, TO PUT A POLE. UH, WHEN C P SS RAN THAT IT HAS A MINIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT, SO IT'S ABOVE ANY REQUIREMENT NEEDS TO BE, UH, AS FAR AS FOOD TRUCKS, PARKING UNDERNEATH IT, ALL THE FOOD TRUCKS, I DUNNO IF YOU CAN BRING UP YOUR, THE SITE PLAN OF IT, BUT YOU CAN GO THAT ONE. SO ALL THE FOOD TRUCKS ARE GONNA BE ON THAT BACK MICRO, THAT'S, SORRY. ALL THE FOOD TRUCKS, UH, ON THE 173 FEET, YOU OVER TO THE RIGHT. ALL THOSE FOOD, THE THREE FOOD TRUCKS I WANT ARE GONNA BE IN THE BACK OF THAT LOT. SO THEY'RE GONNA BE 173 FEET FROM THE HOUSES IN THE BACK AND THEY'RE GONNA BE PROBABLY 160 FEET FROM THE HOUSE ACTUALLY ACROSS THE STREET WHERE THE FOOD TRUCKS ARE ACTUALLY GONNA BE. UH, AND AS SHE WAS SAYING, THE, UH, THE REASON I'M HAVING TO REZONE THIS IS 'CAUSE THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IS I'M ONLY ALLOWED TO HAVE TWO FOOD TRUCKS WITHOUT BECOMING A FOOD TRUCK VENDOR. SO THE OTHER TWO, THE, HE'S GOT A PICTURE OF THREE FOOD TRUCKS ON THERE, BUT ACTUALLY ONE OF 'EM IS NOT ON OUR LOT. HE JUST IS A GUY THAT COMES BY AND GETS ICE AND FILLS UP HIS TANK WITH OUR HOSE , THE RED ONE. UH, BUT THE OTHER TWO, UH, THEY ARE THERE PERMANENTLY. SO I AM ALLOWED TO HAVE THOSE TWO WITHOUT THE PERMIT. UH, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET THIS REZONED JUST TO HAVE THREE MORE IN THE BACK OF THE LOT. SO, AND I'LL JUST HAVE TO CORRECT YOU, IT'S NOT A REZONING, YOU'RE JUST GETTING, UH, DISTANCE REQUIREMENT VARIANCE. OKAY. YEAH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M DOING. I'M WINGING IT. SO ME TOO. , I'M A REDNECK FROM MIDDLE OF NOWHERE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M DOING. LET'S SEE. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? CRUZ, MS. CRUZ, UH, SO WHAT'S THE BUILDING BEHIND YOU ALL? IS IT, IS IT OCCUPIED OR STILL VACANT? NO, THE BUILDING BEHIND ME AND TO THE NORTH SIDE IS A STORAGE FACILITY. STORAGE UNITS. OH, OKAY. YOU JUST CAN'T TELL. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE. THANK YOU. YEAH, SO THAT'S THOSE HOUSES UH, BEHIND US ARE COMPLETELY BLOCKED FROM US WITH STORAGE UNITS. SO THANK ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? SURE. MANNA, MAYBE WITH THE CITY AS WELL. SO, SO, UH, WE HAVE, I GUESS, UH, THE APPLICANT STATING OF WHERE THEY'RE GONNA PLACE THE, UM, EQUIPMENT HERE. AND A QUESTION I GUESS I WOULD ASK IS, UH, THE CITY MENTIONED, UH, LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, WHAT HAVE YOU WITH REGARDS TO THIS PROPERTY. UM, SO, SO CAN THAT BE PART OF THIS DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO ENSURING THAT IF, YOU KNOW, PLANS CHANGE IN THE FUTURE, THAT THEY HAVE TO STAY BEHIND THAT LANDSCAPE BUFFER OF 20 FOOT, UH, SAY, AND SO THAT WAY IT LEAVES THAT A HUNDRED FOOT AVAILABLE ACROSS THE STREET. SO BASICALLY THAT ALONE WOULD, WOULD ENSURE THAT, UH, IT, YOU KNOW, THEY AREN'T GONNA BE IMPACTING THAT IN THE FUTURE. IT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE STATED BECAUSE IT'S A REQUIREMENT. UM, SO THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO MAINTAIN ALL OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR, FOR THEIR SITE. SO THAT'S GONNA INCLUDE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS. UH, SO FOR THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, AND LIKE I SAID, I'M NEW TO THIS. I'M NOT A BUSINESS GUY. I'M LEARNING ALL THIS AS I GO. SO, UH, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WHEN WE DID THE COFFEE SHOP, WE, EVERYTHING WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY AND BY THE STATE OF TEXAS AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO WHY, OBVIOUSLY A LANDSCAPE BUFFER IS GONNA COST ME THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AND I DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY LEFT . SO, UH, HAD WE KNOWN THIS AT THE START AND HAD IT BEEN BROUGHT TO ME AT THE START, WE WOULD'VE HAD THE BANK GIVE US EXTRA MONEY FOR THAT WHEN WE DID THE LOAN. AT THIS POINT, WE'RE HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT. THERE'S NO BANK GONNA GIMME A LOAN. THIS THING COSTS TWICE AS MUCH AS IT WAS SUPPOSED TO COST. IT TOOK A YEAR LONGER TO OPEN THAN IT WAS SUPPOSED TO OPEN. WE DON'T HAVE THE FINANCES RIGHT NOW TO DO THAT. UH, SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN WITH, WITH, I MEAN, WHEN THE TIME COMES AND A YEAR FROM NOW, IF THAT THING'S KICKING BUTT AND WE CAN DO IT, I'LL, I WILL ABSOLUTELY DO IT. BUT, SO, SO YOU'RE NOT BUILDING, UM, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT BUILDING ANYTHING, YOU'RE JUST INTRODUCING THE MOBILE FOOD COURT? UM, I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T, I WAS JUST SAYING THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER IS THERE WHEN YOU DEVELOP, OBVIOUSLY IF YOU'RE JUST BRINGING IN FOOD TRUCKS, YOU'RE NOT BUILDING ANYTHING. SO I DON'T THINK THAT'S GONNA REQUIRE YOU TO HAVE, IT'S JUST YOU CAN'T PUT ANYTHING ON THAT AREA IS WHAT I WAS GETTING AT AND OKAY. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS, AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS DRIVING. SO JUST TO YEAH, JUST TO KIND OF REEMPHASIZE THAT. YOU CAN'T PUT ANYTHING IN THAT FRONT SPACE. [01:00:01] OH YEAH. NO. AND WITH REGARDS TO THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER BASICALLY IS PUT FOUR TREES IN THAT GRAVEL PIT AND YOU'RE COVERED. GOTCHA. THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS TO, AND SO, UM, AND THAT, THAT WOULD, THAT MAKES YOU FEEL A LITTLE BETTER. YEAH. THAT WOULD COMPLY WITH, AND YOU, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO ANY MAJOR CONSTRUCTION THERE AS YOU GO DOWN THAT DIALOGUE FOR, FOR LANDSCAPE BUFFERING. SO. GOTCHA. UM, YEAH. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? VASQUEZ? MR. VASQUEZ? UH, YES, SIR. UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, ARE YOU GONNA ACTUALLY HAVE A TOTAL OF FIVE, UM, UH, UNITS ON, ON THIS PLACE BECAUSE TWO OF TWO OF 'EM, OR, OR SEMI-PERMANENT? AND AND DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU THREE, THREE OTHER TRUCKS ARE COMING IN? I, I ACTUALLY PLAN ON PUTTING TWO IN, UH, FOR THE START, JUST IN THE VERY BACK OF THE LOT. THERE'S NOT, UH, IT'S A, IT'S A BIG LOT, BUT THERE'S, THE MAIN THING IS THE COFFEE. I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ALL ABOUT IS THE COFFEE SHOP. UH, I'M JUST TRYING TO BRING MORE, REALLY, I'M TRYING TO BOOST MY SALES IN THE AFTERNOON. 'CAUSE NO ONE'S DRINKING COFFEE IN THE AFTERNOON. SO IF WE CAN GET 'EM TO COME EAT AND DRINK A SMOOTHIE, THEN WE'RE BOOSTING OUR SALES, YOU KNOW? SO, UH, BUT I DO WORRY ABOUT SEATING AND I WORRY ABOUT PARKING, SO I'M NOT, LIKE, I THINK WITH THIS VARIANCE I'M ACTUALLY ALLOWED TO HAVE UP TO 10 FOOD TRUCKS. RIGHT. I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST IN THAT. I COULDN'T, IT WOULD AFFECT MY BUSINESS. SO I'M REALLY JUST TRYING TO GET TWO MORE. IF, IF I CAN FIT IT, MAYBE A FIFTH ONE. UH, BUT YEAH, I'M, I'M JUST TRYING TO, TRYING TO BOOST SALES. . THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. MANNA, SORRY. SO THIS KIND OF BROUGHT UP ONE MORE QUESTION FOR THE CITY HERE. UM, SO, SO, UM, CAN THERE BE HOURS OF, UH, DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO HOURS OF OPERATION, UM, WITH REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, I GUESS HOW THIS RUNS AND SO SET THAT AS PART OF THE STIPULATION AS WELL? YEAH, THAT WOULD BE, UM, LIKE CONDITIONAL AND SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THIS BOARD COULD DO. MM-HMM. , YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AS FAR AS THEM SHUTTING DOWN A CERTAIN TIME. SO I, SO I DID ACTUALLY WENT YESTERDAY, THIS ISN'T SUPERFICIAL , BUT I WENT AND HAD EVERYONE THAT'S ON THOSE PICTURES, THE HOUSES, I'VE GOT EVERY SIGNATURE IN FAVOR OF IT. UH, YESTERDAY MORNING, THIS MORNING I WENT TO ALL THE BUSINESSES. I GOT ALL THE ONES THAT WERE OPEN. THEY'RE ALL IN FAVOR OF IT. UH, JUDGE OBJECTED. YEAH. COULD YOU, COULD YOU, UH, PROVIDE THAT FOR, UH, THE PERMANENT RECORD? YEAH. OKAY. I, UH, AND ONE THING, I DID HAVE TWO PEOPLE OUT OF THAT LIST THAT, UH, THAT DID ASK THAT EXACT QUESTION, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IS THERE GONNA BE LOUD MUSIC? IS THERE GONNA BE THIS OR THAT THAT I FULLY INTEND ON? UH, HAVING THEM ALL SIGN LEASES THAT SAY NOTHING AFTER 10 O'CLOCK, NO MUSIC. THE COFFEE SHOP HAS MUSIC INSIDE. WE DON'T NEED FIVE DIFFERENT PEOPLE PLAYING FIVE DIFFERENT TYPES OF MUSIC, YOU KNOW. SO 10:00 PM 10:00 PM YEAH, WE, WE ARE ALREADY OPEN UNTIL WE NINE. I USUALLY HAVE STAFF THERE UNTIL NINE 30, USUALLY YOUNG GIRLS, WHICH MAKES ME NERVOUS ANYWAYS. SO, UH, I KIND OF WANT FOOD TRUCKS THERE LATER SO THAT THE GIRLS CLOSE AND AREN'T LEAVING A DARK PARKING LOT. THANK YOU, SIR. YEAH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEREIN? NONE. I'D ASK, UH, MEMBER OF THE BOARD PLEASE MAKE A MOTION. MS. BRAGMAN, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 3 2. I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. GRANTED REQUEST FOR 120 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 200 FOOT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW MO MOBILE FOOD COURT TO BE 80 FEET FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY LOT SITUATED AT 6 0 0 5 AND 6 0 0 7 ROAD. APPLICANT BEING BREVITY COFFEE COMPANY BECAUSE OF THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY, SUCH THE LITTLE 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 BIBLICAL INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. IN THIS CASE, THE PUBLIC INTEREST REPRESENTED BY MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR MOBILE FOOD COURTS AND THE IMPACT THEY MAY, MAY HAVE ON PROXIMITY TO SINGLE FAMILY ALLY ZONED DISTRICTS. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO DEVIATE FROM THE MINIMUM 200 FOOT REQUIREMENT, WHICH IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THERE IS AN 81 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY COMMERCIAL USE AND EXISTING 55 FOOT DRAINAGE RIGHT OF WAY, SEPARATING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE SEPARATED FROM THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL USES TWO DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE SPECIAL CONDITION FOUND ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS THE AMOUNT OF SPACE ON THE PROPERTY IS LIMITED TO PLACE THE MOBILE FOOD COURT. WITHOUT THE VARIANCE, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE LIMITED TO TWO FOOD TRUCKS. AS THE MEASUREMENT IS CALCULATED FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE 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. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS THE MOBILE FOOD COURT USE, NOR ANY SEATING AREAS WILL BE IN A REQUIRED ZONING, SETBACK, BUFFER, YARD, ACCESS, EASEMENT, DRAINAGE, EASEMENT, FLOODPLAIN, DRIVEWAY, UTILITY EASEMENT, AND OR FIRE LANE 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. [01:05:01] NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH 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 MOBILE FOOD COURT WILL BE LOCATED 81 FEET FROM, FROM THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICT, THIS WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES AS THE ABUTTING ZONING DISTRICTS TO THE WEST AND NORTH NORTH, OUR ZONE C DASH THREE R, WHICH ALLOW FOR MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL USES. THE REQUEST DOES NOT SEEM TO CAUSE ANY HARM TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT APPEAR TO CREATE PARKING ON RESIDENTIAL LOCAL STREETS, DOES NOT APPEAR AN ISSUE CREATED. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, 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 OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS LIMITED BUILDABLE AREA WITHOUT IMPOSING INTO THE MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIREMENT. THE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. SECOND, SECOND, SECOND, MS. CRUZ, MS. BAGMAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME DIALOGUE? YEAH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. UH, THE FACT THAT HE WENT AROUND TO ALL THE RESIDENTIAL, UM, PROPERTIES, UM, BEYOND THE, UH, THE PROPERTY LINE, UH, AND GOT SUPPORT FROM THEM AS WELL AS THE BUSINESSES THAT WERE OPEN. UM, AND THE FACT THAT, UM, UM, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE PROPERTY, THE FACT THAT HE'S CONCERNED ABOUT HIS WORKERS, UM, THAT HE'S ALREADY SET, UM, GUIDELINES IN TERMS OF HOW LATE OF OPERATIONS AND WILL HAVE LEASES SIGNED, LET'S SAY, YOU KNOW, UM, MUSIC AND THINGS LIKE THAT WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. SO, UM, I THINK THAT HE'S DOING HIS DUE DILIGENCE AND I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. THANK YOU, MS. CRUZ. UM, YES, I CONCUR WITH MS. BERGMAN. I THINK, UH, WITH ALL THE ISSUES HE'S TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT DON'T OCCUR, UH, WOULD, UH, REALLY HELP IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MS. CRUZ MANNA. MR. MANNA. SO I'LL BE ALSO IN AGREEMENT. UM, ONE OF THE THINGS, UH, JUST RECOGNIZING THAT THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IN THE, UH, NORTHWEST COMMUNITY PLAN, UM, OR SECTOR PLAN. SO, SO IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THAT AND IT ABUTS, UM, A, UH, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AS WELL. AND SO, SO TO ME, UH, THIS LOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW, A BUSINESS THAT WAS DESIGNED TO BE THERE. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DIALOGUE? HEARING NONE. LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT WE HAD A BOARD MEMBER, UM, ZACHARY DEAN JOIN US IN THE MEETING AT 2:00 PM AND SO, UM, HE CAN BE INCLUDED IN THE VO VOTE, OR IF YOU DIDN'T HEAR ENOUGH, SIR, YOU CAN ALSO ABSTAIN. OKAY, I'M GONNA ABSTAIN FROM THIS ONE. THANK YOU, MR. DEAN. I HEAR NONE. LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MR. CODDLE CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA? I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH FINDINGS OF FACT. UNANIMOUS. NINE IN FAVOR. ZERO. AND OPPOSITION. THE VARIANCE PASSES. GOOD LUCK WITH THE PROJECT. I BELIEVE WE BELIEVE WE HAVE 10 MEMBERS ON THE BOARD NOW. SO WE ARE, UH, READY TO PROCEED WITH ANY CASES AS, UH, THE AGENDA WILL TAKE US FROM THE BEGINNING. FROM THE BEGINNING. SO DO GO BACK. OKAY. WE'LL DO, UM, 99 ITEM NUMBER FOUR. I THINK WE'LL JUST, OH, AND JUST F Y I, UM, 97, UH, HAS TO POSTPONE, UM, TO THE NEXT MEETING. IT'S GONNA BE READVERTISED. DO WE NEED TO READ A MOTION FOR THAT? UH, NO SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. UH, BO O A 99 OFF OF 1 0 3 KANSAS STREET COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO APPLICANT BEING NEW COMFORT HOMES. THE REQUEST IS FOR A 346 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM A MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT, UH, ALLOWED ON A RM FOUR, UH, TO ALLOW A RM FOUR WITH 36 54 SQUARE FEET. UH, THREE PARKING SPACE VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE REQUIRED PARKING SPACES TO ALLOW TWO PARKING SPACES. UH, NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A FRONT SETBACK OF, UH, ONE INCH, UH, NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANT FROM THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM REVERSE CORNER LOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A SIDE SETBACK OF ONE INCH AND A NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANT FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A REAR SETBACK OF [01:10:01] ONE INCH ZONE RM FOUR. NEXT SLIDE. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ALONG, UH, LOCATED ALONG THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH HACKBERRY IN KANSAS. THE BUILDING APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED IN 1950S, AND IN 1980, A RETAIL USE WAS CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO COUNTY RECORDS. HISTORICAL ZONING MAPS, IT APPEARS AT THE, AN ANTIQUE SHOP WAS ESTABLISHED ON A LOT PRIOR TO 1993. IT APPEARS ON LOT EIGHT, WHICH WAS SEPARATED BY DEEDED IN 1961, AND THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT IN 1950. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO INITIALLY TO REMODEL THE SINGLE FAMILY TO THREE UNITS, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE A MINIMUM LOSS SIZE AS THEY'RE CHANGING THE USE FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO THREE UNITS. UH, THE ADDITIONAL VARIANCES WERE OBSERVED DURING SITE VISITS. NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. UH, WHAT THEY INITIALLY APPLIED FOR IS THAT ONE INCH REAR SETBACK, UH, ADDITION THAT THEY'RE DOING. EVERYTHING ELSE IS STATED, WAS OBSERVED DURING, UH, SITE VISITS. NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, THE SIDE ALONG HIKE HACK BERRY. SO THESE, THIS OVERHANG IS INTRUDING INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. UH, THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THAT THEY ARE GONNA TAKE THAT DOWN. SLIDE, THE SURROUNDING AREA. ALL RIGHT. STAFF RECOMMENDS, UM, DENIAL OF THE LOT SIZE AND PARKING REQUIREMENT VARIANCES. UM, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOOD WILL BE ALTERED AND THE REDUCED PARKING WOULD CREATE EXCESS PARKING AND RIGHT OF WAYS STAFF RECOMMENDED, UH, RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FRONT AND REAR, UH, CORNER. UH, LOT SIDE VARIANCE. I'M SORRY. UH, AND I THINK THIS IS BACKWARDS. GIMME ONE SECOND. YES. UH, THIS IS, UH, BACKWARDS. IT'S THE, UM, THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING A DENIAL FOR THE REAR SETBACK. UH, IT IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE SETBACKS ALREADY THERE FOR THE REVERSE CORNER LOT AND THE FRONT BACK. NEXT SLIDE. AND WE RECEIVED FOUR IN FAVOR, UM, WITHIN 200 FEET. DENVER HIGHEST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED. UM, AND ONE IN FAVOR OUTSIDE OF 200 FEET. NEXT SLIDE. IT'S THE LETTER FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND, UH, SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. LET'S SEE, A STAFF'S REP, UH, PRESENTATION ORIAN. MR. ORIAN. YEAH. HOW MANY UNITS ARE THEY TRYING TO PUT ON HERE? THREE. THREE. UH, THEY ARE ABLE TO PUT UP TO FOUR THOUGH, BUT THEY'RE INDICATED THEY'RE GONNA PUT THREE AS PART OF THEIR PROJECT. IS THERE A PLATINUM ON FILE? I CAN CHECK. OR THEY GET, I'M ASKING BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT THE, THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED AS WELL AS THE AERIAL WAS SHOWING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC RIGHT UP AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE. AND EVEN IF IT'S SINGLE PHASE, THEY STILL NEED A 10 FOOT EASEMENT. SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER REQUESTING DOWN TO ONE INCH, DID THAT COME INTO STAFF'S, UM, UH, REVIEW AS FAR AS WHETHER THEY WOULD GO TO, YOU KNOW, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR NOT? I'M CHECKING TO SEE IF THERE'S A PLAQUE. OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS WHILE THE STAFF IS LOOKING UP THAT ONE QUESTION? UH, I, I GUESS MS. KAPLAN? YEAH, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO, UM, COMMISSIONER, CAN YOU USE YOUR MICROPHONE? I'M SORRY. YEAH, I'VE GOT IT. OKAY. SO I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THIS. UM, YOU SAY THERE'S AN EXISTING BUILDING, BUT NOW THEY WANNA TURN IT INTO THREE FAMILY HOUSE AND THEY'RE GONNA KEEP THAT EXISTING BUILDING AND MAKE THAT THREE FAMILY, CORRECT? UM, THE EXISTING BUILDING AS IT EXISTS ALREADY, UM, IT WAS BEING USED AS A SINGLE FAMILY, BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE CHANGING THE USE TO [01:15:01] THREE UNITS, IT HAS TO MEET THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE. I SEE. BUT THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING NEW CONSTRUCTION. THEY'RE NOT THAT, NOT THAT BUILDING THAT'S ALL PAINTED. THEY'RE NOT, WE'RE THE, THE PICTURE YOU SEE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS ALL THE PAINTING. I BELIEVE THEY'RE KEEPING THE BUILDING AS IT IS JUST DOING THE INSIDE. IF I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT'S INTENTION CORRECTLY. AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALSO BUILDING A LOT MORE NEW STUFF IN THE, IN THE BACK, IS THAT RIGHT? WELL, WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT YES. THEN MANNA, MR. MANNA. SO, SO I'M LOOKING AT, I GUESS GOOGLE, SO I DON'T KNOW IF I'M AT THE RIGHT LOCATION, BUT, UM, HAS THIS ALREADY BEEN CLEARED? UM, AND THE PRIOR BUILDING'S NOT THERE, AND NOW IT'S A PIECE OF CONCRETE? NO, NO, NO, THE BUILDING'S STILL THERE. OKAY. I'M LOOKING AT THE WRONG PICTURE THEN. OKAY, THANK YOU. YEAH. OR CAN STAFF BRING UP GOOGLE MAPS? BECAUSE I'M SEEING THE SAME THING AS COMMISSIONER MANON CROSS STREET. CROSS STREET IS MESQUITE ON THE GOOGLE MAPS. AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE ON HACKBERRY. HMM. BECAUSE THE ADDRESS IS WRONG AT THE WRONG ONE 30 KANSAS, IS IT ADVERTISED WRONG OR RIGHT THERE? YEAH, IT'S ONE 30 KANSAS. SO OUR PACKET HAS A DIFFERENT ADDRESS. SO, SO WAS IT ADVERTISED AS 1 31 3? I'M LOOKING AT ONE 30 KANSAS ON THE STAFF REPORT. I SEE 1 0 3 KANSAS ON THIS, ON THE, ON THE MOTION. ON MOTION VARIANCE ON MOTION SHEET. SO RIGHT. THE ACTUAL, UH, AGENDA AND THE STAFF REPORTS SAY, UM, ONE. OH, YEAH, WELL, THE STAFF REPORT SAYS ONE 30, BUT THE AGENDA SAYS 1 0 3 KANSAS. SO WHAT, WHAT DID IT GET ADVERTISED AT? DO WE KNOW? WE'LL CHECK THAT. I'LL, I'LL CHECK THAT. WHILE HE'S GETTING THE POT. UH, THERE, THERE IS NO PLA UH, APPLIED FOR. OKAY. ARE THEY GOING TO TWO STORIES OR IS IT, WAS IT A ONE STORY AND THEY'RE GOING TO TWO STORIES? THAT'D BE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I KNOW STAFF IS STILL LOOKING UP. THAT ORIGINAL WAS, OH, DID WE ANSWER THE QUESTION? STAFF? THERE'S NO PLA. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, UH, ADVERTISED? YEAH, WE'RE WAITING FOR THE, AS ADVERTISED. IN THE MEANTIME, AS THE APPLICANT, WOULD YOU, CAN YOU COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND LET'S BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION? MY NAME IS LAWRENCE SENYA. I'M HERE TO REPRESENT, UH, PROPERTY ONE 30 KANSAS. UM, SO LOOK AT HERE. OKAY, SO THERE WAS ALREADY, UH, THERE'S THREE METERS, THREE ELECTRIC METERS, AND THERE'S THREE GAS METERS HERE. UM, OBVIOUSLY THERE WAS NO PICTURE OF IT. SO THIS WAS ALREADY THREE UNITS PRIOR. UH, SOMEONE OBVIOUSLY, UH, TURNED IT INTO ONE UNIT. UH, SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE IT BACK TO THE THREE UNITS THAT IT ORIGINALLY WAS. UM, WE'RE NOT ADDING ANY SQUARE FOOTAGE WHATSOEVER. WE ARE GONNA DEMO THE BACK. UM, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LITTLE, UH, AC ROOM OR, UH, WATER HEATER ROOM THEY HAD IN THE BACK THAT, UH, IT'S ADJACENT TO THE NEIGHBOR IN THE BACK. SO WE'RE GONNA DEMO THAT. UM, WE'RE ALSO GONNA ADD ANOTHER DRIVEWAY AS PER ZONING. THEY SAID I'M ALLOWED TO ADD ANOTHER DRIVEWAY IN THERE. I'VE SPOKE TO ALL THE NEIGHBORS AND THEY'RE ALL FINE WITH IT. SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. WERE YOU GONNA ADD A SECOND FLOOR TO IT OR IS IT, UH, IN THE ATTIC? THERE'S ACTUALLY STAIRS, EXISTING STAIRS THERE. SO THEY HAD A UNIT UP IN THE ATTIC, THE COMMERCIAL SIDE, WE'RE JUST GONNA MAKE THAT INTO RESIDENTIAL. AND THE EXISTING HOUSE IS JUST GONNA BE THE OTHER UNIT. SO THERE'LL BE THREE UNITS. OKAY. AND, AND THE ATTIC HAS ENOUGH SPACE FOR A UNIT. OKAY. LET'S SEE. UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, STAFF, WERE YOU STILL LOOKING UP THE THREE PHASE ELECTRICAL QUESTION THAT, UH, DONALD HAD OR FOR THE, UH, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? HIS QUE DONALD, DO YOU STILL HAVE THE OPEN QUESTION ON THE THREE-PHASE SETBACK REGARDING THE ELECTRICITY? YEAH, MY, I WAS ASKING ABOUT THIS BECAUSE IF YOU GO TO GOOGLE MAPS, THERE'S, THERE'S THREE PHASE ELECTRIC GOING RIGHT OVER THE BUILDING AND THE BUILDING ON GOOGLE MAPS LOOKS LIKE IT'S ONE STORY. IF THEY'RE GONNA ADD. ARE YOU JUST, SO FOR THE APPLICANT, ARE YOU JUST RECONVERTING THE ATTIC OR ARE YOU ADDING HEIGHT? NO, WE'RE CONVERTING, UH, WE'RE NOT REALLY CONVERTING. IT WAS ALREADY THERE, THERE WAS A UNIT UP IN THE ATTIC PRIOR. THERE'S STILL STAIRS. ARE YOU RAISING THE HEIGHT? NO. ARE YOU RAISING THE HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE? NO, SIR. WE'RE NOT TOUCHING THE STRUCTURE WHATSOEVER OTHER THAN DEMOING THE OVERHANGS AND THE BACK, UH, WATER HEATER ROOM. EVERYTHING WILL STAY THE WAY IT IS. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? CRUZ, MS. CRUZ? OKAY. UM, MS. I'M TOTALLY CONFUSED. SO THE ORIGINAL BUILDING YOU SAID HAD THREE UNITS. IS EACH UNIT A [01:20:01] ONE BEDROOM OR TWO BEDROOM? THE HOUSE IS A TWO BEDROOM. UM, THE ATTIC WAS THE ONE BEDROOM AND THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING WAS JUST, IT'S JUST A BUILDING. IT DON'T HAVE ANY BEDROOMS, SO WE'RE PLANNING TO AT LEAST MAKE TWO BEDROOMS OUT OF IT. OKAY. AND EACH ONE WILL HAVE ITS OWN, UH, UH, KITCHEN AND EVERYTHING ELSE, CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. BATHROOM AND KITCHEN. THAT'S WHAT I WANNA MAKE SURE. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. AND, AND YOU WILL GO THROUGH THE CITY PERMITTING PROCESS, ELECTRICAL CODE, PLUMBING CODE, EVERYTHING WHEN YOU DO ALL THE RENOVATIONS. RIGHT? THAT'S WHY WE HAVEN'T TOUCHED IT. WE JUST CLEANED IT OUT AND WE'RE WAITING FOR THE VARIANCE TO PROCEED. GOT IT. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, SO YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, UH, TO DO TWO PARKING SPACES, AND YOU SAID YOU'RE PUTTING EXTRA PARKING IN THE FRONT. THERE'S AN EXTRA, UM, DRIVEWAY YOU'RE PUTTING IN THE FRONT. YES. YOU COULD FIT AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR CARS IN THAT DRIVE. LET'S SAY THREE. RIGHT. AND THEN WE'RE GONNA ADD ONE RIGHT NEXT TO IT, SO THAT'LL BE FOUR. AND, UM, TALKING TO, I MEAN, THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE THERE IS WHEN THE, THE ALAMO DOME HAS EVENTS, EVERYONE PARKS THERE ALL OVER, AND, UH, THE CITY DOESN'T ENFORCE IF THEY HAVE PERMITS OR NOT. SO, I MEAN, REALLY THE NEIGHBORS DON'T MIND IF WE PARK THERE. THEY'D RATHER US PARK THERE THAN, YOU KNOW, UH, PEOPLE FROM THE ALAMO DOME. BUT I'M SEEING ON, ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, UH, THERE'S A LONG DRIVEWAY. AND HOW MANY CARS CAN YOU GET IN THAT DRIVEWAY? THREE. THREE THERE. AND THEN WE'RE GONNA ADD ONE DRIVEWAY TO THE LEFT. WE'LL ADD ONE. SO, SO THERE'LL FOUR, FOUR SPACES. THERE'LL BE FOUR. EXACTLY. AND THEN ONE IN THE FRONT, THE FRONT OF THE STREET WOULD BE FIVE BY THE FRONT OF THE STREET. CAN YOU, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT? I'M SORRY. ON, ON THE, ON THE CITY, ON THE STREET. WE CAN PARK ONE CAR THERE. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE, UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT STAFF? DO WE HAVE, UH, ONE, I HAVE A QUESTION. SO ON GOOGLE MAPS DOWN DOWN KANSAS STREET, THERE'S A SIGN WHERE IT SAYS A CITY SIGN THAT SAYS NO PARKING, LOOKS LIKE IT'S LIKE A FIRE LANE. IS THERE ANY NO PARKING RESTRICTIONS, UH, ON YOUR SIDE OF THE STREET, SIR? UH, ACTUALLY I TAKE THAT BACK. IT, IT SAYS NO PARKING THIS SIDE OF THE BLOCK DURING EVENTS. IT'S ONLY DURING EVENTS. THEY BRING THAT SIGN OUT AND THEY PUT IT THERE ON, ON KANSAS, NOT ON HACKBERRY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. DORIAN. ANY OTHER STAFF? DO WE HAVE ANY, ANYBODY SIGNED UP FOR, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT OR WE HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AND, UH, JUST FOR THE RECORD, UM, THE AGENDA HAD 1 0 3, BUT THE ADVERTISING AND THE NOTICES WAS CORRECT THAT THE ONE 30 LOOKS LIKE THE NUMBER CORRECT. SO WE CAN JUST PROCEED. IT WAS JUST A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR. THE, UM, ALL OF THE DOCUMENTATION, THE IMPORTANT PART, GETTING IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC WAS MAILED TO ONE 30 KANSAS, UH, TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300, UH, 200 FEET OF, OF KANSAS, UH, ONE 30 KANSAS. SO WE'RE GOOD TO GO THERE. WE'VE CONFIRMED WITH OUR ATTORNEY. ALRIGHT, WELL, LET'S GET THE PUBLIC COMMENT GOING THEN. UM, LAWRENCE BRIS. OH, YOU WERE, OKAY, NEVERMIND. THAT WAS THE APPLICANT THAT SIGNED UP. THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. NO PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. WELL, UM, THE APPLICANT, ANY CLOSING STATEMENTS BEFORE WE CLOSE, CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OR, UM, NO, OTHER THAN IT BEING AN EYESORE TO ALL THE NEIGHBORS, THEY'RE JUST HAPPY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE FIX IT UP. SO CURRENTLY IT'S VACANT, RIGHT? AND SO YOU'LL PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND AT LEAST THREE FAMILIES GET TO MOVE IN WHERE NOTHING EXISTS. CURRENTLY, TWO OF THE UNITS WILL BE MY OWN GUYS, MY EMPLOYEES FOR MY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. AND, UH, ACTUALLY SOME OF THEM DON'T EVEN HAVE VEHICLES, AND I'M ONLY GONNA RENT ONE SIDE OUT THE HOUSE. SO THE BUILDING AND THE UPSTAIRS WILL BE FOR MY EMPLOYEES. GOOD STORY. OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. OKAY. LET'S SEE IF ANYBODY, I'LL MAKE MOTION. YEAH, PLEASE. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 23 103 0 0 0 9, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT 1 346 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE. AM I IN THE RIGHT ONE? WE'RE ON 99. OKAY. UH, VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON AN RM DASH FOUR LOT WITH 3,654 SQUARE FEET TO A THREE PARKING SPACES, VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE REQUIRED PARKING SPACES TO ALLOW TWO PARKING SPACES. THREE, A NINE FOOT, 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A FRONT SETBACK OF ONE INCH FOR A NINE FOOT, 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM REVERSE CORNER OUTSIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A SIDE SETBACK OF ONE INCH AND FIVE, A NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT MINIMUM REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A REAR SETBACK OF ONE INCH SITUATED AT ONE 30 KANSAS STREET. APPLICANT BEING NEW COMFORT HOMES INC. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE [01:25:01] ARE NOT CONTRA CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS STRUCTURE WAS ESTABLISHED AND THE LOT SIZE IS NOT FAR FROM BEING MET, THE DRIVEWAY LEAVES ROOM FOR TANDEM PARKING IN ADDITIONAL ROOM TO INCREASE THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT NOT HAVING THE ABILITY TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AS ZONED. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE VARIANCES WILL BE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE STRUCTURE IS DEVELOPED WITH THE EXISTING REDUCED SETBACKS, WHILE MAINLY ABUTTING RIGHT OF WAYS AND NOT, AND LOT LEAVES ROOM FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING 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 VARIANT. FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIAL THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. IF GRANTED, THE VARIANCES WILL NOT INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. AS THE DEVELOPMENT SETBACK INTRUSION WERE ESTABLISHED HISTORICALLY ON THE LOT, AND THE ABILITY FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING EXISTS ON THE LOT, WHICH IS NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX, THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY SUCH AS THE ESTABLISHED, DEVELOPED AREA AND ZONING DISTRICT. THE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. THANK YOU. HAVE A SECOND. SECOND WAS, WAS THAT MR. ORIAN? YEAH. MS. CAPITAL, LIKE I'D LIKE TO OFFER A, UH, UH, THE MAKER MAKE A CLARIFICATION ON ITEM FOUR THAT THE SIDE SETBACK IS REGARDING THE EAST SIDE. DO YOU ACCEPT THAT? ACCEPT THAT. ACCEPT FRIENDLY MOTION. A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ACCEPTED. YEAH. MS. KAPLAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME DIALOGUE? YEAH, I, I'M, I'M FOR THIS. UM, THIS IS A HISTORIC BUILDING. IT'S BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE. UM, THE OWNER DID NOT CREATE THIS, UM, THIS, UH, UH, NEED FOR THE VARIANCE. UM, HE'S RENOVATING A, A STRUCTURE THAT OTHERWISE IS VACANT. UM, THE FACT THAT THE, THERE'S A LONG DRIVEWAY THAT WILL FIT THREE CARS AND HE'S ADDING ONE EXTRA SPACE, I THINK, UM, THAT'S ENOUGH GIVEN THAT THERE'S A TWO BEDROOM AND A ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT THAT BEING SERVICED. UH, SO I'M, I BEFORE THIS THANK YOU MR. ORIA. YEAH, I'M ALSO FOR IT. I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER KAPLAN. I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT THEY'RE NOT INCREASING THE HEIGHT, WHICH WAS, UH, IMPORTANT FOR ME AND THAT THEY'RE GETTING RID OF THE AWNING, SO THEY'RE REDUCING, UH, THE EFFECT THAT IT HAS IN THE ABUTTING ELECTRICAL OVERHEAD ELECTRIC. SO, I'LL BE IN FAVOR. THANK YOU MANNA, MR. MANNA. SO, SO I, I DO WANNA REQUEST THE CITY STAFF WHENEVER IT IS THAT THEY DO GET INPUT FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THAT IT ISN'T JUST SIMPLY, I DON'T AGREE, UM, YOU KNOW, ASK FOR FURTHER CLARIFICATION BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THAT, YOU KNOW, TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, PERSONALLY, I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING. UM, AND SO I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, IF I HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, I MAY HAVE BETTER UNDERSTOOD WHY THEY WERE IN OPPOSITION. SO, SO I WOULD PREFER THAT THAT WOULD BE ADDRESSED IN FUTURE DIALOGUE. THANK YOU. AND WE'LL ADDRESS IT. THANK YOU. AND I'LL BE A SUPPORT AS WELL, UH, GIVEN THE FACT. I, I LIKE THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, AS HE RENOVATES A PROPERTY, ALL THE ELECTRICAL FIRE, UH, PLUMBING CODES, THE PROPERTY WILL BE BROUGHT UP TO CODE, UM, AS A SAFETY MEASURE FOR, FOR THE TENANTS OF THIS BUILDING, WHICH IS, UH, I WOULD SAY A DILAPIDATED, SOMEWHAT DILAPIDATED BUILDING NOW. SO, BUT NO OTHER FURTHER COMMENT. UH, LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. CODDLE CONCUR. MR. DEAN. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA CONCUR. MS. CRUZ, I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR WITH THIS FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. THANK YOU. WITH 10 IN FAVOR? NO, NO VOTES IN OPPOSITION. THE VARIANCE PASSES. GOOD LUCK WITH THE PROJECT. THANK YOU. NEXT CASE. FIVE, OR ARE WE GOOD? OH, WHERE ARE WE NOW? IS IT 1 0 5? OH, JUST KIDDING. THEN [01:30:04] WE JUST NEED TO KNOW WHICH CASE WE'RE ON. NO, THAT DOESN'T SAY ONE. OKAY. SO WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, WHICH ENDS IN ONE 10. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR MM-HMM. . MY NAME IS JESSICA ANDERSON. I'M A SENIOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION SPECIALIST WITH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. I'M HERE TO PRESENT, UH, B O A CASE ONE 10 TODAY. UH, 5 0 1 EAST LOCUST. THE REQUEST IS AN APPEAL OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S DECISION TO DENY THE REPLACEMENT OF 18 1 1 WOOD WINDOWS WITH ALUMINUM CLOUD WINDOWS ON APRIL 5TH. THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION REFERRED THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO REPLACE 18 ONE OVER ONE WOOD WINDOWS WITH ALUMINUM CLA WOOD WINDOWS TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR A SITE VISIT WITH WINDOW INSPECTION ON APRIL 12TH. MEMBERS OF THE D R C O H P STAFF AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS MET ON SITE TO REVIEW WINDOW CONDITIONS. AND ON APRIL 19TH, THE H D R C DENIED THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO REPLACE 18 ONE OVER ONE WOOD WINDOWS WITH ALUMINUM CLA WOOD WINDOWS BASED ON THE D R C SITE VISIT, WHICH FOUND WINDOWS, UM, IN REPARABLE CONDITION, AND THUS INELIGIBLE FOR REPLACEMENT PER HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES. CHAPTER TWO, GUIDELINES FOR HIS, I'M SORRY, GUIDELINES FOR EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE AND ALTERATIONS. SECTION SIX ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, DOORS, WINDOWS, AND SCREENS. UH, THIS IS THAT SECTION REFERENCE, UH, OF THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES. I'LL DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO SIX A THREE WINDOWS, WHICH SAYS TO PRESERVE HISTORIC WINDOWS. NEXT SLIDE. WOULD, WOULD YOU MIND SLOWING DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT? OH, YES. SORRY. I'M USED TO BEING ON THAT SIDE, SO I'M A LITTLE NERVOUS. I APOLOGIZE. YOU COULD RAISE THE MIC A LITTLE BIT. SURE. SO WE CAN HEAR YOU. THANK YOU. DO YOU WANT ME TO REPEAT THE CITATION? UH, IS EVERYBODY GOOD OR REPEAT OR WE OKAY. UM, SO, UH, STAFF FINDINGS, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO, THE PROPERTY AT 5 0 1 EAST LOCUS INCLUDES A SINGLE STORY CRAFTSMAN STYLE HOME AND A DETACHED REAR GARAGE BUILT CIRCA 1924. THE WINDOWS ON THE PROPERTY ARE ONE OVER ONE AND MADE OF WOOD WITH ONE OVER ONE WOOD SCREENS ON ALL ELEVATIONS. AND THE STRUCTURE CONTRIBUTES TO THE TOBIN HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 5TH. THE H D R C REFERRED THE REQUEST TO REPLACE 18 WINDOWS TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE D R C ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12TH, THE D R C MEMBERS O H P STAFF AND THE OWNERS MET ON SITE TO REVIEW WINDOW CONDITIONS. AND OUR NOTES WERE INCLUDED WITH THE CASE FILE, WHICH I THINK MADE IT TO THE PUBLIC POSTING WITH THIS, UM, THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE WINDOWS, UH, STAFF, IN ADDITION TO MEETING WITH THE D R C ON SITE, UM, PRIOR TO THE INITIAL HEARING BY THE H D R C, MET ON SITE ON MARCH 24TH WITH THE OWNER AND ALSO A REP FROM THE WINDOW COMPANY, UH, TO ASSESS THE CONDITION OF CONDITIONS OF THE EXISTING WINDOWS. AND WE FOUND THAT ALL 18 WOOD WINDOWS PROPOSED FOR REPLACEMENT ARE IN REPAIRABLE CONDITION. MOST REQUIRE MINIMAL REPAIR AND INTERVENTION SUCH AS SCRAPING AND REPAINTING, OR REPLACING DAMAGED SASH CORDS. UH, REGARDING FINDING D N E FINDINGS, D N E, UM, THIS IS INFORMATION THAT STAFF SHARED WITH APPLICANT REGARDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY, WASTE, AND LONGEVITY RELATED TO THE RETENTION OF HISTORIC WOOD WINDOWS. UM, FINDING F UH, WINDOW REPLACEMENT. THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO REPLACE 18 WINDOWS ON THE STRUCTURE WITH PELLA ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS, GUIDELINES SIX B FOUR FOR EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE AND ALTERATIONS. STATE THAT NEW WINDOWS SHOULD BE INSTALLED TO MATCH HISTORIC OR EXISTING WINDOWS. UH, I'M GONNA SAVE YOU GUYS ALL OF THAT LANGUAGE. UH, WHILE THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT WINDOWS CONFORM TO OUR GUIDELINES, UM, STAFF DOES NOT FIND THE PROPOSAL TO REPLACE THE ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. ACCORDING TO THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, WOOD WINDOWS SHOULD BE REPAIRED IN PLACE AND RESTORED WHENEVER POSSIBLE, UNLESS THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE WINDOWS ARE DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR. IF A WINDOW ASSEMBLY IS DEEMED REPAIR IRREPARABLE, THE WINDOW SHOULD BE REPLACED IN KIND IN TERMS OF MATERIALITY, CONFIGURATION, INSET PROPORTION STYLE, AND DETAILING. AS NOTED IN FINDING FIVE, STAFF FINDS THAT ALL ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS ARE IN REPAIRABLE CONDITION. STAFF DOES NOT FIND REPLACEMENT OF ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. NEXT SLIDE. UM, O H P STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE APPEAL. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT UPHOLD THE HISTORIC END DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSIONS AND THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S DENIAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF 18. ONE OVER ONE WOOD WINDOWS WITH ALUMINUM CLA WOOD WINDOWS. AND I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS Y'ALL HAVE. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR MANNA STAFF. MR. MANNA. SO, UH, THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, UM, HAD IT BEEN THE CASE THAT THESE WERE IN SEVERE FAILED CONDITION, WOULD THE SOLUTION THAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR BEEN AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION? THAT'S CORRECT. ACCIDENTALLY TURNED MYSELF OFF. UM, THAT'S CORRECT. THE PRODUCT THAT THEY'RE, UH, REQUESTING DOES CONFORM TO OUR STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. THANK YOU. UH, ORIAN. AND, AND THAT'S, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY QUESTION TOO, BUT TO TAKE IT FURTHER. [01:35:01] UM, AT WHAT POINT CAN YOU DESCRIBE AT WHAT POINT, UH, THAT YOU DEEMED THEM NON-REPAIRABLE? YOU HAD MENTIONED CHASING, UH, CHANGING OUT SOME OF THE, THE ROPES, UH, AND, AND SCRAPING AND REPAINTING. BUT IS ANY OF THE WINDOWS, UH, THE WOOD, IS THERE ANY FAILURE AT ALL? ARE THEY ALL THE SAME CONDITION? UH, THEY WERE ALL IN, IN PRETTY IMMACULATE CONDITION. THERE WERE A COUPLE SASHES THAT I BELIEVE WERE ACTUALLY NEWER AND DATED TO, UH, SOME NEW WINDOWS INSTALLED ON A MODIFIED PORCH ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. UM, STAFF DIDN'T OBSERVE ANY WOOD ROTT. UM, THERE WERE, THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS WITH THE ABILITY TO OPEN THE WINDOWS THAT WOULD'VE BEEN RESOLVED WITH SCRAPING AND PAINTING. AND THEN STAFF OBSERVED ONE WINDOW, UH, SASH POLICE SYSTEM THAT THE ROPE HAD BEEN SNAPPED. SO, SO IN YOUR OPINION, IT'S NOT EVEN CLOSED THERE IN GREAT, GREAT CONDITION? YEAH, OUR TYPICAL LITMUS IS THAT IF 50% OR MORE OF THE WINDOW IS BEYOND REPAIR, THAT'S WHEN WE, UH, APPROVE THEM FOR REPLACEMENT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR STAFF? IS THE PAINT ON THE WINDOW LEAD-BASED PAINT? MR. DEAN? I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. IS IT CHIPPING OFF FROM SUN DAMAGE? I DIDN'T OBSERVE ANY PAINT CHIPPING. I'M JUST TRYING TO AGE THE PAINT. CAN STAFF BRING UP THE FIRST SLIDE ON THE PRESENTATION? SO THAT'S DEMONSTRATIVE, THAT'S A CURRENT PICTURE OF THE HOUSE? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ANY OTHER PICTURES FROM THE INSIDE OF THE WINDOWS OR IS THAT THE EXTENT OF THE PICTURES WE'RE GONNA SEE? I HAVE THEM AVAILABLE IN THE CASE FILE FROM H D R C. I COULD PULL IT UP QUICKLY IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. I THINK THAT'S APPLICABLE HERE. I WOULD, IS CORRECT. I WAS GONNA ASK THE SAME QUESTION. SO THIS IS MY, UH, SORT OF ANNOTATED WINDOW SCHEDULE FOR THIS PROPERTY. UM, THE WINDOWS THAT ARE IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER WERE SUBJECT TO WINDOW REPLACEMENT, UH, JUST WITHIN THE LAST FEW YEARS. UM, THAT WAS AN INFILLED PORCH THAT THEY WERE ACTUALLY BRINGING TO A MORE APPROPRIATE CONDITIONS. SO THOSE WINDOWS WEREN'T SUBJECT TO THIS REVIEW. UM, BUT ALL THE OTHER WINDOWS NOTED WERE THE ONES THAT STAFF REVIEWED. GO FORWARD, KEEP GOING. THESE ARE EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR PHOTOS OF ALL THE WINDOWS IN QUESTION. ALRIGHT. SET. DID, UH, THE BOARD, DID YOU ALL SEE THE PICTURES? ARE WE GOOD? MR. AKKA, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, I DO. UM, MICKA, UH, THE QUESTION I HAVE IS IN SHOWING OF THE SLIDES AND I WAS REALLY LOOKING TO SEE WHAT THE, UH, THE COSMETICS WERE WAY OFF, OR IT'S JUST A METAL ISSUE, NOT SO MUCH THE COSMETICS OR THE AESTHETICS OF THE, HOW THE WINDOW LOOKS. I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, I APOLOGIZE. WELL, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE ONE OVER THING. ONE OVER THE WOOD WINDOWS. YEAH. [01:40:01] ONE OVER ONE JUST MEANS THAT'S PLACED OVER THE WINDOWS ONE. IS THAT WHAT THAT WAS SASH? SOME SORT? YEAH. IT'S JUST THE NUMBER, THE NUMBER OF LIGHTS IN EACH SASH. SO WHEN THERE ISN'T ANY DIVISION IN EACH WINDOW SASH, IT'S CALLED A ONE OVER ONE. SO THAT PERTAINS, UH, THAT, THAT, UH, CONSTITUTES SOME SORT OF ARCHITECTURAL VIOLATION OF THE DISTRICT. WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE THE APPLICANT WANTS TO REPLACE ALL OF THE WINDOWS IN THE HOUSE, THE HISTORIC WOOD WINDOWS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU BRAGMAN. MR. BRAGMAN, I SEE IN YOUR PRESENTATION HERE, UM, ITEM NUMBER TWO WHERE IT SAYS, COST TO REPAIR AND RESTORE EXISTING WINDOWS. UH, THE LOW BID TO REPAIR AND RESTORE COST OF AT LEAST 1750 PER WINDOW VERSUS THE PELLA O H P APPROVED WINDOW REPLACEMENT IS 1625 PER WINDOW. GENERALLY SPEAKING OF THE COST, A REPAIR IS MORE THAN 50% OF THE COST TO REPLACE, THEN THE ITEMS SHOULD BE REPLACED. SO YOU'RE SORRY THAT THE CONDITION OF THE WINDOWS, IT IS NOT IN BAD, THEY'RE NOT IN BAD CONDITION. AND, AND THE GUIDELINE OF THE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 1625 AND THE 1750 DOESN'T MEET THAT 50% THRESHOLD. I, CAN YOU TELL ME WHERE YOU'RE REFERENCING THAT? YOUR PRESENTATION, IT SAYS APPROVAL OF A H P STAFF DENIAL FOR WINDOW REPLACEMENT, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REQUESTS ITEM THAT'S, UM, SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, NOT BY ME. OH, OKAY. I'M SORRY. ALRIGHT. BUT THOSE ARE BASED UPON CONDITIONS THAT O H P WOULD PUT INTO PLACE. YEAH, THAT BE, WE WOULD KNOW THAT NUMBER. THE U D C DOESN'T OUTLINE COST RELATED TO A WINDOW REPAIR. WE'RE STRICTLY LOOKING AT THE CONDITION OF THE HISTORIC MATERIALS. GOT IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? HEARING NONE, I'D ASK THE APPLICANT TO PLEASE COME FORWARD AND LET'S BEGIN THE PRESENTATION. PUSH. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. UH, MY NAME IS SHANE RABI, 5 0 1 EAST LOCUST AND MY WIFE IRENE RABY. UH, WE'RE HERE AS, UM, THE O H P OFFICER JUST, UM, UH, WENT OVER THEIR, THEIR DENIAL. UM, THIS IS A BEFUDDLING PROCESS FOR US. THIS IS ROUND FOUR. UM, THE, UH, THE DENIAL WAS BASED, UM, ON FOUR THINGS ORIGINALLY, THE EXISTING WINDOW CONDITIONS, ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN MODERN WINDOWS, WASTE AND LIFESPAN OF A REPLACEMENT WINDOWS AND REPAIRABLE VERSUS BEYOND REPAIRABLE INTERPRETATION. THOSE FOUR CRITERIA WERE THE, THE BASIS FOR THEIR DENIAL. AND WHILE THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A DIFFERENCE IN OPINIONS, UH, WE FEEL THAT THE H D R C DID NOT FULLY, UM, APPRECIATE OUR REBUTTAL, UH, RESPONSES AND UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS OF THEM. THE, UM, THE FINDING THE FACTS THAT THEY HAD REGARDING THE EXISTING CONDITIONS WERE THEY TERMED, UH, THE CONDITIONS TO BE MINIMAL WHEN WE HAD PAID PROFESSIONALS, NOT THE HISTORIC OFFICERS COME OUT. THERE WAS A DISTINCT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, REPAIRING THE, PUTTING SERS IN SCRAPING PAINT AND DOING THOSE SUNDRY THINGS. THESE WINDOWS, WHILE WE, YOU CAN SEE FROM THE HOUSE, WE HAVE OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST SEVEN YEARS, HAVE COMPLETELY REMODELED THIS HOME, TOP TO BOTTOM. THE LAST THING WAS THE WINDOWS. THOSE WINDOWS HAVE BEEN PAINTED. THEY HAVE BEEN WOOD PUTTIED THROUGH OVER THE ROT. UM, SO THEY DO, THEY DO HAVE APPEARANCES OF LOOKING GOOD, BUT THERE'S STILL 105 YEAR OLD WINDOWS THAT DON'T OPEN. THEY DON'T, UM, WE HAVE SOME OF THEM FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT THAT THEY HAVE TO BE, UM, WE HAVE A ONE BY FOUR SO THAT THEY CAN'T BE OPENED 'CAUSE THE LOCKS DON'T WORK. THIS WAS THE LAST PART IN THE REMODELING PROJECT. UM, YOU CAN SEE FROM HAVING, WE'VE, WE'VE HAD OVER FIVE DIFFERENT ARTISANS REPAIR PEOPLE OUT TO LOOK AT THIS. THIS IS NOT A MINIMAL, UH, REPAIR ESTIMATE OR REPAIRS. YOU CAN SEE FROM, UH, THE, THE MOST RECENT, I FINALLY, UH, WAS ABLE TO GET A COUPLE, UM, FORMAL BIDS. THE, A LOT OF THE ARTISIANS ARTISANS ARE RELUCTANT TO GIVE YOU ANYTHING IN WRITING. I DID GET TWO. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE COST TO [01:45:01] REPAIR RANGES FROM A MINIMUM FOR THOSE 18 WINDOWS OF 14 THOU ALMOST $15,000 TO, UH, IN THE WORST CASE, $48,000. THIS IS CRAZY FOR OLD WINDOWS. THIS IS NOT MINIMAL STUFF. YOU CAN'T JUST PUT LIPSTICK ON IT AND THINK THIS IS GONNA BE THE, THE, THE, THE WAY TO CURE IT. SO WE HAVE A BIG, UM, A DISCONNECT WITH THE O H P AND THE WAY THEY EVALUATE THEIR EXPERTISE VERSUS ARTISANS THAT ACTUALLY HAVE TO, WE AS HOMEOWNERS HAVE TO PAY TO DO IT. SO THAT'S THE FIRST THING ABOUT THE EXISTING CONDITIONS. WE DON'T, IT IS NOT MINIMAL BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THESE COSTS. AND THIS IS REAL PROPOSALS, NOT JUST FIGURES THAT ARE THROWN OUT. UM, THE NEXT THING THAT CAME UP, THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY. UM, THEY MADE A POINT THAT, UM, WE SHOULD LOOK AT DOING OTHER THINGS TO THE HOUSE TO MAKE IT EFFICIENT. OUR HOUSE AS PART OF THE REMODELING PROCESS, IS TOTALLY ENCLOSED. WE'VE HAD IT FOAM INSULATED UNDER THE FLOORS IN THE WALLS AND CONDITIONED AIRSPACE IN THE ATTIC WITH, UH, AIR CONDITIONERS OR, UH, UH, UM, DEHUMIDIFIERS TO MAKE SURE IT'S CONDITIONED. THE LAST PIECE TO THIS HEATING, UH, THE CONVEYING THIS ENVELOPE WAS TO HAVE EFFICIENT WINDOWS. OKAY? SO WE'VE CHECKED OFF ALL THOSE THINGS, UM, WITH THE, WITH THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY. AND THE THING THAT, THAT ALSO BEFUDDLED IS THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE A RELUCTANCE OR RETICENCE WITH IDENTIFYING WITH CLIMATE CHANGE. AND WE HAVE CERTAIN THINGS IN OUR COMMUNITY, WITHIN OUR CITY TO SUPPORT AND PROMOTE, UH, ENERGY EFFICIENT, UH, CONDUCTS. THESE WINDOWS ARE, THEY'RE NOT HISTORIC. THESE ARE DOUBLE, UH, DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS ONE OVER ONE. AND THEY ALL MEET THE HISTORIC DISTRICT'S, UM, UH, UTILIZATION. BUT FOR THE FACT THE REPLACEMENT, IF THIS WAS GONNA BE FOR A REMODEL OR NEW CONSTRUCTION, IT WOULD BE ALL APPROVED. THERE'S THIS SOME SORT OF SPECIAL THING ABOUT ON REPLACEMENTS. UM, AND ALL THE LO THE OTHER THING THEY TALKED ABOUT WAS IT, WE SHOULD SUPPORT LOCAL LABOR. AND THIS IS ALL GOING TO BE DONE WITH, UH, PTT WINDOWS. THEY'RE NOT INEXPENSIVE. THEY'RE PRETTY, THEY'RE GOOD STUFF. AND THAT'S, WE PLAN TO BE, WHEN THE KIDS COME TO TAKE US AWAY, WE'RE GONNA BE IN THAT HOUSE. SO WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PICTURES. WE'VE PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO IT. AND THIS IDEA OF PUTTING IN REDOING WITH INEFFICIENT WINDOWS, UM, IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR US. AND IT MAKES NO SENSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE COST. UM, THEN THEY CAME BACK WITH THIS THING ABOUT WASTE AND LIFESPAN WASTE IS THE DETERMINATION. THEY'LL TALK ABOUT 112 MILLION POUNDS OF WASTE GO INTO LANDFILLS. AND THAT'S A REASON WHY WE CAN'T REPLACE OUR WINDOWS. SO WE FOUND, UH, LOCALLY, UH, PICKER'S PARADISE THAT WILL TAKE ALL OF OUR, UH, ALL OF OUR OLD WINDOWS AND RECYCLE 'EM. CHECK. UH, THE NEXT THING WAS LIFESPAN. THE O H P. UM, IN THEIR LITERATURE, THEY'LL TELL YOU THAT A HUNDRED YEAR OLD, UH, OLD GROWTH WOOD IS BETTER THAN NEW WOOD. UM, THEY'LL CITE STATISTICS THAT I CAN'T AND, UH, VERIFY ABOUT OLD, NEW WINDOWS HAVE TO BE REPLACED EVERY 10 TO 20 YEARS. EVERYTHING THAT I'VE READ, A HIGH A A PROPERLY INSTALLED WINDOW TODAY LASTS THE SAME LENGTH OF TIME AS AN OLD GROWTH HISTORIC WINDOW. AN OLD HISTORIC WINDOW IMPROPERLY INSTALLED, DOESN'T LAST EITHER. AND IN OUR HOUSE, WE HAVE, I THINK 20, 27 WINDOWS, UM, 18 THAT HAVEN'T BEEN REPLACED. OF THOSE 1812 HAVE ALREADY HAD SIGNIFICANT WORK, UH, TO REHABILITATE 'EM, AS I MENTIONED, WITH THE WOOD ROT, PUTTING THE WOOD PUTTY OVER HIM TO, TO MAKE 'EM LOOK DECENT. UM, OH, OKAY. SO NOW WE GETS TO THIS PART AND I HA I, I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND. I'M TRYING TO BE DISPASSIONATE, BUT I CAN'T BE, 'CAUSE THIS IS OUR HOME, OUR PROPERTY. WE'VE TRIED TO FOLLOW ALL THE RULES AND REGULATIONS, ADDRESS [01:50:01] ALL THE HISTORIC DISTRICT'S CONCERNS. AND, UM, IT'S BEEN, IT'S JUST A PROCESS. SO THE LAST THING THEY TALKED ABOUT WAS REPLACEMENT. THE, EVERYBODY AGREES THAT THE P WINDOWS, UH, MEET, UH, STANDARDS. UH, AND IF IT WAS A REMODEL OR NEW CONSTRUCTION, NO PROBLEM. BUT BECAUSE THIS IS REPLACEMENT, IT IS A PROBLEM. AND THEY HAVE A, THE DEFINITION IF YOU, I DON'T KNOW. LET'S SEE. WELL, THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONE I LEFT THE DEFINITION FOR BEYOND, UH, FOR REPAIRABLE AND BEYOND REPAIRABLE IS VERY SUBJECTIVE. UM, AND IT'S LEFT UP TO THE INTERPRETATION, OBVIOUSLY, AS YOU'VE WITNESSED, UM, TO THE, TO THE, UH, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE FEE. WITH A LOOK AT THIS FROM A STANDPOINT OF A HOMEOWNER WHO'S TRYING TO HAVE THEIR HOUSE REPAIRED, IT IS, IT IS VERY MUCH DIFFERENT. YOU CAN SEE THAT WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU GET TO THE COST OF THESE THINGS. UM, THE COST TO REPAIR OUR WINDOWS, THE MINIMUM COST WAS $800. AND THAT'S JUST BASICALLY TO MAKE 'EM GO UP AND DOWN AND TO, UM, BUFF UP THE PAINTING. THE FELLOW DOESN'T DO ANYTHING WITH REGARD TO REPAIRING END NEW WINDOWS. HE DOESN'T HAVE THAT SKILLSET. UM, THE, THE, THE OTHER RANGE IS THE MOST, WE'RE SOMEWHERE AROUND 14 TO $1,500 PER WINDOW. WE CAN PUT IN NEW WINDOWS, TOP OF THE LINE P WINDOWS THAT CONFORM TO O H P STANDARDS FOR 1622 THAT'S INSTALLED WITH LOCAL LABOR, UH, AND MITIGATING ALL THE THINGS ABOUT WASTE. THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY GAINS FOR US WILL BE ABOUT A THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR. IT'S NOT HUGE AND IT'S NOT THE BIGGEST SAVINGS, BUT FROM OUR STANDPOINT, MY WIFE WILL TALK ABOUT IT, THE COMFORT AND CONVENIENCE. AND WE LIVE A BLOCK AWAY FROM THE, THE ST. MARY'S HISTORIC OR HISTORIC, UH, ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT, THE SOUNDPROOFING. IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE FOR OUR COMFORT. UM, AND WITH THAT, I'LL LET, UH, MY WIFE IRENE PROVIDE HER COMMENTS. HI. UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ALREADY HAVE HISTORIC LOOKING SCREENS ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE HOUSE. IF WE WERE TO REPLACE THESE WITH THE PILLOW REPLACEMENT WINDOWS, THERE'D BE NO CHANGE TO THE OUTSIDE OF THE HOUSE. NO ONE WOULD EVEN KNOW. UM, WE WANT THE PILLOW WINDOWS VERSUS REPAIRING THE WOOD WINDOWS. 'CAUSE WE'LL HAVE A SUPERIOR PRODUCT. WE'LL HAVE, UH, DOUBLE PANE VERSUS SINGLE PANE WINDOW. UM, WE COULDN'T EVEN GET TRIPLE PANE BECAUSE THE NOISE AT NIGHT FROM ST. MARY'S, OUR BEDTIME IS 10 O'CLOCK. THAT'S WHEN THE LIVE MUSIC AT ST. MARY'S STARTS UP. SO IT REALLY MAKES A DIFFERENCE FOR US AS FAR AS OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. AND IT WOULDN'T AFFECT, AFFECT THE HISTORIC LOOK OF THE HOUSE AT ALL. THE OTHER THING IS, AS WE'RE GETTING OLDER, UM, WE DON'T WANNA HAVE TO PAINT THE EXTERIOR OF THE WINDOWS. 'CAUSE EVEN IF WE DID GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF REPAIRING THE WOOD WINDOWS THAT ARE THERE NOW, EVERY TIME YOU GET THE OUTSIDE OF THE WINDOWS PAINTED, IT'S ANOTHER BIG ISSUE WITH AM I GONNA BE ABLE TO OPEN THEM AGAIN? UM, SO WE JUST DON'T THINK THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE, UM, OPTION FOR US. UM, LET'S SEE, ANYTHING ELSE THAT, THAT'S BASICALLY IT. AND UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU BROUGHT UP, UM, PUBLIC INFORMATION. WE HAVE NOT HEARD ONE NEIGHBOR, UM, HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH IT. MM-HMM. UM, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANNA SAY? THANK YOU. LET'S, LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD. OKAY. AND WE'LL FOLLOW IT THAT WAY. ANY, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? DORIAN, MR. DORIAN ORIAN? YEAH, SO BEHEAD RECORDS SHOW THAT, UH, THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT THAT YOU'VE OWNED THE HOUSE, UH, FOR ABOUT SEVEN YEARS. UH, AND, AND THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 2015. ARE THOSE THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS THAT WERE BUILT WITH THE HOUSE IN 2015, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE? IN 1915 OR, UH, 19. 1915, RIGHT. YEAH, ON OUR DEEDED, THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1918. THAT SCREEN PORCH THAT WAS EARLIER REFERENCED, THAT WAS A SCREEN PORCH THAT WAS FILLED IN IN 1919 ALMOST IMMEDIATELY. SO THESE WERE ALL THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS. UM, THERE HAS, THERE WAS A, UH, A BUMP OUT FOR A MASTER BATH, UM, THAT HAS SOME, UH, OTHER WINDOWS, UH, IN THERE. AND, UM, THOSE I ACTUALLY DOUBLE PANED. YEAH, I WAS JUST CHECKING TO SEE IF THE WINDOWS WERE, YOU KNOW, OVER A HUNDRED YEARS OLD. UH, AND, AND THEREFORE MET THE, THE ANTICIPATED LIFE AS SO EXPRESSED BY, UH, UM, O H P STAFF. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER [01:55:01] QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SO I GUESS MY FINAL PLEA IS THAT, UM, THESE WINDOWS, UM, BUT FOR THE FACT THAT THIS IS A REPLACEMENT WOULD BE PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE. THE COST, UM, THAT IF YOU USE THIS ARBITRARY 50%, IF YOU LOOK AT THE COST IN NORMAL BUSINESS, PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, AS A HOMEOWNER, IF THE COST TO REPAIR, UM, OR REPLACE IS GONNA BE STARTING TO EXCEED 50%, THEN YOU'RE LOOKING TO REPLACE IT. AND I, WE COULD HAVE GOTTEN, UH, LESS EXPENSIVE WINDOWS AND THIS WOULD'VE BEEN CLOSER TO A HUNDRED PERCENT. BUT WE WANTED, WE PLANNED TO KEEP THE HOUSE AND WE WANTED THE COMFORT AND SAFETY THAT THESE WINDOWS PROVIDE US. SO MY, MY FINAL PLEA PLEA IS THAT, UM, I'M JUST GONNA READ IT. THIS IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE HEALTH SAFETY AND CONFORMITY IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT WHILE A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ARBITRARY OR SUBJECTIVE 50% RULE, UM, WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT AND UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO US. AND WITH THAT, I THANK YOU. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. UM, LET'S SEE, STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT TO READ INTO THE RECORD? YES. WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER AND THREE VOICEMAILS. P OF VOICEMAILS FIRST. ALRIGHT. THIS IS, UH, CURTIS CRIER. I LIVE AT 5 0 7 EAST LOCUST STREET, SAN ANTONIO. MY NEIGHBOR IS ATTEMPTING TO PUT IN TWO REPLACEMENT WINDOWS FOR HIS, UM, AND IT'S IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE CASE NUMBER D O A 23 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 0. UM, CASE MANAGER IS RI RICO, UH, LOOKS LIKE VY. UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO HIM. REPLACING HIS WINDOWS WITH, UH, REP, UM, ENERGY EFFICIENT WINDOWS, UH, AS LONG AS THEY LOOK, UH, REASONABLE FROM THE EXTERIOR. UM, I'M NOT SURE WHY, UH, THE HISTORIC COMMISSION WOULD BE CONCERNED IF IT LOOKS SIMILAR TO THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS, UH, WHEN HE IS TRYING TO, UH, DECREASE THE INFILTRATION ON, ON THE OLD WINDOWS, UH, BY REPLACEMENTS. UM, I KNOW THE WINDOWS CAN POSSIBLY BE REPAIRED, BUT MANY TIMES, UH, UH, THOSE WINDOWS CANNOT BE PAINTED. WELL, THEY, EVEN IF THEY SEAL WELL, THEY DO NOT LOOK GOOD. AND I THINK THAT, UH, SOMEONE THAT'S TRYING TO KEEP THEIR HOUSE IN GOOD CONDITION SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE CHARACTER OF THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, I THINK STEVE SAN ANTONIO, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING CASE NUMBER OH 8 2 3 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 0 HEARING DATE, MONDAY, JUNE 5TH, 2023, 1:00 PM SUBJECT, PROPERTY 5 0 1 EAST FOCUS STREET, APPELLANT, REQUEST TO INSTALL REPLACEMENT WINDOWS TO THE HONORABLE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. IN REGARDS TO THE ABOVE SUBJECT, I WISH TO RENDER MY OPINION THAT THE WINDOWS BE ALLOWED TO BE REPLACED, PROVIDED AS FAULT ON CASUAL VISUAL OBSERVATION. THE DESIGN AND MATERIAL MAKEUP OF THE NEW WINDOWS WILL NOT APPEAR DIFFERENT FROM THE EXISTING WINDOWS, SUCH AS NOT TO DIMINISH THE HISTORIC APPEAL OF THE HOUSE, FULL LENGTH WINDOW SCREENS ARE INSTALLED COMPLETELY APPROPRIATE TO THE PERIOD THIS WOULD VISUALLY SERVE TO ENHANCE THE ORIGINAL CREW APPEAL OF THE HOUSE. A MAN TOLD MRS. CASTLE AND THE HOMEOWNER SHOULD BE ALLOWED DISCRETIONARY CONTROL OVER THE INTERIOR, HUMAN COMFORT, EASE OF MAINTENANCE, PERFORMANCE, EFFICIENCY, OFTEN ASSOCIATED WITH CAREFULLY SELECTED REPLACEMENT WINDOWS. RESPECTFULLY, LUIS ALE, 2 1 0 7 8 9 2 5 0 0. ADDRESS, FOUR 20 EAST DEWEY PLACE. THANK YOU. IN RE REFERENCE TO CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING, CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 3 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 0. HEARING DATE, MONDAY, JUNE 5TH, 2023, 1:00 PM SUBJECT, PROPERTY 5 0 1 EAST FOCUS STREET, ELL. MY NAME IS FREDERICA KUSHNER. MY ADDRESS IS FOUR ZERO FIVE EAST MYRTLE STREET. PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 223-2814. I'M SPEAKING FOR THE TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION [02:00:01] CONCERNING ITEM NUMBER 6 5 0 1 EAST LOCUST STREET. WE UNDERSTAND THAT INCREASING ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN OLD HOUSES IS IMPORTANT, BUT IN REALITY, EFFICIENCY CAN BE INCREASED BY REPAIRING RATHER THAN REPLACING ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS AND BY INSULATING WALLS, FLOORS, ATTICS, AND ROOFS. IN ADDITION, WOOD WINDOWS CONSTRUCTED BEFORE 1940 ARE FROM OLD GROSS TIMBER THAT IS MORE RESISTANT TO ROT AND WARPING AND WILL LAST MUCH LONGER THAN MO MODERN WOOD REPLACEMENTS. AND WE BELIEVE THAT ORIGINAL WINDOWS CONTRIBUTE TO THE CHARACTER OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS. WE ASK THAT THE BOARD DENY THE REQUEST TO OVERTURN THE H DRCS DECISION AGAINST A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO REPLACE 18 HISTORIC WOOD WINDOWS IN THE HOUSE AT 5 0 1 EAST LOCUST. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION. AND UH, ONE SPEAKER IS MRS. AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS WHEN YOU GET UP THERE. UH, MY NAME IS MARIBELL ZIMMERMAN, AND I WORK FOR THE, UH, PELLA WINDOWS DISTRIBUTOR HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. AND I WAS INVITED, UM, UH, BY SHANE AND IRENE, UH, TO COME IN AND SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF. UH, AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT, UM, YES, AS A MATTER OF FACT, UM, THE WINDOWS THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING TO PURCHASE FROM OUR, MY BRANCH ARE CLA WOOD WINDOWS. THEY'RE STILL A WOOD WINDOW SYSTEM, UM, MEANING THAT THE EXTERIOR IS ACTUALLY AN ALUMINUM COVERING. IT'S A CLOT, BUT THE FRAME, THE SUBFRAME OF THOSE WINDOWS ARE STILL WOOD WINDOWS. SO THE OBJECTIVE HERE, UM, IS NOT TO INFRINGE ON THE ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY OF THAT HOUSE. SO IT WILL BE MAINTAINED WITH OUR SYSTEMS. IT WILL MATCH WHAT'S EXISTING, UH, IN TERMS OF THE COLOR, IN TERMS OF THE PROFILES. BUT THEY'RE BEING DESIGNED, THEY'RE BEING FABRICATED OR THEY WOULD BE FABRICATED WITH YOUR APPROVAL WITH TODAY'S MODERN TECHNOLOGY. SO THE LOOK WILL BE MAINTAINED, UH, THE INTEGRITY WILL BE MAINTAINED. IT'S JUST THAT THE WINDOWS ARE ACTUALLY BUILT, UH, WITH TODAY'S MORE MODERN, BETTER EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGY THAN BEFORE. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER, I HAVE A QUESTION. IN TERMS OF A SOUND TRANSMISSION, WHAT, HOW, WHAT IS THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE SOUND TRANSMISSION FROM LIKE AN OLDER SINGLE, UH, HUNG WINDOW LIKE THIS AND THEN A PROPOSED? I THINK THE TRIPLE PANE WINDOW IS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING. UH, I, I BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE, UH, YEAH, WE CAN BUILD A TRIPLE PANE WINDOW, BUT I BELIEVE THE WINDOWS THAT, UH, UH, THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO PURCHASE OUR DOUBLE PANE, DOUBLE PANE WINDOWS DO HAVE A, AN IMPROVED SOUND SYSTEM TRANSMISSION. WE MEASURE THE SOUND BY SOUND TRANSMISSION, UH, IN TERMS OF DECIBELS, AND THEY DO, AND CAN GO UP TO ANYWHERE FROM 28 TO 32, WHAT WE CALL S T C, UH, CLASSIFICATION. UM, AS OPPOSED TO A SINGLE PANE THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE MUCH, MUCH LOWER THAN THAT. SINGLE PANE WINDOWS ARE NOT DESIGNED TO, UH, DIDN'T SOUND, UM, AS COMPARED TO DOUBLE PANE WINDOWS, WHICH ARE, AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS, YOU KNOW, THE AIRSPACE, THE, THE WAY THE WINDOWS, TODAY'S WINDOWS ARE BUILT, THE BETTER WITH THE STRIPPINGS, THE FACT THAT THEY ARE STILL WOOD AND IT'S A SOLID WOOD. SO ALL THOSE COMPONENTS DO IMPROVE THE SOUND CLASSIFICATION OF WIND OF OUR WINDOWS. SO FOR AN EXAMPLE, LIKE IF THERE'S A HO A CAR HONKING ON THE DRIVEWAY, HOW, WHAT WOULD THE DIFFERENCE BE ON A SINGLE VERSUS A DOUBLE PANE? IF I'M INSIDE THE HOUSE? WELL, A SINGLE PANE WINDOW, YOU WOULD OBVIOUSLY HEAR IT VERY, VERY WELL, UM, ON A DOUBLE PANE WINDOW. UH, THE SOUND WILL BE MUFFLED. AND THAT'S THE WHOLE ESSENCE OF, YOU KNOW, UH, OF THAT AIRSPACE THAT'S CREATED BETWEEN THE TWO PANES OF GLASS. OBVIOUSLY WHEN YOU GO TO A TRIPLE PANE, YOU ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, UM, IT, IT, IT'S STILL GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS BECAUSE THE SOUND IS MUFFLED. UM, BUT AS YOU KNOW, THEY MENTIONED THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NEAR A UNIVERSITY WHICH ACTUALLY JUST PRODUCE SOUND. IT'S FOR THEM, AND THEY ARE RETIRING. COUPLE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO, YOU KNOW, TO DEADEN AND, UH, MUFFLE, YOU KNOW, EXTERIOR NOISES. [02:05:01] THANK YOU. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS MINCHA. UM, IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY HAVE NOW, AND, UH, IN TERMS OF THE MO THE, THE WINDOWS THAT YOU WILL COULD PROVIDE AND THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY, WHAT IS THE IMPROVEMENT OF THEIR SAVINGS? AN EFFICIENCY? 50%, 10%? OH, ABSOLUTELY. UM, AND IT HAS BEEN MEASURED THROUGHOUT TIME, OBVIOUSLY IN TODAY'S, YOU KNOW, MARKET, EVERYTHING HAS RISEN. UH, ELECTRICITY, COST, BILLS, YOU KNOW, BREAD, EGGS, EVERYTHING YOU BUY HAS RISEN. SO FROM GOING TO WHAT THEY HAVE NOW TO WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PURCHASE, YOU'RE PROBABLY LOOKING ANYWHERE, ANYWHERE FROM, YOU KNOW, A 30%, YOU KNOW, SAVINGS ON THEIR ENERGY, UH, SPECIFICALLY THEIR ENERGY BILLS. SO OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE THEY ARE A RETIRING COUPLE, IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO LOWER THOSE, YOU KNOW, THE, YOU KNOW, THAT BILL FACTOR, THOSE, UH, YOU KNOW, ENERGY, UH, COSTS THAT, UH, THEY ARE INCURRING RIGHT NOW WITH, UH, THE WINDOWS THAT THEY HAVE CURRENTLY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER FOR THIS? NO, MA'AM. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. MOTION. YEAH. AT THIS POINT, APPLICANT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE ANY REBUTTAL? YOU'VE HEARD, UH, SOME OPPOSITION FROM THE TOBIN HILLS ASSOCIATION. WHAT WAS THAT, THE TOBIN HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD, OR WHAT, WHAT ORGANIZATION WAS IT? IN? HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION HAVE LETTERS. SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE ANY CLOSING REMARKS BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? SURE. THE, UM, THE REBUTTAL WAS FROM, UM, ONE OF THE ORIGINATORS OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, IN TOBIN HILLS. UM, SHE CITES THE FACTS THAT I HAVE BEEN REBUTTING IN MY EARLIER PART, THAT, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS, UM, THE OLD GROWTH, UM, PRIOR TO IT, THEY'RE, WHEN I HAVE DONE THE RESEARCH, THEY'RE, IT'S A DISTINCTION WITH NO DIFFERENCE. AS LONG AS THE WINDOWS ARE INSTALLED PROPERLY AND IT'S A GOOD PRODUCT, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO, UH, THE, THE, UH, YOU'LL GET A MAJOR BENEFIT THROUGH THE, UH, THE NEW WINDOW BECAUSE OF THE TECHNOLOGY. UM, I, I RESPECT HER OPINION, UM, BUT I DISAGREE WITH IT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T STAND, IT FLIES IN THE FACE OF FACTS. THANK YOU, SIR. UM, I GUESS IT, IT, SHE WASN'T THE PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBOR TOBIN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND THIS IS ON A, YOU KNOW, A MISTAKE ON OUR PART. I KNOW THE PRESIDENT WOULD'VE BEEN IN FAVOR OF IT BECAUSE THEY'VE HAD REPLACED THEIR WINDOWS. THEY LIVE ON MYRTLE ONE BLOCK AWAY, AND WE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN THAT, AND WE DIDN'T. WE DID HAVE OTHER LETTERS THAT YOU DROPPED OFF TOO, FROM OUR NEIGHBORS THAT ARE IN FAVOR OF IT. WHEN WE GOT THE INFORMATION THAT THE, OUR NEIGHBORS SHOWED US, WE THOUGHT WE WERE ONLY SUPPOSED TO GET, GET IT FROM PEOPLE WITHIN 200 FEET. WE DIDN'T GO PAST THAT. FOR THIS, FOR THIS HEARING. WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE THAT AS PART OF THE PUBLIC, UH, TESTIMONY TODAY? THE, THE, EXCUSE ME, THE, UM, THE ADDRESSES OF YOUR NEIGHBORS THAT ARE IN SUPPORT? IN FACT, I ACTUALLY HAVE SOME OF THE, THE, YOU DROPPED THEM OFF RIGHT HERE. YEAH, I, YEAH. WHY DON'T YOU, UH, PROVIDE 'EM, UH, TO STAFF, AND WE'LL JUST INCLUDE THAT IN THE PUBLIC PORTION. AND IN A PREVIOUS HEARING, ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT SPOKE IN FAVOR, IT'S HER HUSBAND WHO'S THE HAS, WHO'S THE PRESIDENT OF THE TOBIN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION TOO, EVEN IF WE PAY TO PRESERVE THE WOOD WINDOWS, YOU CAN KIND TELL BY LOOKING, WE'RE KIND OF PERSNICKETY. I CAN'T OPEN THOSE WINDOWS TO CLEAN THEM. WE'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO KEEP OUR PROPERTY UP. SO WE THINK THE, THE NEW WINDOWS WOULD HELP US TO DO THAT. THANK YOU, MA'AM. THAT CLOSES A PUBLIC PORTION. UH, DOES ANYBODY OKAY, MS. KAPLAN, DO YOU WANNA MAKE A MOTION? YEAH. REGARDING CASE 20, SOMEBODY ELSE WANT IT? I'LL DO IT, IAN. OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER, NUMBER BO O A 23 103 0 0 1 1 0, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE APPEAL FOR THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 5 0 1 EAST LOCUST STREET, APPLICANT BEING SHANE WILL ROBBIE, BECAUSE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWS THE CITY STA THAT CITY STAFF MADE AN ERROR IN A DECISION TO DENY A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IN THE MOTION. DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? SECOND WHO SECOND FROM MANNA? SURE. OKAY. AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF THEN YOU, YOU'RE VOTING FOR, UH, THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL IF YOU VOTE AGAINST YOUR VOTING FOR THE CITY'S CASE? CORRECT. OKAY. OKAY. UM, DISCUSSION, MS. KAPLAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME DISCUSSION? YEAH. UM, HAVING OWNED 130 YEAR OLD HOUSE WITH VERY OLD WINDOWS, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ABOUT, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU BUY A PLACE IN A HISTORIC [02:10:01] DISTRICT, YOU'RE DOING IT OUT OF LOVE. AND I SEE THAT YOU HAVE LOVINGLY MAINTAINED THIS AND RENOVATED THIS AND KEPT IT IN BEAUTIFUL CONDITION. BUT ALSO I DO BELIEVE THAT THE REASON THEY HAVE HISTORIC DISTRICTS IS TO MAINTAIN, UH, A CERTAIN, UM, LOOK, THE, THE AESTHETICS OF THE, UM, ERA. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, IT'S NOT A MATTER TO ME OF NOISE OR, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE LIVING DOWNTOWN, THERE'S LOTS OF NOISE NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO, AND YOU GET USED TO IT. UM, AND IT'S NOT A MATTER OF EVEN THE COST. IT'S A MATTER OF LOVE AND, AND MAINTAINING THE ARCHITECTURE. SO I'M GONNA SIDE WITH THE CITY, MR. MADAM. SO ACTUALLY I AM GOING TO CONCUR WITH MS. KAPLAN AS WELL. AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, SO, YOU KNOW, WHY DO HISTORIC DISTRICTS EXIST? AND SO PART OF IT IS, YOU KNOW, TO PRESERVE, YOU KNOW, THESE, THESE GEMS IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND, AND WHEN YOU BUY ONE, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF, YOU BUY INTO THAT LABOR OF LOVE THAT'S REQUIRED. AND I HAVE LOTS OF FRIENDS WHO OWN THESE HOMES AND, YOU KNOW, THEY SPEND A LOT OF EFFORT MAKING SURE THAT THEY ARE BEING TRUE TO, UH, YOU KNOW, THOSE HOMES AND, AND WHAT'S EXPECTED OF THEM. AND, AND THIS WINDOWS IS, IS A BIG TOPIC FOR A LOT OF THEM. AND, AND THEY ARE TROUBLESOME AND, AND IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK. AND SO, UM, AND, AND I HEAR ABOUT THAT ALL THE TIME FROM THEM, BUT THEY GO THROUGH THOSE EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE, BECAUSE WHEN SOMEONE ELSE WALKS INTO THAT HOME AND, AND LOOKS AT THAT AS BEING HISTORIC HOME, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S ACTUALLY BROUGHT FORWARD. AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, UM, I'LL BE SORT SUPPORTING THIS CITY'S POSITION. THANK YOU. WOULD ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO PROVIDE ANY COMMENT? MANCHACA, MR. MANCHACA? I, UM, COUNTER TO MY COLLEAGUES. UH, THE, THE POINT IS COMING WHERE THESE ASSUMPTIONS OF, UM, WITHOUT TESTING OF OLD WOOD OVERDOING NEW TECHNOLOGY, IT'S NOT GONNA MATCH UP. I MEAN, NEW TECHNOLOGY PAYS OFF. EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM, MORE OR LESS HAS NEW HOUSES AND WELL HAS HOUSES THAT CONSIDER ENERGY, ENERGY EFFICIENCY. AND TO NEGATE THAT A HUNDRED YEAR OLD WOOD IS GOING TO, UH, BE SUPERIOR IN PERFORMANCE. AND NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOLLARS WITH THINGS GOING UP. SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICANT. ORIAN, MR. ORIAN? YEAH, I I'M GONNA BE, UH, AGREEING WITH COMMISSIONER MINCHA ON THIS. I MEAN, I HAVE, WHAT PUT ME OVER THE EDGE IS THAT THE WINDOWS ARE OVER A HUNDRED YEARS OLD, WHICH IS THE TESTIMONY WE HEARD FROM CITY STAFF ABOUT THE LIFESPAN OF THESE WINDOWS. WE HEARD TESTIMONY FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THE WINDOWS HAVE BEEN PATCHED, UM, WITH, AND, AND TO COVER UP THE, THE WOOD ROCK. UH, AND THIRDLY, YOU KNOW, AND WHEN THE HOUSE IS BUILT, THEY PROBABLY DIDN'T HAVE, UM, UH, UH, THE, ALL THE, THE LOUD MUSIC GOING ON. SO, YOU KNOW, IF, IF YOU'RE GONNA, IF YOU'RE GOING TO PURSUE SOME OF THIS HISTORIC, UM, UH, LOOK FOR THE WOOD, UH, UH, AND KEEPING THE OLD WOOD, SHOULDN'T, SHOULDN'T THE ENVIRONMENT BE THE SAME AS WELL, I MEAN, A CHANGE IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE LOUDER NOISE, IT'S WHAT'S PUSHING THE OVER THE EDGE. AT LEAST GIVE IT THEN TO HAVE, UH, THAT, THAT SOUND MAINTENANCE. SO I'LL BE CITING WITH THE APPLICANT, THANK YOU. I, I TOO WILL BE CITING WITH THE APPLICANT ON THIS. I THINK A COUPLE THINGS, UH, I HAD QUESTIONED THE APPLICANT ABOUT THE NOISE AND ST. MARY'S STREET IS A POPULAR, UH, VENUE FOR MUSE MUSIC, AND IT'LL CONTINUE TO BE, AND, YOU KNOW, JUST TO PROVIDE A, A SAFE, QUIET ENVELOPE FOR THE APPLICANT IN THEIR HOUSE. I THINK IT NECESSITATES A DOUBLE PANE. AND ALSO THE SCREENS THAT ARE GONNA BE SET UP, THEY'RE GONNA PRETTY MUCH SHIELD THE WINDOWS ANYWAY FROM THE STREET, UH, VISIBILITY AND THE APPLICANT'S SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY ON THE PILLOW WINDOW REPLACEMENT. SO, UM, I MEAN, FOR THOSE REASONS, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE APPLICANT ON THIS. SO CO ALRIGHT, HUDDLE. HE'S CU I'M, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT'S, UH, ALSO THANK YOU FOR THE SAME REASON. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. KAPLAN. UH, IT'S, I I DO NOT, THAT'S RIGHT. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. MANNA. I DO NOT, UH, CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. CODDLE. I CONCUR. I CONCUR. MR. DEAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ, I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN? I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN, I CONCUR. FIVE IN FAVOR. FI FIVE AGAINST THE MOTION FOR THE APPEAL. DOES NOT PASS. PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND THEY'LL, UH, ASSIST YOU AT THIS POINT IN TIME. IT'S A THREE 18. UH, THE BOARD WILL TAKE A SEVEN MINUTE RECESS AND WE'LL BE BACK. YEAH, THAT'S THE RIGHT ADDRESS. WRONG. THE TIME IS, UH, 3 27. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS, UH, BACK IN SESSION. UM, STAFF, LET'S, [02:15:01] UH, I THINK CASE NUMBER ONE 18 IS OUR NEXT, UH, CASE ITEM. YES, SIR. THEY'RE SAYING THIS IS THE WRONG PICTURE. THAT'S JUST CITY HALL, YEAH, ISN'T IT? YEAH, IT SHOULD BE FRAME THREE. FRAME BUILDINGS, TWO STORIES GOING UP. SO THERE, YEAH, NO, WE KNOW THAT THAT ONE'S JUST THE OPENING SLIDE, BUT DID YOU NOT? OKAY, SO YEAH, THIS IS THE RIGHT ONE. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. OKAY. UH, SO THIS IS CASE BO A 23 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 8. THE ADDRESS IS 1 0 7 HARDING PLACE. THIS IS IN DISTRICT TWO. THE APPLICANT IS MR. MARIO RIOS. HE'S THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE ABUTTING PROPERTY AT 1 0 1 HARDING PLACE. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL'S DECISION RELATED TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT TO 1 0 7 HARDING PLACE BASED ON THE INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 35 5 16 J SET BACK AND FRONTAGE REGULATIONS PROJECTING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. THIS DISTRICT IS AN RMM FOUR DISTRICT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. ON APRIL 10TH, 2023 AFTER CONCERN WAS RECEIVED REGARDING STRUCTURES BEING CONSTRUCTED, A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATE, UH, INVESTIGATION OCCURRED AT 1 0 7 HARDING PLACE FOR AN ENCROACHMENT ISSUE. STAFF AND CODE FOUND THAT THERE WERE THREE PERMITS FOR RE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION IN THE R M FOUR DISTRICT. AND JUST SO THAT YOU KNOW, AN RM FOUR RESIDENTIAL MIX DISTRICT DOES ALLOW UP TO FOUR UNITS. STAFF COORDINATED AND REVIEWED THE PERMIT APPLICATION WITH THE PERMIT DIVISION AND FOUND IT WAS ISSUED CORRECTLY. ALTHOUGH THE STRUCTURE APPEARS CLOSER THAN FIVE FEET, THE FIRST STORY MEASURES EXACTLY FIVE FEET. AND THE SECOND STORY HAS A PROJECTING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE CALLED A JETTY OR AN OVER SALE THAT ALLOWS THE SECOND STORY TO OVERHANG INTO THE SETBACK BY LEAVING TWO FEET, UH, BY OVERHANGING TWO FEET, LEAVING THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 35 5 1 6 J. THE CONSTRUCTION AT 1 0 7 HARDING IS UNIQUE, IS A UNIQUE BUILDING STYLE. WITH A SECOND STORY PROJECTING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE, THE APPLICANT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN INFORMED THAT SINCE THE OVERHANG IS TWO FEET WITHIN THE SETBACK, THEY MUST HAVE A FIRE RATED WALL. THE APPELLANT, MR. RIOS, DISAGREES WITH STAFF'S INTERPRETATION OF THE PROJECTION AND IS APPEALING TO THE BOARD TO AGREE WITH HIS APPEAL RESULTING IN REVERSAL OF STAFF'S DECISION AND IMP INTERPRETATION. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE YOU HAVE THE SITE PLAN OF THE SITE. SO IF YOU DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS AREA, THIS IS WHERE THE OVERHANG IS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE YOU CAN SEE IT MORE CLEARLY. THIS IS SEEING IT FROM THE FRONTAL VIEW OF IT GARAGE. SO NEXT SLIDE. SLIDE PLEASE. SO HERE'S WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE IN APRIL OF 22, 20 22 BEFORE THE CONSTRUCTION STARTED. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND HERE IS THE STRUCTURE NOW WITH THE OVERHANG. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE. HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF ANOTHER PROJECTION AT FOUR 15 JACKSON STREET. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA. THIS, SO THIS IS THE STREET VIEW, THERE'S THE CONSTRUCTION SITE TO THE LEFT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. STAFF CONCLUDES THAT THE PERMIT ISSUE TO 1 0 7 HARDING IS VALID. AND STAFF REQUEST THAT THE BOARD UPHOLD STAFF'S INTERPRETATION BASED ON U D C SECTION 35 5 16 J, WHICH ALLOWS SETBACK AND FRONTAGE REGULATIONS PROJECTING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES BASED ON THE FI FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT. SECTION 35 5 16 J ALLOWS FOR PROJECTING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT EXTEND MORE THAN TWO FEET INTO THE REQUIRED SETBACK. AND THE SECTION ALSO ALLOWS AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE SUCH AS A JETTY OR OVERSELL TO OVERHANG INTO THE REQUIRED SETBACK. AGAIN, NO MORE THAN TWO FEET AND THE OVERALL PROJECTION OR OVERHANG CONSISTS OF 50% OR LESS OF THE SECOND STORY. AND THE OPENING OF THE BALCONY ALIGNS WITH THE MAIN WALL, WALL FRAME OF THE HOME, WHICH IS SET BACK FIVE FEET. AND BECAUSE FINAL DEVELOPMENT OF ALL THE DWELLING UNITS WILL REQUIRE FIRE, UH, INSPECTION AND FIRE RATED WALLS, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THERE WERE 17 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION. DENVER HEIGHTS DID SUB, UH, SUBMIT, SUBMIT A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE APPEAL. AND THERE YOU SEE THE LETTER, THE DENVER HEIGHTS NA EXECUTIVE BOARD HAS VOTED TO SUPPORT THE APPEAL REQUEST FOR THE SAID PROPERTY AT 1 0 7 HARDIN HARDING [02:20:01] PLACE. AND THAT'S ALL WE HAVE FOR YOU TODAY. FOR CLARIFICATION, THE BOARD IS SUPPORTING THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY. IT SAYS AS A WELL, HE, NO, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE, UH, SUPPORTING WHAT MR. RIOS IS APPEALING. OKAY. HE SUPPORTS, THAT'S THE WAY I READ IT, SUPPORTING THE APPEAL. OKAY, SO HE'S SUPPORTING THE APPLICANT, MR. YES, SIR. OKAY. OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON, WE DO HAVE A PERMIT STAFF AVAILABLE AS WELL. IF THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS, WE MIGHT NEED THEM. OKAY. ORIAN, MR. ORIAN. OKAY. SO, UH, I UNDERSTAND THIS WHOLE PROJECTION, BUT THEY ALSO HAVE OVERHANGS THAT GO EVEN FURTHER THAN THE TWO FEET, CORRECT? ISN'T THAT AN ISSUE? SO THEY HAVE SUBMITTED, UH, POST PERMIT REVISIONS. WE HAVE ASKED THEM TO REMOVE THE OVERHANG. SO CAN WE GET A NAME FOR, UH, THE VOICE SPOKE? UM, . OKAY, GREAT. SORRY. UM, RACHEL PARRISH, I'M OVER A PLAN REVIEW. THANK YOU. SO THE REAL ISSUE BEFORE US IS WHETHER OR NOT AN ENTIRE FLOOR OVERHANGING COUNTS AS AS THIS ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE EXEMPTION, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO, OKAY. 'CAUSE TYP, BECAUSE TYPICALLY IT WOULD JUST BE LIKE A BOX WINDOW OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I'M, I'M SORRY. SORRY, I DIDN'T CATCH YOUR, THE LAST COMMENT IS THAT, IS IT, BECAUSE TYPICALLY IT WOULD BE LIKE A BIG BOX WINDOW PROJECTION THAT WOULD AND BE IN THAT CATEGORY? I BELIEVE SO. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. SO MANNA, I'M GONNA FOLLOW UP ON QUESTION OR, UH, WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER ORS OR, UM, ANYWAYS, UM, SO, SO WHAT PART OF THE HOUSE OR, OR I GUESS WHAT IS THE DIMENSION OF THIS EXTENSION? IS IT TRULY, AS HE STATED, THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE WALL IT PROJECTS THE TWO FEET INTO THE REQUIRED? THAT'S, UH, WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS FROM SIDE TO SIDE ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, IS IT A HUNDRED PERCENT COVERAGE ALONG THE BACK OF THE HOUSE AND THAT IS PROVIDING THIS, UH, LIKE BEING CONSIDERED AS THIS, UM, FEATURE? NO, THE, THE PRIMARY FEATURE IS FOR THE, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM THE STREET SIDE, IS FOR THE LEFT. OKAY. SECTION OF THE, OF THE HOME. OKAY. SO ON THE LEFT SECTION OF THE HOME, I GUESS WHATEVER IT IS THAT'S UNDER CONTENTION. OKAY, LET'S PUT THAT WAY CORRECT. THAT'S OKAY. SO THAT PIECE PIECE THERE, IS IT A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE LENGTH OF THE WALL THAT IS PART OF THAT PROJECTION OR IS IT A SUBSET CLOSER TO WHAT MR. OREN WAS TALKING ABOUT? SO IS IT, IS IT A BOX OR IS IT THE WHOLE LENGTH OF THE WALL THAT IS ACTUALLY PART OF THAT PROJECTION? IT IS THE, I CAN JUMP IN HERE. IT, IT IS THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE WALL. THANK YOU OZUNA. SO IS THE HARDSHIP HERE? HIS, UM, HIS NECESSITY TO DO THE FIRE RATING OF THAT PROJECTION IS THAT THERE IS A HARDSHIP ASSOCIATED WITH DOING THE FIRE RATING, BUT THAT IS NOT PART OF, OF THE REQUEST. IT IS A REQUIREMENT. IF, SO, THE, THE, WHAT THE BOARD IS LOOKING AT TODAY IS WHETHER TO UPHOLD STAFF'S INTERPRETATION OF THE PROJECTION, WHICH ALLOWS IT TO PROJECT THE TWO FEET, UH, BUT MAINTAIN THE THREE FEET. UM, BUT IT, IT DOES NOT, WHETHER IT'S APPROVED OR, OR NOT, WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IS LIKE, LET'S SAY YOU DON'T UPHOLD STOPS, UH, DECISION, THEN THAT APPLICANT HAS TO COME TO THE BOARD ANYWAY TO REQUEST A VARIANCE FOR THE OVERHANG. UM, AND ON TOP OF THAT, UM, WOULD HAVE TO, UM, IN NOT, THEY WOULDN'T INCUR THAT COST BECAUSE OF COURSE IT WAS A PERMIT ISSUED BASED ON WHAT WE THOUGHT IS, IS VALID INFORMATION. BUT, UM, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD. AND SO THEY'RE GONNA CONTEND THAT IT IS A HARDSHIP TO HAVE A FIRE RATED WALL FOR CERTAIN. OKAY. SO, SO IF WE UPHOLD STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OR HOLD THE STAFF'S, UH, RECOMMENDATION HERE, WHAT, WHAT IS, WHAT IS THEN THE REQUIREMENT OF, OF THE BAR? WHAT DOES THE BAR APPLICANT HAVE TO DO? I'M SORRY, TO, UM, TO COMPLY WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION HERE, WHAT WOULD THE APPLICANT HAVE TO DO? HE, HE'S APPEALING STAFF'S DECISION. SO WE ARE SAYING THAT THE, THE PROJECTION, THE OVERHANG IS, IS ACCEPTABLE. UM, HE, HE IS SAYING IT IS NOT. AND SO THEY WOULD EITHER HAVE TO REMOVE IT, REDO THEIR PLANS, OR COME TO THE BOARD AND TRY TO GET A VARIANCE FOR THAT, UH, RATHER THAN IT GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS OF APPEAL. GOT IT. OKAY. SO ORIAN, SORRY, I I I, THIS BOARD HEARD A CASE MAYBE A YEAR AGO WHERE SOMEBODY HAD A SECOND FLOOR PROJECTION INTO A SETBACK UP TO TWO FEET. AND STAFF DIDN'T SAY THAT THIS WAS AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE THAT WAS ACCEPTABLE. IT IT WAS PROCESSED AS A VARIANCE. SO DID SOMETHING CHANGE? I DON'T KNOW ABOUT, NO SIR. NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. UM, I WASN'T HERE AT THAT TIME, SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT, [02:25:01] WHAT THE DECISION WAS BASED ON, WELL, IT WOULD'VE BEEN IN OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, MAYBE DECEMBER. I'M NOT SURE SIR. WE WOULD HAVE TO REFER TO THAT CASE. BUT EACH ONE IS CASE BY CASE. SO, OKAY. I I'M CONFUSED ALSO. SO ARE WE JUST TALKING ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE, THE OWNER NEEDS TO PUT IN A FIREWALL? IS THAT NO, THE ONLY ISSUE HERE? NO, NO. SO THIS IS A REQUEST BY MR. MARIO RIOS AND HE IS SAYING THAT THE PERMIT THAT WAS ISSUED THAT ALLOWS THIS OVERHANG IS NOT VALID AND SHOULD NOT, THEY SHOULD NOT BE A LIT, UH, ALLOWED TO CONTINUE THAT WAY. THEY NEED TO APPEAL TO THE BOARD FOR A VARIANCE THAT IT'S A VARIANCE REQUEST. IT'S NOT A PROJECTION OR OVERHANG THAT IS PERMITTED BY CODE. AND SO WHAT ABOUT THIS FIRE DOES THAT HAVE, WHY IS THAT THERE? IT, IT'S JUST A REQUIREMENT ANYTIME YOU GET CLOSER THAN THE FIVE FEET YOU'RE REQUIRED ON THAT WALL TO HAVE A FIREWALL THAT'S GONNA BE A REQUIREMENT. IF THAT, IF IT REMAINS. EXACTLY. OH, I JUST WONDER IF THAT'S A REQUIREMENT. WHY IS IT THERE? WHY, WHY ARE WE, UH, UH, OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I'M CONFUSED ABOUT. BECAUSE IF THAT'S JUST A REQUIREMENT, IT SOUNDED TO ME LIKE MR. RIOS WAS OBJECTING TO PUTTING IN A FIREWALL. NO. OKAY. S IS NOT THE PROPERTY OWNER, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. HE, HE DOESN'T LIKE THE FACT THAT STAFF SAID AN ENTIRE SECOND FLOOR IS CONSIDERED AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING. HE'S, HE'S HERE AND HE'S, YOU CAN HEAR HIS THANK YOU. THE NEIGHBOR. HE'S THE NEIGHBOR, YES. ON THE HARD CORNER. OKAY, WHY DON'T YOU SAY THAT? SO SORRY. I THOUGHT I, I THOUGHT I MADE THAT CLEAR AT THE BEGINNING. RIGHT? SO THAT HE WAS THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE ABUTTING ABUTTING PROPERTY. SO MANNA. SO, SO I AM LOOKING AT THE U D C AND YEAH, I WOULD, I HONESTLY HAD NEVER HEARD OF THE JETTY OR OVER SALE BEFORE. AND SO, SO THOSE WORDS ARE NOT DEFINED IN THE U D C AS THEY CURRENTLY ARE. AND I LOOKED UP THE CODE AND, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW THE CODE IS CITED. SO, SO, SO THIS IS CONFUSING ME A LITTLE BIT 'CAUSE YOU'RE REFERENCING SOMETHING THAT, THAT I'VE NEVER HEARD OF BEFORE AS A FEATURE. AND, UM, IT MAY BE FROM AN ARCHITECTURAL PERSPECTIVE, SOMEONE ELSE KNOWS WHAT THAT MEANS, BUT IT IS CONFUSING FOR ME FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. SO, SO JUST AS A NOTE. SO YEAH. RIGHT. AND SO HOW THE, THE CODE READS IS, IT SAYS THAT, I MEAN, EVERY PART OF THE REQUIRED, UH, REQUIRED YARD SHALL BE OPEN AND UNOBSTRUCTED FROM THE GROUND TO THE SKY EXCEPT FOR PERMITTED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND THE ORDINARY PROJECTION OF SILLS BELT COURSES, CORNICES, BUTTRESSES, EAVES AND SIMILAR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. AND THAT'S WHERE THAT INTERPRETATION CAME FROM. RIGHT. SO, AND I GUESS THAT'S WHERE THE DIALOGUE WILL COME, IS WHAT WE CONSIDER AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. EXACTLY. AND IS THAT, YEAH, SO, OKAY. OKAY, GOTCHA. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR ARE WE CLEAR AS NONE? YEAH, JUST ONE MORE THING, MS. CAP. SO BASICALLY THE CITY SAYS THIS WAS, OKAY, THE NEIGHBOR IS PROTESTING AND SAYING HE NEEDS A VARIANCE. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE, CORRECT? YES. . BUT YOU CAN GET MORE CLARIFICATION FROM HIM. HE'S, HE'S HERE. THANK. OKAY. YEAH. AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REMIND EVERYBODY, ORIAN, THAT THIS BOARD DID HEAR A CASE AND DID CON DID NOT CONSIDER THIS AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE ABOUT EIGHT MONTHS AGO. YES, I AGREE WITH THAT. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I BROUGHT UP IN AN EARLIER CASE, ANY KIND OF JETTY KIND OF THING. WAS THAT AN ISSUE? AND THIS SORT OF WENT BY THE WAYSIDE. I THINK WE NEED MORE CLARIFICATION AND THANKS STAFF FOR EXPLAINING THAT. THANK YOU. SO AT THIS POINT WE'LL ASK THE, I GUESS IT'S THE APPLICANT TO PLEASE COME FORWARD. HOW ARE WE DOING? EVERYBODY? MARIO RIOS, WOULD YOU, YOU'RE NOT THE APPLICANT THOUGH? I, I AM THE APPLICANT. OKAY. YES SIR. I AM THE APPLICANT. SO I AM THE COMPLAINANT. AND SO I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW WE'RE HERE, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. WHEN I LOOK AT THIS AND WHEN I EVEN SAW THE RERA THING, COULD YOU LIFT THE MICROPHONE A LITTLE BIT? OH, YES SIR. YES, SIR. WHEN I SAW THE RERA BUILD AND IT'S GOING OVER THE SIDES, NOBODY CALLED THAT AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. THEY NEEDED TO COME HERE FOR VARIANCE. UM, WHAT THIS HAS DONE IS BYPASSED ALL OF YOU GUYS, IT'S GONE AND RUBBER STAMPED THIS BUILD AND SAID, THE CITY SAYS THIS IS NOT AN OVERHANG, THIS IS NOT, THIS IS AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE AND WE'RE JUST GONNA RUBBER STAMP THIS THROUGH. WE DON'T NEED THE BOARD, WE DON'T NEED THE COMMISSION, WE'RE JUST GONNA GO AHEAD AND SHOOT THIS THROUGH. AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. UH, I, THERE WAS NO FIRE RATED WALLS ON THE ORIGINAL BUILD. IT WASN'T UNTIL I STARTED COMPLAINING THAT THEY SAID WE'RE GONNA WORK WITH THE BUILDER AND REQUIRE THE FIRE RATED WALLS. ANOTHER ASPECT, IF WE LOOK AT, UH, THIS BOTTOM LOWER LEFT HAND PICTURE, THE TWO WINDOWS ON THE LEFT, NORMALLY I'M A LITTLE NERVOUS. UM, NORMALLY IN ORDER, IF YOU DO BUILD INTO THE SETBACK, YOU CAN'T HAVE MORE THAN 25% OF THE WALL SPACE BE WINDOWS. BUT IF YOU CALL IT AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE, YOU CAN BYPASS THAT AND PUT 50% WINDOWS ON THE WALL. SO THEY'RE [02:30:01] BYPASSING A LOT OF CODE HERE BY RUBBER STAMPING THIS THROUGH. I SPOKE WITH MS. PARISH, SHE DIDN'T WANT TO GIMME HER SUPERVISOR'S INFORMATION. I HAVE TONS OF EMAIL. I HAVE PROBABLY SPENT 40 HOURS WALKING THIS DOWN. I HAVE TALKED TO EVERYBODY, MR. AMIN, MR. SHANNON, EVERYBODY. AND IT'S JUST AMAZING TO ME THAT WE'RE HERE. I DON'T SEE ANY VARIANCES ON THEIR APPLICATION THERE. AND I MEASURED IT THIS MORNING. THEY'RE 28. THERE'S THAT SECTION THAT COMES OFF THE BACK IS 28 INCHES OFF THE FRONT WALL. IT'S ONLY SUPPOSED TO BE TWO FEET. AND WE DON'T EVEN HAVE SIDING YET, OR WE DON'T HAVE A ROOF YET. SO AS IT SITS, IT'S STILL OVER TWO FEET RIGHT NOW. UM, SO I HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES WITH, IT'S THREE OF THESE BUILDS GOING UP. THEY'RE GONNA, THEY'RE, THEY WEREN'T FIRE RATED WALLS, SO I BROUGHT IT UP. THEY'RE PUTTING WINDOWS WHEN THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO GIVEN THE VARIANT. THEY'RE BYPASSING THE VARIANCE SYSTEM. AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT, UM, HOW YOU WOULD CALL JETTING A ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE WHEN IT'S REALLY JUST IN A BUILDING STYLE. A BUILDING TECHNIQUE OF PUTTING A SMALL FOOTPRINT, A LARGER FOOTPRINT HOUSE ON A SMALLER FRAME, PUT ON THE BOTTOM. THAT IS NOT AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE RAW FRAME, DO YOU HAVE ANY PICTURES OF THE RAW FRAME? IT'S GOT EYE JOISTS. IT'S GOT I BEAM JOISTS THAT, UH, YOU CAN'T SEE IT FROM THE SIDE. DO YOU HAVE ANY SIDE VIEWS? THERE WE GO. THOSE ARE I BEAM JOISTS. IF YOU TAKE THOSE OFF THE FLOOR WILL FALL. THOSE ARE NOT ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. THOSE ARE BUILDINGS AND THEY'RE DOING THREE OF THESE INFRINGING. I HAD TO MOVE MY BOYS, I'M A SINGLE FATHER. UM, THEY WERE ON THE OUTSIDE ROOM. I'VE HAD TO MOVE THEM TO AN INTERIOR ROOM BECAUSE LITERALLY THEY'RE 18 INCHES WHEN THEY'RE ON THAT EDGE FROM MY BOYS, FROM MY, FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE. IT'S OBTRUSIVE. I THINK IT'S PREPOSTEROUS AND I THINK IT'S HIGHLY EGREGIOUS THAT MS. PERISH, MS. FLORES, MS. RAMIREZ, HAVE ALL RUBBER STAMPED THIS FOR CARLA ALVARADO, WHO IS THE CONTRACTOR. UM, I THINK IT'S ODD. AM I ALLEGATING SOME? NO, I'M JUST SAYING THAT THREE WOMEN RUBBER STAMPED SOMETHING THAT MR. ORION'S ALREADY SAID DIDN'T APPROVE LAST, LAST YEAR. AND HERE WE ARE. AND THERE'S, I MEAN, IF HE SHOWS YOU THE, I THERE'S A DIFFERENT PICTURE. WE HAVE, THIS IS TWO MONTHS AGO. WE HAVE THE WHOLE SECOND STORY UP. I HAVE IT ON MY PHONE. AND SO HOW WE WERE ALLOWED TO GET THAT FAR, I TRIED TO STOP THIS A LONG TIME 'CAUSE HEY, IF WE'RE DOING THIS WRONG, LET'S STOP 'EM NOW. BUT TWO OF THE UNITS ALREADY HAVE THE FRAME UP ON THE SECOND STORY. THEY ALREADY HAVE THE WINDOW THINGS IN PLACE. SO THEY'VE GONE VERY FAR WITH THIS BILL. IS IT GONNA COST THEM MONEY? IT PROBABLY IS. IS IT GONNA AFFECT MY PROPERTY PROPERTY IF WE DON'T FIRE WATER DRAINAGE? I'M WORRIED ABOUT ME. 'CAUSE I WAS HERE FIRST. THEY'RE COMING AFTER THE FACT. THEY'RE BUILDING IN, YOU KNOW, INTO MY SECTION HERE AND INFRINGING ON MY, MY MY USE, MY, MY ENJOYMENT OF MY PROPERTY. UM, I AM A FAN OF THE BUILDING. CAN I STOP THE BUILDING? NO. BUILD THAT THING STRAIGHT UP FIVE FEET FROM GROUND TO CEILING. LIKE THE RULE SAYS UNOBSTRUCTED GROUND TO SKY. THAT'S NOT UNOBSTRUCTED GROUND ON THE SKY. ON TOP OF THAT, THEY'RE GONNA BE CONCRETE PIERS IN THE SETBACK THAT ARE GONNA HOLD UP THOSE THINGS. SO IT'S NOT UNOBSTRUCTED. I MEAN, SO I HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES WITH THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING. HOW WE GOT THIS FAR. I MEAN, THEY'RE 75% FRAMED OUT AND WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A ROOF YET. AND SO THAT'S 28 INCHES RIGHT THERE. BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, I MEASURED THIS MORNING AND THAT'S BEFORE FRAMING ON THE SIDE. THAT'S BEFORE SIDING AND THAT'S BEFORE THE ROOF. SO ON ALL ASPECTS, THIS IS, IS AN IMPROPER BUILD. CAN CAN I ASK, THANK YOU. WHAT IS YOUR ADDRESS? ONE OH, I'M THIS HOUSE ON THE RIGHT. 1 0 1 HARDY. AND THEY ARE 1 0 7 AND I SOLD HIM THAT LOT. THANK YOU MR. RIOS. YES. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. UH, ANY BOARD QUESTIONS FOR THE, FOR THE APPLICANT? RAGMAN? MR. BRAGMAN? MA'AM? UM, CAN YES MA'AM? YOU TELL ME, UH, WHAT THE DISTANCE FROM THE END OF YOUR HOUSE, IT'S CLOSEST TO THIS PROPERTY. WHAT IS THE DISTANCE FROM THE, THE CLOSEST POINT? I'M FIVE FEET FROM THE CLOSEST THE, THE FURTHEST PART, PART OF MY HOUSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE IS FIVE FEET. SO YOU HAVE A FIVE FOOT? I HAVE, YEAH. EVERYBODY HAS A FIVE FOOT SETBACK. NOT EVERYBODY, BUT NO, NOT THEM. NOT THEM. I DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN MY CORNER. MS. PARISH, FLORIDA EZ. FAIRLY EARLY IN CUSTODY, BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND THE FUNNY THING IS, I DID ASK THEM, I AM INTO CONTAINERS. I LIVED AT NINE 10 WYOMING, WHICH IS A BIG THREE STORY CONTAINER. I OWNED THAT PRIOR TO THIS BUILD. I WANTED TO, I WAS REAL BEING REAL PETTY. AND I SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS I HAVE CONTAINERS THAT I'M GETTING A PERMIT TO, TO BUILD MY CONTAINER HOMES IS OFFSET. PUT ONE STORY ONE ON THE BOTTOM AND OFFSET THE SECOND STORY JUST LIKE THEY DID. AND I SAID, NO, IT'S UP. IT'S ONLY IF WE DECIDE TO, UH, INTERPRET IT THAT WAY. SO THEY'RE NOT WILLING TO DO IT FOR EVERYBODY ELSE. THEY WEREN'T WILLING TO DO IT FOR ME. THEY'RE ONLY WILLING TO DO IT FOR THIS PARTICULAR BUILDER. MS. CARLISLE RADO MANNA. THANK YOU. LET'S TAKE MR. MANAM. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE PICTURE THAT SHOWS THE, UM, ELEVATION. SO, SO EARLIER PICTURE AND THEN, SO I JUST SO YOU CAN ASK SOME CLARITY HERE. SO CAN YOU USE A LATER LASER POINTER AND POINT OUT THE SIDES THAT, THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE? SO YOU DON'T STAND AT THE SAVE THE PODIUM AND THEN POINT THERE SO THAT WAY EVERYONE CAN SEE WHERE, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. THERE WE GO. THERE WE GO. SO THIS IS THE SIDE VIEW OF THE BACK AND WE SEE ALL THIS [02:35:01] HANGING OVER RIGHT HERE. SO RIGHT HERE, RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW WE'RE 28 INCHES. WE DON'T EVEN HAVE THE OVERHANG ON YET. RIGHT HERE THERE'S GONNA BE COLUMNS SUPPORTING THIS STRUCTURE. THIS IS AN OFFICE LIVING SPACE. THIS IS THE TOP OF THE STAIRWELL AND THE LANDING. THIS IS OVER FOR 50% WINDOW. THIS IS CLOSE. AND LIKE I SAID, THEY'RE BYPASSING THE CODE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT CALLING THIS, THEY'RE NOT GETTING A VARIANCE. THEY'RE CALLING THIS AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE AND THEY GET TO BYPASS ALL THAT. AND LIKE I SAID, THERE WERE NO FIRE. SO IF THE CITY WAS ON BOARD AT THE BEGINNING, HOW COME WE DON'T HAVE FIRE RATED WALLS UNTIL I BROUGHT IT UP THAT THEY'RE BUILDING TOO CLOSE. AFTER I BROUGHT IT UP, THEN THE CITY DECIDED WE'RE GONNA WORK WITH THE BUILDERS AND REQUIRE THEM TO PUT FIRE RATED WALLS. SO, I MEAN, THANK YOU. SO I WAS LOOKING YEAH, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I WAS LOOKING AT THAT PICTURE CORRECTLY. CORRECT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTION, QUESTIONS, QUESTION. YES, MA'AM. YEAH, QUESTION MS. KAPLAN. OKAY. UM, YOU ARE A ONE STORY BUILDING, RIGHT? CORRECT? YES MA'AM. AND THIS OVERHANG STARTS IN THE SECOND STORY, CORRECT? SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS, WHAT IS YOUR REAL OBJECTION TO THIS GOING UP TO MAKE THEM, TO HAVE THEM BUILD EVERYTHING FIVE FOOT SET BACK LIKE THE CITY REQUIRES AND, AND IS THAT THE REASON, LET ME ASK YOU THAT. THE REASON, BECAUSE YOU WERE SAYING SOMETHING LIKE YOUR SONS WOULD BE LOOKING IN THE WINDOW, BUT THE OVERHANG IS ONLY ON THE SECOND FLOOR, NOT ON THE FIRST FLOOR. SO, WELL, THAT'S WHAT WOULD OVERHANG BECAUSE THEY'RE THE, THE FIRST FLOOR IS FIVE FEET. THEY'RE OVERHANGING 28 INCHES AS WE SPEAK RIGHT NOW. BEFORE SIDING. BEFORE, BEFORE IT'S FINISHED UP. NO, NO, BUT I'M SAYING IS OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT, THAT THEY'D NEED A VARIANCE TO DO THIS, WHAT WHAT IS YOUR, WHAT IS GONNA HAPPEN TO YOUR PROPERTY? I THINK THERE'LL BE A LOT OF DAMAGE FROM WATER. I MEAN, THOSE ARE MASSIVE STRUCTURES. CAN YOU IMAGINE THE RUNOFF? BECAUSE ALL THESE STRUCTURES FACE THEIR BACK IS TO MY WALL, THEIR BACK IS TO MY SIDE. SO THREE OF THESE STRUCTURES LINED UP ILLEGALLY OR PLACED TOO CLOSE TO MY PROPERTY. IT'S GONNA HAVE A LOT OF REPERCUSSIONS FOR ME, UH, DRAINAGE WISE. OKAY. AND HAVE THEY PUT IN, UM, UH, GUTTERS? I MEAN, WILL THAT ALLEVIATE IT? I DON'T, NO, THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT MY CONCERN. MY CONCERN IS THAT THEY SHOULD BE HELD TO THE SAME STANDARDS THAT EVERYBODY ELSE ELSE'S. OH, OKAY. OKAY. I MEAN THE, WHEN I SAW THE RERA CASE THIS MORNING, Y'ALL DIDN'T, NOBODY SAID ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE, BUT IT WAS REPEAT OVER SIDE BASICALLY SOMEBODY SAY NO TO YOU AND YOU FEEL THAT THAT SHOULD BE A UNIFORM. LIKE IF IT'S NO TO YOU, IT SHOULD BE NO TO EVERYBODY THEN. IS THAT NO, I JUST, IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? I JUST, I'M READING THE CODE. YEAH, I'M READING WHAT IT SAYS AS FAR AS WHAT SETBACKS ARE, WHAT'S REQUIRED. AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND AND WHAT I SEE AND WHAT I JUST SAW THIS MORNING, THAT'S NOT PART OF AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. THANK YOU, MR. ORIAN. MR. ORIAN? YES, SIR. YEAH, I JUST, I JUST CAN'T STRESS ENOUGH THAT WE'RE NOT GRANTING A VARIANCE. WE'RE, WE'RE DEC WE'RE, WE'RE HELPING DECIDE HOW AN INTERPRETATION OF THE U D C IS BEING DONE IS AN ENTIRE SECOND FLOOR AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. 'CAUSE IF THIS THING, IF THIS THING DOESN'T, IF WE DON'T SIDE WITH THE APPLICANT PRECEDENT, WE'RE NOT GONNA SEE ANY OF THESE AS A VARIANCE. WE'RE SUPPORTING THE CITY'S INTERPRETATION THAT AN ENTIRE SECOND FLOOR OR HIGHER COULD BE AN ARCHITECT ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. AND WE NEED TO BE REAL CAREFUL ABOUT THIS. 'CAUSE THEY DON'T, IT'LL OVER, OVER OVERSEE YOU. THEY'LL JUST SAY IT'S AN ARCHITECTURE FLEET. WE DON'T NEED A VARIANCE. WE'LL NEVER KNOW. IT'LL SET A PRECEDENT. AND LIKE I SAID, THE DENVER HEIGHTS ASSOCIATION, SO MY QUE OH, GO AHEAD. SORRY SIR. SO, SO ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS, UH, DO, DID YOU GRANT ANY RIGHTS TO YOUR NEIGHBOR WHEN YOU SOLD THE LAND? NONE WHATSOEVER, SIR. NO EXCEPTIONS PART OF YOUR PROPERTY. HOLD ON. OH, YES SIR. DO YOU USE PART OF YOUR PROPERTY FOR MAINTENANCE? 'CAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO PAINT UP THERE WITH ONLY THREE FEET, GET A LADDER OR WHATEVER. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF THE FIVE FEET IS FOR NOT JUST FOR FIRE AND SETBACK, IT'S FOR DRAINAGE, IT'S FOR MAINTENANCE, YOU KNOW, GIVING TO AC UNITS ACCESS. I MEAN, IT'S NOT JUST FOR FIRE OR DRAINAGE. IT'S A LOT OF THINGS. ANYWAY, THAT, THAT'S, BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, NO SIR. I DIDN'T GRANT ANY EXTRA PRIVILEGES WHEN I SOLD THEM THE LOT. NO, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. ORIAN. ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT HERE? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SIR. WE'LL, THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME. QUESTIONS, UM, AT THIS POINT ARE WE GONNA HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT OR, UH, SO WE HAVE ONE, UH, INDIVIDUAL SIGNED UP TO SPEAK REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, HONORABLE BOARD AND MR. CHAIR CAROLINE MCDONALD HERE WITH BROWN MCDONALD. UH, 100 NORTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10, SUITE 1385. HERE ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER OF 1 0 7 HARDING, UH, THE, THE, UH, DEVELOPER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. I DO HAVE A PRESENTATION. UM, IF YOU COULD GO AHEAD AND GO TO THE LAST SLIDE. I, I'D LIKE TO SOMEWHAT CHANGE THE, THE NARRATIVE HERE. UM, MY CLIENT SUBMITTED FULL BUILDING PLANS, I I BELIEVE LATE LAST YEAR SHOWING THESE EXACT PLANS THAT, YOU KNOW, TO MR. RIO'S CREDIT WERE APPROVED AND THEY DID START CONSTRUCTION AND THEN IT WAS BROUGHT TO THEIR ATTENTION THAT, UH, THERE WAS PART OF AN OVERHANG [02:40:01] OR, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE SECOND FLOOR THAT WAS, UH, TWO FEET WITHIN THE FIVE FOOT, UH, REQUIRED SETBACK. AND YOU DO SEE THAT THERE IS, YOU KNOW, AN ADDITIONAL OVERHANG THAT GOES EVEN FURTHER. MY CLIENT HAS SINCE REVISED THEIR PLANS, KEEPING THAT TWO FOOT OVERHANG ON THE SECOND FLOOR, BUT ADDING THE FIRE RATED WALL AND DECREASING THAT THIRD STORY OVERHANG. UM, YOU KNOW, CITY STAFF REVIEWED AND APPROVED THESE PLANS THREE TIMES. THEY WENT OUT AND CONSTRUCTED PURSUANT TO THE PLANS. THEY HAVE BEEN, THERE'S BEEN A STOP WORK ORDER SINCE APRIL THAT HAS HALTED CONSTRUCTION. UM, SINCE THAT TIME COSTING MY CLIENT MONEY AND TIME O ON THIS PROJECT HERE YOU CAN SEE THE REVISED PLANS. SO THEY'VE REDUCED THAT, THAT, UH, ROOF OVERHANG. THEY'VE ADDED THE FIRE RATED WALL PURSUANT TO CODE AND THEY HAVE KEPT THE TWO FOOT, UM, ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE INTO THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK. UM, IT IS OUR OPINION THAT THIS IS WITHIN STAFF'S PURVIEW AND MY CLIENT RELIED ON STAFF'S APPROVAL OF THESE PLANS AND STARTED CONSTRUCTION. IF YOU GO TO THE SLIDE BEFORE THIS, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS WELL ENOUGH SPACE TO GET IN THERE TO PAINT, MAINTAIN THE STRUCTURES, AND THEY WILL BE PUTTING GUTTERS ON THE, UH, ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE THAT IS TWO FEET WITHIN THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK TO HELP RELIEVE ANY DRAINAGE. UM, AGAIN, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS ALL STARTED LATE LAST YEAR WHEN THE PLANS WERE APPROVED. UM, THEY STARTED CONSTRUCTION, THEY REVISED THEIR PLAN TO HELP MEET THE FIRE AND, UH, SAFETY ASPECTS OF THAT OVERHANG. AND THEY ARE ADDING THE GUTTERS. SO IT IS, WITH THAT WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU DENY THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL AND, UH, APPROVE THE CITY'S STAFF'S DECISION AND ALLOW THEM TO MOVE FORWARD WITH CONSTRUCTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. UH, LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ORIAN. MR. ORIAN? YES. UH, U D C DEFINITION FOR SETBACK, A LINE WITHIN A LOT PARALLEL TO AND MEASURED FROM A CORRESPONDING LOT LINE ESTABLISHING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED YARD AND GOVERNING THE PLACEMENT OF A STRUCTURE AND USES ON THE LOT THE OPEN SPACE BETWEEN THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE LOT AND THE NEAREST PROJECTION OF A STRUCTURE. SO HOW, HOW CAN YOU, THIS IS FOR THE PERSON THAT JUST SPOKE. HOW, HOW ARE YOU MEETING THAT DEFINITION FOR THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK? WHEN, WHEN THE NEAREST PROJECTION OF THE STRUCTURE IS WITHIN FIVE FEET? YES. UH, MR. ORIAN, CAROLINE MCDONALD WITH BROWN AND MCDONALD, UM, PURSUANT TO 3 5 5 2 6 J IT IS A PROJECTING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. THE BUILDING IS PLACED FIVE FEET WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINE. UM, BUT THE CODE DOES ALLOW FOR AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE, UH, NO CLOSER THAN THREE. SO IS IT YOUR ARGUMENT THAT THE, THAT A SECOND FLOOR IS AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE? YES, SIR. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS YOUR STANCE. IS THE ARCHITECT WHO D H R ARCHITECTS WHO ISSUED THESE PLANS, ARE THEY PRESENT IN THE, IN THE GALLERY? NO, BUT, UH, MARSHA OR MARIA CLARK IS HERE WITH THE PROJECT TEAM. I MEAN, I, I'D LIKE TO HEAR HOW AN ARCHITECT IS READING THAT DEFINITION AND, AND I'D LIKE TO HEAR SOME INSIGHT FROM A LICENSED ARCHITECT IF THERE'S ONE PRESENT ABOUT WHAT THEY THINK, UH, HOW A, HOW THIS IS, HOW A SECOND FLOOR IS AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE, IF THERE'S NOT ONE OF THEM. I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. I UNDERSTAND, BUT CITY STAFF ALSO AGREES, UH, WITH THAT ARGUMENT AS WELL. NOT ENTIRELY, BECAUSE ABOUT SEVEN MONTHS AGO, THIS BOARD HERE CASE, WHERE A SECOND FLOOR PROJECTION WAS HEARD AS A VARIANCE STAFF DID NOT CONSIDER THAT AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. SO WE, THIS IS ALREADY A CONTRASTING ISSUE THAT'S BEFORE THIS BOARD, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE HEARING EVERYTHING. SO I'M JUST GONNA LET SOMEONE ELSE ASK A QUESTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. ORIAN. UH, DID WE HAVE THE, WOULD YOU LIKE THE PROJECT MANAGER TO COME FORWARD AND, AND MAKE A FEW COMMENTS OR NO, THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT NECESSARY. WELL, SHE'S, SHE'S HERE ANY ANYWAY, SO WE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND LISTEN TO, UH, YEAH, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND HELLO, THIS IS MARIA CLARK. I'M PROJECT MANAGER WITH HOME NOVI. WE'RE THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR. THE MAIN ISSUE HERE, UM, BESIDES OF COURSE WE DO HAVE THE ENGINEER PLANS AND, UM, ARCHITECTURAL PLANS IS THAT THE CITY APPROVED THIS. JUST PUT YOURSELF, YOU KNOW, IN OUR SHOES WHERE THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR'S BEEN APPROVED THREE TIMES BY THE CITY. 'CAUSE WE DID SOME REVISIONS, NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. AND ON THE THREE TIMES THAT THEY APPROVED OUR FLOOR [02:45:01] FLOOR PLANS, WE WERE OKAY. WE START CONSTRUCTION WITH ALL THAT. IT IMPLIES, YOU KNOW, ALL THE MONEY, TIME EFFORTS AND THEN WE REALIZE ABOUT, ABOUT THIS, THAT'S WHEN WE HAD TO GET HELP FROM AN ATTORNEY TO, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE SURE WHERE WE'RE STANDING. WE HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITHIN THE CITY STAFF AND THEIR INTERPRETATION ABOUT THIS, BUT IT'S NOT US TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, LIKE, UM, MR. RIOS SAYING LIKE, TO DO THINGS THAT ARE NOT CORRECT. WE'RE WITHIN THE STANDARDS OF WHAT THE CITY HAS BEEN TELLING US AND APPROVING US. SO THAT'S OUR MAIN ISSUE. AND TO MOVE FORWARD, IT'S BEEN MORE THAN A MONTH THAT WE CAN GET INSIDE AND WE'VE BEEN ALSO HARASSED BY MR. RIOS. SO, SO, UM, WE REALLY NEED TO SOLVE THIS THE BEST WAY. WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO FIX WHATEVER WE NEED TO FIX, BUT WE NEED HELP. YOU KNOW, IT WAS WITHIN THE CITY THAT ALL THIS WAS APPROVED. OKAY, THANK YOU MAKA. MR. MACHACA, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. UH, UH, MR. MA'AM, ONE QUESTION. UH, THE, THE, YOUR PREVIOUS PRESENTER THERE, UH, SAID EARLIER SOMETHING THAT WASN'T BROUGHT UP, BUT SHE MENTIONED THAT THE GUTTERS, IS THAT THE FIRST TIME THAT THE, THE, UH, APPLICANT HAS KNOWN ABOUT THE GUTTERS? UH, OR HAS THE GUTTER'S BEEN IN THE PLAN ALL ALONG? NO, IF WE NEED TO PUT THE GUTTERS, WE'RE WILLING TO PUT THE GUTTERS. WE DON'T WANNA DO ANYTHING HARM, YOU KNOW, HARMFUL TO HIS PROPERTY. WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO, WE'RE GONNA DO, LIKE THEY ASK US FOR THE FIRE RAID WALLS, WE SUBMITTED A REVISION, WE WANNA MOVE FORWARD WITHIN WHAT THE CITY AND THE CODE STANDARDS ARE. WE DON'T WANNA HAVE ANY ISSUES, YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH THE NEIGHBOR. WE'RE WILLING TO MOVE FORWARD IF WE NEED TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, ADD THESE THINGS. BUT YEAH, IT WASN'T IN THE PLANS BEFORE. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MANA, MR. MADAM. SO THIS QUESTION'S FOR STAFF. AND SO, SO I'M LOOKING UP THE CODE THAT'S BEEN REFERENCED AND YOU KNOW, SO IT'S, IT'S J AND IT TALKS ABOUT EXAMPLES THAT IT GAVE WITH REGARDS TO WHAT THE DEFINITION IS OF AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE AND TALKS ABOUT A SILL AND SILL IS BASICALLY SOMETHING THAT SITS OVER A WINDOW OR DOOR. 'CAUSE THAT'S DEFINED WITH AN E TO C BELT. COURSES ARE NOT, I WENT, LOOKED IT UP 'CAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THAT WAS. THAT'S A ROSE STONES THAT SIT ON A BUILDING THAT BASICALLY ORNAMENTAL DECORATIVE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF STRUCTURE. UM, A CORNICE, WHICH IS DEFINED AS AN ORNAMENTAL MOLD MOLDING. UM, AND THEN BUTTRESSES ARE NOT DEFINED WITHIN E D C, WHICH YOU PROBABLY SHOULD GO BACK THROUGH AND DO. AND THAT'S A PROJECTION THAT SUPPORTS A WALL. SO ALL OF THOSE BASICALLY ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, NOT A SECOND STORY FLOOR. UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE DECORATIONS AND OR, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY SOUND LIKE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. SO I'M STRUGGLING HERE TO UNDERSTAND, UM, HOW WE MOVED THAT OVER. AND SO THE WHOLE DIALOGUE FOR THE SECOND FLOOR AND HOW THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE VERSUS THE EXAMPLES THAT WERE GIVEN. AND SO IT SEEMS LIKE A BIG STEP BETWEEN WHAT IS PROVIDED IN E D C VERSUS WHERE YOU WENT. SO JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT DIFFERENCE. YEAH, ORIAN. YEAH, I THINK THE SECOND THING WITH THIS IS ALL THIS TESTIMONY I'M HEARING. SURE. SOUNDS LIKE IT, IT'S SOMEBODY ASKING FOR A VARIANCE WHEN IN FACT WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS FOR A PERMANENT INTERPRETATION OF A VERY BIG ISSUE. AND I THINK THIS, I REALLY THINK THIS SHOULD BE PROCESSED AS A VARIANCE AND NOT LET EVERYONE ELSE MOVING FORWARD FOLLOW THE SAME LEAD. I MEAN, THAT'S JUST MY 2 CENTS. BUT ANYWAY, WERE WERE YOU LOOKING FOR STAFF RESPONSE TO THAT OR MR. MANN, WERE YOU LOOKING FOR S THE STAFF RESPONSE? WELL, I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT DIFFERENCE OR WHAT I'M MISSING HERE. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT INTERPRETATION, YOU KNOW, SO THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M I KIND OF EVEN ON THE FIELD THERE, UM, 'CAUSE IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT MEETS ALL, YOU KNOW, ANY OTHER DEFINITIONS THAT ARE PROVIDED AND SOUNDS LIKE IT, IT WAS A BIG STEP AWAY FROM WHAT YOU KNOW BEHIND THERE, UM, AS AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE, UM, YOU KNOW, AS THEIR EXAMPLES. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THEN I AGREE WITH MR. ORIAN WITH REGARDS TO, IT SEEMED LIKE THIS IS BACKWARDS. IT, IT SOUNDED MORE LIKE A COMMENTARY. THAT'S WHY STAFF DIDN'T REALLY, YEAH. OKAY. SORRY. MM-HMM. , THANK YOU . I THANK YOU. OKAY. ACTUALLY, ACTUALLY I'LL, I'LL JUMP IN HERE. UH, CRYSTAL GONZALEZ, I'M THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE PLAN REVIEW DIVISION. AND IF WE LOOK AT THE, THE, UM, ELEVATION, UH, DRAWINGS GUYS, UM, ON THE LOWER LEFT OF THAT FOUR, THE PAGE THAT SHOWS THE FOUR ELEVATIONS, WE SEE THAT THIS IS THE SIDE THAT FACES MR. RIOS AND IT HAS THAT BALCONY. SO I, I, EARLIER I DID SAY THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE WALL, NOT THAT ONE, THE ONE THAT SHOWS THE FOUR ELEVATIONS. THERE YOU GO ON THE LOWER LEFT. SO IT DOES HAVE THAT BALCONY, WHICH CREATES MORE THAN 50% OPENING, UM, ON THAT WALL. SO IT HAS, YOU KNOW, THE LEFT AND TO THE RIGHT OF THE BALCONY AND THOSE, THAT IS WHAT'S PROJECTING, UM, IN ADDITION TO THE BALCONY. BUT THAT'S OPEN AND IT'S SET BACK, UM, SEVERAL FEET FROM, YOU KNOW, FROM THE RAILING THERE. SO WE DID CONSIDER THIS ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTION. IT DOES SAY SIMILAR ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS, AND I KNOW THAT'S VERY VAGUE, [02:50:01] BUT THAT'S VAGUE FOR A REASON TO ALLOW INTERPRETATION OF THAT SECTION. IF WE WANNA CHANGE THE U D C CHANGE THE DEFINITIONS, WE HAVE A PROCESS FOR THAT. BUT IT WAS SPECIFICALLY LEFT AS SIMILAR AND TO BE VAGUE TO ALLOW THAT, UM, A CREATIVE USE OF ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES WE'RE WE ARE, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE, IMPOSSIBLE TO LIST THEM ALL. IN ADDITION, THEY'RE GONNA BE NEW CREATIVE WAYS TO, TO COMPLY WITH THE CODE. AND WE SEE THIS, WE SEE PEOPLE, UH, WE SEE DEVELOPERS BEING SO CREATIVE AND WE SUPPORT THAT NEW WAYS TO, UM, TO DO THE SAME THING THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING TO TRY TO INFILL ON THIS PROPERTY. BRAGMAN. YEAH. MR. UH, MR. BRAGMAN. SO A QUESTION, SO WHAT IS THE DEPTH OF THAT? IS THAT LIKE A JULIET BALCONY? WHAT IS THE DEPTH OF THAT BALCONY? IF YOU GIMME A SECOND? I, I HAVE THE PLANS PULLED UP HERE AND I CAN LOOK AT THAT. OKAY. BECAUSE IT, IT LOOKS TO BE, AND I I I CAN'T TELL THE EXACT PROPORTIONS, BUT MAYBE 50% OF THE WIDTH OF THAT REAR ELEVATION, THAT, THAT IF, I MEAN FROM SIDE TO SIDE, IT LOOKS TO BE ABOUT 50% OF THE, OF THE REAR WIDTH ELEVATION. BUT THEN I'M, I'M WONDERING WHAT THE DEPTH IS, IF IT'S LIKE A JULIET BALCONY, YOU KNOW, HOW FAR IT PROJECTS FROM THE WALL TO THE EDGE OF THE BALCONY. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT WHILE SHE'S LOOKING UP THAT. YES, SIR. SO IS THERE ANY, UM, SETBACK OR ANY, ANYTHING THAT THE APPLICANT OR THE, UH, THE BUILDER HERE CAN DO TO, UH, APPEASE YOU OR TO REMEDY THE SITUATION WITHOUT, ARE YOU JUST LOOKING FOR FIVE FEET PERIOD? FIVE VERTICAL AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE I TRIED TO NOTIFY THEM ALMOST THREE MONTHS AGO. UH, I NOTIFIED THE CITY, I CAN GO BACK THROUGH ALL MY EMAILS TO MS. PARRISH, UH, MS. MELISSA RAMIREZ TO, UH, ROXANNE IN THE PERMITTING DEPARTMENT. I HAVE LITERALLY CHASED EVERY RABBIT DOWN EVERY HOLE. AND I'VE GIVEN THEM, AND I EVEN TOLD, HERE'S HERE'S THE PROBLEM. THAT, AND, AND, AND, AND THE GC TRIED TO, AND I I, I SAID THIS STATEMENT TO SEVERAL PEOPLE IN THE CITY. IT SEEMS LIKE THEY'RE BACKED UP AGAINST THE WALL. THEY TOLD THEM 3 10, 3 TIMES IT WAS OKAY. AND IT'S NOT. AND SO I THINK THE CITY'S POSITION TOOK, WE'D RATHER TAKE A LAWSUIT FROM MR. LOWLY MR. RIOS THAN TAKE ON BIG CORPORATE AMERICA OVER HERE IN HOME NOVATE. UM, AND THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION, BUT GIVEN EVERYTHING THE FACTS THAT I KNOW, AND I EVEN PUT IN A COUPLE DIFFERENT EMAILS. SO I, I MEAN, THERE, THERE'S PROOF THAT I SAID THIS, UH, I, IT FEELS LIKE THEY'RE, THEY, THEY WERE BACKED INTO A WALL. THEY, OR THEY, THEY BACKED THEMSELVES IN A CORNER. UM, AND THAT'S NEITHER MY FAULT OR MY CONCERN. THANK YOU, SIR. YES SIR. THANK YOU. SO THE DEPTH OF THAT BALCONY IS SIX FEET. SIX FEET, OKAY. SO FROM THE PLANS FROM THE, THE WALL TO THE EDGE OF THE BALCONY? YES, YES MA'AM. SO I GUESS I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING, SO HOW IS IT ONLY PROJECTING TWO FEET INTO THE FIVE FOOT VARIANCE? IF THE BUILDING ITSELF HAS A FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK OR REAR SETBACK? THE DEPTH OF THE BALCONY IS SIX FOOT. SO IS IT RECESSED? IT'S PROBABLY RECESSED, YES. THE BALCONY IS RECESSED? YES, MA'AM. OKAY, SO IT'SS RECESSED, SO THE BAL, SO THE, THE SLIDING GLASS DOORS OR WHATEVER THOSE WINDOWS ARE, UM, THOSE ARE RECESSED FURTHER INTO THE LIVING SPACE OF THE PROPERTY. SO WHAT IS, SO THE NET EFFECT IS THAT THE BALCONY PRO PROTRUDES TWO FEET BEYOND THE, UH, THE EDGE OF, OF, OF THE, OF THE END OF THE HOUSE. MM-HMM. . SO IT DOES PROJECT TWO FEET PAST THE FIRST FLOOR AND, AND THE VERTICAL PLANE? YES. OKAY. AND, AND IF I READ THIS CORRECTLY, THE TWO SIDES TO IT ARE ALSO TWO FEET OUT. AND SO BASICALLY IT'S A TWO FOOT WALL, OF WHICH THERE'S A BALCONY IN THE CENTER THAT'S INSET BY SIX FOOT. AND SO IT'S TWO FOOT, TWO FOOT LINE, ESSENTIALLY WITH THE INSET IN THE MIDDLE OF BEING THAT BALCONY. AND IS IT WITH LIKE A WROUGHT IRON BALCONY, A WROUGHT RAILING? IT DOES APPEAR THAT IT'S A WROUGHT IRON RAILING, BUT THE, THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR COULD SPEAK TO THAT MATERIAL BETTER. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT IF WE ISSUE A PERMIT IN AIR, WE WOULD REVOKE IT. I KNOW THAT THAT WAS A QUESTION EARLIER DURING A DIFFERENT CASE, BUT IF STAFF REALIZES THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED IN AIR, WE REVOKE IT. SO FOR THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR? YES, MA'AM. YEAH, WE USUALLY PUT, ALTHOUGH RAILING WE HAVE DONE IS WITH AARON. AARON RAILING. OKAY, SO WROUGHT IRON RAILING. YEAH. OKAY. SO IT'S PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ORIAN, MR. ORIAN, IT'S A QUESTION FOR THE, THE STAFF PERMIT SUPERVISOR, THE DIRECTOR THAT, THAT SPOKE [02:55:01] EARLIER TODAY, WE HEARD AN S SS T R PERMIT THAT WAS ISSUED IN ERROR. ARE YOU GONNA BE REVOKING THAT TODAY? UH, WE DID NOT ISSUE THAT BUILDING PERMIT. SO, UM, WE'RE LEAVING THAT UP TO THE SS T R, UH, PERMIT ISSUANCE TEAM, BUT THE BUILDING PERMIT AND THEN THE LAST, AND IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS, EVERY TIME THIS BOARD HEARS A CASE WHERE THIS, ON THOSE RARE OCCASIONS WHERE THE CITY MADE AN ERROR AND IT'S PROCESSED AS A SPECIFIC VARIANCE TO THAT SPECIFIC ADDRESS, WHY IS, WHY ISN'T THIS ONE ALSO BEING HANDLED THAT WAY? WHY ISN'T THIS ONE? BECAUSE WE DON'T BELIEVE WE ISSUED THIS PERMIT AND ERROR. WAS THAT YOUR QUESTION? SO YOU'RE, IT'S, IT'S A CITY'S STANCE THAT THE DEFINITION FOR SETBACK, WHICH DOESN'T SAY FOUNDATION, BUT IT SAYS ANY PART OF THE STRUCTURE EXTENDING, UM, THAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE ENTIRE SECOND FLOOR MOVING FORWARD TODAY INTO ALL TO THE FUTURE, ANYBODY CAN PROJECT AN ENTIRE FLOOR TWO FEET. AND THAT'S COMPLETELY ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY. AS I MENTIONED IN MY PREVIOUS STATEMENT, DUE TO THE BALCONY ON THIS ELEVATION OF THIS SIDE FACING, UH, THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT, WE DID CONSIDER THIS AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTION FOR THOSE TWO SIDES TO THE LEFT AND TO THE RIGHT AND THAT OPEN BALCONY. SO CONSIDERING THAT 50 OR 50% OR MORE OF THIS WALL WAS OPEN, WE CONSIDERED THIS AN PROJECTION, AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTION. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, BOONIE, THAT'S A, A QUESTION FOR STEPH. SO SOME OF THAT SECOND STORY IS LIVING SPACE, RIGHT? YES. OKAY. SO IF IT WAS ON THE FIRST FLOOR, IT COULDN'T BE THERE, BUT ON THE SECOND FLOOR IT CAN BE THERE. IS THAT, HOW WE'RE THAT AS THAT IS HOW WE ARE INTERPRETING THIS SECTION FOR AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTION PERMITTED BY 35 5 16. OKAY. SO ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES CAN INCLUDE A LIVING SPACE THAT, THAT, THAT'S IN THE DEFINITION OF AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. UM, IT'S NOT DEFINED IN THE U D C ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, NOT DEFINED IN THE U D C. OKAY. THAT MAY, THAT MAY BE SOMETHING WE NEED TO DO. 'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE MAIN THING HERE. SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE DEFINITION OF AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE IS AND IF A LIVING SPACE FALLS INTO THAT CATEGORY. I I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THE BIGGEST CONFUSION EVERYBODY'S HAVING HERE, I FEEL IS EMPATHETIC TOWARDS THE BUILDER, BUT THE HOMEOWNER AS WELL. UM, JUST 'CAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES ARE. I MEAN, WE DO, BUT WE DON'T. RIGHT. AND WE'RE JUST KIND OF MAKING IT UP ALONG THE WAY. SO I THINK THAT THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE NEED TO LOOK FOR GOING FORWARD. 'CAUSE I MEAN, I FEEL BAD FOR BOTH RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MS. CHAKA? MR. CHAKA, REAL QUICK. I JUST WANT TO ADD CHAKA, SORRY, GO AHEAD. I JUST WANT TO ADD THAT, UH, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS, I UNDERSTAND YOUR EXPLANATION OF VAGUENESS, ALLOWING ROOM FOR CREATIVITY, BUT THE VAGUENESS WON'T GO AWAY. AND THIS IS WHAT IS PRESENTING US WITH, UH, HOW DO WE HANDLE THIS KIND OF THING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I GUESS, UH, WE SAW THE PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. UH, I'LL ASK THE APPLICANT, YOU HAVE A, A FEW MINUTES FOR A REBUTTAL. YES. I'D SAY PLEASE KEEP IT PERTINENT TO THE FACTS AND LET'S CLOSE IT OUT. VERY MUCH SO. VERY MUCH SO. WHAT I'M MAIN CONCERNED ABOUT, AND I THINK, AND I PUT MYSELF IN MY NEIGHBOR'S SHOES. I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY. I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME. IT COSTS ME $700 TO APPEAL THIS. IT'S COST ME LIKE 40 HOURS OF DUE DILIGENCE. I'VE BEEN DOWN HERE PROBABLY 15, 20 OR SO DIFFERENT TIMES SINCE I STARTED THIS PROCESS OF TRYING TO STOP OR, YOU KNOW, MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS BEING DONE CORRECTLY. UH, BUT WE'RE SETTING A PRECEDENT HERE. UM, THIS PARTICULAR BUILDER'S ACTUALLY GOT ANOTHER PROPERTY ON VINE STREET WHERE THEY'RE DOING THIS EXACT SAME THING. AND THAT'S THE PRECEDENT THAT WE'RE STARTING HERE. SO THEY'RE DOING THIS EIGHT TIMES OVER ON ANOTHER PROPERTY, ON VINE STREET. IT'S LIKE A QUARTER ACRE. AND I KNOW IT'S BECAUSE I OWNED A PROPERTY ON VICE STREET. I WENT TO GO LOOK AT IT AND I SAW THEIR BUILD, EXACT SAME THING. THEY'RE CAN DELIVERING, THEY'RE JETTING AND THEY'RE NOT NEEDING A VARI, UH, A VARIANCE FROM THE CITY BECAUSE WE'RE CALLING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. WE'RE OPENING A CAN OF WORMS HERE THAT I DON'T THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE, AND EVEN MR. AUBREY LEWIS FROM, UH, THE DENVER HEIGHTS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATED AGREES WITH ME AND HE'S IN, IN ACCORD WITH FIGHTING THIS, THIS, THIS PROJECTION, THIS, THIS DEFINITION OF ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. WHEN WE HAVE, I SAID SILLS, I MEAN, EXCUSE ME. WE HAVE I BEAM JOS. THOSE AREN'T, THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE. THANK YOU. NOT, THOSE ARE STRUCTURAL FEATURES. THOSE AREN'T ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. THAT SOUNDS REAL. OKAY. THAT CLOSES THE PUBLIC PORTION. I'D ASK A MEMBER TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION. ORIAN, UH, MS. CAPPEL, DO YOU WANT MR. ORIAN, OR WOULD YOU OH, IT DOESN'T MATTER, MR. ORIAN ORIAN CAN DO IT. CHAIR, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 23 DASH OH THREE EIGHT, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE APPEAL FOR THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 1 0 7 HARDING PLACE, APPLICANT BEING MARIO RIOS, PROPERTY OWNER OF REBUTTING PROPERTY 1 0 1 HARDING PLACE. BECAUSE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWS THAT THE CITY STAFF MADE AN ERROR IN A DECISION RELATED TO THE ISSUANCE [03:00:01] OF A BUILDING PERMIT. SO 1 0 7 HARDING BOULEVARD, BASED ON THE INTERPRET INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 35 DASH FIVE 16 J, SAT BACK IN FRONTAGE REGULATIONS PROJECTING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND OF MOTION. SECOND MS. KAPLAN, UH, DISCUSSION. MS. OREN, DO YOU WANNA JUST, UH, PLEASE LET WHAT YEAH, THIS IS, LOOK, I I DON'T, THIS IS SUCH A BIG DEAL. UH, IT'S AN ENTIRE FLOOR BASICALLY THAT IS STICKING INTO THE THREE FOOT. THIS, THIS BOARD HAS HEARD SOMETHING IN NOVEMBER TO THE CONTRARY WHERE IT WAS TREATED AS A VARIANCE. WE HAVE HEARD, UH, UH, STAFF INTERPRETATIONS COME TO THIS BOARD AS VARIANCES. THIS FI THIS ADDRESS NEEDS TO COME AS A VARIANCE AND NOT AS A PERMANENT INTERPRETATION OF IT IN SECOND FLOOR BEING AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. THAT IS TOO SCARY. AND, UH, WE NEED A SIDE WITH THE APPLICANT ON THIS ONE. MS. KAPLAN? YEAH, I, I, I AGREE ON THAT BECAUSE, UM, I DON'T SEE THAT AS A FEATURE. IT'S A LIVING SPACE. UM, IT'S BASICALLY JUST EXTENDING YOUR LIVING SPACE. AND I DO AGREE IT SHOULD BE A VARIANCE, NOT A ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. ANY OTHER COMMENT FOR THE BOARD? HEARING NONE, LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. CHAIR ORIAN I SIDE WITH THE APPLICANT? YES, MS. KAPLAN. I ALSO SIDE WITH THE APPLICANT. MR. CODDLE, I SIDE WITH THE APPLICANT. MR. DEAN, I SIDE WITH THE APPLICANT, MR. MIN CHACO. I SUPPORT THE APPLICANT. MS. CRUZ, I SUPPORT THE APPLICANT. MR. BONILLA, I SUPPORT THE APPLICANT. MR. MANNA, UM, I SUPPORT THE APPLICANT, MR. VASQUEZ. I SUPPORT THE APPLICANT. MS. BRAGMAN, I'M GONNA ABSTAIN MR. OZUNA. I SUPPORT THE APPLICANT WITH 10 IN SUPPORT OF THE APPEAL AND ONE ABSTENTION OF THE APPEAL, I GUESS PASSES. AND PLEASE GET WITH, UH, STAFF FOR YOUR NEXT OF THE NEXT STEPS FOR THE CASE. THANK YOU. NEXT CASE PLEASE. YOU'RE WELCOME. SHOULD BE CASE 77. DO YOU, IS THE APPLICANT HERE FOR NUMBER 77? YES, SIR. OKAY, LET'S PROCEED. UH, BO O A 77, HIS ADDRESS OFF OF TWO 10 CRAVENS COUNSEL, DISTRICT THREE, APPLICANT BEING MARIA AL. EXCUSE ME SIR. HOLD ON. I'M SORRY, SIR. UM, MR. YES, UH, THE TIME IS FOUR 15 AND UH, COMMISSIONER CODDLE HAS LEFT THE BOARD, SO WE'RE DOWN TO 10 MEMBERS. OKAY, LET'S PROCEED. SORRY, APOLOGIES. AND, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, ROSIN, ARE YOU THERE? OOPS, SORRY ABOUT THAT. YES, I AM. I AM PRESENT. SO WILL YOU TURN ME YOUR CAMERA, PLEASE? YES, OF COURSE. OKAY. SO WE HAVE, UH, 11 MEMBERS. UM, OKAY, UH, BO O A 77, UM, LOCATED AT TWO 10 CRAVENS COUNCIL, DISTRICT THREE, APPLICANT BEING MS. ELMAN. REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT 11 VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SET SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURE WITH A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH OVERHANG TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE ZONED R FOUR SIDE. THIS IS YOUR PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG CRAVENS AVENUE, JUST EAST OF IH 37 SOUTH JUNIOR INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH AVERS AND GOLIAD. THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED VARIANCE FROM THE SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE, UH, WITH A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH OVERHAND TO BE ONE FOOT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE CARPORT AND BUILDING. REAR EXTENSION IS BUILT AS A EXTENSION OF THE HOME IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING DWELLING STRUCTURE. AND THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCTED THE STRUCTURE WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT. NEXT SLIDE. THIS SHOWS THE ONE INCH, UH, SETBACK. NEXT SLIDE. THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE OR THE INSIDE. UH, AND NEXT SLIDE. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES [03:05:01] AND STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL. THE STRUCTURE IS CURRENTLY WANTED FOR THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS NOT OBSERVED, SPARE OF THE ORDINANCE BY PREVENTING SPACE FOR THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, THE REDUCED SIDE SETBACK, INJURIES, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, AND WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. NEXT SLIDE. UH, SO WE HAVE 31 NOTICES MAILED OUT TO, RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NO RESPONSE FROM THE HIGHLAND HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. NEXT SLIDE. AND THERE IS A CLEAR, UM, UH, SIDE PLAN THAT SHOWS THE REAR, UM, ADDITION, UH, WHICH WAS THE ISSUE LAST TIME. UM, WE'RE GONNA PULL IT UP HERE IN A SECOND. THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION, BUT WE'LL HAVE THAT SECOND SIDE PLAN UP HERE IN A SECOND. THANK YOU. UH, LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF THERE? NONE. LET'S GET THE, I ACTUALLY, I DO HAVE A QUESTION. 'CAUSE UM, IT SAYS THAT THE, SO THAT YOU MENTIONED THAT THE, UH, UM, ADDITION IS ALIGNED WITH THE CURRENT ROOF LINE, I THINK IS WHAT I HEARD, BUT CLEARLY IN THE PICTURE THAT IF YOU LOOK AT IT'S NOT, AND SO, SO THERE'S A FOUR INCH OR SIX INCH DELTA BETWEEN THE TWO. AND SO, SO SO DO YOU, AM I READING THAT PICTURE WRONG, OR, OR IS THAT STATEMENT JUST RIGHT? UM, THE ADDITION I BELIEVE WAS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER IN, SO IT WASN'T PERFECTLY OKAY, SO, SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ADDITION OR THE CARPORT BEING, UH, THE ADDITION AND, UH, CARPORT. OKAY. SO THE CARPORT APPEARS TO BE NOT BY THE PICTURE. UH, BUT THE ADDITION IS, IS, IS, IS THAT ACCORDING TO THE SECOND SITE PLAN WE'RE ABOUT TO PULL UP, IT'S A IN LINE. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES, WE, WE MAY COME BACK MORE TO THAT PICTURE. OKAY. SO THE ONE PICTURE THAT SHOWS IT OFF, ALRIGHT, LET'S GET THE APPLICANT IN FRONT. THE APPLICANT, PLEASE COME FORWARD. HI, I AM MARIA LEMAN. UM, THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE, THEY, UM, THEY TOLD ME I HAD TO PICK UP THE SIGNATURES FROM MY NEIGHBORS AND I ONLY GOT TWO. THE OTHER ONES, UM, THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS THE NOTICE ABOUT, SO THEM THREW 'EM AWAY. AND THAT'S ALL THE RESPONSE THAT I GOT FROM MY NEIGHBORS. COULD YOU, DO YOU, CAN YOU GIVE THAT TO STAFF AND THEY CAN PUT IN THE PUBLIC RECORD? THANK YOU. DO YOU, DO YOU WANNA, DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION OR DID YOU WANNA NO, UM, I DIDN'T, I REALLY WAS SO CONFUSED SINCE THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE, BECAUSE I WAS HERE FOR THE BUILDING WITH NO PERMANENT. BUT THEN THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE, THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE CARPORT, SO I WAS LIKE KIND OF CONFUSED. SO, AND THAT'S ALL THEY TOLD ME. I CALLED, UM, THE HIGHLAND HILLS ASSOCIATION LAST WEEK AND SHE TEXTED, UM, SOME BOARD MEMBER FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, SAID THAT THEY WERE GONNA TALK WITH Y'ALL DIRECTLY AND THAT I DIDN'T HAVE TO PICK UP NO SIGNATURES OR ANYTHING. AND I DIDN'T GET NO RESPONSE EITHER FOR, FROM THE ONE THAT SHE EMAILED OR MARELA. AND SHE JUST CALLED ME EARLIER SAYING THAT I HAD THE MEETING. I WAS LIKE, YEAH, I HAVE THE MEETING AT ONE. THAT'S ALL I GOT. OKAY. LET'S SEE IF THERE'S ANY, UH, QUESTIONS. UH, ANY QUESTIONS OF THE BOARD FOR THE APPLICANT QUESTION? HUMANA? SO, SO IF WE GO TO, ON THE PRESENTATION TO SLIDE, UM, I GUESS IT'S THE FOURTH PICTURE IN, UH, FROM THE PRESENTATION. SO THIS, THIS IMAGE RIGHT HERE DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE PICTURE THAT I'M LOOKING AT WITH REGARDS TO THE CARPORT. UM, SO IT'S A PICTURE THAT'S IN, IN THE PRESENTATION PACKET AND IT'S LIKE THE FOURTH PICTURE. THERE WE GO. THAT ONE THERE. OKAY. SO LOOKING THERE, IT, SO THE, SO THE CARPORT DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE EXISTING ROOF BY JUST THIS PICTURE HERE. SO, SO THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, UM, IF I'M LOOKING AT THIS PICTURE HERE TOWARDS THE PART OF THE CARPORT THAT, THAT TOUCHES THE ROOF, UM, I SEE FOUR INCHES THERE OR MORE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT SIDE, THAT DIFFERENCE IS. HOW, HOW FAR IS THAT OFFSET THERE FROM THE ACTUAL ALIGNMENT OF THE, OF THE, OF THE EXISTING ROOF? UM, I THINK MY HUSBAND SAID IT WAS THREE, THREE INCHES STICK. AND SO, UM, AND SO, SO PART OF THE DIALOGUE IS, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BEING VERY CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE WITH THE SLOPE OF THE CARPORT MOVING TOWARDS THAT, YOU KNOW, TOWARDS YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. AND SO, SO WHAT WOULD BE THE HARDSHIP OF HAVING TO SHAVE OFF THOSE THREE INCHES? UM, AND POTENTIALLY WORKING WITH A GUTTER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? YEAH. SO, SO IS THERE A HARDSHIP THAT, SO, SO I GUESS WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT A HARDSHIP OF WHAT THAT WOULD PRESENT OR IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT YOU THINK COULD BE DONE. UM, YOU WANT, YOU'RE ASKING ME TO CUT OFF AND GIVE YOU THE THREE FEET OR MORE? WELL, SO THE THREE, SO IT'S THREE INCHES [03:10:01] AND SO I THINK, UM, FOR A ONE INCH, UM, SO, SO IT'S A ONE INCH SETBACK, SO YOU COULD NOT POSSIBLY PUT A GUTTER INTO A ONE INCH SETBACK. AND ESSENTIALLY THE CARPORT IS, IS MOVING WATER OVER TO YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. AND, AND GENERALLY WE DON'T LIKE TO SEE THAT, UM, IN COMMUNITIES. SO WE DON'T LIKE TO HAVE HOUSES PLUGGED EV THEIR NEIGHBOR'S HELD. YEAH. 'CAUSE ALL THE, THE PROPERTIES FROM THAT SIDE, THEY'RE ALL THE, THE, BUT THIS IS STRAIGHT FROM THE RUN THE ROOF RUNOFF. YES. AND SO THAT'S PART OF THE DIALOGUE IS SO THERE ARE OPTIONS I GUESS, UM, YEAH. ON HOW WE CAN PREVENT THAT. AND SO ONE WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, REMOVING PART OF THE ROOF AND REPLACING THAT WITH A GUTTER AND STILL BEING COMPLIANT WITH THE ONE INCH PIECE. UM, YOU KNOW, THE ONE INCH SETBACK, BUT TWO INCLUDE A GUTTER. YEAH. SO, UM, SO WOULD, UM, SO I GUESS A, UM, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, THE MEMBERS HERE WERE IF YOU AMENDED YOUR REQUEST TO INCLUDE A GUTTER YES. UM, WITHIN THAT ONE INCH DIALOGUE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SO JUST IF YOU COULD SAY, UM, I AMEND MY REQUEST TO INCLUDE GUTTERS ON THE GARAGE. YES. I REQUEST MY AMEND TO THE GUTTERS. OKAY. THANK YOU MS. MANU. OKAY. ANY, ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? YES, MS. KAPLAN? YEAH. WAS YOUR HOUSE BUILT ONE INCH FROM THE PROPERTY LINE? NO. UM, LIKE I SAID, THE LAST TIME THAT I WAS HERE, UM, I WAS WHEN IT WAS MY MOM'S PROPERTY, SO THEN MY DAD PUT IT UNDER MY NAME, BUT MY MOM HAD, UM, THE GARAGE, SHE MADE IT INTO A BEDROOM. SO THAT'S HOW IT WAS. BUT YOU DIDN'T CHANGE THE, THE FOUNDATION OF THE FOOTPRINT? NO. AND THEY JUST MERELY CONVERTED THE GARAGE TO A BEDROOM? YES, THE FOOTPRINT WAS, SHE JUST COVERED IT. FOOTPRINT WAS ALWAYS LIKE ONE INCH FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OR WHATEVER. YEAH, BECAUSE SHE JUST, THE WAY IT IS THE BED, THAT BEDROOM IS SHE, IT WAS A GARAGE. YEAH. SO SHE JUST COVERED IT. SHE DIDN'T PUT ANYTHING FOUNDATION OR ANYTHING TO IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU UHHUH. ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING MR. MACHACA REFERRING TO, WHICH MANUS SAID IF, UH, A ONE INCH AND YOU ADD FOUR INCHES FOR THE GUTTER, THE WIDTH THAT TAKES IT OVER THE PROPERTY LINE. NOW I GOT THE CUT BACK TOO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS HERE? AND JUST FOR THE SAKE OF, UH, SO WE HAVE A NEW BOARD MEMBER ON VIDEO. I DIDN'T GET HIS NAME. WHO WAS, UH, MY NAME IS RAMOND. RHI RHI. OKAY. HONORED TO BE HERE. THANK YOU SIR. ALRIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC HE WAS HERE THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE CASE. I'M SORRY? HE WAS HERE THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE CASE. OKAY. OKAY, COOL. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. UH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? THANK YOU SO MUCH. DO I HAVE A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILLING TO MAKE A, A MOTION HERE WITH THE GUTTER INCLUSION THAT I CAN, UH, MR. MADAM. SO REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 3 1 0 3 0 0 0 7 7, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO A, TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE WITH A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH OVERHANG, WHICH INCLUDES GUTTERS TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT TWO 10 CRAVENS AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING MARINA AMAN. UH, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACT THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS ADMITTED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY, UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTED A REDUCED SIDE SETBACK TO THE CARD PORT ADDED TO THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE. THE STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE BUDDING PROPERTY STRUCTURE IS SET BACK IN EXCESSIVE IN EXCESS DISTANCE AWAY. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT NOT BUILDING THE ATTACHED CARPORT IN LINE WITH THE CURRENT BUILDING SETBACK. THIS WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS A BUILDING SETBACK IS ESTABLISHED. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS A STRUCTURE IS DEVELOPED WITH ADEQUATE SEPARATION FROM A BUDDING STRUCTURE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH IS PROPERTY LOCATED. IF GRANTED, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT INJURE THE APPROPRIATE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AS THE AREAS DEVELOPED WITH REDUCED SETBACKS ON ONE SIDE, WHICH IS NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE OF SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND [03:15:01] ARE NOT DUE TO A RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH HIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH A VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA ESTABLISHED LOCATION AND SETBACK. THE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL AND OF MOTION. THE SECOND, SECOND THIS MATTER. WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME? SO, UM, SO, SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, JUST THE NOTION THAT THIS IS BUILT, UM, UM, ON OR IS BEING ADDED TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, UH, AND THAT LINE WAS ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO THIS STRUCTURE, UM, I'M OKAY WITH APPROVING THIS, UH, PROVIDING THAT THE NEW STRUCTURE ALSO DOES NOT PASS THAT LINE, UH, AND DOES INCLUDE THE GUTTERS SO THAT THERE IS NO IMPACT TO THE, UH, ABUTTING PROPERTY. AND SO, SO FOR ANY OF THE ROOF LINES THAT DO POINT TO THE POINT AT THE NEIGHBOR, THERE'LL BE A REQUIREMENT FOR THAT GUTTER AND THEY'VE, UH, AMENDED THEIR APPLICATION TO INCLUDE THAT. SO WITH THAT, THEN I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. THANK YOU MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND I'LL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. THANK YOU. UM, NO OTHER COMMENT. UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. DEAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MIN CHACO. I CONCUR. MR. RHI I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ I CONCUR. MR. BONILLA I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT WITH 10 IN FAVOR. ONE IN OPPOSITION. THE VARIANCE DOES PASS. PLEASE GET WITH STAFF OR ANY, UH, FURTHER, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS AS SUCH. NEXT CASE, PLEASE. WHICH CASE ARE WE ON THEN? JUST CURIOUS. I BELIEVE WE'RE ON ITEM 12. THE ADDRESS IS 2 2 2 2 BUENA VISTA STREET. IT'S CASE 1 0 7. OKAY, BO EIGHT DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 0 7. ADDRESS IS 2 2 2 2 BUENO VISTA STREET IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER FIVE, APPLICANT IS STANLEY BILL, L L C. AND IT'S A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MINIMUM SIX FOOT FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS C TWO. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON BONNA VISTA STREET ON THE PRE INTERSECTION WITH SOUTH CHUPE STREET ON THE INNER WEST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO CONSTRUCT AN EIGHT FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ON THE SIDE AND REAR YARD. AND THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES UPON SITE VISITS. STAFF OBSERVED OTHER FENCES WITH SIMILAR HEIGHTS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE IS INDICATED, UH, WITH THE HIGHLIGHTED PORTION. AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THIS IS THE INTERSECTION OF BUENA VISTA AND CHUPE STREET. AND THIS IS THE FRONT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND THIS IS THE REAR YARD. AND THEN, AND THEN THE NEXT COUPLE OF PHOTOS ARE THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE DEFENSE HEIGHT. SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 0 7 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. ONE, THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THIS SUBJECT AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES. AND TWO, THE REQUEST WILL NOT ALTER THE LOCATION FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MAILED OUT 21 NOTICES. ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. UH, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NONE. OKAY, THANK YOU. LET'S GET THE APPLICANT IN FRONT OF US PLEASE. ALBERTO TU FOR 2222 BUENA VISTA. HELLO, SIR. UH, SINCE, UH, SINCE WE APPLIED FOR THIS, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS REQUESTED THAT I MAKE AN AMENDMENT AND ASK THAT WE EXTEND THAT TO THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL. [03:20:01] UH, WHERE THAT YELLOW LINE LINE IS ONE STEP ONCE IS THAT PROPERTY ADVERTISED THEN IF WE'RE AMENDING THE, UH, THESE EX AMENDING THE APPLICATION TO INCLUDE THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS IN ADDITION TO THE, UM, NO, IF, IF YOU'RE INCLUDING THE FRONT SIR, THAT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TOLD. THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS ADVERTISED. SO WE CAN'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT EXTENT THE FRONT. OKAY. WELL THEN I'M GONNA CONTINUE WITH THIS. OKAY. AND THEN HE, HE CAN, HE CAN COME ON HIS OWN AND COME AND TALK TO Y'ALL ABOUT IT. OKAY. UM, THEN I GUESS THAT'S IT. WE'RE DONE. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE, WE'RE GOOD. WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE REASONS WHY YOU'RE, WHY YOU NEED THE TWO FOOT. UH, UH, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION, IT'S BEEN PROVEN THAT THERE'S JUST BEEN A LOT OF CRIME AND VANDALISM TO, UH, THIS PROPERTY THAT'S BEEN UNDER CONST, UH, UNDER RE REMODEL OR RENOVATION. AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE HAD BREAK-INS. UM, WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING TO SECURE THE PROPERTY. COPPER WIRING HAS BEEN STOLEN. THE SECURITY FENCE WAS STOLEN. WE HAVE A POLICE REPORT. OKAY. OUR SIX FOOT TALL, UH, PERIMETER SECURITY FENCE FOR OUR CONSTRUCTION JOB SITE WAS, UH, WAS STOLEN A FEW MONTHS AGO. UH, THE REASON THE OWNER WAS PROBABLY GONNA COME AND SAY, HEY, WE'D LIKE TO DO IT IN THE FRONT IS BECAUSE, UH, ABOUT 200 FEET FROM THERE IS A METHADONE CLINIC. AND, UH, AS SOON AS THEY GET THEIR, UH, INJECTIONS OR WHATEVER THEY GET, THEY COME TO OUR PROPERTY, THEY, THEY USE THE PORTA POTTY, WE'VE LOCKED IT. AND NOW, UH, THE TRANSIENTS ARE, YOU KNOW, DEFECATING ON OUR PORCH. AND, UH, AND YOU KNOW, IT'S, UH, IT, IT'S BEEN AN ONGOING PROBLEM AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST WANT TO PROTECT THE FUTURE TENANTS OF THIS PROPERTY. UH, THEIR VEHICLES WILL PARK IN THE BACK WHERE THAT GOLD SECTION IS. AND, UH, THERE'S ALREADY PARKING AS PER OUR APPROVED PLANS. UH, BUT WE DON'T WANT THEIR VEHICLES TO GET VANDALIZED. AND, AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE. YEAH. THANK YOU. UH, LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. WE, I HAVE ONE QUESTION. WHY ARE YOU ONLY DOING TWO SIDES? WHY AREN'T YOU GOING ALONG THE OTHER PROPERTY LINE? WELL, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW I, I DON'T KNOW, DID I SUBMIT THIS? I, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THIS DRAWING CAME FROM BECAUSE, UH, ACTUALLY THE FENCE IS FROM THAT BAY WINDOW THAT YOU CAN TELL ON THE UPPER LEFT. AND IT GOES, UH, CAN YOU USE THE POINTER, THE LASER POINTER AS YOU'RE THAT RED BUTTON? SO, UH, THE PROPERTY FENCE, UH, ON OUR PLANS GOES FROM HERE, THE SUBMITTED PLANS TO HERE ALL THE WAY AROUND. AND IT GOES AND IT STOPS RIGHT HERE. OH, SO IT DOES, IT SHOULD, IT, IT, IT DOESN'T SHOW IT HERE. THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS ASKING FOR. THE, THE AMENDMENT, BUT WHICH IS NOT APPROVED. WELL, STAFF DOES THE, DOES THE ADVERTISING MATCH UP WITH THE REQUEST? THAT CORRECT? WE CAN AMEND THE SITE PLAN BECAUSE WE ADVERTISE FOR THE SIDE AND REAR. OKAY. SO THAT FENCE GOES UP TO HERE. UH, THERE IS A SLIDING GATE HERE. UH, WE THINK AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE MIGHT WORK. IT'S WORKED ON THE PROPERTIES ACROSS THE STREET AND YOU KNOW, IT, IT DOESN'T BLOCK THE HOUSE. THE HOUSE IS FROM THE 19 HUNDREDS AND, UH, UH, IT'S TRANSPARENT, BUT IT'S JUST TO KEEP THE TRANSIENT OUT. SO THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. MANNA? CRUZ, UH, MR. MANNA AND THEN MS. CRUZ? SO, SO JUST SO AS A NOTE, JUST WITH REGARDS TO WHAT'S CONSIDERED, I GUESS THE SIDE YARD, UM, AND THE FRONT YARD, SO, SO ANYTHING THAT IS, UM, BEHIND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE IS SIDE YARD. THAT'S, AND SO YOU HAVE A FENCE THERE THAT'S DRAWN HALFWAY THROUGH, HALFWAY BACK. AND SO THIS DIALOGUE HERE, I THINK IF WE PROVE IT BASICALLY WOULD ALLOW FOR THE FENCE TO GO ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT FACADE, YOU KNOW, SO, SO I THINK, I THINK THAT WOULD BE PART WHAT WOULD BE PERMITTED THAT'LL LIMIT IT TO THE SITE PLAN OR LIMIT TO WHAT HE'S, YEAH, SO THE QUESTION IS DO WE LIMIT THE SITE PLAN VERSUS, YOU KNOW, WHAT WOULD BE PERMITTED? AND SO ARE YOU SAYING HERE YES. NO, BUT SITE, WELL, I'M JUST SAYING JUST TO CALL IT OUT AS WE KIND OF GO THROUGH THE DIALOGUE, BECAUSE YOU WOULD BE ALLOWED, HE'S POINTING AT, HE'S POINTING AT IT. SO YOU'RE SAYING HERE, YES, I'M SAYING THERE WOULD BE PERMITTED IF, DEPENDING ON HOW THE DIALOGUE HERE, SO WE CAN CALL IT OUT AS WHAT'S ON THE SITE PLAN OR ALLOW FOR THAT. SO, SO I GUESS THE QUESTION I WOULD ASK IS DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO HAVE IT ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT FACADE? IF, IF, YOU KNOW, VERSUS THE CURRENT LINE THAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE DRAWN? OH, THE CONCERNS IS REALLY THE PORTS RIGHT NOW FOR ME, , I DON'T WANNA KEEP CLEANING IT , BUT UH, YEAH, IT GOES TO, IF YOU ALLOW US TO DO IT TO HERE, THE OWNER WOULD BE EXTREMELY HAPPY, HAPPY, YOU KNOW, SO, OKAY. WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN, RIGHT? YEAH. SO, OKAY. OKAY. DO DULY NOTED. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE MIN CHAKA? MIN CHAKA, UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FIRST FOR STAFF. THE, THE WORD HERE WAS SIDE OR SIDES, EAST AND WEST. THIS SHOULD BE STATED OR NOT. [03:25:02] WE ONLY STATE THAT WHEN THEY'RE DOING IT ON ONE SIDE. UM, IN THIS CASE WE DID NOT SPECIFICALLY SAY THE WEST SIDE. UM, SO WE CAN ADD THE OTHER SIDE ON THERE. ARE YOU GONNA ADD THE EAST AND WEST SIDE TO BE CLEAR WITH US? SO WHAT WE, WE, WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE LOADING ON. SAY, SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME. SORRY. WHERE YOU, UH, I'M, I'M TRYING TO CLARIFY. IT SAYS SIDE ONE SIDE OF THE STREET. OKAY. BUT IT DOESN'T SAY SIDES, THE OTHER SIDE. AND HE'S POINTING TO TWO SIDES SO THAT EAST AND WEST SIDE SHOULD HAVE FENCES, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT HE WANT. THAT'S WHAT HE'S, THAT'S WHAT HE IS INDICATING. YES. IT'S NOT ADVERTISED THOUGH, IS WHAT I'M SAYING. THAT WAY BOTH SIDES, RIGHT? YEAH. IT SHOULD BE STATED BOTH SIDES. RIGHT? SO THE SIDE SETBACK INCLUDES, UH, BOTH SIDES. OCCASIONALLY WHEN IT IS OBVIOUS THAT SOMEBODY'S DOING IT ON ONE SIDE, WE DO ADVERTISE SPECIFICALLY LIKE WEST SIDE OR EAST SIDE, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. UM, BUT THIS IS PART OF THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACK, OR SORRY, RIGHT IN REAR YARD. OKAY. SO HE CAN'T ADD THAT ON THE OTHER SIDE AS ADVERTISED RIGHT NOW. AND THE QUESTION I HAVE FOR THE APPLICANT IS, UH, YOU, YOU SAID AN OPEN FENCE? Y YES. YEAH, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE. YES. SO THAT IMPLIES WRT IRON, IT'S A TYPE OF IRON. YES. SO IF IT'S A WRT IRON, WHAT'S WRONG WITH SIX FEET INSTEAD OF EIGHT FEET? THAT'S THE ISSUE I'M HAVING. WELL, THEY, THEY, THEY WOULD, WE'RE BREAKING IN WITH THE SIX FOOT FENCE. WHAT DO YOU HAVE NOW? WELL, WE HAVE NOTHING. I THAT'S RIGHT. YOU KNOW, IT COST ME $2,700. YOU HAVE A CONSTRUC STOLE THAT JOB FENCE MENTIONED. WE HAVE NOTHING RIGHT NOW. YEAH, BUT YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE CONSTRUCTION FENCE. I'M SORRY? DIDN'T YOU HAVE A CONSTRUCTION FENCE? YOU SAID THAT THEY'RE LEAPING OVER? YEAH, WE DID. IT WAS SIX FEET. AND, UH, AND, AND WHAT'S ON THE PLANS IS A SIX FOOT WROUGHT IRON. SO WE'RE HERE TO ASK FOR TWO MORE FEET. UH, THE SAME OWNER OWNS THE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET AND, UH, THE EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL. OKAY. UH, THE NEIGHBOR, UH, IMMEDIATELY, UH, TO THE, TO THE EAST OF US LOT EIGHT IS, UH, ALL FOR THIS. HE'S HAPPY THAT WE'RE FINALLY DOING THIS BECAUSE HE HAS, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NO FENCE. AND SO HE'S GETTING THE, WHAT'S HAPPENING OUT THERE. AND SO, UH, HE'S ALL IN FAVOR OF A NEW FENCE ANYWAY, BUT YEAH, NO, I'M IN, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH A FENCE. IT'S JUST A HEIGHT. THEY LOOK KIND OF ODD FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S ALL. THERE'S ALREADY AN EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE ACROSS THE STREET. AND, AND, AND I, I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU. IT JUST, YOU DON'T EVEN NOTICE IT, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. YEAH, YOU SIR. AND, OKAY, CRUZ, WELL, LET'S SEE IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC ON MS. CRUZ AND THE PUBLIC PORTION. THANK YOU. UH, WHAT'S THE BUSINESS ACROSS THE STREET THAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE ALREADY HAS AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE? I'M TRYING TO THINK OF WHAT IT IS. IT'S, UH, I, YOU KNOW, I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT, WHAT THEY DO, BUT, UH, IT'S A, UH, THEY CALL IT THE SHOPS AND IT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE OWNER, HE, HE'S PREDOMINANTLY A SUPPORTER OF THE WEST SIDE. HE HAS BEEN HIS ENTIRE CAREER. AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I I I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT HIS BUSINESS IS ON THOSE BUILDINGS ACROSS THE STREET AS CHRIS. YOU COULD SEE IT. GOOGLE HAS A PICTURE IF YOU JUST OKAY. GOOGLE TO GOOGLE. I'LL LOOK AT IT. GO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A BLACK WROUGHT IRON FAN. YOU COULD SEE IT ON GOOGLE ALRIGHTYY. UM, LET'S SEE IF ANY PUBLIC PORTION, ANY, ANY PUBLIC . WE DO HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL. ONE VOICEMAIL. OKAY. HI, MY NAME IS LETICIA SANCHEZ AND MY ADDRESS IS 1710 VERA CRUZ. ZIP CODE SEVEN EIGHT TWO OH SEVEN AND PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 363-5895. I'M THE CO-CHAIR PERSON OF THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION, AND I'M CALLING ON ITEM NUMBER 12 FOR THE PROPERTY AT 2222 BUENA VISTA, WHICH IS, UH, LOCATED WITHIN OUR ASSOCIATION'S BOUNDARIES. OUR ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR TWO FOOT VARIANCE ON THE SIDE AND REAR FENCE. UM, ALTHOUGH WE WOULD NOT TYPICALLY APPROVE A REQUEST LIKE THIS, THE REASON FOR OUR SUPPORT IS BECAUSE OF THE ISSUES THAT WITH THEFT IN VACANT PROPERTIES THAT MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING AS THEY WORK ON DEVELOPING OR REHABBING THEIR [03:30:01] PROPERTIES. ADDITIONALLY, THE FENCE THAT WILL BE INSTALLED SHOULD THIS VARIANCE BE APPROVED, WILL ALLOW FOR VISIBILITY. UNLIKE, UM, A PRIVACY FENCE, WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL CONSIDER VOTING TO SUPPORT THIS APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BYE. THAT'S ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, LET'S SEE, UH, WITH NO FURTHER COMMENT, MS. KAPLAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 2 3 103 0 0 1 0 7? I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO RE FOR TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM SIX FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN THE REAR AND SIDE YARD, I SHOULD SAY THE SIDES AND REAR YARD SITUATED AT 2 2 2 2 BUENA VISTA STREET. APPLICANT BEING STANLEY BUILT L L C BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE 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 FENCE HEIGHT BEING REQUESTED IS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN AND DOES NOT EXCEED EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT. IF GRANTED STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST TO BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE, B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. THE PROPOSED FENCE BEING REQUESTED WILL BE LOCATED ALONG THE SIDE IN REAR PROPERTY LINES AND IS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT BY TWO FEET. THE FENCE IS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, WHICH STILL SERVES THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE. SEE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE FENCE WILL CREATE EXTE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT IN ADJACENT PROPERTIES. ADDITIONALLY, ANOTHER FENCE EXCEEDING THE MINIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT WAS SEEN IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE SIDE AND THE SIDE AND REAR YARDS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ALTER THE LOCATION FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. AS THE ABUTTING BASE ZONING DISTRICTS ARE COMMERCIALLY ZONED. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE AND ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. END OF MOTION. I GET A SECOND. SECOND, MR. MAN. A SECOND MS. KAPLAN WOULD SOME DIALOGUE? SURE. UM, I'LL BE IN FAVOR. UH, I AGREE. THE, IT'S HANDS IN SECURITY AND THE FACT THAT, AND IT'S ALONG THE SIDE IN RARE YARDS. AND, UM, THERE ARE OTHER FENCES LIKE THIS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. PLUS THE COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENT OR, UM, SURE. I, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND, AND I DID LOOK AT THE, UH, RENDERINGS OF THE FACILITY ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT AND THE ORIGINAL RINES DID NOT HAVE THE FENCING, BUT THEY APPARENTLY SOUGHT THE FENCING AFTER THEY BUILT THE BUILDING. SO, SO THEY MUST HAVE EXPERIENCED SOMETHING SIMILAR. UM, I WOULD SAY I WOULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT HARDER TIME ON THE FRONT YARD PIECE AND SO THAT, SO THAT, SO DIALOGUE ON THAT, UH, WOULD, WOULD INCUR MAYBE SOME ADDITIONAL DIALOGUE. BUT I THINK THE SIDE AND BACK IS APPROPRIATE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENT? HEARING NONE. LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DEAN. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA I CONCUR. MR. RHI I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ, I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. BOEZ. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF THAT, WITH THE FINDINGS OF 10 41 IN OPPOSITION. THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION DOES PASS. UH, THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU. NEXT CASE PLEASE. OKAY, ITEM NUMBER 13 IS BO O A DASH 23 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 8 ADDRESS? ONE SECOND. DO IS THE APPLICANT HERE FOR 1 0 8? YES. OKAY, SO ITEM NUMBER 13 IS BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 3 0 0 8. ADDRESS IS 14 903 CASINO GREEN AND CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER EIGHT. APPLICANT BEING CIO HOMES AND REQUESTS FOR A 175 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT. LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A 3,825 FOOT SQUARE FOOT LOT AND TWO AN EIGHT FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 35 FOOT LOT FRONT FRONTAGE REQUIREMENT TO [03:35:01] ALLOW A LOT WITH A 26 FOOT SIX INCH LOT FRONTAGE. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS MF 18. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG CASINO GREEN, WEST OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO. THE APPLICANT RECENTLY WENT THROUGH A GRANTED VARIANCE REQUEST TO EXCEED THE 50% IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE FOR VARIOUS LOTS ON CASINO RUN. CURRENTLY THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO DEVIATE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT AND FRONT REQUIREMENTS FOR A SINGLE LOT AND DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET. CURRENTLY MEASURING AT 3,825. THE LOT IS IRREGULAR IN SHAPE, RESULTING IN THE NEED FOR AN EIGHT FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE TO ALLOW A LOT TO HAVE 26 FOOT SIX INCH FRONTAGE. AND THEN THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEN THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE LOT SIZE AND FRONTAGE VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO EIGHT DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 3 0 0 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. ONE, THE APPLICANT IS ABIDING BY ALL OTHER BUILDING REQUIREMENTS WHICH WILL NOT INFRINGE ONTO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. AND TWO, THE LOT WILL CONTINUE TO BE VACANT AND UNDEVELOPABLE WITHOUT THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MAILED OUT 23 NOTICES. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. YEAH. LET'S SEE. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU SEAT, THE SEAT OF THE APPLICANT. COULD YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD AND WELCOME AGAIN SIR? HEY, NICE TO SEE YOU GUYS AGAIN. UH, ROB SLU, UH, CONSULTANT FOR SENSE HOMES AND UH, I THINK YOU, YOU, YOU COVERED IT PRETTY WELL THERE. UH, IT'S NOT IMPEDING ANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. IT WOULD BE UNDEVELOPABLE IF WE DIDN'T GET THE VARIANCE THERE. AND UH, OVERALL I DON'T SEE OF IT BEING A NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR ANYONE SURROUNDING IN THE AREA. THANK YOU SIR. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. MR. MANAM. SO, SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UM, IT LOOKS LIKE PART OF THE VARIANCE, UM, IS BEING DERIVED BECAUSE OF THE ODD SHAPED ROAD THAT THAT, THAT IT TERMINATES WITH IS WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THAT, THAT THAT ROAD IT'S DESIGNED AND UH, COULD ANYTHING HAVE BEEN DONE WITH THAT? I GUESS, YOU KNOW, TO, TO ALLEVIATE THE QUESTION OVERALL IT SO SENSE TOOK OVER THIS PROPERTY AS FINISHED LOTS. SO IT WAS ALREADY THE LOTS WERE ON THE GROUND, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET HOMES IN THERE NOW. UH, YEAH, IF YOU GO BACK AND YOU LOOK AT HOW IT WAS DESIGNED, I THINK THERE WOULD'VE BEEN A BETTER OPTIMUM SOLUTION. UH, BUT WE WERE JUST DEALING WITH, UH, THE FINISH LOTS WE HAVE AND WE WANNA FULFILL THE COMMUNITY OF WHAT THE INTENTION WAS TO BEGIN WITH AND, AND GET THE HOMES BUILT. SO THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION MR. MANON. WELL I GET SO I, IT DOESN'T REALLY ANSWER IT, BUT IT'S, YEAH, IT'S, SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS SOME CARDS I WAS DEALT KIND OF THE THING. YEAH. SO I GOT THAT PART. UM, SO, SO I GUESS THE QUESTION, YOU KNOW, THAT I MAYBE I'M ASKING IS, UM, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT COULD BE DONE TO THOSE STREETS TO CHANGE THAT PROPERTY SIZE? YOU KNOW, VERSUS I GUESS HOWS THAT STREET COULD BE USED AND WHAT'S IT USED FOR, YOU KNOW, VERSUS UM, YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY CONVERTED TO THE PROPERTY. 'CAUSE I LOOK AND THE OTHER PROPERTY ON THE OTHER SIDE, YOU LIKELY THEY'RE GONNA BE COMING FOR THE SIMILAR VARIANCE I'M ASSUMING 'CAUSE IT HAS THE SAME, LOOKS LIKE THE SAME HARDSHIP. WOULD THAT ONE? I I I BELIEVE THIS IS THE LAST ONE WE NEED. SO I DON'T THINK WE'LL BE UP AGAIN. YOU'RE YOU'RE MARK, YOU'RE ON THE SAME YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. IT JUST LOOKED LIKE YOU'RE BOTH SIDES WERE DEALING THE SAME AND I BELIEVE YOU NEEDED THAT IN AND OUT FOR FIRE AND ALL THAT STUFF. ACCESS. OKAY. I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. YEAH, YOU KNOW, THE DESIGN LOOKED WONKY AND THEN IT'S SOME WONKY DESIGN. HIM AND I BOTH AGREE. YEAH. ORIAN YOU ON THE STORY. YEAH. SO, UH, I'LL, I LIKE TO PUT SOME INSIDE OF THE, YOU'RE, ARE YOU PUTTING IN A DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT? YES. THOSE ARE SINGLES. YES, THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE SINGLES. THOSE TWO LOTS ARE SINGLES. SO IT'S DUPLEXES ALL UP UNTIL, BUT THOSE LOTS WERE NOT WIDE ENOUGH TO PUT A DUPLEX ON. SO WE'RE PUTTING SINGLES ON THOSE. SO THERE ARE A COUPLE SINGLES THAT ARE MIXED. OKAY. BUT YOU'RE HAVING TO COMPLY WITH A, WITH THAT NEW IB 1 93, YOU WERE HAVING TO PUT SPRINKLER SYSTEMS 'CAUSE YOU GOT MORE THAN 30 UNITS. THERE'S NO SPRINKLERS GOING IN HERE THAT I'M AWARE OF. OKAY. SO IS THIS WELL, THAT, THAT THING WENT INTO EFFECT FEBRUARY 1ST, BUT I I'M JUST CURIOUS, IS THAT FLY? THIS IS ALREADY PLOTTED. YEP. SO IF IT'S ALREADY PLANTED, IS, IS THIS EVEN NECESSARY? LIKE HOW, HOW DID THIS GET PLOTTED IF IT DIDN'T MEET THE CODE? UH, AGAIN, IT WAS FINISHED LAST WE PICKED UP. SO, WELL THEN A QUESTION FOR YOUR STAFF. [03:40:01] IF A PLAT WAS RECORDED AND IT, AND IT DOESN'T MEET THE, THE SIZE OR THE, THE FRONTAGE, HOW, HOW DID THE PLATT GET APPROVED? THEY, THEY'RE WORKING AWAY ON THAT DONALD, SO HE CAN DO A MULTI-FAMILY, UM, BECAUSE IT'S M F 18, BUT BECAUSE HE'S CHOOSING TO DO, OR THE DEVELOPER IS CHOOSING TO DO SINGLE FAMILY AT THAT POINT, THEY HAVE TO MEET THE 4,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT SIZE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT, THAT EXPLAINS. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT TO READ INTO THE RECORD? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. DO I HAVE A MOTION FROM THE BOARD, MS. BRAGMAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 3 0 0 0 8? I MOVE TO THE BOARD ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR ONE A 175 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE TO ALLOW A 3,825 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND TWO, AN EIGHT FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 35 FOOT LOT FRONTAGE TO ALLOW A LOT WITH A 26 FOOT SIX INCH LOT FRONTAGE SITUATED AT 1 4 9 0 3 CASINO GREEN. APPLICANT BEING SINCE SAIL GREEN BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACT THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THE LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. IN THIS CASE, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS REPRESENTED BY MINIMAL LOT SIZES FOR CONSISTENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND LOT FRONTAGE, LOT FRONTAGE MINIMUMS TO ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE ACCESS TO THE STREET. THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF THE DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING IS NOT CONTRARY AS THE USE IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED AND MEETS THE INTENT, UH, INTENTION WITHIN THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT NOT BEING ABLE TO BUILD THE STRUCTURE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. IF NOT GRANTED, THE PROPERTY WILL CONTINUE BEING VACANT WHICH RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. 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 CONSTRUCTION IS ABIDING BY ALL OTHER BUILDING REQUIREMENTS AND THE USE IS CURRENTLY PERMITTED IN THE CURRENT BASE SOUNDING DISTRICT. ADDITIONALLY, NO CONSTRUCTION HAS BEGUN AND THE APPLICANT MUST OBTAIN THIS VARIANCE TO START ALL OF WHICH OB OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE SOUNDING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. IF GRANTED, THE SURROUNDING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS WILL NOT BE INJURED BY THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE. THE LOT SIZE AND FRONTAGE VARIANCE WILL NOT DETRACT OF THE COMMUNITY'S CHARACTER AND THE USE IS COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, 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, 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 SUPPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY SUCH AS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE LOT, ANY IRREGULAR SHAPE. THE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL. END OF MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND. A SECOND FROM MS. CRUZ. ALRIGHT, MS. BREGMAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME COMMENT? YEAH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. UH, IT'S A VERY SMALL VARIANCE REQUEST IN TERMS OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. UH, AND AGAIN, UH, THE, THE LOT WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE USEFUL FOR ANY OTHER, UH, BUILD, UH, IF THIS WEREN'T TO GO IN AND AND BE APPROVED. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU MS. CRUZ. UH, YES SIR. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I SEE NO PROBLEMS WITH THIS AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GONNA BE A REALLY NICE HOME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE, LET BRAGMAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MR. DEAN. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. RHI I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. EZ. I CONCUR. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. MR. ORIAN. [03:45:03] SORRY, I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT WITH 10 IN FAVOR. ONE IN OPPOSITION. THE VARIANCE PASSES. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'D JUST LIKE TO LET YOU KNOW THAT UM, YOUR DINNER IS HERE IF ANYONE'S INTERESTED IN TAKING A LITTLE BREAK FOR THAT. OTHERWISE IT'LL BE THERE WHEN YOU'RE DONE. OKAY. I THINK WE'LL JUST KEEP POWERING. THANK YOU. HOW MANY OKAY. YEAH. LET'S NEXT CASE PLEASE. HOW MANY MORE DO WE HAVE? IT WAS I BELIEVE, FOUR MORE AT LEAST. OKAY, LET'S CUT. OKAY, BUT I KEPT GOING. DO YOU WANNA LEAVE MS. CRUZ? OKAY. THE TIME IS FIVE O'CLOCK AND, UH, MS. CRUZ WOULD BE, IS LEAVING THE BOARD. SO WE'RE DOWN TO 10 MEMBERS NOW. SO NEXT CASE PLEASE. OKAY, ITEM NUMBER 14 IS BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 9. ADDRESS IS 8 1 1 8 LATIGO DRIVE IN CITY COUNCIL. DISTRICT NUMBER FOUR, APPLICANT BEING DAVID RANGE BAR A REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT PRIVACY FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE FRONT AND EAST PROPERTY LINE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD TO A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT. PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE LOCATED IN FRONT YARD. AND THREE, A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ALONG THE SOUTH AND WESTERN PROPERTY LINES LOCATED IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARDS. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS C THREE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF ALIGO DRIVE AND HARNESS LANE, JUST EAST OF I FOUR 10. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO CONSTRUCT A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE FRONT AND EAST PROPERTY LINE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AND TO CONSTRUCT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE, ALSO LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AND TO CONSTRUCT AN EIGHT FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ALONG THE, UH, SOUTHERN AND WESTERN PROPERTY LINES LOCATED IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARDS. UM, THE FENCE OF THIS PROPOSED HYATT WILL PROVIDE SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE PROPERTY. APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THE USE WILL BE AN AUTO SALES FULL SERVICE AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEN THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 0 9 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. ONE, THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES. AND TWO, THE REQUEST WILL NOT RECON, UH, WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MAILED OUT 19 NOTICES. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND WE HAVE NO RESPONSE FROM THE LACKLAND TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. THANK YOU MANNA. ANY QUESTIONS? MR. MANNA? COULD, COULD YOU GO BACK A COUPLE OF PICTURES TO THE SITE PLAN AND JUST INDICATE WHICH LINES WERE THE FENCES ARE? 'CAUSE YOU YOU HAVE A COUPLE DIFFERENT, UH, FENCE DESCRIPTIONS HERE. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE, THE DIFFERENT FENCE DESCRIPTIONS. UH, REAL QUICK, UH, THERE WAS ONE IN FAVOR THAT WE RECEIVED ON LAST MINUTE. OKAY. SO COULD YOU USE A POINTER TO POINT OUT WHICH OF THOSE OR WE CAN HAVE THE APPLICANT DO IT? SO YEAH. YEAH, I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT WOULD BE ABLE TO CLARIFY THAT FOR YOU ALL. OKAY, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE APPLICANT? DOES THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD AND, AND FOR STAFF THE FUTURE, COULD YOU ORIENT IT NORTH UP SO THAT WAY MY BRAIN DOESN'T HURT SO MUCH AS I TRY TO REORIENT MATT'S SO THAT WOULD HELP ME A LITTLE BIT. GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONER. THIS IS DAVID RANCH BAR PROPERTY ADDRESS. 8 1 1 8 LATIGO DRIVE. UH, THE UH, THIS UM, THE PROPERTY WOULD BE, UM, USED FOR, UM, FOR UM, BODY SHOP CAR, CAR CAR BODY SHOP, FULL, FULL SERVICE BODY SHOP. UH, THAT'S WHY WE ARE ASKING TO HAVE, UH, FROM THIS POINT ALL THE WAY SOLID, SOLID, UH, [03:50:01] CENTER BLOCK WALL ALL THE WAY TO FROM THIS CORNER TO HERE. AND THEN SOLID SIDING WALL FROM HERE ALL THE WAY TO HERE. AND THE REST OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE ROD, IRON, EIGHT FOOT, RIGHT ROD OR IRON. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, YES. SO CAN YOU BRING UP, UM, GOOGLE VIEW, UM, SO THAT WAY WHICH INCLUDES SOME HOMES IN THAT, SO WE CAN KIND OF IDENTIFY WHERE THE FENCE IS GONNA BE. 'CAUSE THOSE ARE RESIDENCES, UH, ON THE, UM, EAST SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY. AND THAT'S WHERE YOU PLAN ON PUTTING THE CENTER BLOCK IS THE SOLID WALL THAT, THAT WILL BE ABUTTING THE RESIDENCES, CORRECT? YES. SO COULD YOU GO, GO TO OVERHEAD VIEW? OKAY. SO USING THAT MAP, COULD YOU SHOW, USE YOUR POINTER AGAIN TO SHOW WHERE WHICH FENCE COULD BE WHERE? YES. THIS WALL WOULD BE STANDARD BLOCK RIGHT HERE. AND FROM HERE TO HERE IT WOULD BE STANDARD BLOCK TO COVER THE BODY SHOP. UM, WE HAVE, WE GONNA HAVE SOME CARS LIKE CRASH CARS, SO WE DON'T WANNA SEE, UH, PEOPLE SEE FROM THE OUTSIDE. UH, FROM HERE WOULD BE ALL ROUTE IRON, IRON FENCE. OKAY, SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN I WAS THINKING. SO 'CAUSE I WAS THINKING YOU WERE PUTTING IT ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO YOU'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT PUTTING CINDER BLOCK, UH, ON UH, FACING LATIGO, WHICH WOULD BE THE FRONT OF THE FACILITY. YES. SO IN THE FRONT YARD, UM, ALONG THE FRONT. AND SO, SO IS THAT, UM, SO MAXIMUM THREE FOOT TO SIX FOOT. SO SO YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A SIX FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE FOR A PORTION OF THAT FRONT YARD? YES. FROM HERE, FROM THE GATE. THIS, ABOUT HOW MANY FEET OF THAT DO YOU THINK? A HUNDRED, 114 FEET. 114 FEET FROM THIS CORNER TO THIS SIDE. AND THEN ABOUT 120 FEET ON THIS SECTION. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF KAPLAN. UH, IS THERE A BUFFER, A NEED FOR A UM, UH, GREEN BUFFER ALONG LATIGO FOR THIS KIND OF USE? WAIT ONE SECOND. WE HAVE 15 FEET BUFFER RIGHT THERE. THIS CORNER BUFFER YARD LATIGO IS A LOCAL STREET, SO UH, THERE WOULD, THERE'LL BE NO BUFFER YARD ON THERE. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SO THEN TR UM, LET'S SEE. SO, SO IT SAYS, SO, SO IN THE DIALOGUE HERE, I, SO I SEE A THREE FOOT, OR SORRY, A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE FRONT AND EAST LINE. AND THEN FOR, UM, NUMBER TWO, UM, A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. SO MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE. SO I, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT MEANS. SO I HAVE A FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN AND THEN AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. SO WHICH IS IT? SO I GUESS I NEED HELP UNDERSTANDING WHAT THAT'S WHAT, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO THERE. UH, YEAH, CAN YOU PULL UP THE SITE PLAN? UH, ORIAN, I I ALSO JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT HIS SITE PLAN IS, IS, IS NORTH, IS DOWN, SO IT'S OPPOSITE WHAT YOU'RE SEEING ON YEAH, CAN, CAN YOU JUST SPIN THAT EASILY? SO IT'S IN POWERPOINT, SO I DON'T KNOW. YEAH, THE PRIVACY FENCE WOULD BE OBVIOUSLY ALONG THE, THE REAR OF THE ABUTTING UH, RESIDENTIALS. OKAY. SO WHERE IS THE EIGHT FOOT THEN? I'M SORRY. YOU CAN YOU USE THE POINTER THERE TO KIND THE EIGHT FOOT FROM STARTS FROM HERE ALL THE WAY, ALL THE WAY TO, TO THIS CORNER. IS THAT, DOES [03:55:01] THAT HELP? MR. MAN DOES IT KIND OF FRONTS THE COMMERCIAL PORTION OF THE PROJECT. RIGHT? RIGHT. SO, SO EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG, SO THERE'S SOLID SCREEN FENCE THAT'S SIX FOOT TALL IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY FOR 114 FEET ALONG THE FRONT. AND THEN THE REMAINING FENCE, YOU'RE ASKING FOR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FOR SECURITY? YES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ORIAN MR. ORIAN? YEAH, SO, UM, I, I SEE ON YOUR SITE PLAN THAT YOU'RE CALLING, UH, ON THE EIGHT FOOT ROD IRON WITH AN AUTOMATIC GATE AND THAT'S ALONG THE TIGO AND ALSO AT FOUR 10, ARE YOU PUTTING IN A, UM, A CALL BOX ON THAT? OR, OR, OR NOT? UH, SAY THAT AGAIN A BOX. ARE YOU, ARE YOU PUTTING IN A, A, A CALL BOX WHERE YOU CAN TYPE IN A CODE OR ARE YOU JUST USING CLICKERS? JUST CLICKERS. OKAY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE 'CAUSE OF, 'CAUSE THERE'S A 40 FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT. IF YOU HAVE A, YOU KNOW, CALL BOX AND, AND I LIKE THERE'S NOT A STACKING ISSUE OR A QUEUING ISSUE ON LATIGO, UH, BY HAVING AN AUTOMATIC EIGHT THAT'S FOR STAFF. UM, WE, IT'S GONNA BE OPEN AT, IN THE MORNING AND THEN CLOSE AT AT NIGHT. SO IT'S GONNA BE ONE TIME OPENING AGAIN. WAS IS THAT QUESTION FOR STAFF OR DID YOU, DID YOU GET YOUR QUESTION ANSWERED MR. ORIAN? UH, I GOT IT ANSWERED. I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WAS GONNA BE OPENING AND CLOSING THROUGHOUT THE DAY OR IS IT GONNA BE OPEN DURING THE DAY? UH, YOU STAFF CAN ANSWER IT. IS THERE A QUEUING REQUIREMENT ON THESE AUTOMATIC GATES THAT WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT? IS THERE A WHAT REQUIREMENT? THE QUEUING CAR CUING. A QUEUING WHERE THE CARS LINING UP TO. DOES THERE HAVE TO BE A, A CAR THAT'S LOCATED OFF OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WHILE THEY'RE WAITING FOR THE GATE TO OPEN? OR IS, UM, IS, IS, IS THAT SOMETHING WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF? UH, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT HE, IF THERE IS, HE'D HAVE TO WORK THAT OUT WITH THE TRAFFIC SECTION. UM, OKAY. I COULDN'T TELL YOU. YEAH, LET'S JUST ADDRESS THE, THE FENCING VARIANCES RIGHT. OR SPECIAL EXEMPTIONS AND, OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT STAFF? DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT TO READ IN FOR THE RECORD? WE HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL. HELLO, MR. TINO? THIS IS CARRIE MCFADDEN. I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS REQUESTS WHERE THE, UM, PROPERTY OWNER AT 8 1 1 8 LATIGO DRIVE WANTS TO RAISE HIS FENCE BEHIND MY HOUSE, WHICH IS AT 17 OH EAST HARNESS LANE. HE WANTS TO RAISE IT FROM A SIX FOOT TO AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. UM, I CAN GIVE YOU A CALL BACK ON MONDAY AND, UH, I WOULD LIKE THE FACT THAT HE WOULD KEEP IT AT SIX FEET AND THEN WHEN IT, AT THE POINT WHERE MY GARAGE IS IN THE BACKYARD, HE CAN PUT IT UP TO EIGHT FEET. UM, BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO PRESENT A PROBLEM. THE HOMELESS ARE GONNA BE COMING AND MOVING OVER FROM LATIGO PLAZA TO CAMP OUT BEHIND THIS BRICK WALL. AND, UM, I AM A SINGLE WOMAN. I'M NOT PUTTING UP A PRIVACY FENCE BECAUSE, UH, THEN I KNOW THEY WILL REALLY MOVE IN FROM EXPERIENCE. UM, I'VE ALREADY, WE ALREADY CUT DOWN A HEDGE THAT WAS THERE TO GET THEM TO GO AWAY. THEY PULLED AND TUGGED ON THE GATE, EVERYTHING WE DO TO KEEP THAT GATE UP. UH, BUT I WOULD PREFER THAT IT, IT STAY A SIX FOOT FENCE THE FIRST COUPLE OF YARDS UP UNTIL WHERE MY, UH, GARAGE IN THE BACKYARD STARTS AND THEN YOU CAN RAISE IT UP TO AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. BUT STILL JUST HAVING, UM, A BRICK WALL BACK THERE IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM. UH, I FORESEE WITH THE HOMELESS AND, UM, MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 7 2 5 6 5 0 1. AND I'M CARRIE MCFADDEN. I OWN THE PROPERTY, UM, IN FRONT OF 8 1 1 8 LATIGO DRIVE. WHO WANTS TO RAISE THE FENCE? AND, UM, MY ADDRESS IS 1703 CARNESS LANE. AGAIN, THAT'S CARRIE MCFADDEN AT 2 1 0. [04:00:05] ALRIGHT. UM, SO NOW THE A APPLICANT YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO, SO, SO I JUST WANNA COMMENT. SO THAT WAS THE FIRST HOME, THE, AT THE CORNER THERE, SO LATIGO AND HARNESS. SO THAT WAS THE FIRST HOME. AND, AND IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, SO, AND SO THIS QUESTION IS THAT YOU WERE ASKING FOR A SIX FOOT FENCE AT THAT, AT THAT PART, WHICH I THINK IS WHAT SHE WAS ASKING FOR. SO, SO I JUST WANNA MAKE THAT WOULD BE SIX FOOT, SO THAT'LL BE SIX FOOT COVERED WITHIN THAT SECTION? YES. OKAY, PERFECT. OKAY. SO THAT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE ANY OTHER REBUTTAL BEFORE WE, ANY OTHER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? SO, SIX ON, ON THIS, SHE, SHE LIVES RIGHT HERE. MM-HMM. AND THIS WALL WOULD BE SIX FOOT. OKAY. SO, SO THE LATE THE MESSAGE WAS, OKAY. THAT'LL BE GOOD. OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU. UH, I'D LIKE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION AND ASK A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION. UH, I'LL GIVE THE MOTION IF YOU WANT. MS. KAPLAN. I, WHAT, WHAT DID YOU SAY? OH, OKAY. YOU'LL, YOU'LL TELL ME. TELL ME. YOU'LL, YOU'LL GET TO ME. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 23 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 9. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR ONE, A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT PRIVACY FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE, UH, HEIGHT ALONG THE FRONT AND EAST PROPERTY LINE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD. TWO, A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD. AND THREE, A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ALONG THE SOUTH AND WEST PROPERTY LINES LOCATED IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD, SITUATED AT 8 1 1 8 LATIGO DRIVE. APPLICANT BEING DAVID ROUNDBAR BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY, UH, IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY THANK YOU. UH, SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPT 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 A FENCE SITE MODIFICATION. THE FENCE SITE BEING REQUESTED IS A SIX FOOT PRIVATE DEFENSE ALONG THE FRONT AND EAST PROPERTY LINES LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AND AN EIGHT FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AND AN EIGHT FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ALONG THE SOUTH AND WEST PROPERTY LINES LOCATED IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARDS. IF GRANTED, STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE BE THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE SITES TO PROTECT PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. THE PROPOSED FENCE BEING REQUESTED WILL BE LOCATED ALONG THE FRONT AND EAST PROPERTY LINES LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AND THE WEST PROPERTY LINE IN THE FRONT YARD. AND THE SOUTH AND WEST PROPERTY LINES LOCATED IN THE SITE AND REAR YARDS AND IS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT BY THREE FEET AND TWO FEET. THE PRIVACY AND PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE STILL SERVE THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT IN ADJACENT PROPERTIES. FURTHERMORE, RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ARE REBUTTING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO THE EAST. AND A MOBILE HOME DEALER IS ABUTTING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, WHICH FENCE CAN ACT AS A BARRIER. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE SIDE IN THE FRONT AND EAST PROPERTY LINE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AND THE WEST PROPERTY LINE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AND SOUTH AND WEST. PROPERTY LINES LOCATED IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARDS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE LOCATION FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT AS THE ABUTTING BASE ZONING DISTRICTS TO THE EAST ARE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED AND COMMERCIALLY ZONED TO THE SOUTH E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. SECOND, YOUR HONOR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE ANY, ANY COMMENT MR. KAPLAN? YEAH, IT, I THIS, UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE, UM, THE PURPOSE IS OBVIOUSLY SECURITY, WHICH WILL BE NEEDED. AND UM, ALSO THE FENCE ALONG THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WILL SCREEN, UM, THE USES FROM THEM. SO I THINK IT'S A POSITIVE, UM, UH, USE. THANK YOU, MS. MS. MANO, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE? YEAH, I'M GONNA OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO, UH, MEN'S SO THAT IT IS ONLY THE 114 FEET ON THE EAST PORTION OF THE FRONT PROPERTY. AND I ACCEPT THAT. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, SO THEN I'M GOOD. THAT'S, UH, GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. DEAN. I [04:05:01] DO NOT CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. RHI I CONCUR. MS. MR. BONILLA I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I ALSO INCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, UH, WITH A NINE IN FAVOR. ONE IN OPPOSITION. THE VARIANCE DOES PASS. UH, THANK YOU, UH, WITH THE PROJECT. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. THAT WAS THE EAST 114 FEET, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT. EAST 114. THANK YOU. AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE ALSO THE FRONT FACADE OR THE FRONT SIDE OF THE RIGHT? YES, SIR. OKAY. UM, ITEM NUMBER 15 IS BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 1 1 4. ADDRESS IS 6 3 0 2 BIRCH VALLEY DRIVE IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER FOUR. UM, APPLICANT IS R SALLY LEASE AND THE REQUEST IS FOR THREE FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE ONE FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS R FOUR. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON BIRCH VALLEY DRIVE EAST OF SOUTHWEST LOOP FOUR 10, RESULTING FROM A ZONING U D C INVESTIGATION FOR A PROPERTY SETBACK VIOLATION. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE FOR THE SIDE SETBACK. THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCTED A, AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE MEASURING ONE FOOT FOUR INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED IN SAN ANTONIO ARE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND MUST OBTAIN A VARIANCE TO DEVIATE FROM THIS MINIMUM UPON SIDE VISITS. STAFF DID NOT OBSERVE ANY ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA TOWARDS THE SIDE AND FRONT OF THE PROPERTIES. AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THEN THIS IS THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. AND THEN THE NEXT COUPLE ARE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIDE, STEPBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS, UM, THE DENIAL AND BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 4 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. UH, ONE, THIS DISTANCE IS NOT SUITABLE AS IT IMPOSES ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR BY BEING TOO CLOSE TO THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE AND WATER RUNOFF MAY IMPOSE AND RISK OF FIRE SPREAD IS GREATER. AND TWO, THE APPLICANT COULD RELOCATE THE STRUCTURE. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION AND PLAN STAFF MAILED 35 NOTICES. UM, ZERO RETURN IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND WE HAD NO RESPONSE FROM THE RICH STONE, UM, HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION. AND THIS, UM, CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. YEAH. SO MICCA, UH, IF IT THOUGH IT WAS STATED CLEARLY IT IS BILLED WITHOUT PERMIT. THAT'S CORRECT. NO PERMIT. THANK YOU. A QUESTION ALSO, DO WE KNOW IF THERE'S ANY, UM, UTILITIES OR ANY ELECTRICAL PLUMBING, UM, WATER CONNECTIONS TO THE PROPERTY? UH, WE DON'T KNOW OF ANY EASEMENT. OKAY. THIS PROPERTY, MR. IAN ORIAN? YEAH. SO TWO QUESTIONS FOR ASK. UH, A QUESTION WAS ASKED WHETHER THEY HAD A PERMIT, BUT IF THEY'RE UNDER WHAT, 300 SQUARE FEET ON A SHED, DO THEY HAVE TO GET A PERMIT? IT, UH, I COULD NOT TELL YOU OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. UM, OKAY. I THOUGHT THERE WAS AN EXCEPTION TO THAT. AND THE SECOND ONE IS, UH, DID Y'ALL OBSERVE A FOUNDATION ON THE SHED OR IS IT JUST FLO ON THE GROUND? THE, WE COULD NOT ACCESS THE REAR OR BEHIND THE FENCE WHEN WE WENT TO GO DO SITE VISITS. SO, UM, THE APPLICANT CAN PROBABLY TELL YOU BETTER THAN WE CAN. OKAY. AWESOME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. DORIAN. AT THIS POINT, UM, LET'S, UH, MR. IS THE APPLICANT HERE, CAN YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD? HELLO, MY NAME IS AND I LIVE AT 6 3 0 2 BIRCH VALLEY DRIVE, AND I'M REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE SHED THAT WE BUILT THAT IS LESS THAN 300 SQUARE FEET. AND, UM, IT IS ON A CONCRETE BASE, SO WE ARE UNABLE TO LIKE, REMOVE THE, THE SHED FROM THERE. SO YOU'RE SAYING YOU, YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO MOVE THE SHED FROM THERE? YEAH, NO. 'CAUSE IT'S ON CONCRETE. SO. ON CONCRETE, YES. OKAY. OKAY. LET'S SEE IF ANY, ANY, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MANA, MR. MANA, THIS QUESTION MAY BE FOR STAFF AS WELL, BUT YOU CAN CONFIRM. SO, SO I'M LOOKING, SO [04:10:01] IF YOU BRING UP, UM, THE SIDE OF PROPERTY VIEW, UH, WHICH IS THE THIRD PICTURE MM-HMM. , KEEP GOING. THERE YOU GO. RIGHT THERE. SO, SO IT LOOKS LIKE THERE MAY BE A CONNECTION FROM THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE TO THE STORAGE UNIT. IS THAT TRUE? OR, OR IS THERE, ARE THERE ARE THE ROOFS TOUCHING OR SOME KIND OF STRUCTURE? SO, SO, WELL WE HAVE A, A, LIKE A PORCH SO THAT WHEN WE GO, LIKE WALKING TO THE, TO THE, TO THE SHED, I MEAN, WE DON'T GET RAIN ON . SO THE PORCH DOESN'T TOUCH THE SHED. UM, NO, IT'S LIKE RIGHT, IT'S STANDING. OKAY, BECAUSE I DON'T SEE THE, THE PORCH IN ANOTHER PICTURE. SO HOW FAR DOES THE PORCH, THAT'S THEN ACROSS, SO DOES IT GO ALL THE WAY TO THE FENCE LINE AS WELL? I GUESS SO, YEAH. IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ALSO ON THE, ON THE FENCE LINE. SO, SO THERE, SO THERE'S A CONCRETE PAD THAT YOU PUT DOWN, I GUESS, THAT YOU PUT THE SHED ON. AND DOES THIS FOLLOW THE SAME LINE FOR THIS, FOR THE, FOR THE AWNING AS WELL, RIGHT? OR, OKAY, SO, SO I GUESS THE QUESTION FOR CITY STAFF HERE IS THAT, UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S ANOTHER STRUCTURE THERE THAT WASN'T PART OF THIS DIALOGUE. UM, AND SHOULD THAT BE INCLUDED HERE? 'CAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POTENTIALLY BOTH. UH, IF THERE IS, IF THERE IS ANOTHER STRUCTURE, UM, THAT'S NOT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE CLOSER TO FIVE FEET, UM, AGAIN, WE COULDN'T GO BACK THERE AND SEE IT. SO WE'RE DEPENDING ON THE APPLICANT TELLING US, UH, WHAT WAS BACK THERE. AND THIS IS ADVERTISING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, SO ANYTHING ELSE WE CANNOT ENTERTAIN. SO, UM, SO I GUESS THE, IT COULD BE, WELL, I GUESS SO THE, THE APPLICANT MAY HAVE TWO OPTIONS THEN. SO ONE IS TO GO THROUGH THE DIALOGUE HERE OR TO, UM, HAVE IT RE-ADVERTISED. SO THAT INCLUDES THE SECOND STRUCTURE AS WELL? OR, UH, I'M SORRY, I MISSED A PREVIOUS PART. SO ARE YOU SAYING THE PATIO IS INSIDE THAT THE SAME SETBACK? UH, YES. IT'S LIKE ON THE SAME, THE SAME DISTANCE, I THINK, IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY. SO IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE'S A CONCRETE SLAB THAT IS, THAT THIS UNIT SITS ON, AND NOT ONLY IS IT THAT THIS, UH, THIS SHED IS ON IT, BUT SO IS THE, UM, THE AWNING. AND SO, SO IT WOULD PROBABLY ALSO BE SUBJECT TO IT IS, IS IT, IS IT THREE FOOT AWAY AS WELL? I GUESS IT FOLLOWS THE CONCRETE, THAT LINE? YES. WELL, IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE TO THE, IF IT HAS THE THREE FOOT, UH, SETBACK, UM, THEY'RE GOOD. BUT IF IT'S CLOSER THAN THREE FEET, NO, NO, NO. IT'S, IT'S ABOUT THE THREE, THE THREE FEET. IT'S MORE THAN THREE FEET THE SETBACK. MM-HMM. . OKAY. SO IN THAT CASE, YOU, YOU DO THE LASER POINT AND SHOW US EXACTLY. CAN WE GET A, YEAH. OKAY. WELL HERE'S THE, THE SHED. SO THE, THE PORT IS LIKE FROM THERE TO HERE, I THINK. SOMETHING LIKE THAT. OKAY. OH YES. IT'S, SO WHEN THE, UH, OVERHANG ENDS, DOES IT HAVE MORE THAN THREE FEET ON THIS SIDE RIGHT HERE? SO, RIGHT. WELL, IT'S LIKE ON THE SHED IT'S CLO THE SHED IS CLOSER THAN THE PORCH. THE PORCH IS A LITTLE BIT MORE OKAY. DOES HAVE THREE FEET. THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW. YEAH, I, YEAH, I BELIEVE SO. SO, SO ORIAN JUST AN OBSERVATION ON THE SIDE PLAN, THERE'S A DIMENSION OF EIGHT FOOT FIVE INCHES, AND THEN THE SHED IS SEVEN THREE, AND THEN IT'S ONE FOOT FOUR AWAY. THAT'S, THAT'S MORE THAN EIGHT FIVE. AND THE APPLICANT VERIFY THE DIMENSIONS OF THE SITE PLAN. SO, SO THE SHED IS OBVIOUSLY CLOSER THAN THIS OPEN AREA, RIGHT, RIGHT. AS WE SEE IN THE PICTURE, THIS ESSENTIALLY ONE FOOT TWO INCHES. SO IT'S LIKE ON THIS SIDE OVER HERE, LIKE RIGHT THERE IS THE SHED. AND THEN IT HAS LIKE A LITTLE PORCH THAT WE GO THROUGH THERE. OKAY. SO WHAT, WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND US TO DO HERE? DO YOU WANT TO RE ADVERTISE OR REMEASURE OR, BECAUSE THERE'S ANOTHER STRUCTURE, I GUESS IT WOULD BE UP TO THE APPLICANT. SO IF WE DECIDE ON THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SETBACK AND THE OVERHANG IS LESS THAN THREE FEET, YOU HAVE TO COME BACK OVER HERE. IF IT'S NOT, THEN IF YOU DELAY AND WE JUST KNOCK THEM BOTH OUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOU WON'T HAVE TO PAY, UH, THE FEE AGAIN. YOU GET IT ALL HURT AT ONCE INSTEAD OF SEPARATELY. UM, I WOULD RECOMMEND TO DELAY [04:15:01] THIS AND HAVE US GO, ACTUALLY GO IN THERE AND MEASURE IT, UH, JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS CAPTURED. THAT'S WHAT I SUGGEST. MM-HMM. , AT THE SAME TIME, I WOULD ASK, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT FROM, 'CAUSE THE NEIGHBOR IS MOST AFFECTED THEN, AND IF YOU CAN GET YOUR CONCURRENCE FROM THE NEIGHBOR, THAT'LL BE YEAH, I TALKED TO HIM AND, AND I MEAN, HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY BECAUSE WE PUT GUTTERS LIKE ALL AROUND THE, THE, AND IF YOU, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU HAD LIKE A LETTER SUPPORT OR SOMETHING THAT WE CAN PRESENT TO THE BOARD ALSO TO SAY THAT. OH, OKAY. HE'S OKAY WITH YOU AND NO PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. THAT, THAT'LL BE HELPFUL. THAT'LL GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO TALK WITH A NEIGHBOR TOO. MM-HMM. , UH, TO GET, UM, A LETTER OR SOMETHING THAT SAYS HE SUPPORTS IT BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS I, I IMPACTS HIM THE MOST. RIGHT. AND HE HAS RIGHTS TO, AS A PROPERTY OWNER MM-HMM. BECAUSE YOU'RE SEEKING A VARIANCE RIGHT. FROM NORMAL CITY SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. SO, RIGHT. BUT UNDERSTAND, I MEAN, LIKE I SAID, I MEAN WE HAVE THE GUTTERS AND EVERYTHING SO IT WON'T DAMAGE. DO, DO Y'ALL DAMAGE CASE? DO ANY OTHER COMMENT BEFORE WE LOOK FOR A CONTINUANCE OF THE CASE? UH, MENCHACA, MR. MENCHACA, I, I JUST HAVE A COMMENT TO ADD TO THAT. UH, WHEN YOU TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBOR, UH, I KNOW IT'S YOUR STUFF IN THAT SHED, SO HE MAY FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE THAT YOU DON'T STORE ANY FLAMMABLES IN THERE. MM-HMM. . SO KEEP THAT IN MIND. OKAY. AND JUST TO CLARIFY SOMETHING THAT WAS SAID EARLIER, UM, THE PERMIT IS REQUIRED WITH IT'S 300 SQUARE FEET OR MORE. UM, SO EVEN IF THEY DID NOT REQUIRE A PERMIT, THEY WOULD STILL NEED TO ABIDE BY THE SETBACK. YEAH. DO WE KNOW WHEN THE NEXT AVAILABLE, UM, BOARD OF ADJUST? JUNE 26TH. JUNE 26TH. DO I, DO I HEAR A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF THE CASE? SO MOVED. SECOND. SECOND. DO WE NEED TO TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE? IS THIS, DID YOU SAY WE CAN'T CONTINUE IT? 'CAUSE WE HAVE TO RE ADVERTISE TO ADD THE OKAY. ADDITIONAL. OH, OKAY. SO WHAT, SO THEN YOU'LL TELL US NATHAN THEN, RIGHT? YEAH. SO AT THIS POINT IF YOU WANT TO POSTPONE, UM, WE'LL JUST COME BACK HERE. WE'LL BE IN TOUCH AND, UH, WE'LL COME BACK HERE ON JUNE 26TH. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S THE BEST CASE FOR THAT'S THE BEST. YEAH. RIGHT. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . ALRIGHT. NEXT CASE PLEASE. UH, LISTEN. I HAD A SIX. OKAY, SO, UM, THIS IS A BIG ONE. I WAS 17. WAS JUST, JUST POINTING THAT OUT. YEAH, I'M MEETING AT SIX AND 17 IS A SHORT HEARING. OKAY, WE'LL, WE'LL KEEP IT, WE'LL KEEP IT MOVING. UM, ITEM NUMBER 16 IS BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 3 0 0 1 1 6. A REQUEST BY, OH, I'M SORRY, AN ADDRESS BEING 4 0 2 LEVA, UM, AVENUE IN CITY COUNCIL. DISTRICT NUMBER FOUR, APPLICANT BEING RENE FUENTE. AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A 975 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 6,000 SQUARE FOOT, UM, REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A DEVELOPMENT ON A 5,025 14 FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM AND 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THREE, A 17 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 25 FOOT CORNER. CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CORNER FENCE WITH AN EIGHT FOOT CLEAR VISION. AND FOUR, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AND FIVE, A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT PRIVACY FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW A FOUR FOOT, FOUR INCH PRIVACY FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS R SIX. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG, UM, LEVETTE BETWEEN THE INTERSECTIONS OF OREGON STREET AND FLEMING STREET JUST NORTH OF NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY. THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCTED AN ADDITION WITHOUT PERMITS. THAT IS ONE INCH FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE PER THE U D C. THE ADDITION IS REQUIRED TO BE SET BACK 20 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. UM, ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CORNER AND CLEAR VISION VARIANT FOR THE EXISTING FENCE. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR A PRIVACY FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. AND UPON SITE VISITS, STAFF DID NOT OBSERVE ANY OTHER STRUCTURES IN THE IMMEDIATE AR AREA. AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THIS IS THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE REAR. AND THEN THE SURROUNDING AREAS. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE OFFENSE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. UH, ONE THAT PROPOSED FOUR FOOT FOUR INCH PRIVACY FENCE WILL RESULT IN INCONSISTENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AS NO OTHER FENCES EXCEEDING THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS WERE SEEN IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. AND THE CLEAR VISION VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO EIGHT DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 3 0 0 1 1 16 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. UH, ONE ALTERING THE [04:20:01] FENCE TO MEET THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT WILL RESULT IN, IN A NECESSARY HARDSHIP AS FRONT YARD SPACE WOULD BE REDUCED DRASTICALLY. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MAIL 20 NOTICES, UM, ZERO RETURN IN FAVORS, ONE IN OPPOSITION. AND WE HAD NO RESPONSE FROM THE QUINTANA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THIS IS ONE OF THE PUBLIC RESPONSES WE HAD RECEIVED. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. THANK YOU. YOU, LET'S SEE, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON THE, UH, BUILDING ACCESS, UH, THE BUILDING ADD-ON THAT WAS BUILT. I'M ASSUMING THAT'S WITHOUT PERMITS. YES, SIR. AND DO WE KNOW AGAIN IF THERE'S ANY ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, WATER, ANY UTILITIES WITHIN THAT, UH, BUMP OUT, UH, BUILT WITHOUT PERMITS? WE DO NOT KNOW. UH, I COULD, I COULD, UH, PULL UP THE PLAT. OKAY. AND MANNA, MR. MANNA. SO CAN YOU BRING UP THE AERIAL AND SHOW APPROXIMATELY WHERE IT IS THAT THE DWELLING IS PUT IN THERE? SO I'M TRYING TO LOOK AT THE, NO, THE GOOGLE AERIAL. I'M SORRY. SO, 'CAUSE THAT MAP IS UPSIDE DOWN AGAIN. SO IS IT THAT IT'S BEEN INSET IN THAT, IN THAT LITTLE ALCOVE AREA? IS THAT WHERE THE, WHERE THE IS? YES. YES. SO WE'LL, WE'LL FOLLOW. OKAY. WE'LL HA WE'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT SPEAK TO THAT THEN. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD AND, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND, UH, RENEE LA FUENTE. 12 7 25 APPLE WHITE ROAD. YEAH, IT'S A LITTLE, THAT LITTLE AREA THERE. HE JUST USE THE GENTLEMAN, USE YOUR LASER POINT. YOU, I'M SORRY, COULD YOU USE YOUR LASER POINTER TO OKAY. TO POINT TO RED BUTTON. IT'S, THAT'S A, WHAT HE DID IS JUST SQUARE THAT UP LIKE THAT. HE WAS GONNA USE IT FOR STORAGE SINCE HE PARKS HIS VEHICLE HERE. AND HE WAS JUST GONNA STORE STUFF THERE LIKE A ATTACHED STORAGE BUILDING 'CAUSE THERE'S NO SPACE. IT'S LIKES THE PROPERTY REALLY DOESN'T HAVE, AND IT WAS BUILT IN 1950. REALLY DOESN'T, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY IT WAS ZONED THAT WAY. UM, REALLY DOESN'T HAVE, IT WAS BUILT THAT WAY. AND IT'S BEEN THAT WAY OTHER THAN THIS ADDITION THAT HE JUST HAD IT, UM, WHERE TO PUT ANYWHERE, YOU KNOW, A A STORAGE BUILDING OF ANY, SO IT'S, IT'S UNDERSIZED IN, IN, IN ITS SHAPE. AND THE GENTLEMAN THAT DID THE APARTMENT COMPLEX, I, I GUESS AT ONE POINT HE'S THE ONE THAT SOLD IT TO HIM. THE ONE THAT'S RIGHT HERE SOLD HIM THE, THE PROPERTY, THIS HOUSE. UM, AND IT'S PLATTED THAT WAY. IT'S BEEN PLATTED THAT WAY, BUT IT'S BEEN PLATTED, LIKE UNDERSIZED. I GUESS IT'S UNDER THE, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT IT WAS UNTIL THE STAFF SAID THAT IT WAS UNDERSIZED, BUT WHAT WE WERE SEEKING IS JUST THE VARIANCE FOR THE ADDITION. ALL THE OTHER FENCE STUFF AND THE VISIBILITY AND EVERYTHING CAME INTO PLAY FROM, FROM STAFF'S, UH, SITE VISIT. SO ORIAN, OH WAIT, HOLD ON. UH, I'M SORRY. MR. MAD DID, DID, DID YOU GET YOUR QUESTION? WELL, I WAS GONNA, WHILE YOU'RE, YOU HAD THE POINTER. SO, UM, SO THERE'S, SO, UM, JUST CONFIRMATION THAT THE, UH, STRUCTURE THAT'S BEING BUILT FOLLOWS THE EXISTING ROOF LINE OR EXISTING, UM, UM, BUILDING SIDELINE THAT IS ALREADY THERE AND YOU JUST EXTENDED THAT PARTICULAR STRUCTURE. YEAH. WHAT HE DID, HE SAID, WELL, I'M JUST GONNA ENCLOSE THAT LITTLE AREA THAT'S JUST LIKE A FUNKY LITTLE AREA THERE. SO HE SAID, AND THEN THE SECOND ONE, JUST BECAUSE THERE'S LOTS OF DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO, UH, WAS IT, WAS THAT THE ONLY THING WAS JUST A SETBACK OF THE BUILDING? YES. YES. OKAY. YEAH. UH, AND WAS THAT, UH, A PREVIOUSLY A PORCH OR IS IT, WAS IT GRASS? THAT'S JUST THE WAY THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1950. JUST HAD THAT LITTLE, YEAH. WAS IT GRASS OR WAS IT CONCRETE? IT'S GRASS. IT WAS JUST GRASS. OKAY. YEAH. AND THEN ON THE, YOU'RE SHOWING A, A DRIVEWAY FOR THE CLEAR VISION OFF OF FLEMING, BUT THE AERIAL IMPLIES THAT THERE'S A SHARED DRIVEWAY ON LU WITH YOUR NEIGHBOR. IS THERE ALSO A, A CLEARANCE ISSUE WITH THAT TOO? I THINK THE ONLY DRIVEWAY IS THIS ONE HERE OFF OF FLEMING. OKAY. SO THAT, UH, I'M SORRY. I'M RIGHT. I'M LOOKING AT SOME AERIAL PHOTOS THAT KINDA LOOKS LIKE IT'S A REAL WIDE DRIVEWAY THAT YOU MIGHT BE SHARING WITH YOUR NEIGHBOR, BUT I JUST WANTED TO NO, I THINK THAT'S THE NEIGHBORS. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. TO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. BRAGMAN, COULD YOU SHOW US WITH A LASER POINTER WHERE THE FENCE PROPOSED FENCE IS GONNA GO SINCE THE SITE PLAN IS, UH, UPSIDE DOWN FROM, FROM NORTH. COULD YOU SHOW US WITH A LASER POINTER WHERE THE, UH, THE FENCE IS GONNA GO? WELL, THE FENCE IS ALREADY EXISTING. WELL, WE'RE, WHAT HE'S DOING IS JUST A LITTLE ADDITION RIGHT HERE. THE FENCE EXISTS ALREADY OR THAT WHITE PICKET FENCE. THE PART OF, PART OF WHAT [04:25:01] WE'RE GONNA BE DISCUSSING IS THE, THE FENCE, BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY FOUND AFTERWARDS. SO, RIGHT. COULD YOU POINT OUT WITH THE LASER POINTER WHERE THAT OH, WHERE THE FENCE IS AT? OKAY. YEAH. THE FENCE GOES LIKE FROM RIGHT THERE ALL THE WAY STRAIGHT. UH, IT'S JUST A PRIVACY FENCE. THAT PRIVACY FENCE UP FRONT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE. THAT'S ALL WE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. YEAH. FOR THE CLEAR VISION, IT'S NOT SO, SO IF WE BRING UP THE STREET VIEW, CAN WE BRING UP THE STREET VIEW IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE? THAT'S A WHITE PICKET FENCE. RIGHT. OKAY. AND THEN IF YOU SCOOT OVER ONE MORE, YOU SEE A PERSON STANDING NEXT TO THE FENCE. SO IF YOU GO DOWN, LOVE IT. I BELIEVE SO THIS, OKAY, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU WERE. THERE YOU GO. THERE'S A PERSON STANDING THERE. SO IT'S A FOUR FOOT MORE THAN FOUR, THREE FOOT FENCE. SO THIS WHITE PICKET FENCE IS FINE. IT'S JUST THIS PRIVACY. OKAY. ORIAN. MR. ORIAN, THAT CAR, THAT CAR IS, THAT'S STICKING OUT INTO THE STREET, THAT'S A SECOND DRIVEWAY TO THE, TO THE PROPERTY, ISN'T IT? OH YEAH. THE ONE THAT'S IN, I THINK THEIR VISION OR SITE VISION IS THE ONE ON THE SIDE. I DON'T KNOW YOU HAVE, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING IF YOU HAD TWO DRIVEWAYS. OH YEAH. NO, NO, NO. YES, IT DOES HAVE TWO. BUT THE ONE THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE, THE CLEAR SITE OBSTRUCTION I THINK IS, IS THE ONE ON THE SIDE. THAT'S SOMETHING. SO THAT WAS NOT CLEAR VISION ISSUE. OKAY. WAS A DRIVEWAY. RIGHT. SO STAFF, IS THAT, IS, IS THAT POSE A CLEAR VISION ISSUE OR WITH THE FENCE BEING WHERE IT IS IN RELATION TO THAT CAR STICKING OUT OF THE ? YEAH. SO THE CLEAR VISION WAS FOR BOTH THAT DRIVEWAY AND THE CORNER LOT. OH, IT'S FOR BOTH. OKAY. THANK YOU. I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST A CORNER. I'M SORRY. OKAY. THANK YOU MR. ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. SO MAN, SO, SO, UM, SO RIGHT NOW, SO, SO, UM, THERE'S A, A FENCE THERE THAT WAS POINTED OUT. UM, THAT'S PART OF THE CLEAR VISION CHALLENGE WAS A SOLID SCREEN FENCE. SO I GUESS, UH, WHY IS IT SOLID AND COULD IT BE A, A SLIGHT FENCE? YEAH, NO, IT COULD BE REMOVED. HE JUST BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, UH, A LITTLE BIT UNDER THREE YEARS AGO. THE GENTLEMAN THAT OWNS THE APARTMENT COMPLEX SOLD IT TO HIM, THE ONE DIRECTLY BEHIND IT. HE OWNED ALL THAT. ALL RIGHTY. DOES, DOES THAT ANSWER? SO I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH NUMBER THAT WAS. SO I MEAN, IF WE ADMIT IT, UM, OKAY. ALRIGHT SIR, STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE RECORD? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHTY. UM, THE APPLICANT, WOULD YOU, UH, MR. FUENTE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE ANY CLOSING ARGUMENTS BEFORE OTHER THAN THE PROPERTY'S UNIQUENESS? I DON'T KNOW. SINCE THE GETGO IT WAS UNDER SIZE. IT, IT WOULD NEVER, NEVER HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE ANY OTHER ROOM FOR EXPANSION. IT WAS, IT WAS PLANTED THAT WAY, I'M ASSUMING. 'CAUSE IT WAS UNDER THE, UM, RIGHT. OTHER THAN THAT, THAT'S ALL, THAT'S ALL I COULD SAY. THERE'S REALLY NO ROOM FOR ANY KIND OF STORE. AND WHAT WOULD, AND THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF THAT I HAVE AND APOLOGIES ON THIS. UM, SO IF THE VARIANCE IS DE DENIED, LET'S SAY THE 975 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 6,000 SQUARE FOOT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A DEVELOPMENT, WHAT HAPPENS THEN, IF THIS, HE'S JUST, OBVIOUSLY THE ADDITION CAN'T HAPPEN, BUT THE PROPERTY'S GONNA BE NON-CONFORMING. IT WOULD HAVE TO GO REVERT BACK TO THE CONDITION BEFORE THE SHAD WAS BUILT, CORRECT? UH, YEAH, THIS, THAT ADDITION THAT THEY DID WOULD'VE TO BE REMOVED. UM, AND WITH THAT ADDITION, WOULD WE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT IT COMPLIES WITH ALL APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES, CURRENT BUILDING CODES, WOULD THAT BE PART OF THE YES. YES. SO HE'S GONNA HAVE TO DO THAT DURING THE PERMANENT PROCESS IF IT NEEDS FIRE. UM, ALL THAT STUFF. SO I, I GUESS MY CLOSING ARGUMENT WOULD BE THAT THE HOUSE IS BUILT ALREADY IN THIS 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK. I MEAN, IT'S ALREADY IN IT, WHICH IS KIND OF AWKWARD. IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, THE HOUSE IS ALREADY INSIDE THE 20, IT'S FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE, THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. SO THERE REALLY ISN'T A REAR PROPERTY. SEE THE HOUSES ARE, IF YOU WERE TO DRAW A 20 FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK, THE HOUSE IS ALREADY IN THE 20 REAR YARD SETBACK, WHICH IS KIND OF UNIQUE IN A SENSE. AWKWARD, UNIQUE, WHATEVER. WE SEE A LOT OF UNIQUE SITUATIONS. YEAH, IT'S ALREADY IN, IN THE 20 FOOT SETBACK, SO THANK YOU SIR. IT WOULDN'T BE ADDING ANYTHING MORE TO IT. THANK YOU. WOULD THAT CLOSE? IT'S THE PUBLIC PORTION. SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR CITY STAFF HERE. SO, SO IF WE ARE ADDRESSING THAT SOLID SCREEN FENCE THAT IS IN THE SIDE YARD THAT IS AT THAT CORNER, WOULD IT JUST BE THE EM ADMITTANCE OF NUMBER THREE? WOULD THAT RESOLVE THAT THEN BY NOT INCLUDING IT? CORRECT. YEAH, HE'S INDICATING HE'S GONNA TAKE IT DOWN SO YOU CAN JUST NOT INCLUDE IT. OKAY. SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE A READER FOR THE MOTION. OKAY, SO I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF, UH, SO REGARDING CASE [04:30:01] NUMBER BOA 2 3 1 0 3 0 116, I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR A 975 FOOT SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM 6,000, UH, SQUARE FOOT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A DEVELOPMENT OF A, I'M READING THE RIGHT ONE, RIGHT 5,025 FOOT SQUARE FOOT LOT TO A 19 FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW IN ADDITION TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. UM, AND THEN SKIP THREE, GO TO FOUR. UM, A VARIANCE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION SITUATED AT 4 0 2 LUT AVENUE, APPLICANT B AND RENEE FUENTE BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH THAT LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THAT VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. UH, THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTED A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE DRIVEWAY. UM, LET'S SEE. UM, IN THIS CASE, A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE DOES NOT IMPEDE VEHICLES FROM ENTERING OR EXITING THE PROPERTY. STAFF FINDS THAT THIS REQUEST IS NOT CONTRARY AS A DISTANCE, DOES NOT PROPOSE ANY SAFETY ISSUES. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO REQUESTING A LOT SIZE AND REAR SETBACK VARIANCE, WHICH WOULD NOT POSE ANY SAFETY ISSUES AS THE LOT HAS ALREADY DEVELOPED. AND A REDUCED REAR SETBACK IS ALREADY ESTABLISHED. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN APPLICANT ALTERING FENCE TO MEET THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT. UM, IT WOULD ALSO RESULT IN THE LOT NOT BEING ABLE TO BE DEVELOPED AND PREVENT AN ADDITION IN, IN ALREADY INTRUDING REAR SETBACK. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE FENCES CURRENTLY 10 FEET FROM THE DRIVEWAY, UH, THE STAFF FINDS THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE WITH REQUESTED VARIANCE AS ADEQUATE SIGHT DISTANCE IS PRESENTED. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS ALSO OBSERVED WITH THE REQUESTED LOT SIZE VARIANCES ARE REAR SETBACK VARIANCE AS THE LOT CANNOT BE DEVELOPED AND THE REAR SETBACK WILL LEAVE ROOM BETWEEN THE ADJACENT PROPERTY FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NON-AUTHORIZED THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS VARIANCE IS LOCATED NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH IS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. IF GRANTED, THE STAFF FINDS THESE REQUESTS AS NO, UH, STAFF FINDS THESE REQUESTS AS NO OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE MEDIA AREA SEEN TO BE VIOLATING THE U D C UH, BUILDING STANDARDS AND WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. UM, IF GRANTED THE DISTANCE WILL MAINTAIN 10 FEET FROM THE FRONT DRIVEWAY. UM, UM, LET'S SEE HERE. AND SURE I GET THE REST OF IT, UH, FROM THE REAR SETBACK AND REDUCED LOT SIZE WILL NOT, UH, LIKELY ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THIS DISTRICT. UPON SITE VISIT STAFF OBSERVED OTHER FRONT YARD PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCES IN IMMEDIATE VICINITY, VICINITY, SIMILAR LOT SIZES AND THE REAR BUTTS, UH, A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE HAS SAW IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. I SECOND, SECOND, SECOND. UH, MS. BRAGMAN. SO, SO I READ THE MOTION, UH, WITH JUST THE EXCLUSION OF THE CORONER, UM, UM, CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT AND, AND I THINK THAT'S, UH, RELEVANT HERE BECAUSE, UH, CORONERS ARE IMPORTANT AND I THINK, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY STATED THEY'RE BER REMOVE DEFENSE. SO, UM, SO WITH THAT I WAS OKAY WITH ALL THE REST OF IT. SO I'LL BE, UM, APPROVING THIS AS READ. THANK YOU MR. REAGAN. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS READ. ALRIGHT, LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. MANO. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. DEAN. I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA. I CONCUR. MR. RHI I CONCUR. MR. BONILLA. I CONCUR. MS. KAPLAN, I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. NINE IN FAVOR. ONE IN OPPOSITION. THIS VARIANCE, UH, DOES PASS. UH, NEXT, UH, DO WE HAVE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION? YEAH, THERE'S ANOTHER ONE. OKAY, MANNA. SO, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA 2 3 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 6, I MOVED TO THE BOARD OF JUSTIN GRANT A REQUEST FOR A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT PRIVACY FENCE TO ALLOW A FOUR FOOT, [04:35:01] FOUR INCH, UH, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN PRIVACY FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT 4 0 2 UH LEVITT AVENUE APPLICANT BEING RENEE LA FUENTE. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT AL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT AID, 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 PROPOSED OFFENSE BEING REQUESTED IS A PRIVACY FENCE, UH, THAT EXCEEDS MAXIMUM HEIGHTS REQUIREMENT. IF GRANTED STAFF FINDS REQUESTS WOULD BE IN HARMONY OF THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B. THE SPECIAL, UH, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE SITES TO, UH, PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. THE FENCE AND ITS PRIVACY FENCE. THE FENCE IS PRIVACY EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE. HOWEVER, THE LOCATION, EXCESS HEIGHT WILL STILL ALLOW THE PUBLIC WILL CONVENIENCE, UH, TO BE SERVED. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE PROPOSED FOREFOOT FOUR INCH PRIVACY FENCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED NEIGHBORING CONFORMING PROPERTIES AS THE FENCE IS BUILT AWAY FROM ANY OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, WHICH IS, UH, THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THE PRIVACY FENCE, UH, EXCEEDS A MAXIMUM THREE FOOT FENCE HEIGHT. THE FOUR FOOT FOUR INCH FENCE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE HEIGHT ON A SMALL PORTION OF THE FRONT YARD WOULD NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. UH, E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE AND ESTABLISH FOR THE SPECIAL DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS FOR THE USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH IS, UM, AND IT DOES NOT PREVENT THE USE END OF MOTION. SECOND, SECOND. SECOND. UH, MS. KAPLAN, UH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME DISCUSSION, MR. MANNING? UM, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR, YOU KNOW, SIMPLY BECAUSE, UM, YOU KNOW, IT IS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN AND, UM, YOU KNOW, AND I, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE, THE GOOGLE DRIVE, I CAN SEE THROUGH THE FENCE. SO I'LL BE HAPPY WITH THAT. MM-HMM. ? I AGREE. LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. KAPLAN. I CONCUR. MR. DEAN. OKAY, I'M GOING CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA CONCUR. MR. RHI, SEE YOU NEXT TO HIM. I CONCUR. MR. BONNIS. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OONA. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UH, WITH 10 IN FAVORS, YOUR OPPOSITION, THAT VARIANCE EXEMPTION, SPECIAL EXEMPTION PASSES. UH, THANK YOU, SIR. SO THE TIME IS FIVE 50 AND, UH, MS. UH, KAPLAN HAS LEFT THE MEETING. SO WE'RE DOWN TO NINE MEMBERS. UM, I WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE LAST CASE, BUT I WAS ASK, I WOULD ASK AS A COURTESY, IF YOU SEE ANYTHING THAT YOU SEE AN OPPOSITION THAT WOULD KEEP YOU FROM VOTING, UM, IN SUPPORT OF THE CASE, IF YOU COULD LET THE BOARD KNOW, UH, BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE NINE MEMBERS, IT TAKES UNANIMOUS CONSENT HERE FOR THE VARIANCE TO PASS. AND WE COULD POTENTIALLY, UM, ASK FOR A CONTINUANCE WHERE WE'RE FULLY IMP PANELED AGAIN AS A RESPECT FOR THE, FOR THE APPLICANT. SO I'D ASK IF THERE'S ANY OPPOSITION THAT YOU SEE TODAY WITH THE LAST AND REMAINING CASE. IF YOU COULD PLEASE EXPRESS YOUR, UM, YOUR, UM, OPPOSITION IN, IN THE DIALOGUE, IN THE CASE DISCUSSION. THANK YOU. LAST CASE, PLEASE BO O A ONE 17. IT'S, UH, LOCATED ON FIVE 11 CLOUD W BLACK COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO, UH, APPLICANT BE MR. BEN COURT. UM, A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW CORRUGATED METAL FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD ZONE RMM FOUR SLIDE PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF DOWNTOWN, JUST EAST OF THE ALAMO DOME CODE COMPLIANCE INVESTIGATION WAS FOUND, FENCE WAS BUILT WITH NO PERMITS AND WITH PROHIBITED MATERIAL UPON HOMICIDE VISITS. NO OTHER CORRUGATED METAL FENCES WERE OBSERVED AND NO OTHER VARIANCES REQUIREMENT WERE FOUND ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE CORRUGATED METAL IN THE CORRECT NORTHERN FACING SITE PLAN. THIS IS THE, UH, FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. YOU CAN SEE THE, UH, CORRUGATED METAL BEHIND THE UH, BUSH. IT STARTS BEHIND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME. IT'S CLOSER TO THE, UH, CLOSER VIEW THE SURROUNDING AREA. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND B O A 23 1 0 3 0 0 1 17 BASED ON FOLLOW FINALS OF FACT VARIANCE WILL INTRODUCE OR PROHIBITED FENCING MATERIAL TO THE AREA AND IT'LL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. 29 NOTICES [04:40:01] WERE MAILED OUT, UH, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IMPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. ALRIGHT, LET'S SEE IF ANY, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. I DO. UH, WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE? HOW COME IT WASN'T INDICATED? UH, IT'S A SIX FOOT, WELL IT, IT'S SIX FOOT FENCE. UM, IT'S WITHIN THE MARGIN OF ERROR OF THE SIX INCHES IF HE NEEDS IT. UM, WHEN I MEASURED IT, IT WAS SIX FOOT, MOST OF IT, BUT A COUPLE OF SPACES WERE LIKE ONE OR TWO INCHES ABOVE IT. BUT HE DOES NOT NEED A VARIANCE FOR THE HEIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? HEARING NONE, I'D ASK THE APPLICANT TO PLEASE COME FORWARD AND LET'S BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION. QUESTION FOR STAFF, IS THE FENCE TOO CLOSE ON THE OFFSET IN THE FRONT YARD? UH, SAY IT ONE MORE TIME. SORRY. IS THE FENCE TOO CLOSE IN THE FRONT YARD? IT DOES NOT GO BEYOND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE, UH, HOME. OKAY. SO THIS IS ALL REAR FENCE SIDING. REAR WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. THANK YOU. UH, PLEASE PROCEED WITH THE, WITH YOUR CASE, SIR. UH, YES. UH, UH, CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME? DARRIO BECO FIVE 11 CLOUD W BLACK. UH, THE REASON WHAT I, I'M REQUESTING TO USE THIS TYPE OF MATERIAL FOR MY PROPERTY IS BECAUSE IT'S MORE DURABLE. IT LOOKS A LOT BETTER THAN WOODEN FENCE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO STAIN IT EVERY, EVERY YEAR. I HAD A FENCE FOR JUST OVER SIX YEARS AND IT WAS ALREADY, UH, ROTTEN DAMAGE AND EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SEATED WOOD, SO IT JUST NOT THE TYPE OF MATERIAL FOR TEXAS. THAT'S WHY. AND, UH, I NOTICED THERE'S VENUE USED AROUND IN THE CITY. IT'S NOT A REALLY COMMON MATERIAL, BUT, UH, I MEAN, LIKE I SAID, I GOT PLENTY OF, UH, NEIGHBORS THAT SAID, YEAH, THAT LOOKS GREAT. YEAH. UH, I WISH I CAN INSTALL THAT TOO. COULD YOU HAND THOSE LETTERS TO STAFF AND PUT THAT IN THE PUBLIC RECORD A COPY, BUT YEAH. YEAH. YOU'LL THAT'S THE APPLICATION. WE ALREADY HAVE THAT ON FILE. IT'S ON THERE RIGHT? THE, UH, ALL DAY. MR. MAN, I'LL GIVE YOU THE COURTESY OF ASKING ABOUT CAPS AND YEAH. OKAY. WELL, I GUESS SO YOU SHOWED THE, I MEAN, SO IT, IT DIDN'T INCLUDE ANY PE PEOPLE THAT WERE IN FAVOR, I GUESS, WHEN HE GAVE THE PRESENTATION. SO I GUESS WE'RE TALKING WELL, YEAH, WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY. OKAY. UM, BUT I GUESS THE APPLICANT HAS SOME. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WAS TALK ABOUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT FENCING IS THAT WE WANT IT TO BE SAFE FOR, FOR EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY. AND ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE WITH METAL FENCING IS IT LEAVES A SHARP EDGE ON THE TOP AND THE BOTTOM. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, I GUESS IT'S NOT PERMITTED IS TO HAVE THOSE KIND OF DANGEROUS EDGES. AND SO WE ASK, UH, WHEN IT IS THAT WHENEVER WE SEE THESE FENCINGS THAT WE DO PUT CAPS ON THEM AND SO THE CAP WOULD PREVENT, UM, YOU KNOW, ANYBODY FROM BEING INJURED SHOULD THEY COME IN CONTACT WITH IT AND SO YEAH. AND PURCHASE IT WITH THE MATERIAL. SO I HAVE THEM. AND SO, SO, SO I GUESS, YOU KNOW, AS WE GO THROUGH THE DIALOGUE, YOU WOULD PROBABLY, IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR YOU TO AMEND YOUR, UM, APPLICATION TO INCLUDE THAT, SAY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO INCLUDE CAPS ON THE TOP AND BOTTOM, UH, OF THE FENCE, YOU KNOW, FOR SAFETY REASONS. OKAY. COULD YOU STATE, COULD YOU STATE THAT, THAT YOU'RE GONNA AMEN APPLICATION TO? YES. UH, I STATE THAT, UH, A CAP WILL BE ADDED TO THE TOP OF THE FENCE FOR SAFETY REASON. IN IN THE BOTTOM. UNDERNEATH IN THE BOTTOM. YES, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, LET'S SEE. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ORIAN, MR. ORIAN? YEAH, SO I NOTICED THAT YOU DON'T HAVE A FENCE ON THE OTHER SIDE PROPERTY LINE. CAN YOU DISCUSS WHY THERE'S NOT A FENCE THERE AT ALL? UH, AND SECONDLY, CAN YOU PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE ELSE IN THE NEARBY AREA THAT WOULD ALSO HAVE CORRUGATED METAL? 'CAUSE I'M GOING THROUGH GOOGLE EARTH TO LOOK LIKE THE ONLY ONE THAT WAIT FOR ME. YEAH, THAT'S, YES, SIR. OKAY. YEAH, ON THE LEFT SIDE, WE JUST HAPPEN NOT TO HAVE A FENCE. UH, WHEN I PURCHASED THE HOUSE IN 2007, IT WAS NEVER A FENCE. AND, UH, MY NEIGHBOR JUST NEVER REALLY BOTHERED TO SAY THAT WE NEED A FENCE. SO WE GOT ALONG JUST FINE LIKE THAT. UH, WE DO JUST HAVE A LITTLE, LIKE BUSHES TO THE LEFT SIDE. BUT YEAH, WE BOTH AGREED TO HAVE THOSE PLANTED THERE. [04:45:01] UM, THE FENCE DOES START IN THE BACK AND IT'S LIKE, UH, AT THE END OF THE HOUSE THERE'S LIKE A FENCE THAT PROVIDES PEOPLE FROM GOING TO THE BACK OF OUR YARD. AND THEN OF COURSE, AND THERE'S THE CITY FENCE, UH, IN THE BACKYARD. THANK YOU, SIR. UM, DID YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE, AND, AND YEAH, ONE LAST QUESTION THAT THE PLANS ALSO SHOW BEHIND THAT VAN IN THE PICTURE. A A COVERED AWNING, IS THAT A SETBACK ISSUE OR A COVERED PARKING FEATURE? UH, I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THAT AGAIN? UH, IN THE PHOTO ON THE, ON THE STAFF PICTURE, THERE'S A BLACK VAN IN YOUR DRIVEWAY, CORRECT. AND DIRECTLY BEHIND IT, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE A VINYL CARPORT OF SOME TIME. IS THAT A, IS THAT WITHIN A SETBACK? I I THINK THAT'S A TEMPORARY, UH, NO, THAT'S IS ACTUALLY LIKE, UH, WHAT THEY USE LIKE, UH, AT THE DEALERSHIPS KIND OF THING. UH, WHEN WE PURCHASED THE HOUSE, UH, WE, THE, WE INSTALLED THAT ON, UH, THROUGH THE BUILDER. UH, SO IT IS LIKE, UH, IT'S DETACHED FROM THE HOUSE. IT'S JUST LIKE A 12 FEET LONG JUST TO GIVE SHADE TO A VEHICLE. YEAH. IF WE BRING UP THE GOOGLE FRONT YARD VIEW, UM, IT DOES SHOW THE AWNING IN PLACE AND IT, IT, IT, YOU KNOW, FROM, FROM CASUALIZATION IT DOES LOOK LIKE IT IS APPROPRIATELY, UH, SET BACK. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT STAFF? DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS TO BE READ IN FOR THE RECORD? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHTY. AND WE DO HAVE THE LETTERS FROM THE NEIGHBORS IN SUPPORT. COULD YOU POINT OUT, IS THERE ANY ADDRESSES THAT YOU WANNA POINT OUT WHERE THE LETTERS OF SUPPORT ARE COMING FROM OR YEAH, SPECIFICALLY IF IT'S THE ONE, I GUESS ABUTTING THE PROPERTY SO THAT THE SHARED IT'S SUPPORT, THEY'RE SUPPORTIVE LETTERS. SO WE'LL SEE. I HAVE 5 2 2 CLAUDE BLACK DRIVE, 6 1 1 CLAUDE BLACK DRIVE, 6 3 1 CLAUDE BLACK DRIVE, 7 0 3 CLAUDE BLACK AND 5 1 5 CLAUDE BLACK. THIS IS JASON NEIGHBOR, THAT'S HIM. BUT NOT 5 0 7. SO 5 0 7 WOULD BE THE PROPERTY THAT SHARES THE LINE, CORRECT? YES. SO, SO DID WE HAVE A LETTER FROM THEM OR HAVE YOU TALKED TO THEM? YES. UH, SO 5 0 7 5 0 7 OH THE ONE THAT SHARE? NO, UM, I ACTUALLY DIDN'T HAVE AN EMAIL, BUT I NEVER PRINTED HAVE AN EMAIL IN SUPPORT. YEAH. AND THERE'S AN EMAIL IN SUPPORT. YEAH. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. UM, LET'S SEE. DOES, UH, ANY FINAL COMMENTS BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? UH, NO, NOT, I MEAN, SO HE'S ALREADY STATED THE CAPS AND THE YES. ON THE TOP AND THE BOTTOM MM-HMM. , RIGHT. SO, OKAY. YEAH, THAT WOULD BE, THANK YOU. SO LIKE I SAID, I ALREADY PURCHASED THEM, SO THANK YOU SIR. AND AGAIN, AS A COURTESY, IF THERE'S ANY BOARD MEMBERS IN OPPOSITION OF WHAT THE VARIANCE IS BEING READ TODAY, IF YOU COULD PLEASE LET US KNOW. UH, WE ARE DOWN TO NINE MEMBERS. WE TYPICALLY HAVE A RELIEF VALVE OF A COUPLE TO, YOU KNOW, SO JUST A HUNDRED PERCENT. OKAY. HERE ARE NONE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION. MANO . MR. MANO, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 3 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 7. I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO ALLOW A CORRUGATED METAL FENCE WITH CAPS ON BOTTOM AND TOP IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD. UM, SITUATED AT FIVE 11 CLAUDE W. BLACK APPLICANT BEING, UH, HAN, UH, 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 LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS ADMITTED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS IS LOCATED BEHIND THE FRONT FACADE. IT DOES NOT POSE ANY GENERAL HEALTH AND SAFETY CONCERNS, UH, IN ITS LOCATION. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS OTHER FENCING MATERIALS WOULD NOT MATCH THE DWELLING AESTHETICS. UH, THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF WHAT THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW, THE REQUEST APPEARS TO BE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS LOCATION HEIGHTS OF THE FENCE [04:50:01] ABIDE BY U D C STANDARDS. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO 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 CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH HIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THAT THE VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES AS THE LOCATION OF THE FENCE IS BEHIND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME AND HAS VEGETATION FORWARD OF THE FENCE. SIX. THE APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE OF 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 ARE NOT DUE TO OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH HIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE ASAD IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. END OF MOTION. HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND. UH, MR. ORIAN SECOND. SO YEAH, AND I'D LIKE TO OFFER AMENDMENT TO ADD THE NORTH SIDE AND NORTH REAR JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE RIGHT. GO. JUST THE ONE SIDE. I ACCEPT THAT. NORTH SIDE AND NORTH REAR. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO ACCEPT. SO ACCEPTED. AND, UH, THE, UH, UH, RIGHT BEHIND WHERE THE, LIKE THE CARPORT I HERE IN THERE, THERE'S GONNA BE LIKE A GATE, THE SAME MATERIAL, THE SAME, EVERYTHING. WELL, THAT'D BE COVERED I THINK. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO MODIFY ANYTHING. I THINK THAT'S COVERED BY THE FENCE DIALOGUE, SO I THINK THAT'S COVERED. OKAY. JUST WANTED DOUBLE CHECK. UH, UH, CITY STAFF. CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT? SO, SO BASICALLY IF THEY WANNA PUT A FENCE ACROSS THE, I GUESS THE DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD INCLUDE, UH, BE THE SOLID MIDDLE, THAT WOULD ALSO BE INCLUDED WITH THIS, THAT WOULDN'T REQUIRE ANY MODIFICATION. IS THAT ALONG? YOU'RE GONNA PUT A CORRUGATED METAL FENCE ON YOUR DRIVEWAY. THERE'LL BE HALFWAY, ALMOST THROUGH MY PROPERTY. SO TOWARDS THE BACK WHERE THE VAN WAS PARKED, BUT BEHIND THE CARPORT? YEAH. TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY? YEAH. YES, YOU'RE FINE. YES. OKAY. OKAY. OKAY, LET'S UH, GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. SO, UM, SO WELL I'M GONNA TELL YOU WHY I LIKE IT . SO I, I'M, THAT'S WHY YOU LIKE, OKAY. WELL SO, SO I THINK FOR A COUPLE REASONS. SO ONE, WE TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE DIALOGUE FOR THE CAP. UM, ALSO, UM, I, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, UM, UM, ANODIZED OR WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL IT, COLORED METAL. SO, SO BASICALLY I THINK IT HAS A BETTER PROTECTION AND IT IS AESTHETICALLY PLEASING, WHICH IS ONE OF THE DIALOGUES THAT WE READ HERE. UM, AND SO, UM, AND I THINK THAT, UM, WE HAVE SEEN THESE TYPES OF FENCING IN THE PAST, UM, AND HAVE BEEN IN FAVOR OF THEM, UH, WHEN, YOU KNOW, I GUESS WHEN IT FIT IN THE SCENARIO OF, YOU KNOW, THE SURROUNDING AREA. SO FOR THOSE REASONS I'LL BE IN FAVOR. THANK YOU SIR. I AGREE. SORRY. ALRIGHT, CAN LET, LET'S GO FORWARD WITH THE ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDING IS A FACT. MR. DEAN, I CONCUR. MR. MENCHACA I CONCUR. MR. RHI I CONCUR. MR. BONNI I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. AO I CONCUR WITH NINE IN FAVOR. ZERO IN OPPOSITION. THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU SIR. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. I KNOW IT WAS A LONG DAY FOR YOU. NO, I KNOW, BUT I'M GETTING BYE FOR DINNER, RIGHT? ? I GO AHEAD AND SARAH COLD SANDWICH. YOU WILL, YOU CAN WE DO THAT INSTEAD, . THANK YOU. ALL [ Approval of Minutes  ] RIGHT. ANY OTHER BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD? UH, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES. SECOND. DO WE TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE OR IS THAT A, UH, ROLL CALL? JUST ACCLIMATION IS FINE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE AYE. OKAY. ANY OTHER BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD? NO SIR. ALRIGHT. THE TIME IS 6 0 6. A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IS ADJOURNED. BE SURE TO GET YOURSELF SOMETHING TO EAT. * 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.