* 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. YES. MM-HMM. , YOU'RE RECORDING. [00:00:01] ALRIGHT. [Work Session  ] ALL RIGHT. IT'S ONE OH SEVEN. I'M GONNA CALL THIS MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS TO ORDER IF WE COULD HAVE THE SPANISH INTERPRETER COME OUT AND DO THEIR PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE UH, STAND UP AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH TO CHANCE, ONE NATION UNDER GOD IN THE, WITH LIBERTY OF JUSTICE FOR ALL UNDER THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD. ONE INDIVIDUAL. ALRIGHT, SO BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION. THE BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. THE CASES ARE LISTED BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND THE STREET ADDRESS. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT. LASTLY, ASK CHAIR, I'LL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS. I ASK THE BOARD MEMBERS, SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS A CHAIR AND I'LL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE MEETING. WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY'S ZONING CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THIS AREA. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW. WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELEASE LAW AND WE DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. WE ALSO SERVE AS A, IN AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28. ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 28 DASH FIVE. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR CASES AND OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED UNDER THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS. THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY WILL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ANY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER. AFTER EVERYONE HAS HEARD THE CASE, IT WILL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION. EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION. IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY. IT REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND GRANTING THE RELEASE SOUGHT REST WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS IN WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISIONS OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S. DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE. UH, STAFF, BEFORE YOU DO YOUR PRESENTATION, CAN YOU DO A ROLL CALL? ROLL CALL PLEASE. DR. BARTON. HERE. MS. PICASSO? HERE. MS. BROWN? HERE. MR. DEAN? PRESENT. MS. CRUZ? HERE. MR. ZUNIGA? PRESENT. MR. VASQUEZ? PRESENT. MS. BRAGMAN? PRESENT. MR. OZUNA? PRESENT. MR. RHI. CHAIR? ORIAN. AND I'M PRESENT. SO AT AT POINT WE HAVE 10 AT THIS POINT. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. SO PLEASE, UH, [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items] PROCEED WITH YOUR PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON. STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST. PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXEMPTION OR APPEAL AND PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUESTS IN X INDICATES THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR REQUEST. FOR THOSE THAT SIGN UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST A PROPOSED VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXEMPTION OR APPEAL. YOU'LL BE CALLING THE ORDER THAT YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION. FOR THOSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GIVE UP THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER, THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED MAXIMUM TWO PEOPLE GIVEN UP THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG [00:05:01] WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN? YES. UH, AND HOW MANY PEOPLE WILL SIGN UP TO SPEAK? IS IT A A A LOT TODAY OR JUST? JUST ONE? ALRIGHT, SO LET'S START WITH, UH, ITEM NUMBER ONE. GOOD AFTERNOON. ITEM NUMBER ONE, BO O 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 7. ADDRESS IS 9 35 AGIR AVENUE COUNCIL. DISTRICT ONE APPLICANT IS JOAN GALVEZ A REQUEST FOR ONE PAUSE REAL QUICK. UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, CAN YOU HEAR US COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER ROSMAN KING HARRIS? COULD IT BE THAT WE'RE ON, ON MUTE ON THE THING ON THE WEBEX? HE CAN UNMUTE HIMSELF, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE UNMUTED. CAN YOU HEAR US? COMMISSIONER TES TESS, CAN YOU HEAR US? ASK HIM DO A THUMBS UP? YEAH, GIVE ASK HIM TO GIVE A THUMBS UP OR SOMETHING. CAN YOU GIVE US A THUMBS UP IF YOU HEAR US THUMBS UP? YES. OKAY, SO WE CAN HEAR YOU BUT YOU CAN'T HEAR US. NO, IT'S GONNA BE NO, IT'S, I'M SORRY. THE OTHER WAY AROUND. UH, WE, WE CAN, YOU CAN HEAR US BUT WE CANNOT HEAR YOU. CAN YOU TEST YOUR AUDIO FOR US PLEASE? THERE'S NOTHING. IS THE SOUND ON YOUR COMPUTER ON WE'RE STILL NOT HEARING YOU. WHEN I, WEBEX. WEBEX IN LAST TIME I HAD THE SAME ISSUE AND IT WAS A SETTING IN WINDOWS. I HAD MY MICROPHONE OFF EVEN THOUGH I WAS UNMUTED IN WEBEX. SO WEBEX WOULD, WAS ACKNOWLEDGING MY MICROPHONE, BUT WINDOWS I HAD IT TURNED OFF AND IT AND THAT WAS THE, ULTIMATELY THE PROBLEM. YEAH. IF YOU'RE ABLE TO COMMISSIONER, UH, YOU CAN TRY THE CALL IN OPTION UNDER THE WEBEX INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH YOUR COMPUTER. YES. AND AS LONG AS YOU CAN HEAR US, WE CAN CONTINUE WITH THE MEETING BECAUSE YOU CAN GIVE US A THUMBS UP, BUT WE WON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE ASKING ANY QUESTIONS UNTIL WE GET AUDIO. OKAY. VERY GOOD. WE'RE PROCEEDING. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. UM, A REQUEST FOR ONE, A FOUR FOOT SPECIAL EXEMPTION FROM THE N C D FIVE, MAXIMUM TWO FEET HEIGHT TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE FRONT YARD. TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE N C D FIVE TO ALLOW A GATE STRUCTURE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY. AND THREE, A ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE 13 FEET FOUR INCHES FROM THE FRONT YARD DRIVEWAY. CURB ZONING IS R FOUR C D FIVE CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON GON NEAR BETWEEN INTERSECTIONS OF WEST MULBERRY AVENUE AND WEST MAGNOLIA AVENUE. JUST EAST OF IH 10. THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCTED A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY WITHOUT A PERMIT. ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING VARIANCES FOR THE GATE STRUCTURE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY AND CLEAR VISION ALONG THE FRONT YARD DRIVEWAY CURB. THIS IS A SITE PLAN, UH, SHOWING THE FENCE VARIANCE, CLEAR VISION AND THE GATE ACROSS THE, UH, DRIVEWAY. AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THIS IS A VACANT STRUCTURE. UH, NEXT DOOR TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE FENCE ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY LINE. AND THIS IS THE FENCE HEIGHT AND THE FENCE GATE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY RIGHT THERE BY THE, UM, GREEN RECYCLE CAN. AND THIS IS YOUR CLEAR VISION, UH, MEASUREMENT AND YOUR SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION BECO BEACON HILL [00:10:01] NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND B O A 23 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 7 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT STANDARDS WERE CREATED TO PROTECT TO PROJECT UNIFORMITY IN A NEIGHBORHOOD. TWO. THE FENCE AND GATE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY WILL ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. AND THREE, THE PROPOSED SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE WILL RESULT IN INCONSISTENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AS NO OTHER FENCES EXCEEDING THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS WERE SEEN IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR CLEAR VISION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL M B O 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 7 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. THE DISTANCE AND PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE WILL NOT IMPEDE VEHICLES FROM ENTERING OR EXITING THE PROPERTY. STAFF NOTIFICATION PLAN STAFF, NO DOUBT. 27 NOTICES. 15. RETURN IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION AND BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION. AND THESE ARE THE PUBLIC RESPONSES AND THESE ARE THE PUBLIC RESPONSES THAT THE APPLICANT DID. SHE WENT OUT, UH, TO GET SIGNATURES ON THE NEXT COUPLE SLIDES. AND THEN THIS IS A LETTER FROM BEACON HILL. I'LL JUST KIND OF SUMMARIZE IT. UM, BEACON HILL OPPOSES THE FOUR FOOT SPECIAL EXEMPTION FOR THE NCD FIVE, AND THEY ALSO OPPOSE THE GATE, UH, ACROSS THE STRUCTURE. HOWEVER, THE RESIDENTS VOTED TO NOT OPPOSE THE ONE FOOT AGENTS VARIANCE FOR THE, UH, 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION, UM, TO ALLOW THE FENCE TO BE 13 FEET FOUR INCHES FROM THE FRONT YARD DRIVEWAY. IF MS. GALVAN AGREES TO OPEN THE FENCE TO THE FACADE OF THE HOUSE SO THAT THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS MAY BACK OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY SAFELY, AS SUGGESTED BY THE B O A ON, UH, AUGUST 7TH. UH, ALSO, UM, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS WORKING WITH THE SAFE OFFICER AND CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE BUILDING OFFICER TO HELP, UH, MS. ALVEZ WITH THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR. AS SHE MENTIONED LAST TIME IT WAS, IT WAS VACANT AND UH, THIS INCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. SO, JUST TO, JUST TO BE CLEAR, BEACON HILL IS, IS SUGGESTING, UH, THAT LAST FEW FEET, UH, ARE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU, UHHUH. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA? YES, SIR. YES, SIR. UH, YOU STATED THE CO COMPLIANCE IS WORKING WITH THAT? YES, SIR. UH, ACCORDING TO BEACON HILL, UM, THEIR CO COMPLIANCE IS SAFE OFFICER. THEY'RE WORKING WITH THE BUILDING, A VACANT BUILDING TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE. THE VACANT PROPERTY NEXT DOOR FOR MS. GALVEZ? YES. SO THEY, UH, THE BUILDING HAS BEEN, UH, TICKETED. UH, I HAVE AS OF THIS POINT, NO, I DIDN'T, I DON'T, I'M NOT SURE I, I CAN FOLLOW UP FOR YOU TO MAKE SURE. BUT LAST I HEARD THAT THEY WERE GONNA WORK WITH BEACON HILL WAS WORKING WITH THE SAFE OFFICER, ET CETERA. GIMME YES, SIR. CERTAINLY COMMISSIONER ZUNA. SO, JUST A REMINDER TO THE BOARD, THIS IS CONTINUANCE OF A CASE THAT WAS PRESENTED LAST, UH, LAST MEETING. UM, SO THE APPLICANT WAS, UH, WAS TASKED WITH, WITH GETTING KIND OF NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT, WHICH SHE DID. UH, THE ONLY OPPOSITION IS FROM THE NEIGHBOR THAT TESTIFIED AT LAST MEETING, UM, ABOUT HER OPPOSITION TO THE, TO THE FENCE. SO THAT'S THE ONLY OPPOSITION THAT WE'RE SEEING, UH, TO, TO THE REQUEST HERE, OTHER THAN THE, THE STAFFS. ALRIGHT. AND THEN I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. YES, SIR. DOES THE N C D STANDARD ALLOW FOR, UH, A, A LITTLE HIGHER FENCE IF IT'S PREDOMINANTLY OPEN? OR DOES IT, DOES IT NOT, UH, DELINEATE THE TYPE OF FENCE? NO, IT DOESN'T ALLOW IT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. LET'S HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. YOU NEED TO SEE YOUR NAME. I HAVE, OH, I'M SORRY. UH, WE HAVE ONE MORE COMMISSIONER QUESTION. UH, YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, I WASN'T AT THE LAST MEETING. YES, SIR, GO AHEAD. SO I'M CATCHING UP ON THIS ONE. UH, IS THE OWNER AMENABLE TO THE, UH, CONDITIONS SUGGESTED BY THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITH REGARD TO THE DESIGN OF THE FENCE ON THE SIDE? WHAT DO YOU MEAN? I DON'T UNDERSTAND. OKAY. SO WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS IS, UM, WE HAVE SOME NEW COMMISSIONERS HERE AT THE MEETING, SO I NOTICED YES. SO THAT I DID KNOW THIS, YOU KNOW, THEY WEREN'T PRIVY TO WHAT WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME, UHHUH . AND SO, UH, IS BE, BEFORE WE GET INTO QUESTIONS, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD? UH, 'CAUSE USUALLY WHAT WE DO IS WE'LL HEAR THEIR, THEIR, YOU KNOW, THEIR PRESENTATION AND THEN WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. OKAY. BUT IN THIS CASE, SINCE WE HEARD Y'ALL HEARD YOU LAST TIME, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU'D LIKE TO ADD THAT CHANGED BEFORE WE DELVE INTO QUESTIONS? YES. UH, THE LAST TIME, UH, THAT I WAS HERE, UM, SEVERAL OF YOU SUGGESTED IF I COULD DO, UM, A VIEW, UM, ON MY FENCE TO ADJUST, YOU KNOW, SO IN CASE IF THE HOUSE EVER COMES TO THAT, SOMEBODY IS GONNA LIVE THERE AND THEY NEED TO DRIVE BACK, IF WE, IF I COULD TAKE SEVERAL BOARDS OFF SO THEY COULD HAVE A VIEW, A VIEW WHEN THEY'RE BACKING UP. I WENT AHEAD AND DID THAT. SO YOU DID HAVE A, YOU HAVE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN AT THIS POINT? YES, SIR. YES. TO THE 15 FEET. OKAY. YES, I WENT AHEAD, UH, I WAS TOLD IF I WOULD DO IT, UH, ON THAT FIRST POST THAT WAS THERE, UH, [00:15:01] THANK YOU FOR REMEMBER. YES. AND I, AND I WENT AHEAD AND DID, I MEAN, IT COST ME $600. I WENT AHEAD AND DID, LIKE I SAID, UH, I DID IT BECAUSE OF THE HOMELESS PEOPLE THAT WERE STAYING THERE. I MEAN, THEY'RE STILL HOMELESS PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, REGARDLESS. THEY, THEY ARE, I STILL HEAR THEM AT NIGHT EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, BUT I FEEL SECURE THAT MY FENCE IS THERE. I REALLY DO. AND, UH, BUT I WENT AHEAD AND I MADE SURE THAT I WAS PRODUCTIVE ENOUGH TO GO AND INITIATE AND DO SOMETHING FOR MYSELF TO KEEP MY FENCE. SO I DID, UH, PAY TO, TO HAVE A, UH, AN OPEN VIEW AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IF IT'S, IT'S, IT'S COST ME A LOT OF MONEY. THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR, AS OF TODAY, THEY HAVE DONE NOTHING TO THEIR HOUSE. NOTHING. I MEAN, NOT EVEN A WINDOW, JUST NOTHING. YOU KNOW, THE RACCOONS, AS I STATED, THE FIRST TIME THAT THEY WERE, UH, WILDLIFE GOING INTO THAT, UH, ABANDONED HOUSE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN ABANDONED FOR THREE YEARS, YOU KNOW, THEY SPENT WILDLIFE. WELL, LET'S NOT, LET'S NOT GET OFF TOPIC. WE YES. BUT WE WANT TO HEAR ABOUT YOUR FENCE. AND I DO, BUT IN YOUR DRIVEWAY AND GATE. BUT I WAS JUST GONNA MENTION THE RACCOONS NOW GO OVER TO MY HOUSE AND LOOK WHAT THEY DID TO MY ROOF. I HAD TO SPEND 11 50, 1100. AND IT'S, AND MY ROOF IS ONLY SEVEN YEARS OLD. LET'S KEEP THAT IN MIND. BUT GOING BACK TO MY FENCE, I HAVE COOPERATED WITH YOU GUYS. AND, UH, ALSO IN THE MEETING AND THE N C D MEETING, UH, MS. UH, MS. SPILLMAN HAD SAID TO THE PEOPLE THAT WERE OUT THERE IN THE MEETING, LOOK, BECAUSE EVERYBODY VOTED ON MY BEHALF TO KEEP THE FENCE, PERIOD, YOU KNOW, AFTER THEY HEARD WHAT THE PROBLEMS I WAS HAVING NEXT DOOR, UH, SHE SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, IF YOU COULD PROVE THAT YOU PUT THE IRON FENCE, YOU KNOW, FROM 2005, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD NOT, I WOULD NOT HAVE TO TOUCH MY FENCE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, FRONT AND SIDE. MY IRON FENCE IS 30 YEARS OLD. THE CEDAR FENCE. WELL, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW THE PROBLEM WHY I HAD TO PUT IT, I HAD TO GO TO THE PEOPLE THAT BUILT MY FENCE 30 YEARS AGO AND HAVE THEM WRITE A LETTER FOR ME, WHICH IS OSCAR'S IRONS FENCE. AND I DID, UH, HERE WE GO. AND WHAT, WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE LETTER? THE PURPOSE OF THE LETTER, JUST STATING THAT IF MY IRON FENCE IS PASSED, UM, 2005 TWO, BECAUSE N C D STARTED ON 2005. OKAY. AND THEREFORE, IF IT STARTED ON 2005, ANYTHING BACK THAT, THAT HAS BEEN DONE TO, DID, DID YOU REPLACE MORE THAN 25% OF THE, OF THE, OF THE FENCE? UH, I DID NOT HAVE TO. MY IRON FENCE IS, YOU KNOW, SO IT WAS FINE. OKAY. SO IT'S FINE. WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GOING TO, WE'LL, WE'LL GET SOME QUESTIONS TO YOU. OKAY. AND I BELIEVE THE FIRST COMMISSIONER IS, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, BARTON. AM I PRONOUNCING THAT CORRECT? GREAT. PARDON ME? UH, THE PRONOUNCING OF YOUR LAST NAME. UM, BRERETON BRETON. BRETON. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. UM, THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SAYS THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO SUPPORT THE, WILLING TO SUPPORT THE APPLICA, YOUR APPLICATION IF YOU MODIFY THE SIDE FENCE MM-HMM. , WHICH, WHICH I DID. ARE, ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO THAT? I ALREADY DID THAT. I DID THAT. YES. THE PHOTOS ARE, ARE UP, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. YOU'RE WELCOME. JUST TO ANSWER A EARLIER QUESTION, THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR HAS BEEN STARTED, THE INVESTIGATION A COUPLE MONTHS AGO FROM, UH, CO COMPLIANCE OKAY. FOR AN ENCLOSED PATIO. SO WE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THE, THE WROUGHT IRON FENCE, UH, ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE YARD, UH, WAS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO 2005. UH, AND, AND SHE HAD NOT REPAIRED MORE THAN 25% OF IT, SO THERE WAS NO PERMIT PULLED FOR ANY OF THAT. BUT HOW DOES THAT PLAY INTO, UH, HER, HER PRESENCE HERE TODAY? SO IF THAT IS THE CASE, IF THIS GETS DENIED, IT SOUNDS LIKE SHE HAS A GOOD CHANCE OF GETTING A NON-CONFORMING IF THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH IT. OKAY. SO ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA, UH, QUESTIONS? UH, YOU SAID IT'S ALREADY BEEN TICKETED, UH, THE FENCE, RIGHT? THE NEXT DOOR? I'M NOT, I DIDN'T SAY IT WAS TICKETED, BUT THE INVESTIGATION STARTED A COUPLE MONTHS AGO FOR THE ENCLOSURE, KIND OF LIKE THE PATIO THAT WAS OPEN THAT THEY ENCLOSED. AND HOW ABOUT FOR THE HOUSE? I BELIEVE THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF LIKE WHAT THEY'RE GETTING AT BECAUSE THEY ENCLOSED A PATIO. UM, BUT I, I CAN ONLY SEE WHEN THEY STARTED THE INVESTIGATION. I DON'T KNOW WHAT STAGE THEY'RE ON THOUGH. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. OKAY, SO I HAVE A QUESTION. YES. COMMISSIONER BROWN ISN'T, UH, BEACON HILL OR WILL YOU LIVE A HISTORIC DISTRICT? [00:20:01] NOT YET. THAT'S WHAT I'VE, UH, I'VE ASKED, BUT NOT YET. SO THE ILLEGAL FENCE THAT YOU PUT UP ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE YARD IS SIX FEET. IS THERE, IS THERE SOME KIND OF GUIDELINES THERE FOR, SINCE THEY ARE NOT, UH, HISTORIC? UM, IF THAT'S NON-CONFORMING, IF SHE PUT THE FENCE UP, WHICH ONE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT WE, WHENEVER THEY APPLY FOR NON-CONFORMING IS ONE OF THE LETTERS THAT SHE JUST PUT UP. SO IT'S A SEPARATE APPLICATION. IF THIS GETS DENIED AND SHE APPLIES FOR NON-CONFORMING, MIGHT BE A GOOD CHANCE THAT SHE GETS APPROVED. BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IT, IT'S NOT A HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT IT HAS A NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT OVERLAY ON IT, WHICH MEANS THAT THERE ARE SPECIFIC DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW FOR THE FENCE. AND THE FENCE ONLY ALLOWS THEM TO HAVE UP TO FIVE FEET PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. I BELIEVE IT'S FOUR FEET, FOUR FEET PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. EXCUSE ME. WHY DID YOU TAKE IT YOURSELF TO PUT A SIX FOOT FENCE UP THERE? BECAUSE I HAD, UH, THE PEOPLE, THE VACANT HOUSE NEXT TO ME HAD, UH, HOMELESS PEOPLE GOING IN AND OUT OF THERE, STAYING THERE. AND THOSE HOMELESS PEOPLE STARTED JUMPING OVER MY FENCE, THAT WAS A CHAINING FENCE, AND STARTED STAYING OVER AT MY BACKYARD. THEY WINDED UP BREAKING, I GUESS, JUMPING OVER BACK AND FORTH, JUMP UH, JUMPING OVER THE FENCE. THEY BROKE IT. SO, I MEAN, I DID LET THE PEOPLE NEXT DOOR KNOW, HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU GOT HOMELESS PEOPLE AND, AND NOW THEY'RE COMING OVER TO MY YARD. THEY, THEY WEREN'T CONCERNED. THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING. I, EXCUSE ME, MA'AM. I, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND. YES, YES. AND I REMEMBER YOU FROM THE LAST CASE, OKAY. WHEN YOU WERE HERE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO. BUT THAT DOESN'T GIVE YOU THE RIGHT TO, TO BREAK THE GUIDELINES. WELL, I DIDN'T KNOW THERE WAS ANY GUIDELINES SINCE I ALREADY HAD A SIX FOOT, A SIX FOOT FENCE IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE. OKAY. I REALLY DIDN'T THINK, I REALLY DIDN'T THINK IT WAS SINCE I ALREADY HAD A SIX FOOT FENCE IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE. I REALLY DIDN'T. SO IS THAT SAYING THAT YOU GRANDFATHERED OR SOMETHING? YES, MA'AM. YES, MA'AM. SO LET'S, LET'S, UH, LET, LET ME TRY TO CLARIFY WHAT, WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. SO WE HAVE AN APPLICANT THAT HASN'T, THAT APPARENTLY HAS AN EXISTING WROUGHT IRON FENCE ON THE FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE. UH, AND WAS THE GATE THERE AS WELL? YES. OKAY. SO FENCE IN A GATE THAT, UH, SHE, UH, PROVIDED PAPERWORK THAT PREDATES 2005, WHICH WOULD GIVE HER THE ABILITY TO APPLY FOR, UH, NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS. UH, SHE'S HERE BEFORE THE BO O A, PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE SIX FOOT WOOD FENCE, WHICH ONCE YOU BREAK THE FRONT PLANE OF THE HOME, THE SIX FOOT WOOD FENCE IS A VIOLATION OF THE N C D. IT'S OBVIOUSLY NEW AND THEREFORE IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE, UM, YOU KNOW, ARE ENTERTAINING IF WE, WE, US. AND THAT IS THE GATE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY, THE WROUGHT IRON, UH, THE CLEAR VISION ISSUE, AND THEN THE, UH, SIX FOOT FENCE ALONG THE, IN THE FRONT OF THE HOME. IF WE DENY, UH, EVERYTHING TODAY, WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN FOR THE APPLICANT IS THAT SHE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO APPLY FOR A NON-CONFORMING, RIGHT. SHE WOULD HAVE TO LOWER THE FENCE FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE UP TO THE POINT IF SHE GETS APPROVED FOR NON-CONFORMING, UP TO THE POINT THAT THE FENCE IS EXISTING. SO SHE COULD HAVE A SIX FOOT FENCE ACROSS THE FRONT, DROP TO A FOUR FOOT FENCE TO THE HOUSE, AND THEN GO BACK UP TO SIX FEET. THAT'S WHAT COULD HAPPEN. IF WE APPROVE EVERYTHING TODAY, THAT MEANS THAT SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO DO NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS. SHE'LL BE LOCKED IN FOR BASICALLY. AND SO THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE'RE HERE TODAY. SO IF WE DENY SOME OF THIS, SOME OF THIS MAY STAY AND SOME MAY HAVE TO GO AWAY. AND SO IT'S, THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO KEEP. JUST SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND AS WE MOVE FORWARD IS THAT IS, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS, DOESN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE CLEAR VISION, WHICH MEANS THAT THAT NEW PORTION THAT SHE PUT IN, ONCE YOU TURN THE CORNER FROM THE FRONT, IF THIS GETS DENIED, SHE WILL BASICALLY HAVE TO DROP THAT DOWN TO FOUR FEET AND KEEP FOUR FEET ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. SO THESE ARE JUST SOME THINGS TO BE AWARE OF AS WE TALK ABOUT THIS CASE. SO WAS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YEAH, ZUNIGA CHAIRMAN, I THINK THE LAST TIME WE, UH, TOLD HER TO CUT DOWN TO THE SECOND POLL. SO SHE DID AND SHE DID. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING THERE. PLUS ALSO, YOU KNOW, WE GOTTA GIVE HER CREDIT FOR NOT, YOU KNOW, PUT IN THE FENCE. SHE PUT THE FENCE IN HER OWN YARD AND YEAH, THIS IS WHERE THE SIDEWALK, THE DRIVEWAY, YOU KNOW, SO, SO, YOU KNOW, SHE, SO HERE'S WHAT HAPPENS. AND IF WE APPROVE THE CLEAR VISION, WHAT YOU SEE IN THAT PICTURE WHERE THE FENCE TURNS THE CORNER, THAT WOULD STAY. IF WE VOTE AGAINST THE CLEAR VISION, SHE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THAT, THAT DOWN TO FOUR FEET. IF WE APPROVE THE SIX FOOT FENCE, SHE WOULD HAVE, SHE WOULD KEEP THE SIX FOOT FENCE, BUT WOULD STILL HAVE TO TAKE THAT PORTION DOWN TO FOUR FEET IF CLEAR VISION GOT [00:25:01] DENIED. BUT THE THING IS, HOLD ON, HOLD ON A SECOND. UH, AND THEN THERE'S THE ISSUE OF THE GATE. THE GATE ISSUE AND THE FENCE ACROSS THE FRONT COULD BE RESOLVED BY AN NONCONFORMING RIGHT. APPLICATION, OR WE COULD RESOLVE IT IN PERMANENCE. SO THAT'S JUST, UH, SO IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT THIS COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN AT THIS RESIDENCE. UM, IF WE VOTE FOR THE, THE SIX FOOT FENCE, BUT AGAINST, UH, THE OTHER ITEMS, THEN SHE COULD KEEP THE FENCE AS SHE HAS IT NOW WITH THE NON-CONFORMING RIGHT. APPLICATION. SO THIS IS, IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING, BUT, UM, KIND OF THINK ABOUT WHAT, WHAT YOU THINK THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD, WOULD BE BEST FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND LET'S KIND OF MOVE FORWARD ON THAT IDEA. BUT ALSO AS WELL FOR ME AND MY SON, BECAUSE THE THING IS, IF YOU ASK ME TO BRING IT DOWN, THEN I'M GONNA HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM ALL OVER AGAIN. HAVING HOMELESS PEOPLE JUMP OVER THE FENCE AND GOING OVER MY PROPERTY. THAT WAS THE WHOLE MAIN THING. THAT'S THE REASON I PUT THE FENCE. YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE SIX FOOT FENCE COULD STAY UP UNTIL THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. IT'S BETWEEN THE FRONT AND THE FRONT YARD, FRONT AND THE STREET. THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DROPPED THE FOUR FEET. WHICH ONE? THE IRON FENCE. UM, FROM THE FRONT OF YOUR HOME. USE YOUR YEAH, YEAH. SIDE PLAN. YEAH. LET'S POP IN THE SIDE PLAN. MR. CHAIRMAN. YES. SHE HAS, UH, A SPECIAL RIGHT SON, YOU KNOW, WITH SPECIAL NEEDS ALSO. SO IF WHO HAS A LASER POINTER? I, YEAH. SO LET'S, SO FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOME DOWN TO THE STREET, I DON'T, THAT'S THE SIX FOOT ISSUE. YEAH. AND, AND THAT'S JUST THE POINT. I CAN, CAN SOMEONE TAKE THE LASER BOARDER AND SHOW IT ON THE SCREEN? YEAH, SHE, IT'S NOT WORKING. I MEAN, HE JUST SHOWED ME, BUT THE, MY WHOLE POINT OF VIEW IS, THERE WE GO. I DON'T WANT MY, UH, HOLD ON, HOLD ON. UH, MS. LET'S ONE, ONE ISSUE AT A TIME. SO FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOME DOWN TO THE STREET, THAT'S THE SIX FOOT ISSUE. GOING BACKWARDS IS IRRELEVANT. WE HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT. THAT COULD BE SIX FEET TALL, BUT FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO THE STREET, THE SIX FOOT ISSUE BEFORE US HAS TO DO, IT CAN'T BE MORE THAN FOUR FEET. AND IT HAS TO BE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. SO IF WE, IF THAT FAILS, THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE CHANGED TO A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE. NO MORE THAN FOUR FEET TALL. AND, AND MY POINT OF VIEW IS IF THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR HAS NOT DONE A THING, I THINK, WELL, YOU COULD, YOU CAN TURN YOUR FENCE AND CONNECT IT TO YOUR HOME DURING THAT LITTLE STRIP FROM RIGHT BEFORE YOU BREAK THE FRONTAGE AND LOCK IN YOUR BACKYARD. IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, THEY'LL STILL COME TO THE FRONT. THAT'S THE ISSUE. AND, AND WE'RE TALKING A LOT OF MONEY BECAUSE THAT LITTLE PIECE THAT Y'ALL WANTED, THAT WAS $1,700 THERE JUST TO, I THOUGHT YOU SAID IT WAS 600. NO. YES, BUT LET ME FINISH THAT WOULD'VE, IF OSCARS WOULD'VE DONE IT FOR ME, THAT WAS GONNA BE $1,700. OKAY. I HAD TO GET SOMEBODY WHO WOULD DO IT LESS FOR ME JUST TO SHOW COOPERATION WITH YOU PEOPLE AND N C D. OKAY. AND, AND, AND, UH, IT'S MONEY THAT I DON'T HAVE. MY ONLY INCOME IS S S I. WELL, WE HAVE, WE HAVE THREE ITEMS OF FOREST. ANY ONE OF THEM HAS, HAS A DIFFERENT RESULT FOR, FOR YOUR, YOUR YARD. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER COMM QUESTIONS? MR. CHAIRMAN? HOLD ON. IS THERE ANY THAT HASN'T ASKED A QUESTION? YES. YES. COMMISSIONER, DEAN? UH, CAN WE, CAN WE SHOW THE PICTURE? HOLD ON. UH, HOLD ON. THAT SAYS PRESENT, RIGHT, COMMISSIONER, YOU GO. HOLD ON. COMMISSIONER DEAN, IS THERE POLICE REPORTS OR ABOUT THE HOMELESS OR HOW, HOW HAVE YOU BESIDES THE FENCE BEEN? I, I, I, I, THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE, I WENT AHEAD AND BROUGHT THE COPIES OF ALL THE POLICE CALLS THAT, THAT I'VE, THAT I'VE HAD, UH, RIGHT HERE. IF, IF YOU CAN GIVE THOSE TO STAFF, THEY CAN PROJECT THEM UP FOR US. OKAY. COMMISSIONER DE AND I SHOULD HAVE BEEN CALLING MORE OFTEN BECAUSE, BUT THEN AGAIN, I DON'T, I DIDN'T WANNA BE A TYPE OF PERSON CRYING WOLF. AND THEN, AND, AND THEN IT WOULD'VE GOTTEN TO THE POINT IF I WOULD'VE HAD A HOMELESS PEOPLE IN MY, IN, IN MY BACKYARD, THAT I WOULD HAVE TO ACTUALLY DEFEND MYSELF. AND IF I WOULD CALL THE, THE SS A P D, THEY'RE GONNA SAY, OH, WELL THIS LADY'S ALWAYS CALLING THAT THERE'S HOMELESS PEOPLE THERE AND, AND, AND THEY DON'T CATCH 'EM ON TIME. THEY DON'T CATCH 'EM ON TIME. AND, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I, YOU KNOW, THE LAST TIME THAT YOU GUYS TOLD ME, I MEAN, WELL Y'ALL SUGGESTED, YOU KNOW, IF I WOULD JUST FROM THE POST FROM THERE, YOU KNOW, IF I WOULD JUST DO A VIEWPOINT THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN OKAY WITH YOU GUYS. BUT TODAY I'M HEARING A DIFFERENT STORY. THAT WAS PART OF OUR DISCUSSION FOR THE CLEAR VI TO ADDRESS CLEAR VISION. SO EXACTLY. BUT I'M JUST SHOWING COOPERATION. I APPRECIATE THAT. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, FROM THE COMMISSION, THE PICTURE? WHAT'S THAT? COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA? THAT THE PRESENT PICTURE THAT YOU PUT ON THAT WAS WHAT? LAST MEETING? THERE'S [00:30:01] A PICTURE. OKAY. MR. ZUNIGA, IF YOU COULD USE YOUR MICROPHONE, SIR. YES SIR. YES SIR. YEAH, USE THE MIC 'CAUSE WE CAN'T ALL HEAR YOU, SIR. AND THEN I HAD TO SPEND ANOTHER 1150 BECAUSE THE RACCOONS THAT ARE IN THAT HOUSE WENT INTO MY ROOF AND, AND TORE UP ALL THE RIDGE TOP OF MY ROOF. AND AGAIN, MY ROOF IS ONLY ABOUT SEVEN YEARS OLD AND HERE I AM SPENDING $1,150 AND THIS HOUSE NEXT DOOR, THEY DON'T EVEN PUT A WINDOW NOR EVEN BY CURTAINS. I CAN'T BE COMING UP WITH MONEY THAT YOU'RE ALL ASKING. I'M JUST SAYING MY ONLY INCOME IS S S I. OKAY. AND I DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY. AT LEAST I PUT THAT UP FOR THE SAFETY FOR ME AND MY SON. I UNDERSTAND, SIR. WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS. ALRIGHT, LET'S, UH, VOICEMAILS OR SOMEONE SIGN UP, SPEAK. UH, WE HAVE BOTH. OKAY. LET'S HEAR THE VOICEMAILS FIRST AND THEN WE'LL HEAR FROM, UH, CITIZENS. PRESENT CASE NUMBER B O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 7 AT 9 3 5 GON YEAR. MY NAME IS DANIEL HUBING. I RESIDE AT TEN TWENTY FIVE WEST RESEARCH. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 287-9025. DEAR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS, MS. EZ MET WITH THE DEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ON AUGUST 14TH. THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSOCIATION VOTED TO OPPOSE. ONE IS FOUR FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE N CD FIVE, MAXIMUM TWO FOOT HEIGHT TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE FRONT YARD. AND TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE N CD FIVE TO ALLOW GATE STRUCTURE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY, THE RESIDENTS VOTED TO NOT OPPOSE A ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW FENCE TO BE 13 TO EIGHT FOUR INCHES FROM THE FRONT YARD DRIVEWAY CURB UNDER THE CONDITION THAT MS. ALVEZ AGREES TO OPEN THE FINGER TO THE FACADE OF THE HOUSE SO THAT THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR MAY BACK OUT OF THEIR DRIVEWAY SAFELY. AS SUGGESTED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING ON AUGUST 7TH, WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY OPPOSED DRIVEWAY GATE VARIANCES OF WHICH WE HAVE SEEN PROLIFERATION AND WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY SUPPORTED IN THIS, IN THE NAME OF CONSISTENCY AND FAIRNESS. WE FEEL THE FENCE HEIGHT IS ONE THAT IS HIGHLY VISIBLE AND WILL ENCOURAGE OTHERS IF THEY THINK THAT THE HEIGHT IS ACCEPTABLE. MS. VEZ TALKED TO US ABOUT WHAT SHE PERCEIVES AS SQUATTERS AND THE NEXT EXTRA VACANT HOME. WE ARE WORKING WITH THE SAFE OFFICER, CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE VACANT BUILDING OFFICER TO HELP MISS EZZ. THE OWNERS ATTENDED THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AND ARE WORKING TO CLEAN UP THE PROPERTY AND FIND RENTERS. PLEASE SUPPORT OUR NC FIVE STANDARDS AND DENY THIS REQUEST TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE FRONT YARD AND A GREAT STRUCTURE ALONG THE DRIVEWAY. YOU ACQUIRE THE OWNER IN THE GARAGE TO THE SIDE FENCE THAT SHE OPENS THE FENCE TO THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR TO EXIT SAFELY. RESPECTFULLY, DANIEL HUBING AND CYNTHIA SPIELMAN, CO-CHAIR OF THE ZONING BEVERAGE DESIGN COMMITTEE. BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE, UH, MS. SPIELMAN. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE GOING TO, WE WILL COME BACK TO YOU FOR A, UH, A REBUTTAL AFTER WE HEAR A PUBLIC COMMENTARY. I'M CYNTHIA SPIELMAN. I LIVE AT 900 WEST WOODLAWN. I AM, I'M SORRY, THE PRESIDENT OF BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UM, OUTGOING. AND I AM THE CO-CHAIR OF THE ZONING AND URBAN DESIGN COMMITTEE. UM, WELCOME TO OUR WORLD, . WELL, THIS HAS BEEN, UM, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO WORK WITH MS. VEZ AND TRYING TO FIGURE WHAT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. YOU KNOW, WE, OUR NCD FIVE IS AN OVERLAY. THEY'RE LEGAL ORDINANCES. AS SOON AS SOMEONE PULLS A PERMIT, IT'S CUT AND DRY. THIS IS WHAT YOU KNOW YOU HAVE TO DO. UM, THEY'RE, THEY WERE DONE BY COMMUNITY AND THE CITY IN PARTNERSHIP IN AN INTENSE, INTENSE, UM, PROCESS IN 2004. AND THEN WE DID THE SAME THING AGAIN IN 2017. SO THE THINGS THAT YOU SEE AS OUR N C D STANDARDS MADE THE CUT FROM A REALLY RIGOROUS PROCESS. HAVING SAID THAT, WE ALSO WANT TO HELP OUR NEIGHBORS AND WE'VE BEEN DOING SOME PROACTIVE THINGS TO HELP EDUCATE THEM. UM, WE MAKE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO THE PERSON IS, WHETHER WE FEEL SORRY FOR THEM OR WE LOVE THEM OR WE DON'T LOVE THEM, WE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, BASED ON THE IDEA THAT THERE'S A CONCRETE AND VERIFIABLE SAFETY ISSUE, AN UNAVOIDABLE HARDSHIP THAT DOES NOT CREATE A PRECEDENCE AND VISIBILITY IS IMPORTANT HERE, OR A HARDSHIP FOR THE NEIGHBORS. AND WE STRIVE TO BE CONSISTENT AND FAIR. WE DON'T BELIEVE IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO SAY TO ONE PERSON, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE LIKE YOU, SO WE'RE GONNA GIVE IT TO YOU. WE DON'T LIKE YOU. OR, WE LIKE YOUR STORY. WE BASE IT ON THOSE, ON THAT CRITERIA. AND A SAFETY ISSUE WOULD BE WHEN WE APPROVED A A, A CUT, A DRIVEWAY CUT FOR SOMEONE, A FAMILY THAT HAD TO BACK UP ONTO UM, UH, BLANCO ROAD. YOU KNOW, THAT'S [00:35:01] A SAFETY ISSUE THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO PULL OUT IN THE FRONT. UM, WE TALKED TO MS. VEZ, WE'VE WORKED A LOT. AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT WAS 64 TO ZERO. UM, WE DID NOT WANT TO BE ON RECORD AS SUPPORTING HER DRIVEWAY GATE IN FRONT'S FENCE. SHE'S ON A VERY WALKED AREA, PART OF BEACON HILL, THAT NORTH SOUTH CORRIDOR. THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF PEOPLE WALK THEIR DOGS. AND, YOU KNOW, OFTEN PEOPLE WON'T PULL A PERMIT OR THEY'LL DO SOMETHING 'CAUSE THEY'LL SAY, WOW, THE PERSON DOWN THE STREET HAS IT. SO WE, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY OPPOSED FRONT FENCES THAT ARE TOO HIGH OR DRIVEWAY GATES. BUT AS YOU RECALL FROM A LOT OF THE OTHER CASES YOU'VE DONE FROM BEACON HILL, WE TRY TO FIND PLACES THAT WE CAN HELP THEM OUT. YOU KNOW, PARTS OF A VARIANCE THAT WE CAN SUPPORT. I TOLD MRS. GALVEZ THAT SHE SHOULD TALK TO THE CITY ABOUT GRANDFATHERED. UM, I GUESS IF I HAD MY PREFERENCE, I WOULD RATHER YOU SAY NO TO THE DRIVEWAY GATE AND BE ON RECORD AS NOT SUPPORTING THE DRIVEWAY GATE AND THE FENCE SO THAT WE CAN USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, I'D EVEN BE GLAD TO HELP MS. GALVEZ WITH THE PAPERWORK TO FIGURE OUT HOW DO, WHAT, WHAT KINDS OF THINGS SHE NEEDS TO GIVE THE CITY FOR IT TO, UM, UM, BE GRANDFATHERED. WE, WE HAD THE SAME IDEA THAT YOU DID, THAT IF SHE'S GOT A FENCE THAT'S IN THE FRONT AND IT STAYS, AND THEN SHE'S GOT THIS FOUR FOOT THING THAT GOES HALFWAY BACK, THAT'S UNSIGHTLY FOR THE OTHER RESIDENTS. I MEAN, IN A WAY IT VI IT, IT SUPPORTS THE LETTER OF THE N C D, BUT IT VIOLATES THE, OKAY. WELL, BEFORE YOU GO, WE'RE GONNA SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. CAN YOU GO, OKAY. SO SAYING YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE AN EXAMPLE WELL, FOR OTHERS. UH, AND, AND SECONDLY, UH, WE ARE, ARE, ARE DEALING WITH THIS PROPERTY HERE, THE OTHER PROPERTY, AND YOU'RE PROBABLY WELL AWARE OF BEING INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY, WHICH IS GOOD. PERFECT. BUT I MEAN, IN THREE YEARS, WHAT HAVE YOU DONE ABOUT THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR? UH, WE HAVE SOMEBODY ON OUR SIDE. WELL, FIRST OFF, I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE A SCAPEGOAT OR EXAMPLE OF MS. ALVEZ. I JUST BELIEVE THAT WE TRY TO DO CONSISTENT RECOMMENDATIONS SO THAT WHEN PEOPLE SEE SOMETHING, THEY KNOW THAT EITHER THIS IS N C D OR NOT. UM, WE HAVE, UH, SHE'S, THAT HAS BEEN ON OUR RECORD, WE HAVE CALLED THE SAFE OFFICER. WE HAVE CALLED THE, UM, DISTRICT ONE OUTREACH SPECIALIST. WE HAVE WORKED WITH, UH, UH, VACANT BUILDING ORDINANCE, UH, WITH, UH, O H P. SO WE HAVE, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING TO TRY, BUT SOMETIMES THINGS ARE SLOW. THE OWNER NOW CAME TO OUR LAST MEETING AND I THINK THERE WAS SOME ISSUE BETWEEN HER AND MS. GALVEZ, BUT SHE HAS SINCE BOARDED IT UP. THAT DOESN'T MEAN I CAN'T MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. THEY'RE GONNA BE SQUATTERS THERE, BUT WE ARE NOW HAVING PATROL GO BY THERE TWICE AS MUCH. AND WE'RE WORKING WITH HER LIKE, YOU KNOW HOW MAKE SURE IT'S BOARDED AND CONTAINED, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE PROBLEM IS, IS WHEN YOU HAVE EMPTY HOUSES AND PEOPLE CAN GET INSIDE. WELL, THAT'S GREAT THAT YOU'RE, UH, WORKING WITH THE CITY, BUT THE NEXT TIME GO TO CO COMPLIANCE ON SITUATIONS LIKE THAT. I, I SHOULD SHOULD'VE ADDED THAT. YOU'RE LEARNING NOW. YOU'RE LEARNING. NO, NO, NO. I'M NOT LEARNING. I, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH CODE EN UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT. THAT'S ONE OF THE, THE PEOPLE THAT WE TALKED TO. WE HAVE BEEN. THANK YOU. WHEN DID YOU'ALL FILE IT? WHEN DID, UM, I, I'D HAVE TO LOOK THAT UP. I'M OKAY. LET'S, LET'S KEEP IT ON THE FENCE HERE. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR, FOR THE SPEAKER? I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. DID THAT, DID Y'ALL DISCUSS OF POTENTIALLY AGREEING TO A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ON THAT SIDE? I MEAN, I THINK EVERYONE WANTS TO WORK WITH MS. ALVEZ AND AS LONG AS THE PEOPLE NEXT DOOR CAN COME OUT OF THEIR DRIVEWAY SAFELY, THAT'S MOSTLY OUR CONCERN. OKAY. UM, YEAH, THAT'S OUR CONCERN. SO HOW FAR EVER YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE TO CREATE A SAFE, UH, UM, PASSING FOR THE NEIGHBORS? THAT WOULD BE FINE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, WE'LL UH, MOVE, GET THE APPLICANT BACK UP IN HERE. SO WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN NOW IS WE, WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THIS AND WE KNOW ABOUT WHAT, WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO YOU AND WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE. AND WE ALSO HAVE HEARD FROM WHAT THE, WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD LIKE. SO IF THERE'S ANY LAST MINUTE THINGS YOU'D LIKE TO TELL US BEFORE WE DELIBERATE, YOU GOT A MINUTE? UM, GO AHEAD. I WOULD, EXCUSE ME, CHAIR, CAN I ASK A QUESTION BEFORE? OH, OF COURSE. UH, COMMISSIONER PICASSO. HI. HI. SO I SAW THAT YOU HAVE THE PRIVACY FENCE ON ONE SIDE, BUT NOT THE OTHER IS THERE WAS JUST NO SAFETY CONCERNS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF YOUR HOME, ON THE OTHER SIDE, MEANING THE CORNER HOUSE. CAN YOU BRING THE MICROPHONE DOWN? OH NO, THE MICROPHONE. CAN YOU BRING THE MICROPHONE? YEAH, MICROPHONE. THERE YOU GO. UH, WE'RE TALKING THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE WHERE THE PINK TREE IS. YES, THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE A SIX FOOT, SEVEN FOOT, AND EVEN AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THAT HOUSE. BUT IT'S AN, IT'S A VISIBILITY FENCE. SO IT'S NOT LIKE A PRIVACY FENCE ON THERE. CORRECT. YEAH, IT'S A PRIVACY FENCE. YEAH, THEY, IF YOU SEE, UM, BUT IT'S PUSHBACK IS WHAT I'M SAYING. SO IT'S A LOT FURTHER BACK THAN [00:40:01] WHAT YOU'RE PUTTING THE PRIVACY FENCE ON THE OTHER SIDE IS WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. UH, IT'S ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT, BUT THEIRS IS IRON. IS THAT WHAT YOU YEAH, IT'S, THERE WE GO. SEE THERE'S THE IRON FENCE AND THEY HAVE A GATE. THEY HAVE A GATE, AND THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE, OF THE LEFT, UH, OF YOUR RIGHT SIDE, JUST PRESS THAT BUTTON. OH, WHERE, WHAT PRESS? RIGHT THERE. RIGHT THERE. AND GOING BACK, IT'S LIKE ABOUT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. AND THEN GOING TO THE FRONT IS, UH, SIX TO SEVEN FOOT ANGLE. YEAH. SO THEIR FENCE IS BIGGER THAN MINES, BUT I DIDN'T BUILD IT BECAUSE THEY HAD A FENCE. DON'T GET ME WRONG. MY PROBLEM WAS THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR. I JUST, YOU KNOW, I GOT TIRED THREE YEARS AND I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND. I MEAN, IF TIME IS SLOW, PAPERWORK IS SLOW. THREE YEARS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE THAN ENOUGH. MORE THAN ENOUGH. AND YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T WANNA LIVE IN FEAR ONE OF THESE DAYS JUST WALKING IN. IF YOU HAVE ME MODIFY MY FENCE, IT'S GONNA START ALL OVER. OKAY. THEY'LL GO THROUGH THE FRONT. I MEAN, THEY'RE, THEY'RE HOLD. THEY DON'T CARE. THEY REALLY DON'T CARE. I UNDERSTAND. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NOPE. ANYONE ELSE? NO. ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GONNA DELIBERATE AT THIS TIME SO YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT. IS THERE COMMISSIONER WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? SO AS IT STANDS NOW, WE HAVE HAVE ONE MOTION REGARDING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UH, AND THE, AND THE FENCE HEIGHT. UH, AND WHOEVER READS THAT, UM, MOTION CAN CERTAINLY ASK FOR A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, UH, INSTEAD OF A WOOD FENCE, UH, AT SIX FEET IF, IF THEY SO DESIRE. AND THEN WE HAVE AN ANOTHER MOTION FOR THE VARIANCE, WHICH INCLUDES TWO COMPONENTS. ONE IS THE, UH, IS THE, UH, CLEAR VISION, AND THE OTHER IS THE, UM, UH, GATE ACROSS THE FRONT. SO CHAIR, I'M GONNA START WITH THE, UH, I'M GONNA BREAK UP MOTION MOTIONS AND, UH, START WITH THE, THE, UH, CLEAR VISION VARIANCE FIRST, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O EIGHT DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 1 9 7, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUST GRANNY REQUEST FOR ONE OF VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE TO ALLOW A GATE STRUCTURE ACROSS THE FIR THE DRIVEWAY AND TWO, A ONE OF FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE 13 FEET FOUR INCHES FROM THE FRONT YARD DRIVEWAY CURB SITUATED AT 9 35 AGONE AVENUE. BECAUSE THE APPLICANT, JOANNE GALVEZ, UH, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY, AS SUCH, THERE ARE LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRACT TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST FOR THE GATE STRUCTURE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY AND THE REDUCED CLEAR VISION IS NOT CONTRACTED PUBLIC INTEREST, AS WILL INCREASE SAFETY, UM, ON THE LOT FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT, UH, WOULD REDUCE SAFETY ON THE PROPERTY AND WOULD LEAVE NO ROOM FOR A GATE TO FURTHER PROTECT PROPERTY OWNER'S VEHICLE. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. AND THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE GATE STRUCTURE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY AND THE REDUCED CLEAR VISION WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE BY CREATING ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY. UH, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FOUR. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. IF GRANTED, THE CLEAR VISION WILL MAINTAIN 13 FEET FAR FROM THE FRONT, UH, YARD DRIVEWAY CURB. AND THE DRIVEWAY, UH, GATE MATCHES THE LOOK OF THE FRONT YARD FENCE, WHICH WILL NOT LIKELY ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. AND FIVE, AND APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE OF 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 OR NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UH, STAFF FINDS THAT APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH THE GATE STRUCTURE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY AND CLEAR VISION VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS A RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS. THE DISTRICT, UH, WHEN ESTABLISHED, END OF END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND, UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, THE COMMISSIONER UNA. RIGHT. SO HER TESTIMONY FROM BOTH THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND THE APPLICANT, UM, EACH CASE STANDS ON ITS OWN AND HAS ITS OWN MERITS AND SUCH. UM, I AM GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THE, THE VARIANCE AS READ. UH, WE HEARD TESTIMONY IN A LETTER EVIDENCE THAT THE EXISTING GATE AND IS, IS, IS PREDATES THE N C D ORDINANCE. SO THAT WOULD KIND OF, UH, BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE, YOU KNOW, GRANDFATHERING OF THE CASE. SO WHERE I UNDERSTAND THE, THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT'S INTENT, UH, TO KIND OF USE THIS AS A, UH, CREATING PRECEDENCE. I THINK THAT THE CASE STANDS [00:45:01] ON ITS OWN. AND I WOULD BE FOR THE VARIANCE AS FAR AS THE, THE CLEAR VISION. I MEAN, THE APPLICANT ALREADY TOOK CARE OF IT WITH THE, UH, SECTION OF THE FENCE THAT SHE, UH, SHE, UM, TOOK THE BOARDS OUT AND MADE IT A, UH, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE. SO THAT KIND OF CLEARS THAT ISSUE. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UM, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE ARE SEVERAL, UH, DRIVEWAY GATES ONE RIGHT NEXT DOOR, AND ALSO THE ONE RIGHT NEXT TO THAT. SO THERE ARE TWO RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT HAVE, UH, DRIVEWAY GATES AS WELL. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. OKAY. UH, SO THERE'S 11 MEMBERS SITTING NOW WITH THREE PEOPLE SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OF ANY COMPONENT OF THIS. UH, THEN I, I WOULD SUGGEST A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO REMOVE WHATEVER IS, UH, FOUND TO BE UNDESIRABLE. SO WITH THAT, I'LL LOOK. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTION? UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTARY FROM THE COMMISSION? COULD I, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? COMMISSIONER BROWN, GOING FURTHER, DO WE HAVE A PICTURE OF THE GATE JUST BY ITSELF? FROM THE, THE WOOD TO THE, TO THE, UM, TO THE IRON? NOT, NOT THAT ONE. THAT'S OKAY. THIS IS IT HERE. OKAY. NOW WHAT, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM OF 30 FOOT? UH, THE 30 FOOT, UH, VIEW, 15 OF 15 OR WHATEVER IT IS. THE WHY DOES, DOESN'T, DOES THE GATE OPEN? YES. UH, THE, THE ISSUE IS, IS THAT THERE'S A STRUCTURE WITHIN 15 FEET OF THE FACE OF CURB. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. THE UM, ISN'T IT POSSIBLE THAT SHE COULD MOVE THE FENCE BACK? UH, IT'D HAVE TO MOVE BACK ONE FOOT EIGHT INCHES. I'M SORRY. IT WOULD HAVE TO MOVE BACK ONE FOOT EIGHT INCHES AND SO, SO THAT SHE COULD DRIVE IN AND OUT AND STILL HAVE THE CLEARANCE STOP HER. THE ADJOINING PROPERTY. IT'S THE CLEAR VISION FOR THE ADJOINING PROPERTY FOR THIS PROPERTY HERE. THAT IS VACANT PROPERTY, BUT VACANT HOUSE PROPERTY. RIGHT. SO THAT'S THE VISION. 'CAUSE IF THAT DRIVEWAY, IF THAT CAR WAS TO MOVE OUT, WOULD THEY HAVE THE VISION? WOULD THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO SEE WHAT SHE'S CORRECTED IT. SO THIS PICTURE IS NOT THE CURRENT SITUATION. CAN WE, DO WE PUT UP THE, UH, CURRENT? YEAH. SO SHE ADDED PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FOR A FEW FEET COMING BACK FROM THAT CORNER POST. THIS IS, THIS IS, THIS IS SO CONFUSING. COMMISSIONER OZ, DO YOU MIND USING YOUR MICROPHONE? YOU HAVE SOME? YEAH. SO WE HAVE, WE HAVE, UM, THE, THE GATE ISSUE IS, IS THAT THE N C D JUST DOESN'T ALLOW GATES AT ALL, UH, ON THE FRONT SO THAT IT'S IRRELEVANT ABOUT WHERE IT IS OR WHETHER IT'S MOVED. YOU JUST CAN'T HAVE A GATE. UH, THE GATE, UH, PREDATES 2005 PER HER TESTIMONY SO THAT SHE DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO REQUEST, UH, NON-CONFORMING AND KEEP IT RIGHT. BUT THE CLEAR VISION ISSUE IS, IS SOLELY THAT WITHIN 15 FEET, UH, YOU, YOU CAN'T HAVE AN OBSTRUCTION. UH, I I I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THE GATE, AS I'M LOOKING AT IT FROM HERE, 'CAUSE THIS IS SO CONFUSING RIGHT HERE, UH, THE GATE, THE DRIVEWAY GOES IN THIS WAY. IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH. SO IT, IT RIDES ON THE SIDE OF THE WOOD FENCE THAT YOU SEE IN THAT PICTURE. OKAY. SO SHE DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH, RIGHT? SHE DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH CLEARANCE COMING OUT, IS THAT CORRECT? UH, FOR, FOR SIGHT DISTANCE. SHE DOESN'T HAVE 15 FEET. SHE'S SHORT A FOOT. EIGHT INCHES. SO NOW WHAT WERE YOU SAYING ABOUT, UH, SHE WOULD HAVE TO MOVE IT ONE FOOT EIGHT INCHES OR SOMETHING? SHE WOULD HAVE TO MOVE IT. SHE TO, TO ATTAIN CLEAR VISION. YOU, YOU HAVE TO, YOU CAN'T HAVE AN OBSTRUCTION OVER, IS IT THREE FEET OR 42 INCHES? WHAT IS THAT RULE? THREE FEET. THREE FEET. WHETHER OPEN OR PREDOMINANTLY. SO IF WE FAIL THE CLEAR VISION, THE WAY SHE COULD RESOLVE IT IS SHE COULD, THAT NEW SECTION THAT SHE BUILT, SHE COULD DROP IT DOWN TO THREE FEET TALL AND CHANGE NOTHING ELSE. AND THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD COMPLY WITH THE CLEAR VISION. IF SHE GOT NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS ON THE FENCE ACROSS THE FRONT WOODEN FENCE? NO, NO. CLEAR VISION IS ONLY 15 FEET FROM THE FACE OF HER BACK. OKAY. AND SO THAT SHE WAS SHORT ONE FOOT EIGHT INCHES FROM THAT CORNER POST THAT YOU SEE WHERE THE, WHERE, WHERE IT RUNS ACROSS THE FRONT AND THEN IT TURNS BACK INTO HER PROPERTY. IT, IT'S, IT'S ONE FOOT EIGHT SHY. SHE PROBABLY DID THREE FEET WHEN SHE REPLACED THAT WOOD FENCE WITH A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN RUTT IRON. BUT, BUT IF WE FAIL THE CLEAR VISION, THE WAY SHE WOULD RESOLVE IT IS DROP THE FENCE DOWN TO THREE FEET FOR 18 INCHES. AND SO THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT YOU SEE IN THIS PICTURE HERE. SO THIS PICTURE ONLY? YES. AND THAT SHE DID THAT SO THAT IT WOULD BE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FOR THE 15 FEET FROM THE FACE OF HER BACK SO THAT THE NEIGHBOR CAN SEE OUT WHEN THEY'RE BACKING THEIR CAR OUT THAT HAS THAT CLEAR VISION AREA NEXT DOOR. NOT NOW. NOT NOW, NOW. BUT THAT'S THE ISSUE. YEAH. MR. CHAIR, UH, POINT OF ORDER. CAN WE, YEAH. SO IF IS, UH, AGAIN, WE, WE'VE GOT TWO ITEMS IN THE MOTION [00:50:01] AS READ. ONE DEALING WITH THE CLEAR VISION, UH, AND THE OTHER WITH THE GATE. SO IF WE HAVE THREE MEMBERS WHO ARE, UH, EXPRESSING ANY OPPOSITION TO THAT, WE CAN FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ONE OF THOSE ITEMS OUT. UH, JUST SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO, UH, KEEP READING MOTIONS. UH, SO IF THERE'S, IF I'M LOOKING FOR ANYBODY WHO WOULD BE AGAINST ANY OF THE TWO COMPONENTS OF THE MOTION IS READ. UH, JUST TO BE CLEAR, YES. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONLY ITEM THREE. WE'RE ONLY, WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE, UH, EXISTENCE OF A GATE ON THE FRONT AND THEN THE CLEAR VISION ISSUE. SO I AM NOT HEARING ANY OTHER, UH, COMMENTARY. SO WITH THAT, WE CAN TAKE A VOTE PLEASE. ROLL CALL. VOTE. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN? YES, I CONCUR. DR. BURTON? YES. MS. PICASSO? YES. MS. BROWN? YES. MR. DEAN? I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MR. RHI, CAN YOU DO A THUMBS UP, COMMISSIONER IF YOU AGREE? THANK YOU. CHAIR ORIAN. AND YES, I CONCUR. MOTION PASSES 11 TO ZERO. UH, NOW WE'RE LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON THE, UH, HEIGHT. SPECIAL EXCEPTION, MR. CHAIR. I'LL TAKE THAT MOTION AS WELL. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 97, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE NNC D FIVE, MAXIMUM TWO FOOT HEIGHT TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE FRONT YARD SITUATED 9 3 5 AGANA AVENUE APPLICANT BEING JOANNE GALVES. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY SUCH THAT ARE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C HAS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U U D C STATES THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR A FENCE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. THE PROPOSED FENCE HEIGHT, UH, BEING REQUESTED IS A PRIVACY FENCE LOCATED ALONG THE FRONT YARD. IF GRANT GRANTED, STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. UH, THESE, UH, CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY THE FENCE HIGH TO BE PROTECTED. TO PROTECT A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PRO PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. THE PRIVACY FENCE WILL SERVE AS A PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE. SEE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE, UH, THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT LOCATED ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY YARD OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY APPEAR NOT TO ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. ARE THE REGULATIONS HERE AND ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT? THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. THE REQUEST REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE USE OF THE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. RIGHT. SO, UH, THIS, UH, MOTION KIND OF DOVETAILS WITH THE PREVIOUS VARIANCE. UM, THE APPLICANT DID, UH, AMEND THE EXISTING FENCE, THE SIX FOOT FENCE, UM, TO COMPLY WITH THE VISION AREA. AND SHE GOT, UH, SUPPORT OF THE N C D. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS, UH, THE, THE EXCEPTION HERE SERVES THE PURPOSE TO PROVIDE THE PROTECTION THAT SHE'S SEEKING FOR HER FAMILY AND FOR HER PROPERTY. AND, UH, YOU KNOW, SHE HAS, SHE MADE THE PRESENTATION TO N C D. SHE'S FILED THE POLICE REPORT. SO THAT'S ALL IN, IN EVIDENCE. AND SO THIS I THINK IS A GOOD SOLUTION FOR THE PROBLEM THAT SHE HAS. ANY OTHER COMM UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. UM, SEVERAL ROLL CALL. VOTE. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN? I CONCUR. DR. BURTON I CONCUR. MS. PICASSO? YES. MS. BROWN? I CONCUR. MR. DEAN. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MR. RHI, THUMBS UP. THANK YOU. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR. MOTION PASSES. 11 TO ZERO. UM, NEXT CASE PLEASE. OH, MISS, UH, YOU WE'RE DONE. SO YOUR VARIANCES WERE APPROVED. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF. SO I KEEP MY FENCE? YES. EVERYTHING WITHOUT, YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU BOARD. I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CAN I ASK ONE MA MA'AM? MA'AM, THEY'RE GONNA HELP YOU BACK HERE PLEASE. OKAY. SO WE CAN CONTINUE WITH THE MEETING. THANK YOU. HAVE A GREAT DAY. THANK YOU. [00:55:03] ITEM NUMBER TWO IS BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 1 8. UM, ADDRESS IS 8 1 5 SOUTH PINE IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO, APPLICANT BEING CHRISTENSEN PC. AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A ONE FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FOOT FIVE INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY. LINE TWO, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THREE SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON AN RMM. FOUR. A LOT THAT IS LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE. AND THREE A HALF STORY VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM TWO AND A HALF STORIES TO ALLOW A BUILDING WITH THREE STORIES. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS RMM FOUR. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG SOUTH PINE STREET, SOUTH OF VIRGINIA BOULEVARD. THE LOT IS CURRENTLY VACANT WITH THE APPLICANT ANTICIPATING ON CONSTRUCTING A TOTAL OF THREE UNITS WITHOUT SHARED WALLS. UH, THIS LOT IS CURRENTLY 5,610 SQUARE FEET WITH THE UNITS FACING SOUTH PINE STREET. THIS ORIENTATION AND SIZE RESULTED IN THE APPLICANT REQUESTING A ONE FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FOOT FIVE INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE TO ACCOMMODATE THE UNITS NOT HAVING SHARED WALLS. UPON REVIEW BY STAFF, IT WAS NOTED THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO ATTAIN ADDITIONAL VARIANCES, UM, WHILE THREE DWELLING UNITS ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN THE RM FOUR, UH, DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THREE SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON AN RMM LOT THAT'S LESS THAN ONE THIRD. THE LAST VARIANCE REQUESTED IS THE BUILDING HEIGHT. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF ANY PORTION OF A COMMERCIAL OFFICE OR MUL MULTI-FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED WITHIN 50 LINEAR FEET OF THE PROPERTY. LINE OF AN ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY USE SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE HEIGHT OF THE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THREE STORIES. UH, THE APPLICANT HAS INCORPORATED RIBBON DRIVEWAYS TO ALLEVIATE THE NEED FOR THE PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE VARIANCE. AND THIS IS THE UPDATED SITE PLAN, AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEN THE SURROUNDING AREAS. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO O A DASH 23 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 1 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. UH, ONCE STAFF FINDS THIS, THIS DISTANT SUITABLE AS IT WILL NOT IMPOSE ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR BY BEING TOO CLOSE TO THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE, WATER RUNOFF WERE NOT IMPOSED AND THE RISK OF FIRE SPREAD IS MITIGATED. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE THREE SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON AN ARM FOUR LOT THAT IS LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE AND HALF STORY VARIANCES, STAFF RECOMMENDS A DENIAL AND BO O EIGHT DASH TWO THREE DASH 1 0 3. THIS IS 0 2 1 A BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. UH, ONE MAINTAINING DENSITY OF THREE UNITS CONTAIN CONTAINED INTO ONE SINGLE STRUCTURE, CAN PREVENT OVERCROWDING ON SMALLER LOTS, PROVIDES OPEN SPACES AND CONTRIBUTES TO A MORE COMFORTABLE ENVIRONMENT. AND TWO, UM, HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS ARE ENFORCED FOR THE PROTECTION OF VIEW FOR THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USES. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MAILED 46 NOTICES, UH, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND DENVER HEIGHTS IS OPPOSED TO THE REQUESTS. AND THEN THIS IS THE RESPONSE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND, UH, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. HOLD ON A SECOND. SO THIS WAS ALREADY PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR AN EXCESS OF THE 65%. UM, SO THIS CASE WAS CONTINUED FROM LAST TIME. UM, HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT GOT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER TO, UM, ALTER THE PLANS FOR THE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE TO, UH, BE UNDER THAT 50%. OKAY. AND THEN AS FAR AS IT BEING UNDER ONE ROOF, UH, WHAT IS THE TEST FOR THAT IF HE, IF HE WERE TO PUT A BREEZE AWAY CONNECTING THE REAR OF THESE AND NOT HAVE IT BE AIR CONDITIONED SPACE, BUT IT'S STILL PART OF A CONTINUOUS ROOF. DOES THAT COUNT? YES, SIR. ALRIGHT, JUST, JUST CURIOUS. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. LET'S HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. PATRICK CHRISTENSEN, THREE 10 SOUTH ST. MARY'S, SUITE 2,700. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HEARD ME LAST TIME, I APOLOGIZE, BUT WE HAVE SOME DIFFERENT COMMISSIONERS, SO I KINDA HAVE TO START FROM THE BEGINNING. IF YOU COULD JUST SHOW MY, YEAH, THERE WE GO. UM, SO WE'RE ASKING FOR THREE VARIANCES. ONE IS, WAIT, THIS THING WORKING? OH YEAH. ONE IS THE, UM, ONE FOOT SEVEN INCHES FROM THIS PROPERTY LINE. THIS PROPERTY OVER HERE IS A CHURCH. THE CHURCH IS LOCATED ON THE OPPOSITE CORNERS, AND THIS IS A GREEN SPACE. WE DON'T FEEL THERE EVER BEING ANYTHING, ANYTHING CONSTRUCTED THERE. SO WE WOULD ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR THAT, AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THAT VARIANCE. THEN WE HAVE TWO OTHERS. UH, THE OTHER BEING HAVING THREE SEPARATE STRUCTURES AND, AND COMMISSIONER ORION, AS YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, WHY DON'T THEY JUST DO LIKE A CONNECTED ROOF OR CONNECTED WALKWAY? UM, THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS, SO IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN TWO STRUCTURES CONNECTED, YOU HAVE TO SPRINKLE THE WHOLE BUILDING. SO, SO WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THREE SEPARATE UNITS FOR, FOR A DIFFERENT REASON THAT THAT'S PROBABLY PART OF IT. BUT THE OTHER REASON IS, UM, THE DEVELOPER'S PLANNING ON DOING A CONDO REGIME. THEY'VE DONE THIS BEFORE, THEY KNOW HOW IT WORKS. IT'S NOT SUPER COMPLICATED ONCE YOU'VE DONE IT BEFORE. SO THEY WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE PRIVACY FOR EACH UNIT AS THE PROPERTY OWNERS WILL [01:00:01] ACTUALLY OWN THESE. UM, THEY WON'T BE LIKE A RENTAL PROPERTY LIKE YOU USUALLY SEE IN RMM FOUR. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE, THE SEPARATE UNITS. AND THEN ON THE, THE HEIGHT VARIANCE, IF YOU DID NOT GRANT THE HEIGHT VARIANCE, WE WERE LIMITED TO TWO STORIES. I WOULD UNDERSTAND WHAT STAFF IS STAYING ABOUT THE VIEW SHED, THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT WE'RE ALLOWED TO GO TWO AND A HALF STORIES. SO WHEN YOU HAVE A FULL, A FULL THIRD STORY THAT'S JUST HALF OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE FLOOR BELOW YOU AND YOU HAVE A ROOF, YOU KNOW, GOING UP, YOU'RE STILL BLOCKING THE VIEW ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE THIRD STORY. 'CAUSE YOU CAN SEE WE KIND OF HAVE, THAT ALLOWS US TO HAVE A TWO CAR GARAGE AND THEN A, YOU KNOW, HOME OFFICE FLEX ROOM ON THE GROUND FLOOR, WHICH YOU KNOW, IS BEING IMPORTANT. A LOT OF PEOPLE WORK FROM HOME TODAY. SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD DEFINITELY BE A, A NICE AMENITY FOR THE OWNERS. AND, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTARY, FIRST OF ALL? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, SO IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT FROM THE COMMISSION? CRUZ, MR. CRUZ? OH, WELL MAYBE, I GUESS I WAS ASLEEP FOR THE LAST TIME. , UH, SO THE THREE STORIES WOULD BE FOR EACH OF THE UNITS? YES. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. CORRECT. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I COULDN'T REMEMBER WHAT YOU HAD SAID. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WELL BACK, JUST ANSWER, ANSWER. ONE QUESTION Y'ALL HAD LAST TIME WAS ABOUT THE, WHICH WAY IS THE RAIN FLOWING? AND I DIDN'T HAVE ELEVATIONS, THAT'S WHY I ASKED FOR THE CONTINUANCE. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS FACING PINE STREET. PINE STREET IS A LITTLE BIT BELOW THE PROPERTY. AND IT GOES, THE ELEVATION GOES DOWN AS YOU GO FURTHER SOUTH. SO THE RUNOFF WILL GO TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN IT'LL RUN OUT INTO THE STREET. THAT'S, THAT'S THE GOAL FOR THE RUNOFF. IT WILL NOT FLOOD THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST OF US. THERE ARE STORM STORM SEWERS ALONG PINE STREET. SO THAT'S WHERE THE WATER NEEDS TO GO. SORRY. THANK YOU. OKAY, COMM, COMMISSIONER BROWN, HOW CLOSE ARE THESE HOUSES? 'CAUSE I CAN'T SEE THE, THE WRITING, ARE THEY FIVE FEET APART? THREE FEET APART? WHY ARE THEY THREE FEET . SO WE'D LIKE TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, THE TWO CAR GARAGE AND THEN A PATHWAY TO A STAIRCASE INSIDE THE BUILDING. SO THAT'S WHY WE ASK FOR THREE FEET APART. IF WE DO FAR RATED WALLS BETWEEN THEM, THAT'S 36 INCHES FROM YOUR NEIGHBOR. YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND YOUR DEVELOPERS. YOU KNOW, Y'ALL COME IN HERE AND YOU ASK FOR VARIANCES AND THAT ARE STRICTLY AGAINST RULES. AND THAT'S WHY YOU ASK FOR 'EM. WHY CAN'T YOU REDESIGN YOUR, YOUR STRUCTURES? WELL, WELL, THE VARIANCE WERA FOR IS NOT THE THREE FEET APART. IT'S, IT'S SEPARATED. IT'S FIVE. WELL, IT'S FI IT SHOULD BE FIVE FEET. AT LEAST FIVE FEET. YOUR VARIANCE. HE HAD THIS APPLICANT HAS NO OBLIGATION BETWEEN THE HOMES. IT COULD BE ZERO, CORRECT. I'M SORRY, WHAT? HE, HE, THOSE HOMES COULD BE ANYWHERE BETWEEN TOUCHING EACH OTHER TO AS FAR APART AS HE WANTS. HE HAS NO, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT AS FAR AS PUTTING THEM TOGETHER OR NOT. THEY DON'T, THEY HAVE SETBACK RULES. NOT, NOT INTERNALLY. THIS IS ALL ONE LOT. SO BECAUSE THERE'S NOT THREE DIFFERENT LOTS, THERE IS NO, THEY COULD, THEY COULD BE SIX INCHES APART. WELL, HE COULD STILL REDESIGN HIS, HIS HIS FORMATION HERE TO MAKE IT, MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE COHESIVE AND TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ISN'T, ISN'T AGREEING TO IT. I, I, YOU KNOW, YOU MR. CHAIR, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE, SO YEAH, SO WHAT HAP WHAT HAPPENS IS, IS ON THIS IS, UM, WHAT DID THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SAY WHEN THEY TALK TO YOU? THEIR MAIN ISSUE IS THE HEIGHT. THE HEIGHT, TO BE HONEST. YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, MR. DEAN. UH, BACK TO WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, HOW COME THERE'S NOT JUST ONE STRUCTURE, THERE'S THREE SEPARATE UNITS, IT SEEMS AWKWARD ON A CORNER LOT. YES. SO THE REASON WHY THEY DID THAT IS THEY WOULD, THEY'RE, THEY'RE GOING TO CONDO THIS SO THAT EACH HOMEOWNER WILL OWN THEIR INDIVIDUAL UNIT. SO THEY WANTED SOME SEPARATION, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT MORE PRIVACY. YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT HEARING ANYTHING THROUGH WALLS, WHICH IS FINE ON A RENTAL PROPERTY, BUT IF YOU'RE PURCHASING SOMETHING, IT'S NICE TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF SEPARATION WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS. THAT'S WHY WE'RE, WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT. SO THEY'RE GONNA BE SEPARATE PARCELS FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, SOLD INDIVIDUALLY ONE LOT. BUT A CONDO REGIME. SO WHAT A CONDO REGIME DOES IS IT'LL BE ONE PLATTED LOT, BUT EACH OWNER WILL OWN A CONDO WITHIN THAT LOT. AND THEY'LL HA AND THE SPACE BETWEEN AND AROUND WILL BE COMMON SPACE. SO THERE'LL BE ONE THIRD STAKEHOLDER ON THE DEEDED WHEN IT'S SOLD OR BASICALLY YES. ON, ON THE COMMON AREA. BUT YOU OWN YOUR OWN, IT'S A FEE HOLD ESTATE FEE HOLD ESTATE. BUT YOU DON'T OWN THE DIRT. YEAH. YOU OWN FROM THE FOUNDATION UP. CORRECT. AND SO ONE LOT. YEAH, WE SEE THESE SOMETIMES. UM, WHAT, WHAT NORMALLY IS IS THAT IT'S IF, IF YOU HAVE A COMMON WALL AND SOMETHING HAPPENS IN THAT COMMON WALL, YOU KNOW WHO'S SUPPOSED TO FIX IT. IF THEY'RE SEPARATED, YOU KNOW WHO'S SUPPOSED TO FIX IT BECAUSE YOU EITHER OWN IT OR YOU DON'T. UH, SO THAT'S THAT. AND, AND THE OTHER ITEM WAS, IS BY KEEPING THEM SEPARATE AND GOING A LITTLE HIGHER, YOU'RE INCREASING THE IMPER, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER BETWEEN, WHICH IS WHAT GETS YOU TO THE 65%, ISN'T THAT CORRECT? WHAT CAME UP LAST TIME? OKAY. MM-HMM. . OKAY. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER PICASSO, WHAT ARE THE OTHER [01:05:01] TWO FLOORS? SO I'M LOOKING AT THE FIRST FLOOR BEING THE GARAGE AND THE HOME OFFICE BUTS THE OTHER TWO. WHAT ARE YOU PROPOSING? SO THE SECOND FLOOR IS BASICALLY YOUR KITCHEN LIVING ROOM. SMALL, SMALL, UH, HALF BATH. AND THEN THE SECOND STORY WOULD BE, UH, TWO BEDROOMS WITH TWO BATHROOMS. OKAY. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH, COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA, UH, UH, WHAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE OF THREE UNITS, BUT ONE CAN HEAR THE OTHER ONE AND TWO UNIT? IS THAT ECONOMIC OF FEASIBLE OR? WELL, TECHNICALLY, I MEAN, THE RM FOUR ALLOWS FOUR UNITS. WE, UM, WANTED TO, THERE'S A CERTAIN SIZE THAT THE MARKET WILL FOUR UNITS, RM FOUR ALLOWS, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO MINIMUM RM FOUR GIVES YOU FOUR, NO MATTER, REGARDLESS OF THE LOT SIZE. SO, SO, BUT WE DECIDED, YOU KNOW, WITH THE MARKET TWO CAR GARAGE, THAT THREE UNITS WOULD BE, WOULD BE BEST. YEAH. ONE, ONCE YOU GO OVER TWO UNITS, YOUR PARKING OBLIGATION IS ONE AND A HALF PER UNIT, CORRECT? CORRECT. SO THAT MEANS YOU NEED FIVE SPACES, BUT YOU'RE PROVIDING SIX AND THEN A COUPLE IN EACH DRIVEWAY. CORRECT. SO YOU, YEAH, YOU'VE GOT PLENTY. PLENTY. PARKING. PARKING. PLENTY OF PARKING. PARKING. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE A UTILITY IN THE FRONT? IS THERE A UTILITY LINE? WE'VE GOT A POLE OR SOMETHING? I, I'M NOT AWARE. I'M NOT SURE. BUT IF THERE IS IN THE FRONT OF THIS SIDE, UM, THE BUILDING IS PROBABLY ABOUT 20 FEET BACK FROM THE STREET. SO I THINK WE'D BE OKAY WITH ANY POWER LINE SWAY EASEMENTS OR ANYTHING. AND FROM THE, FROM THE FIRST PICTURE AND THE ATTACHMENTS, IT'S, IT APPEARS YOU HAVE SINGLE, UH, SINGLE PHASE ELECTRIC ALONG PINE, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE POLE, WHICH YOU ARE PROVIDING. BUT YEAH, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. YES SIR. UH, ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE CONCRETE ALL AROUND THEM? NO, SIR. NO. IT'LL BE A LOT OF GRAVEL, SOME GRASS. I MEAN, WE'RE GONNA DO CONCRETE STRIPS IN THE FRONT FOR THE PARKING. SO THAT'S HOW, WHY WE DON'T NEED THAT. WE DON'T MEET THAT 50% THRESHOLD IN THE, IN THE FRONT THERE ON THE BOTTOM. SO THEY'LL BE PERVIOUS. SO FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE BOARD ON JANUARY 1ST, UH, RMM FOUR REQUIRES A 65% IMPERVIOUS COVER THRESHOLD. UH, AND JANUARY 1ST IS ALSO WHEN THEY HAVE TO, YOU CAN'T HAVE SEPARATE UNITS ON AN RM FOUR UNDER A THIRD OF AN ACRE. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT CAME ABOUT JANUARY 1ST. SO CAN BE 55, IT CAN BE 65%. SO THE 65 OR FOUR RMM FOUR. RIGHT. IT DIDN'T HAVE A REQUIREMENT BEFORE, BUT NOW IT DOES. , NO. RIGHT. UM, ANYONE ELSE? OH, ZUNA. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. COULD YOU SPEAK TO THE, UH, TO THE LACK OF, UH, I GUESS QUALITY HOUSING WITHIN THIS AREA, WHICH THIS PRODUCT IS TRYING TO? SURE. SO, UM, THERE'S, THERE HAS BEEN SOME NEW HOUSING IN DENVER HEIGHTS, WHICH FOR YEARS THERE HADN'T BEEN ANYTHING IN PROBABLY A HUNDRED YEARS. AND IT'S ALL SOLD AND NEW FAMILIES LIVING THERE. SO WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE SAME, ALLOW FOR SOME NEW CONSTRUCTION, UM, ON A VACANT LOT THAT'S BEEN VACANT FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. UM, I THINK IT'LL HELP THE NEIGHBORHOOD. YEAH. COMMISSIONER PECANS. SO FOLLOWING UP TO THAT, WHAT, LIKE WHAT IS THE A M I THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR FOR THIS AREA, GIVEN THAT DISTRICT TWO DOES NEED MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING? UM, WELL, I MEAN, I, I DON'T WANNA TELL YOU SOMETHING THAT'S FALSE. I MEAN, IT'S NOT LOW INCOME HOUSING. IT'S BASICALLY, WE'RE PROBABLY LOOKING AT A $350,000 PRICE FOR THESE. SO THAT'S KINDA WHAT THE GOAL IS. UM, YOU KNOW, AS YOU KNOW, WITHOUT SOME KIND OF INCENTIVES, TAX CREDITS, THINGS LIKE THAT, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR DEVELOPER IN THIS DAY AND AGE WITH INTEREST RATES TO BUILD TRULY AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THIS IS PROBABLY AFFORDABLE FOR THE MARKET. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE, BUT IT'S NOT LOW INCOME HOUSING. AND THEN I GUESS MY NEXT QUESTION, IF YOU HAD TO DO, GO DOWN TO TWO AND A HALF INSTEAD OF THREE STORIES, WHAT, WHERE WOULD THE, UM, THAT MEANS WE PROBABLY GO DOWN TO A ONE CAR GARAGE. SO YOU'RE ALWAYS GONNA HAVE AT LEAST ONE CAR IN THE DRIVEWAY OUT FRONT. 'CAUSE MOST PEOPLE HAVE, YOU KNOW, TWO CARS. WE WERE TRYING TO AVOID THAT. SO, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE NICE THINGS ABOUT HAVING A TWO CAR GARAGE WITH SOME PARKING OUT FRONT IS THAT IF YOU HAVE A GUEST COME OVER, THEY CAN PARK IN YOUR DRIVEWAY VERSUS HAVING TO PARK OUT ON THE STREET. YOU REALLY CAN'T PARK ON PINE. I MEAN, IT'S, THE TRAFFIC'S JUST TOO FAST THERE. SOME OF THEM WE'RE KIND OF STUCK PARKING ON THE SIDE STREET, AND THEN THAT'S GONNA START CREATING PROBLEMS WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS. NO DOUBT. YOU COMMISSION ZUNI AGAIN. OKAY. UH, IT, UH, IT'S NOT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO IT BEGS A QUESTION, IS THE DEVELOPER GOING TO PUT ANYTHING IN THERE, 10% OR $10,000 DOWN ON CLOSING AND OR WHATEVER? WELL, I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE A LITTLE BIT EARLY IN THE STAGES FOR THAT. I MEAN, WHAT I HAVE SEEN SOME OF THE DEVELOPERS DOING, THEY'VE HAD SLOW MOVING PRODUCTS AS THEY'LL REDUCE THE PRICE OR MAYBE, UM, TRY TO DO SOME CREATIVE FINANCING, THINGS LIKE THAT. YEAH. ESPECIALLY IN THAT SECTION [01:10:01] THERE. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. AND, UH, WHAT IS HOW MUCH, UH, BY DOING WHAT YOU'RE ASKING, HOW MUCH AIR CONDITIONED SPACE ARE YOU, ARE YOU ATTAINING OOH, AIR CONDITIONED SPACE OUT THROUGH THE GARAGE? I'M THINKING PROBABLY ABOUT 1200 SQUARE FEET, YOU KNOW. OKAY. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE IS IF HE DROPS IT, HE'S, HE'S LOSING A, A PARKING SPACE IN THE GARAGE. UH, UM, BECAUSE YOU, YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE TWO BEDROOMS OR IT'S, YOU DON'T FEEL THE VIABLE TWO BEDROOMS PRODUCTS HAVE TWO. YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT. RIGHT IS WITH THAT, ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? I GUESS I CAN DO IT. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. THANK YOU. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 1 8, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUEST FOR ONE A ONE FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FIVE INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY. LINE TWO, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THREE SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON THE ARM AND FOUR LOT THAT IS LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE AND THREE A HALF STORY VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 2.5 STORIES TO ALLOW A BUILDING WITH THREE STORIES SITUATED AT 8 1 5 SOUTH PINE STREET, APPLICANT B AND CHRISTON PC. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND 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 STAFF FINDS THESE REQUESTS ARE NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AT THREE STRUCTURES WILL NOT CAUSE OVERCROWDING ON SMALLER LAWS WITH A REDUCED SETBACK IN THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS OR FORCE FOR THE PROTECTION OF YOU FOR ADJACENT A ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USES, WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH. TWO DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE SPECIAL CONDITION FOUND ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LIMITED BUILDABLE AREA FOR THE INTENDED USES. STAFF FINDS A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS A REDUCTION OF LIVABLE AREA AND PARKING SPACES WOULD BE REDUCED. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE, RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE STRUCTURE WILL BE ABIDING BY ALL OTHER BUILDING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED. AND THE ZONING DISTRICT CO VARIANCE IS LOCATED NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THESE REQUESTS WILL NOT INJURE. ADJACENT PROPERTY SAYS THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IS COMMON. THE, IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AND WILL NOT BE OUTTA CHARACTER. SIX APPLIED OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE ASSAULT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT, AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND NOT DUE TO OR RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS SUPPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE APPLICANT NOT HAVING SUFFICIENT BUILDABLE AREA. THE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL AND OF MOTION. SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ, PLEASE LEAD THE DISCUSSION. UM, I DID HAVE SOME QUALMS ABOUT IT BEING THREE STORIES, BUT I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER PROBLEMS. AND OF COURSE WITH, UH, THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT THAT WE DO HAVE NOW HERE IN SAN ANTONIO, UM, IT MIGHT BE WORTH THE PROJECT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BRACKMAN? UM, YEAH, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT HAS ADDRESSED THE, UH, IMPERVIOUS SURFACE QUITE WELL. UM, AND THE THREE AND A HALF FOOT SIDE, UH, SETBACK IS NOT UNUSUAL. WE HEAR THAT ALL THE TIME. SO THAT'S NOT, UH, UNUSUAL. UH, THE HEIGHT VARIANCE, UM, AS HE STATED, THE TWO AND A HALF STORIES LOOKS JUST LIKE A THREE STORY. SO, AND VICE VERSA. SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT REALLY GAINING ANYTHING, UM, BY HAVING TWO AND A HALF STORIES. UM, BUT THE, THE DEVELOPER AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC IN TERMS OF HOUSING WOULD BE LOSING, UH, INVENTORY. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. Z COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YES. SO I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS WELL. UH, BY RIGHT. THE APPLICANT COULD DO FOUR UNITS. SO WE'RE, RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT THREE. UM, [01:15:01] HE MEETS THE 65% IMPERVIOUS COVER. UM, HE'S FIRE RATING THE WALLS. THEY COULD BE ONE STRUCTURE WITH ZERO LOT LINE IF, IF, UH, NEEDED. HERE WE'RE CREATING A, A BREAK BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS, WHICH PROVIDES SOME AIR AND LIGHT AND UH, I THINK IT PROVIDES HOUSING STOCK IN A MUCH NEEDED AREA OF THE CITY. AND AT 350, THAT IS AFFORDABLE IF, IF YOU'RE IN THE MARKET LOOKING FOR ANY OTHER, ANY TYPE OF HOUSE. SO I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? YES. UH, COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE FIRST TWO PARTS OF THIS. OKAY. SETBACK S BUT I CAN'T SUPPORT THE HEIGHT. I CAN'T SUPPORT THE HEIGHT LIMIT VARIANCE. OKAY. IS IT, UH, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO, UH, TRY TO SEPARATE THIS MOTION? UH, WE CAN SEPARATE IT. UH, THE OTHER WAY WE CAN DO IT IS IF WE HAVE, UH, TWO OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO EXPRESS, UH, A SIMILAR, UH, FEELINGS, UH, WE CAN FIRMLY AMEND IT IT OUT OF THE MOTION. OKAY. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS WHO, WHO ARE, UH, NOT A FAN OF THE, OF THE THREE STORIES I AM. OKAY. THAT'S ONE. IS THERE AN IS IF THERE'S, IS THERE A THIRD? I AM. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S THREE. SO I'M GONNA OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO, UH, STRIKE ITEM THREE FROM THE MOTION. CAN WE TAKE A VOTE THEN ON THE FIRST TWO ITEMS? OH YEAH, I'M BACK TO THE THIRD. SURE. BUT, UH, YEAH. DO YOU, DO YOU ACCEPT MY FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THE THIRD ITEM REGARDING THE THREE STORIES FROM THE MOTION IS READ? YES, SIR. OKAY. SO CONCUR. SO DOES THE SECOND. SO NOW THE MOTION BEFORE THE BOARD HAS BEEN AMENDED BY FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO NOT INCLUDE THREE STORIES. WE'RE ONLY VOTING ON WHETHER THERE COULD BE THREE SEPARATE UNITS AND THEN THE, UH, SIDE SETBACK. ALRIGHT, SO WITH THAT, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE. MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR. DR. BRADEN, I CONCUR. MS. PICASSO? YES. MS. BROWN? NO. MR. DEAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINANCE OF FACT. MR. VASQUEZ? NO. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. MR. RHI, THUMBS UP. THANK YOU. CHAIR ORIAN. UH, AND I DO NOT CONCUR. MOTION FAILS. SEVEN TO SEVEN TO FOUR. UH, AND I MOVE TO RECONSIDER THE ITEMS SINCE I'M ON THE PREVAILING SIDE. UH, SIR, SORRY, I THOUGHT IT WAS EIGHT TO THREE. THE COUNT. UH, IT IS SEVEN. IT WAS THREE. THERE WAS THREE SEVEN. 4, 7, 4. OKAY, THEN I DIDN'T COUNT, RIGHT? ALRIGHT. YEAH. SO I'M, I MOVE TO RECONSIDER THE ITEM. IS THERE A SECOND? RECONSIDER WHAT PART OF IT, SIR? I'D LIKE TO, I'D LIKE TO STRIKE, UM, ONE OF THE ITEMS OUT TO SEE IF IT'LL STILL PASS. WHICH ITEM? UM, I'D LIKE TO STRIKE OFF THE, UM, SEPARATE UNITS SECOND. OKAY. SO THERE'S A MO MOTION TO SECOND THIS. HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE ON THE MO ON THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE ITEM. UH, OKAY, I'M NOT SURE. WE'RE JUST, WHAT PART OF IT? WE'RE CLEANING THE SLATE. WE'RE CLEANING THE SLATE. SO THIS, WE CAN START OVER, OPEN IT TO RECONSIDER IT AGAIN. AT WHICH TIME AFTER THAT, ANOTHER MOTION WILL BE MADE FOR THE ADDITIONAL OR ALTERNATE MOTION. SO WE ALREADY, SO JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT IT, IT'S, WHAT I'M SEEING HERE IS THAT THIS COMMISSION IS NOT IN FAVOR, UH, WITH NINE MEMBERS ON THREE STORIES. AND APPARENTLY IT'S NOT IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS READ, BUT MAYBE THEY'LL BE IN FAVOR OF SOMETHING. AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO. SO LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER CHAIR ORIAN? YES. MS. PICASSO? YES. DR. BURSON? YES. MS. BROWN. SO, I'M SORRY, WHAT ARE WE VOTING ON? I CAN BARELY HEAR HIM DOWN HERE. WHETHER YOU'RE GONNA HAVE CONSIDERATION OF A DIFFERENT ITEM AFTER THIS OR A DIFFERENT YES, MS. DEAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES. MR. ZUNIGA? YES. MR. VASQUEZ? YES. MS. BRAGMAN? YES. MR. OZUNA? YES. MR. RHI. THUMBS UP. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO NOW THAT THE SLATE HAS BEEN CLEAN, I'M GONNA, SINCE I MADE THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER, I MOVE TO, UM, UM, RESTATE THE MOTION AS READ BY COMMISSIONER A ZUNA STRIKING, UH, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. APOLOGIZE. I'M SO HE TO COMMISSIONER, READ BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UH, BUT STRIKING, UH, THE, THE, THE ITEM [01:20:01] RELATING TO THREE STRUCTURES. SO NOW THE MOTION BEFORE US IS SOLELY FOR THE ONE FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK. UM, WHICH IS ABUTTING. THE CHURCH IS THERE IN GREEN SPACE. IN GREEN SPACE. SO IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO SOLELY CONSIDER THE VARIANCE FOR THE ONE FOOT SEVEN INCH SIDE SETBACK ON THE CHURCH SIDE OF THIS PROJECT. ALRIGHT, SO IF THERE'S ANY DISCUSSION, HEARING NUNS HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE CHAIR. ORIAN? YES. MR. OZUNA? YES. DR. BURTON? YES. MS. PICASSO? YES. MS. BROWN? I'M SORRY. WE ARE CONSIDERING THE 1.7 FOOT YES. THE SETBACK ONLY, NOT THE SETBACK. HOLD ON, HOLD ON. 1.7. UH, ONE FOOT SEVEN INCHES FROM THE CHURCH. THE SETBACK? NO MA'AM. FROM THE RIGHT, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. OH, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE CHURCH? NO, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE, OF HIS PROPERTY. APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. PROPERTY, YES. 1.7 INCHES VARIANCE. NO. ONE FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE. THE STRUCTURE WILL BE THREE FEET, FIVE INCHES FROM THE CHURCH PROPERTY LINE? NO. OKAY. MR. DEAN, I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES. MR. ZUNIGA? I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ? YES. MS. BRAGMAN? YES. MR. RHI? THUMBS UP. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES. NINE TO TWO. ALL RIGHT. SO, UM, THAT, UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE ONE THAT WE EXCLUDED ORIGINALLY FOR THE THREE STORIES, UM, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE. WHAT ABOUT THE THREE STRUCTURES? COULD WE BRING THAT UP AGAIN OR, WELL, THAT WAS, THAT WAS GONNA BE A NO, THAT WAS, YOU STRUCK THAT OUT, RIGHT? YEAH, I STRUCK IT OUT BECAUSE IT, THE, THE MOTION WITH THE TWO ITEMS FAILED. BUT DURING, UH, UH, QUESTIONING, I, I DETERMINED THAT THAT IT, THAT WAS THE REASON. SO I, I'D LIKE TO READ THE MOTION THEN FOR THE TWO AND A HALF STORIES, THE, THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE, YOU, YOU CERTAINLY CAN. SO I'LL, SO I'LL JUST READ THE MOTION, BUT THEN STATE THE, UH, SAME FINDINGS OF FACT THAT WERE READ IN THE ORIGINAL MOTION. RIGHT. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 2 8, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR, UM, A HALF STORY VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM TWO AND A HALF STORIES TO ALLOW A BUILDING WITH THREE STORIES SITUATED AT STREET APPLICANT BEING CHRISTENSEN PC BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY, AS SUCH, THERE ARE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN A NECESSARY HARDSHIP. UM, THE FINDINGS OF FACT ARE THE SAME AS THE COMMISSIONER READ IN THE PRIOR, UH, MOTION. UM, I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION BECAUSE, UH, THE APPLICANT'S IS THERE A SECOND. UM, LET'S LOOK FOR SECOND, SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. UH, SO THE APPLICANT PROVIDED TESTIMONY THAT IF HE WAS TO HAVE TO REDUCE TO THE TWO AND A HALF STORIES AND THE, THE, THE BUILDING LAYOUT WOULD CREATE, YOU KNOW, A SITUATION WHERE YOU'D HAVE ONE, UH, ONE GARAGE SPACE. UM, CLEARLY THE OTHER CARS WOULD HAVE TO PARK DOWN THE BLOCK, CREATE A, A, A ISSUE WITH PARKING. THERE IS NO REAL EFFECT OF A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO AND A HALF AND THE THREE STORIES. I MEAN, THE, THE ROOF LINES ARE GONNA BE THE SAME. UM, EVERYTHING'S THE SAME. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW THAT SPACE IS UTILIZED FOR THAT THIRD STORY. I'M NOT SEEING THE EFFECTS OF ANY OF THE, UM, UH, THE, THE EFFECTS OF A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TWO AND A HALF AND A THREE STORY OTHER THAN HI, UH, THE, UH, DEVELOPER'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE A MORE USEFUL UTILIZATION OF THE SPACE WITH A TWO CAR GARAGE AND THE, UH, TWO STORIES, UH, TWO BEDROOMS AND SUCH FOR THE, FOR THE LAYOUT. SO TO ME, THERE'S NO IMPACT. COMMISSIONER CRUZ, I CONCUR WITH MR. UH, WITH MR. ZUNA. I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT. I STILL, UH, THINK THAT THE THREE STORIES WOULD BE CONVENIENT FOR, FOR ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO, UH, OWN A HOME IN THAT AREA. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? LIKE TO ADD COMMISSIONER PICASSO? I HAVE A QUESTION. I AGREE. I THINK THAT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE PROP, THE AREA PINE IS ALREADY VERY NARROW AND THERE'S, AND IT'S, THERE'S ALREADY A LOT OF TRAFFIC THAT GOES THROUGH THERE. AND THEN EVEN LOOKING AT THE SIDE STREETS, THEY'RE EVEN MORE NARROW AND WITH LACK OF SIDEWALKS. SO I THINK THAT HAVING THE THREE STORIES VERSUS A TWO AND A HALF, GIVEN THAT THE LODGE, THE LOGIC OF PRACTICALITY FOR THE TWO CAR GARAGES IS, IS TENABLE. UM, I, I, I THINK THAT IF IT TWO AND A HALF, I MEAN, ESPECIALLY FOR THE VALUE OF THE, OF THE [01:25:01] PROPERTY, AND IF THEY'RE GONNA STAY AROUND THE 350,000 MARK, THEN I MEAN THEY SHOULD HAVE TWO, TWO, UH, CAR GARAGE. COMMISSIONER BROWN, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED HERE. UM, I DON'T SEE HOW TWO STORIES WOULD IMPACT HAVING A TWO CAR GARAGE. IF YOU HAVE TWO STORIES, YOU'RE JUST REMOVING THE TOP STORY. SO HOW IS THAT GOING TO IMPACT HAVING A TWO CAR GARAGE? I, I DON'T. SO IT'S, IF THIS FAILS, HE CAN DO TWO AND A HALF STORIES, WHICH MEANS IT'S BASICALLY A THIRD STORY, BUT IT, IT'S 50% OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. WELL, WHAT'S WRONG WITH TWO STORIES? WELL, HE COULD DO TWO AND A HALF WITHOUT US RIGHT NOW. WITHOUT WHAT? WITHOUT US OUR VOTING ON THIS AT ALL. WELL, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT MIGHT BE THE WAY TO GO, BECAUSE I DON'T SEE THREE STORIES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. $350,000 WHERE PEOPLE IN THIS AREA REALLY CAN'T EVEN AFFORD THAT. SO I'M, I'M GONNA CHIME IN ON THIS. SO I DO, I DO A LOT OF PROJECTS IN THIS AREA. I'VE ACTUALLY GOT 10 THINGS I'M LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW, AND THEY'RE ALL, AND ONE OF THE COMMONALITIES THAT I SEE BETWEEN ALL OF THEM, THEM THAT THE LOTS ARE LIKE THIS SIZE AND ALL, AND, AND A LOT OF, A LOT OF MY CLIENTS WANT, UH, THEY WANT TO DO FOUR, BUT THEY CAN'T. SO THEY TRY TO DO THREE AND THEN THEY THINK ABOUT SEPARATING 'EM. THEY THINK ABOUT GOING TO THREE STORIES. BUT THE ONE THING THAT ALWAYS COMES UP IS THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH SPACE ON THIS. AND THAT'S, AND IF YOU DON'T GET TWO OR THREE PARKING SPACES PER THESE UNITS, IT CAUSES, THAT'S MORE OF A BURDEN ON EVERYONE ELSE THAN YOU HAVING 35 FEET OF HEIGHT AS A, ACROSS THE WHOLE THING VERSUS HALF, HALF THE SIZE OF THE STRUCTURE. AND SO, BUT YOU KNOW, THESE WERE BUILT FOR SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. THEY'RE SIX SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THAT'S NOT A SINGLE FAMILY LOT. THIS IS A MULTI-FAMILY LOT. SO NOW HE'S GONNA HAVE, WHAT HE'S GONNA HAVE TO DO IS BECAUSE HE CAN'T KEEP THE BUILDING SEPARATE, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME TOGETHER. SO NOW THERE'S GONNA BE, THERE'S GONNA BE, UM, IT'S GONNA BE RECONFIGURED SLIGHTLY, BUT IT'S STILL, I I'M NOT, I'M NOT OPPOSED, UH, TO THE THREE STORIES. I'M ALSO NOT A FAN OF IT. UH, I KNOW THAT IF HE HAS TO PUT THE BUILDINGS BACK TOGETHER AND HE'S LOSING THAT THREE AND A HALF FEET, THAT HE'S DIMENSION BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS, THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE GAME, MAYBE THAT MAKES UP FOR IT. IF HE'LL LEAD US TWO AND A HALF STORIES. SO THAT'S, I'M PUTTING THAT OUT THERE. YOU KNOW, HE COULD DO, HE COULD. AND THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM ISSUE, UM, WHEN YOU PUT IN A A, A RESIDENTIAL CLASS SPRINKLER SYSTEM, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'D HAVE TO DO HERE, YOU CAN FEED IT RIGHT OFF THE WATER METER. IT'S NOT AS EXPENSIVE AS A GRADE D OR YOU KNOW, AS A, AS A COMMERCIAL CLASS FULL 13 SPRINKLER SYSTEM. SO THESE RESIDENTIAL ONES, THEY, THEY PUT A, THEY PUT A FLIP ON THE METER SWAP. AND SO WHEN THE, WHEN IT GOES OFF, THEY JUST TAKE IT RIGHT FROM YOUR HOUSE WATER LINE. THEY DON'T NEED A SEPARATE FIRE LINE. AND LIKE YOU WOULD ON A, ON A COMMERCIAL GRADE, I, I'M NOT CONCERNED WITH THE WATER LINES AND ALL THAT. THAT'S HIS, THAT'S HIS PROBLEM, YOU KNOW, BUT WHY NOT BUILD TWO, TWO STRUCTURES INSTEAD OF THREE? WELL, I MEAN, IT COMES DOWN TO MONEY. SO IF HE, SO WHAT IT, IT ACTUALLY MAY BE MORE VIABLE FOR HIM TO PUT FOUR UNITS ON HERE, A SINGLE CAR GARAGE. AND, AND REALLY, 'CAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING THOSE TOO. WE GOTTA, ONE OF MY JOBS IS THEY'RE DOING FOUR AND HE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THE PLIGHT OF ALL THE NEIGHBORS. AND HE JUST, INSTEAD OF HAVING FOUR PARKING SPACES A UNIT, WHICH IS WHAT HE'S OFFERING HERE, HE ONLY HAS TO DO TWO. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S, WHAT'S YOUR POISON ON THIS STUFF IS WHAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT. YOU KNOW, I, WE COULD DEBATE THIS ALL DAY, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I LIVE NOT IN THIS AREA, BUT I LIVE ON THE EAST SIDE AND I SEE CONTRACTORS AND DEVELOPERS COMING IN THERE EVERY DAY DOING SHODDY WORK AND DOING THREE AND FOUR HOUSES ON. BUT THAT'S, YEAH, LET'S JUST, LET'S JUST TAKE A VOTE. IF, IF THAT'S VERY POINT OF ORDER. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COL WHAT YOU TALKING ABOUT CODE COMPLIANT ABOUT THE CODE HERE? YEAH. I MEAN IT, THIS IS JUST, IF WHATEVER WE DON'T GIVE HIM, HE'S GONNA FIND SOME WAY TO, TO DO SOMETHING. YEAH. SO IT'S JUST WHATEVER WE FEEL IS BEST FOR THE AREA. I, I SPOKE, MY PIECE IS, THERE'S ANYONE ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE? I, I'D LIKE TO SAY, LISTEN, I MEAN, COMMISSIONER PICASSO, IF LOOKING AT THE AESTHETIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS IT STANDS TODAY, THIS IS OBVIOUSLY GONNA STICK OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB. AND WE SEE A LOT OF PATCHWORK IN, IN, UM, DESIGN CURRENTLY IN DISTRICT TWO. AND I'M, I'M FULLY AWARE OF THAT. HOWEVER, TO THE POINT OF THE CHAIR, THIS IS GOING TO, IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE THREE, THREE STORIES REGARDLESS IF, IF, IF WE SAY YAY OR NAY TODAY. UM, AND SO TO BE ABLE TO GIVE THE MOST OPPORTUNITY FOR THE HOMEOWNERS IN THIS AREA, BECAUSE IT IS GONNA BE SINGLE FAMILIES COMING INTO THIS, AND THESE ARE GONNA BE STARTER HOMES FOR PEOPLE. 'CAUSE 300,000 IS, IS AS OF TODAY THANKS TO, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE ARE IN, IN THE ECONOMY. THIS IS GONNA BE A, A STARTER HOME FOR FAMILIES AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE GETTING THE MOST OUT OF, OUT OF THEIR, OUT OF THEIR DOLLAR. AND I THINK THAT IT HAVING THREE STORIES IS GONNA BE THAT. I MEAN, IT'S NOT IDEAL. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THIS AREA. HOWEVER, SEEN IN THE SCHEMATICS THAT ARE BEING SHOWN TODAY, BEING ABLE TO BRING IN SIDEWALKS AND AND OPPORTUNITY INTO THIS AREA, I THINK IS WHAT WE WANNA SEE FOR THE VITALITY FOR, UM, DISTRICT TWO . YEAH. LET'S HAVE A VOTE PLEASE. MS. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. [01:30:01] DR. BURTON? NO. MS. PICASSO? YES. MS. BROWN? NO. MR. DEAN. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. RHI, THUMBS UP. THANK YOU. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF F*G MOTION FAILS. EIGHT TO THREE. AND WITH THAT, WE'LL IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF. NO. OKAY. ITEM THREE. UM, SO THE, UH, APPLICANT REQUESTED A, UM, CONTINUANCE FOR THIS CASE, BUT I'LL PRESENT IT REAL QUICK. UM, AND THEY'RE CURRENTLY NOT PRESENT. IS THERE ANYBODY SIGNING UP TO SPEAK OR PUBLIC COMMENTARY? THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. CAN WE GO RIGHT TO A CONTINUANCE? DO WE HAVE TO HEAR PRESENTATION? YES. OH, NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HEAR THE AND WHAT, DON'T GO STRAIGHT INTO THE CONTINUOUS. WHAT IS THE DATE THEY'RE ASKING FOR? THIS IS THE ONE WEEK. UH, JOSEPH FIFTH. THE 25TH. OKAY. I MOVE TO CONTINUE BO O A 23 DASH ONE OH, EXCUSE SIR. YES. THE NEXT BOARD MEETING'S NEXT MONDAY THE 18TH. WE DON'T HAVE ONE TO 25TH. YES. SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE, WE HAVE A SPECIAL ONE ON THE 25TH. THERE'S THREE THIS MONTH. OH, WELL THAT'S NICE TO KNOW. I HAVEN'T SEEN IT ON THE CALENDAR YET. THANK YOU. YEAH, WE'VE VOTED. THE SPECIAL MEETING IS THE 18TH. 25TH IS THE NORMAL SCHEDULED ONE. ONE. OKAY, I MOVE TO CONTINUE. BO O A DASH 23 DASH 3 75 TO SEPTEMBER 25TH. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ZUNA. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION PASSES. CASES CONTINUE TO SEPTEMBER 25TH. ITEM FOUR. OKAY, ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS BO O A DASH 23 DASH 1 0 3 0 1 8 3. ADDRESS IS 1 7 1 0 MCCULLOUGH AVENUE IN CITY COUNCIL. DISTRICT ONE APPLICANT BEING GERARDO GONZALEZ. UH, AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A 29 FOOT, 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A CORRUGATED METAL FENCE ALONG THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG MCCULLOUGH AVENUE NEAR EAST LOCUST STREET. UH, CURRENTLY THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A RETAIL STORE RESULTING IN A PROPERTY SETBACK VIOLATION. CODE ENFORCEMENT CITED THE PROPERTY FOR A CORRUGATED METAL ENCLOSURE BEING CONSTRUCTED, BEING CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT OBTAINING BUILDING PERMITS. UH, THE ENCLOSURE IS CURRENTLY ONE INCH FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND IS A BUDDING A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. UH, UPON SITE VISIT, STAFF OBSERVED D FOLIAGE PAST THE REAR PROPERTY LINE ON THE ABUTTING LOT. UH, ADDITIONALLY, STAFF DID NOT OBSERVE ANY OTHER STRUCTURES IMPEDING INTO THE SETBACK. THE ORIGINAL, THE ORIGINAL PRIMARY STRUCTURE APPEARS TO HAVE THE REQUIRED 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK. HOWEVER, THE ENCLOSURE BUILT GOES INTO THE REAR, UH, CONFIRMED BY C P S. THE OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL LINE IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE AN EASEMENT. UH, THE SERVICE WIRE THAT GOES OVER THE STORAGE SHED SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY STRUCTURES BUILT UNDER IT. AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SEEN FROM MCCULLOUGH AVENUE. AND THIS IS THE VIEW FROM EAST LOCUST STREET. AND THEN THIS IS AN ALTERNATE VIEW, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, AND THEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY'S ON THE RIGHT. AND THEN THIS IS THE PICTURE OF THE ONE INCH, UH, STRUCTURE FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND THEN THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE REAR SETBACK AND CORRUGATED METAL VARIANCES. STAFF RECOMMENDS A DENIAL IN BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 0 180 3 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. UH, ONCE STAFF, UH, STAFF FINDS THIS IS NOT AN ALLOWABLE DISTANCE AS IT WILL DIRECTLY AFFECT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR. TWO, THE REQUEST WILL INJURE THE RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICT AS THE ENFORCED MINIMUM REAR SETBACK DISTANCES TO PREVENT COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES FROM ENCROACHING INTO THE RESIDENTIAL ZONED AREAS. AND THREE CORRUGATED METAL IS A PROHIBITED FENCE MATERIAL. AND THEN THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MOWED OUT 20 NOTICES, UH, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND TOKEN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION OF THE REQUEST. AND THEN THIS IS THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION RESPONSE. AND, UH, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. DIDN'T, DIDN'T WE HEAR THIS ONE? THIS LOOKS SO FAMILIAR, CORRECT? YES, IT WAS HEARD ON, I BELIEVE IT [01:35:01] WAS, UH, SOMETIME LAST MONTH. AND SO IT DIDN'T SHOW UP AS A CONTINUED CONTINUATION OR ANYTHING. WHAT, WHAT HAPPENED? WE HAD ADDED ON THE ADDITIONAL REQUEST FOR THE CORRUGATED METAL, UH, TO OH, YOU NOTIFIED. OKAY. CORRECT. ALRIGHT. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE BRING UP THE APPLICANT? YES. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA C P S STATES THAT YOU CANNOT BUILD OVER OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINES IN THE REAR PROPERTY. CORRECT. AND WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT? AT THE SHED OR THE PATIO COVER ON THE, YES. UH, TODAY WE'RE LOOKING AT THE, UH, AS SEEN IN THE YELLOW ON THE SITE PLAN. THAT'S THAT CORRUGATED METAL ENCLOSURE, UH, WHICH IS THAT ONE INCH FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND THAT WHOLE STRUCTURE IS BUILT UNDERNEATH THAT SERVICE LINE. OKAY. AND WHAT ARE, THERE'S MANY OF THAT EVEN, UM, I WENT THROUGH THERE MM-HMM. THROUGH THE BACK OF OTHER BUSINESSES AS YOU PROBABLY WENT AND SEEN TOO. MM-HMM. , WHAT IS A SOLUTION FOR THAT THEN? SO JUST TO, JUST TO PUT THAT OUT THERE, IF C P S DOESN'T HAVE AN EASEMENT, THEY MIGHT HAVE ONE BY NECESSITY, A PRESCRIPTION OR SOMETHING EASEMENT. THERE MAY NOT BE. BUT ALSO THE ELECTRIC CODE DOESN'T ALLOW YOU TO BILL WITHIN 10 FEET OF A POWER LINE ANYWAY, JUST SO YOU KNOW. . YEAH. LATERALLY EASEMENT OR NOT. WHAT'S THAT? EASEMENT OR AUTO. YEAH. SO YEAH, YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT THE CORRUGATED METAL AND UH, DOES THE FOLIAGE IN THE BACK, WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO USE? WELL, I JUST MENTIONED THE FOLIAGE IN THE BACK, JUST TO GIVE Y'ALL A SENSE OF THE AREA, UM, THAT THERE'S THAT DENSE FOLIAGE SEPARATING THE COMMERCIAL USED FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY USED AGAIN, JUST TO GIVE Y'ALL, UM, I GUESS A, A BETTER PICTURE OF THE AREA. YEAH. BECAUSE THE FOILER, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THEN YOU, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REQUEST, YOU'RE CORRECT. YEAH, EXACTLY. AND YOU KNOW, I MEAN, AND IT PUTS IN OUR MINDS HERE ANOTHER INFRACTION, WHICH IS NOT FAIR, YOU KNOW, FOR THE APPLICANT. OKAY. NOTED. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO, OKAY, ANY OTHER COMMISSION QUESTIONS FOR STAFF HERE? NOW HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD? IS THE APPLICANT HERE? YEP. ALRIGHT. UH, TELL US YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR CASE PLEASE. UH, YES SIR. YEAH, I WAS HERE BEFORE. MY NAME IS, UH, GERARDO GONZALEZ AND I, UH, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND UH, WELL I DO HAVE, UH, THE RESTAURANT NEXT TO IT. SO I GOT BOTH PROPERTIES IN THERE. LIKE I MENTIONED BEFORE, UH, THE PURPOSE OF BUILDING THIS STRUCTURE IS, UH, TO KEEP TIFFS AWAY BECAUSE THEY WERE JUST JUMPING OVER THE FENCE AND MESSING UP ALL WITH THE STUFF OF THE RESTAURANT AND THE STORE. AND, UH, SINCE IT WAS A METAL FENCE ALREADY BUILT WHEN WE GOT THIS PROPERTY, I MEAN, IT WAS EASY TO ME TO JUST PUT THE CHEAP METALS TO KEEP PEOPLE AWAY FROM STEALING MY STUFF. OKAY. SO THAT'S WHAT IT IS. ALRIGHT. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? CRUZ, MR. CRUZ? UH, SIR, THE PROPERTY OWNER RIGHT BEHIND YOU, THE HOME THAT'S A FOOT AWAY, WHICH IS IN THAT PICTURE THAT THEY'RE SHOWING NOW? MM-HMM. , DO THEY HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE FENCE? I, NO, NO. DON'T SEE ANY, THAT'S WHY I'M MAKING SURE NO'S MY CUSTOMER OF THE RESTAURANT. OKAY, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? YES, COMMISSIONER CORRUGATED METAL FENCE WAS ALREADY THERE. ANOTHER ONE? YOU CHANGED IT? IT WAS PART OF IT, BUT I ACTUALLY PUT THE, THE TOP OF IT. OH, OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA ASK YOU NEXT, BUT IT WAS A METAL, A METAL FENCE AND THEN I JUST PUT THE SHEET METAL ON IT. A METAL FENCE IS THERE. SO THEN YOU PUT ANOTHER, WHAT, TWO FEET? THREE THAT YOU, UH, YEAH. SCREWED IT ON IT OR WHATEVER. YEAH. MM-HMM. , BUT THE METAL FENCE. YEAH. MR. CHAIRMAN. YEAH. THEN WE LOOK AT THE WHOLE METAL FENCE OR JUST THAT. WELL YOU CAN'T USE CORRUGATED METAL AS A FENCING MATERIAL. THE HEIGHT WASN'T AN ISSUE. IS THAT CORRECT? IT'S SIX FEET MAX. UH, THE HEIGHT WAS NOT AN ISSUE. NO. YEAH, HE SAID THE CORRUGATED METAL WAS ALREADY THERE. YEAH, HE ALTERED IT. THE ONLY REASON WE ADDED THE CORRUGATED METAL 'CAUSE LAST MEETING, UM, I BELIEVE THE COMMISSION INDICATED THAT IF THEY DID NOT APPROVE IT RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE, HE MIGHT STILL HAVE THE CORRUGATED METAL FENCE THAT HE HAD BEFORE. THAT'S WHY WE ADDED THAT ON THERE. OH, OH, OH YEAH. THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. UH, ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. UM, WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS SEE IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC COMMENTARY, ANYONE, SENATOR, TO SPEAK? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. AND IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, WE'LL GO. YES. THE COMMISSIONER PICASSO, IF THEY CHANGED THE MATERIAL OF THE FENCE, WERE WE GOOD? WELL, [01:40:01] HE HAD A, SO HE HAD A SHORTER FENCE. HE, HE TACKED ON ADDITIONAL METAL IF THE, IF THE, IF THIS FAILS, DOES HE DOES THIS? UH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. DOES, DOES THIS APPLICANT HAVE THE ABILITY TO REMOVE WHAT HE ADDED AND KEEP WHAT HE, THAT'S A QUESTION HISTORICALLY HAD. THAT'S A QUESTION IF, DOES IT HAVE TO PREDATE 2005 OR IS THAT ONE OF THOSE RULES THAT KICK IN? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU ASK THAT AGAIN? WELL, HE EXPANDED IT SO HE LOST HIS NON-CONFORMING USE. OKAY, SO HE LOST HIS NON-CONFORMING. RIGHT. SO IF WE DON'T GIVE HIM THE CORRUGATED METAL, HE'D HAVE TO REPLACE IT WITH ANOTHER MATERIAL. UH, UNDER WHAT RULE IS THAT? UM, SORRY, CAN YOU READ THE RULES THERE? THAT, THAT HE, HE WOULD LOSE HIS RIGHTS ONCE THEY HE DIDN'T REMOVE IT? Y NO, HE JUST ADDED THAT. NO, BUT IF YOU'RE, IT'S, IT IS STATED IN THE CODE IN CHAPTER 35, 7 15, I THINK 13 I THINK, UH, WHERE IT SAYS THAT, UM, IF THEY EXPAND THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING, THEN THEY HAVE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS FOR THE STRUCTURE ITSELF FOR WHATEVER IT IS. THE FENCE, THE ADDITION. THE BUT, BUT WHAT WE CAN, YEAH, THE THE NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS MAINTENANCE IS ONE THING CHANGES SOMETHING ELSE. HE CHANGED IT AND SO HE LOST HIS NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS. BUT, BUT HE, UH, YEAH, I'M, I'M NOT GOING ARGUE WITH YOU STAFF ON IT. I DON'T WANNA LOOK IT UP AND THEN WRITE YOU A MEMO. BUT I MEAN, THE THING IS THIS THAT, UH, COULD WE AMEND IT IN ANY WAY? UH, I MEAN RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST, IT'S A FENCE MATERIAL. THAT'S ALL IT IS. IS A, CAN HE USE CORRUGATE METAL? YES OR NO? IT DOESN'T. THE HEIGHT HEIGHT'S ARE T 'CAUSE HE'S NOT EXCEEDING SIX FEET. OH, OKAY. SO THERE YOU HEARD THAT SIR? YEAH. SO YOU LOST YOUR RIGHTS. I MEAN, I JUST LOOKING FOR SOLUTION. YOU TELL ME WHAT I NEED TO DO. SO WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS IS WE'RE ABOUT TO ASK FOR A MOTION, BUT WHAT'S GOING ON IS, IS THAT YOU, THE USE OF METAL IS NOT ALLOWED. METAL IS NOT ALLOWED. YOU CAN'T USE METAL COR METAL. YOU CAN'T USE CORRUGATED METAL. YEAH. WELL ACTUALLY IN THE BEGINNING WHEN, UH, THEY FIRST ME GAVE ME THE WARNINGS, I'VE BEEN LIKE LOOKING ALL OVER, EVEN HERE WITH THE CITY ASKING WHAT KIND OF MATERIAL AND I DIDN'T GET AN ANSWER. WELL IT, SO I STILL DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER. WHAT KIND MATERIAL CAN I USE? WELL THE CODE EXPRESSLY PROHIBITS CORRUGATED METAL. UH, FOR ING? YEAH, IT JUST, FOR ANYBODY I'LL BE OKAY CHANGING THE MATERIAL, BUT I HAVE TO KNOW WHAT MATERIAL I CAN USE. WOOD WROUGHT IRON. GOOD. IT CAN BE LIKE PLYWOOD. WELL, CAN YOU PUT PLYWOOD AS A FENCE? I GUESS YOU COULD, RIGHT? UM, IF IT'S NOT INTENDED FOR OTHER USES, UH, IF IT WAS INTENDED FOR OTHER USES BESIDES A FENCE THAT'S NOT PERMITTED. YEAH. SO IF YOU KEEP IT AS A FENCE, THEN YOU COULD USE PLYWOOD. COULDN'T HE TAKE DOWN THE PART THAT HE ADDED AND JUST PUT WOOD? NO, WE, WE JUST, WE ASKED ABOUT THAT BECAUSE HE ALTERED SOMETHING THAT WAS NON-CONFORMING. THE NON-CONFORMING RIGHT. WENT AWAY. SO, ALRIGHT, SO IF THERE'S ANY, ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONER PICASSO, CAN SOMEBODY FROM CODE WORK WITH HIM TO JUST BE ABLE TO ADVISE HIM WHAT MATERIALS HE CAN USE? 'CAUSE THAT SEEMS TO BE, HE SEEMS TO BE OBVIOUSLY WELCOME TO CHANGING IT. JUST, HE JUST WANTS SOME ASSISTANCE TO KNOW WHAT THE BEST OPPORTUNITIES ARE. WE'LL MAKE SURE HE'S AWARE OF THAT, MA'AM. YEAH, YOU'LL HAVE TO WORK BUT THEN, ALRIGHT. YEAH, MAYBE THEY CAN GET HIM A SECTION OF, UH, FIVE 14. I'LL TAKE IT. PREPOS. I THINK THERE'S A PAGE IN THERE THAT TELLS YOU WHAT MATERIALS YOU CAN USE. YES SIR. ALRIGHT, SO WITH THAT, UH, LOOKING FOR A MOTION BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 23 DASH 0 3 180 3. I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT AND REQUEST FOR ONE A 29 FOOT 3 29 FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE ONE INCH PROPERTY LINE AND TWO VARIANCE TO ALLOW CORRUGATED METAL FENCES ALONG THE SIDE OF REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 7 1 0 AVENUE APPLICANT GONZALEZ. BECAUSE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS, WE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER, I'M SO SORRY. I THINK WE LOST YOUR AUDIO. HOW FAR BACK, START OFF RIGHT. START OFF RIGHT WHERE YOU LEFT OFF. OKAY. SHOW THAT 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 HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THE ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE, SORRY, I'M TRYING TO ENLARGE THIS. HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE, UH, OF THE PUBLIC STAFF FINDS THAT THIS IS AN ALLOWABLE DISTANCE AS IT DOES NOT DIRECTLY AFFECT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF FINDS THE FENCING MATERIAL [01:45:01] SUITABLE AS IT IS SOLELY LOCATED WITHIN THE REAR YARD. 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 ALTERING THE STRUCTURE TO ADHERE TO THE REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS AND RECONSTRUCT THE FENCE USING AN ALLOWABLE FENCING MATERIAL. THIS WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS IT APPEARS THE STRUCTURE AND FENCE CAN'T BE ALTERED. 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. C TWO ZONE DISTRICTS HAVE THE OPTION TO ELIMINATE THE REAR SETBACK DISTANCE IF A BUDDING COMMERCIAL ONLY AND THE FENCE IS ALSO ALLOWABLE FENCE HEIGHT. THUS THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED IN THIS CASE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR, OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED. IF GRANTED, THE STRUCTURE WILL MAINTAIN THE CURRENT ONE INCH REAR SETBACK AND HAVE PROHIBITIVE FENCING MATERIALS, THESE REQUESTS WILL NOT INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OR 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 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 WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE APPLICANT NOT HAVING SUFFICIENT BUILDABLE SPACE FOR THE PROPOSED USE OF CIRCUMSTANCES. DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UM, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE CORRUGATED MEDAL, SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. OKAY. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. THIS IS, UM, I LIKE THE WAY IT LOOKS, BUT I KNOW THAT THE CORRUGATED METAL, EVENTUALLY SOMEBODY WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT IT, SO I WILL OPPOSE IT. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? I'M GONNA ADD THAT I'M NOT, I'M, I'M OPPOSED TO THE CORRUGATED METAL AND, UM, ALSO NOT A FAN OF THE SETBACK VARIANCE. HOWEVER, I I WOULD BE, UH, AGREEABLE TO A, TO A 20 FOOT VARIANCE ON THE 30 TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT STRUCTURE TO BE 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE FENCE JUST FOR ADEQUATE ACCESS AND PROTECTION FROM THE NEIGHBORING SINGLE FAMILY USE. UM, IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS ANY SUPPORT FOR THAT, I'LL MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. BUT OTHERWISE I'LL KEEP QUIET. YEAH, I'D BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. OKAY. WELL THEN I'M, I, UH, I OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO, TO, TO STRIKE THE CORRUGATED METAL SECTION OF THE, OF THE MOTION AND TO CHANGE THE 29 FOOT, 11 FOOT VARIANCE TO A 20 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM AND 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THAT'S ACCEPTABLE. YES. WHAT ABOUT COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UH, I CONCUR. OKAY, SO THE MOTION IS OFFICIALLY CHANGED. THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR DOES NOT INCLUDE THE CORRUGATED METAL AND, AND IS PROMOTING A, A, UH, A 20 FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. UH, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO, UH, DISCUSS FURTHER HEARING? NONE. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. DR. BURTON? YES. MS. PICASSO? YES. MS. BROWN? YES. MR. DEAN? I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR IF IT'S FINE. IT'S A FACT. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. MR. RHI THUMBS UP. THANK YOU. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES, UH, 11 TO ZERO. UM, SO WHAT HAPPENS, SIR, IS THAT THE CORRUGATED METAL DID NOT PASS. MM-HMM. ? UH, WE DID GIVE YOU A BREAK FROM THE 30 FOOT SETBACK. YOU CAN BE UP TO 10 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. UM, I'M SURE THIS IS, IT'S, YOU'LL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, BUT THAT'S WHY WE HAVE, UH, STAFF WHO DOES THIS FOR A LIVING THAT CAN HELP YOU OUT. YEAH. UH, BUT YOU CAN GO TALK TO THEM THOUGH. UM, I GOT YOU. OKAY. AND THEY'LL, YEAH. ALRIGHT. FOR ONE WEEK. YEP, I GOT IT. DOES ANY COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE A BREAK OR DO WE WANNA TRY TO HIT THE NEXT ONE? SURE. LET'S, IT'S GONNA BE REAL QUICK. THERE'S A BREAK EVERY CONTINUANCE, WE'LL DO A QUICK CONTINUANCE, THEN WE'LL TAKE A BREAK. SO, UH, WHAT, WHAT THIS IS AN, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED FOR A CONTINUANCE. THAT [01:50:01] IS CORRECT. APPLICANT IS, UM, ASKING FOR A CONTINUANCE. WE'RE ARE, UM, REQUESTING, UM, ADDITIONAL SIGNATURES FROM THE PROPERTIES FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST. WE ONLY GOT, WE APPROXIMATELY NEED 41 SIGNATURES. WE'RE SHORT ABOUT SEVEN. SO WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE. THIS BUILDER IS CURRENTLY WORKING ON GETTING THOSE SIGNATURES FOR NEXT MONDAY, THE 18TH. WHAT IS THE, THE 18TH? YES SIR. 18TH. YES. OKAY. 18TH. AND IS, OKAY. SO IS THERE A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE? I MOVE FOR A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 23 DASH 0 3 2 2 3 TO UH, SEPTEMBER THE 18TH. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION PASSES. S HAS CONTINUED. ITEM SIX. YOU WERE GONNA TAKE A BREAK OR WHAT? OH, I APOLOGIZE. UH, YEAH. LITTLE BA WANTS. YEAH, WE'LL TAKE A QUICK BREAK. WE'LL SEE EVERYBODY BACK AT THREE. IT'S 2 58. WE'LL SEE Y'ALL BACK AT 3 0 5. ALL RIGHT. 3 0 6. I'M CALLING THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER. I BELIEVE WE ARE ON ITEM SIX. ITEM NUMBER SIX IS BO O 8 23. 1 0 3 0 0 2 6. ADDRESS IS 1 1 1 0 NORTH 1604 EAST COUNCIL DISTRICT NINE. APPLICANT IS A AND D ENGINEERING L L C A REQUEST FOR 11 FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO ALLOW A THREE FOOT SIX INCH LANDSCAPE BUFFER ZONING IS A C THREE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG NORTHEAST NORTH SECTION OH FOUR EAST ON THE NORTH SIDE BETWEEN US 2 81 AND STONE OAK PARKWAY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A THREE FOOT SIX INCH LANDSCAPE BUFFER ON THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE TO FACILITATE PARKING FOR PROPOSED COFFEE AND FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT. THE BUFFER REDUCTION REDUCTIONS. REQUESTED BORDER COMMERCIAL USES. THERE IS CURRENTLY A RESTAURANT ON A LOT OF BUD IN THIS PROPERTY. THE SITE PLAN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. UH, NEXT DOOR PROPERTY, THE RESTAURANT AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION, LANDSCAPE BUFFER VARIANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND B O A 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS THAT REDUCED THE BUFFERS REQUESTED BORDER COMMERCIAL USES AND APPLYING THE FULL BUFFER WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY LIMIT THE USABILITY OF THE PROPERTY NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MAIL DOUBT. 11 NOTICES ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE ARE NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. OKAY. BEFORE YOU GO, WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT REDUCING BUFFERS WHEN YOU'RE NEXT TO A, A HIGHWAY DOWN TO FIVE FEET BECAUSE YOU HAD AN, UM, UM, A UTILITY EASEMENT. SO THIS, UM, SKETCH THAT YOU HAVE IN THE PACKAGE SHOWS THAT THERE'S A 14 FOOT C P S, THE STANDARD C P S EASEMENT. HOW COME, BUT THE BUFFER'S BEING SHOWN AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE AS OPPOSED TO AFTER THE EASEMENT. CAN YOU, UH, TALK ABOUT HOW HOW THAT WORKS IS, I THOUGHT WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT, ABOUT THAT. YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE YOU CAN'T PLANT TREES IN, IN THE EASEMENT. AND SO I THOUGHT THAT, I DUNNO IF YOU REMEMBER, WE HAD A 14 FOOT EASEMENT, THEN THE 15 FOOT BUFFER, AND THEN THEY, WE, WE HAD THAT AMENDMENT TO THE U D C THAT WOULDN'T AFFECT AND JANUARY ONE THAT ALLOWED YOU TO GO DOWN TO FIVE FEET IF YOU HAD A UTILITY EASEMENT AND ABUTTING A HIGHWAY. I DON'T KNOW THAT THE TEAM LOOKED AT IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, VINCENT. YEAH, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK SO. WE LOOKED AT, I'M JUST SAYING 'CAUSE AS WE DELIBERATE THE, THE THREE AND A HALF THAT'S SHOWN ON THE SKETCH, I MEAN, SHOULDN'T THAT BE IN FRONT OF THE, THE 14 FOOT C P S EASEMENT? CORRECT. YEAH. CORRECT. I I SEE THE EASEMENT NOW. CORRECT. OKAY. DOES, DOES EVERYBODY ON THE COMMISSION KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT OR, OR RECALL THAT FROM NINE MONTHS AGO? SO WHAT HAPPENED WAS, UH, THIS BOARD, UH, RECOMMENDED A U D C AMENDMENT THAT WENT INTO THAT PASSED AND WENT INTO EFFECT JANUARY ONE. AND SO THESE 15 FOOT EASEMENTS THAT, THAT ARE ACROSS, UM, UH, TEXSTAR RIGHT AWAY, OR, OR STREETS WHEN YOU HAVE A 14 FOOT C P SS EASEMENT AND THEN YOU HAVE A 15 FOOT BUFFER, NOW YOU'RE LOSING 29 FEET. SO THE AMENDMENT WAS TO DROP IT DOWN TO FIVE FEET IN THOSE INSTANCES. SO YOU COULD HAVE A WAY TO PLANT AND THEN NOT HAVE A, A BIG LOSS OF LAND. BUT IN THE APPLICATION, UH, PACKAGE, IT'S SHOWING THAT THREE AND A HALF FOOT BUFFER THAT THEY'RE ASKING TO GO DOWN TO, TO BE AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE PRIOR TO THE, THE UTILITY EASEMENT. AND SO IF YOU PUT THE THREE AND A HALF BUFFER, I MEAN, IN REALITY IF WE DON'T PASS THIS, THEY WOULD HAVE A FIVE FOOT BUFFER IMPOSED AFTER THE 14 FEET, WHICH COULD BE MEANT BY, BY PUTTING IN SOME PARKING ISLANDS. BUT THOSE ARE THE KIND OF THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND, AND POSSIBLY QUESTIONS THAT STAFF WILL ENTERTAIN AS WE GO THROUGH THIS CASE. SO IS IT, I'M GONNA RE REVIEW THAT SECTION WHILE Y'ALL ARE HAVING THE DISCUSSION. OKAY. AWESOME. ALL RIGHT. SO, [01:55:01] UH, LET'S, LET'S GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD. UH, MY NAME IS WILL STEVENS. I'M A CIVIL ENGINEER AT A M D ENGINEERING AT 65 15 60 EIGHTH STREET IN LUBBOCK, TEXAS. UH, ZIP CODE 7 9 4 2 3. UM, AS VINCENT EXPLAINED, UH, WE ARE REQUESTING A, UH, BUFFER YARD REDUCTION. UH, THE MAIN REASON FOR THIS IS TO MAINTAIN A, UH, PARKING AND DRIVE OUT LAYOUT THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPERTY TO OUR WEST. SO THEIR PARKING IS CURRENTLY THREE AND A HALF FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE. UM, AND THEN THE, THE DEVELOPMENT TO OUR EAST ALSO APPEARS THAT THEIR PARKING IS FAIRLY CLOSE TO THEIR PROPERTY LINE AS WELL. UM, THE EASEMENT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, UM, HAS A, HAS A GAS LINE IN IT. UM, THE 14 FOOT C P SS EASEMENT. UH, I ACTUALLY WENT TO THE SITE TODAY TO MEET WITH C P S TO LOOK AT, UH, ELECTRIC SERVICE TO THE, TO THE PROPERTY. EXCUSE ME. THERE'S OVERHEAD ELECTRIC, BUT IT IS, UH, OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY LINE. SO THAT'S HOW WE'RE GONNA BE SERVICING OUR PROPERTY WITH OUR, WITH ELECTRIC. UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM. OKAY. SO WHERE ARE THE ELECTRIC POLES THAT YOU'D MENTIONED? HOW FAR AWAY OFF THE PROPERTY LINE? SO DO YOU, DO YOU HAVE A POINTER OR I CAN USE THE MOUNT. OH, HERE, IT'S THIS ONE RIGHT HERE. SO ONE OF THE ELECTRIC POLES IS RIGHT THERE. AND THEN ANOTHER ONE IS RIGHT HERE. OKAY. UM, SO THE REASON WHY THEY WANT THE 14 FEET, 'CAUSE IF IT'S THREE PHASE ELECTRIC, THEY NEED TO HAVE 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE OUTER ARM. RIGHT. WHICH IS FOUR FEET OFF THE CENTER. RIGHT. SO THEY, THEY ASKED FOR THAT 14 FOOT EASEMENT. IT'S, IT'S FOR COVERAGE OF THE ELECTRIC. RIGHT. RIGHT. AND THEY DON'T LIKE TREES PLANTED IN THERE. RIGHT. AND WE ACTUALLY HAD A MEETING WITH, UH, STAFF TO DISCUSS LANDSCAPING ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE. AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THIS ALL CAME UP ON MY SITE PLAN I'D HAD THAT, OUR PARKING SHOWN AS YOU SEE IT NOW. AND THE STAFF WAS LIKE, WHOA, WHOA, WHOA. WE'VE GOTTA GET VARIANCE. AND ARE YOU AWARE OF, I I, I KNOW YOU'RE, I DUNNO HOW VERSE YOU ARE ON OUR U D C, BUT IT DID CHANGE JANUARY 1ST SPECIFICALLY WITH THESE SORT OF THINGS WHERE THAT 15 FOOT BUFFER WAS ALWAYS SUPPOSED TO START AFTER THE 14 FOOT EASEMENT AND THEN WE REDUCED IT DOWN TO A FIVE FOOT BUFFER. RIGHT. RIGHT NOW, RIGHT. BUT SO WHEN YOU'RE SHOWING THREE AND A HALF THERE, IN REALITY, YOU'RE ASKING FOR A REMOVAL OF THE BUFFER BECAUSE YOUR BUFFER WOULD START AT THE EASEMENT LINE. SO YOU'RE, I GUESS I DON'T UNDERSTAND. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT RIGHT NOW I HAVE TO BE FIVE FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE? WELL, IT USED TO BE 15 FEET RIGHT AFTER THE C P S EASEMENT. SO YOU GO 14 AND THEN YOU HAVE YOUR 15 FOOT REQUIREMENT. OKAY. WE, THE U D C CHANGES WOULDN'T AFFECT JANUARY 1ST. THAT SAID, IN THOSE INSTANCES, INSTEAD OF YOU LOSING 29 FEET, 14 PLUS 15, IT'S A FIVE FOOT STRIP. OKAY. AND SO MAYBE STAFF, CAN YOU BRING UP THAT SECTION OF THE CODE? I THINK IT'S A FOOTNOTE IN THE BUFFER FIVE. WHAT IS THAT 5 23 OR SOMETHING? IT'S THIRTY FIVE FIVE TEN FIVE TEN. AND IT SHOULD BE RIGHT UNDER THAT TABLE. BUT WE ALSO SPOKE TO POLICY ON THIS AND AS LONG AS THERE'S NOT ANYTHING BUILT IN THE EASEMENT, THE ALLOWANCE OF THE BUFFER YARD IN THE EASEMENT IS ACCEPTABLE. IT'S JUST LIKE IF IN YOUR BACKYARD, IF YOU HAVE AN EASEMENT AND YOU PUT TREES IN THERE OR, OR WHERE YOUR C P S BOXES OR WHATEVER, IT JUST, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO REMOVE THE VEGETATION IF NECESSARY TO GET TO THE EASEMENT. BUT WE'LL PULL UP THAT. UH, WELL THAT'S A, SEE THAT'S KIND OF AN ISSUE IS BECAUSE THE C P S USUALLY NEVER BUILDS IN THAT EASEMENT 'CAUSE IT'S SIMPLY FOR CLEARANCE PURPOSES, UNLESS THERE'S A GAS LINE AND THE APPLICANT EITHER IS A GAS LINE IN THERE. SO THERE IS SOMETHING IN THAT EASEMENT. YEAH. AND I BELIEVE THAT EASEMENT DOES GO ALL THE WAY TO THE EAST AND WEST OF US. AND THERE IS PARKING SIMILAR TO HOW WE'RE PROPOSING OUR PARK PARKING TO BE, UH, LAID OUT. SO THE, THE NOTE IS A, IS A FOR ASTERISK NOTE AND IT SAYS, UM, ADJOINING STREET CLASSIFICATION, PRIMARY TARAL SECRETARIAL COLLECTOR FOR WHEN THE ADJOINING STREET HAS EASEMENT OR EASEMENTS THAT PRECLUDE THE PROVISION OF REQUIRING [02:00:01] BUFFER PLANNING OF REQUIRED BUFFER PLANNING, A FIVE FOOT STRIP FOR PLANNING OUTSIDE AND ABUTTING THE OUTMOST EXTENT OF THOSE EASEMENTS MAY BE PROVIDED IN LIEU OF THE REQUIRED BUFFER WITH, SO THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE GAS IN THERE, I MEAN YOU HAVE A FIVE FOOT BUFFER OUTSIDE OF THE 14 AND YOU'RE ASKING FOR A REDUCTION DOWN TO THREE AND A HALF, WHICH I THINK WE COULD STILL ENTERTAIN. CORRECT. UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET THE STREET CLASSIFICATION BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S A PRIMARY ARTERIAL SECONDARY ARTERIAL. IT'S YEAH, IT'S A HIGHWAY WHICH, IT'S A HIGHWAY. RIGHT. WHICH ALSO CHANGED THE CLASSIFICATION WHERE, CORRECT. I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL RECALL THAT WE CORRECT, YES. THAT WAS ONE OF MY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS IS IS GETTING THAT TDOT REMOVED FROM SOME OF THOSE THINGS. AND SO I, I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH, WITH WHAT'S BEFORE US. SO WHAT HAPPENED WAS IS THAT IN, IN TABLE 5 0 6, THERE'S A, WE HAVE A, A MY OF HIGHWAY CLASSI ROAD CLASSIFICATIONS, ONE OF THEM IS FREEWAY. UH, BUT A LOT OF OUR TABLES DON'T INCLUDE FREEWAY. THEY JUST TALK ABOUT ARTERIALS. AND SO THE, I TRIED TO CLARIFY SOME OF THAT WITH A RECOMMENDED CHANGE THAT WAS PASSED. SO THAT WOULD, IT WOULD EXCLUDE THEM MORE SPECIFIC FOR THE, THE SIDEWALK STANDARDS. UM, BUT I GUESS IT COULD PARLAY TO BUFFERS AS WELL SINCE, SINCE THAT CLASSIFICATION ISN'T IN THE ACTUAL NOTE. AND AND IT'S ALSO NOT IN THE TABLE. CORRECT. SO THE QUESTION IS, DOES HE EVEN HAVE A BUFFER REQUIREMENT BECAUSE HE'S NEXT TO A FREEWAY AND THAT DOESN'T EXIST IN THE, IN THE TABLE ITSELF? WELL, IT DID GO THROUGH REVIEW, UH, FOR, FOR LANDSCAPING AND THEIR, THEIR CHANGES. I PERSONALLY DON'T THINK THERE'S A BUFFER REQUIREMENT AT ALL. WELL, AND, AND WE DIDN'T EITHER. AND WE HAD A MEETING WITH LANDSCAPING SPECIFICALLY TO DISCUSS PLANNING IN THE EASEMENT AND WHAT WE COULD DO TO ADHERE TO CODE, UH, BEFORE WE SUBMITTED FOR OUR BILLING PERMIT. AND THAT'S WHERE THIS ALL STEMMED FROM BECAUSE THE TABLE SAYS PRIMARY ARTERIAL SECONDARY TRAIL AND COLLECTOR AND DOESN'T SAY, WHEN YOU LOOK WEST AND EAST OF US, IT APPEARS THAT PEOPLE LAID OUT THEIR PARKING SIMILAR TO HOW WE WERE. SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE ALL OUR BASES ARE COVERED. I, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND. YEAH. UH, IS THERE, IS THERE ANYBODY THAT HAS ANY QUESTIONS AT ALL OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? CRUZ, MR. CRUZ? I JUST GOT ONE. OKAY. SO, AND I'M JUST WANTING TO DOUBLE CHECK. SO THIS IS A VACANT LOT. YOU'RE GONNA BUILD SOMETHING NEW ON IT? YES. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. BUT THE PROPERTY NEXT TO YOU WILL NOT BE INTERFERING WITH THE DRIVEWAY YOU ALL WANT TO CREATE? NO, MA'AM. WE WON'T BE BUILDING ANY NEW DRIVEWAYS. OUR INTENTION FOR THIS, UH, REQUEST WAS TO MAINTAIN THE SAME DRIVE ALIGNMENT. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN OR THE IMAGERY, UM, YOU CAN SEE HOW THERE'S A DRIVE ON EITHER SIDE OF THAT AWNING OKAY. GOING EAST TO WEST. RIGHT. SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAINTAIN THAT, UM, THAT FLEXIBILITY GOING EAST TO WEST, UH, WITH OUR PARKING. AND YOU STILL NEED PLENTY OF PARKING SPACES, RIGHT? YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. YEAH. SO LIKE, SO ONE OF MY ISSUES IS, IS THAT BECAUSE STAFF HAS A POLICY THAT SAYS THERE HAS, THE EASEMENT HAS TO BE UTILIZED FOR IT TO, FOR IT TO GO AFTER THE EASEMENT, BUT THERE IS GAS IN THE EASEMENT, THAT WOULD MEAN THAT YOU'RE, YOU HAVE A FIVE FOOT BUFFER REQUIREMENT AFTER THE 14, BUT YOUR PROJECT IS ASKING TO GO DOWN TO THREE AND A HALF, WHICH WE COULD PASS, BUT THEN IT STILL HAS TO BE LOCATED AFTER THE 14. GOTCHA. WHICH COULD BE DONE WITH SOME LANDSCAPE ISLANDS AND YOU POP A COUPLET TREES IN AND THEN THAT'S ONE WAY TO DO IT. BUT SO HE HAS PADDLE, HE HAS, WELL HE, HE HAS IN, IN THEORY THE BUFFER, HIS BUFFER REQUIREMENT IS FIVE FEET, BUT HE'S SHOWING, HE'S ASKING TO GO DOWN TO THREE AND A HALF, BUT HE'S SHOWING IT TO BE AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE AS OPPOSED TO 14 FEET OFF. AND SO I THINK THAT HIM ASKING FOR THREE AND A HALF FEET IS SOMETHING WE CAN ENTERTAIN. OF COURSE. BUT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT HOW HE SHOWS IT ON HIS SKETCH IS WHAT IS HE'S REQUIRED TO DO. WHAT'S THAT? HE'S SHOWING THE THREE AND A HALF STRIP IN FRONT OF THE PARKING. OKAY. BUT THE THREE AND A HALF STRIP SHOULD HAVE, SHOULD ACTUALLY START AFTER THE C P S EASEMENT. SO, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THIS IS ALL NEW STUFF. STAFF WILL HAVE TO YEAH, I MEAN WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH STAFF AND THAT'S NEVER COME UP TO US BEFORE NOW. AND SO, UM, WE WERE, YEAH, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAINTAIN, YOU KNOW, YEAH. ADJACENT TO US HASN'T BEEN AROUND. THIS IS THE FIRST I'VE HEARD IT. YEAH. OKAY. . SO, UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. DOES ANYBODY IN THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY OR NEED ANY CLARIFICATION OR REQUEST ANY CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF? YES. WE ACTUALLY GOT, UH, AN EXPERT OVER THE, IS THAT, IS IT LANDSCAPE BUFFERS? IS THAT, UH, MR. STINGER? I BELIEVE IT IS. . [02:05:02] WHY DON'T WE, UH, ALLOW STAFF TO PROVIDE US SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY? SURE THING. YEAH. SO I I I KNOW YOU DIDN'T HEAR ALL THE THINGS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT . SO, SO WHAT, SO THE PREMISE OF THIS IS, IS THAT FIRST THE APPLICANT WAS LOOKING AT THE BUFFERING TABLE, AND IT DOESN'T INCLUDE FREEWAY, IT JUST SAYS COLLECTOR PRIMARY MATERIAL. YOU KNOW, IT HAS ARTERIALS ON THERE. YES. UH, AND SO HE WAS QUESTIONING WHETHER OR NOT A BUFFER IS EVEN REQUIRED. STAFF HAD TOLD THEM THAT THERE WAS ONE AND TRADITIONALLY THERE USUALLY IS ONE THERE. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WHERE THE U D C CHANGED WAS IT SAYS THAT ANYTIME YOU'RE, YOU'RE A BUDDING ONE OF THOSE, UH, PRIMARY SECONDARY ARTERIALS OR A COLLECTOR, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DROP THE 15 FOOT BUFFER REQUIREMENT TO A FIVE FOOT. 'CAUSE IT'S SUPPOSED TO START AFTER THE UTIL EASEMENT IF THERE'S A UTIL EASEMENT AT PRESENT. AND SO IN THE BUFFERING TABLE, THERE'S A, IT'S AT FOUR STAR ASTERISK. IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THAT. UM, I HAVE IT UP HERE IF YOU OR MAYBE STAFF CAN BRING IT UP, THEY CAN SHOW IT TO YOU. BUT YEAH, I'M TRYING TO, AND SO ONE, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS STAFF BROUGHT UP IS, OR ONE OF THE POINTS STAFF BROUGHT UP IS THAT THEY'VE, THEY'VE KIND OF MADE IN AN INTERNAL REVIEW POLICY TO WHERE UNLESS THE EASEMENT'S POPULATED, THAT IT, THE STRIP DOESN'T START AFTER THE EASEMENT, IT STARTS AT THE PROPERTY LINE. IN THIS CASE, THERE'S A 14 FOOT C P S EASEMENT. THERE IS A GAS LINE IN THAT EASEMENT. SO IN THEORY, THE THIS, THIS PROJECT HAS A FIVE FOOT BUFFER REQUIREMENT DUE TO THAT U D C CHANGE THAT STARTS 14 FEET AFTER THE PROPERTY LINE. SO I DO BELIEVE ON THAT, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AFTER THAT 14 FOOT, THEY WOULD STILL NEED THE FIVE FOOT PLANNING STRIP WITH THAT ESTABLISHED EASEMENT BASED ON THAT FOUR STAR NOTE WITHIN THE CODE. YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING OF. HE, AND HE'S ASKING TO GO DOWN TO THREE AND A HALF FEET. SO IF WE ENTERTAIN THREE AND A HALF FEET, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS, IT WAS ADVERTISED FOR A, A 11 AND A HALF FOOT REDUCTION ON THE 15 TO THREE AND A HALF, CAN WE DO A FOOT AND A HALF REDUCTION ON THE FIVE I IT STILL GETS YOU TO THREE AND A HALF. I THINK THAT'D STILL BE FINE. IT SHOULD BE FINE. OKAY. AND THEN Y'ALL CAN WORK OUT MEETING THAT REQUIREMENT WHEN HE SUBMITS PLANS? , I GUESS. YEAH. OKAY. AND, UH, JUST TO CLARIFY AS WELL, UH, EVEN, I KNOW THE FREEWAY HAS A CLASSIFICATION, BUT IT'S ANY ACCESS, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'D BE NO ACCESS IS ALLOWED. SO WHEN YOU'RE TALKING FREEWAY, WHERE THE ACCESS ROAD IS REMOVED FROM THAT, THAT WOULD BE JUST THE TRAVEL LANE THAT DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS. THE BUSINESSES DO NOT HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO THAT FREEWAY. SO ONCE IT'S AGAINST THE ACCESS ROAD ROAD, IT'S LOOKED AT AS AN ARTERIAL. YEAH, THAT WAS, THAT'S A DISCUSSION OF IT FOR ANOTHER DAY. AS FAR AS THE L LANDSCAPE BUFFERING, THAT'S, THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING WITH THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER. SO OKAY. ALRIGHT. UH, WITH THAT AS, I'M SORRY, THIS HAS JUST GOTTEN WAY ALL OVER THE PLACE. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO ASK? ANYONE? YES. COMMISSIONER PICASSO. AND JUST TO, TO CLARIFY, I'M SORRY I MISSED THE GENERAL CONSENSUS ON THE, ON YOUR DISCUSSION WITH C P S ENERGY TODAY. IS THAT WHO YOU SAID YOU MET WITH OR SAW? I CAN'T REMEMBER. AND THEY SAW NO ISSUE WITH THE DESIGN? NO. OKAY. SORRY. SORRY. YEAH. YEAH. I'VE SUBMITTED THIS TO C P S AND MULTIPLE DIFFERENT PEOPLE AT C P S AND SAWS AND NO ONE'S HAD ANY CONCERN WITH WHAT I HAVE LAID OUT. I, I FEEL LIKE WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF MATCHING WHAT'S THERE AROUND US. UM, AND I'M, I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED TOO, IS THE . SO IT'S A FOOT AND A HALF OFF OF THE 14? NO. SO IT'S, YOU, YOU HAVE A FIVE FOOT REQUIREMENT, YOU'RE ASKING FOR A REDUCTION TO THREE AND A HALF. RIGHT. THAT'S ALL WE CAN DO BECAUSE WE CAN'T GO BEYOND MORE THAN WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR. RIGHT. UM, THEORETICALLY YOU SHOULD HAVE ASKED FOR IT JUST TO BE WIPED AWAY, YOU KNOW? OKAY. BUT, BUT WE CAN GO DOWN TO THREE AND A HALF FEET. SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR, YOU WOULD HAVE TO THEORETICALLY PUT THREE AND A HALF FEET OF BUFFER ABUTTING THE 14 FOOT C P S EASEMENT. OKAY. SO, AND YOU WOULD JUST, HOW YOU, HOW YOU WORK THAT OUT? YOU JUST WORK IT OUT WITH STAFF. OKAY. LIKE YOU COULD PUT A LANDSCAPE ISLAND AND ACCOUNT ALL THE PREVIOUS COVER FROM THAT, THAT THREE AND A HALF FEET ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE PROPERTY LAND. I GUESS IN THEORY, IF YOU WANTED TO MAKE THAT WORK AND POP A COUPLE TREES IN THERE. I MEAN, BUT THAT, THAT'S OKAY. THAT'S BETWEEN YOU AND STAFF AT THIS POINT, AT THAT POINT. OKAY. SO, ALL RIGHT. I FEEL LIKE I'M TALKING TOO MUCH IN THE SUBJECT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO OFFER, UH, ANY, ANYTHING OR JUST WE CAN GO STRAIGHT TO A MOTION? I'M FINE WITH THAT. I WOULD JUST READ IT, UM, YOU KNOW, AS PRESENTED. HE'LL 'CAUSE WE CAN'T GO BELOW THREE AND A HALF FEET FRAGMENT. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, REGARDING CASE NUMBER B O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 2 26, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. MIRANDA, A REQUESTS FOR 10 FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO ALLOW THREE [02:10:01] FOOT, SIX INCH LANDSCAPE BUFFER SITUATED AT 1 1 1 0 NORTH 1604 EAST. APPLICANT BEING A M D ENGINEERING L L C 'CAUSE OF THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE REDUCED BUFFER WILL BE LOCATED ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE AND WE'LL LEAVE ENOUGH ROOM BETWEEN PROPERTIES TO REDUCE NOISE AND THEREFORE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE FULL LANDSCAPE BUFFER WOULD REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF SPACE THE APPLICANT DEVELOPED ON THE PROPERTY. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW. THE REDUCED LANDSCAPE OF WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THERE WILL STILL BE LANDSCAPE OF LOCATED ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY. LINE. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERAT OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMITY PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REDUCED LANDSCAPE BUFFER WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES AS THE BUFFER VARIANCES BEING SOUGHT AFTER ARE BORDERING THE COMMERCIAL USE BORDERING COMMERCIAL USE. ITS SIXTH, 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 OR WERE 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, THE REDUCED LANDSCAPE VARIANCES ARE SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER ZUNA. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. YEAH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS, AS READ. UH, THEY'RE TRYING TO MATCH UP WITH, IT'S ALREADY EXISTING, UH, THEIR NEIGHBORS TO THE WEST. UM, AND SO I THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT COMMISSIONER ZUNA I SUPPORTING AS WELL AS FOR THE SAME, UH, REASONS AS MCCAULEY. ALRIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? HEARING NONE UNLESS HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. DR. BRETON? I CONCUR. MS. PICASSO? YES. MS. BROWN? YES. MS. DEAN? I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ, I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINANCE OF FACT. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BENAVIDES, CAN YOU PLEASE GIVE US A THUMBS UP OR THUMBS DOWN? THUMBS UP. THANK YOU. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES 11 TO ZERO. UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE TALK TO STAFF. THANK YOU. AND, UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN IS, UH, LEAVING THE MEETING AND IT'S 3 28. WE'RE DOWN TO 10 PEOPLE. AND DID WE, CAN WE ADD TO THE MINUTES THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES HAS HAS JOINED? ALRIGHT, GREAT. ITEM SEVEN. ITEM SEVEN IS BO 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 2 9. ADDRESS IS 1 1 4 SOUTHWAY DRIVE COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE. APPLICANT MS. DOMINGO SALINAS. A REQUEST FOR ONE, A THREE FOOT 10 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT TWO INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND TWO AND NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A ONE INCH CARPORT. FRONT SETBACK ZONING IS R FIVE CASE SUMMARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG SOUTHWAY DRIVE, JUST WEST OF ALITO STREET, AND CURRENTLY HAS AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE BUILDING BUILT WITHOUT A PERMIT. THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCTED AN ATTACHED CARPORT, WHICH ENCROACHES INTO THE SIDE AND FRONT SETBACK. A ZONING U D C INVESTIGATION BEGAN ON JULY 31ST, 2023 FOR A PROPERTY SETBACK VIOLATION. THIS IS A SITE PLAN SHOWING THE, UH, REQUESTED, UH, VARIANCES FOR THE SIDE AND FRONT SETBACK. AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THIS IS THE STREET VIEW OF THE CARPORT. AND THIS IS THE SIDE SETBACK AND THE FRONT SETBACK. AND THIS IS YOUR SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS SIDE AND FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL. AND BILL O 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 2 9 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, THE REDUCED FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK WILL ALTER THE CENTRAL CARE NOTIFICATION. PLAN. STAFF MAILED OUT 19 NOTICES. ZERO. RETURN IN FAIR, ZERO. RETURN IN OPPOSITION. AND [02:15:01] PALM HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE AND WILL NEED A SPANISH INTERPRETER. UH, AND JUST OUTTA CURIOSITY, THIS LOOKS LIKE A ZERO LOT LINE, UH, SUBDIVISION. IS THAT SOMETHING Y'ALL NOTICED? I DON'T THINK SO. I DON'T, I DON'T THINK WE, WE, UH, NOTICED THAT. IT JUST LOOKS LIKE ALL THE, A LOT OF THE STRUCTURES ARE REALLY CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY AND I WAS JUST CURIOUS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES. UH, WE NEED A SPANISH INTERPRETER. YES. OH, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS, UH, DOMINGO SALINAS. MY ADDRESS IS ONE 14 SOUTHWAY DRIVE. MM-HMM. . OKAY. UH, TELL US ABOUT YOUR, UH, CARPORT. . OKAY. UH, YES, I RECONSTRUCTED MY CARPORT. UM, I DID SO FOR THE WEATHER DAMAGE TO AVOID THE HAIL, THE RAIN, UH, ANY DAMAGE LIKE THAT, IT WAS RECONSTRUCTED. I DID HIRE SOMEONE TO DO THE JOB AND I DID DO IT AND I EXTENDED IT OUT SO THAT IT COULD COVER MY CARS. OKAY. AND, UH, BUT HE EXTENDED IT FORWARD. DID YOU EXTEND IT TO THE SIDE AS WELL OR IS THAT THE SAME? ONLY TO THE FRONT. ONLY TO THE FRONT. OKAY. UM, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT FROM THE COMMISSION? COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UH, I'M LOOKING AT THE PICTURES AND MAYBE THEY BRING UP THE LAST ONE THAT I'M LOOKING AT. UM, IS THAT THE WAY IT USED TO BE WITH THE ALUMINUM? NO, NO, THAT'S NOT MINE. THAT'S ANOTHER ONE AREA. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT, BUT I WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK. SO ALL HE DID WAS BRING IT OUT FURTHER OUT THAN WHAT IT WAS BECAUSE HE HAD ONE THERE BEFORE, CORRECT? YES, I EXTENDED THAT OUT TO THE FRONT, LIKE IT SHOWS THERE, BUT I AM WITHIN THE FEET THAT THE CITY REQUIRES MM-HMM. . OKAY. WITHIN THE 15 FEET OF THE FRONT. NOW, SINCE WE DIDN'T GET ANY RESPONSE FROM THE NEIGHBORS, I'M ASSUMING THE NEIGHBORS DO KNOW ABOUT THIS? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. QUESTION. COMMISSIONER ZUNA THEN DEAN? YES. THE QUESTION IS, UH, THE RAIN GUTTERS, WHERE DOES THE RAIN, DOES THE RAIN? LOOKS LIKE IT FALLS ONTO THE NEIGHBOR'S YARD. CAN HE PUT RAIN GUTTERS AS A, UH, PART OF THE PROJECT THAT HE'S DOING HERE FOR THE YES, I'M, I'M JUST, I CAN DO SO I CAN ADD THAT. I'M JUST WAITING FOR THE APPROVAL SO THAT I CAN ADD THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. . OKAY. COMM, WAS IT COMMISSIONER, DEAN OR ZUNIGA? OKAY. YEAH, ZUNIGA. HE, HE, UH, YOU STATED THAT YOU HAD DONE IT ACCORDING TO THE POLICIES. ANTONIO DE SAN ANTONIO. SAN ANTONIO, IS THAT RIGHT? MM-HMM. , YES. OKAY. UH, WAS A CONTRACTOR A REGISTERED CONTRACTOR? NO. NO, IT'S JUST PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR COMPANIES. YEAH. OKAY. SO IT IS AGAINST THE REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, ANTONIO, [02:20:01] THE WAY HE BUILT IT IN FRONT AND ON THE SIDE ALSO, THIS IS WHY HE'S HERE. OKAY. OKAY. YEAH. AND, UH, HE, HE MIGHT HAVE TO ALTER IT, THE, THE GARAGE COURT PORT AS IT IS NOW IF WE DON'T AGREE ON IT, ESPECIALLY THE FRONT. YOU GOT A PERMIT. I FILLED, I FILLED OUT THE APPLICATION AND OH, YOU GOT A PERMIT? NOT YET. I FILLED THAT APPLICATION. I'M PAID THE FINE, BUT I HAD TO COME HERE FIRST. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO INTERPRET THAT. YEAH, SO HE, HE, IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE HE WAS POSSIBLY FINED AND THEN HE PROBABLY FOR A PERMIT, CORRECT? HE JUST WAITING, UM, THE PERMIT CAN'T GET APPROVED UNTIL IF AND WHEN THIS GETS APPROVED. CODE ISSUE, THEN HE APPLIED FOR THE PERMIT. HE FILED FOR A PERMIT. NOT YET. NOT YET. IT HASN'T BEEN APPROVED. IT'S WHAT, UH, UH, THIS BOARD WILL AGREE ON. HAVE TO ALTER IT, ESPECIALLY THE, THE FRONT TO THE SIDEWALK. SO, UM, STAFF THANK CAN HOW WELL WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA, WE DON'T KNOW YET UNTIL WE ACTUALLY HAVE A VOTE. BRING UP GOOGLE MAPS PLEASE. AND WHAT I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO DO IS DON'T TURN ON THE IMAGING, JUST BRING UP THE MAP AS, AS IT WOULD REGULARLY COME UP. THERE YOU GO. AND AS THAT'S COMING UP, UM, THERE WAS NO ZERO LAW LINE ON THE PLAT FOR THIS. YEAH. IT MAY NOT BE ON THE PLAT, BUT SOMETIMES THOSE ARE DONE BY D CAN YOU TURN OFF THE IMAGERY ON IT? THAT LITTLE. THERE YOU GO. SO WHAT I WANTED, WHAT I WAS LOOKING AT WHEN I FIRST OPENED UP GOOGLE MAPS IS IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THESE HOMES UP AND DOWN THE STREET, A LOT OF THEM SEEM TO LIE ON THE LOT LINES. AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR THIS COMMISSION TO, TO, TO SEE, YOU KNOW, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THE SIDE SETBACK FOR THIS, UH, CARPORT. A LOT OF STRUCTURES RIDING THE LOT LINE. I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF THERE'S A DEEDED RESTRICTION THAT NO ONE CAN FIND THAT REQUIRES LIKE A 10 FOOT MAINTENANCE DRIP OR SOMETHING ON THE SIDE OF ALL THESE THINGS. THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT IT'S LOOKING LIKE TO ME, BUT I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT OUT POINT THAT OUT. MAINTENANCE HE STRIP ON THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. I MEAN, YEAH, THEY, SOMETIMES THESE AREN'T DONE ON PLAT THE WAY THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO. OKAY. BUT THERE'S TOO MANY OF 'EM. IT JUST SEEMS A LITTLE ODD CHAIR. AND JUST SO THAT EVERYONE KNOWS THERE'S NO SIDEWALKS IN THE STREET. YES. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN BUILT. YEAH. THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING I NOTICED, THAT THERE ARE NO ESTABLISHED SIDEWALKS AND THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS OVER 50 YEARS OLD. SO THAT GIVES YOU SOMETHING IN THIS AREA. I'M SORRY, WHAT DID MR. SUNY SAY? HE SAYS THAT THERE, THERE'S A PLAN IN DISTRICT FIVE TO, UH, PUT SIDEWALKS IN THIS AREA. UM, YEAH, EVENTUALLY IT ONLY TOOK ME 20 YEARS TO GET THE ONES DONE CLOSE TO ME, SO I KNOW THAT PROBLEM. OKAY. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF HE HAS? OH, OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER PICASSO. SO ARE WE CONCERNED THAT IF THERE ARE TO BE BUILT SIDEWALKS, THAT THIS WILL BE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY? WELL, THE RIGHT OF WAY LOOKS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE THAT'S UM, UM, STAFF, CAN YOU BRING UP A PICTURE OF THE FRONT? OKAY, SO HIS DRIVEWAY APRON EXTENDS BACK ALMOST 10 FEET AND THEN HE'S ABOUT AN INCH AWAY FROM THAT, FROM THE CARPORT. IF THEY PUT SIDEWALKS IN, IT WOULD BE TYPICAL TO PUT IN A FOUR FOOT SIDEWALK. HE WOULD STILL BE APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET AWAY IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN. UM, SO JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE FOR, FOR Y'ALL'S CONSIDERATION. UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT ALL? I GUESS I, NOT A QUESTION BUT A COMMENT. I JUST, I MEAN IF THERE'S NOT GONNA BE ANY DIRECT IMPACT TO [02:25:02] THE RIGHT OF WAY TO PLACE SIDEWALKS, I DON'T SEE THE HARM. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, UM, IS THERE ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, I JUST READY TO MAKE OH, YOU'RE READY. OKAY. WELL WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GONNA ENTERTAIN A MOTION AND WE'LL SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 2 29, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED REQUEST FOR ONE A THREE FOOT 10 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT TWO INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND TWO, A NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A ONE INCH CARPORT FRONT SETBACK SITUATED AT 1 1 4 SOUTHWAY DRIVE. APPLICANT BEING DOMINGO SALINAS BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SO THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRACTED TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. STAFF FINDS THAT SETBACK CANNOT BE MET DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. UH, SUCH THE SIZE OF THE LAW AND LOCATION OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE AND SO IS NOT CONTRARY TO 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 UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE APPLICANT COULD NOT BUILD A CARPORT CONFORMING TO THE CODE. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS 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 REQUEST WOULD NOT INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS IT WOULD HAVE OVER FIVE FEET OF SEPARATION FROM THE CARPORT TO THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURE FOR THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH WERE NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE REDUCED SIDE, SET SIDE AND FRONT SETBACK WOULD NOT INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND LOCATION OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE. AND SIX, THE APPLIED OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH VARIANCE IS SAW AS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, 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 IS APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR THE REDUCED SITE AND FRONT SETBACK. VARIANCE IS SOUGHT DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY SUCH AS THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE AND OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. COMMISSIONER. AND I DO WANNA ADD SOMETHING TO THAT. THE PROPERTY OWNER DID SAY HE WOULD AGREE TO, UH, THE GUTTERS. THE GUTTERS, YEAH. SO WAS THERE AN AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICATION? HE DID STATE THAT HE WAS, HE WAS PLACED THE GUTTERS ON. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. CAN WE MAKE THAT, UH, PROVISO PART OF THE ACT? SO, SO WHAT HAP YEAH, SO WHAT HAPPENS IS, UM, UM, ONLY WE CAN'T PUT CONDITIONS OR REQUESTS, BUT THE APPLICANT DID MAKE, UH, A STATEMENT WHILE HE IS UP IN THE PODIUM. SO IT'S, HIS APPLICATION IS CONSIDERED CHANGED. SO NOW OUR, IF THIS WOULD BE APPROVED, UH, DID YOU READ IT WITH GUTTERS? UM, I CAN, UH, SO I WILL AMEND MY MOTION TO STATE THAT THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS CONTINGENT ON THE APPLICANT PROVIDING GUTTERS ON THE PROPERTY, UH, THAT'S AFFECTED BY THE NEIGHBOR, WHICH IS I GUESS THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AS AS STATED AS THE PODIUM, AS STATED AS THE APPLICANT MADE THE STATEMENT THAT HE WAS GONNA PROVIDE THE GUTTERS IN HIS TESTIMONY. OKAY. I CONCUR. ALRIGHT, SO, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, I SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ A, UH, UH, THE REASONS BEING THERE'S NO OPPOSITION TO THE CARPORT PROTECTS THE CAR, CAR STRUCTURE. UM, THE, THE STRUCTURE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH BUILDING PERMIT TO GET, UH, THE PROPERTY, UH, BUILDING CODES, APPROPRIATE BUILDING CODES FOR THE PROJECT. SO THAT'LL BE UNDER REVIEW AND, UM, IT, IT'S, UH, SET BACK FAR ENOUGH THAT IT'S NOT GONNA BE IMPACTED, UH, BY ANY FUTURE SIDEWALKS OR SUCH. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, PROVIDES SOME RELIEF TO THE APPLICANT WITH COVERAGE OF HIS CAR. AND THAT'S A PREDOMINANT, UH, CONDITION IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S KIND OF THAT ZERO LOT. SO IT'S NOT REALLY IMPACTING THE, THE CON CONTINUITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD 'CAUSE THAT'S A DEVELOPMENT, UH, UH, STANDARD THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UM, YES, I CONCUR WITH MR. ZUNI. I MEAN, I'M SORRY ANDREW. UM, AND, UM, I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT. UH, WHAT IS, WHAT IS GOOD IS NONE OF THE NEIGHBORS COMPLAIN, SO THAT WILL HELP HIM A LOT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD, UH, HEARING NONE? UH, I, I, I'LL CHIME IN. I'M IN SUPPORT BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE IT MAY NOT BE A PLATTED ZERO LOT NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IT'S 99% OF THESE HOMES AROUND THE LOT LINE. SO THE SITE SETBACK IS, DOESN'T, UH, DO ANY, DOESN'T, UH, BOTHER ME AT ALL. AND THAT, AND HE'S SO FAR AWAY FROM THE STREET, IT'S, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT EITHER. SO LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. DR. BURTON? YES, I CONCUR. MS. PICASSO? YES. MS. BROWN? YES. MR. DEAN? I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA I CONCUR. [02:30:01] MR. VASQUEZ, I CONCUR. MS. BENAVIDES THUMBS UP, MS. NEZ OR THANK YOU CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES 11 TO ZERO. HMM. OH 10. OH THAT'S RIGHT. 10 TO ZERO. SO HE CAN HAVE ANY QUESTIONS HE CAN ASK STAFF SAY 10, BUT IT GOT APPROVED? YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. OKAY, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. OKAY, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS BO O A DASH OH, SORRY. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS BO O A DASH 23 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 3 1. ADDRESS IS 3,900 ROGERS ROAD IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT SIX. UH, THE REQUEST OR THE APPLICANT IS CHESAPEAKE ASSOCIATES AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT FRONT YARD FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ALONG THE FRONT YARD. AND TWO, A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT FENCE SITE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARDS. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS C TWO. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG ROGERS ROAD NEAR WISEMAN BOULEVARD. THE APPLICANT IS ANTICIPATING ON CONSTRUCTING AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE FRONT, REAR AND SIDE YARDS. UH, FENCES THAT ARE CONSTRUCTED IN THE FRONT YARD ARE ALLOWED TO BE FIVE FEET TALL IF PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, AND SIX FEET IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARDS UPON SIDE VISITS. STAFF OBSERVED OTHER SIMILAR FENCES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. AND, UH, THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THIS IS THE VIEW LOOKING SOUTHEAST WITH ROGERS ROAD ON THE RIGHT. AND THIS IS THE VIEW LOOKING NORTHEAST WITH ROGERS RUN SEEN ON THE RIGHT. AND THIS IS AN ALTERNATE VIEW. AND THEN THE SURROUNDING AREAS, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE F SITE SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS AN APPROVAL FOR BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 3 1 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING. ONE, THE FENCE WILL ADD SECURITY TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND TWO OTHER PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCES WERE OB WERE OBSERVED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. THEREFORE, THE REQUEST IS UNLIKELY TO INJURE ANY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MAILED SEVEN NOTICES, ZERO IN FAVORS, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION FOR THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. IS, UH, DOES, IS ROGERS ROAD IN ARTERIAL? UH, YES SIR. AND IS THERE, IS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION DEFENSE HEIGHT WHEN YOU'RE BUDDING AN ARTERIAL? I DON'T KNOW WHY I'M CON NO, NO SIR. ALL RIGHT. JUST WONDERING. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE THEY GO? HEARING NONE, I HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. PLEASE, YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. OKAY. MY NAME'S VOSS AND, UH, WE'RE PUTTING A LOT OF EFFORT INTO THE WHOLE PROPERTY AND PUTTING A WROUGHT IRON FENCE. IT HAS MASONRY COLUMNS. I HAVE PICTURES OF WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. UM, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BEAUTIFY EVERYTHING AND GIVE THE EMPLOYEES PEACE OF MIND. UH, WE'VE, I HAVE PICTURES OF SOME BREAK-INS IN THE BUILDING, UM, UH, TRESPASSING AND, UH, THEFT FROM THE OUTSIDE. UM, I HAVE BEFORE AND AFTER PICTURES OF THE WAY IT USED TO LOOK AND THE, WHAT, WHAT WE COME TO NOW. SO THE OWNERS, UH, CHESAPEAKE, THEY, THEY'RE PUTTING A LOT OF EFFORT INTO THIS TO MAKE IT BEAUTIFUL 'CAUSE YOU HAVE THE BANKS ON BOTH SIDES. UM, SOME OF THE ADJACENT LOTS HAVE EIGHT FOOT FENCES. UH, A LOT MORE HEAVY DUTY THAN WHAT WE'RE PUTTING IN. UH, OURS IS A LIGHTER, LIGHTER GAUGE, SMALLER RAILS, BUT IT'S A PRESS SPEAR ON THE TOP. UM, SOME OF THEM ARE CURVED UP, NOT ON OUR LOT, BUT THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BE UNIFORM AND BEAUTIFY THE LOT AND GIVE PEOPLE PEACE OF MIND WHEN THE TENANT DOES GO IN. OKAY. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA? I RECALL THAT THE, THIS AREA IS HOME TO A NUMBER OF, UH, SECURE DATA CENTERS AND UH, I RECALL A NUMBER OF THESE FENCE OR, UH, VARIANCES COMING BEFORE US TO PROVIDE THAT SECURITY TO, UH, SOME OF THOSE DATA CENTERS. SO THAT'S NOT OUTTA CHARACTER WITH, UH, THIS AREA. THIS WAS A FORMER HOME TO THE AETNA INSURANCE, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S THAT BUILDING. RIGHT. AND AETNA'S [02:35:01] ACTUALLY STILL A, A PORTION OF IT, RIGHT? THEY THEY HAVE A PORTION OF, YEAH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE MOVING OUT LITTLE RELOCATING, I GUESS I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. IS THE FENCING HAVE TO DO WITH KIND OF THE TENANT PROFILE OF SECURE TENANTS THEN, THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO TRACK FOR THE BUILDING OR, UH, IS THAT KIND OF IN LINE WITH THE LEASING PROGRAM FOR THE BUILDING OR? CORRECT. YES. AND UM, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE OWNERS ARE GONNA ACTUALLY DO, BUT UM, 'CAUSE I ONLY HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION AS FAR AS MY PART, BUT I KNOW THEY WANT, UH, LIKE SECURITY. YEAH. AND THEY'VE BEEN HAVING A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH, ESPECIALLY WITH THE MONEY THEY PUT INTO IT. AND WE PUT A TER WATER FOUNTAIN IN THE FRONT AND SOMEONE TIPPED THAT OVER, SO I HAD TO REDO THAT. UH, THEY STOLE SAWED OUT OF THE GROUND, STOLE SAW, AND WE PUT ABOUT 60 PALLETS OF SOD AND IRRIGATED IT. THEY STARTED PUTTING ALL OUR BRASS FIXTURES FOR THE LANDSCAPE LIGHTS AND THEY HAD 'EM BUNDLED UP. AND WHEN SOME OF THE EMPLOYEES GOT THERE, THEY SEEN THEM. SO I, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY RAN OFF OR WHAT, BUT THERE'S, THEY'RE STILL IN SMALL STUFF. THEY, THEY HAVE PICTURES OF IT. THEY TOOK THE SQUARE SOD PATCHES OUT OF THE GROUND, PROBABLY, UH, MAYBE A GOOD PALLET WORTH UNTIL THEY GOT TIRED OF WORKING, I GUESS. UM, BUT THE, THERE ARE PICTURES HERE. I HAVE THE ROD IRON FENCE THAT I'M INSTALLING. YOU WANNA SEE THAT? THAT'S JUST THE DESIGN. IT'S, IT'S SIMPLE. IT'S NOT REAL HEAVY, BUT IT IS 16 AND 14 GAUGE, UH, INCH AND A HALF RAILS. I'M GONNA PUT THE MASONRY COLUMNS, I'M GONNA WELD ON THOSE ATTACHMENTS AND BUILD THE COLUMN AROUND THAT. SO IT'S GONNA BE EXTRA SECURITY. IT'S ACTUALLY GONNA BE SEVEN FEET, 11 INCHES, RIGHT UNDER EIGHT, BUT IN SOME AREAS IT MAY BE EIGHT. OKAY. THE ONLY PROBLEM I DID FIND WAS THE UTILITIES. I HAD 'EM ALL MARKED AND, UH, I MOVED 17 FOOT IN FROM THE SIDEWALK AND THAT PUTS ME KIND OF IN THE CENTER. I DON'T HAVE TO TAKE OUT ANY TREES. I KNOW THEY DID SOME BRUSH CLEANUP IN, IN BETWEEN CHASE AND AETNA, BUT, UM, I, I WASN'T RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT PART. LOOKS LIKE YOU GOT SOME, UH, UNDERGROUND FIBER ALONG ROGERS ROAD AS WELL. CORRECT. AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY WORKING ON IT NOW. THE CITY IS, YEAH. OKAY. UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, CRUZ. CRUZ, UH, SO RIGHT NOW THE BUILDING IS OCCUPIED RIGHT NOW. IT IS NOT OCCUPIED, IT'S EMPTY. CORRECT. AETNA, AETNA STILL HAS THAT. UM, THEY TOOK THEIR SIGNS OFF, SO I I'M OKAY. BUT, BUT THERE IS STILL PEOPLE IN THE BUILDING AT FOR RIGHT NOW. SO THEY'RE THERE. BESIDES THEM, THE PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUESTING THE NEW, UH, SECURITY FOR THE, FOR THE BUILDING, IS THAT CORRECT? I HAVE, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT. UM, AS FAR AS SECURITY GOES, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE SECURITY PART-TIME, I GUESS LIKE THEY KIND OF GO IN AND OUT. UM, I BELIEVE AETNA WAS THE ONE THAT HAD SECURITY THERE. ARE YOU, ARE YOU, ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT SHE'S NOT ASKING ABOUT SECURITY GUARDS, SHE'S ASKING ABOUT? NO, NO. OH, I'M JUST ASKING WHY YOU NEED THE FENCE NOW. IF THERE'S THERE, BUT NOBODY IN THE BUILDING. OH, THEY'RE PUTTING TENANTS IN THERE FOR SURE. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANNA KNOW. YEAH, IT'S NOT GONNA BE UNOCCUPIED. THAT'S TOO MUCH MONEY FOR THEM. I MEAN OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANNA KNOW. BECAUSE THAT MEANS THEY'RE GONNA BE HAVING SLIDING GATES SO THAT IT CAN OPEN WHEN PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO GET IN AND COME OUT. CORRECT? CORRECT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT. UM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYBODY SIGNED TO SPEAK ANY PUBLIC COMMENTARY? ONE VOICEMAIL. LET'S HEAR IT. HI, THIS IS FRANK MURPHY WITH PLAZA REALTOR MANAGEMENT. WE OWN, UM, THE PROPERTY AT, UH, ROGERS ROAD IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. WE HAVE A, UH, SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA FOR, UH, FENCE, UM, PERIMETER FENCE AROUND THE PROPERTY. I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT, UH, AS THE OWNERS, WE REALLY, UM, WHEN WE MADE THIS FENCE REQUEST, WE REALLY PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THE DESIGN OF THE FENCE AND, AND BEAUTIFYING THE AREA. ALL WE'RE LOOKING TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE WHO RENT THE BUILDING ARE, HAVE, UM, SOME SECURITY FOR THEIR CARS AND, AND THAT THEY HAVE A LITTLE PEACE OF MIND THAT, UM, THEIR BUSINESS CAN RUN WHILE THEIR, UM, EMPLOYEES HAVE, UH, A LITTLE SECURITY FOR THEIR CARS. WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF BREAK INS AT THE PROPERTY SINCE, UM, IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS AND A LOT OF DEBRIS JUST DUMPED. AND SO WE'VE GOT THIS FENCE PROPOSAL THAT WE WOULD, UH, VERY MUCH APPRECIATE IF YOU WOULD, UH, APPROVE FOR US BECAUSE, UH, AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO BEAUTIFY THE AREA AND, AND MAKE IT JUST A MORE SECURE LOCATION. UM, [02:40:01] WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION AND, UH, WE HOPE WE, UH, CAN GET THAT PUSHED THROUGH. WE HAVE RENE WHO'S GOING TO BE REPRESENTING US AT THE MEETING. HE'S DOING A FANTASTIC JOB. HE'S A, UH, YOU KNOW, A SAN ANTONIO RESIDENT WHO WITH A BUSINESS AND SO, UM, HAS BEEN EXCELLENT. AND SO, UM, WE GIVE HIM FULL AUTHORITY TO SPEAK ON OUR BEHALF. AND, UH, AGAIN, WE JUST HOPE YOU'LL GIVE IT DUE CONSIDERATION UNDERSTANDING THAT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING WILL NOT ONLY PROVIDE A LITTLE SECURITY, BUT ALSO WILL BEAUTIFY, UM, THE PROPERTY. AND, UH, I THINK IT WILL BE JUST BENEFICIAL FOR ALL. SO JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANKS SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION CRUZ. MR. CRUZ, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 3 1 0 3 0 0 2 3 1. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR 1 8 3 FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT FRONT YARD FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. AND TWO, A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FEET FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD SITUATED AT 3,900 ROGERS ROAD. APPLICANT BEING CH CH B ASSOCIATES L C D, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN 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 STATE'S BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXEMPTION FOR FENCE HEIGHT MODIFICATION. IF GRANTED STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED. AND THIS CASE, THESE CRITERIA PRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY ON EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE FRONT SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES DO NOT POSE ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE. SEE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE FENCE WILL ADD SECURITY TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES. OTHER PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCES WERE OBSERVED IN THE AREA. THEREFORE, THE REQUEST IS UNLIKELY TO SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ANY NEIGHBORING PROJECTS. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AND FENCE ALONG THE FRONT SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THE PROPERTY IS ZONE COMMERCIAL. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THEY REQUEST THAT SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. THE FENCE IS LOCATED ALONG ALL PROPERTY LINES AND OTHER PROPERTIES APPEAR TO HAVE SIMILAR FENCES. DOES THIS NOT APPEAR AUTO CHARACTER FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND A MOTION? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WITH A MOTION AND A SECOND. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UM, YES, SINCE THIS IS, UH, MOSTLY COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT. AND WITH THERE BEING OTHER FENCES IN THAT AREA OF THE SAME DESIGN, UH, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH IT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER PICASSO. I AGREE. I THINK IT, IT, UH, CONTINUES ON WITH THE ACIDIC AND THE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. AND AGAIN, FOR SECURITY REASONS, I UNDERSTAND THIS. ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH, AND, UH, I, I KNOW THE AREA PRETTY WELL AND, AND, UH, ONE THING IS THAT SECURITY IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE TENANTS AND FOR THE, THE LEASE UP OF THE BUILDING. I KNOW OFFICE LEASING RIGHT NOW IS, IS VERY DIFFICULT. SO ANY KIND OF, ANY, ANY, UM, ADVANTAGE YOU CAN GIVE THE PROPERTY THROUGH SECURITY TO AID THE TENANTS I THINK WILL BE HELPFUL IN, IN PROVIDING, YOU KNOW, TENANCY FOR SOME OF THESE BUILDINGS. SO THAT SUPPORT. ALRIGHT, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? YEAH, COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. YEAH, I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR IT. THIS IS A NO-BRAINER SINCE, UH, ALL THE COMMUNITY AROUND THERE AND I TRAVELED WISEMAN AND WHAT HAVE YOU AND RIGHT, AND ALL OF THEM ARE, YOU KNOW, IT'S SIMILAR, SAME IN SIMILAR SO, AND SECURITY. WELL, IT MIGHT HELP, BUT I MEAN, OTHER THAN THAT, YOU KNOW, SO I'LL BE VOTING FOR HER AND LIKE I SAY, IT'S A GOAL. ALRIGHT, ANYONE ELSE A HEARING? UH, HAVE A RULE CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MS. CRUZ? YES. SECOND CONCUR. MS. PICASSO? YES. DR. BURTON? YES. MS. BROWN? YES. MR. DEAN? I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINANCE OF FACT. MR. VASQUEZ? UH, YES. MS. [02:45:01] AVI? THUMBS UP. THANK YOU. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UH, MOTION PASSES. 10 TO ZERO. UH, NEXT CASE PLEASE. WELL, CAN WE SEE MS. BREGGAN OVER? OH, EXCUSE ME. UH, ALL RIGHT. IT'S ALSO, UH, BEFORE WE GET STARTED, CAN WE TEST MS UH, BETA'S MICROPHONE AGAIN PLEASE? SURE. GO AHEAD, MA'AM. TELL, UH, SAY HELLO OR TRY TO, ARE YOU ON MUTE OR IS THERE YOUR COMPUTER'S UNMUTED? YOU'RE, ARE YOU USING YOUR PHONE TO CALL IN OR YOUR COMPUTER? COMPUTER? OKAY. NOW THAT'S, THAT'S TWO DIFFERENT, UH, WITH THE SAME ISSUE, SO, OKAY. THANK YOU MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. UH, LET'S LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT. UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN REENTERED THE MEETING AT FOUR O'CLOCK. OKAY, ITEM NINE. OKAY. UM, ITEM NUMBER NINE IS BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 3 9. ADDRESS IS 9 5 0 1. NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR. UH, THE APPLICANT IS BROWN AND MCDONALD, P L L C, AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A 15 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 15 FOOT BUFFER TO ALLOW THE ELIMINATION OF A BUFFER ON THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS C THREE R, WHICH IS, WHICH IS, UM, A GENERAL COMMERCIAL RESTRICTIVE ALCOHOL SERVICE DISTRICT. YEAH, SORRY. YEAH, JUST, UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY'S LOCATED ALONG NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY SOUTH OF QUINTANA ROAD AND CASSON ROAD. UH, IT IS 20.574 ACRES WITH 738 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY. UH, WITH THE CURRENT ZONING DESIGNATION OF C THREE R, IT IS REQUIRED THAT PROPERTIES HAVE A REQUIRED TYPE B UH, LANDSCAPE BUFFER OF 15 FEET ALONG A NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY. A BUFFER YARD IS A REQUIRED INSTALLATION OF LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING MATERIALS BETWEEN ZONING DISTRICTS AND CERTAIN USES. UH, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ELIMINATE THIS REQUIREMENT TO PREVENT THE LOSS OF PARKING AND DRIVEWAYS. AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THIS IS THE VIEW LOOKING SOUTHEAST AND THE VIEW LOOKING NORTHEAST. AND THEN THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED BUFFER YARD ELIMINATION AND THEN THE SURROUNDING AREAS, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BUFFER YARD ELIMINATION STAFF RECOMMENDS A DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF SEVEN FOOT SIX INCH OF A SEVEN FOOT, SIX INCH BUFFER YARD VARIANCE. UH, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, UH, ONE, THIS REQUEST IS CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS BUFFERING ASSISTS, UH, WITH THE SCREENING OF UNSIGHTLY EQUIPMENT OR MATERIALS FROM VIEW OF PERSONS ON PUBLIC STREETS OR ADJOINING PROPERTIES. UH, TWO, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 20.574 ACRES AND COULD ACCOMMODATE THE PARKING ELSEWHERE. AND THREE, THE REDUCED SEVEN FOOT SIX INCH BUFFER YARD WILL PROTECT THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. STAFF MOED OUT 15 NOTICES, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. OKAY. AND, UM, THEY'LL JUST BE READY FOR SOME QUESTIONS. THERE'S A 14 FOOT EASEMENT ON THIS ONE TOO. ? YES. SO QUESTION I HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. YES. COMMISSIONER, QUESTION. IT'S OKAY. QUESTION STATUS STAFF. HELLO. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA HAS A QUESTION. OKAY. YOU, YOU WERE SA UH, SAYING THAT, UH, THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT MM-HMM. WITHOUT THE BUFFERS MM-HMM. WOULD BE AFFECTED. I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT AGAIN? OKAY. YOU STATED THAT THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, UH, WHEN, UH, IF THE BUFFER WOULD BE REDUCED, IT, IT WOULD CHANGE THE CHARACTER? UH, YES, BECAUSE THERE'S A REQUIRED 15 FOOT BUFFER REQUIRED, UH, FOR C THREE R THAT'S ADJOINING, UM, THE NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY. AND WITH THAT, WITHOUT THAT 15 FOOT BUFFER, UM, WE BELIEVE IT WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, BUT THE HIGHWAY, UH, NOT THE RESIDENCE OF OUR COMMERCIAL AROUND THERE. UH, YEAH. SO THE REQUIRED BUFFER THAT THE, THE ELIMINATION OR REDUCTION OF THE BUFFER, UM, WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT IT WOULD, IT WOULD CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, HOW THE DISTRICT IS ESTABLISHED IN THE CODE. UM, WE DO GET [02:50:01] THAT THE DEVELOPMENT, THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT MIGHT NOT MATCH THAT, BUT, UM, WHAT'S IN THE U D C AND WHAT THE ESTABLISHED BUFFER YARD IS, IS WHAT WOULD BE, UM, KIND OF DERIVED FROM THE DISTRICT. YEAH, I THINK WE ALL KNOW THE AREA. AND WHEN YOU SAY SOMETHING, YEAH. WE'RE TRACKING THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. UH, WILL IT BE A SALVAGE YARD OR A RE RECYCLED METAL PLACE? I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT CAN ANSWER THAT BETTER, BUT I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. OH, OKAY. OF THE DEVELOPMENT. SO IT'S DIFFERENT FROM WHAT'S IN THE CODE. THANK YOU. OKAY. OKAY, CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ, UM, BEFORE YOU SIT DOWN, YOUNG MAN, UH, SO THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A NEW DEVELOPMENT BESIDES WHAT'S ALREADY THERE. UM, I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT COULD EXPAND UPON THAT QUESTION. OKAY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. YEAH, BASED ON THE SIGNS, IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS A BUILDING MATERIAL YARD. UH, I HAVE A QUESTION. YES. UH, GO. UH, YOU EXPLAIN THE LOGIC OF, UH, THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION, UH, ESSENTIALLY SPLITTING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES OF 15 FEET AND WHAT THE APPLICANT WANTS, WHICH IS ZERO. SO WHAT'S THE LOGIC OF ? WELL, WE HAD A MEETING WITH THE APPLICANT ALONG WITH OUR TREES DEPARTMENT HERE WITHIN DEVELOPING SERVICES, AND IT WAS THE TREE DEPARTMENT'S RECOMMENDATION, UM, TO SPLIT THAT IN HALF. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE, THAT IS ONE OF THEIR STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS. PARDON ME? THAT'S ONE OF THEIR STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS. IF IT'S A 15 YARD REQUIREMENT, THEY USUALLY, UH, COMPROMISE ABOUT MIDWAY AND THAT RESULTS IN A 7.5 FOOT BUFFER. OKAY. AND THE APPLICANT COULD ALWAYS PUT IN A FIVE FOOT BUFFER ON THE 14 FOOT EASEMENT, AND WE'RE GONNA GET CLARIFICATION ON AND, AND WOULD THERE BE A FENCE AROUND THE PROPERTY? UM, I'M SURE THE APPLICANT COULD EXPAND ON THAT AS WELL IF YEAH, BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING JUST LIKE THE DOCTOR HAS STATED, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING AT THINGS RIGHT HERE, EVEN SPLITTING IT. RIGHT. LISTEN AND IF THERE'S SOME METAL FENCE AROUND IT OR THE LIKE, BE JUST, THANK YOU. HELLO. OKAY. SO JUST SOME CLARIFICATION. THE LAST ONE WITH THAT FOUR STAR NOTE THAT YOU WERE REFERENCING, UM, THERE IS THE, THE PORTION IN THERE THAT SAYS WHEN ADJOINING STREET IN AN EASEMENT OR EASEMENTS THAT PRECLUDE PROVISIONS OF REQUIRED BUFFER. SO A GAS LINE, UM, THEY DON'T WANT ANYTHING PLANTED OVER IT, WHICH IS WHY THE LAST ONE WITH THE GAS LINE WOULD APPLY. WE HAVE BUFFERS IN UTILITY EASEMENTS ALL THE TIME WHERE IT'S NOT PRECLUDED. SO UNLESS IT'S EXPRESSLY PRECLUDED BY THE UTILITY, THEN THE STANDARD BUFFER WOULD STILL APPLY. OKAY. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE CASE WE, AND, AND I KNOW THAT, I BET YOU THE APPLICANT IS WAITING TO COME FORWARD AND TELL US ALL ABOUT THEIR PROJECT . SO THANK YOU. UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. YES. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. UH, THANK YOU BOARD MEMBERS, UM, FOR THE CONVERSATION ON BUFFERS. AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF MY CLIENT, UM, MG BUILDING MATERIALS. THEY, THEY OWN THE PROPERTY HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE IN FRONT OF YOU. UM, THEY'VE OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR PROBABLY 30 YEARS RIGHT AFTER ANNEXATION. UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY'VE, THEY'VE EXPANDED ABOUT AS MUCH AS THEY CAN AND THEY ARE LOOKING, UH, THEY SUBMITTED A REPL FOR THE, ABOUT TWO ACRES AT THE, UH, NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. UM, AND SUBMITTED A BUILDING PERMIT FOR, UH, THE NEW BUILDING THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, UH, THAT ALLOW, ALLOW FOR OFFICE SPACE AS, UH, AS WELL AS STORAGE. AND SO THAT, UH, PLAT AND, UH, BUILDING PERMIT DID TRIGGER A BUFFER. AND I, I DO WANNA CLARIFY, THE REQUEST SAID FOR A 20 ACRE SITE, IT WAS JUST TRIGGERED FOR THE TWO ACRES IN RED IN FRONT OF YOU. AND SO THAT STRIP FROM THE DRIVEWAY TO THE INTERSECTION OF CASSON AND NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY IS ROUGHLY 400 FEET. AND THAT IS WHERE THE, THE BUFFER, UM, IS REQUIRED BY THE U D C. SO IN THE MOTION, I, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE AMENDED TO STATE, UH, WHATEVER THE MOTION IS, UH, FOR THE 2.034 ACRES. IF, IF YOU CAN, UM, I'M GONNA INTERRUPT YOU FOR A SECOND. YES, SIR. SO THE APPLICATION'S FOR 95 0 1 NEW LURE HIGHWAY, IS THAT ADDRESS BEEN ASSIGNED FOR THIS, UH, SMALLER REPLANTED AREA? IS THAT ALREADY NOT YET ASSIGNED YET? NOT YET. NOT YET. MM-HMM. . SO JUST EVERYONE BE AWARE, WHEN YOU READ THE MOTION THAT YOU REFERENCED THE, UH, PLAID, DO YOU HAVE A PLATT ID NUMBER WE CAN THROW IN THERE? I DO, I DO. I THINK SYDNEY CAN, CAN HAND IT TO ME. UM, AND IT, THE PLATT HAS BEEN RECORDED. UM, SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROPERTY IS PRIMARILY C THREE AND WE'RE SURROUNDED BY A LOT OF C THREE USES AS WELL AS INDUSTRIAL USES. UH, MOSTLY LUMBER YARDS AND, UH, CAR JUNKYARDS AS AND USED CAR LOTS. UM, NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY [02:55:01] IS, UH, USED PRIMARILY FOR ACCESS TO ALL OF THESE SITES. I 35 IS TO THE EAST. UM, AND SOME OF THOSE, THOSE PROPERTIES CAN USE THAT FOR, FOR ACCESS AS WELL. UM, RIGHT NOW, THE RIGHT OF WAY IS ABOUT 44 FEET WIDE, AND IT IS A SECONDARY ARTERIAL, SO IT SHOULD, YOU KNOW, PROPOSED IS SUPPOSED TO BE 86 FEET WIDE. UM, SO THE 15 FOOT BUFFER REQUIREMENT IN THE CODE, ALONG WITH THE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY EXPANSION WILL EAT INTO OUR SITE. UM, SO NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, IF YOU CAN. UM, JUST GOING INTO THE FINDINGS OF FACT, UM, BRIEFLY, UM, YOU KNOW, STAT SAFES THAT THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER WILL PROTECT, UH, THE RIGHT OF WAY OR PROTECTED, YOU KNOW, UH, DRIVERS FROM UNSIGHTLY EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS. UM, BUT THIS PORTION OF OUR PROPERTY THAT WE RE PLATTED IS, IS FOR PARKING AND FOR A BUILDING WHERE EVERYTHING WILL BE ENCLOSED. UM, THE OP PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE UTILIZED THE FULL ACREAGE FOR THEIR BUILDINGS AND MATERIALS. UM, THE, THE BUFFER WILL CUT INTO SOME OF OUR PARKING WHERE IT WOULD NEED TO BE RELOCATED. UM, BUT THERE'S NOT A LOT OF SPACE TO RELOCATE. UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. JUST SO I CAN KIND OF SHOW. SO THIS IS AN OVERALL AERIAL, AGAIN, THE RIGHT OF WAY IS, IS SMALL FOR THE TYPE OF TRAFFIC THAT WE SEE HERE. THERE ARE A LOT OF 18 WHEELERS THAT GO UP AND DOWN. UM, SPECIFICALLY THE USED TO RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM US, THE 18 WHEELERS WILL BACK UP. SO THEY WILL GO ONTO THE EXISTING GRASS THAT IS THERE AND THEN BACK UP INTO, UM, THEIR SITE. SO ANY LANDSCAPE THAT WOULD BE IN THERE WOULD BE TRAMPLED UPON. UM, ESPECIALLY WE ARE AT AN INTERSECTION OF CASSON AND NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY, SO THERE ARE A LOT OF MATERIALS THAT GET KICKED UP WHEN YOU TURN OR WHEN YOU STOP. UM, SO, UH, THE SPIRIT OF THE VARIANCE WOULD BE SUR SERVED BY THE CURRENT 35 FEET BETWEEN THE PROPERTY AND THE NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY. UM, I UNDERSTAND WHERE BUFFERS ARE REQUIRED. I, I JUST, I DON'T THINK IT'S HERE. UH, WE ARE PROVIDING LANDSCAPING WITHIN OUR LOT THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE CODE, UM, WITHIN THE FENCE THAT WILL SURROUND THE PROPERTY. UM, I JUST, I DON'T THINK ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE, UH, BUFFERS WOULD LAST VERY LONG, UM, OR IS NECESSARY HERE. NEXT SLIDE. AND THIS IS JUST SHOWING THE FULL FRONTAGE OF THE CLIENT'S PROPERTY. HERE IS, UH, THE SITE PLAN SHOWING THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING ON THE PROPERTY THAT'S TRIGGERED BY THE PARKING AND THE ZONING. UM, AND SO YOU CAN SEE WE HAVE A PRETTY UNIQUELY SHAPED LOT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE FOR, FOR THE LANDSCAPING, UM, THAT IS TRIGGERED BY THE, THE RIGHT OF WAY REQUIREMENT, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE THAT, UH, WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY. NEXT SLIDE. HERE ARE SOME OF OUR SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. UM, LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE A LOT OF, UM, USED CAR LOTS OR CAR STORAGE AND THERE'S, THERE'S NOT LANDSCAPING, UM, ANYWHERE ALONG NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY. JUST SOME MORE EXAMPLES. AND THIS IS, UM, SOUTH OF OUR PROPERTY. THERE IS A, A RECENT PLAT IN BUILDING PERMIT PULLED AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS VESTING INVOLVED OR THEY ALSO OBTAINED A VARIANCE, BUT, UM, IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT THERE'S ANY LANDSCAPING ALONG, UH, NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY. UM, SO WITH THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK, UH, EVEN STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF THE SEVEN FOOT, SIX INCH BUFFER I THINK WOULD IMPACT OUR PROPERTY NEGATIVELY AS FAR AS PARKING GOES. UM, AND WITH THAT, I DO RESPECT YOUR APPROVAL OF OUR REQUEST TODAY, AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. UH, UH, JUST ONE QUESTION I JUST NOTICED IS ON THE SIDE PLAN THAT YOU SHOWED, IT LOOKED LIKE YOU WERE PROVIDING SOME, UH, VEGETATION. HOW, WHAT, HOW THIN, WHAT WAS THE SI THE WIDTH OF THAT? I DO BELIEVE IT'S AT LEAST, UH, FIVE FEET. OKAY. SO A BUFFER DOWN TO FIVE FEET WOULDN'T BE, UH, YOU WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO THAT? WELL, IT ALREADY IS ON THE INSIDE, SO THAT'S TRIGGERED BY A SEPARATE SECTION OF THE CODE. OKAY, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YES, COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA, AND THEN A ZOOM IN. I, I READ, YOU KNOW, ESTATE HERE, BUT CAN YOU, UH, EXPLAIN TO ME OR TELL ME WHAT THE COMPANY, UH, DOES, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT IS IT? SURE. MANUFACTURING, RECYCLING, REBUILDING. YES, SIR. SO THEY'RE A BUILDING MATERIALS COMPANY, AND SO THEY WILL STORE SOME, SOME LUMBER OR, YOU KNOW, DIRT OR OR OTHER BUILDING MATERIALS ON SITE, AND THEY CONTRACT OUT AND CONTRACTORS WILL COME AND [03:00:01] GET IT AND, AND TAKE IT TO THEIR SITE. AND THAT'S IT. THAT'S IT. THERE'S, UH, FROM THE HIGHWAY OR FROM, WELL, YEAH. WHAT THE TRAFFIC THERE, THE PEOPLE PASS BY. WHAT DO THEY SEE? UH, YOU DON'T HAVE A FENCE AROUND THERE OR DO YOU WE HAVE A, A PROPOSED FENCE AROUND THE TWO ACRES AROUND OUR PROPERTY. UM, AND THEN THERE IS A BARRIER, I THINK, UH, WHERE THE MATERIALS ARE AND IT'S SET BACK. OKAY. SO THERE'S, THERE'S PLAN FOR, UM, WELL AFTER WHATEVER YOU, WE PLOT IT OR THE LIKES, THERE IS PLANS FOR A FENCE AROUND IT, RIGHT? YES. THERE, THERE IS A, A, SO THIS WAS PLOTTED BACK IN 1990, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY FIRST ESTABLISHED, AND I GUARANTEE YOU IF THERE WAS NOT SOME SORT OF FENCE, THEIR MATERIALS WOULD BE STOLEN. SO THERE IS, THERE IS A STRUCTURE. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. THANK YOU CHAIR. UH, MY QUESTION GOES BACK TO WHAT WOULD YOU JUST STATED ABOUT THE FIVE FOOT, UM, SET BY FIVE FOOT, I GUESS, BUFFER THAT'S ALREADY IN THE EXISTING CODE. COULD YOU KINDA EXPAND ON THAT OR IS THAT YEAH, AND STAFF, FEEL FREE TO CORRECT ME IF I'M, IF I'M WRONG, BUT THERE ARE, THERE ARE TWO BUFFERS TRIGGERED HERE. ONE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, AND THEN THERE'S ONE INTERNAL INTERNALLY FOR, FOR THE BUFFERING THE PARKING. AND SO WE'RE, WE'RE ALREADY DOING THAT, AND THAT'S WHAT WAS SHOWN THAT'S SHOWN UP THERE. SO THAT FIVE FOOT WOULD NOT BE OVERLAPPING THE SEVEN FOOT, SIX INCH OR IS A, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. FIVE FOOT WOULD'VE BEEN ADDITIONAL TO THE, UH, ANY REQUIRED IT'S INTERNAL TO THE SITE? YES, IT'S INTERNAL TO THE SITE, YEAH. STAFF. CAN YOU, WHAT I DON'T, I I DON'T RECALL WHAT THAT IS. UH, THE FIVE FOOT BUFFER ASSOCIATED WITH PARKING, THAT'S, THAT'S SEPARATE FROM THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER. WHAT, WHAT IS THAT? UM, I'M LOOKING AT, I'M LOOKING AT UP ON COVER, THINK IT'S A SCREENING REQUIREMENT. AND THEN WHILE YOU'RE AT IT, UM, THE APPLICANT HAD MENTIONED THAT, UH, THEY'RE PUTTING A FENCE IN IS, UH, DON'T YOU GET BUFFER REDUCTIONS WHEN YOU PUT IN A FENCE OR POTENTIALLY PUT IN A FENCE, UH, UPWARDS OF FIVE FEET OR SOMETHING? I'M, I'M CURIOUS TO SEE HOW THAT WOULD, IF THERE'S ANY EFFECT TO, UH, A PROPOSED FENCE. UH, I'M NOT SURE ON THE FENCE REQUIREMENT. UM, I, WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT, BUT, UH, THE INTERNAL BUFFER I BELIEVE SHE'S REFERRING TO IS THE PARKING LOT SCREENING REQUIREMENT. UM, BUT I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS SPECIFIC CASE TO BE A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE. BUT THERE IS A PARKING LOT SCREENING REQUIREMENT AS WELL AS A PARKING LOT SHADING REQUIREMENT THAT ARE OFTEN, UH, IMPLEMENTED WHEN, WHEN WE SEE THESE BUFFERS YEAH. ON THE SCREENING. SO IF, IF, IF THEY'RE PUTTING IN A FIVE FOOT BUFFER, CAN'T YOU USE IT FOR BOTH PURPOSES? LIKE SO THE 15 FOOT THAT'S REQUIRED, IT'S NOT AN ADDITION IF THEY DO FIVE FOOT TO MEET THE SCREENING REQUIREMENT, COULDN'T THEY ALSO USE THAT AS PART, AS THEIR LAND LANDSCAPE BUFFER? I'D HAVE TO VERIFY, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT THAT IS OFTEN THEY'RE, THEY'RE USED TOGETHER. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I, THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING. SO, SO THERE IS A WAY TO ACCOMMODATE SOME LEVEL OF BUFFER HERE WITHIN THAT SCREENING? YEAH, I MEAN, SO STAFF IS, IS RECOMMENDING SEVEN, UH, AND A HALF FEET. UM, THEY'RE DOING FIVE, UH, TO MEET A, A SEPARATE REQUIREMENT. UM, IF THIS, IF THIS BOARD WENT DOWN TO FIVE AS OPPOSED TO 15, THEN THEY WOULD BE FINE. UM, AND THEN I'M STILL CURIOUS ABOUT THE FENCE. I, I REALLY THINK THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT A FENCE THAT CAN BE USED AS A REDUCTION. I JUST CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT IS THAT THING. , IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? WELL, CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION. YES, UH, PLEASE. COMMISSIONER PICASSO. HI. UM, SO I KNOW THAT THERE WERE OTHER EASEMENT OWNERS, SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE GAS ELECTRIC MM-HMM. CABLE. UH, HAVE YOU ALREADY SPOKEN WITH THEM? YES, WE WENT THROUGH THAT WITH THE PLATTING PROCESS. OKAY. AND THE IMPACTS TO THE ADDITION, THE DRIVEWAY HAS BEEN THERE FOR, I THINK BEFORE SOME OF THE EASEMENTS WERE EVEN THERE, AND SO THEY'RE FULLY AWARE. AND THEN THIS, UH, THIS REQUEST, I SAW THAT THERE WERE SOME, THERE WAS SOME DRAINAGE IN THE FRONT. WOULD THAT, HOW WILL THAT IMPACT THE DRAINAGE FOR THIS SITE? I DON'T KNOW IF I SAW ANYTHING ABOUT DRAINAGE IN THERE. UM, I DRAINAGE WAS DONE DURING THE PLATTING PROCESS, SO ANY DRAINAGE WOULD HAVE TO ADHERE, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING THEY PLANNED TO PUT IN THERE WOULD HAVE TO ADHERE TO WHAT WAS APPROVED DURING THE PLATTING PROCESS. AND WHAT'S THE REQUIRED PARKING MINIMUM MAXIMUM FOR THIS, UH, SITE THAT YOU ALL ARE LOOKING TO NEED? OOH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. I, I'M AFRAID I DON'T KNOW THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. I'D HAVE TO GO LOOK. OKAY. [03:05:01] WE'RE NOT SEEING ANY REDUCTIONS, UM, BASED ON THE FENCE, WE'RE SHOWING THE REQUIREMENT WITH THE FENCE AND THE REQUIRED BUFFERS AND ALSO IT HELPING TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT. OKAY. WELL THAT MAKES SENSE. I, I, I KNEW THE FENCE WAS IN HERE SOMEWHERE. I FOUND IT AS WELL THAT IT'S, IT'S JUST A COMPONENT OF A DE OR F BUFFER YARD, BUT NOT NECESSARILY CORRECT REDUCTION. OKAY. CORRECT. THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION. UM, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER, UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? ALL RIGHT. WELL, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE, UH, ANY PUBLIC COMMENTARY VOICEMAILS, ANYONE SENATOR TO SPEAK? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, IT, AND IF WE CAN JUST MAKE SURE WE, UM, ANNOTATE THE PLAT. 'CAUSE THIS PLAT WAS RECORDED AFTER WE MADE OUR, UH, PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS. YEAH, IT'S LOT TWO N CCB 1 4 4 92. UM, AND IT'S, UH, IT'S, I HAVE THE PLATT ID NUMBER, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD SUFFICE IF YOU, UH, AND WHOEVER READS A MOTION AND MAKE REFERENCE TO THAT. CAN YOU READ THE N CCB AGAIN? UH, YES. IT'S, UH, IT'S LOT TWO N CCB 1 44 92. AND THE NAME OF THE PLAT IS MG BUILDERS ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 23 DASH NINE, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUST GRANT REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT REQUIRED FOOT BUFFER TO ALLOW THE ELIMINATION TO ALLOW THE REDUCTION OF A BUFFER IN THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 9 5 0 THE LAREDO HIGHWAY. UH, THIS FIVE FOOT WOULD BE IN LINE WITH THE, UH, DESCRIBED AS LOT NUMBER TWO, NEW CITY BLOCK 1 4 4 9 2 KNOWN AS MG BUILDERS, WHICH FURTHER DEFINES A FIVE FOOT BUFFER REQUIREMENT THAT IT WOULD, WOULD ALSO BE CONSIDERED THE, UH, SCREENING FOR THE, FOR THE PARKING LOT, THE APPLICANT BEING BROWN AND MCDONALD, P L L C. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH THAT ARE LITERAL, ENFORCED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ELIMINATE THE MINIMUM, UH, TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM, UH, UH, 15 FOOT BUFFER ALONG NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY, UH, TO 10 FEET. THIS REQUIRE, THIS REQUEST IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE AREA WAS DEFINED IN A SIMILAR DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. DID I STATE THAT RIGHT? THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT BUFFER ALONG NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY, UH, TO FIVE FEET, 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 ABIDING BY THE MINIMUM BUFFER REQUIREMENT. THIS WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE APPLICANT WOULD NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT PARKING SPACE FOR THE PROPOSED USE INTENDED. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED. THE 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. AND THIS CASE, THE ELIMINATION OF THE BUFFER YARD WILL ADHERE TO THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. THE REDUCTION OF THE BUFFER YARD ADHERE TO THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY. SIR, YOUR MIC WENT OUT. IT'S, IT'S GREEN. IT'S LIT UP. ALRIGHT, GO AHEAD, PLEASE TEST. YEAH, YOU'RE ON. OKAY, THERE YOU GO. WANNA START FROM THE VERY BEGINNING? NO, I DIDN'T THINK SO. FOR THE VARIANCE, WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THIS VARIANCE BY SUCH VARIANCE, WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ELSE OF THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. IF GRANTED, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL, WILL HAVE A REDUCED BUFFER ALONG NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS OTHER PROPERTIES APPEAR TO NOT ABIDE BY THE MINIMUM BUFFER REQUIREMENT AT ALL. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS THE VARIANCE OF SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL. THEY'RE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT. WHEN THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, STAFF FINDS IS APPLIED TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. PROVIDING THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THE LAREDO HIGHWAY IS, IS, UM, IS NOT ATTAINABLE. THAT'S WHY WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO THE FIVE FOOT AS THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD NOT WOULD NEED TO RECONFIGURE THE PARKING. THEIR CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION. SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. COMMISSIONER, UH, UNA. RIGHT. SO I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION. UM, AS, AS NOTED, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, UM, CALLING FOR A FIVE FOOT, UM, BUFFER, WHICH IS ALSO, UH, THE SCREENING BUFFER FOR THE PARKING LOT. AS YOU LOOK, UH, UP AND DOWN NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY, THERE DOESN'T REALLY APPEAR TO BE ANY, UH, LANDSCAPE ON ANY OF THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES. SO TO PROVIDE THE FIVE FOOT, UH, SCREENING FOR THE, FOR THE VEHICLES, I THINK IS A REAL ADDITION, UH, TO THE SURROUNDING LAND USES AND, AND, UH, VERY COMPATIBLE WITH THE [03:10:01] SURROUNDING LAND. SO SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UM, YES, I CONCUR. AND I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE REQUEST AS, UM, IT WAS, UH, BRIEF. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? ALL RIGHT. HEARING DONE. OH, DID YOU WANT, UH, COMMISSIONER PICASA? SO JUST TO CLARIFY, WE'RE SAYING FIVE INSTEAD OF 15? YES. UH, FIVE FOOT BUFFER. OKAY. YEAH. AND I, I'D LIKE TO JUST ADD, I MEAN, MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT THIS IS, THIS REQUEST IS COMING IN, UH, FOR THE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING OR SUFFICIENT PARKING, AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER, SO I JUST, I CAN'T SUPPORT THE, THE NEED FOR THE 15, BUT I CAN FOR THE FIVE. OKAY. SO THAT'S, UM, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. DOES THAT A ROLL CALL VOTE MR. OONA? YES, I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. DR. BURTON? YES, I CONCUR. MS. PICASSO? YES, MR. DEAN. I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. EZ, THUMBS UP. THANK YOU, MS. BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. SO MOTION PASSES, UH, 10 TO ZERO OR 11 TO ZERO AND, UM, TAKE A BREAK. YEAH, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A QUICK BREAK. UH, WE'LL SEE EVERYBODY BACK IN 10 MINUTES. OH, NO. WELL, IF Y'ALL, IF STAFF IS READY, WE CAN PROCEED. I'M GONNA WAIT FOR, OH, DOES, IS ANYBODY IN COMMUNICATION WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? SURE. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES, WE'RE READY TO START. ALL RIGHT, PERFECT. WE SEE YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, COOL. THANK YOU. OKAY, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ASHLEY LES, SENIOR PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER B O A DASH 23 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 3. APPLICANT S SHEIK IS REQUESTING FOR AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO REVOKE THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT LOCATED AT 1 0 8 1 0 HILLSDALE LOOP ZONED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY IN COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY INITIALLY APPLIED FOR A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON FEBRUARY 22ND, 2022, THEN WAS APPROVED AND ISSUED BY STAFF ON MARCH 3RD, 2022. OPERATORS ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT MONTHLY REVENUES TO THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT, INCLUDING REPORTING $0. THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT NOTIFIED THE OWNER OF DELINQUENT PAYMENTS OR REPORTS ON THEIR HOT ACCOUNT VIA EMAIL ON JANUARY 19TH, 2023. NO PAYMENT WAS MADE WITHIN THE 90 DAYS, THEREFORE THE PERMIT WAS REVOKED ON AUGUST 2ND, 2023. IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 16 DASH 1 1 1 1 OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES. BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED FROM OUR THIRD PARTY VENDOR, THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT STATES NO REVENUE REPORTS HAVE BEEN MADE FOR FEBRUARY, 2022 TO JUNE, 2023. IN JULY, 2023 AFTER REVOCATION, THE OPERATOR PAID THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX FOR JULY, 2023 IN THE AMOUNT OF $82 AND 72 CENTS. SECTION 16 DASH 10 D STATES THAT FAILURE TO TIMELY REPORT AND PAY HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX WITHIN 90 DAYS SHALL RESULT IN PERMIT REVOCATION. THIS IS A COPY OF THE LETTER ATTACHED TO THE EMAIL SENT ON JANUARY 19TH, 2023 FROM THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT. THIS IS THE PORTION OF THE ONLINE APPLICATION WHERE THE APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES TO APPLY. WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE, ALL APPLICANTS ARE REQUIRED TO CHECK THIS SECTION BEFORE BEING ABLE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREAS. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN BO O A DASH 23 DASH 3 2 3 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES THE STAFF REVOKE REVOKE THE PERMIT FOR THE VIOLATION DESCRIBED IN THIS PRESENTATION. TWO. THE OWNER OPERATOR OF THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT VIOLATED THE S T R ORDINANCE BY FAILING TO TIMELY REPORT REVENUES AND PAY THE ASSOCIATED HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX [03:15:01] PAYMENTS. AND THREE, THE OWNER OPERATOR FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE EVEN AFTER ATTEMPTS WERE MADE TO INFORM THE APPLICANT OF DELINQUENCY ON JANUARY 19TH, 2023 BY CITY STAFF. 31 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, ZERO IN FAVOR, THREE IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. UM, UH, JUST BEFORE YOU GO, YOU, YOU SAID YOU MADE ATTEMPTS IN JANUARY, WAS IT JUST LIKE A, YOU MAIL THEM A LETTER OR PHONE? THAT EMAILED LETTER ON JANUARY 19TH. OKAY. THAT WAS IN THE PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR, FOR STAFF BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE APPLICANT? O ZUNA, COMMISSIONER ZUNA. SO FROM, FROM THE REPORT YOU MADE, THEY WERE BACK TAXES OWED WERE $64. DOES WHAT DOES THAT, UH, CORRESPOND TO A NUMBER OF DAYS OR, UM, OF RENTAL? DOES THAT LINE UP WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY WITH WHAT THE THIRD PARTY VENDOR IS SAYING? THE NUMBER OF DAYS THAT WERE BOOKED, UH, THROUGH THE AIRBNB OR THROUGH WHATEVER, WHATEVER, UH, WEBSITE RESERVATION SYSTEMS, UH, WHAT AMOUNT ARE YOU REFERRING TO? UH, THE BACK TAXES THAT WERE PAID OF, UH, $82 AND 72 CENTS. DOES THAT BRING THEM CURRENT? DOES THAT BRING THEM CURRENT? BUT THEN IS THAT REFLECTIVE? I MEAN, IF THEY'RE SHOWING THE AIRBNB OR ANY OTHER BOOKING SYSTEM SHOWING THEY HAD 30 DAYS OF BOOKINGS, LIKE $32 AND 72 CENTS, DOES THAT LINE UP WITH THE NUMBER OF DAYS BOOKINGS? THAT I BELIEVE FINANCE CAN ANSWER THAT BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE CONFIRMED STAYS, BUT IT'S SELF-REPORTED. SO WHATEVER THEY SELF-REPORTED THE TAXES, THAT'S HOW MUCH IT WAS, IS $82 IS WHAT THEY PAID. DID, HAS THE CITY RECEIVED, UH, MONTHLY REPORTS STEMMING FROM THE DAY THEY GOT THEIR PERMIT TILL TODAY? NO, AS TO DATE, WE DO NOT HAVE REPORTS FROM FEBRUARY, 2022 TO JUNE, 2023. ALRIGHT. AND MR. CHAIR, WE HAVE FINANCE DEPARTMENT HERE TO HELP ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS. OKAY. SO IF I COULD ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. THERE WERE 36 DOCUMENTED STAYS AND THEY ONLY PAID FOR JULY, 2023. YEAH, THAT, SO THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. SO THEY WOULD BE IN ARREARS OF ALL THE OTHER DOCUMENTED STAYS OTHER THAN THAT ONE MONTH THAT THEY'RE CURRENT. CORRECT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND THAT STEMS FROM THE THIRD PARTY VENDOR THAT GATHERS THE INFORMATION? CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO BECAUSE THEIR PERMIT WAS ISSUED ON FEBRUARY 22ND, 2022, THEY WERE THE THEORETICALLY IN VIOLATION, UH, IN, IN, UH, MAY OF MAY 22ND, THAT OR JUNE 1ST, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN THE 90 DAYS, CORRECT? MM-HMM. ? CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. UH, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, LET'S HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU. UH, HELLO EVERYONE. UH, MY NAME IS CHE, SO I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND HOW, HOW THIS LOOKS. YEAH, THERE YOU GO. IS THIS BETTER? MM-HMM. . OKAY. SO I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND HOW THIS LOOKS. THIS LOOKS LIKE, UH, LIKE I IGNORED, UH, WARNINGS AND THAT I DIDN'T CARE ABOUT THE PROCESS. THE ISSUE IS THAT ONE, I HAVE A COUPLE OF PROPERTIES AND THE PROCESS IS A LITTLE FOGGY AND IT REQUIRES YOU SEEK ADVICE FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN DOING IT FOR A WHILE, AND SOMETIMES YOU GET CONFLICTING INFORMATION. AND SO EARLY ON WHEN I GOT THE PERMIT, THERE WERE A FEW SHORT TERM STAYS, AND IT'S A COMMON MISUNDERSTANDING THAT AIRBNB TAKES THE TAXES THEMSELVES. SO YEAH, SO THIS IS, THIS IS THAT ISSUE, BUT AFTER THOSE STAYS, IT WAS VACANT FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS, AND THEN IT WAS A MIDTERM RENTAL. NOW, THE ISSUE IS THAT I DIDN'T REPORT ZERO, WHICH IN MY MIND, ZERO IS MISLEADING BECAUSE TECHNICALLY IT WASN'T ZERO. BUT IF I PUT THE ACTUAL NUMBER, IT WOULD CHARGE ME TAXES. SO THE, THE, THAT'S ALL THIS IS, UM, THIS, IT'S, IT'S MY MISTAKE, BUT THE WARNING THAT I GOT, I ASSOCIATED WITH ANOTHER PROPERTY AND THE, THE ENTIRE TIME I THOUGHT I WAS DOING IT RIGHT. IF YOU LOOK AT MY OTHER PROPERTIES, I'M, I'M GETTING BETTER. IN THE BEGINNING, I MESSED UP, BUT I, I GET BETTER AND I, AND I DO IT CORRECTLY. AND SO THAT WAS THE CASE WITH THIS ONE. THIS ONE, THIS PROPERTY ON HILLSDALE LOOP FELL BEHIND. AND I THOUGHT I WAS DOING IT RIGHT, BUT, BUT I WAS NOT, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT MY OTHER PROPERTIES, I AM DOING IT RIGHT. SO THIS, I, I GET IT, BUT I GOT IT LATE. OKAY. UH, SO QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF. IF, IF THIS, IF THE, IF WE UPHOLD THE CITY'S DECISION, UH, THIS DOESN'T AFFECT ITS OTHER PROPERTIES, CORRECT? NO, IT DOES NOT AFFECT. OKAY. AND, UH, DID I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY THAT YOU HAD A FEW RENTALS WHEN YOU FIRST STARTED, BUT YOU HAVEN'T REPORTED IT BECAUSE YOU THOUGHT THAT YOU WOULD OWE TAXES? SO THAT WAS IN 2022. I, OKAY, SO THE SHORT TERM STAYS. AIRBNB TAKES SOME TAXES AND REMITS THEM FOR YOU, BUT THEY DON'T DO FOR THE CITY. SO WHEN YOU FIRST START, PEOPLE TELL YOU A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS. AND SO THIS WAS, THIS [03:20:01] WAS MY MISTAKE. UH, THEN THE PROPERTY WAS VACANT FOR A FEW MONTHS. WHEN I SAY SHORT TERM STAYS, IT'S LITERALLY LIKE ONE DAY, TWO DAY TYPE OF, AND SOMETIMES THEY HAPPEN FAST AND 20 STAYS CAN GO BY AND YOU THINK YOU'RE DOING IT RIGHT, BUT, BUT YOU'RE NOT, THE REST OF THE STAY WAS TWO, TWO STAYS TOTALED APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS. BETWEEN THAT TIME IT WAS VACANT. IT'S A, IT'S A MIDTERM RENTAL. BUT THE REASON WHY I'M, I'M HERE, UH, APPEALING IS BECAUSE I WOULD JUST LIKE THE OPTION FOR SHORT-TERM AND I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY TO PAY BACK, UH, FOR THE MISTAKES AND, AND JUST BE REINSTATED BRAGMAN. OKAY. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO THAT SIX MONTH RENTAL THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DID, WAS THAT BOOKED THROUGH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL COMPANY LIKE AIRBNB OR DID YOU SO THE FIRST TWO MONTHS OF IT WAS, AND THEN AFTER THAT THEY JUST BOOKED WITH ME DIRECTLY AND IT WAS JUST LIKE A REGULAR. OKAY, SO YOU OWE FOR TWO MONTHS WORTH OF SHORT-TERM RENTAL? IT SHOULD. SO THIS IS WHERE THE CONFUSING PART COMES. IT SHOULDN'T EVEN BE FOR THAT BECAUSE IF IT'S MORE THAN 30 DAYS, THE TAX DOESN'T APPLY. UH, STAFF, CAN YOU COMMENT ON THAT? CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT? 'CAUSE I, I'M NOT THAT IS CORRECT. SO THERE ARE NO TAXES DUE WHEN THE, UH, THE GUEST STAYS FOR LONGER THAN 31 DAYS. BUT THEY STILL HAVE TO, THEY STILL HAVE TO REPORT, CORRECT? THEY HAVE TO REPORT ZERO. SO THIS, SO, SO THIS IS WHERE I MESSED UP. SO I NOW KNOW THAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO REPORT ZERO, BUT AT THE TIME I FELT IT, IT, IT WAS JUST CONFUSING. IF I REPORT ZERO, THAT'S TECHNICALLY NOT CORRECT, BUT IF I REPORT THE ACTUAL NUMBER, IT WOULD'VE CHARGED ME TAXES. AND SO IN IN THAT, IN THAT CONFUSION IS, IS WHERE, WHERE I MESSED UP. SO WHAT, SO JUST OUTTA CURIOSITY, WHAT HE, YOU KNOW IT, IF HE RENTS THROUGH, IF YOU, IF YOU HAVE AN SS T R, BUT YOU END UP RENTING IT FOR MORE THAN 30 DAYS, THE SDR R STILL THERE. HE STILL HAS TO DO REPORTING. AND UH, AND WHAT HE SHOULD HAVE DONE IS REPORTED A ZERO BECAUSE THE STAY WAS OVER 30 DAYS. CORRECT. OKAY. YEAH. YEAH. I MEAN THAT, SO THIS IS, THIS IS WHY I'M HERE. THIS IS MY MISTAKE. WHEN YOU START OFF, THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT INFORMATION. IT'S NOT UNIFORM. THERE'S, THE PROCESS IS NOT, UH, IT'S NOT VERY HANDS-ON FROM THE CITY. SO THERE'S JUST A LOT OF DIFFERENT PLACES YOU HAVE TO GO TO, TO GET INFORMATION. AND SO THIS IS, THIS IS MY MISTAKE, BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UH, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF. SO IN THAT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT WHERE IT SAYS YOU AGREE TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE, UH, 22, DOES IT SPELL OUT THE THINGS THAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT? YES, IT'S ABOUT REMITTING THE TAXES. YES. IF IT'S TO STAY OVER 30 DAYS, HE DOESN'T OWE TAXES, BUT HE STILL HAS TO SUBMIT A REPORT. DOES IT SPELL THAT OUT? IT SPELLS OUT THAT, UM, IF IT'S FOR 30 DAYS, THEY NEED THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT. IF IT'S LONGER THAN 30 DAYS, THEY WOULDN'T NEED THE PERMIT. RIGHT. BUT HE, HE HAS THE PERMIT. HE, ALL RIGHT. SO IN THIS SCENARIO, HE HAS THE PERMIT. HE'S GOT SOMEBODY THAT'S STAYING THERE OVER 30 DAYS. DOES IT SPELL OUT THAT HE HAS TO SUBMIT A REPORT, BUT HE DOESN'T HAVE TO SUBMIT TAXES? NO, NOT, NOT THE PART ABOUT AFTER THE 31 DAYS THAT THEY HAVE TO REPORT ZERO. THAT IS NOT PART OF THE CODE, BUT IT IS PART OF THE POLICY, WHICH I BELIEVE SHOULD BE ON THE FINANCE WEBSITE. IT, IT IS ON THE FINANCE WEBPAGE WHERE THEY REPORT. SO WHETHER YOU REPORT ZERO OR REPORT REVENUE, ONCE WHERE YOU APPLY FOR THE PERMIT, IT DOES, STATE REPORTING IS REQUIRED, WHETHER THERE IS REVENUE OR NOT. SO IN THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, IT DOESN'T LEAD HIM TO GO TO THAT INFORMATION, IT JUST LEADS HIM TO ARTICLE, UH, CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22. CORRECT. IT DOESN'T, UH, DIRECT THEM TO THE FINANCE, UH, WEBSITE. SO VASQUEZ ARE, ARE YOU DONE COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? YEAH. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, YES. UH, FOR, FOR THE FOLKS IN, IN FINANCE, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, THE, IN MY EXPERIENCE, THERE ARE POLICIES AND THERE'S PRACTICES, AND THEN, UH, THERE ARE, UH, PROCEDURES. AND, UM, UH, I'M, UH, THIS IS AGAIN, UH, VERY REPETITIVE. UH, WE'VE BEEN HEARING A LOT OF, UH, THESE, UM, UH, REVOCATIONS AND, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE CLEARLY WHAT DOES THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT, WHAT DOCUMENT OR WHAT, UM, UH, THE, DOES THE, DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE TO KNOW THAT HE'S TO GO TO, TO A FINANCE PROCEDURE? WH WHERE, WHERE, WHERE IS THE APPLICANT, UH, GUIDED BY WHAT TO GO [03:25:01] THERE? SO ONCE THE PERMIT IS APPROVED, THEY'RE DIRECTED TO OUR WEBPAGE. AND ON OUR WEBPAGE, IT DOES STATE THAT REPORTING IS REQUIRED, WHETHER THERE IS REVENUE OR NOT. IT, AND THERE IS A TUTORIAL. IT ALSO STATES THAT THERE IS A PENALTY FOR NOT REPORTING. OKAY. OKAY. SO, UH, THE, I I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY THERE IS A TUTORIAL THEN AVAILABLE. CORRECT? CORRECT. THERE'S ALSO A TUTORIAL. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO FOLLOWING ALONG THAT SAME LINE, BUT DOES IT SAY THAT IF THE STAY IS MORE THAN 30 DAYS, YES. HE STILL HAS TO SUBMIT THE REPORT, YES. BUT NOT TAXES? CORRECT. OKAY. MM-HMM. ? YEAH, I THINK WHAT I'M GETTING FROM THIS IS THAT THE APPLICANT THOUGHT THAT MAYBE IF HE RENTED IT OUT LONG TERM, THAT IT WOULD BE, IT PUT ON A HOLD STATUS OR SOMETHING. THIS S D R PERMIT WOULD BE ON A HOLD STATUS AND MAYBE HE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING THAT MAY, MAY, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT, WHETHER, I MEAN, I KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WE ALL KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT CORRECT. I MEAN, TH THINGS ALSO GOT, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT. THINGS ALSO GOT A LITTLE MORE CONFUSING WHEN ANOTHER COMPANY WAS INTRODUCED THAT WAS GONNA BE COLLECTING TAXES. SO THAT'S, SO WHAT, WHAT NOTIFICATIONS DID YOU RECEIVE FROM THE CITY? DID YOU GET THE JANUARY LETTER? I MEAN, I, I SEE IT, SO, SO IT MUST BE TRUE, BUT I, I DON'T RECALL RECEIVING THIS. WAS IT, WAS IT EMAILED OR MAILED? BOTH. OKAY. OKAY. AND SO HAD HE RESPONDED TO THIS JANUARY LETTER, HE STILL, HE WOULDN'T BE HERE TODAY? CORRECT? THE LETTER DOES STATE THAT THEY DO HAVE 90 DAYS TO CURE, SO THAT THE PERMIT IS NOT REVOKED. OKAY. 'CAUSE THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT THIS BOARD HAS BEEN HEARING IS DIFFERENT MEANS OF, OF, OF, OF CONNECTION. UH, WHETHER IT'S EMAIL OR US MAIL. IN THIS CASE, THEY DID BOTH. UH, AND, UH, THERE WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO MAKE GOOD ON IT BEFORE HE, IT WAS REVOKED. SO, I MEAN, YEAH, EV WHEN IT, IF, IF, UH, THIS DOESN'T PASS TODAY, HIS ONE YEAR STARTS ON AUGUST 2ND, 2024. 2024 IS WHEN HE COULD REAPPLY YES. ONE YEAR FROM THE DAY THAT WE REVOKED IT. OKAY. PROVIDED THAT THERE'S NO OTHER SHORT TERM RENTAL RIGHT. DEAL. SO WE PROVIDED THAT HE'S ALSO CURRENT IN HIS HOT TAX PROVIDED HE'S ALSO COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, SIR, UM, YOU MENTIONED THAT, UH, UH, THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION BECAUSE, UM, THERE WAS A, A LIKE A DIFFERENT, UH, THIRD PARTY THAT, UH, THAT, UH, CAME, UH, ON THE SCENE. A AND MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, UM, UH, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THIS WAS A DIFFERENT THIRD PARTY? HOW DO I KNOW THAT IT'S A DIFFERENT, YEAH, DID YOU GET AN INTRODUCTION EMAIL INITIALLY YOU STARTED I GOT THAT EMAIL, YES. RIGHT. INITIALLY YOU STARTED, UH, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU BECAME A, UM, A PERSON THAT WITH AN S D R, UH, YOU WERE DEALING WITH, WITH THIRD PARTY NUMBER ONE, AND THEN YOU, YOU STARTED DEALING WITH THIRD PARTY NUMBER TWO, AND THEN IT APPEARS THAT, UH, YOU BECAME CONFUSED. BUT MY QUESTION IS, WHO, WHO, HOW DO THESE PARTIES COME INTO YOUR LIFE? WHERE, WHERE DO THEY COME FROM? THEY'RE JUST OUT OF HERE OUTTA NOWHERE. SO LET'S, BEFORE, BEFORE LET'S, LET'S GET THE CITY TO CLARIFY THIS. THE CITY USED TO DO THIS THEMSELVES RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING, AND THEN YOU, YOU HIRED AN OUTSIDE PARTY TO, SO WE HAVE A THIRD PARTY, WHICH WAS HOST, AND WE HAVE BEEN USING IT SINCE THE BEGINNING THAT WE, YOU KNOW, ESTABLISHED THIS ORDINANCE BACK IN 2019. WE JUST RECENTLY RE UM, REACHED OUT OR HAVE ANOTHER CONTRACT WITH ANOTHER THIRD PARTY OF TO COLLECT HOSTS, WHICH IS AVENUE AND AVENUE SENDS OUT NOTIFICATION TO ALL CURRENT PERMIT HOLDERS, UM, THAT THIS IS A NEW SYSTEM, THIS IS YOUR NEW LOGIN AND NEW TAX, UM, ID NUMBER TO REPORT YOUR TAXES. DO YOU, DO YOU RECALL WHEN THAT OCCURRED? WHAT, WHAT MONTH OR YEAR? JULY. SO RE VERY RECENTLY. OH, YES. OKAY. MM-HMM. . SO I GOT THAT NOTIFICATION. I, I WAS ON THE PHONE WITH HIM FOR A COUPLE OF HOURS TO SET ALL THIS UP. AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WHEN THERE WAS SOMEONE KIND OF COACHING ME THROUGH THE PROCESS, I DID IT RIGHT. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA, SAME QUESTION FOR THE, FOR THE APPLICANT. WHO IS THIS, UH, UH, UH, SOMEONE COACHING YOU? UH, WAS IT, I, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT IT. WAS THAT THE CITY PEOPLE, UH, COACHING YOU? COMMISSIONER, IF I MAY, WAS IT WAS SOMEONE ON, UH, AVENUE? YEAH, LET'S HEAR FROM, LET'S HEAR FROM, UH, FINANCE MR. CHAIR. THIS IS MELISSA, ARM'S ASSISTANT DIRECTOR. SO WE HAVE, UM, THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS GONE FROM ONE CONTRACT TO ANOTHER. AND THAT'S WHAT MONIQUE WAS TALKING ABOUT. SO HOST COMPLIANCE WAS ONE OF OUR CONTRACTS. NOW WE ARE WITH AVENUE, UM, THIS IS A THIRD PARTY CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE THAT IS GOING TO BE COLLECTING OUR HOT AND, UH, SEARCHING OUR, OUR WEBS FOR VIOLATIONS. SO THIS IS THE NEW CONTRACT THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH, UH, [03:30:01] AND THE NOTICES THAT THE APPLICANT RECEIVED WERE FROM THE NEW COMPANY AND THEY ARE HIRED TO DO THIS JOB FOR US. SO THAT IS WHERE THE EMAILS ARE COMING FROM, FROM THE THIRD PARTY VENDOR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN? YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY. YES, SIR. TO AN EXTENT, MS. RAMIREZ. BUT I MEAN, THE THING IS THIS, UH, YOU WENT AHEAD WHEN YOU SIGNED YOUR PAPERWORK, WHEN YOU CAME FROM, AND NOW YOU, YOU, YOU HAVE OTHER PROPERTIES, NO PROBLEM. BUT YOU CAME AND, AND YOU ACKNOWLEDGED WHEN YOU PUT THE X OR THE CHECK ON THE BOX HERE, THAT WHAT SECTION, UH, SECTION 22 OR WHATEVER YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABIDING FOR. SO THROUGH THIS, YOU YOURSELF ARE THE ONE THAT'S RUNNING. NOBODY'S GOING, LIKE YOU SAY TO AN EXTENT, YOU WERE ASKING, NOBODY'S GONNA GET YOU BY THE HAND AND THIS AND THAT. I MEAN, BECAUSE THEY KNOW YOU'RE AN INVESTOR, BIG PROPERTIES. SO ALL THE PAPERWORK THAT THEY GAVE YOU AND THEY WERE HERE, UH, YOU COULD PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL 'EM, YOU KNOW, AND SAY, HEY, WHAT'S GOING ON? AND THE HOT TAX, YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO REPORT 'EM REGARDLESS THAT YOU GOT ZERO. OKAY. YOU STILL HAVE TO REPORT 'EM. AND IT SAYS THERE WHAT YOU SIGNED, YOU SIGNED IT, YOU KNOW, NOBODY SIGNED IT FOR YOU. OKAY. SO ON, ON THAT SITUATION THERE, IT'S ANNU IN VOID BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T REPORT, BUT YOU, YOU ARE REPORTING THE OTHER ONES. NOW, I GUESS THE OTHER, BECAUSE THERE WERE SHORT, IF SOMEBODY ELSE CONTACTED YOU, THEY WERE CONTACTING YOU TO REALLY HELP YOU YEAH. TO ASSIST YOU, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HADN'T PAID, I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, I DON'T CARE WHAT THE CITY WAS. I'LL, I'LL, I'LL GIVE YOU ONE. OKAY, LET'S, OKAY. SORRY. GO AHEAD. IF YOU, UH, IF SOMEBODY ELSE CALLS YOU AND SPENDS WHAT, AN HOUR WITH YOU ON THE PHONE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THEY'RE TRYING TO HELP YOU, RIGHT? AND, AND YOU, YOU SIGNED THAT AFTER 90 DAYS HERE, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE IN VIOLATION. SO, SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. LET'S, LET'S, UH, MR. CHAIR, WE DO HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL TO PLAY. YEAH. OH, JUST COMMISSIONER UNI, GO. WE, WE, WE WANNA BE CAREFUL ABOUT, YOU KNOW, KEEPING ON TRACK HERE. 'CAUSE WE'RE GONNA HAVE THE SAME CONVERSATION TWO MORE TIMES WITH TWO OTHER CASES THAT, AND THERE'S OTHER PEOPLE WHO WANT TO, WHO WANT TO CHIME IN. UH, COMMISSIONER BEFORE WE HEAR THE VOICEMAIL, COMMISSIONER KOSKI, THANK YOU. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. UM, HOW MANY OTHER SHORT TERM RENTAL PROPERTIES DO YOU HAVE? UH, TWO. AND THOSE OTHER TWO PROPERTIES, HAVE YOU HAD THIS SITUATION WHERE IT'S BEEN MORE THAN THE 30, 31 DAYS? UH, ONE TIME. AND DID YOU REPORT ZERO? NO. IN FACT, I DIDN'T. THAT WAS ON THE OLD SYSTEM, SO, OKAY. I, I, I DUNNO WHAT TO DO IN, IN THAT CASE, DID YOU RECEIVE NOTIFICATION WHEN YOU DID NOT REPORT ZERO ON THAT, ON THAT PROPERTY? NO. OKAY. UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION FROM THE REPORTING AND HEARING SOME OF, OF THE OTHER RESPONSES FROM THE QUESTION FOR THAT, FOR THE 31 DAY, YOU KNOW, THRESHOLD THAT I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION ON. YOU PAID $82 AND 72 CENTS IN JULY. SO WAS THAT BECAUSE THE, YOU REPORTED IT AS THE 31 DAY PROPERTY, OR BECAUSE IT WAS LESS THAN THE 31 DAYS? IT WAS LESS THAN 31. IT WAS LESS THAN 31 DAYS. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO ON YOUR OTHER TWO PROPERTIES, UH, STAFF DOES THIS, DOES THIS GENTLEMAN HAVE ANY OTHER INFRACTIONS ON HIS OTHER TWO? SO, I'LL, I'LL TELL YOU ONE THING. HOLD ON A SECOND. OH, SORRY, GO AHEAD. THE REASON WHY I ASK IS IF HE'S GOOD ON THOSE TWO, THEN HE, THEN THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF THAT HE SHOULD KNOW WHAT TO DO. WE'LL BE HERE AGAIN, CHAIR, WHILE THEY LOOK INTO THAT. ALSO ON HIS PROPERTIES, HE NOT ONLY, IF HE'S STATING HE HAD LONG-TERM, UH, STAYS, HE DID HAVE SHORT-TERM STAYS AS WELL THAT WERE NOT REPORTED ON. FOR EXAMPLE, JULY OF 2022, HE HAD 10 DOCUMENTED STAYS THAT WERE SHORT-TERM STAYS. AUGUST 7TH, SEPTEMBER TWO, OCTOBER FOUR. OH, THAT'S, THAT'S, YEAH. MY, MY THING IS, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, AS WE HEAR THESE CASES, UH, I'M, I'M, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT HOW, HOW, UM, APPLICANTS ARE NOTIFIED, WHETHER IT'S EMAIL, HARD MAIL, OR BOTH. UM, THIS GENTLEMAN, YOU KNOW, YOU ALSO SAID THAT YOU DID BOTH, WHICH IS WHAT YOU DO FOR THEM. THAT'S, THAT'S GREAT. UM, BUT WHEN SOMEBODY TELLS, SELLS ME THAT THEY HAVE MULTIPLE PROPERTIES AND THEY'RE ONLY HERE ON ONE, I KIND OF GET THE IMPRESSION THAT HE'S OKAY ON THE OTHER TWO, WHICH MEANS THAT HE SHOULD KNOW WHAT TO DO AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO ASCERTAIN. CORRECT. IF THE PERMITS ARE ACTIVE ON THE OTHER PROPERTIES, IT, THEY MUST NOT BE OVER 90 DAYS DELINQUENT. OKAY. AND, AND IS THIS, THIS IS A TYPE TWO, CORRECT? THE ONE BEFORE IS TODAY, IT'S A TYPE TWO? YES, THEY ARE. AND THE OTHER, THE OTHER PROPERTIES, ALL YOUR, ALL YOUR SDRS ARE TYPE TWOS? YEAH. OKAY. ALRIGHT, WELL THAT'S IT FOR ME. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. OKAY. COMMISSIONER, DEAN. [03:35:02] SO I SEE HERE YOU GOT TWO IN OPPOSITION ON THE SAME STREET. UM, WHY WOULD THEY BE IN OPPOSITION? HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO THEM OR WHY, WHY IS, UM, THEY'RE COMING TO THAT DETERMINATION? HELP ME UNDERSTAND THAT. SO THE NEIGHBOR TO THE LEFT, IF YOU'RE FACING THE PROPERTY, I MEAN, SO I, I, IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I VISITED THE PROPERTY, ONLY BECAUSE THERE WAS SOMEBODY STAYING THERE FOR A LONG TIME. UM, WHEN I FIRST SET IT UP, I NEEDED ACCESS TO THE BACKYARD AND THE NEIGHBOR WOULD NOT OPEN THE DOOR. LIKE CARS WERE THERE EVERY DAY. SO I THINK I GOT A LITTLE ANNOYING TO THEM. UM, BUT THE OTHER NEIGHBORS, I, I DON'T KNOW, PERHAPS IT'S A GENERAL OBJECTION TO, TO S STRS, BUT, UH, I'VE NOT HAD COMPLAINTS. I'VE NOT HAD, UH, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S BEEN FAIRLY CLEAN. IT'S, IT'S A CLEAN NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE GUESTS ARE TYPICALLY FAMILIES. OKAY. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA, YOU? YES. UH, YOU HAVEN'T BEEN AT THE PROPERTY? SAYS REGARD, UH, HA HAVE, WHEN YOU RENTED IT, HAVE YOU GONE OVER THERE OR SEEN IF THEY ARE ALLOWED, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PEOPLE YOU RENTED IT TO OR THEY'RE USING IT FOR SOMETHING ELSE WHERE THEY'RE THEIR CARS, ET CETERA. MAYBE THAT'S WHAT THEIR NEIGHBOR SAYS. BUT YOU HAVEN'T HAD NO POLICE REPORTS YET, HUH? NO POLICE REPORTS, NO COMPLAINTS. SO MANY YEARS AGO, I USED TO LIVE IN THIS HOUSE, SO THIS USED TO BE MY HOUSE. SO THE NEIGHBORS DO KNOW ME, UM, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE MY PHONE NUMBER SO THAT NEVERMIND, UH, BUT NEVER HAD ANY COMPLAINTS IN THE HOUSE. ISN'T REALLY, LIKE THE BACKYARD IS NOT THAT BIG, SO THERE REALLY ISN'T, UH, SPACE TO, TO BE LOUD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE A VOICEMAIL I GUESS WE NEED TO HEAR? YES, LET'S HEAR IT. HELLO, MY NAME IS DANIEL SOLIS AND I LIVE AT 80 11 RIVER VALLEY, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 4 9. I'M CALLING ABOUT THE CASE B O A DASH 23 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 3 0. AND I WOULD LIKE TO PROTEST, UH, THE AIRBNB THAT IS LOCATED ON 1 0 8 1 0 HILLSDALE LOOP. I, UH, HAVE SEEN SOME VERY SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY COMING OUTTA THE HOUSE. AND JUST, UH, LAST MONTH, I BELIEVE MAYBE SIX WEEKS AGO, WE HAD SOMEONE COME OUT OF THAT HOUSE OR I'M NOT SURE, UM, IF THEY CAME OUT OF IT OR WERE DROPPED OFF AT THAT HOUSE. AGAIN, IT'S AN AIRBNB, SO YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON THERE, BUT THEY TRIED TO GET INTO MY GATE, THEY TRIED TO KNOCK ON MY DOOR, THEY ACCOSTED MY NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE WAY, AND IT ALL HAPPENED AT THAT FROM THAT AIRBNB. UM, IT BRINGS NOTHING BUT PROBLEMS AND RIFFRAFF. I'M PRETTY SURE THERE'S SOME ILLEGAL ACTIVITY, LIKE I SAID, HAPPENING OUTTA THAT LOCATION. SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT I CAN DO OR BE A PART OF OR SIGN, I'LL EVEN SHOW UP IN PERSON IF I HAVE TO. UM, IN ORDER TO HAVE THIS AIRBNB REMOVED FROM, UM, MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND MY AREA, AGAIN, MY NAME IS DANIEL SOLIS. I'M AT 80 11 RIVER VALLEY. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 941-6048. YOU CAN ALSO REACH ME AT 2 1 0 5 4 4 7 0 6 5. THANK YOU. IS THAT IT? ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO NOW IS, UM, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A MOTION AND DELIBERATE SURE. SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT. WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I BORROW THAT. IS THAT IT? THANK YOU. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 2 3, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE APPEAL FOR THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 1 0 8 1 0 HILLSDALE LOOP, APPLICANT BEING, UH, SKE, SORRY, I MISPRONOUNCING YOUR NAME BECAUSE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWS THE CITY STAFF MADE AN ERROR IN REVOKING THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT. END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I'M CONFLICTED ON THIS BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF, UM, IMPROVEMENTS THAT COULD BE MADE TO THE SYSTEMS IN PLACE SO FAR. UM, BUT I ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT IS CURRENT ON THE OTHER TWO PROPERTIES. SO IT, IT MAKES [03:40:01] ME SEE, FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, HE KNEW BETTER OR AT LEAST FIGURED IT OUT, UH, BUT MAYBE, PERHAPS TOO LATE FOR THIS PROPERTY. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA? YEAH, I WILL NOT BE VOTING FOR THE MOTION EITHER. UH, THE, HE, HE HAS OTHER PROPERTIES AND IF, YOU KNOW, HE'S HAVING THE PROPERTY, UH, RIGHT NOW, EVEN THE NEIGHBORS FROM HERE GOING AGAINST HIM, MAYBE, UH, HE'S MAYBE TAKE CARE OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES TOO BEFORE THEY BECOME LIKE THIS WITH THE COMPLAINTS FROM THE NEIGHBOR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? I HAVE COMMENTS. YES. COM COMMISSIONER PICASSO? YES. UM, I LOOK YOU ALSO MENTIONED ON YOUR OTHER PROPERTY WHEN YOU HAD IT OVER 31 DAYS THAT YOU DID NOT REPORT IT THERE. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE CONSISTENT IN JUST BEING CONFUSED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES. NO, BECAUSE, OKAY, SO THE GUEST THAT IS STAYING 30 DAYS IN THAT, IN THE PROPERTY THAT I DID REPORT ZERO MM-HMM. WAS THE GUEST THAT WAS STAYING THAT THE COMMENT, THE THE AUDIO IS ABOUT, SO THEY MOVED PROPERTIES. OKAY. SO MY POINT IS THAT I, I GOT BETTER, YOU KNOW, I JUST, I I I SO YOUR, YOUR CORRECTION OF THE ERROR IS DUE TO THIS CIRCUMSTANCE. SO YOU STARTED DOING THAT FOR YOUR OTHER PROPERTY. SO I YEAH, WE, I I JUST LEARNED IT RIGHT LATE. SO I, I I FEEL LIKE THE REASON FOR YOU NOT REPORTING IT BEFORE WAS JUST A MATTER OF CONFUSION AND BECAUSE OF THAT I WILL BE SUPPORTING. OKAY. SO WHAT, UM, JUST, JUST SO YOU KNOW, WHEN, WHEN ONCE WE READ A MOTION, WE CAN'T ASK QUESTIONS ANYMORE, SO WE'LL JUST, UH, BUT, BUT IF YOU WANT TO, WE CAN REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE CAN WE DO THAT? YOU JUST HAVE TO ASK, UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS' LIKE TO ADD? I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND ADD THAT. UM, YOU KNOW, I, I'M USUALLY ON THE FENCE ON THESE MYSELF, AND I, I DO HEAR A LOT OF CONFUSION FROM APPLICANTS, BUT THIS ONE HAS MULTIPLE PROPERTIES. IT ISN'T DELINQUENT ON THE OTHER TWO. AND WHEN HE GOT THE NOTICE FROM THE NEW VENDOR, IT'S USING THE SAME INFORMATION THAT THE CITY HAD WHEN HE WAS NOTIFIED IN JANUARY. SO I, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO, TO, TO, TO SWAY ON THIS ONE BECAUSE I'M, I'M SURE HE GOT THAT NOTIFICATION AND COULD HAVE DONE, UH, UH, EITHER A PAYMENT PLAN OR GOT THIS THING CURRENT. SO I, I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT ON THIS PARTICULAR ONE. UH, WE'LL HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. MS. BRAGMAN. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ZUNIGA. DO NOT CONCUR. DR. BARTON? NO. MS. PICASSO? YES, MR. DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. CRUZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ. I DO NOT CONCUR. MS. AVIVE. SHE DOES NOT CONCUR. THUMBS DOWN MR. OZUNA. I DO NOT CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I DO NOT CONCUR. MOTION FAILS. UH, NINE TO ONE. UH, PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND, AND, AND, AND REALLY TALK TO 'EM ABOUT YOUR OTHER PROPERTIES AND MAKE SURE THAT THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN. OKAY? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM, ITEM 11. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ASHLEY LEAL, SENIOR PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER BO A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 2 3 5. APPLICANT RAUL ACOSTA IS REQUESTING FOR AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO REVOKE THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT LOCATED AT 1932 WEST ASH B PLACE ZONE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY IN COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN. THE APPLICANT BEGAN OPERATING WITHOUT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT IN SEPTEMBER, 2020. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY INITIALLY APPLIED FOR A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON JULY 27TH, 2021, THEN WAS APPROVED AND ISSUED BY STAFF ON AUGUST 19TH, 2021. OPERATORS ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT MONTHLY REVENUES INCLUDING $0. THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT NOTIFIED THE OWNER OF DELINQUENT PAYMENTS OR REPORTS ON THEIR HOT ACCOUNT VIA MAIL AND EMAIL ON MARCH 7TH, 2023. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF HAVE PREVIOUSLY NOTIFIED APPLICANT OF DELINQUENCY VIA MAIL ON NOVEMBER 18TH, 2021 AND WAS NOTIFIED VIA MAIL ON NOVEMBER 4TH, 2020 FOR OPERATING WITHOUT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT. NO PAYMENT WAS MADE WITHIN THE 90 DAYS OF THE MARCH 7TH, 2023 DELINQUENCY NOTICE. THEREFORE, THE PERMIT WAS REVOKED ON AUGUST 8TH, 2023 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 16 DASH ONE ONE OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES. BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED FROM OUR THIRD PARTY VENDOR, CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT STATES NO REVENUE REPORTS HAVE BEEN MADE FOR JULY, 2021 TO AUGUST, 2023. SECTION 16 DASH ONE 10 [03:45:01] D STATES THAT FAILURE TO TIMELY REPORT AND PAY HOT ACCOUNT WITHIN 90 DAYS SHALL RESULT IN PERMIT REVOCATION. THIS IS A COPY OF THE LETTER ATTACHED TO THE EMAIL SENT ON MARCH 7TH, 2023 FROM THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT. THIS IS THE PREVIOUS DELINQUENCY NOTICE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT ON NOVEMBER 18TH, 2021. AND THIS IS THE NOTICE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT ON NOVEMBER 4TH, 2020 FOR OPERATING WITHOUT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT. THIS IS THE PORTION OF THE ONLINE APPLICATION WHERE THE APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREAS. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 2 35 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES THE STAFF REVOKE THE PERMIT FOR THE VIOLATION DESCRIBED IN THIS PRESENTATION. TWO. THE OWNER OPERATOR OF THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT VIOLATED THE S D R ORDINANCE BY FAILING TO TIMELY REPORT REVENUES AND PAY THE ASSOCIATED HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX PAYMENTS. AND THREE, THE OWNER OPERATOR FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE EVEN AFTER ATTEMPTS WERE MADE TO INFORM THE APPLICANT OF DELINQUENCY ON NOVEMBER 18TH, 2021 AND MARCH 7TH, 2002, 3 26 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE WOODLAWN LAKE REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION APPLICANT IS HERE. SO JUST QUICKLY ON THE NOVEMBER, 2021 LETTER AND THE ONE FROM MARCH, DID YOU RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE OR CALLS FROM THE APPLICANT? NO. OKAY. ALRIGHT. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM, UH, THE COMMISSION FOR STAFF? YES. COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA? YES. UH, YOU HAVE STATED THAT YOU, OKAY, YOU HAVE STATED THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT WAS OPERATING WITHOUT A, YOU KNOW, A SHORT TERM OR LONG TERM OF A ONE OR TWO. CAN PLEASE USE YOUR MIC, CAN YOU PLEASE? IN SINCE SEPTEMBER THE 2020? YES. SO THAT THEN YOU CAME AND APPLIED AND YOU WENT AHEAD AND, UH, GAVE HIM THE APPLICATION AND APPROVED HIM? WELL, UM, SO WE KNOW THAT HE BEGAN OPERATING WITHOUT A SHORT TERM RENTAL IN SEPTEMBER, 2020 BECAUSE HE HAD CONFIRMED STAYS BASED ON THE THIRD PARTY VENDOR AT THE TIME HOST. UM, WHEN WE MAILED HIM THAT NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE A PERMIT, WE ENCOURAGE APPLICANTS TO COME IN AND COME COMPLIANT BECAUSE WE WANT THEM TO HAVE PERMITS AND PAY HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES. HOW LONG WAS HE OPERATING WITH THAT? UH, FROM SEPTEMBER, 2020 TO NOVE. OH, AUGUST. SORRY, TO JULY OF 2021 FROM, YEAH, FROM SEPTEMBER, 2220 TO JULY 20, 21, 10 MONTHS. RIGHT. ZUNA, BRAMAN, COMMISSIONER ZUNA, THEN BRAGMAN. SO I NOTICED THAT THE LETTERS WERE GOING OUT TO 1932 WEST ASHBY, WHICH IS THE SAME ADDRESS AS THE, UH, AS THE SUBJECT AIRBNB. IS THIS A TYPE ONE OR TYPE TWO? UM, UH, IT'S A TYPE TWO. TYPE TWO. MM-HMM. . SO I WONDER IF THERE'S OBVIOUSLY IF HE'S LIVING THERE, HOW? YEAH. DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER ADDRESS ON FILE? THAT IS THE ADDRESS WE HAVE ON FILE. OKAY. THAT IS WHAT THEY PUT, THAT'S THE SAME ADDRESS THAT, YEAH, AS THE SAME ADDRESS AS THAT THEY HAVE FOR THEIR MAILING ADDRESS. HE'S NOT ALLOWED TO LIVE THERE THOUGH. UM, WELL I KNOW THE APPLICANT IS HERE. I BELIEVE HE SAID THAT HIS, IT'S HIS MOTHER'S HOUSE. SO COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UM, UM, SO WHEN THE, UH, PERMIT TO OPERATE WAS GRANTED, UM, WAS THE APPLICANT REQUIRED TO PAY HOT TAXES UP TO THAT POINT TO BE CURRENT OR WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE FUNDS? SO WE, I BELIEVE FINANCE ONLY, UM, DOES IT FROM THE DAY THAT THE PERMIT WAS, UM, APPROVED. BUT IF IT'S ONLY, IF WE HAD KNOWLEDGE OF THEM BEFORE, LIKE IF LIKE WHEN THE APPLICANT CAME IN AND GOT A PERMIT, IF THEY, IF FINANCE KNOWS THAT THEY HAD CONFIRMED STAYS FROM BEFORE THEN, THEN THEY WILL ASK FOR THEM TO REPORT AND PAY HIM BACK. BUT IF THEY DO NOT KNOW, THEN I DON'T BELIEVE THEY ARE REQUIRED TO. BUT I THOUGHT YOU SAID THAT HOST INDICATED THAT THEY WERE OPERATING WITHOUT A PERMIT AND THAT'S HOW YOU KNEW TO CONTACT THEM, FINANCE THAT LETTER THAT THEY WERE OPERATING WITHOUT A PERMIT. SO THEY MIGHT BE BETTER ABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. OKAY. SO [03:50:01] I'M DIRECTING THIS TO FINANCE THEN. SO THE, IF THE APPLICANT WAS OPERATING WITHOUT A PERMIT AND YOU KNEW THAT BECAUSE HOST, UH, REPORTED THAT WERE THEY, WOULD THEY HAVE BEEN REQUIRED TO COME CURRENT WITH THEIR HOT TAXES IN ORDER TO HAVE THEIR PERMIT, UH, ISSUED? SO NO, THE TAXES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO COME CURRENT. WHEN, WHEN THE PERMIT IS, IS APPROVED, THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO BRING THE TAXES CURRENT. UH, FINANCE IS NOTIFIED IF THEY ARE OPERATING WITHOUT A PERMIT. UH, BECAUSE D SS D LETS US KNOW SINCE THEY'RE THE ONES THAT MAIL THE LETTER THAT THEY ARE OPERATING WITHOUT A PERMIT. SO THE, SO FOR THE 10 MONTHS THAT THEY'RE OPERATING WITHOUT A PERMIT, THERE'S, THERE'S JUST NO TAX COLLECTION FROM THE CITY? CORRECT. THE LETTER THAT THEY DID RECEIVE FOR OPERATING WITHOUT A PERMIT DOES ALSO STATE THAT THEY NEED TO BRING TAXES CURRENT. OKAY. BUT THEN FINANCE DIDN'T COLLECT THEM, CORRECT? CORRECT. SO, A AGAIN, FINANCE DOES NOT KNOW THAT THEY ARE OPERATING UNLESS D S D NOTIFIES US. SO THIS IS A TWO STEP PROCESS COMMISSIONER. UM, THE FIRST VIOLATION IS THEY DID NOT HAVE A PERMIT FOR THEIR SHORT-TERM RENTAL, THEREFORE THERE WAS NOTHING TO IDENTIFY, TO COLLECT. 'CAUSE THERE WAS NOT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT. SO THAT WAS THE FIRST VIOLATION. THEY CAME INTO COMPLIANCE THERE, BUT THEN THEY STARTED HAVING VIOLATIONS OF NOT REPORTING THEIR HOT AND DELINQUENT HOT. AND THEN THAT'S WHERE THE SECOND VIOLATION CAME IN. AND THAT'S, AND SO WE CAN'T GO BACK AND CHARGE THEM FOR HOT COLLECTION IF THEY DID NOT EVEN HAVE A PERMIT. SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY THEY'RE STARTING OFF AT ZERO. IF THEY COME IN AND GET THEIR PERMIT, THEN WE'RE MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER, UH, QUESTIONS? YES, COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. SO, UH, MR. ZUNIGA, CAN YOU USE YOUR MICROPHONE SO THERE'S NO PEN, UH, NO PENALTY FOR A PERSON RUNNING S E R AND, UH, NOT REPORT. AND IF THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE NOT IN THE PROGRAM, IF THERE IS NO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT, THE FIRST GOAL IS TO GET THEM TO PULL THEIR SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT AND WE, AND OR SHUT THEM DOWN SO WE, WE CAN ISSUE CITATIONS FOR THEM DOING WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT, JUST LIKE WE DO, WE CAN DO ACROSS THE CITY. AND THAT WOULD BE THE SAME THING HERE. SO WE GIVE THEM A TIME PERIOD, AND IT'S NOT A LONG TIME PERIOD, IT'S NOT 90 DAYS. I WANNA SAY IT'S LESS THAN 10 DAYS THAT THEY NEED TO COME IN AND PULL THEIR PERMIT OR WE'RE GONNA START ISSUING CITATIONS. WE CAN GO OUT DAILY TO ISSUE CITATIONS IF WE NEED TO. OH, OKAY. SO IN THIS CASE, UH, WERE THEY PENALIZED? THEY CAME IN AND PULLED THEIR PERMIT. OH, BUT THEY WEREN'T PENALIZED? NO. WE WILL GIVE THEM A REPRIEVE. WE GET, WE ALERT THEM TO THE VIOLATION AND THEN WE GIVE THEM A TIMELINE TO COMPLY. IF THEY'D MISSED THAT TIMELINE, THEN WE'RE GONNA START ISSUING VIOLATIONS. THANK YOU. UH, SO QUICK QUESTION, ANOTHER QUESTION FOR STAFF ON THAT POINT, UH, IF SOMEBODY IS RUNNING, UH, AN ILLEGAL S T R, UH, IS THERE, THERE'S EVEN HEIGHTENED MORE, MORE HEIGHTENED COMMUNICATION WITH STAFF AND THE APPLICANT. IS THAT A TRUE STATEMENT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO LET'S HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. OKAY, THANK YOU. OH YES, COMMISSIONER PICASSO. SO WE DID, CITY STAFF DID REACH OUT TO THE, UM, THE PROPERTY OWNER VIA MAIL AND EMAIL ABOUT REPORTING LIKE THE DELINQUENT PAYMENTS. CORRECT. BUT WE DID NOT DO THAT SAME MEASURE. WE JUST DID MAIL FOR THE NOTIFICATION OF DELINQUENCY. AFTER THAT, COULD WE HAVE NOT SENT THEM AN EMAIL AS WELL, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THE ADDRESS IS THE SAME AS THE PROPERTY ITSELF, JUST TO ENSURE THAT THEY ARE GETTING THIS NOTIFICATION. SO FOR DELINQUENT TAXES, WE DO MAIL AND EMAIL. RIGHT. BUT WHEN COULD WE NOT HAVE GIVEN THIS NOTIFICATION TO THEM THAT THROUGH MAIL AND EMAIL AS WELL? 'CAUSE WE JUST DID ON THE, UH, NOVEMBER 18TH AND NOVEMBER 4TH, IT JUST SAYS THAT IT WAS NO, THEY WERE NOTIFIED VIA MAIL, NOT VIA MAIL AND EMAIL. WE HAVE A SECONDARY POINT OF CONTACT FOR THEM, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE GET RECEIVING THE MAIL BECAUSE IT IS AT THE LOCATION IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY OR WHICH THE, UH, C T R IS FOR, JUST TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE RECEIVING IT. SO FOR THE NOVEMBER 4TH, UH, LETTER, THAT WAS A PERMIT VIOLATION. SO THEY HAD NOT APPLIED YET. SO THE CITY DID NOT HAVE THEIR CONTACT INFORMATION YET. GOT IT. THANK YOU. BRAGMAN. SORRY, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UM, SO WHEN THEY DO APPLY FOR A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UM, OUR, AND IT'S THE SAME ADDRESS AS THEY'VE BEEN CONTACTED AT, DOES THE CITY REQUEST A SECONDARY ADDRESS? SO THAT, I MEAN, 'CAUSE IT DOES SEEM LIKE IF IT'S GONNA BE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL TYPE TWO, THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE LIVING THERE, SO THEY WOULDN'T BE GETTING MAIL THERE NECESSARILY. CORRECT. SO WHEN THEY FILL OUT THEIR APPLICATION ONLINE, WE ASK FOR THE PHYSICAL ADDRESS AND THEIR MAILING ADDRESS. [03:55:01] SO ARE WE SAYING THEN IN THIS CASE THEY GAVE THE SAME ADDRESS FOR BOTH? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, LET'S HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT PLEASE. HI, UH, MY NAME IS COSTA, AND, UM, I'M NOT, I'M JUST THE, ON THE PROPERTY, I GUESS A MANAGER. UH, MY MOM IS THE ONE THAT, UH, SHE LIVES ON THE, ON THE HOUSE. AND, UH, SO SHE LIVES IN THE MAIN HOUSE. AND THIS PROPERTY IS A, UM, GRANNY FLAT IN THE BACK. IT'S A DETACHED, UM, STRUCTURE, WHICH IS THE ONE THAT IT'S, UH, RENTED FOR AIR AIRBNB. UH, SO SHE'S, UH, PERMANENT ON THE, IN THE FRONT HOUSE. AND, UM, SO, UH, SO WHEN I STARTED TO, TO RUN THE, THE, THE AIRBNB, UH, FOR HER, UM, IT'S, I'M, I'M, I'M NEW TO THIS. I MEAN, I, I DIDN'T KNOW, UH, UH, AT FIRST THAT I HAD TO, TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT WHEN I STARTED, UH, WHEN, WHEN, UH, SHE SAID ON SEPTEMBER, UH, 2020. UH, AND THOSE, UH, LETTERS THAT WERE MAILED, UH, I NEVER SAW 'EM BECAUSE I DON'T LIVE, UH, IN THE HOUSE. THE, ON, UH, NOVEMBER, UH, UH, WHEN I FINALLY, UH, UM, GOT AN, AN EMAIL OR A NOTIFICATION FROM MY AIRBNB OR SOMETHING THAT I, THAT I NEEDED A PERMIT IS WHEN I APPLIED ON, UH, JULY, UH, 2021. AND THEN, UM, AFTER THAT, I, I STARTED PAYING MY, UH, THE TAXES THROUGH THE SYSTEM THAT, UH, THE CITY HAD, UM, THE, UH, THEY'RE, UH, OLDER, UH, SYSTEM. SO I STARTED PAYING MY TAXES ON JULY, 2021 TO, UM, DECEMBER, 2021. AND THEN AFTER DECEMBER, 2021, UM, I JUST COMPLETELY, THAT WAS, UH, ON ME. I JUST, UH, FORGOT, UH, TO, TO, TO PAY THE TAXES. UH, I BOUGHT A HOUSE. I HAD A BABY THAT SAME YEAR LAST YEAR. SO IT WAS A LOT ON MY MIND, AND I JUST, UH, FORGOT. UM, AND THEN, UH, I GOT THE, THE NOTIFICATION ON MARCH, UH, SEVENTH, UM, THIS, THIS YEAR TO, UM, TO, UH, DELINQUENT THAT I HAD, UH, 90 DAYS. AND SO I DID GET THAT ON EMAIL AND I TRIED TO, TO LOG INTO TO THE SYSTEM, BUT IT'S A, LIKE, LIKE IT'S A NEW SYSTEM, LIKE THE, THE OTHER PERSON WAS, UH, UM, EXPLAINING. SO IT'S A NEW SYSTEM. SO, UH, I MEAN, I TRY TO, UM, UNDERSTAND IT FOR A WHILE TO, TO TRY AND, AND GET MY, I MEAN, I DID ACTIVATE MY, MY LOGIN AND PASSWORD. UH, SO I, I MET, I CREATED MY ACCOUNT THAT, THAT VERY SAME DAY. UH, AND I TRIED TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS, BUT I, I JUST COULDN'T. SO I SAID I WAS GONNA TRY, UH, UH, LATER WITH, WITH MORE TIME JUST TO, TO TRY AND FIGURE IT OUT AND, UH, COMPLETELY FORGOT AGAIN. AND THEN I JUST GOT THE, THE LAST, UH, EMAIL SAYING THAT, UH, THE PERMIT WAS, UH, REVOKED. AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M, UM, UH, APPLYING HERE FOR, FOR THE, FOR THIS. AND, UH, SO FAR, I, I BROUGHT UP ALL MY, UH, CURRENT PAYMENTS, UH, EVERYTHING FROM JULY, 2021 TO AUGUST, 2023. SO I'VE MADE ALL THE PAYMENTS, UH, SO IT'S CURRENT ON THAT. AND, UH, I DO WANNA SAY, I MEAN, LIKE I SAID, IT'S, IT IS NOT MY AIRBNB. IT'S, UH, IT'S MY MOM. SO, UM, THIS IS LIKE 80% OF HER INCOME, UH, UM, BECAUSE SHE, SHE HAS, UH, A LOT OF, UH, HEALTH ISSUES. SO SHE, SHE CAN'T, UH, REALLY WORK A JOB. SO I'M DOING THIS TO TRY AND HELP HER, UH, JUST TO GET SOME, SOME INCOME. UM, AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. OKAY. UH, SO QUESTION IS THIS, THIS IS A TYPE TWO. THIS IS A TYPE ONE. TYPE ONE, OKAY. AND, AND, UM, HMM. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION TO THIS AFTERNOON? ZUNA? YEAH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA. SO THE ADDRESS WE HAVE IS, IS THE SAME 1932 WEST ASHBY. SHE'S NOT GETTING ANY OF HER MAIL AT THAT ADDRESS. YES. YEAH, I MEAN, SHE, SHE, SHE GETS THE MAIL, BUT IF SHE, IF SHE, IF SHE GOT THAT, UH, SHE WOULD'VE HAD MULTIPLE NOTICES MAILED TO HER. BUT IF, IF SHE'S LIKE, IF IT'S ADDRESSED TO, TO ME, TO, UH, RAUL, I MEAN, I, I DON'T KNOW IF SHE THOUGHT THAT WAS MY, MY DAD, UH, THAT, UH, THAT WAS HER, UH, I BELIEVE IT HAS HER, MY DAD'S MAIL. I BELIEVE HER NAME'S ON THERE TOO. MM-HMM. . BUT YEAH, LIKE, LIKE ALL THE MAIL THAT, THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S, MY DAD IS, IT'S, UH, RAUL TO RAUL, BUT THIS IS ALSO SENT THROUGH EMAIL, AND HE JUST MENTIONED THAT HE DID RECEIVE THE REVOCATION EMAIL. I, I GOT THE SEND IT THE SAME E EMAIL ADDRESS. I, I RECEIVED THE EMAIL ON MARCH 7TH, 2023. UH, BUT NOT THE ONES ON NOVEMBER. I MEAN, IF IT'S, IF IT'S SO IMPORTANT THAT INCOME SO IMPORTANT TO YOUR MOM, WHY WOULD YOU BE SO, YOU KNOW, ABSENTMINDED OR FORGETFUL ABOUT JUST MAINTAINING THE PERMITS IN GOOD ORDER WITH THAT? I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IT'S JUST ME. BUT YOU DID GET THE EMAIL FROM MARCH ON MARCH? YES. AND DID YOU TRY TO CALL THE CITY AND, AND SEE WHAT YOU COULD DO ABOUT I WHAT YOU WERE READING? I, I LOGGED IN, I LOGGED IN AT, I, I FOLLOWED THE, ON THE LINK ON THE EMAIL. SO I LOGGED IN. I CREATED MY, UM, ACCOUNT. UH, I WAS TRYING TO, UH, PLAY AROUND WITH, UH, THE OPTIONS, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS, BUT IT WAS, UH, A LITTLE BIT OVERWHELMING AT THE TIME, SO I [04:00:01] WAS GONNA COME BACK LATER, UH, WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO, TO GET ALL THAT BECAUSE IT, IT, IT WASN'T, UH, IT WASN'T AS EASY AS BEFORE WHEN I WAS PAYING IT THROUGH THE CITY. IT WAS JUST LIKE REALLY QUICK. AND ON THIS ONE IT WAS CREATE, UM, TASKS FOR DIFFERENT STEPS. WELL, DID YOU CALL THE CITY OR COME DOWN TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND, AND TRY TO TALK TO SOMEBODY ABOUT, ABOUT HOW TO GET IT TO WORK CORRECTLY? NO, I, I JUST TRIED TO DO IT ON MY OWN, THAT THE, OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? BRAGMAN, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UH, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF. SO I NOTICED ON THE FIRST TWO LETTERS, THE ONE, UH, DATED NOVEMBER, 2020 AND THE, UH, NOVEMBER, 2021, THEY'RE BOTH ADDRESSED TO MARTHA AND RAUL ACOSTA. AND THEN THE ONE ON MARCH 7TH, 2023 IS JUST RAUL ACOSTA. WHY THE CHANGE? SO THE FINAL LETTER, THAT ONE IS FROM FINANCE AND THAT ONE, BECAUSE HE IS THE PERMIT HOLDER, NOT THE PROPERTY OWNER. I MEAN, ON A TYPE ONE, DOESN'T THE PERMIT HOLDER HAVE TO BE THE PROPERTY OWNER? NO. UM, IT, THEY CAN HAVE A DESIGNATED OPERATOR. SO HE WAS, UM, IF YOU'RE A TYPE ONE, YOU CAN LIVE THERE, BETA, YOU HAVE LIKE SOMEBODY TO MANAGE YOUR PROPERTY. IT COULD BE THE DESIGNATED OPERATOR. OKAY. SO HE, SO THE OTHER LETTERS WERE, WERE NOTIFIED TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS, BUT THIS LAST ONE WAS SENT TO THE OPERATOR, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER, SORRY, COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. SO, UH, YOU'RE IN A TYPE ONE, RIGHT? OH, MAN. YES. IT'S A TYPE ONE, YEAH. UH, ON A TYPE ONE, UH, DO THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW THE SAME RULES AS TYPE TWO? YES. OH, OKAY. RAGMAN. OH, OKAY. HOLD ON. COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER PICASSO MOTIONS. AND THEN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO TY TYPE ONE WILL, SO I, OKAY. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, BECAUSE WE, WE'VE CLARIFIED THAT THE FIRST TWO WERE GIVEN TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS, WHICH WOULD BE YOUR PARENTS, YOUR, UH, YOUR MOM AND YOUR DAD. SO THAT RAUL IS NOT THE SAME RAUL THAT WE'RE TALKING TO TODAY. SO TECHNICALLY YOU'VE ONLY RECEIVED ONE NOTIFICATION, WHICH IS THE ONE THAT'S JUST ASSOCIATED WITH YOU FOR THE, THE PERMIT, UM, OR THE DELINQUENCY. I'M, I'M, AM I SAYING THIS ONE CORRECTLY FOR NOT BEING, UH, THE, THE NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE VIOLATION AND THE OTHER ONES, OR WE CAN SCROLL. SO THE FIRST TWO WERE GIVEN TO YOUR PARENTS AND THE LAST ONE WAS GIVEN TO YOU. SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS PERMIT, UH, THE PER THE ISSUE FOR THE PERMIT, ARE WE LOOKING AT IT AS THE PROPERTY ITSELF OR FOR THIS PERSON INDIVIDUALLY? EXCUSE ME, IF I COULD, UH, CHIME IN ON THAT ONE. SO THE PER THE BEAR COUNTY RECORDS FOR BCA RECORDS, THE PROPERTY OWNER IS MARTHA ACOSTA ONLY. SO THEN WHY WAS THIS SENT TO RAUL AND MARTHA ACOSTA? MY, MY PARENTS, THEY, THEY'RE A DIVORCED NOW, SO, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF HOW THAT WORKS, BUT THEY, THEY'RE DIVORCE, SO THE, THE, THE, THE PROPERTIES NOW, IT WAS PASSED ONLY TO MY MOM. SO SHE'S THE, THE ONLY, RIGHT. YEAH. BUT THEN IT SHOULD HAVE JUST BEEN SENT TO YOUR MOM, NOT TO RAUL AND MARTHA. SO THAT, THAT'S WHERE IF, AND IF THESE TWO WERE SENT PRIOR TO IT, JUST THE PERMIT BEING IN HIS NAME, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE CORRELATION TO EVERYTHING, UH, THAT I, I, I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO WHEN, WHEN DID, WHEN DID, UH, SHE BECOME THE SOLE OWNER OF THE HOME? WAS IT AFTER 2021? NO, UH, WELL, NO, I CAN'T, I DON'T, I'M JUST TRYING TO ASCERTAIN LIKE, WHEN THE BE HAD RECORDS WOULD'VE ONLY REFLECTED HER NAME AS OPPOSED TO THE TWO NAMES TO SEE IF THERE WAS A, AN ISSUE WITH NOTIFICATION OR ADDRESSING OF THE LETTER. MM-HMM. SO IF IT'S BEEN MORE THAN TWO YEARS OR LESS THAN TWO YEARS. OKAY. LIKE, LIKE THREE YEARS AGO, IT'S A DIVORCE. OKAY. AND THEN AFTER THAT, I GUESS WHEN THEY FILED ON THE, SO THE PROPERTY, THE, SO HER NAME SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE ONLY NAME ON ALL THE NOTICES INSTEAD OF BOTH. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER BRA. SO I, I'M GOING BACK TO STAFF AGAIN IF I COULD, UM, FINANCE DEPARTMENT. SO YOU HAD SAID THAT THE REASON THAT THE THIRD LETTER DATED, UM, MARCH 7TH, 2023, [04:05:03] UH, WAS SENT, ADDRESSED TO RA A COSTA BECAUSE HE WAS THE PERMIT HOLDER, BUT THE OTHER TWO LETTERS, UM, NOTICE CUSTOMER NUMBER, HOT NUMBER 0 0 4 9 5 9, AND IT'S ADDRESSED TO BOTH RO AND MARTHA. ISN'T THAT THE PERMIT HOLDER? IT, I MEAN, AND THE, AND ALL THREE OF THESE CAME FROM THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT. SO THE FIRST, UM, THE ORIGINAL LETTER WAS FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AND THAT WAS AUTO GENERATED BY OUR SYSTEM HOST. THE SECOND LETTER WAS ALSO AUTO GENERATED FROM HOST, AND THE THIRD LETTER WAS GENERATED BY OUR TAX ASSESSOR. OKAY. VASQUEZ COMM, UH, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I'M SORRY. I GUESS I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE, THE DIFFERENCE. YOU SAID THAT, THAT THE FIRST TWO WERE MAILED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THEN THE THIRD ONE WAS MAILED TO THE PERMIT HOLDER, BUT, BUT THEY, BOTH, BOTH, ALL THREE OF THESE LETTERS REFERENCE THE SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT. SO YEAH, SHE'S, SHE, SHE HAD SENT MENTIONED THAT, AND THEY WERE ALL EMAILED AS WELL TO BOTH OF THEM. SO, SO WHAT'S HAPPENING, THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT IS A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT? DEPARTMENT IS A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT. SO THEY GET, WHEN THEY SEND OUT A NOTICE, THEY PROBABLY DO THEIR OWN RESEARCH? CORRECT? WE DO OUR OWN RESEARCH, UH, UH, SEPARATE AND ASIDE FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. RIGHT. BUT THE SECOND LETTER, UH, DATED NOVEMBER 18TH, 2021 SAYS FINANCE DEPARTMENT. CORRECT. AGAIN, SO THAT WAS GENERATED BY OUR SYSTEM BY HOST. IT WAS SENT OUT BY THEM. THE THIRD AND FINAL LETTER THAT WAS PREPARED BY OUR TAX ASSESSOR. IS THAT THE SAME DEPARTMENT AS FINANCE OR IS THAT A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT? IT'S THE SAME DEPARTMENT AGAIN, BUT THE SECOND LETTER WAS GENERATED BY A SYSTEM. IT WAS IN GENERATED BY AN ACTUAL EMPLOYEE OF THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT. OKAY. I ALSO HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. ON B C, A, THERE IS A GENERAL WARRANTY DEEDED WHERE, UM, IT WAS TRANSFERRED, UM, IT'S NAME ONLY IN SEPTEMBER OF 2021. THAT'S WHEN I WENT FROM BOTH NAMES TO JUST ONE. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? UH, YES, SIR. THIS IS, UH, FOR OUR APP, UH, FOR THE GENTLEMAN AT THE PODIUM. UM, WHAT IS YOUR MIDDLE INITIAL? A A. ALRIGHT. AND, AND SO THEN THE, THE QUESTION, UH, FOR, FOR, UH, FOR THE CITY , I KNOW, UH, WHICH OF THE AT CITY, BUT THIS ONE IS JUST TO RAUL ACOSTA AND, AND I BELIEVE THAT MIDDLE INITIALS ARE VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE, THE, THE, THE FIRST TWO LETTERS WAS TO RAUL S UH, THE, THE ONE, THE MARCH 7TH LETTER, UH, IS JUST RAUL WITHOUT A MIDDLE INITIAL, AND THAT CAUSES CONFUSION. COULD YOU PLEASE CLARIFY WHEN THE APPLICATION, UM, WAS SUBMITTED THROUGH OUR SYSTEM? WE DON'T HAVE IF MIDDLE INITIALS, IT'S JUST RAUL AUGUSTA. THANK YOU. OKAY, CRUZ, UH, COMM, UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. AND THEN COMMISSIONER VACASA. SORRY. OKAY. SO STAFF, YOU'RE STILL SAYING THOUGH, THAT CURRENTLY HE IS PAID UP FOR EVERYTHING THAT HE OWED. IS THAT CORRECT? NO, THAT IS NOT CORRECT. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY PAYMENTS AT ALL FOR THIS PROPERTY. NONE AT ALL. NONE AT ALL. OKAY. THANK YOU. I, I HAVE ALL THE RECEIPTS IF YOU NEED IT. MM-HMM. , DO YOU HAVE, YOU DON'T HAVE 'EM ON, ON YOU, DO YOU? UH, I CAN EMAIL 'EM TO SOMEBODY. YOU CAN. SO I HAVE THE SYSTEM LIVE RIGHT NOW, AND WE, THE SYSTEM DOES NOT REFLECT ANY PAYMENTS ON THIS PROPERTY. OKAY. SO WHAT, WHAT, WHAT ARE THESE RECEIPTS FROM, SIR? THE, THAT, UH, HOT, UH, THE, THAT THE HOT, UH, WEBSITE. UH, OKAY. UH, IF, IF, IF SOMEONE AT STAFF CAN ACCEPT HIS EMAIL, WE WILL SEE WHAT HE HAS. DEFINITELY. OKAY. WHO, WHO CAN YOU SEND IT TO? YOU CAN EMAIL IT TO, TO ME. MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS SABRINA WITH A Z Z A B R I N A, GARZA, G A R Z A@SANANTONIO.GOV. I SENT IT. DO YOU, DO YOU KNOW WHAT TIMEFRAME THOSE RECEIPTS COVER? UH, JULY, 2021 THROUGH AUGUST, 2023. OH, OKAY. BRAGMAN. YES. UH, DID YOU ALSO FILE, UH, REPORTS? I GUESS YOU DID, IF YOU PAID, YOU WOULD'VE HAD TO FILE A REPORT? [04:10:01] MM-HMM. , THEY, THEY COINCIDE YEAH. FOR, UH, EVERY MONTH. UH, SO YOU PAID THESE ON A MONTHLY BASIS OR JUST ALL AT THE END OF THE YEAR OR? RIGHT NOW, LIKE, I, WELL, YOU KNOW, LIKE WHEN I GOT THAT, UH, NOTIFICATION, UM, I WENT IN, UH, I PUT LIKE ALL MY, MY BALANCE CURRENT, SO I DON'T, SO I DON'T OWE ANYTHING. SO YOU HADN'T BEEN PAYING ALL, ALL ALONG THE WAY. YOU, YOU GOT CAUGHT UP AFTER YOU GOT THIS NOTICE IN MM-HMM. MARCH? CORRECT. OKAY. SO WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IT'S, UH, WHAT DO YOU GOT? SO I STILL NOT, DO NOT HAVE HIS EMAIL. OKAY. CAN I JUST SHOW IT? I MEAN, IS IT SOMETHING HE, THEY CAN PROJECT THE SCREEN OF YOUR PHONE OR, OKAY. I DID RECEIVE HIS EMAIL AND THE REASON I DID NOT RECEIVE IT IS BECAUSE HE PAID IT TODAY. OKAY. AWESOME. SO DID YOU MAKE ANY PAYMENTS PRIOR TO TODAY? YES, I PAID, UH, I PAID, UH, FOUR, UH, THREE, NO, FOUR MONTHS, UH, TODAY. UH, AND THE REST I PAID, UH, LIKE TWO, TWO WEEKS AGO. I MEAN, JUST BECAUSE OF THE BALANCE. OKAY. YEAH. SENDING BALANCE. SO NEEDED TO GET THE FUNDING. OKAY. WELL, UM, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE COMMISSION? IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR ANYTHING? THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. SO IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO PROVIDE AS A CLOSING, UH, STATEMENT? UH, WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, I GUESS MY CLOSING STATEMENT WOULD BE, UH, IT WAS MY, MY MISTAKE. I DROPPED THE BALL AND, UH, I GUESS I WOULDN'T WANNA SEE MY MOM PUNISHED FOR MY, UH, UM, MISTAKE, YOU KNOW? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS? OH, ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 2 3 5, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE APPEAL FOR THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 1932 WEST DASH PLACE APPLICANT BEING COASTER BECAUSE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOULD THE CITY STAFF MADE AN ERROR IN REVOKING THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT AND A MOTION SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ, COMMISSIONER ZUNA. SO IN THIS CASE, I AM SEEING SOMEWHAT OF A HARDSHIP COMBINED WITH SOME MISCOMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT. I THINK THERE'S EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES HERE, UM, WITH THE MISCOMMUNICATION, UM, WITH THE SHORT TERM ONE RENTAL, UH, PERMIT BEING THAT THE, UM, MOTHER LIVES ON THE SITE COMBINED WITH, I DON'T SEE ANY NEIGHBORS IMPACTED. WE DIDN'T SEE ANY, UM, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE COMING OUT AGAINST A SHORT-TERM RENTAL RENEWAL HERE. SO THERE SEEMED TO BE OPERATING IT IN A GOOD CONDITION, ALTHOUGH LATE HE DID PAY IN HIS CURRENT ON HIS TAXES. I THINK IT'S A LEARNING LESSON. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE IMPACT WOULD BE PRETTY SEVERE TO HIS MOTHER IF, IF IT WAS NOT, UM, RENEWED, ALTHOUGH THAT SHOULDN'T BE THE PRIMARY CAUSE. BUT I WILL BE, UH, IN FAVOR OF GRANTING THE APPEAL HERE. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UH, YES, I CONCUR WITH HIM. I SEE THE SAME PROBLEM. I WOULD SAY THAT, UM, IT WAST ON A MISTAKE HE HAS, UH, CAUGHT UP AND I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH, UH, RENEWING THE PERMIT. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD COMMISSIONER PICASSO? I ECHO, UM, THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN PREVIOUSLY STATED. I FEEL LIKE THERE HAS BEEN SOME, UH, INCONSISTENCY IN COMMUNICATION, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT, UH, THE FIRST TWO NOTIF NOTIFICATIONS WERE TO BOTH, UH, YOUR MOM AND, UH, AND HER NOW EX-HUSBAND. AND SO WITH ALL OF THAT, AND AGAIN, THE HARDSHIPS, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I, I, I DO STRESS THAT GIVEN THIS, THIS IS A, A LEARNING EXPERIENCE AND NOT TO, NOT TO LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN. ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? UH, I'M ALSO GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS ONE. I THINK THERE WAS SOME MISCOMMUNICATION, MISUNDERSTANDINGS, AND HE IS CURRENT AND THERE'S NO COMPLAINTS. UM, I KNOW STAFF HAS IN THE PAST HAS OFFERED, UH, UH, PEOPLE A WINDOW TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE, AND I THINK THIS WINDOW'S JUST A LITTLE LONGER THAN NORMAL, SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT ON THIS ONE. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE, MR. CHAIR. JUST TO BE, UH, SO IN FAVOR OF THE [04:15:01] APPLICANT IS A CONCURRENCE, CORRECT? YEAH. SO, UH, IF YOU VOTE YES, YOU'RE IN, YOU'RE IN FAVOR WITH THE APPLICANT. MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. DR. BRITTON? YES, I CONCUR. MS. PICASSO? YES, MR. DEAN? I CONCUR. MR. ZUNIGA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINANCE OF FACT. MR. VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. MS. BENAVIDES, THUMBS UP. OKAY, MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR. UH, WITH AND VOTE YES. MOTION PASSES. 10 TO ZERO. UM, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU FILE YOUR MONTHLY HOT TAB. YEAH, WE DON'T GRANT TOO MANY OF THESE, SO JUST, YOU KNOW, PLEASE MAKE SURE ONCE A MONTH YOU'RE GETTING ON THERE AND DOING YOUR PAPERWORK, PLEASE. THANKS SO MUCH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, LAST CASE. ITEM 12, EXCUSE ME. OKAY, ASHLEY, THE ALICE SENIOR PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 2 3 6 APPLICANT JACQUELINE LOPEZ IS REQUESTING FOR AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO REVOKE THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT LOCATED AT 9 4 4 2 MULBERRY PATH ZONE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY IN COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR. THE APPLICANT BEGAN OPERATING WITHOUT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT IN FEBRUARY, 2022. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY INITIALLY APPLIED FOR A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON APRIL 3RD, 2022, AND WAS APPROVED AND ISSUED BY STAFF ON APRIL 6TH, 2022. OPERATORS ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT MONTHLY REVENUES OF ZERO TO THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT. THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT NOTIFIED THE OWNER OF DELINQUENT PAYMENTS OR REPORTS ON THEIR HOT ACCOUNT VIA EMAIL ON APRIL 6TH, 2023. NO PAYMENT WAS MADE WITHIN THE 90 DAYS, THEREFORE THE PERMIT WAS REVOKED ON AUGUST 1ST, 2023 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 16 DASH 1 1 1 OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES. BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED FROM OUR THIRD PARTY VENDOR, CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT STATES NO REVENUE REPORTS HAVE BEEN MADE FOR APRIL, 2022 TO JUNE, 2023. IN JULY, 2023 AFTER REVOCATION, THE OPERATOR PAID THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX FOR JULY, 2023 IN THE AMOUNT OF $180. SECTION 16 DASH 10 D STATES THAT FAILURE TO TIMELY REPORT AND PAY HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX WITHIN 90 DAYS SHALL RESULT IN PERMIT REVOCATION. THIS IS THE COPY OF THE LETTER ATTACHED TO THE EMAIL SENT ON APRIL 6TH, 2023 FROM THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT. THIS IS THE PORTION OF THE ONLINE APPLICATION WHERE THE APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION, AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREAS. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL M B O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 2 3 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT STAFF REVOKE THE PERMIT FOR THE VIOLATION DESCRIBED IN THIS PRESENTATION. TWO. THE OWNER OPERATOR OF THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT VIOLATED THE S T I ORDINANCE BY FAILING TO TIMELY REPORT REVENUES AND PAY THE ASSOCIATED HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX PAYMENTS. AND THREE OWNER OPERATOR FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE EVEN AFTER ATTEMPTS WERE MADE TO INFORM THE APPLICANT OF DELINQUENCY ON APRIL 6TH, 2020 3 32. NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, IS THIS A TYPE ONE OR TYPE TWO? THIS IS THE TYPE TWO. TYPE TWO, MM-HMM. . ALRIGHT. SO THE, THE MAIL WAS SENT TO THE ADDRESS OF THE TYPE TWO, THIS WAS EMAILED ON APRIL 6TH, 2023 AND I BELIEVE MAILED FINANCE, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. SO THE PHYSICAL MAIL WENT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, BUT THE EMAIL WENT TO WHATEVER EMAIL THEY HAVE ON FILE? YES. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, LET'S, UH, THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. OKAY, THANK YOU. [04:20:08] HELLO, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JACQUELINE LOPEZ. I, UM, YES, UM, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU BRING THE MIC UP? THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. OVER TIME. SO, UH, ONE SECOND. I'M A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS HERE. SO I DO HAVE A PERMIT. IT WAS ISSUED ON APRIL 6TH, 2022. I PAID THE TAXES FROM APRIL, 2022 ALL THE WAY UNTIL MARCH, 2023. AND THIS WAS ON APRIL 26. I HAVE THE PAYMENT HERE AND I WROTE IT DOWN. UH, THEY CAN PROJECT IT ON THE SCREEN IF YES, IF YOU HAVE IN THE PUBLIC RECORD. OKAY. SO TEXAS WERE PAID FROM APRIL 22 TO MARCH, 2023 THROUGH HUTT. I DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL ON AUGUST 1ST. I, I'M, I'M SORRY, DID, DID YOU SAY THROUGH HUD, THROUGH THE SYSTEM HUTS? OH, OH HU HUT. OH, I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. OKAY. THROUGH HUD AUGUST. THIS AUGUST 1ST, I DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL, UM, FROM MS. EMILY NOTIFICATION OF THE REVOKE PERMIT. THE SAME DAY I DID CONTACT HER ASKING HOW CAN I FIX THIS? I NOTICED THEN THAT I DID NOT PAY THE TAXES FROM APRIL, MAY, AND JUNE OF THIS YEAR. I DID HAVE A DIFFICULT PERSONAL TIME. AS SOON AS I RECEIVED THIS, I EMAIL, I CONTACT MS. EMILY SAYING, HOW CAN WE FIX THIS? AND I DID PAY THE $600, UM, THROUGH THE BOARD AND I DID PAY AS SOON AS I NOTICED, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENED, I I I TRIED TO, UH, GO BACK TO THE SAME SYSTEM AND THAT'S WHAT I NOTICED. THERE WAS A NEW SYSTEM. SO I DID PAY, UM, JULY, AND THEN I DID NOT KNOW HOW THAT NEW SYSTEM WORK. SO AS SOON AS I LEARNED A LITTLE BIT MORE, I DID PAY TODAY, APRIL, MAY, AND JUNE, THOSE THREE MONTHS THAT THEY, THEY WERE BEHIND AT THIS MO MOMENT, EVERYTHING HAS BEEN PAID. OKAY. AND, UM, IS, DID, DID YOU HAPPEN TO RECEIVE THE NOTICE IN APRIL? NO, ONLY BY EMAIL ON AUGUST 1ST. OKAY. AND STAFF, DID YOU SEND THAT OUT? YOU SENT THAT OUT? UH, EMAIL AND US MAIL ON APRIL 6TH, CORRECT? WE, WE DO BOTH. AND WHEN WE EMAIL, WE USE THE SAME EMAIL ADDRESS THAT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS USING WHEN THEY REVOKE THEIR PERMIT. OKAY. RAGMAN, UH, COMMISSIONER RAGMAN AND THEN UNA, UM, THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT. SO DO YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT MAILING ADDRESS FROM THE, THE ONE THAT'S ON THIS, THAT'S THE 70 PROPERTY? YES. YOU DO. AND SO WHEN YOU FILLED OUT YOUR APPLICATION, DID YOU PROVIDE THE CITY WITH THAT OTHER ADDRESS? TO BE HONEST, I DON'T REMEMBER IF I DID, BUT, BUT I DO GO THERE TO THE SAME, TO MY HOUSE. I GO EVERY WEEKEND. I, I DO HAVE THAT MAIL BECAUSE I STILL RECEIVE A LOT OF MAILS THERE. IS IT A, A CLUSTER MAILBOX? IT'S LIKE OUTSIDE ON THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT. IS IT A GROUP OF MAILBOX? IT'S A GROUP. OKAY. YES, YES. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. SHE TOOK MY QUESTION. . ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION? OKAY, COMMISSIONER PICASSO. SO I GUESS WITHIN THE SUMMARY, WE WERE NOTIFIED THAT THERE WAS NO REVENUE REPORTS FROM MADE FOR APRIL 22ND THROUGH JUNE, 2023. BUT IT SHOW, BUT SHE'S SHOWING THAT SHE DID MAKE SOME, UM, MAKE PAYMENTS FROM APRIL 22 TO MARCH 23. WHERE IS THE DISCREPANCY IN THIS? SO SHE DID, UH, SUBMIT PAYMENTS FOR APRIL, 2022 TO MARCH, 2023, BUT THERE WERE NO PAYMENTS FOR APRIL, MAY, JUNE, JULY OR AUGUST UNTIL THE PERMIT WAS REVOKED. OKAY. DID, DID YOU, UH, INITIATE PAYMENTS, UH, AFTER AP BETWEEN APRIL 6TH AND YES, I DO HAVE THE RECEIPT, SIR. I DO HAVE, UM, APRIL, MAY, JUNE, IF YOU CAN HAND, LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET THESE PROJECTED TO CRUZ? YES. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. OH A FOR THE APPLICANT. SO AGAIN, UH, IF I COULD, UH, DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE DATE FILED, WHICH IS TODAY TO THE VERY BOTTOM RIGHT. [04:25:01] SO SHE PAID AFTER IT WAS REVOKED? CORRECT. WHICH IS TODAY NINE DATE FILED NINE 11, WHICH IS TODAY. AND, AND WHEN DID, WHEN DID THE, UM, WHEN DID YOU CHANGE SYSTEMS AGAIN? I KNOW YOU'VE ALREADY TOLD ME THIS ONCE BEFORE. JULY 1ST WAS THE FIRST REPORTING THAT WAS DUE. THE CITY ALSO HELD, UM, MEETINGS, UH, NOT ONLY HERE AT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUT ALSO OFFSITE. WE ALSO CONTACTED THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL ASSOCIATION. AGAIN, WE ALSO PROVIDED THAT THERE IS A TUTORIAL ON SITE ON OUR WEBSITE WHERE THEY, UH, CAN VIEW STEP-BY-STEP ON HOW TO REGISTER THEIR ACCOUNT, HOW TO PAY FOR THEIR TAXES. SO THE CITY HAS GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND IN TRYING TO ASSIST THE PUBLIC WITH THE NEW PORTAL. OKAY. AND SO, UM, I NOTICED THAT YOU DID MAKE A COUPLE PAYMENTS TODAY, BUT YOU HAVE ONE DATED AUGUST 10TH. WAS THERE AN ATTEMPT FOR PAYMENT IN SEPTEMBER? SEPTEMBER 1ST IS, WAS THERE ANY ATTEMPT FOR PAYMENT? YES. BETWEEN THE APRIL AND THE AUGUST? YEAH, SO I DID PAY IN AS SOON AS I KNEW ABOUT THIS IN AUGUST, I PAID JULY BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN I KNEW ABOUT, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING. UM, I GUESS WHAT WHAT I'M TRYING TO ASK IS, UH, SO YOU GOT ON THE SYSTEM, YOU, YOU KNOW, WE, WE COULD SEE THAT, YOU CAN KNOW, YOU KNOW HOW TO DO THAT MM-HMM. , BUT YOU, YOU DID SOMETHING IN APRIL, YOU PAID YES. MY, MY SON HAD CANCER, SO THAT WAS MY DIFFICULT TIME THAT I WAS NOT ABLE. OKAY. SO SO THAT, THAT WAS WHY THERE WAS A SO THAT YES. YEAH. YOU, YOU, YOU HAD KIND OF, THAT WAS MY DIFFICULT PERSONAL AND THANK GOD HE'S GOOD. SO, AMEN. SO I'M HERE CUTTING EVERYTHING UP. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. UH, SO, SO IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION AT THIS POINT? NO. ALRIGHT. UM, ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD BEFORE WE DELIBERATE? NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS VOICEMAILS. ANY NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. SO, UH, WE'RE LOOKING FOR A MOTION BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 2 3 6. I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE APPEAL FOR THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 9 4 4 2 MULBERRY PATH APPLICANT BEING JACQUELINE LOPEZ BECAUSE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWS THE CITY STAFF MADE AN ERR REVOKING THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT. END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PICASSO. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UM, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, APPEAL. UM, I THINK THAT SHE DID TRY TO STAY CURRENT, UH, THROUGH 2022, UP UNTIL APRIL OF THIS YEAR. UM, AND THEN DID, ONCE SHE FIGURED OUT THE NEW SYSTEM, EVEN IN AUGUST OF THIS YEAR, SHE MADE A PAYMENT AND THEN AGAIN IN SEPTEMBER 1ST, AND THEN OF COURSE SEVERAL PAYMENTS TODAY. SO, UM, I'M JUST GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. ALL RIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONER PICASSO, LIKEWISE, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. YOU DID. UH, YOU WERE ABLE TO SUFFICIENTLY SHOW THAT YOU ATTEMPTED TO, UH, MAKE PAYMENTS PRIOR TO TODAY AND THEN TODAY TO KEEP YOURSELF, UM, IN GOOD STANDING. UM, I EXTEND AS A MOM, EXTEND MY, MY SYMPATHY FOR YOU HAVING TO HAVE GONE THROUGH A DIFFICULT TIME AND JUST ASK THAT, UM, THIS BE A LEARNING LESSON TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT THINGS ARE STAYED, UH, STAYED WITHIN A GOOD STANDING. THANK YOU. AND IF I COULD JUST ADD, PERHAPS GIVE THE CITY YOUR OTHER MAILING ADDRESS. YES. SO THEY HAVE THAT ON FILE? YES. OKAY. UH, ANYONE ELSE? UH, LIKE TO ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? UH, I'M, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND ADD, I'M, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS TOO, ONLY BECAUSE, UH, WHENEVER I SEE AN APPLICANT WHO GETS A NOTICE AND THEN THEY MAKE GOOD ON IT, LIKE THE NOTICE TELLS 'EM TO, THAT, THAT PUTS ME IN A GOOD PLACE ON THAT. AND THEN SHE HAD A, A, A, A, A PERSONAL CRISIS THAT THAT KIND OF TOOK HER AWAY FROM, UH, YOU KNOW, THE SCENE THERE FOR A WHILE AND THEN SHE MADE GOOD ON IT AND IT WASN'T ALL IN ONE DAY. SHE DID IT ON, ON AUGUST 10TH, SEPTEMBER 1ST, AND, AND SEPTEMBER 11TH. SO, I MEAN, I REALLY THINK THERE WAS A, A REAL ATTEMPT HERE TO, TO BE, TO BE COMPLIANT. AND SO, UM, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. ZUNA. OH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA. AND I'LL BE IN SUPPORT AS WELL. UM, SHE SEEMS TO BE A GOOD OPERATOR OF THE, UM, SHORT-TERM RENTAL AND WE DIDN'T SEE ANY COMPLAINTS FROM THE NEIGHBORS. SO YOU'RE A GOOD OPERATOR. YOU JUST HAD A PERSONAL ISSUE, SO YOU KNOW, THINGS HAPPEN. ALL RIGHT. STAFF. MS. BRAMAN. I APPROVE. MS. PICASSO. YES. DR. BURTON? YES. MR. DEAN. I CONCUR. MS. CRUZ? YES. MR. ZUNIGA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINANCE OF FACT. MR. VASQUEZ? YES. MS. BEAVIS? YEAH. YOU GOTTA BRING HER BACK UP. THERE'S [04:30:01] A THUMB SOMEWHERE. . I KNOW. MR. OZUNA. I CONCUR. MS. BEES, THUMBS UP. THANK YOU. CHAIR ORIAN AND I, UH, SAY YES, UH, SIDE WITH THE APPLICANT. MOTION PASSES 10 TO ZERO. UM, CONGRATULATIONS AND, AND PLEASE APPRECIATE IT. REMEMBER TO THANK YOU. GET ON THAT, THAT, THAT SYSTEM EVERY MONTH AND FILE. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, UH, LAST ITEM IS, [ Approval of Minutes  ] UM, UH, MINUTES. ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR COMMISSIONER ZUNIGA. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. OKAY. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UM, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. MR. ZUNIGA? YES. MS. CRUZ? YES. DR. BRETTON? I THINK I HAVE TO ABSTAIN. I CAN'T VOTE TO APPROVE MINUTES OF A MEETING. I WASN'T THAT. OKAY. THAT'S A ROLL. WHY WE'RE DOING A ROLL CALL. VOTE . MS. PICASSO, I ABSTAIN AS WELL. MR. DEAN? I CONCUR. MR. VASQUEZ? YES. MS. BENAVIDES? MS. EZ? THUMBS? OKAY. . MS. BRAGMAN? YES. MR. OZUNA? YES. CHAIR ORIAN? YES. UH, UH, MINUTES PAST EIGHT TO TWO. UM, AND SO IS IS, IS, UH, OH, I'M SORRY. EIGHT. UH, WITH NO, NO. AN EIGHT TO ZERO WITH TWO ABSTENTIONS. YEAH. IS THERE ANYTHING FROM [ Director’s Report  ] THE DIRECTOR FOR THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT? UH, YES. JUST A REMINDER, UM, NEXT WEEK IS THE ADDITIONAL MEETING, UM, THAT WE HAD TO ADD IN. AND, UH, DESIREE, SHE'S COORDINATING, UH, SHE SHOULD JUST ALREADY SENT OUT AN EMAIL SHE DIDN'T ALREADY. UM, THAT ONE WILL START AT 12 BECAUSE THERE IS A WORK SESSION ON, UH, A BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION ON S T R APPEALS AND THEN ALSO THE 9 25 CASE. SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE THREE, THREE WEEKS OF BACK-TO-BACK, UH, TWO BACK BOAS, , AND FOR THE NEW COMMISSIONERS, YOU'RE GONNA GET AN EMAIL OUT SOON SO WE CAN GIVE YOU, UH, A BRIEFING. WE SHOULD HAVE DONE IT BEFORE THIS MEETING, BUT JUST A QUICK RUNDOWN BRIEFING OF, UH, JUST BASIC, UH, B O A, UH, BRIEF. UH, SO YOU'LL GET THAT HERE SOON. AND THAT'S ALL WE GOT. ALRIGHT. SO THANK EVERYBODY. IT'S, UH, 5 59 PRIOR TO SIX O'CLOCK AND I HEREBY CALL, UH, MOTION. UH, I HEREBY ADJOURN THE MEETING. * 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.