[00:00:01]
MARCO CAN, CAN WE START WITH THE, UH, CAN I START WITH THE, UH, ROLE AND THE PLEDGE AND EVERYTHING WHILE WE'RE WORKING OUT THE TECHNICAL ISSUES HERE? ARE WE, ARE WE ON, ARE WE RECORDING YET OR THEY'RE SAYING YES.
ARE WE RECORDING NOW? THEY'RE SAYING YES.
FIRST I'D LIKE TO, UH, BRING THE SPANISH INTERPRETER OUT SO THEY CAN MAKE A QUICK PRESENTATION ON SPANISH INTERPRETATION AVAILABLE TO ANY, UM, MEMBERS THAT MAY NEED IT.
PLEASE BE KIND ENOUGH TO SILENCE ALL MOBILE DEVICES.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS WILL COME TO ORDER.
MS. BENAVIDES PRESENT A QUORUM.
MS. PRESENT? WE HAVE A QUORUM.
UM, PLEASE STAND AND JOIN US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC FOR STANDS NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, LIBERTY OF JUSTICE FOR TEXAS FLAG P TEXAS ONE STATE GOD, WHY AN INDIVIDUAL?
[ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items ]
BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION.THE BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE.
THE CASES ARE LISTED BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND STREET ADDRESS.
FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
LASTLY, AS CHAIR, I WILL 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 OF 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, 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 THOUGHT TO DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN THE DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES.
SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE IN 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 THE DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35.
WE ALSO SERVE AS AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE 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 ANY OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS.
THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND WILL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND THE OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER.
AFTER EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN AND SPOKEN AND HEARD IN THE CASE, IT'LL 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 PRESIDENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN GRANTING THE RELIEF SOUGHT RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS ON WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL SPECIAL, SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW.
BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE.
I'M GONNA READ EACH CASE TO SEE IF WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE AVAILABLE FROM EACH CASE.
THIS IS 17 7 1 5 WESTMORELAND DRIVE.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE? 7 1 5 WESTMORELAND DRIVE.
[00:05:02]
9 54 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE.OKAY, THAT'S WE HAVE LISTED AS 9 54.
OKAY, THAT'S ONE KEARNEY STREET.
OKAY, THIS IS AT EIGHT 10 SOUTH WALTER STREET? YES, SIR.
UH, THIS IS THE SHORT TERM RENTAL.
OKAY, WELL THESE ARE ON THE BACK OF THE AGENDA, SO WE'LL SEE IF THEY SHOW UP FOR THESE CASES.
AND THEY DON'T COME UNTIL AFTER THREE O'CLOCK.
ALRIGHT, UH, STAFF, LET'S GO FORWARD.
MOVE FORWARD WITH THE FIRST CASE.
UM, REAL QUICK, UM, STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OR REQUEST.
PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXEMPTION OR APPEAL AND PROPERTIES WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION.
FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION AND ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THE REQUEST FOR THOSE THAT SIGN UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST APPEAL VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXEMPTION OR APPEAL.
YOU'LL BE CALLED IN ORDER TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK.
THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED MAXIMUM THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION.
THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, STAFF, LET'S, UH, MOVE FORWARD WITH THE FIRST CASE PLEASE REAL QUICK.
UH, COMMISSIONER ORIAN, ARE YOU ABLE TO HEAR US? COMMISSIONER VAZQUEZ, ARE YOU ABLE TO JUMP ON? YES, SIR.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 6.
UH, ADDRESS IS 7 1 5 WESTMORELAND DRIVE IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE.
THE APPLICANT IS MIGUEL GOMEZ AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE STEPBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS R FOUR.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG WESTMORELAND DRIVE, NEAR DEN DRIVE CITED BY CODE ENFORCEMENT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE ALLOWANCE OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE WITHIN THE REAR YARD.
UM, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN SAN ANTONIO ARE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF FIVE FEET AND MUST OBTAIN A VARIANCE TO DEVIATE FROM THIS.
AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THIS IS A SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THIS IS THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
AND THIS IS A SIDE SETBACK AND THIS IS AN ALTERNATE VIEW AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIDE SETBACK STAFF RECOMMENDS A DENIAL IN BO EIGHT DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 3 0 0 2 16 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING.
UH, ONE, THE PROPOSED DISTANCE AND COVERAGE WOULD DIRECTLY AFFECT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR BY BEING TOO CLOSE TO THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE AND RISK OF FIRE SPREAD GREATER.
AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN.
STAFF MAIL 24 NOTICES, UH, ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION.
AND WE HAD NO RESPONSE FROM THE NORTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THIS IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE RECEIVED.
AND I ALSO WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT WE WENT AHEAD AND REMOVED THE SECOND, UH, REQUEST, WHICH WAS FOR THE LOCK COVERAGE FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
UM, THE, WE HAD CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT HE IS UNDERNEATH THAT 50% THRESHOLD.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UH, HEARING NONE, I'D ASK THE APPLICANT TO PLEASE COME FORWARD AND LET'S HEAR YOUR PRESENTATION, SIR? YES.
UH, THE INTERPRETER? UH, THE INTERPRETER PLEASE.
ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE READY FOR HIM TO, UH, TELL US WHY HE'S SEEKING THE VARIANCE.
AND I KNOW THIS IS THE, UH, CONTINUANCE FROM THE LAST CASE, UH, THAT WAS PRESENTED.
[00:10:01]
SO, UM, IF YOU COULD JUST TELL US WHY HE'S SEEKING THE VARIANCE HERE.UM, I WANNA DO THE GARAGE HIGH TO, UH, TO PARK MY VEHICLES BECAUSE I'VE BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE.
AND FOR THE BOARD, I RECALL THAT WE OFFERED A CONTINUANCE TO THE APPLICANT BECAUSE WE WERE SEEKING, UH, STAFF'S, UM, CONSIDERATION OF THE 50% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO I RECALL THERE WERE TWO VARIANCES, ONE WAS A 50% AND THAT I GUESS, HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
SO, UM, SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MR. MANA? SO, UM, I THINK THERE WAS ALSO AN ADDITIONAL REQUEST AND THAT WAS, UH, THAT THE APPLICANT WAS GONNA PROVIDE SOME BETTER DOCUMENTS WITH REGARDS TO THE ORIGINAL SIZE OF THE STRUCTURE ITSELF.
AND WHAT CHANGED BECAUSE I THINK THAT THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS WITH REGARDS TO THE INITIAL DIALOGUE, WHICH STATED THAT, UH, IT WAS ON THE ORIGINAL FOUNDATION, BUT THEN AFTER WE HAD DIALOGUE IT APPEARED THAT THE, THAT THE SIZE OF THE FACILITY CHANGED FROM THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
AND SO I WAS LOOKING, DID YOU BRING HAPPENED TO BRING ANOTHER COPY OF HOW THE DOC, HOW THE STRUCTURE STARTED TO WHERE IT IS NOW WITH REGARDS TO THE SIZE CHANGE? UH, I, I SENT THE DOCUMENTS WITH MEASUREMENTS AND I SENT NEW, UH, NEW PICTURES, BUT I DON'T SEE THEM RIGHT NOW IN THE PRESENTATION.
NOW BY CHANCE, DO YOU HAVE COPIES OF THE PICTURES OR, OKAY, HERE THEY ARE.
UM, THESE ARE THE NEW PICTURES THEN? NO, NO, IT'S JUST THAT ONE.
IS THAT THE SAME THING? MM-HMM.
SO I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT ONE.
SO MY QUESTION IS, WHAT WAS THE SIZE OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE, UH, BEFORE YOU PUT ON ALL THE ALUMINUM SIDING? SO WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL SIZE OF THAT? STRUCTURE? OF THE ORIGINAL SHED? MM-HMM.
UH, SO WHERE IT'S COVER UP WITH METAL, THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL AND EVERYTHING HE ADDED WAS THAT PART WHERE IT'S NOT COVERED YET, THE METAL ON TOP.
BECAUSE THEY STOPPED ME FOR THE SAME REASON.
LET'S SEE, ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? BON EZ, DO YOU HAVE A PICTURE OF THE SHED BEFORE YOU DID ANY OF THIS? PROBABLY.
DO YOU HAVE IT WITH YOU IN YOUR PHONE OR? I HAVE IT ALL PHONES.
WE NO HAVE ANY NEW IN MY NEW PHONE, SO I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING TO SEE IS WHAT THAT STRUCTURE LOOKED LIKE BEFOREHAND.
THAT WAY WE COULD COMPARE AND YOU'LL HAVE TO LOOK FOR IT AND BRING IT BACK.
IS THERE ANY GOOGLE, UM, GU STAFF? WE LOOK AT GOOGLE TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY, UH, HISTORICAL PICTURES WE COULD SEE ON GOOGLE ON EARTH VIEW OR MAP VIEW.
WHILE THEY'RE WAITING FOR THAT, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, BY THE BOARD TO THE APPLICANT? YES.
MR. ZUNIGA, COULD YOU, UH, I REMEMBER THE LAST SESSION THAT WE HAD HERE.
COULD YOU, UH, STATE AGAIN, THE ONLY THING YOU'VE DONE
[00:15:01]
IS, UH, WISH I HAD A POINTER HERE IS PUT THE FRAMES, THE STEEL, UH, IRON ON TOP OF THE, IT WAS A L SHAPE.THAT'S WHAT HE WAS SAYING BEFORE WHEN HE GOT IT MM-HMM.
WHEN HE, THE, THE BLUE, UH, THE FOOTPRINT WAS ALREADY THERE, RIGHT? YEAH, THAT ONE? YES.
AND THE ONLY THING YOU ADDED WAS WHAT? THE TOP, THE IRON AND STEEL THERE? THAT'S QUESTION.
YES, THE, THE FOOTPRINT WAS ALREADY THERE, BUT I TOOK AWAY ALL THE SIDING AND I PUT EVERYTHING WITH METAL.
YOU PUT THE METAL ALSO THE TOP PART? YEAH.
WHERE IT SHOWS RIGHT THERE WHERE THE IRON AND STEEL IS, IS THAT CORRECT? I CAN YOU HAVE A POINTER? YOU SEE THE QUESTION HERE, MA'AM? THE QUESTION HERE WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WAS THE ONLY, UH, BUILDING OF THE ONLY, UH, REPAIRS HE DONE, YOU KNOW, OR REMODELING WAS THE STEEL THAT'S NOT COVERED YET.
AND UH, WAS IT BEFORE? DID YOU HAVE THIS WHEN THE WHOLE METAL, UH, SIDING, ET CETERA ON IT? OKAY.
BEFORE HE DONE ANY WORK? NO, I, I TOOK IT OFF AND THEN I COVER IT WITH METAL BECAUSE THE SIDING WAS GETTING ROTTEN.
UH, THE, ACTUALLY THIS IS THE ORIGINAL STORAGE, SO I I I REMOVE THE SIDING RIGHT THERE.
UH, HE, THE KEY AND WHERE HE'S POINTING AT, HE ADDED THAT, THAT PIECE OF, OF THE, OF THE NEW BUILDING, THEY HAVE A SIDING.
ALL THIS, SEE, YOU SEE ON THE, ON THE ROOF THEY HAVE PIECES OF MINE.
SO ACCORDING TO BEXAR COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, THE ORIGINAL HOME WAS BUILT IN NINE 50.
1958 WAS APPROXIMATELY 1300 SQUARE FEET.
UH, THERE WAS A CARPORT BUILT IN 2015 THAT WAS 432 SQUARE FEET.
AND THEN A TERRACE WITH COVER BUILT IN 2021.
THE SHED, IF THIS IS THE SAME, SHED DOESN'T SHOW A YEAR BUILT, BUT SHOWS THAT IT WAS AT SOME POINT 300 SQUARE FEET.
BUT PER THE DIMENSIONS ON THE SITE PLAN, WE HAVE CALCULATED THAT THAT COMES OUT TO 812 SQUARE FEET.
NOW IF IT'S THE SAME, UM, STRUCTURE AS DESCRIBED HERE, AND THEN THERE WAS A DETA DETACHED OPEN PORCH OF A HUNDRED AND SQUARE, 160 SQUARE FEET.
IT DOESN'T SAY WHEN IT WAS BUILT, BUT THEN THERE'S A MISCELLANEOUS, UM, RESIDENTIAL SHED ALSO THAT WAS BUILT IN 2000 AND THE SPECIFICATIONS ON THAT ONE ARE NOT CLEAR.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I DIDN'T HEAR THAT.
ANYBODY? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.
THAT WOULD THEN, UH, STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP FOR VOICEMAIL OR PUBLIC COMMENTS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
AT THIS POINT I'D ASK THE APPLICANT, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO, UH, SAY BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? THE ONE, THE, THE SHADOW.
IF HE HAS TO TAKE IT AWAY, HE CAN DO THAT, BUT HE COULD PLEASE LET HIM KEEP THE OTHER ONE THAT HE WAS BUILDING.
'CAUSE HE NEEDS TO SECURE HIS PRO, HIS BELONGINGS.
MR. MANNA, THIS QUESTIONS FOR CITY STAFF.
SO, SO AT THIS OVERHEAD HERE, IT APPEARS THAT THERE'S A RAILWAY, A RAIL LINE BEHIND THE HOUSE.
SO IS THERE, UM, SOME, I GUESS GIVE FOR THAT WITH REGARDS TO THE BACK, THE RAIL QUAD LINE? SO YEAH, THAT ACTS THE SAME WAY AS AN ALLEY, SO THAT'S WHY THE REAR SETBACK IS NOT AN ISSUE.
SO THE ONLY VARIANCE HERE IS A SIDE SETBACK, IS THAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING CORRECT.
BENAVIDES IS THAT THE, THE, UH, SIDE FACING DRESDEN OR THE NEIGHBOR? IT'S THE NEIGHBOR, RIGHT? IT'S THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, WHICH THERE WAS NO, UM, OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBOR, SO, OKAY.
UH, BE I HAVE A QUESTION FOR HIM.
IS THIS INTENTION ON THE SECOND FLOOR TO COVER THE ENTIRE SECOND FLOOR? IS THAT
[00:20:01]
WHY THE METAL RODS ARE THERE? BECAUSE HE'S GONNA COVER THE ENTIRE SECOND FLOOR.IT'S JUST TO CO TO PUT THE, UM, THE NEW, SO IT'S GOING, IT'S GONNA BE COMPLETELY ENCLOSED THE SECOND, YES.
UH, AT THIS POINT I'D ASK A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION, MS. BREGMAN, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 216.
I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 7 1 5 WESTMORELAND DRIVE.
APPLICANT BEING MIGUEL GOMEZ GETS THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWED THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN THIS CASE, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS REPRESENTED BY THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR.
FOR SAFETY, STATE STAFF FINDS THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS AN ALLOWANCE DISTANCE, ALLOWABLE DISTANCE ON COVERAGE AS IT WILL NOT AFFECT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR BY BEING TOO CLOSE TO THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE.
AND RISK OF FIRE SPREAD IS MITIGATED.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICANT ALTERING THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO ADHERE TO THE REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
THIS WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
AT IS, APPEARS ALL STRUCTURES CANNOT 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 WILL BE OBSERVED IN THIS CASE AS THE APPLICANT IS ABIDING BY ALL OTHER BUILDING REQUIREMENTS.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN USE IS 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.
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.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL NOT INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES AS OTHER STRUCTURES IN THE IMMEDIATE, UH, APPEARED TO BE WITHIN THE SETBACK.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY PERSEVERANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES SUCH AS LIMITING LIMITED SPACES ON THE PROPERTY.
MR. MANNA, UH, MR. BREGMAN? UM, IT, IT APPEARS FROM WHAT THE APPLICANT IS SAYING IS THAT THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPERTY HAS NOT CHANGED.
UM, WHEN HE, UH, ALTERED THE EXTERIOR, HE WAS JUST PUTTING, UM, ALUMINUM SIDING ON IT.
AND SINCE THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBOR WHO'S MOST IMPACTED BY, UH, THE STRUCTURE IS NOT OPPOSED TO IT, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
MR. MANOR, I WAS ACTUALLY GONNA, UM, ASK FOR A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO ACTUALLY HAVE IT MOVE FROM THE FENCE LINE.
AND PART OF THE REASON WHY WAS, UM, BEFORE IT WAS A SINGLE STORY STRUCTURE AND NOW IT'S A A TWO STORY STRUCTURE.
SO THAT TO ME CHANGES THE, THE, THE, THE, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THE PERS THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
AND SO I WAS GONNA ASK FOR ONE OF OUR TYPICAL KIND OF DIALOGUES ABOUT, UM, EITHER A THREE FOOT OR TWO FOOT VARIANCE.
SO I WAS WONDERING IF THAT WAS ENTERTAINABLE.
I I MEAN, IF, IF THE APPLICANT THINKS THAT HE CAN DO THAT, I'M, I'M FINE WITH IT.
SO THE, UH, THE QUESTION WITH THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IS IF HE COULD MAINTAIN A TWO FOOT SETBACK FROM THE SIDE SO THAT THE PROPERTY WOULD BE TWO FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S DOABLE RIGHT NOW MM-HMM.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I BUILD IT LIKE THAT.
WELL, DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT'S GONNA WORK WITH HIM.
SO AT THIS POINT, UM, I GUESS THE MOTION IS GONNA BE AS READ
[00:25:01]
BY MS. BRAGMAN.ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE, THE BOARD BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE? OKAY.
LET'S, UH, GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
MS. AVILES? YES, MR. DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR.
MR. MANNA, I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
UH, BEFORE AGAINST THE MOTION DOES NOT PASS.
I WOULD SEE IF THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FROM THE PREVAILING SIDE TO MAKE AN A SUBSTITUTE MOTION MANNA, MR. MANNA? UM, YES, I'D LIKE TO, UH, AMEND IT SO THAT IT IS THE TWO FOOT.
UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT I WOULD BE MUCH MORE FAVORABLE FOR IT THERE, BUT CERTAINLY OPEN FOR ANY OTHER DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO THE, UM, I GUESS PREVAILING SIDE.
RIGHT? SO WOULD, UH, SO THAT WOULD BE THE MEMBERS OF THE PREVAILING SIDE TO SEE IF A TWO FOOT VARIANCE WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD SUPPORT BEFORE I OPEN IT UP FOR A, UM, BEFORE WE DECIDE ON THE, ON THE, UM, SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
YEAH, I NEED A SECOND ON THEM.
SO, UM, SO LET'S HAVE A VOTE TO OPEN IT UP FOR, UH, RECONSIDERATION OF THE MOTION.
OKAY, SO NOW LET'S READ THE SECOND SUBSTITUTE MOTION MANNA.
SO DO I NEED TO READ THE WHOLE THING? LET REGARD NO, JUST THE, JUST THE FIRST PART REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 3 1 0 3 0 0 2 1 6.
I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR A, UH, TWO FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE, UH, REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE, UM, THREE FOOT, OR I'M SORRY, THREE FOOT TO ALLOW IT TO BE TWO FOOT FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
DO I HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? SECOND? SECOND.
UH, THAT WAS FROM MR. ZUNIGA, UH, DISCUSSION.
I'M, I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION AS AMENDED.
UM, I GUESS THE, WITH THE, WITH THE TWO FEET OF PROVIDES SOME AREA OF ABILITY FOR HIM TO MAINTAIN THAT SIDE.
UM, THERE'S REALLY NOT MUCH OF A CONCERN ABOUT WATER RUNOFF HERE, BUT I THINK THE TWO FEET DOES PROVIDE THAT SETBACK GIVEN IT'S A TWO STORY STRUCTURE NOW VERSUS OF ONE STORY THAT WAS THERE BEFORE.
AND THEN ALSO I THINK PART OF THE DIALOGUE, IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY IS WE'RE JUST ASKING, NOT NECESSARILY TO HAVE IT CUT OFF BUT ACTUALLY CAN BE MOVED.
AND SO, SO THE SIZE OF THE FACILITY CAN REMAIN THE SAME.
UM, BUT UH, WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR THAT TWO FOOT, SO, ALRIGHT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. ZUNIGA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, DR.
MS. BRAGMAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH 11 4 0 AGAINST THE MODIFIED MOTION.
PLEASE GET WITH STAFF SO THEY CAN EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR UH, OPTIONS ARE HERE.
SO ARE WE INCLUDING ORIAN? UM, WELL HE'S HE'S NOT BEING INCLUDED RIGHT NOW.
I'M GOOD IF, I DON'T KNOW IF DONALD'S WHAT ARE WE DOING? I'M HERE.
WHAT ARE WE INCLUDING HIM ON THE VOTE OR IS HE RIGHT NOW? YES.
YES, BUT CAN WE HEAR YOU? YES, WE JUST DID.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? I MEAN YOU CAN HEAR US.
IS HE RECUSING OR HOW? 'CAUSE WE HAVE 12 AND PANEL NOW ON THE BOARD.
WE'RE GONNA FIGURE THAT OUT RIGHT NOW.
ON THE FLY, B O A DASH TWO THREE
[00:30:01]
DASH 1 0 3 0 2 4 1 ADDRESS IS 1 3 1 3 0 EAST IH 10 IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO, THE APPLICANT IS QT SOUTH L L C AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A 25 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 50 FOOT SIGN HIGH ALLOWANCE TO ALLOW A 75 FOOT TALL SINGLE TENANT SIGN AND TO A 224 SQUARE FOOT VARIANT FROM THE MAXIMUM OF 375 SQUARE FEET ALLOWANCE TO ALLOW A SINGLE TENANT SIGN TO BE 599 SQUARE FEET.AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS C THREE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 10 AT THE EDGE OF THE CITY LIMITS.
UH, UPON REVIEW BY D SS D IT WAS NOTED THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED AT OBTAIN A VARI, SORRY.
UM, IT WAS NOTED THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO OBTAIN A VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM SIGN HEIGHT AND SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWANCE.
WHILE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT PERMITTED IS 50 FEET.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 75 FOOT TOSS SINGLE TENANT SIGN.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS ALSO REQUESTING A SQUARE FOOTAGE INCREASE, UM, FOR THE SIGN TO BE 599 SQUARE FEET WHILE THE MAXIMUM IS 375.
UM, UPON SITE VISITS, STAFF OBSERVED THAT THIS PROPERTY IS ELEVATED HIGHER THAN THE EXPRESSWAY AND IS NOT QUALIFIED FOR THE ADJACENT GRADE ALLOWANCE.
UH, THE SIGN IS GONNA BE LOCATED ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER OF THE SITE PLAN AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AND THIS, UH, THIS IS JUST A SIGN THAT WE SAW ACROSS THE STREET AND THEN THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIGN, HIGH END SQUARE FOOTAGE MAXIMUM VARIANCES STAFF RECOMMENDS A DENIAL AND BO O A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 2 4 1 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING.
UH, ONE, THE NEW PROPOSED SIGN HIGH END SQUARE FOOTAGE ARE EXCEEDING THE U D C AND TWO.
THE CURRENT ALLOWABLE HIGH END SIZE WILL NOT CAUSE A CESSATION OF LEGITIMATE LONGSTANDING ACTIVE COMMERCIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN.
STAFF MODE OUT TWO NOTICES, UH, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NOT LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF A REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
FIRST WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
ONE, THAT SIGN YOU SHOWED THAT WAS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT, DO WE KNOW THE HEIGHT AND THE APPROXIMATE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THAT SIGN? JUST AS A COMPARISON? UM, I CAN FIND OUT THAT HEIGHT FOR YOU.
THE SECOND IT SAYS, IS THIS IN ANY KIND OF SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT OR ANY OTHER, UM, OVERLAY THAT WOULD REGULATE THE SIGNAGE HEIGHTS? AND IT DOES HAVE THE A H O D OVERLAY, WHICH IS THE AIRPORT HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT, BUT NO, NO OTHER SPECIAL LIKE CORRIDOR.
ALRIGHT, SO IF YOU COULD FIND THAT SIGN IN FOR ORIAN S OH, HOLD UP MR. ORIAN.
YEAH, SO A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I NOTICED THAT THIS IS THE LAST PIECE OF PROPERTY BEFORE YOU HIT CITY OF SHIRTS ACROSS THE, UH, UH, FM 1518.
AND ON THE OTHER SIDE OF 10, DO YOU KNOW IF THE CITY OF SHIRTS HAS A DIFFERENT SIGN HEIGHT, UH, THAN, THAN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO DOES, UH, FOR THIS AREA? WE DO NOT.
OKAY, MR. UH, ZUNIGA, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? UH, YES.
YOU STATED THAT, UH, ELEVATION IS HIGHER THAN THE EXPRESSWAY OF THE PROPERTY TO THAT IS OBSERVED.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ELEVATED HIGHER THAN THE EXPRESSWAY, SO THE SIGN WOULD BE HIGHER TOO, RIGHT? YES, SIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? HEARING NONE, I'D ASK THE APPLICANT TO PLEASE COME FORWARD AND LET'S HEAR, UH, YOUR PRESENTATION PLEASE.
MY NAME IS KATHY GARLAND AND I AM HERE WITH QUICKTRIP OR QT.
SO THIS IS A LOCATION AND AS HE OBSERVED IT IS ON THE VERY EDGE OF THE CITY LIMITS.
COULD YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT CLOSER? I'M, I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
UM, SO THIS IS WHERE THE SITE IS LOCATED.
AS YOU CAN SEE IT IS ON THE VERY EDGE OF THE CITY LIMITS.
UM, SEVERAL MILES OUT ON I 10, AND YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
UM, HERE'S A CLOSEUP OF THE ZONING MAP.
UM, WE ARE THE LAST PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY.
EVERYTHING ELSE SURROUNDING US IS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS, UM, INCLUDING ACTUALLY A SMALL SLIVER OF OUR BACK PROPERTY IS CONSIDERED PART OF THE E T J.
UM, HERE AGAIN IS THE SITE PLAN AND LIKE YOU SAID, THE SIGN IN QUESTION IS LONG.
UM, THE FRONTAGE ROAD AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER OF THE SITE AND YOU
[00:35:01]
CAN GO TO THE NEXT ONE.UM, ACTUALLY GO BACK, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
ONE THING I WANTED TO MENTION ON HERE, THE REASON WHY WE'RE SEEKING, UM, A BIGGER SIGN IN THIS CASE.
UM, WE DO HAVE SEVERAL STORES WITHIN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, UM, 28 AT LAST COUNT.
UM, WE DON'T ALWAYS ASK FOR A SIGN VARIANCE.
UM, THIS ONE HAS YOUR REGULAR C-STORE WITH FUEL SALES, BUT IF YOU'LL NOTICE THERE'S ALSO DIESEL BAYS ALONG THE SIDE.
SO WE WANT THE ABILITY TO ADVERTISE TO THE TRUCKERS ALONG I 10 THAT THEY CAN EXIT AND USE OUR FACILITY AND THAT THERE'S ROOM FOR THEM TO DO SO.
UM, THE SMALLER SIGN MAKES IT HARDER TO DO THAT BECAUSE WE NEED TO DISPLAY UNLEADED AND DIESEL PRICES.
UM, JUST TO REFRESH OUR REQUEST, THIS IS THE SIGN THAT WE ARE REQUESTING IT IS 75 FEET HIGH.
UM, THE TOTAL SIGN AREA IS 599 SQUARE FEET, WHICH GIVES US THAT 224 SQUARE SQUARE FOOT UM, VARIANCE.
BUT THE QT SIGN IS UNDER THE LIMIT.
IT IS 347 SQUARE FEET AND THE GAS PRICES SIGN IS 252 SQUARE FEET.
UM, SO THAT WAY WE CAN ADVERTISE THE DIESEL USE, THE GASOLINE USE AND THE CONVENIENCE STORE SLASH KITCHEN THAT WE ARE.
UM, SO IT KIND OF HIGHLIGHTS ALL OF THE USES ALL IN ONE, IN ONE NICE SIGN.
UM, THE SIGN HEIGHT IS SHOWN THERE AS WELL.
UM, SO STAFF DID SHOW ONE OTHER, UH, SIGN ALONG I 10.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE OTHER ONES THAT YOU'LL SEE AS YOU'RE DRIVING ALONG THAT CORRIDOR.
IT IS BUSTLING WITH TRUCKS ALL DAY, EVERY DAY.
UM, NOT JUST SAN ANTONIO DRIVERS, BUT YOU HAVE INTERSTATE TRAVELERS AS WELL.
UM, THE TOP LEFT CORNER THERE IS A SHELL THAT IS LOCATED BETWEEN, UM, THE MAJOR METRO SAN ANTONIO AREA AND OUR SITE, IT IS QUITE LARGE.
UM, THESE ARE ESTIMATES OF THE WIDTH.
I WASN'T ABLE TO GET SQUARE FOOTAGE, UM, THING, UH, SIZES FROM MY RESEARCH, BUT THAT SIGN IS ABOUT 27 FEET WIDE.
THE ONE IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER IS ACTUALLY THE CIRCLE K THAT CITY STAFF TOOK A PICTURE OF.
THE OTHER ONE WAS JUST, UM, THEIR SIMPLE MONUMENT SIGN.
THIS IS THE ONE THAT, UM, THE INTERSTATE TRAVELERS WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IT HAS A VERY SIMILAR PRICER DISPLAY TO THE ONE WE'RE REQUESTING.
AND IT ALSO HAS TWO BUTTON SIGNS OF THE BUSINESSES THAT THEY ARE.
UM, THE LOWER LEFT CORNER IS ANOTHER QUICK TRIP THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE IN CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND IT IS A LONG I 10 AND THIS ONE WAS GRANTED A VARIANCE AS WELL.
UM, IT IS 17.2 FEET WIDE AND THAT IS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE SIDE-BY-SIDE PRICER INSTEAD IT'S STACKED ON TOP OF EACH OTHER.
UM, WE'VE JUST FOUND THAT THE SIDE-BY-SIDES IS MORE WHAT THE INDUSTRY IS GOING WITH AND SO THAT'S THE ONE WE'RE SEEKING HERE.
UM, THE SIZE OF THAT ONE, IT'S NOT LISTED THERE, BUT IT'S 506 SQUARE FEET.
SO THAT ONE DOES EXCEED THE U D C AND IT'S THE SAME SIGN CODE.
UM, ONE THING YOU'LL NOTE, IT HAS THE QT KITCHENS LOGO.
UM, WE WERE ABLE TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE A MULTI-USE.
WE ARE MORE THAN A GAS STATION.
WE'RE A KITCHEN, WE'RE A FUELING STATION, WE'RE A CONVENIENCE STORE, SO WE SHOULD BE ENTITLED TO HAVE THE MULTI-TENANT, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGE EVEN THOUGH WE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY A MULTI-TENANT SITE.
UM, AND THIS ONE IS 65 FEET TALL AS WELL, SO THAT EXCEEDS THE HEIGHT AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
UM, AND THE TA THAT IS ACROSS FROM THAT SITE HAS A LOT OF SIGNAGE GOING ON THERE.
UM, IT'S 26 AND A HALF FEET WIDE AND IT HAS FIVE DIFFERENT PIECES OF THAT SIGN.
AGAIN, I CAN'T FIND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 'EM, BUT IT IS QUITE LARGE.
IF YOU'VE DRIVEN DOWN I 10, YOU CAN SEE HOW LARGE THEY ARE.
UM, SO JUST TO KIND OF GO OVER OUR JUSTIFICATION BEFORE I GET INTO A FEW MORE PICTURES, UM, THE SITE IS AT THE VERY EDGE OF THE CITY LIMITS.
IT'S A VERY COMMERCIAL AREA, CATERS TO INTERSTATE TRAVEL MORE THAN YOUR, UM, JUST COMMUTERS AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.
WE ARE A MULTI-USE FACILITY, SO IT'S VEHICLE FUELING, TRUCK FUELING AND A FULL SERVICE KITCHEN.
IT'S NOT JUST A REGULAR SMALL GAS STATION.
UM, OTHERS IN THE AREA WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE SAME REGULATIONS BECAUSE THEY'RE OUTSIDE OF SAN ANTONIO CITY LIMITS.
AND I CAN GET STAFF, UM, THE INFORMATION FROM SHIRTS IF NEEDED AS WELL.
I DO KNOW THAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS, UM, CAN BE LARGER.
I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE HEIGHT.
UM, SIDE BY SIDE PRICE DISPLAY ALLOWS ALL THE VEHICLES TO VIEW THE SIGN AND SAFELY EXIT.
AND THE DIESEL SIGN IS REALLY IMPORTANT HERE BECAUSE NOT EVERY SITE HAS THAT TRUCK ACCESS AND THIS ONE DOES.
AND WE WANT TRUCKS TO BE ABLE TO KNOW THAT THEY CAN MAKE THAT DECISION TO GET OFF AND FUEL THERE.
AND THEN THE QT LOGO SIGN IS IMPORTANT SO THEY CAN RECOGNIZE THE BRAND.
YOU KNOW, MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO JUST GET OFF AND GO GET GAS ANYWHERE.
THEY LIKE TO CHOOSE A CERTAIN PLACE AND SO WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO ADVERTISE BOTH THE GASOLINE AND THE BRAND.
UM, SO AS YOU'RE DRIVING DOWN I 10 WESTBOUND, THIS IS WHAT THE EXIT LOOKS LIKE.
THERE IS A, UM, SIGN ON THE RIGHT THAT BUSINESS IS NO LONGER IN OPERATION, BUT THEIR VERY LARGE SIGN IS STILL THERE.
AND TO THE LEFT YOU CAN SEE THE CIRCLE K SIGN THAT DOES EXIST AND
[00:40:01]
WE HAVE VERY FANCY SMART PEOPLE THAT CAN DO GOOGLE MAP RENDERINGS OF OUR SIGN AND YOU CAN SEE WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE NEXT TO THE CIRCLE K SIGN AT THE PROPOSED HEIGHT AND SQUARE FOOTAGE.THE NEXT SLIDE, SO THIS ONE IS EVEN MORE IMPACTFUL AS YOU'RE DRIVING EASTBOUND TOWARDS SAN ANTONIO OR TOWARDS HOUSTON.
I'M FROM A DIFFERENT PART OF THE COUNTRY AND I HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHICH DIRECTION WE'RE GOING, BUT EASTBOUND, WE ARE LIMITED WITH OUR VISIBILITY.
THE RAMP IS 2,800 FEET AWAY FROM OUR SIGN.
THERE IS NO LONG EXIT LANE ALONG THIS PART OF I 10.
YOU HAVE TO KNOW THAT YOU'RE GETTING OFF AT THAT EXIT AT 1518.
YOU DON'T HAVE TIME TO MAKE THAT DECISION SO THAT AS SOON YOU CAN SEE THAT SIGN, THE SOONER YOU CAN SAFELY MAKE THAT DECISION TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE IN THE RIGHT LANE AND ABLE TO SLOW DOWN FOR THAT EXIT.
ALSO, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE POWER LINES AND TREES THAT ARE LIMITING THE SIGNS IMPACT AND VISIBILITY AND SOME OF THOSE POLES ARE 60 FEET HIGH AROUND OUR SITE.
AND THIS JUST SHOWS THE GOOGLE EARTH VIEW OF WHAT I ALREADY STATED, THAT IT IS 2,800 FEET AWAY.
SO WE WOULD LIKE PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT CALL AND BE ABLE TO SEE IT.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION THERE RIGHT NOW AND ACTUALLY THAT RAMP USED TO BE MUCH CLOSER AND THAT SIGN WOULD NEED TO BE THAT LARGE.
YOU CAN SEE WHERE THIS, WHERE THE EXIT RAMP USED TO BE.
IT IS NOW 2,800 FEET AWAY FROM OUR SITE.
UM, WE ARE ASKING FOR THIS VARIANCE TO ENHANCE THE SAFETY FOR ALL VEHICLES, BOTH CARS AND TRUCKS, AND THEN PEOPLE WHO JUST WANT TO VISIT THE SITE, NOT EVEN FOR FUEL BUT JUST TO UM, GET FOOD AND OTHER CONVENIENCE ITEMS. SO THE REQUESTED HEIGHT IS BASED ON THE DISTANCE FROM THE EXIT AND THE SURROUNDING CONDITIONS SUCH AS TREES AND POWER POLES.
AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS BASED ON THE NEED TO ALLOW TRUCKS TO RECOGNIZE OUR DIESEL FACILITIES.
THE FACT THAT QT IS A KITCHEN, A STORE, AND A GAS AND DIESEL STATION, UM, WHICH IS THE SPIRIT OF A MULTI-TENANT FACILITY, EVEN THOUGH IT DOES NOT MEET THE TECHNICAL DEFINITION OF A MULTI-TENANT FACILITY.
UM, IF YOU REMEMBER THOSE SIGNS FROM I 10, ALL OF THOSE ARE UNDER ONE BUILDING, BUT THEY HAVE MULTI-TENANT, UM, SIGNS BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL TECHNICALLY OPERATING UNDER DIFFERENT NAMES, BUT THEY'RE ALL ONE BIG BUSINESS.
UM, THE QT LOGO IS LESS THAN THE ALLOWED 370 SQUARE FEET.
AND SO WE'RE REQUESTING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPROVAL.
UM, YOU DON'T NEED TO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, BUT I DO HAVE SOME ALTERNATIVES.
UM, IF, IF THE BOARD IS CONCERNED WITH SOME OF THESE, UM, I AM OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.
I I DO WANT EVERYONE TO BE PLEASED WITH THE RESULT.
LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD.
CRUZ, MS. BRAGMAN AND MS. AND MS. CRUZ.
UM, SO YOU SHOWED A PICTURE OF A ANOTHER QT SIGN WHERE IT WAS QT AND THEN THE TWO PRICES WERE THEY WERE STACKED MM-HMM.
ALRIGHT, MS. CRUZ, AND HOW FAR AWAY IS YOUR OTHER QT LOCATION FROM THE NEW ONE THAT YOU'RE BUILDING? UM, SEVERAL MILES.
DO YOU KNOW OFFHAND? 12 MILES.
12 MILES? IT'S AT, THAT ONE IS AT FOSTER AND I 10.
AND SO, UM, AND THERE'S UM, I MIGHT CONSIDER 65 FEET, BUT THAT 75 JUST DOES NOT DRAW MY ATTENTION.
ALRIGHT, UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR IAN? I, MR. IAN? YEAH, SO, UH, I ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT THE SHIRT IDE, I, I KIND OF LOOKED IT UP ON THE MUNI CODE WHILE UH, THE APPLICANT WAS DOING THEIR PRESENTATION AND IT APPEARS THAT THE CITY ASSURES HAS A MAX OF 50 FEET.
UH, AND, AND SO MY CONCERN WAS IS THAT IT'S ONE THING IF, UH, YOUR SIGN NEEDED TO BE HIGHER BECAUSE YOU'RE COMPETING WITH A DIFFERENT MUNICIPALITY THAT ALLOWS EVERYONE AROUND YOU TO BE HIGHER.
BUT I CAN'T FIND ANY EVIDENCE THAT THE CITY ASSURES ALLOWS A SIGN, UH, HIGHER THAN 50 FEET.
UH, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF THE APPLICANT HAS ANY CONTRARY, UH, CONTRARY INFORMATION TO THAT.
I HAVE NOT ASKED FOR A HIGHER SIGN IN THE CITY OF SHIRTS.
UH, MS. BEVIS, THE, THE STACK SIGN, ARE THOSE NUMBERS CHANGED MANUALLY OR THAT IS AN OLDER SIGN? SO YES.
UM, THAT IS NO LONGER WHAT WE WOULD WANT.
WHAT WE USE THE STANDARD HAS BEEN TO SWITCH THE LEDS.
UM, SO IT WOULD BE L E D EVEN IF WE WENT WITH THE STACK SIGN, LIKE THERE, IT WOULD LOOK SOME, IT WOULD LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THAT EXCEPT THEY WOULD BE RED AND GREEN.
BUT CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE ADVANTAGE IS TO HAVE IT STACKED OR SIDE BY SIDE? ARE THERE ANY ADVANTAGES? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
IT'S MORE OF JUST WHAT KIND OF EVERYONE DOES.
IT'S IT, ME PERSONALLY NOT AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF QUICKTRIP.
THAT'S WHAT I'M USED TO SEEING AND IT, IT'S EASIER TO JUST IDENTIFY RIGHT AWAY WHEN THEY'RE SIDE BY SIDE RATHER THAN HAVING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE'S ON TOP, WHICH ONE'S ON THE BOTTOM.
BUT EITHER WAY IT WOULDN'T CHANGE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO THE NO, NO, NO.
THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD BE THE SAME.
[00:45:01]
MANNA, MR. MANNA, SO YOU MENTIONED YOU HAD SOME ADDITIONAL PICTURES WITH DIFFERENT OPTIONS.DO THOSE INCLUDE DIFFERENT SIZE SIGNS? YES.
YEAH, YOU UM, I, I THINK I WOULD LIKE, IF YOU WANNA GO TO THE NEXT, THE VERY END SLIDE.
SO I DID PREPARE AN ALTERNATE REQUEST.
UM, IT DOES REDUCE THAT HEIGHT TO 65 FEET.
UM, AND THE 50 FOOT WE WOULD PROBABLY BE OPEN TO DISCUSSING AS WELL.
BUT, UM, THIS, THIS WOULD BRING THIS ONE DOWN TO 65 FEET.
IT WOULD REDUCE THE SIGN TO 4 4 4 49, WHICH WOULD BE A VARIANCE OF 75 SQUARE FEET ABOVE THE, UM, ALLOWED 3 75, UM, THE CABINET, THE UM, GAS PRICER WOULD BE 192 SQUARE FEET AND IT WOULD DROP THE QUICKTRIP SIGN DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY, BUT IT SHOULD STILL BE IMPACTFUL AND ALLOW US TO ADVERTISE.
UM, IT WOULD MORE CLOSELY ALIGN WITH U D C, BUT IT WOULD STILL ALLOW, UM, ADEQUATE VISIBILITY AND IT IS STILL SIMILAR IN SIZE TO OTHERS.
I DO HAVE THE DIMENSIONS, I DO HAVE IT PRINTED OUT AS WELL IF SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE A CLOSER VIEW OF IT.
UM, AND LIKE I MENTIONED, WE CAN ADD THAT QUICKTRIP KITCHEN'S LOGO.
THE ONLY REASON I DON'T HAVE IT, UM, PRESENTED IS BECAUSE THAT IS A CUSTOM SIGN.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE DO ALL THE TIME, SO IT WOULD TAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE LEAD TIME, A LITTLE BIT MORE DISCUSSION.
UM, SO WE DON'T THROW THAT OUT THERE ALL THE TIME.
YOU KNOW, ARE THEY ALLOWED TO HAVE JUST MULTIPLE SIGNAGE ON THIS PROPERTY AND UM, ARE THEY KIND OF GIVEN UP SOMETHING BY GOING WITH A ONE? IF THEY HAVE MULTIPLE TENANTS, THEY ARE, UM, ALLOWED A BIGGER SIGN, UM, I CAN GET YOU THOSE CORD OR THAT.
UH, AND THEN QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, ARE YOU ALSO GONNA DO A UM, I GUESS A LITTLE MONUMENT SIGN? LIKE, UH, LIKE THE ONE THAT THEY SHOWED, THE ONE WE SAW ACROSS? YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.
THAT ONE, BUT THAT ONE, THAT ONE COMPLETELY MATCHES THE D D C.
WHAT WOULD THAT ONE BE LOCATED? UM, IT IS ALONG 15, 18 A 1518 MM-HMM.
AND SO WAIT FOR A STAFF'S RESPONSE ON THAT.
AND SO WOULD THAT ONE BE LESS THAN, UH, WHAT'S ALLOWED PER YES.
CODE? SO YEAH, WE'RE NOT SEEKING A VARIANCE FOR THAT SIGN.
SO WHILE THEY'RE LOOKING THAT UP, WHAT HEIGHT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ON THAT SIGN THEN? UM, I BELIEVE THAT ONE IS 40.
YEAH, I DON'T, I DIDN'T PERMIT THAT ONE SO IT WAS ALREADY APPROVED
UH, LET'S SEE IF ANY QUESTIONS MS. PICASSO.
SO HAVING IT AT 75, THAT'S JUST FOR COMPETITOR EDGE OR IS THERE, UM, IT JUST KIND OF PUTS IT RIGHT ALONG WITH ALL THOSE POWER POLES THAT ARE ALONG THERE AND THEN AS YOU'RE DRIVING IT PUTS IT IN PERS WHEN YOU'RE VIEWING THE PERSPECTIVE, IT PUTS IT IN LINE WITH SOME OF THE OTHER SIGNS ON THE PROPERTY.
IS THERE AN ADVANTAGE TO HAVING IT AT 75 LIKE DURING, LIKE AT NIGHT? SO VERSUS HAVING IT AT LIKE A 65 OR AT, AT CODE? UH, I WOULD IMAGINE AT NIGHT THE HEIGHT WOULDN'T BE AS IMPACTFUL BECAUSE YOU'D BE ABLE TO SEE THE SIGN OR THE, THE BRIGHTNESS OF THE, NOT THE BRIGHTNESS BUT THE LIGHT MM-HMM.
AND SO, SO I BELIEVE ON THAT SECTION OF HIGHWAY THERE'S ALSO UM, ROAD SIGNS ON THE SIDES OF THE ROAD, UH, BEFORE THEY EXIT THAT DO INDICATE, UM, UPCOMING VENUES.
UM, AND TRAILBLAZERS ARE SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY, UM, AND THOSE ARE HANDLED SEPARATELY BE OH MS. BE, SO DO YOU, UM, HAPPEN TO KNOW IF THAT TREE, THE AREA THAT'S COVERED WITH TREES, IS THERE A DEVELOPMENT GONNA GO ON THERE WHERE THE TREES WILL EVENTUALLY BE ELIMINATED, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE YOUR SEA? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF RIGHT NOW.
THERE'S NO PLANS ALONG THAT SECTION OF IT.
UM, OUR NEIGHBOR IS A TRUCKING FACILITY AND THEY'VE BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE.
THEY DON'T HAVE ANY EXPANSION PLANS AND THAT'S FARTHER ALONG.
MOST OF THOSE TREES ARE PROBABLY CLOSER TO THE FRONTAGE ROAD THAT WOULD NOT BE PART OF A DEVELOPMENT.
THEY'D BE PART OF LIKE TEXTILE RIGHT OF WAY.
ALSO, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR STAFF THAT WE DETERMINE IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE 12 VOLTS ON THIS OR YEAH, THEY CAN HAVE DIFFERENT SIGNAGE.
THEY CAN HAVE UH, WALL SIGNAGE ON THE BUILDING.
THEY CAN HAVE POLE SIGNAGE AND UM, MONUMENT SIGNAGE.
UM, BUT THE DIMENSIONS OF EACH ONE, WE WILL HAVE TO GET A, UH, SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT FROM SIGNS TO COME DOWN TO EXPLAIN ALL OF THAT.
WE'LL SEE IF WE NEED TO GO THERE NOW.
NOW IN TERMS OF JUST, UH, UH, HOUSEKEEPING ON THE BOARD, DID WE DETERMINE IF OH, MR. VASQUEZ OVER THERE? OKAY.
UH, MR. VASQUEZ IS SITTING OUT.
AND UM, SO IF THERE WAS A MULTIPLE TENANT SIGN THEY WOULD HAVE INSTEAD OF 50 FEET, 60 FEET IN HEIGHT AND INSTEAD OF 3 75 THEY WOULD HAVE 650.
LET'S SEE, DO WE HAVE ANY SOMEBODY SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT OR ANY VOICEMAILS TO READ INTO THE RECORD? SO WE HAVE TWO VOICEMAILS AND ADDITIONALLY THE, UH, SIGNS THAT WE SAW ON THE PICTURES, THOSE ARE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS, SO WE DON'T KNOW THE DIMENSIONS FOR THAT.
[00:50:04]
THIS IS BONNIE CONNOR CALLING ABOUT CASE NUMBER, UH, BO 8 2 3 1 0 3 0 0 2 4 1 A REQUEST BY QT SOUTH L L C FOR A 25 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 50 FOOT STEIN HEIGHT ALLOWANCE TO ALLOW A 75 FOOT TALL SINGLE TENANT SIGN AND A TWO AND ALSO 2 224 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM OF 375 SQUARE FOOT ALLOWANCE TO ALLOW A SINGLE TENANT SIGN TO BE 5 9 8 9 SQUARE FEET LOCATED AT 1 3 1 3 0 EAST IH 10.MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 863-2232.
COLEEN WAPAC 1603 TARTAN LANE, SAN ANTONIO 2 1 0 2 5 9 7 0 6 7.
I'M CALLING TODAY ON ITEM NUMBER SIX ON THE AGENDA, I ASK THAT YOU DENY PETITIONER'S REQUEST TO INCREASE FOCUS SIGN, HEIGHT AND SIZE OF THEIR SIGN AT 13 1 3 0 I 10 EAST CURRENT G P S SYSTEMS, IDENTIFYING LOCATIONS OF SERVICES AT EACH HIGHWAY EXIT.
ADDITIONALLY, TEXT DOT SIGNAGE CAN BE UTILIZED TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO MOTORISTS FOR NEEDED GOODS AND SERVICES.
THE REQUESTED INCREASE IN SIZE AND HEIGHT FOR THE SIGN IS NOT NEEDED IN ORDER TO FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE.
NO CONDITIONS EXIST, WHICH HANDICAP THE PETITIONER'S BUSINESS.
REQUEST WOULD PROVIDE AN UNFAIR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE TO APPLICANT AND WILL LIKELY TRIGGER ADDITIONAL, UH, SIMILAR REQUESTS AS THIS AREA DEVELOPS.
PLEASE DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO VARY FROM THE SIGN CODE REQUIREMENTS.
UH, STAFF, DO WE KNOW IF THOSE, UH, CALLS WERE WITHIN THE 200 FOOT NOTIFICATION OR WE DO NOT.
UM, I SEE THAT THE, UH, CITY SIGN, UH, OFFICER CAME IN AS, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SIGN OFFICER BY THE BOARD WHILE WE HAVE 'EM HERE? NO.
WE MIGHT HAVE SOME, SO WE'LL KINDA HOLD TIGHT.
UM, AT THIS POINT I'D ASK YOU, UH, YOU'VE HEARD SOME OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE VOICEMAILS AND THE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BOARD.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE ANY FINAL REBUTTAL BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? UM, OH, GO AHEAD.
I THINK WE HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE SIGNED OFFICER.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT THIS ONE? UH, UH, MY CONCERN IS THAT THE SIDE IS ELEVATED OVER THE FREEWAY ON, YOU KNOW, ON THE DISTANCE AREA AT ANOTHER 25 FEET OF THE LIKES OF 50 FEET IS UH, REALLY, I MEAN IT NECESSARY.
WE, WE DID A DRIVE, WE WENT AND DROVE BY AND WE LOOKED AT IT AND IT WAS, UM, ACCORDING TO THE SIGN CODE THAT TONY ALLOWED THE, THE 50 FOOT AT 3, 7 5 I THINK, OR 60 FOOT AT SIX 50.
AND, UM, WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT.
YOU, YOU'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH 50, CORRECT? ONLY.
WELL THAT'S WHAT WITH A 75, UH, BVS VISIBLE ENOUGH FROM THE OUTSIDE, FROM THE FREEWAY PER, HUH.
UH, MS. KASO AND THEN MR. ARE, UM, HI.
AS FAR AS LIGHT POLLUTION OR EVEN SIGN POLLUTION, I MEAN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN ADDRESSED THROUGHOUT CITY OF SAN ANTONIO TO WANTING TO REDUCE THIS.
DO WE SEE ANY CONCERN WITH IT BEING AT ONE HEIGHT VERSUS ANOTHER OR IS THAT PRETTY MUCH A NEUTRAL CONSIDERATION AT 50 TO 75? I THINK IT'S PRETTY MUCH CONSIDERATION 50 TO TO SO THERE'D BE JUST A CONS THERE WOULDN'T BE NO, THERE WOULDN'T BE A DIFFERENCE IN THE LIGHT SOLUTION? NOT THAT, NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
SO, UH, IF THIS WAS A MULTI-TENANT SIGN, WHAT WOULD BE THE MAX HEIGHT AND SIZE FOR THIS LOCATION? SIX AND 660.
OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SITE, MS GROUP? MS. CRUZ? OKAY,
[00:55:01]
SO, SO THEN YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE, THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CITY WOULD BE 60 FEET TALL WITH UH, 350 SQUARE FEET? 375 SQUARE FEET? 375.IF IT WAS MULTI, IF IT WAS MULTI-TENANT, CORRECT? YES.
I BELIEVE THIS ONE IS NOT MULTI-TENANT.
SO THEN THEY'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO 50 FEET AT 3 75.
SO, BUT 60 FEET WE CAN GO WITH.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.
NOW THE APPLICANT, UH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE ANY, UM, FINAL REBUTTAL BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? SURE.
SO, UM, AFTER HEARING EVERYONE'S COMMENTS, UM, THE 60 I THINK IS PERFECTLY AGREEABLE.
UM, I REALLY TRULY FEEL THAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS MORE IMPORTANT, UM, BECAUSE WE ARE THAT MULTI-USE, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE UNDER ONE FACILITY, UM, ANY INCREASE ABOVE THE 3 75 WOULD BE APPRECIATED.
THAT'S ONLY A VARIANCE OF 75 SQUARE FEET.
UM, I DO FEEL LIKE THAT WOULD STILL ALIGN WITH THE U D C, KIND OF ACCEPTING THAT WE ARE A MULTI-USE FACILITY ALLOWING THAT, UM, USE OF THE PRICER CABINET.
UM, YEAH, AGAIN, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE I FEEL IS A LITTLE BIT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE HEIGHT.
AND IT DOES SOUND LIKE EVERYONE IS REALLY IN A DISAGREEMENT.
LIKE THEY DON'T WANT THE HEIGHT.
UM, AND I CAN APPRECIATE THAT IT IS ABOVE THE, UM, IT IS ABOVE THE HIGHWAY.
IT'S REALLY MORE TO SERVE THE DISTANCE ALONG THAT HIGHWAY, BUT IF THE HEIGHT IS SOMETHING THAT IS UN AGREEABLE, THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT.
LET ME ASK OF COURSE BEFORE WE GO ON, IS QT KITCHEN ITS OWN L L C UNDER THE SAME QT IN CORPORATIONS OR IS THAT JUST ALL UNDER THE SAME, IS IT JUST A TRADEMARK UNDERNEATH? IT'S A, IT'S A TRADEMARK UNDER QUICKTRIP.
UM, IT DOES HAVE LIKE SEPARATE LICENSING AND STUFF.
WE HAVE TO GO AND GET, UM, FOOD LICENSES JUST LIKE THAT.
K MM-HMM
WE DO HAVE TO GO AND DO ALL OF THAT STUFF AS WELL.
SO IN THAT SENSE IT, IT WOULD BE ITS OWN ENTITY.
BUT IT DOES EXIST IN THE SAME FACILITY.
UM, THE TRANSACTIONS ARE HANDLED AT THE SAME REGISTERS AND STUFF LIKE THAT AND THERE'S NO SEPARATE LEASE TRANSACTION BETWEEN NO, NO, NO, NO.
WHICH GIVES US AN ADVANTAGE, BUT IT GIVES US A DISADVANTAGE.
SOMETIMES IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS WHERE WE'RE NOT MULTIPLE BUSINESSES OPERATING UNDER ONE ROOF, UM, WE'RE JUST NOT TRADITIONAL WITH THE GAS STATIONS LIKE THAT.
A LOT OF THEM, LIKE THE PARTNER, A LOT OF THEM ARE FRANCHISED, THAT KIND OF STUFF, AND WE DON'T DO THAT.
UH, SO WHAT YOUR STATING AS THAT YOU WOULD BE SATISFIED WITH A 50 AND 70 INSTEAD OF A 75? I WOULD BE SATISFIED WITH A 50.
I WOULD PREFER 60, BUT, UM, YEAH, ESPECIALLY IF, IF WE CAN GET THE INCREASED SQUARE FOOTAGE.
ALRIGHT, THAT CLOSES A PUBLIC PORTION.
UM, ORIAN, MS. ORIAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? SURE WOULD.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 23 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 41, I MOVE AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUEST, UH, FOR A, UH, 75 FOOT SQUARE, SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 3,375 SQUARE FOOT ALLOWANCE TO ALLOW A SINGLE 10 TENANT SIGN TO BE UP TO 450 SQUARE FEET SITUATED AT 13 13 0 EAST IH 10, APPLICANT BEING QT SOUTH L L C.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE THE VARIANCE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE STRICT PERFORMANCE AND, UH, ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ARTICLE PROHIBITS ANY REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGNS ON THE SITE.
CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF A SITE SUCH AS ITS DIMENSIONS, LANDSCAPING, OR TOPOGRAPHY ORI, A DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE WOULD PROBABLY CAUSE THE CESSATION OF LEGITIMATE LONG SENDING ACTIVE COMMERCIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY.
THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY QUALIFIES FOR A SIGN 50 FEET IN HEIGHT, 375 SQUARE FEET PER SINGLE TENANT SIGN.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE OR WRECK THE SIGN TO BE UP TO 450 SQUARE FEET TO SAFELY ALLOW TRUCKS TO SAFELY VIEW AND EXIT.
THE VARIANCE IS NECESSARY IN THIS CASE.
AFTER SEEKING ONE OR MORE OF THE FINDINGS SET FORTH AND SUBPARAGRAPH ONE AND TWO, THE BOARD FINDS THAT A GRANTING THE VARIANCE IS NOT PROVIDE THE APPLICANT WITH A SPECIAL P PRIVILEGE NOT ENJOYED BY OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED OR POTENTIALLY SIMILARLY SITUATED.
THE PROPOSED SIGN DOES NOT APPEAR TO PROVIDE A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE AS THERE ARE OTHER SIGNS OF THIS HEIGHT OR SQUARE FOOTAGE IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
B GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE A SUBSTANTIALLY ADD ADVERSE IMPACT ON ENABLING PROPERTIES.
THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT, UH, ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AS THERE ARE OTHER SIGNS OF THIS HYDRO SQUARE FOOTAGE AND APPEAR TO BE SIMILAR TO THE SIGN REGULATION.
STANDARD C GRANTING GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH THE STATED PURPOSES OF THIS ARTICLE.
SIGN EXCEEDING, SIGN EXCEEDING, UH, 375 SQUARE FEET WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH THE SIGN REGULATION STANDARDS.
THAT A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND.
OH, SO I, I, UH, UM, LISTENING TO THE APPLICANT, UM, I, I SOMEWHAT AGREE THAT THE FOUR 50 WOULD BE OKAY BECAUSE IN A WAY THEY'RE KIND OF LIKE A MULTI-TENANT AND GIVING THEM A LITTLE BIT EXTRA
[01:00:01]
DIDN'T SEEM LIKE A BIG DEAL, BUT I COULDN'T GET PAST THE SIGN HEIGHT SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT BELOW THE HIGHWAY FOR ONE.AND NUMBER TWO, UH, THE SURROUNDING AREA AT CITY OF SHIRTS UH, THROUGH LOOKING IN THEIR CODE, THEY HAVE A MAX SIGN HEIGHT OF 50 AS WELL.
SO IT WOULD, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE FAIR TO GIVE THEM A COMPETITIVE EDGE OVER EVERYONE AROUND THEM, UH, WHEN THEY DON'T REALLY NEED IT.
GIVEN THAT THERE IS NOT MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 50 AND THE 75, UM, WHEN IT CAME TO, UH, LIGHT ILLUMINATION OR, AND ALSO LOOKING AT THE OTHER COMPETITORS AND THAT THEY ARE AT SIMILAR HEIGHTS, I FELT LIKE THIS IS FINE.
I'D ALSO BE FINE WITH REDUCING IT TO A 65 FOOT, UM, TO KEEP WITH THE STANDARD WITH WHAT'S BEEN CONSISTENTLY AROUND IN THE AREA.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WERE TWO PEOPLE THAT WERE IN OPPOSED TO IT.
HOWEVER, GIVEN THAT, LOOKING AT WHAT'S AROUND THERE, AGAIN, YOU'RE, I KNOW YOU'RE AT THE VERY EDGE OF THE CITY LIMITS, BUT I, I DON'T SEE, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
SO, SO JUST A FRIENDLY REMINDER FOR THE COUNCIL OR FOR THE COMMITTEE HERE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS HAS BEEN WORKED THROUGH BY SEPARATE COMMITTEES WITH REGARDS TO SIGN HEIGHTS AND CITY WITH STAFF, WITH BUSINESSES, WITH CITIZENS KIND OF CAME OUT WITH THESE, THESE STANDARDS.
SO, SO I THINK, UH, ABIDING BY THEM AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE IS, IS, IS IMPORTANT.
AND SO I, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS.
UM, YOU KNOW, UM, I THINK THE 50 FOOT IS, IS WHERE MY CUTOFF WAS, SO, ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE.
UM, I LIKE, UH, YOU HAVE A, TO SUBMIT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
THAT, UH, SIGN, UH, MAXIMUM HEIGHT TO BE 50 FEET AND NOT 75 FEET.
AND THE, THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT THEY, THAT'S WHAT IT IS.
I DID NOT READ, UH, I DID NOT READ THE HEIGHT PORTION OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO SIGN SIZE.
ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, TAKE A, A, A ROLL CALL VOTE.
MR. ZUNIGA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. URA? YES, I CONCUR WITH 11 IN FAVOR.
ZERO AGAINST THE MOTION PASSES AS READ.
UH, PLEASE, UH, GET WITH STAFF IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
ITEM SEVEN BO 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 1 ADDRESS IS 9 4 5 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE APPLICANT IS JAMIL YABO AND DAVID SCH LECHNER A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF DOWNTOWN BETWEEN IH 10 WEST AND BLANCO ROAD IN THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN EXCEPTION FOR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALREADY BUILT THAT SEPARATES AN ACCESSORY DWELLING FROM THE REST OF THE REAR YARD.
THERE'S AN ALLEY IN THE REAR, WHICH WOULD NORMALLY ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE REAR AND SIDE YARD.
HOWEVER, THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT DOES NOT PERMIT ANY FENCES IN THE REAR AND SIDE YARD OVER SIX FEET.
THIS IS A SITE PLAN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FENCE AND REAR YARD, ADDITIONAL END SURROUNDING AREA.
AND THIS IS THE ALLEY STAFF RECOMMENDATION FENCE HEIGHTS SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 1.
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT GOES AGAINST THE ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT STANDARD AND TWO, IT'LL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS NO OTHER EIGHT FOOT FENCES WERE OBSERVED.
NOTIFICATION PLAN STAFF MAILED OUT TONY THREE NOTICES.
ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION AND BEACON HILL ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE.
SO REAL QUICK, UH, I BELIEVE BEACON HILL DID RESPOND, UM, AS OPPOSED AND IT WAS IN THE, UH, EMAIL THAT WAS SENT EARLIER.
SO, SO HAVE WE SEEN THIS ADDRESS BEFORE ON A PREVIOUS CASE? YES, IT HAS BEEN ON THE AGENDA BEFORE.
[01:05:01]
AND JUST AS A REMINDER, IT IS A FENCE WITHIN A FENCE.SO THERE IS A SIX FOOT FENCE, BUT THEN THERE'S AN INTERIOR EIGHT FOOT FENCE.
SO WHAT ARE WE SAYING? WE'RE HERE, WE'RE HEARING THIS CASE, WE'RE HEARING THIS CASE AGAIN.
YES, IT WAS, YEAH, IT WAS CONTINUED AND THEN THERE WAS SOME SCHEDULING ISSUES WITH THE APPLICANT.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ABOUT MR. ORIAN? YEAH, UH, UH, SO THE QUESTION I HAD IS, UH, STAFF IS, DO YOU LOOK AT THIS ANY DIFFERENTLY AS AN INTERIOR FENCE? IS THERE ANY POINT WHERE IT DOESN'T BE, IT'S NOT CONSIDERED FENCE AND IT'S CONSIDERED LIKE A WALL OR SOMETHING BECAUSE IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE ATTACHED TO A STRUCTURE? NO, SIR.
UNFORTUNATELY, IT, IT'S CONSIDERED A FENCE AND THAT'S THE WAY IT'S SEEN.
I MEAN, BUT IT IS NOT ATTACHED TO TO A STRUCTURE.
CORRECT? YEAH, IT WOULD BE A WALL, UM, IF IT WAS ATTACHED TO THE STRUCTURE AND WITHIN THE BUILDING SETBACKS.
THAT'S, I WAS ASKING 'CAUSE ON THE SITE PLAN THERE, IT, IT REFLECTS A PORCH AND IT SHOWS THAT THE FENCE IS RIGHT UP AGAINST, UH, THIS APPARENT PORCH AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF THE PORCH WOULD WOULD BECAUSE IT, IT'S EXTENDING OUT OFF SOMETHING THAT'S PART OF THE GUEST HOME THAT THAT WOULD QUALIFY IT, IT AS BEING VIEWED AS A WALL OR AT LEAST A PORTION OF IT.
I'M JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE.
ALRIGHT, THEY'RE LOOKING INTO THAT.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, FOR STAFF HEARING THAT I'D ASK THE APPLICANT, UH, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND, UH, LET'S HEAR THE PRESENTATION.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY THAT, UM, WALL WOULD BE ONLY FOR THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE, NOT FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY.
THERE WERE ACTUALLY A FEW, UM, RESPONSES FROM, I'M SORRY, I'M, CAN WE GET YOUR NAME FIRST? SURE.
JAMELE YARBOROUGH SID IN 9 45 WEST SUMMIT WITH MY HUSBAND DAVID SLINKER, WHO UNFORTUNATELY WASN'T ABLE TO BE HERE DUE TO A WORK COMMITMENT.
UM, BUT I ALSO WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THERE WERE ACTUALLY SOME RESPONSES FROM OUR NEIGHBORS, UM, FROM THE LAST CASE.
UH, I WAS TOLD THAT THOSE RESPONSES WOULD BE INCLUDED IN TODAY'S PRESENTATION.
SO WE ACTUALLY HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE IN FAVOR, UH, WITHIN 200 FEET OF OUR PROPERTY, OF OUR, OUR FENCE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT, I'M NOT REALLY SURE IF THAT IN THAT INFORMATION IS STILL AVAILABLE.
UM, BUT I WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS, WE SHOULD HAVE THAT FOR PUBLIC RECORD OR FOR IF, IF WE HAVE THAT, WE'LL PRESENT IT.
WE'LL PULL IT OUT FROM THE PREVIOUS CASE.
UH, I RESIDE AT 9 45 WEST SUMMIT IN BEACON HILL WITH MY HUSBAND DAVIS LINKER.
UH, WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TODAY TO REQUEST AN APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST, UH, OF TWO ADDITIONAL FEE FOR OUR, OUR PRIVACY FENCE.
UH, WE ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR A FEW REASONS.
UM, ONE IS THE NNC D DASH FIVE MENTIONS THAT, UM, UH, SIDE FENCING SHALL NOT EXCEED SIX FEET.
UM, THE FENCE THAT WE BUILD STANDS, UH, WITHIN OUR PROPERTY LINES, UM, AS THE, AS THE SITE PLAN INDICATES.
UM, SO THERE ISN'T A RULE A, ACCORDING TO THE N C D THAT OPPOSES A FENCE BEING BUILT WITHIN OUR PROPERTY LINES, NOR IS IT REGULATING THE HEIGHT OF SUCH FENCE.
SO THE ONLY SECTION OF THE FENCE THAT WE ARE BUILDING THAT WOULD BE PUBLIC FACING WOULD BE THE FENCE THAT'S FACING THE, THE REAR, UM, THAT'S FACING THE ALLEY.
AS YOU SAW, WE HAVE AN ALLEY, UM, IN THE BACK OF OUR HOME.
SO BY HAVING THE FENCE BUILT THE WAY THAT WE INTEND, WE WILL, WE WOULD NOT BE ALTERING, UH, THE STREET FACING FENCE, THEREFORE NOT IMPEDING ON PUBLIC INTEREST AND, UH, REINFORCING SECURITY FOR OUR PROPERTY AS THE FENCE.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE, THE, THE ALLEY IS PRETTY ACTIVE.
THERE'S A LOT OF HOMELESS FOLKS WALKING THROUGH AND, UM, WHEN I FIRST MOVED INTO THE HOUSE, I HAD TO SHOE AWAY, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF PEOPLE TRYING TO GET INTO THE, INTO THE PROPERTY.
UM, AND I ALSO SUBMITTED A VIDEO OF, UM, ME REACHING OVER THE FENCE, UM, BEING A FIVE FOOT NINE PERSON AND BEING ABLE TO EASILY JUST LIKE OPEN UP THE GATE.
I'M NOT REALLY SURE IF THAT'S OF HAVE BEEN RECEIVED OR YOU'VE GOT THAT WE SENT IT TO, SENT IT IN.
UM, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THAT.
UM, WE ALSO GARNERED, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT.
SO WE'VE SECURED SUPPORT FROM OUR IMMEDIATE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS ALONG WITH THOSE THAT ARE WITHIN 200 FEET OF OUR PROPERTY, AS I INDICATED FROM OUR, FROM THE LAST TIME THAT WE WERE HERE.
UM, SO, AND THEY ALL ATTEST THAT THE SUPPORT OF, UH, THE, IN SUPPORT OF OUR FENCE AND STATING THAT, UH, SUCH FENCE WOULD NOT IMPEDE ON THE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY, NOR WOULD IT LIMIT ACCESS TO OR IN THEIR ENJOYMENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN ANY WAY.
ALSO, THE, THE VOTE FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UM, WAS NOT IN OUR FAVOR, BUT IT WAS A VERY CLOSE VOTE.
IT WAS A VOTE OF 22 TO 20, SO, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS PRETTY DIVIDED.
[01:10:01]
OUR FENCE IS ALSO NOT A PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERN, UH, NOR IS IT A PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERN.IT'S A FENCE THAT HAS BEEN BUILT WITHIN OUR PROPERTY LINES AND, UM, OUR FENCE DOES GO, DOESN'T GO AGAINST THE AESTHETICS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AS IT WAS MADE OF, IT'S MADE OF WOOD, UH, WHICH IS THE SAME MATERIAL AS THE OTHER FENCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PHOTOS THAT WE'VE, I MEAN, WE DID PROVIDE PHOTOS FROM THE LAST HEARING, BUT THERE WERE MULTIPLE PROPERTIES WITHIN 200 FEET OF OUR, OF OUR PROPERTY THAT HAD WHAT APPEARED TO BE EIGHT FOOT FENCES AND HIGHER, AND I CAN SEE THREE OF THEM FROM MY PROPERTY.
UM, SO WE'RE HOPING THAT IN THE SPIRIT OF EQUITY THAT YOU WOULD APPROVE, UM, OUR REQUEST.
LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, MS. PICASSO, DO YOU INTEND TO REMOVE THE SIX FOOT FENCE AT ANY POINT? NO, WE DON'T.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO BUILD A BIGGER FENCE THERE IF IT'S POSSIBLE.
I MEAN, WE DON'T WANT TO UPSET OUR NEIGHBORS OR UPSET THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
SO IF THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE, THEN WE WILL KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS.
BUT, UM, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO.
UM, WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF, OF THE FENCE? I, I SEE FROM THE DIAGRAM THAT THAT'S A GUEST HOUSE WITH A PORCH MM-HMM.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF HAVING THE FENCE AROUND THAT GUEST HOUSE? SO, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
THE PURPOSE OF IT IS JUST TO BASICALLY PROVIDE A BARRIER BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, OUR MAIN DWELLING AND THE GUEST HOUSE.
WE ARE PLANNING ON AIRBNBING IT.
SO WE FIGURED THAT IT'D BE NICE TO HAVE A SEPARATION SO THAT WHOMEVER RENTS IT OUT WOULD HAVE, UM, THE FEEL OF LIKE AN EXCLUSIVE SPACE, YOU KNOW, OF THEIR OWN.
UM, SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE BUILT THE FENCE.
UH, AND YOU DON'T FEEL A SIX FOOT FENCE WOULD PROVIDE THAT PRIVACY.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE FELT LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE, SO IT'S A PRIVACY FENCE.
SO LIKE, YOU KNOW, AT SIX FOOT OUR HOME IS ON PEM BEAMS, WHICH MEANS IT'S A LITTLE ELEVATED.
UM, SO IF A PERSON WAS STAYING THERE AND FROM THE BEDROOM, YOU CAN ACTUALLY LIKE KIND OF SEE INTO THE, THE BACK ROOM OF, OF OUR PROPERTY.
SO WE WANTED IT TO BE A LITTLE HIGHER SO THAT WE CAN GET A LITTLE PRIVACY, UM, AND ALSO LIKE A LITTLE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TWO SPACES.
ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? CRUZ, MS. CRUZ? SO BETWEEN THE FENCE AND YOU SAID YOU, IT'S A GUEST HOUSE BEHIND YOU.
UH, IS THERE A DIFFERENT WAY OF THEM GETTING INTO THE PROPERTY? IS THERE A DIFFERENT WAY FOR THEM GETTING INTO THE PROPERTY? UM, WELL, THE ONLY WAY THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO ENTER OUR PROPERTY WOULD BE FROM THAT.
AS YOU CAN SEE THAT OPENING THERE, THERE'S, THERE'S GONNA BE A GATE THERE, UM, WHERE WE ONLY HAVE ACCESS TO LIKE GET IN AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO, YEAH.
SO THAT'S, THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY WAY THAT YOU CAN GET IN FROM THAT PROP, THAT SIDE OF OUR PROPERTY TOO, OUR MAIN DWELLING.
NO, BUT I'M SAYING IS, UH, SINCE YOU'RE GONNA RENT IT OUT MM-HMM.
THAT, THAT HOUSE BESIDES THE ALLEY THERE IS, SO IF YOU WERE TO GO THROUGH THAT GATE AND MAKE A LEFT, THAT IS FACING GRANT STREET, UH, THERE IS, THERE'S A GATE, THERE'S CURRENTLY THERE THAT WHERE THEY CAN ACCESS AND GET INTO IT.
SO THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE PROPERTY FROM, FROM GRANT STREET.
SO THEN THEY WOULDN'T BE USING THE ALLEY FOR ANYTHING, CORRECT? NO, THEY WOULDN'T BE USING THE ALLEY FOR ANYTHING.
BESIDES POSSIBLY TAKING TRASH OUT.
UM, AS THE, UH, THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION IS RED, IT'S, IT'S, UH, THE SIDE AND THE REAR YARD SET OR THE REAR YARD, IS THERE A WAY TO DEFINE THE LIMITS OF THE FENCE TO WHAT THE SITE PLAN SHOW OR WHAT THE EXISTING CONDITION IS VERSUS GRANTING THE VARIANCE WHERE HE CAN DO THE ENTIRE SIDE OR CORRECT? WE CAN LIMIT IT TO THE, UH, SITE PLAN IN THE RECORD.
ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? ORIAN, MR. ORIAN? YES.
UH, SO FOR THE APPLICANT, SOMETIMES, UH, WHEN PEOPLE COME TO US AND THEY HAVE, UH, A MULTITUDE OF, OF, OF, UH, LOCATIONS WHERE THEY WANT SOMETHING WITH A TALLER FENCE.
SO ON YOUR SIDE PLAN, IS THERE ANY PORTION OF THIS EIGHT FOOT FENCE? AND I, AND I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE PORTION PARALLEL THE ALLEY, UH, BETWEEN THE HOME AND THE GAS HOME AND THEN ALONG THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE OF THOSE THREE PORTIONS, IS THERE, IS THERE A, A PORTION THAT YOU COULD LIVE WITH THE FENCE BEING SIX FEET? UM, YEAH, WE COULD, UM, I, I, YOU KNOW, WE PREFER TO HAVE A SIX FEET, UH, FENCE IN THE ALLEY.
UM, BUT I'M SORRY, AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE ALLEY.
BUT IF, UH, WE COULD, WE, WE HAD TO MAKE SOME CONCESSIONS, WE WOULD BE FINE WITH THE SIX FOOT FENCE IN THE ALLEY.
BUT YOU WOULD, BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT PORTION WOULD BE, UH, OUT, OUT OF THE THREE RUNS, WHICH ONE'S MORE IMPORTANT FOR EIGHT FEET TO YOU? UM, FOR US, WE, AGAIN, WE BUILT THE FENCE AT FOR, FOR PRIVACY PURPOSES.
SO WHAT WOULD BE THE MOST IMPORTANT WOULD BE THE, UM, THE FENCE THAT'S, THAT'S, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DESCRIBE IT, BUT GOING ACROSS EAST, EAST TO WEST AND THEN, UM, I'M SORRY.
[01:15:01]
OH, OKAY.WHERE IS IT? WELL, THE PARALLEL.
YEAH, BETWEEN, BETWEEN THE MAIN HOME AND THE GUEST HOME.
SO THIS ONE HERE AND THIS ONE HERE.
THE REASON WHY I BRING THIS UP IS THAT AS WHEN WE MOVE ON INTO DELIBERATION, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU NEED NINE VOTES, SOMETIMES WE MIGHT HAVE TO COMPROMISE.
AND I'D JUST LIKE TO GET JUST TO, JUST TO HEAR FROM YOU WHAT, WHAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT, UH, TO BE EIGHT FEET.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT STAFF? DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, VOICEMAIL OR PUBLIC COMMENTS TO BE READ WITH THE RECORD? I HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 3 0 0 1 4 1 AT 9 4 5 WEST SUMMIT.
I RESIDE AT TEN TWENTY FIVE WEST ATCH.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 287-9025.
DEAR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS, BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OPPOSES THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST FOR 9 4 5 WEST SUMMIT RESIDENTS.
IN AN ADVERTISED MEETING, WE DISTRIBUTE 2200 NEWSLETTERS TO RESIDENTS, VOTED TO OPPOSE THE TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM OF SIX FEET FOR AN EIGHT FOOT REAR YARD FENCE REQUESTED BY THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY.
THE APPLICANT IS PRESENTED TO THE RESIDENCE.
THE ZONING AND URBAN DESIGN COMMUNICATE ITS PRESENTATION AND RECOMMENDATION AND THEN FOLLOWED INTO QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD FINALIZED BY A NOTE VOTE OF 23 IN OPPOSITION AND 20 IN SUPPORT.
I E THE ASSOCIATION VOTED TO OPPOSE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST THAT MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS ON VARIANCES BASED ON THE IDEA THAT THERE'S A CONCRETE AND VERIFIABLE SAFETY ISSUE OR AN UNAVOIDABLE HARDSHIP THAT DOES NOT CREATE A PRECEDENCE OR HARDSHIP FOR THE NEIGHBORS.
UNFORTUNATELY, A VARIANCE FOR OFFENSE TO CREATE PRIVACY OR SAFETY FROM AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT WITH THE STATED INTENTION OF RENTING AS A TYPE ONE S D R THAT WAS JUST BUILT BY THE OWNERS DOES NOT MEET THESE CRITERIA.
THE FENCE AS EVIDENCED BY THE PHOTO, IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
THE PROPERTY IS A CORNER LOT IN GRANT AVENUE, WHICH IS ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IS A POPULAR CORRIDOR FOR DOG WALKERS.
PARENTS WITH CHILDREN'S STROLLERS, STROLLERS, CYCLISTS, AND WALKERS.
PLEASE HELP US PROTECT OUR N C D FIVE GRASSROOTS DESIGN STANDARDS CREATED BY THE APPLICANT'S NEIGHBORS TO PROTECT THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF OUR COMMUNITY BY DENYING THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR AN EIGHT FOOT REAR REAR YARD FENCE.
RESPECTFULLY, DANIEL HUBING AND CYNTHIA SPIELMAN, THE LIVING AND URBAN DESIGN COMMITTEE.
CO-CHAIRS, BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ALRIGHT, THAT, UM, SO I CAN CONFIRM THAT WHEN WE ORIGINALLY PRESENTED THIS CASE, THERE WAS TWO VOICEMAILS IN SUPPORT, UM, BOTH WITHIN 200 FEET.
UM, WE CAN'T PLAY THOSE AGAINST SINCE WE ALREADY PLAYED 'EM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD.
SO TWO IN FAVOR ON THE VOICEMAILS.
ONE AGAINST AND THAT ONE AGAINST BEING THE ASSOCIATION? CORRECT.
AND NO OTHER, UM, WRITTEN OR EMAIL? THERE WERE.
UM, SO WE CAN, AND VINCENT, IF YOU CAN SHOW THE, UM, 'CAUSE I THOUGHT THERE WERE SOME OTHER EMAILS YEAH, OTHER EMAILS.
THE EMAILS THAT WE PRESENTED ON THE FIRST CASE REAL QUICK, PLEASE.
AND I RECALL YOU HAD A PETITION, RIGHT? A PETITION? UH, UH I KNOW THERE YOU MEAN ONE OF THESE? YEAH, AT THE, YEAH, THERE WAS ALSO ONE THAT CAME IN AS WELL.
I THINK THERE WERE TWO ACTUALLY, ADDITIONALLY, THE GENTLEMAN MENTIONED THAT HE HAD, HAD PICTURES OF SIMILAR FENCES TO HIM AND WITHIN A 200, UH, PROXIMITY, DO WE HAVE THOSE FOR US TO BE ABLE TO VIEW AS WELL? HE MENTIONED THAT HE, HE SENT THEM IN FOR A RECORD.
THEY WERE ALL SHOWN AT THE LAST HEARING AS WELL.
YEAH, WE ONLY HAVE WHAT WE HAD IF THEY WERE SHOWN IN THE ORIGINAL HEARING.
UM, I WAS NOT AT THE ORIGINAL HEARING, SO THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE TO VIEW THEM IN ORDER TO MAKE LIKE, YEAH, ALL WE HAVE IS WHAT WE HAVE FOR OUR PRESENTATION THAT WE SHOWED.
DID YOU HAVE THOSE ON YOUR PHONE? 'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S HOW THEY WERE PRESENTED BEFORE.
UM, I THINK THEY WE'RE HAPPY TO DO IT THAT WAY, BUT WE JUST DON'T HAVE RECORD THEM ON FILE FOR THE RECORD.
WE DO ALSO HAVE A VIDEO THAT THEY'RE LOADING UP.
[01:20:16]
WE KNOW WHAT DO WE, OKAY.I WAS ABLE TO FIND SOME PHOTOS.
UH, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE VIDEO IS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT? OH, I DIDN'T SEE IT.
OH, SO THAT'S ME IN THE ALLEY.
UM, JUST I'M ABLE TO EASILY OPEN, UM, THE, THE GATE FROM THE, FROM THE ALLEY.
BUT AGAIN, AS I SAID, THE, I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT PART WAS FOR US TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PRIVACY FOR THE DWELLING.
IF WE HAVE TO MAKE CONCESSIONS AND, YOU KNOW, WE'D BE WILLING TO KEEP IT AT SIX FOOT.
SO, SO I DID HAVE A QUESTION 'CAUSE 'CAUSE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT AN S T R AND I THINK ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN S T R IS PARKING.
SO, SO WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR PARKING FOR SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE, THE PARKING IS NOT, UM, IS NOT, IS NOT MANDATED UNLESS IT IS ABOVE 800 SQUARE FEET.
SO THAT'S THE PARKING SITUATION WOULD BE, UM, SO THAT'S FOR, UH, ACCESSORY, UH, DWELLING, WHICH YOU ARE CORRECT, BUT IF YOU WERE DOING A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, YOU DO REQUIRE PARKING.
UH, SO PARKING WOULD BE OFF, OFF OF, UH, GRANT STREET, OFF STREET PARKING, WHICH WE WERE TOLD.
OH, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE OKAY.
IF, IF YOU'RE DOING A SHORT, AND THIS IS OBVIOUSLY SEPARATE FROM THE VARIANCE, UH, IF YOU'RE DOING A SHORT TERM RENTAL, ONE OF THE REVIEW PROCESSES, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A OFF STREET PARKING SPACE FOR THAT SHORT TERM RENTAL, NO MATTER THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO THERE IS, THERE IS OFF STREET PARKING ON GRAND STREET.
I'M SORRY, ON NOT ON THE STREET.
OH, THAT'S, THAT WASN'T WHAT IT WAS THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE.
IN FACT, YOU HAD, IT WAS YOU WHO TOLD US THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY OKAY FOR US TO HAVE OFF STREET PARKING.
I'M NOT, YEAH, THIS IS THE, AGAIN, SHORT TERM, THE S E R ORDINANCE, NOTHING TO DO WITH DEFENSE MOTION.
RIGHT? YEAH, THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST HERE.
SO, AND FOR MY OWN RECORD, WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT THIS CASE WAS BROUGHT TO THE BOARD? JUNE 24TH.
UH, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
SO THE WAY THE, UM, MOTION AND THE REQUEST IS, IT SAYS, UM, EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY OFFENSE IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD.
SO, UM, IF, AS THE APPLICANT HAS SAID THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT PIECE OF IT IS THE FENCE BETWEEN THE TWO STRUCTURES, IF THAT'S ALL HE NEEDS, DOES THIS EVEN NEED TO BE READ? CORRECT.
I MEAN, HE WOULD STILL NEED, IT'S LOCATED IN THE SIDE AND EVEN IF YOU'RE JUST APPROVING THE NORTH AND WESTERN PORTION, WE WOULD STILL READ IT AS THE SIDE AND REAR AND JUST LIMIT IT TO THE SITE PLAN.
UM, AND WE WOULD JUST ADJUST THAT SITE PLAN.
UM, I THINK WE SHOULD JUST MAKE, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE APPROVING, WE WOULD JUST MAKE MENTION THAT ONLY THE NOR, UH, EAST TO WEST RUNNING FENCE WOULD BE APPROVED.
WHAT THAT WOULD INCLUDE THIS, THIS PIECE? NO, NO, EAST TO WEST.
SO, UM, I GUESS YOU'VE HEARD THE COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD, FROM THE PUBLIC, UM, READINGS.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE ANY FINAL, UH, REBUTTAL BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? UM, YEAH, JUST, I MEAN, I HAVE PHOTOS OF THE FENCES IN THE, IN THE AREA THAT ARE ABOVE EIGHT FOOT.
UM, AGAIN, I, YOU KNOW, I IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH LIKE YOU ARE, YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO JUST MAKE THE EAST AND WEST FENCE.
UH, WE WE'RE ASKING THAT WE CAN MAKE THE EAST AND WEST FENCE AND THE FENCE THAT'S GOING TOWARDS THE ALLEY, THE SAME HEIGHT AT EIGHT FOOT MM-HMM.
UM, AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S GARNERING LIKE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE, WHICH IS PRIVACY FOR, UH, THAT SPACE AND FOR US AS WELL.
AND FOR OUR, UH, OUR NEIGHBOR WHO SUBMITTED A, A VOICEMAIL WHO STATED THAT HAVING THAT FENCE WOULD ALSO GARNER HER THE PRIVACY THAT SHE'S LOOKING FOR FOR HER YARD TOO.
SO, UM, I JUST WISH THAT THOSE VOICEMAILS WOULD HAVE BEEN, UH, YOU KNOW, MADE AVAILABLE AS WELL AS THE PHOTOS THAT WE SUBMITTED SO THAT YOU CAN FEEL FOR LIKE WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE.
UM, AND JUST IN THE SPIRIT OF EQUITY, I JUST HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN MAINTAIN OUR FENCE BECAUSE IT, IT DOES LOOK A LITTLE WEIRD THAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO HAVE OUR FENCE, BUT WE HAVE LOTS OF PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHO HAVE EIGHT FOOT FENCES OR HIGHER.
UM, SO, BUT THANK YOU FOR HEARING MY CASE.
I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
I'D ASK A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION BRAGMAN MS. BRAGMAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 23 DASH 0 3 0 1 41.
[01:25:02]
I MOVED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE, UH, RUNNING EAST TO WEST ON, ON THE INTERIOR OF THE PROPERTY, SITUATED AT 9 5 4 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING JAMEL YARBOROUGH AND, UH, DAVID, UH, LANKER BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOWED THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SET THROUGH A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS EMITTED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER.
THE FENCE HEIGHT BEING REQUEST IS AN EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE RUNNING EAST TO WEST ON THE, IN INTERIOR OF THE PROPERTY.
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 IN THIS CASE.
THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT PROPERTY, UM, PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING INSTANCE OF PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY.
THE PROPOSED FENCE BEING REQUESTED WILL BE LOCATED, UM, RUNNING EAST TO WEST ON THE INTERIOR OF THE PROPERTY, UM, AND IS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT BY TWO FEET FOR THE PRIVACY FENCE.
THIS FENCE WILL SERVE THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE SEED.
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 PROPERTY FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT.
THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT IS IN THE INTERIOR OF THE PROPERTY, DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE LOCATION FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT AS A BUDDING BASED ZONING DISTRICT.
IS REG RESIDENTIALLY ZONED TO THE EAST AND WEST ALONG WEST KINGS HIGHWAY.
UH, E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED BY THE, FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT.
THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT.
MS. BRAGMAN? UH, YEAH, I, UH, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE INTENT, UH, THAT THE APPLICANT IS TRYING TO ACHIEVE.
I THINK THAT THAT WILL EQUALLY BE ACHIEVED WITH THE MOTION AS READ, UM, AND STILL SATISFIED THE BEACON HILL, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
MR. MADAM? UM, YES, THE, THE ONLY THING I WOULD MAYBE ADD POTENTIALLY IS THAT THE SETBACKS OF THE FENCE REMAIN AS THEY ARE ON THE DIAGRAM.
SO ENSURE THAT THEY DON'T RUN ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE SIDE TO SIDE FENCES.
SO, SO ESSENTIALLY AS DRAWN OKAY.
ACCEPTED AND THEN, AND THEN AS A NOTE, SO, UM, HARDSCAPES, YOU KNOW, AND, UH, CAN OFTEN BE, UH, AUGMENTED OR REPLACED BY SOFT SCAPES AND SO, SO, SO PLANTS REALLY DO A GREAT JOB FOR SCREENING.
AND SO I THINK THIS CASE, THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE AS AN OPTION FOR, UH, FOR THAT SIDE OVER THERE.
THE NORTH SOUTH SIDE ON THE, THE NORTH SIDE? YEAH, THE NORTH, SOUTH SIDE.
YOU COULD, YOU COULD REPLACE PLANTS THERE AND MAKE IT REALLY NICE AND OKAY.
AND SO, AND SO FOR THAT REASON, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
RIGHT? I I GUESS THERE'S NO, WOULD THERE BE ANY CONSIDERATION FOR A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE THE EIGHT FOOT ALONG THE NEIGHBORING SIDE PROPERTY LINE? THAT IF THAT'S MOST AFFECTED BY, OKAY.
I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THAT? I WAS, I WAS SEEKING A AMENDMENT.
'CAUSE RIGHT NOW THE, THE VARIANCE IS ONLY FOR THE PORTION BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS.
I WAS SEEING IF THERE WAS ANY, UM, SUPPORT FROM THE BOARD TO DO THAT EIGHT FOOT ALONG THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
SO COMMISSIONER MATTIS SUGGESTED, YOU KNOW, THE PLANTINGS OR SOMETHING TO GET THAT EIGHT FOOT UHHUH UM, UH, CLEARANCE.
AND I THINK THAT'S THE WAY THE BOARD IS SEEKING TO, UH, SOLVE THAT, UH, EIGHT FOOT, UH, OKAY.
SO HEARING NONE, I'D ASK THE, UH, SO MR. SHARON? YES, MR. ZUNIGA, YOU WERE LOOKING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO GO THE WAY IT, UH, I PULLED IT.
IT'S NOT GONNA HA IT'S, IT'S, THERE'S NO SUPPORT FOR IT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, DR.
MS. AVIVE? YES, MR. DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT.
ONE OPPOSED? YEAH, I DIDN'T HEAR THE ONE OPPOSED.
UH, THE, THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION, UH, PASSES.
PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND, UH, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ON THE NEXT CASE OR THAT'S, THAT'S FINE.
[01:30:01]
TO THIS AGAINST CASE? MM-HMM.ITEM NUMBER A IS BO EIGHT DASH 23 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 3 3.
ADDRESS IS 1 6 5 NORTH SAN FELIPE AVENUE IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE.
UH, THE APPLICANT IS OR FOOT TRAVINO.
AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE WITH THREE FOOT EIGHT INCH SIDE SETBACKS AND TWO A 2,125 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE, FROM THE MINIMUM 5,000 SQUARE FEET REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A DEVELOPMENT ON A 2,875 SQUARE FOOT LOT.
AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS R FIVE.
UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG NORTH SAN FELIPE AVENUE, NORTH OF WEST COMMERCE STREET.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON A CURRENTLY VACANT LOT, UH, LAW AND BUILDING RE LAW AND BUILDING REGULATIONS FOR AN R FIVE ZONE LOT, INCLUDING MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 5,000 SQUARE FEET AND FIVE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A LOT SIZE OF 2,875 SQUARE FEET AND THE STRUCTURE TO BE LOCATED THREE FOOT EIGHT INCHES FROM BOTH SIDE PROPERTY LINES.
AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIDE, STEPBACK AND LOT SIZE VARIANCES STAFF RECOMMENDS AN APPROVAL IN BO O A DASH TWO THREE DASH 1 0 3 0 2 3 3 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING.
UH, ONE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME CANNOT SUCCESSFULLY BE COMPLETED WITHOUT THE GRANTING OF THESE VARIANCES.
AND TWO, THE REQUESTS ARE NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN.
UM, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NOT LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF A REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
DO ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES.
MR, DO YOU HAVE A SURVEY FOR THIS PROPERTY? UM, I DO NOT HAVE A SURVEY, NO.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? HEARING NONE, I'D ASK THE APPLICANT TO PLEASE COME FORWARD AND LET'S, UH, HEAR YOUR PRESENTATION.
PUT THIS DOWN SO YOU CAN HEAR ME.
HI, MY NAME ISNO AND I'M THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY.
UH, SO WE'RE PROPOSING TO BUILD A, UH, SINGLE RESIDENCE HOME.
UM, UH, IT WOULD BE A TWO STORY TO FIT IN THAT PROPERTY.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
MS. BRAGMAN, WHAT IS THE WIDTH OF THE STRUCTURE THAT YOU'RE BUILDING? THE WIDTH? UM, CAN YOU SEE IT? I CAN'T SEE IT.
AND IT APPEARS THAT THE WIDTH OF THE LOT IS 25 FEET? YES MA'AM.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YES.
I WAS GONNA ASK YOU ABOUT THE TREES, BUT UH, BARBERS IS THE ONE THAT TAKES CARE OF IT.
UH, WE, WE DON'T ADDRESS THAT HERE, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
UH, THE ARBOR ADDRESSES THIS? YES.
AND DO YOU HAVE A FLOOR? UH, YOU HAVE A SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY? UH, NOT WITH ME.
UH, PETER BARN, UH, DO YOU HAVE A, A PLAN FOR THE HOUSE? IT'S RIGHT THERE, MR. ZENGA.
IT'S SHOWN ON THE, NO, THE, THE PLAN, THE INSIDE INTERIOR PLAN.
I HOW MANY SQUARE FEET WILL IT? I BELIEVE A THOUSAND, UH, A 1,230 I BELIEVE.
UH, NO, THE SQUARE FOOT OF THE HOME.
THE STRUCTURE YOU'RE TRYING TO BUILD, WHAT'S IT? 9,000, UH, 1,230.
HOW MANY BEDROOMS? UH, THREE BEDROOM, TWO BATH.
WHAT IS THAT? BEDROOMS? UM, I, I CAN'T REMEMBER, BUT I'M, I'M, I NEED A TECH.
YOU YOU DIDN'T BRING THE SCHEDULE.
ARCHITECTURALLY SCIENCE, I THINK THE STAFF HAS HAS 'EM.
THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THEM RIGHT NOW.
CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, PUT IT ON A SCREEN?
[01:35:01]
OKAY.WHILE THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THAT, LET'S SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
SO ON THIS DIAGRAM HERE, SO, SO, UM, JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE LAYOUT OF THIS LOT HERE.
AND SO IT SHOWS THE HOUSE AND THEN THERE'S A DOTTED LINE THERE ON THE BACK, ON THE, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS.
WE'LL SAY THE PHOTO HERE OR RENDERING.
SO WHAT IS THAT DOTTED LINE? IS THAT A, A PATIO OR NO, IT'S, IT'S, SORRY.
IT'S JUST, IT WOULD, IT'S TELLING YOU, UM, WHERE THE, IT MEETS A SETBACK FOR THE 10 FEET BUILDING AREA.
THE BUILDING AREA, BUT NO, IT'S NOT, NOTHING THERE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY.
AND WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR THE, UM, YES, THE FLOOR PLANNED IF THEY BECOME AVAILABLE.
WHILE WE'RE WAITING ON THAT AGAIN, IS THERE ANY, UM, VOICEMAILS OR PUBLIC COMMENT TO BE READ FOR THE RECORD? UH, NO, THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
SO WE'RE JUST, JUST TO, SORRY.
APPARENTLY THE INTERNET IS SLOW HERE TODAY IT WOULD BE DOWN.
I THINK HE WANTS TO SEE THE BEDROOMS. I THINK HE'S LOOKING FOR THE FLOOR PLAN LAYOUT.
IS THAT HELPFUL? MRS. GONNA GO? OKAY.
THERE'S PROBABLY AN ELEVATION IN THERE TOO.
ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? ALRIGHT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE ANY CLOSING REMARKS BEFORE WE UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? NO, IT'S JUST, UH, IT'S NOT IMPEDING LIKE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE'RE NOT USING IT LIKE MULTI-FAMILY, NONE OF THAT.
IT WOULD STAY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
SEE UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T SEE THAT OFTEN, SO, ALRIGHTY.
THAT WOULD CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION.
I'D ASK A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION.
RE, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 23 103 2 3 3 I MOVES AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUEST FOR ONE A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FEET SIDES HEAD BACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURE WITH THREE FEET EIGHT INCHES SIDE SETBACKS AND, AND A 2,125 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 5,000 SQUARE FOOT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON A 2,875 SQUARE FOOT LOT SITUATED AT 1 6 5 NORTH SAN FELIPE AVENUE.
APPLICANT BEING OPHELIA TINO BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN 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.
IN THIS CASE, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS SERVED BY MINIMUM LOT SIZES TO PREVENT THE OVERCROWDING OF DEVELOPMENT INTO SMALLER LOTS AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS TO PROVIDE SPACING BETWEEN STRUCTURES TO DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP WILL BE PRESENTED BY HAVING THE APPLICANT ALTER CONSTRUCTION PLANS, WHICH WOULD DRASTICALLY REDUCE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE DWELLING OR PURSUE OF REZONING TO OUR TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE DISPARATE OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE IN THIS CASE.
THE INTENT OF THE CODE IS TO PREVENT OVERCROWDING INTO SMALLER, INTO SMALLER LOTS AND PROVIDE SUITABLE SPACING BETWEEN PROPERTIES.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS THE APPLICANT WILL BE ABIDING BY ALL OTHER BUILDING REQUIREMENTS AND CONSTRUCTION HAS NOT BEGUN.
FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED.
AND THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED NO
[01:40:01]
USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED IN THIS VARIANCE.FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
IF GRANTED, THE STRUCTURE WILL HAVE THE DEVIATED BUILDING REQUIREMENTS, THESE VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES TO OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
SIX SUPPLY OF THE OWNER FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO OR RESULT GEN GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS SUPPLY OF THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE LOT DIMENSIONS OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH THIS, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT DID COME TO THE BOARD BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN DONE AND, UH, IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, ANOTHER HOME IS ALWAYS GREAT, UH, NEWS FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
MS. AVIVAS? I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND THE FACT THAT YOU'RE DEVELOPING NEW CONSTRUCTION IN AN AREA, UM, AND THAT, THAT IT HAS HAD AN EMPTY LOT.
ALSO, JUST AS A NOTE, UH, THERE'S SEVERAL OTHER R FIVE LOTS IN THIS COMMUNITY THAT ARE SIMILAR SIZED, UH, WITH SIMILAR SIZED UH, HOMES OR HOMES IN THE FUTURE.
ANY OTHER COMMENT? ALRIGHT, HEARING NONE, LET'S, UH, GO FORWARD WITH THE ROLL CALL VOTE.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH 11 IN FAVOR.
ZERO AGAINST THE, UH, MOTION DOES PASS.
GOOD LUCK WITH THE PROJECT AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR COMING BEFORE THE BOARD.
ALRIGHT, THE TIME IS, UH, 2 48.
UH, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A QUICK, UH, LET'S SAY EIGHT MINUTE RECESS.
THAT SOUND GOOD? AND WE'LL RECONVENE IN A SECOND.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS BACK IN SESSION.
UM, STAFF, LET'S BEGIN WITH THE NEXT CASE PLEASE.
AGENDA ITEM NINE, BO O A 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 4 8.
ADDRESS IS ONE 10 KEARNEY STREET COUNCIL.
DISTRICT ONE APPLICANT IS KRA SEGLER.
A REQUEST FOR ONE A 663 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON A 3,337 SQUARE FEET LOT.
AND TWO, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK AND THREE A HALF STORY VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM TWO AND A HALF STORIES TO ALLOW A THREE STORY STRUCTURE AND FOUR, A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXEMPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT REAR AND SIDE YARD FENCE AND FIVE AND EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM AND 20 FOOT FROM THE BACK OF A SIDEWALK TO ALLOW A GARAGE ENTRY TO BE 12 FEET FROM THE FRONT SETBACK ZONING IS RM FOUR CASE SUMMARY.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON KEARNEY STREET JUST WEST OF I EAST 37 AND EAST OF SOUTH PRESTA STREET AND WAS LOCATED WITHIN THE ORIGINAL 36 SQUARE MILES OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
THE LOT IS CURRENTLY VACANT, HAS BEEN VACANT FOR SOME TIME.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 663 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND A HALF STORY VARIANCE AND AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK FOR GARAGE ENTRY.
ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXEMPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THE REAR INSIDE YARDS.
ALL OTHER SETBACK REQUIREMENTS WILL BE MET.
THE PROPERTY IS JUST OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY OF SOUTH PRESTA STREET IN SOUTH ST.
MARY'S NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
PER THE SITE PLAN, THE PROPOSED ELEMENT IS UNDER THE RN FOUR 65% BUILDABLE AREA.
THIS IS A SITE PLAN SHOWING ALL FIVE UH, VARIANCES IN THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION REQUESTED.
AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AN ALTERNATE VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION, LOT SIZE RICH SETBACK AND GARAGE ENTRY FRONT SETBACK VARIANCES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO O A 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 4 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, THE VARIANCE REQUEST DO NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CARE TO THE DISTRICT AND TO THE LOT SIZE VARIANCES
[01:45:01]
WERE ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOT STAFF RECOMMENDATION HALF STORY VARIANCE.STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND B O A 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 4 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, THE ADDITIONAL HALF STORY WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
AND TWO, THE HALF STORY VARIANCE WILL REDUCE PRIVACY FOR SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL LAWS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION, FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 4 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, THE PROPOSED EIGHT FOOT FENCE WILL RESULT IN INCONSISTENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AS NO OTHER FENCES EXCEEDING THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS WERE SEEN IN IMMEDIATE AREA NOTIFICATION PLAN.
ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
AND LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION.
THIS DIDN'T HAVE AN ADDRESS, IT'S JUST THE EMAIL RECEIVED THIS MORNING.
AND THIS IS THE RESPONSE FROM LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE.
ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTION FOR STAFF? WE'RE TRYING TO READ THROUGH THE, UH, OPPOSITION.
OH, YOU WANNA GO BACK? OH, THAT ONE RIGHT THERE, CRUZ.
UM, UH, MS, MR. UH, ORIENT AND THEN MS. CRUZ.
YEAH, I WAS GONNA ASK STAFF, DO YOU KNOW THE, THE, THE WIDTH OF KEARNEY STREET? I NOTICED THAT THERE, THERE'S AN ESTABLISHED SIDEWALK THERE, BUT IT IS IT, IS IT ONE OF THOSE, UH, UH, 45 OR 50 SOME ODD, UH, WIDE RIGHT OF WAY STREETS OR IS IT REGULAR SIZE? WE'LL HAVE TO VERIFY IT FOR YOU REAL QUICK.
I'M LOOKING AT THE, THE RESPONSE FROM LACA.
SO THEY'RE IN OPPOSITION TO EVERYTHING FROM WHAT I CAN TELL.
AND WE'LL WAIT FOR A RESPONSE TO, UH, DONALD'S QUESTION APPEARS TO BE A 30 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY, 30 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY OR PAVEMENT.
THE RIGHT OF WAY IS MEASURING 30 FEET.
IS THIS PERSON, SO AS A FOLLOW UP QUESTION, ARE THEY HAVING TO PLAT OR ARE THEY GETTING LIKE A C O D OR WHAT ARE THEY GOING ON HERE? UH, SO SEE IF THE, UH, LOT SIZE IS APPROVED, UM, THERE WOULD NOT BE A REQUIREMENT FOR A C O D.
HOWEVER, A C O D MIGHT ONLY GRANT THEM THE SINGLE FAMILY.
UH, I THINK THEY ARE PROPOSING TWO UNITS ON THIS ONE.
I WAS, I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THEY'RE GONNA PLA BECAUSE OF THE, IF THE, IF IT'S ONLY A 30 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY, THEY'D HAVE TO GIVE UP RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION ON KEARNEY.
AND, AND, AND IF SO, THEY WOULD HAVE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT 12 FOOT DIMENSION THEY HAVE WOULD BE REDUCED.
UM, I CAN'T SPEAK TO ANY PLANNING REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY WOULD'VE TO DO AT THIS TIME.
ALRIGHT, AT THIS POINT I'D ASK THE APPLICANT TO PLEASE COME FORWARD AND LET'S HEAR YOUR PRESENTATION PLEASE.
I PURCHASED THIS LOT IN JULY OF 2023.
LET'S SEE, FROM THE FIRST, UH, REQUEST.
YES, IT'S LESS THAN, IT'S 3,337 SQUARE FEET FOOT LOT.
UH, THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR DUPLEX, UH, I HAVE, I NEED 4,000 SQUARE FOOT.
SO BASICALLY I'M REQUESTING 663, UH, STILL THEIR PERMISSION TO BUILD THAT DUPLEX ON THAT LOT.
SO THAT'S WHAT THE VARIANCE REQUESTED.
IT'S NOT A SINGLE FAMILY, IT'S A DUPLEX.
IT'S RMM FOUR, I GUESS, WHICH MEANS I'M ALLOWED TO BUILD FOUR UNITS ON THAT LOT.
BUT I'M, I'M RE REQUESTING TO BUILD TWO UNITS AND IT'S AN ENERGY SAVING BUILDING.
LET'S SEE, ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT BEFORE I GO ON TO ALL THE OTHER PIECES? YEAH, WELL LET'S SEE.
UH, I KNOW DONALD, YOU HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
YOU WERE, YEAH, SO, SO ONE OF MY QUESTIONS IS, SO IF YOU GET THE 663 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE, YOU QUALIFY FOR, UH, UH, A PLAID EXCEPTION.
UH, AND THEREFORE YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO GIVE UP RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THEN THE 12 FOOT DIMENSION YOU SHOW FROM THE FACE OF YOUR GARAGE WOULD BE FINE.
I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO JUST TO VERIFY THAT.
BUT THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS YOUR, YOUR ONE CAR GARAGE.
HOW DEEP IS THAT? HOW DEEP AT THE WCAN GARAGE IS FROM THE BACKSIDE OF THE SIDEWALK, YOU KNOW, TO THE DOOR, YOU KNOW.
SO RIGHT NOW, ONE OF THE, YES, SIR.
WELL, ONE OF THE VARIANCES BEFORE US IS, IS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE 20 FEET FROM THE GARAGE DOOR TO THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK.
[01:50:01]
YOUR HOUSE IS DIMENSION IS 30 AND A HALF FEET, UH, WITH THE BATHROOM BETWEEN THE GARAGE AND THE REAR WALL.SO WHAT I WAS WONDERING IS, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO, UH, TAKE THE, THE GARAGE, THE FACE OF GARAGES AND, AND MOVE THEM BACK A LITTLE BIT? I MEAN, DO YOU HAVE 20 A GOOD 20 OR 21 FOOT DEEP AREA THERE? I MEAN, CAN YOU GIVE US MORE THAN 12 FEET ON THE DRIVEWAY BY, BY TAKING THE GARAGE DOOR AND KICKING 'EM IN A LITTLE BIT INTO THE GARAGE? SO INSTEAD OF, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IT CLEARLY, THE BACKSIDE OF THE SIDEWALK TO THE FRONT SIDE OF THAT GARAGE DOOR, IT'S, I'M REQUESTING THE 12 FEET.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE 20, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE 20.
WELL, THE ISSUE I HAVE IS BECAUSE, BECAUSE THERE'S GONNA BE A PO A PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK THERE.
AND BECAUSE KEARNEY IS IN A VERY WIDE STREET, THAT 12 FEET DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A LOT.
AND I'M CURIOUS, UM, IF, CAN YOU TAKE YOUR GARAGE DOORS AND PUSH THEM BACK EVEN FURTHER? YOU DON'T HAVE TO.
12 FEET, IS THAT YEAH, DON'T TOUCH THE, I'M NOT TELLING YOU TO CHANGE THE PORCH.
I'M, I'M JUST WONDERING IF YOU'RE, IF IF YOUR BUILDING'S 30 AND A HALF FEET AND THAT RESTROOM LOOKS LIKE IT'S MAYBE SIX FEET, AND THEN IF YOU ACCOUNT FOR THE WALL THICKNESSES, YOU COULD POTENTIALLY MOVE THOSE GARAGE DOORS BACK MAYBE THREE FEET AND GIVE US 15 FEET.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING WHERE, YOU KNOW, SOME CARS COULD ACTUALLY FIT AND BE OFF THE SIDEWALK.
I HAVE TO SPEAK WITH MY ARCHITECT, BUT I'M, I'M SURE WE COULD DO THAT.
UM, JUST THAT, THAT'S, I'M JUST CURIOUS.
ANY, ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE THE APPLICANT MOVES ON TO THE CRUZ, MS. CRUZ? UM, YES.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE SAYING OKAY, YOU'RE ADDING A HALF FOOT.
SO DOES IT HAVE TO BE THREE STORIES AND YOU'RE, I'M ASSUMING THE FIRST STORY IS THE GARAGE AND THEN THE SECOND AND THIRD ARE THE, THE KITCHEN AND, AND THEN THE BEDROOMS. WE HAVE ALSO BEDROOMS ON THAT GARAGE LEVEL.
SO EACH, UH, DUPLEX WILL BE WHAT, THREE BEDROOMS? FOUR BEDROOMS, 2,200 EACH.
SO TRYING TO GIVE, BRING THE, WE'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP THE COMMUNITY, BRING FAMILIES INTO THIS, THIS STREET, INTO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, BASICALLY WITH MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE EACH, WITHIN THE HOME.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE THIRD FLOOR.
THE THIRD FLOOR WILL HAVE A TANKLESS SOLAR WATER HEATER THAT WILL BE ON THE THIRD FLOOR AS WELL AS ANOTHER BEDROOM.
BUT THE WAY WE HAVE IT IS AN ENERGY SAVING BUILDING THAT IT'LL BE, THE ENTIRE BUILDING WILL BE, UH, A COOLING BUILD BUILDING BASICALLY.
SO IT REDUCES THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO SPEND, THE FAMILIES HAVE TO SPEND TO LIVE IN THAT HOME.
BUT ALSO WE WANNA INCREASE THE SPACE.
WE WANNA MAKE THE, THE LIVING INSIDE THE HOME, THE PATIO ON THE THIRD FLOOR, AS WELL AS THE BEDROOM AS WELL AS THAT, AS TANKLESS SOLAR PANEL WATER HEATER THAT'S ON THE THIRD FLOOR.
YOU I DON'T WANT THAT WATER HEATER ANYWHERE ELSE.
I NEED TO HAVE IT ON THE THIRD FLOOR WITH THE SOLAR PANELS.
WE HEAT THE HOME, WE COOL THE HOME, UH, AND WE BRING THE PRICES THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO PAY FOR ALL THIS, THE UTILITIES.
SO BESIDES THE GARAGE THEN THE, UH, LIVING ROOM KITCHEN AND ONE BEDROOM WILL BE IN THE FIR ON THE FIRST FLOOR? YES, MA'AM.
UPSTAIRS, UPSTAIRS FROM THE GARAGE.
ALRIGHT, SO WE, WE SHOULD HAVE A BED, THAT GARAGE PLUS A BEDROOM.
THERE'S REALLY TWO ROOMS. WE'RE TRYING TO WORK ON WHAT SHOULD BE A, A KITCHEN AND A BEDROOM.
BUT YES, TRYING TO MAXIMIZE THAT SPACE.
AND THAT'S WHY WE REQUEST THE FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE BACKSIDE OF THE HOUSE INSTEAD OF THE NORMAL 10 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE, UH, THE PROPERTY LINE THAT WILL GIVE US THAT EXTRA SPACE FOR THAT BEDROOM.
MR. QUESTION, UH, MR. DEAN, HOW COME YOU CAN'T JUST PUT ONE, UH, UH, UNIT ON THIS LOT? ONE UNIT? YES, I CAN PUT WHAT, THERE WAS ONE UNIT ON THAT LOT PREVIOUSLY.
THERE WAS ONE UNIT ON THAT LOT.
CAN YOU KEEP IT STATUS QUO AND DO ONE UNIT? IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE JAMMING A LOT IN HERE AND I'M TRYING TO GET COMFORTABLE WITH, WITH COME TRYING TO MEET YOU HALFWAY, BUT YES, SIR.
THERE'S A LOT GOING ON AND ESPECIALLY LIKE AS WE TALKED ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY EARLIER.
YOU KNOW, A REGULAR CAR SPACE AT A AT A BUSINESS IS 18 BY NINE FEET AND YOU'RE AT 12 FEET, YOU'RE GONNA BE OVER INTO THE SIDEWALK.
IT'S JUST A LOT FOR ME TO COME TO.
CAN I BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO TWO PROPERTIES DOWN FROM MY HOUSE? I'M 1, 1 0, GO TO 1 1 8.
THE WIDTH OF THAT PROPERTY IS MUCH NARROWER THAN THE WIDTH OF MINE.
MY PROPERTY, I HAVE 71 SQUARE FOOT WIDE, MEANING IF I'M WALKING DOWN THE STREET OF KEARNEY, I HAVE 7 71 FEET BEFORE
[01:55:01]
I GO TO THE NEXT PROPERTY.THE WIDTH OF THE OTHER PROPERTY, TWO DOORS DOWN IS ALSO A DUPLEX.
AND THEY DO NOT HAVE 71 FOOT WIDTH YET.
THEY HAVE A DUPLEX GO DOWN TWO MORE PROPERTIES FROM MINE.
I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA INTERRUPT YOU FOR A SECOND.
WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT THE WIDTH, YOU ALSO HAVE TO GIVE US A DEPTH.
THEY'RE DEPTH BECAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE MUCH LONGER THAN YOURS.
THEY HAVE 4,000 SQUARE FEET THAN THEY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM.
MR. CHU, CAN I BRING YOUR ATTENTION ALSO TO HOLD? THAT'S SO SORRY.
UH, MR. ZEAL, UH, JUST HOLD FOR ONE SECOND AND THEN WE'LL, YES SIR.
CAN I BRING YOUR ALSO ATTENTION TO, UH, PROPERTY, UH, TWO DOORS FROM THAT PROPERTY AS WELL.
THEY'RE NOT IMPEDING ANY, UH, VISUAL THAT THAT PROPERTY IS COMPLETED RIGHT NOW.
THAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THREE STORIES.
THEY HAVE OVER 12 FOOT CEILINGS EACH FLOOR.
I WALK THE HOME WITH THE BUILDER.
THEY ALSO HAVE A FENCE IN THE BACK.
IF YOU GO TWO STORIES FROM THAT PROPERTY, IT'S THE PROPERTY 1, 2, 4.
THEY ARE, THEY BUILT THREE STORIES ON TWO DUPLEXES WITH ONE FOOT GAP BETWEEN THE DUPLEXES.
SO HERE'S A DUPLEX, WHICH YES, THE PROPERTY IS LONGER, BUT THEY HAVE ONE DUPLEX IN ONE BUILDING, A ONE FOOT GAP BETWEEN THE SECOND DUPLEX, WHICH HAS A DUPLEX THERE.
THEY HAVE ON THAT SAME STREET.
SO MS.
THEY'RE COMPLETELY ALLOWED TO, THEY DON'T NEED A, AN EXCEPTION.
THEY MEET THE EXCEPTION BECAUSE THEY MEET THE MINIMUM ZONING OF 4,000.
SO WHETHER THEY HAVE A DUPLEX OR EVEN A QUADPLEX HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US.
AS FAR AS THE HEIGHT, SOME OF THE HEIGHTS, UH, LIMITATIONS CAME INTO PLAY A FEW YEARS AGO.
SO IF THEY INITIATED THEIR PROJECT PRIOR TO THAT CODE CHANGE, THEY WERE COMPLETELY ALLOWED TO GO TO THREE STORIES.
UH, THAT'S A RELATIVELY NEW PORTION OF THE CODE.
SO, UM, JUST, I JUST WANT YOU TO BE AWARE OF THAT AS YOU PROVIDED EXAMPLES TO THE BOARD.
UH, OF WHAT YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE DOING.
AND WHILE, AND WHILE I HAVE YOU JUST FOR A MOMENT, DOES A, DOES THE PROPERTY BEHIND YOU HAVE A SWIMMING POOL? THE PROPERTY BEHIND ME IS A, NO SIR.
RIGHT DIRECTLY BEHIND MY PROPERTY IS A CONTAINER.
IT, IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO IT, SEE THERE'S A CONTAINER THERE.
I JUST, THIS, IT'S JUST THAT CONTAINER SITS RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
THERE IS NO SETBACK, BUT, BUT THAT CONTAINER HOME HAS BEEN THERE FOR OVER 40 YEARS.
UH, JUST ON THE AERIAL IT LOOKS LIKE THERE, THEY HAVE A SIZEABLE YARD AND I COULDN'T TELL IF THERE WAS A, A SMALL SWIMMING POOL OR NOT, BECAUSE THERE IS AN EXCEPTION FOR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE IF YOUR NEIGHBOR HAS A POOL.
THAT MAYBE THE REFLECTION WAS THE CONTAINER REFLECTING, LOOKING LIKE A POOL, BUT IT'S A CONTAINER.
UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CLARIFYING.
YES, MR. MR. ZUNIGA HAS A QUESTION THEN YOU CAN YES.
I GUESS WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH YOU YES, SIR.
AND SOME OF THIS U D C CAME IN YES, JANUARY 1ST OF THIS YEAR.
UH, BUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IT'S ALL OR NOTHING THAT YOU WANT? YES SIR.
YOU'RE NOT AMENABLE TO, TO ANY ADJUSTMENTS OR THE LEGS.
SO YOU WANT ALL THIS OR NOTHING AT ALL? NO.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, BECAUSE A GENTLEMAN HERE, A COMMISSIONER ASKED YOU ON IT AND HE SAID, NO, THIS, SO, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GET THE COMPARATIVE.
AND ALSO PROBABLY LIKE MR. DONALD, OUR CHAIRMAN STATED TO YOU, HE'S VERY AWARE OF THIS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, HE'S A CIVIL, BUT ANYWAY, HE, YOU KNOW, THE THING IS, IS THAT IT'S ALL OR NOTHING.
WE, WE CAN GO, THE CHAIRMAN CAN TELL YOU WE CAN GO THROUGH WHATEVER HE WANT.
ANY OTHER QUESTION? OKAY, BON NO SIR.
IF, IF WHAT IS RE REQUEST BEING REQUESTED FOR ME TO BUILD A SINGLE HOME ON THAT PROPERTY, I CAN ALSO BUILD A SINGLE HOME ON THAT PROPERTY.
MR. ZIGA, WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL PARSE OUT THE VARIOUS, UM, UM, REQUESTS AS WE READ THROUGH THE MOTIONS AND SUCH, SO, OKAY.
UH, MR. BONIA HAD A QUESTION AND THEN YOU CAN CONTINUE ON WITH YOUR PRESENTATION.
WHAT ARE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR DUPLEX AGAIN, IS IT TWO TWO SPACES PER CORRECT.
UNLESS THEY'RE IN THE CERTAIN NCDS, BUT THIS PROPERTY IS NOT, SO, SO IT'S ONLY, UH, TWO OR FOUR? TWO.
IF IT'S ONE OR TWO UNITS, IT'S ONE PER UNIT.
THREE OR MORE UNITS? ONE AND A HALF.
MY DIAGRAM IS ONLY ONE PER UNIT.
AND THEN MY, I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION FOR, FOR APPLICANT IS, SO FOUR BEDROOMS, THREE BATHS ARE THE LAYOUTS, RIGHT? IT'S FOUR BEDROOM, THREE AND A HALF BATH.
[02:00:01]
DO YOU THINK EACH UNIT, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THESE HOUSES IF THEY'RE FOUR BEDROOM, THREE BATHS.SO EACH UNIT'S PROBABLY GONNA HAVE TWO VEHICLES.
I, I'M, I'M JUST SAYING IF, IF EACH UNIT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TWO CARS, IF, YOU KNOW, UNIT A IS GONNA HAVE TWO CARS, UNIT B IS GONNA HAVE TWO CARS.
WHERE ARE THEY PARK IN THE TWO CARS? I MEAN, I KNOW WE CAN FIT ONE IN THE GARAGE, BUT WHERE DO WE FIT THE OTHER I CAN ONLY REFER TO THE DUPLEXES, WHICH ARE TWO DOORS DOWN.
THEY ALSO HAVE ONE CAR GARAGE PER DUPLEX, BUT I THINK THEY HAVE ENOUGH DRIVEWAY WHERE THEY CAN FIT A A CAR, YOU MEAN BEHIND IT, RIGHT? I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE CHAIRMAN ASKED.
IF I PUSHED IT BACK ANOTHER, YEAH, FIVE FOOT.
THEN I CAN PUT A CAR, LIKE YOU SAID, OUTSIDE, BUT ONE IS INSIDE PARKED WITH THE DOOR DOWN AND ONE BEHIND IT, BUT NOT IMPEDING ON THE SIDEWALK.
AND THEN BACK, BACK TO STAFF FOR THEM TO HAVE THAT ONE AVAILABLE SPACE OUT OUTSIDE OF THE GARAGE.
HOW LONG DOES THAT DRIVEWAY NEED TO BE? 18 FEET.
SO THEN IF WE PUSH THAT BACK, BACK, HOW FAR DO WE HAVE TO PUSH IT BACK? SO YOU HAVE ENOUGH ROOM ON THAT ONE CAR DRIVE ON THES IT LOOKS, IT LOOKS LIKE SHE HAS 17 FEET OF DRIVEWAY.
SO SHE WOULD NEED TO PUSH IT BACK? YEAH, JUST A TAD.
SO, UH, THE SIDE PLAN, SHE PROVIDED PROVI CALLS FOR 12 FEET FROM THE BACK OF SIDEWALK RIGHT TO THE FACE OF GARAGE DOOR.
AND THEN IT, AND THEN IT SHOWS THAT THE BUILDING TO BE 30 AND A HALF FEET.
SO IF YOU DEDUCT THE BATHROOM, WHICH IS ABOUT SIX FEET, AND THEN A, UH, ABOUT ABOUT A FOOT AND A HALF FOR WALLS, THAT GETS YOU TO 23 FEET OF DEPTH FOR THE GARAGE.
SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.
IF SHE JUST MOVES, MOVES THOSE BACK, YOU KNOW, IF SHE MOVES 'EM BACK SIX FEET, THEN HER GARAGE WILL WON'T BE DEEP ENOUGH IF SHE MOVES 'EM BACK, YOU KNOW, FIVE FEET, OR NO, I'M SORRY, FOUR FEET, THEN HER GARAGE WOULD BE DEEP ENOUGH AND HER DRIVEWAY, WHILE IT WOULDN'T BE 18, IT WOULD BE 16 AND IT WOULD BE SOMETHING JUST TO PUT THAT OUT THERE.
UH, SO PLEASE CONTINUE WITH YOUR PRESENTATION.
WE CAN UH, WE CAN PUSH THAT BACK.
AND, UM, ALLOW FOR AN ADDITIONAL CAR TO NOT IMPEDE NUMBER ONE, NOT BE PARKED ON THE STREET AS WELL AS NOT IMPEDE THE SIDEWALK.
UH, WE ARE REQUESTING THE FIVE FOOT VARIANCE IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
UH, THAT IS BASICALLY TO INCREASE THE, UH, LIVING SPACE WITHIN THE HOME.
UH, ON THE SIDES, UH, THE FENCE, THE FENCE, WE'RE REQUESTING AN EIGHT.
THE NORMAL IS A SIX FOOT HEIGHT OF A FENCE.
WE'RE REQUESTING EIGHT ON THE SIDES.
THE FIRST PROPERTY ON THE STREET, 1500 ON SOUTH PRES STREET.
THEY HAVE A BUSINESS WITHIN THEIR HOME OF SELLING BEER.
SO FOR THE INCREASE THE PRIVACY OF THE FAMILIES WITHIN THE HOME, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT HEIGHT, UH, FENCE SO THAT THERE'S NO, FOR THE CUSTOMERS TO NOT SEE INTO THE HOMES.
AND THEN FOR THE, TO PRESERVE THE PRIVACY OF THE FAMILIES IN THOSE HOMES.
SO THAT'S EIGHT FOOT ON EACH SIDE.
ANY ANY QUESTIONS ON THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THE SIDES? ANYTHING? I REQUESTED ALSO A 10 FOOT IN THE REAR.
10 FOOT PROPOSED, UH, HEIGHT OF THE FENCE, UH, BECAUSE OF THE CONTAINER THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR OVER 40.
IT'S BECAUSE OF THE, THE CONTAINER ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE HOME THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR OVER 40 YEARS.
UH, NOT IMPEDING ON THE, THE ADJOINING PROPERTY.
BASICALLY, UH, NOT REQUESTING THAT THAT, THAT THAT HOME HAS BEEN THERE.
THAT CONTAINER HAS BEEN THERE FOR OVER 40 YEARS BEFORE ALL OF THESE, UH, IT'S GRANDFATHERED IN.
SO I'M JUST ASKING FOR FIVE FOOT FROM, TO HAVE MY PROPERTY BUILT FIVE FOOT FROM THAT PROPERTY LINE INSTEAD OF THE NORMAL 10 FOOT.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? ALRIGHT, CRUZ, MS. CRUZ, EXCUSE ME.
UM, ON THE REAR, SINCE YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S A CONTAINER THERE? YES.
IS THERE, UM, IS THERE A WAY OF, UH, MAKING IT EIGHT FEET INSTEAD OF 10? WE CAN DO EIGHT.
I WAS JUST MAKING SURE THAT IT WAS NO VISIBILITY.
'CAUSE THAT IS A HIGH CONTAINER.
THAT'S A VERY, IT'S STANDS STANDS TALL NOW.
DO, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THEY USE IT FOR? IT HAS NOT BEEN USED IN 40 SOME YEARS.
IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST BEEN THERE PARKED
[02:05:01]
OVERGROWTH ALL AROUND THE TREES GROWING THROUGH THE CONTAINER.UH, SO I JUST, WE DON'T WANT TO REQUEST ANY MOVEMENT OF THEIR PROPERTY.
I I JUST WANTED TO NOT SEE IT FOR THE, FOR THE FAMILIES IN THE PROPERTY.
NOT TO HAVE THE VISIBILITY ON THAT.
I MIGHT CORIAN I I WOULD AGREE TO EIGHT, BUT I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE 10.
MR. CO, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT.
DID YOU, DID YOU UNDERSTAND THAT COMMISSIONER CRUZ IS ASKING ABOUT THE SETBACK AND NOT THE HEIGHT, THE FENCE? YEAH.
I DON'T THINK YOU, I DON'T THINK THERE'S MOVEMENT ON THE BACK.
I THINK SH YOU WERE ASKING FOR THE FENCE THOUGH.
SHE WAS ASKING ABOUT THE FENCE, THE FENCE HEIGHT ABOUT THE FENCE.
SO I HEARD 10 FOOT, EIGHT FOOT FIVE.
I MEAN, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE.
YEAH, I DIDN'T, I WAS, WELL, BECAUSE SHE'S REQUESTING 10 FEET.
THE, THE FENCE HEIGHT? NO, THE FENCE HEIGHT.
AND, UH, AND I'M SAYING WE, WE COULD PROBABLY GO EIGHT, BUT I'M NOT THRILLED ABOUT 10.
I DON'T THINK THERE WAS ANY ADVERTISING.
UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ, I, I I THOUGHT IT WAS EIGHT FOOT ALL THE WAY AROUND.
I DIDN'T REALIZE IT WAS 10 FOOT.
WHAT WAS ED? SO WE, WE ARE ONLY CONSIDERING EIGHT FOOT.
NO, THAT'S WHAT WAS ADVERTISED.
WE CANNOT GO ABOVE EIGHT FEET, UM, FOR THE REQUEST.
WHERE ARE YOUR AC UNITS GOING? YES, SIR.
THE EIGHT AIR CONDITIONING UNITS ARE ALSO ON THE THIRD FLOOR, SO THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ON THE YARD.
THEY'LL ACTUALLY BE WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE BUILDING.
MS. BRAGMAN, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
SO I'M LOOKING AT GOOGLE MAPS AND I'M SEEING THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR.
THE APPLICANT WAS REFERRING TO THEM SELLING BEER.
IT DOES LOOK LIKE A, AN ESTABLISHMENT.
IS THAT LEGAL? NOT IN THE, THAT ZONING, BUT WE'D HAVE TO LOOK TO SEE IF IT'S GOT NON-CONFORMING USE OR WE'D HAVE TO INVESTIGATE.
ANA, THEY JUST HAVE BEER SIGNS, BEER FOR SALE, BEER ON FRIDAY KIND OF THING.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GIVING IT AWAY, BUT I JUST KNOW THEY GET CUSTOMERS.
SO WE JUST LIKE TO HAVE A PRIVACY MR. MANA.
SO QUESTION I HAVE AS THE CITY RECENTLY CHANGED THE U D C FOR WHAT'S CONSIDERED A HALF STORY.
UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, SO PART OF THE DIALOGUE HERE IS ON, YOU KNOW, SO, SO THE, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE HALF STORY IS BASICALLY REQUIRED A PERIMETER ALL THE WAY AROUND ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR FOR THE HALF STORY.
UM, AND THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, THE APPLICANT HAS TALKED ABOUT AN AIR CONDITIONING UNIT AND UM, AND THE WATER HEATER AND A COUPLE OF OTHER COMPONENTS.
CAN THOSE RESIDE OR SIT ON THAT, THAT THE, UM, WE'LL SAY THE HALF OF THE, OF THE TWO AND A HALF STORY THAT'S, THAT WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE BEEN A THIRD STORY.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE WHAT I'M SAYING? SO COULD IT SIT IN THAT, SO RIGHT NOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO HAVE A BUFFER ALL THE WAY AROUND THE HOME, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE TWO AND A HALF.
AND SO, SO COULD THAT EQUIPMENT SIT ON THAT, THAT SPACE THAT WOULD BE THAT BUFFER ALL THE WAY AROUND ON THE TWO AND A HALF STORY? YES, IT CAN.
SO, SO, UM, SO, SO AN EXPLANATION.
SO, SO WE VOTED ON THE U D C, UM, IN JANUARY.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THE CHANGES THAT HAPPENED WITH REGARDS TO THE THREE STORY.
AND WE SAID, UH, WE DEFINED WHAT A TWO AND A HALF STORY WAS, AND A THREE STORY WAS, AND A TWO AND A HALF STORY BASICALLY REQUIRES A PERIMETER ALL THE WAY AROUND THE TOP FLOOR.
UM, IF YOU'RE GONNA, IF YOU'RE GOING TO RESIDE IN THAT HALF STORY.
OKAY, SO, SO TWO AND A HALF STORIES.
AND SO, SO BASICALLY THE ROOF IS IN THE CENTER AND THERE'S A, THERE'S NOT A STRAIGHT WALL ALONG THE SIDE.
SO IT'S NOT A THREE STORY WALL, IT'S A TWO AND A HALF STORY WALL OR, OR TWO STORY WALL.
AND THEN THE CENTER IS RAISED IN THE CENTER OF IT, CENTER OF THAT SECTION.
AND THE REASON WHY I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE AIR MACHINE AND THE WATER HEATER, UM, AND MAYBE THE SOLAR PANELS, THOSE COULD SIT ON THAT SIDE AREA AND NOT TAKE UP THAT THEY COULD BE PART OF THE UNUSED HALF STORY, UH, IF WE WERE NOT TO GRANT THE, THE THREE STORY PERSPECTIVE, IF THAT MADE SENSE.
SO, SO MAYBE DESIGN CHANGE A LITTLE BIT, BUT BUT IT WOULD IT ALLOW FOR IT.
THAT MAKE SENSE? THAT MAKE SENSE? SO DOES THAT MEAN I GET THE, THE THIRD FLOOR? WOULD THAT BE THE AIR CONDITIONING, THE WATER HEATER? IS THAT WHAT WE, IS THAT YOUR PERIMETER? SO SO THAT PART, THAT PART COULD SIT IN THAT PERIMETER, THE AIR CONDITIONING, THE HEATING.
AND THEN IN THE CENTER OF THAT STORY WOULD BE THE RESIDENCE OR THE ROOMS OR WHATEVER WE HAVE THE LIVING SPACE.
YOU HAVE TO PICTURE IT LIKE A WEDDING CAKE OR, UH, DORMERS.
IT'S LIKE A DORMER, RIGHT? SO THE, THE BOTTOM PART IS WIDER, BUT THE TOP ONE ON TOP IS NARROW AND JUST SITS RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE.
AND THEN THAT WOULD BE ALL THE
[02:10:01]
UTILITIES IN THERE, CORRECT? IS CORRECT AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THAT.BUT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT YOU COULD HAVE HABITABLE SPACE.
NOW I UNDERSTAND BY PERIMETER AND NOW I UNDERSTAND.
SO, SO AND SO THAT WAY, SO BECAUSE I DO HAVE A CHALLENGE, YOU KNOW, PERSONALLY WITH REGARDS TO THE THREE STORY THING BECAUSE IT DOES BECOME SOLID WALLS FOR ALL THE NEIGHBORS.
AND SO, SO THERE ARE OPTIONS AVAILABLE FOR YOU WITH REGARDS TO WHERE YOU PLACE YOUR UTILITIES UP, UP ON THE TOP DECK.
SO IT'S TO LEVERAGE THAT AND, AND SO, UM, BUT ANYWAYS, SO JUST WAS TRYING TO EXCELLENT.
CAN YOU SHOW US A FLOOR PLAN SO I CAN BE MORE IN TUNE WITH WHAT MR. MANNA HERE IS STATING? I DON'T HAVE A FLOOR PLAN FOR WHAT HE JUST STATED WITH THE HOUSE.
I DON'T HAVE A FLOOR PLAN FOR WHAT HE JUST STATED, SIR.
OKAY, WELL, WELL, A FLOOR PLAN FOR THE HOUSE, LET'S PUT IT THIS WAY.
NO, THE INSIDE THE FLOOR PLAN.
WHAT IS THE FLOOR PLAN, SIR? WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN GET ONE FOR YOU.
BUT IT'S NOT PERTINENT TO THE, THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE IT, ALL SHE'S ASKING FOR IS FOR THE VARIANCES, UH, FOR THE FENCE AND FOR THE REAR AND FOR THE FRONT.
AND SO IF WE COULD STICK TO THAT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
UH, THE, THE ONLY SITUATION IS I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IN MY OWN MIND, UH, WHERE THE HEATER IS, WHERE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT, ET CETERA.
THIS IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALRIGHT, STAFF, UM, DO WE HAVE ANY VOICEMAIL OR PUBLIC COMMENTS TO BE READ IN? NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
AND, UM, JUST ADDITIONALLY WE HAD NO, UH, NON-CONFORMING USES FOR THE NEXT DOOR PROPERTY.
NO ON RECORD, NO NON-CONFORMING.
SO, UM, FOR THE APPLICANT, YOU'VE HEARD SOME OF THE DISCUSSION HERE REGARDING THE VARIOUS VARIANCES.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME REBUTTAL? MAYBE THE, UM, AMENDMENT TO THE, THE GARAGE OR THE FENCE HEIGHTS OR JUST SOME CLARIFICATION AND SUCH? SO YES, SIR.
UH, THE EIGHT FOOT, UH, OFFERING THAT WAS, UH, PROPOSED HERE IS FABULOUS.
UH, JUST GIVE TO, TO INCREASE THE PRIVACY OF THE FAMILIES LIVING IN THE HOME.
THE REQUESTING FOR THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK FROM THE REAR BASED ON, UH, THE PROPERTY THAT'S BASICALLY HAS NOT BEEN, UH, UTILIZED FOR OVER 40 YEARS.
UH, JUST, UH, PROVIDING PRIVACY, PROVIDING SOME SORT OF BORDER THERE AND TO HAVE THAT HEIGHT OF THE FENCE BEING EIGHT FOOT IS GREAT.
AND THE FIVE FOOT, UH, SETBACK WOULD BE, UH, THAT COULD BE APPROVED, THAT WOULD BE FABULOUS TO INCREASE THE LIVING SPACE.
UH, I, I UNDERSTAND NOW ABOUT THE PERIMETER, UH, AND I WELCOME THAT, UH, FOR THE HOME, FOR THE UTILITIES ON THE, THE, BASICALLY THE CAKE METHOD, UH, AND THEN HAVING LIVING SPACE AROUND THAT.
IF THAT COULD BE APPROVED, THAT'D BE FABULOUS.
UM, AND ALSO THIS IS AN ENERGY, THIS IS ALSO FOR THE COMMUNITY.
THIS BUILDING IS, UH, ENERGY EFFICIENT.
UH, WE HAVE A LOT OF HEAT IN SAN ANTONIO, AS YOU KNOW, AND BASICALLY TO DESIGN A HOME FOR FAMILIES.
AND THAT'S MY INTENTION IS TO, UH, MAKE SURE THAT FAMILIES CAN AFFORD THESE HOMES, STAY THERE FOR 20, 30 YEARS, BRING THEIR KIDS AND THEIR KIDS.
UH, THAT'S WHAT IT IN BEAU BEAUTIFICATION OF DOWNTOWN.
AND UH, THAT'S WHAT THIS WILL DO FOR THAT COMMUNITY.
MR. ORIAN? YEAH, I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
UM, I NOTICED THAT THERE'S NO REAR DOOR ON YOUR FLOOR PLAN TO GO TO THE BACK.
I THOUGHT HOLMES HAD TO HAVE A REAR DOOR.
IS THAT, AM I MISSING SOMETHING? IT'S A WINDOW BUT OUTSIDE TO GO, TO GO OUTSIDE IN THE BACK, YEAH.
THERE'S, THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY IN THIS PLACE.
YOU GOT ONE ENTRY DOOR FROM, FROM THE PORCH AND THAT'S IT FOR, AND YOU'RE ATTEMPTING TO PUT A THREE STORY BUILDING? UH, YES SIR.
IT'S JUST BASICALLY WANTING TO GIVE THE SITE PLAN.
AND THEN QUICKLY, WHAT'S, WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT TO YOU? THE REAR SETBACK OR THE REAR OR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THE REAR 10 FOOT? WE WANT THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK.
IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN? IS THAT, IS THAT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE, THAN AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THE REAR? YES SIR.
THAT INCREASES OUR LIVING SPACE.
UM, SO WE HAVE A LAY SIGN UP, UH, TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE.
I GUESS IT'D BE UP TO YOU WHETHER YOU WOULD ALLOW IT.
[02:15:01]
HERE.WE MIGHT AS WELL LET, OKAY, SO WE HAVE ONE, A PUBLIC, UH, COMMENT AND SO, BUT I WILL OFFER THE APPLICANT A CHANCE TO PROVIDE A FINAL REBUTTAL AT THE END OF THAT, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT.
SO IF WE CAN HAVE, UH, WHO, YES.
I'M A RESIDENT ON LOTUS STREET, WHICH IS RIGHT BEHIND THIS PROPERTY.
UM, I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT COMING FORWARD TRYING TO DEVELOP THIS AREA AND GET IT GOING.
MY CONCERN TODAY IS THE SAFETY SPECIFICALLY ON THAT BACK SETBACK AND ALSO ON THE STREET.
I THINK THIS IS A FAIRLY LARGE PROJECT.
I'M WORRIED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OTHER PEOPLE BEING HURT IF THERE IS SOME SORT OF DISASTER, LIKE A FIRE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, WHEN UTILITIES DO COME IN, THEY BACK INTO THE PROPERTY 'CAUSE IT'S A DEAD END AT THE END OF THE STREET.
THERE'S NO WAY FOR TRASH, BULK PICKUP, THINGS LIKE THAT TO TURN AROUND OR CARS MORE PROPERTY TO IT.
UM, THE SECOND THING TOO, I THINK THEY BROUGHT UP, THEY SELL BEER.
IT'S JUST A PROPERTY OF AN OLDER MAN THAT COLLECTS OLD VINTAGE SIGNS.
IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A LOW KEY BAR, BUT AGAIN, I DO APPRECIATE THE DEVELOPMENT.
I WOULD JUST ASK THAT IT WOULD BE FOR A SINGLE PROPERTY, NOT TWO DUPLEXES, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THE PROPERTY SIZE.
ALRIGHT, LET'S SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, NANA.
SO ONE OF THE, UH, COMMISSIONERS HERE TALKED ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, BRINGING IN THE DRIVEWAY A LITTLE BIT SO AS TO ALLOW, UH, THE PARKING OF A CAR ON THE DRIVEWAY ITSELF.
AND THEN, UM, THE SECOND, UM, DIALOGUE WAS ABOUT HAVING, WE'LL SAY THE, WE'LL SAY THE BACK DOORS, YOU KNOW, TO ALLOW, UM, I GUESS FOR, FOR LEAVING THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.
SO DO THO EITHER OF THOSE ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT YOU HAVE OR, I THINK THE SETBACK FOR THE DRIVEWAY WOULD ALLEVIATE THAT CONCERNS.
I STILL THINK THE BACK THOUGH, THERE REALLY ISN'T MUCH WHAT YOU CAN DO CONSIDERING THE SIZE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT AND PROPERTY.
I MEAN, YOU'RE GONNA WALK OUT TO NOT REALLY A YARD OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
AND LIKE I SAID, IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN, YOU'VE GOT THIS OTHER NEIGHBORS AROUND POTENTIALLY AT RISK AS WELL.
HAVE YOU HAVE YOU, IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, THANK YOU SIR.
WOULD YOU PLEASE, UH, COME FORWARD AND PROVIDE SOME FINAL REBUTTAL TO THEM? YES SIR.
UH, I DO KNOW THE STREET, UH, LOTUS, UH, THEY'RE HAVE THOSE WONDERFUL, UH, TOWN HOMES BASICALLY ON THAT STREET.
AND THEY'RE ALL ABOUT THREE, THEY'RE ALL THREE STORIES HIGHS AS WELL.
UH, THEY'RE, UH, METAL CONTAINER LOOKING, CONTAINER LOOKING BUILDINGS, BUT THEY'RE, UH, IT'S THE NEW, UH, TREND AND THEY'RE ALSO ENERGY EFFICIENT.
UH, BASICALLY WE ARE IN THAT, THAT WHOLE COMMUNITY, THAT WHOLE STREET, UH, THE DESIGN, IT'S, IT'S WHERE EVERYBODY WANTS TO BE.
UH, THEY WANNA BE IN THESE, UH, TOWN HOMES, THREE STORIES HIGH, AND THEY'RE ALL SOLD OUT.
UH, SO WHEN HE SPEAKS, HE SPEAKS OF, UM, IT'S A WELCOMING WHAT I'M BRINGING TO THE COMMUNITY.
UH, BUT I'M NOT, UH, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE STREETS ARE NARROW, BUT THE STREETS ARE IMPROVING WITH EACH ONE OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS.
UH, AND AS WELL AS PREA STREET.
UH, THEY'RE REPAVING THAT STREET.
EVERYTHING IS JUST, UH, IT'S GOING TO GROW.
UH, WE WANNA GROW THE COMMUNITY, WE WANNA GROW THE FAMILIES, THE LOTUS TREES IN WHICH HE COMES FROM, UH, THOSE, THEY HAVE BEAUTIFUL METAL TOWN HOMES ALL SOLD OUT.
EVERYBODY'S LOVING LIFE AND EVERYBODY'S ENJOYING THE COMMUNITY FEEL THAT THOSE HOMES ARE BRINGING TO THE COMMUNITY.
IT'S A FAMILY, PEOPLE WALKING AT NIGHT WITH THE CARRIAGES AND THE DOGS.
AND WE ARE JUST BRINGING MORE COMMUNITY, MORE FAMILIES.
AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BUILD WILL DO FOR THAT COMMUNITY.
ANY, UH, LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU BEFORE WE CLOSE.
ACTUALLY, I HAVE UM, QUESTION FOR STAFF.
AND THEN, UM, WITH THE FIVE FOOT, IF WE WERE TO GRANT THE FIVE FOOT, UH, BUILDING SETBACK, WOULD THERE BE A REQUIREMENT FOR FIRE RETARDANT MATERIAL ON THE, ON THE EXTERIOR ESPECIALLY? WELL, YEAH.
'CAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE SIDE SETBACKS AND REAR SETBACKS ARE, ARE VERY NARROW.
IS THERE A REQUIREMENT? POTENTIALLY, YES MA'AM.
UH, WHEN THEY DO THE BUILDING REVIEW, THAT, THAT IS POSSIBLE BECAUSE IT'S HABITABLE SPACE.
AND THAT REVIEW WOULD INCLUDE, YOU KNOW, THE REAR ACCESS THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, ORIENT A REAR ACCESS A REAR DOOR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF APPLICANT? HEARING NONE, I'D ASK, UH, A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION ORIAN HISTORIAN.
OKAY, I'M GONNA READ THIS, UH, FROM WHAT I'M, I'M GETTING FROM THE, FROM THE COMMISSION OF WHAT COULD BE PASSABLE, BUT I'M OPEN TO ANY, UH, AMENDMENTS.
UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 23 DASH 1 0 3 2 4 8.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RENDERER REQUEST FOR ONE A 663 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT REQUIREMENTS ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON A 3,337 SQUARE FOOT LOT.
AND TWO, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT REAR SETBACK.
[02:20:01]
FOUR, A FOUR FOOT, UH, VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT FROM THE BACK OF SIDEWALK TO ALLOW A GARAGE ENTRY TO BE 16 FEET FROM THE FRONT, UH, SETBACK SITUATED AT ONE 10 HERE A STREET APPLICANT BEING KENDRA ADELE SEGLER.BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
STAFF FINDS THAT THIS REQUEST IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS A REQUEST OF VARIANCES WILL NOT IMPACT THE SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC.
2, 2, 2 SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE FROM RESULT IN AN UN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE INABILITY TO DEVELOP ON THE PROPERTY.
THE LOT SIZE LIMITS THE SPACE TO WHERE A REDUCED SETBACK, WHILE STILL MEETING THE RM FOUR 65% BUILDABLE AREA, THE GARAGE FRONT SETBACK WILL ELIMINATE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A GARAGE ON THE LOT.
ADDITIONALLY, THE STRUCTURE WOULD HAVE LESS SQUARE FOOTAGE DUE TO THE MAXIMUM TO HALF STORIES.
UH, STRIKE THE LAST SENTENCE, SORRY.
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.
THIS VARIANCE WILL PERMIT A REDUCED RISK SETBACK, GARAGE SETBACK AND DEVELOPMENT ON A SUBSTANDARD LOT.
THE REQUEST APPEARS TO BE, UH, TO OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE BY SUCH VARIANCE, SHALL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT TO FOREIGN PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE THAT THIS REQUESTED VARIANCE WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
THE PROPERTY IS PART OF THE ORIGINAL 36 SQUARE MILES OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, WHERE SMALLER LOTS ARE COMMONLY FOUND.
SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS HELD AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
IN THE E CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR NOT DUE TO OTHER RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
UH, IT'S PAGE TWO, STAFF FINDS SU APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THIS PROP FOR THE PROPERTY, UH, FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION.
YOU HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND, SECOND, MR. BREGMAN.
SO, UH, I DID NOT READ, UH, THE THREE STORIES.
I EXCLUDED ITEM THREE REGARDING, UH, SO WOULD BE LIMITED TO TWO AND A HALF STORIES.
UH, I'VE, I, 16 FEET I THINK IS SOMETHING WHERE A LOT OF CARS, MOST CARS NOT A GOOD SIZED TRUCK, BUT MOST CARS WOULD FIT IN THE DRIVEWAY.
BUT, UH, THE REAR SETBACK, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU START BUILDING UP TO EVEN TWO AND A HALF STORIES AND YOU'RE ON A SMALL LOT TO BEGIN WITH, I, I, I JUST, I CAN'T GIVE THE FULL FIVE FEET.
UH, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A REAR DOOR BACK THERE.
IT JUST, I JUST STARTED OFF WITH TWO.
I'M OPEN TO, YOU KNOW, ANY SUGGESTIONS MS. BREGMAN? UM, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE.
I, I LIKE THE FACT THAT THERE'S SOME OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO, UH, ELIMINATE THE THREE STORY THAT WAS, UM, HEART HEARTBURN FOR ME.
SO, UM, I I, I LIKE THE FACT THAT THAT'S BEEN RECONFIGURED SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT.
AND I AGREE IN TERMS OF THE, THE REAR SETBACK, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE THAN FIVE FEET EVEN WITH, UH, POSSIBLE REQUIREMENT OF FIRE RETARDANT MATERIAL ON IT.
UM, SO I'LL BE SUPPORTED THE MOTION AS, UH, READ.
AND I TOO WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ.
I THINK IT, THE, THE FACT THAT THEY'LL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH, UH, ALL APPLICABLE, UH, FIRE CODE AND BUILDING MATERIAL INCLUDING, UH, FIRE RATING ON THE WALLS.
ALSO THE ELIMINATION, ELIMINATION OF THE THIRD STORY WHERE THAT, UH, UH, HALF HALF STORY WOULD HAVE TO BE BUILT WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE ORDINANCE, I THINK, UH, SOLVES A A CONCERN THAT I HAD AS WELL.
SO, UH, LOOKING FOR ANY OTHER COMMENTS? IF NOT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS.
AND THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER SPECIAL EXCEPTION, A SPECIAL EXEMPTION REGARDING THE, THE FENCE WILL BE THE, THE SECOND FOLLOW UP, UH, MOTION WE'D READ ON THIS.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MS. BREGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, DR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
A ZERO AGAINST THE MOTION AS ONE OPPOSED, UH, I'M SORRY, I DID IT AGAIN.
10 IN FAVOR? ONE OPPOSED OR AGAINST, UH, THE MOTION AS AMENDED PASSES.
UM, NOW WE MOVE TO THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION EXEMPTION REGARDING THE FENCE.
DO I HAVE A BOARD MEMBER, UH, READY TO READ THAT MOTION?
[02:25:02]
UH, MAY I'LL READ IT.UH, REGARDING OR REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 23 DASH 1 0 3 0 2 4 8.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM SIX FOOT HIGH TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT REAR AND SIDE YARD FENCE SITUATED AT ONE 10 ERNA STREET.
APPLICANT BEING KENDRA ADE SEGLER BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWED THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SO SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER DEFENSE TYPE BEING REQUESTED IS INNATE DEFENSE IN THE REAR SIDE YARD.
IF GRANTED STAFF FINDS A REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE.
B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE.
THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY FENCE HEIGHT TO PROTECT PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY.
THE PROPOSED FENCE, UH, BEING REQUESTED WILL BE LOCATED ALONG THE REAR, INSIDE THE ORDINANCE, EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT BY A TWO FOOT FOR A FENCE.
THE FENCE WILL STILL SERVE THE PUBLIC WELFARE INCONVENIENCE.
C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE DEFENSE 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, WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION SOUGHT THE ADDITIONAL FENCE SIDE AND THE REAR INSIDE YARD OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, UH, DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE LOCATION OF WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT.
THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE SITE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE AND ESTABLISH FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT.
THE REQUEST IS SPECIAL, EXCEPTIONAL, NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT.
SO I READ IT AS, AS THE APPLICANT READ, BUT I'M NOT A FAN OF, OF THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE SITE WHEN THEIR STRUCTURE IS VERY, VERY CLOSE TO THE FENCE.
UH, I COULD LIVE WITH IT IN THE REAR.
UH, I'M NOT A FAN OF IT, OF THE, ON THE SIDES.
SO, UM, I'M LOOKING FOR, FOR SOME MORE INSIGHT OR, OR REQUEST FOR A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
BUT I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH EIGHT FOOT IN THE REAR NOW THAT THERE'S AN EIGHT FOOT REAR SEPARATION, BUT I'M NOT A FAN OF THE EIGHT FOOT ON THE SIDES, MR. MANUP.
SO, YOU KNOW, DRIVING AROUND THE COMMUNITY, IT APPEARS THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IN AND AROUND THAT AREA HAVE A FOUR FOOT FENCE.
UM, AND SO, SO THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE SIX FOOT FENCES FOR THE MOST PART.
AND SO I, I GUESS I HAVE A CHALLENGE THAT, YOU KNOW, I, I AGREE WITH THE CITY'S POSITION THAT, THAT THIS IS, UM, THE REQUEST IS OUTTA CHARACTER WITH THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY AND, AND SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING IT ALRIGHTYY.
AND IS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION FOR A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT AS, UH, MR. ORIAN, UH, WAS REQUESTING BRAGMAN MS. BRAGMAN? UM, I WILL, BECAUSE I, I THINK SHE, THE APPLICANT NOTED THAT THERE'S THAT CONTAINER THAT'S IN THE BACK.
UM, AND SO THIS WOULD, UM, PARTITION THAT OFF SO IT'S NOT QUITE SO OBVIOUS.
SO I WOULD BE OPEN TO AN AMENDMENT SO THAT IT'S SIX FOOT ON, ON THE SIDES AND EIGHT IN THE REAR.
ALRIGHT, SO, UH, I, I ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT.
SO NOW MY, MY AMENDMENT IF, UH, IF AGREED TO BY COMMISSIONER, MAN, IT WOULD ONLY BE FOR AN EIGHT FOOT IN THE REAR.
SO IF, DO I NEED A SECOND, ANOTHER SECOND OR COMMISSIONER MAMMOTH? I, I'LL ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY MOTION.
SO WE HAVE A AMENDMENT WITH THIS FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, AND ACCEPTED BY THE SECOND.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE BETA BE, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE.
SO WE'RE, IT'S AN EIGHT FOOT IN THE BACK AND SIX FEET ON THE SIDE, CORRECT? UH, CORRECT TO THE, TO THE FRONT OF THE, TO THE SIDE OR THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE? RIGHT.
AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO THEN COMPLY WITH THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION IN FRONT AFTER THAT? WELL, THE, THE, UM, I APOLOGIZE.
THE EIGHT FOOT WOULD ONLY BE ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
IT WOULDN'T BE FOR THE EIGHT FEET FROM THE, THAT THE STRUCTURE'S GONNA BE FROM THE BACK.
IT'S ONLY FOR THE, THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, CORRECT? CORRECT.
DOES THAT MAKE EVERYONE CLEAR ON THAT? OKAY, LET'S GO AND TAKE A ROLL CALL.
MR. ORIAN? YES, MR. MANNA? I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
BURTON? YES, MR. DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR.
MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH EIGHT IN FAVOR.
THREE AGAINST THE VARIANCE DOES NOT PASS.
PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND THEY'LL EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR OPTIONS ARE HERE.
AGENDA ITEM 10 BO 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 4 9.
[02:30:01]
IS EIGHT 10 SOUTH WALTER STREET COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO, APPLICANT IS SO LEASE BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT L L C A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW.TWO SEPARATE STRUCTURES ARE AN RRN FOUR THAT IS LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG SOUTH WALTER STREET.
CURRENTLY THE LOT IS VACANT WITH THE APPLICANT PROPOSING TWO DUPLEXES ON THE LOT WHILE A NUMBER OF UNITS ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN RM FOUR RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW TWO SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON RRN FOUR LOT THAT IS LESS THAN A THIRD OF AN ACRE.
PROPERTY IS 7,000 SQUARE FEET.
SITE PLAN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ALTERNATE VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION TWO SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON THE RM FOUR THAT IS LESS THAN A THIRD OF AN ACRE VARIANCE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL M B O 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 4 9 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, MAINTAINING DESTINY REQUIREMENTS CAN PREVENT OVERCROWDING ON SMALLER LOTS.
PROVIDES OPEN SPACES AND CONTRIBUTES TO A MORE COMFORTABLE AND AESTHETICALLY PLEASING ENVIRONMENT AND ESTABLISHED SINGLE STRUCTURED NEIGHBORHOOD NOTIFICATION PLAN.
STAFF MAILED OUT 31 NOTICES, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, ZERO IN FAVOR.
AND DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION.
HERE'S A LETTER FROM DENVER HEIGHTS.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE.
ALRIGHT, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? HEARING NONE, I'D ASK THE APPLICANT.
I'M SORRY, IS THERE A QUESTION FOR, UH, ORIAN? MR. ORIAN? DID Y'ALL CHECK, DID Y'ALL CHECK TO SEE IF THIS IS EXCEEDING 65% OF PREVIOUS COVER? SHOULD THAT HAVE BEEN INCLUDED AS, AS ONE OF THE VARIANCES? IT SHOULD BE.
WE, WE LOOKED AT IT, BUT WE CAN LOOK AT IT AGAIN.
IT JUST LOOKS, YEAH, MORE THAN 65%.
THIS IS, THIS, THIS WOULDN'T, UH, BE OVER 65%.
ALRIGHT, UH, APPLICANT, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND LET'S HEAR YOUR PRESENTATION.
HELLO, MY NAME IS, IS RICHARD, UH, SOLI.
AND THE ADDRESS IS, UH, EIGHT 10 SOUTH WALTERS.
UM, I'VE LEARNED A LOT HERE TODAY,
I'VE BEEN HERE ALL DAY, SO IT'S PRETTY INTERESTING.
SO, UH, ACTUALLY THE, UM, THE REASON FOR THIS, UM, REASON COME, UH, COMING UP UP HERE.
IF, IF I COULD, I'D LIKE TO START WITH THE HISTORY OF, OF WHAT, UM, I, WHAT, UH, STARTED, UM, THE PROJECTS ON THESE TWO LOTS.
SO THERE'S A, THERE'S A STRUCTURE AT, UM, UM, THAT WE JUST FINISHED AT 8 0 6, UH, SOUTH WALTERS.
AND SO WHEN WE BEGAN TO PLAN BOTH OF THESE BACKEND, UM, UH, WHAT WAS IT? I GUESS IT WAS, UM, AUGUST OF, OF LAST YEAR.
SO, SO WE HAD HAD FENCED IN THIS ENTIRE AREA.
SO THE, UH, THE IDEA WAS TO, UH, WELL BACK IN, UH, 2000, IN 2022, THE TWO SEPARATE DUPLEXES WERE, UH, PERMITTED.
BUT THEN, UH, WHEN WE SUBMITTED THE OTHER SET OF PLANS, UM, UH, ACTUALLY, I, I WANTED TO GO BACK A LITTLE, A LITTLE FURTHER, BUT, UM, IF I COULD JUST GO BACK TO THAT AFTER I EXPLAINED THIS.
UM, SO, UH, WE HAD, WE HAD SUBMITTED FOR THE C O D, THE, THE ADDRESS SCENE, AND, UM, WE WERE GONNA START OUT WITH THESE TWO AND THEN FINISH UP ON THIS SIDE.
SO THE IDEA WAS TO CREATE THE DRIVEWAY HERE AND TO HAVE THE PARKING IN THE MIDDLE.
AND I DO HAVE PHOTOS AND WE'LL, AND WE'LL GO TO THOSE IN JUST A MINUTE.
SO, UM, THE IDEA WAS TO DO THE SAME THING HERE AND HAVE THE PARKING HERE.
SO THIS UNIT WOULD BE BACK HERE AND THERE'D BE BE ANOTHER, ANOTHER UNIT, UH, BACK HERE.
NOW THESE ARE TWO SEPARATE LOTS, AND THE MAIN REASON FOR THAT IS, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S BASICALLY, UH, SAFETY BECAUSE WHAT'S IN, WHEN WE, WE HAD SUBMITTED THE FIRST SET BACK IN AUGUST, UH, SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE IN TWO, IN 2022, WE FINISHED THIS ONE.
SO WE WENT TO SOME, WE SUBMITTED THIS, THE C O D, THE ADDRESSING AND THE PLANS, AND THEN OF COURSE, THE, UH, RE REVIEWER CAME BACK AND ADVISED US THAT THE, UM, THAT THE, UH, ORDINANCE HAD CHANGED.
UM, SO THAT, OF COURSE, THAT'S WHY I'M HERE.
UM, BUT THE, UM, THE BIGGEST REASON IS SAFETY.
SO IN ORDER, IN ORDER FOR, FOR THIS TO WORK, UM,
[02:35:01]
WITH THE FOUR UNITS UNDER ONE ROOF, UM, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THE DRIVEWAY ALL THE WAY THROUGH HERE, PASSING THE TWO UNITS, AND THEN THE PARKING WOULD BE BACK HERE.AND THE PURPOSE, AND I'LL SHOW YOU THE PHOTOS, BUT, UM, THE PURPOSE WAS TO KEEP THIS OPEN, UM, YOU KNOW, CHILDREN PLAYING THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT NOW IF WE, UM, HAVE ALL FOUR UNITS UNDER THE SAME ROOF, THEN WE'LL HAVE TO CREATE THE PARKING BACK THERE.
AND I, I JUST, I JUST THINK IT'S AN AWFUL LONG WAYS TO GO WHEN THEY, THEY COULD JUST GO HERE.
AND, UM, SO IF I COULD GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING, I'D LIKE TO, I'D LIKE TO SHARE, SHOW, SHOW THE FIRST I TURNED THIS OFF.
SO I'D LIKE TO GO TO THE WORD DOC THERE.
SO, UM, THIS IS 800, UH, SOUTH WALTERS.
THIS IS 8 0 6 WHERE YOU SEE THE, UH, TWO DUPLEXES, AND THIS IS EIGHT 10 SOUTH WALTERS, UM, IS WHERE THE PROPOSED, UH, BUILDING IS GOING TO BE.
SO I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT, UM, WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THE AREA, UM, THAT WAS THERE.
THIS IS NOT MY PROPERTY, BUT I HELPED THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY, UH, WITH, WITH ALL THIS.
SO IT'S, NOW IT'S NICE AND CLEAR.
AND THEN OF COURSE, 8 0 6 IS BUILT AND THIS IS A PROPOSED, IF I COULD GO TO THE NEXT ONE OR THE, WHERE CAN I GO TO THIS HERE? SO THIS, THIS IS 8 0 6 SOUTH WALTERS.
AND AS YOU COULD SEE, THIS IS THE, UM, THIS IS THE ENTRANCE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
UH, IF I COULD GO TO THE NEXT ONE, AND THIS IS THE, THE DRIVEWAY.
SO ON THIS SIDE, THE DRIVEWAY WOULD EXTEND TO THE SAME.
IF I COULD GO TO THE NEXT ONE.
SO THIS IS THE PARKING IN THE MIDDLE.
AND, UH, YEAH, AND OF COURSE WE'RE BACK TO IN THE NEXT ONE, PLEASE.
AND SO THE, AGAIN, THIS, WE STARTED THE PLANNING STAGES OF ALL THIS, UH, LAST YEAR.
UH, AND AGAIN, UM, WE SUBMITTED FOR THIS, IT WAS ACCEPTED.
AND THIS YEAR, UH, WE, WHEN WE FOUND OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE ORDINANCE HAD CHANGED, NEXT ONE PLEASE.
SO, SO WHEN WE RUN ALONG HERE, UH, IF WE COULD GO BACK TO THE OTHER ONE, PLEASE.
UM, SO THAT, THAT DRIVEWAY, KEEP IN MIND THEY CAN'T USE THIS ONE.
THIS IS GONNA BE THEIR DRIVEWAY.
IT'S GONNA COME ALL THE WAY BACK HERE.
AND IT JUST, I JUST FEEL IT CAN BE A SAFETY, UH, HAZARD, ESPECIALLY IF PEOPLE HAVE CHILDREN.
AND THIS, THIS WHOLE AREA, IN ALL HONESTY, WAS, WAS GONNA BE DESIGNED FOR LIKE A PLAY AREA AND MAYBE A SWING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND KIDS WERE HERE BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, FOR BOTH UNITS, UH, FOR BOTH PROPERTIES TO, TO SHARE THAT.
AND THIS IS A BETTER VISUAL HERE THAN YOU JUST, UH, UM, IF YOU PUT EVERYTHING UNDER, UH, WHICH IS GONNA BE A IN THIS AREA, THEN AGAIN WE'RE HAVING THE DR.
AND, AND AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S BASICALLY A SAFETY ISSUE AND WE'RE JUST, YOU KNOW, UM, I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE REASONING, THE, FOR THE DENIAL.
I WASN'T QUITE CLEAR ON WHAT, ON WHAT HE WAS EXPLAINING, BUT, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE.
LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY, ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU? ORIAN, SIR? APPLICANT? YEP.
ONE, IT LOOKS LIKE SOUTH WALTERS IS A THOROUGHFARE.
IS THAT TRUE STAFF? IT HAS FOUR LANES, IF THAT.
CORRECT? IT'S A SECONDARY ARTERIAL MATERIAL.
AND THEN FOR THE APPLICANT, YOU HAVE, UM, UM, YOU'RE SHOWING SIX PARKING SPACES, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE 25 FEET BE BEHIND THE PARKING TO GET TO THAT ONE ISOLATED SPACE.
SO I'M, I'M QUESTIONING WHETHER YOU'RE, YOU'RE MEETING THE PARKING REQUIREMENT AND, AND WHICH IN TURN IS, IS MAKING ME QUESTION YOUR SITE LAYOUT.
AND I'M STILL CONCERNED ABOUT THE 65% MAX IMPERVIOUS COVER ALL, YOU KNOW, WHICH CAME INTO EFFECT JANUARY 1ST, ALONG WITH THIS, UH, SEPARATED BUILDING.
DID YOU ALREADY APPLY FOR C O D ON THIS PROPERTY, SIR? YES, SIR.
UM, I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF, IF STAFF WOULD
[02:40:01]
ACCEPT AN APPLICATION IN 2022 TO TRY TO GET YOU VESTED INTO THE BUILDINGS BEING JOINED, BUT I GUESS IT'S A MOOT POINT.UM, BUT THIS, UH, YEAH, I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE REASON WHY YOU WOULD WANNA SEPARATE A BUILDING, YOU KNOW, IT'S BETTER FOR FIRE, THEY'RE SEPARATE FROM EACH OTHER.
YOU, YOU HAVE MORE POTENTIAL FOR LANDSCAPING.
I MEAN, THERE'S SOME GOOD POINTS TO HAVING THE BUILDINGS BEING SEPARATED, BUT THE NEGATIVE POINTS IS THAT YOU DO HAVE MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR THIS EXTERIOR PARKING.
AND BECAUSE SOUTH WALTERS IS A THOROUGHFARE, MAKING SURE THAT YOU HAVE AT, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST THE MINIMUM PARKING, WHICH I PERSONALLY THINK FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING, YOU PROBABLY NEED MORE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T PARK ON WALTER'S.
AND SO, I'M, I'M JUST, I HAVE SOME CONCERN ABOUT, UH, ABOUT THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THIS LAYOUT IN 2023.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO ASK IF YOU, IF YOU COULD PROVIDE SOME INSIGHT ABOUT, ABOUT WHETHER YOU HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING, WHETHER YOU, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THIS, THIS BUILDING SEPARATION OR WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING IS ACTUALLY GONNA BE FUNCTIONALLY AND SAFE.
I MEAN IT'S, UH, I IT WILL WORK BECAUSE IF WE, UM, AGAIN, IF WE, IF WE PUT THE FOUR UNITS HERE, THEN, UM, THEN AGAIN, UH, I, I JUST, I JUST FEEL THAT, UM, THAT'S GONNA RESTRICT US EVEN MORE THAN WHAT, WHAT WE ALREADY ARE.
AND THIS WAY, UM, IN ALL HONESTY, UM, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY CAME IN OFF THE STREET HERE, THEY COULD STILL TURN INTO HERE OR SOMEBODY CAME OFF THE STREET HERE AND STILL TURN INTO HERE.
THERE'S NO, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE ANY TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP ON THIS.
SO THERE, AND THERE'S, UH, SO I THINK, I THINK WITH THE TWO DRIVEWAYS, IT'S GONNA MAKE IT JUST THAT MUCH EASIER AND THAT MUCH SAFER FOR EVERYBODY TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT IS JUST NOT ONE, I THINK, I THINK IN MOST, MOST OF THESE FOURPLEXES THAT, THAT YOU'LL SEE ARE THESE TWO DDU DUPLEXES.
YOU'LL SEE THIS ONE NARROW AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GET IN AND OUT HERE.
WE, WE CHOSE TO DO IT THIS WAY TO, TO, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, UTILIZE THE CENTER FOR ENTRY AND EXIT.
AND I THINK THAT IN ITSELF, UM, YOU KNOW, MAKES IT A WHOLE LOT EASIER.
AND THEN TO MAINTAIN THE PARKING IN THE MIDDLE.
SO, SO DO YOU HAVE 25 FEET BEHIND THOSE FIVE PARKING SPACES BEFORE YOU HIT THAT SINGLE CAR? OH, YES.
WHAT DOES, I CAN'T, I CAN'T READ THAT DIMENSION RIGHT THERE.
THERE'S, THERE, THERE, THERE'S SUFFICIENT ROOM.
SO YOU HAVE AN 18 FOOT LONG SPACE AND THEN 25 FEET, AND THEN THE NINE FEET FOR THAT ONE SPACE.
I, I'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THE, I MEAN THE, THE LAYOUT, BUT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S AN APPROVED, UM, I MEAN IT'S, IT'S BEEN APPROVED ONCE BEFORE.
WELL, SOMETIMES THINGS GET APPROVED AND THEY PROBABLY, I UNDERSTAND BE MADE.
WHAT DOES THAT DIMENSION, WHAT DOES THE DIMENSION SAY ABOVE THAT CAR? I CAN'T READ IT.
I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PLANS OR READ IT A LITTLE BIT.
CAN CAN, CAN YOU TELL YEAH, RIGHT THERE.
WHAT IS THAT NUMBER 18 AND THAT NUMBER? IT'S 18, 18 FOOT AND, UH, EIGHT FOOT WIDTH.
THAT'S NOT EVEN A COMPLIANT PARKING SPACE TO BEGIN WITH.
SO THAT'S, SO THAT'S A CONCERN I HAVE IF, YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS GOES THROUGH CODE REVIEW, THEY'RE SUPPOSED, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE 25 FEET BEHIND A PARKING SPACE ON A 90 DEGREE PARKING.
SO I'M, I HAVE CONCERN THAT THIS IS EVEN, EVEN, YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE EVEN ALLOWED.
UM, SO IS THIS RENDERING THAT WE'RE SEEING, THE SITE PLAN, IS THIS IDENTICAL TO WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED? YEAH.
IT'S JUST FLIPPED THE DIMENSIONS, THE, THE PARKING LAYOUT, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.
AND SO, SO WHAT IS IT YOU ARE SEEKING IS BASICALLY THE INVERSE OF THIS FACING THIS BUILDING? SAME EXACT LAYOUT, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
AND THEN SO MIRRORED IT, AND SO THE QUESTION GOES TO THE CITY.
SO, SO, YOU KNOW, I GUESS I'M GONNA GO BACK TO MR. ORIAN, CHAIRMAN IAN'S, YOU KNOW, DIALOGUE.
THERE'S, I DON'T SEE 65% AT ALL, OR I SEE MORE THAN 65% LOOKING AT THE, UH, BETWEEN THE CONCRETE AND THE FACILITIES ITSELF.
I, I, I WOULD FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE THAT, THAT IT IS, SO THE 65% FOR DEVELOPMENT, UM, THAT'S FOR THE STRUCTURES, UM, THAT NOT THE IMPERVIOUS, NOT THE PIOUS OR IMPERVIOUS COVER, UH, BEHIND
[02:45:01]
THE FRONT FACADE.THAT'S JUST FOR THE STRUCTURES THAT HAS TO BE 65% OR LESS.
AND UM, ADDITIONALLY, THE, AND I KNOW THEY STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE REGULAR REVIEW PROCESS, BUT THE, UH, TRAFFIC SECTION DID REVIEW THIS SITE PLAN, UM, AND THEY SIGNED OFF ON IT FOR THIS CASE TRAFFIC MEANING, UM, FOR PARKING OR FOR FOR PARKING? FOR PARKING.
IS THAT OKAY? WOULD THAT BE KIND OF LIKE AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE FROM THE CODE THAT ALLOWS, THEY DID NOT INDICATE THAT THEY NEED ANY VARIANCE.
THEY, WE SUBMITTED THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE TO THE TRAFFIC SECTION FOR THEIR REVIEW TO MAKE SURE THAT HAVE SIX PARKING SPACES TO ENSURE THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE TO ADD A VARIANCE FOR PARKING.
AND THEY TOLD US THEY HAVE SIX PARKING SPACES.
BUT YES, THEY DO STILL NEED TO GO THROUGH THE REGULAR REVIEW, UM, AS YOU MENTIONED.
AND MY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, AND AGAIN, THE HARDSHIP OF HAVING TO COMPLY WITH THE ONE BUILDING VERSUS TWO ON A ONE THIRD ACRE, WHAT YOUR HARDSHIP, AGAIN, IS PROVIDING WELL CO CORRECT? I MEAN, IT'S, UH, HARDSHIP AS FAR AS THE SAFETY WISE OR WHATEVER THE HARDSHIP YOU'RE SEEKING FOR THE VARIANCE.
I, I MEAN, BASIC NUMBER ONE IS FOR SAFETY.
AND, AND, AND I DO BELIEVE THAT IT'LL MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR THE TENANTS IN THESE, IN, IN THESE UNITS TO MOVE THEIR VEHICLES AROUND AND SAFETY FOR, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE'S KIDS, UM, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF MONEY INVESTED IN INTO THIS ALSO.
UM, BUT, UM, UH, BUT WE ARE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HERE TO, I MEAN, TRY TO COMPLY WITH OR TO, TO COMPLY WITH EVERYTHING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? AND AGAIN, I, DID WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS TO READ IN OR HAVE WE DONE THAT OR NO PUBLIC, NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
UM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE ANY CLOSING REMARKS BEFORE WE CLOSE, CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? UM, NO, I MEAN OUR WHOLE, UH, YOU KNOW, MY PURPOSE HERE IS IS, UH, UH, I'VE, I'VE ACTUALLY, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M A SMALL BUSINESS, BUT I, I, I'VE, UH, UH, WE'VE, UH, DONE SOME OTHER PROPERTIES, UH, SINGLE FAMILY AND, UM, IN THIS AREA AND, UH, AS YOU CAN TELL FROM, FROM THE PREVIOUS PICTURES, I MEAN THERE WAS A LOT OF, UH, UH, CLEANUP TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, AND, AND THAT THAT'S OUR GOAL.
AND SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE, UM, NICE UNITS, UH, YOU KNOW, NEAR, NEAR A COLLEGE AND, UM, AND, UH, AND SAFE FOR THE, YOU KNOW, SAFE FOR THE, AT TENANTS THAT ARE THERE.
AND I THINK THIS WOULD HELP, UH, HELP THAT OUT.
THAT WOULD CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION.
I'D ASK A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 23 103 0 0 2 4 9, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTEE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW TWO SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON, ON AN RMM FOUR THAT IS LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE, SITUATED AT EIGHT 10 SOUTH WALTER STREET, APPLICANT BEING SOLIS BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT L L C.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN THIS CASE, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED BY DENSITY REQUIREMENTS TO PREVENT OVERCROWDING ON SMALLER LOTS.
STAFF FINDS THIS REQUEST IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE APPLICANT IS ABIDING BY ALL, BY ALL OTHER SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, WHICH WILL NOT INFRINGE ON SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
A LITTLE, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN APPLICANT AFTER IN, IN THE APPLICANT ALTERING THEIR PLANS TO ABIDE BY THE RECENTLY CHANGED U D C REQUIREMENT.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
STAFF FINDS THE SPIRIT WILL BE OBSERVED AS THE APPLICANT WILL BE ABIDING BY ALL OTHER BUILDING REQUIREMENT AND HAS NOT BEGUN CONSTRUCTION.
ADDITIONALLY, THIS WILL ALLOW FOR INFILL DEVELOPMENT OF, OF A VACANT REAR.
LOT FOR THE VARIANCE, WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF, OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZING THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED IN 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.
THE GRANTING OF THE, OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING
[02:50:01]
PROPERTIES AS THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IS NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS.THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WASTES OF VARIANCE OF SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES 16 ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO OR RESULTS OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS THE PLIGHT TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE LOT BEING LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF ACRE.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL AND NO MOTION.
YOU HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND.
MS. DORIAN, UH, MS. CRUZ, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE ANY COMMENT? UM, I AM NOT THRILLED ABOUT IT BEING TWO SEPARATE BUILDINGS, BUT I SEE WHAT IT HAS DONE WITH THE OTHER PROPERTIES.
UM, LUCKILY THEY HAVE NOT STARTED CONSTRUCTION, SO THAT'S ONE IN THEIR FAVOR.
AND, UM, OF COURSE, LIKE ALWAYS IN THIS COMMUNITY, WE CAN ALWAYS USE EXTRA HOUSING.
SO I WILL, UM, GO AHEAD AND, UH, GO WITH THE MOTION.
UM, UM, AFTER BEING, UH, CLAR, GETTING CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF ON THE 65%, I THINK THAT I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS.
I I HAVE TO TELL YOU THIS LOT FOR RM FOUR, IT'S, IT'S 7,000 SQUARE FEET.
IT'S A LITTLE BIGGER THAN WHAT WE'VE BEEN SEEING.
AND BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE PARKING INTERNAL, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT.
I DON'T THINK HE'S OVERBUILDING.
HE'S, HE'S BUILDING A RELATIVELY MODEST, UH, UH, UNIT.
AND SO I'M, I'M JUST, UH, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS ONE.
I THINK WITH THE, WITH THE SIZE, IT'S, I'LL BE ALL RIGHT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL.
MR. MANNA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
ONE AGAINST THE VARIANCE AS, AS, UH, AS, UM, AS WRITTEN.
UH, PASSES, PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND I CAN TELL YOU WHAT YOU GOT.
AGENDA ITEM 11 BO 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 5 0.
ADDRESS IS 29 20 COLIMA STREET COUNCIL.
DISTRICT FIVE APPLICANT IS PREMIER TEAM L L C A REQUEST FOR ONE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK AND TWO, A 2,250 SQUARE SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON A 1,750 SQUARE FEET.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND IS LOCATED ON CLEMAN STREET, GRANTING THE RESIDENTIAL, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON A SUBSTANDARD LOT.
THE VARIANCE WILL ALSO ALLOW THE SINGLE HOME TO BE 15 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE UPON STAFF SITE VISITS, STAFF OBSERVED VARIOUS VARIATIONS OF LOTS, SIZES AND OF VICINITY.
IT WILL ALSO OBSERVE THAT NUMEROUS PROPERTIES IN THE AREA WERE VACANT.
THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE WAS RECENTLY DEMOLISHED AND AN APPLICANT HAS BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE POSSIBLE C O D OPTION FOR LOT SIZE.
ALSO RECEIVED LATE, UH, FROM THIS MORNING FROM HISTORIC THAT THE BUILDING WAS RECENTLY DEMOLISHED WITHOUT A PERMIT.
O H P WAS NOT GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW, ENGAGE WITH NA AND COMMUNITY PRIOR TO DEMO BECAUSE OF ITS HISTORIC AGE AND IMPORTANT VERNACULAR ARCHITECTURE.
THIS IS A SITE PLAN AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION, REAR SETBACK VARIANCE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO O A 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE AREA AS THERE ARE SIMILAR STRUCTURES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA TO THE REQUESTED VARIANCE, WILL MAINTAIN A REASONABLE DISTANCE AND OBSERVED THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION LOG SIZE VARIANCE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL MBO O 8 23 1 0 3 0 0 2 5 0 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, THE APPLICANT CAN REZONE TO
[02:55:01]
A ZONING DISTRICT THAT WILL ALLEVIATE THE NEED FOR THE REQUESTED VARIANCES.ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
AND EL CHATTO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE.
LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF.
SO, QUE I I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE CITY'S POSITION.
SO WHAT, SO WHAT IS IT THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING, UH, THAT THEY DO? UM, REONE SO, SO REZONE, UH, REZONE FOR THE CORRECT SQUARE FOOTAGE TO BUILD THE STRUCTURE.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES.
ON THE, WHERE THEY ARE GONNA BE, DO THEY HAVE THE SITE SETBACKS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE, UH, OF THE BUILDING RIGHT NOW, OF THE STRUCTURE THAT'S GOING TO BE BUILT? GO BACK TO THE PICTURE.
ARE YOU ASKING IF THEY HAVE THE REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SETBACK ON THE SIDE? YES.
ON BOTH SIDES THERE? YES THEY DO.
ALRIGHT, THIS TIME I'D ASK THE APPLICANT TO PLEASE COME FORWARD.
HELLO? HELLO, I'M JAY MICHAEL, JEFFS WITH, UH, UH, PREMIER TEAM L L C.
UM, THE, THIS, UH, ORIGINAL PROJECT WAS, THERE WAS AN OLD HOUSE HERE.
UM, IN THE PROCESS OF REBUILDING IT, UH, THE ENGINEER TOLD US THAT WE COULDN'T SAVE THE FOUNDATION.
WE TRIED TO SAVE TWO OF THE WALLS.
UM, BUT ACCORDING TO THE CITY, UH, UH, THE CODE ENFORCEMENT, THAT WASN'T ENOUGH TO SAVE IT AS A, AS, UM, A REBUILDING THE STRUCTURE.
SO IT REQUIRED A NEW HOME PERMIT BECAUSE THE, UM, ZONING IS R FOUR AND THE MAJORITY OF THE, THE LOTS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ARE ACTUALLY UNDER 4,000 SQUARE FEET.
MOST OF 'EM ARE 25 FEET WIDE BY 70 FEET DEEP, WHICH PUTS US AT 1,720 SQUARE FEET ISH.
UM, THEY REQUESTED THAT WE DO, UM, A VARIANCE, UM, OR REQUEST A VARIANCE FOR THE LOT SIZE.
AND BECAUSE OF THE, UM, THERE'S A, AN ABNORMAL AMOUNT OF THEFT IN THAT AREA, UM, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, FROM THE FRONT FENCE TO THE BUILDING WAS ENOUGH SPACE TO PUT A CAR INSIDE THE FENCE.
SO, UM, SO WHEN WE STARTED, WE DID PULL A PERMIT AND THEN, UM, THAT WAS IN JULY.
THE SECOND, UM, TIME THAT THE ENGINEER CAME OUT, HE SAID WE HAD TO DO A NEW FOUNDATION.
SO WE PULLED ANOTHER, A PERMIT FOR THE FOUNDATION, BUT THEN WE FOUND OUT FROM THE CITY ZONING OR CODE ENFORCEMENT THAT IT WASN'T, UM, GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE, UH, DESIGNATED FOR LIKE A REBUILD.
SO, UH, WE PUT FOR THE, THIS VARIANCE AT THE SAME TIME WE WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF CONSTRUCTION.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHY, THAT'S WHY ORIGINALLY THERE WAS A HOUSE THERE.
UM, AND THAT'S WHY IT SAID IN THE BEGINNING OF THEIR, OF THEIR PLAN THAT THERE WAS A ACTUAL HOUSE THERE.
BRAGMAN CRUZ, MS. BRAGMAN, THEN MS. CRUZ.
SO THERE WAS A STRUCTURE THERE BEFORE? YES.
AND ARE YOU BUILDING ON THE SAME FOOTPRINT AS THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE? YEAH, YEAH.
NOT, NOT, NOT BIGGER, WELL, ACTUALLY IT'S A LITTLE SMALLER.
ACCORDING TO THE CITY RECORDS WE'RE, WE'RE, UM, I MEAN YOU CAN GO INTO THE, THE COUNTY RECORDS FOR THE, THE PROPERTY, BUT WE'RE ABOUT, UM, 25 SQUARE, SQUARE FEET UNDER WHAT THE OTHER, UH, STRUCTURE WAS, UM, WITH THE, ACCORDING TO THE, THE COUNTY RECORDS.
SO FOR STAFF, WHY IS IT BEING RECOMMENDED REZONED AS OPPOSED TO THE FACT THAT HE'S BASICALLY REPLACING THE SAME SQUARE FOOTAGE? RIGHT.
UM, SO THAT'S NOT AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE PUT A STAFF REPORT AS AN ALTERNATE WAY OF THEM SOLVING THIS ISSUE.
UH, THE REASON WHY WE'RE RECOMMEND IT NOW IS BECAUSE IT'S JUST SO MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE REQUESTED, UH, OR THE REQUIRED LOT SIZE TO THE ACTUAL LOT SIZE.
UM, SO OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN'T DUE TO REZONING.
WE JUST MADE THAT KNOWN THAT THIS IS ANOTHER AVENUE THAT THEY CAN TAKE.
AND IS IT BECAUSE THAT IT'S SO MUCH OF A REPLACEMENT THAT IT HAS TO MEET THE CURRENT CODE AS OPPOSED TO THE FACT THAT IT WOULD'VE BEEN GRANDFATHERED IN THE EXISTING? RIGHT, RIGHT.
SO IF IT HAD BEEN FOUND TO BE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING, THEN THAT WOULD'VE, THEY WOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO REPLACE IT IN THE SAME FOOTPRINT, BUT BECAUSE IT WAS COMPLETELY DEMOLISHED, ONCE YOU DO THAT, YOU LOSE NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS.
[03:00:01]
FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A, UM, THE ZONING REQUIRES A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE EXCEEDING THE, UM, THEY'RE ASKING FOR BASICALLY 2200, WHICH IS SUBSTANTIAL IN OUR OPINION.AND SO THAT WAS WHY OREGON, MS. CRUZ, AND THEN MR. OREGON.
UM, AND MS. FLORES JUST BROUGHT IT BACK UP.
SO HOW DID THE HOME GET DEMOLISHED IN THE FIRST PLACE? WELL, AS A PRUDENT, UM, HO, UM, LANDOWNER HOMEOWNER, UM, DURING THE PROCESS OF TAKING IT APART TO REBUILD IT, UM, THE, AND WHEN THE ENGINEER CAME IN AND SAID, WE CAN'T SAVE THIS, I COULDN'T LEAVE IT HALFWAY UNDONE, SO WE HAD TO TAKE IT DOWN BECAUSE, OR ELSE I'M LIABLE FOR A LITTLE KID COMING IN THERE AND THEN FALLING ON HIM.
AND THEN, SO THIS ALL HAPPENED WITHIN A, WITHIN JUST A FEW WEEKS OF, WE STARTED AT THE BEGINNING OF JULY AND BEFORE THE END OF JULY, WE, WE FOUND OUT THAT WE HAD TO REDO THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE, UM, THE, THE WHOLE STRUCTURE.
AND SO OUR PERMITS, UM, OUR PERMIT FOR THE FOUNDATION WAS ACTUALLY PULLED TO REDO THE FOUNDATION WAS ACTUALLY PULLED ON THE 3RD OF AUGUST.
SO IN THAT TIME BETWEEN I THINK THE 11TH OF JULY AND THE THIRD OF A AUGUST, ALL THIS HAD COME INTO, UM, FRUITION.
SO WERE YOU TOLD THAT YOU NEEDED A PERMIT TO DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE? UM, I WAS NOT AWARE THAT WE NEEDED A PERMIT TO DEMOLISH HIS STRUCTURE AT THAT POINT.
YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS A PLATTED LOT THAT WAS RECORDED IN OCTOBER OF 1926.
AND SO UNDER THE U D C, BECAUSE IT'S SINGLE FAMILY USE, IT ACTUALLY HAS, IT DOES HAVE TO MEET THE ZONING SQUARE FOOTAGE.
IF IT WAS MULTI-FAMILY OR COMMERCIAL, IT WOULD NOT.
UH, SO I THINK THAT THIS IS KIND OF RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF WHAT, IF IT WOULD'VE BEEN RE-RECORDED SIX MONTHS LATER, IT WOULD'VE BEEN FINE, BUT, UH, IT WASN'T.
SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE.
UH, IS THAT, AND AND IS THAT JUST FOR STAFF? THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S MISSING FROM, UH, MEETING THE PLATT EXCEPTION? CORRECT.
IS, IS, UH, YOU KNOW, UN UNDER THE U D C I'M LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, THAT 4 35 35 4 30, RIGHT.
UH, ZONING DOES NOT REVIEW CDS, BUT I, I BELIEVE YOU'RE CORRECT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MANA, MR. MANA, AND THIS ACTUALLY QUESTION FOR CITY OR DISAPP, THE POINT IS TO JUST FOLLOW UP WITH S PERSPECTIVE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IN LARGE COMMUNITIES WHERE WE SEE, YOU KNOW, WE'LL SAY, UM, UM, ZONING THAT IS OFF.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE HAD COUNCIL COME THROUGH AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS 'CAUSE I SEE LOTS OF OTHER LOTS THAT ARE NON-CONFORMING AT THIS POINT.
AND SO SOMETHING THAT MAY, WE MAY WANT TO CONSIDER.
'CAUSE OTHERWISE WE'LL BE POTENTIALLY SEEING THESE AS WE LOOK AT THESE OTHER LOTS HERE.
SO, COULD I SAY ONE MORE THING? YES.
UM, ON THAT SAME BLOCK, THERE'S SIX OTHER VACANT LOTS AND, UM, WE WOULD ACTUALLY LOVE TO BUILD ON THOSE LOTS, BUT IF, IF Y'ALL MAKE IT SO HARD FOR US TO ACTUALLY BUILD ON THE LOTS, THEN WE'LL GO TO SOME OTHER COMMUNITY WHERE IT'S, UM, MORE FEASIBLE.
SO THE TAX BASIS, YOU KNOW, TAX VALUES THAT ARE PULLED FROM THAT AREA ARE PULLED BASED ON THE STRUCTURES THAT ARE THERE.
SO IT'D BEHOOVE THE CITY TO APPROVE US BUILDING IN THOSE AREAS TO GET RID OF BLIGHT AND TO ACTUALLY INCREASE THE TAX BASIS.
AND THEN IT'LL BE A WIN-WIN FOR EVERYBODY.
PLUS THE HOUSE, IT'S ONLY GONNA BE VALUED AT $130,000.
SO IT'S IN INCREDIBLY AFFORDABLE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY TO COME IN AND, AND MOVE IN.
SO IT WOULD BE LIKE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY.
AND ALSO A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP FOR US AS WELL, BECAUSE WE PURCHASED THE HOUSE THINKING THAT WE COULD REBUILD IT.
I LOVE OLD HOUSES, BUT IF WE CAN'T, IF WE CAN'T SAVE THE OLD HOUSE, THEN WE, I MEAN, THERE'S NOTHING I CAN DO.
SO IT WOULD BE, UM, NEXT TO MY HOUSE.
THERE'S AN EMPTY LOT WITH JUST A SHED ON IT NEXT TO THAT, UH, HOUSE.
THERE'S FOUR EMPTY LOTS RIGHT THERE THAT COULD BE BUILT ON.
I TALKED TO THE GAL THAT OWNS IT AND SHE WOULD LOVE TO DO THAT, BUT WE CAN'T DO THAT IF WE MEANT THE CHAIRMAN POINT OF ORDER.
UH, I'LL LET 'EM FINISH UP AND THEN, AND THEN WE'LL GO CLOSE.
WELL, YEAH, AND BASICALLY WE'D, WE'D LOVE TO INCREASE THE TAX BASIS IN THE AREA AND PAY MORE TAXES, PROPERTY TAXES, WHICH WOULD HELP THE CITY.
UH, STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY SI ANYBODY SIGNED UP FOR, UH, VOICEMAIL, PUBLIC COMMENT? NO PUBLIC COMMENT, ALRIGHTYY? UH, NO.
AND I'LL JUST NOTE THAT AT, AT THE LOT AT 29 13, THEIR SQUARE FOOTAGE IS 9,000 SQUARE FEET, SO, OKAY.
[03:05:01]
UM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE ANY FINAL REBUTTAL BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? I DON'T HAVE ANY.AT THIS POINT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION.
I'D ASK A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION BRAGMAN MS. BRAGMAN, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 3 0 0 2 5 0.
I MOVED TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR ONE OF FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A 15 FOOT REAR SETBACK AND TWO, A 2250 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT TO ALLOW A DEVELOPMENT TO BE 1,750 SQUARE FEET.
LOT SITUATED AT 29 20 KALINA KAMO STREET APPLICANT BEING PREMIER TEAM L L C.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH TO THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
STAFF FINDS THE REQUESTS ARE NOT CONTRARY AS THE REDUCED LOT SIZE WILL NOT INCREASE DENSITY AND THE REDUCED SET REAR SETBACK WILL LEAVE ADEQUATE ROOM BETWEEN PROPERTIES.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SINCE THE LOT DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE MINIMUM REAR SETBACK OF 20 FEET, THE BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD BE DRASTICALLY REDUCED.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUB SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE.
RATHER THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW STAFF FINDS THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS THE APPLICANT ENDS ABIDING BY ALL OR OTHER BUILDING REQUIREMENTS.
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 ITS VARIANCE.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST WILL NOT INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES AND ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS OTHER LOTS IN THE AREA APPEAR TO NOT ABIDE BY THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND WERE A SETBACK REQUIREMENT.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY OF WHICH EXPERIENCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE