[00:00:04]
OKAY.I HEREBY CALL THIS MEETING THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS INTO SESSION.
IT IS 1:01 PM IF WE HAVE THE SPANISH INTERPRETER COME UP PLEASE AND GIVE THEIR PRESENTATION WHEN THANK YOU.
IF EVERYONE, UH, STAFF, IF YOU COULD PLEASE CALL ROLL.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ PRESENT.
I BELIEVE WE'RE EXPECTING AN 11TH AT SOME TIME.
IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE IN I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO REPUBLIC RELIGIOUS STANDS.
ONE NATION UNDER GOD IN WITH LIBERTY JUSTICE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD ONE.
SO BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I'D LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION.
THIS 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 A PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
AND LASTLY, AS CHAIR, I'LL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS.
I ASK THAT THE BOARD MEMBER SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS THE CHAIR AND I'LL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE MEETING.
WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY'S ZONING CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THIS AREA.
THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW.
WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELEASE SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES.
SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE SEC TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL.
THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35.
WE ALSO SERVE IN AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 28 DASH FIVE.
IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR OTHER HEAR CASES AND OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS.
THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY WILL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
ANY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER.
AFTER EVERYONE HAS HEARD THE CASE, IT'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 PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND GRANTING THE RELEASE SOUGHT RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS IN WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF COULD BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL.
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OF VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S.
DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE.
[ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items ]
AFTERNOON.STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST PRIOR TO 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 INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUESTS AND X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR REQUEST FOR THOSE THAT SIGN UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST A PROPOSED VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXEMPTION OR APPEAL, YOU'LL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER THAT YOU SIGN UP TO SPEAK.
THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE A MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION FOR THOSE.
I'D LIKE TO GIVE UP THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER.
THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE GIVEN UP THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES.
THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS.
SO AS WE ONLY HAVE 10 PEOPLE AND WE DO NEED NINE VOTES TO APPROVE, UH, ITEMS, WE ARE GOING TO SKIP
[00:05:01]
TO AN ITEM WHERE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AND THERE IS, UH, LIMITED OR NO, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTARY.SO WE'LL BEGIN WITH ITEM NUMBER 12 AND THEN WE'LL CONTINUE TO ITEM NUMBER 13, UH, AND THEN IF OUR 11TH MEMBER SHOWS UP, WE'LL GET BACK ON ON TRACK TO ITEM NUMBER TWO.
ALL RIGHT, STAFF ITEM 12, LEMME SWITCH.
ALRIGHT, ITEM NUMBER 12, BO OA DASH 24 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 8 2.
ADDRESS IS 71 50 NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY COUNCIL, DISTRICT FOUR APPLICANT BEING NORMA VIOLA, UH, REQUEST IS FOR A NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 21 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY.
LINE ZONING IS C TWO CD WITH UH, CONDITIONAL USE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES.
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SITUATION BETWEEN BRIGGS AVENUE AND THE NORTH, UH, TO THE NORTH AND AND SOUTHWEST.
MILITARY DRIVE TO THE SOUTH ALONG NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY.
THE APPLICANT IS ALSO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SEEKING A NINE FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO ADDITION TO AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE REDUCING THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SET BACK TO 21 FEET.
ON OCTOBER 5TH AT 2023, CODE ENFORCEMENT RECEIVED A CITIZEN'S COMPLAINT REGARDING THE PROPERTY.
AN INVESTIGATION REVEALED THAT THE ADDITION HAD BEEN CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT A PERMIT RESULTING IN A VIOLATION NOTICE.
DURING THE FOLLOW-UP ON OCTOBER 17TH, 2023, THE PROPERTY OWNER INFORMED CODE ENFORCEMENT THAT THE CONTRACTOR THEY HAD HIRED HAD ABANDONED THE PROJECT.
THE APPLICANT WAS ADVISED TO CONTACT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO OBTAIN NECESSARY PERMITS FOR THE REMAINING WORK BETWEEN JANUARY 16TH AND JANUARY 18TH, 2024.
A REINSPECTION HAD SHOWN THAT THE ADDITION HAD BEEN COMPLETED WITHOUT A PERMIT LEADING TO ANOTHER CITATION.
THE APPLICANT'S NEW CONTRACTOR WAS CONTACTED AND PROVIDED COMMERCIAL PROJECT APPLICATION NUMBER.
HOWEVER, THE CONSTRUCTION CONTINUED WITHOUT PERMIT APPROVAL.
ON APRIL 23RD, 2024, THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING AFTER DISCOVERING THAT THE BUILDING PERMIT CANNOT BE ISSUED DUE TO AN INTENDED USE OF THE STRUCTURE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES, WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED IN THE C TWO ZONING DISTRICT.
A CHANGE OF ZONING ORDINANCE OF 2024 DASH ZERO SIX DASH TWO DASH 0 5 1 16 WAS APPROVED ON JUNE 20TH, 2024, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE TO THE MOTOR VEHICLE SALES ON THE PROPERTY.
ON JULY 15TH, 2024, CODE ENFORCEMENT CONDUCTED A RE-INSPECTION AND FOUND THAT A PERMIT WAS STILL NOT ATTAINED.
THE APPLICANT'S, UH, SUBSEQUENTLY APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE THROUGH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ON SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2024 ONCE IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE VARIANCE FOR THE REAR SETBACK WAS NECESSARY.
THIS IS A SITE PLAN SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THIS IS GONNA BE THE THIRD STRUCTURE TO YOUR, UM, RIGHT HAND SIDE, AND THAT'S A PICTURE OF IT.
THIS IS THE REAR SETBACK WITH THE EXTENSION AND THAT'S THE DISTANCE IS THE HISTORICAL VIEWS OF THE PROPERTY AND THE VIEW ACROSS FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE REAR SETBACK WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
AND TWO, THE ADDITIONAL THE ADDITION MAINTAINS A REASONABLE DISTANCE FROM THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND ADHERES TO THE REMAINING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
STAFF MAILED 20 NOTICES ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
UH, BEFORE YOU GO, THE CONDITIONAL ZONING THAT WAS APPROVED TRADITIONALLY REQUIRES THE, REQUIRES A SITE PLAN.
TODAY WAS A SITE PLAN TURNED IN THAT SHOWED THIS ADDITION WITHIN THAT REAR SETBACK THAT WENT THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF.
SO WE'LL HAVE THAT AS A QUESTION FOR LATER.
UH, WILL THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD? HELLO? IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR CASE.
AND WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE US TO KNOW? UM, I THINK EVERYTHING THAT WAS PRESENTED
[00:10:01]
TO YOU RIGHT NOW IS ALL THAT IN.WELL THEN I'LL START OFF WITH A QUICK QUESTION.
UH, WHEN YOU WENT THROUGH CONDITIONAL ZONING, DID YOU TURN IN A SIDE PLAN THAT SHOWED, UH, THIS ADDITION WITHIN THAT REAR SETBACK THAT WENT THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING? YES, I DID.
EVERYONE KNEW THAT'S WHAT YOUR INTENT WAS AND THAT WAS, IT WAS PART OF THEIR ORDINANCE.
THE, THE ADDITION WAS ON THERE.
IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? OH, ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YES.
UH, A QUESTION, WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATE? THE STATUS OF THE BUILDING PERMIT, ARE YOU WAITING FOR THE BOARD TO APPROVE THE CORRECT AND THEN YOU'LL, THE CONTRACT WILL WITH THE, THE SURVEY HAS ALREADY BEEN PROCESSED.
SO, AND THEN THIS NEEDED TO BE PROCESSED, SO RIGHT AFTER THIS, THEN I'LL PROCEED WITH EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND AT THAT POINT, THE CITY, THE STAFF WILL REVIEW IT FOR ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND FIRE AND BUILDING CODES, CORRECT? CORRECT.
ANYONE ELSE? AND STAFF, IS THERE ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK OR ANY VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD BEFORE WE DELIBERATE? NO, SIR.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 24 DASH 0 3 0 0 180 2, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUESTS FOR A NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 30 FOOT REAR STEPBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 21 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 71 50 NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY APPLICANT BEING NORMA VELA.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF PROVISION TO THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE DOES NOT CONTRACT TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE VARIANCE DID NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, IS THAT THERE IS ADEQUATE SPACE REMAINING FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO THE UNIQUE CONDITIONS OF THE LOT.
STRICTLY ENFORCING THE ORDINANCE WOULD CREATE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT SPACE TO BUILD ADEQUATE OFFICE FACILITIES.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE REQUEST WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE WILL STILL RE, UH, MAINTAIN A REASONABLE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE, 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 WOULD 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 HAS DETERMINED THAT THE GRANTING THE REQUESTED REAR SETBACK VARIANCE WOULD NOT SIGNIFICANTLY ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WITH THE REMAINING DISTANCE OF 21 FEET FROM THE, FROM THE STRUCTURE TO THE PROPERTY LINE, THE REQUEST WOULD NOT DISRUPT THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S OVERALL CHARACTER.
AND SIX, THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, NOT DUE TO OTHER THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS.
AND THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE REAR SETBACK VARIANCE SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY THAT SAYS A PROPOSED ADDITION BEING IN LINE WITH THE CURRENT STRUCTURE, THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL.
SO I'M GONNA REPORT, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
UM, AS, UH, THE CHAIR MENTIONED THE, THE, UM, THE ZONING CASE DID GO BEFORE, WHICH HAD A SITE PLAN, WHICH INCLUDED THE SETBACK.
THAT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY OPPOSITION TO BE AIRED.
UH, THERE WAS NONE ALSO WITH THIS NOTIFICATION FOR THIS SPECIFIC, UH, UM, UH, HEARING FOR THIS, THIS SETBACK REQUIREMENT, UH, THERE WAS NOTIFICATION TO NEIGHBORS.
UM, I, I'M, I'M SATISFIED THAT WITH THE BUILDING CODE, THE PROPERTY WOULD HAVE TO MEET ALL BUILDING CODES, INCLUDING FIRE SAFETY AND, AND BUILDING CODE AND SUCH.
SO IF THERE WAS REASONS, I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I'M, I'M GOING TO AGREE WITH MR. UNA.
I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH IT SINCE IT DOES HAVE A LOT OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AROUND IT, I'M SURE THAT, UH, IT WILL GET TAKEN CARE OF.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? I CONCUR.
I CONCUR REQUEST AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
SO NUMBER 13 WILL BE PRESENTED NEXT.
[00:15:02]
OKAY.ADDRESS 16 7 95 SOUTH US HIGHWAY 2 81.
APPLICANT KW LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS REQUEST THE VARIANCE FROM THE SHRUB AND FENCING BUFFER LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS TO ELIMINATE THE SHRUB AND FENCING REQUIREMENTS.
THE ZONING'S I TWO, THE MAP SAYS I ONE, BUT THE CORRECT ZONING IS I TWO.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG SOUTH US HIGHWAY 2 81 EAST OF PLEASANTON ROAD.
THE APPLICANT PROPERTY WAS RECENTLY REZONED FROM R FIVE, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO I TWO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL BY ORDINANCE 20 23 0 5 18 0 3 52 PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL ON MAY 18TH, 2023.
THE BUDDING R FIVE ZONE IS OWNED BY THE SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM AND THEY HAVE PROVIDED THE APPLICANT WITH A LETTER STATING THAT THEY INTEND TO USE THE PROPERTY AS A WETLAND SYSTEM.
THE OBJECTIVE OF THE WETLAND SYSTEM IS TO TREAT WATER FROM MITCHELL LAKE SAWS HAS STATED THEY HAVE NO INTENTION OF UTILIZING THE LAND FOR RESIDENTIAL USE.
AFTER MEETING WITH THE TREES AND ZONING SECTIONS OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THE APPLICANT WAS FOUND TO MEET THE BUFFER AND TREES REQUIREMENTS PROVIDING SIGNIFICANTLY MORE TREES THAN REQUIRED.
HOWEVER, THEY'RE NOT PROVIDING THE ADEQUATE SHRUB OR FENCING REQUIREMENTS.
THE SITE PLAN WHERE THEY'LL BE REQUESTING IT.
AND THIS IS IN RELATION TO THE PROPERTY SUBJECT PROPERTY SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE ELIMINATION OF THE SHRUB AND FENCING LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO OA 24 1 0 3 0 0 1 8 3 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING MORE TREES THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED IN SUBSTITUTE.
SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM HAS INDICATED THAT THEY HAVE NO INTENTION ON USING THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY FOR ANY RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE AND THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE AREA IN WHICH IT IS LOCATED.
WE MAILED OUT FIVE NOTICES IN FAVOR, ZERO AND OPPOSITION ZERO.
AND THERE WAS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION.
I HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
YEAH, MY NAME IS, UH, CLIFFORD SCHAFER WITH KW LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS.
UM, THE PROJECT IS ZONED, UH, I TWO LIKE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED.
UM, THE AREA TO THE SO AND SOUTHWEST.
THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IS OWNED BY SAWS, UM, AND THEY WILL NOT BE DEVELOPING ANY RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THAT LOT.
UH, WE HAVE A LATE A LETTER STATING THAT THEY WILL BE USING IT AS A WETLAND SYSTEM.
UM, IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE ARE PROVIDING SA SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF BUFFER AREA, UM, ADDING MORE THAN THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF TREES AND, AND A AND A BERM ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE, OF THE FIRST PHASE.
UM, ONE QUICK QUESTION I HAVE IS, UH, WHAT YOU'RE SHOWING, UH, TO, THAT YOU'RE ATTEMPTING TO ACCOMPLISH AS OPPOSED TO WHAT, WHAT IS PROVIDED AS YOUR ACTUAL SITE? MM-HMM.
IS, IS ANY OF THAT SAWS WETLAND PROPERTY, IS THAT AN EASEMENT OR IS, IS THAT PROPERTY THAT YOU OWN? BECAUSE IT, THE RED OUTLINE THAT WE, WE SEE SEEMS TO ENCOMPASS A, A SIZABLE PIECE OF LAND STAFF.
YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN OR THE ONE WHERE BOTH OF THEM ARE ON THERE.
THERE THIS ONE RIGHT HERE THAT, THAT RED LINE THAT OUTLINES MM-HMM.
INTERIOR OF THE DASH ONE KIND OF TELLS ME THAT THAT'S THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
YES, THAT IS Y Y'ALL DO OWN THAT AS WELL? NOT, UH, WE OWN EVERYTHING IN THE SOLID RED OUTLINE THERE.
AND THEN THE YELLOW OUTLINE JUST OUTSIDE OF IT IS, UH, IS A, IS ALL OF THE R FIVE THAT'S ABUTTING YOU ON THAT WEST SIDE, IS THAT ALL SAWS? WETLANDS? YES.
YEAH, THE REASON WHY I ASK THAT QUESTION IS THAT WHEN WE READ VARIANCES, WE EITHER CAN DO IT IN A LIMITED FASHION OR WE CAN APPLY THEM ALONG AN ENTIRE SIDE, AND YOURS IS VERY, VERY LONG.
SO I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? COMMISSIONER? ZUNA? OH, ZUNA.
SO, UH, I, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR KIND OF THE, THE IMPACT OF HARDSHIP.
IF YOU HAD TO MEET THE, UH, VARIANCE FOR THE SHRUB AND FENCING BUFFER REQUIREMENT, WHAT WOULD THE IMPACT BE TO THE PROJECT? YEAH, THE IMPACT IS THIS INDUSTRIAL SITE IS ALREADY PRETTY TIGHT.
UM, AND TRYING TO GET EVERYTHING TO FIT ADEQUATELY.
UM, ADDING THAT 40 FOOT SPACE AND IT JUST PUSHES BACK OUR, UM,
[00:20:01]
DETENTION POND AND ADDS FENCING AND IT'S JUST ADDING COST TO A PROJECT.ANYONE ELSE? STAFF? IS THERE ANY, UH, VOICEMAILS? ANYONE SOUNDED TO SPEAK? NO.
ANYTHING LIKE TO ADD BEFORE WE DELIBERATE? NO, SIR.
COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 24 DASH 0 3 180 3, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE SHRUB AND FENCING BUFFING LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS TO ELIMINATE THE SHRUB AND FENCING REQUIREMENTS SITUATED AT 16 7 9 5 SOUTH US 2 81, APPLICANT BEING KW LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC HAS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, YOU FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE DOES NOT CONTRACT TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE VARIANCE ALIGNS WITH THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
AS PROPOSED PLANS INCLUDE THE PLANTING OF SIGNIFICANTLY MORE TREES THAN REQUIRED AND IS DE AND IS, UH, DESIGNATED FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USE.
THE NEED FOR THE SHRUB AND FENCING BUFFER BUFFERING IS DIMINISHED.
DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ORDINANCE WOULD CREATE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP FOR THE APPLICANT REQUIRING THE REMOVAL OF ADDITIONAL TREES AND AND ADJUSTMENTS TO THE BUILDING PLANS TO FIT SHRUBS AND FENCING.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE REQUESTED LANDSCAPE VARIANCE ALIGNS WITH THE ORDINANCE AS THE LOT WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE TREES THAN REQUIRED, ALONG WITH THE DETENTION POND AND OTHER LANDSCAPING FEATURES THAT UPHOLDS THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED.
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 WITHOUT SUBSTANTIALLY INJU THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF CONCLUDES THAT THE LANDSCAPE SHRUB AND FENCING VARIANCE WOULD NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HARM THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AS OTHER LANDSCAPING AND BUFFER REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING BUFFER SIZE AND TREE QUANTITY WILL STILL BE MET.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE OF SALT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY IS THE NEED TO MAINTAIN TREES AND BUFFER YARD AND A STRICT OBSERVANCE OF THE CODE REQUIRED CHANGES TO TREES ON THE BUFFER TO ACCOMMODATE SHRUBS AND FENCING AND OF MOTION.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES.
SO I'M GONNA BE SU SUPPORTING THIS MOTION AS READ AS WELL.
UM, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE, UH, STAFF APPROVAL.
UH, THEY'RE GOING OVER AND ABOVE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS, UH, UH, PLANTING MORE TREES AND NECESSARY, UH, THE MOST, THE AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNER, WHICH IS SAW, SUPPORTED, UH, PROVIDED A LETTER IN SUPPORT OF THE, UM, UH, WAIVING OF THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND THE FENCING BUFFER.
SO I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION.
COMMISSIONER BEES, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE.
I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE, UH, MOTION AS WELL.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? UH, HEARING NONE.
I JUST WANT TO STATE THAT THIS SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT UDC AMENDMENT, THAT IF YOU'RE ABUTTING A WETLAND PERMANENT OWNED BY A PUBLIC AGENCY, MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO DO A BUFFER, BUT JUST MY 2 CENTS STAFF.
COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
IF I CAN ASK, UH, REAL QUICK, IS THE APPLICANT FOR 49 50 SAN PEDRO PRESENT? YES.
AND, UH, JUST FYI I'M SETTING UP A WEBEX FOR COMMISSIONER BONILLA, SO HE SHOULD BE READY BY THIS NEXT.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, BO OA DASH 24 DASH 1 0 3 0 1 67 ADDRESS, 49 50 SAN PEDRO AVENUE COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE APPLICANT CLEARFIELD CLEARFIELD CONSTRUCTION, LLC.
AND A REQUEST FOR A 19 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 25 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT FRONT SETBACK AND TWO A NINE FOOT, AND A FOUR FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT BUFFER TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT BUFFER IN THE FRONT.
AND A 10 FOOT SIX INCH BUFFER IN THE REAR ZONING IS OH TWO.
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED EAST OF MCCULLOUGH AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION OF WEST WILDWOOD DRIVE AND SAN PEDRO AVENUE.
ON UH, JANUARY 2ND, 2024, CODE ENFORCEMENT RECEIVED A THREE 11
[00:25:01]
CITIZENS CALL REGARDING A FENCE THAT WAS INSTALLED ON THE PROPERTY.DURING INVESTIGATION, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE FENCE HAD BEEN INSTALLED WITHOUT OBTAINING A PERMIT AND WITHOUT CONSENT OF THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
THE APPLICANT ALSO BEING THE PROPERTY OWNER RECEIVED AN APPROVED CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS ON JULY 19TH, 2024 THROUGH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOR THE FENCE, AND WAS GRANTED APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CARPORT DURING THAT TIME.
WITHIN AN APPROVED, UH, WITHIN THE APPROVED COA, THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROVIDED A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE APPLICANT MUST MEET ALL SETBACK REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED BY THE CITY'S ZONING AND OBTAIN A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IF APPLICABLE.
THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE APPEARS TO HAVE BUILT, BEEN BUILT AS A RESIDENTIAL DWELLING, UH, ADDRESSED FROM WILDWOOD, UH, WEST WILDWOOD DRIVE.
IF THE CURRENT, UH, DEVELOPMENT WAS ADDRESSED OFF OF WEST WILDWOOD DRIVE, THIS WOULD NOT REQUIRE A SETBACK VARIANCE, HOWEVER, WOULD STILL REQUIRE BOTH BUFFER YARD VARIANCES.
PERMIT IS PENDING THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
THIS IS THE CARPORT SITE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY, AND THIS IS SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE VIEW OF THE PARKING LOT AREA I
THIS IS THE APPROVED LETTER OF, UH, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FROM THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
UH, THAT ALSO INCLUDES THE CARPORT AS WELL AS THE FENCE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FRONT SETBACK AND LANDSCAPE BUFFER VARIANCE, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BOA DASH 24 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 6 7 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE, THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT DOES NOT FIND ANY DEVELOPED STRUCTURES ORIGINALLY FACING SAN PEDRO AVENUE IN THE AREA.
THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE WAS BUILT FACING WESTWOOD WEST WILDWOOD DRIVE, LEAVING LIMITED OPTIONS PROVIDE COVERING COVERED PARKING.
STAFF MAILED 25 NOTICES, ONE IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE ALAMOS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
NO RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE SAN ANTONIO TESTED TE TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION.
THIS IS IN FAVOR AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
SO THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
YES, MY NAME IS MARIANO MOLINA.
UM, WE, UH, WE BASICALLY PUT A, A CAR PORT OVER FOUR PARKING SPOTS IN OUR OFFICE.
YOU HAVE TO KIND OF, IS IT? MY NAME IS MARIANO MOLINA.
WE PUT, UH, A CARPORT TO PROTECT FROM THE, YOU KNOW, FROM THE HAIL AND FROM THE SUN.
UM, THE ONLY, SO THERE'S AN ALLEY BEHIND US, THERE'S A 10 FOOT ALLEY AND THE ONLY NEIGHBOR, WHICH WHICH WE HAVE DID APPROVE, YOU KNOW, HE'S OKAY WITH THE STRUCTURE AND ALSO THE, THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION IS ALSO AN APPROVAL OF IT.
SO WE WERE ASKING FOR KEEP THAT STRUCTURE THERE.
ALRIGHT, STAFF, IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK OR VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENTS.
IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT.
IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT US TO KNOW BEFORE WE DELIBERATE? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
THAT'S, UH, LOOKING FOR A MOTION.
UNA COMMISSIONER UNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 24 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 67.
I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS REQUEST FOR ONE A 19 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 25 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT FRONT SETBACK AND TWO, A NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT BUFFER TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT BUFFER SITUATED AT 4 9 5 0 SAN PEDRO AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING CLEARFIELD CONSTRUCTION LLC.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CARE SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF PROVISIONS OF THE UDC HAS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE DOES NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, THE ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT REQUIRE A SETBACK VARIANCE.
PEDRO AVENUE DOES NOT CURRENTLY, UH, PROJECT A STANDARD BUFFER
[00:30:01]
YARD AS MOST OF THE STRUCTURES ON ST.PEN AVENUE ORIGINALLY BUILT FACING SIDE STREETS IN THE BUFFER YARD ALONG THE R FOUR IS ALREADY BUILT ON WITH THE HISTORIC BUILDING STRUCTURES.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
Y'ALL HEARD THAT TOO, RIGHT? OKAY.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD, WOULD NOT RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOT ALLOWED ONLY ROOM IN THE REAR FOR ANY COVERED PARKING.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCES WILL BE OBSERVED.
THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE.
A SUFFICIENT ROOM WILL REMAIN, UH, BETWEEN PROPERTY LINE OR RIGHT OF WAY.
AND FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OF THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THIS VARIANCE.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS REQUESTED VARIANCES, WILL NOT ESSENTIALLY WOULD NOT, UM, WILL NOT THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS A CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT DOES NOT FIND, UH, DOES NOT FIND MANY DEVELOPMENT STRUCTURES.
ORIGINALLY FACING STEP OR AVENUE IN THIS AREA WILL NOT CHANGE THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTERS IS WHAT I MEANT TO SAY.
APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SAW IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS.
AND THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, STAFF FINDS APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
AS THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES, UH, WAS BUILT FACING WEST WILDWOOD DRIVE, LEAVING LIMITED OPTIONS TO PROVIDE COVERED PARKING AND OF MOTION.
SO I'M ALSO IN CONCURRENT WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THIS VARIANCE.
UH, THIS, THE APPLICANT IS TRYING TO PROTECT HIS AUTOMOBILES BY HAVING THE COVERED PARKING.
UH, HE, HE DID HAVE, UH, LETTERS OF, UH, HIS HISTORICAL APPROPRIATENESS FROM THE HISTORICAL DISTRICTS.
UH, THERE'S NO OPPOSITION, UH, FOR THIS VARIANCE REQUEST.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PROJECT IS BUILT AND, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, PROVIDES SOME PROTECTION TO THE, FOR THE APPLICANT.
SO I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE.
YOU HAVE, UH, THE SUPPORT OF YOUR NEIGHBOR, SO, UM, I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS WELL.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? YEAH, COMMISSIONER BARTON, A SMALL FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, UM, FINDING NUMBER TWO, YOU READ IT AS WRITTEN BY THE STAFF, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT WAS MEANT.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
ALRIGHT, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL.
COMMISSIONER UNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER EZ? UH, I ABSTAIN.
COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR THE FINES OF FACT.
UH, 10 TO ZERO WITH ONE ABSTENTION.
UM, AND IF WE CAN MARK THE TIME.
COMMISSIONER BONNI, UH, BONNI, UH, JOIN THE MEETING.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF.
ITEM TWO, ITEM ONE HAS BEEN POSTPONED.
SO WE'RE ON ITEM TWO FOLLOWING THE AGENDA IN ORDER NOW.
MY NAME IS JOSEPH EOS, SENIOR SHORT-TERM RENTAL PLANNER WITH WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS LOCATED AT 8 2 7 DENVER BOULEVARD WITHIN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO, AND IS
[00:35:01]
REQUESTING TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON THE BLOCK FACE.THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED M FOUR FOR RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICT.
OKAY, NEXT, THERE ARE A TOTAL OF 10 UNITS ON THIS BLOCK PHASE.
THERE'S CURRENTLY ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON THE BLOCK PHASE LOCATED AT 8 1 1 DENVILLE DENVER BOULEVARD, HAVING BEEN APPROVED ON DECEMBER 6TH, 2023.
IF A SECOND TYPE TWO IS APPROVED, THE BLOCK PHASE WILL BE AT 20%, WHICH EXCEEDS THE 12.5% DENSITY LIMITATION FOR TYPE TWO STR.
THERE ARE NO CODE VIOLATIONS OR INVESTIGATIONS FOUND FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OR ANY ACTIVE LISTINGS.
AND THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES ARE, UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS A DENIAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO AS TR PERMIT ON THE BLOCK FACE.
AND THIS WAS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN.
STAFF MAILED OUT 28 NOTICES, UH, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
AND DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
AWESOME, THANK YOU AND GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'M THE SOLE OWNER OF 8 2 7 DENVER BOULEVARD.
I HAVE A POWERPOINT THAT'S GETTING PULLED UP.
UH, UH, REQUEST HERE TO OBTAIN A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON THE BLOCK PHASE.
UH, THE HOME IS LOCATED IN DENVER HEIGHTS, WHICH IS ON THE EAST SIDE OF DOWNTOWN, UH, NEAR THE RIVERWALK, ALAMO AND MANY OTHER ATTRACTIONS MAKING AN IDEAL, UH, LOCATION FOR TOURISTS VISITING SAN ANTONIO.
HERE I HAVE A ZOOMED OUT MAP, UM, OF MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN SURROUNDING BLOCKS AS WELL WITH AN OVERLAY OF THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMITS.
UH, SO STAFF CAN GET A BIG PICTURE OF MY BLOCK AND THEN ALSO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.
UH, THAT YELLOW LINE ON THE MAP THERE IS MY HOME AT 8 2 7 DENVER BOULEVARD, AND THEN TWO DOORS DOWN, UH, IS THAT ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT AT EIGHT 11 DENVER BOULEVARD.
UH, THE HOMEOWNER, UH, OBTAINED THAT PERMIT IN DECEMBER OF 2023, AND SINCE THEN HAS ACTUALLY NEVER USED THE HOME AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
UH, IN FACT, WHEN WITHIN THE LAST FEW MONTHS, THEY ACTUALLY SIGNED NEW TENANTS TO A NEW 12 MONTH LONG-TERM LEASE.
UM, AND PRIOR TO SECURING THAT LEASE, THEY ACTUALLY PUT THE PROPERTY UP FOR SALE TWO DIFFERENT TIMES THIS YEAR, UH, ONE IN MARCH AND ONE IN MAY.
THEY WERE UNSUCCESSFUL IN SELLING EACH TIME, SO THEN MOVED TO THEIR NEXT PLAN, WHICH WAS TO RENT IT OUT AS A, AS A LONG TERM, UH, FURTHER SHOWING NO COMMITMENT TO EVER USE THIS AS A LONG TERM OR SHORT TERM.
UM, AND IT WILL BE RENTED OUT, LIKE I SAID, IN LONG TERM FOR AT LEAST THE NEXT YEAR.
UM, I FOUND THIS OUT WHEN I WAS TALKING TO MY NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR.
UH, IT'D BE THE ONE THAT WOULD BE SANDWICHED IN BETWEEN, UH, MINE AND EIGHT 11.
UM, WHEN I WENT OVER TO INTRODUCE MYSELF, MEET HIM AND ASK IF HE HAS HAD ANY PROBLEMS, CONCERNS WITH THE AIRBNB NEXT DOOR, UH, THAT'S WHEN HE TOLD ME IT HAD NEVER BEEN USED AS SUCH, AND THAT TENANTS JUST MOVED THEIR STUFF IN A FEW MONTHS AGO.
UM, SO I WENT OVER TO THE, UM, TO THAT HOUSE, MET THE NEIGHBORS CONFIRMED THE SAME, UM, THEY SAID THEY JUST MOVED IN.
THEY'RE HAPPY WITH THE PLACE, HAPPY WITH THE LOCATION, AND INTEND TO STAY THERE AS LONG AS THEY CAN.
UM, AFTER FINDING THAT ALL OUT, I THEN REACHED OUT TO THE HOMEOWNER OR THE LANDLORD OF EIGHT 11 DENVER BOULEVARD TO SEE IF THEY'D BE WILLING TO PART WAYS WITH THEIR PERMIT.
THEY CONSIDERED IT, HAD A LONG CONVERSATION AMONGST THEIR INVESTMENT PARTNERS, BUT ULTIMATELY DECIDED TO HOLD ONTO IT AS A WAY TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY FOR THEIR INVESTMENT BACK IN DECEMBER.
I THINK IF YOU RECALL, PERMITS AT THAT TIME WERE A HUNDRED DOLLARS.
THEY WERE GOOD FOR THREE YEARS.
UM, SO THEY WEREN'T OUT MUCH FINANCIALLY, UM, TO GO AHEAD AND GRAB THAT PERMIT.
AND IN TALKING WITH THEM, THEY WERE AWARE OF THE DENSITY LIMITS ON THE BLOCK AND IN, IN THE CITY AND SAID THAT THEY WANTED TO GO AHEAD, GRAB IT SO THAT IF THEY EVER DID DECIDE TO USE IT AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL DOWN THE ROAD, UH, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE ANYONE BLOCKING THEIR RIGHT TO DO SO.
UH, WHICH IS NOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S HAPPENING TO ME, BLOCKING MY RIGHT OR ANYONE ELSE'S RIGHT TO USE, UH, THIS PERMIT FOR ITS INTENDED PURPOSE.
UH, THAT BEING SAID, UH, THEY DO OWN THE PERMIT.
IT IS THEIR RIGHT TO USE IT AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL IF THEY DO WISH.
SO I DO STILL WANT TO SHOW THE BOARD WHO I AM AS AN OPERATOR,
[00:40:01]
UH, STR OPERATOR AND WHY I THINK THIS HOME IS BENEFICIAL FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.UH, LIKE I SAID AT THE BEGINNING, THIS, I AM THE SOLE OWNER OF 8 2 7 DENVER BOULEVARD.
UM, THIS IS MY FIRST SHORT TERM RENTAL.
UM, AND I WANTED TO GO ABOUT DOING THINGS THE RIGHT WAY.
UM, AND I KNEW I HAD A LOT TO LEARN.
SO FIRST I, BEFORE BUYING A HOME, I FIRST INVESTED IN MY EDUCATION AND SHORT TERM RENTALS AND ENROLLED IN A EXTENSIVE COURSE CALLED BY THE NAME OF B AND B INVESTOR ACADEMY.
UM, THERE'S A LITTLE BLURB SUMMARY OFF TO THE RIGHT, BUT ESSENTIALLY IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, GIVES YOU ACCESS TO HOURS OF ZOOM CALLS, MODULES, TRAINING COURSES, UM, THEN ALSO ONE-ON-ONE COACHING, UH, TO SET ME UP TO BE THE BEST, UH, OPERATOR I COULD TO MAKE SURE I'M DOING THINGS THE RIGHT WAY, MAKING THE BEST EXPERIENCE FOR BOTH THE GUEST AND THE COMMUNITY.
AFTER PURCHASING THE HOME, UM, AND LOOKING TO LISTED AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL, I THEN ENGAGED WITH A, UH, DESIGN COMPANY BY THE NAME OF SUMMER LED DESIGNS WHO, UH, SPECIALIZES SOLELY IN, UH, SHORT TERM RENTALS.
UH, PART OF WHAT THEY DO AT THE VERY BEGINNING IS CONDUCT EXTENSIVE MARKET RESEARCH TO SEE WHO AND WHY PEOPLE VISIT SAN ANTONIO.
AND FROM THERE, UH, CURATE THE DESIGN AND ALL THE AMENITIES TO ATTRACT THAT SPECIFIC GROUP OF PEOPLE.
SO I PULLED A FEW SNIPPETS, UM, OF WHAT THEY, UH, OF THEIR DELIVERABLES AT THE END.
AND ULTIMATELY AFTER THEIR, UM, UH, RESEARCH CONCLUDED, YOU CAN SEE THE TARGET AUDIENCE ANALYSIS OFF TO THE LEFT, FAMILIES HOPING OR FAMILIES TRAVELING TO SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.
AND THEN IT GOES INTO SOME OF THE GUEST PROFILES, UH, THE HISTORY BUS THEME, PARK ENTHUSIASTS, THOSE TYPES OF FAMILIES.
AND THEN OFF TO THE RIGHT THERE, UH, THE CONCLUSION THAT WE LANDED ON AND AGREED ON AND WHO WE ARE TARGETING IS FAMILIES HOPING TO BOND AND EXPLORE IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.
SO FROM THERE, EVERYTHING WE PUT DESIGN AMENITY WISE INTO THIS HOME IS TO ATTRACT THAT SAN ANTONIO FAMILY TOURIST.
UM, I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE YOUR STEREOTYPICAL PARTY AIRBNB HOUSE.
I PUT A LOT OF TIME, EFFORT, MONEY INTO IT, UM, AND I DON'T WANT IT TO BE A NUISANCE FOR MYSELF, BUT ALSO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY.
SO, UM, FOR THE NEXT FEW SLIDES, I'LL GO THROUGH SOME PICTURES OF THE INTERIOR AND, AND, UH, EXTERIOR, JUST SO YOU CAN SEE, UM, HOW I'VE PUT THAT INTO ACTION, UM, AND HOW I'VE, YOU KNOW, BEEN INTENTIONAL ABOUT THE DESIGN.
SO HERE WE HAVE SOME PICTURES OF THE INTERIOR.
YOU CAN SEE THE LIVING ROOM, UH, PLENTY OF COMFORTABLE SEATING FOR THE WHOLE FAMILY TO SIT AROUND, WATCH TV.
UH, THEN THERE IS OFF IN THAT TOP LEFT PICTURE, THERE'S ALSO THAT FUN LITTLE BACKDROP, NEON SIGN, VIVA SAN ANTONIO WITH, UM, A COUCH.
MAKES IT A FUN LITTLE BACKGROUND FOR, UH, FAMILY, UH, PICTURES AND JUST MAKING THAT SAN ANTONIO, UH, EXPERIENCE THAT MUCH BETTER.
UH, IT'S ACTUALLY THE FIRST THING MY MOM MADE US DO WHEN I HUNG THAT SIGN WAS TO TAKE A PICTURE.
UM, AND THEN KITCHEN, MOVING INTO THE DINING ROOM, UH, PLENTY OF OPEN SEATING FOR THE WHOLE FAMILY TO ENJOY A MEAL TOGETHER.
AND THEN A BIG KITCHEN FOR PREP SPACE.
MOVING INTO THE BEDROOMS, IT'S A THREE BED, TWO BATH.
THE TOP TWO PICTURES ARE THE PRIMARY BATH OR, UH, BEDROOM.
THERE'S KING BED, AND THEN THERE'S AN OFFICE FOR, UH, OR DESIGNATED WORKSTATION FOR REMOTE WORKERS.
AND THEN THE BUNK BED OR THE KIDS' BEDROOM, THE DOUBLE BUNK BEDS ALSO IN THERE IS A TOY BIN, UM, WITH PUZZLES, GAMES, UH, ET CETERA, AND THE TV TO KEEP THE KIDS ENTERTAINED.
AND THEN THAT SECOND BEDROOM WITH A KING BED AS WELL.
MOVING TO THE EXTERIOR, UM, YOU CAN SEE ANOTHER FUN LITTLE BACKDROP, UM, ON THE FENCE, UM, FOR PHOTOS AND JUST CREATING THAT OVERALL EXPERIENCE.
UM, I ACTUALLY CONTRACTED WITH A LOCAL SAN ANTONIO ARTIST TO COMPLETE THAT FOR ME.
UM, AND THEN ALSO PLENTY OF OUTDOOR DINING TABLE OR DINING ROOM IF, UH, FAMILY MEALS ARE MEANT TO BE MOVED OUTSIDE.
UH, FIRE PIT AREA WITH PLENTY OF SEATING FOR EVERYONE TO SIT AROUND.
AND THEN BOTTOM LEFT, YOU CAN SEE THE COWBOY POOL, UH, OUTDOOR GAMES, UH, POOL FOR PARENTS TO FLOAT AROUND IN, KIDS TO SPLASH AROUND.
AND THEN AT THE END OF THE DAY, VISITING, UH, VISITING SAN ANTONIO, HAVING DINNER.
UM, I HAVE THAT COVERED PERLA WITH A OUTDOOR, UH, PROJECTOR FOR AN OUTDOOR FAMILY MOVIE NIGHT.
I KNOW THIS COMES UP RIGHTFULLY SO.
UH, WHY SHOULDN'T I JUST RENT THIS OUT AS A LONG TERM? UH, I'LL GO INTO THOSE.
THE TOP THREE KIND OF ALL RELATED, I CAN'T USE IT.
MY FAMILY CAN'T USE IT, MY FRIENDS CAN'T USE IT.
UM, MY INTENT HERE IS TO NOT JUST THROW THIS UP ON AIRBNB FOR 365 DAYS A YEAR TO COMPLETE STRANGERS.
I ALSO WANT TO BE ABLE TO USE THIS HOME, CREATE MY OWN MEMORIES IN IT.
I WANT IT TO HAVE A PLACE FOR MY FAMILY AND FRIENDS TO STAY WHEN THEY'RE VISITING SAN ANTONIO.
UM, I'LL BE UNABLE TO DO THAT IF I HAVE TENANTS THAT ARE IN THERE FOR A 12 MONTH LEASE AS IT'LL ALWAYS BE OCCUPIED.
AND THEN, UH, MONETARILY, UM, FOR TRANSPARENCY HERE, UM, PROVIDING THE NUMBERS, UH,
[00:45:01]
MY MORTGAGE FAR EXCEEDS THE MARKET RENT, UH, FOR LONG TERM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.SO I PULLED IN THREE DIFFERENT RENTAL COMPS.
UH, THESE ARE THREE BED, TWO BATH, AND THE DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD, NEIGHBORHOOD AREA.
SO, UH, DIRECTLY RELATED TO MY PROPERTY, YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY'RE RANGING ANYWHERE FROM 1650 TO 1900 A MONTH.
SOME OF THOSE HAVE BEEN ON THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME, SO IT'S LIKELY THAT, UH, THE HOMEOWNER WILL HAVE TO DROP THEIR RENT IF THEY WANT TO FILL IT.
AND THEN MORE TRANSPARENCY, MY EXPECTED AVERAGE DAILY RATE, 300 A NIGHT, 60% OCCUPANCY.
SO FOR 40% OF THE YEAR IT'LL SIT VACANT.
UH, THESE ARE SCREENSHOTS ARE PICTURES OF THE ACTUAL VIEW FROM MY CAMERAS.
UM, YOU CAN SEE I HAVE A CAMERA, UH, RING DOORBELL FACING THE FRONT DRIVE OR FRONT ENTRYWAY, AND THEN A FLOOD, UH, RING CAMERA, UM, THAT OVERLOOKS THE DRIVEWAY.
THIS ALLOWS ME TO SEE THE NUMBER OF CARS AND NUMBER OF GUESTS COMING AND GOING INTO THE HOME AT ANY ONE TIME, UH, SO THAT I CAN ENSURE THE PROPER NUMBER OF GUESTS OR OCCUPYING THE HOME AND AS A WAY TO LIMIT PARTIES.
UM, AND THEN MY KIND OF MY EYES AND EARS ON THE INSIDE IS THAT NOISE MONITORING MACHINE.
SO THAT'S PLACED IN THE LIVING ROOM.
IF IT DETECTS TOO MUCH NOISE, IT'LL ACTUALLY ALERT ME ON MY PHONE, UH, THAT THERE'S TOO MUCH NOISE IN THE HOME.
SO THEN I CAN REACH OUT TO THE GUEST, GIVE THEM A WARNING, LET THEM KNOW TO QUIET DOWN.
AND THIS IS AS A WAY FOR ME TO GET IN TOUCH WITH THE GUEST BEFORE IT BECOMES A NUISANCE FOR THE NEIGHBORS OR THE COMMUNITY.
UH, LAST BUT NOT LEAST, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
UM, AS IT WAS STATED BEFORE, DENVER HEIGHTS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION VOIDED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE AND SUPPORT THE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO STR PERMIT.
UH, I SPOKE WITH THEM LAST WEEK.
WE HAD A GOOD CONVERSATION, UM, ANSWERED THEIR QUESTIONS, LISTENED TO THEIR CONCERNS, AND LIKE I SAID, EV EVERY BOARD MEMBER WAS IN FAVOR OF APPROVING PRIOR TO MEETING WITH THEM.
I DID ATTEMPT, UH, UH, INITIALLY WHEN I REACHED OUT TO THE BOARD, OR EXCUSE ME, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, I ATTACHED THIS FLYER.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY THE EMAIL ADDRESS AT THAT TIME WAS OUTDATED, SO THIS DIDN'T GET INTO THEIR HANDS IN TIME.
UM, BUT AS ESSENTIALLY, UM, A FLYER THAT I WAS HOPING THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DISTRIBUTE TO MEMBERS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BASICALLY SAYS WHO I AM, UH, WHAT I PLAN TO DO WITH THE HOME, AND THEN ALSO ATTEMPTED TO HOST AN OPEN HOUSE SO THAT EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY COULD COME BY, SEE HOW INTENTIONAL I'VE BEEN WITH THE HOME, GET COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT I'M DOING, UH, ASK QUESTIONS, AND A WAY FOR ME TO, YOU KNOW, MEET WITH THEM.
UM, SINCE THAT WASN'T ABLE TO HAPPEN, I STILL WALKED THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND MET, UH, SOME OF MY CLOSEST NEIGHBORS, INCLUDING THE ONE NEXT DOOR WHO SANDWICHED IN BETWEEN MINE AND EIGHT 11.
UM, AT THE END OF OUR CONVERSATION, HE WAS VERY COMFORTABLE, UM, WITH WHAT I WAS DOING, UM, AND EVEN LET ME USE HIS LADDER FOR THE ENTIRE DAY WHILE WE PUT THE BACKYARD TOGETHER.
AND THEN ACROSS THE STREET, UM, MY NEIGHBOR OWNS A, UH, LAWN AND LANDSCAPING COMPANY, MET THEM AS WELL.
UH, THEY WERE COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
AND GOING FORWARD, THEY'LL ACTUALLY BE DOING THE MONTHLY YARD MAINTENANCE AT MY HOME.
AND THEN HERE IS THE, A COPY OF THAT LETTER, UM, FROM THE DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SHOWING THEIR FULL SUPPORT.
AND I'LL CLOSE HERE WITH, I HOPE THAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO CONVEY TO EACH ONE OF YOU THAT THIS IS NOT YOUR STEREOTYPICAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
AND WHEN DONE THE CORRECT WAY, THERE IS STILL A NEED FOR HIGH QUALITY SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
I'VE EXCEEDED THE TYPICAL STANDARDS FOR SHORT-TERM RENTAL OPERATORS.
AND IF ALL STR ARE MANAGED WITH THE SAME LEVEL OF CARE AND RESPONSIBILITY, THEIR PERCEPTION OF THESE RENTALS WOULD LIKELY BE MUCH MORE POSITIVE.
HOWEVER, I'M UNABLE TO PUT THESE EFFORTS INTO ACTION BECAUSE AN UNUSED PERMIT IS PREVENTING ME FROM DOING SO.
I'VE PUT MY HEART AND SOUL AND PRETTY MUCH EVERY DOLLAR I HAVE INTO MAKING THIS THE BEST EXPERIENCE I COULD FOR BOTH THE GUEST AND THE COMMUNITY.
I INVESTED IN MY EDUCATION TO ENSURE THAT I WAS EQUIPPED TO BE THE BEST HOST THAT I COULD BE.
I TAILORED MY HOME SPECIFICALLY FOR THE SAN ANTONIO TOURISTS.
I'VE TAKEN EXTRA SECURITY PRECAUTIONS THROUGH VIDEO AND NOISE MONITORING.
AND LASTLY, I'VE ENGAGED WITH AND LISTENED TO MY COMMUNITY.
I'VE SPENT TIME GETTING TO KNOW MY NEIGHBORS AND LISTENING TO THEIR CONCERNS AND HOW I PLAN TO ADDRESS THEM.
THIS ALL, I RECEIVED FULL SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND THIS ALL COUPLED WITH THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO SHORT-TERM RENTALS OPERATING ON THE BLOCK FACE.
AND THERE'S NO EVIDENCE FROM THE OWNER TO SUPPORT THAT THERE EVER WILL BE.
IF THE VOTE TODAY IS YES IN FAVOR OF GRANTING THIS EXCEPTION, I'LL BE EXTREMELY GRATEFUL.
BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT I'LL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
I'LL BE REQUIRED TO BE IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD AGAIN IN THREE YEARS.
AND IF I DON'T HOLD UP MY END OF THE DEAL AND DELIVER ON THE PROMISES I MADE TO YOU ALL TODAY, THEN MY PERMIT WILL BE REVOKED.
I'M COMMITTED TO ENSURING THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN AND TO RUNNING THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL WITH INTEGRITY AND CARE FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS AND BEYOND.
FOR ANYONE STILL UNCERTAIN OR WITH REMAINING QUESTIONS, I WELCOME THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS 'EM NOW.
[00:50:01]
GONNA SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.I HAVE A A QUESTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE EXISTING, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL THAT'S ON THE BLOCK FACE.
IF, IS THERE A POLICY TO WHERE IF IT'S UNUSED OR THERE'S NO HOT TAX REPORT, HOT, UH, TAX, UH, SUBMITTALS THAT THE PERMIT GOES AWAY? OR IS IT JUST GOOD FOR THREE YEARS NO MATTER WHAT? UM, THERE'S NOTHING OR ORDINANCE THAT STATES THEY CANNOT, THEY DON'T, THEY HAVE TO USE THEIR TYPE TWO SDR PERMIT.
UM, ONE WAY THAT THEY COULD POTENTIALLY GET IT REVOKED IF THEY'RE NOT PAYING THEIR HOT TAXES ON TIME.
UM, BUT THAT'S A FINANCE QUESTION THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO GET WITH THEM FOR THAT ONE.
IS THERE ANY WAY FOR YOU TO LOOK UP TO SEE IF THERE HAS BEEN ANY USAGE? UH, I KNOW WE'VE HEARD TESTIMONY THAT, THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN.
CAN YOU CHECK WHILE WE, UH, ASK QUESTIONS? UM, MR. CHAIR, I DID CHECK OUR THIRD PARTY SYSTEM WHERE IT LOOKS UP ACTIVE LISTINGS IN THE CITY AND I DON'T SEE ANY ACTIVE LISTING FOR EIGHT 11 DENVER BOULEVARD.
AND THEN LASTLY, UH, THREE YEARS FROM NOW, UH, OR TWO, TWO YEARS FROM NOW, WHEN THE ONE UP THE STREET COMES UP, ARE THEY GONNA HAVE TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD OR IS THE FACT THAT THEY WERE, THEY PREDATE THIS APPLICANT, DOES THAT AUTOMATICALLY ALLOW THEM TO RE RENEW THEIR PERMIT? UM, THAT'S CORRECT.
SINCE THEY PREDATE THIS ONE, THEY WOULD JUST COME IN FOR RENEWAL AND IF THEY MEET THEIR CRITERIA, THEY CAN LIKE PAYING THEIR HOT TAX ON TIME, THEY CAN GET RENEWED AUTOMATICALLY.
SO THIS, SO THIS APPLICANT WOULDN'T, IF THIS, IF THE ONE DOWN THE STREET STAYS INTO EFFECT, HE WOULD ALWAYS HAVE TO COME HERE EVERY TIME? THAT IS CORRECT.
ANY, UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? COMMISSIONER ZUNA FOLLOW UP QUESTION REGARDING THE, UH, SHORT TERM RENTAL ON EIGHT 11 DENVER? DO WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE REPORTING EVEN ZERO INCOME ON THEIR HOT TAXES? 'CAUSE THEY HAVE A REQUIREMENT TO REPORT AT LEAST, UH, ZERO IF THEY'RE NOT RENTING IT? UM, WE DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
THAT'S FINANCES QUESTION, BUT WE CAN REACH OUT TO THEM TO SEE REGARDING THAT, BUT I DON'T HAVE, WOULD THAT INFORMATION BE AVAILABLE FOR TODAY'S MEETING OR IS THAT A FOLLOW UP? I CAN TRY TO EMAIL THEM RIGHT NOW TO SEE IF THEY CAN GET BACK TO ME ON THE TIME.
ANYONE ELSE? KAPLAN COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH.
HOW MANY PARKING SPACES DO YOU HAVE ON THIS? ON THIS? UH, SO THE DRIVEWAY IS DEEP.
IT WOULD FIT THREE VEHICLES, ALTHOUGH GIVEN ITS FOUR FAMILIES, I WOULDN'T ANTICIPATE MORE THAN ONE OR TWO.
UM, WHAT ARE YOUR MONTHLY COSTS? YOU SAID THAT YOU COULDN'T RECOUP YOUR MONTHLY COSTS IF YOU RENTED IT OUT.
UM, SO AF MY MORTGAGE PAYMENT WITH TAX AND INSURANCE IS, UH, JUST RIGHT AT $3,100 VERSUS THE RENT OF 1600 TO 1900.
BUT IF YOU RENTED IT OUT FURNISHED, WOULDN'T YOU GET MORE? UH, POTENTIALLY.
I JUST, I DON'T KNOW HOW WELL IT WOULD DO.
12 MONTHS FOR A, UH, FULLY FURNISHED.
AND, AND THE LAST THING IS YOU SEEM TO BE VERY PREPARED AND DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH, UH, AND THE PRI THE OTHER OWNERS DOWN THE BLOCK SEEM TO HAVE JUST GOTTEN THIS AND GOTTEN BEFORE YOU.
WHAT PREVENTED YOU FROM APPLYING FOR THIS EARLIER? UH, I PURCHASED THE HOME IN JULY OF THIS YEAR.
I, ANY OF QUESTIONS? STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS COULD STAFF PLEASE CONFIRM THEIR RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS CASE? STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS A, NOW DUE TO THE STO ORDINANCE STATING THAT IF DENSITY IS OVER THE 12.5%, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO, STAFF WOULD DENY IT AND THE OPTION GOING TO THE BO OA FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
SO THAT'S WHY STAFF IS DENYING IT BASED OFF THE STR ORDINANCE.
IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, UH, I KNOW THAT THERE'S AN, UH, AN INQUIRY, UH, TO FINANCE IS, IS, UH, ANY COMMISSIONER WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A MOTION AT THIS TIME? OR SHOULD, OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO WAIT? WE CAN WAIT AND GET A RESPONSE ON THAT QUESTION.
SO WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IS, UM, THAT, THAT SEEMS TO BE AN IMPORTANT QUESTION THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ANSWERED.
SO WE'RE GONNA WAIT TO SEE IF WE GET AN EMAIL.
SO WHAT I'M GONNA DO IS TABLE ITEM NUMBER TWO AT THIS TIME, UM, UNTIL STAFF, UH, HOPEFULLY GETS A RESPONSE IN THE, IN THE SOON FUTURE.
AND THEN WE'LL BRING IT BACK UP.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO NUMBER THREE.
OKAY, ITEM NUMBER THREE, UH, BO OA DASH 24 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 2.
DO GREEN AVENUE COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE APPLICANT MARIO NICHOLS.
[00:55:01]
UH, REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW TWO FEET, SIX INCH SIDE SETBACKS ON THE NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINES.SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WEST OF SOUTH GENERAL MCMULLEN DRIVE NORTH OF CASTROVILLE ROAD 145 FEET NORTH OF AKRON AVENUE ON DEL GREEN AVENUE.
APPLICANT ALSO THE PROPERTY ALSO BEING THE PROPERTY OWNER IS PROPOSING DEVELOPMENT OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON A VACANT LOT WITH A REDUCED SETBACK DUE TO THE LIMIT SIZE OF THE LOT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A TWO FOOT SIX INCH SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE TWO FEET SIX INCHES FROM THE EAST AND WEST SIDE.
PROPERTY LINES, THE PROPERTY QUALIFIES AS NON-CONFORMING LOT ON OF RECORD, WHICH ALLOWS THEM TO DEVELOP ON A STANDARD LOT THAT DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE OR WIDTH.
SUBMITTAL PERMITS IS PENDING THE RESULTS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SITE PLAN, AERIAL VIEW SITE PLAN OF THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING SUBJECT PROPERTY VACANT LOT AND SURROUNDING AREA STAFF'S.
RECOMMENDATION OF SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO OA DASH 24 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 3 2 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE REDUCE SIDE SETBACKS DO NOT PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE DISTANCE BETWEEN NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, ENHANCING THE RISK OF WATER RUNOFF AND FIRE SPREAD.
AND TWO, WILL INJUR THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES AND ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
AND THE LAW JUS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
THIS IS THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S RESPONSE AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
IS THAT THE APPLICANT? COME FORWARD.
UM, SO I PURCHASED THIS LOT IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR.
UM, THIS IS THE VERY FIRST TIME, UM, ME PURSUING A PROJECT LIKE THIS.
UM, I USED TO BE A FRANCHISE OWNER OF A TAX BUSINESS.
I SOLD MY BUSINESS AT THE END OF 2023 AND I'M USING THE PROCEEDS TO BUILD A, A RESIDENTIAL HOME.
UM, SO THIS IS MY FIRST RODEO.
UM, THE PLAN FOR THE LOT IS TO BUILD A TWO BEDROOM, ONE BATH, ONE STORY, 800 SQUARE FOOT HOME.
UM, AND I GUESS KIND OF AS I'VE BEEN A LITTLE BIT WET BEHIND THE EARS ON THIS PROCESS, I'VE LEARNED A LITTLE BIT
AFTER PURCHASING THE LOT, UM, THE LOT IS THE MOST NARROWEST, UM, ON THE BLOCK.
UM, SO THE SETBACKS WOULD, UH, PRODUCE A AESTHETIC AND A, A HOME, ONE STORY HOME THAT WOULD ACTUALLY NOT KIND OF FIT THE CONTINUITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AESTHETICALLY IT WOULD NOT KIND OF BE IN MATCH WITH THE, WITH THE HOMES THERE.
SO I DID MEET WITH, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TWICE, SPOKE WITH THE CITY COUNCILWOMAN OF DISTRICT FIVE, TERRY CASTILLO, UH, ABOUT MY PLANS AND MY PROJECT, UM, AND WAS RECOMMENDED TO, UH, CANVAS THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SPEAK TO MY NEIGHBORS FACE TO FACE, WHICH I DID PURSUE A FEW WEEKENDS AGO.
UM, AND GOT 20 SIGNATURES OF AGREEMENT THAT I DID PRESENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OF NEIGHBORS BEING IN FAVOR OF MY PROJECT.
UM, THE MAIN CONCERNS ABOUT WATER RUNOFF, UM, I HAVE, UM, GOTTEN QUOTES FOR A FRENCH DRAIN.
UM, I HAVE A COUPLE DIFFERENT OPTIONS, EITHER A FRENCH DRAIN ON BOTH SIDE OR, UM, A CONCRETE SWELL.
BUT I THINK FOR THE AESTHETIC, I WOULD PURSUE A, A FRENCH DRAIN, UM, FOR THAT.
BUT I'M ACTUALLY GONNA LET THE CONTRACTOR TAKE THE LEAD ON ACTUALLY HIRING THE INDIVIDUAL TO INSTALL IT.
UM, YEAH, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY PRETTY MUCH TO SUMMARIZE THE, THE PROJECT IN AND OF ITSELF, THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN THAT I DID, UM, SUBMIT.
I'VE KINDA HAD A LITTLE BIT OF, OF MO A LITTLE BIT OF A MOVING BUDGET SINCE I'M KIND OF SELF-FINANCING THIS PROJECT ALL MY OWN.
SO I WILL NOT BE GOING AS DEEP.
UM, I'LL LIKELY ONLY BE GOING, UM, 43 FEET, UH, LONG AND IDEALLY WOULD LIKE TO GO 20 FEET WIDE ON THE PROJECT WITH A TWO FOOT, UH, SIX INCH, UH, VARIANCE.
UM, SO THAT PROBABLY PRETTY MUCH EXPLAINS THE, THE PROJECT IN A NUTSHELL AND, UH, WOULD LOVE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
HOW WIDE IS THE LOT? UH, THE LOT IS 25 FEET WIDE.
COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH, MR. CHAIR.
I KNOW WE CANNOT IMPOSE CONDITIONS, BUT IF THE APPLICANT WERE TO AMEND HIS, UH, VARIANCE HERE TO REQUEST A FRENCH DRAINS OR TO INCLUDE FRENCH DRAINS AS PART OF HIS OKAY.
UH, DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THAT WE WOULD ENTERTAIN THAT AS A BOARD HERE, IF
[01:00:01]
YOU, OKAY.SO THE WAY THIS WORKS IS, UM, WE, WE CAN APPROVE A VARIANCE, UH, FOR WHAT YOU'RE ASKING OR FOR SOMETHING LESS STRINGENT.
UH, WE CANNOT IMPOSE CONDITIONS.
YOU, HOWEVER, WHILE YOU'RE AT THE PODIUM AFTER HEARING CERTAIN QUESTIONS AND, AND WHATNOT, YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO AMEND YOUR APPLICATION.
IT'S WHAT WE'D BE ENTERTAINING.
YOU'LL HEAR, UH, THINGS LIKE, UM, GUTTERS, FRENCH DRAINS.
OVERHANG DISTANCES, THINGS OF, OF THAT MAY COME UP.
AND JUST TO BE CONSCIOUS OF THAT.
SO I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUESTION.
SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR TWO AND A HALF FEET ON EITHER SIDE, CORRECT.
BUT WHEN YOU, WHEN YOUR STRUCTURE IS THREE FEET OR, UH, I'M SORRY, TWO FEET OR WITHIN THREE FEET OF A SIDE PROPERTY LINE, ROOF OVERHANGS ARE NOT ALLOWED ANYMORE.
ROOF OVERHANGS CAN ONLY EXTEND TO UP TO THREE FEET.
WERE YOU WANTING TO DO ROOF OVERHANGS ON THIS PROJECT? UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I, IF I WERE BEING FULLY HONEST, UM, BECAUSE I AM A LITTLE BIT WET BEHIND THE EARS IN NEW CONSTRUCTION, UM, I DON'T KNOW THE IMMEDIATE ANSWER TO THAT.
I WOULD HAVE TO KIND OF CIRCLE BACK WITH MY CONTRACTOR, WHICH IF I DID AMEND MY, UH, VARIANCE APPLICATION, I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE THE ANSWER AT THAT TIME.
UH, BUT IF I WERE BEING FULLY HONEST WITH YOU AT THE MOMENT, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.
'CAUSE WHAT IS TYPICAL FOR THE AREA, ESPECIALLY WITH THESE SMALLER LOTS, YOU, YOU WOULD SEE AS LOW AS A THREE FOOT OKAY.
UH, AND, AND SO SOMETHING THAT MIGHT, UH, BE, BE ACCEPTABLE TO SOME COMMISSIONERS.
UH, THREE FOOT WITH A SIX INCH OVERHANG IS SOMETHING THAT I TEND TO SEE AND TEND TO AGREE THAT THAT'S, UH, COMMON IN THE AREA.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS? THE FOLLOW UP QUESTION? YEAH.
THE SLOPE OF THE LOT, IS IT FRONT TO BACK OR BACK TO FRONT? IS IT SLOPE TO THE STREET WHILE THE DRAINAGE WOULD GO TO THE STREET OR WOULD IT GO BACK TO THE ALLEY? UM, SO IT WOULD GO TOWARDS THE STREET.
SO I THINK IT'S BACK TO FRONT.
AND I THINK IT WOULD, UM, EVEN IN THE INSTALLATION OF THE FRENCH DRAIN, I THINK IT WOULD KIND OF EVEN LIKE TRY TO INCREASE OR EVEN MITIGATE THAT OR IN, UH, ENHANCE THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
ANY, UH, KAPLAN COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? UH, THIS IS FOR STAFF.
UH, DO WE KNOW WHAT THE OPPOSITION WAS? UH, FROM THE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION? IT JUST SAYS THEY, IT JUST SAYS IN OPPOSITION, BUT THEY DIDN'T GIVE A REASON.
THIS WAS FROM BEING FROM CONTINUED.
SO THEY FOR INITIALLY DID, UH, DENY IT BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO MEET WITH THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET WITH THEM, AND NOW THEY ARE IN, UH, FAVOR.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ.
DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG THIS SLOT HAS BEEN EMPTIED? I DON'T REMEMBER.
I KNOW IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF YEARS ALREADY, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY A LOT OF THAT INFORMATION PROBABLY CAME THROUGH MY REAL ESTATE AGENT.
THERE WAS A SENSE OF LIKE SOME KIND OF PROBATE WITH THIS.
AND, UM, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW MANY YEARS BACK IT DATED, BUT I, IT HAS BEEN AN EMPTY LOT FOR A WHILE.
AND I THINK I DID GET THE OPPORTUNITY IN MEETING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THEY EXPRESSED, UM, GRATITUDE FOR DEVELOPMENT ON EMPTY LOTS BECAUSE THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH LIKE HOMELESS SQUATTERS, UM, TAKING OVER IN THAT AREA OF TOWN.
SO, UM, I'M GLAD THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS PROJECT WOULD BE ABLE TO KIND OF MITIGATE THAT.
BUT IN REGARD TO HOW LONG IT HAS BEEN VACANT, UNFORTUNATELY I COULDN'T TELL YOU WITH PRECISION.
SO WHEN YOU BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, THE, THE HOME HAD THAT WAS THERE BEFORE, HAD ALREADY BEEN DEMOLISHED, CORRECT? CORRECT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
UH, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU, OH, STAFF, IS THERE ANYONE TIME TO SPEAK OR VOICEMAILS? NOPE.
SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE US TO KNOW, UM, ANY AMENDMENTS YOU'D LIKE TO OFFER, UH, BEFORE WE DELIBERATE? YEAH.
SO I THINK, UM, SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS RIGHT, THE OPPORTUNITY TO AMEND PUSHES BACK THE DELIBERATION? NO.
YOU RIGHT NOW, YOUR REQUEST IS FOR, UH, TWO AND A HALF FEET ON EITHER SIDE.
WHICH MEANS NO PART OF YOUR STRUCTURE CAN BE ANY CLOSER TO TWO AND A HALF FEET.
THAT MEANS IF YOU HAVE AN OVERHANG OR IF YOU HAVE AN OVERHANG WITH GUTTERS, THE EDGE OF THE GUTTER, THE EDGE OF THE OVERHANG OR NO PROJECTION COME, CAN COME WITHIN, UH, THE TWO AND A HALF FEET.
YOU KNOW, AS IT'S BEEN REQUESTED.
AND WE CAN'T GO ANY LOWER THAN THAT AT THIS TIME.
UM, HOWEVER, UH, YOU, YOU MIGHT FIND THAT, UH, THE COMMISSIONER WHO MAKES A MOTION OR OR OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO REQUEST FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS MAY WANT IT TO BE ADJUSTED SLIGHTLY.
SO WE'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU.
IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO STATE, UH, THAT WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF? OR ANY AMENDMENTS YOU'D LIKE TO DO? OKAY.
SO I THINK THE, THE FIRST TWO THINGS WOULD BE, UM, I, I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO PURSUE, PURSUE AN AMENDMENT TO PUT THE DETAILS OF THE FRENCH STRAIN IN THE PROJECT, AND ALSO GET A ANSWER FROM THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR ABOUT THE ROOF OVERHANG AS WELL.
SO, WELL, WE, SO YOU, YOU'RE SAYING YOUR APPLICATION WILL INCLUDE FRENCH STRAINS IN THE AMENDMENT? I AM SAYING THAT, YES.
WELL, WELL, I GUESS I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING THE CHRONOLOGY.
LIKE, I GUESS, SO WHAT'LL HAPPEN IS IF, UH, UH, A COMMISSIONER WHO, WHO UH, READS A MOTION STATES THE
[01:05:01]
INCLUSION OF FRENCH DRAINS, THERE'LL BE AN EXPECTATION TO HAVE THE FRENCH DRAINS.AND THEN FROM THAT, I THEN PURSUE THE AMENDMENT? NO, YOU'LL HAVE TO, IT'S VERBAL.
YEAH, YOU'RE DOING IT VERBALLY.
BECAUSE YOU'RE BEING RECORDED.
HEY, YOU KNOW, UM, I SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT MY BEST MATERIAL.
UM, OKAY, UH, YES, I WOULD AFFIRM THAT IF I'M ASKED.
OH, MS. KAPLAN, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN.
'CAUSE IT'S NOT, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 24 DASH OH 3 0 1 3 2, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR TWO SIX INCH VARIANCE, UH, FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SETBACK, WHICH INCLUDES FRENCH DRAINS TO ALLOW 2.2 FEET, SIX INCHES SIDE SETBACKS ON THE NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINES SITUATED AT 1317.
DO GREEN AVENUE APPLICANT BEING MARIO NICHOLS.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
IN THIS CASE, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS REPRESENTED BY MINIMUM LOT SIZES TO PREVENT DEVELOPMENT CROWDING ON SMALLER LOTS REDUCED SIDE SETBACKS OF TWO FEET, SIX INCHES IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST WITH THE FRENCH DRAINS, AS IT WOULD PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE DISTANCE BETWEEN NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT TO THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT TO THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, IS THE SIZE OF THE LOT, SEVERELY LIMITS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOT AND REDUCES LIVABLE SPACE FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS PROPOSED STRUCTURE.
BY RENTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW.
THE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE BY PROVIDING A MAINTAINABLE DISTANCE BETWEEN PROPERTY LINES AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
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.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
IF GRANTED, THE REDUCED SIDE SETBACKS WILL NOT INJURE THE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES, NOR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCES OF SORT ARE DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
THE LIMITED LOT SIZERS TO ITS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, MAKING IT DIFFICULT FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER TO A ADHERE TO ADHERE TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT BUILDING CODE.
I'M FOR THIS, UH, FOR GIVING THE VARIANCE, UH, A BECAUSE IT IS GOOD TO DEVELOP THESE UN UNDEVELOPABLE LOTS.
OBVIOUSLY THE LOT IS VERY SMALL, SO YOU DO HAVE A HARDSHIP THERE.
THREE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS MET WITH YOU AND IS IS FINE WITH IT.
THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION.
AND WHEN LOOKING AT PICTURES OF THE, UH, STREET SCAPE, THE NEIGHBORS ARE ALSO NOT BUILT TO THEIR PROPERTY LINES.
SO WHILE YOURS MAY BE TWO AND A HALF FEET, UM, THERE'S STILL SUBSTANTIAL ROOM IN TERMS OF FIRE AND FLOODING.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I, I AGREE WITH MS. KAPLAN.
I DON'T SEE ANY BIG, UM, STAND STAND ANY BIG ITEM SAYING THAT IT CANNOT BE DEVELOPED.
IT IS A SMALL PROPERTY, BUT I THINK WITH THE IDEA THAT HE'S GOT GOING, IT SHOULD BE A NICE, UH, NEW HOME IN THAT AREA.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER ZI CONCUR AS WELL WITH THE VARIANCE.
UM, I THINK THAT THIS PROVIDES AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN A MUCH NEEDED PART OF THE CITY.
THERE'S NOTHING ELSE I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
THE REASONING IS AT TWO AND A HALF FEET, IF THIS APPLICANT BUILT A PARAPET ROOF, HE WOULD, HE WOULD, THE FRENCH DRAIN WOULD COVER DRAINAGE.
IF HE WANTED TO BUILD A, A ROOF ROOF WITH AN OVERHANG, HE WOULD HAVE TO SCOOT EVERYTHING EVEN CLOSER, WHICH WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE.
OR IF HE WANTED TO PUT GUTTERS, THE GUTTERS WOULD HAVE TO BE TWO AND A HALF FEET.
SO EITHER WAY, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO DO SOMETHING TO ACCOUNT FOR THE DRAINAGE.
SO I'M, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT ON THIS NARROW LINE.
SO I HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR.
[01:10:01]
I CONCUR.COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BONNI? YES, I CONCUR.
IN FACT, UH, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, THE WORDING OF THE MOTION OR WHAT TO DO MOVING FORWARD, STAFF IS MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE FOR YOU.
CAN WE CHECK WITH STAFF ON THE PROJECT? SURE.
HAVE Y'ALL HEARD BACK FROM FINANCE? UH, YES, WE HAVE.
WE WILL BE, I AM NOW BRINGING IT IS TWO 11.
I'M BRINGING ITEM NUMBER TWO BACK FROM THE TABLE AND NOW BEFORE THE COMMISSION.
SO WHAT'D YOU FIND OUT? UM, FINANCE CONFIRMED THAT THEY'VE ONLY REPORTED IT FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST, 2024 AND NO OTHER MONTHS PREVIOUSLY.
SO THEN THEY'RE SUBJECT TO AUTOMATIC REVOCATION.
WE TOOK MAKE SURE THEY RECEIVED THE PROPER NOTICE FOR THOSE 90 DAYS AND STUFF, BUT AS OF NOW, THEY ARE DELINQUENT ON THEIR ACCOUNT.
UH, IF, IF THEIR PERMIT GETS REVOKED, DOES THIS, DOES, DOES THE APPLICANT THAT CAME BEFORE US, UM, DOES HE HAVE ANY STANDING TO BE FIRST IN LINE? BECAUSE HIS APPLICATION, I, I DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE'S A DATE THING, IF IT HAS A CERTAIN AGE THAT MAKES IT NOT THAT CASE.
SO FOR APPLICATIONS, WE ALLOW 45 DAYS TO PROVIDE US WHATEVER INFORMATION IS REQUIRED.
SO IF THE 90 DAYS IS PAST THAT, WE WOULD USUALLY CLOSE THE RECORD 'CAUSE THERE'S NO RESPONSE FOR THAT.
AND, AND IF THIS APPLICANT, UH, IS SUCCESSFUL TODAY AND THE OTHER APPLICATION GETS REVOKED, DOES HE NOW GO BACK INTO THE POLL POSITION WHERE HE IS THE PRIME ON THE BLOCK? OR IS, OR IS HE ALWAYS GONNA BE IN A STATE OF BEING THE, UH, ADDITIONAL SDR? YEAH, SO IF HE GETS APPROVED TODAY AND THIS CURRENT PERMIT IS REVOKED, THEN HE WILL BE THE FIRST PERMIT ON THAT BLOCK FACE MOVING FORWARD.
SO WITH THAT, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? SO JUST A CLARIFICATION COMMISSIONER.
SO, SO THEIR LAST REPORTING WAS AUGUST OF 2024 AND IT'S A 90 DAY REPORTING REQUIREMENT BEFORE THEIR DELINQUENT WITH THEIR ACCOUNT OR, SO WE HAVE, UM, 90 DAY PLUS NOTICE THAT NEEDS TO BE SENT OUT TO THEM.
SO WE NEED TO CONFIRM THAT THEY DID RECEIVE THOSE 90 DAY NOTICES.
UM, BUT IF THEY DID RECEIVE THAT, THEN WE CAN PROCEED TO REVOKE THE PERMIT.
EZ COMMISSIONER BEVIS, CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT FROM JANUARY TO AUGUST THEY'RE IN GOOD STANDING AND IT'S JUST SEPTEMBER THAT THEY'RE NO, THEY HAVEN'T RETURNED.
UM, PER FINANCE, THEY'VE ONLY REPORTED FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST, 2024 FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR.
UM, SO IF WE APPROVE THIS TODAY AND THE OTHER PEOPLE THEN MAKE GOOD WITH THEIR THING, THEN WE HAVE TWO ON THE BLOCK.
RIGHT? BUT IS THERE ANY WAY TO GET, UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, WHAT'S THE WORD, IF THE OTHER PEOPLE DROP OUT TO GIVE IT A CONDITIONAL, IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO LIKE A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL? YEAH, WE DON'T PENDING THE OTHER PEOPLE DROP OUT.
WE CAN'T ISSUE CONDITIONAL, NO.
SO, SO THE, THE TIMING, UH, THEY'RE ALREADY 90 DAYS PAST DUE.
WHAT THEY, SO STAFF, SO STAFF, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THE TIMING.
THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A CERTAIN NOTICE.
AND SO BY THE TIME ANY REVOCATION HAPPENS, THE 45 DAYS WITH THIS APPLICANT WILL ALREADY BE PASSED.
HE WOULD HAVE TO THEN REAPPLY AND, AND AND POTENTIALLY HAVE, HAVE SOMEONE GET IN LINE IN FRONT OF HIM IN THEORY.
UH, AND SO, UH, IF WE GRANT HIS TODAY, THE OTHER PERMIT UP THE STREET THEORETICALLY HAS TO BE REVOKED AND HE WOULD THEORETICALLY HAVE TO COME BEFORE US TO KEEP IT.
IS THAT CORRECT? BECAUSE IT'S BEEN MORE THAN 90 DAYS WITH HIM FILING A HOT TAX.
SO OUR CURRENT PROCESS IS THAT THEY NEED TO BE NOTIFIED 90 PLUS DAYS REVOCATION.
AND IF THEY, AFTER 90 PLUS DAYS, THEY DON'T COME IN AND BECOME CURRENT, THEN THE STAFF CAN, THEN WE CAN REVOKE THEIR PERMIT.
AND IN THE REVOCATION LETTER, WE DO OFFER THEM 20 DAYS TO APPEAL OUR STAFF'S DECISION TO REVOKE THE PERMIT.
SO IF YOU ON FIRST NOTICE THAT THEY FILE NINE HOT TAX DEALS, THEY THEY KEEP THEIR PERMIT AND THEIR FINE.
SO THEY MISSED THEIR JANUARY, THEY MISSED THEIR FEBRUARY AND THEY MISSED THEIR MARCH.
THEY MISSED DECEMBER TO, TO JULY.
SO HOW, BUT DID THEY, DID THEY GET A, A NOTICE FROM THE CITY FOR THAT? THAT'S THE QUESTION.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY TRYING, WE'RE WORKING THEIR THIRD PARTY SYSTEM 'CAUSE WE VERIFY THEY RECEIVED THE PROPER NOTICE, YET WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN NOTICES UPDATED FROM OUR AVENUE THIRD PARTY SYSTEM IN THE LAST COUPLE MONTHS.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO GET THAT INFORMATION FROM THEM BEFORE WE PROCEED TO REVOKE FUTURE PERMITS.
COMMISSIONER ZUNA, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, I AM MS. REQUEST.
[01:15:01]
OKAY.SO WITH THAT, UH, IS THERE COMMISSIONER WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION BEES COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA 2 4 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 7.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT 8 2 7 DENVER BOULEVARD, APPLICANT BEING JEREMY GRIMSON.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HEART HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO OPERATE AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR, OR WELFARE.
THERE IS NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY.
B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE.
THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WOULD BE CREATED IF AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT WAS APPROVED.
C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE.
THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSIST OF SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES.
THIS, THIS SCENARIO DOES NOT CAUSE REASON TO BELIEVE IT WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
D, ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS, ROAD STORM DAMAGE, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND OTHER NECESSARY FACILITIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE.
E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT-TERM RENTAL LICENSES.
CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION.
THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE ANY HISTORY OF REVOCATIONS, UH, CITATIONS OR CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16 FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OR OTHER PROPERTIES.
F THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT.
THE PROPERTY, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO OTHER RESIDENTIAL WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING OFF STREET PARKING AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
AND A MOTION IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, UH, SECOND.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES, UH, I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
I THINK YOU HAVE, UM, ADEQUATE, UM, SUPPORT FROM THE COMMUNITY AND, UH, YOU'VE DONE AN EXCEPTIONAL JOB WITH THE REMODELING OF THIS, UH, PROPERTY.
AND, UH, AND I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF IT.
YEAH, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA BE FOR IT.
I WOULDN'T MIND SEEING A CONTINUANCE UNTIL WE HEARD MORE FROM THE NEIGHBOR AND WHAT IS ACTUALLY GOING ON WITH THE NEIGHBOR, BECAUSE THE NEIGHBOR MIGHT DECIDE TO SET THINGS RIGHT, GET IT STRAIGHT WITH THE CITY, GET HIS SHORT-TERM RENTAL WORKING, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS ON THE BLOCK WHILE I GIVE YOU COMMENDATIONS FOR, YOU KNOW, CREATING A BEAUTIFUL UNIT.
YOU'VE DECORATED IT LOVELY, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, DONE YOUR RESEARCH AS MUCH AS YOU CAN.
BUT I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE, UM, THE DAMAGES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BY HAVING MORE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT, UH, WHO DO NOT ACTUALLY LIVE ON THE BLOCK AND THE NUISANCES TO THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO I AM NOT IN FAVOR UNLESS I KNEW THAT THE OTHER SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS OUT.
MR. CARE, CAN I, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH, JUST, UH, JUST COMMENT REAL QUICKLY.
THE APPLICANT PROVIDED TESTIMONY THAT THAT PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO A 12 MONTH LEASE, SO THERE IS NO SHORT TERM RENTAL BEING OPERATED ON THAT PROPERTY.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? YEAH, COMMISSIONER BARREN.
UH, JUST WANNA EXPLAIN, I'M ORDINARILY SKEPTICAL OF THIS KIND OF APPLICATION, BUT I'M GONNA SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE A VERY ODD SITUATION WITH THAT INACTIVE PERMIT DOWN THE BLOCK THAT MAY OR MAY NOT GO AWAY.
YOU'VE OBVIOUSLY GONE TO A GREAT DEAL OF, UH, EFFORT TO DO THIS IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY, AND I'M ALSO IMPRESSED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S, UH, SUPPORT.
ORDINARILY I WOULD EXPECT A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO OPPOSE THEIR PROLIFERATION OF SHORT TERM RENTALS.
SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS COMMISSIONER.
DEAN, I'M, UH, I'M HEARING MY, UH, FELLOW COMMISSIONERS BETWEEN,
[01:20:01]
UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, KAPLAN.UH, AND I'M TORN, BUT, UH, I THINK I WILL BE LEANING TOWARDS NOT SUPPORTING, UM, TWO SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, UM, FOR HER REASONS.
UM, I'M GONNA ADD THAT I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS ONE.
AND I, I WANTED TO EXPLAIN WHY IS THAT WHEN YOU HAVE SOMEBODY WHO'S HAD AN STR SINCE DECEMBER OF 2023, HAS NEVER USED IT, UH, AND THEN ENGAGED IN A ONE YEAR LEASE, UM, THEY OBVIOUSLY HAVE, THEY'RE JUST DOING IT AS A PLACEHOLDER AND THEY, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED.
UM, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU HAVE SOMEBODY THAT DOES WANT TO USE IT AS AN SDR.
SECONDLY IS, UM, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE NEIGHBOR, IF THE NEIGHBOR GETS THROUGH THE CITY AND MAKES GOOD ON, ON FILING ZERO HOT TAX REPORTS, THIS APPLICANT'S, UH, SDR PERMIT WOULD ONLY BE GOOD FOR THREE YEARS IF THE NEIGHBOR DECIDES THAT THEY'RE JUST GONNA PERMANENTLY RENT IT OUT OR NOT, OR NOT PURSUE, UH, KEEPING IT AS AN SDR, THIS APPLICANT WOULD BE THE, IN THE, IN THE, UM, POLE POSITION AND BE THE PRIME ON THE BLOCK.
SO EITHER WAY, WHAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT IS HAVING A SHORT TERM RENTAL THAT EXISTS BETWEEN AFTER THE YEAR LEASE UP THE STREET AND AT THE THREE YEAR EXPIRATION OF THIS APPLICANT.
SO IT'S, IT'S APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS WHERE THERE POTENTIALLY COULD BE TWO SDRS ON A BLOCK, AND I STILL DON'T EVEN THINK THAT'LL HAPPEN.
SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT JUST BECAUSE IT WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO YEARS AND IT'LL COME RIGHT BACK HERE AT SOME POINT FOR SOMEONE LATER.
SO, WITH THAT, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, JUST GO ON RECORD.
I, I'M GOING TO BE, UH, SUPPORTING, UH, COMMISSIONER DEAN AND COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS, UH, JUST A LITTLE BIT TOO, TOO UNCLEAR AS TO, UH, WHAT IS GONNA HAPPEN WITH THE, UH, THE OTHER SDR.
AND I'D, I'D ALSO LIKE TO REMIND THE BOARD THAT, UM, IF THE OTHER APPLICANT HAS THEIR PERMIT REVOKED AND THEY COME BEFORE US, IT'LL BE QUITE AN INTERESTING MEETING ANYWAY.
UM, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I, I VIEWS ADD ALSO JUST BY THE OTHER STR BEING A PLACEHOLDER, THE CITY IS LOSING OUT ON HOT TAX.
I MEAN, HE'S HAD IT FOR, YOU KNOW, 8, 6, 6 8 MONTHS WITHOUT USING IT.
AND NOW HE HAS A A ONE YEAR LEASE.
SO THAT'S REVENUE THAT THE, THAT THE CITY IS MISSING OUT ON AS WELL.
MAY, YES, COMMISSIONER, DO YOU, I WON'T PUT HOT TAX DOESN'T, DOESN'T GO TOWARDS PAVING ROADS.
IT DOESN'T GO TOWARDS, YOU KNOW, INFRASTRUCTURE.
IT'S A TOURIST TAX LIKE A HOTEL.
SO JUST WANNA MAKE THAT CLEAR, UH, WHERE THAT, WHERE THOSE DOLLARS GO.
ALRIGHT, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL.
COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? I DO NOT, I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CARTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? NO, I DO NOT.
COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BOEZ? YES, I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR THE FINES OF FACT.
WE DO NEED NINE VOTES TO APPROVE, UH, ITEMS BEFORE US.
MR. CHAIR ON THE PREVAILING SIDE, CAN WE REQUEST MAYBE A CONTINUANCE? SO WE GATHER FURTHER INFORMATION ON THE PREVAILING SIDE.
MIGHT RECONSIDER SOME OF THE, UH, WELL THAT'S, THAT'S UP TO THE FIVE THAT, UH, IF THEY WERE TO BE INTERESTED FOR THAT PURPOSE, UH, TO MAKE A MOTION TO RE RECONSIDER THE CASE.
BUT THAT WOULD BE UP TO, UM, THE FIVE THAT VOTED IN OPPOSITION.
AND THE INFORMATION OBVIOUSLY WOULD BE, UM, MORE CITY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THAT OTHER PERMIT.
I THINK THE, I THINK THE, THE, THE PURPOSE WOULD BE TO, UM, TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS AFTER 90 DAYS WITH THE NEIGHBOR UP THE STREET.
AND IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S SOMEONE ON THE, ON THE SURVEILLANCE OF, I, I THINK THAT WOULD BE FINE.
THAT, THAT'S REALLY WHY I'M OBJECTING, IS I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NEIGHBOR'S GONNA DO.
ALRIGHT, SO THIS, UH, WITH THAT, WHO, UH, ARE YOU MAKING A MOTION TO RECONSIDER? COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? I MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER VAZQUEZ.
UH, LET'S HAVE A VOTE TO SEE IF THE RECONSIDERATION OCCURS.
[01:25:01]
IN FAVOR SAY AYE.UH, SO MOTION IS NOW DO WE WANT A ROLL CALL? VOTE ON THAT.
WELL, UNLESS YOU, UH, UH, IN OPPOSITION, I'M IN OPPOSITION.
SO WE HAVE, UH, UH, 10 TO ONE
SO WE'LL, WE'LL PUT DOWN A 10 TO ONE, UH, MOTION PASSES.
UH, IT'S NOW BACK ON THE TABLE.
IS THERE A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE? MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE.
WHAT WOULD BE ENOUGH TIME? I KNOW THIS SEEMS LIKE AN, AN ETERNITY, BUT WHAT WOULD BE ENOUGH TIME TO GET THROUGH THE NOTIFICATION AND RESPONSE PROCESS WITH THE NEIGHBOR? ARE WE TALKING 90 DAYS? YES.
IT WOULD BE 90 DAYS A MINIMUM BEFORE WE CAN READ, READ BEFORE WE CAN DETERMINE IF THEY WILL PAY THEIR HOT TAXES IN THAT TIME PERIOD.
SO WHEN IS, WHEN IS THE NEXT MEETING GIVING THEM A ONE MEETING BUFFER? SO PART OF THE DISCUSSION TODAY WILL BE THE, UH, MEETINGS FOR NEXT YEAR.
UM, BUT, UH, GIMME ONE SECOND.
AND WHO SECONDED THE CONTINUANCE? SO JANUARY WOULD BE, UM, THE JANUARY 6TH OR JANUARY 27TH MEETING.
IS THERE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT LONG OF A CONTINUANCE? I WE NEVER DONE ONE THAT LONG.
YEAH, THE, THE, THE ISSUE IS WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT ABOUT A, UH, A 60 DAY ONCE SOMETHING COMES BEFORE THE BOARD, SO GOING THAT FAR OUT, PUTS IT IN JEOPARDY OF POSSIBLE RULE VIOLATION.
SO WE CAN DO A, A LESS THAN 60 DAY CONTINUANCE AND CONTINU IT AGAIN.
SO LET'S, LET'S, LET'S KEEP THIS, UH, NICE AND LEGAL HERE AND LIMIT IT TO A 60 DAY.
WHAT MEETING WOULD THAT TAKE US TO? THAT WOULD BE THE DECEMBER 2ND.
WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, FROM COMMISSIONER ZUNA TO CONTINUE TO DECEMBER 2ND.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR.
SO, UH, ITEM IS CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 6TH.
UM, I'M SORRY, DECEMBER 2ND, UH, NINE TO TWO AND, UH, WE WILL SEE YOU THEN.
BO O 8 24 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 9 1 4 9.
ADDRESS 15,000 IH 10 COUNCIL DISTRICT EIGHT APPLICANT.
APEX SIGN GROUP REQUEST A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 50 FOOT HEIGHT TO INCLUDE A 10 ADDITIONAL GRADE TO ALLOW A 60 FOOT HEIGHT, MULTIPLE TENANT, MULTIPLE TENANT SIGN, AND TWO, A 350 SQUARE FEET VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 300 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW A 650 SQUARE FEET SIGN.
THIS
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SIGN HEIGHT AND SQUARE FOOTAGE VARIANCE.
THE SIGN IS NOT CURRENTLY CONSTRUCTED AND WILL BE PLACED ALONG THE LOT FRONTAGE ALONG IH 10.
THE SIGN CODE PRESCRIBES A MAXIMUM 50 FOOT HEIGHT TO INCLUDE 10 FOOT ADDITIONAL GRADE AND UP TO 3,300 SQUARE FEET.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 60 FOOT HEIGHT AT A 650 SQUARE FEET, MULTIPLE TENANT SIGN.
AND HERE'S A SITE PLAN, THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION,
[01:30:06]
SUBJECT, PROPERTY SURROUNDING AREA.STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIGN, HEIGHT AND SQUARE FOOTAGE VARIANCES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO OA 2 4 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 9 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE VARIANCE WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND ASSIGNED, CONSTRUCTED AND COMPLIANCE WITH THE UDC STANDARDS WILL NOT CAUSE A CESSATION OF LEGITIMATE AND LONGSTANDING ACTIVE COMMERCIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, STAFF MAIL, DO SEVEN NOTICES.
ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
AND THIS CONCLUDES, UH, STAFF PRESENTATION.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
TELL US ABOUT YOUR, UH, SIGNS.
GREG BURQUETTE WITH APEX SIGN GROUP REPRESENTING SECURITY SERVICE.
UM, I DO KNOW BRINGING A SIGN ORDINANCE A SIGN VARIANCE IS LIKE ROLLING A BOULDER UP MOUNT EVEREST, BUT I DO THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF LACK IN STAFF EXPLANATION OF THE REASON FOR THIS VARIANCE, THE UNIQUENESS OF THE PROPERTY WHERE IT'S LOCATED IN THE SHIPS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE PROPERTY SINCE THE EXPANSION OF 1604 AND I 10.
WITH THAT EXPANSION OF THE FREEWAY INTERSECTION THERE, IT HAS SEVERELY RESTRICTED THE VIEWING OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
CURRENTLY SECURITY SERVICE OCCUPIES A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE, THE 66 ACRE DEVELOPMENT IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
THEIR PLANS ARE TO DEVELOP THE REMAINING PROPERTY THAT THEY OWN AND PUT IN HOTELS, RESTAURANTS, POSSIBLE STRIP CENTER UNDER THE CURRENT CODE WITH THE SCENIC OVERLAY DISTRICT.
THE RESTRICTIONS ARE GOING TO FORCE THEM TO PUT UP MULTIPLE SIGNS MAXIMUM TO THE SCENIC OVERLAY DISTRICT BY ALLOWING THEM TO DO THIS ONE SIGN.
IF WE GET IT APPROVED, THE PLAN IS TO GO TO SITTING AND REQUEST A MASTER SIGN AGREEMENT.
WE ARE GOING TO GO IN WITH A COMPLETE REDUCTION ON THE NUMBER, HEIGHT AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SIGNS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT.
SO THIS IS JUST NOT, WE'RE THROWING TO THE WALL OF SINGLE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE.
THIS IS PART OF A MASTER DEVELOPMENT.
THIS ONE VARIANCE REQUEST IS KEY AND INTEGRAL TO DEVELOPMENT OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, AND THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT THIS REQUEST IS.
OTHERWISE, IF IT'S DENIED, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO PUT UP MULTIPLE SIGNS TO MAKE THE SITE VIABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE THE TENANTS INSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT.
ADEQUATE VISIBILITY IN ADVERTISING.
I KNOW PRECEDENCE IS ALWAYS A ISSUE WITH VARIANCES.
UH, I THINK THE UNIQUENESS OF THIS PROPERTY EXCLUDES THAT BEING A ARGUMENT AGAINST IT.
UH, LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK OR VOICEMAILS? NOPE, NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
I THINK I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE, UH, THE CITY SIGN, UH, DEPARTMENT ART DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY
SO, UM, I'M GONNA LEAD OFF WITH A, A, A, A QUESTION BASED ON WHAT THE APPLICANT HAD JUST MENTIONED.
SO HE'S BEEN FORCED TODAY FOR ONE SIGN THAT HE INTENDS TO USE FOR MULTIPLE PURPOSES, BUT HE HAS NOT APPLIED FOR A MASTER SIGN PERMIT YET, CORRECT? CORRECT.
IF WE APPROVE THIS TODAY, COULD HE STILL APPLY FOR A MASTER SIGN PERMIT WITH MULTIPLE SIGNS? YES, SIR.
BUT THERE WOULD'VE TO BE A REDUCTION INVOLVED.
AND THAT'S PART OF THE S AND PS.
BY AFFORDING THEM THE ABILITY TO ADVERTISE WITH THE MAIN SIGN, THEY'RE GONNA GIVE UP SOME HEIGHT AND SQUARE FEET OF THE EXISTING SIGNS THAT INITIALLY WOULD BE ALLOWED UNDER THE CODE.
SEE, THAT'S WHAT I WAS WONDERING.
LIKE IF WE APPROVE THIS TODAY, DOES THAT MEAN YOU JUST, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PERMIT WITH BLINDERS ON BECAUSE YOU KNOW, WE EXCLUDED WHATEVER, UH, EXCESS IS HERE BEFORE US WHEN YOU DO A MASTER PERMIT, BUT YOU DO GET TO TAKE IN CONSIDERATION WHAT IS TO BE BUILT THERE, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
UH, IS THERE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? CRUZ? COMMISSIONER CRUZ.
[01:35:01]
SO SIR, UH, WITH IT BEING THE 50 FEET MAX, WOULD IT STILL BE HIGH ENOUGH FOR IT TO BE SEEN OVER THE EXPRESSWAY? I'M NOT SURE WHO NEEDS TO ANSWER THAT.WELL, I HATE TO BRING THIS UP.
MY APPLICATION ACTUALLY REQUESTED FOR A TALLER SIGN, AND SOMEHOW THROUGH THE PROCESS, THE, THE STAFF DID NOT PUT IN THE CORRECT HEIGHTS, BUT 50 FOOT WOODWORK.
WE WILL HAVE ALSO REQUEST A GRADE SEPARATION ABOVE TO 10 FEET BASED UPON THE PLACEMENT OF THE SIGN IN, IN RELATION TO THE, UH, EXIT RAMP OFF OF, UH, 1604 ONTO I 10.
AND JUST, UH, TO BE CLEAR, IF THIS IS NOT YOUR REQUEST, SIR, THIS IS WHAT WE PRESENTED TO YOU THAT WE WERE GONNA PUBLISH.
SO IF YOU WANT TO RESTART IT, JUST LET US KNOW.
WELL, I KNOW THAT, BUT IN MY APPLICATION IT'S CLEAR I GOT IT.
THIS WAS, THIS WAS PRESENTED TO THE APPLICANT AND THIS WAS SIGNED OFF ON.
SO IF THERE'S ANY ISSUES AND WE NEED TO REPUBLISH THIS, LET US KNOW NOW.
ARE YOU, ARE YOU WANTING TO COME BACK HERE WITH A 60 FOOT THAT'S REALLY UP TO NO, WE'LL GO FORWARD WITH THIS.
IS THERE A COMMISSIONER QUESTION? YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, OKAY, SO I TRA I TRAVELED THIS AREA QUITE A LOT.
HOW, AND YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OTHER PEOPLE WHO BROUGHT SIGN, UH, VARIANCES TO US, THEY'VE SHOWN US HOW THEIR SIGN WOULD COMPARE TO OTHER SIGNS ALONG THE ROAD.
LIKE COSTCO'S JUST RIGHT DOWN THE BLOCK.
UM, DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF HOW MANY OTHER SIGNS THERE ARE AND THEIR SIZES AND LIKE HOW, LIKE, HOW OBTRUSIVE WOULD THIS SIGN BE? UM, AS OPPOSED TO THE OTHER SIGNS.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T WANNA DWARF EVERYBODY ELSE OR NOT GIVE THEM, 'CAUSE THEN THEY'LL COME TO US AND SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, THIS GUY IS 350 SQUARE FEET LARGER THAN US.
WELL, THERE ARE NO MULTI-TENANTS ALONG THAT AREA.
SO YOU AND YOU, IF YOU'RE GONNA COMPARE A SINGLE USE USER SQUARE FOOTAGE AND ALLOWANCE, IT DOESN'T COMPARE TO A MULTITENANT.
THE WHOLE USE OF A MULTI-TENANT IS TO MAKE A, A CONGLOMERATE, AN AGGREGATE TOTAL INTO ONE SINGLE UNIT.
THE CLOSEST SIGN ALONG THAT STRETCH WOULD BE THE GUN HONDA.
AND IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT'S PROBABLY EVERY BIT OF 15 TO 1800 FEET AWAY DOWN ON THE ACCESS ROAD.
COSTCO, THEY DON'T NEED POLE SIGNS.
THEIR BUILDING IS THEIR ADVERTISING.
AND, UH, IT, I THINK THE GUN HONDA IS PROBABLY IN THE 40 FOOT RANGE, PROBABLY 200 SOMETHING SQUARE FEET IF I WAS TO GUESS.
BUT IT'S A SINGLE TENANT USER.
IT IS NOT A MULTI-TENANT DEVELOPMENT SIGN.
WHAT IS THE DRURY HOTEL AGAIN? DRU JUST IS ALSO A SINGLE TENANT USER AT THE INTERSECTION OF THERE OF 1604 AND I 10.
AND THEIR BUILDING IS A, YEAH, AT LEAST A 10 STORY BUILDING.
SO THEY USE THE BUILDING AS THEIR, AS THEIR PYLON SIGN.
HOW MANY TENANTS ARE YOU GONNA HAVE? OH, I HAVE NO IDEA.
THEY KNEW THAT THEY, IT'S NOT DEVELOPED.
THEY JUST HAVE ADDITIONAL 30 SOME ODD ACRES PLUS THAT THEY'RE GONNA DEVELOP.
UH, IT APPEARS THAT THAT SECURITY SERVICES, ACCORDING TO BCA HAS UH, THOSE FOUR LOTS THAT RUN ALONG THAT, THAT OFF STREET.
AND THEN THEY ALSO OWN THE PROPERTY ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE.
BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT COULD POSSIBLY CHANGE RIGHT NOW.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMISSIONER LIN? YES, COMMISSIONER.
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, OKAY, I UNDERSTAND THE HEIGHT, BUT DO YOU REALLY NEED IT TO BE THAT BIG WIDE, IS THERE A WAY THAT IT COULD BE SMALLER EVEN THOUGH IT'S A MULTI-TENANT SIGN? SO THIS ALLOWANCE MATCHES CHAPTER 28.
IF THIS, IF THIS SITE WAS OUTSIDE THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, I'D PULL A PERMIT IN THREE OR FOUR DAYS OR LONGER SOMETIMES, BUT IT WOULD BE APPROVED UNDER NORMAL CHAPTER 28 CODE.
WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING THAT'S OUTSIDE THE STANDARD CODE.
WE ARE OBVIOUSLY ASKING FOR SOMETHING OUTSIDE.
SO YES, WE WILL NEED THAT ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS WORK.
WE'RE TALKING BIG INTI, BIG IN, UH, USERS.
YOU, LIKE I SAID, IT COULD BE A HOTEL.
THEY, THEY CAN'T WORK OFF OF A 50 SQUARE FOOT SIGN ALONG A MAJOR INTERSTATE.
THEY'RE GONNA NEED SOMETHING OF SUBSTANTIAL SIZE IN ORDER TO HAVE VISIBILITY.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? THE QUESTION FOR STAFF IS, COMMISSIONER TALKED ABOUT THE REDUCTION IN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED.
WHAT, WHAT PERCENTAGE IS THAT? IT'S 25%.
SO 25% REDUCTION FROM WHAT THEY WOULD OTHERWISE BE ALLOWED.
[01:40:01]
SO 25%.THAT'S THE MINIMUM THAT WE START WITH.
UH, WITH THE SITE PLAN UP ON THE SCREEN, YOU KNOW, THE, WHERE THE NUMBER TWO IS, IF YOU FOLLOW THE HIGHWAY DOWN THE HARD CORNER APPEARS TO BE OWNED BY GUNN HONDA, I BELIEVE, AND NOT SECURITY SERVICE.
THAT'S WHAT I, I THINK I SAW ON BCA.
UH, BUT, BUT THE MOST OF THE PROPERTY IS THE ONLY FRONTAGE THAT Y'ALL HAVE IS WHERE THE NUMBER TWO IS.
THAT ONE IT'S ABOUT 1,050 FEET AND THERE'S THREE SEPARATE LOTS.
SO EACH LOT GETS A SIGN AND YOU DO NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT SPACING WHEN THERE'S SEPARATE LOTS.
SO THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
UH, IF THERE'S ANY, UNLESS THERE'S ANY MORE QUESTIONS, ANY PUBLIC COMMENTARY VOICEMAILS, THIS IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, WITH THAT I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION THEN.
THANK YOU ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 24 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 4 9.
I MOVE AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRAND REQUEST FOR ONE, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE MAXIMUM 50 FOOT HEIGHT TO INCLUDE 10 ADDITIONAL GRADE FEET TO ALLOW A 60 FOOT HEIGHT, UH, MULTIPLE TENANT SIGN.
AND TWO, WITH 350 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 300 SQUARE FOOT TO ALLOW A 650 SQUARE FOOT SIGN SITUATED AT 15,000 IH 10 APPLICANT BEING APEX SIGN GROUP.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINE SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY AND SUCH THAT A LITTLE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY, UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE THE VARIANCE IS, IS NECESSARY BECAUSE STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ARTICLE PROHIBITS ANY REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGN ON THIS SITE.
CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE SITE SUCH AS THE DIMENSIONS, LANDSCAPE, TOPOGRAPHY, UH, TO A DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE WOULD PROBABLY CAUSE A CESSATION OF LEGITIMATE LONGSTANDING ACTIVE COMMERCIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY PERMITTED A 50 FOOT SIGN HEIGHT, UH, TO INCLUDE A 10 FOOT ADDITIONAL GRADE AT 300 SQUARE FEET.
THE PERMITTED DIMENSION MAKES THIS VARIANCE NECESSARY BECAUSE STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ARTICLE PROHIBITS ANY REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGNS ON THE SITE CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE SITE SUCH AS DIMENSIONS, LANDSCAPE, AND TOPOGRAPHY.
AND THREE, AFTER SEEING ONE OR MORE OF THE, AFTER SEEKING ONE OR MORE OF THE FINDINGS SET FORTH SUB SUBPARAGRAPH ONE AND TWO, THE BOARD FINDS THAT A GRANTING THE VARIANCE DOES NOT HAVE, DOES NOT PROVIDE THE APPLICANT WITH THAT, WITH SPECIAL PRIVILEGES NOT ENJOYED BY OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED OR POTENTIALLY SIMILARLY SITUATED, THE PROPOSED SIGN DOES NOT APPEAR TO PROVIDE A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE.
THAT'S THE ADDITIONS TO THE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SEVERELY RESTRICTS VISIBILITY OF A SIGN THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE SIGN.
REGULATIONS B GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE A SUBSTANTIALLY ADVERSE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL NOT APPEAR TO HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AS A SIGN HEIGHT WILL NOT BE OUTTA CHARACTER FOR AREA AND DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
AND C GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH THE STATE OF PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH THE STATE OF PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER.
FURTHERMORE, THE REQUEST IS SIGN EXCEEDING THE 50 FOOT IN HEIGHT AND 300 SQUARE FOOT SIZE WILL NOT BE OUTTA CHARACTER FOR THE IMMEDIATE AREA IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN A MOTION.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAPLAN.
SO, UM, SO THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING THIS VARIANCE IN PART TO PROVIDE A, UM, MASTER MASTER SCIENCE PLAN HERE.
IN THE END WE'LL HAVE A 25% REDUCTION IN THE OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE.
UM, IN LIEU OF THAT, THAT PUT KIND THAT 10 FOOT HIGH, WE PROVIDE TESTIMONY THAT, THAT EACH OF THESE INDIVIDUAL LOTS COULD, COULD QUALIFY FOR INDIVIDUAL SIGNAGE.
UH, WITH, WITH THE PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF US, WE'LL HAVE ONE MASTER SIGN, WHICH KIND OF LIMITS THE CLUTTER ALSO.
UM, I CAN, THAT IS AN, YOU KNOW, ELEVATED INTERCHANGE THERE.
SO THERE'S NO REAL VISUAL IMPACT GOING ACROSS THE FREEWAY AND HAVING TO SIGN IT, I BELIEVE AT THIS PARTICULAR HEIGHT IS A SAFETY ISSUE.
IT PROVIDES ADEQUATE VISIBILITY FOR THE MOTORS TO BE ABLE TO FIND THEIR DESTINATION, BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, TURN INTO IT WITHOUT CAUSING ANY, ANY ADDITIONAL HAZARD THERE.
COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? UH, I'M KIND OF TORN ON THIS.
I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE 50 FOOT HEIGHT BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE INTERSECTION.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
UM, I THINK EVEN THOUGH THAT THEY COULD GET DIFFERENT SIGNS BECAUSE OF THREE DIFFERENT LOTS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT LESS THAN 650 SQUARE FEET.
I THINK THAT'S AN ISSUE BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING ALONG AND YOU'RE SEEING THIS HUGE SIGN, IT'S DISTRACTING
SO, I MEAN, I THINK A SMALLER VERSION I COULD LIVE WITH.
IS THERE A SQUARE FOOTAGE YOU'D LIKE TO THROW OUT THERE? NO.
[01:45:01]
CAN'T GO ANY LESS THAN, THAN THE, THAN THE 300 THAT'S ALREADY ON THERE.BUT IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? 'CAUSE REMEMBER WE DO NEED NINE VOTES ON THIS.
SO WE'VE HEARD ONE COMMISSIONER THAT'S, THAT'S OPPOSED TO THE SIGNED SIZE.
WE'VE, WE'VE HEARD FROM ONE COMMISSIONER WHO WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THE SIGNED SIZE.
IS THERE ANOTHER, IS THERE ANY SUGGESTIONS OR ANY COMMENTARY? STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS? UM, I WOULD BE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN A 25% INCREASE.
NOT, NOT MORE THAN DOUBLE THE ALLOWED SQUARE FOOTAGE, SO OKAY.
UH, COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? YEAH, I, I I MIGHT EVEN GO TO 400.
SO WE HAVE A, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS YOU'D LIKE TO CHIME IN JUST TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO WOULD BE OPPOSED TO EITHER OF THOSE TWO NUMBERS? UM, COMMISSIONER CRUZ.
I MIGHT GO, I WOULD SAY 55 AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THE WELL THEY'RE ALREADY DOING, THEY WENT DOWN TO 50.
WHAT ABOUT THE SIZE? IS IS THE, THE FOUR? YEAH, I CAN, I COULD LIVE WITH THAT.
COMMISSIONER Z DO YOU ACCEPT A, A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO GO DOWN TO 400? SURE.
I HAVE A QUESTION OF HOW, SO THERE ANY OF THESE AMENDMENTS, HOW WOULD THAT IMPACT THE MASTER SIGN, UH, PLAN THAT'S GOING, THAT'S PROPOSED.
LET ME REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IF YOU CAN COME BACK UP PLEASE.
SO IF THEY, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE 400, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT A MASTER SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION? IT SHOULDN'T AFFECT THE SIGN MASTER PLAN BECAUSE WE WOULD BASE OUR NUMBERS ON WHAT'S ALLOWED BY CO CURRENT CODE.
SO IT DOESN'T, CAN WE ASK THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY AS WELL? YES.
THEY'VE ALREADY REOPENED SO THEY HAVEN'T COME BACK UP IF YOU HEAR THE NUMBER 400 SHOOTING AROUND, WHAT DO YOU THINK? SO THANK YOU.
UM, PLEASE NOTE THE SIX 50 IS NOT ONE AGGREGATE SIGN.
IT'S MULTIPLE SIGNS ON A ARCHITECTURALLY DESIGNED STRUCTURE.
THE PLAN IS TO INCORPORATE GOOD ACCENT MATERIALS, ROCK.
IT'S NOT JUST ONE UNIT ON A POLE.
SO THE 600, THE 400 STILL DOESN'T WORK WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS MUCH LAND AND DEVELOPMENT.
IF IT'S NOT APPROVED IN ORDER TO MAKE IT VIABLE, WE'RE GONNA GO IN THERE AND THERE THE PLAN IS TO PUT UP MULTIPLE SIGNS AS OPPOSED TO ONE.
SO BY DOING THAT, YOU'RE INCREASING THE AGGREGATE HEIGHT SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALL THOSE SIGNS UNDER THE OVERLAY DISTRICT.
I APPRECIATE THE CONCERN ABOUT THE 650 SQUARE FEET.
IT SOUNDS LARGE, BUT WHEN YOU ACTUALLY KNOW THE SIZE OF SIGNS AND YOU SEE 'EM AT A DISTANCE, YOU WOULD PROBABLY BE SHOCKED AT HOW LARGE THEY ARE COMPARED TO WHAT YOUR MIND IS TELLING YOU THINK THEY ARE.
400 DOZEN WHAT ABOUT 600? I MEAN, IF IT'S A MATTER OF 50 SQUARE FEET, YEAH, WE COULD PROBABLY MAKE THAT WORK.
COMMISSIONER BOIS, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YES, SIR.
UH, DO YOU HAVE A, A RENDERING OF AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT ONE OF THESE MULTI SIGNS LOOKS LIKE FOR US? JUST TO, TO HELP US GET THAT, I GUESS OUT OF OUR MINDS.
SO WE DID NOT DO A RENDERING FOR, THERE'S NO DESIGNS YET FOR THIS SIGN.
UM, AGAIN, LET'S, THE CODE DOES NOT RES CODE DOES NOT HAVE ANY DESIGN STANDARDS.
SO NO, I I I JUST THINK SO WE CAN CLARIFY.
'CAUSE 'CAUSE I, I GET WHAT TYPE OF SIGN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
BUT I THINK IF YOU HAD A RENDERING OR AN EXAMPLE OF ANOTHER MULTI SIGN THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, YEAH, I AGREE.
I MEAN, LOOKS LIKE WE THOUGHT ABOUT DOING THAT AT TIMES.
WE DID THAT IN THE PAST FOR VARIANCE AT NOT HERE, BUT AT OTHER CITIES AND THEY GOT HUNG UP WITH THE DESIGN AS OPPOSED TO THIS WAS NOT THE DESIGN, WE WERE JUST GIVING IT AN EXAMPLE.
SO IT'S THE DAMNED IF YOU DO, DAMNED IF YOU DON'T.
WE JUST DECIDED NOT TO DO IT ON THIS ONE TO SAY THAT WE WILL, THAT THE SIGN SECURITY SERVICE IS NOT GOING TO DO AN UGLY SIGN.
NOW THAT'S A MATTER OF OPINION, BUT THEY'RE GONNA INCORPORATE THE LANDSCAPE ROCK.
UH, IT, IT'S NOT GONNA, THEY'RE, THEY'RE JUST NOT GONNA DO IT.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA PUT A, A VALERO SIGN UP ON A POLE THAT I HAVE A QUESTION FROM.
WHAT YOU ON COMMISSIONER? I'M FINISHED.
COMMISSIONER BONNEY STILL HAS A FLOOR.
YEAH, SO THIS ONE'S FOR, FOR CHAIR AND THEN, UH, AND THEN FOR, FOR THE APPLICANT AS WELL, UH, CHAIR.
ARE WE ABLE TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER THAT SAYS, OKAY, WE WOULD APPROVE THIS 650 SIGN FOR MULTI BUT ONLY IF IT'S GOING TO BE USED FOR MULTI-TENANT USE? YEAH, SO FOR LEGAL, CAN THE MOTION, CAN A MOTION BE MADE TO SAY IT'S A MULTI-TENANT SIGN AS OPPOSED TO A SINGLE TENANT SIGN?
[01:50:03]
BUT SORRY, WHAT THE, WELL THE APPLICANT HAS EXPRESSED THAT HIS VARIANCE IS, IS TO PUT A MULTI-TENANT SIGN UP, CAN OUR MOTION AND UH, LOCK THAT IN AND ACTUALLY INCLUDE THAT IN THE MO IN THE MOTION.THAT'S THE APPLICANT'S, UH, UH, INTENT.
AND IT'S PART OF THE, THAT WAS THE APPLICATION AND YEAH, YOU CAN BE REITERATE THAT IN THE WE, IT HAS TO BE MULTI-TENANT IN ORDER TO BE THE MASTER SIGN AGREEMENT.
THOSE TWO DOVE DOVETAIL HAND IN HAND.
THIS IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A SINGLE UNIT COMMISSIONER.
BONNI, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO, SO I, SO I THINK, I THINK IF WE PUT THAT IN, INTO THE VERBIAGE, I THINK IT COULD, UH, REASSURE EVERYBODY HERE THAT THAT'S WHAT THE SIGN'S GONNA BE USED FOR.
AND, AND I THINK IT, IT JUST BECAUSE IT, THAT WOULD, THAT'S NORMALLY THE SIZE THEY WOULD BE, RIGHT? CORRECT.
SO IF THAT'S WHAT THEY NORMALLY ARE AND THAT'S WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO, AND WE PUT THAT INTO THE VERBIAGE, I THINK WE'RE JUST OKAY.
IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YEAH.
COMMISSIONER, WHAT WOULD YOU REALLY THINK YOUR MINIMUM IS? WHAT WOULD YOU FOR THIS MULTI-TENANT SIGN, COULD YOU DO 500? AGAIN? I, I'M GONNA GO BACK TO WHAT WE DID THE STUDY.
WE LOOKED AT WHAT THE, THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT CAN OR MAY OR MAY NOT BE.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE COULD BE FOUR TENANTS AND THAT USE OF THAT SIGN AND THERE'S, THERE'S ACTUALLY GONNA BE MORE THAN FOUR BECAUSE, UH, THERE COULD BE A, A SMALL STRIP CENTER INVOLVED ALSO.
SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
SO ANSWERING THAT QUESTION IS HARD TO ANSWER FOR YOU WITHOUT KNOWING, AND WE JUST DON'T KNOW.
SO WE ARE REQUESTING THE SIX 50, WHICH AGAIN IS UNDER NORMAL CHAPTER 28 CODE.
IF THIS WAS JUST SOUTH OF WARS BLOCK, WE'D BE ABLE TO DO IT WITH NO PROBLEMS. BUT, BUT IT'S NOT, AND SO, UH, 600 SQUARE FEET IS A 20 BY 30 FOOT SIGN AGAIN.
AND IT COULD BE, IT MAY BE THAT'S PRETTY, IT'S NOT YOU, IT COULD BE, UM, A, A DIFFERENT CONFIGURATION.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CONFIGURATION IS.
NOW REMEMBER THERE THE PLAN WOULD MORE THAN LIKELY BE INDIVIDUAL CABINET SIGNS ACCENTED WITH ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES.
OKAY, WELL, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BONILLA.
IT WOULD'VE BEEN NICE TO HAVE SEEN, UH, YOUR, YOUR PLAN.
WE'VE DONE IT BOTH WAYS AND I, I'VE DONE A LOT OF VARIANCE MEETINGS THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF TEXAS AND IN THE COUNTRY.
AND, UH, THIS ONE, WE JUST DON'T, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DESIGN'S GONNA BE.
WE DON'T HAVE AN IDEA, BUT AGAIN, CODE DOES NOT REQUIRE US TO DESIGN IT ANY PARTICULAR WAY.
IS, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER CRUZ? WELL, I'M NOT SURE IF IT WILL BE FOR THE APPLICANT OR FOR STAFF.
I'M STILL TRYING TO GET MY HEAD AROUND THAT 650 SQUARE FEET.
SO IF YOU DO GET IT AT AT LEAST 500 SQUARE FEET, UH, WHAT DO, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE SAYING IT'S GONNA BE MULTIPLE TENANTS, HOW MUCH, APPROXIMATELY HOW MUCH WOULD, EVEN IF YOU SAY YOU HAVE SIX TENANTS, HOW MUCH OF THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD ACTUALLY BE EACH SIGN? AGAIN, I, I HAVE NO IDEA YOU'RE ASKING ME SOMETHING THAT I HAVEN'T DESIGNED OR FIGURED OUT YET.
AGAIN, WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR AN AGGREGATE TOTAL FOR US TO WORK TOWARD.
AND I WILL TELL YOU, UH, INEVITABLY IF A TENANT FIGURES OUT THAT A SMALLER SIGN MIGHT WORK, THEY'RE NOT IN INCLINED TO BUY A BIGGER SIGN.
IF WE APPROVE A NUMBER AND CAN THE APPLICANT APPEAL OUR APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL TO GET THE NUMBER HE ORIGINALLY ASKED FOR? IS THAT, IS IT, IS THAT SOMETHING HE CAN DO? YES.
COMMISSIONER CAPLIN, WE APPROVE.
IF WE APPROVE A HEIGHT VARIANCE, THEN DOES THAT COUNT FOR THE ENTIRE LOT SO HE COULD PUT UP THREE 50 FOOT SIGNS? NO, IT'S FOR THE, IT'S FOR JUST WANNA, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT ONE SIGN, HE'S ASKING FOR ONE SIGN AT THIS POINT.
AGAIN, THIS IS ONE SIGN THAT'S GONNA BE USED AS A MASTER SIGN AGREEMENT TO REDUCE THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE NUMBER AND HEIGHT OF POTENTIAL SIGNS THAT COULD BE PLACED.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE.
CURRENTLY IT'S, IT'S AS RED AT 650 FEET WITH A 50 FOOT HEIGHT.
UM, I'M LOOKING FOR A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
SOMETHING THAT THE COMMISSION THINKS IT CAN PASS.
WE'VE HEARD 400, WE'VE HEARD 3 75.
SO IS THERE ANYBODY HERE WHO IS, WHO IS OPPOSED TO 500? YEAH.
UM, WHAT ABOUT YOU COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? FIVE.
[01:55:01]
SO WE, HOW ABOUT FIVE 50? I'M, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH, UH, 3 75 AND OKAY, SO I'M GONNA JUST START, LET'S JUST, I'M GONNA FRIENDLY, AMEND, UH, TO 500.UH, IS THAT ACCEPTED BY THE MAKER? YES, I'M THE MAKER.
AND, AND, AND COMMISSIONER KAPLAN, YOU WERE THE SECOND.
I HEARD THAT YOU ACCEPTED THAT AS WELL.
VOTE PLEASE FOR A, AN AMENDED MOTION, UH, TO A 500 SQUARE FOOT WITH A 50 FOOT HEIGHT.
AND THE HEIGHT, MR. CHAIR? YES.
10 FOOT VARIANCE TO A 50 FOOT HEIGHT.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? NO, I DO NOT.
COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER, I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR.
IS THERE ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER ON THE PREVAILING SIDE? HEARING NONE.
UM, IS IT POSSIBLE TO BREAK OUT THE HEIGHT AT THIS POINT OR IS THAT INCLUDED WITH THE TOGETHER? WE CAN HEAR ONE FOR THE HEIGHT? NO, THE, THE MOTION WAS FOR BOTH.
YOU NEED A RECONSIDERATION ON, DOES ANYBODY WANNA MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER JUST TO DO THE HEIGHT? I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE HEIGHT.
OKAY, SO THERE'S A MOTION TO RE WAIT.
WAS SHE ON THE PREVAILING SIDE? SHE WAS NOT ON PREVAILING SIDE.
SO WE HAVE COMMISSIONER DEAN, COMMISSIONER STEVENS OR COMM OR COMMISSIONER BONILLA CAN MAKE A MOTION GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE.
WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
UH, SIR, WHERE DID HE GO? DID HE LEAVE? NO, HE'S RIGHT HERE.
SO YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO APPEAL THE CITY COUNCIL AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF.
DOES ANYBODY NEED A BREAK OR SHOULD WE KEEP ROLLING? YEAH.
WE HAVE TWO REQUESTS FOR A BREAK.
WE'LL SEE EVERYBODY BACK IN FIVE TO SEVEN MINUTES.
WE'RE GOING THIS BACK TO END OF SESSION.
ITEM NUMBER 5 11 27 SOUTH HACKBERRY BO 8 24 1 0 3 0 0 1 60.
ADDRESS IS 1127 SOUTH HACKBERRY COUNSEL DISTRICT TWO.
HE REQUESTS FOR ONE A VARIANCE TO ALLOW TWO SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON AN ARM.
FOUR THAT IS LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE.
AND TWO, A 15 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW GARAGE ENTRY TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY.
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH HACKBERRY STREET IN FLORIDA STREET.
HE DEVICE 37 WITHIN DENVER HEIGHTS.
THE LOT IS CURRENTLY VACANT AND THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO DEVELOP IT BY CONSTRUCTION.
ONE TO SERVE AS A DUPLEX AND ANOTHER AS A SINGLE STRUCTURE ON A LOT THAT IS LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE.
ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A GARAGE ENTRY REDUCTION FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY NEXT DOOR.
AND THE FOLLOWING SLIDES ARE YOUR SURROUNDING AREAS.
SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON OUR R FOUR, LESS THAN ONE ACRE AND GARAGE ENTRY FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE VARIANCES.
1 0 3 0 0 1 6 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.
THE GARAGE SETBACK VARIANCES WILL NOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE RIGHT OF WAY AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES REQUIRED IN THE DISTRICT THAT EXIST IN THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT NOTIFICATION PLAN.
WHEN IN OPPOSITION AND RIVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
AND HERE'S THE LETTER FROM DENVER HEIGHTS.
[02:00:04]
OKAY.AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE.
LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
AND, UM, LAST TIME WE WERE HERE, WE WERE TRYING TO GET THE VARIANCES GOING.
SO, UM, I TALKED TO MY ENGINEER AND WE MOVED THE, UH, SEE IF WE CAN MOVE THE SIDEWALK, UH, BACK TO THE STREET IF YOU WANT.
UM, LASER POINTER IF IT'S UP THERE OR WE CAN PROJECT IT.
SO, SO DO YOU WANT ME TO PROJECT IT? YEAH, GO AHEAD.
OH, LET'S, I'LL PROJECT IT AND THEN I'LL GO OVER THERE.
AND THEN YOU CAN USE THE LASER RECORDER AGAINST THAT SCREEN.
SO THAT'S THE ORIGINAL SIDEWALK.
WE'RE MOVING IT BACK TO THE STREET.
AND, UM, ON HAG BERRY WE MADE THE FRONT ENTRY.
WE MADE THE FRONT ENTRY ON HAG BERRY INSTEAD OF FLORIDA STREET AT THE FRONT ENTRY TO, UH, UH, TO HAG UNIT A TO TO UNIT EIGHT.
'CAUSE I THINK ALL OF WERE FACING FLORIDA STREET WITH THE ADDRESS OF HACKBERRY.
SO, UM, WE MADE THE FRONT, FRONT ENTRY ON, UH, ON, UH, HACKBERRY.
THEN UNIT A AND I MEAN B AND C FROM FLORIDA.
WITH, WITH YOU MOVING THE SIDEWALK TO THE STREET, WHAT'S THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK AND THE GARAGE? UH, 17.4.
SO THAT IS YOUR NEW MINIMUM THAT YOU'RE NOW REQUESTING? YEAH, FROM THE SIDEWALK TO THE, TO THE GARAGE.
I'M JUST LETTING THE COMMISSION 'CAUSE IT, IT WAS ADVERTISED FOR A, FOR A 15 FOOT VARIANCE TO, YEAH, WELL, I MEAN, I GOT, I GOT A LITTLE BIT OF ROOM TO PLAY WITH, WITH NOW IF I MOVE THE, IF I'M ABLE TO MOVE THAT SIDEWALK TO THE END OF THE STREET AND Y'ALL GAVE ME THAT VARIANCE FROM THERE.
SO WHAT THAT THE, THE GARAGE SETBACK VARIANCE IS MEASURED TO THE PROPERTY LINE OR TO THE BACK OF THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK.
IF HE MOVES THE SIDEWALK NOW, ALL OF A SUDDEN, IF HE WAS, HIS GARAGE IS NOW 17 FEET AWAY FROM THE BACK OF SIDEWALK, HIS NEED FOR VARIANCE IS LIKE THREE FEET.
WOULD THAT BE IT? UH, I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL WANT TO SEE THE PRODUCT THAT I'M PUTTING ON, UH, JUST, JUST IN CASE IT'S GONNA BE A, SO THAT WOULD BE MY SINGLE STRUCTURE.
AND MY, AND MY DUPLEX WOULD BE THAT INCLUDING THE GARAGE I HAD TOOK OFF THE GARAGE OF THAT ONE.
SO THAT'LL BE UNIT A AND UH, UNIT B AND C.
SO IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? STEVENS, COMMISSIONER STEVENS.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT MAKING THIS A SINGLE STRUCTURE? IT WOULD BE A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP.
UH, JUST 'CAUSE WHEN WE, THE, THE CODE WENT TO EFFECT RIGHT AS SOON AS I TURNED ON, TURNED IN MY PLANS.
SO WE DID THE PLANS ACCORDING TO THE PASSCODE.
SO WHEN I TURNED THEM IN EARLY JANUARY, THE NEW CODE HAD JUST GOTTEN INTO EFFECT.
SO I HAD ALREADY, WHEN WE PLANTED OUT THE PROJECT AND WE MADE THE PLANS AND EVERYTHING, WE HAD GONE WITH THE OLD CODES.
SO NOW IT WOULD BE A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP IF I PUT, 'CAUSE I COULD PUT A TOWNHOMES IN THERE AND IT WOULD BE THREE, EVEN FOUR PROBABLY.
BUT, UM, IF THEY'RE SEPARATED IT WON'T BE, UM, IT WOULD JUST BE A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP ON THE MONEY THAT I ALREADY SPENT AND ALL THE EXTRA STUFF THAT, THAT I GOTTA PUT INTO A TOWN HOME.
ARE, ARE YOU ATTEMPTING TO AVOID FIRE SUPPRESSION REQUIREMENTS? PRO? PROBABLY, YEAH.
'CAUSE THOSE WERE, THOSE WEREN'T ON THE CO I MEAN, WHEN I DID MY PLANS, THEY WEREN'T ON THE CODE YET.
SO WHEN I HAD ALREADY GOT ALL MY, EVERYTHING GOING FOR, FOR THIS PROJECT, WHICH HAS BEEN ABOUT TWO YEARS, IT WASN'T A, A QUICK PROJECT, YOU KNOW, UM, I THINK I PLANNED IT OUT IN 2022.
AND THEN FROM RIGHT THERE, WE HAD THE PLANS, UH, GOING AT THAT TIME, I JUST HADN'T HAD TIME TO BRING THEM IN OR, OR START ON THE PROJECT.
[02:05:02]
WHEN DID, WHEN DID YOU ORIGINALLY SUBMIT TO THE CITY? I SUBMITTED, I BELIEVE IT WAS, UH, I THINK IT WAS EARLY 2023.AND I THINK THE NEW CODE HAD JUST GONE IN DECEMBER OR JANUARY 1ST.
SO IT WAS EARLY JANUARY THAT I SUBMITTED MY PLANS LAST YEAR.
ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? OKAY.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? EZ COMMISSIONER EZ? UH, SIR, DID YOU SAY YOU HAD APPROVAL FROM DENVER HEIGHTS? UH, YES.
I, UM, AS FAR AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, YES I WAS ABLE TO TALK TO THEM.
UH, THE PREVIOUS TIME I, I WASN'T, I DIDN'T KNOW THEY HAD A HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION, BUT I WAS ABLE TO GET WITH THEM.
I MET WITH A COUPLE NEIGHBORS DOWN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TOO AND I GOT SIGNATURES AND EVERY, EVERYBODY WAS FOR IT PRETTY MUCH.
I SHOWED THEM THE PLANS AND I WENT THROUGH A 200, UH, FOOT RADIUS OF THE N OF THE 'CAUSE.
THE LAST TIME WE MET YOU, YOU DIDN'T HAVE APPROVAL FROM THEM OR YOU HAD, YOU HADN'T BEEN ABLE TO MEET WITH THEM, CORRECT? THEY WERE AGAINST IT, BUT THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WE WERE BUILDING.
BUT NOW I HAD, I HAD TIME TO MEET WITH THEM THIS MONTH.
SO JUST FOR ANY STAFF THAT, THAT WASN'T PRESENT THE LAST TIME THIS GENTLEMAN WAS UP? UH, I GUESS, I GUESS THEY WERE IN OPPOSITION TO IT, BUT HE'S NOW SINCE GONE THROUGH THAT, HE HAS APPROVAL NOW FROM THEM.
SO MY QUESTION IS, UH, WITH THREE UNITS YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOUR AND A HALF PARKING OR FIVE PARKING SPACES.
ARE YOU USING THREE GARAGES AND THEN THE DRIVEWAY? YEAH, THREE GARAGES IN THE DRIVEWAY.
EACH, EACH ONE OF 'EM GONNA HAVE AND OKAY.
THAT'S WHY I KIND OF WANTED A GARAGE.
AND YOUR, THE SITE PLAN IN THE PACKAGE IS A LITTLE BLURRY.
WHAT IS THE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE SINGLE STRUCTURE? THIS, THIS, THE, UH, THE DUPLEX STRUCTURE AND THEN THE, THE SIDES? I MEAN, YOU, YOU HAVE OVER 10 FEET BETWEEN YOU? YES, I HAVE 20, IT'S 20 FOOT.
AND THEN ON THE, DO YOU HAVE MORE THAN 10 FEET ON THE LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE? YES.
I HAVE 14 FOOT ON THE HACKBERRY SIDE AND I BELIEVE, YEAH, IT'S OVER 15 FOOT ON THE, THE RIGHT.
IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CRUZ? COMMISSIONER CRUZ, MR. CRUZ.
SO BOTH OF THESE, WELL, I SHOULD SAY BOTH OF THESE UNITS.
SO THEN THEY WOULD ALL ADDRESS TO HACKBERRY OR TO FLORIDA? THEY WHAT ADDRESS TO HACKBERRY? THAT'S THE ORIGINAL ADDRESS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE.
STAFF, IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE SIGNED TO THE FEET? NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE, UH, WE WILL MOVE FORWARD TO A MOTION.
AND AS, AND AS UH, STATED EARLIER, UH, THE VARIANCE FOR THE FRONT GARAGE SETBACK ONLY NEEDS TO BE A THREE FOOT VARIANCE AT THIS TIME.
UH, AS EXPRESSED BY THE APPLICANT, STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 24 DASH 0 3 0 1 60, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR ONE OF VARIANCE TO ALLOW TWO SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON AN RM FOUR THAT IS LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE.
AND TWO, A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A GARAGE ENTRY TO BE 17 FEET FROM THE FRONT PRO OR 17 FEET FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK OF THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK SITUATED AT 1 1 2 7 SOUTH HACKBERRY STREET.
APPLICANT BEING JUAN HERNANDEZ.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE REQUEST WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS ADEQUATE SPACE AND EXISTS ON THE LOT TO PERMIT TWO SEPARATE STRUCTURES AND THE GARAGE ENTRY FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, WHICH WILL NOT IMPACT THE COMMUNITY FEEL OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
TWO, DUE TO DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOUND IS FOUND IS THE IRREGULAR LOT SHAPE AS IT RELATES TO DEPTH COMPARED TO SIMILAR NEARBY LOTS.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE VARIANCE WILL BE OBSERVING THE SPIRIT, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE, AS IT WILL BE ABIDING BY ALL THEIR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS AND NOT IMPOSING ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
SUCH VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY
[02:10:01]
INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.THE VARIANCE WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL, THE VARIANCE WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS DEVELOPMENTS WITH MULTI STRUCTURES OR REDUCED GARAGE SETBACKS HISTORICALLY EXIST IN THE AREA THAT SHOULD BE READ.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DISTRICT.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE, THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY SUCH AS THE SHAPE AND SIZE OF THE LOT.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE MERELY FINANCIAL END OF MOTION.
UM, SO NOW THAT YOU HAVE 17 FEET TO THE, TO THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK, I'M SATISFIED WITH THE DEPTH OF A CAR BEING ABLE TO PARK THERE WITHOUT BLOCKING THE SIDEWALK BEING ALMOST THE DEPTH OF A STANDARD PARKING SPACE.
AND SECONDLY, I THINK THAT TWO STRUCTURES BEING ON THIS LOT THAT WOULD TYPICALLY REQUIRE A SINGLE STRUCTURE MEETS THE SPIRIT OF, OF THE CODE OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT'S NOT OVERCROWDING THE LOT.
AND TO FORCE SOMEBODY TO PUT A SINGLE STRUCTURE ON THIS LOT WITH THREE UNITS WOULD, WOULD CREATE A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP REQUIRING FIRE SUPR SUPPRESSION.
COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH, I'LL BE IN AS WELL.
I MEAN, LAST TIME THE APPLICANT WAS BEFORE US, WE HAD SENT HIM BACK TO TRY TO TALK WITH THE DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UH, HE DID DO THAT AND CAME BACK WITH A LETTER OF SUPPORT.
SO, UH, KIND OF DID THE HOMEWORK AND I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE UNLESS HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER KAPLAN? I CONCUR.
I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF THE FACT.
UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF.
I ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, BO OA 24 1 0 3 0 0 1 6 8.
ADDRESS, 3 28 EAST SUNSET ROAD COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 APPLICANT JOHNNY CANAVAN.
HOMES LLC REQUEST A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT, 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK ON SEVEN LOTS.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG EAST SUNSET ROAD, WEST OF NORTH, NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS AVENUE.
LOCATED WITHIN THE OAK PARK NORTHWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A DEVELOPMENT OF SEVEN HOMES EACH ON THEIR OWN LOT WITH EACH REQUESTING A 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK VARIANCE AND A 10 FOOT OH NO LONGER THE DOING THAT.
SO IT'S JUST THE 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK.
AND THE ADDRESS HAD A PRIOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION IN DECEMBER, 2023, BUT WAS WITHDRAWN BEFORE CONSIDERATION.
SUBJECT, PROPERTY SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THE REAR SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO OA 24 1 0 3 0 0 1 6 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, SUFFICIENT SPACE WILL REMAIN IN THE REAR SETBACK TO PROVIDE AMPLE SPACE FROM NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES FOR THE PURPOSES OF FIRE SAFETY AND WATER RUNOFF.
AND THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTIES ARE LOCATED.
STAFF MAILED OUT 82 NOTICES IN FAVOR.
AND IN OPPOSITION OUTSIDE OF 200 FEET WERE FIVE.
AND THOSE ARE TO THE NORTH OF THE BOUNDARY RANGE.
AND OAK PARK NORTHWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION RESPONDED AS NEUTRAL.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S LETTER.
[02:15:15]
AND HERE'S THE ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE.
ALRIGHT, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
HEY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
UM, THE PROJECT I, I PURCHASED THE, UH, THE PROJECT FROM THE PRIOR APPLICANT.
UM, NOT REALLY SURE WHY SHE DECIDED TO SELL AND GO ON TO DOING OTHER, OTHER PROJECTS, BUT, UM, SINCE THE TIME OF THESE OPPOSITIONS THAT CAME IN, I'VE HAD A MEETING ON SITE WITH, UH, WITH THE NEIGHBORS IN THE 200 FOOT RADIUS, UM, ACROSS THE STREET IN THE SUNSET VILLAS, ONE OF THE OPPOSITION LETTERS.
I DON'T KNOW IF IF, DID STAFF GET THE, THE ONE WHERE HE CHANGED IT? WHICH ONE? UH, REYNOLDS.
ANYWAY, THE, UH, ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN WHO WROTE, WROTE ONE FROM ACROSS THE STREET AFTER THE MEETING WALKED ACROSS AND IMMEDIATELY CHANGED HIS AND SENT STAFF UP A CHANGE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WENT FROM A NO TO A, TO A, AT LEAST A NEUTRAL.
UM, THE, ALL THE NEIGHBORS ON THE WEST SIDE ARE IN APPROVAL OF IT.
WE'VE DISCUSSED MOVING WINDOWS ON ON HOUSES.
WE'VE DISCUSSED SHIBBY, WE'VE DISCUSSED FENCES, UM, ALL OF THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
WHAT ALSO TOLD THEM WAS THESE HOUSES ARE CURRENTLY ABOUT 28 TO 30 FEET TALL.
I THINK THE ZONING, IT ALLOWS FOR, FOR 35.
THE REASON FOR THE SETBACK, THE MASTER BEDROOM'S DOWNSTAIRS, UM, I REALLY WOULD PREFER NOT TO MOVE IT UPSTAIRS.
IF I DO THAT, I'M GONNA HAVE TO TOP HEAVY THE HOUSE AND LOSE KIND OF THE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE HOUSE.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S GONNA BECOME MORE OF A BOX.
I CAN DO THAT AND I WOULD, IF I HAVE TO MOVE THEM UP HIGHER, I CAN MAKE MORE MONEY.
THESE AREN'T MCMANSIONS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UM, MOST OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE, ARE, THAT ARE IN OPPOSITION ARE NOT AFFECTED BY, IN FACT, ALL THE SINGLE RESIDENT HOMES THAT, THAT ADJOIN THE HOUSE ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE ARE IN APPROVAL.
THE LARGE GROUP OF EXES, WHICH REALLY MADE IT LOOK PRETTY, IS A CONDOMINIUM.
UM, AND SO, AND I'VE ALSO EXPLAINED TOO, WHICH IS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THEY KIND OF CHANGED THEIR MIND ACROSS THE STREET.
THERE WAS A PICTURE YOU SAW OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE NORTH SIDE AND THEY ALL HAVE 10 FOOT SETBACKS.
I'LL JUST START WITH SOME QUESTIONS THEN.
WHEN, WHEN DID YOU PURCHASE THIS? FEBRUARY.
[02:20:01]
YOU'RE AWARE THAT ABOUT THE PLATTING ISSUES AND THE WATER AND SEWER ISSUES OF THIS THING, RIGHT? WHAT ABOUT 'EM? WELL, SAWS REQUIRES A 50 FOOT WIDTH.YOU'RE PROVIDING A 25 FOOT WIDTH IN THE MIDDLE.
SO HOW ARE YOU GONNA GET THEY'VE, EVERYTHING'S BEEN PASSED ON ON THAT.
EVERYTHING'S GONE THROUGH STAFF.
I MEAN, I HAVE SITE PERMIT READY TO GO.
WELL, DO YOU HAVE A SAS GCP PERMIT? YEAH, HE HAS A COUNTER PERMIT.
YEAH, WE'VE GOT COUNTER PERMIT.
BECAUSE I TALKED TO SAS EARLIER TODAY.
THEY SAID THAT YOU DIDN'T HAVE ONE.
AND I RAISED A QUESTION WITH STAFF.
SEE THIS, THIS SITE WAS PROCESSED LIKE IT WAS AN IDZ DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S OWNED WHAT? R FIVE MM-HMM.
SO IDZ IF THIS AS AN R FIVE DEVELOPMENT, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY GOING DOWN THE MIDDLE, AT LEAST A 30 FOOT PAVED AREA.
YOU GOT 25, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LOOP WATER MAIN.
'CAUSE YOU CAN'T HAVE WATER SERVICES ACROSS THE LOT LINES.
SO WHEN YOU HAVE A LOOP WATER MAIN AND THOSE MAINS HAVE TO BE 10 FEET AWAY FROM YOUR SEWER LINES AND EACH HOUSE HAS TO HAVE THEIR OWN SEWER LINE, IT JUST SEEMS ODD THAT IMPRACTICAL, THAT THIS COULD EVER BE BUILT WITHOUT EVERYTHING HAVING TO MOVE.
AND I RAISE CONCERNS WITH THE CITY, AND I'D LIKE THAT POSE.
SO WHEN THIS WAS PROCESSED AS AN AMENDING PLAT TO CHANGE THAT PRIVATE WATER MAIN TO A PUBLIC, THAT CAUSED THE EXTENSION OF MUNICIPAL FACILITIES, WHICH THEREFORE MADE IT NOT ALLOWED TO BE PROCESSED AS AN AMENDING PLAT IN APRIL.
SO IS THE CITY GOING TO BE ACCEPTING THAT PLA THAT VIOLATES COVENANT D OF REASON 11 OF THE AMENDING PLA CODE? AND I WANTED TO KNOW IF, AND IT IS UP TO YOU, THE CITY TO DO IT.
IF THE CITY WANTS TO HONOR THAT PLA THEY CAN, BUT IT'S, IT'S THE, THE ACTION OF USING THE AMENDING PLAT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT, UH, WAS NOT ALLOWED.
IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE AS A FULL REPL, WHICH MEANS THIS WHOLE SITE SHOULD HAVE BEEN RE-LOOKED AT BY ALL AGENCIES, WHICH MEANS EVERYTHING SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN BIGGER, WIDER, UH, CERTAIN VARIANCES THAT ALREADY BEEN RECEIVED.
LIKE THE VARIANCE OF THE WIDER SIDEWALK ON SUNSET, THE VARIANCE OF NO SIDEWALKS INSIDE THE PROPERTY, THE, THE STREET WIDTH VARIANCES.
BUT WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY IS, I AM CONCERNED THAT WHEN YOU TRY TO GO IN AND TRY TO BUILD PUBLIC MAINS IN HERE AND PUT IN SIX, OR I'M SORRY, FIVE TO SEVEN SEVERED SEWER LINES THAT RUN INDEPENDENTLY TO EACH HOME, WHICH IS WHAT SAWS REQUIRES, REQUIRES IT'S GONNA HAVE A RESULT OF MAKING EVERYTHING WIDER IN THE FRONT.
I ALSO DIDN'T SEE ANY CCPS EASEMENTS IN THE FRONT.
CURIOUS TO SEE HOW YOU'RE GONNA GET ELECTRIC.
'CAUSE THEY USUALLY WANT 10 FEET SEVEN ON THIS S SC SIX BOX.
SO I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT BY THE TIME YOU'RE DONE GETTING ALL YOUR UTILITIES, YOUR LOTS CONFIGURATION AND WHERE YOU THINK EVERYTHING IS GONNA BE IS GONNA BE GROSSLY DIFFERENT.
AND SO I I I FEEL VERY UNCOMFORTABLE REVIEWING ME PERSONALLY.
A SETBACK VARIANCE WHEN THERE'S SO MANY OF THESE ISSUES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN RESOLVED YET.
UM, I KNOW THAT IT'S A HARDSHIP, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A SITE ACROSS THE STREET THAT PURPOSELY DIDN'T DO AN IDZ DEVELOPMENT AND THEY COORDINATED HEAVILY, IF ANY, ANYONE ON THIS BOARD REMEMBERS THEY COORDINATED HEAVILY WITH THE COMMUNITY, THE HOA, THE CITY COUNCIL'S OFFICE.
'CAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANNA SEND THE PRESIDENTS OF AN IDZ ZONING DEVELOPMENT.
IF YOU WERE ZONE IDZ, ALL THESE ISSUES WOULD GO AWAY.
BUT IT'S NOT IDC AND I DIDN'T SEE ANY COORDINATION LIKE YOUR, THE NEIGHBORS A ACROSS THE STREET DID THAT WE HEARD PREVIOUSLY.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST, I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT THIS AND I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU WANT TO OFFER OR TELL THE DIVISION BEFORE WE HEAR IT.
UM, WELL, NO, THAT'S KIND ALL NEWS TO ME.
I'VE, I'VE, UH, HAVE SITE WORK SCHEDULED TO START.
UM, CPS HAS, HAS APPROVED, UH, UH, THEY'VE GOT THEIR, UH, RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT IS, IS STARTING TODAY.
UM, THE CONTRACTORS WORKED WITH SAWS, UM, THE SITE CONTRACTORS.
SO I, I'M, YOU'VE, UH, I'M A LITTLE KIND OF SHOCKED ABOUT ALL THAT.
WELL, I MEAN, I, I JUST NEED TO HEAR.
I, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S SOME INFORMATION LACKING FOR ME TO, FOR ME TO BE COMFORTABLE WITH.
THIS, WELL, UH, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? UH, NO.
I, I REMEMBER THE ORIGINAL, UM, HEARING ALSO, AND THERE WERE A LOT OF NEIGHBORS WHO WERE OPPOSED TO THIS.
AND WHILE YOU DO HAVE A FEW, WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO GET THE OTHER PEOPLE, UM, YOU KNOW, TO FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS? I THINK ONE OF THE ISSUES TOO WAS ACROSS THE STREET, THERE'S A LOT OF OPEN SPACE IN THE FRONT, UH, OF THE HOUSES.
AND WE ALLOWED THEM TO BE SET BACK FURTHER IN, IN THIS INSTANCE, AS I REMEMBER, THERE'S THE, ONE OF THE ISSUES WAS TURNAROUND THAT, THAT THE INTERIOR ROAD WAS VERY NARROW.
AND THAT WAS A BIG ISSUE FOR PEOPLE BECAUSE THERE WERE TOO MANY HOUSES, UM, THERE.
UM, SO THAT'S JUST MY COMMENT IS I,
[02:25:01]
I ALSO HAVE SOME RESERVATIONS AND, UH, A QUESTION FOR STAFF.THE LAST TIME I ASKED THE QUESTION, UH, AN ADDRESSING ISSUANCE IS SET, BUT EVERYTHING WAS BASED OFF OF SUNSET.
HAS THAT BEEN REVISED TO HAVE A DRESSING OFF THE, UH, UNNAMED INGRESS? EGRESS EASEMENT.
SO THEY DON'T HAVE A, UM, ADDRESS YET OFF OF THE, UH, EASEMENT.
THIS WAS ADVERTISED WITH THE, UH, LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
THE ADDRESS IS KIND OF LIKE A, SEE WHAT THE WAY CITY CODE READS IS THAT WHEN YOU, A REVOCABLE INGRESS EGRESS TO GET ACCESS TO LOTS THAT AREN'T IDZ, YOU HAVE TO NAME THE INGRESS EGRESS, GET YOUR ADDRESSING OFF THE INGRESS EGRESS, WHICH AFFECTS WHAT'S YOUR SIDE SETBACK, WHAT'S YOUR REAR SETBACK.
CURRENTLY THE ADDRESSING ISSUANCE BY THE CITY IS OFF THE SUNSET.
SO THAT WOULD MAKE THE, THE EASEMENTS THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR NOW, THEORETICALLY, YOUR SIDE.
AND SO THIS APPLICATION IS ASKING FOR A 20 FOOT REAR AS IF IT WAS ADDRESSED OFF THE INGRESS, EGRESS EASEMENT WITH THE NAMED EASEMENT.
DID YOU GET A REVISED ADDRESSING ISSUANCE ON THAT? I I, I, I'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND GO CHECK.
I, I REALLY THOUGHT I WAS DEALING WITH THE NEIGHBORS ON AS FAR AS ADDRESSING THE NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS.
AND, UH, IS THERE A WAY I CAN GET A CONTINUANCE TO OH, ABSOLUTELY.
I MEAN, I, I'M NOT A, I I I JUST THINK THAT THERE'S SO MANY PENDING ISSUES
AND SO I, I AM NOT OPPOSED ANYTHING, BUT IT'S NOT UP TO JUST ME.
IT'S UP TO SOMEONE TO MOVE FOR THAT OR WHATNOT.
SO IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE ANY, UM, COMMISSIONER BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENTARY? COMMISSIONER CRUZ? THANK YOU.
UM, MY ONLY CONCERN IS YOU'RE MAKING, IT'S SEVEN LOTS.
YOU'RE MAKING A HOME IN EACH ONE.
SO EACH ONE IS GONNA BE TWO STORIES AND WHAT IS IT? THREE BEDROOM? YES, MA'AM.
TO ME THAT'S STILL NOT ENOUGH PROPERTY FOR WHAT YOU WANNA MAKE, SO I DON'T KNOW.
BUT I AGREE WITH, WITH THE CHAIR, IT, THERE ARE STILL A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED BEFORE WE CAN SAY YES.
STAFF, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTARY? ANYONE, SENATOR, SPEAK? NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'D LIKE TO TAKE A SECOND AND ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAD.
SO IT HAS NOT, UH, RECEIVED A DIFFERENT ADDRESS.
I DON'T SEE ANOTHER APPLICATION AS OF YET.
THE LAST PLAT THAT I HAVE ON RECORD IS A MAJOR PLAT.
UM, AND I'M NOT SEEING THE AMENDING ONE THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
YEAH, THAT'S THE ONE THAT I HAVE.
I HAVE A SUBDIVISION IN 22, THE ABBEY AT SUNSET.
UM, BUT IT'S STILL MARKED PRIVATE, UM, FOR THE EASEMENT.
IT'S NOW BEEN CHANGED TO THE ENCLAVE AT SUNSET.
AND THAT, I, I, I PULLED THAT FROM THE COUNTY RECORDS.
UH, WHAT THAT PLAT DID WAS THE, THE PREVIOUS PLAT MADE IT A PRIVATE WATER AND SEWER THAT STOPPED AT THE CPS EASEMENT.
THE AMENDING PLAT EXTENDED IT IT TO THE ROAD, BUT THEN THEY MADE IT A PUBLIC WATER MAIN.
BY DOING THAT, THEY'RE, THEY'RE CAUSING THE EXTENSION OF MUNICIPAL FACILITIES.
IT WASN'T ALLOWED TO BE PROCESSED AS AN AMENDING PLAT.
THEREFORE, YOU KNOW, IT NEVER WENT BACK.
AND I'M A MY FEAR WAS, IS THAT BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE, SORRY, HOLD ON.
A LOT OF PEOPLE THOUGHT THIS WAS AN IDZ STYLE DEVELOPMENT.
THAT IT, IT BY THE, IF CPS LOOKS AT THIS, AGAIN, AS A REPL, SAS LOOKS AT THIS AS AGAIN, AS A REPL, YOU'RE GONNA START SEEING THAT INGRESS, EGRESS EASEMENT GET A LOT WIDER.
AND I, AND THAT JUST IS WHAT'S CONCERNED, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE SETBACKS AT BAY? AND THE UDC CODE WOULD THEN REQUIRE IT TO BE A NAMED INGRESS EGRESS WITH WHAT WOULD CHANGE, WHAT IS A REAR, WHAT IS A SIDE, ESPECIALLY ON THE TEE PART OF IT.
SO I JUST, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S, THERE'S SOME THINGS MOVING AND THAT, THAT NEED TO BE RESOLVED BEFORE, I MEAN, I'M COMFORTABLE.
BUT YEAH, I I, IT ISN'T IT ALSO THE ISSUE OF FIRE AT FIRETRUCK, ACCESS TO THAT, YOU KNOW, OH, THERE, THERE'S, THERE WAS, IT WAS TOO NARROW.
HE'S, HE'S NOT EXCEEDING THE HEIGHT.
SO THE FIRE TALKING ABOUT THE WIDTH OF THE STREETS WORK.
WASN'T THAT THE ISSUE? AT LEAST 20 FOR A FIRE LANE? HE HAS LESS THAN 30 LOTS.
RIGHT AT, AT THIS, AT THIS TIME.
BUT IF, UM, IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR A CONTINUANCE.
IF, AND IF ANYONE WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO THAT, HOW MUCH TIME WOULD YOU NEED? WHEN'S THE NEXT CONTINUANCE? WE CAN HEAR YOU IN TWO WEEKS IF YOU WANT.
WHAT ARE WE, WHAT ARE TRYING, WHAT INFORMATION IS HE GONNA COME BACK
[02:30:01]
WITH? I, I, I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR HIM TO, UM, GET, GET AN EMAIL FROM SAS.I WANT TO, I'D LIKE TO HEAR, I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO HEAR HOW CPS IS GONNA BE PUTTING IN THEIR SERVICES.
IF YOU, YOU'RE PUTTING IN A OVERHEAD, UH, TRANSFORMER ON SUNSET GOING DOWN TO AN SEC BOX, THEY'RE GONNA WANT AT LEAST A SEVEN FOOT EASEMENT FOR THAT, THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO SHARE WITH SAWS.
AND WITH SAWS, BECAUSE IT'S A LOOP MAIN, THEY'RE GONNA WANT TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, FIVE TO SEVEN FEET.
THE MAIN 10 FEET, THE SEWER LATERALS 10 FEET, THE MAIN FIVE TO SEVEN FEET, AND THEN THE CPS ON THE SIDES, THIS THING COULD GET 20 FEET WIDER BY THE TIME WE'RE DONE, WHICH COMPLETELY AFFECTS HOW ALL THESE EASEMENTS COME IN.
PLUS IF HE REAPPLY FOR AN ADDRESS OFF THESE INGRESS EGRESS, THAT CHANGES WHERE OUR SETBACKS ARE.
AND SO I THINK THAT WITH THOSE ISSUES, I JUST DON'T FEEL, I PERSONALLY DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE TODAY.
I'D LIKE TO SEE A CONTINUANCE.
AND SIR, WE WOULD, UH, PROBABLY SUGGEST AT LEAST A MONTH, IF NOT MORE, ONLY BECAUSE WE WANNA GET HIM CONNECTED WITH, WITH EVERYONE.
AND ON TOP OF THAT, WE MAY NEED TO RE ADVERTISE BASED ON WHATEVER THE SETBACKS REALLY NEED TO BE.
WHAT MEETING WOULD THAT TAKE US TO? NOVEMBER 4TH IS ONE MONTH.
IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT HAS, UH, WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT? OR HAS ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON? MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE TO NOVEMBER 4TH.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A CONTINUANCE ON NOVEMBER 4TH.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON.
LET'S CONTINUE TO, UH, NOVEMBER 4TH.
APPRECIATE, PLEASE GET WITH CPS.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, I MEAN ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, BO OA DASH 24 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 72.
ADDRESS BEING 30, 50 AND 30 54 MACARTHUR AVENUE COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR, APPLICANT ONE.
STOP CODE LLCI REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOUR DWELLING UNITS IN TWO SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON TWO ABUTTING RM.
FOUR LOTS THAT ARE LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE ZONING.
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF THE SOUTHWEST MIL.
MILITARY DRIVE EAST OF NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY AND A QUARTER OF A MILE WEST OF SOMERSET ROAD ON MACARTHUR AVENUE.
THE APPLICANT ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS PROPOSING DEVELOPMENT OF FOUR SEPARATE DWELLING UNITS ON TWO ABUTTING LOTS, AS THE TWO PROPERTIES ARE ZONED.
R IN FOUR ON LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE.
MULTI-UNIT CONSTRUCTION IS LIMITED TO A SINGLE STRUCTURE.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR FOUR DETACHED MULTI-FAMILY UNITS ON EACH LOT PERMIT PENDING THE OUTCOME OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR FOUR SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON RM FOUR, LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE.
UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO OA DASH 24 DASH 0 3 1 7 4 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE VARIANCES ARE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS MULTIPLE STRUCTURES ON A LOT UNDER ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE PROMOTES OVERCROWDING AND SMALLER LOTS.
TWO WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES LEADING TO POTENTIAL CONFLICTS AND NOT FITTING THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT.
TWO IN OPPOSITION, UH, TO ONE OPPOSED OUTSIDE OF 200 UH FEET.
AND NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITH THIS LOCATION.
[02:35:24]
AND THIS ONE IS THE ONE IN OPPOSITION OUTSIDE OF 200 FEET.AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
UM, GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS.
UM, THIS PROJECT BEGAN WELL BEFORE THE, THIS, THIS SECTION OF THE CODE WAS ADOPTED.
UM, JUST TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF TIMELINE, I'M GONNA JUMP HERE, JUMP TO THE TIMELINE.
UM, WE MET WITH THE COSA CONSULTATION TEAM IN JANUARY 20, 20, 22.
UH, WE DISCUSSED OUR DEVELOPMENT PLANS, UM, AND BASED ON THE INPUT FROM THE CONSULT CONSULTATION TEAM HERE IN COSA AND OUR OFFICE, THE OWNER PURCHASED A LOT.
WE SUBMIT, WE, WE SUBMITTED A PLAT ALONG WITH A SITE PLAN ON MAY 6TH, 2022.
WE FOLLOWED BY A TREE PERMIT THAT WE APPLIED FOR WITH A SITE PLAN, WHICH WAS SUBMITTED ON 28TH OF SEPTEMBER, 2022.
AND WAS APPROVED ON OCTOBER THE 2020 FIRST.
THE CODE WAS ADOPTED, UH, JANUARY 1ST, 2023.
WE THEN SUBMITTED FOR ADDRESSING JUNE 6TH, 2023.
WE SUBMITTED A COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN ON JUNE 15TH.
UH, THE PLAN EXAMINER DID COMMENT ON THAT ABOUT NOT ADHERING TO THE UDC CODE, BUT LATER IT WAS APPROVED, UM, ON MAY 6TH, 2022.
WE THEN SUBMITTED A TREE, A EVR WITH A SITE PLAN, WHICH WAS SUBMITTED ON DECEMBER THE FIRST 20 20, 20 23.
AND IT WAS APPROVED JANUARY 16TH, UH, 2024.
ONCE WE SUBMITTED THAT COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN AND IT WAS APPROVED, WE IMMEDIATELY BEGAN WORKING ON OUR PROJECT, THE INFRASTRUCTURE, PUTTING IN, UH, WATER, SEWER, AND ELECTRICAL AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
I WANNA SHOW HERE THAT ADDRESSING WAS APPROVED JUNE 6TH, UH, 2023.
UM, SITE PLANS WERE SUBMITTED.
UM, IT, IT, NOBODY WAS IN THE DARK, UH, REGARDING THE PROJECT.
UM, AGAIN, IT WAS WELL BEFORE THE ADOPTION OF THAT CODE.
SO WE'RE SEEKING AS, AS FAR AS GRANDFATHERING PRIOR TO, UM, THE ADOPTION OF THAT CODE.
ALSO, I WANNA SHOW HERE THAT OUR COMMERCIAL SITE APPLICATION WAS APPROVED BY THE REVIEWER.
AND THIS WAS AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE CODE, ASSUMING THAT BECAUSE WE WERE GRANDFATHERED BECAUSE WE STARTED WELL BEFORE THE ADOPTION OF THE CODE, IT WAS APPROVED.
AND WHICH BRINGS US TO TODAY, UM, THE RESIDENTIAL REVIEW STATUS BELOW, IT WAS APPROVED BY RESIDENTIAL ZONING, BUT UP TOP IT'S BEEN HELD UP, UM, IN THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING REVIEW PROCESS.
UH, DID YOU PURSUE VESTED RIGHTS ON THIS? I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE A PLAT LOCKING YOU IN PRIOR TO 2023? WE DID, CORRECT? YES.
TELL US ABOUT MORE ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
WE SAID YES, WE DID APPROVE FOR VESTED RIGHTS.
UH, AND THE, THE RESPONSE BACK FROM THE CITY WAS THAT ZONING CANNOT BE VESTED.
SO WE CAME BACK AND, AND WE'RE HERE IN FRONT OF YOU PRESENTING THIS CASE.
BUT WE DID TRY GOING, THE VESTED RIGHTS ZONING CANNOT BE VESTED.
I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST LIFE SAFETY.
THEY ALREADY HAVE THEIR ZONING OF OUR RM FOUR.
UH, BUT THERE, THE PLAT DOESN'T PRECLUDE DOESN'T SHOW TWO, YOU KNOW, SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON IT.
NOTHING THAT THEY SUBMITTED UNTIL JUNE OF 2023, WHICH WAS WELL AFTER SHOWS THAT THEY HAD ANY INTENTION OF BUILDING MULTIPLE STRUCTURES ON THE LOT.
SO I SAW THE SITE, I SAW THAT YOU SUBMITTED A DRAINAGE REPORT WITH YOUR PLAT THAT HAD SEPARATE STRUCTURED.
SO DID YOU APPLY FOR VESTED RIGHTS? WE DID APPLY FOR VESTED RIGHTS, YES, WE DID.
BUT IT WAS NOT, IT WAS NOT, UH, IT WAS DENIED BECAUSE, UH, THEY CANNOT, UM, UH, ZONING IS CANNOT BE VESTED.
I MEAN, I'VE PERSONALLY APPLIED FOR VESTED RIGHTS ON AN URBAN CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT AND GOT IT APPROVED FOR ZONING ISSUES BECAUSE MY PLAT PREDATED THE OVERLAY DISTRICT ON I 10.
SO I, I DON'T KNOW WHO TOLD YOU THAT IT WAS THE, UH, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE OR THROUGH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
I WOULD PROBABLY LOOK INTO THAT, BUT IT'S STILL IN THERE.
IT'S STILL OUR BEST TO WRITE APPLICATION IS STILL
[02:40:01]
THERE.BUT, UH, BUT WE DID TRY AND, UH, AND AGAIN WITH THE, LIKE YOU'RE SAYING, WHEN WE SUBMITTED FOR THE PLAT, OUR STONE WATER HAD THE SITE PLAN.
YEAH, I, I KNOW I'VE DONE A LOT, A LOT OF VESTED RIGHTS OVER, BUT DO YOU KNOW THE APPELLATE IS PLANNING COMMISSION FOR VESTED RIGHTS? DID YOU ATTEMPT TO GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? NO, WE HAVE NOT.
SHOULD YOU BE GOING TO THEM FIRST BEFORE SEEING US FOR THE VESTED RIGHTS? I ONLY HAVE A WITHDRAWN RECORD ON THIS.
WELL, IT'S PROBABLY WITHDRAWN.
WELL, IF IT'S WITHDRAWN, IT'S WITHDRAWN.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? OKAY.
UM, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTARY VOICEMAILS, UH, CITIZENS? WE HAVE, UH, THREE VOICEMAILS AND THREE SPEAKERS ACTUALLY.
WHAT WAS YOUR NAME, SIR? DID YOU SIGN IN? I DID SIGN IN.
SO THERE'S TWO SPEAKERS AND THREE VOICEMAILS.
LET'S HEAR OTHER VOICEMAILS FIRST.
HI, THIS IS COLLEENA AND I LIVE AT 3 0 3 9 MACARTHUR AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 1.
MY DIRECT LINE IS 2 1 0 6 0 5 6 8 8 0.
I AM CALLING ON REGARDING CASE NUMBER B AS IN BOY, OH A DASH 24 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 4.
I'M CALLING TO SAY I'M OPPOSED TO THE NEW BUILDING BEING, UH, BEING BUILT ON PROPERTY 3 0 5 0 AND 3 0 5 4 MACARTHUR AVENUE.
UH, THE REASON IS FOR THIS IS WE DID NOT NOTIFY OF THE OTHER APARTMENTS THAT WERE BEING BUILT ON THE OTHER SIDE.
THIS HAS JUST CAUSED MORE, UH, TRAFFIC OVER HERE.
IT IS MORE SHOOTINGS OVER HERE.
THIS IS GONNA JUST CAUSE MORE IN INCONVENIENCES FOR THE NEIGHBORS.
THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME RESIDENTIAL AREA.
THIS IS RACHEL LOCKETT ON THIRTY FORTY THREE MACARTHUR AVENUE.
REGARD THE CASE NUMBER BO OH EIGHT DASH 24 DASH 1 0 3 0 1 74.
UH, REGARDING, UH, THE LETTER THAT I RECEIVED, I'M AGAINST IT.
UH, THERE IS A LOT OF REASONS.
UH, THERE WILL BE TOO MUCH TRAFFIC GOING ON.
UH, TOO MUCH ROBBERY, TOO MUCH, UH, PEOPLE THAT WE WILL NOT KNOW COMING INTO THE APARTMENTS.
UM, THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFICKING GOING ON DOWN THE STREET.
THERE'LL BE A GARCIA 30 45 MACARTHUR AVENUE, TWO TEN FOUR TWO TWO THREE FIVE SEVEN FOUR.
UH, SO WE HAVE ALFRED, UH, MORENO.
STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS.
HELLO, MY NAME'S ALFRED MORENO.
UM, THIS, YOU CAN, UH, JUST, UH, UH, START OFF SAYING THAT ON THE MIC, PLEASE.
UH, IT'S THE FIRST TIME ACTUALLY DOING THIS.
UM, A LITTLE NERVOUS, UH, DIDN'T PLAN FOR THIS.
WE WEREN'T AWARE OF THIS GOING ON.
WE WEREN'T NOTED, LIKE, NOT THIS, LIKE, HEY, WE'RE GONNA BE BUILDING THIS RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
WE ACTUALLY LIVE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION, WHICH IS, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE BUILDINGS TOWARD THE LEFT, UM, WE'VE BEEN THERE 40 PLUS YEARS, UM, GREW.
UM, WE KNOW ALL THE, THE NEIGHBORS THERE.
YOU GOT THE ES, THE GAR, UH, THE GARZAS, THE LOCKS.
I MEAN, IT'S LIKE A FAMILY ORIENTED, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I FEEL LIKE I'M VERY AGAINST IT STRONGLY.
UM, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE EIGHT UNITS.
IMAGINE YOU LIVING THERE ALL YOUR LIFE AND THEN YOU GOT EIGHT UNITS COMING OUTTA NOWHERE.
YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE PEOPLE COMING OUTTA NOWHERE IN AND OUTTA THESE PLACES.
I GOT MY MOTHER THAT LIVES THERE.
I GOT CONCERNS FOR HER BEING THERE.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT, I MEAN, IT'S JUST LOOKING AT THE, THE PICTURES ON WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO, I'M TOTALLY AGAINST IT.
SO HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION AND, UH, THINK ABOUT US.
I KNOW IF THIS GETS APPROVED, I THINK IT'S GONNA PUSH US OUT.
IT'S GONNA LOWER THE MARKET OF OUR VALUE OF THE HOME TO ACTUALLY SELL IT.
SO I THINK IT'S A BAD DECISION ALL THE WAY AROUND.
UM, I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THIS WAS LIKE A COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD NOW, UP THE STREET WITHIN 300 FEET, YOU GOT OTHER DUPLEXES GOING ON.
YOU GOT DOWN THE STREET, YOU GOT OTHER DUPLEXES GOING ON.
I, WE DIDN'T EVEN VERY MUCH AWARE OF THIS.
SO, AND THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO ME NOW, SO STRONGLY AGAINST IT.
AND I HOPE YOU GUYS TAKE THE TIME AND ACTUALLY, UM, OPPOSE THIS FOR US.
I WOULD VERY APPRECIATE THAT IF Y'ALL DO THAT.
[02:45:01]
ALL I GOT.HOW YOU GUYS DOING? SO, MY NAME'S ADRIAN SALAZAR.
MY ADDRESS IS 3 0 5 1 MACARTHUR.
SO RIGHT DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS.
UM, AS ALFRED'S OUT, I MEAN, I KNOW HIM, HE'S MY NEIGHBOR.
UM, BOBBY SITTING THERE IS MY DAD'S NEIGHBOR.
UM, I MEAN, IT IT'S BEEN, IT'S KINDA LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, SMALL TOWN FEEL, RIGHT? EVERYBODY KNOWS EVERYBODY.
UM, EVERYBODY LOOKS OUT FOR EACH OTHER THERE.
SO THEY'VE BEEN BUILDING, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU SAID, THOSE DUPLEXES UP THE STREET.
THERE'S JUST DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE'RE NOT FAMILIAR SEEING.
AND I MEAN, I'M, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT IS DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? BUT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD KEEP IT AS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, ONE HOME AS OPPOSED TO DOING FOUR UNITS ON EACH LOT.
'CAUSE I MEAN, WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE IS THAT BRINGING, THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT RAISE.
WHAT IS THAT GONNA DO TO THE, TO THE MARKET? UM, WHAT IS THAT GONNA DO TO OUR HOMES? RIGHT.
I WAS BORN AND RAISED IN MY DAD'S HOUSE.
I TURNED 30 YEARS OLD ON SEPTEMBER 30TH.
SO I LIKED THE NEIGHBORHOOD SO MUCH, I DECIDED TO RAISE MY FAMILY THERE.
AND I WOULD HATE TO SEE SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN, RIGHT.
JUST BECAUSE OF THE IMPLICATIONS AND WHAT IT COULD DO TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I MEAN, IT'S BEEN GETTING BAD ALREADY, RIGHT? UM, BUT IT'S JUST, IT, I MEAN, EVERYBODY KNOWS EVERYBODY.
WE JUST DON'T WANNA SEE THAT CHANGE.
WE DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT GOING ON.
THAT'S ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
THAT THE APPLICANT COME BACK FORWARD.
SO YOU'VE, YOU'VE HEARD, UH, CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBORS.
IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? AND WE WILL OPEN THIS UP TO SOME MORE QUESTIONS.
WELL, WHAT I, WHEN I MET WITH 'EM, UH, TODAY, I TOLD THEM THAT WE DO HAVE THE ZONING.
WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR IS THAT WHETHER WE PUT THE FOUR UNITS TOGETHER OR WE PUT A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, FOR US, WE LOOKED AT IT, WHAT WAS BEST FOR US, I THINK FOR US WAS BEST TO PUT 'EM FOUR UNITS ALTOGETHER.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT IT, WE DON'T WANNA HAVE ONE BIG BUILDING WITH FOUR, TWO STORIES ALL TOGETHER IN ONE.
SO WE TRY TO DO IT AS FOUR SINGLE FAMILY UNITS IN EACH LOT, WHICH, YOU KNOW, TO US THAT'S PROBABLY WILL WORK A LOT BETTER FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO PUT FOUR, FOUR SINGLE FAMILIES IN EACH LOT.
UH, SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS THAT, THAT WHEN YOU HAVE, UH, MORE THAN TWO UNITS, IT'S ONE AND A HALF PARKING SPACES PER UNIT.
SO YOU SHOULD HAVE SIX PER LOT.
THAT IS, BUT I'M SHOWING FOUR HERE ACTUALLY.
UM, THIS WENT THROUGH ALREADY TO REVIEW.
WE HAVE A COMMERCIAL SITE PERMIT, SO WE'RE UNDER CONSTRUCTION, UH, TRAFFIC COUNTED IT AS A, AS A SINGLE FAMILY AND DID IT AS A ONE, UH, PARKING PER RESIDENTIAL.
AND WE VERIFIED THAT WITH, UH, THE PARKING, SINCE IT'S A SEPARATE BUILDING, THEY CLASSIFY THAT AS ONE REQUIRING ONE EACH INSTEAD OF THE FOUR REQUIRING SIX.
UH, I KNOW YOU'RE LOOKING, YOU'RE LOOKING FUNNY.
SO THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE THESE LOOK LIKE SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, YES, I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S TECHNICALLY MULTIFAMILY THE WAY THAT IT'S SET UP, BUT WE HAVE FOUND, UM, TRAFFIC WISE THEY FUNCTION MORE LIKE SINGLE FAMILY.
AND SO WE'RE TREATING 'EM LIKE THAT FOR THE REQUIRED PARKING.
AND JUST TO ADD A COMMENT, WE ARE PUTTING, I THINK THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU HAVE THERE, I THINK IT STILL SHOWS EIGHT PARKING SPACES.
WE ARE ACTUALLY GONNA PUT 10 PARKING SPACES.
THE ONE THAT WE, WE HAVE ON OUR PRESENTATION, IT'S, UH, 10 PARKING SPACES.
SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT ABOVE THE MINIMUM.
IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS? BE COMMISSIONER BEES, ARE THESE, ARE YOU SELLING THEM OR ARE THEY RENTALS? THEY'RE GOING TO BE RENTALS, PROBABLY.
SO WE HAVE ONE OWNER AND, UH, THE BOAT LOTS, IT'S OWNED BY ONE OWNER.
UH, IT'S GONNA BE HARD TO SELL 'EM BECAUSE THEY'RE, OR THEY CAN SELL AS A CONDOMINIUM.
UH, BUT RIGHT NOW THE OWNER IS TRYING TO KEEP ALL, ALL UNITS FOR HIMSELF.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DEAN? STEVEN, COMMISSIONER DEAN? SO THE OWNER IS THE OWNER FROM THIS AREA.
THE OWNERS HAVE, UM, HE'S FROM HOUSTON, BUT HE DOES HAVE A LOT OF, UH, INVESTMENTS HERE IN SAN ANTONIO.
AND UH, SO WE'RE DOING SOME IN COMMERCIAL, UH, AVENUE, SOME, UH, HERE.
UH, WE DID OTHER ONES IN COBRA ROAD.
SO WE HAVE SEVERAL PROJECTS GOING ON.
AND THEN YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT BUSINESS, YOU'RE BUSINESS PARTNER TO HIM OR NO, NO, NO.
WE'RE THE, UH, WE'RE THE ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS.
JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND THAT I UNDERSTAND THIS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? STEVENS, MR. STEVENS AND CRUZ.
SO THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE HACKBERRY PROJECT THAT WE JUST HEARD, RIGHT? THOSE, THOSE, I WAS IN FAVOR OF THAT BEING PASSED
[02:50:01]
BECAUSE THERE WAS STILL A YARD BEING MAINTAINED.AND WHEN I, WHEN I LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, I SEE EFFECTIVELY NO YARD FOR THESE, THESE BUILDINGS.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THE SPIRIT OF THAT ZONING ORDINANCE IS ABOUT.
SO CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT OR, I MEAN, IF, IF YOU WERE TO COMBINE THESE INTO SINGLE STRUCTURES, YOU WOULD HAVE OPPORTUNITY FOR YARD.
SO, WELL, IF WE DO A A ONE SINGLE STRUCTURE NOW WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO CREATE A PARKING LOT, UH, SOMEWHERE IN THERE.
UH, SO I THINK FOR US IT WOULD BE A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT.
WOULD IT JUST BE INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE? IT PROBABLY, IF WE DO ONE SINGLE UNIT, YES.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING WITH A FOUR UNIT SINGLE FAMILY PLUS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO SEPARATE THE FAMILIES IN HERE THAT ARE GONNA BE LIVING THERE, SEPARATE 'EM, THEY'RE ABOUT 10 FEET APART.
WHICH IS YOUR TYPICAL LOT, UH, DISTANCES FROM ONE HOUSE TO THE OTHER.
YEAH, I I I WOULD JUST SAY THAT IF I SAW SIX UNITS HERE WITH ACTUAL YARDS FOR PEOPLE TO USE, I WOULD, I WOULD BE MUCH MORE INCLINED TO BE IN FAVOR OF THIS.
MY MY MY ANSWER TO THAT IS PROBABLY YES.
BUT THE THING IS THAT, UM, WE SUBMITTED THIS TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
WE MEET THE CODE AND WE GOT A, A COMMERCIAL PLAN APPROVED AND WE'RE UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
AND THEN WE DID, UM, THIS CAME UP DURING THE COMMERCIAL PLAN REVIEW THAT WE DIDN'T MEET THE CODE.
WE SUBMITTED OUR INFORMATION TO THE REVIEWERS.
THEY WENT BACK, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY DID.
THEY PROBABLY GOT TOGETHER, THEY CAME BACK AND THEY APPROVED THE ZONING AND THEY APPROVED THE COMMERCIAL REVIEW.
SO FOR US, IT'S LIKE WE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING WE CAN SINCE THE PLAT.
WE HAVE, UH, TALKED TO THE CITY, WE TOLD THEM WHAT TO DO, WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING.
IN FACT, BEFORE HE PURCHASED A LOT, WE CAME AND TALKED TO THE CITY, WE TALKED TO FIRE, WE TALKED TO THE BUILDING REVIEWERS.
WE HAD A, A, A, UM, CONSULTATION HERE AT THE FRONT.
WE DID EVERYTHING SINCE THE BEGINNING.
IT'S NOT LIKE WE JUST AT THE END SURPRISED THE CITY.
WE HAVE DONE THIS SINCE THE BEGINNING AND EVEN BEEN APPROVAL AFTER APPROVAL AFTER APPROVAL.
NOW THAT WE'RE AT THE END TRYING TO GET THE RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION APPROVED, THEY THREW THIS AT US.
IT'S LIKE, OKAY, HOW ARE WE GONNA FIGURE THIS OUT? WE WENT THE VESTED RIGHTS.
THEY SAID, NO, NOW WE'RE HERE IN FRONT OF YOU.
SO TO US THAT'S KIND OF, UH, THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN.
AND WE PUT MORE THAN A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ALREADY WITH A COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN.
AND, UH, AND THE, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF IT, YOU KNOW, WE PUT ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE ALREADY IN THERE FOR FOUR SINGLE FAMILY FOR EIGHT SINGLE FAMILY UNIT.
UM, EACH HOME WILL BE HOW BIG AND TWO, THREE BEDROOMS EACH HOME.
THERE'S GONNA BE THREE BEDROOMS, TWO BATHROOM, TWO STORIES, ABOUT 1300 SQUARE FEET.
UM, I, I CAN'T PULL UP THE ZONING MAPS.
IS THIS THE ONLY R FOUR ON THIS BLOCK? BECAUSE IT LOOKS FROM THE VIEW OF THE BLOCK, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BLOCK.
RIGHT? WE'LL PULL UP THAT ZONING MAP FOR YOU TWO.
THE ENTIRE BLOCK, UH, IS RM FOUR, BUT IT IS PREDOMINANTLY, UM, SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU TOUCH ON, UH, WHEN THIS, WHEN THIS CODE CHANGED TO MAKE THEM ONE UNIT AS OPPOSED TO FOUR, SEVEN OR ONE THIRD, WHAT WAS THE, WHAT WAS THE REASONING FOR THAT? CAN YOU KIND OF TALK, DISCUSS THAT A LITTLE BIT? LIKE MAYBE WHAT, RIGHT.
SO WHEN THE UDC AMENDMENTS OCCURRED, IT WAS, UH, THEY DIDN'T WANT FOR THERE TO BE MULTIPLE STRUCTURES ON A LOT.
UM, THEY WANTED IT TO HAVE AN APPEARANCE OF BEING A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, UH, SO THAT IT WOULD BE IN CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO WHAT YOU SEE IN A LOT OF THESE, THESE PARTICULARLY OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS, IS A LOT OF THE LOTS, EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY BE ZONED RM FOUR WERE ZONED, WERE CONSTRUCTED AS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
UM, AND, AND THAT'S THROUGHOUT THE ZONING IN SAN ANTONIO, WHETHER IT BE A MIXED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT OR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
BUT, UM, WHEN THEY WERE CONSIDERING MF DEVELOPMENTS AND RM DEVELOPMENTS, UM, THEY WANTED IT, UM, FOR THE HEIGHT TO BE MORE UNIFORM WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL AS THE LOOK TO BE MORE UNIFORM WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN ON, ON PAST CASES, UM, YOU KNOW, WE SOMETIMES WE DON'T GET INFORMED OF, OF THE REASONING BEHIND IT.
UH, AND SO MY, SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, LIKE IN THE CASE EARLIER TODAY AND IN PAST CASES THIS BOARD HAS HEARD, TYPICALLY
[02:55:01]
THE APPLICANT IS, IS, UH, OFFERING UP EITHER MORE LANDSCAPING OR MORE PARKING OR MAYBE THREE UNITS INSTEAD OF FOUR.LIKE THE PREVIOUS CASE EARLIER TODAY.
UM, I, I PERSONALLY THINK YOU HAVE A CASE FOR VESTED RIGHTS.
I HAVE PERSONALLY GOTTEN VESTED RIGHTS ON ZONING MY, MYSELF AT LEAST ONCE, PROBABLY TWICE.
BUT WHEN YOU COME BEFORE THIS, THIS BOARD, I, I HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT, WHAT THIS BOARD HAS SEEN AND BEEN PRESENTED PRIOR TO SET A TONE FOR THIS RELATIVELY NEW, UH, REQUIREMENT.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE TRYING TO PUT FOUR IN, BUT YOU KNOW, WE HEARD FROM STAFF THAT THEY WANTED TO PUT IN, UH, THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT THIS AS LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY.
'CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY, BUT YOU ONLY HAVE A FIVE FOOT SETBACK IN THE REAR, WHICH IS NOT LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY.
SO DO YOU HAVE SOME ASPECTS OF A HIGHER DENSITY, BUT YOU'RE GETTING SOME OF THE BENNYS OF BEING LOOKING LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY, BUT I DON'T SEE ANYTHING.
IS THERE ANY SWAY WITH MAYBE OFFERING LESS UNITS OR DOING SOMETHING TO APPEASE THE NEIGHBORS? UH, THE ONLY THING I COULD COME BACK AND NO, I HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.
BUT THE ONLY THING, IF I PUT THOSE FOUR UNITS TOGETHER, I'M STILL HAVING THE SAME PROJECT.
I MEAN, IT'S NOT GONNA CHANGE.
I'M STILL HAVING FOUR UNITS IN THERE.
THAT'S, THAT'S MY DILEMMA HERE THAT WE STILL HAVE THE SAME PROJECT.
BUT THAT'S ALWAYS A DILEMMA, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE ISSUE.
WHEN SOMEONE COMES HERE AND THEY WANNA DO SEPARATE UNITS, THEY'RE GETTING 25% MORE FOR THE HOUSE.
THEY DON'T DO IT BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME THING.
THEY'RE DOING IT 'CAUSE THEY GET A LOT MORE MONEY FOR THE HOUSE.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, EVERY TIME SOMEONE'S COME UP TO THIS BOARD AND ASKED FOR THIS VARIANCE, THEY'VE OFFERED SOMETHING TO OVERCOME THE FACT THAT THEY'RE NOT TOGETHER.
COMMISSIONER DEAN AND WHAT THE CHAIR'S TALKING ABOUT IS MAYBE YOUR CLIENT MAY WANNA WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY TO HAVE MORE BUY-IN.
'CAUSE IT SEEMED LIKE IT'S NOT THERE.
IT SEEMED AWKWARD AND I DON'T KNOW IF I WOULD BE WILLING TO COMPROMISE WITH YOU IF THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THE DILEMMA.
BE COMMISSIONER BEUS AND I, I'LL AGREE WITH ALL OF MY, ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES UP HERE.
YOU HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS BEEN THERE, THAT'S ESTABLISHED, THAT HAS BEEN THERE GENERATION AFTER GENERATION AND, AND, UM, IT'S A COMMUNITY.
IT'S A BLOCK THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT FAMILY MEMBERS PURCHASE HOMES ON THERE JUST TO, YOU KNOW, TO BE TOGETHER.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THIS THAT IS COMPLETELY OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE BLOCK.
SO I, SO I AGREE WITH ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES UP HERE IN TERMS OF, I'M NOT SURE THAT I'M GONNA BE ABLE TO SUPPORT.
SO ANYBODY ELSE, COMMISSIONER A COMMENT ON, UM, IF HE WAS TO HAVE TO GROUP TWO OF THE BUILDINGS INTO ONE, WOULD THAT ALSO TRIGGER THE PARKING SPACE? UM, SO IT'S NOT ONE, WELL, NOT ACCORDING TO STAFF BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A DUPLEX AND IT HAS TO BE THREE OR MORE TO HAVE ONE AND A HALF PER UNIT.
SO WITH THAT, UM, SO CAN WE GET OUT LIKE MAYBE TIME TO TALK TO THE NEIGHBORS AND SEE, I MEAN, MAYBE LIKE YOU'RE SAYING, WE COULD PUT TWO DUPLEXES MAYBE TOGETHER AND, OR, OR THREE UNITS OR, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO TALK TO THE NEIGHBORS, RIGHT? SO WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS TODAY OR WOULD YOU LIKE A CONTINUANCE COME ON UP AND STATE YOUR NAME? YES.
I'M, UM, IN THE PART OF THE OWNERSHIP STATE YOUR NAME AND SIR YOU YEAH, I'M JAVIER GONZALEZ.
UH, YES, WE DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH, WITH SOME NEIGHBORS BEFORE.
UH, NEXT, THE, THE NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR WE, WE TALK ABOUT, ABOUT THIS PROJECT A FEW MONTHS AGO OR EVEN, EVEN A YEAR AGO, HE JOKED THAT, THAT HE WANTED TO, TO BUY THE, THE LOT HE OFFERED TO BUY THE LOT.
BUT WE ALREADY HAD IN PROCESS A PROJECT, THIS PROJECT AS, AS THEY ARE STATING, STARTED, STARTED, UH, OVER TWO YEARS AGO.
AND WE DIDN'T BUY THE PROPERTY UNTIL WE BE, WE WERE SURE ASSURED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO THAT WE COULD GO WITH THE PROJECT.
WE, WE ALREADY, WE WE HAVE, UH, SPENT, WE ALREADY HAVE, UH, UH, SOURCE PERMITS.
WE ARE ALREADY WORKING ON, ON SEWER.
WE ARE ALREADY, UH, UH, PAY PAYING CPS DUES BECAUSE, BECAUSE THE, WE, WE HAVE EVERYTHING IN PLACE AS, AS THEY, THEY ARE STATED.
UH, WE STARTED THIS, WE, WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS BY THE BOOK.
EVERY SINGLE STEP THAT, THAT THE RULES CHANGED OVER, OVER, UH, OVER THE, THE TIME THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT WE BEEN, WE, WE STARTED THIS, BUT, BUT WE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY WELL, UH, OVER TWO YEARS AGO.
AND WE DIDN'T BUY THE PROPERTY UNTIL WE WERE ASSURED BY THE SEAT OF SAN ANTONIO THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO, TO TO, TO MAKE THE DEVELOPMENT.
[03:00:01]
OKAY.AND YES, I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HIM.
HE JOKED ABOUT HE WAS, HE WANTED TO BUY THE LOT.
I TOLD HIM NO, WELL, THANK YOU.
BUT WE, WE ARE, YES, THEY WERE AWARE.
I KNOW THAT IT'S, IT'S NOT EASY FOR THEM, BUT WE, WE IN THE OLD, WE ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES THERE, UH, CO YOU, YOU, UH, A COUPLE OF, UH, HALF LOCK THERE.
WE, THEY, THEY, THEY BOUGHT FOUR LOTS.
THEY ARE BUILDING DUPLEXES THERE.
AND IN THE OTHER SIDE, THE AS WELL, I, I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE BEEN DONE EVERYTHING BY THE BOOK, EVERY LITTLE THING.
AND YES, WE'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE NEIGHBORS MYSELF.
I'M THE PERSON IN CHARGE OF THE, OF THE, BUT WE DO HAVE SOME NEIGHBORS HERE WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION.
SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO ASK THE BOARD TO CONSIDER A CONTINUANCE OR WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS TODAY? WELL, YOU TELL ME BECAUSE MY, MY, MY, NO, IT'S UP.
I'M OFFERING YOU TO, TO, I'M ASKING WHAT A CONTINUANCE.
HOW MUCH TIME WOULD YOU NEED TO DISCUSS THIS WITH THE NEIGHBORS? WELL, LET ME ASK YOU SOMETHING.
UH, OF COURSE WE DO NEED TO RESPECT THEIR NEIGHBORS AND WORK WITH THEM.
I, I, I'M, I'M, I'M ALL, ALL, ALL ABOUT THAT.
BUT IF WE STARTED THIS PROJECT WITH THE BLESSINGS, THAT'S INVESTED RIGHTS, APPLICATION RULES, THAT'S NOT FOR THIS OF THE, OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, THAT THAT IS NOT, WE ARE HERE TO LOOK AT THE FACT THAT CITY IS SAYING THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOUR UNITS TOGETHER, NOT FOUR SEPARATE UNITS.
THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE THIS COMMISSION.
AND AN APPEAL TO THE VESTED RIGHTS DECISION GOES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO WE ONLY HAVE TO LOOK AT THE WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY.
AND WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY IS YOU'RE ASKING FOR SOMETHING THAT IS BEING OPPOSED BY SOME OF YOUR NEIGHBORS.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS BOARD CAN MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE A, MAKE A DECISION TODAY, OR WE CAN ASK THE BOARD TO, TO PURSUE A CONTINUOUS.
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE US TO DO TO ASK FOR THE CONTINUOUS? HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED IN FEW WEEKS.
IS, UH, ANY, UH, MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION LIKE TO MAKE A CONTINUOUS TO OCTOBER 21ST CHAIR? MOTION FOR CONTINUOUS TO OCTOBER 21ST.
UM, OTHERWISE MOTION COMMISSIONER BONILLA.
OKAY, SO WE HAVE, IT'S 10, UH, WITH ONE OPPOSED MOTION IS CON.
IT'S, UH, PROJECT IS CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 21ST.
PLEASE GET WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS AND WE'LL SEE HOW THAT CONVERSATION GOES.
UM, I'M CORY EDWARDS WITH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
UM, I'M HERE BECAUSE ITEM NINE IS AN APPEAL OF A DECISION BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, UM, TO DENY A REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO REPLACE HISTORIC SIGHTINGS.
UM, SO THIS WENT TO H-C-R-C-A COUPLE MONTHS AGO.
UM, THE PROPERTY IS AT 7 0 5 EAST WOODLAWN.
IT'S A 1930S BUNGALOW IN THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT, UM, THAT HAS BEEN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, SUCH ABOUT TWO, 2010.
JUST A MAP FOR REFERENCE, YOU CAN SEE WHERE IT'S ON THE STREET.
UM, THIS IS A PHOTO OF THE HOUSE PRIOR TO WORK BEING, UM, BEGUN.
UM, THIS CAME TO US AS A POST-WORK APPLICATION, MEANING WORK HAD STARTED, UH, BEFORE THE HCRC COULD REVIEW IT.
AND SO AT THE TIME OF REVIEW, HERE'S WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE.
UM, SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE WAS SOME NON-ORIGINAL ASBESTOS TILE SIDING THAT HAD BEEN ADDED TO THE EXTERIOR.
UM, THEY BEGAN TO PULL THAT OFF DURING THE RENOVATION AND THAT EXPOSED THE ORIGINAL WOOD SIDING.
UM, THIS IS WHAT WE CALL ONE 17 WATERFALL OR DOUBLE TEARDROP SIDING.
YOU CAN SEE IT IN PROFILE THERE.
UM, AND THIS IS A PAGE FROM OUR HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT BASICALLY EXPLAINS WHAT THE STAFF POLICY IS FOR SIDING REPLACEMENT.
AND SO, UM, WHERE THERE'S ORIGINAL SIGHTING THAT IS DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR OR IT NEEDS PATCHING, UM, THAT IS THE RECOMMENDATION THAT IT BE PATCHED OR, OR REPAIRED, OR, UM, IF IT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED, THAT'D BE REPLACED IN KIND, THAT MEANS A SIGHTING OF SIMILAR PROFILE.
UM, THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST COMMON HISTORIC CITING PROFILES.
UM, YOU CAN ACTUALLY STILL BUY THIS TODAY FOR MOST LUMBER YARDS OR EVEN SOURCE IT THROUGH HOME DEPOT.
UM, SO IT IS, IT IS FEASIBLE TO, UH, ACHIEVE.
UM, THE REASON THAT THIS IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO INSTALL BOARD AND BATTEN.
SO THIS IS THE RENDERING THAT WAS SHOWN TO THE HDRC WHEN THEY MADE THEIR DETERMINATION.
UM, A LOT OF THE OTHER SCOPES WERE APPROVED, SOME WEREN'T.
UM, THIS IS THE ONLY ITEM THAT'S COMING FOR AN APPEAL TODAY.
SO JUST THE DECISION TO, UH, TO, UH, NOT REPLACE THE ORIGINAL SITING WITH WHAT WE SEE HERE.
UM, SO THAT, THAT HEARING TOOK PLACE, THERE WAS PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
UM, THE HCRC MADE THE RECOMMENDATION TO DENY
[03:05:01]
THE SCOPE THAT INCLUDED THE REPLACEMENT OF THE SITING, UM, WITH BOARD AND BATTEN.UM, AND THEN CONSISTENT WITH THAT POLICY, UH, WE ALWAYS UPHOLD THE HD'S RECOMMENDATION AND ISSUED THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS ACCORDINGLY, UM, TO NOT INCLUDE THAT SCOPE FOR APPROVAL.
UM, SO TODAY YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO WHETHER OR NOT TO UPHOLD THAT DENIAL, UM, OF THE SYSTEM DEMOLITION, BUT IT'S NOT
UM, THE EDC STATES THAT YOU SHOULD CONSIDER THE SAME FACTORS THAT THE HCRC UH, RE HAD WHEN IT CONDUCTED ITS REVIEW.
AND SO YOU HAVE THE ENTIRE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND, UH, PACKET THAT WAS PROVIDED TO THE HCRC WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY HEARD, UM, STAFF'S FINDINGS AND THE ORIGINAL EXHIBITS ARE IN THAT, THAT FOLDER FOR YOUR REFERENCE.
UM, SO WE RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE APPEAL, UM, WITH THIS OUTCOME, THE HCRC DECISION WOULD BE UPHELD AND THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO RESTORE OR REPLACE THAT ONE 17 SIDING IN KIND.
UM, SO AT THIS TIME WE CAN HAVE THE APPLICANT COME UP AND THEN I'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
UM, IS, IS THERE ANY, JUST OUTTA CURIOSITY, IS THAT SIDING THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO USE, IS THAT PREVALENT ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE STREET? UM, AND RIVER ROAD? YOU MIGHT SEE IT ON A FEW STRUCTURES.
UM, RIVER ROAD'S A LITTLE BIT LATER.
UH, BOR AND BATON, YOU SEE MOSTLY LIKE TURN OF THE CENTURY VERNACULAR STRUCTURES.
UM, IT'S NOT A VERY DRESSED UP KIND OF MATERIAL, UM, BUT IT IS FOUND ON OTHER HISTORIC PROPERTIES.
ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE A QUESTION FOR, UM, HISTORIC STAFF? OHB STAFF? WHAT MR. DEAN? IS IT, UH, WOOD OR METAL OR WHAT, WHAT, UH, I WOULD NEED THE APPLICANT TO CLARIFY, BUT I BELIEVE IT'S WOOD B AND BENTON.
USUALLY YOU CAN GET IT IN CEDAR.
ANYONE ELSE? I JUST HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
ALRIGHT, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
HELLO, MY NAME IS EVELYN FENNER.
YOU MIGHT HAVE TO YEAH, MOVE THAT DOWN.
HELLO, MY NAME IS EVELYN FENNER AND I'M REPRESENTING THE OWNER OF 7 0 5 EAST WOODLAWN AVENUE, KERRICK HOMES, LLC.
I WOULD LIKE TO FIRST THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE TODAY TO DISCUSS OUR COMPANY'S REQUEST TO APPEAL A DECISION MADE BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
BEFORE I BEGIN DISCUSSING THIS REQUEST, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU ALL A BRIEF BACKGROUND OF HOW WE HAVE GOTTEN HERE TODAY.
CARLE HOMES LLC IS A NEW CONSTRUCTION HOME BUILDER WHO SPECIALIZES MOSTLY IN AREAS UP I 10, LIKE FAIR OAKS RANCH AND BURNEY.
IN 2017, CAR HOMES BEGAN TO PURCHASE PROPERTIES FOR RENOVATION PROJECTS, ALTHOUGH THIS IS THE FIRST PROPERTY THAT WE'VE RAN INTO A HISTORIC DISTRICT IN DECEMBER OF 2023, CAR HOMES LLC PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY FROM GOLDLINE INVESTMENTS, LLC, AN INVESTMENT COMPANY.
WE'VE PURCHASED MANY PROPERTIES FROM BEFORE.
THEY'RE KIND OF JUST LIKE A QUICK TURN AND SALE KIND OF COMPANY.
UM, AND AT THE TIME WE WERE UNAWARE OF THE PROPERTY BEING IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DUE TO THE LACK OF STREET SIGNS AND OUR IGNORANCE OF NOT DOING ADDITIONAL RESEARCH.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS OUR DEEP REGRET TO THE FACT WE ARE HERE TODAY AND WE EXPECT WE ACCEPT FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE POSITION WE ARE IN.
WE'RE NOT A COMPANY THAT WOULD NEGLECT THE PROPER PROCESS FOR ANY PROJECT WE COMPLETE.
HOWEVER, THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR THE ACTIONS THAT'S BROUGHT US HERE.
I'M HERE TODAY TO EXPRESS OUR WILLINGNESS TO ADHERE TO YOU ALL I'D LIKE TO MENTION, IN JULY OF 2023, WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY OF THREE 14 TRAIL STREET AT THE COUNTY AUCTION.
THIS PROPERTY IS RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF THE RIVER ROAD DISTRICT, ONLY DOWN THE STREET FROM THE PROPERTY OF DISCUSSION TODAY, WE DID NOT COMPLETE ANY EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS ON THE PROPERTY AND IT DID NOT NEED MUCH WORK TO TURN AND SELL BUT NEED.
NEEDLESS TO SAY, WE STILL NEVER RAN INTO ANY ISSUES OR MENTIONS OF A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
ONCE WE WERE READY TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION ON THE RENOVATION OF 7 0 5 EAST WOODLAWN, WE TOOK WHAT WE THOUGHT WERE THE NECESSARY STEPS IN OBTAINING PERMITTING FOR THE SCOPE OF WORK WE PLANNED TO COMPLETE.
WE APPLIED FOR SAID PERMIT IN MARCH OF 2024, AND SAID PERMIT WAS MARKED ACTIVE ON THE DATE OF MARCH 13TH, 2024.
WE NEVER RECEIVED ANY HOLD DUE TO A HISTORIC DISTRICT AS WE HAVE HAD OTHER PROPERTIES THAT REQUIRED PERMITTING.
SEEING THE VERBIAGE OF MUST COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE NCD STANDARDS SLASH MUST COMPLY WITH HISTORIC CO A AS APPROVED INSIDE THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT DID NOT SEEM OUT OF THE NORM AS MANY OF OUR OTHER PROJECTS CONTAINED THE SAME VERBIAGE AND WERE NOT LOCATED IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THAT BEING SAID, WE WERE ABLE TO OBTAIN A PARTIAL PASS ON.
WE WERE EVEN ABLE TO OBTAIN A PARTIAL PASS ON A FRAMING INSPECTION IN APRIL OF 2024.
AT THAT INSPECTION, THERE WAS NEVER ANY, ANY MENTION OF, HEY, YOU'RE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, AND FRANKLY, HOW SHOULD WE HAVE EVEN BEEN ABLE TO SCHEDULE INSPECTIONS AND OBTAIN PERMITTING FOR THE PROPERTY IF THAT WAS THE CASE IN OUR SCOPE OF WORK WE APPLIED FOR AND WERE APPROVED FOR, THERE IS VERBIAGE REGARDING THE EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS THAT I NOW UNDERSTAND MUST BE APPROVED BY H-H-D-R-C AND THE OHP, BUT THAT WAS NEVER MENTIONED TO US.
ALSO, WE CALLED THE CITY MULTIPLE TIMES TO AMEND THE PERMIT TO ADD OR DELETE ITEMS FROM THE SCOPE OF WORK.
[03:10:01]
AND ITEMS HAD TO