[00:00:05]
WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND CALL THIS TO ORDER.
WE DO HAVE ONE MORE COMMISSIONER WHO WILL BE ARRIVING SHORTLY.
IF WE CAN HAVE THE SPANISH INTERPRETER COME OUT AND, UH, GIVE A PRESENTATION, PLEASE.
UH, STAFF, IF YOU COULD PLEASE CALL ROLL COMMISSIONER TON HERE.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ PRESENT.
IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE, UH, JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE.
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 THE STREET ADDRESS.
FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
LASTLY, AS CHAIR, I'LL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS.
I ASK THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS 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 WE DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES.
SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATOR AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL.
THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED AT 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 THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32.
THE HEARING DECIDES 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 OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 28 DASH FIVE.
IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR CASES AND OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS.
THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY'LL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
ANY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER.
AFTER EVERYONE ASSERT, THE CASE WILL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION.
EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION.
IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY.
IT REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESIDENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN GRANTING THE 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 DECISIONS OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS.
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S.
DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS OF THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE STAFF.
STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST.
PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXEMPTION OR APPEAL, AND PROPERTIES WITHIN 200 FOOT OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION FOLLOWING THE 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 ORDER TO 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 THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION.
FOR THOSE I'D LIKE TO GIVE UP THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER.
THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED OF MAXIMUM TWO PEOPLE GIVING UP THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES.
THOSE GIVEN UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A REBUTTAL LIMIT TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS.
[ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items ]
AND LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT COMMISSIONER CRUZ, UH, IS NOW PRESENT ON THE BOARD.[00:05:01]
ONE AND GOOD AFTERNOON.MY NAME IS JOSEPH LAOS, SENIOR PLANNER WITH UM, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER ONE IS BO OA DASH TWO FIVE DASH OH 3 0 0 2.
UM, THE ADDRESS IS 2 2 2 BOULEVARD STREET, UNIT FOUR IN COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE.
THE APPLICANT IS AARON FOUTS AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A PARKING ADJUSTMENT TO WAIVE THE ONE REQUIRED OFF-STREET PARKING SPACE FOR A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS R RM FOUR.
AGAIN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2 2 2 BO GUARD STREET.
SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A PARKING ADJUSTMENT TO WAIVE THE ONE REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING SPACE.
THE SHORT TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE STATES THAT AN OFF STREET PARKING SPOT SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO QUALIFY FOR A PERMIT.
UM, CODE SECTION 16 DASH ONE HUNDRED TEN EIGHT B STATES THAT STR PARKING SHALL COMPLY WITH CITY CODE 35, UH, WITHIN THE UDC WITH RESPECT TO REQUIRED PARKING.
UH, LASTLY, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SUBMITTED THEIR CURRENT RENEWAL APPLICATION AND CANNOT BE APPROVED WITHOUT RELIEF FROM THE BOA.
UM, SO THIS IS AN ACTIVE LISTING AND THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO, UM, INVESTIGATIONS OR CODE VIOLATIONS.
THIS IS THE FLOOR PLAN SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION, AND THIS IS THE PARKING THAT WAS SUBMITTED.
AND, UM, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, I WENT AHEAD AND PUT THE TYPE TWO DENSITY COUNT.
UM, SO THERE ARE 12 UNITS WITHIN THIS BLOCK FACE.
THE BLOCK FACE BEING THE CONDO REGIME.
UM, ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO IS CURRENTLY THERE, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
UM, AND THEN THIS IS AN AERIAL OF THE SURROUNDING PARKING.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE RED ARROWS INDICATE NO STREET PARKING AND THE GREEN INDICATES ALLOWABLE STREET PARKING.
AND THEN THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AND THEN THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES ARE SURROUNDING AREA PHOTOS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PARKING ADJUSTMENT STAFF RECOMMENDS AN APPROVAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH HUNDRED 3 0 1 20.
AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN.
UH, WE RECEIVED FOUR INOP, FOUR IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
UH, WE HAD NO RESPONSE FROM THE KING WILLIAM NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION, AND THEN THE FOUR CITYWIDE GROUPS WERE NOTIFIED WITH NO RESPONSE.
AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT MANNA RAGMAN, UM, COMMISSIONER MANNA, THEN BREGMAN.
SO, SO DO ANY OF THE HOMES HERE, UH, OR ANY OF THE RESIDENTS THERE? THE THREE, I GUESS, DO ANY OF THEM HAVE OFF STREET PARKING OR ARE THEY ALL ON STREET PARKING? UM, UPON OUR SITE VISITS, WE DIDN'T SEE ANY, UM, PARKING LOT OR PARKING GARAGE WITH THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY.
SO, SO IF A SET OF UNITS IS DESIGNED THAT WAY SIMPLY BECAUSE A CODE SAYS OFF STREET PARKING MUST BE PROVIDED, IS THAT WHY IT IS THAT THE CITY IS IN OPPOSITION TO THIS? WELL, THEY'RE NOT.
SO BECAUSE IT, I GUESS BECAUSE THERE IS ALL THE OTHER ONES ARE, THAT'S WHY IT IS YOUR FOURTH IT.
COMMISSIONER BECKMAN, DID YOU SAY THIS IS AN, A RENEWAL OF THE STR OR A A INITIAL APPROVAL, CORRECT? YES.
UM, AND THE RENEWAL CAN CANNOT BE APPROVED UNTIL THIS IS APPROVED.
DID THE PARKING REQUIREMENT CHANGE SINCE IT WAS INITIALLY APPROVED? UM, NO.
BACK IN 2022, THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN A REQUIREMENT FOR OFF STREET PARKING.
UM, THE, IT, IT WAS, IT WAS ISSUED IN, IN ERROR WITHOUT LOOKING AT THAT.
AND THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING, RIGHT? IS THIS IS A CONVERSION FROM APARTMENTS? UM, I CAN VERIFY WHEN THE BUILDING WAS BUILT, BUT IT'S NOT A NEWER CONSTRUCTION.
SO IT WOULD'VE BEEN BEFORE PERHAPS THE NECESSITY OR THE CODE FOR OFF STREET PARKING? CORRECT.
AND I BELIEVE THEY'RE, I'M SORRY.
AND SO MY QUESTION IS, IS, UM, WHEN I LOOK AT GOOGLE STREET MAP AND I'M, AND I'M LOOKING AT, UH, THERE'S A DRIVEWAY THAT GOES IN AND IT'S A, A SMALL FENCED OUT AREA LOOKED LIKE THAT USED TO BE PARKING.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE IS, UH, SHOWING ME IS ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING, THERE IS A LARGE NUMBER OF ELECTRIC METERS.
YOU KIND OF HAVE TO LOOK BEYOND.
IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S, I DON'T KNOW, 1, 2, 3, 4, COULD BE SIX OR SEVEN.
HOW MANY UNITS ARE IN THIS FACILITY? UM, SO THIS PROPERTY DID GET A NON-CONFORMING USE REGISTRATION FOR 12 UNITS.
ANYTHING ELSE? HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD? ALL RIGHT.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR
[00:10:01]
PROJECT.THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING US TODAY.
THIS IS MY HUSBAND AARON FOUTS.
UM, AND SO YES, WE ARE CURRENTLY, UM, WE OWN AND OPERATE, UM, THE SHORT TERM RENTAL PROPERTY THAT'S LOCATED AT 2 2 2 BEAUREGARD STREET, UM, NUMBER FOUR IN SAN ANTONIO.
UM, AND THAT IS ONE OF OUR PRIMARY BUSINESSES.
WE ACTUALLY MANAGE IT AND OPERATE IT OURSELVES.
SO WE ARE SEEKING A PARKING EXEMPTION OR EXCEPTION, I GUESS, OR ADJUSTMENT TO RENEW OUR SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UM, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING.
UM, SO YES, IT, ORIGINALLY WE WERE PROVIDED A SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT.
UM, WE'VE OWNED AND OPERATED OUR STR SINCE, UH, MARCH OF 2022.
UM, SO WE'VE HAD IT FOR OVER THREE YEARS NOW.
UM, WE'VE CONSISTENTLY PAID OUR MONTHLY HOT TAXES AND HAVE NO COMPLAINTS, UM, ABOUT PARKING FROM ANY RESIDENTS, UM, NEIGHBORS OR ANY OF OUR GUESTS.
UM, WE HAVE MAINTAINED FIVE STAR REVIEWS THROUGH AIRBNB.
WE ACTUALLY HAVE, UM, IN THAT TIME OVER 185 STAR REVIEWS.
SO THE CONDO COMPLEX, UM, AS HE STATED, DOES HAVE 12 UNITS.
UM, AND THERE'S NO ASSIGNED PARKING FOR ANYBODY THAT LIVES THERE FOR ANY OF THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN THE BUILDING.
AND WE HAVE A SMALLER, UM, RENTAL PROPERTY.
IT'S ONLY TWO BEDROOM, ONE BATH, AND IT HAS A MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY OF FIVE GUESTS.
SO TYPICALLY OUR, UM, GUESTS ARE USUALLY SINGLE FAMILIES, UM, MAYBE BUSINESS TRAVELERS.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY LARGE GUESTS THAT REQUIRE MULTIPLE VEHICLES.
AND A LOT OF TIMES BECAUSE OF THE WALKABILITY OF THE AREA, THEY EITHER EXPLORE THE CITY ON FOOT OR THEY USE RIDE SHARE SERVICES LIKE UBER AND LYFT.
UM, SO A LOT OF TIMES THEY DON'T PARK A VEHICLE AT ALL.
UM, IN 2024, UM, JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME STATS, OUR STR WAS, UH, OCCUPIED APPROXIMATELY 35% OF THE YEAR, SO ABOUT 128 DAYS TOTAL.
UM, AVERAGING ABOUT 10 TO 11 NIGHTS PER MONTH.
SO, UM, WE FEEL THAT IF OUR CONDO WAS RENTED FULL TIME, IT WOULD REQUIRE SOMEONE TO PARK ONE TO TWO VEHICLES ON A REGULAR BASIS, WHICH WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT HIGHER DEMAND ON THE PARKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND IF WE PERSONALLY LIVE THERE, THEN WE WOULD ALSO BE PARKING ONE TO TWO VEHICLES ON A DAILY BASIS.
UM, SO OUR SHORT TERM GUESTS USE STREET PARKING ACTUALLY FAR LESS THAN IF WE LIVE THERE OR IF WE WERE RENTING IT OUT TO SAY A 30 DAY GUEST OR FULL-TIME GUEST.
UM, I'M GONNA HAND IT OVER TO AARON SO HE CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE JUST ABOUT THE SPACES THAT ARE AVAILABLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, SO, SO THE PARKING, I WALK THE PARKING AREAS, UM, YOU CAN SEE WHERE BEL GARDEN, SOUTH ALAMO, UH, THERE'S BASICALLY 13 SPOTS.
YOU GO FROM MADISON TO TURNER, THERE'S 44 SPOTS.
AND THEN IF YOU'RE LOOKING FROM KING WILLIAM TO SHERIDAN, THERE'S 49 SPOTS NEXT.
AND THEN, UH, KING WILLIAM TO TURNER, 49 SPOTS.
AND THEN BASICALLY MADISON TO SHERIDAN.
SO APPROXIMATELY 200, UH, SPOTS FOR GUESTS TO PARK.
UM, GENERALLY THEY CAN PARK RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER AT MADISON, UH, GOING UP SHERIDAN.
OKAY, SO I KNOW YOU MENTIONED THIS IN THE, IN THE INITIAL, SO THIS IS A COMMON SPACE BEHIND THE CONDO.
UM, OUR PROPERTY MANAGER HAD AN ARCHITECT GO OUT THERE A COUPLE YEARS BACK AND HE WANTED TO ASSESS IT FOR POSSIBLE PARKING.
UM, HE INDICATED THAT, UM, BECAUSE, BECAUSE OF THE POWER LINES, THE MATURE TREES, EVEN IF THEY DID DO THIS, UM, THERE WOULD BE A RADIUS OF MAYBE ONE TO TWO CARS THAT COULD EVEN PARK THERE.
SO FINANCIALLY IT, IT WAS AN IMPRACTICAL SOLUTION.
WELL, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? MANNA, MR. MANNA? SO, SO YOU GAVE A LOT OF, UH, GREAT NUMBERS THERE FOR, FOR AVAILABLE PARKING, BUT I GUESS THE QUESTION I WOULD ASK IS, ARE THOSE ALL IN FRONT OF OTHER FACILITIES THAT WOULD BE LOOKING TO UTILIZE THAT PARKING AS WELL? SO, SO YOU KNOW, THE, ARE THOSE TRULY AVAILABLE OR IS IT JUST THAT'S THE TOTAL NUMBER IN THAT AREA IN SOURCE COMFORT SERVE? WELL, GENERAL, GENERALLY THE PARKING'S OUT IN FRONT OF PEOPLE'S HOMES, BUT THEY HAVE DRIVE, ALL OF THEM HAVE DRIVEWAYS SO YOU'RE NOT BLOCKING THE HOME.
THE QUESTION FOR A CITY, SO, SO THIS UNIT HAS 12, 12 UNITS.
UM, BUT, BUT LOOKING AT IT, THERE'S ONLY SEVEN PARKING SPACES IN FRONT OF THIS UNIT, SO, SO HOW MANY MORE FACILITIES DO WE HAVE LIKE THAT AND IS THAT, IS THAT GOOD DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES? I GUESS AS WE GO THROUGH PARKING? SORRY, KEVIN COLLINS, A DSD ENGINEER, NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW MANY FACILITIES
[00:15:01]
WE WOULD HAVE, UH, LIKE THAT IT CLEARLY DOES NOT MEET THE PARKING CODES, 35 5 26, UM, WHICH NORMALLY FOR A MULTIFAMILY USE WOULD BE 1.5 PER UNIT.UM, AND SO, SO, BUT THERE ARE, I CAN SAY THIS, THERE ARE A LOT OF OLDER FACILITIES IN THROUGHOUT THE CITY, SOME OF WHICH MAY EVEN PREDATE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS WHEN THEY WERE CONSTRUCTED.
I THINK THAT MAY BE WHAT WE'RE ENCOUNTERING HERE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND WE OH, WELL, I WAS GONNA SAY THAT THE PROPERTY WAS BUILT IN 1920, SO I'M NOT CERTAIN WHAT THE, AT THAT TIME, WHAT THE CRITERIA WAS.
THAT, THAT PART OF TOWN IS HAVE A LOT OF PARKING
SO, ALRIGHT, IF THERE'S, UH, NOTHING ELSE, IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE'S TIME TO SPEAK? GOT ONE VOICEMAIL.
PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 393-5223.
I LIVE AT 3 0 8 KING WILLIAM AND I AM CALLING REGARDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 0.
I AM FIRMLY OPPOSED TO WAIVING THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COMMERCIAL VENTURE OF A SHORT-TERM RENTAL AT 2 2 2 BO REGARD, THE KING WILLIAM RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IS ALREADY A VIRTUAL PARKING LOT FOR WORKERS AND PATRONS OF RESTAURANTS IN KING WILLIAMS. AND FOR OFFICE WORKERS IN DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES, PLEASE ENFORCE THE SHORT TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE AND REFRAIN FROM ALLOWING ADDITIONAL INFRINGEMENT ON OUR FRAGILE RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT.
ALRIGHT, SO WITH THAT, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.
SO, MAN, JUST SO THE PERSON CALLED IN, THEY WERE NOT REPRESENTING UM, KING WILLIAMS. CORRECT? THEY WERE JUST A RESIDENT.
THEY DIDN'T IDENTIFY AS ANY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ALRIGHT, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.
BE BEN COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A REBUTTAL ON THE REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 5 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 0.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT A SPECIAL REQUEST FOR A PARKING ADJUSTMENT TO WAIVE THE ONE REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING SPACE FOR A SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT 2 2 2 BEAUREGARD STREET, UNIT FOUR, APPLICANT BEING AARON F FOUTS.
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 THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SUCCESSFULLY DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY MEET THE CRITERIA FOR A PARKING WAIVER AND A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER BEESE, I'M GONNA BE IN FAVOR OF, OF THIS.
UM, I, YOU KNOW, THEY, UH, BEEN RUNNING IT SINCE 2022 IS ISSUED AN ERROR.
THEY HAVE NO COMPLAINTS, NO, UM, OPEN INVESTIGATIONS.
THEY'RE ON, ON TIME OF THEIR HOT TECH.
SO I'D BE IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YES.
SO I'M GONNA BE IN FAVOR AS WELL.
UM, STAFF APPROVAL IS, UH, ONE CONSIDERATION THAT I TOOK ALSO, THEY'VE BEEN IN OPERATION OF THIS PROJECT FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND THERE HAS BEEN NO, UM, YOU KNOW, REPORTS THEIR CURRENT OF THEIR HOT TAXES.
THEY HAVE SUPPORT FOR THE NEIGHBOR, UH, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE MOST AFFECTED.
UH, AND THERE WOULD BE NO WAY GIVEN THE NUMBER SPACES FOR THE CONDO UNIT TO EVEN PARK THE EXISTING CONDO UNIT.
SO, UH, FOR ALL THOSE REASONS, I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? UH, I'M GONNA CHIME IN.
UH, AND MY MAIN REASONING IS THAT THIS IS JUST AN INCREDIBLY OLDER PART OF TOWN THAT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN TO HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING AND IT'S NEVER GOING TO HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING.
AND THE POINT THAT THE APPLICANT MADE THAT, UM, THE LIKELIHOOD IS MUCH HIGHER FOR UBERING IF THIS WAS A SHORT TERM RENTAL AS OPPOSED TO NOT.
SO HAVE A ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER BURTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? NO, I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER MANNA? I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT CHAIR ORIAN.
UH, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
UH, MOTION DOES FA DID COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, SIR.
[00:20:01]
YOUR NAME GET CALLED.OKAY, SO THAT'S EIGHT TO THREE.
UM, I, THIS THIS WASN'T ABOUT WHETHER YOU COULD HAVE A SHORT TERM RENTAL.
IT WAS, IT WAS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A PARKING SPACE.
I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU COULD POSSIBLY DO ABOUT IT.
UM, SO, UH, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET WITH STAFF TO SEE WHAT SORT OF OPTIONS YOU HAVE.
UM, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO CONVERT AND, AND GET RID OF THAT YARD FOR THOSE, FOR YOUR 12 RESIDENTS AND PUT ONE PARKING SPACE IN.
IS THERE ANY, AND AND IS THERE ANYBODY WHO IS OPPOSED TO IT THAT WERE WILLING TO CHANGE THEIR MIND GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE.
MY NAME IS JUAN ALVAREZ, PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS REQUESTED BY DANIEL ROSETTI AND IS REQUESTING FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON THE BLOCK FACE LOCATED AT CONCEPT DISTRICT TWO.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT ONE 30 STELLA STREET.
SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY AND VACANT LOTS.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORTTERM RENTAL ON THE BLOCK PHASE.
THERE IS CURRENTLY ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL LOCATED AT ONE 30 STELLA STREET, UNIT 1 0 1 HAVING BEEN APPROVED ON OCTOBER 31ST, 2024 PER THE CODE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL SHALL BE LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN ONE EIGHTH OR 12.5% OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX, TRIPLEX, OR QUADPLEX UNIT.
ON THE BLOCK FACE, THERE IS A TOTAL OF 10 UNITS ON THE BLOCK FACE.
ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO IS ALREADY ON THE BLOCK BEING ONE 30 STATUS STREET, UNIT 1 0 1, THE BLOCK FACE IS CURRENTLY AT 10%.
AND IF THE SECOND TYPE TWO IS APPROVED, THE BLOCK FACE WILL BE AT 20%.
THE PROPERTY HAS HAD AN INVESTIGATION FOR OPERATING WITHOUT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT, BUT IT WAS CLOSED WHEN THE OWNER WAS ISSUED THEIR SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT.
THE PROPERTY HAS NO ACTIVE LISTINGS AND THE ONLY ACTIVE LISTING IS A DOWNSTAIRS UNIT, WHICH IS THE PERMITTED UNIT.
THIS IS THE SIDE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION, AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREAS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 40 MALE NOTICES.
ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
NO RESPONSE FROM DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND NO RESPONSE FROM OUR THREE CITYWIDE GROUPS.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION.
APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR, UH, STR.
UH, MY NAME IS DANIEL ROSETTI HAS MENTIONED FOR MR. ALVAREZ.
THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT MY CASE.
I AM HERE TODAY RESPECTFULLY TO REQUEST A SPECTRAL EXEMPTION FOR A SHORT TERM RENTAL.
UM, I FEEL THAT MY EXEMPTION OR MY SITUATION IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, UM, AND UNIQUE.
I'M SURE YOU GUYS HAVE HAVE SEEN A LOT OF THESE.
SO WHEN YOU HEAR UNIQUE, YOU PROBABLY THINK IT'S JUST ANOTHER GUY SAYING THIS UNIQUE SITUATION.
BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR UNIT, UM, IT'S A STACKABLE DUPLEX.
I AM DOING RENTAL ARBITRAGE WITH PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER.
UH, UNIT 2 0 1, WHICH IS UPSTAIRS, IS ACTUALLY PERMITTED BY THE OWNER AND IS CURRENT AND ACTIVE.
SO THE REASON I SAY MY CASE IS A LITTLE BIT UNIQUE IS BECAUSE I'M NOT ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL DENSITY OR AN ADDITIONAL UNIT.
I AM ASKING TO TAKE OVER THE 2 0 1 UNIT FROM THE OWNER BECAUSE SHE IS MILITARY AND SHE IS NOT IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.
UM, AND AGAIN, I'M DOING RENTAL ARBITRAGE FOR THIS, UH, FOR THIS PARTICULAR UNIT.
SO AGAIN, I'M NOT ASKING FOR A INCREASE, I'M SIMPLY ASKING FOR A CONTINUITY.
UM, AND IT WON'T BE EXP EXPANDING OR ANYTHING.
UH, I ALSO WANNA HIGHLIGHT MY PERSONAL AND COMMUNITY VALUES.
UM, AS A RETIRED MILITARY MEMBER, I SPENT 21 YEARS IN THE MILITARY.
MY GOAL FOR OPERATING THIS UNIT, WHICH IS SO CLOSE TO JOINT BASED SAN ANTONIO, UH, FORT SAM HOUSTON, IS I ACCOMMODATE OR TRY TO ACCOMMODATE, UM, TRANSITIONING MILITARY SERVICE MEMBERS AND THEIR FAMILIES WITH THE SHORT TERM STAYS.
AND THE REASON I MENTION THAT IS BECAUSE I'VE PERSONALLY WENT THROUGH THIS TRYING TO WAIT FOR HOUSEHOLD GOODS COMING OVERSEAS, LOOKING FOR A FUR, FUR, FULLY FURNISHED, UH, PLACE THAT I CAN HAVE MY OWN FULLY KITCHEN FULLY HOUSED.
[00:25:01]
HOTELS JUST DON'T OFFER.SO THAT WAS REALLY MY, MY MAIN POINT OF, OR MY MAIN OBJECTIVE OF GETTING THE SHORT TERM RENTAL SO CLOSE TO, TO JBSA, SAM HOUSTON WAS TO PROVIDE THAT SUPPORT FOR THE MILITARY COMMUNITIES.
AND AS YOU SEE IN MY, UM, PRESENTATION LATER, I HAVE SOME REVIEWS AND STUFF FROM SOME MILITARY MEMBERS THAT HAVE HAD, HAVE STAYED IN MY PROPERTY.
I HAVE ANOTHER PROPERTY NEAR LACKLAND, UM, THAT, THAT HAS THE SAME THING FOR TRANSITIONING FOR, FOR SERVICE MEMBERS.
SO AGAIN, I JUST WANNA REITERATE, UM, I'M NOT ASKING FOR AN, UH, AN ADDITIONAL UNIT.
THERE IS TWO PERMITS AT THIS LOCATION.
ONE DOWNSTAIRS AND ONE UPSTAIRS.
THE, UM, OWNER ACTUALLY HOLDS THE UPSTAIRS ONE.
SO THERE WILL NOT BE AN INCREASE.
UM, SO IT'S LIKE I SAY, IT'S, IT IS A UNIQUE SITUATION.
'CAUSE I'M NOT ASKING FOR, FOR AN ADDITIONAL PERMIT.
I'M ASKING TO TAKE, TAKE OVER THE, THE ORIGINAL ONE.
SO SOME CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS.
THE APPLICANT SAID THERE'S TWO THERE.
DID, DID ONE GET MISTAKENLY APPROVED AND THEN IT JUST EXPIRED AND THAT'S WHY HE'S HERE.
IS THAT WHAT HAPPENED OR WOULD WERE THERE, WERE THERE TWO PERMITS ISSUED FOR THIS ADDRESS? YEAH, THERE, THERE WAS A POINT WHERE THESE TWO PERMIT, I MEAN THESE TWO UNITS HAD A PERMIT.
HOW, HOW LONG? LIKE ONE OF, ON THE STAFF REPORT, ONE OF THEM SAID, I THINK 2022, AND THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER APPLICATION MAYBE IN 2024.
CAN CAN YOU, CAN YOU GIVE SOME OF THE HISTORY OF HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN IN EXISTENT EXISTENCE? YEAH, LET, LET ME GO AHEAD AND GATHER THAT INFORMATION.
AND THEN TO THE APPLICANT, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS PLACE HAS BEEN, UH, RELATIVELY REMODELED RECENTLY.
UH, DID THIS, WAS THIS, UH, UNIT HISTORICALLY A DUPLEX? YES, IT WAS THE OWNER OF THE UNIT, UM, HISTORICALLY, UH, DESIGNED IT FOR A A, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE STAIRS LEADING UP TO THE UNIT 2 0 1, IT WAS DESIGNED FOR A, A SPLIT UNIT OR A TWO LIVING QUARTERS.
SO IT WASN'T, IT'S NOT AN OLDER BUILDING THE THING? NO, IT WAS BUILT FROM THE FLOOR UP IN 2021.
IT WAS BUILT BRAND NEW IN AN EMPTY LOT, SIR.
SO YOU'RE NOT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, YOU'RE THE AGENT OF THE I'M THE AUTHOR.
UH, THE OWNER HAS GIVEN ME AUTHORIZATION.
SO WHEN I APPLY FOR MY PERMIT, I'M APPLYING AS THE, UM, UM, AUTHORIZED APP AUTHORIZED, UM, SORRY THAT THE TERM, UH, JUST, UM, THE AUTHORIZED USER AUTHORIZED OPERATOR OF THE BUILDING.
SO WHEN I SUBMIT MY SHORT TERM THING, I HAVE TO GET A, A, UM, EXEMPTION FROM HER, A MEMO MEMORANDUM FROM HER ASSIGNED BY HER SAYING THAT SHE'S AUTHORIZING ME TO USE THIS AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
THAT'S PART OF MY PERMIT, UH, AGREEMENT.
I'M, I'M AUTHORIZED TO OPERATE THIS, SO I LEASED IT FROM HER AND THE EXPECTATION THAT I WILL BE DOING SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
SO, SO SHE OWNS BOTH UNITS, CORRECT.
YOU'RE LEASING BOTH UNITS? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THAT YOU CAN HAVE BOTH UNITS AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL WITH HER AS THE OWNER? YES, SIR.
AND, UH, DON'T, DON'T YOU THINK THAT'S KIND OF WEIRD IN A WAY, IF SHE'S THE OWNER, DO YOU HAVE ANY PROOF THAT PROOF THAT YOU'RE THE HER AGENT OR, YES, SIR.
AND, AND I DON'T HAVE IT WITH ME, BUT I CAN PULL IT UP, UH, PART OF MY APPLICATION, I HAVE TO GET APPROVAL FROM HER, AN AFFIDAVIT FROM HER THAT, THAT IT WAS SUBMITTED WITH MY INITIAL, UM, PERMIT THAT WAS, THAT THERE WAS A DISAPPROVED BECAUSE OF THE, UH, THE BLOCK PHASE 12.5%.
UM, SO I DO HAVE THE, I HAVE A LETTER FROM HER THAT'S STATING THAT I HAVE PERMISSION TO DO THIS IN, IN, IN THE, UH, SHORT TERM RENTAL BUSINESS.
UM, ESSENTIALLY I'LL, I'LL LEASE THE, THE UNITS FROM HER AND I'LL OPERATE THEM AS, UH, A SHORT TERM RENTAL OPERATOR WITH HER UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S GONNA BE OPERATED AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL.
UM, SHE'S MILITARY HERSELF, SO WHEN I PRESENTED THAT TO HER THAT WE'RE SO CLOSE TO THE BASE AND I WANT TO HELP TRANSITION SOLDIERS AND THEIR FAMILIES, SHE WAS, SHE WAS ON BOARD FOR IT.
UM, AND SHE PREFERS THAT, THAT A SHORT TERM RENTAL IS THERE JUST BECAUSE OF THE MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP.
UM, AND THAT GOES AGAINST LONG TERM RENTALS AND JUST THE OVERALL, UM, UPKEEP AND MAINTENANCE THAT GOES IN THE BUILDINGS TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE, THESE UNITS ARE IN PRESTIGE CONDITIONS FOR THE GUESTS THAT ARE COMING.
PEOPLE WHO AUTHORIZE PEOPLE TO DO SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE, ARE USUALLY IN FAVOR OF THAT, UH, RENTAL ARBITRAGE FOR THAT, THAT, SO THE PERMIT'S GONNA BE IN WHOSE NAME? EXCUSE ME.
SO IF THIS IS APPROVED, THE PERMIT'S GONNA BE IN WHOSE NAME? YOURS OR THE OWNER? IT'S GONNA BE IN MY NAME AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND, SINCE I'M THE APPLICANT, IT'LL BE IN MY NAME.
IS THAT RIGHT MR. ALVAREZ? I DON'T, IT WOULD BE ON, IT WOULD BE UNDER THE PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME, BUT THE DESIGNATED OPERATOR APPEARS ON THEIR CERTIFICATE, YEAH.
SO WHO'S GONNA CARRY INSURANCE FOR THIS? THE OWNER OR YOU? MYSELF.
THAT'S PART OF MY LEASE AGREEMENT AS WELL, SIR.
[00:30:01]
FINDING OUT THAT ON APRIL 18TH, 2022, UNIT 1 0 1 WAS ISSUED A PERMIT, AND THEN DECEMBER 15TH, 2022, UNIT 2 0 1 WAS ISSUED AN ERROR.AND SO WHEN THEY TRIED TO GO GET A REISSUED, THIS IS WHERE THIS CAME UP? YEAH, SO THEY WERE REVOKED ACTUALLY.
SO UNIT 2 0 1 WAS REVOKED ON APRIL 11TH, 2024.
AND THEN UNIT 1 0 1 WAS REVOKED ON SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2023.
BUT WE HAD CONFIRMED WITH AVENUE AND BOTH ACCOUNTS ARE NOW CURRENT ON THIS TAXES.
SO WHY WERE THEY BOTH REVOKED FOR CLARIFICATION? THEY WERE BOTH REVOKED DUE TO HOT DELINQUENCY.
OKAY, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALL CAUGHT UP ON BOTH CORRECT.
SDRS WHEN THEY APPLIED FOR THE NEW APPLICATION, STAFF VERIFIED THEY WERE CAUGHT UP ON THEIR HOT ACCOUNTS, AND THEN 1 0 1 WAS REISSUED.
SO THERE IS AN ACTIVE ON 1 0 1? CORRECT.
AND THEN THIS 1 0 2, 2 0 1, 2 0 1 NEEDS TO COME IN FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE OFFICE.
UM, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? BRAGMAN, BRAGMAN AND THEN DEAN.
SO THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS THE FACT THAT THIS IS AN ARBITRAGE THE SECOND, OR IT'S BECAUSE IT'S THE SECOND ONE.
IT'S JUST THE SECOND UNIT THAT'S COMING IN FOR TYPE TWO STR.
MR. DEAN, AND YOU SAID YOU HAD THAT PROOF RIGHT FROM THE OWNER THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO THIS OR? I I DON'T HAVE IT WITH ME IN, IN HAND RIGHT NOW, BUT I THINK IT'S, IT'S IN THE APPLICATION.
IT WAS ALL SUBMITTED TO THE CITY.
I CAN, I CAN DEFINITELY GET THAT FOR YOU STAFF, THE APPLICANT, DO YOU HAVE AN AGENT, UH, ON LETTER, ON FILE WITH THE APPLICATION? YES, THEY, UH, INCLUDED THEIR AUTHORIZATION FORM.
SO IT IS SIGNED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE DESIGNATED OPERATOR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS, CAN STAFF CONFIRM THAT THERE'S ONLY ONE CURRENT STR ON THE PROPERTY? YEAH, AS OF ANOTHER, THERE'S ONLY ONE CURRENT STR BEING UNIT KNOW 1 0 1, WHICH IS THE ONE THAT WAS PERMITTED BY WRIGHT C.
CAN, CAN I INTERVENE FOR ONE SECOND? UH, WELL HOLD ON A SECOND.
WE'RE GONNA SEE IF THERE'S MORE QUESTIONS.
WE'LL, WE'LL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE COMMISSION? ALL RIGHT.
AND THEN, UH, WERE THERE ANY ONE TIME TO SPEAK OR VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD, SIR? UM, SO I DO HAVE A PRESENTATION, BUT ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT, UM, THE, I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT THE, THE DELINQUENCY DID NOT FALL UNDER ME.
THE OWNER THAT HAD IT BEFORE ME, BEFORE I TOOK OVER, SHE'S MILITARY, SO SHE PCSED AND SHE DID NOT CLOSE OUT THE ACCOUNT, OR SHE DID NOT CONTINUE TO PAY ON THE ACCOUNT.
SO SHE GOT A LETTER SAYING SHE WAS DELINQUENT LIKE MAYBE THREE OR FOUR MONTHS BEFORE I TOOK OVER.
SO UPON ME TAKING OVER HAVE NOT BEEN DELINQUENT ON 1 0 1 OR MY APPLICATION FOR THE 2 0 1, I JUST WANTED TO SET THAT CLEAR.
THAT WAS NOT ME, UM, THAT, THAT WAS DELINQUENT ON THAT, ON THAT ONE THAT GOT REVOKED INITIALLY.
BRAGMAN AND, OKAY, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN.
SO, SO THIS REALLY IS TRULY A, AN A REQUEST FOR AN APPROVAL FOR A SECOND S-T-R-I-I WOULD SAY NO, BECAUSE I HAVE, THERE'S TWO ACTIVE PERMITS AND THEY'RE BOTH CURRENT FOR 1, 1, 2, 1.
DON'T SAY THAT BECAUSE YOU ONE GOT REVOKED.
NO, BECAUSE, NO, NO, IT'S BACK IN GOOD STANDING, SIR.
UM, THE, WELL THAT'S WHY YOU'RE HERE IS BECAUSE THEY, THEY REVOKED UNIT 2 0 1, YOU DON'T HAVE A PERMIT ON TWO.
THEY GAVE, I DUNNO IF THEY GAVE A TIME TO YEAH, THEY, THEY ANNOUNCED THAT THE HOT TAX HAS BEEN PAID, SO THERE'S NO US ANY HOT TAX, BUT BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE TWO IN THE BLOCK PHASE, YOU DO NOT HAVE A PERMIT FOR AN SDR UNIT 2 0 1 RIGHT NOW.
SO CAN I GET CLARIFICATION FROM THE CITY? DO, DOES I NOT, DO I OR DO I NOT HAVE TWO PERMITS FOR UNIT 1 0 1 AND 2 0 1? YOU, YOU CURRENTLY HAVE ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO PERMIT FOR UNIT 1 0 1, YOUR ACT, YOUR TYPE TWO APPLICATION FOR 2 0 1 IS BEING REVIEWED AND IS PENDING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR BE A WAY TO GRANT YOUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR STAFF TO APPROVE THAT SECOND UNIT, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE HERE NOW.
I I WAS JUST, UM, BECAUSE IT WAS CAUGHT UP AND I HAVE A SCREENSHOT FROM THE, THE OWNER THAT IT'S, IT'S ACTIVE AND, AND OPEN HAS A PERMIT NUMBER.
UM, SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER DEAN.
SO DO YOU LIVE ON THE, DO YOU LIVE ON THE, THE PROPERTY? NO, SIR, I DO NOT.
IS THAT A REQUIREMENT? DON'T THE AGENT HAS TO BE THERE MOST OF THE TIME, OR MR. DEAN? THIS IS FOR A TYPE TWO APPLICATION, WHICH IS NON NON-OWNER, NON OPERATOR OCCUPIED.
THEY DO NOT NEED TO RESIDE AT THE PROPERTY.
SO WITH THAT, UH, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GONNA SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT.
DID YOU, I THOUGHT YOU HAD A PRESENTATION.
DID YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION? UH, I DID.
IT COVERS MOST OF THE STUFF THAT I HAD, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD LOVE TO SHARE IT IF I COULD.
IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THERE, PLEASE PROCEED.
[00:35:01]
THE REQUEST WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, THIS IS THE ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT IS THERE'S A GENERAL AREA THAT, AS YOU CAN SEE ON STELLA STREET, THERE'S, THERE'S THE 1 0 1 UNIT AND THEN THERE'S TWO OTHER UNITS THAT ARE, UH, THAT ARE PERMITTED.SO I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT IT'S, THERE'S NOT A, A MASS AMOUNT OF, OF SDRS IN THAT IMMEDIATE AREA.
UH, JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MYSELF.
I'VE BEEN A SUPERHOST FOR OVER THREE YEARS.
UM, I'VE HOSTED FOUR TO SIX PROPERTIES.
I HAVE A 4.9 REVIEW, OVER 200 REVIEWS.
UM, AND I CURRENTLY AM AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF LOG ACADEMY, WHICH IS A COACHING, MENTORSHIP, UH, TAUGHT BY THAT.
AND THIS IS JUST TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF MY, MY EXPERIENCES AND, AND WHAT I DO AS, AS A HOST.
UH, AGAIN, THESE, THESE ARE SOME OF THE REVIEWS THAT I GOT FROM MILITARY FAMILY MEMBERS, UM, THAT HAVE STAYED IN, IN SOME OF MY PROPERTIES.
UM, JUST HIGHLIGHTING THE, UH, AND ME AS A HOST AND THEN HOW THEY BENEFIT FROM HAVING, UH, A SHORT TERM RENTAL INSTEAD OF SOMETIMES A HOTEL WHEN THEY HAVE FAMILY MEMBERS.
AND THEN AGAIN, MY TARGET AUDIENCE, TRANSITIONING MILITARY MEMBERS.
UM, BUT I CAN'T LEAVE OUT THE, UM, THE CLOSE PROXIMITY TO MAJOR ATTRACTIONS IN DOWNTOWN SAN ANTONIO.
UH, JUST A SNAPSHOT OF THE UNIT THAT THIS WAS IMPORTANT, JUST TO KIND OF SEE THAT IT HAS BEEN NEW AND RENOVATED AND THAT MILITARY MEMBERS, WHEN THEY DO COME, THEY HAVE FULL KITCHEN, FULL AMENITIES, UM, AS, AS, AS MOST SHORT TERM RENTALS DO.
BUT, UH, I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT WITH THOSE PICTURES.
UM, SHORT, SHORT TERM VERSUS LONG TERM.
UM, AGAIN, THE, THE OWNER, UH, HAS TRIED TO DO LONG-TERM AND IT, IT'S, SHE'S NOT LOCAL, SO IT'S DIFFICULT FOR HER TO, TO MANAGE THAT.
UM, I'VE, I'VE HAD A LEASE FOR THE UPSTAIRS UNIT, NOT DOING SHORT-TERM RENTAL, DOING LONG-TERM RENTAL, UM, OR MIDTERM LONG-TERM RENTAL.
AND IT'S BEEN AN ISSUE WITH DAMAGES AND UNPAID RENT, UM, DEALING WITH, WITH LONG TERM TENANTS.
SO THAT'S WHY I SEEK OUT THE, THE SHORT TERM RENTAL, UH, FOR OBVIOUS REASONS.
UM, I HAVE RING DOORBELL CAMERAS THAT ARE ALL INSTALLED AND MONITOR 24 HOURS JUST FOR SECURITY.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO HIGHLIGHT.
UM, I HAVE PROVIDED MY INFORMATION AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL HOST TO THE, UH, JBSA SAN FORT SAM HOUSTON TRANSITION OFFICE.
I INTRODUCE MYSELF TO THE NEIGHBORS AND, UH, EXPLAIN MY INTENT FOR THE HOME.
AND I HAVE EMPLOYED, UH, THE NEIGHBORS FOR LAWN CARE AND HANDYMAN SERVICES.
SO I JUST WANNA HIGHLIGHT MY INVOLVEMENT WITH THE COMMUNITY, A CLOSING STATEMENT, UM, REQUESTING CONTINUATION OF THE STR USE.
UM, AGAIN, TO MY, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, UM, I WAS UNDER IMPRESSION THERE WAS TWO ACTIVE STS BECAUSE THE LANDLORD WAS PAYING FOR HER HOT.
AND SHE, SHE SENT ME THIS, THE SCREENSHOT OF THE ACTUAL, UH, TR.
BUT, UM, I JUST WANNA HIGHLIGHT THAT I'M DEDICATED, COMPLIANT IN A COMMUNITY FOCUSED OPER COMMUNITY FOLKS FOCUSED OPERATOR FOR A SHORT TERM RENTAL.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I HAVE A QUESTION.
SO A PART OF YOUR LEASE, YOU PAY THE OWNER AND, UM, THE, THE MONEY THAT YOU GET FROM THE THIS, SO YOU HAVE LIKE A LONG-TERM RENTAL WITH THE OWNER? YES, I SIGNED A ONE YEAR LEASE WITH THE OWNER.
AND THEN YOU ARE GONNA BE RUNNING THIS LIKE A, A BUSINESS, UH, THIS PROPERTY TO PAY THAT LEASE? YES.
WHATEVER REVENUE I GET FROM SHORT TERM RENTALS ESSENTIALLY PAYS MY LEASE, UM, WHATEVER I OWE TO HER.
AND THEN ANYTHING EXTRA IS, THAT'S WHERE MY BUSINESS COMES IN, THAT I, I AM ABLE TO, UM, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THOSE GAINS OR LOSSES FOR THAT MATTER TOO.
I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE, THE MONEY FLOW ON TOP, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LEASE ON TOP OF A LEASE TYPE OF SITUATION.
YEAH, NO MATTER HOW MY, NO MATTER HOW I DO, UM, AS FAR AS MY OCCUPANCY RATE, I HAVE TO PAY HER HER LEASE NO MATTER WHAT.
SO THERE'S MONTHS THAT THE SLOW MONTHS AND SHORT, SHORT TERM RENTAL THAT I LOSE, UM, BUT I GAIN IN OTHER MONTHS, SO IT KIND OF BALANCES ITSELF OUT.
BUT IT'S, IT'S NOT DEPENDENT ON HOW I, HOW WELL I DO AS A SHORT TERM, UH, OPERATOR.
UM, IT, SHE GETS HER MONEY NO MATTER WHAT.
SO A PART OF YOUR LEASE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE RENTAL INSURANCE PER THE STATE, UM, FOR THAT.
AND THEN, UM, IS, DOES YOUR INSURANCE KNOW THAT YOU'RE DOING THIS TOO? YES.
IT'S THIS TYPE OF USE? YES, SIR.
IT'S A SPECIAL INSURANCE THAT COVERS FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
YOU HAVE TO DISCLOSE THAT WHEN YOU'RE LETTING THEM KNOW THAT, UM, THAT IT'S FOR A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
AND THAT I'M NOT LIVING THERE AS WELL.
AND THEN, UH, I WOULD, I WOULD JUST TO, JUST TO CAVEAT OFF OF THAT, UM, ALSO UNDER AIRBNB, THEY DO HAVE A, UM, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN COVERAGE THAT'S UNDER FOR INCIDENTALS DAMAGES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO I WOULD SAY LIKE 99% OF THE TIME YOU, YOU GO THROUGH AIRBNB TO
[00:40:01]
SUBMIT CLAIMS. UM, UNLESS IT'S, YOU KNOW, GOD FORBID THERE'S A FIRE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT IT NEEDS TO AN ADJUSTER OR AN INSURANCE NEEDS TO GET INVOLVED.BUT I WOULD SAY 99%, IN MY EXPERIENCE, 99% OF THE TIME, UH, CLAIMS ARE HANDLED THROUGH AIRBNB, THROUGH THE AIRCOVER PROGRAM.
SO IF THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH THIS HOUSE AND THE PERMIT'S IN YOUR NAMES, BUT YOU DON'T OWN THE HOUSE, YOU JUST A LEASE HOLDER, LIKE WHO, WHO, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS PROPERTY? YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, ON WHO THIS, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE THE PERMIT HOLDER AND, BUT THEN THE OWNER OF THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, I GUESS IT'S YOU, BUT I'M STILL, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S MY LINE OF THING.
NO, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE A LEASE ON TOP OF A LEASE ON, IT'S LIKE A SUBLEASE, I GUESS IS THE WAY TO, TO EXPLAIN IT.
I'M LEASING AND I'M SUBLEASING IT TO, TO OTHER SHORT TERM RENTALS, I GUESS IS, IS THE WAY SUBLEASE WOULD PROBABLY BE A, AN APPROPRIATE TERM MAYBE TO HELP UNDERSTAND.
IT'S, IT'S A WHOLE, LIKE, IT'S CALLED RENTAL ARBITRAGE.
IT'S, IT'S A WHOLE PROCESS THAT, UM, SHORT TERM RENTALS DO WITH IT DON'T OWN PROPERTIES.
I COULD DEFINITELY, UH, TAKE SOME TIME IF YOU WANTED AFTER THIS TO EDUCATE YOU OR GO OVER WITH YOU.
IT'S, IT'S, IT IS A LOT TO, TO WRAP AROUND, BUT I'D, I'D BE MORE WILLING TO, TO EXPLAIN THAT TO YOU.
IT'S, IT COULD BE, IT COULD BE A LITTLE CHALLENGING TO UNDERSTAND.
IT WAS, IT WAS INITIALLY CHALLENGING FOR ME, BUT I'VE BEEN DOING IT THREE YEARS NOW.
SO, UM, I I FEEL LIKE I'M EXPERIENCED ENOUGH TO, TO KNOW ALL THE INS AND OUTS, SO TO SAY.
WELL WITH THAT, UH, SORRY, ONE LAST QUESTION.
YES, COMMISSIONER, MAYOR, MR. STAFF, THE NOTIFICATION PLAN THAT WE HAVE HAVE, UM, IT SHOWS NO RESPONSES, UH, FROM ANYBODY, CORRECT? NOTHING IN FAVOR, NOTHING IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
LOOKING FOR A MOTION, BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 2 0 5 0 3 21.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT ONE 30 STELLA STREET, UNIT 2 0 1 APPLICANT BEING DANIEL ROSETTI.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT A REQUEST TO OPERATE AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE.
THERE'S NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY.
B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE.
THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WOULD BE CREATED OF 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 SCENARIO DOES NOT CAUSE REASON TO BELIEVE IT WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS A SHORT, AS A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
D, ADEQUATE UTILITIES, ACCESS, ROADS, STORM DRAINAGE, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND UNNECESSARY FACILITIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED.
THE SUBJECT, UH, PROPERTY PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE.
E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT-TERM RENTAL LICENSES.
CONFIRMED, UH, CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION.
THE APPLICANT OR OWNER DOES NOT HAVE CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES OR CONVICTIONS FOR THIS PROPERTY AS THEY ONLY RECEIVE A NOTICE OF VIOLATION FOR PROPERTY WITHOUT A PERMIT AND SUBMITTED AN STR APPLICATION SHORTLY AFTERWARD OR OTHER PROPERTIES.
THE OWNER DOES HAVE PREVIOUS REVOKED LICENSES AT THIS PROPERTY.
AT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY, WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION SOUGHT.
THE SPECIAL, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING OFF STREET PARKING AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD 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.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ.
UM, YEAH, I KNOW THIS SEEMS A LITTLE UNUSUAL IN TERMS OF BUSINESS MODEL, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT THAT HARD TO UNDERSTAND.
UM, I FEEL LIKE, UM, SINCE THERE'S NO OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR THE NEIGHBORS THAT WOULD BE IMMEDIATELY IMPACTED AND THEY'RE PROVIDING OFF STREET PARKING, UM, AND THAT HE HAS GOOD REVIEWS, UM, IN TERMS OF, UH, FROM OTHER CLIENTS AND
[00:45:01]
I REALLY FEEL LIKE HE IS PROVIDING A SERVICE, UH, TO MILITARY MEMBERS GIVEN ITS LOCATION.SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT COMMISSIONER BEES.
I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE, I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF IT.
AND ALSO 'CAUSE IT'S REALLY NOT ADDING, UM, AN EXTRA ONE, IT'S EXISTING.
UM, SO IT'S A CLEAR TRANSITION.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS? I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
UM, IF, IF IT WERE, AS FAR AS TO MY RECOLLECTION, THE CITY CONFIRMED THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE ACTIVE PERMIT AND IF THERE WERE TWO ACTIVE, MAYBE THAT'S MORE OF LIKE A PROCEDURAL ADMINISTRATIVE THING AND I CAN GET BEHIND THAT, BUT I DIDN'T SEE ANY CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD WANT ME TO ALLOW AN INCREASE IN THE STR UM, RATING OR PERCENTAGE ACROSS THE BLOCK FACE.
AND I THINK THAT THIS UNIT BEING LESS THAN A BLOCK AWAY FROM ST.
PHILIP'S COLLEGE COULD SERVE MAYBE A STUDENT OR SOMEONE ELSE IN THE COMMUNITY.
SO I WILL BE AGAINST INCREASING THE, THE SHORT TERM LIMIT.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD DEAN? MR. DEAN? I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER STEVENS.
I THINK IT'S UNUSUAL TO ASK FOR TWO PERMITS AT THE SAME PROPERTY, UM, WHEN THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ENOUGH MERIT THERE.
IT SEEMS MORE BUSINESS SCHEME.
UM, I DON'T SEE HARDSHIP, UH, IT'S JUST HARD FOR ME TO GET BEHIND SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
UM, CONSIDERING THERE THE INTENT OF THE CODE IS ALREADY, YOU KNOW, ONE TO 12, YOU ALREADY HAVE A PERMANENT BY.
UM, SO, UH, I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD BEDA? COMMISSIONER BEDA? I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT THERE, WE HAVE SEEN, UM, WE HAVE SEEN SEVERAL, UH, STR IN THE SAME BUILDING CONDOS, UH, WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE.
AND I JUST WANNA REMIND EVERYONE THAT THERE WERE TWO EXISTING IN THIS, BUT BECAUSE THE OWNER, UM, IS ACTIVE MILITARY, UM, AND, AND WE KNOW THAT THE FIRST ONE OR ONE OF THEM WAS IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, ISSUED AN ERROR BY THE CITY.
SO, SO THEY WERE, BOTH OF THEM, UH, BOTH UNITS DID HAVE AN EXISTING, UH, PERMIT BETWEEN 22 AND 24? I BELIEVE SO.
ANYONE ELSE? I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT MR. BRACKMAN LOOKING AT THE NUMBER OF SCRS IN THE AREA, IT'S NOT LIKE OTHER AREAS OF TOWN WHERE WE DO SEE, UM, AN OVERABUNDANCE.
THIS AREA OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT, AT LEAST WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE MAP THAT WE'RE SEEING.
SO I DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA BE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL, UH, STR MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA.
SO, UH, CAN COUNCIL OR CAN THE STAFF REMIND ME WITH REGARDS TO, UM, A THREE YEAR PERMIT THAT THEY WOULD'VE TO COME BACK BECAUSE THIS IS WOULD BE AN EXCEPTION OR DOES IT AUTOMATICALLY GET GRANTED THEN? UM, NO.
SO THEY, WELL THEY, THEY, IF WE GIVE THIS, THEY'D HAVE TO COME BACK IN EVERY THREE YEARS.
UH, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS ONLY BECAUSE, UM, I THINK THAT WHEN, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY HAVE BEEN ISSUED IN ERROR WHEN, WHEN THE, WHEN THE BUSINESS MODEL AND THE OWNERSHIP MOVE FORWARD DOWN, DOWN A ROAD, DOWN A PATH, THREE YEARS ISN'T A VERY LONG PATH.
AND SINCE HE'S HAS A STELLAR RATING AND THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY COMPLAINTS AND NOBODY SEEMS TO MIND IT BEING THERE, GIVING THEM ANOTHER THREE YEARS, UH, TO TRY TO RECOUP SOME FUNDS, UH, DOESN'T BOTHER ME.
UH, 'CAUSE I KNOW THEY'LL HAVE TO COME BACK.
UM, SO WITH THAT'S, HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BURTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? NO, I DO NOT.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF AND WE WILL SEE YOU BACK IN THREE YEARS.
OKAY? UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
UM, AND IF I MAY HAVE A MOMENT, I, I UNDERSTAND YOU GUYS' LOGIC.
I WANT YOU TO KNOW, I I AM SORRY.
I'M THE PUBLIC MEETING IS SAID.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MARK AVI, PRINCIPAL PLANNER.
UM, UH, NUMBER THREE IS BO OA 1 0 2 AT 34 0 6 ROOSEVELT AVENUE DISTRICT THREE.
[00:50:01]
UM, APPLICANT B AND JOEL FERIN, UH, REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION FOR NON-CONFORMING DENIAL FOR AUTO AND LIGHT TRUCK REPAIR AND AUTO PAINT AND BODY ZONING IS IDZ WITH USE OF PERMITTED IN THE C ONE ENTERTAINMENT RECEPTION HALL AND MEETING FACILITY.UH, SO PROPERTY RECEIVED A NON-CONFORMING DENIAL ON MAY, 2025 DUE TO AERIAL IMAGERY SHOWING CLEAR EXPANSION OF THE USE BETWEEN THE TIME OF THE LAST NON-CONFORMING USE REGISTRATION AERIAL UH, PHOTOGRAPHY SHOWS ADDITION ON A PROPERTY SOMETIME BETWEEN JANUARY, 2024 AND MARCH, 2025.
UDC STIPULATES THAT ANY ENLARGEMENT OF THE NON-CONFORMING WILL RESULT IN TERMINATION OF THE NON-CONFORMING.
A NON-CONFORMING REGISTRATION WAS APPROVED IN APRIL, 2024 FOR AUTO LIGHT, UH, TRUCK REPAIR AND AUTO PAINT AND BODY WITH CONDITIONS.
UH, MAY, 2025 CODE COMPLIANCE INITIATED AN INVESTIGATION TO ADDITION OF THE BUILDING BEING CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT A PERMIT.
A PERMIT FOR AN ADDITION CANNOT BE APPROVED UNLESS THE NON-CONFORMING USE IS RENEWED.
AT THE SAME TIME, CO COMPLIANCE INITIATED ZONING INVESTIGATION FOR THE CORRUGATED FENCE, UH, RECENTLY INSTALLED ON THE PROPERTY CORRUGATED METAL FENCE WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ON A SEPARATE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL.
THIS IS THE, UH, NON-CONFORMING THAT WAS, UM, DENIED BACK IN MAY.
THERE ARE TWO AERIAL PHOTOS THAT WE HAVE OF THE PROPERTY SHOWING THE EXPANSION AND CURRENT VIEWS FROM THE PROPERTY STAFF CONCLUDES THAT THE USE OF AUTO LIGHT AND TRUCK REPAIRS, UH, AUTO PAINTED AND BODY WILL REQUIRE A CHANGE OF ZONING APPROVAL BASED ON SESSION 35 7 0 5 B ONE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS.
AERIAL IMAGERY SHOWS CLEAR EXPANSION OF THE USE THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE IN BETWEEN TIME OF THE LAST NON PERFORMING USE REGISTRATION STAFF MAILED OUT 10 NOTICES.
UH, NONE IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION.
AND THE MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED.
AND THIS IS THE RESPONSES RECEIVED STAFF IS, UH, AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
SO, SO IF THIS, UH, REQUEST IS DENIED, UM, SO IS IT A CESSATION OF BUSINESS OR, OR IS THERE ANY REMEDIATION FOR THE BUSINESS TO MOVE IT BACK TO ITS PRIOR STATE? SO, SO WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS? SO ONCE, ONCE AN EXPANSION IS DONE, THAT TAKES AWAY THE NON-CONFORMING.
UM, IF THEY, IF THEY GO BACK TO WHERE IT WAS, UM, STAFF'S GONNA SEE THAT IT WAS STILL EXPANDED.
UM, SO THE POINT THAT THEY EXPANDED, THAT'S WHEN THE NON-CONFORMING WENT AWAY.
SO THEN IF THE CITY, OR IF THIS BOARD SAYS NO, OR DOES NOT AGREE OR DOES AGREE, UH, DOES NOT AGREE WITH APPEAL, THEN BASICALLY IT WOULD BE THE CESSATION OF THAT BUSINESS AT THAT FACILITY OR THAT POSITION CESSATION OF THAT USE OF BUSINESSES THAT, UH, OKAY.
SO THE, THE ZONING IS WHAT NOW? CURRENTLY IDZ ONE WITH USE OF PERMITTED FOR, UH, SO WHEN I, WHEN I, WHEN I WAS LOOKING THIS ONE UP, THIS IS WHAT WAS PECULIAR.
SO THIS BUILDING LOOKED LIKE IT WAS BUILT IN THE FIFTIES OR SIXTIES AND UNDER THE 1987 UDC WAS COMPLETELY ALLOWED TO BE THERE.
UH, THEN THE 2001 CAME IN AND, AND BECAUSE IT WAS C3, IT NEEDED TO BE AN L FOR A BODY SHOP.
SO THAT WAS ONE, THAT WAS ONE HICCUP THAT THIS, UH, UH, FACILITY HAS.
THE OTHER ONE WAS THE CITY INITIATED TWO LARGE SCALE ZONING CHANGES.
SO THEY, THEY TOOK 'EM DOWN TO C TWO AND THEN THEY TOOK THEM DOWN TO IDZ MOST LIKELY AGAINST THEIR WILL.
UH, AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT LIKE, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, I UNDERSTAND THE CITY PROBABLY HAS A GRAND SCHEME FOR, FOR THE AREA, BUT FOR BUSINESSES HAS BEEN THERE THAT LONG AND TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS ZONING CHANGE WENT THROUGH, I JUST THINK THE CITY REALLY SHOULD HAVE INITIALLY MADE IT C TWO WITH A CONDITIONAL USE OR SOMETHING, UH, UH, OR, OR NOT SLAPPED IDZ ON THERE LIKE THIS.
IT JUST SEEMS THAT, THAT SEEMS LIKE A TAKING TO ME.
I I DON'T KNOW IF, YEAH, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR CITY COUNCIL.
UM, THE LARGE REZONING AREA REZONING HAPPENED BECAUSE OF 2015.
THE WORLD HERITAGE OF AREA AND MISSION SAN JOSE IS ONLY A BLOCK AWAY FROM THIS FACILITY.
OH, I, AND SO WHEN THEY DID THE LARGE AREA REZONING MISSION, SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WAS IN SUPPORT OF IT, UH, BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF FACILITIES THAT HAD SPRUNG UP FROM THE 1960S UNTIL THE 1990S OF AUTO BODY SHOPS
[00:55:01]
AND AUTO REPAIR SHOPS ON WITHIN A THREE BLOCK AREA NEAR MISSION SAN JOSE.SO THAT LARGE AREA REZONING WAS SUPPORTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WAS PUSHED BECAUSE OF THE WORLD HERITAGE DESIGNATION.
WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY, WHEN THAT WENT THROUGH, DID THEY OFFER TO BUY THIS FACILITY FROM THEM SINCE IT'S GONNA CAUSE THEM A FINANCIAL HARM OR THEY JUST TAKE IT FROM 'EM? I CANNOT SPEAK TO THAT.
I'M NOT SURE I CAN SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT.
UM, MR. GUERRA, WHO WAS THE OWNER AT THAT TIME, UM, WAS NOT HAPPY ABOUT THE LARGE AREA REZONING.
UM, MOST OF THE BUSINESSES WERE NOT, BUT ONE OF THE CAVEATS OF THAT LARGE AREA REZONING FOR THOSE BUSINESSES WAS THEY WOULD KEEP THEIR ZONING THAT THEY HAD AS LONG AS THEY STAYED IN BUSINESS, IF THEY SOLD IT, THEY HAD ONE YEAR, ONE YEAR WINDOW TO SELL IT TO, UH, THE SOMEONE ELSE WHO WOULD KEEP ALSO THAT, THAT ZONING.
SO IT WOULD STAY IN AUTOBODY SHOP.
UM, IF THEY WERE TRYING TO MAKE SOMETHING DIFFERENT, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO TO REZONING.
AND SO THERE WERE CAVEATS FOR THOSE BUSINESSES TO, UH, KEEP THEM IN THEIR, UH, BUSINESS UNDER THE ZONING THAT THEY WERE FAMILIAR WITH HISTORICALLY.
UM, AND IF THEY SOLD IT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS THEN PROTECTED FROM ANY OTHER INDUSTRIAL TYPE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES OR OTHER AUTO BODY SHOPS OPENING UP ON THAT AREA NEXT TO MISSION SAN JOSE.
AND I CAN SAY, UM, WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE, IF, IF THEY GRANTED A CONDITIONAL USE, LIKE YOU STATED, AN EXPANSION WOULD STILL EITHER REQUIRE A MINIMUM SITE PLAN AMENDMENT OR A MAJOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT, WHICH WOULD JUST BE A REZONING.
AND I UNDERSTAND THEY DON'T DO THAT NORMALLY ON LARGE AREA REZONINGS TOO, SO.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR, UH, CASE.
UH, BALTAZAR SERNA, UH, LAW OFFICER OF CERNER CERNA.
FOR THE RECORD, UH, HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, I'M THE ATTORNEY REPRESENTING HIM.
I'M ALSO GONNA HAVE HIM SPEAKING JUST A SECOND.
UH, WE'RE HERE BEFORE YOU, UH, TO, UH, ASK THAT YOU RECONSIDER THE, UH, DENIAL OF HIS APPEAL AND NONCONFORMING USE.
JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BACKGROUND, BECAUSE THERE IS SOME HISTORY HERE.
THIS PROPERTY HAS NEVER CHANGED FROM A BODY SHOP, UH, TO, TO, UH, UP TO THIS DAY SINCE 1952 AND, AND BEYOND 1952.
UH, IN SEPTEMBER OF 24, MY CLIENT, UH, JOEL FERDEEN, HE WILL TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HIMSELF, PURCHASED HIS PROPERTY, UH, FROM MR. GARRA.
UH, MR. GARRA REPRESENTED HIM.
THERE WAS NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS AS HE WENT IN AND TOOK OVER THE FACILITY TO BEGIN TO TRANSITION INTO OPEN IT UNDER HIS, UH, UH, UH, NAME AND, AND HIS BUSINESS.
UH, HE SAW SOME THINGS THAT WERE WRONG ON THE BUILDING.
ONE OF 'EM WERE, UH, SOME SERIOUS HEALTH AND SAFETY CONCERNS WHERE MR. GARRA HAD IMPROPERLY BUILT, UH, THE, THE PHOTO BOOTH, UH, NOT THE PHOTO BOOTH BUT THE, UH, THE PAINT BOOTH IN THIS SITUATION.
UH, AND HE TOOK IT UPON HIMSELF TO EXPAND THE PROPERTY, UH, 60 FEET, TO, TO MOVE THE PAINT BOOTH IN AN AREA THAT WOULD BE SAFE TO PATRONS, UH, AND HIS CUSTOMERS AND HIS EMPLOYEES.
UM, AS HE, WHEN HE DID THAT, IT TRIGGERED, UH, THE ISSUE WITH THE NON-CONFORMING USE.
SO THIS PROPERTY WAS NEVER ABANDONED AND NEVER, NEVER STOPPED, HAS NEVER STOPPED BEING USED AS A, UH, BODY SHOP.
IT WAS THE EXPANSION THAT OCCURRED THAT CREATED THIS, UH, ISSUE WITH THE NON-CONFORMING USE.
SO I'M GONNA LET HIM TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT OF WHY HE DID IT.
UH, HE'LL GET A SPECIFICS IN IT.
I'LL, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO, UH, MR. INE.
HELLO, MY NAME'S, UH, JOEL FERDEEN.
UH, I OWN JOEL'S COLLISION CENTER HERE IN SAN ANTONIO.
UH, WE HAVE A VERY LARGE FACILITY RIGHT ON FOUR 10 AT 24 24 SOUTHWEST LOOP FOUR 10.
WE'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS IN NOVEMBER, WE'LL BE 26 YEARS.
UM, WE, UH, WE SERVICE ALL THE MAJOR INSURANCE COMPANIES, USAA, STATE FARM FARMERS, UM, ALL THE BIG ONES THAT WERE PART OF THEIR PROGRAM.
SO THEY DIRECTLY SEND US WORK.
AND WE'RE ALSO CERTIFIED IN 15 DIFFERENT, UH, UH, CAR DEALERSHIPS.
SO WE'RE ONE OF THREE TESLA CERTIFIED SHOPS IN SAN ANTONIO.
UH, WITH THAT, UM, THE INSURANCE COMPANIES KIND OF PUSH ME BECAUSE THERE'S NOT, THEY'RE NOT, UH, THEY'RE NOT CERTIFYING ANY MORE SHOPS.
THEY, THEY, THEY KIND OF PUSH ME TO OPEN UP ANOTHER SHOP ON THAT SIDE OF TOWN.
UH, USA WILL BE THERE ON THURSDAY JUST TO SEE WHERE OUR, OUR PROGRESS IS.
UH, THEY REALLY WANT US TO OPEN UP.
UM, WHEN I PURCHASED THIS, UH,
[01:00:01]
SHOP IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR, UH, I, I PRETTY MUCH, I, I THOUGHT I, I, I DID MY DUE DILIGENCE AND CHECKED EVERYTHING.THE ONLY THING I WASN'T AWARE OF WAS THAT IT'S IN THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION, UH, AREA.
UH, I, I THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT THING THAT, THAT THE MISSION WAS RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
UH, IT'S, IT, IT WAS KIND OF A DINGY LOOKING SHOP, AND, UH, I SAW A LOT OF POTENTIAL IN IT.
SO I SAID, I CAN MAKE IT LOOK GREAT.
IF YOU LOOK AT MY EXISTING SHOP, UM, IT LOOKS REALLY NICE WHEN YOU WALK IN.
THE FIRST THING YOU THINK IS, WOW, THIS LOOKS MORE LIKE A BANK THAN IT DOES A SHOP.
AND, UM, THE FIRST THING I NOTICED WAS THE ORIGINAL PAINT BOOTH AND THE OFFICE WERE FIVE FEET APART.
THEY'RE RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER.
UM, THAT'S THAT, THAT YOU, YOU SHOULD HAVE A FIREWALL IN BETWEEN THE PAINT BOOTH AND, AND, UH, WHERE YOUR EMPLOYEES WORK.
SO, UM, BUT BECAUSE I WENT IN AND MR. GUERRA WAS THERE ONE DAY AND I WAS THERE THE NEXT, UH, I CALLED 'CAUSE I KNEW THE FIRST THING I NEEDED TO DO WAS GET MY CFO.
WELL, THEY GAVE IT TO ME INSTANTLY BECAUSE IT NEVER STOPPED FROM BEING A BODY SHOP.
UM, A LITTLE BIT HISTORY OF, OF THIS SHOP, UH, IT STARTED OFF BEING, UM, TOYOTA OF SAN ANTONIO BODY SHOP.
UH, FROM THERE IT WENT TO CAVENDER TOYOTA BODY SHOP, THEN REFLECTION, PAIN AND BODY, AND THEN GET A AUTOMOTIVE AND BODY SHOP.
AND THEN FROM THERE, I PURCHASED IT FROM MR. GUERRA.
UM, SO I, I I, I, I LOOKED AT IT AND I TOLD HIM, YOU KNOW, HOW COME YOU DIDN'T NEVER, YOU KNOW, UH, CHANGED THIS OR THAT? AND IT, IT WAS PRETTY MUCH THE MONEY FACTOR.
UH, BUT I, I SAID I CAN DO, I, I CAN DO A LOT OF THINGS WITH, WITH, UH, THIS FACILITY.
SO AFTER I GOT MY C OF OI, I CALLED, UH, THE PAIN BOOTH COMPANY, AND I TOOK THEM IN THERE SO THEY CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THE OLD PAINT BOOTH THAT WAS THERE.
AND IT WAS, I, I WOULD SAY 30, 40 YEARS OLD.
IT WAS RUSTING IN THE BOTTOM AND, UH, IT HAD A WOOD ATTIC UP TOP.
WELL, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THAT, UH, NEAR A PAINT BOOTH, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE AN ENCLOSED ROOM.
UH, IT'S CALLED A MIXING ROOM.
EVERYTHING HAS TO HAVE FIRE SUPPRESSION, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO, UM, WHAT I DID WAS, UM, I, I, I PUT SOME MONEY INTO IT, AND WE'VE INVESTED ABOUT $1.3 MILLION INTO IT SO FAR.
UH, WE PUT TWO BRAND NEW PAINT BOOTHS.
THAT'S, AS YOU CAN SEE, UM, TOTALLY DIFFERENT STATE OF THE ART.
UM, THE STACKS ON THE O PAINT BOOTH, THE EXHAUST STACKS, WHICH ARE THE ONES THAT GO ON TOP OF THE ROOF, THERE WERE ABOUT THREE FEET IN THE HEIGHT, WHICH LOOKS NORMAL.
BUT, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE, THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE, IT'S CHANGED NOW.
IT SHOULD BE 14 FEET, TWO INCHES AT HEIGHT.
UH, SO WE PRETTY MUCH MOVED IT.
AND I, I, I, I DID DO THE ADDITION BECAUSE I WANTED TO SEPARATE, 'CAUSE IT WAS RIGHT NEXT TO THE OFFICE.
IT WAS FOUR OR FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE OFFICE WITH NO FIREWALL.
SO WHAT I DID WAS, UM, I ADDED TO THE BUILDING SO I CAN MOVE THE PAINT BOOTH TOWARDS THE END OF THE BUILDING AND SEPARATE THE OFFICES AND CREATED A FIREWALL IN BETWEEN.
UH, I ACTUALLY THOUGHT I WAS DOING A GOOD THING.
I THOUGHT I'D GET A PAT IN THE BACK, BUT I DID MAKE A MISTAKE AND I DIDN'T PULL A PERMIT.
UH, SO I ASKED FOR FOUR PERMITS, UH, IN FEBRUARY.
AND, UH, WHEN I ASKED FOR THOSE PERMITS, UH, IT FLAGGED, UM, IT, IT FLAGGED ME.
SO, UM, THE, THE WHOLE BUSINESS HAS BEEN RUNNING UNDER, I GUESS, A NONCONFORMING USE, UH, ZONING AND MINE EXPIRED, BUT THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO NEVER NOTIFIED ME, WHICH THEY, THEY REALIZED AFTER THE FACT AND AFTER WE WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE THING.
UM, AND, UH, SO WE, WE, WE APPLIED FOR IT.
AND WHEN, WHEN THE PROCESS WENT THROUGH, THEY LOOKED AT AN AERIAL AND THEY NOTICED THAT I DID ADD 60 FEET TO THE SHOP.
UM, AND, AND I DIDN'T PULL A PERMIT.
SINCE THEN, I'VE HIRED THREE ENGINEERS, UH, ONE OF THEM BEING HERE TODAY.
UM, WE, WE WERE APPLYING FOR ALL THE PERMITS THAT WE NEED TO, WE, WE'VE SPOKEN TO THE INSPECTOR, UH, WE HAD A MEETING WITH HIM, AND WE'VE, WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO.
UH, WE'RE TRYING TO GET EVERYTHING WHERE, WHERE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PRIOR, BUT AT THIS POINT, FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS, THIS IS RUN AS A BODY SHOP.
WE, WE HAD NO INTENTION OF CHANGING IT TO ANYTHING ELSE.
AND, UM, TO BE HONEST, I, I THOUGHT I WAS DOING A GOOD THING OF IMPROVING IT, UH,
[01:05:01]
BRINGING EVERYTHING UP TO DATE AND, UH, MAKING IT MORE MODERN AND, AND SAFER FOR MY EMPLOYEES, FOR THE COMMUNITY, UM, AND FOR THE BUILDING ITSELF.UM, WE DIDN'T TAKE ANY SHORTCUTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, UH, OTHER THAN NOT ASKING FOR THE PERMIT.
AND I'VE BEEN, I'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, GOTTEN AFTER BY MY WIFE, MY ATTORNEY, MY ENGINEER, AND EVERYBODY ELSE.
UH, BUT WE ARE RECTIFYING THE PROBLEM.
SO, UM, BECAUSE OF THAT, UM, I, I'M HERE ASKING THAT IF YOU GUYS CAN REALLY TAKE THIS IN CONSIDERATION THAT IT HAS BEEN A BODY SHOP FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS.
AND I MEAN, FROM, FROM THE TIME I BOUGHT IT TO, TO NOW, I MEAN, UM, UH, THAT WAS THE INTENTION OF US KEEPING IT AS A BODY SHOP.
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE OLD PHOTOS, CAN YOU PUT THE OLD PHOTOS UP THERE? UM, IT WASN'T, IT WASN'T, UH, ANYTHING THAT YOU COULD REALLY SAY, HEY, THIS IS NOT, TO ME.
I I OWN A LARGE FACILITY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN.
AND, UM, IT, IT WASN'T SAFE FOR THE EMPLOYEES OR, OR FOR, EVEN FOR THE COMMUNITY.
I MEAN, THAT, THAT PAINT BOOTH IS 30, 40 YEARS OLD.
SO, UM, WITH THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT WE DO, AND WE DO, WE DO, UM, BRING IN A LOT OF BUSINESS.
SO, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE HERE ASKING IF YOU GUYS CAN CONSIDER US AND KEEPING US IN THE SAME ZONING THAT WE HAD SO WE CAN CONTINUE DOING BUSINESS.
MR.
UM, HOW, HOW ARE THEY DESIGNED? SO THEY PROTECT THE AIR, SO, SO THE SHORTER THEY ARE, THE LESS THEY'RE GONNA FILTER THROUGH THERE.
UH, ONE BRINGS IN THERE, ONE, ONE DOES THE EXHAUST.
UH, THEY HAVE TO BE SO MANY FEET APART AND, AND, UH, THERE HAS TO BE A 10 FOOT HEIGHT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BOTH OF THEM.
UM, SO THIS IS, THESE ARE THINGS THAT THE PAINT BOOTH COMPANIES HAVE TO LOOK AT IN THE STATE OF TEXAS WHEN THEY'RE INSTALLING THESE.
AND WHEN I SAW 'EM, I, I KNEW THEY WEREN'T, I MEAN, THEY WERE, IT WAS, THEY WERE ABOUT 30, 40 YEARS OLD.
BUT BECAUSE, BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY AN EXISTING BODY SHOP, UM, YOU GUYS CAN SAY, HEY, WELL WE ALLOWED HIM, BUT WE'RE NOT GONNA ALLOW YOU FROM ONE DAY TO THE NEXT.
SO YOU GUYS HAD TO APPROVE IT.
BUT ME BEING THE BUSINESS OWNER, I, I DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT.
I WANTED TO CHANGE IT AND UPDATE IT AND PUT SOMETHING MORE, MORE, UH, EFFICIENT.
UH, THE WHOLE THING IS WHEN YOU'RE PAINTING CARS, YOU NEED THEM TO COME OUT CLEAN AND IT MAKES YOUR JOB A LOT EASIER.
THAT ONE WASN'T TO PAR, IT REALLY WASN'T.
IT, IT REALLY NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, BUT MR. GERRA COULDN'T AFFORD TO, TO INVEST SOME MONEY.
UM, AND, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT.
SO THAT'S WHEN I CAN CAME IN AND SAID, HEY, I CAN DO THESE CHANGES.
WHAT HAS YOUR INVESTMENT BEEN SO FAR, YOUR A TOTAL EVENTS? ABOUT 1.3 MILLION.
UH, MANNA, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER, UH, MANNA.
SO, SO FOLLOW UP ON, UM, THE, THE QUESTION WITH REGARDS TO THE STACKS OR THE, THE, THE, I GUESS THE EXHAUST INTAKE AND EXHAUST.
SO IS THERE ANY FILTERING DONE ON THE EXHAUST WITH REGARDS TO THE VOLATILES FROM THE PAINT ITSELF, FROM THE FUMES IN THAT, OR IS IT JUST YES.
AND SO WHEN YOU BRING IN THE CAR, IT HAS GRADES IN THE BOTTOM.
UH, SO WHEN I DID DO THE, THE 60 FOOT EDITION, UH, WE, UM, WE HAD TO CREATE A, A PIT.
UM, AND THEN IT HAS GRADES AND THE CAR GOES OVER THE, THE, THE, THE PIT AND THE EXHAUST IS PULLING DOWN INTO THE PIT AND IT FILTERS IT THROUGH A TUNNEL AND THEN UP UP THE EXHAUST.
SO BY FILTERING MEANING, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? SO IT, IT, IT CLEANS IT.
ON TOP OF THAT, I DON'T SHOOT.
UM, SO A LOT OF, A LOT OF COMPANIES WILL SHOOT, UM, UH, REGULAR PAINT.
I SHOOT WATERBORNE PAINT, SO THAT CUTS EVERYTHING IN HALF.
SO I CAN ACTUALLY SHOOT THAT PAINT OUTSIDE.
I MEAN, THE CAR'S NOT GONNA COME OUT CLEAN, BUT IT'S NOT BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT.
UH, UH, IT'S, IT'S A, A WATERBORNE.
SO I CAN, WHEN I'M DONE WITH IT, I CAN THROW IT AND IT'S NOT GONNA DO ANYTHING TO THE ENVIRONMENT THAT HELPS IT OUT TREMENDOUSLY.
SO YOU MIGHT SAY, WELL THEN WHY DO YOU NEED THIS BEAUTIFUL PAINT BOOTH? WELL, BECAUSE THE CLEAR COAT THAT GOES OVER IT IS BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FILTER THROUGH.
COMMISSIONER DEAN, BRIAN? YES.
UM, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU KIND OF KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING A LITTLE BIT, BUT IN A WAY, YOU TOOK A LOT OF RISK BY BUILDING THIS PAINT BOOTH WITHOUT INVOLVING, YOU KNOW, THE RIGHT SKILLS, LIKE ENGINEERS AND WORKING
[01:10:01]
WITH THE CITY.SO I'M GONNA ASK YOU A QUESTION REGARDING THE PAINT BOOTH.
UM, IS THERE A PERMIT WITH THE TEXAS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TO OPERATE THIS PAINT BOOTH? IS IT, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONED TO USE, UM, 'CAUSE TYPICALLY PAINT BOOTHS HAVE, YOU KNOW, PERMITS TO OPERATE, UM, THROUGH THE STATE TO, UM, THOSE AEROSOLS AND ALL THAT, LIKE YOU TALK ABOUT MM-HMM
UM, AND THAT'S A SIMPLE YES OR NO, NO.
THERE'S NO PERMIT, NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT.
BRAMAN THE, YOU, THERE'S, THERE'S REQUIREMENTS YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW.
UH, SO THE, SO, UM, SO THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE HAS REQUIREMENTS.
SO WHEN THEY'RE CONSTRUCTED, BUT I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T CREATE THE BOOTH.
I PURCHASED THE BOOTH, AND THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW THE REQUIREMENTS AND SAY, HEY, THIS HAS TO BE AT THIS HEIGHT.
THESE ARE THE KIND OF WALLS THAT HAVE TO BE BUILT.
SO, I MEAN, THEY'RE NOT CHEAP BECAUSE OF THAT REASON, BECAUSE THEY, THEY, UH, THEY CREATE THEM AND THEY GIVE 'EM TO YOU AND, YOU KNOW, YOU PUT 'EM UP.
SO YOUR REVIEW IS THROUGH YOUR BUILDING PERMIT, NOT THROUGH THE TC.
THE TCU DOES NOT REQUIRE A SEPARATE INDEPENDENT REGISTRATION OR SUBMITTAL.
COMMISSIONER DEAN'S ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
SO YOU BUILT IT, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS ON WHAT YOU DID TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY, BECAUSE I'M VOTING ON NONCONFORMING RIGHTS, UHHUH
SO I'M TRYING TO CONSIDER HOW MUCH YOU'VE CHANGED, AND I'M TRYING TO PUT IT IN FRONT OF THE BOARD ON HOW MUCH YOU'VE CHANGED, WHAT YOU CONSIDERED TO BE EXISTING, WHAT YOU DID PROFESSIONALLY, AND, YOU KNOW, IF, IF YOU ENGAGE WITH THE ENGINEER, LIKE WHAT, WHAT WAS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY ESSENTIALLY? UM, 'CAUSE LIKE I SAID, THE, THE AMOUNT OF THINGS TO CONSIDER HERE IS QUITE LARGE.
UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S ALL I REALLY HAVE IS JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE AIR PERMITS, WHAT YOU DID WITH THE STATE, UH, SPECIFICALLY THE TEXAS COMMISSION, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, UH, FOR PAINT BOOTS, WHAT YOU DID WITH THE ENGINEER TO CONSTRUCT THIS, UH, STRUCTURE, UM, YOUR OTHER CODE THINGS.
UM, SO I THINK I UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT, BUT DOES THAT'S MY LINE OF QUESTIONING.
OVER, UM, LIKE I SAID, I, I DIDN'T THINK I WAS DOING A BAD THING.
I, I, I, I, I THOUGHT THAT I, I DID DO A BAD THING.
I, I, I ADDED 60 FEET TO THE BUILDING, THAT, THAT WAS MY MISTAKE.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT, SIR, THE CITY FIRE, DID THE CITY, UH, INSPECT WHATEVER IT IS YOU'VE BUILT AS OF YET? HAS THAT BEEN INSPECTED YET? UH, YES.
ONE OF THE CITY INSPECTORS WENT OUT THERE.
AND INSPECTED IT WITH MY ENGINEERS.
I HAD 'EM THERE AT, AT THE TIME.
JUST, I WAS, JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS SOME OVERSIGHT.
UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UH, SO THIS IS FOR STAFF.
SO IF, UH, THE APPLICANT HAD APPLIED FOR A PERMIT BEFORE HE STARTED BUILDING, WHERE WOULD HE BE AT IN THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW? SO IF THERE WAS AN EXPANSION, UM, THEN THAT WOULD, AND IT WOULD CON, UH, START A NON-CONFORMING, THAT WOULD BE A, AN OBVIOUS STOP TO THE NON-CONFORMING BECAUSE, WELL, WE WOULDN'T HAVE APPROVED THE PERMIT BECAUSE THE PERM, UH, AN EXPANSION OF THE NON-CONFORMING USE WOULD JUST AUTOMATICALLY STOP THAT.
SO HE WOULD STILL BE HERE OR AT, UH, ZONING? HE PROBABLY WOULDN'T, HE PROBABLY WOULD JUST GO STRAIGHT TO REZONING.
UM, DEPENDING, WE WOULDN'T HAVE, WE WOULD TELL HIM, HEY, IF YOU'RE EXPANDING, YOU HAVE TO REZONE.
IT WOULD BE UP TO HIM TO GO FORWARD WITH THE NON-CONFORMING, THEN DENIAL AND THEN BE HERE.
SO IF, IF WE WERE TO DENY HIS APPEAL, WHAT RECOURSE DOES HE HAVE? WOULD HE STILL BE ABLE TO GO TO ZONING? CORRECT.
SO MY QUESTION IS, IS THAT WHEN YOU'RE NOT CONFORMING USE ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS, LIKE A PAINT BOOTH, LIKE HE'S TALKING ABOUT HIS PAINT BOOTH, IF HE CAME UP TO THE CITY AND SAID, HEY, UM, I DON'T WANNA VIOLATE WHAT MY NONCONFORMING I HAVE IN PLACE, BUT I'VE GOT THIS 40 OR 50-YEAR-OLD THING THAT ISN'T COMPLIANT.
IT'S NOT, IT'S A DANGER TO MY EMPLOYEES OR WHATEVER.
IS THERE ANYTHING HE COULD HAVE DONE TO BRING IT UP TO CODE AND HAVE IT NOT BE CONSIDERED AN EXPANSION? SO IF HE PROVIDED US A SPECIFIC LAW OR ORDINANCE THAT HE OR THE, UH, USE IS NOT ABIDING BY, UM, WE CAN TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, UM, UNDER 35 7 0 2 B FOR EXPANSION.
UM, WHAT HE'S DESCRIBING IS, I THINK GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICE, BUT IT IS STILL NOT REQUIRED BY LAW.
I THINK IT, IT MAKES SENSE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE HE HAS A PERMIT, HE HAS A CFO, HE HAD NO OBLIGATION UNDER LAW TO COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT FIRE CODE OR THE BUILDING CODE.
WELL, I, I GUESS I'M NOT EVALUATING THAT.
[01:15:01]
I'M SAYING THE SEPARATION THAT HE PUT BETWEEN THE OFFICE BELIEVE IT MADE IT AN EXPANSION.BUT THERE IS A COMPONENT OF WHAT HE DID THAT MADE IT COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT CODE.
THAT THAT COMPONENT OF IT, AS MINOR AS IT IS, WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD THE CITY WOULD NORMALLY ALLOW.
MAYBE LIKE, CAN YOU ELECTIVELY COMPLY WITH THE NEW CODE AND HAVE THAT FALL UNDER, UH, 7 0 2 B? WHEN, WHEN YOU SAY NEW CODE, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? I'M SORRY.
WELL, LIKE IF HE WANTED TO COMPLY WITH THE 2024 BUILDING AND FIRE CODE WITH HIS PAINT BOOTH AS OPPOSED TO WHATEVER WAS APPROVED IN THE, IN THE EIGHTIES, UH, WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED ALLOWABLE IF THERE WAS ANY SORT OF EXPANSION ASSOCIATED WITH UN UNDER 35 7 0 2 B? BASICALLY? NO.
I MEANT THE NON-CONFORMING STRICTLY STATES THAT YOU CANNOT EXPAND ANY BUILDINGS OF THAT USE.
SO IF IT WAS HAD TO BE OF DONE, THE REZONING WOULD BE THE OPTION, THE AVAILABLE OPTION.
STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS, WHAT IF HE WAS TO PUT THIS PAINT BOOTH IN THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT? THAT COULD WORK, BUT AGAIN, AGAIN, THAT IS THE OPTION.
AS LONG AS HE KEPT THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT, THIS NCU WOULD'VE BEEN STILL ACTIVE.
SO IS THE PURPOSE OF LOSING A NON-CONFORMING USE BECAUSE OF A PHYSICAL EXPANSION, MEANING AN EXPANSION FOOTPRINT, IS THAT IN PLACE, THE SPIRIT OF THAT? IS THAT TO PROTECT FROM A SIMILAR BUSINESS COMING IN, BUT IT BEING A DIFFERENT SCALE, MEANING GOING FROM MOM AND POP TO NO, IT, IT, IT DOESN'T, UM, WELL, OBVIOUSLY IF IT IS A NEW BUSINESS, YES.
BUT THIS WOULD APPLY TO EVEN THE EXISTING BUSINESS EXPANDING OKAY.
SO, SO MAYBE CLARIFICATION ON THAT POINT.
SO, SO, UM, SO IF, IF IT WAS NOT A BODY SHOP AND THEY WANTED TO EXPAND THE FACILITY FOR A BUSINESS THAT WOULD BE CONFORMING SO THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO EXPAND IT THEN AT THAT POINT? THAT IS CORRECT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I SORRY ABOUT THAT.
IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR ANYBODY SIGNED TO SPEAK? I HAVE TWO SIGN UP TO SPEAK.
SO WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE, WE WANT TO HEAR FROM A CITIZENS SIGNED UP.
'CAUSE THEY MAY POINT OUT SOME THINGS THAT YOU MIGHT WANNA REBUTT SURE.
OR EVEN ADD TO, UH, YOUR DISCUSSION.
SO LET'S HAVE THOSE TWO CITIZENS COME UP PLEASE.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS.
I'M PRESIDENT OF MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND, UM, JOEL'S COLLISION HAS NEVER, EVER CONTACTED OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO DISCUSS HIS OPERATIONS HERE.
UM, WE NOTICED FOR SOME TIME THAT HE HAS BEEN MAKING ADDITION AND INCLUDING THOSE HIDEOUS SMOKESTACKS AND IS BEYOND ME, HOW HE COULD NOT REALIZE THAT THE NA THE BUSINESS THAT HE BOUGHT WAS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM MISSION SAN JOSE WITH THE TOWERS THAT HE CONSTRUCTED THOSE AWFUL TIN THINGS RIGHT NEXT TO JUXTAPOSED WITH THE TOWER, THE BELL TOWER OF MISSION, SAN JOSE AND THE DOME OF MISSION SAN JOSE.
UH, CARVALHAL IS ALSO, UM, ONE OF THE, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, PEOPLE OBJECTING TO, TO THIS MAN'S, UH, UH, APPEAL FOR, UH, NON-CONFORMING USE FOR APPROVAL OF NON-CONFORMING USE.
UM, MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OPPOSES, UM, APPROVAL OF NON-CONFORMING USE FOR THE EXPANSIONS THAT THIS MAN HAS MADE TO THE FOOTPRINTS, BOTH, UM, HORIZONTALLY, VERTICALLY AND HORIZONTALLY, AND ESPECIALLY VERTICALLY TO MR. RA'S AUTO SHOP.
I LIVE AT 5 22 EAST DIXON AVENUE IN MISSION, SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE RAVEN HILL, UH, DEVELOPMENT.
AND ROBERT RA WAS MY MECHANIC.
HE DID HARDLY ANY PAINT AND BODY SPRAY.
AND THAT THE, THE BUILDING WAS KIND OF A QUONSET HUT THERE, WHERE YOU SEE NOW IT'S A, UH, WHATEVER, A DIFFERENT ROOF.
UM, AND I HARDLY NEVER, EVER NOTICED ANYTHING GOING ON THERE.
HE SPEAKS OF HOW HE NEEDED TO PRO PROTECT THE OFFICE THAT WAS THERE.
UM, THERE WAS NO OFFICE IN THIS PART OF THE BUILDING THAT HE EXPANDED UPON.
THE OFFICE WAS IN THE, UM, ENTRANCE AT THE, UM, AT THE WOODHULL WOODHULL.
UH, AND HERE'S A PHOTOGRAPH FROM, DO YOU HAVE THE DATE OF THAT? I SENT THESE PICTURES BY EMAIL.
DO YOU HAVE THE DATE FOR THIS ONE? BECAUSE
[01:20:01]
I PUT THAT IN THE SUBJECT OF EACH EMAIL.I JUST INCLUDED THE PICTURES YOU SENT ME.
WELL, ANYWAY, THIS, THIS SHOWS A PILE OF DEBRIS IN THE BACK, WHICH I WAS WONDERING ABOUT.
AND NOW I KNOW THAT IT WAS FROM, UM, WHERE HE BUSTED UP THE GROUND AND MADE AN ADDITION BEHIND THE, THE PREVIOUS, UH, BUILDING THAT WE SAW ON THE SCREEN.
UM, SO WE SUPPORT THE, UM, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL OF THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL OF HIS PREVIOUS DENIAL OF NON-CONFORMING USE OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, IF HE, I HAVE SEEN HIS PROPERTY OUT AT FOUR 10 AND HIGHWAY 90.
I MEAN, IT'S BUILT RIGHT UP AGAINST THE HIGHWAY, UH, ACCESS ROAD AND SURROUNDED BY A LOW INCOME HOUSING PROJECT.
AND BEHIND IT ARE, UH, A COUPLE OF, UM, UH, CHURCHES, CHURCH PROPERTIES, LARGE CHURCH PROPERTIES.
HIS PROPERTY THERE IS VERY LARGE, VERY LARGE WITH VERY HIGH FENCES OF BOTH STONE AND, UM, AND WROUGHT IRON AND, AND BARBED WIRE AND ELECTRONIC, YOU KNOW, ELECTROCUTION STUFF AND ALL THAT.
COMMISSIONER MANNA, WE, WE MIGHT HAVE COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS.
SO, AND REAL QUICK, THIS ACCORDING TO YOUR EMAIL, THIS PICTURE WAS DATED APRIL 4TH, 2025.
SO, SO I KNOW THAT, UM, IN THE LAST UDC REWRITE, UH, THERE WAS SOME MEETINGS WITH REGARDS TO, UM, ELEVATIONS NEAR THE MISSION WITH REGARDS TO ALLOWABLE, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR, TO KEEP THE VISION FREE, THE VIEW SHED, THE VIEW SHED VISION, VIEW SHED.
SO, UM, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS AT THIS POINT HERE OR WHAT THAT VIEW SHED DISTANCE OR THAT HEIGHT WOULD BE AT THIS LOCATION? TERRY IBANEZ WOULD KNOW THE HEIGHT IS BEYOND THE 1500 FEET, OR ACTUALLY IT'S 1800 FEET FROM THE FRONT DOOR TO, FROM SAN JOSE.
SO IT'S JUST RIGHT OUTSIDE THAT, SO IT CAN GO UP TO ABOUT THREE STORIES THERE.
BUT I, I, IT CAN GO UP TO THREE STORIES THERE.
BECAUSE, UM, THIS, I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE, UM, CONCERNING THE, UM, THE SMOKE STACKS AND THE HIGH OF SMOKE STACKS, TEXAS CODE, TEXAS, TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 1 0 6 0.436 AUTO BODY REFINISHING FACILITY.
UM, ITEM NUMBER 11 SAYS THAT IF THE STACK IS LOCATED WITHIN 200 FEET, THE SMOKE, THE SMOKE STACKS, UH, WITHIN 200 FEET OF A BUILDING THAT IS TALLER THAN THE BODY SHOP BUILDING, THE STACK HEIGHT SHALL BE AT LEAST 1.2 TIMES THE HEIGHT OF THE BODY SHOP BUILDING AS MEASURED FROM THE GROUND.
WE HAD BEEN TALKING WITH THE, UM, NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR, UM, OF THE PAR VACANT PARCEL TO HIS, TO THE EAST OF HIS PROPERTY, BORDERING THE EAST OF HIS PROPERTY ABOUT HIS PLANS FOR DEVELOPING THAT PROPERTY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE, UH, MIXED USE, RETAIL AND, UH, LIVING.
AND HE WOULD GO TO THE, UH, TO THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT, UH, THAT MEETS THE MISSION PROTECTION VIEW, SHED MISSION, VIEW SHED PROTECTION ORDINANCE.
UM, AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE JOEL'S THEN TO MAKE THEIR SMOKE STACKS EVEN HIGHER, 1.2 TIMES HIGHER THAN, UH, THAN THE HEIGHT OF THE TALLEST BUILDING OR HIGHER AS MEASURED FROM GROUND LEVEL.
SO WHEN YOU BUILD SOMETHING AND IT'S IN PLACE, WE DON'T BASE THAT ON SOMETHING THAT HASN'T HAPPENED YET.
SO THEY HAVEN'T BILLED THIS, THEY DON'T HAVE THE CEILING, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT WHEN HE DOES, WHEN THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR IS DEVELOPED, THAT THEN HE WILL BE REQUIRED TO MAKE HIS FUNDS STACK EVEN HIGHER.
THINK STATE CODE IS NOT RETROACTIVE IN THAT MANNER.
UM, JUST BECAUSE SOMEBODY BUILDS NEXT TO YOU DOESN'T FORCE YOUR NEIGHBOR TO JUST RAISE THE STACK.
I THINK THERE ARE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES HERE.
'CAUSE I LIVED IN NEW YORK CITY AND I KNOW ALL ABOUT THE SMOKESTACK REQUIREMENT STUFF.
WELL, THAT'S IN NEW YORK THOUGH.
I MEAN, I, I, I KNOW THAT THAT MEANS, WELL, I KNOW, I'M SURE THERE'S, THERE'S REASONING FOR IT, BUT THE STATE CODE DOESN'T, DOESN'T MAKE EVERYBODY RETROACTIVELY RETROFIT ITEMS JUST BECAUSE SOME PERSON COMES IN NEXT DOOR AND DOES SOMETHING THAT WOULD FORCE THEM TO DO THAT.
CHAIR, I'LL COMMISSIONER DEAN, I'LL ADD THAT.
YOU KNOW, WE HEARD TESTIMONY EARLIER THAT, YOU KNOW, THE TEXAS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY WASN'T INVOLVED, YOU KNOW, TO HER POINT ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SHE COULD BE, RIGHT? 'CAUSE THAT'S THE TEXAS CODE, YOU KNOW, PAINT BOOTS, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE STACKS, CERTAIN HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, FOR THE AEROSOLS
[01:25:01]
AND THAT, YOU KNOW, WITHIN X AMOUNT OF FEET.AND WE DON'T KNOW, IT WAS, YOU KNOW, THESE UPGRADES HAPPEN.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WERE RESPONSIBLE OR, YOU KNOW, AND TO VOTE ON NON-CONFORMING FOR IRRESPONSIBLE, YOU KNOW, USES, I, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST PUTTING, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO HELP UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET AFTER HERE.
AND ON BUILDING HEIGHTS FOR STAFF.
DO YOU COUNT STEEPLES SMOKE STACKS, OTHER APP THAT EXTEND BEYOND THE ROOF? IS THAT INCLUDED IN THE HEIGHT? TYPICALLY THEY'RE NOT.
JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT HABITABLE.
THAT'S WHAT I, THAT'S WHAT I RECALL.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I ASK, UH, STAFF, UM, HAD, UM, MR. INE GONE THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS, WOULD HIS EXPANSION DESIGN HAVE TO GO THROUGH OHP SINCE IT'S IN A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD AND WITHIN THE WORLD HERITAGE? YES, MA'AM.
IT WOULD'VE GONE THERE AND THEN IT WOULD'VE GONE TO, UH, IF IT HAD PASSED, IT WOULD'VE GONE TO ZONING.
UM, WELL, FIRST DOES REZONING WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN.
THE REZONING HAS TO HAPPEN FIRST.
COREY IS HERE FROM OHP AND HE CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
WELL, I MEAN, YOU HAD IT RIGHT? I MEAN, IF THERE'S NO, THERE'S, IF THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT STEP TO REZONE OR TO OTHERWISE HAVE THE USE ALLOWED, THEN THE HISTORIC REVIEW WOULD BE THE ONLY NEXT STEP.
W WILL THIS PROJECT GO THROUGH OHP STILL? IT WILL IF THE USE IS ALLOWED.
SO EITHER HERE OR THROUGH A REZONING.
CAN YOU SPEAK ON WHETHER OR NOT OHP WOULD TYPICALLY APPROVE THESE TYPES OF VERTICAL OBSTRUCTIONS? YEAH, I MEAN, SO THE, THE MISSION PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT WAS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED.
UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S A VIOLATION HERE, BUT WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE A SPECIFIC SITE SURVEY TO UNDERSTAND ANY CHANGES IN ELEVATION TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT IT CONFORMS. THAT'S NOT A VIEW SHED, THAT'S REALLY JUST A HEIGHT RESTRICTION.
AND SO WE WOULD LOOK AT THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT AT THIS LOCATION.
UM, I WANT TO SET EXPECTATIONS STRAIGHT FOR WHAT THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES CAN AND CAN'T DO.
UM, THERE'S REALLY NOT POLICY THAT'S BEEN ADOPTED THAT WOULD GUIDE WHAT IN ADDITION TO AN INDUSTRIAL METAL BUILDING LIKE THIS WOULD LOOK LIKE.
UM, THERE HAVE BEEN ANOTHER OTHER REQUESTS MADE TO OHP FOR THIS PROPERTY, INCLUDING SIGNAGE AND FENCING AND SOME MATERIAL CHANGES.
THOSE OF COURSE, ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND THE ADDITION WOULD BE AS WELL.
UM, BUT AGAIN, THERE'S NOT REALLY HARD POLICY ON, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT THERE COULD BE SMOKE STACKS OR EXHAUST EVENTS AT THIS LOCATION THAT'S REALLY TIED TO THE USE MORE THAN IT IS THE DESIGN.
COULD, COULD YOU, UM, ARTICULATE WHAT IT IS THAT YOU'RE MOST OBJECTED TO ABOUT THIS PROJECT? I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THEY DIDN'T PULL PERMITS.
LIKE THAT'S, THAT'S A MAJOR PROBLEM, BUT THAT'S GONNA BE RECTIFIED, RIGHT? SO IS IT THE SMOKESTACKS? IS IT THE EXPANSION? THE SMOKES ARE THE MOST BLATANTLY AWFUL AND TOTALLY, COMPLETELY DISRESPECTFUL.
THIS MAN'S WHOLE DEVELOPMENT HERE HAS, WE NOTICE I AND THE, UH, HOT WELLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT NOTICED ALL THIS ACTIVITY HAPPENING ON WEEKENDS FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS, MONTHS.
THEY WERE BUILDING ON, UH, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT, WITHOUT PERMITS ON WEEKENDS AND EXTENDING, UM, INTO THE WEEKDAYS AS NECESSARY.
BUT MOSTLY IT WAS ON WEEKENDS.
YEAH, THEY'VE SHOWN TOTAL DISREGARD FOR THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE DEPARTMENT.
WE CAN ALL AGREE ORDINANCES AND MUNI CODE, THE MISSION SAN JOSE, THE WORLD HERITAGE SITE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, I, I MEAN THE KNEE I GO ON, YOU GET THE PICTURE.
IF HE NEEDS THAT MUCH MORE SPACE, HE NEEDS TO GO OUT TO 1604 AND ROOSEVELT OR FOUR 10 AND ROOSEVELT OR ANYWHERE, BUT RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM MISSION SAN JOSE IN THE LITTLE, UM, IN MR. MR. GUERRA'S OLD AUTO SHOP THAT, YOU KNOW, DOESN'T MEET HIS, UH, HIS NEEDS AND WELL, HIS NEEDS.
HE NEEDED A BIGGER PLACE, OBVIOUSLY.
IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? THANK YOU.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US YOUR THOUGHT.
MY NAME IS BRADY I EAST PYRON 7 8 2 2 3.
I REPRESENT THE HOT WELLS MISSION REACH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
WE SUPPORT MISSION SAN JOSE IN OPPOSING THIS PROJECT AS IT SETS.
UM, I COULD SIT HERE FOR ABOUT 30 MINUTES AND MENTION ALL THE PROJECTS THAT WE SEE THAT HAPPEN ON THE WEEKENDS.
I MEAN, LIKE THE CELL PHONE PLAN.
UH, THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL, WONDERFUL HISTORIC AREA WHERE SAN ANTONIO STARTED AND IS TURNING INTO A DUMP WITH WHAT IS BEING DONE HERE.
IT'S UNFAIR TO THE BUSINESS OWNERS, THE RESIDENTS, ET CETERA.
[01:30:01]
IN THIS AREA ARE NOT VETTED.THIS IS THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF WORLD HERITAGE THIS WEEK, AND WE ARE HERE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE BEEN WORKED OUT SOONER.
THESE PROJECTS SHOULD BE VETTED BY THE WORLD HERITAGE ORGANIZATION DEPARTMENT.
INSTEAD OF THEM JUST JUSTIFYING THEIR JOBS THROUGH OTHER THINGS, THERE'S GOING TO BE INFILL.
IT NEEDS TO BE APPROPRIATE IN THIS AREA, NOT JUST COME TAKE ALL, DO IT WHENEVER YOU WANT, ET CETERA.
IT BRINGS IN SOME VERY INTERESTING ISSUES HERE.
I KNEW MR. GUERRA AT THE SHOP.
I WONDER, UH, WHAT THEY DID WITH ALL THE FRIABLE ASBESTOS THAT WAS IN THERE.
WAS THAT REMEDIATED OR WAS IT JUST SENT TO THE DUMP OR MAYBE IT'S ROUND BACK? WHO KNOWS? UH, PERMITS NOT BEING PULLED.
MAKES WONDER ABOUT QUALITY OF THE, UM, CONSTRUCTION, UM, GOING FROM ONE TO TWO PAINT BOOTHS.
THERE'S SO MANY THINGS GOING ON.
UM, JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING HAS BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME, UH, DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT'S STILL APPROPRIATE FOR, FOR THE AREA.
UM, IF THE COMMUNITY WERE CONTACTED, SUPPORTED THIS, ET CETERA, AND WANTED THIS IN THE AREA, UM, I THINK THEY WOULD'VE, UM, HAD A LOT EASIER TIME.
I CAN SAY THAT HOT WELLS WOULD WELCOME THIS KIND OF BUSINESS.
WE HAVE TWO ALREADY IN OUR AREA.
WE WOULD PREFER THAT, UH, THE CELLULAR PLASMA PLACE BE SOME PLACE LIKE THIS, WHICH EMPLOYS PEOPLE, PROVIDES A SERVICE COMMUNITY, ET CETERA.
NUMBER TWO, WHICH WERE GETTING SHOVED DOWN OUR THROAT.
WE'RE A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE WORKED FOR A LIVING, ACTUALLY HAD DECENT JOBS, BUT ONCE AGAIN, WE DON'T GET THAT.
BUT IF THEY WANTED TO COME OVER TO HOT WELLS, COME ON OVER, WE'D WELCOME THAT.
BUT WITH THE PROXIMITY TO THE MISSION, THE HISTORIC, THE, UH, MISSION DESIGN DESIGN MANUAL WAS NEVER CONSULTED.
THE HOOPS THAT WERE PUT IN PLACE FOR BUSINESSES TO JUMP THROUGH, TO EXPAND OR TO STAY IN THIS AREA HAVE NOT BEEN FOLLOWED.
AND WE ASK THAT YOU FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND DENY THE PETITIONER'S, UM, VARIANCE REQUEST.
ALRIGHT, SO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT COME BACK FORWARD.
SO YOU'VE HEARD A WHOLE BUNCH OF, UH, UH, INFORMATION AND THOUGHTS.
UM, WE WANT TO GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO RE RE REBUT.
WELL JUST, AND, AND, AND I MAY HAVE HIM TALK AS WELL TOO, IF I CAN.
JUST REAL BRIEFLY, UM, IN CLOSING, I WILL TELL YOU THAT JUST A COUPLE THINGS, UH, MISSTATED.
HE HAS VISITED WITH CARVAL, HIS NEIGHBOR, UH, AND HIS NEIGHBOR ISN'T, HAS NOT, UH, IS NOT OPPOSED TO THIS.
THE LAST TIME WE CONTINUED THIS WAS BECAUSE WE TRIED TO MEET WITH STAFF TO SEE IF WE GET THIS RESOLVED.
THERE IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE EXCEPTION.
THERE IS A PROVISION, UH, AS HE STATED, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE STAFF BECAUSE OF THE LIFE SAFETY ISSUE.
UM, UH, COULD HAVE, COULD HAVE, UH, UM, REINSTATED HIS NONCONFORMING RIGHTS.
UM, BUT BECAUSE OF THE EXPANSION WAS 60 FEET TOLD THAT THEY'D, THAT THEY'D PREFER THAT IT WENT BEFORE THIS BOARD.
THE, AGAIN, THE ONLY REASON HE EXPANDED THE 60 FEET WAS FOR THESE, THESE PAINT BOOTHS THAT HE FELT WERE HEALTH SAFETY ISSUES.
UH, THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT HE'S DONE, UH, INCLUDING THE SMOKE SACKS, BECAUSE SMOKE SACK HAD TO BE REDONE BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT AS SAFE AS WELL.
THIS, THIS, UH, PROPERTY HAS BEEN A PATE AND BODY SHOP SINCE IN INCEPTION.
WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE CHARACTER THAT HE'S TRYING TO IMPROVE IT.
HE, HE UNDERSTANDS HE'S CLOSE TO THE MISSIONS AND HE WANTS THIS TO, TO BE SOMETHING HE CAN BE PROUD OF IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, UH, I KNOW MR. ADEEN FOR A LONG TIME REPRESEN HIM FOR A LONG TIME.
HE PUTS A LOT OF MONEY INTO HIS BUSINESSES AND MAKING SURE THAT HE SETS A DIFFERENT STANDARD.
UH, AND SO I'LL LET HIM, UH, TALK ABOUT, UH, IN CLOSING MANANA.
SO, UM, COMMISSIONER MANNA HAS A QUESTION FOR SURE.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HERE, UM, WE'RE PART OF THE DIALOGUE HERE IS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ERROR IS WITH REGARDS TO THE CITY'S POSITION.
AND I THINK YOU KIND OF ALLUDED TO A LITTLE BIT HERE, BUT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND BETTER SPECIFICALLY THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PETITIONS AGAINST THAT.
THE CITY MADE AN ERROR AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND FROM YOU WHAT WAS THAT ERROR THAT WAS MADE, AND THEN WOULD LIKE THE CITY TO RESPOND TO THAT AS WELL, SO THAT WAY I UNDERSTAND THAT.
I DON'T THINK IT'S, I DON'T THINK IT'S AN ERROR.
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO NO, THEY, THEY, THEY, THE ONLY ERROR THAT WAS MADE BY THE CITY WAS THAT, UM, THE NONCONFORMING RIGHTS.
WHEN, WHEN THEY DIDN'T NOTIFY US ABOUT OUR EXPIRATION ON THE NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS THAT WE HAD, THEY, THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO NOTIFY US, BUT WHAT THEY DID WAS THEY SAID, SINCE WE DIDN'T NOTIFY YOU, WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU, WE'RE GONNA START IT TODAY SINCE
[01:35:01]
YOU FOUND OUT TODAY AND, AND GIVE YOU THE EXTENSION.SO THEY DID EXTEND IT BECAUSE WE WEREN'T NOTIFIED IT WAS A 20 DAYS.
THE 60 FEET THAT WE KEEP HEARING ABOUT MM-HMM
UH, WE, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS THE DIMENSION THAT THE CITY, DID THEY MENTION A DIMENSION THAT THEY COULD HAVE LIVED WITH? THEY, I, I'LL, I'LL JUMP INTO IN A SEC.
THEY, IN SPEAKING TO SOME OF THE HIGHER UPS, THEY SAID IT HAD IT BEEN A SMALLER, THEY DIDN'T GIVE AMOUNT, BUT IT SAID IT WAS TOO LARGE A VARIANCE FOR THEM TO MOVE IT TO, TO DO ADMINISTRATIVELY.
THEY, THEY'D RATHER SEE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS HERE, THE CASE AND DETERMINE AND YOUR PAINT BOOTH BEING THE MORE EXPENSIVE PART OF THIS UPGRADE.
IS THERE A WAY YOU COULD REDUCE SOMETHING TO GET TO A POINT THEY COULD BE HAPPY? I, I AGREE WITH THIS YOUNG LADY.
THEY'RE 14 FEET, TWO INCHES IN HEIGHT.
WELL, AND WHEN THEY, I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE, THE FOOTPRINT EXPANSION THAT IF, IF, AND IN AND IN CONFORMING WITH THE CURRENT CODES THAT ARE IN PLACE.
THERE HAD TO HAVE BEEN SOME KIND OF AN EXPANSION, BUT WHAT WAS THE MINIMAL IT COULD HAVE BEEN TO MEET THE NEW CODES THAT PERHAPS THE CITY WOULD'VE ACCEPTED.
I I I'M WONDERING IF THAT DISCUSSION HAPPENED AND MAYBE SOMEONE THAT THE CITY COULD CHIME IN.
WAS THERE SOME NUMBER THAT MAYBE INTO THE GUISE OF CONFORMING OF THE 2024 CODE THAT MAYBE IT WOULD'VE BEEN ACCEPTABLE UNDER THAT EXCEPTION? THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION ABOUT A, LIKE A, A FRACTION OF THIS WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UM, AND JUST TO CLARIFY, THE, THERE WAS NO ADMINISTRATIVE, UM, I GUESS APPLICATION.
WE DID HAVE A DISCUSSION TO THE, WITH THE APPLICANT, IF YOU CAN PROVIDE US EVIDENCE, WE CAN RE-LOOK AT YOUR NON-CONFORMING, UM, WHICH IS WHAT WE DID, AND WE DIDN'T FIND THAT THERE WAS ENOUGH FOR US TO APPROVE IT BASED ON LAWS AND ORDINANCES.
BUT THAT, THAT INITIAL DIALOGUE TYPICALLY STARTS WHEN YOU GO TO PULL A PERMIT YES.
OR YOU DO A PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW.
I, AND, AND WE TURNED IN THE IFC CODES, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STACKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND, AND AS I WAS SAYING, I I DO AGREE, THEY, THEY ARE REALLY HIGH IN COMPARISON TO WHAT THEY WERE, BUT THAT'S CODE 14 FEET, TWO INCHES AND HIGH.
HAVE YOU APPLIED FOR A PERMIT AS OF RIGHT NOW? UH, WE JUST WENT THE PROCESS.
ME AND MY ENGINEER WENT AND WE, WE SPOKE TO RAUL, RAUL AVILA, AND UH, AND WE GOT THE PROCESS STARTED FOR EVERYTHING.
I KNOW THAT USUALLY WE'RE, AND WE ALREADY HAVE FOUR, FOUR, UH, APPLICATIONS SINCE FEBRUARY THAT ARE IN LIMBO.
OUR, OUR STEP IS A, IS A PART OF THAT MM-HMM
I MEAN, YOU PROBABLY WILL NOT GET A PERMIT UNLESS, YOU KNOW WE VOTE ON IT MM-HMM
BUT IF, IF THERE HASN'T BEEN A TECHNICAL REVIEW YET, I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS ABOUT THE EVALUATION UNDER THE 2024 CODE AND HOW THAT A A A AFFECTS YOU SIZE-WISE, WHAT YOU COULD DO ABOUT IT, UH, WITHOUT NEEDING US PERHAPS.
UM, THAT, THAT'S ALL MANANA COMMISSION.
UM, SO, SO AS AN IDZ, WHAT IS THE MAX HEIGHT THAT A CONFORMING FACILITY COULD BE ON THIS LOCATION? OOH, WELL, BASICALLY YOU WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH, UM, CITY CODE, I BELIEVE BEING IDZ.
NOW THE, UM, IT'S 35 FEET, TWO AND A HALF STORIES FOR IDZ ONE.
THIS IS ALLOWED WITH WHAT USE IS ALLOWED.
STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVEN, WE ALREADY ESTABLISHED THAT THEY'RE, THEY DON'T COUNT CHIMNEYS WELL, YEAH, I KNOW.
AND JUST TO CONFIRM, EVEN IF YOU WERE TO ADD AN EXTRA FLOOR, IT'S CONSIDERING AN EXPANSION BECAUSE YOU'RE EXPANDING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, RIGHT? NO, I, I WAS LOOKING FOR CONFORMING AND SO JUST TRY TO UNDERSTAND YOU AS WE LOOK AT, WE'LL SAY FUTURE USE THAT COULD BE HERE, THAT WOULD NOT BE IN THIS DIALOGUE.
WHAT WOULD BE PERMITTING ON THAT C ONE USES? UM, AND I BELIEVE THE CONDITIONAL USE WAS FOR, UH, MEETING ROOMS. UM, IF WE GO BACK TO FIRST SLIDE RECEPTION HALL MEETING ROOMS AND ANY C ONE USES.
HE COMMISSIONER AND NORMAL, UH, VARIANCES ARE MOTIONS THAT COME BEFORE THE BOARD.
WE CONSIDER HARDSHIP AS ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE IT IS AN APPEAL.
ARE WE ONLY LOOKING AT THE ERROR CONSIDERATION MADE BY THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OR IS HARDSHIP ONE OF THE THE HARDSHIP IS NOT ONE OF, THERE ARE CRITERIA OF REVIEWS FOR APPEALS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME, SO IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ANYONE LIKES TO ASK BEFORE WE MOVE TO A MOTION? I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.
IVANEZ COMMISSIONER IVANEZ REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA 25 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 2,
[01:40:01]
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE APPEAL FROM AN ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION FOR A NON-CONFORMING USE DENIAL TO PERMIT THE USE OF AUTO AND LIGHT TRUCK REPAIR AND AUTO PAINT AND BODY SHOP SITUATED AT 34 0 6 ROOSEVELT, APPLICANT BEING JOE JOEL INE BECAUSE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWS THE CITY STAFF MADE AN ERROR AND A DECISION MADE BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, UM, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS APPEAL.UM, SECOND, THERE'S A COUPLE OF REASONS.
UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO TO, UH, TAKE SERIOUSLY IS THE FACT THAT WE DO HAVE HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND WE DO HAVE A WORLD HERITAGE AREA, WHICH THIS BUSINESS IS WITHIN BOTH OF THOSE, I FEEL THAT, I FEEL VERY SORRY THAT YOU'VE SPENT SO MUCH MONEY ON MAKING THIS BUILDING SAFE AND BETTER, BUT I THINK THAT THE PERMITS AND GOING THROUGH OHP ARE VITAL TO MAKING VIABLE BUSINESSES, ESPECIALLY IN HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, I THINK THAT ALSO THAT MAYBE YOU NEED TO GO THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS AND THROUGH OHP AGAIN, UH, AND SEE HOW THAT FARES FOR YOU.
BUT AS A VARIANCE, I WILL NOT SUPPORT IT.
SO I WILL ALSO NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THIS AND, UH, SIMPLY, UM, SO FIRST OFF, AS WAS INDICATED, UM, BY MY COLLEAGUE THAT THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE PATH TO, UH, RIGHT, WHAT'S CURRENTLY ON, UH, OR POTENTIALLY RIGHT, WHAT'S CURRENTLY GOING ON.
UM, I DO NOT SEE THAT THE CITY MADE AN ERROR AT ALL.
UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE DECISION BASED UPON ALL THE INFORMATION PROVIDED.
AND TO ME, THE, THE ERRORS MADE WERE CERTAINLY BY THE, WERE WERE SPECIFICALLY BY THE APPLICANT THEMSELVES.
AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE APPEAL.
SO LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE.
COMMISSIONER MANNA? I DO NOT SUPPORT THE APPEAL.
COMMISSIONER BURTON? NO, I DO NOT AGREE.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER GOMEZ? I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? NO, I DO NOT APPROVE COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YEAH, I DO NOT CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I DO NOT CONCUR.
UH, PLEASE GET WITH STAFF, UM, AND DISCUSS WHAT YOUR NEXT STEPS ARE.
ALL RIGHT, ITEM NUMBER FOUR I.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 ADDRESS AT 3 4 4 EZ AVENUE.
IN CONS, DISTRICT FIVE, THE APPLICANT IS MICHAEL RIOJAS REQUESTING A THREE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A NEW PORCH WITH A ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH SIDE SETBACK FROM THE WEST PROPERTY LINE TO INCLUDE A ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH OVERHANG AND LIMITED TO NINE FEET IN DEPTH.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED EAST OF SOUTH STARS ZAMORA STREET ON THE NIRA AVENUE.
THIS CASE STANDS FROM A COURT ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION INVOLVING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FRONT PORCH WITH RUFIN ON AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITHOUT THE REQUIRED PERMITS.
DURING A VISIT TO THE SITE, STAFF OBSERVED THAT THE ADDITION ALIGNED WITH THE WIDTH OF THE HOME, INCLUDING AN OVERHANG.
THIS NEW PORCH AT 28 FEET BY EIGHT FEET WAS REPLACEMENT OF THE PREVIOUS 12 FOOT FIVE INCHES BY FIVE FEET, 10 INCH PORCH ACCORDING TO SECTION 35 DASH FIVE 16.
SETBACK AND FRONTAGE REGULATIONS.
THE BUILDING LINE FOR AN EXISTING RESIDENCE HAVING A SIDE YARD OR THREE OR MORE FEET MAY BE
[01:45:01]
MAINTAINED ON ANY ADDITION TO THE RESIDENCE, BUT IN NO INSTANCE SHALL THE SIDE YARD BE LESS THAN THREE FEET.THE EXISTING SIDE SETBACK IS LESS THAN THREE FEET, SO THIS STANDARD WOULD NOT APPLY.
THE PROPERTY OWNER IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED PORCH AND ROOF LINE TO REMAIN ONE FOOT EIGHT INCHES FROM THE WEST PROPERTY LINE.
SITE PLAN HIGHLIGHTED THE LOCATION ON THE WEST SIDE, THE, UM, DISTANCES FOR INCLUDING THE OVERHANG, THAT ARROW, UM, HORIZONTALLY.
THIS WAS A HISTORICAL VIEW DATED JANUARY, 2022.
YOU CAN SEE THE PORCH IS CENTRALLY LOCATED TO THE FRONT AND THIS IS THE CURRENT VIEW, UM, IN THE EXPANSION OF THE FULL WIDTH OF THE HOME.
THE VIEW FROM THE SIDE, THIS IS JUST HIGHLIGHTING THE SETBACKS AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THIS IS THE PROPERTY, UM, ADJACENT WITH THE DRIVEWAY SEPARATION ACROSS THE STREET.
AND CONTINUING DOWN THENAR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR, UM, THIS SHOULD BE SIDE SETBACK.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 9 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE SUFFICIENT SPACE WILL REMAIN FOR THE PURPOSES OF WATER RUNOFF, FIRE SAFETY AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE.
AND TWO, THE PROPERTY OWNERS EXPANDED THE PORCH ALONG AN EXISTING BUILDING LINE THAT WAS HISTORICALLY ESTABLISHED AT A REDUCED DISTANCE FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
WE RECEIVED FIVE IN SUPPORT AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
NO RESPONSE FROM PALM HEIGHTS AND THE SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION.
THIS IS HIGHLIGHTING SUPPORT FROM HIS NEIGHBORS.
AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE DECK OF THE PORCH DOES NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE FOUNDATION OF THE EXISTING HOME.
AND THE ROOF OVERHANG DOES NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE ROOF OVERHANG OF THE EXISTING HOME.
AND THE TOP OF THE PORCH DOES SLOPE TOWARDS THE FRONT AND NOT TOWARDS THE SIDE.
AND THE NINE FEET, THERE'S A ONE FOOT OVERHANG, SO IT WAS EIGHT FEET FOR THE WIDTH OF THE FOUNDATION.
SO, UH, QUESTION FOR CITY STAFF.
UM, SO, SO THIS HOUSE IS BUILT IN 38 AND SO, UM, LIKELY HASN'T MOVED SINCE THEN.
UM, AND SO, SO THAT THERE IS CODE WRITTEN FOR THE THREE FOOT VARIANCE WHERE IF IT HAD BEEN THREE FOOT, IT WOULD'VE BEEN FINE.
SO SHOULD THE UDC REWRITE GO BACK AND CONSIDER FOR HISTORICALLY PLACED BUILDINGS WHERE, UM, IF THEY ARE NOT EXPANDING BEYOND THE LINES LIKE THIS, YOU KNOW, THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER SO THAT THEY DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE TO BRING PEOPLE FORWARD FOR THIS KINDA DIALOGUE.
UM, SO IF THIS WAS A HISTORICAL ONE FOOT SIDE SETBACK, I DON'T THINK, UM, WE WOULD, IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO EXCUSE AN EXPANSION TO REMAIN AT THAT ONE FOOT, ESPECIALLY IF IN THIS CASE THERE'S A DRIVEWAY.
BUT IF THERE WAS ANOTHER HOME THERE, UM, PROBABLY THE THREE FOOT, UM, STOPPING AT THE OVERHANG IS A GOOD, UH, AMOUNT I BELIEVE.
FOR, YOU KNOW, ALLOW FOR YOUR, THE ADMINISTRATIVE, UM, ALLOWANCE I GUESS TO ALLOW FOR THAT OR SOMETHING ALONG THAT LINE.
IF THE UDC IS AMENDED OR CHANGED, UM, THAT IS A POSSIBILITY.
I THINK ON THAT NOTE, BABY STEPS OPEN PORCHES FIRST AND WE'LL SEE HOW THAT WORKS OUT.
OKAY, SO THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
THAT BETTER? MY WIFE VIRGINIA RES.
LIKE WE SAYING, WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO FIX UP THE HOUSE AND TRY TO TAKE OUT THAT OLD UGLY CITY LIKE THE UGLY PORCH.
SO WE, WE TRY BUILDING A NEW PORCH BEFORE WE DID ANY, OBVIOUSLY I WANTED TO REROOF THE HOUSE BEFORE CONTINUING RENOVATION AND TAKING CARE OF THAT AND WE ARE TRYING TO TAKE CARE OF ALL THAT, BUT I DIDN'T GET THE PERMITS IN TIME.
I NEED TO THIS VARIANCE BE APPROVED SO I CAN CONTINUE ON WITH ADDITIONAL PERMITS.
WELL, I I WILL SAY THAT IT IS A, IT, IT ISN'T VERY, UH, A VERY LARGE INCREASE AND IT'S IN LINE WITH THE REST OF THE HOME.
IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, UH, IS THERE ANYONE'S TIME TO SPEAK VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
I, I BELIEVE WE'RE READY TO GO TO A MOTION ON THIS ONE.
COMMISSIONER RAGMAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 9.
[01:50:01]
I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF AN ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A THREE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A NEW PORCH WITH A ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH SIDE SETBACK FROM THE WEST PROPERTY LINE, UH, TO INCLUDE A ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH OVERHANG AND LIMITED TO NINE FEET IN DEPTH, SITUATED AT 3 4 4 RIS AVENUE.APPLICANT BEING, UH, MICHAEL RIOJAS.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THE LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PORCH EXPANSION MAINTAINS ADEQUATE SPACING BETWEEN STRUCTURES TO SUPPORT WATER RUNOFF, FIRE SAFETY AND ACCESS FOR MAINTENANCE.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE ENFORCING THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK WOULD CREATE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BY PREVENTING A MODEST FUNCTIONAL PORCH THAT ALIGNS WITH THE CURRENT STRUCTURE.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE TO SPREAD THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS SUFFICIENT SPACING BETWEEN PROPERTIES REMAINS FOR MAINTENANCE, WATER RUNOFF AND FIRE SAFETY.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE 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.
BECAUSE THE NEW PORCH DOES NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS IT SPANS THE SAME WIDTH OF THE HOME IS LIMITED TO NINE FEET IN DEPTH.
THE PLED OF THE OWNER FOR WHICH THE PROPERTY IS FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER PROPERTY AND NOT MERELY FINANCIAL THAT ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE PROPERTY OWNERS EXPANDED THEIR PORCH ALONG AN EXISTING BUILDING LINE THAT WAS HISTORICALLY ESTABLISHED AT A REDUCED DISTANCE FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
UH, YEAH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
UH, THE PORCH LINES UP WITH THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT OF THE HOME THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR MANY DECADES, I'M GONNA GUESS YES.
UM, AND THERE'S A SH SHARED DRIVEWAY, SO THERE'S SUFFICIENT SPACE BETWEEN THE, THE PROPERTIES TO ALLOW FOR WATER RUNOFF AND FIRE SAFETY.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR WITH MS. BERGMAN AND ALSO TO, SINCE NEITHER ONE OF HIS NEIGHBORS EITHER TO THE RIGHT OR LEFT OF HIM A POST, I WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S REALLY HELPING HIM WITH THIS PROJECT.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE.
UH, WE'RE GONNA DO A VOICE VOTE ON THIS ONE.
ANYBODY LIKE A BREAK? SHOULD WE PRESS ON? WE'RE GONNA TAKE A SEVEN MINUTE BREAK.
WE'LL SEE Y'ALL IN SEVEN MINUTES.
ON ITEM NUMBER SIX, ITEM NUMBER SIX IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 23.
THE ADDRESS IS 700 CRYSTAL STREET IN CONS.
DISTRICT FIVE, THE APPLICANT IS ANDREW SALAZAR.
A REQUEST FOR ONE A 2,503 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 2,500 SQUARE FOOT COMBINED TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF ALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO ALLOW FOR A COMBINED 5,003 SQUARE FEET OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
TWO, A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT FOUR INCH PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD FENCE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SITUATED IMMEDIATELY EAST OF INTERSTATE 35 SOUTH ACCESS ROAD ON CRYSTAL STREET.
THE PROPERTY COMPRISES OF 1.1 TO SIX ACRES CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH ONLY ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND NO PRIMARY RESIDENCE.
SECTION 35 DASH THREE 70 B THREE ACCESSORY USE AND STRUCTURE REGULATIONS OF THE UDC STATES.
THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE OF ALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES SHALL NOT EXCEED 50% OF THE TOTAL AREA OF THE SIDE AND REAR YARDS.
PROVIDED THAT IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, THE TOTAL FLOOR AREA DOES NOT EXCEED A MAXIMUM OF 2,500 SQUARE FEET.
AFTER THE PLA AFTER PLAID IN THE PROPERTY IN DECEMBER OF 2024, THE PROPERTY OWNERS PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
HOWEVER, THE COMBINED FLOOR AREA OF THE EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES EXCEEDS THE 2,500 SQUARE FOOT LIMIT.
ACCORDING TO THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED, THE PROPERTY CONTAINS AT LEAST 20 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES THAT EXCEED THE ALLOWABLE TOTAL FLOOR AREA.
THE MAJORITY OF THE STRUCTURES APPEAR TO BE OVER 20 YEARS OLD AND OWNERS DEMOLISHED NINE STRUCTURES REDUCING THE TOTAL FLOOR AREA TO 5,003 SQUARE FEET.
[01:55:01]
DESPITE THIS REDUCTION, THE AREA OF REMAINING STRUCTURES STILL SIGNIFICANTLY EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE AREA.AN APPROVED VARIANCE IS REQUIRED TO KEEP THE REMAINING STRUCTURES.
AN EXISTING FRONT YARD FENCE LIMITED ON THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE EXCEEDS THE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS ON THE PROPERTY AS A PLAT RECLASSIFIED IT FROM A SIDE REAR YARD FENCE TO A FRONT YARD FENCE ON THE NEW LOT.
THE CLEAR VISION WOULD NOT APPLY AS A FENCE.
DISTANCE TO THE RIGHT OF WAY DID NOT CHANGE.
THOSE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW OR THERE STRUCTURES THAT REMAIN AND THOSE WITH THE X WERE THOSE REMOVED.
AND THIS IS THE FRONT YARD, UH, SHOWING THE FENCE HEIGHT AND SOME OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES REMAINING.
THIS IS THE FRONT FENCE WITH THE ONE FOOT FOUR INCH OVER THE FIVE FEET AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
I STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
TOTAL FLOOR AREA STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 23.
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL INTRODUCE A NEGATIVE PRECEDENCE OF EXCEEDING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, COMBINED FLOOR AREA IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
AND TWO, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
OH, SORRY,
SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO OE DASH 2 5 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 3 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE FENCE SIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS LIMITED IN LENGTH ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
AND TWO, THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
25 RECEIVED IN FAVOR AND ONE IN OPPOSITION.
LEO'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND TWO OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS, UM, REPRESENT THREE COUNTS BECAUSE THEY ARE LOCATED IN THE SAME DISTRICT.
AND THE LAST ONE IN OPPOSITION.
THIS CONCLUDES TASK PRESENTATION.
THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT AND, AND CAN WITH SO MANY ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
IS IS THERE EVER BEEN A RESIDENTIAL DWELLING ON HERE? HOW DID THEY GET THAT MANY ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITH NO RESIDENTIAL? UM, THOSE STRUCTURES WERE BUILT BY NEIGHBOR AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO THE SOUTH.
YEAH, I BE, I BELIEVE THIS PROPERTY WAS, UM, MULTIPLE, LIKE PROBABLY THE BACK SECTION OF MULTIPLE PROPERTIES WITHIN THERE.
AND THEN THEY PURCHASED THOSE AND RE PLATTED IT INTO ONE LOT.
SO YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE STRUCTURES THAT ARE LIKE STRADDLING THE PROPERTY LINE THERE.
THOSE WERE BUILT BY THOSE OWNERS.
LET HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
HI, MY NAME IS CINDY SALAZAR AND MY NAME IS SANDRA SALAZAR.
UH, I LIVE AT 7 7 0 1 KEATS, WHICH IS A STREET, UM, CONNECTED TO THE PROPERTY OF, UM, TO THE RIGHT SIDE OR TO THE LEFT SIDE IS WHERE, UM, ORIGINALLY ALL OF THAT BELONGED TO MY DAD.
ALL THAT PROPERTY BELONGED TO MY DAD AT ONE TIME.
THE, IT'S BEEN IN THE FAMILY FOR OVER, I GUESS MAYBE 36 YEARS, 37 YEARS.
AND, UM, HE LIVES RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO ME.
SO I'VE LIVED THERE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 63 YEARS.
I WAS AN INFANT AND I BROUGHT, CAME HOME AND I'VE LIVED THERE EVER SINCE THEN.
AND THEN I MARRIED AND I WENT NEXT DOOR.
UM, A LOT OF THE STRUCTURES THAT WE HAVE THERE THAT I WE WANTED TO KEEP IS WE DID A LOT
[02:00:01]
OF, UM, CAMPING AND EVERYTHING.MY DAD ALWAYS BELIEVED IN HAVING YOUR VEHICLES, YOUR, YOU KNOW, WE USED TO DO TRAVEL TRAILING.
WE USED TO GO CAMPING, WE USED TO GO BOATING.
WE WERE A TIGHT CAMP FAMILY AND WE WOULD DO THINGS TOGETHER.
HE BELIEVED EVERYTHING WAS ALWAYS COVERED ON CARPORT.
NOT IN A GARAGE, BUT IN A CARPORT.
SO WE HAD LIKE PONTOON BOATS AND WE'VE HAD TWO TRAVEL TRAILERS AND THEY WERE ALL EXISTED AND ALL COVERED OVER.
THE PICNICS ARE TOGETHER, SO THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE SOME OF THE PICTURES YOU SEE THERE HAS, UM, PATIOS WHERE WITH PICNIC TABLES AND STUFF, THE ONES WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO BUILD A HOUSE THERE FOR, I GUESS ABOUT A YEAR, WE REPLANTED IT.
MY DAD, UH, AT ONE TIME OWNED ONE SIDE, BUT HE'S ALREADY 91 YEARS OLD AND HE'S LIKE, I, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA DO ANYTHING ELSE ANYMORE WITH IT, YOU KNOW? UM, MY MOTHER'S 88 YEARS OLD AND THEY'RE NOT MUCH OF GOING ANYWHERE DOING ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
AND SO HE SAYS, HEY, WHY DON'T YOU BUILD A HOUSE? WE'RE GONNA BUILD A HOUSE IN THE BACKYARD.
UM, SO THAT'S WHY IT'S VERY KEPT VERY CLEAN.
EVERYTHING'S PAINTED, EVERYTHING'S ALWAYS BEEN, YOU KNOW, UP TO KEEP.
IT'S NEVER NOTHING THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S, UM, BREAKING DOWN OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
A LOT OF THE STRUCTURES WE TOOK DOWN, UH, WERE THINGS THAT MY DAD HAD BUILT LIKE A GREENHOUSE FOR MY MOTHER WHEN, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE SHE WOULD HAVE PLANTS AND WHEN IT WOULD GET COLD, SHE WOULD PUT IN THERE.
HE HAD ONE LIKE FOR HIS, YOU KNOW, GARDENING AND SHOVELS AND STUFF.
UM, AND JUST, THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WERE NOT IMPORTANT.
WE JUST WENT AHEAD AND TOOK ALL OF THOSE DOWN.
AND THE OTHER ONES ARE REALLY, REALLY NICE STRUCTURES THAT HAVE THE CONCRETE ON THEM.
AND, AND WE USED THEM, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, PURPOSES TO KEEP OUR PROPERTY COVERED AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WELL KEPT AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.
WE DIDN'T WANT THEM TO BE, YOU KNOW.
I'LL SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? SO QUESTION FOR CITY STAFF.
SO, SO THIS IS A, AN ESSENTIALLY AN RE LOT THAT'S CURRENTLY ZONED R SIX, UH, BECAUSE IT IS GREATER THAN AN ACRE.
SO DOES THE SAME, UM, REQUIREMENT WITH REGARDS TO THE NUMBER OF SQUARE FEET APPLY TO AN RE LOT? GIMME ONE SECOND.
UH, I BELIEVE THE PRIOR 2023 HAD THAT EXEMPTION WHERE THE RE CAN HAVE MORE, UM, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
BUT CURRENTLY THE RE DOES NOT ALLOW FOR MORE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE.
UH, MY QUESTION TO Y'ALL IS THAT WHEN YOU DO BUILD A HOUSE, IS THERE ANY OF THESE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES THAT YOU INTEND TO ATTACH TO YOUR HOME? UH, NOT ATTACHED TO THE HOME.
UM, THE HOUSE THAT WE'RE BUILDING DOES NOT HAVE A GARAGE.
SO ONE OF THE CARPORTS, UM, WHICH IS GONNA BE ON RIGHT THERE, THE ONE RIGHT THERE, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GONNA PARK OUR VEHICLES.
AND THEN OUR HOUSE WAS GONNA BE TO THE PICTURE TO THE RIGHT SECOND.
SO RIGHT THERE, THAT, THAT PART IS WHERE WE'RE GONNA PUT THE HOUSE RIGHT THERE AND ONE OF THE CARPORTS RIGHT HERE, THAT'S TO THAT ONE RIGHT THERE IS WHERE WE'RE GONNA PARK OUR VEHICLES AND WALK INTO THE HOUSE TO THE, OKAY.
MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA QUESTION AGAIN FOR CITY STAFF.
SO DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER WAS FOR RE LOTS BEFORE 2023? UH, I DO NOT, IT'S DEFINITELY NOT THIS MUCH, BUT I CAN LOOK IT UP.
IT WAS LARGER IS JUST HIS POINT.
BRAGMAN, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, ARE YOU PLANNING ON TAKING DOWN ANYMORE OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES? NO, I'M NOT.
IT'S, UH, LIKE I SAID, A LOT OF 'EM WE'RE PLANNING ON DOING, WE'RE BOTH RETIRED AND LATER ON WE'RE GONNA, YOU KNOW, DO A LITTLE BIT OF TRAVELING AND STUFF.
BUT LIKE I SAID, MY, I HAVE BOTH OF MY PARENTS, THEY'RE 91 AND 88, AND I'M KIND OF LIKE THEIR CAREGIVERS.
AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE NOT GOING ANYWHERE BECAUSE I NEED TO BE AROUND THEM ALL THE TIME.
AND THEY LIVE RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
WE, UH, WE LIVE ON THE BROWN HOUSE AND THEY LIVE IN THE BLUE, SO THEIR HOUSE IS ALL BLUE.
AND THEN OURS IS KIND OF LIKE A BROWN COLOR.
[02:05:01]
NEXT DOOR AND I'M AT THEIR CALL AT ALL HOURS.YOU KNOW, THEY CALL ME WHENEVER THEY NEED.
I, I, I'M A LITTLE CURIOUS WHY THIS DIDN'T QUALIFY FOR NON-CONFORMING USE.
YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE ALL THESE STRUCTURES AND BUILDING THE HOUSE ACTUALLY KIND OF MAKES IT MORE COMPLIANT, MAYBE.
AND I CAN'T MOVE FAR AWAY FROM MY PARENTS, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST, IT'S, IT'S ESSENTIALLY BECAUSE THEY'RE CREATING A NEW LOT.
UM, IF IT WAS OBVIOUSLY THE SAME LOT AS THE WAY WE'RE CONFIGURED, THERE'D BE NON-CONFORMING.
THEY'RE CREATING A NEW LOT WITH A PLAN AND COMBINING ALL THOSE INTO ONE.
THAT'S WHY WE COULDN'T CONSIDER AS NON-CONFORMING.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS, I'M HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION IF YES.
AND JUST TO ANSWER COMMISSIONER MAYOR'S MAN'S QUESTION, UM, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT WAS MORE GEARED TOWARDS ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS HAVING ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, NOT SEARCH.
WERE THERE ANY, UH, VOICEMAILS ANYONE SENT TO THE SPEAK? NO PUBLIC COMMENTS COMMISSIONER STEVENS, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 3 0 0 1 2 3, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, UH, 2,503 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 2,500 SQUARE FOOT COMBINED TOTAL AREA OF ALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO ALLOW FOR A COMBINED 5,003 SQUARE FEET OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SITUATED AT 700 CRYSTAL STREET, APPLICANT BEING ANDREW SALAZAR.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT, ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS LARGE ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THE REMAINING STRUCTURES AND THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE, WHILE MAINTAINING SIGNIFICANT OPEN SPACE ON THE LOT.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE THE PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD HAVE TO DEMOLISH SOME OF THE REMAINING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, WHICH ARE BUILT ON FOUNDATIONS AND WELL MAINTAINED TO MEET THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE COMBINED AREA.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
ALTHOUGH THE COMBINED FULL AREA OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IS JUST OVER TWICE THE ALLOWABLE REQUIREMENT, THE PROPERTY HAS A LARGER LOT THAT, THAT CAN SUPPORT THIS ADDITIONAL FLOOR AREA.
FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN, THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
BECAUSE THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE PROPOSING A, TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA, THE REMAINING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WILL NOT IMPACT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FUTURE HOME AS THE LOT IS LARGE ENOUGH TO SUPPORT BOTH.
SIX, THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTED 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, TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS THAT THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SAW IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE SIZE OF THE LOT AS WELL OVER AN ANCHOR ACRE.
AND THE, AND THE STRUCTURES ARE CONSTRUCTED BEFORE THE PROPOSED PLATTING OF THE PLOT OF THE LOT.
UH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS VARIANCE.
UH, YOUR PROPERTY IS OBVIOUSLY VERY UNIQUE.
UM, Y'ALL ALMOST OWN THE WHOLE BLOCK, SO THAT'S SUPER COOL.
AND I BET YOU HAVE REALLY GOOD PARTIES THERE.
UM, BUT I, I DO THINK, LIKE THIS IS LIKE, IF ANYTHING, THIS KIND OF SEEMS LIKE A NON-CONFORMING USE, BUT ALSO IT'S COMING INTO CLOSER INTO CONFORMANCE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER MAYER.
I THINK THAT, UH, FOLLOW UP WITH COMMISSIONER STEVENS, YOU KNOW, 21 PEOPLE VOTE IN FAVOR, SO IT'LL BE A REALLY NICE BIG BLOCK PARTY.
AND THEN, UM, ALSO, I WAS ASKING THE RE QUESTION BECAUSE I THINK IT'S RELEVANT HERE.
THIS IS AN RE LOT AND, AND PRIOR TO THIS STRUCTURES BEING BUILT, IT WOULD, THIS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN ISSUE.
SO BECAUSE OF THOSE REASONS, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? UH, HEARING NONE, UH, I ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER, UH, BURTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER OZONE? YES, I CONCUR.
OH, THERE'S ONE FOR THE FENCE TOO.
I CAN, I CAN DO THAT ONE STEVENS.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 23 MOVE THE
[02:10:01]
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRAND REQUEST FOR ONE FOUR INCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT, FOUR INCH PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD FENCE SITUATED AT 700 CRYSTAL STREET.APPLICANT BEING ANDREW SALAZAR.
'CAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PRI PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE, AND THE PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER IS FENCE IS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, PROVIDING VISUAL OPENNESS OF THE PROPERTY AND DOES NOT OBSTRUCT CLEAR VISION.
B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE OF THE CONVENIENCE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED AS THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME PROVIDES ADEQUATE SPACE FOR THE TURNING RADIUS AND DOES NOT AFFECT VISIBILITY ON THE CRYSTAL STREET.
C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USES AS THERE IS VISUAL OPENNESS AND NO INTERFERENCE WITH THE CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENTS.
D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT AS THE FENCE IS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN AND PROVIDES AESTHETIC UNIFORMITY WITH THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORING FENCE.
AND E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED BY THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT AS A SENSE OF COMMUNITY IS STILL PROMOTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS THERE IS NO LOSS OF LIGHT AIR FLOOR VISUAL OPENNESS OF THE PROPERTY AND OF MOTION.
UH, COMMISSIONER STEVENS, I'LL BE IN FAVOR FOR ALL OF THE REASONS THAT I OUTLINED IN MY WELL ARTICULATED MOTION.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, AND I CONCUR MR. STEVENS.
I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THAT FENCE.
I KNOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO IT'S, UH, IN A GOOD AREA.
ANY, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? ALL WE DO VOICE VOTE.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 1 2 4.
THE ADDRESS BEING 1 1 0 0 6 BANDERA ROAD IN COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN, THE APPLICANT BEING TRI-TECH ENGINEERING.
AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A 16 FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A 36 FOOT FOUR INCH FRONT SETBACK.
THE ZONING IS C ONE CD FOR LIGHT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR OFFICE WAREHOUSE FLEX SPACE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF BANDERA ROAD AND PRU ROAD, AND WAS HISTORICALLY THE SITE OF A RESIDENTIAL HOME.
THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY NOT IN USE AND THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE VACANT.
UH, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD CREATE SIX NEW OFFICE WAREHOUSE FLEX SPACE ON THE PROPERTY.
UH, THE DEVELOPER WAS INFORMED BY THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE POTENTIAL OF AN EXPANSION OF THE BANDERA ROAD, TEXAS, UM, TEXAS 16 RIGHT OF WAY.
UH, THE DEVELOPMENT IS PROPOSED WITH A FRONT SETBACK GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FRONT SETBACK IN A C ONE BASED ZONING DISTRICT.
UH, THE INCREASED FRONT SETBACK IS INTENDED TO ACCOMMODATE FOR ANY FUTURE EXPANSION OF THE BANDERA RIGHT OF WAY WHILE MAINTAINING SEPARATION FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY AND SUFFICIENT YARD SPACE.
UH, SHOWN HERE IS A SITE PLAN OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THE, UH, SIX, WELL, FOUR OF THE SIX, UH, OFFICE WAREHOUSES PROPOSED THAT.
ON THE LEFT SIDE IS THE FRONT YARD, UH, FRONTING BANDERA ROAD HIGHLIGHTED IN RED IS THAT AREA THAT WOULD BE EXPANDED UPON BY TXDOT IF THAT EXPANSION GOES THROUGH.
UM, AND SO YOU CAN SEE THE MEASUREMENTS THAT ARE KIND OF HIGHLIGHTING THAT SHOWN HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA OFF BANDERA ROAD STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FRONT SETBACK, VARI STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO A DASH 25 DASH 0 3 24 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY SEPARATE THE, THE DEVELOPMENT FROM THE STREETS SCAPE.
AND TWO, THERE'S THE POTENTIAL FOR A RIGHT OF WAY EXPANSION THAT WOULD REDUCE THE DEPTH AND FRONT YARD SPACE OF THE PROPERTY.
ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION, AND THE OAK RIDGE POINT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
ALL RIGHT, SO THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
HI, UM, I'M AL CARROLL WITH TRITECH ENGINEERING.
UH, WE'RE WORKING WITH BE DOLL DEVELOPMENT ON THIS PROJECT.
UM, THEY RECEIVED THE NOTICE FROM TDOT DURING DUE DILIGENCE THAT THERE WAS A PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY EXPANSION.
SO WE, I GUESS DURING THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS RIGHT NOW, WE'RE JUST TO, TO BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THAT FUTURE EXPANSION.
[02:15:01]
BELIEVE IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO JUST BRING THE, BRING THE BUILDING BACK TO, TO BASICALLY THE UNCON CONFORMANCE IF, IF THE EXPANSION OCCURS.I I FOUND YOU ON THE, UH, PLANNED ROADWAY MAP.
IT DIDN'T TELL ME HOW MUCH OF A WIDTH, BUT I'M SURE 20 FEET SEEMS, IT SEEMS WHAT THEY USUALLY GET.
GET, UH, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? SO MANNA? YES.
SO, SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, SO THE NOTICE WAS SENT OUT TO, UM, TO THE BOARD WITH REGARDS TO RESPONSES.
AND FOR THIS ONE, IT DID SHOW THAT OAK RIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WAS IN OPPOSITION.
AND SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UH, THERE WASN'T SOME CONFUSION THERE.
AND THEN, UM, I WAS ENGAGED WITH REGARDS TO THE TRANSPORTATION OVERLAY DISTRICT AS WE REDREW, UM, BANDERA.
AND SO, YES, SO THIS, THIS DOES MAKE SENSE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT IS GETTING READY TO HAPPEN DOWN THAT WHOLE CORRIDOR.
AND SO THIS FITS WELL WITHIN NET.
ANYONE ELSE? LIKE COMMISSIONER ZUNA? I WAS JUST RECOGNIZING THAT THE PROJECT WOULD MEET ALL KIND OF LANDSCAPE BUFFERING AND SIDESTEP BACK REQUIREMENTS ONCE IT'S MOVED TO KINDA THE DEVELOPMENT STAGE.
IS THAT ACCURATE, SIR? I'M SORRY? WOULD THE PROJECT MEET THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERING AND SETBACK BUFFERING AND ALL THE OTHER BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS AS IT MOVES FORWARD? YES.
UM, IS THERE ANY ONE TIME TO SPEAK VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
OH, ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNI? YES.
NO, WE DID NOT RECEIVE, UH, THAT WAS A TYPO IN THAT PRESENTATION THERE.
SO WE DID NOT, THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION, NO OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 2 4, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUEST FOR A 16 FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A 36 FOOT FOUR INCH FRONT SETBACK SITUATED AT, UH, 11,000 0 0 6 BANDERA ROAD APPLICANT BEING TRI-TECH ENGINEERING.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CARE OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH AS THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS.
SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRACT TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AS A VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY SEPARATE THE DEVELOPMENT FROM THE STREETSCAPE.
AND PARKING IS PROPOSED BEHIND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE BUILDING, NEAREST TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE POTENTIAL FOR A RIGHT OF WAY EXPANSION ALONG BONNE ROAD MAY RESULT IN SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED FRONT YARD TO MAINTAIN THE SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT AND MAY CAUSE DAMAGE TO ANY FOUNDATION, UTILITIES, OR SIMILAR INFRASTRUCTURE IF INSTALLED WITHIN THE MAXIMUM SETBACK, SETBACK LIMITS.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS A PROPOSED USE.
RECENTLY APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL IS UNCHARACTERISTIC OF A TYPICAL C ONE BASED ZONING DISTRICT.
SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE BY GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE.
FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED AS THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
FIVE SUCH VARIANCES WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF LOGISTIC, CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALSO THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AS THE, AS THE VARIANCE WOULD ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION TO BE FURTHER RECESSION OF THE PROPERTY.
AND ALL OTHER PROPOSED SETBACKS PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT SEPARATION FROM SHARED PROPERTY LINES.
AND SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS VARIANCE OF ASSAULT, 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, NOT DUE TO OTHER RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS.
AND THE DISTRICT WENT, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST ON THE PROPERTY, IS THE POTENTIAL FOR FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY EXPANSION ALONG PANDORA ROAD AND A MOTION.
SO I'M SUPPORTING THE, THE VARIANCES READ.
I HAVE NO OPPOSITION FROM ANY OF THE NEIGHBORING, UH, PROPERTIES.
NO OPPOSITION FROM THE OWNERS' ASSOCIATION.
UH, PROJECT WILL MEET ALL, UH, LANDSCAPING BUFFERING, SETBACK, BUFFERING, UH, IT'S MERELY THE FRONT SETBACK, AND WE'RE DOING THAT BECAUSE OF THE RIDE WE TAKING FROM BONNE ROAD, MANDEL ROAD, WHICH, UH, IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION WITHIN THE AREA.
I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE AL BE IN SUPPORT THE MOTION FOR THOSE REASONS TOO.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE? LET'S HAVE ROLL CALL.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER BURTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF ACT.
[02:20:01]
IS BO OA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 0 3 0 1 2 6.THE ADDRESS BEING 3 4 6 THORMAN PLACE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO.
UH, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A 183 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE NCD SIX RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS, MAXIMUM 616 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SIZE TO ALLOW FOR A 799 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF THORMAN PLACE IN NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS AVENUE, UH, AVENUE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT IN THE REAR YARD OF THE PROPERTY, THE MANKEY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS ALLOW FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO BE LIMITED IN SIZE TO A MAXIMUM OF 40% OF THE GROSS FLOOR AREA OF THE PRI PRINCIPAL.
RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES FOOTPRINT, EXCLUDING PATIOS AND GARAGES USING BEXAR COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORDS OF IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY STAFF HAS DETERMINED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SIZE OF AN A DDU ON THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE 616 SQUARE FEET PER THE NCD STANDARDS.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THEIR NEW A DDU AT A SIZE OF 799 SQUARE FEET AND REQUIRES A 183 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE TO BE GRANTED BY THE BOARD TO PROCEED.
THE PROPOSED A DDU SIZE WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 52% OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE SIZE.
THERE ARE AT LEAST THREE OTHER PROPERTIES ON THIS BLOCK PHASE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES THAT APPEAR TO EXCEED THE SIZE LIMIT ESTABLISHED BY THE NCD.
HOWEVER, BEXAR COUNTY RECORDS INDICATE THAT THESE WERE ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO THE NCD ORDINANCE.
THE PROPERTY ABUTS AN ALLEY TO THE REAR, AND THE PROPOSED DESIGN DOES NOT EXCEED THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT STANDARD FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT SIZE.
SHOWN HERE IS A SITE PLAN OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH THE A DDU IN THE REAR YARD OF THE EXISTING HOME.
AND HERE IS JUST TO HIGHLIGHT THE HISTORY OF THE NCD STANDARDS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED IN 2008.
UM, JUST HIGHLIGHTING A SECTION OF CODE THERE THAT SPECIFIES THAT THIS IS IN THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SECTION OF THE NCD, BUT IN IN THE NOTES OF THAT NCD, THEY SPECIFY THIS ALSO APPLIES TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.
UH, FOR THAT 40% LIMIT SHOWN HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE REAR YARD OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THAT A DDU WILL BE ESTABLISHED.
AND THIS IS LOOKING, UH, TO THE SIDE.
THERE YOU CAN SEE SOME EXISTING, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, UH, SIMILAR IN, UM, SIZE TO WHAT IS PROPOSED ON THIS PROPERTY.
SPECIFICALLY TWO HOUSES DOWN ON THIS ONE THERE.
AND THIS IS JUST AN AERIAL VIEW OF THOSE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THAT AREA, AGAIN, SEEMINGLY, UH, LARGER THAN WHAT IS TYPICALLY ALLOWED IN THE NCD, BUT ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF THAT ORDINANCE.
AND THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA.
SIX A DDU SIZE VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BOA DASH 25 DASH 3 26 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE PROPOSED A DDU WOULD BE GREATER THAN HALF THE SIZE OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE WHERE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ARE INTENDED TO BE LIMITED TO ONLY 40% OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURES FOOTPRINT.
TWO, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT MEET THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS IT WOULD ALLOW FOR A DEVELOPMENT THAT PERPETUATES A PATTERN OF LARGE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON THIS BLOCK FACE THAT THE NCD STANDARDS WERE ESTABLISHED TO PREVENT STAFF MAILED OUT 27 NOTICES.
ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION.
ALTHOUGH THE MANKEY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION, AND THIS IS THAT OPPOSITION RECEIVED FROM THE MANKEY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MANNA.
SO, SO I SEEN RECALL THAT IT IN THE NOTES THAT WAS LISTED, I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOME ADDITIONAL NOTES BELOW WHAT IS CURRENTLY STATED ON THE MANKEY POSITION.
MAYBE WAS A DIFFERENT ONE WHERE THEY HADN'T HEARD, UM, FROM THE APPLICANT THEY DID LEAVE A VOICEMAIL.
THAT GOES INTO FURTHER EXPLANATION.
BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, THE THREE ADDITIONAL ADU THAT ARE IN THE AREA, DO WE KNOW WHAT PERCENTAGE THEY ARE IN TERMS OF SQUARE FOOT COMPARED TO THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE? IF THE STANDARD IS 40, ARE THEY AT 60? ARE THEY AT, YOU KNOW, 50? I, I DID NOT RUN THAT CALCULATION, BUT SEEMINGLY AS THEY ARE TWO STORY STRUCTURES, THOSE THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED, UM, PRESUMABLY, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE IN EXCESS OF THAT 40% STANDARD.
UM, BUT I DID NOT DO A CALCULATION ON THAT, UM, THAT COULD BE FOUND THROUGH BEXAR COUNTY RECORDS AS WELL.
UM, AND I CAN, I CAN GATHER THAT INFORMATION NOW.
IS IT GONNA EXCEED THE 52 THAT THIS APPLICANT IS REQUESTING? UNDERSTOOD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? BEES? COMMISSIONER BEES, CAN YOU BRING BACK UP THE, THAT EMAIL FROM THE, UH, MANKEY PARK ASSOCI
[02:25:01]
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? IS THAT FROM THE AS, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE BASING THIS ON? BECAUSE IS THAT FROM THE ASSOCIATION OR IS HE JUST ON THE COMMITTEE? CORRECT.I DID CLARIFY WITH THIS INDIVIDUAL THAT THERE'S SUBMITTING THEIR COMMENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATION AND HE, HE AFFIRMED THAT AND, UH, THEY, THEY ARE, UM, COPIED ON THEIR INFO MANKEY PARK.
LET'S HAVE, ALL RIGHT, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR, UH, PROJECT.
MY NAME IS MIKE S AND I'M, UH, AN AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE HOMEOWNERS, UM, CHRIS AND LANAI HOFFENBERG.
I HAVE HERE WITH ME, EILEEN BENDELL, WHO IS CHRIS'S MOTHER FOR WHOM WE WENT TO BUILD THE A DU.
SO A LITTLE BIT OF A BRIEF HISTORY.
UM, EILEEN MOVED DOWN HERE FROM OHIO INITIALLY TO HELP CHRIS TAKE CARE OF HIS WIFE, WHO UNFORTUNATELY IS UNDERGOING A, UH, TREATMENT FOR CANCER.
SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE INITIAL PURPOSE FOR HER BEING HERE.
AND OBVIOUSLY CHRIS WOULD BE HERE AS WELL, BUT UNFORTUNATELY HIS WIFE IS IN THE HOSPITAL RIGHT NOW DEALING WITH THAT STUFF.
SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE INITIAL REASON FOR DESIGNING THIS.
A DU EILEEN WAS AN AGING IN PLACE SPECIALIST, AND SO HER, HER INPUT WAS VERY INTEGRAL INTO DESIGNING IT.
THINGS LIKE WHEN YOU END UP IN A WHEELCHAIR AND YOU HAVE TO MANEUVER AROUND THINGS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SPACE AVAILABLE TO YOU IN ORDER TO DO THAT.
SO OF COURSE I LEAN WITH HER SPECIALTY AND HER, HER PREVIOUS CAREER HELPED US DESIGN THIS SPACE, OBVIOUSLY.
THEN PART OF THAT IS WE THEN HAD TO INCREASE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, UM, THE FUTURE USE IN THE FUTURE, UM, CHRIS AND HOPEFULLY HIS WIFE WILL BE ABLE TO MOVE INTO THIS A DU THAT WE'RE BUILDING.
AND THEN CHRIS'S DAUGHTER AND HER HUSBAND WOULD THEN WANT TO MOVE INTO THE INITIAL HOUSE, THE FRONT HOUSE.
SO THEY'RE VERY VESTED IN BEING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR DECADES.
THEY WANT TO BE THERE FOR A LONG TIME AND THEY WANT TO HAVE A MULTI-GENERATIONAL, UM, UH, AREA FOR THE KIDS TO BE IN.
AND I BELIEVE, UH, YOUR OTHER SON IS ALSO DOWN HERE AS WELL, IS THAT CORRECT? OR HE IS? NO, MY OTHER SON'S IN THE EAST COAST, IN THE EAST COAST, SO, BUT REALLY THE GOAL HERE IS FOR EILEEN TO HELP CHRIS TAKE CARE OF HIS WIFE AS IS NECESSARY.
AND HOPEFULLY THAT'LL BE FOR A LONG TIME AND SHE'LL GET OVER IT.
BUT THEN ALSO FOR HER TO AGE IN PLACE AND THEN FOR CHRIS AND HIS WIFE TO EVENTUALLY MOVE INTO THIS SPACE.
SO THAT IS WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS VARIANCE.
I KNOW IT'S A, A BIT MORE, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, WALKING DOWN THE STREET, EVEN ON THEIR OWN STREET, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF UNITS THAT, UH, THAT ARE THERE.
THE PLAN, OF COURSE, IS TO HAVE THE SIDING MATCH THE EXISTING SIDING.
THE, THE EXTERIOR WILL ALL LOOK AS I'VE DONE WITH OTHER PROJECTS AS IF IT'S BEEN THERE ALL ALONG.
THAT IS KIND OF MY GOAL WHENEVER I DO ADDITIONS, IS IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE.
IT'S JUST OBVIOUSLY THE, THE VARIANCE IN THE INCREASED SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHICH WE FEEL IS NECESSARY FOR EILEEN TO AGE IN PLACE, AND THEN FOR CHRIS AND HIS WIFE HOPEFULLY TO EVENTUALLY MOVE IN.
SO WE ARE RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING TO CONSIDER THIS VARIANCE BRAGMAN.
UM, HAVE YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE MANKEY PARK ASSOCIATION TO EXPLAIN THE CIRCUMSTANCES BEHIND WHY YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A LARGER THAN I HAVEN'T ATTEMPT TO CONTACT? UH, WE WILL HAVE TO LOOK UP HER NAME, BUT I NEVER GOT A RESPONSE BACK.
SO YOU, YOU HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO REACH THEM, HAVE A CONVERSATION? I'VE NOT, NO.
ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS I'VE REACHED OUT IVANEZ.
UH, IS THIS A ONE STORY OR TWO STORY STRUCTURE? WELL, IT'S ONE STORY WITH AN ATTIC.
SO IT, IT IS BELOW THE 25 FOOT THRESHOLD AND IT IS NOT TWO STORIES.
IS THE ATTIC AIR CONDITIONED? UH, IT IS NOT.
IT'LL FEEL PRETTY GOOD, BUT IT IS NOT AIR CONDITIONED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO JUST TO PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION ON THE SIZE OF THOSE, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES HERE SHOWN ON SCREEN, AND THIS IS INCLUDING THE DETACHED, UM, LIVING AREA SQUARE FOOTAGE ACCORDING TO BEAR COUNTY.
THE PROPERTY THERE AT 3 3 4 THORMAN, UH, IS APPROXIMATELY 41% OF 42% OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
AT 3 2, 2 THORMAN, THERE'S AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, APPROXIMATELY 40% OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
AND AT 3 5 4, AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT IS ABOUT 23% THE SIZE OF, SO AGAIN, THAT'S 41%, 40%, AND 23% THOSE THREE STRUCTURES.
UM, AND JUST TO CLARIFY THAT NOTE ALSO FROM, UH, THE MANKEY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE CONFUSION THERE WAS, UM, I BELIEVE
[02:30:01]
MANKEY PARK NEEDS TO UPDATE THEIR, UM, POINT OF CONTACT, THEIR PRIMARY POINT OF CONTACT THAT IS REGISTERED IN THE SYSTEM.AND THAT MAY EXPLAIN FURTHER WHY THE APPLICANT WAS UNABLE TO CONTACT.
UM, THAT WAS THE CONFUSION THAT I RECEIVED FROM GEORGE GRIMES, THAT INDIVIDUAL THAT RESPONDED, UM, THAT I, I I GUESS THEY HAVE A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS THAT ISN'T REGISTERED IN OUR SYSTEM.
AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT I WAS LOOKING SOME OF THOSE THINGS UP TOO IN THE, THE CORONER HOUSE OVER AT, UH, CARNAHAN IS LIKE 71% FOR THEIRS, UH, AT THE HARD CORNER OF CARNAHAN AND, UH, ELLE.
UH, ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? MANNA.
SO, AND SO IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, ALL, UM, ALL OF THE STRUCTURES, ALL THE OTHER STRUCTURES THAT ARE HERE ON THIS BLOCK THAT I GUESS MENT POINTED OUT, WERE ALL DONE BEFORE THE NCD WAS CREATED? CORRECT? THESE THREE SHOWN ON THE SCREEN, YES.
WERE DONE BEFORE THE NCD WAS ADOPTED.
AND SO QUESTION FOR THE, UM, APPLICANT HERE.
SO, UM, SO WHAT WOULD BE THE SIZE PERMITTED? SO 40%, WHICH IS 616, SO 616.
SO, SO DID YOU TRY TO WORK THROUGH THE 616 TO SEE, SEE WHAT WAS, YOU KNOW, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY ATTEMPTS WERE MADE I GUESS WITH THE SIX 16? I GUESS JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT PER SECOND.
NO, I MEAN, IT'S A FAIR QUESTION AND WE DID TRY TO MAKE IT WORK, BUT, UM, THE ISSUE HAS TO DO WITH AGING IN PLACE.
THAT IS REALLY WHERE WE KEPT RUNNING INTO, INTO, UH, STUMBLING BLOCKS IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE SPECIFIC AMOUNTS OF FOOTAGE IN ORDER TO TURN A WHEELCHAIR, FOR INSTANCE, IN ORDER TO GET, YOU KNOW, THE DOORS HAVE TO BE 36 INCHES.
SO THAT THEN OF COURSE THAT INCREASES THE AMOUNT OF SPACE THAT YOU NEED.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE KEPT RUNNING INTO YOU JUST, WE NEEDED THAT ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTED FOR THAT PURPOSE, FOR THE PURPOSE THAT, THAT EILEEN NEEDS AND THAT CHRIS WANTS TO HAVE FOR HER.
I'M JUST, I'M JUST WONDERING IF A CONTINUANCE WOULDN'T BE APPROPRIATE IN ORDER TO HAVE THE APPLICANT SPEAK WITH YEAH.
UM, NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION, THE MAGGIE PARK ASSOCIATION TO EXPLAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.
'CAUSE CERTAINLY HAVING A DD STANDARDS THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR AGING IN PLACE WOULD BE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MIGHT ALLOW THEM TO APPROVE THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE WHO, UM, ARE THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR SEND TO SPEAK? YEP, WE DO HAVE TWO VOICEMAILS AND TWO PEOPLE SIGN UP TO SPEAK.
WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS, UH, WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA HEAR, UH, FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENTARY AND THEN WE WILL LOOK AT, UH, ABOUT, UH, PERHAPS A CONTINUANCE.
SO LET'S, LET'S START WITH THE VOICEMAIL VOICEMAILS PLEASE HER TODAY ON, HI.
I AM CALLING IN REGARDS TO THE CASE BEING HEARD TODAY ON FORMAN PLACE.
I'M THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE MANKEY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND I AM CALLING IN REFERENCE TO CASE NUMBER DOA 2 5 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 6.
UM, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSING THE REQUEST FOR THIS VARIANT.
UM, WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN ANY KIND OF EX EXCESS REQUEST TO WHAT'S ALREADY IN THE CODE REGARDING THE ALLOWED SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR SECONDARY UNIT, UH, URBAN DWELLINGS.
AND IN THIS CASE, UM, WE HAVE A LAND USE COMMITTEE THAT HAVE RECOMMENDED TO OPPOSE THIS AND WE ARE, UM, REQUESTING AND ENCOURAGING THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO NOT APPROVE, TO DENY THIS REQUEST.
UH, FOR THE FIRST SPEAKER WE HAVE, UH, CAROLYN RICKS.
YEAH, Y'ALL CAN, UH, TAKE A SEAT.
HI, UH, STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS.
I LIVE AT 3 2 6 PERSHING, TWO BLOCKS SOUTH OF THIS HOUSE.
25 YEARS AGO, I FOUND MYSELF IN EXACTLY THIS POSITION, NAMELY, WE WANTED TO BUILD AN 800 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, THE FIRST ONE IN THE CITY UNDER THE NEW UDC.
AND WE HAD TO WORK WITH THE GUYS AT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO WORK OUT SOME OF THE BUMPS THAT THEY HADN'T ANTICIPATED.
[02:35:01]
COULDN'T DO IT.WE COULD ONLY BUILD 600 SQUARE FEET.
SO WE WENT UP AND MY EXPERIENCE IN LIFE IS THAT RESTRICTIONS ON FORM CREATE CAUSE CREATIVITY.
WE ENDED UP WITH A FABULOUS HOUSE.
UM, IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO PUT AN ELEVATOR IN, BUT I WANNA TELL YOU THAT WE BUILT THE HOUSE FOR MY PARTNER WHO WAS A PT WHO KNEW ABOUT WHEELCHAIRS AND ACCESSIBILITY, ET CETERA.
THE FIRST FLOOR IS TOTALLY LIVABLE AS A SEPARATE UNIT, TOTALLY ACCESSIBLE, ALL 600 SQUARE FEET OF IT.
WELL, IT CAN'T BE A HUGE HOUSE ON A SMALL LOT BEHIND A MAIN HOUSE, BUT IT IS TOTALLY ACCESSIBLE.
UM, AND, AND THE RESULT IS THAT WE HAVE A LOVELY HOUSE UNDER THE PECAN TREES THAT ARE STILL THERE THAT WE MADE ROOM FOR.
WE BUILT THAT HOUSE WITHIN THE ROOFS OF THE PECAN TREES.
SO WE'RE SAVING ON, UM, ENERGY AND ALL KINDS OF STUFF.
I HAVE A QUESTION, COMMISSIONER.
YEAH, SO WE, WE DO HAVE A QUESTION.
SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, WHAT IS YOUR OPPOSITION THEN FOR, FOR THE APPLICATION? THAT'S BEFORE A, A VARIANCE.
I DON'T WANT MY TOTAL, MY NEIGHBORHOOD TOTALLY COVERED UP WITH HOUSING.
UM, THERE'S PROBLEMS OF RUNOFF.
IF YOU TOTALLY COVER THE, THE GROUND, WHERE DOES THE WATER GO? IT GOES UP IN BETWEEN HOUSES AND IN WINDOWS.
UM, I, I BELIEVE GEORGE WILL TALK TO THAT ALSO.
NEXT ONE IS, UH, MR. GEORGE GRIMES.
I'LL LIVE AT FOUR 15 PARLIN PLACE IN, UH, IN MANKEY PARK.
AND I'M ON THE LAND USE COMMITTEE AND I'M HERE TODAY REPRESENTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
I WAS ON THE, THE PLANNING TEAM FOR THE ORIGINAL NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, CONSERVATION DISTRICT THAT WAS ADOPTED IN 2008 AND ON THE TEAM THAT DID THE UPDATE IN 2019.
AND I'VE SERVED ON THE LAND USE COMMITTEE ON AND OFF FOR, UH, 44 YEARS.
I, I HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SINCE IT WAS FORMED IN 1979.
UH, AS YOU KNOW, THE PURPOSE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT IS TO, UH, PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO IN 2008 WHEN WE STARTED WORKING ON THE CONSERVATION PLAN, WE DID A SURVEY OF EVERY PROPERTY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND WE, AND WE LOOKED AT THINGS LIKE BUILDING MATERIALS, USE HEIGHT, UH, GARAGES, AND THAT INCLUDED THE, THE NUMBER AND HEIGHT OF ACCESSORY BUILDINGS.
AND WE INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN SOME MAPS THAT SHOWED, UH, WHICH, WHICH PROPERTIES HAD ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND, UH, THE HEIGHT OF THE ACCESSORY BUILDINGS WHEN WE HAD 'EM.
AND THERE WAS VERY FEW ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO WE COULD HAVE JUST SAID, OKAY, WE DON'T WANT ANY ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AT ALL.
BUT WHAT WE DECIDED TO DO IS, IS NOT PROHIBIT THOSE BUILDINGS, BUT LIMITED THEM TO, UM, UH, SOMETHING REASONABLE FOR THE SIZE OF THE LOTS.
AND I THINK, UH, UH, AS WE'VE HEARD, JUST IN THAT BLOCK OF THE THREE ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, ONE'S 41%, ONE'S 40 AND ONE'S 23%.
SO 40% IS WELL WITHIN, UH, REASON FOR THESE, UH, PROPERTIES.
THE, THE REASON, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS CONCERNED IS ABOUT THE PRECEDENCE THAT THESE THINGS, UH, SET.
AND WE HAVE TYPICALLY, UH, NOT, UH, FAILED, UH, NOT, NOT OPPOSED VARIANCES ONLY WHEN BY GRANTING A VARIANCE, THE RESULTING PROJECT IS BETTER THAN COULD BE, UH, BUILT BY NOT GRANTING THE VARIANCE.
SO, UH, SO WE THINK PRECEDENTS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT.
UH, ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE DID NOT CONSIDER IN 2008, BECAUSE IT WASN'T ISSUE AT THE TIME, WAS THE ISSUE OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
AND, UH, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE CURRENT OWNERS HAVE PLANNED FOR THIS, THE, THE, THE LARGER THESE ACCESSORY BUILDINGS ARE, THE MORE LIKELY IN THE FUTURE THAT AT SOME POINT THESE WILL BE, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
AND, AND THIS, THIS BLOCK FACE, IF, IF THE CITY'S, UH, WEBSITE IS CURRENT, DOESN'T HAVE ANY SHORT-TERM RENTALS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET, THE BLOCK FACING, UH, FACE HAS ONE TYPE ONE AND ONE TYPE TWO.
SO, AND, AND AS YOU KNOW, SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE PRETTY, UH, CONTROVERSIAL IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, SO, UH, SO AGAIN, WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS, IS NOT SET A PRECEDENT THAT WOULD THEN GOING FORWARD, SAY, CREEP THESE, THESE, UH, HOUSES GET LARGER AND LARGER AND LARGER,
[02:40:01]
UH, BASED ON, UH, THE PRECEDENT.AND, AND THE OTHER THING THAT CARLIN MENTIONED IS, UH, IS IMPERVIOUS COVER.
UH, THIS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOESN'T HAVE ANY PARTICULAR LARGE TERM DRAINING ISSUES, BUT THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WE'VE HAD ISSUES.
WHEN PEOPLE, UH, PUT IN IMPERVIOUS COVER COVER, THEN UH, THEY GET IN DISPUTES WITH THEIR NEIGHBORS ABOUT THEIR RUNOFF.
SO WE WANT TO AVOID THOSE KIND OF LOCAL DRAINAGE PROBLEMS. UH, ANY QUESTIONS MANNA, MR. MANNA? SO, UM, SO WHEN IT, WHEN IT, IT WAS THAT YOU ESTABLISHED THE NCD, UM, HOW LONG DID THAT, HOW LONG DID YOU WORK WITH THE CITY TO YOU TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN? SO HOW LONG WAS THAT PROCESS? OH GOSH, THE, THE FIRST NCD IN, IN, UH, 2008, I THINK IT WAS NCD NUMBER SIX.
UH, I THINK WE WORKED ON THAT FOR TWO YEARS.
I MEAN, WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON IT.
AND, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING THAT AFFECTS LAND USE IS CONTROVERSIAL.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID IS, IS TRY TO KEEP THE SMALLEST RE REGULATORY FOOTPRINT WE COULD HAVE AND STILL PRESERVE WHAT WE THOUGHT WERE THE KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND SO AND SO WITHIN.
AND SO, AND SO WITHIN THOSE MEETINGS, I MEAN, WAS THERE A VERY LARGE COMMUNITY INPUT AND PARTICIPATION AS IT WAS THAT YOU WERE ESTABLISHING? OH YEAH.
I MEAN, WE, WE HAD, WE HAD MULTIPLE MEETING.
WE, WE, WE HAD COMMITTEES WITH, I DON'T KNOW, 30 PEOPLE PROBABLY WORKING ON DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THIS.
THIS WENT ON FOR AT LEAST A COUPLE YEARS.
WE HAD MULTIPLE, UH, UH, PUBLIC MEETINGS.
WE, UH, WE MADE CHANGES TO THE PLAN AND THEN IN 2019 WE WENT THROUGH, UH, A, A REVISION PROCESS AND MADE MORE REVISIONS TO THE PLAN.
SO, UH, AS, AS FAR AS I REMEMBER, THIS LIMITATION OF 40% ON THE ACCESSORY BUILDINGS HAS BEEN THERE SINCE THE BEGINNING.
THAT WAS GONNA BE A THIRD QUESTION.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, THIS IS FOR STAFF ACTUALLY.
UM, THE, UM, UM, CALCULATION FOR THE PERCENTAGE OF, UH, ALLOWABLE, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR AN A DDU THAT IS THE 40% INCLUDES ALL THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WITHIN THAT A DDU, RIGHT? NOT JUST THE, THE GROUND FLOOR.
IT WOULD BE IF IT WAS A TWO STORY CORRECT.
DOWNSTAIRS AND THE UPSTAIRS, CORRECT.
FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR ALL WITHIN THE, UH, EXTERIOR WALLS OF THE BUILDING ENVELOPE.
AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION IS, WITH THE 799 SQUARE FEET, IF THAT WAS APPROVED, WOULD THAT EXCEED THE ALLOWABLE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE? SO OUR, UM, OUR CODE ONLY REQUIRES THE IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR THE FRONT YARD, SO IT WOULDN'T, UH, IT DOESN'T HAVE A, UM, SO THERE'S NO STANDARD FOR AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS? CORRECT.
WELL, THERE MAY BE FURTHER STANDARDS, BUT THAT WOULD BE ANSWERED BY STORMWATER AND, YOU KNOW, BE REVIEWED BY, UM, THOSE FOLK FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
BUT PER, UM, UDC THAT WE LOOK AT SPECIFICALLY, WE LOOK AT MAINLY JUST THE FRONT YARD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, COULD THE, THE PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THIS PROPERTY, VERY SIMILAR PROPERTIES, UM, IT'S THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS SLIGHTLY LARGER.
IT'S JUST UNDER 2000 SQUARE FEET, THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BUILD THIS STRUCTURE.
SO I'M TRYING TO FIND A REASON WHY WE SHOULDN'T ALLOW SOMEBODY TO DO THAT, JUST BECAUSE THEIR PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS SLIGHTLY SMALLER THAN WOULD BE ALLOWED BECAUSE THOSE, THOSE PROPERTIES TO ME ARE VERY SIMILAR.
AND IF ANYTHING, THEY WILL, THEY WOULD HAVE LESS IMPERVIOUS COVER THAN IF THEIR NEIGHBOR DECIDED TO DO IT, WHICH THEY COULD DO BY.
SO IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THAT.
WELL, I, I, I MEAN YOU, YOU, YOU HAVE TO DRAW A LINE SOMEPLACE AND, AND, AND, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, AT THE TIME WE WERE, WE WERE DOING THE ORIGINAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THE CITY OF ALAMO HEIGHTS WAS ALSO DEALING WITH THIS MCMANSION ISSUE.
AND, AND THEY LOOKED AT A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS TO, UH, TRY TO, TO, TO DEAL WITH THAT.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE AMOUNT OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE YOU COULD PUT ON A LOT AND, AND, UH, A LOT COVERAGE RATIOS AND, AND, AND A LOT OF PRETTY COMPLICATED ISSUES.
AND, AND WHAT WE DECIDED TO DO WAS LET, LET'S JUST, LET'S JUST JUST KEEP THIS SIMPLE.
OKAY? WE, WE, WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO DO A LOT OF CALCULATIONS.
WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE A LOT OF REGULATIONS.
AND SO, UH, TWO OF THE IMPORTANT THINGS THAT WE DID WAS, UH, TO, TO, TO DEAL WITH THAT LOT COVERAGES.
WE REQUIRED DRIVEWAYS GOING PAST THE FACADE OF THE HOUSE BECAUSE ALMOST EVERY HOUSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS THAT, AND
[02:45:01]
THAT HAS THE, THE EFFECT OF MOVING HOUSES FARTHER APART THAN JUST TWO FIVE FOOT SETBACK.SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE WAYS THAT WE DEALT WITH THIS.
THIS IS ANOTHER WAY, IT'S A SIMPLE WAY TO DO IT.
UH, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY KNOWS HOW TO DO IT.
I I, I'M, I'M GONNA CHIME IN ON THIS.
SO WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND I'M LIKE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS, I'M LOOKING AT, THERE'S A, MOST OF THESE BLOCKS, IF NOT ALL OF THEM HAVE ALLEYS.
SOME OF THESE ALLEYS ARE PAVED, SOME ARE NOT ON THIS PARTICULAR BLOCK, THAT ALLEY IS NOT PAVED THE BLOCK TO THE SOUTH.
THE ALLEY DOES HAVE SOME SORT OF A, A SURFACE ON IT, AND SO DOES SOME, SO DOES THE ALLEY, IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, TO THE NORTH.
UH, BUT BECAUSE THIS ALLEY IS NOT PAVED, THIS SLIGHT ENHANCEMENT AND IMPERVIOUS COVER DOESN'T SEEM TO BE, UH, YOU KNOW, CONTRARY TO LET'S SAY OTHER BLOCKS THAT IS, THAT HAS THAT ADDITIONAL, ADDITIONAL PAYMENT SERVICE IN THE ALLEY.
AND SO, LIKE TO THE POINT THAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER MEANT, UH, BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE NEIGHBORING HOME, YOU KNOW, DID, DID Y'ALL LOOK AT, I KNOW YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT YOU DIDN'T WANT TO PUT THE NUMBER TO KEEP THE NUMBER SIMPLE, BUT YOU KNOW, IF THE IMP IF THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, YOU KNOW, TO ME FROM THE CENTER OF THE ALLEY UP TO THE, TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE OF THE LOT IS, IS SIMILAR IN NATURE TO THE REST OF THE BLOCK.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LOOK AT IN, IN DOING THIS.
THE OTHER ITEM I WOULD HAVE IS, UH, AND I'M GONNA ASK THE APPLICANT THIS, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I, I KNOW THAT WHEN YOU DO STUFF FOR ACCESSIBILITY, IT DOES GET BIGGER.
I'M THE STATE INSPECTOR FOR THAT.
I'LL, I'LL TELL YOU THAT WITHOUT SEEING A PLAN, I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE HARDSHIP IS.
AND SO I'M, I'D BE IN SUPPORTIVE OF CONTINUANCE ONLY BECAUSE I THINK SHOWING THE PLAN TO YOUR COMMITTEE AND SAYING, THIS IS WHY I NEED THIS, THIS IS WHAT I'M GOING FOR, BECAUSE THAT LONG-TERM PLAN MIGHT BE TO HAVE A SECOND BEDROOM FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, A LONG-TERM CARE HELPER OR SOMETHING.
AND THERE MIGHT BE A REAL LEGITIMATE NEED FOR IT.
UM, AND I JUST THINK THAT THAT PERSPECTIVE MAY HAVE NOT BEEN BROUGHT UP.
UM, WOULD Y'ALL, HOW OFTEN DO Y'ALL MEET? UH, WE MEET AS NEEDED.
HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE FOR YOU TO SET UP SOMETHING WITH THIS APPLICANT AND REALLY, IT, IT JUST DEPENDS ON PEOPLE'S, UH, PEOPLE'S, UH, LIKE TWO WEEKS ENOUGH YOU NEED A MONTH? UH, WELL, I, OUR RECOMMENDATION TODAY IS THAT THIS VARIANCE BE DENIED.
SO YOU'RE NOT THERE, YOU, YOU DON'T FEEL LIKE THERE'D BE ANY PURPOSE IN MEETING WITH THEM TO DISCUSS OUR, OUR OUR RECOMMENDATION TODAY IS THAT THIS VARIANCE BE DENIED.
BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UM, I GUESS I WOULD JUST LIKE TO THROW IT OUT THERE THAT, WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS.
HOW LARGE IS THE COMMITTEE THAT MEETS TO VOTE ON THERE? THERE'S FOUR OF US.
OKAY, SO YOU ARE INCLUDED ONE AND, AND THE OTHER SPEAKER CARLAN? YEAH.
SO THAT'S TWO OUTTA FOUR SPEAKERS.
SO THERE MAY BE SOME OTHER OPINIONS.
UM, OH, WE, THE, THE, WE POLLED THE COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE WAS UNANIMOUS IN OPPOSING THIS.
BUT THAT'S WITHOUT KNOWING ANY OF THE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES, THE PLAN, YOU HAVEN'T ACTUALLY SPOKE TO THE APPLICANT.
AND THIS IS A COMMITTEE OF FOUR PEOPLE? THE LAND USE COMMITTEE IS, YES.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME BACK FORWARD PLEASE.
DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE, UH, A FLOOR PLAN OF WHAT YOU WANT TO BUILD SOMETHING? YOU CAN, CAN YOU, DO YOU HAVE IT WITH YOU? YEAH, I HAVE ONE.
YEAH, JUST IF YOU CAN HANDLE IT, THEY CAN PROJECT IT UP ON THE SCREEN.
AND I, I WOULD JUST LIKE FOR YOU TO POINT OUT, UM, THE, THE IN NEED AN INCREASE IN AREA TO ACCOUNT FOR, UH, MOVABILITY.
IF I COULD JUST SAY A COUPLE WORDS.
UM, I WAS, I'VE BEEN AN OCCUPATIONAL THERAPIST FOR 47 YEARS, AND AS PART OF THAT, MY JOB WAS TO EVALUATE HOMES.
CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME PLEASE? OH, I'M SORRY.
UM, MY JOB INCLUDED EVALUATING PROPERTIES, HOMES, APARTMENTS FOR NOT ONLY MY PATIENTS FROM MY LEVEL ONE TRAUMA EXPERIENCE, BUT ALSO FOR THE, FROM THE DAYTON VA MEDICAL CENTER.
AND I THINK THAT EVEN WITH THE A DA AND THOSE, THOSE RULES, IT'S, UM, MORE SPECIFIC, MORE PERSONAL THAN JUST WHAT'S ON THE BOOKS.
UM, WE HAVE TO TAKE ALL THOSE THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION, TURNING RADIUSES AND TRANSFER RADIUSES AND,
[02:50:01]
UM, ALL THOSE OTHER THINGS, UM, HEIGHTS AND WIDTHS AND DEPTHS AND, UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S, YOU KNOW, AND MY SON HAS PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO HIS HOME.HE'S REDONE THE FOUNDATION, THE INTERIOR FLOORING.
HE'S TAKEN CLASSES ON HOW TO RESTORE THE, THE OLD ROPE WINDOWS.
SO HE'S BEEN THERE FOR THE LONG RUN.
YEAH, I'M LOOKING AT THIS, UH, I, I DON'T SEE ANY, ANY GRANDEUR OF, I MEAN, I THINK THE WORKSHOP IS THE ONE THING THAT MIGHT, IS CAN YOU, WHAT'S, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO IN THERE? THAT'S, THAT'S FOR HER SON, CHRIS.
HE WANTS A WORKSHOP, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT COUNTS AS ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE SINCE IT'S NOT A CONDITIONED LIVING SPACE.
SO THAT'S PROBABLY FOR HIM TO, YEAH.
SO I MEAN, I, I, I'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE WHERE, AND I PERSONALLY HAVE DONE THIS WHERE WE'VE DONE AN A DU AND THEN WE ALSO HAD A COMPONENT THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LIVING AREA, BUT IT WAS NOT DEEMED AS PART OF THE LIVING AREA.
SO WHAT, SO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WITHOUT THE WORKSHOP IS 7 99 IS 7 99.
AND THAT'S, SO THAT'S A LAUNDRY STORAGE EVERYTHING TO THE LEFT.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION NOW THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT THEIR INTENT IS? ALL RIGHT.
I'M LOOKING AT IT AND I JUST THOUGHT ABOUT IT.
IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU COULD GO DOWN A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN 7 99? I MEAN, CAN YOU DO SEVEN 50? YEAH, I MEAN, OF COURSE WE CAN GO DOWN.
I MEAN THAT THERE, THERE'S ALWAYS A WAY TO DO THINGS.
IT'S JUST WE WERE PLANNING THIS TO BE ACCESSIBLE FOR POTENTIAL WHEELCHAIR AND ALSO TO HAVE IT BE SOMEWHAT OF A DECENT LIVING SPACE FOR WHEN CHRIS AND HOPEFULLY LANAI ARE ABLE TO MOVE IN AS WELL.
SO CAN WE DECREASE IT? OBVIOUSLY ANYTHING'S POSSIBLE.
WE WERE JUST DESIGNING IT TO WHERE IT WAS, UH, UH, MULTIFUNCTIONAL OVER THE COURSE OF TIME.
TON, HOW MUCH COULD YOU DECREASE IT? I REALLY DON'T THINK 616, I DON'T THINK 616 WOULD BE DOABLE, IS WHAT THEY'RE ASKING.
SO SOMEWHERE, IF WE COULD GO DOWN 50, I'M SURE WE COULD SQUEEZE 50 OUT OF IT AND JUST TOLERATE IT.
I MEAN, 10 BY 10 RIGHT? IS BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING.
UM, I MEAN, OF COURSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE GONNA DO WHAT WE'RE HAVE TO GOING TO HAVE TO DO BECAUSE WE NEED THIS THERE.
WE JUST IDEALLY WANT TO MAKE IT TO WHERE NOT ONLY IS EILEEN COMFORTABLE IN THERE, NOT ONLY IS IT ACCESSIBLE FOR, UNFORTUNATELY WE ALL WILL GET THERE AT SOME POINT WITH WHEELCHAIRS, BUT THEN THE NEXT GENERATION, OR CHRIS AND HIS WIFE CAN LIVE THERE COMFORTABLY AS WELL.
SO A HUNDRED FOOT'S THAT'S REALLY PUSHING IT, I THINK.
WELL, THE, THE PROBLEM I HAVE IS I'M SYMPATHETIC TO YOUR SITUATION, BUT I ALSO HAVE TO RESPECT THE FACT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND THAT, AND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS SUBSTANTIALLY BIGGER THAN, UH, THE NEIGHBORING UNITS THAT ARE TECHNICALLY OVER THE 40% LIMIT.
SO THAT THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS WERE DEVELOPED THROUGH A PRETTY ELABORATE PROCESS OF CONSULTATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, AND THEY REPRESENT PROBABLY THE CLOSEST WE'RE EVER GONNA GET TO A CONSENSUS MM-HMM
OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, SPECIFICALLY TO THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF THAT PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S THE PROBLEM TO ME TO, TO VIOLATE THAT.
AND THAT'S WHY I, I'M TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO, TO SUPPORT SOMETHING, BUT I CAN'T SUPPORT THE APPLICATION AS YOU SUBMITTED AT 7 99.
SO I'M TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE THERE THAT CAN WORK FOR YOU AND NOT BE TOO MUCH, UH, IN CONFLICT WITH THE INTENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
I THINK, UM, WE COULD DEFINITELY FIND A WAY TO DECREASE IT AS APPEARS THAT WE MAY NOT HAVE A CHOICE.
UM, I THINK DECREASING IT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE SIX 16 IS REALLY KIND OF DEFEATING THE PURPOSE OF, OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO, BUT IF WE MAYBE HAVE A MIDDLE GROUND ON THAT, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY I WOULD NEED TO TALK WITH, WITH
MY, MY, THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS WHERE'S THAT MIDDLE GROUND? I MEAN, I, I, I JUST THINK THAT THAT
[02:55:01]
WITH, WITH YOU NOT HAVING A PAVED ALLEY, UH, YOUR IMPERVIOUS FOOTPRINT IS, IS ALREADY GONNA BE A A LITTLE MORE, I, I GIVE YOU SOME CREDIT FOR THAT, ME PERSONALLY.BUT I THINK IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OF OF, OF JUST BEING, YOU KNOW, GETTING SOMEWHERE, I WOULD, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE 2 7 50 AND SEE HOW THAT TURNS OUT PERSONALLY.
BUT, UM, WELL ASK FOR CONTINUANCE TO SEE IF THEY TALK TO THE, THEY'VE ALREADY, WE'VE ALREADY HEARD THAT, THAT THERE'S NO MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA.
AND SO YOU, AND THE REASON I ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS WITH REGARDS TO THE NNC D SIMPLY IS, YOU KNOW, AS THE PRESIDENT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHOUT AN ENTITY, THE CITY HAS ASKED US A COUPLE TIMES IF WE WANTED TO GO DOWN THOSE PATHS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY SAYS, HERE'S WHAT WE WANNA DO, AND THEN WE HAVE SOMEBODY DO THINGS THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOESN'T WANNA DO.
AND BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE AN ENTITY, WE HAVE NO NOTHING TO STAND BY.
AND SO, SO FOR COMMUNITIES THAT WENT THROUGH THE CITY, YOU KNOW, THEY DID WORK A LOT WITH THE COMMUNITY SAYING, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT.
AND SO, SO, YOU KNOW, I I DO FIND IN THE PAST I'VE VOTED ALONG THE LINES OF TRYING TO SUPPORT THE NCDS, YOU KNOW, SIMPLY BECAUSE THAT WAS A COMMUNITY DECISION KIND OF GOING THROUGH THAT.
AND IF THIS WAS A, UM, AN HOA, YOU KNOW, IT WOULDN'T EVEN BE AN OPTION.
SO, BECAUSE THE HA WOULD, WOULD DEFINE THAT WITHIN THEIR DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND SO THIS IS, THIS WAS THAT COMMUNITY'S TAKE ON HOW TO DO, MAKE THAT HAPPEN.
SO THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, I DO, I DO STRONGLY SUPPORT, UM, YOU KNOW, AS WE GO THROUGH THE, ESPECIALLY NCDS, YOU KNOW, UH, THAT'S THEIR ONLY RECOURSE FOR REALLY MANAGING HOW THEIR COMMUNITY GROWS.
SO, WELL, MY, MY THING IS, I I'M THIS 40% ON THE MAIN HOUSE LIKE COMMISSIONER, LIKE OUR FELLOW COMMISSIONER BROUGHT UP, IS, SO IF I HAVE A LARGER HOUSE, I CAN PUT A LARGER A DU, AND THEN MY LOT, WHICH IS THE SAME SIZE AS EVERYONE ELSE'S LOT BECOMES AN IMPERVIOUS COVERED NIGHTMARE.
AND ALL THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS SOMETHING THAT'S FUNCTIONAL TO THEM, AND THEY'RE STILL GONNA BE UNDER WHAT OTHER PEOPLE CAN EASILY EXCEED.
I, I, I'M MORE OF A FUNCTION PERSON.
I THINK THAT IF THIS IS WHAT'S FUNCTIONAL FOR THEM, I THINK THAT GOING DOWN TO SEVEN 50 MAKES ME HAPPY.
UM, PERSONALLY AND THE FACT THAT THE ALLEY GIVES THEM SOME EXTRA CREDIT, 'CAUSE IT ISN'T PAID WHILE OTHERS ARE.
AND AT SEVEN 70 THEY'RE AT 50%, WHICH IS WHAT THE TYPICAL NUMBER IS ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY.
SO AT SEVEN 50, THEY'RE ALREADY LESS THAN WHAT EVERYONE ELSE CITYWIDE CAN DO, AND YET THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE PUTTING IN SOMETHING FUNCTIONAL.
STEVENS YES, I, I WOULD, THIS IS PURELY ANECDOTAL, BUT I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THESE PEOPLE WANT TO AGE IN PLACE IN THEIR HOME, WHICH IS THE POINT OF THESE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.
AND WE'RE DEBATING THIS SO HEAVILY WHEN WE'RE SO READY TO HAND OUT SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMITS.
THIS IS JUST PURELY ANECDOTAL, BUT THIS IS WHY ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS ARE IN OUR UDC AND WE ARE HERE TO EVALUATE THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES.
I THINK THAT, I PERSONALLY THINK THAT, UH, YOU SHOULD MAKE A MOTION AND WE'LL SEE HOW IT TURNS OUT.
YOU, YOU SAID, OKAY, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 25 DASH 103 0 1 26, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE REQUEST FOR 183 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE ND NCD SIX RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS, MAXIMUM 616 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SIZE TO ALLOW FOR A 799 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY DWELL UNIT SITUATED AT 3 4 6 THORMAN PLACE APPLICANT BEING MIKE SALARY.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE PROPOSED A DDU WOULD BE BUILT TO COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE SIZE OF THE EXISTING, EXISTING PRIMARY STRUCTURE SIGNIFICANTLY LIMITS THE POTENTIAL SIZE FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING ON THE PROPERTY.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS SUFFICIENT SPACING BETWEEN PROPERTIES WOULD REMAIN ON THE PUR FOR THE PURPOSES OF MAINTENANCE, WATER RUNOFF AND FIRE SAFETY.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE, SPECIFICALLY 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 AS ADEQUATE SPACING IS PROPOSED BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES FOR THE PURPOSES OF MAINTENANCE, WATER RUNOFF AND FIRE SAFETY CONCERNS.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERE, NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND
[03:00:01]
ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE LOCATED THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.THE SIZE OF THE EXISTING PRIMARY STRUCTURE WAS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE ADOPTION OF THE NCD DESIGN STANDARD AND IS NOW THE CAUSE OF THE SIGNIFICANT LIMITS ON ACCESSORY DWELLING SIZE.
ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER EZ.
I'M, I'M, UH, IN SUPPORT OF THIS VARIANCE.
I CAN ABSOLUTELY APPRECIATE THE GUIDELINES THAT ARE PUT TOGETHER BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, BUT WE ARE HERE TO, TO SEE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND I'M TRYING TO COME AT THIS LIKE FROM AN ANGLE OF LIKE EQUITABLE VERSUS EQUAL.
AND I THINK THAT WHAT Y'ALL ARE TRYING TO DO MEETS THAT STANDARD FOR ME.
CO, UH, COMMISSIONER EZ, I AGREE WITH MY UH, COM, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER.
I CANNOT AGREE WITH THE REQUEST AS SUBMITTED.
WELL, THAT IS, IS THAT ACCEPTABLE? COMMISSIONER STEVENS? CAN WE HAVE ANY, CAN WE HAVE DIALOGUE WITH, WITH THE, THE APPLICANT TO SURE.
I'M GONNA REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, I'D ASK ALSO IF THERE'S ANY OPPOSITION FROM OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AS TO RIGHT.
IS THERE, IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION OTHER, UM, WE'VE HEARD FROM? YES.
SO WE HAVE TWO MEMBERS WHO ARE OPPOSED.
IS THERE A THIRD MEMBER WHO IS OPPOSED? CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ? UM, I WOULD, I WOULD SAY THE SAME THING.
I JUST CAN'T, SO WE HAVE A, THERE'S A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO SEVEN 50.
DO YOU ACCEPT? I WOULD, I WOULD ACCEPT THAT.
COMMISSIONER, YOU BEEN AS YOU ACCEPT, SEVEN 50? YES.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE THAT? NO.
SO WE HAVE
AND SO I NEED MORE TO GO OFF OF.
SO, SO I GUESS, YOU KNOW, STARTING THE 40%, YOU KNOW, THAT PUTS US AT THE SIX 16, RIGHT? OR THE, AND THEN IF WE WENT TO 700, UH, SQUARE, YOU KNOW, I GUESS I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE PERCENTAGES HERE.
SO I WAS TRYING TO GET CLOSER TO WHAT IT IS THAT THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY HAS.
AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, SO, UM, THE, THE CITY'S SEVEN 50, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SEVEN 70? IS THAT WHAT, UH, 50% WOULD BE SEVEN 70.
SO SEVEN 50 IS STILL BELOW WHAT THE, THE CITY WOULD TYPICALLY ALLOW.
AND I, AND SOMETIMES I THINK YOU GOTTA LOOK AT THE FUNCTIONAL SIZE AS OPPOSED TO JUST A COMPARISON OF THE WHAT IF THERE, WHAT IF THE MAIN HOUSE IS AT 1200 SQUARE FEET? I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IT JUST GETS TO BE, THERE SHOULD BE SOME LOWER THRESHOLD THAT AT LEAST MAKES IT MORE OF A USABLE YEAH.
AND THAT WAS MY PRIMARY POINT.
SO IF THERE'S NO, IF THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS YOU'D LIKE TO ADD.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BRETON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I DO NOT CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER GOMEZ? I, I CONCUR.
I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MOTION PASSES AT SEVEN 50, SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO MAKE IT WORK.
SO THEN MY NEXT STEP IS MAKE IT SEVEN 50.
AND YOU CAN GO TALK TO STAFF IF YOU HAVE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS.
ITEM 10, ITEM 10 IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 7 AT 4 7 2 9 WEST COMMERCE STREET IN CONSUL DISTRICT FIVE.
THE APPLICANT AMANDA FLORES, A REQUEST FOR ONE, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 10 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO ELIMINATE THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER FOR NEW STRUCTURES FRONTAGE ALONG COMMERCE STREET.
AND TWO, AN ELIMINATION OF FENCE AND REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES ADJOIN IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS AN EXISTING RETAIL SHOPPING CENTER, THE CROSSED ON MERCADO LOCATED ON WEST COMMERCE STREET.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTED THE PROPERTY OWNER IS PROPOSING A NEW RESTAURANT STRUCTURE WITHIN THE EXISTING PARKING LOT FRONT AND WEST COMMERCE STREET.
WHILE A MINIMUM 10 FOOT WIDE TYPE
[03:05:01]
A LANDSCAPE BUFFER IS REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA.THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ELIMINATE THIS BUFFER ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGE.
ADDITIONALLY, LEASE SECTION 35 DASH FIVE 14 D OF THE UDC REQUIRES A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE TO BE ED AND MAINTAINED BY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS THAT ABUT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.
ACCORDING TO CONNIE RECORDS, THE SHOPPING CENTER WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1975 AND THE RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE NORTH WERE ESTABLISHED IN 2000.
WHEN THE SHOP PIN CENTER WAS ESTABLISHED, THE PRIVACY FENCE WAS NOT REQUIRED AS THERE WERE NO RESIDENTIAL USES AT THE TIME.
THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNER HAS THE OPTION TO PURSUE A SIGNED AGREEMENT WITH A BUTTON 18 RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS RATHER THAN DEVELOPING A NEW FENCE WHERE THERE IS AN EXISTING COMPLIANT RESIDENTIAL FENCE.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN HIGHLIGHTED IN RED IS THE EXIST EXISTING FENCING PROVIDED BY THE RESIDENTIAL OWNERS.
AND ITEM NUMBER ONE IN YELLOW IS THE ELIMINATION OF THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER COMPARED TO THE NEW STRUCTURES LOCATION.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHERE THE PROPOSED NEW RESTAURANT WILL BE LOCATED.
A VIEW FROM THE SIDE, AND THIS IS ADJACENT TO THE, UM, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
IT SHOWS THE STRUCTURE AND THE LACK OF A BUFFER AS WELL.
THIS IS TO THE REAR EXHIBIT IN THE EXIST EXISTING RESIDENTIAL FENCE IN PROVIDED BY THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
AND THIS CONTINUES ALONG THE REAR.
THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA LOOKING WEST, LOOKING WEST AND SOUTH, AND STARKLY ACROSS AND LOOKING EAST.
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BUFFER ELIMINATION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO OE DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 7.
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS LIMITED TO THE WIDTH OF THE NEW STRUCTURE ALONG WEST COMMERCE STREET.
ADDING A BUFFER IS NOT FEASIBLE AS IT, IT WOULD REQUIRE DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING PARKING AREA.
AND TWO, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS CONSISTENT WITH ADJACENT BUILDING SETBACK AND PARKING AREA.
THE VARIANCE IS NOT COMPROMISED PEDESTRIAN OR TRAFFIC SAFETY AND DOES NOT ALTER THIS CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE ELIMINATION OF THE FENCING REQUIREMENT FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES, ADJOINING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 27 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT ALIGNED WITH INTENT OF THE UDC AS A FLEXIBLE ALTERNATIVE IS AVAILABLE TO SATISFY THE FENCING REQUIREMENT.
AND TWO, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE COULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE PRIVACY AND SECURITY FOR THE JOINT AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
WE RECEIVED, UM, ZERO IN FAVOR.
UM, WE RECEIVED, UM, OPPOSITION FROM PROSPECT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND NO RESPONSE FROM LAS PALMAS.
AND THIS IS FROM THE PRESIDENT OF PROSPECT HILL.
THIS CONCLUDES, THAT'S PRESENTATION.
THE APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE IS PRESENT.
I NEED SOME CLARIFICATION ON THIS.
SO YOU'RE, WE'RE ONLY LOOKING AT THE BUFFER IN FRONT OF THE PLANE OF WHERE THEY'RE BUILDING, CORRECT.
BUT THEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE ENTIRE FENCE ACROSS THE BACK.
UM, SO THE BUFFER IS, LIKE YOU SAID, FOR THE BUILDING, BUT BECAUSE THE, UM, DEVELOPMENT IS ON THE LOT, UM, AND THE FENCE IS THE REAR OF THE LOT, THAT'S WHY WE HAD TO INCLUDE THE, THE FENCE I HAVE, I JUST HAVE TO SAY, I MEAN THE, THERE'S ALREADY AN EXISTING BUILDING THERE BETWEEN THERE AND THE FENCE.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE WASN'T ANY WIGGLE ROOM FOR STAFF TO LOOK AT THAT FENCE THING TO JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, LOOK, THEY'RE PUTTING A BUILDING, THERE'S ALREADY A BUILDING BETWEEN THE, THERE'S A FENCE, A BUILDING AND THEN ANOTHER
AND, AND THE POINT OF THE, THE FENCE REQUIREMENT IS IF ONE OF THOSE, OR A FEW OF THOSE RESIDENTS, THAT FENCE FALLS APART OR FOR SOME REASON THEY DECIDE TO TAKE IT DOWN, IT WILL EXCLUDE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FROM HAVING TO PUT A FENCE THERE.
UM, IT WAS MORE FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE RESIDENCE.
SO IF WE VOTE NO ON THE FENCE, THAT MEANS THEIR OPTION IS TO GO TO THE RESIDENCE AND COME UP WITH AN AGREEMENT.
IF THE AGREEMENT GO THROUGH, BECAUSE THERE'S EXISTING FENCING.
IF ONE OF THE FENCES DOES FALL DOWN LATER, DOES IT, DO THEY HAVE AN IMMEDIATE OBLIGATION TO BUILD A FENCE OR IS THAT JUST BY PERMIT APPLICATION ONLY? YEAH, SO THEY HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY, UM, DEPENDING ON THE AGREEMENT THEY MAKE, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE RESIDENTS TO PUT THE FENCE BACK UP.
AND THEN IN 1975 WHEN THIS BUILDING WAS BUILT,
[03:10:01]
WAS IT ZONED RESIDENTIAL BEHIND THE BUILDING? OR, OR DID THAT IT WAS, BUT THERE WAS NO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EXISTING THERE.THAT DIDN'T COME ABOUT TILL ABOUT 2000 OR 2001, I BELIEVE.
RACKMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UM, THIS IS FOR STAFF.
SO IN THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE DENIAL, UM, YOU SAID THAT AS A FLEXIBLE ALTERNATIVE IS AVAILABLE TO SATISFY THE FENCING REQUIREMENT, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IT'S THE AGREEMENT WITH THE RESIDENTS.
SO IT'S NOTHING TO DO WITH A PHYSICAL FENCE PER SE, IS JUST THE AGREEMENT.
UM, SO MY BIGGEST QUESTION IS, SO EXACTLY WHO MADE UP THE FENCE IN THE BACK? WAS IT EACH OF THE RESIDENTS OR IT WAS THE, UH, OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY RESIDENT? EACH RESIDENT, I BELIEVE IT WAS, UH, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT PROBABLY WENT UP ALL AT ONCE.
UH, BUT EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT HAS AN INDIVIDUAL REAR YARD FENCE.
UH, I JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK.
AND THEN
UM, JUST WANT SOME CLARIFICATION.
SO THIS, THIS NEW BUILDING IS BEING BUILT IN THIS SHOPPING CENTER AREA.
ARE, ARE WE SAYING THAT, THAT THAT BUSINESS, THIS NEW BUSINESS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PUTTING THAT FENCE ON THAT SHOPPING CENTER? OR IS IT THE SHOPPING CENTER? IT'S THE SHOP.
WELL, IT IS THE PROPERTY OWNERS, THE SHOPPING CENTER RESPONSIBILITY.
UM, THERE'S A NEW, THERE'S A NEW BUILDING GOING UP, BUT IT'S THE OVERALL PROPERTY OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY.
THE DEVELOPER, THE OWNER OF THE BUILDING AND THE PROPERTIES, THE SHOPPING CENTER'S, THE OWNER, AND THEY HAVE A LEASE TO THIS BUILDING TO OPERATE THERE.
AND IS IS THE, UH, WHEN THE TACO CABANA WENT UP, DO THEY HAVE TO DO THE FENCE THING OR IS THAT PRE-DATE? I DO NOT KNOW THE DATE OF THAT ONE.
IS THAT, IS THAT FENCE OBLIGATION, WAS THAT LIKE 2001 UDC OR OH FIVE? IT WAS, IT WAS AROUND PRIOR TO 2001.
UH, WE JUST VERIF WHEN WE DID OUR RESEARCH, WE DID VERIFY THE RESIDENTS DIDN'T EXIST UNTIL 2000 OR 2001.
SO, UM, LOOKING AT THE OTHER BUSINESSES THAT ARE LINED ALONG HERE, UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE BUFFER SPACE, AND SO ARE ALL OF THE OTHER BUSINESSES THAT ARE IN THE CHAIR, THIS, I GUESS PARKING LOT, UM, ALL COMPLIANT WITH REGARDS TO THEIR BUFFER SPACES.
AND THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST ONE.
NOT THIS, THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST ONE UNDER THE CURRENT, UH, BUFFER STANDARDS.
AND THAT'S WHY IT'S ONLY LIMITED TO THE FRONT OF THE NEW PROPOSED BUILDING.
UM, BACK TO THE, UH, REAR FENCE AGAIN.
IS THERE SOME STANDARD FORM THAT THE CITY WOULD REQUIRE FOR THAT AGREEMENT OR, OR WHO WOULD DRAFT THAT AGREEMENT THAT'S PART OF THE PERMANENT PROCESS OR INSTEAD OF TURNING IN A PERMIT, UM, THEY WOULD TURN IN, IN LIEU OF A PER WELL, WITH THEIR PERMIT, IT, THEY WOULD TURN IN THOSE AGREEMENTS WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
UM, I BELIEVE THEY HAVE 19 OR 20 LETTERS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET, HAVE A STANDARD FORM THAT THE CITY WOULD ACCEPT.
THERE'S NOT A FORM, IT'S JUST, UM, WHATEVER AGREEMENT, HOWEVER THEY WANNA WRITE IT UP.
CRUZ AGAIN, COMMISSIONER CRUZ.
SO WITH THE NEW BUILDING GOING UP, IS THERE STILL ENOUGH PARKING IN THAT AREA FOR ALL THE BUSINESSES? OUR PARKING, OUR TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT DIDN'T HAVE ANY, UM, PARKING ISSUES WITH THIS PROJECT? PERHAPS JUST THE, JUST THE LANDSCAPING.
THAT'S GONNA BE SQUEEZING IT, BUT, OKAY.
THE OTHER, THE OTHER, UH, AND THIS IS, I'M LOOKING FOR SOME, MAYBE A COMMENTARY, BUT, SO THIS PLACE IS BUILT IN 1975.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO PUT THE FENCE UP AND THE FENCE IS TIED TO ZONING.
SO WHY, I'M JUST WONDERING, WOULDN'T THE, THE LACK OF THE FENCE BE IN ITSELF A NON-CONFORMING USE THAT WOULDN'T, THAT WOULDN'T, UH, UH, PRECLUDE THEM FROM PUTTING IN THIS LITTLE BUILDING? I, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT LIKE RIGHT, BECAUSE THERE IS A NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD, UH, EXCLUDE THE NON-CONFORMING FOR NOT HAVING A FENCE.
I JUST, I I LOOK AT IT THAT WAY BECAUSE THE DAMAGE IS DONE.
I MEAN, THERE'S THIS MASSIVE SHOPPING CENTER THERE.
THIS, THIS SMALL LITTLE BUILDING ISN'T GONNA CHANGE ANYONE'S WORLD, RIGHT.
AND, AND IT, AGAIN, IT, IT'S MORE, THE WAY WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS IS TO PROTECT THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS TO THE REAR.
UM, AND, AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THEY'RE PROTECTED MOVING FORWARD, EVEN THOUGH THE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT WAS NOT DONE WHEN THEY WERE THERE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? LET'S HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
STATE YOUR NAME AND GOOD AFTERNOON.
UH, EDUARDO SATOU WITH FORESITE
[03:15:01]
GROUP, A CIVIL CONSULTANT ON THE PROJECT.I'M ZEV BARINE, I'M PART OF THE OWNERSHIP REPRESENTATION.
SO AGAIN, AS, AS YOU GUYS, UH, HAVE DISCUSSED, UM, YEAH, CAN YOU RAISE THE, IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE PICTURES OF THE FENCE, UM, YEAH, THERE WE GO.
YOU KNOW, ODD CONDITION, RIGHT? YOU KNOW, AS, AS WE HEARD EARLIER, YOU KNOW, THAT THE, THE, THIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WAS THERE, YOU KNOW, BEFORE THE SINGLE FAMILIES.
UH, YOU KNOW, THAT THE TRIGGER IS, IS THE ZONING, THE DIFFERENCE IN ZONING, YOU KNOW, I GET USUALLY HIRED BY, BY MY CLIENTS TO GUIDE THEM AND MEANING THE INTENT OF THE CODE, RIGHT? AND ASSISTING THEM.
HOW DO THEY MAKE, HOW DO THEY REACH A FINAL PRODUCT THAT MEETS THE INTENT OF THE CODE WHEREVER THEY'RE DOING THEIR PROJECT.
THE INTENT OF THE CODE HERE IS TO PROVIDE THAT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TWO DIFFERENT USERS, RIGHT? YOU DON'T WANT THAT GUY THAT, THAT THAT PROPERTY OWNER THAT IS IN THEIR BACKYARD.
YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S THE INTENT, RIGHT? TO PROVIDE FENCE TO PROVIDE THE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TWO DIFFERENT USES.
THIS PROPOSED NEW PROJECT THAT IS CAUSING THIS TRIGGER, UH, FOR THE FENCE IS, YOU KNOW, MANY FEET IN, FROM AWAY FROM, FROM THIS DIFFERENT, FROM THIS BOUNDARY.
IT'S, IT'S UP ALONG COMMERCE STREET.
SECONDLY, THERE'S ALREADY AN EXISTING FENCE THERE.
WHEN, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ALTERNATIVE OF 18 DIFFERENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND GOING AND GET THEIR SIGNATURE, YOU CAN, YOU CAN IMAGINE HOW COMPLICATED THAT IS SPECIFICALLY, UH, LIKE COUNCIL MENS MEMBER, THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO, UH, THERE'S NO FORM, YOU KNOW, OF, OF THAT IS SPECIFIED THAT GI LETS ME TELL THE PROPERTY OWNER, HEY, THIS IS WHAT IT IS.
IT GIVES 'EM THE LIBERTY TO DO AND ASK AS THEY WANT BECAUSE THERE'S NO STANDARD FORM.
SO IT'S, IT'S VERY COMPLICATED FOR US TO GO GET THAT AND GET 18 DIFFERENT PEOPLE TO AGREE WITHOUT THEY START ASKING FOR THINGS IN RETURN, RIGHT? AND WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN DOWN THAT TRAP BECAUSE WE REALIZED HOW COMPLICATED IT WOULD BE AND HOW MUCH MORE IT COULD POSSIBLY END UP COSTING OUR CLIENT, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY.
UM, AGAIN, LET'S JUST SAY WE TRIED TO COMPLY, YOU KNOW, I GET HIRED THEN IT'S ALL RIGHT.
BUILD IT, YOU KNOW, AND WE HAVE FELT, WE HAVE A FENCE.
WE GOT CPS POLES, WE GOT FIRE HYDRANTS, AND THEN WE GOT A CURB, YOU KNOW, THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR 30 PLUS YEARS OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, 50 YEARS.
I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT'S BEEN.
HOW DO WE PRACTICALLY BUILD A FENCE THERE? YOU KNOW, THERE'S GONNA HAVE TO BE SEPARATION.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S GONNA BE AN ALLEY THAT'S GONNA BE, CREATE A PEST, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY CREATE A BIGGER PROBLEM FOR THEM WITH WILDLIFE AND, AND WHATNOT.
UH, IT'S GONNA CREATE, IT IS, IT IS GONNA BE VERY DIFFICULT TO DO, TO ACHIEVE WHICH, TO ACHIEVE THE INTENT OF THE CODE.
YOU KNOW, IT'S ALMOST GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, AND, AND IT, UM, WE'RE NEVER GONNA GET THERE, RIGHT? AND TO CREATE THE SEPARATION FROM THE DIFFERENT USES, YOU KNOW, WE ALREADY HAVE A, YOU KNOW, 20, 20 FOOT BUILDING THAT SEPARATES, YOU KNOW, OUR NEW NEW RESTAURANT, YOU KNOW, FROM THESE HOUSES.
THERE'S GONNA BE PROBABLY VERY LITTLE THAT CHANGES, YOU KNOW, WHEN THAT RESTAURANT IS IN SERVICE.
UH, THE OVERALL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS WAY OVER PARKED ON THE MINIMUM.
WE'VE RAN THE COWS, WE PRESENTED IT TO, UH, THE, DURING THE PERMITTING PROCESS.
SO HE WE'RE HERE TO RESPECTFULLY, UH, REQUEST YOU GUYS TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS? UM, COULD, COULD THE CITY CLARIFY AGAIN IF, UH, THE RETAIL CENTER OR THE HOUSES WERE BUILT FIRST? THE RETAIL CENTER WAS AROUND 1975.
THE HOUSES WERE, UH, 2000, 2001 ISH.
AND THEN, UH, SECOND QUESTION.
SAY THESE GUYS WENT DOWN THE ROAD AND, AND CREATED AGREEMENTS AND THEY GOT 17 OF THE 18 HOUSES AND THERE'S ONE MISSING TOOTH.
WOULD THEY JUST BUILD ONE SECTION OF FENCE PER CODE? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MANNA, COMMISSIONER, MANNA? SO, SO LOOKING AT THE, UH, COMMENTS, UM, SO THE GROUP THAT WAS IN OPPOSITION ONLY STATED THE, UM, LANDSCAPE BUFFER ON THE FRONT.
AND SO A QUESTION I WOULD ASK IS, CAN THE BUILDING BE PUSHED BACK? UM, AND, AND, AND A LANDSCAPE BUFFER BE PUT IN CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS ALREADY THERE IN, UM, UM, IN THE REST OF THE STRIP AND, YOU KNOW, UH, TO MAKE THAT PART WORK? 'CAUSE IT DOES LOOK LIKE THERE WAS ONE ADDED, UM, WHERE THEY TOOK OUT PART OF THE PARKING LOT, YOU KNOW, SO, SO SOMEONE ELSE DID THAT.
UM, YEAH, SO WE ARE LANDSCAPING THE, THE, THE NEW BUILDING THERE.
THERE'S A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ON BOARD TO SUBMIT A PLANT.
IT'S GETTING IRRIGATED AS WELL.
THERE'S TREES BEING PLANTED IN THE ISLANDS.
THERE'S JUST NOT A FULL BLOWN TYPE A BUFFER, I THINK PER THE SONIAN REQUIREMENT THAT IS BEING, THAT IS BEING, UH, PROPOSED TO, TO BE INSTALLED, YOU KNOW, WHICH WOULD CAUSE US TO RIP UP, YOU KNOW, THAT ENTIRE FRONT, WHICH AGAIN, WOULDN'T ALIGN WITH THE, WITH THE REMAINING PORTION OF, OF THE SUBDIVISION.
UH, BUT, BUT WE ARE LANDSCAPING IT.
THERE'S A, THERE'S AN IRRIGATION, UH, DESIGN THAT'S GONNA IRRIGATE THE TREES, UH, TO PUSH THE BUILDING FURTHER BACK, YOU KNOW, THEN WE'D HAVE TO LOSE THE PARKING STALLS IN THE BACK, YOU KNOW, AND, AND THAT'S ONLY, YOU KNOW, 18 FEET FURTHER THAN THAT.
YOU KNOW, WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT REALIGNING A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS.
SO, SO THE 10 FOOT BUFFER THAT'S CURRENTLY THERE, IS THAT WHAT I GUESS WHAT THE REST OF THE PROPERTY IS USING? AND THERE WAS A CHANGE WHERE IT'S REQUIRING THIS TO BE 20, SO THERE SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF BUFFERING
[03:20:01]
NEAR THE TACO CABANA.UM, EVERYTHING EAST OR WEST OF THAT, THERE SEEMS TO BE NO BUFFERING EXISTING.
UM, OBVIOUSLY INCLUDING THE AREA THAT'S BEING DEVELOPED.
UM, AND EVEN THE, EVEN THE LITTLE BUFFER THAT'S THERE NEAR TACO CABANA THAT SEEMS SPORADICALLY OR SPORADIC.
SO, SO THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS STILL EXISTS WITHIN THE BUFFER SPACE THAT'S BEING DEFINED, UM, WITH REGARDS TO, TO, UH, I GUESS A BUFFER AREA, BUT IT'S JUST A, THE DISTANCE THAT'S, THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED, RIGHT? SO THE REQUIREMENT, CORRECT.
JUST A 10 FOOT IN FRONT OF THE, THE PROPOSED OF ELEMENT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? STEVENS? COMMISSIONER STEVENS, Y'ALL HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING STILL IF YOU ELIMINATE THOSE? YES.
YEAH, FOR, FOR THE ENTIRE SUBDIVISION, IT'S, IT'S STILL OVER PRODUCTS, EVEN IF HARD TO BELIEVE.
I THINK THE FENCE ISSUE IS A LITTLE SILLY ON FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, BUT I, I DON'T KNOW, LIKE I DON'T SEE A HARDSHIP TO ELIMINATE THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER MYSELF.
IF, IF Y'ALL CAN, I DON'T KNOW, ELABORATE ON THAT OR SO, SO JUST TO POINT OUT, WE DID DEVELOP A BUILDING OVER THERE ON THE, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS NORTH, SOUTHEAST WEST, BUT IN THE, IN FAR RIGHT HAND CORNER, WE DEVELOPED A WING DADDY'S BUILDING OVER THERE ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO.
AND THIS FENCE ISSUE DID NOT COME UP.
UH, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER, BUT OVER THERE WE DID INSTALL LANDSCAPING AS WELL, BUT WE ALSO HAVE LANDSCAPING, THEN STILL THE PARKING IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
CAN, CAN YOU, UH, STAFF, CAN YOU BRING UP THE SIDE PLAN AND GET INTO THE BACK TO WHERE YOU CAN GET INTO THE PROPOSED BUILDING AND SHOW WHAT'S GOING ON THERE? LIKE THAT ONE? SO THIS IS ON COMMERCE? YEAH.
I WAS GONNA MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO INCLUDE THIS EXHIBIT AS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, IN LIEU OF THE, KIND OF THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER.
UH, IF, IF WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING AND WHAT THEY'RE SHOWING US TODAY WOULD BE INCLUDED AS, UH, EXHIBIT AS PART OF THEIR LANDSCAPING.
WELL, ONE, ONE THING, ONE THING I LIKE TO BRING UP IS WITH LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, THE CITY HAS, LIKE, LET'S SAY IT'S A 10 FOOT BUFFER, THEY'RE LOOKING FOR 10 FEET AND THEY'LL, THEY'LL, THEY, THEY LET YOU MAKE SLIGHT MODIFICATIONS, UH, AS LONG AS YOU HAVE THE AMOUNT OF AREA.
SO LIKE, IF WE WERE TO, FOR WHAT, WHAT, I WISH SOMEBODY FROM LANDSCAPING WAS HERE TO VERIFY THIS, BUT WHAT DO HAVE SOMEBODY FROM LANDSCAPING? DO WE, MR. RICARDO ESPINOZA SITTING BEHIND US? OH, GEEZ, I, THAT'S RIGHT.
UM, WISH
SO NOW YOU'RE GONNA ASK THEM TO ELIMINATE THE, THE ASPHALT PAVEMENT IN ORDER TO CREATE A BUFFER.
NO, WHAT WHAT I'M GETTING IS GET RID OF, THEY'VE GOT 7 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 PARKING SPACES ACROSS THEIR FRONTAGE.
IF THEY GOT RID OF TWO PARKING SPACES, JUST TWO PARKING SPACES AND LANDSCAPED THEM, AND IT WAS THE SAME AREA AS, AS WHAT A BUFFER WOULD BE, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL COULD APPROVE? AS LONG AS THEY'RE MEETING, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MEETING THE, THE OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE? YES.
JUST DISPLACING IT IN A DIFFERENT AREA? YES.
SO THE INTENT TO MEET WOULD BE THERE? YES.
'CAUSE WE, WE COULD REDUCE THE BUFFER.
THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN ELIMINATION, BUT WE COULD CHARGE THEM WITH A FIVE FOOT BUFFER.
AND THEN WHAT THAT WOULD DO IS THEY WOULD EITHER HAVE TO PROVIDE FIVE FEET OR LET'S SAY TWO, TWO PARKING SPACES WORTH OF LANDSCAPING AND, AND IF IT WAS THE SAME AREA AS FIVE FEET ACROSS THEIR FRONTAGE, WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN APPROVE WITHOUT US? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
SO WHAT DO Y'ALL THINK ABOUT THAT? YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW WHAT I'M GETTING AT? YEAH, NO, I AGREE.
BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT, I'M LOOKING AT THE GOOGLE MAPS AND I'M LOOKING AT THE STRUCTURE THAT'S EXISTING.
THERE'S ALREADY A BUFFER WITHOUT LOSING.
WELL, THAT, THAT'S IN THE, THE RIGHT OF WAY THOUGH.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S IN FRONT OF THE
UH, IT DEPENDS WHERE THAT SIDEWALK IS.
UM, THE SIDEWALK, BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE IT RUNS, I DON'T KNOW, ACROSS THE SAME PLANE AS IN FRONT OF THE,
[03:25:01]
SO THAT'S EXISTING.AND THEN YOU GO STRAIGHT ACROSS, YOU DON'T LOSE ANY PARKING SPACES, THAT'S WHERE THE NEW STRUCTURE IS GONNA BE.
AND YOU PUT IN THE SAME BUFFER THAT'S EXISTING AND IT'S CONSISTENT ACROSS.
THAT'S WHAT I, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING THE QUESTION REAL QUICK.
YEAH, THAT'S WHY THAT'S, I MEAN, I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT, UH, WE, WE, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD REDUCE IT PERSONALLY AND LET THEM DO SOMETHING.
BUT CAN WE ASK THE APPLICANT IF THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE? IS THAT, IS THAT ACCEPTABLE? THAT'S FINE WITH US.
WHAT, UH, WHAT DO, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER COMMENTARY ON THAT? ALL RIGHT.
SO, SO RICARDO, FIVE FEET ACROSS THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY, RIGHT? MEANING WE STILL HAVE, BECAUSE I THINK THE CODE, THE CODE SAYS SOMETHING LIKE 10 FOOT, YOU KNOW, GIVES YOU A SQUARE FOOTAGE, BUT YOU CAN REDUCE IT UP TO A CERTAIN LIMIT IF YOU MAKE UP THE TYPE END BUFFER YOU MAKE UP FOR IT ELSEWHERE.
BUT FIVE FOOT WOULD STILL MAKE US ELIMINATE ALL THE PARKING STUFF.
SPOTS NOT, NO, NOT ALL THIS SQUARE, RIGHT? NO.
IT'S, IF, IF THAT'S WHAT I'M WHAT'S YOUR, WHAT'S YOUR FRONTAGE? UM, I'M NOT SURE.
HOW WIDE IS YOUR BUILDING? I DO YOU KNOW, UH, I CAN'T, I THINK IT'S LIKE 80, 80 FEET OR 70 FEET WIDE.
WE DID A FIVE FOOT BUFFER, THAT'S 350 FEET.
SO A PARKING SPACE IS 143 OR SOMETHING LIKE NINE BY 18.
SO YOU WOULD ZOOM, CAN YOU PIN THAT SCREEN DOWN A LITTLE SO WE CAN SEE BY THIS? YEAH.
SO LIKE IF THEY WERE TO, IF THEY, IF THEY WERE TO DO THAT, THEY COULD, THEY ALREADY HAVE ONE TREE IN A MEDIAN, THEY COULD PROBABLY LOSE TWO PARKING SPACES AND EASILY MAKE THAT OKAY.
GOMEZ, ANY VOICEMAILS OR GOMEZ? YES, MR. GO GOMEZ.
SO BY ELIMINATING THOSE TWO PARKING SPOTS THAT YOU TALK ABOUT, WILL THAT HINDER THEIR, WHEN THEY APPLY FOR THEIR COO AND TRAFFIC, DOES UH, UH, AN INSPECTION? NO.
WE HAVE, THEY GOT TONS OF COUNT.
THEY GET TO COUNT THE ENTIRE SITE BECAUSE IT'S ONE LINE.
THEY ONLY ENTIRE SHOPPING CENTER.
ALRIGHT, SO IF THERE'S NO NO PUBLIC COMMENT, NO PUBLIC COMMENT, MAYBE A MOTION FOR A FIVE FOOT BUFFERS IN ORDER.
NOW DO, CAN I READ BOTH THE BUFFER AND THE FENCING WITHIN THE SAME MOTION OR DOES, DO YOU WANT ME TO BREAK IT OUT? OKAY.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 25 DASH 3 0 0 1 27, I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 10 FOOT LANDSCAPE AIR BUFFER TO PROVIDE A FIVE FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER FOR THE NEW STRUCTURES FRONTAGE LONG COMMERCE STREET.
CORRECT ME, IS THAT, THAT'S THE RIGHT VERBIAGE, RIGHT? WANNA MAKE SURE? FIVE FOOT, PROBABLY, YES.
AND TO AN ELIMINATION OF THE FENCING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NON-RESIDENTIAL USES, OFD JOINING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES, SITUATED AT 4 7 2 9 WEST COMMERCE STREET, APPLICANT BEING AMANDA FLORES, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE REGARDING THE BUFFER, THERE IS ADEQUATE DISTANCE OF THE SIDEWALK AND THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IS MAINTAINED AND WE ARE REQUIRING, YOU KNOW, THE FIVE FOOT OR EQUIVALENT THEREOF SQUARE FOOTAGE TO BE MAINTAINED.
AND THE FENCING THERE IS EXISTING COMPLIANT RESIDENTIAL FENCING PROVIDING SAFETY AND SECURITY FOR, FOR THE PROPERTY FROM COMMERCIAL USES DUE TO DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
THE LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE REGARDING THE BUFFER, THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE TO DEMOLISH EXISTING PARKING TO ESTABLISH AND MEET THE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS REGARDING THE FENCING.
THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE TO INSTALL NEW PRIVACY FENCING ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE, ESSENTIALLY REPLICATING WHAT IS ALREADY ESTABLISHED.
AND THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE AS PERIOD OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE OBSERVED, ESSENTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE REGARDING THE BUFFER.
SUFFICIENT SEPARATION FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY WOULD BE MAINTAINED.
THE BUFFER ELIMINATION OR REDUCTION OF FIVE FEET WOULD BE, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADJACENT STRUCTURE, UH, FRONTING WEST COMMERCE STREET REGARDING THE FENCING, PRIVACY FENCING EXISTS ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE IS PROVIDED BY THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS FOR THE VARIANCE WITHOUT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE.
OTHER NOTICES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT UNTIL THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED, NO USES OTHER, THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
AND FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY.
ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED REGARDING THE BUFFER, THE PROPOSED NEW STRUCTURE MAINTAINS THE SETBACK CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING ADJACENT COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE AND IS IN LINE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THIS AREA ALONG WEST COMMERCE STREET.
REGARDING THE FENCING, THE REAR FENCING WAS INSTALLED AND IS CURRENTLY MAINTAINED BY THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS TO PROVIDE PRIVACY AND SAFETY FOR THE PROPERTY FROM COMMERCIAL USES.
THE APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE INSTALLED IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND NOT DUE TO ALL THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS.
THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED REGARDING THE BUFFER THE STAFF FINDS OF APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH VARIANCE OF SOUGHT IS DUE TO THIS UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AS THE,
[03:30:01]
AS THE REDUCTION OF THE BUFFER WOULD, UH, REQUIRE DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING PARKING AREA AND THE FENCING, THE APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE FENCE VARIANCE OF SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WAS ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH, WHICH DID NOT REQUIRE OFFENSE AT THE TIME.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN.
SO I AM, AS YOU NOTICED, I I, UH, READ THE VARIANCE AS NOT A ELIMINATION OF THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER, BUT A FIVE FOOT, UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, CONCURRED TO THAT AND IT WOULD WORK WITHIN THEIR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND, UH, FIND THE, UH, EQUIVALENT SQUARE FOOTAGE OF LANDSCAPING.
SO, UH, I THINK WE'RE GOOD THERE.
AND REGARDING THE FENCING REQUIREMENT, AS NOTED, THE UH, COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WAS BUILT IN 75 WELL BEFORE THE RESIDENTIAL, UH, BUILDINGS WERE THERE.
AND, UH, THEY, EACH INDIVIDUAL PUT THEIR OWN FENCE UP AND I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE PROBLEMATIC TO TRY TO NEGOTIATE 18 DIFFERENT AGREEMENTS WITH 18 DIFFERENT LANDOWNERS.
AND I LINED UP WITH AN EIGHT FRANKENSTEIN LOOKING F SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION AS READ.
COMMISSIONER BRANER, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE.
UM, WHEN IT COMES TO THE BUFFER, UH, THE ADDITIONAL FIVE FOOT BUFFER, UH, WELL THE REDUCTION FROM, FROM THE REQUESTED 10 TO FIVE WOULD BE IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, UH, NEXT DOOR TO THE NEW DEVELOPMENT.
SO I THINK THAT WILL ACTUALLY ENHANCE THE, THE LOOK OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, BECAUSE UNFORTUNATELY IN A LOT OF THESE, UM, COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS, WE ARE SEEING A LOT OF REDUCTION IN BUFFER, WHICH IS NOT, UH, CONSISTENT WITH THE WAY THE CITY IS GOING.
SO I LIKE THE FACT THAT WE'RE AT LEAST, UH, GETTING SOME BUFFER, UH, IN THIS COMMERCIAL AREA.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE THAT ROLL CALL VOTE.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS.
COMMISSIONER BURTON? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? YES, I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF ACT MOTION PASSES.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GIVE A STAFF.
[ Approval of Minutes ]
LAST THING IS THE MINUTES.UH, ANYBODY HAVE ANY ISSUES? UH, I ENJOYED READING THEM AND IT LOOKED FINE.
UM, UH, MOTION PASSES STAFF IS THEIR DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UM, JUST REAL QUICK, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY DID NOT GO OVER TO UDC AMENDMENTS THAT CAME OUT KIND OF LATE IS WHILE YOU SAW THE, UH, AGENDA POSTED EARLY, UM, WE ARE NOW REQUIRED TO POST OUR AGENDA THREE FULL CALENDAR DAYS.
UH, THAT DOESN'T, IT'S NOT OFFICIAL UNTIL SEPTEMBER 1ST, BUT WE STARTED THIS LAST, UM, SO THAT'S WHY YOU SAW IT EARLY.
I THOUGHT IT ALWAYS WAS THREE, SORRY, NOT CALENDAR, BUT BUSINESS DAYS.
AH, THAT'S, YEAH, IT WAS 72 HOURS, BUT NOW IT IS THREE FULL BUSINESS DAYS THAT GOES INTO EFFECT SEPTEMBER 1ST, BUT WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET READY FOR THAT.
YEAH, YOU'RE PRACTICALLY THERE.
PRACTICALLY
WHAT ABOUT HOLD HOLDOVER APPOINTMENTS WHEN, OH YEAH.
HOW'S THE, HOW'S ALL THE, HOW'S THE, UH, APPOINTMENTS COMING? I NOTICED ON COUNCIL ON THURSDAY, NOBODY FROM THE BOA IS ON THE LIST.
WHEN I, I CHECKED WITH, UH, THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, UH, THEY TOLD ME BOAS IS IN GOOD STANDING, SO I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANYTHING, ANY GUIDANCE ON THAT YET.
WE, THIS IS JOSEPH ARNEY, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE GOTTEN A COUPLE, UM, AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE BEING PUT ON AGENDAS AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, SO THEY'LL, THEY'RE TRICKLING IN AS FAR AS SOME OF THE REAPPOINTMENTS.
UH, SO IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE 4 41.