* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:04] ALL RIGHT. ARE WE, UH, COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES IS RUNNING A LITTLE LATE. IS THERE ANOTHER COMMISSIONER WHO'S ALSO RUNNING A LITTLE LATE? UH, COMMISSIONER BE, SHOULD BE HERE IN A MINUTE. OKAY. WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. IT'S, UH, ONE OH ONE. I HEREBY CALL THIS MEETING OF THE, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS INTO SESSION. CAN WE HAVE THE SPANISH INTERPRETER COME OUT? PLEASE CAN. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE, UH, JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE. I PLEDGE THE LEAD TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD. AND FOR THE REMAIN JUSTICE RULE, HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD ONE AND INVISIBLE GOD. ALL RIGHT. A STAFF COULD PLEASE CALL ROLL COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON. HERE. COMMISSIONER STEVENS. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ PRESENT. COMMISSIONER DEAN PRESENT. COMMISSIONER CRUZ HERE. COMMISSIONER GOMEZ. COMMISSIONER MANANA PRESENT. COMMISSIONER BREGMAN PRESENT, COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES. COMMISSIONER OZUNA PRESENT, COMMISSIONER UNI CHAIR ORIENT. AND I'M PRESENT. SO WE HAVE NINE. WE HAVE A QUORUM. WE'LL BE EXPECTING A COUPLE MORE MOMENTARILY, BUT WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. UH, SO BEFORE WE, UH, PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, UH, I'M GONNA OFFER SOME WORDS OF EXPLANATION. UH, THIS BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA, WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. THE CASES ARE LISTED BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND STREET ADDRESS. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT. LASTLY, AS CHAIR WILL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS, I ASK THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS A CHAIR AND I'LL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE MEETING. WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF COMMENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THE CITY'S ZONING CODES. UH, THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW. WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELIEF SOUGHT, AND WE DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE IN THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 2 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, A DETERMINATION MADE BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND AUTHORIZED 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 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 BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND GRANTING THE RELEASE SOUGHT RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS IN WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW. BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S. DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. UH, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS OF THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE. STAFF. THANK YOU. STAFF WILL BE BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF REQUESTS. PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXEMPTION OR APPEAL. AND THE PROPERTIES WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION FILE THIS PRESENTATION AND ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THE REQUEST FOR THOSE THAT SIGN UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST A PROPOSED VARIANCE, SPECIALIZATION OR APPEAL. YOU'LL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED MAXIMUM THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME [00:05:01] LIMITATION. FOR THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO GIVE UP THEIR TIME TO THE SPEAKER. A SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM TWO PEOPLE GIVEN UP THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES. BILL IS GIVEN UP, THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO BOARD QUESTIONS TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. YES. UH, LET THE RECORD SHOW COMMISSIONER BONNI HAS JOINED THE MEETING, UH, UH, DIGITALLY, UH, AND VIRTUALLY. SORRY. UH, WE'RE STILL WAITING ON COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ, BUT FOR NOW WE HAVE 10, UH, ITEM NUMBER ONE, I UNDERSTAND [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items  ] THEIR APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A, A CONTINUOUS CON CONTINUANCE TILL SEPTEMBER 8TH. UH, YES. SO WE CAN HEAR A BRIEF, UH, PRESENTATION ON THAT? YES. UM, QUICKLY READ IT IN BO 8 25 103 0 1 14. IT WAS REQUEST BY HIL DE FOR VARIANCE FOR THE CD TWO PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE BUILDING FOOTPRINT TO ALLOW 1800 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, A VARIANCE FROM THE CD TWO PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE HEIGHT TO ALLOW A 35 FOOT TALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND DWELLING, AND A VARIANCE FROM THE CD TWO AND UDC STANDARDS TO ALLOW 1800 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY DWELLING LOCATED AT 6 26 FULTON AVENUE STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL AND DISTRICT ONE AND APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE TO SEPTEMBER 8TH. NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS. ALRIGHT, SO WITH THAT, IF THERE'S A COMMISSIONER WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE TO SEPTEMBER 8TH. SECOND. UH, ONE, ONE MOMENT. UH, SIR, PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM. DID YOU INTEND TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS? YES. YEAH. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME SO THEY CAN DOCUMENT YOUR NAME. MM-HMM . MOVE IT TO DECEMBER 18TH. SIR, CAN YOU TURN THE MICROPHONE ON? THANK YOU. UH, IF I CAN MOVE IT TO THE DECEMBER 18TH, A COUPLE MORE MONTHS. I'M STILL WORKING WITH MY ENGINEER TO GET EVERYTHING SITUATED TO GET SOME SIDE POINTS. OKAY. WE THE MEETING ON THE 18TH? YEAH. SO THIS BOARD MEETS THE FIRST AND THIRD, UH, MONDAY. SO THAT WOULD PUT YOU AT THE 22ND, I BELIEVE. SO THE 22ND, IS THAT ACCEPTABLE? UH, DECEMBER, THAT WORKS SEPTEMBER, SEPTEMBER EPTEMBER. I CAN'T MOVE IT A LITTLE BIT LATER THAN SEPTEMBER, MAYBE OCTOBER. IF YOU NEED TO MOVE IT THAT LATE, WE REALLY ARE TALKING ABOUT WITHDRAWING THE REQUEST OR POSTPONING IT AND RE-ADVERTISING. WE TYPICALLY DON'T DO CONTINUANCES FOR LONGER THAN 30 TO 60 DAYS. OKAY. UH, THEN WHATEVER THE LATEST I CAN GET IT. THAT WORKS. OKAY. WELL THE LATEST YOU CAN GET IT WOULD BE, UH, UH, SEPTEMBER, UH, 22ND. SO, WE'LL, WE WILL START THERE. ALRIGHT. OF COURSE. AND HOPEFULLY YOU'LL ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU NEED TO DO AND THEN IF NOT, WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS. THAT WORKS. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A, IS THERE A MOTION AMENDED TO REAL QUICK? UM, COMMISSIONER BEEZ, CAN I GET AN AUDIO CHECK PLEASE? AND WE CANNOT HEAR YOU? CAN YOU HEAR US? OKAY? ALRIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION TILL SEPTEMBER 22ND BY COMMISSIONER UNA AND THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE ITEMS CONTINUED. WE'LL SEE YOU BACK ON THE 22ND. THANK YOU. HAVE A GREAT DAY. YEP. DO WE NEED TO DO ANOTHER, UH, SOUND CHECK WITH COMMISSIONER EZ? CAN YOU HEAR US? YES. COMMISSIONER BERNICE, CAN YOU HEAR? YOU CAN HEAR US? YES. OH, WE HEARD. WE HEARD YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM TWO AND GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JOSEPH LEOS, SENIOR PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS BO OA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 28. THE ADDRESS IS 5 4 5 4 VISTA TRAIL IN COUNCIL DISTRICT 10. THE APPLICANT IS ANTHONY ZUL AND THE, THEY ARE REQUESTING AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO REVOKE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT DUE TO HOT COLLECTION. UH, THE CURRENT TYPE IS THE TYPE TWO AND THE ZONING IS FOR R SIX. UM, AGAIN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 5 4 5 4 VISTA TRAIL SURROUNDING LAND USES INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. UM, AGAIN, THEY ARE REQUESTING AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO REVOKE THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT AT THIS PROPERTY. UM, THE APPLICANT IS CURRENT ON THEIR HALL AS OF AUGUST OF 2025. UM, STR OPERATORS ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX TO THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT ON A MONTHLY BASIS. UM, THIS INCLUDES REPORTING $0 IF NO REVENUE IS COLLECTED [00:10:02] AS OF MARCH 10TH, 2025. PLATFORMS THAT DIRECTLY REMIT STATE HOT. ALSO NOW DIRECTLY REMIT CITY HOT TO THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT. THIS INCLUDES MAJOR PLATFORMS SUCH AS AIRBNB AND VRBO. IF THE STR IS RENTED THROUGH A PLATFORM THAT DOES NOT REMIT THE HOT DIRECTLY TO THE STATE, THE OPERATOR MUST CONTINUE TO, MUST CONTINUE TO REPORT AND REMIT CITY AND COUNTY HOT DIRECTLY TO THE CITY THROUGH AVENUE ON A MONTHLY BASIS. UM, AVENUE IS THE THIRD PARTY SERVICE THAT COLLECTS HOT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. UM, ALL STR OPERATORS ARE STILL REQUIRED TO CONTINUE TO FILE REVENUE REPORTS AND PAY BEXAR COUNTY HOT THROUGH AVENUE ON A MONTHLY BASIS. UM, THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT WHO MANAGES, UM, WHO MANAGE REPORTING AND COLLECTION SERVICES FOR THE CITY STATES REVENUE REPORTS WERE MISSING FROM APRIL, 2024 THROUGH FEBRUARY, 2025. DELINQUENCY NOTICES WERE MAILED BY AVENUE BETWEEN JULY, 2024 AND MARCH, 2025. AND A FINAL NOTICE OF DELINQUENCY WAS EMAILED BY DSD ON JUNE 16TH OF THIS YEAR. UM, LASTLY, SECTION 16 DASH 10 D STATES THAT FAILURE TO TIMELY REPORT AND PAY HOT WITHIN 90 DAYS SHALL REPORT SHALL RESULT AND PERMIT REVOCATION. UH, NO PAYMENT WAS MADE WITHIN THAT 90 DAYS, THEREFORE THE PERMIT WAS REVOKED ON JULY 1ST IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 16 DASH 1 1 1, 1 OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES. UM, AND THIS IS THE TYPE TWO DENSITY COUNT. THERE ARE 17 UNITS ON THIS BLOCK PHASE, UH, AND THERE'S ONE TYPE TWO, UM, CURRENTLY THERE, UH, 5 4 5 4 VISTA TRAIL BEING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. UM, THIS IS, UM, ONE OF THE ACTIVE LISTINGS. UM, AND THERE ARE NO INVESTIGATIONS OR CODE VIOLATIONS FOR THIS PROPERTY. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THEN THE SURROUNDING AREAS. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE DENIAL. UM, THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT STAFF REVOKE THE PERMIT FOR THE VIOLATION DESCRIBED IN THIS REPORT. UH, TWO, THE OWNER, UH, OF THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT VIOLATED THE STR ORDINANCE BY FAILING TO TIMELY REPORT REVENUES AND PAY THE ASSOCIATED HOT TAX PAYMENTS. AND THREE, THE OWNER, UM, FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE EVEN AFTER ATTEMPTS TO WERE MADE TO INFORM OF THEIR DELINQUENT STATUS. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN WE MAILED OUT 37 NOTICES, UH, RECEIVED THREE IN FAVOR TO AN OPPOSITION. UH, ONE WAS ONE WAS RECEIVED NEITHER IN FAVOR OR AN OPPOSITION. SO NEUTRAL. UM, THE VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION. AND LASTLY, THE THREE CITYWIDE GROUPS WHO WERE NOTIFIED WITH NO RESPONSE. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT'S PRESENT AND FINANCE IS PRESENT AS WELL. HEY, COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS. UM, DID, IF, IF FOR SOME REASON THIS, UH, WELL, THIS DOESN'T GET PASSED TODAY, UH, HOW LONG DO THEY HAVE TO WAIT BEFORE THEY CAN REAPPLY? IT WOULD BE ONE YEAR FROM JULY 1ST. FROM JULY 1ST. OKAY. AND THEN YOU IN MARCH WHEN AVENUE, UH, STARTED GETTING HOT TAX PAYMENTS FROM THE MAIN, DID THEY, DID THE CITY RECEIVE ANY PAYMENTS AFTER MARCH? WERE THEY USING ONE OF THE MAJOR, UH, UH, ONLINE RESERVATION? UM, THERE WERE NO MONTHLY PAYMENTS MADE UNTIL, UM, JULY 1ST, WHICH WAS AFTER THE REVOCATION. OKAY. ANY OF THE QUESTIONS OF THE COMMISSION? COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UH, WHEN WERE THEY ISSUED THE, UM, SDR PERMIT IN THE, INITIALLY THEY WERE ISSUED THE PERMIT IN, UM, APRIL, ON APRIL 11TH, 2024. ALL RIGHT. LET HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. YES. IF, IF YOU'RE HERE FOR, FOR THIS CASE, COME ON. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND MY NAME IS, UH, AZULE. I'M ANTHONY Z'S. UH, FATHER, UH, ANTHONY ZULE IS OUTTA STATE, SO HE WAS NOT ABLE TO COME IN. OKAY. WELL, TELL US, TELL US ABOUT THE STR. OKAY. THE STR , I, HIS WIFE ALICE? YEAH, WE HAVE TO, WE'RE RECORDING ALL THIS. OKAY. MY NAME IS ALICE ZLI AND I'M, UM, I CAN ANTHONY'S MOTHER AND, UH, WE HAVE A LETTER THAT HE SENT OVER TO JOSEPH. UH, LEO MM-HMM . AND IN, REGARDLESS WHAT HAPPENED. CAN YOU MOVE THE MIC A LITTLE CLOSER? YEAH, I'M SORRY. IT'S VERY SENSITIVE. OKAY. ANYWAY, HE WAS SAYING THAT, UM, HE DID, UH, IT WAS ON HIS PART THAT HE OVERLOOKED THIS AND THE EMAILS THAT WERE BEING SENT TO HIM WERE SENT TO HIS, UH, SPAN BOX, AND HE WAS NOT ABLE TO, DIDN'T REALIZE IT UNTIL, I THINK WE GOT THE LETTER. WE WERE, UH, GETTING HIS LETTERS OUT OF THE MAILBOX, SO HE NEVER RECEIVED THEM. HE, BESIDES THE MARILYN, AND [00:15:01] SO, UM, EXCUSE MY VOICE IS PRETTY SCRATCHY. AND SO HE'S LOOKING FOR A PART IN THAT. AND JOSEPH, UH, UH, AND JENNIFER OST WERE THE ONES THAT WERE DEALING WITH HIM. AND, UH, AND WE BROUGHT THIS PAPER OF WHAT HE SAYS, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING THAT HE NEEDS TO VERIFY, YOU CAN, UH, HE PUT THE PHONE NUMBER AND EVERYTHING IN THERE SO THAT WE COULD CALL, MIKE CAN GET HIM ON THE PHONE NOW IF YOU'D LIKE. THAT'S NOT NECESSARY UNLESS THE COMMISSIONER INSISTS. BUT, UH, AND THEN WE BROUGHT ALL THE, UH, THE TAX FORMS THAT WERE PAID. OKAY. SO AFTER EVERYTHING WAS PAID IN FULL AFTER HE GOT THAT NOTICE. OKAY. SO IN, IN MARCH WHEN THIS SDR WAS CREATED, UH, IT, I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WERE NO HOT TAX. UH, DID Y'ALL, WERE Y'ALL ACTIVELY RENTING IT OUT SINCE MARCH OF LAST YEAR? GETTING THE PLACE READY? HUH? NO TENANTS WERE GETTING THE PLACE READY. NO TENANTS WERE THERE. WE WERE GETTING THE PLACE READY, YES. OKAY. UH, WHEN DID Y'ALL START RENTING IT OUT? NOT UNTIL DECEMBER. NOT UNTIL DECEMBER. CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MIC PLEASE? NOT UNTIL DECEMBER. OKAY. SO YOU GOT THE PERMIT IN MARCH. UH, YOU WERE GETTING IT READY FOR MARCH, AND THEN YOU DIDN'T RENT IT OUT TILL DECEMBER OF 2024? CORRECT. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? BRAGMAN MR. BRAGMAN? UM, SO HOW DID THEY RE, HOW DID HE RECEIVE THE NOTICE THAT HE WAS, THAT HIS PERMIT WAS BEING REVOKED? IF, IF THE OTHER EMAILS WERE GOING TO HIS SPAM, HOW DID HE FIND OUT? WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT ABOUT THE REVOCATION, UH, FOLDERS, I NOTICED THAT REVOKE CAME IN. SO THEN I WAS LIKE, OH, WHAT IS THIS REVOKE? THEN THAT'S WHEN I NOTICED THE SITUATION. OKAY. UH, BECAUSE THIS, HE'S NOT PRESENT, CAN YOU PLEASE STATE REPEAT THAT INTO THE MIC? UH, THE, THE, THE CRUX OF, OF WHAT IS BEING EXPLAINED, HE SAID HE WAS GETTING, HE SAID HE WAS GETTING IT READY AND IT, UH, AND IN THAT PROCESS, UH, HE, UH, WHEN HE LOOKED INTO THE SPAM FOLDER, THAT'S WHEN I NOTICED IT. WHEN HE LOOKED INTO THE SPAM FOLDER, THAT IS WHEN HE NOTICED THAT. OKAY. AND DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHEN, UH, HE ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT THE CITY AND INQUIRE ABOUT WHAT HE NEEDED TO DO RIGHT AWAY, UH, RIGHT AFTER THAT, CORRECT. ANTHONY? CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. WHAT, WHEN WAS THAT? WHAT MONTH? WHAT MONTH WAS JANUARY? JANUARY 1ST? UH, SADLY, BUT YES, IT WAS, UH, I MEAN JANUARY 1ST, 2025. JUNE, CORRECT. OKAY. CORRECT. SO THIS TO THE CITY, DID YOU HAVE ANY RECORD OF ANY ATTEMPT TO CONTACT IN JANUARY OF 2025 REGARDING THIS SITE? ARE YOU, ARE YOU ASKING A RECORD THAT THE APPLICANT REACHED OUT TO STAFF OR THAT STAFF NOTIFIED THEM OF DELINQUENCY THAT THE APPLICANT REACHED OUT TO STAFF? WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY RECORD. I, I WILL ALSO SAY, I KNOW IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE THE BOARD HAS CONSIDERED ONE OF THESE, UH, APPEALS. THE EMAIL THAT GOES OUT WITH THE NOTICE OF DELINQUENCY, KINDA THAT FINAL, YOU KNOW, FIX IT QUICK OR ELSE IT'S GONNA GET REVOKED, COMES FROM THE SAME SYSTEM TO THE SAME EMAIL ADDRESS THAT THE PERMIT WAS SENT TO. OKAY. UM, AND THE PERMIT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED JUST FINE. ALRIGHT. YEAH. , UH, WELL, COMMISSIONER, UH, BARRINGTON AND THEN COMMISSIONER ZUNA, A QUESTION FOR STAFF, DID WE NOT ABOUT A YEAR OR SO AGO, SUGGEST THAT THESE FINAL NOTICES AND NOTICES OF REVOCATION BE SENT NOT ONLY BY EMAIL, BUT THE OLD FASHIONED WAY BY US CERTIFIED MAIL? YEAH, SO ACTUALLY THE SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE TODAY TAKES ADVANTAGE OF BOTH. SO THE MONTHLY NOTICES OF DELINQUENCY ARE SENT, UH, THROUGH REGULAR MAIL. WE, AS A POLICY TO TRY TO KEEP THIS AS ROBUST A NOTIFICATION AS POSSIBLE, IMPLEMENTED A FINAL EMAIL TO NOTICE TO THE SAME EMAIL THAT THE PERMIT WAS SENT TO. AND THAT EMAIL INCLUDES A WARNING, THIS IS YOUR FINAL OPPORTUNITY, GET THIS ACCOUNT CURRENT, OR WE WILL REVOKE THE PERMIT IN 20 DAYS. SO WE ACTUALLY DO BOTH. NOW YOU SEND A, A PAPER LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL? IT'S, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S SENT CERTIFIED, BUT IT'S MAILED TO A REGULAR PAPER FOR LETTER ANYWAY. YES. OKAY. AND WAS THAT SENT TO ANTHONY'S ADDRESS? THE ADDRESS THAT HE HAS ON A FILE FOR HIS MAILING ADDRESS IS 5 4 5 4 VISTA TRAILS. AND THAT'S THE EMAIL THAT, THAT'S THE ADDRESS THAT WAS MAILED TO. OKAY. ALRIGHT. I OTHER QUE OH, COMMISSIONER ZU. RIGHT. SO, UH, I HAVE A QUESTION. SO THE APPEAL THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY IS THAT WE'RE BASICALLY TRYING TO MAKE A, UM, MAKE A FINDINGS THAT THERE WAS AN ERROR ON THE CITY'S, UH, PROCESS IN THE REVOCATION. CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR STATEMENT IS AND THAT THE CITY ERRORED IN MAKING THEIR, UH, DECISION TO REVOKE THE SHORT TERM LICENSE? [00:20:02] IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, ANTHONY? YES. JUST, IT, IT, IT WENT TO THE SPAM FOLDER. THE, THE ONLY REASON THAT IT WENT TO THEREAFTER, I, I HAD CLEARED MY COOKIES AND ONCE I CLEARED MY COOKIES, I WAS NO LONGER, UH, CONNECTED. I, I DIDN'T APPROVE OF THE, OF THE FOLDER. YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO EXPLAIN THAT TO THEM. OKAY. YOU ALSO SAID, HE'S ALSO ASKING DID YOU GET A, UH, PHYSICAL LETTER AND THEY'RE SAYING THAT THEY SENT IT TO YOUR 54 54 ADDRESS? I'VE, I HAVEN'T RECEIVED IT IN, IN THAT MAILBOX BECAUSE I, I, YOU CHECK MY MAILBOX AND I, I'VE NEVER, YOU ALWAYS SHOW ME WHAT HAS CAME IN AND I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT. YEAH, WE'VE NEVER, OKAY. UM, SO, SO, SO UNDERSTAND TO UNDERSTAND AGAIN, WHAT, WHAT IS YOUR STATEMENT IN TERMS TERMS OF THE CITY ERROR AND, AND THEIR PROCESS IN REVOKING THE LACK OF COMMUNICATION? UH, JUST, IT JUST, IT WENT TO THE SPAM FOLDER AND YES. AND I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T GET TO SEE OKAY. WE'RE, LET'S BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOLDING THE PHONE UP. THE YES. LACK OF COMMUNICATION, JUST, IT WENT TO MY SPAM FOLDER. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. AND STAFF. UH, LASTLY, UH, BILL SA, UH, IS ANY INFORMATION AVAILABLE, LIKE IF THE APPLICANT GOES ON TO BILL SA, THEY CAN SEE THAT THERE'S PERHAPS A NOTICE. UM, IS IT POSSIBLE TO DOWNLOAD ANY NOTICES FROM BUILD SA? I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORKS PERSONALLY. UH, YOU, YOU CANNOT DOWNLOAD THE, THE COPIES OF THE DELINQUENCY NOTICES THAT WERE MAILED MM-HMM . BUT THE RECORD, UH, BUILD SA DOES DOCUMENT ALL EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS. SO THERE WOULD BE RECORD FROM, UH, THE ELLA EMAIL ACCOUNT, INCLUDING THE EMAIL THAT SAID, THIS IS YOUR FINAL NOTICE. I MEAN, SO, SO ANY, ANY, ANY APPLICANT, ANY PERMIT HOLDER CAN LOG INTO THEIR ACCOUNT AND BUILD SA LOOK AT LIKE A PROCESSING STATUS AND SEE THAT THERE'S AN ISSUE OF SOME SORT. I, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE PUBLIC FACING PORTAL ALLOWS MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, WHETHER YOU'RE THE PROPERTY OWNER OR NOT, TO VIEW ALL THE EMAILED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN STAFF AND THE PROPERTY OWNER. UM, BUT CERTAINLY IT IS DOCUMENTED, YOU KNOW, IF WE EVER GOT SOMETHING LIKE AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST AGAIN. OKAY. IT'S NOT, NOT TO IMPLY THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO DO AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST TO GET THAT INFORMATION. WE EMAILED THE NOTICE THAT IT WAS DELINQUENT. OKAY. ONE LAST QUESTION. ME ASK COMMISSIONERS, IF, IF THIS APPEAL WERE TO BE GRANTED TODAY, IT WOULD BE FOR A THREE YEAR RENEWAL AND THAT WOULD BE BEFORE US AGAIN FOR A RENEWAL? OR IS THIS THE ONE THERE ARE NO OTHER, THEY'RE WITHIN ONE YEAR THAT WAS ISSUED. IF, YEAH, IF THIS WERE TO BE OVERTURNED, THEN THE PERMIT WOULD BE REACTIVATED AND IT WOULD RETAIN THE ORIGINAL EXPIRATION DATE. OKAY. WHICH IS THE THREE, IS THAT THE THREE YEAR OUT? IT WOULD BE APRIL 11TH, 2027. SO THREE YEARS FROM THE INITIAL APPROVAL, WHICH CASE THE BOARD WILL REVIEW THEIR APPLICATION AGAINST. I, I DON'T BELIEVE THE BOARD WOULD HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT. 'CAUSE THIS IS THE ONLY TYPE TWO ON THE BLOCK FACE. GOTCHA. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, LET THE RECORD SHOW COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES HAS JOINED THE MEETING VIRTUALLY 1 24. ALRIGHT, IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, HAS ANYONE SENT TO SPEAK ANY, UH, PUBLIC UH, COMMENT? THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. UH, WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'VE HEARD ALL THIS AND WE'RE GONNA LOOK FOR A MOTION AND SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT. OKAY. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. I APPRECIATE IT. I'LL TAKE IT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ZUNE. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OH EIGHT DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 2 8, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE APPEAL FOR THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 5 4 5 4 VISTA TRAIL, A APPLICANT BEING ANTHONY Z BECAUSE OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOW THE CITY STAFF MADE AN ERROR ENFORCING SECTION 16 DASH 10 D WHEN REVOKING THE SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT. SECOND COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMISSIONER MANEZ, I, SECOND COMMISSIONER. YEAH, SO I'M GOING TO, UH, ACTUALLY, UH, SUPPORT THE, UH, THE APPEAL HERE. UM, SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A COMMUNICATION ERROR, BUT THERE IS NO, UM, THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS KIND OF A LEARNING LESSON FOR THE APPLICANT AND KEEPING HIS, YOU KNOW, ADMINISTRATIVE CONTACT INFORMATION. GOOD. BUT I DON'T SEE, I SEE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY TO CON CONTINUE TO COLLECT HOT TAXES. I THINK HE LEARNED HIS LESSON HERE. UM, I THINK THERE WAS NO, UM, YOU KNOW, IMPACT TO THE NEIGHBORS AND, UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY, UH, REVOCATION ISSUES OTHER THAN HIS FAILURE TO REMIT HOT TAXES AS BEING AN ISSUE TO REVOKE HIS SHORT-TERM LICENSE. SO. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MANON, UM, I WON'T BE, WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF THE APPEAL. UM, YEAH, AS, AS THE MOTION'S BEING, I GUESS THE NOTICE WITH REGARDS TO THE APPEAL, I DO NOT SEE THAT THE CITY MADE AN ERROR. UM, YOU KNOW, AND THERE ARE OTHER REMEDIES FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE PROPERTY. 'CAUSE I BELIEVE I UNDERSTOOD THAT IT WAS LONGER TERM RENTED OUT BEFORE HE STARTED THIS PROCESS. SO I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF THE APPEAL. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD, UH, HEARING NONES? HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. [00:25:02] COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I SUPPORT COMMISSIONER MANNA. I DO NOT. COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? NO, I DO NOT. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ. I SUPPORT IT. COMMISSIONER DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? YES, I SUPPORT IT. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? I ABSTAIN. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I SUPPORT IT. CHAIR ORIAN AND YES, I SUPPORT IT, BUT THE MOTION, UH, DID NOT PASS. UH, IT WAS A, IT WAS A SIX TO FOUR WITH ONE ABSTENTION, SO, UH, YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF AND, AND SEE WHERE YOU NEED TO DO FROM HERE. OKAY. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. UH, THAT WOULD BE, UH, JENNIFER, UH, ANY ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS, UH, ON THE LEFT SIDE OVER THERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER THREE, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS TYLER ADAM, UH, PLANNER OF CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. THIS IS, UH, BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 3 5. UM, WHICH IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR AN ADDITIONAL TYPE ONE OR TYPE TWO SHORT TERM RENTAL ON THE BLOCK FACE. UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT, UH, 10 31 SOUTH GIVERS STREET AND COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO. APPLICANT SHIVANI REDDY IS, UH, PRESENT, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 31 SOUTH GOVER STREET. SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON THE BLOCK FACE. UM, PER CITY CODE TYPE TWO, SHORT-TERM RENTAL SHOULD BE LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN ONE EIGHTH OR 12 POINT A HALF PERCENT OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS ON A BLOCK FACE. UH, THE BLOCK FACE CURRENTLY HAS FOUR UNITS. THERE IS ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UM, THAT EXISTS AT 10 23 SOUTH GS. IT WAS ISSUED IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR. UH, THAT PROPERTY IS CURRENT ON THEIR HOT TAXES. UH, BLOCK FACE, UH, IS CURRENTLY AT 25%. IF AN ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO IS APPROVED, BLOCK FACE WILL BE AT 50%. UH, JANUARY 7TH, 2025. UH, THE APPLICATION FOR THIS SHORT TERM RENTAL WAS RECEIVED. STATUS WAS CHANGED PENDING BOA DECISION ON JAN OR JULY 10TH, 2025. UH, NO INVESTIGATION OR PERMITTING HISTORY AND NO ACTIVE LISTINGS, UH, WERE FOUND. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION AND THEN THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEN THE SURROUNDING, UH, PROPERTIES STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON THE BLOCK FACE. UH, 39 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. UH, DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID RESPOND IN OPPOSITION AND WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSES FROM THE THREE CITYWIDE GROUPS. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. ALL RIGHT. STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR SDR. UM, YEAH, MY NAME IS SHIVANI REDDY AND I AM ON THE APPLICATION AND THIS IS SHARMA AND I AM THE PERSON WHO BOUGHT THE PROPERTY. UM, SO YEAH, WE HAVE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY. MY, WE ARE FRIENDS AND SO WE, SHE PURPOSE PURCHASED A PROPERTY. I CURRENTLY HOUSE DIFFERENT AIRBNBS ON THE SITE, AND SO SHE BASICALLY REACHED OUT TO ME AND SHE WAS LIKE, HEY, I WOULD LOVE TO HOST MY HOUSE AND BE WITH YOU. AND SO WE BY, WE WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS OF SETTING UP THE WHOLE HOME, UM, YOU KNOW, PUT EVERYTHING ON THE APP. AND WHEN WE DID THAT, THEN OBVIOUSLY IT CAME BACK AND TRIGGERED US THAT WE NEED TO SUBMIT AN STR. AND SO THEN WE REALIZED THAT THERE WAS AN STR PROCESS THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH. AND THEN WE FILED THE COORDINATE, UM, YOU KNOW, APPLICATION AND THEN WE CAME BACK THAT IT WAS A DENIAL BECAUSE OF THE CITY ORDINANCE ESSENTIALLY. AND BECAUSE OF, YEAH, THERE WAS A PERCENTAGE ESSENTIALLY THAT IT COULDN'T EXCEED. AND BECAUSE IT, THE PER CAPITA IS SO LESS THAT ESSENTIALLY THE ONE OVERSEES THE PERCENTAGE. SO EVEN THOUGH THERE'S ONLY WHAT, FIVE PROP? 4 4, 4 PROPERTIES? PROPERTIES, SO ONE BASICALLY TAKES AWAY ALL OF THE OTHER AIRBNBS, UM, OR THAT THEY THE OPTION TO HAVE OTHER AIRBNBS ALSO. UM, WE'VE REACHED OUT TO THE NEIGHBORS AND THE OTHER AIRBNB AND WE'VE GOTTEN SOME LETTERS OF, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY DON'T MIND THAT THERE WAS AN AIRBNB IN THAT AREA THAT WE, IF WE WOULD, TO GET GUARANTEED THAT EXCEPTION. [00:30:01] YEAH, SO, SO WHEN WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, WE CHECKED WITH THE HOA AND EVERYTHING TO KNOW THAT THERE IS NO HOA AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO THE AIRBNB. UM, SECONDLY WE ALSO TOOK IT OUT AS AN INVESTMENT LOAN THINKING THAT BECAUSE WE ARE PUTTING IT AS AN AIRBNB, WE DIDN'T, LIKE, WE DID THE WHOLE SETUP, LIKE SHE SAID, AND THEN WE CAME TO KNOW THAT THERE'S A 12% VOLUME AND, UH, WE WERE NOT, WE WERE AWARE OF THIS COULD BE IT, BUT THEN WE WERE NOT AWARE OF ONLY FOUR HOUSES COMPRISING THE VOLUME OF THE HOMES. SO WE'VE DONE, LIKE I, WE HAVE HOUSES IN, UM, NORTH CAROLINA AND AUSTIN, BUT WE HAVE NEVER COME ACROSS A PLACE WHERE WE HAVE TO PUT A REGISTRATION NUMBER. SO WE WERE JUST UNAWARE OF THE CITY, THE PROCESS, THE PROCESS OF IT AT ALL. SO WE TOTALLY DID THE ENTIRE THING AND WE WERE STUCK AT THE LAST POINT. SO THAT'S WHY WE CHECKED EVERYTHING AND WE WENT BACK TO OUR NEIGHBORS AGAIN, AND THEN THEY, UM, SO ONE PERSON IS ALREADY HOSTING THE AIRBNB IN THAT AREA AND THEY ARE TOTALLY FINE WITH IT BECAUSE IT'S WORKING WELL AND EVERYTHING IS ORGANIZED WELL. SO THEY WERE TOTALLY ON BOARD WITH US IF WE WANTED TO DO THE AIRBNB. AND, UH, SO WE HAVE LIKE SUPPORTING LETTERS FROM BOTH OUR NEIGHBORS ON THE SITES AND, UM, THEY ARE ON BOARD WITH US. WE HAVE LIKE THEIR PHONE NUMBERS AND ALSO WE LIVE IN THE AREA, LIKE WE LIVE LIKE 30 MINUTES AWAY FROM HERE, SO WE'LL ALWAYS BE AVAILABLE TO, UH, TAKE CARE OF IT. AND ALSO IT IS, IT IS A PROPERTY THAT ME AND MY PARTNER WE BOUGHT TOGETHER TO, UM, YOU KNOW, START SOMETHING NEW AND SEE HOW IT GOES, ET CETERA. SO THIS WAS REALLY A BUMMER FOR US THAT WE DID. WERE NOT AWARE OF THE SYSTEM AND WE PROBABLY WILL BE LIKE TAKING CARE OF IT THE NEXT TIME, BUT IT WAS JUST LIKE A MISTAKE THAT WE WERE NOT AWARE OF AT ALL AND WE COULDN'T HAVE KNOWN BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER AIRBNB, AIRBNBS WE'VE PUT FOR SO FAR HAVE NEVER ASKED US THE REGISTRATION NUMBER JUST BECAUSE THIS IS IN THE CITY. THAT'S WHY WE GOT STUCK HERE. SO, SO WE HAVE LIKE THE NEIGHBORS THING AND WHEN WE HAVE, LIKE, WE WERE PUTTING IT OUT THERE AND WE'VE LIKE TAKEN OUT A 401K LOAN AND EVERYTHING FOR THIS, AND WE WANTED TO REALLY MAKE IT WORK. AND LIKE WITH ME AND MY PARTNER, WE STARTED WANTED TO REALLY START A VENTURE TOGETHER AND SEE HOW IT GOES. SO WE WERE LIKE PROBABLY LIKE BUILDING A LIFE WITH IT, NOT IT'S, SO IT'S JUST NOT AN AIRBNB FOR US. IT'S SO MUCH MORE THAN THAT. SO WE PUT IN LIKE THE, UM, THE INTERIORS AND EVERYTHING, WE PUT IN EVERYTHING AND THEN WE SET UP THE RULES, ET CETERA, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE IT AS A PARTY HOUSE AND WE ARE GOING TO PROMOTE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO COME TO SAN ANTONIO AND WE'VE CONTACTED ALL OUR FRIENDS AND, UH, FAMILY, WHOEVER WE KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THIS THING AND YOU SHOULD COME TO SAN ANTONIO AND THERE ARE SO MANY THINGS HERE. OTHER THAN THAT WE ALSO TRY TO REACH OUT TO SOME LOCAL BUSINESSES, LIKE WE HAVE FRIENDS IN HOT JOY AND KIKIS AND MERIT. SO I REACHED OUT TO THOSE PEOPLE SO THAT WE COULD SUPPORT LOCAL. SO WE HAD A WHOLE PLAN, BUT IT JUST GOT STUCK. OKAY. UH, SO A FEW QUESTIONS. ONE, DO YOU OWN ANY OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THIS IDZ DEVELOPMENT? THIS IS THE ONLY, YEAH, WE DON'T. OKAY. AND STAFF, UM, WHEN I'M LOOKING AT, AT, AT GOOGLE STREET VIEW, I KNOW THAT THIS, THE CORNER HOUSE, THE EXISTING STR IS, IS ADDRESSED OFF OF VERS AND THAT'S WHAT'S CAUSING THE CONFLICT, BUT IT'S DRIVEWAY AND PUBLIC AND SIDEWALK ROUTE TO THE ENTRY DOORS ACTUALLY LOCATED ON ARANSAS. THAT IS CORRECT. SHOULD IT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED OFF OF ARANSAS BECAUSE OF THAT? I ALWAYS THOUGHT IT WAS ACCESS AND, UH, IS WHAT DICTATED THE, THE ADDRESS? UH, I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE A RULE THAT WOULD PRECLUDE THEM BEING ADDRESSED OFF OF GIVER'S. THAT WAS THE ADDRESS THAT WAS ASSIGNED WHEN THE ADDRESS PLAT WAS IN FOR CONSIDERATION. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. UH, AND ARE THERE ANY OTHER STR UH, NEARBY? I'M HAVING TROUBLE GETTING ONTO THE ONE STOP ON MY COMPUTER, SO I'M TRYING TO SEE WHAT'S, OKAY. THERE WE GO. ALRIGHT, WELL THAT'S WHAT I NEEDED TO KNOW. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? YEAH, COMMISSIONER ZUNA. YEAH, JUST TWO, TWO SIMPLE QUESTIONS. UM, ONE, DID YOU EVER, DID YOU TRY TO REACH OUT TO DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? THEY'RE IN OPPOSITION AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU, WE DID, WE TRIED CALLING THEM A COUPLE OF TIMES, BUT NOBODY ANSWERED THE CALL, SO WE SENT OUT AN EMAIL TO THEM, BUT WE NEVER GOT A, BUT HE NEVER GOT A RESPONSE, SO WE DID TRY TO CONTACT THEM, YES. AND THE SECOND QUESTION IS, UM, A LONG-TERM RENTAL, DID YOU TRY TO DO A LONG-TERM RENTAL? I MEAN, WE REACHED OUT TO A LOT OF PEOPLE, BUT THAT DIDN'T WORK EITHER, SO, UM, BECAUSE IT'S PROBABLY LIKE MORE OF THE PEOPLE WANNA GO TO UTSA AND THAT KIND OF AN AREA AND BECAUSE IT'S THE MORE, IF, IF IT'S MORE TOURISTS OR SOMEBODY COMING, THEY USUALLY WANNA STAY IN THE DOWNTOWN, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WERE AIMING AT, SO YEAH, WE DID NOT. YES. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? HAS ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ANY VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THERE ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION WHO, UH, WOULD, WOULD NEED TO SEIZE SOME INTERACTION WITH, WITH NEARBY NEIGHBORS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BEFORE THEY'RE READY TO RENDER DECISION? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA? I WOULD PREFER, UM, SO, SO I, I I ENCOURAGE DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND, [00:35:01] AND, AND I REGULARLY SIDE WITH THEM WITH REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, HOW THEY WANT TO SEE THEIR COMMUNITY DEVELOPED. AND SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO REACH OUT TO THEM AND, AND HAVE A DIALOGUE AND, YOU KNOW, AND TALK ABOUT YOUR PLANS AND EVERYTHING AND THEN, AND THEN GAIN THEIR SUPPORT AND THEN IT PROBABLY WOULD DO, IT WOULD GO WELL FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. OKAY. UM, IS, IS, UM, UH, ME PERSONALLY, I, I DON'T LIKE IT WHEN THERE'S NO, NO, NOBODY KNOW, UH, RESPONDS, YOU KNOW, EXCEPT FOR THE, THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION. SO I WOULD, I WOULD BE GEARED TOWARDS GETTING A, A CONTINUANCE. SO YOU CAN GARNER LIKE ACTUAL DOCUMENTED SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBORS AND ACTUAL DOCUMENTED SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBORS ASSOCIATION. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU'D BE INTERESTED? SO WE HAVE THE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE NEIGHBORS? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? LIKE WE HAVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, OH NO, WE DON'T HAVE THE, OKAY. THE DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION, YOU HAVE TO EMAIL THEM. YOU SET UP A VIRTUAL MEETING. THEY USUALLY MEET, I THINK ONCE A MONTH. UH, AND I THINK IF, IF MEMORY SERVES ME RIGHT, SO I MEAN, AND IS THAT ASSOCIATION, BECAUSE LIKE WHEN WE FIRST FOUND OUT ABOUT THE PROPERTY, WE LIKE INQUIRED ABOUT HOA, SO IT'S A DIFFERENT, LIKE WE WERE TOLD THAT THERE WAS NO HOA AND YOU DON'T HAVE A MANDATORY HOA, YOU HAVE A, A NON-MANDATORY NEIGHBORHOOD AS IT'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BUT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT'S GOING ON IN THEIR COMMUNITY. SO, UH, IS THERE ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION BE OPPOSED TO ASKING FOR A CONTINUANCE? OKAY. UM, BECAUSE THEY USUALLY TAKE AT LEAST A MONTH. I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO GO TO, TO, UH, SEPTEMBER 22ND. SO IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT. UM, YOU, YOU'D HAVE A MONTH AND YOU WE'RE EXPECTING, YOU KNOW, SOME INTERACTION, YOU GOTTA GET ON IT. OKAY. SO IF WE DO THE SAME TYPE OF COMMUNICATION AND WE STILL DON'T HEAR ANYTHING BACK, THEY'LL, THEY'LL, THEY'LL COME BACK. THEY, THEY'VE BEEN PRETTY GOOD ABOUT MEETING WITH PEOPLE. YOU SKATE WITH STAFF AND MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT EMAIL ADDRESS. IS THERE A MOTION FOR CONTINUOUS OF SEPTEMBER TWO? I MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NAY? WE HAVE ONE OPPOSED? UH, COMMISSIONER DEAN, UH, MOTION PASSES. WE'LL SEE YOU IN ABOUT A MONTH AND PLEASE HAVE SOME SOMETHING FOR US. THANK YOU. THANKS SO MUCH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ITEM FOUR. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JUAN ALVAREZ, SENIOR PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS REQUESTED BY ALEJANDRA SAVAS AND IS REQUESTING AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO REVOKE THE APPLICANT'S SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT DUE TO HARD COLLECTION LOCATED AT 13 2 2 3 LOST LAKE DRIVE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 13 2 2 3. LOST LAKE DRIVE. SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AS OF MARCH 10TH, 2025. PLATFORMS THAT DIRECTLY REMIT STATE HOT, ALSO NOT DIRECTLY REMIT CITY HOT TO THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT. AND ALSO ALL STR OWNERS ARE STILL REQUIRED TO CONTINUE TO FILE REVENUE REPORTS AND PAY BEXAR COUNTY HOT THROUGH AVENUE ON A MONTHLY BASIS. AND THE APPLICANT IS CURRENT ON THEIR HOT AS OF AUGUST, 2025. NOTICES OF DELINQUENCY WERE MAILED BY AVENUE BETWEEN JULY 20, 24TH THROUGH MARCH 20, 25, AND THE FINAL NOTICE OF DELINQUENCY WAS EMAILED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ON JUNE 16TH, 2025. NO PAYMENT WAS MADE WITHIN THE 90 DAYS. AN ONLY PARTIAL PAYMENT WAS MADE AFTER RECEIVING THE FINAL NOTICE OF DELINQUENCY ON JUNE 16TH, 2025. THEREFORE, THE PERMIT WAS REVOKED ON JULY 1ST, 2025. THERE ARE A TOTAL OF 22 UNITS ON THE BLOCK. PHASE ONE, FORMERLY ACTIVE STR TYPE TWO PERMIT WAS ON THE BLOCK PHASE BEING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ON 13 2 2 3 LOST LAKE DRIVE. THE PROPERTY HAS NO CODE ENFORCEMENT HISTORY OR ACTIVE LISTINGS. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THE NEXT SLIDES ARE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREAS. A STAFF RECOMMENDS THE NOW OF THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL, AND THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 31 MALE NOTICES, TWO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NOT LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF A REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND FOUR CITYWIDE GROUPS WERE, WERE NOTIFIED WITH NO RESPONSE. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND FINANCES. ALSO HERE TO ANSWER ANY HOT RELATED QUESTIONS. BRAGMAN, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UM, WHEN WERE THEY ISSUED THEIR STR PERMIT INITIALLY, UH, THEY WERE ISSUED THEIR PERMIT ON NOVEMBER 3RD, 2023. SO THIS WERE TO GET APPROVED, IT WOULD ONLY EXTEND FOR ANOTHER 15 MONTHS? YES. OKAY. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA, UM, DOES THE CITY HAVE RECORD, UM, THAT IT ACTUALLY WAS RENTED OUT, UM, IN THAT PERIOD AND HOT TAX NOT PAID? YEAH, SO THE, THE [00:40:01] PERMIT WAS BEING RENTED OUT, HOWEVER, WHEN IT GOT REVOKED, IT WAS MISSING FROM FEBRUARY TO JUNE, 2025. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, ONE LAST QUESTION. YES, COMMISSIONER ER. I'M SORRY. DID YOU SAY THAT THEY ARE CURRENT NOW ON THEIR HOT TAXES? OH YEAH. THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALL CURRENT ON THEIR HOT TAXES AS OF TODAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HELLO, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR SDR. HI, MY NAME IS ALEJANDRA RIOS. UM, LEMME READ THIS. UH, THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO HEAR ME TODAY. THIS WAS, UM, MY FIRST YEAR OPERATING MY SHORT TERM RENTAL THROUGH AIRBNB. ALSO THE ONLY PROPERTY I OWN. UNFORTUNATELY, I MADE A MISTAKE REGARDING THE PAYMENTS OF MY OCCUPANCY TAXES, AND I RESPECTFULLY ASKED THE CITY TO CONSIDER RENT STEADY MY PERMIT. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT AIRBNB WAS HANDLING TAX PAYMENTS ON MY BEHALF. I DID RECEIVE A COUPLE OF LETTERS FROM AVENUE REGARDING TAX PAYMENTS, BUT I THOUGHT THEY WERE PAYING THEM, AND I EVEN BROUGHT THE LETTERS TO MY ACCOUNTANT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR WHEN I WAS FILING MY, MY TAXES. UM, BUT HE ADVISED ME TO VERIFY WITH AIRBNB BEFORE PAYNE AVENUE BECAUSE THEY, THEY ARE A THIRD PARTY AND IT WAS POTENTIALLY A SCAM. SO I FOLLOW UP WITH AIRBNB AND THEY CONFIRMED THEY WERE COLLECTING AND REMITTING MY TAXES, SO I DIDN'T TAKE FURTHER ACTION AT THAT TIME. IN JUNE, WHEN I RECEIVED A NOTICE FROM THE CITY, UM, THAT MY TAXES WERE PAST DUE, I PAID ALL THE OUTSTANDING 2024 TAXES RIGHT AWAY. I DID, HOWEVER, MAKE AN ERROR BY SELECTING THE WRONG MONTH IN THE PAYMENT PORTAL, WHICH CAUSED ADDITIONAL DELAYS. AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT, MY ACCOUNT WAS INCORRECTLY LISTED. IT WAS A HOTEL INSTEAD OF SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UM, WHICH ALSO I WORK TO CORRECT. UM, AT THIS TIME, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THE TAX STRUCTURE IN 2025, AND THIS TIME AIRBNB WAS FULLY TAKING CARE OF MY TAXES. WHEN I LATER RECEIVED THE REVOCATION NOTICE, I WAS VERY CONFUSED BECAUSE I THOUGHT I WAS FULLY CAUGHT UP. IT WASN'T UNTIL I WENT BACK TO AVENUE AND REVIEW MY UPDATED PROFILE MORE CLOSELY THAT I REALIZED THAT IN 2025, WHILE AIRBNB COLLECTS A LARGE PORTION OF MY TAXES, THERE'S STILL A SMALL, SMALL REMAINING BALANCE THAT I MUST PAY DIRECTLY. SO I WENT ONLINE AND I PAID THE REMAINDER IN FULL THAT DAY. UM, THIS HAS BEEN A LEARNING EXPERIENCE FOR ME AND I TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONFUSION. I NEVER INTENDED TO NEGLECT, NEGLECT MY OBLIGATIONS, AND I SINCERELY APOLOGIZE FOR THE OVERSIGHT. I'M NOW FULLY UP TO DATE WITH ALL THE REQUIRED PAYMENTS AND I'M BETTER, BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE PROCESS MOVING FORWARD. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, STAFF, IS THERE ANY CO COMPLIANCE, UH, OTHER THAN, UH, THIS MISSED PAYMENT AND FILINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ADDRESS? YEAH, THE APPLICANT HAS NOTED CODE ENFORCEMENT HISTORY. OKAY. UH, C COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER MANON. SO QUESTION FOR STAFF. UM, SO I GUESS, YOU KNOW, UH, RESPONDING TO THE DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO POTENTIAL CONFUSION, UM, SPAM WE'LL SAY, OR, UM, OR, UM, I GUESS JUST WITH REGARDS TO COMMUNICATION THAT COMES OUT FROM THE CITY, UM, FROM AVENUE VERSUS CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, HOW IS THAT COMMUNICATED REALLY ALL ALONG TO HELP APPLICANTS RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN SAN ANTONIO AND AND AVENUE? UH, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WHEN WE ISSUE THE PERMIT, UM, TO THE APPLICANT IN OUR EMAIL OF APPROVAL, WE DO INDICATE, UM, TO REPORT YOUR, YOUR REVENUE, YOUR REPORT, YOUR REVENUE EVERY MONTH, UH, 20TH DAY, AND WE DO PROVIDE, UM, AVENUES CONTACT INFORMATION, AND THEN WE SEND OUT A SECOND EMAIL THE SAME DAY, GIVEN THEIR TAXPAYER ID, ID REMINDING THEM, YOU NEED TO REPORT ZERO IF YOU HAVE NO REVENUE. AND WE ALSO PROVIDE, UM, AVENUES CONTACT INFORMATION TO CONTACT IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING HOT, SO, SO FROM THE CITY. UM, SO, SO WHILE IT IS THAT WE HAVE A DIALOGUE FROM THE CITY SAYING THAT THIS PARTNERSHIP EXISTS, UM, OUTSIDE OF, WE'LL SAY, UM, A NOTE SAYING EXPECT SOMETHING FROM AVENUE, IS THERE ANY OTHER, UM, GUIDELINES OR GUIDEBOOKS OR ANYTHING KIND OF SAYS, HERE'S WHAT YOU'RE GONNA RECEIVE AND, AND PICTURES OF IT TO SAVE, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO HELP THEM ALONG THE WAY. I GUESS I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT RELATIONSHIP. I MEAN, ON OUR STO WEBSITE, IT DOES PROVIDE, IF YOU GO TO A SHORT TERM RENTALS WEBSITE, IT [00:45:01] PROVIDES HOT FINANCES INFORMATION, ALL THE FI ALL THE CONTACT INFORMATION FOR FINANCE IS AVENUE INSIGHT. WE ALSO PROVIDE OUR CITY EMAIL AS WELL AND QUOTE NUMBER TO CALL. AND AGAIN, WHEN YOU, THE, THE SAME ONLY THEY RECEIVE THE PERMIT CERTIFICATE FROM THE CITY, IT PROVIDES THEM TO REPORT THEIR HOT TAXES AND GIVES AVENUES CONTACT INFORMATION AS WHO TO CONTACT FOR ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING HOT TAXES AND THAT THEY ARE RESPONSE REPORT HOT TAXES ON A MONTHLY BASIS TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO THROUGH AVENUE. AND THEN, UH, THE APPLICANT STATED THAT THERE WAS DIALOGUE WITH REGARDS TO CONFUSION WITH BEING LISTED AS A HOTEL. CAN, DO YOU HAVE ANY, UH, INSIDER CON UH, I GUESS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WITH REGARDS TO THAT? WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT. UH, INFORMATION BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UM, THIS IS FOR STAFF. AND SO YOU SAID, I'M ASSUMING THAT WITH THIS SHE WOULD'VE RECEIVED LETTERS LIKE THE LAST CASE THAT WE WERE ADDRESSING LETTERS TO AN ADDRESS. DO YOU KNOW WHAT ADDRESS THEY WERE SENT TO? I, UM, JUAN, THIS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER IBANEZ, COMMISSIONER IVANEZ. UM, IS THIS THE ONLY STR CURRENTLY ON THAT BLOCK FACE? YES. YES, YES. OKAY. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MISS, UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, IT WAS MAILING AS ON FILE WAS 7 6 8 3 PECOS RIDGE, AND AGAIN, THOSE ARE THE LETTERS THAT THEY'RE MAILED TO OF THAT ON THE SCREEN ABOVE THAT DOES ADDRESS AVENUE INSIGHTS ON THERE AS WELL AS STATING THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO INFORMATION. AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT STATED SHE DID RECEIVE A COUPLE OF THOSE NOTICES IN THE MAIL. UH, THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT. DID YOU RECEIVE ANY OF THESE LETTERS? YES, THOSE ARE THE ONES I TOOK TO MY ACCOUNTANT, BUT I THOUGHT AIRBNB WAS PAYING THAT FOR ME. STAFF. WHEN DID THE AIRBNB START DOING THE, UH, COLLECTIONS AGAIN? I KNOW YOU TELL US IT STARTED MARCH 1ST, 2025. OKAY. MARCH 1ST, WHICH, AND THE DELINQUENCY FROM THIS APPLICANT STARTED IN FEBRUARY-ISH. SO THEY, THEY'VE BEEN RECEIVING, UM, DELINQUENCY SINCE APRIL OF 2024. HOWEVER, WHEN IT WAS REVOKED, THEY WERE MISSING THOSE MONTHS FROM FEBRUARY 2ND, 2025 TO JUNE OF 2025. SO WHEN THEY GOT REVOKED, THEY DID MAKE SOME PAYMENTS, BUT THEY JUST MADE PARTIAL PAYMENTS. OKAY. SO THERE WAS, THIS ORIGINALLY STARTED IN 2024, THEY MADE AN ATTEMPT TO, TO MAKE GOOD ON IT, AND THEN IT STARTED UP AGAIN. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. AND, AND FEBRUARY, MARCH WHEN AVENUE, I MEAN WHEN AIRBNB STARTED MAKING THE, THE, THE DEPOSITS FOR THE APPLICANT. OKAY. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANYONE TIME TO SPEAK ANY VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GOING TO LOOK FOR A MOTION AND SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. COMMISSIONER CRUZ, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 25 103 0 0 1 3 2, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE APPEAL FOR THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 1 3 2 2 3, LOST LAKE DRIVE APPLICANT BEING ALEJANDRO CAOS BECAUSE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWS THAT CITY STAFF MADE AN ERROR IN ENFORCING SECTION 16 1 1 1 0 D WHEN REVOKING THE SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT AND A MOTION. ALL RIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR YOU, SIR. UM, I WILL GO AHEAD AND SUPPORT THIS. I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT, ESPECIALLY SINCE SHE'S THE ONLY ONE IN THE WHOLE TWO OR THREE BLOCKS. AND OF COURSE THERE'S ALWAYS ISSUES WITH, UM, LATE NOTICES AND WHAT CAN AND THEY CAN'T DO. SO I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH IT. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER STEVENS? UM, YEAH, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT THE CITY STAFF MADE AN ERROR, BUT I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THE OUTCOME OF THIS VOTE. SO, UM, THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO ONE THAT WE JUST TOOK A VOTE ON, AND I WAS IN FAVOR OF THAT ONE. I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF THIS SINCE THERE AREN'T ANY OTHER AIRBNBS ON THE BLOCK AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE BUDDING NEIGHBORS OR IN FAVOR OF IT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS' LIKE TO ADD? UH, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND, AND CHIME IN ON THIS ONE. I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT, UH, FOR A FEW REASONS. ONE, THIS IS THE ONLY STR THIS APPLICANT HAS. THEY HAVEN'T HAD IT FOR THAT LONG. AND IF WE APPROVE THIS, UM, IN 15 MONTHS, THEY'LL EITHER GET THEIR ACT TOGETHER OR, [00:50:01] OR NOT. SO THIS ONE DOESN'T BOTHER ME. UM, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER E BONNI. I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN? I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MENA? I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER BREGMAN? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES NINE TO TWO. UM, CONGRATULATIONS. UH, HOPE NOT TO SEE YOU BACK HERE IN 15 MONTHS TOO. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALL RIGHT. ITEM FIVE. ALL RIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON. ITEM FIVE IS BO OA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 22. THE ADDRESS BEING 1139 NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY IN COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR, THE APPLICANT BEING CARLOS JIMENEZ. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION FOR A NON-CONFORMING USE DENIAL TO PERMIT THE USE OF MOTOR VEHICLE SALES WITH FULL SERVICE. UH, THE ZONING ON THIS PROPERTY IS C TWO AND C3. RESEARCH CONDUCTED BY STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR LEGAL NON-CONFORMING USE RIGHTS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DUAL ZONE C3 AND C TWO, IN WHICH MOTOR VEHICLE SALES WITH FULL SERVICE IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT ON THE C3 PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND DOES NOT REQUIRE THE ISSUANCE OF A NON-CONFORMING USE. HOWEVER, THE USE WAS NOT PERMITTED ON ANY PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ZONE C TWO OR WITHIN ANY STRUCTURE THEREIN. AND BEXAR COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT AND DATED AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY SHOW A SERVICE GARAGE BILLED ON THE PROPERTY IN 2023 WITH NO CITY PERMITS OR REVIEW. A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WAS ISSUED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IN JANUARY, 2023 FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES WITH FULL SERVICE. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT NOTED THAT THE USE WOULD BE CONDUCTED OUT OF A 12 BY 12 BUILDING ON THE SITE. ADDITIONALLY, NOTES MADE BY STAFF ON THE COO APPLICATION INDICATE THAT THE INTENT WAS TO RESTRICT OPERATIONS TO ONLY THAT C3 ZONED PORTION OF THE PROPERTY SEPARATE FROM THIS APPEAL. THE NEW STRUCTURES DO NOT HAVE THE PROPER SETBACK AND BUFFER AGAINST RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO THE REAR, AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED UNDER A SEPARATE CASE. SHOWN HERE IS THE NCU DENIAL LETTER THAT WAS FORWARDED TO THE APPLICANT. AND YOU CAN NOTE HERE, UH, IT WAS PROVIDED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE C TWO AND C3 ZONE PROPERTIES ON THAT. PAGE TWO SHOWN HERE IS THAT APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES ON THIS PROPERTY. THIS WAS FROM 2023. UH, JUST HIGHLIGHTING SOME NOTES MADE BY THAT STAFF MEMBER. UH, AGAIN, THAT C3, UH, COLUMN THERE ON THE USE MATRIX WAS HIGHLIGHTED AS THE REASON FOR APPROVAL, UH, FOR THIS C3 PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE THERE. TOWARDS THE BOTTOM, YOU CAN SEE THE FACILITIES THAT WERE PROPOSED IN THE GENERAL INFORMATION FOR A 12 BY 12 OFFICE. AND SHOWN HERE IS THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE THAT EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY AT, UH, SOMETHING LIKE 25 BY 50 FEET. UH, YOU CAN SEE CLEARLY IT EXISTS ON THE C TWO PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, THOUGH LIMITED IN SIZE. UH, THAT C3 PORTION IS ROUGHLY, UH, 3,720 SQUARE FEET. AND JUST AGAIN, HIGHLIGHTING THAT STRUCTURE THAT WAS BUILT WITHOUT REVIEW OR PERMITTING, UH, DOES TECHNICALLY VIOLATE THE REQUIRED SETBACK AND BUFFER AREA AGAINST THAT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. SHOWN HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THIS IS A HISTORICAL VIEW OF THAT SAME PROPERTY, UH, AS A VACANT LOT IN 2022. AGAIN, JUST HIGHLIGHTING, UH, WHEN THE USE WAS ESTABLISHED AND THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF CONCLUDES THAT THE USE OF MOTOR VEHICLE SALES WITH FULL SERVICE ON ANY PORTION OF THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY, ZONE C TWO WILL REQUIRE A CHANGE OF ZONING APPROVAL BASED ON SECTION 35 DASH 7 0 2 A. AND BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE USE OF MOTOR VEHICLE SALES WITH FULL SERVICE WAS NOT PERMITTED ON THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ZONE C TWO AT THE TIME THAT THE USE WAS ESTABLISHED. STAFF MAILED OUT 22 NOTICES. 31, UH, WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR. UH, NINE ARE FROM OUTSIDE OF THE NOTIFICATION AREA, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND THE QUINTANA COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. AND SHOWN HERE IS THE PETITION AND SIGNATURES [00:55:01] GATHERED BY THE APPLICANT, UH, FOR SUPPORT. THOSE CLOUDED IN RED ARE JUST OUTSIDE OF THAT NOTIFICATION AREA. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT, UH, REALLY QUICKLY IS, UH, THE CFO THAT WAS ISSUED IN, UH, JANUARY, 2023. UH, THAT WAS, WHAT WAS THAT FOR? THAT WAS FOR, UH, AUTO SALES AND FULL SERVICE. AND AGAIN, UM, JUST HIGHLIGHTING THE NOTE THERE FOR, FOR THE C3 PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. OKAY. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO WHEN A CITIZEN, UH, COMMUNITY, UM, IS IT SUPPOSED TO INCLUDE KIND OF LIKE THE WHOLE LANGUAGE OF WHAT IT IS THAT THEY'RE PETITION VERSUS LET ME CONTINUE TO DO WHAT I'M DOING WITHOUT REALLY SAYING WHY IT IS THAT THEY'RE COMING BEFORE THEM SO THE APPLICANT CAN PROACTIVELY GO OUT TO THE COMMUNITY AND GET THOSE SIGNATURES. UM, HOWEVER THEY WORD IT, THE BOARD'S GONNA HAVE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. SINCE THEY DID WORD IT. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE NOTICES RECEIVED? UH, SO THIS IS HOW THEY WORDED IT. UH, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE HERE FOR AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. UM, SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE THAT INTO CONTEXT. OKAY. AND ARE THE COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? IVAN? YES. I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. UH, FOR THIS NON-CONFORMING NEWS. UM, THIS NON-CONFORMING NEWS IS BEING REQUESTED BECAUSE THEY WANT TO ABSORB THE C TWO INTO THE C3 INSTEAD OF REZONING. IT. IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT'S HAPPENING? SO THE OPTION IS TO REZONE TO C3. UM, STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE PORTION OF ZONE C TWO WAS NEVER PERMITTED TO HAVE AUTO SALES. AND THAT'S WHAT THEY, THEY'RE SPECIFICALLY APPEALING. SO JUST KIND OF FOUNDATIONALLY NON-CONFORMING USE REGISTRATION PROTECTS THE OPERATION OF A USE THAT WAS LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED. IF THE RULES CHANGED AFTER IT WAS LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED IN THIS CASE, WE FOUND THAT IT WAS NOT LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED. SO THEY ARE INELIGIBLE FOR NON-CONFORMING USE RIGHTS. THEY ARE APPEALING THAT DENIAL. THANK YOU. STEVENS. COMMISSIONER STEVENS CAN, CAN THEY IS PARKING AND STORAGE OF VEHICLES ALLOWED ON A C TWO LOT PARKING BY ITSELF? YES, BUT THIS USE IS CLEARLY ESTABLISHED ON THE C TWO LOT OF AUTO SALES. AND, AND, AND I WOULD ADD THAT LIKE LONG TERM PARKING IS NOT A C TWO USE. YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY A PHARMACY IS ALLOWED TO HAVE PARKING, BUT JUST STANDALONE LONG-TERM USE OF PARKING IS NOT, UH, A C TWO USE. ALL RIGHT, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, LETS HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. HELLO. UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR, YOUR SIGN IS CARLOS JIMENEZ. UM, IN, IN FEBRUARY, 2022, I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUY THAT PROPERTY IN NEW LAREDO, 1139 NEW LAREDO. UM, AT THAT TIME I CAME TO THE CITY TO MAKE SURE THAT I COULD USE THAT TO BUY THAT PROPERTY AND, UH, MAKE SURE THAT I COULD USE IT FOR MY BUSINESS. I BUY, UH, FIXED CARS AND THEN SELL THEM. AND I'VE BEEN DOING THAT FOR 25 YEARS. UM, I CAME TO THE CITY, I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, I FIXED IT. AND UH, IN DECEMBER, 2022, I CAME TO THE CITY TO GET THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. EVER SINCE THEN, I'VE BEEN USING THAT [01:00:01] CERTIFICATE SERVICE. UM, SO I COULD, UM, USE MY, I USED MY PROPERTY FOR AUTO SALES, BUT THIS YEAR THEY DECLINED THE PERMIT SO THAT I, I I COULDN'T KEEP ON USING IT TO SAIL TO FOR THE SALE OF MY VEHICLES. UM, SO I CAME TO THE CITY. UM, I MEAN, THIS HAS BEEN REALLY HARD FOR ME BECAUSE I INVESTED ALL MY LIFE SAVINGS IN THIS, UH, BUSINESS. UH, THEN I CAME TO THE, TO THIS, UM, PLACE AND THE DEPARTMENT TOLD ME THAT I NEEDED TO GET SIGNATURES FROM THE NEIGHBORS. UM, SO I GOT, UH, 34, 31 SIGNATURES. UM, THEY ALL AGREE THAT I CAN KEEP ON MY BUSINESS THERE BECAUSE, UM, THEY ARE HAPPY. THEY EVEN ARE HAPPY, UH, THAT I HAVE THE BUSINESS THERE BECAUSE, UH, THEY SAY THAT BEFORE I WAS THERE, THERE WERE A LOT OF DRUG ADDICTS AND, UH, HOMELESS PEOPLE GETTING IN THERE. WELL, UM, NOW I REALLY DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT TO SAY, BUT, UH, I WAS FEELING THAT I WAS WELL SUPPORTED WITH MY BUSINESS, UM, AND, UH, I COULD KEEP ON HAVING MY BUSINESS RUNNING MY BUSINESS BUSINESS. AND, UM, I REALLY, I'M HERE TO, FOR YOU TO HELP ME BECAUSE I NEED TO KEEP ON WORKING. THIS IS THE WAY THAT I, THAT I, UH, SUPPORT MY FAMILY. I THOUGHT I WAS WELL ESTABLISHED WITH THAT BUILDING, WITH THAT BUSINESS. I THOUGHT ALL THE PERMITS WERE RIGHT. BUT, UM, I REALLY NEED NOW FOR YOU TO SUPPORT ME IF YOU CAN. PLEASE. THANK YOU. UM, SO STAFF, UH, CAN YOU BRING UP THAT C OF O AGAIN? YEAH. SO IT SAYS OCCUPANT LOAD ONE IS, IS THAT, IS THAT JUST, I'VE NEVER, I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER SEEN IT WITH A ONE ON IT. I WAS JUST WONDERING, LIKE, YOU KNOW, I GOT A CLARIFICATION ON THAT. YEAH, I'M JUST CURIOUS, YOU KNOW, LIKE HOW THIS, HOW THIS GOT ISSUED. LIKE, DID, WAS THIS, WAS THE BUILDING IN PLACE WHEN THIS WAS REQUESTED? THE, UH, APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WAS SUBMITTED AS A COO WITH NO CONSTRUCTION. UH, IT WAS NOT AN ASSOCIATION WITH ANY SORT OF BUILDING PERMIT FOR A NEW STRUCTURE. OKAY. SO, SO, SO FOR THE APPLICANT, DID YOU GET YOUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY BEFORE THAT BUILDING WAS PLACED THERE? YEAH, I HAD TO FIX THE PLUMBING AND THE ELECTRICITY SO THAT IT COULD PASS. NO, BUT WHAT I'M WONDERING IS, UM, WHEN YOU GOT THE C OF O, THE BUILDING WAS PHYSICALLY ON THE PROPERTY? YES. UM, IF YOU DON'T HAVE [01:05:01] A BUILDING, YOU CANNOT GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS WONDERING IF, IF THE BUILDING WAS ON THE, WAS ON THE LAND, AND THIS IS, THIS IS BACK TO STAFF. IF THE BUILDING WAS ON THE LAND AND, AND SOMEONE, UH, SUBMITS AN APPLICATION FOR A CFO, DON'T THEY DO LIKE A SITE REVIEW OR SOMETHING TO SEE IF THERE'S A CONFLICT? UM, SO WHEN THIS BUILDING WAS TURNED IN FOR A PERMIT, UH, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS CAUGHT WAS THE ZONING. AND THAT'S WHY THE BUILDING, UM, PERMIT WASN'T, UH, FULLY ISSUED, BUT THE C OF O WAS ISSUED AFTER THE BUILDING WAS IN PLACE. I'LL HAVE TO CHECK THAT TIMELINE. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS WONDERING. SO IF, IF, IF THE BUILDING WAS IN PLACE AND THEN HE SHOWS UP TO GET A CO, UM, I JUST ON SOMETHING THAT WAS OTHERWISE VACANT, I, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE PROCESS. LIKE DID THE, DID THE CITY CHECK TO SEE IF THERE WAS SO A BUILDING PLACED OR WHAT? SO IN MY RESEARCH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HERE, UH, THIS IS KIND OF THE TIMELINE OF EVENTS AT THIS PROPERTY, UH, IN 2019, THERE WAS SOME STRUCTURE THERE THAT, UH, WAS PRESUMABLY DEMOLISHED. AGAIN, KIND OF JUMPING BACK OVER TO, UH, SLIDES HERE IN 20 20 22, THAT PROPERTY WAS COMPLETELY VACANT. RIGHT. UM, AND THEN, BUT THEY GOT A DEMO PERMIT. I'D HAVE TO VERIFY THAT I, I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME. UH, OKAY. SO, BUT SOMETIME BETWEEN, AND AGAIN, THE HISTORICAL IMAGERY IS JUST NOT PRESENT ON THIS ONE, BUT SOMETIME BETWEEN 2022 AND 2024, THAT SERVICE GARAGE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE WAS PUT ON THE PROPERTY. UM, PRESUMABLY THAT WAS THE STRUCTURE THAT WAS INSPECTED WHEN THIS CONSTRUCTION, UH, THIS C OF O APPLICATION FOR NO CONSTRUCTION WAS. AND I MEAN, I, I GUESS WHAT I'M CONFUSED ABOUT IS, IS THAT IF, IF, IF IT WAS VACANT AND THEN A NEW BUILDING GETS PUT IN AND THE BUILDING DOESN'T MEET THE SETBACKS AS THE RESIDENTIAL DIRECTLY BEHIND IT, THERE'S NO BUFFERS. UH, I, I'M JUST COMPLETELY CONFUSED HOW CFO WAS, WAS ISSUED AT ALL. I MEAN, I CAN UNDERSTAND LIKE WHEN THERE'S A C3 AND A C TWO LINE AND MAYBE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS. BUT THIS BUILDING, IT IS NOT LIKE IT'S AN OLD BUILDING THAT WAS THERE. IT'S THE PLACE IS VACANT. A NEW BUILDING WENT UP, I THINK IN THE 2022, UM, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THEY MENTIONED THE 12 BY 12 OFFICE, WHICH I BELIEVE MIGHT BE THE ONE IN THE C3 PORTION. AGAIN, THAT'S KIND OF, THAT'S WHAT WE THINK HAPPENED. OKAY. SO THERE'S, SO HE COULD THEORETICALLY STILL SELL CARS. HE JUST CAN'T WORK ON CARS UNTIL HE CHANGES THE ZONING. HE CAN SELL CARS, FIX CARS IN THE C3 PORTION. UM, OKAY, MAN. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MANNA, COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO, SO THERE'S A FACILITY RIGHT NOW ON THE BACK PIECE OF THE PROPERTY. UM, SO WHAT IS IT THAT CAN, WHAT IS IT THAT CAN RESIDE INSIDE THAT BUILDING? UH, BY, RIGHT, HE CAN DO WELL AUTO RELATED. HE CAN DO ALL CHANGES. UM, OBVIOUSLY THAT BUILDING STILL NEEDS TO GO TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS SEPARATELY FOR THE SETBACKS AND, UM, BUFFER. BUT IT CAN DO SOMETHING LIKE OIL CHANGES. UM, I BELIEVE TIRES CAN ALSO BE DONE IN THE C TWO. SO, SO WOULD NOT NECESSARILY, UM, HE'D STILL BE ABLE TO LEVERAGE OR UTILIZE THE BUILDING, JUST NOT NECESSARILY ONCE THE SETBACKS WERE RESOLVED. UM, UM, JUST COULDN'T USE IT FOR THE, FOR EVERYTHING THAT HE IS CURRENTLY, UH, TRYING TO DO WITH IT. IS THAT CORRECT? THE CELL OF ALCOHOL OR THE CELL OF AUTOMOBILES? CORRECT. THE SELLING OF AUTOMOBILES. CORRECT. BUT, BUT AUTOMOBILES COULD BE SOLD AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AS LONG AS IT, IT STAYS IN THE C3 SECTION THAT WOULD BE PERMITTED. CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK ANY UH, VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE, UH, WE'RE GOING TO, UH, LOOK FOR A MOTION AND SEE HOW IT TURNS OUT LOOKING FOR A MOTION. OH, I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. OH, COMMISSIONER, MAYOR. SORRY. SORRY. UM, SO, SO IF THIS IS, UM, IF THIS IS DENIED WITH REGARD, UH, WE'LL SAY THERE, IT'S DECIDED THAT AN ERROR WASN'T MADE. THE APPLICANT STILL HAS THE ABILITY TO APPLY FOR A ZONING CHANGE TO CORRECT THIS AND, AND MOVE IT TO THE OTHER DIRECTION, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. AS WELL AS RUN THE BUSINESS, UM, AS WE JUST KIND OF OUTLINED WITH REGARDS TO WHAT HE CAN DO IN THE FRONT VERSUS THE BACK, CORRECT? YEAH, CORRECT. AS LONG AS I SAY WITHIN THAT THREE C3 PORTION AS WE STATED EARLIER, AND THE, BUT WE STILL HAVE TO DISCUSS THE WHOLE, UM, I GUESS THERE WILL BE A ZONING CASE WITH REGARDS TO OR, OR A, UH, BOA CASE WITH REGARDS TO THE ADJUSTMENT FOR THE SETBACKS SIMPLY 'CAUSE WHERE THE BUILDING IS CORRECT. SO, AND REAL QUICK, I'M SORRY, CAN WE DO A, A, A COMM CHECK WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER BONILLA? OH, [01:10:02] OKAY. AND I THINK COMMISSIONER, UM, BENAVIDEZ DROPPED OUT, UM, TRYING TO GET HER BACK ON. SORRY, SHOULD WE WAIT FOR HER? I DO. IF I MAY AS WELL. SHOULD THIS, UH, MOTION FAIL AND THEY PROCEED TO TRY TO REZONE THE PROPERTY THROUGH THE ACTUAL ZONING PROCESS, NOT THE BOA, IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE THAT THEY COULD ENTERTAIN CONDITIONAL USE IN A SITE PLAN THAT GRANTS RELIEF TO THOSE, UH, SETBACKS AND BUFFER YARDS IN ONE FELL SWOOP, SO TO SPEAK. SO JUST PUT IT OUT THERE FOR CONSIDERATION. STEVENS. COMMISSIONER STEVENS, IF, IF THIS WAS TO FAIL TODAY AND HE HAD TO GO TO REZONING, COULD HE STILL OPERATE ON HIS WHOLE SITE? WE WOULD WORK WITH THE APPLICANT SHOULD HE SUBMIT A CHANGE OF ZONING APPLICATION WHILE HE WENT THROUGH THAT PROCESS. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER MANNA, ARE WE WAITING FOR, UM, COMMISSIONER BEEZ? OH, THAT'S RIGHT. SOUND CHECK. DOES SOUND CHECK HAPPEN? UH, SHE'S NOT BACK ON CURRENTLY. WE'RE NOT QUITE SURE HOW MUCH OF THE CASE SHE HEARD, SO YOU MAY WANNA TRY TO PROCEED. I DON'T KNOW THAT SHE'S BACK ON. OKAY, I, I THINK WE SHOULD PROCEED REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 5 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 2. I MOVED TO THE BOARD ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE APPEAL FOR THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 1 1 3 9 NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY APPLICANT BEING CARLOS JIMENEZ BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY, OR BECAUSE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWS THAT THE CITY STAFF MADE AN ERROR IN A DECISION FOR A NON-CONFORMING USE DENIAL TO PERMIT THE USE OF A MOTOR VEHICLE SALES WITH FULL SERVICE. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS. COMMISSIONER MANON. UM, YEAH, SO I, I I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS SIMPLY 'CAUSE I THINK, UH, THIS IS PROBABLY NOT THE AVENUE FOR RESOLVING THIS, THIS PARTICULAR DIALOGUE AND THERE ARE OTHER AVENUES, UH, TO RESOLVE THIS, UH, WHICH SHOULD BE GOING THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE PLACE OF THE ZONING COMMISSION, UM, TO HAVE THIS ZONE CORRECTLY. UM, SO COMMISSIONER STEVENS, UH, I'M, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF IT JUST BECAUSE IT SEEMS THAT IT'S KIND OF STRANGE TO HAVE THIS ISLAND OF C3 THAT'S CONNECTED TO HIS REST OF HIS PROPERTY AND, UM, MAYBE THERE COULD HAVE BEEN SOME SORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE WAY TO TAKE CARE OF THIS, BUT IF IT DOESN'T PASS, PASS, I FEEL GOOD ABOUT IT BEING ABLE TO STILL POTENTIALLY OPERATE WHILE HE HAS TO GO THROUGH REZONING, BUT I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. ALL RIGHT, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? YEAH. COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON, I'M SYMPATHETIC UP TO A POINT AND I'M IMPRESSED BY THE SUPPORT OF ALL THE, UH, SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS, BUT CLEARLY IN MY VIEW, IT'S CLEARLY THE STAFF DID NOT MAKE AN ERROR. AND THE PROPER WAY TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE IS TO GET A ZONING CHANGE. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD E IVANEZ? MAKE SURE IVANEZ, I AGREE, UM, WITH STEVENS THAT IF HE COULD STILL, UH, CONTINUE WITH HIS BUSINESS 'CAUSE THIS WOULD BE A HARDSHIP ON HIM, UM, IF HE COULD CONTINUE WITH THAT WHILE THEY, THEY'RE WORKING OUT THE REZONING, UH, PROCESS. ALRIGHT, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? I'M GONNA CHIME IN TOO. I, I THINK THAT, UM, THE FACT THAT HE WENT AND APPLIED FOR A C OF OI KNOW THAT IT, THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION AND, AND MAYBE HE DIDN'T EXPRESS WHAT HIS FULL INTENT WAS BY THE LOCATION OF THE SERVICE BUILDING IN THE BACK, BUT THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT TO BE COMPLIANT. UM, I ALSO THINK THAT IF WE APPROVE THIS TODAY, HE HAS TO COME BACK FOR, FOR A BUFFER OR SETBACK ISSUE, UH, TO US. OR HE CAN GO THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS AND TAKE CARE OF IT ALL IN ONE SOUP ANYWAY. SO I THINK THAT, UH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT JUST TO ALLOW HIM TO OPERATE HIS BUSINESS WHILE HE'S FIGURING OUT WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE, UH, REAR STRUCTURE. COMMISSIONER ZUNA? NO, I JUST WAS ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION ON YOUR POSITION. ARE YOU, I I'LL BE IN SUPPORT, SUPPORT OF THE MOTION OF, BECAUSE I, I KNOW HE HAS TO COME BACK EITHER TO US OR TO THE ZONING COMMISSION AND, AND IF WE DON'T APPROVE THE SETBACK OF THE BUFFERS, HE'S NOT GONNA USE WHAT I THINK IS THE MAIN ISSUE IS THAT LARGE BUILDING IN THE BACK, SO, UNDERSTOOD. ALL RIGHT, LET'S HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I DO NOT SUPPORT THE APPEAL. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES. COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? NO, I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? NO, I DO NOT. CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, [01:15:01] I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. AND, AND I CONCUR, BUT THE MOTION DID NOT PASS. IT WAS A EIGHT TO THREE AGAINST. WERE THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT I THOUGHT YOU WERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS? NO QUESTION. NOT IN SUPPORT OF ONE. I THINK IT WOULD BE, I THINK IT WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL FOR HIM TO GO THROUGH THE REZONING. OKAY. BECAUSE THAT WAY HE COULD GET IT ALL. I THINK HE WOULD GET IT FASTER AND GET EVERYTHING IN ONE. THANK YOU. UH, MOTION FAILS. UH, EIGHT TO THREE. UH, YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF AND, AND, UH, SEE WHAT YOUR NEXT STEPS ARE. ALRIGHT, ITEM NUMBER SIX. ITEM NUMBER, SORRY. THAT'S OKAY. , ITEM NUMBER SIX IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 25. LOCATED AT 800 EAST GUNTHER STREET. THE APPLICANT IS JASON GUDO. BEAR WITH ME, Y'ALL. OKAY, SO THE ADDRESS IS LOCATED AT 800 EAST GUNTHER STREET IN CONSUL DISTRICT ONE. THE APPLICANT BEING JASON GUDO IN CON YOU'RE LEANING ON THIS, SORRY. . ALRIGHT. A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A SWIMMING POOL WITH A TWO FOOT SEVEN INCH SIDE SETBACK ON THE WEST PROPERTY. LINE TWO, A 13 FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT GARAGE ENTRY SETBACK TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT SEVEN INCH GAR GARAGE ENTRY SETBACK. AND THIRD, A THREE FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY. CLEAR VISION AREA TO ALLOW 11 FOOT, SIX INCH DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA ZONE, AND IS ARMED. FOUR. LOCATED IN THE KING WILLIAM HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE KING WILLIAM HISTORIC DISTRICT, EAST OF THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER ON EAST GUNTHER STREET. THE APPLICANT REPRESENTED A PROPERTY OWNERS STATED THAT A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL SWIMMING POOL WAS RECENTLY APPROVED AND ISSUED ON MAY 7TH, 2025. HOWEVER, DURING A BUILDING INSPECTION ON JUNE 16TH, 2025, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE POOL DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIRED MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK AND THEREFORE FAILED INSPECTION. AS A RESULT, THE PROJECT WAS PLACED ON HOLD, PROMPTING THE NEED FOR VARIANCE TO ADDRESS THE SWIMMING POOL SETBACK DURING A VISIT TO THE SITE. UM, THE STAFF OBSERVED THE POOL SIDE SETBACK ENCROACHMENT AS WELL AS A RECENTLY CONSTRUCTED GARAGE WITH A REDUCED ENTRY, SETBACK AND DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION. NO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VARIANCES WERE IDENTIFIED FOR THIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, WHICH WAS BUILT SOMETIME BETWEEN 2018 AND 2019. THESE SUMMARIZE THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMENTS. THE PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN THE KING WILLIAM HISTORIC DISTRICT, ANY EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS OR NEW CONSTRUCTION WILL REQUIRE APPROVAL FROM THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN OR MATERIAL SUBMITTED AS PART OF A VARIANCE APPLICATION DOES NOT SUPERSEDE ANY REQUIREMENTS FOR DESIGN REVIEW OUTLINED IN ARTICLE SIX OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ON APRIL 21ST, 2025, OHP STAFF ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED THE REQUEST TO INSTALL AN IN-GROUND STUDENT POOL ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY BEHIND THE FRONT PORCH AND REAR FENCING AS REPRESENTED IN THE SI THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN IN THE SITE PLAN HIGHLIGHTS THE THREE, UM, PROPOSED VARIANCES. THE POOL LOCATED TWO APPROXIMATELY TWO FEET, SEVEN INCH, UM, [01:20:01] TO THE WATERLINE, THE LOCATION OF THE EXISTING GARAGE AND THE CLEAR VISION AFFECTED. CURRENTLY, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE LOCATION OF THE POOL IN THE SIDE YARD. THIS HIGHLIGHTS THE DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA AND THE GARAGE ENTRY. THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA AT THE INTERSECTION OF BARB AND GUNTHER GUNTHER STREET, ACROSS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE REST OF GUNTHER STAFF'S. RECOMMENDATION FOR THE POOLSIDE SETBACK, THE GARAGE ENTRY SETBACK, AND THE DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES DO NOT IMPACT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION OR PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY SAFETY. AND TWO, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF MAIL 32 NOTICES TWO ARE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. THE KING WILLIAM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS AN OPPOSITION TO SOLELY ITEM NUMBER ONE AND NO RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM THE SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION. THESE ARE FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE 200 FEET IN SUPPORT AND THE RESPONSE SUBMITTED FROM THE KING WILLIAM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION. DIDN'T THE UDC AT SOME POINT ALLOW POOLS TO BE THREE FEET? I DON'T KNOW WHY I THOUGHT IT WAS THREE FEET. IT WAS ALWAYS FIVE. IT WAS ALWAYS FIVE. YOU'RE PROBABLY THINKING ABOUT THE OVERHANG FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. YES, SIR. UH, MY NAME IS JASON LARDO. I'M REPRESENTING KATHLEEN AND RALPH LAB. UM, YOU KNOW, I I WORK FOR CODY POOLS. I SUBMIT ALL OF OUR PERMITS. I I WORK WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, ALL THE VARIOUS CITIES THAT WE DO BUSINESS IN. UM, EACH TIME WE SUBMIT A PERMIT, WE SUBMIT THE PLANS, THE SETBACKS, THE CONSTRUCTION, UM, WHERE THE EQUIPMENT'S GONNA GO. WE GOT THE, UH, HISTORIC HISTORIC PRESERVATION DISTRICT'S APPROVAL. WE GOT THE CITY'S APPROVAL. UM, NOTHING CAME ABOUT. WE STARTED CONSTRUCTION. WE, WE GUN EYED THE POOL. GOT IT TO THAT FIRST POINT OF OF INSPECTION, GOT A CALL FROM THE INSPECTOR, SAID, HEY, IT DIDN'T PASS. HE HAD MENTIONED, HEY, YOU JUST NEED TO, UH, WE DON'T HAVE THE, THE CITY OF AN OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATIONS APPROVAL YET. I SAID, IT'S, IT'S THERE, YOU KNOW, I'LL RELO UPLOAD IT AGAIN, RE-UPLOADED IT, HAD THE INSPECTOR COME BACK OUT AND HE SAYS, NO, IT'S NOT THAT. IT'S ACTUALLY, IT'S WITHIN THE SETBACK. UM, NOTED THAT WE HAD THE APPROVAL ALREADY THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS AS WELL AS THE HISTORIC. HE SAID, NO, YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS. SO THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT BROUGHT US TO HERE. SO AT THIS POINT, YOU KNOW, IT'S THERE. SO IT, IT, IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE, UM, IT WOULD, IT WOULD, DID YOUR POOL DESIGN, UH, PROPOSE AN EXCAVATION DEPTH OF MORE THAN THREE FEET FOR, UH, THE DEPTH OF THE ACTUAL POOL? UH, YES SIR. IT'S, IT'S FOUR FEET DEEP. THE ACTUAL AND THAT WAS ON YOUR PERMIT APPLICATION? YES, SIR. SO YEAH, OUR CONSTRUCTION PLANS OUTLINES THE DEPTHS OF THE POOL AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, RENDERINGS OF THE HOUSE, THE, THE SETBACK, THE WHERE THE EQUIPMENT'S GONNA GO IN RELATION TO THE HOUSE, THE DISTANCES FROM THE POOL TO THE HOUSE. UM, I, I'VE SUBMITTED PROBABLY 300 APPLICATIONS TO SAN ANTONIO OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS. AND THIS IS, THIS IS MY FIRST DAY HERE. AND AS FAR AS, UH, DID Y'ALL GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANYTHING OUT OF ORDER OR, OR MISSING OR SOMETHING? I I, AND THE REASON WHY I ASK IS, UH, THIS HOUSE IS ON A CORNER LOT. I ALWAYS THOUGHT THE CITY WAS A LITTLE MORE, UH, THEY SCRUTINIZED CORNER LOTS A LITTLE MORE. MAYBE I'M CONFUSED, BUT IF, IF HE PUT FOUR FOOT ON THE DEPTH, UM, DID, DID, WAS THE PERMIT ACTUALLY ISSUED FOR THE POOL? YEAH, IT WAS, IT WAS MISSED DURING THEIR REVIEW PROCESS. UM, 'CAUSE IT WAS SUBMITTED OR, I MEAN IT WAS, UM, GIVEN THE PERMIT, IF THE EXCAVATION DEPTH WAS NOT THREE FEET, WHAT WOULD THE SETBACK BE? IT WOULD NOT HAVE A SETBACK IF IT'S IT. OH, OKAY. ALRIGHT. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO LOOKING AT, [01:25:01] UH, KING WILLIAMS POSITION, UH, PART OF THE DIALOGUE HERE IS THAT THERE'S NOT A MENTION OF A PRIVACY FENCE, SO, UH, ON THAT SIDE PROPERTY, SO IS, IS THERE GOING TO BE A PRIVACY FENCE, UH, HERE WITH THE POOL? YEAH, YOU KNOW, I WENT TO THE CUSTOMER AND, AND ASKED THEM LIKE, HEY, YOU KNOW, IN THE EVENT THAT THERE'S ANY REBUTTALS, WOULD Y'ALL BE WILLING TO MAYBE CHANGE THE FENCE STYLE? UM, THEY, THEY DIDN'T GIVE ME MUCH. I EVEN SUGGESTED THERE'S ABOUT SEVEN INCHES TO THE SIDEWALK. I SAID WE COULD MAYBE DO THAT. SHE WAS PRETTY ADAMANT ABOUT THE FENCE. I DON'T KNOW IF, HOW, WHAT KING WILLIAMS STANCE ON THE DESIGN OF FENCE AND WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE TO MAKE IT MORE PRIVATE OR MAYBE, YOU KNOW, A CEDAR STYLE FENCE. IF I THINK IF THAT'S THE DEAL MAKER, THEN I'M, I'M SURE THEY WOULD WILLING TO COMPLY. STEVENS, COMMISSIONER STEVENS, I SAW A SURVEY WITH MARKUP ON IT AND THEN I ALSO SAW A PLAN THAT LOOKED LIKE Y'ALL SUBMITTED. DID YOU CALL OUT THIS TWO SEVEN ON YOUR YEAH, ON BOTH OF APPLICATION. THOSE, THOSE ARE, BOTH OF THOSE DOCUMENTS ARE THE DOCUMENTS THAT I SUBMITTED TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AS WELL AS THE CITY. I, AND I SUSPECT THAT IF YOU WERE TO TRY AND CHANGE THIS FENCE, IT'D PROBABLY BE A BIGGER KERFUFFLE THAN THE WATER LINE OF THIS POOL. OH YEAH. 'CAUSE WE'RE RIGHT UP AGAINST THE SIDEWALK. SO I, I, I DON'T KNOW THE PROCESS ON BUILDING ON THE SIDEWALK, BUT CURRENTLY THE FENCE IS AN OPEN FENCE. THAT OPEN FENCE HAS BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE, RIGHT? YES MA'AM. AND SO, UM, THE PRIVACY FENCE THAT IS BEING POINTED OUT IS IN THE BACK BY THE DRIVEWAY OF THE GARAGE, CORRECT? YES MA'AM. IT'S ON THE REAR. SO IT'S KIND OF MOOT ABOUT THE FENCE RIGHT NOW 'CAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN DEALT WITH OR PERMITS HAVEN'T BEEN GOTTEN FOR A CHANGE OF THE FENCE. NO, MA'AM. JUST ONE CLARIFICATION. GOTCHA. COMMISSIONER SAY, UM, JUST THE THOUGHT ABOUT JUST USING LANDSCAPING OR SOME KIND OF IVY OR SOMETHING TO PROVIDE THAT SCREENING BUFFER BUT STILL HAVE A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IS SOMETHING THAT PROBABLY THE OWNER WOULD CONSIDER. YEAH. UH, IS, IS THE POOL DEPTH SOLID FOREFOOT THE WHOLE WAY OR IS IT GO FROM THREE TO FOUR? IT, IT TRANSITIONS SO FOR EVERY SEVEN FEET OF DISTANCE WE CAN SLOPE AT A FOOT. SO IT GOES FROM 3.5, SO THREE AND A HALF FEET TO FOUR. AND THEN RIGHT AT THE VERY END IT, IT TOUCHES FIVE, BUT IT'S, IT'S NOT MUCH. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. ANYBODY, UH, SIGN UP TO SPEAK ANY UH, VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, WE'RE GONNA GO FOR A MOTION AND SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT. THANK YOU. ZU COMMISSIONER REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 25 DASH 3 25, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, ONE A TWO FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A SWIMMING POOL WATERLINE WITH A TWO FOOT SEVEN INCH SIDE SETBACK ON THE WEST PROPERTY LINE TWO, A 13 FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM AND 20 FOOT GARAGE ENTRY SETBACK TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT SEVEN INCH GARAGE ENTRY SETBACK AND THREE, A THREE FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM AND 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEARANCE VISION AREA TO ALLOW 11 FOOT, SIX INCH DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA SITUATED AT 800 EAST GUNTHER STREET, A APPLICANT BEING JASON GALLARDO. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACT THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS OF THE UDC HAS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT WHEN THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, THE POOL SIDE SET BACK ABUTS A RIGHT OF WAY, AND THE GARAGE SETBACK AND CLEAR VISION IS SUFFICIENTLY SET BACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TO RETAIN THE ABILITY OF SAFE FOR SAFE INGRESS AND EGRESS FROM AND ONTO BARB STREET. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE THERE IS NO DRIVEWAY ALONG EAST GUNTHER STREET AND A LIMITED DEVELOPMENT AREA EXISTS ON THE LOT FOR A GARAGE AND A SWIMMING POOL. THE FENCE ALONG THE CLEAR VISIONARY WOULD REDUCE THE ALREADY LIMITED AREA IN THE SIDE YARD WITHOUT THE VARIANCE. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. AS THERE IS NO SIGNIF, SIGNIFICANT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT WOULD IMPEDE TRAFFIC OR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY OR HINDER, OR THE VARIANCES WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OF THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCES WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJU THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BECAUSE A, THE THE AREA IS IN WHICH THE POOL IS LOCATED IS NOT ABOUT ANY SHARED PROPERTY LINE. ADDITIONALLY, THE FENCE AND GARAGE DISTANCES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND THE SIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY CURB WERE HISTORICALLY ESTABLISHED WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. AND SIX, THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH THE VARIANCES SAW IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, NOT DUE TO OTHER RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITION OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE GARAGE FENCE DID NOT OBSTRUCT CLEAR VISION FOR TRAFFIC FLOW ON BARB STREET OR HINDER, UH, SAFE INGRESS EGRESS FOR THE PROPERTY. LIKEWISE, THE SWIMMING POOL IS NARROW AND WIDTH AND MAINTAINS AN ADEQUATE DISTANCE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. YEAH, SO I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ. UM, UH, CLEARLY THE [01:30:01] APPLICANTS, UH, UH, SUPPORTED, UH, OR HAD ON HIS SUBMITTALS THE, UM, SETBACK LINE THAT THAT WAS KIND OF AN OVERSIGHT OF THE CITY. I THINK THERE'S AN EXTREME HARDSHIP HERE IF THEY WERE, UH, REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK. UH, THE REAL OPPOSITION HERE WAS KIND OF THE FENCE AND I THINK THAT THEY COULD PROVIDE THAT OPAQUE WITH SOME KIND OF, UH, UM, LANDSCAPING OR SOMETHING GROWING ON THE FENCE TO CREATE THAT, THAT BUFFER, UH, OPAQUE THAT, THAT THE, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS SEEKING. UM, AND THEN OF COURSE THE, WE HAD SUPPORT WITH THE, UH, UH, DRIVEWAY AND THE CLEAR VISION. SO UNSU OF THE MOTION TO THREAD. COMMISSIONER BECKMAN? YEAH, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE OF THE POOL THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED IN THE, UM, CASE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY'VE ALREADY STARTED GROWING. LOOKS TO BE SOME SORT OF IV OR JASMINE ON THE FENCE ANYWAY, SO I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE TOO MUCH OF A STRETCH TO, UH, FURTHER THAT OR EITHER THAT OR, YOU KNOW, PUT SOME SORT OF SOLID PRIVACY OFFENSE TO, UH, ADDRESS THE, UH, ISSUES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? I MAN, HEARING NONE. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS. COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MENA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR O YES, I CONCUR. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, CONGRATULATIONS. YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF. ALL RIGHT. UH, ITEM SEVEN. ITEM SEVEN, ITEM SEVEN IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 29 LOCATED AT 5 0 8 ELKS DRIVE. IN CONS, DISTRICT FIVE, THE APPLICANT IS VANESSA RUBIO. SHE'S REQUESTING A THREE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW FOR PRIMARY STRUCTURE WITH A ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH SETBACK FROM THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE TO INCLUDE A ONE FOOT SIX INCH OVERHANG. THE ZONE IS R FOUR. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED EAST OF SOUTH ZAMORA STREET ON ELK DRIVE. HISTORICAL IMAGERY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SUGGESTS THE ORIGINAL HOME ON THIS LOT WAS ESTABLISHED WITH A REDUCED SIDE SETBACK FROM THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE. A COMPLETE GROUND UP RECONSTRUCTION OF THE HOME WITH A NEW ADDITION TO THE REAR IS CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS. ACCORDING TO STRIKE. TEAM INVESTIGATION NOTES, NO PERMITS HAVE YET BEEN AUTHORIZED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. THE PROJECT IS CURRENTLY BEING REVIEWED FOR A NEW RESIDENTIAL HOME PERMIT AND MUST COMPLY WITH THE MINIMUM REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK OF FIVE FEET. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO PRESERVE THE HISTORICALLY ESTABLISHED SIDE SETBACK AND BUILD THIS NEW HOME IN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE. THE REQUEST INCLUDES A ONE FOOT SIX INCH OVERHANG, WHICH PREVENTS THE WALL OF THE STRUCTURE TO BE ANY CLOSER TO THREE FEET, TWO INCHES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. GRANTING THIS REQUEST WOULD ALLOW FOR THE CONTINUATION OF A HISTORICALLY REDUCED SIDE SETBACK AND THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THIS HOME AT A DISTANCE OF ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH FROM THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THIS HIGHLIGHTS THE LOCATION OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WITH THE ONE SIX O ONE FOOT SIX INCH OVERHANG IN THE PICTURE ON THE RIGHT SIDE. THIS, UM, HISTORICAL PHOTO IS FROM JANUARY, 2008 AND YOU CAN SEE A REDUCED SETBACK FROM THAT AGE FROM 2008 AND THIS AS WELL FROM 2022 AND ITS CURRENT VIEW. THIS HIGHLIGHTS THE DIFFERENT MEASUREMENTS, THE OVERHANG AND THE OVERALL SIDE SETBACK WITH THE WALL TO REMAIN THREE FEET, TWO INCH FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. THIS IS A EXTENSION OF THE ORIGINAL HOME, UM, WITH ADDITION BEING 10 FEET BY 26 FEET, THREE INCH. THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SITE SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO OA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 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 REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE RESIDENTS TO REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER AND SETBACK OF THE PROPERTY. [01:35:01] 36 NOTICES WERE MAILED AND ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR FROM THE AFFECTED, UM, ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER AND TIERRA LINDA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION AND THIS IS THE RESPONSE IN FAVOR AND, UM, THE NOTICE RECEIVED FROM THE TIERRA LINDEN, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SAYING IT CREATES A RISK TO NEIGHBORHOOD AND PERMANENT INCONVENIENCE TO THE ADJACENT HOMEOWNERS. AND THIS CONCLUDES NA'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT, UH, A A A COUPLE QUESTIONS. SO, UH, ON THE SITE PLAN THAT'S PROVIDED, UH, IN THE FILE, IT CALLS IT AN EXISTING HOME. THEY'RE REUSING THE FOUNDATION, THEY'RE, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE JUST FIXING UP THE CLADDING OR SOMETHING, UM, BASED ON THE SCOPE OF THE WORK, INSTEAD OF IT BEING AN INLINE, UM, ADDITION, THE REVIEW PROCESS DEEMED IT AS A NEW BUILD. 'CAUSE IT WILL, FROM THE PHOTOS WE HAVE AS WELL, WE SAW, UM, CHANGES TO THE BOTTOM OR THE FOUNDATION GOING UP. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. HELLO. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. HELLO, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS VANESSA RUBIO. UM, I PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY WITH MY FATHER IN, OH, CAN YOU HEAR ME? NO, YOU CAN MOVE IT UP. OH, UP. SORRY. THERE YOU GO. . I PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY AS AN INVESTMENT PROPERTY WITH MY FATHER IN DECEMBER OF 2020, UH, 23. UM, SO THIS IS THE VERY FIRST TIME WE'VE EVER RUN INTO, UH, THIS ENTIRE PROCESS OF, UH, REMODELING A HOME. IT WAS CON WE JUST WANTED TO FLIP IT AND SELL IT AND, UH, WE'VE LEARNED MANY NEW THINGS ALONG THE WAY. UM, WE'VE BEEN HERE ONCE READY FOR THE REPLYING OF THE PROPERTY AND, AND NOW FOR THIS VARIANCE REQUEST. UM, BUT WE'VE BEEN DOING EVERYTHING THAT WE POSSIBLY CAN AND DO IT THE PROPER WAY. WE'VE HIRED ARCHITECT AND GOT PLANS APPROVED AND, UH, PERMITS TRYING TO GET, YOU KNOW, NEXT STEP IN PROCESS AND, ALRIGHT. UM, IT'S, ARE YOU REUSING THE FOUNDATION? WE ARE. OKAY. YES. ALRIGHT. AND THAT WAS A APPEAR AND BEAM OR A CORRECT? IT WAS. OKAY. AND I NOTICED YOU PLATTED, UH, YOU'RE LIKE THE ONLY ONE ON THE BLOCK THAT PLATTED AND HAD TO GIVE A RIGHT OF AWAY. YES, WE WERE THAT PRO, THAT BUILDING'S BEEN THERE SINCE 19, UH, 63. YEAH, THAT'S VERY OLD. UH, ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? CRUZ? COMMISSIONER CRUZ, DO YOU KNOW WHY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSING THIS? DO YOU KNOW WHY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSING YOU? OH, DO I KNOW? NO, THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME I SAW THAT LETTER. UM, THE RESPONSE TO THE VARIANCE. OKAY. SO, BUT IT SAID THAT IT, IT CREATED A, UM, UM, CAN YOU PULL UP THE LETTER? AN INCONVENIENCE TO ADJACENT HOMEOWNERS, BUT THE ADJACENT HOMEOWNER WAS IN. OKAY, SO THE PROPERTY THAT YOU'RE USING? YES. IS IT, AND I KNOW IT, THAT YOUR'RE FIXING IT UP. MM-HMM . SO WAS IT THERE, HOW LONG DID YOUR FATHER OWN IT BEFORE OR YOU JUST RECENTLY JUST PURCHASED IT? WE RECENTLY JUST PURCHASED IT IN DECEMBER OF TWO. OKAY. AND SO YOU HAVE NO, YOU HAD HAD NO CONTACT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? NO, NEVER. OKAY, THANK YOU. MM-HMM . OH, THIS, I'M SORRY. I WANNA BE A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC. UM, I'VE NOT BEEN, UH, AS INVOLVED AS MY FATHER HAS. I'M JUST A PROPERTY OWNER. UH, BUT HE'S THE ONE THAT HAS HIS LIKE CONTRACTOR AND ARCHITECT AND EVERYBODY WORKING WITH AND HE'S WORKING CLOSER WITH THOSE PEOPLE. SO I'M UNSU IF THE ARCHITECT OR THE ENGINEER, IF ANYBODY ELSE WHO'S HAD ANY CONTACT WITH THEM. OKAY. WELL, OR MAYBE EVEN MY FATHER. YEAH, NORMALLY IT'S THE HOMEOWNER THAT REACHES OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. YEAH. ESPECIALLY SINCE I'M SURE THAT WHEN YOU APPLY FOR THE PERMIT MM-HMM . THAT'S WHAT THEY TOLD YOU ONE OF THE OKAY. THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY GIVE YOU. OKAY. SO I'M WONDERING IF MAYBE THE CONTRACTOR, 'CAUSE HE'S THE ONE THAT APPLIED FOR THE PERMIT. MAYBE HE REACHED OUT, BUT I'M NOT, UH, OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM . COMMISSIONER ZUNA, DO YOU KNOW THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE, UM, FRONT OF THE, THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE AND THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY? IS THERE MORE THAN THE, THE SIDE THAT'S AFFECTED BY THE ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH SIDE SETBACK? IT'S CURRENTLY THREE FEET, FOUR INCHES. IT'S A DRIVEWAY. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND. OH, FROM THE, ON THE, LIKE FOR FIRE BREAK, UM, THERE'S, IT'S THREE FEET, TWO INCHES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE? NO, THE, WHEN YOU'RE FACING YOUR PROPERTY MM-HMM . UH, THE PROPERTY ON THE RIGHT, DO YOU KNOW HOW FAR AWAY THEIR HOME IS FROM YOUR PROPERTY? YOU CAN SEE THE PICTURE RIGHT HERE. I'M JUST, YEAH, THE PICTURE YOU JUST HAD. YEAH, THAT ONE. HOW FAR IS THE OTHER OH, FROM THEIR PROPERTY? UM, IT LOOKS LIKE A GOOD, IT'S A DRIVEWAY, SO IT LOOKS LIKE A GOOD 1215 FEET. 1215, RIGHT. YEAH. AND I'M [01:40:01] JUST CONSIDERATION FOR, FOR LIKE FIRE BREAK AND FIRE. YEAH. THE ARCHITECT, UM, DID PLAN FOR A FIREWALL ON THAT. SO IT'D FIREWALL? YES, IT WOULD. OKAY. MM-HMM . AND THEN JUST IN TERMS OF MAINTAINING THAT SIDE MM-HMM . UM, GOING FORWARD IS ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH, UM, ADEQUATE, WELL I GUESS IT'S THREE FOOT, TWO INCH FROM THE WALL. IS THAT ADEQUATE TO MAINTAIN THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE FOR, YOU KNOW, PAINTING? OH, YES. OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU. MM-HMM . ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA END THE SCREEN HERE. SO, UM, UM, IN THE STAFF PRESENTATION, UM, IT SHOWS THE, UM, I GUESS ON THE FIRST PAGE, THE, THE FLOOR, THE, THE PRINT AND IT, UM, AND IT DOES SHOW THAT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WAS AT THREE FOOT, TWO INCH AND THE BACK OF THE HOUSE IS THREE FOOT FIVE. SO IT, IT DOES LOOK LIKE, UM, AND, AND APPEARS THAT THE ONLY CHANGE, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE HOUSE IS THE EXTENSION OF THE BACK BY ADDITIONAL ADDITION. CORRECT? CORRECT. SO, SO, UM, AND SO, UM, IF THE HOUSE HAD BEEN BUILT ON THE SAME EXACT FOOTPRINT WITH NO CHANGES AT ALL, WOULD, WOULD THEY HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS PROCESS AS WELL OR SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH WORK BEING DONE, IT DIDN'T MATTER, THEY WERE STILL GONNA HAVE TO COME THROUGH, UM, AND, AND GET THE BOARD ADJUSTMENT ADJUSTMENT FOR THIS? CORRECT. UM, SO IF THEY DIDN'T NEED AS MUCH WORK WITH THE REDO, UM, RENOVATION OF THE WALLS, EXISTING WALLS AND THEY WERE JUST DOING AN EXTENSION, THEY WOULD'VE BEEN PERMITTED UP TO THREE, LIKE AS CLOSE AS THREE FEET, UM, TO STAY ALIGNED WITH THE EXISTING WALL. AND IT'S, IT'S BECAUSE THERE IT'S MORE THAN 50% OF THE HOME THAT'S EXISTING HOME. THAT'S WHAT'S TRIGGERING THIS? YES. THE PLAN REVIEW TEAM WHEN THEY REVIEWED THIS FELT THAT IT WAS SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO BE CONSIDERED A NEW CONSTRUCTION. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE ANYONE SENT TO SPEAK ANY VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, UH, WE'RE GONNA GO FOR A MOTION AND SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT. BRACKMAN COMMISSIONER BRACKMAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 1 29, I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A THREE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW FOR PRIMARY STRUCTURE WITH A ONE FOOT EIGHT INCH SETBACK FROM THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE TO INCLUDE A ONE FOOT SIX INCH OVERHANG SITUATED AT 5 0 8 ELK DRIVE. APPLICANT BEING VANESSA RUBIO. 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 ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE MAINTAINS ADEQUATE SPACING BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURE FOR THE PURPOSE OF FIRE SAFETY, WATER RUNOFF AND MAINTENANCE ACCESS DUE TO THE DRIVEWAY ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AND DUE TO THE FRONT TO BACK SLOPE OF THE SUBJECT STRUCTURE'S ROOF LINE TWO. DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE TO REDESIGN THE STRUCTURE TO MEET THE WESTERN SIDE SETBACK. THIS WOULD IMPEDE ON THE INABILITY TO REUSE THE EXISTING FOUNDATION FOOTPRINT. THIS WOULD ALSO RESULT IN REDUCTION OF THE EASTERN SIDE YARD AND THUS LIMIT THE WIDTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY'S DRIVEWAY FOR OFF STREET PARKING. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. SUFFICIENT SPACING BETWEEN THE PROPERTY REMAINS FOR MAINTENANCE, WATER RUNOFF AND FIRE SAFETY FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE DISTRICT. IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE PROPERTY USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. 'CAUSE THERE IS SUFFICIENT SPACING BETWEEN STRUCTURES PROVIDED BY THE DRIVEWAY SEPARATION OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUM CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE ORIGINAL HOME CONSTRUCTED IN 1965 WAS ESTABLISHED WITH THE REDUCED SITE SETBACK, REMOVING THE EXISTING FOUNDATION AND FRAMEWORK TO BUILD A NEW STRUCTURE TO COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT SITE SETBACK STANDARDS WOULD CAUSE THE DISCONTINUATION OF THE ORIGINAL HOME'S FOOTPRINT AND IMPEDE ON THE PROPERTY OWNER'S INTENT TO, TO IMPROVE UPON THEIR EXISTING PROPERTY. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UH, YEAH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION, UM, SINCE THEY'RE BUILDING ON THE SAME FOUNDATION FOOTPRINT AND ONLY EXTENDING, UH, BACK A NEW ADDITION WITHIN [01:45:01] THE LINE OF THE ORIGINAL SITE SETBACK. I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH THIS. THERE'S PLENTY OF SPACE BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WITH THE, THE DRIVEWAY ON THE OTHER SIDE, AND THERE'S SUFFICIENT SPACE TO GET IN THERE FOR, UH, MAINTENANCE. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER STEVENS, I TOO WILL BE IN SUPPORT AND AGREE WITH EVERYTHING. UH, MS. BRAGMAN, UH, HAD BROUGHT UP AND I THINK THIS IS LIKE A CRITICAL PATH TO GET THIS PROJECT DONE, WHICH WOULD PROBABLY SATISFY MOST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPLAINTS. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT . ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD MANNA? COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO I, I'LL ALSO BE IN FAVOR, BUT YOU, I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, WITH REGARDS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND SO, YOU KNOW, AS I LOOK AT THIS COMMUNITY, IT, IT APPEARS THAT ALMOST, YOU KNOW, A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE HOUSES HAVE THE SAME FEATURE OF BEING RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINES. AND SO, SO I I THINK THIS IS, YOU KNOW, IN GOOD FAITH OF, OF KEEPING THE HOUSES UP IN THE COMMUNITY. AND SO THEREFORE, I, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THIS. I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE, LET'S HAVE VOICE, UH, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIENT AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. IF YOU HAVEN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN ASK STAFF. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. ALL RIGHTY. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 1 3 0. THE ADDRESS BEING ONE 50 STORY WOOD DRIVE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE, THE APPLICANT BEING KIM C JONES. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A ONE FOOT SIX INCH CARPORT SIDE SETBACK IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THE ZONING IS R FOUR. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN VANCE JACKSON ROAD AND WEST AVENUE. ALONG STORY WOOD DRIVE HISTORICAL IMAGERY INDICATES A CARPORT HAS EXISTED IN THE REAR YARD OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SINCE AT LEAST 2007. THE PROPERTY OWNER BEGAN A PROJECT TO CONVERT THAT EXISTING CARPORT INTO A GARAGE, WHICH WAS SUBSEQUENTLY PLACED ON HOLD FOLLOWING THE ISSUANCE OF A PERM, UH, ISSUANCE OF A NOTICE OF VIOLATION BY CODE ENFORCEMENT STAFF FOR BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT ON JULY 1ST, 2025. THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS STATED THEIR INTENTION TO ABANDON THE PURSUIT OF CONVERTING THIS STRUCTURE INTO A GARAGE AND REMOVE THE RECENTLY, UH, ADDED EXTERIOR WALLS, WHICH CURRENTLY ENCLOSED THE STRUCTURE ON EACH SIDE. THE STRUCTURE MAY BE CONSIDERED A CARPORT AND NOT A GARAGE, SO LONG AS IT IS NOT ENCLOSED ON ANY MORE THAN UH, TWO SIDES, UH, BY ANY WALL. UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER STILL INTENDS TO IMPROVE UPON THE EXISTING CARPORT FRAME BY INCREASING THE HEIGHT OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE, UH, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THE ISSUANCE OF A RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENT PERMIT FOR THAT WORK. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A NEW PERMIT, A VARIANCE APPROVAL MUST BE OBTAINED FOR THE REDUCED SIDE SETBACK OF THE STRUCTURE ENLARGING THE STRUCTURE WOULD PREVENT A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE. REGISTRATION ISSUANCE SHOWN HERE IS THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED, UH, BY THE PROPERTY OWNER IN CONTEXT OF AN AERIAL VIEW OF THAT PROPERTY. UH, THAT CARPORT IS IN THE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE, OF THE LOT THERE. THAT'S THE REAR YARD, UH, WITH THE CLOSEST DISTANCE OF ONE FOOT SIX INCHES FROM THE PROP SIDE PROPERTY LINE THERE. UH, THIS IS THE SUB SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE FRONT YARD. UH, YOU CAN SEE THE CONSTRUCTION THERE IN THE REAR YARD AND ON THE FOLLOWING PHOTO IS A BETTER IMAGE OF THAT CARPORT. AGAIN, IT'S GOT THAT ENCLOSURE ON TWO SIDEWALLS. THOSE HAVE BEEN, UH, STATED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER TO TO BE REMOVED. UH, IN THE SURROUNDING AREA YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS AN ALLEY, UH, TOWARDS THE REAR YARD, UH, WHICH GIVES THEM THAT ALLOWANCE FOR THE REAR SETBACK AND CAUSING THERE TO BE NO REAR SETBACK ISSUE FOR THIS PARTICULAR STRUCTURE AND THE REST OF THE SURROUNDING AREA TO FOLLOW. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CARPORT SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BOA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 0 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE REDUCED SETBACK WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE CORNER OF THIS STRUCTURE CLOSEST TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. AND TWO, THE CARPORT IS SEPARATED FROM STRUCTURES ON NEIGHBORING LOTS BY A RIGHT OF WAY AND AN ADJOINING ALLEYWAY, THEREBY MINIMIZING ANY INCREASED FIRE SAFETY OR WATER RUNOFF CONCERNS. STAFF MAILED OUT 32 NOTICES ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. THE BELLEVUE AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND AND THE SAN ANTONIO DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION DID [01:50:01] NOT RESPOND. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALRIGHT, HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR CARDBOARD. I'M CASEY JONES. UH, WE LIVED HERE ABOUT 30 YEARS AND I WAITED FOR ABOUT 20 TO DO THIS PROJECT. SO, UH, HOPING IT GETS PASSED. UM, I I JUST ASSUMED THAT IT, IT HAD BEEN THERE SINCE PROBABLY 1965 OR SO THAT IT WAS BUILT. UM, I WANT TO USE THAT, THAT SAME STRUCTURE AND I'M BUILDING ON THE SAME FOOTPRINT, UH, THAT WAS THERE ALREADY. SO, UH, THAT'S ABOUT IT. OKAY. UM, I'LL JUMP RIGHT IN. IS THE ALLEY NEXT TO YOU, UH, USE FOR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC? A LOT OF GUYS COMING IN AND OUTTA THE ALLEY THAT LIVE, UH, I GUESS THEY USE IT FOR ACCESS TO THEIR BACKYARDS OR WHATEVER. UH, IS, DOES GARBAGE VEHICLES GO DOWN THERE FOR PICKUP? NO. NO. OKAY. SO THE REAL REASON WHY WE'RE HERE IS BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE WHEN YOU MAKE THIS INTO A CARPORT AND GET RID OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A POST THAT'S LOCATED CLOSER THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE SAXON RIGHT WAY. THOSE, THOSE WALLS WILL, WILL BE THE EXTERIOR WALLS OF THE CARPORT. BUT YOU'RE NOT GETTING, ARE YOU, AREN'T YOU REMOVING AT LEAST ONE OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS? UH, I WAS HOPING I COULD LEAVE 'EM, I WAS GONNA OPEN UP, UH, LIKE SOME LARGE WINDOWS OR, OR SCREENED IN AREAS. MAYBE I COULD LEAVE 'EM OPEN. WHATEVER WOULD BE ALLOWED. WELL ACTUALLY, SO, SO THIS IS COMING BEFORE US AS A CARPORT STAFF. IF HE LEAVES THE WALLS UP AND IT'S AS A GARAGE, HOW DOES THAT CHANGE ANY OF THE SETBACKS? SO IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE SETBACKS. UM, WHEN YOU READ THE MOTION, YOU HAVE TO ELIMINATE THE MENTION OF A CARPORT, UM, BECAUSE AT THAT POINT A CARPORT WOULD MAKE HIM TAKE OUT AT LEAST TWO OF THOSE WALLS, WHICH WE BELIEVE HE INDICATED TO US. BUT IF THAT'S NOT HIS INTENTION AND THAT'S THE WAY YOU WANNA READ THE MOTION. OKAY. DO NOT MENTION CARPORT. OKAY. AND, AND WE'RE HERE BECAUSE IT'S THE CORNER POST CLOSE. THE PORTION OF THE, OF THE WALL CLOSEST TO THE ALLEY IS WITHIN THE FIVE FEET. THE OPPOSITE SIDE IS ACCEPTABLE. CORRECT. AND THEN IS THERE A CLEAR VISION ISSUE WITH THAT BEING AN ENCLOSED WALL ON THE ALLEY SIDE? NO SIR. UH, CLEAR VISION IS ONLY FOR FENCES. ALRIGHT. ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO, UH, THERE'S SOME SUBSTANTIAL WORK BEING DONE ON THE ROOFING AS WELL. SO IS THE ROOFING GETTING READY TO CHANGE WITH REGARDS TO THE STRUCTURE ITSELF? I WAS HOPING TO RAISE THE ROOF, UH, TO A CEILING HEIGHT OF NINE FEET. OKAY. BUT AS FAR AS, AND THEN, AND THEN ROOF CLAD ON TOP OF THAT. SO IT'S NOT GONNA BE A SECOND STORY OR NO. OR ANY KIND OF STRUCTURE LIKE THAT? JUST HIGH CEILINGS. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS? ANYONE SENATOR TO SPEAK? NO PUBLIC COMMENT MAN. NONE AT ALL TODAY, HUH? NEXT CASE. ALL RIGHT. UH, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION THEN IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, I GOT OH YEAH. TAKE OUT CARPORT GARAGE. LEAVE OUT. YEAH, IT WOULD SAY GARAGE. OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 3 0 MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. GRANTED A REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW ONE FOOT SIX INCH GARAGE SIDE SETBACK TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT ONE 50 STORY WOOD DRIVE, APPLICANT BEING CASEY JONES BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS WE HAVE DETERMINED. SO THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT, OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS A REDUCED SETBACK WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE CORNER STRUCTURE CLOSEST TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, ABUT A RIGHT OF WAY, MINIMIZING ANY INCREASED FIRE SAFETY OR WATER RUNOFF CONCERNS. TWO TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. AS THE CAR, AS THE GARAGE'S LONG STAFFING LOCATION ON THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN A WELL-ESTABLISHED FEATURE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, A VARIANCE WOULD ONLY BE REQUIRED TO AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF THE GARAGE AND NO FURTHER ENCROACHMENT INTO THE MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACK IS PROPOSED. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPHERE OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS THE STRUCTURE WOULD REMAIN ADEQUATELY SEPARATED FROM NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES BY THE ADJOINING RIGHT OF WAYS. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. AND WITH THE VARIANCE DIS LOCATED NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AS THE GARAGE WOULD REMAIN IN ITS EXISTING LOCATION, WHICH IS SUFFICIENTLY SEPARATED FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY WHEN ACCOUNTING FOR THE WIDTH, THE ADJACENT RIGHT [01:55:01] OF WAY AND ALLEYWAY SIXTH PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH THERE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED. THE P TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH ANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE GARAGE'S LOCATION, WHICH APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BEFORE IN 2001. THE MOTION, SORRY, I JUST, I WANTED TO INTERRUPT. I APOLOGIZE. UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, BUT THERE ARE DIFFERENT SETBACKS FOR A GARAGE VERSUS A CARPORT AND IT DOES SAY A GARAGE MUST BE 20 FEET SETBACK FROM A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. UM, THE BACK SIDE DOES SEEM TO TO BE READVERTISED IT TO BE READVERTISED. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO BE READVERTISED AND EVERYTHING IF HE WANTS TO KEEP THE WALL, LIKE IF HE WANTS TO KEEP THE WALLS. BUT IF HE WAS TO REMOVE THE WALLS AND MAKE IT A CARPORT, THEN WHAT IF WE COULD PROCEED? WHAT IF THE, WHAT IF THERE WAS NO GARAGE DOOR? IT WOULD STILL BE CONSIDERED A GARAGE. ANYTHING A CARPORT? UM, A GARAGE IS ANYTHING THAT'S MORE THAN TWO SIDES. ALRIGHT, SO, UM, IF THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP PLEASE. SO WHAT WHAT HAPPENS IS, UM, WHEN YOU PUT IN A, A GARAGE AS OPPOSED TO A CAR REPORT, THE FACE OF THE GARAGE HAS, THERE'S ANOTHER REQUIREMENT WHERE IT HAS TO BE 20 FEET AWAY FROM THE FACE OF CURB, RIGHT? YEAH. UH, OR YOU KNOW, SO IS THAT WE'RE WE'LL HAVE TO RE ADVERTISE 'CAUSE WE CAN'T SO WE CAN'T HAVE WALLS THEN? WELL WE'RE, WE'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO VOTE WITH WHAT'S ON OUR AGENDA. AND BECAUSE THAT, THAT PORTION IS A SEPARATE INDEPENDENT CODE, IT'S NOT INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA, WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE IT READVERTISED SO THAT WE COULD ENTERTAIN, UH, THAT GARAGE FOR THE ENCLOSED GARAGE. FOR THE GARAGE. RIGHT. OKAY. WELL I WAS, I WAS TRYING TO GET IT APPROVED AS A CARPORT, SO. WELL IF WE APPROVE IT AS A CARPORT, YOU HAVE TO GET RID OF THE WALLS. YEAH, I CAN DO THAT. OKAY. IT'S EASY ENOUGH. OKAY, SO THEN WHAT WE'LL DO READ THE MOTION THEN. WELL, SO JUST SO EXPLAIN AGAIN. SO, SO WE'RE GETTING READY TO VOTE ON THE GARAGE, BUT WE FOUND OUT THE DISTANCE ARE, WERE KIND OF OFF, IF YOU RE ADVERTISE, IT BASICALLY DELAYS YOUR PROJECT, BUT YOU GET TO KEEP YOUR GARAGE. WELL I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A CARPORT. WE, IF WE VOTE ON THIS ON A CARPORT, YOU WILL HAVE TO REMOVE THOSE WALLS. RIGHT. OKAY. IF YOU WANT TO WAIT AND COME BACK HERE, WHAT, IN TWO WEEKS OR? WELL, I KNOW IT CAN'T BE A GARAGE. I ALREADY KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT WE, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT ALREADY. BUT IT CAN'T BE, BUT IT CAN BE, IF YOU WANT THIS TO BE READVERTISED, THERE'S, WELL, THERE'S NO WAY I CAN GET 20 FEET. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE. WELL THAT'S WHY YOU WOULD COME BACK TO HERE. YOU WOULD ASK FOR A WAIT, SO IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE. YES. OH, OKAY. SO DO YOU, WOULD YOU LIKE THIS READVERTISED AS A GARAGE? I WOULD LOVE TO HONESTLY. OKAY. YEAH. ALRIGHT, SO WE'LL READVERTISED. YEAH. ALRIGHT, SO I, I WAS IN THE MOTION SO WE NO LONGER HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. WE SHOULD SEE YOU BACK HERE IN TWO TO FOUR WEEKS. OKAY. JUST, JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE THERE WILL BE A POSTPONEMENT FEE. SO ARE YOU SURE YOU'RE STILL WANTING TO DO THIS? WHAT IS A POSTPONEMENT FEE? 200. OKAY. DO, IF YOU PAY $200, YOU CAN COME BACK TO US. THAT'S FINE. OKAY. YEAH, THERE YOU GO. ALRIGHT, WE WILL SEE YOU BACK HERE IN ABOUT A MONTH. THANK YOU. YEAH. UH, ONE QUICK QUESTION FOR FOR BEFORE WE LEAVE, JUST IF WE VOTE ON THIS NOW AS A CARPORT, IF HE WERE TO COME BACK AS A GARAGE, WHAT IS THE FEE AS FOR A RESIDENTIAL TO COME BACK AS A GARAGE? 400. 400. IF HE HAS A HOME HAZARD EXEMPTION OR 600 IF HE DOESN'T, SO ONE, ONE LAST THING, WE CAN VOTE ON THIS RIGHT NOW AND YOU CAN GET APPROVAL POTENTIALLY FOR A CARPORT. YOU CAN, INSTEAD OF $200, YOU CAN PAY $400. AND AS AN COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT QUESTION, YOU CAN ASK FOR A CARPORT. YOU WOULD GARAGE, I MEAN A GARAGE. GARAGE, OKAY. DO YOU WANT TO HAVE A VOTE TODAY OR DO YOU WANT TO JUST PAY THE 200 AND DO IT ALL IN ONE? I REALLY WANT A GARAGE SO IF THERE'S, IF OKAY, SO I'M JUST, I'M JUST ASKING. OKAY. ? YEAH, I I WOULD RECOMMEND THE POSTPONEMENT FEE. YEAH. SO WE GET IT ADVERTISED AS A GARAGE. I JUST WANTED TO ASK JUST MANNA, YOU COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE TWO APPROVAL. MANNA COMMISSIONER MAY. SO, SO IF WE COME IN FOR A GARAGE AND WE DECIDE THAT THAT IS, UH, IS DOESN'T WORK, IT COULD BE REDUCED BACK TO A CARPORT. UM, BECAUSE IT IS LESS THAN WHAT IS ADVERTISED AND WE CAN YEAH. SO YOU'LL HAVE THE OPTION IF THEY COME BACK TO ACTUALLY APPROVE WHAT'S HERE, RIGHT? OR APPROVE THE FULL YEAH, WE WILL ADVERTISE IT SUCH THAT YOU HAVE THE CAPACITY TO APPROVE EITHER YES. AND WHEN, WHEN COULD YOU COME BACK? IS IT ON THE 22ND OR ON THE EIGHTH? YOU CAN COME BACK ON THE FIRST, UH, MEETING IN SEPTEMBER. WE WILL SEE YOU ON SEPTEMBER 8TH. AWESOME. OKAY. BUT PLEASE [02:00:01] GET WITH STAFF IN CASE THEY NEED YOU TO SIGN SOMETHING OR SOMETHING. ALRIGHT, WE NEED A MOTION FOR A POST? NO. NO. ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYBODY NEED A BREAK O'CLOCK? YES. OKAY, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A SEVEN MINUTE BREAK. WE'LL SEE Y'ALL BACK IN SEVEN MINUTES TIME. BACK IN SESSION. WE ARE ON ITEM NUMBER NINE. ITEM NUMBER NINE IS BO O EIGHT DASH TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 1. LOCATED AT 2 0 7 HELANA STREET. IN CONS DISTRICT FIVE, THE APPLICANT IS ARMANDO ARMANDO TUJ. A REQUEST FOR A 2001 30 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 6,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON A 3,870 FOOT SQUARE FOOT LOT. THE ZONE IS R SIX. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED EAST OF SOUTH FLORA STREET ON HELENA STREET. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE CONSTRUCTED IN 1930. THE PROPERTY OWNER INTENDS TO TEAR DOWN AND REBUILD A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THIS LOT. ONE SECOND JEWEL. UM, MR. COMMISSIONER BEEZ, CAN YOU TURN YOUR CAMERA BACK ON? I GET RIGHT AT 3,870 SQUARE FEET. THE LOT SIZE IS BELOW THE 6,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT FOR THE R SIX BASED ZONING DISTRICT. AS A RESULT, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THE PROPERTY. AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO SEEK AND REVIEW BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, THE APPLICANT MAY PURSUE REZONING TO THE R THREE DISTRICT, WHICH ALIGNS WITH THE CURRENT LOT SIZE OF THE PROPERTY. AND THIS IS A SITE PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. THEY'RE GONNA BE MEETING THE CURRENT R SIX ZONING SIDE AND REAR AND FRONT SETBACKS AND THE CURRENT VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF'S. RECOMMENDATION FOR THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE VARIANCE, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 1 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE MAY ESTABLISH A PRECEDENT FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF HOMES ON SUBSTANDARD LOTS AND TWO, THE APPLICANT HAS THE OPTION TO PURSUE A ZONING CHANGE THAT ALIGNS MORE CLOSELY WITH THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. 29 NOTICES WERE MAILED, WE RECEIVE NONE IN SUPPORT OR IN OPPOSITION AND NO RESPONSE EITHER. FROM THE LONE STAR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENT. OKAY, SO, SO QUICK QUESTION. THE EXISTING HOME THAT'S THERE, UH, THIS WAS BUILT IN 1930 ACCORDING TO BEHEAD RECORDS, WHAT ARE THEY ATTEMPTING TO DO THE FACT THAT THEY WANT TO DEMOLISH AND REBUILD. OH, DEMOLISH IT PROMPTS THEM TO BE TREATED AS A NEW, UM, APPLICATION FOR. OKAY, I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA, UM, WILL ALL SETBACKS BE OBSERVED WITH REGARDS TO THE PLAN WITH THIS CURRENT SET, UM, SITE PLAN AT R SIX? YES. AND THEN, UH, ONE MORE. SO, SO THE ENTIRE, IT LOOKS LIKE A LARGE PORTION OF THIS COMMUNITY HAS SIMILAR, UM, CONFIGURATIONS. AND SO WOULD THIS SAME REQUIREMENT FROM THAT THE CITY'S LAYING OUT HERE BE REQUIRED FOR ANY OF THE OTHER LOTS THAT WOULD ALSO WANT TO SAY, GO DOWN THIS PATH AS WELL, INCLUDING THE THREE OTHERS THAT ARE SUBSTANDARD THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION FOR THEM TO PURSUE OR THE REZONING? I WILL, I WILL STATE. UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS, THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION, IT, YOU KNOW, IT CALLS OUT THE SOUTH 86 FEET OF THE 40 OF THE EAST, 40 FEET OF LOT 18. THAT MEANS THAT THIS WAS SUBDIVIDED NOT THROUGH, UM, A RECORDED MEANS, BUT MOST LIKELY SOLD OFF IN PORTIONS. AND SO IT WASN'T PART OF THE ORIGINAL DESIGN. BUT IF I LOOK AT THIS BLOCK, IT APPEARS THAT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE LOT IT WOULD LOOKS, APPEARS TO BE SUBSTANDARD SMALLER LOTS. AND I'M JUST OBSERVING REALLY THAT WHOLE BLOCK FACE KIND OF LOOKS, OR THAT WHOLE BLOCK KIND OF HAS SIMILAR CONSTRUCTION. SO, BUT AGAIN, IF YOU WERE TO GO TWO DOORS DOWN, THAT IS TYPICALLY THE SIZE OF THE LOT THAT WAS DESIGNATED FOR THIS AREA WHEN IT WAS DESIGNED. OKAY, THANK YOU. YEAH, AND I JUST WANTED TO ADD, ADD ON THAT. SO YEAH, THOSE LOTS WERE LONG RECTANGULAR, BUT AT THIS HARD CORNER WHERE THESE FOUR WERE CREATED, YOU KNOW, THESE THINGS WERE, WERE CONSTRUCTED SO LONG AGO. I MEAN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, 1950 OR EARLIER AND SO IT'S, IT'S JUST SO LONG AGO. YEAH. [02:05:01] MR. BARRINGTON REMAN, I HAVE A SIMILAR PROBLEM, UH, WITH SO MANY LOTS AROUND THIS PARTICULAR LOT. UH, UH, OBVIOUSLY SMALLER THAN R SIX REQUIRES, IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE WHOLE AREA WAS INAPPROPRIATELY ZONED R SIX. NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THE ALTERNATIVE OF APPLYING FOR A ZONING CHANGE IS PROBLEMATIC TOO, BECAUSE THAT WOULD APPEAR TO BE SPOT ZONING ON THAT LOT. SO, UH, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH THAT EXCEPT PERHAPS TO GRANT THE VARIANCE AS AS REQUESTED. SO THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN MAKE USE OF HIS PROPERTY. IT'S, UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. UM, SO MY QUESTION IS HOW MUCH DOES IT COST IN TERMS OF APPLICATION FEES TO REZONE AS OPPOSED TO GETTING THE VARIANCE THROUGH BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? SO THE COST OF REZONING IS APPROXIMATELY $850, I BELIEVE. AND THEN THIS WAS GOING TO, I BELIEVE THIS APPLICATION IS $600 MANA COMMISSIONER MANA. SO, SO BACK IN 97, I GUESS BEFORE THE LAST UDC COMPONENT KIND OF CAME OUT AND THEY DEFINED R ONE AND R SIX, I BELIEVE IS WHEN IT HAPPENED. 'CAUSE THEY DID IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. SO WE HAD A LOT OF HOMES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY R ONE. UM, AND THEN THEY GOT AUTOMATICALLY CHANGED TO R SIXES. AND SO, UM, UM, AND SO, AND I THINK ONE ASSUMPTION WAS BY DEFAULT THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED, BUT THERE WAS ALSO SOME ZONING BY, UM, BY RIGHT SIZING. AND SO THERE WAS NOT NECESSARILY, IT WASN'T NECESSARILY CONSISTENT OF ONE FOR ONE. AND I KNOW THAT SOME CHANGED TO OTHER ZONINGS AND SO IT WAS JUST, JUST MISSED, UM, WITH REGARDS TO ALL THOSE PROPERTIES. AND WERE, YOU KNOW, JUST BY CARTE BLANC JUST MADE R SIXES JUST SIMPLY BECAUSE THAT WAS JUST WHERE THE CITY'S PATH WAS. SO IT DOES LOOK LIKE THAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY C APARTMENT DISTRICT WHEN IT WAS, WHEN ZONING IN 1938 WAS ESTABLISHED. UM, AND THEN IT WAS REZONED IN 2006. I'M JUST DOUBLE CHECKING TO SEE, UM, IF THIS WAS ONE OF THE LARGE AREA REZONINGS. UM, AS PER THE ZONING HISTORY, IT DOES SHOW THAT IT WAS DONE IN 2006. SO I CAN'T SAY FOR CERTAIN HOW THAT WAS COMPLETED. BUT YES, THIS WAS PART OF A LARGE AREA REZONING. SO THERE'S A TECH POSSIBILITY THAT IT WAS SEEN AS SINGLE FAMILY AND JUST TO GIVE IT A CONSISTENT, UM, ZONING AND A LARGE REZONING IS STILL A VIABLE OPTION THAT WE, THAT COULD BE PURSUED BY CITY COUNCIL TO COME BACK INTO THIS AREA. CORRECT. IT'S ALWAYS A POSSIBILITY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, IS THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD? GOOD AFTERNOON. HI. STATE YOUR NAME. TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. ABRAHAM MORALES. UH, MY FATHER'S THE BUILDER FOR THE, FOR THE NEW PROPERTY. AND I'M HERE WITH, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER'S DAUGHTER. YES. HI, MY NAME IS TRACY MYERS. YEAH. CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE, OH, SORRY. MY NAME IS TRACY MYERS AND I AM THE DAUGHTER OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. I'M THE ONE WHO'S GONNA BE BUILDING THERE. ALL RIGHT. UH, YES. I CAME EARLIER, UH, LAST MONTH TO REZONE THE PROPERTY SO WE COULD BE ABLE TO BUILD A HOUSE BECAUSE I CAME FOR AN APPLICATION TO BUILD THE HOUSE, BUT THEY TOLD ME TO REZONE AND THEN I CAME LATER TO, 'CAUSE I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS ON THE APPLICATION AND THEY RECOMMENDED ME TO, TO GET THE VARIANCE. SO, UH, THEY SAID EVERYTHING WAS OKAY TO, TO GO WITH THE VARIANCE. AND IT WOULD BE THE SAME PROCESS, BASICALLY. YEAH, IT'S A LITTLE QUICKER. YEAH, THEY SAID IT WAS, IT WOULD, BECAUSE, UH, THEY GAVE US THE TIMELINE AND THEY SAID IT, UH, IT'LL BE DONE BY, BY AUGUST, HOW THEY SAID. BUT, UM, THEY SAID THAT, UH, SINCE IT WAS ALL IN THE SAME AREA, THAT TO KEEP IT, EVERYTHING CONSISTENT, THAT WE SHOULD JUST GO WITH THE VARIANCE. SO WE, THERE WAS A QUESTION POSED TO STAFF IF, IF, IF THIS WERE TO GET APPROVED TODAY, YOU'RE NOT IN, YOU'RE NOT IN IN ANY WAY DESIRING TO VIOLATE ANY OF THE REQUIRED SETBACKS. NO, NO, SIR. THE, THE PLANS THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, UH, STAY WITHIN THE SETBACKS THAT ARE APPROVED, UH, ROUGHLY THE SAME SIZE AS THE BUILDING RIGHT NOW, THOUGH. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE WOULD BE THAT THE, THE CARPORT THAT'S THERE RIGHT NOW, UM, THAT WOULD BE, UH, PROBABLY CONVERTED TO A GARAGE, BUT LIKE, NOT AS FAR OUT. OKAY. BUT YOU WERE GONNA FULLY DEMO THE HOUSE THAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE SCREEN? YES. OKAY. MR. UNA? NO, I WAS JUST SAYING IF YOU CAN CLOSE THE GARAGE, OBVIOUSLY YOU'D HAVE THIS PICTURE WE'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW DOES NOT COMPLY WITH A SIDE SETBACK [02:10:01] REQUIREMENT. YEAH. SO ANY GARAGE YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO WOULD BE FIVE FEET OFF. YEAH. YES. THE GARAGE WOULD BE FIVE FEET OFF. UH, WE WERE GONNA STAY. CAN YOU TELL ME THE SETBACKS REAL QUICK? REMIND ME OF THEM. FIVE FEET. FIVE FEET. YES. IT WAS GOING TO BE, THAT'S WHAT THE PLANS WERE FOR, IS TO KEEP WITHIN THE SETBACKS. WE DON'T WANNA CHANGE THOSE AT ALL. UM, I'M GLAD THAT YOU BROUGHT UP THE REZONING BECAUSE THAT WAS MY QUESTION IN THE BEGINNING. I THINK WHEN I SPOKE TO, UM, JOEL. JOEL. JOEL IS, I DON'T KNOW WHO, UM, THAT, BUT ANYWAY, HE CALLED ME AND SO I ASKED, WHY IS THERE, WHY IS THIS AN A SIX WHEN IT'S SO TINY COMPARED TO THE OTHERS? AND, UM, HE SAID, IT MUST HAVE BEEN DONE LIKE A LONG TIME AGO. WE'RE NOT SURE. I, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT EVER HAPPENED. 'CAUSE UM, MY MOM USED TO LIVE IN THAT HOUSE WHEN SHE WAS A KID. WELL, GREW UP THERE AND THE YARD, IT WAS THE LOT WAS ALWAYS THAT SIZE. IT WAS NEVER BIGGER. SHE WAS LIKE, WE NEVER SOLD IT OFF. IT WAS JUST ALWAYS A SMALL LOT THAT WE LIVED ON. UM, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW IT GOT ZONED AT, AT A SIX IN THE FIRST PLACE. 'CAUSE THE OTHER LOTS ARE WAY BIGGER. UM, BUT THEN WE HAD ALSO ASKED ABOUT THE REZONING, UM, WHEN I SPOKE TO SOMEONE ON THE PHONE AND SAID, IS THAT THE ROUTE I NEED TO GO? BECAUSE, UM, IF I NEED TO, THEN WE CAN GO THAT ROUTE. OR, BUT THEY SAID, NO, IT'S FINE. JUST YOU CAN GO THROUGH THIS ONE IF YOU EVER WANT, IF YOU WANNA CHANGE THE SETBACKS, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH REZONING. SO THAT'S WHY WE WENT THIS ROUTE INSTEAD. SO JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, WE GIVE EVERY APPLICANT THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AS THEY CAN GO THROUGH. WE'RE VERY CAREFUL NEVER TO TELL THEM WHAT WE PREFER OR KIND OF WHAT WE THINK IS BETTER. UM, WE ALWAYS PRESENT, UM, EVERY APPLICANT THE OPTION. YOU CAN EITHER REZONE THIS IS THE PROCESS FOR REZONING, BUT YOU CAN GO THROUGH BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. THIS IS THE PROCESS FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, MADAM COMMISSIONER MADON. SO IF THIS, UM, SAY, DOES GET AT SOME POINT REZONED TWO OR THREE, UM, DOES THE, UM, SIDE SETBACKS OR, OR ANY OF THE SETBACKS CHANGE WITH REGARDS TO THAT AS WELL? THE REAR SETBACK IS GONNA BE, I BELIEVE, 10 FEET. EVERYTHING ELSE STAYS THE SAME. OKAY. SO, AND SO ONE THING YOU KNOW, THAT I DID IN MY COMMUNITY WAS WENT TO MY COUNCIL PERSON, SAID, HEY, YOU, MY WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD IS MESSED UP WITH REGARDS TO THE ZONING. CAN YOU HELP ME? AND YOU WOULD HELP ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS. SO YOU UNFORTUNATELY ARE THE FIRST ONES HERE. SO YOU'RE THE KIND OF THE, THE FIRST RUN THROUGH. BUT YOU CAN DO A SERVICE TO THE REST OF YOUR COMMUNITY BY MAKING THAT REQUEST TO YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER. IT, IT DOES APPEAR THAT THE, THE VARIOUS, UH, IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THE DIFFERENT BLOCKS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AT THE CORNERS IS WHERE THE LOTS GET, UH, PARCELED OUT REALLY SMALL. RIGHT. SO THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING TO BRING UP AND SINCE IT HAPPENED SO LONG AGO, BUT, UM, YEAH, IF YOU'RE NOT VIOLATING THE SETBACKS, AND IF YOU DO PUT IN A GARAGE, THE FACE WOULD'VE TO BE 20 FEET FROM THE YES. FROM THE FRONT, 20 FEET FROM, YEAH, JUST THE GARAGE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OR FROM THE BACK OF SIDEWALK OR PROPERTY LINE, WHICHEVER. IS, UH, IS THAT TRUE? IS IT FACE A CURB OR, AND, OR BACK OF SIDEWALK? IT COULD BE THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK OR THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICHEVER IS FURTHEST. YEAH. WHICHEVER IS BETTER FOR YOU. 20 FEET FROM GARAGE. THE SIDEWALK FROM, FROM THE, DO YOU HAVE A PUBLIC SIDEWALK ALONG YOUR STREET THERE? YES. RIGHT THERE. OKAY. SO YOU'D HAVE TO GO 20 FEET BEHIND THE BACK OF THAT SIDEWALK IS WHERE YOUR GARAGE WOULD HAVE TO BE. START. START. SO YOUR HOME IS SHOWN TO BE 10 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE FRONT BASED ON YOUR, YOUR APPLICATION. IF YOU WERE TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO SHIFT THAT PORTION OF IT TO THE GARAGE PORTION OF IT BACK A LITTLE BIT. AND WOULD THAT BE THE SAME IF IT WAS AN R THREE? YES. THAT'S A, THAT'S A REQUIREMENT FOR GARAGES. OKAY. SO IF YOU DID WANT IT, IF YOU DESIRED TO PUT THE GARAGE CLOSER, YOU'D HAVE TO COME BACK HERE AND ASK OKAY. THAT QUESTION. OR YOU COULD PUT A CARPORT. OKAY. LOT TO THINK ABOUT. BUT, BUT WE'RE HERE TODAY ABOUT THE SE UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? ANYONE TIME TO SPEAK? ANY VOICEMAILS? WE DO HAVE, UH, TWO SPEAKERS. OH, ALL RIGHT. LET'S HEAR 'EM. UH, LEONARDO LIMAN. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS. I'M VANESSA AS, THIS IS MY MOTHER. OH, YOU HAVE TO. OH, I'M VANESSA, AND THIS IS MY MOTHER. I'M RACHEL MALANO. I LIVE IN THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR. OKAY. WELL, WHAT DO YOU THINK? WELL, I THINK THE BIGGEST, THE BIGGEST CONCERN WAS THE STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING ITSELF, NOT CREATING ANY PRIVACY FOR THEM LIVING THERE. NOW THERE'S CURRENTLY A STRUCTURE ON THE RIGHT SIDE. IT'S AN 8,000 FOOT LOT. THEY JUST BUILD ON THAT ONE. IT'S A HUGE TWO STORY, PROBABLY OVER 2,500 SQUARE FEET. UM, BUT THEY HAVE THE LOT FOR IT. THIS LOT IS ONLY, WHAT, 3000 AND SOME CHANGE OF SQUARE FEET. SO DEPENDING ON HOW BIG OF THE STRUCTURE IS, THAT'S THE CONCERN TO FEEL COMPLETELY BOXED IN. NO PRIVACY. IF ANY EMERGENCY VEHICLES NEEDED TO COME IN. MY GRANDFATHER'S 95 YEARS OLD, WE'D HATE TO HAVE CARS UP AND DOWN THE STREET [02:15:01] WHERE EMERGENCY VEHICLES CAN'T GET THERE. AND SO JUST THINKING ABOUT THAT. AND THEN OF COURSE, PROPERTY VALUES AS WELL, YOU KNOW, WITH TWO HUGE HOUSES ENCOMPASSING A SMALL HOUSE, HOW THAT AFFECTS THE PROPERTY VALUES TOO. SO JUST A FEW CONCERNS THERE. UM, MOSTLY BECAUSE THE, UH, THE HOME NEXT TO US HAS BUILT OUR HOME EVEN THAT'S RIGHT. AS CALLED FURTHER UP BY THE SIDEWALK. YEAH. SO IF I WANNA GO OUT THERE, I LITERALLY HAVE TO WALK TO THE SIDEWALK SO I CAN SEE IF YOU KNOW WHERE I'M COMING OR IF YOU PULL OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY, YOU REALLY CAN'T SEE ON THE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE. SO YOU, YOU, YOU RESIDE AT TWO 11 HELENA? YEAH. OKAY. AND THE OTHER HOME THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT, THAT'S A LARGE TWO STORY, WHICH IS THAT RIGHT NEXT DOOR ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OR, OR THOSE MM-HMM . OR THE ONE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. TWO 15, RIGHT? TWO 15. OKAY. ALRIGHT. OKAY. AND IS THERE ANY, UH, RES UH, PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON YOUR STREET? ANY NO PARKING SIGNS OR ANYTHING? NO. OKAY. NO, AGAIN, BIGGEST CONCERN IS JUST IF IT'S WITHIN THE SETBACKS. I MEAN, OF COURSE, BUILD, YOU KNOW, UM, WE, WE WANNA IMPROVE THE, THE COMMUNITY, OF COURSE, SEEING IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. BUT DEPENDING ON HOW LARGE THAT STRUCTURE IS, I MEAN, THAT'S JUST GONNA SWALLOW THE HOUSE AND GIVE NO PRIVACY. OKAY. THE, THE CURRENTLY THERE ARE SIX SETBACKS. IT'S 10 FEET IN THE FRONT MINIMUM, 20 IN THE REAR, FIVE ON EACH SIDE. THAT'S, THERE'S ALREADY A CARPORT THERE, THERE'S ALREADY A CARPORT THERE. AND WE'RE NOT ABLE TO OPEN THE WINDOW BECAUSE APPARENTLY THE GUTTERS FELL DOWN. MM-HMM . SO THE WATER RUNS INTO INSIDE THE, THE HOUSE. WELL, THE, THE APPLICANT STATED THEY WERE GONNA DE DEMOLISH THAT HOME AND RECONSTRUCT IT. YEAH. AND, AND UNDER THE NEW, GETTING NEW PERMITS, THEY WOULD MOST LIKELY, WELL, NOT MOST LIKELY THEY WOULD BE, YEAH. REVIEWED AND SCRUTINIZED AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF. UH, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKERS? SO, AND SO, AND SO LOOKING AT THE PICTURE, YOU KNOW, DRIVE BY, IT DOES APPEAR THAT THE CURRENT CARPORT THAT IS THERE IS NOT COMPLIANT. AND, UM, AND SO THAT WOULD BE REMOVED AND GIVEN FIVE FEET AWAY. UH, UM, WHICH IS BY RIGHT FROM, WITH REGARDS TO CODE COMPLIANCE. AND SO, SO THAT SHOULD MITIGATE THE ONE QUESTION WITH REGARD OR WE ALWAYS LOOK FOR THAT MUCH SPACE WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO MITIGATE, YOU KNOW, UH RIGHT. DRAINAGE ONTO IT, ABUTTING PROPERTIES. AND SO, SO, SO THAT SOUNDS LIKE THAT MAY ADDRESS THE PROBLEM OR THE QUESTION THAT YOU HAD. ARE THERE ANY RESTRICTIONS AS FAR AS THE SIZE OF THE HOME TO BE BUILT ON THAT PLOT? IT CAN'T EXCEED THE SETBACKS. AND IS THERE A 50% RULE IN THE FRONT, RIGHT FRONT YARD? UH, 50%. WELL, AGAIN, AS UM, COMMISSIONER ORIEN STATED, IT HAS TO BE WITHIN THE SETBACKS, WHICH IS FIVE ON THE SIDES, 10 IN THE FRONT, 20 IN THE REAR, UM, FOR THE EXISTING R SIX THERE. AS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL BUILDING SIZE, THERE'S NOT A STIPULATION THERE, BUT ANYTHING IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS, UH, COMMISSIONER ORIAN WAS SAYING FIF ONLY 50% OF IT CAN BE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, MEANING, UH, DRIVEWAYS AND SIDEWALKS. RIGHT? YEAH. BUT THE HOUSE ITSELF CAN BE, UM, TWO AND A HALF STORIES, CORRECT? CORRECT. SO, SO THEY COULD PUT IN A TWO AND A HALF STORY HOME. UM, THERE, SO THERE'S NOTHING THAT WE CAN, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, BUT YES. YEAH, WE CAN'T STOP 'EM FROM BUILDING A TWO STORY. OH, THAT'S FINE. AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T, AS LONG AS IT'S WITHIN THE SETBACKS, WE'RE FINE. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. APPRECIATE Y'ALL. THANK YOU. UH, IS THERE ANY, UH, THE OTHER SPEAKER, UH, VANESSA MALDONADO? NO, NOT READY. THAT'S ALL. ALRIGHT. NO VOICEMAILS A CHAIR. THAT'S ALL PUBLIC COMMENT? YES. COMMISSIONER DEAN. IS THE HOUSE HISTORICAL, LIKE, UH, THEY HAVE TO KEEP LIKE THE FACADE OR THE ROOF STRUCTURE OR, IT'S NOT IN A HISTORICAL DISTRICT, BUT OHP WILL HAVE TO REVIEW AS PART OF A DEMOLITION PERMIT. OKAY. IT'S WHAT ANYTHING OLDER THAN 25 YEARS IT GETS TAGGED OR 30 YEARS OR SOMETHING. I, I BELIEVE IT'S ALL OF 'EM. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION ANY DEMOLITION. YES, OHP IS INVOLVED. OKAY. JUST CHECKING. SO HERE YOU GO. THANKS FOR THAT CLARITY. ALL RIGHT. IF, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. WELL, COULD I ASK A QUESTION? YES. COMMISSIONER PPLICANT, COULD THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP? COME BACK UP, SIR. AND WE DO ALSO HAVE SOME, UH, LAST MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT THE APPLICANT JUST PROVIDED 'EM TO GET IT ON THE PROJECTOR RIGHT NOW. OKAY. I I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY THAT THE BUILDING WAS GONNA BE ON THE SAME FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING HOUSE. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. UH, WE INCLUDED THE CARPORT IN AS PART OF THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT. OKAY. TO BE CHANGED BECAUSE YES, YES, YES. OKAY. SO THAT SORT OF ANSWERS THE QUESTIONS FROM THE NEIGHBOR, CORRECT? YES. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND THIS, UH, LATE NOTICE, THE FIRST ONE IS WITHIN 200 FEET. [02:20:04] CAN YOU SHOW IT ON THE, ON OUR MONITORS HERE? AND THE SECOND ONE IS ALSO WITHIN 200 FEET. CAN YOU BRING THAT? THERE YOU GO. BOTH OF THEM INDICATING A THIRD ONE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIRD ONE, ALSO WITHIN 200 FEET. ALL RIGHT. LOOKING FOR A MOTION. STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH TWO FIVE DASH OH 3 0 1 3 1. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, 2,130 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 6,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE TO ALLOW FOR A DEVELOPMENT OF 3,870 SQUARE FOOT LOT SITUATED 2 0 7 HELINA STREET, APPLICANT BEING ARMANDO ZU ZCI ZERO TUCCI. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE OPEN SPACE PRESERVED AND MAINTAINS ADEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR CIRCULATION. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE, WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE THE SUBSTANDARD LOT SIZE PRESENT PREVENTS ANY REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING, REGARDLESS OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE UDC STANDARDS, WITH OTHER, OTHER UDC STANDARDS. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE HOME WILL MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FRONT SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS. 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 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 EXISTING HOME IS SITUATED ON ONE OF FOUR SUBSTANDARD LOTS IN THE INTERMEDIATE AREA IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. SIX. 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 MERELY FINANCIAL, FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE PROPERTY WAS SUBDIVIDED INTO A, INTO A SUBSTANDARD LAW, AND, AND THE HOME HAS BEEN HISTORICALLY ESTABLISHED SINCE 1930. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BAGMAN. COMMISSIONER STEVENS, I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. UH, I THINK THAT THIS IS A PRETTY TYPICAL THING IN THIS PART OF TOWN. UM, OBVIOUSLY A HOUSE CAN BE BUILT ON THIS LOT AS THERE'S A HOUSE THERE TODAY. AND IF THEY'RE MEETING REQUIRED SETBACKS, I THINK THAT THE, WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN PROPOSED PLAN MEETS THIS OF R SIX, WHICH IS MEDIUM TO HIGH INTENSITY, SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. SO I'LL BE IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER BAGMAN. I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. UM, IN ADDITION TO THAT, UH, IT'LL BE A NICE BRAND NEW BUILDING, UM, IMPROVED PROPERTY VALUE. SO, UH, I THINK IT'S A WIN-WIN FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CITY. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD HEARING UNANIM? I HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MANANA. I CON I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER UNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BONNIS? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINAL OF FACT MOTION PASSAGE UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU GET WITH STAFF. LAST ITEM, ITEM 10. ALRIGHTY. ITEM NUMBER 10 IS CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 3 3. THE ADDRESS BEING 1 1 9 2 6 RAIL DRIVE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT 10. THE APPLICANT IS MARK HILL, AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 30 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW FOR A 25 FOOT SIX INCH FRONT SETBACK LIMITED TO THE 100 FEET WIDTH OF THE SOUTHERNMOST BUILDING. THE ZONING IS I ONE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED JUST WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH WIEDER ROAD AND WBA PARKWAY. THE BUILDING RECEIVED A COMMERCIAL BUILDING PERMIT IN OCTOBER OF 2023, AND THE SETBACK STANDARD WAS NOT CAUGHT DURING ZONING. TECHNICAL REVIEW, UH, SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ARE ELIMINATED [02:25:01] WHEN ABUTTING A NON-RESIDENTIAL USE OR ZONED LOT. UH, HOWEVER, THAT DOES NOT APPLY TO THE FRONT SETBACK, WHICH IS A MINIMUM 30 FEET. THE PROPERTY IS IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INDUSTRIAL CUL-DE-SAC SURROUNDED BY INDUSTRIAL USES AND A RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY TO THE REAR. APPROXIMATELY SIX TO EIGHT FEET OF DRIVEWAY EXISTS PAST THE PROPERTY LINE PRIOR TO THE STREET. AND SO THAT KIND OF, UH, IS EXHIBITED HERE BY THAT SITE PLAN. AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SOUTHERNMOST BUILDING, BUILDING NUMBER THREE. UH, THIS WAS SUBMITTED AS YOU CAN SEE BY THE RED WATERMARK IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THAT SITE PLAN. THIS WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY CITY STAFF. UNFORTUNATELY, THAT FRONT SETBACK WAS NOT IDENTIFIED AS NON-COMPLIANT AT THE TIME OF REVIEW. UH, AND THIS IS JUST A CLOSER LOOK HERE JUST TO SHOW AGAIN THAT SITE, UH, THAT FRONT SETBACK, UH, AND THE EXISTING DISTANCE BETWEEN THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE FRONT OF THE SIDEWALK AND THE WIDTH OF THAT RIGHT OF WAY. AND HERE'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT BUILDING THREE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE. SO THAT PROPERTY LINE WOULD EXIST SOMEWHERE WITHIN THAT, UH, HOPEFULLY SOON TO BE GREEN SPACE, UH, BEFORE GETTING TO THAT SIDEWALK THERE. AND THE SURROUNDING AREA, AGAIN, THIS IS AN INDUSTRIAL CUL-DE-SAC STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 1 3 3 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE ADDITIONAL SPACE EXISTS PAST THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE PRIOR TO THE STREET TO VISUALLY INCREASE THE FRONT SETBACK AND NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. TWO, THE IRREGULARLY SHAPED LOT LIMITS THE SPACE IN THE REAR TO PROPERLY ABIDE BY THE FRONT SETBACK. STAFF MAILED OUT 12 NOTICES. ONE WAS RECEIVED IN FAVOR. THAT'S THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH, UH, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN THE NOTIFICATION AREA. AND HERE IS THE NOTICE OF FAVOR THAT WE, UH, RECEIVED. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. I SAY THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR SETBACK. UH, MY NAME IS MARK HILL. I'M REPRESENTING, UH, MR. MULLENS ON THE PROPERTY. UH, WE WENT THROUGH SEVERAL ROUNDS OF, UH, PLATTING. IT WAS AN OLD PLAT WITH A 25 FOOT SETBACK ON IT. WE RE PLATTED IT, MAINTAINED EVERYTHING. JUST TOOK AWAY THE INTERIOR LOTS INTO ONE BIG LOT. UH, 25 FOOT SETBACK STILL ON THE PLAT, JUST WASN'T CAUGHT DURING THE RE PLAT. AND THAT JUST PROPAGATED THROUGH THE SITE PLAN REVIEW AND THEN THE BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW. OUR, OUR INTENT WAS TO COMPLY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE WITH THE 25 FOOT. WE STILL MOVE THE BUILDING BACK SO WE WOULDN'T ENCROACH THE SETBACK LINE. AND IT WASN'T UNTIL, UH, YOU KNOW, A POTENTIAL BUYER SLASH LEASER HEY, UH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT MEETING THE ZONING REQUIREMENT. IT WAS WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. UM, WE, WE APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR, UH, CONSIDERATION ON THIS MATTER AS, UH, IT'S, WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF, IT'S DONE. THE BUILDING'S THERE, UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE DOING THE, THEY'RE SCHEDULED TO DO THEIR LANDSCAPING AND, AND THEIR BUILD OUT ON THE, THE ELECTRICAL. SO, UH, KIND OF IN A ROUGH SPOT HERE WITH A BUILDING THAT'S FAIRLY LARGE. IT WOULD BE, UH, VERY DIFFICULT AT THIS POINT TO MAKE ANY KIND OF REMEDY. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS ANYONE SEND TO SPEAK? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION O ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 3 3. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 30 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A 25 FOOT SIX INCH FRONT SETBACK LIMITED TO THE A HUNDRED FOOT WIDTH OF THE SOUTH SOUTHERN MO BUILDING, SITUATED AT 11 9 2 6 RAIL DRIVE, APPLICANT BEING MARK HILL. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT WHEN THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, A SUFFICIENT SPACE WILL REMAIN FOR THE PROPER FRONT SETBACK. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE SPACE IN THE REAR IS LIMITED DUE TO THE SHAPE OF THE LOT. AND I WOULD ADD THAT THE, UH, IMPROVEMENTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE, UH, ERROR THAT WAS NOT CAUGHT IN THE ORIGINAL, UH, SUBMITTALS THAT WERE PRESENTED TO THE CITY. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND, AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS ONLY A LIMITED FRACTION OF THE REQUIRED FRONT SETBACK WOULD BE REDUCED. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OR THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. WHEN THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED, NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF [02:30:01] ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHEN THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. AS SPACE EXISTS PAST THE PROPERTY LINE PRIOR TO THE STREET, THAT WOULD APPEAR TO INCREASE THE FRONT SETBACK. AND SIX, THE PLIGHT THAT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH THE VARIANCE OF SAW IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. THEY'RE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, STAFF FINDS THAT APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS VARIANCE OF SAW IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE SPACE THAT EXISTS PAST THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO THE STREET AND THE IRREGULAR IRREGULAR SHAPE OF THE LOT AND OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. YEP. SO I'M GONNA BE IN FULL SUPPORT OF THE VARIANCE. UH, THE APPLICANT HAD EVERY INTENTION TO MEET EVERY, UH, CONDITION OF THE UDC AND HE, UH, MADE TESTIMONY TO US TODAY THAT THEY SUBMITTED, UH, THE PLAN AND PLATS THAT, UH, UNFORTUNATELY CARRIED THROUGH THIS ERROR. THERE WAS NO, UM, MAL WILL IN ON THE APPLICANT'S INTENT. AND THE, I THINK THE HARDSHIP HERE IS THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ALREADY COMPLETED AND TO, UH, KIND OF CORRECT THIS, UM, SETBACK WOULD BE A, UH, A VERY COSTLY A HARDSHIP FOR THE APPLICANT. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, UH, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE APPLICANT STATED THAT THEY WERE THE ONES THAT BROUGHT FORTH THE, UH, THE VARIANTS THAT NEEDED TO BE, UH, SOUGHT. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. ALRIGHT, IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD, I'M GONNA GO ON A LIMB AND ASK FOR A VOICE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR ON THIS, SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY, . ALRIGHT. UH, LAST ITEM IS THE MINUTES. [ Approval of Minutes  ] UM, I DIDN'T SEE ANY CORRECTIONS NEEDED, UH, ON MY REVIEW, SO, UH, VOTE FOR APPROVAL. I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MAN. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARRINGTON. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AND ANY OPPOSED? ANY OPPOSED HEARING NONE. MOTION PASSES. THAT BRINGS US [ Director’s Report  ] TO DIRECTOR'S REPORT. MR. CHAIR. I DO HAVE AN UPDATE. UH, I WANTED TO MAKE EVERYONE AWARE THAT, UM, OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL WEEKS THERE'S GONNA BE SOME TRANSITIONING. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU HAVE HEARD, BUT MICHAEL SHANNON WILL BE MOVING TO CAPITAL DELIVERY DEPARTMENT, WHICH WILL BE A NEW DEPARTMENT SPECIFICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH BOND PROJECTS, UM, FOR HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL PROJECTS. SO HE WILL BE THE NEW DIRECTOR OVER THAT DEPARTMENT WITH THAT SHIFT, UM, AMIN TAMEZ WILL BE OUR DIRECTOR FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. I'M GOING TO BE THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, WHICH MEANS WE ARE ALL SHIFTING. AND LOGAN SPARROW IS THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR. SO UNFORTUNATELY LOGAN HAD TO LEAVE, UH, THIS AFTERNOON, BUT I STUCK AROUND HERE TO HELP DELIVER THE MESSAGE. I WANNA THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR OPPORTUNITY OF WORKING WITH ME AND, UM, SHARING YOUR EXPERIENCES. THIS HAS BEEN, UM, A VERY LONG JOURNEY BEING ON THE LAND DEVELOPMENT SIDE. SO NOW I WILL BE SHIFTING OVER TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT AND FIELD SERVICES DIVISION. AND THIS IS, THIS IS NOT AN INTERIM ONE LIKE YOU DID WITH THE, UH, ANIMAL DEPARTMENT. THIS IS THAT IS CORRECT. PERMANENT. THIS IS A PERMANENT APPOINTMENT THAT OCCURRED, UM, OFFICIALLY WE'LL TAKE EFFECT OCTOBER 1ST, BUT WE'RE ALREADY TRANSITIONING RESPONSIBILITIES. IN OUTTA CURIOSITY, WHAT DID THE TASKS THAT HE'S GOING TO OPERATE DID THAT, DID THAT USED TO BE DONE BY PUBLIC WORKS OR TCI OR? RIGHT. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF MANY OF YOU RECALL, BUT THERE USED TO BE A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ALONG WITH THAT RAN PARALLEL WITH PUBLIC WORKS. AT SOME POINT IN TIME THEY BECAME ONE. AND NOW WE'RE UM, I GUESS SEPARATING THE DEPARTMENTS INTO TWO. I STILL CALL IT TCI SOMETIMES THOUGH TCI, UH, TRANSPORTATION AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. SO YES, MANY DIFFERENT NAMES. THE DEPARTMENTS ARE SPLITTING AGAIN AND THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR THAT THEY ARE ADVERTISING. UM, ERIC DID MENTION THAT IT'S BEEN ADVERTISED AND I THINK THEY'RE LOOKING TO FILL THAT POSITION FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. BUT MICHAEL SHANNON WILL BE THE DIRECTOR OF CAPITAL DELIVERY DEPARTMENT. WOW. WELL THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S GOOD. UM, I HOPE, WISH Y'ALL LUCK AND I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR SO LONG. YOU'RE GONNA BE FINE. UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER CHANGES WITH THE STAFF? ANYBODY ELSE? UH, AT THIS POINT I THINK THAT'S ALL THAT IS CHANGING. UM, IF THERE ARE ANY ADDITIONAL CHANGES, WE WILL BE SURE TO MAKE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS, UM, ON THAT. BUT I'M STILL HERE IN THE DEPARTMENT. IF YOU NEED ANYTHING, SEVERAL OF YOU STILL HAVE MY CONTACT INFORMATION. I'M STILL AVAILABLE. OF COURSE. LOGAN SPARROW IS, UM, WELL VERSED IN LAND DEVELOPMENT. YEAH. SO HE'LL BE RIGHT. FIT RIGHT IN. AND HOW ARE WE DOING ON REAPPOINTMENTS? UH, REAPPOINTMENTS, I BELIEVE THOUGH THERE'S SOME OUT THERE THAT ARE STILL CIRCULATING. UM, I KNOW THERE'S HAS BEEN MANY FOR ZONING COMMISSION. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY COMING OUT FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY REACH OUT TO THE COUNCIL OFFICE TO FOLLOW UP. YEAH. 'CAUSE WE, SOME, [02:35:01] SOME, THERE'S ONLY ONE ZONING. ONE ZONING THE LAST, UH, COUNCIL MEETING I THINK. SO ONE PERSON IN ZONING AND EVERYBODY ELSE IS SOMEBODY ELSE, SO YEAH. YEAH, YEAH. THIS IS, THIS IS, UH, THERE'S SEVERAL, I THINK ON THE, UM, THIS THURSDAY'S AGENDA TO BE APPOINTED OR REAPPOINTED FOR ZONING. OKAY. I, I GOT REAPPOINTED ON THURSDAY LAST WEEK, SO I, I GUESS, UH, I LOVE THESE FIVE HOUR MEETINGS. , HOW DID YOU FIND OUT ABOUT YOUR REAPPOINTMENT? HOW DID YOU THEY CALLED AND OKAY. AND ASKED IF I WANTED TO GO TO THE MEETING. AND I DON'T KNOW, THE CLERK'S OFFICE TYPICALLY LEADS THOSE CONVERSATIONS. UM, AS THE, THE COUNCIL OFFICE IS THE ONE WHO APPOINTS PLANNING COMMISSION. WE DO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INVOLVED BECAUSE THOSE ARE AT LARGE APPOINTMENTS. UH, BUT THESE, YOU'RE APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL OFFICE. SO THE COUNCIL OFFICE WOULD TAKE THE LEAD AND THEN OF COURSE THE CLERK'S OFFICE. SO IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY, CONTACT YOUR COUNSEL OFFICE AND TOUCH BASE. ALRIGHT, WELL THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S IT. IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE NO SIR. THAT WOULD BE ALL FOR ME. RIGHT? IT IS. OH, THERE'S STILL A THREE IN FRONT OF IT. 3 46. WE ADJOURN. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.