* 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. [00:00:02] OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IT IS ONE OH TWO. I HEREBY CALL THIS MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS INTO SESSION. WE HAVE THE SPANISH INTERPRETER COME OUT PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, STAFF IF YOU COULD PLEASE CALL ROLL. COMMISSIONER REED PRESENT. COMMISSIONER STEVENS. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ PRESENT. COMMISSIONER DEAN PRESENT. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. HERE. HERE. COMMISSIONER . COMMISSIONER GOMEZ. COMMISSIONER MENA PRESENT. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN PRESENT. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES. COMMISSIONER OZUNA PRESENT. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ PRESENT, COMMISSIONER EZ. CHAIR ORIAN. AND I'M PRESENT. UH, WE CURRENTLY HAVE NINE, BUT WE'RE EXPECTING TWO MORE TO JOIN UH, MOMENTARILY. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, IF ANYONE COULD PLEASE UH, STAND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH STANDS? ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVIDUAL WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD. ALRIGHT, [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items  ] SO BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I'D LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION. THIS BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. THE CASES ARE LISTED BY A NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND THE STREET ADDRESS. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT. LASTLY, AS CHERYL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS, I ASK THAT THE BOARD MEMBER SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS A CHAIR AND I'LL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE MEETING. WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY'S ZONING CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THIS AREA. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY, NOT A COURT OF LAW. WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELIEF SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32, THE HERE AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. WE ALSO SERVE IN AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES WHEN THE REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 28 DASH FIVE. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR CASES AND OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS. THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY'LL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ANY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER. AFTER EVERYONE HAS HEARD THE CASE WILL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION. EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION. IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY. IT REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND GRANTING THE RELEASE SOUGHT REST WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS ON WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF COULD BE LEGALLY GRANTED IN SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S. DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE AND LET THE RECORD SHOW UH, 1 0 6. UH, COMMISSIONER STEVENS UH, HAS JOINED THE MEETING AND COMMISSIONER BENI AS WELL. UH, DIGITALLY, UH, STAFF THANK YOU. STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST. PRIOR PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA IT TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXEMPTION AND PROPERTIES WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHECK MARKS. INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF REQUESTS X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION AND ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR REQUEST FOR THOSE ASSIGNMENTS TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST OR PROPOSED VARIANCE FOR SPECIAL EXEMPTION. YOU'LL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER THAT YOU SIGN UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER. YOU'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION FOR THOSE I'D LIKE TO GIVE UP THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER. THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED OF MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE GIVING UP THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES. THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND [00:05:01] 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 ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. YES. UH, SO I UNDERSTAND THAT ITEM ONE HAS BEEN POSTPONED AND THAT ITEM FIVE IS REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE TILL JANUARY 26. IF STAFF COULD DO A BRIEF PRESENTATION ON ITEM FIVE. SO ITEM FIVE IS, UH, AND REAL QUICK, UH, COMMISSIONER BONNI, CAN YOU, UH, HEAR US? CAN YOU GIVE US A SOUND CHECK REAL QUICK? YOU CAN UNMUTE YOURSELF. OH, LEMME READ, UH, ITEM FIVE. UM, TESTING. TESTING? YEP, WE CAN HEAR YOU. CAN YOU HEAR US, SIR? . ALL RIGHT. UM, ITEM FIVE BO 8 25 1 0 3 0 0 2 3 8. REQUEST BY SO GONZALEZ FOR A THREE FOOT SPECIAL FOOT FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXEMPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT PRIVACY FENCE TO ALLOW SIX FOOT FRONT YARD PRIVACY FENCE AND A 10 FOOT VARI FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY. CLEAR VISION TO ALLOW. FIVE FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION LOCATED 93 10 MAGNOLIA GROVE STAFF. RECOMMENDED DENIAL IN DISTRICT FOUR AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE TO JANUARY 26TH. ALRIGHT, IS, IS THERE A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO JANUARY 26TH? SO MOVED. SECOND AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION PASSES. ITEM IS CONTINUED TO JANUARY 26TH. UH, WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER TWO. GOOD. A GOOD AFTERNOON Y'ALL. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER BO OA 2 5 1 0 3 1 9 5 AND IT WAS CONTINUED FROM 11 17 25. IT IS ADDRESSED OFF 6 0 2 6 0 6 NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS AND 1513 DAWSON STREET. IT'S COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO. THE APPLICANT IS ISKANDER . THE REQUEST IS AN ELIMINATION OF THE REQUIRED 200 FOOT SEPARATION TO ALLOW THE USE OF A MOBILE FOOD COURT WITHIN 200 FEET OF A RESIDENTIAL LOT OR USE. THE ZONING IS C TWO. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS AND DAWSON STREET. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW MOBILE FOOD COURT ON THE THREE CURRENT VACANT LOTS. THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT MOBILE FOOD COURTS BE ESTABLISHED NO CLOSE WITHIN 200 FEET OF ANY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE OR SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT. THE CURRENT DISTANCE TO TO THE RESIDENTIAL LOT IS ZERO AS THE NEXT DOOR LOT IS ZONED. R FOUR, UH, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT AND IS USED AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN BO OA TWO FIVE DASH 103 9 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE, ELIMINATING THE RESIDENTIAL SEPARATION. INJURE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AS IT DOES NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT DISTANCE BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL USES INTENDED FOR PROTECTION FROM POTENTIAL NOISE AND LIGHT POLLUTION. AND TWO, THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY REDUCE THE NUMBER OF, UH, PROPOSED MOBILE FOOD COURT ESTABLISHMENT TO ALLOW THE MAXIMUM TO OPERATE WITHOUT A VARIANCE APPROVAL. THERE WERE 26 NOTICES MAILED SIX IN FAVOR AND TWO IN OPPOSITION. BOTH OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE IN DENIAL. UH, WE ASKED AGAIN, UH, AND THEY SENT ANOTHER DENIAL LETTER. SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE, THESE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE IN SUPPORT AND THIS IS THE ORIGINAL DENIAL LETTERS. AND THEN THEY SENT UPDATED ONES, UH, ON THE 17TH, I BELIEVE, THE MORNING OF THE 17TH AND THE 16TH. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. YOU'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS . UH, LAST TIME WHEN I LEFT I DID GET IN TOUCH WITH THE TWO LADIES, THE ONE THEY OPPOSED AND THEY, UH, RECOMMEND FOR ME TO GO TO THE A RC CHAIR BECAUSE THEY REALLY CANNOT MAKE THE DECISION. I SAID, NO PROBLEM. I DID REACH OUT TO MS. LULU, FRANK COY, HOPEFULLY I GOT IT RIGHT. AND, UH, WE UH, CONTACT A COUPLE OF TIMES AND WE WERE ON ZOOM WITH ANOTHER TWO OR THREE LADIES TOGETHER AND UH, THEY ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND I PRETTY MUCH ANSWERED EVERY QUESTION THEY ASK. AND SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THEY WERE WORRY ABOUT IS HOW THE TRASH GONNA BE PICKED UP, THE PARKING, WHICH IS, I ANSWERED ALL THE QUESTIONS. AND THEN THE LAST THING THEY WANNA KNOW THE HOURS OF OPERATION AND I GAVE THEM THE HOURS OF OPERATIONS, WHAT TIME WE GONNA OPEN, WHAT TIME WE GONNA CLOSE? AND THEN THEY ASKED ME HOW MANY FOOD TRUCKS I'M PLANNING. I SAID, RIGHT NOW MY, IT'S BETWEEN EIGHT AND 10 AND PRETTY MUCH THEY ADJUSTED. HOW ABOUT IF YOU [00:10:01] DO FOUR, START WITH FOUR AND THEN YOU CAN BUILD ON IT AND SEE HOW THAT GOES. I'M OKAY WITH, I TOLD THEM I WILL LOOK INTO IT ABSOLUTELY SHOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM TO LOOK AT IT. I CAN START WITH FOUR AND SEE HOW THAT GOES AND, AND GO FROM THERE. AT THE MEANTIME, WHILE WE ARE DOING THAT, CAN YOU PUT THIS ON THE SCREEN PLEASE? I KNOW WE HAVE THIS CIRCLE SO WE CAN COVER THE 200 FEET. I KNOW THERE'S ABOUT SIX, THEY SEND LETTERS, BUT I DID GO OUT TO EVERY ADDRESS AND I GOT ALL THEIR SIGNATURES, EVERY ADDRESS, AND THEY ALL PRETTY MUCH, UH, THEY ALL PRETTY MUCH ALL EXCITED. THERE'S NOT ONE SINGLE RESIDENT IN THAT CIRCLE, EXCUSE ME, ONE SINGLE RESIDENT. THEY SAY, NO, WE DON'T LIKE IT. EVERYBODY PRETTY MUCH EXCITED UH, WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING OVER THERE. I THINK IT'S SOMETHING GOOD FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND UM, WILLING TO DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET THAT THINGS MOVING ON, ON THE RIGHT TRACK IN THAT AREA. OKAY. UH, TWO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. UH, ON THE PRESENTATION WHERE THERE WAS A, WHERE THE GREEN CHECK MARKS ARE IN SUPPORT, SOME OF THE CHECK MARKS ARE, UH, STRADDLING A LOT LINE. IS THAT IN, IS THAT UH, INDIVIDUALS WHO OWN PIECE PIECES OF A LOT OR IS THAT, UH, OKAY, SO THE, SO 15, 17 AND 1523 ARE, ARE IN SUPPORT BUT NOT 1527? YEAH. YEAH. I'M NOT SURE WHY IT APPEARS THAT WAY, BUT WHEN I HAD IT ON MY COMPUTER IT WAS ON THE FULL LOT LINE. OKAY. AND SECONDLY, UM, WE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT OF HIS DISCUSSION TO LIMIT IT TO FOUR, ARE WE ALLOWED TO IMPOSE A CONDITION ON THIS APPROVAL TO FOUR WE'RE NOT. OKAY. SO I'M PUTTING THAT OUT THERE FOR EVERYBODY. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO I GUESS, UM, WHAT IS THE MAX THAT CAN BE AT THIS LOCATION? SO I GUESS THERE'S THREE LOTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. AND SO THERE'S, IS THERE A MAX PER LOT? UH, IT'S TWO, UH, WOULD BE, UH, REGULAR FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT. ONCE THEY GO ABOVE TWO, THEN IT'S CONSIDERED MOBILE FOOD COURT AND I BELIEVE IT IS 10 MAXIMUM. OKAY. SO, SO, UM, SO IT'S THREE LOTS. SO WOULD IT BE FOR THAT ENTIRE SPACE THAT WOULD BE A MAX OR IS IT, UM, THAT WOULD BE THE NUMBER PER PER LOT WITH THE THREE LOTS. SO IN OTHER WORDS, BY RIGHT, IT'S SIX ON THIS, ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, CORRECT. YEAH. YES. AND THEN IF HE HAS THREE LOTS, HE CAN DO SIX BY. RIGHT. UM, OBVIOUSLY HE HAS TO MEET ALL THE OTHER STANDARDS OF PARKING AND ALL THAT STUFF, WHICH I THINK THERE MIGHT BE AN ISSUE WITH THE SMALL LOTS BUT SIX BY RIGHT. UM, AND TWO AND BY THREE LOTS WOULD BE 18. I'M SORRY, HE'S SAYING TWO PER LOT. SO SIX BY RIGHT. TWO PER LOT, WHICH IS BY RIGHT BY. SO IT'D BE SIX. CORRECT. OKAY. BUT HE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH SOME SIGNIFICANT WORK ON LIKE DIVVYING UP THE PROPERTY INTO THREE SEPARATE UNITS, WHATNOT, UM, AND MEETING THOSE REGULATIONS. AND IF WE APPROVE THIS THEN IT'S HOW MANY PER LOT? 10 AT A MAX. 10 AT A MAX PER LOT. SO 30. CORRECT. OKAY. SO, OKAY. SO ARE YOU, SO THE APPLICANT, ARE YOU PLATTING THIS AS ONE LOT OR MULTIPLE LOTS? UH, RIGHT NOW I'M NOT DOING ANYTHING TO SEE WHAT WE ARE GONNA DO. I'M PLANNING AT SOME POINT TO PLOT IT ALL ONE LOT, BUT, UH, NOT AT THE MOMENT RIGHT NOW. OKAY. BUT JUST THE QUESTION TO ANSWER, UH, I THINK 30 TRUCKS, IT'S WAY TOO MANY FOR THAT LOT. AND I REALLY WANNA STICK WITH EIGHT MAXIMUM 10. THAT'S MY GOAL NOT TO GO AND EXCEED THE EIGHT OR 10. THAT'S MY GOAL FOR NOW. OKAY. WHAT, WHAT I'M HEARING, UH, FROM, FROM STAFF AND FROM THE APPLICANT IS THAT IF HE WERE TO PLOT THIS AS TWO LOTS, HE COULD DO FOUR, WHICH IS WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SEEMED TO, DIDN'T WANTED TO TRY OUT FIRST. UH, WHICH WOULD MEAN THAT HE COULD THEN AT THAT TIME COME BACK TO US IF HE WANTED TO GET MORE WITH POTENTIALLY A SUPPORT LETTER FROM THE NEIGHBOR AS, BUT IT, IT'S ACTUALLY THREE LOTS. SO HE COULD HAVE SIX AT THIS POINT. HE COULD, BUT, BUT AS STAFF SAID, ONE OF THE LOTS IS REALLY SMALL AND WHEN YOU HAVE PARKING AND DRIVEWAY ACCESS, LOGISTICALLY HE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET THAT THAT, BUT I THINK THAT, UM, AND JUST TO YEAH, TO CLARIFY. I SEE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE MENTIONING YES THERE ARE THREE LOTS, BUT WE WOULDN'T SAY YOU COULD DO ALL OF, YOU KNOW, ALL THE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE SEEN DESIGNATED AS THREE SEPARATE, UH, LOCATIONS. AND SO YOU COULD, LIKE EACH LOCATION WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF PARKING, OF LANDSCAPING AND ALL THOSE OTHER ITEMS. LIKE YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PUSH LIKE ALL THE FOOD TRUCKS IN ONE LOCATION AND ALL THE PARKING TO ANOTHER LOCATION BECAUSE THEN YOU'D BE CONSIDERING THAT AS ONE. I MEAN, REALISTICALLY HE WOULD WANNA PLANT THIS AS TWO LOTS AND HAVE INGRESS, EGRESS [00:15:01] EASEMENTS AND COME UP WITH A COOPERATIVE PARKING AGREEMENT AND THEN HE COULD DO FOUR AND THEN COME BACK TO US AND DO UP THE 20 IF HE REALLY WANTED TO. BUT I MEAN, I'M, I'M JUST RIGHT. WELL, WELL I THINK THAT I COULD GET THE SIX ON THOSE LOTS LOOKING AT THE LOTS AND DESIGN IT. SO IF I PUSH 'EM TO THE EXTERIORS OR WHATEVER AND ALLOW FOR THE PARKING IN THE CENTER AND OR YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE COMBINED. SO, SO I THINK I, I WOULD THINK I COULD GET SIX ON THAT LOT IF I, IF I WAS DETERMINED, YOU KNOW, AND SO, AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING WITH REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, I THINK OKAY, THE PATH YOU WERE GOING DOWN WAS, WAS DOING NOTHING AND LETTING HIM PLAT IT HIS, HIS TWO LOTS AND HAVE HIM DO FOUR AND SEE HOW IT WORKS OUT AND THEN COME BACK LATER IF THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION APPROVES. RIGHT. AND THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE, SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING. SO HE ACTUALLY POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE SIX AND, AND SO GROVE FROM THE CHAIR YES. EXCUSE ME, . UM, THE FOCUS HERE IS ON THE ELIMINATION OF THE REQUIRED 200 FOOT SEPARATION TO ALLOW THE USE OF A MOBILE FOOD COURT WITHIN 200 FEET OF A RESIDENTIAL LOT OR USE. SO IT, TO ME IT SEEMS KIND OF, WELL THE REASON WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT IS, IS THAT IF WE APPROVE THIS TODAY, THE APPLICANT, IF HE PLAS IT HIS TWO LOTS, HE COULD HAVE 20 UNITS, WHICH IS GROSSLY AWAY FROM WHAT THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION WANTS. BUT WOULD IT THAT STILL REQUIRE HIM TO HAVE THE 200 FEET? UH, NOT IF WE APPROVE SEPARATION TO THE RESIDENTIAL, NOT IF WE APPROVE THIS. IF WE DON'T APPROVE IT. HE'S LIMITED TO TWO PER LOT WITHOUT THE 200 FEET. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT IS BECAUSE HE'S, HE'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION COULD GET BEHIND FOUR UNITS IF WE, IF THAT WAS THE CASE AND WE SHOULD JUST DO NOTHING AND LET HIM PLA IT HIS TWO LOTS, PUT IN HIS FOUR UNITS AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. YEAH. HAS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND REAL QUICK, IF THAT'S YOUR INTENTION, TO SEE HOW IT GOES. UM, I WOULD SUGGEST TO UM, EITHER GET THE, THE BUY-IN FROM THE APPLICANT 'CAUSE HE'S GONNA HAVE TO WITHDRAW HIS REQUEST. 'CAUSE IF THIS GETS DENIED THEN HE HAS TO WAIT A YEAR. AND IF IT GOES WELL FOR THE NEXT FEW MONTHS, THEN HE STILL HAS TO WAIT A YEAR TO REAPPLY THIS FYII MEAN THAT'S, I'M, I'M JUST, THAT'S JUST WHAT I'M THINKING. I DON'T, THERE'S STILL 11 OF US ON HERE. I DUNNO WHAT EVERYONE ELSE THINKS, BUT STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS. COULD I SEE THE, THE LETTERS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AGAIN? CHAIR MAY I, COMMISSIONER REED? YES. COMMISSIONER REED. UM, HAVE YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE, UH, DIGNITY ASSOCIATION HERE SINCE UH, I CALLED AND UH, I SENT AN EMAIL THROUGH EMAIL. OKAY. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS THAT THEY MAY HAVE WANTED TO BE ADDRESSED AND I'M JUST CURIOUS IF YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO. I DID SPOKE TO ALL OF 'EM ON THE PHONE. WE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE ON ZOOM. WE COULDN'T CONNECT, UH, ON ZOOM. SO I WAS ON THE PHONE WITH THEM WITH AN A RC CHAIR ALSO LULU, SHE'S THE ONE, MS. FRANCO, AND, UH, SHE WAS DIRECTING THE MEETING. THEY DID HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND I BELIEVE I ANSWERED EVERY QUESTION RIGHT OR WRONG TO THEM, YOU KNOW, BUT I DID ANSWER 'EM ALL. OKAY. AND I, I WAS CURIOUS IF THAT CONVERSATION WAS HAPPENED AFTER THIS LETTER WAS WRITTEN AND IF IT, IT APPEARS SINCE THEY HAVE TWO LETTERS, THEY DIDN'T CHANGE THEIR, UH, OPINION, BUT YEAH, THEIR, THEIR LETTERS, THEY SEEM TO BE AGAINST THE 200 FOOT RULE VIOLATING THAT. YES. BONNI, BON COMMISSIONER BEEZ. YEAH. UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, WHAT DAYS ARE YOU PLANNING ON HAVING THIS OPERATING? IS THIS A EITHER THROUGH SUNDAY THING OR ARE YOU DOING WEEKENDS ONLY? UH, MY PLAN IS TO GO WEDNESDAY THROUGH SUNDAY. OKAY. WHAT ARE THE HOURS OF, OF OPERATION OR WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY, THOSE CHANGE OVER THE WEEKEND? I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT, SAY WHAT? EXCUSE ME. SAY THAT AGAIN. WHAT ARE YOUR HOURS OF OPERATION? THE WEEKENDS? ARE THEY, ARE YOU GONNA STAY OPEN LATER? THE PLAN IS, UH, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY IT'LL BE LIKE, UH, 11 FOR LUNCH AND THEN TILL ABOUT 10 O'CLOCK IN THE EVENING. AND I HAVE TO EVALUATE FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. MY PLAN IS NO LATER THAN, UH, 1130, MIDNIGHT. THAT'S THE LATEST. OKAY. UM, ON HERE, THERE, THERE ARE SOME THAT SELL ALCOHOL AND SELL ALCOHOL HERE? NO, I HAVE NO PLANS TO SELL ALCOHOL AND I DON'T BELIEVE THE TRUCKS WILL SELL ALCOHOL. NO ALCOHOL, NO. OKAY. UH, NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE, DO YOU HAVE, I KNOW YOU HAD A SITE PLAN, BUT DO YOU HAVE LIKE A DESIGN PLAN OF YOU COULD PUT THE TRUCKS WHERE CARS WOULD ENTER, WHERE THEY WOULD EXIT AND WHERE THEY WOULD PARK. DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT FOR US? I DON'T HAVE IT HANDY, [00:20:01] BUT I CAN PROVIDE THAT. I DO HAVE A, A PICTURE OF THE LAND AND THE BIG ENTRANCE. LEMME SEE IF I HAVE THAT HERE. I KNOW I HAVE IT. SO THIS IS BASED ON EIGHT TO 10 FOOD TRUCKS. RIGHT. AND WE SEE WHERE DAWSON IS, THAT'S WHERE THE WHOLE TWO BIG GATES WILL BEGIN IN AND OUT FROM DAWSON STREET. THE THE CENTER ONE, THE CENTER ALL TABLES, SEATING TABLES. SO THERE WILL NOT BE ANY ENTRANCE FROM NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS. 'CAUSE THAT'S THE MAIN STREET. I THINK YOU'RE ON MUTE. COMMISSIONER BONIA? NO, I I THINK WE LOST YOUR AUDIO SIR. SEE THAT'S WHERE THE GATES IS GONNA BE. AND THE GATES RIGHT NOW IS ABOUT, UH, A LITTLE BIT OVER 20 FEET WIDE. SO ALL THE PARKING WOULD BE ON THE STREET, SIR. EXCUSE ME. I'M OVER HERE, MISS. OH MISSY MINUS ALL THE PARKING IS ON THE STREET, ON THE STREET AND I, UM, I HAVE A LOT RIGHT THERE THEN CLOSE TO THAT ALSO IT'S WIDE OPEN. MY LOT ALSO IT'S OPEN. MY PLAN IS TO OPEN THE GATE ALSO FOR PEOPLE TO PARK THERE. YES. WHAT IS THE ADDRESS OF THAT OTHER LOT FOR THE PARKING? UH, 1517 DAWON. OKAY. SO RIGHT NOW, 1513 IS ONE OF THE LOTS. 1515. I HAVE A HOUSE ON IT ALSO. THAT'S BELONGED TO ME ALSO. AND 1517 IT'S EMPTY LOT. 1515 IS YOUR LOT? YES. OKAY. SO YOU STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH A ZONING CHANGE TO CHANGE THE R FOUR TO A, TO LIKE AN OH ONE OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR A COMMERCIAL PARKING. YEAH. CORRECT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HELLO? EZ. COMMISSIONER UNI. THERE YOU GOING BACK NOW, UM, I HAD ANOTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. DO YOU PLAN ON HAVING LIKE AN OUTDOOR, UH, AUDIO SYSTEM SPEAKERS THEY DO AT SOME OF THESE FOOD COURTS FOR MUSIC? UH, PRETTY MUCH, YES. WE ARE GONNA HAVE LIGHTS, NOT AS STRONG LIGHTS AND WE CAN HAVE SOME KIND OF MUSIC, NOT A LOUD MUSIC, BUT WILL BE SOME MUSIC AGAIN. I GOTCHA. IF, IF, UH, IF THE MUSIC GONNA CAUSE HEADACHE. ANY, DO YOU HAVE ANY PLANS, LIKE IF YOU COULDN'T GET THIS 200 FEET, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING WHERE YOU COULD SETTLE MAYBE LIKE ON A HUNDRED FEET AND STILL MAKE THIS WORK? OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE, DO YOU HAVE TO BE, DO YOU NEED THAT THIS VARIANCE TO BE THE FULL 200 FEET? DO WE NEED TO GIVE YOU ALL OF THAT? UH, FOR THIS TO WORK? SO IF HE, UM, I CAN'T HEAR HIM NOW. ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU HEAR ME SIR? CAN YOU HEAR ME? COMMISSIONER? I, I THINK THE REQUIREMENT'S 200. I LOST MY AUDIO GUYS. I CAN'T HEAR WHAT HE'S SAYING. SO, UH, I'LL, I'LL JUST, I, I I HEARD THE QUESTION IS, IS THE ONLY LOTS AND QUE ALL THE MF ACROSS THE STREET? I CAN'T HEAR ANYTHING THEY'RE SAYING NOW. OKAY. I CAN'T HEAR Y'ALL. I'LL TYPE THIS IN THE CHAT, BUT IF THE INTENTION IS TO REZONE THAT PROPERTY, THAT R FOUR PROPERTY, THEN THAT WOULD REDUCE IT BY ABOUT 35 FEET. UM, SO HE WOULD STILL NEED A 165 FOOT, UM, VARIANCE. OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO, UM, THIS IS, UH, I GUESS LOOKING AT THE ZONING MAPS, SO C TWO LOTS AND SO HAVE YOU PURSUED, UM, ANY TYPE OF WE'LL SAVE, UM, RESTAURANT BUSINESS THERE? SO, SO BUILDINGS OF THAT? I, I, I'VE BEEN GETTING REQUESTS. A LOT OF PEOPLE ASKED ME TO DO THAT. I REALLY DID NOT DO ANY OF THAT. UM, I, I REALLY DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THE FOOD TRUCK, BUT WHEN [00:25:01] I WAS THERE WALKING ONE NIGHT AND SEE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE JUST WALKING LATE IN THE EVENING AND THERE'S NOT MUCH RESTAURANTS AROUND, THEY HAVE TO CROSS THE STREET TO GO TO RESTAURANTS. THAT'S WHAT MADE ME FEEL LIKE TO PUT A FOOD TRUCK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS. UM, JUST A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT RIGHT HERE. YOU'VE GOT ALL THIS SUPPORT BY THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THIS PROJECT. I'M CURIOUS WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAD TO SAY WHEN YOU PRESENTED THAT SUPPORT TO THEM. UH, THEY, LIKE I SAID, THEY HAVE FEW QUESTIONS. WELL I'D SAY IF YOU PRO, UH, THEY ASKED, THEY WORRY ABOUT THE TRASH, WHO'S GONNA PICK UP THE TRASH RESTROOMS. UM, WE DID COVER THE PARKING AND UM, THEY ASKED THE OPERATIONS THE HOURS OF THE OPERATIONS, WHICH IS, I TOLD THEM I DON'T THINK THEY OPPOSED THAT. AND THE BIGGEST THING IS HOW MANY FOOD TRUCKS I'M PLANNING ON PUTTING. THAT'S THE BIGGEST THING. AND I THINK THAT THE MORE THAN ONE THEY RECOMMEND, LET'S START WITH FOUR OR FIVE MAX AND THEN SEE HOW THAT GOES WITH THE TRAFFIC, WITH THE TRAFFIC UP WITH THE MUSIC AND ALL THAT STUFF. AND THEN WE LOOK AT IT AFTER THAT AND I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE TO DO THAT. I THINK, UH, START WITH THAT MANY. I'M OPEN TO THAT. ABSOLUTELY. SO ACROSS THE STREET FROM DAWSON. 'CAUSE I'M, I'M CONFUSED ABOUT THE GREEN CHECK MARK. THAT'S, UH, WHAT, WHAT, WHICH OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UH, THAT ARE LOCATED ACROSS THE STREET AT DAWSON? I'M LOOKING AT 3 0 7 3 11 3 17, 3 2 3 AND 3 2 7. WHICH ONE OF THOSE, UH, WAS IN SUPPORT? AND, AND I'M ASKING BECAUSE THE, THE PROPERTIES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ALLEY ARE, ARE NOT AS, UH, CONCERNING TO ME AS THE ONES WHO ARE GONNA HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THE STREET PARKING ON DAWSON. AND SINCE THE APPLICANT OWNS THE A BUDDING PROPERTY, THOSE LOTS ACROSS THE STREET KIND OF HAVE SOME MORE PRIORITY TO ME IS WHETHER THEY'RE IN SUPPORT OR NOT. AND THEY'RE ADDRESSED OFF OF GULF, SO YOU MIGHT NEED TO LOOK AT GOLF. DOES HE HAVE OKAY, THREE 17 GOLF THAT WAS IN SUPPORT. OKAY. STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS. UH, JUST FOR EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD, I'D, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THEY ARE ADDRESSED OFF OF GULF STREET. SO IT APPEARS THAT DAWSON IS THE REAR OF THESE HOUSES. YES. 3 2 7 AND 3 1 7 GULF. OKAY. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. YEAH, MR. CHAIR, I HAD A QUESTION. SO LET'S SAY WE'RE PROGRESS PROGRESSING WITH THE PATH OF LIKE THE FOUR FOOD TRUCKS. WHAT IS THE PATHWAY IF HE WANTS TO ADD MORE THAN THE FOUR, DOES HE HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE THE BOARD TO GET THAT VARIANCE AGAIN? IF WE, IF WE APPROVE THIS, HE CAN HAVE UP TO 30. RIGHT. BUT IF WE DON'T AND HE GOES THE ROUTE OF THE REPL TO GET THE FOUR, THEN, THEN BY RIDE THEN, THEN HE'D HAVE TO COME BACK. HE'D HAVE TO COME BACK FOR THE BOARD TO GET THE VARIANCE FOR THE SETBACKS TO ALLOW MORE THAN FOUR TRUCKS. YEAH. THE THE ISSUE IS, IS WE CAN'T IMPOSE CONDITIONS. THERE'S NO DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT WERE NEGOTIATED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE EITHER GOING TO GIVE HIM THE ABILITY TO REALISTICALLY HAVE UP TO 20 BECAUSE IF HE PLA IT AS TWO LOT AND HAS REALISTIC PARKING, I THINK HE COULD PROBABLY GET 20 ON THERE IF HE REALLY WANTED TO. UH, OR WE COULD DO NOTHING AND LET HIM HAVE FOUR AND SEE HOW IT TURNS OUT. IT, IT, IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHETHER OR NOT, UH, HOW, HOW MUCH WEIGHT YOU WANT TO GIVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. 'CAUSE ALL THE NEIGHBORS SEEM TO BE IN SUPPORT, SO. RIGHT. THE NEIGHBOR SUPPORT WAS BASED ON AN UNLIMITED RIGHT. OTHER THAN THE SITE PLAN? I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE. THEY MAY HAVE BEEN TOLD EIGHT OR 10. I, I HAVE NO IDEA. BUT WE, WE DON'T GET INVOLVED WITH THAT. IF WE APPROVE IT, YOU CAN. WE REALISTICALLY GET 20 ON THERE. IT'S NONE OF BRAGMAN REALLY ASKED HOW MANY FOOD TRUCKS I'M PLANNING ON PUTTING. THE ONLY ONE ASK IS THE TEAM, THE ASSOCIATION. THAT'S THE ONLY ONE. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO THE LETTERS FROM THE ASSOCIATIONS ARE DATED OCTOBER 20TH AND NOVEMBER 16TH. DID YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE LADIES AFTER THAT TIMEFRAME? AFTER. AFTERWARDS? THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS ANYONE SEND TO SPEAK? NO WRONG VOICEMAIL. LET'S HEAR IT. HELLO, THIS IS VALERIE TEZ CALLING WITH THE DIG WITTY HILLS HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD REVIEW COMMITTEE REGARDING BO OA CASE 2 5 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 5 [00:30:02] LOCATED ON NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS AVENUE AND DAWSON STREET. WE AGREE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL OF THE ELIMINATION OF THE 200 FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN THIS FOOD COURT AND THE RESIDENTIAL LOT AT 1513 DAWSON STREET. WE UNDERSTAND THE LOTS THE APPLICANT IS TALKING ABOUT ARE ALREADY ZONED COMMERCIAL AND WE SUPPORT THE APPLICANT'S ABILITY TO RENT UP TO FOUR FOOD TRUCKS ON THESE LOTS. WHAT WE ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF IS ABATEMENT OF THE 200 FOOT ZONE THAT SEPARATES THE COMMERCIAL LOTS FROM THE APPLICANT'S RESIDENTIAL LOT, WHICH IS USED AS A RENTAL PROPERTY. THIS IS WHAT WE ARE REFERRING TO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT COMMERCIAL CREEK. THE CITY HAS ESTABLISHED THIS 200 FOOT BARRIER FOR A REASON TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS FOOD COURT IS WILDLY SUCCESSFUL WITH EIGHT TRUCKS SELLING FOOD? THERE WILL BE VEHICLES PARKED ON BOTH SIDES OF DAWSON AND POSSIBLY NOLAN, WHICH WILL CAUSE TRAFFIC CONGESTION FOR THE RESIDENTS. WE CURRENTLY EXPERIENCE THIS WITH A 900 BLOCK OF NOLAN, WHICH IS COMMERCIAL, BUT SINCE THE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES HAVE BEEN THERE FOR DECADES, ANYONE MOVING INTO THE BLOCKS AROUND THIS AREA ALREADY KNOWS THIS IS SOMETHING THEY MUST PUT UP WITH. QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS WE HAVE ARE AS FOLLOWS. DUMPSTERS WILL BE AVAILABLE, BUT THEY CAN STILL CAUSE PROBLEMS WITH THE SMELL. HOW OFTEN WILL THE PORTA POTTIES BE MAINTAINED AND CLEAN? WILL THIS BE GATED AT NIGHT? WHAT TYPE OF LIGHTING WILL THERE BE? WHAT TYPE OF GUARANTEE WILL THERE BE THAT A SECURITY GUARD ARE ALWAYS ON LOCATION? ARE THERE GUARANTEES THAT A FOOD COURT VENDOR WON'T SELL LIQUOR OR BEER? WHAT ARE THE WORKING HOURS OF THIS PROPOSAL COURT? IF THIS REQUEST IS APPROVED, IT CAN OPEN IN A FEDEX THAT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE CONTAINED. WE HIGHLY ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT TO KEEP THE NUMBER OF FOOD TRUCKS TO THE ALLOWABLE NUMBER OUTLINED IN THE CITY GUIDELINES, WHICH THE APPLICANT TOLD US IS BETWEEN TWO AND FOUR. THIS WOULD ELIMINATE THE NEED OF THE TWO OF THIS WOULD ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR THE 200 FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN HIS MOBILE FOOD COURT AND THE RE RESIDENTIAL HOMES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, PUBLIC COMMENTS? OKAY. IS COMMISSIONER BERNICE BACK ON, DOES HE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR NOT? OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? IS THERE ANY LAST, UH, CONCLUDING STATEMENTS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE? I'M GOOD. OKAY. UH, DO YOU, WOULD YOU LIKE TO REQUEST AN OPPORTUNITY TO FURTHER MEET WITH DIGNITY HILL AND PERHAPS WORK OUT SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS THAT THEY HAVE? I WOULD LOVE TO MEET WITH THEM. I REQUESTED, UH, ONE-ON-ONE MEETING AND, UH, THEY SAY WE'LL DO IT THROUGH ZOOM OR THROUGH EMAIL. OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE A CONTINUANCE TO DO SO? UH, YES. OKAY. UH, WHEN HOW LONG WOULD YOU NEED? I'M OPEN YOU, I MEAN, IT'S HOLIDAYS. I'D SAY A MONTH. YEAH, PROBABLY. WHAT'S THE SECOND MEETING IN JANUARY? JANUARY 26TH. JANUARY 26TH. IS UM, ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS TO JANUARY 26TH? REID? A MOTION. ALL RIGHT. UH, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYE. WE HAVE ONE OPPOSITION COMMISSIONER DEAN, UH, MOTION PASSES. WE'LL SEE YOU ON JANUARY 26TH, STAFF JANUARY 26TH. OKAY? YES. AND, UH, YOU'VE HEARD ALL THE CONCERNS AND WE, WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING, UH, SOME POSITIVE NEWS. I, I WILL HAVE A LOT OF ANSWERS WITH ME. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU MANNA. COMMISSIONER MANNA, COULD THE CITY ALSO GET, UH, WITH THE APPLICANT TO DISCUSS SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH REGARDS TO WORKFLOWS IF LET'S IT PASS AND TIMINGS THAT ARE ALLOWED FOR HIM. UM, YOU KNOW, SO IF HE JUST DROPPED IT AND THEN WHAT THAT WOULD PROVIDE FOR HIM IN THE FUTURE SO THAT WAY HE KIND OF KNOWS ALL OF THOSE AS WELL. YEP. WE'LL WALK HIM THROUGH THAT. AND THERE'S NOTHING STOPPING YOU FROM DOING DEED RESTRICTIONS TO ADDRESS NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION CONCERNS, JUST SO YOU KNOW. SURE. CERTAIN COMMISSIONERS MIGHT LIKE THAT. YEP. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ITEM THREE, COMMISSIONER COM. UH, BON YOU ABLE TO HEAR US CUSING HIMSELF? OH, YEAH. UH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER REED EX UH, RECUSING FROM ITEM THREE. IT'S 1 37. COMMISSIONER BON ABLE TO HEAR US. [00:35:01] CAN WE, I DON'T YOU SENDING HIM A MESSAGE OR SOMETHING? I HAVE CALLED IN BEFORE ONTO THE PUBLIC ACCESS NUMBER AND WAS ABLE TO LISTEN IN, UM, YOU KNOW, TO THE MEETING. ALTHOUGH THE DIALOGUE WAS DELAYED BY A FEW SECONDS, BUT THAT'S A VIABLE OPTION IF WE NEED TO. OKAY. AND I, UH, I REALLY WOULD RATHER NOT HEAR THIS CASE IF STAFF'S RECOMMENDING DENIAL WITH ONLY NINE MEMBERS. UM, I THINK MAYBE WE GET READ BACK IN HERE AND WORK UNTIL THIS GETS RESOLVED AND WE CAN GET SOME OF THE ONES WHERE STAFF IS APPROVED. THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO APPROVALS. NONE LEFT. WELL MARSH, WE CAN DO NUMBER 11 IF YOU WANT. DO NUMBER 11. ALL RIGHT, STAFF. UH, WE'LL WAIT TILL REID GETS BACK IN HERE AND LET'S HEAR, LET'S UH, HEAR THE PRESENTATION ON 11 BACK IN IT'S 1 39 AND COMMISSIONER REED HAS, UH, REJOINED THE MEETING. ITEM 11. ITEM NUMBER 11 IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 5 6 AT 2007 WEST MARTIN STREET. THE APPLICANT IS RICHARD RUBY. A REQUEST FOR A ONE FOOT FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. THE ZONE IS C TWO. THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY MAINTAINS A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEAST PORTION OF THE FRONT YARD. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPROVED A FENCE HEIGHT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO CONSTRUCT THIS EXISTING FENCE IN, IN APRIL, 2024. ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT, CONTINUED INSTANCES OF VANDALISM AND LOITERING HAVE TAKEN PLACE ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH HAS PROMPTED THE INTENT TO FENCE IN THE REMAINING SOUTHWEST PORTION OF THE FRONT YARD. FOR THIS PROPOSED NEW FENCING, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A FENCE HEIGHT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO MAINTAIN A CONSISTENT HEIGHT WITH EXISTING FENCING. THE PROPOSED NEW FENCE IN WILL NOT ENCROACH INTO THE MINIMUM REQUIRED SITE DISTANCE AREA AT THE CORNER OF WEST MARTIN STREET AND NORTH SAN JACINTO STREET. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN WHERE IN BLUE, WHICH IS THE REMAINDER OF THE FRONT YARD THAT REMAINS UNFENCED. THE BOARD APPROVED THIS AREA IN 2024 AND THIS IS A CURRENT VIEW OF THE PROPERTY AND JUST HIGHLIGHTING WHERE THAT EXISTS IN FRONT YARD FENCES AND THE REMAINING PHOTOS OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FENCE FE FENCE SIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS APPROVAL, UM, NOT DENIAL, N BO OA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 5 6. BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE INCREASED FENCE HEIGHT STILL PROMOTES A SENSE OF COMMUNITY WHILE PROVIDING ENHANCED SECURITY AND SAFETY FOR THE PROPERTY. AND THE INCREASED FENCE HEIGHT WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS A SIX FOOT FENCE ALREADY EXISTS IN THE SOUTHEAST AREA OF THE FRONT YARD. 24 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THE WEST END HOPE IN ACTION. AND GARDENDALE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE IN FAVOR AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM PROSPECT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THIS IS SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBOR AT 2113 WEST MARTIN. AND COMMENTS FROM THE WEST END HOPE IN SUPPORT AND FROM THE GARDENDALE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALL [00:40:01] RIGHT, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. GOOD AFTERNOON. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR FENCE. YES, MY NAME IS ALMA BROWN AND UH, THIS IS OUR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY FOR, UH, OUR COMPANY LIFT FUND. WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT MOVING BACK TO 2007 WEST MARTIN AND, UH, FOR THE SAFETY OF EMPLOYEES, THE SAFETY, THERE'S A SCHOOL RIGHT BEHIND US, UH, MAR MAR HILL ELEMENTARY. UM, WE ARE REQUESTING THIS ONE FOOT VARIANCE. ESSENTIALLY IT'S A TREE WHERE THE LOITERING IS HAPPENING, WHERE THE TRASH IS BEING COLLECTED. AND SO WE WOULD LIKE TO JUST MOVE THIS FENCE AROUND THE TREE SO THAT IT'S WITHIN OUR PROPERTY AND NOT IN THE CORNER. YOU KNOW WHERE THE, UH, THE BUS STOP IS AND THIS FENCE WILL TIE INTO THE EXISTING WROUGHT IRON THAT WE PREVIOUSLY PROVED. YES. ALRIGHT. THAT'S CORRECT. ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE. ANY VOICEMAILS? ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEED? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. WELL THEN I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 2 5 6. I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANITE REQUEST FOR ONE FOOT FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT 2 0 0 7 WEST MARTIN STREET, APPLICANT BEING RICHARD RUBY. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS WE HAVE DETERMINED SURE THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH TO A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE IN, OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE THE SPECIAL EXCEPT AID, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER AS THERE IS AN EXISTING SIX FOOT FENCE LOCATED ALONG THE SOUTHEAST AREA OF THE FRONT YARD. CONTINUING THE SIX FOOT FENCE ALONG THE SOUTHWEST AREA OF THE FRONT YARD WILL SUPPORT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF HAVING AN INCREASED FENCE HEIGHT FOR THE PURPOSES OF SAFETY AND SECURITY FOR THE PROPERTY. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED. THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE RETAINS VISIBILITY AND OPENNESS OF THE PROPERTY WHILE MAINTAINING THE SECURITY OF THE PROPERTY. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY, WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY BE INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE CONTINUATION OF THE SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OF FENCE ALONG THE SOUTHWEST AREA OF THE PROPERTY WOULD NOT INJURE, INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AS FENCE COMPLIES WITH THE SITE DISTANCE OF THE CORNER OF WEST MARTIN STREET AND NORTH SAN JACINTO STREET AND PAINT MAINTAINS VISIBILITY REQUIRED FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS AN EXISTING SIX FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEAST PORTION OF THE FRONT YARD, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE BOARD IN 2024 E. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY IS, IS ZONED COMMERCIAL AND THE INCREASED HEIGHT IS JUST ONE FOOT ABOVE THE REQUIRED FIVE FOOT, WHICH WOULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR THE PROPERTY. END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER MANDA. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN? UH, YEAH. I, I FEEL LIKE THIS IS, UM, PRETTY MUCH A NO BRAINER. IT'S A VERY SMALL ASK. UM, AND OBVIOUSLY WE WILL SECURE THE PROPERTY EVEN, EVEN MORE, UH, THAN THE EXISTING FENCE. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MANDA. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD HEARING NOW? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, COMMISSIONER BON AND CHAIR ORIAN. YES, I CONCUR. A MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU'RE WELCOME. IS COMMISSIONER BENI FULLY BACK ON? WE CAN TAKE LIKE A THREE MINUTE BREAK, UH, TO TRY. HE'S ON, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO GET THE AUDIO UP. ALRIGHT. [ Approval of Minutes  ] UM, BEFORE WE DO, I GUESS WE CAN HEAR THE MINUTES OR SOMETHING. UM, ANYONE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES? I LOOKED THROUGH 'EM. I DIDN'T SEE ANY ADJUSTMENTS NEEDED. YEAH, ME NEITHER. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? SO MOVED. MOTION BY MAD COMMISSIONER. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER. UM, CRUZ. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE MINUTES PASS. UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A THREE MINUTE BREAK. WE'LL SEE EVERYBODY BACK HERE AT ONE [00:45:01] 50. WE'RE GONNA PROCEED TO ITEM THREE. IT IS. AND THEN WE'LL HIT ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. IT IS 1 52. COMMISSIONER REED IS, UH, RECUSED RECUSING FROM ITEMS THREE AND SEVEN. OH. AND COMMISSIONER CRUZ WILL BE BACK MOMENTARILY. HOPEFULLY I WILL GIVE HER A LITTLE BIT. YEAH, SHE'S COMING. ALL RIGHT, YOU CAN GO AHEAD. I ITEM NUMBER THREE IS BOA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 2 8. THE ADDRESS IS ONE 20 EAST AGARITA AVENUE. IN CONS, DISTRICT ONE, THE APPLICANT IS DAWN B MCDONALD ARCHITECTS A REQUEST FOR A 19 FOOT 11 VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT WITH A ONE INCH REAR SETBACK. THE ZONE IS R FOUR HISTORIC. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE MONTE VISTA HISTORIC DISTRICT ON EAST AGARITA AVENUE. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A NEW BEDROOM ADDITION TO THE EXISTING HOME AT A SPLIT LEVEL ABOVE A NEW CARPORT AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY BECAUSE THE CARPORT AND BEDROOM WILL BE ATTACHED TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AT THE REAR. THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK STANDARD FOR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE APPLIES RATHER THAN THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK STANDARD USED FOR DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. BASED ON THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN, THE ADDITION FALLS WITHIN THE REAR SETBACK AT ONE INCH FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, WHICH ABUTS A 20 FOOT ALLEY PER SECTION 35 5 16 C OF THE UDC LOTS THAT, BUT A PUBLIC ALLEY, ONE HALF OF SUCH ALLEY CAN BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE MINIMUM REQUIRED REAR YARD. THEREFORE, 10 FEET OF THE ALLEY CAN BE APPLIED TO, IN EFFECT, REDUCE THE MINIMUM REQUIRED REAR YARD FROM 20 FEET TO 10 FEET. THIS IS JUST A SUMMARY GIVEN BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION THAT THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE MONTE VISTA HISTORIC DISTRICT. ANY EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS OR NEW CONSTRUCTION WILL REQUIRE APPROVAL FROM THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPROVAL. APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN OR MATERIAL SUBMITTED AS PART OF A VARIANCE APPLICATION DOES NOT SUPERSEDE ANY REQUIREMENTS FOR DESIGN REVIEW, OUTLINE AND ARTICLE SIX OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. ON OCTOBER, 2025, THEY REVIEWED AND APPROVED THE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A RARE ADDITION. AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW IS WHERE THE ADDITION WILL BE. AND THE GRAY AREA IS THE EXISTING HOME. AND THIS IS JUST TO GIVE REFERENCE TO WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE WITH IT BEING AN ADDITION. AND THE CARPORT, THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR, THIS IS JUST THE CURRENT VIEW FROM THE FRONT AND AGARITA AND AN OVERHEAD. SO YOU CAN SEE THE FULL SCOPE OF THE REAR YARD. HOWEVER, THE ADDITION IS JUST GONNA BE IN THIS AREA. AND THIS IS THE REST OF THE AREA ON EAST AGARITA. AND THE REAR WHERE THE ALLEY IS. STAS RECOMMENDATION FOR THE REAR SETBACK IS DENIAL IN BO OA DASH 25 1 0 3 0 0 2 2 8. BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BY ALLOWING THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE FOOTPRINT TO EXTEND TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, THE ADDITION COULD BE REDESIGNED AS A DETACHED STRUCTURE REDUCING THE REQUIRED REAR SETBACK FROM 20 FEET TO FIVE FEET. 25 NOTICES WERE MAILED, WE RECEIVED TWO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PROVIDED COMMENTS WHICH YOU'LL SEE. AND THIS IS SUPPORT FROM THE PROPERTY ADJACENT AT 1 1 6 AND ANOTHER AT ONE 20. AND THE COMMENTS PROVIDED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. AND JUST, JUST TO CLARIFY, FOR WHOEVER READS THE MOTION THAT THE SETBACK IS ONLY A 10 FOOT, IT'S, IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A 19 AND A HALF FOOT, 19 FOOT, 11, 11 INCH SETBACK. IT'S REALLY A NINE FOOT, 11 INCH IF WE APPLY THE IN EFFECT. CORRECT. OKAY. I'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. HELLO. STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. I'M DON MCDONALD. I'M THE ARCHITECT [00:50:01] AND IMMEDIATE NEIGHBOR TO THIS PROJECT. ALRIGHT. UM, IT'S UNUSUAL IN THAT, UM, THERE'S, IT'S A, THIS IS A YOUNG COUPLE WHO RECENTLY PURCHASED THE HOUSE AND, AND LOOKING TO ADD A BEDROOM TO THE, TO THE COTTAGE. AND BECAUSE WE'RE IN MONTE VISTA, WE CANNOT GO TO ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. AND IT, EVEN IF WE COULD, THERE'S A TWO LARGE TREE LIMBS WE'D HAVE TO CUT UP ON THIS PART OF THE HOUSE. AND SO THE, THE, THE NEXT OBVIOUS SOLUTION IS TO GO FURTHER BACK ON THE PROPERTY. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE SIDE YARD IMAGES, THE PROPERTY DROPS OFF ABOUT, UH, I DON'T THINK THIS IS, THAT PROPERTY IS, THEY MAY NOT THE SIDE YARD ANYWAY, THE SIDE YARD DROPS OFF SIX TO EIGHT FEET ON EITHER SIDE. SO IF WE WERE TO PUT THE SECOND FLOOR, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE SIDE HERE, YOU CAN SEE WE WERE TO PUT THE SECOND FLOOR, UM, IN PLACE HERE. IT WOULD END UP BEING 16 TO 18. THE FLOOR WOULD BE 16 TO 18 FOOT ABOVE THE GROUND. AND SO OBVIOUSLY BOTH NEIGHBORS ARE, ARE HIGHLY OPPOSED TO THIS. AND SO THE LEAST WORST SCENARIO IS TO GO SIX TO SEVEN FEET LOWER AND PUT THE, THE, THE NEW BEDROOM ON THE, THE, THE PROPERTY ABOVE A, A CARPORT. UM, THE IDEA IS THAT THIS WOULD ALLOW A CARPORT TO, TO BE INSERTED DIRECTLY UNDERNEATH IT. SO, SO THE WHOLE PROJECT HAS BEEN PUSHED BACK AS TIGHTLY AS POSSIBLE SINCE THE HOUSE WITH A MINIMUM, UM, UH, STAIRCASE THAT, THAT COMES UP FROM THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, UH, TO THIS STRUCTURE. UM, AND, AND LOOKING SO, SO, SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S THE MOST SENSITIVE, UM, APPROACH TO THE HOUSE, TO THE ARCHITECTURE AND TO THE NEIGHBORS. IT'S, IT'S JUST A 50 FOOT WIDE LOT. SO THE IDEA OF PUTTING IT WHERE WE COULD WITHOUT A VARIANCE ABOVE THE STRUCTURE WOULD JUST BE REALLY HIGHLY OFFENSIVE TO BOTH NEIGHBORS. AND, AND SO THIS IS, IS WHERE WE'VE LANDED AND, AND, UH, I THINK THIS SPEAKS TO THAT THERE, THE ONLY OTHER OPTION IS IN, THERE'S A, MAYBE A PICTURE HERE OF A TINY BACKYARD AND, AND IT WOULD FILL UP THE ENTIRE BACKYARD. YOU CAN SEE HOW THIS DROPS OFF. SO THE SECOND FLOOR WOULD ESSENTIALLY CREATE A THREE STORY HOUSE, WHICH, UH, THIS, THIS NEIGHBOR HAS A PATIO THAT OVERLOOKS THE HOUSE ON THE OTHER SIDE. THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE IS ON THIS SIDE. UH, THEY'RE BOTH LARGER PROPERTIES, JUST A TIGHT PROPERTY. OKAY. AND SO, UM, SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY. UM, SO A QUICK QUESTION. ARE YOU, UM, IF I'M INSIDE THE MAIN HOUSE, CAN I, IS THERE A CONTINUITY OF TRAVEL TO GET TO THE SECOND FLOOR AREA? OR IS IT COMPLETELY ACCESSED BY AN EXTERIOR STAIRWELL? YOU, YOU, YOU, YOU, CAN YOU GO BACK ONE TO THAT LAST PICTURE? WHERE THAT ONE RIGHT THERE. OKAY. THIS IS THE EXISTING KIND OF, UM, LAUNDRY ROOM BACK OF HOUSE. AND SO, SO YOU'D ESSENTIALLY HAVE TO GO DOWN, IT'S A SPLIT LEVEL HOUSE. YOU'D HAVE TO GO DOWN SIX TO SEVEN STEPS AND THEN GO BACK UP TO GET TO IT. BUT, BUT THE ALTERNATIVE IS TO GO UP 19 STEPS TO A, A HIGH SECOND FLOOR. OKAY. SO IT'S, IT'S BETTER THAN THE ALTERNATIVE. I'M JUST WONDERING IF, IF I'M IN THE MAN HOUSE, I CAN GET TO THE OH, YEAH. BEDROOM WITHOUT GOING OUTSIDE ANYWHERE. YEAH, THAT WAS THE GO. OKAY. AT, AT THAT LOCATION WOULD BE A LITTLE STARE THAT, THAT S'S BACK AND, AND, AND DISCREETLY KIND OF TOUCH UP TO THIS BEDROOM. ALL RIGHT. ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? MAY COMMISSIONER MANNA. AND SO I, I ASSUME IT IS JUST THE WAY THIS IS WORDED. SO THERE IS A, I I THINK A LETTER SUBMITTED BY YOU, UH, WITH REGARDS TO IT. I WAS CONFUSED BY IT WITH REGARDS TO, UH, STRONG DESIRE DISCOURAGE ANY SECOND FLOOR EDITION AND ABOVE THE MAIN HOUSE. SO, SO THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS NOT TO DO THAT, BUT YOU'RE FINE WITH RIGHT. YOU KNOW, WE COULD DO THAT LEGALLY. YEAH. BUT, BUT BOTH NEIGHBORS ARE VERY MUCH AGAINST IT. OKAY. FOR OBVIOUS REASONS. YEAH. PERFECT. OKAY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD YOUR, YOUR POINT THERE. SO, GREAT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? JUST CONCURRING THAT IT'S A 10 FOOT VARIANCE, RIGHT? AND NOT THE 19 FOOT AS 11 INCHES AS STATED IN THE VARIANCE MOTION. SO WE, WE JUST STICK TO THE, UM, 19 FOOT, 11 INCH, UM, EVEN WE JUST HIGHLIGHTED WHAT THEY CAN DO BY REDUCING THE ALLEY. BUT JUST TO KEEP THE MOTION CLEAN, WE'RE JUST GONNA GO WITH THE, UM, REGULAR 20 FOOT REQUIRED SETBACK, UH, WITH A 19 FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE. OKAY. SO THAT'S WHAT'S RECOMMENDED THEN. SURE. OKAY. AND THEN I HAVE A LOT MORE LAST QUESTION AND ONE OF THE PICTURES, IS THERE AN, AN EXTERIOR FIREPLACE OR SOMETHING AT THE BASE OF THAT HOME? JUST TO THE LEFT OF THE DOOR? OH, OH NO, THAT'S JUST A, A, UM, LITTLE STONE FOUNDATION. IT'S JUST A DECORATIVE ELEMENT. OKAY. IT'S A GOOD, IT'S VERY INTERESTING. I, NO, IT'S FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT WAS. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. UH, WELL IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. OH, ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 2 2 8. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT [00:55:01] GRANT REQUEST FOR A 19 FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT WITH ONE INCH REAR SETBACK SITUATED AT ONE 20 EAST AGITA AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING DON B MCDONALD ARCHITECTS BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS. SO WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF PROVISIONS OF THE UDC HAS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. A ONE INCH, UH, AT ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, THE CARPORT IS SUFFICIENTLY SPACED FROM THE SHARED ALLEY RIGHT AWAY. IT WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ALLEY FOR PUBLIC UTILITY ACCESS. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE ONLY REASONABLE MANNER TO EXPAND THE, THE HOME BUILT IN 1918 IS AND PRESERVE ITS HISTORICAL CHARACTER, IS BY EXTENDING TOWARDS THE REAR THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE OBSERVED IN SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED. AND BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE AS THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE FOOTPRINT EXTENSION WOULD NOT CONTRIBUTE TO CONGESTION OF THE ALLWAY OR LIMITED OR LIMITED TO ACCESS FOR THE VARIANCES WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT FORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED. GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THIS DISTRICT AS THE EXTENSION IS LOCATED IN THE REAR AND OUT OF SIGHT, THEREBY HAVING NO IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, BLOCK FACE AESTHETICS SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE HAS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EX EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, AGAIN, ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO OTHER THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS. THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, STAFF FINDS THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS VARIANCE HAS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING AS THE PROPERTIES HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND ANY EXPANSION MUST BE WITHIN THE REAR TO PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURES, FRONT FACADE AND CHARACTER. AND A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANER. COMMISSIONER ZUNA. YEAH. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. UH, THE ALTERNATIVE HERE IS FOR THE, UH, APPLICANT TO, UH, BUILD UP. AND AS YOU MENTIONED, IT'D BE ALMOST, UH, 30 FOOT IMPOSING ONTO NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE. UH, THE NEIGHBORS HAVE AGREED TO THE PROPOSED SOLUTION HERE, WHICH IS PUSHING TOWARDS THE REAR. IT'S A, UH, WHICH I BELIEVE IS, IS A REASONABLE, UH, COMPROMISE. AND UH, WE HAVE THE BUFFER WITH THE ALLEY THAT PROVIDES ADEQUATE, UH, SPACING BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES TO THE REAR. SO I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER MINOT, UM, I CAN GO WITH MY COLLEAGUE ADDITIONALLY, YOU KNOW, SO WE HAD THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AGREE WITH IT. UM, AND THEN, UM, THREE QUARTERS OF THE PROPERTIES THAT BACK UP TO THIS, UM, TO THIS ALLEYWAY HAVE SIMILARLY SPACE STRUCTURES AS TO THIS FACADE. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S JUST BY DESIGN, HOW THIS IS GONNA BE GREAT. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN, I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES NINE TO ONE. UH, WE'RE NOW GOING TO HEAR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. WE NEED TO GET, HE HAS TO RECUSE ON THAT ONE. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS BO A DASH 25 DASH 0 3 2 51. THE ADDRESS BEING 1 1 6 EAST AITA AVENUE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE, THE APPLICANT IS DON B MCDONALD ARCHITECTS. AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A CARPORT IN THE REAR YARD WITH A ONE FOOT SIX INCH SIDE SETBACK, INCLUDING A THREE INCH OVERHANG LIMITED TO THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPERTY ZONE R FOUR H UH, THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED THE INSTALLATION OF A CARPORT IN THE REAR YARD OF THE PROPERTY TO BE ACCESSED THROUGH THE ALLEY. THE CARPORT IS PROPOSED TO BE ONLY ONE FOOT SIX INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY, UH, FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. UH, THEREFORE THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO PERMIT A SIDE SETBACK REDUCTION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED CARPORT. NO CONSTRUCTION HAS BEGUN AND NO PERMIT APPLICATIONS HAVE YET BEEN FILED, SHOWN HERE AS A SITE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY AND THE PROPOSED CARPORT. NOW THIS DIFFERS FROM THE CASE THAT WE JUST HEARD. UH, [01:00:01] THIS IS A DETACHED STRUCTURE. SO, UM, THE REAR SETBACK HERE IS, IS SATISFIED DUE TO THE ALLOWANCE OF THE ALLEYWAY THERE. UH, THIS IS REGARDING JUST THE SIDE SETBACK AND THE, UH, PROXIMITY THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING THERE. UM, IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE CAN BLOW IT UP A LITTLE BIT MORE. YEAH, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A CLEARER IMAGE. UM, YOU CAN SEE THERE NEXT TO THE ONE ICON IS SHOWING ONE FOOT NINE TO THE POST, UH, COUNTING FOR THE OVERHANG. THE SETBACK WOULD BE ONE FOOT SIX INCHES. UM, AND THERE IS AN EXISTING CMU PLASTER WALL THAT YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE SITE PLAN, AND WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE ON THE NEXT SLIDE. SO HERE'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE FRONT AND HERE'S THE REAR YARD, THE LOCATION OF WHERE THAT CARPORT IS GONNA GO IN THE REAR YARD. AND YOU CAN SEE THE PLASTER WALL, THE CMU WALL THERE TO THE RIGHT. UH, THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA. UH, THIS IS THE ENTRANCE OF THE ALLEY. AND THEN DEEPER IN THERE, THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA, AGAIN FROM THE ALLEY. UH, THAT'S THE, UH, WHERE THE ENTRANCE OF THE, OF THE CARPORT WOULD GO FOR THIS PROPERTY. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE, THE WALL THERE AGAIN, UH, ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THAT THERE. AND THIS IS JUST SOME IMAGES OF SIMILAR, UH, ENTRANCES IN THE AREA THROUGH THE ALLEYWAY. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CARPORT SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 2 5 1 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, UH, ONE THE VARIANCE IS CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THERE WOULD BE INSUFFICIENT SPACE TO SUPPORT THE MAINTENANCE OF THIS STRUCTURE. AND TWO, THERE'S UH, SUFFICIENT SPACE WITHIN THE REAR TO SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SMALLER CARPORT WITHOUT ENCROACHING INTO THE MINIMUM REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK AREA. STAFF MAILED OUT 28 NOTICES TWO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND AND THE SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. AND HERE IS THE SUPPORT RECEIVED BY STAFF FOR THIS REQUEST. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THAT THE APPLICANT? COME OH, COMMISSIONER MAN. SO, SO YOU SAID CMU WALL? YEAH, IT'S THAT STONE BRICK WALL THERE THAT YOU CAN SEE IF WE CAN GO BACK TO IT THERE. UH, IT'S PREEXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. SO WHAT'S IT, WHAT DOES CMU STAND FOR FIRST? SO I DON'T, OH, ONE OF THE ENGINEERS MAYBE ON THE BOARD CAN ANSWER THAT CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT. CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. AND SO, UM, AND THAT'S TALLER THAN SIX FOOT? IT DEFINITELY IS. AND, UH, THE BEST RESEARCH THAT WE COULD FIND ON THE PROPERTY IS THAT IT'S, IT'S EXISTED, UH, ON THE PROPERTY, UM, FOR, FOR SOME TIME. AND I THINK THE APPLICANT CAN PROBABLY, YEAH, THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1928, BUT I'M SURE THE APPLICANT BEING AN ARCHITECT CAN PROVIDE A LOT OF INSIGHT. SO. AND SO MY SUBSEQUENT QUESTION THEN, UM, IS, UH, FIRE SPREAD, IF THERE IS A CMU WALL BETWEEN ONE STRUCTURE AND ANOTHER, DOES THAT RESOLVE FIRE SPREAD DIALOGUE IF IT'S THAT TALL? WELL, THE CMUU WALL IS DEFINITELY, I THINK THAT'S A TWO HOUR FIRE RATING. COULD BE A FOUR, DEPENDING IF IT'S FILLED OR NOT. I, IT'S GETTING A LITTLE BIT TOO TECHNICAL, BUT I KNOW IT'S, IT IS A RATE, IT'S CONSIDERED A RATING. OKAY. AT THE PERMITTING STAGE. I'M SURE THE, THE PERMITTING STAFF WOULD BE ABLE TO KIND OF, UH, CONSIDER THAT, UM, AS PART OF THAT REVIEW PROCESS. ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. I'M, I'M DON MCDONALD. AND, UH, THIS IS AN UNUSUAL CONDITION BECAUSE THIS DRIVEWAY AND WALL ORIGINALLY BELONGED TO THE ADJOINING PROPERTY. AND SO 20 FOOT WAS PURCHASED IN ORDER TO PUT THE DRIVEWAY IN PLACE HERE 30 YEARS AGO. AND SO, UM, THE, THE, THE, THE SETBACK WAS ESTABLISHED BECAUSE THAT WAS ESSENTIALLY A FIREWALL THAT WAS THERE THAT WOULD, WOULD SUPPORT. I THINK THERE WAS PROBABLY A, A GARAGE HERE AT ONE POINT THAT WAS FOR THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THE, THE DRIVE CIRCLED AROUND AND EXITED ON MAIN BACK, BACK ORIGINALLY. AND SO, AND SO, UH, IT, WE COULD HAVE PURCHASED MORE LAND AT THE TIME. I MEAN, WE COULD HAVE EXPANDED IT, BUT FELT LIKE IT WAS GETTING A LITTLE AGGRESSIVE FOR THE ADJOINING PROPERTY. AND, UM, AND SO IT WAS JUST A GOOD PLACE TO MAKE THAT BREAK. THERE'S ALSO AN ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET BETWEEN THE WALL AND THE NEIGHBORING BUILDING THAT'S THERE ALREADY. ANYWAY, SO, SO THE GOAL IS JUST TO SIMPLY PUT UP A CARPORT BETWEEN, UH, THAT EXISTING WALL AND THE WALL THAT, THAT, THAT WE BUILT ABOUT 15 YEARS AGO ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE AND, AND ALLOWING US TO COME IN OFF THE ALLEY MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO IS THE PLAN TO HAVE A CARPORT, UH, ATTACHED TO MY NEW CMU LEARNED WALL? YES. YES. SO IT'S, SO IT'S GONNA BE ATTACHED TO IT AND IT, IT, IT ESSENTIALLY WILL FUNCTION AS A SHEER WALL FOR THE CARPORT. OKAY. SO IT'S JUST A REAL SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD, UH, RESOLUTION. UH, SOMEONE MENTIONED EARLIER THAT, THAT, THAT IT'S, IT'S TYPICAL ON THIS BLOCK WE COUNTED 20 DIFFERENT OUTBUILDINGS THAT ABUTTED THE ALLEY. UH, AND, AND, UH, HALF OF THOSE [01:05:01] ARE UP AGAINST PROPERTY LINES FOR V VARIOUS REASONS. SOME ARE ATTACHED TO OTHER GARAGES. SO, UM, SO, SO, SO THE WALL IS OWNED BY Y'ALL OR BY THE APPLICANT, AND UM, AND IT'S APPARENTLY ONE FOOT SIX INCHES OFF THE PROPERTY LINE FROM, FROM, SO THE, SO THE WALL ITSELF IS, OR THE, OR ON THE OTHER SIDE, THE PROPOSED CARPORT? WELL, I'M JUST TRYING TO TAKE INTO THE THICKNESS OF THE WALL IF YOU OWN THE WALL AND IF THAT'S PART OF IT, OR IS, OR DOES A WALL BECOME PART OF THE CARPORT? WE ZOOM INTO THAT DIMENSION. I THINK THERE WAS A I JUST SAW THAT, I JUST SAW THE BLOW UP OF THAT. UH, WHAT IS THAT DIMENSION, LAURA? DO YOU KNOW? ONE SIX. THE ASSUMPTION IS THAT IT'S A EIGHT FOOT WALL. IT MIGHT BE A 12 INCH. SO WE'RE SIX INCHES OFF THE PROPERTY LINE, SIX TO EIGHT INCHES OFF THE PROPERTY LINE. THE, THE EXISTING WALL, THE PROPOSED CARPORT WOULD THEN TECHNICALLY BE INCORPORATED INTO THE WALL. RIGHT. SO I WE'RE, WHAT I'M HEARING FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER IS THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE ATTEMPTING TO BUILD A CARPORT WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE MASONRY WALL. YES. OKAY. AND BECAUSE IT'S ATTACHED TO THE MASONRY WALL AND IT ONLY HAS A WALL ON ONE SIDE, IT'S STILL CONSIDERED A CARPORT 'CAUSE IT'S NOT COVERED ON MULTIPLE SIDES. BUT SINCE THAT MASONRY WALL IS PART OF THE CARPORT, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THE MASONRY WALL HAS TO BE INCLUDED WITH ANY SETBACK EVALUATION? CORRECT. SO IF HE'S, IF, IF HE'S, UH, RIGHT NOW IT'S BEEN ADVERTISED TO BE 18 INCHES, BUT REALLY IT'S ONLY SIX INCHES AND WE CAN'T GO THAT LOW. SO SHOULD, SHOULD THIS HAVE TO COME BACK TO US WITH A RE ADVERTISEMENT? CORRECT. YEAH. IF HE'S ATTACHING IT TO THE, THE MASONRY WALL THAT CHANGES THE CONFIGURATION THAT MAKES THE WALL PART OF THE CARPORT. SO, SO JUST FOR THE APPLICANT, WE, WE CAN'T GO LESS THAN WHAT WAS ADVERTISED AND IT WAS ADVERTISED TO BE 18 INCHES. SO BECAUSE IT'S ATTACHED, YOUR CARPORT IS ATTACHED TO THE MASONRY WALL, WE HAVE TO INCLUDE THAT WITH ANY SETBACK EVALUATION, WHICH MEANS WE, WE REALLY SHOULD HAVE ADVERTISED THIS WITH A SETBACK OF SIX INCHES. UH, AND SO WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE ON THAT TODAY. UM, UM, STAFF I'M SURE CAN BRING THIS BACK TO US AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. UM, BUT I APOLOGIZE, BUT LUCKILY YOU'RE HERE FOR ANOTHER CASE, . YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. VERY GOOD. OKAY. SO IF YOU GET WITH STAFF, THEY'LL TELL YOU ABOUT WHEN YOU'RE, YOU CAN COME TO THE MEET NEXT MEETING. UH, I DON'T KNOW WITH OUR TIMING, UH, 'CAUSE THERE, THERE HAS TO BE SO MANY DAYS NOTICE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN CATCH THE FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY IF IT'S, IF THE TIMING IS POSSIBLE OR IT HAS TO COME ON THE 26TH. YEAH, WELL, WE'LL BRIEF 'EM OUTSIDE. OKAY. COULD, COULD WE, UH, NOT ATTACH IT TO THE WALL STRUCTURALLY? SO IF YOU DON'T WANT TO ATTACH IT TO THE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRACKING, WE'RE TRACKING THE CARPORT IS GONNA BE ONE AND A HALF FEET FROM THE, UM, PROPERTY FROM THE, FROM THE WALL. BUT IF YOU'RE NOT ATTACHING IT, OR IF YOU'RE NOT ATTACHING IT, THAT MEANS YOU HAVE, UM, GIMME ONE SECOND. IF YOU'RE NOT ATTACHING IT, IT'D BE, WE COULD VOTE ON IT TODAY. IF WE DON'T TIE IT IN WITH THE STRUCTURE, IF WE CHANGE THE ENGINEERING, WE'D HAVE TO COME BACK. BUT THEN THE OTHER THING IS THAT IF YOU COME BACK NOW, YOUR, YOUR MASONRY WALL'S INCLUDED AND YOU'RE, THERE'S, YOU'VE KIND OF FIXED ALL THESE OUTSTANDING LEVEL ISSUES. WELL, I HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE ENGINEER TO FIND OUT IF WE CAN PULL THAT OFF. IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME IF WE ATTACH IT OR NOT, BUT, AND JUST, JUST TO SAY, IF YOU HAVE THREE FEET WITH NO OVERHANG PAST THOSE THREE FEET FROM YOUR PROPERTY LINE AND IT'S NOT ATTACHED TO THE WALL, YOU DON'T NEED TO COME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AT ALL. YOU JUST NEED A THREE FOOT SETBACK FROM YOUR PROPERTY LINE WITH NO OVERHANG PAST THAT THREE FEET, WHICH IT WOULD HAVE TO BE CLOSER TO THAN THREE FEET. YEAH. SO I, I WOULD RECOMMEND THIS THIS BE POSTPONED READVERTISED AS, AND STAFF WILL TALK TO YOU ABOUT YOUR OPTIONS OF WHAT THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO, TO DO THAT IS. OKAY? OKAY. I MEAN, THAT WAY WE'RE AND, AND MANNA. SO, AND, AND, AND IF IT COMES BACK AND, AND YOU WANT TO NOT ATTACH IT TO THE WALL, YOU HAVE THAT OPTION. YOU KNOW, IF YOU COULD DO THIS AND THAT'S, THAT GIVES YOU THAT, THOSE TWO OPTIONS, THEN AT THAT POINT, AND WE DO HAVE A VOICEMAIL. AND WHAT, AND, AND AFTER WE HEAR THE VOICEMAIL, DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION OR CAN YOU JUST POSTPONE THIS? NO, YEAH, WE CAN'T MAKE A MOTION 'CAUSE IT'S MORE THAN WHAT WAS ADVERTISED. SO. OKAY. GOTCHA. UM, WE COULD HEAR THE VOICEMAIL, BUT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO PLAY IT AGAIN DURING THE SURE. WE CAN HEAR THE VOICEMAIL. HI, SUZANNE DICKEY PHONING. I'M AT 1 29 EAST AGARITA. UH, MY MEMBER'S 2 1 0 2 1 3 0 9 2 4 AND I'M CALLING ABOUT CASE NUMBER 0 2 5 1. I AM CALLING TO FULLY SUPPORT THE VARIANCE THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING. I SEE ABSOLUTELY NO REASON WHY THEY SHOULD NOT GET THIS VARIANCE APPROVED. SO WE ARE FOR IT AS NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET. THANK YOU. BYE. ALL RIGHT, SO WITH THAT, THIS ITEM IS CONSIDERED POSTPONED. UM, PLEASE DISCUSS THE EARLY WITH STAFF AND, AND THE NEXT TIME IT COMES TO US, WE'LL TAKE CARE OF, WE'LL SEE HOW IT TURNS OUT. APPRECIATE IT. THANK, THANK YOU. [01:10:01] ALL RIGHT. WE ARE BACK ON ITEM FOUR. AND IF YOU CAN HAVE COMMISSIONER REED COME BACK IN. ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 3 6, ADDRESSED AT 2 7 6 9 NACODOCHES ROAD IN CONSUL DISTRICT 10. THE APPLICANT IS COLE SMITH, A REQUEST FOR ONE SIX FOOT SIX INCH AND 26 FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 10 FOOT SIDE AND 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITH A THREE FOOT, SIX INCH SIDE AND RARE SETBACK. TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE UDC ACCESSORY STRUCTURE REGULATIONS TO ALLOW ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHIN THE SIDE AND RARE SETBACK AREA OF A NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WHICH ABUTS A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. THREE, A SHIPPING CONTAINER DESIGN VARIANCE TO ALLOW SHIPPING CONTAINERS ALTERED WITHOUT SIDING AND A ROOF AND FOUR FENCE MATERIAL VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR SHEET ROLL OR CORRUGATED METAL LIMITED TO THE AS-BUILT PORTIONS. THE ZONE IS C ONE CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY IS AN UNOCCUPIED RESTAURANT WITH OUTDOOR DINE-IN AND SEATING AREAS, A PLAYGROUND, A BARBECUE PIT ROOM, STORAGE SHEDS AND SHIPPING CONTAINERS UTILIZED FOR STORAGE. THIS CASE ORIGINATED AS A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION IN APRIL, 2025 FOR BUILDING WITHOUT PERMITS REGARDING THE OUTSIDE PATIO COVER AND THE ADDITION OF ANOTHER STORAGE CONTAINER. BECAUSE THE PROPERTY ABUTS RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS TO THE SIDE AND REAR THE STANDARD REQUIRES ALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO MEET A 10 FOOT SIDE SETBACK AND A 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK RATHER THAN THE TYPICAL FIVE FOOT SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS REQUIRED FOR DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. WHILE THE USE OF SHIPPING CONTAINERS FOR STORAGE AS A PRIMARY USE ON THE PROPERTIES NOT PERMITTED IN THE C ONE BASE DISTRICT, THEY ARE ALLOWED AS A SECONDARY USE ON THE CONDITION THAT A BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSUED FOR THE INSTALLATION AND ALTERATION OF THE SHIPPING CONTAINER'S APPEARANCE TO INCLUDE SIDING AND A ROOF. STAFF ALSO OBSERVED THE USE OF PROHIBITED PROHIBITED METAL FENCING MATERIAL AT VARIOUS POINTS ALONG THE FRONT SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES IN THE SITE PLAN. FOR THE SIDE SETBACK, IT SHOULD BE 10 FEET AND NO STRUCTURE SHOULD BE LOCATED IN THE SIDE SETBACK OR THE REAR SETBACK UNLESS IT'S A CARPORT. IN NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, THESE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WERE FOUND TO BE AT LEAST THREE FOOT SIX INCHES FROM THE SIDE AND THE REAR. THIS IS AN OVERHEAD VIEW WHERE YOU CAN SEE ALL THE STRUCTURES AND AN APPROXIMATE DISTANCE AND THE CURRENT VIEW OF THE RESTAURANT AREA AND WHAT THE CURRENT SHIPPING CONTAINER DESIGN IS WITHOUT A ROOF AND SIDING AND THE SIDE SETBACK. AND YOU CAN SEE A USE OF THE METAL FENCE IN AS WELL IN THE FENCE DESIGN AND SOME OTHER EXAMPLES LOCATED ALONG THE FENCE AREA. AND THESE ARE THE SURROUNDING AREAS. STAS RECOMMENDATION FOR THE REAR AND SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE IS DENIAL IN BOA DASH 25 1 0 3 0 0 2 3 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THERE IS INSUFFICIENT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN A SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF LIGHT VISIBILITY AND AIRFLOW ON THE ADJACENT RESIDENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. AND TWO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES EXCEPT FOR CARPORTS, ARE PROHIBITED WITHIN THE SITE. AND RARE SETBACKS OF LOTS ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SHIPPING CONTAINER. DESIGNED VARIANCE IS DENIAL IN BO OE DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 3 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE CURRENT ALTERATION DOES NOT APPROPRIATELY CONCEAL THE APPEARANCE OF THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS, NOR DOES IT INCORPORATE SIDING AND A ROOF INTO THE DESIGN. AND TWO, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS THE OPTION TO RE THE PROPERTY WITH A SPECIFIC, WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR STORAGE SHIPPING CONTAINER RATHER THAN TO COMPLY WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR FENCE MATERIAL VARIANCE IS DENIAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 3 6. [01:15:01] BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE FENCE MATERIAL UTILIZED IS PROHIBITED WITHIN THE CITY. AND THE APPROVED USE OF CORRUGATED METAL FENCING WAS NOT OBSERVED IN IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA. AND TWO, THE UTILIZATION OF METAL AND THE FENCING DESIGN DOES NOT APPEAR TO ENHANCE SECURITY OR PRIVACY FOR THE PROPERTY, 23 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NOT LOCATED IN THE BOUNDARIES OF A REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THIS IS THE SUPPORT RECEIVED. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT, SO THE ON THE CORRUGATED METAL, UM, I DIDN'T SEE ITEM NUMBER FOUR ON THE SITE PLAN. DO YOU HAVE A, A, A DEPICTION OF WHERE THOSE EXISTING LOCATIONS ARE? BE? WELL, IN THE PHOTOS THEY ARE, BUT THE REAR SIDE, THERE'S SOME METAL FENCE IN. AND IN ORDER TO HIGHLIGHT IT, I JUST LEFT IT AS TO THE, AS-BUILT PORTIONS. BUT YOU COULD CLEARLY SEE IT ALONG NACODOCHES ON WOODBURY AND EVEN A, BUT IN THAT SIDE, I WAS JUST RIGHT HERE. I'M ASKING BECAUSE, UH, WHOEVER MAKES A MOTION ON THAT. I KNOW I PERSONALLY LIKE TO BE MORE SPECIFIC, WHETHER THERE'S, THERE'S SOMETHING TANGIBLE TO SAY, HEY, THIS IS WHERE IT IS, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE APPROVING. UH, AS OPPOSED TO THAT, IS IT LIKE, WOULD YOU SAY 50% OF THE, OF THE FENCING IS CORRUGATED METAL? NO, I WOULD NOT SAY 50%. HOWEVER, FROM OUR REVIEW, WE'RE UNABLE TO SEE THIS PORTION. SO PUT IN A NUMBER TO IT, MAYBE THE APPLICANT CAN HELP US. OKAY, MAN. WE'LL HAVE WE, THE SITE PLAN ON THE ATTACHMENT HAS THE NUMBER FOUR ILLUSTRATED ON IT. WE'LL PUT IT ON THERE WHILE THE APPLICANT'S SPEAKER OH, IT DOES. I I APOLOGIZE. I THIS IS NOT ON HERE FOR SOME REASON. I THINK IT FELL OFF THE FIRST OR THE REQUEST. THE REQUEST IS THERE, BUT NOT THE HIGHLIGHTING THE LOCATION LIKE Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING AND WE'RE GONNA, HE'S, UH, AND, AND DO YOU KNOW HOW THIS CASE WAS BROUGHT, YOU KNOW, BROUGHT TO Y'ALL'S ATTENTION OR BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION? YES. THIS WAS FROM A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION. SO THERE WERE TWO ACTIVE INVESTIGATIONS. ONE FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ANOTHER SHIPPING CONTAINER AND THE ADDITION OF A COVERED PATIO. WAS IT A COMMUNITY THAT IT IN OR WAS IT JUST DRIVE-BY? DO YOU KNOW? THAT PART I'M UNCERTAIN OF. I CAN DEFINITELY CHECK INTO THAT. PLEASE DO. OKAY. WELL LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD IF YOU COULD PLEASE FORWARD. SURE. UH, AS SOON AS, UH, WE, IF YOU DO TALK, I HAVE TO HAVE YOU STATE YOUR NAME. SURE. UH, SO WE HAVE THAT ON THE RECORD. AND SO STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. VERY GOOD. MY NAME IS RICK GREENFIELD. I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. UM, I'M A LOCAL BUSINESSMAN ENTREPRENEUR AND, UH, BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY IN, UH, LATE 2024. OKAY. AND THIS IS COLT SMITH. HE'S MY EMPLOYEE, GENERAL MANAGER, PROPERTY MANAGER. AND HE'S ALSO GOT A BACKGROUND IN GENERAL CONTRACTING. SO HE IS KINDA HELPED ME NAVIGATE SOME OF THESE PROCESSES. OKAY. I'D LIKE TO START, IF POSSIBLE, BY EVEN JUST GOING BACK TO ONE OF THE FIRST SLIDES WHERE IT TALKED ABOUT AND WHAT YOU JUST MENTIONED ABOUT OPENING UP THIS INVESTIGATION. EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY WAS IN EXISTENCE WHEN I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY. UM, IT HAD AN OPERATING, UH, RESTAURANT. UH, THERE WAS A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. UM, WE HAD TO, WE HAD SOME OPEN PERMITS WHEN WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY. THERE WERE SOME ELECTRICAL PERMITS THAT, UH, WE HAD TO GET CLOSED IN A PLUMBING PERMIT. ACTUALLY SPENT A TON OF MONEY UPGRADING ALL THE ELECTRICAL TO BE ABLE TO CLOSE OUT THESE PERMITS. IN THE PROCESS OF FINAL INSPECTION, THAT'S WHEN SOMEONE DECIDED TO OPEN UP THESE CASES. BUT ALL OF THIS WAS 100% EXISTING WHEN WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY. JUST WANNA MAKE THAT REALLY CLEAR. UM, OKAY. ALRIGHT. I LIVE A COUPLE FEET OLDER, I, OH YEAH. THAT'S GOOD. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. UM, SO I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT, UM, IF WE WANNA JUST START BY ASKING QUESTIONS OR IF I SHOULD JUST EXPLAIN THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THE CONEXES ARE HERE. THEY'RE, THEY PROVIDE A BARRIER BETWEEN THIS RESTAURANT. THERE'S AN OUTDOOR YARD THAT, UM, THERE'S LIVE MUSIC, THERE'S LIGHTS, UM, LOTS OF PEOPLE, THERE'S KIDS PLAYING. UM, WE, YOU KNOW, SO AGAIN, I DID NOT KNOW THAT THERE WERE ANY CODE VIOLATIONS AND WOULDN'T HAVE EXPECTED TO. THERE HAVE BEEN WITH THE OPERATING CO IN PLACE. RIGHT. SO TWO OPERATING, TWO, TWO OPERATING COS UM, AND EVEN SATELLITE IMAGERY SHOWS THAT THESE WERE THERE PROBABLY AT LEAST, UH, FROM 2018 OR LONGER, THEY HAVE PAINTED MURALS ON THEM. UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE REALLY PRETTY, I THINK ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE IN THE RESTAURANT AND WHATNOT, THEY'RE NOT REALLY HIGHLY VISIBLE FROM THE ROADWAY. THAT PICTURE THAT YOU SEE IS LIKE WALKING ALL THE WAY UP TO THE FENCE AND, AND TAKING THOSE PICTURES. BUT FROM THE ROADWAY, THEY'RE NOT EVEN VERY VISIBLE. UM, WE'VE DONE A LOT TO AND BEAUTIFY THIS PROPERTY FROM WHERE IT WAS WHEN WE FIRST BOUGHT IT. EVERYTHING FROM LANDSCAPING TO PAINTING TO CLEANING UP THE GROUNDS. I EVEN PAID $6,500 TO GET THE CHURCH A NEW SIGN 'CAUSE IT WAS DILAPIDATED. AND I THOUGHT THAT WOULD HELP THE COMMUNITY LOOK A LITTLE BIT BETTER. UM, I CERTAINLY WANT TO BE WITHIN COMPLIANCE, BUT TO REMOVE THESE WOULD BE AN ASTRONOMICAL FORTUNE AND WOULD SEVERELY DEGRADE [01:20:01] THE ATMOSPHERE THAT THAT WAS CREATED BY THE PREVIOUS OWNERS. AND THAT I, FOR THE REASONS I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, QUITE HONESTLY. SO, UM, I DON'T EVEN REALLY KNOW WHAT TO ASK FOR. JUST LIKE SOME FORM OF LENIENCY ON ALLOWING US TO KEEP THESE CONTAINERS. UM, I COULD PROBABLY PAY TO HAVE THEM MOVED AWAY FROM THE FENCE LINE SOMEWHAT IF POSSIBLE. UM, I'M SURE IT'S POSSIBLE JUST, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD, WHAT IT WOULD TAKE. 'CAUSE THEY'RE INCREDIBLY HEAVY AND, AND THEY WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO MOVE. UM, AS FAR AS THE CORRUGATED ON THE FENCE, AGAIN, THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. IT'S ALSO AESTHETIC. I WOULD BE FINE TO REPLACE THAT AND CHANGE THAT IF THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S A VERY SMALL ITEM ON THE, ON THE MENU. I MEAN, THE BCAT SHOWS THAT THE RESTAURANT WAS BUILT IN 1948. UM, SO IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S BEEN A RESTAURANT FOR A LONG TIME. WHAT, WHAT ARE YOU USING THE STORAGE CONTAINERS FOR? IS THERE LIKE A BAR COMING? NO, WELL THEY WERE ACTUALLY LOADED WITH TONS OF JUNK AND WE'VE EMPTIED 'EM OUT FOR THE MOST PART. WE ARE USING THEM FOR THE LIGHT STORAGE AT THIS POINT. JUST, UH, RESTAURANT SUPPLIES. SOME OF THEM ARE ALMOST COMPLETELY EMPTY. UM, ONE OF THEM IS, OR WAS, I SHOULD SAY, UTILIZED AS AN OFFICE, BUT WE'VE TAKEN EVERYTHING OUT OF IT. AND THEY'RE REALLY JUST THERE. THEY PROVIDE A BARRIER, LIKE I SAID, REALLY BETWEEN US. AND THERE'S AN APARTMENT COMPLEX ON THIS SIDE WHERE IT SAYS 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK, THAT'S A PARKING LOT AND APARTMENT COMPLEX. YOU HAVE A, A MASSAGE PLACE, UH, COMMERCIAL ZONED PLACE RIGHT OVER HERE. AND THEN THERE'S A COUPLE OF RESIDENCES ON THAT BACK LEFT HAND CORNER. THE, THE REASON WHY I ASK IS, UH, THE PICTURE THAT SHOWS THE LIGHT BLUE CONEX WITH THE HAMBURGER ROCKETING UP IN THE AIR, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE, LIKE THERE'S SOME SORT OF A WINDOW OR SOMETHING THAT OPENS UP THAT COULD BE A, A DISTRIBUTION, LIKE A, LIKE A BAR OR SOMETHING? NO, THAT, THAT'S WHERE THE OFFICE WAS. OKAY. UM, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S SET UP LIKE A LITTLE OFFICE IN THERE. WE ACTUALLY JUST KEEP SOME MUSICAL EQUIPMENT IN THERE FOR THE BANDS. OKAY. AND COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS MANANA, COMMISSIONER MANANA QUESTION FOR CITY STAFF. SO, SO, SO SHOULD THIS BE APPROVED, UM, I GUESS WHAT USES, COULD THOSE CONEX CONTAINERS BE MADE, UH, UTILIZED FOR YOU? UH, ARE THERE LIMITATIONS OR, OR IS THAT OPENING UP COMPLETELY THEN AT THIS POINT? UM, THEY COULD BE USED FOR ANYTHING THAT IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN A C ONE OR ACCESSORY TO THE RESTAURANT USE. IN OTHER WORDS. OH, SO COULD THEY, UM, MAKE IT A, UH, NOT SO MOBILE FOOD COURT AND START SELLING FOOD OUT OF THOSE, THOSE CONTAINERS? WELL AGAIN, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE, UM, AND I APOLOGIZE, I NEED TO STRIKE THAT ORIGINAL ITEM. SO IT COULDN'T BE JUST ANYTHING IN A C ONE USE BECAUSE THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH SETBACKS. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE, IF THEY'RE GONNA BE KEPT AS ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, IT WOULD BE ACCESSORY TO THE RESTAURANT AND UM, AND THAT THEY COULD ALSO SERVE FOOD OUT OF THERE. BUT AGAIN, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE ACCESSORY TO THE RESTAURANT USE OR WHATEVER IS THE MAIN USE OF THE, OR THE USE OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE. DOES THAT. I HOPE THAT MAKES SENSE. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? STEVENS, MR. STEVENS, HAVE YOU EVER HAD ANY COMPLAINTS FROM YOUR NEIGHBORS ON THE SOUTH SIDE? THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT FROM A SETBACK STANDPOINT. ON THE, ON THE WEST SIDE, NORTHWEST SIDE YOU'RE ABUTTING MULTI-FAMILY PARKING LOT. SO I THINK BEING CLOSER TO THAT LI LINE'S. OKAY. BUT NO, WE'VE NOT HAD ANY COMPLAINTS. AND I'M SORRY, JUST TO ALSO REITERATE, UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA, YOU HAD A QUESTION? IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS, UH, THE COMPLAINTS WERE VOICED IN THROUGH THE CALL CENTER, SO SOMEBODY DID CALL, BUT THEY DIDN'T LEAVE ANY INFORMATION OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. OKAY. UM, SHE GOT ME THINKING, SO IF THERE WAS A COMPLAINT THROUGH THE PHONE, DID YOU ALL KNOW ABOUT THIS OR WAS IT SOMETHING TOTALLY NEW TO YOU ALL THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN SOMEBODY, UH, THAT'S WHY YOU ALL GOT INSPECTED? NO, I HAVE, HONESTLY, I HAVE NO IDEA. I'VE NOT HEARD OF ANY COMPLAINTS. THAT'S THE FIRST I'VE EVER HEARD OF ANY SORT OF A PHONE CALL COMPLAINT. I ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW A HUNDRED PERCENT WHY THIS WAS, THIS CASE WAS OPENED UP. UM, BUT IT WAS TEMPORAL TO WHEN WE WERE BEING INSPECTED FOR SOME PERMITS THAT WE WERE GETTING CLOSED AND THEN, UH, A LOT OF QUESTIONS GOT RAISED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THESE CONEX IS DOING HERE AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. AND SO WE'VE BEEN IN A VERY LONG PROCESS AT THIS POINT WORKING THROUGH THESE ISSUES. OKAY. SO HOW LONG HAS THE BUSINESS BEEN CLOSED BEFORE YOU BOUGHT IT AND STARTED WORKING ON IT AGAIN? THERE WAS AN O OPERATING BUSINESS WHEN I BOUGHT IT. OKAY. AND I CONTINUED OPERATIONS OF THAT BUSINESS UP UNTIL, UH, OCTOBER. AND I ACTUALLY CEASED OPERATING MY RESTAURANT IN OCTOBER, BUT IT WAS AN OPERATING BUSINESS WHEN I BOUGHT THE LAND AND I CONTINUED THOSE OPERATIONS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. YES MA'AM. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? [01:25:01] IS THERE ANYONE SIGNING TO SPEAKER OR VOICEMAILS? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. UM, IS THERE ANY, UM, ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD BEFORE WE MOVE ON AND, OH, I ACTUALLY, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. SURE. YOU HAD MENTIONED IT WAS, I KNOW IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT, BUT YOU COULD THEORETICALLY MOVE SOME OF THE, THESE CONEX BOXES. HOW FAR AWAY COULD YOU MOVE ONE AND, AND A MORE PARTICULARLY? UH, THE ONES THAT ARE ABUTTING THE, THE HOMES, UM, IF WE NEEDED TO MEET THE VARIANCE, I MEAN, IT MEET THE REQUIREMENT, WHICH I BELIEVE IS 10 FEET. 'CAUSE THEY'RE ROUGHLY FIVE FEET RIGHT NOW. ONE OF THEM'S A LITTLE BIT MORE LIKE FOUR FEET. UM, YOU KNOW, I I I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALL IS INVOLVED IN MOVING A CONEX LIKE THIS. UM, I THINK IT COULD CAUSE US TO TEAR UP SOME OF THAT, LIKE ASTROTURF THAT'S IN THERE AND WHATNOT. BUT, UM, THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY MAJOR HARM IN MOVING THEM ANOTHER FIVE FEET OUT. I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE'D LOSE SOME OF THE PLAY AREA, UH, SPACE THERE. UH, BUT IT CERTAINLY COULD BE DONE. I, I'M OBVIOUS I'M MUCH MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS 30 FOOT VARIANCE ON THE SIDE THAT'S UP AGAINST THE, UH, PARKING LOT IN THE APARTMENT COMPLEX. 'CAUSE THAT, THAT WOULD JUST, I'D HAVE TO JUST REMOVE IT. AND WHAT, WHAT YEAR DID THAT, THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL CONEX ADDED. DO YOU KNOW WHEN THAT WAS DONE? WE DIDN'T ADD ANY ADDITIONAL CONEXES. EVERYTHING ON THE PROPERTY WAS THERE AT THE TIME THAT I PURCHASED IT IN 24. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL? LET'S MOVE ON TO A MOTION. UM, LOOKING FOR A MOTION. STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS MM-HMM . REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH TWO FIVE DASH OH 3 0 2 3 6. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST FOR ONE A SIX FOOT SIX INCH AND A 26 FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 10 FOOT SIDE AND 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITH A THREE FOOT SIX INCH SIDE AND REAR SETBACK. TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE UDC ACCESSORY STRUCTURE REGULATIONS TO ALLOW ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHIN THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACK OF A NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WHICH ABUTS A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. THREE, A SHIPPING CONTAINER DESIGNED VARIANCE TO ALLOW SHIPPING CONTAINERS ALTERED WITH SIDING WITHOUT SIDING AND A ROOF AND FOUR FENCE MATERIAL VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR SHEET ROLL OR CORRUGATED METAL LIMITED TO THE AS-BUILT PORTION SITUATED AT 2 7 6 9 NACODOCHES. APPLICANT BEING COLT SMITH. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNI UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ARE SUFFICIENTLY SEPARATED FROM THE ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO THE SIDE AND REAR AND WOULD NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THOSE RESIDENCES. THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS ARE ALTERED WITH AN ARTWORK WHICH APPROPRIATELY CONCEALS THE CONVENTIONAL APPEARANCE OF A SHIPPING CONTAINER. AND THE FENCE MATERIAL IS SPARSELY USED ALONG LIMITED PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY LINES TO COMPLEMENT THE DESIGN OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE THERE. THEREFORE, THEREBY HAVING NO SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT TO NEIGHBORHOOD AESTHETICS. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. RELOCATING THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO BE OUTSIDE THE REAR AND SIDE SETBACK AREAS WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE ESTABLISHED OUTSIDE DINING AND ENTERTAINMENT AREAS. THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE TO IMPROVE THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS BY ADDING ROOFING AND SIDING TO EACH OF THE CONTAINER UNITS, WHICH WERE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO THEIR OWNERSHIP. AND THE METAL FENCING WOULD NEED TO BE REMOVED AND INSTALLED WITH AN ALLOWABLE MATERIAL, THEREBY REMOVING THE VISUAL COHESION OF THE RESTAURANT AND ASSOCIATED STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE STRUCTURE SEPARATION FROM ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USES WITH MINIMUM THREE FOOT SIX INCH SIDE AND REAR SETBACK IS SUFFICIENT FOR THE PREVENTION OF POTENTIAL NUISANCES AND WOULD NOT CREATE A SUBSTANTIAL LOSS OF LIGHT VISIBILITY AND AIRFLOW ON THOSE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. THE CURRENT APPEARANCE OF THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS PRESERVES THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SURROUNDING AREA BY INCORPORATING ARTWORK TO PROMOTE A WELCOMING AND NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDLY ATMOSPHERE AND GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT UNDER UNDERMINE THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE OR CONTRIBUTE TO A VISUAL BLIGHT WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OF OTHER THAN THOSE USES. 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, SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE CONFORMING PROPERTY TO THE REAR AND SIDE WOULD NOT BE INJURED AS THE SETBACK REDUCTION PROVIDES AN ADEQUATE SEPARATION BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES NECESSARY TO REDUCE POTENTIAL NUISANCE OF LIGHT AND NOISE POLLUTION. GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THE ARTWORK CAN, CAN BE CONSIDERED AN IMPROVEMENT TO THE, TO THE TYPICAL APPEARANCE OF A SHIPPING CONTAINER. AND THE FENCE MATERIAL AND THE MANNER OF WHICH IT IS USED ON THIS PROPERTY ARE NOT UNCHARACTERISTIC OF A, OF A PROPERTIES [01:30:01] AND DISTRICT DESIGNATED FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USE. SIX. THE PLAY OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THAT THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THIS VARIANCE REQUESTS WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL. THE CURRENT OWNER PURCHASED THE RESTAURANT ALONG WITH ITS EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES USED FOR STORING NECESSARY RESTAURANT SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT. STAFF FINDS THAT THE VARIANCE REQUESTS ARE FROM UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ON THE PROPERTY, SPECIFICALLY THAT THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS WERE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY IN 2019 PRIOR TO THE APPLICANT'S OWNERSHIP. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY ON THE SECONDARY ARTERIAL AND THE NEED FOR PRIVACY SCREENING FOR THE ASSOCIATED OUTDOOR DINING AND ACTIVITY AREAS. END OF MOTION. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANOCK. COMMISSIONER STEVENS. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF ALL OF THESE VARIANCES. I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVING HAD ANY, UM, ANY ISSUES WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH WAS MY PRIMARY CONCERN. AND IT APPEARS THAT THERE'S ADEQUATE SPACE AROUND THESE CONTAINERS TO MAINTAIN THEM. UH, THE CONTAINERS ON THE NORTH NORTHWEST SIDE ABUT A PARKING LOT. SO I THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME LENIENCY IN TERMS OF SETBACKS THERE AND ASKING FOR YOU TO PULL IT 30 FEET OFF, UH, JUST SEEMS LIKE A, AN ISSUE IN TERMS OF YOUR BUSINESS AND LOSING SPACE TO, TO SELL TO PATRONS. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. AND, UM, SO FOR A COUPLE REASONS. ONE IS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH REGARDS TO THE SETBACK ON THE ONE, SO ESSENTIALLY THESE BECOME, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, TALL FENCES THAT ARE KIND OF SOUND INSULATING, UM, UH, THIS, THIS BUSINESS FROM THOSE NEIGHBORS. AND, AND SO I LOOK AT THAT AS A LITTLE BIT OF A BENEFIT. UM, AND WHILE IT IS A, WE'LL SAY A LITTLE BIT, UM, UNIQUE WITH REGARDS TO HAVING THESE STRUCTURES THERE VERSUS WE'LL SAY WHAT WE NORMALLY SEE AS STRUCTURES, I SEE THAT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE USE OR, OR NOT AN INAPPROPRIATE USE, UH, ON THIS PROPERTY. SO, UM, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD UNA THE COMMISSIONER. UNA? YEAH, I THINK WITH THE, UH, THE EXISTING SETBACK, THERE'S ADEQUATE SPACE FOR THEM TO MAINTAIN THAT BACKSIDE BETWEEN THE FENCE AND THE, UH, CONTAINER UNIT. SO I, I DON'T THINK THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH THEM BEING ABLE TO GET BACK THERE AND MAINTAIN THAT SPACE. SO, GREAT SUPPORTING IT. ANYONE ELSE? HEARING NONE? LETS HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BOEZ? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIENT AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES. IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAT OR WE THE FENCING MATERIAL. THANK YOU. UH, THE FENCING I THINK WAS PART OF THIS. 'CAUSE IT'S A VARIANCE. YEAH. ALL RIGHT, SO WE ARE ON ITEM NUMBER SIX. ITEM NUMBER SIX IS BO OA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 3 2 5. THE ADDRESS BEING 7 1 8 TRAFALGAR ROAD IN COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE. THE APPLICANT IS IVAN AVA, AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR 1 8 3 FOOT EIGHT INCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT SOLID FENCE TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT SIX INCH SOLID FENCE WITH SIX FOOT EIGHT INCH COLUMNS, LIMITED TO THE FREESTANDING WALL AS CONSTRUCTED IN THE FRONT YARD. TWO A SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 25 FOOT CORNER CLEAR VISION AREA TO ALLOW AN 18 FOOT CORNER CLEAR VISION AREA. AND THREE, A FOUR FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA TO ALLOW AN 11 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA LIMITED TO THE GATE IN THE REAR YARD. THE ZONING IS R FOUR. IN OCTOBER, 2024, DURING AN INVESTIGATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT STAFF OBSERVED A NEW STONE WALL CONSTRUCTED IN FRONT OF THE HOME. THE WALL WAS NOTED TO HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED OVER THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE THREE FEET AND WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT. THE PROPERTY OWNER'S INTENT IS TO COVER THE WALL WITH FOLIAGE AS A LANDSCAPING FEATURE. HOWEVER, UDC SECTION 35 5 14 A THREE STATES THAT FREESTANDING WALLS NOT INTEGRAL LOAD BEARING PORTIONS OF A STRUCTURE, WHETHER CONSTRUCTED OF MASONRY OR WOOD [01:35:01] FRAMING SHALL BE CONSIDERED FENCING AND THEREBY MUST ABIDE BY FENCE HEIGHT STANDARDS. THE FREESTANDING WALL IN THE FRONT YARD EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FENCE HEIGHT AND ENCROACHES INTO THE MINIMUM REQUIRED CORNER CLEAR VISION AREA. A GATE IN, UH, INSTALLED ALONG THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND IN THE REAR YARD ALSO ENCROACHES INTO THE MINIMUM REQUIRED DRIVEWAY. CLEAR VISION AREA SHOWN HERE IS A SITE PLAN OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITEM NUMBER ONE BEING THAT FREE STANDING WALL AND THE HEIGHT, UH, OF THAT WALL. UH, IT ALSO ENCROACHES INTO THE CORNER OF CLEAR VISION AREA THERE ON THE CORNER OF THE JONES MALTSBERGER ACCESS ROAD AND TRAFALGAR ROAD. AND THEN THREE TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, THERE IS A GATE THAT WAS RECENTLY INSTALLED IN FRONT OF THAT DRIVEWAY, UM, THAT IS WITHIN THE DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA. AND THIS IS A HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY FROM JANUARY, 2023. AND THIS IS THE CURRENT VIEW OF THAT PROPERTY WITH THAT FREESTANDING WALL THERE IN THE FRONT HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE SIDE, UH, SIDE PROPERTY LINE OR THE THE REAR YARD AREA AND THAT DRIVEWAY. AND THIS IS THE CURRENT VIEW AND THAT NEW GATE THAT'S BEEN INSTALLED AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BOA DASH 25 DASH 3 2 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT SUPPORT THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER AS A FREESTANDING WALL CREATES A VISUAL OBSTRUCTION IN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF THE PROPERTY. AND TWO, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WOULD BE LIMITED IN ITS ACCESS TO A FREE AND OPEN VIEW FROM THEIR OWN FRONT YARD BY THE VISUAL OBSTRUCTION. THE FREE STANDING WALL CREATES STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CORNER. CLEAR VISION STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO OA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 0 3 2 5 0 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUPPORT THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE VISUAL OBSTRUCTION OF THE FREESTANDING WALL AT THE CORNER OF THIS LOT CREATES A TRAFFIC HAZARD. AND TWO, THE VARIANCE WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS NO SIMILAR OBSTRUCTIONS IN THE CORNER CLEAR VISION AREA WERE OBSERVED IN THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH 3 2 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT. ONE, THE VARIANCE WOULD SUPPORT THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THERE IS SUFFICIENT CLEAR VISION AREA TO SAFELY EXIT THE GATE. AND TWO, WITH LESS TRAFFIC UTILIZING THIS ACCESS ROAD. THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC HAZARD CREATED BY THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY. CLEAR VISION AREA OF REDUCTION. STAFF MAILED 18 NOTICES ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. THE CROWN HILL PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND IN THE SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. UH, SO JUST A QUICK QUESTION. ON THE COMMON PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN THIS LOT AND THE LOT NEXT TO IT, UH, THERE IS A NO PARKING SIGN WITH ARROWS THAT GO LEFT TO RIGHT. DOES THAT APPLY ON THE ENTIRE BLOCK FACE OR IS THAT ONLY IN FRONT OF THOSE TWO HOMES? UH, I CAN LOOK INTO THAT JUST BY DOING A QUICK GOOGLE STREET DRIVE BY, I'M ACTUALLY NOT SURE, UM, OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I CAN GET THAT INFO FOR YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. VERY, I'M JUST TRYING TO, TRYING TO SEE IF NO CARS ARE ALLOWED ANYWHERE ON THAT SIDE OF THE BLOCK THAT HELPS ENLIGHTEN ME ON, ON TRAFFIC CONCERNS. ABSOLUTELY. LET ME, LET ME GRAB THAT. OKAY, MAN. COMMISSIONER MANER. SO THERE IS A NO PARKING SIGN WITH A SINGLE ARROW ON THE BUDDING PROPERTY POINTING TOWARDS THAT CORNER, SO IT DOES LOOK LIKE IT'S ONE. OKAY. TWO HOUSES DEEP. YEAH, I DIDN'T SEE, I DIDN'T CATCH THAT ONE. I'M SORRY. YEAH, IT'S TURNED KIND OF SIDEWAYS, WONKYISH, BUT OH, THERE IT IS. APOLOGIZE. YEAH, SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S, IT'S JUST FOR THE, FOR THOSE TWO HOMES. OKAY. HELLO. UM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. OKAY. MY NAME IS NANCY. I'M, HE'S A MEDICAL STUDENT. YOU WANTED TO BE HERE, BUT HIS SPEAKERS, MA'AM, I HAVE TO TELL YOU I CAN, IT'S, I CAN HEAR EVERYTHING RIGHT. I KNOW . I KNOW IT'S TOUGHER FOR YOU'RE SPOILED RIGHT THERE. OKAY. . OKAY. MY NAME IS NANCY ESE. I'M REPRESENTING MY NEPHEW IVAN RUBALCAVA. HE'S A MEDICAL STUDENT. HE WANTED TO BE HERE, BUT HIS CLASS, HE HAD CLASS COMMITMENTS AND COULD NOT BE HERE. HE'S THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AT SEVEN 18. UH, TRAFALGAR. UH, I WANTED TO ADDRESS, UH, THE ONE QUESTION YOU HAD AT, UH, IN THE BEGINNING, BEFORE BEGIN, YOU ASKED ABOUT THE PARKING SIGNS AND THE NATATORIUM IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET AND EVERY WEEK THERE ARE CARS PARKED ALL THE WAY DOWN ON BOTH SIDES. THEY, IRRESPECTIVE OF THOSE DO NOT PARKING SIGNS. SO THERE'S, UH, THEY HAVE ACTIVITIES AT THAT NATATORIUM ALL THE TIME, AND THAT BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET ARE JUST LOADED WITH CARS ON THAT SIDE, ON THE, ON THE, ON THE SIDE STREET WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS. THEY'RE PACKED. ALL, IT'S ALL THE TIME. IT'S A ROUTINE. UM, OKAY. TO BEGIN, MY NEPHEW APPLIED FOR THIS VARIANCE AND, UH, [01:40:01] IN SUPPORT OF THE VARIANCE, HE WENT BLOCK WALKING TO 50 HOMES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, TALKED TO NEIGHBORS, SHOWED HIM HIS VARIANCE, SHOWED HIM THE EMAILS, UH, HIS COMMUNICATIONS, AND HE RECEIVED, UH, 50 SIGNATURES FROM NEIGHBORS IN SUPPORT. AND, UH, HIS, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN BY SAYING IN 2022 WHEN HE PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY, HE, UH, CROWN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WAS HAVING MEETINGS. AND IN THE MEETINGS THEY WERE ASKING NEIGHBORS TO SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 350, UH, UNIT COMPLEX ACROSS THE STREET FROM HIS HOME. AND, UH, DURING THE MEETINGS, UH, COUNCILMAN BRAVO WAS APPEARING AT THE MEETINGS AND HE WAS URGING, UH, URGING THE RESIDENTS TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT. AND IN, IN LIEU OF NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS ABOUT THE, UH, INCREASED TRAFFIC, INCREASED NOISE, INCREASED, UH, VEHICLE, UH, TRAFFIC, HE SAID, YOU KNOW, UH, WE KNOW YOU GUYS ARE GONNA HAVE FENCING CONCERNS, UH, ET CETERA. GO TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND WE CAN, UH, WE CAN, UH, HELP YOU DO LANDSCAPE WALLS, FENCING, AND WE WILL BE SUPPORTIVE. AND SO MY, THEY HANDED OUT AN INFORMATION BULLETIN NUMBER 1 71 AND, UH, THAT'S EXHIBIT ONE THAT, UH, WAS ATTACHED TO THE APPLICATION. AND IN RELEVANT PART, I'M GONNA STOP YOU. SO YOU MENTIONED A, A 50 SIGNATURES, AND NOW YOU'RE ON THIS INFO BULLETIN. IS ANY OF THAT STAFF, CAN YOU SHOW ANY THAT FOR THE BEST? I, I PROVIDED, UH, THE SIGNATURES TO, UH, JOEL. OKAY. CAN YOU, OH, THERE WE GO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IT'S AT EXHIBIT EIGHT, AND IF YOU'LL FLIP THE FIRST PAGE, 10, THE SECOND PAGE, 10 SIGNATURES, THE THIRD PAGE, 10 SIGNATURES, THE FOURTH PAGE, 10 SIGNATURES, THE FIFTH PAGE, 10 SIGNATURES. AND ALL THE NEIGHBORS WERE IN SUPPORT AND HE DIDN'T HAVE ANYBODY OBJECTING. AND EVERYBODY WAS FAMILIAR WITH HIS WALL. HE TOOK PHOTOS. UH, IF YOU, UH, TAKE A LOOK AT THE, UH, APPLICA THE SIGNATURE APPLICATION, UH, HE, HE IDENTIFIES WHAT HE'S GIVEN TO NEIGHBORS, THEIR, HIS EMAILS, THE APPLICATION, THE, UH, VARIANCE OF, UH, INFORMATION PROVIDED BY JOEL. AND, UH, IT'S ALL LISTED. EVERYTHING HE, HE TOOK TO THE NEIGHBORS EVERY HOUSE AND NEIGHBORS WERE ALLOWED TO LOOK AT THE MATERIALS, THE EMAILS, EVERYTHING. AND SO HE DID COLLECT THE SIGNATURES. BUT, UH, SO WHERE I WAS, I THINK THE MIC, OKAY, THAT WAS ME. I APOLOGIZE. SO BASICALLY THE, UH, AT THESE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS, HE WAS GIVEN BULLETINS, UH, THE NEIGHBORS WERE GIVEN THESE BULLETINS. IT WAS BULLETIN 1 71, AND ON PAGE TWO OF SIX, THERE'S A HEADING CALLED LANDSCAPE WALLS. AND IT SAYS, LANDSCAPE WALLS ARE DESIGNED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS OR OTHERS STRICTLY FOR LANDSCAPING PURPOSES, THOUGH NOT STRICTLY DEFINED, THEY MAY BE LARGE, HEAVY BOULDERS LIMESTONE BLOCKS PLACED FOR LANDSCAPING PURPOSES ONLY. THESE LANDSCAPE WALLS ARE INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF THIS INFORMATION. BULLETINS, SINCE THEY ARE STANDALONE WALLS AND SOIL IS RETAINED, LANDSCAPING WALLS WILL BE RECATEGORIZED EVERY AS RETAINING WALLS IF THE WALL IS 10 FEET OR HIGHER IN HEIGHT. AND SO THAT WAS BULLETIN 1 71, AND IT WAS DATED MARCH 19TH, UH, 2010, REVISED JANUARY 6TH, 2022. AND THIS IS WHAT WAS BEING HANDED OUT AT THE CROWN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS. MY NEPHEW THEREAFTER, HE, UH, IT'S EXHIBIT TWO, JOEL, IF YOU WANNA SHOW THEM, HE WENT TO, UH, HE WENT TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. HE TOOK A DIAGRAM DOWN TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND HE SHOWED THEM THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE WALL I WOULD LIKE TO DO IN THE FRONT OF MY PROPERTY. AND HE WAS GIVEN THE NAME OF LESLIE A ZAVALA SENIOR PLANS EXAMINER, CITY OF SAN ANTONIO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, EMAIL LESLIE DOT ZAVALA@SANANTONIO.GOV. AND THEN, UH, AFTER HE TOOK IT DOWN, HE STARTED HAVING COMMUNICATIONS WITH LESLIE AND, UH, EXHIBIT THREE, JOEL IS MY NEPHEW'S, UH, THIS IS HIS EMAIL TO MS. VALLA. HE SAID, I'M DESIGNING A LANDSCAPE WALL FOR THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE THAT IS NOT MORE THAN 10 FEET IN HEIGHT. CAN YOU PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHETHER I CAN BEGIN BUILDING OR IF I NEED TO SUBMIT ANY FURTHER APPLICATION WITH THE CITY? AND THEN EXHIBIT FOUR, SHE, UH, [01:45:01] UH, LESLIE ZAVALA RESPONDED TO IVAN ON NOVEMBER 23RD, 2022. SHE AND SHE, SHE SAID, I APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY IN YOUR RESPONSE. A PERMIT IS NOT REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION AS LONG AS YOUR PROPOSED LANDSCAPE WALL IS STRICTLY FOR LANDSCAPING, NOT MORE THAN 10 FEET IN HEIGHT AND DOES NOT SUPPORT, SUPPORT A SURCHARGE. YOU MAY START CONSTRUCTION AT ANY TIME. AND NO INSPECTIONS FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ARE REQUIRED. AND I WOULD, I WOULD PLACE AN EMPHASIS ADDED ON THAT. AND THE EMAIL GOES ON, SHE'S EXPLAINING OTHER THINGS, BUT THAT IS THE KEY, UH, INFORMATION ON HER EMAIL. AND MY NEPHEW RELIED ON THAT. AND, UH, HE FULLY RELIED ON THAT INFORMATION. HE TALKED TO CONTRACTORS, HE TALKED TO, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, BUILDERS, HE TALKED TO, YOU KNOW, UH, IN, YOU KNOW, INVESTIGATED THE TYPE OF ROCK OR STONE OR WHATEVER HE WAS GONNA USE AND INVESTED OVER $5,000 IN, IN GETTING MATERIALS AND STUFF TO BUILD THIS LANDSCAPE WALL. I, I JUST WANTED TO, TO CHIME IN ON THAT. SURE. SO THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FENCE, A WALL, A LANDSCAPE WALL, A RETAINING WALL, RETAINING WALL WITH A SURCHARGE. THE STAFF WASN'T AN ERROR WHEN THEY SAID THAT YOU CAN BUILD A LANDSCAPE WALL AND THEY PUT THEM, POSE THOSE CONDITIONS. BUT ON YOUR PLAN, THOSE, THOSE STONE LIMESTONE BLOCKS ARE WHAT WE CALL BUTTER BARS ARE ABOUT TWO FEET, 18 INCHES TO TWO FEET BY ABOUT FIVE FEET. THE, YOU CAN SEE THEM IN THE FRONT, UH, RIGHT, RIGHT BEHIND THEM, DIRECTLY BEHIND THE MAILBOX. THAT'S A, THAT COULD BE A LANDSCAPE WALL. BUT THE, THE WALL IN QUESTION THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY, THAT'S NOT A LANDSCAPE WALL UNLESS I'M WELL, HE WAS, HE SHOWED, UH, THAT'S WHY I READ , BUT HE DIDN'T TURN IN FOR A PERMIT. RIGHT. AND LESLIE AND LESLIE SAID, UH, OR THE BULLETIN THAT HE SHARED WITH LESLIE THAT HE WAS GIVEN WAS THE ONE WHERE IT SAYS YOU CAN USE LARGE, HEAVY BOULDERS, LIMESTONE BLOCKS PLACED FOR LANDSCAPING PURPOSES AND OR MAYBE WALLS PLACED IN THE CUT OR FILL APPLICATIONS STRICTLY FOR THE PROTECTIONS BY EXISTING TREES. YEAH, THAT I, I UNDERSTAND. BUT THAT'S, THAT INFO BOLD HAS NO APPLICATION TOWARDS THE WALL THAT'S BEFORE THIS BOARD TODAY. THAT'S NOT A LANDSCAPE WALL. AND IT SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN PERCEIVED AS ONE, UH, STAFF. YOU CAN BRING UP THE PICTURE THAT SHOWS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. RIGHT. NO, NO. AND HE ACTUALLY SPOKE TO LESLIE ABOUT WHAT HE WAS USING. LESLIE WROTE BACK THE EMAIL CORRECTLY. YES. YOU KNOW, SHE REITERATED THE CODE. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THAT PICTURE, THOSE SMALL BLOCKS IN THE FRONT BY THE STAIRS, THAT'S A LANDSCAPE WALL. THE, THE, THE MASON, THAT MASONRY PRODUCT BEHIND THERE THAT'S APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET TALL IS NOT A LANDSCAPE WALL. RIGHT. BUT BEFORE, WOULD'VE HE BOUGHT THE, BEFORE HE BOUGHT THE CINDER BLOCK? HE ASKED LESLIE, BUT HE DIDN'T APPLY FOR A PERMIT. RIGHT. AND YOU, IF HE WOULD'VE TURNED THAT IN FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, STAFF WOULD'VE SAID NO. OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT. RIGHT, OKAY. THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY BEARING FOR WHAT WE'RE TODAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. WELL, I'M, I'M JUST SAYING HE DID GO TO L LESLIE BEFORE HE EVEN PURCHASED ANYTHING, AND HE C COMMUNICATED WITH HER. I PERSONALLY WENT WITH HIM AT LEAST FIVE TIMES TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO GET MORE INFORMATION ON LANDSCAPE WALLS. AND UH, AND THE BEST INFORMATION WE GOT WAS YOU CAN USE ANY MATERIALS, BUT THAT IT HAS TO BE RECESSED BACK OFF THE PROPERTY LINE. AND WELL, WHAT TREE? WHAT TREE IS IT? IS THIS LANDSCAPE WALL HOLDING, WHAT, WHAT VEGETATION IS IT HOLDING BACK? I MEAN, THE AND PURPOSE OF THAT WAS FOR A TREE. WELL, OR YOU HAVE A, YOU HAVE A TREE THAT'S LIFTED AND YOU'RE TRYING TO BUILD SOMETHING AROUND IT TO HELP IT, IT SAYS, OR MAYBE WALLS PLACED IN CUT OR FILL APPLICATION STRICTLY FOR THE ROOT PROTECTION FOR THE ROOT PROTECTION ZONE. THAT'S, THAT'S NOT WHAT THAT'S, THAT'S AN OR IN THE YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT WHAT THAT'S DOING. BUT I DON'T WANT TO GET OFF ON A TANGENT ON THAT. AND, AND I HAD A QUESTION AS WELL. SO YES. SO, SO, AND THE QUESTION MAYBE FOR CITY STAFF. SO LOOKING AT THIS PROPERTY, THE WAY IT'S SLOPED, UM, YES, THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT SLOPE COMING FROM, WE'LL SAY FROM THE HOUSE, A LINE TO THE STREET. AND SO IT LOOKS TO DROP, WE'LL SAY, WELL, I'LL GIVE IT FIVE FEET. UM, AND SO, SO IF THEY HAD NOT HAD THE CENTER BLOCKS THERE, OR THEY WERE BROUGHT IN THOSE, UH, LIMESTONE BLOCKS AND THEY HAD NOT BROUGHT ANY OF THE FILL DIRT BETWEEN THE WALL AND THE CURRENT, UM, LIMESTONE BLOCKS AND PUT A FENCE THERE, UH, SO HAD THE EXISTING FENCE THERE. SO BASICALLY IT, SO THE FENCE ITSELF DID BECOME THE RETAINING WALL FOR, FOR THE YARD. WOULD THE HEIGHT OF IT HAD BEEN LIMITED TO THE GROUND LEVEL THAT WAS BEING ESTABLISHED. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE WHAT I'M SAYING? SO, SO IF THE, THE WALL RIGHT NOW IN QUESTION WOULD BE ACTING AS A, UH, LANDSCAPE WALL. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? YEAH. SO, SO THE, SO THE, SO IF IT WAS THE CASE THAT THE LIMESTONE WASN'T THERE, [01:50:01] NONE OF DIRT WAS THERE. AND SO NOW WE HAVE THAT SLOPE GOING ON, AND THE WALL AND THE EXISTING WALL WAS GOING DOWN TO, WE'LL SAY, UH, SURFACE LEVEL. AND THEN ON THE BACKSIDE IT WAS RETAINING SOIL. SO IT, IT ACTUALLY IS WORKING THAT PROCESS. HOW TALL COULD THAT FENCE BE, UM, AS A RETAINING WALL? IS IT AT, IT CAN ONLY BE AS TALL AS THE LAND THAT, OR THE, UH, SOIL THAT IS, UH, KEEPING FROM RIGHT MOVING AWAY, OR COULD IT BE THREE FEET ABOVE THAT? OR COULD IT BE AS 10 FEET TALL? SO JUST TO UNDERSTAND, SO IF YOU, I MEAN I CAN ANSWER THAT. SO YOU, YOU CAN RETAIN EARTH AND THEN WHATEVER YOUR FI FENCE SITE IS, YOU CAN HAVE IT ABOVE THAT. SO IF YOUR FENCE IS THREE FEET, YOU CAN RETAIN FIVE FEET AND THEN YOU CAN GO THREE FEET ABOVE IT. THAT'S ALL. BUT, BUT IF YOU, BUT IF YOU'RE RETAINING MORE THAN FOUR FEET AND YOU HAVE A FENCE PRODUCT ON TOP OF THAT, THE FENCE IS CONSIDERED A SURCHARGE. AND THAT REQUIRES A RETI RETAINING WALL CHILD PERMIT ON THE FENCE APPLICATION. AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG ON THAT, BUT THAT'S MY BEST EXPERIENCE WITH THOSE THINGS. BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS IF THAT CINDER BLOCK WALL WAS IN THE LOCATION OF WHERE THOSE STONES ARE AND IT WAS ONLY THREE FEET ABOVE THE SOIL LEVEL THAT IT WAS RETAINING, IT WOULD BE LEGITIMATE. IT'D BE, IT'D BE LEGITIMATE. BUT THIS, BUT IN THIS CASE, THAT WALL IS LIKE SIX FEET TALL. YEAH. JUST TO KIND OF BRIEF WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER MANOS QUESTION. THERE IS A STIPULATION THAT YOU COULD RAISE A FENCE IF YOU HAVE A SIGNIFICANT GRADE CHANGE OF OVER FOUR FEET, BUT WE DON'T ALLOW THAT IN THE FRONT. IT'S ONLY WITH SHARED PROPERTY LINES. SO IT TYPICALLY WOULD ONLY BE ALONG THE SIDE OR THE REAR. NOW, JUST TO KIND OF STATE THOUGH, SAY THAT FENCE WAS ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT AND YOU HAD ALL THAT FILL, THAT SOIL BEING PUSHED AGAINST THERE, W THAT FIRST SECTION THAT'S HOLDING FILL, WE WOULD NOT CONSIDER THAT AS PART OF THE FENCE HEIGHT. IF I WAS TO BE, THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED GRADE. SO ANYTHING THAT'S NOT CONTAINING SOIL WOULD THEN BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE FENCE HEIGHT. YEAH. AND THAT WOULD BE WHERE YOU WOULD START KICKING IN, IN THE FRONT THREE FEET SOLID OR FIVE FEET. AND THAT EXACTLY HOW I WOULD'VE UNDERSTOOD IT TOO. AND, AND SO AS, AS, UH, HE EXPLAINED, SO. PERFECT. OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. COMMISSIONER REED? YES. REED. UM, SO THAT ONE EXHIBIT YOU SHOWED HAD THE, UH, HAND DRAWING. YEAH. YOU CAN SEE THAT OF, OF THE RIGHT, UH, WALL. YES, SIR. AND WAS THAT PROVIDED IN THE EMAIL SENT TO, UH, YES. IT, IT WAS PROVIDED AS PART OF THE APPLICATION BECAUSE THAT, THAT DOES CLEARLY SHOW SIX FOOT HEIGHT MARKED. UH, I'M JUST CURIOUS WHY THAT WOULD'VE BEEN FOUND ACCEPTABLE. UM, IT'S NOT REALLY CLEAR THERE WHAT IT'S RETAINING, BUT, BUT JUST, BUT, AND, AND I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE AGAIN THAT I DID GO TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WITH MY NEPHEW AT LEAST FIVE TIMES AND WE KEPT INQUIRING, HE TOLD THEM THE MATERIALS HE WAS GOING TO USE. HE NEVER, I DO PARALEGAL WORK AND I TOLD HIM IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO GET THINGS IN WRITING. DO NOT PROCEED WITHOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, SOME CONFIRMATION IN WRITING. AND THAT'S WHAT PROMPTED THIS WHOLE THING. AND HE NEVER, UH, HE NEVER WOULD'VE EVEN, UH, TOOK STEP ONE, YOU KNOW, UH, HE NEVER INTENDED TO, OH, I'M JUST GONNA VIOLATE ALL THE CITY RULES. WE KEPT GOING AND GOING. AND THE BEST INFORMATION THAT FINALLY SOMEBODY GAVE US ON LANDSCAPE WALLS WAS, UH, IT WILL BE CONSIDERED A LANDSCAPE WALL IF IT'S RECESSED OFF THE PROPERTY LINE, IT'S GOT TO BE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY. AND SO, UH, AND WHAT MY NEPHEW REALLY WANTED TO DO WAS, UH, ALSO CREATE LIKE A GARDEN LOOK, HAVE VINES GROWING OVER IT, UH, DO, UH, A LANDSCAPING POTTERY AND STUFF. BUT WHEN HE GOT A WORK STOP ORDER, THAT'S WHEN HE STOPPED AND DID NOT DO ANYTHING ELSE. YOU KNOW, HE WANTED TO COMPLY WITH WHATEVER THE CITY, UH, YOU KNOW, HE WANTED TO GET ALL OF THIS CLARIFIED, RIGHT? BECAUSE HE, UH, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, IT WAS NEVER HIS INTENTION TO JUST GO AND, AND DO SOMETHING WITHOUT, UH, DOING HIS DUE DILIGENCE. AND WE, I TOLD HIM, HE TALKED TO AN ATTORNEY, SHOWED HIM THE EMAIL, AND THE ATTORNEY TOLD HIM, YEAH, THAT'S BINDING. THEY'RE TELLING YOU THE, YOU DO, THE LANDSCAPE WALL CANNOT BE OVER 10 FEET. SO HE'S, YOU KNOW, UH, RELYING ON THE CITY EMAIL AN ATTORNEY, OKAY. EMAIL. AND SO I FEEL NO ONE IS, NO ONE IS SAYING THAT Y'ALL INTENDED TO DO ANYTHING. RIGHT. NO, AND I FEEL BAD BECAUSE I JUST WANT TO REASSURE YOU THAT THAT WAS NEVER HIS INTENTION. AS A FOLLOW UP, UM, MARK ON THIS DRAWING IS EXISTING FOUNDATION. WHAT WAS THAT FOUNDATION FOR? AND IS THAT APPARENTLY TIED INTO IT? WELL, APPARENTLY THE EXISTING OWNER STARTED DOING [01:55:01] SOMETHING SIMILAR. 'CAUSE WHEN HE GOT THAT PROPERTY, WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE SIDEWALK, THE SOIL WAS THE, THE SOIL JUST WAS, THE SIDEWALK WAS DIRT, BASICALLY. YOU COULD SEE THE DIRT JUST ALWAYS GOING OFF INTO THE SIDEWALK. SO THAT WHEN HE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, THE PREVIOUS OWNER ACTUALLY WAS STARTING TO DO A, UH, APPARENTLY A LANDSCAPE WALL TO STOP THE, THE DIRT FROM GOING, YOU KNOW, INTO THE, YOU KNOW, OFF THE, THE PROPERTY LINE, YOU KNOW, OFF THE PROPERTY. SO ANYWAY, SO HE, UH, SO THAT'S WHAT PROMPTED HIM TO GO TO THE CITY. AND OF COURSE WHEN COUNCILMAN BRAVO WAS TALKING ABOUT IT, HE WAS TALKING ABOUT AVOID, YOU KNOW, REDUCING NOISE, REDUCING TRAFFIC, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, ALL THIS STUFF. AND SO, YOU KNOW, HE WAS GETTING MIXED SIGNALS AND, WELL, AND, AND NOT TO CUT YOU OFF, BUT DID YOUR NEPHEW ALSO INSTALL THOSE LIMESTONE ROCKS, WHICH ARE I GUESS, A MORE TYPICAL LANDSCAPE WALL BECAUSE THEY ARE RETAINING EARTH? JUST, JUST, UH, HE, UH, HE, UH, THE PREVIOUS OWNER STARTED THEM AND HE FOUND MORE BLOCKS TO FINISH IT. YEAH. THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD STARTED LIKE, IT, IT WAS CLEAR, BUT NOT TO MY NEPHEW AT THE TIME, UH, WHAT WAS GOING ON UNTIL HE REALIZED, OH, THIS DIRT JUST KEEPS ON, UH, YOU KNOW, GOING. AND I TOLD HIM THAT'LL EVENTUALLY, YOU KNOW, AFFECT YOUR FOUNDATION, IT'S GONNA AFFECT EVERYTHING. AND, UH, SO ANYWAY, SO THERE, YOU KNOW, THE PROJECT HAD BEEN STARTED BY THE PREVIOUS OWNER. OKAY. ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, SO I DON'T HAVE A GOOD VIEW OF THE SIDE, UH, THE, OR THE, YEAH, THE SIDE YARD BETWEEN THIS HOUSE AND THE, UH, A BUDDING HOME, UH, THAT'S, UM, I GUESS FURTHER UP THE STREET. SO IS THERE, IS THERE A VIEW OR SO WHAT TYPE OF FENCE IS THERE ON THAT SIDE, UH, OF THE HOME? SO THAT'S, UH, WHERE THE, A BUDDING, THE OTHER HOME GATE WHERE THE SL THE OTHER SIDE. SO NO, ON THE, SO, SO YOU HAVE A FENCE GOING OUT INTO THE FRONT YARD, AND THEN ALONG THERE THERE'S NO FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD? UH, NOT UNLESS YOU IS ARE YOU SAYING THE LANDSCAPE WALL IS THE FENCE? SURE. THE, THE LANDSCAPE WALL? YEAH, THERE'S, UH, IT'S NOT, UH, ENCLOSED. DID, DID THEY SHOW YOU A PICTURE? IT'S NOT ENCLOSED. IT'S JUST A STANDALONE. IT'S HARD TO SEE. IT'S, SO, SO YOU'RE SAYING ON THE, UM, AND I DON'T KNOW MY DIRECTIONS HERE. SO FACING THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, THE, THE WALL THAT IS THERE, UM, GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE PROPERTY LINE, AND THEN GOING BACK FROM THAT PROPERTY LINE, UH, BACK TO THE HOUSE, WHAT DOES THAT, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS, DID THE BUDDY NEIGHBOR THERE WEIGH IN WITH REGARDS TO PROVIDING THEIR FEEDBACK ON, WERE THEY ONE OF THE HOMES THAT SAID, YES, WE'RE OKAY WITH THIS? YES. YES. IT'S THE ALGAR ADDRESS. OKAY. I BEL YEAH, IT'S, UH, IT COULD BE SEVEN. OH YEAH, BECAUSE THE ONE PICTURE HERE, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S SOME KIND OF FENCING GOING TO THAT FRONT SIDE, THAT FRONT CORNER. AND I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT KIND OF FENCE IT WAS. WAS IT A SOLID, A SOLID WALL OR WAS IT OH NO. SO THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD STARTED, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE PREVIOUS OWNER STARTED? WELL, THIS FENCE RIGHT HERE SHOWS ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE THAT IT BUTTS THE NEIGHBOR. IT'S GOT SOME TYPE OF FENCING YOU CAN SEE KIND OF GREEN OR SOMETHING. RIGHT. AND IT'S A STANDALONE WALL, AND IT JUST GOES TO THE END AND THAT IT DOESN'T, UH, IT'S NOT CLOSED OFF ON THE, ON THE NEIGHBOR'S SIDE. SO IT DOESN'T WRAP BACK BEYOND, RIGHT. IT'S NOT CLOSED OFF. IT, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S SOME KIND OF, THERE'S A FENCE. THERE'S A FENCE ON THAT SIDE. I'M JUST TRYING TO DETERMINE IF IT'S PREDOMINANTLY OPEN OR IF IT'S COMPLETELY CLOSED IN. OH, THERE'S A CHAIN LINK. I THINK THE NEIGHBOR HAS A CHAIN LINK FENCE THERE. THERE APPEARS TO BE A WOOD FENCE AT PAST THE CORNER. OH. OH, OKAY. NO, IF YOU ZOOM, WELL, WELL GIVE TO THE PICTURE THAT'S PART OF THE PRESENTATION. YOU CAN KIND OF ZOOM IN OR YOU CAN WHAT APPEARS TO BE A WOOD FENCE. THERE'S ANOTHER PICTURE THAT KIND OF SHOWS SOMETHING. I, I, I'M SORRY, I CAN'T SEE WHERE THAT, THAT ONE RIGHT HERE. ZOOM, ZOOM INTO THAT. I APOLOGIZE. ZOOM INTO THAT PICTURE ON THE SIDE. THERE YOU GO. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE A WOOD FENCE THERE AND THERE'S SOMETHING HOLDING UP SOME VINES OF SOME SORT. YEAH, THAT'S HIS, THAT'S THE BUSH IN, IN FRONT OF HIS HOUSE. YEAH. THAT'S THE SHRUBBERY, RIGHT? THE FENCE ACTUALLY COMES OFF THE FRONT. THERE'S JUST A LITTLE BIT, JUST A LITTLE. THAT'S WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD STARTED. THE NEIGHBOR HAD STARTED THE SIDE PARTS AND ALL HE DID WAS JUST PUT THE, YOU KNOW, WHEN HE WAS LOOKING AT WHAT THE PREVIOUS NEIGHBOR WAS DOING, THAT'S WHEN HE REALIZED, I THINK HE WAS GONNA BUILD SOMETHING TO, UH, YOU KNOW, STOP THAT DIRT FROM, SO HE WASN'T, YOU KNOW, SO HE JUST DID IT. I MEAN, THERE WAS MULTIPLE REASONS, BUT IT WAS, SO FOR PURPOSES OF THIS APPLICATION THAT ANYTHING ON THE SIDE, IS THAT ON YOUR [02:00:01] NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY OR YOUR PROPERTY? IT'S ON HIS PROPERTY. OKAY. 'CAUSE WE, BECAUSE WE, WE, WE CAN'T MAKE A MOTION ABOUT YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. WE CAN ONLY DEAL WITH WHAT'S RIGHT. RIGHT. YEAH. EVERYTHING IS ON HIS PROPERTY. NOTHING'S ON THE NEIGHBORS. RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND, AND HE HAS THE NEIGHBOR'S APPROVAL. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO EZ YES. COMMISSIONER EZ FOR THE APPLICANT. UM, DID YOUR NEPHEW, UH, REGARDING THE SIDE FENCE, THE WOOD FENCE, DID HE PULL A PERMIT FOR THE WOOD FENCE? THAT'S NOT HIS FENCE, THAT'S THE NEIGHBOR'S FENCE? NO, ON, ON HIS PROPERTY. THAT, THAT, THAT TALL ONE WHERE THE, WHERE THE, THE, THE WOOD, UH, PICKETS ARE RUNNING, UH, HORIZONTAL. HE'S TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER SIDE, UH, ON THE APARTMENT SIDE. ON, ON, ON. THAT WAS ALL STARTED. THAT WAS ALL PREEXISTING FROM THE PREVIOUS OWNER. AND SO HE, HE, THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD, UH, HAD THESE, UM, UH, METAL, UH, METAL, UH, METAL, UH, FOUR BY FOURS, SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT. AND HE TOLD MY, UH, HE TOLD MY NEPHEW THAT HE WAS JUST DROPPING THE WOOD IN THERE, JUST DROPPING. AND SO IT'S LIKE, IT'S LIKE A PORTABLE, YOU KNOW, UH, FENCING HE WAS DOING, OR IT WASN'T REALLY EVEN FENCING. HE WAS JUST, UH, I THINK IT WAS FOR A DOG. IT WAS FOR A DOG THING. OKAY. YOU KNOW, HE WAS TRYING TO STAFF IS THAT SIDE FENCE FACING THE APARTMENT COMPLEX PART OF THIS VARIANCE APPLICATION SINCE IT'S CONSIDERED IN THE FRONT YARD? IT IS NOT, BECAUSE HONESTLY WE CONSIDERED THIS BECAUSE JONES MALTSBERGER ROAD GOES ALONG THE SIDE THERE AND BECAUSE IT IS, UH, THEY'RE PERMITTED UP TO EIGHT FEET. OKAY. JONES BERGER BEING A ARTER ARTERIAL ROAD, SO THEY ARE PERMITTED UP TO EIGHT FEET ALONG THE SIDE. COMMISSIONER UNI. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? SO, SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALK ABOUT ARE HARDSHIPS. UM, AND SO, SO, UM, WHAT IS PERMITTED IS A THREE FOOT FENCE WITH, UM, AND, AND CAN BE DISCUSSED WITH REGARDS TO FENCING ON TOP OF THAT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. AND SO, SO IF WE WERE TO ASK YOU TO, UM, CHANGE THIS FENCE, SO IT'S ONLY THREE FOOT IN HEIGHT FROM A SOLID PERSPECTIVE, WHAT WOULD BE THE HARDSHIP OF THAT? SO BASICALLY REMOVING, YOU KNOW, HALF THE FENCE AND, YOU KNOW, KIND OF TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT. UM, WELL FINANCIALLY I DON'T, I DON'T THINK HE HAS THE MONEY TO DO IT. UH, HE'S A STUDENT AND UM, SO THAT WOULD BE A REAL HARDSHIP. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT A CONTRACTOR WOULD CHARGE TO COME AND, AND CHARGE. I I BET I'M SURE IT WOULD BE ABOUT $5,000 TO AT LEAST STAFF. IS IS, HAS A FENCE PERMIT BEEN APPLIED FOR, FOR THIS ELEMENT? NO OFFENSE PERMIT HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR YET. IT HAS BEEN, NO, NOT YET. OKAY. SO DEPENDING ON HOW WE VOTE ON THIS, IF, IF IT'S APPROVED, THEY WILL HAVE TO COME BACK AND GET, APPLY FOR A FENCE PERMIT AND JUST, AND JUST SO THE BENEFIT OF THE BOARD KNOWS ANYTIME ANYBODY APPLIES FOR A FENCE PERMIT AND YOU HAVE A CORNER LOT, IT GOES TO A MORE INTENSIVE REVIEW, UH, TEAM AT THE CITY TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, NONCHALANTLY APPROVED. THEY, THEY ACTUALLY LOOK AT CORNER LOTS, JUST SO YOU KNOW. OKAY. OKAY. AND REED? I HAVE A, YES. COMMISSIONER REED. UM, DO YOU KNOW, UM, WHAT SORT OF CONSTRUCTION WAS USED ON THIS WALL? I MEAN, I, I ASSUME IT'S CMU WITH A STUCCO. YES, THEY DID CINDER BLOCK AND PORTS TEAM CEMENT THROUGH THE CINDER BLOCKS. OKAY. WAS WAS IT BUILT ON TOP OF A FOUNDATION? YES, THAT'S, THAT WAS THE EXISTING BE MORE THAN EXISTING. THAT'S WHAT THE EXISTING, THE PRIOR OWNER, MY NEPHEW SAW THAT EXISTING. SO, SO THAT'S THE IN EXISTING FOUNDATION? YES, THERE WAS AN EXISTING FOUNDATION, UH, THERE AND SO HE JUST BUILT RIGHT ON TOP OF THE, FOUND THE EXISTING FOUNDATION THAT THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD. ALRIGHT. WELL I THINK WE'VE HEARD A WHOLE BUNCH OF STUFF ON THIS, UH, PROJECT. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR PAPER. IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK BRAGMAN? NOT PUBLIC COMMENT. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. WE DIDN'T DISCUSS THE CLEAR VISION ON THE CORONER. OKAY. LET'S TALK ABOUT CLEAR VISION, UM, STAFF. IS THERE ANY, DID TRAFFIC CHIME IN ON CLEAR VISION TRAFFIC, REVIEWED THEM? UM, THEY CORRESPOND WITH OUR RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WHAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION? IT WAS APPROVAL, RIGHT? DENIAL FOR THE CORNER ONE APPROVAL FOR THE DRIVEWAY, ONE IN THE REAR. OH, OKAY. THE DRIVEWAY. YEAH. APPROVAL FOR THE, UH, CLEAR VISION DRIVEWAY. YEAH. FOR THE DRIVEWAY. RIGHT. OKAY. NOT FOR THE, NOT FOR THE CORNER. SO IS THERE, UH, AND IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. I I'VE GOT A QUESTION. YES. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. SO HOW FAR BACK WOULD THEY HAVE TO MOVE? THEY'D HAVE TO MOVE THAT CORNER FENCE BACK SEVEN FEET IF WE DIDN'T APPROVE IT. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE THE [02:05:01] DRIVEWAY OR THE CLEAR, THE CORNER OF CLEAR VISION? YES. UH, SEVEN FEET TO THE BA UH, BACK. AND, AND AS A, TO, TO BUILD ON THAT, IF THEY WERE TO DROP THAT FENCE DOWN TO THREE FEET, WOULD THERE BE A CLEAR VISION PROBLEM? NO, CLEAR VISION. OKAY. SO, AND THAT'S, AND THAT'S THE CONUNDRUM IS SO CLEAR VISION. IF I'M ON THE ROAD, I MEASURE FOR MY EYES 42 INCHES TALL, I'M LOSING TWO FEET 'CAUSE OF THE LIMESTONE I GO TO THE, IT DOESN'T SERVE A PURPOSE ANYWAY, YOU KNOW, THEY WENT DOWN TO THREE FEET. THERE'S STILL GONNA BE A VISUAL OBSTRUCTION. SO I DON'T, SO I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S A, I BELIEVE ACTUALLY THE CLEAR VISION WOULD STILL BE THERE IF THEY DROPPED THAT FENCE BECAUSE IT'S, THE CLEAR VISION IS THREE FEET FROM THE EDGE OF THE CURB. SO IF YOU'VE GOT THAT FILL THERE AND THEN THAT FENCE IS AN ADDITIONAL THREE FEET, THAT'S GONNA BE OVER THAT THREE FEET FROM THE CURB. YEAH. THOSE CURBS ARE WAY PAST, I MEAN THAT'S A, THAT ROAD THAT THOSE LIFESTONE BLOCKS ARE ABOUT 10 FEET AWAY FROM THAT CURB. I'M JUST SAYING FOR THE HEIGHT, IF YOU BROUGHT DOWN THE FENCE, 'CAUSE THAT'S THE ITEM THAT'S WITHIN THE, BECAUSE CLEAR VISION, MANNA COMMISSIONER, MANNA. SO, SO WITH REGARDS TO I GUESS THIS DRIVEWAY, UM, YOU, IT'S NOT DROPPING OUT ONTO JONES MALTSBERGER. CORRECT. AND SO IT'S LIKE A LITTLE SIDE STREET OR, AND THAT THOSE WHO ARE, FOR THOSE WHO ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA, IF YOU PARK AT THE SHOPPING CENTER, YOU KNOW, UP THERE BY THE ACROSS, UH, 2 81 FROM THE MALL, A LOT OF PEOPLE GO THROUGH THERE AND DRIVE THROUGH CORNET AND MARQUEES AND THEY GO THE BACK WAY TO GET THE, IT IS INUNDATED WITH CARS. IT IS LOT OF, A LOT OF, A LOT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, TRAFFIC BUMPS AND, AND UH, THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING ISSUE SINCE 30 YEARS. 40. AND THERE WAS A CAR THAT ACTUALLY, UH, HAD AN ACCIDENT AND WENT UP ONTO PART OF HIS YARD. YEAH. ABOUT A YEAR. WELL, SO THERE'S A POINT MADE ABOUT IT BEING ON JONES MOSSBERG AND SOME YEAH. THIS HAS KIND, BUT THAT'S NOT TRULY ROAD YEAH. SUB ACCESS. SO, SO, SO IT'S NOT TRULY ON JOE MOSSBERG. SO, SO A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, BUT THERE WAS SOME KIND OF DIALOGUE GRANTED OR RESTRICTING SOMETHING WITH REGARDS TO CLEAR VISION DRIVEWAY IS, YEAH, IT'S STILL, I MEAN, IT'S STILL ONE BIG ARTERIAL, EVEN THOUGH IT HAS ITS LITTLE SUB ZONES, BUT IT'S, IT'S STILL HAS THAT, IT'S STILL CONSIDERED A CORNER. 'CAUSE IT'S STILL RIGHT OF WAY, I MEAN RIGHT. IT'S STILL CORNER, BUT YEAH, JUST THAT CORNER IS NOT NECESSARILY JONES WALTZ BERGER. YEAH, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE USED TO SEEING. OH, ZUNA ZUNA. WITH THAT SAID, I DON'T KNOW IF TRAFFIC HAS PROPOSED, UH, PROVIDED LIKE A TRIANGLE CONE FOR, FOR UH, CLEAR VISION BECAUSE THE FENCE IS SET BACK. I DO HAVE A CONCERN WITH THE NUMBER OF CARS THAT GO THROUGH THERE SPECIFICALLY. 'CAUSE AN AUDITORIUM IS THERE A LOT OF CARS, A LOT OF KIDS, A LOT OF FAMILIES KIND OF DRIVING AND THEY BLOCK HIS DRIVEWAY ALL THE TIME. THEY BLOCK THE DRIVEWAY FOR MORE REASON THAT YOU WANNA BE ABLE TO GET A CLEAR VISION OF CARS COMING THROUGH AS YOU MAKE THAT TURN ONTO NACODOCHES. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE, IF WE CAN GET A CLEAR VISION CONE, I GUESS FROM TRAFFIC, I'D FEEL. YEAH, THEY'RE SAYING THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR A SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE FROM THAT 25 FOOT CORNER. SO THERE'S STILL 18 FEET. FORTUNATELY THERE'S, THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PARKING THERE, BUT THE SIGNS, YEAH. SO I DUNNO. OH YEAH, I SHOULD HAVE BOUGHT THOSE PICTURES. I'VE TAKEN SO MANY PICTURES. BLOCKED DRIVEWAYS, THEY PARK ON THE NO PARKING SIDE. YEAH, ALL THE TIME. THERE'S JUST CARS ALMOST EVERY WEEK. JUST IT'S LIKE A BIG PARTY THERE, YOU KNOW, JUST YEAH, WITH AN, AN AUDITORIUM IN THE APARTMENT COMPLEX, IT'S, YOU'RE GETTING A LOT OF ATTENTION. RIGHT. OKAY. UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO. ALL RIGHT. HAS ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION OR ANYBODY UP TO SPEED? IS ANY YEAH, I ALREADY, THERE'S NO VOICEMAILS ON THIS ONE. AND ONE MORE QUESTION. SORRY. SO, SO THE FENCING ON THE SIDE THERE, UM, SO, SO, UM, ANY CLEAR VISION SPACE, YOU CAN'T HAVE SHRUBBERY OVER THREE FOOT TALL. RIGHT? AND SO, SO, SO THE LANDSCAPING ITSELF BECOMES PART OF THE HINDRANCE FOR CLEAR VISION, CORRECT. I'M SORRY, SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME. SO FOR THE DRIVEWAY, UM, UM, LANDSCAPING, UH, PLANTS BECOMES PART OF THE IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR CLEAR VISION, CORRECT? ARE THEY NOT INCLUDED? ONE SECOND. I KNOW ON CORNERED ON CORNER LOTS IT YOUR, I'VE HAD DIALOGUE IN MY COMMUNITY WITH REGARDS TO PLANTINGS BECAUSE THE PLANTINGS BASICALLY BLOCKED THE VIEW, EVEN IF YOU HAVE A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE. AND SO IT BECOMES A SOLID FENCE AND, AND BASICALLY, AND I THINK A CODE DOES SAY SPECIFICALLY YOU CAN'T HAVE LANDSCAPING IN THAT SPACE. WELL, I THINK THAT'S WHY THEY SHOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAD A PERMIT IN PLACE ON THIS CORNER LOT, I THINK WE'D GET MORE INFORMATION. SO [02:10:01] TRYING TO CONFIRM IT, IT'S DIFFICULT BECAUSE THIS IS GOING INTO TRAFFIC'S REALM. UM, SO THEY COULD BE MORE SPECIFIC ON THIS, IF ANY KIND OF, BECAUSE FROM WHAT I'VE GATHERED, BASICALLY ANYTHING WITHIN ANYTHING THAT HAS HEIGHT REALLY SHOULD NOT BE INSTALLED. BUT AGAIN, I CANNOT CONFIRM BECAUSE THIS IS MORE OF TRAFFIC. UM, YEAH, I THINK, I THINK THE CODE ACTUALLY TALKS ABOUT YOU, YOU, YOU PUT A SKINNY TREE THERE, UM, BUT IT HAS TO BE ABOVE SEVEN FOOT AND NOTHING BETWEEN ABOVE THREE FOOT. SO THE THREE TO FOUR, THE THREE TO SEVEN FOOT RANGE HAS TO BE COMPLETELY OPEN AS I SEEM TO RECALL IT. BUT YEAH, THAT'S ON SITE DISTANCE, NOT CLEAR VISION. UM, OKAY. SO, SO MAYBE THAT'S A DIFFERENCE THERE THEN. AND I, AND I JUST WANNA REITERATE THAT MY NEPHEW DID GO TO 50 HOMES. HE DID SPEAK TO NEIGHBORS. HE DID SHOW THEM EVERYTHING. HE TOLD THEM WHAT HIS UNDERSTANDING WAS. UH, WE TOLD NEIGHBORS THAT I DID GO TO THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND NOBODY COULD EVER GIVE A CLEAR ANSWER ON LANDSCAPE WALLS. WE ASKED ABOUT MATERIALS, WE GOT APPROVAL ON MATERIALS THAT YOU, A LANDSCAPE WALL COULD BE ANYTHING AS LONG AS IT WAS RECESSED BACK OFF THE PROPERTY. AND SO WE WERE ALWAYS GETTING CONFLICTING INFORMATION, BUT THE BEST THING WE HAD WAS THE LESLIE EMAIL AND NEIGHBORS WERE SUPPORTIVE AND, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY GAVE US AN EXAMPLE OF, THEY SAID, AT LEAST YOU ALL, UH, MADE AN ATTEMPT TO COMMUNICATE AND GET PERMISSION. AND THEN THEY GAVE AN EXAMPLE OF SOMEBODY ELSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, SOMEWHERE ELSE THAT TRIED TO DO A LANDSCAPE WALL AND GOT MADE NO ATTEMPT TO GET ANY PERMISSION. AND, UH, SO PEOPLE OPPOSED THAT. AND, BUT PEOPLE, THE NEIGHBORS WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE. UH, AND LIKE I SAID, YOU KNOW, HE HAS 50 SIGNATURES OF NEIGHBORS SUPPORTING THE VARIANCE, YOU KNOW, FOR HARDSHIP REASONS, YOU KNOW, THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, SO IF YOU ALL COULD TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT. OKAY. WELL, IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE BEEN ON THIS CASE OF QUITE A WHILE, . SO IF, IF, UH, I'M, I'M LOOKING FOR SOMEONE TO, TO MAKE A MOTION, WE MOVE THIS ALONG A LITTLE BIT. STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 25 DASH 0 3 2 5 0. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT EIGHT INCH SPECIALIST, EXCEPT FOR THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT SOLID FENCE TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT SIX INCH SOLID FENCE WITH SIX FOOT EIGHT INCH COLUMNS LIMITED TO THE FREESTANDING WALL AS CONSTRUCTED IN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED, SITUATED AT 7 1 8 TGA ROAD. APPLICANT BEING IVAN RUBLE KAVA, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN THE HARMONY OF THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD ALLOW FOR SUFFICIENT OPEN SPACE AND UNOBSTRUCTED VIEWS OF THE FRONT YARD AREA OF THE PROPERTY. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED. THE PUBLIC WELFARE WOULD BE SERVED AS THE FREESTANDING WALL DOES NOT ENCLOSE THE PROPERTY OR CREATE A SIGNIFICANT VISUAL OBSTRUCTION OF THE FRONT YARD. AREA C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WOULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PER PROPOSED USE. THE FREESTANDING WALL DOES NOT LIMIT LIGHT OPEN AND UNOBSTRUCTED VIEWS OR OTHERWISE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE FREESTANDING WALL DOES NOT ENCLOSE THE, AND ISOLATE THE PROPERTY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR OTHERWISE ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE IN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT AS SUFFICIENT OPEN SPACE IN THE FRONT OF THE YARD OF THIS RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IS MAINTAINED. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. COMMISSIONER STEVENS. UH, I THINK CLEARLY THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A LANDSCAPE WALL AND A FENCE. UM, AND YOUR NEPHEW DID OBVIOUSLY PUT IN EFFORT TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT, BUT, UM, THIS IS A WALL AND NOT, THIS IS A FENCE AND NOT A LANDSCAPE WALL. UM, I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE HEIGHT OF IT, GIVEN THE 50 PLUS SIGNATURES FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER AMANDA. SO I DO, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. AND SO, SO I KNOW THAT WHEN WE'VE GONE OUT AND LOOKED, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT OFTEN WE SEE SOLID FENCES IN THE FRONT YARD, SO THAT'S JUST A GIVEN. SO THAT'S ALL. IT'S, THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN THAT OFTEN. UM, BUT WE DO SEE WHEN IT IS, UM, I GUESS ON, ON MAJOR STREETS WHERE WE DO HAVE A LOT OF, UM, WE'LL SAY ACTIVITIES AROUND IT LIKE THE NATATORIUM AND THAT YOU, I I HAVE SEEN WHERE WE HAVE GRANTED THIS IN THE PAST, YOU KNOW, FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. UM, [02:15:01] AND SO, UM, AND THEN, AND, AND AGAIN, BECAUSE OF ALL THE SIGNATURES AND COMMUNITY BASICALLY SUPPORTING IT. SO I, I GUESS FOR THOSE TWO REASONS, I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD, UH, REED, COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I, I AGREE. I THINK, UM, GENERALLY I WOULD NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF A WALL IN THE FRONT OF A HOME OF THIS MAGNITUDE, BUT I THINK THERE ARE SOME SPECIAL, UM, EXCEPTIONS HERE WITH AN AUDITORIUM WITH THE DEVELOPMENT GOING IN ACROSS JONES MOSSBERG. AND ALSO THE FACT THAT, UM, CLEARLY MADE AN ATTEMPT AND UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WAS MISCOMMUNICATION. BUT, UM, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE YOUR NEPHEW FOLLOWED WHAT HE BELIEVED WAS THE CORRECT PROCESS IN ORDER TO, TO HAVE PERMISSION TO GO AHEAD AND BUILD. THANK YOU, SIR. DEAN, COMMISSIONER, DEAN, ONE QUICK QUESTION. IS IT A, IS THIS A DUPLEX OR A SINGLE, UH, LIKE RIGHT NOW HE'S USING IT AS A SINGLE FAMILY, BUT IS IT CONFIGURED LIKE A DUPLEX? UH, UH, IT COULD BE, BUT I, I'M STAYING AT THE OTHER, AT THE OTHER SIDE RIGHT NOW, SO, UH, SO IT'S, UH, RIGHT NOW IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY. WAIT, SO YOU'RE LIVING THERE? YES. AND, AND I USE HIS KITCHEN AND I USE HIS. OKAY. BUT IT IS, IT IS, UH, YEAH, SEPARATE, BUT I DO USE HIS, HIS STUFF. THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE HE NEEDS A PER PERMIT FOR THAT, OR ARE YOU PAYING RENT FOR ME TO LIVE THERE? NO, NO. . SO THIS PROPERTY, UH, I'M FAMILY . THIS PROPERTY DOES FALL UNDER THE B TWO R FOUR CONVERSION. UM, AH, SO AS LONG AS HE MEETS THOSE GUIDELINES. OKAY. THEY CAN'T HAVE A DUPLEX BY. RIGHT. OKAY. WELL THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? YEAH. EZ YES. COMMISSIONER BEEZ. I'M, I'M BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. I, I THINK HE TRIED TO, TO GO THROUGH THE RIGHT CHANNELS TO GET THIS, UH, GET THIS APPROVED. UH, I THINK HE GOT OVER 50 SIGNATURES, UH, BY NEARBY NEIGHBORS. AND THEN, UM, ALSO IN ADDITION, YOU KNOW, UH, AS JUST A SIDE NOTE TO YOU GUYS AND LIKE 27, THEY'RE GONNA BE TEARING DOWN THAT ROBINS AND THEY'LL BE MAKING THAT A PARKING LOT. SO HOPEFULLY YOU WON'T HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THAT MUCH LONGER THE ANCE COURT. OH, OKAY. GREAT. FANTASTIC. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE . COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MENNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN ABSTAIN. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? NO, I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES NINE TO ONE WITH ONE ABSTENTION. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. I, YOU STILL GOTTA APPLY FOR A PERMIT. OKAY, WELL THIS ONLY IS THE FIRST MOTION. THERE'S, AND THAT'S ONLY THE FIRST MOTION. TWO MORE . WE STILL GOT SOME MORE TO GO. OKAY, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON THE VARIANCE. STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 2 5. I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST FOR ONE A SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 25 FOOT CORNER CLEAR VISION AREA TO ALLOW AN 18 FOOT CORNER CLEAR VISION AREA AND TWO, A FOUR FOOT THREE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT NINE INCH DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA LIMITED TO THE GATE IN THE REAR YARD. SITUATE SEVEN 18 TRAVEL TR ROAD APPLICANT BEING EVEN RUBAL RUBALCAVA BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS OF THE, THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE LOCATION OF THE WALL AND GATE ARE AS CONSTRUCTED, ALLOWS FOR SUFFICIENT CORNER AND DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREAS AND IS THEREBY NON CON, NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE WALL AND GATE WOULD NEED TO BE RELO, RELOCATED TO COMPLY WITH THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT. HOWEVER, THERE'S ALREADY AN ADEQUATE CLEAR VISION AREA. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. GRANTING THESE VARIANCES WOULD SUPPORT THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS SUFFICIENT CLEAR VISIONARIES EXIST AT THE CORNER AND DRIVEWAY TO SUPPORT THE TRAFFIC SAFETY. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE, 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. THERE'S NO SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN TRAFFIC HAZARDS FOR ADJACENT PROPERTY CREATED BY THE REDUCED CLEAR VISION AREAS AT THE CORNER OR DRIVEWAY OF THIS PROPERTY. SIX. THE P OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH [02:20:01] THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY IS THE CORNER CREATED BY THE INTERSECTION OF JONES MALTSBERGER ACCESS ROAD AND TRAVELLER ROAD. THE ACCESS ROAD SUPPORTS A RELATIVELY LOW VOLUME OF TRAFFIC, THEREFORE THERE'S NO SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN TRAFFIC HAZARDS CREATED BY THE REDUCED DRIVEWAY AND CORNER. CLEAR VISION AREAS. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ZUNI. COMMISSIONER STEVENS, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS VARIANCE AS WELL. UM, I, I THINK YOU STILL MAINTAIN 18 FEET OF CLEAR VISION, WHICH IS PRETTY GOOD. YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF BUFFER WITH THE ACCESS ROAD. I THINK IF THAT ACCESS ROAD WASN'T THERE AND THIS TRULY WAS ON JONES MALTSBERGER, I'D PROBABLY HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION ABOUT THAT. UH, AND I THINK THAT THE, THE ACCESS TO THE SIDE, UH, DRIVEWAY AREA SEEMS ADEQUATE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. GREAT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH, I CONCUR. FOR THE SAME REASON I THINK THAT ACCESS ROAD FROM, UH, JONES MALTSBERGER, UM, DOES PROVIDE SOMEWHAT OF A, A BUFFER, NOT A LOT OF TRAFFIC GOING ALONG THAT AREA. THEN THE 18 FOOT, UH, CLEAR VISION, UH, DISTANCE ALSO I THINK PROVIDES SOME RELIEF THERE. SO I'LL SUPPORT. FANTASTIC. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD TO THE CONVERSATION? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, SO I DIDN'T NECESSARILY SEE WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE ON THE ONE SIDE OF THE OTHER SOLID FENCE. AND SO, UM, DO WE NEED, ARE WE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT AS BUILT OR ANYTHING? YOU KNOW, CAN ANYTHING CHANGE IT, CAN ANYTHING BE CHANGED TO WHERE IT CURRENTLY IS TO MAKE IT WORSE? THE WAY IT'S BEEN READ, I GUESS IS WHERE I'M GOING. SO AS FAR AS THAT, THE, THAT CORNER. OKAY. UM, YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING? SO, SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE'S FENCING THAT KIND OF HAS SOME OPENINGS AND, AND CAN IT BE MADE WORSE THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE SHOWING? SO IN OTHER WORDS, JUST ADD AS-BUILT AND THAT WOULD RESOLVE THAT. UM, YOU KNOW, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE SURE THIS DOESN'T GET WORSE THAN IT IS. OKAY. UH, STAFF CAN YOU BRING, BRING UP THE STREET VIEW AND JUST SHOW THAT CORNER PLEASE. AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ACCEPT AN AMENDMENT TO MY MOTION REFERENCING AS BILL CONDITIONS. YEAH. 'CAUSE IF, IF YOU BRING UP THE STREET VIEW AND YOU'RE SHOOTING AT THAT CORNER, THE FENCING THAT GOES DOWN THAT YOU CAN SEE ON THE TOP ON THE LEFT SIDE BEHIND THAT WALL IS ACTUALLY IN LINE WITH THE HOUSE. SO IT'S SET REALLY BACK. RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHY I WANNA MAKE SURE IS THAT IT DIDN'T GET EXTENDED FURTHER OUT INTO THE STREET. 'CAUSE THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT, THAT BECOMES MUCH DIFFERENT. SO WE COULD, SO THERE'S BEEN AN AMENDMENT. UH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO, I'LL JUST OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE THE ASBO CONDITION ON THE SIDE FENCE. THINK ALSO ACCEPT IT. I'D BE HAPPY TO ACCEPT THAT. DID YOU ACCEPT THAT TOO? ACCEPT IT, YES. OKAY. SO THAT'S THE AMENDED MOTION BEFORE US. ALRIGHT. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONERS' LIKE TO CHIME IN? ALRIGHT, HEARING NOW HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER UNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BON. I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN ABSTAIN. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MENA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I ABSTAIN. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES NINE WITH TWO EXTENSIONS. UM, CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. YOU ARE WELCOME. THANK YOU. WE ARE ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. YOU'RE ALL SET. OH, I'M DONE. MM-HMM . OKAY. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. ITEM EIGHT IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 2 5 2. THE ADDRESS BEING 8 43 BRADY BOULEVARD IN COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE. THE APPLICANT IS NEW LOOK. LLC. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR ONE, A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT FRONT YARD SOLID FENCE TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT FRONT YARD SOLID FENCE LIMITED TO THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE TO A ONE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT. PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO ALLOW FIVE FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN [02:25:01] FENCE WITH SIX FOOT POSTS IN THE FRONT YARD. AND THREE AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA TO ALLOW. SEVEN FOOT DRIVEWAY, CLEAR VISION AREA. THE ZONING IS MF 33. A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION WAS CONDUCTED IN RESPONSE TO A CITIZEN CALL. THE FENCE POSTS ARE SIX FEET TALL AND THE FENCE FACE IS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN ALONG THE WEST AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINES AS SUCH. A ONE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS REQUESTED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE FENCE POSTS. THE EAST SIDE FENCING IS SIX FEET TALL AND SOLID, AND THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ACCOUNT FOR THIS CONSTRUCTION. A PERMIT WAS ISSUED FOR A FIVE FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE, UH, FRONT YARD FENCE AFTER THE CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION BEGAN. HOWEVER, THE PERMIT ISSUE DOES NOT REFLECT THE HEIGHT, UH, OF THE CONSTRUCTION ON SITE, UH, BEFORE, BEFORE A PERMIT MAY BE AMENDED TO REFLECT THE TRUE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE, THE BOARD MUST GRANT THESE FENCE HEIGHT SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS SHOWN HERE IS A SITE PLAN OF THE FENCE. AGAIN THERE ON THE EAST SIDE IS WHERE YOU HAVE THE SIX FOOT SOLID FENCE. EVERYWHERE ELSE ALONG THE FRONT YARD IS FENCED IN AT FIVE FEET WITH SIX FOOT POSTS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. AND THEN THERE IS A DRIVEWAY THERE ON THE LEFT SIDE HAND, UH, LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT ENCROACHES INTO THE MINIMUM DRIVEWAY. CLEAR VISION AREA AS MEASURED FROM THE CURB SHOWN HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AGAIN ILLUSTRATING THAT SOLID FENCE ON THE EAST SIDE, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN EVERYWHERE ELSE. AND HERE'S A BETTER LOOK AT THAT SOLID FENCE THERE ON THE SIDE. SIX FEET TALL. IT IS INCREASING, UH, WITH THE GRADE OF THE PROPERTY THAT INCREASES TOWARDS THE HOME. AT NO POINT IS IT TALLER THAN SIX FEET FROM GRADE. UH, AND THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND POA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 2 52 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE EXISTING FENCE POSES A VISUAL OBSTRUCTION WITHIN THE MINIMUM CLEAR VISION AREA, THEREBY CREATING A TRAFFIC HAZARD FOR MOTORISTS ALONG BRADY BOULEVARD AND VEHICLES EXITING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. TWO, THERE IS SUFFICIENT SPACE ON THE PROPERTY TO CONSTRUCT FENCING FOR SECURITY PURPOSES WHILE AVOIDING ANY ENCROACHMENT INTO THE DRIVEWAY. CLEAR VISION AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE SOLID FENCING STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO A DASH 25 DASH 3 2 52 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE SOLID FENCE DIMINISHES THE APPEAL OF THE STREETS SCAPE WITHIN THIS COMMUNITY. AND TWO, THE FENCE HEIGHT WOULD LIMIT ACCESS TO AN UNOBSTRUCTED VIEW OF THE FRONT YARD AREA FOR THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. STAFF. RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BOA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 2 52 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE POSTS AND TWO, THE FENCE GENERALLY RESEMBLES PERMITTED FRONT YARD FENCING FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS. STAFF MAIL 35 NOTICES ONE WAS RETURNED IN FAVOR, FIVE WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION. THE EL CHARO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED. AND THE BRADY GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. SHOWN HERE IS THE, UH, COMMENT AND SUPPORT THAT STAFF RECEIVED AND THE OPPOSITION RECEIVED BY STAFF. I AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. SO THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. HELLO, STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR FENCE. EH, MY NAME IS GABRIEL PRE, UH, I, IF, IF I MAY, UH, TELL A STORY PREVIOUS TO THE FENCE AND HOW IT GOT TO BE. UH, IN 2023, I BOUGHT THIS, UM, THIS HOME THAT, UH, WAS, UH, UNOCCUPIED SINCE 2004. UH, THE HOUSE WAS, UH, VACANT. IT WAS, UH, EH, IN DISARRAY. IT WAS A HOME FOR NTS AND, UH, UH, PEOPLE, EH, ON THE STREET THAT, UH, CAME BACK AND FORTH. IN FACT, WHEN I TOOK POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY, EH, I, I CALLED THE, THE POLICE TO ESCORT ME IN BECAUSE THERE WAS, UH, TWO NTS, UH, LEAVING INSIDE. THE REASON WHY I'M MENTIONING THAT IS BECAUSE SINCE 2004 UNTIL 2023, UH, NONE OF THE NEIGHBORS, UH, SEEM TO SHOW ANY INTEREST IN, IN BEAUTIFYING, UH, THEIR BLACK, EH, I CAME IN, I WITH ALL THE PROPER, UH, I NEEDED PERMITS. I FIXED, UH, THE HOME TO MAKE MY OWN. AND, UM, AND THERE, EH, MY WIFE AND I, WE RESIDE WITH MY DAUGHTER AND EH, AND MY GRANDDAUGHTER THAT'S, UH, NINE YEARS OLD, EH, EH, AS WE LIVE THERE, I ENCOUNTER A PROBLEM, UM, THAT REQUIRE ME CALLING THE, THE POLICE A FEW TIMES. BUT, UH, BUT WITH NO, UH, SOLUTION, UH, [02:30:01] MY NEIGHBOR, UH, TO THE RIGHT SIDE, UH, OF, UH, MY HOUSE, EH, WAS A, A, A PROBLEM, A NEIGHBOR. UH, TO WHAT EXTENT, UH, WELL, UH, COPS ARE CALLED, UH, POLICE OFFICERS ARE CALLED TO THIS, UH, HOUSE, UH, UH, UH, SEVERAL TIMES A DAY. UH, HE, UH, UH, STOLE THINGS FROM MY, EH, HOUSE, FROM MY FRONT YARD, FROM MY BACKYARD. UH, HE, UH, EH, SCREAMED OF OBSCENITIES, EH, TO MY FAMILY MEMBERS, INCLUDING MY 9-YEAR-OLD GRANDDAUGHTER, EH, AND EH, THIS IS A HOUSE THAT I THINK IS USED FOR THE DRUG DEALING, EH, IF THEY CAN PROVE THAT OR NOT, I DON'T KNOW. BUT, UH, IT ATTRACTS, UH, THE VISITS OF, UH, EH, VAGRANTS THAT, UH, WALK IN, WALK OUT, UH, RIDE ON THEIR BICYCLES, RIDE, UH, OUT OF THE HOMES, THESE VAGRANTS, UH, CALL OBSCENITIES, UH, TO MY FAMILY MEMBERS. SO, UH, THAT, UH, MOVED ME TO, UH, UH, BUILD A FENCE. UH, IN FACT, IF YOU, UH, LOOK AT THE PICTURE, IT'S A, IT'S A NICE LOOKING FENCE, IS A WELL-MADE, UH, FENCE, UH, WITH CLEARLY THE PROPER PERMITS. AND THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ME BUILDING THIS FENCE, I DECIDED TO, TO PUT A SALAD, UH, A WOODEN FENCE ATTACHED TO THE, TO THE STEEL FENCE THAT WOULD, EH, EH, PROTECT THE DIVISION OF MY NEIGHBOR. AND, UM, EH, FOR THE PAST TWO MONTHS THAT THE FENCE WAS BUILT, I LIVED IN PEACE. I, I LIVED IN, EH, IN A STATE OF VERY DIFFERENT TO THE WAY IT, IT WAS, UH, THE PAST, UH, UH, YEAR OR SO. AND, UH, I, I SIMPLY FORGOT THAT I NEVER EXISTED AND I, UH, AND I'M, I'M, I'M HOPING THAT, EH, THIS, THIS PANEL WILL SEE THE, THE NEED FOR MY FAMILY, MY WIFE, MY DAUGHTER, MY GRANDDAUGHTER, AND MYSELF, BEING THAT WE ARE OF A CERTAIN AGE AND, UH, TO LIVE IN, UH, IN A STATE OF, UH, UH, PEACE. UH, IN REGARDS TO THE, TO THE, TO THE VISION, UH, AS ONE DRIVES OUT AND DRIVES IN, I MADE IT A POINT, UH, TO BUILD THE FENCE, THE FRONT FENCE, UH, WHERE MY SIDE FENCE IN QUESTION AND 10 FEET, UH, FROM THE STREET, I, I ACTUALLY MATCHED, UH, THE REST OF THE FENCES IN, UH, IN, UH, IN THE NEIGHBORING, UH, STREETS. UM, THE VISION IS, IS IS GOOD. WHEN YOU PULL OUT, YOU ARE ABLE TO SEE LEFT, YOU ABLE TO SEE, RIGHT? UH, AND I SIMPLY, EH, DIDN'T SEE THE NEED, UH, TO, UH, TO PULL, UH, THE FENCE ANY FURTHER BACK. OKAY? AND THAT GIVES ME THE, THE, THE, THE SECURITY AND THE PEACEFULNESS THAT, THAT I'M SEEKING LIVING IN, IN THIS HOUSE AND IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. THE WOOD FENCE THAT COMES, UH, BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBOR, HOW LONG ARE THOSE PANELS? ARE THOSE SIX FOOT OR EIGHT FOOT PANELS? NO, THEY'RE SIX FEET, SIR. SIX FEET, OKAY. YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. AND WOULD IT BE, UM, DO YOU THINK YOU WOULD STILL HAVE THE SAME PRIVACY IF THAT VERY FIRST PANEL OF SIX FOOT WOOD WAS REPLACED WITH, UM, SOMETHING THAT WAS PREDOMINANTLY OPEN LIKE YOU HAVE ON THE FRONT OF YOUR PROPERTY? UH, YOU MEAN, UM, LIKE A, A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FEET FROM THE STREET BACK? UH, THE FIRST PANEL, LET'S SAY THE FIRST SIX FEET OF WOOD FENCE, HE'LL, UH, YES. THIS PORTION RIGHT HERE, THIS FIRST PANEL, IF THIS WAS REPLACED WITH PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, EH, BUT DO YOU THINK YOU'D STILL HAVE THE SAME SORT OF PRIVACY FROM YOUR NEIGHBOR? EH, THIS GIVE ME, GIVES ME TOTAL PRIVACY THAT MAKES ME VERY, VERY COMFORTABLE. EH, AND MY WIFE AGREES, AND MY, MY KID AGREES ALSO, EH, IF THERE WAS NO OTHER WAY AND, AND THE PANEL, EH, ALLOWS ME TO KEEP THE REST, I'LL BE MORE THAN GLAD TO, TO, WELL, CLEAR VISION IS A SAFETY ISSUE AND SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY I'M JUST ASKING. NO, NO, ANY, ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, MANNA MR. YOUR MAYOR. AND SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING UP. SO I ALWAYS HAVE A CONCERN FOR NEIGHBORS AND, YOU KNOW, AND SO PART OF THE WHOLE NOTION IS BEING ABLE TO SEE OUT OF ONE'S DRIVEWAY WHEN ONE'S BACKING OUT. AND, AND I'LL SAY THAT YOUR CURRENT FENCE DOESN'T ALLOW FOR THAT FOR THE NEIGHBOR. AND SO I WOULD NEVER SUPPORT IT WHERE IT CURRENTLY IS GOING THAT FAR UP ALONG THE WAY. AND I THINK IT'S A, I THINK IT'S, I THINK THAT IT IS [02:35:01] RELEVANT TO SAY HOW FAR IT SHOULD BE MOVED BACK. AND I GUESS, YOU KNOW, SO, SO A QUESTION FOR THE CITY STAFF WOULD BE TO MAKE IT SO THAT THAT CORNER ISN'T NECESSARILY CLEAR VISION. HOW FAR BACK WOULD IT GO BACK FOR, UH, HOW FAR WOULD IT NEED TO BE FROM THE STREET, FROM A CODE COMPLIANCE PERSPECTIVE IF IT WAS THREE FOOT, UM, IN HEIGHT? SO FOR, FOR THAT CLEAR VISION. SO FOR, UH, DRIVEWAYS, I BELIEVE IT IS 15 FEET BACK, BUT LET ME JUST CONFIRM. AND THAT'D BE 15 FEET FROM THE STREET, FROM THE STRAIGHT, YES. YEAH. SO IF HE, IF HIS FENCE IS 10 FEET BACK AND YOU GO BACK SIX, THERE'S 16. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. SO I JUST, SO I, IT WAS JUST THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT NOTION OF THAT SIX FOOT, SO, UM, OR, OR THAT CLEAR VISION COMPONENT OF IT, WHATEVER THE DISTANCE IS. SO, AND, AND I WOULD, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD MAKE ME FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE OVERALL. ME, ME TOO. UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? I DO UNDERSTAND WE HAVE A VOICEMAIL ON THIS ONE. WE'RE GONNA HEAR THE VOICEMAIL. IS THERE ANYONE SIGNING TO SPEAK AS WELL? JUST THE VOICEMAIL. ALL RIGHT, LET'S HEAR IT. ONE MOMENT. IT'S LOADING. ALSO, COULD YOU SHOW THE, UM, COMMENTS FROM WHAT EL CHARO, PRESIDENT OF THE EL ASSOCIATION CALLING IN REGARDS TO CASE NUMBER ND 2 5 2 TEST TEST? UH, 8 4 3 BRADY BOULEVARD. THIS IN REGARDS TO THE, UH, WELL, CAN I ASK A QUESTION WHILE WE WAIT? YEAH, OF COURSE. OKAY. UM, IN REGARDS TO THE FRONT FENCE, IT APPEARS THERE YOU WERE, UM, GRANTED PERMISSION FOR A FIVE FOOT FENCE, BUT IT WAS BUILT TO SIX, NO, NO, NO. OKAY. IT'S, IT'S FIVE FEET. I'M SORRY. IT'S THE POST FIVE OH OR SIX. OH, I SEE. OKAY. I'M SORRY. BUT THE PANELS ARE FIVE FEET, THEY'RE SIX. YEAH. PRESIDENT OF THE SHADOW ASSOCIATIONS CALLING IN REGARDS TO CASE NUMBER ENDING IN TWO FIVE. CAN YOU PUT THE MICROPHONE ON THE LAPTOP OR THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO DO. I'M THE COMPUTER'S GIVING ISSUES, HENCE WHY WE WERE NOT ABLE TO PLAY THE VOICEMAIL THERE. IF, IF I'M READING MOST OF THESE NOTICES, UM, ALL OF 'EM ARE REALLY DISCUSSING THE FIVE FOOT SOLID FENCE ALONG THAT CORNER IT OR SO IT APPEARS PRESIDENT OF THEDO ASSOCIATIONS. YES, MY NAME IS ANTHONY RE, PRESIDENT OF THE ODO ASSOCIATIONS CALLING IN REGARDS TO CASE NUMBER ENDING IN 2 5 2, UH, 8 4 3 BRADY BOULEVARD. THIS IN REGARDS TO THE REQUEST FOR THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXEMPTION, UM, ON THIS HERE, DOESN'T AGREE WITH THIS. UM, IF HE PULLED PERMITS, AS WE HAD DISCUSSED WITH THE HOMEOWNER, WE CANNOT OBSCURE, I NOT NOTIFIED HIM. THEY CAN OBSCURE THE VISION COMING IN AND OUT, UH, BUT IT WOULD TOTALLY BE UP TO THE BOARD TO SEE WHICH WAY THEY WANT TO DO THAT. HE HAD SAID THAT SOMEBODY NOTIFIED HIM OF PAYING AN EXEMPTION, BUT IF WE CONTINUE TO ALLOW PEOPLE JUST TO PAY, UH, EXEMPTIONS OR PAY, UH, ADJUSTMENT FEES, THEN THAT MEANS ANYBODY CAN GET AWAY WITH WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND WE SHOULD BE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT OTHER PEOPLE'S, UH, DENIAL. SO AT THIS POINT AND MOMENT IN TIME, EL DOES NOT APPROVE THE, THE ADJUSTMENT, UH, ON THIS. THANK YOU. ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO A MOTION? IF Y'ALL DON'T, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION. SURE. OKAY. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 25 DASH 103 0 2 52, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUEST FOR ONE, A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT FRONT YARD SOLID FENCE TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT FRONT YARD SOLID FENCE LIMITED TO THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE, NO CLOSER THAN SIX FEET [02:40:01] FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. AND TWO, A ONE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE WITH SIX FOOT POSTS IN THE FRONT YARD SITUATED AT 8 43 BRADY BOULEVARD. APPLICANT BEING NEW LOOK LLC. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PRO OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS. SPECIFICALLY YOU FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD SUPPORT THE SPIRIT OF THE CHAPTER AS ADEQUATE UN UNDESTRUCTIVE VIEWS OF THE FRONT YARD TO SUPPORT A SENSE OF COMMUNITY WOULD BE MAINTAINED. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED. THE PUBLIC WELFARE WOULD BE SERVED AS OFFENSE AS CONSTRUCTED, ALLOWS FOR ADEQUATE UNOBSTRUCTED VIEWS OF THE FRONT YARD TO PROMOTE CONSISTENCY AND SENSE OF COMMUNITY ALONG THE STREETSCAPE. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS THE ADDITIONAL FENCE SITE IS LIMITED IN SCOPE AND THE FENCE IS NOT DIMINISHED THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY WITHIN THIS AREA. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND THE LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD BE LIMITED IN SCOPE AND THEREFORE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE IN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT AS THE INCREASED FENCE SITE WOULD BE LIMITED IN SCOPE AND WOULD STILL SERVE TO PROMOTE A SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND OF MOTION. SO JUST BEFORE A SECOND IS DONE, WHAT I READ WAS, UM, I'M APPROVING, I'M MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE THE SIX FOOT SOLID FENCE EX LIMITED TO THE EAST SIDE, BUT SIX FEET AWAY FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, WHICH WOULD ACCOUNT FOR THE PANEL. UH, AND THEN THE SECOND PART OF IT WOULD ALLOW FOR A FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN WITH, UH, SIX FOOT FENCE POTS ELSEWHERE IN THE FRONT PROPERTY. IS THAT, SO WHEN I, WHEN I READ IT AS A LIMIT TO THE SOLID AND I READ THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN AND USE THE WORD FRONT PROPERTY, DOES THAT COVER ANYWHERE IN THE FRONT PROPERTY ASIDE FROM THAT PRIVACY FENCE, UM, PRIVACY FENCE ON THE MOTION WE PUT ON THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE. SO THAT LIMITS IT TO JUST THE SIDE THAT IT'S ON CURRENTLY? YEAH, I PUT EAST SIDE, UH, COMMENCING SIX FEET AWAY FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. SO, SO I GUESS I WOULD'VE SAID 15 FEET FROM THE STREET. UM, BECAUSE THAT'S THE CLEAR VISION SPACE. I WILL, I I CAN DO THAT. UM, YEAH 'CAUSE THAT'S, THAT SEEMS A LITTLE BIT MORE DIRECT WITH REGARDS TO ALLOWING FOR THE SECOND PART TO, TO, TO ALLOW FOR THAT, THAT, SO IT'S SIX FEET CONFUSED ME ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW IT'S SIX AND YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT THE MATH. WE'RE 15 FEET FROM THE STREET. I DID, I DID THE SIX BECAUSE, UH, THE, THE STREET'S A 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY. AND SO IF I TAKE 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE 30 THAT, THAT'S WHERE I CAME UP, I WAS GONNA SAY WE ACTUALLY DO HAVE THAT THIRD ITEM THAT, UH, RESOLVES OR LOOKS INTO THE WELL, I I DIDN'T WANT TO ON THE THIRD ITEM, WHICH DEALS WITH CLEAR VISION, CORRECT. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE FENCE GOT APPROVED WITH THAT BEING PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FOR THAT FIRST SECTION. YES. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT GOT APPROVED FIRST. I WAS JUST, I WAS, YEAH, WELL I WAS TELLING COMMISSIONER MANNA 'CAUSE IT SEEMED LIKE YOU WANTED TO ALSO ADD ON THAT CLEAR VISION ITEM, BUT WE DO HAVE IT AS THE THIRD UNDERSTOOD THAT PART. BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT AS IT WAS READ, THAT IT WOULD PUSH IT BACK SO THAT THE CLEAR VISION IS COVERED WITH THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. AND THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING FOR THE 15 FEET. 'CAUSE THAT WAY IT'S, IT'S COVERED. OKAY. SO FOR THAT POINT AND THAT'S WHY I WAS JUST, AND SO IF IF IT, IF IT'S RED AND IT WORKS, THAT'S FINE. BUT YOU KNOW, I CAN CHANGE THE, THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO WAIT BEFORE A SECOND WAS READ. I CAN ALTER THE MOTION TO SAY A, UH, FOR ITEM ONE TO SAY A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT FRONT YARD SOLID FENCE TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT FRONT YARD SOLID FENCE LIMITED TO THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE NO CLOSER THAN 15, 15 FEET FROM THE FACE OF CURB ON THE PUBLIC STREET. I WAS TRYING TO KEEP IT ALL WITH THE PROPERTY LINE, BUT I CAN READ IT THAT WAY TOO. THAT IS UP TO YOU GUYS. EXACTLY. IF SO, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD'VE PREFERRED TO WHAT I WAS GONNA ASK WOULD A SECOND WOULD JUST SIMPLY BECAUSE, AND I WAS GONNA SECOND IT, BUT OKAY. BUT THAT'S HOW I UNDERSTOOD. SO I'VE OFFICIALLY CHANGED MY MOTION TO, TO BE READ TO BE 15 FEET LIMITED TO 15 FEET FROM THE FRONT FACE, A CURB ON THE EAST SIDE. ALL RIGHT. SO IS THAT A SECOND? THAT WAS MY SECOND. ALRIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. UH, I'M IN SUPPORT AS READ. UM, 'CAUSE THE, THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN DOESN'T BOTHER ME. I THINK IT HELPS WITH CLEAR VISION AND ADDRESSES A LOT OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE AGAINST THIS. UH, THAT WE HAD, UH, DOCUMENT WRITTEN COMMENTS SUBMITTED, COMMISSIONER MANON AND, AND I CONCUR. AND I THINK EVEN WITH, UH, ACHA WHAT THEY, WHAT THEY WERE STATING WAS REALLY THAT CLEAR VISION FOR AS I WAS LISTENING TO IT, ALTHOUGH IT WAS A LITTLE BIT HARD TO HEAR. UM, AND, AND SO REALLY AGAIN, IT'S ABOUT PROVIDING SAFETY FOR EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY, INCLUDING YOUR NEIGHBORS. AND BY, BY WRAPPING IT AROUND, YOU KNOW, FOR WHEREVER PANEL WORKS FOR YOU FOR ENSURING AT LEAST [02:45:01] 15 FEET IS CLEARED AND HOWEVER IT WORKS OUT FOR YOU WOULD, UM, SATISFY ME. SO WITH THAT, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. ALRIGHT. UH, ANY OTHER, ANY COMMISSIONERS' LIKE TO ADD TO THE CONVERSATION? I'D LIKE TO OFFER AMENDMENT TO KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS. LET LET 'EM HAVE THE SOLID FENCE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE FRONT. ALL THE WAY DOWN. OKAY. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THAT? I, I PERSONALLY THINK THAT THE WAY I READ IT IS, IS KIND OF MAKING A LOT OF THE, THE NEIGHBORS HAPPY AND THE, THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION HAPPY. BUT UM, IS THERE ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION WHO WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE, THE MOTION AS, AS SUGGESTED ORIGINALLY, LIKE MR. DEAN'S IDEA? HOLD ON SIR. I, I'LL SAY THAT OTHER FENCES THAT ARE BUILT SIMILARLY ON THE STREET DO CUT BACK TO ALLOW FOR THE CLEAR VISION. SO I DIDN'T SEE ANY OTHERS THAT RAN ALL THE WAY UP AND SO I WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME SUPPORTING THAT. SO, OKAY, SO I'M NOT GONNA ACCEPT IT. WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A FORMAL AMENDMENT? I THINK I'LL JUST GO AS IT IS AMENDED 15 FEET FROM THE CURB. CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO ADD HERE NOW LET HAVE ROLL CALL VET VOTE ON THE FENCE. HIDE EXCEPTION CHAIR ORIAN? YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVEN? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BONIS? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ. ONE MORE TIME SIR. THUMBS UP. OKAY, THE VOTE IS 10 TO ONE MOTION PASSES ON THE FENCE SITE. THE NEXT ITEM IS REGARDING CLEAR VISION REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH UH DASH 25 DASH THREE, UH, 1 0 3 0 0 2 5 2. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED REQUEST FOR EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE TO THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA TO ALLOW A SEVEN FOOT DRIVEWAY, CLEAR FOOT, CLEAR VISION AREA SITUATED AT 8 43 BRADY BOULEVARD. APPLICANT BEING NEW LOOK LLC BECAUSE OF TESTIMONY WE PRESENTED US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWING THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH AS A LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS ADEQUATE SPACE WOULD REMAIN TO SAFELY EXIT THE DRIVEWAY ON THE PROPERTY. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LIBERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP GIVEN THAT THERE IS ADEQUATE CLEAR VISION AREA, LITTLE ENFORCEMENT, THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO RELOCATE THE FENCE, RELOCATING THE FENCE FURTHER FROM THE CURB, BUT ALSO REDUCE USABLE SPACE IN THE FRONT YARD. THREE, BY GREENING THE VARIANCES SPIRIT OF THE OR WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. SPIRIT OF THE OR WOULD BE OBSERVED AS A FENCE NEAR THE DRIVEWAY WOULD NOT CREATE A SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC HAZARD AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE DRIVEWAY AND RIGHT OF WAY. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OF THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES IN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WOULD 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. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA AS THE ENCROACHMENT INTO THE MINIMUM DRIVEWAY. CLEAR VISIONARY IS NOT SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE FROM OTHER FRONT YARD FENCE DESIGNS IN THE AREA. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO OTHER RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE PLAINTIFF, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. THE REDUCED DISTANCE BETWEEN THE CURB IN THE PROPERTY LINE. THIS CONDITION WAS NOT CREATED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER. IT IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL IS NOT A RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT. END OF MOTION. SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. UM, I'M IN SUPPORT OF IT NOW THAT THE UH, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE FOR THE FIRST, UH, FOR THAT FIRST PANEL IS GONNA BE, WAS ADDRESSED PREVIOUSLY. COMMISSIONER MANNA AND, AND THE ONLY REASON THIS IS RED IS BECAUSE IT'S OVER THREE FOOT. CORRECT. AND UM, EVEN IF IT'S PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT IS CORRECT. MM-HMM. AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. ALRIGHT, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD HEARING? NONE HAVE ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF ACT COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ. ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES. 11 TO ZERO. CONGRATULATIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, WHAT WE JUST DID, UH, YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF AND THEY'LL HELP YOU OUT. UH, DOES ANYBODY NEED A BREAK? OKAY, WE ARE GONNA TAKE A SHORT BREAK. WE'LL SEE EVERYBODY BACK [02:50:01] HERE AT 4 0 5. 4 0 7. WE'RE BACK IN SESSION. ITEM NINE. ITEM NUMBER NINE IS BO A DASH 25 3 54. THE ADDRESS BEING 43 38 RECCO DRIVE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE. THE APPLICANT IS ELIZABETH VALENZUELA. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 10 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW CARPORT WITH GUTTERS WITH A ONE INCH FRONT SETBACK AND TWO, A THREE FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW CARPORT WITH GUTTERS WITH A ONE FOOT SIX INCH SIDE SETBACK. THE ZONING IS RM FOUR. GENERALLY HOMES IN THE SUBDIVISION WERE DEVELOPED WITH A ZERO FOOT SETBACK FROM ONE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND A TON FOOT SETBACK FROM THE OTHER SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS CONSTRUCTED WITH A ZERO FOOT SETBACK BEING ON THE EAST SIDE. A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION BEGAN ON THIS PROPERTY IN OCTOBER, 2025 AND NOTICES OF VIOLATION WERE ISSUED FOR SETBACK ENCROACHMENTS AND FOR BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT. PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE, THE PROPERTY OWNER MUST OBTAIN A VARIANCE APPROVAL FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CARPORTS ENCROACHMENT INTO THE MINIMUM REQUIRED SIDE SET SIDE AND FRONT SETBACK AREAS. SO THIS IS A SITE PLAN OF THE CONSTRUCTION, UH, AGAIN ON THAT UH, EAST SIDE PROPERTY. SO SHOWN HERE, THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, UM, IS WHERE THAT ZERO FOOT SETBACK IS, UH, AS CONSTRUCTED BY THE OR, OR THAT'S ESTABLISHED BY THE PRIMARY HOME. UM, THE CARPORT DOES ENCROACH INTO, INTO BOTH THE FRONT SETBACK AND THE SIDE SETBACK. AND, UH, HERE'S A PHOTO OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE CARPORT AS CONSTRUCTED. AND HERE'S KIND OF A BETTER VIEW. THOSE RED LINES KIND OF SHOW THE ESTIMATED PROPERTY LINES FOR THIS LOT. AND THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CARPORT FRONT SETBACK STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 2 54 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE CARPORT WOULD BE INSUFFICIENTLY SEPARATED FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND THE PEDESTRIAN RIGHT OF WAY. AND TWO, AN EXISTING GARAGE EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY WHICH THE OWNER MAY USE FOR STORAGE OF VEHICLES INSTEAD. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CARPORT SIDE SETBACK STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 2 5 4 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE, THE CARPORT IS CONSTRUCTED OF NON-COMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL AND WILL UTILIZE GUTTERS TO REDIRECT WATER RUNOFF. THEREBY MITIGATING ANY INCREASED RISK OF DAMAGE OR NUISANCE TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND TO THE EXISTING PRIMARY STRUCTURE, UH, IS ALREADY SET BACK LESS THAN THE CARPORT, UH, INTO THE SIDE SETBACK. STAFF MAILED 47 NOTICES. ONE WAS RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THE PECAN VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. AND HERE IS THE, UH, COMMENT IN SUPPORT RECEIVED BY STAFF AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. SO THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. HELLO, STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR CARPORT. HELLO. UM, I'M ELIZABETH VALENZUELA AND I AM HERE TO THANK YOU, UM, TO KEEP MY CARPORT. OKAY. UM, I'LL START OFF WITH A FEW QUESTIONS. I NOTICED ON YOUR SITE PLAN THAT YOUR CARPORT IS ABOUT 20 FEET LONG. UH, SO YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE NOT IN ANY WAY EXCEEDING WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER NORMAL. UH, BUT YOU ARE, YOU ARE DETACHED FROM THE REST OF YOUR HOME, RIGHT? THOSE, YES, THE POST IT'S DETACHED. OKAY. AND, UM, WELL THAT'S ALL I NEED TO KNOW. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH, JUST CURIOUS, THE WAY THE GUTTERS KIND OF RAIN WATER, DOES IT FALL TO THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY TO THE SIDES OF THE PROPERTY? UH, THE GUTTERS THAT I HAVE RIGHT NOW, THEY FALL IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. SO THERE'S, I DON'T SEE GUTTERS ON, NOT ON THE FRONT PORT, BUT THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE CARPORT. I WILL HAVE THOSE, UM, PUT ON THERE. OKAY. OKAY. DOES YOUR CARPORT SLOPE FROM THE BACK TO THE FRONT SLOPES? TOWARDS THE STREET. TOWARDS THE STREET. OKAY. I DON'T THINK YOU NEED 'EM. YEAH, YOU PROBABLY DON'T BECAUSE IT, I, I WOULDN'T RECOMMEND, I DON'T THINK YOU NEED 'EM. IF IT SLOPES TO THE FRONT OF THE YEAH, IT DOES IT PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY THEN AND THERE'S A RIDGE ON THE SIDE OF THE EXISTING METAL TOP THAT WOULDN'T ALLOW WATER TO DUMP OFF THE SIDE ANYWAY. YEAH. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO. ALRIGHT. UH, THERE ANY VOICEMAILS? ANYONE SEND THE SPEAK BELIEVE COMMISSIONER CRUZ HAD A QUESTION. OH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. THANK YOU SIR. UH, JUST THE OBVIOUS IS YOUR NEIGHBOR, I GUESS LOOKING AT IT NOW TO YOUR LEFT OF YOU THAT HAS NO OBJECTIONS [02:55:01] TO THE CARPORT, UM, BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SUBMIT ANYTHING. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. NO, UM, I'VE TALKED TO HER AND THIS WAS LIKE WAY BACK 'CAUSE MY CARPORT'S BEEN EXISTENCE FOR ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF ALREADY. UM, AND I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH ANYBODY OR EVEN ALEX, THE ONE THAT'S ON THE LEFT SIDE, WHICH IS CLOSER TO HIS HOUSE, HE WAS LIKE, GO FOR IT, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED IT . OKAY. WELL BECAUSE I DON'T SEE ANY OTHERS CLOSE TO YOU. THAT'S WHY I WANNA MAKE SURE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND, AND I, I, I JUST WANTED TO BRING SOMETHING UP WITH STAFF AND THIS IS ON REGARDING THE SIDE SETBACK. I KNOW IT'S A ZERO LOT LINE SUBDIVISION. I ACTUALLY NOTICED THAT, UM, THIS IN THE EIGHTIES, THIS WAS ZONED R SEVEN, WHICH ALLOWED FOR ZERO LOT LINE, BUT BECAUSE IT CONVERTED TO AN R FOUR WHEN THE OH ONE CODE CAME OUT, DON'T, DIDN'T, WOULDN'T THIS APPLICANT QUALIFY FOR DEVELOPMENT PRESERVATION RIGHTS BECAUSE OF THE CONVERSION AND ALSO THE, WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE EXPANSION AND ADDITIONAL PERMITTING OF USE ON THEIR PROPERTY. WOULD THE SIDE SETBACK BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE COVERED UNDER DEVELOPMENT PRESERVATION? RIGHT. DEVELOPMENT PRESERVATION RIGHTS IS FOR THE USES. UM, SO IT WOULDN'T GO FOR THE, THE DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SETBACK STANDARD. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO ASK AS I JUST CURIOUS, ALRIGHT, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE AND THERE'S NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK, NO PUBLIC COMMENT, LOOKING FOR A MOTION UNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 25 DASH 0 3 2 5 4. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS REQUEST FOR ONE A NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 10 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW A CARPORT WITH GUTTERS WITH A ONE INCH FRONT SETBACK AND TWO OR THREE FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A CARPORT WITH GUTTERS WITH A ONE FOOT SIX INCH SIDE SETBACK SITUATED AT 4 3 3 8 GRECO DRIVE. APPLICANT BEING ELIZABETH VALENZUELA. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT, THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE DOES NOT CONTRACT TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE VARIANCE DOES NOT CONTRACT TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS ADEQUATE SEPARATION WOULD REMAIN BETWEEN THE CARPORT AND THE PROPERTY LINES. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE SPECIAL CONDITION OF THIS PROPERTY IS THAT THE LOCATION OF THE EXISTING HOME AND THE DRIVEWAY, WHICH LIMITS THE POTENTIAL AREA FOR THE PLACEMENT OF A CARPORT. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD PREVENT THE PROPERTY OWNER FROM ESTABLISHING A USABLE CARPORT OVER THEIR EXISTING DRIVEWAY. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED, THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. SUCH VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE IN THE SPIRIT. SUCH VARIANCE WOULD BE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THERE WAS SUFFICIENT SEPARATION. THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT REDUCE VISIBILITY. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OUTTA NO USES, SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OF THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT FORMING PROPERTY. THEY'RE ALSO THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS A REDUCTION OF THE SETBACK, AS MINIMAL SETBACK IS, IS MINIMAL AND WILL CAUSE NO HARDSHIP TO THE PROPERTY ABUTTING THIS LOT OR THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY. AND SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT BUILT FINANCIAL, NOT DUE TO OTHER RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS. THE DISTRICT COINS, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE LOCATION OF THE EXISTING HOME AND DRIVEWAY, WHICH LIMITS THE AVAILABILITY AVAILABLE SPACE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CARPORT. AND A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. COMMISSIONER ZIN? YES. I'M SUPPORTING. THE MOTION IS READ. NO OPPOSITION FROM EITHER OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT BE MOST IMPACTED. NO OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HERE. UM, IT'S A ZERO LOT SETBACK. THE APPLICANT IS SET IS IRRESPECTIVE OF THE ZERO LOT, THEY ARE RESPECTING A ONE FOOT SIX INCH SIDE SETBACK. AND THE PROPERTY, UH, THE CARPORT HAS BUILT, UM, KIND OF SLANTS TO THE FRONT. SO ANY RAINWATER WOULD DRAIN TO THE FRONT RIGHT OF WAY THE FRONT, UH, STREET AND NOT TO THE NEIGHBORS. AND SO THEREFORE I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION HAS READ. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR WITH COMMISSIONER UNA. I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH IT SINCE LIKE, IT'S LIKE HE STATED NONE OF THE NEIGHBORS COMPLAINED, SO I SEE. NO, NO PROBLEMS WITH, UH, APPROVING THIS. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD, UH, CHAIR? YES, COME ON. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THE, THE GUTTERS PROBABLY WERE NOT NECESSARY BECAUSE OF THE SLANT OF THE ROOF GOING TO THE STREET AND BECAUSE OF THE LIP ON THE LEFT AND RIGHT OF THE CARPORT. SO SHOULD THIS BE AMENDED TO TAKE THE GUTTERS? YEAH. WE DID NOT INCLUDE GUTTERS DID THEY? THE, THE, THE MAKER OF THE MOTION DID NOT READ IT WITH GUTTERS. NO, I DID NOT. OKAY. SO HE EXPLAINED, OH, I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. IT WAS READ WITH GUTTERS. CAN WOULD YOU LIKE TO OH YEAH, YEAH. I'M SORRY. YEAH. 'CAUSE THE ORIGINAL MOTION AS THE CITY PREPARED HAD, YEAH, I, I STRIKE THE GUTTERS. NO GUTTERS. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CRUZ, DO YOU ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT? YES, I DO. ALRIGHT, SO NOW WE [03:00:01] HAVE FOR SURE A MOTION WITH NO GUTTERS, MANNA, COMMISSIONER MANNA. AND JUST WANTED TO ALSO POINT OUT, SO, YOU KNOW, SO I'D LIKE TO GOOGLE DRIVE AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE ARE SEVERAL CARPORTS HERE. SOME OF THEM HAD THEIR POSTS PULLED BACK A LITTLE BIT, BUT THEY HAVE OVERHANG GOING TO THIS LOCATION. SO IT SEEMS LIKE, UM, THIS COMMUNITY WAS BUILT FOR VERY SHORT DRIVEWAYS. AND SO THIS SEEMS TO BE, THERE'S ANOTHER DOZEN CARPORTS HERE THAT ARE SIMILARLY CONFIGURED WITH REGARDS TO HOW BEING, HOW CLOSE IT IS TO TO, TO A 10 FOOT LINE. SO I DON'T SEE THIS BEING INCONSISTENT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER OZUNA. I'M SORRY. YEAH, I CONCUR. YEAH. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVEN? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ. I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MENA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER BREGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ. ONE MORE TIME, SIR. THUMBS UP. CHAIR ORIAN. AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES 11 TO ZERO. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER 10. ITEM NUMBER 10 IS BOA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 5 5. LOCATED AT 1 5 4 BABCOCK ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS GILBERT VARGAS. A REQUEST FOR ONE A 25 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITH A FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK. A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT BUFFER YARD TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITH A FIVE FOOT REAR BUFFER YARD. AND THREE, A VARIANCE FROM THE UDC ACCESSORY STRUCTURE REGULATIONS TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITHIN THE REAR SETBACK OF A NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT THAT ABUTS A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. THE ZONE IS OH TWO ON THE PROPERTY. THERE IS AN EXISTING REAL ESTATE SERVICES OFFICE BUILDING UNDER RENOVATION AND A FIRE DAMAGE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, WHICH IS SLATED FOR DEMOLITION. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A STORAGE SHED TO HOUSE MATERIALS AND TOOLS FOR MINOR HOME IMPROVEMENTS ON CLIENTS' HOMES LISTED FOR SALE UDC STANDARDS PROHIBIT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES OTHER THAN CARPORTS WITHIN THE REAR AND INSIDE SETBACKS OF NON-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ABUT IN RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. THE PROPOSED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS ALSO WITHIN THE REQUIRED RARE 15 FOOT BUFFER YARD. THEREFORE THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE STORAGE SHED TO BE LOCATED AND USED WITHIN THE MINIMUM REQUIRED REAR SETBACK AND BUFFER YARD AREA. THIS IS A SITE PLAN HIGHLIGHTING THE REAR SETBACK, THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, WHICH WOULD BE FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THIS IS JUST AN AERIAL VIEW TO GET A FULL SCOPE OF THE PROPERTY AND WHERE THAT EXISTING STORAGE SHED IS. AND THIS IS THE CURRENT VIEW FROM THE FRONT AND THIS IS THE REAR OF THAT PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND THE CURRENT VIEW OF THE REAR YARD. AND THESE PHOTOS WILL HIGHLIGHT THE SURROUNDING AREAS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE REAR SETBACK ACCESSORY STRUCTURE REGULATIONS AND THE BUFFER VARIANCES ARE DENIAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 55 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES EXCEPT FOR CARPORTS ARE PROHIBITED WITHIN THE SITE AND REAR SETBACK AREAS OF NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. AND TWO, THE REQUEST DID NOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE SPACING FROM THE ADJACENT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE. 18 NOTICES WERE MAILED ONE IN FAVOR AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION. NO RESPONSE FROM THE MONTICELLO PARK AND THE MAVERICK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND THE SAN ANTONIO TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION. AND THIS IS THE LETTER RECEIVED IN SUPPORT FROM THE JASON PROPERTY. THIS CONCLUDES TASK PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT, THAT THAT MF 33 IS STILL CONSIDERED. I HEAR RESIDENTIAL, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN FOUR OR LESS THAN FOUR, I MEAN THERE'S DIFFERENT, CAN, CAN STAFF CHIME IN ON, ON HOW THAT WORKS? UM, EXHIBIT TO THE, UH, SETBACK YOU'RE ASKING WELL 'CAUSE UNDER IN THE UDC THERE'S A DEFINITION THAT DOESN'T CONSIDER IT MULTIFAMILY UNTIL YOU'RE MORE THAN FOUR. BUT, BUT SINCE THE RESTRICTION ABOUT THE 30 FEET IS LIMITED TO RESIDENTIAL, IT'S ANY KIND OF RESIDENTIAL, ANY KIND OF MULTIFAMILY THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO ASK. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. [03:05:03] THANK YOU. MY NAME IS GIL VARGAS AND UM, I WANNA PICK UP RIGHT, RIGHT WHERE YOU LEFT OFF ABOUT THAT QUESTION. WE ACTUALLY MET WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ON THE REQUIRED SETBACK AND WE HAD TO RESEARCH THAT SAYING, WELL THIS IS MULTI-FAMILY AND IF I COULD ACTUALLY, UM, GET THE SLIDE THAT HAS THE AERIAL ON IT. SO THERE'S A MULTI-FAMILY, UH, APARTMENT COMPLEX, RIGHT, UH, BEHIND THIS PARTICULAR LOT. YOU CAN, YOU CAN SEE IT THERE. AND IN PARTICULAR WHERE THAT, UH, THAT APARTMENT COMPLEX. AND I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY UNITS HAVE THEY HAVE, BUT THERE'S MORE THAN FOUR FOR SURE. THERE'S SEVERAL BUILDINGS. THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THE DUMPSTER AND PARKING RIGHT UP AGAINST THE BACK OF THAT PARTICULAR, OKAY, SURE. UM, SO HERE'S THE SITE. HERE'S THE SITE, RIGHT. HERE'S SPEAK CENTER. MIKE, PLEASE. YEAH. HERE'S THE SITE RIGHT HERE. HERE'S THE APARTMENT COMPLEX. AND RIGHT HERE IS WHERE YOU HAVE, UM, THE DUMPSTERS FOR THE APARTMENT COMPLEX RIGHT HERE BEHIND THE LOT. AND THEN THERE'S SOME PARKING RIGHT HERE. UM, SO WHEN WE WERE TALKING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THEY WERE POINTING OUT THAT, WELL THIS IS RESIDENTIAL AND THAT'S REQUIRED 30 FEET AND AT 30 FEET, IF YOU GO IN AND YOU TRY TO PUT THAT SETBACK IN THAT PARTICULAR LOT THAT, YOU KNOW, ONE TIME WAS PROBABLY RESIDENTIAL AND NOW IT'S, UM, COMMERCIAL, YOU'RE REALLY USING QUITE A BIT OF THE ALLOWABLE SPACE. AND FOR THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS WHERE THEY'D LIKE TO, UH, THERE'S NOT MUCH PARKING IN THE FRONT, BUT THERE IS PARKING IN BEHIND THE MAIN STRUCTURE. IT ALLOWS THEM TO HAVE TRUCKS AND TRAILERS TO, TO DO WHAT THEY NEED TO TO CONDUCT THEIR BUSINESS. BUT HAVING THAT 30 FOOT SETBACK MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR TRAILERS AND TRUCKS TO CIRCULATE IN THERE. AND THEN ALSO TO BE ABLE TO GET, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY NEED TO, UH, TO, TO OPERATE THEIR BUSINESS. SO JUST ALLOWING THAT, THAT IMPROVEMENT OF, OF, UH, OF THE VARIANCE OF 25 FEET. WE STILL HAVE A, A SETBACK, BUT BY ALLOWING THAT 25 FOOT VARIANCE AND THE BUFFER, UH, THAT WOULD, IT WOULD OPEN UP A LOT MORE SPACE THAN WHAT THE OWNER WOULD CURRENTLY HAVE HERE. AND THERE WOULD BE, I'M GONNA SAY THAT JUST INTUITIVELY, NO ONE FROM THE APARTMENT COMPLEX IS GOING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT IT. 'CAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE DUMPSTER IS. AND THE NEIGHBOR RIGHT NEXT TO HIM SAYS SHE'S FINE WITH IT. SHE'S RIGHT NEXT TO IT. AND THERE WAS NO COMMENT FROM THE BUSINESS AS YOU CAN SEE NEXT TO THEM AS WELL. SO FROM A, FROM A, YOU KNOW, JUST A, A BEAUTIFICATION OR A A VIEW, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S VERY LITTLE FOR PEOPLE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT IN THAT REGARD. AND THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE ABLE TO OPERATE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVELY WITH A MUCH WIDER SPACE THAN BEHIND THE MAIN STRUCTURE, WHICH, UH, WOULD DO QUITE A BIT FOR HIM TO OPERATE. THE ADDED BONUS TO THAT IS RIGHT IN HERE, UH, THERE'S AN, THERE'S AN ALLEY. UM, AND THIS ALLEYWAY HAS BEEN A, A, A PROBLEM FOR THIS AREA BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF HOMELESS THAT GO INTO THAT AREA. AND, UH, LIKE IT HAPPENS SO OFTEN THAT PEOPLE JUMP THE FENCE AND THEY GET IN THE PROPERTIES. UM, AND YOU KNOW, TO A LARGE EXTENT THEY WANNA JUST SURVIVE. BUT HAVING THAT 30 FOOT SETBACK AND THEN HAVING A STRUCTURE ALLOWS 'EM TO GET BACK THERE AND, AND HIDE AND, AND DO THINGS, YOU CAN'T SEE 'EM. AND BY BRINGING, BRINGING THE SETBACK MUCH CLOSER, YOU KNOW, IT, IT BY FIVE FEET, IT WOULD BASICALLY REALLY ELIMINATE MUCH FOR THEM TO DO THERE. AND CURRENTLY WHERE THE APARTMENT COMPLEX HAS THE DUMPSTER AND YOU KNOW, THAT'S SORT OF A NATURAL ATTRACTION WHERE THEY'RE GOING IN AND GETTING STUFF NOW WITH A 30 FOOT SETBACK, THEY COULD JUMP OVER, HIDE BEHIND A, A, A AUXILIARY STRUCTURE AND THEN DO THINGS THAT THEY SHOULDN'T BE DOING WITH THE OWNER, LIKELY NOT SEEING THEM BECAUSE THEY'D JUST BE HIDING BACK THERE. SO IT WOULD BE A TREMENDOUS HELP TO, TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM BY ALLOWING, YOU KNOW, THE SETBACK TO BE PUSHED BACK TO FIVE FEET. UM, I MEAN THAT'S SORT OF IT IN A NUTSHELL. OKAY. COMMISSIONER BREGMAN, UH, TWO QUESTIONS. UM, SO HOW LARGE ARE YOU PROPOSING THAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE? UM, RIGHT NOW IT, IT, IT'S GONNA BE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 300 TO 600 SQUARE FEET. OKAY. SO [03:10:01] 10 BY 30. 10 BY 30? YEAH, PROBABLY TWO 10 BY 30 STRUCTURES. OKAY. AND IS IT GONNA BE ON A FOUNDATION OR ON YEAH, YEAH. I I MEAN IT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED PER, PER THE CITY CODES, WHATEVER, WHAT THEY REQUIRE IN TERMS OF A STRUCTURE. OKAY. HOW TALL IS IT GONNA BE? UM, IT'S NOT DEFINED, BUT IT, BUT IT WOULD BE ONE STORY. I MEAN, IT WOULDN'T BE TWO COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, SO THE PROPERTY AT, UH, 3, 4, 2, WHATEVER THE STREET IS BEHIND IT. WHICH ONE'S THREE LEMING OR, YEAH, LEMING. SO, SO THOSE HOUSES BEHIND IT ARE NOT IN PLAY HERE, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE DISTANCE. UM, SO YOU GO FROM THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY TO THE, JUST TO THE MULTIFAMILY IS THE ISSUE. SO IS IT, 'CAUSE THERE'S AN ALLEY THERE OR, UM, SO THEY'RE NOT REALLY, THERE'S A LITTLE SPACE ON THAT ABUTTING PROPERTY, 1 66 C**K THAT IS NOT HAVING THEM ABUT IT DIRECTLY. EVEN IF THE, IF, IF ALLY WASN'T THERE, THEY WOULD STILL NOT BE ABUTTING IT. OKAY. WELL I DID, YEAH, I KNOW I DRAW A PENCIL FROM, FROM THE CORNER OF THAT LOT AND IT DOES HIT 3 46 AND, AND MAYBE TOUCHES 3 42 AS WELL. LET MEAN, SO, UM, SO JUST WANTED TO CALL THAT OUT. UM, AND THEN SECOND, SO IF I SAW CORRECTLY, THERE WAS A DIALOGUE ABOUT, UM, A PREVIOUS STRUCTURE THAT, UM, BURNED DOWN. SO WAS THAT IN THE SAME AREA OR IS IT ELSEWHERE ON THE PROPERTY? NO, IT'S, IT'S ON THE PROPERTY. SO THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ON A RENOVATION AND IT WAS DELAYED FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS. ONE, IT DIDN'T HAVE A PLAID AND TWO, THEY HAD TO GO GET SOME PERMITTING FOR IT. AND DURING THAT TIME, AND YOU CAN SEE IT THERE AND THAT RED BUILDING THERE, UM, HOMELESS PEOPLE WERE COMING IN AND PROBABLY TRYING TO GET SOME SHELTER AND STARTED A FIRE. AND SO THE STRUCTURE GOT RUINED. SO, SO ORIGINAL STRUCTURE OR THE, OR SO THAT STRUCTURE ON THE RIGHT IS ONE THAT GOT DAMAGED? YES. BUT YOU'RE BUILDING THE, THE, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS ONE AT THE BACK SPACE? YES, SIR. I WANNA MAKE SURE IT WAS A SEPARATE BUILDING. YES, SIR. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY. AND JUST TO, UH, CLARIFY WHAT WAS ASKED EARLIER, UM, ABOUT THE MULTIFAMILY NOTE TWO DOES SPECIFICALLY CALL OUT RESIDENTIAL OR MULTIFAMILY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITION OF RESIDENTIAL? THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WE USE IT ON THERE. WELL, THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. 'CAUSE I SOMETIMES I, I HEAR SO MANY DIFFERENT, 'CAUSE SOMETIMES MULTIFAMILY IS CONSIDERED COMMERCIAL IN THE EYES OF OTHER THINGS. THERE'S ONLY A FEW PLACES WHERE IT SPECIFICALLY STATES IN THE UDC THAT THIS WILL MULTI-FAMILY WILL BE CONSIDERED RESIDENTIAL FOR THIS RULE. YES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I MEAN, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE, HAS ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ANY VOICEMAILS? UH, TWO PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. ALL RIGHT, WELL WE'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM, UH, A COUPLE, UH, CITIZENS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AND WE'LL SEE HOW THIS, WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS ARE. THIS ONE IS MRS. MALDONADO. UM, MR. TOM SIMMONS IS ALSO YIELDING HIS TIME TO ME. SORRY, I COULDN'T OKAY. WAS THAT THE OTHER INDIVIDUAL SIGNED UP? MR. SIMMONS. OKAY. AND YOU'RE GIVING UP YOUR TIME, SIR? CORRECT. OKAY. SHE HAS SIX MINUTES. ALRIGHT, WE HAVE SIX MINUTES. GREAT. IF WE COULD START WITH THIS PHOTO RIGHT HERE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, BUT I ALSO HAVE A FILE THAT HAS SOME PHOTOS FOR YOU ALSO. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS BIANCA MALDONADO. PO BOX 1 0 0 3 1 5 7 8 2 0 1. I'M PRESIDENT OF THE MONTICELLO PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OFFERING COMETS ON BEHALF OF OUR 10 MEMBER BOARD OF DIRECTORS 1 54 BABCOCK SOLD, UM, EARLIER THIS YEAR ON MARCH 3RD, 2025 TO UNITED HOMES CONTRACTING LLC. LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ABOUT THIS PROPERTY. THERE USED TO BE A LOT OF FRONT LOADERS, A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT THAT WAS ON HERE. WE HAD SOME, A LOT OF ZONING VIOLATIONS THAT WENT ON PRIOR THE PRIOR OWNER, BUT WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON THE OWNER THAT TOOK OVER AND ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR. UNFORTUNATELY, UM, IN SEPTEMBER, SEPTEMBER 25TH OF THIS YEAR, THERE WAS A SUBSTANTIAL FIRE THAT WAS STARTED BY I WOULD NOT BE GIVING THEM AS MUCH CREDIT AS HOMELESS AS THEY ARE VAGRANTS UNFORTUNATELY IN THIS SITUATION. UM, IF YOU GO TO THIS AERIAL PHOTO AND YOU ZOOM IN, YOU CAN SEE THE BUILDUP OF THE STUFF BEHIND THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. FOLKS, THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN OVERNIGHT. THERE'S BEEN A FENCE ON THIS PROPERTY AND THAT KIND OF BUILDUP BEHIND AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE DOESN'T HAPPEN OVERNIGHT. THE BUFFER IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF THE MULTIFAMILY THAT IS ADJACENT TO IT'S PARK OF THE AUTO. UM, THEY USED TO BE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENT THAT RECENTLY PHASED OUT FROM THAT, BUT THEY STILL OFFER AFFORDABLE RATES FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO WANNA RESIDE ON THAT PROPERTY. AND DIRECTLY [03:15:01] BEHIND THE FENCE AT 1 54 BABCOCK IS A PARKING LOT AND THERE ARE FRONT END HEAD END PARKING NOW BEHIND THE FENCE ON THE LEMMING STREET PROPERTY WITH THE HOMES THAT LIVE ON LEMMING DRIVE. THAT'S WHERE THE DUMPSTERS ARE LOCATED. THIS ALLEY THAT'S BEING TALKED ABOUT IS NOT AN ALLEY, IT IS AN ABANDONED DRAINAGE EASEMENT CITY DOESN'T MAINTAIN IT, NOBODY MAINTAINS IT. UM, AND IT'S NOT REALLY WHAT YOU WOULD THINK OF AS A SERVICE ALLEY OR REALLY AN ABANDONED ALLEY. IT'S REALLY ONE OF THOSE ODDLY EASEMENTS THAT EXIST THROUGHOUT THE CITY. THE BIG CONCERN IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER, WHICH IN THIS PHOTO ORIENTATION WOULD BE THE LOWER LEFT HAND CORNER OF THE PROPERTY, IT IS VERY CLOSE TO THOSE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, OKAY? AND IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, THE FIRE THAT OCCURRED IN THIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ACTUALLY TRAVELED TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. SO I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THAT LAW OFFICE DOESN'T WANT ANOTHER ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UP AGAINST THEM BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT HISTORY TO REPEAT ITSELF. UM, THERE WERE 15 SHOPPING CARTS ON THIS PROPERTY WHEN IT CAUGHT FIRE. THERE WERE PEOPLE GRILLING FOOD BEHIND THERE. I WANNA REITERATE THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN OVERNIGHT. UM, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE HISTORY AND THE BUILD ESSAY, THE STRIKE TEAMS INVOLVED, SEVERAL OF THEIR PERMITS ARE ON HOLD PENDING APPROVAL. YOU HEARD TODAY, JUST AS WE HEARD THAT THERE COULD BE A THREE TO 600 SQUARE FOOT, YOU KNOW, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BUILT AND IT'LL BE BUILT TO CODE. BUT WHAT DOES ALL THAT MEAN? YOU ASKED A GOOD QUESTION. WHAT'S THE HEIGHT GONNA BE? YOU KNOW, THESE ARE ALL UNKNOWNS, BUT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT SOMEBODY'S TRACK RECORD. AND IN MY OPINION, WE MAKE OUR RECOMMENDATION ON THAT. WE LOOK AT THE STRUGGLES THAT WE'VE HAD WITH THIS PROPERTY, COME TO US WITH A FULL PLAN, NOT A PARTIAL MADE PLAN. THIS ISN'T A FULL PLAN THAT'S BEING PRESENTED TO YOU. OUR BIGGEST CONCERN HAS BEEN FIRE IN OUR COMMUNITY. YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU HOPE THAT THAT NEVER HAPPENS IN AN APARTMENT COMPLEX, BUT DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET ON BABCOCK, IT BACKS UP TO BABCOCK, THE FREDERICKSBURG ROAD PLACE APARTMENTS. THEY TOO HAD A FIRE IN THE BACK OF THEIR, UH, UNITS RECENTLY. AND THEN THERE WAS A BIG FIRE ON THE 100 BLOCK OF VANCE JACKSON. THESE ARE ALL WITHIN 15 MONTHS. FOLKS, IN ADDITION TO THE FIRE AT THIS PROPERTY, THESE PEOPLE WANNA START FIRES 'CAUSE THEY WANNA GRILL OR, YOU KNOW, FIRES HAPPEN FOR LIFE SAFETY, YOU KNOW, ELECTRICAL REASONS. AND I THINK WHAT WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON HERE TODAY IS MAINTAINING THAT REAR SETBACK. I KNOW THE PROPERTY OWNER WANTS TO HAVE THAT NEGATED BECAUSE THEY FEEL THAT THEY WOULD CLOSE THAT GAP WHERE SOMEONE WOULD BE ABLE TO HIDE. WELL, THEY'VE BEEN HIDING IN OPEN SIGHT ALL THIS TIME. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DRIVING BY AND YOU KNOW, THE, THE REALLY THE CONCERN IS BEING A RESPONSIBLE PROPERTY OWNER AND WE DON'T FEEL THAT NEGATING THAT THAT REAR SETBACK MEETS THAT OBLIGATION. SO WE'RE ASKING YOU TO, UM, SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL. WHEN YOU LOOK IN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, WHAT GOES IN IT, YOU CAN'T REGULATE ITS CONTENTS. YOU CAN HAVE PAINT, YOU CAN HAVE FLAMMABLE EQUIPMENT, YOU CAN HAVE MORE WOOD. IT COULD BECOME STACKED FROM THE BOARD, YOU KNOW, FROM THE FLOOR TO THE CEILING. THOSE ARE THINGS YOU CAN'T REGULATE. SO I THINK OF WHEN YOU WANNA PUT A STRUCTURE THAT LARGE, THAT CLOSE TO THE REAR SETBACK, YOU HAVE TO TAKE ALL THAT INTO CONSIDERATION BECAUSE ALL THAT IS POSSIBLE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT ITS CURRENT LOCATION, IT'S GOING IN THE MOST VULNERABLE LOCATION. IT'S GOING UNDERNEATH A TREE AND IT'S GOING IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER CLOSEST TO WHERE THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL HOUSES. GRANTED, THERE IS SOME SETBACK ON THE, ON THE APARTMENT SIDE, BUT THERE WOULD BE FRONT END PARKING. SO THINK ABOUT ACCESSIBILITY AND A FIRE. SO THAT'S A FIRE LANE DOWN ON THE PARK OF THE AUTO SIDE WHERE THAT, WHERE THAT, UM, THAT FRONT END PARKING IS AND WHERE THOSE DUMPSTERS ARE LOCATED. BUT WHERE WOULD YOU, HOW WOULD YOU GET TO THAT STRUCTURE, THAT REAR STRUCTURE IN A, IN A FIRE? WOULD YOU COME ON TO PARK OF S OR WOULD YOU TRY TO DO A LADDER TRUCK OFF OF BABCOCK? WE RECENTLY HAD A FIRE HERE AND IT SPREAD AND DAMAGED THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. IF YOU COULD PULL UP THE PICTURES THAT I HAVE, PLEASE. IT'S A FILE. I GAVE IT TO 'EM AHEAD OF TIME. I'M SORRY, I, I TOOK PICTURES FOR TODAY. NO, THAT'S JUST SO Y'ALL CAN SEE WHAT WE SEE. SORRY, DID I CRASH THE SYSTEM? OKAY, WELL THOSE AREN'T YOUR PICTURES, BUT NO, THEY'RE, I JUST HAVE, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS WHILE WE'RE FIGURING THIS OUT. SO THIS WAS A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY BEFORE, WELL THEY STORED CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ON SITE, SO THEY MAY HAVE ISN'T IT IS, CAN YOU DO THAT ON AN OH TWO? YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED, LIKE I SAID, THERE WAS SOME VIOLATION HISTORY, BUT WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT ACCESSIBILITY, BEING ABLE TO TURN AROUND IN THE PARKING LOT, WE'RE TALKING FLATBED TRAILERS PULLED IN HERE WITH FRONT LOADERS. SO BOBCATS. SO I QUESTION THE MANEUVERABILITY OF THE [03:20:01] PARKING LOT. SO I'M, SO HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO, HAS YOUR NEIGHBORS ASSOCIATION HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK WITH THE APPLICANT AT ALL? NO. OKAY. ONLY WE GOT THE PICTURES UP. WE'LL GO BACK. OH, HERE WE GO. SEE, THIS IS THE FRONT PICTURE IN THE RED BUILDING IN THE BACK WITH THE DOOR WIDE OPEN. IT'S BEEN WIDE OPEN SINCE THE DAY OF THE FIRE. COULD YOU GO TO THE NEXT PICTURE PLEASE? THIS IS THE STRUCTURE LOOKING FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY NEIGHBORS. THERE'S TWO UN TWO UNSECURED DOORS. MY UNDERSTANDING THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE DEMOLISHED. IF YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT PICTURE, THIS IS WHERE THE FIRE WAS ON THE BACKSIDE OF THAT PROPERTY. AND YOU CAN ALSO SEE WHERE IT SPREAD TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. AND THAT USED TO BE, THAT'S A NEW OWNER TOO, WHO'S INVESTED A LOT OF MONEY INTO THEIR PROPERTY. SO I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THEY'RE SUPPORTING, HEY, MOVE IT BACK, GET IT AWAY FROM MY PROPERTY. THAT MAKES SENSE. BUT I THINK IT'S HOME OWNERSHIP. BUT YOU CAN ALSO LOOK AT THE, UM, MAIN COMMERCIAL BUILDING. YOU CAN SEE IT'S ALL BOARDED UP AND IT'S ALL RAW AND THERE'S A BIG PILE, BUT THAT WASN'T THE ONLY FIRE ON THIS PROPERTY. THERE WAS A FIRE AT THE REAR OF THE FENCE. SO THE BLACK WROUGHT IRON FENCE IS THE FENCE OF PARK . THE WOOD FENCE IS THE PROPERTY AT 1 54. AND THAT LITTLE SECTION BETWEEN THOSE TWO POLES, BETWEEN THE BLACK POLE AND THE WOOD POLE, THAT'S THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR. AND IT'S A VERY SMALL SECTION BEFORE YOU GET INTO THE RESIDENTIAL RIGHT ACROSS THE WAY. SO OUR BIG CONCERN IS THAT WHEN YOU SEE THIS OCCUR UNDER THE CURRENT OWNERSHIP AND YOU SEE SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO NEGATE THAT, WE'VE SUPPORTED ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT TO THIS PROPERTY. THEY THE LITTLE STRIP CENTER RIGHT NEXT DOOR AND THEN THE HOUSE THAT'S A, A, UH, A WORK HOUSING MIXED USE LOCATION RIGHT NEXT TO IT. SO THEY'RE VERY SUCCESSFUL, UM, REDEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE OCCURRED ON THIS ONE BLOCK. IT'S JUST UNFORTUNATE IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, TRYING TO NEGATE THE REAR SETBACK WITH UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS, UNKNOWNS, GIVEN THE HISTORY THAT HAS OCCURRED WITH LIFE SAFETY ON THIS PROPERTY, IT HAS RAISED SUBSTANTIAL CONCERN IN OUR COMMUNITY. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL ON ALL THREE REQUESTS. OKAY. AND UH, SO JUST A QUICK QUESTION. SURE. JUST A FOLLOW UP. SO I KNOW THAT, UM, WE HAVE TWO THINGS BEFORE US. ONE IS A BUFFER, A 15 FOOT BUFFER, AND THE OTHER ONE'S A SETBACK. IS, IS, IS THERE, I KNOW THAT YOU HAVEN'T TALKED TO THE APPLICANT, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT THE BOARD MAYBE DISCUSSED THAT YOU COULD EVER LIVE WITH A 15 FOOT SETBACK? KEEP, KEEP THE BUFFER BUT GIVE THEM 15 FOOT? IS THAT SOMETHING YOU THINK THE BOARD MAY BE DISCUSSED? I THINK WHEN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GONNA BE BUILT, THE 300 TO 600 SQUARE FEET, SIR, THAT'S PRETTY, THAT'S PRETTY WIDES FLOP. NOT KNOWING WHAT THE CONSTRUCTION, UH, MATERIALS ARE GONNA BE. UH, WE COULD START TALKING ABOUT FIRE RATED WALLS, IS THIS GONNA BE A SHED? YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SO IT DOESN'T REALLY HAVE TO HAVE ANY KIND OF FIRE RATING ON IT. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. SO THOSE ARE ALL THE THINGS THAT COME UP WHEN YOU COME INTO LIFE SAFETY. I THINK IF WE HAD MORE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS, I THINK THERE COULD BE A, A BETTER OUTCOME OF MAYBE A LE UH, A REDUCED SET, UH, SETBACK IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. AND, AND JUST FOR JUST OUTTA CURIOSITY, IF FOR SOME REASON WE DIDN'T WANT TO, THIS BOARD DIDN'T CONTINUE THIS SO THEY COULD GO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION AND, AND HAMMER SOME THINGS OUT, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO SET A SQUARE FOOTAGE LIMIT? LIKE SAY GIVE THEM A VARIANCE OF 15 FEET, BUT ONLY FOR A STRUCTURE NOT TO EXCEED 300 SQUARE FEET OR SOMETHING? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S POSSIBLE? SO YOU ARE ONLY REDUCING THE SETBACK? UM, YOU CAN REDUCE IT OR LIMIT IT TO THE WIDTH OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, BUT AT THAT POINT THEY CAN GO AS FAR. OKAY. I'M JUST CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT WE, WHAT WE COULD DO IN THOSE CASES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UH, FIRST QUESTION. SO I'LL ASK YOU THE FIRST QUESTION, THEN IT'LL DROP TO THEM. UM, SO, SO THERE, THERE ARE THREE OPTIONS HERE. AND SO LET'S SAY THAT WE WERE ABLE TO ISOLATE THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THE PROPERTY THAT GAVE YOU LOTS OF BUFFER SPACE ALL THE WAY AROUND. SO, SO FOR EXAMPLE, PUSHED AGAINST THE EXISTING BUILDING. UM, AND SO, SO WOULD THAT BECOME MORE PALATABLE I GUESS FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE OF THE, THE CONCERNS THAT YOU LISTED? YOU KNOW, UM, IT, SO IF IT IS THAT YOU HAD A HUNDRED, I DON'T KNOW HOW DEEP THE PROPERTY IS, BUT SO WE'LL SAY 50 FEET, UH, TO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY WHERE AS THEY LISTED THEY'D BE ABLE TO DRIVE AROUND IT. SO BE ABLE TO DO THE THINGS STILL ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE PROPERTY, BUT PUSH THE BUILDING ALL THE WAY AGAINST THE EXISTING BUILDING. UM, AND IF IT WAS CENTERED SO IT WASN'T NEXT TO EVERYBODY'S PROPERTY, UM, WOULD THAT BE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER TO BE MAYBE AN APPROPRIATE USE IF YOU'RE GONNA ADD AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON THIS, ON THIS PROPERTY? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? AS LONG AS THE REAR SETBACK IS MAINTAINED. AND TO YOUR POINT, WE DON'T WANNA PUSH IT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER BECAUSE WE SEE THE APPLICANT OR THE, THE, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER WHO SAID THEY'RE IN FAVOR OF BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT IT ON THEIR PROPERTY LINE AND WE DON'T WANNA PUSH IT TO THE OTHER NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT OCCURRED ABOUT EIGHT, 10 YEARS AGO EITHER. SO TO YOUR POINT ABOUT HAVING IT FLOAT IN THE MIDDLE AND AND SO FORTH, THEY'RE A UNIQUE PROPERTY BECAUSE THEY HAVE TWO DRIVEWAY APPROACHES THAT GO AROUND THE BUILDING FOR CIRCULATION. [03:25:01] YOU DON'T ALWAYS SEE THAT IN A COMMERCIAL BUILDING. RIGHT. SO I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE. WE JUST HAVE A LOT OF UNKNOWNS AND WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT FIRE SAFETY RISK IS PARAMOUNT IN CONVERSATIONS KNOWING ALL THE VARIABLES THAT YOU CAN'T REGULATE, LIKE CONTENT, LIKE BUILDING MATERIALS, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY SAY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, SO, SO TO CITY STAFF THEN, SO, SO IT'S AN O 2 0 1 SIDE AND A C ONE ON THE OTHER. SO ARE THERE, UM, UM, SETBACKS ON THE SIDES THAT ARE, THAT ARE REQUIRED? NO, JUST THE, UH, JUST THE REAR BECAUSE OF THE MF. SO THEY COULD BUILD, THEY COULD PUT THE ANYTHING ON EITHER SIDE AND IT WOULD BE COMPLIANT. SO SO IT'S SIMPLY 'CAUSE OF THE ZONING THEY'D HAVE TO FIRE RATE THE WALL IF THEY PUT IT BACK. YEAH, THEY STILL HAVE TO FIRE RATE, UM, THE REGULAR FIRE RATING WITH THE PERMITS, BUT, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. LET THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP SO THERE'S NO VOICEMAILS. NO ONE ELSE TIME TO SPEAK. UH, JUST THE TWO SPEAKERS. SO WE'RE GOOD. ONE MORE, ONE MORE QUESTION, SORRY. SO IF THIS STRUCTURE WAS ATTACHED TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT IS NO LONGER ACCESSORY DWELLING AND IT WOULD BE, THEY COULD BASICALLY PROVIDE STORAGE BY ATTACHING TO THE EXISTING BUILDING? CORRECT. SO LONG AS THEY'RE NOT WITHIN 30 FEET OF THEIR REAR SETBACK, IT COULD BE ATTACHED OR DETACHED AND, AND THE WHOLE NOTION OF THE SIDE SETBACKS BEING NONE, THEY COULD PUT, PUT THAT ATTACHMENT WHEREVER THEY WANT TO DO IT. CORRECT. AND AND WAS THE EXISTING BUILDING DAMAGED ENOUGH TO WHERE IF THEY EVER TRIED TO RECONSTRUCT IT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE CURRENT CODE, INCLUDING FIRE, UH, PROTECTION? WE DIDN'T EXAMINE THAT. 'CAUSE THEY WERE, THEY WERE, UH, PREPARED, THEY WERE PLANNING ON, UH, DEMOLISHING IT AND ALL. THANK YOU. IT WASN'T AN ISSUE FOR US. SO YOU'VE HEARD SOME CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, SOME COMMENTARY FROM THE BOARD. UH, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD OR SURE. PROVIDE? I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY ONE THING. SO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER THAT WAS MENTIONED SAYING THAT, UH, SHE'S IN FAVOR ONLY SO SHE COULD MOVE IT OUT OF THAT AREA, I KNOW HER PERSONALLY AND I'VE TALKED TO HER AT LENGTH AND ESSENTIALLY SHE HAS THE SAME PROBLEM THAT 1 54 DOES. I MEAN, IT'S A LAW FIRM AND UM, THE HOMELESS ARE A THREAT AND UM, SHE WASN'T, SHE WASN'T SAYING, AND YOU CAN LOOK AT HER LETTER, SHE WASN'T SAYING THAT SHE WANTS TO MOVE THAT STRUCTURE BACK SIMPLY BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T WANT IT BY HER. SHE BASICALLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THEIR PROPERTY IS RELATIVELY SMALL, SMALL USE AND THAT, THAT IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHY HAVE A SETBACK THAT FAR BECAUSE SHE, SHE WOULD HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM IF SHE EVER DID SOMETHING LIKE THAT. WHY HAVE THE SETBACK SO FAR FROM THE REAR PROPERTY THAT WOULD ALLOW VAGRANTS, HOMELESS VANDALISM TO COME IN AND GET IN BEHIND THERE? THAT'S JUST NOT A VERY GOOD USE OF THAT PARTICULAR SETBACK BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE PEOPLE GETTING BACK THERE, THEY JUST CAN'T BE SEEN. SO THERE IS A FIVE FOOT SETBACK ON THE SIDE PROPERTY AND YOU KNOW, THAT SORT OF JUST MADE SENSE TO JUST CARRY IT ALL AROUND THE PROPERTY. WELL, YOU DON'T HAVE, THERE'S NO SETBACK ON THE SIDE. AND I'M SORRY, ONE CORRECTION, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WAS A SINGLE FAL RESIDENTIAL ON THE LEFT SIDE. SO THEY WOULD HAVE THE, UM, REGULAR, UH, 20 FOOT SIDE SETBACK FOR THE SIDE. SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. OKAY. SO, SO CURRENTLY THERE'S A 20 FOOT SIDE SETBACK THAT'S NOT BEING, THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS APPLICATION AT ALL. SO ON THE LOT OF, ON THE LOT THAT'S, UH, ADDRESSED AS 1 66 BABCOCK, THAT'S A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND THEY HAVE A AND THERE'S A 20 FOOT SETBACK THERE, CORRECT? WELL WE WENT, THEY SAID IT WAS A FIVE FOOT, BUT, UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S STRUCTURAL. I'M, I'M SORRY, I'M I'M TALKING ABOUT IF YOU CONNECT IT TO THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. OKAY. BUT NOT AS AN ACCESSORY? CORRECT. OKAY. OKAY. I JUST WANNA AT LEAST CLARIFY THAT PART THAT AS LONG AS IT'S DETACHED, YOU DON'T HAVE THE 20 FOOT. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT THE SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBOR WHO, THIS IS AFTER THE FIRE BY THE WAY. UM, SHE WAS IN SUPPORT OF SAYING YES, LET'S, LET'S, UM, PUT THE VARIANCE IN PLACE TO ALLOW FOR BETTER USE OF THE PROPERTY. 'CAUSE THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME, SHE HAS THE SAME PROBLEM OF HAVING THE SETBACK AND IT WASN'T BECAUSE SHE WAS JUST TRYING TO MOVE IT FURTHER AWAY. AND YOU, AND YOU'RE GONNA USE THIS AS AN OFFICE. YOU'RE NOT GONNA TRY TO, I MEAN YOU'RE GONNA, IT'S GONNA BE A BUSINESS. YOU'RE GONNA BE THERE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY KIND OF A THING. CORRECT. OKAY. RIGHT. AND IT'S CURRENTLY VACANT, SO THAT'S BEEN SORT OF A PROBLEMATIC OF HAVING, WELL WHAT, WHAT IS THE HARDSHIP FOR YOU NOT BEING ABLE TO MOVE THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OUTSIDE OF 30 FEET? I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF ROOM THERE. NO, NO. I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE IT, BUT WHEN YOU GET TRAILERS IN AND TRUCKS, UM, YOU, YOU NEED TO TURN 'EM, YOU NEED TO MOVE THEM AND YOU GOTTA WORK AROUND IT. [03:30:01] IT, IT JUST WOULD BE, WAIT, WHY ARE YOU HAVING TRAILERS AND TRUCKS IN THERE? IF IT'S A RESIDENT, IF IT'S AN OFFICE BUILDING? NO, NO, THIS PARTICULAR ONE IS A HOME IS A HOME MAINTENANCE BUILDING. SO THERE ARE JUST TIMES WHERE THE CONTRACTOR GOES OUT. CAN YOU RUN A HOME MAINTENANCE BUILDING ON AN OH TWO? SO THEY CAN'T HAVE, UM, OBVIOUSLY ANY DISPLAYS OUT THERE. UM, THE OFFICE I'M ASSUMING IS GONNA BE IN THE PERSONAL STRUCTURE. SO AS LONG AS THEY ARE, THE EQUIPMENT IS INSIDE THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THEN THERE'S NOTHING THAT'S PROHIBITING IT. I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS IS LIKE A CONTRACTING COMPANY. YEAH. THIS A CONTRACTING, NOT CONSTRUCTION. IT WAS DESCRIBED TO US AT THE OUTSET AS A REAL ESTATE OFFICE AND THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WAS GONNA BE USED TO STORE MATERIALS FOR SMALL HOME MAINTENANCE. SO WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF THIS BUSINESS THAT'S GONNA BE RUN OUT THAT YOU'RE INTENDING TO RUN OUTTA THERE? WHEN YOU SAY RESIDENTIAL SERVICES, ARE YOU, WHAT DO YOU, WHAT ARE YOU DOING RESIDENCE HOMES WHERE YOU'RE CHANGING OUT LIGHT BULBS, FILTERS, UM, WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN TO YOU GUYS? SO, SO I BELIEVE WHAT HE'S DOING, UH, THE REAL ESTATE OR THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT OFFICE AND THEN IN THE BACK, ANY LIKE, EQUIPMENT TO SERVICE THOSE, UH, PROPERTIES. THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS, THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDED LIKE TO US. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT HE'S SAYING RIGHT NOW. YEAH, NO CONSTRUCTION, WHICH IS FINE. THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS THERE TO PROVIDE A STORAGE OF THAT, BUT THE USE ON THE PRINCIPAL CAN ONLY BE AN OFFICE, WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE DOING. OKAY. AND ARE THEY LIMITED BY THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE DEAL WHERE IT'S LIKE 20% OR SOMETHING OR 30% OF THE PRIME FLOOR PLAN WHERE THEY CAN DO SOMETHING THAT MIGHT NOT NORMALLY BE ALLOWED IN AN OH TWO? UM, SO THIS IS, YEAH, THAT'S FOR ACCESSORY USE. THIS IS AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO THE PRINCIPAL USE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. OKAY. THERE, THERE'S NO SEPARATE USE. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE, IT JUST SOUNDS LIKE IT'S MORE THAN AN OFFICE. SO. YEAH, AND ACTUALLY I WANNA COME BACK TO THAT QUESTION, BUT I DO HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. SO, SO, SO EARLIER, SO I WAS TALKING TO, UM, SO THE, SO THE, UM, THAT PERSON CAME UP TO SPEAK WITH REGARDS TO WHERE THE BUILDING WAS GONNA BE PLACED. AND SO, SO YOU STATED THAT IT NEEDS TO BE SCOOTED ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK SO YOU CAN BRING A VEHICLE AND MAKE, MAKE MANEUVERS. SO, UM, COULD IT BE THE CASE THAT IT WAS MOVED ALL THE WAY AGAINST THE EXISTING BUILDING SO THAT YOU DIDN'T, YOU BASICALLY HAD THE SAME SPACE, JUST ONE'S BEHIND THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE VERSUS THE OTHER ONE THAT'S IN FRONT OF IT. SO TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHY, YOU KNOW, WHY WOULD, WHY IT COULDN'T BE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ADJACENT OR CONNECTED TO THE EXISTING BUILDING? WELL, I, I MEAN, I'M NOT SAYING IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO DO THAT, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT I, THE OWNER DOESN'T WANT TO DO THAT IN TERMS OF EFFICIENCY BECAUSE IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE GONNA SAY, WELL, I'M GONNA PUT THAT STRUCTURE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE MAIN BUILDING, IT, IT ALMOST MAKES SENSE THAT WE'LL JUST MAKE IT PART OF THE MAIN BUILDING. UM, AND MAYBE YOU JUST DON'T WANT THOSE THINGS, YOU KNOW, THERE, YOU WANT 'EM AWAY AND YOU KNOW, IT IS WITH THE IDEAL THAT YOU STILL HAVE. UM, I MEAN THE OWNER HAS HIS OWN REASONS FOR SETTING UP HIS OPERATION. UH, THEY ARE DOING A RENOVATION AS IT IS AND THEY'VE ALREADY ESTABLISHED HOW THEY WOULD LIKE IT. SO THIS WAS JUST PART OF, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE HAVING A DETACHED GARAGE, YOU KNOW, YOU JUST WANT THESE THINGS AWAY FROM YOUR MAIN OFFICE BECAUSE THERE'S NOT, THEY DON'T REALLY GO TOGETHER. OKAY. WELL, YOU KNOW, I'VE, OKAY. UM, AND THEN, LET'S SEE, I FORGOT THE SECOND ONE. TRAIN OF THOUGHT EXPLODED THERE. OKAY. UM, I'LL COME BACK TO IT HERE AS I THINK ABOUT IT MORE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ? I I I HAVE SOMETHING I, IT'S JUST A STATEMENT. IT'S NOT A QUESTION. UM, I'M, I'M VERY CONCERNED A ABOUT NOT KNOWING WHAT YOU'RE PUTTING THERE AND I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE ASSOCIATION'S CONCERNS TOO BECAUSE THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF UNKNOWNS OF THE SIZE OF YOUR STRUCTURE AND, AND ALL AND, AND, UM, SO IF I WERE TO VOTE ON THIS RIGHT NOW, I WOULD NOT, UH, BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF IT. UM, SO WOULD YOU CONSIDER, UH, MAYBE A CONTINUANCE SO THAT YOU CAN MAYBE GET A DESIGN DOWN OF, OR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO SHOW WHAT EXACTLY THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THERE IF THEY WERE GIVEN THIS VARIANCE? UM, AND MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SO THAT THEY HAVE MORE, UH, ANSWERS TO THAT. BECAUSE I THINK THEIR CONCERNS ARE VERY SERIOUS AND I THINK THAT, UH, THAT NOT KNOWING WHAT WOULD GO THERE, UM, IS KIND OF DETRIMENTAL TO THEIR COMMUNITY. SO, UH, [03:35:01] WHAT YOU CONSIDER MAYBE HAVING A CONTINUANCE AND TALKING WITH THE ASSOCIATION AND, AND GETTING THE PROPERTY OWNER TO, TO COME UP WITH SOME DESIGNS, EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THERE? YES, WE WOULD DO THAT. ALRIGHT. HOW MUCH TIME WOULD YOU NEED? I'D SAY, UM, TWO MONTHS. I WOULD SAY AT LEAST UNTIL FEBRUARY. OKAY. CAN YOU COME UP TO THE, I'M SORRY TO MAKE YOU WALK BACK UP. WHAT'S THE LONGEST CONTINUOUS WE CAN DO? IS IT TWO MONTHS, SIX WEEKS? IF WE DO ANYTHING, UM, OVER 30 DAYS, WE WOULD JUST RE ADVERTISE IT JUST TO MAKE SURE THE COMMUNITY'S AWARE. AND YOU'RE SAYING FEBRUARY, SO THAT OUR, OUR WHAT'S OUR NEXT, WHAT'S OUR FIRST FEBRUARY 3RD? SO THE FIRST WEEK IN FEBRUARY WOULD PROBABLY BE BEST GIVEN THE UPCOMING HOLIDAYS. SO WE HAVE FEBRUARY 3RD OR FEBRUARY 17TH. THOSE ARE OUR TWO DATES, RIGHT? THE THIRD WOULD BE FINE WITH US. IT GIVES US TIME TO HAVE A BOARD MEETING AND A GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEETING. OKAY. IS FEBRUARY 3RD TOO FAR AWAY FOR US TO DO A CONTINUANCE TODAY? YEAH, I MEAN WE CAN CONTINUE IT, BUT STAFF IS GONNA RE ADVERTISE IT ANYWAY. JUST SO THE COMMITTEE ARE AWARE, SINCE SO LONG IS ANY, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO FEBRUARY 3RD? I MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO FEBRUARY 3RD. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. THIS IS CONTINUED. FEBRUARY 3RD, UH, PLEASE MEET WITH THE, WITH THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION AND WE WILL HEAR, SEE YOU, SEE YOU AGAIN LATER IN THE YEAR. OKAY. EARLIER IN THE YEAR. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. THIS IS BOA ITEMS, UH, BOA 2 5 1 0 3 0 0 2 5 7. THE ADDRESS IS 5 9 0 2 LAKE NAMA. THE CO COUNCIL DISTRICT IS TWO. THE APPLICANT IS CARL LAMKIN. THE REQUEST IS A REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE FIVE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LAWN. THE ZONING IS R SIX. UH, CODE PORTSMAN OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE CARPORT WAS BUILT WITHOUT PERMIT. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENT, UH, PERMITT APPLICATION FOR THE ADDITION OF A CARPORT DURING INTAKE. IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WAS NEEDED IN ORDER TO CONTINUE AS PART OF THE HAS PART OF THE CARPORT THAT WAS ALREADY BUILT WAS WITHIN THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT. FRONT SETBACK AREA WILL DEPEND ON THE DETERMINATION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. THIS IS THE CURRENT SITE PLAN. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S 20 FEET IN DEPTH AND THEN FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT SETBACK. THERE'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE FRONT AND, AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL ON BO OA TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 5 7 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THERE'S AN ADEQUATE DEVELOPMENTAL SPACE AVAILABLE TO SET THE CARPORT WITHOUT ENCROACHING ON THE FRONT SETBACK. AND THE REDUCTION OF THE FRONT SETBACK WOULD LEAD TO LESS VISIBILITY AND WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE MAILED 27 NOTICES. WE'VE RECEIVED ONE IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSITION. THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS IS THE, UH, LETTER OF SUPPORT THAT WE RECEIVED AND THAT THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALRIGHT, SO THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR CARPORT. YES SIR. UH, THANK YOU'ALL FOR HAVING ME. AND UH, MY NAME IS CARL LAMPKIN. UH, I WAS TRYING TO GET A CARPORT COVER OVER MY VEHICLES. UH, JUST SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY IN IN HAIL DANCE, UH, MY WINDSHIELD, I JUST HAD IT PLACED, REPLACED. I HAVE A RECEIPT FROM, UM, GLASS AMERICA. I CAN SHOW IT TO YOU IF NECESSARY. UM, I BOUGHT COVERS ON IT. IT, IT JUST, JUST TEARS UP MY VEHICLE. AND I'VE BEEN THERE ABOUT 38 YEARS AND MY WIFE AND I, WE JUST FINALLY GOT A TIME ENOUGH TO WHERE WE WANTED TO PUT A COUPLE OF OUR VEHICLES AND, UH, THEY, THIS GENTLEMAN HERE WAS MY CONTRACTOR. HE HAD BUILT SOME SIMILAR TO MINE AND I THOUGHT IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS VERY NICE THAT ENHANCED THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND IF YOU, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S WELL STRUCTURED. EVEN THE UH, UH, GENTLEMAN, WHAT WAS THE GENTLEMAN CAME OUT AND LOOKED AT THE OTHER CONTRACTOR? NO, NO. JESSE? NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT IN NO WHO, THE GUY THAT LOOKED AT IT AND SAID INSPECTS, UH, ENGINEER. [03:40:01] THE ENGINEER. THE, UH, FOR THE PERMIT DEPARTMENT OR NO, NO. YEAH. YOU TALKING ABOUT THE SUPERSTRUCTURE? THE, THE FRAMING ENGINEER. OH, OH YES. YES. WE HAD TO GET AN ENGINEER FOR, CAN YOU SPEAK IN, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND I'M TALKING TO THE MIC. MY NAME IS FRANK. I'M THE CARPENTER. THEY RANKED THE CARPENTER. WHAT'S YOUR LAST NAME? EVERYBODY KNOWS ME. UH, FRANK. WHAT'S YOUR LAST NAME? OH, RENDON. OKAY. THANK YOU. OH, OKAY. I'M, I'M, I'M FRANK THE CARPENTER. AND THEN THE OTHER GUY THAT WORKS WITH IS PRIMO. EVERYBODY KNOWS HIM AS PRIMO. OKAY. AND THEN THE ONLY PERSON THAT HAS A FULL NAME IS JESSE SALAZAR. HE'S THE OTHER, HAS A FULL . DID YOU, HAVE YOU APPLIED FOR A PERMIT FOR THIS THING? WE, WE DID NOT. WE DID NOT APPLY AT THE TIME. I DID NOT KNOW THIS. OKAY. BUT, BUT WE APPLIED NOW OR WE'RE APPLYING AFTER Y'ALL'S DECISION. ARE ARE YOU GUYS GONNA BE USING SOMETHING? IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVEN'T PUT THE FORMAL POST IN YET 'CAUSE YOU NO, NO, ACTUALLY, UM, WE PUT A EIGHT BY EIGHT CEDAR POST IN NOW FOR TEMPORARY. 'CAUSE WE WERE WORRIED ABOUT OKAY. FOR THIS MEETING. BUT, UH, WHEN WE FINISH, WE'RE GONNA TAKE THAT EIGHT BY EIGHT OUT BECAUSE EIGHT BY EIGHT, THEY'RE SO BIG THEY CRACK AND SOME CUSTOMERS DON'T LIKE HIM TO SEE THEM CRACK. SO HIS WIFE, NOT HIM . SO WE'RE GONNA REMOVE THE POST AND WE'RE GONNA PUT STEEL PIPES AND PLATES. OKAY. AND THEN WE GET TWO BY EIGHT AND WE MILL 'EM WITH A MIRE AND, AND, UH, GLUE 'EM TOGETHER. SO THEY LOOK LIKE AN EIGHT BY EIGHT. ALRIGHT. BUT INSIDE IS GONNA BE, UH, WELL I'M LOOKING AT THIS PICTURE THAT'S ON RIGHT NOW AND IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE, YOU'RE DO, YOU'RE DOING 20 FEET AWAY FROM THE GARAGE. YES. WHICH IS VERY TYPICAL TO HANDLE A CAR AND YOU'VE GOT FIVE FEET AWAY AT LEAST FROM THAT BACK OF THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK. RIGHT. ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO GOOGLE DRIVING, THERE'S DOZENS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE MUCH CLOSER AND SO THEY'RE MORE ALONG THE LINES OF A PRE PRIOR CASE. SO, SO THIS ONE LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE ACTUALLY TRYING AND, AND, AND REALLY LEVERAGING ALL THAT THEY CAN AND STILL AND STILL MEETING SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS. SO I, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THIS. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? ANY VOICEMAILS? THERE'S NO ONE VOICEMAILS ON THIS. NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. I HAVE ONE NEIGHBOR HERE. SHE, WE HAD A NEIGHBOR HERE. SHE COULDN'T HANG ON. SHE JUST LEFT. LEFT. OH. YOU CAN GIVE THAT TO STAFF AND I'M SORRY. IT'S OKAY. UM, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE AND NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. OH. SHOULD GET THE RIGHT ONE. OKAY. THANK YOU ALL REGARDING . JUST WAIT. ANYWAY. THE ENGINEER THOUGHT IT WAS JUST FABULOUS, FRANKLY, SO IT'S VERY NICE. OKAY. CAN I START TIE THE GARAGE DECK LOOKS REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 5 7 A MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRAND. A REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 59 0 2 LAKE NAMA. APPLICANT BEING CARL LAMPKIN BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS WE HAVE 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. THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST ERRORS AS THERE WOULD BE ADEQUATE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE CARPORT AND FRONT PROPERTY LINE SIDEWALK AND RIGHT AWAY. TWO DO SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE SPECIAL CONDITION IN THIS PROPERTY IS THE LOCATION, THE EXISTING HOME AND DRIVEWAY, LEAVING LITTLE ROOM LENGTHWISE FOR FULL CARPORT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. SUCH VARIANCE WOULD BE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE REDUCTION OF THE SETBACK IS MINIMAL AND WILL CAUSE NO HARDSHIP TO OTHER PROPERTY. ABUTTING THIS LOT BEFORE THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. AND WHICH THE VARIANCE IS 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 CONFORMITY PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THESE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS THERE IS SUFFICIENT SEPARATION AND THE VARIANCE WILL NOT REDUCE VISIBILITY. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR EXPERIENCE OF SAW IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS AND THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE DEPTH OF THE FRONT YARD, WHICH LIMITS THE AVAILABLE SPACE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CARDBOARD. END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I MEAN, HOW CAN I SAY NO TO THIS, UH, COMEDY DUO UP HERE. [03:45:01] COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. YOU KNOW, YOU ALL I WAS KIND OF HAVING ANXIETIES AT FIRST, BUT, AND THEY MADE YOU WAIT ALL THE WAY TO THE END TOO. ALL ON MY, ON YOUR FACE. NEVER REALLY HOPE ANXIETY COME DOWN. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH THIS. OKAY. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GONNA BE A GOOD CONSTRUCTION. AND I JUST WANTED TO ADD, UH, THAT, THAT THAT CIRCULAR THING OF FLOWER STICKS THE GARAGE. THAT'S A LANDSCAPE WALL. . SO THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS' LIKE TO ADD? ALL RIGHT, LET'S HAVE A, A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. . THANK EACH ONE OF Y'ALL. WAIT, WE HAVE TO VOTE STILL TO VOTE. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER REED? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS. YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ. I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER DEAN. I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER UNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ. CHAIR, CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY 11 TO ONE. IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS IT CAN GET WITH STAFF. THANK YOU AGAIN. THANK YOU. THANK Y'ALL SO MUCH. Y'ALL HAVE A GOOD EVENING. YES, SIR. , IS THERE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT TODAY? NO DIRECTOR'S REPORT. JUST WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES ARE AROUND THE CORNER STARTING NEXT YEAR, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, OUR NEXT MEETING IS GONNA BE IN THE NEW YEAR. SO I HOPE YOU ALL HAVE A WONDERFUL HOLIDAY SEASON. SOUNDS AWESOME. AWESOME. I'LL THANKS Y'ALL. IT IS 5 0 4 WORDS, HONOR. MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE. OKAY. MERY, WENDY. OKAY. * 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.