* 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. [00:00:41] PRESENT. COMMISSIONER DEAN. COMMISSIONER CRUZ HERE. COMMISSIONER GOMEZ. COMMISSIONER MANNA. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN. COMMISSIONER BEDA PRESENT. COMMISSIONER OZUNA PRESENT. COMMISSIONER BOEZ. HERE. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. PRESENT CHAIR ORIAN. AND I'M PRESENT. WE HAVE 10 SEATED SO WE HAVE A QUORUM. UH, IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC ONE NATION UNDER GOD. LIBERTY AND JUSTICE ALL AND JUSTICE FOR ALL FLAG. MY PLEASURE. ALLEGIANCE TO BE TEXAS. ONE STATE UNDER GOD. ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT, SO BEFORE WE BEGIN, UM, BEGIN WITH TODAY'S CASES. I'D LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION. UH, THIS BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. THE CASES ARE LISTED BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND STREET ADDRESS. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT. LASTLY IS CHAIR WILL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS. I, AS THE BOARD MEMBERS, SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS THE CHAIR AND I'LL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. UH, WE ARE PRIVATE, EXCUSE ME, FOLLOWING THE FOLLOWING. THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASE IS THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT. UH, WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY'S ZONING CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THIS AREA. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW. WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELIEF SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATOR AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED 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 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. WE ALSO SERVE IN AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 28 DASH FIVE. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR CASES AND OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS. THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND IT'LL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ANY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE, WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER AFTER EVERYONE TO SERVE THE CASE. IT'LL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION. EVERY MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY 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 RELIEF SOUGHT REST WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS IN WHICH THE REQUEST OF RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S. DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. UH, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS OF THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE STAFF. [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items  ] THANK YOU. STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST. PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE VARIANCE OF SPECIAL EXEMPTION AND PROPERTIES WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT. PROPERTY CHECK MARKS. INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST X INDICATES THAT PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION AND QUESTION ABOUT THE BOARD, APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THE REQUEST FOR THOSE THAT SIGN UP TO SPEAK FOR THE PROPOSED VARIANCE FOR SPECIAL EXEMPTION. YOU'LL BE CALLED IN AN ORDER THAT YOU SIGN UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALL ALLOWED A MAXIMUM THREE MINUTES PER A SPEAKER AND YOU'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE A MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION. FOR THOSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GIVE UP THEIR TIME TO THE SPEAKER. THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALL ALLOWED MAXIMUM TWO PEOPLE GIVEN UP THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS TO APPLICANT WILL THEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR 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 TODAY WE'RE GONNA BE STARTING WITH ITEM ONE, WHICH [00:05:01] IS CONSIDERATION OF ADDING A WORK SESSION TO DISCUSS, UH, POTENTIAL UDC UPDATES. SO IN THAT REGARD, UH, WHEN DOES, UH, WHEN DOES STAFF NEED ANY BOA RECOMMENDATIONS FOR UDC UPDATES? IS THERE A TARGET DATE? SO WE WOULD, UH, FORMALLY HAVE THOSE SUBMITTED WHEN THE APPLICATION WINDOW OPENS TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE, WHICH WOULD BE JANUARY ONE THROUGH MARCH 31ST, 2027. SO CERTAINLY WE CAN PUT A A THAT'S AN MATERNITY FOR ME. THAT'S, YEAH. YOU YOU'RE DOING IT THIS YEAR? NO, WE'RE, WE WOULD BE A LITTLE EARLY TO COLLECT THEM FROM THE BOARD. SO THE, THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT INTERNAL STAFF, WE'RE STARTING TO WORK ON OUR AMENDMENTS AND WE'LL HAVE THOSE FINALIZED TO BE SUBMITTED FOR PUBLIC REVIEW WHEN THE JANUARY ONE, UH, APPLICATION WINDOW OPENS. OKAY. SO WE CAN MAYBE LOOK TO SCHEDULE SOMETHING WITH Y'ALL IF YOU'D PREFER IN THE LATE SUMMER AND EARLY FALL. KIND OF COLLECT YOUR FEEDBACK. YEAH, THAT'S FINE. I I I THOUGHT THAT THE TACK WAS IN SESSION THIS YEAR. NO, IT WON'T BE UNTIL NEXT YEAR. ALRIGHT, WELL THEN THAT CHANGES THAT. SO WHAT WE CAN DO IS, UH, CAN WE JUST, UH, TABLE THIS TO A FUTURE MEETING? I DON'T WANNA SEE THIS EVERY MEETING, BUT YOU KNOW, MAYBE HAVE IT POP UP BACK UP IN MAY. SURE, WE CAN DO THAT. ALL RIGHT THEN. LET'S DO THAT. UH, ANY COMMENTARY FROM THE COMMISSION? ANY OTHER ITEMS THEY'D LIKE TO BRING UP? HEARING NONE. WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO, UH, WE HAVE A CONTINUANCE REC TWO CONTINUANCE REQUESTED TODAY. THE FIRST ONE IS ITEM NUMBER SIX. UH, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A VOICEMAIL FOR THAT ONE, CORRECT. UH, LEMME READ IT INTO A RECORD REAL QUICK. BO OA 26 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 1 REQUEST BY ZIEGER ARCHITECT ARCHITECTURAL STUDIOS, UH, FOR VARIANCE FOR A LOT LAYOUT STANDARD TO ALLOW PRIMARY ACCESS IN FRONTED FROM A FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT ON AN ALLEY LOCATED IN FIVE 10 BOOKER ALLEY COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO, UM, THEY'RE REQUESTING CONTINUES TO MARCH 23RD AND WE DO HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL IF WE CAN PLAY THAT PLEASE. YEP. HELLO, MY NAME IS LULU FRANCOIS, CHAIRPERSON OF THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR DIGNITY WOOD HILL. CALLING IN ON CASE FIVE 10 BOOKER ALLEY. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE LOT CONFIGURATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE WIDTH OF BOOKER ALLEY IS NOT LARGE ENOUGH TO ALLOW INGRESS AND EGRESS OF EMERGENCY VEHICLES AND IT WOULD CREATE A DEVELOPMENT OF CONFIGURATION INCONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING CONFORMING LOTS, THEREBY ALTERING THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. STAFF'S. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DENIAL ARE THE EXACT REASONS WE DID NOT SUPPORT THE DESIGN OF THE HOUSE AND THE DETACHED GARAGE WHEN THE DESIGN REQUEST WAS SUBMITTED FOR OHP APPROVAL. AS CALLED OUT, BOOKER ALLEY IS AN ACTIVE ALLEY. THE RESIDENTS WHO FRONT NOLAN AND DAWSON ALL HAVE BACKYARDS AT BACK UP TO BOOKER ALLEY AND MANY OF THEM USE BOOKER ALLEY TO GET TO THEIR BACKYARDS. IN ADDITION, WE SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT OUR CONCERN ABOUT HOW THIS NEW STRUCTURE WOULD BLOCK INGRESS AND EGRESS OF EMERGENCY VEHICLES FROM GETTING TO THE HOUSES THAT BACK TO THE ALLEY. PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE CHARTER OF HDRC IS TO ONLY DETERMINE THE DESIGN AND MASSING OF THE NEW STRUCTURES TO ENSURE THEY MEET OHP GUIDELINES. THEY DO NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHETHER INGRESS OR EGRESS IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM, WHICH IS WHY WE ARE GLAD THIS MAJOR ISSUE OF CONTENTION IS BEING ADDRESSED AND ANSWERED BY THE ZONING BOA STAFF. FOR THESE REASONS, WE ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THIS REQUEST AND DENY THIS APPLICATION. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, IS ANYONE IN THE GALLERY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE? NO, SIR. ALL RIGHT. I'M LOOKING FOR A, A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO MARCH 23RD. SO MOVED. IS THERE THAT GOOD. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UH, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION PASSES. CASES CONTINUE TO MARCH 23RD. UH, THE NEXT ITEM, UH, FOR CONTINUANCE REQUEST IS ITEM NUMBER 11, REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE TO MARCH 9TH. UH, IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK OR PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 11? UH, NOPE. LEMME READ IT TO THE RECORD REAL QUICK. UH, BOA 25 1 0 3 0 0 2 6 1 A REQUEST BY HEMAN GARDA FOR A 66 46 SQUARE FOOT VARIANT FROM THE MAXIMUM 2,500 SQUARE FOOT, UH, FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE FOR A COMBINED 91 46 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE LOCATED 11 0 2 11 0 0 2 VANCE JACKSON ROAD. STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL AND REQUEST A CONTINUOUS TO MARCH 9TH. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. IS THERE A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO MARCH 9TH? SO MOVED. MOTION BY COMMO. MOTION BY COMMISSION. A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BETA. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? UH, MO UH, HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES. UH, ITEM ITEM 11, CONTINUE TO MARCH 9TH. AND NOW WE ARE ON ITEM NUMBER TWO. [00:10:03] GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JUAN ALVAREZ, PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS REQUESTED BY ROB MCLENNAN AND IS REQUESTING FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON THE BLOCK FACE LOCATED AT COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 6 2 6 DELMAR STREET, UNIT 2 0 2. SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON THE BLOCK FACE. THERE IS CURRENTLY ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON THE BLOCK LOCATED AT 6 2 6 DELMAR STREET, UNIT 2 0 1 AND IS OWNED BY THE SAME PERSON AT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAVING BEEN APPROVED ON AUGUST 11TH, 2025 PER THE CODE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL SHALL BE LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN ONE EIGHTH OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX, TRIPLEX, OR QUADPLEX UNITS ON THE BLOCK FACE. THERE IS A TOTAL OF 15 UNITS ON THIS BLOCK FACE. ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO IS ALREADY THERE BEING UNIT 2 0 1 ISSUED ON AUGUST 11TH, 2025. THE BLOCK FACE IS CURRENTLY AT 7% AND IF THE SECOND TYPE TWO IS APPROVED, THE BLOCK FACE WILL BE AT 13% LIMITING. THIS EXCEEDS THE 12.5 DENSITY LIMITATION FOR TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS. THIS PROPERTY HAS NO ACTIVE LISTINGS AND THIS PROPERTY ALSO HAS NO CODE ENFORCEMENT HISTORY. THIS IS THE SIDE PLAN SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREAS. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 37 MALE NOTICES. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR AND NO RESPONSE FROM OUR FIVE CITY GROUPS. THIS CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION. APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND DOES THE APPLICANT, UH, UM, HAVE ANY OUTSTANDING HOT TAXES OR, UM, ON THE SITE? UM, THEY, THEY SHOULD BE CURRENT ON THEIR TAXES. ALRIGHT, ANY CO COMMISSIONS COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OKAY, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR, UH, PROJECT. ALRIGHT, MY NAME IS ROB MCCLELLAN. I AM THE, UH, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY THERE AND I'M REQUESTING THAT JUST DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT IS, UH, WELL, I WAS HERE BEFORE, UM, JUST TO HELP PAY WITH MY BILLS AND, UM, I'M FROM A HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY. IT'S SOMETHING I KNOW. UM, IT, IT'S JUST KIND FOR ME, JUST NATURE. ALL RIGHT. WELL WITH THIS, IF THIS GETS APPROVED, IT'LL HIT 13%, WHICH DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A BIG DEAL. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UM, IS THIS SOMETHING NEW, SIR? OR IS IT BECAUSE IT WAS RENTED OUT IN A DIFFERENT WAY AND NOW YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IT AS A TYPE TWO? UH, NO, IT WAS, UM, A RENTAL PROPERTY WHEN I HAD PURCHASED THE PROPERTY. UM, I TRIED TO MAINTAIN THE, UH, TENANTS. UM, THEY HAD LEFT TO GO TO ANOTHER CITY FOR WORK AND I HAD, UH, DONE, I HAD A PROPERTY MANAGER TO TRY AND HELP ME GET MORE TENANTS IN THERE AND I HAD BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL WITH THAT TIME. MY SAVINGS WAS DWINDLING AND I WAS GOING TO ANOTHER VENUE. OKAY, THANK YOU. MANNA? YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO LAST TIME WE WERE HERE, DIDN'T WE, UH, ASK YOU TO GO TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THAT'S WHAT YOU DID. SO, SO GOOD. GREAT JOB AND THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT 'CAUSE 'CAUSE THAT CERTAINLY BODES WELL IN MY FAVOR. I I ALSO BROUGHT A NEIGHBOR IF ANYBODY WANTS TO TALK TO HIM. SO IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK OR VOICEMAILS ON THIS? NO. PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, GREAT. UH, WITH THAT, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION MANA, MR. MANA. UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 5 1 0 3 0 0 2 3 3. I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT ASPE, SPECIAL SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE TYPE TWO SHORT TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT 6 2 6 DELMAR STREET, UNIT 2 0 2, APPLICANT BEING BOB MC MCLENNAN MCLENNAN, MCCLELLAN, SORRY, UH, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACT THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDMENT WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO OPERATE AN ADDITIONAL SHORT TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY, UH, TO, TO ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE. THERE IS NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY. B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WOULD BE CREATED IF AN ADDITIONAL SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT WAS APPROVED. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE [00:15:01] NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSIST OF RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES. THIS SCENARIO DOES NOT CAUSE REASON TO BELIEVE IT WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE, UH, NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS A TYPE TWO SHORT TERM RENTAL. D, ADEQUATE UTILITIES, ACCESS, ROADS, STORM DRAINAGE, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND OR NECESSARY FACILITIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE. E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT TERM RENTAL LICENSES. CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR. PRIOR TO THE DATE OF APPLICATION. UH, THE APPLICANT OR OWNER DOES NOT PREVIOUSLY HAVE REVOKED LICENSES, CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES OR CONVICTIONS ON THIS PROPERTY OR OTHER PROPERTIES. F THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS THOUGHT SOUGHT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL USES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING OFF STREET PARKING AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ. COMMISSIONER MADDA. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. AND SO, SO, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR LISTENING AND TAKING, YOU KNOW, THE INPUT FROM THE BOARD WITH REGARDS TO REACHING OUT TO COMMUNITY. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, HAVING THE COMMUNITY ENGAGED IN THESE DIALOGUES IS, IS ALWAYS VERY IMPORTANT AT, AT LEAST FOR, FOR ME. AND SO, SO WITH THAT SAID, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER BEES. I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES. I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. UM, YOU ALREADY HAVE ONE. UM, SO YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE YES. UM, WITH, WITH HOW TO RUN 'EM. SO, AND, AND THE FACT THAT YOU, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR OF IT AS WELL. I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONS LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE. HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER BEES. I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OONA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BONS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. A MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU ALL. YOU GOT IT. ITEM NUMBER THREE, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JOSEPH LEO, SENIOR PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. UM, ITEM NUMBER THREE IS, UH, BO OA DASH 25 DASH 1 0 3 0 2 6 9 AT 82 0 1 MEADOW POST, UH, IT'S WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT SIX AND THE APPLICANT IS JK AND FRANCE GUIDANCE LLC. AND THEY ARE REQUESTING, UM, AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO REVOKE THE APPLICANT'S SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT. UH, THE TYPE OF PERMIT IS A TYPE TWO AND THE ZONING IS R SIX FOR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. UH, AGAIN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT A 2 0 1 MEADOW POST SURROUNDING LAND USES INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY. UH, AGAIN, THEY ARE REQUESTING AN APPEAL TO THE ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO REVOKE THIS PERMIT. UM, JUST FOR SOME BACKGROUND AS TR OPERATORS ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT HOT TO THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT ON A MONTHLY BASIS, UH, THIS ALSO INCLUDES REPORTING $0. IF NO REVENUE WAS COLLECTED AS OF MARCH 10TH, 2025, THE PLATFORMS THAT DIRECT, UH, DIRECTLY REMIT STATE HOT, ALSO NOW DIRECTLY REMIT CITY HOT TO THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT. UH, THIS INCLUDES MAJOR PLATFORMS SUCH AS AIRBNB AND VRBO. UM, IF THE PROPERTY IS NOT RENTED THROUGH A PLATFORM, UM, THAT DOESN'T REMIT THE HOT DIRECTLY TO THE STATE, THE OPERATOR MUST CONTINUE TO REPORT AND REMIT THE CITY AND COUNTY HOT, UM, DIRECTLY TO THE CITY THROUGH AVENUE ON A MONTHLY BASIS. UM, LASTLY, ALL SCR OPERATORS ARE STILL REQUIRED TO CONTINUE TO FILE REVENUE REPORTS AND BA AND PAY BEAR COUNTY THROUGH AVENUE ON A MONTHLY BASIS. UH, THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT WHO MANAGES REPORTING AND COLLECTION SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO STATE'S REVENUE REPORTS WERE MISSING FROM DECEMBER, 2024 THROUGH MAY, 2025. UM, NOTICES OF DELINQUENCIES WERE MAILED BY AVENUE BETWEEN FEBRUARY, 2025 THROUGH JULY, 2025 WITH A FINAL NOTICE OF DELINQUENCY EMAILED BY US ON NOVEMBER 3RD, 2025. UM, SECTION 16 DASH 1 1 1 0 D STATES THAT THE FAILURE TO TIMELY REPORT AND PAY HOT WITHIN 90 DAYS SHALL RESULT IN PERMIT REVOCATION. SINCE NO PAYMENT WAS MADE WITHIN THAT 90 DAYS, THE PERMIT WAS REVOKED ON NOVEMBER 18TH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES. UM, AND AS OF, UM, TODAY THE APPLICANT'S STILL NOT CURRENT ON THEIR HOT. UM, THIS IS THE TYPE TWO DENSITY COUNT. SO THERE ARE 12 UNITS ON THIS BLOCK PHASE, UM, AND THERE ARE NO OTHER TYPE TWO [00:20:01] PERMITS. UM, THE ONLY ONE BEING THE EXISTING, UM, PERMIT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR SDR. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS FRANCIS IBA. I AM THE MANAGER OF THE LOSC THAT OWNS THE PROPERTY AT 8 2 0 MEDIA POST. UM, I HAVE THE TIMELINE OF EVENT, WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH THE COMMISSIONERS. UM, NOVEMBER, 2024, UM, AT JK AND I'M FRANCE LS LEASE THE PROPERTY OUT TO A RENTER, UH, TO A TENANT, UH, BY NAME. UM, A DENISE MCQUEENY. UH, HE USED THE PROPERTY TO RUN A AIRBNB AT THE, UM, PERMISSION OF JAKE AND FRANCE. UM, CAN GO TO NEXT PAGE, PLEASE. OKAY. SO ON NOVEMBER 11TH, UM, AN ADDENDUM WAS SIGNED AND EXECUTED TO ALLOW HIM TO USE IT FOR AIRBNB. DECEMBER, 2024. UH, THE OPERATOR STARTED, UH, USING, UH, THE PROPERTY FOR STR ACTIVITY AND COLLECT REVENUE. UM, IN LATE UH, NOVEMBER, UM, LATE 2024, THE OPERATOR FIRST TO THE MEET HOT 2025. UM, THE CITY ISSUES NOTICES WITH INCORRECT NAME. SO I WAS NOT ABLE TO RECEIVE THOSE NOTICES BECAUSE THE NAME WERE INCORRECTLY, UM, ADDRESSED TO ME AS A MANAGER OF THE LLC IN THE LATE 2025 FOLLOWING A VISIT TO THE OFFICE, I WAS MADE AWARE THAT THE RENTER WAS NOT PAYING TAXES AND THAT'S WHEN I FILED THE APPEAL. AND, UH, I STARTED A BE UM, AT THAT, AT THAT POINT I TOOK POSITION OF THE PROPERTY, UH, FROM THE RENTER AND FROM NOVEMBER TO TODAY, FEBRUARY I'VE BEEN COMPLIANT, UH, WITH THE HER TAXES. UM, WELL LET ME ASK, LET ME JUST GET SOME THINGS CLEARED UP REAL QUICK. YOU HAD RENTED THE PROPERTY SUBLET TO SOMEONE ELSE WHO THEN MADE IT AN STR. SO STAFF, UH, WHO, WHO OBTAINED THE ACTUAL PERMIT? THE, THE PERSON HE WAS RENTING TO OR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY? THE RECORD FOR THE APPLICATION INCLUDED BOTH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE APPLICANT'S NAMES. AND WHERE, WHERE I'M GOING WITH THAT IS, SO IF, IF SOMEBODY HAS, IS, IS IN A DULY ACTIVE, UH, RENTAL ARRANGEMENT WITH AN OWNER AND THEY APPLY FOR AN STR WHO TECHNICALLY OWES A MONEY, IS IT ALWAYS THE OWNER? ALWAYS THE OWNER. ALWAYS THE OWNER. OKAY. AND THE OWNER WAS THE NAME THAT THE DELINQUENCY NOTICES WERE ASSESSED TO. OKAY. SO IN NOVEMBER WHEN YOU TOOK BACK THE PROPERTY AND YOU WERE AWARE THAT THERE WAS OUTSTANDING MONIES DUE, SO THAT'S WHEN THEY TOLD ME FROM THE OFFICE, RIGHT WHEN WE CAME TO THE OFFICE, UM, I MET SOMEBODY WHO TOLD ME THE GUY WAS NOT PAYING TAXES. WELL, BUT YOU KNEW IN NOVEMBER. SO HERE WE ARE IN FEBRUARY 23RD. YOU, YOU STILL OWE MONEY. STAFF IS SAYING THAT YOU STILL OWE MONEY AND REPORT FILINGS. I'VE ACTUALLY, IF THEY CAN PULL OUT THE RECORD, I'VE ACTUALLY PAID FROM NOVEMBER, UM, FROM NOVEMBER, I DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF UM, ACTUALLY BOOKINGS. BUT THE ONES I DID BOOK I AM COMPLIANT FROM NOVEMBER TO DATE. WELL, THE, BUT THE, THERE'S STILL MONEY OWED FROM PRIOR TO NOVEMBER OF 2025 AT A MINIMUM. I JUST, I'M TRYING TO, I'M TRYING TO ASCERTAIN, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT SORT OF OUTSTANDING DEBT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? SO THE SHORT TERM RENTAL STARTED 12 20, 24 AND WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED, WE RECEIVED PAYMENTS. YEAH, WE CAN'T, I'M SORRY, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. WE RECEIVED PAYMENTS ON 1ST OF JANUARY, 2026 FOR NOVEMBER, 2025 AND DECEMBER, 2025. OKAY. BUT THERE, BUT THE, BUT PRIOR TO NOVEMBER OF 2025, THERE'S STILL OUTSTANDING MONIES OWED AND THEY'RE, AND THEY'RE STILL OUTSTANDING RE MONTHLY REPORT FILINGS THAT ARE MISSING? CORRECT. OKAY. AND ARE YOU AWARE THAT YOU HAVE TO DO MONTHLY FILINGS WHETHER YOU OWE MONEY OR NOT, OR, UM, SO FIRST OF ALL, I WASN'T THE ONE THAT FILED THE PERMIT. I WASN'T HERE WHEN HE WAS FIRED, BUT I DO KNOW [00:25:01] THAT THE RENTER WAS USING IT FOR AIRBNB. NOW, UM, NOW I, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T KNOW HOW MUCH HE MADE. I WASN'T IN CONTROL OF THE BOOKINGS. I'M NOT SURE YOU KNOW WHO CAME INTO THE HOUSE. THE ONLY THING THAT HE PAID AT J CAMP FRANCE WAS, WAS UM, A MONTHLY LEASE AGREEMENT THAT HE SIGNED. OKAY. IT'S, IT'S, UH, I'M JUST GONNA PUT THIS OUT THERE. IS THAT NORMALLY WHEN PEOPLE APPEAL THESE SORT OF THINGS, THEY COME BEFORE THE BOARD AND ALL THEIR PAPERWORK HAS BEEN FILED AND THERE'S NO OUTSTANDING DEBT, WHETHER YOU INCURRED IT OR NOT. IT'S THE OWNER'S ISSUE. IT'S THE OWNER'S PROBLEM. SO IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS UH, FOR THIS APPLICANT? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO I WAS TRYING TO, UM, SO, SO I THINK YOU STATED THAT, SO YOU DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY NOTIFICATIONS AT ALL THAT, UM, THAT THIS WAS HAPPENING? I HAVE, UM, A COPY OF WHAT I RECEIVED AND THE NAME THE WAY IT WAS MAILED. SO THEY WERE NOT COMING TO ME. I DIDN'T, BECAUSE OF THE DISCUSSION IN THE RECORD, IT APPEARS LIKE A SCAM IN A LETTER, WHICH, UM, I ACKNOWLEDGE IT. SO, UH, COMMISSIONER, BE DO YOU WANT TO ASK ANYTHING? I, I HAD A QUESTION FOR THE CITY BILL. YES, GO AHEAD. I, THE, SO AT THE, THE INITIAL PERMIT THAT WAS ISSUED BACK TO THE PERSON WHO LEASED, AM I CORRECT THAT IT WAS, THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED IN BOTH THE OWNER'S NAME AND THE RENTER? SO ON THE APPLICATION HE PROVIDE THE PROPERTY'S OWNER'S INFORMATION AS WELL AS THE TENANT. WE ALSO HAVE A PROOF OF PERMISSION BY THE OWNER STATING THAT HE'S AUTHORIZING THIS PERSON AS THE APPLICANT, AS A DESIGN OPERATOR TO APPLY FOR THE SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT. YEAH. WELL I'M GONNA MAKE A SUGGESTION. UH, I I JUST IN ALL, JUST TO TRY TO BE AS FAIR AS WE CAN TO YOU, UH, WOULD, WOULD ANYBODY IN THIS BOARD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A CONTINUANCE SO THIS APPLICANT CAN, CAN MAKE CURRENT ON ALL HIS PAPERWORK AND OUTSTANDING MONIES AND THEN COME BACK TO THE BOARD WITH THAT? BECAUSE IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT, I DUNNO, THAT CERTAINLY WOULD PROVIDE, UM, MORE INCENTIVE FOR ME TO BE IN FAVOR . SO, OKAY. RIGHT NOW I'M NOT, SO IT'S, WOULD YOU LIKE A CONTINUANCE SO THAT YOU CAN, OKAY, SO HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED? AND WE'RE NOT ASKING YOU TO MAKE GOOD ON IT UNTIL NOVEMBER. WE NEED IT FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTION. EVERYTHING HAS TO BE IN ORDER AND THEN AT LEAST YOU'LL COME BEFORE THE BOARD NOT HAVING ANY OUTSTANDING DEBT OR OUTSTANDING PAPERWORK IN THE EASY TO BE FILED. WOULD YOU LIKE AN ADDITIONAL TIME? I DO. UM, HOW MUCH TIME WOULD YOU LIKE? UM, SO THE PROBLEM WITH THIS IS THAT I DON'T, I'VE TRIED TO REACH OUT TO THE TENANT. IT'S, IT'S, RIGHT NOW IT'S BETWEEN YOU AND THE CITY IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO NEGOTIATE WHAT SOMETHING YOU CAN AGREE ON, WHAT YOU OWE, WHAT YOU RENTED. IT'S, YOU'RE JUST GONNA HAVE TO WORK THAT OUT WITH THEM. OKAY? OKAY. HOW MUCH TIME WOULD YOU NEED, SIR? UM, PROBABLY GIVING ABOUT MAYBE THREE MONTHS. WELL, WE CAN'T DO THREE MONTHS. WE CAN DO ONE MONTH. OKAY, SURE. I'LL TAKE, I TAKE ONE MONTH. WHEN IS ONE MONTH? MARCH 26TH. EXCUSE ME. MARCH 23RD. 23RD. MARCH 23RD. SO IS THERE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS APPEAL TO MARCH 23RD? IT'S SO MOVED. ALRIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CRUZ. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? UH, HEARING NINE. WE'LL SEE YOU BACK ON THE 23RD AND, AND I HOPE YOU HAVE EVERYTHING IN ORDER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU GOT IT. UH, ITEM FOUR PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JUAN ALVAREZ, PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS REQUESTED BY SKYHAWK CUSTOM HOMES AND IS REQUESTING FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THREE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS ON THE BLOCK FACE LOCATED AT CONTRA DISTRICT ONE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 4 2 4 EIGHTH STREET. SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL, MULTI-FAMILY, AND COMMERCIAL. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THREE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS ON THE BLOCK FACE. THERE IS CURRENTLY ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT ON THE BLOCK LOCATED AT 4 2 4 EIGHTH STREET UNIT FOUR AND IS OWNED BY THE SAME PERSON AT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAVING BEEN APPROVED ON DECEMBER 12TH, 2025. PER THE CODE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL SHALL BE LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN ONE EIGHTH OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX, TRIPLEX, OR QUADPLEX UNITS ON THE BLOCK FACE. ON JULY 2ND, 2019, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOUR ADDITIONAL [00:30:01] TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMITS FOR FOUR TWO FOURTH EIGHTH STREET UNITS, ONE THROUGH FOUR ON JULY 8TH, 2022. THESE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMITS WERE RENEWED BY STAFF WHO MADE AN ERROR BY NOT PROCESSING THE REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR ANOTHER SPECIAL EXCEPTION ON JULY 13TH, 2025. THESE TYPE TWO SHORTTERM RENTAL PERMITS EXPIRED AS RENEWAL APPLICATIONS WERE NOT SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THEIR TO THEIR EXPIRATION DATE. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED FOUR NEW TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL APPLICATIONS FOR 4 2 4 EIGHTH STREET UNITS, ONE THROUGH FOUR, A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT FOR 4 2 4 A STREET. UNIT FOUR WAS APPROVED BY RIGHT, AND UNITS ONE THROUGH THREE WERE PLACED ON PENDING BOA DECISION DUE TO DENSITY BEING MET. THERE'S A TOTAL OF FIVE UNITS ON THE BLOCK FACE. ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO ALREADY BEING ACTIVE ON 4 2 4 A STREET. UNIT FOUR ISSUED ON DECEMBER 5TH, 2025. THE BLOCK FACE IS CURRENTLY AT 20% AND IF THE OTHER TYPE TWOS ARE APPROVED, THE BLOCK FACE WILL BE AT 80%. THIS EXCEEDS THE 12.5 DENSITY LIMITATION FOR TYPE TWO ST. THIS PROPERTY HAS NO CODE ENFORCEMENT HISTORY. THESE ARE THE ACTIVE LISTINGS AS AS OF TODAY. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREAS. AND THIS IS THE PARKING AGREEMENT FROM THE APPLICANT AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. AND THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 21 MILE NOTICES, ONE IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, NO RESPONSE FROM DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND NO RESPONSE FROM OUR SIX CITYWIDE GROUPS. THIS CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION. APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. UH, JUST QUICKLY ON THE PARKING AGREEMENT. I I DIDN'T READ IT QUICK ENOUGH. WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE AGREEMENT? HOW MANY SPACES? OH, UH, THEY HAVE FOUR OFF STREET PARKING SPACES FOR ONE PER UNIT AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, AN OFF STREET PARKING SPACES, SO THEY ASKED THEIR NEIGHBOR TO LEFT TO GIVE 'EM THAT PARKING AGREEMENT. SO THE, THE AGREEMENT IS WITH THE CITY OR WITH THE NEIGHBOR? IT'S WITH THE NEIGHBOR. WITH THE NEIGHBOR? YEAH, IT'S WITH THE NEIGHBOR, BUT IT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY DEPARTMENT. OKAY, GOTCHA. GOTCHA. ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? MANNA MRNA. SO CAN YOU WALK THROUGH AGAIN? UM, SO THE, UM, HOW, SO HOW WE GOT HERE? SO, SO IT WAS APPROVED AND THEN, AND THEN WE KIND OF MISSED SOMETHING THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO COME BACK FOR APPROVAL. IS THAT WHAT I UNDERSTOOD? SO IN 2019 THEY ORIGINALLY CAME TO A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. THEY WERE ISSUED THAT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THOSE FOUR UNITS. AND THEN WHEN 2022 CAME AROUND, UH, THOSE PERMITS WERE RENEWED WITHOUT GOING TO A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGAIN. ALL RIGHT. LET THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. THANK YOU. HELLO. STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR SDRS. YES SIR. GOOD AFTERNOON TO ALL OF Y'ALL. MY NAME IS TANNER MONTGOMERY. I'M REPRESENTED FOR SKYHAWK CUSTOM HOMES ON THIS PROPERTY. UM, BOUGHT THIS ACTUALLY BEFORE THE WHOLE YEAH, YOU GOTTA GET, SORRY. I SEE. I CAN HEAR YOU. BUT SOMETIMES LIKE ANYTHING ELSE I BOUGHT, WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY ACTUALLY BEFORE THE SHORT TERM RENTAL WAS A THING. SO, BUT IT WAS FOR THE INTENTION OF DOING THIS AND TOOK ABOUT TWO AND A HALF YEARS TO, UH, RENOVATE IT, BRING INTO NEW ALL THE NEW CODES. I MEAN THIS BUILDING WAS FALLING APART. AND, UH, ONCE WE GOT IT DONE, THE STR THING CAME OUT. WE CAME DOWN HERE, WENT THROUGH THIS WHOLE APPROVAL PROCESS. IT'S THAT ONE BUILDING YOU SAW IN THE PHOTO, WHICH IS JUST FOUR PRIVATE APARTMENTS. UM, SO IT WAS APPROVED LIKE THAT FROM THE BEGINNING AFTER MEETING WITH YOU GUYS YEARS AGO. AND IT'S BEEN RUNNING THAT WAY EVER SINCE. LIKE YOU SAID, THE CITY JUST MISTAKENLY MADE A MISTAKE AND DIDN'T DO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, BUT IT CAME BACK THIS TIME. THE PERMITS DID EXPIRE. I WAS, I'M A PROFESSIONAL PILOT. I WAS OUTTA THE COUNTRY DURING THE TIME OF THE EXPIRATION. I TRIED TO DO IT ONLINE. SOMETIMES IT'S A LITTLE BIT GLITCHY ON THAT SYSTEM AND I COULD NOT GET IT TO WORK. TIME ZONE CHANGES I KEPT CALLING HIM BUT COULD NOT GET HOLD OF SOMEBODY TO WALK ME THROUGH IT OR TO FIX IT. SO AS SOON AS I GOT BACK HERE, WHICH WAS LIKE THREE DAYS AFTER, 'CAUSE IT EXPIRED ON LIKE JULY 12TH, KINDA A RANDOM DAY. CAME BACK IN A FEW DAYS LATER, PUT ALL THE NEW PERMITS IN, PAID ALL THE NEW PERMIT FEES AND STARTED IT OVER. SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY KNEW THIS IS NOT LIKE ACTUALLY A NEW ONE. I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S NEW 'CAUSE THE PERMIT PROCESS IS NEW, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN RUNNING SINCE 2019. OKAY. WITH NO COMPLAINTS, NO PROBLEMS. ALL MY HOT TAXES AND THE DENSITY THING LOOKS A LITTLE BIT OFF BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S A UNIQUE STREET. IT'S A BUNCH OF OLD HOUSES THAT WERE TURNED INTO BUSINESSES. I ONLY HAVE ONE ACTUAL RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOR ON, IF YOU'RE FACING A BUILDING TO THE RIGHT, THEY'RE ACTUALLY MY BIGGEST FANS. THEY WERE HAPPY TO NOT HAVE A DILAPIDATED, YOU KNOW, BUILDING FALLING APART, BUT THEY ALSO USE IT FOR THEIR FAMILY, THEIR FRIENDS, 'CAUSE THEIR HOUSE IS TOO SMALL TO ACCOMMODATE. PEOPLE COME IN. I'VE USED IT FOR LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE LOCALLY WHO WANNA STAYCATION AND GET TO SEE SAN ANTONIO FOR ALL ITS GLORY. PEOPLE FROM ALL AROUND THE WORLD VISITED AND IT'S JUST A NICE SPOT TO BRING IN BUSINESS. SO BECAUSE THE BLOCK FACES ONE HOUSE, THIS BUILDING AND, AND THE ROCA A BAR, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S REALLY DENSE, BUT REALLY THERE'S NOTHING ON THE ENTIRE STREET. IT'S JUST THE BLOCK FACE IS ONLY THREE BUILDINGS, SO IT THROWS [00:35:01] IT OFF. BUT THE REST OF IT ARE ALL COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS AND WE'VE NEVER HAD ANY KIND OF ISSUES. OKAY. SO, SO STAFF, SO NO OUTSTANDING PAPERWORK OR HOT TAXES ON THIS ONE. THEY OCCURRED ON THEIR HOT TAXES AND NO INVESTIGATIONS WERE FOUND. ALL RIGHT. ANY VOICEMAILS THAT WAS UNDER TO SPEAK? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? BENAVIDEZ? COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY. I'M, I'M SURPRISED THAT YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF IT DUE TO THE DENSITY AT 80%. IS IT JUST BECAUSE THE RENEWAL LAPSED OR, UM, I THINK THE FACT THAT IT'S BEEN OPERATING SINCE 2019, THEY DID GET SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL INITIALLY AND IT WAS A STAFF ERROR UPON RENEWAL. SO IT'S JUST CORRECTING THAT. AND AGAIN, HE HAS PAID ALL HIS HOT TAXES, HAVE NO RECEIVED, NO COMPLAINTS FROM US. AND IT'S ALSO NEXT TO, LIKE YOU MENTIONED, A, A LOCAL BAR AREA AND THEN THE ORIGINAL AND A HOUSE NEXT DOOR AND HIGHWAY. OKAY. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE, UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. UM, LOOKING FOR A MOTION, ANNA. COMMISSIONER MANA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 5 1 0 3 0 0 2 7 9. I MOVED THAT THE BOARD ADJUSTMENT, UH, GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR THREE TYPE TWO SHORTTERM RENTAL UNITS SITUATED AT 4 2 4 EIGHTH STREET UNIT ONE, TWO, AND THREE. APPLICANT BEING SKYHAWK CUSTOM HOMES BECAUSE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINE SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CARE TO THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDMENT WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT, UH, A THE ORIGINAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY DURING THIS PERIOD. THIS PROPERTY HAD ACTIVE STR PERMITS. STAFF WAS UNABLE TO IDENTIFY ANY CODE ENFORCEMENT HISTORY TO THE LOCATION IN THE PAST SIX MONTHS. AND STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO OPERATE THREE ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTALS BEYOND THE 12.5% DENSITY CAP IS NOT LIKELY TO MATERIAL MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND OR SAFETY IF APPROVED. ADDITIONALLY, THE STRUCTURE IN WHICH THE STR ARE LOCATED WITHIN DO NOT POSE A HAZE HAZARD TO LIFE HEALTH OR PUBLIC SAFETY. B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THE APPLICANT HAS DEMONSTRATED OVER THE PREVIOUS SIX MONTHS THAT THE OPERATION OF THESE STR DOES NOT CAUSE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. STAFF FINDS THAT THIS TREND IS MORE THAN LIKELY TO CONTINUE WITH ZERO COMPLAINTS REGISTERED AGAINST THE PROPERTY AND OPERATOR. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE DENSITY CAPS WERE ESTABLISHED TO ENSURE THAT NEIGHBORS ARE NOT INUNDATED BY THE PRESENCE OF TYPE TWO STR. ALLOWING THESE THREE ADDITIONAL ST ON THIS BLOCK FACE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AS THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING SINCE 2019 AND HAS NOT IMPACTED THE SURROUNDING AREAS SINCE. D ADEQUATE UTILITIES, ACCESS, ROADS, STORM DRAINAGE, REACT RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND OTHER NE NECESSARY FACILITIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE ACCESS TO ACCESS UTILITIES AND OPEN SPACE. E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREV PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UM, LICENSES, CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR TO THE DATE OF THIS APPLICANT APPLICATION. THE APPLICANT OR OWNER DOES NOT HAVE ANY CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES OR CONVICTIONS, CONVICTIONS FOR THIS PROPERTY, UH, OR OTHER PROPERTIES. 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 REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED. UM, VBZT FOUR DASH TWO, UM, WHICH ALLOWS FOR LAND USE OF A SDR AND GENERAL RESIDENTIAL LAND USES THE DENSITY LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY CITY COUNCIL EXISTS TO ENSURE THE NEIGHBORHOOD REMAINS PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL SLASH COMMERCIAL STAFF FINDS THAT EXCEEDING 12.8% BLOCK FACE DENSITY IS NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT END OF MOTION. AND I THINK IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE IBZ, RIGHT? OR IS IT FBZ FORM BASED ZONING. FBC. OKAY. FBC. OKAY, THANK YOU. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, I DON'T WANT TO DOUBT THE WISDOM OF THE BOARD, UH, FROM, UH, 2019, SO I SEE NO REASON WHY IT IS THAT I WOULDN'T BE SUPPORTING IT AGAIN. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BEES, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER MANNA, I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF IT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NUNEZ? HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER RE BON? I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. [00:40:01] UH, I CONCUR. THE VICE FACT MOTION PASSES NINE TO ONE. UH, YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF? THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, WE ARE ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE. DO YOU WANNA SKIP TO SEVEN? ALL RIGHT, LET'S SKIP TO SEVEN. ITEM SEVEN. WELL, LET'S, IS HE READY? ALL RIGHT, WE'LL STICK ON FIVE. ALRIGHT. HI. HELLO. UM, THE NEXT ITEM IS UH, BO OA DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3. UH, THE ADDRESS IS 3 2 6 LEXINGTON AVENUE, UNIT 1 0 1 AND COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE. UH, THE APPLICANT IS MANU MARTINEZ AND THEY'RE REQUESTING IS SPECIAL EXCEPTION. UM, AGAIN, THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED AT 3 2 6 L LEXINGTON AVENUE, UNIT 1 0 1. UH, SURROUNDING LAND USES ARE OFFICE, MULTI-FAMILY, UH, PARK, AND THEN SOME VACANT RESIDENTIAL. UM, AGAIN, THEY'RE REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO ON THE BLOCK FACE. UM, AND THEN PER CITY CODE, UM, THEY'RE LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN ONE EIGHTH OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS ON THE BLOCK FACE. UH, THIS IS THE TYPE TWO DENSITY COUNT. UH, SO THIS IS A PRETTY SHORT BLOCK FACE. UM, IT, THERE'S ONLY TWO UNITS. THERE'S ONE ACTIVE TYPE TWO CURRENTLY ON THE BLOCK FACE. UH, 3 2 6 LEXINGTON UNIT 1 0 2. SO WITHIN THE SAME BUILDING, UH, BLOCK FACE IS CURRENTLY AT 50%. AND IF THIS ONE IS APPROVED TODAY, IT'LL BE AT 100%. THE, THIS IS THE PERMANENT HISTORY AND INVESTIGATION. SO, UM, UNIT 1 0 1 WAS ISSUED A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT, UH, BACK IN 2022 ON DECEMBER 16TH. UM, IT WASN'T UNTIL THE RENEWAL WAS SUBMITTED, UH, LATE LAST YEAR THAT WE HAD CAUGHT THAT IT WAS ISSUED, UH, AN ERROR PRIOR. SO WE, UM, HAD, UM, REQUEST A, UM, SPECIAL EXCEPTION TODAY, AND THIS IS THE ACTIVE LISTINGS, THE SITE PLAN, AND THEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS AN APPROVAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. AND THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION PLAN. WE SENT OUT 13 NOTICES. ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSITION, UH, NO RESPONSE FROM DOWNTOWN NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION, AND THEN NO RESPONSE FROM THE, UM, CITYWIDE GROUPS EITHER. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, IF THIS GETS APPROVED TODAY, IS THIS A RENEWAL ON THE, ON THE ORIGINAL PERMIT, RENEWAL DATE? CORRECT? YES, SIR. OKAY. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS BEFORE STAFF LEAVES? ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. HI. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR STR. UH, YES, MY NAME IS, UH, MANUEL MARTINEZ. AND, UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO, UH, TO BE HERE TODAY. NOW, UM, THIS, UH, UH, AS YOU SAW THIS, UM, UM, FACE BLOCK ONLY HAS, UH, TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THE OTHER BUILDINGS, UH, ONE IS, UM, UH, ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND THE OTHER IS A RESIDENTIAL REENTRY, UH, CENTER THAT DOES NOT HAVE, UM, UH, FRONTAGE, UM, ON THAT, UH, SAME BLOCK. NOW, THE INTENT OF, UH, UH, THE SDR DENSITY, UH, LIMIT IS TO, UH, PREVENT THE, UM, UM, UH, UH, OVER, UM, UH, POPULATION OF SDRS AND, UM, UH, UH, THAT CAN DISPLACE, UH, PEOPLE THAT, UH, LIVE ON THE, IN THE AREA, UH, CURRENT RESIDENCE. NOW, PRIOR TO, UM, UM, UH, UH, TO THIS, UH, UNIT BEING, UH, RECONDITIONED AND, UH, AND, UH, START, UH, RENTING, UH, IT HAD BEEN, UH, ABANDONED FOR OVER 20 YEARS. AND, UM, UH, WE DID NOT DISPLACE ANY PRIOR RESIDENCE, UM, UH, ON THIS AREA. NOW, UH, THIS IS A DESIGNATED, UH, HISTORIC LANDMARK. UH, IT DOES, UH, HAVE A, UM, UM, UM, COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS, UH, FOR THE BUILDING AND MAINTENANCE, UH, HAS NO OUTSTANDING, UM, UH, VIOLATIONS AND, UM, UH, UH, IS NOT, UH, PART OF THE PAPER. BUT I DID GET ALERTS OF SUPPORT FROM THE OTHER. ONLY OTHER, UM, RESIDENT IS A NEIGHBOR, UH, AND, UH, HE ALSO HAS AN SDR. UH, SO I HAVE THAT FOR A REVIEW IF YOU, IF YOU WANT. NOW, UH, UH, GIVEN THAT, UH, THAT [00:45:01] THERE'S ONLY, UH, TWO UNITS HERE, I, I DO THINK THAT THAT, UH, UM, UM, THE, UM, GRANTING THIS, UH, WILL NOT RESULT IN, UH, PRECEDENT THAT WOULD COMPROMISE, UH, THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE. AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT, SO QUICK QUESTION. UH, WHEN I LOOK AT STREET VIEW ON THIS, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS SITE IS SURROUNDED BY PARKING METERS ON ONE OF THE PARKING METERS ON LEXINGTON. THERE'S A, IT'S LIKE A SMALL SIGN THAT SAYS THAT PARKING'S NOT ALLOWED AND IT'S FOR EMERGENCY. AND I'M TRYING TO, I DON'T RECALL SEEING A SIGN LIKE THAT. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THAT'S A CITY SIGN OR, OR WHAT. CAN YOU REPEAT THAT, DONALD? OH, YEAH, YEAH, SURE, SURE. UH, SO IT LOOKS LIKE, UM, THIS SITE IS SURROUNDED ON, ON THE, ON THE TWO STREETS WITH, UH, PARKING METERS AND ONE OF THE PARKING METERS ON LEXINGTON, UH, HAS A SIGN THAT SAYS NO PARKING, EMERGENCY RESTRICTION TOW AWAY ZONE. SO I'M JUST WONDERING LIKE, HOW CAN THERE BE A PARKING METER AND THEN A SIGN SAY THAT YOU CAN'T PARK THERE? I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT MEANS. YEAH, WE'RE GONNA NEED TO LOOK INTO THAT AND GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT ONE. OKAY. UM, AND SIR, HOW MANY PARKING SPACES DO YOU HAVE ON YOUR PROPERTY? I NOTICED YOU HAVE A DRIVEWAY ON EITHER STREET? NO, AND THEN IN MY PROPERTY SIDE, UH, THERE IS TWO PARKING SPACES, BUT YOU HAVE A DRIVEWAY ON LEXINGTON AND YOU ALSO HAVE, UM, A DRIVEWAY ON THE, ON THE, UM, ON DALLAS STREET, DON'T YOU? YEAH, THE, THE ONE IN DALLAS IS, UH, MY PARKING SPACE AND IT HAS, UH, TWO PARKING SPACES. NOW THE ONE IN LEXINGTON STREET IS ACTUALLY, UM, UH, FROM THE OTHER, UM, UNIT, UH, ON THE DU DUPLEX, AND THEY ALSO HAVE TWO PARKING SPACES. OH, OKAY. WELL THAT, OKAY, GREAT. ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MANON? NO, I WAS JUST OBSERVING ALMOST EVERY ONE OF THE PARKING METERS HAS A SIGN ON IT FOR THAT BLOCK FACE AND SO, SO APPARENTLY MAYBE IT'S A SHORTCUT WAY TO DO IT. NO PARKING THIS BLOCK, SO THAT IS CONFUSING. WELL, IT DOES HAVE DATES ON IT, SO IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN FOR SPECIAL EVENT. OKAY. WELL I'M JUST, JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE PARKING SCENARIO. UM, IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS THAT ANYONE SIGNED TO THE SPEAK? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, HEARING NONE. UH, LOOKING FOR A MOTION BEEZ COMMISSIONER BEEZ REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A TWO SIX DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 3. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT 3 2 6 LEXINGTON AVENUE, UNIT 1 0 1, APPLICANT B MANUEL MARTINEZ. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN, IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY IN THAT THIS IS THE FIRST RENEWAL AND STAFF HAS BEEN UNABLE TO IDENTIFY ANY CODE ENFORCEMENT HISTORY TO THE LOCATION IN THE PAST THREE YEARS. STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO OPERATE AN ADDITIONAL SHORT TERM RENTAL BEYOND THE 12.5% DENSITY CAP IS NOT LIKELY TO MATERIAL TO MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND OR SAFETY IF APPROVED. ADDITIONALLY, THE STRUCTURE IN WHICH THE S ST R IS LOCATED WITHIN DOES NOT POSE A HAZARD TO LIFE HEALTH OR PUBLIC SAFETY. B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE THE APPLICANT HAS DETER HAS DEMONSTRATED OVER THE PREVIOUS THREE YEARS THAT THE OPERATION OF THE STR DOES NOT CAUSE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. STAFF FINDS THAT THIS TREND IS MORE THAN LIKELY TO CONTINUE WITH ZERO COMPLAINTS REGISTERED AGAINST THE PROPERTY AND OPERATOR. SEE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE DENSITY CAPS WERE ESTABLISHED TO ENSURE THAT NEIGHBORS ARE NOT INUNDATED BY THE PRESENCE OF TYPE TWO ST. ALLOWING THIS ADDITIONAL STR ON THE BLOCK, ON THE BLOCK FACE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS IT HAS BEEN OPERATED SINCE 2022 AND HAS NOT IMPACTED THE SURROUNDED AREA, THE SURROUNDING AREA SINCE THEN, THE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS, ROAD STORM, DRAINAGE, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND OTHER NECESSARY, UH, FACULTIES HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING PROVIDED THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDED. OFFSPRING PRO PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE. E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT-TERM RENTAL LICENSES, LICENSE LICENSES, CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CLERK WITHIN ONE YEAR. PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT OR O OR OWNER DOES NOT HAVE PREVIOUSLY REVOKED LICENSES, CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES OR CONVICTIONS. F THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THE PROPERTY IS [00:50:01] ZONED FBZT FIVE DASH ONE, WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE LAND USE OF A STR AND GENERAL RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL LAND USES. THE DENSITY LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY CITY COUNCIL EXISTS TO ENSURE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT NEIGHBORHOODS REMAIN PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL STAFF FINDS THAT EX THAT EXCEEDING THE 12.5 BLOCK FACE DENSITY IS NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. END OF MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BEEZ. COMMISSIONER BEEZ. I'M GONNA BE IN FAVOR OF THIS FOR THE SAME REASONS AS THE PREVIOUS CASE. IT'S A RENEWAL. THERE'S NO ISSUES. UM, IN THE PAST THREE YEARS, I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF IT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BEEZ? YEAH, I'LL ALSO BE IN FAVOR OF THIS, UH, THE, UH, APPLICANT HAS SHOWN TO BE A GOOD HOST AND, UH, THIS BLOCKS UNIQUE IN, UH, IN HOW MANY ACTUAL RESIDENTIAL, UH, PROPERTIES THERE ARE. THERE. I'LL BE IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? UM, ALL HAVE A ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES. I CONCUR. YES, I CONCUR. YOU READ? YES, I CONCUR. YES, I CONCUR. I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT. MOTION PASSES NINE TO ONE. UM, ALL RIGHT, WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. I HAVE TO RECUSE, I'LL BE TURNING THE GAVEL OVER TO VICE CHAIR ZUNA. ALRIGHT, THE TIME IS 1 51 AND CHAIRMAN ORIAN IS RECUSING HIMSELF. STEPH, LET'S MOVE TO CASE NUMBER FIVE. IT'S CASE NUMBER SEVEN. I'M SORRY. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. JOEL VELA, SENIOR PLANNER. ITEM SEVEN IS CASE BO A DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 1 2. THE APPLICANT BEING ALAMO ARCHITECTS AND COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR AT THREE, EXCUSE ME, 30 22 TO DRIVE. UH, THE ZONING IS R FOUR AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A TWO AND A HALF FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 14 AND A HALF FOOT SITE DISTANCE DECISION POINT STANDARD TO ALLOW FOR A 12 FOOT SITE DISTANCE DECISION POINT AT THE EASTERN DRIVEWAY APPROACH. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SITUATED NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTHWEST INTERSTATE LOOP FOUR 10 AND PALO ALTO ROAD. THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE OCCUPIED BY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, UH, MUNICIPAL PARK, A CHURCH, A STRIP MALL, AND VARIOUS FOOD SERVICES ESTABLISHMENTS. UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ACTUALLY OCCUPIED BY A SCHOOL. UH, THE EXISTING CHAIN LINK PERIMETER FENCE WAS RECENTLY REPLACED BY A WROUGHT IRON FENCE AND THE APPROPRIATE PERMIT WAS OBTAINED. HOWEVER, UPON INSPECTION OF THE NEW FENCE, STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE NEW ROD IRON FENCE ENCROACHES INTO THE AREA DESIGNATED TO BE FREE OF OBSTRUCTION SURROUNDING THE EAST DRIVEWAY APPROACH. PER THE UDC TRANSPORTATION AND STREET DESIGN STANDARDS, THE FENCE MUST BE ALTERED TO ELIMINATE THE ENCROACHMENT OR A VARIANCE MUST BE OBTAINED TO REMAIN IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION. SHOWN HERE IS A SITE PLAN OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING THE EAST DRIVEWAY, UM, APPROACH ON THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT IS KIND OF A BLOWN UP IMAGE FOR YOU. UM, NOTATING AND THE GREEN AND THE YELLOW THERE, THE YELLOW BEING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED SITE DISTANCE AREA. UM, AGAIN, THE, THAT'S BASED OFF OF THAT DECISION POINT NOTATED BY THOSE TWO XS THERE. NORMALLY WHAT'S REQUIRED IS A 14.5 FOOT DECISION POINT THAT'S MEASURED OFF OF THE CURB LINE, UM, INWARDS. UM, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 12 FOOT MEASUREMENT INSTEAD. AND THAT WOULD KIND OF, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES, UM, TO KIND OF SHOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AGAIN, OCCUPIED BY A SCHOOL THAT YOU CAN SEE THAT NEW WROUGHT IRON FENCE ESTABLISHED THERE. AND THIS IS THE INSIDE OF THAT DRIVEWAY. CAN WE GO ONE BACK? UM, AGAIN, UH, KIND OF MEASURING FROM THE CURB LINE INWARDS, UH, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE, UM, KIND OF AROUND THAT. UH, THIS IS WHERE A CAR EXITING WOULD NEED TO BE ABLE TO SEE AROUND THAT CORNER TO THE LEFT THERE AND GO ON ONE. UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS A SPEED BUMP THERE AND THAT'S CALLED OUT ON THE SITE PLAN AS WELL. PRETTY MUCH AT THAT SAME POINT WHERE A CAR WOULD NEED TO BE ABLE TO OBSERVE AROUND THAT CORNER. WE MOVE ON. AND THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA ALONG GRIMA DRIVE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, FOR THE SITE DISTANCE VARIANCE, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO OA DASH TWO SIX DASH 0 3 0 0 0 1 2 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE PROPOSED REDUCTION IN COMBINATION WITH AN EXISTING SPEED BUMP IN THE ROAD ADEQUATELY SUPPORTS MOTORIST SAFETY AT THIS INTERSECTION. AND TWO, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD CAUSE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BY NECESSITATING THE RELOCATION OF THE DRIVEWAY APPROACH OR THE RELOCATION OF THE FENCE TO CROSS THROUGH WHAT [00:55:01] WOULD OTHERWISE BE USABLE PARKING SPACES ON THIS LOT. STAFF MAILED 42 NOTICES ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION REGISTERED WITHIN 200 FEET OF THIS LOCATION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF MANANA, MR. MANANA. SO, SO WHAT IS, SO CAN YOU GIMME A REALLY GOOD DEFINITION OF WHAT A SITE DECISION OR, UH, YEAH, SITE DECISION, SITE DISTANCE DECISION POINT IS SO, SO VERSUS, YOU KNOW, CLEAR VISION, YOU KNOW, SO TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO KIND OF, YEAH. UM, MR. COLLINS IS PRESENT HERE FOR THE TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT. SO THE SITE DECISION POINT IS THE, THE SETBACK DISTANCE FROM THE CURB LINE TO THAT POINT WITHIN THE DRIVEWAY WHERE THE, THE ESSENTIALLY WHERE THE DRIVER IS SITTING RIGHT? TO, TO MAKE THE DECISION WHETHER TO PROCEED INTO THE INTERSECTION OR TO WAIT. UH, SO IT'S, IT'S THE SHORT END OR THE BASE OF THE TRIANGLE THAT JOEL SHOWED UP THERE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SO, SO IT'S STILL TAKING, SO IT'S, IT'S, IT KIND OF IS VERY SIMILAR THEN TO CLEAR VISION WITH THE NOTION OF BEING ABLE TO LOOK DOWN WHILE I'M SEATED IN THE CAR TO BE ABLE TO SEE HOW FAR DOWN THE ROAD IS, RIGHT? YES SIR. IT'S THE SAME EXACT ISSUE THAT IS THE ISSUE. SO, SO, UM, I OBSERVED, OR IN THE PHOTOS HERE THAT THERE ARE TREES IT LOOKS LIKE ON, ON, ON THAT CORNER AS WELL. AND SO, SO UM, I KNOW THAT IN CLEAR VISION DIALOGUE, THERE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE LANDSCAPE THAT'S, THAT'S, UM, BELOW OR OR ABOVE THREE FOOT TO SEVEN FOOT. THAT RANGE IS SUPPOSED TO BE CLEAR AGAIN FOR THE VIEW. SO, BUT IF YOU HAVE A MASSIVE TREE THERE, DOES THAT, DOES THAT WEIGH INTO THE, INTO THAT DIALOGUE AS AS WELL? YES SIR. THE TREE CAN, UM, FREQUENTLY TREES WILL CREATE CLEAR VISION OBSTRUCTIONS. UM, THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION HAS A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON. YOU'VE GOT THE CURVATURE, YOU'VE GOT TREES IN THE, UH, IN THE PARKWAY ALONG THE FRONT OF THE SCHOOL, AND THEN THEY CONVERTED THE CHAIN LINK FENCE TO A RIGHT IRON FENCE, WHICH CLEARLY ON AN ANGLE YOU CAN'T SEE THROUGH VERY EASILY IS THE PROBLEM. UM, BUT WHAT WE DETERMINED WHEN WE WERE OUT THERE IS THAT AT 12 FEET, UM, YOU, YOU, IT IS SAFE. IT IS SAFE AT 12 FEET, YOU CAN SEE A PASS THE TREE AND, AND PASS THE WROUGHT IRON, UH, FOR SUFFICIENT DISTANCE. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. SO THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAD A QUICK QUESTION. SO WITH THE ADDITION OF THE SPEED BUMP, THERE ALSO IS THAT WAS IN CONSIDERED INTO THE, THE VARIANCE REQUEST HERE OR APPROVAL? I, I, I WOULD SAY THAT THE, THE SPEED BUMP HELPS BECAUSE TRAFFIC IS GONNA SLOW DOWN. UM, HOWEVER, WE ALSO HAD TO CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, AT THE PEAK HOUR, UM, FOR TRAFFIC AT THAT LOCATION, IT'S GONNA BE MORNING AND AFTERNOON. OBVIOUSLY PICKUP DROP OFF, UM, THAT IS, THERE IS ALSO, UH, A REGULATORY REDUCED SPEED AT THOSE TIMES. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, HARRY? NOT, I'D ASK THE APPLICANT. ACTUALLY, I HAVE ONE MORE FOR IT. SO, OKAY, SO WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE DIVISION. SO WE MEASURED FROM THE FENCE OR, OR DID IT INCLUDE THE TREE AS WELL? UM, AS YOU KNOW, FOR BLOCKING THAT? YEAH, AT THE 12 FEET WE WERE ABLE TO SEE AROUND THE TREE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR MAN. ALRIGHT, LET'S UH, HEAR THE APPLICANT. IF YOU COULD PLEASE COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. HELLO? UM, MY NAME'S LUTA SU SUAREZ. I'M WITH THE ALAMO ARCHITECTS AND I'M HERE, UH, REPRESENTING SOUTHWEST ISD. UM, SO WE WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THE RAW IRON FENCE WAS INSTALLED IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE SAFETY STANDARDS OF T THAT'S A TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY. THEY NOW REQUIRE A SIX FOOT TALL NON CLIMBABLE FENCE. SO THE OLD CHAIN LINK FENCE THAT WAS DEFINED AS CLIMBABLE. SO THAT'S WHY WE HAD TO, UM, BRING IN THE NEW, UH, RAW IRON FENCE. AND SO IT WAS INSTALLED IN THE EXACT SAME LOCATION AS THE CHAIN LINK FENCE. AND, UM, UH, AS MR. COLLINS STATED, WE WEREN'T REALLY ABLE TO, UH, SEE TO THE LEFT AS WELL AT THE REQUIRED 14 AND A HALF. SO WE'RE JUST REQUESTING THAT WE SCOOCH UP THAT TWO AND A HALF, UM, JUST TO BE ABLE TO SEE TO THE LEFT A LITTLE BETTER. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALRIGHT, STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY VOICEMAIL OR ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS TO BE READ IN? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. UM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE ANY CLOSING COMMENTS BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? UH, THANK YOU . ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. UH, HEARING NONE, I'D ASK A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION. ALRIGHT, MR. MANN, I SEE YOUR REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O 8 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 2. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT THE REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 14, UH, 0.5 FOOT SITE CLEARANCE DECISION POINT STANDARD TO ALLOW A 12 FOOT SITE DISTANCE DECISION POINT AT THE EASTERN DRIVEWAY APPROACH, SITUATED AT 3 0 2 2 REFORMER DRIVE APPLICANT BEING ALAMO ARCHITECTS BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINE SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER [01:00:01] OF THIS PROPERTY, SUCH AS A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDMENT WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE PROPOSED REDUCTION IN COMBINATION WITH AN EXISTING SPEED BUMP IN ROAD, IN ROAD ADEQUATELY SUPPORTS MOTORIST SAFETY AT THIS INTERSECTION. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT WOULD CAUSE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BY NECESSITATING THE RELOCATION OF THE DRIVEWAY APPROACH OR THE RELOCATION OF THE FENCE TO CROSS THROUGH OTHERWISE USABLE PARKING SPACES. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE OBSERVED AS AN EXISTING SPEED BUMP PROVIDES A MEANS OF SLOWING TRAFFIC TO SUPPLEMENT THE PROPOSED REDUCTION TO THE MINIMUM SITE DISTANCE AREA. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, IN WHICH IS VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THOSE VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PERFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE EXISTENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH IS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THIS VARIANCE, UH, IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO AFFECT TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ALONG REFORMER DRIVE, GIVEN THE EXISTING SPEED BUMP IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. SIX, APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH A VARIANCE OF SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE SCHOOL IS TASKED WITH PROVIDING ADEQUATE SECURITY TO THE PREMISES, ADEQUATE PARKING FOR STAFF AND VISITORS, AND SAFE EGRESS FROM THE PROPERTY FOR MOTORISTS. WHEREAS THE FENCES NEEDED TO ENSURE THE SECURITY OF THE PREMISES AND WHEREAS THE RELOCATION OF THE FENCE WOULD REDUCE AVAILABLE PARKING SPACES, THE REDUCTION OF THE SITE DISTANCE AREA WHERE A SPEED BUMP EXISTS BEST BALANCES THESE RESPONSIBILITIES. AND A MOTION. HAVE A SECOND. SECOND, BRUCE. MR. MANO. SO, SO I, I CONCUR WITH THE CITY'S POSITION HERE AND YOU KNOW, I THINK THE ADDITION OF THE SPEED BUMP, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT BECOMES A STANDARD, YOU KNOW, AS WE SEE MORE OF THESE, IF IT IS GONNA BE DRIVEN, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH, WE'LL SAY SOME OF THESE, UH, C UH, CIRCUMSTANCES. BUT, UH, WITH THAT I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. THANK YOU. I'D REMIND MY COLLEAGUES THAT WE ONLY, WE HAVE NINE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HERE, SO WE, IT WOULD TAKE ANIMUS NINE IF, IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE RESPECTFULLY, I'LL ASK FOR YOU TO KIND OF SPEAK UP SO THAT WE COULD, UM, LOOK TO A FULLY AND PANELED BOARD TO RECONSIDER IF THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE. HERE. NINE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. OH, MS. CRUZ. I'M SORRY. . I UNDERSTAND, SIR. UM, AND I CONCUR WITH MR. MANNA. I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH IT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE SPEED BUMP THERE. IT WILL SLOW DOWN TRAFFIC. WE HOPEFULLY A LITTLE BIT MORE. THANK YOU. APOLOGIES MS. CRUZ. ALRIGHT, UH, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IVANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BEEZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. VICE CHAIR UNA. YES. I I CONCUR WITH THE NINE IN FAVOR. ZERO IN OPPOSITION. THE VARIANCE, UH, PASSES AS READ. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, TIME IS, UH, 2 0 3. IF WE CAN GET OUR ESTEEMED CHAIR BACK. GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS BO OA TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 5. THE ADDRESS IS 6 0 2 6 0 6 NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS STREET AND 1513 DAWSON STREET. THE COUNCIL DISTRICT'S TWO. THE APPLICANT IS EAST GANDER AL. THE REQUEST IS ELIMINATE AN, AN ELIMINATION OF THE REQUIRED 200 FOOT SEPARATION TO ALLOW THE USE OF A MOBILE FOOD COURT WITHIN 200 FEET OF A RESIDENTIAL USE, UH, OR LOT. AND THE ZONING IS C TWO. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE CORNER OF NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS AND DAWSON STREET. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW MOBILE FOOD COURT ON THE THREE CURRENTLY VACANT LOTS. THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THE MOBILE FOOD COURTS TO BE ESTABLISHED, NO CLOSE THAN 200 FEET OF ANY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE USE OR A SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT. THE, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY, UH, DIRECTLY ABUTS AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIN USED TO THE EAST. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO OA TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 9 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE ELIMINATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL SEPARATION WOULD INJURE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AS IT DOES NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT DISTANCE BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL USES INTENDED FOR PROTECTION FOR POTENTIAL NOISE AND LIGHT POLLUTION. AND TWO, THE UH, PROPERTY OWNER MAY REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PROPOSED REMOVAL FOOD TRUCK ESTABLISHMENTS TO [01:05:01] THE ALLOWABLE MAXIMUM TO OPERATE WITHOUT A VARIANCE APPROVAL. WE MAILED 26 NOTICES, WE GOT SIX IN FAVOR AND TWO IN OPPOSITION. THE HARVARD PLACED EAST LAWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION RESPONDED IN OPPOSITION AND THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION RESPONDED IN, IN OPPOSITION. UH, WE RESENT THEM. SO THESE ARE THE LETTERS IN SUPPORT AND THIS IS THE OLD LETTERS OF OPPOSITION. AND THESE ARE THE NEW LETTERS OF OPPOSITION OR THESE ARE THE NEW ONES RIGHT HERE. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD ALL. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR MOBILE FOOD COURT. GOOD AFTERNOON. YES, SIR. MY NAME IS ISCA . I THINK THE LAST MEETING, UH, WAS, UH, DECEMBER 15. AND, UH, THE PLAN WAS FOR ME TO LEAVE AND GET IN TOUCH WITH THE MANAGEMENT TEAM OR THE BOARD, UH, MS. FRANK COY IF I CAN MEET WITH HER IN PERSON OR GET INTO THEIR MEETINGS WEEKLY, MONTHLY, QUARTERLY, TO DISCUSS THEIR CONCERNS. UH, AND I UNDERSTAND DECEMBER 15 WAS A LITTLE BIT TOUGH TIME BECAUSE OF THE HOLIDAYS, DIDN'T GET NO RESPONSE. I FOLLOWED BACK ON ANOTHER EMAIL DECEMBER 29, UH, JUST EXPLAINED WHAT I REALLY LIKE TO SIT DOWN JUST TO LISTEN TO THEIR CONCERN AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. DIDN'T GET NO RESPONSE. THEN I RESPONDED AGAIN ONE MORE TIME. JANUARY 6TH. SHE RESPONDED BACK AFTER JANUARY 6TH, WHICH I UNDERSTAND THERE WERE HOLIDAYS. SHE SAID, WE ALREADY HEARD EVERYTHING YOU WANT TO TELL US. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT. AND WE LEFT IT THAT WAY SO I DIDN'T, UM, GET MUCH OF ANSWERS. OKAY. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? CRUZ, COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I'M, I'M TRYING TO MAKE MY RECOLLECTION HERE. HOW MANY TRUCKS ARE YOU PROPOSING ON THIS PROPERTY, SIR? I WAS PROPOSING BETWEEN EIGHT AND 10 ON THREE LOTS. UH, THE MEETING WE HAVE WITH THEM, UH, ABOUT, UH, SOMETIMES IN LATE NOVEMBER, THEY REQUESTED FOUR OR FOUR TRUCKS TO START WITH AND THEY WILL SEE HOW THAT'S GONNA BE BETWEEN TRAFFIC FLOW AND, AND, UH, I'M OKAY WITH THAT TO DO IT START FOUR OR OR FIVE. UH, I LIKE TO DO EIGHT AND 10, BUT I'M OKAY TO DO FOUR OR FIVE TO START WITH TO GET EVERYBODY ON THE SAME PAGE. SO THE QUESTION FOR STAFF, HE HAD MENTIONED HE HAS THREE LOTS. IS HE ALLOWED TWO PER LOT BY RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT. SO IN THEORY HE COULD PUT SIX TRUCKS OUT THERE. UH, AND, AND RIGHT NOW, SO. OKAY. IS THERE, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO, UM, I'M LOOKING AT THE LETTER THAT GOT MAILED OUT WITH REGARDS TO THE COMMUNITY RESPONSES, AND I DON'T SEE THIS CASE LISTED HERE UNLESS I'M LOOKING AT THE WRONG EMAIL. SO I WAS TRYING TO READ THE LETTER THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. CAN YOU BRING IT BACK UP AND LEAVE IT UP SO I CAN READ THROUGH IT PLEASE? STEVENS, UH, COMMISSIONER STEVENS. CAN I, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, THE LAST MEETING THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT HE'D BE ALLOWED TO DO BY RIGHT. AND I BELIEVE THAT IT WAS THE CITY'S STANCE THAT HE WOULD'VE TO PROVIDE SEPARATE FACILITIES FOR EACH OF THOSE LOTS, MEANING PARKING, RESTROOM FACILITIES. IS THAT TRUE? THAT'S CORRECT. SO TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT, IF HE WERE TO DO TWO JUST BY DOING TWO, HE HAS TO HAVE A FACILITY, HE HAS TO HAVE ONSITE PARKING, HE HAS TO HAVE A RESTROOM. CORRECT. OKAY. AND IS IT, DOES IT, IF HE ONLY WANTED TO DO, IF HE WANTED TO DO TWO PER LOT AND TRY TO GET A VARIANCE FROM HAVING THE PARKING ON ONE OR, OR, OR A SECOND LOT, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HE CAN REQUEST FROM THE CITY SO HE CAN DO, UM, A PARKING AGREEMENT, IT SOUNDS LIKE, TO SOLVE THAT ISSUE AND THE RESTROOM ISSUE? UH, I WOULD HAVE TO TELL WITH THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO SEE IF HE CAN PUT THAT IN THE LOT. SO THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO HEAR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? UH, THAT'S NOT UNDER THE PURVIEW. THE, THE BO OA THE LOCATION OF THE RESTROOM. NO, I KNOW, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S A PATH FOR HIM TO POTENTIALLY [01:10:01] HAVE SIX OUT THERE AND HAVE ONE RESTROOM FACILITY AND MAYBE NOT HAVE SEPARATE PARKING ON EACH LOT. IS THERE A PATHWAY FOR THIS APPLICANT? I DON'T, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. UM, OKAY. BUT THAT'D BE THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT'S CALL THE RESTROOM ONE IS, IS THE ONE THAT'S WOULD STOP IT. OKAY. CORRECT. YES. COM UH, UH, IVAN? YES, IVAN, UM, TO THE CITY. SO THE VARIANCE HE'S ASKING FOR RIGHT NOW IS FOR 200 FEET, UH, SETBACK FROM THE EAST SIDE WHERE THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IS, IS HE STILL REQUIRED IN SPITE OF TWO ON EACH LOT? WOULD HE STILL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE THAT 200 FEET? SEAN, I DON'T THINK YOUR MIC'S ON. YEAH, NO. UH, IT WOULD, THE ONLY THING THAT REQUIRES THE 200 FOOT SEPARATION IS THE MOBILE FOOD COURT DESIGNATION. SO IF IT'S NOT A MOBILE FOOD COURT DESIGNATION, IT WOULDN'T REQUIRE THE 200 FOOT SEPARATION. EVEN IF HE HAS THE TRUCKS ON EACH LOT. YEAH, HE, HE'S, IT'S NOT A CONSIDERED MOBILE UNTIL YOU HAVE MORE, MORE THAN TWO TRUCKS. AND BECAUSE HE HAS THREE LOTS, HE COULD PUT TWO IN EACH LOT. AND THAT'S AS A WAY OF BYPASSING THAT 200 FOOT, UH, REQUIREMENT. UM, BUT THEN THE REQUIREMENTS, THE RESTROOMS KICK IN. SO IN THEORY, HE MAY ONLY BE ABLE TO DO MAYBE FOUR WHO, I MEAN, SO, AND YES, COMMISSIONER MANNA AND SO ACTUALLY GOING BACK FOR THE RESTROOM DIALOGUE, SO, SO IF THERE'S TWO OR LESS ON A LOT, IT STILL REQUIRES A RESTROOM BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THERE ARE LOTS OF FACILITIES AROUND MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DO NOT HAVE THAT. AND SO YEAH, THE ONLY THING THAT'S DESIGNATING BETWEEN THE DIFFERENCE OF WHAT SEAN JUST SAID, AND A MOBILE FOOD COURT IS JUST A ZONING DESIGNATION. THAT'S ALL THEY, THEY STILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY PARKING RESTROOMS, ALL THAT STUFF. UH, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION OR QUESTION, BUT IT'S, IT'S FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, IN, UH, DI WITTY NEIGHBORHOOD HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT LIGHTING AND WHERE THE DUMPSTERS WOULD GO, THE CONCERNS ABOUT SMELLS. UM, HOW WOULD YOU ADDRESS THAT? SO THAT, JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE'RE NOT PLANNING ON PUTTING A LOT OF LIGHTS, JUST STRING LIGHTS ONLY, UH, WHICH IS NOT VERY BRIGHT. AND DUMPSTER, WE'RE GONNA HAVE ONE ON THE SIDE. I DESIGNATE THERE'S ONE PERSON ACTUALLY IS GONNA DO NOTHING BUT CLEAN UP THE LOT ON A DAILY BASIS. AND, UH, WE, UH, THAT DUMPSTER BE PICKED UP EVERY COUPLE OF DAYS WHENEVER IT NEEDS IT, ACTUALLY OF MORE THAN THAT. DID THE NEIGHBORS ASSOCIATION SAY THE WORD DEED RESTRICTIONS TO YOU AS FAR AS A WAY OF, OF, OF MAKING SURE THAT THERE WAS SOME DOCUMENTED AGREEMENT ABOUT THE LIGHTING AND THE TRASH PICKUP AND DID YOU BRING IT UP? I DIDN'T, UH, WE TALKED ABOUT IT. THEY DIDN'T. OKAY, YOU DID. YEAH, WE TALKED ABOUT THE LIGHTS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. THEY CONCERNED ABOUT LOUD MUSIC, WHICH IS NO PLAN FOR ME TO PUT A LOUD MUSIC OR STRONG LIGHTING. SO I MEAN, IF, IF, IF I WAS IN CHARGE OF THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION, I WOULD, IF I, IF THE, IF THERE WAS THREE OR FOUR ISSUES THAT KEPT ME FROM APPROVING IT, GETTING SOMETHING RECORDED IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS MIGHT MAKE ME MORE, YOU KNOW, ACCEPTABLE TO IT. THAT'S WHY I'M WONDERING IN YOUR TALKS, THEY, THEY DIDN'T, NONE OF THAT CAME UP. NO, NO. WE, WE TALKED ABOUT MA THEIR BIGGEST CONCERN IS, UH, PARKING, MUSIC, LIGHTING. OKAY. UH, TOO MANY FOOD TRUCKS, UH, WHICH IS, I DON'T WANNA DO A LOT OF TRUCKS, SO. GOTCHA. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE, UH, VOICEMAILS, ANYONE SEND TO THE SPEAK? DO HAVE A VOICEMAIL? ALL RIGHT. HELLO, MY NAME IS LULU FRANCOIS, CHAIRWOMAN OF THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR WITTY HILL. CALLING IN ON CASE 6 0 2 6 0 6 NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS AND 15 13 13 DAWSON STREET. WE AGREE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL OF THE ELIMINATION OF THE 200 SEPARATION BETWEEN THIS FOOD COURT AND THE RESIDENTIAL LOT AT 1513 DAWSON STREET FOR ALL THE SAME REASONS. WE WERE NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST THE LAST FEW TIMES IT WAS PRESENTED TO THIS COMMITTEE. OUR COMMENTS FROM THE LAST REQUEST ARE INCLUDED IN THE EMAIL WE SUBMITTED THE LAST TIME THIS APPLICANT PRESENTED TO THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD REVIEW COMMITTEE. HE STATED THAT HE HAD TROUBLE JOINING THE ZOOM MEETING WE CREATED AND WAS CONCERNED THAT WE DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE GOALS FOR THIS PROJECT. FOR THAT REASON, THE ZONING, DOA REQUESTED THAT HE REACH OUT TO US TO SCHEDULE ANOTHER TIME TO REVIEW THIS REQUEST, WHICH HE DID, BUT WE DECIDED NOT TO MEET WITH HIM AGAIN BECAUSE WE COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD WHAT HE IS RE WAS REQUESTING. WE ALLOWED THE APPLICANT TO EXPLAIN FULLY WHAT HE WANTED TO DO. WE [01:15:01] HAD MANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM BASED ON THE INFORMATION HE EMAILED AND DISCUSSED WITH US. WE FELT SATISFIED THAT HE ANSWERED ALL OUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROJECT. WE DID NOT GIVE HIM A TIME LIMIT TO PRESENT, AND I, AS A CHAIRPERSON MADE IT A POINT TO ASK THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONAL FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT THEN, AND ONLY THEN DID WE END THE CONVERSATION AND PRESENTATION WITH HIM. THE AREAS OF CONCERN HAVE NOT CHANGED, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PREVIOUS EMAIL SUBMITTED FOR THIS, HIS NOVEMBER 17TH REVIEW. FOR ALL THESE REASONS, WE ASK THAT YOU DENY THIS APPLICATION AND RECOMMEND THAT THE APPLICANT ESTABLISH THE TWO LOTS HE OWNS WITH THE FOUR FOOD TRUCKS HE IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED TO ESTABLISH. PLEASE MAKE SURE TO SEE THE ATTACHED COMMENTS FROM THE NOVEMBER 17TH, 2025 MEETING. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, SO IF THERE'S NOTHING, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION ALL I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 1 95. I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRAND REQUEST FOR 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 SITUATED 6 0 2 AND 6 0 6 NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS AND 1 5 1 3 DAWSON STREET, APPLICANT BEING ISKANDER ELLE BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE LACK OF SEPARATION WOULD NOT CREATE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN NOISE, TRAFFIC OR RELATED NUISANCES AS THE LOTS ALREADY SIT ON THE CORNER OF A PRIMARY ARTERIAL ROAD. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE SUBJECT'S PROPERTY, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY'S LOCATION ALONG AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY DISTINGUISHES THIS PROPERTY FROM INTERIOR RESIDENTIAL LOTS. STRICT APPLICATION OF THE 200 FOOT SEPARATION REQUIREMENT WOULD PRECLUDE DEVELOPMENT OF A USE THAT IS OTHERWISE APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THREE. BY GRANTING THIS VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE INTENT OF THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENT IS TO PROTECT RESIDENCES FROM THE INCOMPATIBLE USES. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS LOT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO ALL THE ALL OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, INCLUDING LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AS PART OF THE TRANSITION BETWEEN USES FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. GIVEN THE PROPERTY'S LOCATION ALONG THE PRIMARY ARTERIAL ROAD. THE MOBILE FOOD COURT USE WILL NOT INTRODUCE NOISE, TRAFFIC OR RELATED NUISANCES TO AGREE TO A DEGREE THAT IS SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT FROM EXISTING CONDITIONS. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FINDS THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE EXISTING LOCATION ALONG NORTH NEW BRAUNFELS. TRAFFIC OR NOISE GENERATED BY THE PROPOSED USE WOULD NOT SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE BEYOND EXISTING CONDITIONS CREATED BY THE PRIMARY ARTERIAL ROAD. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNING. COMMISSIONER STEVENS. I AM GOING TO BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS VARIANCE. UM, I THINK WE'VE LOOKED AT THIS THREE TIMES NOW, AND THE MITIGATING FACTORS FOR ME INCLUDE BEING ALONG THIS ARTERIAL ROAD, NEW BRAUNFELS ALREADY A BUSY ROAD ACROSS THE STREET FROM A LITTLE CAESARS AND ADJACENT TO A, A CACHE ADVANCED STORE. UM, THE PARKING ALONG DAWSON DOESN'T CONCERN ME BECAUSE THAT'S THE REAR OF THE HOUSES THAT FACE GULF STREET, UH, AND I THINK THAT THIS, THIS USE SERVES THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS CLEAR IN ALL THE GREEN CHECK BOXES THAT WE SAW. I UNDERSTAND DIGNITY IS AGAINST IT, BUT I THINK THEY MIGHT BE A LITTLE OUT OF TOUCH. UM, I AM, I'M MORE INCLINED TO LISTEN TO THE, THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS AND, UH, IT SEEMS LIKE A, A GOOD USE FOR THE AREA. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER MINNA. UM, I I WILL NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. UM, AND, AND ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IS THAT I THINK THAT, UM, BY, BY, RIGHT, UH, THIS APPLICANT CAN HAVE, YOU KNOW, PRETTY MUCH WHAT IT WAS THAT HE'S LOOKING FOR, JUST NOT QUITE AS MANY. AND THEN HE DOES, YOU KNOW, HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK. AND I THINK ONCE IT IS THAT HE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF DOES PROVE THAT THIS IS HOW YOU WANNA DO IT AND HOW IT WORKS AND, AND, YOU KNOW, THE BE BE ABLE TO GET THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT. [01:20:01] AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS TIMEFRAME WOULD GET, ALLOW HIM TO DO THAT. AND SO, UM, SO THEN, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, HE WOULD GET A SECOND CHANCE ONCE IT IS THAT, UH, HE DOES PROVE, YOU KNOW, THAT IT, THAT IT IS, YOU KNOW, A VIABLE PART OF THAT COMMUNITY AND, AND THEY ADOPT IT. SO I WILL NOT BE VOTING IN FAVOR AT THIS POINT. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? UM, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EEZ? I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I DO NOT CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BEEZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BOEZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR, UH, WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, BUT THE VOTE IS SEVEN TO THREE. IT DID NOT PASS. AND SO WITH THAT, UH, MOTION FAILS IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF. UH, LET'S SEE. ITEM NUMBER NINE. GOOD AFTERNOON. ITEM NUMBER NINE. UM, IS LOCATED AT 93 10 MAGNOLIA GROVE. THE ZONING IS R FIVE AND THE REQUEST IS FOR ONE, A THREE FOOT FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT PRIVACY FENCE TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE AND TWO, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 15 FOOT LY CLEAR VISION TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN INGRAM ROAD AND HUNT LANE ALONG MAGNOLIA GROVE. THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA ARE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND A DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO THE SOUTH. THE APPLICANT INSTALLED A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE AND THE FRONT YARD ALONG THE WESTERN SIDE PROPERTY LINE, AND WITH CITED BY CODE ENFORCEMENT FOR BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT AND EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM FRONT YARD PRIVACY FENCE HEIGHT. CURRENTLY THE FENCE EXTENDS BEYOND THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. THE APPLICANT HAS DECLARED THEIR INTENT TO CUT THE FENCE BACK TO THE FRONT BOUNDARY TO LEAVE A 10 FOOT CLEAR VISION AREA. A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS REQUESTED TO ALLOW THE FENCE TO REMAIN AT ITS CURRENT HEIGHT AND A VARIANCE FOR THE FENCE TO REMAIN WITHIN THE MINIMUM DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN DEPICTING BOTH OF THE REQUESTS. THIS IS THE AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE CURRENT VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH THE ESTIMATED PROPERTY LINE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FENCE, AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BOA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 3 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE INCREASED FENCE HEIGHT IS THREE FEET OVER THE MINIMUM REQUIRED PRIVACY FENCE HEIGHT, WHICH ADVERSELY IMPACTS THE VISUAL OPENNESS OF THE FRONT YARD AREAS ALONG THE STREET. SCAPE TOMB. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER AND UNIFORMITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS NO SIMILAR FENCES WERE OBSERVED TO BE BUILT WITHIN THE FRONT PROPERTY YARD, FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTIES. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN BO OA DASH 25 DASH OH 3 2 3 8 FOR THE DRIVEWAY. CLEAR VISION VARIANCE BASED ON THE FOLLOWINGS FINDINGS OF FACT, THERE'S NO SIGNIFICANT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT WOULD IMPEDE TRAFFIC OR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY OR HINDER MAINTENANCE ISSUES. AND TWO ADJACENT PROPERTIES RETAIN FULL FUNCTIONALITY AND NO TRAFFIC IMPACTS OR CIRCULATION CONFLICTS ARE EXPECTED. STAFF MAILED 39 NOTICES FIVE ARE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION. AND ERO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PROVIDED COMMENTS, THESE RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE JANUARY 26TH, 2020 26 HEARING THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. CAN YOU, CAN YOU, UM, KIND OF EXPAND ON THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION COMMENTS? DID THEY, IS THERE ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR THAT THEY LIKED OR DIDN'T LIKE ABOUT IT? UM, OH, I'M SORRY. I JUST READ THE LETTER. IT SAID THEY DIDN'T WANNA PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS. OKAY, GREAT. UH, ANY, ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE APPLICANT? HEARING NONE SAID THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. HI. STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR FENCE. GOOD AFTERNOON, JUDITH AND SOLO GONZALEZ, MY HUSBAND. UM, SO DEAR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, WE ARE HERE TO FORMALLY REQUEST APPROVAL TO ALLOW US TO MAINTAIN A PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF OUR PROPERTY TO PREVENT UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS AND TO PROTECT THE SAFETY AND THE SECURITY OF OUR FAMILY AND PROPERTY. THIS REQUEST IS BASED ON REPEATED INCIDENTS INVOLVING THE NEIGHBORING TENANTS, WHICH HAVE CREATED BOTH SAFETY AND PROPERTY CONCERNS. SO JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY, THE HOME NEXT TO US, 93 14, THE OWNERS [01:25:01] ZA, IMA AND MUI, AND I APOLOGIZE, KU, THEY MOVED OUT OCTOBER OF 2024. THE PROPERTY WAS LEFT, UM, UN UH, UNINHABITED UNTIL APRIL OF 2025 WHEN IT WAS RENTED. UM, THE FIRST INTERACTION WE HAD WAS ON APRIL, 2025. WE OBSERVED THE NEIGHBORING TENANTS KNOCKING OUT OUR AT OUR DOOR AT 12:00 AM AND THEN RETURNING AGAIN AT 1:45 AM. UM, WE DO HAVE FOOTAGE OF THAT. WE DID SEND THAT TO THE OWNER AND HER COMMENT WAS, WOW, SCARY. UM, THERE ARE GONNA BE SOME VIDEOS THAT MAY HAVE SOME LANGUAGE, SO I JUST WANNA LET Y'ALL KNOW. I WILL TRY TO STOP AS MUCH OF THAT AS POSSIBLE. UH, WE'RE ALL ADULTS. OKAY. , I JUST WANNA LET YOU KNOW, OH, IT IS GOING TO BE IMAGE 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4. AND THEY'RE JUST QUICK SNIPPETS. SO HERE YOU CAN SEE THAT I'M SENDING THIS TO THE OWNER, LETTING HER KNOW THESE ARE VIDEOS THAT WE'RE CAPTURING, LETTING HER KNOW THAT THE FIRST ONE WAS AT 12 AND THEN THEY RETURNED AT 1 45. DO YOU WANNA GO OVER AND THEN THAT'S HER COMMENT. WOW. KIND OF SCARY. UM, HERE'S THE, AT ONE OF THE ACTUAL VIDEOS, IF YOU WANNA, YOU CAN SPEED IT. YEAH, YOU CAN SPEED UP. IT JUST, YOU CAN SPEED UP. WE CAN'T ANSWER THE DOOR RIGHT NOW, BUT IF YOU'D LIKE TO LEAVE A MESSAGE, YOU CAN DO IT NOW. SORRY. UM, THIS IS WHERE SOMEONE, I GUESS, I DON'T KNOW IF THE GENTLEMAN WAS KNOCKING ON OTHER NEIGHBOR'S DOORS, BUT YOU SEE POLICE PRESENCE. UM, THIS IS WHEN THEY RETURNED AGAIN. OKAY, SO THE, OH, GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. SO THIS IS LOITERING MY DAD. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS NO FENCE THERE, BUT THEY USE, OUR PEOPLE ARE COMING IN AND OUT OF THAT AREA, MY DAD'S WINDOW BECAUSE I DO HAVE MY ELDERLY PARENTS THAT LIVE WITH US, HIS WINDOW, THEY HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO HIS WINDOW AND MY SON'S WINDOW IS RIGHT ON TOP OF THAT. AND THIS OCCURS WHEN WE'RE HOME OR WE'RE NOT. YOU CAN SEE THE VEHICLES. UM, AND THIS, THESE ARE OUR VEHICLES RIGHT HERE IN THE DRIVEWAY. UM, IT'S YOUR DRIVEWAY. THAT BLACK VEHICLE IS, THIS IS MY DRIVEWAY, YES. SO ARE THEY, ARE THEY JUST, THEY'RE HAVING A PARTY OR SOMETHING? WE'RE, UH, WE'D LIKE TO ASSUME THAT, BUT YOU'LL SEE MANY VIDEOS THAT SHOW THAT THEY HAVE NO REGARD FOR OUR PROPERTY. SO THIS IS ANOTHER INCIDENT. WAIT, ALL THOSE CARS ACROSS THE STREET ARE GOING TO YOUR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE? YES, SIR. OKAY. AND THE THING IS, THIS PASSAGE RIGHT HERE, THIS IS STILL MY PROPERTY. IF, UM, YOU CAN SHOW VIDEO NUMBER 14 POINT, UH, 14.30. YOU SEE THIS GENTLEMAN, WE DON'T KNOW WHO HE IS. HE'S ON OUR DRIVEWAY. MY PARENTS ARE AT HOME MOST OF THE TIME. THEY ARE RETIRED. UM, 14.3. SO IT IS SOMEWHAT ALARMING, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE NOT HOME AS AN, AS THE HOMEOWNERS AND MY PARENTS ARE THERE ALONE WITH MY 13-YEAR-OLD SON. OKAY. UH, I I GET THE IDEA. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER WE DON'T NEED TO SEE EVERY VIDEO IS WHAT I'M GETTING. OKAY. JUST, AND SO IT DOESN'T JUST, IT'S JUST NOT PEOPLE WALKING. DID YOU SEE THAT VEHICLE? I SAW THE ITV? YES. THERE'S ALSO ONE OF CARS GOING THROUGH, UM, TRUCKS. THEY ALSO PULLED THE BIG UTILITY, UM, TRAILERS WITH ITEMS IN THERE. JUST IS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREETS? THE, IS IT PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET? IT'S, UH, I MEAN, I'M ASSUMING IT'S, IT'S A PUBLIC, PUBLIC STREET. OKAY. YES. UHHUH. . I APOLOGIZE. I WANTED TO SHOW YOU THE WAY THE HOME IS 14.3. THEY HAVE ACCESS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE. WE LIVE ON THE CORNER AND THERE'S A PROP. THE PROPERTY BEHIND US, THEIR BACKYARD IS TO US, THIS IS THEIR DOOR TO THEIR PROPERTY THAT THEY RENT. SO COME, HERE'S THE HOUSE. SO THERE'S THE WINDOWS, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE WAS NO FENCE THERE. OUR INTENT WAS NO THAT. THEN THE MOCK DOOR, THAT'S THE MOCK DOOR AND THAT'S THE ENTRYWAY TO OUR BACKYARD. SO WHAT THEY DID IS THEY TEED OFF OF THIS, OF THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. SO NOW THEY CREATED AN ENTRYWAY TO BE ABLE TO TRANSPORT ITEMS BACK AND FORTH. THERE'S, I MEAN, I BUT YOU'VE CONSTRUCTED A FENCE DOWN THE SIDE, YOUR SIDE PROPERTY LINE ALREADY, RIGHT? SO YES. WHAT HAPPENED WAS, THERE WAS AN ALTERCATION [01:30:01] WITH MY 72-YEAR-OLD FATHER, THIS GENTLEMAN, I MEAN, WE, THERE, THERE'S A, HE ACTUALLY HAS CRIMINAL TRESPASSING CHARGES THAT HAVE FILED WITH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO BECAUSE OF THE ALTERCATION. OKAY. I I, I UNDERSTAND. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SO MANANA, COMMISSIONER MANANA. SO, SO, UM, I KNOW, I KNOW. SO I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND WE WORK WITH OUR, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD SAFE OFFICERS. SO HAVE YOU REACHED OUT TO THEM? YOU, HOPEFULLY YOU LIKE SPEED DIAL WITH THEM RIGHT NOW. SO CHESTNUT SPRINGS HAS GONE THROUGH SOME MANAGEMENT DIFFICULTIES. I THINK FOR THE, FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS THERE, THERE'S A, THERE'S A LEGAL BATTLE GOING ON WITH THE, THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY. HE WAS THE MANAGER OF THE COMPANY THAT WAS OVERSEEING THE HOA, BUT HE WAS ALSO THE PRESIDENT OF THE HOA. SO FOR MANY YEARS. OKAY. THERE'S, WE, SO THEY'RE REBUILDING IT. SO WE, THAT'S ALSO WHY WE REACHED OUT TO SENDERO BECAUSE THEY'RE, IS THIS A GATED COMMUNITY? IT IS NOT. SO, SO THREE, SO 3 1, 1 SAFE OFFICER SPEED DIAL. SO THERE'S ALSO POLICE RECORDS ATTACHED TO THIS OF HOW MANY TIMES SAPD. THE ONE TIME IT HAS SUB SOMEWHAT SUBSIDED IS NOW THAT THE FENCE IS THERE, WE HAVE VIDEOS WHERE YOU SEE THE GENTLEMAN, I MEAN YOU GUYS HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN EVERYTHING. THE GENTLEMAN WALKS AND THEN HE SEES WHERE THE FENCE IS AND THEN HE DOESN'T ABOUT FACE. IS IS, UH, IS YOUR NEIGHBOR'S ASSOCIATION MANDATORY OR NON-MANDATORY? IT IS MANDATORY, YES. OKAY. WE STILL HAVE, THEY STILL HAVE NOT VOTED ABOARD IN. UM, WE STILL DON'T HAVE ONE YET. WE STILL DON'T HAVE ONE STILL WORKING. BUT YOU DO HAVE ONE THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE THERE SUPPOSED TO BE, YES. IN THEORY. OKAY. SO, UM, I I, I'VE SEEN EVERYTHING I NEED TO SEE. IS THERE ANY, UM, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? AND SO WAS THIS GOING, UM, SO IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS COMING UP THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, BUT NOT ACROSS THE FRONT, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. SO, OKAY. SO, UM, YEAH, AND THEN FOR THE EVENING IT DOES HAVE LIGHTS. SO I MEAN THE, THE, I SAW THOSE LITTLE THINGS. YEAH. STAFF. IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS OR ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? YES, TWO SIGN UP TO SPEAK. OKAY. I GOT A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. YES. IS THIS NEAR LIKE A, UM, DOES THE SCHOOL BUS GO NEAR HERE AT ALL? ARE THERE ANY KIDS IN THIS AREA? UM, THE SCHOOL BUS USUALLY, I THINK IT GOES IN AT LIKE FIVE IN THE MORNING. THEY HAVE A BUS STOP FURTHER, FURTHER DOWN FROM THE, FROM OUR HOUSE. THEY HAVE DOES IT DRIVE IN FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE? IT DRIVE, YES, IT DRIVES IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE. OKAY. OKAY. UM, AND HAVE YOU SEEN THAT THIS FENCE HAS ACTUALLY DONE SOMETHING? HAS IT IMPROVED? HOW LONG HAVE YOU HAD THE FENCE UP AGAIN? UM, I THINK WE, SO SEPTEMBER. SEPTEMBER, SEPTEMBER 11. YES. AND THEN HOW LONG HAVE THOSE NEIGHBORS LIVED THERE? SINCE APRIL. APRIL OF 2025. GEEZ. ALL THIS HAS HAPPENED. . YEAH, LIKE I SAID, FIVE MONTHS WE, BECAUSE OF THE THEM, UH, DRIVING THROUGH, THEY ACTUALLY BROKE OUR WATER METER. UM, AND SO THEN WE HAD TO THEN TRY TO OBTAIN RESTITUTION WITH THAT. UM, THEY WANTED TO FIX IT ON THEIR OWN. THEY CALLED SOME BUDDIES FROM HOME DEPOT TO COME AND FIX IT. AND THAT BECAME ANOTHER ISSUE. AND SO A LOT OF THIS HAS BEEN, HAS COME FROM THAT SITUATION. YEAH. THAT'S SAWS PROPERTY. SO, OKAY. SO WE, SO WE DID EXTEND THE FENCE TO PROTECT OUR WATER METER AS WELL. YES. WE HAVE A PICTURE OF THAT AS WELL. SO NOW THEY CANNOT, UM, RUIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE SAWS WATER METER THERE. RIGHT. UM, AND IT KEEPS THEM OFF OF OUR PROPERTY AND, AND PROVIDES A LITTLE BIT OF SAFETY FOR MY PARENTS AND MY SON, MY SON, HE CAN'T EVEN HAVE FRIENDS COME OVER ANYMORE BECAUSE WE HAVE TEXTS FROM FRIENDS PARENTS SAYING, PLEASE DON'T LET THE BOYS IN THE FRONT YARD, DON'T LET 'EM PLAY IN THE BACKYARD. BECAUSE IF, AGAIN, IF YOU HEARD WHAT WE ENDURE, IF I COULD SHOW YOU JUST ONE VIDEO, IF THAT WAS GONNA HELP ANYONE, UM, THEY, MY DAD CAN'T EVEN, HE'S RETIRED. HE WANTS TO SIT OUTSIDE AND DRINK COFFEE FRONT YARD OR BACKYARD. I, I, OKAY. I ONLY HAVE ONE MORE, ONE MORE QUESTION. YEAH. I GUESS MY ONLY CONCERN IS, UH, WHEN, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY KIDS ARE PLAYING OR THEY, THEY'RE WALKING BY THAT SIDEWALK AND YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE THEM. IF YOU, IF WE REDUCED ANY OF THAT, THAT FENCE DOWN TO THE, THE THREE FEET OR WHATEVER WE NEED TO BE, DO YOU THINK IT WOULD STILL HELP EVEN IF YOU, EVEN IF WE BROUGHT IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT SO THAT WAY YOU COULD AT LEAST BE ABLE TO SEE WHEN YOU EXIT THE DRIVE. 'CAUSE 'CAUSE IF ALL THESE OTHER CARS ARE THERE TOO, THEY'RE ALSO CAUSING CLEAR VISION ISSUES. KIDS ARE RUNNING IN BETWEEN THE, I I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY, HOW MANY KIDS ARE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THAT'S MY CONCERN REALLY, WITH NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE WHEN YOU DRIVE OUT OF THERE. AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT THE HOMES IN THAT, IT'S LIKE ALMOST LIKE A LITTLE CUL-DE-SAC. THEY DON'T HAVE YOUNG CHILDREN. IT'S JUST THE TENANTS RIGHT NOW THAT HAVE YOUNG CHILDREN. THE HOME NEXT TO IT, THEY HAVE THREE GROWN. I THINK THEY'RE THREE GROWN CHILDREN. THE HOUSE NEXT TO IT, THERE'S NO CHILDREN HOME NEXT TO IT. NO CHILDREN. THE ONLY OTHER ONE THAT WOULD HAVE A CHILD IS THE ONE ON THE CORNER. BUT THEY'VE HAD ENCOUNTERS, UM, IN ONE OF OUR, I THINK IN ONE OF OUR, UH, POLICE REPORTS, POLICE REPORTS, THAT GENTLEMAN HAS ACTUALLY A APPROACHED THE CHILD. SO WE ARE ALL LIVING JUST KIND OF CONFINED WITHIN, YOU KNOW, GO IN AND GO OUT AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A BUDDY SYSTEM THAT MY PARENT OR MY SONS CANNOT GO OUTSIDE WITHOUT AN ONE OF US. AND IF I CAN JUST, UH, SORRY. SENIOR PLANNER, JOEL VELA OVER HERE. UH, JUST BUT IN ABOUT YOUR CONCERN, MR. BONS, IF WE COULD GO ONE PHOTO FORWARD IN THE SLIDES. UM, AND I THINK THIS WAS PROBABLY YOUR CONCERN. [01:35:01] THIS PHOTO SHOWS THAT THE FENCE GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK. UM, THAT'S ACTUALLY OFF OF THE, THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. AND THAT'S WHY WE KIND OF ESTIMATED THE PROPERTY LINE THERE. IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. UM, THE APPLICANT HAD AGREED TO CUT THE FENCE BACK TO THE PROPERTY LINE WHERE, WHERE THE ACTUAL PROPERTY BOUNDARY IS. SO THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE WHEN WE WENT OUT AND TOOK OUR PHOTOS. BUT THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS AGREED TO REMOVE THE FENCING POSTS, YOU KNOW, TO, TO NOT ENCROACH BEYOND THEIR PROPERTY LINE. THIS IS DOING HERE IS PROTECTING. IF YOU WANNA, UM, MAYBE FOCUS IN A LITTLE BIT, THE WATER METER IS RIGHT THERE. YEAH. SO I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT THIS IS A STANDARD NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH TYPICALLY HAS A 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY. SO THE, THE PROPERTY LINE WOULD BE 10 FEET BEHIND THE FACE OF CURB. SO WITH THE FOUR FOOT SIDEWALK, THEY, THEY'RE BASICALLY CUTTING YOU BACK SIX MORE FEET. THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S CORRECT. AND, AND MANAM. SO, AND I THINK SO PART OF THE DIALOGUE, SO, SO WITH THEIR AGREEING WITH THE CITY HERE AND, AND YOU KNOW, WHAT Y'ALL FIGURE OUT. SO, SO THREE FOOT WITH A A, A, A PARTIALLY OPEN FENCING. SO, SO METAL FENCING ON TOP OF THAT, YOU COULD STILL KEEP. SO PER THIS DIALOGUE STILL KEEP, UM, DEFENSE AS IS, BUT STILL ALLOW FOR THAT CLEAR VISION. 'CAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALK ABOUT SAFETY AND, YOU KNOW, JUST BEING SAFE WITH THE COMMUNITY, BUT ALSO PROVIDING THE SEPARATION THAT YOU KNOW, THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. AND SO, SO THAT MAY BE AN OPTION, YOU KNOW, UM, WELL ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MY DAD'S HUMMER, AS I STATED, HE'S RETIRED. IT'S ALWAYS THERE. SO THAT REGARD IN REFERENCE TO THE, THE VISION, THAT VEHICLE USUALLY DOESN'T EVER MOVE. IT'S ONE, I MEAN NOW IT'S JUST, HE'S SAVING IT FOR ONE DAY FOR MY SON. SO THERE, THE, THE HUMMER IS STILL EVEN TALLER THAN THE FENCE IS. WELL, I DON'T, UH, SO I'M PERSONALLY NOT CONCERNED WITH, WITH, WE'LL SAY THAT FENCE UP TO THAT, YOU KNOW, PAST THE, YOU KNOW, UP TO THE 10 FOOT LINE. BUT, BUT AFTER THAT 10 FOOT LINE, AS YOU GET CLOSER TO THE SIDEWALK, YOU KNOW, MAKING THAT PART OF THE FENCE PARTIALLY OPEN, UM, OR PREDOMINANTLY OPEN IS WHAT WE CALL IT. AND SO THAT WAY YOU COULD STILL SEE THE CURB, BUT YOU STILL HAVE THE SEPARATION AND, AND WE'LL SAY THE PROTECTION. AND SO THAT WAY IT'S KIND OF A, WE'LL SAY A LITTLE BIT OF A COMPROMISE, YOU KNOW? YEAH. AGAIN, JUST TO CLARIFY, UH, BEYOND THAT 10 FOOT LINE THAT'S DEPICTED THERE, THERE CAN BE NO FENCING. THAT'S NOT THEIR PROPERTY, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE RIGHT OF WAY. CORRECT. OH, GOTCHA. OKAY. CORRECT. LIKE WE HAD ALREADY SAID, LIKE WE OKAY. YEAH. WE CAN'T GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO EVEN KEEP IT THERE. SO OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. YES. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. BACK OF THE, THE LAST PAGE, IT'S, I PUT LIKE REMINDER, WE ARE WORKING TO REMOVE THE FIVE, UH, FOOT FENCE. WE, WE HAVE THE GENTLEMAN THAT BUILT THE, BUILT THE FENCE, LIKE ON STANDBY, RIGHT? DEPENDING WHAT HAPPENED. WELL, WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE SIGN UP TO SPEAK. UH, LET'S HEAR FROM THEM. UH, SEE WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY. OH, WELL MY PARENTS FIRST ONE IS MR. FRANK MELENDEZ. YES. ALL RIGHT. IF YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND MAKE YOUR COMMENT PLEASE. YEAH, WE HAVE TO RECORD IT. MY NAME IS FRANK MELENDEZ. UM, OKAY. OH YEAH, . I'M KIND OF NERVOUS. THAT'S WHY I REMEMBER MY ADDRESS. UM, I DON'T KNOW. I REMEMBER DO YOU, DO YOU LIVE WITH THE NINE? UH, NO. UH, I SIR, DO YOU, DO YOU LIVE AT THE PROPERTY? YES, SIR. OKAY. SO YOU, SO FOR THE RECORD, IT'S 93 10 MAGNOLIA, RIGHT? THAT'S RIGHT. CORRECT. SO WHAT DO YOU, WHAT DO YOU THINK? SHOULD THE FENCE STAY? I BELIEVE SO, SIR. BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I'M RETIRING EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. AND, AND I SIT IN THE, IN THE FRONT SOMETIMES AND, AND HE COMES AND HE SAYS, UM, UH, BEFORE THE, THE GATE, THE, THE FENCE WAS THERE, YOU KNOW, THE, LIKE, THEY DIDN'T WANT, THEY WERE MAD. I DON'T KNOW WHY, BUT WHEN WE PUT THE FENCE AND EVERYTHING, HE STILL GOES UP IN THE FENCE AND HE SAYS, I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE TO SAY THIS. HE SAYS, UH, I KNOW YOU'RE RACIST, YOU'RE RACIST, YOU'RE RACIST AND EVERYTHING. AND HE SAYS, UH, DIRTY MEXICANS AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. AND I, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT, THAT THE PEOPLE, THE, THE OWNERS OF THE HOUSE, UM, THE KIDS USED TO CALL ME GRANDPA AND TO MY WIFE, GRANDPA. AND UH, THE LADY WAS VERY NICE WITH US AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. AND WE EVEN WERE GOING TO DUBAI WITH THEM, BUT THEY WENT WHEN IT WAS VERY HOT. AND, UH, SO WE DIDN'T GO. SO WE WENT, UH, LATER ON, BUT ANYWAY, WITHOUT NOW WITH THE FENCE AND EVERYTHING. SO PEACEFUL. SO PEACEFUL, MAMA. AND THEN, BUT I SIT IN THE BACK NOW 'CAUSE I DON'T WANT NO PROBLEMS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AND HE'S, WELL, YOU DIDN'T SEE THE VIDEO, THE F WORD AND SO AND SO AND SO, AND IT'S, IT'S BAD. AND, AND I LIVE IN THIS SIDE. AND WHEN THEY, YOU DIDN'T SEE THE OTHER VIDEO THAT THEY HAD PARTIES. THEY'RE STANDING IN MY, MY WINDOW AND, AND, AND BELIEVE ME, A LOT OF PEOPLE, NOT JUST A LITTLE BIT, YOU GET SCARED. I'M 72 YEARS OLD. MM-HMM . YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? AND UM, [01:40:01] I HATE TO SAY BECAUSE I'M MAD, BUT I'M SCARED, I'M SCARED AND I, I'M JUST SCARED AND WITH A FENCE, QUIET, VERY NICE, PEACEFUL, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? AND UM, HE SAYS, HE SAID, NOW THAT WITH THE DOOR, I KNOW YOU PUT THE, UH, THE FENCE BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE US, UH, YOU DIRTY MEXICAN, UM, UH, WE DON'T WANT TO SEE YOU NEITHER. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? LIKE THIS WAY. BUT IT'S SAFE WITH THE, WITH THE FENCE. UH, I CAN GET OUT RIGHT THERE. I SIT IN THE FRONT AND I SIT IN THE BACK. BUT SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, STILL HE JUMPS, OKAY, HE'S DIRTY. ME GUNS AND SO AND SO AND SO WITH THE FENCE, IT'S REAL GOOD. I, I AM VERY COMFORTABLE AND IT HELPS ME AND IT'S SCARY. AND NOW WITH ALL THE PEOPLE COMING IN AND EVERYTHING LIKE THIS, AND YOU CAN SEE THE OTHER VIDEO, MY, MY HUS RIGHT THERE WHERE THE, WHERE THE CARS GOING IN INSIDE WITH THE TRAILERS INSIDE. AND THEN IN MY DRIVEWAY, THEY'RE SITTING RIGHT THERE. LIKE THEY OWN IT. I'M NOT RACIST. THE PEOPLE THAT OWNS A HOUSE, THEY CAN PROVE. WE GOT LETTERS IN CHRISTMAS, PAPA GRANDPA, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? BABIES, GRANDPA, GRANDPA, I'M NOT RACIST, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? I WORKED FOR THE SCHOOL SO MANY YEARS AND EVERYBODY KNOWS ME, SIR. THE WALL. VERY NICE. AND, AND THEN MY AGE, GOLDEN AGE, THEY RETIRE REALLY NICE AND EVERYTHING LIKE THIS. SIR, YOUR THREE MINUTES ARE UP. OH, I'M SORRY SIR. I KNOW I, IT'S MUCH, BUT LET'S HAVE YOUR, LET'S HAVE YOUR WIFE COME UP. DOES, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING? YEAH, IT'S OKAY. SO MARIA MELENDRES. HI, GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. YOU HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO MELENDRES AND, AND THE ADDRESS IS THE SAME. 93 10 MAGNOLIA, 1983 YEARS OLD. ALRIGHT, WELL TELL US WHAT YOU THINK. WELL, THE MAIN THING, BELIEVE ME AND HONEST TO GOD, I LIVE IN CALIFORNIA, NEVER PROBLEMS WITH THE NEIGHBORS. I LIVE TO EL PASO, TEXAS. WE LIVE TO HOUSE HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. NOW WE LIVE WITH MY SON-IN-LAW AND MY DAUGHTER-IN-LAW. 'CAUSE WE ALL, BUT ANYWAY, UM, WITH THIS PEOPLE, THE NEIGHBORS, VERY GOOD NEIGHBORS. I USED TO BE BABYSIT CITY. THOSE KIDS, THEY CALL ME A GRANDMA. BUT SINCE THEY AND THESE PEOPLE TOO MUCH PROBLEM BECAUSE, UH, I DON'T KNOW, THEY HAVE DIFFERENT MANNER YOU CAN CALL OTHER NEIGHBORS, NEVER PROBLEMS. AND I'M AFRAID, HONEST TO GOD. 'CAUSE I USED TO LEAVE BORDER AND BE AT THE FRONT TO GET THE MAILMAN OR GET THE, WE HAD THE MEDICATION BY THE MAILMAN. MY HUSBAND AND MYSELF SAID I'LL GO GET IT. BUT I NOW, I'M AFRAID TO GO BECAUSE THE YOUNG GUY, THEY CAN COME AND SCARE ME. YOU KNOW, I'M OLD LADY. SO IN ONE WAY I FEEL LIKE, I FEEL LIKE AFRAID TO LIVE, TO GO OUTSIDE. I NEVER LIVE IN THIS COUNTRY TO WITH FEAR. BUT NOW I DO BECAUSE I KNOW HIS, UH, SCHIZOPHRENIA OR SOMETHING IN THE MINE AND HE'S A YOUNG BOY AND ME, IMAGINE IF I DO WATER MY FLOWERS AT THE FRONT AND HE CAN SHOCK ME AND MY HUSBAND AND MY SON-IN-LAW AND MY DAUGHTER AND THE LITTLE BOY AT SCHOOL. I MEAN, I DON'T WANNA BE IN, IN, IN DANGERS. SO LIKE I REPEAT MYSELF. I NEVER HAVE PROBLEMS WENT NOWHERE. I CAN GET THE NAMES, I CAN GET THE NEIGHBORHOOD VERY GOOD, NEVER IN MY LIFE. SO NOW IT'S A PROBLEM. I'M AFRAID, HONEST TO GOD, I'M AFRAID TO GO OUT THE FRONT TO GET THE MAIL, THROW THE TRASH AWAY, OR SIT DOWN AND DO MY, UM, AND BORDER. 'CAUSE THAT'S MY, MY HOBBY. SO I DUNNO, LIKE I REPUT MYSELF, THE OWNERS REAL NICE PEOPLE. I CAN SEE THE LETTER OF THE LITTLE KIDS CALL ME GRANDMA AND A BABYSIT CITY AND EVERYTHING. BUT NOW WITH THE RENTERS, THAT'S THE ONE THAT GIVE YOU A LOT OF PRO UH, PROBLEMS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND GOD BLESS YOU. GOT IT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER, UH, FOLLOW UP FROM THE BOARD? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, SO, UM, AS WE'VE, AS WE WERE EXPLAINING, UH, THE, THE, THE FENCE DOES HAVE TO BE REMOVED APPROXIMATELY FIVE OR SIX FEET BEHIND THE SIDEWALK TO KEEP IT OFF THE CITY PROPERTY. UM, BUT THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY CHANGES TO WHAT'S, UH, TO THE MOTIONS BEFORE TODAY. DOES THAT CHANGE THE CLEAR VISION MOTION? OKAY. SO WITH THAT, UH, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO CLOSE WITH, WE'RE READY TO MOVE ON TO A MOTION. OKAY, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS ONE? OKAY, I CAN DO IT IF NO ONE WANTS ONE. [01:45:03] UH, LET'S SEE. ITEM NUMBER NINE. UH, WE'LL START OFF WITH THE, UH, WITH THE FENCE, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 25 DASH 1 0 3 2 3 8 AND MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. GRANTED REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT FENCE SITE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT PRIVACY FENCE TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT FRONT YARD PRIVACY FENCE SITUATED 93 11 93 10. APOLOGIZE, MAGNOLIA GROVE. APPLICANT BEING SOWELL GONZALEZ BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE PRIVACY'S WILL NOT SIGNIFICANTLY, SIGNIFICANTLY LIMIT VISIBILITY ACROSS THE FRONT YARD OF THE STREETSCAPE AND WOULD STILL PROMOTE, UH, A SENSE OF COMMUNITY THAT IS TYPICAL OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED. THE PROFE THE PROPOSED FENCE DOES APPEAR TO SERVE THE PUBLIC WELFARE AS IT WOULD MAINTAIN THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER ASSOCIATED WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY THE PROPOSED SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS FENCE WILL MAINTAIN SUFFICIENT VISUAL OPENNESS OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY'S FRONT YARD SPACE. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION, WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AS IT WOULD NOT, AS IT WOULD MAINTAIN SUFFICIENT VISUAL OPENNESS OF THE PROPERTY AS IT IS LIMITED TO THE EASTERN SIDE. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR REGULATIONS HERE AND ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THIS REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT AS IT WOULD MAINTAIN A SENSE OF COMMUNITY ESSENTIAL FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. AND JUST TO CLARIFY THAT, THIS IS FOR A, UM, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. THE THREE FOOT IS FOR THE WEST SIDE OF THE FRONT PROPERTY, UH, END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER AMANDA. SO I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, BECAUSE IF YOU TAKE, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU LOOK AT GOOGLE MAPS AND YOU ZOOM BACK A LITTLE BIT, THIS, THIS AREA IS NOT REALLY A THROUGHPUT. IT HAS A VERY MINOR IN AND OUT. AND SO, UM, SO I DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA BE THAT DETRIMENTAL TO THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR TO TRAFFIC FLOW OR A VISUALNESS. UM, AND THE FACT THAT IT'S GONNA BE MOVED OFF OF THE CITY PROPERTY MOVED BACK ABOUT FIVE FEET. UH, THAT I'M PERFECTLY FINE WITH IT. COMMISSIONER MANNA, UM, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. UM, AND SO JUST AS MAYBE, SORRY, I STILL MAYBE A DIALOGUE WITH THE CITY HERE. SO ARE THERE ANY OPTIONS TO PROTECT, UH, THE METER THAT CAN BE DONE BY RIGHT, OR, OR AS A CITIZEN THERE THAT THEY CAN ADD TO, YOU KNOW, PROTECT THAT METER? 'CAUSE THAT'S KIND OF PART OF THE DIALOGUE OF WHY THE FENCE IS ALREADY WHERE IT IS. SO THEY CAN REQUEST, UH, TO BUILD ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE, UH, PLAN OR THE PLAN DEPARTMENT'S REAL ESTATE OFFICE, BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE LIMITED TO THREE FEET IF THAT'S APPROVED. WELL, AS FAR AS THE METER, UM, SAWS DOES HAVE, UH, A METAL METER BOX TYPICALLY ON RESIDENTIAL. THEY'RE NOT THE IRON ONES UNLESS YOU'RE LIKE, YOU KNOW, ON THE CONCRETE. SO I GUESS I COULD ASK, BUT THAT SAW IS PROPERTY. IT'S UP TO THEM. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. YEP. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? UH, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. CHAIR ORIAN? YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER RE BONIS? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BEDA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION PASSES 10 TO ZERO. UH, NOW WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO THE CLEAR VISION ASPECT OF IT. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 25 DASH OH 3 0 2 3 8, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE IN THE MINIMUM OF 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION SITUATED AT 93 10 MAGNOLIA GROVE, APPLICANT BEING SAUL GONZALEZ. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PROPOSED VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS IT DOES NOT COM COMPROMISE TRAFFIC OR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY. SITE OBSERVATIONS INDICATE THAT THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL STILL PROVIDES ADEQUATE SITE DISTANCE FOR VEHICLES ENTERING AND EXITING THE DRIVEWAY. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE OF PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS UNIQUE TO THE SITE THAT LIMIT THE ABILITY TO EXPAND THE CLEAR VISION AREA WITHOUT SUBSTANTIAL LOSS OF FUNCTION. FUNCTIONAL FENCE AREA. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE PROPOSED ENCROACHMENT INTO THE MINIMUM CLEAR VISION AREA IS NOT SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH [01:50:01] TO IMPEDE TRAFFIC OR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY NOR HINDER MAINTENANCE ISSUES. FOUR. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE SUCH VARIANCES DO NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. GRANTING THIS VARIANCE HAS NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND INJURE THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES AS ADJACENT PROPERTIES RETAIN FULL FUNCTIONALITY AND NO TRAFFIC IMPACTS OR CIRCULATION CONFLICTS WILL RESULT BY GRANTING THIS VARIANCE. SIX, THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER, THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR ITS VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE NEED FOR THE VARIANCE STEMS FROM UNIQUE EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS SUCH AS PLACEMENT OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND AN ERROR LOT THAT LIMIT THE ABILITY TO MEET THE 15 FOOT REQUIREMENT. AND A MOTION SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, YES, UH, CHAIR OREN, IT WAS A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE THAT YOU READ TO ALLOW FOR A 10 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION, CORRECT? UH, I I READ IT, UH, AS IT WAS IN THE, IT SAID, YEAH, THIS, THIS THE, UH, SUGGESTED MOTION SAID A REQUEST FOR A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE AND MINIMUM 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION. OKAY, PERFECT. THAT'S CORRECT. ALRIGHT, SO JUST, JUST CLARIFYING. THANK YOU. YOU GOT IT. UH, SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. UM, AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF ON A SHORT STREET THAT THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF A MINOR CIRCULATION AREA. IT'S NOT A LOT OF TRAFFIC GOING IN AND OUT OF THERE. I DON'T SEE IT AS A, AS A TRUE, UH, HAZARD. AS, AS IF IT WAS A MAJOR STREET, UH, MAIN STREET IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND BY MOVING IT BACK THE FIVE FEET BEHIND THE SIDEWALK, I THINK, UH, EVERYTHING WILL BE ALL RIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONER MANO, UM, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, SO DID I UNDERSTAND THAT A THREE FOOT BI, UH, THREE FOOT FENCE WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN FRONT OF THIS PROPERTY ALONG THE SIDEWALK? UH, BEHIND THE SIDEWALK FOR ABOUT FIVE FEET IS CITY PROPERTY. THEY CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING THERE WITHOUT AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY. SO ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE SEE, WHERE THE CHAIN LINK FENCES ARE ABUTTING THE SIDEWALKS, THOSE ARE, THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE. BUT ALSO THERE'S A, UH, SOME OF THOSE OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS, THE STREETS ARE NARROWER. SOME OF THE PROPERTY LINES START AT THE BACK OF SIDEWALK. IT JUST DEPENDS, YOU KNOW. OKAY. SO I GUESS I, THAT'S, I'M LEARNING THIS FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY, SO IT'S . YEAH. AND I THINK SOMETHING THAT AS WE SEE MORE OF THESE IN THE FUTURE, STAFF WILL HAVE TO VERIFY THE DEFENSE IS INDEED ON THEIR PROPERTY AND NOT ON STATS IN PROPERTY. CORRECT. AND WE'RE DOING THAT BY, UM, VERIFYING ON THE PLAT, UH, AS WE RESEARCH THESE TO VERIFY THE RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH AND KIND OF DETERMINE WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE IS FROM THERE. OBVIOUSLY WITH SOME MARGIN OF ERROR, WE'RE NOT SURVEYORS OUT THERE, BUT, AND I'LL JUST MAKE A STATEMENT. IF YOU SEE A SIDEWALK THAT'S OFFSET FROM THE CURB, USUALLY THAT IS THE BACK OF THE, THAT IS THE PROPERTY LINE AT THE BACK OF SIDEWALK. SO THAT, I MEAN, IN SOME CASES IT IS ON THE RIGHT AND I THINK WE HAVE SEEN SOME WHERE IT'S PROBABLY ON CITY PROPERTY. SO THAT'S A GOOD POINT. AND, AND, AND THERE IS AN OPTION THEN FOR IF, IF A CITIZEN WANTED TO GO THERE, THEY, THEY GO TO THE CITY AND THEN PUT IN A, A REQUEST THAT THAT'S WHAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT THROUGH THEIR REAL ESTATE OFFICE TO GET A, UH, ENCROACHMENT PERMIT, ESSENTIALLY TO HAVE SOME SORT OF CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY. UM, THAT'S AN OPTION THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN EXPLORE FOR THIS CASE. OKAY. OR REACH OUT TO SAWS AS CHAIR ORIENTED. YEAH, AND I'VE ACTUALLY DONE SOME OF THOSE. YOU YOU, THEY CANVAS IT TO LIKE 14 DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS. IT'S, IT'S A INCREDIBLY THOROUGH REVIEW AND IT HAS TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL. IT'S A BIG DEAL. YEAH. THANK YOU. I I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR, SO THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. ALRIGHT. SO, UH, IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMISSIONER COMMENTS, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE CHAIR ORIAN. YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES. COMMISSIONER I BARNES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BEES? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. OH, THAT'S IT. USED TO HEARING MY AFTER THE END. SO MOTION PASSES. CONGRATULATIONS. I, I DID WANT TO, UH, JUST ONE QUICK STATEMENT. I NOTICED YOU HAVE A POOL IN YOUR BACKYARD, SO YOU THEORETICALLY IN YOUR BACKYARD CAN HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE BY RIGHT. IF YOU WANTED TO, JUST SO YOU KNOW, IN THE BACKYARD. OKAY. SO WHAT, YOU JUST NEED THAT BACK, OR THE SIDES IN THE REAR, YOU CAN GO UP TO EIGHT FOOT BY. RIGHT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN TALK TO STAFF. JUST THOUGHT YOU MIGHT WANT TO KNOW. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER 10, UNLESS SOMEBODY NEEDS A BREAK QUESTION. YEP. WE'RE GOING TO, I'M SORRY. WE'RE GONNA TAKE A SHORT BREAK. SEE Y'ALL BACK HERE AT THREE O'CLOCK. SIX MINUTES. SIX. . THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IT'S 3 0 2. WE ARE BACK IN SESSION. ITEM NUMBER 10. [01:55:11] YEAH. . GIVE US A MOMENT. WE'RE GETTING OUR TEAM. YEAH. DO YOU WANNA SKIP TO ANOTHER ONE? MINE IS ONE. ITEM NUMBER 12. ONE ONE MOMENT. OKAY. 13 OR 14? TWO. SIX SEVEN. OKAY. THIS IS BO OA, UH, 2 5 1 0 3 0 0 2 6 7. THE APPLICANT IS RICARDO NAVARRO. THE COUNCIL DISTRICT IS TWO. LOCATION IS 3 0 5, 3 0 7, AND 3 0 9 PORTER STREET. UH, THE ZONING IS RM FOUR AND THE REQUEST IS A VARIANCE FROM THE RM FOUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON EACH LOT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTS OF THREE DISTINCT LOTS LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF PORTER STREET AND SOUTH PALAMA STREET. THE APPLICANT HAS RECORDED AN IRREVOCABLE INGRESS, EGRESS EASEMENT ACROSS THE THREE LOTS. TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT TWO SEPARATE DUPLEX STRUCTURES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE SHARED EASEMENT AND ON EACH LOT. THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD CONSIST OF FOUR DWELLING UNITS ON EACH LOT AND 12 DWELLING UNITS TOTAL. CONSIDERING THE ZONING DESIGNATION, LOT SIZE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT THE RM FOUR DEVELOPMENT ON EACH LOT BE CONTAINED WITHIN A SINGLE STRUCTURE TO PROCEED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AS PROPOSED. THE APPLICANT REQUESTED VARIANCE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICT, MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTAL STANDARDS FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALLOW SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON EACH LOT. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. THIS IS THE PLAT THAT WAS RECORDED IN 2023. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE AIR, AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS AN ISLAND BO A 2 503 67 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDING OF FACTS, THERE'S SU UH, SU SUFFICIENT SPACE ON THE PROPERTY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SINGLE STRUCTURE ON EACH LOT TO SUPPORT THE SAME OVERALL DWELLING UNIT DENSITY. AND THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD REPRESENT A CONSPICUOUS DEPARTURE FROM THE ESTABLISHED CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS LARGELY MADE UP OF DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. WE NAILED 26 NOTICES. WE GOT FIVE IN FAVOR IN ONE OPPOSITION. THE DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, RESPONDED IN SUPPORT. OKAY. AND THIS IS THE LETTER IN SUPPORT WE RECEIVED. AND THIS IS THE APPLICANT SUPPLIED, UH, RESIDENT FEEDBACK. AND THE ONE LETTER OF, UH, DENIAL, THAT'S NOT IN SUPPORT. THERE'S TWO OF THEM THERE, BUT THERE'S ONLY ONE THAT'S WITHIN THE 200 FEET. OKAY. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. GREAT. UH, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. THANK YOU. UM, MY NAME'S RICARDO NAVARRO. UM, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE EASEMENT WAS THERE BEFORE. UH, MY CLIENT, UH, BOUGHT THE PROPERTY . SO BASICALLY WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH WHAT WE GOT. RIGHT. UH, THE PROJECT, UM, AS, OOPS, SORRY. THANK YOU. SO WE PUT TOGETHER A LITTLE PRESENTATION THAT ACTUALLY RESEMBLES A LOT OF WHAT HE SHOWED. UM, IT'S, IS THAT IT? SORRY. NOW IT'S NOT LOADING. UM, BUT IT'S JUST SHOWING AERIAL SHOTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE LOT IN QUESTION. AND OBVIOUSLY THAT EASEMENT IN THE MIDDLE DOES NOT ALLOW US TO REALLY BUILD ONE FOURPLEX. THAT'S WHY WE'RE REQUESTING TO HAVE TWO DUPLEXES ON THE SAME LOT. RIGHT. UH, BASICALLY HAVING THE SAME DENSITY, JUST A DIFFERENT CONFIGURATION. OKAY. SO [02:00:01] I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, PROVIDE MY THOUGHTS ON THIS REAL QUICK TO THE BOARD. UH, SO IN 2022, UH, THIS WAS NOT A PROBLEM, AND THAT'S WHY THE PLAT WAS PROBABLY APPROVED AND PROCESSED IN THIS MANNER. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THERE, THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER PROJECTS, UH, THAT WERE PLATTED PRIOR TO THE 2023 CHANGE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. AND WHAT THEY DID WAS THEY APPLIED FOR VESTED RIGHTS TO SAY, HEY, THIS IS MY, MY, UH, PROJECT PREDATES 2023. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SEPARATE UNITS. UH, THE CITY HAS IN THE PAST REJECTED THOSE, BUT IN 2024, AN APPLICANT WENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, OF WHICH I SIT ON AS WELL. AND THEY APPEALED THE DECISION OF THE CITY, UH, FOR A PROPERTY OVER OFF OF A MACARTHUR, UH, STREET OR AVENUE OR WHATEVER THAT IS. AND AFTER DELIBERATION, UH, AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IT WAS UNANIMOUS THAT IT, IT WAS IN FACT SUSCEPTIBLE TO VESTED RIGHTS. SO IN THEORY, YOU THEORETICALLY COULD APPLY FOR VESTED RIGHTS AND GET THEM AND NOT HAVE TO COME HERE. OKAY. VESTED RIGHTS COST A THOUSAND BUCKS. THIS COSTS $600 OR WHATEVER, OR MAYBE 400 IF IT'S RESIDENTIAL. SO THIS IS A LESS EXPENSIVE AVENUE. I JUST WANTED EVERYONE HERE TO KNOW THAT, THAT IF THIS DOESN'T PASS TODAY, UM, THERE IS, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, HISTORY ABOUT THIS OTHER PATHWAY FOR YOU TO ACCOMPLISH THE EXACT SAME THING. THANK YOU. JUST SO YOU KNOW. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO, UM, THERE WAS A NOTE, UH, FROM THE, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, TALKED ABOUT THREE STORY VERSUS TWO STORY. AND SO, SO, SO THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE. SO YOU'RE GONNA BE COMPLIANT WITH REGARDS TO WHAT THAT STATES, CORRECT? YES. IF WE ACTUALLY SCROLL DOWN ON THE PRESENTATION, WE HAD A MEETING WITH THE HOA AND THEY EXPRESSED THEIR CONCERNS, WHICH WE ADDRESSED BY REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE BUILDINGS TO TWO STORIES. UH, I MEAN, THESE ARE PRELIMINARY PLANS OF COURSE, BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T DONE A FULL SET. IF WE WEREN'T GONNA BE ALLOWED TO DO IT, IT WOULD'VE BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF A WASTE OF TIME. UH, BUT THIS IS THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN. UH, IF YOU SCROLL A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN, THERE'S A COLOR RENDERING OF IT, WHICH WOULD SHOW KIND OF, UM, WHAT WE EXPECT THEM TO LOOK LIKE ONCE THEY'RE FINISHED. SO WHAT SIZE WOULD BE, WHAT, WHAT NUMBER OF STORIES WOULD BE PERMITTED BY, RIGHT? YEAH. WELL, WHAT'S YOUR ZONING? IT'S RM FOUR. SO RM FOUR CAN GO THREE STORIES. MM-HMM . OKAY. SO, SO CAN WE ADD, UH, AS SUBMITTED THEN, OR AS WELL, IT'S NOT REALLY SUBMITTED. SO, WELL, THE PROBLEM IS THAT, THAT THAT SECTION THAT ALLOWS YOU TO, THAT SAYS IF YOU'RE WITHIN 50 FEET OF A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE YOU HAVE TO GO DOWN TO THE CODE, ACTUALLY SAYS YOU GO DOWN TO THE, TO THE HEIGHTS THAT ARE, THAT ARE ALLOWED FOR THE ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. HE'S COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY ROOM FOUR. THEY ALL ALLOW 30 FEET. SO WOULDN'T HE BE ABLE TO DO 30 FEET THREE STORIES ANYWAY? CORRECT. THERE IS NO RESTRICTION FOR HIM TO GO. YOU, YOU CAN DO THAT BY RIGHT. NO ONE CAN STOP YOU. YEAH. IT'S JUST TO COMPLY WITH THE HOA REQUESTS AND THEIR CONCERNS IS, AND THAT, THAT'S GENEROUS OF YOU. SO THANK YOU. THAT'S VERY GENEROUS AND VERY COMMENDABLE. ALRIGHT, IS THERE, UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, ANYONE TIME TO SPEAK? ANY VOICEMAILS? HEARING NONE, NO PUBLIC COMMENT. PARDON ME? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT, LISTEN, LOOKING FOR A MOTION. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 5 1 0 3 0 0 2 6 7. I'M MOVED THAT THE BOARD ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE VARIANCE FROM THE RM FOUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARD TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO SEPARATE STRUCTURES ON EACH LOT SITUATED AT 3 0 5, 3 0 7, AND 3 0 9 PORTER STREET, APPLICANT BEING RICARDO NOVATO. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF PROVISIONS OF THE EDC AS AMENDMENT WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, YOU FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. IN THIS CASE, THERE WOULD BE ADEQUATE SPACE TO DEVELOP TWO MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURES ON EACH LOT WHILE MAINTAINING, BUILDING, SCALING AND MASSING THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREAS. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, THE RAISED TOPOGRAPHY OF THE PROPERTY MAKES CREATING DRIVEWAY ACCESS FROM PORTER STREET FOR EACH LOT UNNECESSARILY CHALLENGING. THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED CONFIGURATION TO INCLUDE A SHARED DRIVEWAY ACCESS ALLEVIATES THIS CONCERN. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPEAR OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. SUCH VARIANCE WOULD BE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS ALLOWING THE DEVELOPMENT ACROSS MULTIPLE STRUCTURES ON EACH LOT WOULD NOT HARM NOR INJURE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND WOULD CONFORM WITH THE ESTABLISHED SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THE VARIANCE, WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS, UH, 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 CORRY PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH IS PROPERTY IS LOCATED GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE ADJACENT, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, AS A DEVELOPMENT [02:05:01] WILL BE COMPATIBLE IN SCALE AND DENSITY WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. SIX, THE APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THIS VARIANCE SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN DISTRICT IN WHICH HIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER, THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE INHERENT SIZE AND PHYSICAL LAYOUT OF THE LOTS WHICH PREDATE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND ARE NOT THE RESULT OF THE OWNER'S ACTIONS OR GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THIS DISTRICT. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, UM, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. UM, I THINK, UM, AS CHAIR, UH, BROUGHT OUT WITH REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, THIS WOULD HA THIS, THIS IS GONNA BE ALLOWED, YOU KNOW, MORE OR LESS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. AND SO, SO THIS LOOKS LIKE A MORE APPROPRIATE, UH, UH, SOLUTION FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. AND DENVER, UH, HEIGHTS, THANK YOU FOR REACHING OUT TO THEM, YOU KNOW, IS YOU KNOW THAT YOU'RE WORKING WITH THEM AND SO THEY'RE IN FAVOR OF THIS. SO I HAVE NO REASON TO BE IN, UM, UH, NOT IN AGREEMENT. SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER STEVENS. I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER MANNA. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. I THINK, UM, SEEING ADDITIONAL UNITS AND DENSITY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS GREAT. SO LIKE I SAID, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? MAN? SO ALSO, YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT IT UNIQUE THAT THE, THE, UH, STAFF SHOWED A PICTURE THAT SAYS HOW OUT OF CHARACTER WAS WHERE EVERY SINGLE HOUSE NEXT TO IT WAS A CONFIGURATION LIKE THIS OR BIGGER. SO, SO, BUT JUST AS A NOTE, , I, I'M JUST GONNA CLOSE BY ADDING THAT. IF YOU GO DOWN PORTER, THEY, THEY'RE BUILDING ON 20 FOOT WIDE LOTS. UH, AND IT'S, IT IS, YEAH. THERE'S SOME GOOD DENSITY OUT THERE. ALL RIGHT. GREAT. UH, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE COMMISSIONER MEN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER E BON, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BEES? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT. MOTION PASSES. 10 TO ZERO. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YEP. ITEM 10, ITEM NUMBER 10 I. ITEM 10 IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 2 51. THE APPLICANT BEING DON B MCDONALD ARCHITECTS IN COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE AT 1 1 6 EAST AGARITA AVENUE. THE ZONING IS R FOUR. UH, AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A CARPORT IN THE REAR YARD WITH A FOUR INCH SIDE SETBACK LIMITED TO THE REAR 31 FEET OF THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED THE INSTALLATION OF A CARPORT IN THE REAR YARD OF THE PROPERTY TO BE ACCESSED THROUGH THE ALLEY. AND THE PROPOSED CARPORT WILL BE ATTACHED TO AN EXISTING STONE WALL, WHICH IS, UH, WHICH STANDS FOUR INCHES OFF THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO PERMIT A SIDE SETBACK REDUCTION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED CARPORT. UH, NO CONSTRUCTION HAS BEGUN AND NO PERMIT APPLICATIONS HAVE YET BEEN FILED. UH, SHOWN HERE IS A SITE PLAN OF THE DEVELOPMENT. ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS THE FULL, UH, VIEW OF THAT PROPERTY WITH EAST AGARITA BEING ON THE FAR RIGHT SIDE THERE. AND YOU CAN SEE THE BLOWN UP VERSION. UH, THERE IS THAT EXISTING STONE WALL, UH, WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING THAT CARPORT, WHICH THE, YOU KNOW, CARPORT ROOF WILL BE AFFIXED TOO. AND HERE'S KIND OF A BETTER VIEW OF THAT BLOWN UP PORTION. UH, SHOWN HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM EAST AGARITA. AND THIS IS THE REAR YARD AREA WHERE THE CARPORT IS PROPOSED. THAT'S THAT BACK FENCE LINE ABUTTING THE ALLEY TO THE REAR. UH, THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA. THIS IS THE ALLEY ENTRANCE AND FURTHER DOWN THE ALLEY. THAT'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THERE ON THE RIGHT SIDE. AND AGAIN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THAT BROWN, UH, FENCE THERE IN THE MIDDLE. AND HERE'S MORE OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. THERE IS ANOTHER KIND OF, UH, ACCESS WAY BEING USED RIGHT ACROSS THE ALLEY. JUST A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, UM, TO THE EAST. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR A CARPORT SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO OA DASH TWO FIVE DASH 1 3 20 51 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE VARIANCE IS CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THERE WOULD BE INSUFFICIENT SPACE TO SUPPORT THE MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE. AND TWO, THERE IS SUFFICIENT SPACE WITHIN THE REAR YARD TO SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SMALLER CAR PORT WITHOUT ENCROACHING INTO THE MINIMUM REQUIRED SITE SETBACK AREA. STAFF MAILED 28 NOTICES FIVE WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR, UH, ZERO ONE OPPOSITION. THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND, AND THE SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. SHOWN HERE IS THE SUPPORT RECEIVED BY STAFF AND THE, UH, SURVEY [02:10:01] GIVEN OUT TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS. UH, AT THE TOP THERE. AND HERE'S MORE LETTERS OF SUPPORT THAT WE RECEIVED. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. UH, JUST, UH, THIS CASE LOOKS VERY FAMILIAR. WAS THIS A RE ADVERTISEMENT OR A CONTINUANCE? THIS WAS READVERTISED READVERTISED, UM, BECAUSE WE DID NOT RE ADVERTISE WITH THAT CONNECTION TO THE WALL. AND THEN IT WAS GONNA GO TO THE, UH, THAT LAST ONE THAT JUST GOT CANCELED JANUARY 26TH. SO THAT'S WHAT I REMEMBER THEN. MM-HMM . GREAT. IS THAT THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. HI. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT THE, YOUR PROJECT. I'M, I'M DON MCDONALD. UM, THIS IS REPLACING A STRUCTURE THAT EXISTED HERE UP UNTIL IT FELL DOWN IN MAYBE 1984. AND, UM, AND ALL THAT'S REMAINING IS A TWO HOUR FIREWALL TO THE RIGHT. AND, AND SO WE'RE LOOKING TO PUT THIS, UM, STRUCTURE IN THE SAME LOCATION AS IN THE ORIGINAL BUILDING. UH, THERE ARE IN THE, I JUST COUNTED, UH, THERE ARE FIVE BUILDINGS THAT ABUT THE PROPERTY LINE WITH ADJACENT FIREWALLS ON THIS ALLEY ALONE. OH, WOW. AND THERE ARE A DOZEN IN THIS BLOCK THAT, UH, ABUT THE ALLEY. SO WE'RE MORE NORMAL THAN ABNORMAL IN THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION. AND IT'S THE ONLY, IT'S REALLY THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY TO PUT, UM, IT'S A 20 FOOT WIDE CARPORT. IT'S THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY TO, TO, UM, TO DO THAT ON THIS PROPERTY. ALRIGHT. WELL, IS THERE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? OH, ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA STAFF, UM, MAKES THE ASSERTION THAT THERE'S AN ALTERNATE USE A WAY TO PUT A GARAGE. DO YOU SEE AN ALTERNATE BLADE? WE HAVEN'T FOUND ONE. I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S A TWO CAR GARAGE, RIGHT. UH, CARPORT. AND IT, IT EXISTED PREVIOUSLY AND THERE'S NO OTHER PLACE ON THIS PROPERTY TO DO THAT. IT'S NOT ADJACENT TO A PROPERTY LINE. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? ANY VOICEMAILS ELSE? UH, NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. WELL, UNLESS THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD, WE'LL MOVE ON TO A MOTION ACTION. ALL RIGHT. LOOKING FOR A MOTION. OH, ZONA. I'LL TAKE COMMISSIONER ZUNA. UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 5 1. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRAND REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOUR FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW CARPORT IN THE REAR YARD WITH A FOUR SIDE SETBACK LIMITED TO THE REAR 31 FEET OF THE WEST PROPERTY LINE, SITUATED AT 1 1 6 EAST AGARITA AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING DAWN BB MCDONALD ARCHITECTS, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINE, SO THAT SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN A NECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT WHEN THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST AS THERE WOULD REMAIN SUFFICIENT SPACE TO SUPPORT THE MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE. 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 AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE EXISTING STONE WALL WOULD MITIGATE THE RISK OF DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY FROM FIRE SPREAD OR WATER RUNOFF. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD SUPPORT THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS A TYPICAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS FROM THE CROWDING STRUCTURES ALONG A SHARED PROPERTY LINE ARE MITIGATED BY THE EXISTING STONE WALL, FOR THE VARIANCE, WOULD NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THOSES OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. IF THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED, NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH VARIS WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PERFORMING PROPERTY. THEY'RE ALSO THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. SUCH VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY, NOR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THE CARPORT HAS PROPOSED IN THE REAR YARD AND BEHIND THE EXISTING STONEWALL SIXTH APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH VARI SAW IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED APPLY TO THE OWNER, FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE SAW IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE, UH, LIMITED SPACE IN THE REAR YARD OF THE PROPERTY FOR THE PLACE OF THE CARPORT. THE SPACE LIMITATION REQUIRES THE CARPORT, UTILIZE THE EXISTING STONEWALL AS A STRUCTURAL ELEMENT, AND MOVING, UH, THE, THIS WALL FURTHER FROM THE PROPERTY LINE WOULD BE UNREASONABLE. AND A MOTION SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS. COMMISSIONER ZUMAN. YEAH. SO I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ. UM, THE STAFF PROVIDED, UH, EV UH, TESTIMONY AND SHOWN THAT THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS MOST AFFECTED ARE ALL IN SUPPORT OF THE STRUCTURE AS PROPOSED. THAT GARAGE HAD BEEN THERE FOR YEARS AND YEARS, UH, MOST RECENTLY JUST DILAPIDATING AND THEY'RE REPLACING AND EXISTING, UH, CONDITION. AND THE THIRD, UM, THEY'RE FIXING TO AN EXISTING STRUCTURE OF THAT WALL. SO THERE'S REALLY, UM, NO, I MEAN THE, THE WALL'S THERE ALREADY, AND SO THAT WE'RE MERELY FIXING THE, THE GARAGE STRUCTURE TO THAT WALL. AND SO ANY MAINTENANCE THERE WOULD'VE ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED, UH, WITH, WITH THAT WALL IN ITS PRESENT CONDITION. SO, [02:15:01] ALL RIGHT. SUPPORTING US RED. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER STEVENS. I CONCUR WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER OZUNA. UM, AS MR. MCDONALD STATED, IT'S REPLACING A PREVIOUSLY EXISTING STRUCTURE AND BENEFITS FROM THIS BEEFY TWO HOUR MASONRY WALL. AND IT APPEARS TO BE THE ONLY PLACE TO LOCATE A TWO CAR GARAGE ON THE SITE. SO I'LL BE IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MANNA? YES, COMMISSIONER MANNA. AND I WOULD SAY THAT, UM, MONTE VISTA, UM, WOULD WEIGH IN IF THEY HAD AN ISSUE WITH THIS, AND THEY DID NOT. SO, SO THEY'RE IN FAVOR. SO I'M IN FAVOR. ALRIGHT, AWESOME. UM, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE, UH, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER BEES? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. THUMBS UP. THUMB THUMBS. S THUMBS DOWN THUMB. YEAH. YES. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR THE FINES OF FACT. MOTION PASSES. 10 TO ZERO. UH, CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. WE ARE ON ITEM NUMBER 13. MOVING ALONG. MOVING ALONG BO OA TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 7 7. THE APPLICANT IS JUAN ERO. THE COUNCIL DISTRICT IS 10. THE LOCATION IS 3 2 7 RAINBOW DRIVE. UH, THE ZONING IS R FIVE AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A FOUR FOOT SIX INCH VARI VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A SIX INCH SIDE SETBACK, INCLUDING A TWO FOOT OVERHANG LIMITED TO THE NORTH SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BLOCK FACE ALONG RAINBOW DRIVE BETWEEN EISENHOWER ROAD IN DEERWOOD DRIVE. THE DEVELOPMENT STARTED WITHOUT A PERMIT WAS CITED BY CODE COMPLIANCE FOR BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A PLAN FOR RENOVATION FOR A TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. AND DURING THE PERMITTING PROCESS PLAN REVIEW DETERMINED THAT A VARIANCE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BUILD WITHIN THE SETBACK. PRIOR TO RENOVATION, THE STRUCTURE MAINTAINED A SIMILAR SETBACK THAT WAS, UH, CREATED BY AN ATTACHED CARPORT. THE RENOVATION, UH, MAINTAINS THE CARPORT AND ADDS A LIVABLE AREA ABOVE IT. DUE TO THE EXTENT OF THE RENOVATION TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THE APPLICANT IS CONSIDERING IS CONSIDERED A NEW BILL AND MUST COMPLY WITH CURRENT CODE. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, AND I WANNA POINT OUT THAT THE APPLICANT CUT BACK THE, UM, OVERHANG ON THE SIDE BY A FOOT, AND I'LL SHOW THOSE PICTURES, UH, WHEN HE PRESENTS. NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AS YOU CAN SEE RIGHT HERE. UH, THIS IS THE ORIGINAL ONE. WE WENT OUT IN THE SITE, UH, SITE VISITS. THE NEW ONE IS CUT BACK ABOUT A FOOT, AND THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL ON BO A TWO FIVE DASH 1 0 3 0 0 2 7 7. BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THERE'S, UH, INSUFFICIENT SPACE WILL REMAIN TO ADEQUATELY MAINTAIN THE STRUCTURE AND INSUFFICIENT SPACE WILL REMAIN FOR THE PURPOSES OF WATER RUNOFF AND FIRE PROTECTION. 79. UM, NOTICES WERE MAILED EIGHT IN FAVOR. AND THEN BOTH OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE IN OPPOSITION. THE, UH, THIS IS THE SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, AND THIS IS AN EMAIL PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD DIRECTLY AFFECTED. AND THESE ARE THE TWO OPPOSITION LETTERS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. AND CAN YOU KEEP THOSE UP? ABSOLUTELY. AND, AND AGAIN, THESE WEREN'T IN THE PACKET UNFORTUNATELY, SO FOR SOME REASON. OKAY. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR THAT THEY'RE CUTTING BACK THE OVERHANG OF FOOT, DOES THAT MEAN THE REQUEST IS NOW FOR A A A A ONE FOOT LESSER VARIANCE? YEAH, I BELIEVE SO. YES. SO IT SHOULD BE ABOUT A ONE FOOT LESS VARIANCE. SO IT'LL NOW BE A THREE FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE TO ALLOW A FOOT AND A HALF TO INCLUDE A ONE FOOT OVERHANG. YES, SIR. IF EVERYONE CAUGHT THAT. OKAY, GREAT. ALL RIGHT. UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT, SO THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. ALL RIGHT. STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. IT'S JUAN SORIO. UH, WHAT WAS IT? UH, TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. OH, YES. SO, UM, I STARTED WITH THE, UM, WITH THIS PROJECT WE DID HAVE, UM, I, I KNOW IT SAYS THERE THAT WE DID NOT HAVE PERMITS IN PLACE. [02:20:01] WE'VE ALWAYS HAD PERMITS IN PLACE SINCE DAY ONE. UH, WE STARTED, UM, WE STARTED WITH OUR FIRST PERMIT, WHICH WAS A REMODEL. UH, THAT'S WHAT WE STARTED WITH, REMODELING THE HOUSE. UM, UH, WE REQUESTED, BASICALLY HAD A, UH, IT HAD A CAR, UH, CARPORT AT THE TIME, AND WE REQUESTED TO, UM, TURN IT INTO A CAR GARAGE. THAT WAS AT THE INITIAL TIME THAT WE, UH, REQUESTED THE PERMIT. WHEN WE CAME BACK, UM, THEY CAME BACK. THE CITY SAID, NO, YOU CANNOT HAVE THAT. YOU NEED A FIVE FOOT SETBACK, UM, REQUIREMENT. UM, AND OR YOU HAVE AN OPTION TO DO A THREE FOOT IF YOU DO A CARPORT AND, UH, FIVE FOOT IF YOU DO A CAR GARAGE. UH, THAT'S WHAT THEY GAVE ME AT THAT TIME. UM, CONSIDERING THAT WE HAD PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, BECAUSE IT WAS A ZERO LOT LINE BASED ON THE SURVEY, UH, INITIALLY, UM, THAT WAS THE INITIAL, UH, PROPOSED PROPOSAL THAT WE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY. UH, ONCE THEY DENIED IT, UH, UM, AND THEY SUGGESTED THE THREE FOOT, WE OPTED FOR THAT. UH, SO WE WENT AHEAD AND BUILT A CARPORT. UM, THE EXISTING SLAB MOVED BACK THE, THE, THE HOUSE. AND, UM, AND WE STARTED BUILDING AT THAT POINT WITH PERMIT IN PLACE. UM, THEREAFTER WE WENT UP, UH, INTO THE ATTIC TO BUILD OUR ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS. AND WE REALIZED, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT WHAT WE, IT WASN'T GIVING US WHAT WE NEEDED. SO AT THAT POINT, WE SUBMITTED A NEW APPLICATION FOR, UH, TO BE ABLE TO REMODEL AND ADD THE SECOND PART OF THE HOUSE. UM, WE HAD ALREADY STARTED, LIKE I, LIKE I SAID, WE WERE REMODELING THE HOUSE TURN, TRYING TO BUILD SOMETHING IN THE ATTIC. UH, THE CITY CAME BACK AND SAID, UM, YOU NEED A, A, A NEW CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. SO THEY BASICALLY WHI MY OLD PERMIT AND, UH, GAVE ME A BRAND NEW PERMIT FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. UM, ALL THAT, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THE, WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME, UH, THAT WE HAD ALREADY STARTED BUILDING THAT, UM, IT WAS APPROVED. WE DID GET THAT PERMIT, UM, TO CONTINUE CONSTRUCTION, UH, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT HERE. AND, UM, UH, WE PASSED OUR INSPECTIONS, OUR MECHANICALS. UH, BUT WHEN THE FRAMING CAME BY, UH, THE FRAMING INSPECTOR ASKED US FOR A, UM, UH, HE WANTED TO KNOW HOW WE WERE GONNA X-RAY THE, UH, NORTH SIDE OF THAT, OF THAT WALL, WHICH WE DID NOT HAVE ON, ON THE PLANTS. SO WE WENT BACK TO THE, UH, DRAWING BOARD AND, YOU KNOW, REDESIGNED THAT GAVE THEM WHAT, YOU KNOW, HOW WE WERE GOING TO PLANNING TO, UM, UH, PROTECT THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE. AT THAT POINT, THE, UH, CITY CAME BACK AND, UM, AND APPROVED IT. UH, WE SUBMITTED THAT, THAT PAPERWORK ALSO TO THE CITY. AND THEY WENT AHEAD AND APPROVED THAT. UM, HERE'S WHERE WE SUBMITTED WHAT WAS THE PLAN THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, AND BASED ON PER CODE, OF COURSE, UH, THEY APPROVED IT. AND, UM, THEY SAID, WELL, CONSIDERING THAT YOU'RE GONNA BE DOING THIS, NOW WE NEED YOU TO ENCLOSE YOUR CARPORT, UH, WHICH YOU KNOW, WAS ORIGINALLY A CARPORT. WE NEED YOU TO ENCLOSE IT AND WE NEED YOU TO CUT BACK ON THE SOFFIT, UH, TO ONE FOOT. SO WE COMPLIED WITH THAT. SO WE, WE'VE BEEN COMPLYING WITH EVERYTHING THAT THE CITY HAD BEEN ASKING US FOR, UM, UP TO THE POINT, UM, WHEN I CAME BACK TO THE CITY AND I SAID, HEY, OKAY, WE, WE WE'RE DONE WITH ALL THIS. CAN WE REQUEST OUR FRAMING INSPECTION ONCE AGAIN? AND THAT'S WHEN THEY TOLD ME, NO, NOW YOU NEED A VARIANCE. SO, AND, UM, THAT'S WHERE WE ARE HERE. SO, A QUICK QUESTION. THIS HOUSE WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT 1949. ACCORDING TO THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORDS, ARE YOU WIDENING THE HOUSE BEYOND THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT? WHINING THE HOUSE? YEAH. SO THE, THE, THE HOUSE THAT WAS THE OLD HOUSE THAT WAS THERE WHEN YOU FIRST GOT THERE, ARE YOU MAKING IT ANY WIDER? WIDER? NO. OKAY. SO YOU'RE STAYING IN THE CON, YOU'RE KEEPING THE PLACEMENT, YOU'RE JUST GOING UP TO STORE. YES, EXACTLY. SO WE BUILT, SO THE EXISTING HOUSE IS STILL IN PLACE. UM, WE STILL, THE, THE EXISTING CARPORT, WHAT WE DID IS WE BILLED ABOVE THE HOUSE AND THE CARPORT TO BE ABLE TO FIT, UH, WHAT WE NEEDED. OKAY. MANNA? YES. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO I'M CONFUSED 'CAUSE I'M LOOKING AT A PICTURE FROM 2022 AND THERE WAS A DIFFERENT HOUSE THERE. WAS THERE, OR AM I LOOKING AT THE WRONG PICTURE? WELL, THE, THE, THE RECORDS SHOW THAT ORIGINAL HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1949. GOT THAT. AND THEN WHEN DID YOU GUYS START DOING WORK AT THIS PROPERTY? WE STARTED IN 20, UM, LIKE APRIL, UH, MARCH, APRIL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT OF 2020, UH, 5 20 25. WHAT WAS THE DATE? SO, BUT I LOOK AT THE, SO IF YOU GO TO STREET VIEW MM-HMM . UM, AND SO, SO IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS A CARPORT AND A SEPARATION, A DRIVEWAY THERE. AND THE ORIGINAL HOUSE LOOKED LIKE IT WAS SEPARATED BY 10 FOOT. AND THEN, AND THEN NOW THIS HOUSE SITS HERE. UM, SO IT LOOKS LIKE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A NEW HOME THAT'S BEEN ADDED ON THIS LOT. IS THAT CORRECT? OH, NO. SO IT, IT IS STILL THE ORIGINAL HOUSE. SO, UH, ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE [02:25:01] WHERE YOU SEE THE, THE, THE BEGINNING OF THE CAR GARAGE, NOW THAT'S STILL THE ORIGINAL HOUSE. OKAY. SO, SO EVERYTHING TO THE, EVERYTHING ABOVE THAT GARAGE TO THE RIGHT IS NEW ADDITION TO THE HOME. OKAY. SO, UM, AND SO, SO THAT PART DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE. SO THAT'S AN ADD-ON THERE FROM, FROM THE ORIGINAL BUILD OF THE HOUSE, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. IT LOOKS LIKE THEY HAD A SLANT CARPORT. THAT'S THE, UH, THE ORIGINAL, THAT'S THE ORIGINAL WHEN WE PURCHASED IT THOUGH, IT, IT HAD THE, UH, CONCRETE SLAB ON IT ON THE RIGHT SIDE. UH, SO THAT'S, YEAH, THAT'S A WHAT'S ON THE COM, THE COMMUNITY MONITORS. THERE'S A SLANT CARPORT THAT LOOKS LIKE THEY, THEY NOW ENCLOSED IN, CORRECT. RIGHT. BUT THAT LOOKS LIKE, I MEAN, IS THAT CONCRETE ON THE BOTTOM OR IS THAT JUST GRAVEL? SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE CONCRETE. YEAH, THIS IS, UH, YEAH, THIS IS GRAVEL. YEAH. AND IF YOU GO FURTHER, YOU CAN SEE ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO THE BACKYARD THERE. AND SO, SO BASICALLY, UM, THEY BUILT A NEW STRUCTURE ALL THE WAY TO THE WALL THERE. UM, YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING. I I WAS TRYING TO FIND OUT THAT IF, IF YOU WIDEN THE HOME, DID YOU WIDEN THE FOUNDATION? AND IT LOOKS LIKE YOU DID? UH, NO, I DID NOT. UH, SO THIS, THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE IS STILL THERE, UH, WHEN WE BOUGHT IT, WHEN WE BOUGHT IT. SO YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE NOT BUILDING ANYTHING THAT'S AIR PLUS THE CONCRETE SLAB. SO YOU'RE NOT BUILDING ANYTHING WITH AIR CONDITIONED SPACE UNDERNEATH WHERE THAT CARPORT WAS SHOWN IN THAT PREVIOUS PICTURE? NO, NO AIR CONDITIONING. STEPH, CAN YOU BRING OH, NO, NO, NO AIR CONDITIONING. STEPH, CAN YOU BRING THAT PICTURE BACK UP PLEASE? FROM THE STREET VIEW? SO YOU SEE ON THE SIDE YOU, THERE'S A LITTLE PARKING AREA, IT'S A, THE ROOF IS THERE AND THAT YOU CAN PARK UNDERNEATH OF IT. AREN'T YOU CONSTRUCTING A HOME IN THAT SAME EXACT AREA? OH NO, I'M NOT. YOU'RE NOT, I'M NOT BUILDING SOMETHING IN THAT AREA RIGHT HERE. YEAH. OKAY. WE MOVE TO CONTINUE THE CARDBOARD THERE. WE WERE GONNA REBUILD IT BECAUSE IT WAS FALLING APART. UH, AND THEN WE GO, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? YES. WE'LL FIRST GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN SPEAK IN THE MICROPHONE PLEASE. SORRY. MY NAME IS JONATHAN ODIO. 3 2 7 RAINBOW DRIVE. OKAY. UM, THE INITIAL THING WAS THAT THAT CARPORT WAS FALLING APART, SO THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO, WE WERE, BUT INSTEAD OF A CARPORT, THERE'S A FOUNDA, YOU'RE GONNA PUT A FOUNDATION THERE AND A HOUSE. WELL, WHEN WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, THE SLAB WAS ALREADY THERE. UH, THE CARPORT, IF, IF I'M PARKED UNDERNEATH THAT CARPORT, AM I PARKED ON A SLAB? YES, THAT WAS ONE OF, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS IF YOU HAD SOMETHING OF PERMANENCE OR IS THAT JUST COMPACTED EARTH? UH, WELL WE PURCHASED IT, IT WAS ALREADY A SLAB AND THEN WE, WE BUILT THE DRIVEWAY TO ATTACH TO THAT. OH, THE DRIVEWAY. WE DID BUILD THAT. OKAY. SO THE DRIVEWAY, SO WHEN WE PURCHASED THE HOUSE, THERE WAS A SLAB ALREADY AND THAT WAS WHAT REALLY GOT ME TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. 'CAUSE IT WAS ON A ZERO LOT LINE AND IT ALREADY HAD THE SLAB AND THAT WAS THE REASON WHY I WANTED IT TO, YOU KNOW, BUY THAT PROPERTY. AND, AND WHEN YOU SAY ZERO LOT LINE, IS THERE ANYTHING DOCUMENTED LIKE AN OLD DEED RESTRICTION OR A DEED THAT REFERENCED IT AS A ZERO LOT LINE? OR IS THAT JUST AN ADJECTIVE YOU'RE PUTTING ON IT? UH, WHERE DID YOU GET THE ZERO LOT LINE? OH, FROM THE SURVEY? SO WHEN WE, WHEN WE WERE OFFERED THE PROPERTY, UH, THEY, THE SELLER GAVE US A COPY OF THE SURVEY AND IT SHOWED ZERO AND THEY REFLECTED THE CARPORT VERY, VERY CLOSE TO THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. SO IT'S NOT A TRUE ZERO LOT LINE WHERE IT WAS CREATED IN THE DEED RECORDS OR A PLAT OR ANYTHING QUESTION. SO IT WAS BUILT PRIOR TO ANNEXATION TO THE CITY. SO THAT'S OKAY. YEAH. 1949. ALRIGHT. I THINK I, I HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S GOING ON NOW, SO MANANA SURE. MANA. SO, SO ALWAYS WANT TO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE THINKING OF THE SAFETY AND, YOU KNOW, AND FIRE SAFETY. SO IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, BECAUSE IT'S SO CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE THAT ALL OF THE WALLS WILL BE FIRE RATED AND YOU, SO WAS THE HOUSE BUILT, SO THERE'S, THERE'S TWO PORTIONS. OKAY. MAYBE I'LL ASK YOU ALL. SO THERE'S, SO YOU HAVE, DOES THE CARPORT OR THE GARAGE DOESN'T GO ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, DOES IT RIGHT NOW IT'S, UH, THREE FEET, SIX INCHES AWAY FROM THE LOT LINE. GOT THAT. BUT, BUT, UM, HOW DEEP IS IT? AND SO DOES IS THE LENGTH OF THE CURRENT GARAGE THE ENTIRE LENGTH OR THE CAR? YEAH, THE ENTIRE LENGTH OR DEPTH OF THE HOUSE ITSELF? OH, NO, NO. SO THE CARPORT, UM, THERE'S ABOUT TWO TO THREE FEET OF THE HOUSE PAST, WHAT WAS THE CARPORT? UM, AND SO DID THAT EXIST BEFORE OR IS THAT AN ADD-ON THAT YOU ALL ADDED? SO, SO IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ADDED, WE'LL SAY THE WHOLE RIGHT SIDE WITH A, WITH A LOWER STORY, WITH AN UPPER STORY ABOVE IT. IS THAT WHAT HAPPENED? CORRECT. OKAY. SO, SO WAS, AND YOU SHOWED SOME DOCUMENTS THAT IMPLIED THAT THAT WAS PERMITTED 'CAUSE HE GAVE THE PLANS AND SO, SO, UM, SO CITY CAN CONFIRM THAT THE, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ORIGINAL PROJECT PRIOR TO THE ADDITION OF THE CARPORT OR, OR YEAH, THE CARPORT, UM, WAS PERMITTED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. SO THEY, THEY APPROVED THE WALLS AND ALL OF THAT. AND THIS CAME UP BEFORE US BECAUSE THEY ADDED TO THE FRONT OF IT. IS THAT, IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING? YEAH, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY WERE JUST TRYING TO INITIALLY REPLACE AND REDO THE CARPORT. [02:30:01] UM, BUT THEN IT TURNED INTO SOMETHING ELSE ADDING A WHOLE NEW CORRECT. INSIDE GARAGE AND . YEAH. THE EXISTING PERMITS, IT SAYS HERE THAT THE, UM, THE EXISTING CARPORT ATTACHED TO THE SIDE OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE ON EXISTING CONCRETE SLAB IS TO BE REPLACED. AND THEN THE OTHER ONE I SEE IS A, UM, BASICALLY A RENOVATION OF THE STRUCTURE, BUT NOTHING OF ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE. AND, AND BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T SPENDING MORE THAN THE 50% OR WHATEVER, NOTHING TRIGGERED ANY NEW RE-REVIEW THERE, THERE WAS JUST MAINTENANCE. CORRECT. IT WASN'T UNTIL THEY STARTED DOING FULL-BLOWN, YOU KNOW, HOME CONSTRUCTION IN THAT AREA THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN HERE WE ARE. CORRECT. STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS, WHAT, WHAT WAS IT FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE THAT TRIGGERED THE NEED FOR A NEW BUILD PERMIT? IT, IT'S USUALLY, UM, THE RECONSTRUCTION OF TWO OR MORE EXTERIOR WALLS. UM, AND ANY ADDITION THAT'S OVER ONE STORY. SO THE SECOND STORY EDITION, REGARDLESS, FULL STOP, ANY, ANY TIME THERE'S A SECOND STORY ADDITION REQUIRES A, A FULL PLAN REVIEW AT THAT TIME. AND IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, UM, THE ACTUAL ADDITION OF EXTERIOR WALLS. UM, AND THAT WOULD QUALIFY AS WELL THE, IN ENCLOSING THAT GARAGE. SO THAT WOULD BE THE, THE ENCLOSED AREA ABOVE THE CARPORT? WELL, THE ENCLOSING OF THE GARAGE ITSELF, AS WELL AS THE SECOND STORY ABOVE THE GARAGE. SO THE, THE APPLICANT HAD STATED THAT THE CITY HAD REQUESTED THAT THEY ENCLOSED THEIR QUOTE UNQUOTE CARPORT. IS THAT ACCURATE? I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S, UM, THE, THE CASE OF WHAT HAPPENED IN, IN THIS INSTANCE. UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK PER WHAT THE TESTIMONY THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US, YOU KNOW, UM, OPTIONS WERE GIVEN DEPENDING ON A VARIETY OF SCENARIOS AT THE PERMIT COUNTER, IF YOU ARE GIVEN THE, THE PERMIT TECH IN FRONT OF YOU, A SITE PLAN THAT SAYS I'M GONNA BE THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THAT'S KIND OF THE EXTENT OF THE REVIEW THAT HAPPENS FOR THESE MINOR BUILDS. UM, IF THAT'S THE INFORMATION THAT WAS GIVEN AT THE TIME TO THE PERMIT COUNTER, I CAN SEE HOW THAT WOULD GET APPROVED AND A PERMIT BE ISSUED AT THAT TIME. BUT OBVIOUSLY THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS DONE. UM, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THERE'S MORE CONSTRUCTION GOING ON HERE. I THINK WE HAVE THE EAGLE VIEW IMAGES. I THINK THIS WILL PROBABLY SHED A LITTLE MORE LIGHT ON YOUR CONCERNS. UH, COMMISSIONER MANNA, THIS IS 2025. UM, SHOWING THE CURRENT CONSTRUCTION. IF WE GO BACK ONE, UM, LET'S GO 2023 OR 2024, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE OLD STRUCTURE THAT WAS THERE. LET'S GO ONE FORWARD ACTUALLY. 2025. YEAH, THERE YOU CAN SEE THE OLD FOOTPRINT OF THE STRUCTURE AND THEN GO BACK TO THE CURRENT VIEW. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE, THERE YOU GO, THE CHANGE OVER TIME. IS IT THE CITY'S POSITION THAT THEY'RE NOT ANY CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE CURRENTLY THAN THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE? SO WE THINK THEY'RE THE SAME DISTANCE, BUT OBVIOUSLY IT'S A DIFFERENT STRUCTURE NOW. AND, AND, AND DOES THIS, DOES IT FROM THE AREA, IT LOOKS LIKE THE EXTENT OF THE, OF THE ENCROACHMENT IS NOT TOO FAR INTO THE SIDE PLANE OF THE NEIGHBORING HOME. IT LOOKS LIKE, IT'S LIKE IT'S CORNER TO CORNER ALMOST. IS THAT A TRUE ASSESSMENT? THE CREST OF THE ROOF? OH, I CAN SEE IT NOW. I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T NOTICE THAT SHADOW. OKAY. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND I THINK I, I COULDN'T FIND WHERE WE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THE OPENINGS, BUT MAYBE IT WAS BACKWARDS BECAUSE MAYBE WE'RE TRYING TO TELL THEM THAT IT NEEDS TO BE OPEN NO MORE THAN TWO SIDES TO CONTINUE BEING A CARPORT WHEN WE SAW IT WAS ENCLOSED. I I DON'T SEE ANY OF THAT WRITTEN ANYWHERE, BUT I'M SUSPECTING THAT MAYBE WAS THE CASE. OKAY. WELL, UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO GO BACK TO, SO BY, I GUESS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I ASKED THOUGH WAS THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE FIREWALL RATINGS AND THAT, SO DOES THAT AUTOMATICALLY KICK IN FOR THIS PARTICULAR STRUCTURE SIMPLY BECAUSE OF PROXIMITY TO THE, WITHIN THREE FEET? YEAH, THE, THE PLAN REVIEW TEAM WOULD REQUIRE FIRE RATING. TO WHAT DEGREE? I'M ACTUALLY NOT TOO SURE, BUT YES. AND DID WE HAVE INPUT FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY FOR THE BUDDING PROPERTY NEXT DOOR? YES. AND, AND THEY WERE OKAY WITH THIS? YES. OKAY. SO THE PROPERTY THAT'S MOST IMPACTED POTENTIALLY IS, IS OKAY WITH THIS. OKAY, THANK YOU. YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE SOUNDED TO SPEAK OF VOICEMAILS? NO. PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. I DO, I DO. YES, SIR. A COMMENT, UH, JUST THAT I WANT TO ADD TO IT. UM, YOU KNOW, THE CONFUSION THAT, THAT, UH, WE'VE BEEN HAD GOING THROUGH BACK AND FORTH LIKE THAT X-RAYED, YOU KNOW, WE, WE PAID FOR THE, THE DESIGN AND, YOU KNOW, TO GET A COATED CO UNDERCOAT, UH, FIRE X-RAYED ASSEMBLY. UM, BUT I DO [02:35:01] WANT TO ADD THAT I WAS INFORMED BY THE REVIEWER THAT WE NO LONGER NEED THE X-RAYED. I IF YOU'RE WITHIN THREE FEET OF THAT SIDE PROPERTY LINE, IT HAS TO BE FIRE RATED. OKAY. OKAY. AND, AND YOU, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU TURN ON A RESIDENTIAL PERMIT, I'M JUST, YOU, YOU, YOU KNOW, STAFF HAS TO LOOK AT WHAT'S BEFORE THEM. SO IF THEY THINK IT'S A CARPORT, THEY LOOK AT IT DIFFERENTLY. IF THEY THINK IT'S A TWO STORY STRUCTURE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE AN EXISTING STRUCTURE AND YOU'RE DOING RENOVATION AND YOU DON'T EXCEED 50% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE, THEN IT DOESN'T TRIGGER SOME OF THE NEW RULES. THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT AVENUES AND PASSING TRUE. WE, WE LEARNED THAT YOU CAN GO. YEAH. AND SO WE'RE NOT AWARE OF THAT PART. UM, BUT WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY IS THAT YOU'RE ATTEMPTING TO CONSTRUCT, UH, A STRUCTURE WITHIN, WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE UHHUH. SO THEREFORE YOU HAVE TO COME HERE AND WHATEVER HAPPENS HERE, UH, IF THIS GETS APPROVED, YOU'LL HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE, THE, THE REQUIREMENTS THAT GET IMPOSED BASED ON HOW CLOSE YOU ARE TO THAT SIDE PROPERTY LINE. SURE. SO JUST BE PREPARED THAT THERE WILL BE, THIS GETS APPROVED. THERE'S GONNA BE SOME STUFF FOR SURE. I MEAN, WE WE'RE PREPARED FOR ALL THAT. LIKE, LIKE I SAID, WE'VE COMPLIED WITH EVERYTHING THAT THE CITY HAS REQUESTED OF US. MM-HMM . UH, INCLUDING THAT FIRE ONE. AND I, BUT I'M GLAD YOU CLEAR THAT OUT BECAUSE, UH, LIKE I SAID, THIS IS THE LAST TIME I SPOKE WITH, YOU HAVE TO ASK PLENTY OF QUESTIONS. YEAH. OKAY. WERE TOLD. SO IF THERE'S, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION, CAN I, CAN I JUST CLARIFY WHAT'RE TALKING? YES. UM, WE'RE, THEY'RE REQUESTING A THREE AND A HALF FOOT VARIANCE. MM-HMM . FOR ONE FOOT, SIX SIDE SETBACK, INCLUDING A ONE FOOT OVERHANG. AND REAL QUICK, CAN I GET THE APPLICANT TO VERIFY THAT PLEASE? SINCE WE ADVERTISED FOR SOMETHING DIFFERENT? YES, SIR. YES, YOU DID CUT IT BACK BY A FOOT. YES. THE, THE CITY ASKED ME TO CUT IT BACK. IT WASN'T 11 INCHES. 'CAUSE WE CAN DO WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S THE RIGHT NUMBER. YES, YES. IT WAS 12 INCHES. YES. ALL RIGHT. 12 INCHES. EXACTLY. UH, THERE'S SOME NEW PICTURES. UH OH, WE BELIEVE YOU, WE, WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE DOING WHAT WE NEED TO DO. YES, OF COURSE. ALRIGHT, SO WHO WILL BE READING THE MOTION TODAY? STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 25 DASH 3 20 77. I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT. A FOUR FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM, OR SORRY, A THREE FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A ONE FOOT SIX INCH SIDE SETBACK, INCLUDING A TWO FOOT OVERHANG LIMITED TO THE NORTH, NORTH SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 3 2 7 RAINBOW DRIVE, APPLICANT BEING JUAN OSORIO. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN THIS CASE, THERE WOULD BE ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURES AS THE NEW DEVELOPMENT IS BEING DEVELOPED IN THE SAME FOOTPRINT OF THE ORIGINAL CARPORT. TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. THE SPECIAL CONDITION ON THIS PROPERTY IS THAT THE LOCATION OF THE EXISTING HOME AND DRIVEWAY IS LONG, IS ALONG THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE LEADING TO LESS ROOM FOR DEVELOPMENT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE 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 WOULD NOT CAUSE ANY HARDSHIP TO THE PROPERTY ABIDING THIS LOT AS THERE IS ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN THE HOMES. THE FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITHIN 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. GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS THERE IS SUFFICIENT SEPARATION BETWEEN STRUCTURES. SIX, THE PLAY OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE LOCATION OF THE EXISTING HOUSE IN THE LOT LEADING TO DECREASED SPACE FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANOCK. COMMISSIONER STEVENS. OKAY. I'M GOING TO BE IN FAVOR OF THIS VARIANCE. UM, I THINK THE APPLICANT MAKING AN EFFORT TO CUT BACK THEIR OVERHANG, ALLOWING THEM JUST ENOUGH SPACE TO, UM, TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY. I, I CAN RESPECT THAT. UM, THERE WAS AN EXISTING CARPORT, I THINK THAT THIS KIND OF GOT OUT OF CONTROL AND PERMITTING AND AS YOU WERE ADDING A SECOND FLOOR. BUT, UM, I, I THINK THAT THE ABUTTING [02:40:01] PROPERTY NOT HAVING AN ISSUE WITH THE STRUCTURE KIND OF TIPS IT OVER THE EDGE FOR ME. SO ULTIMATELY I'LL BE IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? HEARING NONE. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MENNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BEES? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BON? YES. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR THE FINES OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF AND PLEASE ASK QUESTIONS FROM THE BILLING PERMIT DEPARTMENT AND MAKE SURE YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE GONNA BE LOOKING FOR. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER 14. GOOD AFTERNOON. ITEM 14 IS BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 2 8 0 LOCATED IN DISTRICT FIVE. THE LOCATION IS 1514 WEST SALINA STREET. THE ZONING IS R FORM AND THE REQUEST IS FOR ONE A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A CAR WITH GUTTERS. LIMITED TO 40 FEET IN DEPTH IN A ONE INCH SIDE SETBACK AND TWO, A THREE FOOT 10 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, A ONE FOOT TWO INCH SIDE SETBACK, INCLUDING A FOUR INCH OVERHANG. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CENTRAL CENTRALLY LOCATED ON WEST SALINA STREET BETWEEN NORTH RICHTER STREET AND NORTH COLORADO STREET. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA ARE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS. THE CASE ORIGINATED IN NOVEMBER, 2025 FROM A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION IN RESPONSE TO SYSTEM CALL RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CARPORT WITHOUT A PERMIT. HISTORICAL IMAGERY SHOWS A SHARK CARPORT PRESENT IN APRIL, 2019. HOWEVER, IMAGERY FROM MARCH, 2022 INDICATES THE CARDBOARD HAD BEEN REMOVED. FURTHER IMAGERY SUGGESTS THE CURRENT CARDBOARD WAS CONSTRUCTED SOMETIME BETWEEN 2022 AND EARLY 2024. DURING A VISIT TO THE SITE, THE CARPORT WAS OBSERVED TO BE WITHIN THE SIDE SETBACK. AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE REAR YARD PROPOSED FOR FUTURE RECONSTRUCTION IS ALSO WITHIN THE SIDE SETBACK. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUESTING VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE CARPORT TO REMAIN IN THE STORAGE SHED TO BE REBUILT AT THEIR EXISTING DISTANCES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. SINCE THIS CARPORT IS CLASSIFIED AS A NEW CONSTRUCTION BUILDING, PERMITS ARE REQUIRED AND ARE PENDING THE OUTCOME OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN WITH BOTH VARIANCES DEPICTED. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THIS IS THE CARPORT SIDE SETBACK, THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, SIDE SETBACK, AND THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 2 8 FOR THE CARPORT AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. SIDE SETBACK BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE IN SUFFICIENT SPACE WILL REMAIN FOR WATER RUNOFF, FIRE HAZARDS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURES. AND TWO, THE CARPORT IS UNCHARACTERISTIC OF THE EXISTING STREET SCAPE AND WOULD VISIBLY DISRUPT THE CONSISTENT SPACING BETWEEN PROPERTIES DUE TO ITS LOCATION WITHIN THE SIDE SETBACK. STAFF MAILED OUT 39 NOTICES. WE RECEIVED ZERO IN FAVOR AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION. PROSPECT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION. AND HERE IS THE PROSPECT HILL NOTICE RECEIVED. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. UH, REAL QUICKLY, THE, THE STRUCTURE IN THE BACK CORNER, SO THERE'S AN ALLEY BACK THERE. SO WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE SIDE SET BACK. DO YOU KNOW HOW HOW LONG THAT, THAT STRUCTURE IS? LIKE 10 FEET OR SOMETHING? 12 FEET? HOW MUCH IN THE BACK? THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE? YEAH. MM. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IF THAT WAS EVER DISCLOSED OR ANYTHING. I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I CAN WE'LL SITE PHOTOS THAT WE VISITED. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL THEN LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. HELLO. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT WHEN I STARTED. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JUAN CARLOS. I'M HERE TO PRESENT MY CASE. I BOUGHT, I BOUGHT MY PROPERTY IN 2016. UH, IS THAT MIKE ON I I CAN HEAR YOU PERFECTLY WELL, BUT IT, IT DOESN'T CAN YOU HEAR ME? IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT'S COMING THROUGH THE SPEAKERS. OH, YOU HAVE TO HOLD IT DOWN. HOLD IT DOWN. OH. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH. SORRY ABOUT THAT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. OKAY. I GUESS YOU CAN HEAR ME NOW. WONDERFULLY GREAT. GREAT. [02:45:01] THANK YOU. SO I BOUGHT MY PROPERTY IN 2016. WHEN I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, THE PORT, THE PORCH WAS ALREADY THERE. UM, IN 2022, I REPLACED IT BECAUSE THE ROOF WAS COLLAPSING. UH, THE CITY HAVE A LET, UM, A NOTICE THERE THAT I DIDN'T HAVE PERMIT FOR THAT AT THAT MOMENT. I WAS NOT AT HOME TO EXPLAIN TO HIM THAT THE PORT HAD ALREADY BEEN LIKE THAT BEFORE. SO I REPLACED IT. SO MY NEIGHBOR ON THE OTHER SIDE WAS THE ONE WHO BUILT THAT PORCH. NOW THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH THIS THING. UM, I ASKED HIM FOR HIS SUPPORT, BUT HE DIDN'T GIVE ME HIS SUPPORT. THE CITY IS REQUESTING ME TO MOVE THE POST FIVE, FIVE FEET, FIVE FEET INWARDS. IF I DO SO, I WON'T BE ABLE TO PUT MY VEHICLE IN THERE BECAUSE THE SPACE IS REALLY NARROW. ON THE SIDE THERE IS THE GAS CONNECTION, THE GAS, UH, LINE. THIS IS THE REASON WHY I REPLACED IT. I DIDN'T KNOW I HAD TO GET A PERMIT FOR THAT BECAUSE THE PORCH WAS ALREADY THERE. UM, WELL THE SPACE THERE IS REALLY, REALLY NARROW. OKAY. AND, UM, IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, THE, THE PARKING SPACE IS REALLY, REALLY SMALL SO THAT I CAN PARK MY, MY CARS THERE. UM, THE, THE, WHEN THE NEIGHBOR BUILT ALL, ALL THESE, UM, PORTS, HE TOLD ME THAT THERE WAS NO PROBLEM, ONLY THAT I NEEDED TO, TO BUILD THE, THE WATER, THE, THE CHANNEL FOR THE WATER TO, SO THAT THE THE WATER WOULDN'T GO INTO HIS HOUSE. OKAY. BUT IF I HAVEN'T HAD ANY, ANY DIFF ANY PROBLEMS WITH ANYBODY, WELL, I HAVE LITTLE KIDS THERE AND MY GRANDCHILDREN, SO I DON'T WANT THEM TO HAVE ANY THAT THERE ARE ANY HAZARDS FOR THEM. OKAY. WELL, LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION. UH, WAS THE CARPORT AS, UH, AS LONG AS IT, THE NEW CARPORT IS AT THE SAME LENGTH. SO IT WENT BACK ABOUT 40 FEET AT, UM, TO, TO THE INSIDE. I, I BUILD IT LIKE 10 FEET LONGER. OKAY. AND THEN, UH, WE'RE ALSO HERE ABOUT YOUR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE BACK. WHAT IS THAT? OH, IT'S THE, UH, IT'S A SMALL BUILDING. IT'S IN THE BACK CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. OH YEAH. DO YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M WONDERING HOW BIG IT IS. WHAT SIZE IS IT? SO ACCORDING TO EAGLEVIEW, IT'S ABOUT 17 FEET AND FROM LEFT TO RIGHT IN THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, 17 FEET ALONG THE SIDE, PROPERTY LINE ALONG [02:50:01] THE REAR. I THINK THAT WAS A QUESTION ASKED EARLIER. OH YEAH. I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, WELL, 'CAUSE THE REAR IS NOT OF ISSUE BECAUSE IT'S A BUDDING AN ALLEY. BUT ON THE SIDE, UH, SOMETIMES WHEN WE READ THESE MOTIONS, WE LIKE TO PUT, UH, A DISTANCE FOR HOW FAR THAT ENCROACHMENT GOES. AND I WAS WONDERING ABOUT HOW LONG IT, UH, BOTH SIDES SEEMS TO BE ABOUT 17 FEET. OKAY. IS THAT, IS THAT A STRUCTURE IN THE BACK ABOUT 17 FEET BY 17 FEET? I REALLY DON'T KNOW FOR SURE, BUT I THINK IT'S KIND OF THAT MAYBE 18 FEET SOMEONE WANTS TO READ A MOTION MIGHT BE THE NUMBER JUST TO BE SAFE. UM, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT, UM, SO WE'VE HEARD TESTIMONY THAT, UM, THE CARPORT IS ABOUT 10 FEET LONGER. UH, THE ORIGINAL CARPORT DIDN'T APPEAR TO HAVE GUTTERS, THE NEW ONE DOES. AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'VE OBSERVED. UH, I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEYOND THAT. MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT'S IN THE BACK, IS THAT A NEW STRUCTURE OR DID THAT JUST COME UP BECAUSE OF THE, THE CITY DIALOGUE, UH, GAVE THE APPLICANT AN OPTION TO ADD IT ON HERE IN CASE HE WANTED TO REMODEL IT. AND HE INDICATED THAT HE MAY WANT TO THAT WAY TO PREVENT ANY ISSUES. SO IT'S EXISTING, SO EXISTING. OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. WELL, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, IS THERE ANYONE SIGNING TO SPEAK? ANYONE ANY VOICEMAILS? UH, ONE SPEAKER. MRS. QUIANA. ALL RIGHT. COME ON UP. TELL US YOUR NAME AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS. HELLO, MY NAME IS KIANA NALA. UH, I ALSO AM A RESIDENT OF PROSPECT HILL. UH, I AM IN FAVOR TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST OF MR. VERA. UH, THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE WAS DECAYING AND POSED A THREAT, A, A SAFETY THREAT TO HIS FAMILY, WHICH IS WHY HE DECIDED TO REBUILD THE CARPORT. UH, SHOWN IN THE IMAGE, UH, PRESENTED HERE ON THE POWERPOINT. THE PREVIOUS CARPORT IS IN SIMILAR OR APPROXIMATE DISTANCE FOOTPRINT AS A STRUCTURE THAT HE HAD, UH, PREVIOUSLY, UH, HAD WHEN HE PURCHASED THE HOME. UH, IN ADDITION TO THIS, BY MAINTAINING THE ONSITE PARKING AREA, HE'S REDUCING THE STREET CONGESTION ON WEST SALINA STREET. IF YOU REVIEW THE IMAGES DOCUMENTED BY THE VARIANCE, UM, THE SURROUNDING AREA, THE STREET VIEWS SHOW CONGESTION BY THE NEIGHBORS. I HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH PREVIOUS, UH, I'M SORRY, WITH, UH, OWNERS FROM THE SAME STREET ON 1502 WEST SALINAS AND 1524 WEST SALINAS. THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS, UM, THEY DID NOT RESPOND, BUT THEY, I DID. I AM A WITNESS THAT I HAD COMMUNICATION WITH THEM AND THEY DID NOT OPPOSE ALSO THE OI ALSO HAD COMMUNICATION IN AS A WITNESS WITH MR. ALVERA THAT HE SHARED, UM, WITH THE OWNERS THAT THEY WENT, SORRY, THE OWNERS OF 1502, WHICH IS THE NEIGHBORS RIGHT NEXT TO THEM. UH, I WAS A WITNESS THAT HE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THEM REGARDING REQUESTS TO SUPPORT HIM, BUT THEY DENIED TO SUPPORT HIM DUE TO THEM HAVING THEIR OWN PERSONAL PROBLEMS WITH THE CITY. SO THAT'S WHY THEY DID NOT WANNA SUPPORT HIM. UM, I HAVE ALS AND THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER ON 1502 WEST SALINA HA DID STATE TO ME THAT THERE IS SIGNIFICANT CON CONGESTION ON THAT STREET, WHICH MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO PARK. UM, UH, ON THAT, ON THAT ON WEST SALINAS. OKAY. UM, YEP, THAT'S IT. ALL RIGHT, WELL, THANK YOU, YOU VERY MUCH COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. SO, SO, HELLO. SO, SO, UM, YES, IT'S, SO THANK YOU. UH, THANK YOU FOR, FOR, FOR HELPING. SO ARE, ARE, SO DID YOU LIVE NEARBY OR NO, I ACTUALLY LIVE ON RA STREET. OKAY. AND THEN HAVE YOU WORKED WITH, SO, UM, PRO PROSPECT, SO THE PROSPECT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, HAVE YOU WORKED WITH THEM AT ALL? I HAVE NOT, BUT I ACTUALLY DID COMMUNICATE WITH THE PROSPECT, UM, HILL, THE, THE GENTLEMAN, UM, TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT HIS PROPERTY AND HE SAID THAT HE JUST DID A QUICK VIEW AND SAID THAT NO, THAT IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT ON THE RIGHT PROPERTY LINE. SO THERE WAS COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ME AND THE, THE PROSPECT HILL PRESIDENT, AND HE DENIED SUPPORTING MR. VERA WITHOUT ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THE FULL PICTURE OF WHY HE HAS THE STRUCTURE LIKE THAT. AND SO, YEAH. UM, THE NOTICE THAT THERE, THE NOTE THAT HE SENT WAS, WAS, WE'LL SAY MINIMAL WITH REGARDS TO DETAILS. RIGHT. BUT TALKED ABOUT FIRE RATING ESSENTIALLY IS WHERE, WHAT HIS INTERESTS WERE. YES. AND SO, UM, AND SO YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING MORE THAN YOU KNOW THAN THAT. OKAY. YEAH, THAT'S, I, [02:55:01] THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR IS ACTUALLY IF YOU HAD A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT 'EM. SO THANK YOU. YES, I DID HAVE A ANOTHER. AND, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR DOING THAT. SO, SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? HEARING NONE. UM, THERE'S, ALL RIGHT. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. COMMISSIONER CRUZ, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOAB 25 103 2 8. I MOVE AS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. GRANTED REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW CARPORT WITH GUTTERS, LIMITED TO 40 FEET IN DEPTH AND ONE INCH SIDE SETBACK. AND A TWO A THREE FOOT 10 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, ONE FOOT TWO INCHES SIDE SETBACK, INCLUDING A FOUR INCH OVERHANG SITUATED AT 1514 WEST SALINA STREET, APPLICANT BEING JUAN CARLOS. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERS PROPERTY SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDCS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN A NECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PROPOSED VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. AS THE INSTALLATION OF GUTTERS ON THE CARPORT WILL REMEDIATE ANY POTENTIAL WATER RUNOFF ISSUES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY THAT REDUCE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, SIDE SETBACK WILL STILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE SEPARATION NECESSARY FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE AND FIRE PREVENTION. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN A UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN A NECESSARY HARDSHIP. AS THE EXISTING RESIDENCE WAS BUILT IN 1940, THE LOCATION OF THE HOME LIMITS THE USABLE SPACE ON THE WESTERN SIDE TO CONSTRUCT A CARPORT THAT COMPLIES WITH THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE REDUCE SITE SETBACK PROVIDES SUFFICIENT SPACING BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES NECESSARY FOR POTENTIAL PRIOR AGGRAVATION. WATER RUNOFF AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURES FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT OF 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. THE PROPOSED CARPORT MAINTAINS VISUAL OPENINGS, OPENNESS OF THE PROPERTY AND PRESERVE THE ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. THE PROPOSED STORAGE SHED SITE SETBACK PROVIDES REASONABLE SEPARATION FROM THE ABUTTING PROPERTY, ENSURING NO ADVERSE IMPACTS FOR MAINTENANCE ACCESS AND FIRE AGGRAVATION. SIX PLIGHT TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. STAFF FIND SUPPLY OF THE OWN, OF THE PROPERTY OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT. IT'S DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS THE EXISTING SIDE SETBACK OF THE HOME ESTABLISHED BY ITS CONSTRUCTION IN 1940. ADDITIONALLY, THE STORAGE SHED WAS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO THE CURRENT OWNER AND ALLOWING THE SHED TO BE REBUILT AS ITS EXISTING SETBACK, MOST REASONABLE TO MAINTAIN A FUNCTIONAL REAR AREA YARD. AND A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES. UM, I WAS KIND OF HESITANT, BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO. AND BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS SO OLD AND THE ORIGINAL HOME IS FROM 1940, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SAY IT'S GONNA BE ANY BIT DIFFERENT. AND SINCE HE ALREADY PUT IN GUTTERS, I THINK THAT WOULD STILL BE A GOOD, UH, IMPROVEMENT ON HIS HOME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO WOULD YOU TAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT FOR RESTRICTING, UH, ITEM TWO TO BE AN 18 BY 18 ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UM, AS, UH, THE APPLICANT KIND OF COMMITTED TO? THAT'S FINE. I'LL ACCEPT. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE AN AMENDED MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO TO BE LIMITED TO 18 FEET ALONG THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE. AND, AND THE SECOND QUESTION, AND, AND AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE, I'M NOT KEEPING UP WITH THE CITY QUESTIONS. AND SO THE FIRE RATING DIALOGUE, IF I UNDERSTOOD EARLIER, UM, BECAUSE IT'S WITHIN THE THREE FOOT, SO, BUT EVEN THOUGH THE [03:00:01] HOUSE, UH, BUDDING IT IS FURTHER THAN THREE FOOT, IT'S STILL GONNA REQUIRE A FIRE RATING, YES OR NO? UH, GOTTA DOUBLE CHECK ON THAT, BUT I BELIEVE THEY STILL WILL NEED IT BECAUSE THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER PROPERTY HAS A POTENTIAL TO BUILD WITHOUT HAVING TO COME OVER HERE. AND, AND THE REASON WHY IT'S IMPORTANT, 'CAUSE I I KNOW THAT THAT WAS PROSPECT HILL'S, YOU KNOW, INTEREST WAS THE FI YOU KNOW, THE DIALOGUE ABOUT FIRE RATING. AND, AND AS I DRIVE THROUGH THE COMMUNITY, I SEE LOTS OF OTHER HOMES THAT ARE BUILT ALONG WITH THE SAME KIND OF STRUCTURE. AND THIS ONE'S GONNA BE FIRE RATED, WHICH IS GOOD. AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO GO LOOK AT ALL THE REST OF THE STRUCTURES THAT ARE OUT THERE AND, YOU KNOW, CONSIDER THE SAME THING. SO, SO, YOU KNOW, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD HEARING? NONE OF US HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MENA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BON? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? YES. I, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT. UH, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. UH, IF THERE'S, UM, IF IT HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ITEM NUMBER 15. THANK YOU. CONGRATULATIONS. COOL. ALRIGHTY. UH, UH, ITEM 15 IS CASE BOA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 2 81. THE APPLICANT BEING MINT DEVELOPMENT LLC AND COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE AT 1 37 UNIVERSITY AVENUE. ZONING IS IDZ TWO WITH USES PERMITTED IN MF 33. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR, LEMME GO BACK. ONE, UH, VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE WINDOW STANDARD TO ALLOW LESS THAN 25% SURFACE AREA TO BE DEDICATED TO WINDOW OPENINGS ON EACH FLOOR. LIMITED TO THE STRUCTURES WITHIN THE NCD BOUNDARY. TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE DRIVEWAY AND CURB CUTS STANDARD TO ALLOW A DRIVEWAY TO BE 25 FEET WIDE AND A CURB CUT TO BE 33 FEET WIDE. AND THREE, A VARIANCE FROM THE NC D FIVE GARAGES STANDARD TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED GARAGE LIMITED TO THE STRUCTURES WITHIN THE NC D FIVE BOUNDARY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF FREDERICKSBURG ROAD AND UNIVERSITY AVENUE, AND IS THE FORMER SITE OF A CHARTER SCHOOL AND MULTIPLE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY UNOCCUPIED SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH AND WEST AND COMMERCIAL TO THE EAST. ONLY AN EASTERN PORTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LIES WITHIN THE NCD BOUNDARY AND IS SUBJECT TO ITS DESIGN STANDARDS. THE PROPOSED DESIGN DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE NC NCD FIVE STANDARDS FOR WINDOWS ON BUILDING FACADES VISIBLE FROM A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, DRIVEWAY AND CURB CUT WIDTHS OR FOR GARAGE DESIGN. AS SUCH, THE GARAGE, UH, EXCUSE ME, THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPROVE VARIANCES FROM THESE STANDARDS TO PROCEED WITH THEIR DESIGNS AS PROPOSED. SHOWN HERE IS A SITE PLAN OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT NOTATING, THE AREA THAT'S WITHIN THE NC D FIVE, UH, BOUNDARY. UH, AND AS SUCH, UH, KIND OF COLOR CODING THERE, EACH OF THOSE, THOSE VARIANCES. SO EVERYTHING IN BLUE, ALL THESE STRUCTURES, ANY FACADES THAT ARE VISIBLE FROM A STREET WOULD BE HELD TO THAT WINDOW STANDARD. UH, WHICH AGAIN STATES THAT AT LEAST, UH, 25% OF, OF THAT SURFACE AREA OF EACH FACADE NEEDS TO BE DEDICATED TO WINDOW OPENINGS. AND THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. STILL SOME EXISTING STRUCTURES FROM THE OLD USES. NONE OF THESE ARE OCCUPIED CURRENTLY. AND THIS IS, UM, THAT MAIN DRIVEWAY, WHICH WOULD BE USED FOR, AGAIN, THAT'S THE DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD BE WITHIN THE NCD FIVE BOUNDARY, KIND OF THE ONE CLOSEST TO FREDERICKSBURG. AND THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA ALONG UNIVERSITY GOING EAST TOWARDS FREDERICKSBURG, AGAIN, GOING EAST TOWARDS FREDERICKSBURG, THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT STREET, IT'S ACROSS THE STREET ON UNIVERSITY AVE GOING WEST ON UNIVERSITY. AND THIS IS GOING NORTHWEST ALONG FREDERICKSBURG AND GOING SOUTHEAST ALONG FREDERICKSBURG STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT VARIANCE IS STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN [03:05:01] BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 2 81 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, ALLOWING REDUCED WINDOW TRANSPARENCY, OVERSIZED DRIVEWAYS AND CURB CUTS AND ATTACHED GARAGES WITHIN THE DI, THE DISTRICT WOULD UNDERMINE THE CONSERVATION GOALS ADOPTED TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC STREET SCAPE AND NEIGHBORHOOD IDENTITY. AND TWO, APPROVING THESE VARIANCES WOULD WEAKEN THE PURPOSE OF THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND CREATE INEQUITY WITH NEARBY PROPERTIES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO MEET THE SAME STANDARDS. STAFF MAIL THAT 51 NOTICES ONE WOULD RETURN IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION. THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT OF ITEMS TWO AND THREE. AND THE SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. AND HERE'S THE RESPONSE FROM BEACON HILL AREA, AGAIN, IN SUPPORT OF, UH, REQUESTS TWO AND THREE REGARDING THE DRIVEWAYS, CURB CUTS AND THE GARAGES. UH, AND THEY ARE IN SUPPORT OF KIND OF AN ALTERNATE, UM, TO THE WINDOW STANDARD, BUT AS WRITTEN, THEY'RE NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE WINDOW VARIANCE. AND THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED THERE. AND THIS IS THE OPPOSITION RECEIVED WITH TRANSLATION AT THE BOTTOM. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, THAT IS LESS THAN HALF OF THE PROPERTY IS IN THE NCD, THE OTHER HALF IS NOT THEREABOUTS, CORRECT? YEAH. OKAY. AND, AND WHEN DID THE IDZ ZONING GO THROUGH? UM, LET ME GRAB MY STAFF REPORT. IT WOULD BE IN THERE. GIMME JUST ONE SECOND. THE ZONING WENT THROUGH, UM, FEBRUARY 15TH, 2024. AND DID THE, THE, AND I KNOW THAT WHEN YOU DO THESE, THESE IDZ ZONING SITE PLANS, BUT DID THE ZONING SITE PLAN THAT WENT THROUGH PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SCRUTINY BY THE COMMUNITY, DID IT INCLUDE, DID IT LOOK LIKE THE LAYOUT THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY? THERE WAS A MAJOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT DONE, UH, AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE INITIAL INITIAL SITE PLAN, UM, TO ACTUALLY REDUCE THE DENSITY THAT WAS INITIALLY PROPOSED, REVIEWED BY THE COMMUNITY AND ADOPTED BY, UH, COUNCIL. UM, THIS DESIGN HERE, AGAIN, IS, UH, IS AN AMENDMENT TO THAT WITH A REDUCED OVERALL DENSITY. SO THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE PROPOSING LESS DENSITY. THAT'S CORRECT. BUT, BUT, UM, I KNOW THE WINDOWS WOULDN'T BE ON THERE, BUT THE GARAGE, THE GARAGES, WERE THEY REFLECTED ON THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS ADVERTISED AND DISCUSSED BY THE COMMUNITY DURING THOSE, THOSE HEARINGS? I, I THINK THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK MORE TO THAT. I, IF I'M REMEMBERING CORRECTLY, AND I CAN PULL UP THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN, IT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED TO BE ONE LARGE SCALE, A LOT MORE, UM, MULTIFAMILY LOOKING IN NATURE, LIKE AN APARTMENT BUILDING. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS A PROPOSED, UH, DIALOGUE FOR ATTACHED GARAGES IN THAT INITIAL PLAN. I JUST THINK THAT IF, IF YOU CAN GET YOUR HANDS ON THAT IDZ SIDE PLAN, IF HAPPEN DOESN'T HAVE IT, I THINK WE MIGHT WANT ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. ALRIGHT, LET'S HAVE THE, YES. SO, SO, UM, HAD IT NOT HAD AN NCD, WOULD THIS BE BEFORE US? NO, THESE ARE ALL NCD REQUESTS. OKAY. YEAH. AND THEN, UM, AND, AND YOU MAY HAVE SAID IT, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR IT. SO WHO, UM, WHO, UH, UM, FACILITATED THE GENERATION OF THE NCD? SO WHICH ORGANIZATION WAS IT? UH, BEACON HILL. SO IT WAS BEACON HILL? CORRECT. PERFECT. THANK YOU. GREAT. UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. HI, GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, MY NAME'S RICARDO TOES WITH MAIN DEVELOPMENT, UH, 10, UH, 4 4 6 TRAILWAY OAK. UM, SO, YEAH. SO, UH, CAN I CONTROL THE KEYBOARD FOR THE, THERE'S A KEYBOARD UNDERNEATH THE PODIUM THERE, RIGHT THERE. YOU CAN, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO USE THAT ONE. IT SHOULD BE PLUGGED IN. IF YOU WANNA JUST SLIDE THAT OUT AND PUT IT ON TOP OF THE PODIUM. YEAH, THAT SHOULD BE CONNECTED AND PERFECT. AND CONTROL. THIS WORKS? NOPE. ALL RIGHT. . OKAY. YOU JUST GO? YES. SO, UM, TO, UH, ANSWER THE PREVIOUS QUESTION, SO YES, SO THIS, IT SHOULD REFRESH. WHY ARE THESE PAGES EMPTY? OH, I JUST HAVE TO LEAVE IT THERE FOR A BIT. SO, YEAH, SO THE, OUR, OUR GROUP, UM, RECENTLY, THERE WE GO. SO OUR, OUR GROUP RECENTLY, UM, STARTED WORKING ON THIS PROJECT. UH, WE HAVE A, WE'RE DOING A JV WITH THE, UH, CURRENT LANDOWNER. UM, THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY DONE A THOUGHT ABOUT DOING A JV FOR, WITH ANOTHER, UH, GROUP. AND THIS WAS THE, UH, SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED. UH, THEY WENT THROUGH THE ZONING AND, UM, GOT A, UM, SUPPORT FROM BEACON HILL. SO IT WAS SLATED TO BE A FOUR STORY, 100 UNIT, UH, PROJECT. UM, UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, THEY, THINGS DIDN'T GO THROUGH. UM, NOW THAT ONCE WE, [03:10:01] I'M SORRY. I THINK THEY'RE PLAYING WITH THE, YEAH, ONCE WE, UH, ONCE WE GOT, UH, UM, STARTED WORKING WITH THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNER AND, UM, WE THOUGHT WHAT WAS THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE, THIS IS HOW, THIS IS WHERE WE LANDED IN REGARDS TO SITE PLAN. SO IT'S 22, UM, DUPLEXES THREE STORY, SO REDUCED, YOU KNOW, WE REDUCED THE, UH, UNITS SIGNIFICANTLY, UH, TO 44 UNITS OVERALL, UM, WITH THE PROPO, AND THEN REDUCE THE PARKING ALSO, UM, SIGNIFICANTLY, UM, BROUGHT DOWN THE OVERALL STRUCTURE TO THREE FROM FOUR. UM, EVERY CAR, EVERY UNIT WILL HAVE THEIR OWN CAR, UM, CAR GARAGE. AND THEN WE HAVE ADDITIONAL, UH, PARKING FOR, UM, THE, UM, FOR, FOR GUESTS. SO THIS IS THE PROPOSED, UM, KIND OF ARCHITECTURE THAT KIND OF, WE'RE KIND OF WORKING THROUGH, AS YOU SEE, UM, THIS, UH, THIS, UH, FACADE IS KIND OF OUR, OUR, UH, SAY PROTOTYPE. THIS FACADE WILL, UH, BE FACING IN THE ENTITY BOUNDARY FREDERICKSBURG. SO AS YOU SEE, WE ARE ABOVE THE 25% THRESHOLD IN, IN, ON THE WINDOWS. UM, ON, ON THO ON THIS, UH, PARTICULAR, UH, ELEVATION, THE WINDOW, UM, VARIANCE THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE HERE TODAY FOR IS THE, THE ELEVATION THAT WE WILL BE FACING. UNIVERSITY AVENUE, WHICH IS THE KIND OF THE, THE MINOR STREET. SO AS YOU SEE RIGHT HERE WHERE, UH, I KIND OF NOTED THE PERCENTAGES WE'RE AT, UM, ON THE FIRST FLOOR, YOU KNOW, WE, WE DON'T, THE, THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION ACTUALLY APPROVE THE VARIANCE, UM, UNDER 25% FOR THE GARAGE, UH, FOR THE FIRST FLOOR ONLY AFTERWARDS, YOU KNOW, WE WERE, WE WERE THINKING, OKAY, WELL MAYBE WE CAN MAKE IT WORK. BUT ONCE WE KIND OF START, STARTED WORKING WITH THE ARCHITECT, THE ARCHITECT WAS, THE ARCHITECT BASICALLY SAID, IT'S, IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE YOU HAVE A TV WALL HERE, YOU HAVE RESTROOMS AND CLOSETS AND THIRD FLOOR. BUT WE WERE, WE TRIED OUR BEST TO REALLY, UM, KINDA WORK THROUGH THE, THROUGH AS MANY WINDOWS AS WE COULD. AND SO THAT, THAT'S WHERE WE LANDED TODAY. THIS IS JUST SOME OF THOSE FLOOR PLANS, SO WE CAN KIND OF REFERENCE WHAT THE ELEVATIONS LOOK LIKE. AND AGAIN, THIS IS, UH, THE FIRST, UH, VARIANCE IS FOR THE WINDOW STANDARD. THE SECOND IS FOR THE DRIVEWAY AND THE, UH, AND THE THIRD ONE'S FOR THE GARAGE STANDARD. UM, SO AS, UM, THE CITY REVIEWER, UM, REVIEWER MENTIONED THE BOUN, THE ENTITY BOUNDARIES ONLY AROUND 40% OF THE, UM, PROJECT. AND I'VE KIND OF NOTED WHERE THE VARIANCE THAT WOULD BE BASICALLY ENACTED. SO THE DRIVEWAY AND CURB CUT VARIANCE WOULD BE FOR THE DRIVEWAY, UM, WHICH WILL BE REPEATED ON THE OTHER ONES. THE WINDOW, WINDOW VARIANCE, UH, WOULD BE FOR THE FOR THE TWO ELEVATIONS. UM, FACE, UH, YEAH, SURE. THE TWO, THE WINDOW VARIANTS WILL REALLY BE ONLY IF IN EFFECT FOR THESE TWO UNITS RIGHT HERE, WHICH ARE UNDER, BECAUSE THIS, THESE FACADES RIGHT HERE ALL ARE BASIC, BASICALLY, UM, WITHIN THE 25%, UH, UH, THRESHOLD IN, IN THAT WINDOW. SO REALLY THAT BECAUSE OF THESE TWO, WERE, WERE HERE TODAY ALONG WITH THIS DRIVEWAY, AND OF COURSE THE GARAGE, UM, THE GARAGES THAT ARE IN HERE. SO I DO WANNA POINT OUT THE NCD FIVE, UM, GUIDELINES WERE INITIALLY, UH, CRAFTED FOR, YOU KNOW, SINGLE FAMILY. SO ANYTHING ABOVE THAT, UH, RIGHT, THAT WERE CRAFTED FOR YOUR ORIGINAL 50 BY ONE 40, UM, LOT WITH YOUR, YOU KNOW, MAIN HOME AND YOUR DRIVEWAY WITH A STRUCTURE IN THE REAR. SO ANYTHING ABOVE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WE'RE, WE'RE HERE, THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN THE BEACON HILL, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S ACTUALLY IN THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT WHEN THE N CITY FIVE BOUNDARY WAS CREATED, THEY KIND OF, YOU KNOW, SLICED IT. THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER, UM, GUIDELINES WERE BEING REFLECTED ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF FREDERICKSBURG, THAT THEY WERE ALSO KIND OF WORKING THROUGH IT. BUT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM SINCE ALMOST SEPTEMBER. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE'VE MET WITH THEM AND, AND THEY WERE, UH, WE APPRECIATE THEIR SUPPORT AND, AND WHAT THEY, YOU KNOW, TO TODAY. SO LET ME ASK, UH, WHAT IS THE MINUTE, WHAT IS THE DRIVEWAY WITH REQUIREMENT OF THE NCD? HE'S PUTTING IN A 25 FOOT WITH A 33 CREW CUP. WHAT, WHAT IS A REQUIREMENT? IT'S JUST A SECOND. AND THEN ALSO THIS IS ONE [03:15:01] LOT, CORRECT? YES, SIR. OKAY. SO DRIVEWAY CURB CUTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 15 FEET IN WIDTH. AND DOES THAT, I MEAN, I HAVE TO TELL YOU, I MEAN, IF I WAS A HUGE LOT AND I WAS DOING A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IN THIS NCD, I MEAN, FIRETRUCK ACCESS HAS TO BE 20 FEET. IS THERE, IS THERE A DIFFERENT SET OF STANDARDS IF YOU'RE DOING MULTIFAMILY IN THIS? YEAH. YEAH, I HEAR YOU. SO THERE ARE A LOT OF, UM, EXCEPTIONS BAKED INTO THIS NCD TO ADDRESS MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS NOT ONE OF THOSE AREAS THAT WAS COVERED BY THAT. THERE'S SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WERE LOOKED IN HERE THAT, THAT COULD HAVE APPLIED TO THIS DEVELOPMENT, BUT WE'RE SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED BY IF MULTIFAMILY, THEY MAY NOT HAVE SORT OF A THING IN THE NCD LIKE THIS, BUT IT JUST, YOU KNOW, WITH THE FIRE CODE REQUIRING A 20 FOOT FIRE LANE, I DON'T SEE HOW YOU COULD EVER MEET THE 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY IF YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING WITH LARGE AMOUNTS OF BUILDINGS LIKE THIS. IT JUST, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW MAYBE THE NCD SHOULD HAVE BE REVISITED. WE'RE GONNA SEE MORE OF THIS STUFF, BUT, SURE. OKAY. IS THERE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER CRUZ, UM, HOW MANY BUILDINGS ARE YOU THINKING OF MAKING AN, EACH ONE OF 'EM IS GONNA BE THREE, THREE STORIES, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. HOW MANY BUILDINGS? 22. 22 DUPLEXES. OH, OKAY. SO YOU'RE, WHAT IS THERE RIGHT NOW? ARE YOU ALL GONNA TEAR DOWN AND REBUILD BRAND NEW ONES? YES, MA'AM. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANNA MAKE SURE. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? STEVENS COMMISSIONER, MAD. SORRY, I KNOW THAT YOU, HE TRIED TO CHIME . OH, COMMISSIONER STEVENS. SORRY. , UH, QUESTION FOR CITY STAFF, WHEN, WHEN IT COMES TO NCD FIVE AND HOW WE CONSIDER GLAZING AND FENESTRATION, DO WE, DO WE EQUATE THAT LOOKING AT THE BUILDING HOLISTICALLY? SO IF I HAD LIKE A CUBE OF A HOUSE, COULD I HAVE JUST ONE SIDE OF IT BE GLAZING, COULD MEET THE 25%? OR IS IT CONSIDERED PER FACADE? IT IS A PER FACADE BASIS THAT IT'S REVIEWED BY. OKAY. AND QUESTION FOR APPLICANT, DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT YOUR TOTAL GLAZING PERCENTAGE WOULD BE FOR THE BUILDING HOLISTICALLY? LIKE IF WE LOOKED AT IT, NOT HOLISTICALLY, BUT AS YOU SEE THESE, UM, UH, THESE EXHIBITS, THE NCD SAYS PER FLOOR, SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE TOOK THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE FLOOR AND THEN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE GLAZING, AND WE PUT A NUMBER RIGHT OF ABOUT WHAT THAT PERCENTAGE IS. SO ON THE ONES FACING FREDERICKSBURG, WE ARE ABOVE THAT THRESHOLD ON THE ELEVATIONS FOR THOSE TWO UNITS THAT THERE ARE WITHIN THE BOUNDARY, UH, ON UNIVERSITY, WE'RE UNDER THAT. RIGHT. SO THE, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BASICALLY SAID, HEY, WE UNDERSTAND THE GARAGE, BUT TRY TO GET AS MUCH AS YOU CAN OUT HERE. WE'VE ACTUALLY ADDED A LOT MORE WINDOWS SINCE WE MET WITH THEM, BUT WE'RE STILL UNDER THIS, YOU KNOW, THE THRESHOLD. IF YOU HAD TO GIVE IT A NUMBER, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY? LIKE, TOTAL GLAZING AGAINST THE WHOLE BUILDING FACADE? HONESTLY, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE PROBABLY ABOVE 25 BECAUSE WE, YOU KNOW, WE WE'RE ABOVE ON, ON THE FRONT FACADE. I MEAN, WE'RE, THERE'S A LOT OF WINDOWS AND WE'RE NOT EVEN COUNTING THIS SIDE LIGHT RIGHT HERE. PLUS, YOU KNOW, THE SAME AMOUNT OF WINDOWS ARE ON THIS SIDE. AND THEN WE HAVE OUR REAR WINDOWS. I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE AT 30%, 36, 36, 38, AND THEN YOU'RE AT 2117 AND IT'S GETTING THERE. YEAH. THANK YOU. MANA COMMISSIONER MANA. SO IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, UM, WHAT'S AT STAKE HERE ARE THE WALLS ON TWO OF THE UNITS THAT ARE WITHIN THE NCD AND THAT WOULD BE THE LOWER TWO BUILDINGS THAT THAT WOULD REQUIRE, UM, OR, OR THAT ARE IMPACTED BY THE NCD THAT ARE LOOKING FOR PER THE LETTER FROM, UM, BEACON HILL FOR THE ADDITIONAL WINDOW SPACE. RIGHT. SO GLAZING, I GUESS I'M, UH, WANNA SPEAK THE LANGUAGE HERE. SO, SO ADDITIONAL GLAZING GOT SOME MARKETS. UM, SO, SO, UM, IS IT IMPOSSIBLE, I GUESS, UM, JUST FOR THOSE TWO TO HAVE THE ADDITIONAL GLAZING AND CHANGE IT FOR THE REST OF, YOU KNOW, ALL THE REST OF 'EM BE AS, AS YOU HAVE A DESIGN AND THOSE TWO RECEIVE THE EXTRA GLAZING FOR WHATEVER REASON? YES, SIR. THAT'S WHAT WE, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT I, WHAT WE'RE TRYING, WE, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO IS, AND, UM, TO ADD AS MUCH WINDOWS AS WE CAN, BUT ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, THE SPACE PLANNING, WE, I'VE KIND OF PUT IT HERE. IT'S LIKE THIS IS A RESTROOM, THESE ARE CLOSETS, THERE'S A TV WALL, UM, GARAGE, YOU KNOW, SO WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE DONE REALLY EVERYTHING WE [03:20:01] CAN, I MEAN, WE'RE STILL OPEN TO ADDING MORE WINDOWS WHERE WE CAN MAYBE CAN MAYBE MAKE 'EM A LITTLE BIT BIGGER. UM, BUT ULTIMATELY I DON'T, I DON'T THINK WE'LL REACH THE 25%, UM, GLAZING WITH. SO, UM, AND SO AS I GO DOWN THIS DEFINITION OF GLAZING, UM, SO DOES GLAZING IMPLY THAT THERE ACTUALLY HAS TO BE, UM, A, A POKE THROUGH ON THE WALL VERSUS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE WINDOWS? SO WHAT, SO THE REGULATION SPECIFICALLY SPAN CLASSING, I'M SORRY, THE REGULATION SPECIFICALLY SAYS A MINIMUM OF 25% OF THE SURFACE AREA OF EACH STORY ON THE FRONT FACADE SHALL BE DEDICATED TO WINDOW OPENINGS. AND SO IF I HAD A WINDOW OPENING, BUT I CLOSED IT OFF ON THE BACKSIDE, UM, WITH A WALL SPACE, IS THAT STILL A WINDOW OPENING? ? SO HE'S WONDERING IF HE CAN PUT A WINDOW ON TOP OF THE WALL AND JUST YEAH, THAT'S, YEAH. SO, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST, I'M JUST, JUST GO THERE. SO YOU KNOW, IF, SO, BECAUSE, 'CAUSE PART OF THE DIALOGUE IS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THAT, THAT LOOK. AND SO ARE THERE WAYS TO OBTAIN THAT LOOK WITHOUT PUNCHING ALL THE WAY THROUGH SO THAT WE CAN ACCOMPLISH, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, SO IF I HAVE A RESTROOM AND CLOSET AND I PUT A WALL ON THE BACK OF IT, YOU KNOW, UM, SO I'M JUST, CAN I PUT, CAN YOU PUT A FAKE WINDOW? THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. I'VE NEVER BEEN TRIED. HAS ANYBODY TRIED THAT? I'VE ACTUALLY DONE IT BEFORE IN, UM, IN, UM, NUITY HILL AND THEY DIDN'T NOTICE. NO, THEY, THEY APPROVED IT LIKE THAT. YEAH, I WOULD SAY THEY, I WOULD, I WOULD ASSUME YOU APPROVE IT. 'CAUSE YOU'RE, YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THE FACADE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S PART OF THE DIALOGUE. AND SO, AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD DIALOGUE IN THE PAST WITH REGARDS TO WHAT CAN AND CAN HAPPEN HERE. AND SO, SO SOMETHING ALONG THAT, ALONG THAT LINE WENT UP. AND SO MAYBE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD ACCOMPLISH WHAT IT WAS THAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR AND HAVING THE, THE CONTINUITY THERE. AND, WELL, I LIKE TO, TO POINT OUT THE, AGAIN, THE ENTITY FIVES, UH, GUIDELINES WERE SPECIFICALLY, I WOULD SAY HISTORICALLY MADE FOR YOUR TYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY, ONE STORY BUNGALOW WITH A FIFTH, YOU KNOW, 50 BY ONE, 50, YOU KNOW, SO THESE GUIDELINES WERE, YOU KNOW, IF I, IF I HAVE TO, RIGHT, UH, KIND OF GUESS WAS WERE MADE FOR FRONT FACING, RIGHT? A LOT OF THESE WERE FOR, FOR FRONT FACING. NOW WE'RE IN A POSITION WHERE WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE BEING, UH, THESE GUIDELINES ARE BEING INTERPRETED ON A NON, YOU KNOW, SEMI RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ALSO ON, YOU KNOW, UH, FACADES THAT ARE BEING SEEN ON BOTH, BOTH STREETS IN PARTICULAR, LIKE THE, YOU KNOW, A CORNER, LIKE OUR CORNER UNIT WILL BE, YOU KNOW, RIGHT HERE, RIGHT. WE WOULD HAVE TO BE, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT REGULATION IS BEING HELD HERE AND HERE. WELL, IN THE, THE IMPROVED IDZ SITE PLAN USED TO HAVE THE STRUCTURES PARALLEL WITH FREDERICKSBURG. AND NOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS YOU'RE KIND OF LIKE 45 DEGREES TO FREDERICKSBURG. DOES THERE ANYTHING THAT WOULD, THE STANDARDS WOULD SAY THAT IT'S NOT FACING FREDERICKSBURG ANYMORE BECAUSE OF THE ANKLE? LIKE IF YOU EXCEED 45 DEGREES, DOES THAT REMOVE IT FROM CONSIDERATION? I, I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, YEAH. WHEN STAFF IS LOOKING AT THIS AS BOTH OF THESE ARE FACING BOTH STREETS, UM, JUST BECAUSE OF THE SCD AND STAFF'S POSITIONING WINDOWS, IT HAS TO BE A WINDOW, NOT A FAKE WINDOW. AND BY HAVING A POOL OR A DOG PARK AT BETWEEN THAT AND THE STREET, THAT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT'S, YEAH, WALL IS FACING A STREET ON THE MCD. SO I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CD FIVE IS, IT'S, IT'S A PRETTY, UM, IT'S PRETTY THOROUGH. AND I, I I, I DO THINK THAT I, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ALONG WITH OUR ARCHITECT TO REDUCE THE VARIANCES NEEDED. SO OUT OF THE, ALL THE VARI, ALL THE N-C-B-N-C-D FIVE GUIDELINES THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE GUIDELINES, WE'RE DOWN TO THREE WITH TWO, YOU KNOW, THREE OF THEM, UM, BEING, UH, TWO OF THEM BEING FULLY APPROVED, WELL, UH, SUPPORTED BY THE MEMBER ASSOCIATION AND ONE OF THEM BEING, YOU KNOW, SUPPORTED WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH I GUESS, UH, WELL EXCLUSION. I'LL JUST SAY THAT THE DRIVEWAY ONE DOESN'T BOTHER ME. 'CAUSE I KNOW YOU NEED IT FOR FIRE PROTECTION. YEAH. THE GARAGE ONE DOESN'T BOTHER ME 'CAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE PARKING, BUT THE WINDOW ONE, YOU KNOW, CAN WE, ARE WE ALLOWED TO MAKE A, A, A MOTION TO INCLUDE FAKE WINDOWS OR SOMETHING? CAN THAT BE A PART OF IT? I'M JUST ASKING. I MEAN, JUST TO GIVE HIM, GIVE THE, JUST TO GIVE THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION SOMETHING, UH, IVANIA YES. GIVE YOUR, UH, CHAIR. I THINK THAT, UH, HIS REQUEST, UH, IS NOT AN UNREALISTIC REQUEST. OH, I AGREE. IT'S, AND I BELIEVE THAT BEING THAT THE OTHER 1, 2, 3, 4 BUILDINGS ON THAT STREET ON UNIVERSITY HAVE SOMEWHAT THE SAME WINDOW DESIGNS ON EACH FLOOR. UM, THAT [03:25:01] I DON'T THINK IT'S AN UNREALISTIC REQUEST TO HAVE. AND, AND I THINK THE OVERALL PERCENTAGE OF HIS GLAZING, HIS SUPPOSE, YEAH, UM, YOU KNOW, PRETTY MUCH MEETS THE STANDARDS OF WHAT THEY'RE EXPECTING. OTHER THAN THOSE TWO, TWO FACADES. I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU. UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ON THE COMMISSION LIKE TO ADD YES. COMMISSIONER RE YES, AND, AND I, I AGREE THAT IT'S NOT UNREASONABLE. I'M JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, WAS ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN INTO, UH, ROTATING THOSE, UH, END UNITS TO FACE UNIVERSITY, THE END UNITS, THE, THE TWO UNITS THAT ARE, ARE BASICALLY BEING AFFECTED BY THE YES. ROTATING THEM TOWARDS SO THAT THE GARAGE WOULD FACE UNIVERSITY? OR IS THAT PRESENT ITS OWN ISSUES WITH CURB CUTS AND SO FORTH? YES. I THINK, UH, YOU KNOW, IN REGARDS TO TRYING TO SERVE THEM IN A WAY WHERE WE CAN, UM, WE CAN SERVE, ALL THESE UNITS ARE REAR LOADED, AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE THESE, THESE, UH, UH, CORRIDORS THAT WILL BE LANDSCAPE AND WE'RE CONNECTING EVERY, EVERY, UM, EVERY UNIT WITH A BASICALLY A MORE KIND OF WALKABLE PATH. SO THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT CAN BE BASICALLY WALK WITH A DA AND, AND EVERYTHING. SO, YEAH. OKAY. I, I WAS JUST CURIOUS. I MEAN, I, I ASSUMED YOU PUT THOUGHT INTO THIS SITE PLAN. YEAH. SO I, I WANT TO THINK ANOTHER WANNA POINT OUT IS THAT I, EVEN THOUGH WE ARE ONLY 40% OF OUR PROPERTIES AND WITHIN THE NCD, WE WILL BE FOLLOWING THE, THE NCD GUIDELINES THROUGHOUT IS, UH, ENTIRE PROJECT. IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS ANYONE SEND TO SPEAK ON THIS? NO. PUBLIC COMMENT. UM, COMMISSIONER MAN, DID YOU, I THOUGHT YOU WERE MOTIONING TO ASK A QUESTION. WELL, IT'S, SO IS THERE AN OVER OR SO A, A VIEW OF WHAT THE NC BOUNDARIES ARE? SO YOU KIND OF SEE THAT, 'CAUSE THEY KIND OF BROUGHT UP THAT IT KIND OF CUTS INTO SOME OF THIS PROPERTY, BUT, YOU KNOW, A LARGER VIEW OF, WE'LL SAY THE REST OF THE NCD JUST TO SEE HOW MUCH IT IS BOUNDED BY THE STREET VERSUS GOING ONE OFF, YOU KNOW, WE'LL SAY ONE PROPERTY OFF YOU PULL UP THE ONE STOP MAP AND KIND OF GIVE 'EM A BIGGER AND JUST, UH, ADDITIONALLY, THE DEFINITION OF A WINDOW IN THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND OPEN AND CONSTRUCTED IN A WALL IN WHICH EMITS LIGHT OR AIR INTO AN ENCLOSED IS FRAMED AND SPANNED WITH GLASS. UM, SO A DECORATIVE WINDOW LOOKING WOULDN'T SUFFICE UNLESS IT WAS VENTED . I'M TRYING, NOT SAYING IT DIDN'T HAPPEN BEFORE, JUST, OKAY. THERE SHOULD BE, JUST TURN ON THE ONCD OVERLAY. YEAH. UNDER LAYERS. ZOOM, ZOOM OUT A LITTLE BIT. I GOT EXACT. OKAY. YEAH, YEAH. THAT'S WHERE IT'S, OKAY. WELL, IF, UM, THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I JUST, I HAVE MORE COMMENT. ANYTHING. SO WE TALK ABOUT HARDSHIP HERE. OBVIOUSLY THE APPLICANT IS WORKING THROUGH THESE HARDSHIPS, UM, TO, TO, TO TRY TO BRING A VIABLE PROJECT, UH, OVER KIND OF THE NCD, UM, CONSTRAINTS HERE. AND I THINK THERE WAS A FIRST ATTEMPT AT THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY, WHICH DIDN'T WORK, RIGHT? SO IF WE LOOK AT TRYING TO PROVIDE WHAT I WOULD SAY AFFORDABLE, MUCH NEEDED HOUSING FOR SPECIFICALLY THIS AREA, AND IF WE'RE DOWN TO A FEW NCD ISSUES, WHICH I DON'T THINK, I THINK IN THE TOTALITY OF THE PROJECT, IT KIND OF MEETS THE N-C-D-I-I, I THINK THIS IS THE EXACT REASON WHY THE BOARD IS HERE AND IT'S A GOOD APPLICATION OF, OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE. SO, WELL, I'M NOT HEARING ANYBODY OPPOSED TO ANYTHING. SO IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. STEVENS COMMISSIONER STEVENS REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 3 0 0 2 8 1. I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT ONE, A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE WINDOW STANDARD TO ALLOW LESS THAN 25% SURFACE AREA DEDICATED TO WINDOW OPENINGS ON EACH FLOOR. LIMITED TO THE STRUCTURES WITHIN THE NCD BOUNDARY. TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE DRIVEWAYS AND CURB CUT STANDARDS TO ALLOW A DRIVEWAY TO BE 25 FEET WIDE AND A CURB CUT TO BE 33 FEET WIDE. AND THREE, A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE GARAGES STANDARD TO ALLOW ATTACHED GARAGES LIMITED TO THE STRUCTURES WITHIN THE NCD BOUNDARY SITUATED 1 37 UNIVERSITY, A AVENUE APPLICANT BEING MINT DEVELOPMENT LLC. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE 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. [03:30:01] ALLOWING THE VARIANCES WOULD CREATE GREATER UNIFORMITY ACROSS THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT AS OVER HALF OF THE PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND THEREBY NOT SUBJECT TO THESE STANDARDS. TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE THE REQUEST CONCERNS A PROPOSED MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. STRICT APPLICATION OF THESE STANDARDS WOULD CREATE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BY IMPOSING STANDARDS INTENDED TO PROMOTE FEATURES OF TYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENT. THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE, GIVEN THAT ONLY THE SUBSET OF STRUCTURES IN THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THESE STANDARDS, GRANTING THESE VARIANCES WOULD PROMOTE CONSISTENCY OF DESIGN WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF AND THEREBY ALIGN WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE. FIVE. SUCH, 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. GRANTING THESE VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, NOR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THE DEVELOPMENT WILL REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND SCALE. MASSEY AND OTHER NCD FIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, SIX, THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SAW AS 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 NEED FOR THE VARIANCES ARISES FROM THE UNIQUE LOT SHAPE, WHICH IMPOSES CERTAIN DIS DESIGN CONSTRAINTS FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY REGARDING DRIVEWAY ACCESS. THIS CONDITION WAS NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER, IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL IN NATURE AND IS NOT THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE BROADER DISTRICT. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANOCK. COMMISSIONER STEVENS. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF ALL THREE VARIANCES. I THINK. UM, THE CURB CUT AND THE DRY VILE IS KIND OF A NO BRAINER. WE NEED TO HAVE, UH, FIRE ACCESS AND THEN I THINK THAT THE GLAZING, UM, YOU, YOU CLEARLY ARE ALIGNED WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE VER OF THE ORDINANCE. UM, SO I'LL BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. THANKS. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MANNA. UM, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND I AND I THINK ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT WITH REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PART OF THE, A GOOD PORTION OF THIS IS NOT WITHIN THAT SPACE, AND SO WOULDN'T REQUIRE THAT. AND SO FORCING ESSENTIALLY EVERY ONE OF THOSE TO BE CHANGED FOR CONSISTENCY OR ALLOWING THESE TWO TO NOT HAVE IT, YOU KNOW, JUST, IT DOES SEEM A LITTLE BIT CONTRARY AND I THINK THEY GOT PRETTY CLOSE TO GLAZING. SO, AND, AND MAYBE IT WAS A STRETCH GOAL, BUT, UM, BECAUSE OF THAT, I'LL BE VOTING PAPER. THANK YOU. ANYONE'S LIKE TO ADD? I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT, YOU KNOW, WITH THIS BEING A LARGER IDZ DEVELOPMENT AND HAVING GONE THROUGH PUBLIC HEARINGS AND PUBLIC SCRUTINY, I, I THINK THAT THIS IS PERFECTLY FINE WITH WHAT THEY'RE DOING. UH, SO LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MONA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER E BON, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. I'LL CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER UNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BONNI? YES. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINANCES OF AG. MOTION PASSES. 10 TO ZERO. THANK YOU. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. YEP. ITEM NUMBER 16. AND IF YOU GUYS HAVEN'T NOTICED THAT, WE DO HAVE SOME FOOD BACK THERE IF YOU GUYS WANNA MUNCH ON. WHAT, WHAT WAS THAT? WE GOT SOME FOOD BACK THERE. OH, OKAY. THAT'S, WE'RE GONNA BE OUTTA HERE PRETTY SOON. I'M OKAY. BUT FEEL FREE TO PARTAKE. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO PRESENT? YES, PLEASE. THIS IS BO OA TWO SIX DASH 1 0 3 0 0 8. THE APPLICANT IS ANNA GURA. THE COUNCIL DISTRICT IS SEVEN. THE LOCATION IS 1 4 3 GLOBE AVENUE. THE ZONING IS R FIVE. THE REQUEST IS FOR A NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITH A ONE INCH FRONT SETBACK AND TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE UDC ACCESSORY STRUCTURE REGULATIONS TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITHIN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. AND THREE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG THE MIDDLE OF THE BLOCK, FACE OF GLOBE AVENUE. THE PROPERTY OWNER INTENDED TO BUILD A CARPORT AND A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION OF THE PROPERTY FOUND A PARTIALLY ENCLOSED STRUCTURE AND NO PERMANENT FILE PLAN REVIEW. STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE STRUCTURE COULD NOT BE CLASSIFIED AS A CARPORT BECAUSE IT IS ENCLOSED ON THREE SIDES, MAKING IT AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. CODE ENFORCEMENT ALSO NOTICED THAT IT WAS BUILT TOO CLOSE TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, WHICH PROMPTED THE APPLICANT [03:35:01] TO REQUEST A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. WHEN CONDUCTING THE SITE VISIT, STAFF NOTICED THAT THE OVERHANG OF THE CARPORT WAS OVER THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE APPLICANT WILL BE CUTTING BACK AT THE OVERHANG TO COMPLY WITH THE SETBACK STANDARD IF THE SETBACK VARIANCE IS APPROVED. STAFF ALSO NOTICED A DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION ISSUE UPON FURTHER INSPECTION OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. HERE IS THE SITE PLAN POINTING OUT ALL THREE VARIANCES AND TO EXPLAIN THIS FURTHER, UH, PLAN REVIEW STATED THAT THE AMOUNT OF WALL ON THE SIDES CONSTITUTES A WALL. SO THAT BACK PART AND THE TWO SIDE PARTS AND BEING ENCLOSED MAKES IT AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT THIS POINT. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE OVERHANG IS A LITTLE BIT OVER THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, BUT THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY STATED THAT SHE WILL BE CUTTING IT BACK. OKAY. AND HERE'S THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FRONT SETBACK, VARIANCE AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. VARIANCE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BO A TWO SIX DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. FACT, THE PLACEMENT OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD WOULD LEAD TO THE CROWDING OF THE FRONT YARD ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, AND THE STRUCTURE WILL BLOCK SIDELINES OF THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE AND IS OUTTA CHARACTER FOR THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO OA TWO SIX DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE SITE LINE VARIANCE REQUEST IS IN CHARACTER FOR THE SURROUNDING AREA AND WILL NOT HARM THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. AND THE REQUEST IS MODEST AND ALIGNS WITH THE SURROUNDING CLEAR VISION SITE LINES. WE MAILED OUT 38 NOTICES. WE GOT ONE IN FAVOR AND ONE IN OPPOSITION. THE UNIVERSITY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND. THIS IS THE IN SUPPORT AND THIS IS THE NEIGHBOR THAT IS IN OPPOSITION. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. SO A QUICK QUESTION IS IF ITEM NUMBER TWO AND ITEM NUMBER THREE ARE NOT, ARE NOT APPROVED, THEN THE RESULT IS THEN AND ITEM ONE IS APPROVED THEN THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO GET RID OF THE SIDING ON EITHER SIDE? YES, SIR. AND THAT'S IT? YES, SIR. AND THE FRONT PART CREEPING INTO THE PROPERTY. OKAY. YES. EVERYBODY CATCH THAT? SO, SO YEAH, I ACTUALLY HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, BUT YES. CAN YOU REPEAT IT AGAIN? YEAH. SO IF, UH, WHOEVER READS THE MOTION, UH, AND, AND WHAT THE BOARD CONSIDERS, IF WE ONLY APPROVE ITEM NUMBER ONE, UH, REGARDING THE FRONT SETBACK, UH, AND DON'T APPROVE ITEM NUMBER TWO AND THREE, THEN THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO GET RID OF THE SIDING, BUT NOTHING ELSE. ITEM NUMBER THREE IS ONLY FOR DEFENSE. NOT, NOT WITH THE, UH, SO JUST ITEM TWO. I THOUGHT IT'S JUST ITEM TWO. OH, I APOLOGIZE. OH, NUMBER TWO, I THOUGHT THAT WAS BECAUSE OF SIDING ALSO WAS A CLEAR VISION. NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN. UM, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. QUESTION. YES. THREE SIDES, TWO SIDES. YOU CAN SHOW IT UP AGAIN. YEAH, THE GARAGE COUNTS AS A SIDE, BUT IT IT ISN'T, UH, IT'S OPEN ON THE SIDES. NO, I MEAN, IT, IT, IT WHATEVER CAUSES A, A YOU HAVE THE TWO SIDES. UHHUH, AND THEN THE BACK. BECAUSE IT IS, IT, IT'S, YEAH, IT'S, I HAVE THE TWO SIDES AND THEN I HAD DOORWAYS MADE. SO IT, IT, IT'S NOT CLOSED UP TO THE, SO AFTER, AFTER WE REVIEWED THIS STRUCTURE, IT IS CONSIDERED, IT'S NOT CONSIDERED A CARPORT. I JUST WANTED SAY IT'S NOT REALLY THREE WALLS, IT'S TWO WALLS. UM, MY NAME IS GERRA AND I'M THE RESIDENT AND THE OCCUPANT OF 1 4 3 GLOBE. CAN YOU HAVE TO SPEAK INTO THE OH YEAH. ONE, THIS ONE. THE TOP ONE. THAT ONE RIGHT THERE. OKAY. CAN YOU LOWER IT? OH YEAH, YOU CAN MOVE. YEAH. UM, I LIVE AT 1 4 3 GLOBE. I'M THE RESIDENT OCCUPANT. I'VE LIVED ON THAT, UH, 4 43 YEARS ON THE BLOCK. UM, UH, MOST OF THE TENANT, THE, THE COMPOSER OF THE, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS SENIORS LIKE ME OR, UH, RENTERS. UM, THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE WOULD NOT BLOCK VIEWS NOR CAUSE INJURY TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. CURRENT RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP ON MY ABILITY TO USE THE, THE AREA OF MY SHALLOW DRIVEWAY TO COMPLETELY COVER MY VEHICLE. IT'S A VERY SHORT DRIVEWAY. UM, GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD ALLOW THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE TO PROVIDE SAFE AND PRACTICAL SHELTER FOR MY VEHICLE. THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE, UH, WOULD HAVE A POSITIVE EFFECT, ENHANCING THE PROPERTY, CURB APPEAL AND NEIGHBORHOOD CHARM. IT'S, UH, CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. IF YOU NOTICE THAT HOUSE ON THE CORNER, THAT'S WAY PAST THE [03:40:01] BOUNDARY LINE. SEE WHERE THE APPROACH IS. SHE GOT, SHE HAS IT ALL THE WAY TO THE SIDEWALK. OH, THAT'S SIDE ONE CORNER. ON THE OTHER CORNER YOU HAVE A, A CARPORT THAT IS NOT AS BAD, BUT IT'S STILL PAST THE BOUNDARY LINE. AND IN BETWEEN, UH, THIS IS MY SIDE OF THE BLOCK, THERE'S STILL TWO OR THREE OTHER, UH, HOUSES THAT HAVE, UM, FENCES THAT GO TO THE SIDEWALK OF PRIVACY FENCE OR THEY HAVE, UH, CONCRETE DECORATIVE STUFF THAT WE WERE TOLD WE WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO. AND I'M NOT COMPLAINING OR I'M JUST SAYING THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS, AND THAT'S WHY I, I, I DIDN'T THINK I NEEDED A PERMIT BECAUSE I THOUGHT I HAD THE 20 FOOT FOR THE DRIVEWAY AND THAT'S WHAT MY CONTRACTOR TOLD. AND WE LOOKED AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT'S WHAT WE WENT BY. THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I DIDN'T GET THE, THE, THE, THE PERMIT, UM, UM, ZONING REQUEST IS DUE TO SHALLOW SHORT DRIVEWAY LOT PRESENTING UNUSUAL CONDITIONS PREVENTING COMPLIANCE. I NEED A SAFE WEATHER PROTECTED AREA TO PARK MY VEHICLE. I'M DIAGNOSED WITH ARTHRITIS IN MY KNEES AND THE STRUCTURE WOULD ALLOW ME MORE ACCESS TO EXIT THE VEHICLE. SOMETIMES I USE A ROLLATOR. SO, UM, IN MY, I HAVE A CAR, A GARAGE, BUT I USE IT FOR STORAGE AND I CAN'T GET IN AND OUT OF MY CAR. UM, DUE TO THE SHALLOW SHORT FRONT YARD, THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE COULD NOT BE RELOCATED. IT CAN'T BE PUT ANYWHERE ELSE. UM, LET'S SEE. UM, THIS IS A MINIMUM VARIANCE REQUEST FOR PROPOSED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE FOR A LIVE ALONE SENIOR RETIREE WITH A MODERATE BUDGET. THE MINIMUM VARIANCE OFFERS ME TO HAVE A REASONABLE USE OF MY PROPERTY. UM, OTHER THAN THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S THE MAIN POINTS. YOU KNOW, I'VE ALREADY, I I'VE ALREADY SPENT MONEY TO GET THAT SIDING ON AND, UH, AND, AND, AND THE POST AND EVERYTHING. UH, FORTUNATELY IT'S WITHIN THE, THE BOUNDARY LINE, WHATEVER, IT'S JUST THE OVERHANG. I NEED TO CUT SOME OF IT SO THAT IT'S NOT INTO THE BOUNDARY LINE. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, AS YOU SEE THAT SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS I HAVE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE SIDEWALK AND I DON'T HAVE IT THAT FAR. SO YOU A CLEAR VISION? UH, IT'S ATTRACTIVE, UH, SEVERAL NEIGHBORS AND THERE'S NOT ONE LETTER. THEY'RE FOUR LETTERS THAT WE GAVE. THERE WERE FOUR. OKAY. BUT I GAVE YOU FOUR I HAND. OH, I YOU WANT ME TO GIVE 'EM TO YOU? UH, YOU SURE CAN. YOU CAN JUST HAND THOSE TO STAFF. THEY CAN PROJECT THEM UP ON. SURE. AND THE ONES THAT I, UM, UH, RECEIVED LETTERS ARE ACTUAL HOMEOWNERS. IF YOU RECEIVE ANY KIND OF OPPOSITION, IT COULD HAVE BEEN. DO YOU NEED TO SPEAK IN, UH, TO THE OH, I'M, I'M SORRY. YEAH, THOSE ARE ALL HOMEOWNERS. THEY PROPERTY OWNERS. UH, IF YOU RECEIVED ANYTHING THAT'S IN OPPOSITION, IT COULD HAVE BEEN FROM A RENTER. 'CAUSE I NOTICED ON THAT, UH, FORM THAT Y'ALL SEND OUT, IT SAYS OWNER AND I DON'T KNOW WHY, YOU KNOW, THEY MAIL THEM TO THE HO TO THE ADDRESS. YOU KNOW WHO ON THE, WHO PICKS UP THE MAIL? WHO, WHO'S THERE. SO THEY COUNT THE RENTERS. WELL, THEY MAIL 'EM TO THE ADDRESS AND THEY RECEIVE WHAT THEY RECEIVE. OKAY. SO, BUT, UM, BECAUSE RENTERS COME AND GO. OKAY. BUT YOU'VE GIVEN THOSE, UH, THOSE DOCUMENTS TO STAFF. OKAY. UH, ALRIGHT. IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? MANNA, COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO ASK WHY PUT THE SIDE. SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING READY TO DO IS ASK YOU, SO, SO I'LL, I'LL SAY THAT I'VE, I'VE SAT ON THIS BOARD FOR A WHILE AND THIS IS THE, THE SECOND TIME WHERE I'VE SEEN THE SIDE PUT ON TO A CARPORT. AND SO, SO I'LL SAY IT, THIS IS FEW AND FAR BETWEEN, OR I'LL SAY RARELY THAT WE SEE THIS. UM, SO, SO, UM, UH, I GOT THE IDEA FROM WALMART BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING AROUND YOU JUST SPEAKING TO THE MIC. OH, I'M SORRY. I GOT THE IDEA FROM WALMART. AND THEN I STARTED LOOKING AT OTHER PLACES THAT BUILD CARPORTS AND THEY DO IT PARTIALLY AND SOMETIMES ALL THE WAY TO THE BOTTOM AND THEY SELL THEM, YOU KNOW, ALREADY, UH, MADE OR WHATEVER. AND I GOT THE IDEA AND I, I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING I NEED BECAUSE I'M LIGHT, I'M IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BLOCK. MY HOUSE IS VERY UPFRONT. I CAN SEE ALL THE OTHER HOUSES AND THEY SEE ME WHEN I GO TO GET, PUT STUFF IN MY CART OR THEY SEE ME ALL THE TIME. I'M, I'M IN DISPLAY AND I LIVE ALONE. AND SO, UM, I, I PUT UP A DOOR CAMERA THAT HELPED ME, BUT THEN I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, I THINK FOR MY OWN PEACE AND SECURITY AND PRIVACY, HAVING THOSE PANELS WILL HELP ME BEING THAT I LIVE ALONE. THEY DON'T [03:45:01] SEE ME COMING IN AND OUT OR YOU KNOW, WHAT I'M TAKING OUTTA MY CAR. BUT IT, IT DOESN'T BLOCK THE VIEW. THOSE OTHER HOMES THAT HAVE THE, THE EXTENSION TO THE SIDEWALK BLOCK THE VIEW, YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING. OKAY. WELL I GUESS I WOULD, I WOULD CHOOSE IT TO GO SCREEN. I'M SORRY. YOU KNOW, SO I LOOK AT THIS AS A 10 FOOT WALL ON THE SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE. AND, AND SO, UM, WE DON'T PUT UP 10 FOOT FENCES. AND, AND SO, SO I, YOU KNOW, I GUESS I'M WORKING THROUGH, UM, PART OF THAT DIALOGUE. SO AS FAR AS THE, SO THE EXTENSION COMING DOWN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE SEEN TEARDROP SHAPE CARPORTS BEFORE. WHERE, WHERE WE'LL SAY THAT THERE IS KIND OF A, A DOWNWARD SIDE TO A STRUCTURE. AND SO, SO YOU KNOW, WHAT WOULD BE PERMITTED? UM, WE'LL SAY BEFORE, BEFORE IT'S CONSIDERED A SIDE TO UH, I GUESS A CARPORT. SO OUR GEN, OBVIOUSLY THIS IS NOT A NORMAL STRUCTURE, BUT THE GENERAL RULE THAT WE USE IS 50%. UM, THIS IS ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF THE WAY DOWN, SO ABOUT 66%. SO, OKAY. UM, AND SO I SAW, SO I SAW, UM, IT LOOKED LIKE A PIECE OF STRUCTURE THAT WAS BEHIND THE SHEET THAT THE SHEET IS ATTACHED TO. UM, AND THERE'S TWO OF THOSE. AND SO, SO IF THE, IF THE ROOF WAS A STOP AT THAT FIRST ONE, THAT THE FIRST SIDE PANEL, UM, SO SO WOULD THAT BE, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD PROVIDE SOME COVERAGE AND, YOU KNOW, GIVE YOU SOME PIECE. IT DOESN'T, WE HAD THAT STORM AND IT CAN'T, IT COMES AT AN ANGLE AND IT JUST COMES STRAIGHT THROUGH. UM, AND IT, IT'S NOT PROTECTING MY CAR. AND IF WE HAVE HAIL, THAT'S GONNA, BECAUSE MY, BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT I HAVE A TWO STORY, THAT THING IS TALL, SO WELL, SO ONE OF THE THINGS I DO IS I GOOGLE DRIVE THROUGH THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD AND NO ONE ELSE HAS THE SIDE PANELS. YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE CARPORTS AND, AND NONE OF THEM EVEN HAVE THE SIDE SIDES AT ALL. AND SO, SO I WOULD STRUGGLE SUPPORTING THIS, YOU KNOW, GOING TO THAT SECOND PANEL. BUT THAT FIRST PANEL, I THINK I CAN, I COULD, I COULD WORK THROUGH, BUT I, I HONESTLY AM STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT SIMPLY BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, DRIVING THROUGH YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, I DON'T SEE THIS, THAT MUCH OF A SIDE. UM, WELL THIS, IF THE, IF IT GETS DENIED, STAFF DID SAY THAT IT, IF IT STOPPED AT THAT FIRST, UH, BEAM, UH, THAT SIDE PANEL, THAT, THAT, THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE. SO. ALRIGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND JUST REAL QUICK, THE FOUR ADDITIONAL NOTICES THAT SHE GAVE US ALL ARE, SEEM TO BE WITHIN 200 FEET. OKAY. MR. ZUNA? YEAH. IS THE, IS YOUR PROPERTY SUBJECT TO A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION ARE DEED RESTRICTIONS? I LIVE BY THE UNIVERSITY. I, I WAS JUST LOOKING IT UP. I THINK IT'S CALLED UNIVERSITY PARK. IT WAS USED TO BE THIRD WORLD AND IT WENT TO GATEWAY AND I THINK NOW IT'S UNIVERSITY PARK. THEY CHANGE IT ALL. AND IS IT SUBJECT TO ANY, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS OR HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATIONS OR ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT, UM, WE HAVE A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION AND I DID CONTACT HER, UH, WHEN I CONTACTED SOME OF MY NEIGHBORS THAT THEY WERE GONNA BE GETTING LETTERS AND UH, SHE AND I SENT HER PICTURES AND SHE SAID THAT, UH, SOMETIMES THEY DO PROVIDE FEEDBACK, BUT USUALLY IT'S FOR OTHER THINGS LIKE STRUCTURES THAT, AND SHE SAID, SO, UH, WE WILL ATTEND TO IT, WE WILL ADDRESS IT AT THE MEETING. BUT I, I, YOU KNOW, I I I GUESS SHE DECIDED NOT TO, UH, I'LL JUST BE CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT THE OWNER'S ASSOCIATION, OR IF THEY DO HAVE ENFORCEABLE DEED RESTRICTIONS AGAINST, UM, KIND OF STRUCTURES LIKE THIS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF, UM, SO, OKAY, THAT'S A GOOD POINT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY RESTRICTIONS. OKAY. UM, I HAVE A QUESTION. WHEN I TORE DOWN MY HOUSE AND I REBUILT IT LOT, I HAD YOU, YOU, TO, YOU REBUILT YOUR ENTIRE HOUSE FROM SCRATCH? YES, SIR. OH, WOW. OKAY. IN FACT, JOAQUIN AND HUANG USED TO LIVE ON THAT PROPERTY. I USED TO RENT TO HIM 'CAUSE I OWNED A HOUSE NEXT DOOR. OKAY. UM, WHEN I TORE IT ON THE PROPERTY AND I BUILT IT RIGHT AWAY, I REALIZED I WAS NOT WITHIN THE NORM. SO EVERY TIME I PROTEST MY TAXES, BECAUSE IT IS NOT LIKE THE AREA, YOU, YOU DIDN'T WANNA MOVE IT FURTHER BACK WHEN YOU REBUILT IT, I CAN'T MOVE IT FURTHER BACK. THE THING WAS, WHEN, WHEN IT WAS BEING BUILT, I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE IT WAS GOING. I MEAN, THEY PUT THE POINTS, THE LITTLE THINGIES WERE OKAY. AND IT WASN'T UNTIL AFTER IT WAS CONSTRUCTED. AND EVEN AFTER THAT, I DIDN'T REALIZE HOW SHORT THE DRIVEWAY WAS UNTIL I DECIDED TO CARPORT. AND I GO, WELL, I, I HAVE 21 FEET, SO I GUESS I HAVE ENOUGH FOR A DRIVEWAY. SO IT NEVER OCCURRED TO ME BEING THAT I'M LIVING ALONE. I DON'T HAVE A BIG FAMILY LIVING WITH ME. UH, I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF CARS. UH, I FIGURED, YOU KNOW, I, IF I SOLD THE HOUSE, THEY WOULD DEAL WITH IT. SO, YOU KNOW, BUT MY POINT IS THIS, I, ALL MY LIFE I'VE BEEN TOLD YOU DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY. YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T DO IT WITHIN THE NORM AND IT'S NOT UGLY. IT REALLY ISN'T UGLY SPEAKING TO THE MIC AND, AND YOU'RE COUNTING IT ALREADY. IT'S JUST SPEAKING TO THE MIC. OH, IT'S NOT UGLY. AND YOU'RE COUNTING IT ALREADY AS THREE SIDES. AND IT'S NOT EVEN WHAT I WAS PLANNING. THEY STOPPED US IN, IN THE PROJECT I WAS PLANNING TO DO ALL THE WAY TO THE BOTTOM BECAUSE I [03:50:01] WAS TRYING TO GET THE PRACTICALITY OF IT. I DIDN'T WANT WATER OR HAIL COMING IN OR WIND. AND I HAVE ON THE SIDES, I THINK IT'S ABOUT SEVEN FEET TALL OR EIGHT FEET TALL, AND THEN IT'S ABOUT FOUR FEET WIDE BEFORE YOU EVEN GET TO THE GARAGE. SO THAT I HAD AN ENTRANCE TO GO INTO THE HOUSE OR TO GO OUT, OR THE MAILMAN TO GO AROUND. AND SO IT, IT'S, IT'S, I FEEL LIKE IT'S OPEN. UH, IT'S JUST THAT, LIKE I SAID, WHERE I'M LOCATED, I'M IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BLOCK. I LIVE ALONE. I'M WAY UP FRONT. EVERYBODY SEES, I FEEL LIKE I'M ON DISPLAY A LOT. AND FOR A WHILE I HAD A LOT OF PROBLEMS. UH, TWO O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, SOMEBODY RINGING MY DOORBELL. SO THEN I DECIDED TO GET A, A DOORBELL CAMERA AND THAT HELPED IT A LITTLE BIT. BUT LIKE I SAID, FOR MY OWN PROTECTION, UM, I DECIDED, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S NOT UGLY. I EVEN STILL LIKE THE COLOR. IT'S THE COLOR OF THE HOUSE. UH, AND I'M GONNA KEEP UP WITH IT. UM, I'M STILL PAINTING THE, I'M GONNA PAINT THE POSTS. UM, SO IT'S NOT, IT'S JUST DIFFERENT, BUT IT'S NOT UGLY AND IT'S NOT BLOCKING ANYBODY'S VIEW. UM, THEY CAN STILL SEE THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE. THEY CAN SEE THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. AND THEN I HAVE A CYCLONE FENCE WHERE THEY CAN SEE ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK. I'M ALL OPEN TO THE BACK. IT'S JUST ME GETTING OUTTA MY CAR, STRUGGLING TO GET OUTTA MY CAR, GETTING MY STUFF OUT, COMING BACK AND FORTH. I DON'T HAVE ANY, I'M NOT WA NOBODY'S WATCHING ME TO CASE THE PLACE AND SEE, OH LOOK, YOU KNOW, SHE LIVES ALONE. I NOTICED THIS, I NOTICED THAT. AND I JUST SEE IT AS SOMETHING FOR A SENIOR THAT, THAT I NEED. 'CAUSE I LIVE ALONE FOR MY OWN PROTECTION. UM, BUT ANYWAY, LIKE, AND ALSO FOR THE WEATHER. UM, LET'S SEE. UM, PRETTY MUCH THAT. OKAY, NO VOICEMAILS, NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT, WELL IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION COMMISSIONER MANON. SO I'M GONNA READ, UH, THIS WITHOUT NUMBER TWO AND THEN WE CAN TAKE A SECOND VOTE ON NUMBER TWO. SO THAT WAY, UM, YEAH, WE VOTED ON THAT ONE SEPARATELY. IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 8, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD ADJUSTMENT GRANT, ONE A NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITH A ONE INCH FRONT SETBACK AND TWO, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION SITUATED AT 1 4 3 GLOBE AVENUE APPLICANT BEING ANNA GOREA. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOWED THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERS PROPERTIES SUCH THAT LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDMENT WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE, UM, UH, IN THIS CASE, THERE WOULD BE ADEQUATE SPACE FOR THE FRONT OF THE CARPORT, UH, WHICH, UH, LEAVES OPEN IN THE FRONT YARD, UM, AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS DIRECTLY OVER THE DRIVEWAY, LEAVING THE FRONT YARD OPEN AND CLEAR, UH, THE DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION. THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GLOBAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. IN THIS CASE, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS REPRESENTED BY HAVING A CLEAR VISION OF TRAFFIC ACROSS THE STREET. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS MODEST. IT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECT CLEAR VISION TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS OR LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE, UM, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AND IT WOULD PREVENT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE FROM SERVING AS A CARPORT AND WOULD LIMIT THE DEPTH OF THE OVERALL CARPORT. WITH REGARDS TO THE CLEAR VISION, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF RESULT WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS EXISTING FRONT YARD FENCES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA ARE SIMILARLY CUT SETBACK FROM THE STREET. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPARE OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE, SUCH VARIANCE WOULD BE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS A REDUCTION IN THE SETBACK IS MINIMAL AND WILL CAUSE NO HARDSHIP TO EITHER PROPERTY, BUDDING THE SLOT. AND, UM, LET'S SEE. UM, AND LEAVING ROOM AT THE BOTTOM FOR LIGHT ACCESS AND SIGHT LINE ACCESS. WITH REGARDS TO DRIVEWAY CLEAR VI CLEAR VISION VARIANCE, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL BE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE CLEAR VISION IS SIMILAR TO THE SURROUNDING AREA AND IS IN CHARACTER WITH THE APPEARANCE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE AND THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS 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 THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE FRONT VARIANCE, SETBACK VARIANCE, UH, GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE, UH, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS THERE IS SUFFICIENT SEPARATION FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. UM, AND THE STRUCTURED [03:55:01] LEAVES, UH, THE FULL FRONT YARD OPENING BEING PLACED OVER ONLY OVER THE DRIVEWAY. UM, DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION VARIANCE STAFF FINDS THE CLEAR VISION VARIANCES WITHIN THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE FRONT YARD FENCES ARE AT A SIMILAR PLACEMENT WITHIN THE FRONT YARD. SIX APPLY TO THE PROPERTY. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH A VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT REALLY FINANCIAL AND NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. WITH REGARDS TO THE FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE, THE PLIGHT TO THE OWNER OF PROPERTY IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ON THE DEATH OF THE FRONT YARD, WHICH LIMITS THE AVAILABLE SPACE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CARPORT. UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION, THE PLIGHT OF THE ON PROPERTY IS DUE TO THE EXISTING DISTANCES FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND THE STREET CURB. A STRICT APPLICATION OF THE STANDARD WOULD REDUCE THE FENCED IN AREA OF THE PROPERTY PROPERTY OWNER'S FRONT YARD. AND THE MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER CRUZ, ARE YOU GONNA BE THE SECOND? I GUESS SO, SIR. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO, SO, UM, I LEFT OUT NUMBER TWO SO WE CAN HAVE A SEPARATE DIALOGUE THAT, BUT YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T SEE REALLY ANY ISSUES WITH REGARDS TO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE OVERALL CARPORT SIZE, YOU KNOW, LOOKING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD THERE IN, THERE ARE LOTS OF OTHER CARPORTS THAT REPLICATE THAT, THAT MODEL. AND SO I DIDN'T SEE AN ISSUE AT ALL. AND SO I, I'D BE PERFECTLY FINE, YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH ONE IN THREE IN THE, IN THE MOTION AND MEAN WE CERTAINLY HAVE MORE DIALOGUE ON NUMBER TWO. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CRUZ. UM, I WILL AGREE WITH MR. MANNA ON THAT, ON ONE OR TWO, ONE AND THREE. UM, THE TWO IS STILL A POOR DISCUSSION. ALL RIGHT. UH, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE THAT ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER REED? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BEES? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER UNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BON? YES. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ. I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINES. IN FACT. MOTION, UH, UH, ITEMS ONE AND THREE IS PASSED. IS THERE A COMMISSIONER WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON ITEM TWO? HEARING NONE. UM, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? UH, YOU CAN ASK A QUICK QUESTION. NONE OF MY NEIGHBORS HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT IT. WELL, I'M, THEY'VE COME UP AND COMPLIMENTED. I'M, I'M SORRY. BUT IT DOES VIOLATE THE ZONING CODE. IF YOU DO HAVE ANY, UH, UH, QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT YOU CAN DO MOVING FORWARD, YOU CAN TALK TO STAFF ABOUT IT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ITEM 16. SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? CHAIR? YES. COMMISSIONER CRUZ. I NEED TO LEAVE. COMMISSIONER CRUZ IS LEAVE, UH, LEAVING THE, UH, MEETING AT 5 0 4. I IT'S ITEM 17. ITEM 17 IS BO OA DASH 26 DASH 0 3 0 0 0 9. UM, IN COUNCIL DISTRICT SIX, LOCATED AT 71 0 6 CLOVERFIELD LANE. THE ZONING IS R SIX AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW FOR A CARPORT WITH A ONE INCH SIDE SETBACK. THE SURROUNDING AREA IS PRIMARILY DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON LOTS ZONED R SIX. THIS CASE ORIGINATED FROM A CODE ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION IN RESPONSE TO A CITIZEN CALL REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CARPORT. A STOP WORK ORDER WAS ISSUED AFTER IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE CARPORT WAS DIS CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT A PERMIT. PER THE STAFF SITE VISIT TO THE SITE IN JANUARY OF 2026, ONLY THE POSTS AND CONCRETE FOOTINGS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. THE APPLICANT WAS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A CARPORT WITH A ONE INCH SIDE SETBACK. SINCE THE CARPORT IS CLASSIFIED AS NEW CONSTRUCTION BUILDING PERMITS ARE REQUIRED AND ARE PENDING THE OUTCOME OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THEN THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND BOA DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 9 FOR THE SIDE SETBACK. BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE REDUCED SETBACK VARIANCE WOULD LEAVE INSUFFICIENT ROOM TO MITIGATE POTENTIAL FIRE [04:00:01] CONCERNS AND WATER RUNOFF INTO ABUTTING PROPERTIES. TWO, THE CARPORT HAS NOT BEEN FULLY CONSTRUCTED AND PLANS COULD BE MADE TO ADJUST THE CARPORT TO FALL WITHIN THE PROPERTY SIDE. SETBACKS, STAFF MAILED 33 NOTICES. ONE WAS RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET, AND THIS IS THE NOTICE OF SUPPORT THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR CARPORT. UH, MY NAME'S ALBERT VINEO. I LIVE ON 71 0 6, UH, CLOVERFIELD. AND I WANT TO GET A, LIKE A CARPORT FOR, UM, FOR, FOR THE, FOR MY CARS, YOU KNOW, THAT WAY THE, THE SUN DAMAGE AND HELL AND STUFF LIKE THAT, OR RAIN WHEN WE COME OUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO. OKAY. AND CAN YOU LIFT THE MICROPHONE UP? THERE YOU GO. YEAH. SO, UH, I'LL JUST START OFF REAL QUICK. SO YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF CARPORTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THIS IS IN CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? MM-HMM . UH, A LOT OF THE HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE A SINGLE CAR GARAGE, AND THE CARPORTS THAT THEY BUILD ARE, UH, AT LEAST TWO CARS WIDE. YEAH. YOURS LOOKS LIKE IT'S THREE CARS WIDE. AM I, UH, NO. LIKE HOW WIDE IS YOUR CARPORT INTENDED TO BE? IT'S, IT'S, IT'S FOR TWO CARS, BUT, UM, THE, WE MADE IT A LITTLE WIDER THAT WAY WHEN, WHEN, YOU KNOW, IT COULD HAVE LIKE A SIDEWALK. OH, I, I KNOW, I I KNOW ALL ABOUT THAT. YEAH, THAT, I MEAN, YEAH. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY MADE IT, I MEAN, BUT IT'S NOT FOR THREE CARS, IT'S FOR TWO, BUT THAT WAY IF TWO CARS ARE PARKED, I MEAN, YOU COULD STILL, YOU KNOW, WALK LIKE ON THE SIDE. OKAY. HAVE YOU, HAVE YOU FILED FOR A PERMIT WITH THE CITY YET? NO. OKAY. I MEAN, UM, THE, I MEAN, I, I APPLIED FOR THE VARIANCE, BUT, UH, THE, THE CONCRETE, THE CONTRACTOR, UM, SUGGESTED I JUST PUT THE POLES BEFORE THE, YOU KNOW, THAT WAY IT COULD BE LIKE SUNK INSIDE THE, THE CONCRETE. BUT IS YOUR CARPORT GOING TO, UH, IS YOUR INTENT TO INCLUDE GUTTERS? UH, THERE WAS NOT AN INTENT. UM, UH, I WAS GONNA FACE THE, ALL THE, THE, THE SLANT, YOU KNOW, TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. OKAY. SO IT'LL, IT'LL DROP TO THE FRONT OF THE, OF THE DRIVEWAY. OKAY. UM, SO JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WHEN WE HEAR, WE HEAR THESE APPLICATIONS, UH, WE, WE DO HAVE EITHER A PLAN OR THERE'S, OR THERE'S SOMETHING DOCUMENTED THAT, THAT EXPLAINS WHAT IT IS YOUR, YOUR INTENT IS AND, AND WHAT WE'RE, WHAT'S PART OF THE APPLICATION. YEAH. AND SO IN THIS CASE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF THAT. AND SO DID YOU WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO EXPRESS, UH, SOMETHING YOU'D LIKE TO TIE TO YOUR APPLICATION, UH, OF WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT YOU'RE DOING? LIKE YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT YOU WERE GONNA PUT A UNIFORM SLANT ROOF AND HAVE A DRAIN TOWARD THE FRONT. WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE THAT PART OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING? UM, YEAH. I MEAN, I GUESS THAT, THAT IT'LL BE LIKE SLANTED TOWARD THE FRONT THAT MIGHT, THAT MIGHT HAVE SOME SWAY WITH, UH, COMMISSIONERS. UH, 'CAUSE THERE'S NINE OF US NOW, SO ALL NINE OF US HAVE TO APPROVE THIS. MM-HMM . AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL. SO IF, UM, IS THERE ANY, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER UH, QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT AT THIS TIME? SO CAN YOU BRING, LET'S SEE. SO, UM, YEAH, IT'S, UH, OKAY, THAT'S REALLY CLOSE TO THE SIDE. MANANA, . SO WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, SO YOU'RE LOOKING TO, SO YOU'RE LOOKING TO PROVIDE A SIDEWALK ON THE SIDE THERE? WHEN I LOOK AT, I DID SEE ONE OR TWO THAT WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE EDGE. A LOT OF, BUT I'LL SAY THE MAJORITY OF THEM WERE IN BY JUST A LITTLE BIT. YOU KNOW, THEY STILL, THEY WERE, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY DIDN'T PUT THE POLES RIGHT AT THE EDGE. AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I GUESS I WOULD GO DOWN THE QUESTION OF IF, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO BRING THE POLLS IN AND, AND MAYBE IT DOESN'T MATTER. SO, UM, I'M FINE. I'M FINE. IT'S NEVERMIND. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. UM, IS THERE ANY VOICEMAILS? ANYONE ELSE? I GUESS THERE'S NO ONE ELSE HAVING TO SPEAK ON THIS ONE, BUT, UH, NO PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. NO OTHER QUESTION. GO BACK FOR, OKAY. SO, SO, YOU KNOW, SO, SO WHAT'S THE WIDTH BETWEEN THOSE TWO POLLS? UH, FROM THE SIDE TO SIDE THERE, UM, I THINK IT'S LIKE 25 FEET. SO IT, IT'S THAT WAY WHEN YOU PARK, THERE'S, UM, LIKE ON THE RIGHT SIDE, I COULD PARK MY TRUCK AND THEN THE, THE GARAGE, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'LL HAVE ACCESS TO GO IN AND OUT. AND THEN THERE'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE LIKE FOUR OR FIVE FEET TO WALK JUST IN CASE, YOU KNOW, YOU PARK ON THE, ON THE PARKING, YOU KNOW, AND THE, UM, THE, THE, THE SLANT OF [04:05:01] THE FLOOR, THE WATER WILL, WILL NOT GO TO THE, TO THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE, WHICH IS MY BROTHER-IN-LAW'S. BUT, UM, IT'LL GO TO THE FRONT. OKAY. I MEAN, I, I JUST HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT BEING SO WIDE. TWO CARS IS NOT A PROBLEM. RIGHT. A PARKING SPACE IS NINE FEET, 10 FOOT GIVES YOU PLENTY OF ROOM TO WALK. RIGHT. SO IT, IT, YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS KIND OF JUST MOVED IN THREE FEET I'D BE HAPPY WITH. RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS WONDERING. THREE FOOT IN. AND, AND THEN ALSO JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T, WE JUST IS MORE THAN 50% OF THE FRONT YARD CONCRETE NOW. YEAH, WE, WE DID LOOK AT THAT AND IT'S LESS THAN 50%. IT'S, IT'S A PRETTY WIDE, UH, FRONT YARD. YEAH. BUT, OKAY. SO I MEAN, IF ANYONE, IF SO, IF WE PUTTING THAT OUT THERE, I'D, I'D, I'D LIKE TO SEE, I I WOULD SELECT THE THREE FOOT. AND SO JUST SIMPLY BECAUSE I, YOU KNOW, I WENT DOWN THE STREET AND ALMOST ALL OF THEM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S TWO THAT WEREN'T, BUT THEY WEREN'T, THEY DIDN'T, THEY WEREN'T AS WIDE. AND SO THEY'RE, THEY WERE TRULY ONLY FOR TWO CAR GARAGES. YEAH. OR TWO CAR CARPORTS. SO THIS ONE IS A LITTLE BIT ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER, YES. CAN WE, IT, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. YEAH. I NOTICED THAT YOUR DRIVEWAY ON THE, UH, SIDE GOES TO THE BACK. YEAH. IS, IS THAT WHY YOU MADE IT THAT WIDE SO THAT YOU COULD ALSO YEAH. USE THAT BACK DRIVEWAY? YEAH, I MEAN, JUST, I MEAN, EMERGENCY, YOU KNOW, I CAN, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE IT WAS DIRT, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE SIDE OF IT WAS DIRT AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE TAKE THE TRASH CANS OUT OR WHATEVER IT, UM, IT WOULD WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, ON, ON MUD OR DIRT. SO WE JUST DECIDED TO DO THE, THE BACK PATIO LIKE THAT. UM, YEAH. SO IF YOU MOVE THOSE POSTS IN THREE FEET, LIKE RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE ON THAT CURB. IF YOU WERE TO MOVE THE POSTS IN THREE FEET OR TWO FEET, UM, WOULD IT BLOCK YOUR USE OF THAT? YEAH. SIDE DRIVEWAY? YEAH, BECAUSE I MEAN, THE, UH, MY TRUCK WILL BARELY FIT. IT'S LIKE 10 FOOT WIDE RIGHT THERE. I MEAN, IF I WAS TO MOVE THE POST LIKE MORE TOWARDS THE MIDDLE, IT'LL, I MEAN, I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO USE IT AS A CARPORT, YOU KNOW? YEAH. HE, HE MIGHT HAVE TO PUT THE POST IN LINE WITH THE, WITH THE HARD CORNER OF THE HOME AND STILL GIVE HIM TWO PARKING SPACES AND THEN HE CAN DO AN OVERHANG ON THE RIGHT SIDE. SO THERE'S, SO WE CAN STILL DRIVE BACK THERE, BUT I MEAN, YEAH, I, I DON'T, I MEAN, I, I DON'T PLAN TO PUT LIKE A, A CARPORT ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. IT'S JUST GONNA BE LIKE THE FRONT, I I DON'T KNOW IF THEY GAVE YOU LIKE, UM, LIKE I GUESS THIS IS THE, LIKE THE, OH, SO YOU DO, YOU DO HAVE A PLAN? YEAH. I MEAN, LET ME SEE IF WE, IT'S IN THE FILE. OKAY. YEAH, IT'S LIKE 2025. OH, THERE WE GO. ALL RIGHT. SO IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, BEEZ COMMISSIONER BEEZ, DID I HEAR YOU RIGHT THAT YOU SAID YOUR BROTHER-IN-LAW LIVES ON THE RIGHT ON THAT? YEAH, MY BROTHER-IN-LAW LIVES ON THE, ON THE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE. LIKE TO THE RIGHT, YEAH. RIGHT WHERE THE, WHERE THE CARPORT'S GONNA BE. HE HAS, HE HAS ONE EXACTLY ON THE SAME. DID HE, YOU DIDN'T GET AN APPROVAL LETTER FROM HIM? NO. I MEAN, ARE YOU IN GOOD STANDING WITH HIM? YEAH, I'M IN GOOD STANDING WITH HIM, BUT, UH, I DON'T THINK HE RESPONDED, BUT, WELL, I MEAN, I'M, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A SIDE PLAN THAT SHOWS THE CARPORT NOT TO EXCEED, UH, PAST THE FRONT CORNER, WHICH IS, UM, A BIG SELLING POINT FOR ME. MOSTLY BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORING HOME DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING ON THE SIDE AND THEIR DRIVEWAY'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO THAT'S ONE THING. UH, I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO SOMEBODY TO MAKE A MOTION IF, UH, AND WE'LL SEE, WE'LL SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT. UNLESS THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS. HEARING NONE. WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? BEUS COMMISSIONER BEUS REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA TWO SIX DASH 0 3 0 0 0 0 9, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RAN A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A CARPORT WITH A ONE INCH SIDE SETBACK SITUATED AT 7 1 0 6 CLOVER FIELD LANE, APPLICANT BEING ALBERT TREVINO. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PROPOSAL TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM SIZE SETBACK FOR A CARPORT ON THIS PROPERTY WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE DECREASED SPACE BETWEEN THE CARPORT AND THE PROPERTY LINE WOULD NOT IMPACT THE ABUTTING NEIGHBOR. TWO, DUE TO A SPEC DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP BECAUSE THE CARPORT, CONCRETE AND POSTS HAVE BEEN PLACED. AND AN APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE WOULD ENSURE THE PROPERTY OWNER DOES NOT HAVE TO MOVE THE POST OR DESTROY THE EXISTING CONCRETE. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE OR ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE OR ORDINANCE WILL STILL BE [04:10:01] OBSERVED, AND THERE IS STILL DISTANCE BETWEEN WHERE THE CARD PORT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED AND THE ABUTTING NEIGHBOR'S PRIMARY STRUCTURE. THE FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THE, THAN THOSE USE 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, JUST SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF, OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE, THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. GRANTING THIS, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS THE REDUCED SETBACK VARIANCE WOULD STILL LEAVE SUFFICIENT ROOM TO MITIGATE POTENTIAL FIRE CONCERNS AND WATER RUNOFF INTO ABUTTING PROPERTIES. SIX. THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE, IN, IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THERE'S LITTLE ROOM LEFT TO CONSTRUCT A CARPORT THAT FULFILLS ITS INTENDED PURPOSE WITHOUT ENCROACHING ON THE SIDE. SETBACKS. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER AMANDA, UM, CAN I OFFER A, AN AMENDMENT TO, TO, TO, TO INCLUDE IN THE, IN THE MOTION THAT THE CARPORT WILL NOT EXCEED 25 FEET IN DEPTH WILL EXIST COMPLETELY IN THE FRONT OF THE EX OF, OF, OF THE HOME. UH, AND, UH, AND, UH, UH, AND AS CITED BY THE APPLICANT, WE'LL SLOPE TOWARDS THE STREET. THANK YOU. TOWARDS THE STREET. YES, I ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT. COMMISSIONER AMANDA? YES. I WAS GONNA ASK FOR THAT AS A FRIENDLY MOTION, SO THANK YOU. OKAY. SO THE, THE MOTION'S BEEN AMENDED, UH, TO LIMITED TO BE 25 FEET IN DEPTH, UH, TO BE IN FRONT OF THE HOME, UH, TO BE ENTIRELY IN FRONT OF THE HOME AND TO SLOPE TOWARDS THE FRONT AS EXPRESSED BY THE APPLICANT DURING HIS PRESENTATION. SO, UM, SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE FRONT OF THE HOME NOTION OF IT BECAUSE IT'S GOT THAT TAIL THAT COMES OUT AND SO, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANT. SO I THINK THAT 25 FOOT IS PROBABLY SUFFICIENT 'CAUSE 'CAUSE OTHERWISE THAT MAY BE IN CONFLICT. OKAY, THAT'S FINE. YEAH. IS THAT OKAY WITH, IS THAT OKAY, COMMISSIONER? YES, THAT'S FINE. ALRIGHT, SO THEN WE, SO NOW IT'S JUST LIMITED TO 25 FEET IN DEPTH, UH, AND THAT'S EXPRESSED BY THE APPLICANT WILL SLOPE TOWARDS THE STREET. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER MANNA, I MEAN, COMMISSIONER BEDA FORGIVE, UH, I'M GONNA BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. I, IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT IT WAS STARTED WITHOUT THE PERMITS, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE FACT THAT YOU'RE, UM, THE, THE SLOPE OF THE CARPORT AND, UM, ALTHOUGH IT IS LONGER, YOU KNOW, 25 FEET IS PRETTY LONG, BUT, UM, YOU'RE, IT'S IN LINE WITH THE HOUSE AND THE FACT THAT YOUR BROTHER-IN-LAW LIVES NEXT TO YOU. SO, I'M, I'M, I'M IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER MADA. UM, I, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE. MY PREFERENCE WOULD'VE BEEN IN BY THREE V, BUT I'LL, I'LL RUN WITH THIS. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? I JUST HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER BENA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? YES. CHAIR ORIAN. AND I CAN GO WITH THE FINES OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, WHAT WE ACTUALLY PASSED, YOU CAN TALK TO STAFF. OKAY? APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU GUYS. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER 18. ITEM NUMBER 18. I THINK WE'VE NEVER SAID THAT BEFORE. ITEM NUMBER 18, THAT'S SOON TO BE 19. NO. ITEM NUMBER 18 IS BO OA DASH TWO SIX DASH 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 LOCATED IN DISTRICT FIVE AT 5 1 9 NORTH SAN MARCOS. THE ZONING IS IEZ WITH USES PERMITTED IN R FOUR AND C TWO AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT FRONT YARD SOLID FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW SIX FOOT FRONT YARD SOLID FENCE. THE SURROUNDING AREA IS A MIXTURE OF BAY ZONING DISTRICTS AND USES INCLUDING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ZONED R FOUR, RM SIX IDZ, AND IDZ TWO IN THE SURROUNDING AREA AND ALONG THE BLOCKED THE SOUTH AND WEST COMMERCIAL ZONED PROPERTIES TO THE EAST AND INDUSTRIAL ZONED PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ALSO LOCATED WITHIN PROXIMITY TO THE RAILROAD IN 2009. THE PROPERTY IS REZONED [04:15:01] ALONG WITH OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA TO IDZ WITH USES PERMITTED IN C TWO AND R FOUR. THIS CASE ORIGINATED FROM THE APPLICANT SUBMITTING REQUEST REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO START THE PROCESS OF REPLACING THE CURRENT FENCE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THE INSTALLATION OF A SOLID SIX FOOT FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD. THE PROPERTY'S CURRENTLY BEING REPAIRED AND RENOVATED AND HAS BEEN ISSUED SEVERAL PERMITS. THIS IS A SITE PLAN OF THE REQUEST. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN BO OA DASH TWO SIX DASH 0 3 0 0 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT. AND THIS IS FOR THE FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION ONE. THE ABUTTING AND IMMEDIATE NEARBY PROPERTIES DO NOT HAVE FENCE HEIGHT SIMILAR TO THE REQUEST. AND TWO, THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD BE INTRODUCING OFFENSE HEIGHT THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. STAFF MAILED AT 24 NOTICES. WE RECEIVED SIX BACK IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND WE ALSO RECEIVED ONE IN FAVOR. OUTSIDE 200 FEET, THERE'S NO RESPONSE FROM THE GARDENDALE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THESE ARE ALL THE RESPONSES RECEIVED IN SUPPORT. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. DID I NOTICE THAT RIGHT? THAT ONE PERSON SEEMED TO APPROVE THREE OF THE LETTERS? YES, THERE IS, THERE ARE MULTIPLE LETTERS FROM THE ONE PROPERTY OWNER, BUT THEY'RE FOR MULTIPLE PROPERTIES IN THE AREA. OKAY. SO I COUNTED THEM. OKAY. EACH AS INDIVIDUAL, I COUNTED AS THE PROPERTY OF THE OWNER AND MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA. SO ON THE LETTER THAT DID GO OUT TO US, IT DID, DID STATE THERE, DID STATE THAT GARDENDALE LABOR ASSOCIATION WAS IN SUPPORT. SO IS THAT AN ERROR OR DID THEY LATER PROVIDE THEIR SUPPORT? IT DOES. SO WE, WE GOT A LETTER TODAY. UH, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE COUNTS THAT WERE MAILED OUT EARLIER? YEAH, THE COUNTS. THE COUNTS SHOWED 24 NOTICES. LET'S, IF I'M LOOKING THE RIGHT ONE. YEAH. COUNTS WERE 24 NOTICES, SIX SUPPORT, ZERO OPPOSITION. AND NICK GARDENDALE WAS IN SUPPORT GARDEN. I DID RECEIVE A RESPONSE FROM GARDENDALE. I MUST HAVE NOT UPDATED THE POWERPOINT, BUT YOU WILL SEE DALE'S NOTICE, I BELIEVE AT THE END OF THIS PRESENTATION. OKAY, PERFECT. YES, I RECEIVED IT LATE THIS MORNING, SO I GUESS, BUT THEY'RE IN SUPPORT. I'VE RECEIVED IT. IT'S JUST NOT ON THE, THAT, WHERE IT'S AT THE POWERPOINT. OKAY. ALRIGHT, WELL LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. AWESOME. HELLO, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR FENCE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS DEBORAH WILSON AND I AM THE OWNER AND RESIDENT AT 5 1 9 NORTH SAN MARCOS. UM, THIS IS NOT A TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL BLOCK. MY PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY NEARBY INDUSTRIAL USES AND A RAILROAD LINE THAT GENERATES CONSTANT NOISE AND ACTIVITY FROM ANYWHERE BETWEEN 5:00 AM TILL 1:00 AM IN THE MORNING ACROSS THE STREET. A PARKING LOT ALSO HOSTS WEEKLY FOOD DISTRIBUTION EVENTS THAT ATTRACT LARGE GROUPS OF HOMELESS PEOPLE. I HAVE EXPERIENCED INDIVIDUALS WALKING ALONG ALONGSIDE MY HOME, ATTEMPTING TO LOOK INTO THE WINDOWS, WHICH I ALSO HAVE A VIDEO CLIP OF AS WELL. SOMEONE CLIMBED MY FENCE, A EXISTING FENCE AND REMOVED MATERIALS AND THERE IS FREQUENT LOITERING AND PUBLIC DISTURBANCE ALONG THE STREET. THE CURRENT THREE FOOT OR FENCE ORDINANCE PROVIDES NO MEANINGFUL PRIVACY OR SECURITY IN THIS ENVIRONMENT. THE HARDSHIP IS NOT PERSONAL, IT IS TIED TO THE LOCATION SURROUNDINGS AND INTENSITY OF THE ADJACENT USES. A SIX FOOT FENCE WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE STREET. SEVERAL NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ALREADY HAVE TALLER FENCES. THIS CORRIDOR DOES NOT FUNCTION LIKE A TRADITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STREET. I HAVE ALSO SUBMITTED LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS AND ALSO I DID SPEAK WITH THE GARDENDALE ASSOCIATION AND THEY ARE IN SUPPORT. THEY ACTUALLY CAME TO MY PROPERTY AND VISIT ME. I AM COMMITTED TO IMPROVING THIS PROPERTY. THIS IS A 1944 HOUSE THAT I ABSOLUTELY LOVE AND I BROUGHT THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE IT IS ID ZI HOPE TO PLAN TO TRANSITION THIS PROPERTY INTO A FUTURE BUSINESS USE. UM, THAT WILL BE HOPEFULLY A COMMUNITY FOR ARTISTS AND MUSICIANS IN THE FUTURE ON, THAT'S MY, MY LONG-TERM GOAL. BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW, I DO LIVE IN THIS PROPERTY AND THIS IS MY HOME GRANTING [04:20:01] THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT PUBLIC SAFETY, TRAFFIC VISIBILITY, OR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. INSTEAD, IT WILL IMPROVE SECURITY, STABILIZE THE PROPERTY, AND ALIGN WITH THE MISUSE CHARACTER OF THIS CORRIDOR. FOR THESE REASONS, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST APPROVAL OF HIS VARIANCE. UM, SO I DO HAVE EVIDENCE, UH, SHOWING THAT THERE ARE, THERE WAS A PERSON ACTUALLY PEEKING THROUGH MY WINDOW WHEN I WAS TRYING TO SHOW YOU GUYS THE TRAIN, UM, COMING THROUGH. YEAH, LITERALLY MADE EYE CONTACT WITH THAT PERSON. UM, SO THAT WAS PRETTY SCARY, JUST CAPTURING THAT RANDOMLY. I ALSO HAVE AN EXPERIENCED INDIVIDUALS GLITCHING AND OVERDOSING ON MY STREET AS WELL. UM, UM, THERE'S THIS ONE, HE'S JUST FROZEN IN TIME HAVING AN EXPERIENCE, SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING I WANT TO OPEN MY FRONT DOOR AND LOOK AT EVERY DAY. UM, I THINK I HAVE, OH, AND THEN ALSO I DO HAVE, SINCE I AM SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BUSINESSES, I ALSO, UH, HAVE EXPERIENCED 18 WHEELERS AS WELL, DRIVING BY MY PROPERTY CONSTANTLY DURING THE WEEK. WHERE DO YOU, YOU AREN'T ABLE TO? OH, I THINK I ALSO HAVE IMAGES TOO. UM, UH, MS. WILSON? YES. UM, WHILE WE'RE WAITING, YOUR IMAGE, I HAVE A QUESTION. UH, ONE OF MY CONCERNS FOR A SOLID SIX, ESPECIALLY IN THE FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE, IS I WONDERING HOW, IF YOU WERE TO BUILD A SIX FOOT SOLID FENCE IN THE FRONT, HOW FAR IN FRONT WOULD IT BE? WOULD IT BE EXACTLY WHERE YOU HAVE THE CURRENT FENCE? YES MA'AM. IT WOULD BE BECAUSE MY PROPERTY LINE IS UP AGAINST THE SIDEWALK DRIVEWAY TO ON THE LEFT SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE, BETWEEN YOUR HOUSE AND YOUR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE. IS THAT YOUR DRIVEWAY OR THEIR DRIVEWAY? THE WHAT? UM, SO THAT THE DRIVEWAY, IF I'M LOOKING AT YOUR HOUSE FROM THE FRONT, OH, THAT IS MY DRIVEWAY. THAT'S YOUR DRIVEWAY? YES MA'AM. UM, AND I WAS JUST CONCERNED ABOUT YOUR CLEAR VISION THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE COMING OUT OF YOUR DRIVEWAY IF A SOLID FENCE, SIX FOOT FENCE IS ON THE FRONT PROPERTY? UH, YES. THERE IS ACTUALLY A LOT OF, OF VISION CLEARANCE AS I PULL OUT BECAUSE I DO HAVE A DRIVEWAY THAT'S IN FRONT OF THE FENCE AS WELL. SO ONCE I AM ACTUALLY OUTSIDE OF MY FENCE, MY CURRENT FENCE, I HAD TO STILL HAVE LIKE DRIVEWAY ON MY DRIVE, LIKE IN FRONT OF MY DRIVEWAY, BEHIND THE FENCE TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON BEHIND ME. AND THERE THE, THE ROAD OR THE STREET IS ACTUALLY WIDE ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO SEE ONCOMING TRAFFIC. I THINK THAT AND THE CORNER, THE CORNER THERE, THERE, THERE'S A, ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE, IF I'M LOOKING TO THE FRONT, THERE'S A CORNER STREET THAT CUTS INTO, INTERSECTS INTO THAT FRONT STREET. YOUR STREET? MM-HMM . THERE'S A NORTH SAN MARCOS, THERE'S AN EMPTY LOT, UH, NEXT TO MY HOUSE. SO THAT ACTUALLY USED TO BE A HOUSE NEXT DOOR, BUT IT BURNT DOWN A FEW YEARS AGO. SO YOU WOULDN'T, THERE'S NO CONCERN THEN FOR CLEAR VISION ON THAT CORNER? UM, I JUST WANNA LET THE BOARD KNOW THAT WE DID MEASURE AND THERE'S NO CLEAR VISION ISSUE. YEAH. BECAUSE OF THE DISTANCE FROM THE FENCE TO THE FACE OCCUR. YEAH. OKAY. UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS MA'AM? MRNA? SO ARE, ARE THERE, SO THERE'S A RAILROAD CLOSE BY, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, IS THERE ANY BY RIGHT LINES THAT ARE PROVIDED BY THAT, YOU KNOW, UM, DISTANCE WISE FOR, FOR, YOU KNOW, ALONG THIS LINE AND THEN ALSO AGAIN ACROSS THE STREET BEING I GUESS COMMERCIAL. SO ARE THERE ANY THINGS PERMITTED THERE? SO THAT'S ONLY FOR IF THERE WERE A, BUT IN THE RAILROAD RIGHT AWAY, THE REAR SIDE WOULD ALLOW A FOOT FENCE, BUT THERE'S NO PROVISIONS THAT ALLOW A HIGHER FRONT YARD FENCE. YEAH, I MEAN, UM, I I, I, FOR PURPOSES [04:25:01] OF SECURITY, WOULD STAFF BE IN FAVOR OF A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE? I DUNNO IF Y'ALL TALKED ABOUT THAT OR ANYTHING. I DON'T THINK WE COULD MAKE THAT KIND OF RECOMMENDATION RIGHT NOW. UM, OKAY. JUST CURIOUS. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION CHAIR? WE HAVE APPROVED SIX FOOT OPEN FENCES FOR THE FRONT. IN OTHER CASES WE HAVE, WE HAVE, UM, WITH, IN THIS CASE, THE SIDE AND REAR COULD BE SOLID. NOT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE. NOT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, RIGHT. YEAH, SO I THINK WE DID HAVE ONE THAT I MENTIONED BEFORE ON MARKHAM DRIVE NEAR LACKLAND THAT WE DID APPROVE FOR A FOOT FENCE IN THE FRONT, SIMILAR TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES WITH SOME SECURITY ISSUES, UM, STUFF LIKE THAT. SO THIS BOARD HAS SEEN IT BEFORE. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THAT I WOULD NOT BE CHANGING THE CHARACTERISTIC OF MY BLOCK IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THERE ARE MULTIPLE PROPERTIES THAT DO HAVE HIGHER FENCES. THEY RANGE FROM SIX TO EIGHT FEET HIGH. YEAH. THERE, THERE IS A PROPERTY DOWN, BUT THAT'S THE SIDE OF THEIR HOUSE, NOT THE FRONT. I SAW THAT ONE ON THE PICTURES AS YOU GO DOWN THE STREET TO THE WEST. YEAH. THE, UH, FIRST, UH, PROPERTY ON THAT STREET, IT'S A BUSINESS, BUT THEN BEHIND IT IS ACTUALLY AN APARTMENT THAT HAS A SOLID FENCE IN FRONT OF IT WITH THE, YOU SEE ON THAT IMAGE THERE'S A WHITE, UH, SIGN THAT'S ACTUALLY AN APARTMENT. . WHAT IS THAT THE PICTURE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE ON THE COMMUNITY? YES, SIR. COMMENT SCREEN. THAT FENCE CAN ACTUALLY GO UP TO SIX FEET UP OR EIGHT FEET I BELIEVE, SINCE IT'S A ALLEY BEHIND THERE. OKAY. WELL, UM, IS THERE ANYBODY ON THE COMMISSION YOU'D LIKE TO CHIME IN ABOUT? ANY SUGGESTIONS? UH, JUST I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT IF, IF A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE, PALATABLE TO YOU VERSUS A SOLID. ABSOLUTELY. UM, I, MY CONCERN IS BECAUSE I, IT CURRENTLY IS A CHAIN LINK FENCE. UM, SO SOMEONE HAD HAS ACTUALLY LIKE ALREADY CLIMBED OVER IT. UM, BUT I AM DEFINITELY OPEN TO HAVING AN OPEN FENCE THAT'S TALLER. OKAY. WELL, ANYONE, UH, LIKE TO MAKE, UH, THERE'S NO ONE SIGN, NO VOICEMAILS OR ANYTHING? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. UM, IS THERE ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR, FOR SUCH A THING? I, ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNI? YEAH. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 26 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 0, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT SPEC SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE MAXIMUM THREE FOOT FRONT YARD OF FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT FRONT YARD PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE SITUATED AT IT'S 5 1 9 NORTH SAN MARCOS. UM, APPLICANT BEING DEBORAH WILSON. BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT, OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE UDC HAS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER. IF GRANTED, THE INCREASED FE HEIGHT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND UNIFORMITY OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, B THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED AS A TALLER FENCE, PROVIDES A DEGREE OF SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE PROPERTY WITHOUT COMPROMISING THE SAFETY. OUR PEDESTRIANS IN THE AREA AND SEE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY THE PROPOSED SPECIAL EXCEPTION. DESPITE THE INCREASE IN FENCE HEIGHT, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WITHIN A BLOCK FACE, THUS LIMITING ANY POTENTIAL VISUAL OBSTRUCTIONS TO ABUTTING PROPERTIES OF ONE OF WHICH IS CURRENTLY VACANT. D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IS THE LOCATION WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THIS DISTRICT IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED IS LIMITED TO THE FRONT AREA AND WOULD NOT IMPACT ANY OTHER FENCE STANDARDS TO WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS REQUIRED TO ADHERE. AND E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. THE REGULATIONS HERE AND ESTABLISH FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT, THE REQUEST OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT AS A TALLER FENCE PROVIDES A DEGREE, A DEGREE OF SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE PROPERTY WITHOUT COMPROMISING THE SAFETY OF PEDESTRIANS IN THE AREA. AND A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER. I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT IF YOU WERE TO AMEND TO A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE AND THE VARIANCE WOULD BE FOR A ONE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION, SINCE THEY'RE PERMITTED A FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE ALREADY. OKAY. SO I AMEND, UH, THE MOTION AS READ TO A ONE FOOT, UM, SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN OFFENSE. MANNA? YES. AND COMMISSIONER BEEZ, IS THAT ACCEPTABLE? SECOND? YEP. ALL RIGHT. SO COMMISSIONER, UH, MANO, DID YOU HAVE A REMARK? SO WELL, UM, SO THE SIDE OF THE FRONT, IS THAT DIFFERENT THAN THE FRONT? FRONT? WELL, THE, IT WAS ADVERTISED JUST AS FRONT. IT DIDN'T SAY, YOU KNOW, IT DIDN'T REALLY [04:30:01] SPECIFY. SO THIS WOULD ALLOW HER TO PUT SIX FOOT ON THE SIDE IN THE FRONT, IN FRONT OF HER HOUSE. AGREED. BUT SO, UH, SO SOLID. SO IS SOLID OKAY. ON THE SIDE AND JUST NOT IN THE FRONT. WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING TO, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, I WILL LEAVE THAT UP TO, YEAH, I'LL ACCEPT THAT. I MEAN, SHE CAN DECIDE WHETHER SHE WANTS TO THE SOLID OR, BUT THEN I WOULD NEED TO RE UM, STATE THE MOTION RIGHT OR NO, I THINK, I THINK YOU, IT'S FINE. JUST WITH THE NOTION THAT THE FRONT IS PERMITTED WITH A ONE FOOT, ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE TWO SHORT YELLOW PIECES THAT ARE DEPICTED ON THE SIDE PLAN ON THE SIDE? THAT'S CONSIDERED THE FRONT STILL? YEAH, BUT WE CAN SPECIFY WHETHER OR NOT, UM, THAT CAN BE SOLID OR THAT COULD BE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN. IS THERE ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION WHO MAY NOT BE IN FAVOR OF SUCH A THING? OKAY. SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO AMEND YOUR, SO AMENDED TO SOLID SIX FEET ON THE SIDE, WHICH IS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO THE, TO THE FRONT. UM, YEAH, THE PROPERTY LINE. AND THEN PREDOMINANTLY OPEN ONE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE FRONT FENCING ADJACENT TO THE STREET ADJACENT. YEAH, TO THE STREET. THE FRONT PROPERTY. FRONT PROPERTY LINE. IT RUNS ALONG THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. YEAH. AND COMMISSIONER BEEZ, IS THAT OKAY? YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER ZUNA, I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS AMENDED AS READ THE APPLICANT, MS. WILSON, UM, CLEARLY SHOWED TESTIMONY OF THE HAZARD SHE FACES ON A DAILY BASIS, BOTH THE NOISE AND THE, UH, CONCERNS FOR HER SAFETY. I THINK THE VISUAL IMPACT HERE IS VERY MINIMAL WITH THE PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, WHICH SHE AGREED TO. I THINK THAT, UH, PROVIDES HER SAFETY AS WELL, SO YOU CAN AT LEAST SEE INTO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND PROVIDES THE SAFETY SHE'S LOOKING FOR. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BEEZ? YEAH, I'LL ALSO SUPPORT THE, UM, I'LL SUPPORT IT AS RED. UH, AND I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE THERE. I THINK THIS IS, UH, MAINLY FOR SECURITY ISSUES AND, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA TAKE AWAY FROM THE, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S, IT'S A PRETTY DIS DISTRESSED AREA AND I THINK SHE'S ACTUALLY MADE IT LOOK BETTER. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER EBAN. I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER MANNA. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. COMMISSIONER BENES? YES, I CONCUR. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR. CHAIR ORIAN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT WE JUST DID, YOU CAN ASK STAFF. THANK YOU GUYS. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM [ Approval of Minutes  ] 19. GOD, WE COULD HAVE GONE TO, WE SHOULD HAVE GONE TO 20 JUST TO BE SAFE, BUT, SO ITEM 19 IS A MINUTES. UM, ANY, UH, LAST MINUTE AMENDMENTS? HEARING NONE. UH, LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES. SO MOVED. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ. IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER IBANEZ. UH, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY, ANY OPPOSED MINUTES HAVE PASSED [ Director’s Report  ] DIRECTOR'S REPORT. JUST A REMINDER, AS WE MENTIONED LAST MEETING, THAT VOICEMAILS WILL CEASE, UM, FOR PUBLIC MEETINGS STARTING APRIL 1ST. ALRIGHT. AND, UM, HAS EVERYBODY DONE THEIR FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE APPLICATIONS? NO, NOT YET. . ALL RIGHT. DON'T LET THAT LAPSE. SO, AND, AND THE DUE DATE IS WHAT DATE? MARCH, APRIL 1ST. IS IT APRIL 1ST? APRIL FOOL. APRIL 1ST. . OKAY. YEAH, 'CAUSE IT'S AUTOMATICALLY YOU'RE KICKED OFF THE BOARD IF YOU DON'T TURN IT. SO PLEASE, PLEASE DO THAT. PLEASE DON'T, YEAH, PLEASE DON'T GET KICKED OFF. WE WERE . IS THERE ANY, IS UH, ANYTHING ELSE NANA? SO, YES. SO REGARDING, UM, THE NO LONGER GETTING NOTICES, UH, WE, AT LEAST I HAD ASKED DID WE MAKE ANY HEADWAY WITH REGARDS TO FINDING A PLACE TO STORE THE, UM, THE PRINTED DOCUMENTS SOONER OR AHEAD OF TIME SO THAT WE HAVE THEM? WHEN YOU RECEIVE THEM, WE'RE GONNA START SENDING, UM, WHAT WE GET, PROBABLY AROUND THE SAME TIME. WE SEND YOU THE MOTIONS AND THEN WE WILL RESEND THE FINAL ONES THAT WE RECEIVED OVER THE WEEKEND AND THAT MONDAY MORNING LIKE WE DO NOW. OKAY. YEAH, THAT, I GUESS THAT WORKS. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, SO IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, IT IS 5 41. WE ARE ADJOURNED. GRAB A SANDWICH ON YOUR WAY OUT. * 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.