[00:00:04]
CHAIR, IF WE CAN, WE CAN PLAY THE VIDEO
[Call to Order]
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.MEETING IS NOW COMING TO ORDER.
UH, PLEASE BE SURE TO SILENCE ALL MOBILE DEVICES AND, UH, PLEASE TAKE A ROLL CALL MONICA.
NOW WE'RE GONNA TAKE THE ROLL CALL.
THAT'S ACTUALLY LISTED HERE BEFORE THE PLEDGE.
UH, EVERYONE PLEASE STAND AND JOIN US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES AND TEXAS FLAG.
I
THE BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA WHICH IS AVAILABLE ON THE TABLE JUST OUTSIDE THE BOARDROOM.
THE CASES ARE LISTED BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT'S AND STREET ADDRESS.
FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
LASTLY, AS CHAIR, I WILL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS.
I ASK THE BOARD MEMBERS SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS THE CHAIR AND I WILL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE MEETING BOARD'S ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY, 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 THE DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES.
SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL.
THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE STATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND CHAPTER 2035 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL.
WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINIS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWING UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35.
WE ARE ALSO SERVED AS 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.
[00:05:01]
IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR CASES IN ANY OTHER MATTER AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.THE BOARD'S DECISIONS AND APPEALS, 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 OF THIS, OF THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY WILL BE QUESTIONED BY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
ANY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER.
AFTER EVERYONE HAS HEARD THE CASE, IT WILL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILL, WILL TAKE, MAKE A MOTION.
EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY, REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF TH 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IN THIS CASE IS NINE VOTES, THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN GRANTING THE RELIEF SOUGHT REST ON THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS WHICH THE REQUEST RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THE BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL OF SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURTS OF LAW.
BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS MADE TO THE BOARD DECISION REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF THIS CASE.
UH, DO WE HAVE, DO WE HAVE A LIST OF NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WILL BE RESPONDING? UH, OKAY.
ALRIGHT, NOW WE'LL CONFIRM THE APPLICANTS ARE PRESENT FOR EACH CASE SOON AS I FIND THEM.
I BELIEVE CASE NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO HAVE BEEN HAVE, UH, WITHDRAWN.
ALRIGHT, SO CASE NUMBER THREE, THAT'S BO A DASH 19 DASH HUNDRED 3 0 0 1 3 8 A REQUEST BY CONCEPTION
NUMBER 1 46 REQUESTED BY BEN JARVIS FOR PARKING VARIANCE.
CASE NUMBER ONE 40 REQUEST BY ORLANDO MORALES.
OKAY, THAT'S, UH, LET'S SEE, 1 46 CROFTON AVENUE NOW PRESENT.
OKAY, WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS THERE.
CASE NUMBER, UH, 1 41 MARIA MUNI CASE NUMBER, UH, 1 42 JOHNNY RODRIGUEZ RODRIGUEZ.
AND CASE NUMBER 1 37 DOMINGUEZ OCTAVIO.
TAKE A NOTE THAT, UH, LET'S SEE HERE, SHOWS UP.
IF NOT, WE'LL HAVE TO MOVE IT.
NOW, UH, LET'S STAFF, WE'LL GIVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION ON INSTRUCTIONS ON SPEAKING AND BY WITNESSES AND FOR THIS, FOR THE ALL THE CASES.
SO 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 OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT.
PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND AN X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION.
FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION, IN ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR REQUEST.
FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED VARIANCE OR SPECIAL REQUEST OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION, YOU WILL BE CALLED AN ORDER THAT YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION.
YOU'LL HEAR THIS WHEN THERE ARE 30 SECONDS LEFT, YOU WILL HEAR ANOTHER BEEP AND WE WILL INFORM YOU THAT YOUR THREE MINUTES ARE UP.
FOR THOSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER, THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE GIVING THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES.
THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED IN TO SPEAK.
THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS.
[3. 19-8928 BOA-19-10300138: A request by Conception Amparan for a special exception to allow a four-year renewal for a one-operator beauty shop in a single family home, located at 2814 War Arrow Drive. Staff recommends Approval. (Council District 6) (Debora Gonzalez, Senior Planner (210) 207- 3074, debora.gonzalez@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)]
[00:10:02]
HELLO BOARD, UH, DEBORAH WITH ZONING.UH, FIRST CASE IS BO, O A 19 1 0 3 0 0 1 38 ADDRESS, TWO 14 WAR ARROW DRIVE, APPLICANT CONCEPTION, UH, AM ZONING R SIX M O D TWO MLR TWO A HHO D.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FOUR YEAR RENEWAL FOR A ONE OPERATOR BEAUTY SHOP IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A RENEWAL FOR A ONE OPERATOR BEAUTY SHOP.
IT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN 2017.
THE PROPOSED HOURS OF OPERATION WILL BE LIMITED, UH, FROM MONDAY TO FRIDAY, 1:00 PM TO 7:00 PM AND BY APPOINTMENT ONLY, THE APPLICANT COMPLIES WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED BY THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN APPROVE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST FOR UP TO FOUR YEARS.
THE APPROVAL IS SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT MEETING THE LIMITATIONS, CONDITIONS RESTRICTED AND STATED IN THE CODE.
THE UM, IS LOCATED AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
HERE IS TO SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
STARR COMMENCES APPROVAL OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN BO O A 19 1 0 3 0 0 1 38.
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE APPLICANT HAS COMPLIED WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED BY THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE GRANTING OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT INJURE THE PUBLIC SAFETY OR WELFARE OF THE SUBJECT NEIGHBORING, UH, PROPERTIES.
THE HOURS OF OPERATION WILL BE LIMITED TO MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 1:00 PM TO 7:00 PM BY APPOINTMENT ONLY.
UH, THERE WAS ZERO IN THERE WERE 23 NOTICES MAILED OUT.
ZERO RETURNED IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DIDN'T HAVE A COMMENT.
QUESTIONS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE, UH, WHERE IS THE FILE, IAN? UM, AT THE BEGINNING, SO I GUESS TOO.
AND ON THE MAP IT SHOWS THAT THE, UH, RESIDENT ACROSS THE STREET IS IN OPPOSITION.
IS THERE ANY, UH, INFORMATION YOU CAN PROVIDE REGARDING PERHAPS WHY THEY'RE IN OPPOSITION? UH, YES.
UH, THEY DID, UH, SUBMITTED A COUPLE OF SENTENCES.
IT PRETTY MUCH STATES THAT THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE, THE PARKING, UM, BECAUSE STACY, A LOT OF CARS CONSTANTLY.
AND THEN THE, THE, THE LICENSE THAT THEY'RE HAVING TO BE RENEWED, WHAT WAS THE PREVIOUS HOURS OF OPERATIONS? WAS IT ALSO ONE TO SEVEN? MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY? I HONESTLY DON'T RECALL, BUT WE CAN YELL TO THE APPLICANT FOR THAT.
UH, QUESTION DEBORAH HAS, HAS SHE HAD ANY, UH, WRITE-UPS ON HER? NO.
THERE HAS THERE NO COMPLAINTS ON THE PROPERTY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? I MEAN, NONE BEING THE CASE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND BRING THE APPLICANT PANEL.
DID, DID YOU STATE HOW LONG SHE'S HAD THAT BEAUTY SHOT? UM, I JUST KNOW THAT THE, I THINK THIS IS THE FIRST RENEWAL, SO THE PREVIOUS TIME THAT YALE GRANTED IT, IT WAS FOR TWO YEARS.
ONCE THEY DO A RENEWAL, IT'S GOOD FOR FOUR YEARS, IN FOUR YEARS IF THEY HAVE TO COME BACK.
LET'S BRING THE APPLICANT FORWARD.
UH, WE'LL BE, UH, PLEASE STATE THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF EACH PERSON SPEAKING.
UH, MY ADDRESS IS 28 4 BAR ARROW, SAN ANTONIO, SEVEN EIGHT A
AND SO YOU'LL BE INTERPRETING FOR HER? I WILL.
CESAR CHAVEZ INTERPRETER FOR YOUR RECORD INFORMATION.
GO AHEAD AND, UH, BEGIN YOUR CASE.
I'M HERE TO APPLY FOR THE RENEWAL OF MY PERMIT BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S BEEN BENEFICIAL FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO WORK A LITTLE BIT MORE FROM MY HOUSE.
[00:15:05]
I WOULD BE REALLY GRATEFUL IF IT WOULD BE GRANTED TO ME BECAUSE I CANNOT WORK TOO MUCH AT THE TOTAL OF WORK.I HEARD FROM THE INTERPRETER THAT A NEIGHBOR COMPLAINED THAT THERE WERE MANY CARS IN MY BUSINESS PARKING, AND THAT'S NOT MY PURPOSE.
IF YOU SEE, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT IT, I HAVE A LOT OF PARKING SPACE ON THE SIDES ALONG THE STREETS BECAUSE I'M AT A CORNER AND THE THING IS PROBABLY WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING IS BECAUSE I HAVE FIVE KIDS AND THEY'RE ALREADY GROWN UP, SO SOMETIMES THEY PARK IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND ALSO MY NEIGHBORS PARK ON THE SIDES AND I CAN CONTRIBUTE, UH, MAKING MY FAMILY TO PARK ON THE SIDES OF THE STREET ON THE SIDES.
NOT IN FRONT OF MY NEIGHBOR, BUT ON THE SIDE.
HAVE ANY, UH, BOARD MEMBERS LIKE TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS? IAN? IAN, PLEASE.
UH, WERE YOUR HOURS OF OPERATION AND DAYS OPEN, UH, YOU'RE REQUESTING THE SAME AS DURING THE INITIAL PERMIT? YES, SIR.
OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, DO WE HAVE, THERE'S NOBODY SIGNED UP.
IN THAT, THAT CASE, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC AND I'M GOING TO ENTERTAIN A, A MOTION FROM THE BOARD.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 1 9 1 0 3 1 3 8, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT SPECIAL ACCEPT RENEWAL FOR ONE OPERATOR BEAUTY SHOP IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH LIMITED HOURS OF MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 1:00 PM TO 7:00 PM AND BY APPOINTMENT ONLY SITUATED AT 28 14 WAR ARROW DRIVE APPLICANT BEING ION.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C S AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER, THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTERS, TO ENSURE THAT THE OPERATION OF A ONE OPERATOR BEAUTY BARBERSHOP DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY OR THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF NEIGHBORS.
THE APPLICANT HAS FULFILLED ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR ONE OPERATOR SHOP AS ESTABLISHED IN THE U D C STAFF, FINDS THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER TWO.
THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED.
THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SERVED AS IT WILL PROVIDE A VALUABLE SERVICE TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PROPOSED HOURS OF OPERATION WILL BE LIMITED TO LIMITED TO MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 1:00 PM TO 7:00 PM BY APPOINTMENT ONLY THREE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE.
THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS NOT LIKELY TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS BECAUSE THE HOME IS IN CHARACTER WITH THOSE AROUND IT.
DURING FIELD VISITS, STAFF NOTED NOTHING VISIBLE FROM THE STREET THAT WOULD INDICATE THE PRESENCE OF A BEAUTY BARBERSHOP.
THERE IS ALSO A DRIVEWAY CAPABLE OF PROVIDING ANY NECESSARY PARKING FOR THE PROPOSED USE.
ADDITIONALLY, THERE ARE NO CODE ENFORCEMENTS ACTION ON THIS PROPERTY, FOR 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 EXCEPTIONS NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AS THE PROPERTY STILL USED PRIMARILY AS RESIDENTS.
THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE
[00:20:01]
SPECIFIC DISTRICT.THE PRIMARY USE OF THE DWELLING REMAINS RESIDENT.
THE ONE OPERATOR, BARBARA BEAUTY SHOP, WILL HAVE RESTRICTED HOURS, WHICH ARE ESTABLISHED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED BY THE U U D C AND I, UM, WANNA EMPHASIZE THAT IT IS FOR FOUR YEAR, UH, RENEWAL.
AND SHE HAD, SHE HAD ONE, UH, HAD BEEN HERE BEFORE FOR THE TWO YEARS.
UH, WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A MOTION.
UM, MARIA, WILL YOU PLEASE START THE DISCUSSION? UH, YES, SIR.
UM, I AM GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS BECAUSE IT IS A SMALL BUSINESS.
IT SEEMS LIKE SHE HASN'T HAD ANY PROBLEMS. THERE IS ONLY ONE NEIGHBOR COMPLAINING, BUT, UH, THAT'S NORMAL BECAUSE OF THE PARKING.
UH, BUT, UH, I THINK THAT, UH, SHE PROVES, HAS PROVEN THAT, UH, SHE IS, UH, REALLY RUNNING HER BUSINESS VERY WELL SINCE, UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER COMPLAINTS, AND, UH, HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY WILL AGREE WITH ME.
ALL RIGHT, MR. UNA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE YOUR INPUT? WELL, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION AS WELL.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE WITH, UH, WITH THE PARKING, AND IT'S REALLY A FUNCTION OF, UH, FULLY HER KIDS HAVING A LOT OF CARS WITH THE MR. ZUNE, IS YOUR MIC ON? YES, IT IS.
I'M PRESSING THE BUTTON AS WELL.
YES, I'M JUST, I'M SUPPORTING THE, THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
UH, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK JUST THE NUMBER OF YEARS SHE'S BEEN IN OPERATION, UH, WITH LIMITED, UH, NEGATIVE REPORTS FROM THE NEIGHBORS OTHER THAN THE ONE PARKING SITUATION, WHICH IS JUST THE FUNCTION OF, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBER OF KIDS SHE HAS WITH THE CARS AND MAYBE, UH, YOU KNOW, BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THE, THE PARKING LOT BETTER.
BUT I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE VARIANCE.
ANYONE ELSE? HANNO, MR. HANNO? YEAH, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS.
UM, I, I'VE, I'VE SEEN QUITE A FEW OF THESE, UM, BEAUTY SHOPS, UH, COMING UP AND ALL ACROSS THE CITY, AND ONE THING I HAVE FOUND IS THAT IT PROVIDES A, AN AN ADDITIONAL EYES AND THE EARS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING GOING ON, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE SOMEBODY THAT'S ALWAYS THERE AT THE HOUSE AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE, LOOK, SHE'S LOOKING OUT FOR HER NEIGHBORS, AND I'M SURE THAT'S THE CASE.
SO I, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS.
ANYONE ELSE? YES, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
HOW MANY STYLISTS ARE ON WORK AT ONE TIME? OKAY.
UH, UNDER THE RULES IS GONNA BE ONE CHAIR SO THAT ONLY ONE, ONE PERSON CAN, CAN OPERATE THIS ESTABLISHMENT.
SO THAT, THAT ANSWERS YOU ALREADY MADE.
ANYBODY ELSE? AND BEING THE CASE? OKAY.
MR. TEO? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. ORIAN? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR ESTABLISHMENT, AND, UH, PLEASE GET WITH THE STAFF TO CON COMPLETE THE PAPERWORK.
[4. 19-8809 BOA-19-10300146: A request by Ben Jarvis for a parking variance request to allow one accessory detached dwelling unit parking space to be located within the front yard of the property, located at 6107 Woodmoor St. Staff recommends Approval. (Council District 8) (Rachel Smith, Planner (210) 207- 5407, rachel.smith@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)]
CASE BO, A 19 103 0 0 1 4 6.UH, THE APPLICANT, BEN JARVIS AT 61 0 7 WOODMORE DRIVE.
THE REQUEST IS A PARKING VARIANCE TO ALLOW ONE ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT PARKING SPACE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY.
THE ZONING IS R SIX M L O D ONE M L R TWO.
THE PROPERTY OWNER IS CONSTRUCTING AN ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND MEETS ALL THE SETBACK AND SIZE REQUIREMENTS.
THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS FIVE FEET FROM BOTH SIDE PROPERTY LINES, WHICH DOES NOT PROVIDE THE REQUIRED SPACE TO ALLOW A DRIVEWAY TO ACCESS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE IS NO ACCESS ALLEY ACCESS TO THIS PROPERTY.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY PARKING SPACE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD INSTEAD OF THE REAR YARD DUE TO ACCESS ISSUES.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS A TOTAL OF SIX PARKING SPACES, INCLUDING THE GARAGE
[00:25:02]
SUBJECT PROPERTY.ADJACENT PROPERTIES F RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE IN B O A 19 100 301 46.
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE APPLICANT WILL BE PROVIDING A PARKING SPACE FOR THE ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT.
THE PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE ACO ADEQUATE SPACE ALONG EITHER SIDE OF OR THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY TO, FOR THE PARKING TO BE LOCATED, WE MAILED 32 NOTICES.
ONE WAS RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION.
ALRIGHT, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ORIAN? ALRIGHT, MR, GO AHEAD.
I NOTICED FROM THE PICTURES THAT IT, THAT IT APPEARS THAT THE, UH, STRUCTURES UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
UH, IS THERE A, AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE A SEPARATE ACCESSWAY FROM THE DRIVEWAY TO DOWN THE SIDE OF THE HOME TO THE REAR? NO.
HAVE YOU NOTICED ANYTHING? OKAY, THANK YOU.
OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF THEN? UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND BRING THE APPLICANT FORWARD.
MR. JARVIS, I'LL NEED YOU TO STATE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD BEFORE YOU PROCEED WITH YOUR PRESENTATION.
MY NAME IS BEN HENRY JARVIS, JR.
61 0 7 WOODMORE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 4 9.
I'M HERE REQUESTING THE, UM, ADDITIONAL PART OF THE PARKING APPROVAL FOR A HOME THAT WE'RE A SMALL HOME I'M BUILDING IN THE BACKYARD FOR MY 33 YEAR OLD BIPOLAR DAUGHTER.
I WOULD BE MUCH MORE EFFICIENT IF I WOULD GET APARTMENT FOR HER, BUT BECAUSE OF HER ILLNESS, MY WIFE AND I ARE AFRAID TO LET HER GO TOO FAR FROM WHERE WE CURRENTLY LIVE BECAUSE OF HER ILLNESS.
SO, UH, THUS THE CONSTRUCTION, UH, OF THE, OF THE HOME, THE PARKING IS PLENTY SUFFICIENT.
WE DON'T USE THE STREET FOR PARKING.
WE HAVE PLENTY OF PARKING, UH, IN OUR DRIVEWAYS.
UH, IT'S ONLY OUR DAUGHTER AND MY WIFE AND MYSELF, AND WE PARK OUR CARS IN THE GARAGE.
UM, I SPOKE TO THE NEIGHBORS BEFORE WE EVEN STARTED THE BUILDING, MAKE SURE IT WAS NOT GONNA BE ANY ISSUES WITH 'EM.
UH, CONCERNS, UH, IF THERE WOULD'VE BEEN, I WOULD'VE SOLD THE HOUSE AND PURCHASED A NEW HOME.
SO, UH, OUR DAUGHTER IS NOT ON SOCIAL SECURITY.
UH, I FEEL THAT WE'RE SUFFICIENT ENOUGH TO SUPPORT HER, UH, WITH OUR OWN FINANCES.
AND SO WE ASKED FOR NOTHING FROM ANYONE IN REGARD TO OUR FAMILY NEEDS.
SO ANY CONSIDERATION, GIFT TO APPROVING THIS REQUEST WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.
NOW, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? ORIAN, MR. ORIAN? SO, UH, ARE YOU GONNA BE, BE PROVIDING A SEPARATE ACCESS WAY DOWN THE SIDE OF THE HOME? UH, ACTUALLY, SINCE THIS IS FROM OUR DAUGHTER, SHE'S GONNA COME RIGHT THROUGH THE HOUSE.
THAT ALLOWS US A LITTLE CHECK AND BALANCE AS TO WHEN SHE'S, SHE CAN LEAVE ANYTIME THROUGH THE SIDE GATE.
THERE ARE SIDE GATES TO COME IN ON ONE SIDE.
UH, BUT WE'D LIKE TO KNOW WHEN SHE'S LEAVING AND WHEN SHE'S COMING ALSO, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, MR. LOVE? YEAH, JUST TO CLARIFY, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY ADDING, YOU'RE NOT ACTUALLY ADDING ONTO THE DRIVEWAY, RIGHT? YOU'RE JUST NO, NO, SIR.
THE VARIANCE IS JUST FOR THE RELINQUISH OR TO NOT HAVE TO HAVE AN EXTRA PARKING SPACE.
BECAUSE OF THE HOME BEING AN ADDITIONAL SEPARATE DWELLING, UH, I GUESS THE STANDARDS OR WHATEVER SHOULD BE FOR A SEPARATE DEDICATED PARKING SPACE.
AND LORD KNOWS I'D BE GREAT IF I HAD THE SPACE TO PUT A, A SEPARATE LOT FOR HER IN THE BACK CONVENIENCE FOR HER ACCESS, UH, AND THEN SHE WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME THROUGH THE HOUSE.
BUT, UH, THAT, THAT IS CORRECT.
MR. LUFF, UH, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE VARIANCE IS RELATED TO THE LOCATION OF THE SPACE.
SO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS ONLY REQUIRED TO HAVE A MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT OF ONE.
THIS PROPERTY ALREADY HAS TWO.
MOST OF THE, MOST OF YOUR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES HAVE ALREADY TWO.
SO HE MEETS THE REQUIRED NUMBER.
IT'S THE LOCATION AND THAT'S DIFFICULT FOR PROPERTIES TO MEET WHEN THEY'RE BUILT ALL THE WAY TO THE SIDE.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE EXPLANATION FROM STAFF.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALRIGHT, UH, IS THERE ANY WITNESSES? NOBODY SIGNED UP.
UH, AND I'M GONNA CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 19 DASH 1 0 3 46.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A PARKING VARIANCE TO REQUEST TO ALLOW ONE ACCESSORY DWELLING ACH, TO, TO ALLOW ONE ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT PARKING SPACE TO BE
[00:30:01]
LOCATED WITHIN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 61 0 7 WOODMORE STREET, APPLICANT BEING BEN JARVIS.BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
IN THIS CASE, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS SERVED BY PROVIDING ADEQUATE PARKING AND CONVENIENCE FOR THE ACCESSORY DWELLING.
IN THIS CASE, THE PROPERTY PROPERTY OWNER WILL BE PROVIDING THE REQUIRED PARKING IN THE ONLY SPACE THAT IS AVAILABLE IN THE SITE IN THE FRONT YARD.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT THIS REQUEST IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS ON THE PROPERTY ARE THAT THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS FIVE FEET FROM BOTH SIDE PROPERTY LINES AND WAS BUILT IN 1978.
THERE IS NO SPACE FOR THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT A DRIVEWAY ALONG THE SIDE OR REAR OF THE PROPERTY THAT COULD BE ACCESSIBLE BY A VEHICLE.
LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP IN THIS SITUATION.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT THIS VARIANCE DESERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE BY PROVIDING AMPLE PARKING WITHIN THE DRIVEWAY AND EXISTING GARAGE.
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.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
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 PARKING LOCATION IS UNLIKELY TO INJURE, INJURE, ADJACENT, CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT STATES THAT THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT WILL BE FOR HIS DAUGHTER AND THUS THE ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NOT ACTUALLY GOING TO BE USED, BUT WILL BE PROVIDED.
THE PLIGHT TO THE OWNER FOR THE PROPERTY, FOR WHICHEVER IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE 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 THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE UNIQUE SITUATION THAT EXISTS ON THIS PROPERTY IS THAT THERE IS NOT ADEQUATE SPACE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE HOME OR ACCESS FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED SPACE.
THE CIRCUMSTANCE IS NOT CREATED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER, IS NOT THE RESULT OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR IS IT MERELY FINANCIAL IN NATURE.
GIVE MS. CRUZ CREDIT FOR BEING THE FIRST ONE TO SAY SECOND.
UH, GO AHEAD AND START THE DISCUSSION MR. ORIAN.
UH, I'M GONNA BE IN, UH, FAVOR OF THIS, UH, REQUEST.
I ACTUALLY GREW UP IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
I ACTUALLY USED TO DELIVER PAPERS ON THAT STREET WHEN I WAS A KID.
AND I KNOW THAT, UH, WHILE IT IS COMMON FOR PEOPLE TO PARK ON THE STREET THAT THE DRIVEWAYS PROVIDED ARE OF AMPLE, GENEROUSLY, AMPLE SPACE TO EASILY, TO EASILY ACCOMMODATE TO SOMETIMES EVEN UP TO FOUR CARS.
UH, AND THAT THIS HOUSE IS, UH, SITUATED ON A, A NICE SIZE LOT.
AND, AND, AND I THINK WHAT IS BEING REQUESTED IS, IS CERTAINLY APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA.
SO I'LL BE IN, I'LL BE IN APPROVAL.
UH, MS. CRUZ? UH, YES, I'LL CONCUR WITH THE, THE MOTION.
UH, AND, UH, I THINK THAT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.
THAT WAY THEY DON'T HAVE TO PARK IN THE STREET.
ANYONE ELSE? UH, WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION AND BEING THE CASE? ALL RIGHT, MONICA, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE VOTE.
MS. DORIAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. CRUZ.
MR. THIEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
UH, PLEASE GET WITH STAFF TO GET, UH, SURE THAT, UH, YOU FOLLOW ALL THE PROCEDURES AND COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S CODES AND REGULATIONS AND GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT.
[5. 19-8807 BOA-19-10300140: A request by Orlando Morales for a 3’ variance from the 5’ side setback requirement to allow an accessory detached dwelling unit to be 2’ from the side property line, located at 123 Glamis Ave. Staff recommends Approval. (Council District 3) (Rachel Smith, Planner (210) 207- 5407, rachel.smith@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)]
GO AHEAD AND GO ON WITH CASE NUMBER FIVE.THAT WOULD BE ORLANDO MORALES CASE BO A 19 103 0 0 1 4 0 AT 1 23 GLAM AVENUE.
THE APPLICANT IS ORLANDO MORALES.
THEY ARE REQUESTING A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
THE PROPERTY OWNER IS IN THE PROCESS OF RENOVATING THE PROPERTY TO BE SOLD.
THE RENOVATION PROJECT INCLUDES CONVERTING THE DETACHED GARAGE INTO AN A D D U.
THE APPLICANT BEGAN THE PROCESS WITHOUT SEEKING PERMITS AND WAS ISSUED A STOP WORK ORDER
[00:35:01]
AS A RESULT.SINCE THEN, THE APPLICANT HAS COMPLETED THE NECESSARY STEPS TO OBTAIN A PERMIT AND HAS OBTAINED THE PERMITS TO CONTINUE THE RENOVATIONS IN THE MAIN STRUCTURE.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING THE VARIANCE TO OBTAIN A PERMIT TO CONTINUE WORKING ON THE A D D U OBJECT PROPERTY, SUBJECT PROPERTY.
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE STRUCTURE HAS EXISTED IN THAT LOCATION FOR YEARS WITH NO COMPLAINTS.
THE PLACEMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH SIMILAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE COMMUNITY.
THE APPLICANT WILL NOT BE INCREASING THE SIZE OR FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION.
AND AS YOU'LL SEE IN THE OPPOSITION NOTE IN THE FILE, UM, THE PERSON IN OPPOSITION IS, UH, INCORRECTLY ASSUMING THAT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS CLOSE TO THEIR PROPERTY LINE.
UH, AND THEY, THEY MARKED THAT ON THE FILE.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY IN SUPPORT OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AS THEY HAVE MARKED IN THEIR COMMENT.
AND THEN HIGHLAND HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND.
DOES, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? UNA UNA, I, I RECALL PRIOR, IN MY PRIOR EXPERIENCE WHEN THEY WERE BUILDING REALLY CLOSE TO THE EP ACT, FIRE CODE BECOMES AN ISSUE.
IS THERE, I MEAN, UH, CLEARLY THAT'D HAVE TO BE AT ALL.
UM, FIRE CODE BEING SO CLOSE TO THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OR ANY CONSIDERATION WITH FIRE CODE IN TERMS OF BEING SO CLOSE TO THE, UH, ADJOINING PROPERTY INSTRUCTION BEING CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
ULTIMATELY DURING PLAN REVIEW, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO ABIDE BY ALL FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS, UH, WHETHER IT BE THE SOFFITS OR, UM, FIRE RATING MATERIAL.
SO THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO FOLLOW ALL BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS.
SO, B C AD RECORDS SHOW THAT, UH, THIS WAS ORIGINALLY A ATTACHED GARAGE BUILT IN 1948, AND THAT HE'S CONVERTING IT TO A DWELLING UNIT.
UH, THERE WAS NO EXPANSION, CORRECT? IT WAS SAME FOOTPRINT.
SAME FOOTPRINT, SAME ROOF, ROOF PITCH THAT YOU CAN, I BELIEVE SO, BUT I, THE APPLICANT CAN CONFIRM.
MS. SMITH, PLEASE CALL THE APPLICANT ROSS.
WE'LL NEED YOU TO, UH, GIVE YOUR, UH, NAME AND ADDRESS, UH, RECORD.
UH, ORLANDO MORALES, UH, THE, UH, PROPERTY, I'M, UH, ASKING FOR A PETITION SHOWING VARIANCE.
CAN YOU FIX YOUR MIC, PLEASE? I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
THE PROPERTY IS 1 2 3 GLAMIS AVENUE.
THIS IS THE EXISTING, UM, GARAGE THAT WAS IN THE BACK.
UM, I BELIEVE MR. UH, ORIAN HAD A QUESTION IN REGARDS TO IT.
UM, NOTHING'S BEEN CHANGED, NOTHING'S BEEN ADDED.
THE SAME ROOF, SAME EVERYTHING.
SO THE ONLY THING I DID WAS AESTHETIC, UH, CHANGES INSIDE THE, UH, THE GARAGE.
AND THOSE ARE THE PICTURES THAT I'M SHOWING RIGHT NOW.
I CONVERTED IT TO AN EFFICIENCY, UH, WITH A FULL KITCHEN, FULL BATHROOM.
UM, AND THE REASON BEING IS TO, BASICALLY MY THOUGHT WAS TO HAVE SOMEBODY LIKE A PARENT OR MOM AND POP RETIREMENT, UH, SPACE FOR THEM IN THE BACK.
UM, AND THE HOUSE WAS ORIGINALLY A THREE, TWO, UH, HOUSE.
SO WITH THE ADDED EFFICIENCY IN THE BACK, I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THAT.
ANY, ANY, ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? NONE.
DO WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES? NOPE.
SO I BELIEVE WE'VE GOTTEN THE INFORMATION WE NEED AT THIS POINT.
SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION DEAL.
DEAL REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH ONE NINE DASH 0 3 0 0 1 4 0.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUEST FOR A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM A FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK
[00:40:01]
REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELLING UNIT TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 2 3 GLAMS APPLICANT BEING ORLANDO MORALES.BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT FOUND TO BE CONTRARY.
SPECIFICALLY, THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE STRUCTURE HAS EXISTED FOR YEARS IN THAT LOCATION, AND THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE TO ITS SIZE.
THE PLACEMENT OF THE STRUCTURE PROVIDES ENOUGH CLEARANCE TO PREVENT FIRE SPREAD, MAINTAIN STORM WATER RUNOFF ON SITE, AND ALLOW LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE WITHOUT TRESPASS ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS ARE THAT THE DETACHED GARAGE WAS BUILT IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION WITHIN THE SETBACK IN 1948.
ACCORDING TO BEXAR COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT INCREASED THE FOOTPRINT OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD MEAN THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD NEED TO ALTER THE SIZE OF THE CURRENT STRUCTURE AND OR MOVE THE STRUCTURE, WHICH WOULD BE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE VARIANCE OBSERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE BY ALLOWING FOR ADEQUATE LIGHTS, SPACE FOR MAINTENANCE AND, AND STORMWATER RUNOFF.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
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 SURROUNDING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS WILL NOT BE INJURED BY THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE, AS THERE WILL NOT BE ANY CHANGE IN LOCATION OR SIZE OF THE CURRENT STRUCTURE.
THERE ARE SEVERAL PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREA WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES SITUATED SIMILARLY NEAR THE SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES, AND THE NEAREST STRUCTURE IS AT LEAST 10 FEET AWAY.
SIXTH, THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER FOR WHICH THIS 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.
THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE EXISTS ON SITE IN ITS CURRENT PLACEMENT, NOT BY THE WORK OF THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER.
THE OWNER WISHES TO KEEP THE STRUCTURE IN ITS CURRENT PLACEMENT.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES WAS NOT, THE CIRCUMSTANCE WAS NOT CREATED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER AND IS NOT THE RESULT OF A GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT, NOR IS IT MERELY FINANCIAL IN NATURE.
UH, MR. TEEL, CAN YOU START THE DISCUSSION? YES, SIR.
UH, THIS SEEMS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
UM, WE APPRECIATE HIM TAKING THE STEPS TO, TO GO AHEAD AND GET THAT PERMIT AND, UH, GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
UM, YOU KNOW, I I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY FIRE SAFETY ISSUES OTHER THAN WHAT WOULD BE BROUGHT UP IN THE BUILDING CODE.
I'LL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
UH, I LIKE THE FACT THAT IT DIDN'T INCREASE, UH, THE FOOTPRINT THAT, THAT STRUCTURE THAT HAS EXISTED THERE FOR THE LAST 70 YEARS AND THAT THERE'S AN ALLEY IN THE REAR.
THERE'S PLENTY OF ACCESS, UH, TO GET TO THIS, THIS STRUCTURE AND THE ROOF PITCH, UH, DOES NOT DIRECT, UH, RUNOFF ONTO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER PERSON WANTED TO DISCUSS THIS? NONE BEING THE CASE.
UH, MONICA, LET'S START TO COUNT.
MR. TEAL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, DR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
THE MOTION DOES CARRY AND, UH, PLEASE GET WITH STAFF TO MAKE SURE ALL THE PROPER PERMITS FOR YOUR CERTIFICATES ARE COMPLETED AND, UH, GOOD LUCK.
UH, DID, UH, MR. HAL WAGNER SHOW UP THE APPLICANT'S ON THEIR WAY TO ABOUT 10 MINUTES IF WE CAN GO ON
[7. 19-8808 BOA-19-10300141: A request by Maria Muniz for 1) a 14.5’ variance from the 20’ rear setback requirement to allow an attached addition to be 5.5’ from the rear property line, 2) a special exception of the allowable fence height to allow a fence to be 6’ tall with 4’ solid screen within the front yard, and 3) a request for a variance from the Clear Vision standards to allow a fence to be within the Clear Vision field, located at 208 Gould St. Staff recommends Approval. (Council District 5) (Rachel Smith, Planner (210) 207- 5407, rachel.smith@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)]
TO THE NEXT CASE.LET'S GO ON TO NUMBER SEVEN THEN.
THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, CASE NUMBER 1 41 MARIA UNI.
ALL RIGHT, UH, STAFF, WE'LL START IT AND SHE'LL CALL YOU UP.
[00:45:01]
O A 19 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 1 AT 2 0 8 GOULD STREET.THE APPLICANT IS MARIA MUNIEZ.
UH, THE ZONING IS MF 33 M L O D TWO MLR, TWO A H O D A REQUEST FOR ONE A 14.5 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED ADDITION TO BE 5.5 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY.
TWO, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE UP TO SIX FEET TALL WITH SOLID SCREEN WITHIN THE FRONT YARD.
AND THREE, A REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM THE CLEAR VISION STANDARDS TO ALLOW FENCE TO BE WITHIN THE CLEAR VISION FIELD.
THE SUBJECT PROPERLY PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY A 640 SQUARE FOOT HOME BUILT IN 2014.
THE PROPERTY WAS BUILT UP TO THE REAR BUILDING SETBACK AND THREE FEET FROM BOTH SIDES.
THE APPLICANT WISHES TO ADD A 266 SQUARE FEET INLINE ADDITION, ATTACHED ADDITION TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY TO EXTEND THEIR LIVING SPACE.
THE APPLICANT WAS CITED, UH, FOR WORKING ON THE ADDITION WITHOUT PERMIT.
IN AUGUST OF 2019, THE APPLICANT STOPPED WORKING ON THE ADDITION AND WHEN THEY APPLIED FOR A PERMIT, WERE TOLD ABOUT THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS UPON VISIT.
STAFF NOTED A SIX FOOT TALL FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD, PARTIALLY ENCROACHING INTO THE CLEAR VISION FIELD AND THE SITE PLAN.
YOU CAN SEE OBJECT PROPERTY, OBJECT PROPERTY, AND THE ADDITION IN THE REAR ADJACENT PROPERTIES THAT RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCES IN SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND BO A 19 103 0 0 1 4 1.
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE LOT IS SMALL IN THAT'S NO FAULT OF THE OWNER.
THE REQUEST STILL LEAVES ADEQUATE SPACE TO PREVENT WATER RUNOFF ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTY FIRE SPREAD AND ALLOW FOR LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE WITHOUT TRESPASSING.
THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT PROVIDES SAFETY AND SECURITY FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER'S FAMILY NOW MAILED 47 NOTICES.
ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ALRIGHT, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? ORIAN ORIAN.
SO THE REAR BUILDING, UH, THE, THE REAR WALL IS FIVE AND A HALF FEET FROM THE, FROM THAT BACK PROPERTY LINE, DID YOU NOTICE ANY, ANY UTILITY APPIS BACK THERE OR ANYTHING, UH, FROM THE NEIGHBORING YARD THAT MAY HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED REALLY CLOSE TO THE FENCE, TO THE FENCE LINE THAT MAY POSE CONFLICT WITH THE BUILDING? UM, NOT THAT I RECALL.
THERE'S A STRUCTURE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW CLOSE THAT STRUCTURE IS.
ELLI RA ELLI, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
YEAH, CAN YOU, UM, BRING UP THE PICTURE OF THE FENCE? UM, THAT WOULD BE IN THE CLEAR VISION FIELD.
SO HOW FAR INTO THE CLEAR VISION FIELD IS THIS FENCE? SO THE FENCE IS EIGHT FEET INTO, IT'S SEVEN FEET FROM THE, UH, STREET.
SO IT REQUIRES 15 FEET, RIGHT.
SO, SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY EIGHT FEET INTO THAT CLEAR VISION FIELD.
UM, WHEN YOU WERE STANDING THERE, WHAT WAS YOUR PERCEPTION OF BEING ABLE TO SEE ON THE SIDEWALK? THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A PRETTY WIDE SIDEWALK AND PEOPLE WOULD WALK ON IT, AND THEN THE STREET ITSELF, HOW DIFFICULT IS IT TO SEE GIVEN THAT FENCE AND GIVEN THE, UM, TRAFFIC AND FOOT, THE FOOT TRAFFIC AND CAR TRAFFIC ON THAT STREET? I THINK WITH THE DISTANCE FROM THE FENCE TO THE EDGE OF THE SIDEWALK, THERE WAS ENOUGH SPACE FOR HER TO SEE WITHOUT HITTING ANYBODY.
IF THAT'S THE QUESTION, LIKE THERE'S, THERE'S ENOUGH SPACE FOR HER TO SEE, TO PULL OUT AND, AND SEE.
BRUCE? UM, I'M CONFUSED NOW BECAUSE IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS PICTURE THAT YOU'VE GOT THERE, I CAN'T SEE THAT THERE'S A SIDEWALK.
'CAUSE IF THERE WAS A SIDEWALK, THOSE TRASH CANS WOULD NOT BE THERE.
I CAN GUARANTEE YOU THAT, THAT THE TRASH CANS ARE ACTUALLY IN THE DRIVEWAY.
THE SIDEWALK IS RIGHT HERE ON THE CORNER, JUST PAST THAT TELEPHONE POST.
IT'S AT THE VERY BOTTOM CORNER OF THAT.
[00:50:03]
MAYBE A DIFFERENT VIEW WOULD ALLOW HER TO SEE THE SIDEWALK MORE CLEARLY.IS THAT SLIGHTLY BETTER? IT'S UNDERNEATH THE BANNER RIGHT DOWN HERE, MARIA, IF YOU LOOK, YEAH.
OR YOU HERE AND THERE'S ANOTHER IMAGE.
IS THAT FRONT, IS THAT FENCE ON THE PROPERTY LINE FRONT FENCE OR IT'S JUST INSIDE ORIAN? SO ON, ON THE PICTURE WHERE THE, THE THREE RECEPTACLES ARE IN FRONT OF, APPARENTLY THE DRIVEWAY, UM, IT, TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE THERE, THE NEIGHBOR MAYBE TOOK THE SIDEWALK AND MADE IT OUT OF A BRICK OR SOMETHING.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT COULD BE RED.
IT ALSO LOOKS LIKE, UM, THERE'S A, SOME SORT OF A SMALL, A SMALL TREE THAT APPEARS TO BE ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE.
IS THAT, I'M CURIOUS TO KNOW IF THAT'S ON CITY PROPERTY OR THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
'CAUSE YOU KNOW, WHEN I'M, WHEN I'M GOING DOWN THIS DRIVEWAY AND I'M ATTEMPTING TO LOOK TO THE LEFT, I HAVE A UTILITY POLE IN THE WAY.
I'VE GOT THIS, YOU KNOW, GROWTH, LANDSCAPING GROWTH THAT OCCURS THERE.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE, IT I'M VISUALLY, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF OBSTRUCTIONS TO MY, TO MY PLAINTIFF, MY VISUAL FIELD THERE.
I MEAN, DID YOU GET THAT IMPRESSION AS WELL? THE SECOND WE'RE GONNA PULL UP GOOGLE VIEW SO YOU CAN SEE A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE.
LIKE THE OTHER ISSUE IS, IS ON GOING DOWN ONE SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY, THE SIDEWALK IS AGAINST THE CURB.
AND THEN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS PICTURE, IT, THERE APPEARS TO BE MAYBE A, SOME BRICK MASON REWORK WHERE THE SIDEWALK SHOULD BE.
AND I'M WONDERING, DOES THE SIDEWALK EVEN EVEN CONTINUE DOWN PROPERTY? THE BRICKWORK IS IN THE GRA OR IS IN THE YARD.
SO THE, SO THE DRIVE, THE SIX FOOT SIDEWALK IS, IS TWO.
SO THE SITE WORK, THE, THE STOP ORDER WAS ISSUED FIRST AND THEN HE CAME IN TO SEEK A VARIANCE? YES.
SO THE ADDITION WAS THE ORIGINAL REQUEST.
AND WHEN WE WENT TO VISIT THE SITE, WE NOTICED THE FENCING WITH THAT.
HAD HE PULLED THE BUILDING PERMIT PRIOR TO STOP ORDER OR WAS THERE A BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED ON NO, THE STOP WORK ORDER WAS BECAUSE IT, HIS WORK WITHOUT, SO GOING FORWARD, HE'LL NOW WE'LL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A BUILDING PERMIT PULLED AND WE'LL ALSO NEED TO COMPLY WITH ALL CURRENT BUILDING CODES.
AND MY CONCERN IS ANY, ANY ELECTRICAL OR WATER OR PLUMBING OR ANY, ANY OF THOSE TRADES THAT HE'S DOING, IS THAT GONNA BE, THAT'S NOT THE PURVIEW OF THIS REQUEST.
THAT WOULD BE WITH THE PERMITTING OFFICE.
YEAH, BUT HE WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PERMITTING AND INSPECTION PROCESS TO SHOW THAT IT WAS BUILT TO CODE.
I MEAN, ARE WE CREATING A FIRE TRAP HERE BY, BY GRANTEES? NO.
HE'LL STILL HAVE TO MEET ALL BUILDING AND FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS.
SO THEY'LL NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY HOW TO EXPOSE THAT SO THEY CAN SEE THAT IT IS BUILT TO CODE.
MR. STAFF, LET'S BRING THE APPLICANT FORWARD PLEASE.
NEED YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS, UH, FOR THE RECORD AND THEN YOU CAN PRESENT YOUR CASE.
MY NAME IS MARIA MUNI AND UM, MY ADDRESS IS TWO EIGHT GOLD STREET.
I WAS SEEKING, UH, YOUR APPROVAL FOR MY ADDITION SINCE, UM, I HAVE, UM, A TWO BEDROOM AND I RECENTLY, UH, ADDED, UM, A DAUGHTER TO MY LIFE.
MY HOUSE IS ORIGINALLY TWO BEDROOM.
I HAVE ONE AND MY BOYS SHARE ANOTHER ONE, WHICH MY DAUGHTER SHARES ONE BEDROOM WITH ME.
AND I WAS ADDING, UH, THE EXTRA ADDITION FOR MY DAUGHTER 'CAUSE I WANT HER TO HAVE HER OWN NURSERY.
HAVE, UH, TWO HUSKY DOGS THAT, UH, MY NEIGHBOR'S CHILDREN WERE THROWING ROCKS TO MY DOGS.
AND I DID, UM, KIND OF MENTION THAT TO MY NEIGHBOR AND SHE'S JUST KIND OF LIKE IGNORED IT.
SO I JUST TOOK PRECAUTIONS AND BUILD THAT, UH, THE FENCE FOR MY DOG'S SAFETY AND HER CHILDREN'S SAFETY.
AND I'M SEEKING FREE APPROVAL, UH, SO I CAN KEEP MY ADDITION SINCE, UH, I WANNA ENJOY, UH, MY PROPERTY SINCE, UH, MY DAUGHTER'S GROWING AND SHE'S A TALLER, SHE'S ALREADY WALKING SOON.
SHE'S GONNA NEED HER OWN, UH, NURSERY.
[00:55:01]
HONOR.UM, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MANNA? SORRY, MR. MANNA, GO AHEAD.
SO ON THE NOTE HERE, IT TALKS ABOUT, UM, I GUESS A, A SIX FOOT FENCE DRAWN WITH THE OUTLINE THERE.
UM, AND THEN ON GOOGLE IT SHOWS THAT THE FRONT BEING PREDOMINANTLY OPEN.
SO IS IT, IS IT THE, THE METAL, UH, DECORATIVE METAL FENCING IN THE FRONT AND THEN WOOD ON THE SIDES? THAT'S CORRECT, YOUR HONOR.
AND THEN ALSO, UM, YOU KNOW, DRIVING DOWN GOOGLE STREET, I DO SEE A FEW OTHER YARDS THAT DID, DO HAVE, THAT DOES HAVE THE FENCE COMING ESSENTIALLY TO THAT, TO THAT FRONT LINE.
I, I GUESS SO YOU'VE SEEN OTHER NEIGHBORS THAT HAVE THAT KIND OF FENCING AS WELL? THAT'S CORRECT, YOUR HONOR.
UM, ALL, ALL AROUND MY NEIGHBORHOOD, OUR LANDS ARE KIND OF SMALL AND UM, I MEAN, IT'S NOT MY FAULT, BUT AT MY HOUSE IT'S, UH, IT'S SET ON THE, I GUESS THE OLD GRAND FATHER-IN-LAW AND YEAH, THEY'RE ALL THE SAME, SAME SIZE LOTS.
ANYBODY, ANYONE ELSE? I THINK DR.
SO I JUST WANT YOU HAVE THE FENCE, UM, BEING SIX FEET TALL ON, UM, AND IN THE CLEAR VISION FIELD, BUT THAT WAS BECAUSE OF YOUR DOGS AND THAT'S CORRECT.
HAS THE FENCE RESOLVED THE SAFETY CONCERNS? YES, BECAUSE, UH, MY NEIGHBOR'S CHILDREN NO LONGER THROW ROCKS TO MY DOG.
SO, UH, I DID GET UP, UH, IN TOUCH WITH HER AND SHE DID KIND OF DISREGARD MY, UH, OPINION THAT MY DOGS WOULD, UH, UM, MAYBE BITE HER CHILDREN.
'CAUSE SINCE, UH, WE HAD A CHIN LUNG FENCE BEFORE AND THAT RESOLVED THE PROBLEM.
IT, IT LOOKS FROM THE PICTURE THAT ONCE YOUR VEHICLE GOES THROUGH THE FRONT GATE, YOU HAVE ENOUGH ROOM TO STOP, GO PAST THE FENCE AND, AND STOP BEFORE ENTERING THE STREET.
IT'S, IT'S, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH SPACE THAT IS, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE YOU GOT ABOUT SEVEN OR SO FEET.
SO DO YOU FEEL LIKE IF YOU WERE TO DRIVE THROUGH THE GATE THAT YOU, YOU KNOW, BEFORE ENTERING THE STREET THAT YOU, YOU CAN SEE LEFT AND RIGHT PAST YOUR FENCE? YES, I'M ABLE TO SEE.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER, UH, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY, I HAVE, UH, ONE QUESTION ABOUT, UH, OF COURSE SINCE EVERY PHOTOGRAPH I'VE SEEN SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY, IT'S DIFFERENT BECAUSE THIS PHOTOGRAPH IS DIFFERENT THAN THIS ONE.
I SEE THAT THE BLOCKS OF, OF, UH, BRICKS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE CURB, THOSE HAVE BEEN REMOVED.
RIGHT? THAT'S MY NEIGHBOR, YES.
AND THE HEIGHT OF THAT FENCE IN THE FRONT THERE IS FOUR FEET? FOUR FEET AND, UH, ONE FEET OF LATTICE? NO, NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE, THE METAL.
AND SO IT'S JUST A SIDE THAT HAS GONE UP ABOVE THE MOUNT, OKAY.
THAT'S, UH, PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE NEED.
ARE THERE ANY WITNESSES ON THIS? NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
I BELIEVE THEY'RE BOTH THE APPLICANT, PA UH, JOSE PACHECO AND MARIA MUNOZ.
SO, UH, SO YOU'RE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AS A WITNESS? CORRECT.
THEN I'LL LET YOU GO AHEAD AND GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
THAT IS 2 0 8 BOW STREET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 8.
AND I JUST WANTED TO COME AND JUST CONFIRM WHAT SHE JUST FINISHED SAYING.
UH, ABOUT THE DOGS, ABOUT THE DOGS AT CHILDREN NEXT DOOR, THROWING ROCKS.
SO THAT WAS THE PURPOSE FOR THE FENCE BEING UP THAT HIGH.
AND THAT'S WHY WE PUT THE MESH SO WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE.
AND, UM, OTHER THAN THAT, UH, THE BRICKS ARE BELONGED TO THE NEIGHBOR AND WE COULD CLEARLY SEE BOTH WAYS AS ENTERING AND EXITING THE DRIVEWAY.
DO ANYONE HAVE A NAP? A QUESTION FOR THIS WITNESS? ORIAN ORIAN, UH, THE, THE WOOD FENCE IN QUESTION DOWN THE SIDE, DOES IT STOP A COUPLE FEET BEFORE THE THE GATE? IS THAT WHAT I'M SEEING IN PICTURE? CORRECT.
IT'S BOTTOM OF A FOOT, ABOUT A FOOT BEFORE, BEFORE THE GATE FENCE.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC.
I WANT EVERYONE TO NOTE BEFORE A MOTION'S BEEN MADE, THIS HAS BROKEN UP INTO TWO DIFFERENT SECTIONS.
WE HAVE A VARIANCE FOR THE ADDITION AND WE HAVE THE EXCEPTION FOR THE FENCE, UH, PORTION OF THIS.
UH, SO BEFORE WE GO AHEAD AND, AND MAKE A MOTION, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU HANDLE THAT APPROPRIATELY.
AND WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION? ANNA, MR. ANA, GO AHEAD.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 19 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 1, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, ONE A 14 FOOT FIVE
[01:00:01]
INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED ADDITION TO BE FIVE FOOT FIVE FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.AND THREE, A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE CLEAR VISION STANDARDS TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE WITHIN A CLEAR VISION FIELD SITUATED AT TWO EIGHT GOLD STREET, UH, APPLICANT BEING MARIA UNI.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC.
IN THIS CASE, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS REP IS REPRESENTED BY SETBACKS THAT MAINTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER IN A CLEAR VISION FIELD AREA THAT ENHANCES PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.
THE FIVE FOOT FIVE REAR SETBACK VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE FENCE IS ENCROACHING SEVEN FOOT ONTO THE 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION FIELD ON BOTH SIDE PROPERTIES.
UH, THE BOARD FINDS THAT IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE SPECIAL CONDITION IS THAT THE LOT IS SMALL AND THE HOME IS ALREADY CONSTRUCTED UP TO THE REAR AND SIDE SETBACK, BUILD, BUILDING SIDE SETBACK.
THE ADDITION IS, UH, PARTIALLY CONSTRUCTED AND A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD REQUIRE THE DESTRUCTION OF A PORTION OF THE HOME.
THE REQUIREMENT TO REDUCE THE FENCE HEIGHT TO MEET THE 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION FIELD WOULD PLACE THE HOMEOWNER'S CHILDREN AND PETS AT RISK.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE STRICT LETTER OF THE LAW.
THE INTENT OF THE CODE IS TO ESTABLISH A COHESIVE DEVELOPMENT THAT PRESERVES THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REAR SETBACK OBSERVES THE INTENT OF THE CODE AS THE PROPERTY COMPLIES WITH OTHER REQUIREMENTS, THE FENCE IS ENCROACHING SEVEN FOOT ONTO THE 15 FOOT CLEAR VISION FIELD ON BOTH SIDES, BOTH PROPERTY SIDES.
THE BOARD FINDS IT STILL OBSERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE CODE.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT TO WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
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 REQUESTS WILL NOT INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AS THERE IS STILL ADEQUATE DISTANCES BETWEEN STRUCTURES IN THE HOME AND WILL NOT CREATE FIRE SAFETY OR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ISSUES.
THE PLIGHT TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE SIX FOR THE PLIGHT FOR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE 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 MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING HERE ARE THAT THE LOT IS SMALL AND THE HOUSE IS ALREADY BUILT UP TO THE REAR SETBACK.
THESE ARE NOT THE FAULT OF THE OWNER AND ARE NOT THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND A MOTION, DO I HEAR A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND.
UM, MR. MANDEN, PLEASE START THE DISCUSSION.
YES, I THINK THERE WAS PLENTY OF DISCUSSION WITH REGARDS TO THE, THE FENCING ITSELF.
AND I, AND I DON'T, DON'T SEE ANY ISSUES OR DID I HEAR ANY ISSUES, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THAT.
AND THE BUILDING ITSELF LOOKS, UH, LIKE IT'S FITTING WITHIN THE, THE COMMUNITY ITSELF.
AND SO I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING, ANY PROBLEMS WITH THAT EITHER.
SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.
SRO? YES, I JUST, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND NORMALLY I'M, I'M QUITE CONCERNED ABOUT CLEAR VISION FIELD, BUT THERE'S ALSO A SAFETY ISSUE WITH REGARD TO THE DOGS AND THE KIDS NEXT DOOR.
AND, UM, AND I THINK THERE'S ADEQUATE SPACE FOR THEM TO PULL OUT SAFELY.
SO I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO PUT THEIR INPUT INTO THIS MR. ORIAN? SURE.
UH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS AS WELL.
I DO LIKE THE FACT THAT THE, THAT THE WOODEN, UH, FENCE STOPS SHORT OF THE PROPERTY LINE AND SO THAT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DISTANCE OF THE FACE OF CURB PROVIDES ROOM FOR A CAR TO, TO, TO MAKE ADEQUATE, TO VIEW LEFT AND RIGHT TO BEFORE THEY PULL OUT.
ANYONE ELSE? UNI MR. UNI? YEAH, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT AND PRIMARILY BECAUSE WITH THE, WITH THE APPROVAL OF VARIANCE, THE PROP, THE PROJECT WILL BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH BUILDING CODES.
AND THAT TO ME IS IMPORTANT THAT IT'S GONNA BE ALL FIRE, UH, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING AND ALL CODES WITHIN THE CITY TO ISSUE A, A VALID BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE PROJECT, WHICH IS GONNA BRING SAFETY FOR HER KIDS IF THAT'S EVENTUALLY WHAT SHE'S TRYING TO BUILD THE HOUSE FOR.
NO ONE ELSE HAS A REMARK THEN.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE VOTE.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
[01:05:01]
MS. CRUZ.YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
THE MOTION DOES PASS AND THE, UH, VARIANCE IS APPROVED.
NOW WE'LL NEED A VOTE ON THE EXCEPTION DER MOTION ON THE EXCEPTION ELLI DR.
ELLI REGARDING CASE BO A DASH 19 DASH 0 3 1 4 1.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE SIX FEET TALL WITH A FOUR FOOT SOLID SCREEN WITHIN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT 2 0 8 GOULD STREET, APPLICANT BEING MARINA MARIA, UH, MUNOZ BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT AN SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER.
THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT IN THE FRONT YARD IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY.
IF GRANTED THIS REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE.
THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE.
THE CRITERIA ARE REQUESTED BY MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND UP TO SIX FOOT TALL FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD AS SUBMITTED IN THIS APPLICATION, IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE FIN UM, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE.
THE FENCE ENHANCES THE PRIVACY AND SECURITY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND AS UNLIKELY TO INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND THE LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT.
THE FENCE PROVIDES A SAFE ENVIRONMENT FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER AND FOR HER CHILDREN, AND DOES NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEREIN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT.
AND I WANNA STRESS THAT THIS, UM, SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS FOR THE FENCE AS PRESENTED TO US.
IN THIS CASE, THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT.
THAT WAS A SECOND FOR MR. MANNA.
ALRIGHT, DOCTOR, PLEASE START THE DISCUSSION.
I MEAN, THIS IS REALLY ABOUT THE SIDE, THE SIDE FENCES THAT EXTEND INTO THE FRONT YARD AND THAT WE'VE ALREADY, UM, GRANTED THE VARIANCE FOR THE, UM, REGARDING THE CLEAR VISION FIELD.
AND I THINK THIS IS JUST KIND OF FINISHING UP THAT LITTLE UNPIECE UNFINISHED PIECE OF BUSINESS TO ALLOW FOR THE SIDE FENCES TO EXTEND ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT YARD.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD TO THIS DISCUSSION? OKAY.
LET'S, MONICA, LET'S TAKE A VOTE.
ELLI, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. ORIAN? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FOLLOW, UH, THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
A MOTION DOES PASS EXCEPTIONS APPROVED.
UM, PLEASE GET WITH THE STAFF FOR THE APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION AND PERMITTING PROCESS AND GOOD LUCK WITH COMPLETING YOUR PROJECT REQUEST.
UH, ANYONE WITH THE STAFF WOULD LIKE A BRIEF BREAK OR DO YOU WANT TO GO? AND LET'S GO THEN.
LET'S START WITH THE NEXT, NEXT CASE.
OH, BY THE WAY, DOES MR. WAGNER RETURN THE REPRESENTATIVE? DID, UH, COME VERY GOOD.
[6. 19-8926 BOA-19-10300135: A request by Hulse Wagner for a 2’ variance from the 5’ side setbacks to allow an accessory detached dwelling unit and detached garage to be 3’ from both side property lines, located at 146 Crofton Avenue. Staff recommends Approval. (Council District 1) (Debora Gonzalez, Senior Planner (210) 207- 3074, debora.gonzalez@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)]
LET'S GO BACK TO CASE NUMBER, UH, 1 35, THEN A BO A 19 1 0 3 0 0 1 35, UH, 1 46 CRAFTON AVENUE APPLICANT NER, UH, SONY RMM FOUR H A H H H S RIO, FOUR H O D.IT'S A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SITE SETBACKS TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY DETACHED DWELL UNIT AND A DETACHED GARAGE TO BE THREE FEET FROM BOTH SIDE PROPERTY LINES.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO BUILD A TWO STORY WOOD STRUCTURE THAT WILL INCLUDE AN ACCESSORY DE DETACHED DWELL UNIT AND A DETACHED GARAGE.
THE LOT IS LOCATED ON AN HARDWARD CURVE.
IT WITH A NARROW YARD TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
THE PROPERTY HAS ACCESS TO A 15 FOOT ALLEY FROM THE REAR YARD, WHICH
[01:10:01]
IS THE LOCATION OF THE NEW GARAGE AND THE NEW DWELLING UNIT.THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE KING WILLIAM DISTRICT.
ON OCTOBER 17TH, THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, UH, ISSUED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION.
SO HERE IN THE SITE PLAN, UM, WE CAN SEE HOW THE, THE SHAPE OF THE LOT IN THE 15 FOOT ALLEY.
THE FOLLOWING SITE PLAN IS A CLOSEUP SHOWING THE THREE, UM, THE DISTANCES TO THE SITE SETBACK.
AND THEY ARE COMPLYING WITH A REAR REQUIREMENT, UH, THAT THIS WOULD BE ON THE SECOND STORY.
AND THE FIRST FLOOR WOULD BE THE GARAGE.
IT WAS JUST SUBJECT PROPERTY, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
THIS IS ALL IN CRAFTON, BY THE WAY.
SO THIS IS THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE DEMOLISHED AND IT TURNED INTO A NEW STRUCTURE COMBINING WITH THE REAR SETBACK, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
AND, AND THIS IS THE VIEW I RECOMMENDS.
APPROVAL OF VARIANCE IN B O A 19 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT THAT REQUESTED SETBACKS WILL PROVIDE ROOM FOR ADEQUATE LIGHT AIR AND MAINTENANCE.
THE VARIANCE, UH, IS UNLIKELY TO DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, AND THE VARIANCE IS UNLIKELY TO HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
ZERO IN FAVOR, NO OPPOSITION, AND NO COMMENT FROM THE KING WILLIAM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
YOU MIGHT FIND, UH, THAT THERE WAS A COMMENT FROM, UM, A NEARBY PROPERTY.
HE HAD, HE WAS FIRST IN A POSITION BECAUSE HIS UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT HE WAS GOING TO, HE WAS SEEKING A REQUEST VARIANCE FROM THE REAR.
ONCE I CLARIFIED THAT THE REQUEST WAS FOR THE SIDE SETBACKS, HE WAS, HE REMOVED HIS COMPLAINT AND HE SAID HE HAD NO OBJECTION TOWARDS THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
ANY QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS FOR, FOR STAFF? AND I GUESS THAT'S PRETTY GOOD.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND BRING THE APPLICANT FORWARD.
NEED YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, UH, FOR THE RECORD BEFORE YOU PRESENT THE CASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, JAMES MCKNIGHT, 1 1 2 EAST PECAN FROM BRIAN ORTIZ HERE REPRESENTING MR. AND MRS. WAGNER FOR 1 46 CROFTON.
UM, YOU KNOW, STAFF COVERED THE BIG POINTS.
SO I HAVE JUST A FEW SLIDES JUST TO, UM, 'CAUSE YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT I DO TO TRY TO, TO TRY TO SHOW, IT'S A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ABOUT
UM, BUT IT'S, IT'S FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
AS I SAID, IT'S PART OF THE KING WILLIAM HISTORIC DISTRICT.
6,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT REAR YARD BACKS UP TO AN ALLEY.
THERE'S AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE THERE.
AND THE NEW STRUCTURE HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY H D R C.
UM, AND YOU CAN SEE THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PHOTO BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE THAT, UH, UM, IT'S GONNA BE IMPORTANT ALONG THIS ALLEY.
YOU CAN SEE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ALL ALONG THERE, ESPECIALLY FROM BOTH SIDES, ESPECIALLY TWO STORY STRUCTURES.
SO IT'S, IT'S EXTREMELY COMMON FOR THIS AREA TO HAVE THIS KIND OF CONFIGURATION.
UM, SO HERE'S THE EXISTING CONDITION.
YOU CAN SEE IN PLAN HOW CLOSE ONE FOOT HERE, 1.2 FEET HERE, 0.1 FEET HERE.
THIS IS THE EXISTING WITH THE FENCE AND EVERYTHING STRUCTURE BEING RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
WE ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE INCREASING THAT.
SO WE'RE GONNA BE IMPROVING THE SITUATION.
THERE'S ALSO, THERE'S A FIVE, 5.9 FOOT SETBACK THERE FOR THE GARAGE.
WE'RE ACTUALLY MOVING IT ALL THE WAY BACK TO SEVEN FEET.
SO WE'RE INCREASING THE REAR SETBACK, WE'RE INCREASING THE SIDE SETBACKS, BUT THEY'RE STILL OUT OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE CURRENT CODE.
THIS IS THE EXISTING CONDITION, AS YOU SAW FOR THE, THE STRUCTURE AS IT IS.
THESE ARE A COUPLE OF OTHER STRUCTURES THAT ARE IN, THAT ARE ON EITHER SIDE OF US THAT HAVE THREE FEET ON THIS SIDE.
THERE'S LESS THAN A FOOT ON THIS SIDE.
AS I SAID, EXTREMELY COMMON TO HAVE THESE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
ALSO EXTREMELY COMMON FOR THEM TO BE VERY CLOSE TO THE, THE PROPERTY LINE IF YOU UP AND DOWN THERE, THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE FOR ALL OF THESE STRUCTURES.
SO, UM, CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO BE OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR HISTORIC STRUCTURE, HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD, IS IT GONNA BE OUT OF CHARACTER? IS IT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST? TWO STORY STRUCTURES ALL UP AND DOWN THIS ALLEY.
STRUCTURES THAT ARE UP AGAINST THAT FENCE LINE ALL UP AND DOWN THIS ALLEY.
LIKE I SAID, WE'RE INCREASING IT, SO WE'RE ONLY GONNA ONLY GONNA MAKE IT BETTER.
UM, THERE'S A, ACTUALLY, IF YOU CAN SEE THE THREE FOOT THAT THEY, THAT THE ARCHITECT DREW WAS TO THE ROOF LINE, IT'S NOT ACTUALLY TO THE STRUCTURE.
SO THERE'S ANOTHER ALMOST NINE INCHES THERE.
SO WE'RE, WE'VE GOT NEARLY FOUR FEET OF CLEARANCE FOR THE BUILDING AND SEVEN FOOT CLEARANCE BACK FROM THE ALLEY FOR THIS STRUCTURE.
SO REALLY FEEL LIKE WE'RE NOT IMPINGING ON ANYBODY ELSE AROUND US.
[01:15:01]
THE REASONS THAT STAFF RECOMMEND APPROVAL THAT IT WAS, THAT IT WAS APPROVED, WAS THAT IT WAS SIMILAR TO ALL THE STRUCTURES IN THE AREA.SO, UM, LIKE I SAID, KEEP IT SHORT AND SWEET AND, UM, HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I BELIEVE YOU'VE ANSWERED THEM.
DO WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES? NOBODY SIGNED UP.
UH, YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE? NONE.
THAT CLOSES TO THE PUBLIC AND THAT'S, I'M ENTERTAINING A MOTION.
STARTING, UH, CASE NUMBER, UH, BO O A 19 DASH ZERO, UH, 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 2.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT FIVE A, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE SIX OH, UH, TAKE THAT BACK.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 19 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 5, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT, UH, SIDE SETBACKS TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY DETACHED D WELDING UNIT AND DETACHED GARAGE TO BE THREE FEET FROM BOTH SIDE PROPERTY LINES SITUATED AT 1 46 CROFTON AVENUE.
APPLICANT BEING WHOLE WAGNER BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED THAT SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT, UH, ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC.
IN THIS CASE, A VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE STRUCTURE PROVIDES ROOM FOR MAINTENANCE, WILL NOT CREATE WATER RUNOFF ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND WILL NOT INJURE THE RIGHTS OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.
THE STRUCTURE WILL BE THREE FEET OUR BORE FROM THE BOTH SIDE PROPERTY LINES AND NO PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE WILL BE IN VIOLATION OF THE CLEAR VISION FIELD.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, THE LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AND NECESSARY HARDSHIP WOULD RESULT FROM THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE AS STRICT ENFORCEMENT WOULD RESULT IN NOT ALLOWING THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO BUILD THE REQUESTED STRUCTURE AS PROPOSED.
AND I WOULD ADD THE ADDITIONAL HARDSHIP IS THAT THE UNIQUE PIE SHAPE OF THE LOT MAKES IT A DIFFICULT SITE TO, UH, TO BUILD, UH, GIVEN THE, UH, UM, THE VARIANCES REQUESTED.
UH, THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AS SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE AS THE REQUESTED SETBACKS WILL STILL PROVIDE FOR A SAFE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
UM, AS INDICATED BY ADJOINING, UH, PROPERTIES THAT SHARE THE SAME CHARACTERISTICS AS IS PROPOSED, THE REQUEST WILL PROVIDE FAIR AND EQUAL ACCESS TO THE AIR AND LIGHT AND PROVIDE FOR ADEQUATE FIRE SEPARATION.
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.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS SUCH AS THIS, IT'S COMMON FOR ACCESSORY UNITS TO BE LOCATED WITHIN THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ESTABLISHED BY THE CURRENT U D C.
UH, THE REQUEST WILL NOT DE, UH, DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
THE PROPOSED UNIT WILL BE IN THE REAR OF THE HOME, NOT AFFECTING THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR THE CLEAR VISION ORDINANCE WITH WITHIN THE TIME SPAN, THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE HAD BEEN IN PLACE.
THERE HAS BEEN NO OBSERVED HARM DONE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
AS A NEW STRUCTURE WILL OCCUR AWAY FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, IT'S UNLIKELY THAT THE REQUEST WILL INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.
UH, SIX SUPPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCES SAW IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CONSTRUCTIVE STANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE REQ, UH, 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 WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER AND IS NOT A FINANCIAL IN NATURE.
THE CHARACTER OF SIDE YARDS WITHIN THE DISTRICT OF PREDOMINANTLY COMPACT, LEAVING LITTLE ROOM FOR PROPERTY, PROPER BUILDINGS, UH, SETBACKS AND OF MOTION.
ALRIGHT, UH, ANDREW, WE'D LIKE TO START DISCUSSION.
UH, I, I I APPROVE THE, THE VARIANCE REQUESTED.
UH, CLEARLY THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE BUILDING WITHIN A SET OF, UH, UM, CONSTRAINTS THAT ARE, THAT ARE DICTATED BY THE LOT SIZE AND THE, AND THE PIE SHAPE.
I THINK THAT THE, UH, THE IMPROVEMENTS OUR BUILDING WILL ADD, UH, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I CONCUR, DURRAN WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE.
I, UH, WILL ALSO BE IN FAVOR OF THIS.
UH, IT, IT IS SUCH A MINOR ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT AND, AND WHAT IS, AND WHAT WAS BEING DEMOLISHED AND, AND, AND PROPOSED TO BE REPLACED WITH, I THINK IS GONNA BE A, A BENEFIT TO THE AREA.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO PUT THEIR INPUT INTO THIS THEN BEING THE CASE? THEN LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE ROLE.
I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
[01:20:01]
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. VINNO.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
THE, UH, MOTION DOES CARRY AND, UH, PLEASE CONTINUE WITH YOUR PROCESS AND GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT.
[8. 19-8806 BOA-19-10300142: A request by Johnny Rodriguez for 1) a 9’ variance from the 10’ front setback requirement to allow an attached carport to be 1’ from the front property line, 2) a 2’ variance from the 5’ side setback requirement to allow 2 attached carports to be 3’ from the side property line, 3) a 2’ variance from the 5’ side setback requirement to allow an attached addition to be 3’ from the side property line, 4) a 6’ variance from the 20’ rear setback requirement to allow an attached addition to be 14’ from the rear property line, and 5) a special exception to allow a solid wood fence to be 6’ tall within the front yard, located at 131 Burke Ave. Staff recommends Denial with an Alternate Recommendation. (Council District 5) (Rachel Smith, Planner(210) 207- 5407 rachel.smith@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)]
CONTINUE ON CASE NUMBER EIGHT, NUMBER 1 42 JOHNNY RODRIGUEZ.HOLD ON, WE'LL CALL YOU UP HERE IN A MINUTE.
MS. SMITH WILL PRESENT YOUR INITIAL CASE, CASE B O A 19 103 0 1 42 AT 1 31 BURKE AVENUE.
THE APPLICANT IS JOHNNY RODRIGUEZ.
THE ZONING IS R SIX M O D TWO MLR, ONE A H O D.
THE REQUESTS ARE FOR ONE A NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
TWO, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW TWO ATTACHED CARPORTS TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE THREE, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO REQUIRE SET SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED ADDITION TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE FOUR, A SIX FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED ADDITION TO BE 14 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
AND FIVE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A SOLID WOOD FENCE TO BE SIX FEET TALL WITHIN THE FRONT YARD.
SUBJECT PROPERTY, OBJECT PROPERTY.
I THINK I MISSED, OH, THERE WE GO.
THE APPLICANT WAS CITED FOR BUILDING THE FRONT PORCH AND CARPORT WITHOUT PERMIT ON OCTOBER 2ND, 2018.
THE APPLICANT ATTEMPTED TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT IN SEPTEMBER, 2019, BUT WAS INFORMED OF THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
THE APPLICANT STATES THE CONTRACTORS INCORRECTLY MEASURED WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE WAS FROM THE STREET, RESULTING IN THE SETBACK VIOLATION.
UPON VISIT TO THE SITE STAFF NOTICED THE FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD AND THE SIDE CARPORT AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WERE ENCROACHING INTO THE SIDE IN REAR SETBACK.
SUBJECT PROPERTY, SUBJECT PROPERTY TO THE SIDE, UH, FOR THE CARPORTS AND THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, DISTANCE TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, SUBJECT PROPERTY AND ADJACENT PROPERTY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCES AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS IN BO O A 19 1 0 3 0 0 1 42 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR YEARS WITHOUT COMPLAINT AND PROVIDES FOR YEARS WITHOUT COMPLAINT AND PROVIDES ADEQUATE SPACE TO PREVENT WATER RUNOFF ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTY, PREVENT FIRE SPREAD AND MAINTAIN THE STRUCTURE.
THERE'S NO SPECIAL CONDITION, OH, I'M SORRY.
THE FENCE PROVIDES PRIVACY AND DOES NOT ENCROACH INTO THE CLEAR VISION AREA.
THERE'S ADEQUATE ROOM ON THE SITE CARPORT TO PROVIDE FOR MAINTENANCE AND FIRE.
UM, THIS ACTUALLY SHOULD READ THAT THERE IS A STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT.
UM, BASED ON THE FACT THAT THERE'S NO SPECIAL CONDITION ON THE SITE TO WARRANT REDUCING THE FRONT SETBACK.
ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
THE KETANA COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RECEIVE.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, STAFF? ORIAN ORIAN.
SO GOOGLE EARTH PICTURES SHOW THAT THERE'S A NARROW ALLEY RUNNING BEHIND THIS PROPERTY.
UH, IT, IT DOESN'T, IT DIDN'T SHOW THAT IT'S PAVED AND IT SHOWS, UH, I CAN SEE PHONE AND APPARENTLY ELECTRIC POLES THAT RUN DOWN THE ALLEY.
SO THE PLANS ARE CALLING FOR A GARAGE IN THE REAR.
HOW DO YOU GET BACK THERE? I'LL PULL IT UP IN A SECOND.
THAT ALLEY IS ACTUALLY NOT A LEGALLY ESTABLISHED ALLEY.
A PART OF THAT IS PART OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
[01:25:01]
IN HALF AND HALF AND IT'S LIKE AN EASEMENT, BUT IT, BUT IT IS BEING, IT'S NOT EVEN AN EASEMENT.IT'S, IT'S LIKE ACTUALLY PART OF THAT PERSON'S PROPERTY LINE.
SO WHERE YOU SEE ON THIS SITE PLAN, THE FENCE, THEIR PROPERTY LINE ACTUALLY EXTENDS SIX FEET PAST THAT.
BUT THERE IS, I MEAN, I'M LOOKING, LOOKING AT UTILITY POLE.
UH, BUT, BUT HOW, HOW DO YOU GET BACK TO THE GARAGE? I, YOU'LL HAVE EITHER THROUGH THE FRONT OR YOU CAN ASK THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER HOW THEY ACCESS THAT.
BUT THE REAR STRUCTURE IS ACTUALLY NOT, I THINK IT'S BEING USED AS AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
AND THEN BCA RECORDS SHOW THAT THIS, UH, UH, FACIL, UH, PRO UH, SITE WAS PREDOMINANTLY BUILT IN 1947.
AND SO AS WE'RE LOOKING AT A NEW CARPORT, A NEW, UH, GARAGE STRUCTURE, THE REST OF THE STRUCTURE IS PRETTY MUCH ALREADY THERE.
SO I, I JUST NEED CLARIFICATION.
YOU DID, YOU DID SAY THAT THE CITY WAS RECOMMENDING DENIAL AND AN ALTERNATE ON ITEM ONE, THE NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT SETBACK, FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
THAT WAS WHAT YOU JUST CLARIFY THAT PIECE.
SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS CASE, THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL OF, UH, THE NINE FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE FRONT SETBACK.
THE SECOND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF 2, 3, 4, AND FIVE.
DID, DID THE CITY HAVE AN ALTERNATE? AN ALTERNATE FOR THAT? OKAY.
WAS THERE AN ALTERNATE NO RECOMMENDATION? NO, NO.
IT DOES SAY DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION.
NOT RIGHT HERE ON THE, BECAUSE TECHNICALLY WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ALL OF THE REQUESTS.
THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE FIRST VARIANCE NOT BE APPROVED.
THE REMAINDER OF THE VARIANCES BE APPROVED.
BUT WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING AN ALTERNATE TO ALLOW ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT SETBACK BECAUSE THE CARPORT IS DEEP ENOUGH.
AND, OKAY, NOW FOR THE EXCEPTION, THERE'S NO RECOMMEND, IS THERE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE EXCEPTION FENCE PORTION THAT'S LOOPED INTO THE APPROVAL? OKAY.
SO THAT HE CAN HAVE A FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD.
UH, THAT'S, UH, I'M ASSUMING SIX FEET TALL.
YES, THIS IS THIS OPEN FENCE, THE SOLID FENCE.
SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE RECOMMENDING A SOLID FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD, AND THEN YOU WANT THE CARDBOARD SET BACK TO THE 10 FOOT.
TO THE FENCE, NO, TO THE STRUCTURE.
UH, LET'S, UH, IS THAT'S ALL WE HAVE NO QUESTIONS.
SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE REFERRING TO A, AN, AN ATTACHED, UM, ADDITION AND THE GARAGE IS WHAT YOU'RE CALLING THE ATTACHED ADDITION BECAUSE THERE'S, IT'S CONNECTED TO THE HOME BECAUSE OF THE PAD COVERED PATIO.
'CAUSE IT'S ALL JUST ONE BIG ATTACHED.
YEAH, BECAUSE THE CARPORT, THE SECOND CARPORT IS ATTACHED TO THAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND IT'S ALSO ATTACHED TO THE HOME.
SO THAT FENCE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, IS THAT FENCE VISIBLE IN A PHOTO? YES, IT'S VISIBLE HERE.
IT'S ACTUALLY SITS FOUR FEET FRONT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
SO THAT'S WHY IT'S CONSIDERED A FRONT FENCE.
SO IT'S NOT FLUSH WITH THE HOUSE.
IT SITS FOUR FEET IN FRONT OF YES.
AND I'LL SWITCH TO THE PICTURE.
THIS PICTURE SHOWS THE CARPORT, THE REAR CARPORT AND THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE BACK THERE.
UM, ON THAT EX STRUCTURE THAT YOU, YOU'RE SHOWING RIGHT NOW, YOU, YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S ADEQUATE WATER DRAINAGE THERE, IT'S THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE? YES.
I DON'T BELIEVE THE OVERHANG IS, BUT I'M SURE THE POSTS ARE.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES.
SO IT'S PROBABLY PROJECTING ANOTHER FOOT AND A HALF, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING.
SO I THINK THAT WATER'S GOING ON THE OTHER SIDE.
ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DEAL WITH SOME OF THIS WITH THE APPLICANT.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND BRING THE APPLICANT FORWARD.
[01:30:01]
RODRIGUEZ, I NEED YOU TO STATE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND BEFORE YOU, UH, PROCEED WITH YOUR CASE.JOHNNY RODRIGUEZ, 1 31 BURKE AVENUE.
UH,
I GUESS I'LL START WITH, WITH THE DENIAL.
UM, THE, THE ONE FOOT, WHAT THE, WHAT WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING AT IS FROM THE STREET UP TO WHERE, WHERE, UH, WHAT I THOUGHT THERE WAS THE APPROACH WAS 10 FEET.
I WENT ONE FOOT BACK TO STAY WITHIN THE CODE.
SO FROM THE STREET TO WHERE THE FIRST POLE'S AT IS ACTUALLY 11 FEET.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S NOT YOUR PROPERTY LINE, RIGHT? YEAH.
NOW IN WHERE THE CONTRACTORS TOLD ME CODE 10 FEET AND I WENT 11, AND I, THERE'S A PICTURE OF, OF A SIDE FENCE VIEW WHERE IT SHOWS YOU, UM, ONE MORE, I THINK ONE, ONE MORE PICTURE.
SEE THAT, THAT WHERE THE FIRST POSE, RIGHT, RIGHT BEFORE IT WAS ACTUALLY THE, THE 10 FOOT APPROACH, WHAT I THOUGHT WAS, WHAT THEY TOLD ME WAS, ALL RIGHT, YOU SEE THAT FENCE POSTED? YOU'RE TAKING A PICTURE.
THAT IS APPROXIMATELY WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE IS NOW.
SO NOW 10 FEET BACK FROM THERE WOULD BE WHERE IT WOULD BE PERMITTED.
ABOUT HALF OF MY CARPORT WOULD BE CUT OFF, UH, 10 AT LEAST.
IF YOU SAY THAT'S, THAT'S ONE FOOT OVER, THEN PROBABLY NINE FEET.
AND, UH, THE FENCE, UH, THE WOODEN FENCE IN FRONT, IN THE, UH, THE COURT PORT IT, IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY LIKE ABOUT TWO AND A HALF FEET FROM THE HOUSE.
AND THE REASON IT'S OFF THE HOUSE, 'CAUSE IT'S, UH, IT, IT'S, IT'S NOT A PERMANENT FENCE.
IT'S, UH, IT, IT ROLLS TO THE RIGHT.
SO I HAD, I HAD, I HAD TO COME OUT OF, UH, OF, UH, A COUPLE OF FEET SO I CAN ROLL IT TO THE RIGHT.
SO IT'S NOT A, YOU KNOW, UM, IT DOESN'T STAY THERE.
YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT MOVES IN OTHER WORDS.
THE FENCE, YOU'RE SAYING THAT FENCE THAT'S IN FRONT OF, IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE? YEAH, THAT'S A GATE.
AND THAT WOULD IT ROLL, ROTATES BACK TOWARD THE HOUSE? IT ROLLS STRAIGHT ACROSS THE WINDOWS.
EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND WHAT HE JUST DESCRIBED? OKAY.
UM, SO IN ESSENCE, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THEN IS THAT YOU BUILT THE CARPORT BASED UPON WHAT, WHAT THE PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS WERE TO YOU? 10 FOOT, SOMEONE TOLD YOU 10 FEET FROM THE STREET AND YOU DIDN'T YES.
WHERE YOU DIDN'T UNDERSTAND YOUR PROPERTY LINE IS GENERALLY INSIDE FROM WHERE YOUR WATER METER IS.
WHERE YOUR WATER METER IS, IS, I'M GONNA SAY THIS, IT'S NOT REALLY A FACT, BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, YOUR WATER METER'S ALWAYS ON PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY? YES.
NOW, UM, DOES ANYONE HAVE A QUESTION IN REGARDS TO WHAT HE'S JUST DESCRIBED? I I HAVE A QUESTION.
MY QUESTION IS, YOU SAID A GENERAL CONTRACTOR BUILT THIS FOR YOU? YES, SIR.
DO YOU KNOW THE NAME OF THAT CONTRACTOR? IS HE A LICENSED CITY? BECAUSE IF HE'S, UH, GIVING PEOPLE BAD INFORMATION, THEN THAT'S SOMEBODY THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT HIS LICENSE IS REVIEWED.
I GOT HIM OFF AN OFFER UP AND, UM, BUT I WILL SAY THREE OF THE FOUR CONTRACTORS TOLD ME THE SAME THING.
10 FEET FROM THE STREET IS THE PROPER IS THE CITIES.
AND HE SHOWED ME WHERE, WHERE THE FENCE, IF I WOULD BUILD A FENCE BECAUSE I WANNA BUILD A FENCE ACROSS THE FRONT YARD.
AND HE SHOWED ME, SEE FROM THERE IS THIS WAY HIS CITY'S HERE OR THIS WAY IS YOURS.
AND CLEARLY HE DIDN'T PULL A PERMIT.
'CAUSE A PERMIT WOULD'VE, UM, FLESHED OUT THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT THERE.
SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT IS SHAME ON YOU FOR NOT REQUESTING A PERMIT ON THAT IS, SIR.
A MISINTERPRETATION OF THE RULE.
IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT THEY WERE TELLING IT MAY BE 10 FEET AND FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, WHEREAS MOST PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE ACTUALLY EXISTS.
AND THAT AS, AS A RULE, YOU CAN ALWAYS SAY THAT, UH, A LAYMAN WOULD MAKE THAT MISTAKE.
BUT REGARDLESS, WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS.
SO DO YOU HAVE ANY COMPELLING REASON BEYOND THAT? IT'S ALL, THE CARPORT IS ALREADY THERE THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER, UM, THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER WITH REGARD TO YOUR CASE? WELL, I, I JUST, I, I WOULD'VE AFFORD CAR CARPORT FOR, FOR MY, MY KIDS AND US.
EVEN FOR ALL FOUR CARS THAT PARK UNDER THE CARPORT.
THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I'LL HAVE TO CUT IN, CUT IN A HALF JUST ABOUT, AND IT'LL BE A TWO CAR CARPORT I GUESS.
AND WHAT ABOUT REACHING THAT BACK CARPORT? HOW DO YOU GET BACK THERE? THE BACK, YOU JUST WALKED DOWN THE DRIVEWAY TO THE BACK THAT'S, YEAH.
YOU JUST WALKED DOWN THE DRIVEWAY TOWARD THE BACK? YEAH.
THE EXTRA THAT WAS BUILT TO THE BACK, IT, IT IS NOT ACCESSIBLE FROM THE OUTSIDE.
IT'S, IT IS, IT'S THROUGH THE INSIDE AND, AND WHAT IT IS, IT'S JUST A, A STORAGE THAT WOULD JUST ADD IT ON.
[01:35:01]
OKAY, SO THAT'S NOT AN ADDITIONAL CARPORT, THAT'S A MORE LIKE A LITTLE STORAGE AREA? WELL, NO, NO, IT'S, IT IS THE GARAGE WHERE THE CARPORT ENDS IN THE BACK AND, UH, CAN SHOW THE, OKAY, THERE YOU GO.IF YOU WALK BACK, THAT'S, THAT'S THE ENTRANCE TO THE GARAGE.
THAT DOOR UHHUH
SO THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE YOU GO IN THE GARAGE.
IN BACK OF, IN BACK OF THAT ATTACHED TO IT IS THAT EXTRA STORAGE THAT WE ATTACHED TO IT.
AND THAT THING THAT YOU'RE POINTING OUT SAYING THAT THAT'S THE GARAGE DOOR, UHHUH
SO ON THE PLOT PLAN, YOU SHOW A, A PRETTY SIZABLE, UH, CONCRETE AREA IN FRONT OF WHAT WE'RE CALLING THE REAR GARAGE.
WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS THAT? BASKETBALL COURT.
UH, AND HOW WAS A ROOF PITCHED ON THIS? UH, WHAT WE'RE CALLING THE GARAGE A ROOF.
IS, UH, THERE, I MEAN, IS IT PITCHED TOWARDS YOUR NEIGHBOR OR IS IT, IS IT GUTTERED? IT, IT'S, IT'S PITCHED TOWARDS THE NEIGHBOR, BUT THAT'S HOW, THAT'S BUSINESS THAT BOUGHT THE HOME.
NOW THE WATER DOES NOT RUN OFF TO THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.
UH, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE THING I MAKE SURE OF THAT IT DOESN'T RUN OFF TO THE NEIGHBOR'S EITHER FRONT OR, OR THE FRONT CAR PART OR BACK PART DOESN'T, ALL RIGHT.
UH, NO ADDITIONAL MANNA, MR. MANNA.
SO, SO I SEE A, SO IT SHOWS ON THE, UH, THE, THE, THE SITE MAPPING, UH, PATIO.
AND ON THIS PICTURE HERE, IT SHOWS THAT STEEP COVER.
IS THAT OVER THE PATIO ITSELF? YES, SIR.
AND SO, SO IT LOOKS PRETTY STEEP WITH REGARDS TO UHHUH TO THE SLOPE.
AND DOES IT FOLLOW THE, THE, THE HOUSE LINE AS WELL OR IS THAT, IS IT, I GUESS, DOES IT CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THE HOUSE LINE? BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE A LOT OF WATER WOULD BE COMING DOWN THAT THE WATER RUNS RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF MY DRIVEWAY TO THE FENCE.
IT DOESN'T RUN OFF TO THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.
WE HAVE NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
WE HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE.
SO WHY DON'T WE, UH, WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES? YOU SAID NONE AT ALL.
I BELIEVE HE'S GIVEN ALL THE TESTIMONY HE CAN GIVE US TO WHAT HE'S WOR THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE TO A, TO ASK YOU IN REGARD TO THIS IS HOW MANY CARS PARKED UNDERNEATH THAT FRONT CARPORT? FOUR.
AND THE, UH, THERE'S SEVERAL OTHER CARPORTS THAT HAVE THE SAME, YOU KNOW, COME OUT TO, TO THE RIGHT.
BUT WE ONLY DEAL WITH APPROACH PIECE OF PROPERTY TIME.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC.
LET'S ENTERTAIN, UH, LET'S SEE, WHAT DISTRICT WAS THIS IN? DISTRICT FIVE.
MARIA, DO YOU, WOULD, WOULD YOU LIKE TO DEAL WITH THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE OR, AND MAKE THE MOTION, YOU'RE DISTRICT FIVE
NOW LEMME EXPLAIN SOMETHING TO YOU THAT YES, SIR, THESE ARE THE, WHAT THE REQUEST IS IS IS QUITE BROAD AND THERE ARE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE CITY STAFF IS MAKING.
YOU CAN, YOU CAN ALTER THIS ANY WAY YOU WANT TO.
THE MOST WE CAN GIVE HIM IS A VARIANCE OF NINE FEET OF THE FRONT.
UH, AND SINCE THEY'VE GROUPED THE EXCEPTION WITH THE VARIANCE, IS THAT, IS THAT THE CASE HERE? NO, THEY DID A SEPARATE MOTION FOR THE SPECIAL, FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
ALRIGHT, THEN, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DEAL WITH THE VARIANCE FIRST AND WE'LL DEAL WITH THE EXCEPTION LATER.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 1 9 103 0 0 1 4 2, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AND ATTACH CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
TWO, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW IT TO ATTACH CARPORTS TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
UH, AND THREE, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM A FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN A, AN ATTACHED ADDITION TO THE THREE FOOT FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY.
LINE FOUR, A SIX FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT
[01:40:01]
REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED ADDITION TO BE 14 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 3 1 BURKE AVENUE APPLICANT BEING JOHNNY RODRIGUEZ.BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS SERVED BY SETBACKS WHICH HELP TO PROVIDE CONSISTENT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING VARIANCES TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND TWO FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND AN ATTACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE 14 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
THE FOUR BOARD FINDS THAT THE CARPORT AS PROPOSED, IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WOULD PROVIDE ADEQUATE ROOM FOR MAINTENANCE AND WOULD PROVIDE BETTER SEPARATION FOR FIRE SPREAD AND WA AND RAIN WATER RUNOFF, EXCUSE ME, TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
A LITTLE, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE SIDE HEAD BACK WOULD NOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE WIDTH TO HOUSE TWO CARS.
THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR YEARS WITHOUT COMPLAINT.
AND A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT WOULD REQUIRE THE PROPERTY OWNER TO MOVE THE STRUCTURE, WHICH BEING ATTACHED IS THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE WOULD BE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE OBSERVED AND THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE, THE STRICT LETTER OF THE LAW.
THE INTENT OF THE CODE IS TO WRITE FOR CONSISTENT DEVELOPMENT AND TO ESTABLISH ROOM FOR MAINTENANCE AND ACCESS TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST ADDRESSES THESE CONCERNS AND OBSERVES THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
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 REQUESTED VARIANCES DO NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
AND SPECIFICALLY THE CARPORT IS BUILT IN A WAY TO MINIMIZE INJURY TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
SIX, THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE C 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 UNDER CIRCUM CIRCUMSTANCES ON THIS PROPERTY, UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ON THIS PROPERTY ARE NOT MERELY, MERELY FINANCIAL OR DUE TO THE RESULTS OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? MANNA? MR. MANNA ALL UM, CRUZ, WOULD YOU LIKE TO START THE DISCUSSION? WELL, I'M KIND OF DEBATING OF WHAT THIS WILL DO AND I'M NOT SURE ABOUT WHETHER TO GO AHEAD AND GO WITH IT OR NOT, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT IT'D BE VERY HARD FOR HIM TO TAKE IT APART AND RE GET IT REDONE.
UM, I KNOW THIS AREA 'CAUSE I LIVE AROUND THE CORNER FROM IT, SO I KNOW THAT, UM, THE PROPERTIES ARE SMALL AND, UM, IF YOU WANNA ADD, AND THE BAD PART IS A LOT OF THESE NEIGHBORS HAVE ALWAYS KNOWN THAT YOU, YOU BUILT WHATEVER YOU WANT TO AND NOBODY'S GONNA TELL YOU ANYTHING UNTIL YOU GET WRITTEN UP.
BUT, UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND SUPPORT IT AND SEE WHERE WE GO FROM THERE.
YEAH, I'M, UH, STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT WITH THIS AS WELL.
IT DOES SEEM LIKE THE FRONT IS, IS ENCROACHING ON THE, UH, THE FRONT PROPERTY.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, DRIVING THROUGH IT DOES NOT LOOK CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY.
YOU KNOW, I, I, I DIDN'T SEE THAT MANY, SO, SO IT DOES LOOK INCONSISTENT.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, THE HARDSHIP THAT WAS PROVIDED KIND OF WAS JUST TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL CARS AND, AND SO I UNDERSTAND THAT PART, BUT, UM, I, I, I AM CONCERNED, SO I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M GONNA BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS ZOAR.
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR ME TO PROVIDE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WOULD MAKE IT MUCH EASIER FOR ME TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION? SURE.
UM, THAT WOULD BE TO STRIKE NUMBER ONE, A NINE FOOT VARIANCE
[01:45:01]
FROM THE 10 FOOT FRONT STEP BACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.UM, I, I JUST, I WANT TO SUPPORT THIS, THIS, UM, THIS MOTION, BUT I'M FINDING IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO SUPPORT THAT ASPECT OF THIS MOTION GIVEN THAT AS I'M LOOKING THROUGH THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, I DO NOT SEE CARPORTS THAT ARE THAT CLOSE TO THE FRONT.
UM, AND I'M JUST, I I I, I GET THAT IT COVERS CARS, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND, UM, THE TRUE NEED FOR THIS BEYOND THE FACT THAT IT'S ALREADY PRESENT AND THAT IS A FINANCIAL ISSUE.
BUT I WOULD HATE TO SEE THIS APPLICANT, UM, IN A SITUATION WHERE THE OTHER ASPECTS OF HIS REQUEST WERE DENIED SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THIS VERY FIRST ISSUE.
SO MY FRIENDLY, CAN I MAKE A FRIENDLY MOTION? OKAY, SO MY FRIENDLY MOTION IS TO STRIKE NUMBER ONE, THE NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIREMENT.
ALRIGHT? WE'RE GONNA NEED APPROVAL BY BOTH THE, UM, PERSON MAKING THE MOTION AND THE PERSON SECOND.
CAN, CAN I ASK A QUESTION BEFORE WE DO THAT? YES, YOU MAY.
WHAT EXACTLY ARE WE VOTING ON? OKAY.
ESSENTIALLY THE WHAT WAS, WHAT WAS REQUESTED, UH, IN THE, UH, FOR THE VARIANCE IS WHAT, WHAT IS BEING MO MOVED AT THIS TIME? DR.
ELLI WANTS TO RE REMOVE THE, UH, NINE FOOT EASEMENT, I MEAN, NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FRONT CARPORT.
OTHERWISE IT'D HAVE TO BE CUT BACK TO COMPLY BACK TO THE 10 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE IN ORDER TO STAY.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MOTION AND THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE NOT VOTING ON THE OTHER STUFF YET.
WE HAVEN'T VOTED ON ANYTHING YET.
WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO SETTLE ON THE MOTION.
SO WHAT'S BEING CONSIDERED RIGHT NOW IS, UH, THE SIDE SETBACK FOR THE CAR, THE CARPORT AND THE ATTACHED EDITION AND THE REAR SETBACK FOR THE ATTACHED EDITION.
AND LET'S SEE IF, IF THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT PA GOES IS ACCEPTED, WHICH WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THEM YET, THEN, AND THE ONE, THE OTHER ONE THAT'S STILL ON THE TABLE, BUT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IS BEING MADE, IS THE FRONT SETBACK FOR THE NEW CARPORT.
SO IF IT IS SUCCESSFUL, SUCCESSFULLY STRICKEN, ALL THAT'S LEFT ARE THE SIDE SETBACK FOR BOTH THE CARPORT AND THE ADDITION AND THE REAR SETBACK FOR THE ADDITION ELLI AND DR.
ELLI, YOU'RE, YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT WE LEAVE IT THERE? NO, I AM SUGGESTING THAT WE REMOVE THE NUMBER ONE, THE FRONT SETBACK.
I'M SUGGESTING WE REMOVE THAT.
THEY WOULD HAVE THE, THE APPLICANT WOULD THEN HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE SETBACK AS WRITTEN IN THE CODE.
HE'S ABLE TO PUT A POST AND HAVE SOME OVERHANG.
I'M NOT GONNA USE THE RIGHT WORDS, BUT SOME OVERHANG, BUT HE'LL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE, THE CODE.
THE POST WOULD HAVE TO BE COMPLIANT WITH THE SETBACK AND THEN HE COULD HAVE A FIVE FOOT OVERHANG.
AND ALSO THE OVERHANG HAS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE TOO.
NO, THE POST HAS TO BE COMPLIANT WITH THE SETBACK.
YOU'RE ALLOWED A FIVE FOOT OVERHANG.
WHAT SHE'S SAYING HERE IS THAT YOU'D HAVE TO CUT BACK A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THE COVER, HOWEVER, HE COULD KEEP IT WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINES AS LONG AS THAT PORTION OF THE COVER IS CANTILEVERED FROM 10 FEET FROM WHERE THE POST HAS TO SIT.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, IT HAS TO BE SUPPORTED AND, AND WHATEVER.
SO HE'D HAVE MORE COVER, BUT HE WOULD PROBABLY END UP LOSING FOUR FEET, AT LEAST FOUR FEET FROM THE EXISTING COVER.
ALL RIGHT, NOW WE STILL HAVE NOT HEARD FROM DR UH, I MEAN FROM, UH, MARIA ABOUT WHETHER SHE ACCEPTS THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
I ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
ALRIGHT, UH, DO WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT? NO, WE DON'T HAVE TO.
SO THE CURRENT MOTION IS FOR ACCEPT OR FOR A MOTION FOR ALL ASPECTS OF THIS PARTICULAR MO ORIGINAL MOTION, EXCEPT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS THE, UH, NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK.
ANY, ANY QUESTIONS? SO AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE ON THIS WOULD APPROVE EVERYTHING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE FRONT, UH, VARIANCE, FRONT CARPORT VARIANCE, IT'S ITEMS NUMBER TWO, THREE, AND FOUR.
ALRIGHT, THOSE WOULD, THOSE WOULD BE ACCEPTED, BUT NOT THE FRONT.
AND IF YOU WANNA DISCUSS ANY PORTION OF THAT ORIAN, WE CAN ORIAN MR. ORIAN.
YEAH, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE AMENDED MOTION.
UM, I STILL THINK THIS PROPERTY HAS GOT WAY TOO MUCH IMPERVIOUS COVER ON IT COMPARED TO OTHER PROPERTIES, UH, AROUND THE EITHER SIDE OF THE BLOCK.
BUT, UH, REMOVING THE CARPORT WILL ALLOW ME TO, UH, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN APPROVAL AS, AS, AS MOVED.
[01:50:01]
OKAY.ANY OTHER INPUT DO WE HAVE ON THIS? DID EVERYONE UNDERSTAND HOW THE MOTION HAS CHANGED? OKAY.
ALL RIGHT, THEN THAT CASE, I'M GONNA GO ALLOW, UM, MONICA TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE VOTE.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. ORIAN? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. MARTINEZ FAIR WITH THE FINES OF FACT.
UH, SINCE IT'S UNANIMOUS VOTE, THEN, UH, THEREFORE THE MOTION DOES PASS WITH THE, AND, UH, NO ADDITIONAL MO MOTIONS HAS BEEN MADE ON A VARIANCE.
IS THAT CORRECTLY? ALL RIGHT, THEN NOW WE PROCEED TO THE EXCEPTION CRUZ, MS. CRUZ.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 1 9 103 0 0 1 4 2, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE SIX FEET TALL WITHIN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED 1 3 1 BURKE AVENUE APPLICANT BEING JOHNNY RODRIGUEZ.
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 LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN A NECESSARY HARDSHIP.
ONE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER.
THE U D C STATES, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE HEIGHT MODIFICATION UP TO EIGHT FEET.
THE ADDITIONAL FENCE HEIGHT AND THE FRONT YARD IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY.
IF GRANTED, THIS REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE.
THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY A MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT TO BE, TO PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY.
A SIX FOOT TALL FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THREE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WOULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE.
YOUTH DEFENSE ENHANCES THE PRIVACY AND SECURITY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FURTHERING FURTHER.
THE FENCING DOES NOT VIOLATE CLEAR VISION STANDARDS FOR 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 FENCE PROVIDES A SAFE ENVIRONMENT FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DIS DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEARING ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT.
THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT.
UH, WE HAVE FIRST AND A SECOND, UH, MARIA, YOU, DO YOU WANT TO DISCUSS ANYTHING ABOUT THIS? UH, EXCEPTION? UH, YES.
THIS ONE I CAN READILY AGREE ON BECAUSE IT IS FAR BACK FROM, FROM, FROM THE FRONT AND, UH, IT IS ATTACHED TO THE HOME.
SO I THINK IT'D BE A, A GREAT WAY FOR HIM TO STAY, UH, WITH THE PRIVACY HE NEEDS.
AND MR. ORIAN? NO, I'M NOT, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE FENCE.
UH, BUT I, I WOULDN'T, UH, LIKE THE MAKER OF THE MOTION TO AT LEAST, UH, MAKE A STATEMENT AS PART OF THE MOTION THAT IT'S LIMITED TO THE FENCE AS, AS APPLIED, BECAUSE I'D, I'D SURE HATE TO, TO HAVE THIS APPROVAL ALLOW HIM TO BUILD A FENCE ALL THE WAY TO THE STREET THAT'S POSSIBLE.
SO A FRIENDLY, UM, A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT HAS BEEN OFFERED TO MS. CRUZ TO AL TO DESCRIBE THE, UH, EXCEPTION TO ONLY INCLUDE THE PORTION OF THE EXISTING FENCE THAT, THAT MEETS THAT, UH, THAT REQUIREMENT BASICALLY WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU.
YEAH, I, I CAN AGREE WITH THAT.
AND I'M SURE SINCE MR. ORIAN MADE THAT HE AGREES WITH IT AS WELL.
SO NOW THIS IS WHAT THE EXCEPTION IS.
IN OTHER WORDS, WE'RE GOING TO BE VOTING ON THE, THE FENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US IN THE IMAGES TO APPROVE THAT SIX FOOT FENCE POR PORTION THAT EXCEEDS THE FRONT OF THE HOME AND NO ADDITIONAL, UH, AREA IS TO BE INCLUDED.
QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A, A VOTE ON THAT.
[01:55:02]
MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.MR. ORIAN? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
ZO I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. MANNA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS EFFECT, MR. VINO? YES, I CONCUR.
MR. MARTINEZ, I EXCEPTION IS APPROVED.
AND, UH, PLEASE GET WITH STAFF, THEY'LL EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT MODIFICATIONS YOU'LL HAVE TO BE MAKING, BUT IT, IT APPEARS THAT YOU'RE GETTING TO KEEP A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF WHAT YOU WANTED.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE ONE, UH, FINAL CASE, I BELIEVE.
COULD WE HAVE FIVE MINUTES? ALL RIGHT, IMMA, LET'S TAKE A BREAK.
WE'RE GONNA RETURN HERE AT, UH, THREE 17.
[9. 19-8927 BOA-19-10300137: A request by Dominguez Octavio for 1) a 9’ variance from the 10’ front setback to allow an attached carport to be 1’ from the front property line, 2) 3’7” variance from the 5’ side setback requirement to allow an attached carport to be 1’5” from the side property line, and 3) an 18’ variance from the 20’ rear setback requirement to allow an attached carport to be 2’ from the rear property line, located at 1212 North Navidad Street. Staff recommends Denial with an Alternate Recommendation. (Council District 1) (Debora Gonzalez, Senior Planner (210) 207- 3074, debora.gonzalez@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)]
WE'RE DOWN TO OUR LAST CASE.CASE BO, A 19 1 0 3 0 0 1 37 12 12 NORTH AIDA STREET, APPLICANT DOMINGUEZ OCTAVIO ZONING MF 33.
AH, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR ONE, A NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
TWO, A THREE FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE ONE, ONE FEET FIVE INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND THREE AND 18 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
AND HERE'S THE, THAT'S THE AERIAL OF THE LOCATION PROPERTY THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING, UH, THE VARIANCE TO FINISH BUILDING AN ATTACHED CARDBOARD.
UM, BUILT OUT OF WOOD, THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1924 WITHOUT A GARAGE IN A COMPACT LOT, 4,880 SQUARE FEET, WITH ONLY 60 FEET OF DEPTH.
THE HOUSE WAS ALSO BUILT TWO FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS MULTIPLE SIMILAR CARPORTS ENCROACHING IN THE FRONT AND SIDE SET.
MAXS HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, BUT THIS IS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY ALMOST FROM THAT FENCE.
THIS IS THE CARPORT IN QUESTION AND THE PROPERTY GOES ALL THE WAY OVER HERE.
HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FRONT SETBACK.
THEY'RE ABOUT TWO FEET FROM THE FRONT.
ONE, UH, ONE FOOT FIVE INCHES FROM THE SIDE.
AND THIS IS THE EXISTING HOUSE WITH A CARDBOARD THAT WE CAN SEE AND HOW THEY ARE ENCROACHING.
I MEAN, THE HOUSE IS ENCROACHING INTO THAT REAR SETBACK.
UH, THIS IS THE REAR SETBACK AS WELL.
WE COULD ALSO SEE THAT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IS ALSO PRETTY CLOSE TO THEIR PROPERTY LINE, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
UM, THIS LITTLE CORNER IS A PORTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THIS IS AN ADJACENT LOT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES TO THE CARPORT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES SIMILAR CARPORTS THAT RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF NUMBER ONE, A NINE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT FROM THE FRONT SETBACK.
NUMBER TWO, THREE FOOT FROM THE THREE FOOT SEVEN INCH VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE ONE FOOT FIVE INCHES FROM THE SIDE.
A NUMBER THREE AND 18 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
UM, WE RECOMMEND THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF NUMBER TWO, A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE IN B O A 19 1 0 3 0 0 1 37 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS.
FACT, THERE ARE NO SPECIAL CONDITIONS PRESENT, UH, TO WARRANT THE GRANTING OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THE ALTERNATE OF THE CORPORATE SETBACKS TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE TO MITIGATE STORM WATER RUNOFF AND ADEQUATE PRIVATE, UM, PREVENT FIRE SPREAD.
UM, WE MAILED 30 NOTICES, ZERO RETURN IN FAVOR, NO POSITION, AND NO COMMENT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ANY QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? BRIAN, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, I MEAN, SO THE, THE CARPORT'S 60 FEET DEEP, THE ENTIRE
[02:00:01]
HOUSE IS 61 FEET.SO THE CARPORT, IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN 60 BECAUSE IT GOES TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
WAS AND, AND CAN, THERE, WAS THERE A CARPORT THERE PREVIOUSLY? NO.
ANY, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BRING UP THE APPLICANT.
I BELIEVE HE'S GONNA NEED SOME ASSISTANCE.
PLEASE ADVISE, UH, THE INTERPRETER.
PLEASE ADVISE THE APPLICANT WILL NEED HIS FULL NAME AND ADDRESS, AS SAID, STATED BY HIM FOR THE RECORD.
UH, THE MAIN REASON THAT I CONSTRUCTED THIS IS TO PROTECT MY VEHICLES.
I HAVE THREE CARS AND IT'S DANGEROUS TO PARK THEM OUT ON THE STREET BECAUSE, UH, THERE ARE CARS ON EACH SIDE AND IT'S VERY NARROW.
AND THE PART THAT IS NOT LEVELED, THAT IS TOWARDS THE BACK, AND IT IS TWO FEET THAT ARE NOT LEVELED.
IT IS, UH, NOT ON THE NEIGHBOR'S SIDE.
AND THE, THAT YOU SEE ON THE PICTURE, I CANNOT MOVE THEM MORE TOWARDS THIS SIDE BECAUSE MY VEHICLE WOULD NOT FIT THEN THE SPACE THERE IS VERY NARROW.
THAT'S ALL, ALL, ALL RIGHT, LET'S SEE IF WE'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD.
MANNA, MR. MANNA? SO I WAS TRYING TO LOOK AT THE CARPORT STRUCTURE OF THE ROOF.
ARE THERE RIBS OR ANYTHING ON THERE THAT DIVER TR UH, THE WATER ONE WAY OR THE OTHER? TOWARDS THE FRONT.
THIS CARPORT WAS, WAS STOPPED, UH, WITH THE STOP ORDER FROM THE CITY.
IS THAT WHAT HAPPENED HERE? YEAH.
SO YOUR PLANS ARE TO HAVE THE, THE WHOLE THING DRAINED TO THE FRONT? YES.
SO YOUR, YOUR PROPERTY IS 61 FEET DEEP AND YOU HAVE THREE CARS.
UM, HOW, HOW, IF YOU WERE TO PARK YOUR CARS BACK TO BACK, I MEAN, HOW, HOW LONG ARE YOUR CARS? UH, WELL, THESE ARE BIG VEHICLES.
AND DOES THE PROPOSED CARPORT HAVE ANY SORT OF GUTTERING ON IT? I DON'T SEE ANY IN THE PICTURE.
ALL OF THE GUTTERS ARE TOWARDS THE FRONT.
THERE ARE TWO, UH, FEET THAT ARE NOT LEVELED OFF, AND THESE ARE ALL GOING TOWARDS THE FRONT.
I'M, I'M, AND SO YOU HAD, YOU HAD MENTIONED IT WAS GOING TO DRAIN TO THE FRONT, BUT BEING 60 FEET LONG AT ANY SORT OF REASONABLE SLOPE, IT WOULD HAVE TO RISE PRETTY HIGH BY THE TIME YOU HIT THE BACK.
SO, UM, I, I'VE HEARD STATED THAT THE TWO
[02:05:01]
FEET IN THE BACK ARE UNLEVEL, SO IS THAT CORRECT? THE THE GROUND IS NOT LEVEL? UM, YES, HE, HE STATED THAT THEY ARE TWO FEET OF UNLEVELING FROM THE BACK TOWARDS THE FRONT.SO THE WATER'S GONNA BE DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE FRONT BECAUSE OF THAT UNLEVELING.
THE, THE PROPERTY SLOPES TWO FEET TOWARDS THE FRONT.
HE SLOPES TWO FEET TOWARD THE FRONT.
AND SO HE'S HOPING THAT THAT WILL THEN RESULT IN THE DRAINAGE? YES.
JUST SO THEN, SO THEN 60 FEET IS NOT UNREASONABLE GIVEN THREE TRUCKS NEEDING TO BE PARKED THERE.
IS THE CONTRACTOR DOING THIS OR YOU, MYSELF, I GUESS LET'S PUT THIS THING IN PERSPECTIVE, BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND I CAN, I CAN TELL THAT THIS DOESN'T MEET A WHOLE LOT OF ENGINEERING STANDARDS.
UM, SO ONCE IT GOES BEFORE THE CITY OR THE CITY BOARD, IT WILL HAVE TO BE ENGINEERED TO MEET THOSE STANDARDS, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
THOSE ARE NOT HEADER BEAMS. THEY'RE GONNA, THEY'RE GONNA TWIST.
UH, SO IT IS, IT, IT'S GOT, HE'S GOT PLENTY OF POSTS HERE, BUT HE IS GOT NOTHING OVER HERE.
AND THAT'S NOT GONNA HANDLE 13 FEET.
IT'S GONNA HAVE TO BE ENGINEERED, RE-ENGINEERED.
HAS, HAS ANYONE WITH STAFF SPOKE TO HIM ABOUT THE RE-ENGINEERING OF THIS CARPORT? WE HAVE NOT, BUT WE'RE GONNA ASSUME THAT DURING THE STOP WORK ORDER, I'LL LET DEBORAH RESPOND TO THAT RIGHT NOW.
AFTER THIS MOTION, WE WILL ELABORATE WITH THE APPLICANT, THAT TYPE OF PROCESS THAT HE HAS TO GO THROUGH PERMITTING.
BASICALLY, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO HAVE A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, GIVE HIM A LETTER AND THEN GIVE IT TO THE CITY.
THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE ANY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS, SO THAT'S HOW HE'S GONNA HAVE TO GET THE CITY'S APPROVAL.
NO OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, ONE MORE OREN, MR. OREN, GO AHEAD.
SO THE PROPERTY BEHIND YOURS, UH, IS, IS THERE ANY STRUCTURES LOCATED, UH, WHERE IN FRONT OF WHERE THE CARPORT IS GONNA END UP IN THE BACKYARD, IN YOUR BACKYARD? NO.
UH, YOU MAY SEE IN THAT PICTURE THROUGHOUT THE, THERE'S NOTHING IN THE BACK.
DO WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES ON THIS PARTICULAR? NOBODY SIGNED UP.
UH, I BELIEVE WE'VE GOTTEN ALL THE RECEIPT.
THEY'RE INFORMATION WE'RE GONNA NEED.
NOW WE'RE JUST HAVE A MATTER OF WHAT WE CAN, AS A BOARD DECIDE WE CAN GIVE, UH, OR WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO ACHIEVE OR, UH, WHAT WE CAN, UH, WHETHER WE'RE JUST GOING TO DEAL WITH WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
SO I GUESS, UH, WHAT DISTRICT IS HE IN? WHAT DISTRICT? ONE DOCTOR, YOU GOT YOUR HANDS FULL? YEAH, I, I'M, I'M STRUGGLING HERE.
UM, WELL, I WOULD SAY YOUR BEST BET HERE WOULD BE TO MAKE THE MOTION, UH, WITH THE ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, FOR THE PURPOSE OF POSSIBLY GETTING THIS PASSED CLARITY THAT THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION IS NUMBER TWO, THE THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE ATTACHED CARPORT
[02:10:01]
TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.EXCEPT THAT I SEE YOU'RE, YOU'RE INCLUDING THE FRONT.
YEAH, I MEAN, SO I GUESS PART OF THE, PART OF WHERE I'M STRUGGLING IS HE SAYS HE NEEDS THE WIDTH FOR THE TRUCK, FOR THE TRUCKS.
AND SO THAT ALTERNATIVE DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEET HIS NEEDS.
WELL, ESSENTIALLY THIS IS WHAT CAN BE DONE HERE.
YOU'VE GOT THOSE POSTS ALREADY SET AND YOU COULD HAVE SET AND YOU COULD ACTUALLY CUT THE, ONCE THERE, THE, THE, THE ROOF IS SECURED PROPERLY.
YOU DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO HAVE AN OVERHANG AND THE POST WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE MOVED.
BUT THEN YOU'RE PROBABLY, I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT, 18 INCHES? WHAT WAS THAT MEASUREMENT? CAN YOU BRING UP THAT PHOTOGRAPH WHERE THE DISTANCE FROM THE SIDE POST TO THE FENCE.
ALRIGHT, BACK I THINK ONE MORE IS THAT THE SIDE FENCE TO THE POST.
SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ROUGHLY A FOOT AND A HALF AND, AND, AND THEN YOU CAN CONTROL THE, THE OVERALL LENGTH AND YOU CAN MIN, BUT HE'S STILL GONNA HAVE TO DO QUITE A BIT OF RECONSTRUCTION HERE, BUT HE, HE MAY NOT.
ARE ARE THESE POSTS SET IN CONCRETE? YES.
ARE THEY SET IN CONCRETE? OKAY, VERY GOOD.
SO ANYWAY, YEAH, LOOK AT THE SHEATHING HE USED ON, ON THIS THING.
ANYWAY, UM, I, I WOULD MAKE YOUR, MAKE WHAT YOU FEEL IN YOUR HEART IS, IS THE, UH, APPROPRIATE MOTION.
AND YOU SAW ON THAT, UM, THAT MEASUREMENT THAT HE'S 18 INCHES FROM THE SIDE OR IS HE CURRENTLY THERE'S MANNA.
SO, SO THERE'S TWO PICTURES OF RULERS.
AND SO I THINK THE PICTURE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS TO THE FRONT, AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER ONE THAT SHOWS 24 INCHES TO THE SIDE.
IS THAT CORRECT? NO, IT SHOWS RIGHT HERE.
IT LOOKS LIKE 17 AND A HALF FEET INCHES RATHER, 17 AND A HALF INCHES FROM THE FENCE.
WE'RE NOT QUITE SURE IF THAT'S THE PROPERTY LINE, I THINK, BUT I THINK BUT ISN'T THAT THE FRONT FENCE THOUGH? SO THERE'S A FENCE ALONG THE FRONT AND I'M
THAT ONE'S SO, SO THIS ONE HERE IS WHAT I'M LOOKING AT.
SO HE NEEDS A THREE POINT, A THREE FOOT FIVE, OR NO, A 3.5 FOOT SETBACK TO KEEP HIS POSTS ONE AND A HALF FEET FROM THE, FROM THE SIDE.
OKAY, I THINK I HAVE SOMETHING REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH ONE NINE DASH 0 3 0 1 3 7.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A 3.5 VARI FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN AT ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE I JUST ONE AND A HALF FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1212 NORTH NAVADA STRAIT.
APPLICANT BEING DOMINGUEZ OCTAVIO.
UM, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT FOR THE VARIANCE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH AND SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC.
IN THIS CASE, THE CARPORT PROVIDE PROVIDES NECESSARY SHELTER FOR THE APPLICANT'S VEHICLES AND DOES NOT DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUESTS ARE NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE REQUESTED SETBACK REDUCTION WOULD CREATE A NON-CONFORMING CARPORT.
ENFORCING THE FULL REQUIREMENT REMOVES DEVELOPABLE SPACE, WHICH LEAVES THE PROJECT WITH INSUFFICIENT SPACE.
TO RETAIN A VIABLE CARPORT OF VARIATION IS REQUIRED TO DEVELOP THIS PRO.
A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE INTENT OF THE SETBACK IS TO CREATE AN OPEN AREA WITHOUT CROWDING OF STRUCTURES AND TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF
[02:15:01]
PROPERTY OWNERS.IN THIS CASE, THE PROPOSED SETBACK REDUCTIONS ARE, WILL, WILL NOT INJURE THE RIGHTS OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS LONG AS GUTTERS ARE INSTALLED TO DIVERT DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER.
THE REQUESTS OBSERVE THE INTENT OF THE CODE.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
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 ADJACENT PROPERTIES ARE UNLIKELY TO BE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED BY THE REQUEST.
THE REQUEST WOULD NOT BE OUT OF CHARACTER.
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 ARE, ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, ARE NOT DUE TO OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES IN THIS CASE IS THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL, UM, WILL MITIGATE WATER ISSUES FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE PROPERTY WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT WITHOUT A CAR GARAGE.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER IS NOT MERELY FINANCIAL IN NATURE.
ALRIGHT, BEFORE WE CONTINUE HERE, I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE FACT THIS HASN'T BEEN MENTIONED IN HERE.
THE CARPORT IN QUESTION BEGINS AT THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.
SO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE IS NOT, IS IS NOT MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS.
SO IN ESSENCE, WE NEED TO INCLUDE A REAR SETBACK VARIANCE TO MAKE THE HOUSE COMPLIANT.
I WOULD APPROVE A FRIENDLY MOTION IF SOMEONE WOULD PROVIDE ONE.
I KNOW, BUT IT'S, BUT IT'S INCLUDED.
THEY ADVERTISE FOR THE VARIANCE ON THE REAR SETBACK.
THE HOUSE IS AN EXISTING CONDITION.
SO
UM, IT WAS NOT ADVERTISED LIKE THAT.
SO I DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN, UH, INCLUDE THAT IN, WELL ACTUALLY WE DON'T HAVE TO WORD IT.
WE CAN JUST INCLUDE IT WITH THE CARPORT.
AND ONCE WE'VE GIVEN THEM THE REAR SETBACK ALLOWANCE, THEN THE HOUSE WOULD FALL UNDER, UNDER THE SAME CRITERIA? THAT'S CORRECT.
WE, WE ADVERTISE FOR THE, UM, 18 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REAR SETBACK.
SO THAT COVERS THE HOUSE AS WELL.
SO IT DOES NEED TO BE INCLUDED.
SO I'D LIKE TO ADD A MOTION ADD TO MY MOTION.
CAN I DO THAT? YOU'RE HAVING FINISHED, UM, AN 18 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED CARPORT TO BE TWO FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
AND, AND I BELIEVE MR. TEAL, DID YOU SECOND THE MOTION AND YOU, DO YOU APPROVE OF THAT? YES, I'M IN AGREEMENT.
SO THE ONLY THING THAT WE'VE LEFT OUT ON THIS IS THE FRONT SETBACK, CORRECT? YES.
SORRY, WHAT DID WE GIVE 'EM TWO? YES.
WE'RE ONLY GIVING HIM TWO VARIANCES.
RIGHT, BECAUSE YOU REQUESTED THREE, BUT HE STILL HAS THE 10 FEET FROM THE FRONT THAT HE'D NORMALLY HAVE.
ALRIGHT, THAT'S, UH, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO, UH, AND NOW THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING RIGHT NOW.
ANYONE ELSE WANNA SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS ORIAN, MR. ORIAN? YEAH, I TAKE NO ISSUE WITH GIVING HIM THE REAR.
UM, AND, UH, AND, AND, BUT I DO WANT TO, UH, COMMENT THAT, THAT IN ONE OF THE, THE DIMENSIONS THAT IT KIND OF SHOWS IT TO BE ONE, UH, FOOT FIVE INCHES FROM THE SIDE.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT ONE AND A HALF IS GONNA BE ENOUGH TO COVER THE POST.
WOULD THAT MEASURING TO THE SIDE FENCE, WHERE WAS THAT? THE FRONT POST OR THE BACK POST TO THE SIDE.
SO THE FIVE, THE SIDE IS ONE FOOT FIVE INCHES, WHICH THAT'S HOW YOU GUYS MADE THE MOTION.
SO DOES THAT MEAN THE MOTION NEEDS TO BE CHANGED FOR THAT TO A ONE FOOT FIVE INCHES? OKAY.
SO WE'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO ONE FOOT TO ALLOW FOR A ONE FOOT FIVE INCHES FROM THE SIDE SETBACK.
ALL RIGHT, SO WE'VE GOT THIS CLEAR.
SO WE'RE GONNA ALLOW FOR, HUH? I'M, I'M IN AGREEMENT.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE AGREEMENT THAT WE'RE GONNA ALLOW A, A VARIANCE OF THREE FEET AND, UH, SEVEN NO FOR THE, YEAH.
SEVEN INCHES, THREE FEET, SEVEN INCHES TO BE FIVE, UH, ONE FOOT AND, AND, UH, FIVE INCHES FROM THE SIDE.
AND WE'RE GONNA DO THE 18 FEET FROM THE BACK TO ALLOW THE, UH, HOUSE TO BE TWO, TWO FEET FROM THE REAR.
[02:20:01]
OKAY.SO ANYTHING WE'RE NOT INCLUDING HERE IS ACTUALLY NUMBER ONE, RIGHT? AND WE ALL COME AGREEMENT ON THAT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THAT.
ZO, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. ORIAN? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. MANNA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDING OF FACT THAT THE MOTION PASSES.
UH, PLEASE, UH, MAKE SURE THAT WHOEVER'S ASSIGNED THIS CASE CAN FULLY EXPLAIN WHAT'S GONNA BE HAPPENING HERE AND HOW HE NEEDS TO COMPLY WITH BUILDING STANDARDS FOR HIS OWN GOOD.
AND, UH, THAT, UH, PRETTY MUCH SIZES UP CASES TODAY.
[Director's Report : Orientation.]
UH, DIRECTOR'S REPORT NEEDS TO BE MADE? NO, WE JUST HAD, WE HAD OUR ORIENTATION THIS MORNING.WE'LL HAVE A MAKEUP ORIENTATION AT THE NEXT MEETING, WHICH IS DECEMBER 16TH AT 11 O'CLOCK.
ANOTHER ONE BECAUSE, OH, THEY DIDN'T SHOW UP.
[10. 19-8937 Consideration and approval of the November 18, 2019 Board of Adjustment Minutes]
ALL RIGHT.NOW EVERYONE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE MINUTES THAT NEED TO BE DEALT WITH? ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO MAKE AN ALTERATION OR CORRECTION? ANYONE? NO.
THE MINUTES ARE PASSED AS PRESENTED.
WE HAVE NOTHING ELSE ACTUALLY TO DEAL WITH TODAY.
UH, ZEKE, DID THEY EMAIL US A CALENDAR FOR NEXT YEAR ALREADY? FOR THE ME MEETINGS? I, I HAVE NOT RECEIVED MINE.
WELL, I KNOW THAT WE SAW THE, THE, THE PROPOSED DATES, BUT I WASN'T SURE IF THAT HAD BEEN A DONE DEAL YET OR NOT.
I'LL WORK ON THAT AFTER THIS MEETING AND WE'LL GET IT OUT TO YOU IF IT'S, IF IT'S ALREADY READY TO GO.
I THINK WE HAD ONE QUESTION ABOUT, UM, DECEMBER 21ST, 2020.
IF THE BOARD WANTED TO HAVE THAT MEETING.
ALRIGHT, SO THAT MEANS WE WOULD ONLY HAVE ONE MEETING IN DECEMBER OF NEXT YEAR? THAT'S CORRECT.
BUT, UM, I HAVE A NOTE THAT WE WOULD CHECK IN THE FALL TO SEE IF THE BOARD WANTED TO KEEP THAT MEETING UP TO THE CHAIR.
UH, IT WOULD BE DECEMBER 21ST, BUT, UH, AGAIN, I HAVE A NOTE THAT SAYS WE, WE WILL CHECK BACK IN THE FALL TO SEE IF THE BOARD WANTS TO CONTINUE WITH THAT MEETING.
UM, WE JUST HAVE TO SEND IT OUT TO YOU GUYS.
WE'LL GET THIS SENT OUT TO EVERYBODY.
SO THE QUESTION IS, WHEN THE CITY IS SHUTTING DOWN, UM, THE WEEK OF, OF CHRISTMAS AND THE FOLLOWING WEEK AS WELL, I NEED TO GET THE EXACT DATES.
UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS GONNA TRY TO BE OPEN ONE OF THOSE DAYS, BUT, UM, AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE ARE SHUT DOWN FOR ABOUT A WEEK AND A HALF.
NO, NO, WE'RE FINE FOR THIS MONTH.
OH YEAH, BECAUSE OUR NEXT MEETING IS DECEMBER 16TH.
HAVE WE FOR THE 16TH, DEBORAH, HOW MANY CASES WE RECEIVED FOR THE 16TH? NO, YOU HAVE, HAVE NO IDEA HOW MANY CASES.
I BELIEVE THAT IS A FULL AGENDA.
[02:25:02]
FULL AGENDA.IN OTHER WORDS, 10 CASES, FULL AGENDA.
SO WE CAN'T ELIMINATE THAT ONE.
UH, ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY MORE ARGUMENTS YOU WANNA MAKE? I CAN.
THAT PRETTY MUCH CONDUCTS, THAT CONCLUDES OUR MEETING FOR TODAY.