[00:00:09]
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, PRESIDENT CHAIR ORIAN.
UH, WE NOW HAVE 10, WHICH IS A QUORUM.
WE'RE EXPECTING ONE MORE VIRTUALLY.
IF EVERYONE CAN PLEASE, UH, JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.
ONE NATION UNDER GOD IN LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD ONE AND INDIVISIBLE OBJECTION.
ALL RIGHT, SO BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I'D LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION.
UH, THIS BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE.
THE CASES ARE LISTED BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND THE STREET ADDRESS.
FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
LASTLY, AS CHAIR, I'LL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS AS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS.
I ASK THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS THE CHAIR AND I'LL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE MEETING.
WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS TO GOVERNING THE CITY'S OWNING 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 WE DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES.
SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL.
THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION TO DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32.
TO HEAR AN ASIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35.
WE ALSO SERVE IN AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUEST FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 28 DASH FIVE.
IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR CASES AND OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MAY MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS.
THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY'LL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
ANY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER AFTER EVERYONE HAS SERVED.
THE CASE WILL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION.
EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION.
IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY.
IT REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESIDENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF INGRAINING THE RELIEF LAW RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS IN WHICH THE REQUEST OF RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL.
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S.
DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS OF THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE STAFF.
STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST.
PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE ERROR TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXEMPT OR SPECIAL EXEMPTION AND PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHECK MARKS.
INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION AND ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR REQUEST FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED VARIANCE FOR SPECIAL EXEMPTION.
YOU'LL BE CALLED IN ORDER THAT YOU SIGN UP TO SPEAK.
THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED OF MAXIMUM THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION FOR THOSE I LIKE TO GIVE WITH THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER.
THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED AT MAXIMUM TWO PEOPLE GIVEN UP THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES.
THOSE GIVEN UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A REBUTTAL LIMIT TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS BOARD QUESTIONS.
[ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items ]
ON THE AGENDA, ITEM ONE, LOCATED AT 2042 HAM TRAIL DRIVE.AND, UH, REAL QUICK, COMMISSIONER UH, BENAVIDES, CAN YOU HEAR US? I,
[00:05:32]
SO WHILE WE'RE WAITING, I THINK WE'D LIKE TO ENTERTAIN ITEM 10, THE MINUTES.UM, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS SOME COMMISSIONERS THAT HAD SOME, UH, ADJUSTMENTS WHICH WERE HANDWRITTEN.
UH, THEY INCLUDED ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
UM, IT WAS A DOCUMENTATION THAT WE REOPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, SO THE APPLICANT COULD AMEND HIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE GUTTERS AT WHICH TIME IT WAS THEN CLOSED AND THE MOTION WAS VOTED UPON.
UH, WERE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION? HEARING NONE.
COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN IS THERE.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANNA MANNA.
LET'S HAVE A, UH, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
MOTION PASSED AS AMEND AS AMENDED FOR THE MINUTES.
UH, WE, WHAT HAPPENED WAS, UH, WE'RE WAITING ON AN 11TH COMMISSIONER, THIS IS FOR THE GALLERY.
WE'RE WAITING ON AN 11TH COMMISSIONER TO JOIN.
UH, IT'S IN EVERYONE'S BEST INTEREST TO HAVE A FULL BOARD SEATED.
UH, SO WE'RE KNOCKING OUT, UH, THE MINUTES, WHICH IS, WHICH IS JUST SOME ADMINISTRATIVE, UH, PAPERWORK, UH, HOUSEKEEPING WE DO AT EVERY MEETING.
COMMISSIONER VIEZ, CAN YOU HEAR US? CAN YOU SEE HER? OKAY.
COMMISSIONER, CAN YOU HEAR US? COMMISSIONER, WE JUST CAN'T TRY ONE MORE TIME 'CAUSE WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
AND I UNDERSTAND YOU CAN HEAR US, BUT IS SHE GIVING YOU A THUMBS UP? SHE CAN HEAR US.
CAN YOU TRY SPEAKING ONE MORE TIME? I'M SORRY.
OKAY, COMMISSIONER, ONE MORE TIME PLEASE.
IS THIS SOMETHING Y'ALL CAN WORK ON WHILE WE'RE, WHILE WE START ON THE FIRST CASE? YEP.
LET'S JUST START WITH ITEM ONE PLEASE.
MY NAME IS JUAN ALVAREZ, PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER ONE IS REQUESTED BY EUNICE CASO DE GONZALEZ AND IS REQUESTING FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON THE BLOCK PHASE LOCATED AT COUNCIL DISTRICT NINE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2042.
CHITHAM TRAIL DRIVE SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.
A UNIT IS DEFINED AS HAVING ITS OWN DISTINCT SLEEPING AREA, KITCHEN AND BATHROOM.
TYPE TWO INDICATES THAT THE OWNER SLASH OPERATOR OF THE PROPERTY DOES NOT OCCUPY THE SITE AS THEIR PERMANENT LEGAL RESIDENCE PER THE CODE.
TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL SHALL BE LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN ONE EIGHTH OR
[00:10:01]
THE TOTAL NUMBER OF THE TOTAL OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX, TRIPLEX, OR QUADPLEX UNITS ON THE BLOCK FACE.THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT ON THE BLOCK PHASE.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY TWO ACTIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMITS ON THE BLOCK.
2110 CHITTEM SHOWED APPROVED ON FEBRUARY 18TH, 2025 AND IT WAS LATER REVOKED ON JANUARY 20TH, 2026.
AND THEN IT WAS REINSTATED BACK IN MARCH 27TH, 2026 AND 2002.
CHICHO DRIVE APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2025 WHEN THE APPLICANT FOR THIS PROPERTY APPLIED FURTHER.
THE ONE STOP MAP DID NOT DISPLAY THE REINSTATED TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT AT 2110 CHICHO DRIVE ON THE BLOCK FACE.
DURING THE APPLICATION REVIEW, STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE BLOCK FACE HAD ALREADY REACHED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED DENSITY FOR TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
AS A RESULT, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION UNDER THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE DENSITY LIMITATION HAD NOT YET BEEN MET.
THERE IS A TOTAL OF 18 UNITS ON THE BLOCK.
PHASE TWO ACTIVE STR TYPE TWOS ON THE BLOCK BEING 2110 CHICHO DRIVE ISSUED ON FEBRUARY 18TH, 2025 AND 2002 CHICHO DRIVE ISSUED ON SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2025.
THE BLOCK PHASE DENSITY IS CURRENT CURRENTLY AT 11%.
IF THE SECOND, IF THE THIRD ST R IS APPROVED, THE BLOCK PHASE WILL BE AT 17%.
THIS EXCEEDS THE 12.5 DENSITY LIMITATIONS FOR TYPE TWO ST.
THE PROPERTY HAS NO ACTIVE LISTINGS AND THE PROPERTY HAS NO CODE ENFORCEMENT HISTORY.
THIS IS THE SIDE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREAS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND THERE WAS A TOTAL OF 37 MALE NOTICES.
TWO IN FAVOR OUTSIDE OF THE 200 FOOT NOTIFICATION PLAN TO AN OPPOSITION AND NO VOICEMAILS RECEIVED, THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN THE 200 FEET NOTIFICATION PLAN.
AND FOUR CITYWIDE GROUPS ARE NOTIFIED WITH NO RESPONSE.
THIS CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION.
APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
OKAY, THIS IS AN INTERESTING QUESTION.
SO WHEN WAS THE APPLICATION FILED ON BILL? THIS A OKAY, LET'S SEE.
THE NEW APPLICATION CAME IN ON 6 2 20 26.
WHO, WHO WAS THAT? OH, THERE YOU GO.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, 'CAUSE WE HAD ONE, WE HAD TWO THAT WERE ISSUED LAST YEAR.
ONE WAS REVOKED, THE BOARD REINSTATED THE SECOND ONE.
AND SO WITH TWO, IT'S AT 11%, CORRECT? YES.
AND THEN, UH, SO THERE WASN'T, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE APPLICATION DIDN'T HAPPEN DURING THE TIME THAT THE SECOND ONE WAS REVOKED.
COMMISSIONER ZUNA, DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE ANY OTHER SHORT TERM RENTAL OPERATIONS IN SAN ANTONIO? NOT THAT I SAW IN A, NOT THAT I SAW IN OUR SYSTEM, NO.
AND SO I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THE TIMING FOR, UM, CAN YOU GO THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THERE WERE TWO, ONE GOT REVOKED AND THEN THEY SUBMITTED AND THE TIMELINE AGAIN.
CAN YOU KIND OF GO THROUGH THAT AGAIN? JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE CITY'S ROLE WAS IN THAT DIALOGUE.
OH, WE'LL, WE'LL WE, WE, WE WE'RE JUST PROBING STAFF FIRST AND WE'LL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY.
YEAH, I'M GOING, I'M TRYING TO GATHER THAT INFORMATION.
UH, ACCORDING TO THE PRINTOUT, IT SAID THAT THEY BOTH EXISTED IN 2025.
IT WAS THE SECOND ONE WAS REVOKED IN JANUARY OF 2026 AND THEN WE REINSTATED IT IN MARCH OF 26.
BUT THE CITY GAVE INSTRUCTION FOR THE APPLICANT AS I UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY COULD PROCEED, RIGHT? YEAH.
DURING THE TIME THAT THE APPLICANT REQUESTED THE INFORMATION, IF THE BLOCK FACE WAS CURRENTLY MET, WE CHECKED OUR ONE STOP MAP AND IT DID NOT DISPLAY THE ACTIVE PERMIT THAT WAS REINSTATED AT 2110 CHICHO DRIVE.
ALRIGHT, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, ALL RIGHT, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR STR.
MY NAME IS IRIS GONZALEZ AND I'M THE DAUGHTER OF THE APPLICANT'S EUNICE AND OCI GONZALEZ.
I'M ALSO A LICENSED REAL ESTATE AGENT AND REPRESENTING MY PARENTS THROUGHOUT THE PURCHASE OF 2 0 4 2 CHIN TRAIL DRIVE AND ASSISTED THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF THE TYPE TWO STR PERMIT.
TO ANSWER THE QUESTION OF MR, I CAN'T READ YOUR NAME, I'M SORRY.
UM, WHEN WE FIRST APPLIED FOR THIS S-D-I-S-D-R TYPE TWO PERMIT, WE ACTUALLY
[00:15:01]
CALLED AND I EMAILED THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE WE EVEN WENT TO LOOK AT THE PROPERTY BECAUSE WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS AN AVAILABLE PERMIT BEFORE WE EVEN GOT INTO THIS COMMITMENT.IN MAY 18TH, 2026 AND I HAVE THE PRESENTATION, I DON'T KNOW IF MR. JUAN'S ABLE TO UPLOAD IT.
IN MAY 18TH, 2026, I RECEIVED WRITTEN CONFIRMATION FROM THE DEPARTMENT, JUAN ALVAREZ, THAT THE PROPERTY WAS ELIGIBLE FOR A PERMIT AND THAT ONLY ONE TYPE TWO STR PERMIT EXISTED ON THE BLOCK FACE LEAVING ONE PERMIT AVAILABLE.
THIS IS ALL DOCUMENTED VIA EMAIL.
AFTER TURNING THE PROPERTY AND RECOGNIZING ITS POTENTIAL, MY PARENTS SUBMITTED AN OFFER AND IT WAS ULTIMATELY ACCEPTED BECAUSE PERMIT AVAILABILITY WAS THE DECIDING FACTOR IN PURCHASING THE HOME.
I CONTACTED THE DEPARTMENT A SECOND TIME ON MAY 25TH, JUST DAYS BEFORE CLOSING TO VERIFY THAT THE PERMIT WAS STILL AVAILABLE ON MAY 26TH.
I AGAIN RECEIVED CONFIRMATION FROM THE CITY THAT THE PERMIT REMAINED AVAILABLE FROM KEVIN ELLISON.
RELYING ON THESE REPEATED ASSURANCES, MY PARENTS PROCEEDED WITH THE PURCHASE AND CLOSE ON THE PROPERTY JUST THREE DAYS LATER, THE FOLLOWING WEEK, ON JUNE 2ND, 2026, WE SUBMITTED OUR SDR PERMIT APPLICATION AND WE PROMPTLY PROVIDED ALL REQUESTED DOCUMENTATION.
HOWEVER, ON JUNE 22ND, SO ALMOST A MONTH LATER, WE WERE INFORMED THAT THE BLOCK FACE HAD ALREADY REACHED THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF TYPE TWO SDR PERMITS AND THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO SEEK A SPECIAL EXEMPTION THROUGH THE BOA.
WHEN WE ASKED WHAT HAD CHANGED IN LESS THAN A MONTH, WE WERE INFORMED THAT NOTHING HAD CHANGED AT ALL.
INSTEAD, WE WERE TOLD THAT THERE HAD ACTUALLY BEEN TWO ACTIVE PERMITS ALL ALONG, BUT ONE HAD NOT APPEARED IN THE CITY, IN THE CITY SYSTEM DUE TO A TECHNICAL GLITCH.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT TECHNOLOGY IS NOT PERFECT AND THAT MISTAKES CAN HAPPEN.
HOWEVER, THIS ERA HAS HAD SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES FOR MY PARENT, FOR MY PARENTS.
THEY ARE RETIRED AND THEY INVESTED A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THEIR LIFE SAVINGS INTO THIS PROPERTY, INCLUDING FUNDS FROM AN INHERITANCE RECEIVED AFTER THE PASSING OF MY GRANDFATHER EARLIER THIS YEAR.
THEY MADE THIS INVESTMENT IN GOOD FAITH ONLY AFTER CONDUCTING EXTENSIVE DUE DILIGENCE AND RELYING ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED DIRECTLY BY THE CITY'S SHORT-TERM RENTAL DEPARTMENT, HAD ACCURATE INFORMATION BEEN PROVIDED FROM THE BEGINNING, THEY WOULD'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A FULLY INFORMED DECISION BEFORE PURCHASING THE PROPERTY.
WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR SPECIAL TREATMENT, WE ARE SIMPLY ASKING THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THIS UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THIS CASE.
AND MY PARENTS ACTED RESPONSIBLY.
THEY FOLLOWED EVERY REQUIRED STEP AND RELIED ON REPEATED CONFIRMATIONS FROM THE CITY BEFORE MAKING A FINAN A MAJOR FINANCIAL COMMITMENT.
IN ADDITION, MY MOTHER AND I VISITED NEIGHBORING HOMES AND OBTAINED NINE SIGNATURES FROM NEARBY RESIDENTS EXPRESSING THEIR SUPPORT FOR, FOR OUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST, WHICH IS ALSO ON THE FILE.
UM, OUR GOAL IS TO OPERATE A PROFESSIONALLY MANAGED BY US, NOT BY A COMPANY, A HIGH QUALITY SHORT-TERM RENTAL THAT PROVIDES A POSITIVE EXPERIENCE FOR VISITORS WHILE BEING A RESPECTFUL NEIGHBOR AND CONTRIBUTING TO THE LOCAL ECONOMY.
SO WE RESPECTFULLY ASKED THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THE FACTS OF THIS CASE.
AND GRANT THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL WOULD ALLOW MY PARENTS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE INVESTMENT THEY MADE IN GOOD FAITH WHILE A DENIAL WOULD CREATE A SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL HARDSHIP RESULTING FROM CIRCUMSTANCES ENTIRELY BEYOND THEIR CONTROL.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, CONSIDERATION AND SERVICE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
UM, YOU PUR CLOSED ON JUNE 2ND.
SO FROM MAY 29TH TILL YOU HEARD FROM THE CITY THAT YOU, YOU WEREN'T ELIGIBLE, WHICH WAS JUNE 22ND.
IN ADDITION TO, TO, UM, UH, I'M ASSUMING THERE WAS A LOAN INVOLVED OR DID WAS CA WAS THIS A CASH PURCHASE? SO IT WAS A CASH PURCHASE.
THAT'S WHY I SAID THEY INVESTED OKAY.
MOST OF THEIR LIFE SAVINGS INTO THAT.
AND WAS THERE ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT IN THE PROPERTY IN THAT, IN THAT THERE HAS BEEN.
SO ACTUALLY WHEN WE PURCHASED, WHEN MY PARENTS PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY, THE HOME HAD BEEN VACANT FOR A WHILE.
IT WAS BOUGHT BY A COMPANY OPEN DOOR AND IF YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT OPEN DOOR, THEY BUY PROPERTIES THAT YOU KNOW ARE ABANDONED OR THEY, YEAH, THEY CAN GET LOW, LOW MONEY FOR IT.
SO IT WASN'T REALLY BAD CONDITION.
IT HAD TONS OF ROTTED WOOD ON THE EXTERIOR, ON THE WINDOW FRAMES.
UM, THE TREES WERE OVERCROWDING THE ROOF AND ALSO NEIGHBOR'S FENCES.
THE, IT WAS PRETTY MUCH ABANDONED ON THE OUTSIDE AND INSIDE AS WELL.
AND SO MY PARENTS SINCE THEN, THEY'VE ALREADY REPAINTED THE EXTERIOR WITH PROFESSIONAL, UM, WHAT IS IT CALLED? CONTRACTORS.
THEY'VE REPAINTED THE EXTERIOR INTERIOR, THEY REPLACE THE ROTTED WOOD.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY PLANNING ON REPLACING THE ROOF BECAUSE THE ROOF IS 14 YEARS OLD AND YOU KNOW, LOOKS OLDER IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND ALSO THEY'VE BECOME FRIENDS WITH THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS, WHICH I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE.
ONE OF THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS SAID NO, BECAUSE WE'VE ACTUALLY PRESSURE WASHED HIS, UH, HIS SIDEWALK, HIS DRIVEWAY, WE'VE CUT HIS TREES AS WELL SINCE WE SENT OUT OUR, OUR TREE GUY.
SO WE'VE DONE THINGS TO MAKE THE HOUSE LOOK MORE APPEALING AND ALSO WE ARE, YOU KNOW, WE ARE HOMEOWNERS SO WE UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE MIGHT FEEL THAT IT MIGHT DECREASE THEIR VALUE, BUT TOTALLY, COMPLETELY OPPOSITE.
WE HAVE ACTUALLY, I BELIEVE, ADDED VALUE TO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE
[00:20:01]
OF THE REPAIRS THAT WE'VE DONE TO THIS ONE.SO THE GOAL, THE GOAL WAS A RETIREMENT, THIS IS FOR RETIREMENT FOR YOUR PARENTS.
THE GOAL IS FOR THIS TO BE THE MAIN SOURCE OF INCOME FOR MY PARENTS.
SINCE THEY'RE RETIRED ALREADY.
DO YOU HAVE ANY, DO YOU OWN ANY OTHER S STS OR DO YOUR PARENTS OWN ANY ESTATE? NO, SIR.
THIS IS THE ONLY OTHER PROPERTY THEY OWN BESIDES THEIR OWN.
SO YOU'VE GOT YOUR TI RETIREMENT FUNDS LOCKED INTO THIS THING, MONEY, HARD MONEY LOCKED INTO THIS THING.
AND DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT IF THIS GETS PASSED TODAY, IT'S ONLY GOOD FOR THREE YEARS? YOU'D HAVE TO, WE UNDERSTAND WE HAVE TO APPLY FOR EVERY THREE YEARS.
AND DO YOU, AND AS A REAL ESTATE AGENT, DO YOU FEEL THAT IF YOU HAD A THREE YEAR WINDOW TO RENT THIS OUT AND TRY TO, WE COULD TRY TO RESELL IT, GET AHEAD A LITTLE BIT.
IT MIGHT BE EASIER TO SELL FOR SURE.
WITH THE MARKET THAT WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW, AS A REAL ESTATE AGENT, YOU BUY THE PROPERTY AT THE TOP OF ITS VALUE, YOU CAN'T RESELL RIGHT AWAY, ESPECIALLY IN THIS BUYER'S MARKET.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THE COMMISSION, COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH, SO MY QUESTION IS KINDA THE HARDSHIP.
IF YOU WERE HAVE TO DO A LEASE LONGER THAN, YOU KNOW, A 30 DAY LEASE, I MEAN, WOULD THAT PROVIDE ANY KIND OF ECONOMIC RETURN TO YOUR PARENTS OR, 'CAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING FOR SHORT TERM RENTAL VERSUS A ONE MONTH OR SIX MONTH OR 12 MONTH LEASE, WHAT WOULD THE DELTA THERE BE BETWEEN THE INCOME AND IS THAT THE HARDSHIP? YOU'RE AS WELL.
SO WE HAVE ACTUALLY DONE ALREADY ESTIMATES ON WHAT A LONG-TERM RENTAL, YOU KNOW, SIX MONTHS PLUS OR SHORT-TERM RENTAL COULD GIVE 'EM AN INCOME AND IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY VERY MUCH LESS MONEY THAT THEY COULD GET WITH THE LONG-TERM RENTAL BECAUSE AVERAGE RENTALS IN THE AREA GO ANYWHERE FROM 2300 TO 2,600 A MONTH WITH AN AIRBNB PERMIT, VRBO, SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT.
THEY COULD MAKE ANYWHERE FROM LIKE FIVE TO MAYBE $6,000 ON A GOOD MONTH.
ON THE SUMMER MONTHS, WHICH THEY HAVE ALREADY PASSED THAT OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE OF THE FACT OF, YOU KNOW, HOW LONG THE APPLICATION TOOK AND THEN HAVING TO WAIT FOR A BOA.
SO THEY'VE DEFINITELY ALREADY LOST MONEY IN THIS INVESTMENT.
YES, THEY COULD LONG TERM RENT IT OUT, BUT IT'S NOWHERE WE'RE GONNA MAKE UP, YOU KNOW, HALF OR EVEN A PORTION OF WHAT THEY INVESTED IN THIS HOME.
SO, UM, WHAT DATE WAS IT THAT YOU APPLIED BACK FOR THE SDR VERSUS I APPLIED JUNE 2ND.
I'M NOT SURE IF THEY'RE ABLE TO CONFIRM THAT.
JUNE 2ND, 2026 AND I FIRST REACHED OUT TO THE DEPARTMENT ON MAY 18TH.
BEFORE WE EVEN LOOKED AT THE HOME.
SO FOR THE CITY, UM, SO ON JUNE 2ND, DID WE KNOW, I GUESS THIS OTHER STATUS OF THE OTHER, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL THAT WAS IN, I GUESS IN WHATEVER STATE IT WAS? SO, SO HELP ME WALK OR WALK ME THROUGH THAT PLEASE.
YEAH, FOR THE CASE MANAGER THAT REVIEWED THE CASE AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION, VERIFIED THAT THEY WERE, UM, THAT THEY MET THE BLOCK FACE AT THE TIME.
IS THAT WHAT YOU, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? NO, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
SO, SO AS I UNDERSTOOD THAT ONE WAS REVOKED, UM, AND SO, SO THEREFORE, YOU KNOW, THE, WE WERE TELLING THEM THAT IT WAS OKAY TO HAVE ANOTHER, UH, ONE ON THE BLOCK FACE.
WHAT, WHEN DID WE DISCOVER THAT IT WAS NOT REVOKED? SO THE WAY OUR, WELL WHEN WAS IT REINSTATED? SO IT WAS REVOKED, BUT WHEN WAS IT ATED? OKAY, SO TO CLARIFY, SO THAT PERMIT WAS REINSTATED, UH, MARCH 28TH, 2026, THE DAY AFTER BO OA REQUESTED THEIR APPEAL TO REINSTATE THE S STR R PERMIT, BUT IT WASN'T DISPLAYED ON THE MAP AT THE TIME WHEN STAFF REACHED, TOLD THE APPLICANT IN MAY, THAT THEN WASN'T MET.
AND IT WASN'T UNTIL THE CASE MANAGER RECEIVED THE APPLICATION JUNE THE SECOND DID HIS REVIEW AND DISCOVERED THAT THAT PERMIT WAS REINSTATED BUT NOT DISPLAYED ON THE ONE STOP MAP.
SO WHAT IS A TIMELINE FOR, FOR I GUESS THAT DETAIL OR IS THAT A NORMAL WORKFLOW WHERE IT TAKES A WHILE FOR THE, IT TYPICALLY TAKES 24 HOURS FROM THE REINSTATEMENT OR APPROVAL REVOCATION PROCESS.
FOR SOME REASON THIS ICON DID NOT DISPLAY ON THE MAP IN THAT TIMELINE.
SO WAS IT JUST THE ICON OR WAS IT, SO, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT WHEN YOU GO AND LOOK, THERE'S RECORDS IN THE BACKGROUND CORRECT.
THAT ALSO STATE YOU KNOW, WHAT THE STATUS IS OF, OF ALL THE RECORDS, WHICH DRIVES THE ICON.
SO, SO IT WAS JUST MISSING COMPLETELY FROM THE MAP THEN? FROM THE MAP, YEAH.
SO IF YOU LOOKED ON BUILD, SAY IT WAS POP UP AS REINSTATED.
AND IF I MAY SPEAK, AND THAT IS WHY I CHECKED TWICE BEFORE WE EVEN BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY.
'CAUSE WE DIDN'T WANNA BE IN THIS SITUATION.
DID, DID YOU E YOU SAID YOU EMAILED THE CITY MM-HMM
YOU HAVE A COPY OF THAT EMAIL? YES, WE DO.
CAN YOU GIVE THAT TO STAFF? THEY CAN DISPLAY IT FOR US.
AND REAL QUICK, COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ, CAN YOU GIVE US A MIC CHECK PLEASE? THIS IS THE SECOND EMAIL, THE SECOND TIME I CONFIRMED.
AND I ALSO HAVE THE SIGNATURES FROM THE NEIGHBORS IF YOU NEED TO SEE THEM ALSO FOR THE STAFF.
SO I DIDN'T SEE THIS PACKET, UH, THIS RESPONSE PACKET IN OUR LISTING HERE.
SO I DUNNO IF IT CAME IN LATE OR AS FAR AS ANY OF THE COMMENTS OR ANYTHING.
[00:25:03]
NO, I SUBMITTED IT WHEN I FIRST DID THE APPLICATION.NO, WE GET A PACKET FROM, OH, OKAY.
UH, ONE GOING BACK TO THE, TO THE, UH, THE AMOUNT OF A LEASE VERSUS THE AMOUNT OF A SALE OR MM-HMM
SO IF, IF WITH THE MONEY YOU HAVE TIED UP, YOU'RE NOT EARNING INTEREST ON THE MONEY ANYMORE, JUST SITTING THERE, PLUS YOU PUT EXTRA MONEY INTO IT.
SO IF YOU WERE TO SELL THE HOUSE AFTER CLOSING COSTS, YOU WOULD BE REALLY UNDERWATER? WE WOULD BE, I ALREADY DID.
IF, IF YOU TRIED TO LEASE IT AT THE MARKET RATE FOR WHAT YOU COULD GET IT BE UNDERWATER, YOU'D STILL BE UNDERWATER? YEAH.
MY PARENTS WOULD'VE MUCH RATHER JUST KEPT THE MONEY AND TAKEN IT TO ANOTHER HOME, ANOTHER INVESTMENT.
STEVENS, MR. STEVENS, WHEN THE CITY WHEN, WHEN THE APPLICANT FIRST REACHED OUT ON MAY 18TH AND THE CITY VERIFIED, WHAT WAS THE CITY USING TO VERIFY? WE USED THE GIS MAP ON OUR ONE STOP.
SO THE SAME MAP THAT THEY WERE RELYING ON? THAT'S CORRECT.
COMMISSIONER ZUNA, IS THERE A WAY TO CROSS REFERENCE THESE, UH, SIGNATURES WITH, WITH THE MAP SO WE CAN SEE WHERE THE MM-HMM
THEY'RE ALL WITHIN THE 200 FEET OR, AND BECAUSE THE, THE APPLICANT DIDN'T EVEN OWN THE HOUSE WHEN, WHEN THE, WHEN WE DID OUR CASE IN, IN MARCH.
SO THEY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN RECEIVED A NOTICE WITHIN THE 200 FEET EITHER.
SO THEY, THIS, THE TIMING WAS JUST AWFUL ON THIS CHAIR? YES.
COMMISSIONER DEAN TO THE APPLICANT.
WHY DID YOU CORRESPOND WITH THE CITY WHEN YOU WEREN'T THE OWNER OF THE HOUSE YET? AND WHY WOULD YOU MAKE A DECISION? YOU KNOW, BASED ON THIS, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS.
I KNOW YOU'RE THINKING INVESTMENT IN A WAY, BUT WHAT, WHAT, YEAH, I MEAN, WHAT LED YOU TO ASK THE CITY THAT? THE QUESTION ABOUT THE SDR R PERMIT AVAILABILITY.
YEAH, BECAUSE THAT WAS A WHOLE PURPOSE OF PURCHASING THIS PROPERTY.
SO AS A REALTOR, AGAIN, I KNOW HOW MUCH, YOU KNOW, STR PROPERTIES CAN DO, ESPECIALLY A GOOD ONE IN A CENTRAL AREA WITH A POOL LIKE THIS ONE.
SO THAT IS WHY BEFORE MY PARENTS EVEN STARTED LOOKING AT HOMES, YOU KNOW, THEY KNEW THAT THEY WANTED TO HAVE AN INVESTMENT TO HAVE A MAIN SOURCE OF INCOME IN THE RETIREMENT SINCE THEY'RE JUST RETIRED NOW.
SO WITH THIS PROPERTY, BEFORE WE EVEN WENT AND LOOKED AT IT AND SCHEDULED, I MADE SURE I GOT WRITTEN CONFIRMATION FROM THE CITY THAT THERE WAS A PERMIT AVAILABLE.
I KNOW I COULD HAVE CALLED, BUT NOTHING IS DOCUMENTED AND I LIKE TO HAVE EVERYTHING DOCUMENTED.
SO THAT'S WHY I EMAILED THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS A PERMIT AVAILABLE.
'CAUSE I ALSO SAW IT ON THE MAP THAT THERE WAS, BUT I WANTED TO HAVE CONFIRMATION FROM THEM.
AND SO WHEN THEY TELL ME THAT IT IS AVAILABLE, THAT WAS OUR DECISION.
LET'S SAY, YOU KNOW, WE SAID, OKAY, LET'S GO AND PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY.
I'VE SEEN THE OTHER TWO THAT ARE ON THE STREET, THEY'RE ALWAYS BOOKED.
UM, AND SO THAT IS A REASON WHY WE DECIDED TO GO FOR IT, BUT BEFORE MAKING OR TAKING THE RIGHT STEPS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WOULD NOT BE IN THE SITUATION THAT WE ARE AT NOW.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
IS THERE ANYONE, SENATOR TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? YES.
UH, WE HAVE A KEVIN KENAGE, KING AID ALL.
IF YOU COULD PLEASE COME UP AND TELL US YOUR STATE, YOUR NAME, AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS.
HELLO, MY NAME'S KEVIN KINCAID.
I LIVE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THIS PROPERTY.
UM, LEMME FIRST JUST THAT PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE THING WAS AWESOME IN THIS DAY AND AGE.
UM, I HAD A WHOLE THING PREPARED ABOUT SETTING, UH, MAKING EXCEPTIONS AND SETTING POSSIBLE FUTURE PRECEDENTS.
BUT I'VE MET THESE PEOPLE WITH SOME ASSER ASSURANCES.
I, I MIGHT BE WILLING TO GO WITH THIS.
I, I, THEY SEEM LIKE REALLY NICE PEOPLE.
AND IF I HAD SOME ASSURANCES THAT THIS WOULD WOULDN'T SPEAKING TO THE MIC, SIR.
THAT, THAT THIS WOULDN'T LOOK THERE ARE KIDS EVERYWHERE AND THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE, WE'VE HAD SOBER HOMES PUT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH I AM ADAMANTLY AGAINST.
THESE KIND OF THINGS CAN LEAD TO THE DEGRADATION OF NEIGHBORHOODS.
NOW THAT BEING SAID, I'VE SPOKEN WITH THESE PEOPLE AND THEY SEEM LIKE WONDERFUL PEOPLE WITH SOME ASSURANCES.
I MIGHT BE OKAY WITH IT, BUT WE, I
[00:30:01]
YOU GUYS ARE GREAT.CAN YOU, CAN YOU, UH, KEEP THE CONVERSATION BETWEEN YOU AND THE COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE? UNA, CAN I, COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH.
SO AS YOU KNOW, THE PERMIT'S ONLY APPROVED FOR THREE YEARS, RIGHT? SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE THE BOARD TO GET A RE-APPROVAL.
WOULD THAT PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF WELL, ABSOLUTELY, BUT YOU, YOU KNOW, WHAT DID IT THEM? I, I, I SPOKE WITH 'EM A LITTLE BIT.
THEIR DAUGHTER SEEMS WONDERFUL.
THEY SEEM MY GOOD PEOPLE AND WITH SOME ASSURANCES THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA RENT TO JUST ANYBODY.
MY GRANDKIDS ARE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND I DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, IN THIS DAY AND AGE, WE ALL HAVE TO BE CAREFUL AND THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS.
BUT AFTER MEETING THEM, I AND THE THREE YEAR HAVE HAVING TO REAPPLY.
I THINK I MIGHT BE OKAY WITH THEM, UH, AFTER THEY SEEM LIKE GOOD PEOPLE.
I JUST DIDN'T WANT SOME CORPORATION.
AND BY THE WAY, WHEN I TRIED TO CALL ON TO FIND OUT WHAT THIS CASE WAS, MY WIFE AND I CALLED FOR A STRAIGHT WEEK, NEVER GOT AN ANSWER.
I HAD TO CALL MY COUNCILWOMAN TO FIND OUT WHAT THIS WAS.
AND, AND ALSO IF, IF, UH, IT'S ALSO COMMON FOR PEOPLE TO DO THIS JUST TO MAKE ENOUGH MONEY TO COVER THEIR LOSSES, BUT BEFORE THEY SELL IT, IF THIS THING EVER DOES SELL ON THE THREE YEAR WINDOW, THE PERMIT AUTOMATICALLY GOES AWAY.
SO, WELL THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THE OUTSIDE.
IT'S NOT, IT, IT, IT MAY, I'M SURE IT HAD THE DAMAGE THAT THEY SAY, BUT IT, IT WAS A NICE HOUSE OR IT IS A NICE HOUSE.
AND THEY, AND THEY, THEY'VE DONE SOME REPAIR TO IT AND I AGREE WITH IT, THEY'VE MADE IT BETTER.
BUT AFTER MEETING AND SPEAKING WITH THEM, I THINK I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THEM, WITH ASSURANCES FROM THEM THAT THEY'RE NOT JUST GONNA RENT TO ANYBODY.
AND THAT'S KIND OF THE REASON I BROUGHT UP NOT KNOWING WHAT THIS WAS, WAS BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WAS A CORPORATION.
I DIDN'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHO WAS DOING THIS.
BUT, AND I, YOU KNOW, THOSE WERE MY CONCERNS, BUT I THINK I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THEM.
THEY, THEY SEEM LIKE WONDERFUL PEOPLE.
THAT'S ALL, THAT'S SIGN OUT TO SPEAK.
OH, AND UH, HERE'S THE NOTIFICATION PLAN SIGNED UP WITH THE MATCHING ADDRESSES THAT WE'RE IN, SIR.
UM, CAN YOU GO TALK TO STAFF? YOU HAVE, WE HAVE, WE CAN ONLY HEAR FROM PEOPLE WHO SIGNED UP.
PLEASE LET US KNOW IF HE'S WITHIN 200 FEET.
YES, HE WAS THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR.
AND COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ, CAN YOU GIVE US A SOUND CHECK PLEASE? STILL NOTHING
COMMISSIONER BEEZ, IF YOU TYPE SOMETHING IN THE CHAT, I WILL RELAY IT TO THE BOARD.
COME ON UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS.
HELLO, I'M CHRISTOPHER DEUCING, UH, 2026 CHITMAN TRAIL DRIVE.
UH, THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE TODAY.
UM, I HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OPERATING ON OUR STREET.
UM, I'M CURRENTLY LOCATED IN BETWEEN WHAT WOULD BE THESE TWO PROPERTIES AND, UH, WE'VE DEALT WITH VERY MUCH, UM, FROM THE, UH, PROPERTY ON THE CORNER.
UM, THE ADDRESS ISN'T ON HERE.
UM, WE HAVE A LOT OF SMALL CHILDREN.
UM, THERE'S FREQUENT PARTIES AT THESE HOUSES.
UM, UM, THERE'S SEVERAL CARS PARKED ON THE STREET AT THIS INTERSECTION, AND THERE'S BEEN SCARY INCIDENCES WITH SPEEDING VEHICLES.
UM, I SEE THAT THIS PROPERTY IS GONNA HAVE, UH, THE ABILITY TO HOUSE 10 PEOPLE.
THAT'S GONNA BE SEVERAL ADDITIONAL CARS OUTSIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY.
UH, THERE'S GONNA BE VISIBILITY ISSUES AT THE INTERSECTION, UH, SPEEDING VEHICLES, LATE NIGHT TRAFFIC.
UM, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S FINANCIAL LOSS HERE, BUT THERE'S A RISK IN BUSINESS.
AND WHAT WE DO KNOW, THESE PROPERTIES ARE ON MY STREET.
AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ME AND MY FAMILY ARE DEALING WITH ON A DAILY BASIS.
UM, I FELT SLIGHTED IN THAT EVERYBODY AROUND ME WAS TALKED TO, BUT I WAS NOT TALKED TO ON THE INTENT OF THIS PROPERTY.
AND, UM, THE HOUSE WAS IMMACULATE.
I UNDERSTAND THEY DID SOME IMPROVEMENTS.
I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNER AND WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
I DO FEEL THAT THERE WERE PROMISES, UH, THAT WERE FOREGONE.
UM, I'M UPSET THAT HE'S NOT HERE BECAUSE I'M NOT, I MAY NOT SPEAK ON HIS BEHALF.
UM, BUT I SEE THIS AS INDICATIONS
[00:35:01]
THAT IT'S NOT GONNA BE HANDLED CORRECTLY AND THAT FOR THREE YEARS MY FAMILY IS GONNA HAVE TO DEAL WITH, UH, THE NEGATIVE IMPLICATIONS OF BEING BETWEEN THESE TWO PROPERTIES.SO I ASK THAT THE BOARD TAKES THIS INTO CONSIDERATION AND THAT WHILE THE CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING TO MAKING THE DECISION TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY ARE SIGNIFICANT, THE IMPACT ON THE FAMILY'S LIVING ON THIS STREET IS GONNA BE EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT.
STEVEN HAD A QUESTION FOR, HOLD ON, SIR.
YEAH, ZUO COMMISSIONER STEVENS, ACTUALLY CHIME.
UM, I WOULD TYPICALLY NOT BE IN FAVOR OF RAISING THE NUMBER OF SHORT TERM RENTALS BEYOND WHAT'S ESTABLISHED IN THE UDC, BUT I'M TRYING TO COME TO TERMS WITH WHAT SEEMS LIKE AN ERROR ON THE CITY'S PART AND WHAT THEY WERE, THE INFORMATION THAT THEY WERE RELYING ON.
SO WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT? I, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT ERRORS EXIST.
UM, TECHNOLOGY TAKES TIME TO CATCH UP.
WE DON'T, WE HAVE FINITE RESOURCES TO WORK WITH.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALL HAVE AS A CHALLENGE WHEN WE MAKE BUSINESS DECISIONS.
UM, BUT THIS PROPERTY OPERATING AND MY FAMILY BEING IN BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES IS ABSOLUTELY GOING TO AFFECT US IN TRAFFIC, IN TYPE OF TRAFFIC, IN AMOUNT OF PARTYING.
I MEAN, REGARDLESS OF THE RULES THAT ARE SET UP ON THIS PROPERTY, THERE'S GONNA BE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF SEVERE PARTYING GOING ON.
AND WE'VE SEEN IT IN THE PROPERTY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF US.
AND IT'S, IT'S, IT AFFECTS THE COMMUNITY DIRECTLY.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT'S WHY THESE ZONING LAWS ARE SET UP AND I ASK THAT THEY'RE UPHELD, UM, JUST SO THAT WE CAN LIVE PEACEFULLY.
NOW, WHEN YOU SAY THE PROPERTY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF YOU, WHAT, WHAT ADDRESS IS THAT? SO THE, IT'S, UM, THE CORNER OF CHITHAM MEADOWS AND CHITHAM TRAIL.
THE ADDRESS ISN'T PRESENT ON THIS MAP.
OKAY, SO THAT'S THE ONE AT THE HARD CORNER? CORRECT.
AND WHERE AND WHERE IS YOUR HOUSE? RIGHT IN THE CENTER? 2 0 2 6.
SO THIS, THIS, THE, THE CASE BEFORE US TODAY IS LIKE SIX HOUSES AWAY FROM YOU.
YOU'RE NOT ON EITHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
FOUR HOUSES, FOUR HOUSES AWAY.
I I HAVE FOUR HOUSES TO ONE PROPERTY AND FOUR HOUSES TO THE OTHER PROPERTY.
I'M WRITING THIS, YOU, YOU MADE IT SOUND LIKE YOU WERE THE IMMEDIATE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR.
UH, SO YOU, YOU BROUGHT FORTH NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE PROPERTIES.
HAVE YOU FILED COMPLAINTS FORMALLY WITH THE CITY ABOUT THESE? UH, NEW IN I NUS I HAVE.
I'M SO YOU HAVE NOT FILED ANY COMPLAINTS? I'M STILL INVESTIGATING HOW TO TAKE CARE OF THAT PROCESS.
SO YOU'VE LIVED THIS WITH THIS SITUATION FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, BUT YOU HAVEN'T FILED ANY COMPLAINTS? THE AIRBNB? YES, THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
I PREVIOUSLY REFERENCED, I'VE ONLY MY UNDERSTANDING IT'S ONLY BEEN ACTIVE FOR FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION WAS IN, IN TERMS OF YOU FEELING SLIGHTED BY THE NEIGHBOR, WAS THERE ANY EFFORT, UH, MADE BY YOUR PART TO REACH OUT TO THE NEIGHBOR OR, UH, TO THE APPLICANT HERE? OR HAS THERE BEEN ANY KIND OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN YOU AND THE APPLICANT REGARDING THIS PERMIT BEFORE US TODAY? NO, THERE HAS NOT BEEN.
WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO MEET WITH THE APPLICANT HERE OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE OR, I, MY, MY ISSUE IS THE PROPERTY BEING OPERATED COMMERCIALLY, NOT WITH THE OWNERS OR MANAGERS OF THE PROPERTY.
IT'S THE TRAFFIC THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND.
I MEAN, IF YOU'RE COMING BEFORE THE BOARD WITH THESE COMPLAINTS, THEN THE STAFF NEEDS TO HEAR ABOUT THEM SO THEY CAN HAVE ON FILE THOSE OPERATORS THAT NOT, NOT OPERATING WITHIN THE BALANCE OF THE SHORT TERM BECAUSE IT PUTS PEOPLE LIKE THESE PEOPLE IN BAD LIGHT BECAUSE OF OPERATIONS LIKE THAT, THAT AREN'T, UH, OPERATING ACCORDING TO THE RULES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, CRUZ, MR. CRUZ, UM, AND THE OTHER TWO, UH, PROPERTIES THAT ARE CLOSE TO YOU THAT YOU SAY, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'RE ALSO BMBS.
DO YOU KNOW THE ACTUAL OWNERS OF THEM OR WHO IS RUNNING THEM AS, AS FAR AS I CAN DISCERN, I BELIEVE IT'S OWNED BY A CORPORATION.
UH, I BELIEVE ONE IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF OAK LINE.
I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT PROPERTY, BUT I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE ONE ON THE CORNER, CHIN MEADOWS AND CHITHAM TRAIL.
'CAUSE THOSE ARE NOT THE BIGGEST STREETS EITHER, SO.
THANK YOU MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA.
SO AS A NOTE, 3 1, 1 IS YOUR FRIEND.
AND, UM, AS I SEE THINGS GOING ON IN MY COMMUNITY, IT'S REALLY EASY.
YOU CAN CALL 'EM AND OR ONLINE AND, YOU KNOW, JUST IDENTIFY THINGS AND THAT'S HOW YOU LOG THINGS.
'CAUSE ONCE YOU LOG THINGS, UM, THEN YOU CAN WORK WITH THE CITY AND OR OTHERS.
AND, AND, AND THEN ALSO POLICE REPORTS ALSO IS ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S THAT OUTTA CONTROL, BUT CERTAINLY 3 1, 1, 1 IT IS
[00:40:01]
THAT YOU SEE THINGS THAT ARE NOT APPROPRIATE.AND THEN JUST AS A COMMENT, SO YOU, SO, SO I'M A I A A STICKLER ON A LOT OF THE RULES AND STUFF, BUT, UM, BY RIGHT TWO ARE ALLOWED ON YOUR STREET.
AND SO WHEN THIS PERSON APPLIED, IT KIND OF LOOKED, IT WAS BY RIGHT.
YOU KNOW, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.
AND SO, SO I'M, I'M STRUGGLING, YOU KNOW, TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, HOW TO WORK THROUGH THIS A LITTLE BIT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, BY RIGHT WHEN THEY APPLIED IT WAS, IT WOULD'VE BEEN PERMITTED.
AND SO, SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
UM, HAS NO ONE ELSE SIGNED UP? ALL RIGHT.
UH, LET THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
UH, IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE ANY CLOSING REMARKS BEFORE WE, UH, DELIBERATE THIS.
AND JUST LIKE IT WAS MENTIONED BY RIGHT.
THAT'S WHY WE, WE EVEN WENT THROUGH WITH THIS PURCHASE, IF WE WOULD'VE KNOWN THAT THERE WAS NOT AN AVAILABLE PERMIT, WE WOULDN'T HAVE EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT IT BECAUSE WE ALSO TRY TO ABIDE, WELL, WE ABIDE BY THE RULES AND REGULATIONS SET IN PLACE BY THE CITY.
AND SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE TRIED TO STILL BUY THE PROPERTY AND STILL TRY TO GET THIS EXCEPTION.
AND TO THE NEIGHBOR, THANK YOU FOR SHOWING UP AND TAKING TIME OUT OF YOUR DAY TO COME OVER HERE.
I DO WANNA ASSURE YOU THAT JUST BECAUSE YOU'VE HAD A BAD EXPERIENCE WITH PREVIOUS AIRBNBS ON YOUR COMMUNITY DOESN'T MEAN THAT'S GONNA BE THE SAME EXPERIENCE WITH US.
I PERSONALLY KNOW, WELL, I DON'T KNOW THE PEOPLE, BUT I KNOW WHO THEY'RE OWNED BY.
THEY'RE INDIVIDUALS JUST LIKE US.
I KNOW THEY HAVE 'EM MANAGED BY A PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, AND THAT IS NOT GONNA BE THE CASE WITH US.
WE'RE GOING TO MANAGE THEM OURSELVES.
MY PARENTS ARE RETIRED, SO THEY HAVE HAVE ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD NOW.
SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING THAT THEMSELVES.
UM, AND AGAIN, LIKE THE OTHER NEIGHBOR WHO CAME FIRST, HE WAS COMING HERE WITH THE IDEA TO OPPOSE, HE MET US AND JUST FIVE, 10 MINUTES HE DECIDED TO NOT OPPOSE ANYMORE.
SO, UM, JUST LIKE HOW THAT NEIGHBOR KIND OF SAW A LITTLE BIT OF THE TYPE OF PEOPLE THAT WE ARE, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THIS HOUSE.
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THE STR PERMIT.
WE ARE NOT GOING TO ALLOW PARTIES.
THAT IS NOT THE TYPE OF PERMIT OF AIRBNB THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SHOWCASE.
AND IT'S ALSO NOT GONNA BE, UM, YOU KNOW, YES, MAX MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF GUESTS IS 10, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT'S HOW MUCH IT'S GONNA BE RENTED FOR ALL THE TIME.
IT'S JUST THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT THAT PEOPLE CAN STAY IN THERE BECAUSE HOTELS ARE PRETTY EXPENSIVE NOWADAYS.
SO WE'RE ALSO TRYING TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE COMMUNITY BY BEING SOMEWHAT AFFORDABLE, BUT ALSO NOT RENTING IT OUT FOR 50, A HUNDRED DOLLARS A DAY TO WHERE WE ATTRACT PEOPLE THAT THE NEIGHBORS WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH.
SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, I JUST HOPE THAT, UH, THE BOARD MEMBERS UNDERSTAND OUR SITUATION, UNDERSTAND THAT WE WERE NOT HERE BY CHOICE, AND THAT THE NEIGHBORS ALSO, YOU KNOW, UNDERSTAND THE TYPE OF PEOPLE THAT WE ARE AND THAT WE'RE GONNA BE TAKING CARE OF THE COMMUNITY AS IF IT WAS OUR OWN HOUSE.
UH, SO ONE OF THE, UM, ITEMS HE BROUGHT UP WAS, WAS PARKING.
HOW MANY SPACES DO YOU HAVE WITHIN, IS THE GARAGE PARABLE CORRECT? YES.
YOU HAVE PARKING WITHIN THE DRIVEWAY TO ACCOMMODATE HOW MANY CARS? YES, SIR.
SO WE HAVE A TWO CAR, UH, ATTACHED GARAGE.
AND THEN WE HAVE A PRETTY LONG DRIVEWAY.
I WOULD SAY AT LEAST TWO OTHER CARS PARKED ON EACH SIDE.
AND THEN WHERE THE HOUSE IS POSITIONED IS LIKE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF A STREET THAT CONNECTS.
SO THERE'S ALSO A LOT OF SIDE PARKING THERE.
SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT ANYBODY'S GONNA BE PARKING ON NEIGHBORING HOUSES BECAUSE WE HAVE AT LEAST FOR FOUR CARS, WHICH A PARTY OF 10 PEOPLE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE FOUR OR LESS.
I DON'T REALLY THINK THEY WOULD HAVE MORE THAN THAT.
UM, AND THEN IF THERE WAS ANY MORE GUESTS OR ANYTHING COMING OVER, WE HAVE THAT FRONT STREET THAT IS ALL SIDE PARKING AND THERE ARE NOT HOUSES FACING DIRECTLY TO THE FRONT OF THAT EITHER.
IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION O ZUNA COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 26 DASH 3 28.
I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT 2 0 4 2, UH, CHI TRAIL DRIVE APPLICANT BEING ELVIS TRAVINO.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINE SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO OPERATE AN ADDITIONAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE.
THERE IS NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY.
B, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE.
THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A REASON TO BELIEVE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WOULD BE CREATED IF AN ADDITIONAL SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT WAS APPROVED.
SEE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE.
THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSIST OF SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURES.
THIS SCENARIO DOES NOT CAUSE REASON TO BELIEVE IT WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS A TYPE TWO SHORT TERM RENTAL.
D ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS, ROAD STORM DRAINAGE, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND OTHER NECESSARY FACILITIES HAVE BEEN, ARE BEING PROVIDED.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE.
E THE APPLICANT OR OWNER OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT-TERM RENTAL LICENSES.
THE CONFIRMED CITATIONS ARE ADJUDICATED OFFENSES CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR PRIOR TO
[00:45:01]
THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION.THE APPLICANT OR THE OWNER DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED LICENSE.
CONFIRMED CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES ARE CONVICTIONS OF CHAPTER 16 AND F THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT.
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE OTHER RESIDENTIAL USES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING ALL STREET PARKING AND MAINTAINING IT FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
THE SPECIAL, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND A MOTION.
SECOND BY COMM COMMISSIONER, MAD COMMISSIONER BAGMAN.
THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN THE NAME ON THE POWERPOINT AND ON THE MOTION.
SO THE MOTION READS ELVIS TRAVINO AND I THINK IT SHOULD READ.
AND THIS SAYSSO DE GONZALEZ, WHICH IS THE CORRECT NAME, WHICH IS THE CORRECT NAME? OKAY.
UH, MOTION TO AMEND, UH, THE, THE APPLICANT NAME IN THE MOTION THAT I READ TO AGREED VASO STATE GONZALEZ.
YEAH, SO I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS I READ.
UM, OBVIOUSLY, UH, THE APPLICANT WAS GOING OFF OF THE PUBLIC WELL, THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED, UM, THAT WAS PART OF HER DUE DILIGENCE AND, AND ACTUALLY ACQUIRING THE PROPERTY.
SHE PROVIDED HARDSHIP INFORMATION ABOUT THE, UM, THE FUNDS USED TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY.
UM, AND, AND NOTED THAT THE, UM, SHORT TERM RENTAL IS A, IS A VIABLE ECONOMIC, UH, USE OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, WE HEARD PUBLIC TESTIMONY FROM NEIGHBORS THAT, THAT WOUND UP SUPPORTING THE PROPERTY.
UM, SO THERE IS A, A, A TEST HERE AT THE END OF THE THREE YEARS WHERE THE APPLICANT, UH, IS OPERATING THE PROPERTY WITHIN, YOU KNOW, WHAT SHE MADE PROMISES TO THE NEIGHBORS AND, AND, AND THE OPERATION AND, UH, REGARDING THE OPPOSITION, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE OPPOSITION WE HEARD NEVER FILED A COMPLAINT.
I MEAN, THEY BROUGHT UP THE DIFFERENT OPERATORS ON EITHER SIDE AS BEING A MAJOR NUISANCE TO THEM, BUT THERE WAS NOTHING ON FILE.
SO, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE PREPONDERANCE OF THAT, I'M SUPPORTING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS READ.
UM, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND, UM, RECENTLY I VOTED IN A, IN A SIMILAR CASE, BUT IT WASN'T SIMILAR ENOUGH.
YOU KNOW, I VOTED AGAINST IT, BUT THIS ONE, I, I THINK THE CITY NEEDS, YOU KNOW, ALWAYS BE ON THEIR A GAME.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE WERE NOT ON THE A GAME HERE.
AND SO I, I THINK OF THIS AS BEING, YOU KNOW, A, A MISS FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE.
AND I CANNOT, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO GIVE CREDIT TO THE, TO THE APPLICANT'S HERE THEMSELVES.
AND SO I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD? UH, HEARING NONE, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT.
MOTION PASSES NINE TO, UH, ONE WITH ONE ABSTENTION.
AND AS A WARNING, IN THREE YEARS IF CAN'T HAVE ANY COMPLAINTS OR YOU MAY NOT TURN OUT SO WELL.
C CHAIR, CAN I ALSO, UM, YES, ADVISE THAT EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY, YOU STILL HAVE TO REPORT TO ZERO INCOME AND MAKE SURE YOU DO YOUR MONTHLY REPORTING, UH, WITH THE CITY ACCOUNTING OFFICE FOR THE HOT TAXES.
IN THREE YEARS, WE HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN.
AND SO IT, IT, SO UNLESS, UNLESS ONE OF, UNLESS SOMEBODY ELSE CANCELS AND YOU BECOME ONE OF THE TWO.
BUT JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT STAFF CAN ANSWER ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS, BUT YOU, BUT BECAUSE YOU HAVE JUST BEEN APPROVED TO BE AN EXTRA ONE, EVERYONE'S GONNA BE LOOKING AT YOUR RECORD AND EVERYTHING, SO, ALL RIGHT.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS BO OA DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 24 LOCATED IN DISTRICT SEVEN AT 2 0 7.
ALEXANDER HAMILTON DRIVE THE ZONINGS R SIX.
AND THE REQUEST IS FOR ONE, A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD SEVEN MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO ALLOW ONE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE PRIMARY DWELLING.
TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD SEVEN MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO ALLOW 1000 205 50
[00:50:01]
SQUARE FEET OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.THREE, A FOUR FOOT NINE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE WITH A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH OF OVERHANG.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY'S ADDRESSED OFF OF ALEXANDER HAMILTON DRIVE AND LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF ALEXANDER HAMILTON DRIVE AND MANAR DRIVE.
THE SURROUNDING AREAS PRIMARILY DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.
ON ZONE R SIX, THE CASE ORIGINATED FROM THE APPLICANT WANTING TO BUILD A TWO STORY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE NEAR THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE AND WITHIN THE NCD SEVEN JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
IN THIS INSTANCE, THE JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT SPECIFIES THAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MUST NOT EXCEED 12 FEET OR BE TALLER THAN 8% OF THE HEIGHT OF THE PRIMARY DWELLING.
AND SPECIFICALLY STATES THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE CANNOT BE TALLER THAN THE PRIMARY DWELLING.
THEN CD SEVEN ALSO STATES AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OR DETACHED BUILDING SHALL NOT EXCEED 40% OF THE EXISTING SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THEIR PRIMARY DWELLING STRUCTURE.
ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED AFTER 2000 2009 MUST ADHERE TO THE LATEST DESIGN STANDARDS IMPOSED BY THIS OWNING OVERLAY DISTRICT.
THE DECIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT STANDARD OF R SIX ZONE PROPERTIES.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA.
OH, HERE, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL.
AND BOA DASH 1 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 24 FOR THE NCD.
SEVEN MAXIMUM HEIGHT FIRST ACCESSORY RESTRUCTURES AND CD SEVEN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
SQUARE FOOTAGE INSIDE SETBACK BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE NCD SEVEN CONSERVATION DISTRICT STANDARDS PROVIDE GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT SO THAT HISTORICALLY COMMON SITE AND BUILDING CONFIGURATIONS ARE PERPETUATED IN THE FUTURE.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE DEVIATES FROM THE STANDARDS WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST REGARDING THE PRESERVATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.
TWO, IF GRANTED THE GARAGE WOULD BE TWO STORIES IN HEIGHT AND WOULD EXCEED THE PERMISSIBLE SQUARE FOOTAGE WHEN COMBINED WITH THE CARPORT, WHICH WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND POTENTIALLY INJURE THE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THE SAME REGULATION.
THE REDUCED SETBACK VARIANCE WOULD LEAVE INSUFFICIENT ROOM TO MITIGATE POTENTIAL FIRE CONCERNS AND WATER RUNOFF ONTO ABUTTING PROPERTIES.
STAFF MAIL DO 23 NOTICES? ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR? ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
WE RECEIVED ZERO VOICEMAILS IN FAVOR OR AN OPPOSITION.
THE JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE.
AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
CAN YOU BRING UP THE, UH, SIDE PLAN WITH THE LITTLE COLORED NUMBERS ON IT PLEASE? YEAH.
SO MY QUESTION IS, IS THAT, UM, THE, THE TAN STRUCTURE WITH THE NUMBER TWO MM-HMM
IS THAT AN AERIAL OF THE EXISTING CARPORT OR DID YOU MARK ON THERE? LIKE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THIS ONE? UH, WELL I CAN SEE THE GARAGE IS, IS MORE SQUARE, BUT NUMBER TWO IS SHOWN AS A RECTANGULAR.
IS THAT THE EXISTING CARPORT? YES, THAT IS THE EXISTING CARPORT, WHICH IS COUNTED IN THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, SQUARE FOOTAGE.
AND THEY'RE GONNA, ARE THEY GONNA CHOP SOME OF THE END OFF TO PUT IN THE GARAGE? 'CAUSE ON THAT SIDE PLAN, ON THE GARAGE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT JUST, I DUNNO, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT THE CARPORT SEEMS LONGER.
I MEAN, IS THE CARPORT GONNA STAY? AND LET ME ASK YOU THAT, THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD PUSH IN FOR THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT TO MY UNDERSTANDING.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S NEWER THAN THE REST OF THE HOUSE.
SO I WAS, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE, AND THE CODE SAYS, UH, CAN'T BE MORE THAN 80% OR EXCEED THE HEIGHT.
WHAT, WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE? DO YOU KNOW? I DON'T KNOW THE HEIGHT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
I KNOW THAT THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE IS GONNA BE TALLER THAN THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
IT'S GONNA BE TWO STORIES, WHICH IS WHY.
THAT GOT, AND, AND ON THE, ON LAST QUESTION, IT'S, IT'S COMMON IN THE UDC TO SOMETIMES WHEN THERE'S A HEIGHT, UH, REQUIREMENT ON A BUDDING ITEMS THAT THERE'S LIKE SOMETIMES A 10% WAIVER IS THAT THERE IS NO WAIVER.
IT'S IF IT'S HIGHER, THEN THAT'S IT.
I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY SORT OF 10% WAIVER.
THERE IS NO A VR OPTION FOR THE, UH, OKAY.
AND THEN LASTLY, IS A HEIGHT ON, IN THE NCD STANDARDS MEASURED TO THE ABSOLUTE HEIGHT OR TO THE DECK OF THE ROOF? IT'S MEASURED THE SAME WAY A BUILDING WOULD BE.
SO TO THE DECK, TO THE, TO THE, UH, I THINK TO THE MEDIAN OF THE ROOF, MEDIAN OF THE ROOF PITCH, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD? ALL RIGHT.
SAID THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
HOW ARE YOU ALL DOING TODAY? MY PRESENTATION IS NOT AS FORMAL AS THE OTHER ONE, SO IT'S NOT AS ELABORATE.
I'M NOT THAT FANCY WITH PRESENTATIONS.
MINE JUST COMES FROM MY OWN NOTES.
[00:55:02]
THERE'S SOME OTHER PHOTOS THAT I HAVE.UM, THE GIST OF MY PRESENTATION IS I, I'VE BEEN IN THIS AREA FOR 20 YEARS, 20 PLUS YEARS.
I MOVED INTO HERE AND, UM, A FEW YEARS AGO, I THINK IT WAS LAST YEAR, I, I, I WANTED TO UPGRADE MY HOME.
SO WHAT I DECIDED TO DO WAS I REMOVED THE EXISTING CI AND OFF OF IT AND I PUT BRICK ON IT AND IT'S KIND OF SCUR WITH THE PHOTOS.
SO I'VE GOT THE EXTERIOR WITH BRICK AND, UM, THE NEXT PROJECT WAS GONNA BE IN MY GARAGE.
AND I, AND THAT, THAT TIME POINT, UH, WHEN WE WERE GONNA INTO THE GARAGE, I WAS LIKE, YOU KNOW, I'VE, I'VE RUN OUTTA SPACE IN MY HOME.
IT'S A SMALLER HOME AND I DON'T LIKE, I DIDN'T WANNA DISRUPT THE FOOTPRINT OF IT BECAUSE I'VE GOT A DECK ALREADY AND IT'S MORE OF A HEADACHE.
IT'S MORE REALLY DON'T, LIKE, THERE'S UNNECESSARY EXPENSE.
I FIGURED, WHY DON'T I JUST PUT SOMETHING ON TOP OF THE GARAGE? UM, THE GARAGE ITSELF IS OBVIOUSLY, AND YOU CAN TELL IT'S, IT'S OLDER AND IT'S GONNA BE LEVELED.
AND I WANTED TO MATCH MY HOME, WHICH I UPGRADED.
UM, I'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF, ACTUALLY A LOT OF CALLS AND PEOPLE WANNA BUY IT.
I'VE BEEN THERE FOR 20 PLUS YEARS.
I TAKE GREAT GOOD CARE OF MY HOME AND, AND THE YARD.
SO WE DID THE, UH, WE DID THE HOUSE.
WE HAVE, I HAVE MATERIALS IN ORDER TO DO THE PROJECT OF THE GARAGE.
UM, I'VE RUN OUTTA SPACE IN A SMALL HOME.
UM, JUST EXPANDING THE HOME, JUST LIKE I SAID, IT'S JUST NOT, NOT FEASIBLE FOR MYSELF.
AND I DIDN'T REALLY WANNA RUIN THE, THE FOOTPRINT OF, I LIKED MY YARD SIZE.
I LIKE TO MAINTAIN MY OWN YARD.
AND SO WE TALKED ABOUT THE PROJECT AND THEN OF COURSE THEY TOLD ME ABOUT THE RULES.
AND I UNDERSTAND AESTHETICALLY YOU WANNA KEEP THE NEIGHBORHOOD THE SAME.
HOWEVER, I DID WALK A BIT DOWN THE STREET.
THERE ARE SOME PHOTOS THAT I PROVIDED TO BRONTE.
THERE ARE TWO STORY STRUCTURES.
IF YOU WALK ALONG ALL THE WAY TOWARDS JEFFERSON HIGH SCHOOL, THERE'S ONE STORY HOMES AND TWO STORY STRUCTURES.
SO I'M JUST SAYING THAT, AND IF YOU LOOK AT MY HOUSE, THAT TOO, THAT THE WAY THEY'RE GONNA DO THE GARAGE IS THEY'RE PROBABLY GONNA ELIMINATE A LITTLE BIT OF THE CARPORT.
IT'S GONNA STAY THERE IN ORDER TO SATISFY THE FOOTPRINT OF THE GARAGE.
BUT EVEN FROM THE APPROACH FROM THE STREET, IF YOU LOOK FROM THE STREET AND YOU LOOK UP, THERE'S TREES IN THE FRONT OF IT.
SO REALLY AESTHETICALLY YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO SEE IT FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
UM, I WOULD, IF, IF I THOUGHT IT WAS GONNA BE AN EYESORE, I WOULDN'T DO IT.
'CAUSE I UNDERSTAND THIS IS JEFFERSON AREA, YOU WANNA KEEP IT NICE AND CONSERVATIVE, BUT FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOME IF YOU BRING UP THE SLIDE, UM, YOU CAN'T, YOU REALLY CAN'T TELL THE ACCESSORIES ARE ACTUALLY GONNA BE BUILT FROM THE BACK.
I DO UNDERSTAND THERE'S RULES AND REGS.
WE HAVE A DEALERSHIP, WE HAVE RULES AND REGULATIONS.
I'M JUST LOOKING FOR SOME EXCEPTIONS.
IT'S KIND OF A MANCAVE, IF YOU WANNA CALL IT.
I HAVE NO USE FOR USE FOR COMMERCIAL USE.
I'M NOT GONNA USE IT TO PARTY LIKE THAT.
I JUST LIKE TO HAVE AN ESCAPE ROOM TO GO INTO THE BACK OF IT.
IF YOU LOOK FROM THE FRONT, THAT'S THE FRONT OF MY HOME.
THERE'S ANOTHER PICTURE THAT I HAVE WHERE IT'S FROM THE DRIVEWAY LOOKING UP.
UM, YOU BASICALLY, YOU'RE LOOKING AT TREES.
THE OTHER PICTURE THAT I HAVE RIGHT THERE THAT I TOOK IS A GENTLEMAN THAT LIVES ONE BLOCK FROM JEFF.
HE'S BUILT A BEAUTIFUL HOME AND STRUCTURE IN THE BACK OF HIS HOUSE WHERE HE WORKS ON HIS CAR AND I GUESS HE SITS ON A PROPERTY AND A HALF, WHICH PROBABLY GIVES HIM PERMISSION TO DO SO.
SO YOU CAN SEE HOW HE HAS A STRUCTURE THAT KIND OF GIVES HIM THE ABILITY TO DO SOME MORE STUFF WITH THIS HOUSE.
AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO.
MY HOME IS RATHER SMALL, THE GARAGE PORT, SIT ON THE, UH, TO THE SIDE.
THERE'S ANOTHER PHOTO I THINK I PROVIDED WITH THE, YOU CAN FLIP THROUGH THE PHOTOS.
AND THESE ARE SOME OF THE HOMES THAT I TOOK PICTURES OF.
THIS IS HIS PROPERTY OVER HERE, AND YOU CAN TELL THAT THE, WHAT HE'S BUILT, IT LOOKS PLEASING.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY, UM, OBJECTION TO THAT.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE HOUSES THAT YOU HAVE HERE THAT HAVE TWO STORY STRUCTURES NEXT TO HOMES THAT ARE ONE STORY.
UM, AND THIS IS JUST A CORNER OF JEFF, WHERE IT HAS SOME APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
SO TECHNICALLY ON ONE SIDE THERE'S SOME APARTMENTS ON THE OTHER SIDE, THERE ARE HOMES AS WELL.
SO I REALLY DON'T SEE WHERE MY STRUCTURE WOULD KIND OF DETRACT FROM ANYTHING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I SIT RIGHT ACROSS FROM THE, UH, I THINK IS WHAT IT IS.
IT'S A, IT'S A BAPTIST CHURCH AND THEY HAVE A, A BUILDING RIGHT ACROSS FROM MY RESIDENCE.
UM, I CAN'T FIND THE FRONT PICTURE.
THERE'S A PICTURE THAT I HAD THAT WAS IT NOT IN THE PHOTOS THAT I SENT YOU.
I'M TRYING TO FIND IT, AND THIS IS MY FAULT FOR NOT GETTING TO YOU.
ANYWAYS, FROM THE APPROACH FROM MY HOUSE, IF I COULD PROVIDE IT, I, I HAVE IT ON MY PHONE, BUT I GUESS I CAN'T PRESENT.
BUT FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, AS YOU'RE DRIVING UP AT THE DRIVEWAY AND TECHNICALLY YOU'RE LOOKING AT TREES AND THE CARPORT AND YOU LITERALLY CANNOT SEE ANYTHING INTO THE BACKYARD.
SO THE STRUCTURE THAT I'M TRYING TO BUILD WILL NOT BE SEEN.
IF, IF, IF YOU COULD SEE IT, THEN I COULD SEND, YOU'D HAVE AN HAVE AN ARGUMENT AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU'RE DRIVING UP AND YOU SEE THIS THING IN THE BACKYARD.
IT DETECTS AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU CAN'T SEE THAT FROM THE FRONT.
MY LAST THING IS JUST BASICALLY IT PROVIDES GOOD INCOME FOR THE, FOR THE FAMILY THAT'S GONNA BE WORKING ON MY HOME.
UM, HE IS AN IMMIGRANT AND HE'S A LEGAL IMMIGRANT.
UM, I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PROBLEMS IN THE CITY, BUT IT PROVIDES GREAT INCOME FOR HIM AND
[01:00:01]
THE PEOPLE THAT DO THE WORK.AND THEY'VE WORKED ON MY HOME.
I HAD A GENTLEMAN DO THE BRICK, UM, LIKE I SAID, AND IT'S, IT'S BEEN A LOVE A PROJECT FOR ME AND I'M GONNA PLAN TO STAY THERE FOR MANY YEARS.
I PROBABLY KEEP THE HOME IN MY FAMILY.
IT'S NOT A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP.
YOU ASKED ME THAT POINT BLANK.
AND I'LL BE QUITE HONEST WITH YOU, IT'S NOT PROVIDING KIND OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP AND I'M, I'M HONEST ABOUT THAT.
BUT IT DOES PROVIDE ME AN ESCAPE PLACE WHERE I CAN READ MY BOOKS AND JUST ESCAPE AFTER A LONG WEEK WORKING IN THE CAR BUSINESS.
YOU CAN, IF YOU HAVE THE PICTURE ON YOUR PHONE, YOU CAN PROVIDE IT.
I'LL WAIT UNTIL YOU TRYING THIS RECORD.
SO BY CHANCE, DID YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REACH OUT TO JEFFERSON? I DID TALK TO 'EM ABOUT TWO OF THEM AND I DIDN'T GET A CALL BACK.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE FIRST CONTACT WAS A GENTLEMAN I CALLED AND I THINK I EMAILED AND I DIDN'T GET A RESPONSE.
THEY GAVE ME ANOTHER, UH, I BELIEVE FEMALE REPRESENTATIVE.
I THINK I CALLED HER AND I DIDN'T GET A RESPONSE, SO I KIND OF LEFT IT AT THAT.
SO THIS IS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
THAT'S WHERE THE CARPORT'S AT, THOSE WHERE THE TREES ARE AT AND BEHIND IT IS BEHIND THE CARPORT IS WHERE THE STRUCTURE'S GOING TO BE.
UM, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING TO DO.
SO WHAT IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOME PRIMARY HOME? I SENT IT IN THE DOCUMENTS.
IS IT IN THE EMAILS FROM, FROM ALAN? DID HE SEND YOU THE SQUARE FOOTAGE? I BELIEVE IT'S 8 76 CORNER OF BA 8 76.
SO YOU'RE LIMITED TO 350 SQUARE FEET AND THE APPLICATION SAYS YOU'RE ASKING FOR WITH THE GARAGE AND THE, UM, CARPORT IS 1250.
IS THAT 1250 IN ADDITION TO THE THREE 50 OR 1250 TOTAL? 1250 TOTAL.
SO THAT'S A 900 SQUARE FOOT A DEVIATION.
AND THE, THE ONE INCH OFFSET IS SOLELY LIMITED TO THE CARPORT.
THE GARAGE IS NOT GONNA HAVE A SIDE SETBACK ISSUE.
I THINK HE SAID HE COULD MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS IF THERE WERE.
ALL I WAS TRYING TO DO WAS BUILD IT THE GARAGE AND IF THERE WAS ANYTHING THAT WAS KIND OF TOO CLOSE TO THE GATE, THEN WE WOULD BRING IT IN.
SO YEAH, THE, THE SITE PLAN THIS BEFORE, IT LOOKS LIKE THE GARAGE IS ACCEPTABLE.
IT'S JUST THAT THE CARPORT IS TOO CLOSE TO THE SIDE.
AND THAT WAS BUILT A WHILE BACK.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY, IF NOTHING NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED ON THAT.
THAT WAS WHEN WE BUILT, THAT WAS YEARS AGO.
AND THE GENTLEMAN TOLD ME, WE'VE GOT A PERMIT FOR THAT.
SO I WENT WITH THAT AND I APOLOGIZE.
I DON'T, HE SHOWED EVERYTHING WAS, WAS ACCEPTABLE WHEN WE DID IT.
IF HE'D HAVE SAID WE HAD A PROBLEM, I WOULD'VE SAID, THEN YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT COINCIDES WITH THE CODE.
THE, THE, THE ISSUE IS, IS UM, IF THIS BOARD CAN ENTERTAIN, UH, SOMETIMES SOME LIMITATIONS.
SO LIKE ON A SIDE SETBACK, THEY COULD LIMIT IT TO JUST THE CARDBOARD.
AND TO NOT INCLUDE THE GARAGE.
I MEAN, THERE'S A, THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT WE CAN READ, READ INTO ON A MOTION.
DOES YOUR CARDBOARD CURRENTLY HAVE GUTTERS? UM, DOES IT LOOK LIKE IT DOES? IT HAS, DOES NOT HAVE GUTTERS ON IT.
AND THE, THE TWO STRUCTURES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE REAR OF YOUR YARD, ARE THEY SINGLE, UH, STORY? 'CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE YOUR NEIGHBORS ALSO HAVE AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE NESTLED IN THE BACK CORNER ON EITHER SIDE OF YOUR LOT.
AND I WAS CURIOUS HOW TALL THEY ARE.
SO MY NEIGHBORS HAVE A ONE STORY THAT'S GARAGE ON THEIR SIDE.
AND MY OTHER NEIGHBOR HAS ALSO A GARAGE.
THEY HAVE A ONE STORE GARAGE ON THERE.
THAT NUMBER RIGHT THERE ON THE CORNER.
SO THEY HAVE ONE STORY GARAGE.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA? AND SO THE QUESTION WAS ASKED EARLIER WITH REGARDS TO THE LENGTH OF THE CARPORT, UM, AND THE NEW STRUCTURE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO BRING IN.
SO IS THE, THE EXISTING CARPORT GOING TO BE SHORTENED AT ALL TO BRING THE EXIST THE NEW STRUCTURE IN? SO WE LOOKED AT THE FRONT OF IT AND WE WERE GONNA BRING, WE WERE GONNA CUT A PORTION OF THE CARPORT IN THE FRONT TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE, FOR THE LENGTH OF THE, OF THE, UH, STRUCTURE.
WE'RE NOT GONNA PUSH IT ANY FURTHER BACK.
SO PROBABLY, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WOULD I LEFT IT TO THE ARCHITECT TO TAKE PORTION OF THE, OF THE CARPORT OFF TO MAKE, TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE SIZE.
I GOT CONFUSED HERE FOR A SECOND.
SO, SO THE, THE CAR I'M TALKING ABOUT WHERE THE CARPORT HITS THE CURRENT GARAGE.
SO WHATEVER WE, HOW WE MAKE THE STRUCTURE THAT, THAT PORTION AND, AND THEN THERE'S SOME BEAMS UNDERNEATH THE SUPPORT BEAMS, WE WOULD COME BACK FROM THOSE BACK TO THE SUPPORT BEAMS CENTER KNOWN AS COME INTO THE GARAGE.
IT SOUNDS LIKE, YEAH, IT MAKES SENSE, BUT I JUST, YEAH, I WAS JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
SO, SO IT IS THAT YOU'RE, IT WON'T BE AS LONG BECAUSE YOU HAD TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE RIGHT?
[01:05:01]
NO, WHATEVER, WHEREVER HE SETS THE GARAGE AT THE LIMIT IS, WE WOULD BRING WITHIN THAT LIMIT.'CAUSE WE, THEY MEASURED EVERYTHING.
THEY TOLD ME WHAT THE, WHAT THE PREMISE IS.
WOULD JUST BE WITHIN THAT SPACE.
AND THEN IF WE HAVE TO MAKE THE GARAGE LONGER, WE'LL JUST, WE'LL, WE'LL BASICALLY COME INTO THE CARPET AND WE HAVE TO CUT THE CARPORT ON THE INSIDE TO ACCOMMODATE THE GARAGE.
'CAUSE IT'LL BUTT UP AGAINST THE, THE GARAGE.
SO, UM, HOW LONG IS, I'M GONNA EXPAND ON COMMISSIONER MANNY'S QUESTION.
SO IF WE ONLY GRANTED A SIDE SETBACK FOR THE EXISTING CARPORT, THAT PART OF THE ISSUE WITH THIS IS THAT YOUR GARAGE LOOKS LIKE THE, THE ACCESS DOOR TO THE ACTUAL VEHICULAR PART OF THE GARAGE MM-HMM
IS, IS NEEDS TO BE IN LINE WITH THE CARPORT UNLESS IT'S FURTHER BACK AWAY SO THAT A CAR CAN NEGOTIATE, SCOOT OVER A LITTLE BIT AND THEN ENTER THE GARAGE.
AND, AND SO IT'S HAVING THE, THE PLAN THAT'S BEFORE US IS REFLECTING THE GARAGE TO NOT NEED A SIDE SETBACK ISSUE AT ALL.
UH, AND SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SCOOTED OVER, WHICH WOULD MEAN YOU'D HAVE TO CUT SOME OF THE CARPORT A LITTLE BIT.
AND THEY, THEIR ATTENTION WAS TO BRING THE CARPORT UP TO THE GARAGE AND THEY WERE GONNA USE A SLIDING TYPE OF MECHANISM.
SO IF I WANTED TO PARK A CAR IN THERE, AND I'M NOT EVEN SURE HOW BIG YOU KNOW, IF IT WOULD ACCOMMODATE, IT MAY NOT.
WELL, YOU HAVE A SINGLE WIDTH WIDE CARPORT, SO HAVE TO DO SOMETHING WITH THOSE POSTS BECAUSE YOUR ALIGNMENT WOULD BE OFF ABOUT FOUR AND A HALF FEET.
SO THEY BASICALLY WHAT THEY SAID WAS THAT IF I WERE, IF I WERE TO BRING A CAR AND IT WOULD BE ONLY LIKE RIGHT AT WHERE THE POLE IS AT, I GUESS THEY SAID, I'M SORRY, I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT, THIS IS WHERE I WOULDN'T HAVE GONE OFF OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THEM.
AND THAT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE, WHERE WE KIND OF COME AROUND THE SIDE AND THE GATE IS RIGHT THERE.
SO YOU'RE REALLY WELL ONLY ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE ONE CAR IF I WERE TO EVEN DECIDE IF PUT ONE IN THERE.
THAT'S KIND OF COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN.
SO ON THE, LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN, IT SHOWS THAT THIS IS A PROPOSED GARAGE, 480 SQUARE FEET, BUT IT'S TWO STORIES.
AND YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT DECIDE TO PARK A CAR IN THERE.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS WHY DOES IT NEED TO BE TWO STORIES THEN IF, IF IF, IF YOU WANTING THE ADDITIONAL SPACE, BECAUSE YOUR HOUSE IS, IS RELATIVELY SMALL, RIGHT? I UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT COULD YOU DO WITH ONE STORY INSTEAD OF TWO IF YOU'VE GOT PLENTY OF PARKING SPACES ON? SO IF I, IF I WERE TO FORGIVE, I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT CARS.
IF I COLLECT, IF I BUY A CORVETTE, IT WOULD GO INSIDE MY CAR CARPORT.
I, I WANT ENOUGH SPACE IN THERE IN THE CASE I WANTED TO PUT IN THERE.
I HAVE, I HAVE TWO VEHICLES RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS WHAT THE CARPORT'S FOR.
AND SO I'D PROBABLY PARK IT IN THERE.
AND THEN I HAVE, I DO POWER, I DO WOODWORK AND POWER TOOLS.
SO THAT OTHER PORTION OF THE GARAGE WOULD BE THERE ON THE SIDE.
THE TOP WOULD BE BASICALLY JUST A SPACE TO ESCAPE AND TO PUT STORE ITEMS BASICALLY.
BUT I THINK WE DESIGNED IT WITH LIKE A PATIO AT THE TOP, A VERY SMALL CORNER NOOK WHERE I COULD JUST GO OUTSIDE AND READ.
THAT WAS BASICALLY WHAT THE TOP WAS FOR.
SO IT, IT SERVES AS PURPOSE OF, AND THEN THE OTHER PORTION OF MY GARAGE WOULD BE FOR WEIGHTS.
SO I LIKE TO WORK OUT, SO I'M GONNA UTILIZE EVERY SQUARE INCH OF IT, INCLUDING THE TOP.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT THE PRO PROPOSITION IS.
SO, SO IN THE NEW STRUCTURE, IS THERE GONNA BE ANY, I GUESS BATHROOMS, KITCHEN, NO KIND OF STUFF? SO THE BATHROOMS, THE ONLY THING WE'VE PROBABLY, I THINK WE ACCOMMODATED FOR WAS A MINI SPLIT, BUT NO, I DON'T WANT BATHROOMS. I SAID MORE PIPES, MORE PLUMBING.
I SAID MORE PROBLEMS. I SAID NO, ALL I HAVE A, I HAVE ONE BATHROOM IN THE HOUSE AND THAT'S ENOUGH FOR ME.
I CAN WALK TO THE, TO THE HOUSE IF I NEED TO.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND UH, DO YOU, DO YOU HAVE, HOW LONG IS THE EXISTING CARPORT IF YOU HAD TO GUESS? OH, IT'S 20.
I MEASURED IT THE OTHER DAY FOR ALON, ACCORDING TO AERIAL, IT'S ABOUT 51 FEET IN DEPTH.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED TO THE SPEAK? NOBODY SIGN UP TO SPEAK.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE, NO, IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS, WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION AND SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT, SIR.
WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS? GET THIS, GET THE BALL ROLLING.
OKAY, MME. STEVENS, COMMISSIONER STEVENS, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 26 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 24, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST FOR ONE, A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD SEVEN MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO ALLOW ONE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE PRIMARY DWELLING.
TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD SEVEN MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO ALLOW 1,250 SQUARE FEET OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND THREE OF FOUR FOOT NINE VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT YARD SET BACK TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE WITHIN ONE INCH FROM THE WEST PROPERTY LINE WITH ONE FOOT FOUR INCH OVERHANG LIMITED TO THE EXISTING CARPORT SITUATED AT 2 0 7 ALEXANDER HAMILTON DRIVE, APPLICANT BEING DAVID VARA.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LA LITERAL ENFORCEMENT
[01:10:01]
OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
AS, AS IN THIS CASE, THE PROPOSED VARIANCE FROM THE NCD SEVEN STANDARDS AND SIDE SETBACKS WOULD BE MINIMAL.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS THE PRO PROPOSED DEVIATION FROM THE NCD SEVEN STANDARDS WOULD NOT IMPOSE A CONSPICUOUS DEPARTURE FROM THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIALLY AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD STILL BE OBSERVED BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE AS THE DEPARTURE FROM THE SINGLE STORY GARAGE AND THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD STILL CONFORM WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN WHILE ALSO SERVING ITS INTENDED PURPOSE.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER AS THERE IS SUFFICIENT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE CARPORT AND NEARBY STRUCTURES.
AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS NOT OUT OF CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
SIX, THE P OF THE OWNER FOR THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE EXISTING GARAGE AND STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH LIMIT THE AVAILABLE SPACE FOR THE ESTABLISHED OF A CARPORT AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WHILE ALSO ADHERING TO NCD SEVEN STANDARDS.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAMMA.
UM, YEAH, I THINK, UH, I'M GOING TO BE IN FAVOR OF THIS.
GIVEN THE, THE LIMITED FOOTPRINT OF THE PRIMARY, PRIMARY DWELLING, I THINK THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NCD SEVEN STANDARDS ARE, ARE PRETTY RESTRICTIVE.
UM, THERE'S SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ESPECIALLY ACROSS THE STREET AND THE PROPOSED GARAGE IS SET PRETTY FAR BACK ON THE PROPERTY.
SO, UM, I WAS MOST CONCERNED ABOUT THE SETBACKS AND IT SEEMS THAT THE, THE NEW CONSTRUCTION AS WELL WITHIN, UH, REQUIRED SETBACKS.
SO JUST, UM, SO MAYBE ASK FOR A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IF, IF WE THINK IT'S NEEDED IS, UM, YOU KNOW, BUILT TO AS, AS PRESENTED HERE WITH REGARDS TO THEIR LAYOUT SIMPLY SO THAT AS WE ENSURING THAT THE NEW STRUCTURE DOESN'T GO INTO THAT SAME SPACE AND IT IS OFFSET KIND OF LIKE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND I ALSO, UM, I I AVOIDED SAYING THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING CARPORT SO THAT HE COULDN'T BUILD NEW WITHIN THAT FOOTPRINT.
I THINK THAT THAT WAS GOOD, RIGHT? YEAH.
SO, SO, SO JUST WE HAVE A, AN, A FRIENDLY AMENDED ACCEPTED MOTION.
UH, AND JUST TO CLARIFY THAT IT IS LIMITED, UH, TO THE EXISTING CARPORT REGARDING THE SIDE SETBACK AND, AND, UH, AND IN LINE WITH THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED AS PART OF THE APPLICATION.
UM, AND, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS GENERALLY PRETTY ACTIVE WITH REGARDS TO WHEN IT IS THAT THEY DO SEE CHALLENGES.
AND SINCE THEY ARE PROVIDING FEEDBACK HERE, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO, I'M GOING TO AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES HERE.
ALRIGHT? AND, UH, AND I I I'M HAVING DOUBTS NOW, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTARY.
NOBODY JUST, I THOUGHT I ASKED, BUT NOW I JUST WANTED TO VERIFY.
ALL RIGHT, IF THERE'S NO OTHER, UH, UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMENTS.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE.
MAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER GOMEZ? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES THUMBS UP FROM COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN GET WITH STAFF.
[01:15:01]
NUMBER THREE IS BO OA DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 7.LOCATED IN DISTRICT TWO AT 5,300 SOUTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10.
THE ZONING IS I ONE AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A 34 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 200 FOOT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A 166 FOOT DISTANCE FROM A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM TOWER TO A RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICT.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED OFF THE SOUTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10 INTERSTATE HIGHWAY ACCESS ROAD SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ZONED I ONE C TWO AND MH WITH VACANT, UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY TO THE EAST AND AN EQUIPMENT RENTAL AGENCY TO THE NORTH AND A CONCRETE VENDOR TO THE SOUTH.
THE APPLICANT WAS ADVISED BY CITY STAFF THAT A VARIANCE REQUEST WOULD BE NECESSARY TO LOCATE THEIR PROPOSED WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TOWER ON THE PROPERTY AS INDICATED ON THE SITE PLAN.
166 FEET FROM THE ABUTTING PROPERTY ZONE, MH MANUFACTURED HOME DISTRICT TO THE EAST PER STAFF'S VISIT TO THE PROPERTY IN JULY OF 2026.
THE TOWER HAD NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED YET.
THE APPLICANT MADE THE REQUEST RELIEF FROM THE MINIMUM 200 FOOT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT THROUGH A VARIANCE REQUEST OR ALTERNATE SITE PLAN DESIGNS THEIR SITE DESIGN PLANS TO COMPLY WITH UDC REGULATIONS.
THAT ORANGE TRIANGLE IS WHERE THE 200 FOOT RADIUS ENCROACHES INTO THE MH ZONE PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT FROM RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT.
ONE, THE PROPOSED TOWER ENCROACHES A MODEST 34 FEET INTO THE MINIMUM DISTANCE BUFFER FROM A PROPERTY THAT IS VACANT AND IS UNLIKELY TO BE DEVELOPED FOR RESIDENTIAL USE DUE ITS LOCATION WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN.
TWO, THE PROPERTY IS LIMITED IN REMAINING DEVELOPABLE SPACE AND STRICT ADHERENCE TO THE MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIREMENT WOULD WOULD NOT RESULT IN A SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC.
STAFF MAILED OUT SEVEN NOTICES.
ZERO RECEIVED, RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
THERE IS ZERO VOICEMAILS RECEIVED IN FAVOR AND OPPOSITION AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
UM, THE SITE BEHIND THIS, IT SAYS IT'S A RESIDE RESIDENTIAL ZONE, BUT ONE OF THE SITE PLANES SHOW IT TO BE FLOODPLAIN AS WELL.
IS THE FLOODPLAIN ENTIRELY WITHIN THE 200 FEET? I WAS TRYING TO PULL UP A ONE STOP MAP.
SO I'M, ARE YOU ASKING IF THE FLOOD PLAIN IS OKAY? JUST CURIOUS.
UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
VINCENT INGER WITH VINCENT GERARD AND ASSOCIATES, UH, THE APPLICANT.
YEAH, I'VE, I'VE GOT A, UH, PRESENTATION SHE'S GONNA RUN THROUGH REAL QUICK THAT SHOWS EXACTLY THAT.
UH, THIS IS FOR A WIRELESS FACILITY.
UM, MY MISTAKE, I MISINTERPRETED THE CODE BEING VACANT, UNDEVELOPED, UN YOU KNOW, UN UNPLED.
BUT THE LANDOWNER HAD CHOSEN THIS SITE BECAUSE HE'S GOT FUTURE PLANS ON THIS THING.
UM, I WANT YOU TO SEE WHERE THE ACTUAL RESIDENTIAL DISTANCE IS.
THERE WAS THE MOBILE HOMES THAT ARE 583 FEET AWAY FROM THE, FROM THE TOWER ITSELF.
SO WE PLANNED THIS SITE TO BE IN THE BACK CORNER, OR HE PLANNED IT TO BE IN THE, IN THE TOP NORTHEAST CORNER AS WELL.
YOU CAN SEE THE LAND USES THAT.
BRONTE WAS TALKING ABOUT ALL HEAVY RES UH, INDUSTRIAL ALONG FOUR 10 ZONING MAP.
THAT LITTLE PIECE OF MH IS WITHIN THAT 200 FEET.
THERE'S THE FLOODPLAIN MAP WITH THE LOTS ON IT AS WELL.
THERE'S A 30 SOMETHING LITTLE PIZZA PIE RIGHT THERE.
IT'LL NEVER BE RESIDENTIAL USE, IT'LL NEVER BE DEVELOPED.
UM, SO I THINK THAT'S THE GLITCH IN THE CODE.
BASICALLY IT SHOULD BE FROM RESIDENTIAL USES, NOT A VACANT, UNDEVELOPED TRACK AS WELL.
SO THAT KIND OF SNUCK UP ON ME.
AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE BLA VARIANCE.
THERE'S A LITTLE CLOSER LOOK OF IT AS WELL.
HE OWNS THE LONE STAR FORKLIFTS TO THE NORTH, BUT NOT THE BUSINESS.
HE WANTED US UP, UP IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER SO HE COULD DEVELOP SOME FUTURE SOMETHING IN THAT AREA.
THIS IS REALLY THE TOWER SITE PLAN WITH SOME OVERLAYS.
UM, AND YES, IT IS RILLA CREEK FLOODPLAIN.
I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY MH IS NEXT TO INDUSTRIAL.
UM, BUT IT IS UNDEVELOPED AND, AND AND WILL NEVER BE ANY RESIDENTIAL USE.
UM, AND THE SPIRIT AND THE INTENT OF THE CODE IS BEING MET.
I MEAN, IF I'M LOOKING AT TRYING TO PUT A WIRELESS SITE SOMEWHERE, I'M LOOKING AT THAT 200 FEET, LIKE IT'S THE BIBLE, I MISSED IT.
UM, AT AND T IS THE PRIMARY CARRIER.
UH, JUST A GREAT SLIDE TO REMEMBER HOW, HOW WE
[01:20:01]
CALL, WE CARRY THESE SUPER COMPUTERS AROUND IN OUR POCKETS ALL THE TIME.UH, HAS ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK? NOBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
UH, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, WELL, LOOKING FOR A, UH, MOTION BRAGMAN COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 26 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 29.
A MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST FOR ONE A VARIANCE FROM THE, SORRY, WHAT THE DATE? STARTING, STARTING OVER.
REGARDING CA CASE NUMBER BO OA DASH 26 DASH 0 3 0 1 27, I MOVED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR 34 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 200 FOOT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW 166 FOOT DISTANCE FROM A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM TOWER TO A RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICT SITUATED A 5,300 SOUTHWEST LOOP FOUR 10 APPLICANT BEING, UM, SHERRY HUBINGER AND VINCENT HUBINGER BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
GRANTING A VARIANCE FOR A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TOWER IN THIS CASE WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND WOULD ALLOW A LIMITED ENCROACHMENT OF THE RADIUS INTO MH ZONED PROPERTY THAT IS CURRENTLY VACANT.
AND WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE PROPOSED TOWER ENCROACHES AON 34 FEET INTO THE MINIMUM DISTANCE BUFFER FROM A PROPERTY THAT IS VACANT AND IS UNLIKELY TO BE DEVELOPED FOR RESIDENTIAL USE DUE TO THE LOCATION WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THERE IS NO ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPOSED TOWER, AND THE CREATION OF ONE WOULD BE DIFFICULT UNDER CURRENT RESTRICTIONS AGAINST DEVELOPMENT WITHIN A FLOOD PLAIN.
FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USE ZELDA AND THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
A DEVIATION FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS WOULD NOT BE PRESENT IN THIS INSTANCE AS THERE'S NO ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD WITHIN THE 200 FOOT RADIUS OF THE PROPOSED WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TOWER.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH VARIANCE SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER, THE PLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES.
THE PROPERTY IS LIMITED IN REMAINING DEVELOPABLE SPACE AND THE STRICT ADHERENCE TO THE MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIREMENT WOULD NOT RESULT IN ITS SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC.
UH, YEAH, THIS IS, UH, A MINOR ADJUSTMENT.
UM, SO, AND GIVEN THAT THERE IS SUCH A WIDE SWATH OF A HUNDRED YEAR OF FLOODPLAIN, I, I CAN'T SEE ANYTHING BEING DEVELOPED THAT WOULD IN THE FUTURE, UH, BE A PROBLEM.
AMANDA, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND THE CITY.
ALSO RECOMMEND APPROVAL, SO I'LL BE AGREEING WITH BOTH OF THEM.
ALRIGHT, SO I'M GONNA GO ON A LIMB HERE AND SAY, UH, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ITEM FOUR, FIVE, JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE, THREE AND FOUR, THE, UH, MOTIONS FOR THREE AND FOUR ARE MIXED UP, SO WHOEVER MAKES THE MOTION FOR ITEM FOUR, READ ITEM THE ONE THAT SAYS ITEM THREE ON THE BACK.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR, BO OA DASH 26 DASH 3 29
[01:25:02]
LOCATED IS LOCATED IN DISTRICT ONE OF 1 2 2 4 WEST FRENCH PLACE.THE ZONING IS R SIX, THE REQUEST IS FOUR ONE A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO ALLOW ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO EXCEED 40% OF THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES.
TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE MATERIAL STANDARD TO ALLOW MATERIAL TO BE USED ON A CARPORT THAT DOES NOT MATCH THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE.
THREE, A VARIANCE FROM THE CD FIVE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
LOCATION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT IN THE EAST SIDE YARD AND FRONT YARD FORM A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
AND FIVE A NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A CARPORT TO BE WITH TO ALLOW A CARPORT WITH A ONE INCH FRONT SETBACK.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ADDRESS OFF OF ONE TR WEST FRENCH PLACE AND LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF WEST FRENCH PLACE AND FREDERICKSBURG ROAD TO THE WEST.
SURROUNDING AREAS PRIMARILY DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON LOTS ZONED R SIX OF THE NORTH AND EAST, AND IS LOCATED WITHIN THE NCD FIVE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO THE SOUTH.
OUR PROPERTY ZONED IDZ TWO WITH USES PERMITTED AND A NOISE RESTRICTED DISTRICT TATTOO PARLOR AND BAR TAVERN TO THE EAST.
OUR PROPERTY ZONED C3 A, THE CASE ORIGINATED FROM A CODE ENFORCEMENT VIOLATION IN DECEMBER OF 2025 FOR BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT.
IN THIS INSTANCE, THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT SPECIFIES THAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MUST NOT EXCEED 40% OF THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES.
BILLING FOOTPRINT THAT THE MATERIALS USED ON A CARPORT MUST MATCH THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE AND THAT A CARPORT CANNOT BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT OR SIDE YARD.
THE FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE STANDARD OF R SIX STONE PROPERTIES.
AERIAL IMAGERY SHOWS THE EXISTENCE OF THREE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE REAR YARD, WHICH ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO NCD FAB STANDARDS AND CALCULATED INTO THE OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON THIS LOT.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMEND DENIAL AND BO EIGHT DASH 26 DASH 0 3 0 1 29 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WOULD NOT BE OBSERVED AND GRANTING VARIANCE TO THESE STANDARDS AS THE CARPORT WOULD BE IN A LOCATION OTHER THAN THE REAR YARD.
THE MATERIALS USED WOULD DEVIATE FROM THOSE USED ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WOULD EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE, ALL OF WHICH DEVIATE FROM THE CHARACTERISTICS DEFINED IN THE NCD TWO, A ONE INCH FRONT SETBACK AND A ONE INCH SIDE SETBACK ON THE PROP TO THE PROPERTY LINES COULD IMPACT FIRE MITIGATION MEASURES TO THE SURROUNDING STRUCTURES AND MAY INCREASE WATER RUNOFF ONTO THE ABUTTING PROPERTY.
AND THREE, UPON APPLYING FOR A PERMIT, THE APPLICANT WOULD'VE BEEN MADE AWARE OF THE EXISTING STANDARDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE NCD FIVE AND OF R SIX ZONE PROPERTIES.
STAFF MAIL 2028 NOTICES ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR.
THERE'S ACTUALLY ONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION FROM THIS PROPERTY RIGHT UP HERE.
1 2 4 1 0 VOICEMAILS WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR AND OPPOSITION AND THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORS ASSOCIATION AND UPTOWN NEIGHBORS ASSOCIATION DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE BY THE CUTOFF TIME.
THIS CONCLUDES DA'S PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF NOW? IS THAT THE APPLICANT? COME FORWARD? GOOD AFTERNOON.
UM, IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US MY NAME.
I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
UH, I WAS CONTACTED THIS MORNING BY THE BEAKER HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND I SPOKE BACK AND FORTH WITH THEM.
THEY APPARENTLY HADN'T GOT THE PROPER NOTICE.
THEY WANT, UH, CONTINUANCE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.
I I'M MENTIONING THIS, I CAN GIVE A VERY LONG SPIEL.
YOU CAN ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS, BUT WE'RE AGREEMENT WITH THAT CONTINUANCE.
I MENTIONED THAT BECAUSE WHILE I CAN GO THROUGH PROCESS, I TRY TO RESPECT PEOPLE'S TIME AND THEY'RE HERE TO EXPLAIN HOW THEY DIDN'T GET THE NOTICE CORRECTLY.
WHY THEY WANT THE ADDITIONAL TIME.
WE WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING THE RIGHT WAY.
IF YOU WANT ME TO CONTINUE MY PRESENTATION, I WILL.
UM, I JUST DON'T WANNA WASTE YOUR TIME.
SO HOW LONG OF A CONTINGENCY WOULD WOULD BE ADEQUATE? IT'S HOWEVER LONG THEY NEED AND, AND, AND THEY HAVE VERY SPECIFIC, UH, CAN WE HAVE THEM COME UP PLEASE? ABSOLUTELY.
I DIDN'T WANNA STEP ON YOUR TOES.
IT'S, THAT WAS GIVING RECORDATION AS WELL.
DID THEY SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? WE GOT TWO SIGN UP TO SPEAK.
WHAT'S HER NAME? YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME, SIR.
I'M A MEMBER OF THE ZONING AND URBAN DESIGN COMMITTEE OF THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
HOW MUCH, UH, TIME WOULD YOU LIKE, UH, WITH YOUR PERMISSION? I CAN READ A LETTER THAT WOULD'VE BEEN PART OF
[01:30:01]
THE RECORD IF WE HAD GOTTEN IT TO THE CITY BY 4:00 PM ON FRIDAY.WELL HAVE YOU, HAVE YOU ALREADY HAVE Y'ALL ALREADY REVIEWED THE CASE AND LOOKED AT NO, WE KNOW NEXT TO NOTHING ABOUT THE CASE.
WELL, THEN THE, YEAH, WE, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
WE'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU Y'ALL BOTH ADEQUATE TIME TO DISCUSS AND WORK OUT WHATEVER'S GIVE A BOTTOM LINE.
THAT'S WHAT WE ARE, WE'RE ASKING FOR A CONTINUANCE OF TWO WEEKS, FOUR WEEKS.
WHAT ARE WE? UH, WELL, THE GENERAL MEETING OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH WOULD EITHER SUPPORT OR NOT SUPPORT IS NOT UNTIL MID SEPTEMBER.
THE COMMITTEE MEETS AUGUST FOUR 14TH, I BELIEVE.
SO YOU WOULD NEED A, YOU WOULD NEED A CONTINUANCE UNTIL SEPTEMBER FOR SURE.
WELL, WHAT IS, UH, FOUR WEEKS? UH, WE HAVE SEPTEMBER 14TH AND SEPTEMBER 28TH.
SEPTEMBER 14TH MIGHT BE TOO EARLY.
THE DATE OF THE ACTUAL GENERAL MEETING.
CAN WE DO THAT LONG? IS IT YES, WE CAN DO THAT LONG.
UH, WE MAY HAVE TO RE ADVERTISE, BUT WE CAN DO THAT LONG.
I COULDN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS 30 DAYS OR 60 DAYS WAS OUR LIMIT OR SOMETHING.
WE DON'T LIKE TO DO IT OVER 30 DAYS.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A HOLIDAY IN THE BEGINNING OF SEPTEMBER.
THAT'S WHY IT'S KIND OF PUSHING IT OUT A LITTLE BIT.
SO SEPTEMBER 28TH WORKS? UH, YES SIR.
AND WE HAD OTHER INDIVIDUALS SIGNED TO SPEAK.
I MAY, JUST TO MAKE SURE, MS. CYNTHIA WALKER, YOU WERE GIVING UP YOUR TIME TO THE CURRENT SPEAKER, IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? NOBODY ELSE.
SO IF, IF THERE'S, UH, SEPTEMBER 28TH IS THE MAGIC DATE AND THERE'S NO OPPOSITION FROM THE APPLICANT, WE AGREE.
I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE OF COURSE.
OKAY, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.
ALRIGHT, UH, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
WE WILL SEE YOU ON THE 28TH AND WE CAN'T WAIT TO HEAR HOW IT TURNS OUT.
AND, AND SIR, FOR WITH REGARDS TO THE COMMUNICATION WITH THE CITY.
SO, SO YEAH, PLEASE GIVE WITH THE CITY THAT, YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE WERE SOME ISSUES WITH REGARDS TO COMMUNICATION WITH THE CITY.
SO YOU MIGHT JUST REFRESH WITH THEM AND LET THEM KNOW.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS, UH, WE GOT AN EMAIL AT SOME POINT ON THURSDAY, AND BY THE TIME ANYONE NOTICED IT, IT WAS FRIDAY.
AND BY THE TIME WE GOT A LETTER DRAFTED, WRITTEN, SIGNED BY CITIZEN VOLUNTEERS, UH, IT WAS TOO LATE TO GET PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.
SO YOU MIGHT FOLLOW UP WITH THEM JUST TO FIND OUT WHAT, WHAT BALLS DROPPED FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, JUST TO FOLLOW UP WITH THEM.
UH, YOU KNOW, MORE THAN 24 HOURS NOTICE WOULD WOULD'VE BEEN GREAT.
WELL, IT SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED AN A MAIL TO YOUR, TO YOUR COMMUNITY MAILBOX, BUT YOU CAN FOLLOW UP WITH THEM.
YOU WENT TO THE PRESIDENT? I, I POCKETED.
I'LL, I'LL DISCUSS IT OUT HERE WITH THEM.
YEAH, THEY'LL GET THAT FIGURED OUT.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS PO OA 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 0.
APPLICANT BEING STEVE OJEDA LOCATED WITHIN CITY COUNCIL.
DISTRICT TWO, LOCATED AT EIGHT 15 ST.
UH, PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED IDZ ONE, UH, WITH USES PERMITTED FOR FOUR UNITS.
UH, THIS BEING A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA TO ALLOW A 12 FOOT, SIX INCH DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA.
UH, I BELIEVE THEY ARE AMENDING TO NOW COMPLY WITH NUMBER TWO.
SO THAT ONE'S GONNA BE STRICKEN.
OKAY, SO NUMBER THREE, A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXEMPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SIX FOOT FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT FOOT, EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD.
NUMBER FOUR, A FIVE FOOT SPECIAL EXEMPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE THREE FOOT FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF ST.
JAMES STREET WITH BLAINE STREET.
THE PROPERTY OWNER PROPOSES THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW EIGHT FOOT TALL WALL TO ENCOMPASS THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY EXCEPT FOR THE PORTION OF THE NORTH SIDE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS BEHIND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME.
FURTHERMORE, THE PROPOSED LOCATION FOR THE WALL ENCROACHES INTO THE MINIMUM REQUIRED CLEAR VISION AREAS AROUND THE STREET CORNER AND DRIVEWAYS.
AS SUCH, THE APPLICANT REQUESTS RELIEF FROM THE FENCE HEIGHT, MAXIMUM STANDARDS, AND CLEAR VISION AREA STANDARDS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
[01:35:01]
SITE PLAN.OKAY, THAT ONE IS BEING, UH, STRICKEN.
WHAT IS, OH, THAT'S THE CLEARANCE.
SO ITEM NUMBER TWO, THEIR PROPOSED RENDERING SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THAT'S JUST THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL ON THE DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA, UH, FOR BOA 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 0 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING, FIND IS A FACT.
ONE, THERE'S A SUFFICIENT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE STREET AND THE PROPOSED WALL TO ALLOW A MOTORIST TO VIEW ONCOMING TRAFFIC AND SAFELY MANEUVER A VEHICLE INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
WITHOUT A VARIANCE, THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD BE REQUIRED TO LOCATE A FENCE OR RELOCATE FENCE, AT LEAST IN PART WITHIN THEIR OWN PROPERTY BOUNDARIES RATHER THAN DIRECTLY ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
TO MEET THE UDC PRESCRIBED CLEAR VISION STANDARD STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL, UH, FOR THE FENCE, HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXEMPTION, AND THE, OR JUST A FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXEMPTION, UH, AND BO 8 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 0 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS.
FACTS DON'T READ THE FIRST ONE, NOT FOR THE CLEAR VISION.
TWO, THE INCREASED FENCE HEIGHT WOULD LIMIT VISIBILITY ACROSS THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY, THEREBY DETRACTING FROM THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY THAT IS TYPICAL OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
THREE, THE PROPOSED WALL DOES NOT APPEAR TO SERVE THE PUBLIC WELFARE AS THERE WERE NO AUTHORIZED AND SIMILAR FENCES OBSERVED IN THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA.
11 RETURN IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
UH, NO VOICEMAILS WERE RECEIVED AND THE HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION.
THAT CONCLUDES STAFFS PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
SO THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
HI, STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I'M LOOKING TO BUILD THIS FENCE, NOT FOR ANY AESTHETIC REASONS, BUT, UH, REALLY IT'S JUST A SECURITY MEASURE THAT WE UNFORTUNATELY FEEL, YOU KNOW, THAT IS NEEDED AT THIS POINT.
BECAUSE ON, UH, APRIL 27TH AT THREE 30 IN THE MORNING, OUR HOME WAS ATTACKED.
UH, THREE BULLETS WENT INSIDE OF THE HOME.
UH, WE WERE SLEEPING UPSTAIRS.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, IT JUST DOESN'T FEEL, IT'S NOT SAFE.
THE, WE BELIEVE THAT, I MEAN, THERE'S AN ACTIVE INVESTIGATION GOING ON, BUT WE BELIEVE THAT THE PERSON WHO ATTACKED OUR HOME WAS ASSOCIATED WITH, UH, UM, A JUDGMENT THAT WE, THAT WE, UH, LOST IN COURT.
UH, AND, UH, WE, WE HAD TO FILE FOR, FOR, FOR BANKRUPTCY TO 'CAUSE WE COULDN'T AFFORD THAT JUDGMENT.
UH, AND, UH, THE TIMING OF ALL OF THIS FILED FOR BANKRUPTCY, APRIL 20, UH, 15TH.
AND, UH, OUR HOME WAS ATTACKED APRIL 27TH AT THREE 30 IN THE MORNING.
UM, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A 3-YEAR-OLD, 2-YEAR-OLD, AND MY WIFE'S PREGNANT.
AND I MEAN, WE JUST, WITH THE BANKRUPTCY AND EVERYTHING, I MEAN, MOVING IS NOT AN OPTION RIGHT NOW, UNFORTUNATELY.
AND WE, I JUST WANNA PROTECT MY FAMILY, UH, THE BEST WAY THAT I CAN.
UH, BUT DOES YOUR NEIGHBORS, NONE OF THEM HAVE A POOL OR A HOT TUB OR ANYTHING? NO.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, CRUZ? SO, IS THERE A POLICE REPORT ON WHAT HAPPENED AT YOUR HOME, SIR? CORRECT.
DID YOU SUBMIT A COPY OF IT? MARCO HAS A, A, A SLIDESHOW THAT WE'VE, WE, ME AND MY WIFE HAVE, UH, CREATED WITH ALL OF THE POLICE REPORTS, OUR PICTURES OF OUR DOG DECEASED, AND, UH, THE BULLET HOLES IN THE, IN THE, IN THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME.
THAT'S WHY WE WANT THE EIGHT FOOT.
'CAUSE I'M SIX FOOT WHEN I'M STANDING INSIDE OF THE FOUNDATION, INSIDE OF THE FLOOR.
AND I HAD MY PARENTS MEASURE SIX FEET OUTSIDE MY HEAD STILL IN THE CLEAR.
UH, SO THIS, THE EIGHT FOOT WOULD COVER MY, MY HEAD, UM, AND THEN THE SIDES AS WELL.
UM, I'M THE SOLE BREADWINNER, SO I NEED TO PROTECT MYSELF TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT THEM TOO.
[01:40:02]
YEAH, THE, IT'S REALLY SCARY.WE CAN'T REALLY EVEN LIKE USE, WE, WE, WE WE'RE LIVING IN TERROR, TOTAL TERROR.
UH, AND, UH, AGAIN, THE MOVING IS REALLY NOT AN OPTION RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF THE BANKRUPTCY KIND OF GOT IN OUR WAY, UH, JUST FOR, FOR, IT'S IN THE WAY OF US BEING ABLE TO LEASE AND ALL THAT SORT OF STUFF RIGHT NOW.
SO CURRENTLY YOU HAVE, UM, A PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE IN FRONT YARD.
IS THAT A FIVE FOOT FENCE OR SIX FOOT FENCE OR WHAT'S IT, IT'S LIKE FOUR AND A HALF.
AND THEN, AND THEN THE BACKYARD FENCE IS WOOD, BUT IT'S, IS THAT SIX FOOT THEN IT IS IN THE BACK.
UM, AND I GUESS, YOU KNOW, SO, SO I, WE DRIVE AROUND NEIGHBORHOODS AND, YOU KNOW, LOOK FOR SOME CONSISTENCIES, YOU KNOW, JUST TO SEE IF THINGS STAND OUT.
AND THEY'RE REALLY IN THE WHOLE CITY.
THERE AREN'T VERY MANY EIGHT FOOT FRONT YARD FENCES, YOU KNOW, SOLID.
AND, AND SO, UM, SO I DO, YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT A CONSISTENCY PERSPECTIVE.
AND WE AREN'T, WE DON'T, I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE SOME AWFUL CIRCUMSTANCES GOING ON, BUT, YOU KNOW, WITH WALLET OFF THE COMMUNITIES, YOU KNOW, I, I DO STRUGGLE WITH THAT A LITTLE BIT.
AND SO IF THERE WAS AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE FROM THE WHOLE BACKYARD, WOULD THAT PROVIDE YOU SOME SECURITY? AND THEN, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, KNOWING THAT YOUR FRONT IS PROTECTED WITH THE FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, BUT, YOU KNOW, OPEN FENCE.
SO, UM, I MEAN, WOULD THAT PROVIDE SOME SECURITY FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE IN, IN THE FRONT OPEN.
THAT'S WHERE WE WERE ATTACKED FROM.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, SO THIS SITE HAS BEEN, WAS ZONED IDZ ONE IN 2021.
AND WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THE IDZ SITE PLAN ON, UH, ON THIS, IT, IT JUST, YOU KNOW, IT IT, THESE HOMES ARE REALLY CLOSE TOGETHER, ALTHOUGH YOU HAVE A 20 FOOT SETBACK AND SO DOES A PERSON IMMEDIATELY BEHIND YOU, IT LOOKS LIKE.
I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF CAN, CAN BRING THAT UP.
I WHAT ARE YOU ASKING FOR THE SITE PLAN? YEAH.
JUST TO GIVE A PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT THE INTENT INTENDED DEVELOPMENT WAS SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE.
UH, IT'S ORDINANCE 20 21 0 3, 0 4 0 1 4 7.
JAMES IN WHAT YOU WOULD CALL THE REAR OF YOUR HOME AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE AIR PROBABLY WOULDN'T BOTHER ME, BUT, UH, BUT I JUST CAN'T, I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH THE REST OF IT.
IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST TOO TIGHT.
YOU ALSO HAVE, UM, LOOK, APPEARS LIKE YOU HAVE SOME PLATTED EASEMENTS THERE SO THAT YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBORS CAN GET SEWER ACCESS.
AND SO, UM, AND WHICH WOULD'VE BEEN ON YOUR PLAT.
IT JUST MAKE BLOCKING IT OFF TO THAT EXTENT SEEMS A LITTLE ROUGH.
SO, UM, SO DID YOU HAVE A CHANCE, UM, TO TALK, TALK WITH DIGNITY? SO YEAH, I, DINU HILL.
YEAH, SO I, I DID SPEAK TO 'EM.
THEIR, UH, RECOMMENDATION IS FOR DENIAL.
UM, BUT WE'RE NOT IN THE HISTORIC PART OF DIG HILL, WHICH WAS, UH, INTERESTING.
DID, DID YOU HAVE ANY OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT ALTERNATIVES OR, OR ANY SUGGESTIONS FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE? 'CAUSE I'M SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY WOULD UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.
SO DID YOU HAVE ENOUGH CONVERSATION WITH THEM ABOUT THAT? YEAH, I, I, UH, I DID, YOU KNOW, STRESS MY CONCERNS AND, AND HOW, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOLELY FOR SECURITY PURPOSES.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, SHE DID SAY, I CAN'T REMEMBER HER NAME, BUT SHE, SHE RECOMMENDED THAT, YOU KNOW, I TALKED TO Y'ALL.
SHE SAID, BECAUSE Y'ALL ARE REALLY, UH, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE THAT CAN HELP ME HERE.
UH, AND SHE DID, YOU KNOW, SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, SINCE I'M NOT IN THE ACTUAL HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, SHE, SHE, SHE FEELS THAT IT'S A LITTLE MORE, THERE'S A LITTLE MORE ROOM FOR, FOR HELP MAYBE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS? NOBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
UM, WE DO HAVE THE ORDINANCE UP WITH THE REVISED SITE PLAN, UH, SHOWING THE FOUR UNITS ON THERE.
[01:45:01]
WE'RE ABOUT TO PULL IT UP.I MEAN, I'M OKAY IF I, I I'M LOOKING AT IT MYSELF, SO I MEAN, I'M, OH, THERE WE GO.
SO THIS, THIS PROJECT IS IN WHAT, WHAT IS SHOWN HERE ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT.
AND SO THERE'S A 20 FOOT SETBACK AT HIS HOUSE AND THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.
UM, AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THAT COMMON LINE WOULDN'T BOTHER ME, BUT I CAN'T SEE IT ANYWHERE ELSE.
SO IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS SUGGESTION, BRUCE? I'M SORRY.
WELL, MY SUGGESTION WAS, WAS IF YOU TO GRANT HIM AN EIGHT FOOT ALONG THAT COMMON LINE IN THE BACK WHERE THERE'S A 20 FOOT SETBACK ON EITHER SIDE, BUT I I, I WOULDN'T BE SUPPORTIVE OF ANYTHING ELSE.
IS IT POSSIBLE, UH, TO HAVE YOUR FENCE IN THE FRONT? I, 'CAUSE THE WHOLE PURPOSE IS FOR SECURITY.
AND THE INCIDENT THAT HAPPENED HAPPENED IN THE FRONT, NOT THE REAR, UM, TO HAVE A SHORTER WALL IN THE FRONT.
I, I THINK THAT, I THINK THE SHORTEST WOULD BE SIX FEET.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THE SHORTEST MM-HMM
IF NOT, I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T.
SO YES, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, AND, AND THE REASON I'M, I'M CONCERNED THAT HIS, THE SAFETY OF HIS FAMILY IS A PRIORITY.
UM, HE WILL HAVE A HARDSHIP OF NOT HAVING THAT SECURITY BECAUSE THE WHAT HAPPENED HAPPENED FROM THE FRONT.
UM, AND SO MY, MY CONCERN IS THAT HE'S NOT REALLY MEETING WHAT HE'S ASKING THE VARIANCE TO DO.
AND UM, SO MAYBE WE COULD CONSIDER IT BEING A LOWER WALL.
NOW, YOU, YOU ALSO ARE MEETING THE CLEAR VIEW FROM THE CORNER BY PUSHING IN THAT, THAT WALL.
AND I WE'RE, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS NO QUESTION ABOUT IT.
HERE'S THE UPDATED, UH, RENDERING WITH SHOWING THAT SPECIFIC CORNER CLEAR VIEW.
UH, 'CAUSE I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, IT COULD CREATE ACCIDENTS AND THAT'S THE LAST THING WE WANT IS TO OBSTRUCT PEOPLE FROM JUST BEING ABLE TO DRIVE THROUGH THAT INTERSECTION THERE.
I MEAN, I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO JUST, I MEAN, AGAIN, WE'RE HERE JUST, WE'RE REALLY KIND OF LIKE WHERE THE WALLS ARE BUILT.
WE'RE NOT ASKING TO BILL OUTSIDE OF THE CODE.
WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR HEIGHT HERE.
I MEAN, UH, AGAIN, THEY, UH, WERE NICE ENOUGH TO RECOMMEND, UH, APPROVAL FOR THE DRIVEWAY, UH, TO MOVE OUT A LITTLE BIT.
BUT I, I SAID, YOU KNOW, REALLY, I DON'T REALLY, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE EXTRA FOR US.
WE, WE WOULD BE HAPPY JUST TO PUSH IT IN AND BUILD TO CODE.
WE JUST HEIGHT IN THE FRONT AND HEIGHT, REALLY IT'S JUST THE FRONT AND THE SIDE, THE BACK.
UM, 'CAUSE THE CAR, WE, WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE VIDEOS WITH MECO.
IF YOU COULD, DO YOU HAVE THE SLIDES SHOW THING? YEAH, YEAH.
IF YOU JUST PRESS PLAY, PLEASE.
HE CAME THROUGH THE SIDE AND HE SLOWED DOWN.
YOU CAN SEE THE GUNSHOTS RIGHT THERE.
AND OUR DOG RAN OUT AND HE'S RUNNING RIGHT THERE.
AND HE PASSED AWAY LIKE 30 MINUTES LATER.
HE'S A ONE, 1-YEAR-OLD GERMAN SHEPHERD.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY ONE OF THE SO THAT'S THE FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE? YEAH.
SO HE CAME ON THE SIDE AND THEN HE, WHEN HE MADE THAT LEFT, HE WAS ON THE FRONT.
SO HE WAS HOW TALL IS THAT FENCE YOU HAVE THERE NOW? THAT WAS IN THAT VIDEO ON THE SIDE, ON THE, THE WOODEN ONE.
[01:50:04]
AND HE PRESSED THE WAY ON THE SECOND VIDEO.AND THE, THE, THE DETECTIVE, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIND THE, THE, THE SHOOTER.
THEY HAVE THE PEOPLE THAT, THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT WOULD HAVE A MOTIVE.
THEY HAVE THEIR NAMES, BUT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO CLOSE THE, THE CASE.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE, WE'RE JUST LIKE SCARED STILL.
WELL I'M OPEN TO COMMISSIONER'S SUGGESTIONS.
SO, SO IF, UM, SO A FIVE FOOT SOLID FENCE, UM, WOULD REQUIRE THAT THEY HAVE TO GET OUTTA THE CAR TO SHOOT BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT BE AT A HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, THEY'D BE SHOOTING THE TOP OF THE HOUSE, I GUESS.
UM, SO THE BULLETS LANDED IN THE FRONT, I I GUESS AT THE LOWER FIRST FLOOR OF THE HOUSE.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, SO A FIVE FOOT FENCE WOULD BASICALLY, IF THEY SHOT AGAIN, WOULD BE ON THE UPPER STORY, BUT OF COURSE THAT'S WHERE YOU SAID YOU SLEEP IN.
UM, BUT IT KIND OF PROTECT THE FRONT DOOR.
UM, YOU KNOW, SO, AND THERE ARE FIVE FOOT FENCES IN THAT COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, AND THAT THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE WOODEN SLATTED.
SO, SO THAT'S CLOSER TO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I LOOK FOR STANDARDS, YOU KNOW, KNOW WHERE THINGS ARE.
AND NORMALLY IT'S FIVE FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN, BUT A FIVE FOOT SOLID FENCE, YOU KNOW, MAY PROVIDE SOME SECURITY, AT LEAST ON THE FRONT, YOU KNOW, THE FRONT PORTIONS.
I WAS THINKING LIKE, I THOUGHT OF THE SAME THING, COMM, WAS IT COMMISSIONER OR I THOUGHT OF THE SAME THING.
AND THEN I SAID, WELL, WHY WOULD THEY COME IN THE SAME CAR? WHY WOULDN'T THEY COME IN A TALLER TRUCK OR, UH, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING TALLER THAN A CAR.
UH, AND THAT'S, THAT'S MY CONCERN ABOUT THE HEIGHT.
I MEAN, I THINK, YOU KNOW, TO YOUR POINT, YOU KNOW, TO YOUR, SO I THINK SIX FEET, UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I THINK THAT JUST BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK ANY ANYONE WOULD COME BACK IN THE SAME CAR.
I THINK THEY WOULD USE SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
UM, WELL I THINK WE'VE HEARD EVERYTHING WE NEEDED TO HEAR AND I THINK WE NEED TO START WITH A MOTION AND SEE, UH, HOW THIS TURNS OUT, WHAT PEOPLE, WE NEED NINE PEOPLE TO, TO BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
SO WORST CASE SCENARIO, I WOULD, SOMETHING'S BETTER THAN NOTHING AS FAR AS FIVE FEET GOES, BUT THAT COULD CONCERN IS STILL GREATLY THERE.
OKAY, SO WHO WOULD LIKE TO, UH, JUST TO GET SOMETHING STARTED HERE, I THINK WE COULD DO THE, UH, THE DRIVEWAY.
MANNA EX COMMISSIONER MANNA, SIR, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 0, I MOVED THE BOARD ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT DRIVEWAY, CLEAR VISION AREA TO ALLOW A 12 FOOT SIX INCH DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA, UM, SITUATED AT 8 1 5 ST.
JAMES STREET, APPLICANT BEING STEVE, UH, OJEDA, UM, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAD DETERMINED, UH, SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDMENT WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE DRIVEWAY, UM, IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THERE IS SUFFICIENT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE STREET AND PROPOSED WALL TO ALLOW MOTORIST TO VIEW ONCOMING TRAFFIC AND SAFELY MANEUVER A VEHICLE INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND INTO THE INTERSECTION.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS OR LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THEIR PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE WALL PROVIDES A SUFFICIENTLY CLEAR VISION AREA TO VIEW ONCOMING TRAFFIC AND SAFELY MANEUVER A VEHICLE INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND INTO THE INTERSECTION AND ALLOWS THE MAXIMUM USE OF THE FRONT YARD SPACE.
UH, THREE, BY GRANTING A VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE RESERVED.
THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE PROPOSED SEPARATION, UM, BETWEEN THE WALL AND THE STREET PROVIDES ADEQUATE SPACE TO VIEW ONCOMING TRAFFIC AND MANEUVER A VEHICLE INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY, THEREBY UPHOLDING THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH HIS VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
UH, FIVE, SUCH, SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PERFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH HIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT INJURE THE
[01:55:01]
APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT, UH, PROPERTY AS AN ADEQUATE, CLEAR VISION AREA WOULD REMAIN TO SUPPORT SAFE USE OF THE DRIVEWAYS AND THE STREET INTERSECTION.SIX APPLY TO THE ONLY PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARI THE SAW 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 THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE WIDTH OF THE PEDESTRIAN RIGHT OF WAY BETWEEN THE WALL AND A STREET DOES NOT PROVIDE A CODE COMPLIANT CLEAR VISION AREA ON ITS OWN.
UM, WITHOUT A VARIANCE, THIS PROPERTY OWNER WOULD, UH, BE REQUIRED TO, UM, TO LOCATE THE FENCE, AT LEAST IN PART, WITHIN THEIR OWN PROPERTY BOUNDARIES RATHER THAN DIRECTLY IN THE PROPERTY LINE TO MEET THE UDC PRESCRIBED CLEAR VISION STANDARD AND OF MOTION.
SECOND IT SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ZUNA, UH, COMMISSIONER MADMAN.
SO I, I CONCUR WITH THE CITY'S POSITION HERE.
UM, THAT THE RIGHT OF WAY, CLEAR VISION ISSUE, UM, UM, IS FINE.
AND YOU KNOW, PART OF THE DIALOGUE THAT WE ALWAYS TALK ABOUT IS SAFETY FOR EVERYONE AROUND YOU AND AS WELL AS EVERYBODY ELSE AROUND YOU.
UH, AND SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER.
I CONCUR WITH THE, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, MY COLLEAGUE'S RECOMMENDATION AS WELL.
UH, THIS IS FOR THE DRIVEWAY CLEAR VISION AREA ALONE.
DEFENSE HEIGHT WILL BE BROUGHT UP AS A SEPARATE MOTION.
ALL RIGHT, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING UNANIM HAVE ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER UNA? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE VICE OF EVALUAT.
UH, SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO THE FENCE SIDE ISSUE.
UH, WHO'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WAY? THERE'S TWO, TWO THINGS BEING REQUESTED SIDE AND REAR AND A FRONT.
RIGHT? AND SO I'LL LEAVE IT TO WHOEVER READS THE MOTION TO GUIDE THE DIRECTION OF, OF THE MOTION.
SO, MANNA COMMISSIONER MANANA, I'M SORRY.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 0.
I MOVE THE BOARD ADJUSTMENT GRANT THE REQUEST FOR ONE, A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SIX FOOT FENCE HEIGHTS TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD.
AND TWO, A TWO FOOT EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE THREE FOOT FENCE HEIGHT TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT PRIVACY FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD, SITUATED AT 8 1 5 ST.
APPLICANT BEING STEVE, STEVE OJEDA BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACT THAT WE DETERMINE, SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LAW ENFORCEMENT, OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE EDC AS AMENDMENT WOULD RESULT IN NECESSARY HARDSHIP, SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER.
IF GRANTED STAFF FINDS REQUESTS WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSES OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE INCREASED FENCE HEIGHT WOULD NOT SIGNIFICANTLY LIMIT VISIBILITY ACROSS THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, B THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED.
THE PROPOSED WALL DOES APPEAR TO SERVE A PUBLIC, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AS INCREASED FENCE HEIGHT WOULD PROVIDE GREATER SECURITY TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITHOUT IMPOSING SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE WIDER COMMUNITY.
UH, C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE.
THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY THE PROPOSED SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS THE WALL DESIGN IS SUCH THAT ANY IMPACTS TO NEIGHBORING OWNER'S VISIBILITY WILL BE MINIMIZED.
D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT.
THE PROPOSED DESIGN OF THE WALL IS MINDFUL OF THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IS SUCH THAT AN ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY ALTERED BY GRANTING THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HEARING ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC DISTRICT.
THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSES OF THE DISTRICT AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER WILL NOT BE PRE, UH, PERCEPTIBLY ERODED BY THE INCLUSION OF THE PROPOSED WALL.
I WAS GONNA SEEK A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, IF YOU WILL, AND SEE IF THAT WOULD GET CONCURRENCE FROM THE WHY DON'T YOU SECOND AND MAKE IT SECOND.
SO SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ZUNA AND WITH A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, WHAT IS IT THAT YOU WOULD, UH, LIKE TO, IF THERE WAS ANY SUPPORT FOR DOING A, UM, LET'S SEE.
A THREE FOOT EXCEPTION FOR A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX FEET AND SEE IF THE BOARD WOULD APPROVE THAT.
AND IF NOT, WE COULD DEFAULT BACK.
WHY DON'T YOU MAKE IT A, UH, FORMAL AMENDMENT AND SEE HOW THE VOTE TURNS OUT? WELL, IT NEEDS TO BE ACCEPTED BY THE MAKER OF THE MOTION.
UH, SO I CAN WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND, AND YOU CAN, WELL HOW ABOUT THIS? I MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION,
[02:00:01]
UH, TO AMEND I THE ITEM NUMBER TWO TO BE A THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD.IS THERE A SECOND FOR THE SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER.
I'LL GIVE IT TO COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN.
VOTE ON TO SEE HOW THAT FARES OUT FOR JUST A ALTERATION TO THE FRONT YARD FENCE HEIGHT.
WHAT ARE WE VOTING ON RIGHT NOW? SO CHANGE IT THE FORM TO SEE HOW THE VOTE'S GONNA GO FOR.
OKAY, SO JUST VOTING ON THE CHANGE? YEAH.
THE REQUESTING CHANGE, NOT ON THE ACTUAL MOTION ITSELF.
I SUPPORT, UH, CHANGING, UH, UH, THE FRONT YARD TO A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE.
COMMISSIONER BREGMAN? UH, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE.
THIS IS FOR CHANGING IT TO A SIX FOOT FRONT YARD PRIVACY FENCE.
COMMISSIONER MANNA? I DO NOT CONCUR.
DID I NOT GET COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
SO PAST NINE TO TWO, THE MO MOTION ON THE TABLE IS FORMALLY AMENDED FOR A THREE FOOT VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A SIX FOOT FRONT FENCE.
SO THAT'S THE ACTUAL MOTION BEFORE US TODAY, ARE THERE ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS FRIENDLY OR OTHERWISE? DOES ANYBODY WANT TO UH, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, LOOK AT MAYBE REDUCING THE EIGHT FOOT DOWN TO MAKE IT SIX FOOT TOTAL.
WOULD'VE, UH, BUT THAT WOULDN'T REQUIRE ANY, ANY VOTE THEN? WELL, THAT WOULD REQUIRE YOU, YOU OWN THE MOTION, YOU'RE THE MAKER, RIGHT? WOULD YOU ACCEPT IT TO BEING SIX OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO KEEP IT AT EIGHT? YOU CAN JUST TELL ME IF WE GET LOST.
IT'S, WELL, I, UM, I WAS HONESTLY COMFORTABLE KEEPING IT AT EIGHT.
SIMPLY BE BECAUSE IF THEY HAD A POOL OR THE NEIGHBOR PUTS IN A POOL, THEN THEY CAN HAVE EIGHT.
I WITHDRAW MY FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
I DIDN'T SEE AN ISSUE PERSONALLY WITH THE EIGHT.
AND SO THE ANDEP A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE YARD, RIGHT? SO ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT? ALRIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR, UH, THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE AS REQUESTED, AND A THREE FOOT, UH, VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD FOR A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE.
AND THE FRONT YARD, THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION, THREE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
UM, I STILL LIKE FIVE FOOT, SO BECAUSE WE DIDN'T SPLIT IT, I'M GONNA SAY NO AND I APOLOGIZE.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER STEVEN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES THUMBS DOWN.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I CONCUR.
YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU GET WITH STAFF, BUT YOU HAVE SIX FEET IN THE FRONT, EIGHT FOOT ON THE SIDE AND REAR.
ALL OF YOU HAVE A GOOD DAY? YES SIR.
ITEM NUMBER SIX? OR DOES ANYBODY NEED A BREAK? OKAY, QUICK BREAK.
LET'S GET THE COMMISSION MEETING BACK ON TRACK.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, APPLICANT BEING MOODY, NOLAN ARCHITECTURE FOR BO OA.
CASE BO 8 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 1 LOCATED WITHIN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO LOCATED AT 35 0 1 MARTIN LUTHER KING DRIVE, UH, ZONING CURRENTLY BEING R FOUR.
THIS BEING A REQUEST FOR ONE A HALF STORY VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TWO AND A HALF STORY BUILDING HEIGHT TO ALLOW A THREE STORY BUILDING.
TWO, A 20 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE, ALLOWABLE.
35 BUILDING, 35 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT TO ALLOW A 55 FOOT TALL BUILDING.
THIS PROPERTY IS A SITE OF THE M-L-K-M-L KING
[02:05:01]
ACADEMY, A PUBLIC EDUCATION INSTITUTION IN THE SAN ANTONIO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.THE PRODUCT INCLUDES A DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND A CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW THREE STORY SCHOOL BUILDING.
ALTHOUGH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ZONE R FOUR, IT IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE HEIGHT LIMITATION IN 35 5 17 D TWO BECAUSE IT IS USED AS A SCHOOL A USE SPECIFICALLY EXEMPT FROM THIS PROVISION, EVEN WITH THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OTHERWISE PERMITTED UNDER THE UDC.
THE PROPOSED 55 FOOT TALL BUILDING WOULD STILL EXCEED THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT AND THEREFORE REQUIRES THE REQUESTED VARIANCE.
THIS IS THEIR PROPOSED SITE PLAN.
BUILDING ELEVATIONS PHOTO OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR THE BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCE, UH, AND BO 8 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 1.
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING, FINES OF FACT, ONE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE HEIGHT LIMITATION WOULD BE UNNECESSARILY RESTRICTIVE AND COULD HINDER THE EFFICIENT USE OF A AVAIL PROP OF AVAILABLE PROPERTY, INCLUDING EFFORTS TO MAXIMIZE SCHOOL CAPACITY AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SITE AMENITIES WHILE ADHERING TO ALL OTHER SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
TWO, TYPICAL CONCERNS ASSOCIATED WITH INCREASED BUILDING HEIGHTS AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ARE MINIMIZED DUE TO SCHOOL SITE'S.
PREPARATION FROM SURROUNDING USES BY MARTIN LUTHER KING DRIVE AND AVA JOE STREET ROADWAYS.
ZERO RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, ZERO IN FAVOR, NO VOICEMAILS RECEIVED.
THE GREATER FAITH INSTITUTIONAL CHURCH COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED.
UH, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION.
BEFORE WE CONTINUE, UM, WHAT I NEED TO ACCEPT MYSELF SINCE I AM ON THE BOARD FOR THE BOND PROJECT FOR THE DISTRICT SOUNDS LIKE A QUESTION FOR ATTORNEY.
YOU, YOU'RE ON THE I'M ON THE, UH, UH, BOND PROJECT COMMITTEE FOR THE DISTRICT FOR S-A-I-S-D, FOR ALL OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ALL THE NEW PLANS.
IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU, YOU'RE THEN YEAH, GO AHEAD AND RECUSE YOU.
IT IS THREE 17 AND COMMISSIONER CRUZ IS RECUSING FROM ITEM NUMBER SIX.
UH, SO MY QUESTION, UH, FOR STAFF IS, SO THEY'RE ASKING FOR A, FOR A HALF STORY AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO ASKING FOR A 20 FOOT VARIANCE.
SO THIS IS A R SIX ZONE, BUT THEY'RE BUILDING A SCHOOL.
YOU HAD MADE MENTION THAT THE HEIGHTS DIDN'T APPLY BECAUSE IT WAS A SCHOOL.
CAN YOU, UH, EXPLAIN WHAT THE RULES ARE WHEN A SCHOOL IS BEING BUILT IN AN R SIX? THE RULES WOULD STILL APPLY.
SO IT'S STILL, SO EVEN THOUGH SCHOOLS ARE ALLOWED, IT'S JUST THE USE IS ALLOWED, BUT THEY'RE STILL LIMITED TO THE, THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS? CORRECT.
THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE, INCLUDING HEIGHT.
AND, AND THEN ALSO THERE'S A NOTE, THERE'S A BUFFER DIALOGUE THAT WE ARE BRINGING BACK BECAUSE IT'S BEEN MISUNDERSTOOD WITH REGARDS TO THE BUFFER SPACE THAT'S REQUIRED BETWEEN THEM AND ABUTTING PROPERTIES.
SO I COULDN'T REALLY ANSWER TO THAT.
YEAH, SINCE I KNOW THAT THEY DON'T REGULATE A BUFFER OF, I BELIEVE ON UM, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, IT'S, SO WHAT IT IS RESIDENTIAL, A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY THAT'S HAVING A SCHOOL PUT ON IT, ABUTTING ANOTHER RESIDENTIAL.
UM, AND SO THERE'S CONFUSION ON IT.
AND SO I'M GONNA ASK FOR CLARITY IN THE NEXT UDC REWRITE.
SO WE PROBABLY NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE GONNA WEIGH ON THAT.
AND PERSONALLY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE BUFFERS TALKED ABOUT AND AS WE GO THROUGH THIS DIALOGUE, THAT'D BE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO, YOU KNOW, SEE WE WOULD HAVE TO, I'LL HAVE TO DISCUSS WITH OUR, UM, LANDSCAPE AND TREES TEAM.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE THE, HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD THERE? THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR SCHOOL PROJECT AND EVERYBODY.
MY NAME IS PHILLIP COMB WITH MOONEY NOLAN ARCHITECTS REPRESENTING SAN ANTONIO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.
I THINK THE PURPOSE FOR TODAY'S IS THAT WE'RE REQUESTING TWO VARIANTS.
THERE'S 2.5 STORIES ORIGINALLY ON THE HISTORIC BUILDING.
DO YOU HAVE THE EXISTING IMAGES THAT YOU COULD PULL UP FOR HISTORICAL CONTENT? YEAH.
AND SO INITIALLY WE WANTED TO REFER BACK TO HOW THE BUILDING LOOKED PREVIOUSLY AND THE STATE OF IT AND
[02:10:01]
YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE AGING, BUT JUST TO SHOW THAT THERE ARE SOME HEIGHT LIMITATIONS.WE HAVE THOSE, UH, EXISTING, IF YOU LOOK UP THE PICTURE ON THE RIGHT, IT EXCEEDS AS, UM, THE CITY ORDINANCE FOR THE 2.5.
AND SO WHAT WE ARE REQUIRING IS A THREE STORY, BUT THAT THREE STORY BASED ON THE SITE CONSTRAINTS AND SITE LIMITATIONS, THE EASEMENT SETBACKS, THE HER YEAR FLOODPLAIN, AND AS WELL AS HOW YOU ABLE TO LOOK AT THE RESIDENT, THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB.
SO THERE IS A LOT OF SITE CONSTRAINTS ON THE SITE CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW.
AND SO THERE'S BASICALLY THAT HAD WE HAD TO REDESIGN TO GO VERTICAL VERSUS HORIZONTAL TO PROVIDE PARKING, BUS CIRCULATION, PARENT DROP OFF OF THOSE NATURES TO WHERE THAT IT ENCOMPASSES.
AND IT, IT IS A FUNCTIONAL EDUCATIONAL PER BUILDING THAT FUNCTIONS FOR THE COMMUNITY.
AND SO THERE'S AN EXISTING SCHOOL THERE NOW YOU'RE REBUILDING A MUCH NICER SCHOOL, CORRECT? COMPLETELY NEW, CORRECT.
AND PREVIOUSLY DEMOED THE BUILDING'S BEEN DEMOED AND SO RIGHT NOW IT'S FLAT RIGHT NOW.
AND SO YOU KNOW HOW SOMETIMES YOU CAN GET HEIGHT INCREASES FOR EVERY FOOT THAT YOU'RE FURTHER AWAY.
I KNOW THAT THAT DOESN'T APPLY TO THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
IT ONLY APPLIES FOR LIKE MULTI-FAMILY OR COMMERCIAL AND I BELIEVE MULTIFAMILY INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, NOT SINGLE FAMILY.
YEAH, WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE LAND USE AT ALL.
IT'S STILL GONNA BE AN EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE WITHIN THE R FOUR.
AND SO JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING THAT, THAT THEY DIDN'T GET ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE USE EXEMPTION IF IT'S A SCHOOL, I MEAN, ON SUCH A LARGE LOT OR SOMETHING, BUT, UH, SEEMED LIKE IT'S SOMETHING THEY SHOULD HAVE.
UH, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SO MANNA, SO WAS THE INTENTION THEN THAT THE, THE ADDITIONAL VERTICAL HEIGHT IS GOING TO BE THE ENTIRE CAMPUS STRUCTURE OR IS IT, OR, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT KIND OF GOING DOWN THE DIALOGUE, UH, OF, YOU KNOW, THE THE DEBUTING HOMES THEMSELVES, UM, AND THE VIEW THAT THEY HAVE OUTSIDE.
AND SO ARE THEY GONNA SEE A THREE STORY BUILDING OR ARE THEY GONNA SEE A TWO STORY LEADING TO A THREE STORY, TWO STORY ON THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB SIDE, AND THEN THE THREE STORY ON THE AVA JOE SIDE AND WHICH SIDE? SO, UH, THERE'S CURRENTLY, I THINK YOU ALL BUT A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY, CORRECT? CORRECT.
CAN AND AND WHAT IS THAT THE BOYS AND GIRLS SCHOOL SIDE OF THAT SIDE? IS IT IS THAT COULD BE A SHORTER SIDE.
YEAH, THAT'LL BE A SHORTER SIDE.
YOU'LL STILL HAVE THE AUDITORIUM AND THE GYMNASIUM ON THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB SIDE.
AND YOU HAVE THE ACADEMIC WING ON THE EAST SIDE, WHICH WILL BE ON THE RESIDENTS NEIGHBORHOOD.
C CAN YOU BRING UP A SIDE PLAN? SO WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU SAY BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB SIDE, I'D LIKE TO KIND OF SEE, OKAY, NO PROBLEM.
YEAH, I BELIEVE IT IS A PARK THAT'S A BUDDING THEM 2D YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A PARK AND THEN THE ON ON THE EAST SIDE AND ON THE NORTH IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S SOME KIND OF A FLOODPLAIN AND A PARK.
AND SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT LIKE WHERE THESE, THESE, UH, ELEMENTS ARE BEING.
SO ON THIS SIDE, OH, THERE IT IS.
WHICH WOULD BE THE THREE STORY SIDE FOR THE ACADEMIC CORE COMMUNITY CENTER.
AND THEN ON THIS SIDE, BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB WILL BE THE GYMNASIUM AS WELL AS THE AUDITORIUM.
IS IS THAT SITE ALSO OWNED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT? NO, IT'S NOT.
YEAH, SEE IF YOU COULD, I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE, UH, AT THE ONE STOP MAP AND, AND THAT GETS YOU A REALLY BIG PERSPECTIVE ABOUT THE GRANDEUR OF THE FLOODPLAIN THAT GOES THROUGH
SO, BUT I THINK THIS WILL BE, THIS WILL SERVE THE COMMUNITY WELL, IT'LL BE STRONG, IT'LL BE A, YOU KNOW, STATE OF THE ART FACILITY THAT WILL SERVE THE COMMUNITY AND, AND THE FOLKS HALL, FAMILY, MLK ACADEMY.
I MEAN YOU'RE, YOU'RE INUNDATED WITH LIKE THE ENTIRE NORTH PART OF YOUR ENTIRE SITE IS A MASSIVE FLOODPLAIN.
AND THEN A CITY PARK IN THE EAST SIDE.
WOULD THERE BE ANY BENEFIT TO REZONING THE PROPERTY SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE THESE VARIANCES? OR IS THAT, WHAT WAS THE LOGIC BEHIND THAT? OR IS ANY ANY BENEFIT OR NO BENEFIT OR WHAT UNDERSTAND THE, WELL, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
WHAT WOULD BE AN, WHAT WOULD BE A ZONING DISTRICT THAT THIS WOULD NOT NEED A VARIANCE IN? JUST TO PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE.
SO THE MF 33 DOES HAVE THE HIGHER ZONING DISTRICT.
I BELIEVE C TWO WOULD GET THEM, UM, WHAT THEY NEED, BUT LITERALLY THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT THEY WOULD BE SAVING.
'CAUSE THE USE IS ACTUALLY PERMITTED ON EITHER ONE.
THAT'S CURIOSITY ALSO, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING BECAUSE UH, IT SEEMS LIKE SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL'S OFFICE WOULD JUST PUT ON A TO-DO LIST OR SOMETHING, RIGHT? THERE'S SUCH A LARGE SITE AND, AND MANNA LIKE THIS.
SO, AND THE GREATER FAITH INSTITUTIONAL CHURCH COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH.
SO DO WE KNOW WHY IT IS? SO I DIDN'T SEE ANY NOTES FROM THEM.
AND SO IT'S MY FIRST TIME HEARING THIS, SO, OKAY.
UH, DO WE KNOW WHAT THEIR OPPOSITION IS TO THE CITY? DID THEY PROVIDE ANY NARRATIVE WHEN THEY WROTE IN OR DID THEY JUST SIGN THE CARD? WE'RE BRINGING IT UP RIGHT NOW.
[02:15:01]
DO YOU KNOW HOW TALL THE PREVIOUS SCHOOL WAS? UH, THEY HAD VARIOUS, UH, ADDITIONS AND RENOVATIONS.SO SOME AREAS OF THE BUILDING WERE ABOUT 30 FEET, SOME AREAS ABOUT 45.
SO THEY'RE ACTUALLY IN FAVOR, NOT A HOST.
WELL,
SO UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
I JUST ALSO WANTED TO, I WAS LOOKING AT THE REGULATIONS FOR BUFFERS, AND IT DOES SAY WE'RE A NON-RESIDENTIAL USE.
AKA SCHOOL IS LOCATED IN A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT AS INDICATED THE REQUIRED BUFFER IS EQUIVALENT TO THAT OF REQUIRED OF LIKE AN OH ONE, C ONE OR C TWO.
SO THERE IS REQUIREMENTS FOR THEIR SITUATION, AS YOU AND I READ.
BUT THAT IS, THAT IS EXACTLY HOW I READ THAT AND HOW I THINK IT'S INTENDED.
BUT THERE'S AN ASTERISK NEXT TO IT, WHICH CONFUSES THE COLUMN AND, BUT, UM, THAT IS HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE.
AND, UM, AND SO, SO DID, UM, SO THERE IS A, THERE IS A BUFFER REQUIREMENT, WHICH I THINK SHOULD BE IN PLACE ON THAT.
AND SO ARE YOU ALL PROVIDING A BUFFER ON THE SIDES, YOU KNOW, ON SPECIFICALLY AGAINST THE, THE ONES, THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY NEXT TO YOU? SO I THINK IT'S GONNA BE THE ONLY BUFFER THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED IS THE, UM, THE EAST SIDE.
THAT'S BUT ABUTTING LIKE THE PARK SPACE? YEAH, BECAUSE THERE'S NOT BUFFERS ALONG, UM, COLLECT OR LOCAL STREETS.
AND I BELIEVE THOSE ARE LOCAL STREETS THAT SURROUND THEM.
OH, IS IT BUDDING ONLY AND NOT, IT WOULDN'T BE, UH, ADJACENT THEN, SO CORRECT.
IT'S JUST FOR A BUDDING PROPERTIES.
YEAH, IT'S NOT RIGHT ADJACENT.
SO, AND, AND YOU'VE, AND THAT'S ONLY WHAT A, A TYPE A OR TYPE B BUFFER? I BELIEVE SO.
IT APPEARS TO BE THE LOWEST, UH, ZONING IN DISTRICT PERMITTED.
SO IF WE LOOK AT LIKE NC AGAINST THE R FOUR, SO THAT'S A 50.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD BE A C OR A B BUFFER.
YEAH, WE WE'RE, WE'RE IN THAT RANGE.
ALRIGHT, WELL IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE LOOKING FOR A MOTION BRAGMAN.
COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 26 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 3 1.
I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, A REQUEST FOR ONE A HALF STORY VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TWO AND A HALF STORY BUILDING HEIGHT TO ALLOW A THREE STORY BUILDING AND TWO, A 20 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE 35 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT TO ALLOW A 55 FOOT TALL BUILDING SITUATED 35 0 1 MARTIN LUTHER KING DRIVE THE APPLICANT BEING MOODY NOLAN ARCHITECT A ARCHITECTURE BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE SCHOOL PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE EDGE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ALLOWING AN INCREASED HEIGHT WOULD NOT SIGNIFICANTLY DISRUPT THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THIS COMMUNITY.
A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP CONSIDERING THAT PUBLIC SCHOOL USE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE HEIGHT LIMITATION WOULD BE UNNECESSARILY RESTRICTIVE AND COULD HINDER THE EFFICIENT USE OF AVAILABLE PROPERTY TO MAXIMIZE SCHOOL CAPACITY AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SITE AMENITIES.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
WHILE THE ORDINANCE INTENDS TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AMONG SIMILAR USES, A NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOL SERVE AS A LOCAL ANCHOR INSTITUTION AND COMMUNITY HUB THAT PROVIDES A BROADER PUBLIC BENEFIT, THE PROMINENCE OF SUCH A FACILITY MAY BE APPROPRIATELY REFLECTED THROUGH INCREASED BUILDING HEIGHT.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CARE TO THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED.
CONCERNS REGARDING INCREASED SHADING AND REDUCED ACCESS TO LIGHT AND AIRFLOW FOR ADJACENT PROPERTIES ARE MINIMIZED DUE TO THE SEPARATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM SURROUNDING USES BY THE MARTIN LUTHER KING DRIVE AND EJO STREET ROADWAYS.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY VERSUS THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OF THEIR PROPERTY AND NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD RECOGNIZE THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF AN INSTITUTIONAL USE WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND ALLOW THE PROPERTY TO CONTINUE SERVING THE COMMUNITY WITHOUT CREATING UNDUE BURDEN THROUGH STRICT APPLICATION OF THE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MANOCK AND COMMISSIONER BRACKMAN.
[02:20:01]
UH, YEAH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT.UM, UH, THE APPLICANT TESTIFIED THAT THE, UH, PREVIOUS BUILDING AT THE HIGHEST POINT WAS ALREADY 45 FEET.
SO THIS IS JUST AN ADDITIONAL, UH, 10 FOOT.
UH, THEY DO HAVE QUITE A BIT OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY THAT IS IN THE, THE FLOODPLAIN, UH, WHICH HINDERS, UH, ANY SORT OF CHANGE TO THE, UM, LAYOUT OF THE, OF THE STRUCTURE.
COMMISSIONER MANON? UM, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONES? HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER MANO, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR.
CHAIR ON AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINE OF FACT.
ALL RIGHT, WE ARE ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS BO OA CASE 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 2.
APPLICANT BEING RICARDO VALDEZ, UH, LOCATED WITHIN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE LOCATED AT 2 2 4 DORA STREET WITH A CURRENT ZONING OF R FIVE.
THIS BEING A REQUEST FOR ONE, A VARIANCE I DESCRIBED IN SECTION 35 5 15 C FOUR TO ALLOW A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT TO FRONT AN ARTERIAL STREET.
TWO, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO BE WITHIN THREE FEET OF THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES.
A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW YOUR PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO BE 15 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPER LINE.
FOUR, A 20 FOOT VARI OR 20% VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 50% IMPERVIOUS COVER TO ALLOW 70% IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THE FRONT YARD.
FIVE A HALF STORY VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TWO AND A HALF STORY BUILDING HEIGHT TO ALLOW A THREE STORY BUILDING.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING SETBACK AND BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCES TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED SIZE OF A NEW RESIDENTIAL HOME AND IMPERVIOUS COVER VARIANCE TO ACCOMMODATE, ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED FRONT YARD PARKING AREA AND WALKWAY AND A VARIANCE FROM LOT LAYOUT STANDARDS TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SINGLE FAMILY LOT ALONG A SECONDER SECONDARY ARTERIAL TYPE B ROADWAY.
THE APPLICANT HAS A FORM STAFF THAT ALL OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, INCLUDING MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS, WILL BE ADHERED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT.
THE, THE BOARD GRANTED IDENTICAL VARIANCES EXCEPT FOR A BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCE FOR SIMILAR DEVELOPMENT ON LOT 32.
NOW ADDRESS TWO 20 DORA STREET.
SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL ON THE LOT FRONTAGE VARIANCE, UH, IN BO 8 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 0 4 3 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE, THE REQUEST DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT ALSO FRONT DOOR STREET WERE OBSERVED IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
TWO, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FRONTAGE ON A SECONDARY ARTERIAL TYPE WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS IT ACCESS IS A ONLY ALLOWABLE ENTRANCE TO THE PROPERTY.
IF THE VARIANCE IS NOT GRANTED, THE PROPERTY WILL NOT BE ACCESSIBLE AND CANNOT BE DEVELOPED.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL, UH, FOR THE SETBACK, IMPERVIOUS COVER AND HALF STORY VARIANCES.
[02:25:02]
ONE, ALTHOUGH THE PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN DEVELOPED YET, THERE ARE PLANS TO CONSTRUCT ON OTHER LOTS OF THE PROPERTY.GRANTING A REDUCED SIDE SETBACK FOR ONE LOT COULD SET A PRECEDENT FOR REDUCED SETBACKS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH MAY NOT PROVIDE AMPLE ROOM TO MITIGATE FIRE SPREAD OR WATER RUNOFF.
TWO, THERE'S SPACE ON THE PROPERTY TO MOVE THE PROPOSED LOCATION FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO MEET CURRENT SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
INCREASED IMPERVIOUS COVER MAY CONTRIBUTE TO THE DIFFICULTY IN MITIGATING STORMWATER AND CAN INTENSIFY FLOOD EVENTS.
A THREE STORY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND MAY RESULT IN REDUCED VISIBILITY, REDUCE PRIVACY AND LOSS OF LIGHT AND AIRFLOW FOR THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.
ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION.
NO VOICEMAILS RECEIVED AND NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THAT INCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
SO, UM, WHEN I LOOK THE PROPERTY UP ON BCAT, IT DID HAVE A DIFFERENT ADDRESS.
'CAUSE THIS THING IS ON BCAT, IT'S SHOWING THAT IT'S THE SOUTH PORTION OF OF THREE LOTS.
YEAH, I DON'T BELIEVE THEY HAVE AN ADDRESS AS SIGNED YET.
THEY DO HAVE A COD FOR IT THOUGH.
DO YOU KNOW, IS THIS A 25 FOOT WIDE LOT? YES.
WELL, WE, WE'LL, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS THE CASE.
I CAN DOUBLE CHECK, BUT IT'S EQUIVALENT.
I I I ALWAYS LIKE TO KIND OF SEE WHAT THEY'RE STARTING OFF WITH AND HOLD ON.
UH, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
MY NAME IS RICARDO VALEZ AND I'M THE OWNER OF 2 2 4 DORA STREET.
UH, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THIS REQUEST FOR LOT 30.
NOW, UH, APPROXIMATELY ABOUT THREE MONTHS AGO, THIS BOARD CONSIDERED, UH, AND APPROVED SEVERAL RELATED VARIANCES FOR LAW 32, 1 OF THESE THREE, ONE OF THE THREE LEGAL ESTABLISHED HISTORIC LOTS AT THIS PROPERTY.
TODAY WE ARE PRESENTING THE CORRESPONDING REQUEST FOR LAW 30, WHICH HAS SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME HISTORIC DIMENSIONS AND PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS.
IN ADDITION, WE ARE REQUESTING PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT, CONSTRUCT ONE TO FULL THIRD STORY WHILE REMAINING WITHIN THE EXISTING 35 HEIGHT LIMITED.
WE'RE NOT REQUEST WE REQUESTING ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT OR AN INCREASE IN DENSITY.
I WILL BRIEFLY EXPLAIN THE STORY.
CLOUD CONDITIONS LIMITATIONS CREATED BY THE PERMITTED HALF STORY ALTERNATIVE AND WHY THE PROPOSED DESIGN PROVIDES REASONABLE RELIEF WITHOUT CREATING AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO, UH, LET ME START WITH THE, UM, EXPLAINING A QUICK RECAP OF WHAT WAS PRESENTED, UH, WITH, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
RIGHT HERE ON SHIFT THE ARROW THERE.
SO, UM, THIS WAS, THIS WAS THE THREE LOTS THAT WE PRESENTED BACK IN, UH, BACK IN APRIL.
UH, WE HAVE THREE ESTABLISHED LEGALLY HISTORIC LOTS WITH THEIR OWN COTS APPROVED EACH LOT APPROXIMATELY 20 FEET WIDE VERSUS 1 0 4 0.7 DEEP.
AND EACH LOT HAS THE SAME PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS.
THE PROPOSED USE IS, IT IS A SINGLE FAMILY AND INCREASE IN DENSITY.
SO JUST TO EXPLAIN, UH, THIS IS THE PHOTO OF THE, ACTUALLY THE WHOLE 2, 2 4 DOOR STREET.
THE VARIANCES WITH DECEPTION OF THE THIRD FLOOR HAVE BEEN APPROVED BACK ON THE BO BY THE BOARD ON APRIL 20TH, 2026.
WHILE WE ARE DOING A QUICK REVIEW OF WHAT, OF WHAT THOSE VARIANCES ARE, AND RIGHT NOW WE ARE DOING IT FOR LOW 30.
AND THE REASON IS WHY WE DIDN'T START BUILDING ON 32 IS THAT WE FOUND LATER THAT THE WATER CONNECTION IS RIGHT HERE.
SO IT, YOU KNOW, IT TAKES SAUCE AND SEA.
WELL, ESPECIALLY IN SAUCE, IT TAKES SEVEN, EIGHT MONTHS TO BUILD THE WATER CONNECTION.
SO IT WILL MAKE MORE SENSE TO START BUILDING ON LOW 30 BECAUSE WE GOT THE WATER CONNECTION RIGHT HERE.
AND WHILE WE REQUEST THE PERMIT FROM SOFT TO BUILD, TO, TO ADD THE WATER CONNECTION HERE, WE TAKE THE TIME TO START BUILDING RIGHT NOW.
SO RIGHT NOW A QUICK REVIEW OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE GOT, UH, ONE STORY AND TWO STORY
[02:30:01]
HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS PRE PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY.AND, AND, AND WE GOT AN ARTERIAL STREET.
SO WE GOT A PRETTY, UH, AMPLE STREET, UH, WHICH CONNECTS TO SAN PEDRO ON THIS SIDE.
THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, UM, VARIANCES FOR LAW 32, WHICH RIGHT NOW WE ARE REQUESTING ARE A SINGLE FAMILY USE ON AN ARTERIAL STREET, A THREE FIVE SIDE, THREE FOOT SIDE SETBACKS, A 15 FOOT REAR SETBACK, AND 70% IMPERVIOUS COVER WITHIN THE FRONT YARD.
SO SINCE THIS LOT HAS EXACTLY THE SAME CHARACTERISTICS ON, ON, ON WIDTH AND LENGTH AND AND DEEP, UH, WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST APPROVAL FOR, FOR THESE VARIANCES AS WELL.
AND ADDITIONALLY TO THIS, WE'RE REQUESTING A THIRD STORY VARIANCE PRESENTED SEPARATELY ON THE THIRD STORY VARIANCE REQUEST.
RIGHT NOW, THE CODE, THE BULLETIN 3 5 3 5 1 PERMITS UP TO TWO AND A HALF STORIES.
THE REQUEST IS TO PERMIT ONE FULL THIRD STORY, ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, THE SAME BUILDING FOOTPRINTS AND NO INCREASE INTENSITY.
AND RIGHT NOW THIS IS A CONCEPT OF CONCEPTUAL RENDERING FOR THE, THE FINALS DESIGN IS SUBJECT TO APPROVING.
SO RIGHT NOW, WITH BY THE CODE, AND IN THIS ZONE IN THIS AREA, BY AN R FIVE, WE ARE PERMITTED TO BE 35 FEET, UP TO 35 FEET WITH TWO STORIES.
WE CAN DO THAT, UH, RIGHT NOW THAT'S PERMITTED.
UH, SO THIS IS CONFIRMED BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
SO RIGHT NOW, THE PROPOSED HEIGHT THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BUILD IS APPRO APPROXIMATELY 33 FEET, NO MORE THAN THAN 35 FEET.
SO WHAT HAPPENS RIGHT NOW ON THEIR CURRENT CONDITIONS WITH BULLETIN 3, 5, 1, WITH WHERE WE CAN ALLOW, UH, BUILD A HALF STORY ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR, UH, THE THIRD FLOOR AREA HAS TO BE LIMITED TO 50% OF THE SECOND FLOOR.
SO RIGHT NOW, THIS IS THE ENVELOPE THAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO BUILD.
WE NEED ADDITIONALLY TO THIS, WE NEED TO HAVE A 20% STEP BACK FROM DEPTH TO WIDTH IN THE AREA.
NO OPEN DECKS AND PORCHES ARE PERMITTED AS PART OF THE HALF STORY.
SO THE RESULT, WE HAVE A VERY STRETCH AND A 472 SQUARE FEET OF US OF USABLE ENVELOPE.
SO, UM, PRETTY MUCH WE, WE, WE CAN, WE CAN DO SOMETHING THERE, BUT IT WILL BE A VERY, UH, FUNCTIONAL COMPROMISE TO TRY TO BUILD SOMETHING SMALL WITHIN THIS, UH, WIDTH.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS CAUSED BY, BY THE WIDTH OF HISTORIC LOT.
SO WE NEED TO, UH, DO STAIRS, CIRCULATION, BEDROOM, BATH CLOSETS, MOST FEET WITHIN THIS AREA.
SO THAT'S PRETTY MUCH PART OF THE HARDSHIP THAT WE'RE HAVING TO LIVE WITH THE HALF FLOOR.
BESIDES THAT, IMAGINE, OKAY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT, UH, AESTHETICS, BUT I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT A HARDSHIP, BUT AESTHETICALLY, THE PERSON REALLY THAT, UM, STAYING THERE WILL HAVE TO BE, HAVE LIVE WITH, UM, REDUCE OUTDOOR SPACE AND, AND HAVE A BIG LAYER OF CONCRETE IN FRONT OF THE WINDOWS.
SO RIGHT NOW, THE DIFFERENCE THAT WE'RE DOING ON THE, ON THE, ON THE, ON THE THREE FLOORS IS REALLY, VERSUS THE 28 FEET.
WE'RE ONLY LOOKING FOR THE DIFFERENCE OF FIVE FEET.
WE CAN, WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO THIS AND WE'RE PLANNING TO DO THIS.
UH, IF THE, THE BOARD DOES NOT APPROVE FOR ANY REASON, FOR, FOR THE, FOR IT TWO REASONS.
WE CAN BUILD UP TO 28 FEET WITH THE TWO FLOORS WHILE WE, THIS IS THIS HOW IT WILL LOOK LIKE WITH THE TWO POINT A HALF STORIES AND THIS IS HOW IT WILL LOOK WITH THE 33 FEET.
SO REALLY THE DIFFERENCE AND THE VARIANCE THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS, IS, UH, IT'S FIVE FEET VERSUS WHAT WE ARE ABLE TO DO RIGHT NOW.
AND AGAIN, WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO UP TO 35 FEET.
ALSO, IF, IF WE BUILD HERE A TWO STORY AGAIN WITH A, WITH A, WITH A 19 FEET, UM, WIDTH, WE HAVE A VERY CONCENTRATED BEDROOMS. THE FLOOR PLAN WILL BE VERY, VERY CONCENTRATED AND HARD TO ACHIEVE.
EVEN IF YOU ASK ME, OKAY, DO THREE BEDROOMS, BUT STILL THE BEDROOMS WILL BE VERY LIMITED AND THE GENERAL SPACES WE WILL BE VERY LIMITED.
SO WHAT IS THE SPECIFIC HARDSHIP? AS A RECAP THAT WE'RE DOING? FIRST WE HAVE A 25 FOOT, UH, WIDE LOT.
THEN WE GOT A 19 FEET THAT IF THE, IF THE BOARD APPROVES AGAIN, THE VARIANCES APPROVED FOR LAW 32, WE'RE GONNA BE HAVING A 19 FEET WIDE ENVELOPE.
UH, THIS CREATES, IF WE DO THE HALF STORY, A VERY RESTRICTED UPPER LEVEL AREA, AND THE FUNCTIONAL RELIEF, THE FULL THIRD FLOOR PROVIDES
[02:35:01]
REASONABLE FUNCTIONAL RELIEF.AGAIN, THIS HARDSHIP RESULTS FROM AOT HISTORIC DIMENSIONS AND THE COLD CONSTRAINTS, NOT FROM A SELF-CREATED CONDITION.
UH, WHAT WE'RE PLANNING HERE TO DO WITH THE, THIS WILL BE THE FRONT RE THE FRONT VIEW AGAIN, WE WE'RE NOT, UH, DOING MORE THAN 33, THE 35 FEET.
THIS WILL BE 33, 32, UM, UH, FEET HEIGHT.
WE ARE LOOKING FOR AN, AN ENCLOSED THIRD FLOOR AREA THAT IS BALANCED BY AN OPEN TERRACE.
UH, WE, WE PLANNING TO HAVE PRIVACY CONSCIOUS TERRACE WHEN WINDOW DESIGNS AND NO ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS OR DENSITY.
THIS WILL, THIS IS HOW THE, THE, THE ROOF TERRACE WILL LOOK LIKE.
AND THIS WILL BE THE FLOOR PLAN.
SO WE'RE HAVING NOW SPACE FOR HAVING A, A FULL FUNCTIONAL, NOT CONSTRAINED, UH, BEDROOM AREA.
AND WITH THIS WILL BE THE ROOFTOP, UH, UH, TERRACE ON THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
NOW LET'S TALK ABOUT THE KENWOOD AS A NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS I DON'T KNOW YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH KENWOOD.
REALLY KENWOOD, IT'S A, IT'S A SMALL SMALLER INCL THAT IS SURROUNDED BY ALMOST PARK, ALMOST PARK TERRACE, MONTE VISTA AND BEACON HILL.
RIGHT NOW, THIS IS AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL AREA.
IT HAS SOME MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS THAT HAS THREE STORY BUILDINGS IN THE AREA.
UH, WITHIN THIS AREA, THERE IS A MIX OF OLDER HOUSING AND NEW RESIDENTIAL INFILL.
IT HAS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR COMPATIBLE SINGLE FAMILY REINVESTMENT AND THE PROPOSAL PRESERVES THE EXISTING USE AND THE DENSITY.
ALSO TO MENTION RIGHT NOW THERE IS A HUGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
THIS IS LO THE LOCATION OF THE AREA.
AND RIGHT HERE, THERE IS A, UH, THERE ARE PLANS TO BUILD 35 3 STORY TOWNHOUSES IN THE AREA.
IT IS CALLED THE HOWARD CROSSING TOWN HOME SUBDIVISION.
AND THIS WILL BE THE LOOK OF THESE TOWNHOUSES IN THE AREA.
AGAIN, JUST A FEW, UH, A FEW AT THE DISTANCE AND THE NEXT BLOCK FROM, FROM THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
SO SIR RECAP, WE'RE REQUESTING THE FULL APPROVAL FOR A ONE FULL THIRD FLOOR WITHIN THE EXISTING 35 HIGH LIMIT, AGAIN, WHERE IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY USE, SAME BUILDING FOOTPRINT, NO INCREASE IN DENSITY.
WE HAVE A PRIVACY CONSCIENCE DESIGN, A FUNCTIONAL ALTERNATIVE TO A RESTRICTED HALF STORY AND RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED FOR LAW 30 ONLY.
OKAY, FOR THESE REASONS, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE VARIANCE TO PERMIT ONE FULL THIRD 30 WITHIN THE EXISTING 35 FOOT HIGH LIMIT.
THE, UH, THE PROPOSED DESIGN REMAINS BELOW THE PERMITTED HEIGHT AND INCORPORATES A RE-ORIENTED TERRACE AND PRIVACY MEASURES INTENDED TO REDUCE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK THE BOARD TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST FOR LAW 30.
UM, SO ON THE, YOU, YOU MENTIONED THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL THAT YOU'D RECEIVED ON LOT 32.
UH, WERE YOU GRANTED A THIRD FLOOR? NO MA'AM.
SO IS OF THE THREE, IS THIS THE ONLY ONE THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING TO BE THAT HEIGHT OR ARE THE OTHER TWO YOU SAID THE 32 WAS NOT GONNA BE, IS 31 GONNA BE, ARE YOU GONNA BE REQUESTING A THIRD STORY? YES.
IN THE FUTURE WE'RE GONNA BE DOING A, A VARIANCE AS WELL FOR 30, FOR 31.
AND WE ARE GONNA BE GOING, WHEN ONCE WE START BUILDING LOG 32, WE'RE GONNA GO BACK TO THE BOARD AND, AND REQUEST THAT VARIANCE FOR THE HEIGHT ON THE LOT 32.
SO YOU'RE GONNA BE REQUESTING THAT ALL THREE OF THESE BE THREE FULL STORIES? YES, MA'AM.
SO MY QUESTION IS, IS YOU'RE ASKING FOR A 20% VARIANCE ON THAT 50% PER DESCRIPTION OF THE FRONT MM-HMM
BUT YOUR DRIVEWAY IS 19 FEET WIDE ACCORDING TO THE SITE PLAN.
IF YOUR LOT'S 25 FEET WIDE, THAT'S 76% OF IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND THEN THAT'S NOT INCLUDING THAT THREE FOOT STRIP THAT WHERE THE FRONT DOOR WOULD COME OUT.
SO HOW, HOW WAS THAT ADEQUATE? YEAH, MR. ORRAN.
YEAH, I I REMEMBER YOU BROUGHT THIS QUESTION.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS JUST A RENDERING.
SO, SO RIGHT NOW THE, THE, THE WIDTH, THIS IS NOT LIKE THE ACT THIS THIS IS JUST A RENDERING.
SO WE ARE, WE'RE GONNA COMPLY WITH, WITH WHATEVER APPEARANCE IS APPROVED.
WELL, THE, THE, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THE FRONT BECAUSE YOU HAVE A, A REDUCED LOT WIDTH AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE A DRIVEWAY.
YEAH, THAT DOESN'T BOTHER ME AT ALL.
UM, IT'S, IT'S THE MARRIAGE OF A THREE FOOT SIDE SETBACK AND A THREE STORY IS WHAT BOTHERS ME.
I MEAN, HISTORICALLY I HAVE BEEN VERY AMICABLE TO PEOPLE ON HIS, ON ANTIQUATED LOTS ASKING FOR A THREE FOOT SETBACK.
'CAUSE THAT WAS THE WAY IT WAS A LONG TIME AGO.
BUT THREE STORIES IS, IS JUST A LITTLE TOO TALL FOR ME.
[02:40:01]
I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF A THIRD STORY IF YOU WENT TO A FIVE FOOT SETBACK, BUT I COULDN'T BE IN SUPPORT OF IT WITH, I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW, UH, IF IT WAS A FULL THREE STORIES, I JUST CAN'T GET BEHIND THAT.BUT, UM, I'M JUST POINTING THAT OUT.
BUT COMMISSIONER MANNA, SO, AND CITY QUESTION HERE PERMITTED BY RIGHT.
TWO AND A HALF STORIES ON THIS LOT.
AND AT THE HEIGHTS, THAT'S, UH, BEEN DISCUSSED, RIGHT? SO MAX HEIGHT IS WHAT'S MAX HEIGHTS FOR? TWO AND A HALF STORY.
SO YEAH, I I'M KIND OF IN THE SAME LINE.
SO, SO TWO AND A HALF I CAN DEAL WITH, UH, YOU WITH IN, WITH THE CUPCAKE DESIGN, UM, BECAUSE THAT DOES, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LIGHT, YOU KNOW THAT I'M BIG ON LIGHT, UH, AS, AS Y'ALL KNOW.
AND SO I DO HAVE A CHALLENGE WITH THAT.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? OH, I WAS CURIOUS OF THE WINDOW PLACEMENT.
UH, ONLY THE WINDOWS FACING THE, THE DRIVE IS IN THE RENDERINGS ARE, ARE THERE ANY SIDE WINDOWS? UH, YES, WE WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO UP TO 25% OF THE, OF THE, OF THE SIDE, UH, WALLS, SIR.
I MEAN THIS, THIS, THIS SORT OF, I KNOW IT'S JUST A RENDERING, BUT IT LOOKED LIKE IT'D BE MORE CONDUCIVE IF YOU HAD ATTACHED TOWN HOMES WITH SOMETHING OF THAT STYLE.
UH, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE ANYONE SENT TO SPEAK, NOBODY'S TRYING ON A SPEED.
ALL RIGHT, WELL THEN, UM, ARE WE LOOKING FOR A MOTION? I'LL MAKE IT
WELL, CAN WE ASK THE APPLICANT, I, I KNOW YOU'RE GONNA BE PROPOSING A FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK, AND I WAS GONNA KEEP A THREE, BUT REMOVE THE THIRD STORY, COULD WE ASK THE APPLICANT IF THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING ACCEPTABLE OR IS THAT, IS THIS THE WAY YOU'RE READING THE MOTION, MR. STEVENS? I'M, I'M OKAY WITH THE THIRD STORY, SO I'M HAPPY TO, TO READ THE MOTION.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH TWO SIX S 1 0 3 0 1 3 2, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR ONE OF VARIANCE AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION THREE FIVE DASH FIVE 15 C FOUR.
TO ALLOW A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT TO FRONT AN ARTERIAL STREET.
TWO, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO BE WITHIN THREE FEET OF THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES.
THREE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO BE 15 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, FOUR OR 20% VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM 50% IMPERVIOUS COVER TO ALLOW 70% IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THE FRONT YARD.
AND FIVE A HALF STORY VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TWO AND A HALF STORY BUILDING HEIGHT TO ALLOW THREE STORY BUILDING SITUATED 2 2 4 DORA STREET, APPLICANT BEING RICARDO VALDEZ.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THE VARIANCES NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WITH THE FRONTAGE ALONG DORIS STREET WERE OBSERVED IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE SETBACKS AND IMPERVIOUS COVER REQUESTED WOULD STILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE SPACE AND CONDITIONS TO MITIGATE STORM WATER RUNOFF OR POTENTIAL FIRE SPREAD TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
THE BUILDING HEIGHT WOULD NOT DISRUPT THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN, IN NOT ALLOWING THE FRONTAGE ON DO STREET.
THE THE INABILITY TO, TO DEVELOP WITH THE REDUCED SETBACKS AND INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVER REQUEST REQUESTED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
AS THE RESULT IS LIMITED, AS THE LOT IS LIMITED IN SPACE, THE PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT IS TO, IS TO THE PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT IS TO ACCOMMODATE REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY DESPITE THE LIMITED LOT AREA.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE FRONTAGE VARIANCE WILL OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS ACCESS FROM DORIS STREET IS THE ONLY ENTRANCE POINT TO THE PROPERTY.
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH REDUCED SETBACKS REQUIRE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, WOULD STILL REQUIRE COMPLIANCE WITH BUILDING CODES TO MITIGATE THE RISK OF FIRE SPREAD.
ALLOWING A THIRD STORY AND INCREASED IMPERVIOUS COVER WOULD OBSERVE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER WOULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY DISRUPTED.
FOUR, THE VARIANCE WOULD, WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED
[02:45:01]
WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.FIVE SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST WOULD NOT INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT DUE TO THE OTHER RESIDENTIAL LOTS FRONTING DOORS, STREET, THE SETBACK, IMPERVIOUS COVER AND HEIGHT VARIANCES WOULD ALLOW REASONABLE DEVELOPMENT ON THIS PROPERTY THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.
THE PLAY OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS THE PLAY OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT GRANTED.
THE PROPERTY WILL NOT BE ACCESSIBLE AND THE LOT DIMENSIONS WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR REASONABLE USE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOT.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER AMANDA, COMMISSIONER STEVENS.
SO I'LL, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF, UM, THE MOTION AS READ AND I KNOW THAT THERE MAY BE SOME RESISTANCE, UM, FROM OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD WITH REGARDS TO THE THREE STORIES.
SO I, I'D BE OPEN TO, UM, DEBATE WITH REGARDS TO THAT PIECE.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER AMANDA, I'M HERE FOR THE DEBATE.
UM, SO, SO I KNOW THAT I WORKED WITH THE CITY QUITE A BIT WITH REGARDS TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THIS SPECIFIC UDC CODE REWRITE IN THE LAST GO AROUND.
AND WE SPENT A WEEK ON JUST THIS TOPIC ALONE ON DESIGN.
AND, AND THIS WOULD MOVE CONTRARY TO THAT WHOLE MOTION OF WHAT IS THAT EVERYONE, BUILDERS, DEVELOPERS, THE CITY AND, AND THE COMMUNITY KIND OF SAID WHAT THEY WANTED WITH REGARDS TO THE TWO AND A HALF STORY VERSUS THREE STORY AND THE WHOLE DIALOGUE.
A LOT OF DIALOGUE WAS SIMPLY, YOU KNOW, DUE TO LIGHT AND IN THREE STORIES YOU DON'T HAVE A LIGHT.
AND THAT'S WHY IT IS THAT THEY CAME BACK WITH A CUPCAKE DESIGN.
AND SO, SO I I WOULD NOT BE, I I WAS OKAY WITH EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR THE THREE STORY.
UM, IVANIA, YES, COMMISSIONER IVAN, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CITY, UH, AND THE CODES HAVE BEEN, ESPECIALLY THIS ONE HAS BEEN TESTED, UM, THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
IN ALL THE DISTRICTS YOU DRIVE ANYWHERE IN ANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS, THERE ARE THREE STORY BUILDINGS ON SMALL LOTS AND THEY'RE SELLING, PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN THOSE HOMES AS FAR AS AS LIGHT.
UM, WE LIVE IN A CITY THAT IS EXTREMELY HOT AND A LOT OF THOSE BUILDINGS ARE CREATING NICE SHADE.
AND FOR ME, THE PRESIDENTS HAS ALREADY BEEN SET IN THIS CITY.
UH, YOU GO AND LOOK AT ANY NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU SEE THESE THREE STORY BUILDINGS, UM, AND THEY CREATE SOME SHADE IN SOME OF THESE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TREES.
SO, UH, I'M GONNA BE INVO VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE THREE STORY.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE AT LEAST VOTE FOR ITEM ONE AND FOUR SEPARATELY, JUST TO GET THOSE OUT OF THE WAY, PERHAPS.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, THAT WE CAN JUST DO OR DOES IT, DOES THAT HAVE TO BE IN A, A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? YOU'D HAVE TO, YEAH.
YOU HAVE TO REMOVE THOSE FROM THE CURRENT.
UM, DO YOU MIND IF WE VOTE ON THOSE SEPARATE? THAT SOUNDS GREAT.
WHAT ABOUT YOU COMMISSIONER? MANNA? UM, WHY WAS ONE BEING REMOVED? NO, JUST WE'RE VOTING ON ONE AND FOUR.
JUST, JUST A VOTE ON 'EM SEPARATELY VOTING ON IT.
SO THE ONLY ONE I HAD A QUESTION ON WAS NUMBER FIVE.
AM I READING THE WRONG LINE? NO, I'M, I'M JUST WANTING, I'M JUST, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO VOTE ON, UM, OKAY, WE CAN DO ONE, THREE, AND FIVE.
I'D LIKE TO JUST VOTE ON THE VARIANCE FOR THE ACCESS TO THE, UH, STREET FRONTING AND ARTERIAL, UH, THE REAR SETBACK AND THE, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITATION.
I'D LIKE TO JUST DO THAT SEPARATELY AND THEN VOTE ON THE OTHER TWO SEPARATELY.
I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE SINCE THE SIDE BACK IS PROBABLY TIED TO THE OR SIDE, SETBACK IS TIED TO THE HEIGHT SIDE.
SO, UH, WITH THAT, UH, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON JUST ITEMS ONE, THREE.
UH, THIS IS A, UH, THE MOTION HAS BEEN FRIENDLY, AMENDED FOR JUST TO, TO AT THIS TIME TO CONCERN ITEMS ONE, THREE AND FIVE, FOUR.
I'M SORRY, ONE, THREE AND FOUR.
I DON'T KNOW WHY ONE, THREE AND FOUR.
[02:50:01]
MENA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.COMMISSIONER IBANEZ, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER BEN NOES, THUMB UP.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE VICE EFFECTS.
SO MOTIONS ON ONE, THREE AND FOUR HAVE PASSED.
UH, NOW WE'RE LEFT WITH, UH, THE, THE, THE, THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, THE TWO FOOT.
UH, LET THE RECORD SHOW IT IS FOUR O'CLOCK AND COMMISSIONER BRAGMAN HAS LEFT A MEETING.
SO, UH, ITEMS TWO AND FIVE REGARDING A, UH, THE SIDE SETBACK AND THEN, AND THE, UH, THIRD STORY.
SO IS THERE ANY AMENDMENTS TO THAT OR WE JUST LIKE TO TAKE A VOTE? MAY MAYBE I CAN JUST CLARIFY MY POSITION A LITTLE BIT.
I THINK THREE FOOT SIDE SETBACK IS LIKE THE BARE MINIMUM FOR ME, ESPECIALLY AT THREE STORIES.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE TWO AND A HALF STORY DEBATE AND HOW WE GOT TO THE, THE CAKE DESIGN, BUT EFFECTIVELY THIS, THIS APPLICANT IS, IS ABLE TO BUILD BY RIGHT UP TO 35 FEET.
AND IF HE WANTS, HE CAN DO THIS HALF STORY, WHICH OUTSIDE OF ACCESS TO LIGHT IS ESSENTIALLY A THIRD STORY WITH A ROOF DECK THAT HE CAN'T USE.
SO FROM A DESIGN STANDPOINT, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.
AND, UM, I JUST THINK PRAGMATICALLY HE'S GONNA BUILD EFFECTIVELY THREE STORIES, MIGHT AS WELL LET HIM ACTUALLY BUILD UP ALL THREE STORIES.
SO THEN THAT BRINGS ME TO ASK A QUESTION IN STAFF IS, UM, IF THIS IS ALL REVOLVING AROUND A DECK, IS THERE A WAY TO, TO CONSTRUCT THIS MOTION TO WHERE WE'RE NOT LETTING HIM GO FULL THREE STORIES, ANYTHING GOES, BUT TO JUST HAVE A 50% LIMIT ON, ON HABITABLE, UH, AIR CONDITIONED SPACE AND THEN HAVE AN OPEN ROOF TERRACE.
CAN THIS BE A MOTION ON THE, ON THE ACTUAL DEFINITION FOR THE HALF STORY AS OPPOSED TO JUST SAYING B THREE STORIES? SO THIS THREE STORIES ACTUALLY, IT, IT DOESN'T HAVE THE WEDDING, THE LITTLE CAKE APPROACH.
SO IT STILL NEEDS A FULL THREE STORIES, NOT JUST BECAUSE OF THE OUTDOOR, IT'S ON THE SIDE, IT'S ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT AND RIGHT.
SO I'M KIND OF IGNORING THE AI RENDERING, YOU KNOW, LIKE I ASSUME IT'S LIKE, IS THERE A WAY TO POSE THIS MOTION SO THAT WE'RE, HE'S ASKING FOR THREE STORIES, BUT WHAT HE'S REALLY ASKING FOR IS A, IS A, AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE, THE READING OF THE DEFINITION OF A HALF STORY.
MEANING CAN HE HAVE AN OPEN TERRACE? CAN, CAN HE, CAN WE SET THE 50% LIMIT ON, ON AIR CONDITIONED SPACE TO, TO BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IS PRESENTED IN THE, IN THE DEFINITION? THAT'S, THAT'S, I AM NOT OPPOSED TO IF HE'S LIMITING IT TO 50% AIR CONDITIONED SPACE AND HE JUST NEEDS US BECAUSE HE WANTS AN OPEN TERRACE AND, AND HE'S LI YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT'S SOMETHING I CAN GET BEHIND.
SO PART OF THE HALF STORY IS NOTE 14.
SO IF YOU WANNA MAKE SPECIFIC, UH, VARIANCE, UM, APPROVAL TO NOTE 14, YOU CAN CLARIFY THAT.
WHICH IS WHAT YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT.
OKAY, NOW WE'RE GETTING SOMEWHERE.
WHAT DO YOU THINK COMMISSIONER? MANNA?
WELL, I MEAN I, TO ME IT'S, IT'S, UM, I, I LIKE THE ABILITY FOR PEOPLE TO BE A LITTLE CREATIVE AND I LIKE OPEN TERRACES, BUT, BUT I THINK THE MAIN PREMISE OF THE HALF STORY, IN MY OPINION, HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT 50% LIMIT.
'CAUSE IN THE PAST THEY DIDN'T HAVE SOLID UP WALLS.
THEY HAD, UH, THAT 50% WAS COMING FROM YOU WERE HAVING A PITCH ROOF AND EVERYTHING.
SO IF YOU HAVE A FLAT ROOF, IT, IT KIND OF CHANGES THINGS AND, AND I THINK THE, THE ABILITY TO SHIFT THAT AROUND A LITTLE BIT IS IMPORTANT.
BUT, BUT, UM, COMMISSIONER STEVENS, IS THERE A WAY YOU WANT TO, CAN YOU POSE THIS TO, ON THAT NOTE 14? I'M, I'M TRYING TO PULL IT UP SO I CAN, MAY I SPEAK TO MR. RYAN? I, THE, THE FLOOR PLAN, UH, RIGHT NOW IF I WASN'T ABLE TO JOIN THE FLOOR PLAN GIVES US SIX, UH, TWO THIRDS OF AIR CONDITIONING SPACE.
UH, IF THE BOARD STILL, UM, STRUGGLES WITH THOSE TWO THIRDS OF, OF, OF AIR CONDITIONING SPACE, UH, WE CAN LIVE WITH THAT 50%.
IT'LL STILL BE CONCENTRATED, BUT, UH, WE RESPECT THE DECISION FROM THE BOARD.
SO IF, IF Y'ALL DON'T MIND, I HAVE THIS, I GOT THAT NOTE UP.
I, I, I'LL BE HAPPY TO, TO READ SOMETHING ON THIS.
IF, IF SO LET ME JUST TAKE A STAB AT THIS.
UH, RIGHT, 14 NOTE 14 ALSO AS A COMMENT.
SO, SO, UM, PRIOR TO THE LAST CDC REWRITE, THERE WAS RUNAWAY THIRD
[02:55:01]
FLOOR, THIRD FLOOR DIALOGUE.AND THAT'S WHERE WE SAW JUST A HUGE AMOUNT.
AND, AND AS YOU RECALL, BEFORE IT BECAME OFFICIAL, THIS, THIS BOARD WAS PUSHED A WHOLE LOT WITH REGARDS TO A LOT OF THE THIRD STORIES.
AND THEN AS SOON AS THE, THE CODE WENT INTO EFFECT, YOU GET KIND OF SHUT IT DOWN.
AND WE SAW A LOT OF CASES WHERE WE STARTED SAYING NO, UM, BECAUSE THAT WAS THE RECENT UDC REWRITE.
SO, SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF WAXING AND WANING THERE IN THAT SPACE.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, AND SO I, I JUST RECALL A LOT OF THE DIALOGUE, SO YEAH.
WELL, LET'S, UH, I, I'M CURIOUS TO HOW THIS, I, I, AGAIN, I I THINK THAT 50% IS A MAIN TENANT, SO I'M JUST, I'M JUST GONNA GIVE THIS THING A SHOT.
UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 2, MOVE THE BOARD OF JUDGMENT GRANT, A, A, UH, VARIANCE FOR A, A TWO FOOT VARIANCE IN THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO BE WITHIN THREE FEET OF THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES AND A VARIANCE TO THE NOTE 14 DEFINITION FOR HALF STORY AS ASSOCIATED WITH, UH, UDC 35.
NOTE 14 OUT OF 35, UH, UH, TABLE 35 DASH ONE OUT OF 35 3 10 0.01 SUCH THAT, UM, UH, LET'S SEE.
TWO, ALLOW A THIRD LEVEL THAT IS LIMITED TO 50%, UM, AIR CONDITIONED SPACE WITH THE ALLOWANCE OF AN OPEN DECK OR PORCH.
SO JUST TO CONFIRM, ALLOW THE UPPER STORY TO BE LIMITED TO OCCUPIABLE 50% AND, AND, AND, AND A DECK OR A BALCONY AND THE ALLOWANCE TO HAVE A DECK OR A BALCONY.
SHOULD WE CALL THAT 50% CONDITION SPACE SINCE THAT DECK WOULD BE OCCUPIABLE? YES.
I WAS GOING TO ENCLOSED OCCUPIABLE, THAT'S THE KIND OF THING, YEAH.
ENCLOSED OCCUPIABLE AND MOST LIKELY CONDITIONED
SO YOU GOT ME TOTALLY CONFUSED, SIR.
SO WHAT MY, SO WHAT THE SAME FINDINGS? OKAY, SO I'LL EXPLAIN.
CAN I GET A SECOND ON THAT SECOND COMMISSIONER? SO WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M SHOOTING FOR IS RIGHT NOW THEY CAN HAVE A HALF STORY, THEY CAN BUILD SOMETHING UP THERE AS LONG AS IT MEETS THE CONDITIONS OF NOTE 14.
OKAY, WELL IT CAN TWO AND A HALF.
I'M TRYING TO MAKE AN ADJUST AN ADJUSTMENT TO NOTE 14 FOR A, FOR A FLAT ROOF, THIS IS NOT A PITCH ROOF, A STRUCTURE, BUT, UH, TO SUCH THAT THEY CAN, THERE ARE NO MORE THAN 50% OF SPACE, BUT THEY CAN HAVE AN OPEN PORCH.
AND SO WHAT I'M DOING IS I'M AUGMENTING WHERE THE 50% CAN BE BECAUSE IN THE DEFINITION THERE'S CERTAIN RULES ABOUT BEING 20% AWAY FROM SIDES AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF I'M GIVING HIM.
I'M SAYING YOU CAN PUT IT WHERE YOU WANT IT, BUT IT CAN'T BE MORE THAN 50% OF THE FLOOR BELOW YOU.
AND THEN YOU ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE OPEN PORCHES, NO COVERS, OPEN DECK OR PORCH.
SO INSTEAD OF, IT STILL WOULD BE CONSIDERED THREE STORIES, CORRECT? IT WOULD BE, BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MEET THE, THE DEFINITION OKAY.
BUT I'M JUST, I'M AUGMENTING THE DEFINITION.
I'M STILL, MM, BUT I, I GET IT.
SO I THINK I HEARD WE DID ADVERTISE FOR A THIRD STORY, WHICH THIS IS SLIGHTLY, YOU'RE JUST KIND OF REGULATING THE AMOUNT OF WHAT, THE THIRD STORY STORY REGULATING THE AMOUNT YEAH.
AND IT'S LESS INTENSE DOWN, SO IT'S A LESS INTENSE USE.
IT'S LESS INTENSE THAN A FULL THIRD STORY ADVERTISED.
SO AGAIN, IT'S REDUCING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND ALLOWING THE BALCONY, THE BALCONY ON THAT TOP FLOOR.
WE WILL SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT.
I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
[03:00:01]
ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE SITTING HERE AT EIGHT TO TWO.IT LOOKS LIKE THAT MOTION DOES NOT PASS.
IS THERE, MR. CHAIR? AGAIN, WE'RE NOT FULLY EMPANELED, RIGHT? I MEAN, UH, WELL, I, I, I, I'M, AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THERE'S KICKBACK ON THE THREE FOOT.
IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A RECONSIDERATION MOTION, JUST TO AT LEAST GIVE HIM THE THREE FOOT, AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE UP TO, UH, MOTION RECONSIDER.
THERE'S A MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
UM, THIS IS TO RECONSIDER THE ITEMS THAT WERE JUST READ.
I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION, UM, JUST ON THE THREE FOOT SETBACK.
UH, THAT WAS, THAT WAS GONNA BE, UH, REGARDING ITEM NUMBER TWO IN THE, IN THE, UH, AGENDA.
UH, IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT? SECOND.
UH, SO REGARDING THE THREE FOOT SETBACK, UH, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE JUST ON THE THREE FOOT SETBACK, OR IAN? YES.
SO FOR THE TWO, UH, THAT WERE AGAINST, UH, THE, UH, THE THIRD LEVEL, IS THERE ANY PLAY AT ALL OR SHOULD WE MOVE FORWARD, IF YOU WILL? ANY OF Y'ALL LIKE TO RECONSIDER IN ANY AUGMENTATION OF WHATEVER
SO, AND THAT WAS WHAT WAS APPROVED THE PREVIOUS TIME, RIGHT? SO ESSENTIALLY WE APPROVED THE SAME THING THAT WE APPROVED THE PREVIOUS TIME THAT THIS CAME THROUGH.
AGAIN, WE'RE NOT FULLY EDD EITHER.
I ITEM NUMBER EIGHT I, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS BO OA DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 3 3.
LOCATED IN DISTRICT ONE OFF 9 2 2 AND 9 1 6 EAST ELER STREET.
THE ZONING IS IDZ WITH USES PERMITTED IN C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND MF 40 MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT.
AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A 150 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 200 FOOT SEPARATION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE USE AVM MOBILE FOOD COURT WITHIN 50 FEET OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE OR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE LOT.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE INTERSECTION OF MCLEAN STREET IN NEWELL AVENUE.
THE PROPERTY'S ADDRESS OFF OF EAST ALAMI STREET, WHICH MERGES WITH NEWELL AVENUE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE A MIXTURE OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES, AND IS LOCATED WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY OVERPASS PER STAFF'S VISIT TO THE SITE IN JULY OF 2026.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY HAS NOT YET STARTED.
THE APPLICANT MAY EITHER COMPLY WITH THE 200 FOOT MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIREMENT OF MOBILE FOOD COURTS TO BE WITHIN PROXIMITY TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BASED ZONING DISTRICTS OR USES, OR THEY MAY REQUEST A VARIANCE WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL FOR THE MOBILE FOOD COURT SINGLE FAMILY SEPARATION VARIANCE IN BO OA DASH 26 DASH 3 33 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL SUBSTANTIALLY ENSURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY BY REDUCING THE REQUIRED SEPARATION BETWEEN THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL USE IN THE EXISTING CONFORMING RESIDENTIAL USES BY EXPOSING THE RESIDENCES TO INCREASE NOISE AND LIGHTING IN VEHICULAR AND FOOT TRAFFIC.
TWO, THEIR PROPERTY IS PERMITTED TO OPERATE UP TO TWO FOOD TRUCKS WITHOUT ADHERENCE TO THE MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIREMENT.
THIS IS THE, UH, STAFF MAIL OUT 20 NOTICES.
RECEIVED IN FAVOR IS AN OPPOSITION, WAS THERE'S ALSO ZERO VOICEMAILS
[03:05:01]
RECEIVED IN FAVOR AND OPPOSITION.AND THEN TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND DOWNTOWN NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
WERE THERE EIGHT AND I'M SORRY, MISSED THAT PART.
WERE THERE EIGHT IN IN FAVOR? ZERO.
IS HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD? THANK YOU.
EMILY WEISLER WITH KILLING GRIFFIN AND FAIRMAN 1 0 1 0 1 REUNION PLACE, SUITE TWO 50 HERE ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, UM, AND APPLICANT.
UM, SO JUST A QUICK LITTLE BACKGROUND, SORRY, GOT AHEAD OF MYSELF.
UM, SO WE ARE REQUESTING 150 FOOT VARIANCE TO THE 200 FOOT, UM, DISTANCE REQUIREMENT FOR A MOBILE FOOD, UM, MOBILE FOOD COURT, UM, FOOD TRUCK PARK.
UM, THIS IS A REVISED REQUEST.
UM, OUR ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL WAS FOR 195 FOOT.
UM, AND I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND SKIP QUICKLY AND THEN I'LL GO BACK REAL QUICK.
UM, AND THAT IS BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS LEFT THE LOT AT TWO 11 AS A PHYSICAL BUFFER FOR THE PROJECT.
SO THE MOBILE FOOD TRUCK PARK, UM, THE FOOD TRUCK PARK IS AT 9 2 2 9 16.
WE HAVE LEFT TWO 11 MCLEAN AS A PHYSICAL BUFFER TO THE ONLY EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE, WHICH IS AT 2 0 7.
UM, SO JUST CLARIFICATION THERE.
ORIGINALLY, TWO 11 MCLEAN WAS TO BE CONSIDERED PART OF IT AND REDEVELOPED FOR THIS.
UM, WE HAVE SINCE REMOVED THAT.
SO THE FOOD TRUCK PARK IS ACTUALLY ONLY FOR, UM, THE CORNER OF NEWELL ELMIRA MCLEAN, UM, WITH TWO 11 MCLEAN LEFT OUT OF THE REQUEST.
SO THAT'S WHERE THE 50 FOOT SEPARATION COMES IN.
UM, JUST FOR SOME LITTLE EXTRA CONTEXT HERE, UM, YOU CAN SEE WE ARE JUST TWO BLOCKS SOUTH OF WHAT IS THE, UH, HEAD WALL EUCLID PARK PROJECT.
THAT'S A LARGE SCALE MIXED USE MULTIFAMILY.
WE HAVE A LOT OF NEW AND EXISTING RESIDENTIAL HERE.
UM, DONE A LOT OF WORK WITH TOBIN HILL.
UM, IF THEY HAD A PROBLEM, THEY WOULD'VE RESPONDED.
UM, BUT I HAVE ENGAGED WITH THEM ON THIS PROJECT.
UM, BUT I'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK WITH TOBIN HILL OVER THE YEARS WITH RESPECT TO WHAT IS THEIR, THEIR RESIDENTIAL CORE, UM, AND SPECIFICALLY THEIR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CORE.
WHERE DOES THAT EXIST IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD? UM, WITHIN THE SHADOW OF IH 35 SOUTH, UM, WHICH IS QUITE FRANKLY WHAT THIS PROPERTY IS, UM, JUST OUTSIDE THE SHADOW OF THE HIGHWAY THAT IS NOT THE TOBIN HILL RESIDENTIAL CORE.
UM, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE 200 FOOT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT, I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULD WANT SUFFICIENT BUFFERING FROM THAT.
UM, BUT WE ARE AT THE REAR OF THE MIDTOWN STATION COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
UM, EVERYTHING THAT I WILL SHOW YOU ACROSS THE STREET, UM, I'M JUST GONNA SLIP AROUND.
ALL OF THESE PROPERTIES WERE JUST RECENTLY REZONED, UM, IDZ TWO FOR COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT.
UM, THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE MET WITH THE RESIDENTS AT 2 0 7.
SHE HAS CHOSEN NOT TO, UH, RESPOND.
UM, AND THAT'S ABSOLUTELY HER CHOICE.
UM, BUT THEY HAVE SPOKEN AND SHE UNDERSTANDS THE PROPOSED FOOD TRUCK.
UM, SO YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS IS THE REAR, UM, OF MIDTOWN STATION BLACK SWAN YOGA.
UM, YOU CAN SEE 2 0 7 IN THE LITERAL SHADOW OF THE HIGHWAY.
UM, AND RIGHT NEXT TO THAT IS ALSO, UM, PARKING.
SO UNDERNEATH THE HIGHWAY HAS BEEN DEVELOPED INTO OVERFLOW PARKING, UM, AT MCLEAN UNDER E 35
UM, AND SO WE'RE LEAVING AGAIN, THAT TWO 11 BUFFER HERE.
WE DO HAVE SUPPORT, UM, FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER AT TWO 11.
UM, AND THEN THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THIS IDZ CON CONGLOMERATE, UM, ON THE RECORD, THEY ARE IN SUPPORT.
SO WE DO HAVE WRITTEN DOCUMENTED SUPPORT JUST OUTSIDE OF THE 4:00 PM CUTOFF.
UM, FOR, FOR ALL OF THAT, AGAIN, THIS IS THE SURVEY OF TWO 11.
IT'S TWO 11 MCCLAIN IS THE BUFFER TO 2 0 7.
UM, BUT WE USE THAT SURVEY TO DETERMINE THAT AT LEAST 50 FOOT SEPARATION THERE.
UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY ZONING, ITS ZONED IDZ WITH USES FOR C TWO AND MF 40.
UM, THE, THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT IS SPECIFIC TO A FOOD TRUCK PARK, I UNDERSTAND WHY.
UM, BUT THE FOOD PAR TRUCK PARK ALSO HAS ITS OWN SET OF SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS IN THE UDC.
UM, THE, YOU KNOW, NO DRIVE THROUGH, UM, WHERE THINGS CAN BE LOCATED, ALL WEATHER SURFACING, PARKING REQUIREMENTS, RESTROOM FACILITIES, NO OUTSIDE SOUND, AMPLIFYING EQUIPMENT, SIGN REGULATIONS.
SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT MAY OR
[03:10:01]
MAY NOT BE REGULATED FOR, SAY, A TRADITIONAL RESTAURANT IN SOME OTHER FORM OR CAPACITY OR MULTIPLE RESTAURANTS OR MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL USES ON THIS PROPERTY.THE MOBILE FOOD COURT HAS ALL OF THOSE REGULATIONS BUILT IN.
THOSE ARE ALL SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATIONS.
UM, AND THE, THE 50 FOOT DISTANCE HERE PROVIDES THAT PHYSICAL BUFFERING FROM THE RESIDENT AT 2 0 7.
UM, AGAIN, THERE ARE NO RESIDENTS LIVING ACROSS MCLEAN.
ALL OF THOSE ARE BEING CONVERTED FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE, UM, COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE STREET.
SO THERE'S SINGULARLY ONE PHYSICAL RESIDENT.
UM, THINK WHAT YOU WANT ABOUT AI GENERATED
UM, BUT THIS IS GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE KIND OF ENVIRONMENT LOOKING FOR, WE'RE LOOKING FOR SEVEN FOOD TRUCKS ON THIS PROPERTY, UM, JUST UNDER HALF AN ACRE OR SO.
UM, SEVEN FOOD TRUCKS, TOTAL ONSITE PARKING, UM, WITH INTENDED OVERFLOW PARKING ACROSS MCLEAN AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT.
SO, UM, BUT I WANNA QUICKLY JUST, IF YOU WILL INDULGE ME FOR ONE MORE SECOND, UM, GO BACK HERE.
SO THE VISION, IN ADDITION TO, UM, WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU SAW ON THE RENDERING VISION, THIS PROPERTY RIGHT HERE, IT HAS, THERE'S A TON OF RESIDENTIAL COMING ONLINE.
THERE'S A TON OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE.
THERE'S ALSO A TON OF PEOPLE WHO WORK HERE.
UM, JUST OUTSIDE OF THE VIEW IS THE METHODIST METROPOLITAN, THEN THE DOWNTOWN METHODIST HOSPITAL.
YOU HAVE A TON OF MEDICAL OFFICES.
YOU HAVE A TON OF PROFESSIONAL OFFICES UP AND DOWN ST.
UM, THERE IS, UH, BUSINESSES LITERALLY, QUITE FRANKLY, UNDER THE HIGHWAY, UM, ST.
MARY'S, CAMPDEN, MCLANE, THERE'S A TON OF, THIS IS A REAL EMPLOYMENT HUB.
SO PROVIDING A WALKABLE, PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED, UM, AMENITY HERE THAT IS NOT JUST THE PEARL, UM, IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK THE COMMUNITY'S BEEN LOOKING FOR.
UM, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN 11 TO 11:00 PM 11:00 AM TO 11:00 PM HOURS.
SO THIS IS NOT A LATE NIGHT BAR SPOT.
THIS IS REALLY FOR THE DAY, THE EVENING TIME, UM, TO PROVIDE SOMETHING THAT RESIDENTS AND THOSE WHO WORK IN AND AROUND HERE COULD VERY COMFORTABLY WALK TO.
THEY CAN DRIVE TO, WE'LL HAVE PARKING, BUT REALLY FOCUS ON, ON A PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED AMENITY HERE THAT DOESN'T EXIST CURRENTLY OUTSIDE OF THE PEARL ITSELF.
SO WITH THAT, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE, UM, FOR 150 FOOT, UM, FOR THE FOOD TRUCK PARK.
AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? CRUZ, MR. CRUZ? OH, WHAT'S THE MAIN BUSINESS ACROSS THE STREET FROM Y'ALL? THE BIG WHITE BUILDING? DO YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS? THAT ONE, THIS ONE THAT WE BACK UP TO? UHHUH.
SO THIS IS, UH, MIDTOWN STATION.
THERE ARE A VARIETY, IT'S LIKE A SHOP.
NOT A REALLY GOOD USE FOR, BUT SHOPPING CENTER, IT'S TWO STORY.
I DON'T KNOW IF BLACK SWAN YOGA IS STILL THERE.
THEY STILL THERE? UH, IT'S THE ONLY PLACE I EVER TOOK HOT YOGA AND I'VE NEVER BEEN BACK
UM, BUT THERE ARE RESTAURANTS.
UM, THERE IS A CBD SHOP, UM, COUPLE OF BUSINESSES IN THERE.
UM, UM, I COULDN'T IMAGINE WHAT IT WAS.
I'M GONE THROUGH THERE QUITE A FEW TIMES, BUT I'M LIKE, OKAY, WHAT IS IT? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.
SO, SO A MOBILE FOOD COURT, DOES IT REQUIRE THE EMPTYING OF THE LOT OF ALL OF THE MOBILE FOOD VEHICLES ON A NIGHTLY RECURRING BASIS? IN OTHER WORDS, YOU CAN'T PARK A TRUCK THERE AND IT JUST STAY THERE FOREVER AS, UM, A MOBILE PART.
SO YOU CAN'T, UH, CLEAN REFILL, UM, YOU KNOW, REGENERATE YOUR FOOD TRUCK ON THERE.
UM, SO MOST LIKELY THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO LEAVE EVERY NIGHT, BUT THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A MOBILE FOOD CORE AND A MOBILE, MOBILE FOOD BASE OF OPERATION.
SO THEY CAN'T BRING ANY MORE FOOD OR REFILL IT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, OR CLEAN IT.
SO THAT MAKES SENSE, WHAT I JUST SAID.
SO, SO, BECAUSE I, YOU KNOW, I DO SEE IN OUR CITY, YOU KNOW, THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FOOD AREAS AND THEY NEVER MOVE AND UH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE PROBABLY NEED TO LOOK AT OVERALL, BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT I WOULD LIKE JUST TO BRING, BRING OUT IS THAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE EMPTIED, I THINK ALMOST EVERY NIGHT WITH REGARDS TO ALL THE TRUCKS THERE.
AND SO, AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT WORKS, YOU KNOW, REALLY FOR THE HEALTH OF THE COMMUNITY FROM A HEALTH SERVICE PERSPECTIVE, BUT, OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
HEARING NONE, IF THERE'S ANYONE, UM, ANY, UH, UH, THERE'S NOBODY HERE, SO I GUESS NO ONE'S UNDERSTANDING.
OKAY, MR. CHAIR, JUST AS A COURTESY, I MEAN, IF THERE'S ANY OPPOSITION, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT FULLY EMPANELED, RIGHT?
[03:15:01]
SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE'S ANY OPPOSITION IF WE CAN HEAR IT UP FRONT SO THAT WE GIVE THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO ADDRESS ANY BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE HERE.REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OH 8 26 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 3 3.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR 150 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 200 FOOT SEPARATION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW THE USE OF A MOBILE FOOD COURT WITHIN 50 FEET OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE OR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE, LOT SITUATED AT 9 2 2 AND NINE 16 EAST ELMIRA STREET, APPLICANT BEING, UH, KILLING GRIFFIN IN FAIRMONT.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY, SUCH A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED, WOULD RESULT IN A NECESSARY HARDSHIP TO SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
IN THIS CASE, THERE WOULD BE ADEQUATE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE PROPOSED MOBILE FOOD COURT AND THE SURROUNDING SINGLE FAMILY USES TO MITIGATE THE NOISE AND TRAFFIC THAT IS CREATED BY SUCH USE.
DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, THE LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE SPECIAL CONDITION ON THIS PROPERTY IS THAT THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY PROPOSED TO BE A MOBILE FOOD COURT IS PROXIMITY TO SINGLE FAMILY USES AND OFFICES LEAVING LIMITED ROOM TO DEVELOP.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD, WILL BE OBSERVED, SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
SUCH VARIANCE WOULD BE IN SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE REDUCTION OF THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT IS MINIMAL AND WILL CAUSE NO HARDSHIP TO THE RESIDENTIAL USES SURROUNDING THE SLOT.
FOUR, THE VARIANCE WOULD WITHOUT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE, OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED, UH, NO USES OF THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WOULD BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WITHOUT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS THERE ARE SUFFICIENT SEPARATION AND THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT REDUCE VISIBILITY.
FURTHERMORE, THERE ARE EXISTING COMMERCIAL USES IN CLOSE PROXIMITY, THUS THE INTRODUCTION OF A MOBILE FOOD COURT WOULD NOT BE COMPLETE DEVIATION FROM THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE AREA.
SIXTH APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT TO.
IT SOUGHT IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE APPLY TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, EXISTING OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE LOCATION AND AREA OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, WHICH LIMITS THE AVAILABLE SPACE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MOBILE FOOD COURT AND A MOTION.
SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE, THE MOTION HERE.
I MEAN THE APPLICANT PROVIDED TESTIMONY OF THE SUPPORT FOR THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY USE, UH, OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
UM, AND THE, UH, MOST AFFECTED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IS IN SUPPORT.
IN ADDITION, THERE'S ADEQUATE PARKING UNDERNEATH THE BRIDGE AND ADEQUATE PARKING ALL WITHIN SHORT DISTANCE FROM THE SITE.
AND, UH, THEY WILL MEET ALL THE CONDITIONS FOR THE FOOD COURT, UH, THAT THE CITY, UM, HAS, UH, WITH CITY ORDINANCES IS REQUIRING FOR A FOOD COURT OPERATION.
SO FOR THAT, I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION IS READ.
UM, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND AS WAS NOTED, UH, TOBIN HILL DID NOT OBJECT.
SO, UM, AND THEY WOULD HAVE IF THEY WOULD HAVE.
SO, UM, I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR.
ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE AS A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER STEVENS? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BROOKE, COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES THUMBS UP COM.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? YES, I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND YES, I CONCUR.
I ASSUME THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM NINE IS NOT HERE.
WE GOT A LATE VOICEMAIL SAYING THEY WANT TO POSTPONE.
SO THIS WILL BE READVERTISED WHEN I MOVE FORWARD.
IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE CONTINUED.
UH, THEY DIDN'T ASK FOR CONTINUANCE.
THEY, THEY MENTIONED POSTPONEMENT.
[ Director’s Report ]
IS THERE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT? UH, NOPE.WE DO HAVE A NEW SENIOR PLANNER FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
UH, FROM HERE,
OH, UH, JUST, UH, ONE CLARIFICATION, YOU ASKED FOR THE BUFFER.
UM, SO WE HAD A DISCUSSION WITH, UH, OUR TREE DEPARTMENT.
SO THEY CAN ASK FOR, UM, DEPTH AND CONFIGURATION OF THE BUFFER, BUT ONCE THEY GO BELOW FIVE FEET, UM, THEY JUST HAVE TO ASK FOR AN ELIMINATION BECAUSE THEY CAN'T FACILITATE A, A BUFFER INSIDE OF THAT FIVE FEET.
UM, SO SOMEBODY CAN ASK FOR, YOU KNOW, THEY REQUIRE TWO TREES THROUGH 200 FEET.
THEY CAN, UH, REQUEST FOR Y'ALL TO DO ONE TREE, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT IF WE HAVE, IF SOMEBODY ASKS
[03:20:01]
FOR A BUFFER OF THREE FEET JUST FOR THE PURPOSES OF HAVING GRASS, CAN THAT STILL BE DONE? AND JUST THERE'S NO PLANTING REQUIREMENT.SO THAT'S A, THAT'S AN ELIMINATION OF THE CONFIGURATION OR COMPOSITION.
I MEAN, SO THAT WOULD NO, I, NO, I KNOW THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD MEAN 'CAUSE IT LOOKED LIKE IT, IT LOOKED LIKE IT HAD WIDTH AND COM COMPOSITION OF AS TWO DIFFERENT ELEMENTS.
SO SOMEBODY WANTED A THREE FOOT BUFFER.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY WOULD, BUT LET'S SAY SOMEBODY WANTED TO ASK FOR A THREE FOOT BUFFER AND THEN NO, AND THEN NO PLANTING REQUIRED.
IT WOULD BASICALLY JUST BE A GRASS STRIP.
THAT SPECIFIC SCENARIO I BELIEVE WOULD BE FINE, BUT I'LL DOUBLE CHECK JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT, BECAUSE, AND, AND THE OTHER QUESTION IS, IS IF AN APPLICANT ASKS FOR SOMETHING, IF THEY ASK FOR AN ELIMINATION, DOES THAT GIVE US THE ABILITY TO, TO, TO THEN CONFIGURE IT TO BE A WIDTH OR A COMPOSITION? OR DO THEY HAVE TO SPECIFICALLY SAY, I WANT A COMPOSITION VARIANCE? NOW, ONCE, ONCE WE ADVERTISE FOR AN ELIMINATION, EVERY, ANYTHING YOU DO LESS IS LESS INTENSE.
I JUST WANTED, I'M JUST ASKING BECAUSE OF, IF SOMEBODY HAS A, A BUFFER REQUIREMENT OF LET'S SAY 15 FEET AND THEY WANT TO GO DOWN TO 10, UH, BUT THEY DON'T MAKE ANY MENTION OF THE PLANTING, DOES THAT MEAN WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO? UH, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO BECAUSE AGAIN, IF WE ADVERTISE FOR AN ELIMINATION OF BUFFER, NO, NOT AN ELIMINATION.
LIKE IF THEY DON'T, IF THEY DON'T SAY THE WORD ELIMINATION AND OH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THEY JUST TO LIKE TAKE THE WORST BUFFER, TAKE A TYPE F BUFFER, LIKE A 40 FOOT BUFFER AND YOU TAKE IT DOWN TO, AND AND THEY ASK FOR IT TO BE 15 FEET AND THE BOARD WANTS TO MAKE IT 20 FEET OR SOMETHING, BUT THE COMPOSITION PART IS NOT PART OF THEIR SPECIFIC REQUEST.
WHAT ARE OUR OPTIONS AT THAT? YOU YEAH, AT THAT POINT YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO TOUCH THE, THE CONFIGURATION OF IT BECAUSE IT WAS JUST ADVERTISED FOR THE DEPTH AS A AND IS STAFF GOING TO TO DISCUSS THOSE INSTANCES, UH, ABOUT OKAY, HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN ASK FOR.
MAKE SURE YOU ASK FOR WHAT YOU'RE AT, YOU, YOU WANT, CORRECT? YES.
SO, SO IF IT'S A F WITH THAT HAS TO HAVE 50 TREES ON IT, WE CAN MAKE IT, UM, LARGER BUFFER SPACE, BUT IT STILL HAS TO HAVE THE 50 TREES ON IT, RIGHT? YEAH.
I MEAN, BECAUSE IF, BECAUSE WHAT I'M ENVISIONING IS, IS THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A BUNCH OF APPLICANTS JUST AUTOMATICALLY ASKING FOR AN ELIMINATION AND THEN SAYING, I CAN LIVE WITH 10 FEET OR I CAN LIVE WITH 15 FEET, AND THEN IT'S UP TO US TO KIND OF MAKE IT HAPPEN KIND OF THING.
AND AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE, WE DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT KIND OF EARLY IN THE PROCESS WITH OUR TREE TEAM.
LIKE, HEY, THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR.
AND IF THERE IS AN ALTERNATE THAT THEY CAN LIVE WITH, WE KIND OF PRESENT THAT ALSO.
I MEAN, MOST OF BUFFERS YOU'RE DEALING WITH A 10 OR A 15 FEET.
IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE THE E OR AN F AND THEY'RE JUST THESE HUGE BUFFERS, YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF ELIMINATION, A COMPOSITION OR IT WOULD JUST BE RIDICULOUS.
AND WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL, SEVERAL COME THROUGH WITH THE, WHERE THERE WAS CONCRETE AND THEN THEY'RE TEARING OUT THE THREE FOOT SECTION, YOU KNOW, AND SAYING, YEAH, WE'RE GONNA FILL IT.
BUT IT WAS, YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW THEY WENT FOR ZERO ELIMINATION, BUT THEY SAID THEY WERE PUTTING STUFF ANYWAYS, SO.
UM, WELL IT'S 4 32 AND WE ARE ADJOURNED.