[00:00:04]
IT[Work Session ]
IS ONE OH THREE HERE.I CALL THIS MEETING THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IN THIS SESSION TO HAVE THE SPANISH INTERPRETER COME OUT, PLEASE.
OH, WHEN? FOR THE SPANISH SPEAKERS.
SO IF STAFF COULD PLEASE CALL ROLL.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES PRESENT.
SO WE HAVE A QUORUM OF NINE, WHICH IS THE MINIMUM.
SO IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE STAND AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH STANDS? ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY JUSTICE FLOOR.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD.
ALL RIGHT, SO BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I'D LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION.
THIS BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA WHICH IS AVAILABLE ONLINE.
THE CASE IS ELICIT BY NUMBER WITH THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT AND STREET ADDRESS.
FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FOLLOWED BY A DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
LASTLY, AS CHAIR, I'LL MAKE ANNOUNCEMENTS SUCH AS COMMUNITY CALENDAR EVENTS,
I ASK THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS SUBMIT THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS TO ME AS A CHAIR AND I'LL READ THEM AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE MEETING.
WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY'S ZONING CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THIS AREA.
THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW.
WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELEASE LAW 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 AT CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY, CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM A DECISION OR DETERMINATION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED AND CHAPTER 35.
WE ALSO SERVE IN AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 28 DASH FIVE.
IN ADDITION, WE HAVE POWERS TO HEAR CASES AND OTHER MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE F BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS.
THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE PETITION AND THEY'LL BE QUESTIONED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
ANY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WILL BE PRESENTED IN A LIKE MANNER.
AFTER EVERYONE HAS HEARD THE CASE WILL BE CLOSED AND A MEMBER OF BOARD WILL MAKE A MOTION.
EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION.
IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY.
IT REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND GRANTING THE RELIEF SOUGHT RESTS WITH THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS IN WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL.
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURT AT LAW.
BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, APPEALS FROM THE BOARD.
DECISIONS REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
PLEASE LET ME YOUR PRESENTATION AND REMARKS OF THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE STAFF.
STAFF WILL BE BEGIN TO CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST.
PART PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR A VARIANCE OF SPECIAL EXEMPTION AND THE PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AS INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION.
UPON THE PRESENTATION AND THE QUESTIONS ABOUT AUTHORITY, APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THE REQUEST FOR THOSE WHO SIGN UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE VARIANCE OF SPECIAL EXEMPTION.
YOU'LL BE CALLED ON IN THE ORDER YOU SIGN UP TO SPEAK.
THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO
[00:05:01]
UTILIZE THAT, UTILIZE A MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION, BUT THOSE WOULD ALLOWED TO GIVE UP THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER.THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE GIVEN UP THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES.
THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS FOUR QUESTIONS.
YEAH, SO NOW THAT WE HAVE NINE PEOPLE PRESENT AND WE NEED NINE VOTES FOR ANYTHING TO PASS, UH, WHAT I WOULD NORMALLY DO AT THIS TIME OF THE MEETING IS JUMP TO THE CASES WHERE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING A FULL APPROVAL.
[ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items ]
FIRST SUCH CASE IS ITEM NUMBER FOUR.I APOLOGIZE IF YOU'RE EARLIER ON THE AGENDA, BUT THIS IS PROBABLY IN YOUR BEST INTEREST.
UH, WE WILL HAVE MORE BED BOARD MEMBERS JOINING AT A LATER TIME.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS BO OA DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 66 LOCATED AT 2045 SOUTH FOSTER ROAD.
THE ZONING IS I ONE AND NP 10 AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A 20 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM ALLOWABLE 30 FOOT HEIGHT FOR A LIGHT SOURCE TO ALLOW 73 LIGHT POLES TO BE 50 FEET IN HEIGHT.
THE SUB PROPERTY IS LOCATED OFF SOUTH FOSTER ROAD.
SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE A MIXTURE OF INDUSTRIAL BASED ZONING DISTRICTS AND NP 10 NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION DISTRICT PROPERTIES ACROSS FOSTER ROAD ARE LOCATED OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS.
THE CASE ORIGINATED FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROPOSING THE INSTALLATION OF 73 LIGHT POLES TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT FOR LIGHT SOURCE BY 20 FEET TO BE 50 FEET TALL PER STAFF'S VISIT TO THE SITE IN SEPTEMBER, 2026.
THE APPLICANT MAY EITHER ADHERE TO UDC STANDARDS THAT LIMIT LIGHT SOURCE FIXTURES TO 30 FEET OR REQUEST RELIEF FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR THE MAXIMUM LIGHT SOURCE, LIGHT VARIANCE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE PERMITTING 50 FOOT LIGHT POLES WOULD NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THEIR PLACEMENT WOULD NOT BE IN PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND WOULD MINIMALLY CONTRIBUTE LIGHT SPREAD TO LOCATIONS OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE PROPERTY OWNER HAVING TO INSTALL LIGHT FIXTURES THAT MAY BE INSUFFICIENT OR UNREASONABLE FOR THE CURRENT OPERATION.
THE SURROUNDING AREA THAT WOULD BE MOST IMPACTED BY THE LIGHT SOURCES IS INDUSTRIAL AND PART OF THE EXISTING WAREHOUSE OPERATION.
STAFF MAIL THAT 24 NOTICES ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, ZERO VOICEMAILS ARE RECEIVED AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
UH, DID THIS HAVE TO GET, UM, SOME SORT OF REVIEW BY THE MILITARY? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
YEAH, I'M JUST ASKING 'CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S IN A, UH, A LOD YEAH.
MILITARY STANDARDS, BUT IT'S REVIEWED BY OUR BUILDING REVIEW TEAM, COMMERCIAL BUILDING REVIEW.
UM, MERKEL, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT PLEASE? UH, THE NAME OF THE OVERLAY IS A MILITARY OVERLAY, BUT IT'S REVIEWED BY OUR BUILDING REVIEW TEAM.
THERE'S NO LIKE NOTICE TO THE MILITARY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SO IT'S NOT IN A OVERHEAD LIGHTING DISTRICT.
IT IS IN A OVERLAY, THE MILITARY OVERLAY LIGHTING OVERLAY DISTRICT.
BUT IT'S REVIEWED BY DSDS UH, BUILDING REVIEW.
YOU OKAY? I'LL HAVE QUESTIONS ON THAT IN A BIT.
HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR, UH, GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.
I'M AN ELECTRICAL ENGINEER WITH SUMMIT CONSULTANTS REPRESENTING HEB FOR THIS PROJECT AND THIS VARIANCE YOU CAN USE.
SO HERE'S A QUICK OVERVIEW OF OUR FACILITY AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED.
YOU NEED TO HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
UH, I HAVE TO RECUSE FROM THIS ONE, SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TABLE THIS UNTIL SOME OTHER PEOPLE SHOW UP.
I DIDN'T KNOW WHO THE OWNER WAS.
[00:10:02]
IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, BE ITEM NUMBER SIX.DO YOU NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECUSE OR WE JUST TABLE IT? WELL, I CAN'T IF I A MOTION TO TABLE OR I JUST TABLED IT SECOND.
I I DON'T THINK I NEED A MOTION TO TABLE IT.
DO I? IF IT'S GONNA HAPPEN IN THE SAME MEETING, WE NEED TO TABLE IT.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, VA 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 2.
APPLICANT BEING DANIEL LORETTO, UH, LOCATED WITHIN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE LOCATED AT 5 0 6 TOPEKA BOULEVARD.
ZONING BEING R FOUR SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.
THIS BEING A REQUEST FOR A ONE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW FOR A PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO BE FOUR FEET FROM THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED OFF TOPEKA BOULEVARD IN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PROPERTY WAS LOCATED EAST OF IH 37 AND IN PROXIMITY TO LOUISE JAFFET ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, THE VARIANCE APPLICATION ORIGINATED FROM THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH A PORTION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT HISTORICALLY ENCROACHES TO WITHIN TWO FEET OF THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
ALL OF THE PROPOSED DEMOLITION WILL REMOVE THE EXISTING TWO FOOT ENCROACHMENT.
THE REMAINING STRUCTURE WILL STILL ENCROACH ONE FOOT INTO THE REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK.
GIVEN THE EXTENT OF THE PROPOSED WORK TO THE STRUCTURE, A VARIANCE IS NECESSARY TO ALLOW THE REMAINING ONE FOOT ENCROACHMENT.
SUBJECT PROPERTY SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND BO A 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 2 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDING OF THE FACT, UH, REGARDING THE SETBACK VARIANCE.
THE PROPOSED FOUR FOOT SETBACK PROVIDES GREATER SEPARATION THAN THE EXISTING TWO FOOT ENCROACHMENT AND REPRESENTS A REASONABLE IMPROVEMENT TO THE PROPERTY.
THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE ENCROACHMENT PORTION TO REBO REMOVED AND THE STRUCTURE TO BE RECONSTRUCTED WITH A FOUR FOOT SETBACK.
ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
NO VOICEMAILS RECEIVED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE HIGHLAND PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
UM, STEVEN LAREDO ON BEHALF OF MY FATHER, DANIEL LAREDO.
UH, THE OWNER? UM, YEAH, JUST, UH, PROPERTY IS IN NEED OF REPAIR, UM, CURRENTLY TWO FEET AWAY FROM, FROM THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.
UM, THERE'S ABOUT A 16 FOOT LONG BY TWO FOOT WIDE, UH, SECTION OF THE HOUSE THAT JUTS OUT A LITTLE BIT.
SO WE JUST WANNA ELIMINATE THAT, GET IT CLOSER TO THE FIVE FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK.
IT'LL BE FOUR FEET, SO WE'RE REQUESTING THAT ONE FOOT VARIANCE.
UH, THE ONLY CAVEAT I WANT TO ADD IS THAT WE DID REACH OUT TO THE HIGHLAND PARK, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND, UH, AARON GALLEGOS REED, THE, THE PRESIDENT OF THAT ASSOCIATION, UH, DID SUPPORT THE PROJECT, UH, VIA EMAIL WITH HER BOARD MEMBERS.
BUT YOU'RE SU YOU'RE SUBSTANTIALLY USING THE SAME FOUNDATION FOOTPRINT? YES.
WHAT YEAR WAS THE HOUSE BUILT? UM, NOT SURE WHEN IT WAS BUILT.
WE, UH, HE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN 1987.
IT'S BEEN THERE QUITE A WHILE,
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? ALRIGHT.
HEARING NONE, UM, ANYONE SIGN TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER? YES, WE HAVE.
UH, MARGARET BENAVIDEZ, COME ON UP PLEASE.
I KNOW WE HEARD YOUR NAME, BUT IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE IT FOR THE RECORD AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS.
AND, UM, THE, THE REASON I WANTED TO SPEAK, YOU CAN MOVE THE MIC A LITTLE BIT TO, THERE YOU GO.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? I CAN HEAR YOU GREAT.
JUST SOMETIMES THEY, UM, MARGARET BENAVIDES AND I WAS JUST WANTING TO SPEAK BECAUSE I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND, THERE WAS VERY LITTLE INFORMATION ON THERE AND I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS GONNA BE GOING UP.
IT SAID THERE WOULD BE A NEW STRUCTURE AND THERE ISN'T ANY KIND OF, UH, UM, LIKE, UH, EXAMPLE OF WHAT THAT STRUCTURE WOULD BE AND EXACTLY WHERE IT WOULD BE AND HOW IT'S GOING TO AFFECT ALL THESE OTHER PEOPLE.
WELL, UM, WE THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND
[00:15:01]
I WILL SAY THAT, UH, CURRENTLY THERE'S A, IT ENCROACHES TWO FOOT INTO THE SETBACK.THEY'RE GONNA MAKE IT ONLY ENCROACH ONE FOOT.
THEY'RE GONNA GET RID OF SOME OF THESE, UH, ELEMENTS THAT JET OUT.
SO THAT'LL BE A LITTLE BETTER.
AND WHEN THEY COME, JETT OUT FROM WHERE? FROM THE SIDE? LIKE, LIKE ALONG THE, THE FRONTAGE ROAD? NO, ON THE SIDE OF THE HOME.
IS THAT ON THE SIDE OF THE HOME? UHHUH.
BUT THEY'RE ASKING TO GO TO FOUR FEET JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING FOUNDATION.
OTHERWISE, I WAS GONNA SAY THE HOUSE, MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD JUST ADD THAT ANYTHING THEY DO, THEY'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE CITY BUILDING PERMITTING PROCESS.
UHHUH
SO THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY FIRE.
UM, YOU KNOW, FIRE, FIRE BARRIERS ARE NEEDED TO PROTECT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
SO THAT WOULD REQUIRE, UH, BUILDING PERMIT PERMITS.
SO IT'S BASICALLY, IT'S JUST ON THAT PROPERTY.
OH, SO I'M, I'M, I'M OKAY WITH IT THEN.
ALRIGHT, WELL I APPRECIATE THAT.
IF WE HAVE THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP, PLEASE.
UH, BEFORE WE, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION, UH, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? NO, SIR.
OONA ZUNA REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 26 0 3 0 0 1 7 2.
I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS A REQUEST BY DANIEL LOREDO FOR A ONE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW FOR A PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO BE FOUR FEET FROM THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE LOCATED AT 5 0 6 TOPEKA BOULEVARD.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOWED THAT THE, THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE ONE FOOT REDUCTION IS LIMITED IN SCOPE AND IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO ADVERSELY AFFECT PUBLIC INTEREST OR SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO THE SPECIFIC CONFIGURATION OF PHYSICAL CONDITIONS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THE REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK WOULD UNNECESSARILY LIMIT THE REASONABLE PLACEMENT IN DEVELOPMENT OF PROPOSED PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED IN SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE ONE FOOT REDUCTION IS LIMITED AND WILL ALLOW THE PROPERTY TO BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THOSE USE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE ZONING VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO OTHER USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED TO THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALSO THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE ONE FOOT REDUCTION ON THE SIDE SETBACK IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO, TO SUBSTANTIALLY IMPAIR THE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTIES OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
THE PLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOOT TO VARIANCE OF SAW IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS.
THE DISTRICT OF THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE PHYSICAL CONDITION AND CONFIGURATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, WHICH CONSTRAINED THE REASONABLE PLACEMENT OF THE PROPOSED PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE PROVIDES A MINIMUM RELIEF NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND A MOTION.
SO I, UH, WILL ALSO, UM, BE IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
UM, THE, THE WHAT'S PROPOSED HERE IS A BETTER TO WHAT THE SITUATION EXISTS CURRENTLY.
UM, AND, UH, THAT ALLOWS THEM TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY, PROVIDE FOR HOUSING MUCH NEEDED IN THE CITY.
COMMISSIONER REED? UH, I ALSO SUPPORT THIS.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER E NESS? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER MANNA? I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
OH, WHAT HAPPENED OH EIGHT NEXT.
IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, YOU CAN, UH, GET WITH STAFF.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, BO 8 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 4.
APPLICANT BEING YIDA EZ, UH, LOCATED WITHIN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE, LOCATED
[00:20:01]
AT THREE 50 MODELO STREET ZONING.BEING R FOUR SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT, THIS BEING A REQUEST FOR A 700 760 SQUARE FOOT LAWN SIZE VARIANCE MINIMUM REQUIRED 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE OF 3,240 SQUARE FEET.
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED OFF MODELO STREET, A, A LOCAL ROAD WITHIN AN ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE EXISTING PRIMARY STRUCTURE WAS RECENTLY DEMOLISHED TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENTIAL DWELLING.
DURING REVIEW OF THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS, STAFF DETERMINE THAT THE PROPERTY DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM LAW SIZE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UDC RESULTING IN THE NEED FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST.
STAFF OBSERVED SEVERAL SIMILARLY LOST SIZE LOTS IN THE SURROUNDING AREA THAT ARE DEVELOPED WITH RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN SUBJECT PROPERTY SURROUNDING AREA STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL ON THE LOT SIZE VARIANCE, UH, NBOA 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 4 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS LIMITED IN SCOPE AND WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECT THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
ALTERING THE ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT TO GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF THE 7 760 SQUARE FOOT DEFICIENCY ALLOWS REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY WHILE MAINTAINING THE INTENT OF THE MINIMUM LAW AREA REQUIREMENT.
37 NOTICES SENT ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, NO VOICEMAILS AND NO RESPONSE FROM COLLINS GARDEN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THAT CONCLUDES, UH, PRESENTATION AND APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
AND THIS, THIS SITE DIDN'T QUALIFY AS A SUBSTANDARD LOT UNDER, UNDER ARTICLE SEVEN.
I MEAN, IT'S A WHOLE LOT, RIGHT? IT'S LOT 15, CORRECT? YEAH, I, I THINK THROUGH PLAN REVIEW OR, OR SOME DETERMINATION WAS MADE THAT I THINK THEY NEED TO GO THROUGH THIS FIRST THEN TO GET A COD.
WELL THE REASON UNDER THE COD SAYS YOU HAVE TO MEET THE ZONING, BUT THERE, IF YOU GO UNDER SUBSTANDARD LOT, WOULDN'T THAT AS A WHOLE LOT.
IF IT'S, IF IT DOESN'T MEET THE AREA, WOULDN'T IT ALREADY BE ACCEPTABLE? SO WE DO GO, UM, SPEAK WITH THE SUBDIVISIONS TEAM THAT HANDLES THIS.
SO I BELIEVE IT WAS NOT AN OPTION.
ALRIGHT, LET HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
MY NAME IS S HERNANDEZ AND I'M HERE TODAY REGARDING MY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REQUESTS FOR 3 5 0 MADERO.
I AM REQUESTING A LOT SIZE VARIANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW ME TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT.
I'VE INCLUDED A FEW RENDERINGS.
DID THAT GO THROUGH? I THINK THERE'S THREE.
I HAVE INCLUDED A FEW CHAT GBT RENDERINGS TO HELP ILLUSTRATE MY OVERALL VISION FOR THE PROPERTY AND WHAT I'M HOPING THE FINISHED PROJECT WILL LOOK LIKE.
THESE RENDERINGS AREN'T EXACT ARCHITECTURAL REPRESENTATIONS.
OF COURSE, I DO HAVE PLANS IN PROGRESS, BUT THEY GIVE A GOOD IDEA OF THE GENERAL DESIGN STYLE AND APPEARANCE I'M TRYING TO ACHIEVE.
THIS PROJECT WOULD NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IN FACT, I BELIEVE THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE.
ALLOWING ME TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT WOULD IMPROVE THE OVERALL APPEARANCE AND CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY, CONTRIBUTE POSITIVELY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND POTENTIALLY SUPPORT FUTURE PROPERTY VALUES IN THE SURROUNDED AREA.
MY GOAL IS TO TAKE THIS PROPERTY AND TURN IT INTO SOMETHING ATTRACTIVE WHILE MAINTAINED AND COMPLIMENTARY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SOMETHING THAT ADDS VALUE RATHER THAN TAKE AWAY FROM IT.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK THE BOARD TO CONSIDER APPROVING THIS VARIANCE SO THAT I CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT.
IS THERE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? MR. CRUZ? THANK YOU.
SORRY, I WAS TRYING TO SWALLOW.
UM, HOW BIG IS IT? THE HOME GONNA BE? IT'S GONNA BE FOR LIMITED AMOUNT.
IT'S RESIDENTIAL PERSON RESIDENTIAL, ABOUT 600 WITH THE ROOFTOP DECK.
WHICH IS WHAT? TWO THREE BEDROOM? UH, ONE BED.
UM, SO I'M ASSUMING FOR, UH, THIS SIZE HOME THAT A TOP DECK, UH, FULLY, FULLY COVERED TOP DECK AS A WE'LL SAY AS A, UH, OUTDOOR AREA IS, UH, IS ACCEPTABLE OR, OR COMPLIANT WITH REGARDS TO THE RULES, UH,
[00:25:01]
WITHIN UDC, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.UH, IT'S ONLY AFTER THAT SECOND STORY FOR THAT HALF STORY.
BUT SINCE THERE'S A ONE STORY, THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH THAT AS FAR AS THAT.
AND YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS WHOLE COMMUNITY IS FILLED WITH LOTS OF THESE SUBSTANDARD LOTS.
AND RATHER THAN HAVE THE, UM, APPLICANTS COME THROUGH AND PAY MONEY, SHOULD THE CITY CONSIDER, CAN THE CITY CONSIDER DOING A MASS REZONING AND MOVING ALL OF THESE TO R THREE ON THEIR OWN? UM, VERSUS HAVING, YOU KNOW, THE RESIDENTS COME AND PAY TO, YOU KNOW, DEVELOP THESE LOTS? UH, THE COUNCIL DISTRICT IS, UM, ABLE TO DO, UH, UH, REQUEST FOR A LARGE AREA REZONING TO ZONING STAFF.
UM, USUALLY THAT COMES WITH THE, THE PROPERTY OWNERS GOING TO THE CITY COUNCIL, UH, TO INITIATE THAT.
BUT WE GET THOSE ALL THE TIME.
COMMISSIONER MANNA, YOU KNOW, I BROUGHT UP SECTION 35 7 0 3 C 'CAUSE THIS IS A PLATTED LOT.
AND THAT SECTION SAYS THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IF IT'S SUBSTANDARD DUE TO AREA, IT COULD BE USED FOR ANYTHING ALLOWED IN THE APPLICABLE ZONING DISTRICT.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY DIDN'T JUST GRANT A COD.
AND THIS IS, THIS IS, IT SHOULDN'T EVEN HAVE TO COME HERE.
AND SHE SHOULDN'T, THIS APPLICANT SHOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE PAID $600, UH, WHEN SHE'S ALREADY PAID 200 FOR THE COD PROCESS.
I THINK STAFF REALLY DROPPED THE BALL ON THIS PERSONALLY.
THAT'S WHERE I WAS KIND OF GOING BACK THE OTHER PATH IS LIKE, IS THE CITY PROACTIVELY GOING OUT FINDING THESE LOTS THAT ARE THIS IN THIS SPACE AND BRINGING 'EM TO THE ATTENTION OF THEIR, OF THE COUNCIL REP SO THAT THEY CAN TAKE, YOU KNOW, POSITIVE ACTION ON BEHALF OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS.
THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS, WHY I WAS GOING THAT PATH.
THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER POSITIVE THING THAT COULD HAPPEN.
I APOLOGIZE THAT YOU HAVE TO SPEND THE MONEY TO COME HERE WHEN YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO.
IS THERE A MOTION THAT WAS DECIDED BY A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT? WELL, I KNOW, BUT, BUT, BUT $600, I MEAN, IT'S ONLY ONE SENTENCE.
A SUBSTANDARD LOT, WHICH THIS IS A PLATTED LOT AND I GET THAT.
BUT AGAIN, WE WERE GOING OFF OF THE INTERPRETATION FROM OTHER STAFF.
SO, WELL, THEY'RE, THEY'RE COMPLETELY WRONG.
I WISH THAT THEY WOULD STOP DOING THAT BECAUSE IT'S A WASTE OF OUR TIME AND HER TIME AND MONEY.
ALRIGHT, LOOKING FOR A MOTION.
UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 26 103 0 0 1 7 4.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT TO REQUEST BY LAIA HERNANDEZ A 700 AND FOOT SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW FOR A LOT SIZE.
SO 3,240 SQUARE FEET LOCATED AT THREE 50 MEDO STREET BECAUSE THE PER 10, I'M SORRY, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDCS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WOULD ALLOW THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO BE RECENTLY DEVELOPED FOR RESIDENTIAL USE WHILE MAINTAINING CAPABILITY WITH THE ESTABLISHED SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LIT, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO THE EXISTING CON CONFIGURATION AND LIMITED AREA OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE 4,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT SIZE WOULD PREVENT REASONABLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE REQUESTED RELIEF IS LIMITED TO THE 600 AND 760 FOOT SQUARE FOOT DEFICIENCY AND WILL PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE BY ALLOWING THE PROPERTY TO BE REASONABLY UTILIZED IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE SONY DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
OTHER NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH EXPERIENCE.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND NOT DUE TO OR RESULTS
[00:30:01]
OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.THE REQUEST IS UNIQUE TO THE SUBJECT.
PROPERTY IS NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE, AND IT'S NOT THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS AFFECTING PROPERTIES THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT.
I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS.
IT WOULD BE A HOME THAT PROBABLY IS REQUIRED IN THAT AR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IT IS A SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD, SO I'M SURE THE NEIGHBORS WILL NOT MINE A NEW PROPERTY IN THE AREA.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER MANNA.
I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND I I'M GOING TO FOLLOW THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.
ALL RIGHT, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NONE.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR THE FINES OF FACT.
ITEM NUMBER NINE, BO OA DASH 26 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 7 5.
THE ZONING IS C TWO AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A ONE FOOT FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FIVE FOOT.
PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD FENCE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD FENCE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED OFF HUBNER ROAD AND SURROUNDED BY PROPERTY ZONE COMMERCIAL OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL USES, WHICH WITH OCL PROPERTIES TO THE WEST.
THE CASE IS A RESULT OF THE APPLICANT INTENDING TO CONSTRUCT A SIX FOOT TALL FENCE WITH ONE FOOT OF BARBED WIRE ON A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY PER STAFF'S VISIT TO THE SITE IN SEPTEMBER, 2026.
DEFENSE HAD NOT BEEN REPLACED AND CONSTRUCTED YET.
THE PROPOSED FENCE MEETS THE SET BY REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROPERTY AND MUST SEEK FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO EXCEED THE REQUIRED FIVE FOOT FRONT YARD MAXIMUM.
IF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPROVES THEIR REQUEST, THE BARB WIRE WILL BE ADDRESSED TO A SEPARATE ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE AND MAY BE PERMITTED TO EXTEND AN ADDITIONAL ONE FOOT ABOVE THE APPROVED FENCE HEIGHT.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR THE FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT.
ONE, THE INCREASED FENCE HEIGHT WOULD NOT BE LOCATED IN YOUR LOCATION WITH HIGH TRAFFIC OR A RESIDENTIAL ZONE AREA, THUS NOT IMPOSING AN INCONVENIENCE OR DETRIMENT TO PUBLIC WIFI WELFARE.
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED FENCE WOULD NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT AS SIMILAR.
FENCE HEIGHTS OF PREDOMINANTLY OPEN MATERIAL WERE OBSERVED OF THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA.
OUTSIDE 200 FEET THERE IS ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR.
THERE'S ZERO VOICEMAILS RECEIVED IN HUNTER'S CREEK.
NORTH NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU BRING UP THE SITE PLAN PLEASE? SO ON THE SITE PLAN, UH, IT SAYS THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
IT WAS, IT WAS MEANT TO BE ONE FOOT.
AND, AND SECONDLY, UM, THE, THE, THE ORANGE PART WHERE THE NUMBER TWO IS, WHICH IS NOT ALONG A PROPERTY LINE, IS THAT BECAUSE IT'S WITHIN THE OFFSET FROM THE SETBACK, THE REAR SETBACK? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS SUBJECT TO THE FIVE FOOT LIMITATION? I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW THAT WORKED.
THE NUMBER TWO VARIANCE REQUEST.
AND I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE LINE THAT CUTS THROUGH.
'CAUSE I THOUGHT THAT IF THE FENCE WAS BEYOND THE SETBACK, UH, OF THE PROPERTY, THEN IT'S, IT'S LOOKED AT A LITTLE DIFFERENT WITH REGARDS TO THE HEIGHT.
IF SOMEBODY COULD EDUCATE ME ON THAT OR MAYBE I'M JUST INCORRECT.
WELL, THE LOCATION WOULD BE IN THE REAR, SO IT'D STILL BE HELD TO WHATEVER FENCE STANDARDS ARE FOR THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, REGARDLESS OF IF IT'S ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE.
I JUST THOUGHT THERE WAS SOMETHING TO IT.
IF THE FENCE WAS, WAS MORE THAN THE SETBACK AWAY, THAT'S ALL.
YEAH, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT WITHIN THE SETBACKS AND THEY'RE SPECIFICALLY FOR A BARB WIRE FENCE, THEN IT'S, IT'S NOT AN ISSUE FOR THEM.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? ALRIGHT, SO THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR FENCE.
I'M WITH HOLLAND AND KNIGHT AND WE
[00:35:01]
REPRESENT CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.YOU MAY ALSO KNOW THEM AS SPECTRUM.
UH, THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY USED AS A TELECOMMUTE COMMUNICATIONS HUB.
IT HAS CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE THAT PROVIDES SERVICE TO RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS FOR, UH, INTERNET, TELEVISION AND PHONE.
UM, WE'RE REQUESTING A ONE FOOT HEIGHT INCREASE, UM, FOR THE FRONT YARD FENCE.
I THINK THAT'S THE REQUEST THAT REQUIRES A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
UM, AND THE REASON IS BECAUSE THIS IS THIS, UH, HUB HOUSES CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE THAT REQUIRES ENHANCED SECURITY TO PREVENT LOITERING AND UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS AND TO HOPEFULLY PREVENT ANY DISRUPTION IN OPERATIONS AND IMPACT ON PUBLIC CONNECTIVITY.
UM, IS THERE A CLICKER? OH, THANK YOU.
SO AGAIN, THIS IS A PHOTO OF THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THE FENCE WOULD BE LOCATED, AND IT'S GOING TO BE A CHAIN LINK MESH FENCE.
UM, THE MAIN REASON FOR THE REQUEST IS BECAUSE OF PAST LOITERING AND EVIDENCE OF TRESPASS ON THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S ALSO BEEN, UM, A, A LITTLE BIT OF A PROBLEM WITH CAMPING ON THE PROPERTY.
SO THE MAIN BASIS FOR THE REQUEST, THE PROPERTY ZONE C TWO AND IT'S SURROUNDED ON EACH SIDE WHERE THE FENCE IS GONNA BE LOCATED BY OTHER COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
AND I BELIEVE ON EACH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, THERE ARE OTHER UTILITY SITES, UH, NOT AFFILIATED WITH CHARTER, UH, BUT THEY ARE SIMILAR TO THIS TELECOMMUNICATIONS HUB.
THIS IS A DEPICTION OF THE FENCE THAT IS INTENDED, UH, THE MAIN PART OF THE FENCE.
WE WOULD LIKE TO BUILD SIX FEET PLUS AN ADDITIONAL ONE FOOT OF BARBED WIRE.
UM, WHICH I THINK FOR PURPOSES OF TODAY, WE'RE ONLY REQUESTING THE ONE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO INCREASE THE MAIN FENCE TO SIX FEET BECAUSE WE WILL NEED TO GO THROUGH ANOTHER APPLICATION PROCESS FOR THE BARBED WIRE ON TOP.
UM, ON THE LEFT IS A SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY, UM, AND THEN THE SECOND IMAGES OVERLAID WITH THE, UM, WITH THE FENCE.
AND YOU CAN SEE IN THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
THE SECOND IMAGE IS, IS FLIPPED UPSIDE DOWN JUST FOR REFERENCE.
AND THE ROAD IS SOUTH OR AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN ON THE RIGHT PHOTO.
SO THE FENCE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PHOTO IS THE, IS THE LOCATION OF THE FRONT FACING FENCE.
AND AS I MENTIONED, WHERE THE FENCE IS GONNA BE LOCATED, IT'S OBVIOUSLY GONNA BE ADJACENT TO RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, BUT THE OTHER SIDES OF THE FENCE ON THE, UM, EACH SIDE IS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND THE BACK FENCE IS PRETTY FAR.
I'LL GO BACK TO THE SURVEY, BUT IT, I I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY FEET, BUT IT'S GONNA BE LOCATED 60, ABOUT 60 FEET I BELIEVE AWAY FROM THE BACK, UH, PROPERTY LINE.
SO AGAIN, UH, THIS SITE HOUSES CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE.
UH, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
AND OUR REQUEST IS NARROWLY TAILORED TO THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING THE SITE FULL SECURITY TO PREVENT REPEATED TRESPASSING, WHICH WE HAVE EVIDENCE OF, UM, PAST TRESPASS.
AND ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA.
SO, UM, WHAT IS THE DISTANCE FROM THE FENCE? UH, FRONTING THE ROAD? UM, YOU KNOW, AND THE ROAD ITSELF.
SO, SO THE ROAD TO THE FENCE ITSELF,
[00:40:01]
THE FENCE IS ON THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.I DON'T KNOW THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE, LIKE THE BUILT STREET AND THE FENCE.
UM, BUT THE RIGHT OF WAY WOULD EXTEND ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE FENCE LINE.
UM, SO SO IS THE, IS THE FENCE GONNA BE DIRECTLY ON THE ROADWAY ITSELF, I GUESS IS WHERE I'M GOING? SO THAT'S A, YOU KNOW, NO, THAT IS A, UM, PRETTY STRETCH OF ROAD THERE.
AND TO SEE IT START TO BE LINES WITH BARB WIRE FENCE WOULD SEEM NOT CONGRUENT WITH THAT COMMUNITY.
IF YOU CAN SEE THE IMAGE ON THE LEFT, THERE'S A FIRE HYDRANT.
I'M THE ROAD, THE RIGHT OF WAY EXTENDS BEYOND THAT FIRE HYDRANT.
SO IT, IT WON'T BE DIRECTLY ON THE SIDEWALK, IT'LL BE A FEW FEET BACK, BUT I, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT DISTANCE.
THERE IS A FENCE ON THE PROPERTY, UM, ON THE RIGHT OF THE, IF YOU'RE FACING THE PROPERTY AND THE FENCE IS GOING TO BE, UH, EVEN WITH THAT FENCE, I DON'T HAVE AN IMAGE FOR YOU THOUGH, I'M SORRY.
SO IT, YOUR, YOUR DRIVEWAY, USUALLY WHEN THE APRON FLARES IN, UM, THAT'S A GOOD MARKER OF WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE IS.
AND SO I I, UM, IF STAFF CAN BRING UP A OR IF YOU HAVE A PHOTO OF, OF YOUR DRIVEWAY, YOU CAN SEE THE, YEAH, SO THERE'S A OVER THERE.
YEAH, THIS PICTURE SHOWS A CONCRETE WALK AND THEN IT SHOWS THAT RED LINE, UH, WHICH IS ABOUT WHERE THE DRIVEWAY FINISHES, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEING AN APRON AND SO THAT'S, IT'S, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF I HAD TO VISUALLY GUESS IT'S PROBABLY GONNA BE FIVE FEET BEHIND THE SIDEWALK.
WELL, I LOOKED AT THE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UH, GOOGLE DRIVE AND, UH, REFERENCED THE FENCE NEXT TO IT, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S CLOSER TO LIGHT, UH, THREE FOOT.
SO IT ALIGNED WITH THE, WITH THE TELEPHONE POLES.
SO, UM, SO I GUESS, AND THAT VERY MO THAT VERY WELL MAY BE WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE IS THAT EXISTING FENCE, I THINK IT IS CLOSER, UM, NEXT TO THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY.
AND AS YOU GO FURTHER TOWARDS THE DRIVE, IT IS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER BACK FROM THE EXISTING SIDEWALK AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THAT IN THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT.
YEAH, IT'S, I MEAN, IT MAY BE A FEW MORE FEET, BUT IT'S NOT A HUGE AMOUNT DOING A CALCULATION.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A LITTLE BIT OVER FIVE FEET FROM THE END BACK OF THE SIDEWALK TO THE ACTUAL PROPERTY LINE.
JUST BASED ON THE CAL OR MEASUREMENTS I DID.
UM, YOU MENTIONED ADDING THE BARBED WIRE, BUT HAVING COME TO COME BACK BEFORE THE BOARD, WHY, WHY NOT JUST BUNDLE IT TOGETHER? WHY NOT DO THE BARB WIRE REQUESTS ALONG WITH THE HEIGHT, HEIGHT REQUIREMENT OR, UH, THE BARB WIRE IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPLICATION.
SO IT, IT'S ALL ADMINISTRATIVE.
SO BY US TAKING A VOTE HERE, THE BARB WIRE WOULD PRETTY MUCH BE DONE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK? NOBODY'S SIGNED TO SPEAK.
WELL THEN I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION Z I'LL TAKE IT.
COMMISSIONER ZUNA, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 26 DASH 0 3 0 0 1 7 5, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUEST BY HOLLAND AND KNIGHT, LLP FOR A ONE FOOT FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FIVE FOOT, PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD LOCATED AT 14,440 EBNER ROAD.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SO THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY SETS IT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT, THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC HAS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION WILL BE ON OR WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER.
THE PROPOSED PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FENCE MAINTAINS VISIBILITY AND AESTHETICALLY COMPAT UH, COMPATIBILITY AND THE REQUESTED HEIGHT IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS EXISTING IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED.
THE INCREASED FENCE HEIGHTS WOULD NOT BE LOCATED NEAR A LOCATION WITH HIGH TRAFFIC OR RESIDENTIAL ZONED AREA.
THUS NOT IMPOSING ANY CONVENIENCE OR DETRIMENT TO PUBLIC WELFARE.
SEE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE.
THE OPEN DESIGN OF DEFENSE MINIMIZES VISUAL IMPACTS AND THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT DOES NOT INTRODUCE ADVERSE EFFECTS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
D THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION OF WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT.
THE PROPOSED HEIGHT IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT DEVIATION FROM THE EXISTING FENCES OF THE ABIDING PROPERTIES.
AND E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE UN ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPEC SPECIFIED DISTRICT.
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED FENCE WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT AS SIMILAR FENCE HEIGHTS TO PREDOMINANTLY OPEN MATERIAL WERE OBSERVED OF THE, OF
[00:45:01]
OBSERVED OF THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA AND A MOTION.COMMISSIONER CRUZ IS A SECOND.
COMMISSIONER Z? YES, I'LL BE, UH, VOTING IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
THE FENCE OBVIOUSLY, UH, PROTECTS CRITICAL, UM, INFRASTRUCTURE AS THE APPLICANT WAS STATING.
UH, I THINK THERE IS ADEQUATE SETBACK, UM, IF IT'S, IF THAT FENCE IS GONNA BE ALIGNED WITH THE EXISTING FENCE IN THAT AREA, UH, FROM THE SIDEWALK.
AND I GUESS MOST IMPORTANTLY, I GUESS THE, THE BARB BAR PORTION IS ADMINISTRATIVE, SO NOTHING THE VOTE THE BOARD CAN KIND OF VOTE ON THAT PART.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ, I CONCUR WITH THE COMMISSIONER.
I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH THIS SINCE IT IS A A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
IT SHOULD BE LOOKING VERY NICELY ONCE THEY'RE DONE.
ANYONE'S LIKE TO ADD HEARING? NONE OF US HAVE ROLL CALL VOTE.
COMMISSIONER ANA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GETTING DOWN TO THE LAST FULL APPROVAL.
ITEM 11, UH, BO OA 26 1 0 3 0 0 1 77.
LOCATED ON MAL MEL DRIVE ZONE PUD R THREE WITH A REDUCED PERIMETER SETBACK OF 10 FEET.
THERE'S A 11 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 20 FOOT GARAGE SETBACK TO ALLOW A NINE FOOT GARAGE SETBACK.
UH, SUCH OUR PROPERTY IS IN A PUD LOCATED OFF OF SPRINGTIME DRIVE, SURROUNDED OUR PROPERTY ZONE RESIDENTIAL TO THE EAST AND COMMERCIAL ON THE OTHER SIDES.
THE PROPERTY IS A STRAIGHT INTERNAL RESIDENTIAL STREET THAT TERMINATES IN THE CUL-DE-SAC THAT SERVES 18 RESIDENTIAL LOTS SITUATED ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE ROADWAY.
WHILE THE PUD DESIGNATION ELIMINATES THE INTERNAL SETBACKS, THE 20 FOOT GARAGE SETBACKS STILL APPLIES.
THE ZONING STAFF ERRONEOUSLY APPROVED THREE BUILDING PERMITS WITHOUT FINDING THE ERROR.
BOA APPROVAL IS REQUIRED TO FINALIZE THOSE PERMITS ALONG WITH FUTURE ONES.
THIS IS A SITE PLAN HIGHLIGHTED ARE THE 18 LOTS SUBJECT PROPERTY SURROUNDING AREA.
AND ALL RIGHT, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL ON BO OA 26 1 0 3 0 0 1 77 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF THE FACT THE PROPERTY FRONTS HIS OWN STREET WITH THE PROS, GAR GARAGE WILL REMAIN WITHIN THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT.
THE REQUEST OF RELIEF IS BASED ON THE PHYSICAL, UH, DEVELOPMENT PATTERN RATHER THAN PHYSICAL CONS, UH, CONSIDERATIONS OR GENERAL CONDITIONS THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT.
NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR AND OPPOSITION OR VOICEMAILS.
TANGLEWOOD RESIDENCE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT.
AND THAT CONCLUDES, THAT'S PRESENTATION.
ALRIGHT, LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
HEY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND, UH, FOR THE RECORD AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
I'M WITH AG ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS AND WE REPRESENT THE OWNER ON THIS, UH, THIS PROJECT.
IT'S A DEVELOPMENT AS THE HAS BEEN MENTIONED.
IT'S 18 LOTS, SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS.
UH, EACH HOUSE WILL BE A TWO STORY, TWO STORY THREE, THREE BEDROOMS, TWO AND A HALF BATHS WITH TWO CAR GARAGES.
AND THE DESIGN CONCEPT IS A CONTEMPORARY TYPE, UH, HOME FOR THE, FOR THIS, UH, DEVELOPMENT.
AND, UH, WE HAVE HAD NUMEROUS CONVERSATIONS WITH THE HOA AND THE SURROUNDING AREA AT THE CONCEPTIONS WHEN WE STARTED WITH THIS PROJECT SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND THEY'VE BEEN IN FULL SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT.
UH, THEY'VE WELCOMED THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA AND, UH, WE FEEL THAT IT WILL ENHANCE THAT WHOLE, UH, SUBDIVISION AND THE AREA.
AND THE IDEA IS TO BRING IN YOUNG PROFESSIONALS, YOUNG FAMILIES INTO A DEVELOPMENT AND, UM, UM, IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE A GOOD PROJECT FOR THEM.
OKAY, SO, UM, I ACTUALLY GREW UP IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
I USED TO HAVE A PAPER OUT THERE, VERY INCREDIBLY FAMILIAR WITH THIS AREA.
UM, I NOTICED THAT, UH, MEL MEL DRIVE IS GONNA BE A PRIVATE ROAD.
OR IS IT GONNA BE THE IRREVOCABLE INGRESS EGRESS.
IT'LL BE, IT'LL BE A PRIVATE ROAD.
UM, 'CAUSE THIS ISN'T A PUT OR
[00:50:01]
ANYTHING, RIGHT? YES, IT'S A PUT.UM, AND THEN HOW MUCH, WHAT IS THE PAVED WIDTH OF THE ROAD? AND THE REASON WHY I'M ASKING IS, SO IF YOU'RE GONNA HAVE YOUR GARAGE DOOR, IT'S GONNA BE NINE FEET AWAY, UH, FROM THAT LINE, IS THE SIDEWALK GONNA BE ON YOUR PROPERTY THROUGH A PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT OR IS THAT GONNA BE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY? IT'LL BE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THE PAVED AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 35 TO 36 FEET.
UH, THE PRI UH, THE PAVED AREA BECAUSE YOUR, I'M JUST JUST ASKING IS YOUR PLAN CALLS IT OUT TO BE 31 FEET WIDE AND I, AND I WAS, NO, I THINK IN, AT, AT THAT POINT THEY WERE LOOKING AT 31, BUT WE, UH, AFTER THE FACT WE DID, UH, INCREASE THE PAVED AREA STAFF.
DO YOU HAVE A ANY, BECAUSE THAT, THAT'S A BIG DEAL FOR ME.
YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT IF YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH ROOM FOR A CAR TO PARK ON THE DRIVEWAY, THERE SHOULDN'T AT LEAST BE ROOM ON THE STREET.
AND THAT'S, AND THAT'S EXACTLY THE REASON WHY WE, UH, INCREASE THE WIDTH OF THE, OF THE DRIVE.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS, DO YOU HAVE A PLAT ON FILE? YES.
IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN GET YOUR HANDS ON THAT FOR US TO LOOK AT IT? I, I JUST, I SEE 31 FEET AND I JUST GET A LITTLE, UH, CONCERN.
YOU GONNA DO FOUR FOOT SIDEWALKS? YES.
IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? IS THERE ANYONE SILENT UP TO SPEAK? WE HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
UH, WHAT WE'LL DO IS WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING UP THE PLAT, WE'LL HEAR FROM ONE OF OUR CITIZENS, CIO FERNANDEZ.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT THE CORRECT.
IS IT, DOES HE NEED TO ASSOCIATE HIS NAME WITH ANOTHER CASE THAT STAFF NEEDS TO NO, HE'S THE APPLICANT ON A DIFFERENT CASE.
SO YOU'LL FOLLOW UP WITH YOUR LINE OF QUESTION A LITTLE BIT.
YOU KNOW, UM, PUDS ALLOW FOR A LOT OF REDUCTION IN A LOT OF THINGS AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, WE'LL SAY TOWN, TOWN HOME KIND, KIND OF DEVELOPMENTS.
AND SO IS THIS, AND, AND MAYBE I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND IT.
UH, IS THIS GIVEN MORE TO WHAT IS PERMITTED WITHIN A P AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE AND OR WITH THE TOWN HOME DEVELOPMENT KIND OF STYLE? WELL, WHAT HAPPENS IS, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE USING A, UM, THEY'RE USING A PRIVATE ROAD TO TRY TO GET SOME REDUCTIONS TO THE STANDARD 50 FEET.
UH, AND SO WHAT, AND REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY CAN GO DOWN TO 28 FEET OR, OR WHATNOT, IF YOU DON'T HAVE A 30 FOOT PAVED ROAD, YOU CANNOT PARK ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ROAD.
AND SO DUE TO THE, DUE TO THE FREQUENCY OF THE NUMBER OF LOTS, IT'S PARKING AVAILABILITY ON THE STREET SOMEWHAT LIMITED.
AND IF IT, AND IF THERE WASN'T GOING TO BE A 30 FOOT PAVEMENT SECTION, THEN IT WOULD BE REALLY LIMITED.
AND SO I JUST, THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT BECAUSE IF A CAR CAN'T PARK ON THAT DRIVEWAY, UH, AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE ENDING UP PERPETUALLY BLOCKING SIDEWALKS.
UM, AND THEY'RE ALSO, UM, WELL I DON'T KNOW WHO WOULD EVER TRY TO PARK THERE.
IT'S NINE FEET ISN'T ENOUGH TO PARK ANY VEHICLE, I DON'T THINK.
UH, SO IT JUST MAKES IT KIND OF TOUGH.
UM, YOU KNOW, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
'CAUSE THIS IS VERY CLOSE TO, UH, THE MAIN STREET, SPRING TIME'S THE MAIN STREET IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND SO IT'S NOW, JUST SO I CAN INTERJECT SOMETHING, THE PARKING FOR THE ACTUAL PEOPLE THAT WILL BE LIVING THERE WILL MORE THAN LIKELY BE USING THEIR TWO CAR GARAGE.
THE ONLY TIME, THE ONLY TIME YOU WOULD PROBABLY EVER SEE SOMETHING WITH CARS ON THE STREET WOULD BE WHEN THEY WOULD HAVE GUESTS OVER AT THEIR HOUSE.
AND THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE PARKED OUT THERE OVERNIGHT OR FOR SEVERAL DAYS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
BUT YES, I UNDERSTAND YOUR, YOUR YOUR OBSERVATION AND THAT'S WHY WE DID MAKE THAT, UH, ROAD WIDER.
YEAH, I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO SEE IT.
'CAUSE WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY, IT'S NOT, YEAH, IT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SEEING.
SO THE ONLY, UH, PLOT WE FOUND IS A 31 FOOT, UH, RIGHT OF WAY.
I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ELSE ON FILE.
SEE, THAT'S WHAT THE THING WITH THAT IS, IS THAT IF THEY DON'T HAVE A SIDEWALK WALK, IS THERE, IS THERE, CAN YOU GET YOUR HANDS ON SOMETHING THAT SHOWS SOMETHING OTHER THAN 30? I'D PROBABLY GET YOU SOMETHING TO THE STAFF SO THEY COULD LOOK AT IT.
NOT RIGHT NOW, BUT YOU KNOW, I COULD GET CAN WE TABLE THIS AND COME BACK LATER? UH, OR DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUANCE OR DO, WOULD YOU LIKE A CONTINUANCE? IF WE COULD MAYBE TABLE IT FOR LATER FOR RIGHT.
YOU KNOW, FOR RIGHT NOW THEN I CAN GET SOMETHING HERE SHORTLY AND THEN GET IT TO THEM SO THAT WAY WE CAN
[00:55:01]
OKAY.UH, SEEING IF YOU CAN, UH, PENDING SOME MORE INFORMATION.
JUST, UH, I'LL BE PAYING ATTENTION AND KIND OF FLAG ME DOWN IF SOMETHING HAPPENS.
ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND DO THE MINUTES REAL QUICK.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A CHANCE TO GO OVER THE MINUTES.
ANY CHANGES? MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
ANY OPPOSED? HEARING? NONE MINUTES ARE PASSED.
OKAY, SO NOW WHAT'S GOING ON FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE GALLERY? ALL THE CASES THAT WE HAVE LEFT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL.
UH, WE ONLY HAVE NINE MEMBERS SEATED, WHICH MEANS THAT IF ANYBODY VOTES AGAINST YOUR CASE, UH, IT FAILS.
AND SO IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE GALLERY WHO WOULD LIKE TO VOLUNTEER TO HAVE THEIR CASE BE HEARD BEFORE? UH, THIS BOARD, UM, STARTS MAKING THOSE DECISIONS ON HER OWN? ALRIGHT.
COULD YOUR CASE NUMBER, WHAT'S YOUR CASE ADDRESS? WHAT IS IT? NINE I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH WITH UH, UM, UH, PROBLEM WE GOTTA HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
YEAH, WE HAVE TO HAVE, I AM THE APPLICANT BUT NOT ON CASE ON NUMBER TWO.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE HEARD NOW OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO WAIT? WE CAN ALSO TAKE A SHORT BREAK.
WE HAVE ANOTHER COMMISSIONER WHO MIGHT BE SHOWING UP VERY, VERY SOON.
TRUE OR NOT TRUE? SUPPOSED TO BE AT TWO O'CLOCK.
WELL, I NEED IT TO BE IN DISTRICT COURT 15 MINUTES AGO, SO UNFORTUNATELY.
OKAY, SHE'S GONNA ITEM NUMBER TWO, RIGHT? ITEM NUMBER TWO.
I THINK ITEM NUMBER 10 ALSO WANTS TO PROCEED.
YES, PLEASE PROCEED WITH ITEM TWO AND THEN ITEM 10 ALSO AFTER THIS.
OKAY, WE'RE GONNA DO A STAFF PRESENTATION FIRST.
ITEM NUMBER TWO, BO OA DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 1 53 LOCATED AT 1514 RIGSBY AVENUE.
THE ZONING IS C TWO NACD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES.
THE REQUEST IS FOR ONE A SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A THREE FOOT SIDE SETBACK ON THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE TO A 17 FOOT VARIANCE FROM MINIMUM REQUIRED 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A 13 FOOT REAR SETBACK.
THREE AND ELIMINATION OF THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE PROPERTY.
A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER TO ALLOW A 13 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER FROM THE REAR PROPERTY.
LINE FIVE, AN ELIMINATION OF THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 10 FOOT TYPE A BUFFER FROM THE NORTH PROPERTY.
A ONE FOOT FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FIVE FOOT.
PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD FENCE TO ALLOW A SIX FOOT PREDOMINANTLY OPEN FRONT YARD FENCE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED OFF RIGSBY ROAD AND IS SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL BASE ZONING DISTRICTS TO THE EAST, SOUTH, AND WEST WITH COMMERCIAL ZONE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET TO THE NORTH.
THE CASE ORIGINATED FROM THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY THAT WAS APPROVED EARLIER THIS YEAR IN APRIL, 2026.
THE EXISTING STRUCTURE DOES NOT MEET THE CURRENT SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY PER STAFF'S VISIT TO THE SITE IN SEPTEMBER, 2026.
THE PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FENCE PERMIT WAS APPROVED BASED ON THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATION THAT THE PROPERTY WAS A VACANT LOT.
HOWEVER, THE PROPERTY DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO A VACANT LOT, THEREFORE THE PERMISSION NOT HAVE BEEN APPROVED UNDER THOSE STANDARDS.
THE PROPOSED PAVING TRIGGERED COMPLIANCE WITH THE CURRENT BUFFER STANDARDS.
ALTHOUGH THE EXISTING BUILDING APPEARS TO BE A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE, APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED SETBACK VARIANCES WOULD ALLOW THE STRUCTURE TO BE FULLY REMODELED OR REBUILT WHILE MAINTAINING THE REDUCED SETBACKS.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THIS IS THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL FOR THE SETBACK AND BUFFER VARIANCES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT ONE GRANTING THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACK VARIANCES WOULD NOT OBSERVE THE FEAR SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS THE PURPOSE OF MINIMUM SIDE AND REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IS
[01:00:01]
TO MINI MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF FIRE SPREAD AND WATER RUNOFF TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS ALONG WITH PROVIDING SPACE BETWEEN HIGHER INTENSITY COMMERCIAL USES THAT WILL BE IN PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL LOTS TO THE PROPERTY HAS SUFFICIENT ROOM TO ADHERE TO THE REQUIRED BUFFER STANDARDS TYPICAL OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.STAFF RECOMMENDS A NOW FOR THE FENCE HEIGHT.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, THEIR PROPOSED INCREASE IN FENCE HEIGHT FOR THE FRONT YARD WOULD INTRODUCE A STANDARD TO WHICH THE NEIGHBORING AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES WOULD NOT BE AFFORDED THE SAME.
RIGHT WITHOUT ALSO REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT AS FRONT YARD FENCES OF THE REQUESTED HEIGHT WERE NOT OBSERVED ON A BUDDING AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
STAFF MAIL AT 37 NOTICES ZERO WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
THERE WERE NO VOICEMAIL RECEIVED AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW WHEN THAT EXISTING STRUCTURE IN THE REAR WAS BUILT? HOW LONG IT'S BEEN THERE? NO, NOT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I CAN LOOK IT UP.
WELL, I'LL ASK THE APPLICANT, BUT IF YOU COULD, UH, CHIME IN AT SOME POINT THAT'D BE NICE.
I JUST HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
STATE YOUR NAME, TELL US ABOUT YOUR CASE.
ELIZABETH RUSSELL WITH THE LAW OFFICE OF ELIZABETH ANN RUSSELL 1 0 1 STONEBERG, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 4 AND I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT.
UM, THE STRUCTURE HAS BEEN THERE AT LEAST SINCE 2007.
UM, IT HAS BEEN A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT COLORS, BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD CURRENTLY REFERS TO IT AS THE BIG YELLOW BUILDING AND IT HAS BEEN THE BIG YELLOW BUILDING FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER, I THINK MOST OF YOU ARE ON THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS WELL.
I GET CONFUSED BETWEEN WHO'S ON PLANNING AND WHO'S ON ZONING.
BUT WE WERE HERE A FEW MONTHS AGO WITH A BOTH PLANNING REQUEST, UM, PLANNING REQUESTED AMENDMENT AND ZONING REQUESTED AMENDMENT.
AND THAT IS WHEN WE INITIALLY DISCOVERED THAT THE BUILDING WAS NOT IN CONFORMANCE TO THE, UM, MUNICIPAL CODE ORDINANCES.
UM, WE REQUESTED PERMISSION TO REZONE FIRST AND THEN TOLD THE COMMITTEE AT THAT TIME THAT IF THAT WAS APPROVED, THAT WE WOULD COME BACK TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
UM, MY CLIENT HAS PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY IN JANUARY OF 2025 AND HE HAS NOT STARTED TO OPERATE YET BECAUSE HE HAS, UM, CONSISTENTLY WANTED TO DO THINGS THAT ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROCESS AND THE STRUCTURE.
HE WANTS TO OPERATE HIS BUSINESS.
UM, THIS HAS BEEN A LONGER PROCESS THAN HE INITIALLY ANTICIPATED, BUT WE ARE HERE REQUESTING THESE VARIANCES BECAUSE THE BUILDING THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE PRIOR TO 2007 IS NOT CURRENTLY WITHIN THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS AND IT WOULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE IN ORDER TO REPLACE THIS BUILDING.
UM, PROBABLY JUST AS MUCH AS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY IS WORTH.
THE, THE BUILDING ACTUALLY TAKES UP A MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY OTHER THAN THE FRONT, UM, PROPOSED PARKING AREA.
THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION WITH STAFF AT ONE POINT ABOUT, UM, MOVING FORWARD WITH A BUILDING VARIANCE AS OPPOSED TO AN ENTIRE APPLICATION WITH THE FENCE REQUESTS AS WELL.
BUT BECAUSE THE PARKING LOT IS NOT CURRENTLY PAVED, WE WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO BOTH GET OUR VARIANCE AND THEN PAVE THE PARKING LOT TO BE IN REQUIREMENTS OF NEEDING A PAVED PARKING LOT.
SO HERE WE ARE, UM, REQUESTING QUITE A FEW VARIANCES AS UM, IT GOES TO BOTH BUFFER AND SETBACKS, BUT THE FENCE VARIANCE IS NO LONGER NECESSARY BECAUSE MY CLIENT, WHEN WE INITIALLY HAD STARTED TO PIVOT TO THAT DIFFERENT DIRECTION.
UM, I ASKED HIM IF HE COULD FIX THE FENCE ISSUE IN WHICH HE DID, AND SO HE HAS REMOVED ONE FOOT FROM THE FRONT FENCE.
SO THAT FENCE IS CURRENTLY IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE AGAIN, MY CLIENT DOES WANT TO COOPERATE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, BUT REMOVING A BUILDING THAT'S BEEN THERE SINCE ALMOST AT LEAST 20 YEARS NOW IS OUR, UM, EVIDENCE WOULD BE HIGHLY, HIGHLY, UM, NOT COST EFFECTIVE FOR HIM.
AND HE PROBABLY WOULD NEVER HAVE PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY IF HE KNEW OF ALL THE ISSUES IT HAD.
SO WE ARE REQUESTING QUITE A BIT OF, UM, BUFFERS AND VARIANCES AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT, UM, WE DO BELIEVE THAT HISTORICALLY THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN THERE FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
IT'S BEEN ALLOWED TO OPERATE, AND HE'S HAD QUITE A BIT OF NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT IN THE PAST.
WHEN WE CAME TO ZONING, HE HAD, AND I BROUGHT THEM WITH ME, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 NEIGHBORS THAT WERE, UM, IN SUPPORT OF HIM OPERATING THAT BUSINESS.
AND OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULD BE OPERATING THE BIG YELLOW BUILDING WITH AND WITHOUT ITS SETBACKS.
UH, WHAT WAS THE CD FOR? CONDITIONAL USES FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES.
AND JUST TO CONFIRM WITH MS. RUSSELL, UM, THE, IT LOOKS LIKE THE BUILDING WAS BUILT IN
[01:05:01]
2000 AND THEN, UM, IS THIS, IS IT CURRENTLY UNDER PERMITTING REVIEW FOR THE EXISTING STRUCTURE OR, OR, OR ANYTHING? I DO SEE, UM, SOME PERMITS, UH, WITHIN THE LAST YEAR.THE REASON WHY I ASK IS, UM, IS THIS BECAUSE THE STRIKE TEAM NOTICED THIS STRUCTURE? NO, NOT STRIKE TEAM.
NO, THIS CAME DIRECTLY FROM OUR ZONING APPLICATION.
SO DURING THE ZONING PROCESS, WE WERE TOLD ABOUT THE SETBACK ISSUES AS SOON AS ZONING WAS APPROVED AND I RETURNED FROM MATERNITY LEAVE, WE PUT IN OUR APPLICATION FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, UM, REQUEST.
AND IT CAME DIRECTLY FROM THE ZONING.
WHAT, WHAT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT IS HOW DO, HOW DOES THE CITY HANDLE THESE OLDER BUILDINGS LIKE THIS? SO IF THERE'S ALREADY A DRIVEWAY AND A BUILDING IN PLACE, UM, LIKE IF THIS DOESN'T GET PASSED TODAY, ARE THEY GONNA BE FORCED TO DEMO? SO, SO IF THEY'RE DOING A, WHAT WE CALL LIKE A FULL REMODEL, UM, PAST A CERTAIN POINT, WE CONSIDER THIS A NEW BUILDING.
UM, BUT YES, IF THEY, IF THIS DOES NOT GET APPROVED, THAT'S, YEAH, I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THERE WAS ANY SORT OF NON-CONFORMING USE THAT WOULDN'T ALLOW SOME OF THE VARIANCES TO GO AWAY, OR THEY'RE JUST DOING THIS JUST TO TRY TO KEEP THE SLATE CLEAN OR, YEAH, WE LOOKED AT NON-CON PERFORMANCE STRUCTURES ALREADY, UH, BUT B THE, THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING IS BEYOND THIS.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? MANNA, COMMISSIONER, MANNA, THEN MANUS.
SO THE QUESTION IS, SO YOU INDICATED THAT YOU HAD A LISTING OF, UH, NEARBY RESIDENTS THAT WERE IN, UM, AGREEMENT WITH THIS.
COULD YOU SHARE THAT WITH, UH, THE STAFF THERE SO THEY CAN INDICATE, UM, WHICH OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS ARE THAT'LL BE RELEVANT FOR ME? UM, AND THE SECOND THING, AND I I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND IN ANOTHER PRESENTATION, I APOLOGIZE, IS HOW MUCH MORE OF THE PROPERTY, I GUESS, IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED OR WHAT IS IT GONNA BE DEVELOPED WITH? AND SO WE HAVE A BUILDING THERE, BUT WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR THE REST OF, I GUESS, THAT PROPERTY? AND IS IT JUST GONNA ASPHALT THE WHOLE THING, UH, FOR PARKING LOTS OR TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT PIECE IS? SO THIS IS PURELY TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS WITHIN COMPLIANCE OF THE MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES.
SO IT IS A NECESSITY TO PAVE THE PARKING LOT.
AND SO CURRENTLY IT HAS LIKE A MIXTURE OF, IT'S BASICALLY GRAVEL AND CRUSHED ASPHALT.
UM, AND SO PAVE THAT TO BE IN COMPLIANCE AND THEN UTILIZE THE BUILDING AS IT HAS EXISTED SINCE 2000.
UM, AND SO STAFF DOES HAVE THE SAME 'CAUSE THESE, UM, THE NEIGHBORS ARE THE SAME, ARE THE NEIGHBORS FROM THE ZONING, UM, REQUEST.
AND SO THOSE NEIGHBORS WERE IN SUPPORT OF THE ZONING REQUEST AT THAT TIME.
AND THAT'S WHAT I BROUGHT, AND I CAN LEAD, READ THOSE OUT LOUD, BUT WE DIDN'T SEPARATELY REACH OUT TO THEM FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS REQUEST BECAUSE THEY ALL SHOWED SUPPORT OF A ZONING REQUEST, WHICH INCLUDED THE BIG YELL ABILITY DID.
SO TO EXPAND ON THAT QUESTION, SO THERE, THE, THE, THE LIST THAT YOU HAVE ARE PEOPLE WITHIN 200 FEET, WHICH WOULD BE THE SAME PEOPLE THAT THEY WOULD NOTIFY FOR THIS CASE.
IF YOU COULD GIVE THOSE ADDRESSES TO STAFF SO WE CAN JUST KIND OF VERIFY THAT THEY'RE ALL WITHIN 200 FEET, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
AND I THINK PART OF THE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THOSE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE MOST DIRECTLY IMPACTED, YOU KNOW, AGREED THAT, THAT THEY THOUGHT THIS WAS THE RIGHT SOLUTION FOR THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY.
AND I THINK THAT'S, UH, RELEVANT HERE.
UM, WELL THE BENEFIT OF THIS CASE IS THAT YOU GOT A CD, WHICH MEANS YOU HAD A SITE PLAN.
DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF THAT SITE PLAN FROM THE ORIGINAL ZONING CASE? I CAN GET IT, ABSOLUTELY.
OR IF STAFF CAN BRING UP THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED.
THAT WAY WE CAN AT LEAST SEE WHAT THE PUBLIC REVIEWED, WHAT EVERYONE VOTED ON, WHAT WENT THROUGH THE SCRUTINY OF A ZONING AND A COMMISSION AND A COUNCIL HEARING.
I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE SOME BEARING ON THE VARIOUS ITEMS BEFORE US TODAY.
DO YOU WANT ME TO VERIFY THE NOTICE A THE NOTICES FIRST, OR BRING UP THE SITE PLAN FIRST? UH, WELL I WOULD BRING UP THE SITE PLAN FIRST, BUT MAYBE YOU'RE, UM, I CAN TELL YOU THE SITE PLAN IS GO WORK CREWED BY CITY COUNCILS.
WHAT'S DISPLAYED ON THE GROUND RIGHT NOW? WHERE IS IT? IT'S, IT'S WHAT'S ON THEIR GROUND RIGHT NOW.
LIKE IT SHOWS THE BUILDING AS IT IS RIGHT NOW ON THE SIDE PLAN, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE ABOUT TO PUT IT UP.
I'M, I'M, I'M REALLY, WHAT I'M REALLY TRYING TO, WHAT ME PERSONALLY, WHAT I'M TRYING TO VERIFY IS THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR SOME SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES AND I WANTED TO SEE IF THE, THE LIMITS OF ASPHALT PAVING MATCHES UP WITH THE VARIANCES THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR ON THE, ON THE, UH, BUFFER VARIANCES.
THAT, THAT'S REALLY WHAT I'M TRYING TO ASCERTAIN.
AND IT DOES EXCEPT FOR THE FRONT.
[01:10:01]
WE GO.SO THIS THING IS, THIS IS WHAT WAS, UH, CANVASED AROUND AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PRETTY MUCH WALL TO WALL, BUT YOU'RE ASKING FOR A FULL VARIANCE ONLY ON, ON WHAT THE EAST SIDE? NO, THERE'S VARIANCES PRETTY MUCH ALL THE WAY AROUND.
SO WE'RE NOT SEEING WHAT'S BEEN DISPLAYED.
CAN YOU SEE THAT COMMISSIONER MADA? NO.
SO BASICALLY THE VARIANCES ARE ALONG THE, UM, EAST SIDE AND THE UH, REAR.
IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE NEED A VARIANCE ON THE SETBACK ON THE WEST SIDE OR IN THE FRONT, BUT THERE ARE REQUESTS TO UM, REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE, UH, LANDSCAPING BUFFERS.
I DO, I DID LOOK AT THE ZONING HISTORY A LITTLE BIT.
THIS AREA WAS KIND OF A MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING, HENCE WHY THIS WAS GUILT IN 2000 THE WAY IT IS.
BUT AS MARCO HAS STATED, JUST BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN USE AND THE EXTENT, THAT'S WHY WE TYPICALLY ENFORCE CODE.
UM, MAY I GET SOME CLARIFICATION CHAIR? YES.
UH, MS. RUSSELL, DID YOU STATE THAT, THAT YOU'RE NOT REQUESTING THE FENCE HEIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
UM, BECAUSE WE STAFF HAD COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT APPROACH THAT ENDED UP NOT WORKING OUT, BUT INITIALLY A DIFFERENT APPROACH THAT WOULD SOLVE MOST OF THE PROBLEMS EXCEPT FOR THE FENCE ISSUE.
MY CLIENT, UM, LOOKED AT IF THAT WAS POSSIBLE TO ADJUST THE FENCE IT WAS, AND HE'S ALREADY ADJUSTED THE FENCE.
SO ITEM NUMBER SIX IS NO LONGER PART OF THIS APPLICATION 'CAUSE IT'S NO LONGER NECESSARY.
ALRIGHT COMMISSIONER, SO RUSSELL, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
SO, UH, YOUR APPLICANT BOUGHT THE PROPERTY WITH THE EXPECTATION THAT HE WOULD CONTINUE TO OPERATE THE PROPERTY.
WAS THERE ANY DISCLOSURE TO HIM THE TIME HE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, THAT IT WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OF THE SETBACKS OR ANY OF THESE ISSUES THAT ARE HERE BEFORE US TODAY? NOT AT ALL.
UM, AND HE WASN'T EVEN AWARE THAT IT HAD BEEN REZONED.
THERE WAS A LARGE AREA REZONING THAT OCCURRED IN THAT AREA.
HE THOUGHT HE WAS STILL GONNA BE ABLE TO USE IT AS COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL.
HE HADN'T EVEN REALIZED THAT IT HAD BEEN REZONED AS RESIDENTIAL.
THAT'S WHAT PROMPTED THE FIRST ZONING CASE AND THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE.
IF THE VARIANCE WAS TO NOT PASS TODAY, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE HARDSHIP TO YOUR CLIENT IF THAT WAS TO BE THE CASE? YEAH, SO THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY VALUED THROUGH BCA AT AROUND A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.
UM, WHAT HE HAS LOOKED AT IN ORDER TO BOTH TEAR DOWN AND REBUILD THE EXACT SAME SIZE BUILDING THAT IS, UM, THAT IS APPROPRIATE TO THE SETBACKS AND BUFFERS WOULD EXCEED THE AMOUNT THAT HE INITIALLY PAID FOR.
SO HE'S UNABLE TO AFFORD THAT.
HE'D BE UNABLE TO AFFORD DOING BUSINESS IN THAT LOCATION.
UM, AND THAT ISN'T EVEN ACCOUNTING FOR MY TIME THROUGH THE ZONING, THE PLANNING AND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
AND DO YOU RECALL IF THIS PROPERTY HAS EVER HAD A CFO ON THIS BUILDING? UM, IT HAS HAD A CFO SOMETIME IN THE PAST, NOT WITH MY CLIENT.
MY CLIENT HAS ALWAYS WANTED TO GET ALL OF HIS DUCKS IN A ROW BEFORE HE APPLIED FOR A COO.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, ANYONE? HOW'S IT COMING ON THE, UH, PEOPLE WITHIN 200 FEET STILL VERIFYING ALL OF THEM.
IT'S VERY HARD FOR ME TO STAND HERE AND NOT SAY ANYTHING.
SO MY JOB FORCES ME TO SAY THINGS WHILE I STAND IN FRONT OF PEOPLE.
COMMISSIONER DEAN, IS YOUR CLIENT SELLING CARS RIGHT NOW? NOT YET, RIGHT? NO, NOT YET.
HE HAS ANOTHER LOT OVER ON MARTIN LUTHER KING THAT HE'S OPERATING OUT OF AT A LARGER CAPACITY THAN HE EXPECTED TO.
'CAUSE HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY THINK THAT THIS WAS GONNA TAKE SO LONG.
WHEN HE, WHEN HE PURCHASED, DID HE HAVE A LAND SURVEY OR DID HE PAY CASH OR, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT HE PAID CASH.
UM, AND I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A TITLE POLICY, WHICH IS PART OF THE REASON THAT IT DIDN'T COME BACK, THAT IT WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE.
HE LEARNED A VALUABLE LESSON THAT WE COULD ALL LEARN.
THE NEXT STEP ON THAT IS GETTING AN OWNER'S POLICY AND NOT JUST A LENDER'S POLICY.
BUT THEN YOU PUT ME OUTTA BUSINESS
[01:15:04]
IT SEEMS LIKE FROM THE NOTICES THERE ARE FOUR PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE 200 FEET IN SUPPORT.THERE ARE THREE THAT ARE OUTSIDE 200 FEET SINCE THEY'RE NOT LISTED AS THE OWNER.
AND THEN THERE'S TWO THAT HAVE THE SAME LAST NAME BUT DIFFERENT FIRST NAMES.
I HAVE NOT VERIFIED IF, BUT THEY'RE IN SUPPORT ALSO.
HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, COMMISSIONER AMANDA.
SO WERE THOSE FOUR POTENTIALLY ABUTTING THIS EXISTING PROPERTY? 'CAUSE THAT YEAH, I'M JUST TRYING TO MINIMIZE OR MAKE SURE THAT THOSE THAT ARE GONNA BE MOST IMPACTED.
DO YOU WANT ME TO TELL YOU THE ADDRESSES OR SHOW YOU ON GOOGLE MAPS? YOU CAN SAY THE ADDRESSES.
I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AT THE MAP.
THE ADDRESSES ARE 1524 CATON 1531 CATON, 1508 RIGSBY AVENUE AND 1514 RIGSBY AVENUE, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
SO 1508 IS THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR.
UH, THE OTHER, THE OTHER, THOSE OTHER ADDRESSES WERE NOT A DIRECTLY ABUTTING.
SO I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION ITEM NUMBER SIX IS, UH, IS NO LONGER PART OF THE APPLICATION AND IT LOOKS LIKE COMMISSIONER BONILLA HAS JOINED THE MEETING.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER REED, REGARDING THE CASE NUMBER BO OA 26 1 0 3 0 1 5 3, I MOVED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUEST BY LAW OFFICE OF E-A-R-P-L-L-C FOR ONE SEVEN FOOT VARIANCE ON THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT SIZE SETBACK TO ALLOW THREE FOOT SIDE SETBACK ON THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE TWO 17 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW 13 FOOT REAR SETBACK.
THREE ELIMINATION OF THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE PROPERTY.
A TWO FOOT VARIANCE OF THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER TO ALLOW A 13 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
AND FIVE ELIMINATION OF THE MINIMUM REQUIRED.
10 FOOT TYPE A BUFFER FROM THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE LOCATED AT 1514 RIGSBY AVENUE 'CAUSE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNITED HEIGHT DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY YOU FIND THAT ONE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN THIS CASE, THERE WOULD BE ADEQUATE SPACE FROM THE SIDE OF THE REAR YARDS TO MITIGATE FIRE SPREAD AND WATER RUNOFF OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AS WELL AS ADEQUATE BUFFER BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL USE AND THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL USES.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS.
SPECIAL CONDITION OF THIS PROPERTY IS A LOCATION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, WHICH WOULD NEED TO BE MOVED IF HELD TO THE CURRENT SETBACK AND BUFFER STANDARDS.
AND THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE REDUCED SIDE SETBACKS, UH, REDUCED SETBACKS AND BUFFER YARDS WILL STILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN THE COMMERCIALS, PROPERTIES, COMMERCIAL USE, AND THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL USE AND PROPERTIES.
FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT TO WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
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 TO WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS THEIR SUFFICIENT SEPARATION AND IT WOULD NOT AFFECT THE LIVABILITY OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING IN THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT TO WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE PLAY OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, WHICH LIMITS THE AVAILABLE SPACE FOR ADHERENCE, THE CURRENT SETBACK BUFFER YARD STANDARDS WITHOUT MOVING OR RECONSTRUCTING WHAT IS CURRENTLY PRESENT ON THE PROPERTY.
THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ZUNA.
UH, YEAH, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THESE VARIANCES.
UM, THIS IS STRUCTURE'S BEEN HERE FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
UM, AND THIS OWNER SEEMS TO BE READY TO OPERATE, UH, A BUSINESS, BUT THIS IS HOLDING HIM UP.
COMMISSIONER ZUNA? YEAH, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT AS WELL.
I MEAN THE, THE UH, CASE HAS GONE BEFORE THE ZONING.
THE SITE PLAN HAS BEEN REVIEWED.
THE NEIGHBORS HAD A CHANCE TO OPINE ABOUT IT.
THERE WAS NO, UM, I GUESS THERE, THERE WERE NO VOTES AGAINST THIS OR ANY, ANY, UH, NEIGHBORS THAT WERE CONFLICTED WITH IT.
UM, AGAIN, THE NEIGHBORS AND THE, UH, COMMUNITY HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST A SITE PLAN THAT WOULD'VE BEEN PRESENTED AT ANY OF THE ZONING BOARD MEETINGS HERE.
[01:20:01]
IS READ AND, AND THE HARDSHIP I THINK IS ALSO TO BE CONSIDERED OF, OF THE APPLICANT BUILDING THIS PROPERTY AND, AND, AND NOT KNOWING THE, THE CHALLENGES THAT HE NEEDS TO OPERATE HIS PROPERTY THAT I'M SUPPORTING.UH, I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD, THIS ALSO WENT THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, AND A LAND USE UPDATE.
SO THAT WAS AN ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD MANNA? COMMISSIONER MANNA? SO I, I GUESS I, I WORKING THROUGH A FEW THINGS, BUT, SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IS, IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, ONE AND FOUR ARE REQUIRED IF WE WANT TO ENABLE THE BUILDING TO REMAIN IN PLACE AND, AND NO CHANGES TO THAT, THE OTHERS OPTIONS ARE BASICALLY ALLOWING THEM TO PAVE A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE LOCK.
IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING? WELL, THERE'S A, UM, SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE VARIANCES ARE RELATED TO WHERE THE BUILDING LIES, LIKE THE REAR BUFFER, UH, THE REAR SETBACK, THE SIDE SETBACK, UH, WHICH, UH, IT'S, IT'S TIED TO THE BUILDING.
UH, THE BUFFER ON THE SIDE, THEY'RE SHOWING PAVING THAT RUNS DOWN THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
SO UNLESS THERE'S LIKE DUMPSTERS THERE, I DON'T, I DON'T, BUT WHERE I'M GOING IS, I, I DON'T MIND, YOU KNOW, HAVING, I I CONCUR THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PERSON BOUGHT A BUILDING AND, AND HAS BEEN THERE FOR 20 YEARS AND THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO LEVERAGE THE BUILDING AS IS.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND SO JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHICH OF THESE ARE ADDITIONAL TO THAT REQUIREMENT.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, SO GOING TO ZERO EVERYWHERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, SO ELIMINATION OF BUFFERS JUST, IT STRIKES ME AS PRETTY LIBERAL WITH REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE ALLOWING THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS TO DO, UH, SURROUNDED BY OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
AND THAT'S WHERE, I GUESS WHERE I WAS QUESTIONING, UH, CAN STAFF, I'M, I'M GONNA GO BACK TO THE PUBLIC HEARING REAL QUICK JUST TO, TO SEE.
WE CAN ADDRESS COMMISSIONER MANOR'S, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER MANOR'S, UH, QUESTION THIS EXISTING BUILDING, HOW MANY PARKING SPACES WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR A 3000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING? IS IT THE ONE TO 200? GIVE THAT A SECOND.
YOU KNOW, AND, AND HAVING THE WORD ELIMINATION IS JUST A LITTLE BIT ROUGH FROM MY PERSPECTIVE ON THE FRONT REQUIRED, YOU KNOW, AND, YOU KNOW, JUST FROM A COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE.
AND THEN, AND, AND SO I DON'T MIND REDUCING IT, BUT STILL, YOU KNOW, HAVING THE PLANTINGS AND EVERYTHING IN THAT SPACE I THINK IS, IS ADEQUATE OR IS APPROPRIATE.
AND I, I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THAT PART AND, AND SO I, I, I WAS, WE'LL SAY A LITTLE BIT, UM, CONCERNED WITH REGARDS TO THE WORDS ELIMINATION ON TWO OF THOSE MOTIONS.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ONE TO 500, RIGHT? AS A MINIMUM.
SO THEY WOULD NEED SIX PARKING SPACES? THAT IS CORRECT.
CAN I HAVE THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP REAL QUICK? UM, SO THEY'RE SELLING CARS HERE.
HOW MANY, WHAT'S THEIR INVENTORY AT ANY GIVEN TIME? THAT'S STANDARD FOR SOMETHING OF THIS SIZE.
'CAUSE THEY, IF THEY NEED A MINIMUM OF SIX SPACES AND YOU'VE GOT BASICALLY 20, UM, THAT'S 14 FOR INVENTORY, IT'S TYPICALLY, HONESTLY IT'S 15 TO 20.
SO, SO THAT, THAT WOULD BE THE REASON WHY THEY'RE DOING WALL-TO-WALL PAVING IS BECAUSE THEY, THEY'RE SELLING CARS AND THEY NEED PLACES FOR INVENTORY.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? SO THE, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT IT'S BEEN LIKE THIS FOR A LONG TIME AND THE NEIGHBORS HAVEN'T COMPLAINED AND IT'S BEEN LIKE THIS FOR 26 YEARS NOW.
BUT ADDITIONALLY, ON THE WEST SIDE, WE'RE NOT REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PARKING.
THAT'S LITERALLY AS MUCH AS THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE BUILDING IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING WHERE YOUR BUILDING IS FURTHEST AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
IS IT PAVED DOWN THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING? IT, IT, THE PROPOSAL IS FOR IT TO BE, BUT I THINK PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE THEY, THERE NEEDS TO BE ACCESS THROUGH A DRIVE ALONG THE EAST SIDE TO GET TO THE BACKSIDE.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE? I THINK IT'S FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE EMERGE I'M NOT POSITIVE ON THAT, SO I DON'T REALLY KNOW.
BUT WHEN I SPOKE TO THE, UM, THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, HE SAID THAT THERE WAS A NECESSARY DRIVEWAY WHEN I ASKED HIM WHY IT WAS NECESSARY.
I SEE WHAT I SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING.
SO YOU'RE HUN TO GET YOUR 150 FEET, YOU'VE GOT, BECAUSE YOU, YOU CAN'T GET A VEHICLE ON THE CORNER.
YOU'RE HAVING TO HAVE THE CAR, THE FIRE TRUCK GOES STRAIGHT BACK AND THEN GO EXIST ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING SO THAT THEY CAN WRAP AROUND THE SIDE TO GET THEIR 150 FOOT MAX HOSE LAY.
HE TOLD ME IT WAS FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES.
I DIDN'T ASK FOR ANY MORE DETAILS OTHER THAN THAT.
THAT MAKES, THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME.
COMMISSIONER MATT, IS THERE ANY OTHER FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS YOU'D LIKE TO ASK? SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S NO AVAILABILITY FOR REDUCING, SO, SO WE HAVE LISTENED TO OTHER
[01:25:01]
APPLICANTS COME THROUGH THAT WAS A HUNDRED PERCENT WALL TO WALL CONCRETE.AND WHEN THEY WENT THROUGH AND RE-ADDED OR REZONED AND RE REDID THE PROPERTY, THEY ACTUALLY CUT OUT AND REDUCED THE AMOUNT TO ALLOW FOR A BUFFER SPACE.
AND WELL THIS, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANT HERE DOESN'T WANT ANY ELIMINATION.
WELL, THEY ARE, THEY ARE PROVIDING A 13 FOOT BUFFER IN THE REAR.
YEAH, BUT THE REAR I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH, LIKE I SAID, SO, SO, 'CAUSE YOU KNOW, THAT'S BASICALLY BASED UPON THE, THE EXISTING BUILDING AND WHERE THE BUILDING IS.
SO, UM, SO THE FRONT AND THE SIDE IS THE ONE SIDE.
BUT, UH, I MEAN YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD AND WE'LL, YOU KNOW, I DON'T LIKE NOT HAVING BUFFERS, BUT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON IT.
I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER UH, DIALOGUE? ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, WHICH IS AS, AS THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED, EXCLUDING ITEM NUMBER SIX.
COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? 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? YES, I CONCUR.
AND I AGREE WITH THE FINDING OF FACT THAT MOTION PASSES 10 TO ZERO.
ALRIGHT, WE'RE WE'RE GONNA, I'M GONNA TURN THE, UH, REIGNS OVER TO, UH, VICE CHAIR ZUNA.
AND WE'RE, I AM BRINGING IN ITEM FOUR BACK UP.
UM, SO EVENTUALLY GIVE HIM, GIVE HIM THREE MINUTES TO WHEEL OUT.
ALRIGHT, STAFF, CAN WE HEAR THE PRESENTATION FOR THE, UH, CONSENT ITEM? THE ONE THAT WITH STAFF WAS APPROVING THE HEB? UM, YOU WANT STAFF TO DO THEIR PRESENTATION AGAIN? YES, PLEASE.
UH, WAIT, WE STAFF DID THE PRESENTATION RIGHT.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND WE LEFT IT WHERE WE WERE LOOKING FOR THE APPLICANT'S.
DO YOU WANNA JUST GIVE A BRIEF REAL QUICK? OH YEAH.
'CAUSE WE HAVE SOME NEW YEAH, YEAH.
STAFF IF YOU COULD DO A, JUST A REAL QUICK, A QUICK, UH, BRIEFING ON IT.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER, UH, FOUR, CORRECT? YES.
BOA DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 66 LOCATED AT 24 24 5 SOUTH FOSTER ROAD.
THE REQUESTS FOR A 20 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE 30 FOOT HEIGHT FOR LIGHT SOURCE TO ALLOW 73 LIGHT POLES TO BE 50 FEET IN LENGTH.
THE CASE ORIGINATED FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PROPOSING THE INSTALLATION OF 73 LIGHT POLES TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT FOR LIGHT SOURCE BY 20 FEET TO BE 50 FEET, FALL 50 FEET TALL PER STAFF VISITED SITE IN SEPTEMBER, 2026.
THIS IS A SITE PLAN, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR THE FOLLOWINGS FINDINGS OF FACT PERMITTING THE 50 FOOT LIGHT POLES WOULDN'T BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THEIR PLACEMENT WOULD NOT BE IN PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
IT WOULD MINIMALLY CONTRIBUTE LIGHT SPREAD TO LOCATIONS OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY.
A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE PROPERTY OWNER HAVING TO INSTALL LIGHT FIXTURES THAT MAY BE INSUFFICIENT OR UNREASONABLE FOR THE CURRENT OPERATION.
THE SURROUNDING AREA THAT WOULD BE MOST IMPACTED BY THE LIGHT SOURCES IS INDUSTRIAL AND PART OF THE EXISTING WAREHOUSE OPERATION.
24 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, NO VOICEMAILS WERE RECEIVED AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
DID UH, DID Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF WHILE WE HAVE 'EM HERE? MY QUESTION, I THINK WAS ANSWERED ABOUT THE MILITARY OVERLAY, UM, DISTRICT.
WOULD, WOULD IT, WOULD ANY OF THIS IMPACT THE MISSION OF THE MILITARY OR I KNOW THE PLANNING, UH, OF THE, THE BUILDING CODE DIVISION WOULD REVIEW THAT? CORRECT.
WE LOOK AT, FROM A MILITARY LIGHTING OVERLAY, WE LOOK AT, UM, WE BASICALLY HAVE OUR, SORRY, OUR ELECTRICAL TEAM THAT LOOKS AT, TO MAKE SURE IT COMPLIES WITH MLOD STANDARDS.
SO NO IMPACT TO THE, TO THE MILITARY MISSION? THAT WOULD BE MY CONCERN SIR.
SO LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD.
AND CHAIRMAN A ZUNA I WANNA JUST REITERATE ON THE MLOD THERE ARE TWO OPTIONS UNDER THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT
[01:30:01]
CODE, WHICH YOU CAN COMPLY WITH MLOD STANDARDS, OPTION A, WHICH IS ADHERED TO ALL BUG STANDARDS, WHICH IS BACKLIGHT, UPLIGHT, AND GLARE.AND THEN OPTION B, WHICH IS USING A PHOTOMETRIC ANALYSIS WITH A VIRTUAL BOX WHICH HAS BEEN PROVIDED.
WE ARE GOING WITH OPTION B, WHICH HAS BEEN PRESENTED AND PROVIDED TO THE STAFF.
SO WE CAN PROVIDE THAT FOR YOU GUYS AS WELL.
UH, AND GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN FOR THE SECOND TIME.
MY NAME IS ALAN BOONE, I'M AN ELECTRICAL ENGINEER WITH SUMMIT CONSULTANTS.
I AM REPRESENTING HEB FOR THIS CASE.
AND AGAIN, OUR REQUEST FOR THIS VARIANCE ARE TALLER LIGHT POLES.
THE STANDARD CODE, THIS IS NOT RELATED TO MLOD, THE MIC IF YOU WANT.
CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME NOW? MM-HMM.
UH, AS MENTIONED, OUR VARIANCE IS TO EXTEND THE HEIGHT AT WHICH LUMINAIRES CAN BE MOUNTED TO, THIS IS UNRELATED TO THE MLOD STANDARDS.
THIS IS JUST A STANDARD LIGHTING ORDINANCE IN UDC.
SO WE ARE STILL ADHERING TO THE PRESCRIPTIVE PATH OF MLOD.
SORRY, I FORGOT I'M IN CONTROL.
SO AGAIN, THIS IS OUR REQUESTED VARIANCE OF ADDITIONAL 20 FEET OF MOUNTING FIXTURE HEIGHT.
I WANNA SHARE TWO DIFFERENT IMAGES WITH YOU.
THIS IS TWO DESIGNS SHOWING 50 FOOT MOUNTING HEIGHTS ON THE LEFT AND 30 FOOT MOUNTING HEIGHT ON THE RIGHT.
YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE THREE TIMES AS MANY LIGHTS ON THE 30 FOOT DESIGN COMPARED TO THE 50.
AND THE NEXT IMAGE YOU'LL SEE IS A HEAT MAP SHOWING FOOT CANDLES AND ILLUMINANCE ACROSS THIS AREA.
SO RED BEING THE HOTTEST, WHICH IS 10 FOOT CANDLES AND ZERO BLUE, WHICH IS NO LIGHT AT ALL.
A LOT OF THE MODELED TRAILERS IN THIS TRAILER STAGING AREA ARE RECEIVING A LOT OF LIGHT.
TRAILERS ARE ABOUT 13 AND A HALF FEET LONG.
UH, HIGH, HIGH, EXCUSE ME, AND OVER 50 FEET LONG.
SO IF WE WERE TO ADHERE TO THE 30 FOOT POLES, THESE TRAILERS WOULD BE NEARLY REACHING HALF THE HEIGHT AND WOULD COVER A LARGE AMOUNT OF THE EFFECTIVE AREA A LIGHT COULD PROJECT.
SO YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT HAND IMAGE THERE IS ABOUT TWO TO THREE FOOT CANDLES IN BETWEEN THE TRAILERS ON EACH SIDE OF THIS DRIVE AISLE, PRODUCING A MUCH SAFER ENVIRONMENT AT NIGHT.
30 FOOT FIXTURES CANNOT SAFELY LIGHT THIS PROPERTY.
WITH THE OPERATIONS THAT ARE GOING ON AT NIGHT AND DURING THE DAY, THE NIGHT THE LIGHTS WOULD BE ONLY ON AT NIGHT.
WE ARE UTILIZING TALLER POLES, BUT THIS DOES NOT CREATE MORE LIGHT SPILL ACROSS THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO AS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, MLOD HAS ITS OWN PRESCRIPTIVE PATH TO ENSURE THERE IS NO LIGHT TRESPASS, LIGHT GLOW OR VERTICAL ILLUMINANCE AT THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND THIS IS TO PROTECT THE OPERATIONS OF THE MARTINDALE AIRFIELD, WHICH WE'RE LESS THAN THREE MILES AWAY FROM ON OUR DESIGN MEETS ALL FIXTURE SHIELDING MINIMIZES BUG RATING AND COLOR TEMPERATURE WITH OUR ALL WITHIN THE MLOD STANDARDS.
IT IS NOT, IN OUR OPINION, IT IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE WE ARE PRIORITIZING THE SAFETY OF PARTNERS AND EMPLOYEES THAT WILL BE ONSITE ENFORCEMENT WOULD CAUSE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
AND THIS IS BECAUSE IT WOULD CREATE AN UNSAFE ENVIRONMENT AT NIGHT FOR WHICH THE PARTNERS TO OPERATE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS OBSERVED.
AGAIN, OUR VARIANCE IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE ON STANDARD, ON THE STANDARD OF LIGHTING HEIGHT, NOT MLOD.
WE ARE PRESERVING MLOD AND ITS INTENT.
WE ARE NOT CREATING ANY EXTRA UNAUTHORIZED USE.
WE ARE ONLY ACTION ASKING FOR TALLER POLES AND WE WOULD NOT BE CHANGING ANY KIND OF OPERATIONS IN THIS INDUSTRIAL ZONE.
THERE'S NO SUBSTANTIAL INJURY TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OR DISTRICT CHARACTER.
THE LIGHTS WOULD BE SPECIFIED AND CONSTRUCTED IN CHARACTER WITH EVERYTHING ELSE EXISTING.
THE HARDSHIP IS UNIQUE TO THIS PROPERTY AND NOT FINANCIAL.
AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO REITERATE THIS IS PURELY FOR THE SAFETY OF PARTNERS AT NIGHT.
THE PHYSICAL LIGHTING COVERAGE THAT 30 FOOT POLES WOULD CREATE IS NOT ENOUGH COMPARED TO 50 FOOT POLES.
LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
ANY, ANY QUESTIONS FROM OUR FRIENDS ONLINE OR ON THE BOARD?
[01:35:01]
NONE.DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, VOICEMAILS OR PUBLIC UH, UH, ONE PERSON TO SPEAK? UH, DANIEL KHAR AND I DIDN'T GET MY BUTTON FAST ENOUGH.
DO YOU WANT ME TO HOLD NOW OR, OR, UH, WAIT TILL LATER.
NO, LET'S, LET'S, LET'S HEAR YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS.
SO, UM, SO THERE ARE RESIDENTS THAT ARE NOT ABUTTING THIS PROPERTY BUT ARE NEARBY.
UM, AND SO, SO AT THE PROPERTY LINE OR, OR WELL AT THE PROPERTY LINE, IT'S ZERO LIGHT CAST PAST THE PROPERTY LINE, UH, FROM THE SHIELDS THEMSELVES.
AND SO THE PROPERTIES THAT WE'LL SAY THAT ARE A THOUSAND FEET AWAY, WILL THEY BE ABLE TO SEE THESE SIGNS AND BE ABLE TO SEE THE BOTTOM OF THEM? UH, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.
SO WHILE IT IS THAT THE, AND SO THEY'LL SEE THE LIGHTS, BUT THEY, BUT THEY WILL, THEY'LL SEE LIGHTING COMING FROM IT, BUT THEY WON'T SEE THE BULBS COMING FROM IT.
IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING THEN? UH, THE LIGHTS THAT WOULD COME FROM THESE LIGHTS WOULD NOT IMPACT ANY LIGHT TRESPASSING THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO AS I LOOK ACROSS, YOU KNOW, THE BACK OF MY PROPERTY, I SEE UH, BANDERA ROAD, UH, WITH TALL LIGHT POLES AND I SEE THE LIGHTS ON THOSE POLES.
UM, AND SO, SO WHILE IT IS THAT THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THEY AREN'T NECESSARILY THE SAME KIND OF LIGHTS ARE YOU ARE, ARE YOU PROTECTED? SO THOSE NEIGHBORS WOULDN'T SEE THOSE, SEE THOSE LIGHTS, YOU KNOW, I GUESS IN JUST IN GENERAL, JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE WHOLE MLD PERSPECTIVE, 'CAUSE YOU KNOW, WE CERTAINLY WANNA PROTECT THE MILITARY, BUT ALSO THE NIGHT VIEW OF ALL OF THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTS THAT ARE THERE, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, AS A RURAL COMMUNITY, BUT YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW THEY HAVE THOSE RIGHTS AS WELL.
SO IT SETS A LIMIT OF WHAT CAN BASICALLY TRESPASS OR BE ON THE FACES OF THIS BOX.
IT DOES NOT PRESCRIBED THAT THERE IS NO LIGHT TRESPASS.
THERE IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT THAT IS ALLOWED THROUGH MLOD, OPTION B.
AND IS THAT, IS THAT TRESPASS HEIGHT RELATED OR OR IS IT GROUND LEVEL? DOES IT GO ALL THE WAY UP? SO HOW DOES THAT, HOW DOES THAT, NO SIR.
MLOD AND HOW HEIGHT IS IN THE FIXTURE? MOUNTING HEIGHT IS NOT, IT'S NOT A CONSTRAINT IN MLOD.
THIS IS A SEPARATE VARIANCE OUTSIDE OF MLOD, BUT WE'D LIKE TO JUST HIGHLIGHT THAT WE ARE ADHERING TO MLOD STANDARDS AND JUST TO, UH, DID THAT, DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION MR MAN? OR DO WE, THIS IS, THIS IS RATHER THE SUPPLEMENTAL USE FOR, UM, ELIMINATION OF USES NOT THE MLOD STANDARD.
CAN YOU REPEAT WHAT YOU SAID? MEKO? I'M SORRY.
THIS IS UNDER THE SUPPLEMENTAL OF USES UNDER, UM, ILLUMINATION OF USES UNDER 35 3 92.
NOT, THIS IS NOT A VARIANCE FROM THE MLOD STANDARD.
THERE IS AN MOD THERE, BUT IT'S, THIS IS NOT A VARIANCE RELATED TO THAT.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION MR. MANNA? ARE WE ALRIGHT, LET'S, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND HAVE THE ONE PUBLIC COMMENT, UH, TO BE READ.
MR. DANNY, YOU CAN SAY YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU SAID NAME AND ADDRESS? YES PLEASE.
5 7 2 5 US HIGHWAY 87 EAST 7 8 2 2 2.
UH, I'VE HAD A DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANTS AND IF THEY'RE BEHOLDEN TO THIS SITE MAP, UH, I WITHDRAW MY, MY OPPOSITION.
OKAY, WELL LET'S, UH, SEE WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY.
UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, IF YOU'VE HEARD COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME REBUTTAL BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION? NO, SIR.
SO, OKAY, THAT, ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS I GOT, I HAVE A QUESTION.
SO THE, THE UH, PROPERTY THERE, THE LIGHTS ARE GONNA BE 24 7, UH, THE LIGHTS WOULD NOT BE ON 24.
COULD COULD YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE TO, SORRY.
THE LIGHTS WOULD NOT BE ON 24 7 ONLY DURING NIGHT.
AND, UH, SATURDAY, SUNDAY? UH, YES SIR.
THERE ARE VERY FEW DAYS THAT THIS FACILITY WILL BE CLOSED ON A YEAR.
THEN Y'ALL HAVE OTHER SECURITY AS WELL? YES SIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALRIGHT, THAT'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION.
I'D ASK A MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PLEASE MAKE A MOTION.
[01:40:04]
ANY, I CAN DO IT AGAIN.OKAY, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 2 6 1 0 3 0 0 1 6 6, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST BY SUMMIT CONSULTANTS FOR 20 FOOT VARIANCE OF THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE 30 FOOT HEIGHT FOR A LIGHT SOURCE TO ALLOW 73 LIGHT POLES TO BE 50 FEET HIGH IN HEIGHT, LOCATED AT 2 0 4 5 SOUTH FOSTER ROAD.
BECAUSE OF THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US IN THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINE SHOWED THAT PHYSICAL CARE TO THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS, THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PLACEMENT WOULD NOT BE WITHIN THE PROXIMITY OF TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND WOULD MINIMALLY CONTRIBUTE TO LIGHT SPREAD TO LOCATIONS OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIFIC CONDITIONS, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF ORDINANCE MUST WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
LITTLE ENFORCEMENT ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN THE PROPERTY OWNER HAVING TO LIGHT FIXTURES THAT MAY BE INSUFFICIENT AND UNREASONABLE FOR OUR CURRENT OPERATION.
BY GRANTED THE VARIANCE SPEED OF THE OR ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED BY AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
PLACEMENT OF LIGHT FIXTURES WOULD NOT BE CLOSE TO ANY NEAR NEARBY RESIDENCES AND WILL CONTRIBUTE TO THE OPERATION ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
FOUR VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WOULD BE ALLOWED WITHIN THIS VARIANCE.
SUCH VARIS NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ENDURE APPROPRIATE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT FORM PROPERTY OR ALTER TO THE CENTRAL CARE TO THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
LOCATIONS LIGHT POLES WOULD NOT SPREAD LIGHT INTO ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE AREAS OF FACILITY OPERATIONS.
THE PLAY OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS VARIANCE IS SOUGHT, IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTED ON THE PROPERTY AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
WERE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE OR RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
LIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE EXISTING FACILITY AND OPERATIONS.
NECESS STATED LIGHT FIXTURES TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE HEIGHT OUTLINE.
THE UDC SURROUNDING AREA WOULD NOT BE, UH, THAT WOULD BE MOST IMPACTED BY THE LIGHT SOURCES IS INDUSTRIAL AND PART OF THE EXISTING WAREHOUSE OPERATION.
ALRIGHT, CAN I GET A SECOND? SECOND.
OH, I DIDN'T SEE, WAS THAT, UH, WHO WAS THE SECOND? MR. MANNA.
MR. REED? UM, YES, I, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS VARIANCE.
I MEAN, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE THE 50 FOOT, UM, HEIGHT IS APPROPRIATE AND NECESSARY IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE TO, UH, TO FULLY LIGHT THIS PARKING AREA.
ALRIGHT, MR. MANA? UM, I CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUE.
YOU KNOW, I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW FOR LIGHTING THE AREA, BUT, UM, I THINK THAT IT'S A GOOD THAT YOU HAD A COMMUNITY MEMBER COME OUT 'CAUSE UH, THAT ACTUALLY HELPED QUITE A BIT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.
CAN WE TAKE A ROLL CALL? VOTE.
COMMISSIONER REED? UH, YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER MANNA? I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER IBANEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR.
ALRIGHT, THE TIME IS, UH, 2 47.
IF WE CAN GET OUR CHAIR, MR. OREO BACK ON THE DAIS, WE'D BE GOOD TO GO.
CHAIR? YES, MS. MAYOR CHAIR, WE, UH, TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK SINCE WE ARE GONNA WAIT FOR OUR NORMAL CHAIR.
WE'LL MEET YOU BACK AT, UH, 2 53.
WE'RE GONNA BE RESURRECTING ITEM 11.
ALRIGHT, I'M GONNA DO A QUICK PRESENTATION FOR COMMISSIONER BONILLA.
ITEM NUMBER 11, LOCATED ON, UH, MEL.
MEL DRIVE TO PUT R THREE, UM, APPROVED WITH A REDUCED SETBACK PERIMETER SETBACK OF 10 FEET.
THEY'RE REQUESTING 11 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 20 FOOT GARAGE SETBACK TO HAVE A NINE FOOT GARAGE SETBACK.
UH, SUBJECT PROPERTIES IS A STRAIGHT INTERNAL RESIDENTIAL STREET THAT TERMINATES IN A CUL-DE-SAC TO SERVING 18 RESIDENTIAL LOTS SITUATED ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE ROADWAY.
UM, THE, WHILE THE PUT SETBACK, WELL, THE PUT DESIGNATION ELIMINATES THE INTERNAL SETBACKS.
SO 20 FOOT GARAGE SETBACK STILL APPLIES.
STAFF ERRONEOUSLY APPROVED THREE BUILDING PERMITS WITHOUT FINDING THE ERROR.
OA, UH, APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR THE, TO FINALIZE THOSE PERMITS ALONG WITH THE FUTURE ONES.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND SUBJECT PROPERTY
[01:45:10]
THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.THE PROPERTY FRONT IS OWN STREET AND PROPOSED GARAGE WILL REMAIN WITHIN THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT.
THE REQUEST FOR RELIEF IS BASED ON PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN RATHER THAN FINANCIAL, UH, CONSIDERATIONS OR GENERAL CONDITIONS THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT.
NONE IN NONE IN RECEIVED IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION? NO.
RESIDENT RESIDENCE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT AND THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND WE CAN CONTINUE THE UM, PRESENTATION.
MY NAME IS RON ALVARADO WITH AG ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS AND, UH, WE ARE HERE JUST TO EXPLAIN THE PROJECT.
THE PROJECT IS A PUD DEVELOPMENT FOR 18 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
THEY WILL BE TWO STORY IN CONSTRUCTION WITH THREE BEDROOMS, TWO AND A HALF BATHS INCLUDED WITH A TWO CAR GARAGE ENCLOSED, UH, GARAGE.
AND IN FRONT OF THAT GARAGE, WE WILL HAVE A NINE FOOT DRIVEWAY THAT GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE STREET.
AND, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT IS IN, IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THIS, UH, PROJECT.
AND IT'S LOOKING FOR, WE'RE TRYING TO BRING IN THE YOUNG PROFESSIONALS AND WE FEEL THAT THIS WILL BE A PERFECT HOUSE FOR THE YOUNG PROFESSIONALS THAT ARE CLOSED THERE WITHIN FIVE MILES OF THE MEDICAL CENTER AREA, WHICH THEY REALLY NEED HOUSING FOR THOSE PROFESSIONALS THERE.
UH, WELL, UM, STAFF, DID YOU FIND A RECORDED PLAT FOR THIS? I SAW THE PLAT FOUND EARLIER WITH THE, UH, 31 FOOT RIGHT OF AWAY WAS THE MOST UPDATED ONE.
AND, UH, SO I'M I I'M JUST GOING TO JUST PUT THIS OUT THERE.
I'M GLAD THAT YOU HAVE A TWO CAR GARAGE MEETING YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENT.
I'M REALLY GLAD YOU HAVE A 30 FOOT ASPHALT PAVEMENT SO THAT CARS CAN PARK ON THE STREET.
UM, SOME, SOME OF MY CONCERNS WERE IS THAT IF, IF YOU'RE DOING THIS AS A 31 FOOT PRIVATE ROAD, THAT'S 30, THAT'S YOU'RE GETTING SOME PAVEMENT AND THEN YOU'RE DOING, I GUESS THE EXTRA FOOT IS FOR THE CURBING MM-HMM
UH, BUT IF YOU'RE GONNA PUT A FOUR FOOT SIDEWALK IN THERE, THAT MEANS THAT THE NINE FEET THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE REALLY GONNA BE FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE SIDEWALK.
AND THAT MEANS YOU HAVE SO LITTLE ROOM THAT THE LIKELIHOOD OF YOU EVER PARKING A CAR THERE IS LIKE SLIM TO NUMB.
'CAUSE IT'S JUST, THERE'S JUST NO ROOM.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S A GOOD THING.
YOU KNOW, I'M JUST, I'M TRYING TO, THE LIKELIHOOD OF WHEN WE SEE THESE SORT OF APPLICATIONS, IF IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE LENGTH OF A CAR, WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS CARS JUST PARK THERE ANYWAY AND THEN THEY'RE BLOCKING THE SIDEWALK OR THEY'RE KIND OF STICKING INTO THE STREET.
AND I WAS, AND I JUST WAS, I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT OCCURRENCE HAPPENING.
UH, IN YOUR CASE YOU HAVE SO LITTLE ROOM THAT IF A CAR WERE TO ATTEMPT TO PARK THERE, IT WOULD BE SO RIDICULOUSLY STICKING INTO THE ROADWAY THAT I JUST, I CAN'T SEE IT HAPPENING.
BUT THAT'S, SO I, I'M GETTING A LITTLE BIT MORE BEHIND THIS, UH, FOR THAT REASON.
IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMENTS OR OBSERVATIONS I'D LIKE TO SHARE MANNA COMMISSIONER MANNA.
SO GOING DOWN THE PATH, YOU KNOW, UM, ACTUALLY I WAS IN A COMMUNITY RECENTLY AND THEY HAD EXTREMELY SHORT DRIVEWAYS AND CARS WERE, YOU KNOW, SO, SO A CHALLENGE IN MANY COMMUNITIES IS NO ONE USES THEIR GARAGE FOR PARKING CARS.
THEY USE IT FOR STORAGE AS ADDITIONAL STORAGE.
AND SO, UM, SO WITH THIS COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, UH, BECAUSE IT'S A PUD SET UP A RESTRICTION SO THAT EVERYONE HAS TO PARK IN THE GARAGE, YES, THERE WILL BE A, UM, UH, LIKE AN HOA AGREEMENT THAT THERE WILL HAVE RESTRICTIONS IN WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO IN THAT DEVELOPMENT.
WELL, I HAVE TO, TANGLEWOOD IS NOT A MANDATORY NO, BUT THIS DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS, IS GONNA HAVE A SUB H.
AND THEN, UH, AND, AND THE QUESTION THAT I WAS KIND OF GONNA FOLLOW UP WITH THAT WAS, UM, YOU KNOW, IF I PARK IN A DRIVEWAY AND THE REAR OF MY CAR IS ACTUALLY SITTING ON THE STREET AND THIS IS A PRIVATE STREET, IS THAT A VIOLATION, A CODE OR A, UM, YEAH, A VIOLATION? UM, THAT COULD BE, YES.
IT WOULD BE, IT, IT'S, IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE BLOCKING, UH, EMERGENCY VEHICLES.
UM, EVEN IF IT, SO, SO SAY, UM, AS THE EXAMPLE THAT I SAW RECENTLY, THIS PAST WEEKEND, SO CARS WERE PARALLEL PARKED OR, OR YOU KNOW, ON THE CURB, THEN THERE WAS A CAR SIT IN THE PARKING OR IN THE DRIVEWAY, BUT ITS BUTT WAS STICKING OUT TO THE LENGTH OF WHERE IT WAS THAT SOMEONE WAS PARKING ON THE CURB.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? WHAT I JUST SAID? YEAH.
[01:50:01]
IS, AND THEN IT IT, WHEN YOU HAVE A 30 FOOT PAVED AREA AND YOU HAVE, WHICH DOES ALLOW PARKING ON EITHER SIDE, UH, YOU, YOU DO HAVE, UH, YOU KNOW, CARS CAN'T BE WIDER THAN EIGHT FEET.SO THAT WHAT YOU END UP HAPPENING IS AS, AS A CAR IS PARKED AGAINST THE CURB ON EITHER SIDE, THERE'S, UM, 14 FEET OF, OF MINIMUM WITH THROUGH, WHICH IS, UH, I MEAN IT DOESN'T SAY IT AS BLUNTLY, BUT, UM, WHENEVER YOU HAVE OBSTRUCTIONS LIKE THROUGH A GATE FOR EXAMPLE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST A 14 FOOT MINIMUM WIDTH FOR A FIRE TRUCK.
UH, AND THEN THEY USE A DRIVEWAY APRONS THEMSELVES, UH, TO NEGOTIATE AND GET OUT AND DO THINGS.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM A, FROM A FIRE OFFICIAL MANY YEARS AGO.
UM, I KNOW IT'S DESIRABLE TO NOT HAVE CARS PARKED ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ROAD.
UH, BUT YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THAT'S JUST WHAT HAPPENS.
BUT IF I AM PARKED IN MY DRIVEWAY AND EXTENDING OUT BY SIX FEET OFF THE BACK, YOU KNOW, INTO THE STREET, BUT I'M STILL WITHIN THAT SPACE OF NOT IMPEDING, WE'LL SAY THE, THE 14 FOOT, IS THAT COMPLIANT? WELL, IF YOU'RE GONNA BE, ARE YOU GONNA BE FOR SURE PUTTING IN SIDEWALKS OR DID YOU GET AN EXEMPTION FROM SIDEWALKS? I BELIEVE WE GOT AN EXEMPTION FROM THE SIDEWALKS.
SO THEN YOU WOULD HAVE A CAR STICKING INTO A INGRESS.
AND I HAVE TO SAY, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT WOULD BE A, A VIOLATION STAFFING.
HAVE ANY INSIGHT ON THAT? UH, YOU KNOW, THE, SO THE PREMISE OF THE QUESTION IS THAT IF A CAR WAS STICKING OUT LESS THAN IT WOULD BE IF IT WAS A PARALLEL PARKED VEHICLE, DOES THAT CHANGE, UM, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S, IT'S AN OFFENSE OR SOMETHING? WE'D HAVE TO LOOK THAT UP.
THAT IS AN INTERESTING QUESTION.
I MEAN, 'CAUSE IF YOU CAN HAVE A CAR STICKING EIGHT FEET WIDE ON THE SIDE OF A CURB, IF A CAR STICKING OUT LESS THAN THAT OUT THE DRIVEWAY WITH NO SIDEWALK THAT IS BLOCKING, ISN'T IT DOING THE SAME THING? YEAH, THERE WERE GIANT BASICALLY WAS A, IT WAS A EXTENDED BED TRUCK THAT WAS PARKED IN A DRIVEWAY STICKING OUT, UM, EIGHT FEET INTO THE STREET.
SO, UM, BUT I GUESS, SO THE POINT IS THAT THERE PROBABLY ISN'T ANYTHING LIKELY.
SO IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER CRUZ.
SO RIGHT NOW, I'M, I'M TRYING TO PICTURE THE DRIVEWAY AND THE GARAGE.
SO THE GARAGE WILL HAVE TWO CAR GARAGE AND IF THEY HAVE ANY EXTRA CARS, THEY HAVE TO STAY IN THE DRIVEWAY AND NOT IN THE STREET.
IS THAT CORRECT? SO THAT MEANS FOUR CARS MINIMUM TO EACH HOUSE? NO, THEY, THEY, THEY'RE ONLY GONNA HAVE NINE FEET TO THE PAVEMENT FROM THE FACE OF THE GARAGE DOOR.
SO, SO THAT MEANS ONLY NO CARS.
WELL, I MEAN, UNLESS YOU HAVE A CAR THAT'S NINE FEET OR SHORTER, I GUESS A SMART CAR MIGHT SMART.
EVERYBODY'S GOTTA HAVE A MINI
THE DEVELOPMENT IS, IS GONNA BE THE MARKET IS THE YOUNG PROFESSIONALS WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE MAYBE ONE, TWO CARS AT THE MOST.
SO IT'S NOT GONNA BE A FAMILY THAT HAS ALREADY CHILDREN THAT ARE DRIVING ALREADY WHERE THEY'RE GONNA HAVE MULTIPLE CARS IN THAT PARKING IN THEIR, AT THEIR HOUSE.
WELL, I'M GLAD THAT THERE'S AN ACTUAL REAL AGE MANDATORY HOA BECAUSE OF IF A YEAH.
YOU KNOW, WHEN I LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, EVERYBODY PARKED IN THE STREET YEAH.
BECAUSE THEY WERE PLAYING BASKETBALL ON THE DRIVEWAY.
AND AGAIN, LIKE AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, IF THERE'S GONNA BE PARKING, IT'S GONNA BE FOR SEVERAL HOURS FOR IF THEY'RE HAVING AN OCCASION AT THE HOUSE.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA BE PARKED THERE 24 7.
TH THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS, IS MORE OF AN R SIX TYPE DEVELOPMENT, YOU KNOW, THREE AND FOUR BEDROOM, TWO STORY HOMES IS, AND IT'S A SMALL DEVELOPMENT.
THIS, THESE ARE REALLY SMALL COMPARED TO THE REST OF TANGLE.
AND SO, ALRIGHT, THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS? OH, I GUESS I CAN DO ONE
LET ME PULL UP THE MOTIONS REAL QUICK.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 1 77.
I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUESTS BY AG ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS FOR AN 11 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 20 FOOT GARAGE SETBACK TO ALLOW A NINE FOOT GARAGE SETBACK LOCATED AT 11 8 0 3 THROUGH 11 8 39.
MEL MEL DRIVE, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED US TO THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED, SHOWED THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH AS A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE IS AMENDED, WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY YOU FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE REDUCED GARAGE SETBACK IS LOCATED ON ITS OWN STREET WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT LIMITING IMPACTS TO TRAFFIC, CIRCULATION AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A
[01:55:01]
LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE HAVE RESULTED IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.THE PROPERTY'S OWN STREET WITHIN CREATES A CONDITION WHERE STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THE CODE WOULD UNNECESSARILY RESTRICT THE REASONABLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.
THREE BY GREATER THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE VARIANCE MAINTAINS THE OVERALL INTENT OF PROVIDING ADEQUATE SEPARATION AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT.
FOUR, THE VARIANCE TO NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF EASE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT OF WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ENTER THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE PROPERTY FRONT ITS OWN STREET AND THE PROPOSED GARAGE WILL, WILL REMAIN WITHIN THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT SIX APPLIED TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARI TO SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, ARE NOT DUE TO OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE PROPERTY'S LOCATION IN ITS OWN STREET WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT IS A SITE SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCE THAT DISTINGUISHES IT FROM OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE DISTRICT.
SO, UM, I I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND VOTE TO APPROVE THIS ONE.
UH, NAMELY BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ENOUGH ROOM THERE'S, WHICH MAKES IT MORE OF A DETERRENT FOR CARS PARKING THERE AND THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE A 30 FOOT PAVED ASPHALT DRIVE.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ, I CONCUR WITH YOU.
I'M STILL SKEPTICAL ABOUT THE PARKING, BUT WE'LL HOPEFULLY HAVE SOME GREAT NEIGHBORS IN THERE.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING NOW? HAVE A ROLL CALL.
COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER I BARNES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER BENAVIDEZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER UNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR.
YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU GET WITH STAFF? LOOKS LIKE WE ARE ON ITEM NUMBER ONE.
ITEM NUMBER ONE, BO OA DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 1 29 LOCATED AT 1224 WEST FRENCH PLACE.
THE REQUEST IS FOR ONE A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO ALLOW ACCESS 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.
A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE LOCATION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW CARPORT AND THE EAST SIDE YARD AND FRONT YARD FORM A FOUR FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY.
LINE FIVE AND NINE FOOT 11 INCH VARI VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW CARPORT WITHIN ONE INCH.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ADDRESSED OFF WEST FRENCH PLACE AND LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF WEST FRENCH PLACE AND FREDERICKSBURG ROAD TO THE WEST.
THE SURROUNDING AREAS PRIMARILY DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON LOTS ZONED R SIX IN THE NORTH AND EAST IS LOCATED WITHIN THE NCD FIVE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO THE SOUTH.
OUR PROPERTY ZONED IDZ TWO WITH USE IS PERMITTED IN NOISE RESTRICTED DISTRICT TATTOO PARLOR AND BAR SLASH TAVERN TO THE EAST ARE PROPERTY ZONED C3 A.
THE CASE ORIGINATOR FROM A CODE ENFORCEMENT VIOLATION.
ITS NUMBER OF 2025 FOR BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT.
IN INSTANCE, THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT SPECIFIES THAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MUST NOT EXCEED 40% OF THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES.
BUILDING FOOTPRINT THAT THE MATERIALS USED ON A CARPORT MUST MATCH THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE AND THAT A CARPORT CANNOT BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT AND SIDE YARD.
THE FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE STANDARD OF R SIX ZONE PROPERTIES.
AERIAL IMAGERY SHOWS THE EXISTENCE OF THREE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE REAR YARD, WHICH ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO NCD FIVE STANDARDS AND CALCULATED INTO THE OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON THE LOT.
THIS IS A SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THIS IS A SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS A**L FOR THE NNC D FIVE MAXIM ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, SQUARE FOOTAGE AND CD FIVE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE MATERIAL AND CD FIVE CARPORT.
LOCATION AND FRONT AND SIDE SETBACKS BASED ON
[02:00:01]
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, ONE, SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WOULD NOT BE OBSERVED AND GRANT ANY VARIANCE TO THE STANDARDS AS A 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 TO THE PROPERTY LINES COULD IMPACT FIRE MITIGATION MEASURES AND SURROUNDING STRUCTURES AND MAY INCREASE WATER RUNOFF ONTO THE ABUTTING PROPERTY.
UPON APPLYING FOR A PERMIT, THE APPLICANT WOULD'VE BEEN MADE AWARE OF THE EXISTING STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE NCD FIVE AND OF OUR SIX ZONED PROPERTIES.
ONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION OUTSIDE 200 FEET THERE IS ONE NOTICE RECEIVED IN FAVOR.
ZERO VOICEMAILS WERE RECEIVED.
BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR OF VARIANCES NUMBER TWO AND NUMBER FOUR AND IS IN OPPOSITION OF VARIANCES.
NUMBER THREE, AND NUMBER FIVE.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD AND ALL RIGHT.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
I REPRESENT, UH, ESMERALDA MORALES, UH, RAMOS.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS, UH, ESMERALDA.
THIS IS YOUR MOTHER AND HER MOTHER LIVES WITH HER AND HER HUSBAND, WHO MOST OF HIS GUYS SIT IN THE BACK 'CAUSE WE DON'T LOOK THAT GREAT.
UM, SO THEY, UH, WERE ADVISED BY THE DOCTOR AND HOPEFULLY THIS IS INCLUDED IN THE PACK THAT WAS GIVEN TO YOU IN A LETTER THAT THEY NEEDED, UM, SOME SORT OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT ALLOWED THEIR, THEY CAN BROADCAST IT UP THERE IN CASE.
I DID SUBMIT IT WITH THE MATERIALS, I THINK ON FRIDAY.
UM, THEY WERE ADVISED BY THEIR DOCTOR THAT THEY NEEDED SOME SORT OF CARPORT, UM, AND AS WELL AS A RAMP SO THAT, UM, SHE'S, I DON'T LOOK, I'M NOT A DOCTOR AND I'M NOT GONNA SAY, HE SAYS ESSENTIALLY SHE, UH, I'M SORRY.
UM, SHE IS, HAS TROUBLE WITH SUNLIGHT.
SO THERE SHE NEEDS SOME SHADE WHEN SHE GETS IN AND OUT OF THE CART.
THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE ASKED PERMISSION.
UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU HAD TO ASK PERMISSION FIRST.
UM, THESE ARE WORKING FOLKS, THEY DIDN'T KNOW ANY BETTER.
UM, I DO THINK OFTEN THAT THE REASON YOU MAKE A MISTAKE, UM, MAKES A DIFFERENCE.
IF IT WAS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND I WAS IN FRONT OF YOU IN MONTE VISTA, YOU WOULD SAY, COME ON EDDIE, YOU KNOW, IT'S A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
YOU CAN'T DO THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA.
I THINK IT'S A, A LITTLE DIFFERENT IN THAT I DON'T THINK THAT THE AVERAGE FOLK WOULD KNOW THAT THEY ALSO WERE NOT AWARE THAT THEY WERE A MEMBER OF, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
SO WHAT THEY DID IS THEY BUILT THE CARPORT.
IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UM, ACTUAL STRUCTURE ITSELF, YOU NOTICE THAT ON ITS, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS A COMMERCIAL AREA.
AND THEN ON THE LEFT SIDE, YOU CAN SEE.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS A BLUE HOUSE, UNLESS I'M MISSTATING IT.
THE PERSON THAT WOULD BE MOST AFFECTED THE BLUE HOUSE IS HERE TODAY.
UM, I'M SORRY I DON'T HAVE HER NAME MEMORIZED.
IT IS ALICIA MORENO AND SHE IS HERE TO SAY THAT ESSENTIALLY THIS IS A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND A GOOD NEIGHBOR IS WORTH FAR MORE THAN A SLIGHTLY ENCROACHING CARPORT, AND SHE'S IN SUPPORT OF IT.
UM, THERE WERE ALSO, WE ALSO INCLUDED IN OUR PACKET, UM, LETTERS FROM THREE OTHER NEIGHBORS, UM, THAT SUPPORTED, UM, THIS PARTICULAR THING.
I ALSO HAVE AN ELDERLY MOTHER, AND SO I WAS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING.
UH, I'M SORRY FOR IT BECAUSE I, I IMAGINE OCCASIONALLY THAT MY WORDS MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND I WOULD'VE EXPLAINED THE SAME THING I'M TELLING YOU, WHICH IS I THINK THE REASON OF PROVIDING FOR MOM IS A FAR DIFFERENT THING THAN IF YOU'RE TRYING TO, I DON'T KNOW, JUST HAVE A, YOUR ANTIQUE TRUCK, A LITTLE PROVIDED FROM THE SUN.
UM, I DON'T THINK PERSONALLY LOOKING AT THE PICTURES, THEY'LL LET YOU MAKE YOUR OWN DETERMINATION THAT IT, UM, GENERALLY INTERFERES WITH THE, UH, AESTHETICS OF THE PROPERTY.
YOU CAN SEE IT'S ON THE SIDE, WHICH IS WHERE THE DRIVEWAY HAS BEEN FOREVER.
WHEN MY CLIENTS AND I SUBMITTED IT, THE STAFF ASKS THAT WE ALSO INCLUDE THE THREE STRUCTURES IN THE BACK.
UM, I, I AM, I CANNOT TESTIFY, BUT MY CLIENT'S TESTIMONY WOULD BE HAPPY TO TELL YOU WOULD BE THOSE THREE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
LOOKING AT THAT PICTURE AT THE BOTTOM, SORT OF THE RIGHT, IT'S LISTED AS A 1 1 1 3 ORANGE THING.
THEY SAID THEY'VE BEEN THERE WAY SINCE THEY BOUGHT THE HOUSE.
THEY, THOSE ARE NOT NEW, NOR IF YOU TOOK PICTURE OF 'EM, WOULD THEY APPEAR TO BE NEW? UH, I GUESS THE OTHER THING I'D SAY IN SUPPORT OF IT IS THAT IS WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS CURRENTLY, AND IT MAKES MOST SENSE
[02:05:01]
TO PUT IT, I GUESS IT IS POSSIBLE TO TRY TO ASK FOR A VARIANCE TO GO TO THE BACK OF THE HELP POUR ADDITIONAL CONCRETE, UM, 'CAUSE YOU'D HAVE TO ASK FOR A VARIANCE, I THINK, TO POUR THAT CONCRETE, THAT CLOSE AND PUT THE CARPORT IN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.BUT I JUST DON'T THINK THAT MAKES SENSE.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS NORMAL OR NOT, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVE IN THE ACTUAL NEIGHBORHOOD ITSELF ARE IN FAVOR OF IT.
I CERTAINLY ALWAYS UNDERSTAND, UH, NEIGHBORHOODS, ASSOCIATIONS ABOUT AESTHETICS.
UM, I THINK THAT AESTHETIC, I'LL LET YOU MAKE YOUR OWN DETERMINATION AS TO THE AESTHETIC IMPACT.
UM, AND I'M SORRY, THIS IS, I, I, I THINK YOU CAN TELL THIS IS HER MOTHER THAT'S HERE.
AND SO, SO I HAVE A QUESTION THAT THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT OF ITEMS TWO AND FOUR.
AND SO ITEM NUMBER TWO IS, UH, THE MATERIAL OF THE CARPORT AND FOUR IS, UH, THE SIDE SETBACK OF THE CARPORT, BUT THEY'RE OPPOSED TO IT BEING AT THAT CLOSE TO THE FRONT, BUT ALSO THEY'RE OPPOSED TO IT, UH, TO BEING A, UH, LET'S SEE, VARIANCE FROM THAT ABOUT ITS ACTUAL LOCATION ON THE EAST AND FRONT.
SO I I I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THEY COULD BE IN SUPPORT OF SOME THINGS.
I CAN, I CAN SEE HOW THEY MAY WANT IT PULLED BACK A LITTLE BIT, BUT THE FACT THAT IT'S THERE AT ALL IN THAT AREA, I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY CAN BE IN SUPPORT OF A COUPLE ITEMS AND NOT AT LEAST ITS LOCATION.
I MEAN, SOMEBODY FROM THE, UH, OH, GREAT.
AND I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T WANT TO INTERRUPT YOU THAT SO THEY CAN EXPLAIN THEIR OWN DECISIONS.
WELL, DO YOU MIND IF WE HEAR FROM THEM? I, I DON'T, I JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU IS, IS, UH, I, IF IT'S NOT OBVIOUS FROM THE PICTURES, THE MATERIALS ARE METAL.
AND I ALWAYS SAY THAT BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND ABOUT FIRE HAZARDS.
I THINK MOST OF YOU HAVE PRETTY GOOD EYES, BUT IN CASE IT WASN'T EVIDENT.
IN REGARDS TO THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE CARPORT PROVIDING THAT SHADE AND, AND PROTECTION ISSUES GETTING IN AND OUTTA THE CAR.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THERE? WHAT, WHAT'S IN THEM AND WHAT IS THAT? WHEN WERE THEY BUILT AND WHAT'S, UH, YOU CAN COME UP AND I, I, I'M SORRY.
THIS IS MY, MY, MY, HEY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND IF YOU HEARD THE QUESTION, WE'D LOVE TO HEAR WHAT YOU IS MORALES AND I'M THE OWNER.
UM, AND YOU SAID THE STRUCTURE AND THE MATERIALS IS BASICALLY JUST METAL? NO, ABOUT THE, THE ITEMS IN THE REAR OF THE YARD.
OH, THOSE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BY THE POOL.
THOSE, THOSE ARE JUST LIKE LITTLE S**T.
THEY'RE, THEY'VE BEEN THERE SINCE I PURCHASED THE HOME ABOUT 30 YEARS AGO, AND THEY'RE LIKE 10 BY TENS WHERE YOU STORE YOUR LAWNMOWER WHEN YOU STORE, YOU KNOW, STUFF.
I MEAN, THEY'RE FULL OF JUNK COMMISSIONER CRUZ, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.
UM, WELL, MY QUESTION WOULD BE IF THE SHEDS WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED, IS THERE A WAY FOR YOU TO DRIVE THROUGH THE BACK TO GET, TO MAKE A CARPORT? NO.
'CAUSE IT'S SO NARROW AS THE WAY THE HOUSE WAS BUILT.
AS YOU DRIVE THROUGH THE BACK, THERE IS JUST NOT ENOUGH SPACE TO GO THROUGH ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK.
I WOULD HAVE TO MOVE THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, TO THE OTHER SIDE BECAUSE I MEAN, THE HOUSE WAS BUILT A HUNDRED AND NINETEEN FORTY FOUR, AND SO I GUESS THEY MADE THE DRIVEWAY A CERTAIN LANE AND THEN NARROW, BECAUSE THERE'S ANOTHER ROOM THAT GOES LIKE THIS.
I'M SORRY, HOW HOW'D THE SHEDS GET THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE?
AND SO IT'S NARROW RIGHT HERE.
I THINK WE ALL DO SOMEONE SOMEWHERE PUT THOSE SHEDS.
WELL, LIKE SHE SAYS, SHE'S, I MEAN, THE HOUSE WAS THERE A LONG TIME BEFORE SHE EVEN PURCHASED IT.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S NOTHING NEW.
AND I'M JUST WONDERING, UM, SINCE IT'S ALUMINUM, BOTH THE, THE ROOF AND THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN ATTACH GUTTERS? BECAUSE I'M SURPRISED YOUR NEIGHBOR HAS NOT SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
I THINK THE RUNOFF IS PROBABLY TOWARDS THE FRONT BECAUSE OF THE YES.
BUT TO BE ON THE SAFE SITE, A GOOD NEIGHBOR.
UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A PRETTY LONG CARPORT AND I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER EXAMPLES ON THE STREET.
UM, AND I DO SEE A SUPPORT POST ROUGHLY ALIGNED WITH THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME.
UM, IS THERE PARTICULAR REASON WHY IT COULD NOT BE PULLED BACK TO THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME AND STILL PROVIDE COVERED PARKING AND DIRECT
[02:10:01]
ACCESS TO THE, UM, WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE WALKWAY INTO THE FRONT ENTRANCE? UM, THE CAR, I'M SORRY.IT'S ALL THE WAY, IT'S FROM THE BACK, SO I CAN'T, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH SPACE FOR ME TO PUSH IT BACK.
WELL, WHAT I'M SUGGESTING, IF YOU CUT OFF THE FRONT OF IT, BASICALLY, UH, OH, I MEAN, I GUESS I COULD HAVE THEM RECUT IT.
I WANNA SAY THAT 'CAUSE THE SOUNDS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OKAY WITH THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION.
UM, AT LEAST IN REFERENCE TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
IT'S MORE SO THE FACT THAT IT PROTRUDES SO FAR OUT FROM THE FRONT FACADE.
AND THERE'S NO OTHER EXAMPLES THAT I CAN SEE ON THE STREET THAT, UM, THAT HAD THIS SORT OF CONDITION.
UM, COMMISSIONER DEAN, HOW, HOW MANY CARS ARE YOU PARKING? I HAVE THREE.
IS THAT WHY YOU NEEDED THAT? UH, WELL, NO, ACTUALLY NOT FOR THE, THE SHADE OF CAR.
'CAUSE I GO TO WORK, MY HUSBAND GO TO WORK, MY MOM HAS TO DO ALL HER EXERCISE FOR PT, UH, WITH HER PROVIDER DURING THE DAY.
SO SHE COMES OUT AND SHE DOES HER PT THERE.
SHE MEANS PHYSICAL THERAPY OF COURSE.
IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUE I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER RITA.
HER MOM ALSO DOES PHYSICAL THERAPY.
AND I, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE LENGTH OF IT.
OTHERWISE IT WOULD'VE BEEN A MUCH SHORTER, SHORTER THING.
IS THERE IS, UM, ANYONE, SENATOR TO SPEAK? YES.
WE HAVE FOUR SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
UM, WELL, LET'S, LET'S HEAR FROM THEM FIRST.
UH, AND MAYBE ONE OF THOSE, UH, MEMBERS IS A, UH, IS A MEMBER OF THE HOA.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS.
I KNOW THAT THEY NEED THE CARPORT BECAUSE THEIR MOM NEEDS, AND I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES BECAUSE MOST OF THE CARPORT IS IN MY, IN MY FRONT YARD.
SO I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES.
I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT.
UH, NEXT ONE IS CYNTHIA WALKER.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS.
I LIVE AT 10 38 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE, AND I'M GOING TO READ A LETTER FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UM, AND THEN SORT OF CLARIFY THAT WHY WE WERE THINKING WHAT WE WERE THINKING.
SO, BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION VOTED ON SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2026, NOT TO SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING NCD VARIANCES, NUMBER ONE, THREE AND FIVE.
AS YOU STATED PREVIOUSLY, WE VOTED TO SUPPORT THE NCD VARIANCES TWO AND FOUR, WHICH INCLUDES ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, MATERIALS TO BE USED IN A CARPORT THAT DOES NOT MATCH THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE.
AND A FIVE FOOT 11 INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SET SIDE SET BACK TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE EAST PROPERTY LINE.
WITH THE PROVISION THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER INSTALL GUTTERS TO PREVENT RUNOFF ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.
THE BAHA OF RESIDENTS VOTED TO SUPPORT THE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE BECAUSE SO MANY STRUCTURES ON THE, ON THE PROPERTIES OF THE PROPERTIES IN THE BEACON HILL AREA DO NOT SIT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTIES.
AND WE HAVE SUPPORTED THIS KIND OF REASONABLE VARIANCE IN THE PAST.
OUR PROCESS IN BEACON HILL, WE MEET REGULARLY AND ALL CASES ARE ADVISED, ADVERTISED IN THE BEACON HILL NEWSLETTER, AND THAT IS HAND DELIVERED TO EACH RESIDENT AND TO LOCAL BUSINESSES AT A MEETING.
APPLICANTS ARE INVITED TO PRESENT THEIR CASE AND TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
THE ZONING AND URBAN DESIGN COMMITTEE BECOME MAKES A RECOMMENDATION.
AND AFTER THE DISCUSSION, THE VOTE RESIDENTS VOTE.
WE FEEL THAT IS, THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE NCD FIVE STANDARDS WERE CREATED BY THE RESIDENTS OF THE BEACON HILL AREA IN 2004 AND REVISED IN 2017.
THE VOTE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS AT THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GENERAL MEETING IS IMPORTANT FOR INCLUSION, TRANSPARENCY, AND FAIRNESS.
AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DENY ELEMENTS ONE, THREE AND FIVE OF THE N ENTITY VARIANCE FIVE VARIANCES THAT ARE REQUESTED TODAY.
AND IN RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT WHY WE WOULD, WHY WOULD WE NOT SUPPORT NUMBER THREE? IT'S JUST SIMPLY WE, WE VOTED TO SUPPORT THE ONES THAT WE COULD SUPPORT, THAT WE COULD GO WITH THE CARPORT NOT BEING OF THE STANDARD MATERIALS AND ALSO THE, THE CARPORT BEING LEFT IN THE LOCATION WHERE IT IS, BUT NEEDING GUTTERS TO HELP THE NEIGHBORHOOD,
[02:15:01]
THE NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR WITH THE RUNOFF.THE, THE REASON WHY I ASK THAT IS BECAUSE IF PART OF THAT IS IT, IT, UH, ITEM NUMBER THREE IS NOT ALLOWING IT IN THE FRONT OR THE SIDE.
AND SO IF IT'S NOT IN THE FRONT OF THE SIDE, IT CAN'T BE THERE AT ALL.
SO I WAS, I WAS CURIOUS HOW YOU COULD SUPPORT TWO THINGS ABOUT IT.
AND BECAUSE WHEN YOU'VE GOT A GROUP OF PEOPLE IN A MEETING, AND THE ONLY TWO THAT MAKES SENSE TO ANYONE ARE THE ONES WE VOTED FOR, IS TWO AND FOUR BECAUSE NO, YOU, AND, AND THE, THE CARPORT'S ALREADY BEEN BUILT AND IN A LOCATION THAT REALLY CAN'T MOVE AT THIS POINT BECAUSE IF THREE DOESN'T PASS, THE WHOLE THING HAS TO COME DOWN.
BUT IF, IF, LIKE IF I NUMBER FIVE DOESN'T PASS, THEY JUST HAVE TO CROP IT BACK, RIGHT.
AND WAS ALREADY JUST, WHICH WE SUGGESTED AT OUR MEETING AS WELL.
SO IF THAT, IF THAT, IF I NUMBER FIVE WERE TO SAY NOT PASS THE HOA MIGHT NOT BE THAT OPPOSED TO IT.
ANNA, COMMISSIONER MAN, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.
WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER, LIKE ASK A QUESTION.
THE, UM, SO, SO JUST REITERATING THAT POINT.
UM, SO, SO YOUR NCD DOESN'T ALLOW FOR ANY CARPORTS TO BE ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AT ALL.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE SETBACK FROM THE FRONT OF THE, OF THE HOME.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
SO, SO EVEN WITH THE FRONT OF THE FACADE, WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE? WELL, WE WERE, WE WERE AT THE MEETING, ALL WE DID SUGGEST TO THEM TO CUT BACK TO INCREASE THE FRONT SETBACK, WHICH THEY SAID THEY WOULD THINK ABOUT.
SO, SO WE HAVE WHERE IT CURRENTLY IS, AND THEN WE HAVE, WE'LL SAY THE FRONT FACADE.
AND SO IS THERE ANY SPACE IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO THAT WOULD BE MORE AMENABLE, AMENABLE TO, UM, WELL, IF IT WAS AN TO WHAT IT IS, I, IF IT WAS AN IDEAL CARPORT BUILD, THEN IT WOULD'VE BEEN SET TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, DEFINITELY NOT EXCEEDING THE FRONT WALL OF THE HOME.
SO TECHNICALLY IT'S NOT AN IDEAL BUILD, BUT WE CAN LIVE WITH SOME OF THE STRUCTURE, JUST NOT EVERY SINGLE THING.
AND, AND NUMBER THREE DOES KIND OF THROW IT INTO A NEBULOUS AREA, BUT WHAT CAN YOU DO WHEN IT WAS BUILT WITHOUT PERMITS, A STOP WORK ORDER AND A CITATION? WELL, I'LL, I'LL CHECK.
SO, AND LIKE PROCEED JUST A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.
'CAUSE THEN IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE MAY BE SOME GIVE FOR HOW FAR THE CARPORT COULD EXTEND BEYOND THE FACADE.
AND ONE OF THE DIALOGUE, SO BY, UM, SO IS, IS THIS, UM, BACK FAR ENOUGH? SEE, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE READS WITH REGARDS TO, NOT THE NCD, BUT UM, ACTUAL CODE COMPLIANCE WITH REGARDS TO ITS VARIANCE, UM, ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
SO IF IT WAS BACK, IS IT AT ONE INCH OR IS IT ACTUALLY AT THE SIDE? THE SIDE SETBACK IS ONE INCH.
AND SO I, SPEAKING SPECIFICALLY TO THE FRONT, THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE, RIGHT, THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE THERE, THEY WOULD NEED A NINE FOOT, THEY NEED TO BE 10 FEET FOOT.
SO IF IT WAS BACK 10 FOOT, SO WE DIDN'T BRING NINE AT ALL, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE BACK 10 FEET FROM WHERE IT CURRENTLY IS.
WOULD THAT BE MORE AMICABLE TO YOU ALL? SO COMMISSIONER MANNA, I, I THINK, UH, ONE QUESTION THAT WOULD HELP WITH THIS IS HOW FAR IS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE? BECAUSE IF IT'S 15 FEET AND WE DON'T APPROVE THE FRONT SETBACK, IT MIGHT STICK FIVE FEET PAST THE FRONT.
IF WE DON'T, IF THE BOARD DOESN'T APPROVE THE FRONT YARD PORTION OF, OF ITEM NUMBER THREE, THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO, IT WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GO PAST THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME.
SO WITHOUT KNOWING THOSE NUMBERS STAFF, DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW HOW FAR THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME IS FROM THE PROPERTY LINE? OR IS THERE ANYONE THAT COULD PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION? WELL, ISN'T NUMBER FIVE, NOT ANYTHING RELATED TO THE NCD, BUT MORE CITY CODE.
AND NUMBER FIVE IS, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS THAT IF WE DON'T APPROVE FIVE AND THEY HAVE TO CUT IT BACK TO THE 10 FEET, THE NCD PORTION ITEM THREE SAYS IT CAN'T BE IN THE, IN THE SIDE OR THE FRONT YARD, BUT WE CAN RIGHT.
WE CAN JUST APPROVE THE SIDE YARD.
SO IT WOULD BE CUT OFF AT THE FRONT CORNER OF THE HOUSE.
THE HOUSE APPROXIMATELY SITS ABOUT 25 FEET BACK.
WELL, IF WE STILL READ IN FIVE, BUT AS YOU MENTIONED, REMOVE THE FRONT YARD FROM THE THREE, WOULDN'T THAT EFFECTIVELY MEAN IT NEEDS TO BE CUT BACK TO THE FRONT FACADE? YES.
SO THAT, SO WHAT I, WHAT I'M THINKING IS, AND SUGGESTING IS THAT WE DON'T APPROVE NUMBER FIVE, BUT WE DO APPROVE NUMBER THREE
[02:20:02]
AND WE CAN, AND IF A COMMISSIONER WOULD, LIKE, IF WE'RE, IF IT'S 25 FEET FROM THE FRONT, A NUMBER COULD BE GIVEN TO HOW MUCH IT COULD STICK INTO THE FRONT YARD, LET'S SAY FIVE OR 10 FEET.I I, I, I WAS KEPT READING IN ON THAT.
THAT'S WHAT, AND I WAS ASKING FOR THE, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD POSITION ON THAT.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE, YOU KNOW, AND SO IF IT WAS 10 FEET BACK, WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE FROM WHERE IT CURRENTLY IS? OR WOULD THEY RATHER HAVE IT 15 FOOT BACK OR SO, 20 FOOT BACK? WE CAN, WE CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS MM-HMM
AS WE READ THE MOTION TO GO ANYWHERE FROM THE FRONT CORNER OF THE HOUSE, WHICH IS ABOUT 25 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, 25 FEET TO ZERO.
SO IS THAT, IS THAT 25 FEET FROM THEIR FRONT PORCH OR FROM THE FRONT WALL? FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, FROM THE, FROM THE FRONT WALL OF THE HOUSE.
BECAUSE OUR NCD IS STAFF, THAT'D BE 25 FEET TO THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOME, NOT INCLUDING THE PORCH.
COULD WE JUST READ IT TO THE FRONT FACADE? WE COULD, WE COULD READ IT HOWEVER, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO, WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT LIKE WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DEALING WITH.
MAY I SUGGEST THAT WE HEAR THE OTHERS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK PLEASE? UH, THANK YOU.
IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER.
LET'S HAVE THE OTHER, WELL, WE MIGHT COME BACK TO YOU, BUT LET, LET'S HAVE THE OTHER, UH, TWO SIGN UP TO SPEAK PLEASE.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US YOUR NAME.
I'M ALSO FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
WE'RE SORT OF CYNTHIA SQUARED.
UM, I, I THINK WHAT, UM, BEFORE I DO PREPARED REMARKS, I THINK WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERN WAS MOSTLY THAT THE CARPORT NOT JET OUT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
AND WE WERE, WE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE FOR ONE THING IN THE SPIRIT OF COMPROMISE, WANTED TO TRY TO HELP THEM AS MUCH AS WE CAN.
UM, AND WE FELT LIKE THE SIDE SETBACK, THAT'S FAIRLY COMMON IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT LIKE IN THOSE DAYS PEOPLE BUILT LOTS OR THEIR HOUSES RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LOT.
AND SO THAT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR US TO SUPPORT A SIDE SETBACK.
WE WERE WORRIED ABOUT THE RUNOFF.
AND BECAUSE THE CARPORT HAS METAL, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD NOT BE AS A FIRE HAZARD.
AND THAT'S WHY WE ALSO SUPPORTED NOT HAVING IT IN MATERIALS THAT MATCH THE HOUSE.
OUR, OUR BIG CONCERN, EVERYBODY'S CONCERN WAS THE FACT THAT THIS NOTCH JOT JUT OUT IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
THAT REALLY, NOW IS THAT IN FRONT OF THE, THE PHYSICAL, THE PORCH OR THE, THE MAIN WALL OF THE HOUSE? UM, I THINK THAT NCD, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, IT'S THE MAIN WALL OF THE HOUSE.
BUT EVEN IF IT WENT TO THE PORCH, I THINK THAT WOULD BE FINE.
WHAT'S THERE NOW REALLY IS INCONGRUOUS WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT TO MENTION OUR NCD FIVE.
UM, I THINK WE ALSO HAD CONCERNS, UM, YOU KNOW, BACK IN NOVEMBER, 2025, THE OWNERS WERE ISSUED A STOP ORDER ON THE CARPORT.
AND I KNOW PEOPLE OFTEN SAY, WELL, WE DON'T, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE NCD AND, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT WE HAND DELIVER SINCE THE EIGHTIES, WE HAND DELIVER TO 3,500 HOUSEHOLDS A NEWSLETTER.
AND THERE IS SOMETHING ABOUT THE NCD AT EVERY SINGLE ISSUE.
AND SO I, I UNDERSTAND THAT NOT EVERYBODY'S READING IT, BUT IT IS MADE AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE IF, IF THEY DO WANT TO KNOW.
THEN THERE WERE, THEY HAD A, A PERMIT INVESTIGATION AND THE CITY ISSUED A CITATION IN DECEMBER OF 25.
AND THEY WERE TOLD THEN WHAT THE NCD STANDARDS WERE.
THEY HAD AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING, UM, THE COURT THAT IT WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE OF A TECHNICALITY AND INCORRECT COURT CODE NUMBER.
UM, ONE OF, ONE OF THE ISSUES THEY TALKED ABOUT WAS HAIL.
THEY DIDN'T WANT HAIL DAMAGE ON THEIR CARS.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT AS WELL.
MOST OF US DON'T HAVE, NOBODY HAS GARAGE SPACE FOR TWO CARS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, MUCH LESS.
AND YOU KNOW, WE TEND TO COVER IT IF WE, IF WE HAVE HAIL.
UM, I THINK, UM, MOSTLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD I THINK WANTED TO TRY TO COMPROMISE WITH THEM.
NOT EVERYBODY, THERE WERE A LOT OF VOTES TO NOT SUPPORT ANY OF IT BECAUSE WE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING VERY HARD TO HOLD ONTO OUR NCD, BUT REALLY IT'S, IT'S THE CARPORT, JETTING OUT IS OUR BIGGEST CONCERN.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
I LIVE AT 8 1 2 WEST MISSILE TOE.
UM, I'M PART OF THE ZONING AND URBAN DESIGN COMMITTEE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT CAME UP WITH THIS SPLIT
[02:25:01]
DECISION.I HAVE VERY LITTLE TO ADD TO WHAT'S BEEN SAID EXCEPT TO REEMPHASIZE THAT WE WERE TRYING TO MEET THESE FOLKS IN THE MIDDLE.
UH, AND ARE THE, WE HAVE IN THE RECENT PAST, UH, BEEN SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF A HOUSEHOLD THAT WANTED TO JUT INTO THEIR FRONT SETBACK BY A COUPLE OF FEET AND WE SO THEY COULD BUILD A PORCH.
UH, THIS EXISTING STRUCTURE BUILT WITHOUT A PERMIT JUTS NINE FEET, 11 INCHES INTO OUR 10 FOOT SETBACK.
AND WE, WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T AGREE WITH THAT.
IF, IF THEY COULD PAIR IT BACK, AND THEY SAID AT OUR GENERAL MEETING, THEY'D BE WILLING TO DO THAT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
WE CANNOT COMPEL THEM TO DO THAT.
YOU GUYS CAN THANK YOU SO MUCH.
DO YOU HAVE, HOW, HOW DEEP IS THEIR PORCH? DO YOU HAVE ANY, EXCUSE ME.
DO YOU KNOW HOW DEEP THEIR PORCH IS? DID Y'ALL EVER DO ANY MEASUREMENTS WHILE HOW, LIKE, YEAH.
HOW FAR DOES THE PORCH STICK OUT? THE ENTIRE CAR PORCH? NO, THE PORCH.
THE, FOR THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE? I DON'T KNOW.
APPROXIMATELY FOUR TO FIVE FEET.
FOUR TO FIVE FEET CORNER AREA.
SO, UH, WE'VE HEARD FROM THE HOA THAT THE, THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO, UM, COMPROMISE POTENTIALLY WITH IT NOT STICKING BEYOND THE PLANE OF THE PORCH, WHICH WOULD BE ABOUT FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT F SIDE OF THE HOUSE, WHICH WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE PART OF ANY MOTION JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE.
SO YOU'VE HEARD, YOU'VE HEARD FROM, UH, THE VARIOUS SPEAKERS.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD OR CLARIFY? SO ASK MY, MY CLIENT, THE BOTTOM LINE IS YOU AND COMPROMISE, AND THE ANSWER IS YES.
UM, I AM A LITTLE CONFUSED AND I'M SORRY, I, I I DON'T DO THIS ALL THE TIME.
UM, HOW MUCH, WHEN YOU SAID IT'S GOING 10 FEET INTO THE SETBACK, IS THERE A 10 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE SIDEWALK? SO THERE'S TWO ITEMS AT BAY.
THE CARPORT, ANY CARPORT IN SAN ANTONIO HAS TO BE, HAS A 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK.
AND THEN THE NCD CARRIES WITH IT, UH, A RESTRICTION FROM IT BEING WITHIN THE FRONT YARD OF THE HOUSE, UH, AND THE SIDE, BUT IN THE FRONT YARD, MEANING FROM THE FRONT PLANE OF THE HOUSE FORWARD, IT'S NOT ALLOWED TO EXIST.
SO THERE'S TWO, THERE'S TWO REASONS THAT ARE OVERLAPPING.
SO IF WE, IF THIS BOARD DOES NOT APPROVE THE FRONT SETBACK OF THE CARPORT, IT WOULD THEORETICALLY HAVE TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE 10 FOOT.
UM, IF WE MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE FRONT SETBACK PART OF THE NCD, THAT'S WHERE IT COULD BE BROUGHT BACK EVEN FURTHER, ALL THE WAY UP TO THE FRONT F SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
AND SO I WAS PERSONALLY ASKING QUESTIONS HOW DEEP THE PORCH WAS, WHICH WE'RE HEARING IS ABOUT FIVE FEET.
AND SO ONE, ONE MOTION THIS BOARD COULD MAKE IS NOT APPROVING THE FRONT SETBACK, WHICH WOULD MEAN BRINGING IT BACK TO 10 FEET AND THEN READING IN THAT IT'S A, IT'S, IT'S ALLOWED IN THE FRONT, IT'S ALLOWED IN THE FRONT SETBACK UNDER THE NCD, NOT TO EXCEED THE DEPTH OF THE PORCH, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY FIVE FEET, WHICH WOULD MEAN IT'D HAVE TO BE BROUGHT BACK EVEN MORE.
AND THAT'S, THAT WAS WHAT I HEARD FROM THE HOA.
I'M SURE THAT THERE'LL BE OTHER QUESTIONS, UH, FROM OTHER MEMBERS, BUT, UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER, I'M, I'M TALKING TOO MUCH.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO CHIME IN OR EXPLICIT THOUGHTS? WELL, COMMISSIONER REED, I, I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY SAYING THE SAME THING, BUT CAN WE READ IT THAT IT DOES NOT, UM, PROTRUDE BEYOND THE FRONT CORNER OF THE PORCH? YEAH.
AS, AS A COMPONENT OF ITEM THREE? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
SO, UH, I'M SORRY, I DON'T, WAS THAT A I WAS GOING TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, BUT I DON'T WANT TO, I ALSO RESPECT THAT IT'S YOUR TIME TO TALK, NOT MINE.
WELL, SO I TALKED WITH MY CLIENT ABOUT IT, AND I DON'T, I'M TRYING TO PROPOSE SOMETHING THAT'S REASONABLE, BUT IF YOU HAVE OTHER REASONABLE THINGS, WE'RE NOT HERE TO BE UNREASONABLE.
AND I ASKED HER, WHAT IF WE RESPECTED, YOU KNOW, THE FRONT SETBACK AND MOVED IT BACK 10 FEET? AND I MEAN, OF COURSE, DO THEY WANT TO DO IT? NO, BUT, BUT SHE GETS IT.
SHE UNDERSTANDS AND SHE WANTS TO COMPROMISE AND MAKE HERSELF AS HAPPY.
IT DOESN'T ALWAYS HAVE TO BE A LOSE LOSE.
SO IF YOU'RE ASKING ME WHAT I THINK IS FAIR AND WHAT SHE WOULD ACCEPT, YOU KNOW, IN, IN SPEARS OF COMPROMISE, FIRST THE GUTTERS ARE DONE, NO ISSUE THERE.
SECOND OF ALL, MOVING IT BACK TO RESPECT THE FRONT SETBACK OF 10 FEET WOULD BE FAIRLY EASY FOR HER.
I THINK MOVING IT BACK FURTHER MIGHT CAUSE SOME PROBLEMS, WHICH WE HAVEN'T GONE ALL THE WAY THROUGH, BUT I TRY TO GET THE LOW HANGING FRUIT IN LIFE AND OKAY.
THE, THE FRONT HANGING SIT BACK AND I THINK IS LOW HANGING FRUIT.
AND WE'D BE DELIGHTED WITH THAT.
COMMISSIONER IVANEZ, CHAIR IVANEZ.
UM, SO THE, THE REAR OF THE CARPORT, WHERE DOES IT END? UH, AS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THAT? THE, THE HOUSE, IS IT ALL THE WAY TO THAT ROOM THAT JUTS OUT? YES.
AND SO HOW DO YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW
[02:30:01]
MANY FEET IT IS FROM THE BACK OF THE CARPORT TO THE PORCH? OH, TO BE HONEST, I DON'T KNOW.WELL, LET'S SAY THE PORCH IS FIVE FEET, FOUR FEET.
AND THEN YOU HAVE YOUR SIDE WALL OF, I'M ASSUMING MIGHT BE THE LIVING ROOM.
IT, IT'S, IT'S THE MOM'S ROOM AND THEN THE RESTROOM AND THEN THE LIVING ROOM.
AND SO THAT'S THAT BACK WALL THAT JETS OUT.
SO YOU'RE TO THAT FROM THE PORCH TO THE SIDE WALL THERE.
HOW MANY FEET DO YOU THINK THAT IS? I DIDN'T MEASURE IT.
PROBABLY, PROBABLY TRYING TO SEE IF YOU CAN FIT TWO CARS.
LIKE WHAT, WHAT THAT WELL, I'M TRYING, SHE USES THAT CARPORT FOR HER PT FOR HER PHYSICAL THERAPY.
SO, AND I'M TRYING TO SEE IF, IF, IF, IF YOU WERE TO MAKE IT TO FROM THE FRONT OF THE PORCH TO THAT BACK ROOM WALL WHERE THE CARPORT ENDS, IS THAT ENOUGH FOOTAGE EVEN TO COVER A CAR? AND IS IT ENOUGH SPACE FOR HER PHYSICAL THERAPY TO BE CONDUCTED THERE? WHAT I, WHAT I CAN ANSWER IS, AND THE REASON I PROPOSED THE COMPROMISE I DID IS WE CAN SAY IF YOU RESPECTED THE FRONT SETBACK AND THAT TOOK OFF 10 FEET, WE KNOW WE'D HAVE ENOUGH ROOM.
AND, AND JUST BLUNTLY, I CAN'T FIGURE OUT IN AN INTELLIGENT WAY AND TELL YOU YES OR NO BASED ON THE OTHER QUESTIONS YOU'RE HAVING.
AND THAT'S PART OF THE REASON I'M MAKING A COMPROMISE SUGGESTION I'M MAKING, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION YOU'RE ASKING, BUT I HAVE ASKED AND CONFERRED WITH HER THAT IF YOU TOOK 10 FEET OFF THE FRONT, IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT.
I'M SORRY, I KNOW I TALKED TOO MUCH.
I'M JUST CURIOUS IF A CONTINUANCE MIGHT BE IN ORDER FOR THEM TO KIND OF WORK OUT SOME OF THESE ISSUES AND DISTANCES AND EVERYTHING BECAUSE, UM, TO ME THERE'S, THERE'S SOME DOUBT AS TO DISTANCES AND WELL, I MEAN, I'M NOT, I'M NEVER OPPOSED TO ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS AND, AND BETTER MEASUREMENTS.
UH, BUT I THINK THE ISSUES AT BAY HERE IS I'M HEARING SHE NEEDS ROOM FOR PHYSICAL THERAPY.
RIGHT? YOU HAVE AT LEAST TWO CARS THAT YOU ABSOLUTELY WANT TO COVER BY THE CARPORT.
THE HOA IS HAS EXPRESSED THAT THEY ABSOLUTELY DON'T WANT TO GOING PAST THE PORCH.
AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT PROVIDES ENOUGH ROOM FOR TWO CAR.
I'M, I'M MORE, I'M MORE WILLING TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT IT CAN PARK TWO CARS.
AND IF THAT'S SEVEN FEET PAST THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE INSTEAD OF FIVE, THEN THAT'S WHAT I WOULD BE ABLE TO LIVE WITH.
I JUST DUNNO WHAT THAT NUMBER IS.
UM, IF I MAY, IN THE EXHIBITS, THERE'S A PHOTO THAT APPEARS TO SHOW TWO CARS PARKED UNDER THE CARPORT WITH THE REAR.
OH, THERE IT'S, UH, THE ONE CAR ROUGHLY ALIGNED WITH THE END OF THAT FRONT PORCH.
SO THERE'S ALSO TWO SUPPORT POSTS ALIGNED WITH THAT PORCH.
IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT YOU COULD HANG IT OUT MAYBE THREE OR FOUR FEET PAST THOSE POSTS.
SO LET'S SAY EIGHT FEET PAST THE FACADE OF THE HOUSE SHOULD COVER THE PORCH AND THEN THAT OVERHANG.
I THINK THAT'S APPROXIMATELY RIGHT.
WHAT DO Y'ALL THINK, COMMISSIONER MANNA? ANYONE VIRTUALLY LIKE TO ADD? SO YOU ALL, WELL, IF THERE'S NO ONE, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I THINK WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION.
WE'RE READY TO GET OUT OF YOUR HERE AND APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
WHO WOULD LIKE, UH, MAKE A MOTION ON THIS, UH, REED? I'LL DO IT.
I JOT DOWN HOW I WANNA SAY IT.
WELL, WE CAN JUST WORDSMITH IT AS I TALK, UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO OA 2 6 103 0 0 1 2 9, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANDER REQUEST BY EDWARD BRAVO NECK TO ONE A VARIANCE FROM THE NC D FIVE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO ALLOW ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO EXCEED 40% OF THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURES BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
TWO, A VARIANCE FROM THE NC D FIVE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE MATERIAL STANDARD TO ALLOW MATERIAL TO BE USED IN THE CARPORT THAT DOES NOT MATCH THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE.
AND THREE, A VARIANCE FROM THE NCD FIVE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE LOCATION REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A CARPORT IN THE EAST SIDE YARD, NOT TO PROTRUDE BEYOND EIGHT FEET FROM THE FRONT WALL OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
UM, 4, 4 11 VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW CARPORT TO BE ONE INCH FROM THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE LOCATED AT 1 2 2 4 WEST FRENCH PLACE.
BECAUSE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOWED THE PHYSICAL CARE TO THE PROPERTY AND SUCH LITERAL ENFORCEMENT, THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SIMPLY FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST, AS IN THIS CASE, THE PROPOSED VARIANCES FROM CD FIVE STANDARDS OR PROPERTY LINE SETBACKS WOULD BE MINIMAL.
TWO, DUE TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT, THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD NOT RESULT OR WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS OPPOSED DEVIATION FROM THE CD FIVE STANDARDS WOULD NOT IMPOSE CONSPICUOUS DEPARTURE FROM
[02:35:01]
THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.THREE BY GRAND, THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED IN SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AS ADU REDUCE FRONT SIZE SETBACKS AND DEVIATION FROM THE CDS.
SEVEN STANDARDS WOULD NOT POSE A SPECIFIC CONSPICUOUS DEPARTURE FROM THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.
FOUR VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OTHER THAN THOSE ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS VARIANCE.
FIVE SUCH VARIANCES WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF, OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTERING THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED GRAIN.
THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS THERE IS SUFFICIENT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE CARPORT NEARBY STRUCTURES AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS NOT OUTTA CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
SIX, PLAY OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING 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 OF THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE PLAY OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS DUE THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES, THE LIMITED FUL AREA IN THE PROPERTY, WHICH LIMITS THE AVAILABLE SPACE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CARPORT AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, WHILE ALSO ADHERING TO THE NC FIVE STANDARDS AND REQUIRED SETBACKS.
SO WE HAVE A, A, A MOTION THAT, UM, THAT WAS READ AS, AS APPLIED WITH FIVE REMO ITEM FIVE REMOVED AND ITEM NUMBER THREE MODIFIED, UH, TO ALLOW IT TO BE EIGHT FOOT INTO THE FRONT YARD.
AND I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM BECAUSE OKAY, SO WE HAVE A FEW, UM, ITEMS HERE.
SO WE'VE GOT LIKE THE FACADE WHERE THE, THE PORCH SITS, AND THEN IT LOOKS LIKE WE'VE GOT A SECTION OF THE SECTION TO THE UM, YES, TO THE RIGHT THERE THAT PROTRUDES A LITTLE BIT FURTHER CLOSER AND THEN LIKE IT GOES BACK ABOUT FIVE FEET AND THEN IT, THAT'S THE NEXT FACADE.
UM, WELL I, I THINK WHEN WERE YOU DOING EIGHT FEET? I THINK YOU WERE, I THINK THE INTENT WAS THREE FEET FROM THE EDGE OF THE PORCH.
I GUESS THE COMMISSIONER REED WOULD, YOU CAN, THAT WAS MY THOUGHT.
ASSUMING THAT THE PORCH DEPTH IS ABOUT, SORRY, YOU SAID EIGHT FEET? SO EIGHT FEET FROM THE PORCH? NO, FROM FROM THE WALL OF THE HOME UNDER THE PORCH.
WE, WE HAD HEARD IT WAS THE WALL OF THE HOME, A FIVE FOOT PORCH, AND THEN WE WERE ADDING THREE FEET.
AND SO IT WOULD, IT, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE THAT, UM, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE THAT EAST SIDE, FRONT CORNER OF THE HOME PLUS EIGHT FEET.
SO IT, IT WOULD ALLOW IT TO LIKELY PROTRUDE PAST THE PORCH ROOF BY A VERY MINIMAL MOUNTAIN, THREE FEET OR SO.
DID COMMISSIONER REED REED IT THAT WAY? 'CAUSE TO ME IT SOUNDED LIKE HE WAS RE AND MAYBE IT WAS JUST MY BAD HEARING.
YEAH, HE HAD READ EIGHT FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE, BUT THEN STAFF HAD MENTIONED THAT THERE'S MULTIPLE DIFFERENT FRONT FACADES THAT WE WERE TRYING TO CLARIFY WHICH ONE HE WAS TALKING ABOUT.
SO CLARIFICATION WILL BE NOTED THEN.
IS THERE, UM, COMMISSIONER REED, WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS? UM, YEAH, I'M IN SUPPORT WITH THESE CHANGES THAT WERE READ INTO IT.
I THINK THAT THE CARPORT ITSELF SERVES A, A NECESSARY FUNCTION.
UM, I WOULD NOT WANT TO ASK THEM TO REMOVE IT ALL TOGETHER.
UH, I DO THINK THE LENGTH OF IT IS UNCHARACTERISTIC, BUT POINT IT BACK CLOSER TO THE, UH, THE PORCH WILL, UM, REQUIRE MINIMAL, WELL, IT, IT'S ACHIEVABLE.
UM, IT WON'T REQUIRE CHANGING ANY OF THE SUPPORT BEAMS THAT I CAN TELL.
UM, THE POST HOLDING IT UP AND, UH, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT.
SO QUESTION, DO WE NEED TO HAVE THE GUTTERS READ INTO THE MOTION AS WELL? THE APPLICANT HERE, UM, STATED THEY WERE GONNA PLACE GUTTERS ON THE SIDE, OR COMMISSIONER REED IS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO, UH, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT YES, I ACCEPT THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT GUTTERS BE ADDED.
SO WE HAVE THE ADDITION OF GUT OF GUTTERS.
AND THE OTHER THING I'D LIKE TO ADD IS THAT ALL OF THIS IS KIND OF SELF-IMPOSED.
IF HAD THEY PULLED A, A BUILDING PERMIT AND SUCH, THEY WOULD'VE KNOWN A THE, UH, NCD AND THEN WHAT THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS WERE.
SO, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, I THINK A, A, A GOOD COMPROMISE.
IT'S NOT EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR, AND IT'S NOT EXACTLY WHAT THE, UM, NCD WAS LOOKING FOR, BUT I THINK IT, IT DOES PROVIDE SOME PROTECTION FOR, UH, THE ELDERLY MOTHER WHO NEEDS SOME OF THE PROTECTION AS NOTED IN THE, IN THE, IN THE LETTER THAT WAS PROVIDED.
BUT I THINK IT IS A GOOD COMPROMISE.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD? ALL RIGHT, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL.
COMMISSIONER REED? UH, YES, I CONCUR THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER IVANEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
[02:40:01]
CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.COMMISSIONER BENAVIDES? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR.
CHAIR ORIAN AND I CONCUR THE FINES AND FACT MOTION PASSES.
UH, 10 TO ZERO IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS YOU GET WITH STAFF.
BEFORE WE CONTINUE, I WAS LEAVING AT FOUR O'CLOCK, SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND EXCUSE MYSELF.
UH, IT IS 3 53 AND COMMISSIONER CRUZ IS, HAS LEFT THE MEETING.
COMMISSIONER EZ, DO YOU HAVE A HARD STOP? YEAH, I HAVE A HARD STOP AT FOUR.
LOOKS LIKE, WE'LL, HOW MANY, HOW MANY MORE? UM, HOW MANY MORE CASES ARE THERE? UH, WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER THREE LEFT.
WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER FIVE AND ITEM NUMBER 10.
I COULD PROBABLY, I COULD PROBABLY STICK TILL FOUR 15.
ALSO NUMBER SEVEN AND ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.
SO, WHICH, WHICH, UM, WHICH ONE DO YOU THINK WE CAN GET THROUGH? OKAY, WE HAVE TIME FOR ONE MORE FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE GALLERY.
WE HAVE TIME FOR ONE MORE CASE.
UH, THAT MEANS THAT THERE'S, WE STILL, WE'RE NOT FULLY IN PANELS.
IS THERE ANYBODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO VOLUNTEER TO, TO BE CONTINUED? WHAT ITEM NUMBER ARE YOU, SIR? THE ONE THAT WAS JUST SEVEN ONE.
YOU WANT TO DO IT TODAY? I'M GOING OUTTA TOWN ON.
THEY'RE NEXT ON THE AGENDA, SO LET'S HEAR IT.
ITEM NUMBER THREE IS LOCATED AT 1306 BLANCO ROAD.
UM, ASKING FOR A EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE FOR SPECIAL EXEMPTION ELIMINATION OF TYPE A BUFFER ALONG THE WEST SIDE AND A TYPE C BUFFER ALONG THE EAST SIDE.
SUBJECT PROPERTY ADDRESS OFF OF BLANCO ROAD INTERSECTION OF EDISON DRIVE CASE ORIGINATED FOR REPAIRS OF IS CONSISTENT STRUCTURE.
UM, EXISTING, UH, STRUCTURE WOULD STILL REQUIRE REAR SETBACK DUE TO BACK PROPERTY LINE ABOVE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THE PROPERTY IS REQUIRED TO PUT A SIX FOOT FENCE ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE.
THE APPLICANT HAD FORMALLY AMENDED THE REQUEST TO PROVIDE A EIGHT FOOT RATHER THAN JUST A SIX FOOT ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE REQUESTED AGAINST, UM, VARIANCES.
OKAY, SO THIS IS THE EXISTING BUILDING.
THEY HAVE THE, UM, TWO FOOT SIX INCH REAR SETBACK, UH, ASKING FOR ELIMINATION OF THE TYPE A BUFFER ON THE WEST SIDE AND TYPE C BUFFER ON THE EAST SIDE.
THIS IS THE WAY PROPERTY IS RIGHT NOW.
STAFF REED'S, UH, APPROVAL FOR THE REAR SETBACK IN THE EASTERN BUFFERY.
UH, APPLICANT WILL PROVIDE EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE ABUT AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY EXCEEDING THE REQUIRED SIX FOOT FENCE, UH, PROVIDING ADDITIONAL SCREENING AND SEPARATION.
AND THE REQUEST FOR RELIEF IS ASSOCIATED WITH EXISTING AND HISTORICALLY ESTABLISHED LOCATION OF A BUILDING.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT NOW THE WESTERN BUFFER, THE PROPOSED BUFFER YARD REQUIRED IS TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS.
WHILE THIS SLOT IS SMALL, HISTORICALLY DEVELOPED ON ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION ELIMINATED, LOT SIZE IS NOT ESTABLISHES SUFFICIT HARDSHIP TO JUSTIFY COMPLETE ELIMINATION OF THE BUFFER YARD.
FOUR NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, NO RECEIVED, NO VOICEMAILS, AND NORTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT RESPOND AND INCLUDES STAFF IN PRESENTATION.
SO THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.
UH, STAFF THIS, THIS BUILDING IS CURRENTLY, UH, BEING REMODELED FOR SOME REASON.
IS THAT WHY IT'S, WE'RE HERE TODAY.
SIMILAR TO THE ONE ON THE, ALL RIGHT.
PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
I OWN THE PROPERTY, THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY.
SO THERE'S THREE ITEMS BEFORE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL ON THE ITEMS TO THE EAST, WHICH IS THE REAR OF YOUR BUILDING.
AND, AND WHAT THEY'RE NOT, UH, SUPPORTING IS, UH, THE BUFFER IN THE FRONT.
SO PLEASE TELL US, UM, YOUR HARDSHIPS OR, WELL, THE FACT THAT THAT BUILDING HAS BEEN OPERATING FOR YEARS BEFORE WE OWNED IT, WE JUST PICKED IT UP AND ACTUALLY WE INHERITED IT.
IT WAS MY DAD'S, HE PASSED AWAY LAST YEAR.
UM, SO WE DON'T, WHAT WE WANNA DO IS TRY AND GET IT FIXED SO WE CAN SELL IT.
AND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT MAJOR REMODELS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FIXING THE ROOF PAINTING, YOU KNOW, JUST DOING LITTLE MINOR WORK LIKE THAT.
[02:45:01]
JUST TRYING TO IMPROVE IT TO GET IT SOLD BECAUSE WE DON'T, WE'RE NOT BUSINESS OWNERS.WE DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH IT.
SO YOU HAVE A REMODEL PERMIT AND, AND APPLICATION RIGHT NOW? I HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW.
UM, THEY JUST, WHAT THEY DID IS THEY DID A SURVEY ON THE PROPERTY AND THIS IS WHERE THE OFFSET CAME UP.
AND THEY TOLD US THAT WE HAD TO GET THIS VARIANCE.
THEY JUST TOLD US TO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE IN ORDER TO GET A PERMIT TO GET THE ROOF DONE.
AND, AND, UH, YEAH, IF YOU SPEND TOO MUCH MONEY AND IT EXCEEDS THE VALUE, MORE THAN 50% OF THE VALUE, IT HAS TO COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT CODES.
UM, IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO DO ALL THAT STUFF, THEN IT WOULD BE NON-CONFORMING.
NO, WE DON'T, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT GONNA PUT MORE THAN HALF OF THE PROPERTY VALUE ON IT.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT'S FORCING THIS TO BE CONSIDERED NON-CONFORMING? IS THERE A COO ISSUE? THERE WAS NO OPEN APPLICATION.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT THE PLANS, UM, PRESENTED, SHOWED OVER 50% AND THAT'S WHAT NOTIFIED, NO, NOT 50% OF THE COST, BUT 50% OF THE, OF THE SPACE OF THE BUILDING.
SO IF, AND IT'S NOT THE COST OF THE LAND, IT'S THE COST OF THE, OF THE IMPROVEMENT.
SO YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THE LAND AND IT'S APPRAISED FOR LAND AND IMPROVEMENT.
IF YOU SPEND MORE THAN THAT, IT OPENS UP COMPLIANCE WITH ALL THE CURRENT CODES, WHICH IS WHY YOU'RE HERE TODAY.
SO THAT'S, UM, SO IF THIS WERE TO NOT PASS, THEN YOUR RECOURSE WOULD BE TO SPEND LESS THAN 50% OF THE OH, OKAY.
BUT, SO, UM, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? NONE.
'CAUSE THE PHOTO IN, IN THE, UH, FILE THAT WAS SHARED IS DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE THAT'S UP THERE.
SO IS THIS THE, THE BUILDING UP HERE? THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S PRESENT NOW? YEAH, I WAS JUST SHOWING WHERE THEY, THE CITY HAD, I GUESS BOUGHT OUT ABOUT 10 FEET FROM MY DAD'S PROPERTY AND IT SHORTENED UP HIS PROPERTY LINE.
I THINK THEY MADE IT A TURNING LANE IN THERE, SO THEY HAD TO BUY SOME PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S WHAT THEY DID TO HIM.
UM, SO I WAS JUST SHOWING THAT THAT WAS, IF THERE WAS AN OFFSET AS FAR AS THE FRONT SPACE, THAT THAT WASN'T OUR PROBLEM.
THE CITY BOUGHT THAT FOR MY DAD.
I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT, AND THE FRONT AND THE BUFFER REQUIREMENT IN QUESTION ALONG THE ROAD IS HOW WIDE? 10 FEET.
IT'S, UH, THE 10 FEET AND I COULD BE TOTALLY WRONG, BUT IT'S, I'M GUESSING ABOUT 10 FEET.
THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FROM THE PICTURE.
UM, ANY OTHER, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? ANYONE SIGN A DISPUTE? ALL COMMENT? OKAY.
WELL ANYONE, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS.
OONA COMMISSIONER O UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 26 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 7 1.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST BY ROGER GONZALEZ FOR ONE TO 27 FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A TWO FOOT SIX INCH REAR SETBACK WITH AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY.
LINE TWO ELIMINATION OF THE REQUIRED 10 FOOT TYPE A BUFFER ALONG THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY LINE, AND THREE ELIMINATION OF THE REQUIRED 15 FOOT TYPE C BUFFER ALONG THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE LOCATED AT 30 16 BLANCO ROAD.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UDC AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY FIND THAT ONE THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRACT TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE APPLICANT WILL PROVIDE AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE, ABIDING THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY EXCEEDING THE REQUIRED SIX FOOT FENCE, AND PROVIDING ADDITIONAL SCREENING AND SEPARATION TO DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE SPECIAL CONDITION ON THIS PROPERTY IS THE LONGSTANDING EXISTING BUILDING FOR WHICH REQUIRING ADHERENCE TO CURRENT STANDARDS WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS GIVEN THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE PROPERTY.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
SUCH VARIANCE WOULD BE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS A PROPOSED AFOOT FENCE PROVIDES ENHANCED SCREENING BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, SUPPORTING THE INTENT OF THE SETBACK AND BUFFERING STANDARDS.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OF THE NOTICE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
NO USES OF THOSE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL BE ALLOWED FOR WITH THIS VARIANCE.
SUCH VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR THE, OR ALTERED THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE BUILDING IS BEING BUILT RE UH, REBUILT IN ITS HISTORICALLY ESTABLISHED LOCATION RATHER THAN INTRODUCING A NEW DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
SIX, APPLY TO 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 NOT MERELY FINANCIAL OR NOT DUE TO OF THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS.
THE DISTRICTS PROPERTY IS LOCATED, THE REQUESTED RELIEF IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXISTING AND HISTORICALLY ESTABLISHED LOCATION OF THE BUILDING OF THE PROPERTY.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE PHYSICAL AND SITE SPECIFIC RATHER THAN FINANCIAL OR REPRESENTATIVE OF GENERAL CONDITIONS.
AND WITH THE GENERAL CONDITIONS WITHIN THE SURROUNDING DISTRICT.
[02:50:03]
SECOND.COMMISSIONER ZUMA? YEAH, I I WOULD SAY THIS WOULD BE A CLASSIC KIND OF HARDSHIP CASE HERE WITH THE CITY TAKING THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT KIND OF PUT THE, UH, CONSTRAINTS ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE REQUIRED OF SETBACKS AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO MEET IT.
ALSO THE, UH, THEY'RE IMPROVING THE PROPERTY.
UM, AS LONG AS IT'S, YOU KNOW, UH, I GUESS STAFF IS CALCULATING IT'S OVER 50%.
BUT IF IT'S 49%
I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF IT AS WELL.
STAFF AND I'M GONNA BE SUPPORT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE TWO ITEMS THAT AREN'T DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE TAKING OF RIGHT AWAY IN THE FRONT.
AND I THINK THE 10 FOOT THE CITY TOOK TAKES CARE OF THE BUFFER HARDSHIP FOR ME.
ALRIGHT, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO ADD HEARING UNANIM? ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER BEEZ? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER REED? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER DEAN? YES, I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER MANNA CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT.
COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ? I CONCUR.
COMMISSIONER EZ? YES, I CONCUR.
CAN I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT? MOTION PASSES NINE TO ZERO.
WE CAN PROBABLY SNEAK ONE THROUGH.
UM, THE NEXT ONE UP IS, UH, 3 4 3 LER LANE.
WOULD YOU LIKE A CONTINUANCE OR YOU WANT TO BE HEARD BY A PANEL OF NINE PEOPLE? UH, WE TAKE A CONVENIENCE.
NEXT MEETING IS WHEN? OCTOBER 12TH, 26TH.
ITEM SEVEN IS CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 12TH CHAIR.
WHAT HOLIDAY? NOT A CITY HOLIDAY.
SHE HAS 3, 4, 3 IS CANCELED TILL OCTOBER AND I CAN'T BE HERE COURT.
I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO LISTEN TO ME.
I WOULD LOVE TO LISTEN TO YOU.
UH, SHE'S SPEAKING ON THE ONE WE JUST CONTINUED BECAUSE SHE CAN'T BE HERE.
SO I'LL I WILL HANG ON TO EVERY WORD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? MOVE, MOVE THE OTHER ONE.
I LIVE AT 3 3 9 SCHMELTZER LANE.
AND I'M HERE BECAUSE I'M THE NEIGHBOR OF 3 4 3 SCHMELTZER.
I'VE BEEN THERE 30 YEARS AND WE'VE ALWAYS GOTTEN ALONG UNTIL ABOUT A FEW YEARS AGO.
HE DECIDED TO GO INTO THE LIMO BUSINESS AND, UH, HE SUCCEEDED.
HE'S HAS A LOT OF BUSINESS AND NEEDED, UH, CARPORT COVERED THE, ALL THE CARS.
AND, UH, WHAT BUSINESS IS THIS AGAIN? WHAT KIND OF BUSINESS? IT'S A LIMOUSINE, LIMOUSINE BUSINESS.
THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORS, BUT THEY DECIDED TO DO THIS PART AND THAT'S FINE.
BUT THE WAY THAT HE'S WELL BUILT.
BUT THE THING IS THAT IN OUR BLOG WAS BEAUTIFUL AND WE HAVE ONE CAR, UH, GARAGE.
SO DOES HE BUT IT'S NEITHER HERE OR THERE.
BUT HE'S BUILT THIS HUMONGOUS CARPORT THAT LOOKS NOT, IT LOOKS COMMERCIAL, IT DOESN'T LOOK RESIDENTIAL, IT DOESN'T LOOK HOMEY.
AND I GET IT, HE, HIS, HIS BUSINESS AND THEN HE BOUGHT ANOTHER HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET AND THEY DID THE SAME THING.
THEY BOUGHT THE HOUSE AND THEY BUILT A BIG GO TO PUT THE REST OF THE CARS THERE.
I DON'T HAVE TOO MANY MORE YEARS TO BE AROUND HERE, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? MY KIDS COME OVER.
MY GRANDKIDS IS GRANDMA, WHAT HAPPENED? WHY IS THAT BIG OLD THING? WELL, THEY NEED IT FOR THE CARS, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN LATER? MY, MY NE UH, DISTRICT, MY NEIGHBORHOOD HAS GONE DOWN.
I THINK HE'S THE ONE THAT DOES DISTRICT ONE.
EVERYBODY PARKS AND THE YARDS AND THEY, THEY LET THE GRASS GROW TALL.
AND I'M JUST REAL DISGUSTED WITH MY NEIGHBORHOOD, THE WAY IT'S GOING BECAUSE NOW WITH THIS COURT PORT AND THE ONE
[02:55:01]
ACROSS THE STREET, I CAN BE DRIVING, I CAN BE AT THE BLOCK AND ALL YOU SEE IS THIS BIG OLD, TALL, I GUESS ABOUT, I DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT FEET AND ALL THAT, BUT IT, MY SON SAID, MOM, I THINK IT'S ABOUT 12 FEET TALL.IT'S NOT ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE.
SO I THOUGHT WHEN THEY WERE GONNA BUILD SOMETHING, IT WAS GONNA LOOK NICE AND PRETTY AND HOMEY.
IT LOOKS LIKE THE GARAGE THAT YOU PARK IN, I THINK OVER THERE BECAUSE IT'S JUST A, A ROOF, YOU KNOW? YEAH.
AND, AND IT'S NICE, IT'S BUILT NICE.
BUT THAT'S MY THING, YOU KNOW, THAT IT DOESN'T, UH, I WISH MORE PEOPLE WOULD CARE AND TAKE CARE OF THEIR, I TRY AND KEEP MY HOUSE LOOKING NICE, DOING HIS WIFE AND I, WE DO THE YARD AT THE SAME TIME SO WE CAN LOOK NICE AND KEEP EVERYTHING.
SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE, I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR 'CAUSE YOU WON'T BE HERE NEXT TIME, BUT YOU'RE, ARE YOU A OPPOSED TO JUST THE SHEER MAN? IT'S JUST A BIG GO GARAGE.
THE Y'ALL TALKING, I LEARNED A LOT NOW THAT Y'ALL BEEN TALKING, BUT IT COVERS THE WHOLE HOUSE.
BUT TO ME IT'S THE, THE WAY IT LOOKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW, I GOT IT.
I MEAN TWO AND THERE'S TWO, THIS ONE THAT'S FAIRLY NEW, BUT THEN, UH, BUT THAT'S MY, MY PEE THAT, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL ARE GONNA GO UP ON THE TAXES.
PEOPLE DON'T CARE ABOUT THEIR HOUSES AND I KNOW THEY WANT THE PROPERTY OR HOUSES DON'T COUNT, BUT I TRY AND KEEP MY HOUSE LOOKING NICE SO THAT I'M PROUD OF IT AND I WANT MY CHILDREN TO BE PROUD OF IT AND I WANT WHOEVER BUYS IT LATER BE PROUD TOO TO LIVE THERE.
YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I'M PROUD OF SAN ANTONIO, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? WE DON'T TAKE CARE OF HER AND MAYBE IT'S NOT GONNA BE WORTH IT FOR ME TO BE TALKING.
AND I'M OLD AND I TALK WELL, WE'RE GONNA REMEMBER YOUR THOUGHTS, BUT THANK, BUT LIKE I SAY, I CARE.
YOU KNOW, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
YESTERDAY I WENT TO CHURCHES, LOVE THY NEIGHBORS MYSELF AND I LOVE HIM.
BUT LIKE I SAY, I DON'T LIKE THE GARAGES HE PUTS
WE DO HAVE A, THAT'S ALL I CAN SAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR SPEAKING.
AND JUST TO ADD, UM, FOR HOME OCCUPATIONS, THERE IS A, HE'S PROHIBITED USE, NO HOME OCCUPATION SHALL BE ALLOWED TO GENERATE ON STREET PARKING.
SO WHAT SHE'S DESCRIBING, WE'RE NOT TRACKING, BUT THAT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF HOME OCCUPATION.
ALRIGHT, SO PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND TELL US YOUR THOUGHTS.
I LIVE AT, UH, THREE THREE H SCHMELTZER LANE.
I BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY APPROXIMATELY FOUR MONTHS AGO.
I'VE LIVED THERE FOR A TOTAL OF FIVE YEARS.
UM, I GUESS MY, I WAS VERY FINE WITH HER SPEAKING HER PIECE, BUT I WILL SPEAK MY PIECE AS I AM ABLE TO, UM, AS OPPOSED TO LOOKING ON A FEW ITEMS. MY FIRST THING WAS THAT I GOT THE LETTER ON SUNDAY TO APPEAR FOR THIS TODAY.
SO I MADE TIME OUTTA MY DAY TO COME TO BE HERE, TRY TO TALK IN FRONT OF US.
UH, I WANNA BE AS RESPECTFUL AS I CAN, FIRST AND FOREMOST.
UM, I DO FEEL LIKE THIS IS A LITTLE BIT, UM, I FEEL A LITTLE BIT UNPREPARED FOR THIS SIMPLY 'CAUSE I FEEL LIKE IF I COULD, I'D BE ABLE TO BRING YOU ALL DOCUMENTATION, PHOTOS, UH, PROPER PROOF AS WELL.
UM, BUT FIRST AND FOREMOST I WILL SPEAK THAT, UM, I, WE ARE HAVING THIS TOPIC.
WE ARE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AS A PART OF THIS TOPIC.
FOR THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO HAVE A LARGER CARPORT, WE SHOULD ASK OURSELVES WHY WE'RE ALLOWING THIS HOME TO HAVE ITS OWN CARPORT, AN ADDITIONAL CARPORT.
IT'S TWO STORE COMPANY VEHICLES.
THEY ARE STORING THEIR LIMOUSINE.
UH, THEY'VE DONE IT FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
IF WE LOOK IT UP ON GOOGLE MAPS AS A STREET VIEW, YOU CAN SEE IT'S JUST BEEN MOVED OVER THE STREET SEVERAL TIMES.
UM, I WAS ABLE TO PULL UP AS WELL BASED ON OUR EVIDENCE, OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAPER THAT WE HAD, IF YOU'RE ABLE TO GET TO THAT PHOTO.
UM, I WANTED TO POINT THIS OUT SPECIFICALLY.
SO IF WE LOOK ON DRESDEN, DRESDEN HAS A TOTAL OF 17 HOMES ON THERE.
UM, I'M SORRY, UH, 15, I BELIEVE IT'S 15 HOMES ON.
SO THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT DO NOT, UH, DRIVE UP AND DOWN, UH, SCHMEER LANE AT ALL.
AND THEN WE HAVE ONE HOUSE ON GILBERT LANE.
SO OUT OF THAT WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 17 HOMES THAT ARE ON SCHMELZER THAT COULD BE IN ACCORDANCE TO THIS.
AND WITHIN THIS 200 FOOT, UH, DIAGRAM, UH, SIX OF THOSE 17 HOMES ARE OWNED BY 3, 4 3.
DO THEY GET ADDITIONAL VOTES? DO THEY GET TO SPEAK? ARE THEY TOLD NOT TO COME HERE BECAUSE THEY ARE AT ENDS TO THE LANDLORD, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE? UM, MOST OF THIS IS GONNA BE, IT CREATES UNDUE FOOT TRAFFIC.
IT CREATES UNDUE TRAFFIC IN THIS AREA BECAUSE YOU HAVE A LIMOUSINE, YOU HAVE A PLACE THAT IS RUNNING A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS OUT OF A RESIDENTIAL.
UM, I THINK ON TOP OF THAT, IT ALSO, BEING NEXT TO EL, ALMOST ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, WE HAVE A
[03:00:01]
LOT OF FOOT TRAFFIC.THAT CARPORT HAS NOW KIND OF EXTENDED INTO THE SIDEWALK IS, IT'S VERY COMMON TO SEE KIDS KIND OF HAVE TO WALK AROUND CARS THAT ARE THEN PARKED ONTO THE SIDEWALK.
THAT CREATES A SAFETY HAZARD ON TOP OF THAT WITH THE CARPORT NOT BEING CONNECTED TO THE HOUSE.
HIGH WINDS TO COME UP AS WE DO KNOW IF IT'S NOT CONNECTED, POTENTIAL OF THAT BEING BLOWN OFF, THAT'S ANOTHER HAZARD.
UM, I THINK THAT THIS IS SIMPLY ACKNOWLEDGING THAT WE LIVE ON A LANE.
I LIVE ON A VERY SMALL STREET.
IT IS VERY DIFFICULT AT TIMES TO TRY TO GET AROUND TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY WITH LARGE TRUCKS NEARBY.
SO I WANTED TO AT LEAST OPPOSE THESE SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT ARE GIVEN.
UM, I DON'T BELIEVE EMBOLDENING THEM TO USE THEIR RESIDENT AS A BUSINESS.
IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? I, I DIDN'T GET, I JUST DIDN'T GET YOUR NAME.
AND YOU'RE NOT, AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ALSO OPPOSED? UH, I'M OPPOSED TO SIR.
TO THE, TO ANY CARPORT OR JUST THE L SIZE? JUST, JUST THE SIZE OF THE UH, I'M SORRY.
I THINK EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, EVERYONE ON MULTIPLE DIFFERENT STREETS AS WELL HAVE ALL ADHERED TO THIS STANDARD CARPORT SIZE.
I THINK CHANGING THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO USE A LARGER CARPORT TO STORE COMPANY VEHICLES GOES AGAINST THE CORE OF IT BEING A RESIDENT.
AND IN DOING SO, IT GIVES ME UNDUE HARDSHIP, HAVING TO DEAL WITH TRAFFIC.
I'VE ALMOST BEEN HIT SEVERAL TIMES.
JUST TRYING TO BACK OUTTA MY, MY, MY HOUSE IS WHAT IT IS.
I, I JUST, I APPRECIATE YOU AND YOUR TIME.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP? THAT'S ALL.
COMMISSIONER BEEZ IS LEAVING THE MEETING.
IS THERE, DO NEED TO CONTINUE THE REMAINING ITEMS? FIVE, 10.
WE CAN DO A MONTH OR TWO OR WE CAN DO OCTOBER 12TH OR OCTOBER 26TH.
WHO'S HERE REPRESENTING ITEM FIVE? RIGHT HERE.
UH, WOULD YOU RATHER COME BACK ON THE 12TH OR THE 26TH? YOU CAN'T DO IT TODAY.
WE'RE ABOUT TO LOSE A MEMBER AND THEN WE HAVE TO STOP THE MEETING.
SO WHAT WAS IT, OCTOBER? OCTOBER 12TH OR 26TH.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE, BO OA 26 DASH 1 0 3 DOUBLE 0 1 69 TO OCTOBER 26 AT 12.
MOTION IS CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 12TH.
ITEM NUMBER 10, VO EIGHT DASH 26 DASH 3 76 TO OCTOBER 12TH.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ZUNO IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ALL HEARING? ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NON MOTION, UH, CASES CONTINUE.
[ Director’s Report ]
THERE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT? NO.UM, I HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD ON, UH, ON THURSDAY, OR I'M SORRY, WEDNESDAY.
THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE APPROVED TO MOVE FORWARD SEVEN ALTERNATE PEOPLE TO CITY COUNCIL.
THEY'LL BE VOTING ON THEM ON OCTOBER 8TH.
COMMISSIONER BONNI AND COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ ARE GOING TO BE HOPEFULLY REAPPOINTED AND THERE'S FIVE MEMBERS.
I NOTICED ONE OF THE NAMES IS SOMEBODY THAT SERVED ON THIS COM, UH, COMMISSION, UH, MANY YEARS AGO.
SO WE WILL HAVE SOMEONE WITH SOME BACKGROUND, BUT, BUT WE'LL HAVE SEVEN ALTERNATES SO HOPEFULLY THIS WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? SHOULD WE LET, SO THE APPLICANTS THAT ARE HERE, LET THEM KNOW THAT THEY'LL BE FIRST ON THE AGENDA? YES.
YOU, BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE EIGHT MEMBERS AND WE MUST HAVE NINE TO HAVE A QUORUM.
UM, WE HAVE TO CONTINUE THE CASE THAT YOU JUST RESPONDED TO.
UM, AND THE NEXT MEETING IS ON THE 12TH.
WE HAVE FIVE HERE AND FOUR THERE.
ISN'T THAT THE NINE? WELL, ONE OF THEM'S LEAVING.
HE'S ALREADY STAYED A LITTLE LATE JUST TO HANDLE SOME OF THIS ADMINISTRATIVE PAPERWORK.
SO WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IS YOU'LL ALL BE HEARD FIRST, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF TIME.
AND WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'VE BEEN HAVING AN ISSUE 'CAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD ENOUGH ALTERNATES.
NOW THAT WE'RE HAVE, WE WILL HAVE A FULL PANEL OF SEVEN ALTERNATES.
WE SHOULD HOPEFULLY NOT HAVE THIS ISSUE AGAIN.