* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:04] UH, SO CHAIR, HAND IT OFF TO YOU AND WE'LL START AGAIN. UH, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, GO AHEAD, SIR. ALL [Call to Order] RIGHT. I HAVE, IT'S ONE 15, UH, THIS, UH, MONDAY AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. MY NAME IS ROGER MARTINEZ AND I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. I HERE CALL THE REGULAR NOTICE MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS INTO SESSION. CAN WE HAVE THE INTERPRETER READ THE INTERPRETATION SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR THIS MEETING? HAS THAT BEEN DONE? THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET A ROLL CALL CONDUCTED. ALRIGHT, MR. MINKA, UH, WE STILL CAN'T HEAR YOU. STILL HAVING AUDIO PROBLEMS? UH, MS. CRUZ? HERE. MR. TEAL? PRESENT? MR. PRESENT? MR. ORIAN? UH, HERE. MR. OZUNA? PRESENT MR. LOVE? HERE. MS. FISHER? PRESENT. MR. DELMER PRESENT. MS. TREVINO PRESENT CHAIR MARTINEZ PRESENT. VERY GOOD. UH, SO FOR RIGHT NOW, SIR, WE'LL HAVE NINE UNTIL WE CAN GET MR. MENCHACA AUDIO UP AND RUNNING. OKAY. WELL, LET'S JUST, UM, THIS IS GONNA BE ONGOING WHILE I'M DOING THIS PRESENTATION, SO, ALL RIGHT. UH, BEFORE WE WOULD PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION. THE BOARD FOLLOWS AN AGENDA WHICH IS POSTED ON THE CITY WEBSITE. THE CASES ARE LISTED BY A NUMBER WITH THE NAMES AND APPLICANT AND STREET ADDRESS. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING. WE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED TO THIS BOARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE BOARD IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, COMPETENT IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CITY, ZONING CODES AND OTHER CODES AND ASPECTS PERTAINING TO THIS AREA. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW. WE ONLY EXAMINED THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELIEF SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES. OUR SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. THEY ARE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OR DETERMINATIONS MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 32 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS UNDER CHAPTER 35 AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35. WE ALSO SERVE AS IN AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO BE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28. IN ADDITIONS, WE HAVE POWER TO HEAR CASES IN ANY OTHER MATTER AUTHORIZED BY CITY COUNCIL CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. EVERY DECISION A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS. EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY A REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF BOARD MEMBERS ON THE BOARD WHERE PRESENT ARE NOT, WHICH IS ALWAYS NINE VOTES. THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND GRANTING THE RELIEF SOUGHT REST WITH THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS AND WHICH THE RELIEF IS REQUESTED AND CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT OR COUNTY COURTS OF LAW BASED ON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS APPEALS FROM THE BOARD OF DECISION REGARDING CHAPTER 28 ARE MADE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. PLEASE LIMIT YOUR PRESENTATION REMARKS TO THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE. ALL RIGHT, UM, BELIEVE I'M GONNA TURN THIS OVER TO CITY STAFF TO EXPLAIN THE PROCESS. OH, JUST TO CLARIFY, WE HAVE 10 UNTIL WE HAVE, UH, AUDIO FROM MR. MENCHACA. OKAY. SO TO PROTECT, TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THE PUBLIC AND LIMIT THE POTENTIAL SPREAD OF COVID 19. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS HOLDING MEETINGS VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE. [00:05:01] THESE MEETING STANDARDS ARE BASED UPON THE VERY SUSPENDED PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT ISSUED BY THE TEXAS GOVERNOR IN RESPONSE TO THE COVID 19 CRISIS AND ARE IN PLACE UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN WATCH AND LISTEN TO THIS MEETING BY VISITING WWW SAN ANTONIO DOCA SLASH DSC BY CALLING IN FOR AUDIO ONLY AT 2 1 0 2 0 6 BY 4 8 3. TO INCORPORATE PUBLIC COMMENTS, THERE ARE FOUR OPPORTUNITIES. THESE INCLUDE EMAIL OR MAIL COMMENTS, DROPPING OFF COMMENTS, LEAVING VOICEMAIL, OR ASKED TO BE CALLED DURING THE MEETING. STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT'S STAFF WILL READ INTO THE RECORD ANY EMAILS OR LETTERS RECEIVED, AND STAFF WILL ALSO PLAY ANY MESSAGES RECEIVED BY VOICEMAIL. LASTLY, FOR THOSE THAT SIGN UP TO RECEIVE A CALLBACK, WE WILL CALL THEM BACK TO STATE THEIR TWO MINUTE COMMENTS AND SPANISH INTERPRETERS ARE ON STANDBY AS NEEDED. THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL WITH A TWO MINUTE TIME LIMIT, ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS PERMISSION QUESTIONS. SHERIFF? YES. UM, AND I I THINK YOU SAID THAT OUR, UM, RESPONSES ARE ONLY LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING, SIR. VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT. LET'S [2. 20-4243 BOA-19-10300162: A request by David Ranjbar for 1) a 5’ variance from the 10’ Type A landscape bufferyard requirement to allow a bufferyard to be 5’ along the south property line, 2) a 5’ variance from the 15’ Type B landscape bufferyard requirement to allow a bufferyard to be 10’ along the north property line, 3) a 5’ variance from the 15’ Type B landscape bufferyard requirement to allow a bufferyard to be 10’ along the west property line, 4) a 10’ variance from the 15’ Type B landscape bufferyard requirement to allow a bufferyard to be 5’ along the east property line, and 5) a 5’ variance from the required 10’ side setback to allow a structure to be built 5’ from the east property line, located at 4674 South Presa. Staff recommends Denial with an Alternate Recommendation. (Council District 3) (Dominic Silva, Senior Planner (210) 207-0120, Dominic.Silva@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)] START WITH OUR FIRST CASE. UH, CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 19 DASH OH THREE TWO STAFF. THIS IS FEL WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FIRST, UH, CASE IS 46 74 SOUTH VESA. APPLICANT IS DAVID VAR. THERE'S MULTIPLE REQUESTS HERE. REQUEST NUMBER ONE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT TYPE A LANDSCAPE BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW BUFFERY YARD TO BE FIVE FEET ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE TWO, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW BUFFER YARD TO BE 10 FEET ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY. LINE THREE A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW IT TO BE 10 FEET ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY. LINE FOUR, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO BE FIVE FEET ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. AND FIVE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 10 FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT FIVE FEET FROM THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. CURRENT ZONING IS C TWO RIO OH FIVE MC TWO H O D. NEXT SLIDE. NEXT SLIDE. UH, UH, BACK UP, ALAN, GO BACK. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING MULTIPLE VARIANCES IN ORDER TO REDEVELOP THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND CONSTRUCT A COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE TO FEATURE APPROXIMATELY 3,500 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE. THE APPLICANT WILL BE DEMOLISHING THE CURRENT COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE ON SITE AND MAINTAINING THE STATION PUMPS. THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE WITH THE, WITHIN THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN BOTH THE SETBACK AND BUFFER YARD DUE TO THE EXISTENCE OF A RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL USE LOT TO THE EAST. THE APPLICANT HAS A 10 FOOT SIDE SETBACK ALONG WITH A 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER YARD. THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED FOR AND OBTAINED H D R C CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR THE, FOR THE PRO PROPOSED PROJECT ON MARCH 18TH, 2020. THIS IS A, UH, PICTURE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA, THE RESIDENCE BEHIND THEM. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF, OF ONE A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE 10 FOOT TYPE A LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENT AS DESCRIBED IN 35 5 10 TO ALLOW BUFFERY YARD TO BE FIVE FEET ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY. LINE TWO, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENT, UH, TO BE 10 FEET ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE. AND THREE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW BUFFER YARD TO BE 10 FEET ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROP, UH, PROPERTY WILL INCREASE THE BUFFER YARD LANDSCAPE, UH, LANDSCAPING THEN WHAT IT CURRENTLY IS AND THE INTRODUCTION OF REQUESTED BUFFER YARDS WILL ENHANCE THE OVERALL APPEARANCE OF THE DISTRICT STAFF. DOES RECOMMEND DENIAL OF ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE E BUFFER, UM, ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. AND FIVE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE PROPOSED 10 FOOT SETBACK. ALSO ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE, UH, DUE TO THE EXISTENCE OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RESIDENTIAL HOME ON THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY. PROPOSED PROPERTY, A FIVE [00:10:01] FOOT SETBACK WOULD LIMIT EQUAL ACCESS TO LIGHT AIR AND A OPEN SPACE. AND A FIVE FOOT SETBACK DOES NOT REASONABLY ALLOW ACCESS FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY PROVIDING ADEQUATE SPACE AND PRIVACY FOR THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. 18 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION, AND THE HOT WALL'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS ALSO IN OPPOSITION. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS DAVID REBAR. MR. REBAR, WHEN YOU'RE AVAILABLE, UM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. THIS IS DAVID REBAR. UH, THE ADDRESS IS 1 0 5 STRATFORD COURT. UH, 7 8 2 2 3. ALRIGHT, GO AHEAD AND PROCEED WITH YOUR, UH, REQUEST. OH, I, I JUST WONDER, UH, WE HAVE THE 10 FOOT SITE DEAD BACK ON THE EAST SIDE. WE NEEDED TO REDUCE IT TO FIVE FOOT AND THEN BUFFER ON THE SAME SIDE, 15 FOOT TO FIVE FOOT, AND ON NORTH SIDE, UH, 15 FOOT BUFFER TO 10 FOOT AND, UH, SOUTH SIDE, UH, 10 FOOT BOXER TO FIVE FOOT. OKAY. NOW YOU'RE SAYING ON THE, UH, ON NUMBER ISSUE NUMBER FIVE, BUT I BELIEVE YOU WANT A, UH, UH, FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE SIDE SET BACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURE ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. UH, UH, AS, AS YOU SEE ON THE, ON THE, ON THE SITE PLAN, UH, THERE IS A EXISTING STRUCTURE. WE, WE NEED TO MOVE THAT AND, UH, WE, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SPACE, SO THAT'S WHY WE, WE GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO, TO HAVE THE FIVE FOOT SO I CAN HAVE MORE, UH, PARKING LOT AND, OKAY. DID, UM, ALL RIGHT, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE THIS, UH, TO, UM, STAFF. CAN YOU GO AHEAD AND READ TO THE OR PLAY FOR THE APPLICANT ANY WITNESS FROM PUBLIC REPRESENTATION? WE DID HAVE A VOICEMAIL THAT WAS SUBMITTED AS WELL AS AN EMAIL. UH, THE HOT WELLS NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION CHOSE TO USE THE EMAIL IN PLACE OF THE VOICEMAIL, SO I'LL READ THAT INTO RECORD. THE HOT WELL MISSIONS REACH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OPPOSE THIS CASE BO, A 1 0 3 0 0 1 6 2 LOCATED AT 1 0 5 STRATFORD COURT. NONE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS WITHIN 200 FEET NOTIFICATION ZONE HAVE EXPRESSED SUPPORT FOR THE APPLICANT. MS. HERNANDEZ AT 1 0 7 STRATFORD COURT AND MS. UH, RUTLEDGE AT 47 10 PRESA ARE OPPOSED, UH, TO THE PROPOSED VARIANCE. THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS NOT IN CO COHESION WITH OUR HOT WELL ED PLAN, WORLD HERITAGE, UH, ZONE, AND DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE ONGOING PRESA STREET CORRIDOR PROJECT. THAT'S FROM, UH, BRADY ALEXANDER, PRESIDENT OF HOT WELLS MISSION REACH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. SECOND FEMALE IS FROM VIRGINIA REDLICH. UH, WE'RE ARE THE OWNERS OF TWO PROPERTIES ACROSS THE STREET FROM 1 0 5 STRATFORD COURT, UH, 1 0 6 STRATFORD COURT AND 47 10 SOUTH PERA. WE SEE NO REASON FOR THE CITY TO GRANT VARIANCES TO THE LANDSCAPE, BUFFER YARD AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS OR ANY OTHER PROPERTY ALONG THE MAJOR CORRIDOR, SOUTH CROSS AND PRESA IN WHAT IS PREDOMINANTLY A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. WE OBJECT TO THESE VARIANCES AND THIS CASE CONTINUE. UH, IF THIS CASE CONTINUES TO BE CONSIDERED ON MONDAY, JULY 6TH, UH, WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE ARGUMENTS FOR THE REQUEST, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE LIVE COMMENT, UH, DURING TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS, UH, PUBLIC HEARING. WE ALSO WOULD LIKE TO, UM, KNOW WHICH OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE SUPPORTED OR OR OBJECTED TO THESE REQUESTS. AND THAT CONCLUDES, UH, ALL THE COMMENTARY. ALL RIGHT. DID WE HEAR FROM ANY OF THE, UH, UH, RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY? IS THAT ALL THE PUBLIC RESPONSE WE RECEIVED? YES, SIR. THAT, THAT IS ALL THE PUBLIC RESPONSE THAT WE RECEIVED. OKAY. AND WE GOT NO OTHER RES, NO OTHER RESPONSE FROM, UH, UH, I, I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING THE, UH, CHART WITH THOSE APPROVING OR DENIAL. SO I GUESS WE HAD NO [00:15:01] RESPONSE TO OUR LETTER ASKING FOR RECOMMENDATION. THERE WAS JUST THE ONE RESPONSE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE NOTIFICATION PLAN NOW, THERE'S ONE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY THAT WAS IN OPPOSITION. OH, OKAY. JUST THOSE TWO, THOSE TWO LADIES ACROSS THE STREET. ALRIGHT. STAFF, DO YOU, UH, UH, SINCE WE'VE HEARD FROM BOTH PARTIES AT ALL PARTIES AT THIS TIME, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE, UH, APPLICANT STAFF OR WELL, JUST APPLICANT OR STAFF ORIAN? MR. ORIAN, GO AHEAD. SO, UH, I'M LOOKING AT IF YOU COULD KEEP THE SITE PLAN UP, UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M LOOKING AT THIS RIGHT. SO THIS IS, IS THIS THE SITE PLAN THAT THEY PUT IN AFTER DISCUSSING WITH STAFF THEIR THOUGHTS? AND, AND I'M ASKING THAT, UH, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T REFLECT, UH, ANY BUFFERING ON STRATFORD OR ALONG SOUTH PRESA, JUST THE FIVE FOOT IN THE REAR AND THEN ON THE NORTH SIDE ALONG SOUTH CROSS. SO IS IS, DOES THE APPLICANT, UH, YOU KNOW, WHO, WHO IS, SEEMS TO BE REQUESTING AT LEAST SOME SORT OF A BUFFER YARD ALONG STRATFORD IN SOUTH PRESA IS A SITE AGAIN, SO THIS, THIS WAS A SITE PLAN THAT WAS GIVEN TO US, UH, IN TIME TO POST THE AGENDA. WE DO HAVE A REVISED ONE, WHICH WE ARE DISPLAYING NOW. OKAY. AND, AND CITY LANDSCAPING IS, IS REVIEWED THE, THE, THE BUFFERING PROVISIONS, UH, ON PRESTON AND STRATFORD? YES, THEY HAVE. OKAY. AND, UH, FINALLY, IS THERE ANYTHING, IS THIS, THIS MAY NOT EVEN BE AN ISSUE, BUT IT TALKS ABOUT, UH, ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UH, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 10 FOOT SIDE SETBACK, THAT'S A REAR SETBACK, RIGHT? THAT DOESN'T CHANGE. WELL, THEY'RE DRESSING IN THIS SITUATION. OKAY. APOLOGIZE. GOTCHA. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I, I HAVE A QUESTION I WOULDN'T MIX STRAIGHT OUT. UH, THE CITY STAFF'S, UH, DETERMINATIONS ARE THAT THEY CAN ACCEPT THE FIRST THREE REQUESTS, BUT THEY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH FOUR AND FIVE. THAT IS CORRECT, BECAUSE THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE BEHIND THEM, WHICH IS PRETTY CLOSE TO PROPERTY LINE AND, UM, IS THE, UH, BACK OF THE BUILDING GOING TO HAVE ANY ACCESS LOADING OR UNLOADING? NOT A CURRENT DESIGN. OKAY. SO, BUT AGAIN, IT'LL ONLY BE FIVE FEET. WE, WE HAVE THE IMAGE OF THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR YES. WHICH IS PRETTY CLOSE TO PROPERTY LINE. THE COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE WOULD BE FIVE FEET AS PROPOSED. I SEE. OKAY. THAT YELLOW STRUCTURE THERE APPEARS TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. THE FENCE IS CORRECT? YES, SIR. THAT'S THE RESIDENTIAL AND THE STRUCTURE THEY WANT IS CONSTRUCTED WILL BE FIVE FEET, THE PROPERTY LINE AND MAKING THE TOTAL BASE OF EIGHT FEET BETWEEN BASICALLY BLOCKING ALL LIGHT FROM THE, UH, FROM THE WINDOWS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY LINE? YES, SIR. WE TOOK THAT INTO ACCOUNT AS WELL. OKAY. AND THE REASONING THEY GAVE AND THEIR EXPLANATION FOR THE REQUEST WAS THAT THEY NEEDED TO SET THE BUILDING THAT FAR BACK IN ORDER TO GET THE NUMBER OF SPACES REQUIRED FOR THE, UH, COMMERCIAL STATUS? I BELIEVE SO. THEY'VE BEEN WORKING WITH OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TEAM FOR A WHILE. UM, SO I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE SCENARIO THERE, BUT IT COMES DOWN TO DESIGN IT ALL. WELL, MY QUESTION FOR STAFF, IF WE, UH, IF LET'S SAY WE GAVE HIM, I BELIEVE THAT'S A GET BACK TO THAT. UH, LET'S SEE ON THAT ONE THERE, IT'S, IT'S BUFFER IS SUPPOSED TO BE 15 FEET. YES, SIR. SO THERE'S A, WITHIN THE U D C, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE AS FAR AS, UM, BUFFER YARD VERSUS THE SETBACK. IT WOULD BE A BIGGER VARIANCE FOR THE BUFFER YARD BECAUSE FOR SIDE SETBACK, IT'S ONLY A 10 FOOT FROM RESIDENTIAL, YET THE BUFFER YARD'S 15, UH, THAT'S HOW THEY REQUESTED, UH, THE 10 FOOT AND THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK. OH, OKAY. SO YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT THE SETBACK OVERLAPS THE BUFFER YARD? THAT'S CORRECT. SO THE BUFFER YARD IS ACTUALLY LARGER IN THE U D C, UM, IN THIS SCENARIO, I CAN SEE THE CONFLICT HERE. SO IF HE REDUCE BY, YOU'D HAVE THE, I SEE REDUCING THE BUFFER YARD BY 10 FEET, FIVE SO THAT [00:20:01] HE CAN REQUEST A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE, UH, SETBACK OF THE STRUCTURE. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. LOVE, MR. LOVE. YES, SIR. THE, UH, HAS ANYONE HEARD FROM THE NEIGHBOR IN THE YELLOW HOUSE? I MEAN, THERE'S, HAS THERE BEEN ANY FEEDBACK FROM THEM AT ALL? NONE AT ALL. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. LOVE. ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION? PHILLIPS? YES. GO AHEAD AND ASK A QUESTION. SO THERE'S A QUESTION FOR A CITY. UM, SO DID, COULD YOU REPEAT, UH, READ WHAT IT WAS THAT THE, OR RESHOW THE WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, UM, LETTER THAT THEY PROPOSED? 'CAUSE I THOUGHT IT DID INDICATE THIS ADDRESS IN THE, UH, IN THEIR DIALOGUE. IN THEIR DIALOGUE, YES. BUT WE, WE HADN'T RECEIVED ANYTHING DIRECTLY FROM THEM, OURSELVES. UH, WE DID SEND THEM NOTICE BUT RECEIVED NOTHING BACK. BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SAID THAT THEY WERE REPRESENTING THIS HOUSE AND HAD SPOKEN TO THEM, IS THAT CORRECT? AND THEY, AND THEY WERE AGAINST IT. UH, LEMME DOUBLE CHECK THE ADDRESS THAT THEY PROPOSED OR THEY IDENTIFY. SO THE ADDRESS THAT THEY'RE IDENTIFYING. SO THE 1 0 7, WHICH IS YEAH, WHICH IS THAT ADDRESS. YEAH. SO THAT'S WHAT THE ASSOCIATION IS STATING. YES, SIR. SO THE ASSOCIATION IS STATING THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE WORKING ON BEHALF OF THAT, THAT RESIDENCE AND SAYS THAT THEY WERE AGAINST IT, IS WHAT I'M READING HERE? YES, SIR. THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE STATING. THANK YOU. SORRY, MS. CRUZ. OKAY. TOWARDS THE ALLEYWAY, UH, LIKE IT'S AN ALLEYWAY AND A SIDE STREET THAT'S, I'M TRYING, I DON'T SHOW AN ALLEYWAY THERE. I SEE A STREET, THE PROPERTY, IN OTHER WORDS, THE STREET THE STREET IS, IS ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY ON THREE DIFFERENT PROPERTY WITH THE HOUSE ADJACENT TO IT. THERE NO ALLEY. OKAY. GO BACK, GO BACK. WHO'S DOING THE PICTURE? WOW. SO WE JUST PUT THE PICTURE UP RIGHT NOW. THERE'S NO ALLEY BETWEEN THEM. IT'S, UH, SOUTH CROSS, AND THEN A, UM, IT'S STRATFORD SAYS STRATFORD ON THE SOUTH END OF IT. OKAY. BUT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT AND YOU SEE, YOU DON'T SEE THE BUILDING THAT'S THERE NOW, AND YOU SEE THE, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S AN ALLEYWAY OR IS IT BECAUSE IT, IT'S COMMERCIAL LOT. OH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. THAT'S ACTUALLY WHERE THEY'RE GONNA BUILD, THAT'S ACTUALLY WHERE THEY'RE GONNA BUILD THE STRUCTURE AT ON THAT VACANT WHAT APPEARS TO BE VACANT LOT. OKAY. THEY'RE MOVING THAT STRUCTURE BACK, SO THEY'RE GONNA DEMOLISH THIS ONE AND BUILD ON THAT OTHER END LOT. OKAY. SO IN OTHER WORDS, WHERE THEY'RE GONNA BUILD THIS, WHERE THEY'RE, THEY'RE GONNA TEAR DOWN THE OLD STRUCTURE WHERE THEY'RE GONNA BUILD, IT'LL BE PART OF WHERE THE OLD STRUCTURE IS, AND THEN TOWARDS THE NEIGHBORS. IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT WHY THEY'RE SAYING THEY DON'T WANT, WANT IT THERE? SO THIS ONE WILL BE DEMOED. THE ONLY THING THEY'RE GONNA KEEP IS THE GAS PUMPS, RIGHT? THEY'RE GONNA BUILD A, THEY'RE GONNA BUILD A BRAND NEW STRUCTURE CLOSER TO THE RESIDENTIAL. RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. YEAH. YEAH. SO , ALLEE, NOW WHAT THAT IS, IS JUST PAID PROPERTY. RIGHT? SO, SO WHAT THEY WANT DO IS THEY WANNA MOVE THAT HOW THEIR NEW STRUCTURE, THE NEW STRUCTURE WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH OF COURSE THAT CAN NEVER BE AN ALLEY. AND THE ONLY THING THAT THEY DO BACK THERE TO MAKE IT USABLE WITH, WELL, THERE'S NOTHING, THERE'S NO ACCESS INTO THE BUILDING. THEN THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A BUFFER YARD WITH, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE LANDSCAPING. IS THAT CORRECT? STAFF? THAT'S CORRECT. IT, SO NO ALLEYWAY, UH, LANDSCAPING WOULD BE REQUIRED ALL THE WAY AROUND. UH, THAT'S WHERE MOST OF THE VARIANCES ARE COMING IN, ESPECIALLY WITH A NEW CONSTRUCTION. AND THEN THE SETBACK IS TO THE BACK ONLY OR WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE BACK, BUT THAT'S TECHNICALLY THE SIZES ARE GONNA RE-ADDRESS. SO THEY'RE GONNA, THIS IS GONNA BE RE-ADDRESS TO PRESSA, [00:25:01] I BELIEVE. STRATFORD. OH, THEY'RE GONNA ADDRESS TO STRATFORD. OKAY. SO IT WOULD BE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, UH, OR ON THE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE IF YOU'RE, YOU'RE FACING THE ADDRESS. SO THERE'S NO ALLEYWAY THERE RIGHT NOW, APPARENTLY, THAT, THAT THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURE THERE HAD HAD, UH, ASPHALT ALL THE WAY TO THE PROPERTY LINE? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO BUILD WITHIN 10, WITHIN FIVE FEET PARKING THE LINE SO THEY CAN PUT A PARKING SPACE. THAT CORRECT. IS THE APPLICANT STILL AVAILABLE? YES, THE APPLICANT STILL ON THE LINE. ALL RIGHT. LET'S, LET'S DIRECT THIS QUESTION TO THE APPLICANT. THE REASON REASONING FOR STRUCTURE, SO CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE EAST SIDE IS, IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT HE WANTS TO HAVE PARKING SPACE? YES. IF I, IF I GO BETWEEN OR 10 FOOT ON THE BACK, ON THE, UH, YOU KNOW, INSIDE, SO ALL PARKING LOT IN THE FRONT WOULD PUSH TOWARDS THE PUMP, SO THERE IS NO, UH, RACE. SO, UH, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM FOR A CAR TO, TO CROSS. I'M OKAY. THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE MAIN ISSUE THAT WE HAVE HERE WITH THE STAFF. IT APPEARS THAT THE, THE, THE BUMPER YARDS ON THE NORTHWEST AND SOUTH SIDE HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED SUCCESSFULLY BY STAFF. AND SO THE BOARD, UM, I'M ADVISING THE BOARD AT THIS TIME. REALLY WHAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE ACT OR THE CLOSENESS OF THE VARIANCE TO THE ADJACENT STRUCTURE OF A NEIGHBOR. IN OTHER WORDS, HE BUILDS FIVE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, THEN THE HOUSE BEING AN ADDITIONAL THREE FEET, THE HOUSE IS ONLY EIGHT FEET FROM THE NEW STRUCTURE, AND HE WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT WHOLE AREA BEHIND THE BUILDING AS A BUFFER YARD LANDSCAPING MANA? YES. IT, OKAY. MR. MANNY, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, THERE'S A QUESTION, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT. AND SO, UM, IS IT THAT, WELL, I GUESS, ARE YOU CHANGING THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE ITSELF, AND BY DOING SO, IS THAT'S, WHAT IS THAT WHAT, CHANGING THE REQUIREMENT OF THE PARKING, IN OTHER WORDS, IF THE SAME BUILDING WAS MOVED, JUST PUSHED BACK, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE EXISTING PARKING IN THE EXISTING AREA, OR IS THE BUILDING CHANGING IN SIZE AS WELL, WHICH IS DRIVING THE ADDITIONAL NEED FOR THE, THE PARKING LOT OR CHANGING YOUR PARKING LOT REQUIREMENT? YES. THE, THE EXISTING BUILDING IS THOUSAND 81 , AND A NEW BUILDING IS, UH, IT'S GONNA BE TWO BUILDINGS, UH, 3,500 TOTAL. SO, SO, BECAUSE YOU'RE CHANGING THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING ITSELF IS WHY IT IS THAT THE PARKING LOT REQUIREMENTS ARE CHANGING FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY? YES. AND THEN THE EXISTING BUILDING IS, IS IS WE HAVE TO DEMOLISH IT. IT IS NOT WORKABLE. IT'S NOT SAFE. ALL RIGHT. I BELIEVE WHAT HE IS BASICALLY SAYING HERE IS THAT HE'S CAUGHT BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE. HE NEEDS ADDITIONAL PA PARKING TO ACCOUNT FOR THE INCREASE IN SIZE OF THE GROCERY STORE. YES. BECAUSE OF , THE STAFF CONCUR WITH THAT ASSESSMENT. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. WITH THE INCREASE, I MEAN, YOU'RE GONNA BE REQUIRED ADDITIONAL SPACES. UM, AGAIN, TRAFFIC HAS LOOKED AT THIS WITH, WITH THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL TIMES OVER. AND ULTIMATELY BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE, THE NEW CONVENIENCE STORE, THEY'D HAVE TO MEET THE MINIMUM, UH, SIZE OF THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT. AND HOW MANY PARKING, UH, SPACES ARE REQUIRED FOR THE NEW STRUCTURE? ONE. STANDBY, WE'LL GET THAT FOR YOU. SO THIS DIAGRAM HERE REPRESENTS THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES THAT ARE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO HAVE A STRUCTURE THIS LARGE FOR THE GROCERY STORE? YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. REMEMBER, PART OF IT'S GONNA BE LAUNDRY AS WELL. OH, OKAY. YEAH. SO HE'S DEFINITELY GONNA NEED MORE PARKING SPACES FOR THAT, BUT RIGHT NOW HE IS ALLOWING FOR [00:30:01] 13 PARKING SPACES ON THE PROPERTY. 17. OKAY. WELL, I, I CAN'T SEE ON THE MAP, WHICH 14, 15, 16 ARE, IT IS UNDER THE, UH, CANOPY. OH, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I SEE NOW 9, 10, 11. SO THEY APPARENTLY ON THE LEFT SIDE OR THE, EXCUSE ME, THE NORTH STRUCTURE, THEY'RE GONNA BE PARKING SPACES. SO QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. YES, GO AHEAD. UM, SO IF THE BUILDING, CAN THE BUILDING BE SHRUNK BY A LITTLE BIT AND THEN MOVE FORWARD FIVE FOOT SO AS TO, UH, MAINTAIN THE BACK BUFFER YARD AND STILL ALLOW FOR THE REQUIRED PARKING? BECAUSE I ASSUME THAT THERE'D BE A LITTLE BIT OF REDUCTION OF A PARK REQUIREMENT, UM, BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING. SO IN OTHER WORDS, IS THERE ANY LEEWAY FOR A CHANGE THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING AT ALL? UM, IF IT'S BY LIKE TWO FEET, UH, IT'S POSSIBLE, BUT IT'S MORE THAN TWO FEET. NOT, YOU KNOW, ON, ON THE SOUTH, ON THE NORTH SIDE, CITY TOOK LIKE, UM, 10 FOOT OF OUR, MORE THAN 10 FOOT OF OUR LAND, UH, LONG, LIKE I I IN PAST AND TO, TO EXPAND A STREET SOUTH CROSS CROT, UH, I, I, I JUST WANT YOU TO CONSIDER THAT ALSO WE LARGE LOT OF LAND ON THE CROT. OKAY. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND HERE, THE TECHNICAL ISSUE HERE IS IN ORDER TO BUILD THE STRUCTURE HE WANTS TO HAVE AND ACCOMPLISH THE GROCERY STORE AND THE LAUNDROMAT, HE'S REQUIRED TO HAVE 17 PARKING SPACES, IS THAT CORRECT? I BELIEVE SO. LEMME DO THE CALCULATIONS ON, ON THE, WHAT HE IS TRYING TO DO. SO THE LAUNDROMAT ONLY REQUIRES ONE SPACE FOR EVERY 15 SQUARE FEET. I WOULD THINK THAT A LAUNDROMAT WOULD, WOULD REQUIRE MORE, BUT UNDERSTAND USING A STANDARD NUMBER. WELL, ACCORDING TO THE CALCULATIONS HERE, I'M LOOKING AT, AT, AT THEIR TABLE. SO THE LAUNDROMAT IS 1500 SQUARE FEET, IT'S 301 PER 300. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE GONNA NEED FIVE SPACES. MR. ROSE, ARE YOU GOING WITH A MAXIMUM OR ARE YOU, ARE YOU GOING WITH THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT? IT, IT IS A, IT IS A MINIMUM. OKAY. AND THEN THERE, THERE'S THE 12 FOR THE, UH, THE GAS STATION. OKAY. SO HE HAS FIVE PLUS 12 TO 17. THAT MAKES SENSE. SO IN ORDER TO AVOID GETTING SO CLOSE TO THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO EITHER MAKE A SMALLER STRUCTURE OR, UH, SHIFT THE STRUCTURE ON, ON THE LAND ORIAN, MR. IAN? YES. UH, I, A COUPLE COMMENTS, UH, TO STAFF AND THEN ONE TO THE APPLICANT. SO FIRST FOR STAFF, UH, THE FIVE FOOT BUFFER THAT'S ON THE EAST SIDE, WHICH WOULD BE THE REAR OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING. NOW WHEN THEY DO A BUFFER, A LANDSCAPE BUFFER REDUCTION STAFF, HOW DO THEY ADJUST THE PLANTING? BECAUSE IF, IF, IF THIS IS APPROVED, ARE THEY GONNA HAVE TO PLANT SIZABLE TREES? AND THAT FIVE FOOT BETWEEN THIS BUILDING AND THE HOME, UH, THAT'S A, THAT'S A CONCERN I'M CURIOUS ABOUT. AND THEN FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, YOU HAD COMMENTED THAT, UH, THE CITY HAD TAKEN OVER 10 FEET ALONG SOUTH CROSS, AND I'M CURIOUS, IS THAT GOING TO PUSH, THAT MEANS SOUTH CROSS IS BEING PUSHED TO, UM, COLLECTOR OR ARTERIAL CLASS, WHICH REQUIRES A 10 FOOT BICYCLE LANE? DO YOU EVEN HAVE ENOUGH ROOM AS SHOWN ON YOUR SITE PLAN FOR YOU TO FIT THE CONVENIENCE STORE ASPECT OF IT? ASSUMING ALL THAT'S HAPPENING WITH BUFFERING AND, AND SO FORTH? UH, THE CITY ALREADY TOOK THE LONG TIME AGO. SO THIS, WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SITE PLAN IS THE ACTUAL, UM, PROPOSAL. WELL, I CAN SEE ALONG SOUTH CROSS AT THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY TOOK A LARGE CHUNK OF LAND. I, I CAN SEE THE PREVIOUS AND THE, AND THE CURRENT, [00:35:01] BUT I'M JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT AS YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, IF YOU ACCOUNTED FOR OTHER CONSTRUCTION ITEMS AND PERHAPS, UH, UTILITY ISSUES. IS THIS, IS THIS SITE PLAN AND HOW YOU HAVE YOUR BUILDING LOCATED, IS IT STILL PLAUSIBLE? IS WHAT I'M WONDERING AS WE, AS WE DECIDE WHAT YOUR HARDSHIP IS. I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF HE IS UNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTIONS ALL. I GUESS WHAT I'M, I'M GETTING AT IS, AS YOU, IF THIS WERE APPROVED TODAY, DO YOU FEE, DOES, DO YOU, AND MAYBE CHAT STAFF CAN CHIME IN AS IT'S SHOWN ON THE SIDE PLAN. IS THIS SOMETHING THAT IT COULD ACTUALLY BE BUILT AND, AND GET PERMITTED? WE HAVE, UH, ALL THE UTILITY PLAN ARE EXISTING. UH, ALL UTILITIES ARE EXISTING. OKAY. WELL, OKAY, I'LL THEN, I'LL, I'LL ACCEPT THAT. BUT WITH STAFF, WITH REGARD TO THE PLANTING, WHEN, IF, IF THIS WERE APPROVED DOWN TO FIVE FEET, WOULD THERE BE PLANTING OF, OF TREES BETWEEN THE BUILDING, THE REAR OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING AND THE RESIDENTIAL HOME DURING PERMITTING? UH, OUR LANDSCAPE TEAM WILL HAVE TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT ON THE VARIANCE THAT WAS, WAS ACCEPTED AND WHAT'S BASICALLY, WHAT'S, WHAT CAN BE PLANTED. ULTIMATELY THE IDEA IS THEY'RE NOT GONNA WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO PLANT ANYTHING THAT WOULD BASICALLY HAVE THE POTENTIAL OF DYING OUT BECAUSE OF HIS PROXIMITY. UM, BUT WE WOULD DEFINITELY WORK WITH THE APPLICANT DURING THAT PROCESS, UM, WITH THAT VARIANCE IF, IF RECEIVED. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? NO ZUNA, MR. OZUNA? SO I HEARD, UH, REGARDING ITEMS NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE, UH, THE APPLICANT, I HEARD HIM SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, HE COULD STILL, UH, MOVE THE BUILDING TWO FEET FROM, UH, FROM WHAT HE'S PROPOSING AND STILL HAVE A VIABLE PROJECT. SO WHAT I WOULD ASK THE APPLICANT IF, IF NUMBER FOUR WOULD BE AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE TO ALLOW THE BUFFER YARD TO BE SEVEN FEET ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE, AND NUMBER FIVE, A THREE FOOT VARIANCE, UH, TO ALLOW THE BUILDING TO BE BUILT SEVEN FEET FROM THE EAST PROPERTY LINE, IF THOSE WOULD BE WORKABLE SOLUTIONS FOR HIM IN CITING THE BUILDING WITHIN THE, UM, AND RESPECTING SOME OF THESE, UH, VARIANCES ON THE, UM, SETBACKS, IF THAT WORKS. UH, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY IS THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GIVE A LITTLE MORE AIR SPACE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD VERSUS WHAT HE CAN POSSIBLY CORRECT. SEE THAT PARTICULAR LOT? CORRECT. IS THE APPLICANT AWARE OF WHAT, WHAT WAS DISCUSSED HERE? YES, IT WOULD WORK THE 10 FOOT ON THE, ON THE NORTH IF WE HAVE IT EIGHT FOOT AND THEN ADD TWO FOOT, UH, TWO FEET ON THE, UH, EAST SIDE. RIGHT. SO WE HAVE SEVEN FEET ON THE EAST SIDE AND THEN EIGHT FOOT ON THE NORTH SIDE. I I DIDN'T CATCH THE EIGHT FOOT. WHERE'D YOU SAY THE EIGHTH? OH, NO, I, I THINK WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT IS THAT YOU'RE STR HE'S, HE'S, HE'S BRAINSTORMING HERE A POSSIBILITY THAT THE BOARD ALLOWING A VARIANCE OF ONLY, UM, UH, THREE FEET FOR THE STRUCTURE, WHICH WOULD MEAN THAT THE STRUCTURE WOULD HAVE TO BE SEVEN FEET. IS THAT CORRECT, MR. ARNO? RIGHT. SO NUMBER FIVE WOULD BE A THREE FOOT VARIANCE. SO THE STRUCTURE WILL BE BUILT SEVEN FEET FROM THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. I BELIEVE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE IS GIVE THE NEIGHBOR MORE LIGHT SPACE, BECAUSE I'M ASSUMING YOUR STRUCTURE'S GONNA BE AT LEAST 18 TO 20 FEET TALL FOR, FOR AIR CONDITIONING AND WALLS AND ALL THAT. UH, IT'S GONNA CUT OUT A LOT OF LIGHT GOING TO THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD, ESPECIALLY IN THE AFTERNOON. BASICALLY HAVE SHADE ON ITS HOME AT THE AFTERNOON. OH, ALL RIGHT. I BELIEVE WE'VE PRETTY MUCH DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITIES HERE. WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE? YEAH, FISHER, MS. FISHER, GO AHEAD. YES, I'M, I'M ASSUMING THIS, UH, PROTOTYPE OR THE SITE, THE SITE PLAN IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH ANY CORPORATE ENTITY THAT WOULD HAVE ANY TYPE OF PROTOTYPES OR PROTOCOL AND DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU COULD NOT REDESIGN THE PROPERTY TO GO AHEAD AND BE MORE CONFORMING WITH THE CURRENT SITE AND PLANS. [00:40:01] UM, YOU KNOW, HE SHOULDN'T BE THINKING ABOUT THINGS LIKE THAT. HOWEVER, YOU MAKE A VERY GOOD POINT. I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS BEEN DISCUSSED THAT HE'S MADE, HE HAS REQUIREMENTS FROM A VENDOR OF ANY SORT FOR THE SIZE STRUCTURE. MM-HMM. FOR INSTANCE, LIKE IF YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE STRUCTURE BEING OWNED BY, UH, SEVERAL K OR SEVEN 11 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. EXACTLY. OR IF THERE'S TYPICALLY THEY HAVE SOME TYPE OF TRAFFIC PATTERNS OR SIGN REQUIREMENTS OR TRAFFIC FLOW THAT MIGHT HAVE A PRIORITY, BUT I DON'T SEE, IT'S NOT, IT, IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO, BUT I'M JUST WANTED TO COVER THAT CONCERN. OKAY. THAT'S, UH, THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION. I DON'T, I, IF THE A WOULD APPLICANT LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT QUESTION, MR. HBAR, ARE YOU STILL THERE AT THE PERMITING? WE'RE GONNA GO COVER EVERYTHING. WE ARE GONNA COORDINATE WITH TRAFFIC WITH ALL, UH, APPROPRIATE, UM, DEPARTMENT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT IS ANY MORE QUESTIONS ON THE BOARD? YEAH, DELMER, MR. DELMER, GO AHEAD. UM, SO IS HE GONNA BE A FRANCHISEE? IN OTHER WORDS, IS HE, UH, HAVING THAT AS A FRANCHISE OF ANY COMPANY? YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU SAID, A CIRCLE K OR ANYTHING? 'CAUSE THEY WILL HAVE REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY DEMAND EACH FRANCHISEE, UH, DO WHEN IT COMES TO CONSTRUCTION OR ANY OF THOSE OTHER THINGS, I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHAT ARLENE WAS GOING WELL, THEY ESSENTIALLY, THAT'S CORRECT, BUT I, IN MOST CASES WHEN, WHEN A MAJOR FRANCHISE COMPANY LIKE CIRCLE K OR SEVERAL 11, THEY ALSO HAVE LOTS OF SIZE REQUIREMENT, I DON'T THINK, BUT HE STATED THAT THIS IS HIS BUSINESS. IT'S TYPICALLY A BRANDING AGREEMENT THEY HAVE WITH THE GASOLINE SUPPLIERS AND NOT, NOT A FRANCHISE WHERE THEY'D HAVE TO BUILD LIKE TO A MCDONALD'S SPECIFICATIONS OR SOMETHING. UH, IT'S PROBABLY JUST A BRANDING TYPE AGREEMENT AND SUPPLY AGREEMENT WITH, UH, THE GASOLINE PROVIDER. THAT'S TRUE. THE PROVIDER DOESN'T MAKE REQUIREMENTS. NO. SO THAT'S MY EXPERIENCE AND WE FINANCED A NUMBER OF THESE SMALLER, UH, CONVENIENCE STORE OPERATIONS. YEAH, THE SUPPLIER WILL HAVE EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE PUMPS AND THEN IF THEY HAD A MCDONALD'S OR SOMETHING IN THE BUILDING, THAT WOULD BE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FRANCHISE AND DIFFERENT, UH, SETUP. YEP. EVERYBODY'S TALKING ABOUT, ABOUT HAVING A, UH, LAUNDROMAT, WHICH CAN BE PRETTY SMALL, JUST BASICALLY A NEIGHBORHOOD LAUNDROMAT MM-HMM. , BUT HE STILL HAS TO MEET ALL THE CITY REQUIREMENTS AND THAT'S WHERE HE THE RUB IN THIS CASE. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL? I'M GONNA CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC. I'M GONNA ENTERTAIN A MOTION AND I WOULD RECOMMEND MR. YOU DO THAT. RIGHTY THEN. REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 19 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 1 62, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT IS REQUEST FOR A NUMBER ONE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT TYPE A LANDSCAPE BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A BUFFER YARD TO BE FIVE FEET ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY. LINE NUMBER TWO, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A BUFFER YARD TO BE 10 FEET ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY. LINE NUMBER THREE, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A BUFFER YARD TO BE 10 FEET ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE NUMBER FOUR, WE'RE GONNA SAY AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A BUFFER YARD TO BE SEVEN FEET ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. AND NUMBER OF FIVE A THREE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 10 FOOT SIDE SETBACK ALLOW TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE SEVEN FEET FROM THE EAST PROPERTY LINE LOCATED AT 46 74 SOUTH PRESA, UM, APPLICANT BEING DAVID REBAR BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAD DETERMINED SHOWED THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THE REQUESTED BUFFER YARDS ON THE SOUTH, NORTH, AND WEST PROPERTY LINE ARE NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND DO NOT GIVE AND ARE NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACTED ANY [00:45:01] SURROUNDING PROPERTIES OR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. AS SO NOW THE PROPERTY HAS NO BUFFER YARDS ESTABLISHED. SO ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL BE BENEFICIAL AND A NET IMPROVEMENT TO THE SURROUNDING DISTRICT. NUMBER TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT WOULD NOT ALLOW THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY AS PROPOSED DUE TO THE COMPACT CONFIGURATION OF THE LOT IN ESTABLISHING NEW BUFFY YARDS AS REQUIRED. NUMBER THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. IN THIS CASE, THE PROPOSED BUFFET YARD IN ESEP AND ESEP BACK REDUCTIONS WILL ADHERE TO THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE BY IMPLEMENTING THE REQUESTED BUFFERY YARDS OF THE NORTH, SOUTH, AND WEST PROPERTY LINES WHERE NONE EXIST CURRENTLY IN ORDER TO REHABILITATE THE PROPERTY. NUMBER FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED. THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED TO THE ZONING DISTRICT. NUMBER FIVE, SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UH, THE INTRODUCTION OF THE REQUESTED BUTY YARDS WOULD ONLY ENHANCE THE OVERALL APPEARANCE OF THE PROPERTY STREET, UH, SCAPE AND DISTRICT NUMBER SIX APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE 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 AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, UH, APPLY TO THE OWNER FOR ITS VARIANCE OF SAW IS DUE TO THE ABSENCE OF BUFFY YARD'S ON AND ALREADY DEVELOPED PROPERTY AND OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. MM-HMM. LOSE OUR CHAIR. SO THIS IS ANDREW. I AM, UH, OBVIOUSLY SUPPORTING THE MOTION WITH THE VARIANCES, UH, AND MODIFICATIONS TO THE VARIANCES AS WE PROPOSED. I THINK THE REDEVELOPMENT IS, IS A GOOD FOR THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD. IT PROVIDES A SERVICE, UH, IN TERMS OF THE, UH, THE RETAIL, THE GASOLINE, AND ALSO THE LAUNDRY THAT THE APPLICANT WILL BE PROVIDING. I THINK THE, UH, THE TWO FOOT, UH, A SHIFT OF THE BUILDING, UH, IS A GOOD COMPROMISE AND IS A, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY, UH, WITHIN THE SPIRIT TO GET THE PROJECT, UH, MOVING FORWARD. UH, CHAIR, UM, YOU'RE MUTED. HOLD ON A SECOND. WE'LL UNMUTE YOU. GO AHEAD, SIR. ALRIGHT. UH, MR. THIEL, DID I GIVE YOU CREDIT FOR SECOND? YOU LIKE TO PUT YOUR INPUT? UH, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MY COLLEAGUE ON, ON ALL THINGS HE STATED, AND I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS READ. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. UH, ANY OTHER INPUT FROM THE BOARD? YEAH, LOVE MR. LOVE. YEAH. YOU'VE GOT A BUILDING SETBACK NEXT TO A NEIGHBOR THAT DOESN'T, THAT DOESN'T WANT IT. SO YOU'VE GOT A COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT'S GONNA BE, I MEAN, I'M, YOU KNOW, LESS THAN THE REQUIRED AND YOU DON'T HAVE SUPPORT OF YOUR NEIGHBOR. UM, I, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY THEM BEING RESIDENTIAL, THAT'S A HARD ONE. DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, BUT THE SET BUILDING SETBACK IS, IS DEFINITELY, UH, THAT CAN'T BE GOOD FOR THE NEIGHBOR. THANK YOU. MATH. ANYONE ELSE? MANNA MR. MANNA? I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE, MR. LOVE THERE. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, SAID THAT THEY DIDN'T CARE FOR THE 10 FOOT STEP BACK OR, OR DIDN'T CARE FOR IT CHANGING FROM THE 10 FOOT SETBACK. AND, AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THEM. UM, AND, YOU KNOW, BUFFERS EXIST FOR THAT VERY REASON TO SEPARATE BUILDINGS, UH, OR, OR, UM, COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES FROM RESIDENTIALS. AND SO, UM, I PROBABLY WOULD'VE ACCEPTED IT, UM, PER OF THE RECOMMENDATION FROM, UM, THE CITY, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT I COULD GO WITH THE VARIANCE THAT'S CURRENTLY READ VERY WELL. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE HAVE SOME INPUT? DELMAR. ALRIGHT. MR. ER? YEAH. DELMER? YES, GO AHEAD. UM, I, I'M KIND OF HERE BETWEEN BOTH. I AGREE THAT, THAT THAT, UH, NEW, NEW, UH, COMMERCIAL STUFF IS GONNA BE GOOD FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IF ANYBODY'S FAMILIAR WITH A LAUNDROMAT, UH, LIKE ONE OF THOSE, SOMETIMES WHEN THEY DRAIN THINGS, THEY TEND TO GO INTO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTIES AND I'D BE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT WITH THE NEIGHBOR. AND I WOULD HAVE TO AGREE WITH MR. LOVE THAT I, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT'S ENOUGH ROOM, UM, FOR THAT NEIGHBOR TO BE HAPPY FOR THE REST OF HIS EXISTENCE BEHIND THAT BUILDING. BUT I ALSO AGREE THAT, THAT, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'D BE GOOD IF THEY CAN COME UP WITH SOME KIND OF A SOLUTION TO MAKE IT WORK, YOU KNOW, WHERE EVERYBODY'S HAPPY. UM, BUT [00:50:01] AS IT STANDS, I WON'T SUPPORT IT. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? ORIAN ORIAN, UH, UH, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT, UH, WOULD COMMISSIONER UH, UH, ZUNA BE WILLING TO FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THIS AND JUST STRIKE ITEM FOUR AND FIVE FROM THE MOTION? MAKE IT A SEPARATE MOTION? NO, JUST VOTE ON ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE. IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE THERE'S ALREADY THREE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T IN SUPPORT OF ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE. THAT'S A GOOD POINT. ACTUALLY WHAT WE NEEDED WAS ONE AGAINST IT FOR PRETTY MUCH ISSUE. LEMME GO AHEAD AND MY STATEMENT HERE AND LET, WE'LL SEE. FISHER, EXCUSE ME, INTERRUPTED THERE. JUST FISHER HAD I JUST HAD A QUESTION. YES. UM, WAS THE DRAINAGE FROM THE LAUNDRY ADDRESSED PREVIOUSLY OR DID WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THAT. UM, THERE IS NO, THERE IS NO LEGAL DRAINAGE FROM A, FROM A LAUNDROMAT AND IT MUST GO INTO THE SEWER SYSTEM. IT CANNOT GO. OKAY. UH, IT, AND PERHAPS THERE IS AN OVERFLOW, BUT LEGALLY ANY WATER THAT GOES THROUGH, UH, ANY ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTY HAS TO BE GOING THROUGH SEWER SYSTEM. IT CANNOT GO ONTO THE PROPERTY, UH, TO THAT. NOW, THE, THE RUNOFF FROM THE RAIN RUNOFF, THAT'S A STORY, BUT AS FOR THE PRODUCT COMING FROM A, UH, COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE BY CODE, IT ALL HAS TO GO THROUGH THE SYSTEM. OKAY. THANK YOU. THEY WOULDN'T BE DISPOSING ANY, ANY, UH, LAUNDROMAT WATER IN IN THAT PROPERTY. THEY, THEY SHOULDN'T BE. AND OKAY, GOOD. UH, DELMER? YES, SIR. I, I I SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE SU UM, UH, UH, COMPLETE ABOUT THAT AS FAR AS, I DIDN'T MEAN DRAINAGE FROM THE ACTUAL MACHINES, OF COURSE THOSE HAVE TO GO IN THE, IN THE, UH, SEWER, UH, SYSTEM. BUT WE'VE GOT A, A LAUNDROMAT CLOSE OVER WHERE I LIVE AND IT ALWAYS SEEMS TO BE WET BEHIND THE BUILDING, WHETHER THAT HAPPENS TO BE THE NIGHT SHIFT COMING IN AND CLEANING OUT AND, AND, AND ALL SORTS OF STUFF. I JUST, I SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE, UH, UH, EXACT ON THAT. SORRY. WELL, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S QUITE ALL RIGHT. BUT I, I WANNA, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO ADD THEIR INPUT IN? BECAUSE I'M GONNA GIVE YOU SOME FACTS THAT WE NEED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ON BEFORE WE, DO WE EVEN ENTERTAIN REMOVAL OF ANY PORTION OF THIS OR ALTERING ANYTHING? THIS IS, UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO SAY ANYTHING? ALL RIGHT. ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS, IS AN UNUSUAL CASE. WE HAVE A, A SMALL PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT SOMEONE WANTS TO OPERATE A BUSINESS, ACTUALLY TWO BUSINESSES ALL, AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO DO WHAT HE'S LIMITED BY THE TYPE OF PROPERTY, THE SIZE OF PROPERTY. AND HE IS ALSO LIMITED BY REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE OF COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT BY PARKING, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. THAT MEAN THAT EITHER CAN, HE CAN DO WHAT HE WANTS OR HE CAN'T DO WHAT HE WANTS AND OR, OR AT LEAST ACCOMPLISH SOMETHING. THE PURPOSE OF HIS REQUEST TO MOVE THE BUILDING BACK FROM MY UNDERSTANDING WAS BASICALLY TO PROVIDE FOR PARKING SPACES THE WAY, IF HE WANTS TO BE ABLE TO SELL GASOLINE, WHICH HE HAS BEEN DOING SUCCESSFULLY FOR A LONG TIME, HE IS BEEN ABLE, HE'S BEEN DENYING HIMSELF PARKING IN FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE IN ORDER TO ALLOW, UH, ACCESS TO THE PUMPS. AND, UM, HE IS REQUIRED BY CODE TO HAVE 17 PARKING SPACES. SO IF YOU LOOKED AT THE DRAFT THERE, HE WAS BARELY ABLE TO SQUEEZE IN 17 PARKING SPACES. THE ISSUE HERE IS THAT, UM, HE EITHER HE IS GOING TO HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE OR, OR WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT ALLOWS AN ESSENTIAL BUSINESS TO THAT AREA. THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT IN MOST OF THESE LOWER INCOME AREAS THAT THEY NEED LAUNDROMATS AND THEY NEED GROCERIES AND THEY NEED MASKS. AND PRESS IS ONE OF THOSE UNIQUE STREETS WHERE IT COMES IN AREAS IT'S NOT, THEY'RE NOT ONE ACROSS FROM THE OTHER. IT'S LIKE THEY ARE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY WHERE YOU DRIVE DOWN, UH, UH, JONES FALLS BURGER AND YOU SEE TWO OR THREE GAS STATIONS ACROSS FROM EACH OTHER. IT'S, IT'S NOT THE SAME DOWN THERE. SO WHAT HE TRIED TO DO IS HE TRIED TO MAKE HIMSELF AN ADEQUATE LOCATION FOR HANDLING GROCERIES AND HE TRIED TO HAVE LAUNDROMAT, HE'S TRYING TO MAKE PROFIT ON THIS PARTICULAR AREA. IF WE WANT TO REMOVE ITEMS FIVE AND SIX, WE CAN DO THAT. IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE NUMBER AND TRY TO PUSH IT BACK, UH, YOU ARE LIMITING HIS ABILITY TO MAKE PARKING [00:55:01] SPACES. SO THIS IS THE QUESTION THAT IT'S, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO DEAL WITH. IF WE WANT TO GIVE THAT 10 FOOT SPACE, UH, THAT IS THE SIDE SETBACK, WE'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH ISSUE NUMBER FIVE. UH, UH, EXCUSE ME, NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER. SO EITHER WE, IF, IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE BUILDING SETBACK, IT'S NUMBER FIVE THAT WOULD BE DELETED. BUT NUMBER FOUR STILL MUST BE ADDRESSED BECAUSE AS I STATED DURING THE, UH, QUESTIONING SESSION THAT THE BUILDING SETBACK WAS ACTUALLY LESS THAN THE BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENT. SO FOUR HAS TO STAY IF YOU ARE PLANNING ON STAYING WITH A 10 FOOT REQUIREMENT. SO IF ANYONE'S GOT AN AMENDMENT, UH, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OR A, UH, A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE, ORIAN ORIAN, NOW'S THE TIME TO VOTE. UH, TO VOCALIZE ORIAN HISTORIAN AND I, I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE AN, UH, AN AMENDMENT TO REDUCE THE VARIANCE IN ITEM NUMBER FOUR DOWN TO A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE SO THAT THERE'S A 10 FOOT TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER. UH, AND THEN STRIKE ITEM NUMBER FIVE ALTOGETHER. ALRIGHT, NOW THAT, ARE YOU CONSIDERING THIS AS A FRIENDLY, I MEAN, WE DIDN'T GET ANY OFFER. SURE, THAT'S FINE. OKAY. THIS IS YOUR FRIENDLY AMENDMENT YOU'RE OFFERING TO MR. UNA? YES. ALRIGHT, THAT, DO WE HAVE TO, UH, DO WE HAVE, DOES MR, IF MR. OZUNA ACCEPTS THIS, DO WE HAVE TO GET AN ACCEPT MR SECOND AND TAKE A VOTE? UH, NO. THAT'S ONLY IF IT'S NOT ACCEPTED. BUT IF MR. TEO AND MR. OZUNA ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, THAT IS THE NEW MAIN MOTION ON THE FLOOR. OKAY. NOW LOVE. YES SIR. UH, WHEN YOU DO THAT AMENDMENT, DONALD, UM, ARE YOU GONNA INCLUDE A FENCE, AT LEAST A PRIVACY FENCE? WE CAN'T, THERE ARE NO PETITIONS THAT ARE ALLOWED TO VARIANCES. THEY'LL JUST HAVE TO MEET CODE AND . THE CODE WOULD REQUIRE, YEAH, CODE REQUIRE RESIDENTIAL IS REQUIRED. RIGHT? WE, WE DON'T, WE, WE DON'T HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE. THAT'S, BUT I, IT IS AN INTERESTING POINT AND THEY'LL PROBABLY BE DEALT WITH GETTING BACK TO MR. OZUNA AND MR. YES, I, I CONCUR WITH THE FRED BEN AS PROPOSED ALL, AND I BELIEVE I GAVE CREDIT TO MR. THIEL FOR THE SECOND. YES, I'M IN AGREEMENT. ALRIGHT, SO NOW THE NEW, SO THE ORIGINAL MOTION HAS BEEN ALTERED TO INCLUDE ALL ITEMS NUMBER, UH, ONE THROUGH FOUR WITH FOUR BEING CHANGED TO A UH, FIVE FOOT REDUCTION BUMPER YARD. UH, BUT NUMBER FIVE ISSUE, EXCUSE ME, THAT'S NUMBER FOUR, I BELIEVE NUMBER FIVE. AND THEN NUMBER FIVE STAY AS AS PROPOSED. UH, A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED SO THERE'S NO CHANGE. SO AT FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 10 FOOT SIDE SET BACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE FIVE FEET FROM THE EAST PROPERTY LINE, NO, NO, NO. NUMBER, NUMBER FIVE WOULD BE DELETED ALTOGETHER. OH, I'M SORRY. IF WE DELETE NUMBER FIVE, THE STRUCTURE WILL HAVE YES. 10 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY, CORRECT? CORRECT, CORRECT. THAT IT'S SO ACCEPTED. YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO THIS IS WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON. ALRIGHT. WE'RE GONNA BE VOTING ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE REQUEST ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE, ITEM FOUR WITH, WITH A REDUCTION FROM 10 FOOT VARIANCE TO A FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT BUFFER YARD, WHICH ALLOWS NUMBER FIVE TO BE DELETED, WHICH IS A 10 FOOT SIDE SETBACK, UH, OR BACK REAR SETBACK, WHICHEVER IT IS SIDE FOR THE BUILDING FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE VOTING ON AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME. UM, SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CALL FOR A VOTE. MR. UH, STAFF, CAN YOU GO AHEAD AND CALL THE VOTE ALL? LET'S SEE. MR. MENCHACA, DOES YOUR AUDIO WORK? OH NO. WE'LL HAVE TO HEAR YOU AND SEE YOU. OKAY. UH, MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONFER. OKAY. MR. THIEL TEAL. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANA, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ORIEN. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. MR. LOVE I CONCUR. MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. DELMER. I CONCUR. MS. TREVINO? YES, I CONCUR. AND CHAIR MARTINEZ. I CONCUR WITH THE FINES OF FACT. UH, THE, THE MOTION HAS BEEN APPROVED. UM, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE TO GET WITH STAFF TO RECTIFY THE DESIGN AND OTHER ASPECTS. AND GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT. I HOPE THAT [01:00:01] YOU CAN MAKE SOMETHING THAT IS PROFITABLE FOR YOU. AND WE'RE OFF ON THE NEXT CASE [3. 20-4251 BOA-20-10300060: A request by Sarah Manzke for a 2’ special exception to allow a fence to be 8' tall along the east side property line, located at 2160 West Summit Avenue. Staff recommends Approval. (Council District 7) (Azadeh Sagheb, Planner (210) 207-5407, Azadeh.Sagheb@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)] NUMBER OH SIX OH. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE IS CASE C A 21 0 3 0 6. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2160 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE. THE APPLICANT IS SARAH MAN MANSKY. SHE IS REQUESTING, UM, A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE EIGHT FEET TALL ALONG THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY IS R SIX H H O D. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING AN ADDITIONAL TWO FOOT TWO FEET TO BE ADDED TO THE EXISTING FENCE TO INCREASE PRIVACY. THE AREA IS PREDOMINANTLY SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. IT'S LOCATED WITHIN THE MONTICELLO PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY OBTAINED A CERTIFICATE OF APPRO APPROPRIATENESS FROM THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. THE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND WE'RE GONNA SCROLL THROUGH THE SURROUNDING AREA. IS THAT WHAT, EXCUSE ME? WHERE IS THIS FENCE GONNA BE? ON THIS SIDE OR THE OTHER SIDE? IT'S GONNA BE RIGHT HERE. OKAY, SO THIS PRIVACY, IT'S THE WOODEN FENCE ON THE SIDE? YES. OKAY. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF D O A 21 0 3 0 0 6 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS. ONE. THE FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD DOES NOT EXTEND PAST THE FRONT FACADE OF THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE. AND TWO, THE MATERIAL AND LOOK OF THE EXISTING FENCE IS NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH A SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. STAFF MAIL 21 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. FOUR RESPONDED IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST. ONE WAS AN OPPOSITION AND THE WOODLAWN LAKE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION IS AN OPPOSITION. AND NOW WE WILL, UH, PASS IT OVER TO SARAH MANSKY, THE APPLICANT. ALRIGHT. HELLO. GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, MY NAME IS SARAH MANSKY AND I DO LIVE AT 2160 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE 7 8 2 0 1. UM, AS STAFF MENTIONED, WE ARE, UH, REQUESTING THIS ADDITIONAL TWO FOOT OF TWO FEET OF HEIGHT ON THE BACKYARD EASTERN PROPERTY LINE. EXISTING PRIVACY FENCE. UH, BOTH OUR HOME AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBOR'S HOME TO THE EAST ARE ABOVE GRADE CONSIDERABLY. SO DUE TO THIS, WE NEED SOME ADDITIONAL HEIGHT TO THE PRIVACY FUNDS TO ACTUALLY ACHIEVE THE DESIRED PRIVACY. UM, AS MENTIONED ALSO, WE ALREADY HAD THIS APPROVED BY THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND HAVE THE C O A THAT WE GAVE ALONG WITH OUR INITIAL APPLICATION. AND UM, THERE ALSO IS A, A SEPARATE P D F THAT WE SENT AS SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL THAT INCLUDES SOME PHOTOGRAPHS OF PRECEDENT IMAGERY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, WITHIN ABOUT A ONE BLOCK RADIUS, UH, WE FOUND MANY EXAMPLES, UH, OF FEET OF, OF FENCES EXCEEDING SIX FEET, UH, IN MANY CASES ALL THE WAY UP TO EIGHT. AND WE HAVE INCLUDED JUST A FEW PHOTOGRAPHS FOR THAT, UH, PRECEDENT. WE ARE HAPPY TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SHOULD YOU NEED. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC INPUT ON THE, ON THIS CASE? YES, WE DO. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND START WITH A, A VOICEMAIL. WE HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL AND THEN A FEW TO READ IN. VERY GOOD. I HOPE WE HAVEN'T LOST AUDIO. NO. [01:05:04] OKAY. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THE RESPONSES WHILE WE LOOK AT THE VOICEMAIL. THE FIRST ONE IS, UH, FROM, FROM CAROL LEE AND WILLIAM ELLISON AT 2171 WEST SUMMIT. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE COMMENTS REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 21 0 3 0 0 6. WE ARE KNOWLEDGEABLE OF THE OWNER'S DESIRE TO HAVE A TALLER PRIVACY FENCE AND WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS OUR FULL UNSERVED SUPPORT. MARK AND SARAH MANKY ARE EXCELLENT NEIGHBORS WHO TAKE GOOD CARE OF THEIR HOUSE WITH THEIR FAMILY AND OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO FOLLOW UP IF YOU'D LIKE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. THE SECOND ONE IS, UM, FROM ALEXANDER DEVORA AT 2176 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE IN REGARDS TO THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FENCE TO BE EIGHT FEET TALL ON THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE AT 2160 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE. I'M A RETIRED S A P D OFFICER AND FAMILIAR WITH THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND REASON FOR THE RE REQUEST BY THE HOMEOWNER. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME DISTURBANCES WITH, WITH THEIR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR AND I HAVE WITNESSED A COUPLE OF THE SITUATIONS. THESE CIVIL DISTURBANCES HAVE NOT ELEVATED TO THE LEVEL OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, BUT I CAN SEE THEY'VE BEEN EMOTIONALLY AND FINANCIALLY BURDENSOME, BURDENSOME TO THE FAMILY AT 2160 WEST SUMMIT FINANCIALLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE MADE, CREATED A BEAUTIFUL NATURAL LOOKING LANDSCAPE WITH TREES, ROCKS, MOTHER EDUCATION THAT PROVIDES PRIVACY. THE TALLER FENCE THEY'RE REQUESTING WILL ALSO BE A FINANCIAL INVESTMENT. THE FAMILY HAS A BABY AND THIS REQUEST FOR A TALLER FENCE TO PROVIDE SOME PRIVACY AND POSSIBLY SAFETY IS NOT UNREASONABLE. THEREFORE, I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS EXCEPTION, SARAH WEEKLY AT 2170 WEST SUMMIT TO THE SAN ANTONIO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. I'M WRITING THIS LETTER IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST BY 2160 WEST SUMMIT TO ALLOW A FENCE TO BE EIGHT FEET TALL ALONG THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE. I HAVE KNOWN THE NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE OF THAT FENCE FOR APPROXIMATELY THREE YEARS. DURING THAT TIME, THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL INTERACTIONS WITNESSED BY MYSELF AND OTHER NEIGHBORS ON THE BLOCK THAT SUGGESTED SIGNIFICANT ANIMOSITY HAS DEVELOPED. I PERSONALLY WITNESSED THE RESIDENCE AT 2154 VERBALLY HARASSED SCREAM AT THE 2160 RESIDENTS ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS OVER THE LAST YEAR. THIS HOSTILITY HAS BEEN DISTURBING FOR MYSELF AND MY IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS WITNESSED. AS SEVERAL OF US HAVE SMALL CHILDREN, IT'S MY BELIEF THAT THE EXTENSION OF THE FENCE IS LIKELY TO IMPROVE HARMONY AND OVERALL RELATIONS WITHIN THE BLOCK. I'M GLAD TO DISCUSS OUR COMMENT ON THIS FURTHER IF ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK WOULD BE HELPFUL. THE NEXT ONE IS FROM WILLIAM AND BARBARA CANELLA. THE OWNER OF 2154 WEST SUMMIT IS IN OPPOSITION. WE UNDERSTAND THE CONCESSION OF ALLOWING THIS PROPERTY OWNER TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT FOR HER FENCE OF HER FENCE. HOWEVER, WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE NOTE THAT TO PRESERVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT THIS CANNOT BE A BLANKET DECISION IN EVERY SITUATION. WE NEED TO BE VERY CONSCIOUS OF OUR DECISION OF ALLOWING PROPERTY OWNERS TO POSSIBLY NEGATE THE PRESERVATION OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THE HIGHER FENCE MAY COMPROMISE THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF OUR HOME AT 2154 WEST SUMMIT. THE HIGHER FENCE WILL BLOCK THE VIEW OF THE STREET FROM THE WEST SIDE OF OUR HOUSE. PLEASE NOTE THE ATTACHED IMAGE SHOWING THE VIEW FROM THE WEST SIDE OF OUR HOUSE. SO THIS, THIS RESPONSE, UM, THIS PROPERTY OWNER HAS PICTURES AND A VIDEO TO SHOW. SO WE'RE GONNA DO THAT NOW. THAT WAS THE VIDEO. OKAY. THIS IS A VIDEO OF THE NEIGHBOR THAT WAS, IS IN DISPUTE WITH THE APPLICANT? YES. THIS IS FROM THE NEIGHBOR AT 2154 WEST SUMMIT. VERY GOOD. AND THIS IS THE IMAGE THAT SHE SUBMITTED. WONDER. THAT'S INTERESTING. OKAY. THAT, THAT IS THE IMAGE. AND WE'RE GONNA GO BACK. WE HAVE ONE MORE TO READ IN. AND THIS IS FROM THE WOODLAWN LAKE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION. THEY OPPOSE [01:10:01] THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE PROPERTY AT 2160 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE. THE STANDARD FOR A SIDE FENCE BEHIND THE FRONT BUILDING FACADE IS SIX FEET IN HEIGHT. THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH CITY ZONING AND WITH HISTORIC DISTRICT APPLICATIONS. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THIS PROPERTY WARRANTS TREATMENT UNLIKE THAT OF ITS NEIGHBORS OR THAT FAILURE TO GRANT THE REQUEST WILL DEPRIVE THE OWNERS OF THE REASONABLE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY FOR CONSISTENCY IN APPLYING BUILDING STANDARDS, PREDICTABILITY AND LAND USE, RESPECT FOR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD AND FAIRNESS TO ALL AREA RESIDENTS. THE B L C A ASKS THAT THE REQUEST FOR AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE EXCEPTION BE DENIED. AND THAT IS IT FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. ALL RIGHT, CAN YOU EVER GET THE AUDIO READY ALL PULLED UP AND WE ARE GOING TO PLAY THAT NOW. MY NAME IS DE I LIVE AT SUMMIT CALLING IN REFERENCE TO I'M IN FAVOR. THEY, IT WOULD BE BETTER. SO, VERY GOOD. I THINK WE, OUR STATIC CONCLUDE PUBLIC PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW, BOARD, WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE STAFF, THE APPLICANT. WE CAN'T AN ASK QUESTIONS OF THE WITNESSES SINCE THEY'RE NOT PRESENT. SO DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? SO MANNA, MR. MANNA. SO, UM, ON THE TWO PRIOR ON, YOU WERE GIVEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY OR THE PUBLIC, THE PUBLIC, UH, STATEMENTS THERE ON THE ONE PRIOR TO THE ONE WITH THE PHOTOS? UM, IT, IT WAS, UH, MAYBE THE POLICE OFFICER ONE. IT WAS SPEAKING ON AN ADDRESS AND WAS, THEY WERE CALLING OUT ABOUT, THERE WAS A CHALLENGE WITH, UH, I GUESS WITH SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS. AND WAS IT THE ADDRESS OF 2154 THAT WAS INDICATED? IS THAT THE, IS THAT THE ADDRESS? YEAH, SO, UM, SO ONE BEFORE THIS ONE. SO, SO YOU READ IT WAS ONE THAT, RIGHT BEFORE THAT ONE, SO, UM, YEAH, IT SEEMED LIKE IT WOULD, YEAH, FOUR IS FROM SARAH WEEKLY AND, AND THEY WERE REFERRING TO 2154. OKAY. SO, SO, SO THEY'RE, SO THOSE TWO NEIGHBORS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE HAVING PROBLEMS AND SO 21 4 DOESN'T WANT THEM TO PUT IN THE FENCE, BUT, UM, THE, AND MAYBE THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT AND PART OF THE REASON FOR THE FENCE IS BECAUSE OF THE NEIGHBOR AT 2154. IS THAT WHAT I UNDERSTOOD? YES. OKAY. AND THEN THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT THEN. SO THERE WAS, UM, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE PE SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY, UM, WAS NOT, WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS, UM, AND YOU HAD A, A NEIGHBOR THAT WAS NOT IN FAVOR. SO DID YOU TALK WITH EITHER OF THOSE AND HAVE A POSITION, UH, WITH REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, WHY THEY WOULD FEEL THE WAY THAT THEY FEEL? YEAH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION. UM, IN REGARDS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, ACTUALLY I'M UNFAMILIAR, UM, WITH THEM AND WE, WE WERE NEVER CONTACTED THEM AND NOT CONTACTED BY THEM. SO WE HAVEN'T, UH, DISCUSSED ANY OF THIS WITH THEM AT ALL. ONLY THE HISTORIC DISTRICT REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THE OFFICIAL CHANNELS. UM, AS FAR AS YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE NEIGHBORS AT 2154, THE CANALS, UM, WE HAVE BEEN ADVISED, UH, TO NOT SPEAK TO THEM, UM, AND TO NOT HAVE COMMUNICATION GIVEN, GIVEN WHAT HAS HAPPENED AND TRY TO STAY AS, UH, NEUTRAL AND, AND FAR AWAY AS POSSIBLE FROM THEM. I UNDERSTAND. STAFF. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU REAL QUICK. IS THIS, UH, LETTER FROM THE HOME, THIS HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATE OR ASSOCIATION, LAKE ASSOCIATION, ARE THEY A REG, ARE THEY REGISTERED WITH THE CITY? YES, THEY ARE. OKAY. I NEED THEM. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF? NO. ONE, ONE ASK A QUESTION. OBVIOUSLY WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A, IS A HATFIELD MCCOY SITUATION. TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME AND GONNA ENTERTAIN A MOTION FROM, FROM THE BOARD. MS. DORIAN, YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION? UH, MAN, IT CAN DO IT. IT'S OKAY. OKAY, MR. MAN, WE'LL DO IT . SURE. SO REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A [01:15:01] 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 6 0, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A PRIVACY FENCE TO BE UP TO EIGHT FOOT TALL ALONG THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 2160 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING SARAH MCKENZIE. UH, BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY AS SUCH, THAT ALL LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY WE FIND THAT A, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER. THE U C STATES THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE HEIGHT MODIFICATION UP TO EIGHT FOOT OF THE ADDITIONAL OFFENSE HEIGHT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. IF GRANTED, THIS REQUEST WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE SPIRIT AND THE PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. B, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY SERVED IN THIS CASE. THESE CRITERIA ARE REPRESENTED BY MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHTS TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHILE STILL PROMOTING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY, AN EIGHT FOOT CALL CLOSED FENCE ALONG EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE WILL BE BUILT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY. THIS IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. C THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. THE FENCE WILL CREATE ENHANCED SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO ENDURE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THE MATERIAL AND STYLE OF OFFENSE IS SIMILAR TO OTHER FENCES AND IS NOT NOTICEABLE, UM, FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, THE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATION IN WHICH THE PROPERTY OR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE FENCING DOES NOT DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE FENCING IS IN LINE WITH OTHER PRE-EXISTING FENCING MATERIAL AND HEIGHT WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY. E THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT OR THE REGULATIONS HERE AND ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIAL DISTRICT, UH, SPECIFIC DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ZONING PERMITS, THE, UH, PERMITS, THE CURRENT USE, THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT WEAKEN THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. END A MOTION. ALRIGHT, GO OUT IN A SECOND. OKAY? SURE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. MR. ROMANA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO START THE DISCUSSION? UM, I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST. UM, SO I GENERALLY, YOU KNOW, RIDE VERY CLOSELY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, BUT, YOU KNOW, I KIND OF, WITH THE, UM, APPLICANT SHOWING EXISTING PICTURES OF MANY NEIGHBORS WITH FENCES VERY SIMILAR TO THAT, UM, AND THEN SEVERAL OF THE NEIGHBORS INDICATING THAT THEY WERE, UH, IN AGREEMENT WITH IT. UM, I I DON'T SEE THAT THIS IS ANY DIFFERENT THAN A LOT OF THE OTHER FENCES THERE, SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT AS READ. OKAY. UM, MS. FISHER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD FISHER? YES, I WILL ALSO BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS I DO AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. I FEEL LIKE THIS WILL BE OF BENEFIT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ALL OF ALL, AND IT IS SIMILAR AND CONFORMING TO OTHER FENCES WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO PUT ALMER? MR. DELMER? I WOULD HAVE TO AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES. UH, IT SEEMED LIKE THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE WAS CONSIDERABLY HIGHER AND IT LOOKED LIKE FROM, FROM THE PHOTO THAT THEY PRESENTED, UH, THAT YOU COULD LOOK PRETTY DARN NEAR, YOU KNOW, DOWN INTO THEIR YARD. SO I THINK IT'LL ACTUALLY HELP, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AMBIANCE AND, AND MAYBE NEIGHBORHOOD RELATIONS. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF IT. VERY GOOD. OKAY. UH, ANYONE ELSE? UH, OKAY, THE ONLY THING I FIND INTERESTING IS THAT NO ONE'S MENTIONED THE HISTORICAL REVIEW. THE, UH, THAT, UH, IF THEY SUPPORT THIS, THEN OBVIOUSLY THEY'VE LOOKED AT THIS FROM A LOT OF DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS AND GENERALLY I, I SUPPORT THEM. SO I, I TWO WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS PARTICULAR, UM, VOTE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS, ON CASE NUMBER OH SIX. ALRIGHT, LET'S TRY AGAIN, MR. MINKA. NOW I STILL DON'T HEAR YOU, SIR. MS. CRUZ? YES, I, I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANA CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS. MR. ORIAN? UH, YES, I CONCUR. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR. MR. LOVE I CONCUR. MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. DELMER? YES, I CONCUR. MS. TREVINO? [01:20:01] YES, I CONCUR. AND SHE MARTINEZ. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT THE MOTION IS APPROVED. UH, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT, BUT PLEASE, PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THERE ARE TREES INTERSECTING THAT PROPERTY LINE AND I WOULD BE VERY CAUTIOUS OF THAT NUMBER. [4. 20-4242 BOA-20-10300059: A request by Josefina R. Castillo for 1) a 6” variance from the 5’ side setback to allow a new residential home to be 4’6” away from the north and south property lines and 2) a 925 square foot variance from the minimum 4,000 square foot lot size to allow a lot size to be 3,075 square feet, located at 313 South San Bernardo. Staff recommends Approval. (Council District 5) (Dominic Silva, Senior Planner (210) 207-0120, Dominic.Silva@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)] WE ARE NEXT UP WITH CASE NUMBER OH FIVE NINE. UH, AFTER THIS STICKER CASE, I'M GONNA EXTRA CALL A BRIEF RECESS FOR RESTROOM BREAK. SO LET'S GO THROUGH THIS ONE QUICKLY. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS BO EIGHT 20, CASE BO A 21 0 3 0 0 0 5 9. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 3 1 3 SOUTH SAN BERNARDO. THE APPLICANT IS JOSE CASTILLO. SHE IS REQUESTING A SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW NEW RESIDENTIAL HOMES TO BE FOUR FEET AND SIX INCHES AWAY FROM THE NORTH AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINE AND TWO AND 975 SQUARE FOOT FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT. LOT SIZE TO ALLOW THE LOT SIZE TO BE 3075 SQUARE FEET. THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY IS R FOUR M O D TWO M R TWO A H O D. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING VARIANCES FROM BOTH THE SIDES SETBACKS, UM, AND THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN ORDER TO BUILD A NEW SHOTGUN STYLE MODERN HOME ON THE, ON THE LOT. THE APPLICANT IS WORKING WITH, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT. THE APPLICANT IS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY RESIDING ON THE PROPERTY AND WILL BE THE RESIDENT OF THE NEW HOME ONCE IT'S BUILT. THE CURRENT DILAPIDATED SINGLE FAMILY HOME WILL BE DEMOLISHED AND REBUILT IF THE VARIANCES, UH, REQUESTED ARE GRANTED. THE HOME AS DESIGNED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WILL BE TWO STORIES TALL, SIX FEET WIDE, FEATURING AN OUTSIDE PATIO AND A TWO BEDROOM, TWO BATHROOM CONFIGURATION. HERE IS THE SITE PLAN AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF C O A 2103 0 5 9 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS. ONE, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, AND TWO, ADEQUATE SPACE WILL BE UTILIZED TO PREVENT STORMWATER RUNOFF, MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPERTY AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE WITHOUT TRESPASS. AND THREE, DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT, DEVELOPMENT CAN ONLY OCCUR ON THIS LOT BY WAY OF REZONING OR THROUGH VARIANCES. STAFF MAILED 41 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. NONE ARE RETURN IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO RESPONSE FROM LAS PAL'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. NOW I WILL TURN IT OVER TO JOSE, THE APPLICANT. IT'S PRESENTED BY PEDRO. HE IS FROM N N H S. YES SIR. MY NAME IS PEDRO LEON. I AM AN EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. I AM, UH, WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES DEPARTMENT. I'M HERE TO REPRESENT, UH, 3 1 3 SOUTH SAN BERNARDO, UM, AND THE RECONSTRUCTION OF, UM, THE HOMEOWNER'S HOUSE. ALRIGHT. DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE INPUT? UH, IS THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WITHIN THE PARAMETERS THAT WE'RE REQUESTING? UM, YES. EVERYTHING THAT, UH, I CONCUR WITH EVERYTHING, UM, THE YOUNG LADY SAID ABOUT THIS HOUSE. UH, JUST LIKE TO FURTHERMORE ADD THAT THE SHOWS, UH, THE SUB UH, APPEARING BEAM STRUCTURE, THE FOUNDATION HAS A CATASTROPHIC, UM, PRETTY MUCH NON-REPAIRABLE FOUNDATION AND THAT'S WHAT, UM, OVERALL GAVE IT DETERMINES TO, UH, REBUILD THIS HOUSE FOR, UH, THE, THIS YOUNG LADY. OKAY, BUT THE STRUCTURE OF EXISTING IS THE HALF FOOT SHORT OF THE REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. UM, I ONLY HAVE THE PLAN THAT I HAVE, UH, TO PUT ON THAT HOUSE IS THE ONLY ONE I HAVE SMALL ENOUGH TO EVEN COME CLOSE TO ACCOMMODATING THE, THE LOT SIZE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. IS THAT, UH, OKAY, UH, IS THE APPLICANT, SHE'S NOT GONNA BE SPEAKING ON THIS CASE? NO, WE HAVE, UH, MR. DELION FROM N H S D REPRESENTING [01:25:01] HER. THAT'S IT. OKAY. YEAH, SIR. ALRIGHT. DO HAVE ANY PUBLIC NOTICES? NO, THERE WERE NO RESPONSES RECEIVED FOR THIS CASE. OKAY. STAFF, I MEAN, BOARD, I'M ASKING THE BOARD, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, EITHER ORIAN OR FROM THE, UH, ORIAN REPRESENTATIVE MR. ORIAN? YEAH, UH, JUST REALLY QUICK, IS THIS, IS THIS ONE OF THESE, UM, ANTIQUATED LOTS? IT'S AN ACTUAL 25 FOOT WIDE LOT COR, CORRECT? IT IS 25 WIDE, UM, BY 122 LONG. OKAY. AND, AND I WAS JUST CURIOUS ABOUT, UM, UH, ITEM NUMBER TWO. I THOUGHT THAT THE STAFF ONLY LOOKED AT THE 4,000 ASSOCIATED WITH THE R FOUR, IF THERE WAS A, A PLATT IN PLAY, IF IT'S ALREADY A APPLIED A LOT. DOES THAT, Y'ALL STILL LOOK AT THAT? SO IT COULD TECHNICALLY QUALIFY AS A NON-CONFORMING OF RECORD, UH, BUT IT WOULD STILL BE NON-CONFORMING SINCE THEY'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE. ANYWAY, WE WENT AHEAD AND INCLUDED THIS, SO IT GIVES, UH, THE PROPERTY A CLEAN BILL OF HEALTH. OKAY. AND IS, IS, UH, THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE NEXT DOOR IS, IS THERE ANYTHING, UH, THAT AFFECTS, THAT AFFECTS THEM AS FAR AS, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS CONSTRUCTION OR INPUT OF, DID THEY SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS AT ALL TO STAFF? NO, THEY HAVEN'T SAID ANYTHING AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD, UM, AFFECT IT. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. I FIND IT INTERESTING. I'M LOOKING AT THAT PHOTOGRAPH. THERE'S APPARENTLY TREES GROWING OVER THE STRUCTURE THAT'S THERE, IS THERE GONNA HAVE TO BE TREE REMOVAL AND THAT, UH, PROPERTY NE NOT NECESSARILY TRIM REMOVAL, JUST TRIM, TRIM, TRIM, UH, TRIM TRIMMING, THE, A LOT OF THOSE TREES HAVE FALLEN. THERE'S A PICTURE THAT I HAVE WHERE A TREE ACTUALLY FELL AND WENT PROTRUDED INTO HER ROOF INTO THE BACK PRO, UH, BACK HOUSE. BACK ROOM. AND IT'S, YOU CAN SEE DAYLIGHT FROM INSIDE THE PROPERTY TO THE OUTSIDE. SO A LOT OF THOSE TRIMS WILL BE TRIMMED BACK TO ACCOMMODATE THE HOUSE. BUT I DON'T PLAN ON ELIMINATING ANY TREES. AND ALSO BY D S D STANDARDS, I ACTUALLY HAVE TO PUT TWO NEW TREES ON THE PROPERTY ONCE, UH, I DO THE PERMIT, UH, FOR UH, THE TOPS. OKAY. AND I ALSO NOTICED THAT THERE ARE TWO VEHICLES PARKED IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW, BUT ONE IS PARKED ON AN UNAPPROVED SURFACE. HOW'S THAT GONNA BE HANDLED? UH, I CAN ASK THE HOMEOWNER, UH, ABOUT THAT, BUT, UH, THE PROPERTY WILL BE PRETTY MUCH SET IN THE SAME LOCATION, SO YOU'LL STILL HAVE A FRONT DRIVEWAY, UH, THE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY THAT'S IN THE FRONT. UM, THE OTHER CAR, I DON'T, I HAVE TO ASK THE HOMEOWNER ABOUT THAT ONE. WELL, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE TO CONSIDER, I MEAN, WE DON'T CONSIDER THIS, BUT IT'S POSSIBLE YOU'D BE COMING BACK TO US IF YOU'RE GONNA PUT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE THERE BECAUSE THAT WON'T BE 50%, SO CORRECT. ALRIGHT, UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WE HAD NO PUBLIC COMMENT. UH, WE HAVE THE INFORMATION THAT WE JUST RECEIVED, UM, WITH, UH, NO QUESTIONS ADDITIONAL FOR STAFF FOR THE, UH, APPLICANT. I'M GOING AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS MEETING TO THE PUBLIC AND, UM, ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. DORIAN, YOU'D LIKE TO DO ANOTHER ONE? ALRIGHT, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 20 DASH UH, 1 0 3 59, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR ONE A SIX INCH VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK ON EITHER SIDE, UH, TO ALLOW A NEW RESIDENTIAL HOME TO BE FOUR FOOT SIX INCHES AWAY FROM THE NORTH AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINES. AND TWO, A 925 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 4,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE TO BE 3075 SQUARE FEET SITUATED AT 3 1 3 SOUTH SAN NANDO. APPLICANT BEING JOSEFINA A CASTILLO 'CAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SO THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST. PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. IN THIS CASE, GIVEN THE LOT CONSTRAINTS GRANTING THE VARIANCES STILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE ACCESSIBILITY TO LIGHT, AIR AND OPEN SPACE. FURTHER FIRE RATED MATERIAL WILL BE REQUIRED DUE TO THE PROXIMITY TO ADJACENT STRUCTURES. TWO, DUE TO, UH, SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. A [01:30:01] LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPABLE SPACE ON EACH LOT. THE SMALL LOT CONFIGURATIONS ARE THE RESULT OF ANTIQUATED SUBSTANDARD LOT DEVELOPMENT AND WILL REQUIRE VARIANCE AS IF DEVELOPING ON EACH LOT AS INTENDED. THREE. BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE STRICT LETTER LETTER OF THE LAW. THE INTENT OF THE SETBACK LIMITATION IS TO PREVENT FIRE SPREAD, ALLOW ADEQUATE SPACE FOR MAINTENANCE AND ENCOURAGE PROPER STORMWATER DRAINAGE. ALL INTENTS OF THIS PROOF FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. FIVE. SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. THE VARIANCES REQUESTED WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE OR, OR ALTER THE USE OF OR CHARACTER OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. SPECIFICALLY, THE VARIANCES WOULD NOT PLACE THE STRUCTURE OUT OF CHARACTER WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. FURTHER, THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IS FOLLOWING A DISTRICT NORM OF REDUCED SETBACKS FOR ALL HOUSES BUILT WITHIN THE AREA. SIX, THE PLIGHT TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT AS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO A RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER AND IS NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE. THE CHARACTER OF REDUCED LOT SIZES WITHIN THE DISTRICT IS UNIFORM, LEAVING LITTLE ROOM FOR PROPER BUILDING SETBACKS. THIS IS CREATED BY THE PRO PRO PROLIFERATION OF HOLDER, OUTDATED, SUBSTANDARD LOTS CURRENTLY ZONED R FOUR. END OF MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. I THINK, UH, MARIA, WAS THAT YOU? YES, SIR. OKAY. ALRIGHT, MS. ALL RIGHT, MR. UH, ARRAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO START THE DISCUSSION? SURE WOULD. UH, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THIS AT ALL. I MEAN, I'M GLAD THAT THEY'RE PUTTING A, A HOUSE THAT, THAT MEETS THE, THE, THE VERY SMALL WIDTH OF THE LOT. I KNOW A LONG, A LONG, LONG TIME AGO THEY WOULD JUST MOVE THESE HOMES THREE FEET OFF OF THE SITE PROPERTY LINE, BUT FOUR AND A HALF FEET IS, IS SEEMS, UH, AN IMPROVEMENT. UH, AND I'M GLAD THAT THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, I WAS LOOKING AT THE FLOOR PLAN. IT LOOKS LIKE A VERY APPROPRIATE FOR THE LOT SIZE AND MAKES SOME MOST OF ITS USE. SO I'LL BE IN UP FOR SUPPORT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MARIA. WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE? UM, YES, I CONCUR WITH WHAT DON'S SAYING. I THINK IT'D BE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UH, LOOKS LIKE SHE CAN REALLY USE THE HOME. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY INPUT? NONE BEING THE CASE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE MS. CRUZ. I CONCUR. MR. KEEL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS. MR. MANA? I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS. MR. ORIAN? UH, YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. LOVE CONCUR, MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR. MR. DELMER? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MS. TREVINO. YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR MARTINEZ. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. IT'S, UH, MOTION IS APPROVED. UH, GOOD LUCK CITY WITH, UH, WORKING ON THIS PROJECT. WE GOT A LOT VERY, A LITTLE ROOM TO WORK, SO, BUT I KNOW COME OUT LOOKING GREAT AS, AS, UH, ANNOUNCED EARLIER. I WAS GONNA CALL A, UH, FIVE MINUTE, UH, BREAK. PLEASE TRY TO TURN OFF YOUR MICROPHONES AND BEFORE YOU LEAVE AND, UH, TRY TO BE BACK WITHIN FIVE MINUTES TIME. RIGHT NOW I HAVE IS 2 49. OKAY. AND MR. MEN'S NOT WORKING. YEAH. HEY, WE'RE OFFICER, GO AHEAD. HI, WE'RE RETURNING. IT IS, UH, 2 56. WE'LL CONTINUE THE NEXT CASE, WHICH IS CASE [5. 20-4239 BOA-20-10300058: A request by Korling Duren for a special exception to allow one (1) Type 2 Short Term Rental, located at 322 Baltimore Avenue. Staff recommends Denial. (Council District 1) (Kayla Leal, Senior Planner (210) 207-0197, kayla.leal@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)] NUMBER OH FIVE EIGHT. ALL RIGHT, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS CASE D O A 21 0 3 8. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 3 22 BALTIMORE AVENUE. THE APPLICANT IS [01:35:01] PORTLAND DURRAN. HE IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY IS F C ZT 51 3 0 2 A H O D. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED DOWNTOWN ON THE CORNER OF DALLAS STREET AND BALTIMORE AVENUE. THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO TYPE TWO S T R PERMITS ISSUED FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF. THE SURROUNDING AREA CONSISTS OF A MIXTURE OF USES INCLUDING COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL, RECREATIONAL AND OFFICE. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT AT THE PROPERTY WITH A TOTAL OF TWO DWELLING UNITS. ACCORDING TO AVAILABLE RECORDS, THERE ARE SIX UNITS ON THIS BLOCK FACE RESULTING IN ONE TYPE TWO S T R PERMITS ALLOWED BY RIGHT. THERE ARE TWO TYPE TWO S T R PERMITS ISSUED FOR THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. UM, THE REASON THERE ARE TWO IS BECAUSE THEY'RE, THEY WERE BOTH GRANDFATHERED IN. IF THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS APPROVED, THERE WILL BE A TOTAL OF THREE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNITS ON THE BLOCK PHASE, RESULTING IN 50% OF THE BLOCK PHASE. HERE IS THE SITE PLAN FOR THE FIRST FLOOR AND SECOND FLOOR. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. THIS IS A, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY THAT HAS THE TWO PERMITS ALREADY. ALL RIGHT, AND HERE ARE THE, UM, THE ICONS SHOWING THE S G R PERMITS ISSUED IN THE VICINITY. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN D O A 1 0 3 0 0 5 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDING OF FACTS. ONE, THERE ARE CURRENTLY TWO ACTIVE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMITS ON THE BLOCK FACE STAFF MAILED 18 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. ONE WAS RETURN IN FAVOR, NONE WERE RETURNING OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE DOWNTOWN RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION. WE HAVE, UH, MR. DURAN ON THE LINE. HE ALSO HAS A PRESENTATION, UM, TO SHOW YOU GUYS. ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND START THAT. MR. DURAN, GO AHEAD WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. YES, THIS IS MR. DURAN AND I'VE GOT THE FIRST SLIDE REPRESENTS THE, UM, FRONT OF THE BUILDING OF A DUPLEX. I JUST FINISHED A MAJOR RENOVATION OF THIS PROPERTY. IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF. I'VE, UM, IT'S BEEN COMPLETELY PAINTED, COMPLETELY RENOVATED, COMPLETELY REWIRED, NEW FLOORS, NEW WALLS, NEW WINDOWS. UM, NEW FOUNDATION. FOUNDATION WAS THE POST, AND WE CHANGED THAT TO THAT WAS CHANGED TO A CONCRETE TIER AND IT'S, UM, RIGHT NOW IT'S AN EXCELLENT SHAPE AND IT'S BEEN, IT WAS COMPLETELY LANDSCAPE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE FRONT YARD HAS ST. AUGUSTINE GRASS AND HAS SHRUBS. THE REASON I WANT TO, I WANT TO CONVERT ONE OF THE UNITS TO A BED AND BREAKFAST AS OPPOSED TO BOTH. ONE OF THE UNITS IS, ESPECIALLY THE ONE UPSTAIRS, THAT'S THE ONE I WANT TO CONVERT TO A BED AND BREAKFAST. IT'S, UM, GETTING UP THE STAIRWELL. IF YOU, IF YOU OPEN, IF YOU GO, IF YOU GO TO THE SECOND SLIDE, IT'S GOT, UH, WELL, THAT'S GOT PART OF THE LANDSCAPING AND THE BACK BALCONY AND THE, AND THE BACK STAIRWELL LEAVING OUT THE FRONT FRONT. AND IF YOU GO UP TO THE THIRD SIDE, THIRD SLIDE, THAT HAS A STEP THAT GOES UP TO THE FRONT DOOR THAT LEADS INTO THE STAIRWELL OF THAT SECOND UNIT. BUT IF YOU GO TO THE FOURTH SLIDE, IT ACTUALLY SHOWS A LOT OF THE WORK THAT WAS DONE INSIDE IT. FIRST SLIDE IS THE SHOWS THE CLOSEUP OF THE FLOORING THAT WAS REPLACED SECOND, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE BEDROOMS. MILL SLIDE ACTUALLY SHOWS THE LIVING AREA, THE NEW LIVING AREA, AND THE RIGHT SLIDE SHOWS. UH, SO THE SECOND BEDROOM, THE UNIT IS A TWO BEDROOM, TWO BATH. WE ADDED ONE BATH. WE MOVED THE KITCHEN. AS I SAID, IT WAS COMPLETELY, ALL THE DRYWALL WAS RIPPED OUT. IF YOU GO TO THE FIFTH SLIDE, IT ACTUALLY SHOWS THE DOOR AT THE VERY TOP THAT LEADS TO THE BALCONY UPSTAIRS. IT HAS A PICTURE OF THE BATH AT THE BOTTOM LEFT, ONE OF THE BATHS, AND THE MA THE BED ROOM AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT. IF YOU GO TO THE SIXTH SLIDE, IT SHOWS TOP LEFT. IT SHOWS A PORTION OF THE KITCHEN AS WELL AS THE PANTRY FOR THE KITCHEN. ALL NEW GRANITE, ALL NEW CABINETS HANDMADE. THE [01:40:01] SLIDE ON THE VERY RIGHT SHOWS THE, UM, THE WASHROOM AREA WITH THE, UM, HEATER. AND BOTTOM LEFT IS A LITTLE CLOSEUP OF THE, UM, OF THE KITCHEN. AND THE BOTTOM RIGHT IS THE, UM, IS THE SECOND BATH. AND THE LAST SLIDE, SLIDE NUMBER SEVEN, SHOWS THE STAIRWELL. NOW ONE OF THE DILEMMAS THAT I'VE HAD WITH, I'VE RENTED THIS PROPERTY. I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY IN 1995 AND HAD SOME UPGRADES JUST TO MAKE IT LIVABLE. BUT ONE OF THE PROBLEMS I'VE ALWAYS HAD WITH THE UPSTAIRS APARTMENT IS NAVIGATING THE STAIRWELL, TRYING TO GET LARGE APPLIANCES. AND OF COURSE WHEN, WHEN YOU'RE RENTER AND YOU'RE MOVING AND YOU WANNA TRY AND DO IT YOURSELF, BUT WHEN YOU GO UP THIS STAIRWELL, IT GOES UP A WAYS AND THEN THERE'S A RIGHT TURN, AND THEN IT GOES UP ANOTHER WAY. AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER RIGHT TURN TO GET IN THE DOOR. AND I'VE HAD HOLES AND, AND, AND WINDOWS BROKE. IT'S GOT TWO WINDOWS ON THIS STAIRWELL, AND I HAD THOSE BROKEN AND HOLES IN THE WALL KICK KNOCKED ON THE WALLS FROM JUST TENNIS, TRYING TO MOVE THEMSELVES. UM, AND OF COURSE, ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO DO, I WAS RESIDENT OF SAN ANTONIO. I'VE LIVED HERE ALL OF MY LIFE PRETTY MUCH EXCEPT FOR THREE YEARS. I WORKED FOR SOUTHWESTERN BELL AND I RETIRED IN 2012 FROM AT&T. BUT I'M WANTING TO USE THIS AS A, UH, TO SUPPLEMENT MY INCOME. UM, WHEN I FIRST BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY IN 1996, IT WAS TAX VALUED AT ABOUT 50, 50, 60,000. SINCE I'VE RENOVATED MY PROPERTY AND THE TWO PROPERTIES ON THE BLOCK HAVE RENOVATED THEIR PROPERTY, IT'S NOW TAX VALUED AT 240,000. SO IT MAKES IT KINDA DIFFICULT TO, TO MAKE A PROFIT WHEN YOUR TAXES THEM GOING UP THAT HIGH. OF COURSE, TAXES GO UP CONSIDERABLY WHEN YOUR PROPERTY VALUED GO UP. I KNOW THAT. SO, UM, THAT'S ONE OF THE, I GUESS THAT'S THE MAIN REASON. UH, I WANTED TO HAVE A SHORT TERM ROLE. I THINK I CAN MAKE A LITTLE MORE MONEY. I THINK WHAT'S, I THINK THE PROPERTY VALUE HAS REALLY INCREASED IN THAT AREA. AND I THINK PART OF THE REASON FOR THAT IS THE RENOVATIONS THAT I'VE DONE AND MY NEIGHBOR HAS DONE. AND THE NEIGHBOR NEXT TO THAT ONE HAS DONE ALL THREE OF THESE PROPERTIES ARE DUPLEXES. AND WE'VE HAD SOME MAJOR RENOVATIONS OF THOSE PROPERTIES. I'VE HEARD, I'VE TALKED TO SEVERAL OF THE NEIGHBORS ABOUT HOW MUCH THE POPULAR PROPERTY VALUES HAVE INCREASED, AND THAT'S LESS THAN, AND A AND A CURSE IN A WAY. OF COURSE, THE VALUES ARE INCREASE, BUT YOUR TAXES WILL ALWAYS, ALWAYS GO UP CONSIDERABLY. NOW, THE UM, I WAS ACTUALLY PRESENT WHEN MY NEIGHBOR NEXT TO ME, UH, MR. PORTER STUART PORTER, UH, REQUESTED A, UM, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS THAT HAVE BOTH OF HIS UNITS. WELL, HE HAD ONE WAS, HE HAD ALREADY HAD ONE, BUT HE WANTED HIS SECOND UNIT TO BE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL. AND I WAS PRESIDENT AND, AND SUPPORT OF HIM BECAUSE THE TENANTS THAT HE HAS, I MEAN, THERE'S SOME, SEEMED LIKE THERE'S SO MUCH BETTER. I'VE LEARNED SO MUCH FROM RENTING THIS PROPERTY, UH, AS A LONG-TERM RENTAL BECAUSE THE TENANT THAT WE HAVE, I, I HARDLY KNOW THEY'RE THERE. THEY'RE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND, UM, I WENT TO TO TELL THE BOARD THAT IN SUPPORT OF HIS REQUESTS FOR A, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL FOR HIS SECOND UNIT, AND I THINK HE'S ONE OF THE PERSONS THAT HAS GIVEN ME A YES. I DUNNO IF ANYONE ELSE RESPONDED, BUT, UH, BETWEEN THE RENOVATIONS, I THINK, I THINK THE NEIGHBORS ARE HAPPY WITH THE CHANGES I'VE DONE WITH THE HOUSE, AND I KNOW IT'S OVER THE LIMIT IN TERMS OF THE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS, BUT I PLAN TO CONTINUE TO TAKE GOOD CARE OF IT. I THINK YOU'LL, YOU'LL FIND THAT I DON'T, I HAVEN'T HAD ANY CITATIONS ON THE PROPERTY ALL OF THE TIME I'VE OWNED IT. I THINK I HAD ONE, BUT THAT WAS DURING THE RENOVATION AND THAT WAS SOME DEBRIS LEFT IN THE FRONT YARD AND I CLEANED IT UP BEFORE THE 10 DAYS. SO, UM, JUST TRYING TO GET SOMETHING TO SUPPLEMENT MY INCOME AND, AND IMPROVE THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THAT'S, I APPEAL TO YOU IF I CAN HAVE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THIS, JUST HAVE A SHORT TERM RENTAL, I THINK I CAN, CAN AT LEAST MAKE PRETTY GOOD PROFIT ON THE, WHAT I'M MAKING NOW BECAUSE OF THE TAX AND THE FACT THAT I MAINTAINING THAT PROPERTY UPSTAIRS. IT'S JUST BECAUSE OF THE MOVEMENT OF EVERYTHING UP THERE WITH THE FURNITURE AND THE, JUST, IT SEEMS LIKE THE DOWNTOWN TENANTS ARE MAYBE A LITTLE ROUGHER THAN SOME OTHER TENANTS. I'VE GOT TWO OTHER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT I RENT, BUT THEY'RE NOT DOWNTOWN. [01:45:01] I DON'T, YOU ONLY HAVE THE PROBLEMS I HAVE WITH THAT UPSTAIRS APARTMENT DOWNTOWN. WHAT I'M PLANNING TO DO, WHAT I'M PLANNING TO DO IS HAVE SOME PROFESSIONAL MOVERS TO GET SOME FURNITURE AND APPLIANCES UP THERE SO THAT I DON'T KNOCK HOLES IN THE WALLS OR BREAK ANY WINDOWS. AND THEN THAT CAN STAY THERE FOR A LONG LENGTH OF TIME AS I NEED THE SHORT TERM METAL, HOPEFULLY. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS MUCH, IAN? HOLD ON. I'M NOT, NOT TAKING QUESTIONS YET. I'M SORRY. LET'S GO AHEAD AND FIND OUT IF WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC, UH, STATEMENTS. YES, WE HAVE ONE RESPONSE. ALL RIGHT. THIS IS FROM STUART PORTER AT THREE 18 BALTIMORE AVENUE. HE SAID THE ENTIRE BLOCK IS RENTALS AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, THE THREE HOUSE SIDE BY SIDE S T R OR EXECUTIVE SEATS. AND THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. ALL RIGHT. AND THIS PER THAT PERSON WAS IN FAVOR? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO OUR ONLY RESPONSE WAS IN FAVOR? YES. AND DO, CAN YOU GIMME AN IDEA WHERE THIS, UH, PERSON O OWNS PROPERTY IN THAT AREA? IT'S THE, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND THAT IMAGE THAT'S SHOWN. OKAY. IT'S NOT, BUT IT'S, IT'S THE OTHER S T R MM-HMM. . THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NOW, MR. ORIAN, YOU MAY ASK A QUESTION. YES. UM, SO FOR, UH, TO THE APPLICANT, UM, MR. DURAN, THE, THE DRIVE THAT'S ON THE SIDE, THAT'S FOR YOUR NEIGHBOR, IS THAT CORRECT? DO YOU HAVE ON ONSITE PARKING? YES, ACTUALLY THE, UH, THE, THE FRONT PART OF THE DRIVE IS, IS WHAT REALLY BELONGS TO THE NEIGHBOR. IF, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DEEP REQUIREMENTS, IT'S WHAT THEY CALL THE EGRESS INGRESS, EGRESS INGRESS USE FOR THAT FRONT PART OF THE DRIVEWAY. THE VERY BACK PART OF THE DRIVEWAY. IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UH, AS ONE DIAGRAM THAT SHOWS TWO CARS, A SPACE FOR TWO CARS IN THE VERY BACK RIGHT OF THE DRIVEWAY. NOW, THAT AREA ACTUALLY BELONGS TO, TO THE LOT TO ME, THE AREA THAT I, THAT I OWN, THE LITTLE PLOT THAT I, AND IT SHOWS TWO CARS UP THERE, AND NOW YOU CAN'T PARK THE TWO CARS. AND WE HAD, AND I GET ALONG REAL WELL WITH MY NEIGHBORS, BUT WE'VE HAD LOTS OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW WE KIND OF SHARE THAT AREA BECAUSE YOU CAN GET THREE IN THE DRIVEWAY, BUT YOU'D HAVE TO MOVE THE ONE IN ORDER TO GET THE OTHER TWO IN AND OUT. OKAY. SEE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE BRICK AREA, NOW THAT BRICK AREA BELONGS TO MY NEIGHBOR, BUT IT'S ALSO DESIGNATED AS EGRESS INGRIS. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE AREA PAST THE BRICK THAT IS IN THE VERY FRONT THAT HAS SPOTTED TWO, TWO CARS, THEN THAT'S MINE. SEE, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I'M, I'M WONDERING IS THAT IF YOU HAVE TWO ADDRESSES AND YOUR NEIGHBOR HAS TWO ADDRESSES, AND COLLECTIVELY YOU CAN ONLY GET THREE CARS, IS THAT AN ISSUE STAFF WITH US REVIEWING THIS? YEAH, HE HAS, IF YOU LOOK, AND IT DOESN'T SHOW HIS PROPERTY, ALL OF HIS PROPERTY, BUT ON THE VERY RIGHT SIDE OF HIS PROPERTY IS ALL OF HIS, ALL OF THAT DRIVEWAY. IT'S, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF SHAPED SIMILAR TO MINE, BUT IT'S, IT'S, THAT ALL BELONGS TO HIM ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF HIS STU. SO YOU FEEL THAT ON THAT SIDE, YOU FEEL THAT, THAT YOU'RE MEETING THE REQUIREMENT FOR A PARKING SPACE IS, I JUST SAW THE TWO HOUR PARKING LIMIT ON THE, ON THE CURB IN FRONT OF, OF THE SIGN THAT'S IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. YEAH. OKAY. THAT, THAT BRING THAT PICTURE OF THAT, THAT REALLY HELPS. . YEAH, IT'S GOT TWO PARKING BETWEEN EIGHT AND FIVE, AND IT'S GOT METERS ACROSS THE STREET AND METERS AROUND THE PARK. THIS, THIS PROPERTY IS ON THE CORNER OF BALTIMORE AND DALLAS, BUT DIAGONALLY ACROSS THE STREET THERE'S A DOGGY PARK AND THEN ACROSS THAT PARK IS A BAPTIST HOSPITAL IS ACROSS FROM THAT. BUT IF, IF I NEED MORE PARKING, THERE'S ACTUALLY A PARKING LOT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE, WELL IT, FROM THE AERIAL DIAGRAM, YOU COULD SEE IT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE THIRD HOUSE, I DO SEE IT ON THAT STREET. YOU CAN SEE A BIG PARKING LOT THERE. AND YOU CAN HAVE ACTUALLY HAVE LEAST MONTHLY PARKING FOR THAT. I MAY END UP DOING SOME OF THAT AS WELL. OKAY. THAT'S, I WAS JUST CURIOUS 'CAUSE I OH YEAH, I DIDN'T NOTICE A DRIVEWAY PARTICULARLY ON YOUR PROPERTY, SO I WAS CURIOUS. THANK YOU. YES. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? HI, ZONA FISHER, SIR. ALRIGHT, MR. OONA FIRST THEN MS. FISHER. WELL, I JUST WANTED TO, UM, [01:50:01] BRING UP TO THE, TO THE BOARD'S JUST ATTENTION THAT WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE, UH, ADJOINING PROPERTY, UM, I, I GUESS IT WAS LAST YEAR OR SO, ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE CONSIDERED WAS THE KIND OF THE COMMERCIAL NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THIS WAS KIND OF A NEIGHBORHOOD FEELING WHERE THE INTENT OF THAT, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UH, ORDINANCE WAS TO, TO KEEP FROM ENCROACHING COMMERCIAL USES INTO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. AND WE MADE THE DETER DETERMINATION, ALTHOUGH EACH CASE STANDS BY ITS OWN, BUT WE MADE THE DETERMINATION AT THAT POINT THAT, THAT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD OR THIS AREA WASN'T SO MUCH A TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT HAD MORE OF A COMMERCIAL FEEL TO IT. AND THAT'S WHY WE ALLOWED THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION. AND I WOULD KIND OF MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT THIS, THAT SAME HOLDS TRUE FOR THE SUBJECT CASE THAT WE'RE REVIEWING TODAY. I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT UP TO THE, UH, TO THE, UH, BOARD'S ATTENTION ON THAT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, MS. FISHER? UH, YES. SO I, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALSO AND IT DOES HAVE QUITE A COMMERCIAL FEEL. I WAS WONDERING, IS THE CURRENT, THE BOTTOM SECTION OF THE HOME, IS THAT BEING CURRENTLY RENTED BY LONG, ON A LONG TERM, A LONGER TERM LEASE? THAT'S THE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, YES. QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? YES, THAT'S TRUE. IT, IT'S, I PLAN TO USE IT FOR A LONG-TERM RENTAL. MOVING IN AND OUT OF THE BOTTOM UNIT IS VERY EASY COMPARED TO THE TOP BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE TO NAVIGATE THAT STAIRWELL. SO FOR NOW MAY COME BACK LATER AND ASK YOU FOR IT, BUT FOR NOW I'M PLANNING TO USE THAT AS A LONG TERM RENTAL. IT'S, I'VE BEEN LONG TERM RENTING IT SINCE 1997 AND IT'S BEEN WORKED OUT PRETTY WELL. AND, AND WHAT ABOUT THE TOP? HAS THAT BEEN RENTED BEFORE? YES, YES. SAME THING WITH THAT ONE. I'VE BEEN RENTING THAT ONE AS A LONG TERM RENTAL SINCE 1997 AND THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY, UH, LONG PERIODS OF VACANCY OR, NO, THIS IS THE LAST VACANT RIGHT NOW AND THAT'S BECAUSE OF THE RENOVATIONS. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALRIGHT, ANY, ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS HAVE A QUESTION? I HAVE A QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT. UM, JUDGE, JUDGING BY THE SITUATION CURRENTLY IN, IN, UH, SAN ANTONIO WITH THE COVID 19, ARE YOU GETTING AS MUCH ACTIVITY ON YOUR SHORT TERM RENTALS AS YOU DID BEFORE THE, UH, PANDEMIC? WELL, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE TRIED TO HAVE, THIS IS THE FIRST PROPERTY THAT I HAVE AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL IF I CAN GET AN APPROVAL. AND, UH, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM MY NEIGHBOR BECAUSE OF THE VIRUS HE IS, HAD MOST OF HIS RESERVATIONS CANCELED RECENTLY. SO I, SO I, I'M, I'M HOPING THINGS IMPROVE FAIRLY SOON, BUT IF IT DOESN'T, I'LL PROBABLY GO AHEAD AND RENT IT LONG TERM UNTIL I CAN, UNTIL THINGS KIND OF SIMMER DOWN IS FOR THE, IN TERMS OF THE VIRUS AND THEN I'LL, THEN I'LL GO WITH THE SHORT TERM RULE. BUT YEAH, THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THE REASON, ANOTHER REASON ALSO THAT I DECIDED TO HAVE A MIX INSTEAD OF APPLYING BOTH AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL BECAUSE I DEFINITELY NEED SOME, SOME INCOME. AND I HAD BOTH AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL AND I GOT CANCELLATIONS AND THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF MESSED MY INCOME UP FOR A WHILE. SO THAT'S WHY I WANT MOURN FOR NOW AS A LONG TERM AND ONE AS A SHORT TERM. VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? MANNA, MR. MANNA? SO, UH, COULD THE CITY GO BACK TO THE PAGE THAT SHOWS ALL OF THE CURRENT RENTALS THERE IN THE COMMUNITY? THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. SO, SO THE, YOU KNOW, I I GUESS LOOKING AT THAT MAP THERE, YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY ARE HOMES VERSUS HOW MANY ARE BUSINESSES. AND I KNOW ACROSS THE STREET THERE WERE SOME HOMES AND THERE'S ANOTHER HOME AT THE, UH, AT THE END OF THE STREET THERE ON, ON, ON THE SAME BLOCK HERE AS THIS HOUSE. SO, YOU KNOW, SO THIS PICTURE KIND OF DOESN'T SUPPORT, UM, THAT THIS COMMUNITY IS DESTINED TO BE ALL SHORT-TERM RENTALS. AND SO, SO, YOU KNOW, I GUESS I, I, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M HAVING PROBLEMS HERE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, ARE WE GONNA LET YOU KNOW, UH, A BLOCK HERE, DETERMINE THAT THEY WANNA MAKE THIS THIS BLOCK SHORT-TERM RENTALS WHERE THE CITY IS SAYING THAT WE'RE TRYING TO LIMIT THAT, YOU KNOW, AND, AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS IS PROVIDING HOME OR SPACE FOR PEOPLE TO RENT AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'VE BEEN SUCCESSFUL RENTING. UM, YOU KNOW, SO I, I DO QUESTION THAT A LITTLE BIT HERE. IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE, YOU KNOW, ANYWAYS, THANK YOU. [01:55:02] YEAH, THE, THE, UH, DUPLEX NEXT TO ME IS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, BOTH UNITS. AND THE ONE NEXT TO THAT ONE, I BELIEVE IT'S NOT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL. I THINK THAT'S THE LONG-TERM RENTAL. OKAY. AND ACROSS, UH, TO THE RIGHT OF THE DUPLEX ACROSS THE, ACROSS THE STREET IS I THINK THE MEDICAL OFFICES. AND THEN, UM, OF COURSE, ACROSS THE STREET IS JUST A HUGE VACANT LOT. AND, UM, IN THE HOSPITAL, THE BAPTIST HOSPITAL WAS A COUPLE BLOCKS, MOSTLY, UH, MOSTLY COMMERCIAL. AND I USED TO WORK ON THE CORNER OF, OF MCCULLOUGH IN ST. MARY'S, WHICH IS ABOUT TWO BLOCKS FROM THERE. AND I USED TO WALK BY THIS BUILDING AND, AND JUST FINALLY DECIDED TO CALL AND CHECK ON THE PRICE. BUT, UM, THAT'S WHAT AT&T AT&T OR ONE OF THE LARGE AT&T OFFICES ARE. I THINK IT HAS 13 OR 14 STORIES. SO IT'S, IT'S PRIMARILY COMMERCIAL IN THAT AREA, BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC AND ENTERTAIN THE MOTION. WHO DID, WHO SAID THAT? UH, ZUNA . MR. UNI NEXT MONTH? YES, SIR. SOUNDS LIKE IT. OKAY. UM, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A DASH 20 DASH 0 3 5 8, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT SITUATED AT 3 2 2 BALTIMORE AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING CORING DURIN. 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 U D C AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE, UH, REQUEST TO OPERATE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS UNLIKELY TO MATERIAL ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY APPEARS TO BE WELL KEPT AND RECENTLY RENOVATED. THERE'S NOTHING OBVIOUS THAT WOULD DISTINGUISH A SHORT-TERM RENTAL VERSUS A LONG-TERM RENTAL AT THIS FACILITY. UH, BE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THE BOARD FINDS THAT THERE ARE A TOTAL OF SIX RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THIS BLOCK FACE, AND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD PERMIT A TOTAL OF THREE TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTALS RESULTING IN 50% OF THE BLOCK FACE THIS. AND THE FACT THAT THE PROPERTY IS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO DOWNTOWN AMENITIES ALLOWS A REASON TO BELIEVE THAT A PUBLIC NUISANCE DOES NOT SEEM LIKELY TO BE CREATED. I SEE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WILL NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED BY SUCH PROPOSED USE. UH, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES CONSIST OF DUPLEXES OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT, WHICH IS AN ATTRACTION TO TOURISTS, TO TOURISTS. ADDITIONALLY, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES PERMITTED FOR TWO TYPE TWO S T R PERMITS SO THAT THE PROPOSED UNIT DOES NOT PROVIDE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT WE'LL STAND SUBSTANTIALLY INJURED NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AS A TYPE TWO SHORT-TERM RENTAL. THE ADEQUATE UTILITIES, ACCESS ROADS, STORM DRAINAGE, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND UNNECESSARY FACIL AND OTHER NECESSARY FA UH, FA FACULTIES FACILITIES HAVE BEEN, ARE BEING PROVIDED. UH, THE BOARD FINDS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO PROVIDE ALL STREET PARKING AND APPEARS TO HAVE ADEQUATE UTILITIES ACCESS AND OPEN SPACE. EITHER APPLICANT OR OWNER FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY REVOKED SHORT TERM RENTAL LICENSES. CONFIRM CITATIONS OR ADJUDICATED OFFENSES, UH, CONVICTION FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 22 OF THE CITY CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION. UH, THE APPLICANT CURRENTLY DOES NOT CURRENTLY HOLD A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT AND DOES NOT HAVE ANY HIS I'VE DROPPED AUDIO. YEAH, I'M SORRY. I HAD AN INCOMING CALL. UH, SO THE APPLICANT CURRENTLY DOES NOT HAVE, DOES NOT CURRENTLY HOLD A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT AND DOES NOT HAVE ANY HISTORY OF REVOCATION, CITATIONS, OR CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 16 AFTER THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS WOULD NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER, ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATIONS IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS SOUGHT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED DOWNTOWN, IS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO COMMERCIAL, RECREATIONAL, AND OTHER RESIDENTIAL USES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDING OFF STREET, OFF STREET PARKING. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT AND LOCATIONS IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND A MOTION. ALL RIGHT. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. ALRIGHT. WHO WAS THE FIRST, SECOND? . [02:00:02] OKAY, SARAH. ALL RIGHTY. UH, THEN MR. UNA, PLEASE START THE DISCUSSION. RIGHT. SO I AM SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS I, UH, PRIOR DISCUSS, YOU KNOW, THE, WHEN WE WERE CONSIDERING THE PROPERTY, THE NEXT DOOR TO THIS, YOU KNOW, THE, THE NIG THERE IS NOT A DEFINED NEIGHBORHOOD HERE. IT'S MORE OF A COMMERCIAL, UH, USES AND THEN COMMERCIAL USE WITH THE DUPLEXES AND, AND OPERATE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL. I DON'T FEEL THAT THE, THE SPIRIT OF THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL, WHICH WAS TO, UH, AVOID, YOU KNOW, UH, A COHERENT NEIGHBORHOOD IS IMPACTED HERE. 'CAUSE THERE THERE IS NO, LIKE A CURRENT COHERENT KIND OF SUPPORT WE THINK OF AS A SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD TYPE THAT'S AFFECTED BY, UH, THE, THE SHORT TERM RENTAL. I THINK IT'S, IT'S, UH, HIGHEST AND BEST USE IS MORE OF A, A SHORT TERM AND, AND, UH, COMMERCIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY. AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, DID A SUBSTANTIAL RENOVATION TO THE PROPERTY AND BELIEVE THAT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE IS SERVED BY, UH, BY, YOU KNOW, ALLOWING HIM TO DO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL FOR THE, FOR THE SECOND STORY AS HE, AS HE, UH, WAS SEEKING, UH, THE EXCEPTION FOR. SO I SUPPORT THE MOTION. ALRIGHT. UH, MRNA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE? UH, YES. I, I'M IN, UH, FULL SUPPORT. I, I THINK, UH, MY COLLEAGUE, MR. OZUNA, UH, STATED IT COMPLETELY, UM, ACCURATELY. UH, NORMALLY I WOULD BE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS IF THIS WAS PRIMARILY A RESIDENTIAL AREA. UM, BUT IT IS PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL. UM, YOU, YOU HAVE VERY FEW POCKET AREAS OF RESIDENTIAL HOMES MEET, UH, THAT ARE JUST SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL. SO I, I SEE THIS MORE AS A COMMERCIAL USE AREA. UM, AND I DON'T THINK THAT IT, UM, IS GOING AGAINST THE CHARACTER, BUT THE TYPE TWO WAS DESIGNED TO BE, SO I'LL BE IN FULL SUPPORT OF THAT. VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER INPUT? UH, FISHER AND FISHER, GO AHEAD. YES, I ALSO WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. I HAVE ALSO DRIVEN THE AREA FOR VARIOUS IN THE STORE LOCATION PURPOSES. AND IT IS, IT IS VERY COMMERCIAL ALSO. IT'S, IT'S AN ADJACENT TO THE MEDICAL FACILITIES AND I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL WOULD BE, UM, NEEDED AND HAVE A GOOD OCCUPANCY FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN REGARD WITH THAT. THANK YOU. VERY GOOD. ANYONE ELSE? ANNA, MR. ANA? SO, YEAH, I, I'M STRUGGLING WITH THIS A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE PART OF THE, PART OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE SHORT TERM RENTAL WAS ALLOWING FOR ALL TYPES OF OTHER COMMUNITIES, INCLUDING RENTALS. AND IT DOES SOUND LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF SUCCESS HERE WITH REGARDS TO RENTALS BEING IN THIS AREA AS WELL. AND SO THERE'S ONE DOWN THE STREET AND, AND THE UP AND THE UPSTAIRS THE OFFICERS BEING RENTED IN AND SEEMS LIKE THE UPSTAIRS ARE RENTED AS AS WELL. SO, UM, SO I, SO I'M LIKELY AT THIS POINT NOT GOING TO BE POINT FOR THIS ABOVE. OKAY. UM, I'M SORRY. UM, MR. MANNA, I DIDN'T HEAR THE END OF YOUR STATEMENT. ARE YOU THE SUPPORT? I'M LIKELY NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THIS. OKAY. AND OKAY, SOMEONE ELSE SPOKE. WHO, WHO LOVE MR. LOVE. GO AHEAD. YEAH, I'M NOT SURE WHY STAFF DID NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL. UM, I THINK IN THIS CASE, I MEAN, IT'S, YOU, YOU GOT TWO SHORT TERMS NEXT TO YOU ON A COMMERCIAL STREET. I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS WHAT THE CODE WAS WRITTEN FOR. I CAN'T THINK THERE'S INTENT IN, IN EVERY RULE THAT WE WRITE AND, UH, I, YOU KNOW, APPLAUD THIS GUY FOR FIXING UP THAT HOUSE. UM, AS MORE PEOPLE DO IT, OUR BAD DOWNTOWN JUST KEEPS BETTER AND GETTING BETTER AND BETTER AND, UH, UH, DEFINITELY I DON'T, DO NOT BELIEVE THIS CAUSES ANY DETRIMENT TO ANYBODY. SO, WELL, I'M VOTING FOR IT. YES, IN DEFENSE OF THE STAFF, THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH OBLIGATED TO FOLLOW THE RESTRICTION AS PER THE S T R CODE. UH, AND IT IS UP FOR US TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION WHETHER THAT IS VALID OR NOT. SO, UM, YOU'RE ALWAYS PROBABLY GONNA SEE CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN YOU'RE GETTING CLOSE TO 50%. UH, THEY'RE GONNA ALWAYS JUST TAKE THAT POSITION OF DENIAL. THAT WOULD EX THAT WOULD EXPLAIN THAT. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY? ALL UM, I'M, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE OUR ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE S T R. ALRIGHT. RIGHT, MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR. MR. TEAL? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. MANA. I DO NOT CON CONCUR. OKAY, MR. ORIAN, I DO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. OZUNA. YES, I DO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. LOVE [02:05:02] CONCUR, MS. FISHER? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. MR. ER, I CONCUR. MS. TREVINO? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR MARTINEZ. I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT. UM, BUT I THINK WE'VE JUST ECA ESTABLISHED A NEW VOTE ON STR, WE'RE APPROVING A, UH, NEW S T R UH, TYPE TWO IN THAT AREA. SO, UH, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT, UH, AND, UH, LET'S HOPE FOR THE BEST. THAT CONCLUDES THE, UH, CASES THAT WE HAVE TODAY. NOW WE'RE GOING [7. 20-4241 Consideration and approval of July 6, 2020 Board of Adjustment Minutes.] TO BE REVIEWING THE MINUTES. HAVE EVERYONE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES THAT WERE SENT TO YOU AND FIND ANY FLAWS AND CHANGES THAT YOU FEEL ARE NECESSARY. I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS WRITTEN. ALL RIGHT. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND. ALRIGHT, LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE. MS. CRUZ. YES, MR. TEAL. I CONCUR. MR. I CONCUR. MR. ORIAN? UH, YES, I CONCUR. MROZ? YES, I CONCUR. UH, MR. LOVE CONCUR. MS. FISHER? YES. MR. DELMER? I CONCUR. MS. TREVINO? YES, I CONCUR. AND CHAIR MARTINEZ. I CONCUR. THEREFORE, THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED. I'LL BE EXPECTING A, UH, AN ATTACHMENT EMAIL FOR MY SIGNATURE. UH, ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO APOLOGIZE TO ABEL MACHACA, I'M SORRY THAT WE COULD NOT INCLUDE YOU IN THE VOTING PROCESS. WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO FIND OUT WHAT THE PROBLEM IS. YOU MAY WANT TO CHECK TO SEE IF THE MICROPHONE HAS BEEN DISCONNECTED IN YOUR COMPUTER. AND I, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, I KEEP TWO COMPUTERS IN FRONT OF ME FOR THE PUR FOR THIS PARTICULAR PURPOSE. UH, I END UP GOING BACK TO MY TRIED AND TRUE EVERY TIME, WHICH I THINK IS A VERY TINY LITTLE LAPTOP AND, UH, BUT IT IS THE ONE THAT YOU CAN HEAR ME ON. SO IT, IT COULD BE A PROGRAMMING ISSUE. YOU MIGHT SOLVE THAT. ALSO STAFF, YOU MIGHT WANNA CHECK TO SEE IF PERHAPS THERE'S SOME PROBLEM WITH THAT TOO. MAYBE, MAYBE IT WON'T ACCEPT TOO MANY. YOU NEVER KNOW. WILL DO, WILL DO ALL. NOW, THE [6. 20-4292 Election of Officers] NEXT ISSUE UP, UM, BEFORE THE BOARD IS THE RESIGNATION OF DR. ZA FROM THE VICE CHAIRMAN'S POSITION, UH, UNDER THE RULES OF THE BOARD IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, MR. DORIAN, MR. SORRY. DONALD DORIAN IS AUTOMATICALLY ADVANCED. I I HAD A BAD NIGHTMARE THERE. , UH, IS AUTOMATICALLY ADVANCED IN THE POSITION FROM PRO TE TWO VICE CHAIR. THEREFORE WE'LL BE RE REPLACING THE PRO PROM POSITION. DO I'M TAKING, UH, REQUEST OR NOMINATIONS FOR THE PRO TEM POSITION? IF I COULD SHARE JUST, UH, REALLY QUICK, UH, JUST FOR THE RECORD, UH, IKE, MR. ORIAN TO ACCEPT THE AUTOMATIC MOVING UP TO VICE CHAIR. JUST FOR THE RECORD. I ACCEPT THE AUTOMATIC MOVING OF MYSELF UP TO VICE CHAIR. OKAY. SO ARE WE DOING NOMINATIONS NOW? WE'RE DOING NOMINATIONS NOW. OKAY. I NOMINATE ANDREW UNA . OKAY. ANY MORE NOMINATIONS? I THOUGHT, UH, SOMEONE HAD INTEREST IN NOMINATING MR. TEAL. NO. I'LL NOMINATE MR. TEEL. SMART MAN. . ALL RIGHT, COME ON ANDREW. THAT'S ANDREW NOMINATING. MR. TEAL. OKAY, MR. TEAL. I GUESS SO WE DIDN'T ASK YOU IF YOU ACCEPT THE NOMINATION, BUT I, I'LL ACCEPT. OKAY. AND MR. OZUNA, YOU ACCEPTED NOMINATION FOR I ACCEPT, RIGHT? OKAY. I'M GONNA TURN THE VOTING, UH, ROLL CALL OVER TO STAFF TO CONDUCT IT IN THEIR FASHION AND WE'LL SEE WHO HAS, WHO WILL BE REPLACING, UH, THE PRO POSITION. ALRIGHT, SO FIRST WE HAVE THE NOMINATION OF, UH, MR. OZUNA. SO I'LL, UH, CALL YOUR NAME AND JUST SAY, UH, YES OR NO. [02:10:01] UH, MS. CRUZ? YES. MR. TEEL? YES. MR. MANA? YES. MR. ORIAN? YES. MR. OZUNA ? UH, NO. OKAY. UH, MR. LOVE? YES. MS. FISHER? YES. MR. DELMER? YES. MS. TREVINO? YES. AND CHAIR MARTINEZ? I HAVE, I HAVE A POWER HERE. I I I I CAN SEE THIS HAPPENING. I KNOW. OKAY, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. ALRIGHT. GOT IT. SO I HAVE, UH, NINE TO ONE. ALRIGHT, SO NEXT VOTE WILL BE FOR, UH, MR. TEAL. ALRIGHT, SO MS. CRUZ? NO. MR. TEAL? NO. MR. MANA? YES. MR. ORIAN? YES. MR. OZUNA? YES. MR. LOVE? SURE. MS. FISHER, I, SORRY, COULD YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? MR, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES. MR. DELMER? YES. MR. VINNO? YES. AND CHAIR MARTINEZ? YES. OKAY. SO THAT IS ACTUALLY EIGHT TO TWO. SO MR. UH, IS PRO TEMP. THANK YOU. CAN I GIVE A SPEECH OR WELCOME BACK TO THE BOARD. UH, THANK YOU LEADERS OR WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL US. PEOPLE CALL US A LOT OF THINGS. YEAH, I'VE BEEN ON THE RECEIVING AND THE GIVING SIDE OF THAT, SO YES, I UNDERSTAND. CONGRATULATIONS. UH, THANK YOU. AND I THINK THAT THEY'LL PROCEED, UH, IN THE FUTURE. THE NEXT QUESTION IS, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY CHAIR, CHAIR? WE, UH, THE, OUR ATTORNEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE, UH, WHETHER OR NOT THE AUTOMATIC MOVING UP OF MR. ORIAN, UM, AND WE DON'T SEE IT IN THE, IN THE RULES AND PROCEDURES. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE NOMINATION FOR MR. ORIAN AND THEN DO AN OFFICIAL, UH, VOTE ON THAT. ALRIGHT. LEMME HAVE A NOMINATION. OKAY. WE HAVE A NOMINATION FOR VICE CHAIRMAN, UM, FOR MR. WHO? ORIAN. OKAY. ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? NO. ALRIGHT. AHEAD. VOTE ON ALL MS. CRUZ. YES. MR. TEAL? YES. MR. MANA? YES. MR. ORIAN? YES. MR. UNA? YES. MR. LOVE? UM, YES. YES. MR. DELMER? YES. YES. AND CHAIR MARTINEZ? YES. SO, UH, WELCOME UNANIM. ALRIGHT. WELCOME TO THE POSITION AS VICE CHAIRMAN, MR. YOUR OFFICIAL DUTIES BEGINNING OF THE NEXT MEETING. CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL THE VICTORS AND CONGRATULATIONS TO, TO THE NONS. SO NOW, DO WE HAVE ANY INFORMATION THAT NEEDS BE DISCUSSED FROM, UH, UNDERSTAND VIRTUAL MEETINGS WILL CONTINUE TO OCCUR NEXT MONTH AS WELL, IS THAT CORRECT? I'M SORRY, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? WE WERE GETTING FEEDBACK. OKAY. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, UH, VIRTUAL MEETINGS FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS WILL CONTINUE FOR THE ENTIRE MONTH OF, OF AUGUST AT LEAST. YES SIR. AT LEAST. ALRIGHT. UH, HOPEFULLY THIS DOESN'T GO ON FOREVER BECAUSE IT'S RATHER AWKWARD, BUT NOW WE'RE TRYING TO DO WHAT THE CITY BUSINESS NEEDS TO BE DONE. [02:15:01] AND I WANNA THANK YOU FOR BEING AS PAID EVERYONE ON THE BOARD FOR BEING AS PATIENT, INCLUDING THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU AS WELL FOR BEING AS PATIENT WITH US AS POSSIBLE. UH, THIS IS ALL, IT'S VERY AWKWARD TO DEAL WITH A SITUATION WHERE WE DON'T GET TO, UH, PERSONALLY LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE SPEAKING, BUT YOU KNOW, WE WE'RE DOING WHAT WE CAN. AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF THERE'S NO OTHER INFORMATION THAT NEEDS TO BE TRANSFERRED AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO GO OFFICIALLY INCLUDE THIS MEETING END OF THE SESSION FOR THE, UH, THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING WILL BE ON AUGUST 3RD, RIGHT HERE ON THIS CHANNEL. SO GOOD AFTERNOON AND GOODBYE. THANK YOU ALL. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.