[00:00:06]
[Call to Order]
GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.MY NAME IS ROGER MARTINEZ AND I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS OF THE CITY OF SAN SAN ANTONIO.
I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULAR NOTICE MEETING NOTICE OF THE CITY OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS INTO SESSION.
NOW, I GUESS WE HAVE THE SPANISH INTERPRETER NOTICE, OR IS THAT LEFT OUT? YES, SIR.
WE'RE BRINGING UP THE INTERPRETER NOW.
UH, NOW STAFF PLEASE CONDUCT THE ROLL CALL.
AND MAKE SURE TO HIT, HIT UNMUTE.
YOU MIGHT NEED TO DIAL BACK IN IF YOU, IF, IF YOU LOGGED OUT.
BUT, UH, WE CAN NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT MR. BATTLE IS PRESENT.
I THINK HE'S JUST TRYING TO LOG IN FROM HIS PHONE ALSO SO WE CAN HEAR HIM AND CHAIR MARTINEZ PRESENT.
BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH TODAY'S CASES, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A FEW WORDS OF EXPLANATION.
THE BOARD IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND NOT A COURT OF LAW.
WE ONLY EXAMINE THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE RELIEF SOUGHT AND DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN, IN DISPUTES OR LEGAL CLAIMS BETWEEN PARTIES.
SPECIFIC POWERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO US BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL.
THEY'RE CLEARLY DEFINED IN CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE AND OTHER ORDINANCES PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR AND DECIDE APPEALS FROM THE DECISIONS OR DETERMINATIONS MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CHAPTER 35 TO HEAR AND DECIDE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER CHAPTER 35, AND TO AUTHORIZE VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING REGULATIONS REQUIRED IN CHAPTER 35.
WE ALSO SERVE AS AN ADVISORY AND APPELLATE CAPACITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICE REGARDING, I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY.
UH, APPELLATE CAPACITY, UH, THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REGARDING REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FROM REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 28.
EVERY DECISION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD MUST BE BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT, AND EVERY FINDING OF FACT MUST BE SUPPORTED IN THE RECORD OF THE BOARD'S PROCEEDINGS.
EACH MEMBER WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO CARRY.
IT REQUIRES A CONCURRING VOTE OF 75% OF THE TOTAL BOARD MEMBERS, WHETHER PRESENT OR NOT, WHICH IS NINE VOTES, THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN GRANTING THE RELIEF, UH, REST WITH THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT MUST PRESENT FACTS ON WHICH THE REQUESTED RELIEF CAN BE LEGALLY GRANTED AND SUPPORTED APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD REGARDING APPEALS FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL.
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES ARE MADE TO THE DISTRICT COURT OR COUNTY COURT OF LAW BASED UPON THE RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS APPEALS FROM THE BOARD'S DECISION REGARDING CHAPTER 30 ON CHAPTER 2028 AND MADE ARE MADE TO THE CITY'S COUNCIL.
PRIOR TO THE STARTING WITH OUR ITEMS, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER LIKE TO OUR STAFF TO REVIEW THE MEETING'S FORMAT STAFF.
UH, SIR, UM, AS I, AS I READ THE STATEMENT, UM, I THINK YOUR CAMERA SHUT OFF MR. MARTINEZ.
YOU MIGHT JUST WANNA BE SURE TO, UH, ENABLE YOUR CAMERA AGAIN 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 VARIOUS 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.SANANTONIO.GOV/DSB OR BY CALLING IN FOR AUDIO ONLY AT 2 1 0 2 0 6 5 4 8 3.
TO INCORPORATE PUBLIC COMMENTS, SARAH, ARE FOUR OPPORTUNITIES.
THESE INCLUDE EMAIL OR MAIL OF COMMENTS, DROPPING OFF COMMENTS, LEAVING VOICEMAIL, OR ASKING TO BE CALLED DURING THE MEETING.
STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES, AND FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT, STAFF WILL READ INTO THE RECORD ANY EMAILS OR LETTERS RECEIVED.
STAFF WILL ALSO PLAY ANY MESSAGES RECEIVED BY VOICEMAIL.
LASTLY, FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO RECEIVE A CALLBACK, WE'LL CALL THEM TO STATE THEIR TWO MINUTE COMMENTS.
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 COMMISSION QUESTIONS.
LET'S BEGIN WITH OUR INDIVIDUAL HEARING ITEM.
[1. 20-5778 BOA-20-10300055]
STAFF.PLEASE PRESENT THE FIRST ITEM, AND I SHOULD BE ON CAMERA NOW.
THIS IS ZEKE FELISE WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
UH, THE CASE IS BO OA 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 5 5 AT 12 5 9 0 WEST AVENUE.
IT'S IN COUNCIL DISTRICT NINE.
THE APPLICANT IS CAROL CAROLINE E MCDONALD, UH, WITH BROWN ORTIZ TO REQUEST FOR A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER YARD TO ALLOW THE NORTH AND EAST SIDE BUFFER YARD TO BE FIVE FEET IN WIDTH.
THE CURRENT ZONING IS C TWO A H O D.
THE APPLICANT WILL BE CONSTRUCTING A ONE-STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY THAT WAS RECENTLY APPROVED FOR A C TWO ZONING DISTRICT DOWN ZONE FROM C THREE AND I ONE PARTIAL RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION WAS RECENTLY TAKEN FROM THE PROPERTY, LEAVING THE, THE DEVELOPABLE SPACE OF THE PROPERTY LIMITED.
ADDITIONALLY, THE CONFIGURATION AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES FURTHER RESTRICTS MAXIMUM USE OF THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY IN THE NORTH AND EAST ARE RESIDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTIES UTILIZED AS COMMERCIAL USES OF RESTAURANTS IN THE NORTH AND MECHANICAL AC AND HEATING REPAIR SHOP TO THE EAST.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN PHOTO OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF VO O A 2103 0 0 0 5 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE WILL NOT DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE DEVELOPING AND EXISTING COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES AND ADEQUATE SPACE WILL BE RESERVED FOR ALL REQUIRED SETBACKS AND PARKING SPACES.
THERE ARE EIGHT NOTICES SENT OUT, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN THE AREA WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
CAROLINE, UM, MCDONALD ON THE PHONE.
CAROLINE, WHEN YOU'RE READY, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, GO AHEAD.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR AND THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
UH, AGAIN, THIS IS CAROLINE MCDONALD WITH BROWNING ORTIZ ONE 12 EAST PECAN HERE AS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT OF AND PROPERTY OWNER OF 1 2 5 9 OH WEST AVENUE.
I DO HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION PREPARED IF STAFF COULD PLEASE GO TO SLIDE TWO.
THE, THE PROPERTY AGAIN IS 1 2 5 9 OH WEST AVENUE.
YOU CAN SEE WE'RE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF, UH, WEST AVENUE AND WEST NORTH LOOP ROAD AND DISTRICT NINE.
WE ARE AT, WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY 1.8 ACRES IN A PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL CORRIDOR.
YOU COULD PLEASE GO TO SLIDE THREE AS STAFF SHOWED BEFORE.
THIS IS THE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
UM, THIS VARIANCE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW FOR A REDUCED BUFFER.
THE CODE CURRENTLY REQUIRES 15 FEET, AND WE ARE PROPOSING REDUCTION OF 10 FEET FOR A TOTAL OF FIVE FEET.
UH, IF WE COULD LEAVE IT ON THIS SLIDE THREE THROUGHOUT THE PRESENTATION, IT MIGHT MAKE IT EASIER AND GIVE EVERYONE A BETTER VISUAL.
UM, AS STAFF WENT THROUGH, THERE ARE SOME SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT EXIST ON THIS PROPERTY.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SITE PLAN, UM, YOU'LL SEE BACK IN 2014, CITY OF SAN ANTONIO DID, UH, PERFORM AND EXECUTE RECORD A RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION.
THAT WEST NORTH LOOP ROAD WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY THERE, AND SO WE DID PREVIOUSLY HAVE ABOUT 2.3 ACRES, BUT AFTER THIS RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION, WE WERE REDUCED TO ABOUT 1.8.
UM, THAT ALSO, THAT ACQUISITION DID
[00:10:01]
NOT ONLY CUT BACK ON OUR PROPERTY SIDE, BUT DID CHANGE THE SIZE OF OUR PROPERTY.UM, AND AS STAFF STATED, THERE ARE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES TO OUR NORTH AND OUR EAST, BUT THEY ARE, UH, OCCUPIED BY COMMERCIAL USES AT THIS TIME.
UH, THIS, THIS REDUCTION OF THE BUFFER GUARD WILL NOT, UH, COMPROMISE THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE WE WILL STILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT BUILDING SETBACKS AND A BUFFER IN PLACE.
UM, THE, AS STAFF MENTIONED, WE DID REZONE THIS PROPERTY, UH, EFFECTIVE AUGUST, 2020 FROM I ONE AND C THREE TO C TWO TO ALLOW FOR THIS SINGLE PURPOSE PRIVATE OFFICE.
THIS, THAT DOWN ZONING FURTHER LIMITED THE USES FROM INDUSTRIAL HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL TO THOSE IN C TWO.
UM, THIS PROPOSED REDUCTION IN THE BUFFER WILL NOT INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS, BUT WILL INSTEAD ENHANCE THE AREA AND CHARACTER OF THIS CORRIDOR.
UM, SO I ASK OF YOU TODAY TO PLEASE APPROVE THIS VARIANCE REQUEST.
UM, WE ARE NOT, THIS REQUEST IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND IS THERE ARE SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT WERE NOT CAUSED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.
UH, I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, SO AGAIN, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR APPRO APPROVAL OF, OF THIS VARIANT.
UM, NOW LET'S, UH, ZEKE, DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, PUBLIC INPUT ON THESE OR, OR STAFF INPUT ON THIS? NO, SIR.
THERE'S NO COMMENTS RECEIVED AND NO CALLS.
WELL, THAT PRETTY MUCH MAKES THIS FAIRLY EASY TO DO.
NOW, UH, I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE BOARD, UH, TO QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANYONE REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE BOARD? I DON'T HEAR MR. OZUNA.
MY QUESTION IN REGARDS TO THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS PROVIDED, IS THAT, DOES THAT FIX THE LOCATION OF THE BUILDING AND STRUCTURES TO THE SITE WITH THE SITE PLAN THAT, UH, THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED? IF WE APPROVE THE VARIANCE TODAY? UH, HI.
UH, NO, THIS IS A DRAFT SITE PLAN.
UM, IT, IT SEEMED AT THE TIME OF ITS DRAFT THAT THAT WAS THE BEST, UM, THE BEST PLACE FOR THE BUILDING, UH, THE PARKING.
UM, BUT OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, AS THEY WORK THROUGH THE DIFFERENT BUILDING PERMIT STAGES AND, AND SITE PLAN REVISION, SOME, SOME ITEMS MAY CHANGE, BUT IT IS THE INTENT TO HAVE THAT BUILDING ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, RIGHT, AND OUTSIDE OF ANY OF THE BUFFER, UM, THAT 10 FOOT ZONES THAT ARE EVEN CONTEMPLATED.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER HAVE A QUESTION EITHER FOR STAFF OR FOR, FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY.
UH, THEREFORE I'M GONNA CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC AND REQUEST THAT A BOARD MEMBER MAKE A MOTION.
I'M SORRY, WHO WAS THAT? HER TWO, I'M SORRY.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A DASH 20 DASH 0 3 0 0 0 5 5, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTOR REQUEST FOR 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 15 FOOT TYPE B BUFFER YARD TO ALLOW THE NORTH AND EAST SIDE BUFFER YARDS TO BE FIVE FEET IN WIDTH, SITUATED AT 1 2 5 9 0 WEST AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING CAROLINE E MCDONALD.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED SHOW THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC.
IN THIS CASE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE CURRENTLY UNDERUTILIZED LOT, THE SURROUNDING AREA PREDOMINANTLY CONSISTS OF COMMERCIAL USES, TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
A, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
STAFF FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL, ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY ODD SHAPED LOTS.
SO LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL CREATE DIFFICULTY IN CONSTRUCTING A COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE WITH SPACE FOR PARKING AND TRAFFIC.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE
[00:15:01]
SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.THE SPIRIT OF ORDINANCE IS SUB, IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW.
THE INTENT OF THE BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENT IS TO CREATE BUFFERS BETWEEN ADJACENT PROPERTY USES AND PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE.
IN THIS CASE, THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES ARE COMMERCIALLY UTILIZED AND DUE TO THE RIGHT OF WAY, ACQUISITION REQUIRES A VARIANCE IN ORDER TO MEET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
FOUR, THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION ABUSE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION ABUSE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN A PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AREA.
THE VARIOUS WILL NOT INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES NOR ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY OF WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE C CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, AND WERE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
STAFF FINDS THAT DUE TO THE RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION, IRREGULAR, LOTS ADJACENT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND COMMERCIAL USE USES OF THOSE LOTS, A VARIANCES JUSTIFIED AND ARE NOT DUE TO FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES ARE DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITION OF THE DISTRICT, UM, AND THE MOTION.
NOW, ANDREW, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU EARLIER.
ARE YOU GONNA SECOND THE MOTION? ALRIGHT, VERY GOOD.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND.
UH, KIMBERLY, SINCE YOU ARE ORIGINATED THE MOTION, I'M GONNA ALLOW YOU TO START THE DISCUSSION.
I'M GONNA BE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION.
I, I THINK THAT THE, THE USE OF THAT LOT IS AN APPROPRIATE, UH, REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE.
UM, AND AS SAID IN THE MOTION, A LOT OF THIS WAS DUE TO THE, UH, RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION, SO MM-HMM.
SO I'M GONNA BE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION.
ANDREW, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION? YEAH, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS WELL.
I MEAN, OBVIOUS REASONS ARE THAT, THAT THIS IS THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT FOR, NOT, NOT, UH, DUE TO THE ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.
AND THIS IS A GOOD USE OF THE PROPERTY AND, UH, AND NO OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
UH, ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO ADD SOME INPUT? ORIAN, MR. ORIAN, PLEASE? YEAH, I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT I, UH, ACTUALLY YEARS AGO RESEARCHED THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY AND I'M GLAD THAT SOMEBODY'S FINALLY DOING SOMETHING RESPONSIBLE WITH IT.
BUT, UH, I WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THERE'S A BIG DRAINAGE EASEMENT ALONG THAT NEW PART OF THE STREET AND, UH, I MEAN, WITH ALL THE STUFF GOING ON OUT THERE, YOU KNOW, THERE USED TO BE A PART OF THE ZONED I ONE THAT THEY FIXED, OBVIOUSLY.
I MEAN, THIS, THIS THING LOOKS LIKE A RESPONSIBLE USE AND, AND EVERYTHING IS PUSHED TOWARDS THE NORTHEAST CORNER THERE BECAUSE OF ALL THE ENCUMBRANCES, UH, THAT ARE ON THE, THE SOUTHEAST, UH, SOUTHWEST CORNER.
SO I THINK THIS IS GREAT AND I'M ALL FOR IT.
ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY INPUT? NONE BEING THE CASE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL.
I SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. MANCHACA, MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.
MS. BRAGMAN? I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS.
MR. BATTLE, MAKE SURE TO HIT UNMUTE, SIR.
MR. DELMER, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MS. TREVINO.
YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
UH, I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. UNA? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT WITH THE UNANIMOUS VOTE.
THIS, UH, MOTION, UH, HAS APPROVED THE VARIANCE SHALL BE ISSUED.
UH, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT CASE.
[2. 20-5782 BOA-20-10300081]
B O A CASE 21 0 3 0 0 0 8 1 ADDRESS IS 9 31 HAYES STREET AND DISTRICT TWO.THE APPLICANT IS ADAM SANCHEZ.
IT'S A REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE OFFICER'S DECISION TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
CURRENT ZONING IS R FIVE HISTORIC, A H O D.
[00:20:01]
THIS IS A PHOTO OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ITSELF.WE DO HAVE EDWARD HALL WHO'LL BE PRESENTING ON BEHALF OF THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
EDWARD, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
UH, EDWARD HALL, CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1901 SOUTH ALAMO.
CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME OKAY? YES, EDWARD? YES.
UH, ZEKE, COULD YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE? JUST TO REPEAT, ZEKE MENTIONED THIS IS AN APPEAL OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S, DENIAL OF THE INSTALLATION OF WINDOWS AND THEN NEW CONSTRUCTION AT 9 31 HAYES THAT DO NOT MEET STAFF STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAME SLASH PROFILES, AND BOTTOM TOP AND MEETING RAIL PROFILES AND DIMENSIONS.
UH, THIS IS RELATIVELY LONG, SO PLEASE BEAR WITH ME.
THE APPLICANT RECEIVED CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FROM THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION WITH STIPULATIONS THAT INCLUDED THE INSTALLATION OF DOUBLE HONK WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS THAT WERE TO MEET STAFF STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
REGARDING APPROPRIATE, I THINK WE'VE LOST AUDIO.
UH, MARCH THE THIRD, 2019, THE APPLICANT RECEIVED CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FROM THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS THAT INCLUDED THE INSTALLATION OF DOUBLE HUNG WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS THAT WERE TO MEET STAFF STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAMES, PROFILES, AND BOTTOM TOP AND MEETING RAIL PROFILES AND DIMENSIONS.
THE APRIL 3RD, 2019 HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, THE APPLICANT RECEIVED FINAL APPROVAL WITH THE STIPULATIONS THAT INCLUDED THE INSTALLATION OF DOUBLE HUNG WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLA WOOD WINDOWS THAT WERE TO MEET STAFF STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAME SLASH PROFILES AND BOTTOM TOP AND MEETING RAIL PROFILES AND DIMENSIONS.
ON MAY THE 23RD, 2019, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED TO STAFF AN ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW TO ADDRESS THE STIPULATIONS OF THE APPROVAL.
STAFF SUBSEQUENTLY ISSUED THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, NOTING THE INSTALLATION OF A WINDOW PRODUCT HAD MET THE REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAME SLASH PROFILES AND BOTTOM TOP AND MEETING RAIL PROFILES AND DI DIMENSIONS.
THE ISSUED CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NOTED THAT A NEW APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED, REVIEWED, AND APPROVED BY THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IF THE APPLICANT INTENDED TO MODIFY THE APPROVED WINDOWS, WHICH WERE ALUMINUM CLA WOOD WINDOWS.
ON JANUARY THE 22ND OF 2020, O H B STAFF PERFORMED A SITE VISIT AND ISSUED A STOP WORK ORDER FOR THE INSTALLATION OF AN UNAPPROVED VINYL WINDOW, AS WELL AS OTHER MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROPOSED DESIGN, INCLUDING MODIFICATIONS TO FENESTRATION PATTERNS IN THE GARAGE DOORS.
THE INSTALLED WINDOWS DID NOT MEET THE REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAMES, SASH PROFILES, AND BOTTOM TOP AND MEETING RAIL PROFILES AND DIMENSIONS.
ON FEBRUARY THE FIFTH, 2020, THE APPLICANT RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO AMEND THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN REGARDING WINDOW FENESTRATION.
THE PREVIOUSLY INSTALLED VINYL WINDOWS WERE DENIED BY THE COMMISSION DUE TO NOT MEETING THE REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAMES, SASH PROFILES, AND BOTTOM TOP AND MEETING RAIL PROFILES AND DIMENSIONS.
AND THEN LASTLY, AT THE JULY 15TH, 2020, HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION HEARING, THE H D R C DENIED A PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT WOULD MAINTAIN THE DENIED WINDOWS AS INSTALLED WHILE INSTALLING WOOD WINDOWS SCREENS TO HIDE THE INSTALLED VINYL WINDOWS.
UH, BRIEFLY, I'LL GO OVER THE APPLICABLE CITATIONS HERE.
THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, CHAPTER FOUR, GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION NOTES THAT MATERIALS THAT COMPLIMENT THE TYPE, COLOR AND TEXTURE OF MATERIALS TRADITIONALLY FOUND IN THE DISTRICT SHOULD BE USED IN NEW CONSTRUCTION.
MATERIALS SHOULD NOT BE SO DISSIMILAR AS TO DISTRACT FROM THE HISTORIC INTERPRETATION OF THE DISTRICT.
FOR EXAMPLE, CORRUGATED METAL SIDING WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR A NEW STRUCTURE IN A DISTRICT COMPRISED OF WOOD SIDING.
THESE ARE STAFF STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WINDOWS IN ADDITIONS AND NEW CONSTRUCTIONS.
THESE STANDARDS HAVE BEEN ROUTINELY
[00:25:01]
UPHELD BY THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION AND HAVE BEEN IN USE FOR APPROXIMATELY THREE YEARS.UH, I WILL GO THROUGH THOSE BRIEFLY IF YOU'LL ALLOW.
UH, IN GENERAL, WINDOWS USED IN NEW CONSTRUCTION SHOULD BE SIMILAR IN APPEARANCE TO THOSE COMMONLY FOUND WITHIN THE DISTRICT IN TERMS OF SIZE PROFILING CONFIGURATION.
WHILE NO MATERIAL IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, A HIGH QUALITY WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW PRODUCT OFTEN MEETS THE GUIDELINES WITH THE STIPULATIONS LISTED BELOW.
WINDOWS SHOULD FEATURE TRA TRADITIONAL DIMENSIONS AND PROPORTIONS IS FOUND WITHIN DISTRICT MEETING RAILS SHOULD BE NO TALLER THAN 1.25 INCHES.
STYLES MUST BE NO WIDER THAN 2.25 INCHES.
TOP AND BOTTOM SASHES MUST BE EQUAL IN SIZE UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED.
THERE SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF TWO INCHES IN DEPTH BETWEEN THE FRONT FACE OF THE WINDOW TRIM AND THE FRONT FACE OF THE TOP WINDOW SASH.
THIS MUST BE ACCOMPLISHED BY RECESSING THE WINDOW SUFFICIENTLY WITHIN THE OPENING OR WITHIN THE, WITH THE INSTALLATION OF ADDITIONAL TRIM WINDOW TRIM.
TO ADD THICKNESS, ALL WINDOWS SHOULD BE SUPPLIED IN A BLOCK FRAME AND EXCLUDE NAILING FINS, WHICH LIMIT THE ABILITY TO SUFFICIENTLY RECESS THE WINDOWS WINDOW TRIM MUST FEATURE TRADITIONAL DIMENSIONS AND ARCHITECTURALLY APPROPRIATE CASING IN SLOPE SEAL DETAIL WINDOWS SHOULD FEATURE CLEAR GLAZING.
LOW EAR REFLECTIVE COATINGS ARE NOT RECOMMENDED FOR REPLACEMENTS.
THE GLAZING SHOULD NOT FEATURE PHOTO DIVIDED LIGHTS WITH AN INTERIOR GRILL IF APPROVED TO MATCH A HISTORIC WINDOW CONFIGURATION, THE WINDOW SHOULD FEATURE TRUE EXTERIOR MUSS AND WOULD WINDOWS SHOULD FEATURE A PAINTED FINISH.
IF A CLAD OR NON CLAD PRODUCT IS APPROVED, WIDER METALLIC MANUFACTURERS COLORS IS NOT ALLOWED, AND COLOR SELECTION MUST BE PRESENTED TO STAFF.
UM, AS I'VE MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY ON THE PAST FEW SLIDES, THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVED A WOOD OR AN ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW.
THE APPLICANT SUBSEQUENTLY SUBMITTED AN ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW THAT MET THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, WHICH ARE SHOWN ON SLIDE 35.
AT THIS TIME, THE APPLICANT THEN INSTALLED VINYL WINDOWS THAT WERE NOT APPROVED BY THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION THAT ALSO DO NOT MEET THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS SHOWN ON SLIDE 35 AT THIS TIME.
ZEKE, COULD YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE? THIS IS, UH, AN EXCERPT FROM OUR SPECIFICATIONS FOR WINDOWS AND NEW CONSTRUCTION.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE, THIS IS ACTUALLY, UH, AN ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW.
UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MEETING RAILS IN THE CENTER OF THE WINDOW, YOU CAN SEE THAT DIMENSION THAT WE'RE REFERRING TO AT 1.25 INCHES AS WELL AS THE TOP AND BOTTOM RAILS.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE HOW THE WINDOW IS SUFFICIENTLY, UH, RECESSED WITHIN THE OPENING.
UH, BUT THEN ON THE RIGHT SIDE, OR ACTUALLY I SHOULD SAY IN THE MIDDLE WHERE THE RED X IS, UH, YOU SEE A WINDOW THAT'S, UH, A BIT MORE, UH, CONSISTENT WITH THE WINDOW THAT'S BEEN INSTALLED THAT WAS NOT APPROVED AT 9 31 HAZE.
UH, THIS WINDOW DOESN'T FEATURE TRADITIONAL DIMENSIONS.
THE WINDOW ISN'T SUFFICIENTLY RECESSED WITHIN THE OPENING.
AND HERE ARE, HERE ARE, UM, A FEW PHOTOS FROM THE ACTUAL PROPERTY 9 31 HAZE.
THE INSTALLED WINDOWS DO NOT MEET THE REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAME SLASH PROFILES, AND BOTTOM TOP AND MEETING RAIL PROFILES AND DIMENSIONS.
ALSO, IF YOU CAN RECALL BACK TO THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS THAT I READ, NEW WINDOWS ARE NOT TO FEATURE FAUX DIVIDED LIGHTS.
UH, THE WINDOWS THAT HAVE BEEN INSTALLED HERE DO FEATURE FO DIVIDED LIGHTS RATHER THAN AN ACTUAL WOOD MU.
BRIEF FINDINGS AT THE APRIL 3RD, 2019 HISTORIC AND DESIGNER REVIEW COMMISSION HEARING.
THE APPLICANT RECEIVED APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A NEW RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WITH THE STIPULATION THAT WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLA WOOD WINDOWS WERE TO BE INSTALLED.
THE APPLICANT SATISFIED THE STIPULATION BY SUBMITTING AN ALUMINUM PLAID WITH WINDOW PRODUCT TO O H B STAFF THAT MET THE REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING TYPE CONFIGURATION AND PROFILE, AND A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WAS SUBSEQUENTLY ISSUED ON MAY 23RD, 2019.
THE C O A IS THE ISSUED C O A NOTED THAT A NEW APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED, REVIEWED, AND APPROVED BY THE H D R C IF THE APPLICANT INTENDED TO MODIFY THE APPROVED WINDOWS FINDING.
THE REQUESTED VINYL WINDOWS WERE INSTALLED WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, NOR ARE THEY CONSISTENT WITH O H P STAFF STANDARDS FOR SPECIFICATIONS FOR WINDOWS AND NEW CONSTRUCTION ON FEBRUARY THE FIFTH, 2020.
THE H D R C DENIED THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WINDOWS DUE TO THE INSTALLED WINDOWS NOT MEETING THE REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAME SLASH PROFILES AND BOTTOM TOP AND MEETING RAIL PROFILES AND DIMENSIONS FINDING C THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A SUBSEQUENT REQUEST TO THE HISTORIC AND
[00:30:01]
DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL OF WOOD WINDOWS SCREENS TO COVER THE DENIED WINDOWS, WHICH WAS HEARD AT THE JULY 15TH, 2020 H D R C HEARING.THIS REQUEST WAS DENIED IN PART BECAUSE OF THE IN INAPPROPRIATE WINDOWS THAT, THAT DO NOT MEET THE REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAME PROFILES AND BOTTOM TOP OF MEETING RAIL PROFILES.
FINDING D STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THROUGHOUT THE REVIEW PROCESS, INCLUDING HEARINGS IN 2019 AND 2020 HAS INCLUDED THE INSTALLATION OF WOOD OR ALUMINUM PLAID WOOD WINDOWS, WHICH MEET THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY REQUIRED BY STAFF REGARDING APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAMES, SASH PROFILES, AND BOTTOM TOP OF MEETING RAIL PROFILES AND DIMENSIONS.
THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE APPEAL.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE ORIGINALLY APPROVED WINDOWS BE INSTALLED, WHICH FEATURE APPROPRIATE DIMENSIONS, BLOCK FRAME SLASH PROFILES, AND BOTTOM TOP AND MEETING RAIL PROFILES AND DIMENSIONS.
UH, THIS CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF NEEDED.
WE'LL, UH, THINK WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND WE MAY BRING SOME QUESTIONS BACK TO YOU.
ALL RIGHT, NOW LET'S GO AHEAD AND, AND BRING THE APPLICANT FORWARD.
UM, MR. SANCHEZ AND, UH, MR. GI ALONG WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER, MRS. JOHNSON, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION.
THIS PHONE NUMBER, I NEED HIM TO BE CONFERENCED IN USING A DIFFERENT PHONE NUMBER.
I NEED TO HAVE CHRISTOPHER GILL CONFERENCED IN AND I CAN PROVIDE YOU A PHONE NUMBER FOR HIM.
AREA CODE 2 1 0 5 8 4 1 1 1 7.
OKAY, WE'LL GO CONFERENCING IN NOW.
OKAY, WE'LL WE WILL HANG TIGHT.
ARE YOU ABLE TO START THE PRESENTATION OR DO YOU WANNA WAIT FOR MR. GI? WE NEED TO WAIT FOR MR. GI.
IS MS. JOHNSON ON THE LINE? MR. GILL, ARE YOU THERE? YES, I AM.
ALRIGHT, SO MR. SANCHEZ, WE HAVE MR. GILL ON THE LINE.
WE'RE MAKING SURE TO GET, UH, MS. JOHNSON ON THE NOW.
ALRIGHT, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND START WITH YOUR PRESENTATION.
ADAM, YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH THIS? YES, PLEASE.
HEY, EVERYONE, APPRECIATE YOU, UH, MAKING THE TIME TODAY.
UM, CHRISTOPHER GILL WITH CENTER CITY DEVELOPMENT, UH, 4 7 2 5 COLLEGE PARK.
UM, IF YOU PULL UP THE, UM, LET'S SEE, THE, THE PRESENTATION THAT WE SUBMITTED, WE'VE GOT THAT UP HERE.
SO KEEP IN MIND IF YOU'RE GONNA SEE IT IN A DELAYED RESPONSE, SO JUST LET US KNOW WHAT SLIDE AND WE'LL GET TO IT RIGHT AWAY.
YEAH, SO JUST THE, THE FIRST SLIDE IS JUST GIVING AN EXHIBIT.
THIS WAS A VACANT UNIMPROVED, UM, PIECE OF PROPERTY IN 9 3 1 HAY STREET.
JUST FOR CONTEXT, YOU GO TO PAGE TWO, SIR, ARE YOU STILL THERE? YES, I AM.
[00:35:01]
WITH YOUR PRESENTATION.IT'S STILL SEWING PAGE ONE HERE ON THIS VIDEO STREAM.
UM, REMEMBER, REMEMBER IT'S GONNA BE DELAYED ON YOUR, ON YOUR SIDE.
SO ON OUR SIDE WE'RE SEEING IT LIVE.
PAGE NUMBER AND WE'LL GET TO IT.
SO ON, YOU KNOW, PAGE TWO, AGAIN, WE HAVE THE FINISHED PHOTOS OF THE, UM, HISTORICALLY APPROVED, UM, NEW CONSTRUCTION HOME THERE.
ON PAGE THREE, WE HAVE AN EXHIBIT OF THE TYPES OF WINDOWS THAT WERE INSTALLED, UM, WHICH SEEMED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH A LOT OF THE OTHER NEW CONS, UM, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, PAGE FOUR, UH, WE HAVE THE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED INITIAL WINDOW DETAIL, UM, WHICH IF YOU ZOOM IN YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE, UM, THE DIMENSIONS AND THE INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS, UM, WITH HOW THAT IS GOING TO BE INSTALLED, BUT DECIDING, RUNNING UP TO THE EDGE OF THE WINDOW, TRIM, TRIM, UM, AND THE, JUST THE, THE GENERAL CONDITIONS THERE.
UM, AS WELL AS A DETAIL OF THE, THE WINDOW INSTALLATION.
UM, A SINGLE DETAIL OF INSTALLATION ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF PAGE FOUR.
SO I THINK, I THINK THE ISSUE AROSE WHEN, WHEN THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF CHANGING THE WINDOW FROM THE ORIGINAL ALUMINUM WOOD CLAD WINDOW TO A VINYL WINDOW, UM, THAT, THAT HAD A SIMILAR PROFILE AND AN INDICATION WAS MADE THAT THIS WAS A, WAS A WORKABLE SOLUTION.
UM, BUT, BUT WE DROPPED THE BALL ON GETTING THE, THE UPDATED DETAIL OVER POST THE INITIAL O H P APPROVAL OF THE PLANS, UM, THAT SHOWED THE WINDOW THAT AGAINST MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT, UM, HIGH QUALITY VINYL WINDOW, UM, THAT THAT IS, YOU KNOW, MORE APPROPRIATE FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, UM, IN THIS AREA.
SO IF YOU GO DOWN TO PAGE FIVE, UM, AND I THINK THESE PICTURES MAY HAVE BEEN SHOWED EARLIER, BUT UM, AFTER THE HOME WAS COMPLETED, THE WINDOWS ARE INSTALLED AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WORKABLE SOLUTION WITHOUT COMPROMISING A LIVED-IN STRUCTURE BY REMOVING ALL OR MANY OF THE WINDOWS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THE STRUCTURE AND CREATING WOODEN FRAME OR WOODEN SCREENS, UM, THAT ARE HISTORICALLY APPROPRIATE THAT MATCH THE SURROUNDING STRUCTURES, UM, WAS A SOLUTION THAT WAS POTENTIALLY EXPLORED, UM, AND HOPED THAT COULD CREATE A, A WORKABLE SOLUTION.
UH, DOWN ON PAGE SIX, YOU WILL SEE SOME OF THE DEPTH AND THE, UM, THE DIMENSIONS OF THE PROFILE OF THE WINDOW FRAMES, UM, THERE, SO THAT, THAT THEY ARE MEETING A, A LARGE AMOUNT OF DEPTH, UM, FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THESE, OF THESE WINDOWS.
UM, JUST SOME DETAILS OF THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION AND THEN I GUESS DOWN ON PAGE EIGHT OR TWO, ONE'S A HOME DIRECTLY NEXT DOOR AND ANOTHER'S A HOME ON THE BLOCK THAT HAVE DETAILS OF WOODEN SCREENS, UM, THAT WE ARE CONFIDENT WE COULD CREATE A SIMILAR, OR NOT A SIMILAR, WE COULD CREATE AN EXACT MATCH TO CREATE A SIMILAR LOOK AND FEEL ON THE SUBJECT HOME, UM, FOR THIS HOME.
BUT AGAIN, WOULD, WOULD PREVENT, UM, COMPROMISE OF A, OF A STRUCTURE THAT'S ALREADY COMPLETED THIS POINT.
SO, UM, GIVES A, A GENERAL OUTLINE OF, OF THE, THE PROJECT.
UM, WE, WE SEE THAT THERE'S BEEN A, A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT WINDOWS INSTALLED ON NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.
UM, AND WE HOPE THAT, UM, THE QUALITY OF THE HOME AND THE QUALITY OF THE WINDOWS AND A SOLUTIONS SIMILAR TO INSTALLING, UM, WITH SCREENS, UM, WOULD BE FOUND APPROPRIATE.
AND, UM, AND WORKABLE, UH, I'VE LOST AUDIO.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR PRESENTATION, SIR? YES, THAT DOES THIS TIME.
IS, ARE ANY OF THE OTHER, UH, ATTENDING, UM, APPLICANTS ARE GOING TO BE SPEAKING? WE WERE, WE WERE HOPING TO SPEAK VERY GOOD.
REMEMBER ABOUT THE NAME AND ADDRESS.
MS. JOHNSON, IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME AND, AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
THIS IS, UH, FAITH AND ALLEN LOWRY, FAITH JOHNSON AND ALLEN LOWRY AT 9 31 HAYES STREET.
ALRIGHT, CONTINUE WITH YOUR EXPLANATION.
[00:40:01]
GREAT, THANK YOU.AND THIS IS THE, THE FIRST TIME IN THIS PROCESS THAT WE'VE, UM, ACTUALLY COME AND, AND SPOKEN.
SO I WANTED TO THANK YOU ALL FOR HAVING US, UM, AND LETTING US BE PART OF THIS PRESENTATION.
UM, SO I'VE NEVER PRESENTED AT THE H D R C OR AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
I AM OF COURSE, AWARE OF THE WORK THAT YOU ALL DO, SPECIFICALLY IN MY CASE.
UH, MY GRANDFATHER LIVED OVER ON
HE WAS IN A HISTORIC HOME AND MY PARENTS HAVE BEEN IN KING WILLIAM AND LAVACCA AT VARIOUS POINTS OVER THE LAST 20 OR SO YEARS.
SO, UH, LIVING IN AND IMPROVING HISTORIC HOMES.
AND SO THROUGH THOSE, THOSE TWO CONNECTIONS IN MY OWN LIFE, I'VE BEEN AWARE OF THE WORK OF BOTH THE, THE B O A AND THE H D R C.
UH, HOME OWNERSHIP IS A HUGE POINT OF PRIDE FOR MY HUSBAND AND I, UH, NEITHER OF OUR PARENTS OWNED HOMES UNTIL QUITE A BIT LATER IN THEIR LIFE.
SO OWNING OUR FIRST HOME HAS BEEN, UH, OUR VERSION OF THE AMERICAN DREAM, THEN BUILDING IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THE WAY THAT WE HAVE WAS ITSELF A COMPROMISE BETWEEN MY HUSBAND AND I, BETWEEN ALAN AND I, I WAS HOPING TO BUY A HISTORIC HOME AND WORK ON IT, BUT HE WAS VERY, UH, UH, SKEPTICAL OF UNFORESEEN COSTS AND HOW THAT COULD GO.
AND SO WE SAID, WELL, WHAT IF WE BUILD A NEW HOME THAT LOOKS LIKE AN OLD HOME? THAT WAS THE COMPROMISE THAT WE, UH, WE STRUCK BETWEEN US.
WE SAID, THAT'LL BE THE VERY BEST OF BOTH WORLDS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE SET OUT TO DO.
WE DECIDED AT THE BEGINNING, WE ARE NOT TRYING TO PUSH THE ENVELOPE.
WE WANT A HOME THAT'S CONSISTENT TO THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THAT LOOKS LIKE AN OLD HISTORIC HOUSE, BUT WHERE WE'LL BE ABLE TO RAISE OUR OWN FAMILY.
WE LINKED UP WITH ADAM AND HIS TEAM AT THE VERY BEGINNING AND THEY HELPED US FIND THE LOT WHERE WE ENDED UP BUILDING THIS LOT.
HAD BEEN VACANT FOR ABOUT 30 YEARS.
UH, I'M TOLD FROM THE NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE AROUND US THAT THE HOME THAT WAS ON THIS LOT, UH, BURNT DOWN ABOUT THAT THAT LONG AGO, 20, 25 YEARS AGO, 30 YEARS AGO, AND NOTHING SAT ON IT UNTIL WE BOUGHT IT.
UM, WE WORKED WITH ADAM AND HIS TEAM ON THE DESIGN.
THEY COOPERATED WITH THE H D R C AND UH, THEN THEY STARTED CONSTRUCTION.
ALAN AND I VISITED ALMOST EVERY DAY DURING THE CONSTRUCTION TO SEE HOW IT WAS GOING.
WE CAME AT ALL DIFFERENT TIMES OF THE DAY.
I WOULD SOMETIMES BRING MY COFFEE IN THE MORNING.
I WANTED TO SEE WHAT IT WAS GONNA LOOK AND SOUND LIKE IN THE MORNING.
I WOULD, UH, AT TIMES BRING DINNER AND WE'D JUST STAND ON THE FOUNDATION AND EAT OUR DINNER.
UH, AT ONE POINT MY NEIGHBOR CAME TO CHECK ON ME 'CAUSE I WAS STANDING ON THE ROOF OF THE CAR AND I WAS THINKING, WHAT'S THE VIEW FROM THE SECOND STORY GONNA LOOK LIKE? UH, AND I WAS HOPING TO GET A GLIMPSE OF THAT.
UM, THAT ITSELF WAS A BIT OF AN HOMAGE TO, UH, MY PARENTS' HOUSE AT 1 1 2 KING WILLIAM.
THERE'S A SMALL PORCH ON THE FRONT OF OUR HOUSE.
IT WAS MEANT TO LOOK LIKE THE SMALL JULIET PORCH ON THAT HOUSE.
UM, AND IMPORTANTLY THAT ALSO GAVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET OUR NEIGHBORS WHO, WHO HAVE BEEN REALLY GREAT.
WE HAD NO IDEA AT THAT POINT THAT, UH, THE WINDOWS BEING INSTALLED IN THE HOUSE WERE CONTROVERSIAL OR WOULD BE A SOURCE OF CONSTERNATION.
UH, WE AREN'T SLIPPERS, WE AREN'T DEVELOPERS.
WE DON'T HAVE A BACKGROUND IN CONSTRUCTION.
SO WE DID NOT MAKE, UH, DESIGN CHOICES AND MATERIALS CHOICES WITH KIND OF A, A CHEAPEST, LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR IN MIND AND HOPE THAT MAXIMIZING RETURN WE WERE AND STILL ARE EXCITED TO HAVE BUILT A HIGH QUALITY HOME WHERE WE COULD RAISE OUR FAMILY.
WE WERE BLESSED TO GET INTO THE HOUSE, IN FACT, BEFORE CORONAVIRUS HIT.
SO WE, WE'VE BEEN DOING OUR TELEWORK POSTURE FROM THIS HOME, UH, UM, AND FEEL BLESSED TO HAVE DONE THAT.
I WANTED TO GIVE THAT BACKGROUND, UH, TO THIS COMMITTEE TO HIGHLIGHT THE POINT THAT WE DID NOT INSTALL WINDOWS, UH, IN DEFIANCE OF THE H D R C OR IN AN ATTEMPT TO FLOOD ITS MISSION.
OUR GOAL HAS BEEN FROM THE BEGINNING TO BUILD A NEW HOUSE THAT LOOKS LIKE AN OLD HOUSE THAT FITS WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THAT'S WHAT ADAM AND HIS TEAM HAVE HELPED US TO DO.
I THINK THE H C R C HAS MADE ITS PERSPECTIVE CLEAR IN THIS CASE.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY I THINK IT'S ONE THAT THAT REALLY INSULATES AND PROTECTS REPEAT BUILDERS AND FLIPPERS.
PEOPLE WHO ARE IN FRONT OF THE H D R C ALL THE TIME WHO CAN OPERATE
[00:45:01]
WITHOUT A MISTAKE, WHO HAVE INSIDE CONNECTIONS AND KNOWLEDGE.WE DON'T HAVE PLANS FOR A SECOND OR THIRD HOME.
UM, AND SO FOR US, OUR FOCUS AT THIS POINT IS A WORKABLE AND PRAGMATIC SOLUTION THAT, UH, PRESERVES AND FURTHERS THE MISSION OF THE H D R C, UH, WITHOUT A, A PUNITIVE QUALITY.
AND I'M VERY HOPEFUL THAT WOOD SCREENS CAN BE THAT SOLUTION BECAUSE THEY LOOK LIKE SO MANY OF OUR NEIGHBORS WINDOWS.
UM, WE THINK IT WOULD BRING THE HOUSE EVEN CLOSER TO THE VISION OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WITHOUT REQUIRING US TO RIP OUT BRAND NEW ECO-FRIENDLY WINDOWS.
AND AS I WALK OUR DOG AROUND THE BLOCK, I I, I DO SEE WE'VE ONLY I THINK, PUT IN PICTURES OF TWO HOMES, BUT THERE ARE HALF A DOZEN OR A DOZEN HOMES ON THE, THE BLOCK LOOP AROUND OUR HOUSE THAT HAVE THESE SCREENS.
IF, IF DOG BARKING IN THE BACK.
UH, IT WAS SUGGESTED TO ME, AND AS I TALKED TO SOME, UM, SOME PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT OPINIONS THAT MAYBE ONE OF THE PROBLEMS IS THAT PEOPLE SAY THEY'RE GONNA PUT ON WOOD SCREENS AND THEY NEVER APPEAR.
AND TO THAT, I'D SAY THAT WE'VE ALREADY MADE THE GOOD FAITH SHOWING PUT ON A DEMONSTRATION OF THE TYPE OF WOOD SCREEN THAT WOULD GO ON, AND THAT THAT GOOD FAITH SHOULD BE CREDITED.
UM, UH, UH, IF THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE GUIDELINE, UH, MIGHT BE SUCH THAT THE APPEAL SHOULD BE DENIED, WE DO ASK INSTEAD FROM THIS BODY FOR A NON-PUNITIVE WORKING COMPROMISE THAT WE ARE HOPEFUL BRINGS OUR HOUSE EVEN CLOSER TO THE MISSION OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
NOT AS AN EXCEPTION WITH THE GOAL OR, OR MOVING TOWARDS SWALLOWING THE RULE, BUT BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT OUTCOME FOR THIS CASE.
SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR, FOR GIVING US THE OPPORTUNITY.
UH, IS ANYONE ELSE GONNA BE SPEAKING, UM, FROM THE APPLICANT'S STANCE? NONE.
UM, I'M GONNA OPEN THE, IT SOUNDS LIKE ADAM'S, ADAM MIGHT'VE GOTTEN DISCONNECTED.
IF THERE'S A WAY TO RECONNECT HIM.
UH, ZEKE, WHAT DO WE HAVE TO DO THERE? WE'RE, WE'RE CALLING HIM RIGHT NOW.
LORD, I SUGGEST YOU USE THIS TIME TO ORGANIZE YOUR QUESTIONS THAT YOU'LL BE ASKING BOTH THE H D R C REPRESENTATIVE EDWARD OR, UH, OR THE APPLICANTS SIR.
ALSO, JUST SO YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE ONE LIVE CALLER, FOUR VOICEMAILS AND FIVE LETTERS TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD.
WELL, I'M JUST, I'M JUST TRYING TO USE DEAD AIRTIME.
THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW AHEAD OF TIME.
IN THE MEANTIME, WOULD YOU LIKE US TO PLAY THE VOICEMAILS? UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND PLAY THE VOICEMAILS SO YOU GET IT CONNECTED THEN, THEN STOP THEM WHEN YOU GET THE APPLICANT ON BOARD.
WELL, I'M JUST, I'M JUST TRYING TO USE AIR TIME.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT MR. SANCHEZ, IS THAT YOU? YES, I'M HERE NOW.
MAKE SURE TO, UH, TURN DOWN WHATEVER, UH, WHATEVER SPEAKER YOU HAVE ON IN THE BACKGROUND.
I HEARD YOU, UH, GOT DISCONNECTED, BUT YOU WANTED TO LET'S GO AHEAD VOICEMAIL.
THEY'RE GONNA PLACE SOME VOICEMAILS.
SO TURN DOWN WHATEVER YOU HAVE ON IN THE BACKGROUND.
WE'RE LIVE IN THE ACTUAL MEETING, SO ONLINE IS ALWAYS GONNA BE A DELAY, SO YOU'RE OKAY.
TURN DOWN WHATEVER YOU HAVE AND GO AHEAD AND, AND STATE WHATEVER YOU NEED TO STATE.
WELL, FIRST OF ALL, AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE.
I WAS ACCIDENTALLY DISCONNECTED SOME, SOME GLITCH HERE WITH OUR PHONE SYSTEM.
SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING ME BACK IN.
UM, I WAS ABLE TO LISTEN AND RECONNECT, UH, ONLINE, SO I ONLY CAUGHT PART OF IT.
I DID CATCH, UM, PROBABLY THE SECOND HALF OF, UH, MS. JOHNSON'S, UH, PRESENTATION AND I DID CATCH, UM, THE FIRST PART OF CHRISTOPHER GILL'S PRESENTATION.
AND SO I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW THAT UP AND, AND REITERATE THE POINT THAT MS. JOHNSON MADE.
UH, AGAIN, WE'RE, WE'RE, IT WAS NEVER OUR INTENTION TO CIRCUMVENT ANY OF THE, OF THE PROCESSES.
UM, IT WAS ALWAYS CLEARLY OUR INTENTION TO INSTALL THESE
[00:50:01]
FINAL WINDOWS.AND WHEN WE HAD MADE SOME INITIAL PHONE CALLS, UM, TO DISCUSS THAT, AT NO POINT IN TIME DID ANYONE EVER SAY, OH, ABSOLUTELY NOT.
THERE'S NO WAY THAT'S NOT GONNA WORK.
UM, SO WE WENT FORWARD UNDER THAT PREMISE THAT WE WERE GONNA TURN IN THOSE DOCUMENTS, BUT IN THOSE INITIAL CALLS WHEN WE WERE JUST ASKING ABOUT ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS AND HAD WE HEARD THERE'S NO WAY THIS IS EVER GONNA WORK, WE WOULD'VE NEVER PROCEEDED, UM, FORWARD.
UM, AND WE ARE HOPEFUL THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE CAN FIND A RESOLUTION TO THIS AND, AND, AND WE'RE VERY WILLING TO INSTALL THESE WOOD SCREENS AND, UM, WE THINK IT'S GONNA MAKE THE HOUSE LOOK EVEN BETTER.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE FROM THE APPLICANTS THAT NEED TO BE SPEAKING? ZEKE? I NOT AWARE IF THEY, IF THEY HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER TO SAY? IF NOT, WE CAN GO TO THE, UH, THE FEEDBACK FROM THE, THE COMMUNITY.
DID YOU WANNA GO WITH THE LIVE CALLER FIRST, SIR? OR DO YOU WANNA GO VOICEMAIL? YES, LET'S GO WITH LIVE CALLER FIRST.
MS. CARMEN LIN, WHEN, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR, YOUR, UH, PRESENTATION.
YES, MY NAME IS, UH, CARMEN LIN AND I'M AT 9 2 7 HAY STREET.
UM, I WAS JUST CALLING, OF COURSE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF 9 31 HAY STREET AND JUST STATING FOR THE RECORD THAT I HAVE SEEN THEM MAKE IN GOOD FAITH ATTEMPTS AT MAKING THE ADJUSTMENTS SINCE, UM, RECEIVING NOTICE OF THEIR WINDOW COVERINGS AND SUCH.
I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE BEEN MAKING, UM, GREAT STRIDES TO IMPROVE THE LOOK OF A NEW HOME ON SUCH A HISTORIC BLOCK AND MAKING IT MESH WELL WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, GETTING THEIR, UM, I GUESS THEIR, THE OPINIONS OF THEIR NEIGHBORS AND TRYING TO COLLABORATE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF, UM, BE KIND OF AN EYEWITNESS AND GIVE MY TESTIMONIAL THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE BEEN MAKING STRIDES TO, TO
I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A PRESENTATION, SO THAT IS JUST, JUST MY, UH, COMMENTING ON THAT.
WELL THANK, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR INPUT.
WE APPRECIATE THAT YOU TOOK THE TIME TO RESPOND TO THIS MEETING.
UH, ZEKE, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER, UH, VERBAL RESPONSES? NO, SIR.
THAT WAS THE ONLY, SHE WAS THE ONLY LIVE CALLER.
THE VOICEMAILS AND 1417 CROCKETT STREET, AND I'M CALLING ON BEHALF OF CASE NUMBER 0 8 1, ARE THE LAST THREE DIGITS.
UM, I'M CALLING IN FAVOR OF THE APPEAL AND ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THIS HOUSE, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S BEAUTIFUL.
IT'S A GREAT ADDITION TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND I DON'T THINK THE WINDOWS ARE AS OFFENSIVE AS FOLKS ARE SAYING THAT THEY ARE.
SO I AM IN SUPPORT OF THEIR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
JUST FEEL FREE TO GIMME A CALL BACK.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 863-9358.
HI, MY NAME IS KELSEY SCHAFER.
UM, I LIVE AT NINE TWO TWO HAYES STREET.
UM, MY TELEPHONE NUMBER IS (210) 332-0603.
UM, AND I AM CALLING ABOUT, UM, CASE, UH, LAST THREE DIGITS, 0 8 1, UM, FOR THE APPEAL OF APPROPRIATION.
UM, I AM IN FAVOR OF, UH, THE WINDOWS BEING AS IS OR WITH WOOD COVERING.
UM, EITHER ONE IS TOTALLY FINE WITH ME.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
UM, I AM CALLING ABOUT B O A DASH 20 DASH 3 8 1.
THE PROPERTY ADDRESS IS 9 31 HAYES STREET.
UH, I'M A DIRECT NEIGHBOR OF THIS HOME AND I'M IN FAVOR OF, UH, OF THIS BO O A REQUEST.
[00:55:02]
ALRIGHT, IS THAT ALL THE, UH, UH, ONE MORE SIR.HI, UH, MY NAME IS, UH, DWAYNE WHITE, AND I LIVE AT 9 23 HAYES, AND I FEEL THAT IN CASE NUMBER 0 8 1, THERE IS NO NEED TO, UH, MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THAT HOUSE.
I THINK IT'S A VERY BEAUTIFUL HOUSE, AND THE ISSUE, UH, THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE DON'T NOTICE.
UM, THOSE PEOPLE ARE VERY NICE PEOPLE, AND THAT'S A VERY HOUSE AND ENHANCES THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT CONCLUDES THE VOICEMAIL, SIR.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND START READING OFF THE LETTERS.
THE FIRST ONE IS FROM HARVIS HOLLAND, PRESIDENT OF DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UH, THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HISTORIC RESERVATION ARCHITECTURE REVIEW COMMITTEE HAS REVIEWED THE PROPOSED PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY, UH, NICK CAR JS DEVELOPMENT FOR THE AMENDMENT TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN REGARDING WINDOWS WINDOW ADMINISTRATION AND GARAGE DOORS.
UPON REVIEW, THE H P A R C DOES NOT SUPPORT THE PROJECT AS PRESENTED AND SUPPORT STAFF, UH, STIPULATIONS.
THE NEXT ONE IS FROM, UH, PATTY Z Z, PRESIDENT OF THE, UH, CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO.
CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO CONCURS WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THE APPEAL OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S DECISION TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 9 31 HAY STREET.
UH, THE APPLICANT KNOWINGLY INSTALLED VINYL WINDOWS AND A NEW RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECT WITHIN THE DIGNEY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DISTRICT WHEN THE APPROVED WINDOWS WERE, UH, SPECIFIED TO THE ALUMINUM CLA WOOD WINDOWS.
THE, THE VINYL WINDOWS ALSO DO NOT COMPLY WITH STAFFED WINDOW DETAIL SPECIFICATIONS FOR INSTALLATION OF WINDOWS WITHIN HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT ALL O H P AND H D R C APPROVALS BE COMPLIED WITH, AND THAT A, UH, PRECEDENT NOT BE SET, UH, TO ALLOW CHANGES TO THESE APPROVED APPROVALS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.
ACTIONS SUCH AS, AS THESE, UH, UNDERMINED THE, THE PURPOSE OF HAVING A CITY DEPARTMENT AND COMMISSION TO PROTECT OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS.
NEXT ONE IS FROM KELBY BELLOWS AT FOUR 11 MUNCIE.
I'M REACHING OUT TO EXPRESS OUR FAVOR FOR THE APPEAL.
WE ARE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS TO THE ADDRESS IN QUESTION AND FULLY SUPPORT THEIR APPEAL.
THAT'S FROM KELBY AND BRADLEY BELLOWS.
NEXT ONE IS OUTSIDE THE 200 FOOT AREA.
UH, THIS IS FROM SCOTT ALBERT AT 9 22 NORTH PINE.
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A CERTIFICATE OF OF APPROVAL TO KEEP THE UNAPPROVED VINYL WINDOWS AND OTHER UNAPPROVED CHANGES SHOULD BE DENIED.
UH, THESE WINDOWS WERE NOT IN THE ORIGINAL C O A AND ARE NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NEW CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES FOR OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
FURTHER, FURTHERMORE, VINYL WINDOWS ARE A LOW QUALITY AND ENVIRONMENTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE CHOICE FOR ANY HOME AND WILL SADDLE, UH, THE OWNER WITH VERY EXPENSIVE REPLACEMENT EXPENSES EVERY 10 TO 15 YEARS.
THE APPLICANT'S, UH, COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR COSA GUIDELINES, APPROVAL APPROVED COAS AND THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD DEMAND, THE NEED FOR INCREASED O H P PRO, UH, PROGRESS INSPECTION FOR THE APPLICANT AND OTHERS IN THE FUTURE.
NEXT ONE, ALSO OUTSIDE THE 200 FOOT AREA FROM MONICA SAVINO AT 1120 EAST CROCKETT, I'M WRITING AN OPPOSITION OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR VARIANCES IN THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED C O A FROM O H P AND SUBSEQUENT, UH, DECISIONS BY H G R C FOR INCORRECT AND NON-CONFORMING WORK IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
I APPRECIATE YOUR SHARING MY COMMENTS WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUST ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS.
THE APPLICANT VIOLATED THE APPROVED O H P IN BUILDING PERMIT, UH, AGREEMENTS AND APPROVALS BY THE INSTALLING WHAT, UH, WHAT HE WANTED TO INSTALL DURING THE CONSTRUCTION.
THE CITY'S ORDINANCES AND GUIDELINES FOR DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICTS ARE IN PLACE TO FULFILL THE PURPOSES OF OF THESE NEIGHBORS.
UM, AS MOST OF US KNOW, ANTONIO'S HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND DESIGNATED HISTORIC LANDMARKS ARE KNOWN THROUGHOUT THE WORLD AND HAVE BEEN, UM, HAVE BROUGHT A HIGH LEVEL OF POSITIVE AWARENESS AND COMMERCE TO OUR CITY.
THOSE OF US LIVING AND WORKING IN THESE DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICTS KNOW FULL WELL, BUT WE ARE IN THAT WE ARE IN A SPECIAL PLACE.
WE UNDERSTAND THE BENEFITS AND RESPONSIBILITIES WITH IT, AND WE MADE FORMAL AGREEMENTS AND SOCIAL CONTRACTS BY PURCHASING THE PROPERTY AND PAY
[01:00:01]
OUR TAXES TO WORK WITH WITHIN THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS TO HELP OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS CHANGE AND GROW IN THE SPIRIT IN WHICH THEY ARE DESIGNATED AS HISTORIC.IF THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT HIS PROJECT MUST HAVE FINAL OR PLASTIC WINDOWS, HE CAN BUILD, UH, THESE HOUSES IN THE HUNDREDS OF SQUARE MILES OF AREA IN SAN ANTONIO IN THE CITY, UH, THAT ARE NOT DESIGNATED HISTORIC.
AND IF APPLICANT MUST DEFINE THE CITY'S BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS, HE CAN BUILD AN, UH, UNOBSTRUCTED OUTSIDE OF THE, THE CITY'S JURISDICTION.
I STRONGLY ASK, UM, YOU TO SUPPORT O H P STAFF AND HRCS, UH, CONSISTENT DECISIONS TO, CAN ANYONE HEAR ME? YES, SIR.
SO THAT IS THE LAST LETTER AND THAT'S THE LAST OF THE COMMENTS.
MR. CHAIR, ARE YOU THERE? WE HEARD YOU JUST A MINUTE AGO.
OH, HE MIGHT BE HAVING TROUBLE CONNECTING.
UM, MR. ORIAN, DO YOU WANNA GO AHEAD AND TAKE OVER? NEXT WOULD BE, UH, REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT FOLLOWED BY REBUTTAL FROM OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
LET'S HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT TO REBUT THE, UH, STATEMENTS MADE WITH REGARDS TO HELLO? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU OKAY WITH REGARD TO THAT LAST LETTER.
UM, IT WAS VERY STRONGLY WORDED, AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PERCEPTION HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT WE TRIED TO CHANGE SOMETHING DURING THE PROCESS TO CIRCUMVENT, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, THE, UH, RESTRICTIONS THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, WERE IN PLACE AND BEFORE WE EVER BEGAN CONSTRUCTION AND WE HAD, WE, WE EXPLORED ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS.
AT NO POINT IN TIME WAS IT EVER ABSOLUTELY NOT A VINYL WINDOW IS NOT GOING TO BE, UH, APPROVED.
UM, THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER PROJECTS IN THAT AREA IN THE DIGNITY HILL AREA.
UM, IN FACT, I HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF A VERY, VERY NICE EXPENSIVE HOME AT 8 21 NORTH PINE, BIG TWO STORY, A HUNDRED YEAR OLD HOME THAT HAS VINYL WINDOWS ON IT.
UM, AND SO AGAIN, THAT WAS NEVER THE CASE THAT WE WERE TRYING TO CIRCUMVENT THE PROCESS.
UH, I KNOW THAT YOU, THERE WERE, UH, MULTIPLE PEOPLE THAT HAD, UH, SPOKEN ON YOUR BEHALF.
IS THERE A SPECIFIC, UH, UH, STATEMENT THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO MAKE AT THIS POINT AS WELL? HI, THIS IS FAITH.
UH, I THINK MY, MY VERY BRIEF REBUTTAL WOULD ONLY BE THAT, UM, OF THE, OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE OFFERED IN EITHER DIRECTION WITHIN THE 200 FOOT AREA OF OUR HOME, WHICH, WHICH BY DESIGN, DRAWING THAT LINE AND SAYING, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GONNA RECEIVE DIRECT NOTICE OF THIS WORK.
WE ARE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, UH, GIVE THEM THE MOST DIRECT ROUTE FOR OFFERING A COMMENT THAT THEY KNOW ABOUT WHAT'S GOING UP NEAR THEM.
EACH OF THOSE COMMENTS WERE IN SUPPORT OF OUR PROJECT, UM, BECAUSE WE, WE HAVE ENDEAVORED TO IMPROVE NOT JUST OUR BLOCK, OUR AREA OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAVE INVESTED SUBSTANTIALLY, UH, IN DOING SO.
AND IT IS OUR HOPE NOW THAT THE, THE WOOD SCREENS BE USED AS THAT PRAGMATIC SOLUTION.
WE THINK, YOU KNOW, UH, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE FINE WITH THE WINDOWS AS THEY ARE, BUT I THINK THAT THAT WOOD SCREEN SOLUTION IS THE COMPROMISE THAT ADDRESSES THE CONCERNS OF NOT JUST THE PEOPLE WHO SPOKE AGAINST THE PROJECT, UM, OR NOT JUST US, BUT ALSO THOSE PEOPLE WHO SPOKE AGAINST THE PROJECT BECAUSE IT WILL BRING THE, THE HISTORIC CHARACTER EVEN FURTHER AND YOU WOULD NOT EVEN BE ABLE TO TELL AT THAT POINT THEIR FINAL WINDOWS.
I'VE MISSED A PORTION OF WHAT'S GONE ON.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED, UH, BUT I'M ABLE TO HEAR SOME OF, SOME OF WHAT WAS DISCUSSED HERE.
UM, HAVE WE HEARD FROM, UM, ALL THE WITNESSES? I DID NOT HEAR THE LAST PORTION OF THE, OF THE READING.
SO YES, WE HEARD ALL OF THE, UH, LETTERS IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION.
ALL VOICEMAILS HAVE BEEN HEARD.
THIS IS THE REBUTTAL TIME, SO THE APPLICANTS WERE GIVING A REBUTTAL.
NEXT WOULD BE A REBUTTAL FROM OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
UM, UM, OKAY, SO WE'RE THROUGH WITH THE QUESTION PORTION OF THIS OR WHAT, WHAT DO YOU NO, NO, NO.
THIS IS JUST THE REBUTTAL AND THEN YOU CAN DO THE QUESTIONS.
EVERYBODY WILL BE ON THE CALL.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND AND GET THE H D, UH,
[01:05:01]
O H P, SIR? YES.UH, ED EDWARD HALL, AGAIN HERE FROM THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
UH, ONCE AGAIN, I'LL BE BRIEF.
I JUST WANNA REITERATE THAT, UH, THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, UH, APPROVED THIS PROJECT CONCEPTUALLY AND FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WITH A WOOD OR AN ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW, AND THAT THE APPLICANT SUBSEQUENTLY SUBMITTED AN ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW TO STAFF TO RECEIVE THEIR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THE ISSUED CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, AND I'M READING VERBATIM QUOTED THE ISSUED C O A NOTED THAT THE APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED AND THAT A NEW APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED, REVIEWED, AND APPROVED BY THE H D R C IF THE APPLICANT INTENDED TO MODIFY THE APPROVED WINDOWS.
UH, SO ON THE ACTUAL APPROVED C O A THAT THE APPLICANT RECEIVED, IT WAS NOTED THAT IF THEY DID WANNA REQUEST AN AMENDMENT FOR THE APPROVED WINDOWS, THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO SUBMIT A NEW APPLICATION TO HAVE THAT REVIEWED AND APPROVED.
UH, NOW DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ELSE THAT'S REBUTTING? ALL RIGHT.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE O H C, I'M REVIEWING YOUR GUIDELINES AND, UH, AND JUST IN REGARD TO WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE, AND I AG I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'VE SAID COMPLETELY, BUT MY CONCERN IS THE TERMINOLOGY YOU USE IN YOUR GUIDELINES WHEN I READ WINDOW USE AND NEW CONSTRUCTION SHOULD BE SIMILAR IN APPEARANCE TO THOSE COMMONLY FOUND WITHIN DISTRICT, UH, SIZE PROFILE CONFIGURATION.
WHILE NO MATERIAL IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED, AND I'VE HEARD FROM SEVERAL PEOPLE RESPONDING HERE THAT, UH, ESPECIALLY THE, UH, UH, CONSERVATION SOCIETY THAT VINYL WINDOWS ARE NOT EVEN, UH, USED IN, IN THE DISTRICT.
WHY IS THAT NOT MENTIONED IN THE GENERAL GUIDELINES? WELL, UH, QUITE FRANKLY, THE REASON WHY WE MENTIONED THAT NO PRODUCT OR MATERIAL IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED IS BECAUSE AN APPLICANT COULD FIND A VINYL WINDOW OR AN ALUMINUM WINDOW THAT MEETS OUR STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
UH, THE ISSUE HERE IS THAT THE WINDOW THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALLED, REGARDLESS OF THE MATERIAL, DOESN'T MEET STAFF SPECIFICATIONS IN REGARDS TO THE MEETING RAIL DIMENSIONS, UH, THE TOP AND BOTTOM RAIL DIMENSIONS IN THE PHOTO DIVIDED LIGHTS.
UH, SO IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE FOR AN APPLICANT TO HAVE A NON-WOOD WINDOW OR A NON ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW THAT DID MEET THOSE SPECIFICATIONS.
UH, BUT QUITE FRANKLY, THE WINDOW THAT'S BEEN INSTALLED DOES NOT MEET THOSE SPECIFICATIONS.
SO YOUR, YOUR SPEC STEP STIPULATION HERE IS THAT THE GUIDELINES HAS TO DO WITH, UM, REVEAL WHAT DO WE ACTUALLY SEE IN REGARD TO A WINDOW INSTEAD OF THE MATERIALS THAT ARE BEING USED? NEXT QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU IN REGARD TO THAT WAS BECAUSE I'VE NOTICED IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE HOUSE THAT UH, SOME OF THE WINDOWS ARE NOT DOUBLE HUNG OR SINGLE HUNG, THEY'RE ACTUALLY PICTURE WINDOWS.
AND I WAS WONDERING HOW DOES THAT COMPLY WITH, UH, THE GUIDELINES HERE? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, UM, THOSE ARE NOT OPERATIONAL WINDOWS.
SO, UH, THERE ARE A FEW WINDOWS THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVED, UH, TO HAVE THAT UNIQUE PROFILE.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PHOTOS THAT ARE SHOWN NOW, THESE WINDOWS FEATURE A PHOTO DIVIDED LIGHT, WHICH IS AGAINST OR NOT CONSISTENT WITH STAFF STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
AND THAT'S IN PLACE FOR THAT SPECIFIC REASON.
UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE WINDOWS THAT, UH, IF, UH, ZEKE, IF YOU COULD GO BACK A SLIDE PLEASE, RIGHT THERE.
UH, SO IF YOU'RE VIEWING THESE WINDOWS, THESE DON'T MEET STAFF STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS BECAUSE THERE'S ACTUALLY NO DEFINITION WITH THE WINDOW.
THERE'S NO SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM SASH.
AND THOSE ARE TWO VERY KEY POINTS THAT OUR STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS LOOK TO ACCOMPLISH A SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM SASH.
UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PHOTO DIVIDED LIGHT, WHICH IS ACTUALLY WITHIN THE WINDOW PANE ITSELF, UH, DOESN'T REALLY SEPARATE THE, THE, THE PLANE OF THE WINDOW.
SO YOU DON'T GET A DEFINITION LIKE YOU WOULD FIND, UH, SAY IF THERE WAS A, A, A WINDOW THAT ACTUALLY HAD TWO OPERABLE SASHES.
UM, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, SIR? WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS, MY QUESTION WAS IS THAT, UH, OBVIOUSLY WHEN I'M READING YOUR DEFINITION, IT, IT ONLY DEFINES OPERATIONAL WINDOWS, WHETHER SINGLE OR DOUBLE HAN AS LONG AS IT MEETS THE GUIDELINES WHERE THE STYLES AND, UH, MEET CERTAIN AND SES MEET CERTAIN SIZE AND DIMENSIONS.
BUT, UH, OBVIOUSLY THESE WINDOWS DO KNOCK.
AND THAT WAS WHY I HAD TO ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT, UH, THE SINGLE PANE WINDOW VERSUS A HOT DOUBLE OR SINGLE HUNG WINDOW.
UM, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO, REASON I ASK THAT IS BECAUSE I'M READING YOUR GUIDELINES AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION, BUT I THINK IT, THE GENERAL DESCRIPTION NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE CLEARER.
BUT THAT, THAT'S ANOTHER POINT HERE.
[01:10:01]
ONLY THING THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY GONNA BE REVIEWING HERE, AND I WANT THE BOARD TO UNDERSTAND THIS, WE CANNOT, AS A BOARD, MAKE A DECISION ON CONDITIONS.WE CANNOT SAY BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA DO SOMETHING THAT, UH, THAT WE COULD EITHER APPROVE OR DENY THIS RE APPEAL.
ALL WE'RE CONSIDERING IN THIS PARTICULAR MATTER IS WHETHER THE, UM, UH, OFFICE OF HISTORICAL COMMITTEE, UH, OP, UH, ACTED APPROPRIATELY IN DEALING WITH THIS PARTICULAR MATTER OR NOT, WHETHER THE APPLICANT IT HAS, UH, UH, SOLUTIONS TO COMPLY WITH WHAT, WHAT THE, UH, UH, THE OFFICE OF HISTORICAL OFFICE, UH, DE DETERMINED IS NOT OUR ISSUE.
OUR ISSUE IS ONLY ON MAKING DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THE, UH, THE O H C WAS ACTING APPROPRIATELY.
SO KEEP THAT IN MIND AS WE ASK OUR QUESTIONS AND, UH, COME TO DETERMINATION.
ANY, UH, ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR, OR THE STAFF? I HAVE A
UM, I JUST WANTED TO ASK, UH, IF THIS WAS THE FIRST PROPERTY DEVELOPED IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND, UM, IF NOT, HOW MANY HAVE YOU BEEN INVOLVED WITH IN THE PAST? UH, THIS IS ADAM.
THIS WAS, YEAH, THIS WAS OUR SECOND ONE IN DAUDI.
AND WHAT ABOUT, UM, UH, MR. GILL, IS HE STILL ON THE CALL? YES, I AM.
YEAH, THIS IS THE FIRST NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECT I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH IN THE DISTRICT.
I HAD LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT.
WE WE'RE, WE'RE ASKING QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW, NOT TAKING STATEMENTS.
I'LL, I'LL GIVE YOU ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY THERE IN A MINUTE.
DO WE HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, ORIAN, MR. ORIAN, PLEASE? YOU HAVE.
SO, UM, DID, UH, JUST TO PUT THIS OUT THERE ON THE, UH, UM, COMMISSION ACTION, DID THE, DID THE APPLICANT END UP PROVIDING A CONFORMING GARAGE DOOR OUT OF CURIOSITY? ARE YOU ASKING THAT A STAFF? YES.
ED, CAN YOU RESPOND TO THAT? YES, SIR.
THE APPLICANT, UH, ACTUALLY PAINTED THE GARAGE DOOR AND THE APPLICANT RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
SO THEN, AND THEN ACCORDING TO THE TIMELINE, UH, 5 23 20 19, THEY GOT APPROVED WITH AN ALUMINUM WINDOW.
DID THEY PROVIDE A, A SPEC OR WAS IT JUST THE IDEA OF IT WAS THE, THE APPLICANT, UM, IT WAS APPROVED FOR, UH, AN ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD OR A WOOD WINDOW.
THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY SUBMITTED A LINCOLN ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW PRODUCT.
SO ONCE THAT, ONCE THAT SPECIFICATION WAS SUBMITTED, STAFF ISSUED THE C O A, BECAUSE IN RECEIPT OF THAT DETAIL, IN THOSE SPECIFICATIONS, THE APPLICANT ADMITTED ALL THE STIPULATIONS OF APPROVAL.
AND THEN WHO GAVE THAT TO YOU? THE, THE CONTRACTOR, THE APPLICANT, THE ARCHITECT WHO, WHO ACTUALLY DOES THAT SUBMITTAL TO YOU? UH, IT WAS THE CONTRACTOR.
SO THEN IN JANUARY OF 2020, UM, DURING A SITE VISIT, YOU OBSERVED COMPLETELY DIFFERENT VINYL TYPE WINDOWS THAT WERE INSTALLED.
UH, SO FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW, UH, YOU WENT TO A, YOU, YOU, UH, DECIDED UPON AND SUBMITTED FOR A SPECIFIC ALUMINUM WINDOW, BUT THEN VINYL WINDOWS WERE INSTALLED.
WAS THERE, IS THERE A HARDSHIP RELATED TO THAT? ARE YOU ASKING US THE APPLICANT? YEAH, I MEAN, I'M, WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THAT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, NORMALLY WHEN SOMEBODY SAYS, HERE IS A PRODUCT THAT I WANNA INSTALL, THEN THEY GET IT APPROVED.
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT LED THE DECISION TO BE CHANGED FROM A, A SPECIFIC PRODUCT THAT WAS APPROVED BY, BY THE CITY TO THE VINYL WINDOWS THAT WE HAVE TODAY.
WELL, SO IT, WHAT LED TO IT WAS THE ARCHITECT, UH, ARCHITECTURE FIRM CALLED M S A ARCHITECTS WAS HIRED TO DRAW THE PLANS AND GO THROUGH THE PROCESS FOR US WITH THE H D R C AFTER THEY RECEIVED A PERMITTED SET OF PLANS.
AND WE STARTED REVIEWING WAS WHEN WE REALIZED, OH, WAIT, WAIT, THESE ARE NOT WOOD WINDOWS.
THESE ARE GONNA BE VINYL WINDOWS.
AND THAT'S WHEN WE STARTED DOWN THE PROCESS ABOUT MAKING THE CHANGE.
AND AS WE'VE MENTIONED HERE SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE, AND EVEN IN OUR APPLICATION, WE DID NOT FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THAT STEP.
SO IT WASN'T LIKE WE JUST MADE A CHANGE AND HOPED FOR THE BEST.
WE, WE WENT FORWARD AND WE EVEN WENT TO GET DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE INCLUDED IN OUR, IN OUR, UM,
[01:15:01]
OUR, UH, UH, PRESENTATION TODAY.WE BELIEVE THAT THE TOP RAIL, THE BOTTOM RAIL, THE MULLINGS, ALTHOUGH MAYBE THEY MAY BE OFF BY AN EIGHTH OF AN INCH, THEY'RE PRETTY CLOSE WITH THE INTENT.
UM, SO LET, SO THEN LET ME ASK YOU THIS THEN.
YOU, YOU TURNED IN PLANS, UH, THAT GOT APPROVED BY THE, BY, BY THE, UH, UH, H C R C, BUT, BUT THEN YOU HAD PLANS REDRAWN WITH VINYL WINDOWS? NO, WE DIDN'T, YOU DON'T NEED TO REDRAW A WINDOW MATERIAL TYPE.
IT WAS JUST MAKE A CHANGE TO THE, UH, TO THE ORDER WHEN YOU'RE ORDERING THEM.
SO DID THE, DID THE ARCHITECT ORIGINALLY DESIGN AN ALUMINUM WINDOW THAT WAS TURNED IN, OR WAS THAT NOT THEN THE ARCHITECT JUST TURNED IN, HE JUST DREW PLANS.
AND SO WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IS, OKAY, WELL WHAT KIND OF WINDOW ARE YOU GONNA PUT IN? WELL, AGAIN, ACCORDING TO THE DOCUMENTS, IT MUST BE THIS, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH THEY SAY IT'S NOT, NOT THE MATERIAL, IT'S GOTTA BE A WOOD OR A WOOD CLAD WINDOW.
SO THAT'S WHAT THE ARCHITECTURAL FIRM, WHO AGAIN, WAS HIRED TO TAKE CARE OF THIS PROCESS FOR US SUBMITTED.
AND THEN ONCE, SO, UH, SO THAT GOES BACK TO MR. HALL.
SO THE PLANS THAT YOU WERE SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL, THEY WERE, THEY WERE NOT, UH, WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER FINAL IN NATURE.
THEY WERE JUST LAYOUT PLANS AND, AND THEN A SPEC WAS PROVIDED FOR THE WINDOW? OR, OR WERE THERE, I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT TO THE LEVEL OF DETAIL AND COMPLETENESS THAT THE H D R C REVIEWED AND APPROVED.
WAS IT, WAS IT THE CONSTRUCTION? THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS WERE COMPLETE? UM, HOWEVER, IT, IT IS COMMON AT TIMES FOR APPLICANTS TO HAVE NOT DECIDED, UM, ON AN EXACT WINDOW PRODUCT BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL GOING THROUGH A BUDGETARY PROCESS FOR INTERIOR FINISHES OR VARIOUS OTHER FURNISHINGS FOR THE HOUSE.
SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S QUITE COMMON FOR AN APPLICANT TO HAVE A COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT SET THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO GET A PERMIT FROM OR A PERMIT FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WITH, BUT NOT HAVE A WINDOW PRODUCT SELECTED.
AND SO IN THE WEEKS THEREAFTER, THEIR H D R C HEARING FOR FINAL APPROVAL, THEY'LL SUBMIT, UH, AT A WINDOW PRODUCT OR AT TIMES OTHER REVISIONS, UH, THAT WERE STIPULATED IN THEIR APPROVAL.
SO BETWEEN MAY AND JANUARY, UH, WAS THERE ANY CONTACT TO YOUR OFFICE ABOUT ANY CHANGES WHATSOEVER TO THE APPROVED PLANS? UH, YES.
THE APPLICANT, THE APPLICANT DID REACH OUT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT, UH, SUBMITTING AN AMENDMENT FOR A NEW WINDOW.
THAT AMENDMENT WAS NEVER SUBMITTED.
YEAH, I'M JUST TRYING TO, IT, IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANT WAS TRYING TO DO WHAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING, BUT I'M TRYING TO GET A HANDLE ON THE PROCESS.
LIKE, DID YOU GET, YOU RECEIVED A COMPLETE SET OF PLANS, YOU RECEIVED A SPEC, IT WAS APPROVED, AND THEN AS THEY WERE FINALIZING ACTUAL, UH, FINISHES AND THERE'S ALWAYS CHANGES THAT KIND OF COME UP, THERE WAS A COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND YOUR OFFICE AS FAR AS ANY, ANY LITTLE TWEAKS OR CHANGES AND THEN THEN ISSUE OF WINDOWS CAME SITE.
IS THAT CORRECT? AM I CORRECT ON THAT? YES, SIR.
DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? MANA, MR. MANNA, YOU HAVE FLOOR.
SO, UM, SO THIS, THIS GOES MR. SANCHEZ, I GUESS.
UM, SO, SO REFERENCE WAS GIVEN TO OTHER, UH, NEW CONSTRUCTION, I GUESS, THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH OR HAVE SIMILAR MATERIALS.
AND, UM, ON EIGHT 17, THE BO O A REVIEWED A CASE AND IT WAS 0 6 8 AT 4 1 5 WILSON RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER.
AND, UM, INTERESTINGLY, WHILE WE ARE REVIEWING THAT CASE, THEY REFERENCED YOUR HOUSE AND APPEARS THAT YOU MAY BE REFERENCING THEIR HOUSE.
THAT CASE WAS DENIED, I GUESS, UH, WITH REGARDS TO A SIMILAR SITUATION WHERE THEY CAME THROUGH AND SAID, HERE'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO, HERE'S THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS WE'VE PUT IN, AND THEN THEY PUT IN VINYL.
AND SO, SO I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU REFERENCING THAT HOUSE OR IS THERE MORE HOUSES THAT LET'S SAY ARE NEW CONSTRUCTION, UM, THAT, THAT YOU KNOW, THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO LEVERAGE OR UTILIZE FOR YOUR, UH, SHOWING CONSISTENCY? HAVE WE LOST THE APPLICANTS? UH, I'M HERE.
UH, I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROJECT THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO ON WILSON STREET.
SO YOU MENTIONED 8 21, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THE, WHEN THAT VINYL WAS PUT IN.
AND DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER REFERENCES OF, WE'LL SAY VINYL WINDOWS IN THE COMMUNITY? UH, THERE WERE SOME OTHER PHOTOS IN OUR PRESENTATION, UH, AND I, I, UH, THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS SOME OTHER ADDRESSES THAT WE REFERENCED IN THERE.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION? OZUNA FOR STAFF?
[01:20:01]
MR. OZUNA, GO AHEAD.SO IF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS THE APPEAL, DOES THIS MEAN THAT THE REQUEST GOES BACK TO THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND THEY THEN CAN DETERMINE WHETHER THE, UM, INCLUSION OF THE SCREENS WOULD BE ADEQUATE? I KNOW WE CAN'T MAKE THAT DECISION.
CAN, CAN THEY MAKE THAT DECISION? IF WE GRANT THE APPEAL? IT WOULD HAVE TO THEN HAVE A CERTAIN SECONDARY REVIEW BY THE O H P AND THEY CAN MANDATE THE SCREEN.
JUST WANTED TO MAKE TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
YEAH, THIS IS, UH, THIS IS O H P STAFF.
UM, ZEKE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN PULL UP OUR PRESENTATION, UH, BUT I'D LIKE TO GO TO THE CASE HISTORY PAGE.
UM, SO THE, THE SUBJECT OF THE WINDOW SCREENS HAS ALREADY BEEN REVIEWED BY THE HISTORIC AND DESIGNER REVIEW COMMISSION, UM, THAT WAS ON, UH, JULY THE 15TH OF THIS YEAR.
UM, SO I CAN, UH, EITHER ALLOW YOU ALL TO READ, UH, THIS, OR I CAN GO OVER THAT, WHICHEVER, UH, STAFF FINDS IS MOST APPROPRIATE.
LET'S, LET'S, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, AND REVIEW WHAT YOU DETERMINED ON JULY 15TH, BECAUSE MY EXPLANATION HERE IS VERY VAGUE THAT I HAVE HERE BEFORE ME, AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE SOMETHING MORE DEFINITIVE.
SO, UM, ON FEBRUARY THE FIFTH, THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION DENIED THE INSTALLATION OF THE VINYL WINDOWS THAT ARE CURRENTLY INSTALLED.
UM, THE APPLICANT THEN, UM, IN A, UH, TO FIND A SOLUTION, A WORKING SOLUTION TO MAINTAIN THE WINDOWS, UH, SUBMITTED AN, UH, SUBMITTED A DESIGN FOR, UH, WOOD WOOD SCREEN THAT IN A SENSE WOULD COVER THE INSTALLED WINDOWS.
THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION AND THE H D R C SUBSEQUENTLY DENIED THAT REQUEST ON JULY THE 15TH.
SO I GUESS THE QUESTION REALLY HERE IS WHICH DENIAL ARE WE REVIEWING IN REGARDS TO THIS PARTICULAR CASE? BECAUSE, UH, OBVIOUSLY A DISCUSSION HAS BEEN GONE ON, AND I BELIEVE THE, UH, THE O H P HAS DETERMINED THAT THEIR ORIGINAL APPROVAL OF A PARTICULAR TYPE OF WINDOW BEING WOOD OR WOOD CLAD ALUMINUM, UH, OR ACTUALLY PLAD LAB ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD, UH, ARE APPROVED, BUT THE WINDOWS THAT WERE INSTALLED ARE NOT.
AND THE WINDOW COVERING THAT THE APPLICANT IS RECOMMENDING TO COMPLY WITH THE, UH, O H P IS NOT BEING ACCEPTED BY THE O H P? THAT'S CORRECT.
THE, THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION DENIED THE WINDOW SCREENS THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSED PREVIOUSLY.
SO THE ONLY CHOICES THAT WE HAVE AS A BOARD IS TO, IS TO EITHER SIDE WITH THE APPLICANT OR SIDE WITH THE, UH, UH, HISTORICAL DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, UH, IN DETERMINING WHETHER SOME MISTAKE OR, OR A POSITION SHOULD BE.
HOWEVER, THE PROBLEM THAT I SEE AS, AS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, UH, WE CANNOT MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED UPON THE INFORMATION THAT MIGHT BE HAPPENING.
WE CAN ONLY MAKE A DETERMINATION ON WHETHER YOU'RE, YOU ARE CORRECT OR NOT BY WHAT HAS BEEN DONE, DONE.
THEREFORE, WE CAN'T NOT TAKE IN CONSIDERATION AT THIS POINT.
I DON'T FEEL WE COULD TAKE IN CONSIDERATION WHAT THEY POTENTIALLY ARE GONNA DO, AND WE'LL HAVE TO MAKE OUR DECISION BASED UPON WHAT HAS BEEN DONE.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO ANYONE ON THE BOARD? BECAUSE THE QUESTION REALLY HERE, HERE IS, IS THAT WE ARE DETERMINED WHETHER THE BOARD ACTED APPROPRIATELY IN DETERMIN MAKING THE DETERMINATION FOR DENYING FOR DENIAL.
AND, UM, ALL WE HAVE IS WHAT WE SEE.
WE CANNOT ASSUME AND, OR PUT ANY CONDITIONS ON ANY ISSUE THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE.
SO WE HAVE A UP OR DOWN VOTE ON WHETHER WE'RE GONNA GONNA APPROVE THE, THE, UH, CITY STAFF'S POSITION OR THE APPLICANT'S POSITION.
SO, UH, NOW IS THERE, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ASKED BY ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD HELP YOU MAKE AN UNDER A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING? UH, ORIAN? YES, MR. ORIAN.
AND JUST, UH, I JUST WANNA ASK STAFF, UH, IF, IF THIS WERE TO, IF THE APPEAL WERE TO BE GRANTED, IT STILL GOES BACK TO THE O H P AND H C R C, UH, SANS THE, THE USE OF THE SPECIFIC WINDOW THAT'S INSTALLED.
IS THAT CORRECT? I DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING BECAUSE THE DENIAL HAS ALREADY BEEN ISSUED.
THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION HAS DENIED THE INSTALLED WINDOW AS WELL AS THE WINDOW SCREEN THAT THE APPLICANT HAS DISCUSSED.
SO BOTH OF THOSE ITEMS HAVE BEEN DENIED.
[01:25:01]
SO THIS WOULD BE NO, I MEAN, BUT IF WE WERE, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE APPEAL, DON'T THEY STILL HAVE TO GO BACK TO YOU FOR ANY REASON? OR IS IT JUST GO TO PERMIT WITH NO SCREENS? THEY WOULD NOT, IF, IF YOU, IF THE APPEAL WAS APPROVED, THE APPLICANT WOULD NOT NEED TO COME BACK TO THE H D R C AND THEY WOULD NOT BE, HAVE TO PUT IN SCREENS OR ANYTHING, CORRECT? THAT'S, THAT'S CORRECT.BUT IF IT, IF THE APPEAL IS NOT A APPROVED, THEY GO BACK TO YOU TO WORK OUT SOMETHING ESSENTIALLY.
NO OTHER WORDS, WE'RE, WE'RE MAKING A DECISION HERE IS WHETHER THE H D R C HAS CONTROL OR NOT MM-HMM.
AND THIS IS UNFORTUNATE POSITION HERE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF GRAND IDEAS, BUT ALL WE CAN BASE OUR DECISION IS UPON WHAT WE ACTUALLY KNOW AS FACT.
SO, UH, IN THAT REGARD, IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, UH, I BELIEVE THAT WE HAD, UH, ONE, UH, ONE OF THE APPLICANTS HAD A STATEMENT THEY'D LIKE TO MAKE.
I, I DON'T RECALL WHICH ONE IT WAS, BUT AT THIS TIME, I'M ALLOWING THAT STATEMENT TO BE MADE.
WELL, I THINK YOU'VE PROVIDED SOME CLARITY HERE THAT, THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA COME, THIS IS ADAM.
WE'RE NOT GONNA COME AWAY WITH A, A, A PATH FORWARD.
IT'S EITHER YOU AGREE WITH US AND THE WORRY WOULD BE THAT THE WINDOWS ARE GONNA STAY AS THEY ARE, OR YOU AGREE WITH STAFF.
I MEAN, I'M SORRY, WITH H D R C, AND I'M NOT SO SURE WHERE WE GO FROM HERE, SO MAYBE WE SHOULD GET SOME CLARITY ON THAT.
WELL, UH, AS I TRIED TO, TO MAKE THIS VERY CLEAR, YOUR APPLICATION WAS ONLY FOR US TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE H D R C OR THE O H P HAS ACTED APPROPRIATELY AND, UH, AND, UH, SHOULD BE UPHELD OR NOT.
THAT'S THE ONLY DECISION WE CAN MAKE.
WE CANNOT MAKE A DECISION BASED UPON ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT EXISTS OR, UH, AND WE CANNOT MAKE, UH, ANY DETERMINATION BASED UPON WHAT COULD BE HAPPENING.
SO OUR POSITION IS GOING TO BE WHETHER WE AGREE WITH THE CITY, UH, OFFICE OF HISTORICAL REVIEW, OR WE'RE GOING, ARE GONNA, UH, KILL THIS AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME.
AND YOU GO THROUGH THE, PER THE PERMITTING PROCESS.
SO THAT'S ACTUALLY WHAT'S BEFORE US AS A BOARD.
WELL THEN, IF THAT'S THE CASE, I BELIEVE YOU MUST CONSIDER THE FACT, AS YOU'VE BROUGHT UP IN THIS CALL TODAY, THAT THERE IS SOME VAGUENESS IN THE, UH, IN THE, IN THE VERBIAGE, ESPECIALLY WITH REGARD TO THE MATERIAL THAT CAN BE USED.
I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT WE DID RECEIVE A PERMIT FOR PLANS THAT SHOW WINDOWS THAT ARE FIXED GLASS.
THESE ARE ONES THAT DON'T OPEN.
UM, AND, AND ALSO THESE ARE WINDOWS THAT HAD MULLINGS ON THEM.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE AN, WE DO HAVE A PERMIT FOR THAT, BUT YET H D R C HAS ADDRESSED THINGS SUCH AS, UM, THE SASH PROFILES, THE TOP AND TOP AND BOTTOM RAILS, WHICH ALL ARE WITHIN THE, THE REALM OF, OF APPROPRIATENESS.
BUT YET WE'VE GOT A, A PERMIT THAT SHOWS THESE WINDOWS CLEARLY ON THE PLANS, THE ONES THAT DON'T OPEN, UM, SPECIFICALLY THOSE THAT, THAT COULD, I THINK THEY'RE ON THE SIDE OF A GARAGE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
YEAH, I UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION AND, AND UNDERSTANDING OF THIS.
AND IN, IN ALL HONESTY, YOU'RE, WHAT'S GOING TO GO ON HERE IS IF, IF WE APPROVE YOUR RE YOUR REQUEST, THEN ALL THIS OTHER ISSUE IS MOOT.
IF YOU ARE DENIED YOUR REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL, UH, THEN YOU HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO GO BACK TO H D R C TO RECONCILE A PARTICULAR ISSUE, UH, UH, ISSUE AND TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, UH, IT'S, IT'S, IT, IT'S VERY COMPLICATED BECAUSE OUR DECISION CAN ONLY BE BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW, NOT WHAT WE THINK WE'RE GONNA KNOW.
SO, UM, BUT THAT'S FOR YOUR INFORMATION AND MY SPECULATION AS TO THE VERBIAGE OF THE, UH, DECLARATION BY THE H D R C O H P, UH, HAS, HAS VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH THE LEGAL STANDING BECAUSE I'M SURE THIS DOCUMENT WAS REVIEWED BY LEGAL STAFF.
HOWEVER, I JUST EXPRESSED MY OPINION, UH, FOR THE PURPOSE OF, UH, PERIODICALLY THE STATE, THE CITY DOES GO THROUGH THEIR DOCUMENTS AND MAKES CLARIFICATIONS.
WE'RE DOING SO AND WILL BE DOING SO WITH THE, UH, CODES FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO THIS NEXT YEAR.
UM, THESE ARE JUST A PROCESS THAT WE GO THROUGH.
UM, SO AT THIS TIME, WE ONLY CAN ACT UPON WHAT WE DO KNOW AND HOW, BY THE RULES THAT WE
[01:30:01]
ARE OPERATING.UM, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC.
AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME, I'M ASKING THAT ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS MAKE A MOTION AND, UH, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT, UH, PLEASE USE THE MOTION AND THAT WAS GIVEN TO YOU, UM, BY, UH, UH, BY THE BOARD, BY THE STAFF ORIAN.
UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO O A 20 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 0 81, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT AND APPEAL OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S DECISION TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE PROPERTY AT 9 31 HAY STREET, APPLICANT BEING ADAM SANCHEZ.
OKAY, MR. ROY, YOU'VE MADE THE MOTION.
WHO'S GONNA SECOND THAT? SECOND MANA? OKAY, LET'S OPEN THE DISCUSSION.
UM, AT THIS TIME, I DON'T THINK I'M GONNA BE IN, WELL, I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
UM, AND IT SEEMS LIKE THERE WAS A LOT OF SPECIFICITY, UH, TO THE SUBMITTALS TO THE H D R C AND O H P, AND I JUST FEEL LIKE THEY WERE PROVI, THEY PROVIDED A SPECIFIC WINDOW, A, A SPEC THAT THEY WERE GOING TO, UH, INSTALL, AND THEY INSTALLED SOMETHING TO THE CONTRARY.
AND SO I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED, UM, UH, THAT IT, THAT JUST SORT OF HAPPENED.
I THINK THERE, IT WAS JUST, UM, WELL, I JUST CAN'T SUPPORT THIS.
UH, MR. MANNA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD YOUR INPUT? UH, I AGREE WITH, UM, UH, MR. ORIAN.
UM, I ALSO WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT YOU.
I THINK, UM, WE REVIEWED A SIMILAR CASE IN THE PAST THAT WE KIND OF CAME TO THAT SAME CONCLUSION.
UM, ONE, TWO IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE GROUP DOES APPEAR TO BE TRYING TO PROTECT THIS HISTORIC COMMUNITY AND, YOU KNOW, IT IS LISTED AS FAR AS IN THE GUIDELINES.
AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, SO I, I GUESS I WILL, UH, NOT BE SUPPORTING AN APPEAL.
ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO ADD THEIR INPUT? ALL UH, I'M GONNA MAKE A BRIEF STATEMENT HERE.
REGARDLESS OF WHAT, UH, PEOPLE MAY FEEL, I MEAN, PERSONALLY, I, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH CERTAIN ITEMS BEING USED ON CERTAIN HOMES, BUT THEN AGAIN, I'M NOT LIVING IN A HISTORICAL AREA AND I'M NOT BEING CONTROLLED BY HOW THAT WOULD'VE BEEN AFFECTING THE VALUE OF MY HOME.
SEC, SECONDLY IS THAT, ALTHOUGH I MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS THAT CONCERNING THE GUIDELINES, THE APPLICANT SHOULD HAVE HAD THOSE QUESTIONS AS WELL.
AND THE THIS GUIDELINES ARE ON THEMSELVES ARE QUITE SPECIFIC AS TO WHAT REALLY ARE THE KEY CRITERIA FOR WINDOWS, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH THE SIZES OF SPECIFIC ITEMS AND NOT SO MUCH WITH THE MATERIAL.
UH, AND, UH, BECAUSE OF THAT, I THINK THAT THERE'S ONE PLACE THAT EVERYTHING DROPPED THE BALL ON, AND THAT WAS NOT THE H D R C OR THE O H PS, UH, PROBLEM BECAUSE THEY DID NOT RECEIVE THE DOCUMENTATION WITH A SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT WERE BEING CHOSEN AS REPLACEMENTS FOR THE ORIGINALLY APPROVED ITEMS. SO I MYSELF AM NOT GOING TO SUPPORT A, UH, THE APPEAL IN THIS REGARD THAT I'M GOING AHEAD AND CLOSING THIS.
HEY, ROGER, CAN I SAY SOMETHING REAL QUICK? OKAY.
I'M MOVING BACK UP FOR MR. UH, DELMER TO WITH HIS INPUT.
UM, THANK YOU FOR SAYING THAT BECAUSE THAT PRETTY MUCH EXPRESSES EVERYTHING THAT, THAT, THAT I AGREE WITH.
I JUST THINK SOMEBODY DROPPED THE BALL AND IT CERTAINLY WASN'T THE HOMEOWNERS AND IT WASN'T THE CITY STAFF.
SO THANK YOU FOR, FOR CLARIFYING THAT AND MENTIONING THAT WHOLE THING.
'CAUSE THAT, THAT, UM, I, I AGREE A HUNDRED PERCENT WITH WHAT YOU SAID.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE ROLL CALL VOTE.
MICHELLE, DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
CHUCK, CAN I, UM, GET CLARIFICATION? YES.
I JUST WANNA CLARIFY LIKE I, AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I'M VOTING THE CORRECT WAY.
UH, IF YOU VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, IN OTHER WORDS, YOU SUPPORT THE, UH, THE, UH, REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL, YOU WOULD SAY YES.
IF YOU'RE SAYING, OKAY, IF YOU'RE IN, UH, GONNA BE AGAINST THE APPEAL AND IN SUPPORT OF THE HD D H D OR C UH, OR UH, O H P, THEN YOU WOULD SAY NO, I BELIEVE YOU SAID NO.
SO THEREFORE YOU'RE SUPPORTING THE CITY
MR. MANCHACA, UH, SUPPORT THE APPLICANT.
[01:35:02]
MR. MANA.MS. BRAGMAN DO NOT SUPPORT THE APPEAL.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDING FACTS SUPPORTS MR. DELMER.
UH, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE APPEAL.
UH, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE APPEAL.
THE, UM, THE, THE VOTE WAS, UM, NINE TO TWO AGAINST, UH, THE APPEAL.
THEREFORE, UH, THE APPEAL IS REJECTED AND, UH, I SUGGEST YOU GET BACK WITH THE, UH, O H P, UH, AND, UH, DETERMINE HOW A SOLUTION CAN BE RECTIFIED, UM, AND PAY PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO THE DETAILS.
[3. 20-5780 BOA-20-10300084]
NEXT CASE IS BO A 21 0 3 0 0 0 8 4.ADDRESS IS TWO 20 AND 2 26 EAST CARSON STREET AND 2 22 OLEANDER STREET.
IN DISTRICT TWO APPLICANT IS DAVID AYERS VARIANCE WILL ALLOW 15 FOOT SEVEN INCH MEDIAN BLOCK FACE DIMENSION FROM THE MINIMUM 21 FOOT.
CODE REQUIREMENT ZONING IS I D Z ONE A H O D, UH, WITH USE OF PERMITTED FOR EIGHT VOLUME UNITS.
APPLICANT IS DEVELOPING EIGHT SMALL LOTS FOR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY USE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE 21 FOOT MINIMUM MEDIAN BLOCK FACE TO THE REQUESTED 15 FOOT SEVEN INCH MEDIUM BLOCK FISH FROM THE CURB TO DEVELOP A NINE FOOT, UH, AT NINE FOOT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
SITE PLAN APPROVED DURING THE ZONING PROCESS ILLUSTRATED A FRONT SETBACK OF ONLY FIVE FEET.
THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING MORE OF A SETBACK IN THIS VARIANCE PROCESS.
UH, DUE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE I D Z ONE REQUIREMENTS, THE MEDIUM BLOCK BASE IS TAKEN FROM THE EXISTING LOTS OF THE BLOCK BASE AS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
ON JUNE 8TH, 2019, THE ZONING COMMISSION HEARD THE REZONING CASE AND VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO TO SUPPORT, UH, AS APPROVAL.
THERE WERE NO CITIZEN COMMENTS AND OR, OR RETURN NOTICES.
THERE WERE NO COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
CITY COUNCIL VOTED ON THIS ITEM AND END THE SITE PLAN ON AUGUST 8TH, 2019 AS AN APPROVAL.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE ISSUE IS CAUGHT AT SITE DESIGN AND SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF BO O A 21 0 3 0 0 0 84 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT, AND ADEQUATE SPACE WILL BE UTILIZED TO PREVENT STORMWATER RUNOFF, MAINTENANCE OF PROPERTY AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURES WITHOUT TRESPASS.
AND DUE TO THE SETBACKS OF TWO LOTS ON THE BLOCK FACE, THE PROPOSED MEDIUM BLOCK FACE WILL NOT INJURE THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
NEXT SLIDE THERE, 42 NOTICES SENT OUT.
UH, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION WITH AN UNKNOWN ADDRESS.
UH, NO RESPONSE FROM THE GOVERNMENT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT, DAVID AYERS ON THE LINE.
MS. HARRISS, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION.
UH, THIS IS DAVID AYERS WITH, UH, ALMOND ARCHITECTS.
UM, WE'RE THE, UH, ARCHITECTURAL FIRM REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.
UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY, UH, ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO PRESENT, UM, VISUALLY.
UM, AS UH, STATED BEFORE, WE WERE REQUESTING TO REDUCE THE, UH, BLOCK FACE REQUIREMENT FROM 21 FEET, UH, DOWN TO 15 FOOT SEVEN, UM, WHICH IS NINE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
UM, ONE OF THE REASONS WE DID THIS WAS THE, WE WERE TRYING TO CREATE A BUFFER BETWEEN OUR PROPERTY AND, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, THAT IS GOING TO BE TO THE WEST OF US ACROSS THE STREET.
UM, AND, UM, THE, THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR, UM, PROPERTY AND THAT ONE IS THAT THE, UH, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IS JUST I D Z.
UM, THEY WERE, UH, THEY HAD REZONED UNDER THE PREVIOUS VERSION OF THE I I D Z PRO, UM, REQUIREMENTS.
AND, UH, WE ARE UNDER I D Z ONE, UM, WHICH IS A LITTLE MORE STRINGENT, UM, UNDER THE I D Z,
[01:40:01]
UM, ZONING.THERE IS NO BLOCK FACE REQUIREMENT.
UM, SO WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO DO IS CREATE A, UH, BUFFER BETWEEN THAT, UM, POTENTIAL PROJECT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE HOUSES TO THE, UH, EAST OF US.
UM, SO WE HAVE A, UM, SETBACK THAT'S SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN WHAT THEY MAY HAVE AND WHAT THE ADJACENT HOMES ARE.
UH, AND THEN AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE SITE PLAN, THERE ARE ONLY TWO OTHER HOMES ON OUR BLOCK, UM, TO TAKE A SAMPLE FROM.
SO IT'S NOT A, UM, UM, VERY GOOD, UM, EXAMPLE OF THE, THE WHOLE, WHAT THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE.
UM, SO AT THIS TIME, I'D JUST LIKE TO REQUEST THAT YOU APPROVE THIS VARIANCE, UH, FOR THIS PARTICULAR, UH, PROPERTY.
AND I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, UH, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC INPUT? JUST ONE LETTER TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD.
WE'RE HAVE TO HAVE THAT CLOCK FOR THIS ONE.
SO THIS IS FROM, LET SEE HERE FROM A FABIAN, UH, SANCHEZ, UM, RESEARCHING THE ADDRESS AT 1719 NORTH OLIVE.
UH, MY NAME IS FABIAN SANCHEZ AND OUR RESIDENT WITH INTERNAL FEET OF THE ASSOCIATED CASE.
I AM SUBMITTING THE FOLLOWING CON COMMENTS.
I RECOGNIZE THIS IS LIKELY OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE HEARING, BUT SHOULD BE PUBLICLY STATED.
UH, NONETHELESS, PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES INCLUDING TECHNICAL LANGUAGES AND MOST CITIZENS DON'T UNDERSTAND, IN THIS CASE, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW 15 FOOT, SEVEN INCH MEDIUM BLOCK FACE DIMENSION FROM THE MINIMUM 21 FOOT CODE REQUIREMENT.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND, AND I THINK IT'S, UH, REASONABLE TO ASK THAT I NOT BE, UH, REQUIRED TO CONDUCT RESEARCH TO UNDERSTAND IT.
MAYBE THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE COULD INCLUDE ADDITIONAL DIAGRAM.
UH, WHAT WOULD HELP EXPLAIN THE CITY? UH, HERE'S RESPON, UH, BEARS RESPONSIBILITY TO, IN ENSURING THAT ITS CITIZENS ARE INFORMED, PLAIN LANGUAGE IS A GREAT WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THAT.
I APPEAL TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, THE D S T AND OTHER PUBLIC NOTICES BE WRITTEN IN COMMON LANGUAGE.
I'LL BE SURE TO APPEAL, UH, TO THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AS WELL AND CITE THIS CASE.
I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE DETAILS OF THIS CASE AND HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO REACH THE CASE MANAGER.
I HAVE WHAT I EXPECT ARE COMMON CONCERNS WITH PROPOSED PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT.
I MAKE, UH, MY COMMENTS NOW IN HOPES THAT, UH, THEY ARE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THIS HEARING OR IF NOT, SO THAT I MAY, UH, EXERCISE MY RIGHTS AS A CITIZEN TO HAVE MY CONCERNS ABOUT THE PRO PROJECT BE HEARD, UH, TO A UNFAIR IMPACT ON CURRENT RESIDENTS.
I UNDERSTAND THE NECESSITY, UH, FOR THE CITY TO PREPARE FOR POP, UH, POPULATION GROWTH.
I ALSO APPRECIATE THE RIGHT OF THE INVESTOR TO MAXIMIZE PROFIT, UH, THOUGH NEITHER SHOULD BE DONE IN AN UNFAIR COST IMPACT TO THE CURRENT RESIDENTS, SPECIFICALLY IN THIS CASE WHERE MANY OF WHOM HAVE RESIDED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, FOR 20 PLUS YEARS, WELL BEFORE THE CURRENT INVESTORS, UH, TOOK INVEST INTEREST IN THE AREA TO BE TAX INCREASES.
EIGHT FAMILY UNITS IS TOO MANY.
UH, THAT'S THE TWO MINUTES, SIR.
SECOND CONCLUDES ALL THAT, THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF THE COMMENTARY.
EZE, DO YOU KNOW IF ANYONE RESPONDED TO THIS LETTER? IT SOUNDS TO ME AS IF HE WAS ASKING FOR MORE INFORMATION.
UH, WE DID, UH, SPEAK TO THE APPLICANT.
NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE NOT THE APPLICANT TO THIS, TO THIS PROPERTY OWNER.
WELL THEN THAT'S AN EMAIL RESPONSE BACK.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? CORIAN? YES, MR. OR, YEAH, SO I AM, I GUESS I APOLOGIZE FOR MY CONFUSION HERE, BUT PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW, UH, HOW IT'S, UM, UH, 15.7, 15 FEET, SEVEN INCHES.
CAN SOMEBODY SHOW ME THAT ON THE SITE PLAN? LIKE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT? THANK YOU.
I I GUESS I'LL TRY TO, UM, RESPOND TO THAT.
UH, CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME OKAY? MM-HMM.
UM, THE IT ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PAGE IS NORTH.
UM, SO, AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WHERE CARSON STREET IS.
SO FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING TO THE PROPERTY LINE IS NINE FEET.
BUT THEN FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE, THE BLOCK, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, THE CURB IS WHERE THE 15 FOOT SEVEN
[01:45:01]
UM, IS.AND THAT'S, IS THIS A SITE PLAN THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT'S PART OF YOUR APPLICATION? IS THIS, IS THIS IS ALL THE PROPERTY.
SO SOME OF IT'S OWN I D Z AND SOME OF IT'S OWN I D Z ONE ACCORDING TO THE ATTACHMENT.
UM, OUR EIGHT, UH, HOUSES, WHICH ORIGINALLY WAS THREE LOTS, AND WE'VE, UM, RE PLATTED INTO EIGHT INDIVIDUAL LOTS, UM, IS ID V ONE THE, UM, PROPERTY TO THE, UM, EAST, I'M SORRY, WEST OF US, WHICH, UM, THE SITE PLAN IS TO THE LEFT IS, IS ID THE REGULAR RIGHT? UH, JUST PLAIN I D V AND IT'S THAT WHOLE OR MOST OF THAT, UM, CITY BLOCK TO THE, UM, WEST OF US.
AND THEN FINALLY IS, IS YOUR PLATT BEEN APPROVED AND RECORDED OR ARE YOU STILL IN PROCESS? IT HAS BEEN APPROVED AND RECORDED.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO, WELL, UM, WE DO HAVE TO MAKE A SMALL, UM, VARIANCE TO IT BECAUSE WE, UM, DIDN'T GET THE, UH, RIGHT OF WAY RECORDED PROPERLY.
SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO REDUCE THE, UM, LOT DEPTH JUST TO LIKE THREE FEET.
THE REASON WHY I ASK IS, UH, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WE HAVE, UH, REQUIREMENTS THAT KIND OF OVERLAP EACH OTHER WITH PURPOSE AND AND WHATNOT.
AND, AND I'VE, I'VE DONE A NUMBER OF I D Z DEVELOPMENTS AND PLATS AND USUALLY, YOU KNOW, I, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE UNDER 20,000 SQUARE FEET, SO YOU GET SOME EXCEPTIONS THERE, BUT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW YOU GOT AWAY FROM NOT PUTTING IN THE 10 FOOT C P S EASEMENT, ESPECIALLY WITH THESE STREETS BEING SUBSTANDARD.
IS THAT, THAT'S WHY I WAS WONDERING IF YOUR PLA GOT RECORDED.
HAVE YOU ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THAT PROCESS? YES.
WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH PROCESS, SO THERE IS NO OTHER WE PROVIDED, I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT IF THERE'S, THERE'S NO OTHER REASON FOR US TO EVEN BE THINKING ABOUT OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT THIS IS BLOCK FACE ISSUE WITH THE CITY.
LIKE THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO PENDING REVIEWS THAT'S GONNA ALTER OR CHANGE YOUR APPLICATION.
THIS IS IT AS FAR AS I'M AWARE, YES, SIR.
MR. MARTINEZ CHAIR, ARE YOU THERE? IF NOT, I THINK MR. MENCHACA HAS SOME, HAS A QUESTION.
MR. ORIAN, IF, IF MR. MARTINEZ CAN'T CONNECT, YOU WANNA TAKE OVER? SURE.
UH, UH, MR. MACHACA, GO AHEAD.
YES, I HAVE A QUICK, ALONG WHAT YOU WERE ASKING THAT BLOCK SAFE ON EACH CARSON STREET TO THE LEFT.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THERE FROM THE, FROM THE EDGE OF THE CURB TO THE HOUSE IS WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IN OTHER WORDS, TO THE PROPERTIES THAT DEVELOPMENT CLOSER TO THE CURB BY UP TO 15 FEET FROM AN ENTRANCE.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? UH, YES.
FACE THE CURB TO THE, UH, BUILDING WALL.
ARE THERE ANY, UH, UH, COMMISSION, OTHER COMMISSIONERS? I HAVE A QUESTION.
SO, UM, SO THE SHOWS THAT IT WENT BEFORE THE ZONING COMMISSION, I GUESS ON JUNE 18TH, AND SO WAS THE SAME, UM, SITE PLAN PRESENTED TO THEM SO THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS THAT THEY WERE VOTING THROUGH? YES, SIR.
IT WAS, IT WENT TO CITY COUNCIL AS WELL, UH, LAST YEAR AND WAS APPROVED.
UH, BUT THE SITE PLAN WAS WHAT WAS ONE OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, CORRECT? THAT, THAT IS CORRECT.
AS PART OF THE, PART OF THE I D Z ONE REQUIREMENTS IS YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE A SITE PLAN WITH YOUR, THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
UH, ANYONE ELSE WITH A QUESTION? SHALL YES, GO AHEAD.
UM,
SOMEONE TOOK A LOT OF TIME TO THEIR CONCERNS OUT AND, UM, EVEN THE BOTTOM HALF OF THEIR LETTER, IF YOU COULD JUST SET ON, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU CAN'T READ IT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO AT LEAST LOOK AT IT MYSELF.
WE'RE GONNA PLACE IT ON THE SCREEN NOW.
IT'S A FRONT, THERE'S A SECOND PAGE TO IT AS WELL.
AND, AND WHILE THAT'S BEING UP, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION? OKAY.
UM, FOR THE APPLICANT, IS THERE A, A REBUTTAL ST STATEMENT THAT YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE? UH, OR IF OTHERWISE, IF, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, SHALL IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD NOW THAT YOU HAD A CHANCE TO, I KNOW IT'S NOT A LONG CHANCE, BUT AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK THROUGH SOME OF THE LETTERS OR ANY OTHER, UH, COMMENTARY YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE BEFORE I TURN THIS BACK TO THE APPLICANT? ANYTHING ELSE RIGHT NOW? OKAY.
UH, AND IF PLEASE SPEAK, SPEAK UP IF YOU HAPPEN TO FIND SOMETHING.
SO BACK TO THE APPLICANT, IS THERE A REBUTTAL STATEMENT YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE? UM, NO,
[01:50:01]
I DON'T.UM, I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY REBUTTAL TO ANYTHING.
AND, UH, WITH THAT IN MIND, UH, COMMISSIONER SHELL, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT, UH, I, I KNOW I KEEP PUTTING THIS BACK ON YOU, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE, UH, WE'RE ALL READY TO MOVE FORWARD TO A MOTION.
IF THERE'S A, UM, IF Z COULD JUST SCROLL TO THE BOTTOM THE LETTER, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
WELL, IS THERE ANYBODY THAT, UH, WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION MANNA, UH, MANNA RECOGNIZED REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 8 4.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW 15 FOOT SEVEN INCH MEDIAN BLOCK FACE DIMENSION FROM THE MINIMUM 21 FOOT CODE REQUIREMENT SITUATED AT 2 2 0 AND 2 2 6 EAST CARSON STREET AND 2 2 2 OLEANDER STREET, APPLICANT BEING DAVID AYERS.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE TO DETERMINED SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC.
IN THIS CASE, GIVEN THE LOT CONSTRAINTS, GRANTING THE VARIANCES ARE STILL, UH, STILL PROVIDES ADEQUATE ACCESSIBILITY TO LIGHT, AIR AND OPEN SPACE FOR BOTH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF AVAILABLE SPACE ON THE LOT FACING EAST CARSON STREET.
IF FOLLOWING THE MEDIAN SETBACK OF THE TWO LOTS TO THE EAST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES, THREE.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPEAR OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE STRICT LETTER OF THE LAW.
THE INTENT OF THE MEDIAN SETBACK OF THE LIMITED INTENSITY INFILL DEVELOPMENT ZONE IS REDUCE ALTERING THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE UTILIZED AS A BUFFER BETWEEN THE COMMERCIALLY UTILIZED I D Z PROPERTIES TO THE WEST AND THE PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY USES TO THE EAST WITHIN GOVERNMENT HILL.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCES, THE SPARE OF THE ORDINANCES WILL BE DONE.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATIONAL USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCES REQUESTED WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE OR ALTER THE USE OF CHARACTER OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
SPECIFICALLY, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT PLACE THE STRUCTURE OUT OF CHARACTER WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AS THEY SERVE AS A BUFFER BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL I D Z LOTS TO THE WEST AND THE RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE EAST SIX TO APPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THIS PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER AND IN THIS FINANCIAL AND IS NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE DUE TO THE MEDIAN SETBACK OF THE EXISTING TWO LOTS ON THE PLOT BASE.
THE MEDIAN SETBACK IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO SMALL LOT CONFIGURATIONS.
MS. CHA, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
UH, I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP FOR DISCUSSION.
UH, WHO, UH, LIKE, TO START OFF PLEASE, COMMISSIONER MANON.
UM, I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS.
UM, UH, YOU KNOW, IT IS, UH, I THINK AN APPROPRIATE USE OF THE PROPERTY WITH REGARDS TO TRANSITIONING FROM I D Z I D Z ONE, UH, TO THE RESIDENTIAL.
UM, ALSO I THINK BECAUSE THIS WAS REVIEWED BY THE CITY OF SAN, BY THE, UM, I GUESS THE, THE ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED AS WELL AS CITY COUNCIL.
YOU KNOW, I SEE NOTHING IN HERE THAT, UH, WOULD WARRANT NOT APPROVING IT.
COMMISSIONER MIN CHAKA, I AGREE FOR THE COMMENTS ON MY COLLEAGUE, ESPECIALLY BEING APPROVED BY THE VOTING COMMISSION AND THE PROPERTY.
UM, I AGREE, UH, WITH WHAT WAS JUST SAID, AS WELL AS THE FACT THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS ON A CORNER.
UM, SO I THINK THAT THE, THE REDUCED SETBACK IS MORE APPROPRIATE.
UM, SO SINCE THIS HAS ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROCESS,
[01:55:01]
UH,UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, THEN I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND ADD, UH, MY 2 CENTS TO THIS.
UH, TO ME IT'S WHAT WAS IMPORTANT TO ME IS THE FACT THAT THE, THE PLAT HAD ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.
UH, THERE'S A LOT OF COSS AND WHEELS ON THESE I D Z DEVELOPMENTS ARE VERY TIGHT, SOMETIMES GETTING UTILITY ACCESS AND WHATNOT.
UH, AND THE FACT THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES IN THE CITY HAVE ALL CHIMED IN HAS BEEN THE SITE PLAN WAS, UH, APPROVED THROUGH CITY COUNCIL, UH, AND THE ZONING COMMISSION.
I THINK THAT THIS IS, UH, COMPLETELY APPROPRIATE.
UH, AND IT'S, IT'S, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT.
SO WITH THAT, IF YOU COULD PLEASE, UH, TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE.
MICHELLE, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MS. TREVINO? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CAN COVER THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
UH, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I WAS JUST GONNA CHECK TO SEE IF CHAIR MARTINEZ IS ABLE TO CONNECT.
UH, I'M, I'M, I CAN HEAR EVERYTHING, BUT I CAN'T.
DO YOU? OH, YES, WE CAN SEE YOU TOO.
YEAH, SO GO AHEAD IF YOU WANNA VOTE.
UH, UH, I, I SUPPORT THE, UH, I CONFIRM THE FINDINGS OF FACT, BUT MY SCREEN STILL SHOWS ME NO AUDIO.
WITH UNANIMOUS APPROVAL, UH, THIS CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED, LET'S GO TO THE NEXT CASE.
CAN WE TAKE A QUICK BREAK? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS JUST GONNA ASK.
IS UH, FIVE MINUTES ADEQUATE FOR EVERYBODY? YES.
SO WE'LL SEE EVERYBODY BACK AT THREE.
ALRIGHT, UH, WE'RE RESUMING, UH, THE TIME IS, UH, 3 0 6.
WE'RE RESUMING THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MEETING FOR OCTOBER 5TH, 2020.
AND WE WILL BE STARTING AGAIN WITH CASE OR
[4. 20-5781 BOA-20-10300057]
ACTUALLY OPENING UP CASE NUMBER 0 5 7.ALRIGHT, AS YOU STATED, THIS IS CASE 0 5 7 AT THREE 15 NORIA COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS, UH, LEADING RISSO.
IT'S REQUEST FOR ONE A 15 FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT, UH, MINIMUM REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED ADDITION TO BE FOUR FOOT SEVEN INCHES FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE TWO, A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE.
AND THE REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO ALLOW THE ATTACHED ADDITION TO BE THREE FEET EIGHT INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
CURRENT ZONING IS R FOUR M O D TWO.
THERE IS CURRENTLY A SINGLE FAMILY HOME CONSTRUCTED ON THE PROPERTY HOMEOWNER BUILT IN A, UH, APPROXIMATE 580 SQUARE FOOT.
ATTACHED ADDITION ON THE REAR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY WITHOUT OBTAINING A PERMIT ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE IS 850 SQUARE FEET AND IS, AND THE OWNER IS REQUESTING, UH, THEIR RANCH TO KEEP THE ATTACHED ADDITION.
MINE REQUIRED REAR SETBACK FOR AN R FOUR ZONE PROPERTY IS 20 FEET.
AND THE NEW ADDITION, WHICH IS MORE THAN 60% OF THE SIZE OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE, LEAVES FOUR FOOT SEVEN INCHES IN THE REAR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
HERE'S A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN.
SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORING, THAT'S STILL THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THERE.
AND HERE'S THE REAR SETBACK, SIDE SETBACK AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF BO O A 1 0 3 0 0 0 5 7.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES DO NOT, UH, DO DISTRACT FROM THE CO CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE'S NO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES PRESENT THAT WARRANT THE REQUEST.
THERE ARE 52 NOTICES SENT OUT, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THE SAN JUAN GARDENS COLLINS NEIGHBORS ASSOCIATE.
THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THEM AS WELL.
AND WE HAVE NO WRITTEN COMMENTS OR CALLS.
WE HAVE THE, YOU DO HAVE THE APPLICANT.
WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT MUTED OUT.
RISSO ACTUALLY IN PLACE OF, I THINK HER BROTHER IS GONNA SPEAK, UH, ROLANDO RISSO.
SIR, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD
[02:00:01]
AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION.HELLO, UH, MY NAME IS ROLANDO RIZZO.
I'M ACTUALLY THE SON OF RISSO.
HOME ADDRESS IS 3 1 5 NOIA 7 8 2 7.
UH, FIRST OFF, I WANNA THANK EVERYBODY FOR, UH, YOUR TIME.
UH, I AM HERE TO ASK PERMISSION TO, UH, PLEASE ALLOW ME AND MY FAMILY TO FINISH THE ADDITION.
WE HAVE STARTED BUILDING ON OUR HOME.
WE APOLOGIZE FOR NOT FOLLOWING THE CORRECT REQUIREMENTS TO BILL.
WE HAD SEEN, UH, NEIGHBORS BY OUR HOME.
WE SIMILAR ADDITIONS AND WE THOUGHT WE COULD GO AHEAD AND DO THE SAME.
UH, WE HAD LIVED OUT FOR MULTIPLE YEARS TO, UH, MAKE OUR HOME A BETTER PLACE FOR, AS YOU CAN SEE, OUR HOME IS VERY OLD, UH, AND SMALL.
BEFORE ALL THE, BEFORE THE FIX UP THAT WE DID, WE HAVE LIVED HERE FOR, UH, CLOSE TO 20 YEARS.
UH, WE ARE A VERY HARDWORKING FAMILY AND WE WERE LOOKING FORWARD TO, UH, UH, BETTER OUR, OUR, OUR HOME.
UH, AGAIN, WE APOLOGIZE FOR NOT FOLLOWING THE, THE CORRECT REQUIREMENTS, BUT I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND THIS IS THE BEST PART OF THE HOME.
UH, THE ADDITION WE ARE GOING, WE ARE THINKING OF DOING, AND IT HAS TAKEN A LOT OF HARD WORK AND SAVING MONEY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO, UH, BUILD IT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I HOPE YOU HAVE SYMPATHY FOR ME AND MY FAMILY AND HAVE A BLESSED DAY.
UH, BEFORE YOU GO, I WANT YOU TO BE, UH, AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS WE'LL BE ASKING.
AND, UH, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS OR PUBLIC OR WITNESSES OTHERWISE.
SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND ASK THE BOARD TO ASK THEIR QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT, UH, AND OR STAFF.
DO WE HAVE ANY BOARD MEMBERS WANTING TO ASK QUESTIONS? OZUNA, MR. OZUNA, YOU THE FLOOR? YES.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE APPLICANT AWARE THAT IF, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE, THAT THE, THE CONSTRUCTION WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE CITY PLAN PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS.
THAT'D BE MEETING ALL FIRE CODE, ELECTRICAL, COAL CODE, PLUMBING CODE, AND IF HE'S PREPARED TO MEET ALL THE CODES, UH, IF THE VARIANCES IS APPROVED TODAY.
SO WE HAVE, UH, ALREADY, UH, REACH OUT TO DIFFERENT, UH, THE PLUMBING AND THE, UH, ARCHITECT TO GET THOSE APPROVALS.
UH, BUT I KNOW WE HAD TO GET IT APPROVED FIRST.
IT BEFORE GETTING THOSE, UH, IMPROVEMENT PREPARED TO GO THROUGH THE CITY PERMITTING PROCESS WITH ALL THE VARIANCE, UH, VARIOUS, UH, UH, CODE COMPLIANCE.
CRUZ, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CRUZ MARIA, PLEASE.
UM, SIR, I'M JUST WONDERING, SO YOU, THIS ADDITION IS ATTACHED TO YOUR MAIN HOME OR IT'S SEPARATE? IT IS ATTACHED, MA'AM.
MR. DORIAN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR? YES.
UH, SO I, I I WAS WONDERING, I NOTICED IN THE BACK WHERE YOU, WHERE YOU, UH, COME OVER TO THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE WHERE YOU'RE THREE FOOT EIGHT INCHES AWAY, BUT IT'S BEFORE A RELATIVELY SHORT DISTANCE.
UH, IS THERE AN OBJECT THAT, UH, OR, OR SOME REASON WHY IT DOES IT FOR THAT LITTLE DISTANCE ON THE SIDE INSTEAD OF IT JUST GOING STRAIGHT BACK? OKAY.
SO THAT, THAT USED TO BE A, A LITTLE STORAGE ROOM.
UH, SO THE, THE ONE THAT, IT'S IN AN ANGLE THAT WAS A STORAGE ROOM.
SO IF, IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE, WE CAN ACTUALLY, WE WOULD BE OKAY WITH KNOCKING THAT PART DOWN.
WELL, UH, THE OTHER PART IS THE ONE THAT, OKAY, NOW WHAT I'M ASKING ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, ONE, ONE THING THAT, UH, THAT THESE SETBACKS ARE USED FOR IS FOR, YOU KNOW, UM, EMERGENCY RESPONDERS TO, TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS PARTS OF THE HOME IN CASE IT WAS A FIRE OR SOMETHING.
AND IT LOOKS LIKE ON THE EAST SIDE OF YOUR LOT, YOU PROBABLY HAVE, UH, A GOOD 10 FEET FROM THE SIDE OF YOUR HOME, UH, TO THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
AND FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE OTHER SIDE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S WELL OVER FIVE FEET AND YOU'RE SO THAT DEVIATION.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT HOW LONG THAT IS? I MEAN, THE, THE THREE FOOT EIGHT INCHES, IS THAT ABOUT 10 FEET OF THE REAR, EIGHT FEET, 10 FEET? WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? UH, THAT WOULD BE, HONESTLY, I, I'M, I'M AT HOME.
I THINK I HAD A MEASUREMENT ON THERE.
UH, BUT FROM THAT, FROM THE BACK OF THE HOUSE AFTER THAT, I PROBABLY SAID ABOUT EIGHT FEET.
AND THEN FINALLY, IS THERE, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT'S, UH, I KNOW WE HAVE, UH, PICTURES, BUT IS THERE ANYTHING THAT, UH, WOULD HINDER, UH, AN EMERGENCY RESPONDER FROM, FROM GETTING TO THE REAR OF YOUR HOME JUST IN CASE THAT NEED EVER ARISES? LIKE A LARGE TREE OR NO, SIR.
THERE WAS A TREE AND GOT KNOCKED DOWN.
[02:05:01]
ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF? MANNA, MR. MANNA, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR? YEAH, THIS FOR STAFF, I GUESS, UH, WHAT, WHAT WAS IT THAT, UH, I GUESS BROUGHT THIS CASE BEFORE US? WAS THERE A VIOLATION NOTED OR? YES, SIR.UH, THEN THEY CAME TO US AT THAT POINT.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH 'EM SINCE ON THE SITE PLAN AND, AND THE APPLICATION ITSELF.
DOES ANY, UH, NO ONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? SHELL, UH, YES, MS. UH, PLEASE, MICHELLE, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND ASK YOUR QUESTION.
UM, IT'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, I, I NOTICED THAT, UM, IT, IT SAYS THE WORD AND FOR THE TWO VARIANCES, CAN WE, UM, APPROVE ONE AND NOT THE OTHER? OR ARE THEY LINKED AND IF WE APPROVE OR DENY THEY GO TOGETHER BY A RULE, WE CAN, WE CAN APPROVE, UH, ANYTHING LESS THAN WHAT HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR.
SO IF YOU'RE SAYING, CAN WE DENY THE SIDE SETBACK, UH, VIOLATION? YES, WE CAN, WE CAN DENY THE WHOLE THING OR PORTION THEREOF.
AND YOU CAN TAKE EACH, UM, EACH MOTION INDIVIDUALLY.
WE, WE COULD BREAK IT UP INTO TWO MOTIONS OR WE CAN JUST ELIMINATE ONE PORTION OF IT.
ORIAN, MR. ORIAN, I JUST SAW, UH, AND, AND, UH, TO ADD ON TO, UH, UH, MY COLLEAGUES, UH, INQUIRY, WE CAN ALSO MAKE A MOTION TO LIMIT THE, UH, SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE TO LET'S SAY THE REAR 10 FEET OF THE HOME AS SUBMITTED.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S GRANTING A THREE FOOT EIGHT INCH ALLOWANCE FOR THE ENTIRE SIDE.
SO WE CAN DO THAT AS WELL IF JUST TO PUT THAT OUT THERE.
WELL, THAT, AND THAT PARTICULAR INSTANCE, WHAT WE DO IS WE'D ACTUALLY SAY FOR WHAT, WHAT EXISTS.
AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE SAME THING, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, WE CAN SAY, BUT I, I, I'M HESITANT TO USE SPECIFIC NUMBERS WHEN I'M NOT GIVING A SURVEY BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU, YOU CUT YOUR NOSE, SPITE YOUR FACE AND THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.
SO I WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH SAYING WITH WHAT EXISTS THAN, UH, TRYING TO GET A SPECIFIC NUMBER.
BUT I UNDERSTAND YOUR MEANING.
BUT I, 'CAUSE I CAN SEE JUST FROM THE MEASURING TAPE THAT I'M LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW, THAT THEY'RE MEASURING FROM THE FENCE AND WE'RE NOT EVEN SURE THAT'S THE PROPERTY LINE.
I MEAN, WE, YEAH, WE COULD JUST SAY AS, AS EXISTS TODAY OR EVEN GIVE THEM THE LAST 20 FEET JUST TO BE SAFE.
I DOUBT THAT THEY EXTEND THE HOUSE ANY FURTHER
BUT, UH, YES, I UNDERSTAND MY, UH, ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION? ALL RIGHT.
UM, I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
I'D LIKE TO FIND OUT WHY I NOTICED THAT IN THE VERY BACK.
UH, IS THE APPLICANT STILL WITH US? YES, SIR.
ON THE VERY BACK, THE WHOLE HOUSE SEEMS TO SHIFT OVER A FEW FEET ON BOTH THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT SIDE.
WAS THIS BUILDING EXISTING THAT WAS JUST BEING TIED INTO THE NEW STRUCTURE? SO THAT WAS JUST A, A STORAGE ROOM WHERE THEY HAD LIKE THE LAWNMOWERS AND STUFF.
UH, SO IF, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO GET KNOCKED DOWN, THAT WOULD BE A LOT EASIER FOR US TO KNOCK DOWN THAT EXTRA PART BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S KINDA, IT'S CONNECTED BUT IT'S SEPARATE AT THE SAME TIME.
IS THAT ON PIER AND BEAM, OR IS IT ON CONCRETE? SO THAT, THAT LAST PART IS ON, ON PIER AND BEAM.
SEE THAT'S THE INTERESTING PART ABOUT THAT.
UM, IT COULD BE MOVED, YOU SLIDE THE WHOLE THING OVER, BUT THAT'S A, A CHORE ON ITS OWN.
UM, LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT YOUR, UH, YOUR INTENTIONS.
SO YOU SAY THIS, SO WHAT HAPPENED, MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU ADDED ONTO THE BACK OF THE STRUCTURE AND YOU TIED IT INTO ANOTHER BUILDING THAT WAS THERE ALREADY.
AND THEN BY TYING IT ALL TOGETHER, YOU THOUGHT, WELL, IT'S ALREADY BUILT, LET'S USE IT FOR WHATEVER PURPOSE.
AND, UH, AND YOU DIDN'T TAKE IN CONSIDERATION THAT YOU COULD HAVE MOVED IT OVER A LITTLE BIT, BUT YOU DIDN'T SEEK A PERMIT.
SO YOU, YOU, UH, YOU FOUND OUT THE HARD WAY AND, UH, CORRECT SIR.
AND THE DISTANCE FROM THE, THE BACK OF THE HOUSE TO THE, UH, FENCE, UM, DO YOU KNOW IF, UH, IF THAT FENCE THAT BEHIND YOU IS, UH, ON, ON THE PROPERTY LINE OR NOT? WE HONESTLY DON'T KNOW, SIR.
IT'S BEEN, UH, A LONG TIME SINCE WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE, AND I REALLY DO NOT KNOW THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
I BELIEVE YOU'VE ANSWERED ABOUT ALL THAT'S GONNA BE FAIR TO ASK YOU IN, IN REGARD TO QUESTIONS HERE.
[02:10:01]
I'M, SINCE THERE IS NO OTHER INPUT, NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M GONNA CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION.OZUNA, I'M SORRY, MR. OZUNA, DID YOU SAY SOMETHING? YEAH, I, I'LL, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO EIGHT DASH 20 DASH 1 0 3 0 0 5 7, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT A VARIANCE REQUEST, UH, TO ALLOW THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT EXISTS TODAY, UH, TO, TO CONFORM WITHIN THE REQUIRED SETBACKS.
UH, AND THAT SHOULD COMPLY WITH THE, UM, THE VARIANCE REQUESTS INSTEAD OF RE INSTEAD OF READING OUT THE, THE, UH, EXACT MEASUREMENT FOR EACH OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTS.
UH, BUT YOU DO HAVE TO READ THE REST OF IT BECAUSE IT'S REQUIRED FOR THE CODE.
UH, SO THEN THE, THE MOST I, I GUESS, WOULD APPLY WHETHER THE, THE EXISTING OR ONE, A 15 FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT MINIMUM REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW AN ATTACHED ADDITION TO THE, TO BE FOUR FEET, SEVEN INCHES FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, AND TWO, A ONE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SETBACK, UH, TO ALLOW THE ATTACHED ADDITION TO BE THREE FEET EIGHT INCHES AWAY FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT THREE 15 NORIA APPLICANT BEING MYRNA RIZO.
BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO US AND THE FACTS THAT WE'VE DETERMINED SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE U D C HAS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC.
IN THIS CASE, THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS SERVED BY SETBACKS.
IN THIS INSTANCE, THE ATTACHED ADDITION MAINTAINS ADEQUATE SPACE FOR MAINTENANCE AND PRIOR SEPARATION, WHILE MAINTAINING ACCESSIBILITY TO LIGHT, AIR AND OPEN SPACE.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP RELATES TO THE FACT THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT GRANTED.
THE APPLICANT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THE ADDITION AS IT WAS INTENDED, AS IT NEEDS TO BE DEMOLISHED.
THREE, BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE STRICT LETTER OF THE LAW.
THE INTENT OF THE SETBACK LIMITATION TO PRESENT IS TO PREVENT FIRE SPREAD, ALLOW ADEQUATE SPACE FOR MAINTENANCE, AND ENCOURAGE PROPER STORMWATER DRAINAGE.
ALL INTENTS OF THIS LAW WILL BE OBSERVED IF, IF APPROVED FOR THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE VARIANCE IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED TO THE ZONING.
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.
THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE OR ALTER THE USE OR CHARACTER OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
THE STRUCTURE, UH, THE STRUCTURE THIS VARIANCE IS REQUESTED FOR IS IN HARMONY WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR THE VARIANCE OF ASSAULT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
UH, THE ATTACHED ADDITION MAINTAINS THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH ADEQUATE SPACE UTILIZED FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE, STORMWATER DRAINAGE, AND ACCESSIBILITY TO LIGHT AIR AND OPEN SPACE AND A MOTION.
OKAY, MARIA, I'LL GIVE YOU CREDIT FOR THAT.
AND, UH, LET'S START THE DISCUSSION, MR. OZUNA.
SO I WILL SUPPORT THE, UH, THE MOTION, UM, UNDERSTOOD THAT THE, UH, APPLICANT DID NOT PULL THE, THE PROPER PERMITS.
AND HAD THEY PULLED THE PROPER PERMITS, UH, WOULD, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WOULDN'T BE HERE TODAY.
BUT THE FACT IS THAT, UH, WE HAVE THE CON CONDITION.
UH, GIVEN THAT THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE ALL THE ELECTRICAL FIRE CODE, UH, PLUMBING, ALL THE CODES WOULD NE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE MET.
UM, I, I FEEL ADEQUATE, UH, SATISFIED THAT THE, THE PROJECT ONCE COMPLETED WILL MEET LIFE SAFETY ISSUES AND, UH, OBVIOUSLY WE HAD NO OPPOSITION FROM EITHER THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WOULD BEEN MOST AFFECTED.
UH, SO THEREFORE I'D SUPPORT THE MOTION.
IS ANY OF ANY OTHER INPUT MARIA? UH, YES, SIR.
I THINK THAT, UH, WITH EVERYTHING GOING ON AND BECAUSE THERE WAS NO OBJECTION, I DON'T SEE THE PROJECT, UH, UH, STOPPING FOR ANY REASON.
SO I CONCUR WITH WHAT'S BEING SAID.
ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY INPUT THEY'D LIKE TO PROVIDE? ORIAN? MR. ORIAN? YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT, UH, THERE WAS AN EXISTING STRUCTURE, UM, 4.7 FEET FROM THE BACK THAT HE TIED INTO.
SO THERE IT WAS ALREADY SOMETHING THERE FOR MANY YEARS AND THAT THERE'S ADEQUATE, UH, UM, EMERGENCY RESPONSE, UH, WITH ON THE SIDES AND THE, THE REAL CONFLICT IS JUST A SMALL PIECE IN THE REAR.
ALRIGHT, ANYONE ELSE? ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL.
[02:15:02]
UM, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT, MR. MENCHACA, MS. CRUZ? YES, I CONCUR.I DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MS. TREVINO? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. ORIAN? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR MARTINEZ.
OKAY, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
THE MOTION, THE MOTION VARIANCE DOES PASS.
UH, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE WITH YOUR PROJECT ONCE PERMITS AND CITY STAFF OBSERVATIONS ARE, ARE MAINTAINED.
UH, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT AND ITS COMPLETION.
UH, AND, UH, YOU ARE NOW AN EMISSARY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
ADVISE EVERYONE THAT THEY SHOULD PULL PERMITS BEFORE THEY DO ANY PARTICULAR ADDITIONS TO THEIR HOMES.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND WE'RE
[5. 20-5776 BOA-20-10300085]
GONNA PROCEED TO CASE NUMBER, UH, 0 0 0 8 5.SO AS YOU STATED, 0 8 5, IT'S AT 1 0 6 CASTILLO AVENUE COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE.
APPLICANT IS, UH, JOHN ANTE TO REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM A, THE MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 35 3 10 0.01 TO ALLOWING AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEAR THE CORNER OF CASTILLO AVENUE AND GROVE AVENUE.
THERE'S CURRENTLY A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE REAR.
THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS IN NEED OF REPAIR, AND WHEN IT WAS CONSTRUCTED, WAS BUILT DIRECTLY UP TO THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE EAVES OF THE STRUCTURES ON THE ABUTTING LOT TO THE SOUTH.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE VARIANCE IN ORDER TO REDEVELOP THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, ALLOWING THERE TO BE MORE SPACE IN BETWEEN, UM, IT AND THE STRUCTURE ON THE SOUTHERN ABUTTING LOT.
THAT IS THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE CURRENTLY IN PLACE, ABUTTING, UH, PROPERTIES AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ITSELF.
THIS IS A PHOTO OF THE ALLEY THAT'S BEHIND THE STRUCTURE.
STAFFORD'S APPROVAL OF VARIANCE IN B O A 21 0 3 0 0 0 8 5 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS.
OF FACT, THE EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS TWO FEET AWAY FROM THE EAVES OF THE STRUCTURE ON THE BUDDING LOT, UH, TO THE SOUTH.
AND THE RENOVATED, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WILL BE THREE FEET AWAY FROM THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE.
29 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT, TWO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE ROOSEVELT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
MR. BUSANTE, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR MARTINEZ AND BOARD MEMBERS.
I WANNA MAKE SURE YOU CAN HEAR ME.
I JUST HEARD SOMEONE BINGING ON, UH, YES, ACTUALLY, MR. BUSANTE, CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BECAUSE YOU WERE MUTED FOR A SECOND THERE.
UH, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER THOUGH, MUTED, I AM JOHN BUSANTE AND I LIVE AT 1 0 6 CASTILLO AVENUE.
UH, AGAIN, GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR MARTINEZ AND BOARD MEMBERS, AND I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE ON THIS BOARD.
IF I COULD GET SLIDE TWO OF MY PRESENTATION PLEASE.
I, ALONG WITH MY WIFE, TRACY HAMILTON, AM REQUESTING A TWO FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK ALONG THE SOUTHERN EDGE OF OUR PROPERTY.
AGAIN, AS STAFF MENTIONED, THIS IS TO ALLOW A NEW ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UM, THAT WILL REPLACE THAT EXISTING ONE, BUT ALLOW FOR GREATER FIRE SAFETY AND, AND GREATER FIELD OF VIEW AS BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES.
UM, AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
IF I CAN GET SLIDE THREE PLEASE.
HERE IS A REPRESENTATION OF THE EXISTING, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SHADED IN GRAY, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IT GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO THAT SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE.
[02:20:01]
A REPRESENTATION OF THE PLAN STRUCTURE.ONE OF THE ISSUES, UM, THAT EXISTS HERE IS IF WE HAD TO GO OVER THE ENTIRE FIVE FEET, UH, WE WOULD END UP HAVING TO REALLY HAVE SOME ISSUES SHOULD ANYONE DECIDE TO USE THIS STRUCTURE AS A GARAGE IN THE FUTURE.
UH, THIS HOME AS WE'LL SEE IN A LITTLE BIT, UH, HAS A, CURRENTLY HAS A DRIVEWAY THAT RUNS ALONG THE SOUTHERN SIDE AND GOES STRAIGHT INTO THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
UH, IF I CAN GET SLIDE FOUR PLEASE, I'M SORRY.
HERE IS WHY THIS IS NECESSARY.
HERE ON THE LEFT AND WHITE, YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UH, IN THE BACK.
I BELIEVE IN RED, I'M SORRY, I'M COLORBLIND.
UH, IS AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON THE ABUTTING LAW.
AND THEN TO THE RIGHT IMMEDIATELY IS THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE OF ONE 10 SPI, OUR NEIGHBOR.
UM, AND THEN FINALLY WHAT WE CAN SEE IS IN THE NON-HIGH LEAD LOT, YOU SEE THE DRIVEWAY THAT GOES STRAIGHT DOWN THAT SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, YOU SEE THAT ALMOST ALL OF THE PROPERTIES ON THIS BLOCK FACE HAVE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND THOSE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, UH, GOES STRAIGHT UP AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE IN THIS CASE TO MAKE MOST EFFECTIVE USE OF THIS PROPERTY TO PROVIDE AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UH, THAT HOPEFULLY WILL BE MUCH SAFER WITH RESPECT TO FIRE.
I ASK FOR THE TWO FOOT VARIANCE ON THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK ALONG THE SOUTHERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT THIS VARIANCE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, WITNESSES, PUBLIC OR OTHERWISE? UH, TWO LETTERS SHOULD BE READ INTO RECORD.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET THOSE ENTERED.
I AM WRITING IN SUPPORT FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR 1 0 6 CASTILLO AVENUE.
THANK YOU, AND I HOPE THAT YOU ARE DOING WELL.
THAT'S KRISTEN RAMIREZ, ONE 20 CASTILLO AVENUE.
THE NEXT EMAIL FROM, UH, STATE ALICIA, I'M WRITING TO INFORM YOU, UH, OF MY VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE, UH, TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST FOR THE PROPERTY AT 1 0 6 CASTILLO AVENUE.
MY NAME IS ALICIA GUERRERO, I RESIDE AT ONE 16 CASTILLO AVENUE.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS SUCH, UH, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF, IF THIS SATISFIES THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE HEARING ON THIS CASE.
THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF THE COMMENTARY.
UH, NOW BAR, UH, I'M GONNA ASK THE BOARD, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR FOR THE, UH, APPLICANT? CRUZ.
OKAY, MS. CRUZ, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.
UM, MR. BUSANTE ON THE, UH, STRUCTURE THAT'S THERE NOW, SO, SO ARE YOU GONNA TEAR IT DOWN COMPLETELY OR YOU'RE GONNA JUST TEAR SOME OF IT DOWN AND THEN STAY WITH WHAT YOU CAN AND, AND MAKE A, A NEW UH, UH, STRUCTURE? YES.
OUR INTENTION IS TO, AFTER RECEIVING THE APPROPRIATE PERMITS, UM, FOR DEMOLITION TO DEMOLISH THAT STRUCTURE, UM, UNFORTUNATELY IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE NOT SURE WHEN THAT STRUCTURE WAS MADE.
WE IMAGINE IT'S AT LEAST POST-WORLD WAR II, POSSIBLY THE 1960S, BUT THE, UH, EXISTING FOUNDATION IS BOTH THIN AND CRACKING FAIRLY SIGNIFICANTLY.
AND SO OUR INTENTION, UH, WOULD BE TO DEMOLISH THAT STRUCTURE, UH, AND POSSIBLY MOVE IT FORWARD A LITTLE BIT, UH, NOT MOVE IT FORWARD, BUT EXTEND IT FORWARD A LITTLE BIT.
UH, KEEPING THE EXISTING REAR SET REAR LINE AND THEN MOVING IT TOWARDS THE PRINCIPAL PROPERTY.
UH, BUT IT IS TO DEMOLISH THE PROPERTY.
I'M SORRY, DEMOLISH THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, NOT THE, NOT THE PROPERTY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MUCH, NANA.
ANY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, PLEASE, NANA? MR. MANANA, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR? YES.
SO, MR. BUSANTE, UM, THERE WAS A PICTURE THAT YOU SHOWED ON YOUR PRESENTATION THAT HAD, UM, LOOKED LIKE ANOTHER ACCESSORY DWELLING THAT YOU SAID WAS ADJACENT, BUT BEHIND YOU, YOU HAVE AN ALLEY, CORRECT? THAT, YEAH, THAT PICTURE RIGHT THERE.
SO THAT RED STRUCTURE, IS THAT THE ADJACENT BUILDING, UM, THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT PICTURE, YES, MR. MANN, THAT, THAT'S THE EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON THE NEIGHBORING LOT AT ONE 10.
AND THEN, SO THIS IS, THIS IS LOOKING DOWN THE DRIVEWAY, UH, ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE TOWARDS THE EAST.
AND SO RIGHT NOW THERE IS AN ALLEY, I'M SORRY.
SO RIGHT NOW THERE IS AN ALLEY BEHIND YOU.
SO DO YOU PLAN ON USING THE ALLEY FOR ANY, UH, UH, EGRESS, UM, TO, TO YOUR PROPERTY? I APOLOGIZE MR. MANOR.
UM, IT IS A NON-SERVICE ALLEY AT THIS POINT, AND SO, UH, WE ARE NOT INTENDING TO USE IT AS CERTAINLY NOT VEHICULAR
[02:25:01]
EGRESS, ALTHOUGH WE MAY PUT IN, UH, A GATE TO REPLACE THE EXISTING GATE ALONG THAT FENCE LINE.MS. DORIAN, YOU, YOU MAY HAVE FLOOR? YES.
UH, SO, UH, TO THE APPLICANT ON THE, ON THE SITE PLAN THAT THAT WAS PROVIDED, IT HAS A, UM, UH, IT'S REFLECTING TWO POWER POLES THAT ARE AT THE 10 FOOT ALLEY.
UH, I KNOW THAT WITH THE ALLEY YOU CAN GET A REDUCTION IN THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STRUCTURE, BUT IS THERE A, A, A, YOU ARE THOSE ELECTRIC LINES LIKE RUNNING RIGHT AGAINST YOUR BUILDING BACK THERE OUTTA CURIOSITY? THANK YOU, MR. IAN? UH, NO, THEY ARE, THEY'RE, I MEAN, THEY'RE MUCH HIGHER UP.
UM, AND SO THERE IS, LET ME ACTUALLY LOOK AT IT SINCE I'M STUCK AT HOME, BUT THEY ARE RUNNING PRIMARILY ON, IT LOOKS LIKE THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THAT SERVICE ALLEY.
BUT THERE ARE, THERE ARE POWER LINES RUNNING BETWEEN THOSE TWO POWER HOLES.
AND YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT IF SOMEONE WANTED TO USE THIS AS A GARAGE, IT'S, IT WOULD LINE UP BETTER WITH THE STREET.
UM, BUT YOU HAD ALSO SAID THAT THE ALLEY ISN'T DRIVABLE.
CORRECT? THE ALLEY IS A NON-SERVICE ALLEY.
I DON'T THINK, I MEAN, I GUESS WITH FOUR WHEEL DRIVE YOU CAN DO IT, UM, BUT IT'S, IT'S NOT MAINTAINED AS AN ALLEY.
IT HAS NOT BEEN USED AS AN ALLEY, UH, AS OPPOSED TO SOME OTHER ALLEYS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THEN FINALLY, WHAT'S A, WHAT SIZE OF OVERHANG, UH, E YOU GONNA HAVE ON THIS STRUCTURE? SO WITH RESPECT TO, UM, THE ROOF LINE, WE'RE STILL WORKING OUT SOME OF THE PLANS, BUT MY INTENTION IS TO, UH, KEEP THAT KIND OF SHED ROOF FORM, UH, THAT IS ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE RIGHT NOW.
SO THE EAVES ON THE SOUTHERN AND NORTHERN SIDE WOULD BE VERY LIMITED.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WITH QUESTIONS EITHER FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? ALRIGHT, NONE BEING THE CASE.
UH, UH, WE, UH, I DON'T THINK IT, WE HAVE A A DO WE HAVE A REBUTTAL NECESSARY IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THEREFORE? OKAY, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC AND, UH, LET'S ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO A 21 0 3 0 0 0 8 5, I MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTED A REQUEST FOR A TWO FOOT, UH, VARIANCE FROM A FIVE FOOT MEANING MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 0 6 CASTILLO AVENUE, APPLICANT BEING JOHN BUSANTE.
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 VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC.
IN THIS CASE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE APP TO RENOVATE AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND MOVE IT FURTHER FROM A STRUCTURE ON AN ABUTTING LOT.
TWO, DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED, WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO MOVE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE UPON RENOVATION, BUT THE MINIMUM SITE SETBACK OF FIVE FEET WOULD RESULT IN A SMALLER FOOTPRINT OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW.
THE INTENT OF SIDE SETBACKS IS TO PROVIDE SEPARATION BETWEEN STRUCTURES AND PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE.
IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT WILL BE MOVING THE, THE, THE DUPLICATED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE FOR IT CURRENTLY SITS.
THIS WILL ALLOW FOR, ALLOW FOR SEPARATION FROM THE EASE OF THE ABUTTING STRUCTURE TO THE SOUTH, CREATING MORE SEPARATION AND REDUCING FIRE RISK FROM THE ABUTTING PROPERTY.
VARIANCE WILL NOT, WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
[02:30:01]
BY 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 REQUEST TO REDUCE THE SIDE SETBACK DOES NOT POSE A RISK OF SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING.
THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTY IS AND IS NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER IN THE DISTRICT SIX SULI OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH ITS VARIANCE IS SOUGHT.
IT'S DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY, AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, ARE NOT DUE TO THE RESULT OR GEN OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE LOCATION OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND PROPOSED PLANS FOR THE LOT SHALL WARRANT THE GRANTING OF THIS REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT WAS INFORMED OF THE LIMITATIONS INCURED BY THE ORDINANCE AND SUBMITTED THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND OF MOTION.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE WHO WAS THAT? WHO SECOND? I HEARD SOMEONE.
CAN ANYONE HEAR ME? I SECOND IT.
I HEARD, I HEARD THE NOISE TOO, BUT
WHO SECONDED? WAS THAT MANNA OR MR. ROYA? MANNA.
AND UH, SO SINCE YOU MADE THE MOTION, MS. CRUZ, YOU, WOULD YOU LIKE TO START THE DISCUSSION? UH, YES SIR.
I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS, ESPECIALLY SINCE, UH, HE DID REQUEST THE VARIANCE BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION WAS MADE.
SO THAT'S GREAT POINTS IN HIS FAVOR.
AND, UH, I SEE NO PROBLEMS WITH THE CONSTRUCTION.
UH, MR. MANNA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD TO THAT? YES.
I THINK THAT HAVING THE, UH, THE EASEMENT IN BACK OF IT WITH REGARDS TO THE UNUSED ALLEY, UM, ALSO, UM, WARRANTS THIS.
UM, AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD ADDITION AND THANK YOU FOR COMING BEFORE THE BOARD BEFORE, UH, ACTUALLY DOING CONSTRUCTION.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS LIKE TO ADD SOME INPUT? NONE BEING THE CASE.
LET'S, UH, UM, LET'S GO AHEAD CATHERINE AND TAKE A ROLL CALL.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACTS.
TREVINO, YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF MR. OZUNA.
YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
UH, YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR MARTINEZ.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
UH, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT.
IT'S GONNA BE A LOT OF FUN, I'M SURE.
SO, UH, LET'S, UH, I BELIEVE OUR
[6. 20-5775 BOA-20-10300078]
NEXT CASE IS NUMBER OH SEVEN EIGHT.IT'S TWO 11 NORTH POLAR STREET COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO.
UH, THE APPLICANT IS BRETT HENKE.
REQUEST FOR ONE, UH, 1,816 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW THE LOT TO BE 2,184 SQUARE FEET.
TWO, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO, UH, ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
AND THREE, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 20 FOOT GARAGE ENTRANCE TO ALLOW GARAGE TO BE LOCATED 10 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
CURRENT ZONING IS R FOUR M O D THREE.
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF NORTH PILAR STREET BETWEEN BELMONT STREET AND PASO PASON.
THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY VACANT AND LOCATED MID-BLOCK.
THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING VARIANCES FOR THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, UH, THE REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND THE GARAGE FRONT SETBACK IN ORDER ORDER TO HAVE A MORE FLEXIBLE, MORE FLEXIBILITY IN DEVELOPING THE LOT.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DEVELOP A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON THE PROPERTY.
HERE'S A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN, SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE IN D O A 21 0 3 0 0 0 7 8 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS.
OF FACT, THE LOT SIZE OF THE PROPERTY IS 2,184 SQUARE FEET AND THE DEPTH OF THE LOT IS 50 FEET.
AND THE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WILL MAINTAIN THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACKS ONCE DEVELOPED
[02:35:01]
AND THE GARAGE WILL BE DEVELOPED 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.25 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT, TWO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO RESPONSE FROM JEFFERSON HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE.
SIR, WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION.
IS IT MY HOME ADDRESS OR THE ADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY? YOUR HOME ADDRESS, SIR? UH, 8 1 5 DAWSON STREET.
UM, I JUST, Y'ALL PRETTY MUCH COVERED IT.
I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT, UH, I HAD SPOKEN WITH SAS AND THERE WAS A, UM, A HOUSE THERE IN THE FIFTIES THAT HAD BURNED DOWN.
UH, THAT'S, UH, ALL THE INFORMATION FROM THE APPLICANT.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC INPUT? NO PUBLIC INPUT.
WELL, WE'RE PRETTY MUCH TAKEN CARE OF THERE.
UH, BOARD, UH, MEMBERS, I'M GONNA REQUEST THAT THOSE THAT YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, UH, EITHER FOR STAFF OR FOR THE APPLICANT, DO SO NOW ORIAN, MR. ORIAN? YES.
UH, DO YOU, BASED ON YOUR DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK, UH, DO YOU THINK THERE'S ADEQUATE ROOM TO PARK A VEHICLE AND NOT BLOCK THE SIDEWALK WALL? YES, IT WOULD BE A, UH, OBVIOUSLY A SMALLER VEHICLE.
UM, I MEAN, A TRUCK, A TRUCK WOULD NOT, IT, THERE IS SPACE BETWEEN THE, UM, SETBACK AND THE ACTUAL CURBSIDE.
I BELIEVE IT'S, I DON'T, DON'T HOLD ME TO IT, BUT I THINK IT'S SEVEN OR EIGHT FEET FURTHER.
BUT, UM, BUT YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AT.
IF YOU HAVE 10 FEET FROM THE FACE OF YOUR GARAGE TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND THEN ANOTHER SEVEN OR EIGHT FEET TO THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK, YEAH.
IT MIGHT BE MORE THAN THAT, BUT THERE IS NO SIDEWALKS ON THAT, ON THAT STREET.
I MEAN, ON THE, ON THE, ON THE NORTH, YOU KNOW, NORTH AND SOUTH STREET.
I GUESS WHAT THERE WILL BE, BUT YEAH, IT'S JUST HARD TO TELL, SO, OKAY.
ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION FOR, FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? SHE, MICHELLE, GO AHEAD.
UM, FOR THE APPLICANT, I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT YOUR TOTAL PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS FOR THE HOUSE.
UH, THE A THIS FOR THE APPLICANT, SHE WAS REQUESTING TO KNOW HOW LARGE OF A HOUSE ARE YOU CONSTRUCTING HERE? UH, IT'S GONNA BE 1600 FEET AND IT'S TWO STORIES.
SO THAT'S PRO, PRIMARILY 800 PER LEVEL? YES.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
GENERALLY SPEAKING, WHEN A DEVELOPMENT IS DONE AND, UH, AN APPLICATION IS, IS MADE FOR A PERMIT, THE, UH, CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO PUT IN A PUBLIC ACCESS SIDEWALK.
UH, DOES THIS HOUSE OR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT REQUIRE THAT? IT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON THE, UH, CURRENT CONDITIONS OF THE BLOCK.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S REVIEWED IN THE PERMIT PROCESS.
UH, IF THERE ARE SIDEWALK SIDEWALKS ALONG THAT STREET, THEN YES, THEY'LL HAVE TO BE PROVIDED.
BUT IF THERE'S NOT, THAT IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION DURING THE REVIEW VERY WELL.
THAT WOULD MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE IN HOW MUCH PARKING SPACE HE HAS.
ALRIGHT, THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.
IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, THEN I'M GOING TO, UH, CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC THEN.
MR. ORIAN, UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BOA DASH 20 DASH OH 3 0 0 0 78, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT A REQUEST FOR ONE A 1,816 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW FOR THE LOT TO BE 2,184 SQUARE FEET AND TWO, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE TO THE REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A 10 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
AND THREE, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 20 FOOT GARAGE ENTRANCE TO ALLOW A GARAGE TO BE LOCATED.
10 FEET FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT TWO 11 NORTH POLARIS STREET, APPLICANT BEING BRENT HENNEKE.
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 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIFICALLY, WE FIND THAT ONE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, PUBLIC INTEREST
[02:40:01]
THAT'S DEFINED AS A GENERAL HEALTH AND SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC.IN THIS CASE, THE VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE VARIANCE DUE TO THE SIZE CONSTRAINTS OF THE LAW, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON, ON A CURRENTLY VACANT LOT TOO, DUE TO SPECIAL UH, CONDITIONS, A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT IF ENFORCED, WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
SPECIAL SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS A SQUARE FOOTAGE LESS THAN THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT AND HAS A SHALLOW LOT THAT, SO A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD CAUSE ISSUES TO OBTAIN RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT ON PROPERTY.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS DEFINED AS THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE EXACT LETTER OF THE LAW.
THE INTENT OF THE MINIMUM LOT DIMENSIONS AND SETBACKS IS TO CREATE UNIFORMITY AND PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE.
THE APPLICANT WILL MAINTAIN THE SITE SETBACKS IN THIS PROPOSING A 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK, WHICH WILL ALLOW ENOUGH SEPARATION FROM ABUTTING PROPERTIES.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF THE USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE FRONT GARAGE SETBACK, THE REAR SETBACK, AND ALL SIDES TO NOT CLOSE AT RISK OF SUBSTANTIAL SUBSTANTIALLY INJURING THE USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND IT'S NOT LIKELY TO ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
THE PLIGHT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WERE NOT, WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL AND ARE NOT DUE TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE UNIQUE SIZE AND CONFIGURATION OF THE LOT SHALL WARRANT THE GRANTING OF THIS REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT WAS INFORMED OF THE LIMITATIONS INCURRED BY THE ORDINANCE AND SUBMITTED THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE PRIOR TO CON CONSTRUCTION, THE MOTION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? MAD SECOND UP
OKAY, MR. MA, UH, THEN LET'S GO AHEAD AND START THE DISCUSSION.
AND, UH, DON, WILL YOU PLEASE BEGIN THAT? SURE THING.
UH, I'M GONNA BE IN SUPPORT, UH, OF THIS REQUEST.
UH, I KNOW IT'S A, IT'S A RELATIVELY SMALL, UH, TRACT OF LAND.
HOWEVER, UH, I THINK WITH THE SEPARATION FROM THE ACTUAL, UH, UM, CURB LINE AND THE FACE OF GARAGE, A SMALL VEHICLE COULD ADEQUATELY PARK THERE AND, UH, BE OUT OF A, OF A RELATIVELY SMALL SIDEWALK THAT WOULD EXIST ON POLARIS.
UH, THE OTHER THING IS THIS, THESE STREETS ARE RELATIVELY DEVELOPED.
I I DON'T SEE ANY WIDENING, UH, ANTICIPATED IN THE FUTURE.
SO, SO WITH THAT RESPECT, I'M FINE IN THE REAR, UH, 10 FEET.
UH, WHILE 20 IS THE MINIMUM, I THINK 10 IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE SIZE OF THE PARCEL, WHAT'S BEING CONSTRUCTED, AND IT DOES PROVIDE ACCESS TO, UH, EMERGENCY PERSONNEL.
ANYONE ELSE? UH, MR. MANA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE YOUR INPUT? SURE, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE.
I WILL BE ALSO VOTING IN FAVOR.
ONE NOTE HERE IS THAT THE STRUCTURE BEHIND IT IS ACTUALLY IN A, UH, AN APARTMENT ON ANOTHER SMALL LOT KIND OF INSERTED IN THE MIDDLE OF A BLOCK BASE HERE, WHICH IS KIND OF WEIRD.
UM, BUT, UM, BEING THAT IT'S GONNA BE 10 FEET AWAY FROM THAT, FROM THAT STRUCTURE, I THINK GIVES IT ADEQUATE SPACE AS WELL AS THE, UM, THE LOT THAT IS ACTUALLY, UM, ADJACENT TO IT.
UH, ITS SIDE LOT ON, UH, HONDO IS ACTUALLY LESS THAN 10 FEET.
SO, SO ACTUALLY GIVEN, GIVEN THE SPACE BEHIND AS WELL AS AROUND IT.
SO I WILL BE PUTTING IN FAVOR.
ANYONE ELSE? MINKA? MR. MINKA, GO AHEAD.
THE CONCERN THAT I HAD ON THIS ISSUE WAS THAT, UH, THE FRONT SET BACK OF 10 FEET AND RIGHT NOW THE SMALL CAR THAT HE HAS AND THE FUTURE CARS THAT MAY BE THERE WILL BLOCK THAT SIDEWALK AND THE STREET, BUT I'LL SUPPORT THIS.
OKAY, THEN, UH, ANYONE ELSE? NONE BEING THE CASE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE.
I CONCUR WITH A FINE EXIT ACT.
MR. MANAS, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MS. BRAGMAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF ASH.
MR. TREVINO? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. OZUNA CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MR. ORIAN, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR MARTINEZ.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
[02:45:01]
YOU HAVE YOUR VARIANCE.UM, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT AND, UH, UM, JUST REMEMBER YOU CAN'T BLOCK SIDEWALKS.
ANYWAY, UH, LET'S GO ON TO OUR LAST CASE, I BELIEVE IS
[7. 20-5779 BOA-20-10300082]
NUMBER OH EIGHT TWO ON.THIS IS 1 0 2 STREET AT DISTRICT FIVE AND THE APPLICANT IS RE HOMES REQUEST FOR ONE AND 8 843 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE WITH THE REQUIRED 4,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE TO ALLOW TO ALLOW A LOT SIZE TO BE 3,157 SQUARE FEET AND TWO, A 10 FOOT GRAND FROM THE REQUIRED 20 FOOT MINIMUM REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
CURRENT ZONING IS R FOUR A H O D.
THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING VARIANCES FROM THE REAR SETBACK AND FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN ORDER TO BUILD A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THE LOT.
SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS BEEN VACANT SINCE, UH, BEFORE 1980.
DUE THE ANTIQUATED SUBSTANDARD LOTS WITHIN THE DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT MUST MAINTAIN, OBTAIN VARIANCES TO THEIR OR TO REZONE IN ORDER TO DEVELOP ON THIS LOT.
DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT, THE APPLICANT WILL NEED A VARIANCE FOR THE REAR SETBACK AND REQUESTED A, A CLEAN SLATE FOR PROPERTY PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT TO INCLUDE A LOT SIZE VARIANCE.
THESE LOTS WITHIN THE DISTRICT ARE ONCE CONVERTED FROM THE 1938 C APARTMENT DISTRICTS CONVERTED AND REZONED TO WHAT IS CURRENTLY THE R R FOUR SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.
BECAUSE OF THIS, THE LOT IS CONSIDERED A NON-CONFORMING LOT OF RECORD.
HERE'S A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN.
SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE O A 21 0 3 0 0 0 82 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WILL NOT DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE, OF THE DISTRICT IN ADEQUATE SPACE WILL BE UTILIZED TO PREVENT STORMWATER RUNOFF.
MAINTENANCE OF PROPERTY AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STRUCTURE WITHOUT TRESPASS AND DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT DEVELOPMENT CAN ONLY OCCUR ON THIS LOT BY WAY OF REZONING OR THREE VARIANCES.
NEXT ONE, UH, 29 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE'S NO RESPONSE FROM THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
WE DO HAVE THE, UH, APPLICANT FROM, UH, RE HOMES.
WHEN YOU'RE READY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU CAN START YOUR PRESENTATION.
UH, HI, MY NAME IS BETO SEPULVEDA.
UH, MY, THE, UH, PROPERTY ADDRESS IS 1 0 2 GREENNET, UH, STREET.
UH, DO YOU NEED MY ADDRESS, MY PERSONAL ADDRESS OR YOUR HOME ADDRESS IS FINE.
UH, A B R GARDENS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 5 1.
CONTINUE WITH YOUR PRESENTATION.
UH, YES, AS A GENTLEMAN STATED, UH, THE, UNFORTUNATELY THE, UH, THIS IS A NON-CONFORMING LOT, UH, FOR WHAT IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED FOR, WHICH IS A R FOUR.
UH, IT COMES IN AT, UH, 3,157 SQUARE FEET.
UH, SO, UH, WE WERE HOPING TO GET, UH, I GUESS A VARIANCE TO BE ABLE TO, UH, CONSTRUCT ON THIS SLOT.
UM, AND THE SECOND, UH, THING, UH, AGAIN, DUE TO JUST THE, THE DIMENSIONS IN THE SIDES OF THE SLOT, UH, WOULD BE TO HOPEFULLY GET A, UH, 10 FOOT, UH, VARIANCE ON THE REAR OF THE LOT AS WELL, UH, TO ALLOW US TO BUILD A, A 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AS OPPOSED TO THE, UH, 20 FEET REQUIRED BY THE, UH, R FOUR, UM, ZONING THAT IT CURRENTLY HAS.
IS THAT THE EXTENT OF YOUR PRESENTATION? WOULD YOU, OKAY, ZEKE, SO THERE'S ONLY ONE COMMENT, UH, SENT IN, IN FAVOR.
IT'S A QUICK, QUICK STATEMENT.
I ACTUALLY CAN'T READ ALL OF IT.
SO IT JUST SAYS IT'S IN FAVOR, LOPEZ AT ONE 13 GRANITE.
UH, I APOLOGIZE THAT I'M UNABLE TO READ, UH, WHAT THEY WROTE OUT, BUT THEY ARE IN FAVOR.
OKAY, WELL THAT'S, THAT'S A, THAT'S A PLUS.
YOU GET, YOU READ THEIR NAME RESO LOPEZ AT ONE 13 GRANITE.
UM, NOW LET'S, LET'S, UH, TAKE THIS TO THE BOARD AND ASK THAT YOU ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF AND OR THE APPLICANT IN REGARD TO THIS CASE.
ANY QUESTIONS? CRUZ MARIA, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.
I'M JUST WONDERING THE, UH, TREES
[02:50:01]
IN THE BACK OF THE YARD, WILL THOSE STAY THERE OR WILL YOU MOVE THEM AROUND OR WHAT? UH, YEAH, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I MEAN, WE ALWAYS WANT TO TRY TO SAVE, UH, YOU KNOW, AS MANY AS WE CAN.UM, IF FOR WHATEVER REASON, UH, WE DO END UP HAVING TO KNOCK ANY OF 'EM DOWN, UH, UH, WE, WE WOULD OBVIOUSLY SUBMIT A A AN A V R FOR THE, UH, TREES, UH, TO, TO BASICALLY REPLENISH WHATEVER WE'RE REMOVING.
UM, AND, AND TYPICALLY IF, YOU KNOW, IF IF THEY'RE FAR ENOUGH FROM THE FOUNDATION, THEN, THEN WE, WE, WE LEAVE 'EM ALONE BASICALLY.
I JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
UM, LET ME, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION IN REGARD TO THAT 'CAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THIS PHOTOGRAPH.
IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT TO BE ANY STRUCTURE BEHIND THOSE TREES, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO THE SIZE OF THE LOT IS NOT GONNA POSSIBLY INTERFERE WITH THE POTENTIAL FIRE, UH, RESPONSE.
SO, UM, I SEE THE ADVANTAGE OF THIS.
ALRIGHT, UH, SINCE THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS TO THE PUBLIC AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
CRUZ MARIA, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.
UH, REGARDING CASE NUMBER BO 8 21 0 3 0 0 0 82, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
GRANTED REQUEST FOR ONE AN 843 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 4,000 SQUARE FOOT.
LOT SIZE TO ALLOW THE LOT SIZE TO BE 3,157 SQUARE FEET.
AND TWO, A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 20 FOOT MINIMUM REAR SETBACK TO ALLOW A STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE SITUATED AT 1 0 2 GRANITE STREET, APPLICANT BEING LIBRE HOLMES.
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 VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS DEFINED AS THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC.
IN THIS CASE, GIVEN THE LOT CONSTRAINTS, GRANTING THE VARIANCES WOULD STILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE ACCESSIBILITY TO LIGHT AIR AND OPEN SPACE.
FURTHER FIRE RATED MATERIAL WILL BE REQUIRED DUE TO THE PROXIMITY OF ADJACENT STRUCTURES TO DUE TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
A LITTLE A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.
A LITTLE A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP DUE TO SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPABLE SPACE ON EACH LOT.
A SMALL LOT CONFIGURATIONS ARE THE RESULT OF ANTIQUE ANTIQUATED, SUBSTANDARD LOT DEVELOPMENT AND WILL REQUIRE VARIANCES IF DEVELOPING ON THE LOT AS INTENDED.
BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE WILL BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.
THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE IS IN THE INTENT OF THE CODE RATHER THAN THE STRICT LETTER OF THE LAW.
THE INTENT OF THE SETBACK LIMITATION IS TO PREVENT FIRE SPREAD, ALLOW ADEQUATE SPACE FOR MAINTENANCE AND ENCOURAGE PROPER STORM WATER DRAINAGE.
ALL INTENTS OF THIS LAW WILL BE OBSERVED IF APPROVED FOR THE VARIANCE, WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A USE OTHER THAN THOSE USES SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE DISTRICT.
SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THE ADJACENT, ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE VARIANCES REQUESTED WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE OR ALTER THE USE OR CHARACTER OF ADJACENT CONFORMING PROPERTY OR CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
SPECIFICALLY, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT PLACE THE STRUCTURE OUT OF CHARACTER WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.
FURTHER, THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IS FOLLOWING A DISTRICT NORM OF REDUCED SETBACKS FOR OUR FOR ALL HOUSES BUILT WITHIN THE AREA SIX SUPPLY TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS SOUGHT IN TWO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
[02:55:01]
AND THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT MERELY FINANCIAL, ARE NOT DUE TO TO, OR THE RESULT OF GENERAL CONDITIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS IS LOCATED.THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY ARE NEITHER DUE TO THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE DISTRICT, NOR DUE TO THE OWNER.
AND IT'S NOT FINANCIAL IN NATURE.
THE CHARACTER OF REDUCED LOT SIZES WITHIN THE DISTRICT IS UNIFORM, LEAVING LITTLE ROOM FOR PROPER BUILDINGS HEAD BACK.
THIS IS CREATED BY THE PROPOSITION OF ODOR, OUTDATED, SUBSTANTIAL LOTS CURRENTLY.
OH, THAT'S A MOUTHFUL, ISN'T IT? YEAH.
DO WE, DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? I'M SORRY, I DON'T HEAR ANYONE.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THE MOTION? SECOND.
MR. MAN, I'M CREDITED YOU 'CAUSE I HEARD YOU FIRST.
ALRIGHT, MARIA, LET'S START THE DISCUSSION.
UM, I CONCUR WITH THIS, UH, RECOMMENDATION, UH, WITH IT, UH, BEING AN EMPTY LOT AND BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE LOT, I THINK THAT NEW HOME IN THERE WOULD BE, UH, SIGNIFICANT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT SURE WOULD GIVE A NEW, UH, OUTCOME FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, MR. MANUS, SINCE I GAVE YOU CREDIT FOR THAT, WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY? I, UH, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE AND, UH, THE PROPERTY BEHIND THIS PROPERTY IS, IS AN EXTENDED PROPERTY.
AND SO AS YOU POINTED OUT, THERE IS NO, UH, NO STRUCTURES BEHIND IT.
SO, SO I THINK IT IS A GOOD FIT FOR THE SPECIFIC LOT AND, UH, THEREFORE I WILL BE PUT IN FAVOR.
ANYONE ELSE WANNA ADD SOME INPUT? ALL RIGHT, THAT'D BE THE CASE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE ROLL CALL VOTE.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
MS. TREVINO? YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
YES, I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CHAIR MARTINEZ.
I CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
UH, I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING A, A REALLY NICE LOOKING STRUCTURE THERE.
AND GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT.
THAT CONCLUDES THE CASES BEFORE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR, FOR OCTOBER 5TH.
[8. 20-5787 Consideration and approval of September 21, 2020 minutes.]
THAT EVERYONE, UH, I DON'T KNOW.I DIDN'T, BUT DID EVERYONE ELSE RECEIVE A, A COPY OF THE MINUTES TO REVIEW? DID WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONS OR ALTERATIONS? DID WE GET A COPY OF THE MINUTES? I DIDN'T SEE THEM.
YEAH, I JUST HIT A, I HIT ON THE AGENDA.
WHEN DID WE, WE GOT 'EM LAST WEEK, RIGHT? I'M SORRY.
WELL, I I YOU'VE GOT A GOOD CHANCE TO DO IT RIGHT NOW, SO, OKAY.
UH, DOES ANYONE SEE ANY ALTERATIONS OR CORRECTIONS NEED TO BE MADE ON THE MINUTES? I DO NOT.
WELL, IT LOOKS ALL CORRECT TO ME.
UM, SO THEREFORE I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND TAKE THIS, GIVE THIS A ROLL CALL.
VOTE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE, UM, PRE, UH, THE, UH, PREVIOUS MEETING.
WHO MADE THE MOTION? AND THE SECOND, WHO'S MAKING THE MOTION? MANO SO MOVED.
I MOVED THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTE AS DOCUMENTED.
MR. ORIAN IS MADE THE SECOND, I BELIEVE.
MS. BRAGMAN? YES, I APPROVE MR. BATTLE? YES,
[03:00:01]
I APPROVE MR. DELMER.I APPROVE MR. OONA? YES, I APPROVE MR. ORIAN.
AND THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
AND, UH, THAT CON UH, CONCLUDES THE, UH, FORMAL PORTION OF OUR MEETING.
WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE NEED TO BE RECEIVING FROM STAFF? UH, NO.
THE NEXT MEETING, UH, WE'LL HAVE A FULL COMPLIMENT ABOUT SEVEN CASES, AND WE'LL ALSO CONSIDER, UH, THE 2021 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING CALENDAR AS WELL.
THAT'S FOR OUR SCHEDULE FOR OCTOBER 19TH, 2020.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS THEY WANNA BE BROUGHT UP IN THE NEXT MEETING? OH, CHAIR.
I JUST WANTED TO ASK CATHERINE, BY DOING SEVEN A MEETING, ARE, ARE WE MAKING A HUGE BACKLOG OR ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT STUFF? SO THIS IS ZEKE.
UM, I WILL SAY NOW THAT THINGS ARE OPENING UP, A LOT OF CODE CASES ARE COMING IN.
SO WE ARE A LITTLE BACKLOGGED.
THERE WAS A DEADLINE FOR THE FIRST WEEK IN NOVEMBER.
WE ALREADY HAVE CASES SET FOR THE SECOND MEETING IN NOVEMBER.
ARE WE UNDER ANY SORT OF GOVERNMENTAL REQUIREMENT TO BUMP IT UP MORE THAN SEVEN? OR, OR IS IT OKAY,
IF, IF, UM, I MEAN, TODAY IS GOOD.
WE, WE FINISHED A LITTLE AFTER FOUR.
UM, WE, WE JUST DON'T WANT TO LOSE A QUORUM IN CASE PEOPLE HAVE TO LEAVE AFTER FIVE O'CLOCK.
I THINK, I THINK WE HAVE A BIGGER PROBLEM WITH THE INTERNET LOSING QUORUM.
ANYTHING
UH, THIS, I GUESS THIS FORMALLY ENDS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, UH, MEETING IT IS, UH, FOUR 10.
'CAUSE MY SCREEN JUST WENT BLANK EXCEPT FOR I CAN SEE MARIA.
AND, UH, THIS, THIS IS PHILLIP.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR KAT MEETING FOR OCTOBER 5TH THOUSAND 20.
YES, MR. SO, UH, KAT, SO WE, UH, IN ONE OF TODAY'S DISCUSSIONS, A CHAIRMAN MARTINEZ BROUGHT UP THE, THE DIALOGUE ABOUT THE U D C REVIEWING, UM, WE'LL SAY SOME OF THE CODE, UM, REGARDING, UM, THE H D R C AND WINDOWS AND THAT.
SO, SO BEING THAT WE'RE STARTING THE REVIEW OF THE U D C SHORTLY, UM, IS THAT GONNA BE AUTOMATICALLY ADDED BY YOUR TEAM AS FAR AS THE DIALOGUE? UH, NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
UH, IF THERE, IF THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS THAT YOU NEED CLARIFICATION FROM O H P, WE CAN HELP TO FACILITATE THAT, UM, IN, IN A WORK SESSION.
BUT I I'M, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE SUBMITTING.
AND RIGHT NOW THERE IS THE, THE U D C AMENDMENT PROCESS IS ON HOLD.
UH, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHEN IT'S GOING TO RESTART.
I'D LIKE TO, I JUST GOT A NOTICE TODAY ASKING ABOUT INPUT FOR IT AS FAR AS SETTING TIMES AND STUFF.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS, YEAH, BECAUSE, BECAUSE THERE ARE, UM, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, MAJOR ZERO FOR PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, ARE WE ARE REQUIRED TO GO TO TAC.
SO THERE MIGHT BE AN ITEM THAT NEEDS TO BE HEARD BY THE TAC, BUT IT'S NOT AN, IT'S NOT THE OFFICIAL U D C AMENDMENT PROCESS THAT'S RESTARTING.
AND CAN'T TURN TO EXPAND ON, UH, COMMISSIONER MAN'S QUESTION.
DOES THE H D R C COMMISSION REVIEW CHANGES TO THE GUIDELINES OR IS THAT A TAC PROCESS? IT, IT GOES TO H D R C BECAUSE THEY'RE THE EXPERTS IN THE PROCESS.
AND THEN ONCE THEY PROVIDE THEIR SUBMITTAL, IF YOU WILL, UM, WITH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION, THEN IT GOES THROUGH THE FORMAL PROCESS OF OKAY, GOING TAX AND PLANNING COMMISSION, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
WELL, AND I WISH EVERYBODY A VERY GOOD, UH, COMFORTABLE FALL.
IT'S BEEN NICE WEATHER RECENTLY.
MOST OF YOU CAN'T GET OUTSIDE.
BUT TRY, IT'S, IT'S NICE OUT THERE.
I'VE BEEN TAKING A LOT OF WALKS LATELY.
SO
YEAH, IT'S BEEN CHILLY LATELY.
SO ANYWAY, THANK YOU ALL FOR ATTENDING AND I HOPE THAT EVERYBODY DRIVES HOME SAFELY.