San Antonio Zoning Board of Adjustments Meeting - August 18, 2025

The Zoning Board of Adjustments of San Antonio, Texas, met on August 18, 2025, beginning at 1:01 PM. The meeting was presided over by Chair Oren, with commissioners present including Osuna, Mena, Barrington, Stevens, Ibañez, Dean, Cruz, Brackman, Benavides (arriving late and departing early), Bonillas (joining digitally), and Berndon. A quorum of nine members was established. The board heard and voted on ten agenda items, including appeals of short-term rental (STR) permit revocations, special exceptions for STRs, variance requests, and an appeal regarding a non-conforming use.

Calendar Item 1: Continuance

• A motion was made and seconded to continue Case BOA 23103014 (Sergio de la Mora, 626 Fulton) to September 22, 2025. The continuance was approved. The case involves variances for an accessory structure and building height.

Calendar Item 2: Appeal of STR Permit Revocation – 5454 Vista Trail

• Case: BOA 251030128, requested by Anthony Sul. The appeal challenged the city's revocation of a Type 2 short-term rental permit for failure to report and pay Hotel Occupancy Tax (HOT) from April 2024 to February 2025.
• Staff Position: Recommended denial, citing 37 notices sent (three in favor, two opposed; Vista Neighbor Association opposed). The applicant's father, Alex Zully, represented the absentee applicant, stating that notifications went to a spam folder and no physical certified letter was received at the property address. Staff noted that 37 email notifications had been sent and that a certified letter was sent to the property address (5454 Vista Trail).
• Public Comment: None.
• Motion: Commissioner Osuna moved to grant the appeal, finding that the city made an error in revoking the permit due to a lack of communication. He noted that there was no opposition from neighbors and that the issue was limited to tax reporting.
• Vote: 6 in favor (Osuna, Stevens, Ibañez, Brackman, Bonillas, Chair Oren), 4 opposed (Mena, Barrington, Dean, Cruz), 1 abstention (Benavides). The motion failed (6–4–1). The permit revocation stands. The applicant may reapply after one year from July 1, 2025.

Calendar Item 3: Special Exception for Type 2 STR – 1031 South Gabriel Street

• Case: BOA 251030135, requested by Shivani Brady. The property is located in District 2. The block already has four STR units (one active Type 2 at 1023 South Gavins). The applicant requested an additional Type 2 STR permit; the block limit is 21 units. Currently, 21.43% of the block is STRs; the cap is 25%.
• Staff Position: Recommended denial. 39 notices sent; zero in favor, zero opposed. The Denver Heights Neighborhood Association responded in opposition. No other neighborhood association responded.
• Applicant Testimony: Gina Ready (co-owner) explained that she purchased the property with a friend to operate as an Airbnb. She stated they did not know about the density cap and have been working to comply. She said they contacted the Denver Heights Neighborhood Association but received no response. They also attempted a long-term rental but could not find tenants.
• Public Comment: None.
• Outcome: The board voted to continue the case to September 22, 2025, to allow the applicant to engage with the Denver Heights Neighborhood Association and seek their support. The motion passed with one opposed (Commissioner Dean).

Calendar Item 4: Appeal of STR Permit Revocation – 1323 Lost Lake Drive

• Case: BOA 251030132, requested by Alejandra Ceballos. The appeal challenged the city's revocation for failure to pay HOT from February to June 2025.
• Staff Position: Recommended denial. 31 notices sent; two in favor, none opposed. No neighborhood association is in the area. The applicant's taxes are currently current as of August 2025.
• Applicant Testimony: Ms. Ceballos stated that she is a first-time STR operator. She believed a third-party vendor (Avenue) was paying taxes on her behalf via Airbnb, but there was confusion about the payment portal. She acknowledged the error and has since paid all outstanding taxes.
• Public Comment: None.
• Motion: Commissioner Cruz moved to grant the appeal, finding that the city made an error in revoking the permit because the applicant is the only STR on the block, her taxes are now current, and the confusion was a first-time mistake.
• Vote: 9 in favor, 2 opposed (Commissioners Dean and Mena). The motion passed.

Calendar Item 5: Appeal of Denial of Non-Conforming Use – 1139 New Laredo Highway

• Case: BOA 251030122, requested by Carlos Jiménez. The appeal challenged the city's refusal to recognize a non-conforming use for motor vehicle sales and full-service repair on a property zoned C2 and C3. The property is split-zoned: the front is C3 (vehicle sales and service allowed by right) and the rear is C2 (vehicle sales not allowed). The applicant had obtained a Certificate of Occupancy in January 2023 for a 12-foot by 12-foot structure on the C3 portion of the property.
• Staff Position: Recommended denial. 22 notices sent; 31 signatures in favor, zero opposed. The Quintana Community Neighborhood Association did not respond.
• Applicant Testimony: Mr. Jiménez stated he purchased the property in February 2022, invested his life savings, and received a Certificate of Occupancy in January 2023 for vehicle sales and full-service repair. He obtained 31 signatures from neighbors supporting his business, which he says has reduced crime (drugs, homelessness) in the area.
• Public Comment: None.
• Motion: Commissioner Mena moved to deny the appeal, stating that a non-conforming use is not the correct avenue; the proper path is a zoning change (rezoning) for the C2 portion of the property.
• Vote: 8 in favor of granting the appeal (Stevens, Dean, Cruz, Brackman, Benavides, Osuna, Bonillas, Chair Oren), 3 opposed (Mena, Barrington, Ibañez). The motion to grant failed (8–3 in favor, but a 75% supermajority of the total board – 9 votes – is required to pass an appeal; 8 fell short). The applicant was directed to seek a zoning change through the Zoning Commission.

Calendar Item 6: Variance Request – 800 East Gunter Street

• Case: BOA 251030125, requested by Jason Gallardo (Cody Pools) for Kathleen and Rolf Loubordy. The property is in the King William Historic District. The applicant sought three variances: (1) 2'5" from the 5' minimum side setback for a swimming pool (proposed 2'7" water's edge to property line); (2) 13'5" from the 20' minimum driveway setback (proposed 6'7" from garage entrance); and (3) 3'6" from the 15' minimum clear vision area at the garage entrance.
• Staff Position: Recommended approval. 32 notices sent; two in favor, zero opposed. The King William Neighborhood Association opposed variance #1 (pool setback). The San Antonio Neighborhood Association did not respond.
• Applicant Testimony: Mr. Gallardo explained that the pool construction began with a valid permit issued in May 2025, but during a June 2025 inspection, the pool was found to be non-compliant with the 5-foot side setback. He stated that the pool design (depth transitions) makes it impossible to meet the 5-foot setback without significant rework.
• Public Comment: None.
• Motion: Commissioner Osuna moved to grant all three variances, with specific findings: (1) the variances do not impact the clear vision area or safe ingress/egress; (2) literal enforcement would create an unnecessary hardship due to the property's constraints (Garage on Gunter Street, limited clear vision area); (3) no significant intrusion into the right-of-way; (4) no authorization of uses not permitted in the district; (5) the pool does not encroach on shared property lines, and the existing fence and garage do not obstruct clear vision for traffic.
• Vote: Unanimous approval (all commissioners present).

Calendar Item 7: Variance Request – 508 Haltsdrave

• Case: BOA 251030129, requested by Vanessa Rubio. The property is located in District 5, zoned R4. The applicant sought a variance of 3'4" from the 5' minimum side setback to allow a principal structure with a 1'8" side setback. The house is being rebuilt on existing foundations that were originally built before current setback requirements. The expansion (10' x 20' addition) triggered full code compliance, including side setbacks.
• Staff Position: Recommended approval. 36 notices sent; one in favor (property owner), zero opposed. The Tierra Linda Neighborhood Association opposed.
• Applicant Testimony: Ms. Rubio stated that she purchased the property from her father in 2023. The existing foundation dates from the original home, built in 1965, which had reduced side setbacks. She is reusing the foundation and adding a rear addition. She stated she had not contacted the neighborhood association directly.
• Public Comment: None.
• Motion: Commissioner Brackman moved to grant the variance, with findings that sufficient space remains for maintenance and fire safety, and that the reduced setback is consistent with the character of the neighborhood, where many houses have similar setbacks. The addition does not impede access for emergency vehicles or maintenance.
• Vote: Unanimous approval.

Calendar Item 8: Variance Request – 150 Stonewood Drive

• Case: BOA 251030130, requested by Kim C. Jones. The applicant initially sought a variance to convert an open carport into an enclosed garage, but during discussion it became clear that the structure was closer than 25 feet from the property line (a requirement for garages) and would also need a variance for the side setback. The applicant indicated a desire to keep the walls (making it a garage) rather than an open carport.
• Staff Position: The staff recommended approval only for the carport structure as an open structure, not for a garage.
• Applicant Testimony: Mr. Jones, a 33-year resident, stated he had waited 20 years to do this project. He wanted to use the existing foundation and structure. He expressed a preference for an enclosed garage but was willing to remove the two walls to keep it an open carport if necessary.
• Public Comment: None.
• Outcome: The board determined that a vote on the carport variance was possible, but the applicant requested a continuance to consider the garage option. The board continued the case to September 8, 2025, with an additional $200 fee. The applicant agreed to pay the fee.

Calendar Item 9: Variance Request – 207 Helena Street

• Case: BOA 251030131, requested by Armando Certuche. The property is located in District 5, zoned R6 (minimum lot size 6,000 sq ft). The lot is 3,870 sq ft. The applicant sought a variance of 2,130 sq ft from the minimum lot size requirement to allow the redevelopment of a single-family home built in 1930 on a substandard lot. The home was to be demolished and rebuilt with the same footprint and setbacks, including a front setback of 10 feet, side setbacks of 5 feet, and a rear setback of 25 feet.
• Staff Position: Recommended denial, citing the precedent such a variance would set and the availability of a zoning change.
• Applicant Testimony: The applicant's daughter explained that the property has been in the family since 1930 and was never subdivided. They were told to seek a variance instead of a rezoning. They are willing to pursue a zoning change if necessary.
• Public Comment: One neighbor, Vanessa Richard Maldonado (living at 215 Helena Street), expressed concern about the size of the new home, privacy, and emergency vehicle access. She stated the current home on the lot is small and a larger home would block light and air. The board noted that the proposed setbacks meet R6 requirements except for lot size.
• Motion: Commissioner Stevens moved to grant the variance, with findings that literal enforcement would cause an unnecessary hardship due to the lot's substandard size, which prevents any redevelopment under current zoning. The proposed home meets all other setback requirements. The variance will not authorize uses not permitted in the district.
• Vote: Unanimous approval.

Calendar Item 10: Variance Request – 1926 Rail Drive

• Case: BOA 251030133, requested by Mark Hill (representing Mr. Mollens). The property is in District 10, zoned for industrial use. The applicant sought a variance of 4'6" from the 30-foot minimum front setback to allow a front setback of 25'6", limited to the 100-foot width of the building. A commercial building permit was issued in October 2023, but the reduced setback was not identified during technical review.
• Staff Position: Recommended approval. 12 notices sent; one in favor (adjacent property to the north), zero opposed.
• Applicant Testimony: Mr. Hill stated the building is already constructed. Correcting the setback now would be very costly. The building is on an irregularly shaped lot in an industrial area, and the reduced setback does not affect adjacent properties.
• Public Comment: None.
• Motion: Commissioner Brackman moved to grant the variance, with findings that it is not contrary to the public interest, the irregular lot shape creates a unique difficulty, and the reduced setback is limited to a small fraction of the frontage.
• Vote: Unanimous approval.

Key Outcomes

• Appeal 5454 Vista Trail: Denied (6–4–1). Permit revocation stands. Applicant may reapply after one year.
• Appeal 1323 Lost Lake Drive: Granted (9–2). Permit reinstated with original expiration date (April 11, 2027).
• Appeal 1139 New Laredo Highway: Denied (8–3 in favor, but fell short of the required 9-vote supermajority). Applicant directed to seek zoning change.
• Variance 800 E. Gunter Street: All three variances granted (unanimous).
• Variance 508 Haltsdrave: Granted (unanimous).
• Variance 150 Stonewood Drive: Continued to September 8, 2025, with additional fee.
• Variance 207 Helena Street: Granted (unanimous).
• Variance 1926 Rail Drive: Granted (unanimous).
• Director's Report: Announced the departure of Mike Shannon, who will become director of the new Capital Delivery Department (bond projects). Leticia (interim director) will remain. Commissioner Mena noted his reappointment to the Zoning Commission. The meeting adjourned at 3:46 PM.