San Antonio Board of Adjustment Meeting – May 4, 2026
San Antonio Board of Adjustment Meeting – May 4, 2026
The San Antonio Board of Adjustment convened on May 4, 2026, at approximately 1:53 PM (with a recess from 2:23 PM to 3:31 PM) to hear 12 agenda items, including requests for special exceptions, variances, and continuances related to short-term rentals, landscape buffers, fence heights, setbacks, and lot size requirements. The meeting concluded at 4:56 PM.
Consent Calendar
- Items 4 and 13 (four-foot front yard fence variance and fence material/clear vision variance at 539 Calmont Place and 607 MacIvean, respectively) were continued to May 18, 2026 by unanimous vote.
- Item 15 was withdrawn.
Public Comments & Testimony
No members of the public spoke in person during any agenda item. Written opposition was received for item 1 (one opposition) and item 2 (one opposition); written support was received for item 6 (one in favor) and item 9 (one in favor). No other written or voicemail comments were recorded.
Discussion Items
Short‑Term Rental Special Exceptions
- Item 1 (122 Rilla Vista): Applicant sought a special exception to allow a second Type 2 STR on a block face with 11 units (currently at 9.09% density; approval would reach 18.1%, exceeding the 12.5% limit). Staff recommended denial. The applicant cited a lapse in permit while out of the country, a history of compliance, five‑star ratings, and no neighbor complaints. The motion to grant failed 8‑3 (the chair declared failure despite the tally showing eight in favor – a discrepancy noted).
- Item 2 (1722 North Olive): Request for a special exception to add a second Type 2 STR on a block face with only three units (current density 33%; proposed 66%). Staff recommended denial. The applicant stated the property is his part‑time residence. The motion to grant failed 6‑5.
- Item 3 (247 Princeton): Request for an additional STR on a block face with 15 units (current 6.6%; proposed 13.3%). Staff recommended denial. The applicant noted prior operation as an STR and no neighborhood opposition. The board continued the case to May 18, 2026 to allow the applicant to obtain written support from the neighborhood association and immediate neighbors.
Landscape Buffer Variances
- Item 6 (5070 Old Pearsall Road): Request to eliminate a 30‑foot Type E buffer along the north line, eliminate a 15‑foot Type C buffer along Medina Base Road, and reduce a 15‑foot buffer along Old Pearsall Road to 10 feet for a drive‑through restaurant on a 0.434‑acre lot. Staff recommended denial, but the applicant argued the lot’s irregular shape and easements created hardship. The board granted a five‑foot reduction on the north buffer (to 5 ft) and the requested 10‑ft buffers along the roads, with a five‑foot buffer on the north. Vote: 10‑0.
- Item 7 (720 NW 24th Street): Request for an 18‑foot rear‑setback variance (to 12 ft), a reduction of the 15‑ft rear buffer to 12 ft, and elimination of the 10‑ft front buffer. The property is a narrow commercial lot used for a food truck. The board approved a 12‑ft rear setback, a 12‑ft rear buffer, and elimination of the front buffer. Vote: 11‑0.
Fence and Setback Variances
- Item 8 (1419 West Malone Avenue): Request for a 13‑inch front‑yard fence height special exception (to 4 ft 1 in) and an 8‑ft clear‑vision variance. The fence had existed for over 11 years. Staff recommended denial on fence height but approval on clear vision. The board granted both, with the fence height approved “as built.” Vote: 11‑0.
- Item 9 (1023 North Pine Street): Request for a 2‑ft‑6‑in fence height special exception for side/rear (to 8 ft 6 in) and a 1‑ft‑6‑in exception for the front (to 6 ft with 6‑ft‑6‑in columns) for a city‑owned community center. Staff supported. The board granted the request. Vote: 11‑0.
- Item 10 (103 Connolly Street): Request for a fence material variance to allow corrugated metal fencing. The fence had been in place since 2014–2015. Staff recommended denial. The board granted the variance. Vote: 11‑0.
- Item 12 (239 Highway Drive): Request for an 11‑inch side‑setback variance to allow a home to be 4 ft 1 in from the north property line, restoring a fire‑damaged structure built before current codes. Staff supported. The board granted the variance. Vote: 11‑0.
- Item 11 (1910 Montezuma Street): Request for a 12‑ft‑6‑in rear‑setback variance (to 7 ft 6 in) to build a single‑family home on a narrow 24.8‑ft‑wide lot (74.8 ft deep). Staff recommended denial. The board granted a 7.5‑ft rear setback. Vote: 11‑0.
- Item 14 (4260 Mickey Road): Request for a 12.321‑acre variance from the required 25‑acre minimum lot size in the FR district to build a single‑family home on a 12.679‑acre platted lot. Staff supported. The board granted the variance. Vote: 11‑0.
Key Outcomes
| Item | Decision | Vote | Next Steps | |------|----------|------|------------| | Item 1 – 122 Rilla Vista STR | Denied | 8–3 (declared failed) | Applicant may explore other options with staff. | | Item 2 – 1722 North Olive STR | Denied | 6‑5 | Applicant may explore other options with staff. | | Item 3 – 247 Princeton STR | Continued to May 18, 2026 | Unanimous | Applicant to obtain written support from neighbors/association. | | Item 6 – 5070 Old Pearsall | Granted (amended) | 10‑0 | Applicant may proceed with reduced buffers. | | Item 7 – 720 NW 24th | Granted | 11‑0 | Applicant may proceed with reduced setbacks/buffers. | | Item 8 – 1419 W Malone | Granted | 11‑0 | Fence approved “as built”; clear‑vision variance approved. | | Item 9 – 1023 N Pine | Granted | 11‑0 | City may proceed with fence improvements. | | Item 10 – 103 Connolly | Granted | 11‑0 | Corrugated metal fence permitted. | | Item 11 – 1910 Montezuma | Granted (7.5‑ft setback) | 11‑0 | Applicant may build with approved setback. | | Item 12 – 239 Highway | Granted | 11‑0 | Home restoration permitted. | | Item 14 – 4260 Mickey Road | Granted | 11‑0 | Single‑family home allowed on 12.679‑acre lot. |
The board also approved the minutes from the previous meeting and noted a vacancy among alternate members. The Director’s report was absent. The meeting adjourned at 4:56 PM.
Meeting Transcript
Commissioner Reed. Yes, I'm present. Commissioner Stevens. Commissioner Ibanes. Commissioner Dean. Present. Commissioner Zuna? Present. Commissioner Bragman. Present. Commissioner Manna? Present. Commissioner Cruz? Present. Commissioner Vasquez. Present. Commissioner Benez. Here. And Commissioner Gomez. Here. We are good to go. All right. Thank you very much. If anyone could please join me in the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and Republic for which it stands. One nation under God. Indivisible liberty and justice for all. Under the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to the Texas. One state under God. One and indivisible. All right, I thought I could show that Commissioner Ivanez has joined the meeting. So before we proceed with today's cases, I'd like to offer a few words of explanation. This board follows an agenda which is available online. The cases are listed by number with the name of the applicant and street address. Following the conclusion of the cases, the board will consider the minutes from the previous meeting, followed by a director's report. Lastly, as chair, I will make announcements such as community calendar events. I ask that the board members submit these announcements to me as the chair, and I will read them at the appropriate time in the meeting. This is an administrative body, not a court of law. In addition, we have powers to hear cases and other matters authorized by the City Council under Chapter 21 of the Texas Local Government Code. Every decision or recommendation to the board must be based upon findings of fact, and every finding a fact must be supported in the record of the board's proceedings. Appeals from the board decisions regarding Chapter 28 are made to the city council. So please limit your presentation and remarks to the pertinent facts of your case. Those in support and opposition will be allowed a maximum three minutes per speaker. You are not obligated to utilize a maximum time limitation. For those that like to give up their time to the speaker, the speaker will be allowed a maximum two people giving up their time for a total of nine minutes. Those giving up their time must be present and signed up to speak. The applicant will then be given an opportunity for a rebuttal limited to one speaker with a three-minute time limit along with the opportunity to address board questions. Thank you, Chairman. Yes, I understand we have uh two uh cases requesting a continuance, item four and and item thirteen. Is there anybody sign up to speak uh on those two items?
openpublica.com