San Antonio Board of Adjustments Meeting - June 15, 2026

The Board of Adjustments of San Antonio convened on June 15, 2026, to hear 11 variance and appeal cases. The board considered requests ranging from setbacks for carports and additions to a controversial short-term rental permit revocation appeal and variances in a neighborhood conservation district. The meeting lasted from approximately 1:13 PM to 4:15 PM, with a full board of 11 members present for most items.

Consent Calendar

• The board approved the minutes from the previous meeting without opposition.
• Item 9 (18 Chelsea Way): A request for an eight-foot variance from the minimum 20-foot rear setback to allow an addition 12 feet from the rear property line was approved unanimously. Staff recommended approval. The applicant, Michael Amquis, proposed a mother-in-law suite above an existing garage. The vote was 11-0.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Public Comment on Item 1 (117 Cactus Street): Elisa Garcia, a neighbor who owns 112 Cactus Street, spoke in opposition to the short-term rental permit appeal. She alleged criminal activity (drug trafficking, prostitution) at the property and stated the applicant did not have a compliant driveway in 2023. She also disputed the claim that neighbors were in favor.
• No other public comments were made on other items.

Discussion Items

Item 1 – Appeal of Short-Term Rental Permit Revocation (117 Cactus Street)

• Staff recommended denial, stating the applicant provided an altered photo of a driveway to obtain a renewal. Code enforcement later confirmed the driveway did not match the photo. Staff cited a pattern of deception, noting eight total violations from the same entity.
• The applicant’s attorney, Eddie Bravinek, argued the mistake was unintentional and did not benefit the client, as the actual driveway (then caliche) was code-compliant. He also noted the neighbor’s support but could not address other alleged violations because staff had not disclosed them beforehand.
• Board discussion: Some commissioners felt the photo issue was minor given a driveway existed; others saw it as falsifying documents. The motion to grant the appeal failed 4-7. The board then clarified the applicant may reapply after 12 months.

Item 2 – Variance Continuance (9102 Broxton Drive)

• The applicant, active military, requested a continuance to August 17, 2026, to allow CPS Energy to assess the property. The board granted the continuance unanimously.

Item 3 – Variances at 219 Palo Grande

• Applicant Dudley Harris (age 83, Vietnam veteran) sought variances for: (1) 1,215 sq ft additional accessory structure square footage (approved 11-0); (2) a fence height special exception for a 6-ft solid front yard fence on a large lot (approved 10-1, with Commissioner Bragman dissenting). The razor wire variance was withdrawn as the applicant had removed the razor wire.
• Key Outcome: Accessory structure variance approved unanimously. Fence height special exception approved 10-1, with an amendment limiting the fence to the existing location as presented.

Item 4 – Variances at 155 Canton Street (Corrugated Metal Fence)

• Applicant’s father, Jack Hernandez, explained the fence was needed for security in a high-crime area. Staff recommended denial on the fence material (corrugated metal) and clear vision variances.
• The board approved all three variances unanimously after amendments: (1) corrugated metal fencing allowed with caps, limited to north and east sides; (2) clear vision variance for corner (3 ft vs 25 ft required); (3) clear vision variance for driveways (6 ft vs 15 ft). The motion included a requirement for predominantly open fencing on the front to mitigate clear vision concerns.

Item 5 – Carport Setback Variance (6316 Cincinnati Avenue)

• Applicant Henry Gonzalez proposed a 12x40 ft metal carport 4 inches from the side property line. Staff recommended denial, but the board unanimously approved the variance, praising the applicant for seeking approval before construction. The carport will slope to the front with gutters.

Item 6 – Multiple Variances at 124 East Savio Street (IDZ District)

• Staff recommended denial for impervious cover and clear vision variances, but approval for a fence height special exception.
• The board granted all three requests unanimously: (1) impervious cover variance (as submitted, river rock without plastic liner); (2) clear vision variance (6 ft 10 in vs 15 ft); (3) fence height special exception for a 6-ft front yard open fence and a 7.5-ft overhead rail for a sliding gate.

Item 7 – Carport Setback Variances (551 Griggs Avenue)

• Applicant Valerie Tobias, representing her mother, sought variances for an existing carport built without permits. Staff recommended denial, but the board approved both variances unanimously (front setback reduced to 4 ft 4 in; side setback reduced to 8 in). The applicant agreed to install gutters along the front.

Item 8 – Carport Setback Variance (1431 West Gramercy Place)

• Applicant Cecil St. Clair proposed an open metal carport 18 inches from the side property line, sloped to the alley with gutters. Staff recommended denial, but the board unanimously approved the variance, noting the open design mitigates fire risk.

Item 10 – Lot Size and Side Setback Variances (517 Nevada Street)

• Applicant Dan Gonzalez sought variances for a home renovation where the existing structure encroaches. Staff recommended approval. The board unanimously granted the variances: (1) 450 sq ft exceeding the minimum lot size; (2) side setback reduction to 1 inch (existing condition). The motion included a note about gutters, later withdrawn, but the variance was granted as applied.

Item 11 – Rear Setback Variance (3614 Shallow Brook Drive)

• Applicant Adam Ortiz requested a 6-ft variance to allow a 12x14 ft addition 14 ft from the rear property line. Staff recommended denial, but the board unanimously approved, noting support from adjacent neighbors.

Item 12 – Multiple Variances at 285 Post Avenue (NCD9)

• Applicant Patrick Christensen explained the project (three dwelling units) had neighborhood support during rezoning but required variances for rear setback (10 ft vs 20 ft), driveway width (15 ft front, 25.5 ft side vs NCD standards), and carports in side yard. West 4 Alliance did not object.
• Staff recommended approval for rear setback but denial for NCD design variances. The board overruled staff and granted all three variances 10-1 (Commissioner Dean abstained), finding the project did not conflict with neighborhood character.

Key Outcomes

• Item 1 (Appeal): Motion to grant appeal failed 4-7. The short-term rental permit revocation stands. Applicant may reapply after 12 months.
• Item 2: Continued to August 17, 2026.
• Item 3: Accessory structure variance approved unanimously. Fence height special exception approved 10-1.
• Item 4: All three variances approved unanimously with amendments.
• Item 5: Carport variance approved unanimously.
• Item 6: All three variances approved unanimously.
• Item 7: Both carport setbacks approved unanimously.
• Item 8: Carport variance approved unanimously.
• Item 9: Rear setback variance approved unanimously (handled earlier as consent-like item).
• Item 10: Lot size and side setback variances approved unanimously.
• Item 11: Rear setback variance approved unanimously.
• Item 12: All three variances approved 10-1 (one abstention).