The San Antonio Board of Adjustment on Sept. 30 approved a series of variances and a special exception for individual properties across the city, continued three cases to October, and adopted a narrowed landscape‑buffer compromise for a proposed used‑car lot on Hawthorne Street after opposition from the city council office and neighborhood groups.

The board unanimously approved several residential variances to allow development on substandard lots and to permit modifications such as carports and reduced setbacks. Commissioners repeatedly said they weighed neighborhood character and safety concerns against applicants’ difficulties posed by small lots or changes in zoning rules.

Why it matters: The board’s decisions allow several new or rebuilt single‑family homes to proceed, resolve retroactive construction questions in a few cases, and permit a commercial redevelopment with fewer planting requirements than standard code requires. Those actions change what can be built on the affected lots and — in the Hawthorne case — set a precedent for how narrow commercial parcels adjacent to IH‑35 may be planted or screened.

Key decisions and context

- Forest Avenue (BOA‑25‑10300152): The board granted a half‑story variance to allow three new single‑family homes to be built as three stories under the applicant’s plans. Applicant Anthony Almaraz told the board staff had earlier told him his site plan submission complied under the prior code and that a 2023 UDC amendment altered the half‑story definition. Chair Oriens and a majority of commissioners accepted that the change in code created a unique hardship and approved the variance. The vote recorded was 11‑0.

- 116 Rose Lane (BOA‑25‑10300165): The board approved variances for minimum lot size and lot width so the applicant may build a single‑family home on a 4,899‑square‑foot, 41‑foot‑wide lot in an R‑6 district. Commissioner Bragman moved the approval and the roll call was unanimous (10‑0 in that vote block).

- 118 Parkview Drive (BOA‑25‑10300168): The board approved variances to allow construction on a 4,750‑square‑foot lot (R‑5 historic Mission District). The Office of Historic Preservation comment and a design review approval were noted in staff materials. Motion carried unanimously (10‑0).

- 7802 Farland Park Drive (BOA‑25‑10300170): The board granted a special‑exception permit to allow a 7‑foot privacy fence with 7‑foot‑6‑inch posts along the Cedar Park frontage and the rear greenbelt. Israel Garcia (contractor) explained the fence had been built and the request came after the owner received a stop work notice; the applicant submitted a letter from an HOA but staff did not have that document in the record. Commissioners limited the exception to the east side and rear and to the specific locations described. Motion passed unanimously.

- 126 West Carolina Street (BOA‑25‑10300177): The board approved a 4‑foot‑11‑inch variance to allow a new infill structure to be built 1 inch from side and rear property lines under the IDZ‑2 zoning allowance for 10 dwelling units. Staff pointed out the development will be the sole structure on the block face; the motion passed unanimously (10‑0).

- 7802 Farland Park Drive and 1323 West Theo Avenue (carport) cases: The board approved a 4‑foot variance for a carport that brought a structure to 1 foot from the side property line at 1323 West Theo; the applicant agreed to add gutters to the amended application. Roll call showed unanimous support where recorded.

- 376 Hawthorne Street (BOA‑25‑10300167): The board granted a negotiated staff alternative for a used‑car lot zoning condition. The board approved elimination of the 15‑foot landscape buffer along the IH‑35 (west) side, retained two large native trees and two understory trees, and reduced the south buffer to a 4‑foot strip in lieu of the full 15‑foot planting area; the site will also include a 6‑foot solid‑screen fence where it abuts residences and operate under the conditional hours approved at rezoning. The vote was 9‑2; Commissioners Cruz and Mena recorded dissent. District 5’s office and some neighbors had opposed the original request; the applicant said retaining trees and a fence were acceptable compromises.

- 409 Eleanor Avenue (BOA‑25‑10300172): After a highly emotional public statement from homeowner Taylor Fording — who said the front yard had been shot at twice since he purchased the house — the board granted a limited variance to raise the allowable front‑yard impervious cover from 50% to 60% so the homeowner can create a larger paved parking area in front of a bedroom window. Several neighbors and the Mesquite Park Neighborhood Association opposed the larger hardscape as out of character with the conservation district; the board approved a 10% variance (60% total) on a 9‑2 vote.

- 1155 Arrowhead Trail (BOA‑25‑10300174): The board approved a front‑setback variance to allow a carport to sit 1 inch from the front setback line (9‑foot‑11‑inch variance) for a property with a shallow front yard. The applicant and contractor explained the requested depth was necessary to protect vehicles and personal property; the board approved the request with standard conditions about location and drainage.

Cases continued

Three items were continued without public hearing to October: BOA‑25103160 (mobile food court separation variance, continued to Oct. 6), BOA‑251031000176 (703 West Rosewood Ave accessory‑structure variances, continued to Oct. 20), and BOA‑25103‑13175 (8338 Broadway Street rear setback, continued to Oct. 20) after applicants or neighborhood representatives requested more time.

What the board emphasized

Commissioners repeatedly said they try to balance strict code enforcement and neighborhood character against applicants’ practical hardships (small lot sizes, recent zoning changes, established patterns on block faces). Several commissioners asked staff for clarity about what a permit or site‑work submission would have required to avoid appearing before the board. On the Hawthorne and Eleanor matters, commissioners noted strong neighborhood feeling and urged applicants to work with council offices and nearby residents when possible.

Ending note

Applicants granted variances were reminded by staff that Board approvals have deadlines: applicants generally must apply for a building permit within one year for the approval to remain valid. Several applicants were directed to customer consultation or plan‑review staff for next steps.