[00:00:02]
[Board of Adjustments: Panel C on February 23, 2023.]
THIS IS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL C.I AM THE VICE CHAIR OF THE BOARD AND THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF PANEL C.
BEFORE WE BEGIN, UH, A COUPLE OF THINGS.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR.
UH, WE GIVE OUR TIME FREELY AND RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR THAT TIME EXCEPT FOR LUNCH.
UM, NO ACTION OR DECISION ON A CASE SETS A PRECEDENT.
EACH CASE IS DECIDED UPON ITS OWN MERITS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
EACH USE IS PRESUMED TO BE A LEGAL USE.
WE'VE BEEN BRIEFED BY STAFF PRIOR TO THE HEARING AND HAVE ALSO REVIEWED A DETAILED DOCKET, WHICH EXPLAINS THE POINTS OF THE CASE.
ANY EVIDENCE THAT YOU WISH TO SUBMIT TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION ON ANY OF THE CASES, UH, SHOULD BE SUBMITTED THROUGH THE BOARD.
SECRETARY, WHO IS THE TIME OF JACKSON SITTING IN FRONT OF YOU, UH, WHEN YOUR CASE WAS CALLED.
THE EVIDENCE MUST BE RETAINED IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.
LETTERS OF THE BOARD'S ACTION TODAY WILL BE A AVAILED TO THE APPLICANT SHORTLY AFTER TODAY'S HEARING AND WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.
UH, LASTLY, ALL PEOPLE REGISTERED TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE CASES TODAY, WERE REQUIRED TO REGISTER ONLINE OR IN PERSON WITH STAFF BEFORE ADDRESSING THE BOARD.
IF YOU HAVEN'T AND YOU'D LIKE TO PLEASE ALSO SEE MS. JACKSON WHEN YOU SPEAK, IF YOU'D, UH, GIVE YOUR ADDRESS, UH, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE, UH, THAT WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED.
UM, EACH SIDE, UH, WE'LL HAVE 10 MINUTES, UH, OR, UH, AND IF NEED BE, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE A, A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UM, IF FOR SOME REASON WE HAVE TOO MANY SPEAKERS, UH, IF A YOU CAN BAND TOGETHER AND, AND HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE OR BE, IF YOU CAN'T, LET ME KNOW AND WE'LL PARCEL OUT THE TIME.
UM, UM, ALL REGISTERED ONLINE SPEAKERS MUST BE PRESENT ON VIDEO, WHICH MEANS YOUR FACE HAS TO BE THERE ALL THE TIME.
UH, OTHERWISE, YOU, YOU ARE NOT PRESENT.
UH, BOARD MEMBERS TODAY INCLUDE JUDY P*****K, ROGER SASHING, RODNEY MILTON, AND JARED SLADE.
UH, WITH FIVE OF US, WE HAVE A QUORUM.
UH, ALSO HERE IS, UH, TERESA CARLISLE, WHO IS, WE'VE DRAGGED BACK INTO MUCK, UH, TO, IS TEMPORARILY FILLING IN AS OUR BOARD ATTORNEY.
UH, MARY WILLIAMS, WHO IS ASSISTANT SPECIALIST MEETING MODERATOR LATON JACKSON, WHO WAS OUR BOARD SECRETARY, OSCAR AGUIRE, UM, SENIOR PLANNER, UH, GIANNA BRIDGES TO, THIS IS YOUR FIRST PANEL MEETING FOR SURE.
UM, YOU WANNA SAY ANY, ANYTHING BY VIRTUE OF WELCOME OR THIS IS THE ONLY CHANCE YOU'LL GET
I'M JUST, UH, GLAD FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.
WE'RE REALLY GLAD YOU'RE HERE.
UM, NORA SENATA, UM, DEVELOPMENT CODE SPECIALIST.
I ALSO THINK THIS MIGHT BE YOUR FIRST PANEL.
C WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING?
UM, UH, SENIOR PLANS EXAMINER, NIKKI DUNN, WHO'S TAKEN OVER AS THE CHIEF PLANNER AND BOARD ADMINISTRATOR, UH, WHO IS ASSISTED BY STEVE LONG, WHO'S THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CONSULTANT.
UM, IN THE PLACE OF DAVID NAVAREZ IS MR. LLOYD.
UH, I GUESS YOU ARE ALSO SORT OF THAT FAMILIAR.
YOU WERE WELCOME TO SPEAK IF YOU'D LIKE.
WE'RE HAPPY YOU GUYS ARE HERE.
UM, UH, AND I GUESS PHIL ERWIN IS NOT GONNA JOIN US.
UH, ARE THERE SPEAKERS FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY? NO, SIR.
WE DO NOT HAVE ANY, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE THINGS.
[00:05:01]
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING? MS. POLL? I HAVE BOTH THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR OUR LAST MEETING AS PRESENTED.THOSE AGAINST, PLEASE SAY MAY PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, UH, ALL FUTURE MOTIONS WILL BE DONE BY ROLL CALL.
UM, QUESTIONS COME THROUGH THE CHAIR.
UM, I DON'T SEE ANYONE LINE TO CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN BE HEARD.
UM, SO WE'RE GONNA ASSUME WE'RE BEING HEARD.
UM, I BELIEVE CHAIRMAN NEWMAN MIGHT BE, WELL, HE WAS, BUT I DON'T SEE HIM.
MR. NEWMAN, CAN YOU HEAR US? YES, I CAN.
UM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING? HAVEN'T NOTHING.
I'M JUST OBSERVING AND APPRECIATIVE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS FOR THEIR SERVICE.
SO AT THIS POINT, WE'LL JUST, UH, GO IN ORDER.
UM, THIS IS BDA 2 23 DASH OH 2 1 58 0 3 VICTOR STREET.
THIS IS OUR UNCONTESTED DOCKET.
UM, IT REMAINED UNCONTESTED UNLESS ANYTHING HAS CHANGED.
WE RECEIVE, NO, NOTHING HAPPENED OVER LUNCH.
UH, SO UNLESS ANYBODY HAS ANYTHING FURTHER, I'LL, UH, HEAR A MOTION.
AND MR. MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A MOTION.
NO, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION LISTED ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET, BECAUSE IT APPEARS FROM OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE THAT THE APPLICATION SATISFIES ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENTAL CODE, AND ITS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE CODE AS APPLICABLE W TO WIDTH VDA 2 23 DASH 0 21 APPLICATION OF FELICIA HAD TO GO TO FOR VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN IS REQUIRED.
SECONDED BY MR. SASHING COMMENTS? PARDON? MS. CALL THE BOOK.
THE VOTE FIVE ZERO IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
SO WE GO TO THE HOLDOVER CASE, BDA TWO 12 DASH 1 0 5 39 23 FRONTIER LANE.
MR. BALDWIN, DO YOU NEED TO SWEAR EVERYONE IS YES, I WILL.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD TODAY? PLEASE ANSWER.
AND PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, ROB BALDWIN, 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS.
WE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER 39 23.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR GRANTING US THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO HOLD THIS CASE TO WORK WITH, UH, OUR NEIGHBORS WHO ARE HERE TODAY.
BOTH, UH, PAM AND, AND SUE WHO LIVE ACROSS THE STREET AND RIGHT NEXT TO THE PROPERTY.
UM, THEY'VE BEEN GREAT TO WORK WITH AND I THINK WE'VE COME UP TO WITH A, UH, A COMPROMISE THAT EVERYBODY CAN LIVE WITH.
BUT IF WE, IF YOU'D LIKE, I'M GONNA DO QUICKLY GO THROUGH MY LAST PRESENTATION BECAUSE THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT GOING ON HERE.
UM, SO, UH, MARY, IF YOU GO THE FIRST SLIDE, PLEASE.
UH, WE'RE UP BY, UH, WHITE ROCK LAKE.
THIS IS, UH, RIGHT ON THE CORNER OF FRONTIER IN ELLSWORTH, AND WE'RE, UM, ON, ON A CORNER LOT.
UH, WHAT HAPPENED WAS, UH, THE HOUSE WAS BUILT, A POOL WAS BUILT, A FENCE WAS BUILT.
THEY HAD PERMITS FOR EVERYTHING.
BUT AFTER EVERYTHING WAS BUILT, REALIZED THERE WAS TWO FRONT YARDS AND THERE WAS FENCES THAT WERE TOO TALL.
THERE WAS A POOL INSIDE OF, UH, PROJECTED FRONT YARD SETBACK.
AND THAT'S WHEN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAME IN.
AND SO WE HAVE A REQUEST TO, UH, VARIANCE OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW THE SWIMMING POOL TO PROJECT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK.
WE HAVE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A FENCE TALLER THAN FOUR FEET IN THAT PROJECTED FRONT YARD.
AND THEN WE HAVE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SITE VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.
ORIGINALLY, WE HAD ONE ON BOTH SIDES OF OUR DRIVEWAY, BUT WHAT YOU'LL SEE IS
[00:10:01]
THAT WE PUSHED THE FENCE, UH, THE, OR THE GATE IN FRONT OF THE DRIVEWAY THAT WAS ORIGINALLY RIGHT UP ON PROPERTY LINE, PUSHED IT BACK 24 FEET.UH, AND THAT REMOVED ONE OF THE, THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES.
WE JUST HAVE A VERY SMALL PORTION OF A, A FENCE IN A TRIANGLE THAT IS DOWNSTREAM.
SO IF YOU'RE COMING OUTTA YOUR DRIVEWAY, IT'S, IT'S ON YOUR RIGHT.
AND SO ALL THE CARS WOULD BE COMING UP ON THE OTHER SIDE.
SO HOPEFULLY THAT'S, UH, NOT, NOT, UH, A MAJOR ISSUE.
BACK WHEN WE HAD SIDE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES IN BOTH, UH, SIDES, UH, THE TRA TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DID NOT HAVE AN OBJECTION.
SO HOPEFULLY THEY'LL NOT HAVE AN OBJECTION SINCE WE REMOVED ONE AND MADE IT LESS.
SO HOW DID WE GET HERE? THE CITY ISSUED PERMITS FOR THE POOL AND FENCE IN ERROR.
UH, WORK WAS INSTRUCTED AND THE PERMIT CREATED.
YOU'RE LAGGING THEN? UH, WHAT, I'M SORRY, MR. BALDWIN, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE LAGGING ON OUR NO, DIDN'T, NO, THEY LOOKED THE SAME.
DID YOU SAY NEXT SLIDE OR, I JUST MADE THAT, YEAH, SORRY.
THE PREVIOUS SLIDE WAS WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
THE NEXT, I'M SORRY, I'M INCORRECT.
I KNOW, UH, I LEARNED SOMETHING, MAKE THE SLIDE MORE DIFFERENT.
UH, AND SO WORK WAS DONE, UH, AND, UH, FOUND OUT THAT THERE WAS CON UH, ISSUES WITH PERMITS BEING ISSUED IN ERROR APPLIED FOR THE VARIANCES.
SO THIS IS JUST FROM THE CITY'S WEBSITE SHOWING THAT THE PERMITS WERE ISSUED.
THESE ARE, THESE ARE THE PERMITS.
SO WITH THE TWO FRONT YARDS, THIS, EVERYTHING IN RED IS NON-BILLABLE BECAUSE IT'S IN A SETBACK, WHICH LEAVES US WITH THE GREEN.
AND YOU'LL SEE ALL OF THE BUILDING IS WITHIN THE GREEN, BUT THE POOL IS OUTSIDE, HALF THE POOL IS OUTSIDE THE GREEN.
SO, UH, WE THINK THAT THIS, GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF BILLABLE AREA VERSUS LOT AREA AND SOME RESEARCH THAT WE'VE DONE, THAT OFFICER SHOWED YOU EARLIER THAT, UM, THERE'S A, IT STAFF SUPPORTS THAT WE DO HAVE A HARDSHIP IN THIS CASE AND THE VARIANCE IS WARRANTED.
AND SO THIS JUST SHOWS WHERE THE HOUSE IS VERSUS WHERE THE POOL IS AND THE SETBACK.
YOU CAN SEE THE FENCE ALONG THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, THAT PORTION OF THE FENCE WE'RE ASKING TO MAINTAIN.
BUT, UH, YOU'LL SEE IN A MINUTE WE'RE, AFTER WORKING WITH OUR, OUR NEIGHBORS, WE'VE AGREED TO, TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO THE FENCE AND LANDSCAPING.
SO YOU SEE WE HAVE A, A DROP OFF.
SO IT'S A SIX FOOT FENCE, UH, ALONG THE SIDE, BUT THE GROUND SLOPES AWAY.
SO ACTUALLY WHERE IT STARTS AT SIX FOOT AT ONE SIDE, IT GETS TO ABOUT EIGHT AND A HALF ON THE OTHER, UH, BECAUSE EVERYTHING ELSE IS LEVEL.
SO YOU CAN SEE WE'RE ON A RETAINING WALL, MR. BALDWIN.
IS THAT, BUT IT'S, IT'S STILL A SIX FOOT FENCE TECHNICALLY, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S AVERAGE GRADE.
WELL, UM, YOU'LL SEE IN OUR REQUEST, WE'RE ACTUALLY ASKING FOR LIKE AN EIGHT FOOT SIX, BUT THE MOST OF THE IS SIX FEET.
SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT THE WOOD IS SIX FEET TALL? YES.
UM, THAT JUST AGAIN SHOWS THAT WE HAD A FENCE PERMIT.
UH, SO HERE'S WHAT WE'VE DONE.
AND I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER SLATE.
I UNDERSTAND YOU WERE ASKING ME QUESTIONS WHEN I WAS LEAVING.
UM, I NEVER LISTENED TO MY MOM WHEN I WAS YOUNGSTER AND LISTENED TO MY ROCK AND ROLL.
THERE, THERE, THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS.
IT WAS MAINLY TO FLAG THAT THIS IS WHAT I HOPE WE WOULD SEE TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THE CHANGE WERE.
SO YEAH, SO THE, THERE WAS SOME BIG CONCERNS WHEN WE MET, UH, LAST TIME.
AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WERE HERE, WE HAD WHAT, FOUR, FOUR OR FIVE NEIGHBORS HERE IN OPPOSITION.
UM, BIG CONCERN WAS THE GATE AND ON THE DRIVEWAY WAS RIGHT UP ON THE PROPERTY LINE OR WAS CONCERNS THAT IT WAS TOO CLOSE.
IT WAS SOLID, AND IT WAS A HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUE.
SO WE'VE AGREED TO MOVE THAT BACK 24 FEET.
ONE OF THE ISSUES WITH THE, UM, SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES.
WE'VE ADDED LANDSCAPING IN FRONT OF OUR FENCE ALONG IN THE STREET RIGHT OF AWAY, UH, BECAUSE PAM LIVES RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET THERE.
UM, WHERE DO YOU SEE THIS, WHERE IT SAYS GATE MOVE BACK.
RIGHT BELOW THAT THERE'S A LITTLE RED LINE AND I THINK NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
[00:15:01]
I MEAN, SUE LIVES RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO IT.AND THIS IS WHAT SUE WOULD BE LOOKING AT FROM HER HOUSE.
AND IF YOU SAW THE SLOPE, SUE'S PROPERTY FLUSHED WITH US, AND THEN OURS STARTS DROPPING DOWN, WE'VE AGREED TO REMOVE THE SIX FOOT WOODEN FENCE, UH, ON OUR SIDE AND REPLACE IT WITH A FOUR FOOT DECORATIVE IRON FENCE.
BUT THAT ALSO STARTS 24 FEET BACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND THEN ONCE WE GET AS SHOWN HERE TO THE BACK, BEHIND HER FRONT, UH, THE FRONT OF HER HOUSE, IT GOES TO WOOD FENCE.
WE'VE, WE'VE AGREED TO STAIN IT AND PUT THE GOOD SIDE OF THE FENCE OUT AND, AND ALL THAT.
SO, UM, WITH THESE CHANGES, I, I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT FOR WHAT WE'RE DOING AND THEY'RE HERE, UH, TO TELL ME IF I'M WRONG.
UH, I'M, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
YOU'VE BEEN VERY KIND TO, TO ALLOW ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH YOU, AND THEY'VE BEEN GREAT TO WORK WITH IT AND MORE THAN FAIR.
AND I HOPE THAT THEY CAN SUPPORT IT.
THANK YOU MI MS. DUNN, LET ME ASK YOU, AND YOU CAN POINT ME TO WHO THE CORRECT PERSON IS.
UM, I WAS ONCE PART OF A CASE WHERE WE SPENT AN HOUR TRYING TO DECIDE WHETHER THE CITY CONSIDERS A POOL, IF IT'S NOT STEPPED UP TO BE A STRUCTURE.
THERE WAS CONFUSION AT THE TIME.
UH, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IF THE, IF THE POOL WEREN'T A STRUCTURE, WE WOULDN'T BE HERE.
SO I I I, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE AND THAT THE CITY BUILDING INSPECTION, WHATEVER, CONSIDERS A POOL TO BE OBSTRUCTION, EVEN IF IT'S NOT RAISED, UH, VICE CHAIR, I CAN MAYBE SHED A LITTLE LIGHT ON THAT.
UH, WE RAN INTO THIS BEFORE AND WE APPEALED THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S DECISION SAYING THAT THAT MAY WELL BE THE CASE, SHOULD NOT BE A STRUCTURE BECAUSE IT'S UNDERGROUND.
THAT MAY NOT BE THE CASE I'M THINKING OF.
AND, UH, THAT WAS IN FRONT OF YOU.
AND, UH, THEY BROUGHT OUT THE BIG GUNS AND STUCK TO THEIR, THEIR LINE THAT A POOL IS ACTUALLY A STRUCTURE AND IT AND POOLS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN THE FRONT YARD, THIS GUN CONCURS.
ARE THERE QUESTION, OKAY, MR. BELAY? NO, I WAS GONNA SAY THAT I THINK THE REALLY ONLY QUESTION IS GONNA BE WHETHER THEY'RE COMING UP ON THE OPPOSITION SIDE OR THE, UH, SUPPORT SIDE.
WHEN, WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY SPEAK.
DO, DO WE HAVE OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? UH, WE DO HAVE ONE, UH, SPEAKER, SANDRA SUE WAKI.
UM, UH, WHILE WE'RE DOING THIS, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'S GONNA SPEAK TO THIS CASE? OKAY, SUE WASOWSKI 69 46 ELSWORTH.
MS, I WANNA, I SWEAR YOU OH YEAH, GO.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH AND YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD TODAY? PLEASE ANSWER.
NOW, IF YOU NOW CHANGE YOUR MIND AND SAY, SO WE WANNA THANK YOU ON BEHALF OF ALL THE NEIGHBORS.
AND THEN WILL YOU PROVE TODAY THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH THAT YOU'VE GOT? UM, WE'RE WE, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING AS IT WAS PRESENTED.
AND THANKS ROB, AND THANKS ALL OF YOU.
ARE THERE FURTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? NO, SIR.
ARE THERE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? NO.
WELL, I, I DO JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT, UM, WITH, UM, ENGINEERING THAT THE ISSUE THAT WAS THERE WITH THE OBSTRUCTION HAD BEEN CLARIFIED OR RECTIFIED WITH THE MOVING OF THE GATE.
UM, BECAUSE IN PREVIOUS, UM, UH, TIMES BEFORE THE BOARD THAT WAS, UM, AN OBSTRUCTED VIEW AND CAUSED, UM, UH, SOME SAFETY CONCERNS FOR PE PEDESTRIANS ALONG THAT, ALONG THAT WAY.
MR. DENMAN, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT, MR. SCOTT? IS HE CORRECT? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE VISIBILITY OBSTRUCTION WAS INDEED REMOVED.
AND IS THAT BY ADJUSTING THE POSITION OF THE FENCE? WE MOVED, UH, THE FENCE BACK 24 FEET.
SO THE, THE OBSTRUCTION THAT WAS ORIGINALLY ON OUR SHARED PROPERTY LINE WITH SUE, THAT'S GONE AWAY.
BUT WE HAVE PART OF A, A FOUR BY FOUR POST, A COUPLE INCHES THAT STILL FIT IN IT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY, BUT NOT A VISIBILITY OBSTRUCTION PER SE? WELL, THE, IN THE 2020, YEAH, IT'S PART OF THE, IT'S IT'S IN THE 20 BY 20 FOOT, BUT IT'S JUST ABOUT TWO INCHES, RIGHT? YEAH.
I THINK THE OPINION WOULD BE THAT IT HAD MOVED AND ACTUALLY DAVID NAVARRES DID HAVE NO OBJECTIONS HAVING SEEN THE REVISION, SO, OKAY.
[00:20:01]
A BETTER ANSWER.THAT'S CONFIRM THAT THAT WAS, THAT WAS CLEAR.
UH, WITH, WITH, WITH, UH, MR. NAVARRO.
NOW THE SITE PLANS AND ELEVATIONS HERE ARE ALL UPDATED, RIGHT.
SO, UM, IF I CAN JUST CLARIFY ONE LITTLE THING FOR THE RECORD.
THE DOCUMENT THAT I PASSED, UM, MIDSTREAM WAS, UH, MR. NAVARRO'S INDICATION THAT HE HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE PRIOR PLAN, WHICH HAS SINCE BEEN REDUCED SIGNIFICANTLY.
ONE SIDE BEING REMOVED AND THE OTHER SIDE BEING DIMINISHED FURTHER.
SO IF, IF THERE HAD BEEN NO OBJECTION TO THE MORE ENCROACHING, WHICH SHOULD BE LESS OBJECTION TO THE LESSON.
NOW MY MEMORY IS THAT THAT DIFFERS FROM MR. DENMAN'S AMOUNTS.
AM I WRONG? YOU, YOU WERE CONCERNED.
YOU MAY BE TALKING ABOUT THE NEXT SITE.
DO WE HAVE THE CUR THE CURRENT UPDATED SITE PLAN ALLEGATION? YEAH.
ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GET TO GOVERNMENT? I'M GONNA PRESUME FOR THE, FOR THE SAKE OF EXPEDIENCY THAT THE, WE ALL AGREE THESE ARE THE MOST UPDATED PLANS, IF NOT, WE'LL, MR. BALDWIN, YOU HAVE THE, I'M GONNA PRESUME THEY'RE UPDATED.
UM, ALTHOUGH THE PROPER PLANTS HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO THE CITY, MS. DUN, AND ALSO ALL OF THE REVISED DOCUMENTS ARE IN THE DOCKET, AND THOSE ARE THE, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THOSE ARE THE MOST CURRENT.
YEAH, EVERYBODY'S GOOD WITH THAT? YES.
MR. CHAIR, CAN I PLEASE ESTABLISH SOMETHING WITH MR. BALDWIN? YES, SIR.
I TO BAR KU YOUR CODE SPECIALIST.
IS THIS SAID SHE HAS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT SOMETHING WAS BROUGHT INTO HER OFFICE TODAY? YEAH, I, I EMAILED IT TO, TO OSCAR EARLIER, BUT I BROUGHT THE HARD COPIES IN TODAY.
OKAY, SO THERE ARE NO, SO THERE, THESE AREN'T DIFFERENT.
I JUST BROUGHT THE HARD COPIES TO, TO DEFENSE ELEVATION TWO OF TWO.
THE ONE, THE ONE IN THE DOCKET IS CORRECT.
MS. BAR, YOU, YOU, IF YOU NEED A MINUTE TO LOOK AT IT AND VERIFY JUST TO, OKAY.
NO, IF YOU, IF YOU TELL ME THAT, THAT WHAT, IF YOU TELL ME THAT WHAT'S BEING REPRESENTED HERE IS CORRECT ON THE PLAN, THAT'S, WE'RE GOOD.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION MR. CHAIR? I HAVE A MOTION.
MR. SAHA, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER B D A 2 1 12 105 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES GRANT, THE 25 FOOT THERE VARIANCE ON THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF PROVISIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS AS AMENDED, WOULD RESULT IN AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT.
I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BEING IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH THE REVIS, WITH THE REVISED SUBMITTED SITE PLAN IS REQUIRED.
SECOND, MS. POLLY? UM, I HAVE A, A, A COMMENT SIMPLY, UH, WHEN WE FIRST SAW THIS CASE IN NOVEMBER, MAYBE OCTOBER, UH, I PUSHED REALLY HARD TO JUST HEAR IT.
UM, ON THE BASIS OF, UM, WE SEE A LOT OF CASES WHERE, WHERE NOBODY STARTS TALKING UNTIL WE GET TO THE BOARD.
AND, UH, MY EXPERIENCES IN THOSE CASES, IF WE POSTPONE AND POSTPONE, IT TAKES STAFF A LOT OF WORK AND A LOT OF TIMES WE END UP IN THE SAME PLACE.
UH, I APPRECIATE WHATEVER THE VOTE IS.
I I APPRECIATE THAT, THAT YOU GUYS WORKED TOGETHER AND CAME TO A COMPROMISE.
IT MAKES LIFE HAPPIER FOR ALL OF US, THAT THAT'S ALL.
THAT SAID, WILL YOU CALL THE CALL THE VOTE? YES.
THE VOTE IS FIVE ZERO IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
[00:25:01]
MOTION, MR. CHAIR.LET THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER B D A 2 1 12 105 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN AND ASSOCIATE'S GRANT THE REQUESTED APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN AN EIGHT FOOT, EIGHT FOOT NINE INCH HIGH FENCE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT FOR FENCES CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, I FURTHER MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND THAT'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED REVISED SITE PLAN AND REVISED ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
I'M JUST GONNA NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT IT'S THE, UH, SUPPORT OF THE NEIGHBORS, UH, THAT JUSTIFIES WHY THE STANDARD HAS BEEN MECHANISM THINGS.
AND I APPRECIATE THAT THEY KEPT AN OPEN MIND FOR ENGAGED WITH THE HOMEOWNER, UM, AFTER I'M SURE BEING DISMAYED TO SEE THE FENCES GO UP IN THE FIRST PLACE.
THE VOTE IS FIVE ZERO IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
DO YOU HAVE MOTION? DO WE HAVE A DON'T WE HAVE A THIRD MOTION ON THIS? WE HAVE TWO.
ALRIGHT, MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A MOTION.
UH, SIR MR. SANCHEZ, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 1 2 105 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES GRANT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN FENCE PANELS WITH THE SURFACE AREA LESS THAN 50% OPEN, LOCATED LESS THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT OF THE LOT LINES AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SURFACE AREA OPENNESS REQUIREMENT FOR FENCES IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND THE INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED REVISED SITE PLAN AND REVISED ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
SECOND VICE CHAIR SHALL SECOND MR. SLATE SECONDS COMMENTS? HEARING NONE VOTE PLEASE.
THE VOTE IS FIVE ZERO IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AND MOTION PASSE UNANIMOUSLY.
MS. ONE FINAL, I HAVE A, UH, I HAVE A MOTION MR. CHAIR SESSION.
I MOVE AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEAL NUMBER B BDA TWO 12 DASH 1 0 5 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES.
GRANT THE REQUEST TO MAINTAIN ITEMS IN THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AT THE DRIVEWAY APPROACH AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE VISUAL OBSTRUCTION REGULATION CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT CONS CONSTITUTE A TRAFFIC HAZARD, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED REVISED SITE PLAN AND REVISED ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
VICE CHAIR AGNI, I'LL SECOND MR. SLADE SECONDS.
ARE THERE COMMENTS? UM, JUST TO ROUND IT OFF, UM, I DO AGAIN, AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED BY THE, UM, UH, FELLOW BO BOARD MEMBERS APPRECIATE THE EFFORT OF MR. BALDWIN AND HIS ASSOCIATES AND THE NEIGHBORS TO COME TOGETHER IN THIS ON BEHALF OF THIS PROPERTY AND TO, UM, WORK OUT A SOLUTION THAT WORKS FOR, UH, THE ENTIRETY OF, UM, ALL INVOLVED AS WELL AS THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE.
I THINK THAT SUMMARIZES THE BOARD'S FEELINGS FOR SURE.
THE VOTE IS FIVE ZERO IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? THE MOTION PASSE UNANIM.
UM, OKAY, WE MOVE TO THE INDIVIDUAL CASES, UH, BDA 2 23 DASH 0 1 7 43 27.
[00:30:01]
DID WE DECIDE CABLE DRIVE? WE HAVE MISPRONOUNCE THE, THE STREET.UM, ARE THERE SPEAKERS? IF YOU, YOU'RE OUT THERE AND YOU'RE GONNA SPEAK ON THIS CASE.
MS. JACKSON, WILL YOU SWEAR? YES.
WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ONLY, NO OPPOSITION OR OTHER SPEAKERS IN FAVOR.
WHAT YOU NEED TO SWEAR IN? YES, SIR.
DO YOU SWEAR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH AND YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD TODAY? PLEASE ANSWER.
PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
CAN I ACTUALLY SHARE MY SCREEN? UM,
PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.
I RESIDE AT 43 27 CAPITAL DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 75,204, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF THE SUPPORTIVE ADJUSTMENT HEARING TODAY.
THIS MATTER INVOLVES THE CAPITAL ADDRESS, WHICH IS MY HOME.
I'M SEEKING FOUR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ADDRESSING HEIGHT, 50% VISIBILITY IN THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AT TWO LOCATIONS, SO THAT I MAY KEEP AND MAINTAIN MY CONSENT AS CONSTRUCTED.
BEFORE STARTING MY PRESENTATION, I WANNA THANK MS. BARUN, MR. AGUILERA, MR. DENMAN, MR. LONG, AND MR. NAVARRES FOR ASSISTING ME DURING THE ADMINISTRATIVE PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY.
THEY DESERVE A VACATION AFTER ALL THE QUESTIONS I ASKED.
UM, ALL I CAN SAY IS IF DON'T GIVE THEM ONE
UM, ALL I CAN SAY IS IF, IF I KNEW THEN WOULD I KNOW NOW.
UM, I WOULD'VE NEVER BUILT THIS FENCE BEFORE, BEFORE COMING TO YOU ALL.
UM, I MOVED FROM ARKANSAS AND PURCHASED THIS HOME AT CAVAL ON AUGUST 1ST, 2021 FROM, UM, JOHN BARNEY.
THE PREVIOUS OWNER, EXHIBIT NUMBER ONE SHOWS YOU PICTURES OF THE RESIDENCE AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE.
AT THE TIME, THERE WAS A FOUR AND A HALF FOOT FENCE WRAPPING AROUND THE ENTIRE FRONT, INSIDE YARD THAT ARE CAB ON ASHBY.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE FENCE FA FACING CAB WAS THREE FEET CLOSER TO THE CABELL STREET, WHILE THE FENCE ON ASHBY WAS APPROXIMATELY EIGHT INCHES CLOSER TO ASHBY THAN MY PRESENT FENCE.
EXHIBIT NUMBER TWO SHOWS PICTURES OF THE NEW FENCE AS CONSTRUCTED.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE ORIGINAL FENCE EXTENDED MUCH FURTHER WRAPPING AROUND BOTH THE WHOLE FRONT AND ONE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
NOW, I WANNA TAKE UP TO WHAT I UNDERSTAND TO BE THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT THE BOARD CONSIDERS WHEN ADDRESSING SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS THAT I AM SEEKING.
THE FIRST IS WHETHER THE FENCE HAS AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WELL, THE BEST EVIDENCE OF ITS LACK OF ADVERSE EFFECT IS IN THE 45 STATEMENTS I'VE OBTAINED PERSONALLY FROM NEIGHBORS AND LOCALS REFLECTING THEIR LACK OF OPPOSI OPPOSITION TO THE FENCE IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION AND IN CONSTRUCTION.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT THERE WERE NO VISIBILITY TRIANGLE CONCERNS.
I DID TALK TO MANY NEIGHBORS ABOUT THAT.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT MANY, UM, OF THE LETTERS THEY THEY SIGNED, BUT THEY ALSO WROTE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SHOW THAT, UH, THEY HAD NO OPPOSITION.
A PARTICULAR INTEREST IS THE STATEMENT OF MR. PEREZ, WHO IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPING SEVERAL TOWN HOMES DIRECTLY ACROSS ASHBY FROM ME, WHICH ARE SCHEDULED TO BE ON THE MARKET LATER THIS YEAR.
I'VE INCLUDED IT IN MY PACKET AND IT SAYS WE ARE ABOUT TO START BUILDING AT 44 0 1 CABLE.
AND I LIKE THE FENCE AT 43 27 CAB LOOKS REALLY GOOD AND SEEMS FIT WITH THE NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE AREA.
I ALSO HAVE PROVIDED A GOOGLE MAP SCREENSHOT TO SHOW WHERE SEVERAL OF THESE, UM, LETTERS ARE.
I'M SORRY, I'M ON THE WRONG, UM, WHERE SEVERAL OF THE LETTERS ARE IN COMPARISON TO MY HOUSE.
SO YOU'LL SEE MY HOUSE IS THE RED DOT.
MOST OF THE LETTERS, UM, ARE ALL IN THE GREEN DOTS.
EXHIBIT NUMBER FOUR SHOWS PHOTOS OF COMPARABLE FENCES AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I WOULD RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST DEMONSTRATE FENCES OF THIS TYPE IN THE AREA ARE MORE OF AN AMENITY RATHER THAN A CAUSING AN ADVERSE EFFECT.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE MAJORITY OF THESE FENCES ARE SIX TO NINE FEET TALL, ALL WITHIN A BLOCK OR TWO OF MY HOME.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL TALL FENCES IN THE AREA OUTSIDE OF THIS ONE BLOCK RADIUS THAT ARE, UH, THAT ARE TALL AS WELL.
SLIDE 12 SHOWS THE INTERSECTION AND FENCE DIRECTLY ACROSS CAB FROM MY HOME.
[00:35:01]
THE HEIGHT, BUT ALSO WHERE THE STOP SIGN IS IN COMPARISON TO THE END OF THE FENCE.AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS SEVERAL FEET BACK.
FOR EASY REFERENCE, I'VE INCLUDED A SCREENSHOT OF GOOGLE MAPS TO SHOW YOU WHERE THESE FENCES ARE IN PROXIMITY TO MY HOME.
THE NEXT TOPIC IS SAFETY VISIBILITY THAT IS MEASURED BY TWO VISIBILITY TRIANGLES, ONE AT THE INTERSECTION OF ASHBY AND CABELL AND THE OTHER WHERE ASHBY MEETS MY DRIVEWAY.
I'VE LEARNED THAT THESE TWO VISIBILITY TRIANGLES AT, WELL, THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AT THE INTERSECTION IS 45 FEET, AND THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, UM, AT MY DRIVEWAY IS 20 FEET.
I THINK THE PHOTOS I'VE EXHIBITED HERE BEST REPRESENT THE SITUATION.
THE FIRST PHOTO IS A PICTURE OF THE VIEW OF MY DRIVEWAY IN MY CAR FACING EAST TOWARDS CABELL.
THE SECOND PHOTO TO THE RIGHT, UM, IS, WAS TAKEN BY MY MOTHER OF ME.
AS I SAID IN THE LOCATION I JUST DESCRIBED TO YOU, YOU CAN SEE FROM THESE PHOTOS THAT THERE'S NO IMPAIRMENT OF VISIBILITY.
UM, UH, AS OSCAR ALSO SHOWED EARLIER, UM, IN ONE OF THE PICTURES WHERE HE SHOWED THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, WE, WE BUTT RIGHT UP TO WHERE THE FENCE IS RIGHT NOW.
UM, SO I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE SIDEWALK ENDS OUTSIDE OF MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE ON ASHBY, WHICH RESULTS IN LITTLE PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.
THESE ARE SMALL BLOCKS WITH CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS, LITTLE TRAFFIC, AND GENERALLY VEHICLES MOVING AT SLOW SPEEDS.
LIKE, LIKE MR. DENMAN MENTIONED EARLIER, TRAFFIC IS MINOR IN THIS AREA.
IT'S NOT A CUT THROUGH STREET.
UM, AS TO THE VISIBILITY OF, I'M SORRY.
UM, I JUST WANNA BE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING.
UM, IS THIS A VIEW OF YOU LOOKING THIS? ARE YOU, WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO TELL US AGAIN WITH THIS PARTICULAR PICTURE ABOUT VISIBILITY? RIGHT.
UM, I'M JUST SHOWING THAT AS I'M, I'M PULLING OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY, I'M ABLE TO LOOK LEFT AND RIGHT AND SEE ANY ONCOMING, YOU KNOW, WALKERS OR DOGS, UM, PRIOR TO ENTERING THIS SIDEWALK.
PRIOR TO ENTERING THE SIDEWALK.
UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.
UM, AS TO THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AT THE INTERSECTION OF AB AND ASHBY, BECAUSE MY FENCE IS THREE FEET FARTHER BACK THAN THE, UM, THAN THE EARLIER FENCE, THERE'S ACTUALLY AN IMPROVEMENT OF VISIBILITY OVER WHAT EXISTED PRIOR TO MY CONSTRUCTION.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THIS PHOTO CA THIS PHOTO INDICATES VISIBILITY WHILE IMPACTED, IS NOT FULLY IMPAIRED, UM, WHEN MEASURED AGAINST THE EARLIER FENCE.
WHILE, WHILE I AM HERE IN SUPPORT OF KEEPING MY FENCE AS CONSTRUCTED, BECAUSE I OWN A VERY SMALL LOT, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE BOARD WAS INCLINED TO MAKE AN ACCOMMODATION.
A 25 TO 30 FOOT MEASUREMENT BACK FROM THE CABELL ASHBY INTERSECTION WOULD PROVIDE COMPLETE VISIBILITY.
WHEREAS A 45 FOOT VISIBILITY MEASUREMENT WOULD RESULT THE LINE BEING RIGHT UP NEXT TO THE CORNER OF MY HOME WHILE TAKING PICTURES OF THE COMPARABLE FENCES WITHIN A BLOCK OR TWO.
I SHOWED YOU PREVIOUSLY, I NOTICED THAT TWO FENCES HAVE CUTBACKS FOR WHAT I NOW KNOW TO BE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES.
THESE FENCES MEET THE CRITERIA FOR 20 TO 30 FOOT VISIBILITY TRIANGLES.
I WANT TO MENTION THAT I THOUGHT VERY HARD ABOUT THE COMPATIBILITY OF MY FENCE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WORKED HARD TO BUILD AN AESTHETICALLY PLEASING FENCE MADE OF HIGH QUALITY MATERIALS.
IN CLOSING, THERE IS ONE POINT I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS BRIEFLY BECAUSE IT'S THE REAL PURPOSE OF MY BUILDING, THE NEW FENCE, WHICH IS TALLER AND MORE SECURE AS A SINGLE FEMALE WHO LIVES ALONE AND TRAVELS OFTEN FOR WORK, I COME AND GO IN THE DARK.
AND, UM, HAVING LOOKED AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THINKING ABOUT MY FENCE COMPARED TO OTHER FENCES, UM, IT, IT SEEMS THAT THESE TALLER FENCES HAVE REALLY BECOME PART OF THE URBAN DESIGN.
I THINK IT COMES WITH A HIGHER DENSITY AND ALSO THE CURRENT FENCE, UM, AND A DESIRE FOR PRIVACY AND SECURITY.
I WILL SAY FOR ME PERSONALLY, I'VE HAD BOTH PRIVACY AND SECURITY ISSUES, UM, SINCE AUGUST.
AND THIS CURRENT FENCE AT GROUND LEVEL HAS HELPED ME TREMENDOUSLY TO FEEL SAFE AND PROTECTED.
UM, I HOPE THAT YOU WILL CONSIDER ALL THESE POINTS FOR MAKING YOUR DECISION.
I WANNA THANK THE BOARD FOR ALLOWING ME TO APPEAR BEFORE IT.
UM, ONCE AGAIN, I'M REQUESTING THESE FOUR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, WHICH WILL RESULT IN ME LEAVING THE FENCE AS IT STANDS TODAY.
I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO, UH, PRESENT IT TO US.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS? MR. SLATE IS CONSIDERING A QUESTION.
OH, I JUST, OH, THAT'S REALLY NOT FAIR.
WHICH I KNOW SHE BARELY MARRIED IT.
I HAVE A I DO HAVE A, JUST A QUESTION FOR YOU.
UM, SO AT THE CORNER, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU, ARE YOU WILLING TO CONSIDER,
[00:40:01]
UM, MAYBE MODIFIED IN THAT CORNER SIMILAR TO, UH, THE PICTURES THAT YOU SHOWED, UH, IN THE, UM, IN THE VISIBILITY OF THE TRIANGLE TO TO, TO, UM, CATA CORNER OR NOTCH IT OUT SO THAT IT CREATES A BETTER, UM, A BETTER CIRCUMSTANCE AT THAT CORNER? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE WILLING TO, UM, CONSIDER? YES, ABSOLUTELY.UM, ONE, ONE THING THAT I DO WANT THE BOARD TO CONSIDER IS THE 45 FOOT, UH, VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.
WITH MY LOT BEING THE SIZE THAT IT IS, IT DOES CUT IN TO ALMOST THE CORNER OF MY HOME.
SO, UM, LIKE THE OTHER FENCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IF, IF IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE A 20 TO 30 FOOT, UM, VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO, OR EITHER, OR EITHER, UM, UM, RE RECONSTRUCT THE FENCE AT THAT CORNER WHERE THE OPENNESS, WHERE WHERE IT HAS THE 50, IT MEETS THE 50%, UM, OPEN AREA.
UM, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE, JUST FOR THE PRIVACY AND SECURITY CONCERNS THAT I'VE HAD, UM, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE FENCE AT THE 50 PER OR, YOU KNOW, FULLY COVERED, UM, EIGHT FOOT, LIKE OTHER FENCES IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE OKAY.
BUT IF YOU'D LIKE TO, IF YOUR TIME, YOU'RE WELCOME.
WELL, I WAS JUST GOING TO MENTION, I CAN GO BACK TO THOSE PICTURES.
I KNOW I KIND OF WENT THROUGH THEM FAST, BUT THE NEIGHBORING FENCES THAT ARE ALSO SIX TO EIGHT FEET TALL AND ZERO PER, I'M SORRY, 0% VISIBILITY, UM, BETWEEN I SAW THE PICTURE.
SO WE GOT FOUR ISSUES AT HAND.
UM, WE HAVE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, SURFACE AREA OPENNESS, VISUAL OBSTRUCTION, AND VISUAL OBSTRUCTION.
UM, FIRST TWO HAVE TO DO WITH, WITH THE EFFECT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, THE SECOND TWO OF BLUE WILL SAFETY.
UM, VICE CHAIR, IF WE'RE DONE WITH QUESTIONS, DOES THAT MEAN THE SPEAKER IS ALLOWED TO SIT DOWN OR ARE WE STILL OPEN ASKING QUESTIONS? SORRY, I'M REALLY NOT GONNA TELL THE SPEAKER WHAT TO DO, BUT, UH, UM, I'M NOT SURE THAT THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS.
I WANTED TO TRY TO SEPARATE THE FOUR ISSUES AND, UM, ASK WHETHER YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.
BY THE WAY, YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT.
UM, WHY DON'T WE JUST TAKE UP THE, THE HEIGHT ISSUE FIRST.
UH, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL BDA 2 23 DASH OH 17 AN APPLICATION OF JULIA WHITE GRANT, THE REQUEST WITH THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH OFFENSE AND A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR FENCES CONTAINING THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT
COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
MR. VICE CHAIR, I HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT MOTION.
SECOND MS. P*****K DISCUSSION, MR. SITE, UH, VICE CHAIR A I SUPPORT THIS MOTION.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THIS APPLICANT DID AN AMAZING AMOUNT OF HOMEWORK TO SECURE THE SUPPORT OF NEIGHBORS, IDENTIFY AND CONFIRM THAT THERE IS AN ABSENCE OF, OF OBJECTION.
GENERALLY THE ONE OPPOSITION MOVE THIS OFF OF THE BOOK, REMOVE THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, I SHOULD SAY OFF THE CONTESTED DOCKET, UM, SEEM TO FOCUS AS MUCH ON THE PAC QUESTION OF THE HEIGHT.
UH, AND I BELIEVE THE PPLICANT IS MORE THAN, UH, NET PER BURDEN TO SHOW, UM, COMPARABLE STRUCTURES AROUND THE COMPLETELY AGREE.
ARE THERE OTHER, YEAH, I'LL JUST SAY THIS.
ONCE THIS GOES FOR ALL FOUR, UM, I, I ALSO APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION AND I CAN'T IMAGINE TALKING TO THAT MANY PEOPLE THAT NOW YOU KNOW, YOUR NEIGHBORS, I GUESS.
UM, AND, UM, SOME DAYS PEOPLE WORK TOGETHER TOGETHER, OTHER DAYS PEOPLE DON'T.
UM, IT'S, IT'S VERY NICE AND THANK YOU FOR THE PRESS EASY PRESENTATION.
SO INSTEAD OF SAYING THAT FOUR TIMES, AND THANK YOU FOR THE PICTURE OF YOUR DOG, MS CHAIR, UM, I ALSO, UM, AM IN SUPPORTIVE THE MOTION.
IT'S NOT MY GREATER CONCERN, THE, UM, THE HEIGHT AND THE AND SPECIALIST SINCE, UM, WITH ALL OF THE, UM, LETTERS AND SUPPORT.
UM, OBVIOUSLY IT DOESN'T PRESENT A,
[00:45:01]
UM, A PROBLEM FOR THE COMMUNITY.UM, HOWEVER, MY, MY, MY GREATER CONCERN IS, IS, UM, THE OTHER, THE OTHER, UH, ITEMS THAT ARE, THAT ARE PRESENTED TO THEM.
SO ON THE ISSUE OF THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT, UH, WILL YOU CALL THE VOTE? YES, MR. SLATE? AYE.
AYE, BY SHARING, AYE THE VOTE IS FIVE ZERO.
MR. SESSIONING, DO YOU WANNA MAKE THE NEXT MOTION? SURE.
UM, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BD 2 23 DASH OH 17 ON APPLICATION OF JULIA WHITE GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN BENCH PANELS WITH THE SURFACE AREA LESS THAN 50% OPEN, LOCATED LESS THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT LOT LINES AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SURFACE AREA OPENNESS REQUIREMENT FOR FENCES AND DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION TO PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER TO PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
SAC, MR. CHAIR, I SECOND MR. MIL SECONDS DISCUSSION? MR. SESSION, UM, JUST SO I'M CLEAR, UH, THIS IS, THIS IS AT THE CORNER, RIGHT? THIS IS THE MOTION FOR THE
THIS WAS, BUT THIS WAS THE TRANSPARENCY ISSUE, RIGHT? UM, YEAH, I I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
I JUST WANT CLARIFICATION IF THIS WAS THE CORNER.
THE STANDARD ON TRANSPARENCY IS NOT SAFETY.
HEARING NOTHING ELSE, UH, IT COULD BE BOTH, RIGHT? UM, YOU COULD ARGUE THAT UNSAFE IS BAD FOR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
UM, HEARING NONE, WILL YOU CALL TO VOTE? YES, MR. SLATE? AYE.
A AYE REGARD IS FIVE FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
OKAY, I'LL MAKE A THIRD MOTION.
UM, I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN APPEAL NUMBER B D 2 23 DASH 0 1 17 ON APPLICATION OF JULIA WHITE GRANT.
THE REQUEST TO MAINTAIN ITEMS IN THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AT THE DRIVEWAY APPROACH AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE VISUAL OBSTRUCTION REGULATION CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT CONSTITUTE A TRAFFIC HAZARD, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
SECOND VICE CHAIR A SHALL SECOND, MR. SLADE'S? SECOND.
UM, I DON'T TAKE MR. DENMAN'S RECOMMENDATION LIGHTLY.
UH, I I KNOW YOU, YOU SAID YOU, YOU WEREN'T IN FAVOR.
UM, IN NO SMALL PART, THERE'S A TREE IN THE CORNER THAT SEEMS TO DO A LOT OF THE WORK.
UM, BUT, UM, I JUST, I LOOKED AT IT AND, UM, FROM ALL THE PICTURES I CAN TELL, I I, IT LOOKS TO ME, AND I HOPE I'M RIGHT, THAT THERE'S ENOUGH ABILITY FOR PEDESTRIANS TO SEE SOMEONE BACK IN THE OFFICE, MUCH AS FOR A, A CAR, A DRIVER TO SEE A PEDESTRIAN.
SO THAT'S WHY I MADE THE MOTION VICE JAR.
I WAS CONVINCED, UM, THANKS TO THE APPLICANT USING THE PHOTO OF HOW CAR LOOKS TO THE ANGLE, THE CORNER FROM OTHERWISE.
UM, AND THE, THE FURTHER, UM, WHAT WE HEARD, UM, EARLIER ABOUT THIS BEING A MINOR SORT OF TRAFFIC AREA, UM, THAT IN MY OPINION, THIS WOULD NOT, UH, COMPETENT TRAFFIC HAS
YEAH, FOR ME, UM, THE PICTURES OF THE APPLICANT PRESENTED OF THE CAR, UM, IN THE DRIVEWAY, UM, WAS EVIDENT THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, A MOTORIST WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE PEDESTRIANS ALONG THE WAY.
AGAIN, MY, MY GREATER CONCERN, UM, IS AT THE, UM,
[00:50:01]
AT THE CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION.UM, BUT AGAIN, AS YOU MENTIONED, UH, CHAIR AGNI, THE TREE THAT'S THERE DOES MOST OF THE WORK IN THAT VISIBILITY AREA.
UM, AND UM, ANYWAY, FOR THOSE REASONS, UM, I, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE, UM, MOTION.
UH, PLEASE CALL IS THIS LATE? AYE.
MOTION PASSES YOUR UNANIMOUSLY.
UNLESS, UM, ANYBODY ELSE, I'LL JUST MAKE IT, UH, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 17 ON APPLICATION OF JULIA WHITE GRANT.
THE REQUEST TO MAINTAIN ITEMS IN THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AT THE STREET INTERSECTION AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE VISUAL OBSTRUCTION REGULATION CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT CONSTITUTE A TRAFFIC HAZARD, I FURTHER MOVE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND THE INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION LEAVE REQUIRED VICE CHAIR AG SHALL SECOND THE MOTION.
MR. S BUT I WANTED TO HEAR WHAT I HAD NOTHING.
I I WAS READY TO, I WAS READY TO MOVE ON TO, UH, VOTING.
GEEZ, THAT'S WHAT I WAS DOING.
UM, VICE AGNI, I I DO HAVE COMMENTS ON THIS ONE.
THIS ONE, I, I'M GETTING THE VIBE FROM THE BOARD IS PROBABLY THE HARDEST LOCATION, MAYBE OFF THE STATION OF THE STOP SIGN.
GENERALLY THE LOCATION PLEASE.
UM, I AM GOING TO BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION CAUSE UH, UH, HOW IT LOOKS FROM THE PHOTO THAT WE'RE TAKING AT THE SITE AND THE SETUP AND THE TESTIMONY REPORT ABOUT THE MINOR OR NOT TRAFFIC CLEAR.
UM, IN MY OPINION, UM, THE SPECIAL EXCEPT HERE WILL NOT COME THROUGH GIVEN WHAT LOOKS LIKE.
BUT I CAN CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE, UM, CONCERN AND LEANING INTO THE DESIRED MAX CRIME.
YEAH, I, I LOOKED AT THE PICTURES PROVIDED AND FRANKLY CON CONCLUDED, THERE IS A TRAFFIC HAZARD, IT'S THE TREE.
PEOPLE CAN'T SEE THE STOP SIGN.
SO, I MEAN, YOU REALLY CAN'T SEE, AT LEAST FROM THAT ONE ANGLE.
I HOPE IT'S MORE VISIBLE IN REAL LIFE.
BUT, UM, BUT THAT'S NOT THE FENCE.
SO I, IF ANYTHING, ONE MIGHT ARGUE THAT THE FENCE MIGHT MAKE PEOPLE MORE WARY OF JUST ENTERING INTO AN INTERSECTION WITHOUT, SO I'M NOT ONE TO PROTECT THE RATIONALE OF DRIVERS.
UM, MR. SASSON, YOU KNOW, I THINK MR. SLATE MAKES AN EXCELLENT POINT, UM, THAT THE TREE MAY CREATE, UM, AN ADDED LAYER, LAYER OF COGNIZANCE, UM, TO, TO THE INTERSECTION.
I MEAN, NOT THE TREE, THE, UH, FENCE MAY, MAY CREATE THAT, UH, GIVES YOU THAT AWARENESS THAT I CAN'T SEE AROUND THE CORNER.
WE GOTTA DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT.
ABOUT THE STOP SIGN BEING BEHIND THE TREE THOUGH.
I MEAN, YEAH, I'M MAKING THE REQUEST.
I'M GOING DOWNSTAIRS TO THE BASEMENT AFTER WE GET OUTTA HERE TO TALK TO TRANSPORTATION.
SO ANYWAY, UM, I, I THINK, I THINK THE TREE DOES MORE OBSTRUCTING THAN THE FENCE.
I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE RE THE, UH, APPLICANT MAYBE, UM, SHORTEN THAT CORNER.
BUT AGAIN, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT IS WHAT IT IS.
UM, YEAH, THAT TREE MAY PROTECT THE FENCE FROM, I HOPE, I HOPE I'M WRONG.
I, SO, SO IF MR. MR. DEMOND WILL FOLLOW THROUGH, I I FEEL LIKE SOMEBODY WE, WE'VE DONE PUBLIC SERVICE FOR THAT.
SO WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL VOTE YES.
OKAY, THE VOTE IS FIVE ZERO FAVOR.
THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
[00:55:01]
OH, THAT WAS AN AMBITIOUS ARGUMENT, BUT YOU MAY BE RIGHT.I THOUGHT IT WAS OKAY, SO I'VE LOST.
OUR FINAL CASE IS BDA 2 23 DASH 0 2 4 5 0 2 LELAND AVENUE.
UM, IF YOU GUYS ARE ALL HERE TO SPEAK FOR THAT, LET'S SWEAR YOU ALL IN AT ONCE.
SO IF EVERYBODY WOULD STAND UP AND RAISE YOUR HAND.
AND ARE YOU THE ONLY SPEAKER? YES, WE ONLY REPRESENTATIVE? YES AND NO.
UM, NO OTHER SPEAKERS IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION.
MR. THORPE, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH AND YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD TODAY? PLEASE ANSWER.
AND PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
YES, MY NAME IS ANDREW THORPE.
I'LL BE REPRESENTING 45 2 LELAND.
NOW, I DIDN'T HAVE A FULL PRESENTATION.
I WAS HERE TO JUST ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, BUT I CAN'T GIVE JUST AN OVERVIEW OF MY PLAN AND, UH, PREPARATION FOR THE LOT.
SO, UH, WHEN BUYING, PURCHASING THE LOT, I PURCHASED IT ONE OF MY BUILDER FRIENDS THAT PURCHASED 45 1 4 5 19 LELAND AS WELL.
SO WE SUBMITTED THE SAME PLANS.
I THINK WE SUBMITTED IT IN JULY AND GOT APPROVED FOR IT IN SEPTEMBER.
SO I JUST WANTED TO USE THOSE SAME, UH, SAME PERMIT, UH, SAME PLANS TO BUILD ON 4 5 0 2.
LELAND UH, KNOWN THAT IT'S A CORNER LINE.
IS YOUR, MICHAEL, IS YOUR MIC ON? CAN YOU HEAR? YOU'RE JUST TOO TALL FOR IT.
YEAH, CAN YOU HEAR IT NOW? YEAH.
SO, UH, ONE OF MY FRIENDS BOUGHT 4 5 19 LELAND.
SO I USE THOSE SAME PLANS TO SUBMIT FOR 5 4 5 0 2 LELAND.
KNOWING THAT IT'S A CORNER LOT, THERE MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A VARIANCE.
SO, UH, WITH THE FIVE AND FIVE AND A HALF, CAUSE I AM BUILDING ON PENNSYLVANIA AS WELL, SO I KNOW THAT PORT LOT HAS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A VARIANCE.
SO, UM, BUT AFTER, UH, THE INITIAL SUBMISSION, THERE WAS A, IT CAME TO MY ATTENTION THAT THERE WAS A 20 FOOT VARIANCE THAT WAS REQUIRED, WHICH WILL TAKE ABOUT HALF OF THE LOT, ESSENTIALLY MAKING IT UNBUILDABLE.
SO I'M HERE TO REQUEST A VARIANCE WITH THE STANDARD VARIANCE OF FIVE, FIVE AND A HALF.
UH, SO MY INITIAL PLAN FOR THE VARIANCE FOR THE, UM, WAS TO GO AROUND TO MY NEIGHBORS AND MAKE SURE THERE, THERE WASN'T ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR WASN'T, UM, HINDERING ANY SAFETY FOR ANY OF MY, UM, FELLOW NEIGHBORS.
UH, SO I GOT ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE SIGNATURES, UH, KNOCKED ON ABOUT EIGHT HOUSES, BUT EVERYBODY WAS, UH, PRETTY MUCH IN, UM, AGREEMENT THAT THE PLANS LOOKED GOOD AND THERE WAS NO SAFETY HAZARDS TO THE HOUSE.
AND THE SIGNATURES THAT I DID NOT ABIDE WERE RENTERS.
SO THEY WEREN'T, THEY DIDN'T REALLY FEEL COMFORTABLE SIGNING ON ANY DOCUMENTS THAT WEREN'T REALLY THEIR DOCUMENT OR, UM, THEIR HOUSE.
SO, UM, SO I DID OBTAIN FOUR SIGNATURES, UH, 4 5, 1 LEE, OF COURSE 45 15 LELAND, 45, 10 LEELAND.
AND THEN THE HOUSE RIGHT BEHIND ME, WHICH I WOULD ASSUME WOULD BE THE REASON FOR THE VARIANCE, WHICH IS 42 4 16 MOBERG, UM, BECAUSE IT IS DIRECTLY BEHIND ME.
SO, UM, THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS WELL.
SO I WANTED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR ANY CONCERNS, UM, WITH A STANDARD OF FIVE, FIVE AND A HALF VARIANCE FOR MY LOT, FOR MY, MY OWN EDIFICATION.
AM I CORRECT? AND WHAT YOU SAID IS THAT YOU RECEIVED INITIAL PERMITS TO DO THIS.
YOU SAID IN SEPTEMBER, THAT'S WHEN YOU STARTED THE DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD? YES.
ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS? MY ONLY COMMENT IS I LIKE THE DRAWINGS OF THE CARS THAT CAUSE TO BOND.
UH, IS THERE A MOTION, I'M SORRY, THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS OPPOSED THERE? UM, NO SIR.
IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY, BUT, UH, NO, THAT IS IT.
I BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, IS THERE A MOTION, MR. SLADE WOULD BE HAPPY IF YOU SAT DOWN? OKAY.
BUT YOU
I THOUGHT YOU HAD MOVED INTO THE DISCUSSION, BUT WAS JUST MAKE SAY, UM, I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 DASH ZERO 20 ON APPLICATION OF HABA REPRESENT BY ANDREW THORPE.
GRANT, THE 14 FOOT SIX INCH VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH TO ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT.
A FURTHER MOVEMENT FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN IS REQUIRED.
UM, ROGER ASTON, I SECOND ASTON SECOND COMMENTS.
[01:00:01]
AYE.THE VOTE IS FIVE ZERO IN FAVOR.
THE MOTION, THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
UH, BEFORE WE ADJOURN, UM, I WANNA SAY A HEARTFELT THANK YOU TO MS. JACKSON.
THIS IS HER LAST MEETING WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
IS THAT TRUE? IF IT'S NOT YOUR LAST MEETING, I, I'M, YOU COULD WAIT TO EMBARRASS ME.
WELL, YES, BUT, BUT NONETHELESS, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE WORKED THROUGH COVID AND, AND, UH, CHANGING DEPARTMENTS TWICE AND, UH, REWRITING OUR RULES.
AND, UH, I AM THE ONE GRATEFUL TO, TO HAVE THE ORGANIZATION AND, AND, UH, PREPARATION.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THAT, MR. SESSIONS.
WE COULD, WE COULD TAKE A MOTION TO NOT ALLOW HER TO QUIT, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE ANY, ANY STANDING, BUT WE COULD TRY IT.
BUT YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE AGENDA IF YOU WANT.
WELL THAT SAID, UH, AT 2 0 4 AND 27 SECONDS, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL C IS ADJOURNED.