[Board of Adjustments: Panel A on March 21, 2023]
[00:00:05]
IT IS, UM, IF EVERYONE TURN THEIR SCREENS ON FOR THE PANEL.
IF YOU HAVE YOURS, MS. DAVIS AND MS. HAYDEN, TURN YOUR SCREENS ON.
IT IS 1:15 PM ON THE 21ST OF MARCH, 2023.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, UH, PANEL A IS HEREBY CALL TO ORDER.
MY NAME IS DAVE NEWMAN AND I'M HONORED TO SERVE AS CHAIRMAN OF THE FULL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF PANEL A.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE AT, I'M BEING ASKED TO HOLD FOR ONE SECOND, SO WE'LL JUST HOLD, BUT WE DID CALL TO ORDER AT ONE 15 HOLDING FOR TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES, UH, PRIOR TO US GETTING OUR AUDIO VISUAL.
I, THIS IS AN ANNOUNCEMENT FOR ALL THOSE THAT ARE IN THE HEARING ROOM.
IF YOU WANTED TO SPEAK TODAY, I NEED YOU TO FILL OUT A BLUE SHEET OF PAPER.
WOULD YOU HAND THAT UP IN THE AIR? HOLD THAT BLUE SHEET OF PAPER UP IN THE ENTER.
UM, YOU NEED TO HAVE FILLED OUT A BLUE SHEET OF PAPER IF YOU WANTED TO SPEAK AT THE BEGINNING OF OUR HEARING TODAY OR ON A PARTICULAR CASE.
SO, UM, MAKE SURE ANYONE AND EVERYONE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK HAS TURNED OUT A BLUE SHEET AND HAS TURNED IT INTO OUR, OUR BOARD SECRETARY, MARY WILLIAMS. I THINK THERE'S SOMEONE THAT DID YOU WANT A BLUE SHEET? THANK YOU.
SO MARY, WE'RE WORKING ON PUSHING A BUTTON OR TWO.
SO WE CAN ALL LOOK AT HIM NOW.
[00:07:21]
WE KNEW IT WAS NIKKIWHO KNOWS THE OTHER ONE? EVERYBODY.
I DON'T KNOW WHY I BACK TO BEING A PANELIST.
YES, YOU WANNA BE A PANELIST AND THE PANEL'S CODE.
WANT MY BACK TO BEING A TV? NO, YOU SHOULD BE A PANELIST.
WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY EVERYONE.
WE'RE TRYING TO UTILIZE TECHNOLOGY TO OUR ADVANTAGE.
SHOULD START EVERYTHING OVER? YEP.
UH, MY NAME IS DAVE NEWMAN AND I'M HONORED TO SERVE AS CHAIR CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, UH, AND PRESIDING OFFICER OF PENK TODAY, TUESDAY, MARCH 21ST.
WE STARTED THE MEETING, THE PUBLIC HEARING THIS AFTERNOON AT 1:15 PM OUR, UM, I'D LIKE TO WELCOME YOU TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING.
BEFORE WE BEGIN, I WOULD LIKE TO READ A FEW, UH, READ A FEW GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE MANNER IN WHICH, UH, WE WILL CONDUCT THIS PUBLIC HEARING THIS AFTERNOON.
I'M READING FROM PREPARED REMARKS, SO PARDON WITH ME PLEASE.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE GIVE OUR TIME FREELY AND RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR OUR TIME.
NO ACTION OR DECISION ON A CASE THAT'S A PRECEDENT.
EACH CASE IS DECIDED UPON ITS OWN MERITS AND CIRCUMSTANCES.
OTHERWISE, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, EACH USE IS PRESUMED TO BE ILLEGAL USE.
WE HAVE BEEN FULLY BRIEFED BY OUR STAFF THAT OCCURRED AT THIS MORNING, UH, PRIOR TO THIS HEARING, AND HAVE ALSO REVIEWED THE DETAILED DOCKET, WHICH IS PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING.
ANY EVIDENCE YOU WISH TO SUBMIT TO THE BOARD
[00:10:01]
FOR CONSIDERATION IN ANY CASES TODAY, UH, SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO OUR BOARD SECRETARY MARY WILLIAMS. WOULD YOU RAISE YOUR HAND, MARY? SO, ANY, ANY INFORMATION THAT COMES TO THE BOARD NEEDS TO COME THROUGH MS. WILLIAMS. UH, THE EVIDENCE MUST BE RETAINED.THE BOARD'S OFFICE AS PART OF OUR PUBLIC RECORD, EVERYTHING IS BEING AUDIO TAPED AND VIDEOTAPED TODAY.
LETTERS OF THE BOARD'S ACTION WILL BE MAILED, UH, TO THE APPLICANT SHORTLY AFTER TA TODAY'S HEARING AND WILL BE PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.
LASTLY, ALL PEOPLE REGISTER TO SPEAK ON ANY CASES.
TODAY WERE REQUIRED TO REGISTER TO THE STAFF BEFORE ADDRESSING THE BOARD.
EACH REGISTERED SPEAKER WILL HAVE, UH, THREE MINUTES A PUBLIC TESTIMONY THIS, THIS AFTERNOON.
UH, THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL WILL NOTIFY THE CHAIRMAN OF, UM, UH, YOUR TIMING AND, UH, AT THE DISCRETION AND BENEVOLENCE OF THE BOARD WILL ALLOW, UH, THE SPEAKERS TO CONTINUE IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THEIR THOUGHTS.
WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE GET ALL INFORMATION AND ARE FAIR TO ALL SIDES ON AN ISSUE.
ALL REGISTERED ONLINE SPEAKERS MUST BE PRESENT ON A VIDEO TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
NO TELECONFERENCING WILL BE ALLOWED VIA WEBEX.
ALLOW ME NOW TO INTRODUCE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
AGAIN, MY NAME IS DAVE NEWMAN AND I'M CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD AND THE PRESIDING OFFICER PANEL A TO MY LEFT IS RACHEL HAYDEN, EXCUSE ME, IS, EXCUSE ME, IS KATHLEEN DAVIS.
TO MY RIGHT IS OUR, UH, BOARD ATTORNEY EMERITUS, DANIEL MOORE.
UH, OUR NEW BOARD ATTORNEY, MATTHEW SAP.
STEVE LONG, WHO'S OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CONSULTANT, NIKKI DUNN, WHO'S OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF PLANNER.
UM, GILLUM BRIDGES, WHO'S A SENIOR GIANNA, I APOLOGIZE.
BRIDGES, WHO'S A SENIOR PLANNER AS PART OF MS. DUNN'S TEAM.
UH, DIANA BURK, WHO IS THE SENIOR PLANS EXAMINER PART OF MS. DUNN'S TEAM.
I NORA COST, IS THAT CLOSE? OKAY.
AND NORA, WHO'S A DEVELOPMENT CODE SPECIALIST ALSO JOINING US IS LLOYD DEADMAN, UH, AS A CONTRACTOR AND TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND ENGINEERING.
AND OUR BOARD SECRETARY IS MARY WILLIAMS. AND, UM, UH, CONSULTANT AND, UH, TRAINING, UH, ASSISTING US WITH IS, IS TRINA LAW ALSO PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES? THAT IS OUR TEAM HERE WITH US TODAY.
UM, LET ME PREVIEW THE AGENDA FOR EVERYONE.
UM, THIS MORNING WE HAD OUR STAFF PRESENTATION AND BRIEFING.
WE'RE BEGINNING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE'LL TAKE PUBLIC TESTIMONY IN A MOMENT.
WE HAVE OUR MEETING MINUTES TO, TO REVIEW AND APPROVE APPROVED.
WE HAVE GOT A, A MISCELLANEOUS ITEM, UM, ON WINSTON COURT.
AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO THE, THE DOCKET.
AND ON THE DOCKET WE HAVE, UH, FIVE CASES TO BE HEARD IN FULL INDIVIDUAL ITEM CASES, UM, 22, 24, 25, 28, AND 27.
AND WE'LL HANDLE THEM IN THAT ORDER.
22, WHICH IS TURTLE CREEK, THEN COLUMBIA, UH, WHICH IS 24.
THEN HUGHES LANE, THEN MOCKINGBIRD LANE, THEN LIVE OAK STREET.
SO THE FIRST ITEM IS SPEAKERS, PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
MS. BOARD SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR, UH, PUBLIC TESTIMONY? NO.
ONLINE OR IN PERSON? ONLINE OR IN PERSON.
THE NEXT ITEM ON, ON OUR AGENDA, UM, IS THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF OUR BOARD MEETING MINUTES DATED FEBRUARY 21ST.
THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MOTION I'D, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE, THE MEETING MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 21ST, 2023.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MS. HAYDEN.
BEEN SECONDED BY MR. NE, OUR MEETING MINUTES FOR PANEL A, UH, FROM FEBRUARY 21ST, UH, HAVE BEEN, UH, MOTION HAS BEEN MADE BY MS. HAYDEN AND SECONDED BY MR. NE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION HEARING.
MOTION CARRIES FIVE TO ZERO MEETING MINUTES FROM THE FEBRUARY 21ST PANEL.
A MEETINGS ARE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS MISCELLANEOUS ITEM NUMBER ONE.
IT'S B D A 2 0 1 DASH ONE 12 BDA 2 0 1 12.
UH, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? YES, SIR.
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE, UH, GIVE US YOUR NAME OR BE SWORN IN BY OUR BOARD SECRETARY, AND THEN GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
DO YOU SWEAR OR COM OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? PLEASE ANSWER ID.
PLEASE BRING, UH, BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
MY NAME IS ROB BALDWIN, OFFICE AT 39 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE V IN DALLAS.
AND, UH, NIKKI, CAN YOU PULL UP MY PRESENTATION PLEASE? I UNDERSTAND YOUR, YOUR AGENDA GOT MUCH LARGER, SO I'LL MAKE THIS VERY CLEAR.
UH, SO, UM, THIS IS A WEIRD ONE.
[00:15:01]
UH, I THINK THIS MIGHT BE THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER COME BEFORE THE BOARD ASKED FOR A TWO YEAR WAIVER.UM, THE SUMMARY IS THAT, UH, IN 2021, WE PROCESSED A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE FOR, TO ALLOW A FENCE TALLER AND FOUR FEET IN A FRONT YARD.
THE PROBLEM WAS, IS THAT WHAT WE DIDN'T REALIZE IS THAT THE, THE, THE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED SHOWED A LOT OF THE FENCE TO BE INSIDE THE, THE CITY RIGHT AWAY, WHICH, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THE CITY ISSUED A PERMIT ON.
AND, UH, THEN THE CONTRACTOR WENT OUT THERE AND WAS TOLD THAT THEY COULD NOT HAVE A FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD WITHOUT A A, A PRIVATE LICENSE.
THEY TRIED TO GET A PRIVATE LICENSE AND THEY TOLD ME THEY COULDN'T GET IT.
AND THEY SAID, WELL, WHAT NOW WHAT DO WE DO? AND I SAID, WELL, UNFORTUNATELY, WE EITHER HAVE TO WAIT TILL THE JANU, I MEAN, OF NOVEMBER OF THIS YEAR TO FILE AGAIN, OR WE CAN GO ASK FOR A TWO YEAR WAIVER.
BUT WE, I'VE NEVER DONE THAT BEFORE AT THE BOARD, BUT I HAVE DONE IT AT THE, THE CITY COUNCIL.
UM, SO THE CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES IN THIS CASE IS THAT THE APPROVED PLAN CANNOT BE BUILT, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK TO YOU WITH A REVISED PLAN THAT CAN BE BUILT, UM, AS, AS THE REGULAR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE AS THE, THE CHAIRMAN CONFIRMED THIS MORNING.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR YOU TO APPROVE A DESIGN OR ANYTHING TODAY.
WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR PERMISSION TO COME BACK AND SEE YOU BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR.
UM, WITH THAT, MY PRESENTATION, WE DON'T NEED TO SEE BECAUSE THAT JUST, UNLESS YOU REALLY WANNA SEE WHERE THE ENCROACHMENTS ARE, THAT'S ALL IT IS.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE YOUR INDULGENCE TO ALLOW US TO COME BACK, UH, AND FILE THE CASE.
AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT FROM THE PANEL? I DON'T THINK YOU NEED YOUR PRESENTATION, I THINK.
YOU SAVED YOU FIVE OR SEVEN, SEVEN MINUTES, MAYBE SAVED YOUR CLIENT SOME MONEY TOO, BUT HOPE, THERE IT COMES.
WHAT TIMING? UH, WE DON'T NEED TO SEE IT UNLESS YOU WANNA SEE WHERE THE I, I, I'M FINE WITH AS PRESENTED.
THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MR. NAING? THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REQUEST NUMBER B D A 2 0 1 DASH ONE 12 ON APPLICATION OF ROB BALDWIN.
GRANT THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO WAIVE THE TWO-YEAR LIMITATION ON A FINAL DECISION REACHED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A ON NOVEMBER 16TH, 2021 BECAUSE THERE ARE CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES REGARDING THE PROPERTY SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT A NEW HEARING.
IS THERE A SECOND ON THE MOTION? I'LL SECOND.
THANK YOU MS. HAYDEN, UH, IN BDA 2 0 1 12.
MR. MAR, MR. NA MOVED TO GRANT AND MS. HAYDEN SECOND AT THE MOTION.
I THINK THIS IS A PRETTY CLEAR CASE.
UH, SEEING NO OTHER DISCUSSION, WE'LL CALL THE ROLL MR. HOLCOMB.
MR. NEWMAN? AYE THE VOTE IS FIVE ZERO.
BDA 2 0 1 12 HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
UH, AS WAS MENTIONED IN OUR HEARING THIS MORNING, UH, THAT PARTICULAR ITEM ONLY REQUIRED BY CODE OR BY RULES, UH, A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE.
THE BALANCE OF THE CASES IS BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY, AND QUITE HONESTLY, ON AN ONGOING BASIS REQUIRE THE AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF FOUR OF FIVE PANEL MEMBERS.
SO WE HAVE FIVE PANEL MEMBERS HERE, SO ANY VOTE GOING FORWARD TO APPROVE AN I A REQUEST REQUIRES FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES, NOT JUST A SIMPLE MAJORITY.
I SAY THAT JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M GONNA UNDERSTAND, UH, THE RULES THAT WE HAVE, UH, THAT WE'RE OPERATING UNDER.
ALRIGHT, NEXT ITEM, UM, IN OUR PUBLIC HEARING THIS AFTERNOON IS BDA 2 23 DASH 0 2 2 2 23 DASH 0 2 2 AT 4 0 11.
TURTLE CLERK TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD IS THE APPLICANT HERE YOU'D COME FORWARD, OUR BOARD SECRETARY WILL, WILL SWEAR YOU IN.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTERS? PLEASE ANSWER.
PLEASE, WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
MARY, TURN THE MICROPHONE ON, I THINK.
AND I LIVE AT 40 11 TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD.
OKAY, SIR, I'LL GIVE YOU FIVE MINUTES TO PRESENT.
UM, I WANT TO THANK THE BOARD, OF COURSE, UH, FOR HEARING ME TODAY AND LETTING ME, UH, WOULD, WOULD YOU HOLD ONE SECOND, MARY, WOULD YOU TAKE THAT OFF? NOPE.
[00:20:02]
OKAY.WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING OTHER THAN TO HEAR FROM YOUR REQUEST.
THIS IS NOT BEING TIME IS USED AGAINST YOU.
TECHNOLOGY, OUR FRIEND AND OUR FOE, WISH WE COULD BLAME IT ON YOU TRINA, BUT I UNFORTUNATELY IS NOT GONNA STICK.
SO DOES THAT MEAN WE'RE OPERATIONAL? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ALL RIGHT, SO IF YOU WOULD BE SO KIND, SIR TO GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS ONE MORE TIME AND THE CLOCK DID NOT START OKAY.
UH, AGAIN, MY NAME'S STEVEN WORSHAM.
I LIVE AT 40 11 TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD.
I WANNA THANK THE BOARD FOR AGREEING TO LET ME SPEAK BRIEFLY ABOUT MY REQUEST FOR A SECOND POWER METER, UH, AND MY HOUSE.
UH, I HAVE, UH, UH, GARAGE AT MY HOUSE AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE A SECOND POWER METER TO OPERATE SOME EQUIPMENT INSIDE THAT GARAGE.
UH, PRIMARILY THIS WOULD BE LIKE A PORTABLE, UH, HEATER AND, UH, PORTABLE AIR CONDITIONER.
I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO RAPIDLY HEAT AND COOL, UH, MY GARAGE WHEN I OPEN AND CLOSE THE DOOR.
I HAVE TWO VERY LARGE DOGS THAT, UH, NEED TO LIVE IN THE GARAGE ACCORDING TO MY WIFE.
AND THE IDEA HERE IS IT GETS VERY HOT AND VERY COLD, UH, AND IT'S VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO USE TRADITIONAL, UH, PORTABLE, UH, HEATERS OR AIR CONDITIONERS.
THREE PHASE UH, EQUIPMENT CAN DO THAT JOB VERY QUICKLY.
AND, UH, IT'S ALSO VERY, UH, ECONOMICAL TO RUN.
HOWEVER, IT DOES REQUIRE A SECOND POWER METER.
UH, AND, UH, ENCORE SAYS THIS IS, UH, A VERY DOABLE THING.
I DO NEED A, UH, A SECOND, UH, SECOND METER AND, UH, THAT REQUIRES, UH, AN EXCEPTION OR PERMISSION FROM, UH, FROM THIS BOARD.
SO I'M ABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT MY REQUEST.
[00:25:01]
UM, WHAT QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE FROM THE PANEL, MS. HAYDEN? UM, I, I'D JUST LIKE TO CONFIRM WHAT WE HEARD EARLIER IS THAT THIS, UM, THIS GARAGE WILL NOT BE USED AS AN ACCESSORY UNIT OR RENTAL UNIT OR ANY OTHER USE THAT'S NOT PERMITTED BY THE CITY.THERE'S, THERE'S NO, NO INTENTION OF THAT, NOR WOULD THERE BE ANY WAY TO DO IT.
WELL, WE SAW THE, THE PHOTOS DURING THE BRIEFING THERE WERE SOME CONSTRUCTION.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT IS THAT A NEW STRUCTURE THAT'S BEING BUILT? THERE'S A SWIMMING POOL AND A, A EXTERIOR FENCE.
MY NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH HAS BEEN WORKING FOR OVER A YEAR.
HE'S GOT CONSTRUCTION GOING ON THERE AS WELL.
UH, BUT THIS ISN'T REALLY TIED INTO THOSE PROJECTS.
SO IS THE, THE, THE PHOTO OF THE CONSTRUCTION, IS THAT YOUR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE OR YOUR HOUSE? WELL, IF IT'S THE ONE ON THE CORNER AT AVONDALE, HE'S BEEN WORKING FOR OVER A YEAR PUTTING A BIG WALL AROUND THE PROPERTY.
HE'S ALSO DOING THE SWIMMING POOL AND A COMPLETE RENOVATION.
I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU.
I'M TALKING ABOUT, BUT WHEN WE SAW PHOTOS OF YOUR PROPERTY, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S CONSTRUCTION ON YOUR PROPERTY.
WE'VE STARTED REPLACING THE EXTERIOR FENCE AND I'M PUTTING THIS ONE AND PULL IN OTHER QUESTIONS.
WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING A HOMEOWNER.
PART OF THE REASON THE IS SET UP ON THESE SORT OF, THIS SORT OF PARTICULAR ISSUE IS KIND OF AS A TRIP WIRE, A TRIP WIRE BECAUSE THERE IS CONCERN, UH, POLICY SET BY THE CITY COUNCIL CONCERN OF ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS IN THE REAR PORTION OR IN THE SIDE PORTION OF A HOME.
AND THE PARTICULAR WAS A SECOND METER.
AND IF, AND IN THE, I, I DON'T KNOW ALL THE CITY COUNCIL HISTORY, BUT THAT WAS THE TICKLER, IS THAT OKAY IF WE, IF FOR SOMEONE TO REQUEST A SECOND METER, THEY NEED TO GO THROUGH THE APPROVAL PROCESS AS A WAY TO FORESTALL POTENTIAL SECOND HOME, ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT WHERE IT'S NOT ALREADY ALLOWED WITHIN THE ZONING WITHIN THAT AREA.
THAT IS THE WHOLE BASIS BY WHICH UNFORTUNATELY YOU'RE HAVING TO TAKE TIME OFF TO DO THIS.
AND, AND WHEN WE SAW PICTURES THIS MORNING OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND WE THINKING, OH GOODNESS, IS, IS THIS A RESIDENTIAL UNIT? SO THAT'S WHY UNDER OATH YOU WERE ASKED QUESTIONS HERE AND SO FORTH AS IT RELATES TO THAT.
I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU THE BACKGROUND ON THAT.
I CAN ASSURE YOU I'M NOT TRYING TO HAVE A SECOND RESIDENCE OR RUN ANO ANOTHER BUSINESS OR ANYTHING.
UH, THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR CUZ THAT CLEARS ONE OF THE POTENTIAL BARRIERS THAT WE HAVE FOR GOING FORWARD.
WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE THE CHAIRMAN TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION? MS. HAYDEN? UM, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 DASH 0 22 ON APPLICATION OF STEVEN WORSHAM GRANT THE REQUEST TO INSTALL AND MAINTAIN AN ADDITIONAL ELECTRIC METER ON THE PROPERTY AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO SINGLE FAMILY REGULATIONS IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AND WILL NOT BE USED TO CONDUCT A USE NOT PERMITTED IN THE DISTRICT WHERE THE BUILDING SITE IS LOCATED.
IT'S BEEN, UH, IN B D A 2 23 DASH 22 A MOTION BY MS. HAYDEN, UH, WAS MADE TO GRANT.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND BY MS. DAVIS DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION, MS. HAYDEN? UM, I I FEEL THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SATISFIED, UM, OUR CURIOSITY ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION AND ABOUT THE USE FOR THE ADDITIONAL ELECTRIC METER.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT WILL BE, UM, CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST OR FOR USE THAT IS NOT PERMITTED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT.
MS. DAVIS, I AGREE WITH MS. MS. HAYDEN'S REMARKS.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? THE FLOOR HEARING? NO DISCUSSION.
VOTE IS FIVE ZERO IN B D 2 23.
THE BOARD IS UNANIMOUSLY BY FIVE BRANDER REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
NEXT ITEM, UH, BEFORE THE BOARD IS BDA 2 23 DASH 24 BDA 2 23 DASH 24.
THIS IS AT 55 0 6 COLUMBIA AVENUE.
[00:30:01]
THE APPLICANT HERE? SHE'S ONLINE.UM, IF YOU WOULD BE SO KIND TO BE SWORN IN BY OUR BOARD SECRETARY FIRST.
AND THEN GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? PLEASE ANSWER.
PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
MY NAME IS KAISHA GOODWIN AND THE ADDRESS IS 55 0 6 COLUMBIA AVENUE.
UH, CAN YOU HEAR ME CLEARLY? YES, SIR, I CAN.
ALL RIGHT, SO YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO PRESENT TO THE BOARD.
ON SEPTEMBER THE FOURTH, DALLAS HAD A SEVERE THUNDERSTORM THAT CAME THROUGH AND IT DESTROYED THE FENCING OF 55 0 6 COLUMBIA AVENUE.
AT THAT TIME, I WAS, UM, NOT AWARE.
OF COURSE, THE STORM CAME THROUGH, I WASN'T AWARE THAT THIS FENCE WAS DESTROYED, BUT LATER ON I WAS NOTIFIED BY ONE OF MY TENANTS THAT THE FENCE WAS DOWN THERE WAS TREE LIMBS DOWN AND IT WAS PRETTY BAD.
SO WE WENT OVER AND CHECKED OUT, UM, THE SITUATION.
UM, I REACHED OUT TO MY LANDLORD AND LET HIM KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON AND THE DAMAGES THAT, UM, TOOK PLACE.
AND THEN WE CALLED IN A CONTRACTOR, UM, THAT WE'VE USED BEFORE TO, UH, PUT IN THE FENCING AND REPAIR THE FENCE.
UM, LITTLE DID WE KNOW THAT THE CONTRACTOR DID NOT GET A PERMIT.
WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T KNOW UNTIL MY OWNER RECEIVED A CODE COMPLIANCE NOTICE ON DECEMBER THE FIRST.
UM, ACTUALLY HE RECEIVED IT ON DECEMBER THE SIXTH, BUT IT WAS DATED FOR DECEMBER THE FIRST THAT THERE WAS NO PERMIT, UM, ACTUALLY FOR THE FENCE TO BE INSTALLED, BUT THE FENCE HAD ALREADY BEEN INSTALLED BECAUSE WE HIRED THE CONTRACTOR TO GET THE PERMIT TO TAKE CARE OF THAT FOR US.
UM, AT THAT POINT THEN I, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, CAME TO THE DEVELOPMENTAL OFFICE, UM, ON JEFFERSON AND ACTUALLY TALKED TO MS. DUNN AND TOLD HER WE WERE NOT AWARE OF THE PERMIT NOT BEING GOTTEN.
AND SO THEN I WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THE, UH, APPLICATION PROCESS OF, UM, SUBMITTING TO THE BOARD.
SHE TOLD ME WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
SO HERE I AM THIS AFTERNOON ASKING THE BOARD TO, UM, PLEASE GIVE US A TWO FOOT VARIANCE.
WE JUST REPLACED THE FENCE THAT WAS ALREADY EXISTING.
UM, AND WE WERE NOT AWARE THAT THE CONTRACTOR DIDN'T GET A PERMIT AND THAT THERE WAS, UM, PREVIOUS, UM, THAT THE FENCE WAS INSTALLED WITHOUT A PERMIT.
SO WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT EITHER, EVEN WITH THE IRON GATE, THAT IRON GATE ALREADY EXISTED.
QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? JUST ONE SECOND.
UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. HOLCOMB.
I JUST WANTED TO, UH, CONFIRM THE DETAILS THAT WE HAD EARLIER IN THE BRIEFING.
SO THE FENCE THAT WAS, UM, RECONSTRUCTED WAS CONSTRUCTED TO THE EXACT SAME SPECIFICATIONS AS THE PREEXISTING FENCE.
THERE'S NO HEIGHT OR DIMENSION DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FENCE THAT WAS THERE AND THE NEW FENCE, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? I HAD A QUESTION OR TWO.
MS. GOODWIN, DO YOU OWN THE PROPERTY? NO, SIR.
UM, THE OWNER LIVES IN ALASKA.
OKAY, OKAY, BECAUSE YOU SAID YOU NOTIFIED THE LANDLORD AND SO IT THREW ME AS TO, ARE YOU THE LANDLORD OR IS THERE SOMEONE ELSE? YES, SIR.
I'M JUST THE PROPERTY MANAGER.
SO THE OWNER, THEN THERE'S YOU, THE PROPERTY, UH, THE PROPERTY MANAGER THEN TO THE LANDLORD IS, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE TALKING TO THE PERSON THE, THAT, THAT'S SUFFICIENTLY IN CHARGE OF THE PROPERTY? YES SIR.
I'M, YOU'RE REPRESENTING THE OWNER? YES, SIR.
I'M REPRESENTING THE, THE THE OWNER LANDLORD? YES, SIR.
UM, SO IT PROVIDES CLARITY, THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, MR. HOLCOMB, THAT YOU JUST REPLACED WHAT WAS ALREADY THERE.
UH, AND YOU SAID THAT A PERMIT WASN'T SOUGHT, SOUGHT, SOUGHT FOR THE REPLACEMENT, NOR FOR THE ORIGINAL FENCE THAT WAS IN THERE.
THAT'S WHAT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION.
BUT AT THE SAME TOKEN, UH, YOU REPLACED TO WHAT WAS, THERE WEREN'T COMPLAINTS BEFORE.
IT'S A SIX LANE, THREE LANE, SIX LANE, THREE LANE DIVIDED THE STREET IN FRONT OF YOU.
AND SO MY, MY, UH, I DON'T WANNA SAY TOLERANCE.
[00:35:01]
OF A TALL FENCE AND A FRONT YARD IS A LOT GREATER WHEN IT'S ADJACENT TO A BUSY STREET AS OPPOSED TO A CLOSE IN SINGLE FEMORAL RESIDENTIAL, UH, IN FRONT AND BESIDE AND, AND THAT SORT OF THING.SO THAT'S PART OF WHAT'S COMPELLING FOR ME TO KIND OF APPROVE THIS IN RETROACTIVELY, CUZ THAT'S IN ESSENCE WHAT YOU'RE ASKING US TO DO.
SO THAT'S KIND OF MY THINKING AT THIS STAGE OF THE GAME.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT MY FELLOW PANEL MEMBERS FEEL OR THINK OR WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS MAY, THEY MAY HAVE, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I DID YOU REACH OUT TO ANY OF YOUR NEIGHBORS ABOUT THIS? DID YOU GET ANY COMPLAINTS FROM ANY OF YOUR NEIGHBORS? NO, SIR.
SO THE OUT AND TO THE NOTE AND TO THE COMPLAINT? YES, SIR.
I DIDN'T REACH OUT TO ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS AND I DID NOT, UM, RECEIVE ANY COMPLAINTS.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL THAT, THANK YOU, MA'AM.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR OR YOUR COMMENTS.
UH, THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MR. HEK, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 DASH 24 ON APPLICATION OF KAISHA GOODWIN GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A SIX FOOT HIGH FENCE HAS 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 PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
UH, MR. HOLCOMB IN B D A 2 23, 0 24.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, MR. NE SECOND IN THE MOTION, UH, MR. HALCOMB DISCUSSION? YEAH, I, I, YOU KIND OF HIT MY HIGH POINTS, MR. CHAIRMAN WITH, WITH YOUR OPINION.
UM, IT'S, THERE'S NOT A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE FROM WHAT WAS WORKING BEFORE.
IT, UH, OPERATES IN A, IN A SPACE THAT'S NOT CONTR.
CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST, THERE IS THE BUSY ROAD.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE NOT CREATING AN ALLEYWAY.
IT, IT SEEMS LIKE THE RIGHT DECISION UNDER THE STANDARD.
MS. JANNER? I CONCUR WITH MR. HOWK.
DISCUSSION, MS. DAVIS? UM, JUST MY OPINION, I I DON'T LIKE APPROVING, I DON'T LIKE APPROVING PROJECTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN COMPLETED.
HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS, YOU BUILD IT ACCORDING TO WHAT IT WAS BEFORE YOU'VE GOT THE BUSY STREET.
I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU AND ANY OTHER APPLICANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THE RULES AND THAT YOU'RE NOT RELYING ON YOUR CONTRACTOR TO DO THE APPROPRIATE WORK.
IT'S ULTIMATELY YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR HOME IS WITHIN CODE AND THAT YOU HAVE THE PROPER BUILDING PERMITS.
WE'VE HAD SEVERAL PEOPLE COME BEFORE US WHO'VE SAID, WELL, OUR CONTRACTOR, I FELT MY CONTRACTOR DID THIS, OR MY CONTRACTOR TOLD ME THIS.
IT'S UP TO YOU AS A HOMEOWNER OR SOME, OR A BUILDING MANAGER TO, TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION.
SO I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION, BUT I AM NOT HAPPY ABOUT IT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? UH, THE MOTION FOR US, UH, BY MR. HEK, SECONDED BY MR. NE AND 2 23 0 2 4 IS TO GRANT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST HEARING.
NO, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL FOR A VOTE.
MR. NEWMAN? YES, IT'S FIVE 20 IN THE CASE OF BDA 2 23 DASH 24, THE BOARD, UH, UNANIMOUSLY BY A FIVE TO ZERO VOTE.
GRANT YOUR REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
UH, THE NEXT CASE BEFORE THE BOARD IS BDA 2 23 DASH 25 BDA 2 23 DASH 25.
THIS IS AT 13 408 HUGHES LANE.
13 4 18 HUGHES LANE IS THE APPLICANT HERE.
IT'S UP FAMILIAR FACE BACK AT CITY HALL.
UH, MAKE SURE THE MICROPHONE'S ON.
IF YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN SHE'S GONNA SWEAR YOU IN.
JENNIFER HIROTO, 1 0 2 33 EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY IN DALLAS, TEXAS.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH AND THE TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? PLEASE ANSWER.
UM, UH, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
UM, WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
UM, A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE.
[00:40:01]
REQUEST IS FOR OFFENSE HEIGHT AND, UH, FRONT YARD.UM, AND, UH, THERE'S ONE FENCE PANEL THAT IS EXCEEDING THE 50% OPENNESS THAT WE WE'D LIKE IN OUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST.
UM, YOU MAY NOTICE TO THE EAST THERE'S, UM, A PRIVATE GOLF COURSE THAT YOU, UM, MAY RECOGNIZE FROM PREVIOUS, UH, REQUEST A COUPLE MONTHS AGO.
UM, THE PRESENTATION THIS MORNING FROM STAFF, UM, I UNDERSTAND THEY DID RECEIVE THE, UM, THE NEIGHBORS SUPPORT LETTERS.
THOSE WERE EMAILED TO THE PREVIOUS PLANNER ON FEBRUARY 27TH, 28TH.
UM, SO WE DID OVERSHOOT A LITTLE BIT.
UM, THERE WERE 12 NEIGHBORS THAT THE HOMEOWNERS REACHED OUT TO AND, UM, DID RECEIVE 10 LETTERS OF SUPPORT.
UM, AND THE, THE HOMEOWNERS THEMSELVES MADE THAT OUTREACH, UM, THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO THEM AS NEW NEIGHBORS TO MAKE THAT CONNECTION.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S SOMEONE PRESENT.
UH, THIS IS A CLOSE UP OF THE SITE PLAN I'VE HIGHLIGHTED ON THE BOTTOM.
UM, THE FENCE IS JUST AT THE PROPERTY LINE FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE SPAN ALONG THE FRONTAGE.
THERE'S A PEDESTRIAN GATE ON THE NORTHERN SIDE.
AND AS IT, UM, WE'LL SEE IN THE ELEVATIONS AS YOU GO FROM NORTH TO SOUTH, THERE'S A BIT OF A GRAY CHANGE.
AND THE TALLEST PORTION OF THE FENCE IS APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET, SIX INCHES.
UM, I'VE GOT A RED ARROW TO THE SOLID PANEL THAT IS BETWEEN ZERO AND FIVE.
UM, AND THEN THAT SORT OF SERVES AS A WING WALL AROUND THE DRIVEWAY AS THE, THE FENCE IN THE GATES SET BACK TO MEET THOSE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE REQUIREMENTS.
UM, THERE'S ALSO, UM, ANOTHER PEDESTRIAN GATE NEAR THE VEHICULAR GATE.
UM, SO THIS IS A CLOSE UP OF THE ELEVATIONS.
UH, THE FENCE LINES UP WITH THE NEIGHBOR'S FENCE TO THE NORTH, AND THAT'S WHERE THAT PEDESTRIAN GATE IS ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF, UH, THE ELEVATION.
AND YOU CAN SLIGHTLY SEE THAT GRAY CHANGE AS WE MOVE TO THE SOUTH.
UM, THE PANELS ARE, SORRY, THE PANELS ARE A WIRE METAL, UH, MESH.
UM, AND THEN THERE'S A MASONRY BASE AND COLUMNS THAT ARE THE SAME MATERIALS AS THE HOME.
UH, THIS IS A CLOSE UP WHERE YOU HAVE THAT TRANSITION TO THE VEHICULAR GATE, UM, AND SORT OF THE WING WALLS THAT ARE, EXCEPT FOR THAT FIVE FOOT PORTION, THE REMAINDER ARE OUTSIDE OF THAT AREA THAT'S LIMITED IN ITS OPENNESS.
UM, THIS IS THE SOUTH ELEVATION.
SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS IS THE PORTION ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
SO IF YOU WERE STANDING IN THE DRIVEWAY, THIS IS THE AMOUNTS THAT WOULD BE OPEN, UH, FOR THE DRIVEWAY.
UH, THE PROPERTY LINES ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, THE, THE WIRE MESH CONTINUES, EXCUSE ME, AND MEETS WOODEN FENCE THAT IS AT THE 40 FOOT, UH, SETBACK LINE, BUILDING LINE.
UM, THIS IS JUST A VIEW OF THE PEDESTRIAN GATE THAT IF YOU WERE STANDING IN THE DRIVEWAY AND FACING NORTH, THIS IS WHAT YOU WOULD SEE.
THIS IS THE PORTION FROM THAT PROPERTY LINE TO FIVE FEET THAT EXCEEDS THAT 50% OPENNESS.
UM, THIS JUST PROVIDES A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA PRIVACY, BEGINS THAT TRANSITION FOR THE DRIVEWAY.
UM, THE PROPERTY, YOU CAN SORT OF SEE THE PIN.
UM, IT'S LOCATED BETWEEN LBJ, FRONTAGE ROAD AND ALFA ROAD ON THE NORTH.
WE'RE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF PRESTON ROAD.
HILLCREST IS FURTHER TO THE EAST.
UM, OKAY, HOLD ON ONE SECOND HERE.
WHERE ARE YOU ON THIS MAP? I'M TRYING TO GET MY BEARS, UM, NOT TOO FAR OFF FROM WHERE THE CURSOR IS, WHERE THERE'S A LITTLE RED PEN.
OH, WELL, I'M SQUINTING MY EYES.
I I WANTED TO KIND OF, I DON'T SEE IT NOW.
UM, THIS, WELL, IT WOULDN'T NATURALLY APPEAR TO BE A CUT THROUGH STREET, UM, WITH TRAFFIC WITH NAVIGATION APPS.
UM, THIS IS, UH, VERY APPEALING FOR PEOPLE TO CUT THROUGH TO TRY TO AVOID PRESTON ROAD, MAYBE CUT THROUGH, AVOID SOME OF THE RETAIL TRAFFIC AT 6 35.
UM, FOR THOSE REASONS, THE HOMEOWNERS HAVE ADDITIONAL REASONS, UM, UH, FOR THE REQUESTED FENCE TO BE TOLERANT.
AND FOUR FEET JUST PROVIDES THE, THE FAMILY AN
[00:45:01]
ADDITIONAL SENSE OF SAFETY AND SECURITY AND THIS LOCATION.QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I'VE GOT A FEW, BUT I'LL WAIT FOR MY BRETHREN AND SISTER.
SO I'LL, I'LL START OFF WITH A FEW QUESTIONS, BUT CAN YOU COME BACK UP? YES, SIR.
UM, SO HUGHES LANE GOES ALL THE WAY FROM ALPHA TO LBJ? YES, SIR.
YES, I WOULD, I THINK THAT WOULD CREATE POTENTIAL CHALLENGE FOR PROPERTY OWNERS DOWN THERE.
UH, THE MAPPING THAT YOU CAME UP WITH THAT SHOWED THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT YES SIR.
IT, IT'S MORE GREEN THAN THE MAP THAT SHOWED UP AT THE CITY.
UM, BUT I'LL, I'LL, SINCE YOU'RE UNDER OATH, WE'LL TRUST THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THERE IS YES SIR.
YOUR GREEN, CUZ YOURS IS GREEN.
UM, I WAS PARTICULARLY TAKEN, UM, I'M SLIPPING OVER TO ONE OF YOUR SCHEMATICS THAT SHOWED THE FRONT PEDESTRIAN GATE AND THE W THE WING WALL THAT WAS PLACED KIND OF WITH A 90 DEGREE OVER 90 DEGREE DOWN.
I'M GIVING YOU A POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT.
WE DEAL WITH THESE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE ISSUES THAT NO ONE THINKS ABOUT UNTIL THEY, THEY GO TO TRY TO GET IT PERMITTED OR THAT LANDS HERE.
AND WE HAVE OUR VISIBILITY TRIANGLE EXPERT, TWO SEATS DOWN.
AND IT, IN THE HEARING THIS MORNING AND THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING, SHE TOOK NOTE OF THE FACT THAT, OOH, THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE HERE.
WHOEVER DREW THESE PLANTS TOOK THAT BULLET OUT OF THE CHAMBER.
UM, MY CONCERN ON ALL OF THESE TYPE OF CASES IS WHEN YOU PUT A FENCE UP, UM, THAT HAS THIS SORT OF STRUCTURE, IT CREATES A POTENTIAL TUNNELING EFFORT.
BUT, UH, I'M, I'M PAUSING ON THAT CONCERN BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF NEIGHBORS THAT YOU SAY ALONG YOUR STREET ARE SAYING THERE'S NO PROBLEM.
AND THE ONES ACROSS THE STREET FROM YOU WOULD BE THE ONES THAT WOULD FEEL TUNNELED.
SO HOW DO YOU REACT TO THAT? UM, YES SIR.
I, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN, UM, THE NEIGHBORS NOR, UH, AGAINST THE NORTH IS, HAS UM, RIGHT ARM PANELS AND MASONRY COLUMNS IS VERY OPEN.
UM, SO WE'RE KIND OF CONTINUING THAT OPENNESS FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE FENCE.
UM, THE OTHER FENCES THAT ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, TO ME, THEY APPEAR TO BE ON CORNER LOTS AND KIND OF FENCING THE BACKYARDS.
SO THOSE WOULD NATURALLY BE MORE SOLID.
UM, THOSE CREATE MORE OF THE TUNNEL EFFECT THAT YOU'RE ABOUT.
SO LET, LET, LET ME RE LET ME GET CLARIFICATION, BUT YOU JUST SAID, YOU SAID THE NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH HAS AN OPENNESS EFFECT.
I THINK WE SAW A PICTURE OF SOMETHING THIS MORNING.
UH, THE ONLY PORTION THAT IT'S, THAT IS LESS THAN 50%.
IS THAT PEDESTRIAN GATE WALL? YES, SIR.
UM, AND THERE WILL BE LANDSCAPING INSTALLED ON THE INSIDE OF THE FENCE, SO IT WON'T JUST BE JUST FENCE, IT WILL BE, UM, BEAUTIFIED WITH GREENERY.
UH, MY ONLY QUESTION WAS TWO PEOPLE TO THE ONE SIDE OF THE HOUSE DIDN'T RESPOND AT ALL.
DO YOU, I MEAN, DID YOU TRY TO REACH OUT TO THEM AGAIN? DO YOU HAVE ANY FEEL FOR WHETHER OR NOT THEY SUPPORT OR OPPOSE US? UM, YES.
UM, THEY'D LIKE TO, TO SPEAK AS WELL TO THE OUTREACH.
UM, I BELIEVE THE OWNER TO THE, IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH IS HERE, UM, AND HAS CONCERNS ABOUT OPENNESS.
SO FORTUNATELY FOR US THAT THE DRIVEWAY IS ON THAT SOUTH SIDE WHERE IT IS SET BACK FOR THE DRIVEWAY AND THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES.
SO IT'S THE LEAST IMPOSING PORTION OF OUR PROPOSED FENCING.
DID, SO I GUESS WE'RE GONNA HEAR FROM THE OTHER SIDE IN THE MOMENT.
THEY, THEY DID REACH OUT PERSONALLY TO EVERYONE, UM, THAT RECEIVED THE, THE, THE TURNED IN A LETTER.
WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ARE THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THIS APPLICATION IF YOU'D COME FORWARD PLEASE.
I ASSUME YOU TURNED IN A BLUE SHEET? I DID.
IF YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
UM, I'M LYNN PUS MUELLER AT 13 4 8 HUGHES LANE 75 2 40.
AND THAT YOU'RE GONNA BE SWORN IN.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? PLEASE ANSWER.
I KNOW YOU HAVE ALL OF THE PAPERWORK AND APPRECIATE YOU, UH, VISITING OUR REQUEST TODAY.
I AM, UH, WE'RE NEW HOMEOWNERS AND I, UH, WHEN THE LETTERS WENT OUT FOR OUR PROPOSED, UH,
[00:50:01]
FENCE REQUEST, I DID, UM, VISIT ALL 14 HOMES THAT WERE AFFECTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.UM, OUT OF THE 14 I MET WITH 12 IN PERSON.
AND OUT OF THE, UH, 12TH, THERE WERE TWO THAT I COULD NEVER REACH.
UM, AND ONE OF THOSE, UH, NO, I TAKE THAT BACK.
THE ONE ON THE OTHER SIDE THAT IS MENTIONED OF NOT SUPPORTING, I DID MEET HER IN PERSON.
SHE'S AN ELDERLY WOMAN, AND, UM, I DON'T THINK SHE REALLY UNDERSTOOD WHAT I WAS DOING, BUT I, I GAVE HER A LETTER TO REVIEW AND SHE WAS VERY SWEET.
AND, UM, I GAVE HER A BOX OF COOKIES.
AND, UM, WHEN ALL FA FA WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, BRIBE THE EXACTLY, I'M JOKING, I'M JOKING.
AND, UM, I DID NOT MEET HER HUSBAND.
I HEAR HE'S, UM, AND IN HIS NINETIES OR SOMETHING.
SO I JUST, I NEVER WENT BACK TO, UM, INTRUDE ON THEM.
SO, UM, AND THEN THERE WERE TWO OTHER HOMEOWNERS THAT I, I JUST WAS NEVER ABLE TO REACH.
SO OUT OF THE 14, I GOT 10, UH, SUPPORT LETTERS OUT OF THOSE, I GOT PROBABLY FIVE OR SIX ADDITIONAL EMAILS AND TEXTS WELCOMING US TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SUPPORTING OUR PLANS.
I HAD THE TEXTS THAT I ACTUALLY HAD COLLECTED, BUT BECAUSE IT HAD PERSONAL INFORMATION WAS INSTRUCTED THAT WE SHOULDN'T SHARE THOSE IN THE DOCUMENTS TO YOU.
SO, UM, AND THAT INCLUDED, UM, ALL OF THE NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET, OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH.
SO, UM, AND IT, IT WAS ALL ABOUT THE FRONT FENCE.
I WAS, UM, TRYING TO BE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT, UM, WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TODAY.
SO, UM, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
JUST AS A MATTER OF, OF, UM, PROCESS, I VISITED WITH OUR BOARD ATTORNEY EMERITUS AND HE SAID, ACCORDING TO OUR RULES, ANYTHING THAT'S SUBMITTED TO US, UH, THE O WHAT, THE ONLY THING THAT HAS TO BE REDACTED IS THE EMAIL ADDRESS.
SO IF AN EMAIL'S, IF SOMETHING IS PROVIDED, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
WHY DON'T YOU, WHY DON'T YOU SAY IT, DANIEL AND, AND MR. CHAIRMAN, IT'S NOT UNDER OUR RULES.
SAYING STATE LAW SAYS IT NEEDS TO BE REDACTED AS THE EMAIL ADDRESSES, BUT ADDRESSES AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS ARE OKAY.
WELL, I, I, I'M NOTED, I GOT TWO EMAILS AND 1, 2, 3, 4, 4 TEXTS.
SO YES, OUR, OUR, WE HAVE GUIDED BY STATE LAW AND IT SAYS THE E EVERY, EVERYTHING'S PUBLIC EXCEPT THE EMAIL ADDRESS.
AND THAT'LL CHANGE OVER TIME TOO.
QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT FOR THIS SPEAKER.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS HERE? SPEAK IN FAVOR.
ANY SPEAKERS HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION IF YOU'D COME FORWARD? SIR, DID YOU TURN IN A BLUE SHEET? YES.
VERY GOOD MS. MARY, SHE, HE HAS SOMETHING HE WANTS TO HAND OUT.
LET'S LET HER CIRCULATE THIS AND THEN WE'LL RECOGNIZE YOU AND THAT SORT OF THING.
SO BEFORE YOU BEGIN, UM, GIVE US A MINUTE JUST TO ABSORB WHAT YOU'VE JUST GIVEN US AND THEN WE'LL HAVE YOU SWORN IN AND THEN WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
ALL IS THAT FOR YOUR RECORDS? MARY? YOU HAVE MS. WILLIAMS, YOU HAVE, OKAY.
YEAH, THIS COPY HAS TO BE KEPT BY YOU GUYS.
UM, IF YOU WOULD GIVE US YOUR NAME, YOUR ADDRESS, AND THEN OUR BOARD SECRETARY'S GONNA SWEAR YOU IN.
MARY, IF YOU WOULD SWEAR HIM IN, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? PLEASE ANSWER.
AND YOUR FULL NAME AGAIN? ONE MORE TIME.
COULD YOU SPELL THE LAST NAME PLEASE? T O O P
[00:55:01]
I A N.YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
I, UH, I HAVE BEEN IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OVER 30 YEARS.
UH, SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WAS MENTIONED, THAT'S NOT SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD OR TRAFFIC HAS NEVER BEEN ANY ISSUE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO HAVING THAT EXCUSE, WE WANNA HIRE BANKS TO PROTECT OURSELF, THAT'S NOT RIGHT.
NOW WE HAVE A NEWCOMER, WHICH ARE WELCOME TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I FEEL LIKE THEY ARE FROM THE BEGINNING, THEY'RE TRYING TO CHANGE THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE INTEGRITY OF NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE FIRST THING THEY DID, THEY COMPLETELY DESTROYED ALL THE TREES IN THEIR FRONT YARD.
I, I SH I'M SHOWING THE PICTURES, THE ONE THE WAY IT WAS BEFORE AND THE WAY IT'S NOW.
AND THEN NOW THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE FENCE, WHICH I FEEL LIKE IT'S BOX IN MY, UH, PROPERTY.
ONE OF THE FENCES THAT THEY ALREADY PUT THERE IS THE EXTENSION OF THEIR BACKYARD TO MY FRONT YARD.
AND LOOK, PLEASE LOOK HOW UGLY MAKES MY PROPERTY LOOK.
AND I FEEL LIKE THEY JUST MOVED IN AND THEY FEEL LIKE THEY CAN DO WHATEVER WANT AND WITHOUT CONSIDERATION FOR THE NEIGHBORS.
UH, THEY, I I, I FEEL LIKE THEY TRIED TO GET APPROVAL OF ALL THOSE PEOPLE THAT THEY KNEW ALREADY, BUT THEY DID NOT TALK ABOUT ONE OF THE PEOPLES THAT ARE MAKING OPPOSITION.
ONE OF THE, THE LADY IN FRONT OF PEOPLE, I TALKED TO HER, SHE WAS OPPOSED TO THAT, BUT BECAUSE SHE'S ELDERLY, SHE COULD NOT MAKE IT OR, AND DID NOT RESPOND TO, TO THE BOARD.
SO THAT'S, UH, WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY, THAT THAT THING IS NEGATIVE EFFECT.
THE VALUE, THE LOOK OF MY HOUSE AND THE PICTURES PRETTY MUCH IT SHOWS IT THE ONE I SHOWED FOR THE, IN THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE PANEL TO THIS, UH, GENTLEMAN? ABRAHAM TUBAN.
HOW DO YOU SPELL THAT? PRONOUNCE IT TUBAN.
HOW DO YOU PRONOUNCE IT? TUBAN.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS? I'M GONNA HAVE A, I HAVE A ONE OR TWO FOR THIS GENTLEMAN.
UM, AND THIS QUESTION GOES TO STAFF.
SO MR. TUBAN, YOU PROVIDED US PICTURES OF BEFORE AND AFTER OF TREES IN THE APPLICANT'S FRONT YARD AND BEFORE AND AFTER PICTURES, UH, OR UH, OF BEFORE TREES, PICTURES IN THE BACKYARD.
AND THEN YOU PROVIDED US A PICTURE OF PROPOSED FENCE ADJACENT.
SO WHERE I'VE RECEIVED THOSE, YES.
SO WE ARE, WE TRY TO DO OUR BEST TO MAKE SURE WE FOLLOW WHAT THE CODE AUTHORIZES THIS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO DO BASED ON CRITERIA AND REMEDY.
AND, UM, I'M GONNA ASK MS. NICKI, MS. DUNN, OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR AND OR OUR BOARD ATTORNEY, THE ISSUE OF TREES AND WHETHER TEARING OR TAKING DOWN A TREE OF A PROPERTY IS BY RIGHT, OR IF THERE'S A REQUIRED PERMIT FOR THAT.
AND NUMBER TWO, WHETHER THAT ISSUE OF A TREE CAN BE UTILIZED AS A CRITERIA FOR A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE, GOOD LUCK.
MOST OF THE TIME THERE IS A PROCESS TO EMANATE TREES OFF OF A PROPERTY, BUT FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE, UH, WE'RE NOT, I A LITTLE BIT CLOSER SO I CAN HEAR YOU FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
TREES DO NOT ALLI ALIGN WITH WHAT THEY'RE HERE FOR TODAY.
TREES WERE NOT A CONSIDERATION OF THE CASE.
SO REALISTICALLY, FROM A PROFESSIONAL STAFF STANDPOINT, AND DANIEL, I'M COMING TO YOU NEXT, IT THAT SH SHOULD NOT BE PART OF OUR CRITERIA IN GATHERING EVIDENCE FOR A DECISION.
THAT'S NOT ONE OF THE STANDARDS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY.
I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE BASED ON EVIDENCE THAT COMES TO US, WHAT WE CAN UTILIZE VERSUS NOT MR. BOARD ATTORNEY MOORE.
THE STANDARD BEFORE THE BOARD IS WHETHER OR NOT THE FENCE WILL HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
SO THAT, THAT IS THE STANDARD.
THAT ALONE IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT.
THAT ALONE IS HOW THIS BODY MAKES THIS DECISION.
AND THAT'S, YOU'RE, YOU'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT MS. DUNN? YES, I AM.
SO I'M, IT'S OUR DECISION IN THE END AS PRIVATE CITIZENS APPOINTED
[01:00:01]
BY THE COUNCIL, BUT WE TRY TO SHAPE OUR DECISIONS BASED ON LEGAL INTERPRETATION AND PROFESSIONAL STAFF INTERPRETATION.HENCE, BASED ON WHAT YOU GAVE ME, I'M TRYING TO ABSORB THAT.
UM, NOW AS IT RELATES TO THIS, THE PHOTO THAT YOU HAVE HERE THAT YOU GAVE US, IT SAID VIEW FROM MY HOUSE, THEIR BACKYARD FENCE EXTENDED TO THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE.
HAVE YOU SHOWN THIS TO THE APPLICANT OF YOUR CONCERNS? THEY BUILD IT.
THEY KNOW, OF COURSE THEY'RE AN NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR.
YOU'RE JUST SAYING IT BLOCKED YOUR VIEW.
MAKE MY HOUSE LOOK NOT, YOU KNOW, I, I'M SURE NOT NOBODY WANTS TO HAVE A UGLY WALL LIKE RIGHT LIKE THAT RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEIR ENTRANCE TO THE HOUSE.
UH, QUESTIONS FOR THIS SPEAKER? HE'S IN OPPOSITION.
I DON'T SEE ANY AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? ONE SECOND.
DID YOU, DID YOU TURN IN A BLUE SHEET? YES.
CAN YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME, YOUR ADDRESS, AND THEN OUR BOARD SECRETARY'S GONNA SWEAR YOU IN.
MY NAME IS MITCHELL TERRY, 1500 RAMSGATE CIRCLE POLLO 75 0 93.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, PLEASE CENSOR.
AND YOUR LAST NAME AGAIN, SIR? TERRY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. TERRY.
YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
UM, I HANDLED COMMERCIAL PROPERTY FOR MR. TUBAN.
UH, SO I'M HERE MAINLY AS BACK UP FOR HIM.
BUT, UM, MY QUESTION WOULD BE TO THE APPLICANT, HAVE THEY DONE ANY SORT OF RESEARCH FROM RESIDENTIAL BROKERS IN THE AREA TO SEE IF THIS NEGATIVELY IMPACTS MR. TUBING'S PROPERTY FROM A MONETARY STANDPOINT? ALSO THEY MADE REFERENCE TO POSSIBLE CRIME ALONG THE AREA.
HAVE THERE BEEN ANY STUDIES YOU CAN FIND ONLINE ANY PROBLEMS WITH CRIME ON THE DALLAS? STATISTICS? I CAN BELIEVE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT PUTS OUT.
UM, SO FROM A VISIBILITY STANDPOINT, OBVIOUSLY THIS, UH, EIGHT FOOT FENCE, UM, WHICH I THINK WOULD BE QUITE CAPABLE OF BEING FOUR FEET BY RIGHT.
IS GOING TO OBVIOUSLY NEGATIVELY IMPACT, UH, MR. TUB'S PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THE SITE ABILITY FROM THE, COMING FROM THE NORTH TO THE SOUTH.
MR. TERRY, DID YOU ADDRESS THOSE QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT BEFORE BRINGING THEM IN PUBLIC TODAY? UH, NO, SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE FROM THE PANEL TO THIS SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION? MR. NIAN? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
YOU SAID AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE AND ACCORDING TO OUR DOCUMENTS, THEY'RE REQUESTING A SIX AND A HALF FOOT HIGH FENCE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL FOR THE, FOR MR. TERRY? MS. HAYDEN? OKAY.
JUST SO I'M CLEAR, MR. TERRY, UM, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR YOU'RE NOT IN THE I OR IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD? I'M NOT, YOU'RE, YOU'RE CORRECT.
WAIT, WELL, COULD I ASK ONE MORE, MAKE ONE MORE STATEMENT REAL QUICK IF IT'S AN ANSWER TO A QUESTION OF MS. OH, I'M SORRY.
YOU CAN, WELL, IT, IT ACTUALLY HAS REFERENCE TO WHAT YOU HAD TALKED ABOUT.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO KEEP THINGS NARROWED.
LANES OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT WERE PROPONENTS OF THE, THE CHANGE, THE VARIANCE.
YOU ASKED FOR THE 200 FOOT RADIUS AROUND THE PROPERTY, HOW MANY OF THOSE PROPONENTS ARE WITHIN 200 FEET? HOW MANY ARE THOSE? WHAT THE PROPONENTS, THE OH, THE PEOPLE ARE IN A IN FAVOR? YEAH.
THEY'RE IN FAVOR OF THE THAT'S A QUESTION FOR ME.
BECAUSE YOU HAD ASKED HER EARLIER.
WHEN WE WERE BRIEFED THIS MORNING BY OUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF, WE WERE NOT NOTIFIED OF ANY IN OPPOSITION.
WHICH, SO THAT'S ONE, RIGHT? RIGHT.
NOW, MR. TIAN SPOKE TODAY IN OPPOSITION, SO THAT IS REGISTERED, BUT FROM OUR NOTIFICATION PROCESS WHERE PROPERTY OWNERS GET A, A LETTER FROM THE, FROM THE CITY IN ADVANCE, WE WERE, UH, NOTIFIED WITH
[01:05:01]
SOME IN FAVOR, BUT NO, IN OPPOSITION.THE APPLICANT GAVE US A MAP IN HER PRESENTATION.
THE APPLICANT'S CONSULTANT MM-HMM.
AND I QUESTIONED HER SAYING, THAT'S A LOT MORE GREEN.
I'M REPEATING WHAT I SAID BEFORE.
YES, I, I HEARD MY WIFE SAYS THAT I SAVE, DO THAT ALL THE TIME, UH, THAT A LOT MORE GREEN THAN WAS PRESENTED TO THE CITY.
SO, BUT SHE DID THAT UNDER OATH.
IN ADDITION, THEY PROVIDED TO US, UH, IN THE A IN THE FILE THAT WAS PUBLISHED TO A WEEK AGO, A WEEK AGO, NEIGHBORS THAT SIGNED.
SO, UM, I HAD COUNTED 1, 2, 3, 4, 4 IN FAVOR JUST FROM THOSE THAT WERE SUBMITTED.
SO, UH, BUT WITH NO OPPOSITION.
BUT BUT YOU DON'T HAVE A LOCATION FOR EACH OF THE PEOPLE EXACTLY.
FOR THE FOUR WE DO BECAUSE OF THE PETITION.
ARE THEY, ARE THEY, YEAH, THEY'RE PETITION SIGNED.
BUT CAN YOU TELL IF THEY'RE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THAT? YES.
THOSE ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT I'M ZEROING IN ON.
NOW, FEEDBACK THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE NOTIFICATION AREA IS RELEVANT.
BUT THE DALLAS CODE, MR. ATTORNEY CONFIRM FIRM FOR ME, DALLAS CODE SPECIFIES THAT THE BOARD, UH, IS REQUIRED TO NOTIFY AND GET FEEDBACK AT OR SOLICIT FEEDBACK.
THOSE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE CIRCUM OF ANY OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION MR. TURN.
UNDER STATE LAW AND CHAPTER 51 A, WHEN SOMEONE MAKES AN APPLICATION TO THIS BODY, STAFF NOTIFIES ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY.
AND SO THAT'S OUR PRIMARY AREA OF, OF CONCERN.
WE DON'T IGNORE OUTSIDE OF THAT BECAUSE THESE ARE NEIGHBORHOODS, THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE MORE THAN 200 FEET.
SO, AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
WELL, FROM A, A LOGISTICS STANDPOINT OF THE, WHAT YOU HAVE, YOU DON'T KNOW HOW MANY ARE WITHIN THAT 200 FOOT.
WELL, AS I SAID BEFORE, SIR, YES.
ON MY MAP RIGHT HERE, I NOTED IN WRITING FOUR PROPERTY, SEVEN PROPERTY EIGHT, PROPERTY 10, PROPERTY SIX, THAT ARE ALL WITHIN THE 200 FEET NOTIFICATION.
THAT'S, AND THOSE PROPERTIES ALL ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE APPLICANT, WHICH IS COMPELLING.
IT'S COMPELLING BECAUSE OUR CONCERN OVER TIME IS THIS TUNNELING EFFECT THAT OCCURS WHEN WE PUT FENCES IN NARROW STREETS AND WE HAVE A SENSITIVITY TO THAT.
BUT IT'S A CASE BY CASE BASIS BASED ON PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND THEN A CONSENSUS OF CITIZENS THAT LIVE IN NEIGHBORHOODS.
IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT IT'S MEANT TO BE FAIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. TERRY? OKAY.
SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? NO OTHER SPEAKERS, SIR.
NO OTHER SPEAKERS EITHER SIDE.
SO DOES THE BOARD HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR ANY SPEAKERS? MR. HOLCOMB? I'M SORRY.
SO, SO I GUESS THIS WOULD BE, UM, PROBABLY BEST ADDRESSED TO THE APPLICANT OR, OR MAYBE CITY STAFF IF THEY HAVE THE PICTURES.
HOW MANY OF THESE, I'M LOOKING AT THE AERIAL MAP HERE.
THAT WAS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE DOCKET.
HOW MANY OF THESE HOUSES HAVE, HAVE A FENCE LINED THAT'S THAT UP CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE, MR. AL? YES.
I, I I ALONG STRAIGHT LANE? YEAH.
HUGHES LANE, YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH HAS A FENCE ON THEIR FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
UM, I BELIEVE THERE WERE SOME CORNER LOTS, WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT BE ON YOUR MAP.
UM, BUT I RECALL THREE AS I TRANSVERSED FROM NORTH TO SOUTH UP HUGHES LANE, APPROXIMATELY.
AND THAT, AND THAT ONE TO THE NORTH.
I'M ACTUALLY THE, THE NEIGHBOR DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH.
I'M, I'M, I'M KIND OF CONCERNED WITH THAT ONE.
SO THAT, YOU SAID THERE'S A FENCE THERE ABOUT HOW HIGH WOULD YOU SAY THAT FENCE IS? DO YOU THINK IT'S LIKE A FOUR FOOT OR IS IT A BIGGER, I BELIEVE IT'S A SIX FOOT FENCE.
SIX FOOT FENCE, UM, OR ELEVATION SHOW.
UM, I LOOKED AT GOOGLE STREET VIEW AND IT WAS THERE THE ENTIRE TIME FOR THE HISTORY.
SO IT'S BEEN THERE SINCE THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS.
SO, SO IF I'M STANDING AT THE HOUSE TO THE SOUTH OF THE APPLICANT, AND I'M LOOKING NORTH, OKAY, RIGHT NOW, I'M STILL LOOKING INTO THE FENCE OF THAT PROPERTY TO THE NORTH OF THE APPLICANT.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, THIS NEW FENCE IS ONLY CUTTING OFF OF A VIEW IN THAT LITTLE SORT OF TRUNCATED TRIANGLE BETWEEN THE APPLICANT TO THE SOUTH, OR I MEAN THE APPLICANT, SORRY, THE PERSON TO THE SOUTH OF THE APPLICANT AND THE PERSON TO THE NORTH IN, IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THE VIEW THERE IS ONLY THIS SMALL TRIANGLE THAT THIS FENCE WOULD OBSCURE BECAUSE THERE'S ANOTHER FENCE TO THE NORTH, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
SO THE FENCE TO THE NORTH IS AN OPEN RODAR STYLE WITH MASONRY COLUMNS.
[01:10:01]
UM, UH, THERE MAY BE SOME MINOR OBSTRUCTION BECAUSE OF OUR WING WALLS BY OUR DRIVEWAY, JUST TO BE, UM, HONEST WITH YOU.UM, BUT THE ROAD CURVES AT THIS LOCATION, SO THE, IF YOU'RE STANDING IN, IN OUR DRIVEWAY AND LOOKING DEAD NORTH, YOU'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT THE HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET.
AND, AND THAT'S THE ONLY SITE LINE THAT THE PROPOSED FENCE WILL OCCUPY? YES, SIR.
WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE OF THE APPLICANT OR ANY THE SPEAKERS? HEARING NONE, UH, THE CHAIR WOULD, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MR. HALCOMB, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 DASH 0 25 ON APPLICATION OF JENNIFER HIROTO GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A SIX FOOT, SIX 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 AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
A MOTION'S BEEN MADE BY, HOLD ON A SECOND.
UH, I'M GONNA ASK YOU, UH, THE CHAIR'S NOT GONNA RECOGNIZE YOUR MOTION YET.
UH, BECAUSE I, I WANNA ASK ONE OTHER QUESTION AND THE QUESTION I ASK CAN'T BE ASKED DURING DELIBERATION OF A MO MO MOTION, SO I APOLOGIZE.
COULD I ASK THE HOMEOWNER TO COME UP BACK UP TO THE PODIUM PLEASE? I THINK THE BOARD ATTORNEY AGREE THIS QUESTION I REALLY SHOULDN'T ASK DURING THE, DURING THE DELIBERATION.
DELIBERATION IS JUST ON THE MOTION HELLO.
SO, I I, YOUR NEIGHBOR, MR. TOBI TOBIN, YES.
UH, YOU HEARD OUR COMMENT ABOUT, UH, THE APPLICABILITY OF TREES ON A CASE LIKE THIS OR NOT, AND WE'VE BEEN ADVISED THAT IT'S NOT PART OF OUR DISCUSSION, SO I'M NOT PURSUING THAT.
UM, WHAT FEEDBACK WOULD YOU GIVE THIS BOARD BASED ON THE FEEDBACK OF ONE OF YOUR PROPERTY OWNERS AND YOUR, THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER IS CONCERNED ABOUT WALLING ADJACENT TO HIS PROPERTY? WELL, I THINK HIS CONCERN IS THE WOOD FENCE THAT IS BETWEEN OUR PROPERTIES, BUT IT DOESN'T GO ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT.
IT GOES TO WHERE IT WAS ACTUALLY BUILT BEFORE WE MOVED IN BY THE BUILDER.
SO THAT WAS ALREADY EXISTING, AND IT REPLACED A FENCE THAT WAS THERE BEFORE WHEN THE OLD HOUSE WAS TORN DOWN AND REBUILT.
SO THAT REALLY ISN'T PART OF OUR DESIGN OR PLANNING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SO I'M NOT REALLY, I, THERE'S, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO ON THAT.
AND, AND MY QUESTION TO YOU IS NOT AT ALL TO YOU FOR OR OR AGAINST YOUR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS.
BUT I WANT TO BE FAIR IN AIRING OUT.
A CONCERN OF A NEIGHBOR AND OF A PROPERTY OWNER.
AND WE DON'T TAKE A POLL AND WHOEVER'S GOT THE MOST YESES WINS, OR WHOEVER GETS THE MOST NOS LOSES.
IT ALL IS INFORMATION INTO THE, INTO THE SUMTOTAL.
I JUST WANNA BE SENSITIVE TO MAKING SURE THAT EACH PROPERTY OWNER'S RESPONSIVE, RESPECTFUL, BUT ALSO TAKE CARE OF THEIR OWN SELF-INTEREST.
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH, IT SHOULD BE ALL, ALL TOGETHER, SO.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I APOLOGIZE FOR CUTTING YOU OFF, MR. HOLCOMB.
I, THAT'S A QUESTION FOR PRIOR TO THE MOTION.
I JUST WANTED TO HAVE CLOSURE TO THAT ISSUE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY THE, BY THE NEIGHBOR.
NOW, THE CHAIR WILL RECOGNIZE YOUR MOTION.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 DASH 0 25 ON APPLICATION OF JENNIFER GUERO MOTO GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A SIX FOOT, SIX 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 PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MR. HALCOMB IN BDA 2 23 DASH 25 TO GRANT THE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
[01:15:01]
SECOND.IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MR. NA DISCUSSION, MR. HALCOMB.
SO, UM, IT TOOK ME ALMOST THE ENTIRE HEARING TO COME TO A REAL DECISION ON THIS CASE, UM, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS THAT, THAT WEIGH INTO THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTY VALUES.
AND WHAT SETTLED IT FOR ME IS I TOOK SEVERAL DIFFERENT DIAGRAMS FROM THE DOCKET, UM, THE OVERHEAD ARCHITECTURAL PLAN, THE OVERHEAD SATELLITE IMAGE, AND THEN THE, UH, IMAGE FROM THE, THE NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR.
AND I KIND OF DREW A LITTLE DIAGRAM, UH, OF WHAT SIGHT LINE WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED FENCE.
AND I CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT IT'S A SLIM TRIANGLE, AND THE KEY PART IS THE NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH HAS A FENCE THAT BLOCKS THE LINE OF YOU ALREADY.
SO THERE'S ONLY, YOU KNOW, THE LENGTH OF THE PROPERTY LINE BY 19 FEET IS THE BASE OF THE TRIANGLE, AND THEN THE DIAGONAL THAT'S AFFECTED BY THIS FENCE.
AND SO, IN MY OPINION, UM, THAT LIMITED, UH, RESTRICTION OF THE VIEW DOES NOT AFFECT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
AND SO THEREFORE, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
MR. NE, I CONCUR WITH MR. HOLCOMB'S ANALYSIS WITH THE, WITH AN ADDITION THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, STATED THAT THIS, THIS PARTICULAR FENCE WAS ALREADY CONSTRUCTED WHEN THE HOME WAS BUILT.
UH, SO THIS WAS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE HOME.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
BESIDE THIS, BESIDE THE DRIVEWAY FENCE.
SO, UH, THAT, THAT, THOSE TWO THINGS, UH, ARE THE REASON I'M SUPPORTING IT.
THANK YOU MR. NERING DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE.
UH, MY COMMENT WOULD BE THAT, UM, I APPRECIATE THOSE THAT ARE HERE TO SPEAK OUT, UH, IN, AS IN ADVOCACY OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOUR PROPERTY.
UM, I'M IMPRESSED THAT THE, THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNER CANVASED THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND GOT FEEDBACK.
UM, THIS IS NOT A POPULARITY CONTEST.
THIS IS NOT WHOEVER GETS THE MOST GREENS VERSUS RED'S WIND.
UM, BUT ON THE WHOLE, I'M, I'M GONNA BE IN, BE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS PRESENTED TO APPROVE, UM, UH, I'M, I'M A LITTLE STARTLED THAT HUGHES LANE GOES FROM ALPHA ALL THE WAY DOWN TO LBJ AND THAT POTENTIAL PASSED WAY AND HOW THAT, THAT HAS ISSUES.
UH, BUT I'M ALSO SENSITIVE TO TUNNELING EFFECT AND, AND FENCES.
NOW, UH, FROM THE PICTURES WE SAW THIS MORNING AND FROM THE, UH, GRAPHICS WE HAVE, IT'S, UH, UM, IT'S AN OPEN FACE FENCE WITH VERY MINIMAL, MORE THAN 50%.
UH, SO IT'S HAS AN OPEN FACE FEEL.
AND FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, THAT PERSUADES ME TO, TO GO WITH THAT, TO GO WITH THAT.
THAT'S JUST ONE, ONE PERSON'S OPINION.
ANY OTHER OPINIONS OR DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL A VOTE MS. BOARD SECRETARY.
MS. DAVIS, HI, MS. HAYDEN? AYE.
IT'S FIVE TO ZERO IN THE MATTER OF PDA 2 23 DASH 0 2 5 ON APPLICATION THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY BY FIVE GRANTS, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR HEIGHT, MR. NE SECOND MOTION OR, OR MR. NE OR MR. HOLCOMB? EITHER WAY.
UH, JUST DON'T MAKE ME READ THIS ONE TWICE.
UH, I, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 DASH 0 25 ON APPLICATION OF JENNIFER HIRA MOTO GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A FENCE WITH PANELS HAVING LESS THAN 50% OPEN SURFACE AREA, LOCATED LESS THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT LOT LINE 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 PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MR. HOLCOMB.
AND SECOND MOVED BY MR. HOLCOMB, SECONDED BY MR. NE IN BDA 2 23 DASH 25 TO GRANT THE REQUEST FOR LESS THAN 50%, UH, OPEN SURFACE AREA ACCORDING TO THE SIDE PLAN AND ELEVATION.
DISCUSSION IN THE MOTION, MR. HOLCOMB? YEAH, UH, UH, INITIALLY WHEN I SAW THE PLANS, I WAS A LITTLE CONCERNED, LIKE, WHY EVEN ASK FOR THIS FOR JUST SUCH A SMALL STRETCH, BUT IT WAS ADEQUATELY EXPLAINED BY, UH, PREVENTING HEADLIGHT, UM, HEADLIGHTS FROM AFFECTING THE NEIGHBORS AND THAT SORT OF THING.
SO IT SEEMS LIKE A, A REASONABLE MODERATE REQUEST.
AS THIS BOARD KNOWS, OPACITY IS A BIG ISSUE FOR ME.
UM, I, I DON'T LIKE ENCLOSED, UM, FENCES THAT YOU CAN'T SEE THROUGH.
[01:20:01]
HOLCOMB STATED, THE PERCENTAGE OF THIS OVERALL FENCE THAT WILL BE LESS THAN 50% OPEN.ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION HEARING? NO.
THE DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION, THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL FOR A VOTE.
IT'S FIVE ZERO IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 23 DASH 25, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY FIVE TO ZERO GRANTS THE REQUEST FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE LESS THAN 50% OPEN SPACE AREA, UH, SUBJECT TO THE SITE PLAN IN ELEVATION.
TWO CASES REMAINING IN OUR DOCKET TODAY.
UH, THE NEXT CASE IS BDA 2 23 DASH 0 28 BDA 2 23 DASH 28 AT ONE 30.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE IF YOU TURN IN A BLUE SLIP OH, GOT, OKAY.
THEY E IF THEY'RE REGISTERED SPEAKER, SIR, THEY EACH CAN TAKE FIVE MINUTES.
UM, I'LL, WE, WE WANNA HEAR ALL SIDES OF THE ISSUE.
WELL BE, BEFORE YOU GO ANY FURTHER, I REALLY NEED TO GET YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND THEN OUR BOARD SECRETARY SWEAR IN WHO ALL'S GONNA TALK AMONGST YOUR GROUP AND CLOSER TO THE MIC, PLEASE.
RODNEY MOSS, 26 26 COLE, SUITE FIVE 10, DALLAS, TEXAS.
ARE YOU OTHER GENTLEMEN GONNA SPEAK? YES.
AND IF OUR BOARD SECRETARY JUST SWEAR ALL YOU IN AT THE SAME TIME, GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
I'M AT 2100 MCKINNEY, SUITE 700 DALLAS, TEXAS.
HI, I'M BILL WONG, DIRECTOR OF DALLAS COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AT 2377 STEM NORTH STEM STREET, DALLAS.
IF YOU'D ALL BE GET SWORN IN BY OUR BOARD SECRETARY.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN THE TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? PLEASE ANSWER.
UM, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
THIS PROJECT IS THE, UH, THE NEW HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, UH, BIOSAFETY LAB, UH, THAT IS TO BE LOCATED AT 1300 WEST MOCKINGBIRD.
UH, THE COUNTY UNDERTOOK, UH, A PRETTY EXHAUSTIVE SEARCH TO FIND A PARCEL OF LAND TO BUILD THIS NEW LABORATORY THAT'S BEING FUNDED BY, UH, ARPA FUNDS, COVID RELIEF FUNDS.
UH, THIS WILL BE A COVID LAB IN PART OF ITS FUNCTION.
UH, SO THERE'S SOME URGENCY TO GET THIS THING BUILT.
SO WHAT WE'RE DOING, UH, THE, THE OWNER OF 1420 WEST MOCKINGBIRD, WHICH, UM, YOU'LL SEE IN A SECOND IS SEPARATING THAT 1420, UH, PARCEL INTO THREE, UH, NEW SMALL PARCELS.
LOT TWO A IS THE ONE THE COUNTY WANTS TO ACQUIRE.
THE COUNTY, UH, IS GOING TO BE REPLAT AND RECOMBINING 1300, WHICH IS THE BUILDING THAT IT OWNS CURRENTLY, UH, WITH, UH, THE EMPTY LOT, WHICH IS LOT TWO A, UH, THE, THE CURRENT BUILDING THE COUNTY OWNS ON 1300 IS A COMBINATION OF USES.
IT IS ON THE FIRST FLOOR AT DATA CENTER BY VERIZON ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR IS COUNTY OFFICE.
UH, IT HAS THE ADULT PROBATION, UH, DEPARTMENT.
AND THEN ON THE FIFTH FLOOR, IT'S, UH, IT'S, IT'S VACANT.
SO, UM, THE BUILDING IS ROUGHLY 30%, UH, VACANT RIGHT NOW.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THE, UH, THE BUILDING ON THE NEW PARCEL AND THE EXISTING BUILDING ON 1300 WEST MOCKINGBIRD.
UH, THAT IS THE FIRST FLOOR OF FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING.
UM, THE, THE, UH, CURRENT PARKING THAT IS ON THE SITE IS ROUGHLY 500 AND, UH, 36 SPACES, UH, THAT WE WILL LOSE, UH, 59 SPACES BECAUSE OF THE, REPEAT THAT AGAIN? THE BUILDING, WHAT YOU JUST SAID, THE
[01:25:01]
BUILDING TO THE LEFT, WHICH IS THE ONLY CURRENT BUILDING? THE EXISTING BUILDING.IT HAS 500 AND, AND ROUGHLY 36 SPOTS.
UH, AND SO THAT WAS THE, THE BENEFIT OF TRYING TO COMBINE THE SMALLER PARCEL IS THAT WE COULD USE THE EXCESS PARKING FROM THE, THE, THE EXISTING BUILDING LOT AND, AND, AND PROVIDE, UH, THE MAXIMUM PARKING FOR THE COMBINED PLAT.
UH, SO THE NEW BUILDING, THE, THE MOST WE CAN ADD TO THE SITE ON THE CURRENT, UH, I MEAN ON THE NEW PARCEL, UH, IS 61 SPOTS.
UH, SO THE NET IS WE ARE, UH, ROUGHLY JUST TWO SPOTS UNDER WHAT IS CURRENTLY EXISTING, BUT WE'RE LOSING 59.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? GA GAINING 61, LOSING 59.
AND SO WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE TWO SPOTS MORE THAN WE CURRENTLY ARE.
SO BASICALLY, UH, WE HAD THE P UH, PK, UH, GO AND, UH, LOOK AT STONER, UH, DID THE STUDY.
THE CURRENT MAX PEAK USAGE OF THIS BUILDING IS, IS ROUGHLY 189, UH, PARKING SPOTS.
SO IT IS, UH, VASTLY OVER PARKED RIGHT NOW.
HE SAYS THAT IF THE FIFTH FLOOR IS OCCUPIED, UH, THE MOST IT WILL EVER NEED IS 2 81 ON THE CURRENT SITE.
WONG AND, AND, UH, AND MR. JANSSEN ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT, UH, THE, THE CLASSIFICATION OF THIS BUILDING UNDER THE CURRENT PARKING REGS IS, IS A MEDICAL LABORATORY THAT IS ONE PER 300, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY 10% MORE PARKING THAN AN OFFICE, WHICH IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING.
AND THEY'LL EXPLAIN THAT THE, WE WILL ONLY EVER HAVE 98 CARS IN THIS, IN THIS BUILDING, WHICH IS ROUGHLY A ONE PER SIX 70 IN THE TWO A BUILDING.
IN THE PROPOSED BUILDING, YES.
IN THE TWO A, YOU'LL AT MAXIM ONLY HAVE HOW MANY? 98.
IT'S A 66,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING.
AND THEY'LL EXPLAIN WHY THIS PARTICULAR LABORATORY, THE SCIENTISTS NEED TWICE AS MANY SQUARE FOOT PER EMPLOYEE AND THERE ARE NO VISITORS, CUZ IT'S A RESTRICTED ENTRY LAB.
SO IT IS A, IT'S A, IT'S A, A VERY MUCH BESPOKE SORT, SPECIAL UTILIZATION, WHICH THE PARKING REGULATIONS DON'T REALLY ACCOMMODATE.
SO WAIT, SO WHAT I'M ALLOCATING IS FIVE MINUTES PER, SO ARE YOU START AT 2 38.
SO YOU HAVE ANOTHER MINUTE ON YOURS.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING ELSE, OR ARE YOU DONE WITH YOURS? UH, I'VE GOT SOME MORE SLIDES I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE AT THE AUDIENCE OR ONLINE THAT IS WANTING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT IS HERE OR ONLINE REGISTERED THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? NO.
IT'S THE ONLY SPEAKERS ARE THESE THREE GENTLEMEN.
GIVEN THAT I'LL LET YOU SHUFFLE YOUR, YOUR TIME.
UM, THE WAY THE, UH, COUNTY HAS, UM, WHO'S THE END USER OF THIS BUILDING HAS ARRANGED THIS TRANSACTION IS, UH, THROUGH MY COMPANY, C B O E, UH, TO HIRE A DEVELOPER TO AID US IN THIS SPECIALIZED CONSTRUCTION.
SO, UM, WE'RE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UH, MR. MOSS, UH, WHO IS THE DEVELOPER OF THIS PROJECT, BUT THE END USER IS OF COURSE, DALLAS COUNTY.
AS HE NOTED, THIS IS A HIGHLY SPECIALIZED USE.
UM, AND AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, WHEN YOU ARE PERFORMING, UH, INTENSIVE RESEARCH, YOU CAN'T BE IN YOUR OFFICE AND A LABORATORY AT THE SAME TIME.
AND SO THIS IS A VERY LOW DENSITY USE, NON-PUBLIC FACING, NOT A RETAIL ENVIRONMENT, NOT A MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE REDUCTION IN, IN PARKING.
UM, AS YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY HAS LIMITED FUNDS AND THESE ARE, UH, SPECIALIZED, UH, SUPPORT FUNDS, UM, THAT THEY'RE DEPLOYING HERE.
AND THE COST TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE WOULD BE, UM, BASICALLY PROHIBIT THIS PROJECT FROM HAPPENING.
UM, AND SEEING HOW WE DON'T NEED IT, UH, WE'RE APPEALING TO EVERYBODY'S GOOD SENSE THAT, UH, THIS WOULD BE A GOOD WAY TO SAVE MONEY FOR PARKING THAT WE ACTUALLY DON'T NEED GIVEN THE SPECIALIZED USE.
SO, UM, WE THINK IT MAKES A TON OF SENSE.
AND, UM, UH, THE, THE COUNTY'S VERY ACUTELY INTERESTED IN, UH, UH, IN YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS PROJECT.
PHIL WONG, DIRECTOR OF DALLAS COUNTY HOOKING HUMAN SERVICES.
UH, YEAH, JUST TO ECHO WHAT'S BEEN SAID, UH, THIS IS JUST A PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY FACILITY, SO IT IS MUCH LESS, UH, THE, THE UTILIZATION, UH, YOU KNOW, WE WILL HAVE, UH, OTHER EQUIPMENT, UH, OTHER THINGS, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST, UH, AUTOCLAVES, ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT MAKE THIS, UH, IT'S ESSENTIALLY HALF THE AMOUNT OF, UH, IT'S AN INEFFICIENT USE OF THE SPACE.
ONE PERSON TAKES ABOUT TWICE THE AMOUNT OF SPACE, AND IT'S NOT FOR PUBLIC, UH, YOU KNOW, LABORATORY, NOT A LOT OF VISITORS OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO, UH, AGAIN, I THINK IT'S ABOUT ONE HALF WHAT NORMAL OFF OFFICE OCCUPANCY WOULD BE.
[01:30:01]
SIR.UH, THIS IS THE SUMMARY FROM THE PARKING STUDY THAT WAS PROVIDED TO STAFF.
UH, THIS IS WHAT IS ON THE, UH, THE DRAWING.
AND IT SHOWS THE COUNT THAT I WAS, UH, TALKING ABOUT JUST A MINUTE AGO IN TERMS OF THE PARKING THAT'S GONNA BE PROVIDED.
SO 5 34 IS THE MOST WE COULD POSSIBLY FIT ON THIS SITE.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF UTILITY COORDINATION, UH, AND, AND OTHER THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON.
WE DO NOT THINK WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET TO 5 34.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR 17% OR 93 SPOT VARIANCE.
SO THIS IS KIND OF THE PARKING STUDY CONCLUSION.
I'M SORRY, WOULD YOU GO BACK ONE CLICK? YES.
I, I'M ABSORBING THAT YOUR CHART HERE, 5 32 IS EXIST.
THIS IS NOT USED AGAINST YOUR TIME.
5 32 IS EXISTING ON THE GROUND RIGHT NOW.
CORRECT? UH, YOU'RE GONNA REMOVE 59 IN ORDER TO PUT THE NEW BUILDING IN.
IS THERE ANY PARKING ON THE FRONTAGE OF THE NEW BUILDING? TWO A LOT, OR THAT'S ALL RAW LAND.
UH, THERE'S NO PARKING THERE NOW.
IT'S ALL, IT'S ALL RAW UNDEVELOPED LAND.
SO 59 OF THE EXISTING, OR 5 32 IS BEING REMOVED FOR AS PART OF DEVELOPING TWO A? YES.
NEW PARKING SPACES THAT YOU PLAN TO, WHEN YOU SAY NEW PARKING SPACES, IN OTHER WORDS, THAT'S THE, WHAT YOU ARE WILLING TO DO IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THAT'S THE MOST, THAT CAN BE ADDED TO LOT IN AS PART OF THE LOT TO A TWO A.
THAT FRONTAGE ALONG MOCKINGBIRD.
THREE A D EIGHT VANS, 2 0 5 EQUALS 5 34.
THE, SO THAT'S SPACES NOT REQUIREMENTS.
THAT'S WHAT, IF YOU, IF YOU'D STRICTLY APPLY THE CODE BASED, IT'S ONE FOR 300, I THOUGHT.
WELL, IF YOU, SO DATA CENTER IS ONE PER 5,000.
SO YOU, IF YOU DO THE CALCULATION, THE REQUIRED PARKING IS 5 47.
THAT'S ONLY 13 SPOTS, BUT WE ARE VERY CONCERNED THAT, UM, MAXING OUT THE PARKING, UH, WILL NOT ALLOW THAT RIGHT OF WAY FOR UTILITIES.
SOME, SOME EASEMENTS AND SOME OTHER THINGS WE'VE GOTTA ACCOMMODATE.
SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR A 93 SPOT VARIANCE, WHICH IS GREATER THAN THE, THE MAXIMUM THAT YOU SEE THERE, BUT FAR UNDER WHAT WOULD EVER BE NEEDED FOR THIS PROJECT.
YOU CAN KEEP GOING ON YOUR SLIDE.
ALRIGHT, SO NEXT SLIDE IS SORT OF, UH, UH, WHAT PACHECO COULD KIND OF CAME UP WITH.
THE, THE, THE EXISTING ACTUAL PEAK DEMAND OF THE BUILDINGS 198.
IF THE FIFTH FLOOR IS, IS FULLY UTILIZED, IT WOULD BE 2 81 HOLD THERE.
WE SHOULD ASSUME THAT THE FIFTH FLOOR WOULD BE OCCUPIED.
THE QUESTION THEN, BECAUSE THAT'S MIKE'S ASSUMPTION.
NO, NO, MY ONLY POINT WAS THE PEAK IS, IS, IS UNDER, IS IS INHERENTLY INACCURATE CUZ THEY'VE GOT A VACANT FLOOR.
AND HOW DO YOU GET 2 81? IS THAT BASED ON GENERAL OFFICE CALCULATION? CORRECT.
WHICH IS THE ONE FOR 301 3 33 1 3 33.
SO THE NEW BSL WILL ONLY EAT 98, UH, WHICH ACCORDING TO DR.
WONG, WHICH IS ROUGHLY AS WE SAID, UH, ONE PER SIX 70, WHICH IS HALF OF WHAT A, AN OFFICE BUILDING WOULD TAKE AND, UH, UH, OF ONE PER 3 33.
AND IF YOU USE MEDICAL LAB, WHICH IS THE STRICT INTERPRETATION OF CODE, IT WOULD BE LESS THAN HALF BECAUSE IT'S A 66,000 FOOT BUILDING.
SO YOU DIVIDE THAT BY 3 33, YOU GET SOMEWHERE AROUND OR 300, YOU GET SOMEWHERE AROUND 220 SPOTS ARE GONNA BE REQUIRED.
BUT THAT'S NOT
BUT UNLESS THERE'S MORE INTENSIVE USE ON THE FIFTH FLOOR, UH, NO, UH, THE, THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD CHANGE THE EXISTING BUILDING PARKING WOULD BE IF THE DATA CENTER BECOMES A, AN OFFICE BUILDING.
I DON'T WANNA INTERRUPT YOUR PRESENTATION, I'M JUST ABSORBING THE INFORMATION.
SO, UH, FROM MY, ALRIGHT, LET ME ASK THIS THEN.
UM, WHAT'S THE MOST INTENSIVE USE OF THE FIFTH FLOOR AND THE PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR THEREOF? IT WOULD BE 2 81 FOR THAT BUILDING.
BUT THAT'S ONE FOR 300, RIGHT? THAT'S A RATIO 33, THAT'S ONE FOR THREE.
33 WILL NOT BE A LAB, WHICH IS ONE FOR 300 OFFICE IS WHAT IT WILL BE IS ONE PER 3 33.
BUT IS THERE MORE, IS THERE A HIGHER PARKING REQUIREMENT THAN THAT CATEGORY OF JUST GENERAL OFFICE? NO, NOT, NOT THAT, NOT THAT WOULD APPLY TO THIS.
[01:35:01]
SO 2 82 81 IS THE ACTUAL PEAK DEMAND, THE PROJECTED TOTAL PEAK DEMAND OF BOTH BUILDINGS AT FULL BUILDING, BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT.BECAUSE YOUR INTENTION IS TO REPLAT AND BUILD AND IT'S ONE BOTH RELYING ON, ON COMMON PARKING.
SO THE THIRD BULLET THERE, THE TOTAL PEAK DEMAND FOR FULL BUILDOUT FOR BOTH BUILDINGS WOULD BE 3 79.
AND YOU HAVE 5 22 CURRENTLY FIVE.
SO MY POINT IS THAT, THAT THAT'S, WE'RE ROUGHLY 41% OVER PARKED AT 5 34, WHICH IS WHAT IS CALCULATED ON THE MAX PARKING.
SO THAT WOULD BE 41% OVER PARKED.
SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR, UH, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW US TO, UH, UH, ONLY PROVIDE 454 SPOTS, WHICH IS ROUGHLY, UH, 65 SPOTS BELOW WHAT THE MAX USAGE WOULD BE AND 17% OVER WHAT THE PARKING REGS REQUIRE.
YOU'RE ASKING FOR EXCEPTION TO 4 54, EVEN THOUGH YOU THINK THE MAXIMUM PARKING WILL EVER PARK AT 3 79.
CORRECT? WELL, WHY AREN'T YOU ASKING FOR MORE OF AN, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION THEN? THREE THAN FOUR 50 TALKING TO STAFF? 17%.
I MEAN, WE COULD HAVE ASKED FOR 25.
I DIDN'T THINK WE NEEDED MORE THAN 17%.
I'M ABSORBING AND ASKING ANYTHING ELSE? DID I DON'T WANT TO INTERRUPT YOUR PRESENTATION? I'LL JUST, I'LL JUST OFFER UP.
WE REALLY DIDN'T WANT TO PUSH THE ENVELOPE HERE.
SO YEAH, THERE'S A BUFFER IN THERE.
UM, I THINK IF I WERE IN YOUR SHOES, I WOULD BE ASKING, IS THERE SOME WAY THIS BUILDING COULD BE PARKED EVEN MORE HEAVILY AS THERE COULD BE A CHANGE OF USE, BUT WELL, THAT'S WHY I'M PROBING.
THE ONLY WAY THAT HAPPENS IS IF THE DATA CENTER GOES AWAY, BUT THE COUNTY JUST RENEWED THE TENANT THERE FOR 15 YEARS.
UM, SO THAT'S A, THAT'S A DATA CENTER.
IT'S A SWITCHING STATIONS VERY KEY TO AT T'S INFRASTRUCTURE.
UM, SO THAT USE IS NOT CHANGING.
ACTUALLY, MY AREA WAS THE PROBATION FLOORS BECAUSE THE ISSUE OF THE TRAFFIC FROM THE STREET.
YOU KNOW, AND I'M NOT MAKING A VALUE JUDGMENT ON PROBATION.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT BRINGS THE PUBLIC INTO A BUILDING WITH YOUR CARS AND HOW DO YOU REALLY MEASURE THE, THE PUBLIC TRAFFIC.
SO I GET YOUR CORRELATION IN THE DATA CENTER, AND I GET YOU ON THE FIFTH FLOOR WANTING TO ASSUME IT WILL BE THE LEAST INTENSIVE USE IN PARKING THEREOF, BUT OKAY.
YEAH, AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHY THERE'S A LITTLE BUFFER IN IT.
UM, AT THE REDUCTION OF 17, INSTEAD OF ASKING FOR AN EVEN MORE INTENSE, UH, REDUCTION, UM, WE DON'T FEEL LIKE WE NEED IT.
UM, AND IT DOES GIVE US SOME ROOF AND, AND ROOM IN CASE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A COUPLE DAYS WHERE, UH, THERE'S A MORE INTENSIVE NEED FOR PARKING ON THOSE DAYS.
BUT, SO LET ME SWITCH GEARS JUST FOR A SECOND.
THE TWO A BUILDING, YOU CALLED THIS A BSL, WHICH WHAT? THE BIO BIOS SAFETY MAP.
I, I DON'T, I WANNA MAKE SURE REFER TO IT APPROPRIATELY.
IT'S 66,000 SQUARE FEET, BUT IT WOULD ONLY REQUIRE 98 SPACES.
AND THAT'S BECAUSE OF THE LARGER SPACE.
THESE ARE LABORATORY BASED ON THE LAB.
THE ENTIRE THIRD FLOOR IS, IS LABORATORY.
UM, AND, AND YOU'RE SPEAKING WITH A LOT OF CERTAINTY.
WELL, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR ABOUT A YEAR, SO I I'M GETTING YEAH.
THE PROBLEMATIC ELEMENTS TO IT.
AGAIN, DECIDED WE HEAR, WE GET ALL SORTS OF REQUESTS FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS IN THE PARKING.
AND THIS ONE MEMBER'S HESITANT ALWAYS BECAUSE SURE.
WE DON'T WANT, BECAUSE CARS WOULD, ON THAT AREA OF MOCKINGBIRD, I DON'T KNOW WHERE CARS WOULD PARK IF THEY COULDN'T PARK.
YEAH, BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T PARK ON MOCKINGBIRD.
YOU COULDN'T PARK ON MOCKINGBIRD.
OH, THEY DIDN'T GOING INTO YOUR NEIGHBOR AND THEY WOULDN'T WANT THAT.
AND YOU DON'T WANT NEIGHBORS COMPLAINING ABOUT THE COUNTY AND ALL THAT.
AND THAT BECOMES ALL SORTS OF ISSUES.
RIGHT? WELL, WE ARE, WE ARE BUYING THIS LAND FROM THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR AND THEY'RE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PLAN.
THEY'RE WELL AWARE OF THIS SUPPORTING US IN THE PLAT AND REPLAT APPLICATIONS.
YOU'VE BEEN GRACIOUS IN ALLOWING ME TO ASK QUESTIONS DURING YOUR TIME.
WHAT ELSE? FIRE DO WANNA PRESENT AS PART OF YOUR TIME? AND THEN I'M GONNA OPEN UP FOR QUESTIONS.
IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC ABOUT THE LABORATORY.
WONG'S, UH, GRACE HAS GIVEN US HIS TIME TO HELP US PRESENT THIS, UH, ABOUT THE, THE USE OF THE NATURE OF THE USE THERE.
BUT, UM, YEAH, WE, WE CAME IN WITH, UM, WHAT WE FELT WAS A REASONABLE REQUEST.
UH, WE DIDN'T WANT TO PUSH AN AGGRESSIVE REQUEST.
FIRST OF ALL, WE DIDN'T NEED IT, BUT SECOND OF ALL, WE THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE, UH, JUST A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH TO BE ASKING
[01:40:01]
FOR.BUT ANYWAY, UH, WE'VE ANALYZED IT.
UM, IT SEEMS TO US THAT OUR PEAK DEMAND IS GONNA BE LESS THAN THE TOTAL SUPPLY WE'LL HAVE, AND WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, ABOUT 70 SPACES OF BUFFER THERE.
SO, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW WE DECIDED TO APPROACH IT.
WHAT'S THE ZONING? I'M, I'M ZEROING IN ON THE USE OF THAT EMPTY FIFTH FLOOR.
SO THAT'S ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF, WELL, SO JUST THINKING ABOUT THE, LET'S JUST HYPOTHETICALLY ASSUME IT COULD BE A, A, A MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING, WHICH IS ONE PER 200.
SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE INTENSE.
THAT'S MORE, THAT'S THE MOST INTENSE USE I CAN EVEN IMAGINE.
THAT'S IS WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR.
UH, SO, YOU KNOW, AND IT COULD BE WITH A LAB FACILITY ACROSS THE WAY.
COULD, WELL, I, THIS IS NOT THE KIND OF LAB I GET YOU
WELL, HE, YOU SAID IT'S CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC.
I BACK, BUT DOCTORS AND MEDICAL FACILITIES CLUSTER TOGETHER, SO I DON'T, YOU KNOW.
BUT YEAH, IT COULD BE ONE TO 200.
SO THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE A, A ANOTHER.
IT'S ROUGHLY 25,000 SQUARE FEET.
SO YOU KNOW THAT, THAT THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER HUNDRED SPOTS.
QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL ON BDA 2 23.
SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, UH, THE, THE FIRST PART OF MY QUESTIONS TO STAFF, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS, THIS EXCEPTION WOULD BE TIED TO USE.
SO IF THEY SWITCHED TO A HIGHER, MORE INTENSITY USE, THEY WOULD LOSE THIS EXCEPTION.
SO THEN MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO THE APPLICANT AND, AND HOLD ON.
LET'S, LET'S GET A VERBAL SURE.
MR. HOLCOMB, IT WOULD BE TIED TO THE OFFICE VIEW.
YEAH, I MEAN THE MOTION IN FRONT OF ME SAYS IT'S THE COMBINATION OF THE THREE OFFICE MEDICAL AND COMMUNICATION.
SO IF THEY WERE TO SAY, LOSE THE COMMUNICATION LEASE, I KNOW YOU JUST SIGNED IT FOR 15, BUT JUST SAKE OF ARGUMENT AND THEY DON'T RENEW ANOTHER COMMUNICATION, THIS PARKING GOES RIGHT OUT THE WINDOW.
OR THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK, CORRECT.
I'M NOT, I JUST WANTED ON THE RECORD THAT YOU'RE, HE'S BEING INSIGHTFUL ABOUT THAT USE.
I I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS ON THE RECORD THAT THE APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE CHANGE IN USE WOULD INVALIDATE THE PARKING.
AND SINCE THEY'RE ON BOARD WITH THAT, THAT ADDRESSES MY CONCERN FOR THE QUESTION.
OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL FOR THE APPLICANT? MS. DAVIS, WOULD YOU MIND EXPLAINING AGAIN WHY THE, THE INITIAL BUILDING IS OVER PARKED? DID THEY DO THE CALCULATION INCORRECTLY? IT'S GOT EXCESSIVE PARKING AT MY POINT.
IT, IT, IT'S, I, I, I DON'T KNOW.
WAIT, I, I REPRESENTED THE CA I REPRESENTED THE COUNTY IN THAT TRANSACTION.
THEY BOUGHT THAT BUILDING, UH, A COUPLE YEARS AGO.
AND THAT WAS THE EXISTING CONDITION.
UH, THE OWNER HAD PREVIOUSLY, OR THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD DEVELOPED IT TO BE OVER PARKED AT THAT HIGHER RATIO TO COMPETE IN THE OFFICE MARKET.
UM, SO THAT WAS JUST THE INHERITED CONDITION OF THE BUILDING.
IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY WENT AND BOUGHT EXTRA LAND AND DEVELOPED MORE PARKING, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT WAS THE EXISTING CONDITION.
WE WOULDN'T WANNA ASSUME THAT THAT'S TAXPAYER MONEY.
SO ALL OF OUR POCKETS, MS. DAVIS, ANSWER THAT, ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
UM, ALRIGHT, WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE FOR THE APPLICANTS? MR. NA, MR. CHAIRMAN? I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE A PARTICULAR QUESTION.
I JUST, UH, THINK IT WAS A VERY THOROUGH PRESENTATION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A POINT OF PRIVILEGE TO THANK DR.
WONG FOR HIS EXEMPLARY LEADERSHIP DURING THE RECENT PANDEMIC.
UH, MADAME BOARD SECRETARY, THERE WERE NO OTHER SPEAKERS REGISTERED ON ONLINE OR OTHERWISE? NO OTHER SPEAKERS, SIR.
I HAVE TO REMIND MYSELF SOMETIMES I DON'T RECOGNIZE THEM.
UM, THE APPLICANT CLEARLY UNDERSTANDS THAT IF THE CHANGE OF USE CHANGE, IF, IF THE USE CHANGES BASED ON WHAT'S SUBMITTED TODAY AND AGREE TO ON THE RECORD, THAT WOULD FORCE YOU BACK TO ANOTHER HEARING AS IT RELATES TO THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND SO FORTH.
UH, THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MS. DAVIS, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 27 ON APPLICATION OF KEVIN, UM, ALAMO.
AM I SAYING THAT CORRECTLY? I, AM I ON THE WRONG ONE? SORRY.
OH, WE, WE WENT OUT OF ORDER, DIDN'T WE? GOT IT.
[01:45:01]
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 28 ON APPLICATION OF HUNT COMPANIES REPRESENTED BY RANDY MOSS, RODNEY MOSS GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO PROVIDE 454 OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES TO THE OFF-STREET PARKING REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED, WHICH REQUIRES 547 OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY USE AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT INCREASE TRAFFIC HAZARDS OR INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
AND THE PARKING DEMAND GENERATED BY THE USE DOES NOT WARRANT THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES.
THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS GRANTED FOR A COMBINATION OF OFFICE MEDICAL LABORATORY AND COMMUNICATION EXCHANGE FACILITY.
I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND ATTEND THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF 93 SPACES SHALL AUTOMATICALLY AND IMMEDIATELY TERMINATE IF AND WHEN THE COMBINATION OF OFFICE MEDICAL LABORATORY AND COMMUNICATION EXCHANGE FACILITY IS CHANGED OR DISCONTINUED IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 23 28.
IS THERE SECOND, SIR? I'LL SECOND.
IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MS. HAYDEN.
UM, MS. DAVIS DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
UM, J JUST GOING BACK TO MR. NE'S COMMENTS, I THOUGHT IT WAS A REALLY THOUGHTFUL AND, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST THOUGHTFUL AND COMPLETE PRESENTATION, AND IT, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THE VARIANCE, AND I, I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO BE COVERED WITH ALL OF THE ANALYSIS THEY'VE DONE.
MS. HAYDEN, I AGREE WITH MS. DAVIS.
I BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT THIS IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UM, WITH THE CONTROLLED ACCESS MEDICAL FACILITY AND THE USES THAT ARE DESCRIBED HEREIN.
I THINK THAT, UM, THIS DOES NOT, UM, THIS, THIS IS DEMONSTRATED AND, AND IT IS A, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? MR. HOLCOMB? UH, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING STATED.
I JUST WANTED TO ADD ONE MORE POINT THAT THERE'S A CUSHION OF 75 SPACES ON THIS CALCULATION, WHICH IS A SIGNIFICANT PERCENTAGE, IS WHAT MAKES ME COMFORTABLE WITH THIS.
NORMALLY THEY WANT TO CUT IT TO THE BONE AND, AND THEY'RE SHOEHORNING EVERY LAST TINY SPACE THEY CAN HERE.
THIS IS A REASONABLE, MODERATE REQUEST.
UH, RESPECTFULLY, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S A CUSHION.
RESPECTFULLY, I, THAT FIFTH FLOOR EMPTY SPACE WORRIES ME THAT, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON WHAT WOULD GO IN AND WHAT MULTIPLE THEREOF, UH, I'M ALWAYS HESITANT ON PARKING EXCEPTIONS BECAUSE, UH, YOU AS A DEVELOPER, I'VE NEVER BEEN.
BUT IN REAL ESTATE, YOU NEVER WANNA SPEND MONEY FOR EMPTY SPACE.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S A DRAG ON THE PROFITABILITY OF A PROJECT.
AND SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, LET'S PUT COMPACT SPACES AND SO YOU CAN GET MORE SPACES IN THAT, A CHECK MARK AND THAT SORT OF THING.
SO I THINK THE CUSHION IS THE FACT THAT WE HAVE LANGUAGE IN THE MOTION THAT TALKS ABOUT THE THREE KEY USES.
THEN IF THOSE USES CHANGE, THAT THE USE, THE PERMISSION, UH, TERMINATES.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M COMMON ON.
I DO APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT YOU'VE MADE FROM A DEVELOPMENT, FROM A PURCHASE AND SALE AND FROM A USE ALL BEING HERE, UH, IN SUPPORT OF WHAT'S NECESSARY FOR DALLAS COUNTY.
AND I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.
BUT YOU, WE ALWAYS HAVE TO BE CAUTIOUS TO NOT BLEED INTO OFF, UH, TO BLEED INTO ON STREET PARKING OR OTHER PROPERTIES.
AND AGAIN, YOUR NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH OR THE EAST DOES NOT WANT TO PARK FOR YOU.
SO, AND YOU JUST DON'T WANT THAT COUNTY ISSUE.
SO, SO I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION AND, UM, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, WE'LL CALL THE VOTE MS. BOARD SECRETARY, MR. HAWK? AYE.
MR. CHAIR? YES, IT'S FIVE IN THE BDA 2 23 0 28 CASE.
THE BOARD GRANTS THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION BASED ON THE CONDITIONS PRESENT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GENTLEMEN.
WE'RE GONNA TAKE A SIX MINUTE BREAK.
WE'LL COME BACK INTO SESSION AT 3:10 PM SIX MINUTE BREAK.
UH, IT IS 3:04 PM ON THE 21ST OF, UM, MARCH.
AND WE'RE IN RECESS UNTIL 3:10 PM
[01:56:03]
IT[01:56:03]
IS 3:10 PM ON THE 21ST OF TURN, YOUR VIDEO BACK ON, GUYS.IT'S 3:10 PM ON THE 21ST OF, UH, MARCH.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS COME CALLED BACK TO ORDER PANEL A.
WE HAVE ONE REMAINING CASE TODAY TO BE HEARD IN OUR PUBLIC HEARING, AND THAT IS BDA 2 23 DASH 27 BDA 2 23 DASH 27 5 6 8 LIVE OAK STREET IS THE APPLICANT HERE.
THE APPLICANT WOULD COME FORWARD IF YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN OUR BOARD SECRETARY'S GONNA SWEAR YOU IN.
MY NAME IS KEVIN LAMO AND MY PROPERTY ADDRESS IS 56 0 8 LIVE OAK, DALLAS, TEXAS.
MS. BOARD SECRETARY, IF YOU WOULD GO AHEAD AND SWEAR IN, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? PLEASE ANSWER.
AND YOU PRONOUNCE YOUR LAST NAME, HOWEVER YOU PLEASE KNOW.
AMO, BUT ALAMO, ANY OF THINGS FINE? AMO, AMO, AMO.
YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, EARLIER, I BELIEVE IT WAS TALKED ABOUT HOW LONG WE REALLY OWN THIS PROPERTY AND IT HAS BEEN AN EXTENSIVE PERIOD OF TIME.
AND WE HAVE LOOKED FOR RESOLUTIONS IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT FACETS TO, UH, KIND OF RESOLVE IT.
SO WE PURCHASED THIS IN JULY 28TH, 2017, AND I DID WANT TO THANK THE BOARD TOO FOR, I, I REALLY DO APPRECIATE YOU GUYS, YOUR VOLUNTEERS, AND I THINK THAT'S FANTASTIC.
AND MANY OF THE STAFF MEMBERS I'VE MET YOU BEFORE AND I'VE WORKED A LOT WITH YOU AS WELL, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.
AND THEN MS. DAVIS, THANKS FOR ALMOST JUMPING AHEAD AND RUBBER STAMPING.
WE GOTTA BE A LITTLE BIT LIGHTHEARTED HERE FOR NO OTHER, WE'LL GET, UH, CRAZY.
BUT, UM, WHEN WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, UM, WE DID DO A FULL-BLOWN TITLE SEARCH.
UM, I AM A REAL ESTATE BROKER OF 32 YEARS.
UH, I KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
I, THERE WAS NOTHING IN OUR TITLE COMMITMENT.
THERE WAS NOTHING IN OUR TITLE POLICY.
UM, SO THAT WAS VERY MUCH A SURPRISE ONCE WE CLOSED ON IT AND STARTED, YOU KNOW, HAVING SOME DISCOVERY.
THERE WAS A, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS KIND OF THINKING BACK THROUGH AS FAR AS THE HARDSHIPS DID, DID KIND OF WANNA REALLY ADDRESS THOSE POINTS BECAUSE I DO TAKE THEM VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY.
UM, THIS WAS NOT SELF-IMPOSED.
THIS PROPERTY WAS ALREADY BUILT THIS WAY, THE WAY THAT IT IS NOW, FOR THE MOST PART, UM, AS OF TODAY.
WE DID NOT PUT PLANS IN WHAT APPEARS IN THE VERY BEGINNING.
WHEN I WAS DOWN YEARS AGO DOWN AT, UM, UH, MR. LONG'S OFFICE HERE VISITING ON IT, I COULD SEE THAT THE ARCHITECT ACTUALLY DID A ONE-TO-ONE RATIO OF THE PLANS.
SO INSTEAD OF IT BEING AN RPS THREE TO ONE, IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS ONE-TO-ONE.
SO IT HAD A LITTLE TEENY CLIPS OF A CORNER VERSUS ANYTHING ELSE.
SO, YOU KNOW, AS YOU'RE SITTING HERE GOING THROUGH ALL THIS, I COULD SEE HOW AND WHY THESE THINGS HAVE OCCURRED.
AND YES, I WOULD THINK IT IS AN AN EYESORE TO THE COMMUNITY.
I SAY I, MY WIFE AND I WANT TO CHANGE THAT.
UM, WE HAVE MET NUMEROUS TIMES WITH THE COMMUNITY.
UM, AT FIRST IT, I DIDN'T SAY I WOULD COMPLETELY GET IT, BUT
[02:00:01]
I GOT IT MORE OVER TIME.AND I THINK WE GAVE AND UNDERSTOOD MORE OVER TIME AND HOPED THAT WE WERE STRIVING TO MAKE SOMETHING BETTER.
UM, I DO BELIEVE THAT IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST.
WE DELETED, AS REQUESTED BY THE HOMEOWNERS, THE WINDOWS ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR OF THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS NOT A PERFECT SOUTHEAST WEST NORTH PROPERTY.
SO I'M GONNA KIND OF REFER TO IT AS THE REAR WHEN I SAID THAT THE REAR IS A SOUTHEAST EXPOSURE, UM, THERE WERE SIX PATIOS UPON ONE MEETING.
UH, THAT WAS ONE THING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP.
YOU KNOW, SO MANY DIFFERENT PATIOS.
WE DID NOT ORIGINALLY INTEND THIS TO BE OUR HOME.
WE DO INTEND THIS TO BE OUR HOME AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
NOT ONLY THAT, BUT WE HAVE ALSO RECENTLY SOLD AND CLOSED ON OUR HOME.
SO, UH, WE'RE VERY SERIOUS ABOUT THIS, UH, VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS.
WE DO WANT TO LIVE IN THIS AREA.
WE DO WANT TO LIVE IN THIS HOME.
UM, SO WE TOOK SIX PATIOS DOWN TO ONE.
UM, AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WASN'T ORIGINALLY REQUESTED, BUT WE DID FEEL LIKE IN TALKS THAT THERE WAS SO MANY PATIOS, THAT THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE COMMUNITY DID WANT.
THERE WAS AN OVERHANG THAT WAS PREVIOUS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PANEL C PREVIOUSLY GAVE AN EXCEPTION TO.
WE DON'T HAVE THAT AS A SETBACK ISSUE.
SO I KIND OF JUST WANT TO KEEP CONTINUING THAT.
WE'VE DONE A LOT OF THINGS TO MAKE THIS A LOT MORE PALATABLE FOR THE COMMUNITY.
UM, WE ARE NOT DOING THINGS TO TRY TO MAKE IT HARDER, AND WE'RE ALSO TRYING TO MAKE THINGS LOOK BETTER, BETTER FOR THE COMMUNITY, BETTER FOR OURSELVES AS WELL.
UM, I DON'T BELIEVE SUN EXPOSURE IS AN ISSUE.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, IN BEING A REAL ESTATE BROKER I CAN UNDERSTAND.
WELL, YOU KNOW, THIS BUILDING WAS SO TALL, IT ACTUALLY BLOCKED OUT ALL MY CHANCE FOR LIVABLE VEGETATION.
UM, I DON'T THINK THAT EXISTS ONE TODAY, BUT FOLKS, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND TOO, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT JUST LEAVING THE STRUCTURE THE WAY IT IS TODAY.
TODAY IT'S 36 FEET TALL FROM FRONT TO REAR.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THIS BEING IN CUT BACK STILL.
SO WE HAVE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK EVEN AT WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED.
UM, BOTH ADJOINING PROPERTIES ARE 36 FEET IN HEIGHT ALL THE WAY TO THE REAR, SO WE DON'T STAND OUT.
UM, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THOSE WERE GRANDFATHERED IN, AND AGAIN, WE DIDN'T SELF-IMPOSE THIS, SO WE'RE NOT, WE WEREN'T TRYING TO BUCK THE SYSTEM ON THAT.
UM, WE DO FEEL, AND HAVE FELT LIKE WHEN WE VISITED UPON THIS, AND WE CAME UP WITH A BETTER IDEA OF THIS AND NOT HAVING THIS THREE INVESTMENT PROPERTY.
SO WHEN WE FIRST BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, IT WAS TO BUY THE PROPERTY AND IT WOULD BE A FINANCIAL GAIN.
UM, HOWEVER, OVER TIME WE HAVE CHANGED OUR THOUGHT PROCESSES AND DECIDED TO MAKE THIS OUR HOME AND MOVE BACK TO DALLAS AND RESIDE THERE.
UM, I THINK THERE'S SEVERAL FACTORS THAT, UM, HELP THE CAUSE HERE.
I MEAN, THERE ARE A LOT OF REDUCED STRESSES BY CHANGING THIS BACK TO A SINGLE FAMILY INSTEAD OF A THREE, UM, SINGLE FAMILY CONDOMINIUM PROJECT.
UM, CLEARLY DENSITY IS ONE, THE LACK OF TRASH AND RECYCLE BINS.
AND I KNOW THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY BROUGHT UP, UM, BY THE JOINING OF PROPERTY OWNERS THAT, YOU KNOW, WHERE ARE THESE BINS GONNA BE ABLE TO BE STORED SO FORTH AND SO ON.
WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE SIX TRASH BINS AND SLASH RECYCLE BINS.
UM, THERE WAS A PARKING ISSUE, SO AGAIN, I, IT'S KIND OF GRAY TO ME LIKE HOW ALL THIS REALLY KIND OF WENT THROUGH AND GOT PERMITTED AND APPROVED.
AND I'M NOT HERE TO REALLY DEBATE THAT PART.
THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.
BUT THE PARKING IN THE FRONT, UM, WAS AN ISSUE AND THAT WAS SOMETHING I WAS TOLD THAT WE HAD TO MODIFY.
HOWEVER, WITH IT BEING SINGLE FAMILY, SINGLE DWELLING, THERE REALLY IS NOT THAT ISSUE OR BURDEN ON THE COMMUNITY, PARKING ON THE STREET AND SO FORTH AND SO ON.
I ALSO THINK IT WILL BE A BETTER NOISE CONTROL.
UH, SOMETIMES MY WIFE GETS A LITTLE ROWDY, BUT NO, NOT REALLY.
UM, IT'S JUST THE TWO, TWO OF US.
WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE THREE DIFFERENT FAMILIES LIVING AT THAT PROPERTY.
UM, ALSO POINTED THIS OUT THAT PREVIOUS MEETINGS WITH HOME WITH THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE COMMUNITY, THAT WE'LL ALSO BE LESS TRANSITIONAL.
WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO, UM, MOVE UPTOWN THE NEXT MONTH OR YEAR.
WE RESIDED IN OUR LAST COMMUNITY,
[02:05:01]
UM, FOR 16 YEARS.UH, AESTHETICALLY WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT HOW TO IMPROVE THIS.
UM, THE PLANS THAT WERE APPROVED PREVIOUSLY EVEN WENT UP HIGHER THAN 36 FEET AND WENT UP WITH LIKE, LIKE A DORM OR FLAT, KIND OF LIKE A COMMERCIAL LOOKING DWELLING.
WE HAVE, UH, MADE THIS WHERE IT'S A PITCH ROOF FROM LEFT TO RIGHT AND AS IT GOES BACK TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY THAT IT DOES THE SAME THING.
I DO HAVE ALL THESE ON A FLOPPY DRIVE THAT I CAN POINT OUT AS WELL TO YOU GUYS AS, AS I WAS TOLD I COULD DO.
UM, YOU, YOU'RE AT EIGHT MINUTES OF THE FIVE MINUTES OF WHICH I'M GONNA EXTEND AT 10, BUT PROBABLY GONNA STOP AT 10.
SO, UM, UH, BUT WE, WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU.
UH, BUT WE ALSO WANT TO HEAR, KNOW, WE WANT TO HEAR ALL SIDES.
SO UNDERSTAND, I I WILL TRY TO BE AS QUICKLY AS QUICK AS I CAN.
I'M GETTING PRETTY FAR ALONG, SO IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU WANT TO GIVE US, YOU SHOULD GIVE THAT TO OUR BOARD SECRETARY.
UM, NOW YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S ON A, THAT'S ON A PIN DRIVE.
SO DO WE TAKE THAT, DO WE TAKE INFORMATION ON THUMB DRIVES? I DON'T THINK WE DO.
WHAT'S, WHAT'S OUR PROTOCOL? YEAH.
SO MARY, WOULD HE PUT IT IN HIS COMPUTER AND THEN SHARE HIS SCREENS THAT WHAT YOU'D RECOMMEND OR WHAT'S THE BEST WAY? OKAY, THANK YOU.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'D LIKE FOR YOUR LAST I'LL KEEP MOVING ALONG.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE MAXING OUR TIME HERE.
UM, WELL, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE AT THE OUTER BOUNDARIES NOW.
UM, SO, UM, YOU WANNA HOLD FOR A SECOND AND THEN WE'LL, OH YEAH.
LET THIS BE YOUR LAST COUPLE MINUTES HERE AND THEN WE NEED TO HAVE CLOSURE.
JUST SO YOU KNOW, OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE CURRENTLY STATE THREE MINUTES.
BUT THE BOARD HAS THE ABILITY TO EXTEND THAT.
WE'RE SWITCHING TO FIVE MINUTES MOMENTARILY IN THE NEXT MONTH ONCE THE COUNCIL APPROVE OUR, OUR TIME.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S NORMALLY THREE MINUTES OF SPEAKING, SO I UNDERSTAND.
WELL, WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE HEAR ALL SIDES, SO, OKAY.
MS. BRIDGES IS NOT ABLE TO OPEN UP THE FILE THAT HE HAS PROVIDED ON HIS THUMB DRIVE.
HE'S NOT COMPATIBLE WITH WHATEVER SOFTWARE WE HAVE TO OPEN IT.
THE ONLY WAY HE WOULD BE ABLE TO PRESENT IS IF HE OPENED IT UP ON HIS OWN DEVICE AND WE ALLOWED HIM TO SHARE HIS SCREEN.
THANK YOU FOR EVERYONE IN THE AUDIENCE'S PATIENCE.
EVERYONE WILL GIVE EQUAL TIME.
WE'RE GETTING THIS TO LOAD IN HERE.
UM, BARRY, CAN YOU HELP THEM HELP YOU? I HAD PREVIOUSLY MET AS WELL AFTER ONE OF OUR MEETINGS WITH THE COMMUNITY AND WENT DOWN, HOLD ON A SECOND.
BECAUSE IF YOU SPEAK, UH, THAT GOES AGAINST YOUR REMAIN TWO MINUTES.
SO I'M GIVING YOU TIME FOR YOUR PRESENTATION, OTHERWISE WE NO, THAT'S YOUR PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE OR SOMETHING.
[02:10:02]
THAT'S, THAT'S NOT USB.ANY, ANY LUCK, MARY OR NO? OH, DOESN'T HAVE WEBEX.
SO SIR, YOU HAVE, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU, DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE CAN SEE WHAT YOU WANT US TO SEE.
TELL US WHAT YOU WANTED US TO SEE.
AND WE'LL LISTEN TO WHAT YOU WANTED US TO SEE OR WHATEVER YOU'D LIKE TO IN YOUR REMAINING MINUTE AND A HALF.
IS THAT YOU'RE UP AT, YOU'RE UP TO ALMOST 11 PLUS MINUTES.
I MET ON MARCH 28TH WITH CHARLES TREBLE.
HE ASKED, HE HE WAS GOING TO REVIEW EVERYTHING BEFORE I TRIED GOING BACK TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTERS PREVIOUSLY AND VISITING WITH HIM.
WHAT DATE DID YOU SAY? YOU SAID MARCH 28TH, 2000.
UM, AFTER REVIEWING EVERYTHING, HE LOOKED AT ME AND HE SAID, IF YOU WILL STAY BELOW 36 FEET, YOU DO NOT NEED TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTERS WITH US, AND YOU WOULD HAVE MY SUPPORT.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS NO LONGER IN THAT CAPACITY.
ROSANNA, I'M SAY HER LAST NAME WRONG, SAVVI, UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT.
SHE ACTUALLY WELCOMED ME DOWN TO THE CITY AND TRIED TO RESOLVE CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES.
BUT, UM, I TOLD HER THAT I WAS WANTING TO GET PERMITS AND SUCH AND SHE WALKED ME AROUND ROOM TO ROOM UNTIL FINALLY WE, UM, WERE ABLE TO GET SOME ASSISTANCE AND SOME HELP, UM, FILLED EVERYTHING OUT COMPLETELY.
AND, AND AGAIN, AS I GET IT, THIS IS VERY COMPLEX.
THIS IS NOT YOUR EASY, NORMAL RUN OF THE MILL KIND OF PERMIT.
WELL, AND TO BE VERY CLEAR, SIR, RESPECTFULLY, A PROFESSIONAL STAFF PERSON CAN'T WAVE A WAND AND SAY, SURE, YOU CAN DO YOUR 36 FEET WHEN THE CODE SAYS OTHERWISE.
UH, THEY CAN SAY THAT THEY MAY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD, BUT THE CODE IS THE CODE AND THEY'RE NOT EVER IN A POSITION THAT THEY CAN WAVE WHAT THE CODE SAYS.
THAT'S HOW THE COUNCIL, CITY COUNCIL'S EMPOWERED THE BOARD TO DO SO.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS OR WAS NOT CONVEYED OR NOT CONVEYED BY MR. TRAMEL, WHETHER HE WAS HERE, THERE OR NOT, THAT SORT OF THING.
UH, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT I'M JUST, THEY, THEY PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL ADVICE AND FEEDBACK TO TAXPAYERS, APPLICANTS AND ALSO AS, AS, AS THE BOARD A AGREE.
AND SO HE ADVISED ME NOT TO DO THAT.
SO PLANS WERE RESUBMITTED, UM, MR. RE OLIS AND AT THE CITY HAD WORKED WITH HIM AND WILLIE FRANKLIN, AND EVERYONE KNEW WHEN THIS WAS RE THE TIME IS DONE AGAIN IN DECEMBER.
PERMITS WERE APPROVED THE END OF DECEMBER AND ONLY MID-JANUARY DID I GET A PHONE CALL THAT INVITED ME BACK DOWN TO THE CITY.
AND I SAID, IS EVERYTHING ALL RIGHT? YES, EVERYTHING IS ALL RIGHT, BUT THEY'RE JUST SO HIGHLY SENSITIVE AND POLITICAL THAT WE NEED YOU TO COME BACK DOWN AND VISIT.
I WENT BACK DOWN AND THEN, UH, IN THAT MEETING IT WAS TURNED OVER TO, UH, UH, MRS. DUNN AND, AND MR. FRANKLIN AND I WAS EXPLAINED THAT I HAD TO GO BACK AND AS UNFORTUNATE IT WAS START ALL OVER AND GET A VARIANCE.
COULDN'T MOVE THIS PROPERTY TO A SINGLE FAMILY TO GET IT REZONED BECAUSE IF YOU DID THAT, THEN THERE WOULD BE OTHER CHALLENGES, UM, TECHNICALLY MIGHT EVEN BE ABLE TO LEAVE THE BUILDING THE WAY THAT IT CURRENTLY IS, UM, FROM MY RESEARCH.
AND, UM, SINCE THEN, SINCE WE DID MOVE VERY QUICKLY, WE REMOVED ELECTRICAL PLUMBING, H V A C FRAMING, STARTED TAKING FRAMING DOWN FROM THE EXTERIOR.
AND THEN ONLY THEN WAS I TOLD, OH, WELL YOU COULD HAVE ACTUALLY GONE BACK AND BUILT THEM AS THREE UNITS AGAIN.
AND I'M LIKE, WELL, THAT'S GREAT.
WE JUST SPENT $90,000 WRECKING ALL THAT OUT.
UM, SOME OF THE COMMUNITY WANTED SOME THINGS, UM, ADDED, WHICH WE WERE AGREEABLE TO DO EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE PROPERTY AND THE REAR, EITHER THAT OR MASONARY.
WE AGREED TO DROP THE LINE EVEN FURTHER BELOW EIGHT FEET.
AND WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, IF YOU LOOKED AT A SURVEY, WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY EVERYONE, THE PRIOR SURVEY ACTUALLY OVERSTEPPED THE LINE AND WE INFRACTED IT BACK TO EVEN TO BE MORE CONSERVATIVE.
SO I'M JUST ASKING FOR, YOU KNOW, YOUR CONSIDERATION ON THIS AND I KNOW IT'S CHALLENGING.
UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN FAVOR?
[02:15:02]
OKAY, SO WHAT SPEAKERS DO YOU HAVE? THESE ARE MR. LAW SPEAKERS.SPEAKING IN FAVOR, MR. GARY LAWLER? YES.
YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, SIR.
MY NAME IS GARY LAWLER, UH, LIVE IN THE M MC OAKS, UH, CONDOMINIUM ADJACENT TO 50 56 0 8 AT 11 56 20.
LIVE OAK NUMBER 2 0 2 DALLAS 75 2 6 LAWLER, L A W L E R? YES, SIR.
I'M ALSO A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE M MC OAKS CONDOM.
IF YOU WOULD LET OUR BOARD SECRETARY SWEAR YOU IN.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN THE, IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF GUSMAN? PLEASE ANSWER.
UH, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION ON THE BASIS OF A, OF A DATE RESTRICTION THAT THE OWNERS AND MC OAKS HAVE COME IN INTO, UH, AGREEMENT ON.
IS THAT CORRECT?
ONE IS THAT, UH, THE USE COULD BE IS RESTRICTED TO SINGLE FAMILY USE, UH, BY DE RESTRICTIONS SO THAT EVEN IF THEY SOLD THE PROPERTY, IT COULDN'T GO BACK TO MULTIFAMILY USES.
WE HAVE TREES THAT UP ORIGINATED ON OUR PROPERTY THAT GO ACROSS THE PROPERTY LINE, ACROSS THE FENCE AND THEIR PROPERTY.
UH, WE, THOSE TREES ARE IMPORTANT TO US.
THEY PROVIDE SCREENING SO THAT WE CAN'T SEE INTO THEIR HOME, SO THEY CAN'T SEE INTO OURS.
IT ALSO PROVIDES SHADE IN THE SUMMERTIME TO KEEP OUR AIR CONDITIONING COSTS DOWN AND ADDS TO THE ATTRACTION OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, HE'S AGREED TO, UH, A 10 FOOT AREA FROM THE FENCE LINE TO THE, TOWARD HIS, ONTO HIS PROPERTY WHERE HE WOULD NOT CUT DOWN ANY TREES OR ANY LIMBS UNLESS THEY WERE DEAD.
THE THIRD UNIT IS, UH, THIRD ITEM IS, UH, THE SCREENING FENCE.
UH, HE'S AGREED TO A LARGER FENCE THAT WOULD ADD ADDITIONAL SCREENING FOR OUR, FOR OUR PATIENTS ON OUR, UH, RESIDENCE ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
UM, SEE WE HAVE 20 UNITS IN OUR, IN OUR CONDOMINIUM, AND NINE OF THOSE, UH, ARE DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM HIS PROPERTY.
SO THE SCREENING AND THE REDUCTION OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN WHICH HOME, UH, USE, WHICH COULD, UH, HOPEFULLY CUT DOWN A LOT OF NOISE AND SO FORTH, IS VERY IMPORTANT TO, UH, ALMOST HALF OF OUR REFERENCE.
WE ALSO, HE MENTIONED THE TRASH CARTS.
THE, THERE WAS A BIG ISSUE FOR US ON LIVE OAK, THE TRASH CARTS, THE THREE TRASH CARTS, AND THE THREE RECYCLING CARTS THAT WOULD'VE BEEN CAUSED BY THE THREE CONDOMINIUM UNITS.
THERE'S NO PLACE TO PUT THE CARTS EXCEPT ON THE SIDEWALK ITSELF.
SO IF YOU'RE A PEDESTRIAN, IF YOU'RE ON THE CRUTCHES OR IN A WHEELCHAIR OR A WALKER OR TRICYCLE OR ANYTHING, YOU HAVE TO STEP OUT ONTO LIVE OAK TO GO AROUND THOSE TRASH CARTS FROM PICKUP DAY AND TRY CUTTING THAT DOWN FROM SIX TO TWO IS, UH, A VERY SAFE, UH, MUCH SAFER.
WE, UH, INVITED, UH, THREE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE DIRECTLY BEHIND THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE, UH, MOST AFFECTED TO JOIN US IN OUR DE RESTRICTIONS AND THEY CHOSE NOT TO.
SO THAT'S, I THINK EVERYTHING I HAVE TO SAY.
I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE QUESTIONS AT THE, AT THE END OF EVERYONE'S VERY GOOD COMMENTS.
WHAT OTHER SPEAKERS HAVE REGISTERED? MS. BOARD? SECRETARY.
SO, UM, GO AHEAD AND CALL, CALL THE FIRST OPPOSITION SPEAKER, MR. CAR.
I'M SORRY, SIR, IF YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
LARRY OFFIT, O F F U T T 60 38 BRYAN, B R Y A N, PARKWAY, DALLAS, 75 2 6.
AND I DO SWEAR AND AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH.
IS THAT SUFFICIENT? IS THAT JUST ONE SECOND.
IS THAT SUFFICIENT OR YOU NEED TO DO THE GO AHEAD.
SHE WANTS YOU, HE WANTS YOU TO DO THE, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? PLEASE ANSWER.
WOULD YOU GIVE ME YOUR ADDRESS AGAIN, SIR? 60 38 BRYAN PARKWAY.
UH, FIRST THANK YOU GUYS FOR SERVING.
I UNDERSTAND THE TIME, NOT JUST IN THIS BUILDING, BUT WHAT YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH WHEN YOU GET YOUR PACKETS OVER THE WEEKEND TO SPEND TIME ON AND STAFF.
THANK YOU AS ALWAYS, CUZ ENOUGH PEOPLE DON'T SAY THAT TO YOU.
I HAVE, UM, THIS IS MY THIRD VISIT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS
[02:20:01]
ON THIS PROPERTY.UH, THE FIRST ONE BACK IN 17, UH, ALL RESPONSES WERE NEGATIVE.
THE, UH, MAYBE THAT WAS 16, THE SECOND ONE IN 17.
ALL OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, NEIGHBORS, INCLUDING THE SWISS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT ASSOCIATIONS WERE POSITIVE IN FAVOR OF THAT EXCEPTION.
AND THEY WERE, BECAUSE THE OWNER AT THAT TIME HAD WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH US TO DO CERTAIN THINGS.
AND, AND INDEED WE AGREED TO GIVE UP SOME THINGS THAT WERE OUR RIGHTS.
BUT IN ORDER TO MOVE THINGS ALONG, UM, I TAKE A LITTLE EXCEPTION TO, OR AS ONE OF YOU POINTED OUT, DON'T BLAME IT ON THE CONTRACTOR.
UH, CONTRACTOR WAS SUPPOSED TO GET THE PERMIT.
CONTRACTOR WAS SUPPOSED TO DO THIS.
CONTRACTOR WAS SUPPOSED TO DO THAT.
UH, IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE A, UH, PROFESSIONAL, UH, REAL ESTATE PERSON WHO DID NOT KNOW WHEN HE WAS BUYING A THREE STORY, UH, FINISHED OUT BUILDING EXCEPT FOR THE OUTSIDE WITH ALL THE PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL IN IT, THAT HE WAS PAYING LOT VALUE THAT THAT DIDN'T RAISE A RED FLAG.
UH, SO I THINK THAT PERHAPS THERE COULD HAVE BEEN SOME KNOWLEDGE THERE.
I THINK OUR FIRST MEETING IS NEIGHBORHOOD WAS IN, UH, UH, EITHER 17 OR 18, UH, WITH THE APPLICANT.
UH, WHEN HE BROUGHT, UM, HIS, UM, FRIEND AND FROM WHO WAS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF EITHER RICHARDSON OR, UH, FRISCO TO TELL US HOW LUCKY WE WERE AS RESIDENTS TO HAVE HIM COMING IN AND JUST LET HIM DO WHAT HE WANTED TO DO AS OPPOSED TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN ORDERED TO DO.
UM, OBVIOUSLY WE DIDN'T AGREE WITH THAT.
UM, WE DID HAVE A MEETING AS RECENTLY AS FOUR WEEKS AGO ON THE 18TH, BUT ONE OF THE REASONS YOU GOT SO FEW RESPONSES, UH, THIS WEEK IS BECAUSE, ONE, IT'S SPRING BREAK, BUT TWO AT THAT MEETING, UH, THAT THE HISTORIC ALRIDGE HOUSE MUSEUM HOME HOSTED FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, ON THE, THE 18TH OF LAST MONTH WITH ABOUT 40, 50 PEOPLE ATTENDED, THE APPLICANT AGREED THAT HE WOULD RESUBMIT OR COME BACK IN WITH WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE NOLAN PLAN, WHICH WAS THE PLAN THAT WE AGREED TO BACK IN 17.
UM, WE DID NOT KNOW THAT HE WAS NOT GOING TO DO THAT UNTIL, I THINK I GOT THE INFORMATION ON EITHER THURSDAY OR FRIDAY OF THIS WEEK.
AND THEN IT WAS COMING IN WITH AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT PLAN THAN WHAT'S EVEN ON PRESENTED TO YOU.
UH, SO WE REALLY HAVE NO CLUE WHAT'S BEING ASKED FOR.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THE 200 FOOT RULE, IT'S IMPORTANT.
ON THE OTHER HAND, THIS IMPACTS THE ENTIRE SWISS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO IT IS MORE THAN JUST A, OH, THERE'S A NEIGHBORHOOD, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES BEHIND THEM.
UM, BY THE WAY, THIS PLACE CAN'T BE LEFT AS IS IN TERMS OF REMOVING S OR WHATEVER THE ORIGINAL THING WAS STOPPED BECAUSE IT WAS BUILT OUT OF CODE AND NOT EVEN BUILT TO THE PLANS THAT WERE SUBMITTED CURRENTLY.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND STAFF COULD PROBABLY EDIFY YOU, AS I RECALL, NOT ONLY ARE CURRENT THE BUILDING PERMITS BEEN STOPPED, ORDERED, NOT NECESSARILY JUST CAUSE OF THE SETBACK, BUT IT IS ALSO NOT STILL IN COMPLIANT WITH OTHER PIECES OF THE CODE THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN FIXED BACK IN 17 AND 18.
UH, WHAT IS YOUR LAST NAME AGAIN? O O F F U T T O F F U T T AS THE AIR FORCE BASE.
WELL, I'LL SALUTE YOU THERE ALL WHEN YOU SAID SIR, YOU'D COME BACK A QUICK SECOND.
I I'M SURE THERE'LL BE MORE QUESTIONS COMING, BUT I'M, I'M, WHEN I TOOK NOTES, YOU SAID THE NOLAN PLAN.
AND WOULD YOU SPELL THAT WE REFER, CAN YOU SPELL THAT? O L A N N O L O A N, NOLAN, N O L A N.
THE NOLAN PLAN N WE REFER TO IT AS THE NOLAN PLAN ONLY BECAUSE THAT WAS THE BUILDER CONTRACTOR THAT WAS WORKING, UM,
[02:25:01]
WITH THE OWNER TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE AND WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WITH, TO, FOR US TO AGREE TO CERTAIN, UM, ADJUSTMENTS TO LET THEM MOVE AHEAD WITH THE PROJECT.UM, THAT, AND THAT WAS WHEN IT, OF COURSE, WAS GONNA BE USED AS CONDOS.
UM, IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND, WHILE THE CURRENT REQUEST HAS TO DO WITH UTILIZING AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT, THE ZONING IS MULTI-FAMILY.
SO THAT'S JUST A CURRENT USE THAT CAN GO BACK TO MULTI-FAMILY THE DAY AFTER THEY MOVED IN.
BOARD SECRETARY, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? UM, MR. CHAIR? I DID HAVE, YES, A QUESTION FOR THAT SPEAKER.
I, I'M, I'M DECIDED TO, TO LOAD THE DECK FIRST.
SO, BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA DO QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, THEN THE OPPOSITE.
I GIVEN THAT WE HAD OPPOSITION HERE, I WANTED US TO HEAR BOTH SIDES AND THEN ASK QUESTIONS FOR SURE.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? YES, SIR.
WE HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER PLEASE.
IF YOU COME FORWARD, SIR, AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN OUR BOARD SECRETARY'S GONNA SWEAR YOU IN.
YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M BILL HEATHCOTT.
I CURRENTLY RESIDE AT 55 0 7 BRIAN STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS 75,206.
AND YOUR NAME AGAIN? I APOLOGIZE.
ALL RIGHT, SIR, IF YOU BE SWORN IN BY OUR BOARD SECRETARY, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS? PLEASE ANSWER.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN AND BOARD.
AND AGAIN, THANK YOU'ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE AND APPRECIATE YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE ME THE CHANCE TO SPEAK UP UNTIL, PARDON ME, UP UNTIL AUGUST OF 22 FROM 17, UH, FEBRUARY OF 17 TO AUGUST OF 22.
I LIVED AT 60 15 BRIAN PARKWAY, WHICH IS JUST RIGHT THREE HOUSES BEHIND, UH, THE CURRENT LIVE OAK PROPERTY.
UM, WE JUST MOVED SEVEN HOUSES AWAY TO THE PROPERTY AT BRIAN STREET IN AUGUST.
SO WE'RE STILL VERY, UH, VERY INTERESTED AND VERY CONCERNED AND VERY, UH, MUCH PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AFTER, AFTER MUCH FRUSTRATION LOOKING AT OUR BEDROOM FOR MANY YEARS, UM, AT THE, AT THE GREEN BOX THAT Y'ALL SAW IN THE PICTURES IN THE HEARING THIS MORNING, UM, AND WHAT APPEARED TO BE A NOTIFICATION FROM THE CITY TO EITHER DEMOLISH AND OR MOVE FORWARD WITHIN A TIMELY FASHION.
UM, THE CURRENT OWNERS REQUESTED A MEETING WITH A NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO WE MET, UH, AND THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE MET THE CURRENT OWNERS, AND THERE APPEARED TO BE AND WHAT DATE WAS THAT? I, I DON'T RECALL.
I, I AND I, AND I'M, I WOULD JUST BE GUESSING IT WAS, IT WAS, THIS WAS IN, THIS WAS IN 20, UM, AND, AND IT APPEARED THAT THERE WAS JUST, IT WAS A NEGOTIATION MEETING.
IT WAS, AND, AND THERE WAS A LOT OF FRUSTRATION FROM THE NEIGHBORS AND, AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS WERE REALLY TRYING AS, AS MR. LAWLER, UH, EVIDENCED YOU, UH, ANOTHER NEIGHBOR, UH, JUST BEFORE ME.
AND, AND, AND, UH, IN AGREEMENT WITH THE, WITH THE VARIANCE AND, AND OTHER NEIGHBORS WERE, WERE TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT CAN WE DO TO MAKE THIS MOVE FORWARD? THEY WERE JUST SICK AND TIRED OF OBVIOUSLY LOOKING AT THIS GREEN BOX AND, YOU KNOW, TAKE OUT WINDOWS SO THEY CAN'T LOOK IN THE BACKYARD, TAKE OUT BALCONIES, MOVE FENCES, AND, AND ANYWAY, THE REAL, THE REAL NEED FOR THE VARIANCE JUST WASN'T EXPRESSED.
UM, IT WAS VERY CLEAR THAT THE PROPERTY COULD BE DEVELOPED WITHOUT THE VARIANCE THAT THERE WAS NO NEED IN THE PLANS FOR THE VARIANCE.
THERE WAS A NEED FOR AN ELEVATOR, BUT THE ELEVATOR COULD BE PUT IN THE PROPERTY WITHOUT THE VARIANCE.
SO IN THAT MEETING, MY WIFE AND I LET IT BE KNOWN THAT WE WEREN'T GONNA SUPPORT THE VARIANCE, UM, ONLY BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT TO MISLEAD THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR OUR NEIGHBORS OR, OR THE CURRENT OWNERS THAT, UM, THAT WE WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF AND NOT SUPPORT THEM WITH, YOU KNOW, TO THE BOARD.
IT, IT SEEMED TO JUST DIE AGAIN.
[02:30:01]
THE STRUCTURE JUST SAT THERE.UM, SO THERE WAS ANOTHER MEETING CALLED JUST THE ONE, MR. OFFIT MENTIONED, UH, FOUR WEEKS AGO.
AND AGAIN, THERE WAS, UH, ANOTHER NEGOTIATION SESSION AND, AND WE MADE IT VERY CLEAR MY, MY WIFE AND I AND OTHERS IN THIS MEETING, CUZ MANY OTHERS WERE, UH, EXTREMELY TIRED BY THIS TIME.
YOU CAN BUILD MULTI-FAMILY, YOU CAN BUILD SINGLE FAMILY, YOU CAN BUILD WHATEVER YOU WANT, JUST BUILD TO THE CODE.
YOU'VE GOT A STRUCTURE THERE THAT YOU HAVE TO TAKE THE TOP OFF OF, PERIOD.
WHEN YOU TAKE THE TOP OFF OF IT, MAKE IT TO THE CODE.
YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE, YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF ROOM.
THAT'S ALL, THAT'S ALL WE WANT.
WE DON'T CARE HOW MANY BALCONIES YOU HAVE.
WE DON'T CARE HOW MANY GARAGED DOORS YOU HAVE.
WE DON'T CARE WHERE YOUR GARBAGE CANS GO, BUILD THE STRUCTURE TO THE CODE.
UM, ANYWAY, UH, I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN THE END, THE R P S IS THERE FOR A REASON.
UM, AND IT, IT PROTECTS OUR PROPERTIES FROM ENVIRONMENTAL, FROM, UM, AND NOISE INTRUSION.
AND AS MR. OFFIT B*****N, THE, THE PROPERTIES ON BRYAN PARKWAY AND LA VISTA AND LIVE OAK, ALL BUT OUR HISTORIC PROPERTIES, WE CAN'T GO CHANGE OUR BACKYARDS.
WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT.
WE REALLY HAVE TO PROTECT THOSE PROPERTIES FOR WHAT GOES IN BEHIND THEM IN THE ALLEYS.
AND, YOU KNOW, A LOT, SOME OF THOSE PROPERTIES, THEIR GRANDFATHERED IN, THEY WERE THERE LONG BEFORE AN RPS WAS ESTABLISHED.
AND THAT IS, THAT'S, WE BOUGHT IT THAT WAY AND THAT IS WHAT IT IS.
AND WE'RE NOT HERE ARGUING ABOUT THAT TODAY.
BUT FOR THOSE THAT ARE THERE NOW TO CHANGE, TO GIVE THEM VARIANCES AND TO ALLOW THAT TO CHANGE JUST SETS UP FOR MORE DISRUPTION IN THESE ENVIRONMENTAL LIGHT AND NOISE INTRUSIONS.
AND I THINK IT SETS UP A POOR PRECEDENT FOR THE HISTORIC BOUNDARIES THAT SIMILAR ZONE PROPERTIES HAVE ALL IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
THANK Y'ALL VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR COMING HERE AND GIVING US YOUR FEEDBACK.
ANY OTHER REGISTERED SPEAKERS? NO, THOSE SPEAKERS REGISTERED.
SO I ELECTED IN THIS SITUATION TO HEAR FROM ALL FROM THE THO FROM THE APPLICANT, FROM A SUPPORTER, FROM OPPOSITION IN OUR PACKET.
WE HAVE EMAILS THAT WERE GIVEN TO US THIS MORNING.
UM, WHAT QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE FOR THE APPLICANTS? YES, GO AHEAD.
DID YOU ASK THE STAFF TO LOOK UP THESE ADDRESSES? UH, THAT'S IMPORTANT.
UM, MS. DAVIS IS FOLLOWING UP ON A QUESTION I HAD EARLIER TODAY WITH MS. WILLIAMS AND THAT WAS THE, WE WERE GIVEN EMAILS, BUT THE ADDRESSES WERE REDACTED.
IS THERE ANY WAY OF GETTING ADDRESSES ON THESE TO KNOW WERE THERE THOSE THAT WROTE TO US VIA THE STAFF, WE COULD HAVE ADDRESSES.
SO IF WE CAN SEE IF THEY'RE WITHIN THE 200 FEET OF NOTIFICATION AREA OR IF THEY'RE OUTSIDE OR IF THEY'RE DALLAS OR IF THEY'RE WHERE, I DON'T KNOW HOW EASY THAT WOULD BE OR NOT.
I'M GONNA SAY THAT I, I THINK IT'S, UH, I MEAN, SPEAKING AS ONE BOARD MEMBER, THAT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT TO ME IN MAKING MY DECISION OKAY.
TO KNOW WHERE THESE, UM, UM, NEIGHBORS ARE LOCATED.
MS. DUNN, THE ADDRESSES WERE PROVIDED ON THE PRESENTATION DURING THE BRIEFING AND WE ARE GONNA WANT THAT BRIEFING BACK UP TO SHOW, BECAUSE I THINK WHAT WE'RE WANTING TO SEE, INCLUDING THESE EMAILS THAT WE GOT JUST THIS MORNING, I'M, I'M PRETTY SURE OKAY, SO IF YOU COULD BRING THAT UP.
I'M NOT ALLOWED TO LOG IN BECAUSE I AM MAKING THE WHOLE PRESENTATION.
SO HOW DO, WHO GETS TO LOG IN? WE'RE GONNA GO AND SEE OUR REVIEW DRIVE AND PULL IT FROM ME.
SO WHILE YOU'RE, SO IF YOU COULD WORK ON THAT ONE, CUZ I THINK THAT'S A RELEVANT QUESTION FOR BOARD'S CONSUMPTION.
UM, AND AGAIN, OUR CODE SAYS THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO NOTIFY THAT DOES NOT BIND THE BOARD'S DECISION.
IT INFORMS THE BOARD, BUT IT'S A, IT'S A RELEVANT DECISION.
SO I HAVE MANY QUESTIONS, BUT I'M GONNA WAIT.
SO I, WHO ALL MS. HAYDEN, MS. DAVIS, MR. HOLCOMB.
SO WE'RE GONNA START WITH MS. HAYDEN.
IS THIS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY, THIS FOR THE APPLICANT.
IF YOU'D COME UP, MR. ALAMO, PLEASE.
WE RECEIVED A SEVERAL LETTERS OF OPPOSITION AND IT, THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF CONFUSION THAT
[02:35:01]
I'VE NOTICED ABOUT THE LETTERS QUESTIONING, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THE CURRENT PLANS AND, AND THE CITY SHOWS SOMETHING AND THE APPLICANT SHOWS SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF CONFUSION THERE.CAN YOU, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? YES.
UH, AND I'M, I'M GLAD THAT WAS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE THINGS I HAD ANOTHER MINUTE I REALLY WANTED TO KIND OF DO.
SO THE PLANS THAT WE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY, UM, HAD THE NINE FOOT NINE INCH VARIANCE.
WE SHARED THE WHOLE ENTIRE SET OF PRINTS, OUR PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH THE ENTIRE GROUP.
SO BEFORE WE HAD THAT MEETING, WE EMAILED THAT INFORMATION OUT TO ALL OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.
SO IS THIS THE MEETING THAT I THINK MR. OFFIT REFERRED TO AS THE FEBRUARY 18TH MEETING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE SAYING THAT THIS, THE PLANS THAT WERE SHARED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON FEBRUARY 18TH ARE THE SAME, EVERYTHING WAS THE SAME AS WHAT WAS SENT TO THE CITY? CORRECT.
THE OTHER SET OF PRINTS THAT I HAVE HERE, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID TALK ABOUT AT THE MEETING AS IT CONCLUDED, WAS THAT WE WERE WILLING TO GO BELOW EIGHT FOOT, WHICH WAS BELOW THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF SEVEN FEET, NINE INCHES, SEVEN FEET, 10 INCHES AND A QUARTER.
UM, WHICH IS WHAT I HAD ON THE THUMB DRIVE, WHICH WAS WHAT I WAS TOLD TO BRING TODAY.
AND I APOLOGIZE, I SHOULD HAVE NOT LISTENED, I SHOULD HAVE JUST PRINTED THEM.
BUT, UH, SO YOU HAD A DIFFERENT PLAN THAN WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED TO THE CITY? I HAD SOMETHING THAT WE WERE REQUESTING LESS THAN, SO THAT'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT? CORRECT.
BUT THAT WAS BASED ON, THE REASON FOR THAT WAS THE QUESTION WAS ASKED AND THEN PAUL RIDLEY, I BELIEVE ASKED THE SAME QUESTION TO THE GROUP IS IF IT WAS REDUCED TO WHAT IT WAS PREVIOUSLY BY THIS NOLAN PLAN, WHICH IS KIND OF INTERESTING BECAUSE THE NOLAN PLAN, THE MEASUREMENT IS WRONG.
SO IF WE ACTUALLY USED THE QUOTE UNQUOTE NOLAN PLAN, IT ACTUALLY WOULD'VE ACTUALLY BENEFITED US.
AND I'M BEING VERY UPFRONT ABOUT THAT, SAYING IT'S WRONG.
HE SHOWS 20 FEET SIX INCHES AND THE REALITY IS IT'S ONLY 19 FEET THREE.
SO MEANING WE HAVE, THAT BACKS OUR LINE THE WRONG WAY.
SO I THINK, I THINK YOU'VE ANSWERED, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH, AND I, AND I THINK YOU'VE ANSWERED MY QUESTION AND THAT WAS THAT WHAT WAS SHOWN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON FEBRUARY 18TH IS WHAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
BUT YOU HAD SOMETHING DIFFERENT ON A FLASH DRIVE THAT YOU WERE GONNA PROPOSE.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
SO THERE WAS NO DECEIT OR TRYING TO CHANGE OR TRYING TO NEGOTIATE, BUT THE QUESTION WAS IF WE DROPPED IT BELOW EIGHT FEET AND SO THE COMMUNITY SAID IF YOU WOULD GO BACK AND DO A RED LINE OVER THE NOLAN PLAN.
AND SO I DID, I REACHED OUT TO MY ARCHITECT AND I ACTUALLY GAVE THE COMMUNITY BACK THAT EMAIL SO THEY COULD SEE IT DIRECTLY AND IT'S NOT ME MAKING IT UP.
AND IT SAID IN THAT, THAT HE COULD NOT, BECAUSE THAT WAS JUST AN OLD, LIKE, COPIED, COPIED, COPIED PDF.
SO THERE WAS NO WAY HIS SOFTWARE WOULD ALLOW HIM TO OVERLAY IT.
BUT THEN HE POINTED OUT IN THAT OVERLAY THAT THE SURVEY LINE WAS 19 FEET, THREE INCHES ON ONE SIDE, 19 SIX ON THE OTHER.
WITH THAT SAID, WE PAID HIM MONEY AS THE COMMUNITY REQUESTED TO DRAW THAT UP.
AND WE DO HAVE THAT AND WE WOULD STILL BE WILLING TO HONOR THAT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TRYING TO, THAT'S CHANGE OUR OPINION.
SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE HAVE BEEN PRESENTED WITH TODAY.
SO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THERE.
MY ONLY POINT TO THAT WAS I WAS TOLD BY MR. AGUILERA THAT I COULD PRESENT THAT TODAY AND THEN I LEARNED THAT HE NO LONGER IS PART OF THE PROCESS.
HE WAS OUR REP THAT WE WERE ASSIGNED TO AND EVIDENTLY HE LOST HIS POSITION BECAUSE OF THE POLITICAL NATURE OF THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY AND HE VERIFIED THAT.
I DO APPEAR THAT I CAN MAYBE DO THIS LAUNCHING OF THIS WEBINAR IF YOU GUYS WANT ME TO TRY THAT.
NOT AT THIS JUNCTURE, BUT THANK YOU.
UH, QUESTIONS I'VE GOT MR. HOLCOMB, THEN MS. DAVIS, MR. HOLCOMB.
SO I THINK ONE THING THAT WOULD HELP ME, THESE ARE JUST QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
THEN WE CAN GO BACK TO THE, UH, OPPOSITION AS WELL.
SO FOR THE APPLICANT AND APPLICANT ONLY, UM, I, I WOULD LIKE TO TRY SOMETHING THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD PROBABLY HELP ME A LOT AND LET'S BUILD A TIMELINE OF WHAT HAPPENED WHEN.
SO I'VE KIND OF WRITTEN THAT OUT HERE.
SO WHEN DID YOU BUY THE HOUSE? I THINK YOU SAID UH, JULY 17, WAS THAT RIGHT? JULY OF 2017? YES, IT WAS, UH, JULY 28TH, 2017.
AND, UH, WHEN DID, UH, THE, SO THE FACILITY THAT'S THERE, OR I MEAN THE STRUCTURE THAT IS THERE RIGHT NOW, WHEN, WHEN WAS THAT CONSTRUCTED? AT LEAST THE, THE FRAME? OH.
SO IT, IT IS, AND THE BEST WAY TO EXPLAIN IT, CAUSE I KNOW THIS IS KIND OF HARD TO FOLLOW, IS THAT CURRENTLY IT'S 36 FEET TALL FROM ONE END TO SURE.
WE'VE GOT ACTUALLY REALLY GREAT DIAGRAMS IN HERE.
[02:40:01]
TRYING TO PUT THE TIMELINE TOGETHER TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU KNEW YOU WERE GETTING INTO AND WHAT YOU WERE SURPRISED WITH.YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? SO I'M, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HAPPENED WHEN NO, I UNDERSTAND.
OKAY, SO, SO THEN, UM, IT WAS FRAMED AND THEN YOU BOUGHT IT AND THEN YOU FOUND OUT THAT THE STRUCTURE ALREADY BUILT BEFORE YOU BOUGHT IT WAS OUTTA CODE SOMETIME AFTER YOU BOUGHT IT? CORRECT, AFTER WE PURCHASED IT AND THEN WE ACTUALLY WENT BACK TO THE NOLAND SCHWARTZ OF ACE DEVELOPMENT AND HE OFFERED TO BUILD OR COMPLETE THE PROPERTY FOR US AND GOT THE PERMITS MOVED TO HIS NAME WHILE WE OWNED IT AND THERE WAS NOT A STOP WORK ORDER.
I HAVE COPIES OF THOSE SOS AS WELL.
I'M TRYING TO LIKE, CUZ I'VE GOT SEVERAL QUESTIONS IN A ROW HERE AND NO, NO, NO, ABSOLUTELY.
OKAY, SO, SO THEN OUT OF CODE THEN, AND THEN WE'VE GOT THIS, THIS PERIOD OF TIME, DO YOU COULD, DO YOU KNOW ROUGHLY HOW FAR AFTER YOU BOUGHT IT YOU GOT THE OUT CODE NOTICE? I KNOW YOU DIDN'T REALLY HAVE A FIRM DATE, BUT SIX MONTHS A YEAR? OH, PROBABLY FROM A CODE STANDPOINT I WOULD SAY IT WAS A LONG, YEAH, DEFINITELY OVER SIX MONTHS, SO.
THE ONLY REASON THAT IT ACTUALLY CAME ABOUT WAS COMMUNICATING WITH PEOPLE THAT WERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS HOW I ACTUALLY LEARNED THAT, WHAT WE GOT INTO.
AND, AND I DON'T REALLY KNOW OF ANOTHER WAY OF RESEARCHING, UM, THAT INFORMATION.
I MEAN, IF IT'S NOT IN PUBLIC RECORDS OR IT'S NOT INDEED RESTRICTIONS OR A TITLE COMMITMENT, I MEAN THAT'S WHERE EVEN EDUCATED PEOPLE GO TO VIEW THAT INFORMATION.
SO THAT WAS OBSERVED AND WE DIDN'T WALK INTO THE COMPLETELY BLIND, BUT WE WERE BLIND INTO WALKING INTO NOT KNOWING THERE WAS AN R P S VIOLATION.
BUT I, I GUESS THE KEY THING AND, AND YOU'VE CONFIRMED IT TO ME, WAS THAT THE STRUCTURE AS IT WAS AT THAT 36 FOOT HEIGHT VIOLATION, UM, OR SORRY, NOT 36 24 BECAUSE OF THE ANGLE.
OR 26, UH, BECAUSE OF THE ANGLE THAT WAS THERE AND PRESENT PHYSICALLY CONSTRUCTED BEFORE YOU EVER BOUGHT THE HOUSE, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT.
THAT'S WHAT, THAT WAS WHAT I WANTED TO DO.
WELL, I I SAY THAT, I MEAN IT WAS THERE BEFORE THAT, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY AFTERMATH, WE LEARNED THAT THAT EXISTED.
BUT THERE WAS A FRAME UP THAT HIGH ALREADY.
AND IN FACT, GOOD ENOUGH, NOT GOOD ENOUGH BEYOND 26.
UM, I'VE, I THINK I'VE GOT MS. DAVIS.
ALRIGHT, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
SO WHEN YOU, YOU PURCHASED THE, UM, THE PROPERTY 2017, WHAT CHANGES AND IMPROVEMENTS HAVE YOU MADE TO THE PROPERTY SINCE THEN? AND CAN YOU GO THROUGH THAT? YES.
SO REALLY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO MAKE ANY CHANGES CUZ THERE WEREN'T LIVE REAL PERMITS FOR ME TO DO THAT EXCEPT AT THE END OF LAST YEAR.
SO WHEN PERMITS WERE APPROVED MID-DECEMBER, LATE DECEMBER, UM, WE DID GO IN THERE FULLY AUTHORIZED AND RIPPED OUT ALL ELECTRICAL OUT OF THREE UNITS THAT ARE THREE STORIES TALL.
WE RIPPED OUT ALL PLUMBING, PEX LINE TUBS, SHOWERS, WATER SPIGOTS, WATER HEATER LINES, EVERYTHING.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S NINE IN THIS PROPERTY, 3, 3, 3 9.
AND WE STARTED REMOVING THE EXTERIOR FRAME, UM, BOARDS ON IT.
SO THEY STUCK HARDY BOARD ON TOP OF ZIP BOARD.
UH, CAUSE THAT WAS KINDA LIKE THEIR FINISHED PRODUCT.
BUT WE TOOK ALL THE ZIP BOARD OFF BECAUSE A, WE DIDN'T BELIEVE IT WAS THE RIGHT WAY OF BUILDING IT AND B THERE IS MOLD THAT WAS BEHIND THAT WALL.
AND SO WE WERE, OUR PLAN WAS TO START REFRAMING THAT AND MAKE THAT PROPERTY STRONG AND STURDY AND LIVABLE.
UH, SO SO YOU DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO THE HOUSE FOR FIVE YEARS BASICALLY? UM, OTHER THAN JUST KEEP IT IN CODE COMPLIANCE? NO.
SO, UH, ONE TIME WE GOT A CALL CUZ THERE WAS A BROKEN WINDOW ON THE THIRD FLOOR ON THE ALLEY SIDE.
SO, UM, A CODE ENFORCEMENT PERSON REACHED OUT TO US AND ASKED US TO TARP IT, WE TARPED IT, THEN I GOT A CALL FROM ANOTHER COMMUNITY MEMBER THAT SAID THERE'S ANOTHER COMMUNITY MEMBER REALLY WOULD RATHER YOU REPLACE THE GLASS OR PUT IN PLEXIGLASS.
SO WE PAID THE MONEY FOR THAT TO BE REMOVED AND UNDERSTANDABLE, WE DIDN'T MEAN TO, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MEET CODE.
SO WE TOOK THE TARP DOWN AND THEN WE ACTUALLY SPENT THE MONEY AND MADE THAT PLEXIGLASS SO THAT YOU COULD SEE IN AND OUT YOU DIDN'T SEE A BROKEN WINDOW OR A TARP.
SO FOR FIVE YEARS YOU DIDN'T DO ANYTHING BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE PERMITS TO DO ANYTHING.
UM, I KNOW THAT SOUNDS REALLY WEIRD.
I DON'T KNOW HOW, I MEAN, IT WAS REALLY LIKE A GODSEND THAT WE EVEN GOT THE CODE VIOLATION OFFICER BECAUSE IF IT WASN'T FOR THAT CODE VIOLATION OFFICER, I DON'T THINK WE WOULD'VE EVER WOULD'VE ACTUALLY GOTTEN PERMITS LIKE THE BUREAU BUREAUCRATIC SYSTEM.
[02:45:01]
AND I DON'T MEAN THIS OF ONE CITY, I JUST MEAN IN GENERAL, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE THAT MUCH KIND OF NEGATIVITY AGAINST ONE PARTICULAR PROPERTY, NOBODY WANTED TO TOUCH IT OR APPROVE ANYTHING.SO WE WENT THROUGH THAT WHOLE JOURNEY AND IT TOOK US ABOUT A MONTH TO GET THAT APPROVAL, EVEN MOST RECENTLY.
BUT, BUT GOING BACK TO MY ORIGINAL QUESTION, YOU COULD NOT DO ANYTHING FOR FIVE YEARS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE PERMITS.
WE, WE DID TRY TO PERMIT AND WERE, THERE WAS NOT APPROVAL, NOR DID WE HAVE COMMUNITY SUPPORTED DOING THAT EITHER.
SO YOU COULDN'T DO ANYTHING, YOU WERE RESTRICTED FROM DOING ANYTHING BECAUSE YOU DID NOT HAVE THE PERMITS.
I WAS ABLE TO PAY TAXES AND I WAS ABLE TO CLEAN THE LOT AND MOW THE YARD AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, AND JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION.
THERE'S A, A LISTING HERE OF IT'S FROM TRIPLE, UM, MONREAL CONSTRUCTION.
SO, AND IT'S A TOTAL, I I GUESS OF 600, THAT $614,900.
SO IS THIS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING A COST WOULD BE FOR YOU TO TURN IT INTO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT WOULD, WELL, MR. AGUILERA, UM, SAID THAT HE NEEDED A BUDGET OF GETTING THE PROPERTY TO BE IN CODE COMPLIANCE AND THAT IS WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO GET THE PROPERTY INTO CODE COMPLIANCE.
SO THIS HOME WAS NEVER SHEETROCK, SO IT WAS JUST PRIOR TO, UM, INSPECTIONS ALL.
HOWEVER, I DO HAVE A, A TEXT OR AN EMAIL THAT I RECEIVED FROM NOLAN THAT SAID, DON'T KNOW HOW THIS REALLY HAPPENED, BUT SOMEHOW WE HAVE APPROVAL TO FOR GREEN TAGS.
AND I'M LIKE, I DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT.
HOW WOULD YOU, HOW WOULD YOU NOT HAVE 'EM ONE DAY AND THEN MAGICALLY YOU WAIVED AAND AND YOU HAVE THEM.
SO I LOST FAITH IN MR. NOLAN'S INFORMATION AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
SO MY, MY FINAL QUESTION, I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S FOR YOU OR IF IT'S A GENERAL QUESTION, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BECAUSE I THOUGHT I SAW SOMEWHERE THAT FOR YOU TO GO FROM A MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURE TO A SINGLE FAMILY, IT WOULD COST MORE THAN HALF OF THE VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE.
IS THAT, IS THAT ACTUALLY SOMEBODY, SOMEBODY ELSE MAY NEED TO ANSWER THAT A LITTLE BIT.
SO WHAT IS KIND OF CONFUSING OF MF TWO ZONING, MF TWO ZONING ITSELF CAN BE SINGLE, CAN BE DUPLEX, IT CAN BE THREE CONDOS OR UH, A TRIPLEX FOR EXAMPLE.
BUT IF YOU WERE TO GO BACK TO SINGLE FAMILY ZONING ONLY THEN THE PROPERTY WOULD THEN BE RESTRICTED TO BEING ONLY SINGLE FAMILY, WHICH IS WHY WE WERE TRYING TO HELP AND CREATE THIS DEED RESTRICTION SO THAT OKAY, IT'S NOT JUST US AND WE'RE NOT JUST TRYING TOMORROW.
IT WAS KIND OF ALLUDED A MOMENT AGO TO CHANGE IT BACK TO MULTIFAMILY.
SO WE'RE KIND OF STUCK IN BETWEEN ZONINGS AND USES.
BUT IF WE CAME BACK AND ACTUALLY ASKED FOR, MAYBE I'M WRONG ON THIS.
IF WE ASKED FOR SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, THE RESTRICTIONS THAT I SEE SAY SOMETHING EVEN DIFFERENT THAT THE 36 FEET IN HEIGHT COULD BE LEFT AS IT EVEN IS.
OUR INTENT WAS TO ABIDE BY WHAT WAS REQUESTED AND WHAT WAS AGREED UPON.
AND WHEN WE HAD THE LAST MEETING, THE COMMUNITY SAID THERE WOULD BE NO OPPOSITION IF WE DID THAT.
AND THAT WAS SOMETHING WE WERE WILLING AND ABLE TO DO.
SO I'M GONNA GO BACK TO MY QUESTION.
IT, IT STATES HERE THE COST TO REBUILD STRUCTURE WOULD FAR EXCEED 50% OF THE CURRENT DALLAS COUNTY APPRAISED VALUE.
SO IS THAT WHAT THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE? YES MA'AM.
AND THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE RIGHT NOW IS WHAT? I THINK IT'S LIKE $952,000.
BUT IT'S NOT A FINISHED STRUCTURE.
AND EVEN THOUGH I PROTESTED THE VALUE, I'VE NEVER HAD A, SO REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOU WOULD BUILD, WHETHER YOU WOULD MAKE IT INTO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME OR A MULTI-FAMILY HOME, YOU'RE STILL GONNA HAVE A LOT OF THESE COSTS.
YOU'VE GOTTA FINISH THE HOUSE.
THESE COSTS ARE JUST NOT RELATED TO IF YOU CHANGE IT TO SINGLE FAMILY HOME, WELL THERE'S DEFINITELY, DEFINITELY ADDITIONAL EXPENSES TO DOING IT DIFFERENT WAYS THAT, BUT THAT'S MY QUESTION.
SO IS THIS, IS THIS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS REQUIRED TO CHANGE IT TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME? IS THAT WHAT I'M SEEING HERE? NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING.
BUT MR. AGUILERA SAID HE WANTED, HE WANTED THE EXPENSE LIST OF WHAT IT WOULD COST TO RENOVATE THE PROPERTY AND COMPLETE IT.
THEN HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THE COST TO CHANGE IT INTO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS MORE THAN HALF OF THE APPRAISED VALUE? IF THAT'S WHAT THIS ISN'T, THIS IS NOT THAT.
SO HOW, HOW DO YOU MAKE I THINK I, I THINK TO FINISH IT OUT CLAIM, I THINK TO FINISH IT OUT EITHER WAY, IT WOULD BE THAT AMOUNT IF NOT MORE EITHER WAY.
[02:50:01]
NOT ONLY THAT, BUT I'VE ALSO SPENT ALMOST NEARLY A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS DEMOING OUT GOODS THAT IF WE WERE KNOWN THAT ONLY WE COULD DO MULTI-FAMILY THREE UNITS, WE WOULD NEVER HAVE RIPPED OUT IN THE LAST PRIOR MONTHS.SO THE REASON I'M ASKING IS BECAUSE YOU'RE CLAIMING THAT TO NOT DO A, A MULTI-FAMILY TO GO TO A SINGLE FAMILY TO CHANGE THE MODIFICATIONS TO BE WITHIN CODE, IT WOULD BE MORE THAN 50% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE.
BUT I AM NOT SEEING ANY PROOF OF THAT.
SO I'M NOT BELIEVING IT UNLESS I SEE SOMETHING IN FRONT OF ME THAT SHOWS TO CONVERT IT FROM WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE TO WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE, THAT IT'S GOING TO BE 50% MORE THAN THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE HOUSE.
DOES THAT, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? IT DOES MAKE SENSE.
I DON'T KNOW QUITE HOW TO, SO I CAN'T, YOU THAT CAN'T, I CAN'T TAKE THAT UNDER CONSIDERATION IF I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME.
SO, SO YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION.
UH, OUR BOARD ATTORNEYS ASKED ME TO, UH, RECOGNIZE HIM SO HE CAN READ FROM THE CODE.
AND MS. DAVIS, THIS SORT OF GOES TO THE QUESTION YOU ASKED DURING THE BRIEFING ABOUT THAT 50% COMPLIANCE AND IT'S FOR THE SECOND ELEMENT AND WHAT THE CODE SAYS IS THE FINANCIAL COST OF COMPLIANCE IS GREATER THAN 50% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE.
SO COMPLIANCE ISN'T COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE IN THIS SENSE IT'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE.
SO THAT PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE THAT IS RIGHT.
IT'S NOT JUST COMPLIANCE WITH, IT'S FOR THE COMPLIANCE FOR THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS.
AND A QUESTION FOR, FOR STAFF MS. DUNN.
AND THEN I'M GONNA GO, I I THINK, YOU KNOW, I WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE GETS THEIR SHOT HERE CAUSE YOU HAD OUR SHOT ALREADY FOR THAT.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE TODAY CUZ THE APPLICANT PREVIOUSLY GOT APPROVAL BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR BACK IN 17 FOR VARIANCES AND FOR SLOPE IN A MULTI-FAMILY SETTING.
AND THE APPLICANTS WANTING IT NOW TO BE SINGLE FAMILY, NOT MULTI-FAMILY, CORRECT? CORRECT.
THAT'S WHAT'S TRIGGERING THIS AND THE R PS RIGHT? CORRECT.
BECAUSE THE R P S IS ACTIVE IN A, IN A, AND SO THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO GO TO SINGLE FAMILY IS WHAT'S TRIGGERING THIS HEARING.
THERE'S THREE THINGS THAT'S TRIGGERING THIS HEARING.
IS USE IS TRIGGERING THE HEARING FROM MULTI-FAMILY TO SINGLE FAMILY.
THE R P S THE HEIGHT IS 39 FEET.
YES, BECAUSE IT'S STILL NON-COMPLIANT IN HEIGHT.
AND THE PREVIOUS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE, IT WAS SUBJECTS TO ELEVATION AND SO HIS ELEVATION CHANGED AND SO HE'S HERE BECAUSE THE ELEVATION IS DONE COMPLIANT WITH WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN 2017.
I JUST WANT TO ASK IT ALL GROUNDED IN IT WAS THE APPLICANTS, THOSE ARE THE THREE THINGS THAT ARE OCCURRING HERE AND THOSE ARE ALL BURDENS ON THE APPLICANTS NOT A BURDEN ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT A BURDEN ON THE CITY.
IT'S A BURDEN ON THE APPLICANT.
UH, HAS ANYONE OCCUPIED THIS FACILITY, THIS BUILDING? WHEN'S THE LAST TIME THIS BUILDING WAS OCCUPIED? IT'S NEVER BEEN OCCUPIED.
YOU BUILT A BUILDING THAT'S NEVER BEEN OCCUPIED.
UH, YOU PURCHASED A BUILDING THAT'S NEVER BEEN OCCUPIED.
IT WAS AN INCOMPLETE PROPERTY.
OKAY, SO I I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE OPPOSITION, BUT, BUT I WILL TELL YOU HERE, SIR, I AM TOTALLY NOT CONVINCED IN YOUR CASE AS OF RIGHT NOW, UH, I AM CONFUSED AS TO WHY YOU WOULD AGREE THAT IT'S AN IR FOR THIS COMMUNITY.
I WOULD AGREE THAT YOU, I'M, I'M, I'M, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY.
WHEN YOU'RE QUOTING STAFF PEOPLE, IT'S SAYING ALL THE PERMITS WERE APPROVED WHEN, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU COULD HAVE PERMITS APPROVED IF YOU HAVE VIOLATIONS OF CODE.
AND THAT WAS MARCH OF 20 2022.
UM, I I MEAN I'M I'M THOROUGHLY CONFUSED AT YOUR APPLICATION.
UH, I HEARD FROM THE GENTLEMAN THAT IS WITH THE CONDOS ADJACENT TO YOU A POTENTIAL DESIRE BASED ON SPECIFIC DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND I, I THINK, I MEAN IT SOUNDS LIKE LIKE THEY'RE JUST WANTING THE DARN THING FINISHED.
UH, I'M JUST NOT CONVINCED AT ALL YET.
NOW I'M JUST ONE VOTE, BUT I'M JUST NOT CONVINCED AT ALL YET.
SO I REALLY AM, DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THIS CUZ I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO GO WITH THIS.
SO THAT'S JUST WHERE I'M AT AND THE BURDEN IS ALWAYS ON THE APPLICANT.
YOU MAKE APPLICATION TO OUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF.
OKAY, I'LL GET YOU IN ONE SECOND, MS. DUNN TO PROFESSIONAL
[02:55:01]
STAFF.AND THEN A CASE IS PRESENTED TO US AND WE JUST REACT TO THE INFORMATION WE'RE GIVEN.
AND I'M, I, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE TOO MANY SIDE STORIES.
NOLAN NOLAN PLAN THE DEED RESTRICTION PLAN VIA THE CONDO PLACE NEXT DOOR.
THERE'S SO MANY THINGS GOING ON HERE, I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REAL PLAN IS.
AND IT WAS YOUR REQUEST TO CONVERT FROM MULTI-FAMILY TO SINGLE FAMILY AND NOT AND VIOLATING THEIR RPS.
IT'S NOT THE CITY WHICH EVERYONE LOVES TO BLAME THE CITY, BUT IT'S NOT THE CITY OR THE STAFF IT YOU AS AN APPLICANT.
SO I'M GIVING YOU THAT FEEDBACK WHILE OTHER QUESTIONS MOVE FORWARD POTENTIALLY.
AND THEN WE NEED TO GO TO QUESTIONS FOR THE OPPOSITION.
JOEL? WELL, MS. DUNN, DID YOU NEED TO BE RECOGNIZED PLEASE? JUST TO QUELL ANY CONFUSION ABOUT CITY STAFF AND APPROVALS? IT NEEDS TO BE ON THE RECORD THAT WHEN THIS APPLICANT CAME IN IN 2022 TO HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY USE PERMITTED THAT THE CITY DID REVIEW AND APPROVE HIS APPLICATION FOR A SINGLE FAMILY USE.
THAT IS HOW THIS WAS BROUGHT TO THE BOARD'S ATTENTION THE THIRD TIME AROUND.
CITY STAFF DID APPROVE IT AS A SINGLE FAMILY USE AND DID APPROVE IT WITH THAT R P S FRACTION.
SO THE APPLICANT IS CORRECT IN SAYING THAT CITY STAFF APPROVED IT.
THAT MAY CLEAR UP SOME THINGS.
OKAY, WELL THAT DOESN'T MAKE ME HAPPY.
I KNEW IT WOULDN'T, BUT THAT'S MATERIAL.
AND, AND AND THAT'S A FAX IT DID COMING IN IN 2022 AND CITY THEFT.
I APPRECIATE THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND THE RPS AND ALL THE VIOLATIONS WERE ACTUALLY DISCUSSED DURING THIS WHOLE JOURNEY.
I AM JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT SO I'M NOT MAKING IT UP.
WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. NE YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT.
SECOND ROUND QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
MR. HO, WELL THIS IS ACTUALLY, UH, QUESTIONS TO STAFF RELATED TO WHAT THE APPLICANT SAID TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTIONS.
SO, SO THERE I ACTUALLY HAVE, UM, THREE MECHANICAL QUESTIONS.
THE FIRST ONE IS ON THIS 25 OR I MEAN THIS, UH, THIS, THIS VALUE THE NEW STATE LAW.
UM, UM, IT'S ABOUT THE STRUCTURE, THE, NOT THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE LAND PLUS THE STRUCTURE.
AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE THE TAX VALUE SUBMITTED THAT 900, 980,000 IS LAND PLUS STRUCTURE, NOT JUST STRUCTURE.
OH, THE JUST STRUCTURE ON HERE SAYS 545,000.
MR. HE'S SAYING ITS THE RPS COMPONENT.
IT'S THE, BUT IT IS THE R PS COMPONENT.
BUT MR. HOW COME'S QUESTION IS WHAT IS THAT 50%? LIKE WHAT IS THE DENOMINATOR I GUESS? AND IT, YEAH.
WHAT WHAT IS IT 50% OF? YEAH, IT'S THE, IT'S THE STRUCTURE WHICH IS, WHICH IS 545,000.
SO THAT'S QUESTION NUMBER ONE.
UH, ONE OF THE ISSUES, UH, UH, STATED WAS THAT NOW THE ELEVATION IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS SUBMITTED IN 2017.
SO MY QUESTION IS, IS THAT THAT CASE THAT WAS APPROVED WITH AN ELEVATION THAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE BUILT TO? WELL, THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT TO THAT IN THEORY, BUT IT WASN'T, CUZ IT DOESN'T MATCH NOW.
AND THAT OCCURRED BEFORE THE PROPERTY OWNER BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.
SO I, I GUESS I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS HOW DO WE HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT IS NOT BUILT TO THE 2017 CASE? AND THAT HAPPENED ENTIRELY BEFORE THE APPLICANT.
THE DIFFERENCE IN THE ELEVATIONS WERE SLIGHT VARIATIONS OF MEASUREMENT.
WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT IN IN 2017, IT WAS FOR AN EIGHT FOOT VARIANCE.
WHEN WE MEASURED IT THIS TIME AROUND, IT WAS NINE FEET, NINE INCHES.
AND SO EVEN THOUGH THAT'S VERY MINIMAL, IT, IT, IT COULD HAVE BEEN AT FAULT OF THE PREVIOUS PLANS EXAMINER THAT ONE FOOT NINE INCHES THE ARCHITECT COULD HAVE, UH, DID IT DIFFERENT ON A WHATEVER TYPE OF SOFTWARE.
ONE FOOT NINE INCHES IS VERY MINIMAL.
HOWEVER, IT'S STILL A DIFFERENCE.
THE OTHER DIFFERENCE WERE FACADE ISSUES.
UH, BACK IN 2017 WE APPROVED IT WITH A THREE CAR GARAGE, CAME IN WITH A TWO CAR GARAGE.
ALTHOUGH GARAGES ARE NOT INCIDENTAL TO HEIGHT MAY BE THE BOARD SHOULD SPECIFY IF WE'RE GONNA MAKE THIS COMPLIANT OR ELEVATION IF WE'RE GONNA MAKE IT COMPLIANT TO ELEVATION, STRICTLY THE HEIGHT AND OR FACADE AS WELL.
AND THEN MY VERY LAST QUESTION ON THIS, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS CORRECTLY.
NOW, THE, THE RPS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT APPLIED TO THE MULTIFAMILY BEFORE, IT'S JUST THAT IT'S REEVALUATED WITH THE SWITCH TO SINGLE FAMILY? CORRECT.
SO IT WAS APPROVED BEFORE IN THE 2017 CASE, BUT NOW IT LOSES THAT APPROVAL BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE AND THEY HAVE TO COME ASK FOR IT AGAIN NOW.
OKAY, SO, SO THE R P S SCENARIO DIDN'T ACTUALLY CHANGE JUST THE CLASSIFICATION CHANGE, WHICH TRIGGERED THE CHECK AGAIN.
ON THE RECORD TO HIS QUESTION, YES.
[03:00:01]
THANK YOU.QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICABLE? OKAY, THANK YOU FOR THE MOMENT.
QUESTIONS FOR ANYONE IN THE OPPOSITION? WELL, LET ME REVIEW MY NOTES.
UM, WELL, WELL REALLY IT'S, YOU CAN ANSWER, YOU CAN ANSWER A QUESTION.
SO IN ORDER TO ALLOW THAT, I'M GONNA ASK YOU A QUESTION.
MR. OFFIT, WOULD YOU COME FORWARD PLEASE? SO WOULD YOU CLARIFY YOUR PREVIOUS COMMENTS? Y YES.
UM, THE LAST QUESTION HAD TO DO WAS, WAS THE R P F EXACTLY THE SAME AS WHAT WAS APPROVED IN 2017? AND I THINK THE ACTUAL ANSWER TO IS NO, IT IS NOT.
THEY'VE ASKED FOR AN ADDITIONAL VARIANCE, UM, DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S ON THE 2017 AGREED UPON, UM, ADJUSTMENT.
UM, IF YOU LOOK CAREFULLY ON THE PLANS THEY HAVE SUBMITTED NOW, AND IF YOU LOOK ON THE 2017 PLANS, THE ROOF LINES HAVE CHANGED.
SO THEY HAVE ASKED FOR A DIFFERENCE.
UM, AND THE SETBACK DIFFERENT.
UM, SO I, I GUESS THE, AS CONFUSED AS YOU CAN BE ABOUT THIS, WE'VE LIVED WITH IT DAY AND NIGHT FOR, SINCE 2016 WHEN IT WENT UP AND THE CITY SAID, STOP FIX IT.
WHEN THE NOLAN PLAN, THEY SAID STOP FIX IT.
AND EVEN IN THE APPLICANT'S OWN WORDS, WHEN NOLAN, HE WAS WORKING WITH NOLAN TO FIX IT ON THE APPROVED PLANS, HE SENT HIM WALKING AND THOSE ARE HIS WORDS.
UH, SO I THINK THOSE ARE VERY IMPORTANT THINGS TO UNDERSTAND.
IN, IN THE FIVE YEARS WHAT'S BEEN DONE? IT WAS LEFT EXPOSED TO THE WEATHER.
UH, QUESTIONS? YEAH, MR. I THINK ANOTHER MEMBER HAS A QUESTION FOR YOU.
YOU, YOU KEEP ESCAPING BEFORE I CAN CATCH YOU.
UM, SO I JU I JUST WANTED TO HAVE A QUESTION.
UH, ON YOUR PREVIOUS COMMENTARY, YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WERE, I GUESS SEVERAL THINGS THAT, THAT YOU TOOK ISSUE WITH, WITH THE PLAN.
NOW TODAY, THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE RULING ON IS, IS JUST THIS, THIS NINE FOOT, NINE INCH HEIGHT.
UM, AND SO THAT SPECIFIC PORTION OF IT, YOU KNOW, I HEARD FROM THE OTHER GENTLEMAN, IT SEEMS LIKE HE JUST WANTS IT DIRECT TO CODE, BUT IN YOUR CASE, DO YOU JUST WANT IT THAT ONE FOOT THREE LESS? DO YOU WANT IT ALL GONE? I MEAN, WHERE, WHERE IS YOUR SWEET SPOT ON THE ISSUE? BEFORE US TODAY AT THIS POINT, BASED UPON WHAT'S BEEN PROMISED TO US BEFORE, UH, THROUGH THREE, THREE WEEKS AGO UNTIL THIS THURSDAY, IS THEY NEED TO SIMPLY BUILD IT TO CODE.
THEN THEY CAN USE IT FOR ANYTHING THEY WANT TO.
THEY CAN DESIGN IT, THEY CAN PAINT IT, THEY CAN DO ANY FINISH OUT THEY WANT.
THEY JUST NEED TO DO LIKE THE REST OF US DO AND FOLLOW THE LAW AND FOLLOW THE CODE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS STAGE? I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION.
I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 DASH 27, UH, ON APPLICATION OF MICHAEL ALIMO.
DENY THE VARIANCE TO THE HI, I'M SORRY TO KEVIN, I APOLOGIZE.
I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 DASH 0 27.
DENY THE VARIANCE TO THE HEIGHT REGULATIONS REQUEST BY THIS APPLICANT, UH, WITHOUT PREJUDICE BECAUSE OF OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT, LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION OF THE DOLLARS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD NOT RESULT IN NECESSARY TO THE APPLICANT.
IS THERE, UH, THE CHAIR HAS MOVED.
IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MS. DAVIS.
I AM NOT CONVINCED, UM, IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM.
OUR RULES CLEARLY STATE THAT THE BURDEN IS ON THE APPLICANT.
UH, OUR RULES STATE THAT OUR CRITERIA IS WHEN WE CAN APPROVE SOMETHING WHEN IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
UH, WHEN IT'S A UNIQUE PARCEL OF LAND, UH, UH, AND WHEN IT'S NOT GRANTED TO RELIEVE A SELF CREATED PERSONAL HARDSHIP, I DO NOT BELIEVE IT'S IN THE PUBLIC'S BEST INTEREST.
I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS IS A UNIQUE, UH, SPECIFIC PARCEL OF LAND.
AND I DO BELIEVE THIS WAS REQUESTED IN ORDER TO RELIEVE SELF CREATOR
[03:05:01]
PERSONAL HARDSHIP GIVEN THAT THE APPLICANTS CHANGE IN USE.AND THEREFORE, THAT'S WHY I MADE THE MOTION TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
I'M SAYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE BECAUSE THIS NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED.
RESOLVED FOR THE APPLICANT AND HIS OR HIS AND HER INVESTMENT AND RESOLVE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE'S A WAY TO RESOLVE THIS.
IT'S NOT ALL ONE SIDE VERSUS THE OTHER, BUT WE'RE NOWHERE NEAR RESOLVING IN WHAT'S, UH, BASED ON OUR CRITERIA THAT WE HAVE.
MS. DAVIS, I AGREE WITH THE CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS AND I, I I GUESS IN, IN THIS BOARD MEMBER'S OPINION, I THINK THIS PROCESS WOULD GO SMOOTHER AND THINGS WOULD GET DONE FASTER IF THE BUILDING WAS BUILT TO CODE.
SO, UM, HOPEFULLY THAT CAN HAPPEN AND WE CAN PUT THIS MATTER TO REST AND WE CAN GET THIS THING BUILT SO THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN COME TOGETHER AGAIN.
OTHER COMMENTS ON THE MOTION HEARING? NO COMMENTS ON THE MOTION.
THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE.
THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
MR. NEWMAN? AYE VOTE IS THREE TO TWO.
THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
I'M SORRY, I I MISUNDERSTOOD THAT VOTE.
I, I WANTED TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE CHAIRMAN'S MOTION.
OKAY, SO MY VOTE WAS, SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE CHAIR.
THE CHAIR WILL ASK THAT THE, UH, MR. BOARD ATTORNEY MAKE SURE I SAY THIS CORRECTLY.
THE CHAIR IS GONNA DIRECT THE BOARD SECRETARY TO RECALL THE VOTE TO RE REQUEST A VOTE.
IS THAT THE WAY I SHOULD PUT IT? IT MIGHT BE EASIER JUST TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION.
WELL THE MOTION FAILED, RIGHT? SO ACCORDING TO THE THREE QUARTER VOTES, THE MOTION FAILED.
SO IT HAS TO BE SOMEONE IN THE PREVAILING SIDE.
SO EITHER MR. NE, MR. HOWK OR MS. HAYDEN CAN MOVE TO RECONSIDER.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVED TO RECONSIDER.
UM, UH, WASN'T, UH, WAS A COUPLE OF US WERE, UM, UH, NOT CLEAR ON WHAT WE WERE VOTING FOR YOUR MOTION OR AGAINST.
SO MR. NE'S MOTION IS TO RECONSIDER THE VOTE.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
FOR THE SAME REASON IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MS. UH, HAYDEN.
MR. NE, ANY COMMENT ON THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER NON DEBATABLE MOTION? THANK YOU MR. BOARD, BOARD ATTORNEY, UH, NO DEBATE IN THE MOTION WE CALL THE ROLE.
THE ROLE IS TO VOTE TO RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS MOTION TO DENY VOTE TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION.
MO THIS IS A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS MOTION TO THAT FAILED TO DENY.
SO I NEED YOU TO CALL THE VOTE.
SO THE MOTION BY MR. NE, SECONDED BY MS. HAYDEN TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION TO DENY HAS BEEN, UH, VOTED FIVE TO ZERO.
THAT MOTION, PREVIOUS MOTION HAS BEEN RECONSIDERED.
I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 23 DASH 27 ON THE APPLICATION OF KEVIN ALI NE I APOLOGIZE FOR MISPRONOUNCING DENY THE VARIANCE TO THE HEIGHT REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT WITHOUT PREJUDICE BECAUSE OUR, A EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OF THE PRIVILEGE OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD NOT RESULT IN NECESSARY UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO HIS APPLICANT.
THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE BY MY BY CHAIRMAN NEWMAN.
IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MS. DAVIS.
UH, MY MOTION IS TO STATE THAT THE BURDEN OF PROOF BY THE APPLICANT HAS NOT BEEN MET BY VIRTUE OF REQUESTING A DENIAL OF THE REQUEST WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IT ALLOWS THE APPLICANT TO FILE TOMORROW WITH A NEW PLAN, WHATEVER THEY WANT.
THE OPPOSITE IS WE FILE WITH PREJUDICE AND THAT REQUIRES TWO YEARS.
AND CLEARLY EVERYONE'S IN EVERYONE'S BEST INTEREST TO MOVE FORWARD IN A WAY THAT IS GOOD FOR THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE WHEN THAT PROCESS CAN BE.
SO THEREFORE, THIS MOTION IS TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
MS. DAVIS, NO FURTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS ON THE MOTION? THIS IS A MOTION TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
ARE ARE WE FINE ON THIS MR. CHERNEY? OKAY.
FIVE ZERO MOTION PASSES IN THE MATTER OF 2 23 27.
[03:10:01]
UNANIMOUSLY BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO, DENIES THE VARIANCE REQUEST WITHOUT PREJUDICE.UH, THAT IS THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA FOR TODAY'S AGENDA.
UM, JUST FOR EVERYONE'S ED, UH, EDIFICATION OUR NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A HEARING IS MAGICALLY ON THE 18TH OF APRIL.
UM, AND THERE'S A POSSIBILITY WE'RE GONNA WANT THE PUBLIC HEARING AT EIGHT, AT 10 30 AS OPPOSED TO 11 SO THAT WE CAN ASSURE THAT WE START OUR PUBLIC HEARING AT ONE.
THE BRIEFING, THE BRIEFING AT 10 30.
I'LL ON OFFLINE, THAT WAS A CONSENSUS OF THE GROUP, MAYBE STARTING A HALF HOUR EARLIER FOR THE BRIEFING.
SO WE CAN CLEARLY START THE, THE PUBLIC HEARING AT ONE.
BUT I'LL COME BACK TO YOU ON THAT.
AND WE PROBABLY DO THAT ON ALL THREE PANELS, AS I'M GUESSING.
NOT TOMORROW OF COURSE, BUT STARTING IN APRIL 10 30.
UH, SO PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDARS FOR, UM, TUESDAY, APRIL 18TH.
MS. DAVIS ALREADY SAID THAT SHE'S NOT GONNA BE, SO I'LL BE WORKING WITH MS. WILLIAMS ON AN ALTERNATE, BUT NUDGE, NUDGE, NUDGE FOR THE 18TH OF APRIL.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS ON THE AGENDA? HEARING NONE, UH, THE CHAIRMAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MS. HAYDEN.
MOTION CARRIES THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A IS ADJOURNED ON THE 21ST OF MARCH AT 4:26 PM THANK YOU.