[00:00:01]
HIS PARTNER.IT'LL BE THROWN OUT OF HIS GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN THE MANNER
[Board of Adjustments: Panel B on August 16, 2023.]
IN WHICH THIS HEARING WILL BE CONDUCTED.MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL.
WE GIVE OUR TIME FREELY AND RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR THAT TIME.
NO ACTION OR DECISION ON A CASE SETS A PRECEDENT.
EACH CASE IS DECIDED UPON ITS OWN MERITS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
EACH USE IS PRESUMED TO BE LEGAL USE.
WE HAVE BEEN FULLY BRIEFED BY STAFF PRIOR TO THE HEARING AND HAVE ALSO REVIEWED A DETAILED DOCKET WHICH EXPLAINS THE POINTS OF EACH CASE.
ANY EVIDENCE THAT YOU WISH TO SUBMIT TODAY FOR CONSIDERATION ON ANY OF THE CASES THAT WE HEAR SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD SECRETARY WHEN YOUR CASE IS CALLED.
THE EVIDENCE MUST BE RETAINED IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR EACH CASE.
ACTION WILL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT SHORTLY AFTER TODAY'S HEARING AND WILL BECOME PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR EACH CASE.
LASTLY, ALL PEOPLE REGISTERED TO SPEAK ON ANY CASE.
TODAY WERE REQUIRED TO REGISTER WITH STAFF BEFORE ADDRESSING THE BOARD.
EACH REGISTERED SPEAKER WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL TIME AT THREE MINUTES AND IF REQUESTED BY THE SPEAKER OR DESIRED BY THE BOARD, THE CHAIR MAY REQUEST A MOTION AND VOTE ON A SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF TIME TO COMPLETE PRESENTATIONS OR CONTINUE TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
ALL REGISTERED ONLINE SPEAKERS MUST BE PRESENT ON VIDEO TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
THERE WILL BE NO TELECONFERENCING VIA WEBEX.
OUR BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT INCLUDE, UM, SARAH LAMB AND MICHAEL KOWSKI HERE IN THE CHAMBERS AND ONLINE WE HAVE JOSEPH CANNON AND DEREK AL.
UM, ALSO HERE TO ASSIST THE BOARD OR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF.
WE HAVE MATTHEW SAPP, OUR ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY, NIKKI DUNN, CHIEF PLANNER AND BOARD ADMINISTRATOR.
GIANNA BRIDGES, OUR SENIOR PLANNER WHO IS ONLINE.
CAMIKA MILLER HOSKINS, OUR SENIOR PLANNER, BILL IRWIN.
OUR ARBORIST LLOYD LLOYD DENMAN, OUR CONSULTANT ENGINEER.
DIANA BARUM, OUR SENIOR PLANS EXAMINER.
WE HAVE MARY WILLIAMS, OUR BOARD SECRETARY AND MEETING MODERATOR.
AND BEHIND ME WE HAVE JASON POOLE, OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICE ADMINISTRATOR.
UM, ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS TODAY FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY? NO PUBLIC SPEAKERS, MA'AM.
AND MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR MINUTES SLAM? UM, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OUR MAY, 2023.
HEARING THAT A SECOND? I SECOND THE MOTION.
AND ALL FUTURE MOTIONS WILL BE CALLED BY EACH MEMBER'S NAME.
A ROLL CALL FOR VOTES IS REQUIRED TO PROPERLY RECORD ALL THE VOTES.
PLEASE REMEMBER TO MUTE YOUR MICS WHEN YOU'RE NOT ON, AND IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, MAKE SURE YOU RAISE YOUR HAND TO GET MY ATTENTION.
IF FOR SOME REASON I DON'T HEAR YOU OR SEE YOU, JUST GO AHEAD AND BREAK RIGHT IN, THAT'LL BE OKAY.
AND WE WILL GET STARTED WITH OUR FIRST CASE OR WE'LL GET STARTED WITH OUR UNCONTESTED DOCKET, WHICH INCLUDES, UM, B D A 2 2 3 DASH 0 7 1 5100 ROSS AVENUE, AND B A DASH 2 2 2 2 3 DASH 0 7 6 20 21.
UM, DO I HAVE A, UM, MOTION MS. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS LISTED ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET BECAUSE IT APPEARS FROM OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE THAT THE APPLICATION SATISFY ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ARE CONSISTENT WITH A GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE CODE AS APPLICABLE TO WITT B D A 2 23 DASH 0 7 1 APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE LANDSCAPING REGULATIONS.
AND THIS DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.
COMPLIANCE WITH A REVISED SITE PLAN IS REQUIRED APPLICATION OF JACOB, UH, SORRY.
B D A 2 2 3 DASH 0 7 6 APPLICATION OF JACOB SOLOMON FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO DEFENSE HEIGHT.
REGULATIONS IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE REVISED SITE PLAN IS REQUIRED.
DO I HAVE, I I THINK, UM, BEFORE WE, BEFORE I GET A SECOND, WOULD IT BE HELPFUL TO HAVE THE, UM, UH, THE TRANSLATOR EXPLAINED TO, UM, 2021 HAYMARKET ROAD, WHAT WAS STATED? OR CAN WE WAIT UNTIL WE DO A SECOND? I BELIEVE THE TRANSLATOR NEVER SHOWED UP.
WELL THEN WE WILL, UM, DO I HAVE A SECOND FOR THIS, UH, FOR THESE TWO CASES? YES.
UM, ANY, UH, TEST ANY DISCUSSION? UM, WE CAN HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE MR. CANNON.
[00:05:01]
MS. CHAIR AYE.UM, SO I, SOMEBODY WILL PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION TO 2021 PAY MARKET ROAD TO THAT APPLICANT.
WE WILL START WITH CASE B D A 2 2 3 DASH 0 73, 77 0 4 GLEN ALVINS DRIVE.
UM, IF THE APPLICANT CAN COME FORWARD, MR. RA? HI, MS. RED.
UH, THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE THERE.
AND JUST MAKE SURE THAT, I GUESS THE GREEN LIGHT OR THE, THERE WE GO.
AND WE'LL NEED TO SWEAR YOU IN.
DO YOU SWEAR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
UH, GRETCHEN RE UM, I, I CURRENTLY LIVE AT 7 5 0 3 CARRUTH BOULEVARD, BUT THIS IS ABOUT OUR NEW PROPERTY AT 7 7 0 4 GLEN ALBANS IN DALLAS.
UM, I DIDN'T BRING MY DAUGHTER WITH ME TODAY.
SHE'S AT HEROES IN TODAY'S BOWLING DAY AND SHE WOULD BE ANGRY, BUT THIS IS MY DAUGHTER.
SHE'S 22 AND SHE WILL BE WITH US UNTIL HOPEFULLY WE'RE NO LONGER HERE.
SO THIS IS THE RETIREMENT HOME WE'RE BUILDING AND SHE'LL BE LIVING THERE WITH US.
UM, AND I UNDERSTOOD, I WATCHED THE HEARING THIS MORNING AND THE QUESTIONS DO MAKE, MAKE SENSE.
UM, THE BIGGEST ISSUE WITH INCREASING THE FOOTPRINT IS THAT WHEN WE COVER ANY KIND OF OUTDOOR AREA, IT'S INCLUDED IN THE FOOTPRINT.
SO, UM, I, I GOT THE FIGURES FROM THE ARCHITECT AND 955 SQUARE FEET OF THE FOOTPRINT IS COVERED PORCH AREA WHERE WE CAN SIT.
SO WE WE'RE PUTTING WINDOWS ACROSS THE FRONT TO ENJOY IT, BUT ALSO A PORCH THAT SHE CAN SIT OUT WITH US AND ENJOY IT.
AND WHEN WE COVER THAT WHOLE SPACE, AS WELL AS COVER THE BACK PATIO TO PROTECT FROM THE SUN, WE END UP WITH QUITE A BIT OF, UM, COVERED SPACE.
SO THE ACTUAL LIVING AREA ITSELF IS, UM, ONLY 26 16 SQUARE FEET.
AND SO THE REST IS THE GARAGE AND THEN THE COVERED PORCH AREAS.
UM, AND THEN THERE IS A, A RAMP THAT WE HAD TO DESIGN TO GET UP TO THE PORCH AREAS.
NOW THAT, THAT'S NOT COVERED, BUT YOU CAN SEE IN THE DRAWING THERE WHERE IT LEADS UP TO THE COVERED PATIO AREAS.
UM, AND SO THIS STARTED WE'RE THE FIRST HOUSE TO, UH, TEAR DOWN AND BUILD.
THERE'S ONE OTHER HOUSE THAT DID IT AND THEY RAN INTO A PROBLEM WITH THE 45%.
AND THE PEOPLE WHO DESIGNED THE COMMUNITY SAID THEY WERE GIVEN A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR IT BECAUSE IT'S DESIGNED LIKE A ZERO LOCK COMMUNITY OF, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE PERCENTAGE WAS, BUT THEY, THEY HAD A WAIVER.
NO ONE'S BEEN ABLE TO FIND THAT.
THEY, THERE WAS A FLOOD AND I GUESS HARD COPIES LEFT.
I WENT THROUGH THE ARCHIVES HERE, NO ONE COULD FIND ANYTHING.
SO, YOU KNOW, I GUESS IT'LL GO CASE BY CASE.
BUT FOR US IN PARTICULAR, WHEN I WENT THROUGH AND TABULATED OTHER PROPERTIES, THEY'RE ALL AT 53%.
SO NOT REALLY SURE HOW THIS WILL BE HANDLED, 'CAUSE I KNOW THERE'S GONNA BE TEAR DOWNS IN THE FUTURE, BUT FOR US IN PARTICULAR, UM, FOR ANDREA, WE REALLY, WE NEED THAT COVERED SPACE.
SO, UM, SO THE 609 SQUARE FEET THAT YOU'RE SEEKING IN A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR, IS THAT LIVING SPACE OR IS THAT PART, IS LIVING SPACE AND COVERED? IT'S, IT'S MOSTLY THE COVERED AREA.
UM, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU LOOK AT HOW IT GOES OVER, BUT I MEAN, THE COVERED SPACE ALONE, THE, THE FRONT PORCH AND THE BACK PORCH ARE 955 SQUARE FEET.
SO YOU COULD KIND OF LOOK AT IT AS THE CURRENT HOUSE THAT ONLY HAS A, A COVERED, A SLIGHT COVERED AREA IN THE BACK.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, OUR PARAMETERS ARE, ARE PRETTY MUCH ALL THE SAME.
SO WHEN WE WERE BUILDING, WE'RE DESIGNING THIS, THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE OVER THIS 45%, BUT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND HOW, BUT NOW I DO BECAUSE WE'RE INCLUDING THE GARAGE AND THE COVERED PORCHES.
BUT WE, WE HAVE TO HAVE COVERED PORCHES.
SHE CAN'T SIT OUT IN THE SUN AT ALL.
I THINK THE ONLY REASON WHY I PULLED THIS CASE FROM THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET WAS JUST TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE IT'S A NEW BILL.
YOU KNOW, WHY YOU NEED, YOU KNOW, THESE ACCOMMODATIONS IN TERMS OF IT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE.
ON OUR, OUR POINT OF VIEW IS, YOU KNOW, HOW CAN YOU MAKE IT WORK WITHOUT COMING IN FRONT OF US, BUT, UM, I JUST WANTED TO HEAR YOUR, FROM YOU.
I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
JUST FOR, JUST A QUESTION TO STAFF, WHAT IS THE NORMAL LOT COVERAGE FOR, UM, FOR HOMES AT 45%? OH, THAT IS, THAT'S NORMAL.
SO THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY, 45% IS THE MAXIMUM.
[00:10:01]
THE MAXIMUM.OH, SO THAT'S, IT'S NOT JUST THEIR AREA, IT'S KIND OF EVERYWHERE.
IT, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT ZONING DISTRICT THEY'RE IN.
BUT LIKE NORMAL, LIKE R 16 ZONING, WHAT WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM COVERAGE? I'D HAVE TO LOOK IT UP.
I CAN'T REMEMBER RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
I WAS GONNA SAY, BECAUSE I LOOK AT THE HOUSES IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S DEFINITELY MORE THAN 45%.
THERE'S DIFFERENT, DEPENDING ON THE ZONING DISTRICT.
I, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. CANON? MR. NUTTAL, DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO.
OH, NO QUESTIONS? NO QUESTIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION OR ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS CASE? NO OTHER SPEAKERS.
I, I HAVE A MOTION I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER B D A 2 2 3 DASH 0 7 3 ON APPLICATION OF GRETCHEN RIF.
GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE FOR WHICH WILL REQUIRE A 609 SQUARE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED LOCK COVERAGE OF 45% AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO AFFORD A HANDICAPPED PERSON EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO USE AND ENJOY A DWELLING AS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
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.
UM, I, UM, I WANTED TO GRANT THIS THE, UM, IN THE, UH, BRIEFING, BUT I NEEDED TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE GROUND UP.
SO, UM, YOU CAME HERE AND YOU, YOU ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS AND OFFERED, UM, US UM, THE CONSIDERATION AND, UM, ALLOWED US, ALLOWED ME TO GET THERE AND BE COMFORTABLE WITH GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
SO I APPRECIATE YOU COMING AND GIVING CLARITY TO THIS PROJECT.
UM, CAN I HAVE A ROLL CALL? VOTE MS. LAMB? AYE.
WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO BDA 2 2 3 DASH 0 3 8 52 15 MORNINGSIDE AVENUE.
UM, AND, UH, LET ME ASK A QUICK QUESTION.
SO BEFORE WE BEGIN THIS CASE, I'M GOING TO ASK, UH, MS. LAMB TO SHARE SOME INFORMATION THAT HAPPENED, UM, AFTER, THIS IS A HOLDOVER CASE THAT WE HEARD IN MAY AND, UM, SHE RECEIVED A, UM, TEXT AND SHE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT REAL QUICK.
UM, SO THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS, UM, THE ONLY THING THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE ADDRESSED TO THE BOARD IS INSIDE THE PUBLIC FORUM.
UM, I WAS ENGAGED BY A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT, UM, REGARDING THIS CASE FOLLOWING A HOLDOVER.
I I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS NO ILL WILL OR LOBBYING EFFORTS ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT'S REP REPRESENTATIVE, BUT I DO WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE COMMUNICATION WAS, UH, I WAS APPROACHED ABOUT THIS CASE.
UM, NO LOBBYING ONCE AGAIN HAD HAPPENED.
I DID, UM, PROPERLY NOTIFY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT THAT ALL COMMUNICATION AS IT PERTAINS TO A, UH, ONGOING CASE MUST BE HELD IN THE PUBLIC FORUM.
SO I JUST WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND SHARE THAT AND PUT THAT ON THE RECORD.
AND IF WE CAN, UM, HAVE THE APPLICANT, UM, ARE THEY ONLINE OR IN PERSON? THERE IS, YES.
ALRIGHT, IF YOU CAN, UM, BE SWORN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM, UM, IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
MY NAME IS SCOTT JORDAN AND I LIVE AT 52 15 MORNINGSIDE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 6.
AND UH, AT THE LAST MEETING, UH, THERE WAS A REQUEST THAT WE MOVED THE SIGN CLOSER OR ADJACENT TO THE STREET, WHICH WE HAVE DONE, AND ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ALERTED NEIGHBORS, UH, OF OUR REQUEST, WHICH I'VE DONE.
UM, I REQUESTED IT, KNOCKED ON DOORS AND ATTENDED, UH, A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AND BROUGHT, YOU KNOW, SOME PRESENTATION MATERIALS WITH THEM TO THEM THERE AND GOT THEM TO SIGN A PETITION AS WELL AS SEND IN LETTERS, WHICH I'M HOPING YOU GOT SOME OF THOSE.
SO, UM, I, THIS MORNING I SENT THE EMAIL, UH, BEFORE THE 9:00 AM DEADLINE OF THE PETITION, SO HOPEFULLY YOU HAVE THAT TOO.
[00:15:01]
UM, MS. WILLIAMS, UM, SAID THAT THOSE WERE DISTRIBUTED.SO I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
UM, I APPRECIATE, UM, YOU GOING BACK AND MAKING SURE THAT YOUR NEIGHBORS KNEW WHAT WAS HAPPENING.
UM, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I I THINK THE BIGGEST ISSUE HERE WASN'T NECESSARILY THE MERITS OF YOUR APPLICATION LAST TIME, IT WAS RATHER OR NOT, THE, THE, UM, YOUR NEIGHBORS, UM, AND POTENTIAL STAKEHOLDERS WERE PROPERLY NOTIFIED.
AND I THINK THAT YOU'VE DONE THE DUE DILIGENCE AND THE SIGNAGE IS PROPERLY, UM, PLACED, WHICH I APPRECIATE AND APPRECIATE ALL THE HARD WORK THAT YOU DID INTO GOING IN AND GETTING, UM, SUPPORT FROM THOSE IN YOUR COMMUNITY.
UM, MAY I HAVE A MOTION? OH, I'M SORRY.
DO WE HAVE, UM, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION? NO OTHER SPEAKERS? UH, MAY I HAVE A MOTION? I HAVE A MOTION.
UM, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN APPEAL NUMBER B D A 2 2 3 DASH 0 3 8 ON APPLICATION OF 10 MYRICK GRANT, THE ONE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE REAR YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE FISCAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS, THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY, UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT.
I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH IS THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN IS REQUIRED.
SHOULD HAVE TOLD YOU THAT BEFORE.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS A HISTORIC, UH, I THINK THIS IS A CONSERVATION DISTRICT, SO WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL NEIGHBORS WERE APPRISED THE PROPER SIGNAGE NOTIFICATION OF THE PUBLIC TO OPEN UP THE, UH, THE, UM, CONVERSATION AND DISCUSSION, UM, WAS HAD.
AND I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT DID THEIR DUE DILIGENCE, UM, AND PROBABLY NOTIFY, UM, TO ALLOW FOR US TO HEAR AND TO MAKE A DETERMINATION ON THIS CASE.
AND THAT'S WHY I AGREE TO IN AGREEMENT.
CAN WE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE MR. NOTAL? AYE.
UM, MOVING ON TO B D A 2 2 3 DASH 0 6 2 27 30 NORTH HENDERSON AVENUE.
I DO YOU HAVE ANY SPEAKERS FOR THIS CASE? WE HAVE THE APPLICANT AND THE REPRESENTATIVE, YES, SHE IS HERE.
AND YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? PLEASE ANSWER.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
1414 BELLEVUE STREET, SUITE ONE 50, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 5.
REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER IN THIS CASE.
UH, I HAVE A PRESENTATION THAT I BELIEVE I SENT TO STAFF.
IF WE COULD PUT, PULL THAT UP PLEASE.
ALL RIGHT, JUST GO TO PAGE THREE.
JUST LISTENING TO THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING, JUST WANTING TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT I HEARD.
THIS HAS BEEN BEFORE YOU, BEFORE IT CAME TO YOU LAST YEAR.
WE JUST DID NOT GET THE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMITTED WITHIN THE 180 DAY WINDOW.
SO THAT IS WHY IT'S BACK IN FRONT OF YOU NOW, BUT IT'S THE EXACT SAME APPLICATION.
SO THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW LONG THE BUILDING HAD BEEN HERE.
THIS BUILDING'S BEEN HERE SINCE 1942.
UH, SOMEBODY SAID THAT IT LOOKED NEW.
THEY DID A REALLY GOOD JOB REFACING IT, BUT IT'S THE SAME BUILDING.
UH, THEY GOT IN THERE AND CREATED A WHITE BOX SO THAT THE TENANT THAT THEY SIGNED COULD COME IN THERE AND DO WHAT THEY NEEDED TO WITH IT.
UM, THE CO ON FILE, THE REASON WE HAVE FIVE DELTA CREDITS IS EMERALDS TO COCONUTS OPERATED HERE ALMOST 40 YEARS.
IT WAS IN A WOMAN'S APPAREL STORE WITH ACCESSORIES AND THE CO THAT THEY OBTAINED WAS FOR A FURNITURE STORE WHEN THEY FIRST OPENED AND THEY NEVER CAME IN AND REVISED THAT CO SO IT OPERATED AS GENERAL MERCHANDISE ALL THOSE YEARS WITH THE IMPROPER CO OR ELSE WE WOULD BE IN FRONT OF YOU NOW, WE WOULD HAVE DELTA CREDITS FOR GENERAL MERCHANDISE.
[00:20:01]
WE'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.YEAH, THERE'S A PICTURE OF IT.
YOU MAY REMEMBER THE BRIGHT GREEN BUILDING.
AND THERE'S A PICTURE OF THE ALLEY.
AND HERE'S AN AERIAL OF THE SITE.
YOU CAN SEE THE BUILDING REALLY IS SITTING AT AN ANGLE IN THIS TRIANGLE LOT.
IT'S KIND OF BACKED UP ONTO THE PROPERTY LINE ALONG THE ALLEY.
SO WHEN WE CAME IN AND LOOKED AT THIS, WHEN THE OWNER BOUGHT IT, HIS INTENT WAS TO PUT ANOTHER GENERAL MERCHANDISE, UH, BACK INTO THE SPACE, WHICH IS WHAT HAD BEEN THERE.
WE DIDN'T ASK, ASK FOR ANYTHING THAT WAS MORE OR LESS INTENSIVE THAN WHAT HAD BEEN THERE FOR ALL THOSE YEARS.
SO WHAT WE HAVE NOW IS A BOOKSTORE THAT WANTS TO GO INTO THE SPACE.
UH, THEY WILL HAVE A SMALL RETAIL SPACE OFF TO THE SIDE TO SELL COFFEE.
THE IDEA THERE IS FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO COME IN AND SAMPLE, ACTUALLY BUY A CUP, AND THEN TAKE A BAG AT THE GOURMET COFFEE HOME WITH YOU.
BUT IT'S ONLY 5% OF THE FLOOR AREA, WHICH WE WILL GET TO.
THERE WAS SOME COMMENTS ABOUT WHO'S GONNA OCCUPY THE SPACE.
SO YOU'LL SEE THE DISPLAY AREAS THAT ARE KIND OF OUT AND ABOUT AROUND THE FIRST FLOOR.
THOSE ARE FOR BOOKS AND LITTLE KNICKKNACKS THAT THEY SELL.
AND THEN THE DARK GRAY AREAS, THAT IS THE ACCESSORY USE SIDE OF THIS, WHICH IS ALLOWED BY CODE.
YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE 5% OF YOUR FLOOR AREA DEDICATED TO AN ACCESSORY USE.
AND IN THIS CASE IT WILL BE COPY SALES.
AND HERE YOU CAN SEE WE HAVE MORE DISPLAY.
THE ONLY SEATING, UH, ON THE SECOND FLOOR HERE ARE THOSE TWO CHAIRS IN THE READING ROOM.
AND THAT'S IF THEY WANT TO HAVE A CHILDREN'S STORY HOUR OR SOMEONE COME IN AND, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE KIDS SIT ON THE FLOOR, THAT SORT OF THING.
AND HERE'S JUST AN, JUST UH, A ZONING MAP OF THE AREA.
THIS, THIS PARTICULAR PD DOES NOT ALLOW ON STRAIGHT PARKING TO COUNT TOWARDS REQUIRED PARKING.
THERE IS ONE PARALLEL SPACE ON HENDERSON, AND EVEN IF THERE IS ROOM IN THE ALLEY, WHICH WE COULDN'T FIND ROOM TO PUT, UH, PARALLEL SPACES BACK THERE IN THE ALLEY, BUT EVEN IF WE COULD, WE STILL COULDN'T COUNT IT TOWARDS REQUIRED PARKING, WE WOULD STILL BE IN FRONT OF YOU WITH THE EXACT SAME REQUEST.
AND THERE'S ALSO SOMETHING TO POINT OUT HERE AS WELL.
EVEN THOUGH WE'RE ASKING FOR GENERAL MERCHANDISE, WE DO HAVE A D OVERLAY, WHICH WOULD MEAN NO ALCOHOL CAN BE SOLD HERE.
THAT WAS A QUESTION THAT CAME UP LAST YEAR FROM ONE OF THE COMMUNITY FOLKS.
YOU KNOW, CAN THEY COME IN HERE AT SOME POINT AND SELL ALCOHOL AND THEY CAN'T DO IT WITHOUT COMING IN AND CHANGING THE ZONING THROUGH C P C AND COUNCIL TO A D ONE WITH AN S U P.
SO EITHER WAY, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD TAKE, UH, TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR TWO DIFFERENT PROCESSES SO THE NEIGHBORS WOULD HAVE A, A SAY IN THAT.
BUT THAT IS NOT THE INTENT OF THIS PARTICULAR TENANT.
LIKE I SAID, IT'S JUST BOOKSTORE AND COFFEE.
SO WE DID DO SOME RESEARCH AROUND THE COMMUNITY AND THERE, SURPRISINGLY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THERE ARE A LOT OF TRIANGULAR SHAPED WATTS.
UM, I WAS ACTUALLY KIND OF SURPRISED WHEN I FIRST WENT THROUGH THIS.
THE, FORTUNATELY THOUGH THOUGH, THE OTHER TRIANGULAR SHAPED WATTS ARE EITHER, THEY EITHER HAVE ENOUGH ROOM ON THE SITE TO PROVIDE THEIR PARKING OR THEY'RE CLOSE ENOUGH WITHIN 300 TO 600 FEET OF COMMERCIAL SURFACE PARKING WHERE THEY CAN ACTUALLY HAVE A PARKING AGREEMENT TO MEET THEIR PARKING REQUIREMENT.
THERE IS NOTHING AROUND US ALONG THAT LINE.
AND THIS IS IMMEDIATELY ACROSS, UM, OH, WHAT'S THE SIDE STREET OVER THERE? KEEP GOING.
WHEN THEY FINISHED REFACING IT, UH, DID A BEAUTIFUL JOB ON IT.
WE DID HAVE SEVERAL ATTEMPTS LAST YEAR OF TRYING TO PROVIDE SOME PARKING AND WE GOT SHOT DOWN BY TRANSPORTATION AND ENGINEERING
SO THIS ONE WE ACTUALLY TRIED TO SQUEEZE IN THERE FOR PARKING SPACES, BUT WE COULDN'T MAKE THAT WORK.
UH, BECAUSE PARKING SPACES HAVE TO BE SET BACK 20 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND WE JUST COULDN'T GET THERE WITH THE TRIANGULAR SHAPE NATURE OF THIS NEXT SLIDE.
WE TRIED IT THIS WAY AT THIS ANGLE, DIDN'T WORK.
WE TRIED IT WITH A LOANING ZONE AND AN A D A SPACE.
STILL COULDN'T GET THERE FROM THE HENDERSON SIDE.
AND SO THIS IS THE REGULATION THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAD TO FOLLOW THAT THE PARKING SPACE HAD TO BE 20 FEET FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY AND NO PARKING SPACE LOCATE ON PUBLIC STREET OR AN ALLEY CAN BE USED IN THE CALCULATION.
[00:25:01]
COUNT ANYTHING, EVEN IF WE COULDN'T COMPLY WITH, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO PUT SOMETHING IN THE ALLEY.AND SO THIS IS WHAT WE ENDED UP WITH.
WE GET NO CREDIT FOR THE BIKE RACKS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO BE REQUIRED AT LEAST I THINK 20 OR 25 SPACES FOR THE BIKE RACKS TO COUNT AS A FULL PARKING SPACE.
UH, WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE THEM ANYWAY BECAUSE THE IDEA BEHIND THIS USE IS FOR IT TO BE MORE COMMUNITY PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED.
THERE'S A LOT OF, UH, PEOPLE WHO RIDE BICYCLES IN THIS AREA THAT WALK IN THIS AREA.
AND THAT'S REALLY WHO WE'RE AFTER IS THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY.
SO PEOPLE CAN RIDE THEIR BIKES UP.
IT'S NOT AS INTENSIVE AS SOME OTHER GENERAL MERCHANDISE USES.
YOU COULD HAVE LIKE A CONVENIENCE STORE OR SOMETHING ALONG THAT LINE.
'CAUSE AT LEAST HERE YOU COME IN, YOU GET A BOOK, IT'S IN A BAG, YOU HANG IT ON YOUR HANDLEBAR, YOU CAN DRINK COFFEE ONE HAND AND STEER WITH THE OTHER.
YOU CAN'T DO THAT WITH JUST ABOUT ANY OTHER GENERAL MERCHANDISE.
MARY, WHERE ARE WE ON TIME? OH, TIME IS UP.
CAN WE JUST GRANT SHE LET HER FINISHER? HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED TO FINISH? MAYBE A MINUTE.
JUST WANTED TO SHOW YOU THE, THE PARKING SPACE ON HENDERSON.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE, THERE'S A PATIO ON THE SITE, UM, THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR, IT'S PART OF THE ORIGINAL SURVEY.
WE'RE NOT INTENDING ON, UM, HAVING ANY PERMANENT SEATING OUT THERE.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING YOU MAY WANNA CONSIDER, UH, DISCUSSING AMONGST YOURSELVES IS I DID GET A PHONE CALL THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT IT WOULD BE COVERED UP WITH PATIO FURNITURE AND PEOPLE HANGING OUT ON THE PATIO.
BUT WITH IT BEING A COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ORIENTED BUSINESS, IT MIGHT BE GOOD TO HAVE SOME SEATING OUT THERE.
SO THAT'S, WE DIDN'T SHOW ANY ON THE SITE PLAN BECAUSE WE DIDN'T INTEND TO PUT ANY OUT THERE.
SO, UM, I WASN'T HERE WHEN YOU, UM, WHEN THIS CASE CAME IN FRONT OF THE, THIS PANEL PREVIOUSLY, UM, I THINK IT WAS THIS PANEL, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
UM, BUT THE REASON WHY YOU'RE BACK HERE YOU MENTIONED WAS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T FILE FOR PERMITS FOR THE FIRST 180 DAYS.
UM, WHERE YOU, WITH BUILDING PLANS, WHERE YOU WITH, WITH SUBMITTAL POTENTIAL? THEY'RE SUBMITTED NOW.
SO WHERE ARE THEY IN THE PROCESS WAITING FOR THIS
SO THE CITY STAFF IS REVIEWING, YOU'VE HAD, YES.
UM, AND THE, ONE OF THE LAST THINGS YOU NEED IS THIS IN ORDER TO PARK IT AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE, 'CAUSE I IMAGINE THERE'S NO BUILDING, LIKE IT'S JUST TENANT IMPROVEMENT, RIGHT? CORRECT.
LIKE THERE'S NO OTHER, THERE'S OBVIOUSLY NO DEMO PERMITS.
NO, NO DEMO PERMITS FOR CO CORRECT? YEAH.
ALL OF OUR BUILDING PERMIT PLANS ARE SUBMITTED.
WE'VE ALREADY BEEN GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH STAFF TRYING TO GET THOSE EXACTLY LIKE THEY NEEDED TO BE.
AND NOW WE'RE JUST, NOW WE'RE HERE.
AS FAR AS I KNOW, I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING DIFFERENT.
I I'M SURE YOU DON'T WANNA BE BACK HERE RIGHT? IN A YEAR.
WE DON'T WANT YOU TO BE BACK HERE IN A YEAR.
AND THEN IS THIS A NATIONAL RETAILER OR IS THIS A LOCAL? HE'S BASED OUT OF ATLANTA.
AND HE HAS SOME OTHER PROPERTIES IN VARIOUS STATES.
THIS WILL BE A, A NEW CONCEPT FOR HIM AT THIS PARTICULAR STORE.
HE DID HAVE A COFFEE SHOP DOWN ON LOIS GREENVILLE.
UH, BUT THIS IS GONNA BE MORE MERCHANDISE ORIENTED, UH, WITH COFFEE BEING A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE SALES THERE.
CAN YOU SHARE WHICH COFFEE SHOP HE HAD ON, ON A GREENVILLE? IT WAS UM HUH OH, OKAY.
UM, I'M JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING LIKE A HALF PRICE FOLKS COMING IN OR A FOXTROT OR SOMETHING THAT OH NO.
THAT DEMANDS A LOT MORE OF THE COMMUNITY AND THAT MAY BE CONSIDERED CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
IT JUST DEPENDS ON KIND OF WHO THE OPERATOR IS.
YEAH, THIS IS A BOUTIQUE BOOKSTORE, SO.
IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING'S GONNA BE BROUGHT IN ON A BIG TRUCK LIKE COMMUNITY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, AND I, I HAD ASKED PREVIOUSLY ABOUT, I THINK YOU ADDRESSED IT IN YOUR BRIEFING, UM, I HAD ASKED PREVIOUSLY AT AROUND 11 TODAY HAD THERE BEEN A TRAFFIC STUDY, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF YOUR CUSTOMER DO YOU ASSUME WILL, WILL USE OTHER MODES OF TRANSPORTATION OTHER THAN DRIVING? I WOULD IMAGINE WITH THIS AREA WE'RE LOOKING AT HOPEFULLY 30 TO 50% OF THEM WALKING RECYCLING HERE IS WHAT WE'RE HOPING.
'CAUSE WE WANT IT TO BE A NEIGHBORHOOD ORIENTED BUSINESS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST? UM, PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
[00:30:01]
REERAND LET'S, UH, SWEAR YOU IN AND, UM, YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
DO YOU SWEAR OR, OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DO.
PLEASE START WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
I RESIDE AT 5 2 2 2 HOMER STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 6.
UH, I'M THE CO-OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY AND RESIDE THERE WITH MY HUSBAND GREGORY ARMSTRONG.
AND I'M HERE TODAY REPRESENTING BOTH OF US.
I'M HERE TODAY BECAUSE WE SUPPORT THIS APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO THE PARKING REGULATIONS AT 27 30 NORTH HENDERSON.
I MIGHT MENTION THAT GIVE PEOPLE I'VE NEVER MET IN MY LIFE.
WE ARE OWNERS OF THREE PROPERTIES WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE ABOVE-REFERENCED PROPERTY, UH, WHICH ARE 52 22 HOMER 52, 26 HOMER, AND 52 30 HOMER STREET.
THESE THREE LOTS ARE CONTIGUOUS TO ONE ANOTHER AND WE HAVE RESIDED AT OUR HOME AT 52 22 HOMER STREET IN THE COCHRANE HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE 1986.
SO WE KNOW WHAT GOES ON
AND PARKING IS CONCERNED IF ANYONE IS TO BE AFFECTED BY WHAT HAPPENS OR DOES NOT HAPPEN AT 27 30 NORTH HENDERSON.
IT IS WE WHO WILL BE THE MOST AFFECTED SINCE OUR THREE CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES LIKE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THAT PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
WE ARE VERY WELL FAMILIAR WITH THE HIGHLY UNUSUAL CONFIGURATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES OR IMPOSSIBILITY I SHOULD SAY, OF COMPLYING WITH THE CURRENT PARKING REQUIREMENTS PER ZONING REGULATIONS FOR ANY BUT THE VERY MOST MINIMAL USES OF THE STRUCTURE.
THIS IS DUE TO THE EXTRAORDINARILY AWKWARD TRIANGULAR LOT WHOSE ACUTE CORNERS LEAVE MUCH UNUSABLE SURFACE AREA.
THE BUILDING WAS FORMERLY OCCUPIED BY A BELOVED LOCAL SMALL BUSINESS CALLED EMERALDS TO COCONUTS, WHICH WAS A SMALL SCALE RE RETAIL STORE THAT WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD FIXTURE FOR MORE THAN 30 YEARS.
GIVEN THE SMALL SIZE OF THE BUILDING AND THE RELATIVELY LOW TRAFFIC THAT THE STORE COULD THEREFORE ATTRACT, WE NEVER OBSERVED THAT THE EXISTING PARKING SPACES ON THE SITE WERE INADEQUATE FOR THAT TRAFFIC.
I'M HERE TODAY TO TELL YOU THAT WE NEVER EXPERIENCED SPILLOVER PARKING FROM THAT BUSINESS INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING STILL REMAINS THE SAME AS IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN.
THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT ANY NEW TENANT'S BUSINESS WOULD BE ABLE TO GENERATE SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED RETAIL TRAFFIC INTO THEIR STORE THAT WOULD CAUSE SPILLOVER PARKING PROBLEMS. I WOULD ADD ALSO THAT AS THE APPLICANT NOTED, UH, THIS IS A HIGH PEDESTRIAN AREA, UH, THERE ARE HALF A SQUARE MILE OF NEW APARTMENTS AND CONDOS THAT ARE INHABITED BY YOUNGER PEOPLE WHO WALK THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALL THE TIME.
NOW A NEW OWNER HAS REMODELED AND MODERN MODERNIZED THE BUILDING AND THEY ARE MAKING APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE TO THE, UH, APPLICABLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
SINCE THE STRUCTURE WAS CONSTRUCTED FOR RETAIL USE AND IS STILL ZONED FOR SUCH USE, WE WOULD NOT ANTICIPATE ANY APPRECIABLY DIFFERENT TRAFFIC PATTERNS AND NEEDS FOR PARKING THAN EXISTED WHEN THE PREVIOUS LONG-TERM TENANT EMERALDS TO COCONUTS OPERATED IN THE SAME SPACE.
THEREFORE, WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE GRANTING OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND WE SUPPORT THE APPLICANT'S APPLICATION.
MOREOVER, WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS IF THIS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DOES NOT GRANT THE VERY REASONABLE REQUEST OR VARIANCE, IF THIS PROPERTY CANNOT BE GRANTED A VARIANCE, IT EFFECTIVELY BECOMES UNUSABLE AND FOREVER VACANT, WHICH IS AN OUTCOME THAT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF NO ONE.
SO I ASK YOU TO PLEASE VOTE TO ALLOW A PARKING VARIANCE SO THAT WE CAN ONCE AGAIN WELCOME A NEW BUSINESS TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
I CAN'T TELL YOU THE BUZZ OF EXCITEMENT.
THERE IS ABOUT A COOL BOOKSTORE AND COFFEE SHOP IN OUR WITHIN WALK DISTANCE OF OUR HOMES.
UM, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONING, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS? UM, SOMEBODY REGISTERED ONLINE BUT THEY'RE NOT ONLINE, SO.
UM, AND I THINK MS. BRIDGES SAID THAT THERE WAS A LETTER IN OPPOSITION, BUT WE HAVE NOT SEEN IT.
I THINK THAT WE PROBABLY NEED TO, IT WAS EMAILED, BUT DO YOU KNOW WHAT WHEN I WOULD SAY IT'S PROBABLY A HALF A MILE AWAY.
IS THAT RIGHT? IT'S ON V RIGHT.
[00:35:02]
I DON'T HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE.CAN YOU ATTEST TO WHAT THEY'RE ASKING ABOUT THE PROXIMITY OF THE OPPOSITION FROM SAID PROPERTY? IT'S NOT IN WITHIN THE NOTIFICATION AREA.
I, I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK SO.
WELL, I GUESS, UM, AM I ALLOWED, I HAVE IT ON THE SCREEN THERE.
DO I NEED TO READ THAT OR NO? I FOUND IT ON MY, UM, OH, IT'S ON RICHARD.
IT IT, CAN WE PULL, UM, THAT'S DIFFERENT, THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE THAT YOU SENT.
THAT'S A, THAT'S A DIFFERENT LETTER.
SO NOW YOU HAVE TWO LETTERS IN OPPOSITION.
MR. CHAIR, MAY I MAKE A MOTION? UM, WELL I, YEAH, CAN YOU, CAN YOU PULL UP ON THE MAP WHERE THESE, WHERE 52 14 RICHARD IS LOCATED LOCATED AND WHERE 55 51 VICKERY BOULEVARD IS LOCATED? 'CAUSE BOTH OF THOSE ARE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE.
IT'S TWO SEPARATE LETTERS FROM TWO SEPARATE PEOPLE.
SO THERE'S TWO PEOPLE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE AND THE REGISTERED ONLINE SPEAKER WAS, WAS THAT IN CORRELATION TO EITHER ONE OF THESE LETTERS? YES, IT WAS ONE OF THE, UH, OPPOSITION LETTERS.
IT WAS ONE OF THESE PEOPLE DO.
CAN WE, WHICH WAS IT THIS ONE RIGHT HERE OR THE OTHER ONE? UM, KELLY SMITH I BELIEVE IS THE SECOND LETTER.
UM, CAN YOU SEE THE NOTIFICATION MAP? NO.
ONE MOMENT ON A NOTIFICATION MAP IS NUMBER SIX.
SO JUST TO, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE LETTER THAT WAS JUST ON THE SCREEN CAME FROM NUMBER SIX ON THE MAP.
AND THEN THERE WAS A LETTER OUTSIDE THE NOTIFICATION AREA ON 55 31 VICKERY.
WHERE IS VICKERY ON THIS MAP? IT'S NOT.
CAN I CALL THE APPLICANT BACK UP TO ASK QUESTIONS? YES.
UM, MS. BUCKLEY, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND RETURNING.
SO ONE OF THE, UH, POINTS OF OPPOSITION IS, UM, THAT IN THE, UM, IN THE LIQUID ADVOCATE, UM, THE OWNER OF THIS SHOP SAID THAT THEY WOULD HAVE SEATING THROUGHOUT FOR LOUNGING.
IN ADDITION, THERE'S AN OUTDOOR PATIO THAT'LL BE FURNISHED WITH CHAIRS.
IT'S A GREAT PLACE TO COME IN THE MORNING TO DRINK COFFEE AND READ BOOKS AND BUY GENERAL GIFTS AND HANG OUT.
SO, UM, YOU STATED THAT THERE WOULD BE NOTHING ON THE PATIO AND THERE WOULD ONLY BE TWO CHAIRS IN THE BUILDING, SO CORRECT.
WHO IS CORRECT? WE ARE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.
SO NOT HAVING FURNITURE ON A PATIO IN A SITE PLAN, IS THAT, WILL THEY BE HELD TO THAT OR CAN YOU ADD FURNITURE TO A SITE PLAN EVEN? I MEAN, IF IT HAS AN OUTDOOR PATIO, HOW DOES THAT WORK OUT? OUTDOOR FURNITURE, UH, FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS ON THE SITE PLAN IS AN INDICATOR OF, OF A RESTAURANT OR THERE'S OUTDOOR ACTIVITY GOING ON.
UH, THE ONLY CONCERN FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS FOR OUTDOOR FURNITURE WOULD BE IF IT'S IN PROXIMITY TO A RESIDENTIAL AREA WHERE AN R A R IS REQUIRED, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS NOT ANY ACTIVITY THAT COULD DISRUPT OR DISTURB THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITHIN CERTAIN HOURS OF THE DAY.
UH, SUCH AS, UH, MAYBE TVS THE BAR OR IF THEY'RE PLAYING GAMES, YOU KNOW, LIKE ON THE, UH, OUTSIDE OF THE PATIO PAST A CERTAIN TIME OR HOURS OF THE DAY.
AND SO, UM, IF THERE IS NO FURNITURE INDICATED ON THE FLOOR PLAN WHEN
[00:40:01]
IT COMES IN, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD TYPICALLY HOLD THE APPLICANT TO FOR, FOR THAT TO BE, I DON'T KNOW, MAY, MAYBE JUST A SPACE FOR THEY GO OUTSIDE AND ENJOY THE SUN.I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S AN JUST AN, IS IT AN EGRESS? I HAVE NO IDEA.
WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE SITE, BUT, BUT IF, LET'S SAY THAT FURNITURE SHOWS UP AND THE NEIGHBORS COMPLAIN MM-HMM.
UH, IT, IT DEPENDS ON IF THE FURNITURE IS FIXATED.
IF, IF IT'S NOT A FIXTURE, IT IT'S EASILY REMOVABLE.
UH, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THEY'RE UTILIZING THE FURNITURE FOR.
THAT'S MORE OF A CODE QUESTION BECAUSE IT DEPENDS.
IF IT'S JUST FURNITURE OUTSIDE, IT'S INCONSEQUENTIAL.
NOBODY'S SITTING IN IT SITTING, UH, IT, RIGHT.
I GUESS I, MY, I MEAN I DON'T, WITH, WITH ONLY FIVE SPOTS.
I MEAN, IF YOU ARE HAVING A LOT OF LOUNGE FURNITURE AND FURNITURE INSIDE, AS THE LIQUID ADVOCATE STATED MM-HMM.
YOU'RE NOT JUST RUNNING IN TO GRAB YOUR CUP OF COFFEE OR COFFEE TO GO, YOU'RE STAYING.
AND THAT IS GONNA CAUSE TRAFFIC IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IF THIS WAS A RESTAURANT THOUGH, UNLESS IT WAS A COMPLETELY ENCLOSED PATIO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO ACTUALLY PARK THE PATIO.
WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S COVERED PATIO.
I HAVEN'T SEEN THE SITE PLAN, SO, NO.
SO, SO EVEN IF THIS, IF THIS IS A RESTAURANT USE, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IF THIS IS A RESTAURANT USE, BECAUSE IT'S AN OPEN PATIO, YOU DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR PARKING FOR A PATIO UNLESS IT'S COMPLETELY ENCLOSED.
IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE, THE DEMAND ON PARKING, EVEN THOUGH TECHNICALLY THERE'S TABLES, SINCE IT'S NOT ENCLOSED PATIO, YOU DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO ACCOUNT THE PARKING.
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO, I PATIO FURNITURE IS VERY INCONSEQUENTIAL, UH, TO THIS CASE.
I, I I THINK MY CONCERN IS WE WERE TOLD BY THE APPLICANT THAT THERE ARE GONNA BE TWO CHAIRS INSIDE AND NO FURNITURE OUTSIDE.
AND THEN WE HAVE A LETTER THAT SAYS THAT THE LIQUID ADVOCATE STATED SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
AND I THINK THE FURNITURE INSIDE, WE CAN TAKE THE PATIO OFF, BUT THE FURNITURE INSIDE, IF THERE'S GOING TO BE COMFY LOUNGING FURNITURE INSIDE, THAT IS GONNA CREATE A DIFFERENT TRAFFIC PATTERN THAN JUST SIMPLY RUNNING IN AND BUYING SOMETHING.
I THINK THE APPLICANT JUST ASSERTED THAT THERE'S NO FURNITURE.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? UM, DID THAT PERSON ONLINE SHOW UP? MS. WILLIAMS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT BEFORE SHE BACKED DOWN FROM THE THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION OR DO YOU HAVE MOTION? NO, I'LL, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION ALL I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA A 2 2 3 DASH 0 6 2 ON APPLICATION OF AUDREY BUCKLEY.
THE EIGHT SPACE VARIANCE TO THE PARKING REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT IS OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT.
I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED OR FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH A REVISED SITE PLAN THAT'S REQUIRED.
I SECOND THE MOTION, UM, DISCUSSION.
TO ME, THIS IS A TEXTBOOK, UH, CASE FOR WHY THE WORD ADJUSTMENT EXISTS.
BUT IF WE DON'T GRANT THEM THIS, THIS, LIKE THE, UH, NEIGHBOR STATED, IT WOULD BECOME, UH, UNDEVELOPABLE UNUSABLE.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT.
AND, UM, I THINK MY QUESTIONING WAS TO THE APPLICANT THAT YOU ARE GOING INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD AND WELL, I COMPLETELY SUPPORT, UM, THE PARKING VARIANCE, BUT I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT IF PARKING BECOMES A PROBLEM, THAT THEY MANAGE IT, THAT THEY FIGURE OUT A DIFFERENT PROGRAM.
'CAUSE THAT WOULD NOT BE FAIR TO THE NEIGHBORS.
AND SO I THINK IT'S, UH, I MEAN I THINK THAT THEY NEED TO BE AWARE OF THAT AND ENCOURAGE BIKING AND WALKING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
UM, AND IT LOOKS LIKE WITH THE BIKE RACKS THAT YOU HAVE THAT, BUT I THINK TO LET THAT PROPERTY GO EMPTY WOULD BE WORSE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD OVERALL.
UM, I NEED TO GRANT THIS BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
I ACTUALLY THINK THAT IF WE DO NOT GRANT THIS, IT WILL BE CONTRACT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
UM, THIS WOULD BASICALLY BE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO LEASE TO ANOTHER USE OTHER THAN AN OFFICE OFFICE USE.
UM, WHICH MAY BE MORE INTENSIVE THAN WHAT WHAT WE SEE HERE.
UM, AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE WALKABILITY IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
THIS IS PROBABLY ONE OF MAYBE THREE CORRIDORS THAT IS REALLY DESIGNED TO CULTIVATE AND SUPPORT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I THINK THE OPERATOR HAS A HISTORY OF BEING A GOOD OPERATOR FROM HIS, UM, PREVIOUS LOCATION, UM, ON LOWER GREENVILLE.
SO FOR ALL THOSE REASONS, UM, AND PRIMARILY BECAUSE I THINK IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST IS WHY I GRANTED THIS, UM, APPLICATION.
[00:45:01]
YES.UM, I SUPPORT THIS MOTION TO GRANT, UM, JUST BASED ON THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC.
UM, I KNOW THAT ONE OF THE LETTERS OF EX OR THE LETTER OF OPPOSITION, UH, THEIR CONCERN WAS MORE, UM, FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.
UH, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS VARIANCE WILL IMPACT PUBLIC SAFETY, BUT JUST FOR, UM, THOSE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT MIGHT THINK THIS, UH, VARIANCE WOULD, I WOULD, UH, STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO ADVOCATE FOR CONFORMING THAT, UH, RICHARDS AND, UH, HOMER, UH, INTERSECTION INTO A FOUR-WAY STOP, UM, THROUGH USE OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, UH, CITY COUNCIL LEADERS TO, UM, ENSURE THAT SAFETY.
BUT AGAIN, I BELIEVE THAT US GRANTING THIS VARIANCE IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
CAN WE TAKE A ROLL CALL? VOTE MS. LAMB? AYE.
OUR LAST CASE FOR TODAY, BDA 2 23 DASH 0 7 4 55 0 5 CHATHAM HILL ROAD.
IF WE CAN HAVE THE APPLICANT STEP FORWARD AND BE SWORN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DO.
PLEASE, YOU START WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
TRENT ROBERTSON 22 1 SOUTH MAIN STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 1.
UM, AND I DO HAVE A POWERPOINT SHARE I JUST NEED TO HAVE ACCESS TO REAL QUICK.
AND I'LL TRY TO GO QUICK BECAUSE I KNOW HOW IT IS.
SO I'LL TRY TO GO QUICKLY FOR YOU.
UM, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW
YOU HAVE GREAT STAFF, ALL YOUR STUFF'S GREAT INTERVIEW.
THEY'RE DOING A LOT, SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THE TIME AND THEY'RE WILLING TO TALK TO ME MULTIPLE TIMES.
THEY SAID I COULD DO IT THROUGH WEBEX.
THEY MAKE ME A PRESENTER AND THEN I PROMISE IT'S A REALLY GOOD PRESENTATION.
MR. TRENT, IF YOU'RE GONNA SHARE, I BELIEVE YOU WOULD HAVE TO JOIN THE WEBINAR.
ALRIGHT, UM,
UM, EXPLAIN WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING TO DO.
I'M GONNA GO TRY AND TAKE A HISTORY ON THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS 55 0 5, UH, CHATHAM HILL.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT WE'RE PROPOSING, UH, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION BULLET.
UH, BACK IN 2018, UH, WE WERE, WE APPLIED TO CONSTRUCT A NINE FOOT FENCE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR A NINE FOOT FENCE, UH, THAT'S IN THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE A FIVE FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
UM, AT THAT TIME THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPROVED THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST, UH, FOR A CHAIN LINK FENCE.
UM, HERE'S THE COPY OF THE APPROVAL LETTER THAT WE RECEIVED.
UH, AS PART OF THOSE TERMS AND CONDITIONS AT THAT TIME, THERE'S OTHER REQUESTS THAT THEY MADE AS WELL IN 2018.
BUT THE ONE THAT'S, UM, HIGHLIGHTED OR CIRCLED IN RED IS THE SP THE ONE SPECIFIC TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
UM, ATTACHES THE MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 22ND, 2018 MEETING WHERE PANEL B APPROVED THIS REQUEST AS WELL, UH, FOR A SPECI SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR OFFENSE EXCEEDING THE FI, UH, FIVE FOOT OR FOUR FOOT REQUIREMENT, ALLOWING IT TO GO UP TO NINE FEET.
UM, IN THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED, UM, THAT IS RIGHT HERE ALL THROUGHOUT THE SITE PLAN AROUND THE PERIMETER OF CHATHAM
[00:50:01]
HILL, UM, HOLLOWAY, UM, ALL ON OUR PROPERTY, IT SHOWED THERE'S LITTLE, UM, MARKING IN THERE.IT SHOWED THE CHAIN LINK THAT WAS APPROVED AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REFERENCING WHEN WE WENT.
RECENTLY WHEN WE WENT TO GO APPLY FOR THE PERMIT, WE APPLIED FOR A NINE FOOT METAL MESH FENCE, WHICH IS A HIGHER QUALITY METAL MESH.
WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE OPACITY OF THE FENCE.
UM, INSTEAD OF A DIAMOND, IT'S SIMPLY BEING CHANGED INTO A RECTANGLE.
UM, BUT IT'S A HIGHER QUALITY FENCE OR INDIVIDUALLY WELDED, UM, STRONGER, LASTS LONGER, IT LOOKS BETTER OVER TIME.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO.
UM, AS PART OF THAT, HERE'S THE AMENDED SITE PLAN AND THOSE LITTLE AREAS ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE.
UM, IT DOES CHANGE IT FROM CHAIN LINK TO METAL MESH.
NOTHING ELSE IS CHANGING PER OUR SITE PLAN, PER OUR REQUEST.
EVERYTHING ELSE WILL STAY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WAS APPROVED IN 2018.
UM, THAT, AND THAT'S CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
UM, ONCE AGAIN, HERE'S AN EXAMPLE.
OH HERE, HERE'S THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 2018 APPROVAL AND WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING TODAY IS SIMPLY CHANGING THAT TO US TO DO A NINE FOOT INSTEAD CHAIN LINK.
AND HERE'S HERE'S SOME SAMPLES OF WHAT CHAIN LINK FENCE LOOKS LIKE.
I'M SURE WE'RE ALL VERY FAMILIAR WITH CHAIN LINK AND WHAT THE CHAIN METAL MESH FENCE WOULD LOOK LIKE.
UM, PREVIOUSLY IN MY PRESENTATION I ALSO SHOWED YOUR ELEVATIONS OF WHAT THE METAL MESH.
IT'S MORE OF THE UM, STRUCTURAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS OF WHAT THOSE, OF WHAT THE METAL MESH IS COMPRISED OF, HOW FAR IT GOES TO THE GROUND, ET CETERA, OR THE POST.
UH, AND THAT'S ALSO PART OF THE FACT PLAN DOCUMENT THAT WE GAVE.
IN NO WAY WILL THIS FACT 2018 STAFF, UH, DIDN'T FIND ANYTHING OR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, DIDN'T FIND ANYTHING THAT WOULD INJURE ANY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
AND WE FEEL THAT CHANGING THIS TO A METAL MESH, A HIGHER QUALITY FENCE WOULD STILL NOT INJURE OR HARM ANY OTHER NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
WE FEEL THAT THIS IS AN UPGRADE THAT WE'RE NOT CHANGING WHAT WAS APPROVED IN 2018 BESIDES CHAINLINK TO METAL MESH.
AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTION THUS MY QUESTION MAYBE COMES TO APPLICANT OR CITY STAFF.
SO THE REQUEST HERE IS A, FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO DEFENSE HEIGHT REGULATIONS.
BUT WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT IS MATERIALS.
UM, CAN SOMEBODY CLARIFY HERE, MAYBE I'M MISUNDERSTANDING.
WELL, THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL WAS FOR A HEIGHT BUT IT WAS FOR A CHAIN LINK FENCE.
SO BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN THE UM, MATERIAL, HE WOULD JUST HAVE TO PROVIDE NEW ELEVATION 'CAUSE HE HAD TO COMPLY WITH THE ELEVATIONS IN THE SITE PLAN.
SO THE ELEVATION SHOW A CHAIN LINK FENCE TO HER, NOW HE'S SHOWING A METAL MESH FENCE.
SO THAT WOULD NOT BE A DIFFERENT APPLICATION FOR A CHANGE OF, FOR MATERIALS BECAUSE OKAY.
SO WE STAY THE SAME, THE MATERIALS ALLOWED, SO IT WOULDN'T BE FOR A MATERIAL.
YEAH, IT'S FOR THE HEIGHT BECAUSE OUR SITE PLAN AND THE ELEVATION IS ALL SET CHAIN LINK.
AND NOW IT'S CHANGING THE METAL MESH.
WE HAD TO COME BACK TO THIS PROCESS.
AND THEN HAVE YOU SPOKEN, ENGAGED, UH, YOUR NEIGHBORS ABOUT THIS CHAIN? UH, MATERIAL? UH, NOT THE ONES ON CHATHAM HILL.
UM, BUT ONCE AGAIN THIS WE THOUGHT WAS A SIMPLE CHANGE GOING FROM MIDDLE MESH.
I MEAN, ONCE AGAIN A LONG CHATMAN HILL, IT'S GONNA BE WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNED TO BE HIGHLY VEGETATED AS WELL.
SO YOU COULDN'T REALLY SEE INTO THE PROPERTY.
NOTHING WAS CHANGING EXCEPT FOR GOING FROM A DIAMOND TO A RECTANGLE.
UM, SO WHAT, I GUESS IT'S NOT REALLY THAT IMPORTANT, BUT WHY, WHY IS THE APPLICANT NOW CHANGED THE MATERIALS AFTER? IT'S A HIGHER, IT'S A BETTER LOOK.
THEY THINK IT'S A BETTER QUALITY FENCE OR LESS MAINTENANCE DOWN THE ROAD THAN WHAT CHAINLINK IS.
GENERALLY CHAIN LINK IS ONE PIECE THAT'S RAVELED THAT'S INTERTWINED.
METAL MEASURES ARE INDIVIDUALLY WELDED THINGS.
WOULD YOU MIND GOING BACK TO THE PICTURE OF THE MATERIAL PLEASE? OH, SORRY.
IS THE FENCE ALREADY ON THE SITE? IS THERE, UM, THERE ARE, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, WE, SO THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF FENCE ON THE PROPERTY.
SO BACK IN 2018 THEY APPROVED, UM, SOME FENCE FOR LIKE A MASONRY WALL ON, ON THE PROPERTY IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS AND THEN CHAIN LINK ON OTHER PORTIONS OF THE, ON THE, SO OTHER CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE FENCE HAVE INSTRUCTED THERE, THERE IS CONSTRUCTION FENCES UP BECAUSE IT IS A LARGE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FOR SAFETY.
THEY, THEY HAVE CONSTRUCTION FENCES UP.
BUT, BUT WE HAVE NOT, WE WENT TO PULL THE PERMIT AND WHEN WE WENT TO GO PULL THE PERMIT, THEY NOTICED THAT IT SAID MESH ME METAL MESH INSTEAD OF CHAIN LINK.
AND THAT'S WHAT TRIGGERED US TO GO BACK TO THE BOARD OF DESIGN.
SO THEY DIDN'T, THEY HAVEN'T CONSTRUCTED THIS FENCE YET.
SO THE ELEVATIONS ARE NOT CHANGING AT ALL, JUST THE MATERIAL? CORRECT.
AND WE'RE NOT ADDING ANY ADDITIONAL FENCING HERE? NOPE.
IT'S JUST LITERALLY SWITCHING OUT EXACTLY WHERE IT'S LOCATED.
BUT IF YOU COMPARE THE TWO SIDELINES, THERE'S NOT ONE CHANGE IN THE MATERIAL, BUT THERE'S NOT ONE CHANGE LIKE A CONCRETE WALL, UH, MASON WALL CHANGING THE CHANGE, UH, THE METAL MASS SOMEWHERE
[00:55:01]
ELSE OR YOU'RE GETTING MORE METAL MASS OR MORE CONCRETE WALL.I MEAN IN ORDER TO IMPROVE THIS IT HAS, HAS TO BE NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC OPINION.
WE DO HAVE A LETTER IN OPPOSITION FROM ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS ON CHATHAM HILL.
UM, 'CAUSE THEY'RE SAYING THAT THE FENCE HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT AND THAT IT'S A SOLID METAL FENCE.
WE, IF THERE'S ANY FENCE, IT'D BE A CONSTRUCTION FENCE THEY DO HAVE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE PARK.
THAT WOULD BE THE SOLID FENCE.
I, I MEAN IF YOU LOOKED AT THE I VIDEO THAT STAFF SHOWED DURING THE BRIEFING, UH, YOU CAN SEE WHAT'S OUT THERE TODAY.
I MEAN THERE WASN'T ANY SORT OF, I CAN'T RECALL A SOLID METAL FENCE.
AND IF THERE IS ONE, IT'S MORE THAN LIKELY A CONSTRUCTION FENCE FOR SAFETY PURPOSES.
BUT EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE CONSTRUCTING WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED CYCLING FOR ELEVATION IN BOTH 2018, HOPEFULLY TODAY.
AND I'M SORRY, I'M JUST RECALLING HERE THAT THE VIDEO THAT WE WERE SHOWN IN BRIEFING, IT DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE ANY SOLID METAL FENCES, JUST CHAIN LINK WITH, UM, WITH A, THERE ARE METAL WRAP ON IT.
YEAH, THERE'S A, LIKE A BLACK VINYL WRAP AND THAT'S USUALLY FOR CONSTRUCTION AND DUST, DEBRIS NOT PROPERTY, WHICH WE'RE, I THINK IS REQUIRED.
I'M WITH MASTER PLAN 2021 MAIN STREET, THE LETTER.
HEY, CAN YOU SWEAR, UH, STEVEN PLEASE? YES I DID.
I DO WANT TO POINT OUT TO YOU THAT THE LETTER THAT WAS TENDERED TO YOU THIS AFTERNOON, UM, TO THIS REQUEST DOES TEND, UH, MAKE A, I THINK, UH, FOR CLARIFICATION IT IS NO VARIANCE REQUEST HERE.
THE LETTER THAT'S YOU'RE READING IN TERMS OF OPPOSITION TALKS ABOUT VARIANCE HARSH.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE THINGS REQUESTED HERE TODAY IS FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE DEFENSE STANDARD REGULATIONS WHERE THE APPLICANT, WE HAVE THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO SHOW YOU THAT DEFENSE OVER FOUR FEET IN THE FRAME YARD SETBACK DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
I GUESS THE THING I HAVE A HARD TIME WRAPPING MY HEAD AROUND IS THAT YOU HAVE THE NEIGHBOR ACROSS, REALLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE FENCE SAYING THAT THIS IS GONNA ADVERSELY AFFECT THEIR PROPERTY.
BUT, AND SO NO, IT'S, IT'S THE SIZE OF THE FENCE.
THEY SAY IT'S THE SIZE OF THE FENCE AND ONCE AGAIN, AND SO I I I FIND THAT I THINK WITHOUT, AND IT APPEARS THAT THEIR SUPPORT WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN ME GETTING THE ORIGINAL CREW.
I KNOW THERE WAS PRESSING IT, BUT I FEEL LIKE, AND WHAT'S HARD ABOUT, WE WERE, SO WE READ THE LETTER WHEN WE GOT IT AROUND AFTER ONE O'CLOCK.
UM, AND THE HARD THING IS LIKE BACK IN 2018, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY LETTERS IN OPPOSITION.
THE FENCE HEIGHT'S NOT CHANGING.
WE'RE LITERALLY JUST CHANGING IT FROM A DIAMOND TO A SQUARE AND A BETTER HIGH QUALITY, MORE HIGH QUALITY METAL FENCE.
UM, SO IT'S REALLY HARD TO SAY ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S GONNA INJURE OR ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WHEN NOT, I MEAN, TODAY WE COULD HAVE GONE FORWARD WITH A CHAIN FENCE AND WHICH WAS PERMITTED IN 2018.
SO THAT, THAT'S WHAT'S HARD FOR US TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT CHANGED.
UM, I THINK IT'S, TO ME, IT IT MAKES IT, UM, IT'S HARD TO ARGUE THAT IT DOESN'T ADVERSELY AFFECT YOUR NEIGHBORS WHEN YOU HAVE THEIR, THE TWO, THE TWO NEIGHBORS THAT ARE ADJACENCY THE SAME, IT ADVERSELY AFFECTS US.
AND SO I THINK THAT MAY BE SOMETHING WORTH, UM, PURSUING WHY THEY, WAS IT UNDERSTANDING WHY THEY THINK IT'S GONNA ADVERSELY AFFECT THEM.
SO HERE THOUGH, UM, I THINK A LOT OF THEIR SENTIMENT SEEMS TO LEAN TOWARDS THE REMOVAL OF TREES AND THE MATERIAL.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAST PARAGRAPH, UM, AN ALMOST SOLID FENCE.
UM, I MEAN THEY, THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO INSTALL A NAILING SOLID FENCE WITHOUT OUR APPROVAL.
THAT WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IN TERMS OF ITY AND THEN HERE THE CLEARING CUT OF 40 YEAR OLD TREES.
UM, BUT THAT IS OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW 'CAUSE IT'S NOT A LANDSCAPE VARI REQUEST, IT'S JUST FOR HEIGHT.
SO I THINK SOME OF THE SENTIMENTS HERE, ALTHOUGH I I APPRECIATE THAT THE APPLICANT TOOK THE TIME OR THE NEIGHBOR TOOK THE TIME TO, TO EXPRESS THEIR SATISFACTION WITH THE APPLICATION.
I THINK A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO WITH TREES AND
[01:00:01]
WITH MATERIALS, WHICH IS OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW AND THE APPLICATION.I MEAN, WELL, AND WE, WE CAN'T HAVE DISCUSSION AFTER WE'VE MADE A MOTIONS AT ALL.
JUST, UM, BUT YOU, DID YOU REACH, IF YOU REACHED OUT TO THIS NEIGHBOR, UH, NOT TO THAT NEIGHBOR DIRECTLY, HAVE YOU, HAVE YOU REACHED OUT TO OTHER NEIGHBORS? DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THEM THAT SAY THEY SUPPORT THIS CHANGE? WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY LETTER TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT.
WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY LETTERS ATION BESIDES THE ONE THAT, UM, IT SEEMS THAT THERE IS SOME CONFUSION HERE IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, YOUR NE THE NEIGHBORS IN TERMS OF WHAT'S REALLY HAPPENING HERE.
I'M JUST, I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT OBVIOUSLY WE REALLY CAN'T GO INTO DISCUSSION TOO MUCH.
IT SEEMS THAT A SIMPLE CONVERSATION AND LETTING THEM KNOW WHAT IF I WAS A NEIGHBOR AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE GOING FROM CHAIN LEE TO METAL MESH AND IT WAS STILL THE SAME OPACITY BUT A HIGHER END MATERIAL.
UM, AND YOU ADDRESSED SOME OF THE CONCERNS AND JUST, AND CLARIFIED ON THE, THE LANDSCAPING PIECE.
I THINK THAT WOULD GO A LONG WAY.
I FIND THAT, I, I THINK THAT IF YOU'RE YOUR NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET HAVE AN ISSUE, EVEN IF, IF THE ISSUE THEY HAVE IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING, THEN THAT'S BEEN A FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS.
AND I THINK THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED.
I, UM, IN ORDER TO, FOR US TO, OR AT LEAST REMOVE THE FEEL COMFORTABLE JUST KINDA GIVE SOME HIGH, UH, SOME HISTORY.
I THINK THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME HISTORY BETWEEN THESE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS.
SO ONE OF OUR CONCERNS IS EVEN IF WE DO REACH OUT TO 'EM, WE DON'T THINK THAT WE'LL ACHIEVE ANYTHING DUE TO THE HISTORY BETWEEN, AND I'M JUST BEING BLATANTLY HONEST WITH, WITHOUT ME SAYING MORE, I CAN'T SAY MORE THAN THAT.
IT SEEMS IN THIS LETTER THAT, UM, THE, THE SIGNAGE, UH, NOTIFICATION SIGNAGE ON THE PROPERTY ON JUNE 9TH, ACCORDING TO THE NEIGHBOR, UM, AND THEN IT SEEMS THAT, UM, THEY'VE MADE A COMMENT ABOUT, UM, THE CONSTRUCTION NEW FENCE STORY BEGUN EARLY JULY.
IS THAT NEW FENCE, IS THAT THE CONSTRUCTION FENCE TO MAINTAIN THE PERIMETER WHILE CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION'S HAPPENING? RIGHT, RIGHT.
SO IT SEEMS TO BE, THERE'S SOME CONFUSION HERE IN TERMS OF HERE, THE APP, THE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY'S BEEN NOTIFIED, RIGHT.
AND THAT THE APPLICATION, AND THEN THEY'RE SEEING THIS FENCE WITH SOME MESH GO OVER IT.
THAT'S TO CONTAIN THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.
AND THEY'RE ASSUMING IN MY, FROM WHAT I'M INTERPRETING, THAT, THAT YOU'RE COMING IN AND ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS RATHER THAN PERMISSION.
SO I THINK THERE JUST SEEMS TO BE A MISCOMMUNICATION, UM, IN TERMS OF, I THINK THEY BELIEVE THAT WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY PUT FORTH IS ALREADY, IS WHAT THEY'RE GETTING IF, IF THIS IS APPROVED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? UM, NO, THE SPEAKERS.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MS. SAME, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER B 8 2 2 3 DASH 0 7 4 HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 20TH.
IS IT SEPTEMBER? WE, IN AUGUST, SORRY.
NO, YEAH, IT'S OCTOBER, RIGHT? WE, WE DON'T HAVE A MEETING IN SEPTEMBER, RIGHT? WE DO NOT, UM, WE DO NOT HAVE A MEETING IN SEPTEMBER 'CAUSE THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH CASES.
AND I RECEIVED A NOTE FROM MR. UM, NEWMAN, CHAIR NEWMAN YESTERDAY OR THIS MORNING THAT WE MAY NOT HAVE ENOUGH CASES FOR OCTOBER, OR WE MAY NOT BE THERE UNTIL NOVEMBER.
SO, WELL, THAT MIGHT CHANGE MY POTION.
WELL, UM, IF, IF WE HOLD SOMETHING OVER, CAN WE MEET IN OCTOBER? SO SHE DOESN'T HAVE, HE DOESN'T HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION IS ON FRIDAY.
UM, IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS MOTION, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS.
[01:05:38]
OKAY.MS. UM, I THINK THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
UM, MOTION IS, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER B D A 2 2 3 DASH SEVEN FOUR HOLD ON.
IN STATE, WE'RE, WE'LL RESTART THE MEETING A LITTLE.
CAN WE, WE SAID TWO 13, WE HAVE TO WAIT TILL TWO 13.
DO OR CAN WE START IT EARLY? OKAY.
OKAY, WELL, ONCE WE TURN EVERYTHING BACK ON, WE'LL GET STARTED.
ALL THIS TECHNOLOGY IS SO MUCH EASIER.
WE ALL JUST SAT HERE IN PERSON,
UM, I MOVE THE BOARD OF, I'M GOING TO REITERATE MY MOTION, UM, WITH A PRECISE STATE.
UM, I MOVE WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 2 3 DASH ZERO SEVEN FOR HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 20TH, 2023.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
MR, DO YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? YES.
SO I, I THINK THE BIGGEST THING IS CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
I THINK THAT HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF TIME FOR YOU TO ENGAGE WITH THE NEIGHBOR, I THINK THEY TRULY BELIEVE FROM READING THIS LETTER THAT WHAT IS THERE TO, UM, THAT ENCOMPASSES THE PROPERTY NOW FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.
I THINK THEY BELIEVE THAT'S TRULY WHAT YOU'RE COMING IN FOR, UM, UH, FOR YOUR APPLICATION FOR.
SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, GIVEN SOME TIME, UM, WITH THE, WITH THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I THINK THAT WE WILL GET THERE.
UM, WE, WE WILL LIKELY BE HOLDING A SPECIAL HEARING JUST FOR Y'ALL.
SO Y'ALL ARE VERY SPECIAL IF THIS GETS APPROVED.
SO PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE DO THE DUE DILIGENCE WITH THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
UM, THEY'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 2018.
LET'S MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND MAKE SURE THIS IS APPLICATION IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
FOR THE RECORD, YOU DON'T MEET IN SEPTEMBER, CORRECT? WE DO NOT MEET IN SEPTEMBER.
AND ARE YOU EVEN NOT STATED? POSSIBLY.
YOU'RE SAYING THIS MAY BE A SPECIAL CASE IN OCTOBER? WELL, WE HAVE, IT HAS NOT BEEN, IT HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED THAT OUR OCTOBER HEARING HAS BEEN CANCELED.
THANK, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO NOTIFY THE PUBLIC OF A HEARING IN SEPTEMBER.
SO WE, WE, IF WE HOLD UP THIS CASE, I BELIEVE IT'S THAT WE HAVE A PURPOSE TO MEET IN OCTOBER.
AND, AND, UM, FOR THE RECORD, UM, DO I NEED TO RE, DO I NEED TO JUST STATE THE NEW DAY OR DO YOU HAVE TO REHEAR THE, WHAT THE, THE DATE OF THE HEARING IS? CAN YOU CORRECT YOUR MOTION? IF NOT, OCTOBER 20, IT'S OCTOBER, WHAT DO YOU THINK? IT'S NO, NO, IT IS A WEDNESDAY.
LET, I'M GOING TO AMEND MY, UM, MOTION TO REFLECT THE ACTUAL HEARING DATE, WHICH IS THE THIRD WEDNESDAY OF EVERY MONTH, UM, WHICH WOULD BE, UM, I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER REMEDIATE 2 2 3 DASH ZERO SEVEN BOARD HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 18TH, 2023.
AND SINCE THAT WAS AN AMENDMENT, WE'RE GONNA NEED A SECOND.
IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I THINK MS. LAMB SHARED, OR SHE WAS I AGREE WITH THAT.
ANYBODY ELSE? I THINK LET'S CALL, OH, I DO HAVE A POINT OF DISCUSSION THERE.
SO, UM, IN THIS CASE, UH, JOE CANNON SPEAKING HERE, UM, I WILL NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION THAT IS PUT ON THE FLOOR.
UM, FOR THE POINTS BEING THAT, UM, THE MATERIALITY IS THE, THE FOCUS OF, OF THIS, UH, APPLICATION HERE.
I DO UNDERSTAND THE DISCUSSION REGARDING ENGAGING THE NEIGHBORS, BUT IF THERE'S BEEN A NINE FOOT FENCE, UM, SURROUNDING PERIMETER FOR AT LEAST THE PAST FIVE YEARS, UH, THAT SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE.
UM, AND FURTHERMORE, THE SITE PLAN SHOWS THAT THIS NEW, UM, THIS CONSTRUCTION WILL, UH, INCLUDE A POOL, WHICH I BELIEVE HAVING A FENCE PERIOD, UH, IS IN THE MOST AND HIGHEST, UH, BEST USE OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST FOR SAFETY.
AND TO HOLD THIS OVER FOR 60 DAYS, UH, JUST TO REACH OUT TO A NEIGHBOR TO, NOT TO MINIMIZE THE VOICE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT, UM, THINK THAT WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO US AS FAR AS THIS FENCE, THE MATERIALITY OF IT, AND JUST CHANGING THAT FROM A LOW GRADE CHAIN LINK TO A HIGHER GRADE, UH, WIRE MESH THAT IS, SHOULD NOT BE A POINT TO HOLD THIS OVER.
SO THAT IS, UM, MY POINT OF DISCUSSION THERE.
[01:10:01]
OR I, I DO.UM, TO ME, I MEAN, WHEN I HEAR PUBLIC INTEREST, I MEAN A DISLIKE OF A FENCE IS NOT NECESSARILY HARM TO A NEIGHBOR.
NINE FEET, NINE FEET MESHED TO, YOU KNOW, THIS NEW PARTICULAR DESIGN.
UH, THE HOMEOWNER THAT IS IN OPPOSITION DOES APPEAR TO HAVE, UH, A MISUNDERSTANDING, SO TO SPEAK, OF WHAT IS ACTUALLY OCCURRING.
AND YES, IT WILL BE NICE IF THAT LETTER DID NOT EXIST, BUT YOU KNOW, FOR WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED TODAY TO US THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY UTILIZE TO SAY, YES, WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ALL WE HAVE.
UM, SO LIKE, AGAIN, I, I DEFINITELY CONCUR WITH, UM, MR. CANNON AND I CAN'T SUPPORT AN AMENDMENT TO DELAY THIS TWO MONTHS BECAUSE OF THAT.
I, UH, I, I UNDERSTAND AND, UM, I, I CAN'T SUPPORT THE, UM, MOTION BECAUSE, UM, I THINK THERE, I DO NOT THINK THAT THERE IS A NINE FOOT FENCE THERE CURRENTLY.
UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S BEEN THERE ONE FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
I THINK THEY HAVE BEEN IN THE PROCESS OF CONSTRUCTING THIS HOME.
AND SO THIS WILL BE SOMETHING NEW.
UM, THAT WAS FROM WHAT I CAN TELL FROM LOOKING AT THE VIDEOS THAT WE SAW.
BUT I, I MEAN, THAT'S ALL I CAN RELY ON.
UM, I WANT TO REMIND THIS BOARD THAT IT'S ON THE APPLICANT'S BURDEN OF PROOF TO PROVE THAT THIS IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
IT'S NOT ON THE NEIGHBOR'S BURDEN OF PROOF TO PROVE, TO PROVE THAT IT'S, UM, THAT IT ISN'T.
SO I, I THINK THAT THIS LETTER SHOWS THAT THERE'S NOT BEEN ENOUGH DUE DILIGENCE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT TO PROVE THAT THIS IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
SO ONCE AGAIN, IT'S ON THE APPLICANT TO MAKE THAT CASE, NOT THE NEIGHBORS.
AND THE NEIGHBORS ARE SPEAKING UP SAYING THAT THEY DON'T, THEY FEEL LIKE WHAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION ENTAILS, UM, IS, IS CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
SO THIS IS HOLDING OVER JUST TO DO BETTER DUE DILIGENCE BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD SO THAT WE CAN BRING THEM TOGETHER AND MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE CONTINUED DISAGREEMENT AND THAT WHAT'S BEING PUT FORTH IS, UM, IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE, TO THE COMMUNITY AND NOT JUST THE APPLICANT.
IT'S A, THERE'S A BIGGER PICTURE HERE.
UM, AND THIS IS ONCE AGAIN A SPECIAL EXCEPTION ON THE HEIGHT.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MATERIALS.
IF WE WERE HEARING ABOUT MATERIAL, WE WOULD HAVE A SEPARATE APPLICATION ON THAT.
YES, IT IS MATERIAL, BUT LIKE I SAID BEFORE, IF IT WAS APPROVED IN 2018 FOR NINE FOOT VARIANCE, ISN'T THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW? FEET? NO, THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICATION IS TO PROPOSE A NINE FOOT FENCE AND REQUIRED FRONT YARD, WHICH REQUIRED A FIVE FOOT EXCEPTION TO FENCE REGULATIONS.
THE REQUEST BE THOUSAND 18 IS ABOUT, THEY MAY BE TELLING US IT'S ABOUT MATERIALS, BUT THE REQUEST THAT CAME IN IS ABOUT THE HEIGHT THAT THIS IS NOT A MATERIALS.
WHAT WAS 2018 CASE? WAS THAT NOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THIS BOARD? I THAT IS A GOOD IT.
W I THAT'S WHAT THEY STATED WAS APPROVED, BUT UM, I DON'T KNOW IF, BECAUSE THEY DID NOT PUT THE FENCE IN AND NOW THEY HAVE TO COME BACK AND ASK FOR IT AGAIN AND THEY'VE CHANGED THE MATERIAL.
'CAUSE WHEN THEY WENT TO PERMIT, THEY CHANGED THE MATERIAL.
BUT ACCORDING TO THIS, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENED IN 2018, THEY'RE ASKING FOR A FENCE HEIGHT AND NO CASE SETS PRECEDENT.
SO WE HAVE TO GO ON EXACTLY WHAT'S BEING ASKED FOR HERE, WHICH IS HEIGHT, WHICH IS PART OF WHAT IT'S NOT A MATERIAL.
AND THEY MAY HAVE ASKED FOR THE WRONG THING.
AND CHAIR G IF YOU, IF I MAY, I MEAN, EVEN IF I WOULDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM APPROVING THIS, IF EVEN WITH THE, UH, OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBOR, IF THERE HAD BEEN, THERE'S EVIDENCE THAT THEY ATTEMPTED TO REACH OUT TO THE NEIGHBOR AND TALK TO THEM, I DON'T THINK THEY NECESSARILY NEED TO CONVINCE THE NEIGHBOR.
THEY JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE NEIGHBOR UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S REALLY HAPPENED.
AND TO ME, THAT'S WHAT IS KEEPING ME FROM APPROVING THIS AT THIS POINT.
I THINK THE APPLICANT CAN'T JUST RELY ON THE CITY STAFF TO SEND A NOTIFICATION AND ASSIGN TO DO THE WORK FOR THEM.
NOT TO SAY THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED HERE, BUT I THINK THAT JUST SARAH, ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A PRETTY EXTENSIVE LETTER FROM, FROM A NEIGHBOR WHO, UM, WHO SIDES WHOSE SECTION OF THE PROPERTY IS PRETTY, PRETTY CLOSE IN PROXIMITY TO THE APPLICATION.
UM, I I DON'T SEE ANY HARM IN HOLDING OVER FOR TWO, TWO MONTHS TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT AND REPRESENTATIVES TO DO THE WORK DURING THE DISCUSSION.
MAY I ASK A QUESTION TO DO SO? UM, BUT I, I MEAN MR. UH, MR. CANNON AND MR. NET ALL BROUGHT UP AN INTERESTING QUESTION.
I MEAN, THE APPLICANT DEFINITELY WAS SAYING THAT THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED FOR A NINE FOOT FENCE AND THEY'RE HERE FOR MATERIALS.
YET WHEN I GO BACK AND READ THE FINE PRINT, I'M JUST KIND OF, IT SAYS THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR A FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT.
SO IF THEY ALREADY HAVE THE FENCE HEIGHT, WHAT, WHAT? I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, EVEN THOUGH I KNOW WE'VE, I JUST CLARIFY THAT FOR ME.
[01:15:01]
RIGHT.THEY PREVIOUSLY DID GET APPROVED FOR THE NINE FOOT HEIGHT OF A FENCE FOR A CHAIN LINK FENCE, BUT BECAUSE THEY CHANGED THE MATERIAL THAT THAT KIND OF GETS VOID, IT'S, IT'S TAKEN AWAY.
SO THEN NOW THEY HAVE TO COME BACK FOR THAT SAME, JUST THE PORTION OF THE CHAIN LIFT FENCE TO CHANGE THE MATERIAL TO THE, UM, THE MESH FOR THE SAME HEIGHT.
AND IT, AND WE DON'T, WE'RE NOT HERE BECAUSE THE MATERIAL IS APPROVED BY THE CITY, BUT BECAUSE THEY CHANGED IT, THEY HAVE TO GET THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT AGAIN.
BUT THEN WE STARTED ASKING QUESTIONS AND MY WHOLE BRAIN JUST COULDN'T HANDLE IT.
IS THAT BECAUSE WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU REMOVE THE, THE MAIN COMPONENTS FENCE, TECHNICALLY YOU'RE TAKING IT DOWN SO YOU'RE ASKING TO PUT IT BACK UP.
IS THAT, IS THAT WHY WE, I DON'T KNOW IF HE EVER PUT THAT CHAIN LINK.
IS IT TRIGGERED BY THAT OR IS IT THE CON TRIGGERED BY THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE CYCLINE AND ELEVATIONS IS WHAT TRIGGERS IT.
SO THIS WOULDN'T BE IN COMPLIANCE, THE CYCLINE AND ELEVATION.
WE, SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION THEN, SO WE'RE SAYING BECAUSE THE ELEVATION ON THAT WAS SUBMITTED, THAT HAS CHANGED BECAUSE THE NEW MATERIALS.
SO HAD HAD THIS APPLICATION IN 2018 BEEN APPROVED JUST BASED ON COMPLIANCE WITH SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND NOT ELEVATION, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME BACK, BUT BECAUSE IT WAS SUBMITTED BA IT WAS APPROVED WITH SITE PLAN AND APPROVED ELEVATION.
I MEAN I, MY POSITION STILL STANDS ON HOLDING OVER.
UM, SO I GUESS WE HAVE TO DO, SORRY, IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR ARE WE READY FOR A ROLL CALL? VOTE? JOE, DO YOU HAVE YOU, YOU KEEP LIGHTING UP, YOU HAVE NO, NO, I'M READY TO VOTE.
AYE MR. KENYON NAY, MR. NOTEL NAY.
MR. KOWSKI? AYE MR. CHAIR AYE MOTION FAILS THREE TO TWO, SO THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE ANOTHER MOTION.
SO I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER B D A 2 23 DASH SEVEN FOUR ON APPLICATION OF MASTER PLAN GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A NINE FOOT HIGH FENCE AS A SPECIAL SUCTION 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, WHICH IS COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION IS REQUIRED.
UM, MY QUESTION IS, DID WE ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY'RE OKAY WITH US COMING OVER TILL OCTOBER TO DO THE DUE DILIGENCE? MAY, MAY I ASK A QUESTION OF STAFF IF THIS, IF THIS FAILED, IF THAT'S A DENIAL, IS THAT CORRECT? IF YOUR MOTION TO HOLD OVER, SORRY.
IF THIS MOTION TO GRANT THE EXCEPTION FAILS, THEN WHAT, WHAT IS THE RESULT OF THAT MOTION? IT DEPENDS ON IF YOU, UM, DENY WITH OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
WELL WE HAD, WE, WE HAD ONE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, WHICH WAS TO HOLD OVER THAT FAILED.
SO NOW WE MADE ANOTHER MOTION TO APPROVE.
AND IF THAT FAILS THEN WHAT HAPPENS? I, I'LL MOVE TO THE ATTORNEY FOR THAT.
I BELIEVE MR. SAPP IS CONFIRMING WHAT THE PROCESS IS.
SO I THINK BEFORE WE VOTE WE SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT, I MEAN, I, I GO BACK TO THIS.
I MEAN WE MADE A, THE STATE WAS MADE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT FAIR TO HOLD THE APPLICANT OVER UNTIL OCTOBER.
I MEAN, HAVE WE ASKED THE APPLICANT IF THEY'RE OKAY WITH DOING A LITTLE BIT MORE WORK AND COMING BACK IN OCTOBER? BECAUSE IF, IF THEY ARE THEN
WELL, BUT I WOULD ALSO ARGUE TOO THAT IF APPLICANT IS HERE TODAY, THAT, I MEAN NOT TO MAKE THINGS EXPEDIENT, BUT, AND I DON'T WANNA PUT WORDS IN THE APPLICANT'S MOUTH THERE COMING UP ON THE PODIUM, BUT I MEAN IF WE CAN GET THIS RESOLVED TODAY WITH ALL THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO US, I THINK THAT WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE APPLICANT.
WE, WE, I DON'T THINK MASTER PLAN CAN SPEAK AT THIS POINT IN TIME, ALTHOUGH WE CAN, WE ASK.
[01:20:01]
A QUICK RECESS TO MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS MOTION FAILS.WE WILL RECONVENE AND DO YOU HAVE A TIME THAT WE RECONVENE OR WE'LL RECONVENE IN ABOUT FIVE MINUTES AT 2 29.
OKAY, WE'LL CALL THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER, UM, AT 12 2 30 2:00 PM AND UM, I'M GOING TO HAVE MR. SAPP, UM, STATE FOR THE RECORD WHAT, WHERE WE ARE.
AFTER CONSULTING WITH THE SEVENTH FLOOR, UM, A MOTION TO HOLD OVER ONLY REQUIRES A SIMPLE MAJORITY.
SO THE THREE TWO VOTE ACTUALLY PASSED.
WE WILL HOLD OVER, UM, CASE E D A 2 2 3 DASH 0 7 4 UNTIL OCTOBER 18TH.
UH, I THINK AT THIS TIME, IF I MAY, UM, THE APPLICANT, IF I THINK WE MADE IT CLEAR, BUT WE NEED TO GET DONE HERE ON OUR END IN ORDER TO GET THERE.
I THINK YOU HAVE A LOT OF SUPPORT WITH YOUR APPLICATION.
I THINK THAT THE ONE PIECE THAT WE NEED TO, FOR WRAP UP THIS CASE IN ORDER FOR APPROVAL IS MAKE SURE IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
IF YOU COULD JUST REACH OUT AND DO THE WORK WITH, WITH THE NEIGHBOR, JUST LET THEM KNOW WHAT YOUR PLANS ARE, WHAT YOUR INTENTIONS ARE, UM, TALK 'EM THROUGH IT AND THEN WE'LL SEE YOU IN OCTOBER.
AND THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED AT 2:33 PM I.