[Board of Adjustments: Panel A on November 14, 2023. ]
[00:00:02]
TODAY IS TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14TH, TWO 20, UH, 2023 AT 1:00 PM I HEREBY CALL THE MEETING OF A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A TO ORDER FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.UM, MY NAME IS DAVE NEWMAN AND I'M HONORED TO SERVE AS CHAIRMAN OF THE FULL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF ITS PANEL A, A QUORUM IS OF OUR PANEL MEMBERS, IS PRESENT, AND THEREFORE WE CAN PROCEED BY OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE.
IT REQUIRES FOUR OF FIVE MEMBERS OF EACH PANEL TO TO HEAR A CASE.
AND WE HAVE FIVE OF FIVE TODAY.
ALLOW ME TO MAKE SOME INTRODUCTIONS AND THEN MAKE A FEW COMMENTS AND THEN WE'LL PROCEED WITH OUR AGENDA.
UM, INTRODUCTIONS AGAIN, MY NAME IS DAVE NEWMAN AND I'M CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
TO MY LEFT ARE IS KATHLEEN DAVIS, RACHEL HAYDEN, JAY NER, AND MICHAEL HOROWITZ.
TO MY RIGHT IS OUR BOARD ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, MY MATTHEW SAPP.
UH, JASON HOOL, OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR, BRYANT THOMPSON, SENIOR PLANNER, DR.
CAMIKA MILLER HOSKINS, SENIOR PLANNER, DIANA BARKUM, DEVELOPMENT CODE SPECIALIST COORDINATOR, AND PHIL IRWIN ARBORIST.
BEFORE WE BEGIN, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FEW GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE WAY THE HEARING WILL BE CONDUCTED.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE GIVE OUR TIME FREELY AND RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR OUR TIME.
WE OPERATE UNDER CITY COUNCIL APPROVED RULES OF PROCEDURE, WHICH ARE POSTED ON OUR WEBSITE.
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, A LEGAL USE.
WE'VE BEEN FULLY BRIEFED BY OUR STAFF PRIOR TO THE HEARING THIS MORNING AT OUR 10 30 BRIEFING AND IS ALL, AND HAVE ALSO REVIEWED A DETAILED PUBLIC DOCKET DOCK, WHICH EXPLAINS THE CASE, WHICH W AND WAS POSTED ON OUR CITY WEBSITE SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY EVIDENCE YOU WISH TO SUBMIT TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION ON ANY CASES TODAY, UH, SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO OUR BOARD SECRETARY MARY WILLIAMS, WHICH REMINDS ME, I DIDN'T IN INTRODUCE MARY.
MARY WILLIAMS, YOU RAISE YOUR HAND A SECOND.
MARY WILLIAMS IS OUR BOARD SECRETARY.
SO IF YOU WANTED TO SPEAK TODAY EITHER FOR THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY PORTION OR TO SPEAK OR TO SPEAK AT, UM, UH, PUBLIC TESTIMONY OR TO SPEAK AT A SPECIFIC CASE, YOU NEED TO FILL OUT ONE OF THESE BLUE SHEETS OF PAPER.
THE EVIDENCE YOU PROVIDE AND YOU GIVE TO OUR BOARD SECRETARY WILL BE RETAINED IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.
APPROVALS OF VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR REVERSAL OF A BUILDING ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL DECISION REQUIRES 75% OR FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES OF THE FULL FIVE MEMBER PANEL.
ALL OTHER MOTIONS REQUIRE A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE.
AGAIN, I'M REINFORCING AND AFFIRMATIVE APPROVAL REQUIRES FOUR OF FIVE MEMBERS OF THE PANEL LETTERS TO THE BOARD'S.
ACTIONS TODAY WILL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT BY OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR SHORTLY AFTER TODAY'S HEARING AND WILL BECOME PART OF THE OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD.
UH, AGAIN, ANYONE DESIRING TO SPEAK TODAY MUST REGISTER IN ADVANCE.
EACH REGISTERED SPEAKER DURING PUBLIC TESTIMONY WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK, UH, WHEN YOUR CASE IS CALLED.
UH, TYPICALLY WE PROVIDE FIVE MINUTES FOR THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK AND ANYONE IN FAVOR? FIVE MINUTES FOR THOSE OPPOSING.
UH, AND THEN A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, ALL COMMENTS WILL BE DIRECTED TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER WHO MAY MODIFY THE SPEAKING TIMES AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN AN ORDER.
I WILL, WE WILL GIVE AMPLE TIME FOR THE APPLICANT TO MAKE THEIR CASE IF IT'S MORE THAN FIVE MINUTES, BUT WE HAVE TO GIVE EQUAL TIME TO EVERYONE.
SO, UM, THAT'S IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, EVERYTHING IS HEARD TODAY.
LET ME PREVIEW THE AGENDA FOR TODAY.
UM, WE HAVE SEVEN CASES ON OUR AGENDA.
UM, THE TWO CASES THAT WERE ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET THIS MORNING HAS BEEN PULLED INTO THE INDIVIDUAL CASES.
UH, SO WE WILL GO IN THE ORDER, THE ORIGINAL AGENDA, UM, BUT NOTHING IS UNCONTESTED.
EVERYTHING WILL BE HEARD THROUGH A BRIEF THROUGH A, UH, PUBLIC HEARING THIS AFTERNOON.
FIRST ITEM THAT WE'LL HANDLE AS A BOARD IS PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
MS. BOARD SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY? NO PUBLIC SPEAKERS, SIR.
NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES.
THE FIRST ITEM IS OUR, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FULL SPECIAL CALL MEETING.
THIS WAS HELD, UM, ON OCTOBER 31ST.
UM, IN FRONT OF YOU ARE THE MEETING MINUTES THAT, UM, THE BOARD SECRETARY AND I HAVE PREPARED, UM, THE CHAIRMAN ENTERTAIN A MO, ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE.
I MOVE TO APPROVE THE, THE FULL BOARD SPECIAL
[00:05:01]
MEETING THAT WAS HELD ON OCTOBER 31ST.IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MS. HAYDEN.
IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MS. DAVIS.
DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION HEARING? NO.
ALL ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF OUR SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2023, UH, PANEL.
THE CHAIRMAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
I MOVE TO APPROVE THE PANEL A MEETING MINUTES FROM, I'M SORRY, THAT'S SEPTEMBER 29TH, SEPTEMBER 29TH, 19TH, 19TH, SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2023.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MS. DAVIS TO APPROVE SEPTEMBER 19TH PANEL A MEETING MINUTES.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
SECONDED BY MS. HAYDEN DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION HEARING? NO DISCUSSION.
THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
UH, THAT, THAT COVERS OUR MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS. UM, WHAT WE HAVE REMAINING FOR TODAY ARE SEVEN CASES, AND AGAIN, THEY'LL BE CALLED AND A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CONDUCTED IN THE ORDER OF THE CASES, UH, JUST FOR EVERYONE'S, UH, EDIFICATION.
SO YOU SEE WHAT PAPERS ARE SHUFFLING LEFT AND RIGHT.
UH, THE BOARD ALWAYS WELCOMES PUBLIC COMMENT AND SO WE, UH, THROUGH OUR BOARD SECRETARY OR OUR PLANNERS RECEIVE EMAILS FROM, UH, INDIVIDUALS.
AND IF YOU WERE PARTICIPATING IN OUR BRIEFING THIS MORNING, I HAVE A FOLDER OF EMAILS THAT HAD COME IN AND WE ARE BRIEFED.
SO I'LL DO THE SAME THING THIS AFTERNOON AS WE HEAR EACH CASE.
I WILL PASS ON WHATEVER THE PUBLIC EMAILS THAT WE RECEIVED BY NINE O'CLOCK THIS MORNING SO THAT WE AS A PANEL CAN, UH, ABSORB THAT.
UH, THERE MAY BE TIMES WHEN WE TAKE A PAUSE IN ORDER TO READ FURTHER OR READ AGAIN THAT EMAIL, UH, THAT PUBLIC COMMUNICATION JUST TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION.
FIRST ITEM, UM, FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IS BDA 2 2 3 DASH 0 9 5.
THIS IS AT 4 7 0 7 ALLEN CREST LANE IS THE APPLICANT HERE.
HOW ARE YOU? I AM GOOD, HOW ARE YOU? VERY GOOD.
ALRIGHT, SO OUR PROCEDURE IS THAT WE GIVE YOU FIVE MINUTES PLUS OR MINUS.
UH, I'LL GIVE YOU AMPLE TIME IN ORDER TO PRESENT TO THE, TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND UM, AND THEN WE WILL COME BACK TO YOU WITH QUESTIONS AND THEN IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR AGAINST BEFORE YOU START, I'M GONNA ASK FOR YOUR NAME.
YOU'RE GONNA BE SWORN IN, THEN YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS REGISTERED FOR THIS CASE OTHER THAN THE APPLICANT? NO, SIR.
SO IF YOU'D GIVE US, UH, IF YOU WOULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN OUR BOARD SECRETARY'S GONNA SWEAR YOU IN.
YES, MY NAME IS MADISON UMBERGER AND MY HOME ADDRESS IS 9 1 4 0 LINBROOK DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 3 8.
MS. WILLIAMS, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? PLEASE ANSWER.
MAKE SURE THAT MICROPHONE, YOU MIGHT PUSH THAT DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT.
THE MICROPHONE, THE STEM JUST DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
SO YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES PLUS OR MINUS PROCEED.
UM, SO WE WERE BUILDING A CAR.
WE WOULD LIKE TO BUILD A CARPORT AND JUST TO ADDRESS SOME OF Y'ALL'S CONCERNS.
UM, THE TREE THAT Y'ALL WORRIED ABOUT, I HAVE PICTURES OF IT.
I DROVE BY AFTER I LISTENED TO THE BRIEFING.
IT IS WAY FAR IN FRONT OF THE CARPORT, SO NOTHING HAS TO BE TRIMMED.
I HAVE PICTURES OF THAT IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT.
UM, UM, THIS FAMILY HAS LIVED HERE FOR 19 YEARS IN THIS HOME.
THEY ARE VERY, VERY CLOSE WITH ALL OF THEIR NEIGHBORS.
THE HOUSE TO THE LEFT OF THEM THAT IS VACANT IS A WOMAN NAMED BERNIE, WHO THEY'RE VERY CLOSE WITH.
SHE'S NOW LIVING IN A HOME, BUT HER KIDS, HER GRANDKIDS COME OVER AND SWIM.
SHE HAS GIVEN HER APPROVAL AND CONSENT.
LOVES THIS FAMILY TO BUILD THIS CARPORT.
UM, EVERYTHING WILL BE BUILT TO CODE.
IT IS NOT A DRIVE-THROUGH CARPORT, SO IT, IT JUST STOPS AT THE BACK.
BUT THE TWO SIDES ARE OPEN WITH TWO BRICK COLUMNS, UM, AND METAL ROOF AND GBOARD CEILING FOR FIRE PROTECTANT.
I THINK THAT'S ALL I REALLY HAVE JUST TO COVER Y'ALL'S CONCERNS.
IF NOT, I'M SURE THERE ARE QUESTIONS THAT ARE COMING.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR Y'ALL, SO I'LL TAKE QUESTIONS.
AND AGAIN, YOUR NAME IS MADISON.
ARE YOU REPRESENTING THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY? I OR ARE YOU THE PROPERTY OWNER? I AM REPRESENTING THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
YOU'RE REPRESENTING THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL FOR THE APPLICANT? MS. HAYDEN? UM, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU HAVE PICTURES THAT SHOW WHERE THE TREE IS? YES.
UH, I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO SEE THOSE.
[00:10:01]
I EMAILED THEM DURING THE BRIEFING.UM, BUT I CAN, I HAVE THEM ON MY PHONE ALSO IF THAT HELPS Y'ALL SEE, IS IT EASIER IF I GRAB MY PHONE AND Y'ALL, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA PASS YOUR PHONE ALONG.
YEAH, I THINK, AND ANYTHING THAT YOU PROVIDE US IS PUBLIC RECORD, SO WE NEED A HARD COPY OF SOME SORT.
SO, UM, UM, MS. DAVIS, SO, UM, COUPLE QUESTIONS FIRST.
IS THERE A, A GARAGE ON THE PROPERTY? THERE IS NO GARAGE, NO.
SO WHEN, WHEN YOU WERE CON WHEN CONSTRUCTION, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
WHY DIDN'T YOU, WHY DO YOU HAVE TO COME IN FRONT OF US? WHY DIDN'T YOU SPACE IT OUT SO THAT YOU COULD FIT THAT CARPORT SO THAT IT'S NOT SO CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE? SO MOST OF THESE HOUSES ON THE STREET HAVE ALL THE LEFT SIDE DRIVEWAY THAT WRAPS AROUND.
AND SO THEY'RE JUST WANTING TO MAKE IT SO IT'S NOT A DRIVE-THROUGH TO CLOSE IT OFF WITH THE CARPORT.
IT WASN'T, WE KEPT THE FOUNDATION, WE KEPT PART WHOLE RIGHT SIDE OF THE HOUSE IS ALL EXISTING.
WE JUST ARE CHANGING THE STRUCTURE OF IT.
AND, UH, YOU MENTIONED THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER TO THE, I'M TRYING TO LOOK AT THIS HOUSE TO THE LEFT, TO THE EAST OR TO THE WEST OF YOU, WHICH IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE CARPORT.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING FROM THAT CAR? THAT PROPERTY? I DO NOT BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY ALL THAT MATTERS.
BUT REALLY SINCE EVERYTHING WE DO IS A MATTER OF RECORD, WE NEED SOMETHING IN WRITING.
UM, ALRIGHT, SO YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU LISTENED TO OR WE'RE AWARE OF SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT CAME UP THIS MORNING.
ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT I MADE WAS, I DON'T SEE ANY OF THE CAR POINTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THE REASON WHY I LOOKED FOR THAT AND MADE THE COMMENT WAS ONE OF OUR CRITERIA IS WHETHER THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WHEN I GOT THIS BRIEFING PACKAGE AND SAW THAT, I WENT, OH, I WONDER WHAT ELSE IS GOING ON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T DISRUPT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
NOW YOU CAN RESPOND DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET IS A PORT RICOCHET WHERE IT'S A DRIVE-THROUGH CARPORT THAT GOES INTO THEIR GARAGE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THEM.
AND THEN THE HOUSE ON THE CORNER OF ALAN CREST ALSO HAS A CARPORT.
YES, MS. DAVIS, DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW IF THEY ARE, UM, IF THEY'RE FIVE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OR ARE THEY CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE? SO ARE THEY COMPLIANT? THOSE OTHER TWO CAR PARTS? YES, THEY ARE.
THAT YOU MENTIONED? YES, THEY'RE, YES, THEY'RE OKAY.
AND THIS WOULD BE HOW CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE? IT WOULD BE FOUR INCHES OFF, YES.
SO ONE OF THE OTHER CRITERIA THAT WE LOOK AT, CRITERIA THAT WE LOOK AT IS THE MATERIALS TO BE USED IN CONSTRUCTION OF THE CARPORT.
AND I THINK YOU SAID THAT IT WON'T BE OPEN ON THE BACK.
UM, AND THEN I'M ASSUMING THERE ARE TWO COLUMNS.
ARE ARE, CAN YOU DESCRIBE A LITTLE IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL THE MATERIALS OF CONSTRUCTION? CORRECT.
THERE'LL BE TWO BRICK COLUMNS THAT MATCH THE EXTERIOR OF THE HOUSE TO THE, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HOUSE ON THE LEFT SIDE, TWO OPEN BRICK COLUMNS, AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE THE NEIGHBOR'S FENCE RIGHT THERE THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THROUGH.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? UH, SURE.
SO THE SIZE OF THE BRICK COLUMNS, HOW, AND, AND SO THE BETWEEN THE BRICK COL COLUMNS, IT'S OPEN TO THE NEIGHBOR'S SIDE? IT IS OPEN, YES.
AND HOW BIG ARE THE BRICK COLUMNS? I DO NOT HAVE THAT.
THAT IS ON THE PLANS? THEY'RE, YEAH, IT'S ON THE PLANS.
WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE? MR. VEZ? UH, DID I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY THAT, UM, THE FENCE THAT THIS IS GONNA BE ADJACENT TO, IS THE PROPERTY AN OBLIGATION OF OF THE NEIGHBOR? SORRY, SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME.
THAT THE FENCE IS RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE THIS IS SUPPOSED TO GO UP.
IS THE RESPONSIBILITY AND PROPERTY OF THE NEIGHBOR, NOT THIS HOUSE.
OH, I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE WHO THE FENCE BELONGS TO.
UM, IT'S DIVIDING THE TWO PROPERTIES.
QUESTION FOR YOU, THIS PROPERTY NEVER HAD A GARAGE? NO.
WHERE DID THE CARS PARK? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
THROUGH, I THINK THE BACK DRIVEWAY AND THEY JUST HAD A DRIVEWAY IN THE BACK AND THEN THEY HAVE A POOL.
OKAY, WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS YOU, UH, ANY OTHER, ANY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. NER? THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN.
[00:15:01]
MY MAIN CONCERN, UH, WITH THIS CASE IS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY, UH, TO THE LEFT OF THE CAR PROPOSED CARPORT.UM, YOU REPRESENTED THAT THE OWNER IS AN ELDERLY PERSON IN A CARE FACILITY OF SOME SORT.
AND THAT THEIR FAMILY USES THE PROPERTY ON A REGULAR BASIS FOR SWIMMING OR ET CETERA? NO, HER BERNIE'S FAMILY COMES TO THE WONDER LAKES HOUSE, THE HOME WHO'S WANTING TO, THEY'RE JUST VERY CLOSE TO THAT FAMILY.
THEY COME OVER TO THE WONDER LAKES HOUSE TO HANG OUT AND SWIM AND, OKAY.
I WAS JUST USING THAT AS A REFERENCE TO SHOW YOU THAT THEY'RE VERY CLOSE.
UM, I'M GONNA CONVEY MY FEEDBACK BEFORE WE GO, GO INTO A MOTION.
UH, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT AS, AND I'M GONNA REPEAT THE FOUR CRITERIA THAT THE CODE HAS FOR US COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHETHER IN WHETHER THE VALUE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES WILL BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED, SUITABILITY OF THE SIZE AND THE LOCATION AND MATERIALS TO BE USED IN THE CONSTRUCTION.
I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE COMPATIBILITY, I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE SUITABILITY AND THE SIZE AND THE LOCATION, FOUR INCHES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE VALUE OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
UM, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO RESPOND TO THAT BECAUSE ONCE WE GO TO A MOTION, REALLY THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTIONS CLOSE.
SO THERE ARE MY CONCERNS STILL.
SO IF YOU DRIVE DOWN ALLEN CREST, ALL, IF YOU'RE FACING THE HOUSES, VERY FEW GARAGES ARE IN THE FRONT.
MOST GARAGES ARE IN THE BACK AND THEY HAVE THESE BACK ENTRANCE DRIVEWAYS.
AND THEY HAVE WHAT? FROM FROM THE ALLEY OR FROM FROM THE FRONT STREET.
SO YOU ENTER THROUGH THE FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE AND YOU DRIVE DOWN YOUR DRIVEWAY TO GET TO THE BACK OF YOUR HOUSE.
SO THEY EITHER HAVE GATES THERE, ALL OF THESE HOUSES EITHER HAVE SLIDING GATES, THAT AUTOMATIC GATES THAT OPEN TO ALLOW YOU TO THEIR DRIVEWAY IN THE BACK.
AND SO OUR CUSTOMERS WANTED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAT WOULD BE MORE OF A CARPORT, SO THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO DRIVE ALL THE WAY TO ENTER THROUGH THE BACK INSTEAD OF DOING AN AUTOMATIC GATE.
IT'S, I'M WONDERING IF THAT'S OUT OF CHARACTER, OUT OF THE COMPATIBILITY AND CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE ARE MULTIPLE CARPORTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT AREN'T FOUR INCHES OFF, BUT THERE ARE MULTIPLE CARPORTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
OTHER DISCUSSION, MS. HAYDEN? I, I LOOKED AT THE PLANS AGAIN AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE, THE CARPORT IS 13 AND A HALF, UH, FEET TALL TO THE, TO THE TOP OF THE ROOF.
AND SO MY CONCERN IS, YOU KNOW, THE SUITABILITY AND OF THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF THE CARPORT BECAUSE YOU'RE GONNA HAVE 13 AND A HALF FEET, FOUR INCHES OFF THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND THAT, THAT, THAT CONCERNS ME A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE THAT'S ONE OF THE CRITERIA THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT AS WELL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS JUNCTURE? MS. DAVIS? I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 2 3 0 9 5 ON APPLICATION OF MADISON UMBERGER DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS FOR CARPORTS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT WITHOUT PREJUDICE CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT GRANTING THE REQUEST WILL HAVE A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 2 3 0 9 5.
UH, MS. DAVIS HAS MOVED TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IS THERE A SECOND ON THE MOTION? I'LL SECOND.
IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MS. HAYDEN.
MS. DAVIS, SPEAK TO THE MOTION PLEASE.
UH, A A COUPLE, COUPLE COMMENTS.
I MEAN, THERE, THERE'S NOT A COMPELLING REASON, IN MY OPINION TO ADD A, UM, A CARPORT TO THE SIDE.
I DON'T THINK IT'S SUITABLE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I DON'T THINK IT ENHANCES THE VALUE OF THE EXISTING HOUSE, AND I CERTAINLY DON'T THINK IT IS, UH, ENHANCING THE VALUE OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND, UM, THE MATERIALS AS WELL, AND JUST THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CARPORT.
I I THINK IT'S, UM, I, I DON'T AGREE AND I I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOUR CLIENT TO LOOK FOR OTHER METHODS.
MS. HAYDEN, I AGREE WITH MS. DAVIS AND YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT IT'S ONLY FOUR INCHES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE GIVES ME SOME CONCERN, ESPECIALLY 13 AND A HALF FEET TALL.
UM, FOR THE FUTURE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THE ADJACENT UH, PROPERTY, AND A NINE FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE IS A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT VARIANCE FOR A SIDE YARD SETBACK.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I WOULD AGREE.
AS I SAID BEFORE WE WENT TO THE,
[00:20:01]
UH, MOTION.MY CONCERN REMAINS THE COMPATIBILITY.
MY CONCERN REMAINS THE SUITABILITY.
UM, SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS PRESENTED.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION HEARING? NO DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
WE'LL CALL THE ROLL BOARD SECRETARY, MS. HAYDEN.
MOTION PASSES FIVE TO ZERO IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 2 3 DASH 0 9 5 9 5.
THE BOARD APPRO, UH, DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA TODAY IS BDA 2 2 3 DASH 0 9 7 BDA, 2 2 3 DASH 0 9 7.
THIS IS AT 2 7 6 4 CATHERINE STREET IS THE APPLICANT HERE.
UM, WE'RE GONNA HAVE YOU SWORN IN AND THEN YOU HAVE FIVE PLUS OR MINUS MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD.
UH, MS. WILLIAMS BOARD SECRETARY, DO WE, WHAT SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE ON THIS CASE? NO, THE SPEAKERS SIR.
ALRIGHT SIR, IF YOU'D GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND THEN OUR BOARD SECRETARY WILL SWEAR YOU IN.
NO, YOU TURN THE MICROPHONE ON PLEASE.
MY ADDRESS IS 3000 IRWINDALE, I-R-W-I-N-D-E-L-L DALLAS 7 5 2 1 1.
AND MS. WILLIAMS, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? PLEASE ANSWER.
UH, I WAS HERE FOR THE BRIEFING EARLIER TODAY, THIS MORNING.
UH, ONE THING THAT I HEARD IS, UH, I SENT, UH, SOME PICTURES YESTERDAY EVENING.
I, AND I THOUGHT I WAS IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE I HAVE AN EMAIL FROM THE CITY TO, UH, MAKE SURE THAT Y'ALL RECEIVED THEM BY SIX O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING THE DAY OF THE HEARING.
SO I, I THOUGHT I WAS IN COMPLIANCE AND I'M SORRY I DID WRONG, BUT I I DID SEND THEM.
THIS IS NOT GONNA TAKE AWAY FROM YOUR TIME.
THE REASON WE HAVE THE THRESHOLD AND OUR RULES PROCEDURE IS SO THAT WE'RE ABLE TO ABSORB IT IN ADVANCE OF THE HEARING.
AND THIS IS WHAT YOU HAD SENT US AND IT'S, IT'S DETAILED AND, AND IT'S A LOT OF PICTURES.
AND IN ORDER TO BE FAIR TO YOU, WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE HAVE TIME TO BE REVIEW IT.
NOW, I'M GONNA PASS THIS BACK DOWN THROUGH THE PANEL TO ABSORB IT WHILE YOU'RE SPEAKING, BUT REALLY I WANT US TO BE LISTENING TO YOU SPEAK AS OPPOSED TO EVIDENCE THAT WE JUST RECEIVED.
AND THE PLANNER THAT YOU DEALT WITH SHOULD HAVE PART OF OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE TOLD YOU ABOUT THIS 10 DAY RULE.
IT'S, AGAIN, IT'S ALL IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION IN ADVANCE.
AND LIKE I SAID, I'M SORRY, I WAS JUST, UH, RELYING ON THE EMAIL THAT I RECEIVED MS. HOSS HOSKIN MILLER, DO YOU WANNA MAKE A COMMENT? YES, YOU CAN.
UM, WHO DID, WHO SENT THE EMAIL REGARDING SIX O'CLOCK THE MORNING FROM, FROM THE CITY? AND, UH, I'VE GOT A SCREENSHOT OF IT SAYS, IF YOUR PRESENTATION CANNOT BE SHARED BY YOUR DEVICE, MAKE SURE THAT YOU SEND IT TO MARY WILLIAMS BEFORE 6:00 AM ON THE MORNING OF THE HEARING.
ALL SINS, WHETHER INTENTIONAL OR NOT ARE FORGIVEN.
OF COURSE, WE WANNA SPEAK TO THE MERIT OF YOUR REQUEST.
WE JUST WANNA MAKE FOR SURE THAT WE HAVE AMPLE TIME TO HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO PRESENT.
BUT AS A GENERAL RULE, IT'S 10 DAYS BEFORE, RIGHT? OKAY, THANK YOU.
SO, OKAY, SO I'VE UH, BUILT THIS HOME FOR MY DAUGHTER AND SHE'S SINGLE, JUST GRADUATED FROM
[00:25:01]
COLLEGE.AND I WANT TO SECURE THE PROPERTY WITH THE FENCE.
AND AS FAR AS I NEED YOU TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE, I I WANTED TO, THERE YOU GO.
I BUILT THIS HOME FOR MY DAUGHTER AND I WANTED, I BUILT THE FENCE TO SECURE THE PROPERTY.
THE, I HEARD DURING THIS MORNING THAT SOMEBODY WAS ASKING ABOUT THE VARIANCE.
THE ENCROACHMENT WAS BETWEEN SEVEN AND 10 FEET FROM THE 20 FOOT VARIANCE.
THE GATE DOES HAVE SLATS, TWO INCH GAPS BETWEEN TWO INCH SLATS.
SO THERE IS VISIBILITY FOR THE GATE.
OTHER THAN THAT, UH, THE PICTURES YOUR, SOMEBODY ELSE BROUGHT UP, HOW MANY OTHER FENCES ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD? WELL, THIS CONSERVATION DISTRICT IS BETWEEN 12TH STREET AND CLARENDON.
BETWEEN CHALMERS AND RAVINIA, AND THERE'S OVER 95% FENCES IN THAT CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
THE PICTURES THAT I SENT YOU VERIFY THAT.
SO BASICALLY, UM, THAT'S MY PRESENTATION.
I'M AT Y'S MERCY FOR THIS VARIANCE OR THIS, UM, I DON'T THINK IT'S A VARIANCE.
IT'S A, THERE'S SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
SO I'M OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
QUESTIONS FOR MR. SMITH REGARDING 2 7 6 4 CATHERINE STREET, MS. DAVIS.
UM, DID, DID YOU BUILD THE, BUILD THE FENCE YOURSELF OR DID YOU HIRE A CONTRACTOR? UH, NO, I BUILT IT.
AND WERE YOU AWARE OF THE RESTRICTIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR THE PROPERTY? UH, I TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY, NO.
WHAT I DID IS THAT I WENT BY THE PICTURES OF ALL THE OTHER FENCES THAT ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH I TOOK PICTURES OF.
I COMPLIED WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S ADJACENT AND ALL AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SOLD 95% OF FENCES.
AND, UH, AS FAR AS TRAFFIC IN THE ALLEY IS VERY MINIMAL.
ALL THE, ALL THE, THERE IS NO TRASH ABOUT TRASH PICKUP IN THE ALLEYS.
I, I JUST WANNA ADD, IT'S UP TO EVERY HOMEOWNER TO UNDERSTAND THE RESTRICTIONS OF THEIR PROPERTY.
WE DO HAVE PEOPLE COMING TO US ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS THAT I'VE, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING I SUPPORT.
EVERY HOMEOWNER NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THE RESTRICTIONS, WHETHER YOU'RE HIRING A CONTRACTOR OR BUILDER OR YOU'RE DOING IT YOURSELF.
IT'S JUST THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF HOME, HOME OWNERSHIP.
UNFORTUNATELY, I, I TOTALLY AGREE.
IT'S AFTER THE FACT THAT THANK YOU MS. DAVIS.
OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. SMITH? ON 2 2 3 0 9 7 MS. HAYDEN, SO YOU MENTIONED THAT THE ALLEY DOESN'T HAVE, UH, THERE ARE NO TRASH TRUCKS GOING DOWN THE ALLEY? NO.
WHERE'S THE ALLEY OR, OR WHERE'S THE GARBAGE COLLECTED? IN FRONT? IN FRONT.
IT'S ALL BROUGHT OUT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
AND THEN ARE THERE CARS, UH, HAVE THAT GO DOWN THE ALLEY, I'M ASSUMING? THERE, THERE'S, THERE'S ALSO NO, CAN, CAN I ASK THE QUESTION REAL QUICK? SURE.
SO ARE THERE, ARE THERE, ARE THERE DRIVEWAYS ALONG THE ALLEY FOR PEOPLE THAT LIVE ALONG THE ALLEY WHERE THEY CAN, THERE THERE IS NO DRIVEWAYS OR GARAGES THROUGH THE ALLEY? UH, MY PICTURE SUPPORT ALL THAT.
ALSO, I KNOW IT'S, IT, UM, THE STAFF SHOULD HAVE CONVEYED TO YOU SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS AS IT RELATES TO WHAT'S CALLED VISIBILITY TRIANGLES.
ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE CONCEPT OR THAT CONVERSATION? I AM.
AND, UH, THAT IS MY, AND WHAT, WHAT I WALKED OVER TO THE STAFF MEMBER IS TO GET THIS DRAWING THAT WAS SUBMITTED THAT LOOKED AT THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES.
BECAUSE THAT'S A VERY, THAT THAT IS PART OF, PART OF OUR DUTY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE, WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ANYTHING THAT WOULD CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD.
AND, UH, AND THERE'S, THERE'S SHOWING THAT THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT AREAS THAT HAVE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES OR TWO DIFFERENT AREAS, THE DRIVEWAY AND THEN THE ALLEYWAY.
UM, DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THOSE CONCERNS ON THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES? I, I DON'T DISAGREE.
[00:30:03]
OKAY.THE DEFENSE IS BUILT AND, UH, THAT'S THE REASON I'M ASKING FOR SPECIAL EXEMPTION.
THE ACTUAL GATE WHERE THERE'S TWO TRIANGLES THERE, THERE IS SLATS ON THAT ON THE GATE THAT'S THERE NOW WHERE YOU CAN, YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE OUT.
AND AS FAR AS THE ALLEY'S CONCERNED, I'M AROUND 10 FEET ENCROACHMENT OR SEVEN FEET ENCROACHMENT FROM THE, THE 20 FOOT SETBACK.
UH, DIANA, WAS THERE ANOTHER DRAWING? ONE SECOND SIR.
WAS THERE ANOTHER, A SMALLER VERSION THAT HAD THE THREE TRIANGLES ON IT FOR THIS ONE THERE? YES.
THERE'S A BETTER VERSION THAT YOU SHOWED US AT THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET OURSELVES EDUCATED HERE.
ALRIGHT, SO I'M LOOKING AT, UM, AND OUR RESIDENT EXPERT AT THIS IS MS. HAYDEN, SO I ALWAYS BEND TO HER, UH, WE ALL HAVE INDIVIDUAL VOTES, BUT, UM, IT, IT, IT SHOWS THE THREE AREAS THAT, THAT ON BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE, THE GATE I GUESS THAT YOU HAVE, AND THEN AT THE CORNER WITH THE, UM, WITH THE ALLEY.
NOW I'M GONNA PASS THAT TO MR. HAYDEN.
UH, THAT, THAT'S STILL A CONCERN TO ME.
I'M NOT AS CONCERNED, I'M NOT AS CONCERNED ABOUT THE HEIGHT ISSUE OF THE FENCE AS, AS OPPOSED TO ARE WE ENDORSING A TRAFFIC HAZARD? AND I HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT US ENDORSING A TRAFFIC HAZARD.
PIERCE STREET HAS VERY LITTLE, I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
PIERCE STREET HAS MINIMAL TRAFFIC.
THE ALLEYS HAVE ALMOST NO TRAFFIC AND THE ACTUAL FENCE GATE ITSELF'S GOT SLATS.
WELL, THE, THE CITY COUNCIL CREATED THIS AS A RULE, BUT THEY ALSO EMPOWERED US TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION TO THE RULE.
SO WE DIDN'T CREATE THE RULE, WE'RE JUST THERE TO ENFORCE, ENFORCE IT, GRANT AN EXCEPTION WHEN IT'S, WHEN IT'S MERITED.
SO THAT'S THE PROCESS WE'RE GOING THROUGH.
WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DID YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON, ON THAT MS. HAYDEN? OKAY.
DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WANTED TO ADD TO US AT THIS TIME? NO, SIR.
I'M, I'M JUST HERE YS MERCY AND WE'LL COMPLY WITH WHATEVER YOUR DECISION, OUR CRITERIA IS, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
AND SO WE ZERO IN, WE ZERO IN AND ALSO NOT CONSTITUTE TRAFFIC HAZARD.
THOSE ARE THE TWO CRITERIA CRITERIA IN FRONT OF US.
I I WILL TELL YOU THAT, UM, IT'S A CONCERN OF THIS ONE MEMBER WHEN WE'RE ASKED TO GRANT APPROVAL AFTER THE FACT, UH, WHEN SOMETHING WAS NOT PERMITTED.
AND, UH, SO THEY, THIS GIVES US PAUSE THAT'S NOT DIRECTLY TO THE CRITERIA, BUT THAT IS PART OF THE DECISION AT LEAST OF THIS ONE MEMBER.
SO I HAD TO TELL YOU THAT BECAUSE, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S THE LENS BY WHICH I'M LOOKING AT THIS.
THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MS. HAYDEN, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 2 3 DASH 0 9 7 ON THE APPLICATION OF ROBERT SMITH, DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A SIX FOOT HIGH FENCE WITHOUT PREJUDICE BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT GRANTING THE APPLICATION WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 2 3 0 9 7.
UH, MS. HAYDEN HAS MOVED TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO MAINTAIN THE SIX FOOT HIGH FENCE.
UH, IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? SECOND, IT'S BEEN SECONDED.
OUR PUBLIC HEARING IS OVER UNLESS I MISS SOMETHING.
DID YOU HAVE, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU NEEDED? UH, UH RIGHT.
UH, I THOUGHT THAT WE WERE QUESTIONING THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE THERE.
THERE ARE TWO VISIBILITY TRIANGLES AND THERE IS THE FENCE HEIGHT.
WELL, THE FENCE HEIGHT IS IN, I'M IN, UH, COMPLIANCE FENCE HEIGHT.
WE HAVE THREE ITEMS IN FRONT OF US.
AM I CORRECT? IT'S NOT THE FENCE HEIGHT, IT'S JUST THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.
ALL WE'LL HOLD FOR ONE SECOND.
[00:35:02]
MS. MARY, CAN WE HAVE TECHNOLOGY BACK? OKAY.IT IS 1:46 PM ON THE 14TH OF NOVEMBER.
UH, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A IS BACK INTO, UH, SESSION, UM, PANEL MEMBERS.
UM, I ASKED THE THE PANEL TO GO INTO RECESS IN ORDER TO GET FURTHER CLARIFICATION AS IT RELATES TO BDA 2 2 3 0 9 7.
AND I'M GONNA ASK DIANA COMB AND MR. TREVOR BROWN TO PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH VIA SOME POWERPOINTS FURTHER CLARIFICATION ON, UM, THE FENCE ISSUE AND WHY THE FENCE IN THEIR OPINION IS RELEVANT AS SUBMITTED, UH, FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES, BUT WE'RE CERTAINLY THE STAFF'S AVAILABLE TO DO THAT.
SO WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF THE BOARD ATTORNEY THAT WE HAD THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING, UH, THE MOTIONS HAVE BEEN WITHDRAWN.
SO WE'RE STILL PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING THIS AFTERNOON, CORRECT? MR. BOARD ATTORNEY? OKAY.
SO WOULD I SAY, VINCENT, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND SIT DOWN FOR A MOMENT SIR AND WE'LL CALL YOU BACK UP.
WE'RE, WE'RE GETTING, WE'RE TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION FOR EVERYONE INVOLVED.
ALRIGHT, SO, UH, MS. BARUM, I'M GONNA REFER TO YOU FIRST AND THEN IF YOU WANNA INTRODUCE MR. BROWN THAT'S FINE.
UM, UH, WOULD YOU PROVIDE US SOME ADDITIONAL, UH, INFORMATION RELATING TO THE REQUEST, THE ORIGINAL REQUEST THAT'S IN FRONT OF US AND, AND THEN THE TWO OF YOU WITH ANY APPROPRIATE, UM, GRAPHICS? OKAY, I AM GOING, THE REQUESTS STAY THE SAME.
THERE IS A VARI OR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE HEIGHT THERE IS AND THERE'S TWO SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES, THE CORNER, THAT'S WHAT'S IN OUR RECORD AND THE, UM, DRIVE APPROACH.
UM, I WILL LET TREVOR EXPLAIN THE CD.
UM, IT'S 15 REGULATIONS FOR THE FENCES.
SO YOU
JASON, CAN YOU GIMME THE ABILITY TO SHARE MY SCREEN PLEASE? GOOD AFTERNOON.
UH, SINCE I DID NOT PREPARE UH, A POWERPOINT, UH, BUT I DO HAVE AN ILLUSTRATION THAT I SHARED WITH THE, UH, BOARD, UH, IN ORDER TO EXPLAIN THE REGULATIONS AS LAID OUT BY CD EIGHT, WHICH I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ JUST TO GIVE YOU THE IDEA, IT IS A BIT CONFUSING.
SO I WILL DO MY BEST TO EXPLAIN ON THE ILLUSTRATION ON THE SCREEN.
BUT FOR FENCES IN SUB AREA, ONE FENCES IN THE FRONT YARD MAY NOT EXCEED THREE FEET IN HEIGHT.
I WANT TO CLARIFY ON THIS DRAWING A FRONT YARD, JUST HOLD ON A SECOND.
AND OUR DOCKET, IT SAYS THIS IS IN ZONE CD EIGHT OH SUB SUB AREA ONE.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE AREA YOU'RE SPEAKING TO.
UH, AND JUST TO CLARIFY THAT PORTION, I DO WANT TO POINT OUT WHAT A FRONT YARD IS ON THIS DRAWING AND LEMME SEE.
I GUESS I CAN MAKE THAT BIGGER.
THE FRONT YARD IS FROM THIS FRONT SMALLER PORTION OF THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE 25 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
SO THIS AREA IN THE TRIANGLE IS THE FRONT YARD WHERE A FENCE CANNOT EXCEED THREE FEET IN HEIGHT.
AS YOU GO THROUGH THIS, I WANNA PAUSE TO MAKE SURE I SEE FIVE SETS OF EYES HERE.
I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
SO, SO THE FRONT CORNER THIS MORNING IN THE BRIEFING, HE SAID THE FRONT YARD IS THAT LITTLE TOW, GO BACK A CLICK THERE.
THAT LITTLE TOW WHICH HITS, UM, CATHERINE STREET.
IT GOES TO THAT BUILDING LINE.
RIGHT? SO FENCES IN THAT AREA MAY NOT EXCEED THREE FEET IN HEIGHT.
SO THAT'S NOT REALLY IN QUESTION, BUT JUST FOR, AND THAT'S PART OF THE CD EIGHT? CORRECT.
SO THIS IS NOT AN OVERLAY, THIS IS THE ZONING FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY FENCES MAY NOT EXCEED FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT IN THE FRONT YARD AND SUB AREAS TWO AND THREE, THE FRONT 50% OF THE SIDE YARD IN ALL SUB AREAS THAT WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THIS.
'CAUSE THIS IS IN SUB AREA ONE, CORRECT.
IN THE FRONT 50% OF A CORNER SIDE YARD IN ALL SUB AREAS.
SO JUST THINK ABOUT ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS.
'CAUSE THIS IS A CORNER SIDE YARD ALONG PIER STREET.
SO ON BOTH OF THESE SIDE YARDS IN THE FRONT 50% OF THE SIDE YARD, WHICH NOT TO CONFUSE THINGS, BUT YEAH, HOLD ON.
SO IS THIS CONSIDERED, SHOW US WHAT'S CONSIDERED THE SIDE YARD.
THE FRONT SIDE YARD, ISN'T THAT THE TERM YOU JUST USED? SO THIS BLUE LINE WAS DRAWN TO INDICATE 50% OF THIS SIDE YARD AND THIS CORNER SIDE YARD.
SO ANYTHING FORWARD TOWARDS CATHERINE
[00:40:01]
STREET OF THIS BLUE LINE, ANY FENCE IN THAT AREA CANNOT EXCEED FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT.DOES EVERYONE GET THAT? SO THEY PUT THE BLUE LINE IN TO SHOW WHAT FORWARD OF THE BLUE LINE CANNOT BE HIGHER THAN FOUR FEET? CORRECT.
NOW WHAT IS PROPOSED AND OR WAS BUILT THAT WOULD BE NON-COMPLIANT TO THAT INTERPRETATION? SO THIS SITE PLAN THAT WE WERE PROVIDED, THAT CONSERVATION DISTRICTS REVIEWED AND THIS MARKUP IS ON, DOES NOT INDICATE A FENCE GOING FORWARD OF THE DRIVEWAY ON PIER STREET, IF YOU NOTICE.
BUT THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO YOU GUYS FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN DOES INDICATE A FENCE ALONG PIER STREET BASICALLY CONNECTING WITH THAT, THAT DIAGONAL FENCE THAT IS EXISTING OR HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT, UH, THERE IN WHAT MOST PEOPLE WOULD CONSIDER THE FRONT YARD.
SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT SITE PLANS? SO CONSERVATION DISTRICT REVIEWED THE ONE THAT YOU SEE ON YOUR SCREEN, THE ONE THAT WAS PROVIDED TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? WE HAVE NOT REVIEWED THAT PLAN.
SO IN THIS CASE, DO WE HAVE THE ACCURATE SITE PLAN FOR US TO DETERMINE TODAY I'M HEARING TWO DIFFERENT, I'M HEARING STAFF HAS TWO DIFFERENT SITE PLANS, ONE THROUGH THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND ONE THAT WAS SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO US.
THE SITE PLAN THAT WE PASSED AROUND EARLIER WITH THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES, UM, YOU HAVE IT BACK.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS THE FENCE.
SO WE HAVE THE SITE PLAN THAT'S SHOWING THE FENCE.
AND IS THAT DISTRICT DOES NOT, IS THAT SITE PLAN COMPLIANT WITH HIS INTERPRETATION OF THE BLUE LINE? YES.
YEAH, I MEAN IT'S, YES, IT'S, EVERYTHING'S THE SAME EXCEPT OURS HAS THE, UM, THE FENCE ON IT.
SO IT IS, IS IT IN STAFF'S OPINION, SO, OKAY, BUT YOU'RE SAYING THIS PLAN WE SEE RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF US DOESN'T SHOW WHAT THE APPLICANT WANTS TO BUILD OR HAS BUILT.
SO I BELIEVE WHAT IS INDICATED ON THE PLAN THAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN IS WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED BECAUSE THE FENCE HAS NOT COMPLETELY ENCLOSED THE YARD AND THE APPLICANT JUST SAID CORRECT.
SO WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN IS WHAT HAS BEEN BUILT SO FAR.
WHAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED IS WHAT IS APPARENTLY PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT TO ENCLOSE THE ENTIRE YARD.
SO WHAT, SO WHAT I SEE IN OUR CASE REPORT, PAGE 79, UH, IT SAYS FENCE PLAN LAYOUT C ONE DASH ZERO ONE DATED AUGUST 23RD, 2023 DRAWN BY MJ KB AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A FENCE THAT WOULD ENCOMPASS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
AND IF I AM INTERPRETING WHAT I SEE ON PAGE 79 COMPARED TO YOUR DEAL HERE WITH THE BLUE LINE, THAT FRONT PORTION OF THE FENCE IS NON-COMPLIANT.
THAT, THAT'S WHY I'M INTERPRETING, I'M LOOKING WHAT WE WERE PROVIDED AND THEN I'M INTERPOSING THAT LINE MR. ATTORNEY, YOU'RE LOOKING OVER MY SHOULDER HERE, RIGHT HERE AND ALL THIS PORTION OF THE FENCE DIAGONAL ACROSS AND THEN ALONG PIERCE TO WHAT? I DON'T KNOW WHAT DIRECTION THAT IS.
IS THAT NORTH TO THE YEAH, TO THE, TO THE RIGHT OF THAT BLUE LINE IS ALL NON-COMPLIANT.
AND THAT IS WHAT'S SUBJECT TO THE REQUEST BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY? CORRECT.
DID YOU ALL GET MY GIBBERISH MR. OVITZ? SO LOOKING AT PAGE 79, YES.
CAN YOU SPECIFY PLEASE? UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT SECTIONS LABELED FENCE DASH OH FOUR AND FENCE DASH OH FIVE? UM, WHERE, OH, UM, OH GOOD MAN.
UM, THE BLUE LINE, I'M LOOKING ON HIS GRAPHIC UP THERE AND I'M LOOKING AT ABOUT HOW IT, IT GOES EAST WEST AND IT, IT, IT, UH, I'M SEEING THAT THAT IT'S YOUR RIGHT, IT'S DEFENSE OH 3 0 4 AND OH FIVE ARE NON-COMPLIANCE AND ARE SUBJECT TO THE PURVIEW OF THE BOARD.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA ADJUDICATE WHETHER WE GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR NOT.
IS THAT A CORRECT INTERPRETATION? DIANA, DO YOU SEE WHAT OURS IS? EXCUSE ME.
MS. KU, IS THAT WHAT OURS IS COMPARED TO HIS, I'M JUST TRYING TO PUT THE BLUE LINE IN.
SO DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YOU HAVE, GO AHEAD.
IT DID, I JUST TO CLARIFY FURTHER PLEASE.
UH, THE SECTION LABELED FENCE OH FIVE YES.
HAS BEEN BUILT OR HAS NOT BEEN BUILT? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
[00:45:01]
PIER STREET.SO FROM THE ALLEY TO THE, NO, THE OTHER DIRECTION DRIVEWAY.
THE OTHER DIRECTION, OH FIVE IS OH OH FIVE.
THAT HAS NOT BEEN BUILT AS OF YET.
SO I, I HAVE TO REPEAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY I LEARNED.
SO WE'RE IN A CONSERVATION DISTRICT EIGHT SUBSECTION SUB AREA.
ONE, THE RULES WITHIN THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT EIGHT SUB AREA ONE WHICH ENCOMPASSES THIS PROPERTY SAYS THAT YOU CANNOT BUILD YOUR FENCES CAN'T BE OVER FOUR FEET BASICALLY BY THAT THERE'S THAT BLUE LINE TO THE TOE, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
UNLESS YOU GET A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
SO THIS ORDINANCE DOES ALLOW FOR, UH, AN APPLICANT TO COME TO THE BOARD FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IF IT'S ALLOWED UNDER 51 A I'M ASSUMING THE ANSWER IS IT'S ALLOWED UNDER BOTH IF, IF WE APPROVE, RIGHT.
OKAY, SO I'M GONNA MAKE IT, I'M GONNA MAKE A DETERMINATION.
SO IT'S MY DETERMINATION THAT IT IS A, IT IS A, IT IS PROPER BEFORE THE BOARD A REQUEST THE APPLICANT QUESTIONED WHETHER, UH, WHY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXEMPTION.
I WILL MENTION FOR THE RECORD, IN HIS APP, IN THE APPLICANT'S APPLICATION, IT SAYS FENCE CAP, UH, FENCE IS AT SIX FEET REQUIRING A TWO FEET SPECIAL EXEMPTION.
SO IN THE WRITTEN NOTARIZED APPLICATION, HE MADE APPLICATION FOR A FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
AND I'M GETTING CONFIRMATION TODAY FROM PROFESSIONAL STAFF THAT IT IS NON-CONFORMING AND THEREFORE IT WOULD REQUIRE APPROVAL FOR THE APPLICANT TO BE PROPERLY PERMITTED.
THAT'S MY, THAT'S MY DETERMINATION UNLESS THE BOARD FEELS OTHERWISE AND I DON'T HEAR THE BOARD SAYING OTHERWISE.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO.
SO WE'RE NOW GONNA GO BACK AND, AND BACK TO THE, TO THE APPLICANT.
I'M GONNA BRING THE APPLICANT UP AND LET THE APPLICANT RESPOND.
SINCE WE HAVE, IS THERE ANY OTHER CLARIFICATION THAT THE PANEL NEEDS RELATING TO THIS? I'VE GOT MS. DAVIS THEN MR. HOP, MS. DAVIS, I, I SEE ON THIS ONE DI DIAGRAM THAT IT SAYS NEW SIX FOOT WOOD FENCE ON TWO FOOT CONCRETE FOOTING.
SO WOULDN'T THAT MAKE IT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE? THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION.
SO WHERE DOES THE FENCE, HOW DO YOU MEASURE THE HEIGHT? IS IT SPECIFIC TO CD EIGHT OR IS IT BASE ZONING? SO REMEMBERING THAT IT SAYS, UH, FENCES IN THE FRONT, 50% HAVE A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF FOUR FEET IS ALLOWED.
UH, IT GOES ON TO SAY IN ALL SUB AREAS, FENCES IN THE REAR YARD, THE REAR 50% OF THE SIDE YARD AND THE REAR 50% OF THE CORNER SIDE YARD MAY NOT EXCEED NINE FEET IN HEIGHTEN.
SO THAT'S WHY THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
BUT IT, SO THERE WOULD NOT BE A NEED FOR A HEIGHT EXCEPTION IN THAT AREA.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE FRONT PORTION? IN THE FRONT PORTION? THAT'S WHAT THEY APPLIED FOR.
SO, SO THAT THE VARIANCE, I MEAN WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR THEN WOULD NEED TO BE FOUR FEET, NOT TWO FEET BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING THAT, THAT, I MEAN, AND WHAT, WHAT I'M, ALL OF OUR INFORMATION SAYS THAT THE APPLICANT WANTS TO BUILD A SIX FOOT FENCE BUT IT'S ACTUALLY AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE.
SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE SCREEN, THIS PORTION WHERE IT SAYS THE, THE SIX FOOT FENCE ON A TWO FOOT CONCRETE FOOTING.
THAT'S WHY THEY'RE ASKING FOR A TWO FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FENCE HEIGHT.
BUT BUT AGAIN, NO, IT'S A SIX FOOT FENCE ON TOP OF TWO FOOT FOOTER.
SO THE, THE ENTIRE TWO FOOT OF THE CONCRETE IS NOT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
IT'S ONLY IN THAT BACK PORTION OF IT, BUT NO, NO, NO.
SO IS THERE TWO FOOT FOOTING ON THE FRONT PORTION? THERE IS NO FENCE ON THE FRONT PORTION AS OF YET.
AND, AND PERHAPS STAFF CAN SHARE PHOTOS TO, UH, HELP.
I, I THINK MS. DAVIS'S QUESTION IS RELEVANT 'CAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO WHAT EFFECTIVELY ARE WE, UH, ADJUDICATING A VARIANCE AND DOES THAT INCLUDE THE FOOTING OR NOT? AND ALL WE'RE ZEROING IN ON IS TO THE FRONT OF THE BLUE LINE.
SO IS SOMEONE BRINGING THAT UP, THAT PICTURE? SO YOUR QUESTION IS PENDING.
SO MS. DAVIS'S COMMENT GOES TO PAGE 79 AND THE DETAILS ON IT WHERE IT SAYS NEW SIX FOOT WOOD FENCE ON TWO FOOT CONCRETE FOOTING, MR. BROWN, THAT'S EIGHT FEET.
[00:50:02]
UM, EIGHT FEET WHEN IT'S ONLY ALLOWED FOUR FENCE.OH THREE AND OH TWO I BELIEVE ARE THE, NOW WE'RE TALKING FENCE OH FIVE IS WHAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT.
FENCE OH FIVE IS A SIX FOOT FENCE WITHOUT THE, UM, IT SAYS ON TWO FOOT CONCRETE FOOTAGE.
THAT IS WHO? SO IF YOU OH FIVE, UM, I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT IS ON YOUR DOCKET, BUT THE PAGE 79, THE ELEVATION FOR OH FIVE IS A SIX FOOT FENCE.
SEE OH FIVE FENCE IS SIX FOOT.
SO I JUST HEARD MS. HAYDEN SAY TO GO TO PAGE 82, THAT'S FENCE OH FIVE, BUT I SEE A CONCRETE FOOTING ON THERE AND I SEE SIX, I SEE SIX FEET AND I SEE A FOOTER.
IF YOU LOOK ON THE SCREEN YES.
YOU DO NOT SEE A FOOTER AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PARTICULAR FENCE.
IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT PICTURE, YOU CAN SEE AT THE FRONT, THAT'S THE CORNER WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE FOOTER AND THAT'S THE BACK PORTION.
BUT WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT CURRENTLY THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY THAT THE ENTIRE FENCE HAS THE FOOTER, THE ENTIRE FENCE DOES NOT HAVE THE FOOTER.
WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THE BACK PORTION DOES HAVE THE FOOTER, THE FRONT PORTION DOES NOT.
AND AGAIN, IF YOU GO BACK TO THE PICTURE, THE ONE WE CAN SEE THE TRUCK SEE THIS, THIS, OKAY, I HEAR YOU HOLD THAT THOUGHT.
ON PAGE 79 OF THE APPLICANT'S DOCUMENTS TO THE BOARD AND ON FENCE ON FENCE FIVE, IT SAYS NEW SIX FOOT WOOD FENCE ON TWO FOOT CONCRETE FOOTER.
I'M JUST READING WHAT IT SAYS.
AND IT IS JUST LIKE WHEN APPLICANTS ASK FOR A SEVEN FOOT THREE FOOT VARIANCE AND IT'S ONLY JUST A PORTION OF THE GATE AND THE REMAINDER OF THE FENCE IS AT FIVE FOOT, THEY DON'T IDENTIFY EACH AND EVERY PORTION IN THE WRITTEN PORT.
THIS IS THE EXACT SAME SCENARIO.
IT'S JUST ONLY DEALING WITH THE FOOTER IN THIS SCENARIO.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S EIGHT FEET.
THAT'S MY INTERPRETATION MS. HAYDEN.
AND I, I UNDERSTAND THE CONFUSION HERE BECAUSE IT DOES SAY ON THE PLAN VIEW THAT IT'S A SIX FOOT CONCRETE, UH, SIX FOOT WOOD FENCE ON TWO FOOT CONCRETE FOOTING.
UM, JUST ON FENCE OH FIVE, JUST LIKE IT SAYS THE SAME THING ON FENCE OH TWO.
SO IT MAKES YOU THINK, WELL THAT'S THE SAME HEIGHT FENCE.
AND EVEN WHEN YOU GO BACK TO LOOK AT PAGE 82 WHERE IT HAS THE PROFILE VIEW OF FENCE OH FIVE AND FENCE OH FOUR, IT SHOWS THE CONCRETE FOOTING.
IT'S NOT DIMENSIONS, BUT YOU CAN'T TELL IS THAT SIX FEET ABOVE GRADE ABOVE THE, ABOVE THE GROUND LINE OR IS THAT SIX FEET IN ADDITION TO WHATEVER THAT FOOTING THAT'S NOT DIMENSIONS ON THAT DRAWING ON PENSO FIVE AND PENSO FOUR ON PAGE 82.
CLICK THAT SLIDE THAT'S GOT THE BLUE LINE.
'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S INSTRUCTIVE.
WHAT I'M ABOUT TO ASK, I'M GONNA GO TO MR. KOVA.
HE HAS A QUESTION I'M ABOUT TO ASK THE BOARD IS DO WE HAVE SUFFICIENT AND CONSISTENT AND ACCURATE INFORMATION TO MAKE A DETERMINATION? IF WE DON'T, WE PROBABLY NEED TO HOLD THIS OVER OR DENY IT.
IF WE DO, THEN WE CAN MAKE A DECISION TO APPROVE OR DENY.
BUT I'M QUESTIONING NOW WHETHER WE HAVE SUFFICIENT ACCURATE INFORMATION.
'CAUSE NOW THERE'S A DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER THERE'S A FOOTER OR NOT.
IF IT'S AN INCH, TWO, TWO FEET DOCUMENT, SAY IT'S TWO FEET I'M HEARING, OTHERWISE IT'S NOT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO BELIEVE OR NOT.
AND ONCE WE APPROVE, WE MOVE ON OUR WAY AND THEN IT'S UP TO BUILDING INSPECTION TO SAY WHAT WAS APPROVED OR NOT BASED ON WHAT WE, WHAT THE PLANS WERE SUBMITTED.
SO, AND THAT BURDEN OF ACCURATE INFORMATION IS THE APPLICANT'S.
SO MR. HOKO, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? UM, I'M MORE THAN A LITTLE CONFUSED BECAUSE I UNDERSTOOD THE APPLICANT TO SAY DEFENSE HAS BEEN BUILT.
WE'RE SEEING PICTURES OF THE FENCE THAT'S BUILT.
THE DRAWINGS INDICATE THERE'S MORE FENCE TO BE BUILT, BUT I'M UNCLEAR WHETHER, WHETHER THEY'RE PLANNING TO BUILD THAT OR NOT.
UH, WE'RE NOT VOTING ON APPROVING WHAT'S BEEN BUILT.
SO THERE'S, THERE IS NO FENCE THAT'S IN THE FRONT 50% OF THE SIDE YARD
[00:55:01]
BY NOW.SO TO HIS QUESTION, WHAT PORTION OF THE FENCE HAS BEEN BUILT TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE BLUE LINE? I NEED YOU TO TURN YOUR MICROPHONE ON PLEASE.
THIS AREA IS THE NEIGHBOR'S FENCE THAT WAS EXISTING.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS FENCE IS EXISTING OR HAS THIS, WAS THIS BUILT AS PART? SO THIS FENCE IS EXISTING.
THERE IS A SMALL SECTION OF FENCE BETWEEN THE EDGE OF THE DRIVEWAY HERE AND A STAIR, UH, THAT IS NOT INDICATED ON THE, THE PLANS.
WE'LL LOOK AT PHOTOGRAPHS TO CLARIFY THAT THERE IS NO FENCE BEYOND THAT STAIR CONNECTING TO THIS FENCE, WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.
SO THIS HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED YET, BUT WAS APPARENTLY PART OF WHAT WAS SUBMITTED TO YOU GUYS FOR CONSIDERATION AT SIX FEET OR AT SIX PLUS TWO OR WE DON'T KNOW.
SO THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT DID NOT REVIEW THIS.
WHAT'S THAT? I'M SORRY? THE CONSERVATION, YOU CAN'T COMMENT TO THAT.
YEAH, THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT DID NOT REVIEW WHAT THE BOARD HAS IN FRONT OF IT.
UH, WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE CAN MOVE TO A VOTE TO APPROVE OR DENY.
UH, WE'RE JUST TALKING TO THE DEFENSE RIGHT NOW.
UH, OR WE CAN HOLD OVER AND ASK FOR MORE CLARITY IN INFORMATION, UM, AND MAKE SURE THAT THE DOCUMENTS WE HAVE ARE CLEAR.
WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE GENERAL CONSENSUS OF THE PANEL? MS. HAYDEN, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION? YES, I, I'M, I CAN VOTE ON THIS NOW BASED ON WHAT I HAVE.
THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MS. HAYDEN HAS MOVED TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE REQUEST FOR A SIX FOOT HIGH SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UH, OFFENSE EXCEPTION.
IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MS. DAVIS.
MS. HAYDEN, IF YOU WANNA COMMENT ON THE MOTION.
THIS WHILE, UM, THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION IN, IN THE, THE DRAWINGS AND THE INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE.
UM, THIS IS A, A CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND THERE ARE REASONS THAT THOSE ARE PUT IN PLACE WITH, WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE, UH, STRINGENT ZONING LAWS.
UM, AND I, THE, IT'S, IT'S REALLY JUST COMES DOWN TO OUR OPINION OF WHETHER IT WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
WHEN I SAW THE VIDEO DRIVING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT THERE WERE VERY FEW FENCES, UM, ALONG PIER STREET AND THEN BOOM, THIS WAS RIGHT THERE, IT, IT, IN MY OPINION, WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
MS. DAVIS, WOULD I SPEAK COMPLETELY AGREE WITH MS. HAYDEN'S COMMENTS, OTHER DISCUSSIONS ON THE MOTION? MY COMMENT IS, I, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT CONFUSING INFORMATION.
UM, I'M GLAD WE CLEARED IT UP.
IT'S, IT'S MY OPINION THAT IT WAS, ACCORDING TO THIS RE EXPLANATION, IT'S CLEAR THAT IT'S WITHIN THE PROVINCE OF REQUIRING A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPECIAL EXCEPTION GIVEN THE BLUE LINE CD EIGHT AND SUB AREA ONE.
UM, SO I, I'M GLAD THAT'S CLEARED UP.
I'M CONCERNED THAT WE HAVE DIFFERENT DRAWINGS THAT AREN'T, ARE AS CLEAR AS IT SHOULD BE, AND ONE SAYS SIX FOOT WITH TWO FEET FOOTER.
THE OTHER SAYS SIX FEET AND IT DOESN'T SAY HOW MUCH.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW BUILDING INSPECTION
AND WE DON'T WANNA CREATE CONFUSION ONCE WE ADJUDICATE A DECISION.
SO I'M ALWAYS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.
UM, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA ALLOW YOU TO MAKE A COMMENT, SIR, EVEN THOUGH WE ARE PAST THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION, YOU CAN MAKE A BRIEF COMMENT.
I WOULD LIKE TO HOLD OVER TILL WE GET THIS CLARIFIED SINCE THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION.
AND SO I WOULD REQUEST FOR HOLD IT OVER UNTIL WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING'S BEING CLARIFIED BEFORE I GET, UH,
[01:00:01]
UH, ANY TYPE OF A JUDGMENT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT AND YOUR REQUEST.
UH, THE CHAIR ADVISED THE PANEL THAT THAT IS CERTAINLY ONE OF THE OPTIONS FOR US TO TAKE, UH, A HOLDOVER.
IF WE CHOOSE TO MAKE A WHOLE ORDER, WE'D GO TO OUR JANUARY 16TH OR 17TH.
JANUARY 16TH IS THE NEXT HEARING DATE OF THIS, IF THAT'S THE PREROGATIVE BOARD, BUT THAT IS THE, THE BOARD'S PREROGATIVE.
THAT'S UP TO MS. HAYDEN AND MS. DAVIS 'CAUSE THEY MADE THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
UH, JUST I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF HOLDING THIS OVER AND GETTING MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE PLANS AS THEY ACTUALLY ARE.
MS. DAVIS, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF HOLDING THIS OVER MR. NER, IT'S YOUR TURN.
UH, I'M GOING TO, UM, IF THE BOARD DENIES AND IT STILL ALLOWS THE APPLICANT TO REAPPLY TOMORROW, UH, IF THE BOARD HOLDS OVER, UH, IT JUST MOVES THE DIS THE, THE PROCESS TO JANUARY AND, UM, THE APPLICANT WOULD THEN BE FREE TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, CLARIFICATION OR NOT.
UM, SO THAT'S, THOSE ARE THE PATHS WE'RE ON.
THOSE WERE, THOSE ARE THE PATHS WE'RE ON.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN WE DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE APPLICANT CAN STILL REAPPLY TOMORROW.
TOMORROW, THEY COULD REAPPLY AT TWO 13 IF THEY WANTED TO.
NOW, THE QUESTION OBVIOUSLY IS, IS CLARIFICATION ON THE DRAWINGS GIVEN THE ADDITIONAL INTERPRETATION OF CD EIGHT, SUB AREA ONE AND THE 50% RULE ON THE FRONT PORTION AND THIS AND THOSE, THOSE SORT OF THINGS? UH, YES.
DISCUSSION, MR. HAITZ, UH, DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE ALLOWS HIM TO REAPPLY, BUT THEN HE WOULD BE VERY UNLIKELY, I WOULD THINK, TO MAKE THE JANUARY HEARING.