[Board of Adjustments: Panel A on January 16, 2024. ]
[00:00:02]
WELCOME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
I'M HONORED TO SERVE AS THE TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN OF THE FULL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND PRESIDING OFFICER OF ITS PANEL A.
TODAY IS TUESDAY, JANUARY 16TH, 2024, WITH A TIME OF 1:00 PM ACTUALLY IT IS ONE OH THREE.
I HEREBY CALL THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A TO ORDER FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, BOTH IN PERSON AND THE HYBRID VIDEO CONFERENCE.
A QUORUM OF OUR PANEL MEMBERS IS PRESENT, THEREFORE, WE CAN PROCEED WITH A MEETING.
THERE'S FOUR OF US PRESENT TODAY INSTEAD OF FIVE.
AND BECAUSE OF THAT, IN ORDER TO GET SOMETHING PASSED, YOU WILL NEED SUPPORT OF FOUR MEMBERS ON THE PANEL.
TO MY LEFT, I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE MY FELLOW, UM, VOTING MEMBERS OF RACHEL HAYDEN, JAY NER, AND MICHAEL KOVICH.
STAFF PRESENT TO MY RIGHT, MATTHEW SAPP, OUR BOARD ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
WE'VE GOT, UH, CAMBRIA JORDAN, OUR SENIOR PLANNER, DR.
KAMIKA MILLER HOSKINS, INTERIM BOARD ADMINISTRATOR.
DIANA BARKUM, DEVELOPMENT CODE SPECIALIST.
WE HAVE BRYANT THOMPSON, SENIOR PLANNER, JASON POOLE, OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR WILL, UH, JUST WALKED INTO THE ROOM AND WE HAVE MR. PHIL IRWIN R ARBORIST, AND WE ALSO HAVE OUR BOARD SECRETARY MARY WILLIAMS. BEFORE WE BEGIN, I'D 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 RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR THAT 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 ILLEGAL USE.
WE HAVE BEEN FULLY BRIEFED BY STAFF PRIOR TO THIS HEARING AND HAVE ALSO REVIEWED A DETAILED PUBLIC DOCKET, WHICH EXPLAINS THE CASE AND WAS POSTED SEVEN DAYS AGO ACCORDING TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY EVIDENCE YOU WISH TO SUB SUBMIT TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION ON ANY OF THE CASES THAT WE WILL HEAR TODAY SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD'S SECRETARY WHEN YOUR CASE IS CALLED.
THIS EVIDENCE MUST BE RETAINED IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR EACH CASE.
APPROVALS OF A VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR REVERSAL OF A BUILDING ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL DECISION REQUIRES 75% OR FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES OF THE FULL FIVE MEMBER BOARD PANEL.
SO AGAIN, ALL FOUR OF THE MEMBERS HERE PRESENT TODAY DO NEED TO APPROVE.
UM, DO NEED TO APPROVE AN ITEM IN ORDER TO HAVE THAT BE PASSED.
ANYONE DESIRING TO SPEAK TODAY MUST REGISTER IN ADVANCE WITH OUR BOARD SECRETARY.
EACH RES REGISTERED SPEAKER WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES OR WHEN A SPECIFIC CASE IS CALLED FOR ITS PUBLIC HEARING FOR A MAXIMUM OF FIVE MINUTES.
ALL REGISTERED ONLINE SPEAKERS MUST BE PRESENT ON VIDEO TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
NO TELECONFERENCING WILL BE ALLOWED VIA WE WEBEX AND ALL COMMENTS ARE TO BE DIRECTED TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER WHO MAY MODIFY SPEAKING TIMES AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN ORDER.
WE ARE GOING TO BEGIN WITH OUR FIRST CASE, BDA 2 1 2 0 7 8, WHICH IS A HOLDOVER.
BEFORE WE GO THERE, DO WE HAVE ANY, UM, ANYONE, UH, SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY? NO SIGNUP SPEAKERS.
SO OUR FIRST CASE, BDA TWO 12 DASH 0 78 IS A HOLDOVER.
MARY, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SPEAKING IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THIS CASE? MS. RA BUCKLEY.
AND SHE'S THE APPLICANT? CORRECT.
AND IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, UH, MARY, DO THEY NEED TO STATE ANYTHING ELSE IN ORDER TO BE SWORN IN? JUST NAME AND ADDRESS.
DO YOU SWEAR 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.
WELL, I LISTENED TO THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING.
UH, IF WE WOULD, COULD WE JUST GO AHEAD AND GO TO SLIDE NUMBER FOUR, PLEASE? THIS IS, UH, A KIND OF A PLAN REVIEW OF WHAT IS THERE CURRENTLY.
YOU'LL SEE THAT WE HAVE, UH, A DRIVEWAY RIGHT UP THERE AT THE INTERSECTION.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE CLOSING AS WE REMODEL THIS EXISTING STRUCTURE.
WE ARE ADDING A DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANT TO THE STRUCTURE, AND THAT GRASSY AREA OVER THERE TO THE WEST IS GOING TO BE THE PARKING LOT.
SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
SO THESE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR OUR LANDSCAPING.
UH, CLOSING OFF THAT INGRESS EGRESS POINT IS GONNA BE A BIG DEAL FOR THIS SITE.
UH, I THINK IT'S GONNA HELP A LOT WITH, ESPECIALLY
[00:05:01]
WITH PEDESTRIAN ACCESS.THE, WE'RE ALSO GONNA BE PROVIDING SOME SCREENING ALONG THE FREEWAY ALONG WITH THREE LARGE TREES AND SOME SHRUBS, WHICH IS A MAJOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE CURRENT CONDITION.
UH, WE'LL BE PROVIDING SOME LANDSCAPE BETWEEN THE SUBJECT SITE AND THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST.
AND THEN WE'LL BE IMPROVING LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS ALONG WINSLOW.
AND THE, I HEARD THE, THE COMMENT THIS MORNING, WAS IT ECONOMIC THAT WE WEREN'T PROVIDING MORE TREES? WE DO HAVE SOME UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND SOME OVERHEAD UTILITIES AS WELL AS, UH, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO STEER CLEAR UP THERE ON THE CORNER OF WINSLOW AND RL THORNTON WITH THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL.
SO CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE? AND SO WITH ALL THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, THIS IS WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
UH, THERE'S, WE'RE GONNA BE REPLACING ALL OF THAT SIDEWALK ALONG ERL THORNTON AND PROVIDING SIDEWALK AND ALSO EXTENDING THAT CURVE DOWN ON WINSLOW TO CREATE A LITTLE BIT MORE LANDSCAPE SPACE.
WE COULD NOT MEET THE BUFFER IN THE REAR, UH, WHICH FOR US, UH, DIDN'T REALLY MAKE A LOT OF SENSE TO HAVE A BIG LANDSCAPE BUFFER THERE ANYWAY, BECAUSE IF, IF YOU SAW THE SLIDES THIS MORNING, THE ALLEY BEHIND US, ALL THE RESIDENCES HAVE FENCES AND THAT WE ALSO HAVE A FENCE, BUT WE'RE GONNA PUT IN A NICE NEW FENCE.
IT'S GONNA BE SIX FEET ON THE FENCE WITH MASONRY COLUMNS THAT ARE EIGHT FOOT TALL.
SO WE THINK THIS IS A, A MUCH IMPROVED, UH, APPLICATION OVER WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED.
UH, WHEN WE ORIGINALLY CAME TO YOU, WE HAD VARIANCE REQUESTS FOR SIDE YARD THAT'S GONE.
UH, WE ALSO HAD A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR PARKING.
WE GOT THAT DOWN FROM 41 TO 16%, WHICH IS, WELL, ROUGHLY 16%, WHICH IS GOOD.
SO WITH THAT, UM, IF YOU HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR ME ABOUT THIS, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? I THINK THERE WAS SOME, UH, CONFUSION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS WOULD HAVE A DRIVE THROUGH, UM, FOR THE TACO CASA? YES.
AND AND WAS THAT CONSIDERED IN THE APPLICATION IN THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES? YES.
OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? THERE ARE, UM, IN DIFFERENT PLACES IN THE DOCUMENTATION AS REFERENCE TO A VARIANCE OF FOUR, BUT ELSEWHERE IT'S TALKING ABOUT SIX.
UM, SO COULD YOU MAYBE EXPLAIN HOW YOU ARE COUNTING YOUR PARKING SPOTS? YES.
THE TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT CALLS IT OUT IS 20 AND 26 BECAUSE THEY'RE LOOKING AT PHYSICAL PASSENGER CAR SPACES BECAUSE THERE'S NO TRIP COUNT FOR BICYCLES.
SO THEY JUST LOOKED AT THE 20 PHYSICAL VEHICLE PARKING SPACES VERSUS 26 REQUIRED.
WE DO HAVE THE TWO BIKE RACKS.
SO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL REPORT IS CORRECT WHEN IT SAYS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF FOUR SPACES, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT, IT'S LOOKING AT PHYSICAL PASSENGER CARS.
SO DOES THAT HELP? AND YOU'RE ALSO, YOU'RE COUNTING SPOTS WHERE CARS ARE IN THE DRIVE-THROUGH LANE AS PARKING SPOTS AS WELL.
WELL, IT'S, IT'S NOT REALLY COUNTED AS PARKING.
IT'S JUST SHOWING WHERE, 'CAUSE THIS IS A DRIVE THROUGH ONLY.
SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE QUEUING UP.
YOU CAN EITHER DRIVE THROUGH THE DRIVE THROUGH OR YOU CAN PARK OVER THERE AND DO A CARRYOUT.
SO IT'S, IT'S A CONVENIENT STORE WITH THE DRIVE THROUGH.
OTHER QUESTIONS? DO I HAVE SOMEONE READY TO MAKE A MOTION? I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 1 2 DASH OH SEVEN EIGHT ON APPLICATION OF AUDRA BUCKLEY.
GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO PROVIDE 22 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES TO THE OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED, WHICH REQUIRES 26 OFF, SORRY, 22 REQUIRES 26 OFF STREET PARKING PLACES BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY USE AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT INCREASE TRAFFIC HAZARDS OR INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
AND THE PARKING DEMAND GENERATED BY THE USE DOES NOT WARRANT THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES.
THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS GRANTED FOR THE MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION AND RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE USE AND A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE USE.
I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF FOUR SPACES SHALL AUTOMATICALLY AND IMMEDIATELY TERMINATE IF AND WHEN THE MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION AND RESTAURANT WOULD DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE USE.
AND A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR A FOOD STORE USE IS CHANGED OR DISCONTINUED.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
[00:10:02]
I'LL SECOND.UM, IT SEEMS LIKE WITH A DRIVE-THROUGH A DRIVE-THROUGH ONLY OR WALK-UP RESTAURANT, THAT THERE, UH, WILL NOT BE AS MUCH NEED FOR PARKING AS THE RETAIL USE REGULATIONS MIGHT REQUIRE.
UM, IN ADDITION, IT'S EXPECTED AND REASONABLY SO THAT THERE WILL BE PEOPLE COMING FROM THEIR CARS PARKED IN THE FUELING STATION TO PICK UP FOOD AS WELL.
AND SO COUNTING THOSE PARKING SPACES SEEMS TO BE REASONABLE TO ME.
I CONCUR WITH WHAT MICHAEL JUST SAID.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, MADAM? SECRETARY? I THINK WE CAN CALL FOR A VOTE.
LET'S MOVE, LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR SECOND MOTION.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 12 0 78 ON APPLICATION OF A BUCKLEY GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 10 OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT ONE, STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THIS ARTICLE WILL UNREASONABLY BURDEN THE USE OF THE PROPERTY.
TWO, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
AND THREE, THE REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT IMPOSED BY A SITE-SPECIFIC LANDSCAPE PLAN APPROVED BY THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION OR CITY COUNCIL.
I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS IS REQUIRED.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND DISCUSS.
MS. HAYDEN? I I BELIEVE THAT THE, UM, THE INTENT OF THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET, UH, BY CLOSING OFF THAT ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY AND LANDSCAPING THAT AREA AND ALSO WITH THE CONSTRAINT OF THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL AREA TO, TO STAY OUT OF THAT AREA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE.
MOTION PASSES FOUR TO ONE, I MEAN FOUR TO ZERO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
IN THE CASE OF BDA DASH, OR SORRY, BD 202 DASH 0 78, THAT M MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
WE'RE GOING TO GO TO OUR SECOND HOLDOVER CASE, BDA 2 23 DASH NINE SEVEN.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE APPLICANT DID MAKE A REQUEST TO HOLD THIS OVER UNTIL NEXT MONTH.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT FOR THIS, FOR THIS CASE? BDA 2 23 DASH 0 9 7.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO HOLD THIS OVER UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING FROM THE PANEL? I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 2 3 DASH 0 9 7 HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY.
DO DO YOU KNOW THE DATE? WE'LL GET THAT NEXT MEETING.
TO HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 20TH, 2024.
ANY DISCUSSION? CALL FOR A VOTE PLEASE.
[00:15:01]
FOUR TO ZERO.SO, BDA CASE NUMBER 2 2 3 DASH 0 9 7 WILL BE HELD OVER UNTIL FEBRUARY 20TH.
THOSE WERE TWO HOLDOVER CASES.
WE'RE GOING TO START WITH OUR INDIVIDUAL CASES START UP HERE.
ALRIGHT, EVERYONE, WE'RE STARTING UP HERE WITH THE INDIVIDUAL CASES.
ALRIGHT, LET'S GO TO CASE BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 5 4 7 0 1 SOUTH DENLEY DRIVE BOARD SECRETARY.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SPEAKING IN EITHER A, A PRO OR AN OPPOSITION OF THIS CASE? UM, MR. ERIC BONILLA.
THE, THE, THIS IS THE APPLICANT, CORRECT? YES.
BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY SPEAKING, UH, TO HER IN, IN FAVOR OR OPPOSING THIS CASE.
YOU'VE GOT FIVE MINUTES TO PRESENT.
SORRY WE DIDN'T, SORRY WE DID NOT SWEAR YOU IN BOARD.
SECRETARY, I'LL LET YOU GO FIRST AND THEN, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
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.
ERIC BONILLA, 47 0 1 DANLEY DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 6.
I IF YOU COULD JUST SPEAK CLOSE TO THE MICROPHONE SO WE CAN HEAR YOU.
WELL, THE REASON I'M HERE IT IS BECAUSE I JUST GET THE PROPERTY AND I JUST WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ADDITION TO THE BACK OF THE YARD AND THAT'S IT.
AND I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF I CAN GET UP THROUGH OR ALL RIGHT.
QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL FOR THE APPLICANT.
IS THERE, UM, IS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT FROM THE INFORMATION WE REVIEWED YOUR BUILDING CLOSER TO THE STREET, UM, ON A FAIRLY DEEP LOT.
I'M JUST WONDERING WHY YOU'RE NOT BUILDING BACK INTO THE LOT.
UH, WELL THE REASON IS BECAUSE, UH, I THINK THE LOT, THAT'S A CORNER LOADER LOT AND, UH, THAT IS ALREADY BUILT A HOUSE IN THERE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE ADDITION, CONTINUE WITH THE LIGHT, WITH THE LINE, UH, OR THE OLD PROPERTY OR THE OLD HOUSE.
SO, SO OUR UNDERSTANDING IS YOU'RE NOT TEARING DOWN THE EXISTING, YOU'RE EXPANDING, YOU'RE ADDING ADDING ONTO IT.
OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? IF NOT, ARE WE READY FOR A MOTION? MR. MARY? OKAY.
UM, YES, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 5 ON APPLICATION OF ERIC BONILLA GRANT, THE 17 FOOT VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS 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 TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THAT COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
DISCUSSION, MR. N? YEAH, NORMALLY, UM, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO DENY THIS BECAUSE IT'S, IT IS A CONSIDERABLE VARIANCE, BUT SEEING AS THAT THERE'S NO OPPOSITION, UM, TO THIS FROM THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS OR PROPERTY OWNERS, UM, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT, SO THAT'S WHY I'M SUPPORTING IT.
[00:20:01]
17 FOOT VARIANCE ON THE SURFACE LOOKS EXTREME, BUT WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE TWO FRONT YARD SITUATION, THEN IT, IT MAKES SENSE.ANY DISCUSSION? CALL FOR VOTE.
IN THE CASE OF BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 5, THAT MOTION PASSES YOU HAVE, UH, YOU FULFILLED YOUR REQUEST.
AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
OUR NEXT CASE IS BDA 2 3 4 DASH 8 54 33 EAST GRAND AVENUE.
MADAM SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR FOR THIS CASE? WE HAVE THE APPLICANT, UM, UH, FOR SUPPORT AND WE HAVE SOMEBODY ONLINE AND FOR OPPOSITION IF MR. SEAN RAFFORD CAN PLEASE LET ME KNOW THAT HE'S ONLINE.
WE'LL GIVE, UM, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
WE'LL GIVE THREE MINUTES TO THE PERSON IN OPPOSITION.
AND IF YOU COULD PLEASE SWEAR IN MR. BALDWIN, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THE TRUTH TO TAKE IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS, UH, JASON, OR WHO'S EVER RUNNING MACHINE.
COULD YOU PLEASE PUT MY PO UH, PRE PRESENTATION UP? WE'LL GET THAT UP IN A SECOND.
AND I, HAVE Y'ALL SEEN THIS BEFORE? IT WAS, I SUBMITTED IT WITH MY MATERIAL, SO I I WON'T SPEND A WHOLE LOT OF TIME ON IT.
UH, BUT, UH, SO THE, THE PROJECT IS ON EAST GRAND AT, UH, 54 33 EAST GRAND.
AND IF YOU LOOK, COULD YOU GO TO SLIDE THREE PLEASE? SO THIS, THE AREA IS SHADED IN GREEN IS THE BUILDING LONG, NARROW, BUILT IN TWENTIES.
AND YOU CAN SEE THERE IT GOES ALL THE WAY ALMOST TO THE BACK OF THE LOT.
SO THERE IS NO PARKING AVAILABLE IN THE BACK OF THE, THE, THE PROPERTY AT ALL.
ALL THE PARKING IS, UH, IN THE FRONT.
AND THE, THIS IS THE SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS THE, THE BUILDING ORIENTATION AND HOW MUCH THE LOT NEXT DOOR HAS PARKING.
BUT WE WE'RE NOT LUCKY ENOUGH TO HAVE ANY BEHIND US.
SO THIS AREA, THIS IS A, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, A STREETCAR MAP FROM THE 1920S THAT SHOWS THAT WHEN THIS AREA WAS DEVELOPED, WE WERE ON TWO STREET CAR LINES AND THAT'S, IT WAS NOT COMMON BACK THEN TO HAVE PARKING.
SO, UM, THE ONLY PARKING FOR THIS IS RIGHT OUT IN FRONT, BUT EVERYBODY SHARES THE, THE, THE SAME PARKING ON THE STREET AND IT'S WORKED WELL, UH, SINCE THE TWENTIES.
THE PROBLEM WAS, UH, THE CITY OF DALLAS, WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE, WHEN THE BUILDER IS BUILT BEFORE THE PARKING REGULATIONS, YOU HAVE WHAT THEY CALL DELTA CREDITS.
AND DELTA CREDITS GIVE YOU CREDIT FOR PARKING SPACES THAT WERE NEVER BUILT BUT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT WITH.
THE BUILDING WOULD'VE BEEN BUILT AFTER THE PARKING, UH, REGULATIONS CAME IN PLACE.
IN THIS CASE, WE ORIGINALLY BUILT AS RETAIL, UH, BUT AT SOME TIME IN THE SEVENTIES OR EIGHTIES, UH, AN OFFICE USE WENT IN THERE.
THE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE RETAIL AND THE, THE OFFICE CREDITS WE'RE ASKING IT TO GO BACK TO ALLOW US TO REOCCUPY THIS WITH AN, UH, A RETAIL OR A PERSONAL SERVICE USE, WHICH PARKS AT ONE TO 200 SQUARE FEET VERSUS ONE TO 333 FEET FOR AN OFFICE.
UH, THIS IS A STREET, I DUNNO IF YOU'VE BEEN DOWN THERE.
IT'S A VERY ACTIVE AND ROBUST STREET.
UH, A LOT OF PEDESTRIANS, UH, A LOT OF PEOPLE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD COME RIGHT AROUND HERE.
UH, AND IT'S A MIXTURE OF RESTAURANTS, OFFICES, UH, RETAIL, PERSONAL SERVICE.
UH, THIS IS AGAIN LOOKING AT, UH, AT OUR BLOCK.
IT'S NOT THE DENTAL CLINIC, IT'S NOT THE BUILDING NEXT TO THE DENTAL CLINIC.
IT'S THE, THE, THE GRAY BUILDING.
UH, IT'S BEEN, UH, UP FOR LEASE FOR ABOUT A YEAR AND WE CAN'T GET ANYBODY INTERESTED IN THE OFFICE SPACE.
AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO PIVOT TO, TO MAKE SURE IT CAN, CAN BE OCCUPIED.
IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY, YOU'LL SEE A, A FOR LEASE SIGNED IN THE WINDOW THERE.
IT'S A, I THINK THEY DID A REALLY GOOD JOB OF BRINGING IT, UH, RE RENOVATING IT, MAKING IT ONE OF THE NICEST BUILDINGS ON THE
[00:25:01]
PROPERTY ON THE BLOCK.BUT WE STILL CAN'T LEASE IT JUST BECAUSE THERE'S A, UH, NO ONE'S LEASING SMALL OFFICE SPACES AT THIS POINT.
SO WE'RE, UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
IF I CAN ASK A QUICK QUESTION.
SO DO YOU HAVE A CLIENT FOR THAT SPACE? NOT YET.
UH, WE, WE, BECAUSE WE CAN ONLY OFF, UH, WE CAN ONLY MARKET IT AS OFFICE RIGHT NOW.
SO IF, IF WE, IF SHOULD THIS BE APPROVED, THEN WE CAN SAY NOT ONLY OFFICE, BUT WE CAN ALSO GET A NAIL SALON IN THERE OR RETAIL FACILITY IN THERE.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED ANOTHER DENTIST.
THERE'S ONE ON EITHER SIDE OF US, BUT, UH, ANYTHING THAT PARKS AT ONE TO 200, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR PERMISSION TO, TO PUT A RESTAURANT IN THERE.
'CAUSE THAT PARKS AT ONE TO 100, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN JUST A, A BIT TOO MUCH OF A BITE.
BUT WE DO WANNA BE ABLE TO RE RETEN IT WITH A, A RETAILER OR PERSONAL SERVICE USE.
AND THE, THE SPACES IN FRONT OF ALL OF THOSE OFFICES, THEY'RE JUST SHARED, THEY'RE NOT LABELED SPECIFIC TO EACH BUSINESS THERE? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, IN DALLAS, YOU'RE NOT LEGALLY ALLOWED TO RESERVE SPACES EXCEPT FOR LOVE FIELD.
UM, EVERYTHING THAT'S ON THE STREET IS OPEN TO ANYBODY.
BUT PEOPLE PUT SIGNS UP THERE.
THIS IS A, A VERY SCARY ENTRANCE OR EXIT, UH, TO THE ALLEY RIGHT BEHIND OUR BUILDING.
SO EVEN IF THERE WERE PARKING SPACES BACK THERE, UH, IT'S A ONE-WAY ALLEY COMING OUT AND IT BRINGS YOU OUT HERE AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S NO VISIBILITY ONCE YOU GET TO THE STREET.
UH, I WANTED TO CONFIRM THE BUILDING THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR, CONFIRM OUR REQUEST.
AND I HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT IT.
AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL FOR THE APPLICANT.
IS THERE, IS THERE ANYTHING, UM, WHAT EXACTLY IS, UH, KEEPS IT FROM BECOMING A RESTAURANT IF YOU WERE TO MARKET IT THAT WAY? UH, YOU PARK, RESTAURANTS, PARK AT ONE SPACE PER 100 SQUARE FEET.
AND, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ENOUGH.
WE'RE, THIS WAS NEVER RESTAURANT, SO WE NEVER HAD DELTA CREDITS FOR THAT.
SO WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR REINSTATEMENT OF MORE THAN WE EVER HAD IN, IN THE PAST.
OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? SO, SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THEY, THEY, WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY WOULD LEASE THIS SPACE AND SOMEBODY WOULD COME IN AND, AND START A RESTAURANT? WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS AT THEY WOULD AT BUILDING THE CITY LEVEL, THEY WOULD NEVER BUILDING, GET A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THAT 'CAUSE THEY COULDN'T PARK IT.
DO I HAVE A VOLUNTEER TO MAKE A MOTION? UM, YES.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 8 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES.
GRANT THE FIVE SPACE VARIANCE TO THE PARKING.
OH, OH, WE DO HAVE AN OPPOSITION SPEAKER.
DID THAT, DID HE EVER COME BACK ONLINE? NO, NO, NO.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 2 2 3 4 DASH ZERO EIGHT ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES GRANT THE FIVE SPACE VARIANCE TO THE PARKING REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN 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.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND DISCUSSION? UM, SO ONE OF THE CRITERIA WE LOOK AT IS THAT IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.
I DID NOT HEAR ANY, UH, LETTERS IN OPPOSITION OR TESTIMONY THAT WAS IN OPPOSITION.
ALSO, THIS SITE IS VERY RESTRICTIVE.
IT'S BOUND BY AN ALLEY ON THE BACK, TWO BUILDINGS ON EITHER SIDE AND A STREET AND VERY, UH, AND STREET PARKING ON THE OTHER SIDE.
UM, SO IT IS NOT A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP.
MR. MARY, I BASICALLY CONCUR, UM, WITH EVERYTHING.
I THINK MR. BALDWIN DID AN, UH, EXCELLENT JOB IN EXPLAINING, UH, THE REASON FOR THIS REQUEST.
AND, UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M SUPPORTING IT ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.
I'LL JUST SAY THAT, THAT I THINK THE PEOPLE MOST LIKELY TO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS WOULD BE THE ADJACENT BUSINESSES AND THEY'RE NOT HERE TO VOICE OPPOSITION.
SO THERE'S SEE NO REASON NOT TO APPROVE IT.
AND, AND I AGREE, I'M, I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION.
UH, I APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION AND THE CLARIFICATION AND OUR APOLOGIES FOR GETTING THAT MIXED UP AS WE WENT THROUGH THE STAFF BRIEFING.
BUT, UM, VERY, UM, EXCITED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF YOU BEING ABLE TO LEASE THIS SPACE BECAUSE WE WANNA BRING AS MANY BUSINESSES INTO THIS AREA AS POSSIBLE.
[00:30:01]
MR. N AYE.IN THE CASE OF BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 8, MOTION PASSES FOR 54 33 EAST GRAND AVENUE, SUITE B, LET'S GO ON TO OUR NEXT CASE, WHICH IS BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 9.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT TO WITHDRAW AHEAD, OKAY? OKAY.
YOU'RE THE APPLICANT? YES, MA'AM.
UM, MADAM SECRETARY, CAN WE SWEAR IN THE APPLICANT PLEASE? DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
DE ONE SESSION 9 0 9 SOUTH CORINTH STREET ROAD, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 3.
HOW EVERYBODY'S DOING? I, I'M SORRY.
COULD YOU SPEAK JUST A LITTLE BIT? IT DIDN'T HOW EVERYBODY'S DOING? THANKS.
UNFORTUNATELY, I HAVE TO, UH, REQUEST A WITHDRAW OF APPLICATION PLEASE.
UM, DUE TO UNFORESEEN ISSUES THAT KEEP ARISING TRYING TO GET PERMITS DONE FOR THIS LOCATION, I'D LIKE TO PULL THE APPLICATION.
I RECEIVED THE EMAIL GENERATED EIGHT REQUESTING THAT I UPDATE TAX CERTIFICATES OR SHOWING A ZERO BALANCE OF TAXES PRIOR TO THIS HEARING.
AND THAT KIND OF PUT ME IN A POSITION OF TELLING SOMEONE THAT NORMALLY PAY THEIR TAXES ON THE 31ST OF JANUARY EVERY YEAR.
HEY, YOU NEED TO PAY YOUR TAXES.
AND THAT KIND OF PUT ME IN AN AWKWARD POSITION.
SO THEREFORE I'D LIKE TO WITHDRAW MY APPLICATION.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION? NO, THE SPEAKERS.
UM, DO WE HAVE MOTION FIRST? ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? IS THERE, UH, ANY PARTICULAR REASON YOU'RE WITHDRAWING INSTEAD OF ASKING FOR A A LATER TIME? WELL, IS JUST SO MUCH.
I'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS SINCE AUGUST OF 2023, TRYING TO GET EVERYTHING SUBMITTED, GET EVERYTHING DONE FOR A HOT DOG STAND FOR THE COMMUNITY.
AND IT'S LIKE I KEEP RUNNING TO ISSUES EVERY SINGLE TIME, YOU KNOW, SO I JUST LIKE TO WITHDRAW.
THAT'S PRETTY MUCH I HAVE TO WITHDRAW.
UM, I'VE SEEN, I'VE JUST LISTENED TO OTHER PEOPLE JUST TALK AND SPEAK TODAY.
I'M JUST OVER THERE THINKING MAYBE I COULD JUST WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE 31ST OF JANUARY, JUST ASK FOR A, UM, A LATER DATE MAYBE TO FEBRUARY, PUSHES IT BACK TO FEBRUARY.
UM, BUT HONESTLY IT'S, IT'S REALLY UP TO, TO THE PANEL IF I CAN PUSH IT BACK.
UH, THEREFORE I CAN JUST GO AHEAD AND DO, JUST DO A WITHDRAW.
UH, JUST SO THE PANEL'S AWARE.
UM, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED WITHDRAWAL, BUT HE'S OKAY WITH A HOLDOVER.
YOU GUYS WEREN'T PROPERLY BRIEFED ON THIS CASE.
SO IF YOU GUYS WANNA BE PROPERLY BRIEFED, WE COULD DO THAT OR YOU COULD HOLD IT OVER OR YOU COULD DENY IT WITHOUT PREJUDICE OR YOU COULD DENY IT WITH PREJUDICE.
IF YOU MAKE NO MOTION AT ALL AND WE JUST GO ON ABOUT OUR BUSINESS, UM, THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A DENIAL WITH PREJUDICE.
SO IF WE, IF WE DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE, HE CAN COME BACK AT ANY TIME AND PRESENT THE CASE.
I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
WOULD WOULD, UH, US HOLDING THIS CASE OVER UNTIL OUR FEBRUARY MEETING, WOULD THAT BE BENEFICIAL TO YOU? WOULD YOU BE READY AT THAT TIME OR, WELL, THE TAXES SHOULD BE PAID JANUARY 31ST OF THIS YEAR.
UH, THAT'S THE ONLY THING I BELIEVE WAS HOLDING THIS WHOLE ORDEAL UP FROM WHAT I WAS STATED FROM MS. BURMAN SAID I NEED TO UPDATE TAX CERTIFICATE SHOWING A ZERO BALANCE.
I, AND THE REASON I ASK IS, YOU KNOW, I JUST DON'T WANNA HAVE TO PUT YOU IN A POSITION WHERE YOU HAVE TO PAY ANOTHER FILING FEE.
IF WE CAN HOLD THIS OVER UNTIL FEBRUARY FOR YOU.
WELL, HERE, HERE'S ANOTHER DEAL.
UM, THURSDAY I SUBMITTED A REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MY APPLICATION FOR A REFUND AND ALSO I SENT IT OVER FOR THE PERMIT DEPARTMENT AND THE BUILDING, YOU KNOW, THE BUILDING AND THE CEO DEPARTMENT.
I HAVE NOT GOT A RESPONSE BACK FROM THEM AS OF YET.
ONCE I LEAVE THIS MEETING HERE, I'M GOING DIRECTLY OVER THERE TO THE OFF JEFFERSON TO SPEAK WITH THAT.
UH, I THINK IT'S WILLIS, MR. WILLIS, UH, 'CAUSE I HAVE NOT GOT A UPDATED OR SAYING YAY OR NAY ON THE, UM, WITHDRAWAL OF THAT APPLICATION.
SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE IT'S JUST UP IN THE AIR, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
UM, IF, IF WE HELD THIS OVER TO FEBRUARY, UH, I MEAN WE CAN, WE CAN DO THAT, BUT WE'RE NOT GONNA HOLD IT OVER AGAIN.
SO YOU WOULD PREFER THAT WE JUST PULL THE CASE ALTOGETHER OR WOULD YOU PREFER THAT, THAT WE CONSIDER HOLDING THIS OVER TO FEBRUARY KNOWING
[00:35:01]
THAT YOU'RE EITHER GONNA PRESENT IN FEBRUARY OR, OR YOU'RE NOT? YES MA'AM.UH, THE THIRD OPTION, THE THIRD OPTION IS TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE, CORRECT? YES.
HE CAN EITHER WITHDRAW AND THEN YOU COME BACK WHENEVER YOU WANT TO OR WE CAN HOLD IT OVER, BUT IF WE HOLD IT OVER, WE NEED, WE WOULD HEAR THE CASE IN FEBRUARY.
WE'RE NOT GONNA VOTE FOR ANOTHER HOLDOVER IF HE, IF HE WITHDRAW.
SO THE BENEFIT OF HOLDING OVER, THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
AND THAT WAS THE REASON WHY I ASKED IF MM-HMM,
OKAY, SO JUST TO CLARIFY, IF YOU DO WANNA HOLD THIS OVER MM-HMM,
WOULD, WOULD HE BE ABLE TO HOLD IT OVER TO? OKAY.
SO, UM, IF YOU, IF WE HOLD THIS OVER TILL FEBRUARY, WE WOULD HEAR THIS CASE IN FEBRUARY, VOTE ON THE CASE IN FEBRUARY.
YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO SUBMIT ANOTHER APPLICATION FEE, BUT WE'RE NOT GONNA HOLD IT OVER AGAIN.
OR YOU CAN PULL IT AND THEN IF YOU DECIDE YOU WANNA COME BACK IN FRONT OF THE BOARD, YOU WOULD HAVE, YOU CAN COME BACK AT ANY TIME, BUT THEN YOU'D HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT APPLICATION FEE AGAIN.
SO WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO ASK? THE, WHAT ACTION WOULD YOU LIKE THE BOARD TO TAKE WHAT DATE IN FEBRUARY 20TH.
20TH FEBRUARY 20TH IS OUR NEXT, IS OUR NEXT MEETING.
AND THEN WHEN WOULD HE HAVE TO HAVE EVERYTHING SUBMITTED BY THEN? ALL THE PAPERWORK.
UM, SO I GUESS, WELL, HE CAN'T PAY IT UNTIL JANUARY 30TH.
SO AT THAT TIME, THE FIRST OF, SINCE FEBRUARY 9TH, WHAT IS THE DEADLINE TO SUBMIT FOR? OKAY, JEN, TO BE INCLUDED IN THE FEBRUARY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS PANEL A MEETING.
WHAT IS THAT DEADLINE? THAT HE HAS TO HAVE EVERYTHING IN FEBRUARY 9TH.
FEBRUARY 9TH IS THAT DEADLINE WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE ALL COMPLETED PAPERWORK OKAY.
FOR THE FEBRUARY 20TH MEETING.
IS THAT THE ONLY THING THAT YOU GUYS NEED IS A UPDATED TAX CERTIFICATE? I, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT YES, AS FAR AS WHAT I'VE ASKED YOU FOR, YES.
UM, BUT IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WE WILL NEED NEW EVIDENCE.
FOR THE APPLICATION THAT IS CURRENT RIGHT NOW, THAT IS WHAT I NEED.
THE TAX CERTIFICATE, IT'S STILL PUT IN A HARD, UH, POSITION.
UM, SO IF YOU'RE NOT, I'LL TELL YOU WHAT I I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, JUST WITHDRAW THE WHOLE APPLICATION.
PLEASE WITHDRAW THE WHOLE APPLICATION.
JUST WITHDRAW THE WHOLE APPLICATION.
UM, I'M JUST GONNA GO, JUST GO GO A DIFFERENT ROUTE ON THIS PROJECT.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PROJECT MOTION TO, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? YES.
UM, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 9 ON APPLICATION OF WAN'S SESSION DENY THE VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT WITHOUT PREJUDICE BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD NOT RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT.
ANY DISCUSSION? CALL FOR A VOTE PLEASE.
UH, SORRY, MICHAEL, DID YOU HAVE ANY VOTE PLEASE? MR. N AYE.
MOTION PASSES TO DENY FOR TO ZERO.
IN CASE NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 9, UM, MADE A MOTION TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WHICH MEANS IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND AND YOU'D LIKE TO COME BACK IN FRONT OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, YOU ABLE TO DO THAT AT ANY TIME? OKAY.
IN REGARDS TO A REFUND ON THAT, WHO DO I NEED TO GO THROUGH ABOUT THAT? YES, WE'RE GONNA WORK ON THAT.
UM, AND IT WOULD BE A REIMBURSEMENT.
NEXT CASE IS BDA NUMBER 2 3 4 DASH 0 12 30 10 CITATION DRIVE.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? THANK YOU, MADAM SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THIS CASE BESIDES THE APPLICANT?
[00:40:01]
UM, NO.NOBODY ELSE? UM, I, WELL I HAVE MR. LOGAN.
AND MAY WHITNEY, MR. WHITNEY? YEAH, MY WIFE.
IF YOU COULD SWEAR THE APPLICANT IN, PLEASE.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH AND YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
LOGAN KLEIN, 3 0 1 0 CITATION DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 2 9.
UH, SO I'M HERE WITH MY WIFE WHITNEY MCATEER AND MY CONTRACTOR TREY OCHOA.
UM, SO I UNDERSTAND FROM THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS ABOUT OUR FENCE AT 30 10 CITATION, AND I WAS HOPING TO ADDRESS THOSE FIRST.
UH, THE FIRST ONE WAS IF THE, WE'D ALREADY CONSTRUCTED A FENCE, IF WE'D BUILT ANYTHING.
THE ANSWER'S NO, WE CLOSED ON OUR HOUSE IN MARCH OF 2021 AS PART OF OUR SUBMISSION PACKET, WE HAVE AN INITIAL, AN ORIGINAL SITE SURVEY MADE BY THE SELLER IN APRIL OF 2019 THAT WE SUBMITTED THAT INCLUDED THE PRE-EXISTING FENCE.
SO JUST TO, JUST TO CONFIRM, WE'VE, WE HAVE NOT BUILT ANY FENCE.
WE HAVE NOT CONSTRUCTED ANYTHING ON THE PROPERTY.
THERE WAS ALSO A QUESTION AROUND WHERE THE NEW FENCE IS GOING.
THE NEW FENCE IS GOING WHERE THE CURRENT FENCE IS WITH SOME ADJUSTMENTS FOR HEIGHT AND GENERAL LOCATION BASED ON HOW WE USE OUR HOME ON THE PROPERTY.
SO THE GEN THE, JUST TO REITERATE, THE NEW FENCE IS GOING WHERE THE CURRENT FENCE STANDS.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, THERE WAS ALSO NO, NO, UM, REPRESENTATIVES, UH, IN OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT OF THE FENCE, UM, OF FORMALLY SUBMITTED.
WE DO HAVE LETTERS OR WRITTEN, UM, AFFIRMATION OF THE FENCE FROM FIVE NEIGHBORS WITHIN THE NOTIFICATION ZONE THAT THEY DO SUPPORT THE PROJECT THAT I'M HAPPY TO SUBMIT TO MARY, THE BOARD SECRETARY.
COULD, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? WE, DID, WE HAVE PEOPLE, DO WE HAVE LETTERS SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS CASE? THE APPLICANT SAYING HE HAS FIVE LETTERS OF SUPPORT, INFORMAL LETTERS FROM NEIGHBORS AS WE'VE WORKED WITH OUR NEIGHBORS.
SO, BUT THEY, THEY WEREN'T SUBMITTED THAT WE DIDN'T GET ANY RESPONSES FROM, FROM OUR DUE DILIGENCE.
AND THEY WEREN'T SUBMITTED WITH OUR, CORRECT.
YEAH, THEY, WELL THAT'S BECAUSE HE'S SAYING IT WAS INFORMAL.
I GUESS THEY DIDN'T, I GUESS WHEN WE DID THE NOTIFICATION, NOBODY SENT THEIR INFORMATION BACK TO THE CITY.
BUT THROUGH YOUR EFFORTS, I GUESS YOU WERE TALKING TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND THEY SUBMITTED LETTERS TO YOU.
THEY SUBMITTED INFORMAL VIA TEXT CONFIRMATION OF THE PROJECT AND THEIR SUPPORT THAT I'M HAPPY TO SHARE WITH THE BOARD SECRETARY, JUST ONE MOMENT, PLEASE DO, DO YOU HAVE THOSE PRINTED? I DO.
WE'LL PASS THAT ALONG SO EVERYBODY CAN SEE THOSE LETTERS OF SUPPORT.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO PULL UP SOME OF THE SLIDES FROM THE PRESENTATION DURING THE BRIEFING? YES.
AND WHO'S OPERATING THE SLIDES? YOU WANT THE PRESENTATION THAT THE STAFF DID EARLIER? YES.
ON THE PAPERWORK THAT'S BEING PASSED AROUND, I DID INCLUDE THE ADDRESS IN THE HOMEOWNERS WITH THEIR CONTACT INFO.
NO, NONE OF THIS IS TAKING FROM YOUR TIME, JUST SO YOU KNOW.
[00:46:05]
IF YOU COULD PROCEED TO, UH, ONE OF THE PHOTOS OF THE VENETIAN WAY WITH THE FENCE.UM, ONE MORE, MAYBE ANOTHER SLIDE PLEASE.
SO ON THE, ON THE PHOTO ON THE RIGHT, YOU'LL SEE THE FENCE ALONG THE, UM, SO IT IS A CORNER LOT, SO IT HAS TWO FRONT YARDS.
SO ON THE, THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PHOTO, YOU'LL SEE THE EXISTING FENCE, UH, BUILT BY THE CELLAR ALONG VENETIAN WAY.
SO THAT IS WHERE THE NEW FENCE WILL BE GOING.
UH, BUT TALLER NINE FOOT BOARD ON BOARD AND THE ONLY ADJUSTMENT WILL BE THE FENCE WILL, UM, BE PULLED CLOSER TO CITATION TO ENCLOSE THAT ONE WINDOW RIGHT NEXT TO THE FENCE.
AND THEN IF YOU COULD PROCEED ANOTHER SLIDE.
LET'S SEE, UH, ANOTHER SLIDE PLEASE.
WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THE EXISTING FENCE? SIX FOOT.
SO IT'S SIX FOOT, UH, PANELS OR SIX FOOT, UM, SIX FOOT BOARDS.
DID YOU WANNA SEE A VIDEO? OH, I GUESS WHEN THERE WAS ALSO A QUESTION AROUND WHERE THE FENCE WAS GOING AND IF IT WOULD BE ALONG CITATION OR VENETIAN, AND I THOUGHT THERE WAS A PHOTO OF THE SITE PLAN WHERE THE PHO WHERE THE FENCE WOULD BE.
SO I THINK THERE WAS AN ANOTHER QUESTION BY, BY SOME OF THE PANELISTS OR THE BOARD MEMBERS, UH, WHERE THE FENCE WOULD BE.
SO TO REITERATE, THE FENCE IS GONNA GO WHERE THE EXISTING ONE IS.
IT'S THE SQUIGGLY LINE ALONG VENETIAN WAY.
UM, AND, AND YOU CAN SEE THE, UM, THAT THE FENCE WILL BE MOVED JUST A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO CITATION, TO ENCLOSE THE, UH, ENCLOSED ONE OF THE LIVING ROOM WINDOWS.
AND THEN IT'LL BE ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE ALONG VENETIAN WAY WITH A VISIBILITY TRIANGLE ALONG THE ALLEY WITH A VEHICLE GATE AND THEN ENCLOSING THE, THE, UM, EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
SO THAT FENCE IS GETTING CLOSER TO CITATION.
IN ADDITION TO BEING CLOSER PULLED UP TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
IS IT ALSO GOING CLOSER TO CITATION? UM, CLOSER TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND CLOSER TO CITATION I BELIEVE IS THE SAME.
SO IT'S MOVING JUST A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO ENCLOSED ONE MORE WINDOW OF THE HOME.
WHAT, WHAT DOES CURRENT ZONING ALLOW FOR SIDE YARD FENCE HEIGHT IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA? IS IT EIGHT? SO FOR A FENCE IN A SIDE, IF IT WAS CONSIDERED A SIDE, YOU COULD, UH, SIX FEET WITHOUT A PERMIT AND THEN UP TO NINE FEET WITH THE PERMIT.
ANYTHING ELSE OVER THAT THEY WOULD'VE TO COME IN FOR THE BOARD.
IS IS CITATION CONSIDERED THE SIDE OR THE FRONT? CITATION IS THE FRONT.
SO AGAIN, CAN YOU REITERATE THE, THE FENCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FRONT? SO YOU HAVE TO, SO YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE DASH LINE IS? MM-HMM,
SO THAT IS THE FRONT BUILDING LINE.
SO YES, THAT AREA THAT THE CURSOR IS GOING.
SO ANYTHING IN FRONT OF THAT WOULD BE THE FOUR FOOT THAT YOU'RE PROBABLY REFERRING TO.
BUT ANYTHING BEHIND THAT WOULD BE INTO THE SIDE YARD.
SO IN THIS CASE, WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING WOULD BE IN THAT QUOTE UNQUOTE SIDE YARD.
UM, ARE YOU, ARE YOU FINISHING? YEAH.
UM, QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? YEAH.
SO THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE WE HAVE TWO FRONT YARDS, ESSENTIALLY.
ONE OF 'EM REALLY ACTS AS A FRONT YARD AND THE OTHER ONE ACTS AS A SIDE YARD, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE ZONING REGULATIONS CALLED THEM BOTH FRONT YARDS.
[00:50:02]
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.UM, I KNOW YOU STATED THAT, UH, YOU'RE PULLING THE FENCE A LITTLE BIT FORWARD TOWARDS CITATION IN ORDER TO ENCOMPASS THAT FIRST UH, WINDOW.
BUT CAN YOU TELL ME THE, THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND THE PROPOSED NEW, UH, FENCE SET? IS THERE A FIVE? IS THERE AT LEAST A FIVE FOOT BUFFER THERE? WE THINK IT'S ABOUT 10 FEET.
UH, I'VE GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
SORRY, JUST TO, JUST TO MAKE SURE I ANSWER THAT CORRECTLY.
SO FROM THE, THE, THE CORNER OF THE HOME, UH, ON CITATION IN VENETIAN, THERE'S GONNA BE A ABOUT 10 FEET FROM THE CORNER OF THE HOME TO THE START OF THE FENCE.
TODAY THERE'S ABOUT 20 FEET, SO WE'RE PULLING IT IN A LITTLE BIT.
SO YOU'RE ADDING THREE FEET TO THE FENCE.
WHY, WHY, UM, THE NEED TO, WHY DO YOU NEED TO MAKE IT TALLER? FOR HEIGHT? WE, WE'D LIKE THE HEIGHT BECAUSE THAT THE WAY THE FENCE IS ON A SLOPE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S SIX FOOT BOARDS, WHEN YOU'RE AT THE HEIGHT OF THE HOME, IT FEELS MORE LIKE A FOUR FOOT FENCE BECAUSE THE, THE WAY THE YARD SLOPES.
SO OUR, OUR HOUSE IS ABOUT 18 INCHES HIGHER THAN WHERE THE EXISTING FENCE BEGINS TODAY AT GROUND LEVEL.
AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION, I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE, YOU'RE MOVING THE FENCE UP SO THAT YOU CAN ENCOMPASS THAT WINDOW.
YOU'RE ALSO PUSHING IT OUT FURTHER.
IS IT JUST TO EXPAND YOUR BACKYARD? IS THERE ANY OTHER REASON WHY? BECAUSE IT'S NOT, IT'S, IT'S GOING TO BE NON-COMPLIANT.
SO I MEAN, SOMETIMES WE'LL GET PEOPLE COMING IN HERE AND THEY JUST BASICALLY WANNA REBUILD WHAT'S ALREADY THERE.
UM, BUT YOU'RE ASKING TO BE PUSHING IT OUT SO THAT, THAT REQUIRES US TO LOOK AT DIFFERENT VARIANCES FOR THAT DISTANCE AS WELL.
SO WHY THE NEED TO PUSH THAT OUT CLOSER TO THE STREET? CAN, CAN YOU CONFIRM HOW THAT WOULD BE NON-COMPLIANT? SORRY.
OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? ARE THERE OTHER FENCES ALONG, UM, THAT SITE? IS IT CITATION THE SIDE YARD? YEAH, SO SO CITATION IS ALONG THE BOTTOM OF THE PICTURE, RIGHT? MM-HMM,
ARE THERE OTHER FENCES ALONG VENETIAN, LIKE, SAY ACROSS THE ALLEY THAT I DON'T RECALL FROM THERE, FROM THE VIDEO THERE.
IN FACT, WE DID BRING SOME ADDITIONAL, ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FOR THE, UM, FOR THE BOARD OF PRECEDENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD'S FULL OF CUL-DE-SACS AND CORNER LOTS.
SO WE HAVE QUITE A FEW HOMES WITH CORNER, LOTS WITH TWO FRONT YARDS WHERE YOU HAVE AN ADJACENT HOME THAT FACES THAT SIDE YARD WITH EIGHT FOOT BOARD ON BOARD PRIVACY FENCES, UM, INCLUDING SOME WITH VEHICLE GATES.
SO WE BROUGHT ADDRESSES AND IMAGES OF THOSE FENCES TO, TO SET THAT PRECEDENCE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
NOT ALL OF THE, HOW, HOW MANY PAGES DO YOU HAVE? OH, THREE FOUR.
AND, AND IF I RECALL, WE SAW SOME OF THESE OH, ON THE DRIVE AROUND.
NOT ALL OF THESE HOMES WERE IN THE NOTIFICATION AREA, BUT THEY ARE ALL IN THE CHAPEL DOWNS NEIGHBORHOOD.
BEFORE YOU HAND THAT TO US, I I UNDERSTAND THAT WHERE THAT THERE THERE'S A LIMIT TO THE NUMBER OF DOCUMENTS THAT WE CAN REVIEW.
UM, BOARD ATTORNEY, COULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT? RIGHT.
SO WE CAN TAKE UP TO FIVE PAGES.
SO YOU'VE ALREADY GIVEN US TWO, WE CAN TAKE THREE MORE OR IF THE BOARD IS INTERESTED, WE CAN JUST MAKE A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE, THE RULES CONCERNING THOSE AND THEN YOU CAN JUST LOOK AT WHATEVER HE WANTS TO HAND US.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO SUSPEND? YES, MADAM CHAIR.
I MOVE THAT WE SUSPEND THE RULES AND ACCEPT ALL ALL DOCUMENTS.
THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO SUSPEND THE EXISTING RULE ABOUT LIMITING THE NUMBER OF DOCUMENTS WE'RE ABLE TO REVIEW.
UM, AM I ABLE TO JUST DO CALL FOR? OKAY.
LET'S DO, UH, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
WE'LL JUST TAKE A MOMENT TO LOOK AT THESE PHOTOS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? GO AHEAD.
SO OUT OF THOSE PHOTOS, HOW MANY ARE WITHIN THE NOTIFICATION AREA? OH GOSH,
[00:55:01]
I SHOULD HAVE WROTE THAT DOWN.I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE ADDRESSES TO SEE.
ALL HOMES ARE IN THE CHAPEL DOWNS NEIGHBORHOOD, JUST OUTSIDE THE NOTIFICATION ZONE, BUT TWO ARE IN THE NOTIFICATION ZONE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? DO I HAVE A VOLUNTEER TO MAKE A MOTION PLEASE? I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH ZERO 12 ON APPLICATION OF IGNACIO OCHOA GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A NINE FOOT HIGH FENCE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT FOR FENCES CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH HEIGHT AND FENCE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED IN THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
DO I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND DISCUSSION? UH, THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
YEAH, THE MAIN REASON I'M SUPPORTING THIS IS 'CAUSE MY, MY CONCERNS HAVE BEEN, UH, ASSUAGED, UH, THERE DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE ANY OPPOSITION IN THIS CASE.
AND IN FACT THE APPLICANT HAS BROUGHT, UM, WRITTEN TESTIMONY THAT, THAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE NOT PO NOT OPPOSED, BUT IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, HENCE MY MOTION.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? UM, I, I'M SYMPATHETIC TO THE, UH, TO THE FACT THAT YOUR YARD SLOPES 'CAUSE MINE DOES ALSO
SO I UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WORKS.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION FOR THE PANEL? LET'S CALL FOR A VOTE PLEASE.
MOTION PASSES 4 2 0 THANK YOU.
IN THE CASE BDA 2 3 4 DASH ZERO 12.
WAIT, OH, WE'VE GOT A, THAT OUR FIRST MOTION PASSES.
DO WE HAVE A, A VOLUNTEER FOR THAT SECOND MOTION? YES.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL THE BDA 2 3 4 DASH ZERO 12 ON APPLICATION OF IGNACIO OCHOA.
GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN FENCE WITH PANEL HAVING LESS THAN 50% OPEN SURFACE AREA LOCATED LESS THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT LOT, WHICH IS BEING TREATED AS A SIDE YARD AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SURFACE AREA, OPEN THIS REQUIREMENT FOR FENCES IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I FUR FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH OPACITY AND FENCE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED IN THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND DISCUSSION? UM, NO.
NORMALLY I'M, UH, OPACITY IS A BIG ISSUE FOR ME AS MANY OF MY FELLOW PANEL MEMBERS KNOW, UH, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT'S NOT ON A VERY BUSY THOROUGHFARE HO.
HOWEVER, IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, BECAUSE IT IS IN EFFECT BEING TREATED AS A SIDE YARD, I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH IT.
THANK YOU FOR THEIR DISCUSSION.
ANY OTHER PANELISTS DISCUSSION? LET'S CALL FOR A VOTE, PLEASE.
UH, BDA CASE 2 34 DASH ZERO TWO BOTH MOTIONS PASS.
[01:00:05]
ALL RIGHT, OUR NEXT CASE IS BD 2 23 DASH 1 0 7 54 24 VICKERY BOULEVARD.WE ARE UNDER OUR INDIVIDUAL CASES 55 24 VICKERY BOULEVARD.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? NO, HE'S NOT PRESENT.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ASSIGNED TO SPEAK EITHER AND FOR OR AGAINST THIS CASE? NO SPEAKERS REGISTER.
SO TYPICALLY WE ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT BEFORE WE WOULD MAKE A MOTION AND OPEN IT TO DISCUSSION, BUT SINCE THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE, I'M GONNA ASK THAT SOMEBODY ON THE PANEL MAKE A MOTION AND THEN WE WILL GO AHEAD AND DISCUSS THE CASE BEFORE WE VOTE.
UM, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 2 3 DASH TEN SEVEN FR ONE ON APPLICATION OF MICHAEL VAN DENY THE REQUEST TO REIMBURSE THE FILING FEES IN ASSOCIATION WITH REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL AS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT WITH PREJUDICE BECAUSE OF OUR, OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT PAYMENT OF THE FEE WOULD NOT RESULT IN SOME SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND DISCUSSION? UM, I, I RECALL THIS CASE FROM OUR, OUR LAST MEETING AND WE DID DENY THE APPLICANT'S, UM, REQUEST TO FOR A VARIANCE FOR FENCE HEIGHT, UM, BECAUSE HE WAS IN A CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
AND I THINK THE FACT THAT WE DENIED THAT, THAT CASE THERE, IF I COULD JUST MAKE ONE TIME DIRECTION, IT WASN'T FOR A VARIANCE OR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
THIS WAS A A, A BUILDING OFFICIAL APPEAL.
AND SO THE OH, THE, IT WAS OH, THAT'S RIGHT.
IT WAS BUILDING OFFICIAL APPEAL.
AND IT WAS OVER THE LINE, BUT YOU ARE CORRECT IN THAT IT WAS, UH, YOU GUYS CITED WITH THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND EFFECTIVELY DENIED HIM.
AND, AND ALSO I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT, UH, AND I'M SORRY TO TO INTERRUPT YOU.
UM, SO 75% IS REQUIRED, WHICH, WHICH MEANS FOUR OUTTA FIVE OR IN THIS CASE FOUR OUT FOUR.
UM, HOWEVER, THAT'S ONLY FOR VARIANCES, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND REVERSAL OF OFFICIAL DECISIONS.
FEE REIMBURSEMENTS ARE A SIMPLE MAJORITY, SO IT CAN BE DONE WITH JUST A THREE PERSON VOTE.
AND IN ADDITION, THE FACT THAT THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE TO REQUEST THIS IN PERSON, UM, IS WHY I DECIDED TO DENY IT WITH PREJUDICE.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? LET'S CALL FOR A VOTE PLEASE.
MOTION PASSES THREE TO ONE AND BDA CASE NUMBER 2 2 3 DASH 0 1 0 7 FFR ONE.
UM, THAT MOTION WAS DENIED FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF, UM, OF THOSE FEES.
SO WE WILL GO ON TO THE NEXT CASE, WHICH IS PDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 3 BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 3 7 15 WEST REDBIRD LANE.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY BESIDES THE APPLICANT? DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THIS, THIS CASE? NO, THE REGISTERS.
IF YOU COULD SWEAR IN THE APPLICANT PLEASE.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
LETICIA DORSEY, 7 1 5 WEST RED BIRD LANE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 3 2.
AND IF YOU COULD SPEAKING, KEEP SPEAKING INTO THE MICROPHONE JUST THE WAY YOU ARE, THAT WOULD BE PERFECT.
SO, UM, EARLIER YOU MENTIONED THAT I HAD BROUGHT SOME SUPPORT FROM MY COMMUNITY, MY NEIGHBORS, WHICH WAS 20 AND I NEVER GIVE UP.
I WENT DOOR TO DOOR AND I SPOKE TO THE, MY NEIGHBORS WALKED AROUND AND GAVE THEM AND
[01:05:01]
EX HAD A, A MAP AND EXPLAINED TO THEM MY DETAILS OF WHAT WAS I GOING THROUGH WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS.SO I HAVE EXTRA, AND ALSO AT THE SAME TIME I WANNA SAY TO Y'ALL, I'M NOT A CONTRACTOR OR A BUILDER, I'M JUST A HOMEOWNER.
AND SO WHAT HAPPENED TO ME IN MY SITUATION WITH MY HOME WAS THAT I HIRED A CONTRACTOR, GAVE HIM 30,000, UH, WORKED ON MY HOME FOR A MONTH AND A HALF, TOOK THE MONEY AND MOVED ON.
SO I WAS LEFT WITH MY HOUSE, NOT FINISHED.
DURING THAT TIME, I BROUGHT A BUILDER AND HE TOLD ME THAT THE JOB WAS NOT DONE CORRECTLY.
WHEN I HAD MY FIRST CONTRACTOR, I KEPT ON ASKING HIM ABOUT MY PERMIT.
HE SAID, DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT.
FOUND OUT THAT HE NEVER DID A, UH, PERMIT.
BEING A HOMEOWNER, A SINGLE WOMAN, MY DREAM WAS TO EXPAND MY HOME.
I WAS, I'M A RETIRED TEACHER FOR 40 YEARS WITH DALLAS, ISD.
I WORKED HARD WORKING WITH THESE CHILDREN WITH THEIR EDUCATION, BUT MY DREAM WAS TO BUILD MY EXTENSION TO MY HOME.
SO WHEN I HAD TO FIND MY SECOND CONTRACTOR, WE WENT THROUGH A PERMIT AND I WAS RUNNING TO THE ON JEFFERSON AND, UM, GOT MY PERMIT, THEY STARTED AND AS THEY WERE FINISHING, THE INSPECTOR CAME AND THAT'S WHEN HE PUT A FLAG.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I FOUND OUT THAT, UH, I HAD A SETBACK LATER ON.
I AM LEARNING THROUGH THIS EXPERIENCE OF MY HOME THAT HAS HAPPENED TO ME.
AND I DID NOT KNOW WHAT ELSE, WHAT TO DO.
AS YOU SEE, I'M REPRESENTING MYSELF.
NO CONTRACTORS ARE HERE BECAUSE WHEN HE FOUND OUT THAT I WAS GOING WITH THIS ORDEAL WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS, THEY MOVED BACK.
THEY DON'T WANNA BE THERE TO SUPPORT ME.
SO I AM HERE TO, UH, JUST REPRESENTING MYSELF TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I AM, UH, WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND MY SITUATION WITH MY HOME.
AND I SPEND MORE MONEY THAN WHAT I THOUGHT I HAD.
NOT ONLY DID I PAY MY SECOND, UH, CONTRACTOR, I HAD TO PAY EXTRA FOR OTHER JOBS THAT THEY HAD TO BE DONE CORRECTLY.
UH, I FEEL LIKE I HAVE SPENT SO MUCH MONEY ON THIS PROJECT NOT KNOWING WHAT I WAS GETTING INTO, BUT MY HOME IS COMPLETED MOST ALL OF IT.
AND I AM JUST PLEADING TO Y'ALL THAT YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I WENT THROUGH.
QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO YOUR NEIGHBOR ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE WITH THE ADDITION? YES.
AND WHAT DID THEY HAVE TO SAY? OH, UM, LIKE I SAID, I WENT TO THEM ONE-ON-ONE SPOKE TO THEM, GAVE THEM THE MAP, AND TOLD THEM THE SITUATION THAT I WENT THROUGH, THEY HAVE NO ISSUE.
UM, I AM A CITIZEN THAT WATCH OUT FOR MY NEIGHBORS.
WE WATCH OUT FOR EACH OTHER SO THAT THE ONE THAT'S TOWARD MY FENCE HAS NO ISSUE WITH IT.
AND I HAVE A SIGNATURE AND I HAVE A LETTER THAT SHE SIGNED.
DO WE HAVE LETTERS OF SUPPORT? YEAH, WE DO.
MORE DISCUSSION, MORE QUESTIONS.
THE LETTERS WERE, I'M NOT SURE WE HAVE LETTERS.
BUT WE DID HAVE, YEAH, WE HAD THE GREEN DOTS ON THE MAP.
I DON'T, WE MAY NOT HAVE HAD THE LETTERS IN HAND, BUT I REMEMBER ASKING THE QUESTION OF THE ADJACENCY OF THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER.
AND THERE WAS A GREEN DOT OF SHOWING THAT THEY WERE YOU RECEIVED A LETTER OF SUPPORT OR QUESTIONS? WE, WE DIDN'T, WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY OPPOSITION FROM.
NO SPEAKERS REGISTERED IN OPPOSITION.
I DON'T THINK THE LETTER WAS ACTUALLY IN THERE.
I THINK IT WAS THE, I THINK IT WAS THE NOTIFICATION AREA MAP THAT THEY SHOWED WITH THE GREEN DOTS, WITH LETTERS, WITH THE, UM, SUPPORT LETTERS.
UM, WELL, SHE, BUT I DON'T THINK THE ACTUAL LETTER, THESE ARE, THIS IS LIKE, I TURN IN 20 OF THESE, AND THEN THESE ARE EXTRAS THAT I BROUGHT.
'CAUSE I TURN IN SOME OF THOSE.
YEAH, WE, THE ONE IN THE PACKET.
YEAH, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
DO YOU WANNA LOOK AT THIS? SURE.
AND HOW MANY, HOW MANY PAGES DO YOU HAVE? I TURNED 20 AND THEN I BROUGHT SIX EXTRA.
[01:10:01]
OKAY.YOU MENTIONED THEY WERE SUBMITTED TO THE, AND THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE, IN THE DOCKET.
SO THIS IS JUST A PAPER COPY OF WHAT SHOULD ALREADY BE IN THE DOCKET.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO SUSPEND THE RULES.
I THINK SHE SAID SHE HAS SIX ADDITIONAL, THEY OH, SIX ADDITIONAL RULES.
I GAVE YOU GUYS THE COPIES THIS MORNING.
SO THESE ARE IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE SHOULD YES.
THE ONES SHE'S BRINGING, THOSE ARE IN ADDITION TO THE ONES THAT I PROVIDED TO YOU.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE ADDITIONAL LETTERS.
IF WE COULD SEE THOSE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
AND JUST TO CONFIRM WITH YOU, CHAIRMAN, UM, SINCE WE ALREADY VOTED ON YES.
TO SUSPEND THE RULES, WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT AGAIN.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS ON THE RECORD.
IF YOU COULD JUST GIVE US A MOMENT, PLEASE.
WHAT, WHAT IS THE HOUSE NUMBER? MY HOUSE THAT NEXT TO YOUR HOUSE WHERE YOUR ADDITION IS? THE ADDRESS, THE STREET NUMBER.
NOW REMEMBER I WENT DOOR TO DOOR KNOCK ON THOSE PEOPLE AND ACTUALLY TALKED TO THEM AND EXPLAINED MY SITUATION.
DO WE HAVE MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? THANK YOU.
AS A PANELIST, I APPRECIATE YOUR INITIATIVE IN DOING THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? DO I HAVE VOLUNTEER TO MAKE A MOTION? I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH ZERO THREE ON APPLICATION OF LETICIA DORSEY.
GRANT, THE THREE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS 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 TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
CODE COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND DISCUSSION.
UH, WE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT, BUT WE'RE SURE, SORRY.
OF WHAT YOU'VE BEEN PUT THROUGH.
HOPEFULLY IN THE FUTURE, IF YOU DO ANYTHING ELSE TO YOUR PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED TO LOOK INTO NEXT STUFF.
I WANNA SAY THANK YOU TO MS. DIANA.
I BUGGED HER EMAIL, HER WENT TO PERSON, SHOWED UP AT ANY TIME, AND SHE REALLY HELPED ME WHAT TO DO.
[01:15:01]
THE FACT THAT, UM, YOUR NEIGHBORS WERE NOT OPPOSED AND IN FACT WROTE LETTERS IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UM, REALLY MADE ME LEAN IN THE DIRECTION OF APPROVING THIS.IT IS DIFFICULT TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT VIOLATES A SETBACK REQUIREMENT, UM, ESPECIALLY A STRUCTURE LIKE THIS.
SO AGAIN, AND YOU'VE BEEN HERE LISTENING TO ALL THE TESTIMONY OF ALL THE, EVEN A OFFENSE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL OF THOSE THINGS.
SO OBVIOUSLY, LIKE YOU SAID, YOU'VE LEARNED YOUR LESSON, BUT I THINK THE LETTERS OF SUPPORT AND NO LETTERS IN OPPOSITION, UM, MADE ME VOTE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
UH, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION.
AND, UH, I, I WANNA THANK YOU AND JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, MAYOR JAY'S, UH, MR. N'S COMMENTS ABOUT YOUR DUE DILIGENCE, THAT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE.
BECAUSE IF THERE WAS OPPOSITION ON EITHER SIDE, I DON'T KNOW THAT I COULD HAVE SUPPORTED THIS.
SO I DO APPRECIATE THAT YOU DID YOUR DUE DILIGENCE, THAT YOU WENT OUT AND YOU REACHED OUT TO YOUR NEIGHBORS, THAT WE'RE ALL, WE ALL WANNA BE GOOD NEIGHBORS.
WE WANT EVERYONE TO GET ALONG.
SO I LOVE THE FACT THAT YOU DID THAT.
I WILL JUST SAY TO YOU AND TO ANYBODY ELSE WHO MAY BE LISTENING, IT'S UP TO THE OWNER TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE RESTRICTIONS ARE.
BECAUSE THEY HAVE SO MANY OTHER CLIENTS.
THEY HAVE, UH, THEY'VE, THEY'RE WORKING ON PROPERTIES IN DIFFERENT, UM, DIFFERENT COUNTIES, DIFFERENT DISTRICTS.
IT'S UP TO YOU AS A HOMEOWNER TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE RESTRICTIONS ARE.
SO ANYTHING THAT YOU DO MOVING FORWARD, DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH, DON'T TRUST SOMEBODY ELSE.
AND, UM, IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, I THINK WE CAN CALL FOR A MOTION OR CALL FOR A VOTE.
IN CASE BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 3, THAT MOTION PASSES.
AND WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
JUST ONE MOMENT AND THEN WE'LL GO TO, UM, WE'VE GOT SORT OF TWO PARTS TO OUR LAST CASE HERE.
MADAM SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SPEAKING BESIDES THE APPLICANT IN EITHER FAVOR OR AGAINST? I HAVE TWO SPEAKERS ONLINE IN OPPOSITION.
WE WILL GIVE EACH OF THEM THREE MINUTES.
WE'LL GIVE MR. BALDWIN'S FIVE.
MR. BALDWIN FIVE MINUTES FOR HIS PRESENTATION.
I BELIEVE YOU WERE ALREADY SWORN IN, SO I THINK OKAY.
WE ARE READY WHENEVER YOU'D LIKE TO START.
ROB BALDWIN, 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS.
THIS IS A TALK ABOUT, UH, THE STRUCTURE OF 2000 EUCLID AVENUE.
IT'S, UH, BASICALLY JUST LOWER GREENVILLE AREA, KIND OF WEST OF GREENVILLE BEHIND TRADER JOE'S.
UH, AS DURING THE BRIEF SESSION, YOU'LL TOLD, AND I CAN CONFIRM LATER IN MY PRESENTATION, THAT ALL PERMITS WERE ISSUED AND APPROVED FOR THIS PROPERTY.
UM, THE HOUSE WAS BUILT, THE HOUSE IS IN THE GREEN HERE.
UM, THE FENCE WAS BUILT, GOT ALL APPROVALS.
UH, THE OWNER WAS SELLING THE HOUSE TO, UH, PERSON OUTTA CALIFORNIA WHO WANTED TO PUT A POOL THERE.
THEY WENT TO GO GET A POOL PERMIT AND THE CITY SAID, OH, YOU HAVE TWO FRONT YARDS, UH, AND WE CANNOT ISSUE THE POOL PERMIT.
NOT ONLY THAT, YOUR HOUSE IS IN VIOLATION.
SO, UM, THAT, THAT DEAL FELL THROUGH.
THE REALTOR FOUND OUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE CITY SAID, SO THAT SHE HAD TO DISCLOSE THAT TO THE, THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE IT UNDER HER CONTRACT NOW.
AND THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE IT ON HER CONTRACT NOW, THEY'RE, THEY CAN'T GET MONEY LENT ON IT UNTIL THE NON-CONFORMING ISSUES RESOLVED.
IF YOU CAN SEE THIS PART OF EAST DALLAS, EVERYTHING RUNS, UH, THE LOTS RUN EAST WEST.
THE LOT JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ALLEY USED TO BE ALL LOT ONE.
SOMETIME IN THE TWENTIES, THE, THE BACK PART OF IT WAS CARVED OFF, WHICH WAS NOT UNCOMMON AT THAT TIME.
UH, IT IS A PLATTED LOT NOW, BUT THE DUPLEX FACES ONTO SEARS STREET.
EVERY OTHER LOT IN THE AREA FACES ONTO, UH, NOT ONTO TO SEARS STREET.
THE FUNNY THING IS BECAUSE THAT FACES ONTO SEARS STREET, THAT PROJECTS A FRONT YARD SETBACK AT 25 FEET ONTO 2000 EUCLID.
EVEN THOUGH THE BUILDING THAT'S PROJECTING THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IS NOT, IS ABOUT FIVE FEET OFF THE, THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO IT'S PROJECTING A GREATER SETBACK THAN IN ITSELF.
IF YOU LOOK AT THIS, OUR, OUR STRUCTURE ALIGNS, UH, WITH THAT STRUCTURE.
[01:20:01]
SO IT'S ONE OF THOSE WEIRD THINGS ABOUT DALLAS, BUT WE HAVE A PROJECTED FRONT YARD ON OUR PROPERTY THAT IS GREATER THAN THE STRUCTURE THAT'S, THAT'S PROJECTED IT.AND THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE BEFORE THE FENCE WAS PUT UP.
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ALIGN WITH, WITH OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE, TO THE EAST.
UH, THIS IS THE ORIGINAL PLAT SHOWS THAT ORIGINALLY NO STREET, NO HOUSES FRONTED ONTO TO SEARS STREET.
UH, IT WAS DONE, UH, SOMETIME AFTER THIS PLATT WAS RECORDED IN, UH, 1920.
THIS SLIDE DEMONSTRATES THAT THERE ARE NO OTHER HOUSES OR LOTS IN THIS GENERAL AREA.
THAT'S THE BIG STREET ON YOUR RIGHT IS GREENVILLE.
EVERYBODY ELSE IS ONLY ENCUMBERED BY ONE FRONT YARD, A 25 FOOT FRONT YARD ON THE STREET THAT THEY'RE ADDRESSED FROM.
THERE'S ONE LOT BECAUSE OF OUR NEIGHBOR TO THE EAST.
ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ALLEY, WE HAVE TWO FRONT YARDS, WHICH YOU HAVE 2 25 FOOT FRONT, FRONT SETBACKS, WHICH WAS NOT NOTICED UNTIL AFTER THE HOUSE WAS BUILT, OCCUPIED AND WAS UP FOR SALE.
SO THIS IS WHAT A NORMAL R SEVEN FIVE, UH, SETBACKS ARE.
YOU HAVE A 25 FOOT FRONT, FIVE FOOT SIDE AND REAR.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE THOUGHT WE HAD.
AND THAT'S WHAT, WHEN THE CITY REVIEWED AND APPROVED OUR PLANS, THAT'S WHAT THEY THOUGHT WE HAD.
WITH A 25 FOOT SETBACK, THAT IS WHAT'S LEFT TO, TO BUILD ON.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE, UH, A GOOD PORTION OF THE HOUSE IN THE SETBACK.
WE'RE ASKING FOR, UH, UH, BASICALLY A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THAT PORTION OF THE HOUSE TO STAY.
THERE WAS ALSO A FENCE THAT WAS PUT UP ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE.
IT'S A, A SIX FOOT FENCE ON TOP OF A THREE FOOT RETAINING WALL, UH, FOR A TOTAL OF NINE FEET.
IT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR FENCES ALONG, UH, THIS PORTION, UH, ALONG THE SIDE YARDS HERE, IN THIS CASE ACROSS THE STREET, WE, THERE'S NOT A FENCE BECAUSE THOSE PEOPLE ARE IN A MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT.
AND IT'S ACTUALLY, UM, TOWN HOMES IN THE, THAT'S WHERE THEIR DRIVEWAYS ARE.
BUT THERE IS A SLIGHT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, UH, IN THAT AREA IN GREEN.
UH, HERD STAFF SAY IT WAS ABOUT 12 SQUARE FEET.
AND THAT, UH, DAVID NAVAREZ HAS REVIEWED IT AND DID NOT SEE IT AS BEING, UH, A HORRIBLE ENCROACHMENT.
THIS JUST SHOW, THIS IS FROM THE, THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
THE TWO YELLOWS, UH, HIGHLIGHTED.
YOU, YOU CAN, YOU CAN FINISH YOUR THOUGHT.
THE, THAT JUST SHOWS THE PERMITS ISSUED AND COMPLETED.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS.
WE'RE ASKING FOR, UH, YOU TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE BUILDING WAS BUILT AND WHAT EVERYBODY THOUGHT WAS THE, THE REQUIREMENTS, THE BUILDING AND THE FENCE.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
AND THAT, THAT, SO AGAIN, THAT SIDE WHICH THEY HAVE DESIGNATED AS YOUR FRONT YARD, REALLY IS NOT YOUR, YOU DON'T, YOUR, YOUR CLIENT WOULD NOT CONSIDER THAT YOUR FRONT YARD.
YOU CONSIDER THE U EUCLID, THE, THE EUCLID STREET.
SO THAT IS, 'CAUSE IT'S A, THE, THE CITY NOW CONSIDERS IT A PROJECTED FRONT YARD.
UM, WE CAN NO LONGER HAVE, AND WE'RE LIMITED TO A FENCE FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT, AND IT HAS TO BE 50% OPEN.
COULD WE HEAR FROM OUR, UH, SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION, PLEASE.
SO EACH OF OUR SPEAKERS WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
THEY EACH GET THE SAME TIME ALLOTMENT AS MR. BALDWIN.
SO THEY'LL EACH HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO, UM, TO SPEAK.
SO, MADAME SECRETARY, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, MS. CAROLYN PARROT.
ROB, YOU CAN SIT DOWN IF YOU LIKE.
MR. YOU, YOU'RE WELCOME TO SIT DOWN IF YOU LIKE.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.
UH, DO YOU COM DO YOU AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
UM, I HAVE THE PROPERTY THAT IS DIRECTLY TO THE EAST OF, UH, THE ONE IN QUESTION.
UM, THE PROPERTY THAT I OWN IS A DALLAS LANDMARK PROPERTY.
IT WAS, UH, BUILT BY A REGIONAL ARCHITECT, AND IT'S HAD THE, HAD THE LANDMARK STATUS ON IT FOR A WHILE.
[01:25:01]
THE, UH, THE FOUR ITEMS PRESENTED TODAY.UH, I FEEL THAT THE APPLICANT HAS FAILED TO MAKE A, UH, CONVINCING CASE FOR THEM.
UH, FOR ONE, NO VARIANCE WAS REQUIRED TO MAKE THIS LOT DEVELOPABLE.
IT WAS PREVIOUSLY OCCUPIED BY A ONE STORY DUPLEX, A PRETTY GOOD SIZE DUPLEX BEFORE THAT WAS DEMOLISHED.
AND THEN THIS NEW STRUCTURE IS, UH, MASSIVE COMPARED TO THAT.
UM, EVEN, EVEN WITHOUT THE PROPORTIONS IN THE, THE SETBACK, IT WOULD STILL BE, UH, IT WOULD STILL BE MASSIVE.
UM, THE, A CORNER LOT IS, IS NOT A, A HARDSHIP.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.
UH, LITERALLY NONE OF THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS WOULD BE REQUIRED IF IT NOT WERE FOR THE APPLICANT'S DESIRE TO BUILD A POOL IN THE SIDE YARD.
UH, THE POOL IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS LOT.
UH, THE FENCES CURRENT LOCATION IS DRIVEN SOLELY BY THE QUESTION OF THE POOL, BUT IT IS A PARTICULAR DANGER TO THE, THE, THE FENCE IS A DANGER TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND WELFARE.
UM, IT'S, IT'S A VERY HEAVILY TRAVELED SIDEWALK, PEDESTRIAN WISE, UH, AND ITS LOCATION.
THE, THE FENCE LOCATION BLOCKS ANY VISIBILITY OF THE SIDEWALK, WHETHER A CAR BACKS OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY OR THE ALLEY THERE, OR EVEN, UH, APPROACHES FACING THE STREET.
THERE'S A LOT OF, A LOT OF FOOT TRAFFIC I SEE GO BY ALL THE TIME.
UM, WHEN I, I LOOK OUT THE WINDOW THERE.
NOW, I'M AWARE THAT THE STAFF MISTAKE RESULTED IN THE, UH, APPROVAL OF THE, THE PLAN INITIALLY.
UH, I'M ALSO AWARE THAT THE CITY'S, UH, APPROVAL STAMP, UH, REMINDS A PROPERTY OWNER THAT IT IS THE OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY, UH, TO MEET ALL CODES AS WE DISCUSSED IN THE, THE PREVIOUS, UH, UM, CASE THERE.
UM, NOW, UH, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE LEGISLATURE RECENTLY PASSED A LAW THAT REQUIRES BOARDS OF ADJUSTMENT TO CONSIDER EVIDENCE OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP WHEN SPECIFIC EVIDENCE IS PRESENTED.
HOWEVER, NEITHER THE APPLICANT NOR THE STAFF PRESENTS EVIDENCE OF THIS KIND AS A RESULT, UH, THE APPLICANT IS WAIVED THAT CONSIDERATION.
SO I'M, UH, I'M ASKING THAT YOU DENY ALL FOUR PROPOSED MATTERS IN THIS CASE.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL FOR THE SPEAKER? ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL FOR THE SPEAKER BEFORE WE GO TO THE NEXT SPEAKER? UH, MS. PARROT, ARE YOU? YES.
UM, JUST TO MAKE CLEAR, ARE YOU RESIDING IN THE DUPLEX OR OWNING THE DUPLEX THAT WAS IN QUESTION EARLIER.
AND DO YOU RESIDE IN THAT DUPLEX? I DO NOT RESIDE IN THE DUPLEX AT THIS TIME.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? ALL RIGHT, I THINK WE CAN GO TO OUR SECOND SPEAKER, PLEASE.
MADAM CHAIR, CAN YOU HEAR ME? MR. BRUCE RICHARDSON.
MADAM CHAIR, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE HEAR YOU.
FIRST OF ALL, I NEED TO, I NEED TO, WE NEED TO SIGN YOU IN.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I ABSOLUTELY SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH IN MY TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
AND, UH, AS A POINT OF ORDER, MADAM CHAIR, UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING, PLEASE.
I'M BRUCE RICHARDSON, 5 6 0 7 RICHMOND AVENUE.
UM, I LIVE ONE BLOCK FROM THIS LOCATION.
I, I KNOW, I KNOW, UH, THE PLAYERS HERE.
AND FOR THE RECORD, I CHAIRED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR EIGHT YEARS BETWEEN 2011 AND 2019.
UM, I HAVE TO SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT FOUR MATTERS IN FIVE MINUTES, AND THAT IS A TIGHT BIT OF WORK FOR ME TO DO.
I WILL BEG FOR YOUR INDULGENCE AND I'LL GET THROUGH IT QUICKLY, AND I WILL NOT WASTE TIME.
BUT, UM, I HOPE THAT WE MIGHT HAVE A LITTLE RESPONSE AND I'M CERTAINLY WILLING TO SEED TIME TO MR. BALDWIN, UH, WHEN I'M COMPLETE.
[01:30:01]
UM, AND I ASK THAT AS A POINT OF ORDER SO THAT I CAN START MY TIME, HOWEVER YOU CHOOSE TO GRANT.UM, MR. RICHARDSON, IF YOU COULD DO AS BEST YOU CAN IN THOSE FIVE MINUTES, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND LISTEN TO YOUR PRESENTATION.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, WE DID NOT GET TO WEIGH IN ON AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SET BACK BECAUSE WE WERE DENIED THAT BECAUSE THE STAFF SCREWED UP AND GETS AN F MINUS FOR NOT DOING STEP ONE OF ANY APPLICATION.
SO THIS IS, THIS IS QUITE AN IMPOSITION TO ARGUE A VARIANCE ON SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY BUILT RATHER THAN HAVING INPUT.
UM, YOU WILL LIKELY GRANT THE VARIANCE BECAUSE YOU'RE BEING PRESENTED WITH A CASE THAT IS UN AN UNFOR UNFORTUNATE FAILURE ON SO MANY LEVELS BEFORE IT GOT TO YOU.
HOWEVER, WHEN IT COMES TO THE FENCE AND THE VISIBILITY, THAT IS SOMETHING ELSE.
AND I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU A PHOTOGRAPH AND I SEE THAT MY FRIEND MR. NEVAREZ IS NOT IN THE ROOM.
SO, UH, THAT'S QUITE UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE I WANT TO SHOW YOU, AND THIS IS GONNA BE DIFFICULT.
I'M GONNA TURN OFF MY LIGHT AND SEE IF THAT HELPS.
HOW FRUSTRATING THAT I CANNOT SHOW YOU THIS PHOTOGRAPH BECAUSE I DROVE THAT VISIBILITY.
MR. RICHARDSON, YOU COULD DO YOUR BEST TO DESCRIBE THE PHOTOGRAPH.
THERE IS A NINE FOOT FENCE THAT IS ABOUT 12 FEET FROM THE GARAGE DOOR IN A ONE LANE DRIVEWAY.
AND I DROVE MY HONDA ELEMENT, WHICH IS A TALL CAR.
YESTERDAY IN THE 16 DEGREE WEATHER, I GOT OUT, I DROVE NOSE DOWN AND I BACKED DOWN.
AND YOU WILL NOT SEE A PEDESTRIAN BEFORE THE PEDESTRIAN IS UNDER YOUR CAR.
AND THAT PARTICULAR SIDEWALK IS TRAVELED BECAUSE THAT IS THE PATHWAY FOR OVER HALF OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE TRADER JOE'S WHERE PEOPLE WALK TO GET THEIR GROCERIES.
AND MS. PARROT IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT THAT IT IS OFTEN TRAVELED, AND IT IS, THE VISIBILITY IS LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
AND YOU WOULD NOT SEE THAT BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T SHOWN PICTURES OF THE COMPLETED FENCE AND THE COMPLETED DRIVEWAY.
AND GOD, I WISH I COULD GET THAT PICTURE TO YOU.
THIS IS A, THIS IS AN INCONVENIENCE.
THERE'S NO GETTING AROUND THIS VARIANCE.
I FEAR, AND I HATE THAT AS A FORMER PUBLIC SERVANT.
I HATE IT FOR THE, FOR THE LAYERS OF FAILURE THAT LED TO IT.
IT'S DEPLORABLE AND IT SHOULD STOP.
AND YOU SHOULD USE YOUR VOICES TO COMPLAIN THAT IT STOPPED, BECAUSE WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS BEFORE IT WAS BUILT AND COME TO A BETTER ARRANGEMENT ON THAT LOT.
BUT THE FENCE IS A NO GO FOR ONE THING.
AND EVEN WALKING DOWN IT, YOU ARE FACED WITH A SHEER WALL THAT IS NINE FEET STRAIGHT UP.
SECOND, UNDER, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD WE HAVE A LANDMARKED, UH, NEXT DOOR BUILDING THAT WE'RE PROUD OF JUST DWARFED BY THIS.
BUT AGAIN, WE CAN'T HELP THAT.
MY RECOMMENDATION TO YOU IS THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE, THEN DENY THE THREE FOLLOWING SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS BECAUSE CROWDING THAT SIDEWALK IS A HORRIBLE OUTCOME.
LOSING THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE IS A HORRIBLE OUTCOME.
MR. RICHARDSON, IF YOU COULD HOLD MOMENT.
[01:35:16]
OKAY.UH, MR. RICHARDSON, I'M GONNA LET YOU GO FOR A COUPLE MORE MINUTES, BUT THEN I ALSO NEED TO EXTEND TIME TO MR. BALDWIN AND TO OUR OTHER SPEAKER AS WELL.
SO I'M GONNA GIVE YOU TWO MORE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
I HAVE, I HAVE NO PROBLEM EXTENDING TIME TO MY FRIEND MR. BALDWIN.
OKAY, TWO, YOU'VE GOT TWO MINUTES, MR. RICHARDSON.
IF YOU DENY THE THREE REQUESTS THAT FOLLOW THE VARIANCE, WHAT WILL RESULT IS THE FENCE WILL STILL BE AROUND SEVEN FEET TALL BECAUSE IT SITS ON THAT THREE FOOT RETAINING WALL.
SO EVEN A FOUR FOOT FENCE EQUALS SEVEN FEET AT THE SIDEWALK.
IF YOU DENY THE 50% VISIBILITY, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THROUGH THE FENCE RATHER THAN HAVE IT BE A SOLID FENCE.
AND, AND AS A REMINDER, THE PEOPLE WHO APPLIED FOR THE SWIMMING POOL, THEY'RE NOT IN THE PICTURE ANYMORE.
THIS IS A BROKER THAT IS WORKING TO GET THIS DONE.
THOSE PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY PASSED ON THEIR OPTION TO BUY.
UM, AND THE THIRD PIECE IS THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.
AND FOR GOD'S SAKE, IF YOU CANNOT SEE YOUR WAY TO CLEAR THAT SIDEWALK AND TO MAKE THE BLOCK FACE AT LEAST SOME COMPROMISE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIVED HERE AND WHO HAVE DONE EVERYTHING RIGHT VERSUS A BUILDER WHO DID EVERYTHING WRONG AND THEN FOLLOWED UP BY A STAFF WHO MISSED THE BASIC SQUARE.
ONE QUESTION, WHAT ARE THE SETBACKS? IF YOU CAN DENY THOSE THREE FENCE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, THEN WE ALL WALK AWAY WITH WHAT WE NEED.
IT MAY NOT BE WHAT EVERYBODY LIKES, IT'S CERTAINLY NOT WHAT WE LIKE, BUT EVERYONE COULD WALK AWAY WITH WHAT THEY NEED.
THE PUBLIC SAFETY WOULD BE ENHANCED, THE BLOCK FACE AND THE LANDMARKED BUILDING WOULDN'T HAVE A SHEER WALL ON THE WAY TO IT.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE AN EQUITABLE AND FAIR OUTCOME FOR THIS PANEL TO CONSIDER.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR INDULGENCE.
I APPRECIATE IT, AND I WILL, UH, RELENT AT THIS POINT.
UH, SHOULD WE GO TO OUR, OKAY, MS. PARROT, YOU, YOU ARE ALLOWED TWO MORE MINUTES IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK AN ADDITIONAL TWO MINUTES.
THAT'S NOT NECESSARY, BUT I WANTED TO GIVE YOU THAT OPTION.
I I DO JUST WANNA EMPHASIZE THAT THE PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE'S A LOT OF PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.
UH, THE, THE, THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE TO LOWER GREENVILLE AVENUE, UH, SEVERAL YEARS AGO HAVE IMPROVED THE NEIGHBORHOOD IMMENSELY AND MAKING IT A WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD, A MUCH MORE WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT'S PART OF, OF THE, THE CHARM OF IT NOW.
BUT TO, TO HAVE, UM, THIS, THIS PROBLEM OF VISIBILITY THAT ENDANGERS PEDESTRIANS IS VERY PROBLEMATIC AND GOES AGAINST THE, THE WHOLE, UH, DIRECTION THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S BEEN TRYING TO GO TO.
WE'LL BRING YOU BACK UP SO YOU HAVE AN ADDITIONAL TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL FIVE MINUTES AND THEN YOU SEVEN MINUTES.
I'M GONNA RESPECT Y'ALL'S TIME.
SO, YOU KNOW, AS MR. RICHARDSON POINTED OUT, THERE'S REALLY TWO BIG ISSUES HERE.
ONE, THE VARIANCE ON, ON THE HOUSE, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS, UH, TRIGGERED AGAIN BY A BUILDING THAT IS AT THE SAME LOCATION THAT WE ARE.
IT'S A BUILDING ON A LOT THAT DOESN'T CONFORM WITH THE ZONING ON THE SITE.
IT'S A, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MINIMUM 7,500 SQUARE FOOT LOT THAT'S ABOUT 2,500 3000 SQUARE FEET.
IT'S PROJECTING A 25 FOOT SETBACK ONTO OUR PROPERTY WHEN THEY'RE, WHEN THAT'S ABOUT FIVE FEET STAFF.
IT WAS, THEY WOULD'VE CAUGHT IT.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE BUILT THE PROPERTY AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, BE HERE TODAY.
UNFORTUNATELY, UH, STAFF DIDN'T CATCH IT.
NO ONE CAUGHT IT UNTIL, UH, WE WENT TO SEARCH FOR A POOL.
UH, AND AS SOON AS THAT CAME IN AND WE, WE, WE BECAME BEFORE YOU, UH, THE ORIGINAL PERSON WHO, UH, WANTED THE POOL IS, IS NO LONGER IN THE PICTURE, BUT THE HOUSE IS UNDER CONTRACT AND WE HAVE TO TRY TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE BEFORE THEY CAN CLOSE ON IT AND GET FUNDING.
[01:40:01]
ALONG WITH THE FENCE, THE, THE FENCE ALSO HAD A PERMIT.UH, IT WAS BUILT ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED PLANS.
UH, THE, THE FENCE IS RIGHT ON THE SIDEWALK.
THERE IS A SLIGHT ENCROACHMENT AND SLIGHT VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, UM, BECAUSE THE, THE FENCE IS TREATED AS A SIDE YARD FENCE JUST LIKE IT IS UP AND DOWN, UH, SEARS STREET.
UM, I'M HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
I, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE, I WAS ABLE TO PROVE THAT WE DO HAVE, UH, A HARDSHIP ON THE PROPERTY.
WE'RE THE ONLY PROPERTY IN THE AREA THAT HAS TWO FRONT YARDS AND, UH, AND THE FRONT YARD IS BEING TRIGGERED BY A HOUSE THAT DOESN'T COMPLY AS WELL.
SO, UH, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
IF YOU COULD JUST GIVE US A MOMENT.
MR. THOMPSON, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF, IF WE DENY THERE'S FOUR DIFFERENT MOTIONS? SO I, I CAN GUESS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN WITH SOME OF THEM, BUT I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND EACH ONE.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE DENY, UM, THE REQUEST FOR THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, WE DENY THAT, I'M ASSUMING THEY'D HAVE TO TEAR DOWN THAT PORTION OF THE FENCE AND REBUILD IT.
OR I, I MEAN, COULD, CAN YOU GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THOSE MOTIONS AND LET US KNOW WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THERE'S A DENIAL? JUST ONE SECOND.
THAT'S JUST GONNA HELP ME ORGANIZE A LITTLE BIT.
YEAH, TECHNICALLY THE FENCE WAS APPROVED.
UM, WE CAN COME BACK AND SAY THE FENCE WAS APPROVED IN ERROR, BUT THAT'S NOT FOR THE BOARD'S, UM, PER SE PRIVY.
BUT, UM, IN TERMS OF THE FOUR REQUESTS, THERE'S FOUR DIFFERENT MOTIONS.
I JU WOULD JUST HELP ME ORGANIZE MY THOUGHTS A LITTLE BIT.
IF I KNEW FOR EACH MOTION, IF A PARTICULAR MOTION IS DENIED, WHAT, WHAT IS THE BURDEN ON THE APPLICANT? WHAT DO THEY NEED TO DO TO BE IN COMPLIANCE? UM, IN TERMS OF DEFENSE? SO YEAH, THIS IS IT.
UH, SO THE FENCE, UM, THEY WOULD HAVE TO REDUCE THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE AND THE, UH, VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AND THE, UH, OPACITY AS WELL.
WHAT ABOUT THAT ONE? UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY COULD EVER MEET THE SETBACK BASED ON THE DENIAL, UH, DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE 25 FOOT, UM, AND SO IN THE FRONT YARD IT WILL BE FIVE FEET, SO THEY HAVE TO MOVE IT BACK AN ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET, WHICH WILL PROBABLY PUSH IT UP AGAINST WHERE THE HOUSE IS.
I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHERE THE SETBACK IS.
I THINK YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTIONS.
SO I'M GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO THE PANEL FOR QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
IS IT, WOULD IT BE A CORRECT STATEMENT TO SAY THAT IF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK WERE NOT APPROVED, THAT PART OF THE HOUSE WOULD HAVE TO BE DEMOLISHED? THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
[01:45:03]
IF I COULD JUST ASK ANOTHER FOLLOW UP QUESTION.SO THE, THE, THE HISTORY, THE HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY IS THE HOUSE WAS BUILT AND PEOPLE LIVED IN IT, AND THOSE WERE THE PEOPLE THAT MOVED OUT AND LEFT IT VACANT.
IF YOU COULD, HOLD ON ONE MOMENT.
THE, UH, THERE'S SOME ISSUE WITH SOUND.
I'M BEING TOLD JASON, I'M BEING TOLD THAT, THAT NOBODY'S PICKING UP SOUND.
OH YEAH, I GUESS HE MEANS THAT HE CAN'T HEAR YOU, SO I'M SORRY.
IF YOU COULD SPEAK CLOSER INTO THE MICROPHONE, THAT'D BE GREAT.
I'M SORRY, I TURNED IT BACK ON.
Y'ALL CAN CONTINUE WHAT? I KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.
SO TO REPEAT THE QUESTION, THE, THE PEOPLE THAT BUILT THE HOUSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT LIVED IN IT AND RECENTLY, HOWEVER LONG MOVED OUT, THOSE ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT HAVE LIVED IN THAT HOUSE.
THEIR, THEIR JOB TOOK 'EM OUTTA TOWN.
AND I'LL TELL YOU OUT OF THE FOUR, YOU KNOW, CLEARLY I WANNA GET 'EM ALL APPROVED, BUT OUT OF THE FOUR, THE NON-CONFORMING IS THE BIGGEST ONE BECAUSE THAT, THAT DEALS WITH THE ABILITY TO OCCUPY AND SELL THE STRUCTURE.
SO IF I COULD JUST, UM, TAKE THAT A STEP FURTHER.
IF, IF SO, RIGHT NOW, WOULD THIS BE A NON-COMPLIANT PROPERTY? YES, SIR.
SO, UM, HOW IS IT BEING MARKETED FOR SALE? HOW IS THERE A PERSPECTIVE BUYER? WELL, THERE WOULD, WOULD GO ONTO THE MARKET AND THEN, AND REALTORS ARE OBLIGATED, AND THE OWNERS ARE OBLIGATED TO REVEAL ANY DEFECTS INTO THE PROPERTY.
AND HERE WE WOULD HAVE A ZONING DEFECT THAT THEY'D HAVE TO RELATE TO THE, THE BUYER AND WHO WOULD HAVE TO RELATE THAT TO THEIR LENDING COMPANY.
AND THEN THE LENDING COMPANY, UH, RIGHT NOW WE'RE HAVING PROBLEMS, I UNDERSTAND WITH THE COMPANY, WITH THE PEOPLE HAVE IT UNDER CONTRACT, NOT WILLING TO LEND MONEY ON THE HOUSE, UH, UNTIL THIS ISSUE IS RESOLVED.
SO THIS DEFECT HAS BEEN DISCLOSED TO THE PEOPLE WHO WERE PENDING BUYING IT? YES.
I BELIEVE THEY'RE WATCHING THIS, THIS HEARING RIGHT NOW.
OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL? NO, BUT I MEAN, AS, AS A LICENSED REALTOR, MR. BALDWIN IS EXACTLY CORRECT.
ANY BROKER WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DIVULGE THIS INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPERTY.
THE ONLY EXCEPTION WOULD BE IF, UH, THERE WAS AN ALL CASH BUYER THAT DIDN'T NEED FINANCING OR UNDERWRITING, THEY COULD PURCHASE THE HOME, BUT ANYBODY THAT WOULD REQUIRE FINANCING OR MORTGAGE WOULD, WOULD HAVE AN, UH, DIFFICULTY WITH THIS.
UM, I, I BELIEVE, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS A QUESTION FOR MR. BALDWIN OR CITY STAFF, BUT I BELIEVE A, A STATEMENT I HEARD FROM MR. RICHARDSON EARLIER SAID THAT IF WE, UM, IF WE DO NOT APPROVE THE FENCE HEIGHT, UM, I THINK THAT'S MOTION TWO, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BUILD A FOUR FOOT FENCE AND ON TOP OF THE RETAINING WALL, THAT WOULD MAKE IT A SEVEN FOOT FENCE.
BUT IF WE APPROVED A FOUR FOOT FENCE, I WOULD ASSUME THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE RETAINING WALL
RIGHT? SO IT WOULD JUST BE A ONE FOOT FENCE ON TOP OF A THREE FOOT RETAINING WALL? OR IS THAT, AM I NOT, IS THAT INCORRECT? YEAH, WE WOULD COUNT FROM THE RETAINING WALL AND THEN WHATEVER PORTION OF THE FENCE, THE ONE FOOT THAT THEY WOULD, UM, UP TO MEETING FOUR FEET.
UM, BUT THE OTHER THING IS THAT IN THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, YOU CAN'T HAVE ANYTHING ABOVE TWO FEET IN THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.
SO IF THAT RETAINING WALL'S ALREADY TWO AND A HALF FEET, THAT'S ALREADY EXCEEDING THAT.
BUT FOR THE REST OF IT, IT'S, YEAH.
FOUR FEET FOR THE PIN FOR THE FENCE, IT'S THE RETAINING WALL, AND THEN IT'S FOUR FEET ON TOP, NOT TOTAL, TOTAL, SO IT'D BE ONE FOOT ON THAT RETAINING FALL
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE, UH, BEFORE I ASK FOR A VOLUNTEER FOR A MOTION? ALL RIGHT.
IS THERE A MOTION I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 6 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES GRANT THE 24 20 FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT? BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS
[01:50:01]
PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN 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 COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS AS REQUIRED.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND DISCUSSION? DISCUSSION? SO I, YOU KNOW, I, I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF THESE WHERE WE HAVE WHAT APPEARS TO BE TWO FRONT YARD SETBACK ISSUES, AND ESPECIALLY IN SOME OF THESE NARROW LOTS.
IF THIS HOUSE WEREN'T EVEN HERE YET, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO, UM, TO GRANT THIS VARIANCE BECAUSE, UM, I WOULD LOOK AT EUCLID AS THE FRONT YARD AND, UM, SEARS, I THINK AS THE SIDE YARD.
SO IN THIS CASE, UM, THAT'S THE REASON I DECIDED TO, UH, APPROVE THIS BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A RESTRICTIVE AREA IF YOU HAD A 25 FOOT SETBACK ON TWO SIDES OF THAT PROPERTY.
UM, MY OPINION ON THIS IS THAT I'M NOT GOING TO DENY THIS, UH, VARIANCE ON THE FRONT YARD SETBACK BECAUSE I DON'T, I, I DON'T JUST DON'T WANNA PENALIZE THE HOMEOWNER OR THE BROKER, UM, TO FORCE THEM TO TEAR DOWN THE ACTUAL HOUSE ITSELF, THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE.
UM, HOWEVER, MY OPINION ON SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES IS DIFFERENT, BUT ON THIS, UM, I AM IN FAVOR OF GRANTING THE VARIANCE ON THE SETBACK.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION.
UM, AND, AND, UH, I'LL MIRROR, UH, MS. HAYDEN'S COMMENTS.
E IF THE, IF THIS BUILDING WAS NOT IN EXISTENCE, THE FACT THAT YOU BUILT IT AND IT ALIGNS WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES IN TERMS OF PLACEMENT, I, I JUST THINK THE PLACEMENT MAKES SENSE.
AND AGAIN, YOU'RE DEALING WITH TWO FRONT YARDS, WHICH IS ALWAYS A CHALLENGE.
SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION.
I DO WANNA REMIND YOU THAT YOU DO NEED FOUR YESES BECAUSE THERE ARE ONLY FOUR OF US.
YOU NEED FOUR YESES FOR EACH ONE OF THESE MOTIONS IN ORDER FOR THEM TO PASS.
IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE GO FOR A CALL? CALL TO VOTE? NOPE.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 6 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A NINE FOOT HIGH FENCE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT FOR FENCES CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH HEIGHT AND FENCE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED IN THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL GO AHEAD AND SECOND DISCUSSION.
YOU KNOW, SIMILAR TO MY, MY FIRST COMMENTS ABOUT, UH, THE 25 FOOT SETBACK ON TWO SIDES OF A LOT, UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE FENCE HEIGHT IS NOT REALLY THE ISSUE FOR ME ON THIS.
UM, I THINK THERE ARE SOME OTHER ISSUES AT HAND, BUT IN THIS CASE, I WOULD, I WOULD VOTE TO GRANT THIS REQUEST.
I, I SECOND IN THIS MOTION, I WILL SUPPORT IT.
I, I DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT THE FENCE IS NINE FEET TALL, BUT I THINK IF YOU HAD TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE AND HAVE A TINY LITTLE ONE FOOT FENCE, IT'S GOING TO LOOK ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS AND I THINK IT'S GONNA HURT THE VALUE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
HURT THE VALUE OF THIS PROPERTY.
SO, UM, BECAUSE OF THAT, I MEAN, I WISH I'M CHAIR, THAT'S AN INCORRECT INTERPRETATION.
WE'RE WAIT, PUB PUBLIC TESTIMONY HAS ENDED.
UM, SO BECAUSE OF THAT REASON, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
UM, I THINK THAT THE APPLICANTS CAN COME BACK AND SEEK A FOUR FOOT FENCE OR A THREE FOOT FENCE ON TOP OF THAT RETAINING WALL IN A, IN ANOTHER APPLICATION.
UM, I THINK WE'VE HEARD A LITTLE FROM PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE AREA ABOUT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I THINK WE NEED TO, UH, RESPECT THAT SOME AS WELL.
I OBVIOUSLY IT'S A BIG IMPOSITION TO REQUIRE SOMEONE TO MODIFY THEIR HOME.
UM, OFFENSE IS ANOTHER MATTER.
AND, UM, SO I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, WE CAN CALL FOR A VOTE.
[01:55:02]
MR. N UH, UH, NAYYY.LET'S GO TO MOTION NUMBER THREE, PLEASE.
SO, UNLESS ANYBODY WANTS TO MAKE A SUBSEQUENT MOTION FOR THE SECOND ITEM, GIMME ONE MOMENT PLEASE.
I, THERE THE MOTION WAS TO GRANT THE MOTION IT FAILED UHHUH
IF THERE IS NO FURTHER MOTION MADE IT, THIS PARTICULAR WILL BE DENIED WITH PREJUDICE.
WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSEQUENT MOTION? I'LL MAKE A SUBSEQUENT MOTION.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 6 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A NINE FOOT HIGH FENCE WITHOUT PREJUDICE BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT GRANTING THE APPLICATION WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND SECOND THAT AND OPEN UP THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION.
UM, THIS WOULD PERHAPS GIVE THE APPLICANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THIS, UM, APPLICATION TO BRING IT CLOSER IN COMPLIANCE AND THAT WOULD, AND TO ACTUALLY, UM, GET WITH THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND GET SOME BUY-IN OF THE PUBLIC.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I WOULD, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANTS TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
AND THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION, MATTHEW.
ALRIGHT, OUR THIRD MOTION PLEASE.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ON APPEAL IN APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 6 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUESTED TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN OFFENSE WITH PANEL HAVING LESS THAN 50% OPEN SURFACE AREA LOCATED LESS THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT LOT LINE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SURFACE AREA OPENNESS BY THIS APPLICANT WITHOUT PREJUDICE BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
UM, YOU KNOW, STATED BEFORE, I THINK THE TESTIMONY FROM THE PUBLIC AND THE FACT THAT THIS IS A VERY HEAVILY TRAVELED PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK AND THE FENCE IS BASICALLY ADJACENT TO IT, UM, I THINK IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT WE, UM, KEEP THE OPACITY ON THIS FENCE.
UM, I BASICALLY AGREE, I THINK THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE IS A CRITICAL ISSUE ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
UM, AS ILLUSTRATED IN THE PICTURES AND THE DIAGRAMS, THE FENCE GOES RIGHT UP TO THE BACK.
WE'RE DOING OPACITY, NOT THE VISIBILITY.
UH, YOUR MOTION TO SING OPACITY? UH, I I'M STILL SECOND.
I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AT THIS POINT.
DREW, IF MR. NARY WITHDREW HIS SECOND AND MR. HVI IS MADE A SECOND, THEN WE CAN PROCEED.
WE CAN PROCEED WITH MR. HVI AS THE SECOND.
UM, AS I, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, I THINK THE OPACITY IS IMPORTANT, UM, DUE TO THE HIGH, UH, PEDESTRIAN VOLUME ON THIS SIDEWALK.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? LET'S CALL FOR A VOTE, PLEASE.
THIS ONCE AGAIN IS TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
[02:00:01]
MS. DAVIS? AYE.I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 6 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT TO MAINTAIN ITEMS IN THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AT THE DRIVE APPROACH WITHOUT PRES PREJUDICE BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT GRANTING THE APPLICATION WOULD CONSTITUTE A TRAFFIC HAZARD.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND DISCUSSION? UM, YOU KNOW, I'M A STICKLER FOR THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AND I THINK GIVEN THE TESTIMONY OF THE ADDITIONAL OF, OF THE, UM, THE, THE PEDESTRIAN VOLUME THAT THEY SEE ON THIS SIDEWALK AND THE FACT THAT THIS, THIS FENCE IS THE HEIGHT THAT IT IS, UM, UH, REALLY FURTHER UNDERSCORES THE NEED TO STAY WITH, STAY OUTSIDE OF THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.
UM, AS I PREVIOUSLY STATED, THE FACT THAT THE FENCE GOES RIGHT UP TO THE ALLEY LINE AND THE, UH, WHERE IT MEETS THE SIDEWALK, UH, THAT REALLY SHARP ANGLE GIVES ME PAUSE FOR CONCERN, ESPECIALLY ON A, UH, SIDEWALK THAT'S HEAVILY TRAVERSED, UH, AS TESTIMONY, UH, STATED, YOU KNOW, UP AND DOWN THE STREET, UH, TO AND FROM TRADER JOE'S, ET CETERA.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THE CASE? I JUST WANTED TO GET A CONFIRMATION.
IT WAS THE DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE IS WHAT THIS MOTION WAS.
I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
I, UM, JUST FOR SAFETY REASONS, I COMPLETELY CONCUR WITH, UM, MS. HAYDEN AND MR. NARY THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY IN THIS VERY WALKABLE AREA, THAT YOU HAVE GOOD VISIBILITY.
I WOULD HATE FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN AND, UM, FOR THAT TO BE ON OUR SHOULDERS.
SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I AM SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
I THINK WE ARE READY TO CALL FOR A VOTE.
MOTION PASSES FOUR TO ZERO THANK YOU.
BDA CASE NUMBER 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 6 DB.
THAT FIRST MOTION FOR THE SETBACK REGULATION DID PASS MOTIONS TWO, THREE, AND FOUR REGARDING FENCE HEIGHT, FENCE OPACITY, AND THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE WERE DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO YOU CAN COME BACK AND, UM, GIVE THIS ANOTHER GO.
AND, UM, TAMIR, UM, OUR, OUR PANELISTS POINTS, I WOULD HIGHLY ENCOURAGE YOUR CLIENT TO GET INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY AND TO GET THEIR BUY-IN BECAUSE IT WEIGHS HEAVILY ON HOW WE DETERMINE NEXT STEPS AND HOW WE VOTE.
OUR FINAL CASE IS BDA NUMBER 2 3 4 0 6.
UM, THIS IS THE SAME CASE NUMBER, UH, BUT MR. BALDWIN WILL BE ASKING THE BOARD FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF FEES PAID FOR THE APPLICANT.
SO, UH, MR. BALDWIN, YOU DO HAVE FIVE MINUTES AND YOU CAN START.
I'M, I'M NOT GONNA TAKE FIVE MINUTES.
SO, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS, I GUESS MAKING A POINT, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY PAID FOR THE PLANS PREPARED, THEY THEN REVIEWED BY THE CITY, THEN GOT EVERYTHING APPROVED, GOT IT BUILT, AND THEN, UH, HAD TO PAY ANOTHER $2,500 IN FEES TO COME BACK HERE TO DEFEND THE CITY'S ACTIONS.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT, THAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THIS.
IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S TRYING TO HOLD THE CITY ACCOUNTABLE FOR, FOR THE MISTAKES THEY MADE.
SO, UH, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
ARE THERE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? AND I JUST WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY THAT APPROVALS OF A VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR REVERSAL OF A BUILDING ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL DECISION REQUIRES 75% OR FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES.
SO IN THIS CASE, AND BECAUSE THIS IS NOT ONE OF THOSE ITEMS, THIS IS A FEE REIMBURSEMENT ONLY REQUIRES THREE.
BECAUSE OF THAT, WE ONLY NEED THREE VOTES IN ORDER FOR THIS TO PASS BECAUSE IT'S A FEE REIMBURSEMENT.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? UH, YES, MADAM CHAIR.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 6 FFR ONE ON APPLICATION BALDWIN ASSOCIATES GRANT THE REQUEST TO REIMBURSE THE FILING FEES IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FENCE HEIGHT REGULATIONS SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FENCE OPACITY STANDARDS AND SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE VISIBILITY OBSTRUCTION REGULATIONS AS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PAYMENT OF THE FEE WOULD SUB WOULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT.
[02:05:02]
I WILL GO AHEAD AND SECOND THAT DISCUSSION.YEAH, I JUST, I FEEL THAT, UH, THE, THE CITY DID MAKE, UH, SOME SERIOUS MISTAKES IN GRANTING THE ORIGINAL PERMITS HERE.
AND I THINK THAT OUR DENIAL OF THE, UH, THREE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS IS KIND OF PUNISHMENT ENOUGH, IF YOU WILL, UH, IN THIS CASE.
AND I DON'T WANNA TO, YOU KNOW, PUNISH THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER OR THE APPLICANT ANY FURTHER.
AND BECAUSE IT WAS THE CITY'S ERROR IN GRANTING THE ORIGINAL PERMITS, UH, THAT'S WHY I'M MADE THIS MOTION TO GRANT THE $2,500 FEE WAIVER.
I CONCUR WITH MR. N'S COMMENTS.
IT REALLY, THIS WAS, UM, I MEAN, REALLY THE MISTAKE WAS ON OUR END HERE AT THE CITY.
SO I, I DON'T THINK THERE'S A REASON THAT WE SHOULD FURTHER PUNISH THE APPLICANT.
THEY'VE ALREADY GOT TO MAKE STRUCTURAL CHANGES.
SO I, I THINK IT IS VERY REASONABLE THAT WE WOULD REIMBURSE THIS PERSON'S FEES.
I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS, UM, THIS MOTION BECAUSE I FEEL THAT THE APPLICANT HAD THE CITY NOTICE THAT THERE WERE TWO FRONT YARDS.
THE APPLICANT WOULD'VE HAD TO PAY THE FEE ANYWAY TO COME AND GET THE, THE VARIANCE AND, UH, FOR THE, FOR THE SETBACKS.
SO, UM, EVEN IF THE CITY HAD DISCOVERED THIS IN THE BEGINNING, THEY WOULD'VE HAD TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO GET A VARIANCE AND, UM, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
I ALSO, UM, WOULD COMMENT THAT, UM, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE NATURE OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOME, THE OWNERSHIP OF THE HOME, THE SALE OF THE HOME, UM, I'M NOT SEEING WHERE IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL HARDSHIP.
I THINK ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I BELIEVE WE'RE READY TO CALL FOR A VOTE.
IN BDA CASE NUMBER 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 6 FFR ONE, THAT MOTION HAS FAILED.
ALL RIGHT EVERYONE, WE ARE, WE WENT THROUGH ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS.
SO I THINK WE ARE READY TO WRAP THINGS UP.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THIS MEETING? SO MOVED.
DO I HAVE SECOND? I'LL SECOND.