[00:00:02]
IT IS 1:05 PM TODAY IS AUGUST 19TH, 2024.
THIS IS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL C MEETING.
UH, CALL TO ORDER WITH THE QUORUM.
I'M THE VICE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF PANEL C.
UH, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY.
I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT BUMPY, BUT WE'RE HERE AND WE'RE MOVING HERE.
UH, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PANEL ARE ROGER, ROGER SINGTON, UH, RODNEY MILLIKEN AND JARED SLADE.
UH, MEMBERS ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR SERVE WITHOUT COMPENSATION EXCEPT FOR LUNCH.
AND GIVE, GIVE OUR TIME FREELY, UH, STAFF PRESENT.
INCLUDE OUR BOARD ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, MATTHEW SAPP.
UH, DR. MILLER HOSKINS IS WITH US, UH, ONLINE.
SHE IS THE BOARD ADMINISTRATOR, CHIEF PLANNER.
BRIAN THOMPSON IS A SENIOR PLANNER.
DIANA BARQUE IS DEVELOPMENT CODE SPECIALIST AND PROJECT COORDINATOR.
NORRA CASTANEDA IS SENIOR PLANS EXAMINER.
UH, SARAH AT TABARI IS SENIOR PLANS EXAMINER.
JASON POOLE IS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY FOR THOSE ATTENDING IS MARY WILLIAMS, BOARD SECRETARY AND MEETING MODERATOR.
YOU NEED ANYTHING? SHE IS THE PERSON YOU TALK TO.
UH, BEFORE WE BEGIN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A FEW STATEMENTS.
UH, NO ACTION OR DECISION ON A CASE SETS A PRECEDENT.
EACH CASE IS DECIDED UPON ITS OWN MERITS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
EACH USE IS PRESUMED TO BE A LEGAL USE.
WE'VE BEEN FULLY BRIEFED BY STAFF THIS MORNING, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO BE BRIEFED BEFORE HEARING EACH CASE.
UH, ANY EVIDENCE YOU WISH TO SUBMIT TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION ON THESE CASES SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO OUR BOARD SECRETARY MARY WILLIAMS, WHEN YOUR CASE IS CALLED, THE EVIDENCE MUST BE RETAINED IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR EACH CASE.
UH, APPROVALS OF A VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXCEPTION, OR FOR REVERSAL OF A BUILDING OFFICIAL DECISION REQUIRES 75% OR FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES.
UH, LETTERS OF OF THE BOARD'S ACTION TODAY WILL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT BY OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR SHORTLY AFTER TODAY'S HEARING AND WILL BECOME PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR EACH CASE.
ANYONE DESIRING TO SPEAK TODAY MUST REGISTER IN ADVANCE WITH OUR BOARD'S SECRETARY.
EACH REGISTERED SPEAKER WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES.
WE CAN SPEAK ON ANYTHING ON THE AGENDA AT THAT POINT.
UM, UH, APPLICANTS WILL, UH, RECEIVE SAY FIVE MINUTES, BUT WE'LL, WE'RE WILL BE WILLING TO EXTEND THAT AND WE'LL EXTEND IT EQUALLY TO OPPOSITION.
UH, AND I SAY FIVE MINUTES BECAUSE OUR QUESTIONS DON'T COUNT FOR THE TIME, BUT YOU OUGHT TO NOT EXPECT TO BE CUT OFF AT FIVE MINUTES.
UH, UM, OPPOSITION WILL HAVE THE SAME TIME AND THEN THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UH, ALL COMMENTS ARE TO BE DIRECTED TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER AT ALL TIMES.
UH, SPEAKERS COME THROUGH THE PRESIDING OFFICER.
A QUICK NOTE ABOUT WHAT WE DO AND WHAT WE DON'T DO.
AS A QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARD, WE CAN'T TALK TO YOU.
YOU CAN'T TALK TO US BECAUSE OF THAT, OUR DECISIONS ARE BASED ON, ON STANDARDS THAT ARE DEFINED IN THE STATUTE, UH, NOT BASED ON WHAT WE MAY THINK MAY WANT, MAY THINK SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS.
UM, WE HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT, THAT ARE NOT THAT AND WHITE.
BUT, UM, WE DON'T MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON PERSONALITIES.
WE MAKE THEM BASED ON INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY.
THAT SAID, DOES ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT OUR MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING? HEARING NONE.
IS THERE A MOTION TO PASS THE MINUTES? VICE CHAIR AG MR. SASH? UM, I MOVE THAT WE HAS NO, THAT WE ACCEPT THE MEETING MINUTES FROM OUR PREVIOUS, UM, HEARING AS AS THEY HAVE BEEN PROVIDED.
I SUPPOSE EVERYONE KNOWS THE EXACT DATES.
[00:05:05]
JUNE, JUNE, I BELIEVE SO.UH, WE, WE, WE WILL HEAR OUR AGENDA IN ORDER, UM, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE HAVE TWO CASES ON, UH, CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, BEFORE WE CONTINUE, I'D LIKE TO HAVE THE, THE, UH, PUBLIC SPEAKING PART OF OUR MEETING.
SO IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA.
YOU'LL OBVIOUSLY SPEAK DURING, DURING THE CALLING OF THE HEARING, BUT THIS IS FOR, THIS IS A CASE FOR ANYONE CAN SPEAK.
NO PUBLIC, NO, NO PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
AT THIS POINT THEN WE ARE GOING TO, WE'RE, THIS IS DIFFERENT.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE TWO COMPONENTS OF WHAT WE DO.
ONE IS A BRIEFING DURING THE BRIEFING.
THAT'S A SITUATION WHERE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO CAN SPEAK ARE STAFF AND BOARD MEMBERS.
UH, WE THEN WILL HAVE A HEARING ON EACH CASE AFTER THE BRIEFING.
THE BRIEFING IS PUBLIC SO THAT EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT WE KNOW.
AND, UH, IF YOU'RE JUST JOINING US, WE HAD AIRPLANE AND AUTOMOBILE TROUBLE THIS MORNING, BUT, UH, AS WELL AS TECHNOLOGICAL TROUBLE THAT, UH, MADE IT HARD FOR US TO HAVE A QUORUM.
SO WE ARE RUNNING BEHIND, BUT WE ARE DOING OUR ABSOLUTE LEVEL BEST.
UM, MS. JORDAN WAS MOST OF THE WAY THROUGH BDA 2 3 4 DASH OH 9 1 1 4 4 4 OKLAN AVENUE.
WOULD YOU PLEASE CONTINUE? THIS IS STILL THE BRIEFING.
SO WE ARE, UM, WE WERE ACTUALLY ON THE TWO IN FOOTIES VIDEO, BUT I DID WANNA PROVIDE CLARIFICATION.
SO WE, WE RECEIVED TWO LETTERS OF SUPPORT, UM, AT, UM, LOT TWO AND THE SECOND ONE AT LOT THREE.
AND THEN WE ALSO RECEIVED ONE LETTER PROPOSITION, AND THAT'S MARKED BY, UM, LOT 16.
YOU GUYS HAVE THE LETTER OVER THERE.
SO THIS FIRST STREET IS OAKLAWN OAKLAWN AVENUE, AND OUR SUBJECT SIDE IS ACTUALLY, THE PART OF IT IS TO THE LEFT HERE.
AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A LEFT ONTO DRAGON.
AND OUR SUBJECT SIDE IS HERE TO THE LEFT.
LET'S SEE HERE WHERE THE NOTIFICATION SIGN IS.
IF WE'RE GONNA GO PAST THE LETTER WRITERS, IF YOU COULD CALL THEM OUT, THAT WOULD BE NICE.
SO LOT 16 IS GONNA BE ON THIS SIDE.
I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE ALREADY PASSED IT.
THIS IS THE STRIP WHERE THE LETTER CAME FROM.
IT'S GONNA BE ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
AND WE'RE GONNA TURN AROUND, WE'LL MAKE A U-TURN IN A FEW SECONDS.
ACTUALLY NOW, AND I'LL TRY TO CALL IT OUT.
[00:10:10]
I BELIEVE LOT 16 MAY BE ONE OF THESE TO OUR LEFT.AND OUR SUBJECT SIDE IS TO THE RIGHT.
AND WE'RE STILL ON DRAGON STREET.
WE JUST MADE A U-TURN ON DRAGON STREET.
AND THEN SHORTLY WE'LL MAKE A RIGHT ONTO OAK LAWN AVENUE.
AND THIS IS STILL OUR SUBJECT SITE TO THE RIGHT.
SO WE PASSED OUR SUBJECT SITE NOW, AND I'M ACTUALLY GONNA SEE IF I CAN FAST FORWARD IT.
AND SO WE JUST MADE A RIGHT ON THE SLOCUM.
BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IN CURRENT STATE, ONCE WHEN WE TURN FROM OAK LAWN ONTO LOCUM, THAT'S, THAT'S PAVED.
AND JUST PARKING AND THAT SATELLITE IMAGE.
SO OUR SUBJECT SIDE IS TO THE RIGHT NOW, WHERE THIS CURVE IS WHERE, OR EXCUSE ME, WHERE THE STREET TURNS THE CURVES BATHROOM TWO AND THREE ARE ACROSS THE WAY.
THEY'RE ACROSS THE STREET FROM EACH OTHER.
AND THESE ARE THE LETTERS OF SUPPORT.
AND SO WE'RE NOT GONNA GO BACK AROUND TO THE, UM, SUBJECT SIDE.
DID YOU WANNA CONTINUE WITH THE VIDEO? WE'RE JUST GONNA GO ALONG YOUR ROUTE AS YOU OKAY.
IF YOU, YOU CAN SPEED IT UP, BUT BEING ABLE TO SEE, OKAY, YOU'RE COMING BACK.
SO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, OR WHAT WE'VE SEEN ESSENTIALLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM EVERYBODY, RIGHT ACROSS THIS SOMEWHAT OAK LAWN, BUT REALLY CROSS SLOPE.
RIGHT? SO DOES ANYONE WANNA SEE THE RESTROOM, YOU THEN? NO.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? OKAY.
SO AS I DO THIS, DO I NOW CLOSE THE BRIEF? NO, WE'RE, WE'RE WITHIN THE HEARING.
THE BRIEFING PART OF THIS IS OVER.
AT THIS POINT WE'LL CALL THE CASE.
UM, UM, BEFORE I END THE PRESENTATION, I DID WANNA, UM, READ OFF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING COMMENTS.
UM, THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSAL REQUEST.
YEAH, I, I DO WANT TO GO OVER IT.
SO I'LL JUST FINISH THE FULL PRESENTATION.
YEAH, LET'S JUST FINISH YOUR, YOUR, UH, OKAY.
SO THE STANDARD, THE LEGAL STANDARDS OF REVIEW FOR DECISION MAKING, PLEASE COME FROM, UH, SECTION 51, A DASH FOUR POINT, UH, 3 1 1 A.
AND IT, UH, READS THAT, UM, OR EXCUSE ME, OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE, STATES THAT THE BOARD MAY GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO AUTHORIZED REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF OFF STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED UNDER THIS ARTICLE.
AT THE BOARD FINDS AFTER PUBLIC HEARING, THAT THE PARKING DEMAND GENERATED BY THE USE DOES NOT WARRANT THE NUMBER OF OFF STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED.
AND THE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD OR INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
UM, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS PARAGRAPH, THE MAXIMUM REDUCTION BY THIS SECTION IS 25% IN ONE SPACE, WHICHEVER IS GREATER, MINUS THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES CURRENTLY NOT PROVIDED DUE TO DELTA CREDITS AS DEFINED IN SECTION 51 A DASH 4.704 B FOUR A IN A STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THERE IS NO RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR ANY SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
[00:15:02]
AND THEN THE, UM, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS, WHICH COME FROM, UH, MR. NAVAREZ STATED THAT THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED REQUEST.AND THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 9 1 AT 1 4 4 4 WAN A.
UH, WHILE WE DO, UH, OUR ATTORNEY HAS A HANDOUT ABOUT THIS STANDARD, ONE OF WHICH NEEDS TO GO TO THE PUBLIC RECORD THAT UP THERE.
VICE CHAIR, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'D LIKE TO OPINE A LITTLE BIT ON THE STANDARD HERE.
UH, IT COMES OUT OF SECTION 51 A 43 11 OUT OF THE DALLAS CITY CODE, WHICH STILL IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PARKING DEMAND.
AS MS. JORDAN NOTED THAT THERE'S ESSENTIALLY TWO ELEMENTS.
AND, UH, THAT ONE IS THAT THE PARKING DEMAND GENERATED BY THE USE DOES NOT WARRANT THE NUMBER OF OFF STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED.
YOU GUYS WILL NOTICE IN THE HANDOUT THAT I HAVE IN PARENTHESES AFTER THE TERM USE HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER, THAT'S 'CAUSE WHEN I DRAFTED THIS, I DRAFTED IT, UH, IN PREPARATION FOR THE VISIBILITY OF THE NEXT CASE, WHICH IS A HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER.
THE CURRENT CASE, UH, THE USE IS NOT A HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER, BUT RATHER IS A RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE-IN OR DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE, RETAIL OFFICE AND SHOWROOM.
SO KEEP IN MIND WHEN YOU ARE ANALYZING, UM, THIS PRESENT CASE, BDA 2 3 4 0 9 1, THE, THE USE IS NOT A HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER, BUT RATHER, UH, AS I SPOKE MOMENT AGO, A RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-IN DRIVE THROUGH RETAIL OFFICE SHOWROOM.
SO THAT THE STANDARD, THE TWO ELEMENTS THAT YOU'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT ARE THAT THE PARKING DEMAND GENERATED BY THE USE BEING THE RETAIL, UH, RESTAURANT DRIVE-IN ET CETERA, DOES NOT WARRANT THE NUMBER OF OFF STREET PARKING SPACES.
AND THEN THE SECOND ELEMENT IS THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD OR INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
SO KEEP IN MIND IT'S THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD, NOT THAT THE EXISTENCE OF THE PROPERTY WOULD CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD.
YOU'RE HAVING TO WEIGH THAT AGAINST THE OB SAY THAT AGAIN.
IT'S THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD RATHER THAN THE PRESENCE OF THE PROPERTY WOULD NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD, RIGHT? SO IF THE PROPERTY WAS COMPLETELY VACANT, THERE WOULD BE NO TRAFFIC OR VERY LITTLE TRAFFIC BECAUSE NOBODY WOULD BE TRYING TO UTILIZE THAT PROPERTY.
AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
WE'RE WEIGHING THAT AGAINST THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THE PROPERTY.
AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT WHETHER THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD CREATE THAT TRAFFIC HAZARD, NOT WHETHER THE EXISTENCE OR THE USE OF THAT PROPERTY.
SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT A VACANT PROPERTY VERSUS A PROPERTY AND YOU SAY, WELL, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A PROPERTY THERE, IT'S GONNA BE A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
SO OF COURSE THAT WOULD INCREASE CONGESTION.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
WE'RE SAYING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD CREATE THE TRAFFIC HAZARD.
AND THEN IN ADDITION, YOU'LL NOTICE ON THE HANDOUT THERE ARE THE SECTION TWO OR PART, UH, SUBPARAGRAPH TWO OF SECTION 51, 1 A 43 11 LIST D DETERMINING THINGS THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT.
SO UNDER SECTION A, IT TALKS ABOUT WILL THE, UH, EXTENT TO THE PARKING SPACES WILL BE REMOTE SHARED OR PACKED PARKING.
THE SECOND, UH, ELEMENT B WAS THAT THE PARKING DEMAND AND TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS OF ALL USES FOR WHICH THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS REQUESTED.
UH, ELEMENT C IS WHETHER OR NOT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OR ANY PROPERTY IN THE GENERAL AREA IS IN A PART OF A MODIFIED DELTA OVERLAY DISTRICT.
NEITHER OF THE, UH, CASES BEFORE US TODAY, UH, NEITHER THIS ONE, UH, BDA 2 3 4 0 9 1 OR THE FOLLOWING CASE BDA 2 3 4 0 7 9 IS IN A MODIFIED OVERLAY DISTRICT.
SO THAT ELEMENT DO NOT, WE DO HAVE THAT CREDIT TO ABOUT YOU DO HAVE DELTA CREDITS, BUT IT NOT IN A MODIFIED O OVERLAY DISTRICT.
UH, ELEMENT D IS THAT THE CURRENT AND PROBABLE FUTURE CAPACITY OF ADJACENT AND NEARBY STREETS BASED ON THE CITY'S THOROUGH FAIR PLAN E THE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC TRANS TRANSIT, AND F THE FEASIBILITY OF PARKING MITIGATION.
AND SO, AS I SUSPECT, AND AS YOU GUYS MOSTLY MOST LIKELY SUSPECT AS WELL, THE APPLICANT WILL GET UP AND MAKE A, UH, VERY EDUCATED, UM, ADVOCATE FOR THEIR CLIENT, YOU KNOW, AND, UM, AND BE ABLE TO ILLUSTRATE THESE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS AND HOW THEY WILL AFFECT THOSE TWO, UM, ELEMENTS OF THE STANDARD THAT WERE MENTIONED.
AND I JUST WANNA GO OVER THAT.
AND YOU HAVE THE, UH, THE HANDOUT IN FRONT OF YOU.
AND SO IF THERE ARE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS YOU CAN, UH, ASK THEM NOW OR LATER, I DO, I WANNA CLARIFY THE DISTINCTION.
YOU'RE MA IS IT TRUE THE, THE DISTINCTION YOU'RE MAKING IS ABOUT USE? YOU DON'T WANT US MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT USE ALLAH, WHAT THE ZONING IS, WHETHER IT'S RETAIL OR INDUSTRIAL OR WHATEVER.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, UH, THE VERY FACT THAT A BUILDING IS CURRENTLY IT, WERE, WERE IF YOU HAD AN EMPTY BUILDING AND THEREFORE YOU HAD NO CURRENT TRAFFIC, UH, YOU'RE CONCERNED THAT WE WOULD MAKE A DECISION BASED ON WHAT KIND OF USE IS GOING THERE.
WHAT, WHAT IS THE DISTINCTION? I DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND IT.
I'M NOT SURE I FULLY UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, BUT, UM, I, I THINK IT, IF THE LOT WAS, LET'S SAY, EMPTY AND, AND YOU, AND WE SAID, WELL, WE'RE GONNA, AND THE APPLICANT SAID, WELL, I WANNA BUILD THIS PROPERTY AND MAKE A
[00:20:01]
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.AND, AND YOU SAID, WELL, BY HAVING THIS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, PEOPLE ARE GONNA USE THAT PROPERTY.
THEY'RE GONNA PARK THERE, PEOPLE ARE GONNA GO TO THIS PROPERTY THAT IS GONNA CAUSE CONGESTION, THAT IS GONNA CAUSE TRAFFIC.
THAT'S NOT WHAT THE PURPOSE OF IT IS.
THE PURPOSE IS TO SAY THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE FACT THAT IF THEY DID IT, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS ACTUALLY A REDUCTION.
RIGHT? SO THE VERY FACT THAT IF THEY BUILT SOMETHING PER CODE, THAT THAT WOULD CREATE CARS IS REALLY NOT OUR CURTAIN.
BECAUSE THEN NOBODY WOULD EVER GET TO BUILD ANYTHING.
'CAUSE EVERYTHING WOULD CAUSE TRAFFIC AND THEN YOU WOULD NEVER GET UP.
BUT WHEREABOUT, THE, WE HAVE TO DECIDE THAT THE REDUCTION OF PARKING THAT IT ASKED FOR, UH, DOESN'T ESSENTIALLY CAUSE HARM TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES TO TRAFFIC.
ESSENTIALLY, IF THE REDUCTION OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS MM-HMM.
THAT'S WHAT YOU THAT'S CORRECT.
I THINK I UNDERSTAND IT, MR. S HOW LONG YOU WANT WATER? UH, OKAY.
THE BRIEFING PART OF THIS CASE IS CLOSED.
AND NOW, UH, BEFORE WE CALL THE NEXT CASE, UH, OR BEFORE WE WE HEAR IT, I WONDER IF I, I COULD HAVE A MOTION ABOUT OUR UNCONTESTED CASES.
MR. VICE CHAIR, I HAVE A MOTION.
MS.
AND YOU KNEW THAT, UM, THE APPLICATIONS IN RESPECT OF DEFENSE TYPE REGULATIONS IN DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE ALONG SAME BAY AVE AND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO DEFENSE TYPE REGULATIONS ALONG SOUTH BEACON STREET IN THE DALLAS GOVERNMENT CODE BOTH BE GRANTED SUBJECT PROPONENT'S ION COMPLIANCE WITH TIGHT AND FENCE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS.
THOSE GREATER, THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRE IN RESPECT TO THE THREE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS SOUGHT BY BERNARD JOHNSON IN CASE BD TWO P FOUR DASH 0 8 5, TO THE VISIBILITY OBSTRUCTION REGULATIONS IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AT THE INTERSECTION OF SANTA FE AVE AT THE DRIVEWAY APPROACH OF SANTA FE AVE.
AND AT THE DRIVEWAY APPROACH ON SOUTH BEACON STREET, ALL THREE BE GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION LINES OF THE MOST RECENT BURDEN.
ALL SUBMITTED CLAIMS IN REGARDS TO THE PORTION IN VIOLATION OF THE VISUAL OBSTRUCTION TRIANGLE ARE REPLIED.
IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND MR. MILLIKEN SECOND, UH, VICE CHAIR.
CAN I JUST GET CONFIRMATION, I WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND MR. SLATE'S MOTION FOR PURPOSE OF, OF, UH, KEEPING A CLEAR RECORD.
UM, YOU'RE SUGGESTING ALL FIVE ARE APPROVED, OR THREE HAVE APPROVED, AND TWO, DID I MISS SOMETHING? APOLOGIES, UH, YES.
UM, BUT I TRIED TO SYNTHESIZE THEM SO THAT THE TWO FENCE HEIGHT REQUESTS, UM, THE CONDITIONED ON THE FENCE AND HEIGHT LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF THE SUBMITTED SITE PLANS.
AND FOR THE THREE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS IN RESPECT TO VISIBILITY, OBSTRUCTION, REGULATIONS, UM, EACH OF THOSE WAS COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS IN REGARDS TO PORTION AND VIOLATION OF VISUAL OBSTRUCTION.
I THINK I UNDERSTAND YOU WENT WITH WHAT WAS ON THE DRAFT.
I, I MIGHT GET WITH YOU AFTERWARDS JUST TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE SAME THING WRITTEN DOWN.
SO THEREFORE, MARY'S RECORD KEEPING, IT'S, IT'S, UH, SOLID.
BUT THANK YOU, SIR FOR CLARIFICATION.
SHOULD STOP LETTING LAWYERS MAKE MOTIONS.
UM, DID, DID YOUR MOTION, UH, DEAL WITH OH EIGHT FOUR? YES.
AND I BELIEVE MR. MILLIKEN SECONDED THE MOTION? YES.
UH, UH, WE DO HAVE DISCUSSION ON, ON THE CONSENT AGAIN, MRS. YEAH, I JUST WANNA BE SURE THAT, UM, MR. NAVAREZ, WHEN HE WAS ON THE, ON THE LINE MENTIONED, UM, IN, IN LIEU OF THE 45 DEGREE ANGLE,
[00:25:01]
THAT THE SUGGESTION BE MADE TO THE APPLICANT TO DO A 30 BY 30.IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE CAN INCORPORATE THAT, UM, INTO, UM, YES.
UH, IT WOULD BE BY HEARING THE CASE.
SO THAT'S THE REASON I ASKED WHETHER ANYBODY WANTED TO PULL IT.
YOU STILL CAN'T, UH, NO, YOU CAN'T.
SO YEAH, WE ARE, WE HAVE DECIDED NOT TO, NOT TO HEAR IT AND LEAVE IT AS IT IS, BUT IF YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT IT, EITHER
MOTIONS ON THE FLOOR AND IT'S SECONDED.
DISCUSS MS. WHAT? MR. SLATE? AYE.
OKAY, SO WE'RE NOW GONNA HEAR OH NINE ONE, THEN WE'RE GONNA HEAR THE OTHER CASE THAT WE'VE ALREADY BEEN BRIEFED ON, UH, WHICH WILL THEN, UH, WHICH IS OH EIGHT SEVEN
AND THEN WE'RE GONNA GO BACK TO BRIEF HERE AND BRIEF.
THAT'S NOT CONFUSING, BUT I DO WANT TO ULTIMATELY TAKE IT AS CLOSE TO AN ORDER AS WE CAN.
THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 9 1 1 4 4 4 OAK LAWN AVENUE APPLICATION OF JENNIFER.
HI, MOTO, FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE PARKING REGULATION APPLICANT, WOULD YOU PLEASE BE SWORN IN, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR HIM.
JENNIFER CARTO, 1 0 2 3 3 EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY DALLAS, 7 5 2 3 8.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
UM, THIS, UH, SORRY, THIS IS A LITTLE OUTTA ORDER.
I WASN'T EXPECTING TO BE HEARD SO QUICKLY, BUT I APPRECIATE IT.
UM, THIS IS, UM, I THINK AN EXCITING CASE TO SEE A SHOWROOM CENTER BE REDEVELOPED, BE PART OF A VIBRANT URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS DEVELOPING, UH, VERY QUICKLY IN THIS PART OF DALLAS.
UM, THE CENTER IS VACATING, UM, SO THAT IT CAN PERFORM A REMODEL AND HAVE SOME NEW TENANTS, UM, TO HAVE A MORE, UH, DIVERSE MIX OF RETAIL, PERSONAL SERVICE, RESTAURANT AND SHOWROOM USES, UM, SO THAT IT CAN SERVE THE GROWING NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I'M NOT SURE IF THE, THE, UM, SITE VISIT REALLY CONVEYED AS CLEARLY AS THE SITE PLAN DOES, BUT THIS IS A SITE THAT HAS BUILDINGS ON THE PERIMETER AND A CENTRAL PARKING PORT, UM, AND WE ARE ONE OF THE LUCKY PDS THAT HAS A GENEROUS PARKING REDUCTION DUE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION PROCESS.
SO JUST SO I CAN IS, AND, AND THIS SITE PLAN AS I OVERLAY IT WITH WHAT I, THE SATELLITE IMAGE, IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE SOME PARTS HERE IS BUILT WHERE THERE'S CURRENTLY PARKING, OR AM I MISREADING THE, THE OVERHEAD? NO, THE, THE, THIS IS A, UM, REUSE OF THE EXISTING CENTER.
SO THIS ADDITION, NO ADDITIONAL BILL.
IF THERE'S ANYTHING ADDITIONAL, THERE MAY BE A MEZZANINE ADDED WITHIN ONE OF THE LARGER SUITES, UH, SUCH AS THE RESTAURANTS.
UM, I THINK THAT'S MAYBE JUST HERE OR THERE OR FLOWS IN PATIOS, RIGHT? AND, UM, WE PROVIDED THE PATIO CALCULATIONS SINCE THIS PD DOES REQUIRE PARKING FOR THOSE AREAS, UM, JUST TO BE THE WORST CASE SCENARIO SO THAT IF THE RESTAURANTS WANT TO HAVE THAT UPPER SEATING THAT THEY CAN PROVIDE IT.
UM, SO THIS IS THE PLAN THAT I WAS REFERRING TO, UH, WITH THE, THE CENTRAL PARKING PORT.
UM, OUR MIX OF USE IS ABOUT 53% RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICE.
UM, AND THEN 29% RESTAURANT WITH PATIOS AND 18% SHOWROOM.
UH, JUST WANNA MAKE A CLARIFICATION FROM WHAT I HEARD EARLIER, THERE'S NO DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANT PROPOSED.
SO IT'S ALL WITHOUT DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE.
UM, ALSO WE DON'T HAVE ANY DELTA CREDITS PER SE.
UM, THE PD HAS SEVERAL TYPES OF PARKING CREDITS AND REDUCTIONS AND SO FORTH THAT YOU HAVE OPTIONS TO, TO UTILIZE.
THIS IS AN ON STREET PARKING CREDIT THAT WE HAVE, NOT DELTA CREDITS.
UM, THIS IS A RENDERING OF, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO MAKE TO THE CENTER.
[00:30:01]
THEN I JUST WANTED TO TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.UM, IF YOU CAN SEE THE RED DOTS ON THE TOP RIGHT, UM, SLIDE, THAT'S GOOGLE MAPS AND THOSE ARE RESTAURANTS.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE LOWER RIGHT HAND SIDE, HOPEFULLY IT'S BETTER VISIBLE ON YOUR SCREEN.
UM, THERE'S HOUSING NEARBY IN A HOTEL.
THIS IS PART OF THE DESIGN DISTRICT TIP AND SINCE 20 2006 IS WHEN IT WAS ESTABLISHED, THERE'S ALMOST 4,000 NEW DWELLING UNITS THAT HAVE BEEN, UM, ONLINE SINCE THEN.
UM, AND 518 HOTEL ROOMS. SO THIS IS CHANGING FROM THE TRADITIONAL DESIGN SHOWROOM AREA TO A VERY DIVERSE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, THIS IS MY LAST SLIDE BEFORE LLOYD JOINS US.
UM, THE RED STAR ON THE LOWER RIGHT IS THE LOCATION APPROXIMATELY.
SO WE ARE RIGHT BY THE NEW HIGHLINE CONNECTOR.
AND THIS IS, UH, A MULTIMODAL TRAIL THAT CONNECTS TO THE KA TRAIL AND THE TRINITY STRAND TRAIL.
UM, SO THAT ALTERNATIVE OVER DELOITTE.
MR. DENMAN, PLEASE BE SWORN IN.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? CAN WE SWEAR YOU ALL IN AT ONCE? MR. DOUG LEMON? UH, LLOYD DENMAN, WOULD YOU SWEAR BOTH, BOTH OF THESE PEOPLE IN MS. WILLIAMS, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND PROCEED.
LLOYD DENMAN 29 28 WESTMINSTER DALLASES, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 5.
I'VE MADE SOME PARKING OBSERVATIONS FOR THE SITE AS WELL AS TWO SIMILAR CENTERS ADJACENT TO AND JUST NORTH OF THE SITE FOR COMPARISON PURPOSES.
AND THE GRAPHS THAT YOU SEE WILL REPRESENT MY PARKING OBSERVATIONS.
THE FIRST ONE IS A 1444 OAK LAWN ITSELF IN ITS CURRENT TODAY IN ITS CURRENT CONDITION.
AND THE ORANGE HORIZONTAL LINE ON THE TOP REPRESENTS THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE.
AND THE BLUE BAR GRAPHS REPRESENT THE OBSERVED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AT DIFFERENT TIMES OF DAY AND DIFFERENT DAYS OF THE WEEK.
AND WHAT THIS SHOWS I'VE PUT IN WRITING BELOW THE OAKLAWN CENTER IS CURRENTLY UNDERUTILIZED AND EXCEEDINGLY OVER PARKED.
THERE'S ROOM TO ALLOW A MUCH GREATER DENSITY AND MIX OF USES.
IT IS NOT FULLY LEASED, YOU KNOW, BUT AGAIN, JUST TO SHOW THERE'S NOWHERE NEAR CURRENT PARKING, YOU KNOW, TO MEET WHAT'S THERE.
THE PROPOSED IS THE NEXT SLIDE TO REVITALIZE THIS EXISTING CENTER.
THE CURRENT USES OF SHOWROOM HAVE NOT KEPT PACE WITH THE MARKET, YOU KNOW, SORT OF A DYING CENTER.
SO THE NEW OWNER WANTS TO REVITALIZE BY ADDING IN SOME RETAIL AND RESTAURANT USE.
THE PLAN IS TO MAXIMIZE, AND THAT'S WHAT THESE BAR GRAPHS SHOW, MAXIMIZE THE EXISTING PARKING WITHOUT EXCEEDING IT.
UM, AND THAT, UH, HELPS ADDRESS THE ITEMS BEFORE YOU FOR A, FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
THE DEMAND WILL NOT EXCEED THE NUMBER OF SPACES, AND THAT IS WHAT WE INDEED BELIEVE.
AND THEN THAT NO, IF YOU GRANT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, NO HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WOULD OCCUR.
THE CENTER FACING PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH, ADJACENT TO THE NORTH IS THE DECORATIVE CENTER.
YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH THAT.
IT HAS ALREADY BROUGHT IN A MIX OF, USES SOME RESTAURANTS TO HELP READ REVITALIZE ITS, UM, OPERATION.
AND THE PARKING OBSERVATIONS I MADE ARE FOR IT, ARE ILLUSTRATED ON THIS SLIDE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT WITH THREE RESTAURANTS, VALET PARK, THE EXISTING PARKING AVAILABLE WITHIN THE SITE IS NOT EXCEEDED.
AND SO, AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT 1444 IS, IS HOPING TO DO AS MATTER OF FACT, THE DECORATIVE CENTER,
[00:35:01]
IT COULD ADD SOME DENSITY WITHOUT EXCEEDING THE PARKING ON SITE.AND THE NEXT SLIDE, THERE'S ANOTHER SIMILAR CENTER AT OAK LAWN AND SIMMONS AND I MADE OBSERVATIONS THERE AS WELL.
IT ALSO HAS SHOWROOM USES AND RESTAURANTS AND SOME RETAIL AS WELL.
AND IT HAS BEEN REVITALIZED IN A SIMILAR FASHION.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THE RESTAURANT USE ON THE WEEKEND, THE PEAK ON THE WEEKEND, ACTUALLY EXCEEDED THE EXISTING NUMBER OF SPACES AVAILABLE.
AND IT'S LIKE, HOW COULD THAT HAPPEN? AND IT WAS NOT DUE TO SPILLOVER PARKING.
IT WAS BETTER UTILIZED INTERNAL PARKING AS A RESULT OF THE VALET DOUBLE STACKING AND ADDING CARS WHERE THEY COULD, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHY THAT GRAPH EXCEEDS THE EXISTING NUMBER OF MARKED SPACES.
YOU KNOW, THE VALET WAS CREATIVE INTERNAL TO ITS OWN SITE.
AND I WILL SAY ALL OF THESE OBSERVATIONS CHARTS THAT YOU JUST LOOKED AT, NO PUBLIC PARKING, NO PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, PARKING WAS INCLUDED.
THESE ARE INWARD FACING CENTERS WITH MARKED PARKING SPACES INTERNAL TO THE SITE.
SO THERE WAS ZERO SPILLOVER PARKING, AND THAT'S THE INTENT OF 1444 OAK BAR.
AND LAST SLIDE THERE, THERE WAS A PARKING STUDY SUBMITTED IN YOUR PACKET.
AND THESE ARE SOME HIGHLIGHTS THAT I AND HAVE PULLED JUST FROM THAT STUDY.
REMEMBER, THE PD ITSELF HAD SOME FORESIGHT AND VISION TO SEE THAT URBAN DENSITY WOULD INCREASE AND MADE ALLOWANCE FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF UP TO 50% REQUIRED PARKING.
SECOND MAIN POINT, THE 1444 OAK LAWN CENTER CAN BETTER UTILIZE ITS EXISTING PARKING WITH A BALANCE, A RIGHT-SIZED BALANCE OF USES.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THE NEW OWNER IS LOOKING FOR WITHOUT IMPEDING OR CREATING A, A HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THEN LASTLY, THE PARKING DEMAND TO ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, IS THE PARKING DEMAND REALISTIC THAT THE PD CALLS FOR.
AND, AND I THINK BASED ON THE URBAN DENSITY, WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT DEMAND IS IS REALISTIC OR THERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS WALKABLE.
TODAY, THERE'S LYFT, UBER ALTO, THE VIRGIN HOTEL HAS A SHUTTLE THAT CAN BRING PEOPLE TO THE RESTAURANTS.
AND BY THE WAY, THE RESTAURANTS ARE THE PRIMARY DRIVER OF THE PARKING.
YOU KNOW THAT ON THOSE NUMBERS.
PEOPLE RIDE BIKES, E-BIKES, THERE'S PUBLIC PAY LOTS.
WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT DEMAND AS PUT FORTH IN THE PD IS REALISTIC, YOU KNOW, AND ALL THESE, UH, URBAN DENSE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS HELP LOWER THAT TO ME.
AND WITH THAT, JENNIFER AND I BOTH WE'LL TAKE QUESTIONS AND THEN IT LOOKS LIKE WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER AND SUPPORT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT ORDER YOU WANT TO, IF YOU WANT TO ASK JENNIFER ANY QUESTIONS NOW OR HEAR ARE THE OTHER SUPPORT.
UH, WELL IT'S, IT'S UH, THE APPLICANT'S TIME.
UH, HOW ARE WE DOING? UH, PROBABLY OVER, BUT I SAID IT'S OKAY TO GO OVER.
UM, MS. WILLIAMS, WE'RE PAST FIVE MINUTES FOR SURE.
RIGHT? UM, SO IN TERMS OF HOW YOU, LET'S NOT TALK FOREVER, BUT, UM, UH, YEAH, LET'S LET MR. VINCENT, LET'S GIVE HIS PITCH AND THEN WE'LL ASK ANSWER QUESTIONS.
UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS JONATHAN VINCENT, 2323 ROSS AVENUE.
UM, WE ACTUALLY REPRESENT ANOTHER MAJOR PROPERTY OWNER IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH IS H AND CAPITAL.
UM, WE'RE HERE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
UM, I THINK IT MAKES A TON OF SENSE, MR. CHAIR.
HE DID NOT SWEAR, GET SWORN IN.
HE HE STOOD UP BACK THERE WHEN YOU SWORN IN.
UM, SO I MEAN, THIS IS, THIS IS AN EXISTING MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT.
I, I, AS I SAID IN MY LETTER TO YOU, I THINK THE PD HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL.
I THINK THE CITY GOT IT RIGHT, UH, WHEN THIS PD WAS DONE ABOUT 20 YEARS AGO.
AND THE RESULT HAS BEEN AN INCREASINGLY WALKABLE, INCREASINGLY MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT, WHICH I THINK IT, IT HAS A GREAT FABRIC IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, UM, OF THE OPINION THAT REQUIRING TOO MUCH PARKING, UM, ACTUALLY IS DETRIMENTAL TO WALKABILITY AND TO THE FABRIC OF A NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT.
YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A CREDIBLE STUDY THAT SAYS THAT THE 363 SPACES IS MORE THAN ADEQUATE.
UM, BECAUSE OF ALL THE FACTORS THAT HAVE BEEN DESCRIBED, YOU KNOW, THAT A LOT MORE PEOPLE LIVE IN THE DESIGN DISTRICT.
A LOT MORE PEOPLE STAY IN HOTELS IN THE DESIGN DISTRICT THAN THEY DID, YOU KNOW, 15, 20 YEARS AGO.
[00:40:01]
NEIGHBORHOOD, THESE ARE RESTAURANTS THAT THEY CAN WALK TO.I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE WANNA FOSTER MORE AND MORE OF IN DALLAS.
DON'T HAVE ENOUGH OF THAT NOW.
SO I, IN SUMMARY, I THINK THIS MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
I THINK THE STUDY DEMONSTRATES THAT THIS IS MORE THAN ENOUGH PARKING, YOU KNOW, THE MIX OF USES.
THE, THE RESTAURANTS WILL PROBABLY BE MORE PEAK HOUR IN THE, IN THE EVENING, MAYBE SOME AT LUNCH, YOU KNOW, OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE, THAT'S VERY LOW PARKING DEMAND GENERATION.
SO I, I THINK THIS WORKS WELL.
UM, THE CITY'S OWN ENGINEER HAS NO OBJECTION TO THIS.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IN MY OPINION, IT MEETS THE STANDARD, UH, THAT'S REQUIRED IN THE CODE.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE DEMAND DOES NOT WARRANT THE AMOUNT OF SPACES THAT OTHERWISE WOULD BE REQUIRED.
SO I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU APPROVE THIS.
DID YOU HAVE ONE
UM, THE FIRST WAS FOR THE OTHER TWO COMPARABLE CENTERS, WERE THE AVAILABLE SPACES LIKEWISE REDUCED VIA SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR WAS THAT, UH, UH, RATIO OF SPACES REQUIRED BY THE USE AND SIZE OF THE CENTER? SO, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION AND I HAVE THAT SAME QUESTION.
I, I I CAN ADD ONE INTERESTING OBSERVATION THOUGH.
PER SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING BUILDING 1444 HAS THE MOST PARKING.
UM, NEXT QUESTION, IN TERMS OF HOW THE NUMBERS WERE TABULATED, WAS THAT AN INDIVIDUAL OR INDIVIDUAL DOING SORT OF A PERSONAL, UH, COUNTING OF IT? OR DID YOU USE SOME TYPE OF ELECTRONIC TOOL? IT WAS ME.
THEN YOU CAN ANSWER THE NEXT QUESTION, WHICH WAS, UH, OBVIOUSLY ONE OF THE, THE FACTORS WE NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT IS ABOUT A TRAFFIC HAZARD OR INCREASE OF CONGESTION ON ADJACENT AND NEARBY STREETS.
DID YOU OBSERVE, UH, EVEN DURING PEAK TIMES THAT FOR THESE OTHER TWO COMPARABLE CENTERS, THAT THERE WAS ANY SORT OF ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC HAZARD OR CONGESTION EVEN DURING THEIR PEAK TIME? NO, I DID NOT.
AND IT'S INTERESTING ON 1444, OAKLAWN ITSELF IS NO PARKED ON BOTH SIDES.
SO THANK YOU MR. VICE CHAIR MY QUESTIONS.
UM, YOU CAN DECIDE WHO, WHO CORRECTLY I HAVEN'T READ THE PD 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO OUR OWN RESEARCH, HAVE WE? SO WHEN YOU SAY THE, THE PD CONTEMPLATES A 50% SPECIAL EXCEPTION, IT IS THAT TO SAY THAT THERE'S ALREADY A 50 50% DATE IN, OR, I MEAN, IT, IT'S, IT'S ALL, I MEAN, ANYBODY CAN ASK FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
YOU DON'T NEED PD TO ASK THAT.
SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT, THAT WHEN THEY WROTE THE PD, THEY CREATED 50% AND SAID, WE'LL BASICALLY ALLOW UP TO 50% ON THE STANDARD OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION INSTEAD OF A VARIANCE? OR WHAT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? SO, PD 6 21 IS A CITY SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT.
SO THIS WAS AN AREA THAT THE OWNERS SAID, HEY, CITY, WE NEED A PD.
'CAUSE WE HAVE UNIQUE SITUATION.
A LOT OF IT WAS THE OLD RAIL BEDS THAT WANTED TO BE UTILIZED.
AND, UM, I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST FREQUENTLY REVISITED PDS SINCE I'VE BEEN IN DALLAS, SINCE 2004.
UM, SO THEY'VE KIND OF GROWN IN THEIR VISION AND IN THEIR ABILITY TO MAKE THOSE REDUCTIONS, UM, AND BAKE THEM INTO THE PD.
SO THERE'S A VARIETY OF THINGS.
THE DELTA CREDITS, WHICH MOSTLY BENEFITS THOSE SMALLER SHOWROOM KIND OF USES THE, THE LITTLE GUYS.
UM, THERE'S, UM, SOME SITE SPECIFIC REDUCTIONS THAT WERE NOT IN THAT VICINITY.
UM, SO IT IS A VERY ROBUST PD FOR PARKING.
IF I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION WELL VISION, I DON'T, I WAS NEVER A PLANNER ON THOSE CASES.
I'M JUST TRYING TO UN UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEANT.
MAYBE LET ME GET AT IT A DIFFERENT WAY.
WHEN, UH, PARKING IS CALCULATED IN THIS PD, IS IT DONE IN THE TRADITIONAL ONE PER HUNDRED RESTAURANT, ONE FOR 200 RETAIL? OR IS THERE AN OVERARCHING, LIKE SOMETIMES YOU SEE ONE FOR TWO 50? YEAH.
HOW, HOW ARE THEY DONE? SO THEY, THEY DID, UM, MODIFY CERTAIN USES.
UM, RESTAURANT WAS ONE, MULTIFAMILY ONE.
UM, SO MULTIFAMILY, FOR EXAMPLE, IS ONE AND A HALF SPACES FOR JOINING IT.
THEY'RE GONNA APPLY HERE, BUT, UH, OFFICE INSTEAD OF ONE TO 3 33 IS ONE TO 3 58 MM-HMM.
UM, BUT YOU ALSO REQUIRE, UM, UM, RIGHT, THIS, UH, I JUST THINK IT'S INTERESTING ONE PER 1 0 5 AS OPPOSED TO ONE PER HUNDRED.
SO THAT, THAT'S PART OF WHY I THINK, UM, THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR, AND A GOOD TOOL FOR US TO USE IN THIS
[00:45:01]
SPECIAL EXCEPTION BECAUSE WE ARE PROVIDING SUCH A MIX OF USES 1 0 5.I THINK I UNDERSTAND, BUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS WE DIDN'T START OUT WITH A 50% REDUCTION.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT AMOUNTS TO REDUCTION ON TOP, RIGHT? THERE'S, THERE'S VARIOUS REDUCTIONS THAT ARE BUILT IN AND SOME VARIOUS CREDITS, BUT IT'S, IT'S A BROAD AREA TOO.
IT'S NOT JUST THIS AREA, THIS, THIS
UM, IF, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO CLARIFY THAT WE ARE HOPING TO PROVIDE RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICE USES WITHIN THE, THE PROPERTY SO THAT THERE COULD BE, YOU KNOW, A BARBER OR SALON OR THOSE TYPE OF THINGS THAT WOULD SERVE A NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, SO IN YOUR MOTION, IF YOU WERE TO APPROVE THAT, IT'S THE RETAIL CATEGORY, UM, NOT JUST GENERAL MERCHANDISE.
THAT WAS OUR INTENT WAS TO HAVE A BROAD MIX OF USES.
WELL, WHAT DOES THE REQUEST SAY? THAT'S, THAT'S WELL JUST SAYS.
WE'LL, UM, I ASSUME THIS YOU COMMUNICATED.
UH, ARE THERE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? NO, THE SPEAKERS REGISTER, SIR.
UM, I'LL GIVE YOU THE OPTION TO COME, YOU KNOW, ABOUT YOURSELF.
UH, HAVE, ARE WE OKAY? THANKS.
CLOSE THE, THE HEARING AND TAKE A MOTION.
UH, VICE CHAIR ACKMAN, I HAVE A MOTION.
I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 9 1 ON APPLICATION OF JENNIFER RITO.
GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO PROVIDE 363 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES TO THE OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED, WHICH REQUIRES 661 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES 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 A RESTAURANT WITHOUT A DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE RETAIL OFFICE OR SHOW THEM, I FURTHER MOVE THE FOLLOW CONDITION BEING IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF 298 SPACES SHALL AUTOMATICALLY AND IMMEDIATELY TERMINATE IF AND WHEN THE PROPOSED USE IS CHANGED OR DISCONTINUED.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
I HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION, BUT YOU SAID, UH, THE MOTION ALLOW FOR RETAIL WITHOUT DRIVE-THROUGH COMMA SOMETHING, SOMETHING ELSE, RIGHT? SO YOU MEAN RETAIL WITHOUT DRIVE-THROUGH NOT RETAIL, WITHOUT DRIVE-THROUGHS AND TWO OTHER THINGS.
RIGHT? DO YOU MEAN THAT IT IT IS MEANT TO INCLUDE THE NEXT THING? YES.
TO CLARIFY THE PROPOSED USES COULD BE, UM, ONE OR MORE OF ONE A RESTAURANT WITHOUT A DRIVE-IN OR DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE TWO RETAIL THREE OFFICE OR FOR JOE.
AND AGAIN, IT COULD BE SOME COMBINATION THERE, RIGHT? IS THERE A SECOND? SINGTON? MR. SINGTON SECOND DISCUSSION, MR. SLAVE? UH, I FELT LIKE THE APPLICANT WAS ABLE TO JUSTIFY THE NEED AND THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE BEFORE US INDICATES THAT IT WOULD, UM, SATISFY THE STANDARD TO BE
UH, I DON'T, UH, YOU KNOW, WE LOOK AT IT, YOU'RE A LITTLE WORRIED IT BECOMES SOMETHING LIKE LAKEWOOD VILLAGE, BUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SAY THAT CASE AND THIS IS YOU DO HAVE, UH, REASONABLE AMOUNT OF APARTMENTS AND, UH, UH, WALKABLE OFFICE.
UM, I, I'M ALWAYS SENSITIVE WHEN WE DO THIS BECAUSE FOR EVERY ONE WE DO LIKE THIS, IT MAKES IT LESS LIKELY THAT THE NEXT ONE GETS DONE BECAUSE THERE'LL BE MORE USE.
BUT THAT'S NOT WITHIN OUR PURVIEW.
I DON'T HAVE ANY REASON TO SEE, UH, I DID READ THE LETTER IN OPPOSITION, BUT I THINK BECAUSE IT'S CONTAINED, IT'S A BIG LOT.
UM, UH, AND I I HAVE A MR. DENMAN'S TESTIMONY.
I DON'T, I DON'T THINK WE'RE UE HARMING MAY BREAK UP.
OH, MR. S UH, WELL, NOT THAT I HAVE MUCH
[00:50:01]
TO SAY, BUT, UH, COUNSEL GAVE US SOME ADDITIONAL, UM, INFORMATION EARLIER.IN THE EXCEPTION DOES NOT CREATE A HABIT.
I MEAN, BY GRANTED THIS EXCEPTION ALONE DOES NOT CREATE AN ADDITIONAL HAZARD.
SO I, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, TO THE TESTIMONY OF THE APPLICANT, THEY'RE ABLE TO, UM, CONVINCE ME THAT IT DOESN'T CREATE ANY ADDITIONAL HARDSHIP TO ANY SURROUNDING PROPERTY.
SO WE'RE ESSENTIALLY SAYING GREENS OVER ON, RIGHT? IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY.
UH, NEXT CASE IS BD 2 3 4 DASH 0 8 7 8 7 3 ANGORA STREET.
IF YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT THAT, EITHER FOR OR AGAINST, WOULD YOU STAND INM BE SWORN IN.
ONCE YOU SWORN IN, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
87 0 3 AGORA, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 8.
UH UH, WE GOT AN AIRPLANE AND A AND A CLONE TIRE.
WELL, THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.
UH, I'D LIKE TO JUST SHED SOME LIGHT ON OUR PROJECT THAT WE'D LIKE TO DO.
UM, THIS IS, UM, AN EXISTING, UH, BUILDING IN THE BACK OF OUR, UM, IN THE BACK OF OUR PROPERTY THAT WAS AN OLD, UM, GARAGE.
SO WE'RE JUST ADDING ONTO THAT FOR MY MOTHER, UM, TO, TO MOVE INTO AND, UM, BE A PART OF, YOU KNOW, RAISING OUR LITTLE GIRL AND ET CETERA.
UM, SO WE DO PLAN TO STAY AT THE PROPERTY, UM, SO THAT OUR DAUGHTER CAN GO TO THE LOCAL ELEMENTARY.
UM, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS, UM, QUITE UNIQUE.
UH, LITTLE FOREST HILLS, UM, HAS A LOT OF ADUS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THE HOUSES FOR THE MOST PART ARE PRETTY SMALL.
I KNOW THAT'S, UM, ODD FOR THIS, FOR THIS CITY, BUT, UM, AND THAT'S WHY, UH, THERE WAS A QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT ADDING, YOU KNOW, 125 SQUARE FEET TO THE MAIN HOUSE TO, UM, MEET THE SECOND, UH, VARIANCE AND THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
AND I JUST THINK THAT AFTER STUDY OF THE HOUSE, IT'S JUST, WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT AS SMALL AS WE CAN.
UH, 'CAUSE 125 SQUARE FEET IS, IS ABOUT 10% OF THE CURRENT HOUSE.
SO, UM, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
UM, AND JUST ANOTHER THING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, MY, ACROSS THE STREET NEIGHBOR, SHE HAS A STUDIO OVER HER GARAGE.
UM, SO THAT'S PRETTY LOCALIZED TO OUR STREET.
AND THEN JUST A QUICK LOOK AT SOME OF THE OTHER, UM, PROPERTIES AROUND, THERE'S TWO OR THREE WITHIN, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE BLOCKS THAT, UM, THAT ARE STUDIOS AND APARTMENTS.
YEAH, WE UH, I KNOW WE DO, BUT MR. S CAN YOU OKAY.
UH, I HAVE, SO YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE TWO REQUESTS.
ONE IS THE RIGHT TO HAVE THE A DU CORRECT.
WHICH IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND A PRETTY LOW STANDARD.
THE VARIANCE REQUEST, WHICH IS TO HAVE IT IN A CERTAIN SITE IS A TOUGH STANDARD.
UM, AND IT'S ONE THAT, THAT WE HAVE A, A LOT LESS LEEWAY ON.
UH, AND THE REASON I THINK YOU WERE HEARING THAT QUESTION IS BECAUSE THIS IS THE STANDARD THE STAFF OBJECTED TO.
UM, UH, BECAUSE WITH THOSE, UH, ONE OF THE SIZE DIFFERENCES, YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO ASK FOR THAT.
[00:55:01]
NEED US.AND AS MUCH AS WE KNOW YOU'RE HAPPY TO BE HERE, NOT MEETING US IS PROBABLY NUTS
UM, UH, SO JUST, I, I WANNA, I THINK YOU UNDERSTAND THAT.
UM, DO YOU IT'S IN MY PACKAGE, SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE SIZE OF THE LOT.
UM, DO YOU KNOW NO
ALL I'M TRYING TO DO IS GET TO LOT COVERAGE.
IT'S A LOW LOT COVERAGE WE DO.
UM, NO, UM, THE STAFF'S, UH, POSITION IS, IS THAT YOUR LOT IS NOT UNLIKE OTHER LOTS.
UH, DO YOU HAVE, FOR EXAMPLE, UM, A MAP THAT HAS THE DIMENSIONS OF WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER TO BE SIMILAR, LOTS, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT MIGHT HAVE SIMILAR LOT COVERAGE? UH, COULD THERE A WAY YOU COULD MAKE AN ARGUMENT THAT YOUR LOT IS DIFFERENTLY SHAPED THAN OTHERS? YES, IT IS DIFFERENTLY SHAPED, BUT IN SUCH A WAY AS TO RESTRICT YOUR ABILITY TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT OTHERS COULD, COULD IT IS DIFFERENT IN THE FRONT, NOT THE BACK.
UM, HOW IN THE FRONT IT IS, IT'S UM, IT'S CURVED.
IT'S PART OF A CURVE OF THE STREET.
UM, BUT IN THE BACK, IT, IT IS, DO YOU THINK THAT THAT CURVE IN THE FRONT MAKES IT, UH, MAKES IT HARDER FOR YOU TO, UM, SITUATE, UM, A HOUSE THAT SAY MIGHT FIT ON SIMILAR PROPERTIES? DO YOU THINK IT RESTRICTS YOUR ABILITY TO BUILD, DOES IT RESTRICT YOUR ABILITY TO SAY, BUILD YOUR HOUSE BIGGER OR THE BACK HOUSE SMALLER BY, BY VIRTUE OF THE SIZE AND SHAPE AND THE DIFFERENCE IN YOUR LOT FROM OTHERS? I WOULD SAY YES.
UM, THE, THE SETBACK REQUIRED, UM, DOES THE CURVE.
AND SO I WOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD, YOU KNOW, THE MAIN HOUSE BIGGER IN THE DIRECTION OF THE STREET IF I DIDN'T HAVE THAT CURVE.
SO, UM, ARE, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE CURVATURE OF THE STREET, WHICH FORCES YOUR PROPERTY TO BE FURTHER BACK THAN MAYBE THE PROPERTY NEXT TO YOU THAT CURVATURE CAUSES YOU TO HAVE TO YOUR PROPERTY TO BE SET BACK FURTHER THAN OTHER PROPERTIES AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY CAUSING WHAT YOU WANT TO DO WITH WHAT YOU'RE REQUESTING TO NEED, WHAT YOU COME IN TO ASK FOR TODAY, IS THAT, IS THAT YOUR TESTIMONY? Y YES.
SO DOWN THE, YOU KNOW, EVEN RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO US AND THEN EVEN THIS HOUSE NEXT TO, YOU KNOW, TWO STREETS OVER, OR TWO HOUSES OVER, SORRY.
THEY'RE FOR, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE FURTHER FORWARD TO THE STREET THAN WE ARE.
UM, SO, SO THE RESTRICTION OF THE CURVATURE, UM, IS CAUSES, CAUSES, CREATES THAT, UM, DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR PROPERTY AND YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY? CORRECT.
UH, I DON'T, I ASSUME THEY'RE NOT SPEAKERS AGAINST OR NOT, THERE'S ALL THE SPEAKERS REGISTERED, SIR.
I, I ASSUME YOU HAVE SAID WHAT YOU WANNA SAY.
YOU, YOU TECHNICALLY HAVE A REBUTTAL IF YOU'D LIKE TO, YOU CAN USE IT, BUT, OKAY.
UM, THAT SAID, UH, MAY I HEAR A MOTION?
[01:00:03]
I'LL MAKE IT, UM, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN REQUEST MEMBER BDA 2 3 7 DASH OH EIGHT SEVEN.UH, I WANNA MAKE SURE I'M, I'M MAKING THE CORRECT MOTION.
UM, WHERE'S MY SPECIAL EXCEPTION MOTION? OH, THAT'S SO, OKAY.
UH, IN THE CASE OF UH, 2 3 4 DASH OH EIGHT SEVEN ON APPLICATION OF CATHERINE GOWAN GRANT THE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT ON THE SITE DEVELOP OF THE SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATIONS IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED THE APPLICANT MUST DEED RESTRICT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, PREVENT THE USE OF THE ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT AS A AS RENTAL ACCOMMODATION.
YOUR ARGUMENT ALL SECOND, MR. SLATE SECOND.
SO THIS IS THE MOTION TO ALLOW THE A DU COMMENTS.
UH, I FELT THE APPLICANT SATISFIED THE STANDARD HEREBY IDENTIFYING THAT IT DIDN'T ADVERSELY AFFECTING OUR OWN PROPERTY.
AND JUST BY LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN, THERE'S DOESN'T EVEN LOOK AS THOUGH YOU'D BE ABLE TO SEE IT FROM ANY PARTICULAR AREA, ET CETERA.
SO FELT IS SUPPORTING THIS ONE.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER B BDA 2 3 4 DASH OH EIGHT SEVEN ON APPLICATION OF CATHERINE GOWAN GRANT, THE 31 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE FLOOR AREA RATIO REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS 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 THAT FURTHER MOVED 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 SITE PLANS IS REQUIRED.
IS THERE SEC? ALL SECOND MR. SLATE SECONDS.
THIS IS A HARDER STANDARD, UH, WAS CONVINCED BY THE APPLICANT'S TESTIMONY THAT THE, UH, CURVATURE, UH, OF HER LOT, UH, MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT THAN THE MOST AVERAGE OF LOTS FOR HER TO BILL.
I WAS ALSO PERSUADED THAT, UM, SHE COULD HAVE MOED THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE BY ADDING SQUARE FOOTAGE TO HER HOUSE AND THE BURDEN ASSOCIATED WITH HER COURTS WITH SORT THAT EXPENSE IN TIME AS WELL.
UM, AND THE DESIRE NOT TO HAVE TO UNDERGO THAT IT TO PENALIZE THE HAS EXISTING SITE.
IT'S NOT THE NORMAL KIND OF QUESTION.
WE'RE ASK OTHER COMMENTS, MS. WILLIAMS? MR. S AYE.
UM, ALRIGHT, NOW WE GO BACK TO BRIEFING.
UH, THIS IS, UH, BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 7 9 9 3 3 3 4 EAST RL THORNTON FREEWAY.
UH, REQUEST AN APPLICATION OF JORDAN CORBETT FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE PARKING REGULATIONS.
AND AGAIN, HERE IS A QUESTION WHERE WE ASK ABOUT HAVING FOUR PEOPLE AS OPPOSED TO FIVE, JUST KNOWING ONE VOTE MEANS NO ONE NO VOTE MEANS NO.
SO ARE THERE SPEAKERS IF, IF FOUR OR AGAINST THE APPLICANT'S? OH, I'M SORRY.
[01:05:03]
HAS THE APPLICANT INDICATED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO POSTPONE IT? UH, WE STILL HAVE TO BRIEF IT, BUT KNOWING THAT HELPS WE DO THAT ORDER OF ADJUSTMENT CASE BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 7 9 AT 9 3 3 4 EAST HORNE FREEWAY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PRIMARY METRIC FOR 47 DAYS.SO THE LOCATION OF THE SUBJECT SIDE IS DENOTED BY THE YELLOW STAR ON THE CITY OF DALLAS MAP AND IT IS NORTH OF SAMUEL BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF I 30 FRONTAGE ROAD EAST OF ST.
FRANCIS AVENUE AND WEST OF BIG TOWN BOULEVARD.
THE AERIAL MAP IS TO YOUR LEFT AND IT HAS A SUBJECT SITE OUTLINED IN BLUE AND THE ZONING MAP IS TO YOUR RIGHT AND IT HAS A SUBJECT SITE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW.
AND, UH, THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE RR ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH STANDS FOR REGIONAL RETAIL.
SO IN TOTAL, 12 PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED.
ONE SECOND, ONE SECOND, I'M GONNA PULL THIS OFF THE SCREEN.
BOARD OF JESSICA CASE BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 7 9 AT 9 3 3 4 EAST R THORNTON FREEWAY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PRIMARY METRIC OF 47 DAYS.
THE LOCATION OF THE SUBJECT SIDE IS DENOTED BY, BY THE YELLOW STAR ON THE CITY OF DALLAS MAP AND IT'S NORTH OF SAMUEL BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF I 30 FRONTAGE ROAD EAST OF ST.
FRANCIS AVENUE AND WEST OF BIG TOWN BOULEVARD.
SO THE AERIAL MAP IS TO YOUR LEFT AND IT HAS THE SUBJECT SITE OUTLINED IN BLUE AND THE ZONING MAP IS TO YOUR RIGHT AND IT HAS THE SUBJECT SITE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW.
AND THE, UM, SUBJECT SIDE IS LOCATED IN THE RR, WHICH, UH, ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH STANDS FOR REGIONAL RETAIL.
SO IN TOTAL, FIVE PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED, OH, IN TOTAL PROP FIVE, UM, PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED.
WE RECEIVED ZERO LETTERS OF SUPPORT AS WELL AS ZERO LETTERS OF OPPOSITION WITHIN THE 200 FOOT RADIUS.
THE SUBJECT SITE HAS STREET FRONTAGE OFF OF THREE SEPARATE STREETS.
THE, UM, FIRST BEING I, OR ACTUALLY THEY HAVE IT'S, IT HAS STREET FRONTAGE OFF OF TWO SEPARATE STREETS, BUT THERE WERE, UM, SEVERAL NOTIFICATION SIGNS.
UM, AND YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT ALL THE NOTIFICATION SIGNS WERE PROPERLY POSTED.
IN TOTAL IT'S ONE DEVIATION, WHICH IS A REQUEST FOR THIS, UH, FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A NON-RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE FOR A HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER AND PROVIDE 422 OF THE REQUIRED 512 PARKING SPACES, WHICH WILL REQUIRE A 90 SPACE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE PARKING REGULATIONS, WHICH IS, UH, EQUIVALENT TO AN 18% REDUCTION.
AND THE RELEVANT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMES FROM SECTION 51 A DASH
[01:10:01]
4.311 A, WHICH UH, SPEAKS TO SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.AND IT STATES THAT THE, UH, THE MAXIMUM REDUCTION AUTHORIZED BY THIS SECTION IS 25% OR ONE SPACE, WHICHEVER IS GREATER, MINUS THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES CURRENTLY NOT PROVIDED DUE TO DELTA CREDITS AS DEFINED IN SECTION 51 A DASH 4.704.
AND THERE IS NO BDA HISTORY FOUND AT THIS SUBJECT SITE IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
SO THE NEXT SLIDE IS A RELEVANT INFORMATION.
THE NEXT SLIDE IS RELEVANT INFORMATION.
SO I KNOW THAT THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS PREVIOUSLY, UM, FROM THE BOARD WHEN THIS, UH, CASE WAS PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED, UM, ABOUT WHETHER, I MEAN, HOW MANY LOTS THE SUBJECT SIDE CONTAINS.
SO, UM, JUST TO BREAK DOWN ORIGINALLY, YOU'LL, WE'LL, ACTUALLY BEFORE I START THAT, SO THE FOCUS NOW IS, UM, THE, CAN YOU GUYS SEE THE, THE MOUSE? OKAY, SO THIS IS WHAT I'M SPEAKING TO NOW.
SO ORIGINALLY THE, UH, AT THE VERY BEGINNING WHEN THE SUBJECT, OR EXCUSE ME, WHEN THE APPLICANT PURCHASED THE SUBJECT SITE, IT EXISTED AS TWO SEPARATE LOTS.
UM, ONE BEING THE TOP ONE, ONE AT NORTH ONE, EXCUSE ME.
UH, WHICH IS, WHICH WAS ADDRESS 9 3 3 4 EAST R THORNTON IN THE BOTTOM ONE, WHICH WAS ADDRESS 5 6 6 5 SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD.
SO WHEN THE APPLICANT PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, THEY SUBMITTED A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVISION AND UM, THE PURPOSE OF THAT PLAT WAS TO, UH, PLAT TWO LOTS INTO ONE TRACT OF LAND AND MAINTAIN TWO LOTS ON THE PROPERTY WHILE MODIFYING THE INTERNAL LOT LINE AS SHOWN ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
SO HERE'S THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER.
SO, UH, BASICALLY WHAT THEY DID, THEY MADE IT ONE ENTIRE TRACT OF LAND, WHICH IS RECOGNIZED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS AS PRELIMINARY PLAT AS 2 3 4 S 0 3 1, WHILE MAINTAINING TWO LOTS.
AND, UM, WHILE MAINTAINING THOSE TWO LOTS, THEY, THEY MODIFIED THE, THE LOT LINES.
SO INSTEAD OF IT BEING A NORTH AND SOUTH, OR EXCUSE ME, NOT NORTH AND SOUTH, BUT INSTEAD OF IT BEING, UM, DIVIDED, HOW YOU SEE ON THE FAR LEFT, IT'S NOW DIVIDED HOW YOU SEE ON THE TOP RIGHT AND THE, THE BOTTOM RIGHT BOTTOM.
SO IS WHAT YOU SEE, WHAT'S, UH, DESCRIBED AS LOT TWO IN THE GREEN, RIGHT? YES.
MM-HMM?
SO THE FOCUS IS LOT ONE, THE FOCUS THAT WE'RE, UM, THE FOCUS OF PDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 7 9 IS LOT ONE, NOT LOT TWO.
SO IT'S RECOGNIZED AS ONE PLAT, ALL OF IT, ALL OF IT IS ONE PLAT, BUT TWO SEPARATE LOTS.
AND THE LOT THAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON TODAY IS LOT ONE.
IT'S PRELIMINARY, IT'S RECEIVED PRELIMINARY APPROVAL.
THAT MEANS THERE'S COMMUNICATION, COMMUNICATION HAS STARTED.
BUT CHAIR, IF I COULD ADD IT, I DID SPEAK AND CONFIRM WITH THE BOARD COUNCIL OF THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION THAT THIS, UH, FOR THIS CASE, THESE LOTS ARE, HAVE BEEN, UH, IN UNDER AN APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT.
AND I HAD THE SAME QUESTION THAT YOU DID IN THE, IN THE ANALOGY WE CAME UP WITH, IS THAT THESE TWO LOTS ARE ENGAGED.
WHEN THE PLAT IS APPROVED, THEY ARE MARRIED.
SO THEIR MARRIAGE HASN'T OCCURRED YET, BUT THE ENGAGEMENT IS ON.
AND THAT'S WHAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, THAT'S THE ANALOGY THAT WE CAME UP WITH.
UM, AND SO IF EVERYTHING GOES AS PLANNED, THE THE TWO LOTS WILL BECOME, BUILD SOME UNITED, RIGHT.
AND, AND, AND, AND, AND IT BECOMES MOOT FOR PURPOSES OF YOUR CONCERN.
BECAUSE IF THE MARRIAGE DOES NOT OCCUR, IF THESE ARE NOT UNITED, RIGHT, UH, THE PLA DOES NOT GO THROUGH, THEN, UM, IT IS MOOT.
THEY CANNOT BUILD WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR ANYWAY.
SO IT GIVING THEM THE, UH, THEIR IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, GIVING THEM THEIR SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UH, WILL BE MOVED.
SO, OKAY, SO HERE PURPOSES WHAT I'M, I'M, WHAT I'M SAYING IS YOU'RE GOOD TO GO FOR YOUR PURPOSES.
SO HERE'S WHY I'M ASKING IF IN FACT THE APPLICANT HAS POTENTIAL TO HAVE A BIGGER LOT TO PARK ITS USE AND INTENTIONALLY DECIDES TO REDUCE THAT LOT TO CARVE SOMETHING OUT, TO HAVE A DIFFERENT USE THAT WOULD BE LEGAL.
UH, DOES THAT BECOME SELF-CREATED, OR TO WHAT DEGREE DO I HAVE TO EVALUATE THAT? UH, WHEN I LOOK AT, LOOK AT, AT A REQUESTED PARKING REDUCTION, BECAUSE IT CERTAINLY FEELS SELF-INFLICTED, BUT A HARDSHIP IS, IS NOT AT ISSUE.
BUT SO TO, SO THE SELF-CREATED ASPECT IS FOR A VARIANCE AND WHAT NO, I KNOW THAT.
AND, AND SO THE, THE ELEMENTS FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION ARE THE
[01:15:01]
ONES THAT WE WENT OVER EARLIER IN THE HANDOUT, WHICH DOES NOT HAVE A SELF-CREATED ASPECT.SO EXCEPT I DO SHOULD CONTEMPLATE THE EFFECT OF MY ACTION, WHICH WOULD BE TO ALLOW A, ANOTHER USE ON THIS LAND.
SO IT'S NOT JUST NOW THE USE AT HAND, IT'S THAT THERE IS, I HAVE WHAT EXISTS AND WHAT PROPOSES TO EXIST.
PRESUMABLY WHAT PROPOSES TO EXIST IS BASED ON APPROVAL HERE.
UH, SO IF I APPROVE HERE, THE CONS, DIRECT CONSEQUENCE OF THAT IS THAT I, I AM SAYING, HEY, THERE'S MORE LAND THAN YOU ACTUALLY NEED HERE TO PARK, AND BY VIRTUE OF THAT, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LEGALLY DO SOMETHING WITH THIS, THIS OTHER LOT.
WHEREAS I DON'T, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW I, HOW I DEAL WITH THAT VICE.
ARE YOU ASKING THE QUESTION OF WHAT WOULD BE THE SITE PLAN THAT WE WOULD CONDITION ANY APPROVAL TO? BECAUSE THE NOTION WOULD BE LIMITING IT ONLY TO THE HOME IMPROVEMENT USE AND NOT NECESSARILY TO ANY OTHER USE CONTEMPLATED BY THE GREEN.
YEAH, SO NOT PORTION OF THE TRACK REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT USE.
UM, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT TRACK AND IF, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU TOOK A HOLE PRINCIPLE, A A HOLE, UH, THE CITY HAS SAID TO HAVE THIS MANY SQUARE FEET OF WHATEVER, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS MANY PARKING SPACES.
AND BECAUSE PARKING SPACES ARE THIS LONG, THIS WIDE, ET CETERA, UH, THE SIZE AND SHAPE OF THE LAND ESSENTIALLY LIMIT HOW BIG THE BUILDING WOULD BE.
BUT IF YOU, SO BY VIRTUE, I ASSUME THE SITE PLAN WE'D LOOK FOR IT WOULD ESSENTIALLY NOT HAVE PARKING ON WHAT'S CARVED OUT.
SO THAT I, I ASSUME THAT, SO MY STANDARD IS WHAT WILL THE, THE EFFECT OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION BE? NOT THE EFFECT OF WHETHER SOMETHING IS IN BUSINESS OR GOES THERE.
UM, AND I'M AWARE OF WHAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER.
IT FEELS LIKE THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
A LOT DIFFERENT BECAUSE WHETHER, WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING GOES SOMEWHERE, ALTHOUGH I I REALISTICALLY, I THINK THEY'RE, THEY'RE SAYING IT WILL, I AM DEALING WITH A REDUCED SPACE, WHICH OKAY, THAT MAKES SENSE.
IF YOU COME TO A, FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, YOU ARE ESSENTIALLY SAYING, I NEED LESS SPACE.
I'M WEIGHING HOW TO HANDLE THE FACT THAT, OKAY, FIRST QUESTION IS DOES THE, THE PROPERTY PARK, WELL, THE QUESTION AT HAND HAS TO DO WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN TO THE NEIGHBORING AND TRAFFIC.
ALRIGHT, SO WHAT'S THE DIRECT CONSEQUENCE OF MY DECISION IF I SAY YES, WELL, I FREE UP OTHER LAND, PROBABLY NOT GONNA SIT THERE VAGUELY.
AND I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO HANDLE THAT WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S MEMO.
UH, BUT MAYBE PER THE TESTIMONY, AND FRANKLY I'VE INTERRUPTED YOUR BRIEFING, SO MAYBE IT BECOMES, BUT THE ANSWER IS, IT IS PRELIMINARILY ONE LOT AND BY ALL ACCOUNTS, THAT PRELIMINARY FLAT TO HAVE ONE, I BELIEVE MEANS STAFF HAS APPROVED IT AND IT HAS TO GO TO CPC.
IS THAT TRUE? STAFF HASN'T, DOES IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN IT STAFF.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN? LIKE THE DIFFERENT TRADES OR CPC PRELIMINARY PLAT, IT WAS APPROVED IN CPC.
OH, IT'S ALREADY, IT WAS PRE, THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WAS APPROVED IN CPC.
SO PRESUMABLY IF THE APPLICANT WENT FORWARD, THIS WOULD, BUT THIS ISN'T REALLY JUST CONCEPTUAL, RIGHT? IT RECEIVED PRELIMINARY APPROVAL, UM, ON JANUARY 18TH BY CPC.
SO JUST TO REITERATE, THE YELLOW MAP
[01:20:01]
TO THE LEFT WAS WHAT THE SITE USED TO BE WHEN IT, WHEN IT EXISTED AS TWO SEPARATE LOTS.THE YELLOW MAP WITH THE GREEN PORTION TO THE RIGHT IS WHAT THE SITE WAS PROPOSED TO, UM, EXIST AS.
AND IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT THAT'S RIGHT ABOVE WHERE YOU SEE APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT IS, UM, IT WAS THE APPROVED VERSION OF WHAT WAS PROPOSED AT THE TOP RIGHT.
SO THE PROPOSED PLAN WAS TO PLAT THE TWO SEPARATE LOTS IN A ONE TRACT OF LAND AND MAINTAIN TWO LOTS ON THE PROPERTY WHILE MODIFYING THE INTERNAL LOT LINE AS SHOWN ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY CPC ON JANUARY 18TH, 2024.
SO HERE IS THE PROPOSED NON-COMPLIANT SITE PLAN, AND HERE'S THE PROPOSED, UH, COMPLIANT VERSUS NON-COMPLIANT SITE PLAN.
SO COMPLIANCE WOULD, UH, JUST INCLUDE PROVIDING ALL 512 THE OF THE REQUIRED PARKING SPACES.
SO, UM, WE'LL START WITH THE RUNDOWN OF THE PARKING SPACES PER ALL THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
UM, A TOTAL OF 514 PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED FOR THE LOT BECAUSE OF THE, UH, 12 BIKE RACKS.
UM, THERE IS A TWO TWO PARKING SPACE REDUCTION, WHICH, UH, BRINGS THE TOTAL PARKING SPACE REQUIRED, UH, MINUS THE BIKE REDUCTION, UM, TO 512.
SO THE TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED IS 422.
SO 512 MINUS THE 422 PROVIDED LEADS WITH 90 SPACES.
SO THAT'S THE PARKING REDUCTION AND THAT'S EQUIVALENT TO THE 18%, WHICH IS WHAT THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING.
THIS IS THE FRONT PERSON PICTURES ARE GONNA BE, UM, I 30 FRONTAGE ROAD PROPERTIES TO THE EAST, NORTHEAST, NORTH, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT SITE NORTHWEST.
YOU CAN STILL SEE A PORTION OF THE SUBJECT SITE, WEST, SOUTHWEST, ACROSS THE FREEWAY AND SOUTHEAST.
NEXT UP WE'RE GONNA BE PICTURES OFF OF BUCKNER BOULEVARD PROPERTIES THROUGH THE EAST NORTHEAST.
YOU CAN SEE THE SUBJECT SIDE NORTH, AGAIN, THE SUBJECT SIDE, NORTHWEST WEST, SOUTHWEST SOUTH, AND SOUTHEAST.
SO NEXT UP IS GOING TO BE THE 200 FOOT RADIUS VIDEO.
WE'RE GONNA START ON I 30 FRONTAGE ROAD AND THE SUBJECT SIDE IS GONNA BE VISIBLE IMMEDIATELY.
UM, AND YOU CAN FIND THE ROUTE TO THIS PATH ON PAGE ONE 13 OF THE DOCKET 13.
SO THE SUBJECT SITE IS THIS BUILDING HERE.
ARE YOU, UH, ARE YOU THINKING THE VIDEO'S FINE? UH, YEAH.
SO THE SUBJECT SIDE IS MANILA BUILDING WITH THE RED LETTERS ON IT TO THE RIGHT.
SO THIS IS OUR 30 FURNITURE AND WE'RE GONNA MAKE A RIGHT ONTO THAT.
AND THEN WE'RE JUST GONNA CIRCLE THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT SITE TO THE RIGHT.
SO THAT'LL BE THERE FOR A WHILE.
AND THEN THE CROSS IS THE FREEWAY.
AND HERE WE'RE MAKING A RIGHT INTO WHAT TURNS INTO BUCKMAN.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS STILL TO OUR RIGHT TO THE NOTIFICATIONS SIGN IN.
SO THIS DEAD ENDS HERE, HUH? YES.
SO LIKE ALL TRAFFIC HAS TO THEN TURN BACK INTO THIS SITE.
SO THERE IS CURRENTLY A DEAD END THERE.
WE'LL HAVE TO ASK WHETHER IT'S TEMPORARY, WHAT THE HECK IS GOING ON.
THAT'S, YEAH, I'M NOT SURE I REMEMBER THAT THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT IS DOING THINGS.
[01:25:01]
I DON'T KNOW WHAT, BUT I DO RECALL THAT, UM, WE'RE STILL AT THE SUBJECT SITE.THE LARGE BUILDING IS HERE ALSO THIS PORTION HERE IS ALSO A PART OF THE SUBJECT SITE.
SO WE'RE GETTING READY TO DRIVE OFF OF THE SUBJECT SITE ONTO, UM, STAN'S PARKING LOT.
I, I FORGOT ON THAT SITE PLAN.
DOES THIS EGRESS THAT YOU'RE SITTING AT RIGHT NOW, IT STILL EXIST? DOES THIS PORTION, IS THIS, UH, ON THAT SITE PLAN? CAN YOU GET OUT OF IT FROM THE BOTTOM? JUST LIKE SHE DID? DID YOU CROSS SOME SHARED EXIT ON THAT SITE PLAN ON THE SITE PLAN? IT LOOKS LIKE GET OUT.
ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE SHARED EXIT? UM, YEAH, I'M ASKING LITERALLY ABOUT THE EXIT YOU JUST TOOK.
LIKE, SO WHAT WAS THE QUESTION ABOUT IT IN THE SITE PLAN? DOES THIS EXIT CLOSED? NO, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S THE EXIT RIGHT HERE.
ACTUALLY, LET ME, LET ME GO BACK TO SEE WHERE WE'RE, ANYBODY HAVE THE SITE PLAN? ROD, WHAT DOES IT SAY? LIKE, HANG ON.
SO IN THE SITE PLAN IN RED HERE IS THE, THE DEAD END.
SO YEAH, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S STILL HERE.
THAT'S THE DEAD ENDS TO THE LEFT.
WHAT'S, UH, THAT LOOKS LIKE SAM'S MM-HMM.
WE'RE GETTING READY TO TURN IN THE SAM'S PARKING LOT HERE.
YOU CAN SEE THE END OF THE SUBJECT SIDE.
WE'RE THE STEADY, STEADY VIDEO FOR YOU ALL.
SUBJECT SIDE IS IN THE BACK WHERE I'M CIRCLING, AND NOW WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE SIDE OF SAM.
WE CAN SEE WE REACT ON THAT SIDE.
AND THEN STRAIGHT AHEAD IS WALMART'S PARKING LOT.
IS THERE AN INTERCONNECTION BEYOND THE ONE YOU TOOK? LIKE COULD YOU GET BACK TO THE SUBJECT SITE FROM HERE WITHOUT GOING ON MAIN ROADS? UM, JUST DON'T HAVE A SENSE OF THAT.
SO IF YOU TURNED RIGHT, WE TURNED RIGHT.
I'M TALKING LIKE YOU COULD ACTUALLY DO IT TURN RIGHT, SO WE'RE NOT GONNA DO IT.
BUT YOU THERE IS A WAY TO CUT THROUGH THE PARKING LOT.
SORRY, BUT THE POINT WAS TO, UM, FOR YOU ALL TO SEE HOW, OR I GUESS THE, UM, NO, YOU DISTANCE BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT BECAUSE I KNOW THAT, UM, WALMART AND SAM PARKING LOTS WERE BROUGHT UP PREVIOUSLY.
WE'RE GONNA END HERE AT THE SUBJECT SITE.
ANYONE WANT TO RUN THAT BACK OR ARE WE GOOD? OKAY.
STANDARDS OF REVIEW FOR DECISION MAKING COME FROM SECTION 51 A DASH 4.311, WHICH STATES, UM, OR OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT STATES THAT, UM, THE BOARD MAY GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO AUTHORIZE A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF OFF STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED UNDER THIS ARTICLE.
IF THE BOARD FINDS AFTER A PUBLIC HEARING THAT THE PARKING DEMAND GENERATED BY THE USE BY THE USE DOES NOT WARRANT THE NUMBER OF OFF STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED AND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD OR INCREASED TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS STAFF PROVIDES NO RECOMMENDATION AS THIS IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
AND THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
[01:30:01]
CASE BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 7 9 AND 9 3 3 4 EAST R THORNTON FREEWAY.UH, WE NOW CALL THE CASE AND WE'LL PROBABLY LOOK TO STAFF TO, TO SEE WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO, WE ULTIMATELY HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION BY BOAT, BUT SEE WHETHER THEY'RE GONNA ASK US TO POSTPONE.
UH, THIS IS BDA 2 3 4 DASH 7 9 9 3 3 4 EAST RL FREEWAY, UH, APPLICATION OF JORDAN CORBET FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION DEPARTMENT REGULATION.
IF YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK, PLEASE BE SWORN IN, EITHER FOR OR AGAINST.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE COURT OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DID.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
DO DO YOU WANT TO BE SWORN IN AS THIS MEETING? NO.
LET'S SAY YOU DO
JORDAN CORBETT? UH, 1565 DRIVE.
UM, MR. VICE CHAIR MEMBERS THE BOARD, I APPRECIATE YOU ALL BEING HERE TODAY.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO EFFECTIVELY REQUEST A HOLDOVER FOR THIS PROJECT FOR REGARD, UH, OUR NEXT MEETING IS IN OCTOBER.
WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION.
NO, THE SPEAKERS, RIGHT, MR. JUDGE, SO I COULD MAKE A MOTION.
COULD I MAKE A MOTION WITHOUT CLOSING THE HEARING? LET'S SAY I MAKE A MOTION AND THE BOARD DECIDES NOT TO HOLD IT OVER AND TO HEAR IT.
WHAT'S THE DATE ON IN OCTOBER, DO YOU KNOW? I DON'T.
I MOVE, UH, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND CASE OF, UH, BDA 2 3 4 DASH OH 7 9 9 3 3 4 EAST RL THORNTON FREEWAY.
HOLD THIS CASE UNTIL OUR MEETING ON OCTOBER 21ST, 2024.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT.
I DID IT BECAUSE WE HAVE FOUR PEOPLE.
I DID IT BECAUSE THERE ARE FOUR PEOPLE AND WHEN THINGS AREN'T CONTENTIOUS, AND THIS IS, I HATE FOR, UH, ONE PERSON TO BE ABLE, UH, TO END IT.
UH, I WOULD RATHER HAVE ALL OF US HERE.
AND I THINK IT JUST WOULD ALSO ALLOW A LITTLE MORE TIME FOR THE UPDATED SITE PLAN TO KIND OF SETTLE IN FOR US TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING.
IN ANSWER, MAYBE THOSE QUESTIONS ABOUT, ABOUT, I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT I APPRECIATE THAT, UH, AS A RESULT OF OUR LAST SETTING, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED THE PARKING STUDY.
APPRECIATE I BE SO, AND I ALSO ASSUME WE DIDN'T HAVE NOTICE ISSUES THIS TIME, WHICH I ALSO APPRECIATE ZIP TIES WORK REALLY WELL.
SAYS ZIP TIES WORK REALLY WELL.
I DID READ ABOUT A, A, A PERSON RUNNING FOR OFFICE WHO STARTED ATTACHING UH, AIR TAGS TO THEIR BIG SIGNS.
SO, UH, OTHER DISCUSSIONS SHOULD WE VOTE? DISCUSSION.
OKAY, MS. WILLIAMS, MR. MILLIKEN? AYE.
MOTION PASSES TO POLL FOUR TO ZERO.
UH, MY, OUR, OUR ATTORNEYS HAVE ASKED FOR A BRIEF RECESS, UH, TO DISCUSS SOMETHING.
HOW LONG, UH, SO WE WILL RECONVENE AT 2:50 PM TODAY.
IT WAS 2:57 PM UH, PANEL IS BACK IN SESSION.
[01:35:01]
BDA 2 3 4 DASH OH 8 3 1 0 1 0 STRAIGHT LANE APPLICATION ROB BALDWIN FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION DEFENSE HEIGHT REGULATIONS, SPECIAL EXCEPTION DEFENSE OF PASSENGER REGULATIONS AT STRAIGHT LANE AND FOR A SPECIAL ACCEPTION OF DEFENSE OPACITY REGULATIONS AT WALNUT HILL LANE AND FOR A SPECIAL ACCEPT OF DEFENSE HEIGHT REGULATION.UH, I DIDN'T LOOK TO SEE WHO'S BREATH THE CASE THAT YOU, OKAY.
SO BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 8 3 1 0 0 1 0 STRAIGHT LANE, UH, WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICE, UH, PINE METRO 63 DAYS.
AND SO THE STARS OF THE VICINITY MAP IS CORRECT.
IT IS NORTH OF WALNUT HILL, UH, SOUTH OF RURAL LANE, EAST OF MIDWAY AND WEST OF INWOOD ROAD.
UH, THE AERIAL MAP, UH, IS TO THE LEFT OUTLINING IN BLUE, UH, WHERE WALNUT HILL BEING TO THE SOUTH AND ZONING DISTRICT IS R ONE ACRE.
THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 13, UH, HOMEOWNERS, UH, NOTIFIED IN THE 200 FOOT RADIUS ONE OF SUPPORT AND ONE IN OPPOSITION.
WE HAVE MULTIPLE LETTERS THAT WERE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, BUT THEY WERE NOT IN THE 200 GREATEST WHY YOU DID NOT SEE THEM NOTED ON THE SHEET AND YOU WILL NOT SEE IT.
THEY ARE IN THE PACKAGE THOUGH.
JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT WHY YOU DON'T SEE THEM ON THE NOTE AND YOU WILL NOT SEE THEM ON THE NEXT SLIDE.
SO, UM, THE ONE OF SUPPORT IS AT THE CORNER OF LYNDHURST AND STRAIGHT LANE AND IN THE ONE OPPOSITION IS AT CORNER ACROSS THE STREET FROM WALNUT HILL AND STRAIGHT LANE.
UH, THE FIRST DEVIATION IS FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE FENCE HEIGHT REGULATIONS.
UH, THE APPLICANT PROPOSED TO CONSTRUCT AN OR MAINTAIN 11 FOOT THREE INCH HIGH FENCE AND A REQUIRED FRONT YARD ALONG STRAIGHT LANE, WHICH WAS REQUIRED SEVEN FOOT THREE INCH SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FENCE HEIGHT.
UH, THE SECOND IS FOR A FENCE STANDARD.
UH, THE APPLICANT PROPOSED TO CONSTRUCT IT ON MAINTAINING A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FENCE STRUCTURE AND A REQUIRED FRONT YARD WITH A FENCE PANEL HAVING LESS THAN 50% OPENING, UM, ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGE OF STRAIGHT LANE.
THE THIRD IS ESPECIALLY ACCEPTED TO DEFENSE STANDARD REGULATIONS THAT A PROPOSED TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN, UH, A FENCE HAVING LESS THAN 50% OPENING.
UH, AND THIS IS THE LONG WALNUT LANE, I'M SORRY, WALNUT HILL LANE.
UH, THE FOURTH DEVIATION IS FOR SPECIAL EXCEPT TO THE FENCE SITE REGULATIONS AND THE APP PROPOSED TO CONSTRUCT AN OR MAINTAIN A LEVEL FOOT HIGH FENCE, UM, ALONG WALNUT HILL.
AND THAT'S FOR SEVEN FOOT THREE HIGH.
UH, THIS IS A NOTIFICATION ALONG STRAIGHT LANE AND WALNUT HILL.
UH, SO THIS IS THE FULL SITE PLAN, THE YELLOWER IDENTIFIED AS THE LOCATION OF THE FENCE.
SO, UM, IT KIND OF HIGHLIGHTS AS IT GOES THROUGH, UM, THE 11 FOOT THREE INCH HIGH IRON GATE AND FENCE IS IDENTIFIED AT THE LOCATIONS.
UM, AND THE, THEN THERE IS THE 20 FOOT VISIBILITY.
TRYING TO JUST SHOW THAT WE ARE CLEAR OF THAT AS WELL, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE.
UH, THE 45 VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, WHICH WE'RE CLEAR OF AS WELL.
AND THEN A LONG WALL HERE WITH SIX SIX ENTIRE FENCE.
SO, UH, THE COLORS THAT YOU SEE LIKE PURPLE, GRAY AND ORANGE, YOU WILL SEE THOSE ON THE NEXT COUPLE SLIDES AND IDENTIFY THE LOCATION FOR THE FENCE AND THE HEIGHT.
UH, THIS IS MORE OF AN ENLARGED MORE DETAIL, UM, LOCATION OF EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING ON.
UH, SO THERE'S YOUR 11 FOOT PORTION, UH, THE SIX FOOT SIX HIGH DECORATIVE METAL FENCE, UH, IS THE MAJORITY OF IT.
UM, BUT THERE IS, LIKE I SAID, A PORTION OF 11 FOOT THREE INCH HIGH AND A LONG WALNUT HERE, THE SIX FOOT SIX INCH.
AND SO AGAIN, THE COMPLIANCE, UM, FOR A FRONT YARD WILL BE FOREFOOT AND THAT PORTION THAT IS 11 THREE IS THE NON-COMPLIANT PORTION.
AND THEN THESE ARE ENLARGED OF DETAILS OF YOUR OFFENSE.
[01:40:01]
AND THE MAJORITY OF WHAT I HAVE WAS SIMILAR TO WHAT THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO REPRESEN PRESENT AS WELL.I'LL LET THEM TELL SOME OF THE OTHER AREAS AS WELL, BUT FOR VISUAL IS PRETTY SIMILAR.
UM, BUT, AND SO, UH, THIS IS THE EXISTING HOUSE THAT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION THEN OVERSIZED LOT OR, UH, LARGE LOT.
UH, THIS IS FURTHER DOWN CLOSER TOWARDS WALNUT DEAL AND THIS IS LOOKING SOUTH, UH, WITH THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY TO THE RIGHT, THE ONE THAT'S IN OPPOSITION, NORTHWEST NORTH LOOKING, UH, ALONG STRAIGHT LANE BACK TO THE SEVENTH SIDE.
UH, THIS IS LOOKING FROM WALNUT HILL.
THE CREEK JUST RUNS BEHIND THE PROPERTY.
UH, THIS IS ACROSS THE STREET WHERE THE SCHOOL NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
AND THEN WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THE, UH, 200 FOOT RADIUS VIDEO.
SO THIS IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD BEHIND THE PROPERTY.
UM, WE'LL APPROACH WALNUT HILL, MAKE A RIGHT AND THEN ANOTHER RIGHT ON STRAIGHT LANE.
SO WE'RE APPROACHING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO OUR RIGHT.
UM, THIS IS CROSSING THE CREEK HERE THAT RUNS BEHIND IT.
THAT'S THE, THIS BRIDGE THAT THIS, THE WHITE CAR AHEAD IS STRAIGHT LANE ON, STRAIGHT ON, UH, WALNUT.
YEAH, IT PRETTY MUCH FLEW THROUGH, UH, VIDEO.
[01:45:10]
I'M PRETTY ALL TOO SMALL, SMALL FOR ME, OR I'M TOO OLD FOR, UH, WHAT THAT MEANS.UH, LEGAL STANDARDS, WE CAN ASK THAT.
UH, THERE ARE FOUR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
NO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS MADE, UH, ON THIS OR ANY REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE DEFENSE REGULATIONS SINCE THE BASIS OF, FOR THIS TYPE OF APPEAL IS WHEN IN OPINION OF THE BOARD ESPECIALLY EXCEPTION WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ING PROPERTY.
AND THIS CONCLUDES BDA 2 3 4 DASH 83 1 0 0 1 0 STRAIGHT LINE.
MR. THAT MR. SLATE WAS STAFF ABLE TO ASCERTAIN THE HEIGHT OF THE POSTS AND THE PROPERTY THAT WAS IMMEDIATELY FACING THE SUBJECT SITE? UM, IMMEDIATE ACROSS THE STREET? YES.
SO IMMEDIATE ACROSS ON STREET LANE.
UM, LOOKING AT THE, UM, PRESENTATION FROM THE APPLICANT, UH, IT WOULD BE IDENTIFIED.
UM, NO ONE'S STILL OUT THERE FROM LIGHTEN HECK OF A PICTURE.
AT THIS POINT WE ARE NOW IN THE PUBLIC HEARING PART OF BDA 2 3 4 DASH 8 3 0 0 1 0 STRAIGHT LANE.
PLEASE SWEAR MR. BALDWIN, ARE THERE OTHER SPEAKERS IN THIS CASE? NO OTHER SPEAKERS, SIR.
NOT FOR OR AGAINST OTHER THAN MR. BALDWIN? NOPE.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
MY NAME IS ROB BALDWIN, OFFICE AT 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS.
AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER IN THIS REQUEST.
MR. THOMPSON DID A GREAT JOB SHOWING WHERE IT IS.
WE'RE ON THE CORNER OF STRAI AND WALNUT HILL.
AS YOU KNOW, WALNUT HILL IS A MAJOR EAST WEST THOROUGHFARE, UH, BUSY STREET.
WE'RE ASKING FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR FENCES, BOTH LONG WALNUT HILL AND STRAIGHT LINE.
SO THE INTERESTING THING IS IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE ASKING FOR A WHOLE LOT OF FENCE BECAUSE IT SAYS IT'S 11 FEET, THREE INCHES TALL.
HOPEFULLY I'LL BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE TO YOU THROUGH MY PRESENTATION THAT JUST A VERY SMALL PORTION OF IT IS THAT TALL, UH, AT THE GATES.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE TO DEAL WITH, UH, SLOPE.
UH, IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, YOU MEASURE A HYPER FENCE ON THE INSIDE AND THE OUTSIDE OF THE FENCE.
AND THE HIGHEST IS THE, THE HEIGHT.
AND IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE SLOPE LEADING INTO THE SITE AND WE HAVE RETAINING WALLS.
SO MOST OF THE FENCE, AS YOU'LL SEE, IS SIX FOOT, THREE INCHES TALL, AND MOST OF IT IS OPEN.
IT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION TODAY.
UH, SAME THING, UH, THE HOUSE.
UH, I'LL GET TO THE ONE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE HERE IN JUST A SECOND.
THAT'S THE ONE THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER SLATE ASKED ABOUT.
I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ONE.
THIS SHOWS THE MAKEUP OF THE FENCE, VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT MR. THOMPSON DID.
UM, EVERYTHING IN GREEN HERE IS SIX FOOT, THREE INCHES TALL, OPEN FENCE.
THE EVERYTHING IN THE, THE CYAN COLOR TO THE RIGHT THAT IS SOLID, BUT SIX FEET TALL.
BUT THAT IS RIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION OF TWO MAJOR, WELL MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND A COLLECTOR STREET RIGHT AT THE CORNER OF, UH, STRAIGHT AND WALNUT HILL.
THE AREA IN PURPLE IS A MIXTURE OF OPEN AND SOLID.
UH, AND IT, AS YOU'LL NOTICE, IT'S ALSO PUSHED BACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
THAT'S WHERE IT GETS, UH, TALL, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S ON EITHER SIDE OF, OF THE GATE AND THE GATES ARE PUSHED BACK.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY, UH, ENCROACHMENTS INTO THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, JUST THE FENCE HEIGHT.
UM, AND, UH, A PORTION OF THE, THE FENCE THAT IS WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE, THE, THE PROPERTY LINE AND SOLID IS JUST THAT LITTLE AREA IN BLUE OR CYAN AT THE VERY END BEFORE IT STARTS MAKING THE, THE TURN TO, TO THE EAST.
SO A VERY SMALL PORTION OF THE FENCE THAT'S SOLID WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE.
THIS IS A VERY BUSY SLIDE, BUT THAT JUST SHOWS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AT THE GATES.
[01:50:01]
THE, THE PORTION, IF YOU CAN SEE, OH, ACTUALLY I'LL GET TO IT IN IN THE NEXT SLIDE.SO THIS SHOWS THE MAJORITY OF THE FENCE OPEN, SIX FEET, THREE INCHES TALL.
ACTUALLY BEFORE YOU JUMP TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
WOULD YOU MIND GOING BACK ONE, UH, ONE MORE FORWARD PLEASE.
UH, THERE ARE A COUPLE KIND OF SPOTS ALONG THE TOP ON THE BOTTOM THAT SEEM ALMOST DARKER.
AM I CORRECT THAT THOSE ARE JUST KIND OF SMUDGES AND THAT THE CONSISTENCY OF THE TYPE OF THE FENCE IS THE SAME THROUGHOUT? IT JUST MAYBE IS CURVING? EXACTLY.
IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST WHERE THE, UH, IT'S AN OBLIQUE ANGLE AT THAT POINT.
SO, SO IT'S A, JUST A CONSISTENT SPREAD SPACED OUT FENCE, JUST, IT'S THE SAME SP FENCE PANELS.
BUT THANK YOU FOR FOR CLARIFYING THAT MR. BALDWIN.
SO THIS IS THE, THE PART OF THE, THE FENCE THAT IS, UH, WE'RE ASKING FOR AN ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL.
IT'S JUST THESE, IT, IT'S, UH, ARCHITECTURAL METAL THAT, THAT, UH, HAS THE SAME COLOR AND CONSISTENCY OF THE DECORATIVE, UM, METAL FENCE.
BUT IT, IT'S JUST, IT, IT IS TO ADD VARIATION TO THE FENCE SO IT DOESN'T LOOK SO MASSIVE.
THIS IS A, AN OVERALL SITE PLAN OF THE SITE.
THE INTERESTING THING IS, YOU'LL GET TO MY VERY LAST SLIDE, IS YOU'LL SEE THAT EVERYTHING IS PUSHED FORWARD.
AND I UNDERSTAND A LOT OF THE LETTERS IN OPPOSITION.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE HOUSE AND NOT SO MUCH THE FENCE.
AND THE REASON IS, IS MOST OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE FLOODPLAIN, AND SO THE HOUSE HAS TO BE PUSHED TOWARDS STRAIGHT LANE.
AS, AS YOU'LL KNOW IN THIS PORTION, PRESTON HOLLOW, MOST OF THE TIME HOUSES ARE PUSHED AWAY FROM THE STREET.
BUT IN THIS CASE, AS YOU'LL SEE, MY LAST SLIDE, WE REALLY COULDN'T DO IT.
BUT I WANNA SHOW YOU THIS TO SHOW THAT WE'RE REALLY NOT OVERBUILDING THE SITE AND I THINK THAT THE FENCE IS VERY THOUGHTFULLY DONE.
THESE ARE OTHER HOUSES IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY THAT HAVE FENCES TALLER THAN FOUR FEET.
WE ARE IN THE THE LIGHT GREEN.
THIS IS THE HOUSE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET AND, UH, IT'S LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF WALNUT HILL AND STRAI.
AND THE FENCES ARE BETWEEN SEVEN AND A HALF AND NINE AND A HALF FEET, UH, TALL.
AND THEY HAVE, UH, OPEN PICKETS BETWEEN UP BUT THERE, AND IT'S ALSO SOLID AS IT TURNS TO CORNER WALNUT.
THIS IS CASE, CASE I SAW ON OUR LAST HEARING.
PARDON ME? IS THIS THE CASE WE SAW ON OUR LAST HEARING, THAT PROPERTY YOU JUST SHOWED IT.
THIS THIS PROPERTY IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.
IF I'M LOOKING AT MY PROPERTY, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE SAW LAST HEARING.
UH, YOU WEREN'T REPRESENTING YEAH, YOU WERE, I WASN'T REPRESENTING THOSE PROPERTY.
YOU WERE REPRESENTING A PROPERTY THAT WAS ON ROYAL.
YEAH, PRESTON HALL HAS BEEN VERY GOOD TO ME OVER THE YEARS.
UH, BUT, BUT AS YOU'LL SEE ON THE NEXT SLIDE, IT'S SOLID AND TALLER THAN WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING ALONG WALNUT HILL.
THIS IS, UH, ANOTHER ONE THAT'S JUST NORTH OF US ON THE WEST, AND IT'S, UH, SIX AND A HALF FEET TALL COLUMNS.
AND THEN, UH, A FENCE THAT'S ABOUT NINE AND A HALF FEET.
AND THEN, UM, THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, IS STRAIGHT, ANOTHER ONE ON STRAIGHT LANE.
THAT IS, UH, SIX AND A HALF TO SEVEN AND A HALF FEET TALL IN THE FRONT YARD.
OPAQUE, UH, THAT WAS THAT ONE FARTHER NORTH.
AND FINALLY THE, THE NEXT SLIDE IS SURRY OAKS, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO US ALONG WALNUT HILL.
YOU'LL SEE THEY HAVE A SOLID FENCE THAT'S SEVEN FEET, TWO INCHES TALL.
AS I WAS SAYING, EVERYTHING IN THE CYAN COLOR IS THE BUILDABLE AREA.
EVERYTHING IN GREEN IS A FLOODPLAIN.
THAT IS WHY THE HOUSE IS PUSHED TO THE STREET.
IT MEETS THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT, IS THAT THEY THINK WE'RE BUILDING TOO CLOSE TO THE STREET.
BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S ALL WE HAVE TO BUILD WITH.
SO, UH, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I KNOW THE APPLICATION THAT SOUNDS SCARY FOR 11 FOOT, THREE INCH TALL FENCE, BUT SUCH A SMALL PORTION OF THIS IS THAT MOST OF IT IS SIX FEET, TWO INCHES AND OPEN.
UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE SING.
MR. BALDWIN, HOW ARE YOU TODAY? GREAT, GOOD TO SEE YOU.
UM, COULD YOU JUST TALK ME THROUGH THE PURPOSE OF THE SOLID AT THE CORNER THERE? THE SOLID WALL AT THE CORNER AS IT, UH, AS IT COMES TO, UH, WHERE YOU, WHERE YOU HAVE THE 45 DEGREE.
TO BLOCK WHAT? TO BLOCK HEADLIGHTS AS WHEN PEOPLE ARE COMING ON WALNUT HILL AND TURNING ONTO STRAIGHT, UH,
[01:55:02]
STRAIGHT LANE.I'M, I'M, I MEAN, I, I DON'T KNOW, I, IT IS HARD TO GET A PERSPECTIVE ON DISTANCE FROM JUST FROM THE SITE PLAN, BUT WE DON'T NEED VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, RIGHT? NO, NO, NO.
WE'RE NOT ENCROACHING VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.
IT'S, IT'S, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE SOLID WALL THERE, IT'S, UH, PROTECTION FROM HEADLIGHTS AND ALSO ANYBODY WHO MIGHT BE RUNNING INTO IT AS A, UH, AS A SECURITY YEAH.
AND YOU COULDN'T DO THAT WITH THE WROUGHT IRON.
UH, IF THE BOARD WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE DO IT, THE WR IRON, WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS AREA RIGHT HERE? YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.
UH, THAT'S ONE OF THOSE, WE'D PREFER TO HAVE IT SOLID, BUT IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD PREFER TO SEE AS DECORATIVE IRON, WE WILL BE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
YEAH, I MEAN, PERSONALLY, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S YOUR PROJECT AND OB OBVIOUSLY IT WAS SUBJECT TO THE ENTIRETY OF THE, UM, YOU KNOW, OF THE BOARD HERE.
BUT IF THAT WOULD HELP US GET THERE, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
YOU THINK IT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL IN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES TO DO I THINK IT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOR STANDARD? DO I THINK IT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO, I I THINK THAT, UM, AT LEAST FOR THE, UM, FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE LETTERS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED, THE, THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS FEEL THAT IS DETRIMENTAL, UM, UH, TO THE ALL MEANS.
I, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT CHANGE THEN.
MR. BALDWIN, IF I ZOOMED IN ON THAT SPORTS COURT, WOULD I SEE THE NUMBER SEVEN? SEVEN? WELL, THAT IS OKAY.
UM, OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. MILL, MR. BALDWIN, UH, DO YOU RECALL WHAT THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY THAT WAS THERE BEFORE THAT WAS SCRAPED? WAS IT ALSO OUT OF THAT FLOOD, SAME FLOOD PLAIN? I, I BELIEVE IT WAS.
UH, I KNOW THAT THIS IS BACHMAN BRANCH AND AS DEVELOPMENT OCCURS UPSTREAM, THIS, THE FLOODPLAIN GETS WIDER AND IT'S BEEN STEADI.
SO IT COULD HAVE BEEN THAT THE PREVIOUS HOUSE, UH, THE FLOODPLAIN WAS NARROWER BACK THEN, BUT YEAH, I WOULD ASSUME IT'S IN THE SAME GENERAL LOCATION.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE CHANGED THAT MUCH.
OTHER QUESTIONS FROM MR. BALDWIN? MR. SLAVE? THANK YOU.
ARE THERE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION, MS. WILLIAMS? NO.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO USE YOUR REBUTTAL? I JUST WANNA, UH, REITERATE THAT I'D LIKE TO MODIFY MY PROPOSAL TO HAVE THAT, UH, THAT SOLID PORTION OF THE FENCE AT THE INTERSECTION OF WALNUT HILL AND STRAIGHT TO BE DECORATIVE IRON TO MATCH THE REST OF THE FENCE, UH, IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO IT.
DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT HERE NOW? 'CAUSE WE'RE GONNA HOLD YOU TO SITE AN ELEVATION PLAN, RIGHT? SITE AND ELEVATION IN THE PAST, IF I, IF I CAN SAY SO WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO ALTER THE PLAN BY PUTTING A NOTE ON THE PLAN SAYING THIS SECTION IS NOW DECORATIVE IRON.
THAT'S TO MATCH THE EXISTING WORD PROPOSED.
UM, MAKE THE CORRECTIONS ON THE SITE PLANS THAT WE HAVE TODAY, AND THEN HIM PROVIDE REVISIONS FOR THE PLANNERS TO, UM, STAMP THOSE PLANS.
LET'S JUST MAKE SURE WE, WE CORRECTLY REFERENCE IT IN ANY MOTION IF WE WERE TO APPROVE IT.
SO MAYBE YOU, DO WE NEED TO CHANGE A MOTION IF WE DO, IF YOU CHANGE, WELL, I, I ASSUME WE'RE GONNA HAVE THAT, THAT MOTION.
IS THERE A MOTION? MR. SLAVE? UH, VICE CHAIR? A CHAIR MOTION.
I MOVE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 83 ON APPLICATION OF BOB BALDWIN.
GRANT, THE REQUESTING THIS APPLICANT CONSTRUCTING OR MAINTAIN AN 11 FOOT THREE INCH HIGH FENCE ON STREET LANE IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT FOR FENCES CONTAINED IN DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT BE, WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED FURTHER.
THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE BALANCE DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH HEIGHT INTENSE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED, THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
DO YOU INTEND TO MAKE THE MR. BALDWIN'S MODIFICATION OR NO? I DON'T BELIEVE WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS ONE BECAUSE IT PERTAINS TO THE, OH, I'M SORRY.
[02:00:02]
MR. MILLIKEN? AYE.DO I HAVE A SECOND MOTION? MR. SLATE? THAT'S YOUR
UH, I'M GONNA TAKE THESE SLIGHTLY OUT OF ORDER SO THAT WE DEAL WITH THE COMPLICATED.
UM, SO FOR THOSE WATCHING AT HOME, I'M DOING MOTION 4 0 4.
I MOVE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 8 3 ON APPLICATION OF ROB BALDWIN BRANT REQUESTING THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT UNDER OR MAINTAIN 11 FOOT THREE INCH HIGH FENCE ON WALNUT HILL LANE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF THE HYPERCAR OFFENSES CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS AMENDED BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF NOT ADVERSELY EFFECT ON PROPERTY.
NOW FURTHER MOVE, FOLLOW CONDITION BEING IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENTS OF DENIAL DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH HEIGHT AND FENCE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED IN MOST RECENT VERSION WHILE SUBMITTED.
PLANS FILED REPLY AG OF SECONDS.
DISCUSSION NONE SPRING MR. SLATE.
MR. S AYE MR. VICE CHAIR? AYE.
I MOVED TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 8 3 ON APPLICATION ROB BALDWIN.
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 LINE AT STRAIGHT LANE AS SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF THE SURFACE AREA OPENNESS REQUIREMENT FOR DEFENSES IN DALLAS DEVELOPMENT.
EVALUATION OF PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWED THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT PROPERTY FURTHER CONDITION.
BE POST FOR PURPOSE INCENTIVE DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH OPACITY AND FENCE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED IN THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ON STRAIGHT LANE ARE REQUIRED.
MR. S BAZAR MOST RECENT PLAN LANGUAGE NOT SOLVE THE ISSUE, CALL IT AMENDED SITE.
ARE WE, LET'S FIRST ASSUME WE HAVE A MOTION, MR. S UH, WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING FOR WORDSMITH.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BD 2 3 4 DASH 0 8 3 ON APPLICATION ROB BALDWIN GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN DEFENSE PANEL HAVING LESS THAN 50% OPEN SURFACE AREA LOCATED LESS THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT BLOCK LINE AT WALNUT LANE IS SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE SURFACE AREA OPENED THIS REQUIREMENT FOR DEFENSIVE IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT OF, BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWED THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AMOUNT OF ADVERSELY AFFECT NUMBER OF PROPERTY FURTHER REMOVE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BEING PUT FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENTION.
DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH OPACITY AND DEFENSE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED P ARE REQUIRED.
AND UNLESS THE APPLICANT SEEKS TO REPLACE, UM, THE CURRENTLY VIEWED, UH, BRICK WITH A WR IRON FENCE TO MATCH THE STYLE, UH, ELSEWHERE IN THE CURRENT SUBMISS YES.
THAT THE MOTION, WHERE IS THE MOTION, UNLESS THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE IT, BUT TO AFFORD THE APPLICANT THE RIGHT TO MAKE A CHANGE FOR NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE EXPRESSED DESIRE FOR THAT.
SO MEMBER SLATE, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU NO, HE'S GIVEN HIM IF THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND HE'S, HE'S VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT HE SAID.
SO YOU YOU'RE JUST ASKING FOR THE MOTION, GIVING THEM WHAT THEY WANT WITH AN OPTION ESSENTIALLY.
UH, WE DON'T HAVE SET HEARING NONE MOTION FAILS.
UH, I GUESS I'M GONNA TRY, MY ATTEMPT IS TO DO EXACTLY WHAT HE DID, EXCEPT I WANNA SAY THAT, THAT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THE WR IRON FENCE IN THE TANK, NOT THE OPTION.
THAT IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO.
[02:05:03]
YES, IF YOU, IF YOU WOULD, UH, I AT WALNUT HILL LANE IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SURFACE AREA OPENNESS REQUIREMENT FOR FENCES IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE OPPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
UM, COMPLIANCE AND OPACITY AND FENCE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS AND ILLUSTRATED, THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS WERE REQUIRED PROVIDED HOWEVER, THAT IN LIEU OF THE CON, UH, FREE MASON WALL NEAREST THE WALNUT HILL, LANE B, THE WALNUT HILL STRAIGHT LANE INTERSECTION BE CONTINUED IN THE FORM OF THE ROT IRON FENCE WHILE PERMITTING, UM, MORE, LESS THAN 50% OPEN SURFACE AREA FOR THE POSTS TO PROVIDE FOR HIM.
MR. SLATE, UM, I'LL, I'LL SECOND THE MOTION TO DISCUSS, IF WE SIMPLY DENIED THIS MOTION, THEY WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THE WR ISLAND RIGHT? NOT WITH POSTS.
WE HAVEN'T APPROVED THOSE POSTS, CORRECT? THAT'S THE HEIGHT, RIGHT? YOU'RE TALKING NO, IT'S ALSO IT'S THE OPACITY REQUIREMENT.
FOR THE COLUMNS? NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.
IT'S IN BETWEEN THE TWO COLUMNS.
THAT'S THE OPACITY, THE OPAQUE PORTION OF IT.
SO, OH, IF THEY WERE TO DENY THE OPACITY ISSUE FOR MOTION THREE, WHICH IS THE OPACITY ISSUE ALONG WALL AND HILL LANE, THAT WOULD JUST BE NOT ALLOWING THE OPACITY IN BETWEEN THE COLUMNS, BUT THE COLUMNS WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED WOULD STILL BE AT 11 FOOT, YOU'D JUST BE DENYING THE OPACITY IN BETWEEN THE COLUMNS, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO, AND THOSE, ARE THOSE COLUMNS GONNA STAY AS BRIT COLUMNS OR ARE THEY GONNA ALSO BE BROAD IRON? I WAS ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A MOTION TO ALLOW THEM TO HAVE THEM BE THE, THE BRICK COLUMNS JUST FOR PURPOSES OF THE, THAT'S WHY THE MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
BUT I THINK THAT'S ALREADY BEEN COMPLETE AND ACCEPTED.
'CAUSE I DON'T FEEL LIKE THE, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, THAT THE OPACITY WAS IN REGARDS TO THE COLUMNS, BUT IN REGARDS TO DEFENSE AND THE COLUMNS WERE SAFE, SO TO SPEAK.
IS THAT A CORRECT INTERPRETATION? IF THE MOTION IS DENIED, CAN THEY HAVE THE COLUMNS AS THEY I THINK IT'S LOCATION, IT'S THAT SPECIFIC LOCATION BECAUSE THE MOTION REFERS TO THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION OR INTERSECTION.
SO I SIGN YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE.
I AGREE WITH THAT INTERPRETATION.
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL.
I I DO APPRECIATE MR. SLADE'S ATTEMPT TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT WE'RE SAYING.
SO WE'RE DISCUSSING, MAY I MODIFY THE MOTION? ABSOLUTELY.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND MY MOTION AND I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND FROM THE PORTION OF I FURTHER MOVE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF DENIAL DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH OPACITY AND DEFENSE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED.
THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED PROVIDED HOWEVER, IN LIEU OF, UH, A BRICK FENCE, THE APPLICANT MUST CONTINUE THE WR IRON FENCE AND MAINTAIN THAT OPACITY THROUGHOUT THIS SECOND TURN FROM STRAIGHT LANE TO WALNUT HILL AND DOWN.
MR. STON SECONDS, THE AMENDMENT, UH, WE VOTE.
DO WE NOW JUST VOTE ON THE AMENDED MOTION? WE DON'T HAVE TO ACTUALLY ACCEPT APOLOGIES, BUT I BELIEVE THE OTHER MOTION WAS FOR OPACITY ON STRAIGHT LANE AND THAT WAS APPROVED WAS IT NOT? SO THE OPACITY, IS THAT CORRECT? DID I MISS CORRECTLY? NO, THIS IS THE ONLY OPACITY YOU'RE CORRECT.
UM, I WAS CLARIFYING THAT IT WAS THE, AS YOU TURN AND ARE ON WALNUT BILL COMPONENT.
IT'S GONNA BE UP TO MS. MARKING TO MAKE SURE THAT PLAN DO SAYS WHAT
[02:10:01]
THE INTENT IS OUR TIME, SO WE'RE GOOD WITH THE COLUMNS ARE FINE.UM, IF THIS MAKES, MAKES ANYBODY FEEL BETTER.
SO A FENCE PANEL MEANS A PORTION OF A FENCE LOCATED BETWEEN THE POST OR COLUMNS.
SO THE COLUMNS ARE OKAY, WE'RE LEAVING THOSE BRICK COLUMNS.
CORRECT? SO THE OPACITY PART IS ONLY FOR THAT PORTION BETWEEN THE, SO WHEREVER THE OPACITY LAYS ON THE SITE PLAN, THAT HAS TO BE OPEN AND YOU'RE, MR. BALDWIN'S GONNA PROVIDE NEW ELEVATIONS, AND I GUESS WE WOULD JUST NEED NEW ELEVATIONS FOR THAT.
AND THAT SHOULD HANDLE BOTH OPACITY REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE.
YEAH, I THINK I, I BELIEVE WHAT MR. BALLWIN JUST SAID IS THAT, UM, IF WE, IF WE WRITE IT, UM, TO STATE EVERYTHING EX EXCEPT WE ADD OR MODIFY THAT THE, UM, THAT THE, UH, THE OPENING SHALL BE, SHALL MATCH THE OPACITY OF THE, OF THE REMAINING FENCE.
I BELIEVE UNDER ROBERT'S RULES YOU CANNOT AMEND AN AMENDMENT.
SO THE QUESTION IS ON THE TABLE IS THE AMENDMENT.
ARE WE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS LANGUAGE? I, OKAY.
AND I GUESS WE VOTE ON THE WE'RE VOTE.
SO ON, ON THE MATTER OF THE MR. SLAVE'S AMEND.
WE CAN'T JUST VOTE ON THE AMENDED MOTION.
HERE, HERE IS A VOTE ON MR. SLAVE'S AMENDMENT.
VICE CHAIR AYE AMENDMENT IS, IS APPROVED.
SO NOW, UH, YES, MR. SINGTON, SO NOW COMES A VOTE ON THE AMENDED MOTION.
WE ARE TEMPORARILY LOSING OUR QUORUM.
UH, YOU THINK? UH, FOUR O'CLOCK.
WE WILL, UH, WE WILL RESUME AT, UH, 4:00 PM IT IS 4:05 PM ON MONDAY, AUGUST 19TH.
ORDER OF ADJUSTMENT PENALTIES BACK IN SESSION.
WE HAVE ONE FINAL CASE TO BRIEF, THEN HERE THAT CASE IS, UH, BD 2 3 4 DASH 0 8 8 5 0 7 EXPOSITION AVENUE AND APPLICATION OF ROBERT LONG FOR A VARIANCE TO PARKING REGULATIONS.
UH, BRIEF, UH, OH, HAVE WE LOST OUR BRIEFER? I DON'T KNOW.
BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 8 8 5 0 7 EXPEDITION AVENUE, UH, WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PRIMARY METRO FOR 57 DAYS.
SUBJECT SITE IS, UH, NORTH OF FIRST AVENUE SOUTH OF COMMERCE STREET, EAST OF CANTON STREET AND WEST OF I 30.
[02:15:05]
THE AREA MAP IS TO THE LEFT AND THE ZONING MAP IS TO THE RIGHT.UH, THE AREA MAP SHOWS WHERE THE APPLICANT, UM, WILL BE TRYING TO REPL MULTIPLE LOTS INTO ONE.
TRACK DATE, UH, THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 31 PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFIED.
UM, AND ONLY FOUR WERE IN OPPOSITION.
ZERO LETTERS OF SUPPORT AND THE OPPOSITIONS WERE IN A TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT NEXT TO THE, UH, SUBJECT PROPOSED SITE.
UH, THIS WAS A STAFF REFERRAL.
UH, THEY CAME IN AND SPOKE WITH OUR, UH, SENIOR PLANNER IN OUR ZONING DIVISION.
AND THERE ARE NO CURRENT PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW FOR THIS SITE OTHER THAN THE, UM, FLAT, UH, THIS IS FOR VARIANCE FOR OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS.
UH, THE APPLICANT POSES TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURE, UH, AND PROVIDE 68 OF THE REQUIRED NINE FOUR PARKING SPACES, WHICH WILL REQUIRE, UH, 26 SPACE, 28% VARIANCE TO THE OFF STREET, UH, PARKING REGULATIONS.
SUBJECT SITE HAD SIGNS POSTED ON BOTH E EXPOSITION AND FIRST AVENUE, AND THIS IS THE, UH, PRELIMINARY PLAT ON THE LEFT, UH, SHOWING WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING, UH, TO REPL INTO ONE AND TO THE LEFT OF THE ACTUAL SUBJECT SITE.
ALL THOSE SITES, AGAIN, THAT WERE IN OPPOSITION, UH, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO PROVIDE PARKING ON THE FIRST LEVEL.
UM, AND OF THE REQUIRED NINE FOUR PARKING SPACES.
UH, THE PD, UM, REQUIREMENTS ARE ONE PARKING SPACE FOR DWELLING UNIT, AND AGAIN, THEY'RE PRO PROVIDING 68 SPACES.
AND OF THE 68 SPACES, THEY'RE PROPOSING 25 OF THOSE TO BE COMPACT.
UH, THIS IS THE CURRENT SITE AS IT CURRENTLY SITS.
UM, AND THIS IS LOOKING AT EXPEDITION LOOKING NORTH.
SO TO BE CLEAR, WELL THIS, THIS IS ASKING TO HAVE LESS THAN ONE PARKING SPACE PER UNIT? THAT IS CORRECT.
THESE ARE THE VIEWS FROM EXPOSITION AND NOW WE'RE MOVED TO FIRST AVENUE, AND THEN WE'LL TAKE THE, UH, 200 FOOT RADIUS VIDEO.
AND WE'RE EXPOSITION CURRENT, UH, THIS IS WHERE THE START OF THE SUBJECT SIDE IS TO THE RIGHT.
WHAT'S THE CLAIM BILL? SAY AGAIN? IMMEDIATE VICINITY BEING BUILT WITH A CRANE, UH, TO THE LEFT.
AND THEN WE'LL LOOP BACK AROUND AND SEE THE SUBJECT SIDE AGAIN FROM FIRST AVENUE, I SEE THE LEFT
[02:20:01]
SOMEBODY, SO, SO WE'LL GO UNDER I 30 AND AS SOON AS WE COME UNDER I 30, IT'LL BE THE NEXT LOT.SO THAT'S THE EXIT RAMP TO OUR RIGHT.
AND THEN SUBJECT SIDE IS THIS AREA? YES.
SO IT GOES ALL THE WAY TO EXPEDITION COMPUTER, THE SUBJECT SIDE OR THE ONE NEXT, NEXT TO IT.
SO IT WAS ONCE MULTIPLE LOTS IN THERE.
THEY PURCHASED ALL AND NOW REPLANTING INTO ONE, CORRECT? YEAH.
THE ONE LOT IS THE ENTIRE YES.
ALL OF THIS IS VERY SEL OWNERS.
AND THAT'S THE END OF THE VIDEO QUESTIONS ON THE VIDEO.
AND SO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UM, UM, FOR REVIEW DECISION MAKING, UM, 51, A 4.302 DEVELOPMENT CODE SPECIFIES THAT THE BOARD HAS THE POWER TO GRANT VARIOUS FOR VARIOUS OPTIONS, IN THIS CASE THE OFF STREET PARKING, AND THAT IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST NECESSARY TO PERMIT DEVELOPMENT AND NOT GRANT TO DELETE A SELF-CREATED PERSONAL HARDSHIP.
AND SO IN THIS CASE, UH, FOR THE VARIANCE, UH, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED DENIAL, UM, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED.
UM, WHILE IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLICLY INDICATED, UM, BY HAVING RECEIVED, THERE WAS FOUR LETTERS OF OPPOSITION.
UM, IT'S NOT RESTRICTIVE IN SHAPE OR SLOPE.
UH, THE SUBJECT PROPOSED REPLANTING THE SITE AND IT'LL BE, UH, 27,684 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS 0.636 OF AN ACRE.
UH, IT IS IN PD AGAIN, 2 69 TRACK DAY, WHICH HAS NO MINIMUM LOT SIZE, UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE SUBJECT SITE AND OTHERS LOCATED IN, IN THE PD.
UH, THEREFORE THE SUBJECT SITE CAN BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER OF COMMISSION WITH OTHERS AND THE PARCELS OF LAND.
UH, AND IN TERMS OF THE PARKING, UM, IT FELT LIKE IT WAS A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP, UM, FOR VARIOUS REASONS.
UM, OBVIOUSLY IT COULD HAVE WENT UP, UH, THEY'RE RESTRICTED IN HEIGHT BASED ON 200 FEET IS THE MAX HEIGHT FOR PART OF THE, UH,
SO THEY COULD HAVE DONE THEY RESTRICTED IN THE SAME WAY AS EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE ZONING? CORRECT.
AND SO, UM, THEY DID PROVIDE, UH, UM, A DETAILED REPORT TO DAVID NAVAREZ AND, UH, HE HAS NO OBJECTIONS, UM, FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE WHEN IT WAS, UH, PRESENTED BEFORE.
UH, SO, UH, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY UPDATED COMMENTS.
DID SOMETHING CHANGE OR WHY WOULD THEY BE UPDATED? UM, SO INITIALLY, UH, WITH THE TRAFFIC STUDY, UH, THEY HAD ONE PROPOSED
[02:25:01]
PLAN WHERE THE PARKING WOULD BE, UM, LOCATED ON THE STREET WHERE THEY WERE DOING LIKE SOME CURB CUTOUTS.UM, AND SO THEN THEY REMOVED THAT AND ALL THE PARKING BEING ON SITE, UM, MEANING NO CLEAR THAT THAT OR PARALLEL PARKING BECAUSE IF THEY DID A CURB THAT IT WOULD BE ON THEIR PROPERTY.
I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WOULD, IT WOULD'VE BEEN IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THE AREA BETWEEN YES, MR. SACKMAN.
WELL, UH, WOULD THAT CHANGE IF YOU DID THAT? WOULD, DOES THAT CHANGE ANYTHING ABOUT YOUR SETBACKS? UH, NO, IT WOULDN'T CHANGE SETBACKS.
SO THE PROPERTY LINE IS ON THE OTHER SIDE THOUGH, SO IT HAVE, IT WOULD HAVE NO EFFECT ON HOW THAT COULD HAVE BEEN BILLED? WELL, THE, LIKE IN CERTAIN AREAS, UH, YOU CAN COUNT THAT AS YOUR OUT STREET PARKING.
UM, IN THIS PARTICULAR PD IS VARIOUS TYPES OF PARKING THAT GOES ON THROUGHOUT.
UM, AND SO ONE OF THE PART OF OUR TRAFFIC STUDY WAS TRYING TO ENCOURAGE, UM, PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY ACTIVITIES, UH, DART ACTIVITIES, UH, THINGS OF, OF SUCH, MM-HMM.
AND IF NO OTHER QUESTION, THIS CONCLUDES BDA 2 3 4 DASH 0 8 8 5 0 7 EXPOSITION AVENUE.
UM, SO THIS CLOSES THE BRIEFING.
UH, I'LL CALL CASE AND THEN ASK FOR QUESTION.
UH, THIS IS BD 2 3 4 DASH 0 8 8 5 0 7 EXPOSITION AVENUE.
UM, MS. WILLIAMS, ARE THERE, ARE THERE, IS THERE ANYONE SENT, UH, SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? UM, THE APPLICANT WAS ALIGNED, BUT HE WAS HAVING TECHNICAL ISSUES AND NO ONE ELSE THOUGH.
MR. ATTORNEY, MY UNDERSTANDING OF A CASE LIKE THIS IS THAT IF THE APPLICANT DOESN'T SHOW UP, WE ONLY HAVE TWO OPTIONS.
ONE IS TO HOLD IT OVER IF IT'S THE FIRST TIME OR SECOND TO DENY IT.
OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE ALL FIVE.
BY THE WAY, OUR RULES ARE POSTED ON THE BOARD OF JUSTICE WEBSITE AND VERY EASILY FOUND AND VICE CHAIR AG.
THAT'S BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN OPPOSITION NOTED OR THAT THIS ONE IS NOT AN UNCONTESTED CASE.
IS THAT CORRECT? NO, I THINK ABOUT MY UNDERSTANDING AND MEMORY OF THE RULES IS THAT THE APPLICANT WROTE NOT HIM, HIM, WE CAN'T APPROVE IT.
AND IF IT HAPPENS TWICE, WE ARE REQUIRED TO DENY IT.
UM, BUT JUST GIVING AN HONOR, WE'LL LOOK UP OUR RULES AND MAKE SURE UNLESS MR. ATTORNEY, UH, OKAY.
[02:30:17]
HOLD ON.IF THE CASE IS CALLED FOR HEARING IN DUE ORDER IN THE DOCKET AND THE APPLICANT OR ANYONE, HIS OR HER BEHALF DOES NOT APPEAR, THE PANEL MAY HOLD THE CASE OVER TO THE FOLLOWING HEARING AT WHICH TIME IT WILL BE CALLED AGAIN.
APPROVE A CASE OR DENY A CASE FOR LACK OF APPEARANCE AT THE FIRST CALL AT ITS DISCRETION.
IF NO ONE APPEARS SECOND TIME THE CASE MUST BE DENIED WITH PREJUDICE.
NO, I WAS JUST GONNA ASK, UH, IF A APPLICANT WAS ONLINE AND HAD TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES AND WE KNEW THEY WERE THERE, WOULD THAT BE GROUND FOR HOLD OVER OR SOMETHING TO CONSIDER OF THE DAY WE'VE HAD? YEAH, I DON'T, UH, YEAH.
UH, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
PROBABLY THE ANSWER IS NO, YOU HEARING OR NOT, BUT, UM, UH, IN THIS CASE WE'RE NOT REQUIRED.
SO, UM, MS. WILLIAMS WILLIAMS, IS IT TRUE THAT THE APPLICANT HAD ASKED TO BE HELD OVER? THAT IS CORRECT, SIR.
UM, SO LET'S GO THROUGH THE, THE CORRECT PROCEDURE.
UH, ARE THERE SPEAKERS IN FAVOR? NO.
THE SPEAKERS SAY, ARE THERE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? NO, THE SPEAKERS.
HEARING NONE MAY HAVE A MOTION.
MR.
IT WOULDN'T IT BE SIMILAR TO, UH, INTRODUCING INFORMATION IN FOR THE RECORD? YEAH.
IN THE SAME WAY THAT, THAT IF, I MEAN, WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF SOMEONE, UH, WROTE YOU AN EMAIL THIS AFTERNOON ABOUT A CASE? UH, WELL, NOT SOMEBODY, I CANNOT PRESENT IT.
UH, THIS IS THE EMAIL SAYING THAT YOU WANTED TO POKE IT OVER.
YEAH, I, SO I, I THINK, UH, IT'S BETTER THAT YOU TOLD ME WHAT HE WANT.
I, I'M JUST, I MEAN, ONCE WE GET INTO JUSTIFICATIONS, HOW ABOUT WE MAKE IT AS SIMPLE AS WE CAN? I THINK HE WAS ONLINE AND MS. WILLIAMS WAS TRYING TO HELP HIM.
EARLIER WE DISCUSSED, UH, KNOWING THAT WE ONLY HAVE FOUR MEMBERS IN OUR FIVE, UH, STAFF REACHING OUT TO APPLICANTS.
SO THAT'S PROBABLY HOW HE KNOWS HE HAS THE OPTION.
SO IF THAT IS THE CASE, AND NOW SOMEONE IS RESPONDING TO A REQUEST, THEN I THINK WE HAVE THE REQUEST.
IS THERE A MOTION? MR. I HAVE A MOTION, SIR.
UH, THE APPLICATION OF ROBERT LONG FOR VARIANCE TO PARKING REGULATIONS AT 5 0 7 EXPEDITION AVENUE THAT WE PULLED OVER THIS CASE UNTIL OUR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING SET FOR OCTOBER 17TH IN 20 I SECOND, UH, DISCUSSION IF WE HAD, UH, OPPOSITION HERE, SPENDING THEIR TIME SAYING, HEY, I CAME DOWN HERE ONCE, NOT MY FAULT.
UH, THAT THEY WOULD BE CERTAINLY, IT WOULD BE UNDERSTANDABLE SINCE WE DON'T, UM, AND WE HAVE FOUR AND GIVEN THE DAY WE'VE HAD, UM, WE CLIMBED, UH, TO GIVE AS MUCH GRACE AS WE CAN.
SO I, I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION.
I'M SORRY, MR. SLAY, UM, YOU RECTIFIED THE DATES TO OCTOBER 20TH.
IS THAT ONE OF THE THURSDAY MEETINGS? YES, I CAN, UH, MR. CIO MAY HAVE AMEND MY MOTION SO THAT IT REFLECTS THE NEXT MEETING TO ACTUALLY BE OCTOBER MR. SLAVE'S PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
SO THE MOTION IS TO POSTPONE UNTIL OCTOBER 31ST, I BELIEVE.
[02:35:01]
YOU WANTED TO HAVE THIS ON SATURDAY? NO, YOU HAD A, YOU WANNA HAVE PRIOR THURSDAY.I JUST SCREWED UP WHAT TIME YOU WANTED TO MEET.
VOTE MS. WILLIAMS. MR. MILLIGAN.
MOTION PASSES TO HOLD UNTIL OCTOBER 21ST.
UM, SO AT THIS POINT, DO, DO WE HAVE FURTHER BUSINESS? YES.
UH, SO THE ANSWER IS GOOD AFTERNOON.
JASON POOLE, UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR AND INTERIM ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR THE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE.
UM, AS A COMMUNITY INTEREST ANNOUNCEMENT, WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION AND OPTION THAT MAY ENSURE FAIRNESS AND CONSISTENCY IN THE RESOLUTION OF CASES ARISING FROM PREVIOUS CITY OVERSIGHTS IN THE ELM THICKET NORTH PARK NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, PARTICULARLY WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 67.
UM, THE CITY HAS RECENTLY IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF OVERSIGHTS IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS FOLLOWING THE ADOPTION OF NEW ZONING REGULATIONS FOR PD 67.
UH, THIS OCCURRED ON OCTOBER 12TH, 2022.
THESE OVERSIGHTS HAVE LED TO CASES BEING BROUGHT BEFORE THE BOARD AND MAY RESULT IN FUTURE CASES ALL RELATED TO THE SAME UNDERLYING ISSUE OF OUTDATED ZONING INFORMATION BEING USED DURING THE PERMIT EVALUATIONS.
THE BOARD MAY WISH TO CONSIDER TEMPORARILY SUSPENDING ITS CURRENT RULES ON CASES ASSIGNMENT FOR THESE RELATED CASES.
DOING SO COULD PROVIDE SEVERAL KEY BENEFITS.
THE FIRST BEING CONSISTENCY ACROSS CASES.
GIVEN THAT THESE CASES ALL STEM FROM THE SAME UNDERLYING ISSUES, UH, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THEY BE TREATED CONSISTENTLY.
ASSIGNING THESE CASES TO A SINGLE PANEL OR SUSPENDING THE USUAL CASE ASSIGNMENT.
RULES WILL HELP ENSURE THAT ALL AFFECTED PARTIES RECEIVE EQUITABLE CONSIDERATION.
UH, THE SECOND FAIRNESS TO AFFECTED PARTIES, THE HOMEOWNERS, DEVELOPERS, AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS IMPACTED BY THESE OVERSIGHTS DESERVE A CLEAR AND CONSISTENT PROCESS FOR RESOLVING THEIR CASES.
A UNIFORM APPROACH BY THE BOARD WILL HELP PREVENT DISCREPANCIES IN HOW SIMILAR CASES ARE HANDLED.
UM, NUMBER THREE, EFFICIENCY IN CASE MANAGEMENT.
CENTRALIZING THE HANDLING OF THESE RELATED CASES COULD STREAMLINE THE BOARD'S WORKLOAD, REDUCE THE LIKELIHOOD OF CONFLICTING DECISIONS, AND PREVENT UNNECESSARY DELAYS.
ADDITIONALLY, THIS APPROACH WOULD MINIMIZE THE NUMBER OF MEETINGS THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD NEED TO ATTEND, MAKING COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD AND FOCUSED.
AND FINALLY, RESTORING PUBLIC CONFIDENCE.
THE CITY IS COMMITTED TO BEST SERVING OUR COMMUNITY IN THE ERRORS THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN THE ELM PICKET NEIGHBORHOOD.
BY SUSPENDING THE USUAL RULES ON CASE ASSIGNMENT AND ADOPTING A CONSISTENT APPROACH TO THESE CASES, THE BOARD WILL CONTRIBUTE TO RESTORING PUBLIC TRUST IN THE CITY'S ZONING AND PERMITTING PROCESSES.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION OF THIS OPTION MAY PROVIDE A FAIR AND EFFECTIVE PATHWAY TO RESOLVING THE CASES ARISING FROM THE CITY'S OVERSIGHTS IN PD 67.
SHOULD THE BOARD FIND THIS OPTION TO BE VIABLE? IT COULD BE A CR OR IT COULD PLAY A CRUCIAL ROLE IN ENSURING A CONSISTENT AND EQUITABLE RESOLUTION FOR ALL EFFECTIVE PARTIES.
WHAT IS THE CURRENT VOLUME OF CASES THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSAL? WE'RE STILL WORKING ON THE DEFINITIVE VOLUME.
UH, CURRENTLY WE'VE IDENTIFIED 14, UH, SITES THAT ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE.
HAVE ANY OF THOSE RESULTED IN APPLICATIONS YET? TO THE BOARD THAT HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED TO ONE OR MORE PANELS? WE CURRENTLY HAVE TWO CASES THAT HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED.
UH, ONE WILL BE HEARD TOMORROW AND THERE IS ONE CASE ASSIGNED FOR SEPTEMBER.
WOULD THE EXPECTATION FOR THE BOARD TO ADOPT A PROPOSAL SIMILAR TO THE ONE YOU'RE DESCRIBING RESULTS IN MOVING ALL THE CURRENTLY PENDING CASES TO THE PANEL THAT IS HEARING ONE TOMORROW WITH THE OTHER NEW CASES TO EVEN THE LOAD BETWEEN THE PANELS, SORT OF RESHUFFLED BETWEEN THE REMAINING TWO PANELS? I THINK SHOULD THE BOARD DECIDE
[02:40:01]
TO SUSPEND THE WAY CASES ARE, ARE ASSIGNED, THE IDEA WOULD BE TO POTENTIALLY STREAMLINE SOME OF THOSE CASE ASSIGNMENTS THROUGH ONE, ONE PANEL TO BE, BE CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD IN, IN THE WAY THEY'RE EVALUATED AND TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF HEARINGS THAT, UH, APPLICANTS AND NEIGHBORS WOULD NEED TO ATTEND.MR. POOLE, HAVE THERE BEEN, UH, OTHER, UH, APPLICATIONS FILED WITHIN THIS PD THAT HAVEN'T OR ARE YOU AWARE OF, OF MORE THAN TWO CASES THAT HAVE BEEN FILED? SO, SO CURRENTLY WE JUST HAVE THE TWO CASES.
WE, WE DO HAVE 14 CURRENTLY THAT ARE OUTSTANDING IN VIOLATIONS.
UM, WE ARE COMPLETING AN INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE IF THERE ARE MORE.
UH, SO WE DO ANTICIPATE MORE APPLICATIONS OR AT LEAST THE OPTION OF MORE OP APPLICATIONS, BUT CURRENTLY WE ONLY HAVE TWO.
YOU GUYS ARE, ARE IN CONTACT WITH SOME OF THESE PEOPLE? YES.
THIS, SO YOUR ANTICIPATION IS BASED ON GOOD DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE? IT IS, IT IS, YES.
MR. POOL ARE, ARE ANY OF THESE CASES THAT ARE PUT, UH, IDENTIFIED OR POTENTIALLY, UM, GOING TO BE IDENTIFIED, ARE, ARE ANY OF THESE LIKELY TO BE APPEALED ABOVE? UM, I MEAN, ARE, ARE WE ANY OF THESE IN, IN JEOPARDY OF BEING APPEALED ABOVE THE BD, UM, TO THE DISTRICT COURT? RIGHT.
SO, YOU KNOW, YOU HEAR THIS IN THE NEWS, I CAN'T COMMENT ON AN IMPENDING INVESTIGATION AND WHETHER SOME OF THE, BECAUSE THERE ARE CASES BEFORE THE BOARD, I WOULDN'T WANNA SPECULATE AS TO WHETHER THEY ARE GOING TO APPEAL TO THE DISTRICT COURT, BUT THEY CERTAINLY HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL TO THE DISTRICT COURT.
I WOULD SAY THAT EVERY CASE WE HEAR IS A POTENTIALLY, UM, POTENTIAL CASE FOR THE DISTRICT COURT UNDERSTANDING THAT, UM, THAT THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M, I GUESS A CONCERN.
I GUESS I MAY, I MAY HAVE AS A RESULT OF THIS FINDING COUNSEL, WILL THEY GET THE STANDARD ONE APPEAL LIKE TO A JUDGE? I'M NOT SURE I FOLLOW.
WHEN YOU SAY STANDARD ONE APPEAL, YOU MEAN THEY, THEY ONLY HAVE ONE, ONE FIGHT AT THE APPLE, SO TO SPEAK.
IF WE HEAR THEIR CASE, AND SO IF THEIR CASE IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE BOARD, THEN WE WILL HEAR THE CASE.
UM, AND IF THEY'RE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE OUTCOME, THEN THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL.
THEY CAN APPEAL IT TO THE DISTRICT COURT AND DEPENDS ON WHAT THE DISTRICT COURT DECIDES.
THEY MAY REMAND IT AND SEND IT BACK TO US.
UM, THEY MAY SAY, YOU'RE WRONG.
THEY MAY SAY THE BOARD IS WRONG, YOU ARE CORRECT.
UM, BUT THEY, THEY DON'T GET MULTIPLE SHOTS AT APPEALING.
THEY CAN ONLY APPEAL AT ONE TIME CORRECTLY.
IF I CAN ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION, I THINK NOTHING IN THE PROPOSAL THAT'S BEEN RAISED WOULD CONSOLIDATE THE MATTER AT ALL.
THERE WOULD STILL BE SEPARATE, SEPARATE CASES OR APPEALS.
AND SO EACH WOULD HAVE ITS OWN TYPICAL RIGHTS FROM THERE? CORRECT.
AND THE PROPOSAL, AND I STREAMLINE THE EFFICIENT, I, I'M NOT EVEN SURE I WOULD CATEGORIZE MR. MR. POOLE'S COMMENTS AS A PROPOSAL, RATHER A, UM, WHAT WAS THE PHRASE THAT YOU USED AT THE BEGINNING? A PUBLIC? YES, AN ANNOUNCEMENT, UH, A COMMUNITY INTEREST ANNOUNCEMENT.
WERE THE ASPECTS OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT, UM, ADOPTED BY THE BOARD FOR STREAMLINED IN CERTAIN ASPECTS? I DON'T THINK THE ANNOUNCEMENT WOULD INCLUDE A, ANY SORT OF CONSOLIDATION SUCH THAT EACH CASE WOULD STILL STAND ON ITS
I BELIEVE HE'S ASKING WHETHER, WHETHER THERE, THERE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE CLASS ACTION OR WHETHER THE CASES GET, OR TELL ME IF I'M WRONG.
YOU, YOU'RE JUST ASKING WHETHER THERE IS NO MECHANISM FOR IT TO BE CONSOLIDATED LIKE A CAT CLASS ACTION? IT COULD BE.
THEY WOULD EACH BE DONE ON THEIR OWN MERITS.
SO YOU COULD HAVE DIFFERENT OUTCOMES BASED ON DIFFERENT FACTS.
[02:45:05]
I WOULD ASSUME THAT THERE WILL BE LOTS OF CASES TO BE HEARD ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.I'M LOOKING FOR, UM, SORRY, I'M BEING ASKED, UH, FOR PATIENCE.
HOW LONG DO YOU NEED? 10 MINUTES FOR A 10 MINUTE RECESS TILL FOUR.
HE DOESN'T NEED ME TO TELL HIM TO SIT DOWN.
WHAT, WHAT? OH, IS IT ON? THANK YOU FOR, FOR HAVING IT OFF AND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL C IS NOW ADJOURNED.