* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. ARE WE READY? [Board of Adjustments: Panel B on January 22, 2025.] [00:00:03] OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. I'M SHERRY GABO AND I'M HONORED TO SERVE AS THE VICE CHAIR OF THE FULL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOARD. ITS PANEL B. TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 22ND, 2025. IT IS 1:01 PM AND I HEREBY CALL THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL B TO ORDER FOR OUR PUBLIC HEARING, BOTH IN PERSON AND HYBRID VIDEO CONFERENCE. A QUORUM, WHICH IS A MINIMUM OF FOUR OR FIVE OF OUR PANEL MEMBERS IS PRESENT AND THEREFORE WE CAN PROCEED WITH THIS MEETING. UM, PRESENT TODAY ARE MYSELF, SHERRY GABO, SARAH LAMB, PARKER GRAHAM, UH, NICHOLAS, UH, BROOKS AND JOE CANNON. UM, OUR STAFF PRESENT INCLUDE THERESA CARLISLE, OUR BOARD ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, DR. CAMIKA MILLER HOSKINS, OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF PLANNER, MARY WILLIAMS, OUR BOARD SECRETARY AND MEETING MODERATOR. WE HAVE BRYANT THOMPSON, SENIOR PLANNER. WHO ELSE IS HERE? LAURA. OKAY. MR. SCOTT ROPER WITH SIGNS AND NORA CASTA PLANNER AND C CITY, CITY PLAN'S EXAMINER. AND IS DIANA BARUM ATTENDING? OKAY. AND DIANA BARUM IS ONLINE. ALL RIGHT. SO THERE WE GO. BEFORE WE BEGIN, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FEW GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE WAY IN WHICH THIS HEARING WILL BE CONDUCTED. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL. WE GIVE OUR TIME FREELY AND RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR THAT TIME. WE OPERATE UNDER CITY COUNCIL APPROVED RULES OF PROCEDURE, WHICH ARE POSTED ON OUR WEBSITE. NO ACTION OR DECISION ON A CASE SETS A PRECEDENT. EACH CASE IS DECIDED UPON ITS OWN MERITS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED IS ASSUMED TO BE A LEGAL USE. WE HAVE BEEN FULLY BRIEFED BY STAFF PRIOR TO THIS HEARING AND HAVE ALSO REVIEWED A DETAILED DOCKET, WHICH EXPLAINS THE CASE AND WAS POSTED SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THIS PUBLIC HEARING. ANY EVIDENCE THAT YOU WISH TO SUBMIT TO THE BOARD TODAY FOR CONSIDERATION ON ANY OF THE CASES THAT WE HEAR SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD SECRETARY WHEN YOUR CASE IS CALLED. THIS EVIDENCE MUST BE RETAINED IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE AS PART OF PUBLIC RECORD FOR EACH CASE. APPROVALS OF A VARIANCE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR REVERSAL OF A BUILDING ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL DECISION REQUIRES 75% OR FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES OF A FIVE FULL MEMBER PANEL. ALL OTHER MEMBER, ALL OTHER MOTIONS ONLY REQUIRE A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE. LETTERS TO THE BOARD. LETTERS OF THE BOARD'S ACTIONS TODAY WILL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT BY OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR SHORTLY AFTER TODAY'S HEARING AND WILL BECOME PART OF PUBLIC RECORD FOR EACH CASE. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TODAY MUST REGISTER IN ADVANCE WITH OUR BOARD SECRETARY. EACH REGISTERED SPEAKER WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES OR WHEN A SPECIFIC CASE IS CALLED FOR ITS PUBLIC HEARING FOR A MAXIMUM OF FIVE MINUTES. ALL REGISTERED ONLINE SPEAKERS MUST BE PRESENT ON VIDEO TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THERE IS NO TELECONFERENCING ALLOWED ON WEBEX. ALL COMMENTS ARE BE DIRECTED TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER AND I MAY MODERATE MODIFY SPEAKING TIMES IS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN ORDER. UM, OKAY. SO LET'S SEE. FOUR R. YES. UM, WE WILL START WITH, UM, SOME OF OUR MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE OUR MINUTES, WHICH WE DID MAKE A FEW CHANGES TO. UM, AND WE PUT THAT ON THE RECORD DURING THE BRIEFING. SO DO I HAVE ANY, UM, MOTION? THANK YOU MS. LYNN. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS MODIFIED IN THE 10:30 AM MEETING THIS MORNING. DO I HAVE A SECOND? AYE. JOE CAN SECOND UP. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL FUTURE VOTES WILL BE A ROLL CALL VOTE. UM, WHAT'S THAT? AND THEN IN TERMS OF OUR AGENDA, UM, WE WILL, WE'RE, WE'RE BASICALLY GONNA GO IN ORDER. UM, WE'LL START WITH OUR W WE'LL HAVE OUR CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH IS BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 0 6 BDA 2 4 5 0 0 4. AND BDA 2 4 5 0 1 2, UM, ARE ALL ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. AND WE ALSO, UM, HAVE BDA 2 4 5 DASH ZERO 15, WHICH IS 63 56 DENHAM STREET. UNFORTUNATELY THIS CASE, UM, WHILE, UH, NOTIFY CORRECTLY IN THE NEWSPAPER AND ALL OF THE DOCKET MATERIALS ARE CORRECT ON THE AGENDA, IT IS ONLY SHOWING, UM, ONE REQUEST FOR A CHANGE AND IT HAS TWO. AND SO WE CANNOT HEAR THIS CASE TODAY, SO WE WILL MAKE A MOTION AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING TO HOLD THAT CASE OVER. UM, SO IF WE CAN START WITH, UM, BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 1 15 63 56 BENNI STREET. IF I CAN HAVE SOMEONE MAKE A MOTION ON THAT TO HOLD THAT CASE OVER. YES, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO HOLD OVER. UM, BDA 2 4 5 DASH 15 ZERO. YEAH. YEAH. UM, TO OUR FEBRUARY, UM, WHAT'S THAT GONNA BE? THE 20TH 19TH, FEBRUARY 19TH, 2025. SECOND. OKAY. CAN WE HAVE A ROLL CALL? VOTE [00:05:02] MS. LAND? AYE. MR. CANNON? AYE. MR. BROOKS? AYE. MR. GRAHAM? AYE. MS. VICE CHAIR AYE. MOTION TO HOLD UNTIL FEBRUARY 19TH PASSES FIVE TO ZERO. AND IF I CAN, UM, HAVE A MOTION FOR THE, UM, UH, CONSENT AGENDA. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. THANK YOU MR. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS LISTED ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET BECAUSE IT APPEARS FROM OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE THAT THE APPLICATION SATISFY ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE CODE AS APPLICABLE TO WE SO SIR, OFF WITH BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 0 6 APPLICATION OF MARGARET MURPHY REPRESENTED BY BALDWIN ASSOCIATES FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FENCE HEIGHT REGULATIONS ALONG PEYTON DRIVE. AND THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FENCE HEIGHT REGULATIONS ALONG HILLCREST ROAD CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, WHICH IS COMPLIANCE SPECIFIED HEIGHT AND FENCE. LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED IN THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED. NEXT CASE, BDA 2 4 5 DASH ZERO FOUR, THE APPLICATION OF ANDREW GLOVER FOR A VARIANCE OF THE INTERIOR EAST SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS AND FOR A VARIANCE TO THE INTERIOR WEST SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION, WHICH IS THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED. AND LAST, THE BDA 2 4 5 DASH ZERO 12, THE APPLICATION OF BALDWIN FOR A VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS, A VARIANCE TO THE OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS AND A FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS FROM THE VISUAL OBSTRUCTION REGULATION AT THE DRIVEWAY APPROACH CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION, WHICH IS THE COMPLIANT WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED. SECOND MAY HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE. OH. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? I HAVE REGISTERED SPEAKER. OH, FOR WHICH CASE? UH, 0 0 4 1. YOU'RE ONE YOU'RE ABOUT TO VOTE ON. OH, OKAY. UM, DID WE KNOW THAT HE WAS ON THERE? MARY? IS HE REGISTERED? YES. MR. HAZEL. SORRY. MR. HAZELTON. HAZELTON. YES. HAZELTON. OKAY. UM, ? YES. THESE TWO ? YEAH. ARE YOU IN OPPOSITION OR FAVOR? MR. HAZELTON? OPPOSITION. OKAY. ALRIGHT. OKAY, SO WE WILL, UM, WHAT'S THAT? DO WE NEED TO WITHDRAW THE WHOLE MOTION? ZERO. ZERO. WE AMEND IT. CAN WE JUST AMEND AND, OKAY. UM, SO I, OKAY, UM, I'LL, OH, SORRY MR. I MEAN IF IT'S EASIER FOR YOU WITHDRAW WITHIN WITHDRAW, YOU COULD PROBABLY JUST SAY, I, I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, UM, TO INCLUDE THE CONSENT ITEMS TO BE JUST VDA 2 4 5 DASH SIX AND VDA 2 4 5 DASH TWO. DOES THAT WORK LEGALLY? OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, WELL THEN I AMEND THE MOTION THAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE FLOOR TO JUST INCLUDE CASES BDA 2 4 5 DASH ZERO SIX AND BDA 2 4 5 DASH ZERO TWO SECOND. AND FOR DISCUSSION, I THINK NOW WE VOTE ON WHETHER TO ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT AND THEN WE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT. YES. YES. OKAY. SO CAN WE HAVE A ROLL? YEP. THIS IS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. WE ALSO, THIS IS THE FAMILY AMENDMENT. YES, I ACCEPT THE FAMILY AMENDMENT. OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. WELL, WE HAVE IT IN A ROLL CALL. VOTE YES. YES. NOW WE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE AMENDED. YOU GIMME A MOMENT. SORRY. DO YOU WANT SOMETHING MR. HAZELTON? WE WILL HEAR YOUR CASE AT A, UM, IN, IN ORDER, UM, AT A LATER TIME TO, UH, TODAY. OKAY. UH, DOES THE CHAIR HAVE AN IDEA APPROXIMATELY BASED ON HER AGENDA? UM, YOU ARE FOURTH IN LINE. VERY GOOD MA'AM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. SO CAN WE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THAT. AMENDED, UM, [00:10:04] UM, MS. LAMB? YES. AS AMENDED. MR. CANNON? YAY. MR. BROOKS? YES. MR. GRAHAM? YES. MS. GABO? YES. MOTION TO AMEND PASSES. FIVE TO ZERO GOOD ROARING START. OKAY, WELL WE WILL MOVE ON TO BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 0 8 60 41 MC BOULEVARD. IF THE APPLICANT WILL PLEASE STEP FORWARD. THIS IS MCCOMBS. IF YOU'LL PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND WE WILL HAVE YOU SWORN IN BY MS. WILLIAMS. UH, SPENCER EAST AT MY ADDRESS IS 91 16 MELISSA DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 8. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES. OKAY. UH, PLEASE PROCEED. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. OKAY. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE BOARD, THANK YOU FOR TAKING YOUR TIME AND OPPORTUNITY TO LISTEN TO OUR APPEAL, UH, OF THE EAST SIDE GUARD SETBACK AT 60 41 MCMA BOULEVARD. THIS HOME, LIKE MANY IN CD 11, HAS BEEN THROUGH DIFFERENT RENOVATIONS IN THE PAST, WHICH DON'T CONFORM TO PRESENT DAY RULES OR ORDINANCES, WHICH BRINGS US TO OUR APPEAL TODAY. THE HOMEOWNERS WISH TO ADD A SIMPLE ADDITION OVER THE GARAGE TO CREATE MORE SPACE FOR THEIR FAMILY TO GROW AND THRIVE, WHICH CREATES SPACE DOWNSTAIRS FOR HOME OFFICE SPACE IN A GUEST ROOM BY MOVING SOME FAMILY UPSTAIRS. CURRENTLY, THE GARAGE IS ATTACHED TO THE HOME FOR THE PREVIOUS ADDITION OVER 30 YEARS AGO, AND IS NON PERFORMING ON THE CURRENT EAST SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 10 FEET AND CANNOT BE MADE MORE NONCONFORMING. THE SPACE, THIS SPACE IS THE MOST FEASIBLE LOCATION FOR THE ADDITION, UH, FOR THE ADDITIONAL BEDROOM FOR MANY REASONS, INCLUDING COST AND EASE OF CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTAINING THE ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY OF THIS BEAUTIFUL COLONIAL REVIVAL HOME. A SPACE SUCH AS A GARAGE CREATES A BUILD OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD A SECOND, UH, STORY AS IS LEAST INVASIVE FOR THE FAMILY AS TO NOT CAUSE DISRUPTIONS TO THE NORMAL DAY, UH, TODAY ACTIVITIES, WHICH IS ONE REASON THIS AREA WAS CHOSEN FOR THE PROJECT. SECONDLY, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE COST OF ADDING SPACE OVER ANY OTHER PART OF THE HOME IS GONNA CAUSE A, A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN COSTS, WHICH WOULD BE WELL OVER 50% OF THE PRICE VALUE OF THE HOUSE. THERE'S NO WAY TO ADD THE SPACE DOWNSTAIRS, UH, AND ADDING SECOND FLOOR LIVING AREA OF ANY OTHER PART OF THE HOUSE WILL TAKE AWAY, UH, FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE HOME. ARCHITECTURALLY REQUIRE MAJOR RESTRUCTURAL ELEMENTS AND NEARLY A FULL HOME REMODEL. ALSO, AS EVIDENCED BY OUR CURRENT SURVEY, THE WEST SIDE IS ALSO NONCOMPLIANT WITH CURRENT SETBACKS AND WE WOULD HAVE TO APPEAL TO THE BOARD ANY OTHER RENOVATION BOARD IN ORDER TO CREATE THE NECESSARY SPACE OVER THE PRIMARY SUITE AND THE FAMILY ROOM. WE UNITED CUT OFF WATER, POWER, HVAC, PROMOTE OF THE BUILD, REMOVE THE SUBSTANTIAL FIREPLACE DEMO TO THE STUDS OF FAMILY ROOM, PRIMARY SUITE, UTILITY ROOM, POWDER, BATH AND HALLWAY, AS WELL AS RESTAIN AND REFINISH THE ENTIRETY OF THE CURRENT ORIGINAL, UH, FLOORING. THIS IS WELL BEYOND THE NECESSARY SCOPE OF ADDING LIVING SPACE OVER THE GARAGE ITSELF. THE ATTIC SPACE WITH THE PRIMARY SUITE IS THE LOCATION OF THE HVAC SYSTEM AS WELL AS, UM, AND WOULD NEED TO BE, BE REPLACED. FURTHERMORE, THE HOMEOWNER WOULD BE FORCED TO ADD A STAIRWELL IN LIEU OF SUBSTANTIAL LIVING SPACE, THUS LOSING VALUABLE FLOOR AND LIVING SPACE. ALSO, PUTTING ADDITION TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE LOT REDUCES VALUABLE OUTSIDE RECREATION AREA AND WOULD REQUIRE AN OLD GROWTH LIVE OAK TREE TO BE TAKEN DOWN. UM, IF WE COULD REDESIGN THE ADDITION WITHIN THE REAR FIVE FOOT SETBACK AS WELL AS INCREASING INCREASING NONPERMEABLE SERVICES AND AFFECTING RUNOFF, OUR APPROXIMATE BUDGET OF 200 K WILL JUMP TO NEARLY $600,000 GIVEN CURRENT RENOVATION AND ENGINEERING COSTS, STORAGE COSTS, MOVING THE FAMILY TO TEMPORARY HOUSING FOR SIX MONTHS. THIS IS WELL OVER HALF THE APPRAISED VALUE. WE HOPE THAT YOU CONSIDER OUR APPEAL AS VALID FOR THESE REASONS AND CONSIDER THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND ALLOW US TO PROCEED. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, SO WILL YOU TOUCH ON, UM, BUILDING ON THE BACK PORTION, UM, WHICH WOULD MEAN THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME IN FROM THE BOARD? UM, SO DO YOU HAVE IMAGES ON THE OF THE BACKYARD OF WHERE POTENTIALLY? UH, JUST FROM WHAT I SUBMITTED, UH, WHEN WE APPLIED FOR, UM, THE APPEAL, UM, IT'S, IT'S A VERY, IT'S, IT IS A SMALL BACKYARD AND IT'S THE ONLY RECREATION SPACE THEY HAVE. UM, AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE ALREADY PRETTY CLOSE TO, UH, LOT COVERAGE MAXIMUMS. DO YOU KNOW, DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR LOT COVERAGE IS NOW? UH, I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. 40%. DID WE EVER FIND OUT WHAT THE MAXIMUM LOCK THAT AS WELL IN THE CITY THAT IS, THAT, IS HE AT 40%? WHAT'S AGAIN, I'M SORRY. HAVE THAT INFORMATION. NO, [00:15:01] YOU'RE FINE. YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. UH, SO DURING THE BREAK, UH, THE RESEARCH WAS DONE. SO 40% IS THE MAX LOCK COVERAGE AND THEY'RE CURRENTLY AT 33.8. SO BASICALLY 34%. SO IF THEY WERE TO BILL IN AN AREA OF THIS PROPERTY IN ORDER TO BECOME COMPLIANT, THEY WOULD STILL COME ON THE BOARD FOR A VARIANCE ON LOCK COVERAGE. IF THEY WERE TO EXCEED THE 40%, THEY WOULD'VE TO COME FOR THE BOARD. IF THEY DO NOT EXCEED THE THEY WOULDN'T, THEY WOULDN'T. BUT WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IS WHAT AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE? SQUARE FOOTAGE ON THE SECOND FLOOR. LIKE IF THEY WERE TO REPLICATE THAT ON THE BACKSIDE OF PROPERTY, THAT'S APPROXIMATELY, UH, 450 SQUARE FEET. YEAH, IT'S JUST DIRECTLY ABOVE A TWO STORE GARAGE. SO, AND IT BLEEDS, SO IT JUST, SO IF THEY WERE TO REPLICATE THE PLAN ON THE SECOND FLOOR AT THE BACKSIDE OF PROPERTY, THAT WOULD LIKELY EXCEED THE FOUR SET? UH, I WOULD SAY YES. OKAY. SO THEN THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO COME FROM THE BOARD FOR A VARIANCE ON, UH, IT WOULD BE A TOTALLY DIFFERENT DESIGN BECAUSE, UM, THE WIDTH, THE WIDTH THAT'S PROVIDED IN THE REAR YARD IS NOT THE SAME 20 PLUS FEET IN THE REAR YARD. SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLETELY REDESIGN THAT AREA THAT'S CURRENTLY ABOVE THE GARAGE, UH, TO COMPLY WITH THE SETBACKS WITHOUT COMING BEFORE THE BOARD OR WITHOUT ENCROACHING INTO AN ALLEY OR ANY OTHER SETBACKS. IT'S ALSO THE ONLY, UH, ENTRANCE TO THE BACKYARD FROM THE HOUSE. UM, AND WE DID DISCOVER THERE'S ALREADY A, UH, THE WEST SIDE IS ALSO NOT COMPLIANT. IT'S ABOUT 4.6 FEET OR NOT FIVE FEET. SO ALSO NEED A VARIANCE IF WE WENT ON THE FIRST FLOOR, UH, OR THE SECOND FLOOR OVER THE PRIMARY, UH, FOR THAT AS WELL. YOU MENTIONED TREES IN THE BACKYARD. MM-HMM. WHERE, WHERE ARE THOSE? UH, THEY'RE DIRECTLY BEHIND THE, THE PRIMARY SUITE WHERE THEY ADDITION WOULD GO, UM, AS WELL AS ONE TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE GARAGE. UH, ANY FOUNDATION WORK WOULD, UH, COMPROMISE THE INTEGRITY OF THOSE TREES. IF YOU WERE TO ESTIMATE, UH, WHEN WERE THOSE PLANTED, WHAT WERE THEY, UH, APPROXIMATELY WHEN THE HOUSE WAS BUILT? UM, LIKE THE 47. I MEAN THEY'RE, IT'S 70-YEAR-OLD TREE. YES. I HAVE A COUPLE ON THESE. UM, FOR THE APPLICANT HERE. THIS IS GONNA BE A COUPLE OF MATH QUESTIONS, PROMISE IT'LL BE EASY, BUT, UM, CAN YOU SHARE WITH US, SO WE'RE LOOKING TO SEE OR UNDERSTAND THIS, UH, LOT COVERAGE PERCENTAGE. OKAY. SO THERE'S A DELTA OF 6% BETWEEN WHAT CURRENTLY EXISTS, UM, VERSUS WHAT THE MAXIMUM, UH, MAXIMUM IS FOR THE DESIGN THAT'S CURRENTLY IN FRONT OF US. ARE THOSE ROOMS, WOULD YOU SAY, ARE THEY, UM, DESIGNED TO LIKE A MINIMUM? SO LIKE THE BEDROOM FOR EXAMPLE, ARE THOSE THE, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS LIKE WHAT'S LEGALLY ALLOWED, THE MINIMUMS FOR SQUARE FOOTAGES FOR LIKE A BEDROOM, A BATHROOM? UH, UH, BEFORE HE ANSWER, LET ME ADD ONE MORE CAVEAT TO THE LOCK COVERAGE. GOT IT. OKAY. SO EVEN WITH THE 7%, UM, A PORTION OF THAT IS THAT DRIVEWAY THAT COMES FROM THE FRONT TO THE EXISTING GARAGE. SO WHILE IT'S QUOTE UNQUOTE HE'S AT 34%, 33.8, 34% AND THE MAX IS 40, YES. THAT DRIVEWAY, YOU CAN'T BUILD IN FRONT OF THAT ANYWAY JUST BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT YOU WOULD BE CUTTING OFF ACCESS TO THE TWO, TO THE CURRENT EXISTING TWO CAR GARAGE. SO THAT 6% IS REDUCED EVEN MORE IF THEY WOULD, SHOULD ONLY JUST BUILD IN THE BACKYARD. MR. THOMPSON, DOES THIS CHANGE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION LOOKING AT THE LOT COVERAGE AND WHAT'S BEEN BUILT AND WHAT CAN BE BUILT? UM, I WOULD RECONSIDER YES. BASED ON THIS, YES. SO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD INCLUDES, UH, APPROVAL, UM, BASED ON THIS LATEST, YES, I WOULD, I WOULD RECONSIDER TO, UH, APPROVAL. OKAY. UM, IN THAT CASE THEN I'M GONNA WITHDRAW MY QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT THERE. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS FOR THIS CASE? MR. DARREN DUNN, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND THEN WE'LL SWEAR YOU IN. UH, DARREN DUNN, 60 41 MC BOULEVARD, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 6. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. ALRIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M DARREN DUNN, HOMEOWNER OF 60 41 MC BOULEVARD BOULEVARD FOR THE LAST 11 YEARS. WE'LL START OUT AS A FAMILY OF TWO IN 2013 IS NOW A FAMILY OF FOUR IN 2025. WE'VE FINALLY COME TO A POINT WHERE WE'VE OUTGROWN OUR THREE BEDROOM HOME IN THE LAST 11 YEARS. WE HAVE VASTLY IMPROVED THE HOME FOR WHEN WE FIRST PURCHASED IT. A FEW IMPROVEMENTS TO HIGHLIGHT OR A TOTAL KITCHEN MAKEOVER, MASSIVE BATHROOM RECONSTRUCTION, [00:20:01] AS WELL AS REFINISHING ALL THE ORIGINAL HARDWOOD FLOORS. THE LAST AND PERHAPS MOST IMPORTANT IMPROVEMENT IS TO ADD MORE LIVABLE SPACE. OVER THE LAST 18 MONTHS, WE'VE WORKED ON A PLAN TO ADD THAT LIVABLE SPACE BY WORKING WITH THE LOCAL ARCHITECT TO FINALIZE DESIGN PLANS, SOURCING AND ENGINEERING STUDY SECURING THE NECESSARY CAPITAL, FILLING ALL, FILLING, FILING ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, ET CETERA. WHAT WE DIDN'T KNOW UNTIL WE HAD OUR PLANS REVIEWED BY A CITY OF DALLAS PLANS EXAMINER IS THAT OUR EXISTING ATTACHED GARAGE IS NON-PERFORMING CODE. IN MY OPINION, THIS HAS CREATED AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP THAT WAS DONE FORESEEABLE UNTIL THIS POINT IN TIME. WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS THE MOST UNIQUE CHARACTERISTIC OF AN OLDER HOME COULD POTENTIALLY BECOME AS BIG A SETBACK. TODAY I ASK THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS TO RECONSIDER THEIR DENIAL OF VARIANT RECOMMENDATION. WITHOUT THE NECESSARY APPROVAL, WE WOULD HAVE TO MATERIALLY CHANGE OUR PLANS AND BY DOING SO, RUN THE RISK OF HINDERING THE EFFORT TO ADHERE TO THE EXISTING ARCHITECTURAL STYLE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. FURTHERMORE, WE DON'T GET THE VARIOUS APPROVAL WE WOULD HAVE TO MOVE TO ANOTHER HOME AND LEAVE BEHIND ALL THE TIME, MONEY, AND EFFORT SPENT MAKING THE HOUSE OUR HOME. WE WANT TO DO RIGHT BY THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND FEEL THAT OUR CURRENT PLAN WITH THE VARIANCE APPROVAL FITS WELL WITHIN THE CITY ORDINANCE, WON'T TAKE AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WON'T BE INVASIVE TO THE TREES, AND WILL STAY WITHIN THE STYLE OF THE HOME. TO CONCLUDE THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT WE NEED TO ADD LIVABLE SPACE SIMILAR TO OUR HOME. WE WANT NOTHING MORE THAN FOR THIS HOME TO BE OUR FOREVER HOME. ASK THAT YOU PLEASE APPROVE OUR VARIANCE REQUESTS. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? YES, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. UM, THIS IS JUST FOR A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, MR. DUNN. YEAH. UM, WE RECEIVED A LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM A MICHELLE AND SCOTT STRONG, UH, LOCATED AT 60 45 MCAS BOULEVARD. CAN YOU CONFIRM OR DENY THAT THOSE ARE YOUR NEIGHBORS ADJACENT TO THE AREA OF YOUR SITE? YOUR, YOUR PROPERTY THAT'S IN QUESTION. YEAH. CONFIRM. THEY'RE ON THE EAST SIDE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ABSOLUTELY. ALRIGHT, THANKS. NO PROBLEM. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS CASE? NO, THE SPEAKERS REGISTER. OKAY. DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR THIS CASE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. THANK YOU MR. P. OKAY. UH, LET'S SEE HERE. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER EDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 0 8 ON APPLICATION. WHOOPS. THIS WAS THE WRONG SHEET, UH, BECAUSE THAT WAS . NO, UH, YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. SORRY. UH, SPENCER SO GRANT, THE FOUR FOOT EIGHT INCH VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT. BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOW THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT. I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH IS A COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE ACQUIRED. SECOND, THANK YOU. DISCUSSION? YES. UH, MY MOTION TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS, I BELIEVE, UM, WITH THE FACTS PRESENTED TO US THAT IT DOES MEET ALL THREE, UH, STANDARDS FOR, UH, THE VARIANCE THERE. AND I'LL JUST LIST THEM OUT. YOU DO HAVE, UH, COMMUNI OR SPECIFICALLY YOUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR, UH, SUPPORT IN THIS? I THINK THAT'S VERY STRONG, UM, TO YOUR CASE THAT, UM, AND THEN POINT B BEING THAT, UM, THIS SITE IS PRETTY MUCH MAXED OUT AS FAR AS LOT COVERAGE. SO IT WOULD IN FACT BE RESTRICTIVE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO ENFORCE THE CODE AS IS THAT YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD ANYWHERE JUST BY THE FACT THAT YOU'RE EITHER AT OR VERY CLOSE TO THAT 40% LAW COVERAGE AND THAT ABOVE ALL, THAT THIS IS NOT A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP. SO, UM, AN ADDITIONAL POINT TOO, BEING THAT THIS IS A CONSERVATION DISTRICT, UM, FROM THE IMAGES THAT WE WERE SHOWN EARLIER TODAY, THE ADDITION TO THIS GARAGE WOULD NOT, UM, AT LEAST VISUALLY OR THE AESTHETICS OF THIS COMMUNITY WOULD NOT BE A DETRIMENT, UM, SINCE THAT GARAGE IS SO, UH, SET BACK FROM THE STREET FOOTAGE THERE. SO THAT IS WHY I'M VOTING, UM, IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION. UH, I AGREE WITH THAT. UM, I ALSO WANNA COMMEND THE, UH, SPEAKER MR. ESTE ON HIS, UH, WELL THOUGHT OUT. ELEMENT TWO, SUBSTITUTE FINANCIAL COST HARDSHIP EXPLANATION. WE, WE DON'T GET THAT MUCH. SO GOOD JOB. UM, I WAS GOING TO DENY THIS, BUT GIVEN THE STEPS, UM, RESEARCH BETWEEN BRIEFING AND THE HEARING, UM, AND THE, UH, PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, UM, IT IS NOW CLEAR THAT STAFF HAS, UH, NOW RECOMMENDED APPROVAL BASED ON THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE PROPERTY. UM, AND THEREFORE, UM, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THIS APPLICATION. I THINK WE SHOULD, AS A BOARD, ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO STAY IN THEIR [00:25:01] HOMES. AND, UM, WE, WE ARE AN URBAN, WE, WE ARE VERY URBAN. SO, UM, THIS WILL ALLOW THE FAMILY TO GROW, UM, WHILE ALSO MAINTAINING THE CHARACTER OF THE HOME. UM, LIKE I SAID, IF IT WASN'T FOR STAFFS, UH, RESEARCH DURING BREAK, UM, THE APPLICANT'S, UH, REPRESENTATIVE I PROBABLY WOULD'VE VOTED. DENIAL. ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. LAMB. AYE. MR. CANNON? AYE. MR. BROOKS? AYE. MR. GRAHAM? AYE. MS. VICE CHAIR? AYE. MOTION? GRAHAM PASSES. 5 2 0. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALRIGHT, MOVING ON. BD 2 4 5 DASH 0 1 4, 31 46 CLYDE DRIVE. IF, UM, THE APPLICANT COULD PLEASE STEP FORWARD. GOOD AFTERNOON, MA. MY NAME IS BLANCA CARDENA. I'M JUST HERE ON BEHALF OF MR. MENDEZ. OKAY, HANG ON JUST A SECOND. IF, UM, WE NEED YOU TO STATE BOTH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, THEN WE NEED TO SWEAR YOU IN. OH. SO IF YOU CAN, UM, START WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN MS. WILLIAMS, WE'LL JUST SWEAR YOU IN. BLANC CARDENA, I'M, UM, 7 45 CLEARWOOD, UH, DRIVE, DO TEXAS 7 5 2 3 2. UH, I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF MR. MENDEZ AND I'M SORRY, I NEED TO SWEAR YOU IN. OKAY. OKAY. DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, I'M JUST REQUESTING THE, UM, THE COUNCIL BOARD, UM, PERMISSION FOR POSTPONING THIS, UH, APPLICATION FOR A COUPLE MONTHS SINCE MR. MENEZ HAS SOME ISSUES TO WORK ON WITH. AND, UM, HE'S, UH, ASKING FOR A COUPLE MONTHS IN ORDER TO WORK WITH A BOARD OF JASMINE. UH, WHEN YOU SAY A COUPLE MONTHS, WHAT, WHAT, TWO, TWO MONTHS. AND WHAT WILL YOU BE FOR? FOR ANOTHER COUNCIL MEETING. SURE. SO WHAT WILL YOU BE DOING IN THOSE TWO MONTHS? THAT SHE, UH, OKAY, HE HAS SOME ISSUES TO WORK WITH. UM, WE KNOW THAT, UH, THE CITY, UH, IS ASKING US BECAUSE OF THE HOUSES ARE, ARE TOGETHER AND, UH, I KNOW THE CITY'S GONNA, UM, UM, CALL THE NEIGHBOR AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO WORK, UM, TO SEE WITH, UM, WITH THE CITY. I WAS TALKING TO MR. THOMPSON AND, UH, PROBABLY, UM, WE HAVE TO SEE WHAT ELSE WE NEED TO SUBMIT IN ORDER TO GET OUR, UM, PERMIT TO PROVE SOME MORE EVIDENCE OR, UM, SOMETHING, SOME MORE EVIDENCE TO WORK WITH, UM, THE CITY. SO I DON'T, WOULDN'T HAVE ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. HAVE Y'ALL ALREADY ENGAGED YOUR NEIGHBOR IN THESE DISCUSSIONS? YES, HE'S AWARE OF, AND HE KNOWS BECAUSE WHEN THEY DID THIS, THE JOB, THEY, BOTH OF THEM AGREED TO DO IT. I'M THE APPLICANT. I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY DID IT. UM, I HAVE NO IDEA. WHAT IS YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THE HOMEOWNER? NO, JUST, JUST, UM, NOTHING. UH, MY, THE COMPANY PLANS, HE DID THE PLANS AND WE TRIED TO HELP THE, THE CUSTOMERS TO SUBMIT TO THE CITY THE PLANS AND ALL THE DOCUMENTS IN ORDER TO GET THE, UH, PERMITS APPROVED. BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY RELATIONS RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM. SO YOU ARE PART OF THE FIRM THAT DREW UP THE PLANS THAT RRC PLANS? YES, CORRECT. SO DID YOU DROP THOSE PLANS BEFORE OR AFTER IT WAS CONSTRUCTED? AFTER THIS IS ALREADY EXISTING. I SEE. YES. OKAY. SO THEY CAME TO YOU ONCE THE CITY HAD TAGGED THEM AS, AS NOT BEING COMPLIANT. THEY CAME TO YOU TO DRAW PLANS? YES. I THINK THEY GOT A TICKET FROM THE CITY AND, UM, THEY, THAT THE CITY WAS AWARE THAT THESE HOUSES WERE BUILT TOGETHER. SO THEY CAME UP TO US AND, AND, AND TRY TO, UM, TO, TO DO THE PLANS AND TRY TO SUBMIT FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO SEE IF WE GET APPROVED. SO HAVE YOU BEEN INSIDE THE PREMISES? HAVE YOU BEEN ON, HAVE YOU BEEN IN THE HOUSE? UM, YES, I'VE BEEN IN THE HOUSE. SO IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT THE PLANS THAT Y'ALL HAVE DRAWN UP, THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE CITY, IS THAT AN ACCURATE DEPICTION OF HOW THE PROPERTY EXISTS TODAY? YES. YES. OKAY. UM, I CAN, UM, IT'S NOT MY FAULT. I SHOULD BRING, UH, PICTURES, UH, FOR YOU TO YEAH, I DON'T SEE VIDEOS AND PICTURES WITH IT. I THINK THE PLANS AND THEN JUST THE STREET VIEW THAT MR. THOMPSON PROVIDED IS PROBABLY PRETTY SUFFICIENT. UM, I HAVE A, I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE NECESSARILY WITH, WITH A MONTH. A, A FEW MONTHS IS IS A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME CONSIDERING THAT THIS TWO HOUSES THAT ARE ADJOIN. YES. UM, [00:30:01] AND THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR BOARD ATTORNEY MADE A GOOD POINT DURING BRIEFING THAT WHEN THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER, UH, COMES FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, THEY MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE ASSIGNED TO THIS BOARD. SO WE'RE GONNA, AND REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS TO YOUR YOUR CASE, THERE'S NO CASE THAT'S PRECEDENT. SO ALTHOUGH IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE TO HAVE CONSIDERATION FOR THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER, 'CAUSE YOUR Y'ALL'S PROPERTIES ARE BUILDINGS ARE ATTACHED THAT THEY, THESE WILL BE MADE INDEPENDENT AND THEY MAY NOT ACTUALLY COME UP ON THE SAME BOARD. YES. I'M, I EVEN TOLD THEM MYSELF, I'M NOT, UM, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THINGS LEGALLY AS YOU DO, BUT, UM, AS COMMON SENSE US, I, WE COULDN'T SAY NO TO THEM. ASK, UM, OUR CLIENTS, BUT MYSELF, UNDERSTOOD. I UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD. SO WE HAVE TO COME FORWARD WITH IT. IS YOUR CLIENT GONNA BE HERE NEXT? UH, YES, BOTH OF THEM. IS THERE, IS THERE A REASON THEY'RE NOT HERE RIGHT NOW? UM, I THINK, UH, HE'S, UM, ABOARD, UM, HOW DO YOU SAY IT, ABROAD? HE'S IN ABROAD, YEAH. MEXICO. OKAY. BUT SO WILL HE, IF WE ONLY HOLD IT OVER FOR A MONTH, WILL HE BE HERE? YES. YES. DO DO THE TWO HOUSES ACTUALLY TOUCH? YES, THEY ARE. SO DO THEY SHARE A WALL? NO, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN WALL EACH, EACH ONE OF 'EM, I BELIEVE. I'M NOT PRETTY SURE, BUT I BELIEVE, UH, THE, THE NEIGHBOR, HE DID LIKE A FIREWALL. FIREWALL. FIREWALL, IT'S CALLED RIGHT? THE WALL. IT'S AGAINST FIRE PROTECT. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY I'M SORRY, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT HE DID. NOT THE MEN INEZ, BUT THE OTHER ONE TOOK TAKE CARE OF IT FOR LIKE, FOR FIRE. UM, PROBLEM. DO YOU HAVE, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHEN YOUR CLIENT CONSTRUCTED THIS ADDITION? NO. DID THEY GIVE YOU ANY INDICATION? NO, I BELIEVE NO. NO. DIDN'T TELL ME WHEN HE DID IT. HE DOESN'T. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'M . ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS CASE? NO OTHER SPEAKERS. UH, MR. CANNON? YEAH, I JUST, THIS IS PROBABLY MORE OF A PROFESSIONAL COMMENT AND I'M GONNA, UM, JUST REFERENCING THE, THE PLANS THAT WERE SUBMITTED, UM, THE WAY THAT IT WAS AT LEAST ORIGINALLY INTERPRETED WAS, UM, I DUNNO THAT YOU ALL HAD, HAD DONE THE DRAFTING WORK AND THEN THE CONSTRUCTION HAPPENED. UM, WHERE, AND THIS IS PROBABLY REALLY NITPICKY, BUT JUST KIND OF JUST FOR FUTURE REFERENCE, IF WE'RE GOING TO, TO HOLD THIS CASE OVER, UM, IT'S SHOWING PROPOSED, UH, FOUR PLANS, PROPOSED ELEVATIONS, IF THIS IS ALREADY CONSTRUCTED, UM, I BELIEVE LIKE THE, THE PROPER LANGUAGE WOULD BE ASBUILT SINCE YOU'RE RECORDING AND I DON'T WANNA TELL YOU HOW TO DO YOUR JOB, BUT JUST FOR, UM, AS SINCE THESE ARE LEGAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, UM, JUST TO IDENTIFY THEM AS, AS-BUILTS INSTEAD OF UM, PROPOSED. SO, OKAY. YEAH, I'M SURE I KNOW THAT. OH, SO, OH, HOLD ON. WE'VE GOT, UM, SORRY. UM, MR. THOMPSON, I'M HAND IT OVER TO YOU. YEAH. SO ANY WORK THAT'S DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT IS PROPOSED BECAUSE LEGALLY IT WAS NOT BUILT WITH A PERMIT. AND SO WHEN THOSE PLANS ARE SUBMITTED, THAT'S THE REASON WHY IT'S PROPOSED AS OPPOSED TO IN OUR ARCHITECTURE WORLD AS BUILT SYSTEM WAS ACTED OUT HERE AND WAS BUILT WITH THE PERMIT. BUT FROM A PERMITTING STANDPOINT, IF THERE IS NO PERMIT ON FILE, IT IS A PROPOSED, EVEN THOUGH IT'S, WE CAN GO OUT THERE AND WE CAN SEE IT TODAY, IT'S STILL PROPOSED. SO IF IT SAID AS BUILT, YOU GUYS WOULD JUST KICK IT BACK AS A MATTER OF COURSE AND GO NO, WE WOULDN'T. I MEAN WE WOULD, WE WOULD UNDERSTAND IT IF OKAY. YEAH, BUT JUST WE WE'RE OKAY WITH RECEIVING PLANS TO SAY PROPOSED EVEN THOUGH IT'S ALREADY BILL. OKAY. ALRIGHT. I STAND CORRECTED. THANK YOU MR. THOMPSON FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. AND I WILL RESEND MY FORM OF CLARIFICATION FOR THE APPLICANT. MS. UM, I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION. OKAY. UM, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BD 8 2 4 5 DASH 0 1 4 HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 19TH, 2025. SECOND, UM, I AM OKAY WITH GIVING Y'ALL A MONTH. UH, I DON'T THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE PULLED UP. WELL, YOU KNOW, MOVED OUT, KICKED OUT ANY LONGER. UM, AND IT'S NOT THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY DENY THIS AND HAVE YOU ALL REFILE AND COME BACK 'CAUSE THAT THERE'S A, THERE'S A PRESSING MATTER HERE. UM, AND WHATEVER HAPPENS TO YOUR NEIGHBOR POTENTIALLY MAY NOT COME IN FROM THIS BOARD. I THINK THIS NEEDS A, A SWIFT RESOLUTION, UM, AND TO BE HEARD. SO I'M, I'M WILLING TO GRANT YOU A ONE ONE MONTH EXTENSION ON THIS. YEAH, I'M WILLING TO GIVE A ONE MONTH, BUT I WON'T EXTEND IT PAST THEN. NOTHING. [00:35:01] THANK YOU. YEAH, I, I, UM, I'M SORRY. SECOND JEN, I JUST AGREE THAT FEEL THAT WE SHOULD LIKE, KEEP THE BALL OF ROLLING UP THOSE THINGS IN, UH, IN HERE IN A MONTH. I THINK THEY NEED MORE THAN A MONTH. I THINK THIS IS A, A SERIOUS ISSUE THAT'S GONNA REQUIRE SOME REALLY CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING. UM, IF, IF, IF PART OF OUR JUSTIFICATION IS THAT THE OTHER, UH, HOMEOWNER WILL SIMILARLY SUBMIT AN APPEAL, 30 DAYS ISN'T LONG ENOUGH FOR THEM TO GET IN FRONT OF THE BOARD. LOOK, IF IT'S ON THE DOCKET NEXT MONTH AND IT JUST GETS PUSHED AGAIN, I GUESS THAT'S FINE. BUT I, MY CONCERN IS THAT'S NOT ENOUGH TIME. THIS IS TOO BIG OF A PROBLEM. PEOPLE CAN'T, IT TAKES THEIR PEOPLE 30 DAYS TO ROUND UP NEIGHBORS TO TALK ABOUT FENCE HEIGHT. THIS IS GONNA BE A SOLUTION THAT WE HAVE NEVER SEEN BEFORE. UM, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT 30 DAYS FROM TODAY IS ENOUGH. I WILL MAKE, UM, A POINT OF DISCUSSION HERE. UM, YOU KNOW WHAT, WHAT MY COLLEAGUES SAY, UM, I DO AGREE TO HOLD THIS OVER. HOWEVER, UM, AGAIN, JUST IN MY PROFESSIONAL SENSE, UM, THIS IS A HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE ISSUE. UM, ONE THAT I'VE NEVER SEEN AND ON MY OWN WAS FOUR YEARS ON THE BOARD HERE. UM, GOD FORBID IF A FIRE OR LIFE EVENT WERE TO HAPPEN TO EITHER ONE OF THE PROPERTIES, UH, LIVES WOULD BE IN JEOPARDY, I BELIEVE, AND AS WELL AS PROPERTY 30 DAYS. I MEAN, ACT QUICK, I'LL VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE HOLDOVER, BUT MAN, THIS IS, UM, AGAIN, THERE'S SETBACKS FOR, FOR A REASON. UM, AND IT IS TO PROTECT LIFE AND PROPERTY AND THE DISREGARD FOR THAT. UM, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE'S JEOPARDY WITH THIS. SO 30 DAYS ACT QUICK, I'LL VOTE IN FAVOR. AGAIN, THESE ARE TWO SEPARATE CASES. REGARDLESS OF WHAT Y'ALL WORK OUT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY'RE INDEPENDENT AND WE MAKE DECISIONS INDEPENDENTLY. I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AT THE STREET VIEW AND Y'ALL HAVE A, AN AIR CONDITIONING UNIT POKING OUT FROM, FROM A FENCE TO HIDE AN ILLEGAL STRUCTURE THAT WAS, WAS BUILT. AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT LOOKS, WHAT, WHAT WAS BUILT IN TERMS OF QUALITY. AND AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S TO ME A SAFETY ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO HAVE A QUICK RESOLUTION. I MEAN, IF IT WAS MY WAY, I'D PROBABLY TEAR THE CASE TODAY. BUT I WILL GRANT YOU A 30 DAY, I WON'T GRANT ANYTHING LONGER. ALL RIGHT. FULL CALL VOTE. OKAY, MS. LAMB. AYE. MR. CANNON? AYE. MR. GRAHAM? AYE. MR. BROOKS? AYE. MS. GABO AYE. MOTION TO HOLD UNTIL FEBRUARY 19 PASSES? FIVE TO ZERO. THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD DAY. ALL RIGHT. UM, BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 0 1 14 17 LYNNWAY STREET. THE APPLICANT WILL PLEASE STEP FORWARD IF YOU'LL STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN WE'LL SWEAR YOU IN BEFORE YOU START YOUR TESTIMONY. UH, J TAYLOR AT 10 33 EAST NINTH STREET. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES MA'AM. PLEASE PROCEED. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD. UM, I'M THE APPLICANT FOR 1417 LYNNWAY. UH, WITH THIS APPLICATION WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF, I'M REPRESENTING ST. PHILLIPS. WE ARE WORKING WITH THE PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOMES. UM, AS PART OF THAT, THAT'S WHAT'S ON THE CONSTRUCTION CURRENTLY ON THE LOT. AS PART OF THAT PARTNERSHIP, WE'VE ALSO WANTED TO INCREASE DENSITY WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE APPLYING FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE A DU. UM, THE SECOND SPECIAL EXCEPTION THAT WE WERE ASKING FOR IS FOR A SLIGHT INCREASE OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ABOUT 2%, UH, FOR A LITTLE EXTRA SQUARE FOOTAGE BECAUSE THE INTENT WAS THAT THIS A DU WAS TO BE DESIGNED FOR A HANDICAP, UH, PERSON. WHEN I ORIGINALLY MENTIONED THAT AND DID THE REQUEST, I TALKED TO, UH, DIANE BARKUM, I BELIEVE. UM, AND SHE LET ME KNOW, ACCORDING TO THE CITY OF DALLAS CODE SECTION 51 A, 1.107, THERE'S ESPECIALLY EXEMPTS FOR HANDICAP, WHICH LED US DOWN THE PATH OR IF THE REQUEST HAD TO BE CHANGED AND AUGMENTED FOR THAT PURPOSE. BUT AFTER GOING BACK AND FORTH, WE REALIZED SINCE A HANDICAPPED PERSON ISN'T ACTUALLY LIVING IN THE HOUSE RIGHT NOW, THOSE SPECIAL EXEMPTIONS MAY BE LEGALLY BLURRY. AND SO WE DECIDED TO JUST LEAVE IT THE WAY IT WAS. BUT I THINK WHAT WAS READ DURING THE BRIEFING WAS THAT IT WAS CHANGED FROM THE ORIGINAL SPECIAL EXEMPTION, UM, TO INCLUDE ALL THAT LANGUAGE OF [00:40:01] A SPECIAL EXEMPTION FOR A HANDICAP. SO I THINK IN THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WE WERE JUST ASKING FOR THE A DU AND THEN THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION, FOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE TO BE INCREASED, UM, WHICH I BELIEVE IS WHAT YOU GUYS DISCUSSED. BASICALLY REMOVING THE PROVISIONS OF THAT HANDICAPPED PERSON HAD TO BE LIVING IN HERE CURRENTLY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT BUILT. SO I THINK WHAT THE TWO APPLICATIONS WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US, THE TRUE REQUESTS ARE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE HANDICAPPED TO THE SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATION AND THEN A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE HANDICAPPED TO THE FLOOR AREA REGULATION. SO WHEN I MADE THE ORIGINAL REQUEST, IT WAS A SPECIAL, I GUESS, OR A VARIANCE FOR AN A DU AND THEN IT WAS A SPECIAL EXEMPTION FOR AN INCREASED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF, SO I HAVE ON YOUR ORIGINAL APPLICATION A VARIANCE, UM, AUTHORIZING ADDITIONAL DRAWING UNIT FOR 1417 LEND AND A VARIANCE, UH, TO EXCEED 25%. CORRECT. UM, AND THEN APPLICATION IS, UH, MADE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE TO GRANT THE PRESCRIBED A DESCRIBED APPEAL FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS TO PROVIDE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSE, AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT FOR OLDER SENIOR FAMILY MEMBER NOT TO BE USED FOR RENT. SO YOU'RE CORRECT ON THIS APPLICATION, THERE IS NOTHING HERE REGARDING HANDICAP, BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON HERE WE HAVE THE HANDICAP PROVISION IN BOTH OF THE APPLICATION REQUESTS. RIGHT. THE ACTUAL APPLICATION THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE APPLICANT DOES STATE THAT IT'S FOR A HANDICAPPED PERSON. IT SHOWS SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT IT. SO, SO THEN CAN, CAN WE HEAR THE CASE TODAY BASED ON, ON THE TWO REQUESTS, WHICH WAS, UH, A VARIANCE EXCEEDING 25%, UM, AND THEN ALSO ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT NOT FOR RENT HERE, THE, THE LANGUAGE WAS THAT THEY ASKED US TO WRITE A REASON FOR THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION OF THAT INCREASED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF I THINK ABOUT 50 SQUARE FEET. AND, AND YOU FOLLOWED UP, YOU MADE THIS APPLICATION ON NINE FOUR AND THEN ON 11 ONE YOU DID SAY YOU WANTED IT FOR A HANDICAPPED PERSON, THE SECOND LETTER RIGHT HERE. AND, AND IN THAT LETTER WHEN, WHEN I TALKED TO DIANE, SHE SAID THE RIGHT TO REASON WHY YOU WANTED THE SPECIAL EXEMPTION. AND I SAID WE DESIGNED IT TO HAVE A LITTLE LARGER BATHROOM SENIOR FOR HAND. YEAH, YEAH. IT DOESN'T INDICATE, UH, ABILITIES. SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, HE'S, HE'S NOW SAYING HE DOESN'T WANNA HAVE THE COMPONENT OF HANDICAP SINCE WE NOTICED, UM, THE APPLICATION HERE IS FOR THAT. CAN WE MAKE CASE CONCERN CAME WHEN YOU WERE ASKING THE QUESTION EARLIER, LIKE IF THE HANDICAP PERSON MOVE OUT, YOU KNOW, WILL THEY HAVE TO REVERT BACK? SO I THINK HIS CONCERN WAS LET'S NOT EVEN YEAH, IT'S OKAY IF YOU TAKE THAT OFF. WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE IN THE EVENT THAT THE HANDICAP PERSON DOES MOVE OUT. SO THERE, BUT ARE, ARE YOUR PLANS BA PLANS BASED ON SOMEBODY THAT TO RESIDE THERE THAT HAS A HANDICAP? NO, THE HOME ISN'T BUILT. NOW WE'RE IN TALKS WITH THE BURRELL FAMILY THAT HAS A HANDICAPPED PERSON THAT WANTS TO BUY THE HOME, THAT HAS SOMEONE THAT IN THE FAMILY, BUT SINCE THEY, THEY CURRENTLY LIVE THERE. I SEE. WE DIDN'T WANT TO GO DOWN THAT PATH OF TRYING TO RESTRICT THAT HOME BECAUSE THEY DON'T ACTUALLY OWN THE HOME YET. AND SO THAT'S WHY THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS JUST FOR THE A DU AND THE INCREASED WORK FOOTAGE. SO CAN WE HEAR THIS CASE WITHOUT THE, THE HANDICAP COMPONENT OR DOES HE WE HAVE TO MODIFY IT AND RESUBMIT IT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO BE MODIFIED AND RESUBMITTED BECAUSE THERE ARE SPECIAL PROVISIONS. SO WITH, UM, THE HANDICAP PROVISION, THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO JUST COME IN UNDER A SPECIAL ACCEPT TO ANY OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE, UM, AND THE FEES ARE WAIVED. I SEE. SO IF WE REMOVE THOSE MODIFICATIONS, WELL IF WE REMOVE THE HANDICAP PORTION, THEN THEY WILL HAVE TO MODIFY THE APPLICATION AND PAY THE FEES. OKAY. SO I I'VE ALREADY PAID THE FEES ALREADY. I THINK THE $1,200 FOR BOTH S THEY WERE GONNA BE REIMBURSED AND I ALREADY TOLD DIANE I DIDN'T WANT TO MODIFY THE REQUEST. THERE WON'T BE. SO I THINK WHAT SOUNDS LIKE IS GONNA HAPPEN IS YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO RESUBMIT. THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY THOUGH THAT, OR YOU CAN MOD, MAYBE MODIFY, UM, IS HE GONNA HAVE TO RESUBMIT OR CAN YOU MODIFY? [00:45:01] OKAY, WE'RE TRYING TO FIND OUT. OKAY. IF, IF YOU DO HAVE TO RESUBMIT, I'M GONNA ENCOURAGE YOU TO ALSO FILE, UH, A ALSO A FEE WAIVER. UM, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL, FOR TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF WE JUST HAVE TO HOLD YOU OVER AND HEAR THE CASE WITH WITHOUT THE HANDICAP PROVISION OR IF YOU NEED TO REFILE WITH JUST YOUR OTHER REQUESTS WITHOUT THE HANDICAP BECAUSE THE HANDICAP PROVISION GIVES YOU, UM, A MORE ROOM, UH, TO NAVIGATE THE DEVELOPMENT CODE A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY THAN WHAT YOU MIGHT BE GRANTED IN THAT PARTICULAR PD OR ZONING DISTRICT. YEAH, CORRECT. AND I WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT RIGHT NOW. THAT'S OKAY. IF, IF, IF I MAY, I THINK I'M READING THE TEA LEAVES HERE. I THINK THAT THE LETTER THAT YOU GUYS, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED SORT OF EXPLAINING WHY THEY WANTED THE A DU WAS, WAS MORE OF AN EXPLANATION RATHER THAN A CHANGE IN THE APPLICATION. AND I CAN ABSOLUTELY SEE WHY, WHY STAFF WOULD THINK THAT IT WAS YOU, YOU WERE CLARIFYING YOUR REQUEST. AND I CAN ALSO READ IT AND SEE WHY THAT WAS NOT A CLARIFICATION OF YOUR REQUEST. I DON'T, I I DON'T THINK, AND I DIDN'T ASK TO CHANGE IT. RIGHT. I THINK THE STAFF IS JUST VERY SENSITIVE TO MAKING SURE THOSE THAT HAVE DIFFERENT ABILITIES ARE, ARE, YOU KNOW, ARE ACCOMMODATED AS AS BEST AS POSSIBLE. RIGHT. SO I THINK WE TEND TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION, BUT I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE CLEARING IT UP. HOPEFULLY WE'LL FIGURE OUT WHICH DIRECTION WE GO. OKAY. I THINK, I THINK IN GENERAL THERE'S A LOT OF SUPPORT FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING HERE. ST. PHILIP'S A GREAT SCHOOL. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, THAT WAS A BIG QUESTION IN TERMS OF WHAT THAT LOOKED LIKE WITH THAT VISION AND THAT DEED RESTRICTION. I THINK WE'RE ALL JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE NEXT STEPS ARE. OKAY. THIS IS DIANA, I'M ONLINE. UM, CAN I GO AHEAD AND SPEAK? YES, BUT YOU HAVE TO TURN YOUR CAMERA ON. OKAY. ONE SEC. OKAY. CAN YOU SEE ME? ARE WE GOOD? YES, WE CAN SEE. UM, OKAY. SO I, UM, AFTER OUR STAFF MEETING, IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION THAT THIS WAS GONNA BE A, UH, FOR A HANDICAP UM, PERSON. AND SO I SPOKE TO THE APPLICANT AND I TOLD HIM WHAT IT ENTAILED TO CHANGE IT. UM, THE MAIN DIFFERENCE IS THAT THEY WOULD BOTH BE CONSIDERED SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, NOT ONE VARIANCE AND ONE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. UM, AND HE WENT AHEAD AND DECIDED TO CHANGE IT. UM, AND HE SAID THAT HE WAS GONNA HAVE THE, UM, THE POTENTIAL HOME BUYERS ALSO BE INCLUDED IN THIS CASE. UM, AND I HAVE THE EMAIL, I SENT HIM AN EMAIL STATING HOW THE LANGUAGE WAS GONNA READ AND HE AGREED WITH IT TO GO AHEAD AND LEAVE IT THAT WAY. UM, SO, SO NOW, UM, HE'S WANTING TO CHANGE IT BACK TO KEEP IT AS A VARIANCE AND A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WHICH WOULD BE FINE. I DON'T SEE THE ISSUE WITH THAT. UM, THE ONLY THING IS THAT WE WOULD NOT REIMBURSE HIM FOR THE FEES UNLESS HE WOULD COME BACK TO THE BOARD AND REQUEST A FEE WAIVER. UM, BUT HE'S STILL WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE STANDARDS FOR A VARIANCE. SO I GUESS NOW IN HIS PRESENTATION, IF HE COULD MEET THOSE, THAT MAY BE A POSSIBILITY FOR YOU GUYS TO STILL, YOU KNOW, LISTEN TO THIS CASE OR DECIDE ON THE CASE. SO, SO THEN YOU'RE SAYING IF YOU HAVE A CASE TODAY, IT WOULD NOT BE TWO SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO BE ONE VARIANCE AND ONE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. CORRECT. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. CAN WE DO, CAN WE DO THAT? CAN THEY? YEAH. OKAY. I THINK SHOULD WE, ONE SEC SECOND, WHY DON'T WE JUST TABLE THIS OR SOMETHING. I'VE NEVER HAD TO STOP ONE HALFWAY THROUGH. I THINK THEY'RE, BUT THEY'RE ALREADY ATERNITY ME, SO I THINK THEY HAVE TO CALL FOR A, WELL WE'RE DOWN A LAWYER SO I THINK WE NEED TO CALL FOR, UH, WE'RE JUST GONNA CALL FOR A FIVE MINUTE RECESS WHILE, UM, TERESA CARLISLE THE, UM, FOR SEC WELL CITY ATTORNEY, UM, UNTIL SHE COMES BACK. SO IT'S ONE 50, WE'LL JUST RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. WE'LL RECONVENE AT 1 55. SORRY GUYS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. YEAH, I DON'T KNOW. WE DIDN'T HEAR IT THAT WAY. OKAY. WE ARE RECONVENING IT IS 1:56 PM UM, WOULD THE BOARD ATTORNEY MIND GOING OVER THE VARIOUS OPTIONS WE HAVE IN REGARDS TO THIS CASE? PLEASE? IF THE APPLICANT CHOOSES TO CONTINUE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE HANDICAP FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATIONS INTO THE FLOOR AREA REGULATIONS, WE CAN CONTINUE. OR IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO CHANGE THE APPLICATION TO A VARIANCE, A REGULAR VARIANCE, THE FLOOR AREA REGULATIONS INTO A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO [00:50:01] THE SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATIONS, THEN YOU HAVE TWO OPTIONS YOU CAN EITHER DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE SO THEN HE CAN REFILE WITH THE CORRECT APPLICATION. OR WE COULD HOLD THIS CASE OVER FOR A MONTH AND FOR DIRECT STAFF TO RE-NOTICE IT AS A REGULAR VARIANCE GATES AND AS A REGULAR SPECIALIST SUBJECT CASE, OR IF WE APPLICANT DECIDES TO MOVE FORWARD AS OUTLINED IN THE HEARING TODAY, WE COULD MOVE FORWARD AND APPROVE IT OR DENY, BUT WE CAN ALSO PROVE BY MOVE, REMOVING THE HANDICAP POSITION. CORRECT. THAT SAYS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION EXPIRES WHEN A HANDICAP YES. YEAH, YOU CAN REMOVE THAT AS WELL. SO TECHNICALLY AS A PANEL WE HAVE THREE DIFFERENT OPTIONS. CORRECT. DOES EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND? SO MY QUESTION FOR YOU, THE APPLICANT IS WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE FORWARD AS YOU SUBMITTED, UM, AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WITH THE HANDICAP PROVISION OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO, UM, ALLOW, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HOLD OVER? UM, OR WOULD AND EVEN IF YOU HOLD OVER, WE CAN STILL DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO CHANGE IT TO A VARIANCE IN A SPECIAL EXCEPTION? THOSE ARE YOUR TWO CHOICES. UM, I THINK ULTIMATELY I WANT TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT I WANT TO GO, I THINK WITH THE THIRD PATH WITH REMOVING THE HANDICAPPED VARIANCE. THAT MAKES SENSE. AND THAT THAT WILL HAVE TO PASS THE BOARD. UM, BUT WE OKAY. I, UM, ARE THERE ANY SPEAKER, OTHER SPEAKERS FOR THIS MS. NICOLE BUFFET? RAPHAEL HELLO BOARD. MY NAME'S NICOLE RAFAEL 5 5 6 WENDY LANE. UM, I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. I'M WORKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, I'M SORRY, I NEED TO SWEAR YOU IN. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, PLEASE PROCEED. SURE. YES. I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, UM, IN THE FOREST DISTRICT WITHIN THE, THE SEVERAL BLOCKS OF THIS HOME. UM, THIS IS A VERY UNIQUE AND LOVELY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS, UM, MULTIDIMENSIONAL IN THAT YOU HAVE NOT JUST SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, YOU HAVE QUADPLEXES, YOU HAVE 20 UNIT, UM, APARTMENT MULTIFAMILY, 12 UNIT MULTIFAMILY TOWN HOMES ALL WITHIN A THREE BLOCK RADIUS IN THIS PARTICULAR SMALL HOME WITH FIT WITHIN THE CULTURE, WITHIN THE CLIMATE OF THE COMMUNITY. BUT IT WOULD ALSO ALLOW, WITH THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT PERSON, THAT FAMILY MEMBER, IT'S, IT'S BEING LABELED AS A GRANNY FLAT. UM, AND SO IN JUST THINKING ABOUT, UM, THOSE MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY WHO WILL BE LIVING INSIDE OF THE HOME, THEY WILL HAVE THAT ACCESSIBILITY WITHOUT, UM, ANY, UM, HINDER EXISTS. AND SO I JUST WANTED TO, TO LEND MY SUPPORT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. MS. LIAM. UM, SO MY QUESTIONS ARE, UM, THE FIRST ONE IS THE INTENTION IS TO KINDA BE A HANDY, UH, A GRAINY FLAT THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE ACCESSIBLE. RIGHT? UM, WILL IT BE THE SAME FAMILY LIVING IN BOTH THE A DU AND ON ON PREMISE SO IT WON'T BE KNOW WHAT IT'S NO, HE DOESN'T SOLVE IT. WELL, LET'S ASK THE APPLICABLE OKAY. THE INSPECTION, SORRY, THIS IS, THAT, THAT WAS THE LEGALITY ISSUE WE WERE TRYING TO NOT AVOID BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN SOLD YET. THE PEOPLE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH THE LENGTHY A MI RESTRICTION PROCESS AT THE CITY OF DALLAS TO BUY THE HOME. OKAY. SO Y'ALL ARE, SO THE CITY OF DALLAS OWNS OR THEY'RE GETTING FINANCING THROUGH THE CITY? I'M SORRY? THERE'S A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS WITH FINANCING AND WITH ST. PHILLIPS. YES. AND THE CITY OF DALLAS. OKAY. SO Y'ALL BASICALLY WORK WITHIN THE COMMUNITY TO PUT HOUSING WITH THOSE THAT NEED HOUSING AND WORK WITH THE CITY TO GET FINANCING FOR SUCH. YES MA'AM. SO YOU HAVE A TARGET FAMILY THAT'S INTENDED TO ADVISE, BUT YOUR THINGS ARE BEING TIED UP WITH FINANCING OF THE CITY. WE HAVE A TARGET FAMILY WHO'S LOOKING AT BUYING IT AND THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS TO BUY IT, BUT WE HAVE TO BUILD IT FIRST SURE. BEFORE THEY CAN BUY IT, UH, BECAUSE OF HOW THE A MI RESTRICTION PROCESS GOES. UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY WE FELT THAT IT WOULD BE SOMEWHAT OF A ISSUE BY TRYING TO RESTRICT IT OR GO THROUGH THAT PATHWAY. SO IF Y'ALL BUILD IT, UM, ARE Y'ALL BUILDING IT TO BE HANDICAPPED EXCESSIVE, LIKE EXCESSIVE, UM, ACCESSIBLE? YES MA'AM. THERE'S FIVE FOOT RADIUSES GRAB BARS IN THERE IN THE, AND THAT, THAT'S THE INTENT OF WHY IT'S A LITTLE BIGGER. SO REGARDLESS IF THIS FAMILY BUYS IT OR NOT, Y'ALL ARE BUILDING, THE INTENT IS TO BUILD IT TO MAKE IT HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. WHETHER A HANDICAPPED PERSON IS IN THERE OR NOT, THAT THAT IS THE INTENT OF WHY WE DESIGNED IT THAT WAY. AND THEN DO Y'ALL DON'T INTEND [00:55:01] TO RENT THIS A DU OUT? NO, MA'AM. SO IF WE WERE TO ACCEPT THIS, Y'ALL WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO US PUTTING A RESTRICTION WHERE IT'S NOT FORAL OR THE PRIMARY RESIDENT HAS TO RESIDE ON THE PROPERTY? SURE. WE, IT'S ALL GONNA BE ONE, ONE INDIVIDUAL PERSON LIVING THERE OR ONE FAMILY. IS THAT A NOT SOIS WITH AN A DU? IT'S NOT . IT'S A REASONABLE CONDITION THAT YOU CAN ADD THAT. OKAY. UM, I, I KNOW Y'ALL'S WORK REALLY WELL. I'VE DONE, I PARTNERED WITH TREK AND DID SOME STUFF WITH WE ALL OVER THERE AND I THINK Y'ALL ARE DOING GREAT WORK. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR YOU JUST BECAUSE IT'S DEVIATING FROM WHAT THE INITIAL APPLICATIONS, I THINK SOME PEOPLE ARE HAVING A HARD TIME GETTING THERE WITHOUT HAVING THE KINDA, THE PROPER I'S DOTTED AND T'S CROSSED. SO I THINK WE'RE JUST ASKING THE QUESTION HERE TO UNDERSTAND, UM, WHICH DIRECTION TO GO. BUT I THINK IN GENERAL WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF WHAT Y'ALL ARE DO HERE. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IT COMES WITH THE, THE BIGGER PICTURE. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, THIS, IT'S MAY NOT FOR, UM, FOR, I, SORRY, I DIDN'T CATCH YOUR NAME, BUT OUR SECOND, UM, SPEAKER, I DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR HER IF SHE COULD COME BACK UP. HI THERE. UH, THERE WAS A QUESTION I WANTED TO ASK BEFORE, UH, YOU WERE SEATED AGAIN, BUT, UM, YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS COMMUNITY IS MULTIDIMENSIONAL. UM, AS FAR AS LIKE THE JUST KIND OF GOING FOR, UH, AGE DEMOGRAPHICS, WOULD YOU SAY THAT IF THIS PROJECT WERE TO GO FOR THIS, UM, UM, ACCESSIBLE A DU WERE TO BE CONSTRUCTED, THAT UM, THAT THERE'S, THAT THERE'S A, A NEED FOR THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF DESIGN FOR THIS COMMUNITY, UH, TRYING TO GET AT. UM, IS THERE LIKE A, DOES THE DEMOGRAPHIC SUPPORT THAT THERE ARE AGING, UM, IN PLACE SENIORS THAT COULD BENEFIT FROM THIS IF IT'S THIS FAMILY THAT'S BUILT FOR FUTURE FAMILIES? TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES, THERE'S A LARGE DEMOGRAPHIC OF SENIORS THAT'S IN THE COMMUNITY. YOU HAVE SENIORS, YOU HAVE, UM, WORKING AGE INDIVIDUALS, YOU DO HAVE CHILDREN. UM, AS IT RELATES TO THE SENIORS IN THE COMMUNITY, YOU'LL SEE A LOT OF THE OLDER HOMES OF THE SENIORS WHO ARE AGING IN PLACE THERE. UM, A LOT OF THOSE HOMES ARE DILAPIDATED, SO THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, VERY, UM, UH, IN TERMS OF NEW PRODUCT OR RECENT PRODUCT IN THE AREA. THERE, THERE'S AN INTERESTING MIX OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. UM, SO WITH THIS PARTICULAR FAMILY, NOT THIS PARTICULAR FAMILY, BUT JUST EVEN THIS HOME OR THIS EVEN CONCEPT, WHAT IT WILL ALLOW IS THIS COMMUNITY TO BE A PART OF LIVING IN SOMETHING NEW AND NEWER AS WELL AS BRING THEIR FAMILY ALONG. INSTEAD OF HAVING THE BIFURCATION OF THE FAMILY WITH THE CHILDREN AND THEN THE GRANDPARENT, YOU KNOW, THAT MAY RECENTLY HAD A STROKE AND HAVE THEIR OWN SPACE OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, IT ALLOWS FOR THE FAMILY UNIT TO STAY TOGETHER. SO THAT'S CONCEPTUALLY, YOU KNOW, HOW WE SEE THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY AS IT RELATES TO PRODUCT TYPE AND KEEPING FAMILIES NEAR EACH OTHER AND CLOSE TO ONE ANOTHER. UM, ON THIS PARTICULAR BLOCK, THERE'S ONE, TWO, THERE ARE THREE ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORS ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE ROAD. ONE OF THOSE FAMILY HAS BEEN IN THE COMMUNITY SINCE 1924 WHEN THE GRANDMOTHER PURCHASED A HOME. AND SO THE NEIGHBOR, UM, THAT PARTICULAR NEIGHBOR HAS THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR, THE, THE, THE, THE RELATIVE THAT LIVES ON THE OTHER SIDE. AND THEN OF COURSE THEY KNOW THEIR NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET. AND SO I WOULD SAY THE AVERAGE AGE WITH THIS PARTICULAR STREET IS PROBABLY ABOUT 58 OR SO. AND SO YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, IN THE FIFTIES TO THE SIXTIES. AND SO WITH THAT, WHAT, WHAT THIS PARTICULAR HOME IS, IS REALLY IS A PERFECT FIT, BUT WHAT WE HAVE INSIDE OF THE COMMUNITY, BUT ALLOWING THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN AND AROUND THE COMMUNITY OR WHO WANT TO COME INTO THE COMMUNITY TO HAVE ACCESS TO SOMETHING THAT'S NEWER. UM, THE PARTICULAR, UM, INDIVIDUAL AS IT RELATES TO, UM, THIS HOME, UM, IS A MULTIDIMENSIONAL FAMILY, YOU KNOW, AND SO CONCEPTUALLY, YOU KNOW, WITH THE TAG NAME OF GRANNY PLAQUE, IT'S JUST THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVING THAT EXTRA SPACE, BUT ALSO ALLOWING THE FIT SAME WAY TO HAVE THEIR SANCTITY PRIVACY WITH EACH OF THEM. THANK YOU FOR, UH, SHUTTING LIGHT AND UH, ACTUAL THE FACTS TOO AS TO WHAT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND MORE SPECIFICALLY, WHAT THE BLOCK LOOKS LIKE AS, YOU KNOW, THIS PROJECT MOVE FORWARD, UM, GIVING THE CONTEXT OF A AGING IN PLACE AND THEN THE, UM, THE, THE, THE NEED FOR, UH, MORE A D HOUSING THAT'S ACCESSIBLE FOR ALL PEOPLE. MM-HMM . ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS THERE? THERE WAS A LETTER SUPPORT. MS. JULIE SECOND. SECOND, YES. MY NAME IS LEY [01:00:01] SARTON. I LIVE AT 58 30 MEADOWS LANE IN DALLAS. AND I, UM, THIS MORNING, UM, WE NEED TO SWEAR YOU IN . AND DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU. I'M, I'M WITH ST. PHILLIPS AND I, UH, LEAD OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS. I'VE BEEN, UH, BLESSED TO BE A PART OF THAT MINISTRY THERE FOR 15 YEARS. AND I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF BACKGROUND AS TO WHY WE'RE SUPER EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR, UH, UH, CONSIDERING IT. UM, THE A DU CONCEPT AS PART OF A DEMONSTRATION PROJECT, WE'RE BUILDING SEVEN UNITS IN, IN, IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, ALL SORT OF SHOWCASING DIFFERENT OPPORTUNITIES TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE LOT SIZES THAT WE HAVE. IN OUR CASE ON THE STREET IN PARTICULAR, THEY'RE VERY DEEP LOTS AND SO WE WANTED TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UM, TO SHOWCASE THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. WE HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING AND SHOWED DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPOLOGY TO OUR RESIDENTS. AND THE CONCEPT, AS NICOLE MENTIONED OF THE GRANNY FLAT WAS SUPER EXCITING. AND WE DO HAVE A LOT OF AGING SENIORS, ESPECIALLY SENIOR WOMEN. UM, AND THE OTHER THING THAT'S VERY UNIQUE ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR STREET IS THAT WARREN AVENUE IS THE BACK OF LYNNWAY. IT'S A VERY UNUSUAL COMBINATION WHERE THE BACKYARD OF THIS HOUSE ON LYNNWAY IS ACTUALLY FRONTS ONTO WARREN AVENUE. AND WARREN AVENUE IS, UM, UNTIL THREE YEARS AGO, IT WASN'T EVEN PAVED. IT WAS JUST LIKE A DIRT ROAD. AND THERE IS ONE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, UH, JUST ACROSS WARREN AVENUE FROM WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING THIS BE BUILT. AND, UH, IT'S A, A A A WONDERFUL OLDER WOMAN THAT LIVES THERE BY HERSELF. AND SHE FREQUENTLY, UH, REPORTED CRIME AND ACTIVITY BECAUSE IT WAS JUST KIND OF AN OVERGROWN ALLEY THAT WAS A STREET. AND SO REALLY THANKFUL THE CITY, UH, CAME IN AND IMPROVED IT AND PAVED IT. AND THIS WOULD INCREASE SAFETY IN THE COMMUNITY BY HAVING MORE EYES ON THIS STREET. UM, HAVING A SECOND HOME THAT ACTUALLY FRONTS, UH, WARREN AVENUE. AND, UM, I JUST, UH, WANTED TO ALSO SHARE THAT, UM, SORRY, NEED TO GET MY . UM, I, OH, I WANTED TO SHARE THAT. UH, IT WAS MENTIONED, WE DID HAVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT. UM, WE HAVE A, A, A RESIDENT, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL HAVE RECEIVED IT, BUT IT'S ONE RESIDENT THAT LIVES JUST, UH, THREE HOUSES DOWN. AND, UH, AND SHE'S VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS CONCEPT, WANTS TO HAVE THIS CONCEPT IN THEIR OWN BACKYARD. AND, UH, WE'VE ALSO HEARD INFORMALLY OF OTHER SUPPORT, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT WE KNOW FOR SURE HAD SENT IN A LETTER. UM, AND WE, UH, JUST HOPE THAT, UH, YOU'LL CONSIDER APPROVING THIS REQUEST. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. UM, NO MORE SPEAKERS? NO THE SPEAKERS. OKAY. UM, MS. LYNN, DO YOU WANNA MAKE A MOTION? YES. I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 0 1 HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 19TH, 2025. I SECOND. THE ONLY REASON WHY YOU HAVE A LOT OF SUPPORT HERE, THE ONLY REASON WHY I WANNA HOLD THIS OVER IS JUST BECAUSE THERE'S A CONFLICT OF, OF WHETHER SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND VARIANCE. AND THERE'S SOME THINGS I WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT BETWEEN NOW AND FEBRUARY. AND THAT IS, IF THIS IS NOW SUBMITTED AS AN A DU FOR REGULAR USE, EVEN IF YOU BUILD IT TO BE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE, THERE'S SOME, UM, POTENTIAL RESTRICTIONS THAT MAY BE PUT ON YOU, UM, WHICH POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE BEEN PUT ON YOU TODAY. AND THAT IS THAT SOMEBODY HAS TO RESIDE ON THE PROPERTY AND THAT NO RENTALS. AND I WANT Y'ALL TO THINK ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF YOUR COMMUNITY AND IF THOSE ARE PROVISIONS THAT POTENTIALLY MIGHT MAKE SENSE OR NOT. UM, AND SO I ALSO WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE FILING AND THAT THE, THE VARIANT THAT WE'RE CONVERTING IT TO A VARIANCE 'CAUSE IT'S NO LONGER ESPECIALLY EXCEPTION BASED ON THE FACT THAT, UM, THERE IS A PROVISION THAT WE WERE CONSIDERING THAT A HANDICAP PERSON MUST RESIDE ON PROPERTY. SO THIS HOLDING IT UP GIVES YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY TO REALLY BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE DIFFERENT TYPES OF FOLKS, UM, ON, ON PROPERTY. IF THIS IS PROVED NEXT TIME, MS. MA'AM, CAN I, CAN YOU CLARIFY YOUR MOTION? ARE YOU HOLDING IT OVER AND INSTRUCTING STAFF TO RE-NOTICE THE CASE AS A VARIANCE IN A SPECIAL EXCEPTION? YES. OKAY. SO, UM, THAT'LL, BECAUSE YOU ARE REMOVING THAT, YOU AS ESSENTIALLY MOVING IT FROM BEING A, REQUIRING A HANDICAPPED PERSON OR REQUESTING THAT A HANDICAPPED PERSON, UH, RESIDE ON THE PROPERTY OR IT HAS TO REVERT BACK. UM, WHEN YOU WORK WITH A CITY WITH DURING HOLDOVER, THE, THE STAFF WILL THEN RE-NOTICE AS A VARIANCE INSTEAD OF SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS. SO THEN YOU'RE NOW JUST APPLYING FOR A REGULAR A DU RATHER THAN THOSE THAT REQUIRES A HANDICAP PERSON TO RESIDE FULL-TIME ON PROPERTY. SO THIS JUST KIND OF CLEANS THINGS UP A LITTLE BIT AND THEN IT GIVES YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE OPTIONS WHEN WE COME BACK IN FEBRUARY. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS, ANYBODY ELSE WANTS. OKAY. UM, ROLL CALL VOTE. MS. LYNN? AYE. [01:05:01] MR. BROOKS? AYE. MR. CANNON? AYE. MR. GRAHAM? AYE. MS. VICE CHAIR? AYE. MOTION TO HOLD UNTIL FEBRUARY 19TH PASSES FIVE TO ZERO. SO JUST TO CLARIFY, STAFF WILL RE-NOTICE THIS WITH BEING A VARIANCE IN A SPECIAL EXCEPTION VERSUS TWO SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, WHICH WHEN YOU HAD THE HANDICAPPED PRO VIO, IT MADE IT EASIER TO PUT AN A DU IN THE BACKYARD. THE VARIANCE HAS A LITTLE BIT, IT'S A LITTLE BIT HARDER TO GET PAST THE VARIANCE. UM, BUT THAT'S, BUT THAT'S REALLY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR. UM, SO TO REMOVE THE HANDICAP PROVISION WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE VARIANCE IS, THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE CAN REALLY GO ABOUT IT. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT STAFF HAS ALREADY SAID THAT YOU PAID FOR A FEE. 'CAUSE WHEN YOU INITIALLY APPLIED IT WAS NOT FOR THE HANDICAP PROVISION. SO YOU WON'T HAVE TO RE IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. YOU'LL NOT HAVE TO PAY AN ADDITIONAL FEE 'CAUSE YOU'VE ALREADY PAID THE FEES. CORRECT. SO IT'S JUST SIMPLY HOLDING IT OVER AND THEN THEY'LL RE-NOTICE AND THEN YOU'LL COME IN FRONT OF THE SAME PANEL IN FOUR WEEKS. OKAY. OKAY. SORRY ABOUT ALL THAT CONFUSION. ALRIGHT, WE ARE MOVING ON TO BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 4 48 19. MELISSA LANE. UM, IF THE APPLICANT COULD STEP FORWARD, UM, I GET SWORN IN. UH, BRIAN, DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF MY PRESENTATION YOU CAN PULL UP PLEASE? 0 0 4. IT WAS, IT WAS SENT TO CAMBRIA. IT WASN'T SENT TO YOU. IT WAS SENT TO CAMBRIA. UH, IKA, DO YOU HAVE IT? DID YOU COPY ME? DID YOU COPY ME ON IT? NO, I SENT DIRECTLY TO CAMBRIA. IT IS NOT THERE. I'LL DO MY BEST. OKAY. GIMME ONE SECOND. SO, UM, MORNING, I'LL LOOK IN THE PHONE, BUT JUST PRETEND THAT I HAD A PRESENTATION. IT WAS AWESOME. WELL, I THINK ROB, I THINK MR. THOMPSON SAID THERE MAY BE A SHARED FOLDER. HE GONNA A LOOK IN. OKAY. IT JUST A SECOND. BINGO. THERE WE GO. HI. THANK YOU BRIAN. HE'S READY. SORRY. UH, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. OKAY. DO WE SWEAR EVERYBODY? WHAT'S THAT? DID YOU SWEAR YOU WANNA SWEAR EVERYBODY? OH, YOU, YOU, YOU DID SAY I, NO, I DO, I DO. OKAY, GO AHEAD. YOU GOT WARNING IN, RIGHT? DID YOU SAY I DROVE THERE. SHE DIDN'T STATE HER NAME AND ADD CHRISTA GLOVER. OKAY. . AND DO YOU SWEAR YOUR ADDRESS? SWEAR AFFIRM TO TELL THE WHAT? 48 19 ME LANE. THANK YOU. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BORDER ADJUSTMENT? I DO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, MY NAME IS ROB BALDWIN, OFFICE AT 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE D, AND I'M HERE, UH, ASSISTING THE GLOVERS KRISTA AND ANDREW IN THEIR REQUEST, UH, BEFORE YOU TODAY AT 48 19. MELISSA LANE, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS IN NORTH DALLAS, UH, NOT TOO FAR FROM THE NORTH HAVEN TRAIL, UH, WEST OF THE TOLLWAY, UH, SOUTH OF 6 35. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND THIS, THIS IS A SLIDE OF THE PROPERTY, UM, EXISTING STRUCTURE. UH, COMMISSIONER BROOKS NAILED IT AT THE BRIEFING SESSION. THEY APPLIED FOR PERMITS, UH, GOT PERMITS STARTED CONSTRUCTING UNDER THE PERMITS. UM, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, AND, UH, DURING THE PERMITTING PROCESS OR DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS, THEY'RE GOING THROUGH INSPECTIONS AND EVERYTHING AND, UH, THEN THE CITY REALIZED THEY MADE A MISTAKE, UH, AND RESULTING IN ENCROACHMENTS ON THE WEST SIDE AND ON THE EAST SIDE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS IS A COPY OF WHAT WAS, YOU KNOW, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS, THE GO BACK, ONE MORE SLIDE, PLEASE. IT SHOWS THAT THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED, IT WAS PROPERLY DONE, AND WE CALLED AN INSPECTION UNTIL WE REALIZED THERE WAS A, AN ISSUE. AND THE SEAT PUT STOP WORK ORDER ON THE HOUSE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UH, NEXT SLIDE. OH, YOU'RE THE OTHER DIRECTION. I'M SORRY. THAT ONE. SO THE RESULTS IS WE, UH, AS COMMISSIONER BROOKS SAID THAT THE CITY, UH, REVIEWERS AND ARCHITECT DID NOT REALIZE WE WERE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION OVERLAY, UH, IN, SO ONE THAT, UH, INCREASED THE SIDE YARD SETBACKS IN THE WAS DISTRICT FROM 10 FEET TO 15 FEET. SO, UM, WE [01:10:01] HAD PROBLEMS WITH ENCROACHMENT AS SOON AS WE FOUND OUT ABOUT IT. HAD A GREAT EXPENSE AND, UH, GNASHING THE TEETH, THE GLOVERS WERE ABLE TO, UH, SOLVE THE ENCROACHMENT ON THE WEST SIDE. UM, BUT THEY CAN'T, UH, SOLVE THE PROBLEM ON THE, THE EAST SIDE AS EASILY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO THIS IS THE, THE, UH, PROPOSED SITE PLAN. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. OKAY. AS YOU CAN SEE THAT AREA IN THE RED BOX, THAT AT THE ENCROACHMENT THAT IS MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO, UH, TO FIX, UH, ALL CONDITION SPACE, PART OF THE ROOF. UH, ANY, UH, ANY WAY TO FIX THAT WOULD REQUIRE NOT ONLY REMOVING THAT SECTION OF THE BUILDING, REDOING THE ROOF, REDOING THE HVAC AND REMOVING A SLAB, AND, UH, THAT'S A VERY COST PROHIBITIVE. SO WE'RE, WE'RE GOING FORWARD ASKING FOR, UH, POSITIVE CONSIDERATION IN OUR REQUEST TO ALLOW THAT PORTION OF THE CODE FROM THE STAY. IT'S, IT, IT IS LESS THAN 15 FEET, BUT IT DOESN'T ENCROACH INTO WHAT A NORMAL SIDE, SIDE YARD SETBACK AND, YOU KNOW, HALF ACRE DISTRICT IS. UM, IF YOU JUST GO THROUGH SOME, SOME SLIDE KEEP JUST BRIAN, YOU CAN GO, THAT WAS AN EXISTING STRUCTURE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UH, THIS IS WHAT, THIS IS THE, THE SECTION WHERE WE HAVE THE, WE STILL HAVE THE ENCROACHMENT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND NEXT SLIDE. AND NEXT SLIDE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS THE SECTION WHERE, WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO FIX IT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. I HOPE SO, MR. BALDWIN? YEAH. UM, WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THE REQUEST, THERE'S A VARIANCE FOR THE INTERIOR EAST SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS. YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE NO LONGER NEEDING THAT EAST SIDE? NO, WE NEED THE EAST SIDE. WE DON'T NEED THE WEST SIDE. OH, YOU'RE RIGHT. SORRY. SO, OKAY. YEAH. AND THEN THE SECOND ONE IS FOR THE WEST SIDE YARD SETBACK, YOU NO LONGER NEED THAT SECOND ONE, RIGHT? SO, UH, UH, UNFORTUNATELY, UH, MS. HOS, DR. HOSKINS DIDN'T, WASN'T NOTIFIED THAT WE AMENDED OUR APPLICATION, BROUGHT IT A NEW SITE. NO, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I, I, I THOUGHT I WAS FOLLOWING. JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT IT'S, SO DID Y'ALL PAY FOR TWO APPLICATIONS THEN? YES, MA'AM. UM, SO I HOPE YOU CAN SEE WITH THESE SLIDES THAT WE'RE NOT OVERBUILDING THE LOT. YOU KNOW, UH, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS BEING REDEVELOPED AS IN MOST AREAS, UH, NORTH AND EAST OF DOWNTOWN. UH, THE HOUSE TO THE WEST OF US IS MUCH LARGER IN SCOPE AND SIZE THAN US. UH, WE THINK THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS REASONABLE. WE HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT US. STAFF FOUND THAT WE DID HAVE A, A HARDSHIP STAFF DID ISSUE. THE, THE CITY STAFF DID ISSUE THE PERMIT IN ERROR, AND WE WERE WELL UNDER CONSTRUCTION BEFORE THAT HAPPENED. UM, AND AS SOON AS WE FOUND OUT ABOUT, WE STOPPED. UM, IS THERE, YOU HAVE ANYTHING ? SO, UH, I UNDERSTAND THERE IS A GENTLEMAN ON THE PHONE IN OPPOSITION. I WOULD LIKE TO RESERVE ANY TIME I HAVE FOR A REBUTTAL AFTER THAT IF I STAND READY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ACTUALLY, DO, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? GO AHEAD, MR. HANNON. UM, YES, JUST ONE QUESTION. SO, UM, ON YOUR LAST POINT THERE ABOUT THE PERMIT BEING ISSUED, SO BY THE TIME THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED, CONSTRUCTION STARTED, WHAT WAS, I GUESS, WHAT WAS THE TIME FROM WHEN, UM, CONSTRUCTION STARTED TO WHEN, UH, YOU ALL WERE NOTIFIED THAT THE PERMIT WAS IN FACT ISSUED? I, I CAN TURN IT OVER TO MS. GLOVER FOR THAT. SO, KRISTA GLOVER, 48 19 MELISSA LANE. SO WE STARTED CONSTRUCTION LAST, UH, LAST APRIL. AND SO THE, THE PERMITS WERE, UM, ISSUED IN APRIL. I BELIEVE THAT THEY PUT A STOP WORK ORDER IN NOVEMBER. UM, SO WE WERE WELL INTO CONSTRUCTION. OKAY. AND THEN WHAT'S THE, UM, AT LEAST WHAT'S BEEN, UM, THE CONTRACTORS OR WHAT'S THE, UH, CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE LIKE TOTAL FROM START TO TO END? WHAT'S THE CONS LIKE? SO YOU ALL STARTED IN APRIL. WHAT'S THE PROJECTED, UM, SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION THAT YOU'VE BEEN, THAT YOU'VE BEEN TOLD? WELL, IT WAS JANUARY 20, I THINK IT WAS JANUARY 25TH, 2025. BUT BECAUSE OF THIS, UM, BECAUSE OF THE COST, WE OURSELVES STOPPED CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, THE COST OF BRINGING SOMEONE IN, WE DIDN'T WANT TO, IF WE HAVE TO FIX THIS, WE DIDN'T WANT IT TO BE MORE COSTLY THAN IT'S ALREADY GONNA BE. I MEAN, WE COULDN'T BRING IN JUST AN INSULATOR TO DO PART OF THE HOUSE AND NOT DO ALL THE HOUSE OR, UM, DRYWALL. I MEAN, WE, WE HAD TO STOP, WHICH HAS BEEN A SUBSTANTIAL COST OF OKAY. OKAY. UH, NO THANK YOU FOR THOSE STATES THERE. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS FOR THE APPLICANT? YES. NO. NO. OKAY. ALL QUESTION THEN, IF WE CAN HEAR FROM THE OPPOSITION. UM, I HAVE, UH, THE SPEAKER ONLINE IN OPPOSITION. UH, MR. HAZELTON, IF YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND THEN, UM, WE'LL SWEAR YOU IN. [01:15:03] WE CANNOT HEAR YOU. THERE WE GO. MY NAME IS JOHN HAZELTON. I'M THE OWNER AND MY WIFE ARE THE OWNERS OF 48 29. MELISSA LANE, 7 5 2, 2 9. AND MY WIFE IS HERE. SHE'S ALSO A REGISTERED SPEAKER, AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE HER SWORN IN AS WELL AT THIS TIME. OKAY. DO YOU BOTH SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO. WE DO. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, UH, BOARD, UH, CHAIR AND, AND, UH, BOARD MEMBERS, UM, OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. THANKS FOR ALLOWING ME TO GET US TO COME ON TODAY TO, TO ADDRESS THE MATTER REGARDING THE VIOLATION OF THE NSO, THE NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION OVERLAY, WHICH IS, UH, NOT NEW. IT WAS, IT WAS CREATED BACK ON DECEMBER 13TH, 2006. UM, SORRY FOR BLOCKING THE CAMERA THERE. UM, AND IT WAS SIGNED INTO LAW BY THE CITY ATTORNEY NOTES THAT PERKINS AT THE TIME, UH, AFTER APPROVAL VOTE OF THE, THE, I UNDERSTAND THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL, UH, ORDINANCE WAS PUT INTO PLACE TO PRESERVE AND STABILIZE, UH, THE CHARACTER AND INTEGRITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, ENSURING THAT, UH, ALL CONSTRUCTION, NEW CONSTRUCTION OR RENOVATIONS RESPECT THE ESTABLISHED SETBACKS AND SPATIAL STANDARDS. UNFORTUNATELY, OUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY ON THE WEST SIDE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS. INSTEAD OF ADHERING TO THE REQUIRED 15 FOOT SETBACK, IT'S, UH, AT 11 FEET, SEVEN INCHES. I THINK IT'S FAIRLY CLOSE, AND I THINK I'LL CONFIRM THAT, UM, AFTER THEIR PLANS WERE DEVELOPED, REVIEWED BY A COMPETENT, UH, ARCHITECT AND CONTRACTOR, THEY WERE FURTHER EXAMINED AND PROVED BY A CITY OF DALLAS INSPECTOR. HOWEVER, AS PROPERTY OWNERS, THEY HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY, I FEEL, TO ENSURE THAT THE PROJECT COMPLIES WITH ALL OF THE GOVERNING REGULATIONS, UH, SUCH AS THIS, WHICH SUPERSEDE THE GENERAL DALLAS CITY CODE AND BILLING CODE. I KNOW THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED FOR TWO VARIANCES, AND I THINK THAT, UH, ROB JUST INDICATED, OR, OR MAYBE KRISTA DID, I THINK ROB DID THAT THE WEST SIDE VARIANCE HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. UM, MY QUESTION ON THAT IS WITHDRAWN. UM, UH, IS THERE ANY INTENTION TO HONOR THE REMAINING ON THE WEST SIDE, ANY ADDITIONAL, UH, 15 FOOT SIDE SETBACK, UM, FOR ANY REMAINING PROJECTS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THEIR PROPERTY, THEY MAY BUILD AS THEY FINISH THE PROJECT? THAT'S A QUESTION WE CAN ASK IN A BIT. UM, THE, UH, EXCUSE ME, THE SIDE, UH, OF COURSE ON OUR SIDE, IT'S THE THREE FOOT FIVE, UH, FOOT VARIANCE. UM, IN HER LETTER DATED JANUARY 3RD TO THE NEIGHBORS, SHE, UH, KRISTA INDICATED THEY REVISED HER PLANS TO ELIMINATE ANY ENCROACHMENT ON THE WEST SIDE YARD. UM, SO WE UNDERSTAND, UH, THIS WAS WRITTEN BEFORE THE VARIANCE WAS RE UH, REPEALED, UH, OR PULLED BACK. UM, I WAS INFORMED, I INFORMED THE CONTRACTOR AND THE CITY OF DALLAS, SPECIFICALLY ANNA NINA, THAT THE EXISTING SIX FOOT EXERCISE ROOM ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE GROUND FLOOR APPEARS TO BE IN VIOLATION OF THE NSL OVERLAY NUMBER 2 6 5 2 7 DASH 2 0 0 6, WHICH REQUIRES THE 15 FOOT SIDE SETBACK TO THE PROPERTY LINE. THIS CONCERN WAS DOCUMENTED UNDER CODE COMPLIANCE SERVICE NUMBER 24 DASH 0 0 4 7 3 9 7 1. AGAIN, THAT WAS ON SEPTEMBER 30TH. WE WERE OUT OF TOWN, IF I MAY SAY, WE WERE OUT OF TOWN FROM DURING THE CONSTRUCTION, UH, FROM JUNE THROUGH SEPTEMBER. UM, AND SO WE WERE NOT HERE WHEN THAT CONSTRUCTION WAS GOING ON, BUT WE HOPE THAT THE CITY WOULD PROTECT OUR INTERESTS AND THE NSO THE ORDINANCE IN, IN FINALIZATION, UH, IN FINAL, UH, COMMENTS ESTABLISHED TO PROTECT THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF OUR COMMUNITY AND THE RIGHTS OF THE NEIGHBOR PROPERTY OWNERS IS WHAT IT'S DEVELOPED NOW IS IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, NEIGHBORS, UH, FIGHTING NEIGHBORS. AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WANT IN THE CITY OF DALLAS. UM, SO WE RESPECTFULLY ASKED THE BOARD TO SERIOUSLY REVIEW AND THE, THE 15 FOOT SIDE SETBACK, WE UNDERSTAND THE FINANCIAL HARDSHIPS, UH, BUT THIS WAS ENACTED OVER 19 YEARS AGO. UH, [01:20:01] THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I APPRECIATE IT, AND WE'LL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. HAZLETON, OR DO WE WANNA HEAR FROM MRS. HAZLETON NOW? ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. IF YOUR WIFE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM HER AS WELL, AS SHE WAS SAYING, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK. OH, IT, NO, I THINK THAT, THAT, UH, MR. HAZELTON SAID EVERYTHING. IT, IT IS A STABILIZATION PROGRAM THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE, AND WE WERE PART OF IT 19 YEARS AGO. MA'AM, MA'AM, IF YOU'RE GONNA SPEAK ON THIS, WE'LL ME JUST THROW YOU IN. AND DID SHE ARGUE THAT OKAY? SHE DID. DID, YEAH. THE, UM, OTHER THING THAT I THINK SIE WAS GETTING TO IS IT WAS, IT WAS RATHER TRAUMATIC BACK IN 2005 SIX WHEN A BUILDER ON, UH, CROOKED LANE, A COUPLE BLOCKS UP WITHIN THE STABILIZATION AREA, UH, BUILT A HOME AND IT WAS OUT OF CONFORMANCE WITH ALL KIND OF STANDARDS, UH, FIVE FEET TO THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR'S, UH, DRIVEWAY AND, AND HAVING TO LOOK AT A FIREPLACE. THE POINT BEING IS THAT, UH, IT WAS TAKEN TO COURT. WE WERE ALL, UH, NOT ONLY DID WE PARTICIPATE IN FINANCIALLY HELPING, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE COURT TRIAL, YES, IN THE COURT TRIAL AND, AND THE ORGANI, THE ORGANIZ, THE ORGANIZATION OF THE, UM, OF THE TRIAL, BUT, UH, ON OUR SIDE. BUT IT WAS, WE WERE ALSO NAMED AS THIRD PARTY DEFENDANTS. ANYONE WHO DID NOT SIGN THE CONTRACTOR'S VARIANCE, WHEN HE SAT WITH US IN THE, IN OUR BREAKFAST ROOM, UM, HE IMMEDIATELY PUT IN A, AS A THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT. WELL, THE JUDGE THREW THAT OUT AND FIND THE ATTORNEY AND THE CONTRACTOR ON THAT, ON HIS FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS WHEN THE CASE CAME TO TRIAL. UM, ANYTHING ELSE? I'M SORRY, ? NO, I THINK THAT'S, YEAH. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM. UM, SO, WE'LL, MR. BALDIN, YOU HAVE, UM, THREE MINUTES FOR A REBUTTAL. FIVE MINUTES. FIVE MINUTES FOR A REBUTTAL. THIS IS INDEED AN UNFORTUNATE SITUATION FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED. UH, THE GLOVERS, THE HAZELTON'S, AND THE CITY OF DALLAS, UH, CLEARLY, UM, WE WISH IT WOULDN'T HAVE GONE THIS FAR, MEANING THAT IT WOULD'VE BEEN CAUGHT EITHER BY OUR ARCHITECT OR BY THE CITY BEFORE WE STARTED. AND UNFORTUNATELY WE WERE DURING IT DURING THE SUMMER, UH, TON'S WERE WE OUT OF TOWN, BECAUSE CLEARLY THEY CAUGHT IT AS WELL. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE LUCKY YOU'RE NOT ON PANEL A BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN DEALING WITH ALL, ALL THE ELM THICKET CASES RIGHT NOW, AND THAT'S NO FUN FOR ANYBODY EITHER. UM, IT'S, IT'S HARD TO POINT AND FIGURE OUT WHO'S AT FAULT HERE, BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S, UH, PROBLEMS ON ALL SIDES. UH, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO SOLVE HALF OF OUR ISSUE. UNFORTUNATELY, WE'LL NOT BE ABLE TO SOLVE IT ON THE HAZELTON SIDE. I WISH WE, YOU KNOW, WE COULD HAVE DONE THAT BECAUSE THAT THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A, A GOOD COMPROMISE, BUT THAT'S JUST NOT WHERE WE ARE TODAY. UM, I HOPE YOU, YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS REQUEST. I THINK IT'S FAIR AND EQUITABLE. UM, BECAUSE IT WAS, WE BUILT UNDER APPROVED PLANS, WENT THROUGH INSPECTIONS, AND AS SOON AS WE WERE TOLD IT WAS A PROBLEM, WE STOPPED AND TRIED TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND WE JUST CAN'T DO IT ECONOMICALLY ON OUR, ON THE, ON THE EAST SIDE. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. YES. UM, MR. BALDWIN, I'VE GOT, UM, I THINK I'M JUST GONNA KEEP IT TO ONE QUESTION HERE. SO IN YOUR LETTER TO THE BOARD, UM, THIS IS GONNA BE REFERENCING PAGE 1 28 OF THE DOCKET, UM, SHE SENT TO MS. JORDAN ON DECEMBER 23RD. OKAY. UM, THIS IS THE SECTION REGARDING COST IMPLICATIONS. SO AS YOU'RE VERY WELL AWARE OF, PART OF THE VARIANCE, UM, STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE TO MEET IS COST, AND THEN THERE'S THE STATE BILL. THERE'S, YOU KNOW, X AMOUNT TO REMEDY TO THE PROB THE, THE DESIGN OR THE CONSTRUCTION. UM, IN ONE OF THE PAR IN THIS PARAGRAPH HERE, YOU SAY IT WILL COST TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO BRING INTO COMPLIANCE. CAN YOU ACTUALLY GIVE, OR YOU OR, UM, THE HOMEOWNER HERE GIVE, I MEAN, HAS THERE BEEN ANY KIND OF SUBSTITUTE COST AS TO WHAT IT WOULD BE? 'CAUSE TENS OF THOUSANDS, THAT COULD BE 20,000. THAT COULD BE 90,000. YEAH, WE, I KNOW, AND IT'S HARD TO PUT A FINGER ON IT. YEAH. TRUST ME, IT'S HARD TO PUT A FINGER ON ANYTHING WHEN IT COMES TO CONSTRUCTION COST. BUT WE HAVE BEEN TOLD, JUST WITH THE CONSTRUCTION ONLY PART, IT COULD RUN ANYWHERE FROM 35 TO 50,000. THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE, UM, WE HAVE A CONSTRUCTION LOAN AND WE HAVE A MATURITY DATE ON THAT THAT'S COMING UP. UM, AND THERE'S THAT, AND THEN THERE'S ALSO, THAT IS OUR HOMESTEAD, AND WE DO HAVE A COST OF LIVING THAT WE'RE PAYING FOR SOMEWHERE ELSE. SO WE HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL COST IN THIS. AND, AND, UM, I HAVE A QUESTION STAFF. IF THIS DOESN'T, IF THIS WE DON'T APPROVE THIS, THEN DOES [01:25:01] THE APPLICANT THEN HAVE TO RESUBMIT NEW PLANS FOR PERMITTING WITH THE CHANGE ON THE, ON THE EAST SIDE OR LIKE, AND WHAT KIND OF TIMEFRAME DOES THAT LOOK TO PERMITS TO START REBUILDING AGAIN? DOES THE, PER THE PLANS HAVE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED TO BUILD WHAT IS BEING CONSTRUCTED AND NOW THERE'S A STOCK WORK ORDER? SO WHAT DOES THAT PROCESS LOOK LIKE IF THEY'RE DENIED? DO THEY HAVE TO THEN GO DROP NEW PLANS AND RESUBMIT TO THE CITY? AND THEN WHAT AMOUNT OF TIME DOES THAT TAKE TO GET PERMITS? I CANNOT SPEAK TO THE TIMEFRAME WITH THE PERMITTING DEPARTMENT. OKAY. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE TIMEFRAME LOOKS LIKE. MR. BALDWIN? YES, MA'AM. SO, UM, I'M SORRY. UH, UNFORTUNATELY THE, UH, THE VOYA WOULD WORK. WE HAVE AN APPROVED SET OF PLANS SHOULD IT NOT BE APPROVED. WE HAVE TO DO WHAT THEY CALL AN ADDENDUM. SO WE TAKE THE APPROVED PLANS, WE A, WE ADJUST THEM TO MAKE THE CHANGES, SUBMIT 'EM TO THE CITY, THEN IT GOES BACK THROUGH REVIEW AND MAKE SURE THAT WE COMPLY WITH, UH, NOT ONLY ZONING, WHICH HOPEFULLY WOULD BE THE FIRST THING THING THEY LOOK AT, BUT ALSO BUILDING CODE GREEN REVIEW. BECAUSE OUR, UH, BUILDING ENVELOPE OF CHANGE, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S GREEN ENERGY CODE. ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING. UH, I WOULD SAY IT WOULD TAKE SIX, SEVEN WEEKS TO GET THROUGH BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS. AND THEN, I'M SORRY, UH, MR. BROOKS, JUST TO GET BACK TO THE QUESTION, WERE, WERE THERE, WERE THOSE ALL THE LINE ITEMS THAT RELATE TO THE COST OF, UM, 'CAUSE YOU MENTIONED CONSTRUCTION, THERE WAS THE MATURITY DATE AND THEN ALSO JUST MONTHLY, UH, COST OF LIVING WAS, UM, WAS THAT IT? OR WERE THERE OTHER ITEMS JUST TO BE UNDER CONSIDERATION? WE'LL HAVE TO, YOU GOT OUR NEW ARCHITECT . YEAH. UH, ARCHITECTURAL DRAWING, RESUBMITTING PLANS, UM, ENGINEERING PLANS, BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GETTING INTO THE ROOF STRUCTURE. I MEAN, WE DON'T WANNA, WE DON'T WANNA HAVE A BUILD, BUILD A CONSTRUCTION THAT'S GONNA EVENTUALLY FALL DOWN ON IT. SO, I MEAN, WE'RE LOOKING AT BRINGING IN SEVERAL, YOU KNOW, ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE COMING BACK TO THE CITY TO GET PLANS. IT SUBMITTED PERMITTED, I , YOU MIGHT NOT. IS THIS A POST PENDING SLAB? YOU KNOW, THAT , THOSE MR. BALDIN, WILL YOU SPEAK ON, ON, I WAS ASKING IF, IF THAT'S, SO THE SLAB IS ALSO CONSIDERED PART OF THE STRUCTURE MM-HMM . WITH OVER SIX INCHES TALL. AND I WAS ASKING IF IT'S A POST TENSION SLAB AND POST TENSION SLABS ARE OF SPECIAL, THEY, THEY HAVE GIVEN DIALYSIS SOILS. UM, THE, THEY HAVE CABLES GOING THROUGH 'EM THAT, UH, CONNECT THEM. AND THOSE ARE VERY DIFFICULT TO SEVER BECAUSE IF YOU SEVER IT, THEN YOU'RE, UH, LOSING INTEGRITY WITH THE REST OF THE SLAB. SO WE, WELL, NO, IT'S ACTUALLY A TE SO WE DON'T KNOW THAT, THAT THE LAB WILL HAVE TO BE REMOVED AS WELL, AND THEN REBOARD OR SOMEHOW, UH, FITS YOUR YES. SO I, I GET THAT'S A, THAT'S A BIG LINE ITEM FOR, UM, REMEDIATING THIS PROBLEM THAT THE FOUNDATION WOULD IN FACT HAVE TO BE PHYSICALLY REDESIGNED AND YES, SIR. OKAY. AND YOU'D HAVE TO FIND AN ENGINEER OR A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO, TO SEAL IT AS WELL. THANK YOU. THAT, UM, ANSWERS MY QUESTION. THANK YOU. YEAH, I, I HAVE A HALF QUESTION, HALF COMMENT. UM, AND IT'S IN LINE WITH, WITH WHAT MR. CANNON IS SAYING IS, UM, I THINK APPLICANTS ARE FAR TOO CONSERVATIVE ON THE NUMBERS THEY BRING TO THE BOARD AND THE CATEGORIES OF COSTS THEY BRING TO THE BOARD HERE. SO IT SAYS THE FINANCIAL COST OF COMPLIANCE IS GREATER THAN 50% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE. TO ME, THAT MEANS I'M PAYING TO LIVE IN AN APARTMENT FOR SIX MONTHS LONGER. SO PUT THAT IN THERE. TO ME THAT MEANS THE HOUSE IS, YOU KNOW, 150 SQUARE FEET LESS AT X DOLLARS A SQUARE FOOT, AND IT DOESN'T HAVE THIS ROOM, WHICH IS AN AMENITY. YOU CAN FIND A REAL ESTATE AGENT AND TELL YOU THAT AMENITY WOULD BE $500,000 IN VALUE OF YOUR HOUSE. SO IN THESE KIND OF SCENARIOS WHERE EVERYONE HAS KIND OF DONE THE RIGHT THING AND YOU GUYS HAVE, HAVE CHANGED YOUR PLANS TO, TO GET RID OF ONE OF THESE VARIANCE REQUESTS, YOU KNOW, I WOULD THINK CREATIVELY ABOUT WHAT ALL OF THESE COSTS ARE, BECAUSE ALMOST EVERYONE WHO COMES IN HERE IS JUST WAY LOW BALLING IT TO ME. SO THAT'S JUST MY, UH, YEAH. DON'T YOU AGREE MR. BALDWIN NOW? YEAH. SO, MR. BALDWIN, WOULD YOU MIND SPEAKING TO, UM, THE WEST SIDE AND HOW Y'ALL, BETWEEN WHEN YOU, UM, SUBMITTED YOUR APPLICATION VERSUS NOW, HOW Y'ALL WERE ABLE TO BECOME COMPLIANT ON THE WEST SIDE? CAN CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? SURE. YEAH. I MEAN, NONE OF THIS WAS DONE INTENTIONALLY. SO, YOU KNOW, AS SOON AS WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS, WE LOOKED AT IT AND SAID, WHAT CAN WE AFFORD TO DO? I MEAN, WHAT CAN, WHAT CAN WE TAKE ON THAT WOULDN'T BE A HARDSHIP TO OUR FAMILY? [01:30:01] AND WHAT WE DID IS WE, THE, THE WEST SIDE WAS THE GARAGE WHERE THERE'S NOT ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HVAC, THERE WAS NONE OF THAT IN THERE. AND SO AS SOON AS WE WERE ABLE TO REDUCE THE SET OF DRAWINGS AND DO ALL THAT, WE QUICKLY REMEDIED, IT REMEDIATED THAT THE GARAGE SMALLER. WE MADE OUR GARAGE SMALLER, WHICH, YOU KNOW, NOBODY LOVES, BUT IT WAS, YOU KNOW, IT WAS WHAT WE COULD DO FINE , UM, UNFORTUNATELY, UM, YOU CANNOT SPEAK AGAIN. I'M SORRY. OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR THE OPPOSITION AT THIS POINT? OKAY, DO I HAVE A, UM, DO I HAVE A MOTION? UM, OKAY, SO SEEING AS THE ORIGINALLY THERE WERE TWO MOTIONS. I'M ACTUALLY ONLY GONNA MAKE ONE TODAY OR DO I HAVE TO MAKE, I HAVE TO MAKE A RULING ON BOTH. CORRECT. THEY DID NOT WITHDRAW, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THEY DID NOT WITHDRAW ON TIME. SO THE REQUEST IS, OKAY, SO YOU REQUEST, BUT WITH THE SECOND ONE. OKAY. YOU WOULD JUST DENY IT WITH THAT QUESTION. SO THE REQUEST THAT WE'RE, THAT THEY'RE SEEKING RIGHT NOW IS, IS MOTION NUMBER ONE OF TWO, WHICH INVOLVES THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, CORRECT? THE SECOND THEY HAVE NOT FORMALLY WITHDRAWN, BUT THEY HAVE ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES WITHDRAWN. CORRECT. WHICH IS THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. SO, UM, I MOVE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 0 4 ON APPLICATION OF ANDREW GLOVER GRANT, THE THREE FOOT FIVE INCH VARIANCE FROM THE SIDEY YARD SETBACK AT THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY REQUEST BY THIS APPLICANT. BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH AT A LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION OF DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS METED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT. I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE. THE MOST RECENT, UM, VERSION OF ALL SITE'S, UH, VERSION OF SMITHS PLANS ARE REQUIRED. THE SITE PLAN DOESN'T INCLUDE THE WEST SIDE, DOES IT? SO WE HAVE A ADVISED SITE PLAN SHOWING THE CORRECTED, DO THE DATE ON THAT WITH THIS MOTION OF THE REVISED SITE PLAN TO REFLECT YOU CAN, BUT SINCE WE SAID THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS, I'M ASSUMING IT'S THIS REVISED PLAN. OKAY. SO THAT WOULD TAKE CARE OF IT. ALRIGHT, SO THEN MY MOTION, UM, STANDS, I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. UM, I, I BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE, I THINK THERE, THERE'S A LOT OF ERRORS ALL THE WAY AROUND. UM, I DO BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE, UM, COGNIZANT EFFORT TO TRY TO RECTIFY ONCE THEY SEE ONE, THEY THUMB OUT THAT THEY HAD MADE ISSUES WITH THE SIDE YARD SETBACKS. I DO THINK THE COST TO BECOME COMPLIANT IS ONE THAT THEY MEET THE STANDARD, UM, IN ORDER, UH, TO, THAT'S WHY I MADE THIS MOTION. UM, I, LIKE I SAID, THE COST AND THE BURDEN ON THE APPLICANT IS ONE MM-HMM . THAT I THINK JUSTIFIES UH, GRANTING THIS MOTION. YES, I'LL SUPPORT THIS MOTION, UM, AND TO THE POINTS THAT MR. LAMB JUST MADE. BUT ALSO I DO WANT TO JUST VERY, UM, IN UNDERSTANDING THIS CASE, I KNOW THAT THERE'S APPLICANT'S SIDE AND WE DID HAVE THE NEIGHBORS AS OPPOSITION SPEAKING TO THAT, UM, OPPOSITION THERE. THERE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN. UM, AND THIS IS JUST SPEAKING FROM A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL STANDPOINT, THAT THAT OVERLAY SHOULD HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED DURING THE DESIGN PROCESS. UM, BUT FURTHERMORE THAT OUR PERMITTING REVIEW PROCESS DID NOT CATCH THAT. BUT, UM, NEEDLESS TO SAY THIS, UM, IS A BURDEN THAT WAS IMPOSED UNKNOWINGLY BY THE APPLICANT AND OUTTA RESPECT FOR THE OVERLAY THAT WAS IN PLACE NEARLY 20 YEARS. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED AND DESIGN FROM THE GET GO. SO, UM, WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, I WILL SUPPORT THIS MOTION TO GRANT. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENT? ALL RIGHT. WE'LL HAVE A LITTLE CALL VOTE MS. LAMB. AYE MR. BROOKS? AYE. MR. CANNON? AYE. MR. GRAHAM? AYE. MS. VICE-CHAIR? AYE. MOTION TO GRAHAM PASSES. FIVE TO ZERO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, OKAY. AND NOW WE WILL, UM, DO THE SECOND, UM, MOTION FOR THIS. UM, MS. LI, I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN IN REQUEST BDA NUMBER BDA 2 45 DASH ZERO 15 ON APPLICATION OF BLANCA CARD. IT'S DENIED A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. OH, I'M SORRY, WHERE DID I GO? OH, THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. UM, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH [01:35:01] ZERO FOUR ON APPLICATION OF ANDREW GLOVER DENY THE VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS AT THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT WITH PREJUDICE BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE FISCAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD NOT RESULT IN THE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT. SECOND, I WENT WITH PREJUDICE. Y'ALL HAVE RECTIFIED IT. I THINK THAT THIS, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB OF FIXING IT. I THINK THIS HELPS REALLY SOLIDIFY THE OVERLAY THERE AND PROTECTS THE OVERLAY AND THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS. SO, UM, I WENT AHEAD AND DENIED, UM, THIS ONE WITH PREJUDICE SO THAT YOU CAN'T COME BACK FOR TWO YEARS. I THINK THAT SHOULD SETTLE THIS FOR THE NEIGHBORS AND, UM, RESOLVES EVERYTHING. UM, ALSO, YOU KNOW, THERE IS SOME CONSIDERATION HERE THAT THIS WAS AN ERROR FOR MULTIPLE DIFFERENT PARTIES INVOLVED. SO I THINK THIS RECTIFIES IT. NOTHING FURTHER. DO WE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE MS. LAMB. AYE. MR. BROOKS? AYE. MR. CANNON? AYE. MR. GRAHAM? AYE. MS. VICE CHAIR MOTION, NOT MOTION TO DENY PASSES? FIVE TO ZERO. OKAY. UM, OUR LAST CASE TODAY IS, UM, BDA 2 3 4 DASH 1 39. THIS IS A HOLDOVER CASE, 62 40 EAST MOCKINGBIRD LANE. WE WERE TOLD AT THE BEGINNING, UH, DURING OUR BRIEFING THAT THEY HAD A DIFFERENT SET OF PLANS AND THAT WE WERE NOT GONNA BE BRIEFED ON THIS CASE. HOWEVER, THEY DID TURN IN PLANS, UM, THAT HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY OUR PLANNERS AND THAT THEY ARE, UM, ACCEPTING OF THOSE. AND SO WE WILL NOW BE BRIEFED ON THAT CASE AND THEN WE'LL APPEAR THE CASE AND WE'LL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK TO GO TO THE BATHROOM. IT'S 2 43, WE'LL BE BACK AT 2 48. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL RECONVENE, UM, FOR OUR FINAL CASE TODAY, THE 2:49 PM WE ARE HERE IN CASE BDA 2 3 4 DASH 1 39, UM, 62 40 EAST MOCKINGBIRD LANE. BEFORE WE BEGIN THE, UM, TESTIMONY, WE'LL BE BRIEFED BY STAFF ON THIS CASE PDA 2 3 4 DASH 39 AT 62 40 EAST MOCKINGBIRD LANE. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED NORTH OF ANITA STREET, SOUTH OF ST. MORITZ AVENUE, EAST OF NORTH STREET AND WIDTH OF ALDERSON STREET. THE AREA MAPPED TO THE LEFT SHOWED THE SUBJECT SITE OUTLINED AND RED. THE ZONING MAP TO THE RIGHT INDICATES THE ZONING AS COMMUNITY DETAIL. THERE WERE, UM, TOTAL OF 27 27 PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFIED WILL RECEIVE ZERO LETTERS OF SUPPORT, ZERO LETTERS OF OPPOSITION. THIS REQUEST IS, UM, A SPECIAL ACCEPTANCE OF ASSIGNED REGULATION. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A DETACHED PREMISE NON MONUMENT SIGN ON A NON-RESIDENTIAL PREMISE WITH TWO WITHIN 250 FEET OF EITHER PRIVATE PROPERTY AND A NON-BUSINESS ZONE OR PUBLIC PARK OF MORE OF MORE THAN ONE ACRE, WHICH WILL REQUIRE SPECIAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE SIGN. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE NOTIFICATION SIGN WAS PROPERLY POSTED. I WHITE MAKE TO THE BREAK SIGN. HERE'S THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN WHERE THE PROPOSED NON MONUMENT SIGN OF THE, UM, LOCATED, UM, WE, SO IS THAT, IS THAT ON A PARKING SPOT? NO, IT'S NOT ON A PARKING SPOT. IT'S ON A SIDEWALK. IT'S NOT, IS THAT CONSTRUCTION? THE PARKING, IT LOOKS LIKE IT NEAR OR A BUDDING AND EXISTS IN EXISTING SIDEWALK IN BETWEEN TWO PARKING, UM, AND BETWEEN PARKING, IT'S A, UH, WALK PATH BETWEEN PARKING SPOTS. IT'S A BUILDING THAT USED, I BELIEVE IT USED TO BE A BRAHMS, THE OLD STYLE BRAHMS THAT HAD THE WALK PATH WITH THE PARKING SPOTS ON EITHER SIDE. SO IF, IF THIS IS GRANTED, THIS HAVE A, DOES THIS HINDER ACCESSIBILITY FOR THAT ? NO, IT'S, IT'S TODAY LOOKS LIKE IT'S LOCATED WITHIN THAT EXISTING WALK, SO, AND MAKE YOU . OKAY. BETTER. I THINK THERE MAY BE SOMEBODY ONLINE THAT HAS THEIR MICROPHONE ON. [01:40:03] ALRIGHT, SO HERE'S THE PROPOSED, UM, NON MONUMENT SIGNED THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING. JUST TO CLARIFY, A MONUMENT IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT? CORRECT. TYPICALLY IN THIS, UH, ZONING, UH, THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED IN NON MONUMENT, BUT BECAUSE OF THE PROXIMITY TO, UH, RESIDENTIAL, THEY'RE LIMITED TO A NON TO A MONUMENT SIGN. I SEE. AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE ASKING FOR A NON MONUMENT INSTEAD. HOW CLOSE ARE THEY TO RESIDENTIAL? I BELIEVE IT WAS JUST ACROSS THE STREET, JUST ACROSS MOCKINGBIRD. HOW MUCH, OKAY. OKAY. THERE'S A GOOD PICTURE ON PAGE 180 OF THE BRIEFING THAT SHOWS THE SUBJECT SITE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY SOUTH OF IT, AND THEN IT LOOKS LIKE A SCHOOL TO THE NORTH OF IT ACROSS, UM, MOCKINGBIRD. AND IT'S SORT OF, YEAH, I THINK, YEAH. THANK YOU. OKAY. YEAH, I'M JUST GONNA GO THROUGH THE, UM, THE SITE PHOTOS AND THE SURROUND PROPERTY. SO HE'S UP SIDE HERE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO THE EAST. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT ONE? WHERE WE SEE THE HEAD ON IS, AND CAN YOU POINT OUT WHERE THE PROPOSED MONUMENT IS? IT'S GONNA BE PROPOSED RIGHT IN THIS AREA. RIGHT. SO, SO THEN HOW ARE THOSE THAT ARE HANDICAPPED ABLE TO ACCESS THE WALKWAY INTO THE ESTABLISHMENT WITHOUT GOING BEHIND THE CARS? IF THIS IS GRANTED, UM, LOCATION, I THINK THERE'S A, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO SEE IN THIS PICTURE, BUT I WOULD BET THAT THE RAMP, UM, FOR THE HANDICAP SPACES IS IN BETWEEN THE TWO HANDICAP SPACES. SO YOU WOULDN'T GET OUT AND WALK UP THE CURB INTO THE SIGN, YOU'D WALK IN BETWEEN THE TWO HANDICAP CARS. IS THIS PROPOSED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WALKWAY? IT IS IN THE WALKWAY, BUT IT, IT'S A VERY WIDE WALKWAY. IS THE QUESTION ON THE FLOOR, IS THIS GONNA IMPACT THE E INGRESS, EGRESS OF HANDICAP? THAT'S THE QUESTION. I THINK THAT'S THE QUESTION I HAVE, YES. OKAY. YEAH, JUST FROM WHAT I'M SEEING HERE ON THE, THIS IS THE SITE PLAN ONE 90. SO YOU'VE GOT YOUR TWO STALLS THAT ARE BASICALLY ADJACENT TO THE, THE FRONT OF LOOKS LIKE, IS THIS EITHER THE BUILDING OR IT'S A PATIO, BUT THE, UH, LOCATION OF THE SIGN WOULD NOT IMPEDE ON THE INGRESS OR EGRESS OF THE, UH, HANDICAP STALLS ON THE SITE AS REPRESENTED MY SITE. I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE STALL. OH, I SEE. SO THEY ON THE, ON THE RIGHT OR THE LEFT? YEAH. SO IF YOU YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. SO THE SIGN IS, YEAH, THE HANDICAP PARKING IS THIS, THERE'S NO INTERFERENCE FROM WHERE THE SIGN IS BEING PLANNED. SO THERE IS, IF YOU'RE ACCESSING THE LEFT WHEEL HANDICAP PARKING SPOT AND YOU, UH, THE DRIVER'S SEAT, RIGHT. AND THEN TO, TO APPROACH THE WALKWAY. WELL, ASSUMING THAT THIS WOULD BE A VAN YOU WOULD GET OUT ON THE RIGHT SIDE. SO WHERE YOU SEE THAT STRIPED, BUT YOU STILL HAVE A DRIVER ON THE LEFT SIDE. I THINK THERE'S A WHOLE OTHER SPACE BETWEEN THAT HAND OF THE SIGN THOUGH. I THINK WE'RE SPECULATING. YEAH, BECAUSE THE STAFF AREN LOOKING AT IT, PAUL. SO ONE THEY HAVE TO MEET, UM, THE 88 88. SO THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH BUT TOSS. DID IT STILL TOSS? SO THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE REVIEW. OKAY. UH, THE POLE IS ONLY 80 INCHES WIDE AND THEN THEREFORE THE HEIGHT IS GONNA BE WELL ABOVE. SO WHAT IS ACTUALLY IN THE CONCRETE WHERE SOMEONE WOULD BE WILLING IN THAT SPACE IS ONLY EIGHT INCHES IN DIAMETER? IS THAT WHAT YOUR CONCERN WAS? IT'S STILL IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WALKWAY. CORRECT. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A WHEELCHAIR THAT HAS TO GO AROUND THE POLE. YES. AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A WIDTH OF FIVE FEET, SIX FEET AND WIDTH. THAT WHEELCHAIR CAN EASILY WHEEL AROUND THE, THAT FOUR, THAT EIGHT INCH POLE TO GET FROM THE STREET SIDEWALK INTO THE BUILDING OR BACK FROM THE BUILDING SIDEWALK TO THE STREET. OKAY. SO I FEEL COMFORTABLE IN WHAT I'VE SEEN AND THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO MEET IT. UM, IN TERMS OF THE PARKING SPACES, UH, AGAIN, THEY HAVE THE HANDICAPPED PARKING SPACE, WHICH IS THE TRADITIONAL WIDTH, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE ON THE PLAN, INCLUDING THE ACCESS OUT THAT'S IN THE MIDDLE. SO I, I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH THE HANDICAP FROM WHAT I SEE ON THE PLAN TO ASK QUESTIONS. LOOK, SEEING WHAT CITY STAFF HAS APPROVED TYPICALLY TODAY, TYPICALLY A DA RE UH, REQUIRES AT LEAST 36 INCHES ON THE SIDEWALK. OKAY. PROPERTY TO THE EAST, NORTHEAST, NORTH, [01:45:03] NORTHWEST WEST OF THE SUBJECT SITE, SOUTHWEST, SOUTH, SOUTHEAST. AND THEN ANY FURTHER VIDEO FROM THE 30TH. UM, SUBJECT, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? AM I, AM I CORRECT IN SEEING MONUMENT SIGNS AT EACH OF THE ADJACENT COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORS? IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S ONE AT, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A CAR WASH OR A, OR WHAT, UM, SORT OF TO THE EAST AND SOMETHING ELSE TO THE WEST. IT WAS IN, IT WAS IN THE PICTURES. UM, I, I THINK THERE'S SEVERAL. I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT IF WE CAN WATCH THE VIDEO BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE, YEAH, THERE'S ONE, A A LOT OF THESE BUILDINGS ARE OLDER, BUT THE CONTEXT OF THIS, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD I LIVE OVER HERE IS CHANGED. LIKE, THIS ISN'T LIKE WE'RE IN THE SUBURBS AND THIS IS, THERE'S, THERE'S STUDENTS WALKING TO SCHOOL. I THINK IT'S LIKE WHEN THESE WERE ALLOWED BEFORE, IT WAS VERY VEHICLE HEAVY AND IT STILL IS, BUT IT'S SHIFTING. UM, AND THIS IS VERY MUCH A RESIDENTIAL CONTEXT. THIS IS NOT LIKE A NORTHWEST HIGHWAY OR ANYTHING OF THAT SORT. SO I THINK IT'D BE IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT, UM, THE VIDEO BECAUSE JUST BECAUSE THERE'S SOME, THERE DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THERE'S PRECEDENT. I I DO THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE DIRECTION IT'S GOING. YEAH. IF THE VIDEO WILL WORK. YES. I'M, I'M ABOUT TO PULL IT UP THERE. UM, A QUESTION FOUR. I, SCOTT, SCOTT, UM, SO I MEAN, I THINK THE RE THIS, THE RULE IS IN PLACE BECAUSE I MEAN, IT IS ADJACENT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I MEAN, THE MONUMENT SIGNS WERE ALLOWED AND THEN WE PUT IN PLACE THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE PUTTING THOSE IN ANYMORE BECAUSE WE WANT THAT RESIDENTIAL FEEL. SO I MEAN IT'S, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER LIGHTLY EVEN IF THERE ARE OTHER ONES THERE. 'CAUSE THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO BE RID OF THOSE KINDS OF SIGNS, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S A RESIDENTIAL AREA, IS THAT CORRECT? THE NON MONUMENT SIGNS THE NON CORRECT. THEN WE WANNA BE RID OF THE NON MONUMENT SIGN. CORRECT. WE DON'T WANNA ADD MORE, BUT IN THIS AREA, THE SURROUNDING, THE SURROUNDING BUSINESSES DO ALL STILL HAVE THE NON MONUMENT STYLES, BUT THE GOAL WOULD BE TO BE GETTING RID OF THEM. CORRECT. SINCE YOU'RE IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, AND THAT'S WHAT THE RULE IS IN PLACE FOR. IT'S SIMILAR TO LIKE IF YOU, YOUR YOUR HOUSE, YOUR, YOUR GARAGE IS GRANDFATHERED IN, BUT IF YOU TEAR IT DOWN, YOU CAN'T BUILD IT AGAIN. YEAH, I, I BELIEVE THERE, THE, THE BACKSTORY ON THIS WAS BEFORE THIS, UH, THE BLACK SHEEP COFFEE, BEFORE THE TENANTS AGREED TO THIS LOCATION, THE, THE SIGN WAS STILL THERE AND THEN THE OWNER TORE DOWN THAT SIGN AND PUT IN A MONUMENT SIGN MUCH SMALLER. AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANTED. THEY WANTED THE ORIGINAL SIGN. THE TENANTS TORE IT DOWN OR THE OWNER, THE BUILDING, THE PROPERTY OWNER OWNER. OKAY. SO THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE REQUEST OF THE TENANT. RIGHT. THAT'S POTENTIALLY TEMPORARY, BUT THIS, BUT WE GRANT THIS WILL RUN WITH THE LAND. 'CAUSE I GUESS THE INTENT, EVEN THOUGH THE, THE OWNER IS, IS SUBMITTING THIS, THE OWNER INTENDED TO REMOVE IT, WHICH IS WHY IT'S NO LONGER THERE. IT'S THE TENANT NOW THAT IS OCCUPYING THE BUILDING THAT IS BASICALLY MAKING THIS REQUEST, UH, TO MY UNDERSTANDING. OKAY. MAY I SPEAK? NOT YET. OKAY. WHEN I SAY TENANT THAT I, I COULDN'T BE MISSPEAKING. THAT COULD BE THE CURRENT OWNER AND THE PREVIOUS OWNER VERSUS OWNER AND TENANT. I KNOW THIS PROPERTY WELL. MM-HMM . UM, THE APPLICANT, UH, MR. CORSON IS THE OWNER. THE TENANT IS BLACK SHEET COPY. OKAY. SO I GUESS WE'LL HAVE TO ADD CLARITY ON, ON WHO TORE IT DOWN AND RIGHT. AND WHO, WHO WANTS US. I GUESS THAT'S NOT REALLY IMPORTANT 'CAUSE THE APPLICATION IS WHAT IT IS, BUT MM-HMM . I DO THINK THOUGH THERE IS A PIECE THOUGH. IS IT, IT'S, IT'S LIKE IF WE HAVE A, A RENTER, WE'VE HAD A PIECE LIKE THIS BEFORE VERSUS A PROPERTY OWNER. IF WE'RE SEEKING A, A PERMANENT SOLUTION FOR SOMEBODY THAT'S TEMPORARY, I THINK THAT DOES, THERE'S SOME CONSIDERATION THERE IN THE REQUESTS AS A BOARD MEMBER AFFIDAVITS HAVE TO BE SIGNED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER TO EVEN APPLY. SO EVEN THOUGH IT MIGHT BE THE TENANT, THE PROPERTY OWNER STILL HAS, BECAUSE IT'S HIS PROPERTY, THEY STILL HAVE TO FILE AN AFFIDAVIT SAYING THAT THIS IS OKAY TO FILE FOR MY PROPERTY. BUT SO THIS, IT'S GOING DOWN CHENBO [01:50:02] AND SOMETHING SAY WILL BE, OKAY, SO THIS IS THE SET SIDE. I KNOW THAT THESE ARE, ARE TEMPORARY HERE, BUT IT FEELS LIKE A LOT WITH LIKE FOUR GIANT ADVERTISING SIGNS AND THEN A NON MONUMENT SIGN. AND WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THESE . THOSE ARE ACTUALLY NOT ALLOWED. OKAY. SO , UM, THAT'S JUST MY, AND THEY'RE ON CITY PROPERTY. IS THAT CITY PROPERTY? THAT'S THE CITY SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE. OH, INTERESTING. BUT THEN HOW DOES THAT WORK? 'CAUSE THEN THE OTHER MONUMENTS ON THE BURGERS BURGER HOUSE ON CITY PROPERTY TOO. THE . OH, WITH THE UH, WITH, WITH THE WAY THE, UH, RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENTS HAVE WORKED OVER THE YEARS, THE PROPERTY LINES HAVE ADJUSTED. I SEE. AND WHEN THEY RE PLATTED I SEE, UH, THEIR PROPERTY LINES SHIFTED. INTERESTING. CAN YOU JUST IN, IN LAY TERMS, DESCRIBE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A MONUMENT SIGN AND A NON MONUMENT SIGN? JUST THE TERMS GETTING THROWN AROUND. I THINK I KNOW WHAT IT MEANS, BUT, BUT WE GOT THE EXPERT HERE, SO I WANNA TAKE, TAKE MY CHANCE. UH, IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, UH, A MONUMENT SIGN IS DEFINED AS A SIGN, UM, WITH, UH, GROUND LEVEL SUPPORTS AND SPECIFICALLY NO DIRECT BURIAL POLE. AND THE BOTTOM OF THE SIGN MUST BE IN CONTACT WITH THE GROUND. SO AESTHETICALLY IT, IT NEEDS TO NO, NO POLE SUPPORT. IT, IT SHOULD HAVE SKIRTING OR A BRICK BASE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND, UH, NO DIRECT BURIAL POLES. SO IT SHOULD HAVE LIKE, UH, A BOLTED SUPPORT TO THE GROUND OR REBAR OR J BOLTS OR SOMETHING. SOMETHING OF SORT LIKE, UH, LIKE THAT IS A NON MONUMENT SIGN OR THAT IS A NON MONUMENT SIGN. THOSE ARE DIRECT BURIAL POLES. YOU'LL HAVE SPACE BETWEEN THE BOTTOM OF THE SIGN AND THE GROUND. SO IS THERE A HEIGHT MAXIMUM FOR A MONUMENT SIGN? THERE'S A HEIGHT MAXIMUM FOR ALL OF THE SIGNS. UH, THEY'RE ACTUALLY SIMILAR. OKAY. THE MONUMENTS IN VERSUS NON MONUMENTS, BUT HAVING A MONUMENT ALLOWS LESS OF A SETBACK, SO YOU ACTUALLY HAVE THE BENEFIT OF BEING CLOSER TO THE RIGHT AWAY. OKAY. SO IF THEY WANTED TO, THEY COULD PUT LIKE A STONE OBELISK ABOUT THE SIZE OF THIS SIGN, AND SO LONG AS IT WAS INDIRECT CONTACT WITH THE GROUND AND DIDN'T HAVE A POLE, THEY COULD HAVE THIS AS A MATTER OF RIGHT. THAT WOULD LOOK GREAT. YOU SAID SARCASTICALLY, SORRY. SETBACK FOR A MONUMENT VERSUS A FULL SIGN, A NON MONUMENT, YOU COULD HAVE A ZERO FOOT SETBACK FROM MONUMENT SIGN, UH, DEPENDING ON THE, UH, THE EFFECTIVE AREA. SO BASED ON WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING THIS NON MONUMENT TO GO TO, UM, WHERE WOULD, WHERE WOULD A MONUMENT BE ALLOWED? UM, CAN WE POP THAT SITE? PAN BE FINISH? COULD BE. OR, OR SORRY, I KEEP INTERRUPTING YOU. NO, IT'S OKAY. I WAS JUST GONNA HAVE TO KEEP GOING. UM, DO YOU MIND IF I GRAB MY COMPUTER VIDEO? YOU NEED TO GO. SO THEN LIKE THAT COMERICA, THAT'S TECHNICALLY A NON MONUMENTAL, IF I'M GETTING THAT. OKAY. I CAN SEE THAT. UH OH, GOT IT. SO LIKE WHERE THE LUBY WAS, IS THAT MONUMENT NON MONUMENTAL? AH, THOSE SMART BOOKS, . AND IT WON'T GO BACK TO THE SUBJECT SITE. SO I, OKAY. SO AS A, UH, AN EXAMPLE, A NON MONUMENT, UH, THE ONE THEY'RE PROPOSING IS AS CLOSE AND AS CLOSE AS THEY COULD GET AS A NON MONUMENT. 15 FOOT SETBACK AS THE MINIMUM, UM, WITH 120 SQUARE FOOT MAX AND [01:55:01] A 15 FOOT TALL, UH, WITHIN THOSE PERIMETERS AS A MONUMENT SIGN, THEY COULD HAVE AS LITTLE AS ZERO FOOT SETBACK, BUT THEY WOULD BE LIMITED TO 60 SQUARE FEET AND SEVEN AND A HALF FOOT TALL. REALISTICALLY, BECAUSE AT GREENS, AS YOU POINTED OUT, IS CITY PROPERTY, THEY'D HAVE TO PROBABLY PUT IT, EVERYTHING'S MEASURED FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY WITH THE, WITH THE ASSIGNED SETBACKS? NO, NO, BECAUSE EVERY, ALL, ALL OF THE SETBACKS ARE MEASURED FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, RIGHT OF AWAY. SO, AND IN THIS CASE, THERE'S ACTUALLY A RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT. SO THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD BE MEASURED FROM INSTEAD OF THE PROPERTY LINE. WHERE'S, CAN YOU SHOW US WHERE THE RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT IS? IT'S BARELY VISIBLE ON HERE, BUT THERE IS A FIVE FOOT RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT. SO ESSENTIALLY THE CLOSEST THEY COULD BUILD WOULD BE THAT FIRST PARKING SPOT THAT MAY BE LIKE A FEW FEET OVER FROM WHERE THEY SEE IS 20 FOOT BACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE? NO, FOR A, FOR A MONUMENT. FOR A MONUMENT, THEY COULD BUILD BACK FIVE FOOT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE? NO, AT, AT ZERO, AT ZERO FOOT THEY'RE ALLOWED SEVEN AND A HALF FOOT. AND IT GOES UP FROM THERE LIKE AT, AT 15 FOOT TALL, THEY'D HAVE TO AGAIN HAVE A 15 FOOT SETBACK. MM-HMM . YES. SAYING A MONUMENT SIGN, IF IT'S SET 15 BACK FROM THE ROAD, 15 FEET BACK FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY COULD BE 15 FEET TALL. YES. IT, IT HAS STARTING AT 15 FOOT SETBACK, IT HAS THE SAME ALLOWANCES AS A NON MONUMENT, BUT THE MONUMENT GIVES YOU THE OPTION OF BEING CLOSER THAN 15 FOOT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE GO TO THE ACTUAL HEARING? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU FOR THE BRIEFING. AND WE WILL NOW, UM, HEAR CASE BD 2 3 4 DASH 1 3 9 62 40 EAST MOCKINGBIRD LANE. AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON LINE. SO IF YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. WE'LL SWEAR YOU IN. HI, I AM JULIE ROBERTSON. THE ADDRESS IS 14 2 0 1 SOVEREIGN PARKWAY IN FORT WORTH, TEXAS 7 6 1 5 5. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. UM, THE PREVIOUS SIGN THAT WAS THERE WAS A-B-B-V-A-P-N-C SIGN DURING THE CONVERSION, UM, THE CLIENT PNC ACTUALLY REMOVED THAT SIGN WITHOUT THE LANDLORD ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DURING THE REMOVAL. AND WHEN THEY LEFT THE BUILDING, UM, THE LANDLORD DID GO BACK AND PUT IN A VERY LARGE MONUMENT SIGN. UM, THAT WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE BLOCKED THE HANDICAPPED PARKING SPOTS THAT WERE INITIATED IN THE PLANS WITH BLACK SHEEP. WE'RE GOING BACK WITH A POLE SIGN, UM, ONE FOR HEIGHT, UH, TO MAKE IT READABLE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY COMING FROM THE EAST DIRECTION, UM, IT'S VERY HARD TO READ. BUT WEST WE WOULD BE ABLE TO BE VISIBILITY TO BE ABLE TO COME INTO AND WHERE TO TURN INTO GOING TO BLACK SHEEP COFFEE. UH, OTHER THAN THAT, I MEAN THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THE SETBACKS AND THE HEIGHT. 'CAUSE IF WE DID A MONUMENT, IT WOULDN'T BE SEEN WITH THE CARS. THE AVERAGE CAR, IF IT'S PARKED IN A PARKING SPOT WHERE WE COULD PUT IT, WHICH IS FIVE FOOT FROM THE PROP PROPERTY LINE BECAUSE WE DO HAVE THE EASEMENT SETBACK, UM, IT WOULD STILL BE IN A PARKING SPOT, LIKE IN THE MIDDLE AND IT WOULD BE LARGER AND IT WOULD NEVER BE SEEN BECAUSE CARS BEING PARKED THERE. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? EITHER COMING FROM EITHER DIRECTION. IT WOULDN'T BE SEEN IF IT WAS A MONUMENT, WHICH IS WHY WE WENT WITH THE, THE PYLON. THAT'S . HOW BIG WAS THE PNC UH, NON MONUMENT SIGN THAT WAS THERE, THAT PNC REMOVED WITHOUT, UH, OWNERSHIP APPROVAL? YEAH, THAT WENT OVER WELL. UM, I WANNA SAY IT WAS 15 FOOT TALL. AND IT WAS WITHIN YOUR PROPERTY LINE. IT WAS WITHIN YOUR PROPERTY WHEN IT WAS THERE, WHICH, OKAY, SO THE NEW SIGN YOU'RE PROPOSING IS 20 FEET TALL. IT'S 15 [02:00:01] FOOT OVERALL HEIGHT. SO THIS, WHAT WAS THERE PREVIOUSLY FROM P-N-C-B-B-V-A? IT WAS A 20 FOOT TALL PYLON WITH A RECTANGULAR HEAD THAT HAD TREES AROUND THE BOTTOM, LIKE THE LITTLE BUSHES AROUND THE BOTTOM OF IT. BUT ON, UH, AND MAYBE I'VE GOT THE WRONG SITE PLAN 'CAUSE I KNOW THERE WAS SOMETHING NEW GIVEN. UM, BUT THIS SAYS IT'S YOUR, THE SIGN YOU'RE PROPOSING IS 20 FEET TALL, WHICH I THOUGHT IT CAN ONLY BE 15 TALL. HERE ARE THE, OH YEAH, IT WAS ABOUT TO SAY THE REVISED ONES ARE 50, IT'S 20 FOOT SET BACK WITH 15 FOOT OVERALL HEIGHT. AND THE PREVIOUS SIGN WAS, I THINK IT WAS LIKE TWO FOOT BEHIND THAT SIDEWALK. THE PREVIOUS SIGN WAS LOCATED IN WHAT IS NOW THE, UH, RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT. CORRECT. YEAH. WELL, WELL WE, WE ABOUT THE LOT OF SIGNS, JUST LEMME KNOW, HOW TALL IS THE BURGER HOUSE SIGN NEXT DOOR? 28 FEET. 28 FEET COME AMERICA'S RIGHT AT 30. AND THEN CRAB HOUSE, I THINK NEXT DOOR TO THE, IF YOU'RE FACING IT TO THE RIGHT IS AT 18. WHAT WAS, I MEAN, WHAT WAS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THIS? AND THEN QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT HERE. UM, JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU WERE SAYING THAT THE BBVA, THAT THAT TENANT TORE DOWN THE, UM, WHAT THEIR NON MONUMENTAL SIGN THAT WAS AGAINST, UM, WAS THAT IN VIOLATION OF THE, THE LEASE AGREEMENT THAT, UH, YOU ALL HAD WITH THEM? I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT ENDED UP. I JUST KNOW THAT PNC REMOVED IT WITHOUT THE LANDLORD'S PERMISSION BECAUSE IT WAS A GRANDFATHERED SIGN. OKAY. ALRIGHT, THANKS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? NO, THE SPEAKERS REGISTER. OKAY. OH, UM, ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I HAVE A MOTION. I MOVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 3 1 4 1 3 9 ON APPLICATION OF CHARLES D CORSON. GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN THE DETACHED PREMISE NON MONUMENT SIGNED TO BE LOCATED WITHIN 250 FEET OF PRIVATE PROPERTY AND A NON-BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SIGNED REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED. BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE. COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE PLANS ARE REQUIRED. I'LL SECOND THAT DISCUSSION. GO AHEAD. I, I DON'T SEE ANY EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD THAT THIS IS GONNA ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. UM, AS COMPARED TO THE OTHER SIGNS IN THIS COMMERCIAL AREA, IT'S SMALL. UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE REASON THIS ORDINANCE WAS, I GUESS, PASSED IS TO DISCOURAGE THESE SIGNS, BUT WE'RE HERE TO EVALUATE THEM ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. UH, AND I JUST DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE RECORD ABOUT HOW THIS IS GONNA ADVERSELY AFFECT DAM AND PROPERTY. UM, I SUPPORT THIS MOTION. UM, IN ADDITION TO WHAT MR. BROOKS SAID, UH, I MEAN, THIS IS A LITTLE TOUGH BECAUSE LI TENANT, UM, TORE DOWN THE EXISTING WHAT GRANDFATHER SIGNED, UH, WITHOUT CONSENT FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER. UH, THUS BRINGING THE CASE HERE TODAY, I THINK THAT THERE'S SOMETHING TO BE SAID ABOUT BOTH, UM, THE CONTEXT OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT YOU DO HAVE A RESIDENTIAL ZONE WITHIN THE 250 FEET, BUT ALSO THAT WE DO WANT ALL OF OUR BUSINESSES HERE IN DALLAS TO THRIVE. SO SEEING THAT SIGNAGE IS A CRUCIAL PART OF ANY BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS, UH, WAY OF GENERATING REVENUE AND THE FACT THAT THE SIGN, UH, HEIGHT WAS REDUCED FROM 20 FEET TO 15 FEET, I FEEL COMFORTABLE IN SUPPORTING THE, THE ERECTION OF THIS NON MONUMENTAL SIGNAGE. [02:05:01] UM, I THINK THE CURRENT TENANT, UH, LEASED THE SPACE WITHOUT ANY SIGNAGE AT ALL. I THINK WHAT WAS THERE WAS ACTUALLY CONSTRUCTED BY THE CURRENT OWNER, WHICH WAS A VERY REASONABLE MONUMENT SIGN. UM, I BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD, THEY CAN CONSTRUCT THE MONUMENTS SIGNED BY WRIGHT. I'D LIKE TO SEE THIS. THIS IS VERY RESIDENTIAL. I MEAN, THIS IS A COMMUNITY COLLECTOR, THIS STREET, UM, SURROUNDED BY NEIGHBORHOODS, A LOT OF LOCAL BUSINESSES. THIS IS NOT NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, THIS IS NOT THE SUBURBS. I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO BUILD A MONUMENT SIGN WITHIN THE PARAMETERS, WHICH WOULD GIVE THEM RIGHT, UM, AND VISIBILITY THAT THEY DESIRE WITHOUT NEEDING TO ADMIT OF THE BOARD. . I AM, I I I WAS TORN ON WHAT TO DO ABOUT THIS CASE. UM, I DEFINITELY BELIEVE WHEN WE PUT IN ORDINANCES TO GET RID OF CERTAIN THINGS AND TO CHANGE THE FEEL OF A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU WANNA ADHERE TO, THAT AND I TRY TO SUPPORT THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. UM, LOOKING AT THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE FACT THAT WE CAN BUILD A MONUMENT SIGN THAT WILL BE 15 FEET TALL AND THAT WOULD BE A SOLID BARRIER, UM, IS VERY UNAPPEALING TO ME. I DO NOT THINK THAT THAT MEETS THE NEEDS, UM, OF THE RESIDENTS. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A VERY POOR CHOICE. UM, ALSO LOOKING WHERE THE MONUMENT SIGN WOULD BE, I FEEL LIKE THAT THAT IS IMPEDING, UM, WHERE PEOPLE WOULD PARK. I DON'T THINK, I DO NOT THINK THAT SIGN INVISIBLE FROM, UM, FOUR DRIVERS DRIVING BY. AND WHILE I KNOW IT'S A NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, A, A BUSINESS DOES NEED A SIGN AND IT, WHEN IT WAS AT 20 FEET, I FELT VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH IT, KNOWING THAT THE OTHER SIGNS ARE 28 FEET AND 30 FEET AND 18 FEET, AND THIS IS 15 FEET. I THINK THIS IS A HAPPY MEDIUM TO MEET THE RESIDENTIAL NEEDS AND, UM, ALLOW THE COFFEE SHOP TO BE SUCCESSFUL. UM, AND SO I WILL SUPPORT THIS, WHICH AS EVERYBODY KNOWS, I TYPICALLY DO NOT SUPPORT THINGS LIKE THIS, BUT I DON'T FEEL LIKE THERE'S ANOTHER OPTION ON THIS ONE. I, I, I FEEL LIKE A 15 FOOT MONUMENT SIGN IS A TERRIBLE IDEA AND I'M AFRAID THAT THAT'S WHAT WE MIGHT END UP WITH THAT WOULD ASSUME THAT THEY HAVE A PLACE TO PUT IT, TO BUILD THAT HIGH. THEY MAY END UP BUILDING A SMALLER, MORE REASONABLE MONUMENT SIGN THAT WOULD ACHIEVE A VISIBILITY AS WELL. THAT IS, THAT IS ASSUMING THAT THEY GETS TO THAT HEIGHT. I THINK THAT WHAT ULTIMATELY WOULD HAPPEN IF WE DENIED THIS IS THEY WOULD PROBABLY PUT BACK WHAT THE LANDLORD HAD PUT THERE, WHICH WAS A VERY REASONABLE MONUMENT SIGN, WHICH IS ALLOWED BY WRIGHT. WE'RE ASSUMING THAT THEY WOULD BUILD 15 IF THEY WERE GONNA BUILD A 15 FOOT HIGH MONUMENT, THEY WOULD'VE DONE THAT ALREADY. BUT LOOKING WHERE THAT MONUMENT SIGN WAS, WHEN I LOOK AT IT, I, I MEAN, I GET BUT THIS, THIS AREA HAS LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY CHANGE AND THIS, IF WE APPROVE THIS, THIS IS HERE FOREVER. IT'S NOT GOING AWAY. YEAH. AND SO I HAVE A HARD TIME WITH THAT BECAUSE THEY TOOK IT DOWN AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW THIS NEIGHBORHOOD TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP WITHOUT BEING VEHICLE FIRST. AND THIS TENANT WENT IN THERE KNOWING THAT THEY WOULD BE SUCCESSFUL WITHOUT A MONUMENT SIGN OR A PYLON SIGN. AND, BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THE MONUMENT SIGN VERSUS THE PYLON SIGN, I FEEL LIKE FROM A PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY KIND OF PERSPECTIVE, THEY'LL HAVE, THIS IS MORE THEY'LL TO ADHERE TO THE, TO THE, THE CODE IF THERE WAS AN ACCESS WITH WHEELCHAIR PEDESTRIAN. I HAVE A HARD TIME CONTINUING THIS. I MEAN, WE'RE GONNA END WHERE THIS IS GONNA END UP LOOKING LIKE FRISCO AND PLANO AND NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. THIS IS, THERE'S RESIDENTIAL ON WIN ON WINTON, ON ST. MORS, ON NORRIS. THIS IS RESIDENTIAL WISDOM COMMERCIAL. THIS IS NOT NOR HIGHWAY. UH, YES, GO AHEAD. YEAH, I UM, I AGREE. THIS ENDS UP BEING SORT OF HAVE TO MEAN TWO EXTREMES. LOOKING AT THE SIGNS, BASICALLY ON BOTH SIDES THERE'S A, THE MURDER HOUSE SIGN AND ALSO THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD SIGNS. THIS THE SHORTEST ONE. AND WHAT I'M REALLY LOOKING AT IS, I THINK WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT IS ARE PEOPLE IN RESIDENCE MAKING IT ON WEDNESDAY SUPPOSED TO BE KNOW, ARE THEY GONNA BE ABLE TO SEE THE SIGN FROM THE BACKYARD? AND I'M JUST LOOKING AT MOST RECENT PLANS OF THE 15 FOOT VERSION, AND I'M PRETTY CONFIDENT BASED ON THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD, THAT THAT'S NO, I THINK SIGN THAT'S SHORTER THAN THE BUILDING. AND SO, UH, I JUST RESPECTFULLY DON'T THINK THE QUESTION IS, CAN YOU SEE IT FOR MOCKINGBIRD? OR WHAT, HOW DOES THAT AESTHETICALLY WORK? I THINK IT'S STRICTLY ASKING THAT YOU LIVE ON VINTON OR WHEREVER THE STREETS ARE IN THE RESIDENCE AND YOU SEE THE SIGN. I IF KNOW. AND SO FOR THAT REASON, I IN FAVOR THE SAME, I IF, IF A MONUMENT SIGN ISN'T SOMETHING THAT'S VISIBLE ON MOCKINGBIRD, IT MEANS THAT PEOPLE ARE DRIVING BY TOO FAST. AND THIS IS A COMMUNITY COLLECTOR. IF THE ONLY WAY THIS BUSINESS THRIVES IS IF, IF YOU PUT A 15 FOOT BULL SIGN, THEN [02:10:01] YOU'RE NOT SERVING THE COMMUNITY WHERE WE'RE SERVING VEHICLES. A MONUMENT SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT ALLOWS VISIBILITY AND ALSO PRESENTS THIS BUSINESS WITHOUT CHANGING THE, THE, THE NATURE OF WHAT THIS IS, IS COMMUNITY COLLECTIVE. I MEAN, I I I AGREE WITH THE PRINCIPLES. YOU'RE, YOU STAND ON HERE. UM, WHICH IS WHY I ALWAYS VOTE AGAINST PARKING ORDINANCES. AND I I'LL I NEVER WANT MINIMUM PARKING STUFF REQUIREMENT. I WANT PEOPLE TO WALK. BUT I, I, I THINK, UM, OUR, OUR NEW BOARD MEMBER HERE BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT. YOU'RE NOT GONNA, YOU'RE NOT GONNA SEE IT FROM THE RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY. AND AT, EXCUSE ME, AT THE POINT THAT ONE PERSON IN OR CLOSE TO THIS 200 FOOT RADIUS CAME BACK AND SAID EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, I'M VOTING AGAINST THIS SIGN. NO DOUBT. AND NO ONE DID. LET'S, UH, TAKE A ROLL CALL. VOTE MS. LAMB. NO. MR. BROOKS. YES. MR. CANNON. YES. MR. GRAHAM? YES. MS. VICE-CHAIR? YES. MOTION TO GRANT PASS THIS FOUR ONE. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU EVERYBODY FOR THE MEETING AND WE WILL ADJOURN BOARD. EXCUSE ME, MS. VICE CHAIR AT 3:23 PM I DID HAVE ONE LAST COMMENT. OH. OH YES. I, I'M SORRY. YES, YES. UM, I JUST WANNA TAKE A MOMENT HERE TO, UM, FIRST OF ALL THANK MR. BROOKS HERE FOR YES. HIS SERVICE ON THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. UM, I KNOW IT IS 3 23, BUT I HAVE AN HOUR OF SPEECH PREPARED. I'M KIDDING. . BUT, UM, HONESTLY, UH, IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE WORKING WITH YOU FOR AT LEAST I'VE BEEN ON FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS. UM, YOUR SERVICE IS, PEOPLE SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE A LOT, BUT I ACTUALLY GET IT. SO, UM, FIRST OF ALL, CONGRATULATIONS TO YOUR, YOUR NEXT TRANSITION, UH, SERVING THE CITY OF DALLAS AND WE WILL MISS YOU HERE ON THE PANEL B. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES. AGREE WITH THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN A LOT OF FUN. THANKS TO STAFF. THIS IS LIKE BRAND NEW. I WAS GONNA TELL YOU GUYS AFTERWARDS. UM, UM, BUT YEAH, NO, UM, IT'S BEEN A REALLY FUN LAST EIGHT YEARS. UM, I'VE SEEN A LOT OF, UM, CHANGES AND, AND THE MOST RECENT ONES HAVE BEEN GREAT. UM, I THINK STAFF IS DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB AND, UM, AGAIN, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL ALWAYS REMEMBER MY EIGHT YEARS AS AN ALTERNATE ON THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. WELL, I'M BEING NOMINATED TO SERVE ON A TIFF BOARD IN WEST DALLAS. UM, AND I WAS TOLD THIS MORNING DURING BRIEFING THAT I HAD TO RESIGN AND I'M LIKE, WELL, I CAN'T RESIGN TODAY, BUT I CAN RESIGN TOMORROW. SO ANYWAY, THANK, THANK Y'ALL. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.