This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
End of dialog window.
[Board of Adjustments: Panel C on February 20, 2025.]
[00:00:02]
GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
IT IS 1:24 PM WE HAVE FORUM THIS MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANELS CALLED TO ORDER.
UM, WELCOME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL C PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, HERE TODAY ARE MEMBERS TO MY LEFT, JUDY P*****K.
TO MY RIGHT IS MATTHEW SAPP, BOARD ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, DR.
CAMIKA MILLER HOSKINS, BOARD ADMINISTRATOR CHIEF PLANNER, MS. MARY WILLIAMS, OUR BOARD SECRETARY AND MEETING MON MODERATOR.
IF YOU NEED TO PRESENT ANYTHING TO THE BOARD, SHE'S THE PERSON TO DO IT THROUGH.
UH, MARY, OUR SIGNUP SHEETS BACK AT THE BACK OF THE ROOM.
SO IF YOU'RE GONNA SPEAK AND YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY SIGNED UP, USE ONE OF THOSE SHEETS.
UM, ALSO HERE IS MR. BRYANT THOMPSON, WHO'S THE SENIOR PLANNER.
WE ALSO HAVE BILL IRWIN, WHO IS OUR CHIEF ARBOR.
UM, BEFORE WE BEGIN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A FEW GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE BOARD.
IN A WAY THE HEARING IS CONDUCTED.
BOARD MEMBERS SERVE WITHOUT COMPENSATION.
WE ARE APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR.
UM, WE ARE A QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARD, WHICH MEANS THAT WE CAN HAVE NO DISCUSSION ABOUT A CASE OUTSIDE OF THIS HEARING.
UM, NO ACTION OR DECISIONS ON A CASE SETS A PRECEDENT.
EACH CASE IS DECIDED UPON ITS OWN MERITS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
EACH USE IS PRESUMED TO BE A LEGAL USE.
WE HAVE BEEN BRIEFED BY STAFF PRIOR TO THIS HEARING, AND WE'VE ALSO REVIEWED A DETAILED PUBLIC DOCKET, WHICH EXPLAINS THE CASE THAT WAS POSTED SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE DID, UH, RECESS EARLY FROM OUR BRIEFING THIS MORNING, UH, AND ONLY HAD HALF OF A BRIEFING ON ONE CASE.
WHEN THAT CASE IS CALLED, WE WILL CONTINUE THE BRIEFING AND THEN HEAR THE CASE.
UM, APPROVALS OF A VARIANT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION, OR REVERSAL OF A BUILDING OFFICIAL DECISION REQUIRES 75% OR FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES OF THE FULL FIVE PANEL MEMBER, UH, FIVE MEMBER PANEL.
ALL OTHER MOTIONS REQUIRE SIMPLE MAJORITY LETTERS TO THE BOARD.
ACTION TODAY WILL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT BY OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR SHORTLY AFTER TODAY'S HEARING AND WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.
UH, ANYONE DESIRING TO SPEAK TODAY SHOULD REGISTER EACH REGISTERED SPEAKER DURING THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY, WHICH WILL START FIRST, UH, WILL SPEAK FOR A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES AND MAY SPEAK ON ANY SUBJECT ON OUR, ON OUR, UH, DOCKET TODAY.
UH, SPEAKERS FOR CASES, UH, WE WILL GIVE THE APPLICANT, UH, FIVE MINUTES AT A MINIMUM, BUT WE WILL EXTEND IN CASES WHERE IT'S NEEDED AND OPPOSITION WILL HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME.
AND THEN THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UM, ALL REGISTERED ONLINE SPEAKERS MUST BE PRESENT ON THE VIDEO.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE YOUR FACE PRESENT.
IT CAN'T JUST BE YOUR VOICE IN ORDER TO BE COUNTED.
UM, ALL COMMENTS WILL BE, UH, DIRECTED TO ME.
UH, IF I NEED TO, I WILL MODIFY THE SPEAKING TIME.
SO LET'S, LET'S DO THE MINUTES FIRST BEFORE I HAVE A MOTION.
MS. POLL, I MOVE THAT THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 23RD, 2025 MINUTES BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.
OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
FURTHER MOTIONS WILL BE DONE BY ROLL CALL.
UM, BEFORE WE GET TO PUBLIC COMMENT, WE'RE, LET'S HEAR IT THIS WAY.
LET'S, LET'S HEAR OUR CONSENT AGENDA THEN THE, UM, UH, THE FEE REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST.
UH, AND THEN THE CASES THAT WE'RE GONNA HEAR IN ORDER START WITH OH 18.
THEN LET'S HEAR OH TWO SEVEN AND THEN COME BACK TO OH TWO EIGHT AND OH TWO NINE.
UH, AND I WILL LATER ASK THE ATTORNEY HOW WE WANNA CALL THOSE CASES.
I THINK I WILL CALL 'EM INDEPENDENTLY AND VOTE ON THEM INDEPENDENTLY.
UM, ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT? OKAY.
[00:05:02]
UM, SO WE HAVE OUR MINUTES.ARE THERE SPEAKERS, UH, REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY? MS. WILLIAMS? NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY SPEAKERS REGISTERED.
SIR, GOING FORWARD, IF YOU, IF YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK, PLEASE BE SWORN IN AND THEN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
UM, IS ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION OR AT, AT ALL FOR, UH, BDA OH ONE OH, NOT THE FEE WAIVER, THE ACTUAL CASE? UH, UH, THAT'S IT.
YEAH, BUT KEN'S HERE, SO THE BOARD IS INCLINED TO, IS THE, AND IF HEARING NO LATE OPPOSITION, THE BOARD'S INCLINED TO GRANT YOUR, UH, YOUR REQUEST, UH, UNLESS YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND ABOUT YOUR REQUEST.
IS THERE A, A MOTION FOR CONSENT AGENDA? A MOTION.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN THE APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 1 0 FR HAVE ONE ON THE APPLICATION? NO, THE CONSENT.
WE MET THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS GRANT, THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS LISTED ON THE ED DOCKET BECAUSE IT APPEARS FROM OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE THAT THE APPLICATION SATISFY ALL OF THEIR REQUIREMENTS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE CODE AS APPLICABLE TO WIT BDA 2 4 5 DASH ZERO APPLICATION OF ALEJANDRO ARROYO OR VARIANCE TO THE FLOOR AREA FOR STRUCTURES ACCESSORY DWELLING TO SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATIONS, A VARIANCE TO THE BUILDING HEIGHT REGULATIONS, A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS, A VARIANCE TO THE REAR YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS.
AND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
THE APPLICANT MUST DEED RESTRICT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO PREVENT THE USE OF ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT AS A RENTAL ACCOMMODATION.
AND COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
MR. MILLIKEN, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE RECORD, YOU MEAN BDA 2 4 5 DASH THAT'S CORRECT.
NOT SO THE, THE CASE, NOT THE FEE WAIVER.
SO, MR. MILLIKEN AND MR. AG SECOND DISCUSSION.
MS. WILLIAMS? MS. P*****K? AYE.
OKAY, NOW WE, WE ARE TO THE FEE WAIVER.
BDA 2 4 5 DASH ONE FR ONE C 2 1 72 JORDAN VALLEY ROAD.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FEES.
WELL, IT'S NOT WRITTEN THAT WAY HERE.
IS IT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION REIMBURSEMENT? YES.
IT'S A, IT'S A FEE? NO, IT'S JUST A FEE WAIVER.
JUST A FEE WAIVER REIMBURSEMENT FEE.
SO IF YOU WERE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE, PLEASE STAND TO BE SWORN IN AND, AND I THINK WE'VE DECIDED THE MICROPHONE IS THERE.
WE'RE NOT IN OUR NORMAL, UH, ROOM.
MARY, WOULD YOU PLEASE SWEAR AHEAD? ALRIGHT, YOU WANT ME, CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE? MARY, WOULD YOU SWEAR HIM IN? YOU CAN STATE, OH, YOU NEED TO DO MR. OKAY.
DO YOU, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE PROCEEDING.
UM, ALEJANDRO ARROYO FROM 2172 JORDAN VALLEY.
OKAY, SO WE ARE REQUESTING TO GET THE FEE, UH, WAIVE.
UH, WELL THANK YOU FOR APPROVING THE OTHER STUFF.
UM, SO WE'RE REQUESTING THIS REALLY
[00:10:01]
JUST TO, UH, PAY FOR THE, THE PROPERTY TAXES.UH, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO PAY 'EM THIS, UH, PAST MONTH, BUT WITH, UH, THE NEW FEES THAT WE HAD TO PAY, WE KINDA HAD TO USE THAT MONEY THAT WE HAD SAVED UP BY THE PROPERTY TAXES.
UM, THIS YEAR HAS BEEN A WEIRD YEAR FOR, UH, ME AT WORK AND, UH, UH, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T MAKE ENOUGH AS I USUALLY, UH, DO.
AND, UH, WITH, UH, A NEW BABY, UH, COMING UP TOO.
AND HAVING KNOW, UH, UH, GOVERNMENT HELP, IT'S BEEN REALLY TOUGH ON, ON BOTH OF US AND THAT'S REALLY ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WHY WE COULDN'T REALLY GET MORE EXTRA MONEY TO PAY FOR THE PROPERTY TAXES.
AND BY THE FEES BEING WAIVED, WE, WE WERE ABLE TO DO THAT, UH, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
MR. ROYAL, OUR, OUR STANDARD IS EXTREME FINANCIAL HARDSHIP.
WHICH, UH, EXTREME FINANCIAL HARDSHIP DID YOU, UH, BRING MR. THOMPSON? I, I WAS ABOUT TO LOOK FOR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.
MR. THOMPSON'S RAISING HIS HAND.
SO HE PROVIDED SOME INFORMATION OVER THE, UM, OVER THE BREAK.
I KNOW IT'S EXTREMELY HARD TO SEE THERE.
MR. ROYAL, THIS IS YOUR, YOUR PRESENTATION.
YOU'VE ASKED HIM TO DO THIS? YES.
WE DO HAVE IT ON OUR COMPUTERS.
THOSE OF US, I WOULD SAY IF YOU CAN'T SEE IT, GO UP THERE, UM, WE'LL DO OUR BEST.
UM, SO JUST, I MEAN, THAT'S THE, THE ONE YOU'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW.
IT'S THE, THE LAST ONE THAT WE PAID THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A COVERED TAXES, BUT WE DIDN'T, WEREN'T READY FOR, FOR THIS KEY.
UH, WE PAID A TOTAL OF 3,200, BUT WE'RE ONLY REQUESTING 2,400 BACK, WHICH IS REALLY JUST WHAT THE TAXES ARE.
ARE, UH, SOME OTHER DOCUMENTS OR ANOTHER OPTION WAS MAYBE OPEN ANOTHER CREDIT CARD, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT ONE'S KIND OF LIKE MAXED UP.
UH, THERE'S OTHER, AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT'S A PROPERTY TAXES ONE RIGHT THERE.
AND UH, THINK IT WENT UP $200, MOSTLY 200, 400.
AND, UM, THERE'S OTHER DOCUMENTS THERE, UM, ABOUT JUST THE COST FOR PERMITS AND, UH, THE, I GUESS THE DOCTOR VISIT FOR THE, THE NEW NEW BABY THAT'S COMING OUT.
I WANNA BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT HIPAA RIGHTS.
UM, IS THERE A WAY ONCE THIS IS DONE THAT WE CAN REDACT ANYTHING THAT GOES INTO PUBLIC RECORDS SO THAT HIS PERSONAL INFORMATION AND I TOLD HIM THAT WE WOULD DEFINITELY, WHICH IS WHY DO YOU NEED SOME, WE HAD THE DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW MUCH OF THIS WE WANTED TO KIND OF PUT UP AND THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT OF EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
WE DIDN'T WANT THIS TO BE, IT'S, WE DON'T ASK PEOPLE TO GIVE SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS.
THAT'S WHY IT'S KIND OF WELL, BUT WE DO ASK PEOPLE TO PROVE IT REAL FAST TO PURPOSELY NOT HAVE UP FOR WELL, I SUSPECT ANY, ANY COURT IN THE WORLD WOULD ON THE US WOULD ALLOW REDACTIONS OF PERSONAL INFORMATION LIKE THIS.
I IF YOU NEED A MOTION FROM US TO DO IT.
IT JUST BEFORE IT GOES INTO
WELL, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD REDACT IT.
I LEAVE THAT TO YOU TO DO IT LEGALLY, BUT I, I DON'T, THERE'S GOTTA BE A WAY GUYS.
I I DON'T, UM, SAY RECORDED UP THERE.
HOW ARE YOU GONNA, I DON'T KNOW, BUT WHEN YOU POST THE VIDEO, THERE'S A FILE SOMEWHERE.
I DON'T KNOW, MATH LAWYERS, WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY.
I DON'T KNOW HOW I DON'T WANT, IF IT'S AT ALL POSSIBLE, PLEASE DO THAT FOR HIS UNDERSTOOD.
BUT I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
ARE THERE, UH, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO QUESTIONS.
QUESTIONS MR.
WE HAD IT FOR EITHER ONE AND WELL, IT WENT TO THE, THE LEASE.
UM, AND WHEN ARE Y'ALL EXPECTING? REALLY? UH, ANYTIME SOON.
IT DEPENDS ON THE BABY NOW, BUT IT WAS
[00:15:01]
SUPPOSED TO BE MARCH 3RD, BUT IT'S REALLY UP TO HIM NOW.UH, AND I ASSUME YOU DON'T HAVE SUFFICIENT SAVINGS SOMEWHERE OR INVESTMENT SOMEWHERE THAT WOULD LET YOU COVER THE EXPENSE? THIS, THIS YEAR WAS, UH, THIS PAST YEAR? UH, NO.
I, I HAD SOME STOCKS AND STUFF, BUT I SLOWLY HAD TO TAKE ONE BY ONE OUT, SO I'M NOT AND SO IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY THAT IT HAVING TO PAY THESE FEES WOULD CONSTITUTE A SUBSTANTIAL HARDSHIP FOR YOUR FAMILY.
WHO SAYS YOU CAN'T BE A PUBLIC DEFENDER IN, UM, THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, THANK YOU.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION? OKAY, THANK YOU.
UH, IS THERE A MOTION MR. SW? UH, I'M HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 45 DASH ZERO FR ONE ON APPLICATION OF ALEJANDRO ARROYO.
GRANT, THE REQUEST TO THE REIMBURSEMENT OF FILING FEES PAID IN THE ASSOCIATION WITH THE REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF THE FOR AREA FOR STRUCTURES ACCESSORY TO SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATIONS OF VARIANCE TO THE BUILDING HEIGHT REGULATIONS, A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS, A VARIANCE TO THE REAR YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS AND A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATIONS IS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY OF THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PAYMENT OF THE FEE WOULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT, AG SHALL SECOND.
SO, MR. SWAY AGNES DISCUSSION, I BELIEVE, UH, OUR ANALYSIS IS WHETHER, UM, THE PAYMENT OF THE FEE OR THE ABSENCE OF REIMBURSEMENT OF THE FEE WOULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT.
AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAS SATISFIED THAT, OR TO THE EXTENT I'M WILLING TO DIG INTO ANYONE'S PERSONAL STUFF BEYOND, BEYOND THAT, UM, I WILL MAKE A NOTE.
YOU CAN, IF, IF WE CHANGE THE RULE NAME THE RULE AFTER YOU WHERE, WHERE WE SEE IF WE CAN'T FIND A WAY TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS LIKE THAT, WE HAVE AN ISSUE IN THAT IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING AT PUBLIC RECORD, BUT I GOTTA BELIEVE THE LAWYERS WILL FIND SOMETHING, THEY'RE LAWYERS.
SO THANK YOU AND GOOD LUCK AND CONGRATULATIONS.
SO, UH, ALTHOUGH WE SHOULD VOTE WE HAVEN'T, UH, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU CALL THE MS. P*****K? AYE.
MOTION TO GRANT PASSES? FOUR TO ZERO.
OKAY, SO NOW WE GO TO RUSSELL CIRCLE.
UH, THIS IS BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 1 8 1 1 2 2 5.
UH, MARCELO BARON, UH, REPRESENTED BY ALAN NINO ORINO, EXCUSE ME IF I MISPRONOUNCED FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS FOR A CARPOOL.
ARE THERE SPEAKERS HERE IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION? IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE? MS. WILLIAMS? UH, THERE IS SOME POSITION ONLINE.
THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION, OKAY? I DON'T BELIEVE THAT OUR RULES REQUIRE US TO DECLINE IT.
WE COULD DO, IF IT WERE A SECOND TIME, WE WOULD BE REQUIRED SO WE COULD, UH, OKAY.
SINCE THE OPPOSITION IS HERE, I, I'D LIKE TO HEAR THE OPPOSITION AND FRANKLY NOT HOLD IT AGAINST THE OPPOSITION'S TIME THAT THE APPLICANT ISN'T HERE.
UH, IF YOU ARE HERE IN OPPOSITION OR ONLINE, WOULD YOU PLEASE BE SWORN IN? MS. WILLIAMS? MR. LANCE, CAN YOU PLEASE PROVIDE AUDIO AND VIDEO? MR. LANCE,
[00:20:01]
DID STAFF HAVE ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT? IT ALL INDICATE APPLICANT WASN'T COMING TODAY.I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY INFORMATION STATING THAT THEY HERE TODAY THAT THEY ARE ENCOURAGED TO.
USUALLY YOU TELL US JUST LOOKING B MR. LINZ, ARE YOU STILL ONLINE? ARE YOU ABLE TO GET YOUR EMAIL IF SOMETHING'S HAPPENING? FOR WHATEVER REASON? HE, HE UH, HE SENT ME A MESSAGE EARLIER THAT OKAY.
CAN YOU PLEASE PROVIDE AUDIO AS WELL? THERE WE GO.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
I LIVE IN 53 20 TAN BARK ROAD IN THE RUST WOOD ACRES, ACRES NEIGHBORHOOD OF DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 2 9.
WELL, AS I'VE SAID, MY NAME IS LANCE JO.
I LIVE IN RU WOOD, WHICH IS THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD AS THE APPLICATION FOR OH ONE EIGHT.
I'M A FELLOW IN THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS AND MY FIRM WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PLANNING OF STATE THOMAS NEIGHBORHOOD IN DALLAS, UH, MOCKINGBIRD STATION, AS WELL AS THE REBUILD OF THE PENTAGON AFTER NINE 11.
AND THE EXPANSION OF THE US CAPITAL VISITOR CENTER AS WELL AS WELL AS MANY OTHER NUMEROUS NOTEWORTHY NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL PROJECT.
I AS WELL AS MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS DELIGHT IN WALKING OUR NOT OUR RUS WOOD NEIGHBORHOOD AND MEETING EACH OTHER FREQUENTLY TO COMMENT ON OUR APPRECIATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ITS NATURAL SETTINGS.
LAST YEAR, THE GAZEBO AT 1 1 2, 2 4, APPLICANT OH ONE EIGHT RUSS WOOD CIRCLE WAS CONTINUALLY BROUGHT UP.
SO I WENT BY TO PERSONALLY VIEW WHAT WAS HAPPENING THERE.
THE EXISTING GAZEBO IS, IN MY OPINION, HORRIFIC AND NEGATIVELY COMPROMISES VIEWS ON THE STREET.
APPARENTLY THE HOMEOWNER BUILT THE EXISTING GAZEBO STRUCTURE WELL PAST THE SET BUILDING SETBACK LINE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
FURTHER RESEARCH INDICATED THAT THEY BUILT THIS STRUCTURE WITHOUT A PERMIT AND DISCUSSIONS WITH CITY OFFICIALS AFTERWARDS INDICATED THAT THE, UH, THAT HAD THE STRUCTURE THEY BUILT APPLIED FOR A PERMIT AS THEY BUILT IT.
IT WOULD'VE BEEN DENIED AS NON-CONFORMING APPROVAL WILL SET UP A PRECEDENT FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S ALREADY NEGATIVELY BEEN IMPACTED AND, UM, PROBABLY DAMAGED PROPERTY VALUES OF ADJACENT RESIDENCES.
NOW I UNDERSTAND THAT THE SAME INDIVIDUAL WHO CHOSE NOT TO GO THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS TO GET THE EXISTING STRUCTURE PERMITTED AND REVIEWED, WHICH WOULD'VE BEEN DENIED, IS NOW GRACIOUSLY DOUBLING DOWN AND ASKING FOR NOT ONLY A PERMIT, BUT AN EX EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING NONCONFORMING UNPERMITTED WORK ALREADY IN PLACE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD STRONGLY SUGGESTS THIS BODY TURN DOWN THE APPEAL AND RECOMMENDS NO FUTURE BUILDING PAST THE SETBACK LINE AND THAT THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ENCROACHING UPON THE SETBACK LINE BE REMOVED AT OWNER'S EXPENSE IMMEDIATELY.
UH, I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, BUT ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR THE IN SPEAKER? I HAVE A QUESTION.
UH, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU REPRESENT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU DO? JUST YOUR NEIGHBORS NOT A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR AN HOA OR ANYTHING ELSE? WE DO NOT.
I'M JUST CURIOUS, THIS IS, IS THERE PAPERWORK INDICATING THE REPRESENTATION? THERE'S CERTAINLY PAPERWORK THAT INDICATING PEOPLE ARE AGAINST IT.
SO MS. P*****K, DO YOU HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS? NO, I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF YOU WERE AN OFFICIAL REPRESENTATIVE.
SOMETIMES WE HAVE PEOPLE TESTIFYING THAT THEY ARE REPRESENTING A PARTICULAR ORGANIZATION.
[00:25:01]
UM, SAID NEIGHBORS IN GENERAL.I I AM AN, I I DO NOT HAVE ANY CAPACITY TO SPEAK FOR THE NEIGHBORS INWOOD ACRES.
SO IF I LED YOU TO BELIEVE THAT, I APOLOGIZE.
IT'S ONLY THAT I'VE MET PEOPLE AS I WALK THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS A SMALL, TIGHT-KNIT COMMUNITY WHO MENTIONED TO ME, KNOWING I'M AN ARCHITECT, THAT THIS WAS A REAL CATASTROPHE AND THEY ASKED ME TO SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF.
WE, WE UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOUR NEIGHBORS DID WRITE US.
UH, SINCE THERE, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE A REBUTTAL.
UM, IS THE EXISTING STRUCTURE LEGAL? IT'S NOT PERMITTED.
WE DO NOT HAVE, UM, PERMIT ON FILE FOR THAT STRUCTURE.
BUT IS IT BUILT OVER A BUILDING LINE? IT'S ENCROACHMENT TO THE FRONT YARD SET BACK.
IT IS SO, SO, SO WITHOUT, SO THEY, THEY, THEY DO NEED TO COME ASK US THIS.
UH, I HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING TO BE THERE AND WHAT WAS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT'S THERE, BUT THAT'S, THERE'S NO ONE HERE TO ANSWER THOSE.
UH, SO YEAH, SO OUR STANDPOINT IS, IT'S, IT'S, UH, IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THEY PLAN TO DO FROM HERE ON OUT.
ANYTHING THAT APPROACHES ON THE SETBACK LINE, I THINK SHOULD BE DENIED.
IT'S, IT'S THE KEY ASPECT TO THIS COMMUNITY THAT MAKES THE TREES AND THE OAK TREES, UH, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD SO APPEALING TO EVERYBODY THAT, THAT CHOOSES TO LIVE HERE.
AT THIS POINT, UH, WE'LL CLOSE THE, THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, IT WAS THERE A MOTION MR. SLAVE VICE CHAIR? I HAVE A MOTION.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 1 8 ON APPLICATION NUMBER MARCELO BAR REPRESENTED BY ALAN NINO, DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATION FOR A CARPORT REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT WITH PREJUDICE CONTAINED IN AND CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT GRANTING THE REQUEST WILL HAVE A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, WELL, WE MAY HAVE TO DO, DO WE HAVE TO DO ALL OF THESE OR CAN WE MAKE A GLOBAL MOTION? ALL I PROGRESS WITH IT.
MR. NO, SECOND, UH, TO YOUR MOTION, WHY DID YOU CHOOSE TO DO IT WITH PREJUDICE? UM,
TODAY'S HEARING, UM, IS SUFFICIENT FOR ME TO DECIDE THAT IT SHOULD BE WITH PREJUDICE.
WE JUST HAD SOMEBODY WHO, WHO'S NOT PAYING THEIR PROPERTY TAXES SO THEY CAN PAY THESE FEES.
AND IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'D SHOW UP IF YOU'RE GONNA MAKE AN APPLICATION, I I'LL VOTE FOR IT.
OR IF SOMETHING WERE TO INTERFERE THAT YOU WOULD TRY TO REACH OUT TO COMMUNICATE AND THAT I THAT SOMETHING IS RISKY.
WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE BOTH MS. P*****K? AYE.
MR. MILLIGAN A MS. MR. VICE CHAIR AYE, MOTION TO DENY YOUR PREJUDICE AS THIS COURT BUREAU.
THAT MEANS THEY WILL NOT BE BACK WITHOUT A WAIVER FOR TWO YEARS.
THE NEXT CASE IS BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 2 4 5 4 1 4 FALLS ROAD.
IF YOU WERE HERE TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST IT, WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND AND BE SWORN IN? DO THIS BELOW.
MS. WILLIAMS, WE, I'M TRYING TO GET, TRYING TO GET THE PREVIOUS REST OFFICE SCREEN.
[00:30:07]
UM, DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DO.UM, WHOEVER'S GONNA SPEAK FIRST, YOU CAN COME UP HERE.
SPEAKER'S IN FAVOR OF THE A, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
CHRIS BOWERS SISTER LAW GROUP.
I RESIDE AT 4 1 1 5 RAINS SONG DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS AFTERNOON.
THANK YOU FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE YOUR BUSINESS ADDRESS IN PUBLIC RECORD, I BELIEVE WE ALLOW THAT.
I, UH, AM HERE REPRESENTING DOUG AND DEVORA BISHOP ON A REQUEST FOR A FOR FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR A FRONT YARD FENCE.
THE STANDARD, UH, FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS WILL IT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AND I WILL EXPLAIN WHY THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD.
THE FENCE WOULD HAVE LIMESTONE COLUMNS AND WR IRON BARS AND GATES.
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS ZONED R ONE ACRE AND MANY NEARBY HOMES HAVE SIMILAR FENCES.
AND I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THIS FENCE WILL BE UNOBSTRUCTED.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THROUGH THE IRON BARS AND SEE THE FRONT YARD.
UH, THE REASON FOR THE REQUEST IS FOR SECURITY AND PRIVACY.
IT IS A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD THAT DPD HAS FEWER OFFICERS NOW THAN IT DID A FEW YEARS AGO.
UH, IT'S A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD THAT DUE TO HAVING FEWER OFFICERS THAT RESPONSE TIMES ARE UP AND CRIME IS UP.
NOW IN THE LAST YEAR, DPD HAS MADE PROGRESS ON BOTH THOSE FRONTS, BUT STILL COMPARED TO FIVE YEARS AGO, THINGS ARE A LITTLE WORSE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND OTHERS.
AND BECAUSE OF THAT, THERE HAS BEEN QUITE A FEW APPLICATIONS FOR FENCE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS.
I'M GONNA WALK YOU THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD 'CAUSE I HEARD A QUESTION THIS MORNING ABOUT WHERE ARE THESE DIFFERENT, UH, FENCES LOCATED.
THIS IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE SAME BLOCK OF FALLS ROAD.
AND YOU CAN SEE THERE A TALL FENCE THAT IS, UH, WHERE THE VIEW IS OBSTRUCTED.
NEXT SLIDE GOING TOWARD THE APPLICANT'S HOUSE.
THIS IS ANOTHER HOUSE ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
THERE'S A, UH, WALL AND GATE THERE.
SO THIS FENCE RIGHT THERE, IS THAT INSIDE THE, IS IS THAT OUTSIDE THE, THE, IS THAT INSIDE THE, THE BUILDING LINE? IT'S IN THE FRONT DOOR.
IS IT IN PUBLIC RIGHTWAY? I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
IT'S NOT IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY THEN IT'S A, IT'S, YOU WOULDN'T NEED US.
UH, IF YOU'RE BUILDING INSIDE YOUR BUILDING LINE, YOU, YOU, YOU CAN BUILD A IN NEAR FORTRESS, I BELIEVE.
FORRES, YOU CAN, BUT, BUT, WELL, SO WITHIN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, RIGHT? SO IF THAT, WHATEVER THAT DISTANCE IS.
SO THE QUESTION THAT YOU BEHIND THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO GO UP TO A CERTAIN HEIGHT BEFORE A PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND ANOTHER HEIGHT BEFORE ENGINEERING.
SO IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IS ABOVE FOUR FEET, YOU WOULD STILL UNDERSTOOD? YES.
SO MY QUESTION IS WHETHER THIS IS IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK.
I BELIEVE THE SETBACK IS 25 FEET.
ONE ACRE IS A MINIMUM 40 AC AND IF THERE'S A PLATY MIDDLE LINE, THAT CAN BE MORE.
AND THIS PANEL MAY RECALL THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE THIS WAS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION THAT YOU HEARD LAST JUNE AND YOU GRANTED A ONE FOOT, UH, SIX INCH, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE FENCE, UH, THAT IS SHOWN ON THIS PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S CURRENTLY NO FENCE THERE.
THIS, UH, IS, UH, PROPERTY STILL ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS NO FENCE THERE, BUT THERE IS SOME LANDSCAPING THAT, UH, DOES OBSTRUCT.
NEXT SLIDE THEN THIS IS IN THE NEXT BLOCK.
CONTINUING ON FALLS ROAD, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS A FENCE THERE,
[00:35:01]
OR AT LEAST A PORTION OF WHICH APPEARS TO BE MORE THAN FOUR FEET AND HEIGHT.CAN YOU GO BACK? IS THAT ON A CORNER? I DON'T RECALL.
IT JUST LOOKS LIKE THE HOUSE IS FACING A DIFFERENT WAY THAN BUT DON'T KNOW.
UH, AND THEN THIS IS A YET ANOTHER HOUSE WITH A FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD.
AND HERE YOU HAVE EVEN ANOTHER FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD.
AND THEN THIS IS ON NORTH SIDE OF THE STREET.
IT HAS A MEADOWBROOK ADDRESS, BUT THIS IS WHAT IT FACES FALLS AND IT HAS A FENCE IN THE FRONT AND THE SIDE YARD.
SO LET ME LET SAY IF IT'S A SIDE YARD.
SO IT COULD BE A FRONT YARD, HOWEVER, IF IT WERE SIDE YARD, WHAT, WHAT IS THE SETBACK IN R ONE? THEY 10.
THIS IS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FALLS ROAD.
YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A NICE FENCE THERE.
AND THEN, UH, 55, 39 FALLS ROAD ALSO HAS A FENCE.
THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY.
UH, I DON'T HAVE A PICTURE OF, BUT IT IS OPEN.
AND WHAT I WOULD POINT OUT IS THAT THIS IS THE LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE APPLICANT.
I'M SORRY, IS THAT SWISS FAMILY ROBINSON? IS THAT THE THING WE USED TO FORGET? SORRY.
OKAY, SO THIS IS THIS, THIS RIGHT HERE IS THE OPPOSITION.
UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, UH, IT IS NOT THE NORMAL CHARACTER FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I WOULD POINT OUT THAT IT'S GOT A CROSS POST AND A, AND A FENCE POST THAT APPEAR TO BE MORE THAN FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT.
AND BASED ON ONLINE RECORDS, I'M UNABLE TO FIND ANY, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION GRANTING PERMISSION FOR THAT NEXT SLIDE.
UH, IT APPEARS THAT AT LEAST TO A PART OF THAT, UH, UH, BASE, UH, LIMESTONE OR SIMILAR STONE FENCE, UH, IT APPEARS TO BE ALSO MORE THAN FOUR FEET OF HEIGHT.
UH, AGAIN, I'M NOT AWARE OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION THAT WOULD AUTHORIZE THAT.
THIS IS IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE OPPOSITION.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS A LONG FENCE THAT HAS PILLARS THAT ARE MORE THAN FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT.
UH, SO, UH, THIS IS, I WOULD ARGUE THE TRUE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I WOULD POINT OUT ALSO THAT THIS BOARD HAS GRANTED MANY SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS FOR TALL FENCES.
UH, WE HAD, UH, JENNIFER PITO REQUESTING THE NEXT DOOR PROPERTY.
AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY LAST JUNE, WE ALSO HAD ROB BALDWIN APPEAR, UH, IN THE BDA 2 0 1 1 12 CASE.
AND THAT WAS ONE WHERE THE APPLICATION WAS FOR EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE.
AND THERE IS A LONG HISTORY OF OTHER CASES WHERE THE BOARD APPROVED THAT ARE IN THE MINUTES, UH, FOR THAT BDA FILE NUMBER.
AND THE BOARD APPROVED A NINE FOOT FENCE IN JANUARY, 2017 OR PROPERTY ON MEADOWBROOK.
AN EIGHT FOOT TOOTH TALL FENCE, JANUARY OR MAY OF 2017, UH, FOR 55 30 FALLS, A SIX FOOT SIX FOOT FENCE, UH, FOR 55 39, A 10 FOOT FENCE, A FIVE FOOT SIX FENCE, A 58 0 7 PARK LANE, A 10 FOOT FALL FENCE ON 95 20 HATHAWAY, A SIX FOOT TALL FENCE AT 58 30 FALLS ROAD, AND EIGHT FOOT SEVEN FENCE AT 55 35 PARK LANE.
SO WHAT WE HAVE, AND THERE ARE NO IN THAT LONG HISTORY OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES THAT IS CONTAINED WITHIN YOUR MINUTES, THERE ARE NO DENIALS BY THIS BOARD OF A FENCE HEIGHT, SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
SO WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU, THIS HAS BEEN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS HAD TRANSITION OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS.
THERE HAVE BEEN MANY APPLICATIONS FOR THESE TYPE FENCES FOR SECURITY AND PRIVACY REASONS.
AND THE BOARD IN EACH CASE HAS GRANTED.
UH, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND HERE, THE OPACITY IS NOT AN ISSUE.
AND YOUR COLUMNS, BETWEEN THE COLUMNS, YOU WOULD
[00:40:01]
HAVE BROAD IRON.THERE WOULD NOT BE, FOR INSTANCE, A FOUR FOOT BASE OF CONCRETE OR STONE OF SOME SORT.
THEN FOUR FEET OF WROUGHT IRON FENCING.
IT WOULD BE ALL OPAQUE ALL THE WAY ACROSS BETWEEN THE STONE COLUMNS.
THIS IS AN ELEVATION, RIGHT? YEAH.
PAGE 89 AND I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THAT ELEVATION IN FRONT OF ME, BUT, UH, YEAH, SO BETWEEN THE COLUMNS, THERE'LL BE ALL RIGHT.
SO EIGHT FOOT IS THE COLUMN? YES.
OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. MILL? UH, MR. SUITER, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
THEY'RE REQUESTING THIS EXCEPTION FOR SAFETY, IS THAT CORRECT? SAFETY AND PRIVACY.
THIS IS FOR MY EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES AND I CAN BRING AROUND THE ELEVATION IN CASE YOU DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF YOU.
UM, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
THERE'S A PORTION OF IT THAT'S DOESN'T HAVE THE LITTLE ALL AMOUNTS WRITTEN DOWN.
AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT LIKE, I, I THINK I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT THERE WOULD BE, UH, WR IRON, UH, BARS FOR THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF EVENTS.
UM, 'CAUSE OF COURSE, AS YOU'RE, YOU'RE DIRECTING US TO OUR PRIOR CASES, OBVIOUSLY ALL OF THOSE APPROVALS WERE SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFIC SITE PLAN THAT WAS PROVIDED, WHICH FREQUENTLY DOES INCLUDE A DIFFERENTIATION BECAUSE I, I THINK, UM, THE BOARD COULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHETHER THE EIGHT FOOT TALL, UH, FENCE WAS BRICK VERSUS, UH, SOMETHING MORE OPAQUE LIKE A WROUGHT IRON OR OTHERWISE.
AND SO THAT'S A MATERIAL CONSIDERATION FOR US.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
THANK, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE? OKAY, THANK YOU.
ARE THERE OTHER SPEAKERS IN FAVOR? HOW MUCH TIME DO WE HAVE, MARY? SO OUR, OUR TOTAL TIME IS UP, BUT WE, YOU KNOW, WE EXTENDED EQUITABLY, BUT YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT SENSITIVE TO IT.
SO PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
UH, MY ADDRESS IS 54 14 FALLS ROAD.
UH, AND I AM SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION AND I WILL BE VERY BRIEF.
MY WIFE WHO'S HERE IS 72 YEARS OLD.
UH, WE LIVE ALONE AT, UH, 54 14 FALLS ROAD.
UH, AND WE ARE ASKING FOR AN ADJUSTMENT IN THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE OR SECURITY SAFETY PURPOSES, PRIMARILY.
UH, AND I WOULD, UH, NOTE THAT THAT IS AS RECOMMENDED AS I UNDERSTAND IT BY THE CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN GUIDELINES, WHICH ARE RELIED UPON, I THINK, BY THE, UH, DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEN ADVISING PROPERTY OWNERS ON SAFETY AND SECURITY ISSUES.
NOW, I FREQUENTLY TRAVEL IN MY WORK, I SPEND A LOT OF TIME IN HOUSTON WORKING, UH, AS WELL AS ELSEWHERE.
AND I WOULD FEEL, UH, MUCH BETTER ABOUT THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF MY LIFE IF WE'RE ABLE TO HAVE AN EIGHT AND NOT NEARLY A FOUR FOOT ONE.
NOW, IN ADDITION, WE HAVE FOUR YOUNG GRANDCHILDREN WHO OFTEN, UH, ARE ROVER AND PLAY IN THE FRONT YARD.
AND WE WANT TO, OF COURSE MAKE SURE THEY ARE, UH, PROTECTED AND SAFE AT ALL TIMES.
NOW, THE FENCE HAS, AS HAS BEEN NOTED, THAT WE'RE PLANNING TO BILL IS AN OPEN WR IRON FENCE.
I THINK IT'S BEEN ACCURATELY DESCRIBED, UH, EARLIER.
UH, AND IT WILL BE AESTHETIC AND IT WILL BLEND IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
DEFENSE WILL NOT IN ANY WAY ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I THINK THAT'S SHOWN BY THE FACT THAT
[00:45:01]
OUR NEIGHBORS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM US HAVE SUBMITTED A LETTER, UH, IN, UH, IN SUPPORT OF OUR APPLICATION.NOW, I WOULD, I WOULD, UH, END ON THIS.
UH, I I HAVE GONE AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN OUR BLOCK AND IN THE TWO BLOCKS THAT ARE PARALLEL ON, ON EACH SIDE OF FALLS ROAD AND LOOKED AT THE, UH, THE HOUSES.
AND, UH, BY MY COUNT THERE ARE ABOUT 16 HOUSES THAT HAVE FENCES THAT APPEAR TO BE TALLER THAN FOUR FEET.
UH, AND THAT'S OUT OF A TOTAL OF 26 HOUSES.
SO IT SEEMS THAT THERE ARE 60% OR MORE OF THE HOUSES, UH, SEEM TO HAVE FENCES IN OUR GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE HIGHER THAN, UH, FOUR FEET TALL.
SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE ASKING FOR ANYTHING THAT IS OUT OF ORDINARY, UH, IN OUR GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
ANY QUESTIONS? APPRECIATE, THANK YOU.
ARE THERE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? NO.
UH, WE TECHNICALLY ALLOW A REBUTTAL.
UH, IS THERE A MOTION MR. CHAIR? I'LL MOTION MR. MILTON.
OKAY, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN THE APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 2 4 ON THE APPLICATION OF CHRIS BOWERS RAN THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A NINE FOOT OFFENSE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE HIGH REQUIREMENT FENCES CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED FOR FURTHER PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
COMPLIANCE WITH HEIGHT AND FENCE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED IN THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND MS. POLL SECONDS.
UM, I, I MEAN, I FEEL THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED ENOUGH INFORMATION FOR ME TO SATISFY THAT IT'S BEING USED FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY.
UM, THERE IS SOMEWHAT OF A, I DON'T WANT TO USE THE WORD PRECEDENT, BUT THERE IS A, UH, A BIT OF A HIGHER FENCE, UM, HISTORY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I GUESS I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.
I THIS IS, THIS IS A GOOD REMINDER THAT, THAT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF HOW THE BOARD VOTES IN THE END, THE ONLY THING ANYBODY REMEMBERS IS HOW DID THE BOARD VOTE? AND IF SOMEBODY WENT INTO THE MINUTES TO SEE HOW YOU VOTED, THE ONLY THING THAT REMEMBER IS HOW YOU VOTED, NOT HOW HESITANTLY YOU DID IT OR WHATEVER, MAN, YOU HAVE A DECISION, YOU GET TO OWN IT.
UM, SECONDLY, IF PRECEDENT WERE AN ISSUE, UM, I, I'D HAVE, I I, IF WE WERE ALLOWED TO USE SECURITY AS A STANDARD, UH, IT WOULD BE A WHOLE DIFFERENT SET OF ISSUES WE'D, WE'D DEAL WITH.
UM, UH, THE QUESTION HERE IS WHETHER IT ADVERSELY AFFECTS NEIGHBOR AND PROPERTIES.
UM, I LIKE THAT IT IS WROUGHT IRON AND IT'S VERTICAL.
I THE PART OF SOME OF THOSE CASES, UH, I SEE IMMEDIATELY AROUND THERE RELATIVELY, I MEAN, A FOUR FOOT BROAD IRON IS INCREDIBLY OPEN.
DOESN'T REQUIRE US, SOME OF THEM, THE LANDSCAPING, UH, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, LANDSCAPING IS THE GREATEST WAY TO NOT HAVE TO COME SEE US, I DON'T BELIEVE.
UNLESS YOU'RE OUTSIDE IN A VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, NOBODY CAN TELL YOU ANYTHING.
I BELIEVE, UM, I'D FIND A WAY TO SAY NO IF IT WEREN'T AN OPEN FENCE, BUT BECAUSE IT IS WROUGHT IRON VERTICAL.
AND WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT IS, IS THE QUOTE UNQUOTE PEERS, WHATEVER.
[00:50:04]
NOTHING.OKAY, MS. WILLIAMS, MS. P*****K? AYE.
MOTION TO GRANT PASSES FOR TO ZERO LET IT BE KNOWN THAT THIS BOARD APPROVED LUKA DON'S HOUSE.
AND IT DID US NO GOOD
YES, WE ARE GONNA FINISH THE BRIEFING HERE, WHICH, SO HERE WE ARE NOW GONNA, OKAY.
DO I NEED TO CLOSE THE HEARING AND REOPEN THE BRIEFING? NO, JUST START.
SO HERE IS THE REMAINDER OF THE BRIEFING PART.
SO THIS IS A SITUATION WE'RE ONLY THE STAFF AND THE BOARD SPEAK, UH, ON DDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 2 7 48 0 2 BELMONT AVENUE.
SO WE WERE AT THIS POINT IN THE VIDEO, SO GUESS WE CAN FINISH THE VIDEO AND THEN ANY QUESTIONS WE'LL PICK UP FROM THERE.
SO, SO WE'LL JUST START THE VIDEO OVER AND RECAP, UH, THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD, THIS IS ONE STREET OVER STILL A PART OF MF TWO.
NOW WE'RE MAKING A LEFT FROM BELMONT.
I IS THAT THE ONE THEY MISSED? YES, IT WAS.
THIS AREA IS RESTRICTED TO 30 FEET IN HEIGHT.
THIS IS DIRECTOR BEHIND THE PROPERTY.
SO ALONG THIS FENCE IS WHERE THE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE STARTS AND IT GOES TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
SO, AND ONE MORE STREET CONCLUDES VIDEO, UH, LEGAL STANDARDS FOR DECISION MAKING.
THIS ONE DEALS WITH OUR HEIGHT, IN PARTICULAR RPS.
UH, THE RATIONALE, UM, UM, NO LETTERS WERE RECEIVED WITHIN THE JOINT FOR GREATEST, UM, IN OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT.
UH, THE SUBJECT SITE DOES DIFFER, UM, FROM OTHER PARTS OF THE LAND BEING IN SUCH A RESTRICTED AREA, SHAPE AND SLOPE.
THEY CANNOT BE DEVELOPED IN A MATTER OF COMMENCING WITH
[00:55:01]
DEVELOPMENT ON OTHER PARTS OF LAND.HOWEVER, RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE PURPOSES TO PROTECT OUR STRUCTURES NEXT TO TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES.
AND THIS IS NOT A SELF-CREATED OR PERSONAL HARDSHIP 'CAUSE IT'S NOT BUILT.
UM, AND BECAUSE OF THE RRP S IS THE REASON FOR THEM TO NOT.
SO IF IT WEREN'T AN RRP S AND THEY WERE REQUIRED REQUESTING A VARIANCE, WELL, WITHOUT RPS, UM, MF TWO ALLOWS FOR 36 FEET IN HEIGHT.
AND THEN THE ONLY THING THAT WILL COME INTO QUESTION IS HOW STAFF WILL TAKE A LOOK AT THE, UH, MECHANICAL ROOM.
I'M FOCUSED ON THE, THE RATIONALE.
AS PART OF YOUR RATIONALE IS IF YOU GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE.
SO IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE ACTUAL LOT ITSELF, SO IT IS AN IRREGULAR SHAPED BLOCK.
AND AS YOU CAN TELL IT, IT STARTS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE BLOCK, IT STARTS TO GET SMALLER THE CLOSER YOU GET TOWARDS, UH, I FORGOT WHAT THAT NAME, BUT THAT FITS YOU, FITS YOU, FITS YOU.
I BET IT'S DEFINITELY SIMILAR.
SO THEY START TO GET, SO THE LOT SIZES AND DEPTH START TO GET SMALLER.
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO RPS, YOU STILL DON'T WANT A STRUCTURE THAT'S GONNA BE TOWERING OVER SINGLE FAMILY.
CAN YOU SHOW ME ON THAT MAP WHERE THE, WHAT TRIGGERS THE RPS? YEAH.
SO THIS BLACK LINE ALRIGHT HERE TRIGGERS RPS.
SO THE RPS GOES TO THE LEFT AND IT STARTS AT THE GROUND LEVEL AND IT CONTINUES TO GO UP AT THE ANGLE.
SO THAT BLACK LINE REPRESENTS THIS HERE.
SO IT STARTS TO GO BACK IN THIS DIRECTION TOWARD THE FRONT OF THE, IF THAT HELPS ANY IT DOES.
CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT OVERVIEW SLIDE? THAT MAY HAVE BEEN THE LAST SLIDE.
SO YOU SAY RPS PURPOSE IS TO PROTECT POWER STRUCTURES NEXT TO TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT.
ARE, ARE YOU SAYING THOUGH THAT, THAT WHETHER OR NOT A HARDSHIP EXISTS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR THAT? FROM MY RATIONALE, YES.
BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU DON'T WANT A 45 FOOT STRUCTURE TOWERING OVER A 30 FOOT STRUCTURE.
SO SOMETHING'S LIMITED TO 30 FEET IN HEIGHT.
IN THIS CASE, YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S 45 FEET IN HEIGHT, IT'S GOING TO BE TOWERING OVER THERE.
AND SO RPS WILL PUT INTO PLACE TO PROTECT THOSE SCENARIOS.
QUESTIONS FOR MR. THOMPSON? MR. SLATE, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
SO DID YOU NEED TO BACK UP? I'M SORRY.
UM, BUT I'M, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
IS THERE AN AGREEMENT OR DISAGREEMENT THAT THIS IS AN IRREGULAR AREA? I AGREE THAT THIS IS A REGULAR SHAPE BLOCK.
IT IS EITHER IRREGULAR SHAPE LOCK, UM, AND JUST AS MANY OF THE LOTS IN THIS PARTICULAR BLOCK BASE ARE.
AND I DO AGREE THAT IT IS SMALLER THAN OTHER LOTS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT.
HOWEVER, IT'S THE RPS, IT'S THE RPS.
'CAUSE I THOUGHT THAT THE, UM, I THOUGHT THERE MIGHT BE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT POSITION TAKEN IN THE WRITEUP.
REMEMBER OUR STANDARD, THEY, THEY WRITE THREE THINGS THAT EACH, EACH ONE OF THEM HAS SOME SUBSETS THAT, UH, OKAY.
UM, SO THIS INCREASE IS, IS IT ASKING FOR A ROOFTOP ABILITY OR IS IT, I COULDN'T TELL FROM THAT.
THAT, SO THERE IS A PORTION THAT IS A ROOFTOP, UM, THAT INTENDS TO BE A, IT'S A MECHANICAL, SO YOU CAN GO UP TOP FOR MECHANICAL PURPOSES, BUT NOT, AND UM, IF YOU CHOOSE TO STAY UP TOP, THERE IS NOTHING THAT STOPS YOU FROM BANANA THROUGH THE ROOFTOP.
THAT'S CURRENT TRADITIONAL STRUCTURE, MAKEUP OF THE CIGA, BALL WITH FLATWORK.
UM, I DID SAY ELEVATOR, IT WAS STAIRS
[01:00:01]
THAT WERE LEADING UP TO THE PENTHOUSE.SO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THOUGH IS NOT JUST THE ELEVATOR, THE LITTLE ENTRANCE, THE LITTLE TOP OF A STAIRCASE THAT IS.
UM, SO THE PURPOSE OF THOSE IS TO LEAD TO MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT THAT IS ON THE TOP OF THE STRUCTURE.
UM, BECAUSE YOU ARE MORE SO LIMITED ON GROUND LEVEL, UH, OR PLACEMENT, OR MAYBE IT COULD BE FOR SECURITY PURPOSES OR VARIOUS REASONS WHY PEOPLE PUT YEAH.
UM, IN THIS CASE, THE CITY ALLOWS FOR ZONING, ALLOWS FOR YOU TO HAVE, UM, STAIRWELL THAT LEADS TO THAT LEVEL SPECIFICALLY FOR YOUR MECHANICAL.
SO THERE'S NO ARGUMENT THAT, THAT THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE AN ELEVATOR ON THE OUTSIDE IN ORDER TO GET TO THE TOP.
IS THERE A HEIGHT AT WHICH WHEN A BUILDING IS CONSTRUCTED WHERE IT MUST HAVE AN ELEVATOR FOR RESIDENTIAL? YES.
SO YOU COULD HAVE A SIX STORY RESIDENTIAL HOUSE WITH NO ELEVATOR.
WELL TECHNICALLY YOU COULDN'T HAVE A SIX STORY HOUSE.
WELL, LET'S SAY FOUR STORY HOUSE, BUT IT'S 60 FEET TALL.
YEAH, IT'S, IT'S NOTHING THAT DEALS WITH THAT.
UM, BECAUSE SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES DON'T HAVE A DA REQUIREMENTS.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN YOU BUILD A, YOU'RE BUILDING A HOUSE FOR YOURSELF.
IF YOU LIMIT YOURSELF TO HANDICAP ISSUES, THEN THAT'S ON YOU.
SO AADA A ISSUES COME INTO PUBLIC FACILITIES.
AND A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE IS A PRIVATE FACILITY.
ALRIGHT, SO NOW WE ARE FINISHED WITH THE BRIEFING AND UH, WE CALLED THE CASE, UH, WHICH IS BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 2 7 48 0 2 BELMONT AVENUE, APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES REPRESENTED BY ROB BALDWIN FOR VARIANCE TO THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REGULATIONS.
WOULD YOU BE SWORN IN? AND ROB BALDWIN 3 9 0 4 HELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ACCOMMODATING MY SCHEDULE TODAY.
UM, SO, UH, BRIAN DID A GREAT JOB, UH, BRIEFING THIS SECTION.
SO THIS IS ON BELMONT AVENUE EAST DALLAS, JUST KIND OF SOUTHWEST OF FITZ.
SO THIS IS THE, THE PROPERTY IN OUTLINED IN GREEN.
AS YOU CAN SEE, AS BRIAN POINTED OUT EARLIER, AS YOU GO NORTHEAST ON THIS PROPERTY, UH, THIS BLOCK, ALL THE LOTS GET NARROWER AND SHALLOWER.
UH, THIS IN FACT IS THE, UH, THE SECOND SMALLEST LOT ON THE BLOCK.
IT ALL SHARES, UH, AN MF TWO ZONING DISTRICT.
UH, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THESE ARE BEING DE DEVELOPED AS DUPLEXES.
UH, HISTORICALLY, AND AS Y'ALL SAW IN THE VIDEO, MOST OF THE DUPLEXES ARE BEING BUILT NOW ARE THREE STORIES.
NOT QUITE SURE HOW THEY'RE BEING BUILT.
BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE ALL RUNNING THE SAME PROBLEM THAT WE'RE RUNNING INTO.
UH, WE'RE DOING THIS PROACTIVELY, BUT WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS BE ABLE TO BUILD COMMENSURATE WITH THE OTHER PROPERTIES THAT YOU'VE SEEN BEING RECENTLY BUILT ON THIS BLOCK.
THIS IS THE ZONING MAP THAT SHOWS THAT WE'RE, UH, IN, UP TO NEXT SLIDE.
SO THESE ARE THE HOUSES THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT RIGHT AT THE END OF THE STREET.
WE WANNA BUILD THE SAME THING.
NOW GOING TO THE, UH, OVERALL HEIGHT.
SO WE, IN MF TWO DISTRICT, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO GO TO 36 FEET IN HEIGHT.
BUT IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE, IF YOU'RE IN A DISTRICT THAT IS IT 36 FEET AT OR LESS MAXIMUM HEIGHT, YOU'RE ALLOWED 12 FEET IN ADDITION FOR WHAT THEY CALL NORMAL PROJECTIONS.
AND THAT COULD BE, UH, ELEVATOR PENTHOUSES, IT COULD BE UH, EQUIPMENT ROOMS, CLEAR STORIES AND THE LIKE.
IN THIS CASE, WE'RE PROPOSING TO HAVE AN EQUIPMENT ROOM ON THERE.
SO BECAUSE BEING A DUPLEX, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE THE ROOM TO PUT THE AC UNITS ON THE GROUND, WE'RE GONNA PUT THEM ON THE ROOF.
UM, SO THAT BUMPS THE HEIGHT UP TO MORE THAN THREE, SIX FEET.
BUT THAT IS, IF THE RRP S WASN'T
[01:05:01]
THERE, THAT WOULD BE TOTALLY FINE.SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE RRP S THE RRP S IS A ONE TO THREE SLOPE THAT EMANATES OUT FROM, UH, THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE PROTECTED PROPERTY.
IN THIS CASE, IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, GIVEN SHARE BACK BOTTOM LINE WITH THE PURPOSE OF THAT IS IF BRIAN SAID JUST PROTECT, UH, SMALLER HOUSES AND SMALLER HOUSES.
SO TO PROTECT A HOUSE TO GO TO 30 FEET FROM A HOUSE DIDN'T GO TO 36 FEET.
UM, WE'RE ASKING THAT, THAT BE, UH, RELIEVED IN ORDER TO US TO BUILD COMMENSURATE WITHOUT LOTS ZONED MF TWO IN IMMEDIATE VICINITY, UM, WE ARE 84 FOOT DEPTH PLOT WHEREVER THE AVERAGE LOT DEPTH ON THE STREET IS 118 FEET.
UM, THE RPS VERY LIMITS WHAT WE CAN BUILD ON THE PROPERTY.
NEW DUPLEX HOMES HAVE BEEN BUILT ON THE BLOCK AND HAVE A COMBINED FLOOR AREA OF 5,869 SQUARE FEET.
SO THAT'S THE TWO UNITS WITH, UM, OUR RESTRICTION, WE'D BE LIMITED TO LESS THAN 2000 SQUARE FEET.
SO ALMOST CUT DOWN BY TWO THIRDS OF WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE ON THE STREET HAS BEEN ABLE TO BUILD.
UM, THE HARDSHIP WAS NOT SELF-CREATED AND IT'S NOT AGAINST THE PUBLIC INTEREST 'CAUSE WE HAVE NOT SEEN ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS.
WE HAVE WRITTEN LETTERS TO ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS, UH, AND AS HAD ANY CONCERNS, HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING, NO ONE'S WRITTEN AN OPPOSITION.
EVERYBODY GOT AT LEAST TWO NOTIFICATIONS AND NO ONE SEEMED TO HAVE A CONCERN WITH THIS.
I HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS REQUEST.
UH, LET ME MAKE SURE I HAVEN'T LEFT OUT ANY GOOD PARTS.
UM, NO, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
UH, I DO APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
HOLLY, HOW HIGH ARE THE CEILINGS ARE ON EACH FLOOR? NINE FOOT.
SO IF THEY WERE, SO IF THEY WERE NINE FOOT CEILINGS, THAT WOULD BE NINE TIMES, I MEAN THREE TIMES.
YEAH, SO THAT WOULD BE THREE FEET.
SO THAT WOULD MAKE IT EASIER TO, UM, COMPLY WITH THE RRP S SO THE RRP S WITH THE RRP S IN PLACE, WE'D BE LIMITED TO 26 FEET IN HEIGHT AT SOME POINT AND HIGHER AT ANOTHER POINT YOU HAVE TO BE, YEAH.
ONCE YOU GET TO 78 FEET OR 79TH, ONCE YOU GET TO 81 FEET AWAY, YOU CAN GO UP TO 27 FEET.
'CAUSE IT'S THREE TIMES, UH, 20, 27.
IS IT THREE OVER ONE OR ONE OVER THREE? IT'S, IT'S ONE OVER, IT'S ONE OVER THREE.
SO EVERY RISE OVER RUNNING NOW YOU GET TO GO UP ONE.
AND WITH OUR LOT ONLY 84 FEET DEEP, WE'RE NEVER GONNA BE ABLE TO GET HIGHER THAN 28 6 FEET.
SO THE CEILINGS ARE 10 FEET? YES MA'AM.
OH, IN THE COMPS YOU GAVE ARE, IF I LIMIT YOUR COMPS TO, UH, TO PIECES OF PROPERTY THAT ARE INSIDE, UH, A RESIDENTIAL SLOPE, UH, WHO'S, WHO'S BUILDING AS HIGH AS YOU WANT TO INSIDE A RESIDENTIAL SLOPE? I MEAN IN ANY CROSS TOWN EITHER.
I DON'T KNOW WHO THEY'RE, THEY ARE WHO BUILDING, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN BUILT.
IS THAT THE ONE THAT MR. MR. THOMPSON CALLED OUT IN THE, IN THE THREE ON THAT VERY END OF THE STREET AS YOU ARE? THOSE ARE THOSE INSIDE? THEY ARE, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
UM, IS IS, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY WERE BUILT, BUT I KNOW FOR SURE THE ONE THAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO WAS BUILT IN THE LAST TWO YEARS.
IS THE R-R-S-A-A NEW THING? RPSR SORRY.
UM, SO WHETHER THEY'RE OLD OR NOT, 1985.
AND THE, THE THREE AT THE END OF THE STREET, UH, THEY WERE, UH, RECALL THEY WERE 2018.
AND ARE THOSE ABOVE? ARE THEY SUBJECT TO THE SLOPE? THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN.
UM,
I WOULD'VE TO GO AND MEASURE THOSE.
UH, TO TELL YOU SPECIFICALLY HOW FAR, UH, AS TO WHETHER THEY'RE INSIDE THE TRIANGLE.
BUT TO GET TO THE FULL 36 FEET, THEY'D HAVE TO BE 108 FEET AWAY.
AND WITH THE SETBACK, I DON'T THINK MAYBE A SMALL PORTION OF 'EM COULD GET TO THREE STORIES.
BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY WERE BUILT.
BUT THAT'S NOT, NOT MY, MY BUSINESS.
SO TO REMEM, IF I REMEMBER MR. THOMPSON'S SLIDE, UM, THE SLOPE WOULD CUT THROUGH ABOUT MIDWAY THROUGH THE THIRD
[01:10:02]
FLOOR OF THIS, THE WHOLE, NO, IT'S THE SOLE PROPERTY.COULD YOU JUST, JUST KEEP IN MIND RED BIRDS ONE FOR EVERY ONE FOOT OUT YOU GET, YOU'RE VERY THREE FEET OUT, YOU GET TO GO UP ONE FOOT.
AND UH, THAT'S WHY I WAS CONFUSED ABOUT THE FLAT LINE THAT WAS RED AND GREEN.
SO ONCE YOU GET TO 26 FEET, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO INCREASE.
SO THE FIRST 26 FEET, REGARDLESS OF IF YOU'RE UNDER THE, YOU'RE ALLOWED 26 FEET.
SO AS THAT SLOPE COMES UP, THIS PORTION IS IRRELEVANT.
SO, ALRIGHT, SO THIS PART HERE, AS THIS LINE COMES UP, IT IS NOT TELLING YOU THAT YOU HAVE TO BUILD ALONG THIS LINE.
WHAT IT'S TELLING YOU IS THAT ONCE YOU GET TO THIS POINT HERE IS WHEN YOU CAN START TO GO, YOUR HEIGHT OF YOUR ROOF CAN START TO INCREASE.
AND THE IDEA IS THAT YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO BUILD INSIDE THE TRIANGLE THAT IS MADE BASICALLY INSIDE THE HYPOTHESIS.
YOU ARE ALLOWED TO BUILD INSIDE THE TRIANGLE OUTSIDE OF THE FIRST 26 FEET.
SO YOU'RE ALWAYS ALLOWED 26 FEET, OTHERWISE YES.
AND THEN ONCE YOU GET OUTSIDE THE TRIANGLE, THEN YOU CAN START TO GO UP.
SO WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU CAN BUILD A TWO STORY AND YOU'LL BE OKAY.
YOU JUST CAN'T BUILD ABOVE THAT.
MY MEMORY IS THAT WE TECHNICALLY DON'T HAVE A DEFINITION OF STORY IN THE CITY.
YOU'RE YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT SIR.
IT COULD BE A 26 FOOT TALL STRUCTURE.
THAT COULD BE ONE STORY, BUT, BUT YES, IN THEORY.
HE UP TO GET HIM THREE AND 26 FEET, BUT I MEAN THEY WILL ALL BE EIGHT FOOT WITH ONE FOOT IN BETWEEN EACH FLOOR.
AND THAT, THAT'S THE MAP BETWEEN SOME ARCHITECT COULD DO AN INTERESTING ARGUMENT, UM, WITH THE PROPERTY VALUES THERE.
AND YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WANT, UH, A NICE FINISHES.
UH, MS. P*****K, I JUMPED IN ON YOUR TIME, YOUR QUESTIONS? NO, I WAS JUST CURIOUS THAT AT LEAST A REDUCTION OF THE CEILINGS FROM 10, 10 TO NINE, UM, WOULD HELP SLATE.
MR. MR. SLATE THEN MR. MILL, VICE CHAIR AG, I HAVE A PAIR OF QUESTIONS JUST FOR CLAR.
THE CEILINGS ARE NINE, THE CEILINGS ARE NINE.
NINE SECOND, SECOND THE SECOND AND SECOND.
AND, UH, THIRD 13 BECAUSE THE FIRST FLOOR IS MOSTLY PARKING.
MR. BALDWIN, I EXPECT MY FIRST QUESTION WILL REQUIRE YOU TO TURN TOWARDS YOUR, UH, CLIENT.
ARE YOU ANTICIPATING HAVING ANY FANS IN THE PROPERTY, CEILING FANS, CEILING FANS? YES.
AND HOW FAR DID THOSE USUALLY COME ON DOWN? USUALLY THREE 12 TO 18 INCHES.
ERIC, WHY DON'T YOU COME ON UP.
BE SWORN IN AND YEAH, HE'LL BE SWORN IN.
JUST TO WARN YOU, HE'S IRISH SO HE DOESN'T SOUND LIKE ME.
SO, UH, HE'S GOT A HAPPIER VOICE THAN I DO.
UH, ERIC FOLKNER, 5 8 3 9 RICHMOND, EBONY, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 6.
YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
SO THE, THE QUESTION WAS, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CEILING HEIGHT, I JUST WANTED TO INQUIRE ABOUT, I WOULD ASSUME THE PROPERTY LIKELY HAS CEILING FANS AND HOW FAR DOWN THOSE MIGHT KIND OF, UM, YEAH, I BELIEVE BETWEEN 12 AND 18 INCHES THEY WERE OFF SEAL.
SO THEN THAT KIND OF RESTRICTS YOUR
UM, THE SECOND QUESTION, MR. BALDWIN, I THINK YOU'LL BE ABLE TO ANSWER, JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM IN TERMS OF THE NOTICE OBVIOUSLY WAS MAILED, BUT WAS ANY SIGNAGE PUT OUT SO THAT NEARBY NEIGHBORS WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING HAPPENING AND YOU MIGHT PAY ATTENTION? YES.
SO THE CITY REQUIRES IT TO PUT A SIGN OUT THERE WITHIN 10 DAYS OF NOTICE.
AND IT WAS OUT THERE AS YOU SAW IT IN THE SIGN IT WAS OUT THERE.
UH, AND AS OF RECENTLY, AS A WEEK AGO, BUT ALSO AS OUR OFFICE, WE ALWAYS SEND OUT LETTERS, UH, TO ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS WITHIN THE NOTIFICATION AREA BEFORE THE SIGN COMES OUT.
SO, UM, I THINK THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT IT.
THOSE WERE THE QUESTIONS I HAD.
I HAVE A COMMENT ABOUT CEILING FANS.
I LIVE IN AN OLD, OLD PROPERTY WITH EIGHT FOOT CEILINGS.
I HAVE CEILING FANS IN ALL MY ROOMS. THEY'RE FLUSH MOUNTED AND IT'S NOT AN ISSUE.
I DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WORKS.
FLUSH MOUNT, THEY JUST SCRAPE THE TOP OF THE OKAY.
[01:15:01]
AND I WOULD BE SCARED OUT OF MY MIND ABOUT THE FLIP CEILING FAN, BUT, UM, UH, MR. MALAM HAS MR. BALDWIN OR MR. FLETCHER CAN ANSWER.UM, IS THIS BEING DEVELOPED FOR SALE OR FOR PERSONAL? I MEAN TO LIVE IN NO, IT'S ACTUALLY A RENTAL PROPERTY.
AND ARE THE, THE, UM, THE OTHER PROPERTIES JUST DOWN THE STREET, MR. BALDWIN, THAT YOU KIND OF REFERENCED, ARE THOSE ALSO DUPLEXES AND IN THE NEXT BLOCK? YES, THEY ARE.
THE BEST I CAN TELL, ALL THE HOUSES THAT WE BUILT FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS ARE ALL DUPLEXES.
EVEN THOUGH THE MULTI FAMILIES ONLY DISTRICT.
YES, THOSE, THE MECHANICAL ROOM HAVE TO BE THAT TALL.
IS THAT JUST WHAT, THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE, ISN'T IT? AS FAR AS YOUR NO, I MEAN, WE, WE CAN REDUCE THE SIZE OF THAT AND WE COULD, OR WE COULD REMOVE IT IF, IF THAT'S A PAIN POINT SIMPLY, IT'S MUCH EASIER TO PUT THE UNITS ON TOP BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY GRAVITY FED THE H FIVE WATER TANKS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
AND, AND THEN FROM ACCESSIBILITY AND MAINTENANCE, IT'S MUCH EASIER FOR THE GUYS TO GET ACCESS TO THOSE SERVICE, THOSE UNITS AS OPPOSED TO
WELL, MY QUESTION WAS THE, THE, THE, UM, ROOF ON THE MECHANICAL ROOM SLOPES QUITE A BIT.
SO I WAS WONDERING, IS THAT MOUNT IN THE, UH, TOTAL HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING? PROBABLY AT THE TOP POINT, YES.
BECAUSE OF THE WAY, UM, IT'S A PITCH ROOF FLAT OR DEPTH GABLE TECHNICAL TERMS THAT WE USE.
UH, BY THAT BEING IT'S SLOPE, WE GO TO THE HIGHEST POINT TO WHERE IF IT WAS A HIP OR G, WE WOULD GO TO THE MIDPOINT.
UM, IT STILL MAY BE THAT SAME OVERALL HEIGHT, BUT THE WAY THAT WE MEASURE IN THIS SCENARIO, BECAUSE IT'S SLOPE, WE GO TO THE HIGHEST POINT.
SO THE HIGHEST POINT BEING AT 45 FEET IS THE REASON WHY.
AND THE HIGHEST POINT OF THE ROOF IS AT WHAT FEET? I'M TRYING TO SEE HERE.
PARDON? UH, THE HIGHEST POINT OF THE ROOF IS 36 FEET.
AND SO THE, UH, SO THERE'S NINE FEET EXTRA FOR THE RIGHT.
AND SO THAT'S MEASURED TO THE VERY TOP OF THE MECHANICAL, WHICH REMEMBER, UH, THE, THE CITY'S, UH, MF TWO DISTRICT ALLOWS THOSE EXTRA 12 FEET FROM MECHANICAL ROOM.
BUT AS ERIC SAYS, IF THAT'S, UH, WE WOULD PREFER TO KEEP IT.
IF, IF THAT'S WOULD HELP US GET TO A YES, WE CAN REDUCE THE HEIGHT OF THAT OR, OR ELIMINATE IT.
SO THAT I MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
THE CITY ALLOWS 12 FEET FOR MECHANICAL WHATEVER, THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IN WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED FOR.
WELL, THE CITY ALLOWS FOR IT, BUT IT, BUT IT CAN'T PENETRATE THE RPS, SO, SO THE CITY DOESN'T ALLOW, WELL, OKAY, LET ME DO IT.
IT CAN'T PENETRATE THE RRP S BUT SINCE WE'RE ASKING FOR A HEIGHT VARIANCE, UH, THE CITY STAFF'S REQUIRED TO CALCULATE TO THE VERY TOP OF WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR, EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD BE ALLOWED IF WE DIDN'T HAVE AN RRP S ISSUE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
LET'S SAY, OKAY, BAR, THE ROOF DECK IS 2030 3.4 AND THE EXTRA 12 FEET IS THE COUNT.
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO MATH
IS THAT ONLY IN THIS SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE? NO, IT COUNTS IN EVERY CIRCUMSTANCE I COUNT, BUT HE SAYS THE CITY ALLOWS, I, WHEN HE SAYS ALLOWS, I TAKE THAT AS MEANING.
IT DOESN'T REALLY COUNT TO, SO, SO I GUESS TO BETTER ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IN THE HOUSES NEXT DOOR WHERE THEY'RE TRADITIONALLY ALLOWED TO GO UP TO 30 FEET IN HEIGHT BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT INSIDE THE CRIME.
JUST, JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE ALLOWED TO GO TO 30 FEET IN HEIGHT IN THAT AREA.
IF THAT WAS A FLAT ROOF, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO GO UP TO 12 FEET ABOVE IN THAT SCENARIO AS WELL.
BUT ONLY FOR THE SAKE OF PUTTING ELECTRIC CHEMICAL.
SO NOT LIKE A ROOF OR ON WHAT THEY DON'T WANT IS THAT TO BE BECOME A ADDITIONAL YEAH.
SO NOW YOU COME IN LATER, YOU COME BACK IN YEAH.
YOU ADD A PERGOLA AND YOU ADD THIS AND NEXT THING YOU KNOW.
AND SO IT'S SPECIFICALLY FOR MECHANICAL UNDERSTOOD PURPOSES.
NOW, IN WHAT WE HAVE IN THIS CASE, THAT ALLOWANCE GOES AWAY YES.
[01:20:01]
VARIANCE TO THE HEIGHT.AND SO AT THAT POINT, STAFF HAS TO SAY, WHAT'S YOUR TALLEST HEIGHT? AND OUR TALLEST HEIGHT IS JUST UNDER 48 FEET.
UM, WHEREAS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT, WE NEED TO TELL YOU WHAT THE TALLEST PART OF THE BUILDING IS.
AND SINCE WE'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE, IF WE DIDN'T HAVE AN RPS ISSUE, WE WOULD JUST SAY, WE WANT, WE WANT BE ABLE TO BUILD THE 36 FEET.
WE AUTOMATICALLY GET THE, THE OVERRUNS.
SO WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS 36 FEET PLUS A PLUS THE, THE MECHANICAL.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE SITE POND WE SHOWED YOU, IT'S CLEARLY A MECHANICAL ROOM.
I JUST, I MAYBE GET THAT MATH LEVEL.
'CAUSE YOUR, AS THEY SAY, YOUR ROOF DECK IS 33 FEET, FOUR INCHES, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE WALL.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THE WALL, WHICH MAKES IT, UH, 36.
SO IN YOUR WORLD, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT THE 33 FEET ABOVE THE 26 IS WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR.
YOU CAN'T IMAGINE MY
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE, I I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO EQUATE TO.
I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HE SAID.
UH, WHEN THE CITY ALLOWS, DOES THAT MEAN I NEED TO DISCOUNT? SO, BUT SO IF THEY WERE TO TAKE OFF THE MECHANICAL, THEY WERE COMING IN FOR A REQUEST FOR THE 33 FEET, EIGHT INCHES, WHICH IS ABOVE, STILL ABOVE A 26.
SO IT'D BE SEVEN FEET, EIGHT INCHES.
NO, IT'S STILL, STILL HAVE THE PROBLEM WITH THE RRP S 33 WOULD BE 36 FEET.
MR. MILLER, UM, MR. BALDWIN, UM, IT'S A FRONT DR.
THE, UH, GARAGE, UH, IT'S A FRONT ENTRY, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
DO THESE HAVE A BACKYARD? NOT MUCH TO SPEAK OF? NO, BECAUSE YOU'RE, YOU'VE GOT A REALLY RESTRICTED DEPTH.
AND THEN WE HAVE A 20 FOOT SETBACK, SO YOU KNOW THAT THAT GIVES US SIX AND THEN A 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK.
SO, YOU KNOW, VERY QUICKLY YOU RUN OUT OF, UH, BUILDING AREA AND MAXIMIZING THEIR BOAT.
MOST LOTS IN EAST DALLAS ARE 150 FEET DEEP.
WE'VE GOT A FIVE FOOT SIDES, UH, 10 FOOT REAR, 20 FOOT FRONT.
THANK YOU MS. WILLIAMS. WE HAVE SOMEBODY ON LINE.
IS THIS IS SPEAKER IN FAVOR OR MS IN OPPOSITION.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, UH, MS, ONE MORE QUESTION.
NO, YOU MANY QUESTIONS INSTEAD OF IF, IF THE MECHANICAL ROOM IS THE ISSUE, I KNOW YOU DON'T WANNA PUT IT INSIDE, BUT WHAT ABOUT IN THE BACK? YEAH, I MEAN THAT'S, THERE'S, IS THAT A POSSIBILITY? THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES TO MOVE THE MECHANICAL ROOM.
IF THEY PUT IT IN THE BACK, WOULDN'T THAT SHRINK THE BUILDING IN THIS? NO.
WHAT IS YOUR BACK SETBACK? 10.
OH, YOU WANNA PUT IT INSIDE THE, INSIDE THE FENCE? YEAH.
A DIFFERENT, BUT WE JUST, INTERESTING.
WHY? WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT IDEA? YEAH.
SMALL VARIANCE, RELATIVELY RIGHT.
BECAUSE THEY CAN, 26 FEET IS OUTSIDE OF A SMALL PART.
26 FEET AS HIGH AS THEY CAN GO.
I THOUGHT YOU JUST SAID 26 FEET PLUS.
I WAS GIVING AN EXAMPLE OF A PROPERTY NEXT DOOR.
OH, FOR THIS ONE? THIS IS THE SMALL PART THAT GOES ABOVE 26.
IT JUST, THERE'S ONLY A, A SMALL PART OF SMALL PART TRIANGLE THAT WOULD GO ALLOW IT TO GO OVER 26.
SHORT, NOT, I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY 20 SMALL IN MY ONE.
UH, I ASSUME NO OTHER SPEAKERS IN FAVOR? UH, NO.
WOULD YOU CALL SPEAKERS? WELL, ARE THERE SPEAKERS AGAINST, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S AT LEAST ONE.
UH, ARE THERE OTHERS PRESENT? NO.
UH, WOULD YOU PLEASE SWEAR HIM IN AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS? MR. DANIEL BRESLER.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH AND YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
[01:25:01]
STEEL STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS 75 7 5 2 1 9.I'M ALSO THE OWNER OF FIVE PROPERTIES THAT FALL WITHIN THE, UH, NOTICE AREA.
SO I TRIED TO SEND A LETTER IN.
UM, I'LL JUST TRY AND BRIEFLY READ THROUGH THIS AND THEN I'LL ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS JUST FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE.
UM, I OWN THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY BEHIND THIS 24 23 NORTH PRAIRIE.
I OWN 24 14 GRIGSBY AVENUE, WHICH IS THE NEXT BLOCK OVER THAT.
MR. BALDWIN SHOWED THE VIDEO OF I OWN 47 22 CAPITAL AVENUE AND 47 19 CAPITAL AVENUE.
I'M NOT SURE THAT ALL OF THOSE ARE WITHIN 200 FEET, BUT THEY'RE ALL QUITE CLOSE.
UM, AS A PROPERTY DONOR WITHIN 200 FEET, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, I HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS REGARDING THE IMPACT OF ALLOWING A 19 FOOT VARIANCE, WHICH WOULD PERMIT A 45 FOOT STRUCTURE, FAR EXCEEDING THE 26 FOOT LIMIT CURRENTLY IMPOSED BY THE ZONING OF MF TWO A.
THIS VIOLATES CURRENT ESTABLISHED ZONING LAWS.
UM, THIS IS ALSO FALLING WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE.
AND GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD UNDERMINE THE, THE INTEGRITY OF ZONING LAWS IN THE AREA.
THE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON ADJACENT HOMES.
I WOULD'VE A STRUCTURE TOWERING OVER MY BACKYARD.
UH, THE TWO DUPLEXES ADJACENT ALREADY LOOKED DIRECTLY INTO THE HOME.
IT WOULD CAST EXCESSIVE SHADOW OVER BOTH MY PROPERTY AND THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
AND I BELIEVE THERE'S ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER ON THE CALL ATTENDING AS WELL.
IT ALSO SETS A BAD PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I SHOULD ALSO NOTE THERE IS PRECEDENT, PRECEDENT AGAINST THIS NEARBY ON HENDERSON AVENUE, WHERE SOMEONE TRIED TO DO A SIMILAR THING, BUILT THE STRUCTURE.
IT'S BEEN CONDEMNED BY THE CITY AND SITTING THERE FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
UM, IT ALSO HAS AESTHETIC AND COMMUNITY DISRUPTION, AND IT DOES NOT MAINTAIN CONSISTENT RESIDENTIAL AESTHETIC BY ADHERING TO THE 26 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT AS THE OTHER DUPLEXES ON THE STREET HAVE.
FOR THESE REASONS, I DO REQUEST A DENIAL OF THIS VARIANCE, AND I WOULD SPECIFY THAT PER THE ZONING CODE AND THE REQUIREMENTS, THERE'S BEEN NO, UH, DEMONSTRATION OF ANY LEGITIMATE HARDSHIP CAUSED BY NOT BEING ABLE TO EXCEED THIS HEIGHT RESTRICTION.
AND JUST TO SORT OF PIGGYBACK ON A COMMENT THAT WAS MADE EARLIER, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO PUT HVAC UNITS WITHIN THE SETBACK SO LONG AS THE THREE FOOT PASSAGEWAY.
SO IF THERE'S A 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK, THE HVAC CONDENSING UNIT CAN SIT THERE.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS? I DON'T SUPPOSE YOU'RE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE, UH, CALLED OUT IN THE VIDEO CALL THAT IN TERMS OF THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS, I'M NOT, BUT THAT LOOKS DIRECTLY INTO MY PROPERTY.
I'M SORRY, I, I INTERRUPTED YOU.
SO SEVERAL OF MY PROPERTIES WERE IN THE VIDEO.
I BELIEVE THE ONE YOU'RE REFERENCING IS THE TALL DUPLEX THAT'S ADJACENT.
I AM NOT THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY, BUT THAT ONE DOES LOOK INTO MY PROPERTY AND IT LOOKS INTO THE PROPERTIES.
AND I WOULD NOTE THAT WHILE IT'S A WELL-KNOWN LOOPHOLE TO PUT THE HVACS ON THE ROOF IN ORDER TO GET ROOFTOP DECKS, SO THAT PROPERTY UTILIZES THOSE HVAC ACCESS LADDERS IN ORDER TO HAVE ENTERTAINMENT ON THE ROOFTOP.
AND THIS IS VERY COMMON IN TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, AND IT IS TYPICALLY PERMITTED THROUGH THAT 12 FOOT ALLOWANCE.
HOWEVER, THOSE, WHEN THAT IS DONE, IT DOES NOT FALL WITHIN OUR RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE.
SO TAKE EXAMPLE IN THE VIDEO, THERE WAS A LARGER DEVELOPMENT OF, UH, SEVERAL TOWN HOMES RATHER THAN DUPLEXES THAT WERE QUITE HIGH WITH ROOFTOP DECKS.
THAT IS PERMITTED BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FALL WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLIP 'CAUSE IT'S NOT ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.
ARE THERE, IS THERE, MAYBE YOU SAID THERE, THERE IS ANOTHER SPEAKER? YEAH, THERE'S ANOTHER GENTLEMAN ON THE CALL WHO LIVES, UH, BEHIND MY PROPERTY.
I DON'T KNOW IF HE IS REQUESTED TO SPEAK OR NOT, BUT HE'S ALSO ON THE CALL.
MS. WILLIAMS. NO, WE DON'T SEE HIM, BUT, UH, BUT IF HE HASN'T AT THIS POINT REQUESTED, HE, HE PROBABLY CAN'T SPEAK, RIGHT? YEAH.
UM, FURTHER SPEAKER'S, OPPOSITION? NO, THE SPEAKER'S REGISTER, SIR.
UH, THIS IS REBUT MR. BALDWIN.
WELL, THANK YOU, UH, APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR ASSISTANCE WITH THIS.
UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE REQUIREMENTS WHERE THE, UH, FINDINGS YOU MUST FIND TO GET A VARI VERSUS, YOU KNOW, IS THERE SOMETHING DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS LOT, UH, THAN OTHER LOTS IN THE AREA? AND BOTH STAFF? AND I SUGGEST THAT THERE IS, UH, WHERE THE, UH, ONE OF THE SHORTEST NARROWEST LOTS IN THE AREA, UH, NOT COMMANDER WITH OTHER LOTS IN THE, UH, IN IMMEDIATE VICINITY.
AND WITH THE SAME MF TWO ZONING, WE'RE ONLY 84 FEET DEEP WHEN THE AVERAGE
[01:30:01]
LOT IS 118 FEET ON THE STREET.WE'RE UNABLE TO BILL COMMENS WITH OTHER, UH, PROPERTIES IN THE AREA.
GIVEN OUR, UH, LOT AREA AND OUR, UH, THE POSITION OF THE RESIDENTIAL PARKS IN THE SLOPE, OUR DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL GOES DOWN BY TWO THIRDS COMPARED TO OTHER LOTS THAT WERE BUILT RIGHT DOWN THE STREET.
THE HARDSHIP WAS NOT SELF-CREATED.
THIS IS THE WAY THE LOT WAS, UH, PLOTTED OR ENDED UP.
WE DID NOT BUILD SOMETHING THAT'S NOT COMPLIANT.
UH, AND, UH, WE HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS REQUEST.
UH, YOU'RE ANSWERING QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WORD THIS.
UM, I
EVEN IF THERE WAS, TAKE THE RPF OUT OF THIS.
WELL, BUT IT, IT'S THE REASON WE'RE HERE.
I KNOW, BUT THIS WHY ALL OTHER LOTS ON THE, THE STREET EXCEPT FOR THE RPFS.
AND SO EVEN IF IT WASN'T RPS, WE STILL WOULD'VE TROUBLE BUILDING COMMENSURATE WITH OTHER LOTS ON THE STREET BECAUSE WE'RE 84 FEET AND THE AVERAGE IS 118.
I WAS LOOKING AT AREAS, UM, OKAY.
QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN? OKAY.
IF WE WANT TO TAKE A SECOND AND THINK IT'S OKAY.
MR. SLICK VICE CHAIR ARGUMENT SHALL MAKE A MOTION AND THEY'LL GET US GOING ON DISCUSSION.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 2 7 ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATES REPRESENTED BY ROB BALDWIN.
GRANT, THE 19 FOOT VARIANCE TO THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT, GIVEN OUR EVALUATION PROPERTY TESTIMONY SHOWED THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF A PROVISION TO THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS AMENDED, WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT THAT FURTHER MOVE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS OR REQUIRED.
IS THERE A SECOND? ONCE, TWICE.
SO I WILL MAKE ANOTHER MOTION TO ALLOW US TO TALK.
UM, UH, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER B 8 2 4 5 DASH OH TWO SEVEN ON APPLICATION OF BALDWIN ASSOCIATED FOR, REPRESENTED BY ROB BALDWIN, DENY THE VARIANCE TO THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT REGULATION REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS NOT, I MEAN, IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT PROVISION OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDMENT WOULD NOT RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIPS AT THIS APP.
THE SIDE THAT SUPPORTS MY MOTION ARGUES, OKAY.
WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL SLOPES FOR A REASON, UH, IN THE SAME WAY WE HAVE OTHER CODES FOR REASONS.
SO THE QUESTION HERE IS, UH, IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT THE CODE ITSELF THAT REALLY DOESN'T APPLY TO THIS PROFIT? UH, AND, UH, UM, AND SAY, OKAY, WHAT'S, WHAT'S SO ABSOLUTELY UNIQUE ABOUT THIS PROPERTY THAT, THAT JUSTIFIES THIS KIND OF, OF, UH, OF DEVIATION FROM THE, FROM WHAT THE CODE ALLOWS? YOU COULD SAY, ALL RIGHT, IT'S
[01:35:01]
STRANGELY SHAPED.UH, AND THEN YOU COULD LOOK AND SAY, OKAY, MAN, IF I WENT TO THE EDGE OF THAT, THAT NOT QUITE TRIANGLE, YOU WOULD HAVE A, A PROPERTY THAT, THAT COULD HAVE A, IF I, IF I LIMIT MY DISCUSSION ONLY TO THE, THE HARDSHIP BASED ON, ON SHAPE AND SIZE, YOU WOULD ALLOW THAT THE END OF THAT TRIANGLE TO BUILD AMAZINGLY HIGH.
SO, UH, IS THERE SOMETHING HERE THAT SAYS, MAN, IN ORDER TO TO, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER PEOPLE BUILDING INSIDE OF THIS PARTICULAR KIND OF RESTRICTION, THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS? UH, THAT'S HARD TO, THAT'S HARD TO ARGUE.
IF YOU, IF THIS IS THE, THE ARGUMENT AGAINST YOU ALSO HAVE, UH, WELL, LET'S NOT EVEN GO THERE.
UM, SECOND POINT AGAINST WOULD BE, HEY, SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE IS A HARDSHIP DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO ALLOW SOMEBODY TO GO THIS HIGH.
AND SO THEN YOUR QUESTION IS, HOW HIGH AND WHAT, AND THAT'S A TRICKY DISCUSSION AS WELL.
UM, PUTTING THE, THE HVAC STUFF ON THE GROUND.
IF I'M AN OWNER, I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING IT CONSTANTLY VANDALIZED.
I MEAN, I, I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU MIGHT WANNA PUT IT ON ON TOP.
SO, SO IF I'M VOTING NO, IT'S NOT 'CAUSE OF THAT, IT'S NOT 'CAUSE OF THAT 12 FEET, IT'S, IT'S THE DEVIATION OVER TYPICALLY THE THE 26TH.
UM, SO THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S THE ARGUMENT AGAINST ARGUMENT FOUR, I THINK IS STRANGE SIZE.
BUT IF YOUR ARGUMENT BECOMES, HEY, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE SUBJECT TO THIS SLOPE, AND OTHER PEOPLE AREN'T, THAT'S SIMPLY SAYING, HEY, WE'RE SUBJECT TO THE CODE AND OTHER PEOPLE ARE SUBJECT TO A DIFFERENT CODE.
AND I DON'T THINK THE CODE ITSELF CAN BE A HARDSHIP.
THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING ABOUT THE PROPERTY, NOT THE CODE.
UH, THAT'S AN ARGUMENT THAT THE COUNCIL AND CPC, SO YOU TWO DIDN'T SUPPORT THE, UH, MOTION TO PASS EITHER.
SO IF YOU HAVE THOUGHTS YES, I HAVE SEVERAL THOUGHTS.
ONE IS THAT THERE'S A SILVER LINING TO WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY.
AND THAT WOULD BE TO INCREASE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND THE INTERIOR OF THE HOUSE.
YOU WOULD ELIMINATE THE STAIRWAY UP TO THE MECHANICAL ROOM IF YOU RELOCATED THE HVAC AND ALL THOSE MECHANICAL ISSUES TO, TO THE GROUND FLOOR AND STEEL CAGES.
I'VE SEEN, I DID THIS, MY HOUSE, YOU BUILD STEEL CAGES AROUND YOUR UNITS.
ALSO, I THINK, UM, IT IS NOT A HARDSHIP TO HAVE NINE FOOT CEILINGS IN THOSE TWO FLOORS, WHICH WOULD GIVE AN EXTRA TWO FEET BELOW.
ENABLES ROUGH TO LINE TO BE TWO FEET LOWER.
AND I THINK WITH THOSE ISSUES, UM, IT WOULD NOT DECREASE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOUSE AT ALL.
IN FACT, IT WOULD INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF SPACE BECAUSE OF THE ELIMINATION OF THAT STAIRWAY TO THE, UH, MECHANICAL ROOM.
THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS, MR. MILLIKEN.
I JUST, MY THOUGHT ON THIS IS THAT, UM, LIKE MS. P*****K, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE OPTION OF TAKING THE MECHANICALS FROM THE TOP AND PUTTING THEM AT THE GROUND MUFFLED.
AND THAT'S THE MAIN REASON WHY I ASKED ABOUT THE BACKYARD, ABOUT YOUR YARD SPACE IS BECAUSE I ALWAYS THINK THAT'S AN OPTION.
UM, I DO KNOW THAT, UM, THERE'S CONCERN ABOUT PROTECTING THOSE.
AND LIKE SHE SAID, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S WAYS TO PROTECT IT.
I PERSONALLY HAVE TO DO THAT MYSELF, SO I UNDERSTAND.
UM, AND I, I, I JUST THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, UM, WITH THAT OPTION, I CAN'T SUPPORT, UH, YOU KNOW, PUTTING THAT OTHER LEVEL WHERE IT'S GONNA, UH, IMPEDE ON THE NEIGHBOR'S LEGACY.
MR. SLATE, I DON'T THINK I'M UNDERSTANDING HOW THE,
[01:40:01]
THE STAIRS UP TO THE MECHANICAL WOULD GET SPACE, BUT MAYBE I'M JUST MISREADING THE PLANS.I DON'T UNDERSTAND PEOPLE, BUT I, SO HE'S KIND OF ASKING YOU WHAT, SO THE, THE STAIRS UP WELL TO, WELL, WHEN YOU BUILD A STAIRWAY, DO ANY BETWEEN FLOORS, YOU TAKE UP SOME FLOOR SPACE.
SHE'S MAKING THE, THE, UH, I BELIEVE YOU'RE SAYING LIVABLE AREA CORRECT.
'CAUSE IF THIS IS YOUR ROOM FUNCTIONAL AREA AND YOU'RE BUILDING A STAIRWAY HERE, YOU'RE TAKING AWAY THAT SPACE ON THE FLOOR.
YOU GUYS CLEARLY NEVER WENT A APART HUNTING WITH MY MOTHER WHO WOULD LOOK AT MULTI-LEVEL LOSS AND SAY, UH, THIS SQUARE FOOTAGE IS NOT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE YOU THINK IT IS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T USE THE SPACE IN THE, WHERE THE STAIRS ARE.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, YES.
UM, I MEAN, I, I THINK THE DIFFERENCE JUST BOILS DOWN TO WHETHER THERE'S AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER IT'S CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST OR NOT.
I MEAN, THE, UM, CITY AGREES THAT IT, THIS PARTICULAR BLO IS A RESTRICTIVE AREA, SHAPE OR SLOPE.
SO THAT ELEMENT, I THINK IS NET.
UH, I DON'T THINK THERE'S A DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER IT'S GRANULAR RELATED TO SELF CREATED OR PERSONAL HARDSHIP.
AND SO THEN IT'S REALLY JUST COMES DOWN TO ONE'S POSITION ON WHETHER THE PROPOSAL MIKE IS CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST OR NOT.
AND I, THE OPPOSITION THAT WOULD VOICE ITS PERSPECTIVE, I THOUGHT MADE COMPELLING POINTS, BUT IN MY MIND, WEIGHING IT OUT AND WHAT'S GOING ON IN THAT AREA, PARTICULARLY SINCE OF COURSE THIS IS PERMITTED TO HAVE DUPLEXES BEING BUILT ON IT, UH, I THINK SIGNALS A, IT'S JUST HOW YOU BALANCE THOSE OUT.
FOLKS DISAGREE ON THAT THOUGHT THROUGH THAT.
'CAUSE I, I AGREE WITH YOU THAT IT, THIS IS AN AREA THAT IS ZONED DUPLEXES.
THAT'S WHAT IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE BUILT THAT WAY AND IT'S GONNA BE DENSE.
YOU LOOK AT AREAS IN THIS CITY AND OTHER CITIES WHERE, WHERE BUILDINGS BECOME MORE AND MORE DENSE AND THEY DO BEGIN TO FIGHT FOR SUNLIGHT, SO TO SPEAK, AND, AND VISIBILITY AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
IT IS A, A SIGNIFICANT ADVANTAGE TO BE TALLER.
UH, WHEN I LOOK AT PUBLIC INTEREST, THERE'S SOME IMPLIED, SOME IMPLIED VALUE.
THE, THE CODE GIVES TO A RESIDENTIAL NA IT WOULD BE IN PROTECTION OF A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD BY VIRTUE OF EVEN HAVING A SLOPE, UH, UH, THAT I DON'T THINK SHOULD GET WIPED AWAY BY VIRTUE OF ANOTHER PROPERTY BEING OF NON-STANDARD SHAPE SIZE.
UH, AND I DO THINK COMMENSURATE OUGHT TO BE INSIDE THE TRIANGLE, OTHER PROPERTIES OF HEIGHTS THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE TRIANGLE.
UH, I WOULDN'T CONSIDER IN THIS CASE TO BE IN THE SAME SITUATION.
UH, I SAY THAT ON THE RECORD BECAUSE SOMEBODY MAY CHALLENGE THAT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT IS PART OF MY THINGS.
UM, I DO THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE, PEOPLE CAN DISAGREE.
OKAY, MS. WILLIAMS. SO THE MOTION IS TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
MOTION TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE PASSES THREE TO ONE.
UH, CAN WE TAKE A QUICK RECESS BEFORE WE, UH, WE HIT THESE FINAL TWO PAGES? EXCELLENT.
FIGURED YOU MIGHT, UH, WE'LL BE, WE'LL SAY FIVE MINUTES.
UH, BUT IF, SO THAT'S THREE 15.
IT'S, UH, 3:26 PM WE ARE BACK TO HERE.
OUR LAST TWO CASES, WHICH ARE SIMILAR, BUT WE ARE GONNA CALL AND VOTE ON SEPARATELY.
UH, SO THE FIRST OF THOSE CASES IS BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 2 8.
[01:45:01]
THIS IS 1900 WHEATLAND ROAD, AND THE REQUEST IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE LANDSCAPE AND URBAN FOREST CONSERVATION REGULATIONS.ARE THERE SPEAKERS IN FAVOR? IF SO, PLEASE BE SWORN IN AND YOU CAN SWEAR EVERYONE IN.
UH, I'M BARBARA TAN AND MARIA, JUST LET, LET MARY ASK YOU THE MAGIC WORDS.
DO YOU BOTH SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
WHEN YOU COME TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND FOR SUFFERING THROUGH ALL OF THE OTHER CASES.
UM, MY NAME IS ARTHUR SANTA MARIA.
UM, ADDRESS IS, UH, 1717 MAIN STREET, SUITE 56 30 DALLAS, TEXAS.
I'M WITH GLOBAL VICE PRESIDENT OF, UH, REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS AND DEVELOPMENT.
UM, SO WE'RE, WE'RE HERE TO PRESENT OUR, UM, OUR ASK FOR OUR UNIVERSITY HILLS PROJECT, AND THERE'S, THERE'S TWO COMPONENTS AS, AS WAS MENTIONED.
UM, WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE AND I'LL JUST GIVE A REALLY QUICK INTRODUCTION TO THE PROJECT AND KIND OF WHAT, WHY WE'RE HERE DOING THIS PROJECT, REALLY IN THE FIRST PLACE, AND WHAT WE HOPE IT'LL, IT'LL LEAD TO.
AND THEN, UH, DAVID'S GONNA GO THROUGH THE MORE DETAIL ABOUT THE, THE REQUEST HERE IN
UM, BUT UNIVERSITY HILLS, UH, IT'S, IT'S A LARGE SCALE.
MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT IS SOUTHERN DALLAS, UM, RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE UNT DALLAS IS BUILDING THEIR, THEIR CAMPUS.
NOW THEY'RE, THEY'RE EXPANDING, THEY'RE ADDING NEW BUILDINGS.
UM, AND THAT ALONG WITH, YOU KNOW, I THINK MANY EFFORTS ON, PARTICULARLY ON THE PUBLIC SIDE, HAVE BEEN TO REALLY IGNITE AND GROW SOUTH AND HAVE LARGE SCALE INVESTMENTS.
THERE REALLY ISN'T THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT THAT'S HAPPENED ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF DALLAS.
YOU KNOW, UH, THESE TOWN CENTERS WITH WALKABLE AND URBAN HOMES AND, YOU KNOW, OF, OF A LARGE SCALE.
YOU KNOW, THESE, THERE'S, UH, 580 HOMES THAT WE'RE PLANNED HERE.
WE HAVE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, RETAIL AND, UM, HOTEL AND OTHER USES, UM, 280 ACRES, YOU KNOW, SO THIS KIND OF THING, LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE SEE IN THE, IN THE NEWSPAPER COME OUT IN ANOTHER CORNER OF ALLEN OR
BUT SOUTHERN SIDE OF DALLAS HAS REALLY NOT SEEN THESE KIND OF, UH, CATALYTIC LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENTS.
UM, I LIVE JUST A FEW MINUTES FROM THE SITE AND, YOU KNOW, WE, WE DON'T HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN, ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT, IT, THERE ARE A LOT OF REASONS WHY THAT'S THE CASE NOW.
AND A, A LOT OF IT'S AROUND THE CHALLENGES IN BEING FIRST MOVER AND DOING, YOU KNOW, UH, GOING SORT OF AGAINST THE GRAIN OF WHAT IS A TYPICAL DALLAS DEVELOPMENT.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE WORK THAT'S HERE.
WE WORK WITH THE CITY ON SOLVING SOME OF THOSE CHALLENGES.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, WE, UM, JUST HAVE, HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO, TO MAKE THIS PROJECT POSSIBLE.
IT'S BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, UM, LONG BEFORE EVEN WE CAME, UH, HOPE GLOBAL CAME TO THE, TO THE PROJECT.
UM, UH, AND, YOU KNOW, THE COMMUNITY HAS LOOKED TO SEE SOMETHING LIKE THIS, UH, CATALYTIC AND TRANSFORMATIVE FOR A LONG TIME.
SO, UH, WE'RE PROUD TO BE STEWARDS OF IT TODAY.
UM, AND SO WE'LL, WE'LL WALK YOU THROUGH OUR REQUEST OF, UH, YOU KNOW, WITH THE, UM, THE, THE VARIS.
MY NAME IS DAVID PITCHER 35, UH, 3 5 0 1 OLYMPUS BOULEVARD IN DALLAS, TEXAS.
AND I'M THE CIVIL ENGINEER ON THIS PROJECT.
AND I FIRST JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR HEARING THIS CASE, UM, SPECIAL THANK YOU TO ALL THE CITY STAFF THAT WE WORKED THROUGH AND WORKED WITH ALONG THIS PROCESS.
UH, SPECIAL THANKS TO PHIL OVER HERE.
UM, HE'S BEEN, UH, VERY HELPFUL WITH US UNDERSTANDING THE ORDINANCE AND MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT.
UH, I WANNA MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, AND JUST DISCUSS THE HARDSHIP THAT WE BELIEVE WAS INFLICTED ON THE PROPERTY.
SO THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF AN ATYPICAL HARDSHIP FOR A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE, BUT I WANT TO JUST EXPLAIN THIS AS WELL AS I CAN.
THIS, THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN, UM, IT'S BEEN HISTORICAL FARMLAND IN EVER SINCE.
WE CAN TELL BASED ON BURIAL, TOPOGRAPHY, UM, PART OF THE FARMING OF THIS PROPERTY, THERE WAS CHANNELS THAT WERE BUILT THAT REPLACED THE NATURAL CHANNELS THAT GO FROM THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, AS YOU CAN TELL THE ON THE SCREEN, THE CHANNELS THAT WERE BUILT WERE SOLELY MEANT FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES, AND WERE NOT BUILT WITH ANY TYPE OF FLOODPLAIN OR FLOOD MITIGATION IN MIND.
UM, SO WHEN WE STUDIED THE FLOOD PLAIN THROUGH THIS PROPERTY, THERE'S A VERY LARGE AND WIDE FLOODPLAIN AREA.
[01:50:01]
IT'S, THIS IS MORE SPECULATORY, BUT YOU CAN TELL ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, THAT THERE, WHEN THERE IS A NATURAL CHANNEL, THE FLOODLINE IS VERY SMALL THROUGH THE PORTION, THROUGH THAT PROPERTY.IT'S ONLY, UM, THE PORTION THROUGH THE MIDDLE WHERE IT'S A LOT WIDER THAN IT REALLY SHOULD BE IN THE NATURAL SCENARIO.
THE ONE, THE PIECE, THE, UH, WHY THIS REALLY CAUSES A PROBLEM IN THE DEVELOPMENT IS THAT THE, THERE'S AN OLD FIELD DELINEATION, UH, SECTION IN THE ARTICLE 10 THAT SPECIFIES THAT, THAT THE OLD FIELD CANNOT BE UTILIZED WITHIN FLOOD PLAIN AREAS.
UM, IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, I JUST WANTED TO SH I WANTED TO BRING THESE TWO PHOTOGRAPHS TO LIGHT SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT A PHOTO FROM THE 1950S AND ALSO A PHOTO FROM 2020.
SO ON THE LEFT SIDE, UH, THERE'S REALLY NO TREE COVERAGE.
UM, YOU CAN TELL IT, IT IS ALL FARMLAND.
UM, IT LOOKS VERY DIFFERENT IN THE, WHAT, IN THE FIFTIES THAN IT DOES TODAY.
UM, SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE, UM, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OLD FIELD DELINEATION, YOU CAN PHYSICALLY TELL BASED OFF THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS THAT THIS IS AN OLD FIELD AND HAD BEEN FOR SOME TIME BEFORE IT WAS ABANDONED AND LEFT TO GROW BY ITSELF.
SO THE, WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING TODAY IS AN EXCEPTION TO THE SECTION OF ARTICLE X.
THAT'S, THAT CLEARLY STATES THAT THE OLD FIELD DELINEATION IS NOT ALLOWED WITHIN FLOODPLAIN AREAS.
SO WE WOULD LIKE TO SPECIFY THAT THIS REQUEST IS ONLY FOR THIS AREA THAT'S SHADED IN OR THAT'S OUTLINED IN YELLOW.
UM, IT'S NOT OUR INTENT TO WAIVE TREE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY OR DO ANYTHING, UM, BLANKET STATEMENT HERE.
WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS JUST SAY THAT THE INTENT OF THE CODE, UM, PLEASE, PLEASE, UH, EXCUSE MY INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE, BUT OUR, MY INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE IS THAT IF THERE'S A PROPERTY THAT WAS AN OLD FIELD IN THE PAST, THAT THERE SHOULD BE SPECIAL, UM, SPECIAL ALLOWANCES FOR GROWTH ON THAT IN THE, UM, IN THE FUTURE.
SO TREES THAT ARE, UM, CLASS THREE TREES, OR WHAT YOU MIGHT CALL UNDESIRABLE TREES WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR AS MUCH MEDICATION.
SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS HOW WE PROPOSE TO PLANT THE PROPERTY.
UM, OBVIOUSLY YOU, WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, AND THIS IS THE MAJORITY OF THE FIRST PHASE OF OUR DEVELOPMENT.
AND, UH, THE CITY REQUIREMENTS, UM, ONLY REALLY REQUIRE A TREE IN THE FRONT YARD AND THE REAR YARD, UM, OR OF THESE PROPERTIES.
HOWEVER, WE WOULD LIKE TO KINDA MAINTAIN THE NATURAL BEAUTY OF THIS AREA, UH, WITH THE NATURAL DRAINAGE WAYS, THE TOPOGRAPHY.
AND WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO USE PROPOSED PLANNINGS TO MEET THE MITIGATION REQUESTS, UH, THE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS ON IN THE CODE.
AND, UH, THE, WHAT IS DIFFICULT WITHOUT, UM, WITHOUT THIS REQUEST BEING GRANTED IS ALL OF THE UNDESIRABLE TREES WITHIN THAT FLOODPLAIN AREA COUNT TOWARDS A MUCH HIGHER MITIGATION VALUE THAN THEY WOULD IF IT WAS ALLOWED TO GO THROUGH THE, UM, THE CURRENT PROCESS OF THE OLD FIELD.
AND SO IT WOULD BE REALLY HARD, UH, WE WOULDN'T REALLY HAVE A A, AN ABILITY TO PLANT THAT MANY TREES ON THE PROPERTY.
UH, WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY A FEE IN LIEU OF TO DO THAT.
AND WITH THE AMOUNT OF TREES THAT ARE THERE THAT ARE CLASSIFIED AT A MUCH HIGHER RATE, UH, THAT WOULD MAKE THE PROJECT REALLY INFEASIBLE TO DO THAT.
SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, UM, I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR THE QUESTIONS.
I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF, UM, A LOT OF COMPLICATED REGULATIONS THAT GO ALONG WITH THIS, AND I DEFINITELY WOULD LOVE TO ANSWER ANY OF THOSE.
UM, BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE IT HERE.
FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, THE REALITY IS THAT, THAT, UH, YOU'RE A LOT MORE, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WE SEE.
SO WE, WE ARE, UH, INFANTS WHEN IT COMES TO THIS, SO DON'T ASSUME TO KNOW EVERYTHING THAT YOU KNOW.
[01:55:01]
ARE, ARE THERE QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT? I HAVE NONE.YOU JUST MENTIONED THAT THE TREE, YOU, YOU WOULD LIKE THE TREES THAT ARE LOCATED IN THE FLOODPLAIN, THEY HAVE A HIGHER MITIGATION RATE.
DO THEY HAVE A HIGHER MITIGATION RATE AND YOU WOULD LIKE TO NOT HAVE THEM HAVE A HIGHER MITIGATION RATE? IS THAT CORRECT? I'M CONFUSED BY YOUR REQUEST.
THAT'S, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY THE REQUEST.
WOULD, SO IT, WHAT WOULD THE HIGHER MITIGATION RATE BE AND WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO LOWER IT TO? SO IN, WITHOUT GOING INTO SPECIFIC NUMBERS OF THERE IS A THIS MANY THOUSAND INCHES THAT WE WOULD LIKE TOLU FOR, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS USE WHAT'S ALREADY PROVIDED IN THE CODE, WHICH IS THE OLD FIELD DELINEATION THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, WE CAN, WE WILL DO, WE HAVE DONE A VERY DETAILED TREE SURVEY OF THE WHOLE PROPERTY AND WE HAVE IDENTIFIED WHICH SPECIES, UM, THE SIZE OF THE SIZE OF THE TREES AND THE SPECIES OF THE TREES.
AND IF THERE ARE IDENTIFIED STANDS THAT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE CODE, THEN THE MITIGATION FOR SPECIFIC SPECIES AND SIZES ARE WAIVED.
SO I'M NOT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICATION IS NOT TO JUST SAY CARTE BLANCHE, WE DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR ANY OF THESE
IT'S, WE THINK THAT IT SHOULD QUALIFY AS AN OLD FIELD AND BASED OFF OF THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE PROPERTY AND HOW IT WAS FARMED IN PREVIOUS YEARS, WE CAN'T USE THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE GONNA COME DOWN.
SO TO BE CLEAR, YOU'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY RELIEF FROM THE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS, NOT ASKING TO WHAT QUESTION ONE? YES.
UH, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A STRICT, WE WOULD NOT LIKE TO MITIGATE FOR THESE TREES.
UH, WE ARE ASKING FOR JUST THIS VERY SPECIFIC PHRASE THAT STATES THAT AN OLD FIELD DELINEATION CANNOT BE DONE IN A FLOOD PLAIN.
SO WHILE WE BELIEVE, WHILE WE BASED OFF HISTORICAL PHOTOS, WE CAN TELL IT WAS PART OF AN OLD FIELD.
YOU KNOW, NORMALLY OLD, OLD FIELDS LIKE THAT ARE NOT INSIDE FLOODPLAINS.
NORMALLY THERE'S CREEKS AND OTHER THINGS.
BUT SINCE THIS WAS REROUTED, KIND OF CREATED THIS LARGE FLOODPLAIN AREA WITHIN OLD FIELDS.
AND THIS, UM, I MEAN THE INTENT OF THE CODE NOT ALLOWING THAT WITHIN FLOODPLAINS FROM MY INTERPRETATION OF IT IS OBVIOUSLY IF YOU HAVEN A CREEK, THERE ARE A LOT OF TREES THAT HAVE GROWN THERE OVER TIME.
THE OLD, YOU KNOW, TREES THAT YOU WANT TO BE WITHIN YOUR, UM, THAT YOU WANNA MAINTAIN FOR MUL MULTIPLE REASONS.
UM, THAT IS HOW I INTERPRET THE CODE.
WHY YOU CAN'T USE THE OLD FIELD IN THE FLIP PLAIN AREAS.
UM, THIS, THAT DOES NOT, THE CASE FOR THIS IS, YOU CAN TELL THERE ARE NO, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE NO TREES IN 1950 AND SINCE THEN, A LOT OF EASTERN RED CEDARS A LOT OF TREES THAT THE CITY CLASSIFIES AS CLASS THREE OR THE, THE LOWEST POSSIBLE, UM, LOWEST POSSIBLE CLASSIFICATION FOR TREES.
CAN I GO BACK AND, AND GIVE YOU A SENSE FOR, FOR THE LEVEL OF IGNORANCE OF, OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER HERE, AT LEAST, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DEFINITION OF OLD FIELD DID, IS THAT A LEGAL DEFINITION? IS THAT IN OUR CODE? IS WHAT DOES THAT TECHNICALLY MEAN? DOES IT JUST MEAN AN OLD FIELD? YES.
SO I, UM, BILL IS THE EXPERT ON OLD FIELD.
SO IF I DESCRIBE THIS INCORRECTLY, PLEASE CORRECT ME.
UM, WHAT THE CODE AND ARTICLE 10 ALLOWS FOR IS IF YOU DO A TREE SURVEY OF AN AREA AND YOU CAN S UM, YOU CAN JUSTIFY OVER AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH O OVER AERIAL PHOTOS AND THE SIZE AND SPECIES OF THE TREES THAT ARE WITHIN THESE FOUR STANDS.
UM, THERE ARE SOME, YOU CAN CLASSIFY SOME OF THE STANDS AS OLD FIELD.
SO A, A VERY EASY WAY TO UNDERSTAND IT IS IF 60% OF THE TREES ARE EITHER EASTERN RED CEDAR OR CLASS THREE TREES, BASICALLY THE MAJORITY OF THE TREES ARE WHAT YOU WOULD CALL UNDESIRABLE.
THEN THAT WOULD CLASSIFY, THAT WOULD BE ONE, UM, INSTANCE WOULD CLASSIFY IT AS IN THE OLD FIELD.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER WAYS TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
AND THAT WAS ALL DONE BY AN ARBORIST ON THIS PROPERTY.
AND WE HAVE A FULL FOREST AND DELINEATION REPORT THAT SHOWS ALL THE TREES ON SITE HERE, WHAT AREAS CLASSIFY BASED
[02:00:01]
ON THE CITY'S CODE.AND THIS AREA WOULD CLASSIFY IF IT
IT ALMOST SOUNDS LIKE YOU'D LIKE US TO MAKE AN INTERPRETATION, ALMOST A RULING THAT ALLOWS YOU TO GO FORWARD.
USUALLY WE GET A, WE WANT TO NOT HAVE TO DO WHAT WE NORMALLY WOULD AND HERE'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO AND HERE'S THE MAP, HERE'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE AND I, THIS IT SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF MOVING PARTS, LIKE A LOT.
AND, YOU KNOW, UH, IF WE'RE GONNA, UH, TALK ABOUT A CODE AND INTERPRETATION OF IT, SHOW ME WHAT I NEED TO, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO GO DO OUR OWN INDEPENDENT RESEARCH.
SO I, I CAN'T LOOK UP THE CODE AND DO IT MYSELF.
UH, I'M, I'M STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING US TO DO.
SO LOOK, SORRY, LET ME, I KNOW THERE'S A LOT THAT GOES INTO THIS.
UM, SO THE SPECIAL, THE, THE ACTUAL SECTION OF THE CODE THAT WE'RE REQUESTING IS A VERY SPECIFIC PHRASE AND THAT'S IN THIS 10.1 32.
ACTUALLY, COULD YOU GO BACK TO SLIDE FIVE FOR ME? 'CAUSE IT STAKES IT ON THERE.
SO IT'S THE, THE 10.1324 B ONE BB.
UM, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT EXPECTING YOU TO TURN THAT, BUT WHAT THAT CODE STATES IS THAT A FOUR STAND DELINEATION CANNOT BE COMPLETED WITHIN 50 FEET OF A 1% CHANCE FLOOD PLANE.
SO MY REQUEST IS AN, EXCEPT IT IS, IS AN EXCEPTION TO THAT SECTION OF THE CODE SO THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THE STANDARD FOREST STAND DELINEATION WITHIN THIS AREA, EVEN THOUGH IT IS WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN.
WHAT IS A FOREST STAND DELINEATION? YES.
SO, UM, AND AGAIN, PLEASE, PHIL, PLEASE, UM, HE, HE CAN HELP OUT IF I MISS ANY POINTS HERE, BUT IT'S A VERY SPECIFIC, UM, IT'S A VERY SPECIFIC PROCESS THAT'S ALLOWED IN ARTICLE X WHERE AN A REGISTERED ARBORIST WILL GO OUT TO THE PROPERTY AND WILL SURVEY THE TREES.
AND UH, YOU CAN DO THAT EITHER THROUGH SAMPLING OR, UM, DOING A FULL TREE SURVEY.
AND THEY SAY THEY LOOK AT WHAT'S ON SITE CURRENTLY, AND THEY ALSO LOOK AT HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS AND THEY WILL SAY, HERE ARE THE STANDS THAT HAVE GROWN OVER TIME.
THEY WILL OUTLINE THOSE AREAS AND SAY, HERE ARE SOME HARDWOODS THAT HAVE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME.
UM, THIS USED TO BE, UM, AN OLD FIELD.
UM, AND THERE ARE A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN MAKE THE CLASSIFICATION THIS OLD FIELD BASED OFF OF THE HISTORICAL AREA PHOTOGRAPHS THAT SAYS, YES, THIS ACTUALLY WAS A FIELD AND WAS USED FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES IN THE PAST AND NOW HAS OVERGROWN, UM, AND DOES NOT HAVE THE HARDWOODS THAT YOU NORMALLY WOULD LIKE TO MITIGATE FOR AND NORMALLY MITIGATE A HIGHER VALUE.
HAVE YOU DONE THIS TO WHERE YOU AND MR. IRWIN AGREE ON AT LEAST WHAT EXISTS? HAS THIS SAMPLING ET CETERA BEEN DONE? YES.
SO THE, AROUND THE SAME PAGE, UH, YES.
THERE, THERE WAS A YES, UH, YES, YES.
THERE WAS A FULL REPORT PROVIDED TO THEIR COMPANY TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHAT WAS ON THE PROPERTY.
A FULL SURVEY, WHAT WE CALL A FOREST AND DELINEATION, WHICH BASICALLY INCLUDES A SURVEY, INCLUDES ANALYSIS OF THE SITE, UH, ON SITE AND ON USING AERIAL IMAGERY AND OTHER ASSESSMENTS.
AND THAT'S A FUNCTION OF HERE'S WHAT IS THAT'S, THAT'S A STANDARD FOR ANY, UH, TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
THERE'S NO DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
BUT YOU AGREE YOU HAVE THE SAME IDEA OF THE FACTS ON THE YES.
SO NEXT STEP THEN YOU, YOU FIGURE OUT WHAT'S THERE AND AT THAT POINT THE CODE SAYS THERE'S GOTTA BE, WELL, LET ME BACK UP.
ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S ACTUALLY WHERE, OR ARE WE SIMPLY SAYING, UM, THIS CITY CODE SAYS YOU CAN'T BUILD WITHIN 50 FEET OR WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET? NO, WE'RE TALKING
[02:05:01]
ABOUT THE, THE, THE METHODS OF CREATING A SURVEY AND WHAT CAN BE DONE AND NOT DONE.AND DO WE AGREE ON WHAT CAN AND CAN'T BE DONE? UH, CORRECT.
UH, THE ORDINANCE STATES WHAT IS RESTRICTED FROM HAVING AN OLD FIELD SUCCESSION REVIEW.
THAT'S WHERE WE WENT BACK TO THE EARLY SUCCESSION OLD FIELD.
WHAT, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH THAT IS WHAT, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SUCCESSION FROM PICKING IT FROM AG LAND INTO A FOREST MM-HMM
WHERE ARE WE IN THAT PROCESS? OKAY.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT AGE CLASS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING LESS THAN 60 YEARS.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT IT OVER TIME.
WE STARTED SEEING TREES START CROP UP.
AND CERTAIN SIZE TREES START COMING UP.
DIFFERENT TYPES OF VEGETATION FROM BRUSH GOING INTO PO TREE COTTON, WITHROW REAL QUICK.
THEN WE GET INTO ISSUE OF, UH, WATER, THE SPECIES SELECTION.
UH, ARE WE EASTERN RED CEDAR, WHICH IS IN THIS AREA.
AND THEN ARE THERE AC, ARE THEY A CLASS THREE TREE, WHICH ARE LIKE HACK BEARING OR OTHER LESS DESIRABLE SPECIES THAT WE, WE PUT ON A LIST AS CLASS THREE TREE, IF WE HAD A MAJORITY PERCENTAGE OF THOSE.
THEN WE ALSO LOOK AT WHAT'S THE AVERAGE TREE SIZE FOR THAT POPULATION.
SO WE LOOK AT THAT SURVEY AND, AND ASSESS WHAT IS THE AVERAGE TREE SIZE.
IT'S STARTING TO MEET THAT QUALIFICATION.
THE LAST PART OF THAT, UH, THE LAST PART OF THE EQUATION IS WHETHER IT, THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN 50 FEET OF A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN, 50 FEET OF WETLAND, 50 FEET ON A CARBON ZONE OR 150 FEET OF A STREET AND BANK.
THEN THAT EXCLUDES THAT PROPERTY FROM BEING INCLUDED IN THE OLD FIELD SUCCESSION.
THEN WE START COUNTING TREES INDIVIDUALLY AND EVERY BE SUBJECT TO MITIGATION.
THE CONSEQUENCE OF BEING EXCLUDED FROM AN OLD FIELD SEC SUCCESSION MEANS, MEANS THEY WERE, THAT EACH TREE IS COUNTED INDIVIDUALLY WOULD BE INCLUDED IN MITIGATION, OLD FIELD SUCCESSION, WHICH APPLIES ALSO THROUGHOUT OTHER PARTS OF THIS PROPERTY.
IT IS CAPABLE BASICALLY BEING TAKEN OUT THE MITIGATION EQUATION.
SO THERE'S A LARGE CHUNK, WE'RE SAYING THAT WE DON'T REALLY HAVE TO COUNT EACH ONE BECAUSE A GOOD CHUNK OF IT IS BROUGHT OR CLASS THREE, WHATEVER IS THAT.
WHEREAS WHEN WE GET CLOSE ENOUGH, WE START COUNTING.
BUT IN THIS SITUATION, THERE WAS A FULL ASSESSMENT OF THE TREES TO CROSS THE PROPERTY, AT LEAST IN THE AREA WHERE THEY'RE PREPARING TO DEVELOP PHASE ONE.
UH, SO WE HAVE AT LEAST A COMPLETE ASSESSMENT OF WHAT'S ON THE PROPERTY.
THEY, PART OF THAT ASSESSMENT IS IN WHAT IS DESIGNATED BY FLOOD PLAN MANAGEMENT AS FLOOD PLAN AND A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAN.
FOR THAT PURPOSE, WE HAVE TO EXCLUDE THAT FROM THE CALCULATION FOR A OLD FIELD SUCCESSION REDUCTIONS PROPERTY OR TREES AROUND THE SPACE THAT WOULD OTHERWISE WOULD QUALIFY, CAN BE TAKEN OFF THE MITIGATION EQUIP.
SO THERE'S PROBABLY A LOT OF TREE MITIGATION THAT THERE'S NOT, THAT THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN OFF THE TABLE BECAUSE OF IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN.
AND IT MET THE CRITERIA FOR AN OLD FIELD SUCCESSION REVIEW BECAUSE THE TREES WERE LESS THAN 60 YEARS AND WERE LESS THAN 12 INCHES.
AND IN THAT, ON AVERAGE, AND WERE CLASS THREE OR EASTERN RED CEDAR, THERE'S A LOT OF TREES, A LOT OF ACREAGE TAKEN OFF THE MITIGATION TABLE.
AND THEY'RE ASKING TO EXPAND THAT ACREAGE, EXPAND THAT INTO AN AREA THAT IS CURRENTLY RESTRICTED BY RESTRICTED FROM WHAT NOT BUILDING RESTRICTED.
IT'S NOT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH BUILDING.
THAT IS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH HOW, WHAT IS CALCULATED FROM TREE MITIGATION.
AND IF THEY'RE IN THAT AREA, I DESIGNATED AS IT CALLED, IT'S CALLED A PRIMARY NATURAL AREA.
THE TREES ARE CLASS ONE, ONE FOR ONE MITIGATION.
SO IF WE GOT 12 INCH EASTERN RED CEDAR, YOU'RE GONNA MITIGATE 12 INCH EASTERN RED CEDAR.
SO THEY WOULD ESSENTIALLY LIKE US TO INCREASE THE DENOMINATOR.
THEY WOULD, I THINK THE REQUEST IS TO REMOVE THE ELEMENT THAT OF THAT FLOOD PLAN.
OH, OR ONLY FROM THAT 50 FOOT PART.
WELL, AS A QUALIFIED YEAR, THEY HAD DESIGNATED THAT AREA TO BE SPECIFIED FOR THAT DEFINITION.
OUTLINED IN YELLOW, THE YELLOW AREA IS THE, IS THE AREA OF STUDY, WHICH INCLUDES THE FLOOD PLAIN AREA AND, AND UH, THAT ALSO A LITTLE BIT OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
SO THAT'S THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAN, I THINK IS WHAT MAYBE YOU MIGHT WANT TO SPECIFY WHAT THE YELLOW BOX IS.
SO THE YELLOW BOX WAS JUST THE AREA THAT WE WERE REQUESTING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION BE GRANITE FORK.
[02:10:01]
HOW DID YOU DEFINE THAT AREA? YES.OUTSIDE OF 50 IT'S, IT'S BEYOND 50 FEET OF THE CURRENT FLOOD PLAIN.
SO YOU TOOK THE CURRENT FLOOD PLAIN AND JUST MOVED IT OUT 50 FEET.
AND THAT'S HOW WE GOT THIS SHAKE.
I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY THAT THE ACTUAL A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN IS LARGER THAN THE MAP SHOW.
THE, I THINK TO THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IS IF IT WAS LEFT AS A NATURAL CHANNEL IN ITS NORMAL STATE, THE FLOOD PLAN WOULD'VE BEEN MUCH SMALLER.
BUT SINCE THERE WAS AN AGRICULTURAL CHANNEL THAT WAS CREATED THAT'S VERY SHALLOW MM-HMM
IT MADE THE FLOOD PLAN MUCH, MUCH LARGER THAN WHAT WOULD'VE BEEN NATURAL IN THE AREA.
WE ARE USED TO THINKING OF FLOODPLAINS IN TERMS OF WHETHER SOMEBODY SHOULD BUILD IN IT OR NOT.
AND I'M COMING TO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S REALLY NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AT ALL.
AND YES, AND TO, TO THE, THE POINT THAT PHIL MADE ABOUT THE PRIMARY NATURAL AREA, UM, YOU KNOW, THE IT FROM HOW I INTERPRET THE CODE THERE IS THAT, THAT PROTECTS ALL THE TREES WITHIN WHAT YOU WOULD CALL NATURAL AREAS FROM BEING REMOVED.
UM, BUT THIS, BASED OFF OF WHAT WE CAN TELL, THIS WAS NOT WHAT I WOULD CALL AS A PRI AS A NATURAL AREA.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS MANMADE AND, UM, THAT'S JUST OVER, OVER TIME.
A QUESTION TO ME, IT IS FROM US.
WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING, OKAY, WE GET BACK TO, I HAVE A STANDARD MM-HMM
WELL, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO WANT TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION, BUT THAT'S IN THE CODE.
THAT'S BASICALLY WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, YOU CAN'T, UM, WE'RE LOOKING, WE'RE TRYING TO BASICALLY DETERMINE WHAT THE ACTUAL MITIGATION REDUCTION WOULD BE.
YOU WANT US TO DO THAT? WELL, IT'S, IT'S A QUESTION.
THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING IS HOW DO I DO THAT? WELL, IT IT GETS TO BE VERY SUBJECTIVE AT THAT POINT BECAUSE YOU ARE LOOKING AT TRYING TO DETERMINE, I MEAN, THEY CAN GIVE ME A CALCULATION OF WHAT THEY THINK IS, IS REASONABLE COMPARE BASED ON, UH, IF THEY WERE NOT, IF THEY WERE ABLE TO DO AN OIL FIELD IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, HOW MANY INCHES WOULD THAT BE? AND THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
AND SO LOOKING AT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, WE, IF WE KNOW HOW MANY INCHES ARE ON THE PROPERTY AND LOOKING AT THEIR EQUATION, YOU CAN ASK AS TO, YOU CAN ASK HOW MANY INCHES CAN WE GET REDUCED FOR? SO ESSENTIALLY, 'CAUSE ULTIMATELY THE ENTIRE PROPERTY'S GONNA GET DEVELOPED.
UM, WE'RE, WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THAT, BECAUSE THE ENTIRE PROPERTY IS UNDER EVALUATION ON, IN THIS CASE, HOW DO YOU DEFINE ENTIRE PROPERTIES? YOU MEAN BOTH LOTS HERE? MM-HMM.
WELL, ACTUALLY WE HAVE MULTIPLE PROPERTIES CURRENTLY.
THEY WILL ARE BEING IN, IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REPLANTED OVER TIME.
SO, UH, SAY FOR INSTANCE, UH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE, THE TOWNHOUSE AREA IS SEPARATE FROM THE MULTIFAMILY AND FROM COMMERCIAL.
SO SOME OF THE FUTURE AREAS MAY NOT EVEN BE PART OF THIS CONVERSATION.
UM, THAT WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO ASSESS IS WHAT IS THE TOTAL MITIGATION FOR THE ENTIRE PROPERTY SITE ONE AND SITE TWO, AND DETERMINE WHAT, WHAT IS THE REASONABLE REDUCTION THAT WOULD, MIGHT BE CONSIDERED FOR THAT ON THE BASIS OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT.
SO GENERALLY IN THE 10 YEARS I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD, ROUGHLY, I SAW THAT BY LOOKING AND SAYING, MR. IRWIN, WHAT IS REASON? AND YOU SAY IT'S THIS, AND UNLESS I UNDERSTAND SOMETHING, WELL, IN THIS SITUATION, WE HAVE, I HAVEN'T, I HAVE, UH, DATA FROM, UH, A GOOD PART OF THIS PROPERTY AS TO WHAT, WHAT IS ON THE PROPERTY.
THEY'VE GIVEN US NUMBERS TO SAY THAT IT'S OVER 10,000 INCHES OF TREES ON SITE ONE THAT, UH, WOULD BE SUBJECT TO REPLACEMENT.
AND A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF THAT IS IN THE AREA THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO GET REDUCED REDUCTION FOR SAY, 4,000 INCHES IN THAT 4,000 INCHES IN A SUITABLE REDUCTION.
AND THAT MIGHT BE WORK FOR THEIR, THE PURPOSE OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT.
SO IT'S A, IT NOT, IT, IT IS A, IT'S RARE TO HAVE A HAVE A TREE CONSERVATION CASE LIKE THIS AND HAVE ONE WITH A SU TWO LARGE PROPERTIES.
UH, ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, ONE LARGE DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS IS
[02:15:01]
EXTREMELY RARE.SO I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONFUSION AND IT'S DIFFICULT TO TRY TO WALK YOU THROUGH THIS, BUT WE'RE ALSO TRYING TO ADDRESS THAT WE'RE NOT, UH, READY TO, UH, SAY THAT A PART OF THE ORDINANCE IS, UH, INVALID.
WE CAN'T, EVEN IF WE SAID IT WAS INVALID, RIGHT, THEY WOULD AND SHOULD, UH, TELL US WHERE TO STICK.
UM, LIKE WE, WE DON'T GET TO SAY WHETHER A CODE IS INVALID.
WE CAN ACCEPT FROM IT AND THAT'S ALL THEY'RE
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT, FROM MY, MY PERSPECTIVE, I TRY TO LOOK AT, UH, AS WE HAVE, AS WE MIGHT LOOK AT ANY PARTICULAR, UH, TREE CONSERVATION CASE, WHAT IS A REASONABLE, AGAIN, A REDUCTION BASED ON THE, THE CALCULATION TREES ON THE PROPERTY AND RELATION TO THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THEY'RE DOING.
KEEPING IN MIND ALSO, THERE ARE DEFENSES TO PROSECUTION THAT WILL PLAY IN HERE, SUCH AS WHEN THEY BUILD STREETS OR DETENTION PONDS.
THOSE AREAS ARE ELIMINATED FROM MITIGATION BY ORDINANCE.
SO THERE ARE ALREADY SOME REDUCTIONS THAT ARE GOING TO OCCUR JUST BY NEW DEVELOPMENT, UH, WITH ION OF STREETS.
UH, ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THAT IS A QUESTION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DETERMINE ON THE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT, WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHERE IS THE OLD FIELD AT? WHEN WE DEVELOPED OLDFIELD SUCCESSION PROCESS IN 2018, THAT WAS PROVIDED FOR A CA CASE JUST LIKE THIS, WHERE WE HAVE AN AREA WHERE THERE'S A LOT OF, UH, YOUNG STAND THAT COULD BE TAKEN OFF THE TABLE FOR MITIGATION BECAUSE THE COUNCIL SAW FIT THAT, THAT WAS TO THE EXTREME OF MITIGATION BECAUSE WE WERE GETTING INTO THE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF INCHES OF TREES BECAUSE JUST A MASS POPULATION OF YOUNG CEDARS.
SO THE COUNCIL AMENDED, AMENDED THE CODE TO INCLUDE THE, INCLUDE THIS PROVISION.
AND IN THIS SITUATION, UH, THEY'RE RE REQUESTING TO, UH, CONSIDER THE TOOL WHERE THERE IS CONSIDERED FLOODPLAIN, UH, FLOODPLAIN ADMINISTRATOR.
MS. PAUL, IS IT YOUR INTENTION TO REMOVE ALL THE TREES IN THE YELLOW BOX? YEAH, THAT, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
SO THE, WE ARE ONLY, THERE'S A PORTION OF THE YELLOW BOX THAT WE ARE NOT DEVELOPING WITH PHASE ONE.
UM, BUT THERE ARE SOME AREAS WITHIN THE FLOOD CLAIM THAT IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY, WE'LL NEED TO RAISE THE GRADE AND PROVIDE DETENTION PONDS SO THAT WE DON'T, YOU KNOW, ADVERSELY IMPACT OUR NEIGHBORS DOWNSTREAM.
SO THE MAJORITY OF THE TREES WITHIN THE YELLOW BOX WILL BE REMOVED.
UM, AND I WOULD SAY MOST OF THE TREES, A LOT OF THE TREES IN THERE ARE THE SMALLER TREES OR THE MORE UNDESIRABLE TYPE OF TREES.
UM, THE GOAL THEN WOULD BE TO REPLANT BETTER HARDWOOD TREES IN FLOODPLAIN, ACTIVATE OPEN SPACE, THOSE TYPE OF AREAS.
UM, BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT EXHIBIT A AND THEN THIS EXHIBIT B, EXHIBIT A SHOWS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
AND THEN NOW, WHICH IS ALL GREEN.
AND THEN B IS THE BLUE OUTLINE FLOOD PLAN, I'M ASSUMING, MAKE SURE YOU LOOK AT THE, UH, LE OH, UM, DNA LOOK AT THE LEGEND FOR WHAT I AM.
DOES THAT FOR ME UNTIL I LOOK.
AND IF, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND GOING BACK TO THE SECOND SLIDE, I JUST WANNA PULL THE CONCEPT PLAN UP AGAIN.
SO THIS, THIS IS THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE FULL DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THE MAJORITY OF THE SOUTHERN PART OF WHEATLAND IS GOING IS A MORE MIXED USE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
SO THERE'S NOT MUCH OPPORTUNITY TO MAINTAIN EXISTING TREES, ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT ARE IN.
AND THEN THERE'S, YEAH, THE, THE GREEN SPACE THROUGH THE MIDDLE IS MAINTAINING SOME OF THAT NATURAL DRAINAGE WHILE PROVIDING THE DETENTION REQUIRED.
UM, THROUGH THAT WE'VE HAVE HAVING A STUDY THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND, UM, ALMOST APPROVED.
CAN YOU LOWER THAT A LITTLE BIT? I WANNA LOOK AT THAT ON THE TOP RIGHT, THAT AREA THAT'S BAY, UH, GRAY, THAT AREA.
OH, CAN YOU HERE MS. BALL, WHERE, WHERE HIS, UH,
[02:20:01]
CURSOR IS.IF I'M DRESSED, MOVE THE CURSOR TO, DO YOU SEE HIS HAND THERE FURTHER DOWN TO THE BOTTOM? TO THE BOTTOM WHERE YOU HAVE THIS GRAY OR WHITE SPACE OR WHATEVER THIS OH, THIS OVER HERE? THAT'S YES.
IT'S, IT'S OWNED BY ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER AND WE DON'T HAVE ONE.
IT'S ALL, IT'S FOREST THOUGH TREES.
I'M TRYING TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH I HAVE TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I PROBABLY DON'T HAVE TO, I STILL, SO IS THERE, I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE MOTION THAT I WOULD MAKE IT, IT, IT WOULD REQUIRE COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE PLAN.
THERE'S NO SITE PLANS, UH, THAT I, WE COULD ACTUALLY REFER TO.
SO I THINK WE WOULD NEED TO LOOK AT THAT CAREFULLY, UH, ON THAT MOTION.
DO I HAVE TO IN ORDER TO, I MEAN, YOU GUYS WROTE THE MOTION THAT MY WHOLE CAREER RE UH, CAREER, UM, CAREER OF NOT GETTING PAID.
UM, UH, WE TIE AN APPROVAL TO A PLAN.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE HAVE THE RIGHT NOW NOT TO DO IT.
I WOULD REQUEST A RECESS SO THAT I COULD CON CONFIRM WITH SOME.
I, I DON'T SEE HOW WE COULD DO THAT WITHOUT CPC REPLANNING.
WELL THE, UH, AS YOU GUYS HAVE ENCOUNTERED, THIS IS A KIND OF NEW TERRITORY FOR US AND IT IS PRETTY AS WELL I'D LIKE TO CONFER WITH.
UM, AND WE HAVE SOME KIND OF SPECIAL DISPENSATION TO ATE OURSELVES TO EDUCATE OUR, I DON'T FORGET, UM, IF, IF I MAY, MR. URBAN, IN THE SITUATION OF THE TREE MITIGATION, WE'RE BASICALLY TALKING ABOUT A CALCULATION OF THEY'VE DONE A TREE SURVEY.
WE KNOW HOW MANY INCHES OF TREES ARE IN A PARTICULAR AREA.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE FOR THE FULL PROPERTY.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S A STUDY FOR THE AREA THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING FOR, UH, IMMEDIATE DEVELOPMENT, I WOULD ASSUME.
'CAUSE THEY CURRENTLY HAVE TWO, TWO PORTIONS ON THE NORTH SIDE.
THEY HAVE UNDER PRELIMINARY PLAT AND ON THE SOUTH SIDE IS CURRENTLY UNDER PRELIMINARY PLAT.
PART OF THAT, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, PART OF, OUTSIDE OF THAT, PART OF THAT PROPERTY.
SO, SO THE NORTH SIDE IS BASICALLY WHERE THE BULK OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT IS LOOKING TO PROCEED.
AND I BELIEVE THAT, UH, THEIR REDUCTION WOULD GO PRIMARILY INTO THAT.
BUT ESSENTIALLY IT'S THE TOWNHOUSE AREAS YOU SEE ON THE CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLANS.
THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO DEVELOP.
I BELIEVE THERE'S STILL A HOTEL AND THERE'S TWO ADJACENT PROPERTIES THAT ARE BEING CONSIDERED AS WELL.
I HAVE, WE HAVE, I THINK WE HAVE A, A SURVEY ASSESSMENT FOR ALL OF THAT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE ENTIRE 1900, UH, WHEATLAND OR THE ENTIRE LANCASTER PROPERTY.
SO, UH, THAT FIRST THING I WOULD THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT OR WE NEED TO BETTER DEFINE THE AREA FOR MITIGATION REDUCTION.
IF IT'S NOT THE ENTIRE 1900 WHEATLAND, INCLUDING THE MULTIFAMILY COMMERCIAL IS, AND IT'S ONLY THE TOWNHOUSE, CAN WE HAVE THAT DETERMINED? AND THEN ON THE SOUTH SIDE, IS IT ONLY THE AREA THAT'S CURRENTLY PLATTED ON THE SOUTH SIDE? IF WE CAN DETERMINE WHAT THE NEEDED MITIGATION IS FOR A DEFINED AREA, THEN WE CAN, YOU CAN MAKE BETTER REASONABLE DISCUSSION AS TO WHAT IS A REDUCTION THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THAT PARTICULAR OR SITE BASED ON THE DATA THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED US.
WHEN YOU SAY WE DETERMINE, YOU MEAN US, DO YOU MEAN YOU GUYS DO, ARE YOU ASKING US TO NO, I WOULD SAY THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO BASICALLY DEFINE THE AREA OF THE, OF THE REQUEST AND THEN CLARIFY THAT WE HAVE THE FULL DEFINITION OF WHAT THE POTENTIAL TREE MITIGATION IS.
UM, AS FAR AS THE INFORMATION THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED US IN THE STUDIES OVER THE LAST YEAR, I BELIEVE WOULD GIVE US THAT AND THEN WE RESTRICT, RESTRICT THE REQUEST TO THOSE PARTICULAR AREAS.
WELL, THE REQUEST ON UH OH TWO NINE BT IS TALKS ABOUT ALTERNATIVE LANDSCAPE PLAN TREATMENT, WHICH WILL REQUIRE SAME LANGUAGE SPECIAL, IT SAYS
[02:25:01]
A NON-RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE.SO THIS APPLIES TO THE NON-RESIDENTIAL PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
SO WE'RE NOT TALKING THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT ON THIS ONE.
THAT COULD BE A TYPO BECAUSE AGAIN, WE'RE WE'RE UNDERSTANDING NO, I DOUBT IT IS, IT LOOKS RIGHT.
IT LOOKS LIKE MOST OF THE STUFF FROM THE SOUTH OF THIS OF WHEATLAND IS NON-RESIDENTIAL.
AGAIN, TRUST ME, I DO TRUST IT'S A TYPO.
AND THIS SAYS THE A UH, THE APPLICANT MAY BE ABLE TO DEFINE THIS A LITTLE BIT BETTER FOR US RIGHT NOW AS TO IF NEED TO ADDRESS THE ENTIRE SOUTHERN PROPERTY OR A PORTION OF THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY AND IF WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE ENTIRE NORTHERN PROPERTY OR A PORTION OF THE NORTHERN PROPERTY BECAUSE BOTH, BOTH OF THESE, THE WHEATLAND AND THE LANCASTER ADDRESS BOTH SAY NON RESIDENTIAL AND THIS IS A COMBINATION OF THEIR, MR. THOMPSON IS SAYING THAT THAT'S YEAH.
DON'T, LET'S NOT GET HUNG UP ON.
I CAN DEFINITELY SPEAK TO THAT AREA.
UM, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND GOING TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
SO THIS IS ONE OF THE, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT, I WANTED TO TRY TO MAKE CLEAR WITH THIS REQUEST, UM, WAS THAT THE AREA THAT WE ARE REQUESTING THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR IS JUST WITHIN THAT YELLOW BOX.
UM, NOW THAT DOES INCLUDE A PORTION THAT'S ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LELAND AND A PORTION ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
UM, THAT INCLUDES SOME OF THE MIXED USE AND MULTI-FAMILY AREA AS WELL AS THE SINGLE FAMILY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
SO WHEN I, WHEN I WAS READING THIS, IT WAS ARE, ARE WE ESSENTIALLY BACK TO MONEY IN A MORE DIRECT WAY THAN NORMAL IN THAT THIS IS NOT SO MUCH ABOUT WHAT TREES HAVE TO GO AWARE, BUT WHAT THE, THE FEE, THE MITIGATION FEE IS? YES, SIR.
SO THE, WE BELIEVE THAT THE CURRENT CONDITION OF THE LAND IS CAUSING A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP.
AND UM, THIS IS OUR, UH, REQUEST TO HELP WITH THAT FINANCIATION.
SO YOU'RE HAVING, I DON'T THINK YOU NEED A HARD SHEET.
SO YOU RE YOU'RE HAVING, BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE PROPERTY, YOU'RE HAVING TO REDIRECT THE CHANNELS AND WHATEVER IRRIGATION WAS ESTABLISHED WHEN IT WAS AGRICULTURAL.
AND DO YOU HAVE TO BUILD RETENTION POND AND REGRADE I GUESS THE ENTIRE SECTION? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND, AND NOT NECESSARILY THAT, THAT THOSE DEVELOPMENT COSTS ARE WHAT IS UM, ARE TO GET OVER.
IT'S MORE OF THE WHAT, WHAT THE MITIGATION FEES NOW ARE BECAUSE OF THE LARGE WIDE
FEELS LIKE WE HAVE AN EASIER TIME REDUCING A FEE THAN WE DO MAKING DIRECTLY.
IS THAT TRUE? THIS IS AN INDIRECT REDUCTION OF I KNOW IT IS, BUT I'M, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REQUIRES US TO UNDERSTAND THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE, ARE TO GIVE US THE MOST BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.
NO, UM, WELL, SO YOU ARE ASKING US TO DEFINE, HOW DO YOU SAY DEFINE WHICH PART IS SUBJECT TO TREE MITIGATION? I ALL THAT IS WELL, BUT SOMETHING THAT WE DO HERE COULD REDUCE THE MITIGATION FEE.
I'M, I'M, I AM UH, MAINLY REQUESTING THAT WE UTILIZE THE TOOL THROUGH THE, THROUGH THE OLD FIELD SUCCESSION, UM, DELINEATIONS ON THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
UM, I'M SPECIFICALLY NOT TRYING TO WAVE REDUCTION WITHIN THIS AREA ENTIRELY 'CAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF TREES THAT STILL WOULD REQUIRE MITIGATION, UM, LARGER SIGNIFICANT TREES AND OTHER TREES IN THE AREA.
UM, BUT WHAT IT WOULD ALLOW IS FOR ALL THE TREES THAT WOULD NORMALLY BE ALLOWED TO BE, NOT REQUIRE MITIGATION TO MEET THAT SAME REQUIREMENT CODE.
SO IN ESSENCE, I PURCHASED A PROPERTY THAT PUT FOREST TO BUILD A HOUSE AND WE CALL THOSE TREES, JUNK TREES.
EXACTLY WHAT IT'S MR SWES, I'M GONNA GIVE THIS A SHOT TO SEE IF I AM FOLLOWING.
THE APPLICANT IS CONTENDING THAT STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 10 AND DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE WOULD UNREASONABLY BURDEN THE USE OF THE PROPERTY BECAUSE THE COST TO CONDUCT THE MITIGATION WOULD BE SO HIGH THAT IT ASKS US THIS BOARD TO GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THEM TO TAKE WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED AS EXHIBIT B
[02:30:02]
AFMS LETTER TO BE QUAL WITHIN THE YELLOW TO BE QUALIFIED AS A FOREST STAND DELINEATION AND AN OIL FIELD CLASSIFICATION.IN WHICH CASE THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THE PLAN THAT IS PRESENTED AS EXHIBIT C TO ADD THE PROPOSED ORNAMENTAL AND CANOPY PLANTINGS TO MEET THE REMAINING MITIGATION.
YEAH, I MEAN, I, I UNDERSTAND THE WORDS
I'M THINKING ABOUT IT IN TERMS OF IF THIS BOARD WAS INCLINED TO GRANT MOTION WHAT THE VARIOUS STEPS WOULD BE AND THEN TO BE ABLE TO ASK STAFF WHEN THEY TAKE A BREAK ANALYZING WHETHER THE, WHAT IS PRESENTED AS EXHIBIT B AND EXHIBIT C IS SUFFICIENTLY CLEAR FROM AN ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE SO THAT THERE ISN'T LATER CONFUSION OR DIFFICULTY.
AND THAT'S WHY I WAS TRYING TO DO ALL THESE TWO STEPS BECAUSE I APPRECIATE THAT THE APPLICANT IS TRYING TO BE AS CLEAR AND STRAIGHTFORWARD AS POSSIBLE.
BUT I AGREE IT'S A VERY, VERY BIG PICTURE WITH REALLY LONG STRAIGHT LINES.
IT, IT MAY BE, UH, HERE'S ANOTHER FOR, FOR LAWYERS AND STUFF.
IT MAY BE THAT THE BETTER WAY TO GO ABOUT THIS IS TO ASK US TO SIMPLY WAY A PART OF THE FEE.
WE DO THAT, THAT WAY WE DON'T GET INTO THE BUSINESS OF MITIGATION AT ALL.
THAT WOULD BE CLEANED AND ONLY WAY WE CAN DO IT OR WHAT WE WANT THAT, BUT I'VE NOT WELL IF WE JUST CLASSIFY A, ALLOW THEM TO CLASSIFY THIS AS OLD.
BUT IS IT, IF I MAY, UH, I WOULD STEER AWAY FROM THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE OLD FIELD SUCCESSION DUE WITH, AS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND START DEALING WITH ACTUAL, UH, NUMBERS.
I'M COUNTING NUMBER OF INCHES DIAMETER INCHES OF TREES MM-HMM
THAT TURNS INTO MONETARY CA WELL, CORRECT.
I'LL, I'LL CALL IT CALIFORNIA DIAMETER.
WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL CALL IT THE SAME.
SO WE'RE, I'M COUNTING THE, THE NUMBER OF INCHES OF TREES AT WHICH THEY HAVE CALCULATED, I'M SEEKING TO, UH, APPLY THAT STANDARD, UH, ON THESE PROPERTIES AND NOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF A PARTICULAR ASPECT OF ARTICLE 10.
UH, OTHER THAN THAT IT, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S UNREASONABLE BURDEN TO THE USE OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S UNDER 10.110.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW FAR I WOULD LOOK TO WHETHER OR NOT THE PROVISIONS IN ARTICLE 10 CREATE THAT UNREASONABLE BURDEN FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION.
IS THERE A REASONABLE, UH, REDUCTION TO THAT MITIGATION? IT SHOULD BE APPLIED HERE BASED ON THE AREA THAT WE'RE, THAT'S IN QUESTION.
ARE THEY, IS THE, IS THE REQUEST FOR THE ENTIRE PROPERTY OR FOR A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY? IF WE'VE GOT THAT DEFINED, THEN I NEED TO KNOW THE FULL MITIGATION FOR BOTH AND THEN WE CAN REDUCE BASED ON WHAT IS AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT BASED ON THE CALCULATIONS THEY'RE PRESENTING TO YOU.
DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION ON WHAT THE ANSWER IS? UH, IN THE LETTER MEMORANDUM I PROVIDED THE BOARD ADMINISTRATOR, THERE ARE NUMBERS THAT THEY HAVE PRESENTED.
I LISTED NO OBJECTION TO PROPOSALS ON THAT.
BUT MY RECOMMENDATION, UM, IS THAT, UH, THEY WERE LOOKING AT THE PHASE ONE DEVELOPMENT PRIMARILY NOW, AND THAT, LIKE, THAT WAS PART OF CONVERSATIONS I HAD WITH MR. PITCHER AND BASICALLY THAT WE, THE, THE PHASE ONE DEVELOPMENT ON THE NORTH, THE TOWN HOMES PRIMARILY WOULD BE, THEY COULD APPLY THAT TO THAT LOCATION.
THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES WOULD BE FUTURE, UH, IN THE FUTURE SOLD AND, AND DEVELOP SEPARATELY AND BE SUBJECT TO THEIR OWN MITIGATION.
ON THE SOUTH PROPERTY SOUTH OF WHEATLAND.
UH, MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE HOTEL AND AND ADJACENT PROPERTY, WHICH IS CURRENTLY UNDER A PRELIMINARY PLA AS OF LAST APRIL, UH, MAY BE SUBJECT TO A REDUCTION AND YOU COULD DETERMINE WHAT THAT WOULD BE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT, UH, IT SHOULD APPLY TO OTHER SURROUNDING PARCELS.
UH, YOU CAN MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
[02:35:01]
COULD YOU GIVE US A BIG, HUGE PICTURE OF WHAT START TO FINISH THIS PROJECT REQUIRES AND, AND ULTIMATELY WHERE WE FIT IN? SO IF I, IF WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT IT AND I SAID, OKAY, SO YOU BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, OKAY, WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH IT, WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN? OKAY, WE, WE GOTTA HAVE PLANS FOR EVERYTHING FROM STREET TO GRADING TO, TO WHERE ARE WE IN THAT REALLY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY, WHY YOU'RE HERE INSTEAD OF AFTER CPC.LIKE WHAT, WHAT STAKE IN THE GROUND CAN WE PROVIDE YOU THAT ALLOWS YOU TO MOVE FORWARD? FEELS TO ME LIKE THE STAKE IN THE GROUND OUGHT TO BE THE PLA, BUT I, I I NEED TO UNDERSTAND, TELL ME WHERE WE FIT IN THE WHOLE PROJECT.
YEAH, SO, UM, I'M, I'LL START FROM THE, THE BEGINNING FROM WHAT I REMEMBER IS THAT WE WERE BROUGHT ON IN I THINK NOVEMBER OF, UM, 2023.
AT THAT POINT THIS PROJECT HAD ALREADY GONE THROUGH TO FUNDING, I BELIEVE, UM,
AND THERE WAS A CONCEPT PLAN DONE THAT'S, SORRY, IT HAD ALREADY BEEN ZONED.
UM, SO THEY REZONED IT THE PRIOR OWNERS.
DO YOU KNOW WHEN, ROUGHLY 18TH 18.
SO THESE CURRENT ZONING, THESE DIFFERENT ZONING THINGS ARE THE PRODUCT OF SOMEBODY LOOKING AT THE WHOLE POINT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO SINCE, UM, SINCE THAT POINT, WE HAVE SUBMITTED, FIRST WE DID THE, WE WENT OUT AND DID THE TREE SURVEY.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE A LOT OF TREES ON SITE.
SO THE WHOLE PROPERTY NOW HAS A DETAILED SURVEY OF EVERY, OF EVERY TREE THAT WOULD BE, WE BELIEVE IS PROTECTED MM-HMM
UM, THEN THE PLANS, CONSTRUCTION PLANS HAVE BEEN DONE, UM, AS WELL AS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
PRELIMINARY PLAT WAS APPROVED THROUGH CPC CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE REVIEWS WITH THE CITY AND ARE NEARING APPROVAL.
UM, THE NEXT STEP FOR US REALLY IS GRADING.
UM, ONCE OUR PLANS GET APPROVED, THE FIRST THING THAT WE'LL DO IS START GRADING.
UM, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM HOW SOME DEVELOPMENTS ARE DONE WHERE THE, THE PLOT DOESN'T GET RECORDED UNTIL THE VERY END OF THE PROCESS AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS DONE.
SO IN ORDER TO PROCEED WITH OUR GRADING AND CLEARING OF THE TREES, THIS IS REALLY THE NEXT STEP FOR US IN ORDER TO, TO KEEP MOVING.
I, I THINK I UNDERSTAND IF I WERE IN THE SHOES OF THE OWNER, I WOULD NOT WANNA SPEND MONEY IF IN FACT I WAS NOT GONNA BE ALLOWED TO DO WHAT I SPENT MONEY TO DO.
AND THAT'S WHERE THE GRADING COMES IN.
THAT'S WHERE YOU ARE, CORRECT? CORRECT.
NOW, IN ORDER TO MAKE THE PLAN THAT YOU HAVE THAT WE DON'T HAVE, THAT THERE IS A PLAN THAT YOU WANTED, DO YOU NEED US TO ACCEPT? RIGHT.
THAT'S WHERE USUALLY, ALRIGHT, WHAT EXCEPTION IF IT WORTH FENCE, FOR EXAMPLE, WE'D SAY, ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU AN EXCEPTION.
AND HERE'S, HERE'S YOUR ELEVATION.
IT'S THE LATTER PART THAT I DON'T SEE.
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SURE.
AND YOU KNOW, EVER SINCE WE RECEIVED THE TREE SURVEY AND WENT THROUGH THE OLD FIELD DELINEATION, BUT WE'VE HAD ONGOING CONVERSATIONS WITH CITY STAFF ABOUT THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE IT, WHAT REQUESTS TO MAKE, HOW TO MAKE THIS MAKE SENSE.
UM, AND SO I, UM, I, THE THE METHOD THAT WE CHOSE WAS TO ASK FOR AN EXCEPTION ON THIS ONE PIECE OF THE ORDINANCE.
UM, IF IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO TALK ABOUT SPECIFIC NUMBERS OF REDUCTION, UM, THEN WE'RE DEFINITELY PREPARED TO DO THAT.
I, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY, BUT IF YOU AND THE STAFF, I DON'T HAVE CONCLUDED THIS IS THE RIGHT, AND THEY'VE INDICATED THEN, UH, I'M NOT HERE TO OVERRULE BILL.
THAT, YEAH, I THINK WE'VE, WE, I BELIEVE THAT WE WERE IN AGREEMENT OF, OF WHAT THE NUMBERS SHOW ON THE PLANS AND THE, THE METHOD THAT WE CHOSE WAS NOT TO TRY AND COME IN FRONT OF YOU AND SAY, WE WOULD LIKE THIS MANY TREES REDUCED, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT A LOT OF THE CONTEXT HERE.
UM, I THINK THAT THE ASK WAS MORE TO UTILIZE THE TOOLS THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY HAS IN PLACE, BUT IF WE GET TO THE SAME END GOAL, YOU KNOW, THE, THE METHOD THAT WE USE, WE CAN GO EITHER WAY.
SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE EVALUATION ACCORDING TO THE MOTIONS,
[02:40:02]
ONE OF THEM IS A STRICT COMPLIANCE WOULD CREATE A BURDEN TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND IT, NONE OF IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTY VALUES AND THAT, UM, WHAT WE DO ARE NOT IMPOSED BY SITE SPECIFIC LANDSCAPE PLAN APPROVED BY CPC.RIGHT? SO THOSE ARE OUR THREE PARAMETERS FOR THIS.
SO DESPITE YOU GOING TO CPC, THIS IS NOT PART OF THE SITE SPECIFIC LANDSCAPE PLAN POSED BY THE SAFETY C, RIGHT? CORRECT.
SO YEAH, SO THOSE ARE OUR THREE CONSIDERATIONS.
DOES IT ACCEPT, UM, SO YEAH, THERE'S NO EXCEPTIONS.
NO, UH, I I WAS WONDERING WHETHER THE FOR COMPLIANCE UNREASONABLY BURDENED USE HAS A CARVE OUT FOR FINANCIAL HARDSHIPS.
SHALL WE GIVE THE STAFF AND THE ATTORNEYS, I'VE HEARD COUPLE OF REQUESTS TO ACTUALLY HAVE A SECOND TO, UH, FOR THEM TO, TO HUDDLE UP.
I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE'RE AT THE POINT WHERE THEY OUGHT TO AND WE OUGHT TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER WE, HOW AND WHAT EITHER TO GO FORWARD OR WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW IN ORDER TO, BUT WE'RE NOT JUST SENDING ANYBODY IN CIRCLES AND WE UNDERSTAND THE HECK WE, IF WE CAN'T DO SOMETHING TODAY, LET'S UNDERSTAND WHAT WE WOULD AND NEED YOU ORDER TO MAKE IT DECISION.
WELL, AREN'T THESE THREE THINGS WE'VE COVERED? NO.
WELL, I DON'T, I I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE IF THE ATTORNEYS HAD A CHANCE TO CONFER, GIVEN THAT OUR ATTORNEYS HAVE ASKED US TO, YOU KNOW, WE ASK THEM TO BE RIGHT ALL THE TIME.
I ALWAYS PROMISE THAT WE'LL GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO THINK ABOUT IT.
SO HOW LONG? 10 MINUTES, 15 MINUTES.
SO WE WILL TAKE A RECESS UNTIL I'M PASSING THESE VALUES.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL C IS BACK IN SESSION AT 4:50 PM OKAY.
UH, SO THE ATTORNEYS WANT TO REPORT OR TELL ME HOW YOU GONNA PROCEED? YEAH, SO CERTAINLY, SO THE APPLICANT CAME TO THE BOARD AND THEY REQUESTED A VERY SPECIFIC CHANGE, WHICH WAS TO MAKE A CHANGE TO SECTION 51, A DASH 10.132 B FOUR, BIG B, UH, ROMAN I, LITTLE TWO LITTLE PS.
AND, UH, AND THIS HAD TO DO WITH THE FLOOD, FLOOD FLOOD PLANE.
UH, AND ESSENTIALLY YOU GUYS DON'T, THAT'S NOT IN YOUR PURVIEW TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE IN THE CODE.
SO THAT ASPECT OF THE REQUEST IS NOT REALLY VIABLE.
HOWEVER, YOU CAN AND ARE ALLOWED TO GRANT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ARTICLE 10 IN THE FORM OF REDUCING THE REQUIRED TREATING LITIGATION, WHICH IS IN ESSENCE WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING.
HOWEVER, THE STAFF HASN'T BEEN GIVEN SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
SO IF THE BOARD WERE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS REQUEST, WE WOULD ADVISE YOU TO HOLD OVER UNTIL FURTHER INFORMATION LIKE MAPS, UH, SITE PLANS, SPECIFIC NUMBERS REGARDING THE TYPE OF MITIGATION CAN BE DELIVERED AND APPROVED BY A STAFF.
AND THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AT A LATER MEETING.
THIS IS CASES SIMILAR TO A CASE AS WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST WHERE YOU GUYS RECEIVE A SITE PLAN THAT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION OR YOU RECEIVE NO SITE PLAN AT ALL.
SO YOU CAN MAKE THE MOTION, BUT THERE'S NOTHING TO TIE IT TO.
AND SO IF WE HAD MITIGATION PLANS PUT FORTH THAT STAFF WAS APPROVING, THEN WE COULD TIE IT TO THAT MEDICATION SO THE STAFF CANNOT APPROVE.
WELL, A MITIGATION PLAN, LOOK, WE, IF WE WERE SO INCLINED TO REALLY PUSH THROUGH AND DO IT, WOULD WE EVEN KNOW HOW MANY THREES WE WOULD ACCEPT? EXACTLY.
I THINK THE NO, THAT'S PRECISELY THE DILEMMA IS THAT WE DON'T, WE, YOU COULD APPROVE IT, BUT WE WOULDN'T KNOW PRECISELY WHAT WE'D BE APPROVING.
YOU MIGHT BE IN UP GIVING THEM A CART CLASS TO DO WHATEVER THEY LIKE.
AND SO OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE DANGERS IN THAT SITUATION.
UM, SO BY DELAYING IT, IT ALLOWS STAFF AND I WOULD, UM, IF IT PLEASES THE BOARD, I WOULD ASK STAFF TO LIST ON THE RECORD WHAT TYPE OF INFORMATION THEY'RE REQUIRED SO THAT THE APPLICANT CAN BRING THAT TO A LATER DATE OR CONVERSE WITH STAFF IN THE INTERIM SO THAT IT CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH A, UH, SMOOTH CONJECTURE.
I'LL ADD TOO, I, I THINK THE BOARD IS, IS INTERESTED IN WHAT THE MOST DIRECT SOLUTION IS AND IF, IF WHAT REALLY THAT MEANS IS MONEY AND, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO THAT, BUT I WOULD SAY THE SIMPLEST YOU CAN MAKE IT FOR US, THE BETTER IT IS FOR ALL.
UM, BUT WHATEVER YOU BEST THINK IS APPROPRIATE, WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO UNDERSTAND IF IT'S DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO PUT IT IN A BRIEFING.
SO WE ARE ALLOWED TO LOOK AT IT AHEAD OF TIME.
IF THAT MEANS YOU HAVE TO DO TWO SEPARATE DOCKETS FOR DOWN, FINE, BUT YOU KNOW, JUST UNDERSTAND WE CAN'T GO LOOK ON OUR, BUT IF YOU GIVE IT TO US, WE CAN READ IT.
[02:45:01]
MR. SAPPS REQUESTS, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE SUBMITTED SPECIFICALLY? OKAY.UH, SPECIFICALLY YOU CAN, UH, YEAH, I THINK WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, I MEAN FOR THE TREE SURVEY DATA IS PROVIDED, UH, AT LEAST FOR BULK OF THE PROPERTY.
I DO NOT KNOW IF IT'S FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, BUT WE ALSO NEED TO DEFINE THE AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOR FULL REMOVAL, UM, INCLUDING THE INITIAL, UH, PHASE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT.
SO LOOKING AT IT FROM THE, THE BEGINNING, I NEED THE FULL TREE SURVEY.
THE SECOND PART IS WHAT IS THE AREA THAT, THAT WE'RE SEEKING FOR MITIGATION REDUCTION FOR? IS IT FOR A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY OR IS IT FOR THE ENTIRE PROPERTY? THIS IS MORE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY SOUTH OF WHEATLAND, WHERE BASICALLY WE DO KNOW THAT THERE'S A PORTION THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER PRELIMINARY FLAT HAS NO ADDRESS, BUT, UH, THERE IS, UH, ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES THAT WILL BE DEVELOPED IN THE FUTURE.
IS THE INTENTION THAT THIS MITIGATION BE APPLIED TO THE FULL AREA AS WELL? SO IF WE CAN GET THOSE ANSWERS, UH, CONCLUDED, WE CAN THEN IDENTIFY THOSE ON A PLAN, THEN WE CAN BA BASICALLY BE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHAT THE NUMBER OF INCHES ARE BASED OFF THEIR DATA TO APPLY THAT TO THAT PLAN AND IDENTIFY WHAT THE POTENTIAL REDUCTIONS ARE AND WE CAN DETERMINE IF WE AGREE WITH THAT.
UM, YEAH, LET'S BEFORE COMMENTS, UH, LET'S MAKE A MOTION.
OUR, OUR MEETING IS, UH, 17 MARCH, YOU SAID? YES, I MOVED IN THE CASE OF BDA 2 45 DASH OH TWO EIGHT BOARD, UH, OF ADJUSTMENT, UH, HOLD THIS CASE UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING ON MARCH 17TH, 2024.
SECOND, SECOND, MS. P*****K DISCUSSION.
I THINK, I FEEL, MY SENSE IS THAT THIS CAME TO US BEFORE IT WAS READY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S REALLY DISAGREEMENT, BUT I DON'T THINK ANYBODY KNOWS WHETHER THERE'S DISAGREEMENT.
UH, THAT'S WHAT I THINK ABOUT BOTH OF THESE.
UM, AND I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THIS IS UNIQUE FOR US AND SO WE WILL, WE WILL BE DILIGENT IF YOU GIVE US WHAT WE NEED, WE, WE WILL.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY, MS. WILLIAMS. MS. P*****K? AYE.
MOTION TO HOLD IT UNTIL MARCH 17TH, 2025 PASSES.
OKAY, THIS BRINGS BDA 2 4 5 DASH OH TWO NINE.
SO WE NEED TO CALL IT, I BELIEVE THE, I'M SORRY.
WON'T BE SAYING, I BELIEVE THE INTENTION IS TO HOLD THIS OVER.
THE CASE HAS BEEN CALLED DO YOU NEED TO, I NEED TO DO JUST MAKE A MOTION, BUT I DON'T WANT, I'LL CALL THE CASE, SEE IF THEY ARE THERE SPEAKERS IN FAVOR? IF, IF, IF YOU WANT TO COME.
I, I BELIEVE THE BOARD'S INTENT IS TO HOLD IT OVER, BUT THIS IS PROCEDURAL FOR THE RECORD, BUT IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO IT.
YEAH, YOU'RE WELCOME IF YOU DON'T NEED TO.
NO, I THINK, I THINK WE'RE ALRIGHT.
UH, ARE THERE SPEAKERS AGAIN? HEARING NONE? UH, IS THERE A MOTION I MOVE WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN CASE BDA 2 4 5 DASH OH TWO NINE? UH, HOLD THIS MATTER UNTIL THE BOARD'S NEXT MEETING ON MARCH 17TH, 2025 AND SECOND.
MR. MILLIKEN SECTIONS? MS. WILLIAMS? MS. MS. POLLICK AYE.
SO WE HAVE DISPOSED OF OUR CASES.
UH, SEE YOU NEXT MONTH AND THANK YOU.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS RECESS AT 4:58 PM.