[Board of Adjustments: Panel A on May 20, 2025.]
[00:00:03]
GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
I'M DAVID NEWMAN, AND I'M HONORED TO SERVE AS CHAIRMAN OF THE FULL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND PRESIDING OFFICER OF ITS PANEL A COMING IN SESSION TODAY.
TODAY'S TUESDAY, MAY 20TH, 2025, AND THE TIME IS 1:00 PM I HEREBY CALL THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A, UH, TO ORDER FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, BOTH IN PERSON AND HYBRID VIDEO CONFERENCE, A QUORUM, WHICH BY OUR RULES IS A MINIMUM OF FOUR OF FIVE MEMBERS IS PRESENT.
WE HAVE FIVE MEMBERS PRESENT, AND SO THEREFORE, UH, WE CAN PROCEED WITH OUR HEARING.
LET ME FIRST INTRODUCE OUR PANEL MEMBERS AND STAFF.
AGAIN, MY NAME IS DAVID NEWMAN.
I'M CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF PANEL A.
TO MY IMMEDIATE LEFT IS KATHLEEN DAVIS, RACHEL HAYDEN, JANE RY, AND MICHAEL KOVI IS WITH US ONLINE, RECOVERING FROM HIS ANKLE SITUATION.
TO MY RIGHT IS OUR ACTING BOARD ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, MATTHEW SAP, DR.
KAMIKA MILLER HOSKINS, OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF PLANNER, AND MARY WILLIAMS, OUR BOARD SECRETARY, A MEETING MODERATOR.
BEFORE WE BEGIN, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FEW GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE WAY THE HEARING WILL BE CONDUCTED.
UM, AND THE NUMBER ONE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE GIVE OUR TIME FREELY AND RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR THAT TIME.
WE OPERATE UNDER CITY COUNCIL APPROVED RULES OF PROCEDURE, WHICH ARE POSTED ON OUR WEBSITE.
NO ACTION OR DECISION ON A CASE SETS A PRECEDENT ACCORDING TO CITY CODE AND STATE LAW.
EACH CASE IS DECIDED UPON ITS OWN MERITS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED EACH USE IS PRESUMED TO BE A LEGAL USE.
WE'VE BEEN FULLY BRIEFED BY OUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF PRIOR TO THIS HEARING.
THIS MORNING STARTED AT 10 O'CLOCK BRIEFING AND REVIEWED A PUBLIC DETAILED PUBLIC DOCKET, WHICH EXPLAINS THE CASE AND WAS POSTED ON OUR WEBSITE SEVEN DAYS AGO.
ANY EVIDENCE YOU WISH TO SUBMIT TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION OF ANY CASES THAT WE HEAR TODAY SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO OUR BOARD SECRETARY, WHEN YOUR CASE IS CALLED.
THE EVIDENCE MUST BE RETAINED IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR EACH CASE.
MARY WILLIAMS IS OUR BOARD SECRETARY MARY, RAISE YOUR HAND PLEASE.
SHE'S THE PERSON YOU NEED TO GET THE INFORMATION TO FOR EACH YOUR CASE, AS WELL AS IF YOU PLAN TO SPEAK AS A PUBLIC SPEAKER DURING PUBLIC TESTIMONY OR TESTIFYING IN A SPECIFIC CASE.
YOU NEED TO FILL OUT THIS BLUE SHEET OF PAPER AGAIN, MARY, AND GIVE IT TO HER IN ADVANCE.
THE BLUE SHEETS OF PAPER ARE UPFRONT, SO PLEASE, ANYONE THAT'S WITH US TODAY, IF YOU PLAN TO SPEAK AT ANY TIME TODAY, COME FILL OUT THE BLUE SHEET OF PAPER SO THAT WE CAN HEAR FROM YOU.
UM, APPROVALS OF A VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXCEPTION, OR REVERSAL OF BUILDING ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL DECISION, UH, REQUIRES 75% OR FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES OF OUR FIVE PANEL.
YOU SEE FOUR MEMBERS HERE AND MICHAEL KOVICH IS OUR FIFTH MEMBER.
REQUIRES FOUR OR FIVE MEMBERS TO APPROVE ANYTHING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.
ALL OTHER MOTIONS REQUIRE A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE.
LETTERS OF THE BOARD'S ACTION TODAY CALLED DECISIONS LETTERS WILL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT BY OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR SHORTLY AFTER TODAY'S HEARING, AND WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD TYPICALLY WITHIN TWO DAYS.
DECISION LETTERS ARE SENT TO YOU TYPICALLY BY EMAIL? YES.
ANYONE DESIRING TO SPEAK TODAY MUST REGISTER IN ADVANCE.
I MENTIONED TO YOU THOSE BLUE SHEETS OF PAPER WITH OUR BOARD SECRETARY.
EACH REGISTERED SPEAKER WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES, OR, AND WHEN A SPECIFIC CASE IS CALLED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A MAXIMUM OF FIVE MINUTES, ALL REGISTERED ONLINE SPEAKERS MUST BE PRESENT ON VIDEO TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.
NO TELECONFERENCING WILL BE ALLOWED VIA WEBEX, WHICH MEANS VOICE AND, UH, VIDEO, VIDEO AND AUDIO HAS TO BE HEARD FOR WEBEX.
ALL COMMENTS ARE DIRECTED TO MYSELF AS THE PRESIDING OFFICER, AND ALL COMMENTS ARE DIRECTED TO MYSELF, AND I MAY MODIFY SPEAKING TIMES IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN A BALANCE.
IN ORDER FOR THE BOARD, WE STRIVE TO GIVE EVERYONE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, UH, BOTH APPLICANTS AND ANYONE IN FAVOR OR AGAINST.
SO YOU'LL SEE THAT I WILL GO AT GREAT LENGTHS TO TRY TO ACHIEVE THAT FIRST BOARD MEMBERS.
LET ME GO THROUGH, UM, OUR AGENDA THIS MORNING.
WE CALL TO ORDER AT 10:00 AM WE HAD OUR STAFF PRESENTATION.
UH, WE'RE NOW IN THE PUBLIC HEARING PHASE.
IN A MOMENT WE'LL DO PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND THEN WE'LL HAVE OUR MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS. WE HAVE TWO ITEMS THAT ARE MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS, APPROVAL OF OUR MINI MEETING MINUTES AND PROPOSE AMENDMENTS TO OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE.
[00:05:01]
HAD SIX CASES ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET AND FOUR HOLDOVERS AFTER THIS MORNING'S BRIEFING.UH, THREE OF THE SIX CASES WILL REMAIN ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET, SUBJECT TO THE WILL OF THE, OF THE BOARD.
THREE WILL GO AS INDIVIDUAL AND THEN FOUR HOLDOVERS.
THAT IS THE ORDER BY WHICH WE WILL HEAR CASES TODAY, UH, AS THEY ARE ORIGINALLY IN THE AGENDA ONE THROUGH 10.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD REGARDING, UH, THE AGENDA OR ITEMS? AND AGAIN, MR. KOVI, PLEASE WAVE OR GET MY ATTENTION.
IF THERE'S A QUESTION THAT YOU WANT TO ASK OR, OR YOU WANT MY ATTENTION, I, I WILL DO, DO MY BEST TO, TO KEEP AN EYE ON MY CORNER, CORNER OF MY EYE ON YOU.
NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
MS. BOARD SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY? NO SPEAKERS REGISTER, SIR.
NO SPEAKERS FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS REVIEW, UH, AND APPROVAL OF OUR MEETING MINUTES THIS MORNING OF THE, THE, THE BOARD WAS BRIEFED AS IT RELATES TO OUR MEETING MINUTES.
UH, QUESTIONS ON THE MEETING MINUTES? THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MS. DAVIS, THOSE THREE AMENDMENTS.
I, UM, I, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR APRIL MEETING MINUTES WITH A FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS.
MEETING MINUTES WITH THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS.
ON PAGE THREE, WE CHANGED DENY TO GRANT.
ON PAGE EIGHT, WE HAD APPROVED FIVE ZERO.
AND ON PAGE 24, WE HAD APPROVED FOUR ZERO.
MS. DAVIS HAS MOVED TO APPROVE OUR MEETING MINUTES FROM APRIL 15TH, SUBJECT TO THREE AMENDMENTS.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THE FIRST ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE? MANY MINUTES? UH, SUBJECT TO THOSE THREE CHANGES, MARY, YOU HAVE ALL THREE? OKAY.
ALRIGHT, WE WILL GO FOR A, A VOICE VOTE.
THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
SUBJECT TO THOSE THREE, UM, UH, CHANGES.
NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS, UM, PROPOSED CHANGES TO OUR, UM, PROPOSED CHANGES TO OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE.
UH, YOU WERE BRIEFED THIS MORNING AT THE, UH, BRIEFING PORTION, UH, FROM OUR BOARD ATTORNEY, MR. SAPP, AS WELL AS OUR EMERITUS BOARD ATTORNEY MR. MOORE, AS IT RELATES TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO WORKING RULES AND PROCEDURE SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO BEING IN COMPLIANCE WITH A RECENTLY PASSED ORDINANCES, CITY COUNCIL.
THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
UM, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDED BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULES OF PROCEDURE.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MS. HAYDEN TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO HER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULES OF PROCEDURE.
WILL THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL FOR A VOTE.
THE, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO OUR WORKING RULES AND PROCEDURES ARE APPROVED.
THE NEXT STEP IN THAT, UM, PROCESS IS PANEL B MEETS TOMORROW, UH, SUBJECT TO THEIR, UM, APPROVAL.
IT WILL GO TO CITY COUNCIL, HOPEFULLY TO BE ADOPTED IN THE MONTH OF JUNE.
SO WE'LL HAVE AN UPDATED VERSION.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS HAVE BEEN TAKEN CARE OF.
UH, NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS THE CONSENT DOCKET.
UH, AT THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING, UM, THE STAFF BRIEFED US ON SEVERAL CASES AND, UM, THREE OF THE SIX IN THE UNCONTESTED DOCUMENT, THE CONSENSUS WAS TO HAVE, UH, REVIEWED AND APPROVED ON A UNCONTESTED DOCKET.
WHAT THAT MEANS IS THERE'S, THERE WE'RE, WE'RE CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT THERE'S NO NEED FOR TESTIMONY.
UM, CONSISTENT WITH OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I, MR. NARY, THANK YOU.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT, THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS LISTED ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET BECAUSE IT APPEARS FROM OUR EVALUATION THE PROPERTY AND ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE THAT THE APPLICATION SATISFY ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE CODE
[00:10:01]
AS APPLICABLE TO WIT BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 5 4 APPLICATION OF CAMILLO DUARTE FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FENCE HEIGHT REGULATIONS IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE PLANS IS REQUIRED.
BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 5 5 APPLICATION OF CAMILLA DUARTE FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FENCE HEIGHT REGULATIONS IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
BDA 2 4 5 0 5 6 APPLICATION OF RAJA DEB FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE HANDICAPPED TO A 45% MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE REGULATION IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
MR. NERI HAS MOVED TO GRANT ON THE CONSENT UNCONTESTED DOCKET 2 4 5 0 5 4 2 4 5 0 5 5 2 4 5 0 5 6.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO GRANT THREE CASES ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET.
2 4 5 0 5 4 2 4 5 0 5 5 AND 2 4 5 2 4 5 0 5 6.
HEARING NO OTHER DISCUSSION, THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE.
MOTION TO GRANT PASSES FIVE TO ZERO.
THE THREE ITEMS IN THE CONSENT DOCKET ARE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
EACH OF YOU WILL GET A LETTER, A DECISION LETTER FROM OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR IN THE NEXT COUPLE DAYS.
NEXT ITEM ON OUR, OUR AGENDA IS 2 4 5 0 6 1 2 4 5 0 6 1.
THIS IS AT 5 5 1 4 ROYAL LANE IS THE APPLICANT HERE, HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
I WANNA MAKE SURE I DON'T HAVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE AS IT RELATES TO THIS.
SO THIS WILL GO BACK OVER HERE.
IF YOU WOULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN OUR BOARD SECRETARY WILL SWEAR YOU IN.
JENNIFER HIROTO 1 0 2 3 3 EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY DALLAS 7 5 2 3 8.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO, IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DO.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS FOR THIS CASE? NO, THE SPEAKERS REGISTER.
TAKE AS MUCH TIME AS YOU NEED TO.
WE HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS I THINK SO WELL PROCEED.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY, UM, I NOTICED DURING THE BRIEFING THAT I THINK WE DID NOT ADVERTISE OR REQUEST THE FRONT YARD PORTION CORRECTLY.
UM, THE FENCE ELEVATION, UH, IF YOU RECALL, THERE'S THE GRADE THAT THAT VARIES AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE TALLER 10 FOOT SIX HEIGHT AND THE SIDE YARD PORTION.
UNFORTUNATELY THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE WAS CALLED OUT ON THE ELEVATION, BUT NOT THE BOTTOM ROD IRON PORTION.
RIGHT AT THAT A HUNDRED FOOT LINE, I BELIEVE IT'S GREATER THAN EIGHT FEET.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT WE RE ADVERTISE.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS, YOU AS AN APPLICANT DIDN'T FILE IT CORRECTLY OR THE STAFF DID NOT ADVERTISE IT? I'M CONFUSED WHERE THE ERROR IS.
ALRIGHT, SO JUST SO THAT, UM, I'M LOOKING AT YOUR SUBMITTAL.
SO WOULD YOU SHOW, WOULD YOU TELL ME WHERE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? YOU'RE TALKING THAT CORNER INTERSECTION.
SO IF YOU GO TO THE FENCE ELEVATION AND LOOK AT WHERE THE 100 FOOT PLATTED BUILDING LINE OCCURS.
ALRIGHT, GUESS SOMEONE'S GONNA TAKE US IN THE SCREEN.
WE LOOKING ON THE SCREEN RIGHT, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S THE TWO FENCE TYPES.
THERE'S THE WOOD UH, PORTION AND THEN THERE'S THE ROD IRON PORTION BELOW IT AT THAT 100 BUILDING LINE MARK.
IT'S, THERE'S RIGHT IRON PORTION.
SO IN MY UNDERSTANDING OF THIS EXHIBIT, OUR FENCE HEIGHT REQUEST IS GREATER THAN EIGHT FEET AND WE FAILED TO CAPTURE THAT WR IRON PORTION.
MS. BOARD ADMINISTRATOR, DO YOU CONCUR WITH HER OBSERVATION? YES, I DO.
AND WHICH NECESSITATES IT BEING HELD OVER AND READVERTISED OR DENIED? I MEAN, WHAT'S THE PROCESS? HMM.
[00:15:01]
IT'S UM, A GREAT, IT'S GONNA BE A GREATER REQUEST.I'LL LEAVE THAT TO, WELL, I'LL DEFER TO OUR BOARD COUNCIL.
I, IF WE DENY THEN THEY HAVE TO REFILE THE WHOLE THING.
SO I DON'T THINK, I DON'T, THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD, I DON'T THINK IT JUST CANNOT BE APPROVED.
IT COULD BE, UH, DENIED OR, OR HELD OVER.
IT CAN BE DENIED WITH DENIED WITHOUT, OR, UH, OR HELD OVER.
IT'S IN THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD.
SO THIS IS AN HONEST MISTAKE IT'S BROUGHT UP BY THE APPLICANT.
I'M FINE WITH JUST HOLDING THIS OVER.
YOU'LL MAKE SURE YOU WORK WITH THE STAFF TO GET THE RIGHT INFORMATION.
UM, AND WE DID HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBOR THAT WAS MENTIONED IN THE LETTER AT THE CORNER EMPTY LOT.
AND I EXPECT AND HOPE THAT WE HAVE THEIR SUPPORT IN WRITING 'CAUSE IT'S ABSENT RIGHT NOW.
IT'S JUST BEEN VERBAL EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS.
UM, SO I HOPE TO HAVE THAT SOLIDIFIED FOR YOU IN JUNE.
UM, SO THE CHAIRMAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MS. DAVIS, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 45 DASH SIX ONE HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OUR JUNE MEETING.
THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO, UH, IT IS JUNE 17TH.
AM I CORRECT, CAMIKA IS THAT JUNE 17TH? YES.
ALRIGHT, MS. DAVIS HAS MOVED THE BDA 2 4 5 0 6 1 BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST UNTIL JUNE 17TH, 2025.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MS. HAYDEN.
UM, IS THERE ADEQUATE TIME FOR THE APPLICANT TO GET THE CORRECT INFORMATION TO YOU IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE ADVERTISED PROPERLY? YES.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE CONFIDENT OF THAT, GIVE IT TO US.
AND THIS IS AT YOUR REQUEST SO THAT'S FINE.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS? UH, THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE ROLE.
THE, UM, THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO HOLD BDA 2 4 5 0 6 1 UNDER ADVISEMENT AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST UNTIL JUNE 17TH, 2025.
MR. OVITZ AYE MR. CHAIRMAN AYE, MOTION TO HOLD UNTIL JUNE 17TH IN THE MATTER? 2 4 5 0 6 1 THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTES FIVE TO ZERO TO HOLD THIS ITEM AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JUNE 17TH, 2025.
OKAY, NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS 2 4 5 0 6 3 2 4 5 0 6 3.
THIS IS AT 9 6 7 0 LINBROOK DRIVE.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE? THEY ARE ONLINE.
UH, AND MR. NICHOLAS? YES MA'AM.
I'M TRYING TO, CAN YOU PLEASE PROVIDE VIDEO? YEAH, I'M TRYING TO PROVIDE MY VIDEO.
I, I THINK I'M HAVING ISSUES WITH THE VIDEO.
UM, I BELIEVE I SEE MS. RACHEL.
UH, I'M NOT TOTALLY SURE WHY OH, START VIDEO.
ALRIGHT, HOLD ON ONE SECOND NOW.
ALRIGHT, UM, WHO IS REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT? I AM SIR.
AND IS THE ADDITIONAL PERSON ONLINE WANTING TO SPEAK TODAY? UH, YES SIR.
THE APPLICANT JUST WANTS TO ALRIGHT.
HAVE THEY BOTH REGISTERED TO SPEAK? OKAY, THIS IS WHAT I WANNA HEAR.
WHO ALL'S REGISTERED TO SPEAK ONLINE OR IN PERSON FOR 2 4 5 0 6 3? UH, NOBODY ELSE.
SO IF YOU WOULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, NAME AND ADDRESS, THEN OUR BOARD SECRETARY WILL SWEAR YOU IN.
UH, MY NAME IS NICHOLAS MCKISSICK, UM, AND MY ADDRESS IS 96 7 LINBROOK DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS.
AND I'M RACHEL LIN LITT, UH, ALSO AT 96 70 LINBROOK DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS.
DO YOU BOTH SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, MA'AM.
UH, BOARD MEMBERS, I'M PASSING DOWN THE RUN A UH, THE ONE PIECE OF, UM,
[00:20:01]
FEEDBACK WE GOT FROM NEIGHBORS.UM, YOU SAW THIS AT THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING.
I'M SENDING IT BACK THE SAME WAY.
UM, SO, UH, MR. MCKISSICK, YOU'RE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT TODAY, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
SO YOU'VE BEEN SWORN IN AND SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GIVE YOU FIVE MINUTES PLUS OR MINUS TIME AND THEN WE'LL HEAR FROM MISS, UH, IS LYNN LIT? OKAY.
UH, WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND CON YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY.
BUT, UM, AS INDICATED EARLIER, MY NAME'S NICHOLAS MCKISSICK AND I'M REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT HERE.
UM, AND AS WE NOTED IN OUR APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, UH, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AT 9 6 7 LINDBERG DRIVE, UH, TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN AN EIGHT FOOT HEIGHT FENCE THAT FACES WALNUT HILL LANE AND, UH, WILL ALSO REQUIRE A FOUR FOOT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE FENCE HEIGHT REGULATIONS.
UM, I WON'T GO INTO THE LONG, UH, SERIES OF UNFORTUNATE EVENTS THAT LED US TO, TO THIS APPLICATION.
UM, BUT, UM, THE PRIMARY REASON FOR, UM, THE CONSTRUCTIVE AND NEW FENCE IN THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UM, IT'S JUST DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE, THE APPLICANT HAS EXPERIENCED, UH, SEVERAL BREAK-INS AND TRESPASSES ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY THERE'S A, A OR NOT FORTUNATELY OR UNFORTUNATELY, BUT, UM, THERE'S JUST A, A BUS STOP THERE, UM, AND JUST REQUIRES QUITE A BIT OF, UH, FOOT TRAFFIC, UM, THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE DAY.
UM, THE APPLICANT, UM, WORKS FROM THE HOUSE BY HERSELF, UM, AND JUST DOESN'T HAVE A, A CERTAIN LEVEL OF, OF SECURITY AND COMFORT IN HER OWN HOME DURING THE TIME.
UM, AND IN FACT, YOU KNOW, HAS HAD SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS HAVE BRAZENLY KIND OF REMOVED FENCE POSTS, UH, TO TRESPASS INTO THE PROPERTY AND HAD ALSO, UH, GRABBED THE TOP OF THE FENCE TO TRY TO LOOK OVER AND TO TRY TO RIP THE FENCE POST OUT.
UM, THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, SUBMITTED SEVERAL, UH, POLICE, UH, DEPARTMENT REQUESTS, AND WE'VE CONTACTED POLICE SEVERAL TIMES WHO HAVE GRACIOUSLY PROVIDED, UH, ADDITIONAL SECURITY, UH, IN AND AROUND THE PREMISES.
UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, JUST IN FACT, YOU KNOW, WE ALSO, UH, OR THE APPLICANT ALSO, UM, SEVEN MONTHS PREGNANT AND ALL WALKED AROUND, UM, TO OTHER NEIGHBORS TO TRY TO DEMONSTRATE AND TO NOTIFY THEM ABOUT THE FENCE.
UM, AND ALSO CLARIFY THAT, UM, TO GET CONFIRMATION THAT THE, THAT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT, YOU KNOW, CAUSE ANY, UM, ADVERSE EFFECTS TO ANY NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
AND WE APOLOGIZE TO THE BOARD.
UH, WE ACTUALLY SUBMITTED A PETITION, UH, THAT WAS SIGNED BY FIVE DIFFERENT NEIGHBORS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, UM, WE'RE NOT SURE IF THAT GOT TO THE APPROPRIATE STAFF MEMBERS.
UM, I'M GONNA, UH, THIS DOESN'T COUNT, I GET YOUR TIME.
UH, YEAH, WE RECEIVED, UM, PETITION TO THE CITY OF DALLAS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BY THE NEIGHBORS OF 96 70 AND LINBROOK.
SO WE JUST WANTED TO NOT NOTE THAT, UM, UH, THAT THE APPLICANT HAS, UM, WALKED AROUND TO TRY TO PROVIDE, UM, YOU KNOW, AND TO GET CONFIRMATION THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULDN'T PROVIDE ANY TYPE OF, UM, ADVERSE EFFECTS TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
UM, SO THAT'S WHAT'S LED US TO THIS, UM, TO THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THE REQUEST.
AND THAT'S WHY THE REQUEST FROM A SIX FOOT FENCE TO AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE, UM, IS, IS BEING, UH, REQUESTED OR RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED AT THIS TIME.
SO I WILL, UH, RESPECTFULLY, UH, SEE THE REMAINDER OF MY TIME UNLESS THERE ARE ANY OTHER OUTSTANDING, UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD AND HAPPY TO HAND IT OVER TO THE APPLICANT OR HOWEVER YOU FEEL IS APPROPRIATE, MR. CHAIR.
UM, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM MRS. ISLAN LIT AND THEN YOU'LL BE, THERE'LL BE SOME QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US TODAY.
UM, AS NICK MENTIONED, I'M SEVEN MONTHS PREGNANT.
UM, WE'RE EXPECTING OUR FIRST CHILD IN AUGUST.
BUT, UM, THE CONTINUOUS, UH, BREAK-INS AS AFORE MENTIONED, AND, UM, JUST THE FACT THAT I DO WORK FROM HOME AND AM BY MYSELF MOST OF THE DAY HAS CAUSED A LITTLE BIT OF STRESS AND ANXIETY.
UM, IN, IN MY DAY TO DAY I WOULD BE THERE WITH YOU IN PERSON, BUT WE, I GET A LITTLE NERVOUS JUST LEAVING THE HOUSE THESE DAYS, UM, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SO MANY REPEATED ATTEMPTS.
UM, WE HAVE FILED MANY, UM, POLICE REPORTS AS WELL JUST TO DOCUMENT.
AND THE LAKE HIGHLANDS POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN SO GRACIOUS TO PROVIDE US WITH EXTRA PATROL IN THE MEANTIME.
BUT WE FEEL THAT THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT OF THE FENCE REPLACED EXACTLY IN THE PHYSICAL LOCATION WHERE IT IS RIGHT NOW, WOULD PROVIDE US WITH A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA SECURITY AND, UM, PRIVACY, ESPECIALLY WITH THE FOOT TRAFFIC IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
WHAT QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE FROM
[00:25:01]
THE BOARD FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, MR. HOVIS, I THINK YOU HAD ASKED TO SEE THIS, SO DID YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? UM, SOME OF, SOME OF MY CONCERNS WERE ADDRESSED BY THEIR REMARKS.UM, I GUESS I WOULD JUST REITERATE THAT, UM, THE CIRCUMSTANCES AS THEY'RE BEING DESCRIBED TO US REGARDING THE SPECIFIC, UM, APPLICANT, OUR DECISIONS ARE RELATING TO THE PROPERTY AND NOT THE APPLICANT, THE SPECIFIC SITUATION OF THE APPLICANT, UH, THEMSELVES.
IS THAT CORRECT, MR. CHAIRMAN? ANYTHING ELSE, SIR? WELL, I ENDED UP WITH A QUESTION TO YOU.
UM, IS IT CORRECT THAT THE DECISION WE'RE MAKING RELATES NOT TO THE SPECIFIC SITUATION OF THE APPLICANT, BUT TO THE PROPERTY? THAT IS CORRECT.
OUR STANDARD, AND MY BOARD, OUR BOARD ATTORNEY WILL CONFIRM THIS, OUR STANDARD IS THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS REQUESTED, WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, UH, RESPECTFULLY TO EVERYONE INVOLVED.
IT, IT DOES NOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF SECURITY, OF TRAFFIC OF, UH, STREETS.
IT SPECIFICALLY GOES TO THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
SO TO YOUR QUESTION, YES, IT RELATES TO THE IMPACT OF THIS PROPOSED EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG WALNUT HILL AND HOW THAT IMPACT WILL THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS.
SO MY, SO MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION THEN TO THE APPLICANT IS, WHAT ABOUT THE FENCE THAT YOU'RE BUILDING OTHER THAN THE HEIGHT IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT DEFENDANT IN THE FENCE DOES THERE CURRENTLY? THAT'S, THAT IS, UM, GOING TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE YOU DESCRIBED? UH, YES, SIR.
UM, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT, THAT PROBLEM.
SO, UH, OR ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
BUT THE, THE REASON THAT WE BELIEVE THAT THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE IS GONNA ADDRESS, UH, THE SECURITY ISSUE IS THAT, AS NOTED IN THE APPLICATION, UM, THE FENCE WILL BE A BOARD ON BOARD FENCE.
UM, SO THE FENCE WILL, UM, IN TERMS OF A SEE-THROUGH PIECE, WILL, WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL LEVEL OF SECURITY BECAUSE, UM, INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE LOOKING INTO THE PROPERTY WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN.
AND, UM, PREVIOUSLY, LIKE I WAS MENTIONING EARLIER, WE'VE HAD INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE, UH, THE APPLICANT'S HAD INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE RIPPED OPEN, UH, A FENCE POST TO TRY TO PEER INSIDE TO SEE IF THE APPLICANT IS WORKING INSIDE OF THE HOUSE.
UM, SO WE DO FEEL THAT THE BOARD ON BOARD, UH, WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL LEVEL OF, UM, SECURITY.
BUT IN ADDITION TO THAT, UM, THE HEIGHT LEVEL OF THE FENCE BEING SIX, BEING EIGHT FOOT RATHER THAN SIX FOOT WOULD LIKELY MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, UH, DIFFICULT FOR ANYONE TO TRY TO GRAB THE TOP OF THE FENCE OR TO TRY TO RIP IT DOWN.
UM, WE JUST FEEL THAT IT, IT MAY PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A DETERRENT FROM ANYONE TRYING TO GET ON TOP OF THE FENCE OR LOOK OVER JUST DUE TO THE, THE EXTRA TWO FEET OF HEIGHT.
UM, BUT CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND AND RESPECT, UH, THE BOARD'S COMMENTS WITH RESPECT TO THE STANDARD AND VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT.
UH, WE JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE THE EXTRA LEVEL OF CLARITY IN TERMS OF WHY WE WERE SUBMITTING THE REQUEST.
UM, JUST BECAUSE TO I THINK THE POINT THAT EVERYONE I THINK IS MAKING RIGHT, YOU KNOW, WHY WOULDN'T THE SIX FOOT FENCE BE SUFFICIENT? AND WE JUST WANTED TO TRY TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA DETAIL IN TERMS OF WHY, UH, THE SIX FOOT FOOT, SIX FOOT FENCE ISN'T CURRENTLY SUFFICIENT.
UM, AND THEN ALSO TRY TO PROVIDE, UM, A A LITTLE BIT ADDITIONAL, ADDITIONAL DETAIL IN TERMS OF, UM, HOW THE APPLICANT HAS REACHED OUT TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS TO ADDRESS HOW, UH, THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE PROPERTY.
AND TO CONFIRM, JUST TO ADD ON TO THAT, UM, ALL OF THE SIGNATURES ARE THE HOUSES THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY AROUND US.
SO IT'S ANYONE WHO WOULD BE DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THE NEW STRUCTURE.
SO WE HAVE ACROSS THE STREET ON BOTH SIDES AS WELL AS NEXT DOOR, UM, AND BEHIND OUR HOUSE.
SO WE'VE, WE'VE GATHERED SIGNATURES FROM OUR IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS AND EVERYONE'S IN SUPPORT.
SO IF I COULD ASK, SINCE I'M NOT THERE TO SEE IT, IS WHAT'S IN THE ENVELOPE THAT YOU PASSED AROUND MR. CHAIRMAN? UH, A PETITION OF SORTS SIGNED BY MULTIPLE PEOPLE? YES, I HAVE IT IN MY POSSESSION.
IT'S SIGNED BY, UM, FOUR SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND THEN THERE'S A SEPARATE EMAIL AND THE GRAPHIC OF THAT CHARTED.
SO I USUALLY LIKE TO CHART 'EM.
IS THAT MICHAEL? YOU CAN SEE THE YESES AND NOS.
[00:30:01]
SO JUST FOR THE PUBLIC, UH, WE, THE PER STATE STATUTE, WE SEND A LETTER TO PROPERTY OWNERS 200 FEET FROM EVERY PROPERTY PENDING AND GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO RESPOND.IN ADDITION, IF YOU SEND AN EMAIL TO THE BDA REPLY EMAIL, IS THAT WHAT IT IS? EMAIL REPLY.
WE CIRCULATE IT AMONGST THE BOARD AND I JUST SIMPLY PUT IT ON A CHART SYSTEM IN ORDER TO SEE WHAT, HOW IT IMPACTS THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS.
THAT'S WHAT MR. HAVIS WAS ASKING FROM.
OTHER QUESTIONS, JOHN? I'M, I'M DONE.
THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 2 4 5 DASH 0 6 3 ON APPLICATION OF RACHEL, I, I'M SORRY, ISLAN LIT GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH FENCE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT FOR FENCES CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH HEIGHT AND FENCE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED IN THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
MS. DAVIS HAS MOVED TO GRANT THE REQUEST IN 2 4 5 0 6 3.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
MS. MS. HAYDEN HAS SECONDED THE MOTION DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
FIRST TO MS. DAVIS, THEN TO MS. HAYDEN.
I I APPRECIATE THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION THAT YOU PROVIDED REGARDING, UM, WHAT, WHAT IS MOTIVATING YOU TO MAKE THIS CHANGE.
I ALSO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU WENT TO YOUR NEIGHBORS TO GET SUPPORT THAT'S COMPELLING.
SO BASED ON THAT EVIDENCE, BASED ON THE LOCATION OF THIS SITE, I REALLY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS IS GOING TO ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, WHICH IS WHY I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
MS. HAYDEN, I HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO ADD.
I AGREE WITH MS. MS. DAVIS' COMMENTS.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION HEARING? NO DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE.
MOTION TO GRANT PASSES FIVE TO ZERO IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 4 5 0 6 3.
THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO.
GRANT YOUR REQUEST, YOU'LL GET A DECISION LETTER FROM OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR IN THE NEXT COUPLE DAYS.
THANK YOU FOR WE APPRECIATE IT.
OKAY, THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS 2 4 5 0 6 8.
HOLD ON ONE SECOND, LET ME GET THIS.
THIS IS AT 2 7 0 6 LEN WAY STREET.
2 7 0 6 LEN WAY STREET IS THE APPLICANT HERE.
IT'S, IT'S PART OF THE PRESENT.
IT'S PART OF THE, IT'S PART OF THE TEST WE DO HERE AT CITY HALL FOR OUR CITIZENS.
PAY YOUR TAXES AND PUSH THE BUTTON.
UH, IF YOU WOULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN OUR BOARD SECRETARY WILL SWEAR YOU IN.
ADDRESS 2 7 0 6 LYNN WADE STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 5.
MS. BOARD, SECRETARY, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
UH, MS. WILLIAMS, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? NO, THE SPEAKERS REGISTER, SIR.
PROCEED YOU TAKE, WHAT TIME YOU, THE STANDARD IS FIVE MINUTES PLUS OR MINUS WHATEVER'S NECESSARY.
UH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HEARD SOME OF THE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS IN THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING.
WELL THEN YOU'RE DULY, DULY INFORMED.
FIRST AND FOREMOST, UH, ALLOW ME TO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT MY CASE.
UH, WE HAVE BEEN STRUGGLING WITH THIS SINCE JULY OF 2024.
IT STARTED IN OTHER CHAMBERS WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND WE HAVE MADE OUR WAY HERE, UH, WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTERS REGARDING A PARKING VARIANCE.
UH, AS OF LATE, WE HAVE COME TO, UM, FIND THAT THERE IS NOT A REQUIRED PARKING FOR THIS COMMUNITY, BUT WE HAVE IN OUR PLANS AN 18 FOUR BY 21 PARKING IN THE FRONT OF THE
[00:35:01]
HOUSE, UH, ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS BETWEEN THE FRONT OF THE HOME AND THE SIDEWALK.IT'S PARKING FOR TWO VEHICLES.
WE, WE WERE FIRST, UH, CHALLENGED WITH A TWO CAR GARAGE ON A SET OF PLANS.
WE CHANGED THAT TO A CARPORT, UH, THAT WASN'T ALLOWED.
SO WE CHANGED THAT TO A GAME ROOM.
AND NOW WE ARE, UH, WE HAVE PARKING FOR TWO VEHICLES IN THE FRONT OF THE HOME.
THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOME IS 2,106 SQUARE FEET.
2001 ZERO SIX IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOME.
AND I KNOW YOU'VE SAID THE DIMENSIONS OF THE PARKING A A COUPLE TIMES.
IT'S WHAT BY WHAT, 18 FOUR WIDE BY 21 DEEP, WHICH BRINGS US TO THE FRONT EDGE OF THE SIDEWALK.
18 FEET WIDE AND 21 FEET DEEP.
AND I THINK WE HEARD THIS MORNING, OH, MR. THOMPSON, WHAT WAS THE, WHAT'S THE STANDARD ON, ON CAR NINE BY 18? SAY NINE BY 18.
SO NINE BY 18 OR 18 BY 21 CAN FIT TWO NINE BY EIGHTEENS.
FOUR INCHES ON THE SIDE AND THREE FEET IN DEPTH.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I THOUGHT.
UH, THAT, THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION, SIR.
I'M JUST READ, UH, THE BOARD THAT WOULD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME REGARDING ANY OTHER PORTION OF PROPERTY THAT AFFECTS THE PARK.
UH, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
I'VE GOT MS. HAYDEN AND THEN MS. DAVIS.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE SORT OF CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS, UH, TWO YEAR PERIOD, I GUESS, WHERE YOU HAVE THIS HISTORIC, UM, DESIGNATION COMING AND SO YOU'RE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH THAT WITH YOUR HOUSE PLANS.
BUT THEN, AND, AND THEY DON'T REQUIRE PARKING, BUT THEN YOU STILL HAVE TO REQUIRE, HAVE TO HAVE PARKING IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY CODE.
SO NOW YOU'RE ASKING FOR THIS VARIANCE SO YOU CAN PROVIDE THE PARKING EVEN THOUGH THE NEW HISTORIC DISTRICT WON'T NECESSARILY REQUIRE IT.
HOW MANY PEOPLE WILL BE LIVING AT THE HOUSE? THREE.
AND, UH, UH, ONE OF THEM A CHILD.
ARE THEY ALL ADULTS WHO DRIVE ONE CHILD? TWO ADULTS.
AND HOW OLD'S THE CHILD? FOUR.
SO THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE DRIVING ANYTIME SOON.
AND YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU TRIED TO GET A GARAGE.
WHAT, BUT YOU WERE NOT ALLOWED TO DO A CARPORT.
WHAT HAPPENED? COULD YOU JUST GIVE US A, JUST A QUICK SUMMARY OF WHY YOU WERE NOT ABLE TO PUT IN A GARAGE? WOW.
I, UH, WE HAD THE FIRST SET OF DRAWINGS IN AUGUST OF 2024 WAS A TWO CAR GARAGE ENCLOSED, NO OTHER HOME IN THAT COMMUNITY HAD A GARAGE.
WE WENT TO A CARPORT AND OPENED OPEN.
WHO DENIED YOU THE PERMITTING DEPARTMENT? NO, WE WERE DENIED AT, UM, THE, HIS, I WOULD THINK IT'S THE, UH, DR. DUNN, DR.
THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DENIED THE, DENIED THE, THE ENCLOSED GARAGE.
AND THEN WE WENT TO A OPEN CARPORT AND THEN WE WERE DENIED THE OPEN CARPORT AS WELL.
UH, GUYS, PUT IT ON THE RECORD 'CAUSE I WANT TO HEAR IT.
SO I FIND THAT STRANGE, BUT I DON'T KNOW, I'M, YOU KNOW, THEY WERE DENIED BY A STAFFER.
IS THAT WHAT THAT IS? OR IS THAT A BROADER COMMISSION? YES, I SPOKE DIRECTLY WITH HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
UM, THAT HOUSES IN THE SAME OFFICE AS WE DO.
UM, AND THAT'S HOW I'M AWARE OF THE PROCESS, UM, WITH THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
AND SO, UH, THE COMMUNITY WANTED A CERTAIN DESIGN.
THERE ARE DESIGN CRITERIA THAT THEY HAD TO MEET FOR BEING IN THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT OR FUTURE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, THEY HAD TO HAVE A PORCH ON THE FRONT.
UH, THEY DIDN'T WANT FRONTAL GARAGES.
IF THERE WAS TO BE A GARAGE ON THE SITE, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE NEAR THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND DETACHED.
UM, SO THOSE WERE SOME OF THE DESIGN CRITERIA, UH, THAT THEY HAD TO COME BEFORE.
[00:40:01]
SO YES, THE INITIAL TWO CAR GARAGE WAS DENIED AND THE CARPORT.SO, BUT I, I GET YOU THAT MAKES SENSE, BUT NOT SENSE.
SO HISTORIC PRESERVATION HAS OR PERMITTING DOES THAT NO HISTORIC PRESERVATION HAS TO APPROVE AND YOU RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS, I'VE HEARD OF THAT BEFORE.
BEFORE YOU CAN GO, BEFORE PERMIT, YOU HAVE TO RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FROM HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
SO THEY MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING MEETS THE TIME PERIOD, THE DESIGN CRITERIA, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, BEFORE EVEN COMING TO US FOR PERMITTING.
SO I'M GONNA COME BACK TO A COUPLE QUESTIONS HERE.
MY BOARD ATTORNEY WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY IN MR. THOMPSON'S COMMENTS.
UM, HIS, IT'S HIS HISTORIC PRESERVATION THAT'S ISSUING IT, BUT IT'S COMING THROUGH THE, UH, PROCESS OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
SO IT'S ACTUALLY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION THAT'S ISSUING THAT, UH, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
AND SO THE, THE STAFFER IS SAYING THAT ON BEHALF OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OR AT THE DIRECTION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION UPON DIRECTION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION THAT I, THAT I'LL LISTEN TO, I GET NERVOUS IF JUST THE STAFFER ALONE IS DOING THAT.
SO THE LANDMARK ALONE, LANDMARK COMMISSION SAID THAT YES, WE WENT THROUGH THREE MEETINGS.
THREE MEETINGS AND SEVEN PLANS LAID.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE WEAR ME OUT SEVEN DESIGN PLANS.
MS. HAYDEN, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION ON A FOLLOW UP OR MS. DAVIS? OKAY.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WITH THAT PERSON IS SAYING THAT YOU NEEDED THIS OR NOT, AND THAT PROHIBIT OR REQUIRED THE PORCH, NOT THE GARAGE UNLESS IT WAS DETACHED IN THE BACK.
AND I, I JUST ONLY GAVE A PORTRAIT AS ONE EXAMPLE, BUT YES, THE DESIGN CRITERIA HAD TO BE MET PRIOR TO RECEIVING THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
OKAY, MR. NARY, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN.
YEAH, I'M LOOKING RIGHT NOW AT, UH, PAGE ONE 60, WHICH IS A CONTEXTUAL SITE PLAN FOR WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE BLOCK.
UM, AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS PRESENTED IN OUR BRIEFING EARLIER WAS THAT, UH, UNIT 27 16, UH, HAS WAS ABLE TO GET A FRONT ENTRY GARAGE BECAUSE THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED BEFORE THE HISTORICAL MORATORIUM MONTH, ONE MONTH BEFORE
UM, CAN YOU CLARIFY FOR ME, MR. LIVINGSTON? UM, DOES, UH, MOHAMMAD HAMM THE OWNER FOR 27 0 6, DOES HE ALSO OWN THIS IN THESE OTHER UNITS ON THE BLOCK, OR IS NO.
'CAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT IT APPEARS LIKE.
IT'S LIKE A ONE SINGLE DEVELOPER IS PLANNING TO REDO THE WHOLE STREET.
AND I JUST WANTED A CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
MS. DAVIS, DO YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE BACK OF YOUR HOUSE? IS THERE AN ALLEY OR ANYTHING BACK THERE? NO ACCESS IT.
THE PROPERTY, UH, IS ADJOINED BY NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AROUND THE ENTIRE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S NO ACCESS TO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY AT ALL.
SO YOU CAN'T, THERE'S NO WAY TO PUT A GARAGE IN THE BACK? NO.
AND YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED A GARAGE OR A CARPORT? NO.
SO IT'S EITHER DO THIS OR JUST HAVE GRASS THERE.
I'M GONNA BE DELICATE, BUT FORTHRIGHT AND VERY PEOPLE, FEW PEOPLE SAY I'M DELICATE
CARS IN THE STREET HOUSES IN VARIOUS STATE OF CONDITIONS.
SO I AM PULLING MY HAIR OUT TO THINK WHY PUT THESE RESTRICTIONS ON SOMEONE THAT POTENTIALLY WANTS TO BUILD NEW, WHICH INCREASES VALUE AND HELP YOUR, YOU'RE SMILING.
I I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT NOW WE DON'T MAKE POLICY.
OUR JOB IS TO TAKE WHAT THE CODE SAYS AND WE HAVE THREE CRITERIA OF WHICH I'M GONNA READ INTO THE RECORD AGAIN, BUT I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND.
IT'S A CHALLENGING NEIGHBORHOOD, CHALLENGED NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THEN ALL THESE RESTRICTIONS.
SO WITH THESE CHALLENGES, YOU'RE STILL WANTING TO BUILD HERE? WELL, WE'VE ALREADY SUNK AND LOST NEARLY 60 GRAND JUST WITH THESE MEETINGS.
SO WE, WE CASE WE ARE GOING TO BILL THERE CASE, LIKE I SAID, THANK YOU.
LIKE I SAID, I WANT TO BE DELICATE.
I DON'T, I DON'T, I'M NOT BEING DISMISSIVE OR DEMEANING.
I'M JUST SAYING WE HAVE A CHALLENGED NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THE STANDARD HAS BEEN CREATED HERE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS HERE.
AND I GUESS AS A NEW PERSON, YOU'RE EXPECTED TO BE UP HERE AND THE ENT THE EVENTUALLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL GRAVITATE TO HERE.
THEY'RE IN THE NEIGHBORING, UH, UH, BLOCKS WITHIN ONE CITY BLOCK.
THERE'S NEW MODERN STYLE HOMES.
WELL, OKAY, WE, I, I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING THAT.
ALL I'M JUST SAYING IS THAT I, I I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND.
[00:45:01]
TO ZERO IN ON WAS IT A STAFFER OR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WHO MADE THIS DESIGNATION AND THAT SORT OF THING.AND IN MY BRAIN, WHEN I HEAR LANDMARK AND HISTORIC, I THINK WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE, HIS HISTORIC STRUCTURES OR AREA, NEIGHBORHOOD.
OUR PURVIEW IS TO DECIDE WHETHER THE OFF STREET PARKING, UM, VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST IS PIECE OF RESTRICTIVE AREA, SHAPE OR SLOPE.
AND NOT GRANTED TO RELIEVE SELF CREATED HARDSHIP.
SO HOW DO I ONE MEMBER, HOW DO WE AS A BOARD MEASURE NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST? WELL, I CAN HAVE AN OPINION.
NO ONE SAID ANYTHING IN OPPOSITION ACCORDING TO WHAT WE WERE TOLD BY OUR STAFF.
36 PEOPLE WERE NOTIFIED, ZERO RESPONDED.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW TO MEASURE NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST OTHER THAN THAT YOU'RE PROVIDING POTENTIALLY A POSITIVE INCREASE IN INVESTMENT IN A STRUGGLING COMMUNITY.
AND THE STRUGGLING IS NOT NEGATIVE, IT'S JUST WHAT IT SEEMS TO BE RESTRICTIVE AREA, SHAPE, OR SLOPE.
IS YOUR LOT RESTRICTIVE IN AREA, SHAPE OR SLOPE? I DON'T THINK SO EITHER.
SO I'M SCRATCHING MY HEAD ON THAT ONE.
UH, NOT GRANTEDLY FOR SELF-CREATED A PERSONAL HARDSHIP.
IT SEEMS LIKE THE REQUIREMENTS HERE ARE GIVING YOU THE HARDSHIP, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SELF-CREATED.
THAT'S THIS LANDMARK COMMISSION CREATION.
BUT I'LL STOP TALKING THERE 'CAUSE I'LL GET IN TROUBLE.
BUT YOU'RE STILL HERE AND YOU'RE, AND YOU'RE STANDING TALL AND WITH A SMILE AND, AND YOU INEVITABLY WILL, IF THIS PASSES AND YOU MOVE FORWARD, WE'LL INJECT NEW LIFE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'M TRYING TO BE POSITIVE, BUT IT'S A CHALLENGED NEIGHBORHOOD FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN.
SO, UM, THAT'S MY QUICK ANALYSIS.
I DON'T KNOW, DO YOU WANNA RESPOND TO THAT AT ALL OR YOU DON'T HAVE TO, OR YOU CAN JUST BRIEFLY.
WE'VE, UH, WE'VE MET EVERY STANDARD THAT HAS BEEN ASKED OF US, UH, FOR THE PAST 10 MONTHS.
AND, UH, WELL, YOU'RE A BETTER READY TO BUILD HOUSE.
YOU'RE A THAN ME BECAUSE I DON'T OKAY.
QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. NERI? NOT, NOT SO MUCH A A QUESTION MORE, MORE OF A STATEMENT OR OBSERVATION.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MOTIVATION IS BEHIND THE, UM, THE PROPOSED HISTORICAL DESIGNATION, LANDMARK, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
BUT WHAT I SEE POTENTIALLY HAPPENING IS ANOTHER NORTH PARK ELM THICKET WITHOUT THESE KIND OF DESIGNATIONS PUT IN.
SO THAT MAY BE PART OF THE MOTIVATION.
UH, AND JUST, JUST SOMETHING IN MY MIND IS ONE, ONE BOARD MEMBER.
SO, UM, I DO THINK THAT THE APPLICANT IS ACTED IN GOOD FAITH GIVEN THE RESTRICTIONS AND THE, THE FREEZE OR MORATORIUM THAT'S PENDING BEFORE THEM.
UM, SO I'M INCLINED TO, TO BE SUPPORTIVE.
OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MS. HAYDEN OR MR. NER? MS. HAYDEN.
I WAS, I WAS MAKING SURE WE WERE ON 0 6 8.
UM, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 6 8 ON APPLICATION OF MOHAMMAD DURHAM RUM GRANT, THE VARIANCE TO OFF STREET, OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS BEING A SETBACK OF 20 FEET REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT.
I FURTHER, UH, MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE WITH THE LATE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS AS REQUIRED IN THE MATTER BDA 2 4 5 6 8.
MS. HAYDEN HAS MOVED TO GRANT.
DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION, MS. HAYDEN? UM, SO, UH, THE CRITERIA THAT WE LOOK AT, ONE OF THOSE IS THAT IT'S NOT A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOU
IT'S NOT EVEN ACTUALLY IN PLACE YET, BUT YOU STILL HAD TO COMPLY.
SO I DON'T THINK IT WAS A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP.
I DO THINK THAT THE LOT SIZE, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY VARY ON THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO PUT A REAR ENTRY GARAGE WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE AN ALLEY OR AN ALLEY ACCESS.
[00:50:01]
I, THE FACT THAT YOU DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY AND WE DIDN'T SEE ANY LETTERS OF OPPOSITION OR ANY INDICATION THAT THERE WAS ANY OPPOSITION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY IMPROVING, THE NEIGHBORHOOD TELLS ME THAT IT'S NOT, UM, CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST.MR. NRI, UM, I COMPLETELY, UH, CONCUR WITH MS. HAYDEN'S COMMENTS.
I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER TO ADD.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO GRANT 2 4 5 0 6 8 THE BOARD'S.
MR. HOVIS, WAS THAT A QUESTION OR NO? OH, OKAY.
THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE.
THE MOTION IS TO GRANT 2 4 5 0 6 8.
MOTION TO GRANT PASSES FIVE TO ZERO IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 4 5 0 6 8.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTS YOUR REQUEST, UH, UNANIMOUSLY BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO.
YOU'LL GET A LETTER OF DESIGNATE, UH, DECISION LETTER FROM OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR WITHIN A COUPLE DAYS.
NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA THAT COMPLETES OUR, UH, INDIVIDUAL AND UNCONTESTED.
WE NOW HAVE FOUR REMAINING CASES.
THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS BDA 2 4 5 0 4 7.
JUST FOR THE RECORD, 2 4 5 0 7 WAS BRIEF THIS MORNING.
SO WE'LL GO TO THE PUBLIC HEARING AFTER WE COMPLETE 2 4 5 0 4 7 FOR 8 4 9 AND FIVE ZERO.
WE'RE NOT BRIEFED THIS MORNING, SO WE WILL DO THE BRIEFING FOR FOUR NINE, EXCUSE ME, FOR 4 8 4 9, AND FIVE ZERO PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO I'M JUST GETTING A LITTLE BIT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHAT'S HEADED IN, IN OUR DIRECTION.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE FOR BDA 2 4 5 0 4 7 PLEASE COME FORWARD.
IF YOU WOULD GIVE US, OH, HE'S GONNA LOWER THE DEAL.
ASK OUR LAST GUY WAS TOWERING
THAT'S A COMPLIMENT, NOT A YEAH, IT WAS A TOWER.
ALRIGHT, NOW YOU GOT STATURE THERE MR. VINCENT.
WANNA MAKE SURE YOU HEAR ME? GIVE US YOUR, YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND THEN OUR UM, HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
MS. BOARD SECRETARY, WHO ALL DO WE HAVE, UH, REGISTERED TO SPEAK ON? 2 4 5 0 4 7? UM, WE HAVE, UH, THREE IN SUPPORT AND TWO IN OPPOSITION.
UH, ARE THE THREE IN SUPPORT IN THE CHAMBERS OR ONLINE? DO WE HAVE ANYONE ONLINE OR THEY'RE ALL IN THE CHAMBERS? THEY'RE ALL ALL IN CHAMBERS.
THREE IN SUPPORT AND TWO OPPOSITION.
UM, THE WAY WE'RE GONNA GO ABOUT THIS IS THE APPLICANT WILL SPEAK FIRST, THEN ANYONE IN SUPPORT.
THEN WE'LL HEAR FROM THE OPPOSITION.
OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE SAY THAT THE APPLICANT SPEAKS ANYONE IN SPORTS SPEAKS, ANYONE IN OPPOSITION SPEAKS ALL THE SAME TIME FREQUENCY AND THEN THE APPLICANT GETS A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
THAT IS WHAT OUR CURRENT RULES SPECIFY.
I WILL TELL EVERYONE I'M GONNA GIVE AMPLE TIME FOR EVERYONE, BUT I'M GONNA TRY TO BE CONSISTENT.
SO IF I GIVE THE APPLICANT 10 MINUTES OF TIME, THAT MEANS ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING GETS THAT 10 MINUTE TIME OTHER THAN THE REBUTTAL TIME THAT IS RESERVED FOR THE APPLICANT.
BUT EVERYONE GETS AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF TIME.
I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO EVER FEEL LIKE THEY DIDN'T GET THEIR, THEIR THEIR TIME.
WE HAVE THAT FIVE RULE AND FIVE MINUTE RULE IN THERE THAT GIVES ALL THIS POWER TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER.
WE WANT TO BE FAIR TO EVERYONE.
UH, DO YOU WANT TO SWEAR EVERYONE IN ONE TIME? WHY DON'T WE DO THAT MARY, WE'LL SWEAR WHO ALL IS SPEAKING TODAY ON THIS CASE.
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STAND UP AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND GO AHEAD.
MARY, DO YOU ALL SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO.
UM, IF YOU WOULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
UM, THIS CASE WAS HOLD HELD OVER AT THE LAST MEETING AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
UM, SO WE'LL PROCEED WITH YOU, SIR.
UH, MY NAME IS JONATHAN VINCENT, 2323 ROSS AVENUE HERE REPRESENTING DDD PORTFOLIO HOLDINGS, LLC.
AND I HAVE WITH ME, UH, LLOYD DENMAN, WHO IS OUR ENGINEER ON THE CASE.
UM, AND ALSO MR. ADAM HAMMOCK, WHO IS A SENIOR EXECUTIVE WITH THE PARENT COMPANY, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER.
SO, UH, WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR
[00:55:01]
AGAIN IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY.I AM GONNA TRY TO BE AS RESPECTFUL AS POSSIBLE OF YOUR TIME.
UH, WE HAVE UPDATED OUR REQUEST, UH, THAT WAS THE SUBJECT OF THE MAY 9TH LETTER THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET.
WE HAVE THAT AND WE DISCUSSED IT THIS MORNING, CORRECT? UH, NEXT LINE PLEASE.
SO WHAT WE'VE DONE THERE, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS JUST TO UPDATE EVERYONE.
UM, IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION CORRECTLY THAT FOUR OF THE SPACES WE WERE COUNTING ACTUALLY STRADDLED A PROPERTY LINE.
UM, WHICH, YOU KNOW, PER CODE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, THAT MEANS THAT BASICALLY NOBODY GETS TO COUNT 'EM, NEITHER US NOR THE PERSON ON THE OTHER SIDE.
SO WE REWORKED OUR NUMBERS, UM, THAT PROVIDES FOR 13 SPACES ON SITE, WHICH WE HAVE.
UM, WE WERE ORIGINALLY ASKING FOR JUST TO BE ABLE TO USE THE 17.
WHAT WERE THEN WE THOUGHT WERE 17 SPACES ON SITE, UM, OUT OF AN OTHERWISE REQUIRED 32.
SO WHAT WE'VE DONE NOW IS WE'RE FACED WITH HAVING 13 ON SITE.
UM, AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE BUILDING A NEW PARKING LOT ON THE OTHER SIDE, UH, CLOSE TO THE STEMMONS FRONTAGE ROAD.
UM, AND WE HAVE AGREED TO A CONDITION OFFER A CONDITION THAT WE WOULD DEVOTE 10 OF THOSE SPACES IN THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED LOT TO REMOTE PARKING TO SERVE THIS SITE.
SO WHAT THAT ENDS UP BEING IS INSTEAD OF, UM, WHAT WE THOUGHT WERE 17 OUT OF THIR 32, WE'RE NOW PROVIDING 23 OUT OF 32 THAT CHANGES OUR PERCENTAGE NUMBER FROM, UH, WHAT WAS A 46.8% REDUCTION TO 28.1%.
SO, YOU KNOW, ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS, UM, THAT'S A, THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION.
SO WE THINK THIS IS A, A BETTER REQUEST.
WE, WE'VE TRIED TO RESPOND TO THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED LAST TIME.
YOU, AS, AS YOU KNOW, WE DISCUSSED THIS EXTENSIVELY LAST TIME.
WE THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF MITIGATING FACTORS HERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, OFFICE, SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE AND RESTAURANT, ESPECIALLY A HIGHER END RESTAURANT ARE, ARE VERY DIFFERENT PEAK OPERATING TIMES.
WE HAVE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA THAT WE CAN USE.
UM, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A GOOD DISCUSSION THIS MORNING, UM, IN BRIEFING, WHICH I'LL COME BACK TO ABOUT THE VERY RECENT PARKING REFORM PASSED BY THE COUNCIL.
UM, AND I THINK THAT'S A RECOGNITION ON, ON SORT OF A HIGH LEVEL FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT THAT PARKING DEMAND IS, WE LIVE IN A MUCH DIFFERENT WORLD OF PARKING DEMAND THAN WE DID 30 YEARS AGO WHEN A LOT OF THESE ORDINANCES WERE WRITTEN OR EVEN GOING BACK TO 1965 WHEN A LOT OF THESE PARKING RATIOS WERE ADOPTED INTO WHAT BECAME CHAPTER 51.
UM, SO WE, WE THINK THIS MAKES A LOT OF SENSE ON THAT BASIS.
UH, I'M NOT GONNA READ THIS TO YOU.
UH, PD 6 21 ALLOWS UP TO A 50% SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PARKING IF IT WOULD NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD OR INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
WE OBVIOUSLY THINK WE MEET THAT.
UM, ANOTHER AERIAL PHOTO OF THE SITE.
YOU DID A DAYTIME PHOTO, OBVIOUSLY.
UM, THERE ARE A LOT OF AVAILABLE PARKING SPACES THERE.
UH, REVISED SITE PLAN TO SHOW, UM, NOT COUNT THOSE FOUR SPACES KIND OF IN WHAT IS THE LOWER LEFT HAND CORNER IN THIS VIEW.
UH, ALSO A REVISED MIXED USE PARKING CHART, WHICH LLOYD HAS UPDATED TO SHOW THE 13 SPACES ON SITE.
UM, AGAIN, WE CONTROL A LOT OF PROPERTIES IN THE AREA, AS YOU KNOW.
UM, WE THINK WE MEET THE STANDARD FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
ALL THESE FACTORS, WHICH ARE YOU'RE WELL AWARE OF.
UM, AND AGAIN, THIS IS FROM THE, THE PARKING STUDY.
UM, YOU KNOW, JUST, I'M, I'M GONNA BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE BASICALLY THIS DOCUMENTS BY SOMEONE YOU KNOW, WHO IS AN ENGINEER WHO HAS DEALT WITH THESE THINGS FOR MANY YEARS, THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS WILL NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD, CREATE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS, PARKING PROBLEMS IN THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
I'M PARAPHRASING, OF COURSE, BUT YOU CAN READ IT FOR YOURSELF.
AND YOU HAVE THESE IN YOUR, IN YOUR PACKET, INCLUDING AN UPDATED ONE THAT LLOYD DID FOR 1626 AND 1616.
SO AGAIN, WE THINK WE MEET ALL THE CRITERIA.
UM, AGAIN, Y'ALL HAVE READ THIS PROBABLY SEVERAL TIMES.
I'M, I KNOW YOU, YOU'RE GOOD ABOUT DOING YOUR HOMEWORK.
THIS IS AN INTERESTING SITUATION.
UM, I WAS AROUND WHEN PD 6 21 WAS ADOPTED, AND I THINK IT'S WORKED REALLY WELL.
I THINK THE CITY DID EXTREMELY WELL WITH THIS.
YOU KNOW, THE SUCCESS OF THE DISTRICT TODAY MAKES IT VERY ATTRACTIVE.
IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A NICE PROBLEM TO HAVE.
THERE'S MAYBE MORE PARKING DEMAND AT NIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A SUCCESSFUL DISTRICT, YOU KNOW, IN A GREAT MIXED USE DISTRICT.
ALL KINDS OF USES, WHICH I THINK IS A GOOD THING.
UM, I'M KIND OF AN URBANIST MYSELF, SO I THINK THAT'S A BETTER ENVIRONMENT.
[01:00:01]
6 21 WAS ADOPTED, IT WAS FORWARD LOOKING IN THE SENSE THAT IT GRANTED, UM, PARKING, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE I WANNA USE THE WORD BRAKES, BUT IT, IT LOOSENED THE RULES IN SOME INSTANCES, LIKE BEING ABLE TO COUNT ON STREET PARKING, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT LOOSER, UH, REQUIREMENTS ON PARKING RATIOS, THINGS LIKE THAT.SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL THRUST OF PD 6 21.
SO I THINK FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD START FROM THERE.
SO, UH, JUST RECENTLY CITY COUNCIL PASSED PARKING REFORM AND END.
THERE WERE A LOT, WAS A LOT OF, UM, DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT IN THE MEDIA.
UM, AND I THINK IT'S A RECOGNITION THAT THE PARKING ENVIRONMENT HAS CHANGED CONSIDERABLY.
AND I'LL JUST QUOTE, YOU KNOW, OUR NEW CITY MANAGER, UM, BASICALLY SAYS THAT BY ALLOWING RIGHT SIZED PARKING, WE CAN ENCOURAGE A SAFE, WALKABLE CITY, UH, MORE HOMES, MORE ROOM FOR HOMES, MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR SMALL BUSINESSES, MORE RESPONSIBLE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
UM, SO THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT SIZING THE PARKING FOR TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT, TODAY'S WORLD IN TERMS OF PARKING DEMAND.
UM, YOU KNOW, I, I FULLY SUPPORT THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS KIND OF A COMPROMISE THE WAY THEY DID IT.
BUT AS WAS DISCUSSED IN THE BRIEFING, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE BETWEEN THE OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE, NOT HAVING ANY REQUIREMENTS AT ALL.
AND I'LL, I'LL COME BACK TO THE KIND OF A PROCESS QUESTION THAT WAS DISCUSSED.
UM, UNDER THESE PARKING REFORM AMENDMENTS, IF WE WERE IN A STRAIGHT ZONING DISTRICT UNDER CHAPTER 51 A, WE ARGUABLY WOULD HAVE LITTLE OR NO PARKING REQUIRED DEPENDING ON THE, THE DENSITY OF THE USES.
WHAT'S TRICKY ABOUT THIS, AND AGAIN, YOU ALL DISCUSSED THIS IN THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING PDS, THEY'RE WHAT, PROBABLY 1,150 PDS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS BY NOW.
UM, SOME OF THOSE PDS IN TERMS OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS FALL BACK ON THE UNDERLYING CODE.
THEY WILL SAY, YOU KNOW, PARKING MUST BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 51 A.
SOME PDS LIKE PD 1 93, LIKE PD 6 21, HAVE THEIR OWN RATIOS.
THOSE ARE SEPARATE ORDINANCES, AS YOU'RE WELL AWARE.
UM, TO CHANGE THOSE PD ORDINANCES TO AMEND THOSE, YOU WOULD HAVE TO SEND NOTICE TO ALL THE OWNERS IN THE DISTRICT.
AND SO, TYPICALLY, I'VE ALWAYS SEEN IT DONE THIS WAY.
I'D HAVE TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IF THERE'S ANY OTHER WAY TO, TO DEAL, TO DEAL WITH THAT.
I'M NOT SURE THERE IS TO AMEND AN EXISTING PD WITHOUT CALLING, YOU KNOW, AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THAT PD TO MAKE THOSE AMENDMENTS.
IN OTHER WORDS, YOU CAN AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE.
YOU CAN AMEND 51 A IN PARKING SPECIFIC, IF THE PD REFERS TO 51 A, SURE, YOU CAN USE THAT IF IT HAS ITS OWN RATIOS.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE MECHANISM IS TO CHANGE THAT.
SO THE REASON I'VE SPENT SO MUCH TIME DISCUSSING PARKING REFORM IS NOT BECAUSE I'M NOT ARGUING THAT IT SHOULD INCLUDE PD 6 21.
IN FACT, I DON'T THINK IT DOES.
AND IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS IN HERE, DOES NOT CHANGE EXISTING PDS THAT HAVE PARKING LOT RATIOS.
HOWEVER, I THINK IT'S A GREAT POLICY ARGUMENT.
IT'S A GREAT DEMONSTRATION OF WHAT THE CITY IN 2025 THINKS WE OUGHT TO BE DOING AS REGARDS PARKING.
OUR PROBLEM IS WE CAN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT.
WE HAVE TO COME BEFORE YOU TO ASK FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR, YOU KNOW, LOOK FOR SOME OTHER KIND OF, UM, SOLUTION TO THAT.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY.
I THINK WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR ALIGNS EXTREMELY WELL WITH THE CITY'S POLICY IN 2025.
IT'S JUST FROM A PROCESS STANDPOINT, WE CAN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT.
I MEAN, WE'RE OFFERING UP, YOU KNOW, WE OFFERING UP 10 ADDITIONAL REMOTE SPACES AS A FIRM CONDITION.
YOU KNOW, THAT INVOLVES, IF YOU WERE TO GRANT THIS WITH THAT CONDITION, IT WOULD BE ON US TO COMPLETE THE CITY'S FORM REMOTE PARKING AGREEMENT, GET THE REQUISITE SIGNATURES, TAKE IT TO THE CITY BUILDING INSPECTION, LOOKS AT IT, CITY ATTORNEY LOOKS AT IT.
IF THEY APPROVE IT, IT GETS FILED FOR RECORD.
IT'S SOMETHING THE CITY HAS TO APPROVE ANY AMENDMENT OR TERMINATION OF.
UM, SO WE'RE OFFERING THAT AS A CONDITION.
IN ADDITION, UH, I'VE SEEN PARKING REQUESTS COME BEFORE YOU ALL AND BE GRANTED WITH A REVIEW PERIOD WHERE YOU COME BACK IN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME AND Y'ALL TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT IT.
IS THIS WORKING OR IS IT NOT WORKING? WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO ABOUT THIS? WE'RE SO CONFIDENT WE THINK THIS WILL WORK, THAT WE'RE ALSO OFFERING THAT AS A CONDITION.
I PICKED 18 MONTHS IS WHAT SEEMED LIKE A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME.
BUT, UM, THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS, MAIN THINGS THAT WE HAVE COME UP WITH SINCE THE LAST TIME.
UM, THERE WAS ONE OTHER QUESTION THAT CAME UP ABOUT, UM, THE WALKING DISTANCE FROM THE NEW PARKING LOT TO BOTH THIS SIDE AND THE OTHER SIDE ON HIGHLINE.
[01:05:02]
THE, THERE'S AN OAK LAWN HIGHLINE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, AND THEY HAVE THE FUNDING AND EVEN THE PLANS TO INSTALL SIDEWALKS ON PROPERTIES THAT DO NOT HAVE SIDEWALKS.THE LOT THAT WE'RE BUILDING, UM, YOU'RE PROBABLY AWARE OF THIS, BUT THE, THE DEFAULT AT THE CITY IS THAT IF YOU'RE DOING NEW CONSTRUCTION, YOU HAVE TO INSTALL SIDEWALKS UNLESS YOU GET A WAIVER, UH, MEETING THE MINIMUM WIDTH, UM, WHATEVER IT IS IN THE PD OR OTHERWISE.
SO WE WILL BE INSTALLING SIDEWALKS AS THAT PARKING LOT IS COMPLETED.
UH, FURTHER, THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT CAN AND WILL ASK FOR THAT TO INSTALL SIDEWALKS TO COMPLETE THAT LOOP FROM A SIDEWALK STANDPOINT AROUND A HIGHLINE.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, AS A SIGNIFICANT PROPERTY OWNER IN THE DISTRICT, WE, WE HAVE SOME, UH, ABILITY TO GO TO THE PIT AND REQUEST THAT.
SO THAT WOULD BE OUR PLAN THERE AS WELL.
SO, UM, NOW ALL THAT BEING SAID,
UH, WE HAVE HAD A, A GOOD CONVERSATION WITH MR. CRAWLEY.
HE'S HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HIS CLIENT.
WE RECOGNIZE THAT SHE HAS SOME, UH, CONCERNS ABOUT THIS REQUEST.
UH, WE WANNA BE GOOD NEIGHBORS, WE WANNA BE RESPECTFUL, AND WE WANT TO TRY TO ALLAY HER CONCERNS.
SO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO, UM, NOW THAT I'VE MADE MY SPEECH, IS TO RESPECTFULLY ASK OF YOU ALL THAT YOU GIVE US ONE MORE MONTH ON THIS TO GO BACK AND TALK TO MS. CARSON AND SEE IF WE CAN ADDRESS HER CONCERNS, UM, AND WHAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO ABOUT THAT.
SO THAT WOULD BE OUR ASK TO YOU AT THIS POINT.
YOU DON'T WANNA DRAG THESE THINGS OUT INDEFINITELY.
UM, WE, UM, YOU KNOW, FAIRLY RECENTLY BECAME AWARE THAT SHE WAS SO CONCERNED ABOUT THIS, THAT SHE WAS GONNA OPPOSE IT.
SO, AND THE, THE, UH, THE HEAD OF THE COMPANY, THE PRINCIPAL, UH, MR. NAMBIAR IS OUT OF THE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK HIM TO SIT DOWN WITH MS. CARSON AND HAVE A CONVERSATION AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO ADDRESS HER CONCERNS.
SO WE, THAT WOULD BE OUR SPECIFIC REQUEST TODAY, MR. CHAIR.
AND YOU MAY, YOU MAY WANNA HEAR FROM THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE.
I, I DO NOT LOOK FAVORABLY ON HOLDOVER AFTER HOLDOVER.
I UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT, IT'S NOT GOOD FOR THE GOVERNMENT, IT'S NOT GOOD FOR STAFF, IT'S NOT GOOD FOR PROPERTY OWNERS, THE TAXPAYERS, ALL THE ABOVE.
SO, A I WAS VERY CLEAR AT THE BEGINNING, THIS CASE WAS HELD OVER AT YOUR REQUEST, NOT THE BOARD'S REQUEST.
WE WERE READY TO ACT ON IT LAST MONTH AND IT WOULD'VE FAILED.
SO, UH, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE BOARD, UH, TO HOLD OVER.
IT REQUIRES THREE OF FIVE VOTES TO APPROVE.
SO, UH, THINK WE'LL CONTINUE HEARING THE OTHER SPEAKERS.
UM, AND I'VE GOT LOADS OF QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS, AS DOES MY PANEL MEMBERS, AS WAS EVIDENCED IN THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING.
AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF THESE THINGS ARE GONNA CHANGE WHETHER, YOU KNOW, UM, OUR CRITERIA AGAIN IS THAT THE PARKING DEMANDS GENERATED BY THE USE DOES NOT WARRANT THE NUMBER OF ALL STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED.
THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD OR INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
I ALWAYS READ IT IN, I ASK THE STAFF YEARS AGO TO PUT THAT IN BOLD IN OUR DOCUMENTS.
SO WE STAY FOCUSED ON OUR CRITERIA.
OUR CRITERIA IS NOT WHETHER ONE PROPERTY OWNER MAKES NICE WITH ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
IT'S SPECIFIC TO TRAFFIC CONGESTION, TRAFFIC HAZARD, UH, ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
AND THEN IT'S UP TO US TO INTERPRET THAT, THAT, SO I, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND.
AND, AND THAT'S KIND OF THE BOTTOM LINE FOR US, IS WE A HUNDRED PERCENT BELIEVE THAT WE MEET THOSE CRITERIA.
I, I I I, I AM EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED THAT YOU REPRESENTED ON PA ON BASED ON YOUR CLIENT ABOUT THOSE OTHER PARKING SPACES THAT CLEARLY WERE NOT YOURS.
WE DID NOT REALIZE THAT AT THE TIME.
WELL, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE
BECAUSE WHAT WE GRANT STAYS WITH THE PROPERTY AND IT'S BASED ON THE TESTIMONY GIVEN.
ALRIGHT, THAT WAS, SO NOW IT'S, WELL, WHAT DO WE BELIEVE? I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, BUT PROBABLY FOR THE PANEL, THAT WAS NOT AN INTENTIONAL, UH, GL.
I, I DIDN'T GLIT THINK IT WAS INTENTIONAL.
YOU AND YOUR FIRM HAVE HIGH STANDARDS AND YOU HAVE DONE A VERY GOOD JOB HISTORICALLY.
BUT THIS IS A, WHAT ELSE AM I SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE OR NOT BELIEVE? SO AGAIN, I'M ONE VOTE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'LL GO.
THE PANEL WILL DECIDE IN THE END, BUT I'M GUESSING I'M
[01:10:01]
PROBABLY PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH, WITH THE GENERAL FEELING IS, BUT WE'LL SEE.SO, UH, I, I DON'T WANT TO INTERRUPT YOU.
IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU WERE FINISHED, SIR.
UH, WE'LL GO AHEAD TO SEE ANYONE ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK TODAY.
UH, WELL, WHO'S THE NEXT SPEAKER IN SUPPORT? MS. MARY LLOYD DIAGRAM OR THE
LLOYD DENMAN 29 28 WESTMINSTER SPEAKING IN FAVOR? YES, PLEASE.
YOU'VE BEEN SWORN IN, RIGHT? YOU'RE LOADING A, A POWERPOINT.
I GUESS IT'S WHERE WE LEFT OFF.
SO I WILL SPEAK TO THE TRAFFIC PART AND THE CONGESTION AND THE TRAFFIC HAZARD.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THE APPLICANT IS BUILDING A NEW PARKING LOT.
AND YOU SAW THAT ON THE BRIEFING 185 NET GAIN OF SPACES.
OF THAT 185, THE APPLICANT WILL RESERVE 75 FOR VALET.
AND THAT'S GROWN SINCE WE WERE HERE LAST MONTH, SO THAT WE COULD ACCOMMODATE MORE RESTAURANT PARKING.
THAT STILL LEAVES 110 NEW SPACES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
IT, THEY MAY BE A PAY LOT, BUT THAT'S A LARGE NET GAIN OF OVERALL PARKING FOR THE DESIGN DISTRICT AS A WHOLE.
THEN SPECIFICALLY BACK TO 1616.
AND IF YOU WANT ADVANCE ONE, SO YOU HAD ASKED NO, NO, WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT 1626.
THE CASE IN FRONT OF US IS SIX AND, AND, AND I, I NEED TO REITERATE FOR THE RECORD, HOLD RIGHT THERE.
AND I SAID THIS LAST MONTH, AND I SAY THIS ALL THE TIME, WE DEAL WITH EACH CASE BASED ON THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES SPECIFIC TO THE CASE.
CORRECT? UH, WE ARE MAKING, WE'RE AT BEING ASKED TO MAKE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION BECAUSE OF UNIQUE THINGS RELATING TO A SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY.
IF THE APPLICANT, IF AN APPLICANT, ANY ROOM IN THE CITY WANTS TO CHANGE THEIR LAND USE, THEY CAN GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR THIS, AND THEN THE CITY COUNCIL TO GET A BROADER INTERPRETATION, CHANGE THE MIXED USE OR CHANGE OF USE.
SO WE WE'RE NOT GONNA TALK AT ALL ABOUT ANY OTHER CASE OTHER THAN 1626 HIGHLINE DRIVE.
THIS DIAGRAM SHOWS 1626 HIGHLINE DRIVE AND THE WALKING DISTANCE FROM THE CORNER OF THE NEW PARKING LOT AND IT'S 600 FEET TO 1616.
AND YOU'D ADD ANOTHER A HUNDRED FEET TO 1626.
THAT IS A TWO MINUTE 22ND WALK.
AND TO GET TO 1626, PERHAPS A THREE MINUTE WALK, WELL UNDER FIVE MINUTES, YOU KNOW, QUARTER MILE THAT MOST PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO DO.
FOR 1626
THERE SHOULD BE TURNAROUNDS FOR 1626, I THINK PAGE 2, 5 5 IN YOUR PACKET.
CAN YOU GO TO PAGE 2 5 5 TO ADDRESS ANY TRAFFIC CONCERNS OR CONGESTION OR HAZARD? WE DID LOOK AT HOW A VALET MAY OPERATE WITHIN THE PROPERTY AND I BELIEVE PAGE 2, 5 5 IN YOUR PACKET.
[01:15:01]
WELL, THAT JUST SHOWS THE RADIUS FOR A SUBURBAN 51 FEET OUTER DIAMETER.MOST CARS DO NOT REQUIRE 51 FEET.
OH, IT WAS ONE OF THOSE, LET'S SEE, THERE WE GO.
THAT'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 1626 HIGHLINE.
SO THERE IS STACKING ROOM AVAILABLE FOR AT LEAST FOUR AUTOS.
AND NOT ONLY IS THERE STACKING ROOM FOR THE VALET OFF STREET, YOU KNOW, WHERE, WHERE THAT MEASUREMENT IS.
THEN THERE'S ALSO ROOM FOR A CIRCLE TURNAROUND.
OH, BUT THAT'S CROSSING A PROPERTY LINE, BUT THERE IS AN ACCESS EASEMENT.
SO THERE'S ROOM FOR A VALET TO MAKE THE U-TURN OFF STREET, NO TRAFFIC HAZARD, NO CONGESTION CONCERNS.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS FOR 1626.
I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FROM SOME PANEL MEMBERS.
YOU SAID THAT IT IS 600 FEET FROM THE OFF, UM, FROM THE, THE PARKING LOT TO THE PROPERTY.
16, IT'S, YOU WOULD ADD ANOTHER A HUNDRED PLUS FEET.
FOR THIS ONE? IT, IT SEEMS A LOT.
I MEAN, I, I WE, WE SAW THE VIDEO, THE DRIVING.
ARE YOU, I MEAN, DID THAT, DID YOU ACTUALLY MEASURE THAT? BECAUSE TO ME IT SEEMED, IT SEEMED A LOT LONGER.
IT WAS MEASURED ON THE DIAGRAM.
AND DOES THAT INCLUDE YOU WALKING ACROSS THE STREET TO GET IN THE SIDEWALK? 'CAUSE THERE'S NO SIDEWALK ON THAT SIDE OF EDISON.
SO I USED THEIR PAVED PARKING AREA, SO I STAYED ON PAVEMENT, BUT NO, I DID NOT CROSS THE STREET.
BUT YOU'D HAVE TO CROSS THE STREET TO GET ON THE SIDEWALK NEAR THE HIGH RISE APARTMENT BUILDING'S.
THAT'S NOT GONNA ADD THAT MUCH.
THE REASON WHY I, I'M REACTING IS YOU SAID THERE'S A SIDEWALK THE WHOLE WAY.
THERE'S NOT A SIDEWALK THE WHOLE WAY.
THERE'S SIDEWALK ALONG HIGHLINE NOT, BUT NOT FROM THE PARKING LOT.
YOU, YOU SHOWED THE RADIUS, YOU SHOWED THE SUBURBAN.
SO WHERE, WHERE WILL THEY DO THAT? WILL THEY DO THAT IN THE GRASS? I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, YOU SAID THAT, THAT THERE'S ROOM FOR VALET TO GO THROUGH AND DO A U-TURN.
CAN YOU SHOW ON THE MAP WHERE THEY WOULD, WHERE THEY CAN FIT THAT IN? I MEAN, IS THAT, CAN THEY DO THAT RADIUS ON YOUR PAVEMENT OR DO THEY NEED TO GO INTO THE GRASS TO DO THAT? NO, THERE WAS PAVEMENT.
PLENTY OF PAVEMENT TO DO THAT.
YOU'RE SAYING WITH CARS PARKED YES.
AGAINST YOUR BUILDING AND NOT CROSSING THE PROPERTY LINE, YOU CAN GET 51 FEET.
NO, IT DOES CROSS THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO YOU'RE GOING AN INTO THE NEXT DOOR PROPERTY BY HOW MANY FEET? THERE'S AN ACCESS EASEMENT THAT COVERS THAT AREA AND IT'S KIND OF SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE.
UM, AND I MEASURED THE RADIUS FOR MY CAR IS 39 FEET.
AND THERE'S, YOU HAVE TO REALLY ZOOM IN, I GUESS IF WE'RE GONNA TRY TO SEE THAT MR. CHAIRMAN.
UH, WHEN, WHEN AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME, I HAVE A QUESTION OF COURSE MOMENTARILY SO YOU CAN, SO MS. DAVIS'S QUESTION WAS YEAH.
HOW DO YOU FIT A 51 FOOT, UH, RADIUS TO MAKE PAR UH, UH, TURNAROUND? RIGHT.
AND THAT DOES ENCROACH INTO WHAT? DOT TO DOT WHAT? WHERE ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THOSE TWO RIGHT THERE? THAT, BUT THERE'S, THERE'S CARS PARKED THERE.
SO THAT'S JUST A MEASUREMENT TO SHOW THAT'S 54.
BUT YOU HAVE TO ASSUME THERE'S CARS PARKED IN YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PARKING LOT.
I'M NOT SAYING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SHOWING 54 FEET OF WHAT THAT IS.
SO A VALET OPERATOR CAN GO A LITTLE MORE TO THE RIGHT AND MAKE A U-TURN WITHOUT ENCROACHING ON ANY PARKED CARS.
AND I DID IT IN MY CAR AND IT WAS, I MEASURED AND IT WAS 39 FEET.
MS. HAYDEN, AND THEN MR. KOVI, MS. HAYDEN, UM, YOU MENTIONED THERE'S AN ACCESS EASEMENT FOR ON THE OTHER PROPERTY.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT SHOWS THAT IN OUR DOCUMENTATION? I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING IT, BUT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
THERE WAS AN OWNERSHIP MAP, I BELIEVE THAT DID SHOW IT, BUT I DON'T HAVE A COPY OF
[01:20:01]
IT.MS. HAYDEN? IS THAT IT? MR. OVITZ.
UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AND I, I'M NOT AN EXPERT ON THESE THINGS.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING
IS THAT BETTER? NOT REALLY, BUT WE'LL LISTEN ACUTELY.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT AN ACCESS EASEMENT IS FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE THAT WOULD BE STATED IN THE EASEMENT.
SO, UM, THAT GOES ALONG WITH MY GENERAL COMMENT THAT THE APPLICANT APPLICANTS ARE MAKING A LOT OF ASSERTIONS, UM, THAT, THAT WE HAVE NO WAY TO VALIDATE, VERIFY, OR HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE TO.
AND REALLY AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH IS THINGS THAT WE CAN EITHER IN THE SITE PLANS OR THROUGH OTHER MEANS IN OUR DISPOSAL, UM, IF WE'RE RELYING ON CERTAIN, UH, GONNA BES OR MIGHT BES OR KIND OF LIKE THIS, WE TRIED THIS OUT THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY BUILD THE REQUIREMENT THAT, THAT BE MET INTO OUR DECISION.
IS THAT CORRECT, MR. CHAIRMAN? ANY OTHER COMMENTS, SIR? UH, NOT AT THIS TIME.
UM, MR. DENMAN, YOU, YOU SHOWED US A MAP AND YOU DID POINT TO POINT AND YOU SAID THAT POINT TO POINT WAS 54 FEET.
AND SO, UM, I'M TRYING TO, I'M STILL PAPER GUY AND SO I'M TAKING WHAT YOU HAD SUBMITTED IN THE, IN THE PACKET AND IN OUR PACKET IT IS PAGE 2 55.
AND I'M TRYING TO DRAW, I'M TRYING TO LOOK BETWEEN ONE PROPERTY AND THE OTHER.
UH, YOUR NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH OR WEST DOESN'T HAVE CARS PARKED AT THAT POINT IN TIME IN THEIR LOT, BUT YOUR.TO DOT WOULD TAKE OVER PARKING SPACES WOULD PROTRUDE PARKING SPACES OF YOUR.DOT.
SO IT'S VERY HARD FOR ME TO CONCLUDE THAT THAT'S A 55 FEET MANEUVER.
IF THERE'S NO ONE PARKED THERE, IT DOES, BUT THAT PRESUMES THAT YOUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR'S GIVING UP THOSE PARKING SPACES WHENEVER YOU NEED TO USE THEM.
SO I'M JUST USING YOUR CHART ON YOUR MAP SAYING HOW ARE YOU OPERATING WITHIN YOUR PROPERTY BASED ON YOUR REQUEST TO CHANGE YOUR USE AND YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENT? CORRECT.
AND I'M STATING THERE'S ROOM TO MAKE A U-TURN FOR A VALET OPERATOR WITHOUT ENCROACHING INTO THE PARKING SPACE.
THE DIAGRAM ISN'T GONNA SHOW THAT EXACTLY.
WHEN I DID IT IN MY CAR, IT WAS 39 FEET.
UM, I'M LOOKING AT THE MAPPING THAT YOU GAVE US ON THIS, THIS LOT HERE.
UM, YOU SAID IT WAS A TWO MINUTE, 22ND WALK OR 600 FEET NOW TO THIS PROPERTY IT'S 700 FEET.
SO IT'S MORE THAN TWO MINUTES.
THAT'S A BRISK WALK IN DALLAS, TEXAS, 85 DEGREE WEATHER.
NOW IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE CLOUDY OUT TODAY, SO MAYBE IT'S 75 OR 80 OUT.
AND AGAIN, I HAVE TO LOOK WHAT'S BEFORE US AND WHAT'S BEFORE US.
AND IN OUR LEGAL LANGUAGE IT SAYS COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS.
SO WE, WE OPERATE ON ACTUAL PLANS THAT WE GIVE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO OR NOT.
AND THERE IS NOT SIDEWALK THERE.
I KNOW YOU SAID THAT YOU'RE, YOU HAVE A PROPERTY REPRESENT A PROPERTY OWNER THAT'S GOT SWAY IN THE PIT THAT CAN PUT THAT IN AND SO FORTH, BUT IT'S NOT THERE.
IT'S NOT GUARANTEED UNTIL THE PIT AUTHORIZES IT.
UM, HOW IS IT THAT YOU OR THE PROPERTY OWNER ARE KEEPING A CUMULATIVE SUMMARY OF USE INTO THIS LARGE PARKING LOT? 'CAUSE IT CHANGES EACH MEETING.
SO IT STARTED OUT 180 5, CORRECT? IT'S STILL 185 NOON PARKING SPACES.
BUT YOU'RE NOW PROJECTING 75 VALET OR 10 FROM THIS REQUEST.
AND 65 THEN GOT OTHER REQUESTS PENDING.
HOW DO, HOW DOES THE CITY, HOW DO WE KEEP TRACK OF PARKING THAT ENCUMBERS THAT SPACE? THAT'S BY THE PARKING AGREEMENT.
SO SOMEONE SOMEWHERE KEEPS TRACK OF WHAT YOU SAID IN THIS CASE OR IN THAT CASE OR IN ANOTHER CASE, CORRECT.
THAT'S THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT'S
[01:25:02]
JOB.IT'S YOURS BECAUSE YOU'RE COMING IN FRONT OF US SAYING WE'RE GONNA USE REMOTE PARKING AND WE HAVE AVAILABLE SPACES.
WELL, AND THAT'S THE AGREEMENT.
THE BUILDING OFFICIALS, IT IS YOURS TO PROVIDE ACCURATE TESTIMONY BASED ON YOUR REQUEST.
NOW YOUR ALTERNATIVES, YOU GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CHANGE PD 6 21.
WE AGAIN, OPERATE ON COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE PLANS.
QUESTION FOR YOU IN OUR PACKET.
THE SITE PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT SPECIFIES RESTAURANT VERSUS SHOWROOM OFFICE IS WHICH ONE? WHERE'S THE SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS THAT? 'CAUSE I LOOKED FOR IT.
THE CLOSEST THING THAT I GOT TO THAT WAS THIS COLORED ORANGE AND RED VERSION.
IS THAT WHAT IT IS? IT'S, IS THIS CONSIDERED THE SIDE PLAN? IT'S, YES.
IS THIS BINDING, IS THIS A BINDING DOCUMENT FOR BUILDING INSPECTION? 'CAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE MEASUREMENTS.
IT'S, IT WOULD, INTERIOR REMODELS ARE NOT AS EXACT AS YOU'RE PROBABLY THINKING.
SO CAN I SAY A HUNDRED PERCENT THAT THEY WOULD ACCEPT THAT I CANNOT A HUNDRED PERCENT SAY YES.
SO MS. BOARD ADMINISTRATOR, I FIND THIS STRANGE THAT THIS IS A CONSIDERED THE SITE PLAN.
WE'RE CONSIDERING WE'RE VOTING ON IT.
IT IT'S AN EXISTING IDENTIFIABLE STRUCTURE.
OTHER THAN THE INTERIOR REMODEL AS MR. SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS THIS CONSIDERED SUFFICIENT ENFORCEMENT DOCUMENT FOR BUILDING INSPECTION.
'CAUSE THIS IS THE ONLY SITE PLAN WE HAVE FOR THIS, THIS BUILDING.
'CAUSE WE'RE CALLING OUT SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR RESTAURANT USE VERSUS SHOWROOM OFFICE.
AGAIN, VARIOUS SITE PLANS HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED.
SO I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT A HUNDRED PERCENT THAT THEY WILL OR WOULD NOT ACCEPT THAT.
BUT IT SEEMS LIKE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE ACCEPTABLE.
MR. CHAIR, I, YOU KNOW, I'M, I DON'T WORK FOR THE CITY.
OBVIOUSLY I'M NOT IN THE BUILDING, UH, INSPECTION DIVISION, HOWEVER IT SEEMED, I MEAN, THERE ARE LOTS OF INSTANCES LIKE CITY PLACE AND OTHERS WHERE THEY KEEP TRACK OF SQUARE FOOTAGES.
THERE ARE SQUARE FOOTAGE LIMITATIONS, EITHER MINIMUM MAXIMUMS ON DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES.
SOMEBODY ACTUALLY KEEPS TRACK OF THOSE.
SO, I MEAN, I DON'T SEE WHY THAT WOULD BE ANY DIFFERENCE.
THE FOOTPRINT IS NOT CHANGING.
UM, SO WE KNOW WHAT THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE IS AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY GO IN FOR PERMIT CO, SOMEONE WOULD CHECK TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE NOT EXCEEDING THAT AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR RESTAURANTS.
SO THIS IS NOT BINDING YOU TO THESE LOCATIONS IN THE BUILDING.
THIS IS BINDING YOU JUST AS SQUARE FOOTAGE.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE SAID LAST TIME WE WERE THERE.
THAT WAS IN, WHEN I WENT BACK THROUGH THIS, THIS TIME, I'M SAYING WHERE'S THE SITE PLAN? WHERE'S THE SITE PLAN OF WHERE, BECAUSE PART OF MY CONCERN IS THE PARKING ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING WHERE THE ENTRANCE, THE BUILDING, IF YOU HEARD THIS MORNING, A COMMON WAS, OH, THERE'S THE DOCK HIGH, THERE'S THE DOORWAY THAT PEOPLE WOULD GO FROM THE PARKING LOT INTO THE BUILDING.
AND I STARTED THINKING AGAIN, IS THIS THE SIDE PLAN WE'RE GOING AGAINST? NOT REALLY.
IS THIS REALLY JUST 2,500 SQUARE FEET AND 11,586 SQUARE FEET? CORRECT.
IF THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS, I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I YEAH.
BUT I MEAN IT'S YOUR, IT'S YOUR DOCUMENT, JONATHAN.
SO, UH, SO I, I'M, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT, WHAT WE'RE, AGAIN, TO OUR LEGAL LANGUAGE COMPLIANCE IS THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SITE PLANS COMMITTED.
AND THAT INCLUDE PARKING SPACES THAT PREVIOUSLY WERE ON A NON ON ANYMORE.
SO I KNOW I'M BEMOANING THAT, BUT WE RELY ON THE APPLICANT AND THE ACCURACY OF THEIR DOCUMENTS.
AND THERE, THERE'S A CONSISTENT PROBLEM HERE OF WHETHER WE'RE GETTING ACCURATE DOCUMENTS.
WELL, THAT'S AN ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF THE EXISTING BUILDING FOOTPRINT, WHICH AGAIN, IS NOT GONNA CHANGE.
THE DOCK'S NOT GONNA MOVE, BUT NOT THE PARKING SPACES.
THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES CHANGED BY FOUR BECAUSE WE DISCOVERED THAT THEY WERE PARTIALLY ON OUR PROPERTY.
THAT MEANS NOBODY GETS TO COUNT 'EM.
WELL, OKAY, ARE THERE QUESTIONS WE HAVE? OTHERWISE WE'LL GO TO OTHER SPEAKERS.
CHAIRMAN, MS. HAYDEN HAS A QUESTION.
OH, MR. OVITZ GOT A QUESTION THEN.
MS. HAYDEN? MR. OVITZ, THANK YOU.
UM, I, I KIND OF ASKED A QUESTION BEFORE, I GUESS I DIDN'T MAKE IT CLEAR.
I WAS EXPECTING AN ANSWER FROM THE APPLICANT.
UH, YOU, YOU'VE FACED A LOT OF YOUR PARKING INFORMATION ON THIS ACCESS EASEMENT ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
I, I WAS TRYING TO GET AT THAT ACCESS EASEMENTS ARE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSES.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE
[01:30:01]
SPECIFIC ACCESS EASEMENT IN EXISTENCE IS? AND IF YOU DO, WHAT IS IT? AND IF YOU DON'T, THEN JUST SAY YOU DUNNO.UM, EASEMENTS CAN BE EITHER SHOWN GRAPHICALLY OR THEY CAN BE BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.
THE TERMS OF THAT EASEMENT WOULD DEPEND.
UM, AND THIS ONE WOULD MOST LIKELY BE A SEPARATE INSTRUMENT SINCE IT'S A ACCESS EASEMENT AS OPPOSED TO SOME KIND OF RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT.
UH, THE TERMS OF THE EASEMENT WOULD DICTATE WHAT YOU CAN DO IN THAT ACCESS EASEMENT.
ACCESS EASEMENTS TYPICALLY ALLOW FOR NOT JUST ACCESS, BUT MANEUVERING.
UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE TAKING A TYPICAL STRIP SHOPPING CENTER.
THOSE VERY TYPICALLY HAVE CROSS ACCESS EASEMENTS WHICH ALLOW, YOU KNOW, ALL THE CUSTOMERS AND THE EMPLOYEES TO CROSS OVER THROUGHOUT THE SHARED DRIVEWAY, SHARED DRIVEWAYS, MANEUVER BACK OUT INTO DRIVE AISLES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, I DOUBT THIS IS VERY DIFFERENT.
UM, ALBEIT ON A SMALLER SCALE, YOU KNOW, IF WE COULD CERTAINLY COME UP WITH A SURVEY AND A COPY OF THE EASEMENT IF YOU WANT US TO BRING IT BACK TO YOU IN A MONTH TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
UH, WELL, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU'RE GONNA BE BACK IN A MONTH, BUT, UM, UH, I GUESS YOUR ANSWER IS, IS YOUR, IS YOU, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TERMS OF THE EASEMENT ARE AT THIS MOMENT.
I CAN'T REALLY STAND HERE AND TELL YOU THAT I KNOW WHAT THE ACCESS EASEMENT SAYS IF I HAVEN'T SEEN THE ACCESS EASEMENT.
DRIVEWAY AND IT'S AN ACCESS EASEMENT.
YEAH, HE SAYS THEY DO SHARE A DRIVEWAY.
SO IT'S AN, AND IT'S AN ACCESS EASEMENT.
SO LIKE I SAY, THAT WOULD TYPICALLY INCLUDE MANEUVERING AS WELL.
BUT YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T KNOW IS REALLY THE ANSWER TO MY QUESTION.
OH, FOR A FACT, I HAVEN'T READ THE EASEMENT.
OTHER QUESTIONS? MS. HAYDEN? MY, MY QUESTION IS RELATED TO THE EASEMENT TOO.
I THINK MR. THOMPSON PULLED UP A DRAWING THAT LOOKED LIKE A PLAT AND WHAT THE EASEMENT THAT I SAW ON THAT LOOKED LIKE A, A DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
UM, IT LOOKED LIKE A STORM SEWER EASEMENT.
SO LEMME PULL IT BACK UP PLEASE FOR JUST A QUESTION FOR THE CITY THEN.
IS A STORM SEWER EASEMENT CONSIDERED ALSO AN ACCESS EASEMENT FOR THE PUBLIC OR FOR ANYONE? IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD JUST BE ACCESSED BY THE CITY IF THAT'S ACTUALLY THE ONLY EASEMENT THAT'S THERE.
UNLESS THERE'S ANOTHER ACCESS EASEMENT.
EVEN EVEN MR. VINCENT'S HAVING TO SQUINT.
THAT, YEAH, IT SAYS, SAYS IT'S A STORM SERIES ISN'T, LOOKS, IT'S, SO THAT'S A STORM EASEMENT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH USING SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY.
SO THE EASEMENT I THINK THAT, UM, IS THIS EASEMENT IS BY CORRECTIONS, SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED, WHICH IS THIS AREA HERE, WHICH IS KIND OF WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, UH, WHEN WE WAS TALKING ABOUT ACCESSING TO THE PROPERTY, UM, FOR DRIVE PURPOSES.
SO DRIVING INTO, AND IF YOU CAN'T REMEMBER FROM THE PRESENTATION THIS MORNING, VIDEO PAUSE, I WAS SAYING, YOU CAN GO HERE AND THEN IT CURVE BACK, OR IT GOES BACK LIKE AT A 60 DEGREE ANGLE.
SO THAT'S WHAT THIS EASEMENT IS THAT I'M REFERRING TO THIS MORNING.
SO THAT'S KIND OF LIKE THAT DRIVE ACCESS EASEMENT THAT ALLOWS YOU TO GET BACK TO THIS PROPERTY THAT ALLOWS FOR THE APPLICANTS OR THE, UH, STAFF OR CUSTOMERS FOR 26 TO BAG INTO THIS AREA, DRIVE PAST IN THIS AREA, AND THEN ULTIMATELY GET BACK ONTO THE PROPERTY OF 26.
SO THAT'S WHY THAT THIS EASEMENT HERE IS BUILT.
AND IT, AGAIN, THIS IS THE POINT THAT WE'RE REFERRING TO THAT EASEMENT IS ON TOP OF THE STORMWATER EASEMENT.
DOES THAT KIND OF ANSWER WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, MS. HAYDEN, OR WAS THAT YEAH, IT DOES.
IT, IT DOES, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT STOPS AT THE, AT THAT PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES.
SO THAT'S REALLY NOT IN THE AREA WHERE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE TURNAROUND.
AND I WAS JUST POINTING OUT THAT THIS IS THE ONE THAT I WAS REFERRING TO EARLIER WHEN I WAS SAYING THIS ALLOWS THEM TO ESSENTIALLY CROSS OVER THE PROPERTY LINE TO GET OFF.
UH, OTHERWISE THERE WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH DRIVE ACCESS BECAUSE THIS IS THEIR PROPERTY LINE.
EVERYTHING ELSE IS THE, GO BACK TO YOUR COMMENT, MS. HAYDEN.
IT'S NOT IN THE SAME AREA THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT FOR THE TURNAROUND, RIGHT? I THINK, WHAT WERE WE TALKING ABOUT? THE TURNAROUND BEING FURTHER UP? UM, UH, IT'S FURTHER WHERE THAT DIRECTION IS.
[01:35:01]
AND AGAIN, YOU CAN CORRECT ME, MR. DIMOND.UM, I THINK WHAT HE WAS SAYING WAS YOU CAN GO HERE TO TURN AROUND AND COME BACK, RIGHT.
WHICH WOULD BE CROSSING INTO THAT OTHER PROPERTY WHICH PUSHED YOU ACROSS THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND WE'RE TALKING 52 FEET YES.
I THINK A DIAGRAM OF, OF THAT TURNAROUND THAT'S ANTICIPATED WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.
AND THEN THIS IS THE, JUST FOR REFERENCE POINT, THIS IS THE EDGE OF THE BUILDING BEFORE IT TURNS, UM, AT 90 DEGREES.
SO THIS IS WHERE THOSE FOUR PARKING SPACES ARE IN QUESTION, UH, OR NO LONGER IN QUESTION, BUT WE'RE ORIGINALLY, SO THIS JUST KIND OF GIVE YOU A REFERENCE POINT AS TO, UH, WHAT WAS OUTLINED ON THIS PARTICULAR SURVEY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT IN TIME? OKAY.
DO WE HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER IN SUPPORT? I SAID YOU SAID THREE.
NO, I THOUGHT THERE WERE THREE IN SUPPORT AND TWO IN OPPOSITION.
I GUESS THE APPLICANT DOESN'T WANT TO SPEAK.
SO, WE'LL, WE'LL NOW GO TO, UH, SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.
WHO'S THE FIRST SPEAKER? MS. WILLIAMS. OKAY.
IF YOU, YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN SWORN IN, SO JUST GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND THEN YOU CAN PRESENT.
I AM DIANE CARSON, OWNER OF 1710 HIGHLINE DRIVE AND A LARGE SECTION OF, UH, THE SOUGHT AFTER RAIL BED AT 1600 EDISON.
UH, I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME.
I HAVE BEEN IN THE DESIGN DISTRICT LONGER THAN ANY PERSON, STILL LIVING 50 YEARS.
I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY FROM LUCY CROW BILLINGSLEY AND IT WAS MY BIG MOVE FOR MY ART COMPANY THAT WAS HOUSED THERE FOR MANY YEARS.
I HAVE SEEN MANY CHANGES, GOOD AND BAD, AND THIS IS A BAD ONE WITH OVER THE TOP DEMANDS AND REPERCUSSIONS.
I AM LATE TO THE GAME IN THIS BECAUSE WE REALLY DIDN'T ALL KNOW ABOUT IT.
YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GOT THE, THE, UH, I DID SEE A NOTICE FROM THE CITY, BUT IT SAID 1626.
AND I THOUGHT, WELL, WHERE IS, THAT'S A LONG WAY AWAY.
WELL, IN THE PARKING LOT, I'M 1710, AND THEN THEY'RE ACROSS THE PARKING LOT.
SO I DIDN'T GET ON THIS QUICKLY.
UM, THEN I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING UNTIL ONE OF, I CALL THEM VHN, BUT IS IT DDD WHO OWNS IT? UH, I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING ELSE UNTIL ONE OF THEIR TENANTS ACROSS THE WAY CAME TO MY TENANT AND SAID, WHAT IS THIS? WE DON'T UNDERSTAND IT, BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD.
AND THEN THEY CAME TO ME AND SAID, WHAT IS THIS? AND I SAID, I DON'T KNOW.
SO, UH, MY TENANT THEN BROUGHT IT TO ME AND I SAID, I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS.
WHAT I SAID, I, I'M SORRY, I HAVE TO READ 'CAUSE I'M NOT A SPEAKER.
I HAVE NEVER YOU'RE YOU'RE DOING FINE.
I TRIED TO SKINNY THIS DOWN FOR THREE DAYS.
YOU, YOU'VE GOT PLENTY OF TIME.
LIKE I SAID AT THE BEGINNING, EVERYONE'S GONNA BE GIVEN WHATEVER TIME THEY NEED.
UM, MY TENANTS AND DID BRING IT TO ME.
I HAVE, AND I'VE NEVER BEEN CONTACTED BY VIPIN OR ANYBODY WITH THESE COMPANIES.
THEY NEVER CAME TO ME AND SAID, WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS THIS REDUCTION WITH YOU OR THE IMPACT ON YOUR PROPERTY.
SO HE HAD A CHANCE TO REACH OUT AND HE DIDN'T DO IT.
UH, AND THEN I WOULD'VE BEEN MORE AWARE OF IT TOO.
AND VHN OR DDD HAS THREE TENANTS AT 1626.
THEY WERE REQUIRED BY OUR PD 6 26 21, UH, TO HAVE 13 PARKING PLACES.
THEY ALREADY DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH PARKING SPACES FOR THEM AND THEIR CLIENTS.
SO THEY PARK IN OUR PARKING LOT.
THIS IS DAY AND NIGHT AND WE'VE BEEN VERY GRACIOUS ABOUT IT.
UH, IF THEY WORK LATE, SOME PARKING THAT WAS DESIGNATED FOR RE REQUIRED RESTAURANT VALET PARKING SPACES WILL ALREADY BE USED UP BECAUSE THEIR CARS ARE GONNA BE THERE 'CAUSE THEY'RE WORKING.
IF THEY HAVE A NIGHT EVENT, IT REQUIRES PARKING SPACES.
[01:40:01]
PROBABLY BE FILLED LEAVING NO REQUIRED PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE FOR VALET OTHER PARK.UH, OTHERS PARK HERE, 5:00 PM TO GO TO OTHER RESTAURANTS, THE AMERICAN AIRLINE CENTER AND OTHER LOCATIONS.
THIS USES UP SOME OF THE REQUIRED RESTAURANT PARKING SPACES.
THIS LEAVES THEM BELOW REQUIRED PARKING.
SOME PEOPLE LEAVE THEIR CARS AND TRUCKS FOR HOURS AND SOMETIMES OVERNIGHT THIS PARKING LOT CAN'T HANDLE ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR THIS RESTAURANT.
UH, WHEN MY, WHEN MY TENANTS HAVE EVENING EVENTS, THIS WILL CREATE A JAM UP AT OUR ENTRANCE AND THE TURN IN FROM HIGHLINE AND OVERFLOW PARKING WILL BE ANOTHER ADVERSE EFFECT.
THIS IS NOT JUST A PARKING LOT, IT IS THE ENTRANCE TO FOUR BUSINESSES AND NOT A PLACE TO HIDE VALET CARS.
UH, THIS WILL HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON MY TENANT'S BUSINESS.
MY TENANT ALSO HAS DELIVERIES AND PICKUPS AFTER FIVE, WHICH WOULD LOGISTICALLY BE VERY DIFFICULT.
THEY'RE ASKING FOR A HUGE REDUCTION.
I'M JUST, MINE ISN'T ABOUT REDUCTION.
MINE IS, THIS IS NOT THE SPACE FOR IT.
IT, UH, AL AND WE'RE ALREADY OVERCROWDED.
AND THAT'S GONNA PUT MORE STRAIN ON ALL OF US.
I HAVE BEEN VERY GENEROUS IN THE PAST ABOUT OTHER CARS AND TRUCKS, PARKING IN OUR LOT.
BUT NOW I HAVE TO PROTECT MY BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY.
SO I CAN'T ALLOW THIS ANYMORE.
WHICH ARE THEIR CLIENTS, THEIR A LOT OF THEIR, UH, TENANTS AND OTHER PEOPLE TOO.
UH, DUNHILL TRIED TO BUY MY PROPERTY AND I SAID, NO, VHN, WHICH IS THIS.
I THINK THE DDD TRIED TO BUY MY PROPERTY.
AND I FEEL NOW THEY'RE TRYING TO PUSH ME OUT AND I PLEASE DON'T ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN.
UNDER THIS UNFAIR EXCEPTION, I DIDN'T INHERIT MY MONEY.
I WORKED LONG HOURS, YEARS FOR THIS BUILDING, AND THEN IT'S MY RETIREMENT.
IF THIS EXCEPTION PASSES, IT WILL OF OF COURSE INCREASED THE VALUE OF THEIR RESTAURANT PROPERTY.
WE ALREADY HAVE OVERFLOW PARKING DAY AND NIGHT.
AND IF THIS WERE TO PASS, WE WOULD HAVE A HUGE OVERFLOW PARKING WITH DELILAH'S CUSTOMERS JUST NEEDING TO WALK A FEW STEPS FROM MY PARKING LOT TO THEIR RESTAURANT.
THE OVERFLOW WILL GO TO PRIVATE COMPANIES PARKING LOTS, ALL THE WAY DOWN OAK LAWN.
THESE COMPANIES ALREADY HAVE THE SAME PARKING ISSUES AS WE HAVE, AND IT'S AFFECTING THE ENTIRE NA NEIGHBORHOOD ALREADY.
THAT IS WHY AN SACKS CORPORATION SIGNED A LETTER OF PETITION.
UM, AND I COULD HAVE GOTTEN MORE IF I'D HAD MORE TIME.
UH, THEN THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIKE TO VALET PARK THEIR CARS.
RIGHT? I'M THE NEXT PARKING LOT DOWN.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S, AND I'M FREE.
YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE TO PAY, THEY DON'T HAVE TO TIP, THEY DON'T DO ANYTHING.
THESE CLIENTS AND VALETS WILL CONSTANTLY BE CROSSING OVER INTO MY PROPERTY AND CREATING POSSIBLE ACCIDENTS, INJURIES AND MORE LIABILITY TO ME AND MY TENANTS AND MORE WEAR ON OUR PROPERTY.
I WILL HAVE TO HAVE A TOW TRUCK DAY AND NIGHT, AND THIS WILL BE A GREAT DEAL OF WORK AND EXPENSE TO ME AND MY TENANTS.
I SHOULD NOT BE FORCED TO DO THAT FROM WHAT THEY WANT.
ALSO BOTTLENECKS, THE ENTRANCE FOR VALET AND US.
I HAVE RESTAURANTS AND NIGHT ENTERTAINMENT COMPANIES INTERESTED IN RENTING AND BUYING MY PROPERTY, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE OF THE RAILED PARKING.
MY FUTURE TENANTS OR OWNERS CAN LEGITIMATELY WITH NO EXCEPTIONS NEEDED, PARK ON MY RAIL BED.
I THINK IT'S ABOUT 50 CARS OR SO.
'CAUSE WE HAVE NOT CONSIDERED IT EXCEPT FOR ONE TIME I WILL.
UM, IF I DO TRY TO SELL OR LEASE TO A NIGHTTIME BUSINESS, THE 6 16 29
[01:45:01]
VALET PARKING WILL BE AN EYESORE.IT'LL CAUSE MORE BOTTLENECK FOR MY, FOR MY TENANTS ON HIGHLINE BACKUP TRAFFIC ONTO HIGHLINE AND INCREASE THE CHANCE OF ACCIDENTS.
AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE SPACE THEY THINK THEY HAVE.
SO I I THINK HE'S GONNA COVER THAT.
CARL, AREN'T YOU GONNA COVER THAT? YEAH.
YEAH, I THINK HE MIGHT HAVE THEM TOO.
OH, WE, WE ALL, OH, WELL THAT'S THE NINE FEET.
WE GOT SOME OF THESE PICTURES.
SO, SO WE'VE TAKEN OFF THE FOUR.
WE'VE TAKEN THOSE FOUR OFF BECAUSE, AND THEY KNOW THAT NINE FEET EXISTED.
I'M SORRY, WHAT? THEY KNEW THAT THAT NINE FEET INTO THAT PARKING LOT, THAT THEY HAD TO TAKE THOSE CARS OFF.
I HAVE SENT THEM, UH, NOT D, D, D, BUT WHEN YOU SAY THEY, YOU MEAN THE APPLICANT? WELL, I SENT IT TO DUNHILL BEFORE I SENT THEM MY WHOLE, UH, THEY HAD A SURVEY.
THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHERE IT IS.
SO YOU'RE, THEN YOU'RE DRIVING IN.
IF YOU WENT, IF THE TRUCK WASN'T THERE, YOU WOULD BE AT MY DOCK.
BUT THEN THEY HAVE TO COME IN FRONT OF MY DOCK, IN FRONT OF MY PARKING AND BACK UP TO THEIR DOCK.
I MEAN, THAT'S THE GOOD HEARTED.
EVERYBODY OUT HERE IS CHANGING NOW,
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO STRAIGHT DOWN AND THEN TAKE IT OFF AND UNLOAD IT TO THEIR DOCK.
UM, LET'S SEE, WHERE WERE WE? UH, HIGH LINES.
YEAH, WE'RE GONNA, IF IT WE'RE GONNA INCREASE THE CHANCE OF ACCIDENTS, THAT, THAT, UH, THERE'LL BE OVERLOAD.
THIS IS IF I'M TRYING TO SELL OR LEASE IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE, OR EVEN NOW, IF THIS PASSES, THERE'S GONNA BE OVERFLOW PARKING, TOW TRUCK ISSUES, OVERNIGHT PARKING, DELIVERY CONGESTION.
WELL, THEY DON'T, THEY CAN'T EVEN GET A DELIVERY, BUT IT'S GONNA BE VERY HARD FOR THEM TO GET ONE NOW.
THESE WILL ALL ADVERSELY IMPACT MY ABILITY TO RENT OR SELL MY PROPERTY.
UM, AND THIS IS THE TRAFFIC AT, AT OAK LAWN AND HIGHLINE IS ALREADY JAMMED AT FOUR 30.
I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL HAVE HEARD ABOUT ANY OF THAT, BUT, SO IF THEY DON'T HAVE PROPER AND QUICK, UH, VALET, IT'S JUST GONNA MAKE THAT WORSE.
AND HIGHLINE ALSO TURNS INTO VICTORY IN AMERICAN AIRLINE CENTER.
SO THEY HAVE MANY EVENING EVENTS, OBVIOUSLY AT THE AMERICAN AIRLINE CENTER.
AND THAT, THAT IS GONNA BE, YOU'RE YOU'RE SAYING THAT THAT EVENTS AT THE AMERICAN AIRLINE CENTER SPILL TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION ALONG HIGHLINE? YES.
I I JUST WANTED YOU TO TESTIFY TO THAT, IF THAT'S THE CASE.
UH, UH, SO THESE, YEAH, THESE TWO PROPOSED PARKING REDUCTIONS ARE ON HIGHLINE BETWEEN THE AMERICAN AIRLINES AND OAK LAWN.
SO, UH, IT CAN'T HANDLE PEOPLE WAITING IN LINE OF VALET OR PICKING UP CARS OR WHATEVER.
UH, IF THEY HAVE AN IDEA FOR A RESTAURANT AT 1626, THEY ALREADY DON'T HAVE A TRUE DOG.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW, AND THEY ACTUALLY, I THINK, HAVE TO COME ONTO MY PROPERTY.
GO A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE.
I JUST, WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
PUSH THE BUTTON ONE MORE TIME.
OH, MAYBE THAT GOT, THERE YOU GO.
THE, SO WE TALKED ABOUT, UH, THE, THE AMERICAN AIRLINE CENTER, IF THEY HAVE AN IDEA FOR A RESTAURANT AT 1626, THEY ALREADY DON'T HAVE A TRUE DOCK.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY'RE GONNA MOVE FOOD IN AND OUTTA THERE.
AND I DON'T EVEN BELIEVE THEY CAN GET TO IT IF THEY DON'T COME ON MY PROPERTY.
YOU KNOW, YOU SAW THE UPS TRUCK, IT HAS TO GO WAY INTO MY PROPERTY TO BACK UP TO THEIRS.
SO THAT, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT.
THESE CURRENT PARKING LOTS ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING UNLESS, UH, USES FOR THE RESTAURANT BEING PROPOSED.
[01:50:01]
EXCEPTION IS APPROVED, THERE IS LITTLE THE CITY CAN DO TO ENFORCE THE HOURS OF VALETING OR LIMIT THE OVERFLOW ONTO PRIVATE LOTS.UH, THE CITY TRAFFIC'S GONNA GREATLY BE AFFECTED ON HIGHLINE AND OAK LAWN.
UH, THESE, THESE FEW PARKING SPACES AT 1629 ARE MEANT TO BE USED FOR THE BUSINESSES HOUSED THERE.
NOT FOR OFFSITE VALET PARKING.
REMEMBER, THIS IS NOT A TRUE PARKING LOT, BUT IT'S THE ENTRANCE TO FOUR BUSINESSES.
SO, UH, AND I TOLD YOU, THEY KNEW, KNEW ABOUT THE FIVE FEET.
UH, IF THEY HAVE EXTRA AND IF THEY HAVE THE EXTRA PARKING IN THEIR NEW LOT, WHY AREN'T THEY USING THAT? BECAUSE I THINK THEY WANNA TAKE AND USE A LITTLE BIT FOR ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT THINGS THEY'RE DOING AND PUT IT IN THAT AND USE, WE'RE GONNA GIVE 10 HERE.
WELL, WHY NOT JUST GIVE IT TO THIS, YOUR, THIS SITUATION.
YOU'VE GOT THE PARK IN YOUR BUILDING, SO I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU WANNA GO AND MESS SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY UP.
UH, AND WHERE'S THE TURNAROUND? I DON'T THINK THAT'S GONNA WORK.
UH, THE EASEMENT DOESN'T COVER THE WHOLE PROPERTY, AND I THINK CARL'S GONNA COVER THAT.
UH, SO Y'ALL ARE RIGHT IN SEEING THAT.
IT JUST, IT, IT STOPS BEFORE THEIR DOCK EVEN.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, WELL, I WANNA THANK Y'ALL.
WELL, WELL THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
UH, UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY.
HOW LONG HAVE YOU OWNED THE BUILDING? 25 YEARS.
I'VE BEEN IN THE DISTRICT THOUGH.
I'M, LOOK, I'M LOOKING AT THE CHART THAT WE GET FROM THE, FROM THE STAFF, AND I THINK YOUR PROPERTY NUMBER FIVE.
AND IT SAYS IT'S H-I-E-D-L-L-C.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I'VE GOT YOU ON MY MAP.
I ALMOST SAID I WAS HIGH ED, BUT NO, NO, YOU'RE GOOD.
I JUST, NOW IT SHOWS HERE THAT YOU HAVE TWO PROPERTIES, RIGHT? ONE THE BUILDING.
UM, AND THEN THE, IS THAT OLD DART OR OLD RAIL LINE? RAIL BED.
IT'S, THOSE ARE SO IMPORTANT IN THE DESIGN DISTRICT.
'CAUSE NOW, I MEAN, YOU CAN PARK ON 'EM AND EVERYBODY NEEDS PARKING.
SO I OWN THE RAIL BED BEHIND DAVID GILBERT NEXT TO ME.
SO YOU, SO YOU THINK THERE'S A SHORTAGE OF PARKING IN THE DESIGN DISTRICT?
NO, I I, YOU, YOU'VE BEEN THERE 25 YEARS.
YOU, YOU HAVE A VESTED INTEREST.
SO WE ARE LOOKING FOR FORTHRIGHT, INFORMED TESTIMONY ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE GROUND.
WE SEE PICTURES, WE SEE VIDEOS, WE HEAR TESTIMONY.
SO IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE HEAR YOUR PERSPECTIVE FROM A 25 YEAR PERSPECTIVE.
WELL, 50 YEARS IN THE DESIGN DISTRICT.
I'M TALKING ABOUT AT THIS LOCATION.
WE EVERY DAY HAVE PEOPLE PARKING IN OUR LOT EVERY DAY.
THERE'S NOT ONE THAT, THERE'S NOT THREE OR FOUR OTHER PARK PARKING THAT SHOULDN'T BE THERE, THAT SHOULD NOT BE THERE.
THEY JUST GO TO OTHER SHOWROOMS. THEY GO TO RESTAURANTS, THEY GO, WHO KNOWS? THEY JUST PARK THERE AND WALK SOMEPLACE.
I MEAN, EVEN 16, 26, THEY HAVE WORKERS THAT NEED TO COME AND WORK ON THEIR BUILDING.
THEY PARK IN OUR PARKING LOT, USUALLY BECAUSE WE HAVE A BIG SPACE AND WE DON'T HAVE, HAVE TO HAVE AS MANY EMPLOYEES.
SO WE END UP WITH PARKING AND EVERYBODY, EVERYBODY I EVER SAY, TELL 'EM I HAVE THIS BUILDING.
THEY SAY, OH MY GOD, YOU HAVE PARKING.
WELL, WE, WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING, COMING AND, AND GIVING US YOUR INFORMED OPINION.
IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. CARSON? RIGHT.
UH, MS. WILLIAMS, WHO ELSE DO WE HAVE SPEAKING, UM, MR. CARL CROWLEY, YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN SWORN IN.
JUST GIVE US YOUR NAME AND, AND ADDRESS.
WE JUST MOVED WELBURN 7 5 2 1 9.
LAST HEARING, I DIDN'T KNOW IT, BUT SOMEONE TEXTED ME WHAT THE ZIP CODE WAS.
UM, REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER.
SHE, SHE DID A LOT OF MY PRESENTATION, SO I'M GONNA BE A LOT BRIEFER.
MAYBE SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO PAY AS MUCH NOW.
[01:55:01]
ALL FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HERE.HAVE HER KEEP AS MUCH MONEY AS SHE CAN.
UH, I WAS JUST GONNA PULL UP THE, THE EASEMENT.
SHE, I'M GONNA S SOME, IT JUST, EVERYONE GOT THE ANSWER RIGHT? I JUST WANTED TO SHOW YOU IN A PICTURE THAT EVERYONE GOT THE ANSWER RIGHT.
UM, THERE IS A LARGE EASEMENT THERE, A STORM SURGE EASEMENT.
AND THAT'S RIGHT, IT'S A STORM SURGE EASEMENT AND BIG PIECE OF PIPE PROBABLY UNDERNEATH IT.
UM, BUT THE, UH, ACCESS EASEMENT IS ATTACHED TO THE BACK OF A DEED.
WELL WE SENT THE PRESENTATION, BUT IT'S NOT LOADED.
WE'RE NOT GONNA SHARE THE UPS PICTURE 'CAUSE YOU'VE ALREADY SEEN THE UPS JUDGE.
UH, IF, IF Y'ALL CAN SEE THAT NOW, UM, IF YOU SEE THE RED LINE, THAT'S THE ACTUAL ACCESS EASEMENT ON MR. THOMPSON.
CAN YOU DO A LITTLE ZOOM IN FOR US? YEAH.
FOR THOSE OF US WITH IMPAIRED VISION, NOT YOU GUYS, BUT ME.
SO THAT'S THE ACTUAL, THE RED HIGHLIGHTED IS THE ACCESS EASEMENT THAT'S ON OUR PROPERTY.
AND THEN OBVIOUSLY GO BACK, GO BACK ONE OR TWO CLICKS, MR. THOMPSON.
SO WE CAN SEE THE OTHER, THE BUILDING TO THE OTHER SIDE AND RELEVANT.
SO, SO THAT'S BASICALLY, IT ALLOWS THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR TO COME IN THE DRIVEWAY 'CAUSE THEIR DRIVEWAY WIDTH WOULDN'T BE ENOUGH TO GET IN THEIR VEHICLES.
AND THEN, AND THEN IT SORT OF, I THINK YOU MENTIONED 60 DEGREES AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S 60 DEGREE ANGLE.
IT GETS ANGLES AND BACK ONTO THEIR PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S, UM, I, I TALKED TO MS. CARSON.
SHE COULD GO OUT AND PUT LITTLE BARRICADES ALL UP AND DOWN THERE AND SAY, I GOT MY HALF, YOU GOT YOUR HALF STAY OFF MY PROPERTY.
BUT OBVIOUSLY SHE HASN'T DONE THAT.
UM, AND, AND SHE'S OBVIOUSLY ALLOWED THE FOUR VE, THE, THE INFAMOUS FOUR HALF CARS TO PARK ON HER PROPERTY.
UM, SHE ACTUALLY, I GUESS COULD PUT ONE CAR IN THERE STRAIGHT IN IF SHE NEEDED IT, BUT SHE DOESN'T NEED THE PARKING.
UM, SO I, I THINK YOU COULD SEE THE ISSUE WITH, UM, IF YOU WENT FURTHER NORTH ON THAT, UH, SCREEN NORTH, YOU WOULD SEE THAT THE TURNAROUND IS GONNA BE DIFFICULT.
MR. THOMPSON, COULD YOU TAKE US NORTH? THE TURNAROUND IS GONNA BE DIFFICULT FOR VALET JUST BECAUSE YOU PULL IN AND YOU GOT, AND THEN YOU'VE GOTTA DIVE BACK AGAIN.
THAT, THAT, WITH THOSE FOUR PARKING SPACES UP THERE, YOU REALLY DON'T HAVE MUCH ROOM AND YOU GAIN NINE FEET ONTO OUR PROPERTY.
BUT AGAIN, WE HAVEN'T BLOCKED OFF OUR PROPERTY AND, AND, AND IT'S NEVER BEEN AN ISSUE BEFORE.
UM, AND NOR HAVE WE DONE ANY TOWING BEFORE.
AND, AND OBVIOUSLY SHE HAS THE RIGHT TO DO THAT AND DOESN'T WANT TO DO THAT, UM, MIGHT BE FORCED TO DO THAT, UM, BECAUSE SHE HAS EVENTS ALSO.
UM, AND IN HER BUILDING AFTER FIVE O'CLOCK, AND, AND ACTUALLY SOME OF THE TENANTS IN THE, IN THE APPLICANT'S BUILDING HAS, HAS EVENTS.
AND I THINK YOU'VE SEEN SOME OF THE OPPOSITION FROM THOSE TENANTS EVEN AND STUFF.
AND SHE'S GOT, IF YOU'LL GO BACK A FEW SLIDES, SHE WENT OUT AND GOT SIGNATURES.
BUT I THINK YOU'VE GOT THOSE IN THAT PETITION FROM HER, FROM OTHER, FROM OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS AND OTHER TENANTS IN THE AREA.
SO I, I'M REALLY NOT GONNA GO OVER ALL THAT.
IT'S WHAT I REALLY WANTED TO EMPHASIZE IS WHAT SHE TALKED ABOUT IS, IS SHE, THIS IS, IS REALLY PUTTING AN IMPOSITION ON HER PROPERTY MORE THAN IT'S REALLY SOLVING FOR THEIRS.
SHE EVEN MENTIONED THAT IF THEY'RE BUILDING THIS 185 SPACE LOT OVER THERE AND THEY'RE SETTING ASIDE 75 FOR VALET, AND THIS IS WHAT, 10 SPACES, THERE'S STILL ANOTHER 110 SPACES OVER THERE.
UM, WE THINK THAT'S MORE APPROPRIATE THAN, UH, DISRUPTING HER PROPERTY, FORCING HER TO THEN ENFORCE HER PROPERTY SO THAT OTHER PEOPLE AREN'T IMPOSING UPON HER RIGHT NOW.
UM, THE FOUR SPACES AREN'T A PROBLEM.
UM, BUT AT SOME POINT THERE'S, THERE, IT JUST GETS PRETTY SERIOUS NOW WHERE YOU'RE IMPOSING A LOT OF STUFF ON HER THAT SHE'S GONNA HAVE TO TAKE ACTION FOR THE NEIGHBORS GETTING A, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THIS CASE.
SO, SO OBVIOUSLY WE'RE OPPOSED TO THAT.
UM, SHE, SHE HAS NOT BEEN REACHED OUT TO BY THE NEIGHBORS OF THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE.
UM, THEY'VE HAD OBVIOUSLY, WELL, I DON'T KNOW, THREE MONTHS AT LEAST, IF NOT MORE.
THEY ASKED FOR A DELAY AND YOU GAVE 'EM A MONTH DELAY.
THE APPLICATION TAKES A COUPLE MONTHS.
SO, AND THEY OBVIOUSLY BEEN PLANNING THIS FOR A WHILE, SO THERE'S A LOT OF TIME IN THERE THAT THEY COULD HAVE REACHED OUT TO HER AND SAID, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.
YOU KNOW, JUST LOOKING AT OTHER LOGISTIC THINGS.
[02:00:01]
SITTING THERE, WHERE'S THE RESTAURANT'S DUMPSTER GONNA BE? WELL, I DON'T KNOW.YOU SEE A SITE PLAN FOR A DUMPSTER.
THERE'S ONE, THERE'S ONE IDEA TO HAVE A DUMPSTER FOR A, FOR AN ART GALLERY AND A, AND A RUG DEALERSHIP OR SOMETHING, A RESTAURANT.
THEY GOTTA EMPTY THAT DUMPSTER A HECK OF A LOT MORE.
I DIDN'T SEE A PLACE ON THEIR SITE PLAN.
YOU COULD HAVE PUT A DUMPSTER TO BUILD THAT, TO PUT THAT 2,500 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER THINGS THAT I DON'T THINK HAVE BEEN ANSWERED ON THAT SITE PLAN, BE IT A LEGITIMATE SITE PLAN OR NOT
WE'D ASK THAT YOU, UH, NOT APPROVE THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
QUESTIONS FROM THE PANEL FOR, UH, MR. CROWLEY OR FOR THE, UH, MS. CARSON, UH, FURTHER TO RESPOND TO YOUR COMMENT ABOUT THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A WHILE.
SO I'M LOOKING BACK IN MY INCH, THINK OF, OF PAPER, I SEE A LETTER FROM AUGUST OF 24.
WHAT'S, HOW, WHAT'S AUGUST? YEAH, THAT'S, I CAN'T DO CALENDAR MATH.
AND YOU'VE, YOU'VE HEARD FROM US ONCE OR TWICE A HUNDRED TIMES THAT IT'S ABOUT HOW YOU INTERACT WITH YOUR NEIGHBOR AND YOUR PROPERTY OWNER.
NOW, FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION LIKE THIS, IT SPEAKS TO THE ISSUE OF TRAFFIC AND SAFETY AND THOSE AND CONGESTION, BUT STILL THE OVERLYING THE OVERRIDING ISSUE THAT A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN DALLAS OR ELSEWHERE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS ALWAYS GOES TO THE IMPACT OF YOUR SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.
WHETHER IT'S RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL.
YOU HEAR THAT ALL THE TIME ON CASES BEFORE AND AFTER THIS ONE TODAY.
AND IT'S PROBABLY BE BEFORE THAT, BUT THAT'S A SEPARATE ASIDE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I THANK YOU FOR YOUR, I DON'T WANT, UH, WHAT DO YOU CALL IT? A HANGOVER OR WHATEVER.
A HOLDOVER OVER, I'M SORRY, OVER.
SHE DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE DELAYED.
IT'S NOT GONNA BE, IT'S NOT GONNA BE.
THANK, UM, ANY QUESTIONS FOR ANY OF THE SPEAKERS? MR. VINCENT? OUR RULES SAID THAT YOU ARE ALLOWED A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE, AS I SAID A FEW MINUTES AGO, WE, UM, HAVE LISTENED VERY ATTENTIVELY TO MS. CARSON'S CONCERNS.
WE WOULD STILL LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO HER TO TRY TO ADDRESS THOSE.
UH, WE WERE NOT AWARE, THERE WAS NOT A FORMAL RESPONSE THAT SHE SENT IN LAST TIME SHE DID THIS TIME, AND WE'RE AWARE OF IT.
THE, UH, THE HEAD OF THE COMPANY, UH, MR. VIPIN NAMBIAR HAS BEEN OUT OF THE COUNTRY QUITE A BIT.
HE'S OUT OF THE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW.
WE WOULD STILL LIKE TO ASK HER THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN WITH MS. CARSON AND TRY TO ADDRESS THESE MATTERS.
YOU KNOW, SOME OF 'EM ARE OPERATIONAL AND MANAGEMENT TYPE THINGS, UM, THAT CAN BE DEALT WITH, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF, YOU KNOW, THE ACTUAL PARKING COUNTS.
WE WOULD JUST LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TRY TO DO THAT.
YOU KNOW, RESPECTFULLY COOPERATIVELY IN GOOD FAITH.
UM, REALLY DO WANNA BE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND WANT TO WANNA ADDRESS HER CONCERNS.
UM, WE STILL MAINTAIN, AND IT'S, IT'S CLEAR IN OUR MINDS THAT WE MEET THE STANDARD.
UM, YOU KNOW, DOES ANY URBAN AREA HAVE ENOUGH PARKING? THAT'S A KIND OF A SUBJECTIVE JUDGMENT.
IF PEOPLE HAVE TO DRIVE AROUND FOR A FEW MINUTES AND LOOK FOR A PARKING PLACE, YOU KNOW, SOME PEOPLE SAY, WELL, THAT'S LIFE IN THE BIG CITY.
SOME PEOPLE SAY, WELL THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THIS IS TERRIBLE.
I MEAN, IF YOU GO TO, YOU KNOW, DEEP ELEM OR UPTOWN OR ANY NUMBER OF OTHER PLACES, YOU KNOW, IT'S A SIMILAR ENVIRONMENT.
IT'S AN URBAN MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT.
UM, IN TERMS OF WALKABILITY, YOU KNOW, I, I GET THE WEATHER ARGUMENT.
UM, SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE MOST WALKABLE CITIES IN THE COUNTRY, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ACTUALLY GO TO BECAUSE OF THESE URBAN ENVIRONMENTS, YOU KNOW, LIKE BOSTON OR NEW YORK OR CHICAGO, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT GETS REALLY COLD IN THE WINTER THERE.
I KNOW IT GETS, I GREW UP HERE.
I KNOW HOW HOT IT GETS IN THE SUMMER FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS.
UM, YOU KNOW, SO I MEAN THAT'S, I I THINK PEOPLE ARE STILL GONNA WALK, YOU KNOW, IT'S AN URBAN MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT.
UM, AND AS WE SAID, YOU KNOW, WE THINK THOSE SIDEWALKS CAN BE PUT IN EXPEDITIOUSLY THANKS TO THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.
SO THE, THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED, WE THINK CAN BE ADDRESSED.
UM, AND TO THE EXTENT THEY'RE OUTSIDE OF THE PARAMETERS OF, UH, CODE OR THE PD, YOU KNOW, IT'S, WE SHOULD BE WORKING TOGETHER COOPERATIVELY ON OPERATIONAL AND MANAGEMENT, UH, MATTERS.
AND THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD COME IN.
WE WOULD SIT DOWN WITH MS. CARSON AND, AND WORK THESE THINGS OUT, WORK THESE THINGS OUT.
UM, I THINK TO THE BENEFIT OF EVERYBODY AND TO THE BENEFIT OF THE DISTRICT.
SO JUST TO SUM UP, YOU KNOW, WE THINK WE MEET THE STANDARD.
[02:05:01]
UM, IMPORTANTLY, I THINK THE BOTTOM LINE IS DO YOU MEET THE STANDARD OR NOT? WE THINK WE DO.WE THINK WE'VE DOCUMENTED THAT, YOU KNOW, MR. DENMAN'S DONE, UH, NOT JUST A FIRST PARKING STUDY, BUT AN UPDATED ONE.
UM, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS WILL WORK AND WORK WELL, ESPECIALLY WITH THE ADDED VOLUNTEERED CONDITION OF THE ADDITIONAL REMOTE SPACES.
UM, AGAIN, YOU CAN REVISIT THIS AFTER A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD, IF YOU THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE, WE'D BE FINE WITH THAT.
UM, THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA.
SO, UM, AGAIN, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, MR. NAMBIAR WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN WITH MS. CARSON, UM, JUST OUTTA RESPECT AND, AND TALK TO HER ABOUT IT.
SO, YOU KNOW, OUR FIRST REQUEST WOULD BE TO HOLD THIS OVER, TO GIVE THE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.
YOU KNOW, IF YOU WERE TO DENY THIS, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO DENY IT WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WHICH SIMILARLY GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOME MORE WORK ON IT AND COME BACK.
UM, SO, BUT I WILL MAINTAIN THAT WE MEET THE STANDARD AND WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU APPROVE THIS OR WELL HOLD IT OVER.
ULTIMATELY APPROVE IT, HOLD IT OVER TODAY.
UH, I THINK WE HAVE A QUESTION.
MS. DAVIS, I'M REALLY STRUGGLING WITH WHY YOU DIDN'T APPROACH YOUR NEIGHBOR SOONER.
AND I KNOW YOU MENTIONED THE OWNER WAS OUT OF THE COUNTRY, BUT THIS HAS BEEN IN PROCESS FOR A LONG TIME.
AND YOU SAY THAT YOU WANNA BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR, BUT I MEAN, TO ME IT'S COMMON SENSE THAT YOU WOULD'VE GONE TO HER FIRST.
SO, I, I AM LOOKING FOR A REALLY HONEST ANSWER HERE, BECAUSE WE ARE ALREADY A LITTLE, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING WITH A PARKING, THE PARKING SITUATION.
YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU SAID THAT YOU DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I, I WOULD THINK YOU'D HAVE THAT BUTTON DOWN AND THAT YOU WOULD KNOW THAT IF YOU'RE COMING IN FRONT OF US.
BUT I'M, I'M REALLY JUST BLOWN AWAY THAT YOU DIDN'T EVEN DISCUSS THIS WITH HER.
I MEAN, THIS DIRECTLY IMPACTS HER BUSINESS.
SO TO ME, THERE'S JUST NO EXCUSE FOR NOT DOING THAT.
SO I, I'D JUST LOVE TO HEAR YOUR SIDE OF THAT.
FOR WHATEVER REASON, SCHEDULES DIDN'T MESH.
NOW, THAT'S NOT BEING ACCOUNTABLE.
I'M, I'M LOOKING FOR AN ACCOUNTABLE ANSWER THAT'S DEFLECTING.
SO I, I MEAN, MAYBE YOUR ANSWER, I WANT AN HONEST ANSWER.
MAYBE YOU'RE LIKE, WE DIDN'T CARE.
WELL, IT'S NOT THAT WE DIDN'T CARE.
IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, I, I CAN'T FULLY EXPLAIN WHY THE SCHEDULES DIDN'T MESH FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO GET TOGETHER.
UM, IT'S NOT BECAUSE WE DON'T CARE.
UM, I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION.
UM, MY QUESTION IS WHETHER WE DENY THIS WITH PREJUDICE OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WE'RE GONNA DENY THIS.
NOW, I'M ONLY ONE VOTE, BUT THIS IS UTTERLY EMBARRASSING.
SHOULD BE DENIED THIS WITH OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
MS. DAVIS' QUESTION, AND THIS IS ALL ON THE RECORD, AND AGAIN, FOR THE PUBLIC
UH, WE DEBATE RIGHT HERE IN THE PUBLIC.
UH, I'M ALMOST IN FAVOR OF DENYING IT WITH PREJUDICE BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S NOT BEEN GOOD FAITH ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANT.
AND THAT IS THE ONE OF MY CRITERIA ABOUT WITH PREJUDICE IS WHEN THERE'S NOT GOOD FAITH.
UM, SO BEFORE I MAKE MY MOTION, I'M WELCOME TO HAVE A DISCUSSION.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M INCLINED TO AGREE WITH YOU.
UM, AND MS. DAVIS SAID IT ELOQUENTLY, THERE'S BEEN MORE THAN AMPLE OPPORTUNITY FOR DUE DILIGENCE HERE, AND I DON'T, I DON'T SEE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT BEING MADE EITHER OVER AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME.
SO I, I WOULD BE AMENABLE TO A DENIAL WITH PREJUDICE.
I, I WELCOME OTHER COMMENTS, MS. DAVIS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD SUPPORT DENYING WITH PREJUDICE.
YES, MISTAKES WERE MADE, AND YOU KNOW, IT'S CAUSING US TO QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF THE DATA.
BUT I WOULD RATHER DENY, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET AND TO COME BACK TO US WITH SOME, YOU KNOW, HONEST FEEDBACK AND, AND HONEST SOLUTIONS.
AND AT THAT CASE, IF THEY COME BACK, AND AGAIN, THERE'S NO ACCOUNTABILITY, THEN WE SAY DONE.
BUT THAT JUST MY OPINION, I WOULD DO IT WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
ONE COMMENT, THEN I'M GONNA GO TO MR. KOVICH THEN MS. UH, UH, HAYDEN, UH, OUR RULES ARE SUCH THAT IF WE DENY WITH PREJUDICE, AN APPLICANT CAN COME BACK AND ASK FOR A WAIVER IF THERE ARE CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES.
BUT THE MESSAGE THAT THE BOARD GIVES AN APPLICANT WHEN YOU DENY WITH PREJUDICE IS YOU JUST RAISED THE STANDARD TO COME BACK TO US.
AND RARELY HAVE I VOTED FOR WITH PREJUDICE.
IT'S ONLY BEEN WHEN THERE'S A LACK OF GOOD FAITH ON ONE PARTY, ONE SIDE.
SO, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'LL GO WITH THE WILLINGNESS OF THE BOARD, UH, MR. KOVICH THEN, MS. HAYDEN.
[02:10:01]
I WOULD BE INCLINED TO, UH, VOTE FOR, UM, DENYING WITH PREJUDICE IN THIS CASE.I DON'T THINK THE APPLICANTS HAVE BEEN FORTHCOMING WITH US, UM, OVER TWO MEETINGS NOW.
AND, UM, SO I WOULD BE, UH, AGREEABLE TO, UM, WITH, UH, UH, WITH PREJUDICE.
THANK YOU, MR. HOPKOS, MS. HAYDEN.
SEE, I'M MORE INCLINED TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
AND MY, MY REASONING FOR THAT IS NOT BECAUSE I, I BELIEVE THAT THE, THAT THE ONE SIDE ACTED IN GOOD FAITH.
BUT THESE ARE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS THAT HAVE SHARED ACCESS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM RE REPAIR THIS RELATIONSHIP.
THE, THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT IS REQUESTING THIS, UM, THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION NEEDS TO REPAIR THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER.
AND I FEEL IF WE DIS DENY IT WITH PREJUDICE, UM, THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
I, I, I JUST THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS IS, THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE I WOULD HATE FOR THIS, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS LLC, TO COME IN WITH SOME BIG GUNS AND BULLY THEIR WAY INTO GETTING WHAT THEY WANT.
BUT IF WE DENY IT WITH PREJUDICE, I FEEL THAT OP THAT KEEPS THE DOOR OPEN FOR THEM TO HAVE SOME DIALOGUE AND TO WORK SOMETHING OUT.
AND TO, THAT'S, THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.
AND THAT'S EXACTLY ONE PART OF THE REASON WHY I'M THINKING IT SHOULD BE DENIED WITH PRESIDENT, WITH PRE WITH PREJUDICE.
I FEEL LIKE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENED.
AND, AND I'M NOT, I'M PROB PEOPLE WOULD PROBABLY SAY I'M MORE OF THE BIG GUNS, THE, THE, THE LARGE PROPERTY OWNER TYPE PRIVATE CITIZEN, THAT, THAT'S WHERE WILL NEWMAN WOULD FALL.
BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE ALREADY.
AND IT'S SHOCKING TO HEAR THE APPLICANT SAY, WELL, YEAH, IT WAS AUGUST, IT'S BEEN THERE, IT'S EIGHT MONTHS, NINE MONTHS, AND I DON'T REALLY HAVE AN ANSWER AS TO WHY YOU DIDN'T ENGAGE YOUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR.
AND TO THINK, WE WENT THROUGH A HEARING LAST MONTH, AND GUYS, I KEEP ALL THIS STUFF EVERY MONTH AND I WRITE NOTES.
AND I, I AM DUMBFOUNDED AT THE NUMBER OF THINGS THAT HAVE CHANGED OF WHAT WAS TOLD TO US LAST MONTH VERSUS THIS MONTH.
SO WHAT ELSE IS NOT ACCURATE? AND I, I, YOU KNOW, IF THE BOARD SAW IT TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE, I'D GO ALONG WITH IT.
I'M GONNA STILL RECOMMEND WITH PREJUDICE, THE ESCAPE CLAUSE IS THE APPLICANT CAN COME BACK TO US WHEN THEY CAN SAY THERE ARE CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES.
IS THAT NOT THE CRITERIA, MR. BOARD ATTORNEY? THAT IS CORRECT.
THEY CAN CERTAINLY SEEK A WAIVER TO, UM, GET AROUND THAT.
BUT THE CRITERIA ON THE WAIVER IS CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES.
SO THEY, THAT PUTS THE ONUS ON THE VERY BIG GUNS THAT YOU SAY, WHICH IS WHAT IT IS HERE, THROWING AN ELBOW.
TELL US WHAT PROVE TO US THAT YOU'VE MADE AN EFFORT THAT WHAT'S THE CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES? 'CAUSE CLEARLY THE LAST EIGHT MONTHS, I, I DON'T, I MEAN, OTHER THAN, GOSH, ALMIGHTY, AN INCH OF PAPER, AND AS, AS, AS MR. FINNEY STATED LAST MONTH, WHY DID YOU OVERLOAD US WITH A BUNCH OF PAPER AND OUTDATED REPORTS THAT AREN'T SPECIFIC TO THIS PROJECT? SO I I, I'M NOT ANGRY, I'M JUST DISAPPOINTED.
I'M JUST APPOINTED MR. MR. NRI.
AND, AND WITH NO REAL DEFINITIVE SPECIFIC SITE PLAN BEING OFFERED, CORRECT.
COLOR CODED DOESN'T CUT IT WITH ME.
I DON'T REMEMBER APPROVING A SIDE PLAN THAT'S COLOR CODED.
OR ANYWAY, MS. DAVIS, UH, I, I'M GONNA AGREE WITH MS. HAYDEN.
I THINK, UH, I THINK MS. HAYDEN BRINGS UP A REALLY GOOD POINT BECAUSE I COULD PICTURE EVERYBODY GOING BACK TO THEIR PROPERTIES, SOMEBODY PUTTING UP CONES, AND IT JUST BEING A REALLY BAD SITUATION AS OPPOSED TO, OKAY, THE DOOR IS OPEN THERE FOR FUTURE COLLABORATION, WE'RE DENYING IT, BUT LET'S SEE IF THEY CAN WORK TOGETHER AND HAVE A DIALOGUE AS OPPOSED TO, NOPE, THEY HATE EACH OTHER, GONNA MOVE ALONG.
AND IT'S GOING TO BE A TERRIBLE RELATIONSHIP FOR BOTH OF Y'ALL.
SO AT LEAST THAT I, I THINK YOU MADE A REALLY GOOD POINT.
AND I MEAN, THERE'S ENOUGH JUST DISCORD AROUND ANYWAY, SO THAT'S, WE'RE STILL DENYING IT.
I JUST, IT DOES LEAVE THE DOOR OPEN A LITTLE BIT AND, AND COMPLETELY UP TO MS. CARSON IF, IF SHE WANTS TO HAVE THAT DIALOGUE.
AND IF SHE DOESN'T, SHE DOESN'T.
UM, BUT I JUST HOPE THAT SOMETHING THEY CAN AT LEAST WORK OUT SOMETHING SO THAT IT'S NOT COMPLETELY UNPLEASANT FOR ANYBODY.
[02:15:01]
COMMENTS, MR. KOVI? WAS THAT A, WAS THAT A YES.IT, IT WAS, UM, WELL, IF I'M HEARING CORRECTLY, MR. CHAIRMAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE ARE THREE IN FAVOR OF DENYING WITH RESPECT TO THIS, AND TWO, THAT WE NOT WILLING TO DO THAT.
WHAT, WHAT, WHAT OUR RULES OR PROCEDURES STATE THAT IN ORDER TO GRANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WE NEED A MINIMUM OF FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES TO DENY.
WE JUST NEED A MAJORITY THREE.
THAT'S OUR RULES ARE SAY YOU NEED FOUR TO APPROVE, BUT YOU ONLY NEED THREE TO DENY THE QUESTION RESPECTFULLY IS WHETHER WE WANT TO DENY WITH PREJUDICE OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
AND, AND, YOU KNOW, I'M ALL FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND I'M ALL FOR POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS.
I COULD BE CONVINCED TO GO AHEAD AND DO IT WITHOUT PREJUDICE, BUT I, BUT IF WE GO THAT PATH, I'VE GOTTA, I'VE GOTTA ASSURE THIS PROPERTY OWNER WHO HAS 25 YEARS OF INVESTED HISTORY, YOU'RE GONNA BE TREATED FAIRLY BECAUSE ANY OTHER CASE THAT COMES, COMES BACK TO THIS PANEL.
AND I'LL PROBABLY KEEP ALL THIS INFORMATION BECAUSE YOU'LL HAVE TO, MR. CHAIR, MR. CHAIRMAN? YES, GO AHEAD.
SO, UM, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO STATE THAT SHOULD THIS CASE COME BACK BEFORE OUR PANEL? UH, LEMME BACK UP A SECOND.
I DON'T VIEW OUR POSSIBILITY AS, AS OUR CASE IS NOT TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON WHETHER THE NEIGHBORS AGREE OR NOT.
WE CONSIDER THAT INFORMATION WHETHER WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO DECIDE OUR CASE BASED ON THAT.
UM, BECAUSE OUR DECISIONS ARE DEALING WITH THE PROPERTY AND NOT WHO MAY BE A NEIGHBOR TODAY AND NOT TOMORROW.
UM, I'M, I'M VERY UNHAPPY THAT THE APPLICANTS HAVE NOT BEEN FORTHCOMING WITH US ON TWO MEETINGS NOW.
UM, AND THERE'S AN, AN AWFUL LOT OF SUPPOSITION AND ASSUMPTION, UH, AND, AND VERY LITTLE IN THE WAY OF ANYTHING HARD SERIAL THINGS WE CAN SUPPORT.
UH, THAT, UH, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT IF THIS CASE COMES BACK BEFORE A PANEL, THAT IT'S NOT SUB A SUBSTANTIALLY BETTER MADE CASE, IT'S NOT GONNA GAIN MY APPROVAL.
SO IF WE WERE TO DENY WITH PREJUDICE AND THEY CAME BACK AND REQUESTED A WAIVER, WOULD THAT COME TO OUR PANEL AGAIN? YES.
ANY, ANY ISSUE RELATING TO 1626 HIGHLINE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS HAS TO COME BACK TO PANEL A.
IS THAT CORRECT, MR. BOARD ATTORNEY? THAT'S CORRECT.
A, ANYTHING HAVING TO DO WITH ANY ISSUE, VARIANCE, SPECIAL EXCEPTION, ANY ISSUE A BUILDING OFFICIAL APPEAL, ANYTHING WITH THE ADDRESS? 1626 COMES BACK THIS PANEL COME BACK BEFORE THIS PANEL.
A AND I, I DON'T WANNA BE ABSENT ABOUT IT, BUT I WANNA BE VERY RESPECTFUL ALSO OF THIS PROPERTY OWNER WHO WAS FORCED TO COME DOWN AND DEFEND HER PROPERTY ON HER OWN.
NOT BECAUSE SHE WAS TALKED TO AND HAD A DISAGREEMENT WITH THE OTHER PROPERTY, THE APPLICANT.
'CAUSE IF IT, BUT NOW WE'RE GONNA RUN HER THROUGH THE RINGER AGAIN.
I MEAN, I MEAN, GUYS, I HEAR ALL THE TIME FROM YOU ALL ABOUT, WELL, DID YOU ENGAGE WITH YOUR NEIGHBOR? DID YOU ENGAGE WITH YOUR NEIGHBOR? I RARELY SAY THAT 'CAUSE I'M NOT AS FERVENT AS THAT, BUT YOU GUYS ARE FERVOR ABOUT THAT.
FROM N ALL THE TIME YOU WORKED WITH YOUR NEIGHBOR, I'M IN FAVOR.
OR MS. DAVIS, YOU DIDN'T WORK WITH YOUR NEIGHBOR.
WHY NOT? AND IT IS OBVIOUS THEY CHOSE NOT TO AND DON'T TELL ME SCHEDULES.
OH MY GOSH, EIGHT MONTHS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SCHEDULES.
I MEAN, SO I, I COULD BE CONVINCED TO DO IT WITHOUT PREJUDICE, BUT I JUST DON'T WANT TO PUT, I JUST DON'T WANNA PUT THIS OTHER PROPERTY OWNER THROUGH THE GRINDER AGAIN, AND MR. CHAIRMAN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IF WE DENY WITH PREJUDICE, UH, THAT GIVES THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY TWO AVENUES, THEY CAN EITHER WAIT TWO YEARS OR REQUEST THE WAIVER.
SO AFTER TWO YEARS, EVEN IF WE DENY IT WITH PREJUDICE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY CAN COME BACK AFTER A TWO YEAR PERIOD.
THEY COULD FILE TOMORROW FOR A REQUEST OF THE TWO YEAR WAIVER TOMORROW.
THEY'D HAVE TO THEN PROVE CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES.
YES, THE WAIVER TO GET THEM BACK IN THE DOOR, THEY COULD APPLY IT TOMORROW.
[02:20:01]
I'M OF THE OPINION THAT A DENIAL WITH PREJUDICE DOESN'T POISON THE WELL.WE'RE THE ONES THAT ARE RESPONDING TO THIS.
I'VE YET TO HEAR FROM THE APP, FROM THE NEIGHBOR, WHETHER THEY'RE IN FAVOR OF TWO YEAR OR A PREJUDICE OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
I'M, I REALLY DON'T WANNA NECESSARILY ASK THAT BECAUSE THAT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY.
I DON'T THINK IT POISONS THE, WELL, I THINK IT REINFORCES TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE APPLICANT.
THESE GUYS ARE SERIOUS ABOUT THIS.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE WANNA DEAL WITH FACTS AND WE WANNA DEAL WITH PEOPLE THAT TREAT THEIR NEIGHBORS WITH RESPECT AND THAT BOTH FAILED HERE.
THAT'S WHY I'M, THAT'S WHY I'M OF THAT OPINION.
BUT IT STILL LETS THEM COME BACK IN THE DOOR.
THEY JUST HAVE TO PROVE, CHANGE THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
AND THEN THAT'S OUR SUBJECTIVE OPINION ON OUR PART.
SO, OTHER OPINIONS, AND THEN I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALED NUMBER BDA 2 5 2 4 5 0 4 7.
AND THE APPLICATION OF JONATHAN VINCENT DENIED THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF THE PARKING REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT WITH PREJUDICE, BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL INCREASE TRAFFIC HAZARDS OR INCREASED TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
AND THE PARKING DEMAND GENERATED BY THE USE WARRANTS THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES.
I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THE APPLICANT IN, UH, MEETING THE STANDARDS THAT WE AS A BOARD HAVE LIVED BY AND OUR SPECIFIC CRITERIA.
AND, UM, AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, UH, THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK AND ASK FOR TWO YEAR WAIVER.
WE WAIVED ONE JUST THE OTHER DAY, LAST MONTH.
IF THEY SHOW THAT THERE IS A CHANGE IN THEIR CIRCUMSTANCES, THEY'RE WELCOME TO COME BACK.
AND, UH, BUT THAT CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCES IS A FUNCTION OF WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO, HOW THEY'RE GONNA DO IT, AND HOW IT AFFECTS THEIR NEIGHBORS AND HOW IT AFFECTS THE TRAFFIC AND THE CONGESTION.
MR. COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
UM, I, I TOO AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE PREVIOUSLY STATED.
UM, I, I TOO AM VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THE APPLICANT IN AND OF THE FACT THAT THIS IS A LARGE LAND OWNER WITH A LOT OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, EXPER COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT EXPERIENCE.
I JUST DON'T FEEL THE DUE DILIGENCE WAS DONE HERE.
UM, AGAIN, THERE WAS AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO APPROACH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND IT, IT JUST WASN'T DONE.
DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? MR. KOVI? UH, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST, I, I CONCUR WITH, WITH YOUR COMMENTS, MR. CHAIRMAN AND MR. NERS.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD, UM, MY FEELINGS ABOUT HOW I'M GOING TO VOTE ON THIS CASE ARE DEAL PERSONALLY WITH HOW THE, THE, THE DEALINGS WITH THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR WERE DEALT WITH, BUT VERY MUCH MORE SO WITH THE WHOLE ISSUE OF THE PARKING IT WAS BEING DEVELOPED FOR THIS PLACE.
UM, UH, MY OPINION IT IS, IS A LESS ACCEPTABLE PLAN WHAT THEY BROUGHT TO US THAT MONTH AND NOT MOVING IN THE DIRECTION OF BEING MORE ACCEPTABLE.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE THAT POINT.
OTHER DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION HEARING? NO DISCUSSION.
THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE, CALL THE MOTION.
MOTION TO DENY PASSES FOUR TO ONE IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 4 5 0 4 7.
THE BOARD ON A VOTE OF FOUR TO ONE DENIES THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WITH PREJUDICE.
YOU'LL GET A DECISION LETTER FROM OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR IN THE NEXT COUPLE DAYS.
UH, I WANNA MAKE ONE OTHER COMMENT TO MS. CARSON.
UH, I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.
UM, IT IS THE CONS, IT IS THE, THE DESIRE OF THE BOARD.
AND I THINK I SAY THIS UNANIMOUSLY, THAT PROPERTY OWNERS, WHETHER IT BE RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, UH, ARE GOOD NEIGHBORS IN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
SO WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL CONTINUE TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND YOU'LL USE YOUR BEST JUDGMENT ABOUT HOW TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY RIGHTS IN LIGHT OF THE LARGER COMMUNITY AS WELL, WHETHER IT BE YOUR DIRECT NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR OR OTHERS.
WE WILL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS.
[02:25:01]
WE WILL COME BACK AT 3:30 PM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A ON THE 20TH OF MAY IS IN RECESS UNTIL THREE 30 THANK YOU.BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A ON, UH, MAY 20TH, 2025.
IT IS 3:37 PM WE'RE BACK IN SESSION.
UM, WE HAVE THREE REMAINING CASES.
UH, THIS WAS COMMUNICATED THIS MORNING.
UH, WE RAN OUT OF TIME FOR THE BRIEFING TIME.
SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE, UM, THE CASES BRIEFED TO US, THEN WE'LL GO TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
FIRST CASE TO BE BRIEFED TO US IS 2 4 5 0 4 8 2 4 5 0 4 8.
MR. THOMPSON, UH, GOOD AFTERNOON.
UH, BDA 2 4 5 0 4 8 AT 1616 HIGHLINE DRIVE.
I'M GONNA PASS DOWN EMAILS, UH, FROM CONS, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS ON 2 4 8.
UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICE, PRIMARY METRICS FOR 49 DAYS.
YOU'RE GONNA START OWNING FOURS THAT POOR NORA AND SARAH ARE GONNA BE UNDER THE GUN AND, AND CAMBRIA AND, AND BRYANT.
UH, THE VICINITY MAP IS TO THE RIGHT WITH THE SUBJECT SITE BEING IN THE AREA OF THE YELLOW STORE.
UH, IT IS NORTH OF HIGHLINE, UH, SOUTH OF STEMMONS, EAST OF OAK LAWN AND WEST OF SLOCUM.
THE GOOGLE AREA MAP IS TO THE LEFT AND THE ZONING MAP IS TO THE RIGHT IS PD 6 21, SUBDISTRICT ONE.
THERE WERE A TOTAL OF EIGHT ON EIGHT PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFIED.
UM, PULL ON, LET ME CHART THIS.
OKAY, EIGHT OUT, EIGHT NOTIFIED YES.
AND THEN NINE LETTERS OF SUPPORT.
OKAY, LET ME, HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
I'M GONNA NINE LETTERS OF SUPPORT.
SO ON THIS PAGE, I, THEY'RE NINE IN SUPPORT TO AN OPPOSITION.
ALRIGHT, MS. HAYDEN, YOU HAD A QUESTION.
THE MAYOR, THE APPROVAL, THE, THE SUPPORTS ARE ALL THE SAME COMPANY AND THAT'S ALSO THE COMPANY THAT OWNS THE YES, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S CONSIDERED LEGITIMATE.
EVEN IF IT'S THE SAME OWNER, IF THEY'RE, THEY'RE REPRESENTING THAT PROPERTY, THE SURVEY OF 200 FEET ARE PROPERTY OWNERS, EVEN IF IT'S THE SAME PROPERTY OWNER, IT'S COUNTED AS A PROPERTY IN FAVOR.
SO NOW JUST 'CAUSE IT'S IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT THROWS THE VOTE OR THROWS THE DECISION OF THE BOARD.
OKAY, GO BACK TO THE NEXT ONE HERE.
UH, LET ME CHART THIS AND THEN RACHEL, OR EXCUSE ME, MS. HAYDEN, DID, DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION OR NO? YES, THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION.
TWO AGAINST, UH, INTERESTING ENOUGH TO YOUR POINT, IT'S ONE PROPERTY ORDER WITH TWO PROPERTIES AGAINST AND ONE PROPERTY WITH ARREST.
ISN'T THAT IRONIC? BUT THIS IS OUR SYSTEM AND WE ABIDE BY OUR SYSTEM.
UH, SUBJECT SITE WAS PROPERLY NOTIFIED, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION, UM, TO THE, UH, PARKING.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO PROVIDE 77 OF THE REQUIRED 153 PARKING SPACES, WHICH WILL REQUIRE 76 SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WHICH IS 49%, 49.6%.
UH, THIS IS THE EXISTING SITE PLAN, UH, SHOWING THE PROPERTY.
UM, THE BUILDING IS THE GREEN OUTLINE HERE AND THEN THE PARKING LOCATED IN THIS AREA.
UM, THIS IS THE, UH, EXISTING PARKING WITH COUNT, UH, SUBJECT SITE FROM HIGHLINE, LOOKING NORTH, AGAIN, BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS, JUST SHOWING THAT THEY ARE SEPARATED,
[02:30:01]
UH, LOOKING EAST, SUBJECT SITE WITHIN THE PARKING LOT ITSELF, AGAIN WITHIN THE PARKING LOT.AND THEN THE, UH, 200 FOOT RADIUS VIDEO, UM, IT IS SIMILAR TO THE ONE FROM EARLIER, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR ONE, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE GO INSIDE THE PARKING LOT IN QUESTION.
SO AGAIN, THE FIRST TIME AROUND, WE'LL JUST PASS THE SUBJECT SITE.
ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE ON HIGHLINE AND APPROACHING THE SUBJECT SITE AND NOW WE'RE AT THE SUBJECT SITE.
OKAY, PAUSE HERE FOR A SECOND.
SO, UM, THE SUBJECT SITE'S ON THE LEFT SUBJECT SITE IS ON THE RIGHT.
SO ON THE RIGHT OR THE LEFT, THE RIGHT? NO, IT'S ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE STREET, BUT IN THE PARKING LOT.
I'M HAVING A PICTURE INTO THE PARKING LOT IS WHAT I'M AFTER.
SO MAKE SURE WE'RE SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE.
OKAY, SO THERE IT IS ON THE LEFT, THE BUILDING OF THE PICTURE RIGHT NOW.
AND INCLUDES BOTH SIDES OF THAT PARKING LOT.
SO THE PROPERTY LINE SHOOTS DOWN TO THE END OR THE EDGE OF THAT OTHER BUILDING.
THE EDGE OF THE WHITE BUILDING.
BUT ALL THOSE PARKING SPACES ARE PART OF THIS PROPERTY? THAT IS CORRECT.
THE WHITE BUILDING HAS ITS OWN PARKING ON THE OTHER SIDE.
UM, THERE'S AN ENTRANCE BACK HERE THAT CAN LOOP THROUGH AND COME OUT ON THIS SIDE.
SO ALL OF THAT PROVIDES IS PARKING FOR THIS BUILDING IN ADDITION TO THE SIDE STREET ALONG EDISON.
AND THEN I JUST SKIP AHEAD TO THE, AGAIN, THE LOCATION OF THE SUBJECT, UM, REMOTE PARKING.
AND IT IS FURTHER ALONG IN THIS ONE.
I, AT THIS TIME, WE'LL GO INSIDE THE PARKING LOT.
UM, COULD YOU HOLD RIGHT THERE? YES.
FURTHER ALL THE WAY BACK OR, YEAH, ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE PARKING LOT EDGE.
I WANNA REMIND THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC RIGHT THERE.
IF YOU STOP THERE A SECOND, I WANNA REMIND THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HANDLES EACH AND EVERY CASE SEPARATELY AND DISTINCTLY.
IT MAY HAVE BEEN THE SAME PROPERTY OWNER, DOESN'T MATTER.
THE STAFF GOES THROUGH THEIR ANALYSIS SEPARATELY.
WE GO THROUGH OUR ANALYSIS, WE TAKE PUBLIC TESTIMONY SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FOR EACH, UH, CASE.
AS IS SAID IN THE BEGINNING OF EVERY HEARING THAT BEGINS THAT NO CASE SETS A PRECEDENT, NO DECISION SETS A PRECEDENT.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M GONNA WALK BACK THROUGH COMMENTS I MAY HAVE MADE BEFORE, BUT I'M GONNA DO IT ALRIGHT.
FROM HERE, I'M LOOKING FOR SIDEWALK ACCESS FROM THEIR PARKING LOT BECAUSE THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT USING A REMOTE AND I'M LOOKING FOR IT ON THIS SIDE.
I SEE A SIDEWALK TO THE EDGE OF THIS PROPERTY, BUT I DON'T SEE ANY SIDEWALK PAST IT.
NOW YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD PLEASE.
YOU'RE GOING THROUGH SOMEONE'S PARKING LOT OR ON THE STREET? CURRENTLY WE'RE ON THE STREET.
UM, WE WILL GO THROUGH THE PARKING LOT.
IF A PEDESTRIAN'S WALKING IS WHAT I'M TALKING.
[02:35:08]
SO IS THAT A DUMPSTER IN THE BACK? IT IS A DUMPSTER.AND IS THAT TAKE AWAY PARKING SPACES? UH, CURRENTLY, YES.
BUT I MEAN, DUMPSTERS ARE ALLOWED ON SITE WHILE CONSTRUCTION IS GOING ON.
OH, THIS IS WHILE CONSTRUCTION.
BUT I'M WONDERING WHERE THE CURRENT TENANT REMOVES THEIR TRASH.
YEAH, THAT DUMPSTER APPEARED TO BE MORE ONE WHEN, UM, CONSTRUCTION IS GOING ON INTERIOR REMODELS.
BUT A BUILDING WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOME WAY OF GETTING TRASH OUT, I MEAN, CORRECT.
I'M JUST GOING TO THE ISSUE OF HOW THE CORRECT CITY HANDLES A DUMPSTER FOR A PROPERTY.
I'LL ASK THAT OF THE APPLICANT.
AND THAT CONCLUDES THE VIDEO FOR QUESTIONS ON THE VIDEO GUYS.
UH, LEGAL STANDARDS OF REVIEW.
UH, NO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS MADE ON THIS REQUEST AND THAT CONCLUDES BDA 2 4 5 0 4 8 AT 1616 HIGHLINE BOARD MEMBERS, WHAT QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE FOR STAFF FOR 2 4 5 0 4 8, WHICH IS 1616 HIGHLINE DRIVE? MS. HAYDEN? SO THE, ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATION, IT LOOKS LIKE THE PROPOSED USE FOR THE PROPERTY IS RESTAURANT AND OFFICE SHOWROOM.
IS THAT WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE? THAT IS CORRECT.
THIS SAYS OFFICE SHOWROOM 42 22 SQUARE FEET.
IS THAT WHAT YOU HAVE? AND 16 SEVEN? I CAN'T READ, I'M LOOKING AT THE SIDE PLAN.
WHAT, WHAT DO YOU HAVE FIF 15,766 SQUARE FEET FOR CORRECT RESTAURANT ON PAGE 2 68.
YEAH, THERE'S A CHART ON 2 68.
ALRIGHT, SO 15 7 66 PROPOSED FOR THE RESTAURANT AND FOR OFFICE SHOWROOM.
THAT IS, THOSE ARE THE PROPOSED NUMBERS.
I'M STILL COMMUNICATING TO MY STAFF.
I'M BEGGING THE QUESTION WHETHER THAT'S CONSIDERED A SUFFICIENT SITE PLAN FOR PURPOSES OF PERMITTING.
I I, I GET A LITTLE NERVOUS WHEN YOUR SENIOR PLANNER SAYS HE CAN'T, HE CAN'T CONFIRM IT, BUT HE THINKS IT'S SO, BUT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
I, I KNOW IT JUST SEEMS TO BE THAT IT'S, IT'S ILLUSTRATIVE.
I GUESS THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S ALL WE HAVE.
I, I'VE SEEN LESS BE PERMANENTED
DEPENDS ON WHAT SENIOR PLAN EXAMINER YOU GET SOMETIME.
WELL, BUT RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME, I'VE GOT, I'VE GOT THE TWO OF YOU GUYS, PLUS I GOT DIANA BACK OVER THERE TOO.
I COULD GO FOR THE APPEALED AGAINST THE WALL, BUT I WON'T YET.
THAT'S PART OF OUR PROBLEM, BRIAN, IS THAT SOMETIMES MORE AND SOMETIMES LESS.
THE MORE AS I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE LESS.
AND, AND I'M GONNA JUST GIVE YOU A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THIS.
UM, EVEN IF WE HAD DIMENSIONS ON HERE, SOMEONE WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND ADD UP ALL THOSE DIMENSIONS.
IF I GO THROUGH AND I ADD UP THOSE DIMENSIONS AND IT COMES TO 42 22, THEN THIS IS SUFFICE FOR ME.
IF I CAN GO THROUGH AND ADD UP THOSE BECAUSE I'M GOING TO SEE THE FLOOR PLAN ITSELF.
SO ONCE I SEE THE ACTUAL FLOOR PLAN, THE EXIT PLAN, UM, FOR FIRE RESCUE, YOU GO TO THE NUMBER, GET TO THE NUMBER.
I WOULD GO THROUGH THOSE NUMBERS.
IF IT ADDS UP TO 4 22, EVEN IF IT CAME TO 42 20, I'M GOOD UNDER, BUT NOT OVER.
AND THAT'S WHY I SAY LIKE, I KNOW WE WANNA PUT A HARD WELL EMPHASIS ON THIS AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT WE'RE NOT IN THE ENFORCEMENT BUSINESS.
THAT'S PERMING AND BUILDING INSPECTION.
THAT'S WHY WHEN YOU ASK ME, IS THIS ENOUGH, THIS VERY WELL COULD BE ENOUGH OR IT COULD NOT BE ENOUGH DEPENDING ON WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OKAY.
YOU PROVIDED TO THE SENIOR PLAN'S EXAMINER.
MS. DAVIS, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT, BUT WHAT IS DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS REQUEST COMPARED TO THEIR INITIAL REQUEST? I LIKE THAT.
UH, I WILL LEAD THAT UP TO THE APPLICANT.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? OKAY, WE'LL SWITCH GEARS AND NOW CALL PUBLIC HEARING FOR P-D-A-B-D-A 2 4 5 0 4 8 16 16.
HIGHLINE DRIVE IS THE APPLICANT HERE.
MS. MARY, UH, WHAT SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE FOR 16? 16 HIGHLINE, WHICH IS, UH, 2 4 5 0 4 8, 2 IN
[02:40:01]
FAVOR AND TWO IN OPPOSITION, TWO IN FAVOR, AND TWO IN OPPOSITION.IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? MM-HMM
UM, YOU'VE BEEN SWORN IN ALREADY SO THAT SUFFICE FOR THE DAY.
UM, OUR RULES OF PROCEDURES ARE THE APPLICANT'S GIVEN FIVE MINUTES.
ANYONE ELSE IN FAVOR IS GIVEN FIVE MINUTES.
ANYONE IN OPPOSITIONS GIVEN FIVE MINUTES AND THE APPLICANT'S GIVEN FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL? AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, I'LL GIVE YOU PLENTY OF TIME AS AN APPLICANT TO MAKE YOUR CASE.
WHATEVER TIME I GIVE YOU, I NEED TO GIVE EVERYONE ELSE EQUALLY.
UM, USUALLY IT WORKS, SO IT'LL BE PLUS OR MINUS.
MY GOOD BOARD SECRETARY GIVES ME A NUDGE USUALLY WHEN WE START RUNNING OUTTA TIME.
BUT I WANNA GIVE EVERYONE THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME, BUT THE APPLICANT GETS THE LAST SAY ON CASES.
SO PROCEED IF YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
UH, NAME IS JONATHAN VINCENT, 2323 ROSS AVENUE IN DALLAS.
AND, UM, AGAIN, APPRECIATE BEING IN FRONT OF YOU.
UM, I'LL JUST, YOU KNOW, START OUT, UH, DIRECTLY ANSWERING MS. DAVIS'S QUESTION.
WHAT'S DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS CASE? WELL, THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS CASE.
UM, AND I'LL JUST, YOU KNOW, THE OBVIOUS ONE I'LL ADDRESS UPFRONT.
UM, MS. CARSON, WHO WAS IN OPPOSITION ON THE PREVIOUS CASE, IS NOT ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.
UM, WE DO NOT, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GONNA USE THE WORD ADVISEDLY, SHARE PARKING.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE ADJACENT PARKING AREAS WITH ANYONE ELSE.
UM, AND WE'LL GET TO THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH IN A MINUTE.
I THINK YOU SAW THAT DURING THE BRIEFING.
BUT WE HAVE OUR OWN PARKING ON SITE THAT NOBODY SHARES WITH US.
WE CONTROL IT OPERATIONALLY AND OTHERWISE.
UH, WHICH LEADS ME TO A SECOND THING THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS CASE.
UH, THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT WHO OWNS WHAT AND HOW CAN WE COUNT 'EM? WE CAN COUNT 'EM.
THERE'S 28 ON SITE, UH, SINCE THE LAST TIME WE WERE IN FRONT OF YOU ON THIS MATTER.
WE HAVE COME UP WITH A PLAN TO PROVIDE AND DEDICATE 65 VALET SPACES ON THE, UH, NEARBY PARKING LOT.
SO IF YOU ADD UP 28 ON SITE IN 65 REMOTE, WE'RE NOW PROPOSING TO PROVIDE 93 SPACES, UH, TOTAL.
AND LET ME, UM, AS A SIDEBAR, LET ME NOTE THAT REMOTE PARKING, THAT'S NOT, I MEAN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE A RIGHT TO COUNT UNDER THE CODE.
SO, YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE THE FACT THAT THEY'RE OFFSITE, THEY'RE ON A REMOTE LOT, WE CAN STILL COUNT THEM FOR CODE PURPOSES.
UM, SO WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO 28 ON SITE 65, UH, VALET OFFITE SPACES.
THAT'S A TOTAL OF 93 SPACES PROVIDED OUT OF 153 REQUIRED.
UM, SO LAST TIME WE WERE IN FRONT OF YOU, WE WERE ASKING FOR ALMOST A 50% REDUCTION, WHICH WE CAN DO UNDER PD 6 21, 49 0.67%.
THAT, UH, REQUESTED REDUCTION IS NOW 39.2%.
SO WE'VE COME DOWN, I THINK IT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT, UH, GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE PD ITSELF CONTEMPLATES UP TO 50% FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE CLOSER TO THE CORNER AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD SOME ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
UH, BUT AGAIN, WITH THE SIDEWALK ISSUE, WE BELIEVE THAT THE, UH, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, WE'LL SEE TO THE INSTALLATION OF THAT SIDEWALK, YOU PROBABLY SAW IN, UH, MR. THOMPSON'S VIDEO.
SOMEBODY HAS RECENTLY INSTALLED SIDEWALK ALONG HIGHLINE BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE THE AADA A COMPLIANT, UH, CURB ACCESS.
YOU KNOW, WE ALSO, THE NEW PARKING LOT THAT'S BEING BUILT, AGAIN, WE HAVE TO INSTALL SIDEWALKS THERE, WHICH WE WANT TO DO ANYWAY.
SO WE, WE DO THINK IT'S WALKABLE.
UM, THAT WAS A POINT OF DISCUSSION.
UM, AND WE THINK IT'S GONNA BE MORE WALKABLE IN THE FUTURE.
UM, ONE OTHER THING I WANNA POINT OUT JUST FOR THE RECORD, IS THAT, THAT THIS OWNERSHIP GROUP, UM, HAS PURCHASED A LOT OF PROPERTIES IN THE DESIGN DISTRICT FROM DUNHILL.
WE ARE NOT DUNHILL, WE'RE NOT AFFILIATED WITH DUNHILL IN ANY WAY.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S IN THE PAST, WE'RE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT COMPANY.
SO, UM, WE DON'T PARTICULARLY WANNA HAVE THAT ASSOCIATION, YOU KNOW, IMPLIED.
I WANNA, I KNOW THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED AS WELL.
UM, THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU HAVE, THE MAIN POINT OF THAT IS TO SHOW THE RELATIVE DENSITIES OF THE POTENTIAL USES ON THE SITE.
UM, IN PARTICULAR, THE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR RESTAURANT WHEN YOU GO IN FOR PERMIT, UM, FORTUNATELY I'M NOT THE ONE THAT DOES THIS, ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS DO THIS, BUT THERE'S A, THERE'S A ROLL OF PAPER.
USUALLY YOU SEE 'EM DOWN ON JEFFERSON CARRYING THESE THINGS AROUND.
THEY'RE ABOUT THAT BIG AROUND, IT'S A SET OF CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS.
USUALLY THE FIRST PAGE IN THAT SET OF CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS IS A DETAILED SITE PLAN FOR THE PROJECT.
[02:45:01]
CONSTRUCTION OR FINISH OUT.UM, THAT WOULD BE WHERE YOU SHOW ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU NEED TO SHOW TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH ALL THE VARIOUS CODE REQUIREMENTS LIKE DUMPSTER LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
THIS WOULD BE ILLUSTRATIVE IN TERMS OF SHOWING, WELL, WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF RESTAURANT THAT COULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT SPACE.
SO THIS WOULD NOT BE THE SITE PLAN THAT WOULD BE SUBMITTED AND REVIEWED FOR PERMIT.
IT JUST NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT.
AND THE REVIEWER FOR PERMIT WOULD SAY, OKAY, WELL HERE'S, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE SHOWING 13,000 SQUARE FOOT OF RESTAURANT.
WELL THAT'S WITHIN THIS MAXIMUM THAT THE BOARD APPROVED.
SO THEY PROCEED TO CHECK ALL THE OTHER BOXES AND ALL THE OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS.
SO IN MY MIND, THAT'S HOW THAT WOULD OPERATE.
SO IS IT THE MOST DETAILED SITE PLAN YOU'VE EVER SEEN? NO, IT'S NOT.
BUT UM, IT SHOULD WORK FOR THIS PURPOSE, WHICH MAINLY IS ABOUT THE PARKING FOR THE VARIOUS USES AND IN PARTICULAR, MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF RESTAURANT USE.
UM, AND YOU DID CORRECTLY SAY THAT EVERY CASE STANDS ON ITS OWN.
SO I THINK THOSE ARE IMPORTANT DISTINCTIONS.
SO, UM, I GUESS AT THIS POINT I'D LIKE TO KIND OF RUN THROUGH OUR PRESENTATION DECK, UM, THIS FIRST PAGE.
YOU KNOW, I'VE TALKED ABOUT HOW THE NUMBERS HAVE CHANGED.
YOU KNOW, WE, WE DID GIVE A LOT OF CONSIDERATION TO WHAT WE HEARD LAST TIME.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, OFFERING UP THESE 65 REMOTE SPACES, WE THINK, AGAIN THAT WE MEET THE STANDARD, UM, FOR, YOU KNOW, NOT CREATING, UH, CONGESTION OR TRAFFIC HAZARD OR, YOU KNOW, THAT THE, THE AMOUNT OF PARKING WE WOULD BE PROVIDING WOULD BE SUFFICIENT.
UM, THERE ARE OTHER SPACES ON THIS NEWLY CONSTRUCTED LOT THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
WE THINK, YOU KNOW, ALLOCATING THE ENTIRE LOT JUST TO A COUPLE OF USES TO BE ABLE TO HIT THE NUMBER.
THAT'S REALLY NOT A GOOD THING FROM WHERE WE'RE HEADED AS A, A CITY FROM A PARKING POLICY STANDPOINT.
YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING TO HAVE SPACES AVAILABLE TO SOMEBODY TO JUST DRIVE DOWN TO THE DESIGN DISTRICT, UM, WITHOUT A PARTICULAR DESTINATION IN MIND.
THEY JUST WANNA PARK THERE AND WALK AROUND AND MAYBE GO TO TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT PLACES.
I THINK THAT HELPS EVERYBODY IN THE DISTRICT.
I JUST THINK IT'S A GOOD THING.
SO THAT, THAT'S OUR THINKING THERE AND WHY WE ALLOCATED, ALLOCATED THOSE SPECIFIC NUMBERS.
YOU KNOW, YOU'VE HEARD THIS SEVERAL TIMES BY THIS POINT.
UM, WE THINK THERE ARE MITIGATING FACTORS IN THE DISTRICT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OUR OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY DIFFERING PEAK TIMES.
I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
I MEAN, OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE, THAT'S MOSTLY A DAYTIME USE.
UM, IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF CASES, YOU KNOW, THE RESTAURANTS THAT ARE CONTEMPLATED FOR THE DISTRICT, UM, OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, MAYBE PEAK LUNCH HOUR, DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF RESTAURANT THEY'RE GONNA BE MORE EVENING, UM, AFTER FIVE TYPE USES.
SO I THINK THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT THING TO CONSIDER.
UM, AND WE'RE USING THE MIXED USE PARKING CHART UNDER THE PD.
YOU KNOW, ABOUT THIS PD 6 21, 50%.
UH, THIS IS, I WANTED TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION AGAIN TO THIS, THIS IS AN AERIAL PHOTO OF THE SITE.
UM, THE SITE IS HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN, AND THIS IS A BETTER ILLUSTRATION THAN ME TRYING TO DESCRIBE IT VERBALLY OF THE FACT THAT OUR PARKING IS ADJACENT TO OUR BUILDING.
IT'S, YOU SEE IT THERE, SORT OF TO THE, UH, THE SOUTH SOUTHEAST OF THE STRUCTURE.
UM, AND THE STRUCTURE TO OUR FARTHER DOWN, UM, CLOSER TO EDISON.
SOMEBODY ELSE OWNS THAT, BUT THEY HAVE A BLANK WALL THERE THAT FACES OUR PARKING.
SO THEY ARE IN NO WAY IMPACTED BY THE PARKING.
AND, UM, FRANKLY, IT'S FARTHER AWAY FROM MS. CARSON'S PROPERTY AS WELL.
SO IT, UM, I SEE NO IMPACT THERE ON HER.
THIS IS A, A DAYTIME AERIAL PHOTO.
UH, YOU'LL SEE THERE ARE A LOT OF EMPTY SPACES THERE.
AT THE SITE PLAN, WE TALKED ABOUT, UM, I TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT MIXED USE PARKING CHART.
UH, AGAIN, WE OWN A LOT OF PROPERTIES IN THE AREA.
WE MAY BELIEVE WE MEET THE STANDARD FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
I'M GONNA KEEP REITERATING THAT BECAUSE I'M CONVINCED IT'S TRUE, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, THE DEPART, THE PARKING DEMAND IS JUST NOT THERE COMPARED TO WHAT THE CODE, WHAT THE PD REQUIRES FOR THESE USES.
UM, I THINK THAT'S KIND OF THE BOTTOM LINE, BUT I THINK ALL OF THESE, ALL OF THESE FACTORS COME INTO PLAY HERE.
UM, SAME THING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OUR PARKING STUDY.
YOU'VE HAD OPPORTUNITIES TO READ THAT.
UM, AGAIN, THIS IS LENGTHY NARRATIVE ABOUT HOW WE MEET THE STANDARD FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
I'M SURE YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO READ THIS.
UM, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH ALL OF IT.
[02:50:03]
SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I WANNA REEMPHASIZE THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS, THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, HAVE MADE A POLICY DECISION THAT WE DON'T NEED NEARLY AS MUCH PARKING IN THE CITY AS WE USED TO THINK WE DID.UM, PERSONALLY, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT.
UM, THIS EXPLAINS THAT VERY WELL, WHAT THE RATIONALE IS FOR THAT.
UM, IT ALSO HIGHLIGHTS THE FACT, AND AGAIN, I I'M NOT GONNA GIVE YOU THE SAME DETAILED EXPLANATION FROM A PROCESS STANDPOINT, BUT WHY THIS IS AN EXPRESSION OF THE CITY'S POLICY.
IT, AND IT'S, IT CHANGES CHAPTER 51 A, BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE PD 6 21 BECAUSE THAT'S JUST NOT THE PROCESS.
SO WE ARE STUCK WITH PARKING RATIOS THAT WHILE THEY WERE LOOSENED UP A LITTLE BIT IN THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS WHEN PD 6 21 WAS ADOPTED, THEY'RE BASED ON PARKING RATIOS THAT GO BACK TO 1965, CHAPTER 51.
UM, AND I'VE ACTUALLY DONE RESEARCH IN A FEW INSTANCES ON CASES, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO PROVE UP DELTA CREDITS THAT YOU GO BACK AND YOU LOOK AT IN THE 1930S AND FORTIES AND FIFTIES, WHAT THE PARKING RATIOS WERE WHEN CITIES FIRST STARTED TO HAVE PARKING RATIOS WHEN MORE PEOPLE HAD CARS IN SOME INSTANCES.
THAT'S WHAT THIS GOES BACK TO.
AND IT'S JUST WE LIVE IN A DIFFERENT WORLD NOW WITH UBER AND LYFT AND, YOU KNOW, MORE TRANSIT, UM, PEOPLE WALKING MORE, YOU KNOW, DENSER, MORE MIXED USE ENVIRONMENTS.
I THINK THE CITY FINALLY RECOGNIZED THIS.
UM, IT DIDN'T GO ALL THE WAY THAT SOME PEOPLE HOPED IT WOULD, BUT IT WENT A LONG WAY.
BUT WHAT'S IMPORTANT FOR US HERE TODAY IS THAT IT DOESN'T HELP US BEING IN PD 6 21.
I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING FOR US.
SO, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE REVISED OUR REQUEST, UM, TRIED TO DO WHAT WE COULD TO IMPROVE, UM, OUR POSITIONING ON THIS ASK, YOU KNOW, WE'RE OFFERING UP TO 60, SPECIFICALLY OFFERING UP 65 REMOTE VALET SPACES.
UM, WE THINK THAT'S QUITE A, THAT'S A, THAT'S A PRETTY BIG NUMBER, UH, COMPARED TO WHAT WE THINK THE ACTUAL DEMAND IS.
AND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE'RE OFFERING UP, UM, A REASSESSMENT AT WHATEVER PERIOD OF TIME YOU THINK IS APPROPRIATE.
AND I THINK THIS, THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I CAN STAND UP HERE AND TELL YOU, I THINK THIS WORKS.
UM, MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE HAVE AN ENGINEER WHO HAS STUDIED THIS, WHO BELIEVES THAT THIS WILL WORK.
UH, THE OWNER AND OPERATOR OF THESE PROPERTIES BELIEVES IT'LL WORK.
BUT THAT GIVES YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK AND LOOK AT IT AND SAY, YOU KNOW, THESE GUYS TOLD US THIS WOULD WORK.
DOES THIS WORK? OR IS IT NOT WORKING? SO WE'RE FULLY, UM, ON BOARD WITH, YOU KNOW, A PROVISION TO HAVE US COME BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
WE'RE CONFIDENT THAT YOU WOULD SEE AT THAT POINT THAT IT WOULD WORK.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WE UNDERSTAND IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO THAT.
SO, UM, GIVEN ALL OF THAT, I'M HERE TODAY TO ASK YOU TO APPROVE THIS.
UM, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
UH, MR. DENMAN MAY WANT TO ADD SOME THINGS FROM, UH, HIS STANDPOINT AS AN ENGINEER.
SO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE.
UH, QUESTIONS FOR MR. VINCENT? OR WE CAN HOLD FOR LATER? EITHER WAY.
SO, UH, WITH THE, I KNOW YOU SAID THE NEW CITY PARKING RE REGULATIONS DON'T APPLY TO THIS PD, BUT WHAT WOULD THEY BE, ASSUMING THIS WERE NOT A PD, WHAT WOULD THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS BE? HAVE YOU DONE THOSE NUMBERS? THAT'S OKAY.
LET ME, UH, I DON'T WANNA, LET ME GO BACK TO, I THINK IT'S ZERO.
IT, IT WOULD DEPEND ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
UM, BUT I KNOW THAT RESTAURANT AND BAR, OH, YOU'RE RIGHT.
RESTAURANTS UNDER 2,500 SQUARE FEET, THERE WOULD BE NO REQUIREMENT.
UM, BEYOND THAT, I THINK IT WOULD BE ONE FOR TWO, ONE TO 200.
ONE TO 200, WHICH IS, YOU ALL PROBABLY KNOW THIS FROM YOUR SERVICE ON THE BOARD RIGHT NOW, TYPICAL CODE 51, A RESTAURANT IS ONE TO A HUNDRED, RETAIL IS ONE TO 200.
SO, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GOING FROM A RESTAURANT REQUIREMENT TO A RETAIL 67 67.
SO WHAT I DID WAS I TOOK 15 7 66 MINUS 2,500 DIVIDED BY 200, AND I COME UP WITH 66 POINTS.
SO IT'S 67 AND WE'RE PROVIDING 93.
SO ABOUT ONE A HALF TIMES THAT, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN A REALLY GREAT CHART IN HERE,
WELL THAT'S A GREAT IDEA, A REALLY GOOD ARGUMENT FOR YOU THERE.
AT, SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, BUT YOU REGULARLY ADMIT THAT DOES NOT APPLY.
I WOULD YET THE COUNCIL COULD HAVE IDENTIFIED PDS TO HAVE IT APPLIED TO OR NOT.
SEE, THAT'S THE THING, THAT'S A VERY INTERESTING QUESTION BECAUSE BE CAREFUL HOW WE BOTH SPEAK FOR THE COUNCIL.
WE SHOULDN'T, YEAH, I WOULD NEVER PRESUME TO DO THAT, NOR SHOULD I.
BUT, BUT I THINK THEIR INTENT, I DO THINK THEIR INTENT IS PRETTY MANIFEST BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS OVER THE COURSE OF MONTHS, BOTH AT PLAN, COMMISSION
[02:55:01]
AND COUNCIL.IT'S, UM, IT'S KIND OF A CONUNDRUM.
I MEAN, IT'S DIFF YOU KNOW, AGAIN WITH, SO WE HAVE SO MANY PDS, UM, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHY THAT IS, THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT DISCUSSION.
A LOT OF THE PDS, WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT PARKING OFF STREET PARKING, THEY'LL SAY, YOU KNOW, LOOK TO THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN CHAPTER 51 A FOR THE PARKING.
YOU KNOW, SIMPLE, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A PD, OKAY, YOU JUST GO BACK TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THAT'S YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR WHATEVER USE.
THERE ARE OTHER PDS, ESPECIALLY THE LARGER, MORE COMPLEX ONES LIKE THIS ONE, LIKE PD 1 93, UM, I THINK THE DEEP LMPD, SOME OF THE OTHERS THAT THEY HAVE THEIR OWN PARKING RATIOS.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALL WELL AND GOOD THAT COUNCIL IS DOING THIS WHOLESALE PARKING REFORM.
BUT IN ORDER TO CHANGE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THOSE PDS THAT HAVE THEIR OWN PARKING RATIOS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO AUTHORIZE A PUBLIC HEARING ON SAY, PD 1 93, OPEN THAT GIGANTIC CAN OF WORMS, NOTIFY EVERYBODY IN THE PD AND THEN PROCESS IT JUST LIKE ANY OTHER AMENDMENT TO, OR AMENDMENTS TO PDS.
BUT, BUT TO MS. HAYDEN'S QUESTION AND TO YOUR ANSWER, THAT'S THE COUNCIL'S PREROGATIVE.
THAT'S THE COUNCIL THAT COULD GIVE DIRECTION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR A PROPERTY OWNER THAT WANTS TO CHANGE ONE OF 1,100 PDS.
OUR SCOPE IS SPECIFICALLY TO 1616 HIGHLINE DRIVE BASED ON OUR CRITERIA.
I'M NOT, NOT DISPUTING THAT AT ALL.
I'M JUST USING, I I GET YOU, I WROTE IT, I WROTE IT DOWN.
I MEAN, JUST FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT, COUNSEL IS RECOGNIZING THAT THE PARKING DEMAND ENVIRONMENT IS DIFFERENT TODAY.
OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. VINCENT AT THIS TIME? I'VE GOT A BUNCH, BUT I'M GONNA WAIT A LITTLE BIT.
ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR MR. VINCENT? OKAY, PLEASE.
LLOYD DENMAN 29 28 WESTMINSTER SPEAKING IN FAVOR.
SO REGARDING THE TRANSPORTATION SIDE OF THINGS FOR 1616 HIGHLINE, REMEMBER THAT HIGHLINE ITSELF IS NO PARKED ON THE NORTH SIDE, SO THAT MAKES FOR EASIER ACCESS IN AND EASIER EGRESS OUT.
IS THERE SIGNAGE? OH, IT'S ALONG HIGH.
MR. MOND, IS THERE SIGNAGE CLEARLY POSTED ALONG HIGHLINE THAT SAYS NO PARKING? YES.
'CAUSE I DIDN'T SEE THAT IN THE VIDEO.
NOW I MAY HAVE MISSED IT, BUT I THERE'S NO PARKING, IT'S NO PARKING'S ALLOWED ON THAT NORTH SIDE OF HIGHLINE ON THE NORTH SIDE.
SOUTH SIDE DOES ALLOW PARKING.
I WE DISCOVERED THAT IN SHOCK.
YES, BUT IT WAS AND THAT'S PART OF THEIR COUNT.
WHO KNOWS HOW THAT GOT IN, BUT THAT'S THAT BUSINESS.
SO YOU'RE SAYING, AND THIS SIDE IS DIFFERENT, IT'S NO, YOU'RE SAYING ON THE NORTH SIDE NO PARKING.
AND MY QUESTION AGAIN IS HOW IS IT, HOW, HOW DO WE KNOW? IT SAYS NO PART A CURB.
WE'LL LOOK ON, UH, BRYANT'S DRIVE THROUGH.
SO THEN AS FAR AS VALET OPERATIONS, IF YOU'RE GONNA PULL IN AS THEIR STACKING ROOM, AND THIS PROPERTY HAS ADDITIONAL STACKING ROOM, BUT, UM, IF YOU CAN ZOOM IN ON THE LOWER ONE ROOM FOR AT LEAST SIX VEHICLES, THERE'S OVER 120 FEET.
THE.TO DOT, IN THIS CASE, THAT'S 120 FEET OF STACKING ROOM FOR PATRONS PULLING IN OFF STREET.
SO THERE'S NOT CREATING A TRAFFIC HAZARD OR ANY CONGESTION.
AND THEN FROM THERE, IF YOU CAN GO TO THE UPPER ONE, UPPER SLIDE, THE VALET OPERATION WOULD DO A TWO POINT TURN WITHIN THAT 60 FEET FROM DOTTO DOT, HE'LL ZOOM IN SHORTLY, OR PERHAPS YOU CAN SEE IT ON YOUR DIAGRAM.
I SEE THE BOTTOM ONE WAS THE, A PORTION OF THE DEPTH INTO THE LOT.
AND IT'S GOING INTO THE WIDEST PORTION OF THE WIDTH IN THE BACK, CORRECT? WHERE THAT DUMPSTER WAS? CORRECT.
THERE'S A LOADING DOCK ON THE WEST SIDE, AND THAT'S WHERE THE, THE BUILDING ITSELF WOULD PROBABLY HAVE ITS TRASH DUMPSTER IN THAT DOCK AREA.
BUT AS FAR AS A VALET OPERATING, THEY HAVE PLENTY OF ROOM TO, WITHIN THAT 60 FEET TO TURN IN, BACK UP, TURN AROUND, MANEUVERING ALL ON SITE, YOU KNOW, NOT IN THE STREET.
SO THERE'S NO CONGESTION OR TRAFFIC HAZARD.
AND THEN JUST A REMINDER, AGAIN, THIS IS REPURPOSING AN EXISTING BUILDING, YOU KNOW, ADDING A RESTAURANT USE
[03:00:01]
TO TRY TO BETTER BALANCE AND MAKE USE OF AN EXISTING BUILDING.AND IN MY OPINION, IT WILL NOT CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD OR CONGESTION.
AND THERE'S AMPLE PARKING WITH THE NEW NET GAIN OF NET PARKING THAT'S BEING PROVIDED.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM AT THIS POINT IN TIME? OKAY.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN FAVOR, MS. WILLIAMS? NO OTHER SPEAKERS, SIR.
YOU CAN CALL THE SPEAKERS AGAINST MS. CARSON.
IF YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME, WE'LL CONSIDER YOU SWORN FROM BEFORE.
SO IF YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN PROCEED.
DIANE CARSON FROM 1710 HIGHLINE DRIVE.
UM, THIS IS JUST, I THINK FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THAT'S OUR INTEREST THAT WE, THIS IS A SMALL PARKING LOT FOR A LOT OF VALET AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T TAKE ALL THE PARKING ON, UH, AND MOVE IT TO OTHER COMPANIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE A SMALL PARKING LOT OR HAVE ANY PARKING.
SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING WE, WE HAVE TO WATCH.
IT SEEMS, IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS BECOMING A HISTORY WITH THIS COMPANY TO ASK FOR EXCEPTIONS.
AND THEN THEY'RE LEAVING INSUFFICIENT PARKING AND THEY'RE FORCING THE OTHER NEIGHBORS, THE PARKING IS FORCED ONTO THEIR PARKING, WHICH IS, IT BECOMES A PROBLEM FOR EVERYONE.
UM, AND, AND WE, I THINK WE JUST NEED TO WATCH FOR TRAFFIC CONGESTION IN THE DESIGN DISTRICT.
YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S ON OUR PUBLIC STREETS AND DUE TO THIS, UH, HOW THEY'RE ASKING FOR ALL THE EXCEPTIONS AND NARROWING IT DOWN, I DON'T HAVE AS MUCH TO SAY.
I'M SURE YOU'LL BE THANKFUL FOR THAT
UH, AND I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE SOMETHING WHERE YOU CAN SAY MAYBE YOU NEED, THE CITY CAN COME BACK AND, UH, IN A YEAR FROM WHEN THEY OPEN AND CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ALL WORKING.
DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT? I THINK THEY'RE OFFERING THAT.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE OFFERING FOR THE, THIS ISSUE TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION.
WE WOULD APPROVE A PARKING EXCEPTION AND LITERALLY THEY HAVE TO COME BACK AND PROVE UP THAT THERE IS NOT, THEY'RE NOT VIOLATING THE, THE ORIGINAL ORDER OF THE BOARD AND THAT WE DON'T HAVE TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND EVERYTHING MOVING ALONG.
IT'S, AND IT'S A NOTICE HEARING WHERE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS GET A CHANCE TO COME AND SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST.
UM, AND I MEAN, THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN OFTEN, BUT IT HAPPENS OFTEN ENOUGH THAT WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS.
THEY, THEY'RE PROPOSING THEIR CURRENT PROPOSALS 18 MONTHS.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT'S, AND I DO WANNA THANK Y'ALL FOR YOUR DECISION 'CAUSE I DON'T WANNA GO THROUGH THAT AGAIN.
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT'S RIGHT IS, RIGHT.
YOU WHAT? I DON'T HAVE ANY HARD FEELINGS.
Y'ALL SEEM TO THINK I DID IT TOWARD THESE PEOPLE, BUT WHAT'S RIGHT IS RIGHT AND WHAT'S WRONG IS WRONG.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. CARSON? MR. NER, CARSON, COME BACK.
MR. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.
UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY, UM, OPINION, I DON'T WANNA PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH, BUT DO YOU HAVE ANY OPINION OR CONCERNS IF THIS PARTICULAR CASE WERE TO BE APPROVED, UH, WITH VALET PARKING GOING AROUND THE BUILDING TO THE SIDE THAT YOU SHARE, DO YOU, DO YOU ENVISION THAT BEING AN ISSUE OR THAT THEY WOULD, WHAT IF, IF, IF WE GRANT THIS APPLICATION RIGHT, FOR THEM TO DO VALET PARKING ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE, DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH REGARD TO THEM USING LIKE VALET OR OVERFLOW AROUND TO YOUR SIDE OF THE BUILDING WHERE YOU SH WHERE YOU HAVE THAT JOINT SHARED SPACE? ARE YOU, IS WHAT I'M SAYING? ARE YOU BACK ON YOU, MR. N DO YOU, ARE YOU ASKING IF SHE'S CONCERNED THAT THEY'LL OVERFLOW BACK INTO HER PARKING LOT? YES.
I THINK THE PEOPLE AROUND THERE ARE.
[03:05:01]
CAN THEY'RE MOSTLY OPPOSED TO IT? NO.'CAUSE YOU CAN'T, THERE'S NO OTHER PLACE TO PARK.
THEY, AND IT'S NOT THAT, I MEAN, DELILAH'S IS RIGHT BY MY PARKING.
RIGHT? I MEAN, IT'S, THAT'S WHAT I MEAN.
SO, AND, BUT YOU CAN GO DOWN TO THE NEXT LOT AND THE NEXT LOT AND THE NEXT LOT AND THEY WILL, I MEAN, THERE WOULD BE OVERFLOW.
I MEAN, THERE'S GONNA BE A LINE FOR VALET AND THEY SAY, HEY, WE CAN GO RIGHT OVER TO THESE PARKING MM-HMM
THERE'S NO ONE AND YOU DON'T PAY ANYTHING.
OR, OR I DON'T THINK YOU CHARGE FOR, YOU CAN CHARGE FOR THAT KIND OF PARKING, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, IT, UH, YES.
THAT, AND THAT'S WHY I SAY WE NEED TO WATCH ALL OF THIS.
THAT IT DOESN'T BECOME A HISTORY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT THEY'RE JUST GETTING IT ALL DOWN TO THE, ON TO THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT HAVE ANY PARKING DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER IT.
THANK YOU MS. WILLIAMS. NEXT SPEAKER.
IF YOU'D GIVE, YOU'VE BEEN SWORN IN BEFORE.
GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
WELBURN, UH, DIAL 6 7 5 2 0 9.
UM, ONE THING WHILE I WAS SITTING OUT HERE, UM, ON THIS REQUEST, UM, THERE'S A, OBVIOUSLY THIS, THIS IS A VERY LARGE RESTAURANT, 15,000 SQUARE FEET.
I WAS JUST CURIOUS, THE MCDONALD'S IS 5,000.
THAT'S THREE MCDONALD'S, WHICH THAT'S NOT A GOOD COMPARISON.
IT'S TWO AND A HALF CHILI'S RESTAURANTS, THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD SIZE RESTAURANT.
AND THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN CARS AND STUFF THAT WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
THEY'VE ALREADY STARTED RENOVATION.
I I'M CURIOUS ON HOW YOU GET A PERMIT WHEN NOT HAVING PARKING IN PLACE.
DO THEY HAVE A PERMIT ALREADY? I JUST LOOKED ON THE WEBPAGE AND IT SAID OF JUNE OF LAST YEAR, IT WAS A PERMIT WAS ISSUED TO RENOVATE FOR A RESTAURANT CALLED DELILAH'S.
NO, I, I'M, I'M, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I I WANT MY, I I, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT'S KIND OF CURIOUS HOW YOU COULD GET A PERMIT UNLESS, UNLESS THEY ALREADY KNEW THEY HAD ANOTHER PLACE TO PUT THIS PARKING WITHOUT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
AND THEN YOU GO, WELL, IF THEY ALREADY KNEW THAT, THEN I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WANT A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE BUILDING A VERY LARGE PARKING LOT, AND THAT'S GREAT FOR THE AREA, UH, THAT, THAT'S REALLY A GOOD, A GOOD THING FOR THE WHOLE AREA AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I'LL CALL IT.
UM, NOW IF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS NOT APPROVED OR REDUCED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT MEANS THEY'RE GONNA USE UP MORE SPACES IN THAT LOT.
AND THEN THAT LOT CAN'T BE USED FOR MAYBE THE NEXT TWO REQUESTS OR THE REQUESTS IN SIX MONTHS OR SOMETHING.
BELIEVE ME, I'VE, AND SOME OF Y'ALL KNOW WE REPRESENT PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE AND I'D BE ASKING THE SAME THING, UM, EXCEPT THAT THERE'S A LOT OF SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ON TODAY'S AGENDA ALONE, UM, FOR THIS COMPANY.
AND THERE'S A LOT OF RESTAURANTS AND OTHER THINGS.
AND THIS IS A HIGH RESTAURANT AREA.
I'M FOR, IT'S FORTUNATE THAT THEY'VE ASKED FOR, AND, UH, HOPEFULLY YOU'LL CONSIDER A REVIEW.
I WOULD SUGGEST 12 MONTHS INSTEAD OF 18 MONTHS, BECAUSE SIX MONTHS CAN HAVE A LOT OF EFFECT ON, ON, UH, AREA BUSINESSES.
AND IF THEY ALREADY HAVE A PERMIT FOR A YEAR AND DONE CONSTRUCTION, THEY'LL BE OPEN PRETTY QUICK.
I WOULD THINK, UH, THAT THAT OTHER SIX MONTHS WOULD MAKE SENSE IF THEY HAD CONSTRUCTION AND STUFF.
SO IF, IF, IF THIS, IF YOU'RE INCLINED TO APPROVE SOME SORT OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION, EITHER THE FULL, THEY'RE ASKING OR LESS, UM, I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT FACTOR TO, TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT.
BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN.
AND THEN IT COMES INTO CODE AND THEN WE GET INTO REALLY ARGUMENTS AMONG PEOPLE AND THEN, AND BAD DISCUSSIONS AND STUFF.
AND, AND THAT DOESN'T SOLVE ANYTHING.
BUT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE, THE, THE OVERALL NUMBER OF, OF REQUESTS FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS IN THE WHOLE AREA AND STUFF.
AND, AND CURIOUS, I WAS THINKING, BECAUSE THE CHAIRMAN KNOWS I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 30, I, I WAS TALKING TO SOMEBODY, I'VE BEEN COMING TO THIS BUILDING FOR 37 YEARS, WHICH IS KIND OF SCARY.
10 YEARS WHILE I WORKED HERE AND 27 ON THIS SIDE.
IT'S THE, NOT, NOT NUCLEAR OPTION, BUT SOMEWHAT YOU COULD CREATE A SUB AREA FOR THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY OR OTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THIS PD.
THIS PD HAS SUB AREAS AND CREATE YOUR OWN PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
IE THE NEW PARK CODE REQUIREMENT.
YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO IT FOR THE WHOLE PD.
THAT'S A PRETTY BIG SHOTGUN APPROACH TO IT.
UM, AND THEN YOU WOULDN'T BE ASKING FOR SPECIALIST SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR A LOT EASIER, OBVIOUSLY.
BUT THERE IS OPTIONS TO FIX PARTS OF PDS, ESPECIALLY THIS PD I'VE CREATED SUB AREAS IN THIS PD JUST FOR CERTAIN THINGS, NOT FOR PARKING AS I REQUIRE, BUT OTHER THINGS.
BUT, BUT I, I, I JUST THINK THAT YOU'VE, NOW EVERY BOARD CASE IS DIFFERENT, BUT YOU GOTTA LOOK AT, THERE'S
[03:10:01]
A LOT OF CUMULATIVE REQUESTS FOR, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS FOR, FOR RESTAURANTS.AND RESTAURANTS ARE KNOWN FOR.
I DON'T WANT TO GO PARKING VALET MAY BE FREE, BUT WE ALL KNOW IT'S NOT REALLY FREE.
UH, IF I CAN GO DOWN THE WAY OR OH GEE, THE OTHER SIDE OF HIGHLINE FACING THE OTHER DIRECTION, I CAN THROW MY CAR OVER THERE OR SOMETHING.
YEAH, YOU'RE GONNA GET THAT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I DON'T MIND VALET, BUT SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE VALET.
SO, UM, WE'D ASK FOR YOU TO REALLY, REALLY CONSIDER, UM, UM, MAYBE DENYING THIS OR REDUCING THE NUMBER OF SPACES.
AND THEN DEFINITELY IF YOU'RE INCLINED TO APPROVE IT, IS PUT THAT TIME TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT.
'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR NOT JUST MS. CARSON, BUT FOR ALL THE OTHER NEIGHBORS IN THERE WITH A, WITH A RESTAURANT THIS SIZE.
SO 2,500 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT IS NOT GONNA HAVE AS MUCH TRAFFIC.
THIS IS WHAT, SEVEN TIMES, SIX TIMES THAT BIG.
UM, SO THAT'S GONNA HAVE A BIG IMPACT I THINK.
QUESTIONS FOR MR. CROWLEY? ALRIGHT.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS REGISTERED? MS. WILLIAMS? NO, THE SPEAKERS ARE, THANK YOU.
OKAY, SO QUESTIONS MR. VINCENT.
UH, CAN WE DO QUESTIONS BEFORE YOUR, UH, REBUTTAL? MS. DAVIS HAS QUESTIONS? I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AND, BUT YOU, YOU STILL HAVE FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL THAT, THAT THE CHAIR WILL ALLOW.
MS. DAVIS, HOW MANY SEATS WILL BE IN THIS NEW RESTAURANT? UM, I ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE FLOOR PLAN.
PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN FOR THE RESTAURANT.
I THINK THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF A RESTAURANT, THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF RESTAURANTS, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH DIFFERENT SEATING CAPACITIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
I, I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF A RESTAURANT DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF THE RESTAURANT COULD BE DIFFERENT SEATING CAPACITIES.
BUT I'M SORRY TO SAY I DON'T KNOW THAT NUMBER TO GIVE YOU.
SO, AS A FOLLOW-UP, HOW, AND, AND I APOLOGIZE IF YOU WENT THROUGH THIS AND I MISSED IT, HOW DID YOU CALCULATE THE NUMBER OF SPACES THAT YOU WOULD NEED IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER OF SEATS? WELL, IT'S BASED ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
UH, IT'S ONE TO, IN PD 6 21, IT'S ONE SPACE PER 105 SQUARE FEET OF RESTAURANT.
NO, THAT WHAT SHE WAS GOING AT IS YOUR, HOW DID YOU GET TO YOUR REDUCTION? THE REQUIRED WAS 1 53, WHICH IS ONE FOR 1 0 5, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SHE'S GOING TO, HOW DID YOU GET TO THE, HOW DID YOU GET TO THE 93 NUMBER? THAT'S WHAT I THINK MS. DAVIS WAS GOING FOR.
UH, WELL THAT'S THE 28 ONSITE AND PLUS THE, OUR NEWLY OFFERED 65 VALET SPACES ON THE REMOTE LOT.
AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A NUMBER THAT JUST BASED ON OUR STUDIES, UH, THAT LLOYD HAS DONE, WE THINK THAT'S CONGRUENT WITH THE DEMAND AND IT SHOULD BE MORE THAN SUFFICIENT.
CAN CAN YOU GET A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC? I MEAN, WHAT, WHEN YOU SAY YOUR STUDIES, I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF STUDIES YOU'VE DONE.
PAGE, PAGE 2, 5 1 IN OUR PACKETS.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU SUM SUMMARIZE? YES.
I SEE, I SEE CHART RIGHT HERE.
IT'S SIDEWAYS, BUT, SO IN THIS CASE, THE BOTTOM OF THE DIAGRAM, WHICH WOULD BE THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE PARKING LOT, SEE THE 27, 27 AND 21, THE 27 AND 27 ARE BUILT AS STACKED PARKING SPACES SPECIFICALLY FOR VALET.
AND THEN ADDING THE 21 IS, BRINGS IT TO 75 OPERATIONAL WISE.
YOU SEE THERE'S A DRIVEWAY OFF THE STEMMONS PARKWAY ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SCREEN.
WHEN YOU PULL IN, YOU TURN LEFT FOR PUBLIC PARKING AND TURN RIGHT FOR VALET.
THIS GIVES A NATURAL DIVISION FOR THE VALET TO OPERATE SO THAT IT'S SEPARATE FROM THE PUBLIC PARKING.
AND THAT'S A TOTAL OF 75 SPACES WITH 75 VALET SPACES OPERATING WITHIN THAT NEW LOT.
WE PUT 10 TO THE PREVIOUS CASE AND IT'S IN THE PARKING LOT, 65 TO THIS ONE.
THE, THE VAL, THE VALET IS, IS RIGHT IN THAT BIG PARKING LOT THAT YOU'RE BUILDING.
IT'S VALET PARKING AND THE WESTERN SIDE ONLY.
I'M SORRY, THE WESTERN SIDE ONLY.
BUT THERE'S NO VALET STAND AT THE RESTAURANT? NO.
THERE'S A VALET AT THE RESTAURANT.
[03:15:01]
THESE ARE WHERE THEY PARK, THEY'RE CAR TAKE, TAKE THE CAR, THEY CIRCLE AROUND AND PARK IN HERE AND THEN RUN ACROSS AND GO GET THE CAR.SO I, I, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE NUMBER, BUT I, I'M STILL CONFUSED HOW YOU CALCULATE HOW, HOW YOU'RE SO CONFIDENT THAT YOU HAVE ENOUGH SPACES WITHOUT HAVING THE SEATS IN THE RESTAURANT.
REPEAT THAT ONE MORE TIME, MS. DAVIS? YES.
HOW ARE YOU CONFIDENT? I, I'M, I DON'T YOU, YOU DON'T NEED TO DO THE MATH.
I'M ASKING, YOU HAVE THAT NUMBER 90 TOTAL, YOU HAVE THAT TOTAL NUMBER 93.
HOW ARE YOU CONFIDENT THAT THAT NUMBER IS SUFFICIENT FOR THAT SPACE? BECAUSE THERE'S AN OVERALL REDUCTION IN PARKING DEMAND, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE TRENDS WE'VE SEEN, ET CETERA.
AND IT, IT HITS, IT'S A 39% NUMBER.
HOWEVER, THIS IS THE, I BELIEVE THE BEST RESPONSE THERE IS RESERVE PARKING AVAILABLE.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE RIGHT BALANCE, AND THIS IS THE BEST USE TO FIND THE RIGHT BALANCE IF IT WERE TO EXCEED.
WELL, I HAD MENTIONED THE LAST TIME I'M THE, UM, NON VALET GUY
SO THERE'S, NOW THERE'S 110 NEWLY AVAILABLE PARKING SPACES WHERE THERE WERE NONE TODAY.
AND THAT'S THE OVERFLOW PARKING.
IF IT'S, IF, IF IT DOES OVERFILL.
AND THAT'S A GOOD THING TO KNOW, YOU KNOW, LIKE, OKAY, WHAT DO YOU DO IF, IF, IF WE, OR IF WE MAKE THIS APPROVAL, BUT IT'S NOT QUITE ENOUGH.
WELL, THERE'S A LOT OF SPILLOVER ROOM WITH THE, THE NET GAIN OF PARKING OF THOSE 110 SPACES.
WHAT WE DID BETWEEN THE LAST WAS WE PULLED FROM THOSE PUBLIC SPACES AND DEDICATED THEM TO VALET.
BUT, BUT AGAIN, I I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE, I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE TRYING TO COME UP WITH WHATEVER SPACES YOU CAN AND SAYING, OKAY, WE'VE GOT 93 SPACES.
I THINK THAT'S THE, THERE'S ALL THESE CASES.
AND YOU'RE SAYING WE'VE GOT 93 SPACES, THAT'S ENOUGH.
AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S PUBLIC PARKING THAT YOU CAN PULL FROM, BUT HOW DO YOU KNOW, LIKE, HOW ARE YOU COMING WITH 93? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU COULD FIND, OR HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH A NUMBER OF 93? WHY DO YOU BELIEVE 93 SPACES ARE SUFFICIENT FOR THE USE OF THIS BUILDING? WELL, BACK TO WHAT THE COUNCIL JUST DID.
THEY, THEY'RE SAYING CITY, BUT, BUT THE COUNCIL'S DECISION DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS.
SO I KNOW YOU KEEP REFERENCING IT, THEY'RE SAYING ONE TO 200, BUT THIS SAYS ONE TO 100, WHICH IS A LOT OF DENSITY.
BUT SPECIFIC TO YOUR QUESTION, I LOOKED AT THE NEW PARKING LOT AND HOW IT'S GONNA OPERATE, AND I THINK IT'S VERY LOGICAL THAT VALET TO THE RIGHT PUBLIC TO THE LEFT FROM THAT DRIVEWAY AND, AND THE WAY THE, THERE WERE 54 SPACES DEDICATED TO VALET ORIGINALLY IN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
BUT, BUT YOU'RE STILL NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION.
WHY DO YOU THINK 93 SPACES ARE SUFFICIENT FOR THIS? WHAT CALCULATION DID YOU USE TO COME UP WITH 93? I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE OTHER PARKING.
I DON'T CARE ABOUT WHAT THE COUNCIL DECIDED.
HOW WOULD I, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, DID YOU SAY, OKAY, WELL WE COULD, WE FOUND 93, SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA GO WITH? OR DID YOU GO THROUGH SOME TYPE OF CALCULATION THAT I MISSED SOMEWHERE THAT SAYS YOU NEED 93 SPACES? NOT OTHER THAN THE PARKING LOT LAYOUT AND KNOWING THAT WE HAVE A NET GAIN OF SPACES AND THAT THERE'S THAT WALKING, YOU KNOW, TWO OVER 2000 UNITS WITHIN A FIVE TO 10 MINUTE WALK.
AND THE TRAIL IS RIGHT THERE, YOU KNOW, ON AND ON.
YOU COULD, I'M, I'M TRYING TO, I'M TRYING TO WANT TO VOTE FOR THIS, BUT I'M STILL NOT GETTING THERE BECAUSE I DON'T, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE BEING REALLY VAGUE WITH YOUR ANSWERS.
SO IF, IF I COULD ADD TO THAT, AND, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, UH,
THERE'S A, A GROUP CALLED THE IN INSTITUTE FOR TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, UM, THEY ALSO DO TRIP GENERATION MANUALS FOR TRAFFIC GENERATION, AND THEY DO PARKING STUDIES.
AND THESE ARE CONTINUALLY UPDATED.
AND I, I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, AS THE ENVIRONMENT HAS CHANGED, AS CITIES HAVE GOTTEN DENSER AND MORE MIXED USE, YOU KNOW, RIDE SHARING THINGS LIKE THAT, I KNOW THAT'S A MOVING TARGET, THAT THOSE NUMBERS HAVE GONE DOWN IN TERMS OF PARKING DEMAND FOR LIKE AN URBAN NIGHTTIME RESTAURANT USE.
UH, SO THERE IS DATA OUT THERE TO SUPPORT THIS.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE EFFORT THE CITY JUST WENT THROUGH ON THE PARKING REFORM, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS A VERY MUCH DATA DRIVEN, YOU KNOW, THAT, UM, THEY DID A LOT OF THE STAFF DID A LOT OF HOMEWORK ON THAT TO ARRIVE AT THOSE NUMBERS.
SO I, THEY ARE, THEY'RE NOT JUST NUMBERS JUST PULL OUT OF A HAT.
I MEAN, THESE ARE REAL, YOU KNOW, IS IT A PRECISE MEASUREMENT? YOU KNOW, THAT THAT DEPENDS ON SOME OTHER FACTORS, I THINK.
BUT I THINK IT'S A GOOD RULE OF THUMB TO ASSUME
[03:20:01]
THAT THE 93 SPACES WILL BE ENOUGH FOR THIS TYPE OF USE OF, YOU KNOW, AN URBAN MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT, NIGHTTIME USE.SO I THINK, I THINK IT MAKES SENSE.
AND, AND LLOYD HAD INCLUDED SOME, YOU KNOW, SOME GENERAL DISCUSSION IN HIS STUDIES ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
AND I CAN ADD ONE MORE COMMENT ON THE, THE PREVIOUS CASE, LIKE IF THERE'S AN EXISTING RESTAURANT, YEAH.
I GO DO EXISTING COUNTS AND THAT GIVES YOU HARD DATA.
IN THIS CASE, THE RESTAURANT'S NOT THERE YET.
YOU KNOW, HEY, I DID A COUNT, I COUNTED THIS MANY CARS ON A FRIDAY NIGHT, SATURDAY NIGHT, AND, AND YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS.
THIS ONE, YOU'RE RIGHT, WE'RE, I'M PULLING FROM THE PARKING LOT, I'M PULLING FROM NUMBERS THAT ARE LOGICAL, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF 105, THE PD SAYS 105, ONE SPACE PER 105 SQUARE FEET.
NOW THE CITY'S SAYING ONE PER 200, THIS IS GONNA FALL SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE.
SO THAT'S WHERE THAT CAME FROM.
SO MY QUESTION OR TWO GOES TO WHAT MS. DAVIS IS TRYING TO GET TO.
SO WE HEARD THAT A PERMIT'S ALREADY BEEN ISSUED.
IS THAT TRUE? I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THAT, BUT I GUESS, I GUESS IT IS TRUE.
DID WE FIND OUT IF PERMIT'S BEEN ISSUED? SO I DON'T SEE, I SEE A, UM, BUILDING PERMIT FOR INTERIOR REMODEL, BUT I, I DO SEE THAT THERE'S A, UM, PENDING TCO WHAT'S THAT MEAN? A CCO? WELL, A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
SO THAT MEANS A PERMIT'S BEEN ISSUED FOR A RESTAURANT.
I WON'T, WELL, I WON'T CHASE THAT RABBIT WELL, NO, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO, MY QUESTION GOES TO WHAT KIND OF MS. DAVIS WAS GOING TO, AND THAT IS, HOW DO YOU KNOW, AND YOU'VE FELL INTO IT A LITTLE BIT, MR. MOND, HOW DO YOU KNOW THE PARKING DEMAND IF YOU DON'T HAVE AN EXISTING RESTAURANT? THAT GIVES A BIG QUESTION MARK.
TWO, CAN YOU GIVE US A COMPARATIVE RESTAURANT AT 15,766 THAT, AND LET KNOW WHAT THE PARKING DEMAND ON THAT IS.
THREE, HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU KNOW ABOUT PARKING DEMAND ON A BUILDING WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THE SEAT COUNT? SO YOU DON'T KNOW HOW MANY GUESTS ARE GONNA BE, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S, AND IT'S NOT OUR PREROGATIVE, OUR PURVIEW TO SAY, YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE IN YOUR KITCHEN IS THIS AND DINING ROOM IS THIS, AND BATHROOM IS THAT.
WE, AS MR. THOMPSON SAID, IT'S SQUARE FOOTAGE TOTAL.
IT'S, IT'S THE, IT'S THE RESTAURANT.
AND THEN THEY DIVIDED UP AGAIN.
IF YOU HAVE A 15,766 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT AND YOU, YOU CAN'T TELL US A SEAT COUNT, HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO KNOW WHAT, WHAT TO ANTICIPATE? 'CAUSE 27, 28 SPACES, AND REALLY IT'S 26 IF THE HANDICAPS, 'CAUSE THOSE ARE SPECIAL USE, BUT IT'S 28 THEY COUNT.
DO YOU SEE WHEN I'M, I'M TRYING TO GET BACK TO YOUR QUESTION, RIGHT? YEAH.
I MEAN, INTERIOR REMODEL, THAT COULD BE FOR ANYTHING.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PERMIT SAYS.
IT MAY JUST BE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA UPGRADE.
THE WIRING AND THE PLUMBING AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
UM, AS REGARDS TO RESTAURANTS, I MEAN, THERE AGAIN, THERE ARE RESTAURANTS AND THERE ARE RESTAURANTS.
I MEAN, THERE ARE SOME RESTAURANTS THAT ARE REALLY LARGE.
UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE A DAVE AND BUSTER'S.
I DON'T, THAT'S PROBABLY COED AS A RESTAURANT COULD BE.
UM, THAT'S A REALLY BIG SPACE.
BUT NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE NECESSARILY ARE IN THERE AT THE SAME TIME.
OR A LARGE BAR AREA, WHICH TAKES UP MORE SPACE RATHER THAN SEATS.
BUT WE'RE IN A POSITION OF TRYING TO MEASURE WHAT'S THE TRAFFIC GONNA BE, WHAT'S, IS THERE CONGESTION? IS THERE GONNA BE OVERFLOW PARKING TO OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS, UNINVITED GUESTS? YEAH.
THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE GETTING TO.
NO, AND THOSE ARE GOOD QUESTIONS.
UM, WE HAVE THE ADVANTAGE HERE OF, YOU KNOW, ANCIENT CAPITAL OWNS, AS I'VE SAID, A LOT OF PROPERTIES IN THE DISTRICT, UH, THEY ARE NOT IN, THEY'RE NOT MERCHANT, YOU KNOW, BUILDERS.
THEY'RE NOT THERE TO FLIP THE PROPERTIES THEY'RE IN FOR THE LONG HAUL.
THE DISTRICT, UH, THE SUCCESS OF THE DISTRICT IS DOING, BUT THAT'S NOT PART OF OUR CRITERIA.
BUT WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M LEADING UP TO IS THAT THEY HAVE A LOT OF RESTAURANT SPACE ALREADY IN THEIR PROPERTIES.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF, UH, REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE IN THE DESIGN DISTRICT AND THEIR PROPERTIES SPECIFICALLY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT REALLY HOW MUCH PARKING REALLY DO THESE RESTAURANTS NEED.
BUT IN ALL DUE RESPECT, MR. VINCENT, THE CASES THAT YOU'VE REPRESENTED HAVE COME TO US MAGICALLY HAVE BEEN TO THE NUMBER THAT OF THE SPACE YOU HAVE ON THE GROUND ACROSS THE STREET.
WE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY A CASE LAST MONTH.
BUT MAGICALLY, THE, THE PARKING USE WAS THE NUMBER OF SPACES YOU HAVE ON THE GROUND.
AND I THOUGHT THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN COUNT THOSE SPACES IN THE EXTERIOR.
I'M GOING, I'M GOING BACK TO WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE PROPERTY OWNER'S EXPERIENCE.
THE PREVIOUS CASE THAT WE JUST HEARD MAGICALLY WAS THE SAME NUMBER ON THE GROUND SOMEHOW YOU WANTED TO GET TO, GOING BACK TO MS. DAVIS'S QUESTION AGAIN.
[03:25:01]
DID YOU COME UP WITH THIS NUMBER? IS IT MAGICALLY THE 28 SPACES HERE? RIGHT.SO WE'RE TRYING TO GET OUR HANDS AS EMPIRICALLY AS POSSIBLE MM-HMM
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO.
IS THAT A FAIR WAY? I MEAN, WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO, I MEAN, WHAT MAKES SENSE? YEAH.
WE HEARD FROM OPPOSITION SAYING IT'S GONNA BE AN OVERFLOW IN MY PARKING LOT.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO THE EMPIRICAL SIDE.
UM, THE OTHER CASE, AND I KNOW THAT'S ALREADY BEEN HEARD, THAT'S SETTLED.
THE DISTINCTION THERE WAS THAT ALL THE PARKING WAS ON SITE, YOU KNOW, THROUGH EXPERIENCE, THROUGH OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE, WE KNEW THAT THAT WAS MORE THAN ENOUGH PARKING.
YOU'RE TALKING THE PREVIOUS OTHER CASE, RIGHT? RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.
WELL, WE WE'VE APPROVED IT, RIGHT? CORRECT.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE WE LANDED ON THAT ONE.
YOU KNOW, WITH THE 28 SPACES ON SITE WITH VALET SERVICE WITH, YOU KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY SPACES ARE GONNA BE FILLED BY RESTAURANT PATRONS AT ANY GIVEN TIME ON ANY PARTICULAR NIGHT.
THERE'S NO WAY ANY OF US COULD KNOW THAT WITH CERTAINTY.
WE THINK THIS IS A GOOD NUMBER.
WE THINK THIS WILL ACCOMMODATE THAT.
AND, AND I WANT TO TALK A SECOND ABOUT, UM, OPERATIONAL ISSUES BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN BROUGHT UP, UM, SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUE OF WHAT THE RIGHT NUMBER IS FOR THE PARKING COUNT.
UM, AND WE THINK WE DO HAVE THE RIGHT NUMBER THAT'S MORE THAN ADEQUATE.
A LOT OF THESE ISSUES THAT PEOPLE RUN INTO IN, UM, ESPECIALLY IN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTS LIKE LOIS GREENVILLE, DEEP EL AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
A LOT OF IT IS JUST RESPONSIBLE OPERATION AND GOOD MANAGEMENT.
UM, Y'ALL PROBABLY KNOW THIS, BUT THERE'S A WHOLE SECTION OF THE CITY CODE SEPARATE FROM, YOU KNOW, THE ZONING REGULATIONS THAT TALK ABOUT VALET OPERATIONS.
THE, THE VALET STAND HAS TO BE ON SITE.
WE'RE WE, ARE, WE HAVE TWO MORE CASES TO GO.
SO NO, I NEED UNDERSTAND, WE NEED TO, I'M JUST TRYING TO EXPLAIN THAT WE NEED TO COME TO A CONCLUSION.
SO, SO I NEED YOU TO, I I JUST WANNA SAY ONE MORE THING.
MS. CARSON'S CONCERN ABOUT US USING THAT LOT TO VALET FOR 16.
I, I KNOW YOU SAY YOU'RE NOT GOING TO, BUT YOU KNOW, A AS IS WE'VE ALL EXPERIENCED, WHEN YOU SEE A LINE OR YOU SEE AVAILABLE SPACES, YOU GO AND PARK.
I'M NOT SAYING ANYONE WOULD, BUT THAT THERE'S A PROPENSITY FOR THAT.
AND THE WHOLE REASON PART OF THIS, THIS CRITERIA IS IN PLACE, IS SO THAT ONE PERSON'S SPECIAL EXCEPTION, EXCEPTION DOESN'T CREATE ISSUES WITH OTHER PEOPLE.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GO TO.
WE, WE WOULD BE WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANNA CONDITION US TO A CON A CONDITION WHERE, YOU KNOW, THE VALETS AT 16, WELL IF AT THIS POINT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE ANY VALETS AT 1626, BUT IF WE EVER WERE TO THAT THEY WOULD DIRECT PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU GOING TO THIS RESTAURANT? ARE YOU GOING TO THE OTHER RESTAURANT? WELL, YOU NEED TO MOVE YOUR CAR OVER THERE IN VALET OVER THERE.
WELL, I, I I, WE, WE GOTTA GET TO SOME CONCLUSION HERE.
UM, AND I CAN SUMMARIZE IN, IN PUTTING, SO I SEE A SIDE PLAN, I DON'T LIKE IT, BUT IT'S WHAT IT, WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US.
YOU'RE SAYING 28 SPACES PLUS 65 REMOTE PARKING IS, YOU SAID OPERATIONALLY.
SO OPERATIONALLY, IS THERE A VALET STAND INSIDE THIS PARKING LOT? CORRECT.
AND SO SOMEONE COMES IN AND I SUPPOSE IF THEY SELF-PARK, THEY'RE FINE AT WHEN YOU THE 28 ARE FILLED, THEY, THE VALET KICKS INTO OPERATION OR IS THE VALET IN OPERATION ALL THE HOURS OF THE RESTAURANTS? HE'S TALKING, LET'S MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.
I, I'M ASSUMING THE VALET STAND WOULD BE ON THE 16, UM, 16 PROPERTY AND THE VALETS WOULD TAKE THE CARS AROUND TO THE REMOTE LOT PER CORRECT? ABSOLUTELY.
I WOULD, I WOULD ASSUME THAT, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TESTIFYING TO? YES.
SO A VALET STAND IS AT 1616, YOU COME AND PULL YOUR CAR, CAR IN.
IS THE VALET OPERATION, IS IT OPERATIONAL THE ENTIRE HOURS OF THE RESTAURANT? TYPICALLY, YES.
NO, I DIDN'T, TYPICALLY IT DOESN'T CUT IT WITH ME.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE THE ENTIRE HOURS OF THE RESTAURANT OPERATION.
SO WHEN I OBSERVED CARBON, WHICH WAS ACROSS THE STREET, IT WAS TILL 10 O'CLOCK.
AND THEN USUALLY A LITTLE AFTER 10 O'CLOCK, THEY WOULD SHUT DOWN.
BUT YOU CAN MAKE IT WHATEVER YOU WANT IT TO BE.
THAT BUT THAT PARTICULAR ONE HAD A GIGANTIC PARKING LOT.
THAT YOU HAD AMPLE SPACE TO IT.
NOW IT MAY BE DIFFERENT WITH TWO OTHER RESTAURANTS YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT PUTTING IN, THAT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE, RIGHT? WHAT, WHAT CONCERN? SO MY ONLY OPERATES AS LONG AS PEOPLE ARE DINING CONCERN.
'CAUSE YOU HAVE TO FETCH THE CAR.
WHAT MY CONCERN IS, YOU AS AN APPLICANT HAVE NOT YET PROVED UP HOW YOU GOT TO THE 93.
SO, AND I SUMMARIZE THAT JUST A MINUTE.
I'M KIND OF LIKE, MS. DAVIS, I WANNA TRY TO APPROVE THIS.
'CAUSE THIS SEEMS HAS MORE CAPACITY.
BUT WHAT ARE THE SAFETIES WE PUT IN REQUIRING THE VALET,
[03:30:01]
UM, THE SAME TIME OF THE HOURS, UM, HAVING A 12 MONTH LOOK BACK TYPE PERIOD? UM, I THINK THIS PARKING LOT FROM WHAT WE'VE SEEN SEEMS TO BE WIDER.SO THE TURNAROUND HAS A BETTER CHANCE WITHOUT VIOLATING SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY.
I THINK, UM, THAT DOESN'T HAVE THAT PROBLEM.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE MORE THAN 93 CARS, THE 94TH CAR, WHAT HAPPENS? SO HOPEFULLY THEY WOULD SELF PARK IN THE PUBLIC LOT.
I PULL IN TO THIS GREAT RESTAURANT WITH 15,766 SQUARE FEET OF SPACE.
OKAY? AND WE PULL UP TO THE VALET VALET STAND, AND YOU'VE ALREADY HAD 93 CARS PARKED EITHER 28 LOCAL AND 65 REMOTE.
WHAT HAPPENS, THE VALET FINDS A WAY TO MAKE IT WORK.
AND THAT CAN BE WITH AN AGREEMENT WITH THE, YOU KNOW, THE SAME OWNER OWNS 110 SPACES NEXT DOOR.
SO THEY CAN FIND A WAY TO MAKE THAT WORK.
SO ARE YOU SAYING I'M, YOU'RE GIVING ME SQUISHIES.
SO IF I'M THE 90, IF I'M THE 94TH CAR COMING INTO THAT PARKING LOT VALET, WE AGREE THAT THE VALET WOULD USE THE RIGHT.
SO LIKELY THE VALET WOULD USE THE SAME OWNER'S PARKING NEXT DOOR.
THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THE RIGHT BALANCE.
AND IN 18 MONTHS OR 12 MONTHS, WHATEVER Y'ALL SAY, IF IT WERE TO COME BACK AND NOT OPERATE WELL, THEN WE WOULD DEDICATE MORE OF THE PUBLIC PARKING TO VALET PARKING.
BUT WE WANT TO FIND THAT RIGHT BALANCE TO MAKE IT WORK.
AND IN THIS CASE, WHILE IT'S BALANCING, THERE IS RESERVE, YOU KNOW, SO THAT IT DOESN'T BECOME A TRAFFIC HAZARD.
AND, AND, AND I'M GONNA RELEASE TO MS. DAVIS IN A SECOND THEN, MS. HAYDEN, UH, AND I'M ENOUGH OF A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER MINDSET, ALTHOUGH THIS IS A BIG BUSINESS, IS THAT IN THE END, YOU'RE NOT GONNA WANT TO TURN AWAY A CUSTOMER WANTING TO COME TO YOUR RESTAURANT AND SAY, I'M SORRY, OUR VALET IS FULL.
OOH, YOU'RE NUMBER NINE FOUR OF DEATH.
WE'RE JUST WANTING TO AVOID THE PARKING IN SOMEONE ELSE'S LOT OR ON THE STREET AND CREATE CONGESTION.
SO I JUST SAY AGAIN, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE 94TH CAR IS DAVIS, JUST A REALLY QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE VALET, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT REQUIREMENTS WE CAN MAKE, BUT I, I THINK TO SAY THE VALET HAS TO BE OPERATING DURING THE ENTIRE TIME THE RESTAURANT IS OPERATING, I DON'T THINK THAT'S REASONABLE BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA NEED TO SEE THE DEMAND.
AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST, I'M, I'M JUST THINKING OF THIS AS A BUSINESS PERSON, YOU CAN'T JUST SAY, YES, WE WILL DO IT FOR ALL OF THE HOURS OF THE RESTAURANT WHEN IF NOBODY'S THERE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, TWO O'CLOCK AND FIVE O'CLOCK.
SO I THINK SOME OF THE QUESTIONS ARE OPERATIONAL AND PROBABLY THE GENERAL MANAGER OF THE RESTAURANT WOULD LIKELY BE ABLE TO ANSWER THOSE IN TERMS OF BRINGING IN THE VALET WHEN THERE'S THE DEMAND AND WHEN IT'S FULL, YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU PUT A SIGN OUT JUST LIKE WHEN YOU GO TO A STARS GAME, IF YOU CAN'T GET IN LOT FULL, YOU'VE GOTTA GO TO PUBLIC PARKING.
I THINK SOME OF THE QUESTIONS WE'RE ASKING ARE A LITTLE TACTICAL.
AND THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION, MR. OKAY.
UM, I KNOW WE'VE TALKED MOSTLY ABOUT THE PARKING BECAUSE THIS IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PARKING, BUT SOME OF OUR CRITERIA WILL NOT INCREASE TRAFFIC HAZARDS OR INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
AND I'M STRUGGLING WITH THOSE.
I'M NOT NECESSARILY STRUGGLING WITH THE TRAFFIC HAZARD ISSUE.
UM, BECAUSE YOU WILL HAVE THE VALET AND I'M NOT SURE HOW WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAPPENS.
BUT THE VALET STAND WILL BE ON THAT PRIVATE PROPERTY IN THAT PARKING LOT, RIGHT? YES.
UM, AND THE FACT THAT THERE'S NOT ON STREET PARKING ON HIGH LINE RIGHT IN FRONT OF THAT, WHERE THE QUEUE WOULD BE.
SO THAT, THAT GIVES ME, UM, THAT I, I'M A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE ISSUE OF, UM, NOT INCREASING TRAFFIC HAZARDS.
UM, THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ONE I'M STRUGGLING WITH.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE SEEN ANY EVIDENCE THAT THIS WON'T INCREASE TRAFFIC.
I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW IT WOULDN'T INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION.
I MEAN, IF YOU'RE ADDING RESTAURANTS IN A PLACE, AND, AND OF COURSE THAT'S A BALANCE THAT WE HAVE AS A CITY, RIGHT? I MEAN, LIKE YOU MENTIONED LOWER GREENVILLE, A LOT OF PLACES, BISHOP ARTS, A LOT OF THOSE PLACES.
IT INCREASES TRAFFIC CONGESTION, IT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
SO HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU PROVE THAT? I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE SEEN ANYTHING SAYING, OKAY, YEAH, HERE'S HOW MUCH TRAFFIC CONGESTION THIS WILL CAUSE OR HERE'S HOW WE'RE GONNA MITIGATE THAT.
I, I MEAN, I THINK, LET ME SEVERAL COMPONENTS TO THAT.
UM, FIRST LLOYD HAS, WHAT, WHAT WAS THE QUEUING LENGTH ON THE PROPERTY? SEVEN CARS.
BUT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES ON HIGHLINE? BECAUSE I HAVE OBSERVED THAT AND IT'S, IT'S EMPTY.
THERE'S NOT MUCH TRAFFIC ON THE HIGHLINE.
YEAH, I'M JUST SAYING, ESPECIALLY SAYING WHAT IT SAYS IS THAT TOWARDS OAK LAWN, THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT INCREASE CONGEST TRAFFIC, CONGEST CONGESTION, CONGESTION ON
[03:35:01]
ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREET.SO THERE'S PLENTY OF, PLENTY OF CAPACITY ON HIGHLINE AND THEN OAK LAWN OF COURSE, AND THE SERVICE ROAD, ALL THESE ROADS.
I JUST HAVEN'T SEEN ANY HARD EVIDENCE TO THAT FACT.
I GUESS POINT I, I THINK THE ADVANTAGE HERE IS THAT MOST, AND I'M LIKE, LLOYD, I TRY TO AVOID VALET.
I'D RATHER PARK MY OWN CAR EVEN IF I HAVE TO WALK CAREFUL.
THAT'S, UM, THE, UM, I THINK THAT THE DISTINCTION HERE COMPARED TO MOST PLACES YOU SEE WITH VALET PARKING, A LOT OF RESTAURANTS YOU SEE WITH VALET, UM, ESPECIALLY PLACES LIKE DE BEUM, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IT, THE VALET STAND IS LIKE IT HAS TO BE ON THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY.
BUT IT'S NOT VERY FAR INTO THE PRIVATE PROPERTY.
IT, THE ADVANTAGE HERE IS WE HAVE THIS SEVEN CAR LENGTH OF QUEUING SO PEOPLE CAN PULL IN AND, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANTED TO MAKE A, A CONDITION THAT THE VALET STAND HAD TO BE AT THE HEAD OF THAT QUEUING DISTANCE, I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE.
I THINK THE BOARD, YOU KNOW, IN MY EXPERIENCE, THE BOARD CAN IMPOSE IT SAYS REASONABLE CONDITIONS IN THE CODE.
SO, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD, YOU COULD, UM, HELP MANAGE IT THAT WAY.
I THINK THE VALETS COMPANIES THEMSELVES, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, YOU GET A GOOD VALET COMPANY THAT HAS A TON OF EXPERIENCE.
UM, AND WE'RE ALSO, BEAR IN MIND WE'RE ADDING THE HUNDRED AND 10 PUBLIC SPACES, LIKE LLOYD SAYS, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT.
OKAY, YOU GET TO THE 94TH CAR.
WELL, I THINK THAT 94TH CAR WOULD GO IN THOSE PUBLIC SPACES.
WE ALSO, THE THE CASE THAT YOU ALL APPROVED EARLIER, 1617 HIGHLINE, THAT IS A VERY LARGE DEVELOPMENT WITH INTERNAL FACING PARKING THAT'S RIGHT ACROSS HIGHLINE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I I MEAN I CAN'T, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WOULD BE A GOOD PLACE FOR OVERFLOW THAT WORKS AS LONG AS THERE'S A PARKING AGREEMENT FOR THAT PROPERTY.
WELL, BUT IF THAT OWNER CHANGES HANDS, THEN IT'S POOF.
SO YEAH, BECAUSE PARKING HAS TO BE BY DEED RESTRICTION, CORRECT? WELL, WE'RE, IT HAS TO BE DEEDED.
WELL, HERE'S THE THING,
THERE'S A PEDESTRIAN CROSSING AND I DON'T THINK THERE IS, THERE.
NO, I FARTHER DOWN THERE IS, BUT NOT IN FRONT OF YOURS.
NO, I'M SAYING SINCE WE CONTROL BOTH PROPERTIES THAT THE VALETS COULD TAKE CARS OVER THERE.
I MEAN, AND IT'S RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET, BASICALLY.
THAT'S WHY I ASK ABOUT THE 94TH CAR, MR. RY.
I'VE GOT A HYPOTHETICAL CONCERN HERE WITH REGARD TO THE NEW PARKING LOT.
ALRIGHT, LET'S SAY YOU'VE ALREADY FILLED UP THE SPACES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
I'M THE 94TH CAR, BUT IT'S ON A FRIDAY OR SATURDAY NIGHT.
THERE'S A BIG EVENT AT THE AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER, WHETHER IT'S A CONCERT, A STARS GAME OR WHATEVER, AND THE, THIS ENTIRE LOT IS ALREADY FULL.
IS THIS, IS THIS GONNA BE A FREE LOT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC OR ARE YOU GUYS GONNA CHARGE PEOPLE TO PARK THERE? BECAUSE, BECAUSE I MEAN, A HUNDRED, YOU COULD FILL UP 180 PARKING SPACES LIKE THAT MM-HMM
SO IT'S A WAYS FROM THE AMERICAN HONOR CENTER, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S PROBABLY USED WILL BE USED FOR THAT.
I WOULD THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GREAT OPTION AND NOTHING'S FREE.
PEOPLE WILL WALK, BE WALKING ACROSS THAT BRIDGE.
SO I THINK THE ASSURANCE HERE IS THESE EXTRA 110 SPACES AND THE TIMELINE THAT Y'ALL MAY PUT ON THIS APPROVAL IS THEN YOU HAVE ROOM TO ADD MORE VALET.
IF YOU NEED MORE VALET THERE, WE'RE LOOKING FOR A, A BALANCE.
AND THAT'S KIND OF HOW YOU FIND THE BALANCE.
LUCKILY THERE'S EXTRA RESERVE PARKING IF NEEDED.
WHAT MR. N DID, DID THEY ANSWER YOUR HYPOTHETICAL
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, WHICH ONES GET REMOTE VERSUS REGULAR? I'M STILL CONCERNED ABOUT THE 94TH PARKING.
I'M TRYING, I'M LIKE MS. DAVIS, I'M TRYING TO FIND A WAY THAT WILL WORK WITHOUT, AND I'M NOT PICKING ON YOU, MS. CARSON WITHOUT INTERFERING WITH ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER MM-HMM
BECAUSE SHE HAS HER RIGHTS TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE HER BUSINESS AND HAVE HER SITUATION JUST LIKE OTHERS DOWN THERE.
I'M TRYING TO FULFILL WHAT THE CODE SAYS FOR US.
SO I'M STILL MULLING OVER THAT.
WHAT ARE THE QUESTIONS WE HAVE? AND THEN WE'RE GONNA GO TO HIS REBUTTAL.
I'LL TRY NOT TO USE THE FULL FIVE MINUTES.
UM, JUST ONE MORE THING ON THE, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBER, WHETHER IT'S 93 OR 94, I AM, BECAUSE OF THE FACT, WE HAVE THE ADVANTAGE OF HAVING THESE OTHER PROPERTIES.
[03:40:01]
UM, SO I'M CONFIDENT THAT WE CAN MAKE THAT WORK.I MEAN, I THINK THE NUMBER THAT WE HAVE IS MORE THAN SUFFICIENT, BUT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE HAVE OTHER SPACES IN THE AREA, WHETHER IT BE ON THE, THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED LOT OR 1617 OR WHEREVER, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF TYPICAL FOR THIS TYPE OF ENVIRONMENT THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, NOT EVERYBODY GETS TO PULL UP AND PARK RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE RESTAURANT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
YOU KIND, IT'S JUST SOMETHING YOU KIND OF HAVE TO DEAL WITH IN A, IN AN URBAN MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT.
SO I'M CONFIDENT WE CAN MANAGE THAT.
UM, I ALSO KNOW THAT, AND IF YOU WANNA MAKE THIS A CONDITION THAT THE VALET STAND FOR 16, 16, NOT, WE DON'T VALET, WE DON'T USE 1626 IN ANY WAY TO VALET FOR 16, 16, BE THAT THE VALET STAND OR WHATEVER THE LOCATION OF THE VALET STAND, YOU KNOW, PUTTING IT AT THE HEAD OF THE QUEUING DISTANCE.
UM, THE 12 MONTH REASSESSMENT, WE'RE FINE WITH THAT.
WE THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IF IT MAKES EVERYBODY FEEL BETTER, THEN SURE.
UM, WE'RE, AGAIN, WE, WE WE'RE CONFIDENT THAT WE CAN MAKE THIS WORK.
UM, SO GENERALLY TO SUM UP, I MEAN WE, THESE ARE ALL THINGS WE'VE ANTICIPATED.
WE BELIEVE IT'LL WORK AND WORK WELL.
WE THINK ADDING THESE EXTRA 110 PUBLIC PARKING SPACES AND THE 75 VALET SPACES IS GOOD FOR THE DISTRICT, GOOD FOR EVERYBODY.
IT PROBABLY WILL TAKE PRESSURE OFF MS. CARSON'S PROPERTY, FRANKLY.
I'M JUST TRYING TO BE POSITIVE HERE, MR. CHAIR.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE THINK WE'VE MET THE CRITERIA.
WE THINK WE MEET THE STANDARD.
UM, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T ANTICIPATE EVERY SITUATION, YOU KNOW, PEAK USAGE, YOU KNOW, AS MR. NURI SAID, NERI SAID A A STARS GAME OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT WHERE PEOPLE ARE PARKING ALL OVER THE PLACE.
THAT'S KIND OF LIKE, UM, PARKING RATIOS USED TO BE BASED ON, WHAT WAS IT, THE DAY AFTER THANKSGIVING? UM, YOU KNOW, MAXIMUM.
I MEAN THAT'S PROBABLY FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT, UM, I THINK WE'VE GOTTEN PAST THAT.
UM, THAT'S, THAT'S TOO MUCH PARKING.
SO, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN ANTICIPATE THAT.
SOME NIGHTS ARE GONNA, NIGHTS ARE GONNA BE BUSIER THAN OTHERS, BUT WE THINK THAT THIS IS A GOOD SOLUTION THAT WILL WORK WELL.
UH, IT'S BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE AND WE'RE HAPPY TO COME BACK IN 12 MONTHS AND LET YOU ALL TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT IT.
SO WE WOULD SPEC RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU APPROVE THIS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR FOR THE OPPOSITION? UH, THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
OH, DID YOU WANNA GIVE A NEW MOTION? UH, FORMS, MR. WELL, I HAVE THE MOTIONS.
IF YOU GUYS ARE GONNA TWEAK IT, THEN YES, WE ARE GONNA TWEAK IT.
I MIGHT NEED A OKAY, WELL THEN, BUT MS. DAVIS I THINK IS GONNA MAKE A MOTION.
BUT, BUT, UM, I, THEY'RE GONNA, I THINK WE'RE GONNA PUT SOME CONDITIONS.
I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE BOARD, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO HERE.
WELL, WHO WANTS TO DO THIS? OKAY, WAIT A MINUTE.
MY CONDITIONS, OKAY, HOLD ON FOR ONE SECOND.
SO I'M GONNA HAVE A BRIEF DISCUSSION AND THAT WAY SHE CAN FORMULATE HER MOTION.
SO, UM, UH, I'M IN FAVOR OF MOVING FORWARD WITH IT.
UM, I WANT, I THINK THE, IT'S ESSENTIAL THAT WE DO THIS 12 MONTH LOOK BACK, MR. BOARD ATTORNEY.
THE QUESTION IS, THE QUESTION IS, HOW DO YOU PUT THAT IN WRITING? IS THAT 12 MONTHS FROM OPENING? IS THAT 12 MONTHS FROM TODAY? WHAT'S THE IT'S GONNA BE, IS THAT, IS THAT A CORRECT AS PART OF OUR REASONABLE CONDITIONS, I WOULD THINK IT'S 12 MONTHS FROM OPENING.
SO YOU MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THAT IN YOUR LANGUAGE, 12 MONTHS FROM OPENING.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LANGUAGE IS FOR A REVIEW THAT IT HAS TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND CONDUCT ANOTHER.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE TO GIVE US THE LANGUAGE.
UM, WHAT OTHER CONDITIONS ARE WE WANTING TO PUT ON THIS, MR. NRI? THIS IS JUST DISCUSSION BEFORE MOTION.
I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, A STIPULATION PUT IN THE, UH, MOTION THAT THE VALET STAND WILL BE IN THAT PARKING IN 1616 AND NOT ON THE 1626 SIDE.
HAS TO BE IN, IN THE PARKING LOT OF 16.
YOU'RE GONNA MAKE SURE WE CAN DO THAT.
BUT IT SAYS REASONABLE CONDITIONS.
AND THE 12 MONTH, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, WHATEVER THE LANGUAGE FOR THAT.
WHAT OTHER POTENTIAL CONDITIONS DO WE WANNA PUT ON THIS? I'M QUITE HONESTLY, GUYS, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER 93
[03:45:01]
IS THE RIGHT NUMBER OR NOT.I'M ALMOST CONVINCED THEY CAN MAKE THE TURNAROUND.
SO MY, MY ONLY OTHER COMMENT IS IT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE THE HOWEVER MANY SPACES, VALET SPACES THAT ARE DEDICATED IN THAT PARKING LOT.
IT SEEMS LIKE THAT THAT LAST ROW THAT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S 110 FOR PUBLIC PARKING SEEMS LIKE THEY COULD SORT OF PARTITION OFF THAT ONE ROW IN CASE THEY NEED THAT OVERFLOW PARKING FOR VALET ONCE UNTIL THEY KIND OF FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT BALANCE IS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A CONDITION WE NEED TO PUT IN THERE, BUT IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S A NO.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN PUT THAT A CONDITION IN THERE.
UM, WHAT WE, WHAT WE'RE GONNA SAY IS 12 MONTH REVIEW SOME, WHATEVER THE LANGUAGE HE SAYS, WHAT WE'RE GONNA SAY IS THE VALET STAND IS IN THE, THE 1616 HIGHLINE PARKING LOT.
UM, AND THEN WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW, AND THAT YOU HAVE TO F COM, UH, YOU HAVE TO COMPLETE A REMOTE PARKING LOT AGREEMENT THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY.
ISN'T THAT THE OTHER THING? A REMOTE PARKING AGREEMENT? THAT'S ANOTHER THING.
I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.
AND COULD I JUST, AM I OUTTA ORDER IF I ADD ONE THING? NO, WE, THERE'S NOT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR YET.
WE'RE PERCOLATING MI MR. DIMAN REMINDED ME THAT VALET OPERATIONS, TYPICALLY THEY CAN STACK CARS BECAUSE IT'S VALET.
SO, I MEAN, THAT, I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK AS, AS MY, AS MY GREAT FRIEND AND BOARD MEMBER SAYS THAT'S GETTING INTO TOO TACTICAL, DAVE.
I I, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA PUT THAT IN THE STACKING IS NOT OUR ISSUE.
BUT I I'M JUST SAYING THEY COULD SQUEEZE MORE CARS INTO THAT 75 DEDICATED SPACE AREA.
WE'RE NOT SAYING SQUEEZE MORE INTO 16.
I, I MEAN THE SEVEN, THE 65 SPACES WELL ARE REALLY 75 THAT ARE PARTITION.
AND I'M CONCERNED STILL ABOUT HOW YOU ALLOCATE AND KEEP TRACK OF HOW MANY YOU'RE ALLOCATING AGAINST THIS BUILDING.
BUT I GUESS WE'RE GOING WITH 93, WHICH IS 65 AND 28 TO START WITH.
AND THEN, ALRIGHT, WHAT OTHER CONDITIONS, GUYS? MR. KOVI, ANY SUGGESTIONS ON CONDITIONS THAT YOU WANNA PUT INTO THIS? NO, I DON'T HAVE ANY.
SO WHAT DO YOU HAVE THUS FAR? SO I THINK, I THINK MR. SAP IS GETTING PROPER LANGUAGE.
VALE IS IN THE PARKING LOT OF 16.
16, AGREED THAT THEY HAVE A REMOTE PARKING AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY.
AND THEN THE 12 MONTH, WHAT'S THAT CALLED? SO IT WOULD BE A REASSESSMENT CONDITION.
AND SOME BOARD, WE INQUIRY TO REQUIRE A FOLLOW UP, UH, ASSESSMENT FOR SPECIFIC POINT IN TIME TO DETERMINE PARKING WORK, LOOK AND SO FORTH.
WE'RE AMENDED TO SUCH A CONDITION IN THESE CASES.
WE'D SUGGEST 18 MONTH, WE'RE GONNA GO WITH 12 MR. REMEMBER THAT? YEAH.
WE'RE JUST GONNA SAY A 12 MONTH.
HE'S GONNA GIVE US THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE.
12 MONTH REASSESSMENT DATE BACK BEFORE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
AND FOR YOU, MS. CARSON, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT IN MOTION YET.
THIS GIVES YOU AS A PROPERTY ORDER THAT YOU'LL GET NOTICED, READ YOUR NOTICES THIS TIME.
YOU'LL GET NOTICED 12 MONTHS FROM, THEY'LL HAVE TO FILE IT BECAUSE THEY'RE FILE A CASE, I GUESS 30 DAYS BEFORE 12 MONTHS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROCEDURE IS.
AND THAT'LL BE YOUR OPPORTUNITY AS A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY ORDER TO SAY IT'S WORKING OR, OH MY GOSH, IT'S NOT.
AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE HERE TO REMEMBER THAT.
WE PROBABLY WILL BE WAIT AND SEE WHETHER WE GET REAPPOINTED OR NOT.
BUT ANYWAY, THE IDEA IS IT COMES BACK TO US IN 12 MONTHS AND GIVES YOU, AS A PROPERTY OWNER, OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS, THE CHANCE TO SAY NO ISSUE OR ISSUE.
UM, AND THE HOPE IS MR. VINCENT THAT YOU'RE COMMUNICATING WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS BECAUSE YOU DO NOT WANT TO COME BACK TO US IN 12 MONTHS AND HEAR PROBLEMS. 'CAUSE THEN WE'RE GONNA SAY, WAIT A MINUTE, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS.
SO, ALRIGHT, WE'RE WAITING FOR OUR BOARD ATTORNEY TO GIVE US LANGUAGE AND THEN WE WILL PUT IT, PUT IT IN THE RECORD.
IS THAT THE SENSE OF THE BOARD? MR. N? YEAH.
[03:50:42]
FROM RUTH.MATTHEW, WE'RE WAITING FOR YOU.
ALRIGHT, SO JUST STAY HERE WITH ME.
SO THE, THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON 2 4 2 4 5 0 4 8.
MS. DAVIS, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 4 8 ON APPLICATION OF JONATHAN VINCENT.
GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO PROVIDE 93 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES, 28 OF WHICH WILL BE PROVIDED ON SITE.
AND 65 BY REMOTE PARKING AGREEMENT TO THE OFF STREET PARKING, WAIT, SORRY.
65 VALET SPACES BY REMOTE PARKING AGREEMENT TO THE OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED, WHICH REQUIRES 153 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES.
BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY USE AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT INCREASE TRAFFIC HAZARDS OR INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT OR NEARBY STREETS.
AND THE PARKING DEMAND GENERATED BY THE USE DOES NOT WARRANT THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES.
I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE, OKAY, I'M GONNA GO RIGHT HERE.
I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
NUMBER ONE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF 60 SPACES SHALL AUTOMATICALLY AND IMMEDIATELY TERMINATE IF AND WHEN THE USE IS CHANGED AND DISCONTINUED.
NUMBER TWO, THE VALET STAND MUST BE LOCATED ON SITE AT 1616 HIGHLINE DRIVE.
NUMBER THREE, THAT THE APPLICANT MUST APPEAR HERE BEFORE THE BOARD FOR REASSESSMENT AND FINAL ISSUANCE, ISSUANCE OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WITHIN 12 MONTHS OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE CO ISSUANCE OF THE COATE OCCUPANCY, WHICH IS CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
I MEAN, I KNEW THAT, BUT I DIDN'T
AND THAT'S PANEL, PANEL A IS IT PRESUMED? IT WOULD BE PRESUMED, PRESUMED.
AND THEN NUMBER FOUR, COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE PLANS ARE REQUIRED.
IT HAS BEEN MOVED BY MS. DAVIS VAT.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
AND BY MS. HAYDEN, DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
MS. DAVIS? UM, I I REALLY DON'T HAVE A DISCUSSION.
I THINK WE DISCUSSED EVERYTHING PRETTY THOROUGHLY.
I I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT
UM, I'M RELUCTANTLY GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS.
UM, HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE, LIKE IT STATED ON THE RECORD THAT I DO THINK THAT THIS WILL INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ADJACENT AND NEARBY STREETS.
MR. HOPKOS, ANY COMMENT ON THE MOTION? UH, I WILL ALSO RELUCTANT, RELUCTANTLY GO ALONG WITH IT.
I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CHAIR AS TO HOW, WHAT THE PROCESS BY WHICH THIS COMES BACK BEFORE US OR, OR IT DOESN'T, WHO KNOW? SO, UM, THE ONE OR TWO OR THREE TIMES THAT I'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS IS THAT, UM, THIS REQUIRES THE APPLICANT TO, ACCORDING TO THE LANGUAGE OR APPEAR BEFORE US, 12 MONTHS AFTER THE ISSUANCE TO THE CO.
WHICH MEANS THAT THEY, IF THEY'RE SMART, THEY'RE ANTICIPATING THAT.
'CAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO BE LATE FOR THAT BECAUSE THEN YOUR CO THE EXCEPTION EXPIRES AT THE 12 MONTH PART.
SO THEY COME BACK TO US AND IN ESSENCE, IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING.
IT WOULD BE POSTED, CORRECT ME IF I'M CORRECT OR INCORRECT, IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING.
IT'S POSTED SURROUNDING PROPERTY ENTERS.
NOTICE THAT IT'S A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING AND YOU'RE BASICALLY REPROVING
[03:55:01]
THAT THERE IS NO CONGESTION, NO TRAFFIC HAZARD, ALL THOSE THINGS.AND WE TAKE FEEDBACK AND TESTIMONY FROM SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.
THE STAFF DOESN'T GIVE A RECOMMENDATION, BUT GIVES US INFORMATION.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR NECESSARILY A TRAFFIC STUDY THERE.
YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK WE NECESSARILY THAT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS IN REALITY WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS AND DO WE HAVE BLEED OVER? DO WE HAVE CONGESTION? DO WE HAVE ISSUES THAT WOULD PRECLUDE US FROM CONTINUING OR CHANGING THE REQUIREMENT? BECAUSE QUITE HONESTLY, WHAT WE COULD DO IS CHANGE THE REQUIREMENT.
WE COULD SAY THE 65 28 IS NO LONGER IN EXISTENCE.
WE'RE NOW GONNA GO BACK TO THE 1 53.
'CAUSE IT'S CLEAR THAT THIS IS CREATING PROBLEMS. YES.
THE LANGUAGE THAT I USED IN THE MOTION WAS SPECIFICALLY THAT THE APPLICANT MUST REAPPEAR BEFORE THE BOARD FOR A REASSESSMENT, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
AND A FINAL ISSUE TO THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
SO IT'S ALMOST LIKE A CONTINUATION OF THIS HEARING.
BUT YES, IT WOULD BE PROPERLY NOTICED.
AND, UM, ALL THE T'S CROSSED AND I'S DOTTED, SO TO SPEAK.
AND THE CODE CLEARLY SAYS WE ARE ALLOWED TO PUT SPECIAL CONDITIONS, REASONABLE SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
CORRECT? UH, IS THE APPLICANT WILLINGLY ACCEPTING THESE REASONABLE CONDITIONS? I NEED YOU TO SAY SOMETHING PLEASE, FOR THE RECORD.
YOU WANT ME TO COME DOWN? YEP.
I JUST WANT, I WANNA MAKE SURE THIS IS NOT A FORCED CONFESSION.
THIS IS JUST, THIS IS, IS IS THE, IS THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE PENDING REASONABLE TO THE APPLICANT? YES, THEY ARE.
SO DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION MR. KOVI? WELL, SO, SO DID I HEAR CORRECTLY THAT THERE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL BE ISSUED CONDITIONAL ON THIS? UM, HIS QUESTION WAS, IS THE CO ISSUANCE CONDITIONED ON THIS REASSESSMENT? THE, THE CO CONDITION IS BASED ON THIS PARKING PERIOD.
LIKE THAT TEMPORARY CO IS CONTINGENT ON THEM HAVING PARKING.
SO YEAH, I MEAN, UNTIL THEY GET THE CO AND THEY OPERATE, THERE'S NOTHING TO RE REASSESS.
SO THAT'S WHY THE MOTION IS 12 MONTHS FROM THE ISSUE TO THE CO.
BUT THAT CO IS GONNA HAVE THIS CAVEAT IN IT.
MR. THOMPSON? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO MR. SO WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY TAKE THIS DOCUMENT TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FOR THE PERMIT, THEY'RE GONNA ADD ALL THOSE CONDITIONS INTO THAT PERMIT? MM-HMM
MR. KOVICH, DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? THAT'S TEMPORARY.
SO WE CLEARLY, 12 MONTHS FROM THE CO ISSUES CAN SAY THIS ISN'T WORKING OR THIS IS WORKING AND IF IT ISN'T WORKING, THESE ARE OUR NEW CONDITIONS AND YOU UNDERSTAND THAT, UNDERSTOOD? YES SIR.
AM I CORRECT MR. BOARD ATTORNEY? THAT IS CORRECT, SIR.
SO THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.
THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE BOARD.
MOTION TO GRANT PASSES FIVE TO ZERO IN THE MATTER OF 2 4 5 0 4 8.
UM, THE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED FIVE TO ZERO, THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WITH THE CONDITIONS NOTED.
WE ARE ABOUT TO LOSE OUR THANK YOU.
WE'RE ABOUT TO LOSE OUR QUORUM.
SO, UM, WHAT I'M GONNA DO IS WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO HOLD OVER THE LAST TWO CASES UNTIL NEXT MONTH.
SO THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON, UM, THE CHAIRMAN WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON 2 4 5 0 4 9.
MS. HAYDEN, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 8.
JUST OH 4 8 2 5 2 4 5 2 4 0 4 9 OH MY GOSH.
2 4 5 DASH OH FOUR NINE HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JUNE 17TH, CORRECT.
AND BY MR. N, UM, DISCUSSION, HEARING NO DISCUSSION.
THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE, THE, THE VOTE.
MR. HAITZ, WHO'S THE SECOND? AYE MR. CHAIRMAN HAYDEN.
NEXT CASE IS 2 4 5 DASH ZERO FIVE.
I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 5 0 HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JUNE 17TH, 2025.
SECONDED BY MR. N, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
[04:00:02]
AYE.MOTION, MOTION TO HOLD PASSES FOUR TO ZERO IN THE MATTER.
THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AND A FOUR TO ZERO VOTE, UH, IS HOLDING THIS ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT TO JUNE 17TH, 2025.
THAT IS THE LAST OF OUR AGENDA FOR TODAY.
OUR NEXT MEETING IS THE 17TH OF JUNE.
SO WE HAVE A, WE'LL HAVE A FULL DAY.
UH, MY GUESS MY GUESS IS WHAT'S THAT MR. CHAIRMAN? DID WE VOTE ON THE LAST ONE? WE JUST VOTED ON 2 4 5 0 5 0 OH.
UM, TO HOLD OVER THE LAST TWO CASES TOGETHER? NO, THEY'RE SEPARATE VOTES.
SO, UH, THAT'S THE LAST AGENDA ITEM.
SO IN OUR JUNE MEETING, JUNE 17TH, WE HAVE ALREADY SIX CASES PLUS THESE TWO HOLDERS.
MY GUESS IS, WE'LL, WE'LL START THE, THE MEETING AT 10 O'CLOCK AGAIN THAT DAY.
UM, THE HOPE IS TO GET THROUGH THAT, UM, HEARING NOTHING ELSE, THE, THE, UM, THE CHAIR TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, THOSE OPPOSED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A IS ADJOURNED ON MAY 20TH AT 5:13 PM THANK YOU.