* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:03] GOOD [Board of Adjustments: Panel A on June 17, 2025.] AFTERNOON, MARY. WE HAVE TECHNOLOGY. OKAY, THANK YOU. MEMBERS, TURN ON YOUR MONITORS. GOOD AFTERNOON. WELCOME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. MY NAME IS DAVID NEWMAN AND I'M HONORED TO SERVE AS CHAIRMAN OF THE FULL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF ITS PANEL A TODAY. TODAY IS TUESDAY, JUNE 17TH, 2025 WITH A TIME OF 1:00 PM AND I HEREBY CALL THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A TO ORDER FOR OUR PUBLIC HEARING IN BOTH IN-PERSON AND HYBRID VIDEO CONFERENCE. A QUORUM WHICH IS DEFINED AS A MINIMUM OF FOUR OF OUR FIVE APPOINTED MEMBERS IS PRESENT. AND THEREFORE WE CAN PROCEED WITH OUR MEETING. PLEASE ALLOW ME TO INTRODUCE PEOPLE ACROSS THE PANEL. AGAIN, MY NAME IS DAVID NEWMAN AND I'M CHAIRMAN OF THE FULL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. TO MY IMMEDIATE LEFT IS KATHLEEN DAVIS, MICHAEL DORN, JAY MARY, AND MICHAEL OVITZ. TO MY IMMEDIATE RIGHT IS OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF PLANNER, DR. KAMIKA MILLER HOSKINS, AND OUR BOARD SECRETARY AND MEETING MODERATOR MARY WILLIAMS. AND IN A MINUTE I'LL INTRODUCE OUR BOARD ATTORNEY WHEN SHE, UH, OUR BOARD ATTORNEY, JUST LISA IS THERESA CARLISLE. 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. BEFORE I CONTINUE ON MY PREPARED REMARKS, I WANNA REMIND THE AUDIENCE THAT IS HERE TODAY, THANK YOU FOR COMING, THAT IF ANYONE WISHES TO SPEAK TODAY, YOU NEED TO FILL OUT A BLUE CARD. MARY, WOULD YOU PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND? A BLUE CARD JUST LIKE THIS AND THEY NEED TO GET THAT BLUE CARD TO MARY. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU NOW TO GET THE BLUE CARD, WHICH IS UPFRONT. IS IT UPFRONT, MARY BLUE CARD AND FILL IT OUT AND GIVE IT TO MARY. 'CAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY WAY YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SPEAK TODAY. NUMBER TWO, UH, IF IT'S A SPECIFIC CASE THAT IS ON THE AGENDA, YOU CAN SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY TIME AND YOU CAN ALSO SPEAK WHEN THE CASE IS CALLED. THE LAST CASE ON OUR AGENDA IS THE APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL. AND IN THAT CASE, AS THE NOTICE THAT WENT OUT, YOU CANNOT SPEAK DURING THE CASE THAT BECAUSE THAT IS NOT CONSIDERED A PUBLIC HEARING, THAT'S BE CONSIDERED AN APPEAL HEARING. SO IF YOU'RE WANTING TO SPEAK REGARDING THE CASE NUMBER, THE BOA 2 5 0 0 1 AT 17 7 76 DALLAS PARKWAY, YOU CAN ONLY SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY, WHICH WILL BE DONE IN ABOUT THREE MINUTES FROM NOW. SO THAT'S THE TIME TO SPEAK. AND YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT A BLUE SHEETED PAPER IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK. THAT IS AN APPEAL HEARING. AND APPEAL HEARING IS ONLY BETWEEN THE PARTIES, THE REST OF OUR CASES, WHICH ARE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, VARIANCES, FENCE HEIGHTS, UH, OTHER LAND USE THERE, YOU CAN SPEAK ACCORDING TO THE CASE. I JUST DON'T WANT ANYONE DISAPPOINTED. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THAT. OKAY. SO BEFORE WE BEGIN, I'D LIKE TO BE A FEW GENERAL COMMENTS. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ARE APPOINTED BY YOUR CITY COUNCIL. WE GIVE OUR TIME FREELY AND RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR OUR TIME OTHER THAN OUR JASON'S DELI ICE TEA, WATER, AND BOX LUNCHES. AND WE APPRECIATE THAT. UH, WE OPERATE UNDER CITY COUNCIL APPROVED RULES OF PROCEDURE AND IT'S ON OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEBSITE. AND I KEEP MY RULES OF PROCEDURE VERY HANDY WITH ME. NO ACTION OR DECISION ON A CASE SETS A PRECEDENT. EACH CASE IS DECIDED UPON ITS OWN MERITS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. EACH USE IS PRESUMED TO BE A LEGAL USE. WE HAVE BEEN FULLY BRIEFED BY OUR STAFF THAT STARTED AT 9:00 AM THIS MORNING AND WE HAVE ALSO REVIEWED A DETAILED DOCKET. I'M A PAPER GUY THAT'S OUR DOCKET FOR TODAY, NINE CASES, UH, AND EXPLAINS THEIR CASE. AND OUR DOCKET IS POSTED SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING CONSISTENT WITH OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE. ANY EVIDENCE YOU WISH TO SUBMIT THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION ON ANY OF THE CASES ON OUR AGENDA SHOULD BE, UM, SHOULD, WILL BE SUBMITTED TO OUR BOARD SECRETARY. THIS IS EVIDENCE AND, UH, THE SECRETARY WILL KEEP THAT AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD. AGAIN, I'M GONNA REMIND [00:05:01] EVERYONE IF YOU WANNA SPEAK TODAY, YOU NEED TO FILL OUT THIS BLUE SHEET OF PAPER AND GET IT TO OUR BOARD SECRETARY. I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO SAY LATER I DIDN'T KNOW APPROVALS OF VARIANCES, SPECIAL EXCEPTION, OR REVERSALS OF A BUILDING OFFICIAL DECISION REQUIRE 75% OR FOUR OF OUR FIVE MEMBERS. FOUR OF OUR FIVE MEMBERS, ALL OTHER MOTIONS REQUIRE A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE. LETTERS OF TODAY'S BOARD'S ACTIONS WILL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT BY OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR WITHIN TWO DAYS AFTER THE HEARING AND WILL BECOME PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD. I'LL SAY FOR THE LAST TIME, ANYONE DESIRING TO SPEAK TODAY MUST REGISTER IN ADVANCE WITH OUR BOARD SECRETARY. EACH REGISTERED SPEAKER WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES OR ARE WHEN APE DURING THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY TIME PERIOD WHEN YOUR SPECIFIC CASE IS CALLED. IF IT'S A ZONING CASE, YOU'RE GIVEN UP TO FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK, BUT DURING THIS PUBLIC TESTIMONY PORTION, IT'S THREE MINUTES. ALL REGISTERED ONLINE SPEAKERS MUST BE PRESENT ON VIDEO TO ADDRESS THE BOARD, NO TELE AND HAVE TO REGISTER 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE. THOSE THAT ARE HERE IN PERSON, YOU REGISTER WHEN YOU WALK IN THE DOOR. UNTIL WE CLOSE PUBLIC TESTIMONY ALL REGISTERED, UH, NO TELECONFERENCE MEETING TELECONFERENCE WILL BE ALLOWED. ALL COMMENTS ARE TO BE MADE TO MYSELF AS THE CHAIRMAN AND DIRECTED TO MYSELF AND I MAY MODIFY SPEAKING TIMES IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN ORDER. OKAY, BOARD MEMBERS, I'M GONNA PREVIEW OUR AGENDA. UH, WE HAD A, A BRIEFING THIS MORNING. WE REVIEWED THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT CASE FILED ON DECEMBER 2ND. I THINK THAT WAS A SATISFACTORY, A PUBLIC BRIEFING. UM, WE ARE GOING TO REVIEW, UM, WE THEN WILL GO TO, SO WE HAD OUR STAFF BRIEFING THIS MORNING ON NINE CASES PLUS A, A LEGAL BRIEFING. UH, THIS AFTERNOON WE'RE GONNA BEGIN OUR PUBLIC HEARING, BUT WE'LL START WITH PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND THEN WE HAVE NINE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA. UH, AFTER WE DO PUBLIC SPEAKING, UH, WE WILL REVIEW AND APPROVE HOPEFULLY OUR MEETING MINUTES WITH THE EDITS THAT WE SPOKE ABOUT. THEN WE'LL START WITH THE FEE, RE FEE, REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST ON GARDEN DRIVE. THEN WE'LL GO TO THE UNCONTESTED CASE ON GARDEN DRIVE. THEN WE'LL GO IN ORDER OF THE UNCONTESTED CASES. UM, ALHAMBRA, COURTLAND CHAMELEON, UM, LAWN DRAGON AND ROYAL. UM, THAT IS, AND AND THEN WE WERE GOING TO DO THE DALLAS PARKWAY LAST BECAUSE I SEE THERE'S A NUMBER OF SPEAKING PEOPLE WANTING TO SPEAK ON DALLAS PARKWAY. WE WILL DO THE DALLAS PARKWAY, UH, CASE FIRST AFTER OUR MEETING MINUTES AND OUR FEE, UH, REQUEST. SO, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY. JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S INFORMATION, THE APPLICANT AND THE CITY HAVE ASKED FOR A TWO MONTH POSTPONEMENT. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE WILL GRANT IT, THAT JUST MEANS THAT'S WHAT THEY HAVE FILED WITH US FOR A TWO MONTH POSTPONEMENT. IT'S UP TO A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE BOARD WHETHER WE CONTINUE WITH THE CASE TODAY OR AS IT'S BEEN ADVERTISED OR WE POSTPONE IT. SO AFTER PUBLIC SPEAKING AND AFTER A MEETING MINUTES AND THE FEE RE FEE REQUEST, THEN WE WILL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND THE CITY REGARDING 1 7 7 7 6 DALLAS PARKWAY. QUESTIONS ON THE AGENDA BOARD MEMBERS? OKAY, UM, WE WILL GO TO PUBLIC SPEAKING, PUBLIC SPEAKERS. MS. BOARD SECRETARY, PLEASE TELL ME, UH, HOW MANY WE TOTAL, JUST GIMME TOTAL NUMBER OF PUBLIC SPEAKING RIGHT NOW HAVE SIGNED UP. AND OUR RULES ARE THAT YOU CAN SPEAK AT A CITY MEETING AS LONG AS IT'S ON THE AGENDA. SO YOU CAN'T COME IN HERE AND TALK ABOUT WORLD FAMINE. YOU HAVE TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S ON OUR PUBLISHED AGENDA. WE HAVE 17 SPEAKERS, SIR. 17 FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING. IS THAT ONLINE PLUS IN PERSON OR, UM, EVERYBODY THAT SIGN UP ONLINE, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE HERE IN PERSON. OKAY, SO 17. OKAY. ALRIGHT, MS. BOARD SECRETARY, WE'LL GO AHEAD WITH PUBLIC SPEAKING. CALL THE FIRST PRE SPEAKER MR. MIKE HIGGINS. SIR, IF YOU COME FORWARD DURING PUBLIC SPEAKING, I WILL ASK YOU TO GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. YOU'RE NOT SWORN IN. PUBLIC SPEAKING DOES NOT REQUIRE OR BEING SWORN IN. IF YOU SPEAK TO [00:10:01] A CASE DURING A CASE HEARING, YOU ARE SWORN IN THREE MINUTES. YES, SIR. AND LET'S MAKE SURE THE MICROPHONE WORKS. IS THAT GREEN LIGHT ON? YES, NOW IT IS. THERE YOU GO. I WAS GONNA SAY PUT IT CLOSER, BUT I CAN HEAR YOU. OKAY, GOOD. SO, SIR, IF YOU WOULD, UH, AND OUR BOARD SECRETARY'S GONNA TELL ME AS EACH PERSON DOES THEIR THREE MINUTES, AND I'M GONNA TRY TO BE FAIR TO EVERYONE. SO LET'S TRY TO KEEP IT TO THREE MINUTES. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND THEN YOU CAN BEGIN. UH, MIKE HIGGINS, 49 28 SEA PINES DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 8 7. YES, SIR. UH, THAT HAS BEEN MY HOME SINCE, UH, 1986. IT'S IN THE, UM, ENTRY NORTH SUBDIVISION RIGHT BEHIND THE AREA THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING ON THE THE PARKWAY. UH, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU BOARD MEMBERS FOR YOUR SERVICE. APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO TO HELP US, UH, RUN OUR CITY IN A MORE EFFICIENT WAY. UH, GAMBLING IS ILLEGAL IN TEXAS, UH, 24 HOUR OPERATION AND, UH, INCREASED TRAFFIC, UH, WOULD BE, WOULD PUT A UNNECESSARY STRAIN ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS MADE UP OF, UH, EVERYTHING FROM VERY YOUNG FAMILIES TO OLD FOLKS LIKE ME. AND, UH, I BELIEVE THAT, UH, WHILE THE FORMER THREE FORKS WAS THERE AS A RESTAURANT RUNNING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS, WE HAD NO MAJOR ISSUES TO SPEAK OF. UH, AS YOU'LL HEAR LATER ON, THERE'S PLENTY OF EVIDENCE ABOUT INCREASED POLICE CALLS AROUND, UH, GA GAMBLING ESTABLISHMENTS. THERE'S INCREASE IN TRAFFIC, UH, THERE'S INCREASE IN NOISE, AND, UM, MANY OTHER ISSUES. THE ONE PRIMARY ISSUE THAT I WANTED TO ADDRESS, UH, AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH ON THIS IS I SEE A LOT OF WRITINGS ABOUT THIS IS A GRAY AREA, WHICH OF COURSE MAKES IT EASY FOR, UH, PEOPLE TO GO ONE DIRECTION OR THE OTHER. BUT TYPICALLY WHEN THERE'S A GRAY AREA, IT TENDS TO, UH, FALL TOWARD THE PERSON THAT'S LOOKING FOR THE EXCEPTION. UH, BUT IT'S JUST AS EASY FOR YOU TO MAKE THE DECISION TO GO FOR WHAT'S THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY. AND SO I URGE YOU TO, UH, CONTINUE TO PREVENT, UH, CHAMPIONS FROM OPERATING POKER AND GAMBLING, UH, AND ALSO RESTRICT, UH, THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF OPERATION. ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU MR. HIGGINS. NEXT SPEAKER, MS. BOARD SECRETARY, MR. DAVID SCHNITZER. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. I WAS NOT EXPECTING TO SPEAK SO EARLY ON HERE. UM, MY NAME IS DAVID SCHNIER AT 1 7 5 2 8 IVY HILL DRIVE, UH, DALLAS, TEXAS. I DO LIVE IN THE BEN TREE NORTH AREA, UH, JUST DOWN THE STREET ACTUALLY FROM THE PROPOSED CLUB. I PASS IT MULTIPLE TIMES PER DAY GOING IN AND, UH, OUT OF MY HOME AREA. I'M ALSO A COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE EXPERT. I DO RETAIL AND RESTAURANT LOCATIONS IN AND OUT AROUND THE DALLAS-FORT WORTH AREA AND OTHER PLACES AROUND THE COUNTRY. I HAVE ADVANCED TRAINING IN COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE DESIGNATIONS. I'M A BROKER, I'M AN INVESTOR, AND I'M ALSO DO EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONY. MR. CHAIR, YOU GOOD? OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, I COME HERE WITH ZERO AFFILIATION TO THE PROPOSED RESTAURANT OR MEMBER CLUB, ZERO WHATSOEVER. I DID NOT DO THE DEAL. I HAVE NEVER BEEN AFFILIATED WITH THEM, UH, WHATSOEVER. I JUST SPEAK IN FAVOR OF LETTING THE BUSINESS OPERATE. THERE ARE SEVERAL OF THESE TYPES OF OPERATIONS AROUND THE STATE OF TEXAS. THEY RUN VERY SUCCESSFULLY AND VERY WELL THROUGHOUT THE STATE. THERE ARE NO EMPIRICAL STUDIES THAT I'M AWARE OF, AND I HAVE RESEARCHED THAT SAYS THAT THIS IS GONNA CAUSE INCREASED CRIME, INCREASED TRAFFIC, ET CETERA. I HAVE WALKED INTO A FEW OF THESE ESTABLISHMENTS, THOUGH I'VE NEVER PLAYED AT ANY OF THEM. MY 84-YEAR-OLD FATHER ACTUALLY DOES PLAY AT ONE OFTEN IN SAN ANTONIO THAT OPERATES IN AN OPEN AND VERY LEGAL ENVIRONMENT IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL STATE LAWS, WITH REGARD TO MEMBER CLUBS AND GAMES OF SKILL. AS YOU'RE AWARE, THE STATE DOES NOT CURRENTLY CONSIDER POKER GAMBLING AS LONG AS THE HOUSE DOES NOT TAKE A RAKE. THESE MEMBER [00:15:01] CLUBS ARE CLEAN WITH A LOVELY CLIENTELE OF BOTH MEN AND WOMEN, AND SAFE WITH SECURITY PROVI AND PROVIDING, UH, A PLACE TO GO AND COLLABORATE SOCIALLY WITH OTHER PERSONS. IT'S A NICE WELCOMING SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT FOR MANY, MANY PEOPLE. I AM, HOWEVER OPPOSED TO A SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT, UH, PRESENT MISLEADING INFORMATION TO OTHERS IN AN ATTEMPT TO PREVENT THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS FROM OPERATING LEGALLY. AS I SAID, I'M AN EXPERT IN COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND FORT WORTH A VIABLE BUSINESS IF IT IS CLEAN, DONE WELL AND DONE LEGALLY IS BETTER THAN A VACANT BUILDING THAT HAS BEEN SITTING VACANT FOR A DECADE ALMOST. SO I SAY AGAIN, I AM IN FAVOR OF LETTING THIS BUSINESS OPERATE AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. NEXT SPEAKER, MS. BOARD SECRETARY, MR. DAVID WALTER. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. UH, MY NAME IS DAVID WALTER. I LIVE AT 55 31 TAMRON COURT, UH, DALLAS, 7 5 2 8 7 IN THE VENTRY NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M ALSO THE, UH, VENTRY NORTH HOA PRESIDENT. YOU KNOW, VENTRY NORTH IS A NEIGHBORHOOD, A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OF 640 HOMES, TWO CHURCHES, A PRESCHOOL, A CEMETERY, AND ONE OF THE FEW REMAINING BLACK, UH, BLACKLAND PRAIRIE, UH, AREAS IN THE, IN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND ALSO IN TEXAS. RECOGNIZED, UH, HISTORIC, UH, SITE. THE SITUATION WITH CHAMPIONS AND ITS, UH, PREDECESSOR NAMES HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR FOUR YEARS. TO BE CLEAR, WE WELCOME CHAMPIONS AS A RESTAURANT OR AN ENTERTAINMENT VENUE. UH, WE JUST ARE OPPOSED TO GAMBLING. AND WHILE THERE IS DISCUSSION ABOUT A GRAY AREA, UH, YOU KNOW, THE RULINGS, UH, OF THE COURT HAVE SAID IT'S POKER IS ILLEGAL. THE CONSTITUTION SAYS GAMBLING IS ILLEGAL AND GAMES OF CHANCE AND POKER IS, UH, AT LEAST SOME PORTION A GAME OF CHANCE. UM, WE HAVE OVER 1300 NAMES SIGNED ON A PETITION FROM PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SURROUNDING AREAS, UM, THAT ARE OPPOSED TO ANY POKER, UH, ACTIVITY. UM, SO IT'S A VERY LARGE GROUP THAT ARE, IS IN OPPOSITION AND WE'RE A VERY DIVERSE NEIGHBORHOOD, ALL AGES, UH, RACES, NATIONALITIES, AND OTHER, UH, DIVERSITY METRICS. UM, BUT MAINLY WE'RE A NEIGHBORHOOD OF FAMILIES WITH, YOU KNOW, MANY YOUNG CHILDREN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. CHAMPIONS IS LOCATED AT THE BUSIEST OF OUR FOUR ENTRANCES INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ALMOST EVERYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PASSES THIS INTERSECTION COMING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IF THEY'RE COMING NORTH ON THE TOLLWAY OR EXITING OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, GOING NORTH OR SOUTH. UM, MITCHELL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE TOLLWAY IS JUST A FEW BLOCKS, UH, FURTHER WEST. SO POTENTIALLY PEOPLE ARE, UH, ARE GOING THERE EVERY DAY TAKING CHILDREN TO AND FROM SCHOOL. UM, YOU'LL HEAR FROM OTHERS ON THE BOARD, UM, TALKING ABOUT IT AND, AND OTHERS, UH, YOU KNOW, AND ON BOTH SIDES. OBVIOUSLY THERE'LL BE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES. UM, BUT WHAT WE WANT YOU TO REMEMBER IS THAT, UH, WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE CITY TO UPHOLD THE, THE RULING THAT THEY'VE MADE IN TERMS OF YOUR TIME IS SUB IN TERMS OF THEIR, UH, REJECTION OF THE, UH, OF THE, OF THEIR CO. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT, SIR. AND FOR YOUR VOLUNTEER LEADERSHIP. NEXT SPEAKER, MS. COURT, SECRETARY DEIS. CAN DEIS. OKAY. MARY LOU REESE. WE'LL PUT THAT, WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT PERSON AT THE END. OKAY. THERE MAY BE SOME PEOPLE STILL TRYING TO OF, OF COURSE, I WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. [00:20:03] HELLO, MY NAME IS MARY LOU REESE. I LIVE AT 46 0 4 HONEY CREEK DRIVE LANE HONEY CREEK LANE. I AM THE, THE SINGLE HONEY CREEK LANE PERSON IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I BACK UP TO THE OLD THREE FORKS PLACE, THIS NEW CHAMPIONS PLACE. UH, THERE IS A CON UH, THERE IS A BRICK WALL BETWEEN MY HOUSE AND THEIR PARKING LOT. THEIR LIGHTS SHINE INTO MY BEDROOM AT NIGHT. I MEAN, LIGHT IT UP. SO, UM, I AM, UM, HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL, BUT I WANT FIRST TO THANK YOU THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR YOUR VOLUNTEER WORK AT I'M SURE GREAT SELF-SACRIFICE TO BE HERE AND TO DO THIS REALLY IMPORTANT WORK FOLLOWING THE LAW AND STANDING IN THE GAP BETWEEN YOUR RESIDENTS WHO DESIRE A SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD AND CITY AND THOSE WHO WOULD BRING IN THE REAL THREAT OF ILLEGAL ACTIVITY. WE NEED TO KEEP UNPREDICTABLE AND EXTENSIVE CRIME OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. IT IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT DURING THIS TIME WHEN FUNDING FOR POLICE IS SO DOWN. AND AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT CURRENTLY HOUSTON HAS BEEN, HAS SPOKEN TO THIS IN THEIR GAMBLING OPERATIONS AS THEY HAVE, UM, AFFECTED THIS, UH, SENT IN AN AMICUS BRIEFS FOR THIS, UM, PARTICULAR THING. I TRUST THAT YOU ARE AWARE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOFT OPENINGS AND I ASK THAT YOU WOULD REFUSE THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NOW IN ORDER TO NOT LET THIS BE A SOFT START, WHICH WOULD LEAD TO A PERMANENT OR EVEN GRANDFATHERED SITUATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK. THANK YOU FOR YOUR VOLUNTEER TIME, AND THANK YOU FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING AND REFUSING THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY APPEAL. THANK YOU, MS. KATHY USHER. GOOD AFTERNOON AND THANK YOU TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU. MY NAME IS KATHY USHER. I'M A RESIDENT AT 48 43 STONY FORD DRIVE, DALLAS, 7 5 2 8 7. I AM ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ALSO AS AN OFFICER. I'M HERE TO PROTEST THE APPROVAL FOR CHAMPIONS TO BE GRANTED. A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY CHAMPIONS IS LOCATED AT ONE OF THE MAIN ENTRANCES OF VENTRY NORTH AT THE CORNER OF DALLAS, NORTH TOAY AND BRIAR GROVE. THE EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION AT THE CHAMPIONS CLUB WILL BRING ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC, LOITERING AND LITTER TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THE EXTENDED HOURS LEAD TO NOISE DISRUPTION AND INCREASED POPULATION FLOW TO OUR RESIDENTS IN AFTER HOURS TIME DISRUPTING SLEEP FOR WORKING INDIVIDUALS AND SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN. CHAMPIONS HAS STATED IT WILL BE ORGANIZING POKER TOURNAMENTS. INCREASED TRAFFIC IS THE RESULT. GAMBLING INSTITUTIONS CLOSE TO NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE A PROPENSITY TO REDUCE THE PROPERTY VALUES. THESE INSTITUTIONS ALSO TEND TO ATTRACT ORGANIZED CRIME GANGS AND OTHER INDIVIDUALS WHO POSE A THREAT TO THE SAFETY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. ADDITIONAL POLICE PROTECTION WILL BE NECESSARY FROM A PUBLIC HEALTH STANDPOINT. CASINOS AND POKER CLUBS LEAD TO THE FOLLOWING, EXTRACTED EARNINGS FROM AMERICANS LEAST ABLE TO AFFORD IT. COMMUNITIES WITHIN 10 MILES OF A CASINO EXHIBIT DOUBLE THE RATE OF PROBLEM GAMBLING. GAMBLING WEIGHS HEAVILY ON THE POOR, THE ELDERLY, THE LESS EDUCATED, AND THE PSYCHOLOGICALLY VULNERABLE PROBLEM. GAMBLING IS ALSO ASSOCIATED WITH MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES. THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION HIGHLIGHTS THAT GAMBLING HARM INCREASES AS GAMBLING MARKETS EXPAND, CHALLENGING THE HEALTH AND WELLBEING OF POPULATIONS. HOUSTON'S EXPERIENCE WITH POKER CLUBS BACKS UP THIS DATA IN THEIR AMICUS BRIEF TO THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT. THEY STATED THAT THE HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS REPORTED THAT IN THE AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY WITH POKER ROOMS THERE WERE 85,191 TOTAL CALLS FOR SERVICE IN 2024 WITH 1004 OF THEM REFERENCING ACTIVITY WITHIN 250 FEET OF A POKER ROOM. WE HAVE MANY HOUSES, AS YOU WILL HEAR TODAY, THAT ARE WITHIN 250 FEET OF THE PROPOSED CHAMPIONS CLUB. POKER CLUBS AND GAMBLING HAVE NO PLACE NEAR BEN TREE NORTH. PLEASE VOTE TO DENY CHAMPIONS A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY [00:25:01] TO OPERATE AS A POKER CLUB OR ALLOW ANY FORM OF GAMBLING. WE WANT TO REMAIN LEGAL IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS MR. PETERS. MY NAME IS PETER ZABY. I LIVE AT 5 0 2 3 SEA PINES IN DALLAS, UH, IN THE BEN TREE NORTH, UH, AREA. I'VE LIVED THERE SINCE 1992. WE'VE ALWAYS SUPPORTED QUALITY DEVELOPMENT IN OUR AREA. AND IN THE NINETIES WE HAD, UH, SIX HIGH-END STEAK HOUSES WITHIN A FEW BLOCKS, BUT ONE BY ONE THEY'VE ALL CLOSED EXCEPT FOR ONE. RUTH CHRIS, WE WELCOME GENUINE DINING ESTABLISHMENTS, BUT LET'S BE HONEST, THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT ABOUT FINE DINING. THE PARENT COMPANY BEHIND THIS APPEAL NIGHT ADVENTURES IS NOT IN THE RESTAURANT BUSINESS. THEIR OWN WEBSITES PROUDLY STATES THAT THEIR FOCUS IS ON CARD CLUB GAMING. THEY OPENLY PROMOTE THEIR SUCCESS AND EXPANDING GAMBLING OPERATIONS ARE NOT HOSPITALITY. NOW, AFTER FOUR YEARS OF TRYING TO SECURE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, THEY'RE ATTEMPTING TO PACKAGE THEIR OPERATION AS A PRIVATE DINING CLUB. BUT THAT IS SIMPLY A FACADE. THIS IS NOT ABOUT FOOD, IT'S ABOUT GAMBLING AND CALLING IT ANYTHING ELSE IS AN INSULT TO THE INTELLIGENCE OF THIS BOARD AND THE RESIDENTS. IT SERVES ITS LIPSTICK ON A PIG. ALCOHOL GAMBLING AND LATE NIGHT HOURS CREATE A VOLATILE MIX THAT OFTEN LEADS TO CONFLICT AND DISORDER. EVEN CHAMPIONS RECOGNIZES THE RISK. THEY'VE ALREADY, UH, INSTALLED EXTENSIVE CAMERAS, LIGHTS, THEY EVEN HAVE A SECURITY VEHICLE PARKED IN THE PARKING LOT AND HAS BEEN FOR MONTHS. DESPITE IT NOT EVEN YET BEING OPEN, IT REVEALS MORE ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE EXPECTING THAN WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY SAYING. ALLOWING THIS POKER ROOM TO OPERATE WHILE ITS LEGALITY IS STILL BEING CHALLENGED, IS LIKE HANDING OUT MATCHES DURING A BURN VAN. IT'S RECKLESS, IT'S DANGEROUS, AND IT'S LACKING IN BASIC JUDGMENT. THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS DOES NOT BELONG IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA NEAR SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES. IT DOES NOT SERVE THE LONG-TERM INTERESTS OF OUR COMMUNITY AND WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY HAVE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE PROPERTY VALUES AND SAFETY. I URGE YOU TO DENY THIS APPEAL AND PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. MR. STEWART BERKMAN. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M STUART BERGSMA. UH, MY ADDRESS IS 5 0 1 5, BE IN DALLAS. UM, WE RELY ON OUR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS TO PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. UM, I SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OF THE GAMBLING COMPONENT OF THE, UH, CHAMPION POKER HOUSE. UM, IT MOST CERTAINLY, AS YOU'VE HEARD FROM OTHERS, WILL, UM, PRESENT INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS SOME UNSAVORY ACTIVITIES. IT'S WELL DOCUMENTED WHAT THOSE ARE. WE PLEAD WITH YOU TO ENFORCE THE LAW. UM, GAMBLING, WHICH IS REPRESENTED BY THIS POKER HOUSE IS ILLEGAL AS BY STATE LAW. THERE'S BEEN ATTORNEY GENERALS THAT HAVE SPEAK TO THIS CAUSE AND, UM, ALSO REITERATED THAT IT IS IN FACT ILLEGAL. UM, IT HAS HUGE SOCIAL, UH, IMPACT AND COST. IT WOULD, UH, DRASTICALLY AFFECT NEGATIVELY OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND AS OTHERS HAVE SAID, THERE'S SCHOOLS, THERE'S, UH, CHURCHES, A LOT OF YOUNG PEOPLE. UM, MOST OF US ARE RETIRED AND CAN, CAN COME HERE AND AND SPEAK, BUT FOR EVERY ONE OF US, THERE'S PROBABLY 10 YOUNGER FAMILIES THAT HAVE KIDS THAT, UM, GO UP AND DOWN THE STREETS AND PLAY AND, UH, POKE OUR HOUSE. WITH ALL THE ELEMENTS THAT IT BRINGS, WOULD, WOULD REALLY, UH, PRESENT SOME REAL SAFETY ISSUES FOR US. UM, SO I WOULD PLEAD THAT YOU, UM, REVERSE YOUR DECISION. MAKE SURE THIS POKER HOUSE DOESN'T GET ESTABLISHED AND ENFORCE THE LAW PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. MS. VIVIAN UNGER. [00:30:14] GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU TO THE CITY OF DALLAS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. MY NAME IS VIVIAN UNGER. I LIVE AT 5 1 1 5 SPY GLASS DRIVE, DALLAS 7 5 2 8 7. WE HAVE BEEN THERE 20 YEARS. WE RAISED OUR KIDS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE'RE JUST A COUPLE OF STREETS DOWN FROM CHAMPIONS. I JUST WANT TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION TO THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR CHAMPIONS AND I WANNA CONNECT THE DOTS BETWEEN THE HOUSTON AMICUS ABBOTT'S OPINION AND COLLIN COUNTY DA REGARDING THE TEXAS LAW ON GAMBLING AND POKER IN 2005 THEN ATTORNEY GENERAL ABBOTT RENDERED AN OPINION THAT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED POKER CLUBS PROPONENTS CALLED POKER A GAME OF SKILL AND THEREFORE NOT GAMBLING. THE TEXAS PENAL CODE SAYS SOLELY OR PARTIALLY BY CHANCE. THEN ATTORNEY GENERAL ABBOTT'S OPINION SAYS ANY CHANCE IS SUFFICIENT TO MAKE A GAME GAMBLING NOT 51% CHANCE OR SOME CHANCE PER ABBOTT ANY CHANCE AND POKER IS GAMBLING PER THIS INTERPRETATION PER GREG WILLIS THE DA OF COLLUM COUNTY BOARD OF APPEALS LETTER IN OCTOBER 14TH, 2021. HE WROTE AND EMPHASIZED THAT GAMBLING IS ILLEGAL UNDER TEXAS LAW AND STATED THAT HIS OFFICE IS COMMITTED TO ENFORCING TEXAS LAW, CITING THE HOUSTON AMICUS AS KATHY USHER HAD ME MENTIONED THERE, UH, WERE OVER 1004. UH, SERVICE CALLS WITHIN 250 FEET OF THE POKER ROOM IN HOUSTON ACCORDING TO, UH, TEXAS PENAL CODE 47.02 AND 47.04. ALTHOUGH GAMBLING ESTABLISHMENTS IN HOUSTON AND DALLAS ATTEMPT TO QUALIFY AS PRIVATE PLACES BY REQUIRING CUSTOMERS TO SIGN UP FOR A MEMBERSHIP TO GAMBLE UNDER TEXAS LAW, A MEMBERSHIP FEE DOES NOT CONVERT A PUBLIC POKER ROOM TO BE OPEN 24 7 INTO A PRIVATE PLACE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, MR. RAJ NA NARA, MA SORRY, I APOLOGIZE. IT'S OKAY. MY NAME IS RAJ NAAN. UH, I LIVE AT 1 7 5 1 5 RIVER HILL DRIVE, UH, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 8 7. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU BOARD, UH, FOR LISTENING TO THESE, UM, UH, NEIGHBORS AND RESIDENTS AND, UH, AND THE COMMUNITY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK. UM, LIKE YOU, I SERVED ON THE BOARD OF THE DFW AIRPORT FOR SEVEN YEARS AND TOOK UP SOME VERY CONTROVERSIAL, DIFFICULT ZONING AND LOCATIONAL CHALLENGE ISSUES THAT WE HAD. AND THE AIRPORT HAD 17,000 ACRES TO DEAL WITH, BUT ONE THING WAS REALLY CLEAR, WE WOULD NOT BUILD A HUNDRED FOOT TALL, UH, BUILDING AT THE END OF THE APPROACH END OR DEPARTURE END OF ONE SEVEN, LEFT THREE FIVE, RIGHT? WE WOULD NOT PUT A SCHOOL AT THE APPROACH END OR DEPARTURE END OF A RUNWAY, UH, AT DFW AIRPORT. SIMILARLY, UM, IF PEOPLE MOVED NEXT TO AN AIRPORT, THEY KNEW THEY WERE MOVING NEXT TO A PRE-ESTABLISHED AIRPORT. IN THIS CASE, MY NEIGHBORS, MY FRIENDS AND MY COLLEAGUES HAD NO IDEA THAT THE PREMISE OF THIS LOCATION ON DALLAS PARKWAY WAS GONNA OFFER GAMBLING AND POKER. IF THEY WERE GOING TO OFFER A TRADITIONAL RESTAURANT AS WAS THERE IN THE PAST, I THINK YOU'D FIND, AS THEY HAVE MENTIONED, WE'D ALL BE IN VERY MUCH SUPPORT OF THAT. UM, HOWEVER, TO THE POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE HERE, UM, GAMBLING DRIVES, SECURITY ISSUES, SAFETY ISSUES, UH, ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION ISSUES AND DUI ISSUES AND IT'S JUST NOT A GOOD LOCATION. GIVEN THE ENTRY INTO ENTRY NORTH. THERE MAY BE A LOCATION FOR SUCH AN ESTABLISHMENT. I'LL LET THE COURTS AND THE LEGALITY OF THAT SIDE OF IT, UM, WORK THROUGH THAT PART OF THE SYSTEM. IT IS NOT AT THIS LOCATION. A TRADITIONAL RESTAURANT PERHAPS, UH, WOULD BE SUITABLE AT THIS LOCATION. BUT A LATE NIGHT, UH, HOURS GAMBLING ESTABLISHMENT, POKER, UH, CARD PLAYING WITHIN 200 FEET OF CHURCHES, UH, RESIDENTS, MYSELF, UH, SCHOOLS IS A VERY POOR CHOICE FOR THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY. UM, WE ARE ALREADY PAYING MY NEIGHBORS AND MY FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES FOR EXTENDED NEIGHBORHOOD PATROL IN THIS AREA. UH, WE'RE PAYING FOR THAT. WE'RE THANKFUL TO DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR THE SURVEILLANCE THAT THEY ALREADY PROVIDED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, THIS IS ONLY GONNA CAUSE A GREATER SECURITY AND SAFETY ISSUE FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I WOULD ASK, UM, THAT, UH, THIS BOARD SUPPORT THE [00:35:01] CANCELLATION OF THE CO AND THE APPEAL. THE CO SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ISSUED TO BEGIN WITH, WITH THE PREMISE IN THE APPLICATION THAT THE APPLICANT WAS MAKING FOR GAMBLING, UH, AND FOR POKER ROOMS. AND, UM, UH, SO I WOULD, UH, ASK, UH, YOUR DUE CONSIDERATION IN SUPPORT OF THAT, UH, UH, CANCELLATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND YOUR SERVICE AT DFW BOARD. YEAH, THANK YOU FOR YOURS, MS. MISTY NELSON. GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD. THANK YOU FOR HEARING US TODAY. I AM MISTY NELSON, 4 7 0 3 BRIAR GROVE LANE, AND I LIVE WITHIN 250 FEET OF THE ESTABLISHMENT. I'M ASKING YOU TO FOLLOW THE LAW. I HAVE GREAT CONCERNS ABOUT THE TYPE OF TRAFFIC A GAMBLING ESTABLISHMENT WOULD BRING IN. WE'VE LIVED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 20 YEARS. I'VE RAISED MY KIDS. THEY BOTH ARE FRESH OUTTA COLLEGE, YOUNG ADULTS. THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF TIME, WE'VE HAD ONE DRUNK DRIVER RUN THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND HIT OUR FRONT TREE. IT WAS A HUMMER, SO IT WAS A PRETTY GOOD HIT. WE'VE HAD THREE TRUCKS STOLEN OUT OF OUR DRIVEWAY. WE'VE SINCE BUILT A GATE TO TRY TO PREVENT THAT. AND THAT'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF TIME, THREE TRUCKS STOLEN LARGE, LONG, BAD KING RANCH TRUCKS. I RUN A BUSINESS, SO I'M NOT RETIRED. I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TYPE OF TRAFFIC THIS TYPE OF ESTABL ESTABLISHMENT WOULD BRING IN. I KNOW WHAT TYPE OF PEOPLE, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE ATTRACTED TO GAMBLING THAT HAVE ALCOHOL AND DRUG PROBLEMS. WE'RE TRYING TO PREVENT THAT AND TO KEEP THAT AWAY FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S HARD ENOUGH WITH THE WAY THINGS ARE NOW TO DO THAT. AND I'M ASKING FOR HELP IN FOLLOWING THE LAW AND DENYING THIS APPEAL TO GET THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. I FULLY, FULLY SUPPORT A NICE RESTAURANT. WE MISS THOSE NICE RESTAURANTS THAT WE USED TO HAVE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING AND FOR HEARING ALL OF US. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, MS. DIANA HARRIS. GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD. THANK YOU FOR HEARING US IN THE BEGINNING. AND ALSO THANK YOU FOR YOUR VOLUNTEER EFFORT. UH, MY NAME IS DIANA HARRIS AND I'VE LIVED AT, UM, 55 31 TAMRON COURT FOR 31 YEARS. UH, I'M ALSO A MEMBER OF THE BEN ENTRY NORTH HOA BOARD. SO, UH, WE KNOW WHAT TIME IT TAKES. UM, I'D LIKE TO SHARE AND REMIND YOU OF A LETTER THAT YOU RECEIVED ON JUNE 9TH FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF COLLIN COUNTY WHERE WE AND CHAMPIONS BOTH RESIDE. UM, AND BASICALLY, UH, KEY POINTS FROM HIS LETTER AND YOU'LL MAY WANNA READ MORE THAN THAT. UM, ON OCTOBER 14TH, 2021, HE HAD WRITTEN, UH, TO YOU ALSO TO EMPHASIZE THAT GAMBLING IS ILLEGAL UNDER TEXAS LAW. AND TO MAKE CLEAR THAT HIS OFFICE IS COMMITTED TO ENFORCING THAT LAW IN REGARDS TO THE SAFE HARBOR ACT AND THE IS A PRIVATE PLACE AND NO BENEFIT FROM HOSTING THE GAME. HE STATES THAT HE HAS YET TO ENCOUNTER A POKER ROOM OPERATING AS A BUSINESS THAT WOULD QUALIFY FOR THAT DEFENSE. UH, HE ALSO STATED THAT WHILE THE APPELLATE COURT REVERSED THE MOYE JUDGMENT ON PROCEDURAL GROUNDS, IT DID NOT DISTURB THE TRIAL COURT'S CONCLUSION THAT COMMERCIAL POKER ROOMS VIOLATE COMMERCIAL LAWS. SO THEREFORE THERE'S NO LEGAL OPINION STANDING THAT POKER ROOMS ARE LEGAL. HE CONCLUDES IN THAT LETTER THAT TEXAS LAW REMAINS CLEAR ON THIS AREA. NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE HE FIRST ADDRESSED THE BOARD IN 2021 FROM THE PREVIOUS STATEMENTS OF OTHER PEOPLE. AND ALSO MORE COMING, YOU'LL SEE THAT A POKER ROOM AND CLUB DOES NOT REALLY BELONG IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH EFFECTIVELY IT'S RIGHT AT THE ENTRANCE TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY'VE BEEN PROVEN TO VIOLATE TEXAS LAW AND SO THE COOS SHOULD REMAIN RESCINDED. HOWEVER, IF CHAMPIONS DECIDES TO ISSUE A NEW APPLICATION FOR A VENUE NOT HOSTING POKER, BUT MAYBE RESTAURANTS ONLY AND VENUES IN A PRIVATE CLUB, WE WOULD VERY MUCH WELCOME THEM TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, IF YOU SAW ME UP HERE, FUMBLING WITH PAPERS, THE BOARD THROUGH OUR BOARD SECRETARY RECEIVES EMAILS, [00:40:01] LETTERS AND OTHERWISE, AND WE GET THOSE, I PROMISE YOU. AND DURING THE HEARING, I WILL PASS THIS DOWN TO BOARD MEMBERS, UM, THOSE FOUR AND THOSE AGAINST. AND THEY DON'T, WE DON'T DIFFERENTIATE. WE GIVE THE, WE GET THE FEEDBACK. SO NEXT SPEAKER, MR. GREG POLITO. GOOD AFTERNOON AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS GREG POLITO. I'M A RETIRED PHYSICIAN AND I LIVE IN THE BEN THREE NORTH COMMUNITY AT 5 1 1 9 BELL REVE DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 8 7. UM, AS LUCK WOULD HAVE IT, UH, THIS VERY MONTH, ONE OF MY MEDICAL JOURNALS PUBLISHED AN ARTICLE ENTITLED THE WORSENING PANDEMIC OF GAMBLING. AND IN IT, THE AUTHOR NOTES THE, UH, THE FOLLOWING, UM, BILLIONS ARE SPENT A YEAR ON GAMBLING. UH, AS OF TWO YEARS AGO, THE AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION NOW INCLUDES GAMBLING AS AN ADDICTIVE DISORDER SINCE IT REQUIRES INCREASED PARTICIPATION OVER TIME TO ATTAIN THE SAME LEVEL OF SATISFACTION AND STOPPING THE HABIT CAUSES, UM, WITHDRAWAL PAIN. UH, TODAY, UNFORTUNATELY, EVEN YOUNG PEOPLE ARE BEING GROOMED TO GAMBLE BY VIDEO GAMES WHERE THE PLAYERS HAVE TO SPEND ADDITIONAL MONEY TO OPEN A LOOT BOX THAT POSSIBLY CONTAINS NEW SKILLS FOR THEM TO, TO, UH, CONTINUE PLAYING THE GAME. BUT IT MAY NOT. SO, IN OTHER WORDS, CHANCE IS A FACTOR. THEY'RE BEING TAUGHT THAT, UH, THAT THEY'RE GROOMED THAT, UH, TO GAMBLE REALLY 'CAUSE BECAUSE CHANCE IS A FACTOR. THERE'S EVEN A NATIONAL COMPANY TODAY IN, IN OF ALL PLACES THE FINANCIAL DERIVATIVES MARKET THAT OFFERS EVENT CONTRACTS WHERE PEOPLE CAN BET ON ANYTHING, UH, ANY EVENT WHERE THE OUTCOME IS A YES OR A NO. SO, UM, LASTLY, UM, IF WE LOOK AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, AGAIN, NOTED IN THIS PAPER, UH, IN CON DISTINCTION, WHAT WE HEARD EARLIER, UH, THE PAPER NOTES THAT NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, THAT HARBOR A PLACE OF GAMBLING, UH, THERE, UH, THEY ES UH, THERE IS AN ESTIMATED FIVE TO 10% DROP IN PROPERTY VALUES PLUS THE MAJOR ASSOCIATED SOCIAL COSTS, INCLUDING BANKRUPTCIES, INCREASED CRIME THROUGH DRUG USE AND PROSTITUTION, INCREASED TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION. AND FROM A MEDICAL STANDPOINT, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, FOR, TO ME AS A PHYSICIAN, THERE'S A 15 TIMES HIGHER SUICIDE RATE IN GAMBLERS COMPARED TO THE GENERAL POPULATION. SO PLEASE, UH, WE DON'T WANT THIS SOCI, BASICALLY SOCIETAL CANCER IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I RESPECTIVELY, UH, UH, REQUEST THAT YOU RESCIND THEIR, UH, CERTIFICATE OF SEA FOR THE CHAMPIONS SOCIAL CLUB. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, MR. TOM DUPRE. THANK YOU. UH, I'M TOM DUPREY, 51 32, BE RIE DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS. AND I SERVE AS THE, UH, VICE PRESIDENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR THE VENTURING NORTH HOA. AND AS SUCH, UH, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE CHAIRMAN AND THE PANEL FOR HEARING THIS. FIRST, I'VE BEEN TO A LOT OF THESE HEARINGS THAT HAVE GONE WELL TOWARDS MIDNIGHT, AND I APPRECIATE YOU GIVING US SOME CONSIDERATION, BUT HERE WE ARE, DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN. UM, FOUR YEARS AGO, THIS PANEL RULED TO ALLOW TEXAS CARDHOUSE TO REMAIN, REMAIN OPENING, UM, TO THE, AND TO THE, UH, FOUR YEARS AGO, THIS PANEL RULED TO ALLOW TEXAS CARDHOUSE TO REMAIN OPEN, STATING TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY, I TRY TO RECOLLECT THE EXACT VERBIAGE. BECAUSE WE ARE NOT A COURT OF LAW, WE CANNOT RULE ON THE LEGALITY OF POKER CLUBS. THE ONLY THING THAT HAS CHANGED SINCE THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WAS ISSUED, ISSUED IS THE CITY OF DALLAS'S MIND. SO UNTIL A REAL JUDGE AND A REAL COURT ISSUES A RULING, WE HAVE TO VOTE TO ALLOW TEXAS COURTHOUSE TO REMAIN OPEN. AS SOON AS WE HAVE A RULING BY A REAL JUDGE, IT SAYS OTHERWISE WE WILL RULE DIFFERENTLY. SINCE THEN, A LOT HAS HAPPENED. UH, IN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF DALLAS, SEVERAL OTHER ENTITIES HAVE JOINED THE OPPOSITION TO THE LEGALITY OF POKER CLUBS, INCLUDING THE CITY OF HOUSTON, WHO IS CONSIDERED THE EPICENTER OF POKER CLUBS IN TEXAS WHO [00:45:01] SENT AN AMICUS TO THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT ON THE CASE THAT'S PENDING THEIR, UH, CLAIMING THAT NOT ONLY IS IT ILLEGAL, BUT AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED, THERE'S BEEN THOUSANDS OF, UH, OF CRIMES REPORTED IN AREAS NEAR POKER CLUBS. UH, JUDGE MOYE IN DALLAS, UH, COUNTY DISTRICT COURT DID RULE AND HE IS A RULE JUDGE THAT POKER'S ILLEGAL AND, UH, THE COLLIN COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND TWO FORMER TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERALS HAVE ALSO WRITTEN OPINIONS THAT TECH, THAT POKER IS ILLEGAL. POKER CLUBS ARE NOT ILLEGAL USAGE. THOSE WHO HAVE CHALLENGED THE LEGALITY OF POKER CLUBS ARE ONLY THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN PAID TO SAY OTHERWISE. SO IT FOLLOWS THAT PANEL A USING THE SAME LOGIC SHOULD MOVE TO DENY CONTENDERS APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AT THIS TIME. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, KEVIN MEN MENSING, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME'S KEVIN MENSING. I RESIDE AT 5 1 4 3 QUAIL LAKE DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 8 7. THAT HOUSE IS LOCATED IN BEN TREE NORTH. MY WIFE AND I PURCHASED THAT HOUSE IN SEPTEMBER OF 2004 AND WE'VE RESIDED THERE EVER SINCE. MY WIFE WAS UNABLE TO BE HERE TODAY. SHE SUBMITTED HER COMMENTS TO YOU VIA A LETTER. I SHOULD ALSO MENTION I AM ON THE, UH, VENTRY NORTH HOA BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND SERVICE TREASURER. I'M HERE TO ASK THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS UPHOLD THE, UH, RESCINDING OF THE CONTENDERS DALLAS LSC CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. ON THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION, THEY INDICATED THAT THEY INTEND TO USE THE FACILITY FOR LEGAL POKER GAMES, AND THAT'S IN QUOTE, THE CITY OF DALLAS REVOKED THE CITY OF OCCUPANCY BECAUSE IT WOULD VIOLATE TEXAN PENAL CODE CONCERNING KEEPING A GAMBLING PLACE, I'D ASK THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS UPHOLD THE REVOCATION BECAUSE THE CITY IS ACTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW OF TEXAS AND DOING OTHERWISE WOULD SEEM TO FLT THOSE LAWS REVOKING THIS, UH, CERTIFICATE OCCUPANCY WOULD ALLOW CONTENDERS DALLAS TO REMOVE ANY LANGUAGE REGARDING GAMBLING OR POKER IN THEIR RESUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION. AND I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO CONTENDERS DALLAS OPERATING A RESTAURANT AT 1 7 7 7 6 DALLAS PARKWAY. MY ONLY OBJECTION IS IN THEIR STATED INTENTION OF OPERATIONS THAT VIOLATE CURRENT TEXAS LAWS. MY CONCERN IS THAT IF CONTENDERS DALLAS IS ALLOWED THAT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, THEN IF AND OR WHEN THE LAWS OF TEXAS ARE CHANGED THROUGH LEGISLATION OR COURT RULINGS, THAT THEY WILL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY NEW ZONING LAWS THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS MIGHT ENACT. UPHOLDING THE REVOCATION OF THE COO ALLOWS THE CITY OF DALLAS TIME TO DEVELOP ZONING LAWS AND OTHER ORDINANCES GOVERNING BUSINESSES THAT WOULD OPERATE LEGAL POKER GAMES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS MR. MATTHEW. LOVE. HI, UH, MY NAME IS MATTHEW LOWE. I LIVE AT 17 5 1 2 RIVER HILL DRIVE. UM, I'M ONE OF THE NEWEST RESIDENTS TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, WE MOVED IN ROUGHLY THREE WEEKS AGO, SO, UM, I HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE THAN MAJORITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I LONG FOR WHAT THESE NEIGHBORS HAVE HAD. UM, I HAVE A FOUR, UH, NINE AND 11-YEAR-OLD. I DRIVE BY THIS FACILITY TO CHURCH, TO SCHOOL, TO THE GROCERY STORE. UM, I'M A STONES THROW FROM THE BUILDING, SO MY ONLY CONCERN IS SAFETY RESTAURANTS, NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. UM, I'M OKAY WITH, UH, GAMBLING CASINOS, WHATEVER IT MAY COME IS WHERE I DRAW THE LINE. UM, I DID A LOT OF RESEARCH INTO THE PARENT COMPANY KNIGHTED. UM, IF YOU GO TO THEIR WEBSITE, THE FIRST THING YOU SEE IS A VIDEO THAT EXPLAINS THEIR PRIORITY. THEIR PRIORITY IS GAMBLING. THEIR PRIORITY IS CASINOS AND PROFITING FROM THAT, WHICH IS GREAT. BUSINESSES CAN DO THAT. NOT NEAR A NEIGHBORHOOD. I BELIEVE THESE SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED IN LOCATIONS THAT THE GOVERNMENT ALLOWS, BUT NOT NEAR A NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT NEAR A CHURCH, NOT NEAR A SCHOOL. SO I WANTED TO BRING MY PERSPECTIVE AS A YOUNG HOMEOWNER. I HOPE TO LIVE IN THIS HOUSE FOR AS MANY YEARS AS SOME OF THESE, UH, GREAT FOLKS HAVE LIVED IN, IN A SAFE, UM, RESPECTFUL NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE WE [00:50:01] ARE NOT DEALING WITH LATE NIGHT CALLS, CONSTANT POLICE ACTIVITY. I CAN WALK FROM MY FRONT DOOR IN LESS THAN 90 SECONDS TO THE FRONT DOOR OF THIS ESTABLISHMENT. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW THIS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. DID YOU MOVE TO DALLAS OR WITHIN DALLAS? UH, WE MOVED FROM PLANO. GOOD MAN. WE LIKE THAT . SEE, THAT WAS A SETUP. I DID KNOW WE DID, BUT I'M GLAD WE, WE'LL ALWAYS TAKE YOU IN DALLAS. THANK YOU MS. BOARD. SECRETARY? NO THERE. SPEAKERS REGISTER SIR. ANY ONLINE SPEAKERS FOR THIS? IS THERE ANY, NO OTHER SPEAKERS. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT DESIRES TO GIVE ANY COMMENTS AT THE PUBLIC SPEAKING SECTION OF OUR AGENDA? YES. OH, CORRECT. COULD YOU REREAD THE NAME OF THE FIRST ONE THAT YES. THANK YOU. MR. KOVI. CANDI. LENIS. OKAY, I'LL SAY ONE MORE TIME. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC SPEAKING SECTION OF OUR AGENDA? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO WE HAVE NO OTHER SPEAKERS? NO, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, NEXT ON OUR AGENDA WILL BE THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF OUR MEETING MINUTES. UH, BOARD MEMBERS AT THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING, I MENTIONED THAT, UM, I MENTIONED THAT, UH, OUR MINUTES FROM MAY 20TH HAD FOUR, UH, MODIFICATIONS ON 2 4 5 0 5 6 TO SAY THAT THE, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION EXPIRE WHEN A HANDICAPPED PERSON NO LONGER RESIDES IN THE PROPERTY ON 2 4 5 0 4 7. I MENTIONED THAT WE NEED TO ADD THE TWO SPEAKERS AGAINST CARL CROWLEY AND WHO WAS THE OTHER PERSON? DIANE CARSON. THANK YOU. ON 2 4 5 0 4 8 WE HAD TWO SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION. OPPOSITION CARL CROWLEY AND DIANE CARSON. THANK YOU. UM, AND ALSO THAT THE, THERE WAS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR 2 4 5 0 4 8 THAT THE APPLICANT TO ENTER INTO A CITY APPROVED REMOTE PARKING AGREEMENT FOR 65 SPACES IN THE NEW ADJACENT PARKING LOT. UH, AND MS. BOARD, SECRETARY HAVE YOU MODIFIED ACCORDINGLY? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THE CHAIR TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES CONSISTENT WITH THOSE CORRECTIONS. MR. OVITZ, MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT THE MINUTES AS WITH THE AMENDMENTS THAT YOU HAVE, AS YOU HAVE MENTIONED, BE APPROVED. IT'S BEEN MOVED. UH, THE MEETING MINUTES, UM, SUBJECT TO THE, UM, MODIFICATIONS AS MENTIONED, BE APPROVED, UH, FOR MAY 20TH. IS THERE SECOND? SECOND. SECONDED BY MR. NARY, UH, DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. OKAY, THAT'S FINE. ALRIGHT. HEARING NO, UM, DISCUSSION, UH, WE'LL MOVE TO A VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MEETING MINUTES FROM MAY 20TH. SUBJECT TO THOSE ADDITIONS, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED MEETING MINUTES ARE APPROVED AS AMENDED. THANK YOU. MARY, YOU DON'T NEED ANY OTHER LANGUAGE. CORRECT. YOU'VE GOT IT. OKAY, GOOD. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS, UM, BO A 2 5 8 FR ONE. THIS IS A FEE REQUEST, UH, FROM 2 4 0 2 GARDEN DRIVE IS THE APPLICANT HERE. PLEASE COME FORWARD. ONE SECOND, SIR. LET ME GET MY PAPERS ORGANIZED. IF YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND THEN YOU HAVE, UH, FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON YOUR REQUEST. OKAY? UH OH, HOLD ON. THEN YOU'LL HAVE TO BE SWORN IN YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, THEN BE SWORN IN. OKAY. MY NAME IS ANISH ER. I LIVE AT 32 0 8 COLE AVENUE, UH, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 4. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO. OKAY. OH, PLEASE PROCEED. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. UM, THE REASON FOR MY REQUEST IS ORIGINALLY, YOU KNOW, WHEN I REQUESTED THIS PROPERTY FROM THE LAND BANK, UM, I KNEW THAT THE DOUBLE FRONTAGE WOULD BE AN ISSUE. SO I, I WENT TO, I, I WENT TO THE, UH, CITY STAFF TO GET A RULING, NOT A RULING, BUT AN OPINION FROM, UH, ZONING. UH, IF THIS, IF IT WOULD BE A CASE, UH, DOUBLE FRONTAGE, WHICH WOULD APPLY OR NOT, SINCE THERE'S NO HOUSE IN THE BACK. AND I WAS ASSURED TWICE THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE A CASE BECAUSE I'VE DONE, I MEAN, I'VE BUILT MANY PROPERTIES BEFORE, SO I I, I ASKED HER TWICE, IS THIS GONNA BE AN ISSUE? SHE SAID, NO, CITED SOME CODE. AND I SAID, FINE. UH, WENT AHEAD AND REQUESTED THE PROPERTY ALONG WITH, UH, IN FACT THE PROPERTY NEXT TO IT, WHICH I, I'M BUILDING ON NOW, AND [00:55:01] THREE OTHER PROPERTIES PUT A LOAN IN PLACE. UM, AND, UM, SUBMITTED, SUBMITTED MY, UH, APPLICATION, MY MY PERMIT APPLICATION. UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY CAME BACK AND THEY SAID, OH NO, YOU HAVE DOUBLE YOU HAVE DOUBLE FRONTAGE ISSUE. THESE PLANS AREN'T GONNA WORK. THAT'S WHEN I, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY I WAS A LITTLE ANNOYED AT THAT. UM, AND UM, THAT'S WHEN THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU ONLY REMEDY IS TO COME TALK TO Y'ALL. UH, THE REASON WHY I'M REQUESTING A FEE, UH, A A FEE REVERSAL IS BECAUSE I'M PAYING ON THE, ON A, ON A LOAN THAT I PUT IN PLACE FOR, FOR BUILDING THIS PROPERTY, WHICH THIS DELAY COST ME INTEREST ON, ON SAID LOAN. ALSO, I CANNOT, I CANNOT ADD THAT EXTRA MONEY I'M SPENDING ON THAT, ON THAT LOAN OR MY TIME TO THE PRICE BECAUSE THE LAND BANK TELLS ME WHAT I CAN, WHAT I CAN SELL THIS FOR. AND IT'S A LOW INCOME PROPERTY, SO I CANNOT RAISE THE RAISE IT AT ALL. AND IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A LOW MARGIN. IT'S A LOW MARGIN HOUSE. SO IT'S NOT LIKE I'M MAKING THAT MUCH MONEY ON IT AS IT IS. SO, UM, WITH THAT, I REQUEST Y'ALL'S GRACE IN REVERSING THE FEE ON THIS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. ARE YOU, UH, BUILDING IT AND LIVING PLANNING AND LIVING IN IT OR NO? NO. BUILDING IT TO RESELL? YEAH. THE LAND BANK SAYS YOU HAVE, I HAVE TO RESELL TO, UH, 60 TO 80% A MI, UH, CLIENTS. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. CHAIR. UM, MR. N THANK YOU. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN APPEAL NUMBER BOA 25 0 0 0 0 8 FR ONE ON APPLICATION OF IN CAR GRANT. THE REQUEST TO THE REIMBURSEMENT OF THE FILING FEES PAID IN ASSOCIATION WITH A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATION IS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PAYMENT OF THE FEE WOULD RESULT IN A SUBSTANTIAL FINANCIAL HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT. IT'S BEEN MOVED IN THE MATTER OF BO OA TWO FIVE. WE'RE GONNA HAVE A LONG YEAR WITH ALL THESE ZEROS. MISS, UH, MILLER HOSKINS. OH MY GOSH. BOA. WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME UP WITH AN ABBREVIATION. MARY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GONNA BE. OH, JUST SAY FIVE ZEROS. OKAY. BOARD SECRETARY SENATE. YEAH. ONE, ONE SOLUTION WOULD BE, WE HAVE SO MANY CASES THAT, OH, NO, NO, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY WHAT WE WANT. MR. KOVICH IN THE MATTER OF BOA TWO FIVE DASH FIVE ZEROS AND AN EIGHT. THANK YOU MS. MARY FFR. ONE. UH, MR. NRI HAS MOVED TO GRANT THE REQUEST FOR A FEE REIMBURSEMENT. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MS. DAVIS. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. MR. NRI? UM, YES, I I BELIEVE THAT, UH, A FEE WAIVER IS WARRANTED IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE AS THE APPLICANT WAS ASSURED BY CITY STAFF THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE WITH THIS, UH, PARTICULAR PROPERTY AND DEVELOPMENT. UM, HE'S ALREADY EXPLAINED, I THINK, UH, WHY, UH, THAT HE'S ASKING FOR IT AND I THINK, I JUST THINK IT'S WARRANTED. THANK YOU MS. DAVIS. I AGREE WITH MR. NE'S COMMENTS. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION HEARING? NO DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE. MR. NE AYE. MR. HAITZ? AYE. MS. DAVIS? AYE. MR. DORN? AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN? AYE. MOTION PASSES TO GRANT FIVE TO ZERO IN THE MATTER OF BO OA 2 5 5 ZEROS AND AN EIGHT. I LIKE THAT MARY. FIVE ZEROS AND AN EIGHT FFR ONE. THE BOARD GRANTS BY UNANIMOUS FIVE TO ZERO VOTE YOUR REQUEST FOR A FEE REIMBURSEMENT. YOU'LL BE, THE STAFF WILL START THE PROCESS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A WEEK, A MONTH OR WHATEVER, BUT THAT PROCESS WILL MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. HOLD ON. YOU'RE NEXT, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK UP, BUT YOU'RE NEXT. UM, NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS B BO A 25 DASH FIVE. THANK YOU MARY EIGHT. UM, AT THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING, IT, UH, THE STRAW POLL WAS THIS COULD BE LEFT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. THE PROCESS FOR A CONSENT AGENDA, ACCORDING TO OUR RULES IS THAT A CASE CAN BE CALLED AND VOTED ON WITHOUT PUBLIC TESTIMONY BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ANY OPPOSITION. UM, THE CHAIRMAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. OVITZ, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANT THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION LISTED ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCKET BECAUSE IT APPEARS FROM OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE THAT THE APPLICATION SATISFIES ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AND [01:00:01] IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE CODE IS APPLICABLE TO WIT BO OA DASH 25 DASH 0 0 0 0 8 APPLICATION OF A NICHE RA FOR A VARIANCE OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION. COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS AS IS REQUIRED IN THE MATTER BO A 2 5 508 MR. HOP HOP HAS MOVED TO GRANT THE REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECONDED BY MR. NER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. MR. HAITZ, UH, THE PROPERTY IS, IS VERY DIFFICULT TO DEVELOP WITH THE TWO YARD SETBACKS WITHOUT THIS ADJUSTMENT AND SO I'M IN FAVOR OF GRANTING IT. MR. NER. I I CONCUR. UH, I THINK THAT A, A VARIANCE IS WARRANTED IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE AND I ONCE AGAIN, I JUST WANTED STATED ON THE RECORD THAT I'M IN FAVOR OF, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS MUCH NEEDED IN THIS CITY. SO THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? UH, THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IN BO A 2 5 5 0 8 IS TO GRANT THE VARIANCE. THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE. MR. MARY AYE. MR. DORN? AYE. MS. DAVIS? AYE. MR. OVITZ? AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN, AYE. MOTION TO GRANT PASSES 5 2 0 IN THE MATTER OF BO A 2 5 5 0 8. THE THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GRANTS YOUR REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE. YOU'LL GET A LETTER FROM OUR BOARD, UH, ADMINISTRATOR IN THE NEXT COUPLE DAYS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WHAT IS REMAINING ON OUR AGENDA BOARD MEMBERS IS, UH, WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY ON THE UNCONTESTED DOCUMENT. THERE WERE THREE ITEMS, 0 5, 8, 0 0 3, 0 0 5, AND THREE HOLDOVERS. AND THEN THE INDIVIDUAL INDIVIDUAL CASE 0 0 5 ZEROS AND A ONE. WE'RE NOW MOVING TO, I'M GONNA JUMP FORWARD. SO WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GONNA CALL FOR, UH, BOA TWO FIVE ZERO ZERO ZERO ZERO ONE AT 1 7 7 7 6 DALLAS PARKWAY. I MENTIONED THAT AT THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING. I MENTIONED THAT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE HEARING. UM, WE'LL CALL THAT CASE FORWARD AFTERWARDS. WE WILL SWITCH GEARS TO THE THREE UH, CASES THAT ARE ON INDIVIDUAL, THEN WE'LL HEAR OUR THREE HOLDOVERS. SO LET ME ARRANGE MY PILES HERE. IS THE APPLICANT HERE IN BO A 2 5 0 0 0 0 1 IF YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE. YEAH. TOMMY MANN 500 WINSTEAD BUILDING REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT. OBVIOUSLY WE'VE PRESENTED YOU WITH A JOINT REQUEST FOR BUILDING OFFICIALS COUNSEL TO POSTPONE UNTIL AUGUST. UM, REASONING BEING THAT BRIEFING IS DONE AT THE SUPREME COURT, WE MAY VERY LIKELY HAVE MEANINGFUL LEGAL DIRECTION IN THAT CASE BY AUGUST. THAT WILL IMPACT BOTH SIDES. DESIRE TO PROCEED. WE COMMUNICATED TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACTS BEFOREHAND. THERE MIGHT'VE BEEN MORE FOLKS HAD WE NOT DONE THAT. UM, SO WE UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THEM TO PARTICIPATE IF THEY SHOW UP AND CONTINUE TO DO SO IN AUGUST, BUT WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU POSTPONE IT UNTIL THEN. I I HEAR YOUR REQUEST. UM, WE ALSO ARE RESPONSIVE TO THE CITIZENS IN MAKING SURE THAT WE HANDLE CASES ON A TIMELY BASIS. UM, IS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY HERE, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IF YOU COME FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND OBVIOUS ADDRESS? . THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. MY NAME IS STACY RODRIGUEZ. I'M AN ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. VERY GOOD. ALRIGHT, SO OUR RULES OR PROCEDURE ARE, ARE SPECIFIC AS IT RELATES TO APPEALS TO BUILDING OFFICIAL CASES. OUR RULES STATE THAT EACH SIDE'S GIVEN 20 MINUTES AND THEN TIME FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION AND THEN REBUTTAL AND THEN CLOSING STATEMENTS. OUR RULES SAY THAT THE BOARD AT ANY TIME CAN ASK ANY QUESTION ABOUT ANYTHING. BY AND LARGE, IT'S NOT HELD AGAINST EACH SIDE, ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER. UM, THOSE RULES ARE CODIFIED INSIDE OUR RULES OF PROCEDURES AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. UM, IT IS UP TO THE BOARD TO DECIDE WHETHER WE POSTPONE A CASE OR NOT, WHICH REQUIRES A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE. UM, BEFORE I ASK THE BOARD TO ACT, I'M GONNA ASK EACH ONE OF YOU TO GIVE US A FIVE MINUTE OR LESS JUST HIGH LEVEL BRIEFING ABOUT THE, THE BASIS OF YOUR REQUEST AND THE BASIS OF THE ORIGINAL DENIAL OF THE, [01:05:01] OF THE UH, CERTIFICATE OF OP OCCUPANCY. UM, AND THEN WE'LL THAT'LL SERVE AS A PRIMER TO DECIDE HOW, WHETHER WE WANNA MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CASE TODAY, WHICH IS ON THE DOCKET AND TO THE PUBLIC OR WE WOULD POSTPONE IT. I'D ALSO MENTIONED TO YOU TWO MONTHS IS A LONG POSTPONEMENT. I'M NOT USED TO GRANTING POSTPONEMENTS. THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY, AND I'LL SAY THIS TO MY PANEL AS WELL AS TO THE PUBLIC, I DON'T LOOK FINE. UH UH, I DON'T LOOK INDIVIDUALLY WELL ON ADDITIONAL POSTPONEMENTS. SO WE WANT TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT THAT BECAUSE IT DELAYS THE JUSTICE AND A DECISION FOR THE PUBLIC. SO, UH, MR. MANN, DO YOU WANNA START? WHAT I'D LIKE TO ASK FOR YOU IS TO GIVE US A HIGH LEVEL IN WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY, UM, SUMMARY AS TO THE BASIS OF YOUR APPEAL OF THE BUILDING OFFICIALS DECISION AND THEN WE'LL FOLLOW WITH, UH, THE CITIES AND THEN THE BOARD WILL TAKE ACTION. SO POINT OF CLARIFICATION MR. CHAIR, DO YOU WANT ME TO GIVE A FURTHER DETAILED EXPLANATION FOR THE TIMING AND THE REQUEST FOR THE DELAY OR YOU WANT ME TO GET INTO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE THAT IS ENTIRELY UP TO YOU. OKAY. WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IS PRIME THE BOARD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE THE RELEVANT ISSUES. OKAY. QUITE HONESTLY, I WANT TO TELL YOU I WAS DISAPPOINTED WITH THE LACK OF DETAIL WITH THE FILING. YOU FILED AN APPEAL ON THE 5TH OF MAY AND IT WENT TO OUR DOCKET AND THERE WAS NO FOLLOW UP. AND I WAS LOOKING AND PREPARED AS WE ALL AS VOLUNTEERS FOR TO HEAR THE CASE. SO, BUT THAT'S YOUR RIGHT TO REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT. SO, BUT I'M GONNA GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE US A HIGH LEVEL BRIEFING. SURE. THIRD TIME I'M SAYING IT. HIGH LEVEL BRIEFING ON THE BASIS OF YOUR REQUEST FOR A REVERSAL OF THE BUILDING OFFICIALS DECISION. AND THEN I WILL LET THE ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TELL US ON A HIGH LEVEL BASIS THE BASIS OF THE REVOCATION. SURE. SO WE APPLIED FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THE USE IS ALLOWED. THE LAND USE STATEMENT CLEARLY INDICATED WHAT THE INTENDED USE WAS AND IT WAS GRANTED. UH, WE ARE REQUIRED STATUTORILY TO APPEAL THAT REVOCATION WITHIN 20 DAYS OF RECEIVING IT. AND SO WE DID. THE CITY IS REQUIRED STATUTORILY TO SCHEDULE THIS HEARING WITHIN 60 DAYS OF US FILING THE APPEAL, WHICH THEY HAVE DONE, WHICH IS WHY WE ARE HERE. IT JUST SO HAPPENS THAT IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS THE SUPREME COURT'S BRIEFING ON THE RELATED LITIGATION THAT IS THE EXACT SAME LEGAL ISSUE OF THIS APPEAL, WHETHER OR NOT POKER DEALT IN THIS MANNER VIOLATES THE TEXAS PENAL CODE CLOSED. AND WE ANTICIPATE THAT THE SUPREME COURT WILL INDICATE WHETHER OR NOT THEY WILL HEAR THAT CASE BY MID-JULY, WHICH IS THE REASON FOR ASKING FOR A DELAY UNTIL AUGUST. BECAUSE IF THE SUPREME COURT REFUSES TO HEAR THE CASE, THEN THERE IS ONE SET OF LEGAL CONSEQUENCES TO THAT. IF THE SUPREME COURT CHOOSES TO HEAR THE CASE, THERE'S A DIFFERENT SET OF LEGAL CONSEQUENCES TO THAT. AND SO TO US IT MADE SENSE NOT TO PRESENT YOU A CASE TODAY WITH A POTENTIAL CHANGE IN THE LAW THAT IMMINENT THAT WOULD AFFECT THIS PROCEEDING. WE HAVE SEVERAL HUNDRED PAGES OF MATERIALS PREPARED TO SUBMIT TO YOU THAT WE ELECTED NOT OUT OF RESPECT FOR YOUR TIME KNOWING THAT WE HAD AGREED TO REQUEST THIS POSTPONEMENT, BUT WE WILL CERTAINLY SUBMIT ALL OF THAT INFORMATION PRIOR TO THE AUGUST SETTING IF IT IS POSTPONED. BUT THAT IS THE REASON FOR THE REQUEST AND THAT IS THE REASON, REASON FOR THE TIMING OF THE REQUEST. AND I ASSURE YOU I PREFER TO PROCEED WHEN WE'RE READY, AS WOULD MY CLIENT. IT MAY ALSO HELP TO NOTE POKER'S NOT ACTUALLY OCCURRING AT THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW AND WOULD NOT BE BEFORE AUGUST IF IT WERE POSTPONED UNTIL THEN. SO THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS AT LEAST WOULD NOT BE RELEVANT UNTIL AFTER THAT IF IT HELPS. THANK YOU SIR. MM-HMM . UH, ONE OTHER QUESTION FOR YOU AND THEN WE'LL COME TO YOU ONE SECOND. AND THIS IS NOT OPEN-ENDED, WE'LL KEEP THIS TIGHT. UM, WHAT HAPPENS IF THE, THERE'S NO ACTION BY THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT BETWEEN NOW AND SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO OUR, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING IN AUGUST. 'CAUSE THAT'S WHEN WE FILE OUR AGENDA TO THE PUBLIC. SO HOLD ON. ONE SECOND. WHAT IS OUR AUGUST DATE? WHAT IS PANEL A? SO I'VE BEEN ADVISED BY OUR BOARD MINISTER, OUR CALENDAR SAYS AUGUST 19TH. SO WE WOULD PUBLISH OUR AGENDA BY AUGUST 12TH. SO IF THERE'S NO DECISION OR ACTION BY THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT BY AUGUST 12TH, TELL ME WHAT YOU PLAN TO DO. TWO THINGS I CAN TELL YOU FOR SURE IS WE WILL SUBMIT ALL OF OUR MATERIALS AND WE WILL ARRIVE PREPARED TO PUT ON WITNESSES AND ARGUE OUR MATERIALS. IF THE SUPREME COURT HASN'T TAKEN IT, IT WOULD OF COURSE, AGAIN, BE UP TO YOU WHETHER YOU WANTED TO ACT THAT DAY, BUT WE WOULDN'T LEAVE YOU SHORTHANDED AND WE'D BE PREPARED TO GO ON THAT DAY PENDING YOUR DECISION OF WHETHER OR NOT TO PROCEED. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE, UH, APPLICANT? MR. OVITZ? [01:10:02] I, IF I WERE TO SAY TO YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKING WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS NOT JUST RELATED TO WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS DECIDES AN ISSUE RELATING TO THE LEGALITY OF THE ACTIVITY THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE THERE, BUT WE ARE, UH, CONSIDERING THE REVOCATION OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCU OCCUPANCY AT A SPECIFIC LOCATION AND DEALING WITH THE LOCATION AS WELL AS THE ACTIVITY, WOULD YOU HAVE ANY RESPONSE TO THAT? YEAH, SO THE, THE LEGAL ISSUE REALLY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LOCATION OTHER THAN DOES THE ZONING ALLOW THE USE. AND THE ANSWER IS THE COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE USE IS ALLOWED HERE. IT'S LIKEWISE ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE SUPREME COURT CASE. SO FROM A ZONING ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE, THE LEGAL ISSUE IS EXACTLY THE SAME IRRESPECTIVE OF WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. AND THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY IS NOT PART OF THE STANDARD IN CONSIDERING A BUILDING OFFICIAL APPEAL. IT'S JUST THE ZONING REGULATIONS AND WHETHER THEY WERE CORRECTLY APPLIED. UM, I DON'T WANNA LEGAL ARGUE WITH YOU. THE ZONING ALLOWS FOR RESTAURANT, IT ALLOWS FOR INSIDE AMUSEMENT, BUT THEN THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE DETAIL ACCORDING TO YOUR LAND USE STATEMENT WITHIN INSIDE AMUSEMENT? CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT IT'S GONNA ZERO DOWN TO. SURE. THAT'S PART OF IT. YEAH. I MEAN, OKAY. YEAH. ALRIGHT. SO WHAT I, WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY TO THE BOARD IS THAT REGARDLESS, OR IF THERE'S NO DECI, NO COMMUNICATION FROM THE SUPREME COURT BY OUR FILING DEADLINE, WHICH IS SEVEN DAYS PRIOR, ACTUALLY I THINK MARY WOULD SAY THE FRIDAY BEFORE, CORRECT, MARY, THE FRIDAY BEFORE THE THE 12TH. SO WHAT IS THE FRIDAY BEFORE? SO THIS, I JUST WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ON THE RECORD THAT YOU'LL BE, YOU'LL FILE WHATEVER YOU NEED TO FILE SO THAT WE ARE PREPARED TO MOVE FORWARD. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. 'CAUSE I DON'T ANTICIPATE THE BOARD POSTPONING AGAIN, IF WE POSTPONE TODAY. I KNOW. I WON'T AGREE TO IT. I THAT'S, I APPRECIATE THE DIRECTION STALLING, STALLING CREATES, UM, CREATES ISSUES THAT I DON'T THINK IS IN EVERYONE'S BEST INTEREST. BUT MARY, WHAT'S THAT FRIDAY DATE? IT'S AUGUST 8TH. SO IT'S BE END OF BUSINESS AUGUST 8TH IS THE DEADLINE FOR THE DOCKET INFORMATION. CORRECT. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY, THANK YOU MS. RODRIGUEZ REPRESENTING THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. UM, AS MR. MANN REPRESENTED, WE DID HAVE A JOINT AGREEMENT TO REQUEST TO POSTPONE IT TODAY. UM, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD A AGREE TO THAT. WE THINK IT MAKES SENSE, UM, BECAUSE AS HE STATED, AND I AGREE WITH THIS, THE CENTRAL LEGAL ISSUE HERE IS WHETHER OR NOT A COMMERCIAL POKER ESTABLISHMENT CAN COMPLY WITH THE TEXAS PENAL CODE PROVISIONS AGAINST KEEPING A GAMBLING PLACE. THAT LEGAL ISSUE IS SQUARELY BEING DECIDED BY THE COURTS THAT HAVE TAKEN UP THE OTHER CASES THAT HAVE COME OUT OF THIS BOARD. SO WE THINK IT MAKES SENSE FROM A RESOURCE PERSPECTIVE AND ALSO FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF WAITING UNTIL THE HIGHEST CIVIL COURT, UH, IN OUR STATE MAKES A DETERMINATION ON WHETHER OR NOT, UH, THIS BUSINESS MODEL CAN GO FORWARD. SO, UM, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. IS THAT IT FOR WHAT YOU WANTED TO SPEAK TO THIS? YES. BEFORE I GO TO QUESTIONS, I MEAN, WELL, I'LL ADD ONE MORE THING. THE CITY'S POSITION ON THE LEGALITY OF POKER ROOMS HAS NOT CHANGED. WE BELIEVE THAT THEY DO NOT COMPLY IN THE FORM OF THIS BUSINESS MODEL, UH, WITH THE PENAL CODE. AND THAT IS WHY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL HAS DENIED COS THAT HAVE BEEN APPLIED FOR WITH THIS LAND USE AND HAS REVOKED COS THAT HAVE BEEN GRANTED AN ERROR, WHICH IS WHAT HAPPENED HERE. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR THE RESPONDENT, MR. OVITZ, COULD YOU GO INTO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ABOUT WHAT SPECIFICALLY WAS THE ERROR IN WHICH THE CERTIFICATE WAS ORIGINALLY ISSUED? AND I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION AFTER THAT. I, I COULDN'T QUITE HEAR YOU. WAS YOUR QUESTION, WHAT IS THE ERROR, WHAT WAS THE ERROR THAT WAS MADE IN THE ISSUANCE INITIALLY? WHERE, WHERE, WHY WAS, I MEAN, WHAT WAS THE, WHAT WAS THE MISCONCEPTION ON THE PART OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL THAT THEY ISSUED IT INITIALLY, I BELIEVE, WELL, I DON'T HAVE FULL EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THE CO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE [01:15:01] THAT WAS APPLIED FOR, UH, IN OCTOBER OF 2024 WAS INITIALLY GRANTED, I BELIEVE IT WAS A HUMAN ERROR. THE LAND USE STATEMENT SAYS WHAT IT SAYS, YOU HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU. UM, I, IT WAS JUST AN ERROR THAT IT WAS GRANTED WHEN THE ERROR WAS DISCOVERED. UH, THE CO WAS REVOKED ON THE SAME BASIS THAT THE OTHER POKER CLUB COS WERE DENIED AND REVOKED IN THE OTHER MATTERS. SO IF I COULD JUST FOLLOW UP ON THAT. SO ARE YOU SAYING THERE WERE SEVERAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCIES AT THIS THAT CONCURRENTLY WERE PULLED? NO, SIR. I'M SORRY IF I LEFT THAT IMPRESSION. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER MATTERS THAT HAVE BEEN BEFORE THE BOARD PREVIOUSLY INCLUDING ONE FOR THIS SAME APPLICANT. UM, ALL OF THOSE OTHER MATTERS ARE CURRENTLY IN LITIGATION. ALL OF THOSE LITIGATION CASES ARE STAYED OR ABATED WHILE THE TEXAS CARDHOUSE CASE, UH, IS ON APPEAL TO THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT. I BELIEVE THAT IF, UH, THE BOARD WERE TO HEAR THIS CASE, THIS APPEAL, UM, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE DECISION WAS, ONE OR THE OTHER PARTY WOULD LIKELY APPEAL THAT LITIGATION WOULD ALSO BE STAYED UNTIL THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT DECIDES THE TEXAS CARDHOUSE CASE. THANK YOU. AND I DO HAVE A SECOND QUESTION. UM, IF THIS BOARD TODAY, UH, DECIDES TO MAKE A DECISION ON THIS, UH, AND IF THAT DECISION WERE TO UPHOLD THE BUILDING OFFICIALS ACTIONS, WHAT WOULD BE THE, UH, WOULD THERE BE ANY IMPEDIMENT TO THE APPLICANT REQUESTING A NEW CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY? IF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT UPHOLDS THE REVOCATION, THEN THE APPLICANT COULD APPLY FOR A NEW CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR A RESTAURANT USE. WELL, LET ME, LET ME ASK MORE SPECIFICALLY. WHAT IF THE SUPREME COURT RULES IN THEIR, UH, WHAT WOULD BE IN THEIR FAVOR OF HAVING WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THERE? WOULD THE CITY THEN STILL CONSIDER ISSUING A NEW CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY? I THINK THAT IS A LEGAL QUESTION THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DISCUSSED, UH, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE ANSWER YET TO THAT SPECIFIC LEGAL QUESTION, BUT, UH, IF AND WHEN THE SUPREME COURT DOES RULE, WE WILL, UM, STUDY THE OPINION AND THE, THE IMPACTS TO THE CITY AND PROVIDE OUR LEGAL ADVICE ACCORDINGLY. BUT THERE WOULD BE NO, THERE WOULD BE NO LEGAL IMPEDIMENT TO THEM APPLYING FOR ANOTHER CERTIFICATE THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF. ANY LEGAL IMPEDIMENT TO APPLYING FOR A CO? NO, SIR. THANK YOU. MR. KOVIC, YOU JUST ALLUDED TO SOMETHING THAT TRIGGERED A QUESTION. YOU SAID IT'S THE SAME APPLICANT. IS THIS THE SAME APPLICANT THAT HAVE FILED FOR THIS THREE YEARS AGO? ACTUALLY, THE, THE APPLICANT, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THE APPLICANT, UH, ON THE PRIOR, UM, CO WAS CHAMPIONS CLUB. THE APPLICANT'S NAME ON THIS ONE IS CONTENDER, LLC, CONTENDER DALLAS, LLC. BUT I I BELIEVE IT'S THE SAME, UH, THE SAME PEOPLE ARE INVOLVED. BUT THAT IS REALLY A QUESTION FOR MR. MANN. I'M ABOUT TO ASK THAT QUESTION. OKAY. SINCE YOU OPENED THAT SMALL BOX. WELL, ONE SECOND. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE BUILDING OFFICIAL? OKAY, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOUR OVERVIEW WAS JUST LIKE, I WANTED IT HIGH LEVEL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND AS WELL AS MR. MANN. IT WAS HIGH LEVEL. I LIKE THAT. ALRIGHT, SO MY QUESTION TO YOU, SIR, IS WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US, I'M LOOKING AT THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION APPEAL TO THE BOARD AND IT SAYS THE APPLICANT, THE OWNER IS CONTENDER DALLAS, LLC, THE APPLICANT IS YOURSELF AND YOUR FIRM. IS THIS THE SAME APPLICANT AS BEFORE? I DID NOT REPRESENT THEM IN THE PREVIOUS APPEAL, BUT THE PRINCIPLES OF THE BUSINESS ARE THE SAME INDIVIDUALS. YES. THE PRINCIPLES OF THE BUSINESS OF THE SAME AS BEFORE? YES, SIR. OKAY, THANK YOU. I'M SURE WE'LL GO INTO ALL THESE OTHER ISSUES LATER. I'M GONNA HOLD ONTO THAT IF THE BOARD SO CHOOSES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, BOARD MEMBERS ARE CHOICE TO, UH, AT ONE OF THE BEAUTIES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. I SAY THIS TO THE PUBLIC IS THAT WE DELIBERATE IN IN PUBLIC. WE DO NOT DELIBERATE IN THE BACK ROOM. UH, WE TRY TO AVOID EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, UH, IF WE CAN. UM, BUT SO NOW YOU'RE GONNA GET SOME PUBLIC DELIBERATION. SO HERE WE GO. UH, BOARD MEMBERS, I'M IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING THIS AND HONORING THEIR REQUEST. I'VE ADMONISHED BOTH SIDES TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE READY TO GO ON AUGUST 19TH. UNLESS WE HEAR SOMETHING DEFINITIVE FOR THE SUPREME [01:20:01] COURT. I DON'T ANTICIPATE THE SUPREME ACT ACTING BY THEN, I JUST DON'T, BUT I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW ANY BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE, BUT I'M WILLING TO HONOR A ONE TIME POSTPONEMENT. UM, SO, SO THEREFORE I, UH, THEREFORE, UM, TO, UH, I MOVED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 5 5 ZEROS ONE. THERE YOU GO, MARY. IT'S GONNA BE FOREVER. YOU HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL AUGUST 19TH, 2025. THE MOTION'S BEEN MADE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MS. DAVIS. SO THE BASIS OF MY MOTION IS ONE, I HAVE A GENERAL PREFERENCE TO DEFER TO THE PARTIES INVOLVED IF THEY COME TO AN AGREEMENT TO POSTPONE. IT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST. UM, BUT WE BETTER BE READY TO GO ON THE 19TH. MS. DAVIS DISCUSSION. I AGREE. I THINK IT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE SUPREME COURT WILL MAKE A RULING BY THEM, BUT IF THEY DO, I I THINK THAT COULD BE INTERESTING AND COULD GIVE US SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR OUR JUDGMENT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? MR. KOVI? MR. CHAIRMAN, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH YOUR ASSESSMENT. UM, I'M NOT SEEING ANY DOWNSIDE TO THE APPLICANT AT ALL. THEY CAN REAPPLY FOR AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT IF THE SUPREME COURT DECISION WERE TO GO THEIR WAY. UM, YET WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT CAME DOWN HERE TO SPEAK WHO WOULD HAVE TO THEN COME AN ADDITIONAL TIME, UM, WHICH WOULD PUT, PUT THEM AT A DISADVANTAGE AND PUT THEM OUT. UH, SO I, I RESPECTFULLY, UH, THINK WE SHOULD GO AHEAD WITH IT. SO I WILL BE, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING YOUR MOTION. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I WILL MENTION, UH, THAT, UH, THOSE THAT CAME TODAY CAN COME BACK ON THE 19TH AND SPEAK AGAIN. ONE. NUMBER TWO, ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WE RECEIVED AS A BOARD IS KEPT AND WILL BE AVAILABLE AND DISTRIBUTED. SO, UM, GOD FORBID IF YOU RESEND IT AGAIN, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL HAVE IT IN FRONT OF US. UM, SO ANY DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION, THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE. THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO HOLD ITEM BDA 2 5 0 0 0 0 1. UH, HOLD THIS ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT INTO AUGUST 19TH. MR. N AYE. MR. DORN AYE. MS. DAVIS? AYE. MR. KOVI NAY, MR. CHAIRMAN? AYE. MOTION TO HOLD UNTIL AUGUST 19TH PASSES FOUR TO ONE IN THE MATTER OF BDA TWO FIVE DASH 0 0 0 0 1. THE BOARD ON A VOTE OF FOUR TO ONE HOLDS THIS ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT TO AUGUST 19TH. UM, THANK YOU FOR ALL FOR YOUR BEING HERE. UH, WE WILL HEAR THE CASE ON AUGUST 19TH. UH, LET ME ASK A QUESTION FOR STAFF. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS FOR MRS. MS. RODRIGUEZ OR FOR MY BOARD ADMINISTRATOR AND THAT IS, UM, THE, AND I SHOULD HAVE SAID THIS BEFORE, BUT THAT'S OKAY. YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE IF YOU WOULD, AND THIS IS NOT EX PART TYPE 'CAUSE YOUR OTHER ATTORNEY'S HERE. SO THE APPLICANT APPLIED WAS GIVEN A PERMIT ISSUED, REQUESTED A CO WAS GIVEN A CO, THE CO WAS REVOKED. WHAT ARE THE RULES IN THE MEANTIME, WHILE THIS IS BEING LITIGATED IN FRONT OF US, THE RE UH, I MEAN THE REVOCATION IS NOT STAYED WHILE IT'S LITIGATED. SO IF THAT'S THE QUESTION, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT. WELL, CAN, CAN THEY, CAN AN A, CAN A BUSINESS OPEN THAT UP OR ARE THEY ON HOLD? THEY, THEY CANNOT OPEN UP UNDER A CO THAT HAS, UH, THAT THAT HAS BEEN REVOKED. OKAY. SO IN OTHER WORDS, IT FREEZES THE STATUS QUO. IT TAKES THE, IT TAKES THE CO AND PUTS IT ON HOLD? YES. THE STATUS RIGHT NOW IS THE CO IS REVOKED. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HEARD SOME CONFUSION IN SOME OF THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT'S ON. SO THERE IS NO CO THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT CASE WILL BE HEARD ON AUGUST 19TH. OKAY. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 5 8 2 4 5 DASH 0 5 8. THIS IS AT 1 6 1 5 ALE STREET. IS THE APPLICANT HERE. PLEASE COME FORWARD. [01:25:02] GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M JAY LED DEMA. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. ONE SECOND, SORRY. OKAY. UH, MS. BOARD SECRETARY, HOW MANY, WHAT SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE FOR UH, BDA 2 4 5 0 5 8? THE APPLICANT AND HER DAUGHTER, I'M SORRY, THE APPLICANT AND HER DAUGHTER WHO IS TRANSLATING? JUST TWO. OKAY. VERY GOOD. ALRIGHT, UH, IF YOU'D GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN YOU'LL BE SWORN IN BY OUR BOARD SECRETARY. OKAY. MY NAME IS JACQUE DEMA. I LIVE IN 16TH HAMBURG STREET. MY NAME IS . I LIVING IN 1615 A STREET. ARE WE IN ENGLISH OR SPANISH HERE? . I'M ENGLISH OR SPANISH TRANSLATE. I CAN BE THE ONE SPEAKING. OKAY. YEAH, ARE, ARE YOU BOTH THOSE, THOSE PERSONAS, BOTH PEOPLE WANNA SPEAK OR JUST ONE? JUST ONE. JUST ME. OKAY. SOLO UNO. OKAY, JUST ONE. ALRIGHT, SO, SO DID YOU, YOU SWEAR IN MARY. OKAY, GO AHEAD. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. AND IT OKAY. HI. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. ARE YOU GOING TO CLARIFY THAT THE SMALL STRUCTURE BEHIND MY HOUSE IS NOT A LIVING SPACE BEING, IS NOT BEING RENTED OUT OR OCCUPIED BY ANYONE? IT'S SIMPLY A SMALL SHARE LIKE DWELLING THAT I USED TO MY STORE. MA'AM, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE PLENTY OF TIME. OKAY. , SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE PERFECT AGAINST IT, BUT JUST A LITTLE SLOWER. OKAY. . 'CAUSE WE WANT TO HEAR EVERY WORD SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND AND THEN ASK QUESTIONS. YES, SIR. . SO YOU'RE JUST, YOU DON'T NEED TO BE NERVOUS. JUST UNDER, JUST SLOW IT DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT. OKAY. THERE YOU GO. PERFECT. . NOW YOU CAN START OVER. OKAY. I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT THE SMALL STRUCTURE BEHIND MY HOUSE IS NOT A LIVING SPACE. IT'S NOT BEING RENTED OUT OR OCCUPIED BY ANYONE. IT'S SIMPLY A SMALL SHED, LIKE A DWELLING THAT I USE FOR MY STORE. FOR PERSONAL ITEMS LIKE STOOL ESSENTIAL ITEMS, HOUSEHOLD STORAGE. IT DOESN'T IMPACT ANY NEIGHBORS IN ANY WAY. THERE'S NO NOISE, NO TRAFFIC, NO SAFETY CONCERNS OR NOTHING THAT CHANGES THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PHOTO REGULATION AND I'M HAPPY TO MAKE ANY ESSENTIAL ADJUSTMENTS IF NEEDED. BUT AGAIN, THE STRUCTURE IS PURELY FOR PERSONAL STORAGE. IT HAS NO CAUSE OF ANY ISSUES TO ANYONE IN THE AREA. YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES. I THINK WE MAY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. MS. DAVIS, SO YOU MENTIONED THE STRUCTURE, NOBODY'S LIVING IN THIS STRUCTURE, IT IS JUST FOR STORAGE. YES, MA'AM. AND DID YOU BUILD THE STRUCTURE? UM, MY DADDY IS YES. YOUR FATHER DID? YES. DID HE GET A BUILDING PERMIT? NO, MA'AM. SO WHY DIDN'T HE GET A BUILDING PERMIT? UM, BECAUSE, BECAUSE IT WAS JUST LIKE, BASICALLY LIKE A STORAGE ROOM. SO WE DIDN'T THINK IT WAS LIKE A BIG THING FOR A PERMIT. YEAH, THAT'S, I MEAN, UNFORTUNATELY THAT THAT'S A BIG PROBLEM. MM-HMM . YOU NEED TO, YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE RULES ARE FOR YOUR PROPERTY AND I MEAN, THAT'S A BIG NO TO NOT GET A, A BUILDING PERMIT. SO I'LL, I'LL BE INTERESTED TO, TO HEAR THE OTHER QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THE OTHER, UM, MEMBERS. THANK YOU. OKAY. MM-HMM . THANK YOU MS. DAVIS. QUESTIONS, OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. UM, PART OF THE STANDARD, THE STANDARD THAT WE UTILIZE IS THAT TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST. AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS, IS THAT WHAT DO YOUR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS FEEL ABOUT IT? ARE THEY IN FAVOR? ARE THEY AGAINST, DO THEY NOT CARE? MM-HMM . HAVE YOU TALKED TO ANY OF THE SURROUNDING OWNERS OF PROPERTY IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD? SO ACTUALLY I HAVE, SO ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS CAME 'CAUSE THEY SAW THE, THE NOTICE ON THEIR LETTER AND THEY CAME TO US AND TALKED TO US ABOUT LIKE, WHAT WAS IT ABOUT? AND THEY SAID THAT IT REALLY DIDN'T MATTER TO THEM 'CAUSE THEY WEREN'T CLOSE TO THE HOUSE OF THE AREA. SO THEY WEREN'T CONCERNED ABOUT IT. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING THAT? NO. SAYS THAT THIS NEIGHBOR OR THAT NEIGHBOR SIGNED A PETITION OR GAVE YOU SOMETHING THAT, THAT WE CAN SEE? NO, I DON'T THAT THEY, OKAY. MM-HMM . OKAY. UH, MY BOARD ATTORNEY JUST ASKED ME A QUESTION ABOUT FLOOR PLANS. UM, IN OUR DOCKET, MS. MS. BOARD ADMINISTRATOR, DO WE NOT HAVE A FLOOR PLAN GIVEN US? YES WE DO. UH, THIS IS FOR THE, THE WHOLE, OKAY. SO WHAT YOU SUBMITTED TO THE CITY AND THAT WE HAVE IS A DIAGRAM OF THE AREA AND IT'S GOT A KITCHEN [01:30:01] SINK, A REFRIGERATOR, A TOILET, A BATHROOM, AND A SINK. THAT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A STORAGE ROOM. THAT SOUNDS LIKE LIVING QUARTERS. MM-HMM . AND JUST A MINUTE AGO YOU SAID THIS IS GONNA BE STORAGE, NOT LIVING. SO I'M CONFUSED. WAS NO, NO ONE'S, NO ONE LIVES THERE. SO IT'S BASICALLY FORTOR, BASICALLY STORAGE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. I, I'M, I'M JUST LOOKING AT WHAT THE, WHAT WE WERE PROVIDED AND WE WERE PROVIDED IN OUR DOCKET THAT YOU SUBMITTED. UH, UH, A DIMENSION PLAN THAT HAS A SINK, A REFRIGERATOR, A AN OVEN, AND THEN IN A SEPARATE ROOM. UH, IT LOOKS LIKE A SHOWER, A TOILET, AND A SINK AND A BATHROOM. THAT LOOKS LIKE A LIVING QUARTERS TO ME. BUT YOU'RE SAYING IT'S JUST STORAGE? YES. NO ONE LIVES THERE. OKAY. MM-HMM . MR. OVITZ, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO US, UH, YOUR, YOU SAID YOUR FATHER BUILT, BUILT THE STRUCTURE. EXCUSE ME? YOUR FATHER BUILT THE STRUCTURE. YES, SIR. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO US WHY HE BUILT WHAT APPEARS TO BE A LIVING QUARTERS TO USE FOR STORAGE? WHY HE BUILT THE STORAGE. IT APPEARS TO BE BUILT AS A LIVING QUARTERS. MM-HMM . WHY WOULD YOUR FATHER HAVE BUILT WHAT APPEARS TO BE A LIVING QUARTERS FOR A STORAGE SHED? MAYBE 'CAUSE UM, MY SISTER DOES LIKE PINATAS. SO LIKE, HE MAYBE LIKE FOR THE STUFF THAT SHE NEEDS THERE. I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T FOLLOW YOUR ANSWER. OH. 'CAUSE MY SISTER DOES PINATAS, SO SHE DOES, SHE DOES 'EM THERE AND SHE USES THE STUFF THERE, LIKE THE WATER FOR IT. OKAY. I DON'T, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT. SAY THAT AGAIN. YOU SAY YOU'RE, YOU'RE MAKING SOMETHING. YEAH. MAKE SOMETHING PRODUCING SOMETHING. USES LIKE THE STUFF FOR LIKE THE WATER AND THE SINK FOR THAT. SO IT'S NOT JUST USED FOR STORAGE, IT'S USED FOR OTHER THINGS BASICALLY. YEAH. OKAY. ALRIGHT. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. SO ARE THE GENERAL RULES OF THE CITY, WHEN YOU BUILD A STRUCTURE, YOU NEED A PERMIT. THAT'S ONE. MM NUMBER TWO, IF YOU DO A PERMIT, IF YOU DO A STRUCTURE THAT MEETS THE QUALIFICATIONS OF AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT, YOU NEED A, YOU NEED TO GET APPROVAL OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. MM-HMM . OKAY. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. DISCUSSION ON THE, UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. THE, THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MS. DAVIS, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REQUEST NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 0 5 8 ON APPLICATION OF DELIA. THANK YOU. SORRY ABOUT THAT. DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT NOT FOR RENT ON A SITE DEVELOPED WITH A SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE AS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT WITHOUT PREJUDICE. BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT GRANTING THE APPLICANT WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 5 8, MS. DAVIS HAS MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST, UH, FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT, UH, WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? SECOND. IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MR. NARY DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION. MS. DAVIS. I, I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION FOR A FEW REASONS. UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE A PERMIT WAS NOT OBTAINED. THAT THAT'S A, THAT'S A BIG ISSUE. UH, NUMBER TWO, THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE GETTING SEEMS TO BE CONFLICTED. I DON'T, I I, THERE WASN'T A CLEAR EXPLANATION IF IT'S USED FOR STORAGE, WHY IT WAS SET UP TO LOOK LIKE A, A LIVING UNIT. AND, UM, I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THIS CAME TO US THROUGH A 3 1, 1 3 1 1. UM, I, I'M NOT SEEING THE SUPPORT FOR THIS, THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR THIS. SO, WHICH IS WHY I AM, I AM DENYING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. WHY MOVING TO DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. THANK YOU MS. DAVIS. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. MR. NI AGREE WITH MS. DAVIS. UM, TO ME, LOOKING AT THE SITE PLANS, UH, AGAIN, IT MOST CLEARLY WAS MEANT AS A RE BUILT OR CONSTRUCTED AS A RESIDENTIAL, UH, UNIT. AND, UH, SO THAT'S WHY I'M, I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION IN THE MOTION, MR. KOVI? YEAH, I, [01:35:01] I CONCUR WITH, UM, I CONCUR WITH THE BASIS FOR MAKING THE MOTION. I ALSO, UM, UH, HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT, AS THE PROPERTY WAS BUILT WITHOUT A PERMIT, WHICH MEANS IT WAS NEVER INSPECTED AS TO THE SAFETY OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND THE ELECTRIC ELECTRICAL AND SO FORTH. THAT SAID, THAT MIGHT BE IN THERE. THANK YOU MR. KOVI. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I WOULD MAKE A COMMENT THAT I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION TO DENY. I WOULD AGREE BOTH WITH THE ISSUE ON LACK OF PERMIT, AND THERE ARE MANY REASONS THE CITY REQUIRES A PERMIT. UH, AND THERE ARE MANY REASONS WHY THE CITY CITY COUNCIL HAS CHOSEN TO REGULATE ADDITIONAL UNITS ON A SINGLE FAMILY LOT. AND THAT IS BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS TO BE OVER DENSE AS IT RELATES TO ONE STRUCTURE. UH, IN ADDITION, THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF A PERMIT HELPS TO ENSURE HEALTH AND SAFETY FOR STRUCTURE, FOR ELECTRICITY, FOR WATER, FOR ALL THE OTHER COMPONENTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH A STRUCTURE WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL, RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I'M IN AGREEMENT TO DENY THE REQUEST. ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL MOTION. THIS IS A WHAT'S ON THE MOTION BY MS. DAVIS, SECONDED BY MR. N IN 2 4 5 0 5 8. UH, IS A MOTION TO DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT WITHOUT, UH, PREJUDICE MS. BOARD SECRETARY MR. OVITZ? AYE. MR. DORN AYE. MR. D AYE. MS. DAVIS AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN AYE. MOTION TO DENY PASSES FIVE TO ZERO IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 5 8 THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, UNITED U UNANIMOUSLY HAS MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE ADDITIONAL WILLING UNIT, UH, WITHOUT PREJUDICE. NEXT MOTION. MS. DAVIS, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 5 8 ON APPLICATION OF DELIA ZEMA DENY THE VARIANCE TO THE FLOOR AREA FOR A STRUCTURE ACCESSORY TO THE SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THIS APPLICANT WITHOUT PREJUDICE BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD NOT RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT IN THE MATTER OF, IN THE MATTER OF 2 4 5 DASH 0 5 8. UM, MS. DAVIS HAS MOVED TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE REQUEST FOR, UH, VARIANCE FOR THE FLURRY RATIO, UH, ON A SINGLE FAMILY USE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECONDED BY MR. NARY DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION. MS. DAVIS, I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION BECAUSE OF EVERYTHING THAT WE HAD JUST DISCUSSED WITH A PREVIOUS MOTION, AND I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS WILL BE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. I I BELIEVE IT WAS A SELF-INFLICTED HARDSHIP. AGAIN, BECAUSE THIS WAS CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT A PERMIT, THERE ARE SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS AND YOU JUST ABSOLUTELY NEED TO GO THROUGH THE PROPER PROCESS WHEN YOU'RE BUILDING ON YOUR PROPERTY. THEREFORE, I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. MR. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? UM, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING MS. DAVIS SAID. UM, WHILE THERE MAY NOT BE SOMEBODY LIVING IN THIS PARTICULAR UNIT AT PRESENT, THEY CERTAINLY COULD. UM, AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S QUITE EVIDENT TO ME THAT IT'S MEANT AS A RESIDENTIAL, UH, DWELLING. SO THAT'S THE REASON I'M IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION DISC. THANK YOU MR. JENNER. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. MR. OVITZ? UH, I ALSO SUPPORT THE MOTION. I HAVE A QUESTION, UH, I GUESS FOR STAFF, UH, AS TO, UH, THE DENIAL OF THE DENIAL OF THESE TWO REQUESTS APPLICATIONS, WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE THE RAMIFICATIONS THAT THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO BE AWARE OF AS TO WHAT HAPPENS IF THESE ARE DENIED? IN OTHER WORDS, ARE THEY REQUIRED TO BRING THE STRUCTURE DOWN OR THEY, WHAT, WHAT ARE THEY REQUIRED TO DO AS A, AS A RESULT OF THIS? SO WHEN IT'S DENIED, THEY WILL HAVE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. AND SO IF THAT MEANS TEARING IT DOWN, TEARING IT DOWN, BUT THEY WILL HAVE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. AND SO THIS DENIAL WILL ALSO BE SENT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT TO GO OUT AND ENFORCE THAT IT BE BROUGHT TO, BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE IN SOME SHAPE, FORM, OR FASHION. MM-HMM . OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IN BDA 2 4 5 0 5 8 WAS A MOTION TO DENY THE VARIANCE FOR THE FLOOR AREA RATIO, UM, FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. [01:40:01] UH, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE BOARD'S SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE. MR. DORN AYE. MR. OVITZ AYE. MR. N AYE. MS. DAVIS? AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN, AYE. MOTION TO DENY PASSES FIVE TO ZERO IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 4 5 0 5 8. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN UNANIMOUS FIVE TO ZERO DECISION DENIES THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF THE FLOOR AREA FOR THE STRUCTURE ACCESSORY TO THE SINGLE FAMILY USE WITHOUT PREJUDICE, YOU'LL GO TO THE LETTER FROM OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS BOA 25 DASH 0 0 0 0 3 7 2 1 5 COURTLAND AVENUE IS THE APPLICANT HERE. PLEASE COME FORWARD. GOOD AFTERNOON. HOW ARE YOU? GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS MONSERRAT AND I'M GONNA BE INTERPRETING FOR HER. HOLD ON. SO ARE YOU A TRANSLATOR? INTERPRETER? YES. INTERPRETER. I APOLOGIZE. INTERPRETER. OKAY. HOLD ON A SECOND. FIRST QUESTION IS, HOW MANY SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE FOR 2 4 5 DASH, EXCUSE ME, TWO FIVE DASH FIVE ZEROS AND A THREE TWO PLUS THE INTERPRETER. TWO PLUS THE INTERPRETER. ARE THEY ALL IN FAVOR OR AGAINST FAVOR? ALL IN FAVOR? OKAY. ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA SWEAR IN, ARE THE TWO OF YOU THE SPEAKERS, THOSE MR. CHAIRMAN AND I DO HAVE A, UH, UH, AN OPPOSITION ONLINE? OPPOSITION ONLINE? OKAY. SO WE HAVE ONE IN FAVOR AND ONE IN OPPOSITION, AND THAT'S ONLINE. ALRIGHT. SO OUR RULES OR PROCEDURES ARE SUCH THAT YOU, YOU AS THE APPLICANT GET TO SPEAK FIRST AND BECAUSE IT'S A TRANSLATOR, YOU GET DOUBLE THE TIME. THANK YOU. OKAY. AND AFTER YOUR PRESENTATION, THE PERSON IN AN OPPOSITION CAN SPEAK AND THEN YOU ARE ALLOWED FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL, WHICH MEANS 10. MM-HMM . OKAY? YES. ALRIGHT, NOW I'M, I'M GONNA BE GENEROUS WITH TIME, SO I JUST WANT HER TO BE ABLE TO, UH, HER BE ABLE TO PRESENT ANYTHING SHE WANTS TO PRESENT, BUT WHATEVER I TAKE TIME, I GIVE HER, I HAVE TO GIVE EQUAL TIME TO THE OTHER SIDE. SO WE'LL BE FINE. ALL ALRIGHT. SO FIRST YOU NEED TO BE SWORN IN BY OUR BOARD SECRETARY. OKAY. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES. OKAY. IS IS HE, IS HE SPEAKING AS WELL? I'M NOT GONNA SPEAK. OKAY. ALRIGHT. PLEASE PROCEED. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FIRST. MARIA PEREZ AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS. MM-HMM . MY NAME IS MARIA PEREZ. MY ADDRESS IS 7 2 1 5 CORLAND AVENUE HERE IN DALLAS, TEXAS. PROCEED. I'M HERE TO ASK FOR PERMISSION TO LIVE IN A PROPERTY WHICH I PURCHASED AND IT'S ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE HOUSE. SO MY DREAM WAS TO HAVE A HOUSE HERE IN DALLAS AND ONE DAY I SAW THE OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE A HOUSE. UM, WELL SHE WAS DRIVING TO CHURCH ONE DAY. SHE SAW A HOUSE THAT WAS ON SALE WITH A SIGN THAT SAID OWNER TO OWNER. AND SHE SAW THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY. OKAY? WE AGREED TO MEET SINCE THIS PERSON SPOKE SPANISH. THIS IS AN OLDER GENTLEMAN OF 90 YEARS OLD. WE AGREED TO MEET AT THE PROPERTY. UM, [01:45:07] HE WAS REQUESTING $15,000 FOR DOWN PAYMENT. HER HUSBAND AND HER HAD THAT MONEY BECAUSE THEY WERE SAVING MONEY TO BUY A PROPERTY TOGETHER. THEY AGREED TO MEET AT THE TITLE HOUSE TO SIGN THE PAPERS AT THE TITLE HOUSE. THEY SAID THAT THE HOUSE WAS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS. IN REGARDS OF PAPERWORK, SHE SIGNED BLINDFOLDED SINCE HER DREAM WAS TO HAVE HER OWN HOUSE. UH, I LIVE IN THE FRONT HOUSE AND MY DAUGHTER, MY SISTER SORRY, WHO HAS A SON WITH AUTISM LIVES IN THE BACK PART OF THE HOUSE. OH, ONE SECOND. WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO REPEAT WHAT SHE SAID BEFORE. WE DIDN'T TOTALLY UNDERSTAND HOW YOU TRANSLATED. OKAY. UM, GOING BACK TO WHAT PART EXACTLY THE LAST THING YOU TRANSLATED. OKAY. HER SISTER IS LIVING IN THE BACKSIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SHE HAS A SON WHO IS AUTISTIC AND SHE'S ASKING FOR THIS MOTION TO PASS SINCE SHE'S A SINGLE MOM AND SHE'S THE ONLY PERSON SHE CAN COUNT ON IN THIS COUNTRY ONE DAY WHEN SHE GET HOME. SHE WAS TOLD BY HER KIDS THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS WAS THERE LETTING THEM KNOW THAT THEY WANTED TO GO INSIDE THE HOUSE AND THEY GOT SCARED BECAUSE HE WAS CARRYING NO REASON TO GO INSIDE THE BUILDING THAT DID NOT GO IN BECAUSE THERE ARE MINORS, MINORS. BUT THEY RETURNED THE NEXT DAY AND SHE WAS THERE. THEY SAY THEY WANTED TO GO INSIDE THE HOUSE. SHE ASKED WHAT WAS THE REASON AND HE STATED THAT HE WANTED TO SEE THE BACK PART OF THE HOUSE WONDERING WHAT WAS IT. SHE TOLD THE GENTLEMAN THAT IT WAS A LIVING PROPERTY WITHOUT KNOWING THAT IT WAS NOT APPROVED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS. SO SHE RELIED ON A LAWYER AND A TOTAL HOUSE TO MAKE SURE SHE WAS DOING THE RIGHT THING. KNOWING THE HOUSE WAS WITH NO PROBLEMS. THE CITY SAID THAT THERE WERE NO PERMISSIONS FOR HER TO BE THERE. AND EVER SINCE THIS HAS BECOME A NIGHTMARE, THEY GO EVERY SINGLE DAY TO THE HOUSE. SO THE FIRST TIME SHE GOT A FINE FOR $400 FROM HIM. [01:50:11] UM, SHE SAID SHE DID NOT HAVE THAT MONEY THAT SHE STILL PAYING FOR THE TAXES FOR THE HOUSE, THAT SHE NEEDS TO GET MORE TIME BECAUSE SHE COULDN'T PAY RIGHT THERE AND THEN. AND SHE WAS LOOKING FOR SOMEONE TO ASSIST HER BECAUSE SHE HAD NO IDEA WHAT SHE WAS SUPPOSED TO DO. SHE WAS SENT TO JEFFERSON TO REQUEST PERMIT WHERE SHE WAS STRUGGLING A LOT DUE TO THE LANGUAGE. JEFFERSON CITY HALL, UM, FROM JEFFERSON. THEY SENT HER OVER HERE WHERE SHE ALSO STRUGGLED DUE TO THE LANGUAGE. BUT SHE WAS FORTUNATE TO HAVE A PERSON WHO SPOKE SPANISH. THEY GUIDED HER TO WHAT SHE WAS SUPPOSED TO DO. NOW SHE'S HERE REQUESTING FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT TO PLEASE DO NOT TURN DOWN THE HOUSE SINCE IT'S THE LIVING SPACE FOR HER SISTER AND HER AUTISTIC SON. AND IT'S NOT HARMING ANYBODY. MM-HMM . OKAY. THE GENTLEMAN, UM, MISLEADED HER SAYING THAT THE HOUSE VALUE WAS $350,000. SHE HAS TO DO A MONTHLY PAYMENT OF $2,700. SAY THAT AGAIN. ONE, WHAT DID YOU SAY AGAIN? ALLEGEDLY THE HOUSE COST IS $350,000. SHE SAYS SHE PAYS A MONTHLY PAYMENT OF $2,700 MONTHLY. THIS GENTLEMAN MISLEADED ME. I DID NOT KNOW THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS VALUED AT $160,000 WHEN THE PROBLEM ARISE WITH THE CITY. SHE TRIED TO CONTACT THE GENTLEMAN BUT HE HAD PASSED AWAY. SO, SO SHE TRIED TO REACH FOR THE KIDS OF THIS GENTLEMAN, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN DENYING HER PHONE CALLS AFTER ONE YEAR AND MULTIPLE PHONE CALLS ATTEMPT, SHE FINALLY GOT A CALL FROM THE SON AND HE SAID THAT HE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT ISSUE. SO LOST THE PROBLEM IN SON, BUT SHE'S STILL PAYING FOR THIS HOUSE. SO IF THIS PROBLEM IS NOT FIXED, SHE STILL HAS TO PAY FOR THIS. SO, OKAY. SO SHE SAYS THAT THIS GENTLEMAN IS STILL RECEIVING THE MONEY AND SHE DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS IS FAIR BECAUSE SHE'S NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT THE GENTLEMAN DID. THE CITY OF DALLAS IS MAKING HER RESPONSIBLE OF THE PROBLEMS ARISING WITH THAT PROPERTY, BUT SHE HAS A CONTRACT OF 20 YEARS WITH THIS PERSON. [01:55:02] IF SHE DOES NOT PAY $2,720 MONTHLY, THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO GET WITHDRAWN FROM HER. SO HER ONLY REQUEST AND PETITION IS TO HAVE THE PROPERTY IN THE BACK REMAIN. SO IT'S A REFUGEE FOR HER DAUGHTER AND HER SON. PLEASE, PLEASE DO NOT KNOCK THE HOUSE. YOU HAVE THE POWER TO HELP ME. I HAVE TWO JOBS, MY HUSBAND AND I TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THE MONTHLY PAYMENT BECAUSE IT IS NOT EASY. BESIDES THAT PAYMENT, I NEED TO PAY CITY TAXES, HOME INSURANCE. AND THE ONLY THING I'M REQUESTING IS THAT SPECIAL PERMIT PLEASE. THANK YOU. UH, ALRIGHT. UH, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR, UM, OKAY, SO I'VE GOT MR. NARY ALRIGHT, YOU'RE GONNA TRANSLATE AS I SPEAK, OKAY? YES, SIR. SO WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. AND THEN WE HAVE ONE OTHER, UH, PERSON ONLINE IN OPPOSITION. IS THAT IT? OKAY. SO MR. NER, THEN MS. DAVIS FOR THE APPLICANT. MR. RY. THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, UH, SHE ENTERED INTO A CONTRACT TO PURCHASE WITH THE 90-YEAR-OLD GENTLEMAN. UM, AND THEN HE PASSED AWAY, OR, OR HOW, HOW EXACTLY? CAN YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER ON THAT? OKAY. THE 19-YEAR-OLD GENTLEMAN WAS PRESENT AND ALSO A LAWYER CALLED THOMAS SMITH. SHE ASKED THE GENTLEMAN WHY WERE THE KIDS NOT PRESENT SINCE HE WAS 90 YEARS OLD, BUT HE SAID HIS KIDS WERE NOT PRESENT BECAUSE THAT'S THE REASON WHY THERE WAS A LAWYER THERE. OKAY. SO THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED WAS, DID THE APPLICANT, MS. PEREZ ENTERED, ENTERED A CONTRACT PURCHASE THE HOUSE? YES. OKAY. THAT IS SEPARATE AND ASIDE FROM WHAT WE DECIDE HERE. SO THE ANSWER TO HIS QUESTION WAS YES. YOUR NEXT QUESTION, MR. N OKAY. MS. DAVIS, WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE HOME, WAS THE ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT ALREADY BUILT? YES. THE HOUSE ON THE BACK WAS ALREADY BUILT. SHE DID NOT DO THAT. THE GENTLEMAN SAID THAT THERE WERE TWO HOUSES THAT SHE WAS PURCHASING. OKAY. DID, DID YOU THE, UM, AND, AND I BELIEVE THE UNIT HAS A, A STOVE, A REFRIGERATOR, IS THAT CORRECT? SORRY, I SHOULD REALLY LOOK AT THAT AGAIN. DID YOU MAKE ANY MODIFICATIONS SO THAT YOUR SISTER COULD MOVE INTO THE HOUSE? NO. THE WAY SHE PURCHASED THOSE HOUSES, THAT'S THE WAY THOSE HOUSES WERE. SHE TRUSTED THE LAWYER. OKAY. SO I JUST WANNA CONFIRM THAT WHEN SHE MOVED IN THE HOUSE, THE, THE, THE ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT WAS ALREADY BUILT AND IT HAD ALREADY INCLUDED THE KITCHEN AND THE BATHROOM. SHE DID NOT, UH, MAKE THOSE ADDITIONS AFTER SHE MOVED IN THE HOUSE, ALREADY HAD A RESTROOM AND A KITCHEN. SHE HAS NOT PERFORMED ANYTHING ON THAT HOUSE. OKAY. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. OVITZ, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE HOME, WHEN YOU WERE ACTUALLY AT THE CLOSING FOR THE PURCHASE, WAS THERE ANYBODY, UM, DID YOU HAVE ANYBODY THERE WITH YOU, UH, ENGLISH SPEAKING PERSON WITH YOU? [02:00:04] THERE WAS A PERSON THAT WAS THERE WHO SPOKE SPANISH, BUT THE GENTLEMAN WAS NOT HONEST. HE SAID THAT BUILDING, HE HAD BILLED HIMSELF, BUT THE LAWYER SAID THAT THE HOUSE HAD NO ISSUES WHATSOEVER. OKAY. LET'S, LET'S MAKE SURE THAT OUR QUESTIONS AND THE TESTIMONY GOES TO OUR STANDARD. AND OUR STANDARD IS THAT IT DOESN'T EV ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. IT WILL NOT BE USED OF RENTAL ACCOMMODATIONS. IT IS NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC PUBLIC INTEREST. IT'S NECESSARY TO PERMIT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SPECIAL SPECIFIC PARCEL OF LAND AND IT'S NOT GRANTED TO RELIEVE A SELF-CREATED PERSONAL HARDSHIP. THAT WAS A NUDGE FROM MY BOARD ATTORNEY. WASN'T THAT YOUR NUDGE? I'M SORRY. YES. . SO CONTINUE. SO THE, THE SECOND HOUSE WAS ON THE PROPERTY WHEN SHE PURCHASED IT? YES. THE SECOND HOUSE WAS THERE. THE GENTLEMAN SHOWED HER TWO HOUSES. BUT THERE IS NO CITY PERMIT FOR THAT SECOND STRUCTURE. IS THAT? NONE. NONE AT ALL. SO AS FAR AS THE CITY IS AWARE, THERE'S NEVER BEEN A SAFETY INSPECTION OF THAT STRUCTURE. THANK YOU. SO HERE'S A QUESTION TO, TO FOLLOW UP, MR. KOVI. IF THE BOARD DID APPROVE THESE WOULD PERMITTING OR CODE COMPLIANCE OR SOME GOVERNMENTAL ENERGY GO OUT TO THE PROPERTY AND ENSURE THAT THERE WEREN'T CODE VIOLATIONS GIVEN THAT IT WASN'T PERMITTED IN THE FIRST PLACE? I SAID IF MS. BOARD ADMINISTRATOR, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT IT? I'LL DO IT AGAIN FOR YOU. SO DOVETAILING MR. KOVI QUESTION AS IT RELATES TO CELL SAFETY AND STRUCTURE, IF THE BOARD SAW FIT TO APPROVE THESE REQUESTS IF YOU'RE TRANSLATING RIGHT? YEAH, BECAUSE SHE NEEDS TO KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING HERE. MM-HMM . OKAY. IF THE BOARD SAW FIT TO APPROVE IT, DOES THAT MEAN IT AUTOMATICALLY GETS PERMITTED OR DOES THAT MEAN THE CITY GOES OUT AND DOES THEIR INSPECTIONS IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE OH, MR. THOMPSON'S WAKING? NO, BUT IT GOES TO MISS A BOARD ADMINISTRATOR FIRST. AND DO YOU SEE MY QUESTION? YES. I'M GOING BACK TO HIS SAFE, SAFE AND HEALTHY. YES. I BELIEVE THAT THEY WOULD DO HAVE TO DO SOME LEVEL OF INSPECTION, BUT MR. THOMPSON CAN SPEAK BETTER TODAY. IS THAT WHO YOU WANT TO SPEAK FOR YOU? YES, PLEASE. OKAY. NOW YOU CAN SPEAK SIR. UH, SO SO TO ANSWER THE QUESTION YES. AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, I WANT TO ADD YES. MEANING WHAT? YES, YES. THE CITY WILL GO OUT AND PERMIT AND IT ALSO GOES TO THE FACT THAT IT WILL BE PERMANENTED BASED ON TODAY'S RULES AND REGULATION AS IF IT WAS PERMANENT IN 2025, NOT WHEN IT WAS BUILT, IS RELEGATED TO TODAY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS. SO YOU DON'T GET THE BENEFIT OF IT BEING BUILT IN 1979 AND GO BACK AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE CODE WAS. THEY HAVE TO MEET TODAY'S ELECTRICAL CODE, TODAY'S PLUMBING CODE TODAY, TODAY'S BUILDING CODE. THEY HAVE TO MEET EVERYTHING BASED ON JUNE 17TH, 2025 OR WHENEVER THEY APPLY FOR THE PERMIT. I, I MEAN IN, I WANT MAKE SURE SHE UNDERSTOOD IT. I WANNA MAKE SURE SHE UNDER THE APPLICANT UNDERSTANDS WHAT MR. THOMPSON JUST SAID. MICHAEL, THIS IS ALL GOES TO YOUR QUESTION. DOES SHE UNDERSTAND THAT? I DIDN'T SAY WE APPROVED ANYTHING YET. I'M JUST SAYING IF SHE, SHE SAYS HE UNDERSTANDS. OKAY. I'M RELIEVED. I'M KIND OF SURPRISED MR. THOMPSON. I'M PRETTY BATTERED ON THE CITY, BUT I'M RELIEVED THAT YOU GUYS DO THAT. THANK YOU . AND THAT'S WHY ON THOSE PLANS WHEN YOU SEE THAT WE'RE PROPOSED, OF COURSE IT'S PROPOSED 'CAUSE IT'S NOT OFFICIALLY. I HEAR YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY, ONE MOMENT. WE HAVE ANOTHER PERSON THAT WANTS TO SPEAK MM-HMM . SO YOU CAN SIT DOWN. OKAY. SIT BACK OVER THERE. JUST RIGHT THERE. OKAY. JUST RIGHT BEHIND YOU. YEAH, I DON'T WANT HIM TO GO TOO FAR. OKAY, MS. WILLIAMS, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? MS. JANIE GONZALEZ, IF YOU'RE ONLINE, PLEASE PROVIDE AUDIO AND VIDEO. [02:05:01] HELLO EVERYONE. HELLO? HELLO. ARE I'M HERE. OKAY. OKAY. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO, YES. OKAY. MAKE MAKE SURE YOU STAY ON VIDEO, OKAY? OKAY. I'M NOT SURE HOW THIS WORKS. SO I, I DID THE CAMERA THING. IT'S, I MEAN, WE CAN SEE YOU RIGHT NOW. JUST MAKE OH, OKAY. JUST MAKE SURE YOU STAY ON, OKAY? OKAY. ALRIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. SURE. JANIE GONZALEZ. 71 24 CORTLAND AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 3 5. OKAY, ONE SECOND. NOW YOU, MA'AM, YOU SAID YOU'RE AT 71 24? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. ONE SECOND. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF YOU'RE WITHIN THE 200 FEET OR NOT, BUT YOU'RE NOT, BUT YOU'RE STILL ABSOLUTELY WELCOME TO SPEAK ARE OH, OKAY. WHAT? NO, HOLD ON ONE SECOND. ALRIGHT. YOU WERE SWORN IN. MM-HMM . YOU, YOU HAVE UH, UH, FIVE PLUS OR MINUS MINUTES TO ADDRESS THIS. GO AHEAD. OKAY. WELL THAT, THAT ANSWERS, UH, THE QUESTION. I DIDN'T RECEIVE A LETTER, BUT I DID SEE THE, THE SIGN, SO I WANTED TO SEE, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS GOING ON. WELL, THE ANSWER TO THAT, BUT THAT'S WHY I, THE ANSWER TO THAT IS BY, BY STATE LAW UHHUH, WE SEND A LETTER TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE REGISTERED THROUGH DALLAS COUNTY CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY. SO ACCORDING TO OUR REPORT, IT DOESN'T SEEM AS THOUGH YOUR PROPERTY AT 7 1 2 4 IS WITHIN THE 200 FEET AND ALL THAT IS, IS A NOTIFICATION AREA. EVERYONE HAS STANDING TO SPEAK AND THAT'S WHY YOU'RE WELCOME TO SPEAK, RIGHT? YES. SO, UM, SO I WAS INQUIRING, YOU KNOW, WHAT THIS WAS ABOUT BECAUSE IT'S ON MY BLOCK, OF COURSE. UM, I CALLED MR. THOMPSON, I DIDN'T GET A CALL BACK. I EMAILED AND I SPOKE TO MARY A FEW TIMES. I WAS JUST TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS, WHAT WAS THIS ABOUT? UM, AND THAT'S WHY I PUT, YOU KNOW, POST 'CAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS GOING ON AND I WANTED TO FIND OUT. AND IF I DIDN'T HAVE TO PROCEED THEN I WOULD NOT, I DIDN'T WRITE A LETTER BECAUSE I'VE BEEN WITHOUT POWER FOR ALMOST A WEEK AND IT WAS JUST TURNED ON LAST NIGHT. SO, UM, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS GOING ON, HOW THIS CAME ABOUT. BUT A LOT OF THE, UM, ANSWERS I RECEIVED FROM, YOU KNOW, FROM LISTENING ALL MORNING, UM, MY CONCERN IS JUST THE TRAFFIC, UM, COMING INTO MY STREET. I LIVE FURTHER DOWN AS YOU CAN, AS YOU CAN TELL, UM, I'M ALMOST A BIT HIT MULTIPLE TIMES BY THE YOUNG LADY WHO LIVES THERE BECAUSE SHE, SHE RUSHES IN AND RUSHES OUT. UM, THAT'S MY CONCERN IS THE TRAFFIC THAT THE DWELLING UNIT MIGHT, UM, HAS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO PARK ON THE OUTSIDE AND THEN THERE ARE MULTIPLE OTHER HOUSES ON THAT BLOCK THAT PROBABLY HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED TO HAVE THE SAME ISSUE. AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY I, THAT'S WHY I HAVE THE ISSUE IS BECAUSE THERE'S OTHER HOMES THAT HAVE UNITS LIKE THAT FROM THAT GENTLEMAN THAT HE SOLD AND THEY'RE BEING RENTED OUT. SO THAT'S PART OF THE, THAT'S WHY I'M NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THOSE TYPE OF STRUCTURES BECAUSE THIS, THIS MAN, HE DID PRO, HE HAD LOTS OF HOMES ON THAT BLOCK AND HE DID CREATE, UM, GARAGES INTO, INTO LIVING QUARTERS THAT WERE RENTED OUT. SO THIS ONE WAS ADDRESSED. I'M NOT SURE HOW, HOW OR WHY AND THE OTHERS ARE NOT, BUT TO ME IT'S A PROBLEM BECAUSE I'M, I'M NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THOSE TYPE OF STRUCTURES IN MY STREET. I'VE BEEN LIVING THERE 45 YEARS, THAT'S A LONG TIME. AND, AND I'M JUST NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT, NOR THE TRAFFIC THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS BRINGS WHEN I TRY TO ENTER MY STREET, IT'S, THERE'S OTHER SURROUNDING HOMES THAT I THINK HAVE STRUCTURES BECAUSE THERE'S JUST SO MUCH CAR CONGESTION THERE AND IT'S JUST A BATTLE TO GET IN AND GET OUT ALL THE TIME FOR MY STREET. AND IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A NUISANCE FOR ME. AND THAT'S WHAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO JOIN THIS MEETING JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT'S HOW IT, IT IT AFFECTS ME EVEN THOUGH I'M NOT WITHIN THOSE 200 FEET. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, MA'AM. SURE. SO IF I READ WHERE YOU'RE LOCATED, YOU'RE ON COURTLAND AVENUE 7 1 2 4, CORRECT? YES. YES. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, YOU ARE RIGHT OUTSIDE THE ME NOTIFICATION AREA. I, AS I LOOK AT MY MAP UHHUH, SO IT ACCORDING TO OUR, OUR 200 FEET DEAL. BUT, BUT AGAIN, YOUR OPINION UHHUH IS JUST AS VALUE AS IN ANYONE ELSE. UM, ARE YOU STATING YOU ARE OPPOSED TO THIS REQUEST IN [02:10:01] SUPPORT OF THIS? YES, I, I'M OPPOSED TO THOSE REASONS? YES, CORRECT. OKAY. ALRIGHT, THAT'S FINE. I APPRECIATE THAT. UM-HUH. QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD HAS FOR THE, THE SPEAKER, HOW LONG HAVE YOU LIVED THERE MA'AM? 45 YEARS . OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HOLD ON. OH, NO, NO, I'M SORRY. NO, NO QUESTIONS. NO, THEY, THEY, LIKE I SAID, EVERYTHING HAS, YOU KNOW, BEEN, YOU KNOW, ADDRESSED, UM, THROUGH LISTEN, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE MORNING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JUST HOLD ON HERE. ALRIGHT. UM, THE APPLICANT CAN COME BACK UP. SO MS. PEREZ, UM, I HAVE A QUESTION OR TWO AND THEN SHE HAS FIVE MINUTES TO RESPOND. UM, WERE YOU ABLE TO TRANSLATE TO HER WHAT THIS OTHER PERSON SAID? YES, SIR. OKAY. SO LET ME ASK A QUESTION AND THEN SHE CAN TAKE THE TIME. UM, THE PART OF OUR CRITERIA IS WHEN A PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUESTING A ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT IS THEY GET THAT IT IS NOT ADVERSE TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S NOT NEGATIVE TO OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. OKAY. HAS SHE MADE ANY EFFORT TO TALK TO THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS IN HER NEIGHBORHOOD ON COURTLAND OR LOVEDALE OR THURSTON GOING FIRST, WHICH WOULD BE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES? SHE SPOKE TO THE ONES TO THE SIDE, BUT THE NEIGHBORS TO HER SIDE SAY THAT THEY'RE OKAY WITH THAT. THEY HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THAT. THANK YOU. OUR PROCESS USUALLY REQUESTS THAT WE GET SOMETHING IN WRITING. OKAY. AND THAT IS SO THAT WE ARE ABLE TO MAKE SURE IT'S, UM, DOCUMENTED AND FORTHRIGHT IS THE APPLICANT. IS MS. PEREZ ALSO SAYING IT WILL NOT BE USED? IT WILL NOT BE RENTED OUT. SHE'S NOT WILLING TO RENT THE PROPERTY. OKAY. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE IN THE BACK. I'M NOT TALKING THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. OKAY. AND IS, IS SHE SAYING SHE'S THE OWNER OR RENTER OF THE FORWARD HOUSE? UM, SHE COMMUNICATES THAT SHE'S PURCHASING THE HOUSE, PURCHASING OR PURCHASED THAT SHE'S PAYING FOR THE HOUSE. DID SHE PURCHASE THE HOUSE OR IS SHE, IN OTHER WORDS, HAS THE TITLE TRANSFERRED? DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M TRYING TO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SPANISH IS, SO SIR, THE TITLE IS ON HER NAME ALREADY. OKAY. QUESTION FOR STAFF MM-HMM . UM, BEFORE YOU ACCEPT A CASE, DON'T YOU VERIFY WHO THE PROPERTY OWNER IS. SO I GUESS I SHOULD HAVE JUST ASKED YOU RIGHT? RIGHT. YOU VERIFY THE, WHO THE PROPERTY IS, RIGHT? AND THEY'RE CURRENT ON THEIR TAXES AND ALL THAT STUFF? CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO YOU, SO BY VIRTUE OF HER BEING HERE TODAY, YOU'VE ALREADY VERIFIED THAT SHE IS THE LEGAL OWNER OF THE PROPERTY? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY, GOOD. SO DID YOU TRANSLATE THAT? OKAY. ALRIGHT, NOW I HAVE A QUESTION, ANOTHER QUESTION FOR HER. DID YOU HEAR WHAT THE PERSON IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD SAID THEIR CONCERN WAS AND WHAT IS HER RESPONSE? UM, SHE'S SAYING THAT THE PROPERTY THAT IS ON THE BACK OF HER HOUSE DOES NOT IMPACT THE PERSON ON, [02:15:05] SHE HAS A GREAT RAPPORT WITH THE NEIGHBORS NEXT TO HER AND THEY AGREE THAT THE HOUSE IN THE BACK STAYS THERE. SO, UM, SHE SAYS THAT THIS IS VERY SAD THAT THE CITY IS WILLING TO TURN THE HOUSE DOWN BECAUSE IT'S A REFUGEE FOR A PERSON. SHE NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THE CITY IS NOT DOING ANYTHING. THE CITY IS ENFORCING WHAT THE LAW IS AND THE LAW REQUIRES THERE BE ONE HOUSE ON ONE PROPERTY AND IF YOU DO A SECOND STRUCTURE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE PERMIT. THAT'S WHAT THE LAW IS. AND WHAT YOU'RE HERE FOR TODAY IS TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION TO THAT LAW. SHE UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY. OKAY. SHE SAYS THAT SHE'S KIND OF FAMILIAR WITH THE LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY AND SHE TRIES TO RESPECT THEM, OF COURSE. OKAY. THE OTHER PERSON THAT SPOKE SAID THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT TRAFFIC. IS THERE, OR WILL THERE BE A TRAFFIC PROBLEM BY VIRTUE OF YOU HAVING PEOPLE IN THAT REAR STRUCTURE? SHE DOESN'T BELIEVE. SO DOES THAT PERSON THAT OCCUPY THAT OTHER STRUCTURE HAVE A CAR? AND WHERE DO THEY KEEP THE CAR? YES, SHE HAS A VEHICLE AND SHE PARKS THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF THE MAIN HOUSE. IS THERE SPACE AVAILABLE IN YOUR DRIVEWAY FOR THAT SECOND CAR? YES, THERE IS. THAT'S WHERE IT SHOULD BE PARKED. AN ADDITIONAL CAR ON THE STREET CREATES A TRAFFIC PROBLEM. SHE UNDERSTANDS. OKAY. SHE HAS FIVE MINUTES TO SAY ANYTHING ELSE. IT'S IN YOUR HANDS TO HELP ME. I BELIEVE THAT HOME IS NOT AFFECTING ANYBODY. I WAS MISLEADED BY THIS GENTLEMAN, BUT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE THIS OUT. PLEASE HELP ME KEEP IT. NOTHING WITH THERE IT IS MY FIRST TIME PURCHASING A HOUSE AND I HAVE NO IDEA, BUT I BELIEVE IN THE FUTURE THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN TO ME AGAIN. SO, RESPONSIBILITY, PROBLEM. I AM RESPONSIBLE THAT MY SISTER CAUSED NO PROBLEM AT ALL. OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU. ONE MOMENTUM. MM-HMM . OKAY. THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MS. DAVIS, MAKE SURE I HAVE THE RIGHT ONE. UH, IT, IT IS TWO FIVE YEAH. AVENUE. OKAY. FIVE ZERO. 5 0 3. YEAH. TO USE MS. WILLIAMS NEW MONIKER, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REQUEST NUMBER BOA DASH 25 DASH 5 0 3 ON APPLICATION OF MARIA PEREZ GRANT THE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT NOT FOR RENT ON A SITE DEVELOPED WITH A SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATIONS IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE. BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT [02:20:01] THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DEV DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE. COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED. THE APPLICANT MUST DEED RESTRICT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO PREVENT THE USE OF THE ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT AS RENTAL ACCOMMODATIONS IN THE MATTER. BDA. EXCUSE ME, BO A 2 5 5 0 3. MS. DAVIS HAS MOVED TO GRANT THE REQUEST TO MAINTAIN AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT NOT FOR RENT. NO. UM, IT'S BEEN SO MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? SECOND. SECOND. BY MR. NRI. DISCUSSION BY MS. DAVIS. I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS ADDITIONAL UNIT WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THERE IS ONLY ONE PERSON WHO OPPOSED IT. AND I, YOU KNOW, WITH JUST ONE PERSON OPPOSING, I DON'T CONSIDER THAT ADVERSELY AFFECTING NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTIES. THE STRUCTURE WAS ALREADY BUILT WHEN YOU MOVED IN AND YOU'VE TOLD US THAT YOU DID NOT MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THE PROPERTY. YOU DID NOT ADD A KITCHEN OR BATHROOM. AND BECAUSE OF THOSE REASONS, I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. THANK YOU MS. DAVIS. MR. NARY? I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING MS. DAVIS JUST SAID. UM, AND AGAIN, UM, MY, MY MAIN CONCERN IS THAT, UM, MS. PEREZ DID NOT HAVE ADEQUATE REPRESENTATION WHEN SHE WAS BUYING THE PROPERTY. THAT SHE ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS NEEDS TO EITHER HAVE AN ATTORNEY OR A LICENSED REALTOR REPRESENTING YOU, UH, WHEN YOU, WHENEVER YOU GO TO PURCHASE A PROPERTY. AND, UH, I DO THINK YOU ACTED IN GOOD FAITH AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. THANK YOU MR. JANNER. OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? MR. OVITZ? UM, AS SYMPATHETIC AS I FIND THE APPLICANT'S ARGUMENT, UM, THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE AS THEY APPLIED TO WHAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE DECIDING WERE NOT RELATED TO, UH, HER CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH SHE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY AND MAY HAVE BEEN MISLED. UM, THIS PERTAINS TO, UH, CITY BUILDING CODE, A PROPERTY THAT IS SITTING THERE, UM, WHICH SHOULDN'T BE THERE. AND AS FAR AS I CAN UNDERSTAND AT THIS POINT, THE APPLICANT STILL DOES NOT HAVE, UH, THE KIND OF REPRESENTATION THAT THEY NEED IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH THE SITUATION GOING FORWARD SHOULD BE APPROVED BY THIS BOARD. SO I FIND THAT I'M UNABLE TO, UH, UH, SUPPORT THE MOTION. THANK YOU MR. KOVICH. ANY OR JUST ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? MS. DAVIS? I I JUST WANNA CLARIFY MY SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO. WHO YOU BOUGHT THE HOUSE FROM, WHAT YOU PAID FOR THE HOUSE, WHAT TAXES YOU'RE PAYING ON THE HOUSE. IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT. I HAVE A MIXED OPINION. ON ONE HAND, I AM SWAYED BY THE FACT THAT, UM, THE STRUCTURE WAS THERE WHEN YOU PURCHASED IT AS OPPOSED TO YOU BUILDING IT WITHOUT A PERMIT AS OPPOSED TO YOU IMPROVING IT WITHOUT A PERMIT. BUT I'M GOING BACK TO OUR CRITERIA AND OUR CRITERIA SAYS NOT FOR RENTAL ACCOMMODATION AND YOU'VE PLEDGED THAT YOU'RE NOT GONNA RENT IT. NUMBER TWO, THAT IT'S NOT ADVERSELY AFFECTING NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. AND I'M TRYING, I'M TRYING TO FOCUS ON THAT. IN ADDITION, THE ISSUE OF NOT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC INTEREST, I'M, I LISTENED TO WHAT THE A THE OPPOSITION SAID THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT TRAFFIC AND THAT'S WHY I SPOKE TO WHERE YOU'RE PARKING VEHICLES. IF THE VEHICLES WERE PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY, IT REDUCES THE POTENTIAL TRAFFIC ISSUES. I HOPE YOU HEAR WHAT I'M HINTING AND THERE'S ASSURANCE THAT, THAT, THAT YOU WILL MAKE SURE THERE'S NOT TRAFFIC ISSUES BECAUSE THAT GOES TO HOW IT ADVERSELY AFFECTING NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. WHAT I WANT TO DO IS PUT A CONDITION THAT IT REQUIRES NO OFF STREET OO ONLY OFF STREET PARKING, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO [02:25:01] OKAY. BUT I'M VERBALLY SPEAKING TO THIS. OKAY. AND YOU'RE, AND YOU'RE SAYING TO ME THAT THE SECOND VEHICLE COULD BE PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY. YES. I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ANY OTHER DEBATE ON THE MOTION HEARING? NOT THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL A VOTE. THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IN BO OA 2 5 0 0 0 0 3 IS TO GRANT THE REQUEST FOR AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT, NOT FOR RENT. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MS. DAVIS, SECONDED BY MR. NARY. MR. N AYE. MR. OVITZ NO NAY. MR. DORN AYE. MS. DAVIS AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN, AYE. MOTION TO GRANT PASSES FOUR TO ONE IN THE MATTER OF BOA TWO FIVE TRIPLE 5 0 3 ON APPLICATION OF MARIA PEREZ. THE BOARD GRANTS THE REQUEST FOR AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT NOT FOR RENT. TRAFFIC TRAFFIC, TRAFFIC TRAFFIC, TRAFFIC TRAFFIC. NO. SECOND MOTION MS. DAVIS, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BO A DASH 25 DASH 5 0 3 ON APPLICATION OF MARIA PEREZ. GRANT THE 177 SQUARE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE FLORA AREA FOR A STRUCTURE ACCESSORY TO THE SINGLE FAMILY USE REGULATIONS BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THE PHYSICAL CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY IS SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT. I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE. COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE PLANS ARE REQUIRED IN THE MATTER OF BO A 2 5 5 ZEROS. THREE. MS. DAVIS MOVED TO GRANT THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, THE VARIANCE TO THE VARIANCE FOR THE FLOOR AREA RATIO. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECONDED BY MR. MARY. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. AGAIN, I, MS. MS. DAVIS, SORRY. UH, AGAIN, I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION BECAUSE I, I DON'T THINK IT WILL DEVALUE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WILL NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BUILDING IS UP TO CURRENT COMPLIANCE REGULATIONS, WHICH IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT. HOLD THAT THOUGHT. YES. DOES SHE UNDERSTAND THAT? YES, SIR. I HAVE BEEN CONFIRMING THAT THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT WHAT MR. THOMPSON SAID. YEP. YES, SIR. YEAH. UM, AND, AND AGAIN, SHE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH A STRUCTURE ALREADY BUILT. SO THAT WEIGHS HEAVILY ON MY DECISION TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION. THANK YOU, MS. DAVIS. MR. NARY, ONCE AGAIN, I CONCUR WITH EVERYTHING MS. DAVIS SAID. UM, IN REITERATING A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THIS PROVISION, I BELIEVE WOULD RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THIS APPLICANT. SO THAT'S THE REASON I'M IN FAVOR OF GRANTING DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION HEARING, NO DISCUSSION. THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE. MR. N AYE. MR. HAITZ NAY. MS. DAVIS AYE. MR. DORN? AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN? AYE. MOTION TO GRANT PASSES FOUR TO ONE IN THE MATTER OF BO OA 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 3. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ON A VOTE OF FOUR TO ONE GRANTS, THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO FLOOR AIR RATIO. NO TRAFFIC. NO TRAFFIC, AND GET THE, GET IT INSPECTED PROPERLY SO IT'S SAFE AND IT'S BEEN APPROVED. THANK YOU, CIA. THANK YOU. THANK YOU TIME. NEXT ITEM FOR THE BOARD. AND IS BO A 2 5, 5 0, AND A FIVE? HOW'S THAT? WE'RE GONNA SAY THAT LIZ TONGUE ALL YEAR. MARY, MR. CHAIRMAN, WHEN WE GET TO THE DOUBLE DIGITS IS ONLY GONNA BE FOUR. YOU'RE RIGHT. YOU'RE RIGHT. SO WE'LL HEAD THERE SOON. OKAY. THAT KEEPS US AWAKE. UH, MS. WILLIAMS. ALL RIGHT, MR. APPLICANT. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME'S ROB BALDWIN. HOLD THE PHONE HERE, HOLD THE PHONE. WE GOTTA SHIFT OUR PAPER. ALL RIGHT. UM, IF YOU WOULD SWEAR IN THE APPLICANT AND WHAT SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE ON THIS ONE FIRST? UM, THERE IS SOMEBODY SIGN UP ONLINE TO BE IN OPPOSITION, BUT, UM, HE'S NO LONGER THERE, SO WE'LL SEE. AND WE HAD ONE, ONE EMAIL OF OPPOSITION THAT I'LL SEND ON THE ROAD. IS IT THIS PERSON, UM, EDWARD MADELINE ROBERTSON? CORRECT. SO THEY SIGNED UP, BUT THEY ALSO EMAILED. OKAY. SO I'M GONNA SEND THIS DOWN THE [02:30:01] ROW. NOW YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND SWEAR 'EM IN. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? YES, I DO. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN. GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, ROB BALDWIN, 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER, UH, AT 1 0 8 0 6 CAMILIA. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. MITCHELL THOMPSON. SO THIS IS UP LIKE, UH, ROYAL AND PRESTON. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UH, THE CORNER LOT. UH, THE LONG SIDE IS ON, UH, ROYAL, BUT THE FRONTAGE IS ACTUALLY ON CAMILLA. UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S RIGHT OVER THERE, RIGHT NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF, OF ROYAL AND PRESTON, THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THIS IS THE PROPERTY. IT'S CURRENTLY VACANT. UH, THERE WAS PREVIOUSLY A HOUSE ON IT, UH, THAT WAS DEMOLISHED. UH, MY CLIENT WENT IN TO GET NEW PERMITS, PERMITS WERE ISSUED, UH, FOR THE HOUSE, BUT BEFORE WE COULD START CONSTRUCTION, THANK GOODNESS, UH, THE CITY MADE REALIZE THEY MADE A MISTAKE AND, UH, TOLD 'EM THE PERMITS WERE ISSUED IN ERROR. SO HERE WE ARE. UH, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. WHY AM I CHUCKLING? I'M JUST CHUCKLING. I KNOW. PERMANENT ERROR. THAT'S OUR, MAYBE OUR NEW MIDDLE NAME. I KNOW. IT'S, IT'S, UH, . LET, LET US BE THE BAD GUYS. OKAY. YEAH, YOU, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO, IT'S GOOD FOR BUSINESS, BUT IT'S EMBARRASSING ALL THE WAY AROUND. OH, PLEASE DON'T . OKAY. SO WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS A FEW THINGS. WE'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO A PROJECTED FRONT YARD SETBACK ALONG ROYAL LANE. UH, SO OUR, OUR PROPERTY FRONTS ON CAMILLA, AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, IT HAS A 60 FOOT PLATTED BUILDING LINE, WHICH IS REALLY DEEP. WE'RE COMPLYING WITH THAT. WE'RE ASKING FOR A 20 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK ALONG, UH, ROYAL LANE IN INSTEAD OF THE, THE 10 FOOT SIDEWALK SIDE YARD. UM, THE, WE'RE ALSO ASKING FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO RECONSTRUCT THE EXISTING FENCE THAT'S THERE. IT'S A WOODEN PRIVACY FENCE. IT'S IN DISREPAIR, BUT IF WE TAKE IT DOWN, WE LOSE THE RIGHTS TO, TO REBUILD IT. SO WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT. AND FINALLY, WE'RE ASKING FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO, UH, ALLOW ENCROACHMENT INTO A SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE. AND I WAS AT THE BRIEFING SESSION, SO I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS AND HOPEFULLY I CAN ADDRESS THOSE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THIS IS THE PROPERTY. THIS IS LOOKING EAST DOWN ROYAL. AND, UM, ROYAL IS A SIX LANE DIVIDED THOROUGHFARE AT THIS LOCATION. UH, AND AS I SAY, WE'RE FRONTING ONTO THE RESIDENTIAL STREET, NO FENCES ALONG THE RESIDENTIAL STREET ON CAMILLA, JUST ALONG, UH, FOREST LANE WHERE THE FENCE IS TODAY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS IS THE FENCE THAT'S THERE TODAY. THIS IS LOOKING FROM, UH, LOOKING EAST ON, ON ROYAL. THAT'S THE ALLEY THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE, UH, THE BRIEFING SESSION. THAT'S LOOKING WEST. THIS IS NOT LOOKING, I'M SORRY. WE'RE LOOKING WEST. YEAH, THIS IS LOOKING WEST. THANK YOU. UH, SO THAT'S THE EXISTING FENCE WE WANNA REPLACE WITH A, A NEW FENCE, BUT AT THE SAME PRIVACY STYLE. EIGHT FEET SOLID. SO I SHOULD KNOW THIS, BUT YOU TEAR IT DOWN, YOU LOSE THE RIGHTS FOR THE EIGHT FEET. YES, SIR. THERE'S NOT A TIMETABLE INVOLVED. WOW. NO, UH, IT'S NOT, IT IS NOT LIKE A NON-CONFORMING USE WHERE, OH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING. YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS. OH, OKAY. YOU TEAR IT DOWN, YOU LOSE IT. RIGHT. YOU KNOW, TECHNICALLY WE COULD PROBABLY COME IN THERE AND, AND BOOTLEG RE REPAIRING IT, YOU KNOW, BUT WE'RE NOT GONNA DO THAT. WE'RE HERE. WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE TRYING TO DO IT RIGHT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THIS IS THE, THE PROPERTY BEFORE THE HOUSE WAS REMOVED. WE'RE BASICALLY PUTTING THE HOUSE BACK IN THE, THE SAME LOCATION AS IT WAS BEFORE. UH, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. WAS THIS A BYPRODUCT OF THE TORNADO? THE, THAT WENT THROUGH A COUPLE YEARS AGO? WHY THIS HOUSE WAS GREAT? NO, IT WAS, IT WAS JUST A SEPARATE ISSUE, AN OLDER HOUSE. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THIS, UH, THIS SLIDE ON THE LEFT IS THE SURVEY OF THE PREVIOUS HOUSE THAT WAS THERE. AND IT SHOWS THAT WE HAVE A, WE WERE PROPOSING THERE WAS AN EXISTING 20 FOOT EIGHT INCH SETBACK FROM ROYAL LANE. WE'RE PROPOSING A 20 FOOT SETBACK. WE'RE STILL MEETING THE FRONT YARD SETBACK ALONG CAMILLA, BUT WE'RE JUST WANTING TO PUT THE, THE BUILDING BACK TO THE PREVIOUS SETBACK LINE. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THE ORIGINAL HOUSE WAS BUILT, UH, WITH THAT, UH, 20 FOOT SETBACK, BUT IT WAS, AND IT WAS IN OPERATION AND AND OCCUPIED. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO THIS JUST SHOWS THAT THE ZONING AND BUILDING CODE DID APPROVE THE POLICE. AND I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING AND I'LL GIVE YOU EVERY TIME YOU WANT. COULD YOU GO BACK ONE SLIDE? SURE. [02:35:01] I, I'LL GIVE YOU EVERY BIT OF TIME YOU WANT. I, I WANT US TO ALL, TO ZERO IN ON AND ANSWER A QUESTION. I'M LOOKING AT THE, THE, ON THIS SLIDE, THE PICTURE ON THE LEFT, DO I SEE A FENCE LINE THAT'S AT AN ANGLE ON THAT CORNER? YES, SIR. OKAY. JUST THOUGHT I'D WANT THAT. NO, I, I WAS GONNA BRING THAT UP WHEN IT GOT TO THE TIME. OKAY. WELL, OKAY. SELF-INFLICTED WOUND THERE, MR. BALDWIN? NO, IT, UH, YEAH, I, I'LL TAKE THAT. OKAY. WELL, WE HAD A FORMER MEMBER, MS. HAYDEN, WHO WAS VERY, HELPED EDUCATE US ON VISIBLY TRIANGLES. SO, BUT ANYWAY, I THOUGHT THAT LOOKED LIKE A FORM. WELL, I, I'LL TELL YOU. YEAH, I, I HAVE A SLIDE COMING UP. OKAY, GOOD. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS SHOWS THAT THE PERMITS WERE ISSUED IN, UH, APRIL OF 2022. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THAT SHOWS, IF YOU LOOK UP AT THE RIGHT TOP HAND CORNER IN THE YELLOW, THAT'S A STAMPED APPROVED SITE PLAN SAYING YOU CAN BUILD IT THERE. UM, WHICH THANK GOODNESS WE DIDN'T BECAUSE THAT'S ALWAYS, UH, MORE DIFFICULT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO THIS IS, UH, SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE FENCE, UM, SHOWING THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE UP IN THE TOP. UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. UH, THIS SHOWS THE ENCROACHMENT OF THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE. THE, UH, IT'S MISLABELED ON THERE. IT'S ACTUALLY EVERYTHING IN THE GREEN WHERE IT SHOWS A VISIBILITY TRIANGLE. SO IT'S A BIGGER ENCROACHMENT THAN THAT. THE RED WOULD LEAD YOU TO BELIEVE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO WHY I THINK THIS WORKS, WALNUT HILL, SIX LANE DIVIDED, WE ARE ON THE UP UPSTREAM SIDE. SO IF WE'RE LOOKING, IF WE PULL UP TO OUR, THE, THROUGH THE ALLEY OR SOMEONE'S UP TO THE ALLEY, THE FENCE WILL BE ON THEIR RIGHT. BUT ALL THE TRAFFIC'S COMING FROM THE LEFT. SO ON ANY THERE, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE ANY TRAFFIC COMING INTO THEM FROM ROYAL LANE. SO THE TRAFFIC IS GOING EAST TO WEST ON A DIVIDED. RIGHT. SO ALL, ALL THE TRAFFIC ON OUR SIDE OF THE STREET'S HEADING WEST, EAST TO WEST, AND THE, THE ENCROACHMENTS AND VISIBILITY TRIANGLE IS BLOCKING TRAFFIC. OKAY. YOU MAY JUST GO TO THE EAST. YOU MAY HAVE GOT ME ON THAT ONE. YOU'RE RIGHT. OKAY, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TODAY. UM, SO THE, THE DEFENSE WOULD GO BACK IN, IN THIS LOCATION AND IT WOULD, UH, YOU COULD STILL SEE CARS COMING IN, BUT IT'S, UH, IT IS AN ENCROACHMENT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO THIS IS THE BUILDING AREA, UH, IN THE GREEN. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. UH, SO, UH, WE HAVE, UH, APPROVED PLANS THAT WERE TERMINATED. UM, WE'RE GOING BACK IN THE SAME APPROXIMATE LOCATION. WE HAVE TWO FRONT YARDS, WHICH IS UNCOMMON IN THIS AREA. AND NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE A A A 35 FOOT PROJECTED, 35 FOOT FRONT YARD ALONG ROYAL, WE HAVE A PLATTED 60 FOOT FRONT YARD, UH, ALONG CAMILLA, WHICH NORMALLY IS, THAT'S A 30 OR 35 FOOT, THE 35 FOOT FRONT YARD IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, IT'S ACTUALLY 60 BECAUSE IT'S PLATTED. SO ALL THE HOUSES ARE PUSHED BACK. WE'RE MEETING THAT. BUT BECAUSE OF THE SECOND, UH, FRONT YARD SETBACK ALONG ROYAL, WE CANNOT BUILD COMMENSURATE WITH OTHER HOUSES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, UH, TO SPEAK TO THE FENCE. I KNOW THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER MARY REALLY DOESN'T LIKE, UH, THE CANONIZATION OF FENCES. UH, BUT THIS IS A, A WIDE STREET. UH, WE'RE ONLY ASKING FOR EIGHT FEET. THE FENCE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP ACROSS THE STREET, THE WHITE ONE THAT THAT WAS PUT UP, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S EVER WENT TO THE BOARD. I HAD A COLLEAGUE GO OUT BETWEEN THE BREAK AND MEASURE IT. AND THAT'S EIGHT FEET TALL. UH, SOLID FENCE, UH, DUNNO HOW IT GOT THERE, BUT IT IS, UM, SO WE'RE ASKING FOR, UH, ALLOWANCE TO ONLY HAVE ONE FRONT YARD SETBACK, BUT THE SECOND SETBACK WOULD BE 20 FEET, UH, INSTEAD OF 35, UM, ALLOW US TO REBUILD OUR FENCE IN THAT CURRENT LOCATION. AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE. AND HERE I'M TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. BALDWIN. UM, YOU SAID THERE WERE NO OTHER SPEAKERS, CORRECT? MS. WILLIAMS? NO, THE SPEAKERS REGISTERED, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, ALRIGHT. QUESTIONS FOR MR. MS, THE APPLICANT. I'M SORRY, I RETRACT THAT. UM, BUT, UH, HE'S STILL NOT BACK ONLINE. SO THERE IS ONE SPEAKER THAT REGISTERED, BUT THEY'RE NOT ONLINE. CORRECT. OKAY. YOU'LL N YOU'LL NUDGE ME IF THEY COME BACK ONLINE. CORRECT. OKAY. QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN, THE APPLICANT. ALRIGHT. SO, SO YOU'RE, [02:40:01] SO OUR, MY CONCERN THAT WAS VOICED AND WAS THE TRIANGLE OFF THE ALLEY? YOU'RE SAYING IT'S A NON-ISSUE BECAUSE ALL THE TRAFFIC ON, I'M JUST SAYING OUT LOUD AND YOU, I WANT YOU TO CONFIRM OR DENY THE TRAFFIC ON ROYAL IS DIVIDED AND ALL THE TRAFFIC AT THAT INTERSECTION IS GOING WEST TO EAST. SO THE LINE OF SIGHT IS CLEAR. OH, E EAST TO WEST. SO THERE'S A CLEAR LINE OF SIGHT EAST TO WEST TO THE LEFT. CORRECT. AND THERE IS A, UH, A MEDIAN YES. DIVIDING ROYAL RIGHT THERE. SO PEOPLE CAN'T TURN LEFT ANYWAY OUT OF THE ALLEY. SO THE ONLY THING THEY CAN DO IS TURN RIGHT. OKAY. CAN I READ TO YOU WHAT THE PERSON IN OPPOSITION? SURE. AND I, SO I CAN, IT SAYS, IN ORDER TO HAVE A CLEAR LINE OF SIGHT TO TURN RIGHT OR LEFT ONTO CAMILLA, THE DRIVER WHO'S ATTEMPTING TO SAFELY PULL INTO ROYAL STREET TRAFFIC WOULD BE FORCED TO ACTUALLY ENTER THE TRAFFIC LANE OF ROYAL IN ORDER TO SEE, I THINK HE'S ASSUMING THAT WE'RE HAVING A FENCE ALL THE WAY TO CAMILLA. AND YOU'RE NOT, 'CAUSE YOU'RE STOPPING AT IT'S, WE'RE WE'RE BLOCKING, WE'RE WE'RE STOPPING. IF YOU, UM, SORRY. IF YOU WE'RE, WE'RE STOPPING AT 60 FEET FROM, UH, CAMILLA. OKAY, SO HOLD ON. LET ME DIGEST. I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. IN ORDER TO HAVE A CLEAR LINE OF SIGHT TO TURN RIGHT OR LEFT TO CAMILLA, THAT'S A NON-ISSUE. 'CAUSE YOUR FENCE IS NOT IN THAT FRONT YARD THERE. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THE DRIVER WOULD ATTEMPT IT. SO THIS COMMENT HERE DOESN'T REFER TO THE TRIANGLE AT THE ALLEY. CORRECT. OKAY. HMM. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THIS SITE PLAN, SO HOLD ON. DON'T, YOU'RE, YOU'RE BUILDING YOUR CASE. DON'T, DON'T, DON'T WHACK IT HERE. UM, SO DOES STAFF HAVE ANY CONCERN ABOUT THAT TRIANGLE, MS. CAMIKA? ALRIGHT, MR. THOMPSON, LUCKY YOU, YOU GET DRAFTED FOR THE MOMENT. IT LOOKS TO LIKE TO ME THAT IT'S A NON-ISSUE BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC'S GOING EAST TO WEST. OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER DID NOT SUPPORT THIS. DID NOT SUPPORT IT. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. DAVID NAVARRES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO MUCH FOR MY OPINION. , NO. ALRIGHT. SO, BUT I THINK THIS, THIS PERSON HERE WAS THINKING THAT WAS THE FENCE ALL THE WAY TO THE COURT. I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. OKAY. WHICH I WOULD BE SENSITIVE TO AS WELL. IN THE, IN THE BIG SCHEME OF THINGS, YOU KNOW, THE TRI THE SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE IS THE SMALLEST OF THEIR QUEST. YOU KNOW, DON'T GIVE IT UP YET. I'M NOT GONNA GIVE IT UP, BUT YET I, I DON'T WANNA POLLUTE THE REST OF THE CASE ON THAT. I, I WOULD AGREE. WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE? MS. DAVIS? IS THERE A A, IS THERE A SIDEWALK, UH, ALONG ROYAL LANE? NO, THERE'S NOT. OKAY. I DIDN'T THINK SO. THANK YOU. ANYWHERE ALONG ROYAL LANE OR IN THAT BLOCK FACE? NOT, NOT IN FRONT OF US. IN THE, IN THE BLOCK BEFORE. OH, I'M SORRY. UH, OH. THERE, THERE IS A A AND WE'LL HAVE TO REBUILD IT. THERE, THERE IS A SIDEWALK. OKAY, HOLD ON. SO THERE IS A SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO YOUR PROPERTY? YES. WELL, LET ME, IT NO, THERE'S NOT A SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO OUR PROPERTY, BUT THERE'S ONE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ALLEY TO THE, TO THE EAST OF US. YES. SO THE CITY WOULD MAKE US REBUILD THIS. THAT'S WHAT I, TO CONSTRUCT A SIDEWALK, BUT NOT ALONG YOUR FENCE LINE. RIGHT. REALLY? YOU DON'T HAVE TO PICK WHY. 'CAUSE THERE'S NO SIDEWALK THERE NOW. BUT THEY WILL MAKE US PUT ONE IN, YOU'LL HAVE TO PUT ONE IN. WHY? 'CAUSE YOU'RE TOUCHING THE PROPERTY. RIGHT. SINCE WE'RE REBUILDING AS PART OF IT, THAT WILL MAKE US PUT ONE IN. IS THERE A, IS THERE A SIDEWALK ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THAT STREET OF CAMILLA AS YOU HEAD WEST AT THE SIDEWALK WOULD LEAD TO? YEAH. THERE, THERE'S A SIDEWALK THAT, THAT'S, IT'S NOT IN THE PROPER LOCATION BECAUSE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE FIVE FOOT BACK. YEP. AND NOT ON THE CURB, BUT THERE IS. OKAY. SO YEAH, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES THERE WILL BE A SIDEWALK. WELL, WE'RE NOT DRILL, WE'RE NOT ADDRESSING THE SIDEWALK ISSUE. THAT'S, THAT'S NOT WITHIN OUR POWER. BUT, UH, COMMISSIONER DAVIS ASKED ABOUT IT. SO ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES THERE WILL BE A SIDEWALK. YES. CORRECT? YEAH. SHE WAS GOING TO THE TRIANGLE ISSUE. YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE? SO YOUR REQUEST IS THE VARIANCE OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK. YOUR REQUEST IS A SPECIAL, AND THAT IS 'CAUSE THE TWO SET, TWO FRONT YARDS SPECIAL DEFENSE HEIGHT AND THEN OPACITY ARE FENCES IN THE AREA, SOLID FENCES. ALL THE ONES THAT THE SIDE ONTO, UH, ROYAL LANE ARE IN THE, IN THE VICINITY. YOU SAW IT DURING THE, THE, THE VIDEO TOUR THAT YOU TOOK AS YOU HEARD ME THIS MORNING OR ANOTHER TIMES I, AND THIS IS A COMMENT DIRECTED TO MR. NARY, OUR FENCE GURU. YOU KNOW, IT'S THE WHOLE DAM CITY'S GONNA BE FENCED THAT'S IN AT LEAST THE SIX LANE THOROUGHFARES. RIGHT. AND IT MAKES SENSE. IF I LIVED ALONG A SIX LANE THOROUGHFARE, I WOULD WANT TO HAVE A SOLID FENCE. IT, IT STOPS [02:45:01] DUST, IT STOPS VIBRATION, IT STOPS SOUND. AND UH, BASICALLY IT GIVES PRIVACY. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR NOW. THANK YOU. WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE? THANK YOU MR. HOP. MR. HOP. SO I'M NOT SURE I FOLLOW THE CONCLUSION THAT WAS REACHED AS REGARDS TO THE VISIBILITY OBSTRUCTION. SO, UM, VISIBILITY TRIANGLES ARE THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN YOU PULL UP TO AN INTERSECTION YOU CAN LOOK AND SEE IF VEHICLES ARE COMING AND SO YOU DON'T PULL OUT IN FRONT OF A VEHICLE. AND WE'RE ASKING FOR ENCROACHMENT AND VISIBILITY TRIANGLE FOR ALL INTENTS PERSONS ON MY RIGHT ON ON THE WEST. PLEASE TAKE ME BACK ONE STEP AND TELL ME EXACTLY WHERE THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE ISSUE IS. OKAY. IT'S AT THE, UH, ON, PUT YOUR SLIDE UP. THAT WOULD SHOW US. YEAH. UH, BRIAN, WOULD YOU MIND GOING TO, I WISH I HAD MY SLIDES NUMBER, BUT GO, GO BACK TO, UH, ANY OF THE AERIAL OR, SO OUR, OUR PROPERTY IS BOUNDED ON THE WEST BY CAMILLA, ON THE SOUTH BY ROYAL ON THE EAST BY AN ALLEY, AND THEN ON A NORTH BY ANOTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, WE'RE ASKING FOR THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE EXCEPTION AT THE ALLEY. SO IS THAT A SIDEWALK I SEE ALONG ROYAL THERE? YEAH. LOWER RIGHT, THE LOWER RIGHT? YES, SIR. GOING, THAT'S GOING UNDER ROYAL LANE. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT ALL THE TRAFFIC THAT, UH, ABUTS OUR PROPERTY IS HEADING WEST BECAUSE THERE IS, IT'S A, A DIVIDED, IT'S A DIVIDED THOROUGHFARE AND THERE'S NO WAY ANYBODY CAN TURN LEFT OUT OF THAT BECAUSE THERE'S A MEDIAN. MR. THOMPSON, WOULD YOU GO OUT ONE CLICK SO I CAN SEE THE, THE ROYAL IN FRONT OF HIS PROPERTY? I DUNNO IF THAT CAN ZOOM IN OR ZOOM OUT. ALLEY. THERE IT IS. THE PROPERTY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ALLEY. GO TO YOUR MICROPHONE MR. HOP. I CAN'T HEAR YOU. . THE PROPERTY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ALLEYWAY HAS NO FENCE. NO, BECAUSE IT'S FRONTING ONTO, UH, IT FRONTS ONTO ROYAL LANE. IT HAS, DOESN'T HAVE A SIDE FENCE AT THE ALLEY OR DOES IT HAVE, DOES IT HAVE A FENCE? OH, IT HAS A, A CHAIN LINK FENCE. HAS A CHAIN LINK FENCE. YES, SIR. ALONG THE ALLEY. YES SIR. SO YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S NOT A VISIBILITY PROBLEM BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE THROUGH THE CHAIN LINK. THAT'S RIGHT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. I'M GONNA MAKE A COMMENT, THEN I GO TO MS. DAVIS. I MEAN, IF I LOOK AT THIS HERE, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, MR. BALDWIN, IS THERE'S NO WAY SOMEONE GOING SOUTH ON THAT FROM THAT ALLEY COULD CROSS THE NORTHERN PORTION OF ROYAL BECAUSE THAT THERE'S A MEDIAN THAT FORESTALLS 'EM, THEY CAN'T MAKE IT TO THE EASTBOUND LANE. THAT'S CORRECT. I'M, I'M WANTING MY PANEL MEMBERS TO HEAR THAT YOU CAN'T COME OUT OF THE ALLEY AND GO EAST ON ROYAL. NO, YOU CAN'T. THE ONLY WAY YOU GO WOULD BE TO THE RIGHT WOULD GO WEST. CORRECT. AND WHEN YOU'RE GOING WEST, YOU'RE LOOKING TO THE LEFT, WHICH IS EAST IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE YOU DON'T HAVE TRAFFIC. THAT'S RIGHT. AND THERE'S NO OBSTRUCTION THERE. NO, THERE'S A CHAIN LINK FENCE. WELL, IS THAT AN OBSTRUCTION? WELL, NO. YOU CAN SEE THERE, THERE'S NO OBSTRUCTION THERE. THERE'S NO OBSTRUCTION THERE. MS. DAVIS, MY, I WASN'T LEADING THE WITNESS, BUT MAYBE I WAS. MY AND I, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT FROM A CAR PERSPECTIVE, IT WOULD NOT HURT YOUR VISIBILITY. BUT MY CONCERN IS WITH THAT TRIANGLE RIGHT THERE, IT COULD OBSTRUCT YOUR VIEW TO THE RIGHT PEOPLE COULD BE WALKING OR RUNNING DOWN THE SIDEWALK, WHICH YOU HAVE TO, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO CONSTRUCT. SO THAT'S, I, THAT'S MY ISSUE. SO RIGHT NOW, I'M, I'M ANTI TRIANGLE UNLESS YOU CAN CONVINCE ME THAT, YOU KNOW, I, THEY WILL HAVE PLENTY OF ABLE TO SEE. BUT YOU COULD HAVE A KID RUNNING DOWN. YOU COULD HAVE A DOG, YOU COULD HAVE A JO. SHE, SHE'S RIGHT. YOU HAVE A PEDESTRIAN OR A BICYCLE GOING ON THE SIDEWALK WEST TO EAST. THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S CORRECT. UH, THAT'S WHY I SAID, BOY, TALK ME BLOWING IN THE WIND. I'M NOW WITH HER ON IT. RIGHT. NO, THAT, THAT'S FROM A VEHICLE. IF THERE WASN'T A SIDEWALK THERE, WE'D HAVE A MUCH STRONGER CASE. BUT, UH, WHEN YOU POINTED OUT THERE'S A SIDEWALK, I REALIZED THAT MY CASE WASN'T AS STRONG AS IT USED TO BE. , UH, HOLD MS I'M GONNA GO TO MR. HOPKINS IN A MINUTE. UH, MS. BOARD ADMINISTRATOR, IF THE BOARD CHOSE TO NOT APPROVE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR THE TRIANGLE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, CAN HE STILL PRESENT? CAN HE STILL PROCEED WITH [02:50:01] PLANS OR DOES HE HAVE TO DO NEW PLANS FOR US? I'M SAYING DOES HE HAVE TO COME BACK OR IS JUST TAKING THAT PORTION OUT? IF THE BOARD SO CHOOSES RIGHT, WE WOULD JUST NEED MODIFIED PLANS SHOWING THAT IT'S JOGGED OUTSIDE OF THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE. SO DOES HE HAVE TO COME BACK OR HE CAN DO THAT ADMINISTRATIVELY? HE COULD DO THAT ADMINISTRATIVELY ACCORDING TO WHAT YOU GUYS DECIDE ON. OKAY. 'CAUSE I'M GONNA, I WANNA MAKE SURE WE PROVE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE ENFORCED MM-HMM . IF, IF THE BOARD CHOSE. OKAY, MR. OVITZ. SO, UH, IS THERE A PARTICULAR REASON THAT YOU CAN'T ANGLE OFF THAT CORNER OF THE FENCE? NO SIR. IT JUST, UH, MY CLIENT WANTED TO CAPTURE AS MUCH OF THE BACKYARD AS THEY COULD BECAUSE THE BUILDING SET BACK ALMOST TWICE AS MUCH AS REQUIRED, USUALLY UNDER THE, OUR THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. DO YOU ENVISION THAT WOULD BE A PROBLEM TO, TO DO THAT, MAKE THAT CHANGE? NO, SIR. 'CAUSE THAT'S THE WAY IT IS TODAY. ANGLED? YES. YEAH. THANK YOU. WHAT ARE THE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YOU GONNA MAKE THE MOTION? YEAH, I CAN. YOU WANT ME TO? OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, SO, UM, I'M, I'M GONNA RECOMMEND WE APPROVE ALL OF THEM EXCEPT THE TRIANGLE. UM, SO I'M GONNA DO THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE LAST, UH, MS. BOARD ADMINISTRATOR, YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT IF I RECOMMEND THE FIRST THREE AND IF WE APPROVE THE FIRST THREE AND DENY THE, THE VISIBILITY THAT YOU CAN HAVE SUFFICIENT DIRECTION WITH THEM SUBMITTING PLANS BACK TO YOU. YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK TO US. OKAY. I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BO A 2 5 5 0 5 ON THE APPLICATION OF ROBERT BALDMAN. GRANT THE 15 FOOT VARIANCE OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT. BECAUSE OUR EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND TESTIMONY SHOWS THE PHYSICAL CARE CHARACTER OF THIS PROPERTY, SUCH THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISION OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE IS AMENDED WILL RESULT IN NECESSARY HARD, UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT. I FURTHER MOVE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION, BE OPPOSED TO FURTHER PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT VERSION, VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED SITE PLANS. THE CHAIRMAN. SO MOVES. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECONDED BY MS. DAVIS. I THINK, UH, YOU DID A GOOD JOB IN PRESENTING THIS AS A REASONABLE REQUEST, ESPECIALLY WITH THE DUAL FRONT YARD SETBACK ISSUE. SO, UM, QUESTIONS ON THE MOTION HEARING? NO QUESTIONS. THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE. THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO GRANT 15 FOOT FREE VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK MS. DAVIS. AYE. MR. DORN? AYE. MR. OVITZ? AYE. MR. N AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN? AYE. MOTION TO GRANT PASSES. FIVE TO ZERO FIRST MOTION PASSES. FIVE TO ZERO UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT MOTION I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BO 8 2 5 DASH FIVE FIVE ON APPLICATION ROBERT BALDWIN. GRANT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH FENCE ONLY S ROYAL LANE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT FOR FENCES CONTAINING THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED BIZARRE EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY TESTIMONY SHOWS THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. I FURTHER MOVE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BEING IMPOSED TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE OF THE LI INTENT OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE OF THE HEIGHT AND FENCE LOCATION REQUIREMENTS TO ILLUSTRATE THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED. I SO MOVE. SECOND, SECOND BY MS. DAVIS. UM, I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS BECAUSE IT IT DOES, IT'S A LONG ROYAL LANE. IT'S IN ESSENCE THE SIDE YARD. IT'S SIX LANE DIVIDED. IT'S NOT INTERFERING WITH WHAT'S THE STREET NAME? CAM KAM. UH, AND IT'S, I I THINK IT'S REASONABLE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. THAT'S MY DISCUSSION. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE. MR. KOVI? AYE. MS. DAVIS? AYE. MR. DORN? AYE. MR. N AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN? AYE. MOTION TO GRANT PASSES. FIVE TO ZERO. THAT WAS BO A 2 5 5 ZEROS AND A FIVE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. FIVE TO ZERO. NEXT ITEM IS, UH, I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BO A 2 5 5 0 AND A FIVE ON THE APPLICATION. ROBERT BALDWIN GRANT THE REQUEST FOR THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT MAINTAIN FENCE WITH PANELS HAVING LESS THAN 50% OPEN SURFACE AREA LOCATED LESS THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT LOT LINE AS THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE SURFACE AREA. OPENNESS REQUIREMENTS FOR FENCES IN THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT COP ARE VALUES FROM THE PROPERTY TESTIMONY SHOWS THAT THIS SPECIAL, EXCEPTIONAL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. I FURTHER MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITION BE IMPOSED. THE FURTHER PURPOSE AND CONTENT OF THE VALVE DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE WITH OPACITY AND FENCE LIMITATION REQUIREMENTS ILLUSTRATED IN THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF ALL SUBMITTED PLANS ARE REQUIRED. THE CHAIRMAN SO MOVES SECOND. IT'S BEEN SECOND AMENDMENT BY MS. DAVIS. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I THINK IT'S REASONABLE. I HATE THE IDEA OF SOLID FENCES, BUT HERE WE GO AGAIN. SIX LANE DIVIDED AND, UM, THAT DOESN'T MEAN EVERYONE GETS IT BUT [02:55:01] HERE WE GO AGAIN. DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION. CALL THE VOTE. MS. DAVIS. AYE. MR. HAITZ? AYE. MR. DORN? AYE. MR. N AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN? AYE. MOTION TO GRANT PASSES. 5 2 0. UH, THE MOTION BBOA 2 5 5 0 5 GRANTED THE REQUEST OF OPACITY LAST MOTION. I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL BO. A 2 5 5 5 ON APPLICATION ROBERT BALDMAN DENY THE SPECIAL REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT TO MAINTAIN ITEMS IN THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE ALLEY AND ROYAL LANE WITH WITHOUT PREJUDICE BECAUSE OF OUR, OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TEST SHOWS THAT GRANTING THE APPLICATION WOULD CONSTITUTE A TRAFFIC HAZARD. THE CHAIRMAN. SO MOVES SECOND DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. I WAS ORIGINALLY THINKING IT WAS A NON-ISSUE, BUT I APPRECIATE MS. DAVIS BRINGING UP PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE TRAFFIC. GO ON THE SIDEWALK GOING WEST TO EAST AND I THINK WE HAVE TO BE SENSITIVE TO THAT AND I'M GLAD THAT YOU REALIZE THAT AS WELL. DISCUSSION THE MOTION. CALL THE VOTE MR. NE AYE. MR. DORN? AYE. MR. OVITZ? AYE. MS. DAVIS? AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN? AYE. MOTION TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE PASSES FIVE TO ZERO IN BO A TWO FIVE DASH FIVE ZEROS OF FIVE. THE MO THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY FIVE TO ZERO DENIES THE REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE. THANK YOU MR. BALDWIN. YOU'LL GET LETTERS FROM OUR BOARD ATTORNEY. OKAY. WE'RE GONNA TAKE A BRIEF, UH, RECESS. UM, WE'LL DO, WE'LL DO, UH, 4:05 PM SO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AT 3 57 PM'S GONNA RECESS TILL 4:05 PM I KNOW GUYS, THE DAY GOES ON. ALRIGHT, SO, UH, WE'RE IN RECESS TILL 4:05 PM OKAY, WE'RE READY WHEN WE'RE READY GUYS. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PANEL A ON JUNE 17TH, 2025 AT 4:05 PM IS CALLED BACK TO ORDER. UH, WE HAVE THREE REMAINING CASES. THE NEXT CASE WE'RE GONNA TAKE UP IS BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 6 1 2 4 5 DASH 0 6 1. THIS IS AT 5 5 1 4 ROYAL LANE IS THE APPLICANT PRESIDENT, I THINK YOU GOTTA TURN IT BACK ON THERE. WE TURN ALL THESE MICS OFF. YEAH. GOOD AFTERNOON, JENNIFER. HI MOTO. GOOD AFTERNOON. OKAY. UM, MS. WILLIAMS WILL SWEAR IN, UH, HOW MANY SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE ON THIS CASE? WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS. TWO SPEAKERS. IS IT THE REP, THE A, THE REPRESENTATIVE AND THE OWNER? YES SIR. IS THAT WHAT WE HAVE? YES SIR. YES SIR. OKAY. ANYONE IN OPPOSITION? NO OPPOSITION. OKAY. ARE REGISTERED. ALRIGHT, WELL WHOEVER'S GONNA SPEAK IF YOU WOULD STAND PLEASE INCLUDING YOURSELF, YOU'RE STANDING READY? YES. GO AHEAD. SWEAR 'EM IN. OKAY. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO. OKAY, VERY GOOD. CONSIDER YOURSELF SWORN. YOU GO AHEAD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES PLUS OR MINUS TO PRESENT. I'M REALLY INTERESTED IN WHAT HAPPENED BETWEEN THE LAST HEARING AND TODAY'S. YES, SIR. JENNIFER. HI, MOTO 1 0 2 3 3 EAST NORTHWEST EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY IN DALLAS, 7 5 2 3 8. UM, THIS APPLICATION IS, UM, IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, IT'S, UH, 55 14 ROYAL LANE. UM, THIS IS A TWO-PART, UH, APPLICATION. WE'VE GOT A PORTION OF THE PROPOSED FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD AND A PORTION, UH, THE BULK OF IT IS IN THE SIDE YARD. UM, UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. I STAFFED AT A GREAT BRIEFING. UM, SO I THINK WE'RE KIND OF BREEZED THROUGH THAT. THE GREEN HIGHLIGHT ON OR CLOUD ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SITE PLAN. THAT IS THE EXTENT OF THE PROPOSED FENCING. IT IS NOT A LONG ROYAL LANE. THE EXISTING FENCING ALONG ROYAL LANE WILL REMAIN ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, A COLORED IN BLUE, THE FENCING THAT WILL REMAIN AND THE GREEN IS THE FENCING THAT IS PROPOSED. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, I MARKED UP THE ELEVATION TO SHOW YOU, UH, FROM ROYAL LANE AND THE PROPERTY LINE. THERE'S 35 FEET OF OPEN FRONT YARD BEFORE YOU GET TO THAT EXISTING, UM, STUCCO FENCE. UM, AND THEN THERE'S 65 FEET OF FRONT YARD FENCE PROPOSED 135 FEET OF THE SIDE YARD FENCE, AND THEN IT'S ANOTHER 150 FEET TO THE ALLEY. SO ANYTHING BEYOND THAT IS NOT CHANGING. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. YOU HAD ASKED ABOUT THE NOTCH IN THE FENCE AND THERE'S AN EXISTING TREE THAT WILL BE, UH, WORKED AROUND. UM, THE VEGETATION THAT IS IN THIS GOOGLE STREET VIEW PICTURE HAS UH, BEEN REMOVED. UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. [03:00:02] UM, THE DELAY FROM LAST MONTH WAS TO CORRECT THAT THE PORTION OF THE PROPOSED FENCE AT THE 100 FOOT BUILDING LINE WILL GET UP TO 10 FEET. AND THIS IS PROBABLY AN UNUSUAL CASE. YOU GUYS DON'T HEAR A LOT OF SIDE YARD FENCE CASES. UM, THIS, THE PURPOSE OF THIS FENCE IS FOR PRIVACY AND SCREENING. SO IT IS SOLID WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE BOTTOM PORTION, WHICH WILL BE WROUGHT IRON PANELS. AND THAT'LL BE FOR ALLOWING DRAINAGE. UH, NEXT SLIDE. UM, SO, AND THIS IS WHERE THE TOPOGRAPHY GOES DOWN ANOTHER SIX INCHES. SO THE PORTION IN THE SIDE YARD IS UP TO 10 FOOT SIX INCHES. UH, THE BOARD ON BOARD FENCE WILL BE EIGHT FEET AND THE GOAL IS TO HAVE A CONSISTENT LOOK, UM, AT THE TOP OF THE FENCE LINE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE LIVED HERE APPROXIMATELY 14 YEARS. IN THAT TIME, THEY'VE HAD THE PROTECTION OF, UH, FROM ROYAL LANE BY THE DENSE LANDSCAPING ON THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. UM, THIS GOT CLEARED OR AROUND FEBRUARY THIS YEAR WHEN THERE WAS A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP. UM, AND BECAUSE OF THE REMOVAL OF THAT DENSE LANDSCAPING, THAT IS WHY THEY ARE TAKING UPON THEMSELVES TO REQUEST FOR SOME SCREENING. THIS IS, YOU KNOW, ROYAL LANE IS A SIX FOOT, SIX LANE DIVIDED ROAD HERE. UM, AND WE'RE JUST TWO BLOCKS WEST OF THE TOLLWAY. THANK YOU. THIS IS THE GOOGLE STREET VIEW PICTURE OF WHAT THAT LOOKED LIKE BEFORE. SO YOU, YOU DEFINITELY CANNOT SEE THE HOMES. THIS IS, THAT'S A VERY EXPENSIVE CORNER LOT OVERGROWN. YES, I, I MEAN, YEAH. WHOA. OKAY. UM, AND UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. UM, SO THIS IS THE VIEW AFTER THAT VEGETATION GOT CLEARED FROM INSIDE THE PROPERTY. UM, SO ROYAL LANE IS VERY EXPOSED. UM, IT WAS VERY VISIBLE. AND IF WE CAN KIND OF GO THROUGH THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES AND KIND OF GO, UM, TOWARDS THE EAST. IF YOU WANNA JUST KEEP GOING A COUPLE OF SLIDES. RIGHT. AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE SOLID WALL. KEEP GOING. ONE MORE. OH, I'M SORRY. RIGHT. SO WE'RE ALSO EXPOSED TO THE NETHERLAND FRONTAGE AS WELL BECAUSE THIS SITE IS COMPLETELY CLEARED. UM, YOU CAN SEE THE MASONRY WALL THAT'S ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE SLIDE AND IT'LL REMAIN. UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. UM, I DID HEAR YOU ASK ABOUT, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH. I MAILED LETTERS TWICE ON THIS CASE, UM, PRIOR TO THE LAST HEARING. AND THEN I MAILED AGAIN AND SAID, HEY, I MADE A MISTAKE AND YOU'RE GONNA GET ANOTHER LETTER FROM THE CITY. I'M SORRY, THE REQUEST DIDN'T CHANGE. WE'RE JUST, UM, CORRECTING A TYPO. UM, THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE NETHERLAND LOT DID CONTACT ME, CONTACT ME. WE HAD A PHONE CALL AND I HAD UNDERSTOOD THAT WE HAD, UM, ADDRESSED ALL THEIR CONCERNS. THEY DID NOT HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THE HIDE, THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE DRAINAGE, UM, WHERE WE'RE PROVIDING THOSE ROD IRON, UH, PANELS. UM, WHEN I SENT THE SECOND LETTER, I DID GET A PHONE CALL FROM THE OWNER OF NUMBER FOUR ON YOUR NOTIFICATION LIST. UM, AND HE INDICATED HE WAS IN SUPPORT, BUT HE DID NOT PUT THAT IN WRITING. BUT HE DIDN'T, DIDN'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS. SO I TOLD HIM I WOULD LET YOU KNOW. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. I DID GET AN EMAIL FROM THEIR REPRESENTATIVE THAT SAID THAT THEY WILL GIVE US A LETTER OF SUPPORT AND THAT DIDN'T MATERIALIZE, BUT JUST WANTED TO SHOW WE DID HAVE MAKE CONTACT AND WE DID ANSWER THEIR CONCERNS. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THE NETHERLAND PROPERTY, I WON'T GO INTO THIS TOO MUCH, BUT IT'S BEEN VACANT SINCE 2015. AND THIS IS PART OF WHY THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE WANTING TO HAVE CONTROL OVER THEIR SCREENING AND PRIVACY. UM, WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THE, THE CORNER LOT WILL DEVELOP. UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THE, THAT PROPERTY OWNER PUT UP A TEMPORARY FENCE. IT'S MADE OF PLYWOOD. UM, SO THIS IS THE VIEW FROM THE, UM, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. LOOKING AT THE, THE TEMPORARY FENCE IF YOU TO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FROM THAT CORNER OF ROYAL LANE AND NETHERLAND. SO WE HAVE SOME TEMPORARY PROTECTION FROM THIS INFORMAL FENCE. UM, BUT WE WANT TO HAVE ASSURANCE THAT WHENEVER THIS, UH, PROPERTY GETS DEVELOPED, THAT WE, IN THAT MEANTIME WE HAVE SCREENING AND PRIVACY. UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. UH, WE DID HAVE THE ENGINEER'S LETTER, UM, THAT CONFIRMED [03:05:01] THAT THE RODAR PANELS WILL ALLOW THE DRAINAGE TO FUNCTION PROPERLY. UM, AND I THINK THAT MAY BE IT. UM, RIGHT, SO, UM, THE, THE PURPOSE OF OUR REQUEST IS FOR SCREENING AND PRIVACY. UM, AND MAKE SURE I ANSWERED ALL YOUR QUESTIONS. UM, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT SURROUNDING PROPERTIES SINCE WE'VE HAD THAT OPEN DIALOGUE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WITH THE NEIGHBOR AND WE HAVE ADDRESSED HIS CONCERNS. UM, UNFORTUNATELY THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO PUT THAT IN WRITING BECAUSE THAT PROPERTY IS FOR SALE, AS YOU NOTED IN THE, THE SLIDESHOW. UM, BUT WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL. UM, AND THE OWNERS ARE HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THEM. THANK YOU. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FOR YOU AND THEN WE'LL GO. YES, SIR. MR. HOP HAS HAD A QUESTION FIRST. GO AHEAD AND THEN I'LL HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. UM, I HAD A COUPLE ACTUALLY. UM, THE, THE, UM, THE WROUGHT IRON FENCE THAT'S THERE THAT YOU SHOWED THAT'S ALLOWING THE VISIBILITY INTO THE PROPERTY. THERE'S THE WROUGHT IRON FENCE, THE EXISTING FENCE EXISTING ONE. HOW HIGH IS THAT? FIVE FEET. FIVE? YES SIR. AND, UM, THE STUDY THAT WAS DONE ON THE DRAINAGE WAS THAT THE DRAINAGE, IS THAT THE DRAINAGE SOLELY FROM THIS PROPERTY? OUR CIVIL ENGINEER LOOKED AT THE, UM, THE DRAINAGE OF OUR PROPERTY AND THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY AND, UM, THERE WAS, UM, PHOTOS AND VIDEOS FROM THE HOMEOWNER THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE'VE HAD SOME SIGNIFICANT RAIN EVENTS OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS AND HE WAS ABLE TO OBSERVE THAT AND RESEARCH THE CITY'S RECORDS ON THE, THE CHANNEL THAT GOES ON THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. UM, AND WITH ALL OF THAT INFORMATION, HE CONFIRMED THAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY PROPOSED HORIZONTAL SLATS THAT IT WOULD BE, WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE DECORATIVE, BUT THE VERTICAL SLATS ARE WHAT IS GOING TO NOT CHANGE THE DRAINAGE PATTERN. SO THAT'S WHY FROM OUR INITIAL FIRST REQUEST WE REVISED TO HAVE THE BROAD IRON SLATS. SO THE DRAINAGE PATTERN, YOU'RE SAYING THE DRAINAGE PATTERN FROM THAT, FROM, FROM THE PROPERTY YOU'RE REPRESENTING WILL BE NO DIFFERENT THAN IT THAN IT IS TODAY? EXACTLY. YES SIR. THANK YOU. UH, TAKE US TO A COUPLE OF YOUR SLIDES. GO BACK TO YOUR SLIDE DECK PLEASE. I DIDN'T WANNA INTERRUPT YOUR PRESENTATION, I INTERRUPT ALL THE TIME, BUT TRY NOT TO, WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE, THE FRONT END PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD. I'LL CLICK BACK TO THE BEGINNING AND THEN I'LL PLEASE. THIS IS THE CURSE OF, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GIVE AN APPLICANT THEIR TIME, YOU DON'T WANNA INTERRUPT, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, CLICK THROUGH PLEASE. I DON'T KNOW WHO'S RUNNING THIS IS IT. OH, OKAY. GO AHEAD AND CLICK. ALRIGHT. SO, ALRIGHT, LET'S HOLD HERE FOR A SECOND. SO, SO THAT I UNDERSTAND THIS, UM, THE, ON THE LEFT PICTURE, THE GREEN IN THE CLOUD IS THAT PORTION THAT THIS IS, THIS IS ROUGHLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. IT'S 200 LINEAR FEET OF PROPOSED FENCING. BUT THE PORTION, BUT THE PORTION THAT YOU NEED, OUR YAY SO ON IS IN THAT FRONT YARD. WHAT THE A HUNDRED FOOT SETBACK? YES SIR. OKAY. WHICH IS NOT THE WHOLE CIRCLE CORRECT. IT'S JUST A PORTION OF THE RIGHT. THAT'S CORRECT. SO 65 FEET OF OUR PROPOSED FENCE IS IN THAT FRONT YARD SETBACK. OKAY. 'CAUSE YOUR BUILDING LINE IS A HUNDRED FEET. YES SIR. OKAY, SO YOU CAN DO BY RIGHT. BE BE BELOW THAT. UP FRONT OF THAT YOU NEED US. OKAY, SO THAT'S ONE BEHIND THAT. YOU'RE ASKING FOR 10 FEET, CORRECT. 10 FOOT SIX. 10 FOOT SIX. AND THE CODE ALLOWS FOR NINE FEET. CODE ALLOWS FOR NINE. SO BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING ABOVE NINE TO 10. SIX, SIX REQUIRING US. YES SIR. I'M TRYING TO ALWAYS DIFFERENTIATE WHAT YOU CAN DO BY RIGHT VERSUS BY REQUEST. OKAY. SO, ALRIGHT, GO AHEAD AND CLICK, CLICK. ALRIGHT. THIS IS THIS NOOK IN THE FRONT? YES. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THROUGH THE WINDOW THAT THERE'S, OR MAYBE I COULD SEE ON MY COMPUTER THAT THERE'S, UM, CURRENTLY WROUGHT IRON FENCING THAT GOES AROUND THE TREE. YES. AND THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT OUR SITE PLAN SHOWS THAT THE NEW FENCE WILL GO AROUND THE TREE. OKAY. JUST FOR ITS PROTECTION. OKAY. GO AHEAD AND CLICK, CLICK. OH, BACK, BACK. ONE CLICK. I'M SORRY. SO ARE YOU PUTTING, WHAT ARE YOU, ARE YOU PUT, I'M GOING TOO DEEP INTO THIS, BUT WHAT'S HOLDING THE ROD IRON UNDERNEATH? IS IT CONCRETE OR SOMETHING? HOW DO YOU KNOW IT'S NOT GONNA SINK? UM, ARE SET, THE, THE POSTS ARE SET AND CONCRETE. OKAY. SO [03:10:01] YES, WE, I'M NOT INTO CONSTRUCTION. I'M JUST EN ENVISIONING SINCE YOU'RE CREATING THIS, 'CAUSE THIS TOPOGRAPHY I GUESS OF THE LAND. YES. I JUST WONDER WHETHER IT'S GONNA SINK FURTHER OR WHATEVER. OKAY. GO AHEAD AND CLICK PLEASE. I DON'T, I DON'T BELIEVE THEY'VE HAD ANY ISSUES WITH THAT CURRENTLY. UM, OKAY. THIS IS A PRETTY ELABORATE FENCE CLICK. ALRIGHT. HMM. THIS IS BEFORE. YES. SO PART OF MY HESITATION IS RESPECTING YOUR ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER AND HOW DO WE, I GUESS IT'S IN THE UNKNOWN IF WE GRANT THIS BIG FENCE ALONG YOUR PROPERTY LINE THAT'S IN THAT FRONT BUILDING SETBACK. IS THAT A, IS THAT UNDUE OBSTRUCTION OF YOUR, THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER NEXT DOOR TO YOU? HENCE THE WHOLE ISSUE OF THE BUILDING SETBACK NOW IT'S A BIG VACANT LOT. GO AHEAD AND CLICK. YOU SEE WHAT I'M, OKAY. THAT'S BEFORE CLICK. RIGHT? SO THEY USED TO HAVE THE SAME, SO THERE, SEE HOW THIS IS OPEN? IT'S VERY OPEN. I I DIDN'T MAKE THE POLICY, BUT I PRESUME THE POLICY CITY COUNCIL IS YOU WANT OPENNESS IN THAT FRONT YARD? YES SIR. AND WE'RE ABOUT TO CLOSE IT. TELL US WHY. WELL, IT IS ON THE SIDE, IT'S ONLY ON THAT EASTERN PROPERTY LINE THAT WE'RE MAKING THIS REQUEST. THE, THE, THE EXISTING FENCE ALONG ROYAL LANE WILL REMAIN, YOU KNOW, I I UNDERSTAND THAT. YES. WHICH IS PARALLEL TORO ROYAL. YES, SIR. UM, AND WE'RE ACTUALLY, OUR FENCE IS 35 FEET BACK. I THINK YOU SAW IN THE SITE VIDEO THAT ALL THE OTHER NEIGHBORS HAVE BUILT THEIR FENCES UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE OR, SO THE 30, YOU'RE 35 FEET BACK AT THE FRONT OR LONG ROYAL? THE, THE STUCCO, THE CONCRETE, THE, THE STUCCO WALL THAT YOU SEE IN THIS PICTURE? YES SIR. OKAY, SHOW ME THAT. WHICH SLIDE WILL SHOW ME THAT 35 FEET BACK? UM, THERE WAS THE ONE WITH THE RED, THE EL THE ELEVATION. UH, MAYBE GO BACK LIKE THREE OR FOUR. YEAH. THIS ONE NO, THAT NO NOTHING YET SHOWS ME THE, THE EXISTING FENCE IN RELATION TO ROYAL LANE. SO THE, WAIT A MINUTE. SO HOW DOES THIS WHERE I, I I'M WHERE TAKE, WHERE AM I? YES, THAT'S ROYAL LANE RIGHT THERE WHERE YOUR CURSOR IS KAMIKA. YES. AND THEN FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE EXISTING FENCE IS 35 FEET. SO IF I'M THE PROPERTY OWNER, WHETHER IT'S CURRENT OR IN THE FUTURE ADJACENT TO YOU ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF YOU, THE FIRST 35 FEET IS, IS GONNA REMAIN OPEN. YES SIR. AND WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY WILL PROPOSE THEIR FENCE AND WELL, I'M, I AND THEY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TWICE. YES SIR. AND WE DON'T HEAR ANYTHING. WELL, WE HAD CONVERSATIONS. YES SIR. BUT YOU KNOW THE RULES HERE, JUST LIKE YOU'VE HEARD OTHER CASES. YES SIR. WE BELIEVE IT WHEN WE SEE IT. SO, AND WE'RE NOT SAYING YOU'RE NOT TELLING THE TRUTH, BUT IN ORDER TO BE CONSISTENT, WE NEED SOMETHING IN WRITING. OKAY. SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS 35 FEET OF OPENNESS WILL REMAIN. IT'S THAT NEXT 65 FEET THAT WILL NOW GET A WALL. THAT'S RIGHT. AND IT'S, IT, IT'LL, IT'LL HAVE A, A WOOD SCREENING FENCE. YES SIR. YEAH, THAT'S A NICE WAY OF PUTTING IT. ALRIGHT, GO AHEAD AND CLICK FORWARD. KEEP GOING. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE A QUESTION THERE? GO BACK A CLICK FROM MR. HAKO. SO HOW TALL IS THAT WALL? I BELIEVE THE FIVE FOOT ROD IRON THAT YOU SEE ON THE FAR LEFT IS FIVE FEET. UM, SO I WOULD GUESS THAT THAT'S SIX, SIX AND A HALF FOR THE COLUMNS. OKAY. SO THAT, THAT'S GONNA REMAIN AS IS. YES, SIR. AND UM, THE PREVIOUS PLANNER DID FIND THE BOARD HISTORY ON THAT, UH, PARTICULAR FENCE. SO WHERE IS THE 10 FOOT SECTION OF THE FENCE? THERE'S A 10 FOOT AND THERE'S A 10 AND A HALF FOOT. RIGHT. SO WHERE'S THE 10 FOOT FROM THIS STUCCO WALL? UM, IT GOES BACK, I BELIEVE EIGHT FEET. THAT'LL BE A SIX FOOT PANEL. AND THEN AT THAT POINT IT'LL GO UP TO EIGHT FEET AND THEN THE, THE GRADE STARTS TO TAPER AND THAT'S WHERE THE PERPENDICULAR TO ROYAL PERPENDICULAR. I SEE. AND THAT'S WHERE THE, THE GRADE COMES IN AND THOSE ROD IRON PANELS ARE NEEDED TO ALLOW FOR THE DRAINAGE AND THAT'S WHY IT GOES FROM 10 FEET TO 10 AND A HALF FEET. YES SIR. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY, MS. DAVIS. NANCY. ALRIGHT. AGAIN, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THERE IS PERPENDICULAR FROM ROYAL. YES SIR. WHEREAS THIS WE SEE IS PARALLEL TO ROYAL. YES SIR. ALRIGHT, CLICK FORWARD, MS. FORD ADMINISTRATOR. I'LL SEE WHAT'S NEXT. CLICK, CLICK. HMM. SO THERE'S 35 FEET OF UNOBSTRUCTED VIEW ON OUR PROPERTY. YES SIR. YEAH. AND THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS TOO? YEAH. YES. AND, AND DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE SETBACK IS FOR THAT PROPERTY NEXT TO YOU? IS IT A HUNDRED FEET ALSO? YES. THE [03:15:01] BUILDING LINE OF A HUNDRED FEET TWICE. I MEAN BUILDING LINE. YES SIR. NOW THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TWO FRONT YARDS 'CAUSE OF THE SIDE, BUT THE NETHERLAND WOULD BE TREATED AS A SIDE YARD. THERE'S NOT CONTINUITY ON THAT FRONTAGE. OH, THE NETHERLAND WOULD BE OKAY. YES SIR. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU FOR THAT ANSWER. OKAY. I AM JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE LOOK BEYOND THE CURRENT REQUEST AND HOW IT AFFECTS THAT THIS, THIS PROPERTY. I REALLY WISH WE HEARD SOMETHING FROM THAT. THIS PROPERTY OWNER. I, I THINK THAT SOLID FENCING ON INTERIOR LINES ARE VERY COMMON AND SO I THINK THEY'RE GETTING THE BENEFIT OF US INSTALLING THAT FIRST. OF COURSE YOU'RE SAYING THAT I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THEM. IS IT? YES SIR. IS IT MR. MS. LU OR LEE? L-L-U-L-I IS WHAT SHOWS IS THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT WAS THE PREVIOUS OWNER. OH, IT'S OKAY. SO THE, OKAY. UM, THIS PROPERTY CHANGED HANDS IN JANUARY. OKAY. AND THAT'S AGAINST THAT THE HEARING HAPPENED. WE AGAINST THE CITY SYSTEM GOES AGAINST THE LAST DEC AD LISTING. RIGHT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. CLICK FORWARD PLEASE. THAT'S BEFORE MM-HMM . MM-HMM . I SEE. I'M JUST HESITANT ABOUT CREATING A SOLID WALL IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING LINE, BUT KEEP GOING, KEEP GOING. I I GET THIS. KEEP GOING, KEEP GOING. THERE WAS ANOTHER PICTURE YOU SHOWED IN THERE WITH A TEMPORARY FENCE. THAT'S THE NEXT SLIDE. IS THAT OKAY? UM, THAT WENT UP. THAT'S, THAT'S THE BACK. RIGHT. SO THIS IS FROM THE, THIS IS FROM THE STREET HERE. OH, OKAY. THERE. YES SIR. WE DIDN'T SEE THIS LAST TIME. CORRECT. IT HAPPENED AFTER OUR LAST HEARING. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO HOLD, I DIDN'T THINK WE SAW THIS LAST TIME. CORRECT. SO YOU'RE SAYING RIGHT NOW THERE'S THIS TEMPORARY FENCE UP. YES, SIR. THAT IMPLIES CONSTRUCTION, UH, IMPLIES THERE'S NO PERMIT RECORDS FROM WHAT I CAN TELL. BECAUSE YOU WOULD'VE BEEN, THEY WOULD'VE COME HERE FIRST. I TOOK, I TOOK THIS , I TOOK THIS PHOTO LAST TUESDAY. WOW. OKAY. MR. KOVI, THIS IS WHERE I WAS HEADED TO. DO WE, DO WE KNOW, DO YOU KNOW HOW TALL THIS IS? UM, EIGHT, EIGHT FEET. AT LEAST EIGHT FEET. AND IT'S PLYWOOD AND IT'S PAINTED. OH, IT'S A, IT'S NOT A TARP, IT'S A FENCE. FENCE. IT'S PLYWOOD. AND HOW COULD THEY INSTALL IT? OR IS IT CONS CONSIDERED TEMPORARY WITHOUT BENEFIT OF PERMIT? I'M SORRY. WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF PERMIT. THEY BUILT THIS WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A PERMIT. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. YES SIR. WHAT WOULDN'T IT REQUIRE A PERMIT? IT WOULD'VE REQUIRED BOARD APPROVAL FIRST BECAUSE THIS IS WITHIN THE FIRST A HUNDRED FEET OF THE PROPERTY AND IN THE, OKAY. I THOUGHT THIS WAS A TARP AND IT WAS A CONSTRUCTION FENCE. NO SIR. I'M SORRY. YOU JUST RATTED OUT. YOUR NEIGHBOR, THEY'RE PROVIDING SOME TEMPORARY SCREENING FOR US AND WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR IS OUR SCREENING BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN WITH THEIR PROPERTY. BUT WOULDN'T THEY BE CITED FOR AN ILLEGAL FENCE? THEY COULD, YES SIR. OKAY. I THOUGHT IT WAS A TARP. MS. DAVIS, I I JUST WANNA CONFIRM THIS BLACK PLYWOOD FENCE IS PERMANENT. NO, SIR. UH, NO MA'AM. IT'S, IT'S UM, I BELIEVE THEY PUT IT TO DEMONSTRATE WHAT A FENCE WOULD LOOK LIKE 'CAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO SELL THE PROPERTY, BUT THERE'S NO WAY WE TO PROVE THIS, THIS PROPERTY, THIS IS GOD AWFUL, NOT RECOMMENDED. YES, I AGREE. OKAY. YES. WOW. SO WE, WE WANNA HAVE CONTROL OVER OUR SCREENING AND OUR PRIVACY AND WANT THAT RESPONSIBILITY RATHER THAN RELYING ON THE NEIGHBOR TO PROVIDE SCREENING OR ANOTHER WALL TO BE DETERMINED IN THE FUTURE. WELL, THERE'S WAY TO GET SCREENING AND THEY COULD DO THIS IF THEY DID IT IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, THEY'D NEED TO GET A A, A, UM, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. OKAY. I THOUGHT, THOUGHT IT WAS TEMPORARY, BUT IT'S CLEARLY DOESN'T LOOK TEMPORARY NOW THAT YOU'RE SAYING THIS TEMPORARY. YEAH. WELL IT'S TEMPORARY UNTIL SOMEONE CALLS CODE COMPLIANCE. YES. YES. AND WE, WE HAD NO, NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. WE DID NOT ASK FOR THIS. I, YEAH, I, THIS IS VERY UNUSUAL. I WOULDN'T GET YOUR FINGERPRINTS ON THAT. YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. CLICK FORWARD. AND I THINK THAT'S IT OF MY QUESTIONS. I WANTED TO SEE THIS AGAIN AND I WANTED TO SEE THE ADJACENCY OF THE FENCE LINE FOR THAT FORWARD VIEW. ALRIGHT. WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE FOR THE APPLICANT, MS. DAVIS TO BE COMPLIANT? YOU, YOU WANT, YOU BASICALLY WANT, IS IT 10 FEET, SIX INCHES ON THE SIDE? YES. SO TO BE COMPLIANT, WHAT WOULD THAT HEIGHT NEED TO BE? UM, IF WE WANTED TO GET A FENCE PERMIT TODAY, WE WOULD BE ALLOWED A NINE FOOT FENCE IN A SIDE YARD. NINE FEET. OKAY. YES. SO THE ADDITIONAL, THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WE BELIEVE IS WARRANTED BECAUSE OF OUR EXPOSURE TO ROYAL LANE. AND IT'S A VERY, VERY BUSY STREET. BUT, BUT THAT FENCE IS ON THE SIDE. IT'S NOT IN FRONT OF ROYAL LANE, CORRECT. ROYAL [03:20:01] LANE? CORRECT. SOMEONE'S MICRO, SOMEONE'S MICROPHONE. RIGHT. SO OUR PROPOSED FENCING IS ONLY ON THAT OUR EASTERN PROPERTY LINE. OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. IS SOMEONE'S OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO YOU'RE ASKING FROM NINE TO 10, 10 FEET, SIX INCHES ON THE SIDE. OKAY. YES. ALL RIGHT. GOSH, I WISH I WOULD'VE HEARD, WE COULD HEAR FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT YOUR FENCE IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO. I KNOW YOU SAID YOU TALKED TO HIM, BUT, OKAY. OKAY. WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DO WE HAVE FOR THE APPLICANT AND HAVE YOU HAD ANY OTHER OPPOSITION FROM ANYONE ELSE? NO, I ONLY RECEIVED THE ONE PHONE CALL, UM, FROM THE NEIGHBOR AFTER THE TEMPORARY FENCE CAME UP AND THEY WERE IN SUPPORT. OUR CRITERIA IS SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. OKAY. UH, DID THE HOMEOWNER WANNA SPEAK AS WELL? DID YOU WANNA YEAH. HI, THANKS FOR HEARING US TODAY. I'M MARIE HUGHES. UM, I NEED YOU TO GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. MARIE HUGHES. 55 14 ROYAL LANE. OKAY. UM, THE ONLY THING THAT I WANTED TO OFFER TO YOUR COMMENT OF WISHING THAT THE OWNER WAS HERE IS THE TEMPORARY FENCE THAT THEY HAVE PUT UP IS HIGHER THAN WHAT WE'RE EVEN PROPOSING RIGHT NOW. AND IT'S GOING ALONG THE SIDE OF OUR HOUSE ALONG ROYAL. SO WONDERING WHAT THEY WOULD THINK ABOUT A HIGHER FENCE? UH, IT WOULD IMPLY THE FACT THEY BUILT A HIGHER FENCE THAN WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING WOULD SAY THAT THEY MAY BE OKAY WITH IT. UM, BUT THEY REACHED OUT TO ME AFTER WE HAD OUR LAST HEARING SCHEDULED AND ASKED IF OUR FENCE GOT APPROVED AND NOTED. WHEN I TOLD THEM IT WAS DELAYED, THEY SAID, OH, THAT'S TOO BAD. WE'RE GONNA START CONSTRUCTING A FENCE NEXT DOOR. AND THEY WERE HOPING TO USE OUR FENCE TO FINISH THAT LINE FOR THE REAL ESTATE. SO NOW IT'S EXPOSED ON OUR SIDE WITH THE NEW FENCE ALONG ROYAL AND NETHERLAND AND THEY BUILT THE PORTION, THE PORTION OF THEIR FENCE THAT BORDERS OUR PROPERTY. THEY'VE ALSO BUILT A SMALL PORTION ALONG OUR FRONT YARD THAT IS VISIBLE FROM OUR HOUSE. WE JUST WANT OUR PRIVACY BACK. YES. AGAIN, OUR CRITERIA IS SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, SECURITY, PRIVACY, ALL THOSE THINGS ARE DESIRES BUT NOT IN THE CODE. I SEE. SO I I RESPECT YOUR DESIRE. I KEEP REPEATING THAT TO TELL OURSELVES THAT'S THE CRITERIA THAT WE LOOK AGAINST. OKAY. UM, THE NEIGHBOR'S FENCE IS OUTRAGEOUS, BUT IT'S THAT'S A BUT THERE'S JUST BEEN YEAH. STRANGELY ENOUGH, IT'S BECOMES IN YOUR FAVOR. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, IT DOES IN A REVERSE WAY, BUT WE JUST DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN NEXT. RIGHT. FOR ONE DAY I WAKE UP AND THE VEGETATION'S CLEARED THE NEXT DAY. WELL, I SAID BEFORE THAT IT WAS A LARGE CORNER EXPENSIVE OVERGROWN LOT AND NOW IT'S FENCED. YEAH. MR. OVITZ. SO I BELIEVE I HEARD YOU JUST SAY THAT THE, THAT FENCE, THE MONSTROSITY WAS AS TALL AS THE FENCE YOU'RE LOOKING TO BUILD. IT'S TALLER. TALLER, BUT MM-HMM . I THOUGHT MS. HARIMOTO SAID IT WAS EIGHT FOOT AND YOU'RE ASKING FOR 10. 10. 10 TO 10. WE'RE ASKING, IT DOESN'T CONTINUE ON THE PART WHERE OUR YARD DIPS, THE ONLY 10 FOOT PORTION IS TO KEEP THE EIGHT FEET CONSISTENT SO WE DON'T HAVE A STAIR STEP. UM, SO THERE'S A PORTION BETWEEN OUR LOTS WHERE THE TOPOGRAPHY DIPS, SO WE'RE JUST KEEPING IT EIGHT FEET STRAIGHT ACROSS. BUT IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THAT, WE HAVE TO COMPENSATE FOR WHERE THE LAND DIPS DOWN. WELL, IT, IT'S NOT EIGHT FEET, IT'S 10 FEET OR 10 AND A HALF FEET. RIGHT. THEIR FENCE DOES NOT GO ALL THE WAY DOWN THERE. SO WHERE THEY PUT UP THE EIGHT FEET ALONGSIDE OF THE FRONT OF OUR FENCE UP TO, SO IT'S PAST, I THINK WE SAID THAT OUR MASONRY WALL IS 35 OR 36 FEET BACK FROM ROYAL. SO THEIR UH, TEMPORARY FENCE GOES FROM ROYAL JUST AT THE EDGE OF THE SIDEWALK, ABOUT PROBABLY 20 FEET INTO OUR FENCE PAST THAT, THE MASONRY WALL. BUT THE DIP DOWN WHERE IT'S GONNA HIT THE TEN SIX HAPPENS FURTHER BACK. SO I'M, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED 'CAUSE YOU, YOU SAY IT'S EIGHT ARE YOU ARE, DOES THE, DOES THE WROUGHT IRON PART NOT COUNT IN SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM OR YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE THAT YOU'RE, 'CAUSE YOU'RE ACTUALLY, I I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BY THAT. WELL, [03:25:01] IF, IF WE HAD A CLOSER PICTURE OF, AND WE DIDN'T INTEND FOR IT TO DEBATE WHAT FENCE THEY BUILT. IT'S NOT THE NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT YOUR FENCE. YEAH, THEY'RE EIGHT FEET. THEY'RE, THEY HAVE FOUR FOOT PLYWOOD, TWO ON TOP OF EACH OTHER, SO IT MAKES IT EIGHT FEET. IT'S NOT TOUCHING THE GROUND. SO IT'S UP A LITTLE BIT HIGHER. SO IT'S COMING UP ABOVE OUR EIGHT FOOT FENCE. UM, IF I CAN JUST, YEAH. ADD REALLY QUICKLY. UM, THE HEIGHT OF OUR FENCE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING, WE HAVE TO IDENTIFY THE TALLEST PORTION OF OUR FENCE FOR THE NOTIFICATION PURPOSES. SO WHERE IT BEGINS, IT WILL BE AN EIGHT FOOT SECTION AND THEN WHEN IT, THE LAND TAPERS, THAT'S WHERE THE WR IRON COMES IN TO HELP US WITH THE DRAINAGE. I KNOW THIS IS A COMPLICATED ONE . SO, SO WHERE I HAVEN'T HEARD THAT ANY PART OF IT IS EIGHT FEET. SO WHERE IS IT, WHERE IS THE EIGHT FOOT PORTION OF IT? THE WOOD, THE BOARD ON BOARD WOOD FENCE, THAT PORTION WILL BE EIGHT FEET. UM, AND THEN WE GET THAT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT UNDERNEATH IT FROM THE WR IRON. OKAY. SO, SO IT'S YOUR, IT'S YOUR ASSERTION THAT THAT EXTRA FOOT AND A HALF PROVIDES SOME MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE IN YOUR PRIVACY LEVEL. IT PROVIDES, IT PROVIDES A CONSISTENT HEIGHT OF THE WOOD FENCE. SO WE'RE KIND OF COMPENSATING FOR THE TOPOGRAPHY WITH THE WROUGHT IRON PANELS. OKAY. UH, DID YOU FINISH WHAT YOU WANTED TO SPEAK TO US ON? OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT MS. DAVIS? I JUST WANNA CONFIRM A COUPLE OF THINGS. SO THE WOOD PORTION OF THE FENCE IS EIGHT FEET AND THEN AT TIMES IT GOES AN ADDITIONAL TWO FEET WITH A WROUGHT IRON WHEN THE SLOPE DIPS? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND YOU WOULD BE COMPLIANT IF YOU BUILT A NINE FOOT FENCE BUT YOU'RE ASKING FOR 10 AND A HALF FEET BECAUSE YOU WANNA TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHEREVER IT DIPS. RIGHT. AND WE WANT THE PORTION THAT IS IN THE FRONT YARD TO BE ADEQUATELY, UH, TALL ENOUGH TO PROVIDE SCREENING. YES. UNDER. OKAY, I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. DID WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS OR NO, THIS IS, THEY'RE IT RIGHT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MM-HMM . THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. ALL RIGHT. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JUST WE'VE BEEN SWITCHING AROUND SO MUCH, I WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE RIGHT ONE. YEAH. OKAY. I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 6 1 ON APPLICATION OF JENNIFER HI MOTO GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A 10 FOOT HIGH FENCE ANY REQUIRED FRONT YARD IS 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 IN THE MATTER BDA 2 4 5 0 6 1. MS. DAVIS HAS MOVED TO GRANT THE REQUEST FOR A 10 FOOT, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION OF THE FRONT YARD FENCE HEIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MR. DORN. DISCUSSION IN THE MOTION. MS. DAVIS, I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE IT WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE YOUR PRIVACY THERE, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE REALLY, UM, UNSIGHTLY FENCED THAT'S TEMPORARILY HOPEFULLY CONSTRUCTED AND YOU JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GONNA COME UP. SO I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT. ROYAL LANE IS A VERY BUSY THOROUGHFARE. UM, YOU DIDN'T HAVE, I DON'T THINK YOU HAD ANY OPPOSITION. IF NOT, YEAH. SO, UM, THERE'S REALLY NO EVIDENCE THAT SHOWS THAT THIS IS GOING TO ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, WHICH IS WHY I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. I WOULD CONCUR WITH MS. DAVIS AND AS I SAID, THE, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. AS MUCH AS I WANT TO HEAR FROM THEM BY LOOKING AT THE PICTURE I JUST HEARD FROM THEM. YEAH. AND IT KIND OF LEAVES ME, LIKE, WHY NOW I'M NOT GONNA CALL 9 1 1 OR THREE ONE ONE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT THEY'LL END UP GETTING CITED. THAT'S TOO MUCH OF A THUMB IN THE AIR. SO, BUT ANYWAY, I CONCUR WITH YOUR, I, I CONCUR WITH YOUR RATIONALIZATION AND I'M NOT CALLING 3 1 1. DID I SAY THAT? ? I'M NOT CALLING. OKAY. YOU NOT ANONYMOUSLY . YOU'RE RIGHT. ALRIGHT. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO APPROVE, TO GRANT. HEARING NONE. THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE. [03:30:01] MR. DORN. AYE. MS. DAVIS? AYE. MR. OVITZ? AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN, AYE. MOTION TO GRANT PASSES. FOUR TO ZERO. SECOND. SECOND MOTION. MS. DAVIS, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 6 1 ON APPLICATION OF JENNIFER HI MOTO GRANT, THE REQUEST OF THIS APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT AND OR MAINTAIN A 10 FOOT SIX INCH HIGH FENCE AND YOUR REQUIRED SIDE YARD IS 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 IN THE MATTER OF BDA 2 4 5 0 6 1. MS. DAVIS HAS MOVED TO GRANT THE REQUEST FOR A 10 FOOT SIX FOOT HIGH FENCE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN THE REAR SIDE YARD. UM, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECONDED BY MR. DORN DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION. MS. DAVIS? I HAVE NO DISCUSSION BECAUSE I'VE USING THE SAME RATIONALE FOR THIS MOTION AS I DID FOR THE PREVIOUS ONE. ANY DISCUSSION MR. DORN? OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION I'LL SUPPORT THIS AS WELL. UM, ENOUGH SAID I COULD MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THE NEIGHBORS. AGAIN, REPEAT BUT . OKAY. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. HEARING NONE, MS. BOARD SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. MR. DORN. AYE. MS. DAVIS? AYE. MR. HAITZ? AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN? AYE. MOTION TO GRANT PASSES FOUR TO ZERO IN THE MATTER BDA 2 4 5 0 6 1. THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AND AFFORD A ZERO VOTE. GRANTS YOUR REQUEST FOR A SIDE YARD SETBACK, UH, SPECIAL EXCEPTION, 10 FOOT SIX. YOU'LL GET A LETTER FROM OUR BOARD ADMINISTRATOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. NEXT CASE IS BDA 2 4 5 DASH 0 4 9 2 4 5 0 4 9 IS THE APPLICANT HERE. GOOD AFTERNOON MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? GOOD. A GOOD AFTERNOON SIR. UM, UM, IF YOU HOLD ON A SECOND, UM, DO WE HAVE, LET ME GET ORGANIZED HERE. WHAT SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE? MS. WILLIAMS, UM, THE REPRESENTATIVE AND THE ENGINEER. OKAY. SO TWO IN, IN FAVOR. ANY OPPOSITION? NO OPPOSITION. OKAY. TWO IN FAVOR. I DO HAVE, UM, YEP, PASS IT OUT. OKAY. OKAY. ONE SECOND. WE'LL DO 2 4 5 0 4 9. THANK YOU. I AM PASSING OUT TO THE BOARD, UM, INFORMATION THAT WAS PASSED OUT THIS MORNING AS WELL FOR OH FOUR NINE. OKAY. IF YOU WOULD GO AHEAD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND SWEAR YOU IN. OKAY. UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. MY NAME IS JONATHAN VINCENT, 2323 ROSS AVENUE. AND, UM, HAPPY TO BE SWORN IN AND THEN, UM, HAVE, UH, SOMETHING BRIEFLY I'D LIKE TO IMPART TO THE BOARD WITH YOUR INTELLIGENCE. I'M SORRY, AGAIN, I JUST, AFTER I GET SWORN IN, I WANNA UH, JUST ASK A QUESTION BASICALLY OF THE COURT. OKAY. YOU'RE SURE YOU'RE QUICK. OKAY. ONE SECOND. GO AHEAD AND SWEAR HIM IN. MARY LLOYD, WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE SWORN IN? OKAY. IF HE'S GONNA SPEAK. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? I DO. I DO. OKAY. YOUR QUESTION, SIR, MY QUESTION IS THIS, MR. CHAIR, UM, IT SEEMS THAT MR. NARY, UM, HAD TO LEAVE, HE DID THE BUILDING, SO I OF COURSE RECOGNIZE THAT YOU STILL HAVE A QUORUM. WE DO. HOWEVER, WE UM, AS WE ALL KNOW, IT TAKES FOUR VOTES OUTTA FIVE TO, UM, APPROVE ANYTHING. UM, JUST LIKE THE LAST CASE GOT APPROVED, JUST LIKE EVER SINCE I'VE BEEN DOING THIS. YES, SIR. UM, SO GIVEN THE NATURE OF THIS, THE COMPLEXITY OF THIS, THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS IN BRIEFING WHICH WE THINK WE CAN ANSWER AND I CAN ANSWER THOSE MORE FORMALLY. I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING IS FOR THE, UH, IF THE BOARD WOULD INDULGE US, AND WE COULD GIVE YOU SOME TIME BACK TODAY IF YOU WOULD SEE FIT TO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU HOLD US OVER TILL YOUR NEXT MEETING IN JULY SO THAT WE WOULD HAVE A FULL PANEL PRESENT AT THAT TIME AND THAT WOULD APPLY TO CASE 0 5 0 AS WELL. UM, BY RULE, UM, BY RULE WE CAN HEAR THE CASE. UH, THERE'S NOTHING IN THE RULES THAT SAYS THAT WE GIVE THAT OPTION TO THE APPLICANT OR OPPOSITION OR OTHERWISE, UM, BUT IT'S A FAIR REQUEST. UM, WE DO HAVE A JULY HEARING SCHEDULED, [03:35:01] UM, AND IF WE DID THAT, I WOULD HAVE YOU GO FIRST, SO MAKE SURE WE GET IT DONE. THAT WOULD BE VERY MUCH APPRECIATED. MR. CHAIR, I'M, I'M SURE WE ARE, WE'RE ALL ANXIOUS TO ULTIMATELY THESE AS, AS IS THE CHAIRMAN. YES, SIR. UM, SO WHAT IS THE, WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE PANEL? I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULD ANSWER THAT. YES, SAY THAT ON THE RECORD PLEASE. I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THE APPLICANT WOULD REQUEST THAT. YES. SO I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. OKAY. MR. HOP, DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT , MR. DORN? DO NOT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO, UM, THAT BEING THE CASE, MR. MR. DORN, YOU WANNA READ THE HOLDOVER IN THE RECORD? WHAT'S OUR JULY, WHAT'S OUR JULY DATE? OKAY, ONE SECOND. YES, MR. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE COMMENT YES, PLEASE. THAT I'M, I'M, I'M, THIS IS ALMOST LIKE FORUM SHOPPING, IS IT NOT? NO. HOW WOULD IT BE? FORUM SHOPPING? UM, WE HAVE A LEGITIMATE PANEL HERE. WE DO. AND DULY CONSTITUTED. SO, UM, YOU DON'T ALWAYS GET WHAT YOU PREFER, DO YOU? WELL, I MEAN, UH, NO, NO, WE, WE WILL IN A SECOND. UM, I I'M GONNA RESPOND TO THE, THE FORUM SHOPPING QUESTION. OUR RULES ARE SET UP AND RECENTLY APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AS IT RELATES TO HOW WE HANDLE CASES. UM, AND I'M GONNA SAY THIS FOR EVERYONE'S BENEFIT, UH, THE BOARD SECRETARY, MS. WILLIAMS, RANDOMLY AND INDEPENDENTLY ASSIGNS CASES AS THEY COME IN. THAT MEANS NOT THE BOARD ATTORNEY, NOT THE BOARD ADMINISTRATOR, NOT THE CHAIRMAN, SHE RANDOMLY INDEPENDENT ASSIGNS CASES. OUR SECOND RULE SAYS A CASE THAT'S ASSIGNED OF ANY HISTORY WHATSOEVER IN THE PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS COMES BACK TO THAT SAME PANEL. ONCE THE BOARD SECRETARY PUBLICLY RELEASES THAT ASSIGNMENT, IT'S DONE. NOW, I SUPPOSE SHE COULD CHANGE IT IF THERE WAS GOOD REASON AS LONG AS SHE COULD JUSTIFY THAT. BUT THAT'S WHAT PREVENTS THE FORM SHOPPING IS THAT RANDOM AND INDEPENDENTLY. NOW IT'S, IT'S THE MAJORITY VOTE WHETHER WE WANNA HOLD OVER IT OR NOT. UM, I, I CAN IDENTIFY AS MS. DAVIS JUST SAID ABOUT THEIR CONCERN BECAUSE YOU LOSE ONE VOTE AND YOU IT SINKS THE PROJECT, BUT YET, YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S AGAIN UP TO THE PANEL. SO MS. MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD JUST ASK THEM FOR SOME TYPE OF A COMMITMENT THAT COME THE JULY, 'CAUSE THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THERE WON'T BE FOUR PANEL MEMBERS IN JULY. YOU ARE RIGHT ABOUT THAT. THIS IS, THIS IS NOT GOING TO KEEP BEING PUT OFF PENDING A FIVE MEMBER PANEL. WELL, I INTEND AS CHAIRMAN, IT'S WITHIN MY DISCRETION TO APPOINT ALTERNATES TO PANELS. I INTEND AND ALREADY ASKED MR. DORN TO COME BACK IN, UH, JULY. UM, MR. NER IS NOT GONNA BE WITH US IN JULY OR AUGUST. HE'S OUT OF TOWN FOR THOSE DATES. SO I'LL BE GETTING ANOTHER ALTERNATE FOR HIS SPOT IN JULY. SO THE PANEL WILL EVOLVE AGAIN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALTERNATE WILL ASSIGN. UM, SO I ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTAND THAT. UM, AND HE IS CORRECT MR. VINCENT IN THAT, UM, THERE'S NO APP AS LONG AS WE ARE PROPERLY CONSTITUTED, WE CAN HEAR CASES AND FOUR IS PROPERLY CONSTITUTED. MM-HMM . SO, UM, IF, IF THIS HAPPENS AGAIN, IT'S OF NO FAULT OF YOUR OWN. I UNDERSTAND. UM, I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T THINK I WANNA SAY YOU, YOU DON'T HAVE THAT OPTION TO ASK THAT AGAIN, BUT I TOO WANNA GET THIS DONE AND WE'VE HELD THIS OVER SEVERAL TIMES. FIRST TIME, I THINK YOU GUYS REQUESTED IT LAST TIME, WE LOST OUR, OUR, OUR DEAL, OUR QUORUM I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, SO MM-HMM . SO I HEAR YOUR RESPECT AND YOUR, YOUR OPINION. SO YOU WANNA MAKE ANY OTHER COMMENT OR ARE YOU GONNA LET LET THE VOTE FALL? UM, I, NO SIR. I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY. I MEAN WE'RE, WE CERTAINLY SUBSTANTIVELY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS HEARD ULTIMATELY OURSELVES, BUT, UM, WE'D LIKE TO HAVE A, A FULL PANEL AND YOU KNOW, LET'S HOPE FOR THE BEST IN JULY. I I UNDERSTOOD. I I UNDERSTAND. UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE I MAKE A MOTION? I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 0 4 9 HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JULY 15TH. YOU'RE SURE IT'S THE 15TH ? YES. OKAY. GOOD TILL JULY 15TH THE CHAIRMAN. SO MOVES THE 16TH. OH, WHAT'S THAT? 15TH OR 16TH? OKAY, YOU GUYS ARE GETTING ME NERVOUS. HOLD ON. 15TH. 15TH. SHE SAYS SHE'S GOT IT ON 15TH. WE'LL ALL MAKE SURE IT'S THE 15TH. IT'S THE 15TH. OKAY. FIFTH JULY 15TH THE CHAIRMAN. SO MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND. AND BY MR. DOREEN, NOW WE CAN DISCUSS THE MOTION. YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELL APPRECIATED. MR. KOVI, DO YOU WANT TO PUT THEM ON THE RECORD FURTHER OR THEY'RE ALREADY ON THE RECORD? [03:40:05] I GUESS THEY'RE ALREADY ON THE RECORD. IS IT NOT? I, I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU. I DON'T THINK I WANNA SAY TO THE APPLICANT THAT HE MUST COMMIT BECAUSE PART OF MY JOB AS CHAIRMAN IS TO HAVE FULL PANELS. BUT GUYS, YOU'RE VOLUNTEERS. WELL, MR. CHAIRMAN, I CAN'T MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M NOT ASKING, I'M NOT ASKING THE APPLICANT TO COMMIT. I'M ASKING YOU . WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF WELL AND I APPRECIATE THAT AND AS I SAY, PART OF MY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO HAVE FULL PANELS, BUT I CAN'T HOG TIE PEOPLE TO MEETINGS. UH, EACH ONE OF YOU COME AND GO AS YOU NO. IF WE HAVE FOUR PANELISTS HERE IN JULY, WILL THIS CASE MOVE FORWARD? MAY AND BE DECIDED. WELL, IS WHAT I'M ASKING YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. I WILL TELL YOU I HAVE THE AUTHORITY OF ONE VOTE. I'M FIRST AMONG EQUALS HERE GUYS. THAT'S WHAT I AM. SO IT'S UP TO THE MAJORITY DECIDES AND I CAN ENCOURAGE AND I PERSUADE ALL THE TIME, BUT I'M ONLY FIRST AMONG EQUALS MS. DAVIS. AND YOU MENTIONED IN JULY WE WOULD HEAR THIS CASE EARLIER. OH NO. BECAUSE THAT FEEL LIKE WE'RE ALWAYS HEARING THESE CASES AT THE VERY END OF THE DAY. YES. WELL, UH, PART OF OUR PROCESS IS HOLDOVERS ARE LAST. OH, THAT'S WHY. AND I WANTED TO BE DEFERENTIAL TO THE 25 PEOPLE THAT SHOWED UP FOR THAT CASE. I, I THINK YOU CAN APPRECIATE THAT. UNDERSTAND? YES. AND I KNEW WE WERE PROBABLY GOING TO HOLD THAT OVER, SO I WANTED TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THEIR TIME. I LIKEWISE. WANNA RESPECTFUL OF YOUR TIME, SIR. I I WOULD JUST ADD IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD EARLIER IN THE AFTERNOON, THEN I, YOU, I'M USUALLY A MAN OF MY WORD AND I'VE ALREADY TELEGRAPHED. I WILL PROBABLY MOVE IT FORWARD. IT'S WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN TO ADJUST THE AGENDA. AND SO, UM, I DON'T HAVE THE FULL AGENDA FOR NEXT MONTH, BUT I WOULD ATTEMPT TO DO THAT SO, AND I CAN THANK YOU. I CAN MOVE IT FORWARD TO MAKING SURE WE HAVE IT. SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, WHAT'S THE REQUIRED VOTE TO MOVE THAT MOVE YOUR RECOMMENDATION, YOUR MOTION FORWARD? WHAT? THE MOTION I'M ABOUT TO MAKE. IT'S JUST MAJORITY. OKAY. IT'S JUST MAJORITY. OKAY. SO THE CHAIR IS MOVED. IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION? SO IT REQUIRES A SIMPLE MAJORITY, WHICH MEANS UH, THREE OF OF FOUR. THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE. MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS BDA 2 4 5 0 4 9 TO JULY 15TH. HINT, HINT EARLY ON THE AGENDA, IF NOT FIRST. MR. DORN. AYE. MS. DAVIS? AYE. MR. OVITZ NAY. I KNEW THAT WAS COMING. MR. CHAIRMAN. AYE, VERY STRATEGIC MOTION TO HOLD PASTORS VERY STRATEGIC. MICHAEL ONE, UH, IN THE MATTER OF 2 4 5 0 4 9 AT THE, AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, WE'RE HOLDING IT OVER TO THE JULY 15TH MEETING AND I WILL MAKE GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO HAVE IT EARLY, IF NOT FIRST. HOW'S THAT? THANK YOU. A GOOD FAITH EFFORT. APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. UM, I MOVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL NUMBER BDA 2 4 5 0 5 0 HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JULY 15TH AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. THE CHAIRMAN M SO MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MR. DORN DISCUSSION SAME AS BEFORE. I WILL MAKE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO HAVE IT HAVE A FULL PANEL AND, AND ALSO EARLY. IF NOT FIRST THE BOARD SECRETARY WILL CALL THE VOTE. MR. DORN. AYE. MS. DAVIS? AYE. MR. KOVI? AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN? AYE. MOTION TO HOLD PASSES THREE TO ONE. TWO FOUR. 5 0 4 9 2 4 2 4 5 0 5 OH. BOTH BY A THREE TO ONE VOTE WE MOVE TO, UH, HOLD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO JULY 15TH. OKAY, THAT CONCLUDES OUR AGENDA FOR TODAY. THANK YOU GENTLEMEN. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. YEP. UH, UM, DO YOU GUYS WANT THESE BACK? 'CAUSE WE'D HATE FOR, YOU HAVE TO REPRINT 'EM AND IF WE KEEP 'EM THEN IT GOES INTO RECORD. SO I'D RATHER GIVE THEM MARY CAN WE GIVE 'EM ALL BACK SINCE? OKAY. THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, IT IS 4:52 PM ON THE 17TH OF JUNE. UM, WE HAVE MAGICALLY NEXT MONTH'S AGENDA RIGHT HERE. NOT AGENDA, BUT CASE LISTING. WE HAVE 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 CASES, 1, 2, 3, 5 CASES SCHEDULED. UH, PLUS THE TWO WE JUST HELD OVER FOR JULY. SO YES. ALRIGHT, THAT BEING CASE, THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. MOTION TO AUR. THANK IT'S BEEN MOVED TO ADJOURN BY MR. DORN. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN SECOND BY MS. DAVIS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED. MOTION TO ADJOURN. YOU UNANIMOUS FOUR TO ZERO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JUNE 17TH, APRIL UH, JUNE 17TH, 4:53 PM IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.