We're going to move on to the next item. The next item actually about the minutes of the meeting. The August 20, 2020. The first item on the agenda is I would comment. If you have anybody signed up. You can get public. Now. Okay. We'll go to the next item. As the board had a chance to review the meeting minutes from last week. Yes. Anybody have any changes in corrections? I have one and one. I think there is a motion under February 4 that's left in there from prior meeting. We shouldn't be in there. So under item here, I'm forward. I wish you to a left air of Lane's Chairperson. That was from a prior meeting. I hope you. Okay. We'll do a shared Google make sure that's all the next. Next agenda. Yeah, Okay. All right. Moving on to a general three V. Space. Okay. All right. case BNA 124 or 5, bullet public hearing and consider impact on various requests. The HINC code for this is section 155.23. In six, to allow for a 4.1 foot incroachment into the minimum 30 foot, front yard setback section 159. 1 2 3 3 3 3 8 8 4 8.1 foot encroachment into the minimum 10 foot side during setback section 159 2 3 e 11 for exceeding 35% maximum building coverage of the lock area by 3%. Let me pause there. Is it 3% or 1.7% okay that was 1.7% so yeah so 1.7% the 3% comes from when staff constantly just based off of the the image that we had but the surveyer actually correcting that's what it's 1.7% okay exceeding the 35% of building coverage to go a lot of areas like 1.7% and allowing 14.5 footed encouragement into the building on the 25th with a year yard first section 159.237 by consideration of a special exception under section 159.87B. In the rear yard setback, the bun in the city of Dallas, take. And for the purpose of construction to single family home that is designed for SF-15 single family residential land and by uses of property located at 303, city ground being described as a lot of 22 and people that are in addition to the city of heat block while county Texas. Do we have a presentation from staff? Yes, thank you Mr. Chairman. First of all, welcome everybody. Thank you. Thank you, Michelle and us. And we certainly, I know they're happy to have you here. And just a couple of announcements here, number one. Some of the discussion that we had, and no, I think we have a couple of new members here as well. So we just want to go with the importance of the Board of Adjustment. Is if there is an error in a permit, some of the staff see that we cannot approve. This has been imperative that it come before this Board in order to take a look to see if there is anything in the application that would prevent that from receiving a variance. In other words, those are things those are backs that you'll need to take a look at and find. And it's this is important. What your decision is, it does not go to the city council. If there have a good reason that the termination is not approval, then the applicant can see a appeal to that two district court. And so what we're doing here this evening is a picture that we're going to do the facts. And what the findings are here in the evening is a picture that we're going to do the facts and what the findings are here the applicant has provided a lot of information for you. I didn't duplicate that in my staff report and it was well written. You took a look at all the information as you go through and make a decision to see me. And the other important item here is that we have five members. Just more. If you go through and make a decision this evening and the other important item here is that we have five members just want to clarify for the board other other Plans on the commission city council and other boards generally has seven members on there who requires a a simple majority, a four to three, something like that. What are the adjustments because of the nature of what you're... a simple majority of four to three, something like that. What are the adjustments because of the nature of what you're looking at what you're doing because of the something that you're looking to make that rendered decision on requires a 70% three-groom majority of this board. So we have five members. It takes minimum of four in order to accrue. 70% of three-gore majority vote of this board. So we have five members. It takes minimum of four in order to accrue an alternative person to the board. If we don't reach that then then we're not there. We need a minimum of four here to have a quorum between that we have 100% of the vote in order to accrue the variance of being the first to get we don't have a minimum of four. We only have three. So, we have a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little variance of being the trusted. You don't have a minimum of four, well, you have three, show up, we don't have four. So I just wanna put that out there just for the new members. And once again, if you have any other questions concerning, your vote in this is very important. I would appreciate your being here and your time to to assess this and to take a look at this so that you're welcome to give me a call at any time and we have to do the discussing thing with you at that point. With that, the applicant is here this evening Mr. Wolfe and he has a deep friends with him here as well as you've been seeing. And there are there are several several items on this particular agenda that we're taking a look at. First of all, obviously what the app is here to do is to request four different items on this. That being three variances and one special exception. We've noted in instant for part of our due diligence here is a mixture that we built on public we have in this case we posted it in the newspaper good on our city website as well as provided 30 38 notices I think it's a 38 notices that went out to all property owners and And today, we received an additional notice today. So we have a total of 10 notice from this neighborhood that are in favor of the applicant's request. That's important because these are the folks that live in the neighborhood with the particular gentleman and then for what he's asking for. Essentially what he's asking for is you see here, 4.1 foot encroachment into the front yard setback. He's asking for that sort of lie ahead. He's asking for a point one zero foot encroachment into the side yard setback. asking for a 1.7% to exceed the maximum block per by 1.7% to exceed the maximum watt per 1.7% and also to a special exception because they do lease with a take on you can see that there is the lake back here so they lease they sub lease this out from the city of heat and an our sponsor for that portion that. So there is a special exception that's associated with that, for where the signline setbacks as well. When we take a look at what the applicant requesting he wants to construct a 5781 sport, but two stories single family home. This is the image or rendering rather that he provided to us showing us citing brick and And what this is going to look like with gable elements and in a standard route When 5781 square foot that's that's overall score, but that's not an additional thing. Yeah, that's not linear. Yes, that's correct. So it includes the patio. Exactly. OK, I'm always sure that's been included. Yeah, it's been added on the right. So how much living area? I think $630, $600 in the there. Yeah, almost 37. Yes, yeah. And what was there before was a, 2690 square foot home. And that's definitely lived something believes in 2007. That's how it was. It was a last year. Okay, so it was late. The CAD had different information, not 50,000, but the year it was built, because it was, it's read different, so I didn't know what we were gonna use. I went with 2000, but it was probably that age as Mr. Walsh and K. So we then came to what the, what he's requesting out of our area requirements of the zone. And and once you know we're in this in that first slide just to show you once again the areas that we're looking at and all these are associated with our zoning ordinance and check the 159 and the important items I think here that are well that you need to look at and consider, this area was planted back in 1965. And you can see there are squad two blocks within this subdivision. And what you have up here is a 2006 survey. This was, this is what my understanding is, this was given to the survey, I'm sorry, the contractor who had poured the foundation, put four boards in, I'm sorry, the fourth foundation, put four boards in, and installed peers for this particular project. One thing I wanted to discuss on the 65 subdivision plaque is this was not in the city limits. This was not zone at that time. I did not find the, when this was actually annexed into the city, but I do want to touch on that. annexation at the time when you annex property into when the city brings in property they assign it a zoning. The zoning typically a whole load of a pattern cultural district. So at some point when this came into the city it was Ag and when you go to rezone the, then you have to take a look at what I'm zoning is and what's most applicable to that area or to that seven-vision miscarriage. When you take a look at Mr. Wolf's property, his property is less than 15,000 square feet. It does not meet the minimum 15,000 square foot lot that we would typically have here in the city for those that are inside the city and that develop inside the city. When you take a look at this particular plaque, that may be the case for quite a few of these locks here. They become a lot of records. That's important to note that this is a lot of records. In other words, they can build on this spot as long as they meet those requirements that we have. In this case, the first one that was built built to some sort of standard. They had 20-butthurt front yard setbacks. They had 10-foot sign yard setbacks. I don't know what the rear yard setback was, but that's what's shown on the 2006 survey. So that's important to note to take a look at when you were reviewing this as well. So this 2006 survey that I have shown up here was hinted to the contractor who did the clockwork permit, okay It did a plopper permit. That permit is on hold until this proceeding has completed. And he granted the decision. The permit was plopper projective. So once again, it's just important to note on that subdivision plan. Now, what the applicants provided here is to show all these areas right here that they have to flag on. Every one of these are less than 25. Although the most number, I'm sure they most number less than 25 feet on the front yard setback. So a lot of this neighborhood came in, when the built-in machine was not inside the city limits. And so don't know what standard they built you, but they do not need our current standards right now of the 30 foot setback. That's because the grandfather did, right? Yes, that did become a long you know, these homies can be grandfather dyn, but soon as you bulldoze a house, now you are supposed to become flying to the current zoning and plants. That's correct. It's a legal non-performing status for that, right? And the one thing you do that you must comply with our zone. So knowing that this is an older neighborhood, all these red dots, how many of these are brand new construction post 2018? No, no, no. So everyone's grandfather did, but yet the applicant wants to put a house that does not comply with current zoning standards when they're supposed to. That's correct. And once again, that's the reason for this meeting and that part of that finding is that you should do. Right. So this map is irrelevant. The map is just to indicate how this neighborhood is developed. No, yeah. You can understand it with an older neighborhood that's been added. It makes perfect sense. So the fact that all these homes are legally not conforming, that's completely understandable with an older neighborhood. So if you're wanting to build a new house, this map is irrelevant to make your case. So in an understanding point, in the one of the things as well to add to the speed of, on the SF-15 lot, you have minimum standards. 15,000 square feet. Additionally, you have minimum standards as far as width, as far as depth. This lot is not even the minimum depth standard. Well, so you have poppy that could be added to the back as well. And may if you if you met the 125, you had an additional poppy on that on that real set. So any any more concept, any buyer who wants to buy this property and build on it, they would have to understand that they're required to build these smaller house because it's a small block. They're required to meet the zoning for all of that 30 foot setback for the front and 10 foot setback on the side and 25 longer rear. That is correct. So just say it's a small block, you have to small block, you just make you have to build a smaller home. The building on the road would be Yeah, that is correct. Yes. And but the other thing to consider here would be the the lot self is an off-shake lot. You can see how the how set on this is the previous one. How it set on the lot itself in a manner that is not typical. We see a typical 50,000 or a typical lot, so it has to make adjustment. It looks like a square shaped lot. The on your regular shape, the, the lot line here used to be a square foot lot now and the acting may be able to insert it but I don't believe this home was originally built and crushed into this neighbor's property here right here. So they added this portion right here which now had bunched out a little bit. It's not a an absolute square plot, but this made way for some additional side yards. I hope you have that side. Yeah, sorry. Yeah, well, we have lots of questions for you at that time. Let's address the staff currently and we're giving the audience a chance. I have one question from the commission. The uh permit was applied for me. You didn't get a specific date for when it was applied for. Could you fill that in? Yeah. Yeah. We wait those August 26th. August 1 was made in to put on August 26th of 2020. Okay. One additional question then is that the permit was requested then. Was there a certain factor for why the applicants were given the set after requirements or were they? I don't want to ask you so that they do they had work within those constraints to come up with a desire. Do you want to have any information? I'm going to defer that to my building official. Do you have, do you need bergit's plans or need to? I was going to put the billings at Paxport for a while. I'm sorry, can you come up here and put the record to be the only one? Just make sure you're all in a fishing vet so that we could put it with help. I was not asked what the building said back to me when I moved to the hospital. So, in my first time to tell you the house down, and they had some issues giving the house to a little more on floor and their rape scenes. And then in the course of my review, I just got to look at that. The house. And the head's issues given house for them. All on floor and various things. And then in the course of my review, I discovered that the house did not meet the effects after they've started construction. Well, I think the foundation guy got a little excited and she helped them just to hear. And with the appointment, she should the decision. So that falls on the builder from that control and subcontractor. All right, I guess one game out there. Yeah, well, what's there any of them? Yeah, what's there any permission from the city and any kind of education that the current you granted from the city that went on? Yeah, once all of the one's all the playing me questions for answer but one of my favorite questions was one of my favorite items was setbacks on thought and they had submitted you know part of the play me you said that that one the one about the reviewing the site plan was nist in what they submitted and I had to go back together and ask you to submit that and that's kind of when we discovered the Pearson Blue Girls. Do they submit a site a setback information in their initial site plan publication? Yes there was on their original cycling, they could put, you know, their setbacks and stuff on there, but they didn't need the zoning for the setback. They put the incorrect setbacks. Yes. Okay. Thank you. And. How do you have one question? You know, the architect come y'all and show you the plans or how you'll get the audience. In the building, building country. Sorry, we just have to process this and go ahead. So we have to think about addition questions. Okay, so. the way it works is the run of like, the final family system. So. So we have to think about additional questions. Okay, so the way it works is the run electronic plan with the system. So the builders submit through our board. And when they submit, they'll submit their package, which includes house plans, engineering, both foundations, shear wall, energy, framing, site plans, range plans, you know, all of our requirements get submitted. And they submit that through. And we read you on, and through the world, we put our comments in, we respond, and then we respond back to you. So did you give all the go to proceed with construction? You did not? When the architect, The architect being the responsible and put it on a lot we're supposed to do. How do you build it? Yes. Or the simple agenda. No, the simple agenda. Whichever one of them did it? Yeah, I mean the first step to make any improvement to a lot is to look at what the zone against it, you know, what you can build. So we draw a Well, I'm, I'm, I'm, yeah, I think they placed it on the lot based on what. And where the house, the house that was there already exists. That was built in the eighties and we know that the zoning has been changed six years ago. And, and the wolves may not have been aware that the zoning had been changed, but you know I don't imagine the city notified us. I'm gonna take a bit about that. Yeah but any any builder architect there's a set number one to check what they can do. Okay and I'm sorry currently do you know where they're at in construction? Did I heard the piers work for? Does that true? Yes, the piers are reported. That's it. And when I reached out to Jerry, that it needs to be an issue immediately. If all the piers are poured in or maybe a portion of house, you probably have to ask everybody. I just wanted to get confirmation to review before asking the builder. I don't know what you'd like to. I don't want to mention that. One additional question. So for a builder or a architect, for them to find out what the setbacks are, are for residual, etc. Is there information readily available on the portal to infuse mentioned or a link to the information is so we know that yes they could have. Well, there's not a link on the actual portal that you can certainly go through the city website and get linked to the work ordinances and things are or something. And I do build a lot of calls from architects and build a version of various individuals, checking requirements for the city and lack of stuff. I don't know where this side of construction is. I know they did, but they did. You didn't judge them on it? No, they don't leave the zoning. they whether they have more peers or not. I think they wanted to leave the house where they had said it. They still would have to come here. I can't I can't prove that they would have to go to the board just if they would have come to the board of justice regardless. Okay. I don't understand. With the way they had laid down your cloth. As there have been any other homes in Antigua Bay that help big granted variants or their construction. Well I mean there are homes out there for them being bringing variances are you helping that for us? We're SSX, yeah. For else field. Yeah, for else. Well, you have one overall and scenic. And I hear. that have been bringing variances. Are you helping that for us? We're SSX, yeah. For House Bill. Yeah, for House Bill. Well, you have one overall on the scene. And a year or two years ago that was building a building in the backyard and got a variance for the setback in the rear yard against the tape line. I may have been, yeah, I was on the corner. You were. So was that a building or is that patio? It was a patio. Pady was a structure. It was still a structure. Yeah. And do you place any difference between a patio cover and that actual house? Well, I mean structures, but they are different. Right. So this is what's most important about this board is that we cannot set precedence. And if we were to grant a variance for a house in your opinion, does that set precedence as opposed to two years ago, someone putting in a patio cover? I mean, it's a much different structure because the reason why I ask is that the interesting thing about this case is the length of you. And a lot of neighbors are very concerned about their view of war. I mean coming on the same day again and when you anyone who is proposing to add on to a building or a recon strike, they actually physically have to put wooden states with ribbons across so that way the neighbors know what the roof fight is going be so that way they know how much their ocean view is gonna be frayed upon. So same thing here where we have water view. It's one thing to break one person, what they went for a lot, but it's also, we have to take an effect in the neighbors who may lose their lake view if they encroach on the setbacks. Well, in Tbilabay, there are none of the lake lots that have elevation restrictions set to the lake. You do have some lots here in here in other neighborhoods that have some elevation restrictions, but that one does not. In your house is not taller than what's allowed for the zombie. They're under the height. But if you're approaching on the setbacks, it's not a height issue, but perhaps on the sides where you can have some peekaboo views of the lake between the houses. Sort of caught them. I don't think that they, the way they had the house positioned, it was blocked. Anybody's new. it was wild for anybody's from you. I mean, do you want that figure-boo on each side? They still ride, figure-boooo you know because the neighbors on each side also have strips you know they're on the side 10 or 50 feet wide so they're not in my opinion they're not walking anybody's from you in the house. You might catch also one that take on women's toys. The take on lease, bring back who lives on the way, you know, the take on itself, the take on zoning has restrictions. And so when the take on survey is done, you have, you won't get all the same, but this is the product lock down here. This is their tape line and this is called the visibility goal, okay, right here. So nothing can be built in here because that would lock neighbors, you know, since they're looking, but they are not, They're not asking for variants and they're not asking the bill inside that this room. So I don't think that they would be blocking anybody's community level. You need the neighbors in judges? No, I think all of these people that responded and they have responses. Yeah, we get gender responses. They were all in favor of and just a note for the tagline. The only thing that the applicant has for a structure is a vote House. And so that's all there's nothing else behind this property inside the take on where they're going to be that often. But I'm sorry, just go back two years ago on that particular property, the encroachment was only on the take line. And that's my memory serves me correct. Remember, right? So far. The problem that we talked about two years ago, that we've read various for the page cover over the setback. If my memory serves me right, we granted because it was only take line and it was only approaching one property. What's that about? Yes, the reader. In this case, we've got five scenarios. We've got four improvements on each side of it. Plus, they exceeded the coverage ratio. Yes. Well, three plus the coverage ratio. Yeah, three plus the coverage ratio. So, there's point one side front. Well, yeah, well, there's two side, right? So, yeah, the side next to kind of getting directionally, the eastern side is not encroaching my assignments. So three sides plus a coverage ratio issue. So that's kind of a different scenario as it was two years ago. Yes. Because again, my big thing is setting precedence. One thing I also, the ethnic body and others, apparently I put on a desk this evening, people provide a diagram here that we're gonna kind of share exactly how the encroachments are looked, how they would look with the home that would be set on the foundation itself. And the colored in area is the area that would be the encroaching portion. So the side yard that we're referring to actually would not be in coaching, however the form board is there. So we have to show them from the form board survey at 9.9 feet, probably a couple of inches not being there. But this is essentially what we're looking at, the home itself is not in coaching to the rear yard setback in the patio that we're looking at that he's requesting the variance for that rear yard. Okay, from the special exception to the Dallas Tech Company, all the positives of approaching rear setback, desperate, and it looks It's like it's a garage that's encouraging the front stuff out. Yes. The question is the variance is grant? Does that say any precedent for future people? So the purpose of the board is to take a look at this on an individual basis, an individual a lot. Every situation would be different. It is different. Every lot is different. And, you know, so it is a key common problem board and take a look at what's there by need to see if you want to build a grant that or not. That ruling would be just for this particular law. Okay. You know, that doesn't mean if you have somebody who comes in and 15,000 books of law, they can just do this. You know, and just spread out all over the entire law. I've come before you. You take a look at that and you make termination and then see is there something they can do? Oh, yeah. have you have to be consistent, though. Well, did you get arrested? Yes, yes, yes. So the State of Texas creates the Board of Adjustment as a quasi-judicial board. And you are given an elevated amount of power because you serve as quasi-port, if you will, for the city. And as such, precedent isn't really an issue for this board because you're charged with reviewing each case individually and you are held to a standard of having to prove all of the criteria exists for a variance on every property. So they did that all purpose to remove that precedent from from their consideration. So I understand what you're saying, Eric. And that is a common issue that we run up against when when cases are reviewed by planning and zoning commission or by the law council. But that's it's not so it's not a factor of a little bit of orange estimate. Okay, because my concern, especially with this neighborhood, it's an older neighborhood. Clifes and best use would be to demo a house that may have been built in the 70s and build a nice lake front house. And if we grant variants, then future buyers, builders will be building structures that do not conform to the current zone. And therefore, we are not keeping the integrity of the comprehensive plan. Well, to your concern, it's very common in older neighborhoods for this type of situation to occur, where an assumption is made that a new structure can be built where an order structure previously sat. And it's not uncommon for us to address that issue in the office with applicants. In this situation where another home would be a plane would be made for another home to be built in a orientation that encroaches they would have have to come back to this board and you would have to consider their peculiar situation of their property. The geometry, the development pattern, the neighborhood is what they're proposing consistent with the development pattern in the neighborhood or not. You have the same factors that you would have to prove out for any case that comes before you. So I understand you're concerned that because you have to deal with every property as an individual situation, you would have to deliberate that one just like you would rate this one. And I don't know that the precedent setting, like I was trying to splat I was saying doesn't doesn't come into play But you're more like it does So these older homes are grandfather dead and so what you're saying is If someone were to demo a house They can put a new house where the old house used to be even though that old house was grandfathered into the zone. Well, no. Well, we come up against this in lots of the smaller, larger areas of town. Where if someone demos a house and the previous footprint of the house encroached in the setbacks, they cannot automatically go back and build by our code. They're not allowed to do that. And typically what we do is we tell them that. We tell them, I'm sorry that you can't put your home back where it was. And their only relief is to come to this board. And to either appeal the staff's decision, so appeal to administrative decision made by member. After they don't know or they can come to you and do that before they can. But unfortunately that didn't happen in this case. That's why I did it. Try to clean that up. So when was the staff's position of this? So for us, because me, Arizona, it doesn't, we our code is the purpose why it's locked before this point. We can't approve it. So relief has come from this board if you send it. He's a lot too. I have one question. One additional question? And that is, is there any kind of campus aside from these islands that creates a challenge for the homeowner, for the homeowner? Such as, and I'm just speaking to you right away, at this point, I'm, if, okay, the house signs, and its current orientation was decreased 20% so that the current problems were avoided, is there any other problem that they are trying more? No. They're all arrested. All arrested at New Zealand. New Zealand is just these issues just the way. Okay. Please. Yes. Do you know what the maximum. Square footage will be allowed for this property. So if it's 11,000 square foot wide at a 35% coverage ratio. When is that like 4,000 square foot footprint. But again, that's without any consideration given to the setbacks. Yes, because the percentage of lock coverage was based on the foundation, not the total support for the footprint. Yeah, footprint, right. Right, right. And if you're in commercial, we'll say we call it that, they are, which doesn't matter. But the point being is the footprint would be about 4,000 square feet, but in this case, it's gonna be a lot less because of the setbacks. The whole lot is used in the calculation. Not the piece in the setback. Not the piece less than setback. I think it's the same. So 11,000 square foot by I was 35% your game now 4,000 square foot foot. But we can't be able to put 4,000 square foot print because it encroaches the setbacks. Yes. So therefore it has a city calculated with a maximum of 4,000 just for this lot. I'm just curious the difference. It's not. Is it 11,000 square feet exactly? It's 11,000 square feet. It's 11,000 square feet. That space on the commentary ratio also nice where without setbacks So we've setbacks that footprint wouldn't be decrease Yeah, I don't think it would be I just can fit all that with that. I did some rough math earlier I think you can fit that 4,000 with that So you put two store house I mean you But eight that 4,000 with that. So you put a two-story house. I mean, you put 8,000 square foot home in it. Well, I'm not going to be honest, but I have a bar. Yes. Yeah, it would just be a lot of options. Yeah. We don't limit it with acts. We don't have a C of 8 months where. Right. No, I don't that. But they're actually not that getting under-spirifucked. Okay. Okay. I'm just curious if there's a way we can make it work with baseless refurbished. Bye. I'm trying to make my hair one of the way there. Okay, any other questions for Lucent? Someone wants to say, go as I on. Maybe sit, let's go. Thank you, Lisa. Okay, well, please continue. Okay, so the next slide here is just some of the things that we're talking about already and what this represents is just what existed. Oh, sorry. sorry. How the lot, how the home said they just, I'm sorry, pretty small sat. And how the full board survey shows to how the home will be, will say as well. Let's get the first of the diagram that the applicant has given you. But this is just kind of giving you an idea of the total lock of what you're looking, what the applicant is presenting here. So that's all this represented in the show to where the exception of being requested in the variances here. So just trying to do aside my side comparison with that. This just showed the subject property of an aerial view to see how that the previous home sat, the lake and behind the property. And in this right here, it's just given the kind of representation of what that could look like on the lock and of course, you know, the home and their requesting for this particular property. With that, once again, the jurisdiction of the board is clear in 3360 D1, whether you can request a special exception or not going to read all of this. I want to put you all asleep. But a special exception is a permission given by the board for an act to use his or her property and a mandatory supervision of the ordinance, obviously that's what the special exception is for for that rear portion that's adjacent to the tagline variant is authorization from for granting relief. Once again, the happiness asking for relief on this, doing substantial justice in the use of the app properly, where a little and a little enforcement of the provision of the ordinance will result in an unnecessary hardship. And the happiness provided is some information to you, the costs that they have included with their project to date. And so when we take a look at the special exception, when you go through this, there are a qualified within here, and now it may be granted by board, and what your findings are. And number one, that the granting of the accepting will not be injurious or otherwise detrimental to the injury of the public health safety rules for general welfare of the general public. Okay, so take a look at the negative thing. That the granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the property or improvements in zone for neighborhood in which the property is located. And in three, the grantee of the exception will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this subchef. So you've got to take over the spirit of the ordinance as well. In determining the finding, the board shall take into account the character and use of the joint buildings and those there within the vicinity, the neighborhood and what we're looking at. We take a look at special exceptions on how you would do that and what your authorization is here to permit the modification of the yard, lock area or lock wet regulation requirements requirements that may be necessary to secure appropriate improvement of the parcel of land as being questioned. The original policy right there? Yes. So when I first started looking at special exceptions and variances, it wasn't clear to me the distinction between the two. And I know that there's a section where they're saying, this is what the distinction is between the two. And I read read that over and over again I didn't see a distinction. It just seemed like two different tests and I didn't know when we want to reply the other one. Having looked at a little bit more closely, tell me if I'm right or wrong on this. Special exceptions are related more to the property as a whole. It deals with the overall size of the property deals with lot of wits. Typically, you can see that right there in C1, permit the modification out of a yard, lot area, a lot width regulation requirements as maybe necessary. The reason they were looking at a special exception in this case doesn't relate to any of those. It relates to a kind of a unique standalone provision elsewhere in the code that addresses the take line and says the board has the authority to authorize a building that for a rear yard setback. I think also a side yard setback when there's when it's adjacent the take line. So that's the only reason we're looking at special exceptions right now. Right, yes. And in that being the, the, the, the, the, a lot area, the area requirements essentially what this is, that wouldn't bring those into into play area problems. But yes, for the special exception, it is the rear inside, which is part of the discussion part of the bindings into it. All of the issues we have to address relating to setbacks, those are going to be under vacancies. Yes. So we've got two different standards. We have to, the burden is on the applicant to meet two different set standards here. And we're going to be talking about these five jurisdictional requirements we have to find. They have to prove for the front yard setback the side yard setback and maximum building coverage variants. On the rear we're looking at the special exceptions standard which is a different standard it's these things right well I think it's on a different section but it's essentially the three the three-part test right? Yes, yes, the correct slide. That is correct. Okay. I don't know if that's helpful about that. Yeah. Well, yes. And looking number two, I didn't highlight anything there is I the way I read I can read where you're number two doesn't have the plonger, but in two get rather 2d that in granting any special accepting number you're going to be sorted the board may designated the conditions in connection there with, which in its opinion will secure a substantially, will secure a substantially the purpose and intent of this subchamp disorder, need take a look at that and see, is it going to meet that, does it meet that, does it meet that pressure? And then when we continue on at the very instance, it will be different as you've been in case. And here it says that they, that there are special circumstances for conditions, applying to the land or building in which the variance is is soft, which certain types of conditions are peculiar to the land or building and not apply to the land or building in the same zone or neighborhood and that the circumstances or conditions are such that the strict application of the provision and the sub-capital would imply the attribute of reasonable use of their land or building. So that's something I think that needs to kind of absorb there. And look at number one, a virtue that the brand of the brands will not be detrimental to the public welfare, or the neighborhood in which the property is located, that branding of the variance is necessary to the reasonable use of any planned, for that the little enforcement and strict application of the provision of the sub-chapter of the results in an unnecessary hardship. In addition to considering the character and use of the joining buildings and those that live in the consent team, the board is coming this fine leaves, shall take the account, the number of persons that are residing upon the land and the track conditions, which probably do not change the delivery already. And so as far as what staff is taking a look at, where does that mean take a look at, obviously, at what 3360 centimeters and what your, what your permit such variants of the front yard, side yard and rear yard, coverage, minimum setback standards, where the lower enforcement of the provisions of the subchapy with results need an unnecessary hardship and where the variance is necessary to commit a specific partial land that's differs from other parcels of land in the same district by being a restricted area, shape or slope that cannot be developed in a manner that's mentored with the development committed on other parcels of land in the same district. So the variation from the standards that this chapter shall not be granted to relieve a self-created or personal hardship nor financial reason only. Once again, from the staff member, who this is a discretionary decision, we can take a look at this, so granting of this is a decision that's just tuned for the Board the adjustments. Dave one of the key questions we're going to be looking at talked in the lunch 10 that we have to decide in these cases is the land or the building special unique in some way. The slide before this talked about What is it peculiar of others in the same zone or neighborhood? You know, third line down zone or neighborhood? Okay. The next slide says, I've got the same thing, but it uses the word district. And you speak to us a little bit about those three terms and what they need. Does it matter if it's disparate or favor ordered? So what am I going to be. In this particular case, that district was established after it was, after it was annexed and then so. So I think there are two different things there that you have to take a look at and see how is that with what the neighborhood versus the actual district itself. Rather than the neighborhood being designed to meet the SF-S-F-15 requirements, we had picked the closest zoning district to what was already in existence. We had to go look at our zoning regulation and decide is this neighborhood that already exists is the closest to F-S-F-15, F722 or F or warmth. So it was closest to SF-19, so that's why I got to sign that designation. Aaron, if the board finds today that this parcel, this lot is different because it's special when compared to others in SF-15 and so, but it's not special when compared to others in the SF 15 zone, but it's not special when compared to others in the NACLs. If the board finds that, have we met my first jurisdiction requirement? You have, because it says board. There's any further presentation. I believe this up to board, We I want to be happy to answer any questions. I'm going to show you how this is in public hearing. And I think there's several measures you want to come speak on the hand. Perfect. If you'd like to make a resolution, you can go to the public. Yes. Perfect. Okay, you open the hearings of public. So we're going to say for now. Yeah. So my name is Daniel Wolf. I've been living in Antifa since 2007. I mean, I've come and come to the areas since 1990. So I've seen them. So you know, they grow a lot of changes. So I just of just for the record keys also stay here addressed. Yes, some three or three things. Probably we're talking about. You know, if they for anybody who's lived in Keith and has gone down and changed people, then one of the things I think that will recognize very quickly is it's, it's a unique neighbor in there. And I also think that's probably one of the reasons that you'll see some of my, you know, we have 10 total supporting this and non-photos, which included both my neighbors on both sides as well as everybody on the way front. And, you know, one of the things that we all experienced in an end of the way are our challenges are left over from long time ago, when the city was first built, I'd imagine that, let's say, in a bacteria, canolitis, and it's the only other neighborhood that's also zone SSF-15. And there are challenges that come with that. It just as an example of that, it wasn't until just a year and a half ago, 82 total, that the audience would say, we finally got biopitras. Right, so the entire year would be being that biopitras. That old and that, kind of just quirky. And the loss, although it looks like a square up there, it's really not a square up. So this would be an example of how quirky it is, the house that we bought when we went to purchase it. If you don't mind, could you go back to the 2006 survey? Can I leave the microphone and go there just to point to the first several beautiful apples? Oh, I can't. So the original lot, which you saw, which was a square, is actually this line right here, right? So that would be that. Well, this is my driveway, and you'll see a corner of trying to go up portion of the house. Well, when you, it's actually cut off here, but you'll see a plot one and a plot two. So the house in the entire driveway was built on my neighbor's law. So it's time that I, when it came time, made actually buy the house, we had to work with the neighbor and actually buy it back from now, to talk back to the rules. So it's just an example of how just things are just not done right for the development standpoint. And these things are just legacy and left over and unfortunately, we end up in situations like we are today trying to explain things that just don't want makes sense right to us. So, now we did, we provided the 2006 survey, but we also provided a 2023 survey. We just had that doc built, right? Right before the house came down to finish it. But at 2023 survey, it's that same thing. So, from a builder perspective, you would think from reasonably that, okay, I've got a service, it's 2023, that's recent, we can kind of move forward with that. We also have some challenges with from a time-on perspective. You're building your house, right? It's going to be our family's dream about to finally get to design this thing as we want to. If we were going to jeopardize the actual size of the house or anything just by taking it down from a known perspective, we would not have torn this house down, right? We knew we were going to lose a tour of 20 feet from front to back just by tearing this thing down. We would not have done so. We would extend this thing into a remodel as a matter of fact, it was something that we evaluated. We actually worked with with Mr. Davis on some plans on a remodel and as you can imagine when you've got no life foring out the house built in 1978 by the way. For you to go up which would be what we want to do on a 1978 foundation and what we want to do you hit it across a point where it just makes financial sense to tear this thing down. So we pulled the trigger on that, not knowing that we were going to lose 20 feet on both the front and the back. So if you read through the document, as it was originally presented to you, and actually we went around to our neighborhood and we stopped mailboxes and we met people. We wanted to explain in layman's language what we're actually looking for. I think it looks like we're trying to make a land grab. When the reality of this is not, it could not be further from the case. We're just looking to build within the same footprint that we were at a previous home already stood at. We're also actually, it's actually, if you looked at that house on the side, it was built to an eight foot side lock so now stand off on the side so now we're going to that 10 so the sides are getting they correct their backing alignment and the one that's there it's really only the front and the back that we're talking about the one on the side it's point one foot so we'll put it in plus inside I'm not going to react ends of an edge but we were just going to move to form it's on one part raw and have it resurveyed before we pour so that side would be edge. So when you make these changes and I apologize by the way I heard some of the stuff that you go through here, but this is pretty important to us. When this first happened, and we had the stop work that came into play, I was looking at life and trying to break the news to heard what had just happened, they'd have a really expensive vacant lot right now. So we're about $220,000 into this, and the the peers and foundation and chemical treatment and all of that sort of stuff is done based upon the design that we have created. That design was submitted to the city and by the way I'm going to pause because this group that's been just absolutely incredible to work with. We've made some errors along the way, right, from a timing perspective, but we submitted those document application with the design in August. We got permission to tear the house down. We moved forward with tearing the house down based upon some verbal communication right back and forth. We even have the elevation and the drainage permit for I'm not sure that's probably what's it called the drainage plan. Drank drainage plan. Both of those have been approved and those drawings show the buildings, the 25th foot on the front and the 10 foot on the back. So you can understand like, okay, yes, if we're looking at this thing from the letter of the law, and you're not involved with it, you can absolutely say, no way, you shouldn't know, you should know, you're toward the same down, you're going to lose a large portion of your of your lot in your house. Well, I can tell you that these are honest to God mistakes. You know, I have done everything, I'm going to in the member of the community for a long time. I'm not a unfamiliar face around the city call. I've known them quite regularly. And I don't want that name that's out there, or I don't want it on or in family name. That paper trying to paint for favors will get something special, you know, through this one of you, what's wrong. So, as we go through and all those five different checkpoints that we have to have, you know, on a variance, it comes down to hardship, right? hardship, we're reducing the lot by 28% 4,466,166 square feet that were taking away like that because of the zoning warnings set was put in place in 2019 and clearly not well advertised. The feedback that we got from the neighborhood was I didn't even know this happened. We got a bunch of emails people calling they're like, what? Didn't even know this happened. So that made it to us. I'm like, okay, we'll wait a minute. I love it. We're not in same together. Obviously, I'm hoping that's why we have some support, you know, from the script here. So a lot small, right? It's 1100 or 11,000 square feet to begin with. But yet it falls under 15,000. I don't know what that percentage difference is, but you know, it's significant. What 20% or so? Right Delta? It's significant. Where so we're zoned something 15,000 square feet that should have a certain amount of setbacks, but the actual was only 11,466 feet. Another unique thing, if you look in SF 15, it says that the minimum lot has got to be 125 feet from front to back. We'll ride off the back, we're a lot taller than 120 feet. So there are things about antivore data. Just don't make sense, it does not fit into the SF-15 zoning requirements. And I do a bit, makes me wonder that, okay, when do we start analyzing, we started re-zoning in 2018, eventually, past December 2018, I guess. We're neighborhoods like Inti-O-Day and Generalite, really truly concerned. Whether it really looked down, you know, fully built out. There's like three vacant lots that are left in our neighborhood. So, I don't know. Like, were these things considered when they did these things, or was just like, I don't know, like where these things consider when they think they say, okay, this is a nothing burger move on down road. We're more concerned things like keep up and y'all some of the other things that we've got go along are viewer developments in their neighborhood. And clearly, I would expect, you know, I would think we're zoning kind of comes into place if we want uniformity. You know, Mr. Harlow, as you talk a lot about, you know, and how things are going to go. Well, if you're starting on of brand-in neighborhood, yeah, I don't want houses that are kind of out of luck. Well, we're going to be exactly in line with the rest of the neighborhood. We're not looking to stand out in front of anybody else. We're just sticking over and it's just that triangle kind of very, we look at tail and the back of it, right, where we're looking at a special exceptions and one of the things that this Aaron shared with me and we're talking about, this is the burden of proof on that special exception is a little bit less, you know, it's only the three boxes that we have to check. So it's a patio, That's mostly a patio. And yeah, we live on the lake. We've had this one for a long time. We've always said enough money, but we can do what we want right there. And I didn't really like how to be out of it. We can sit on and enjoy the view. Like, so that's where that special exception, it does not overstand everything that is associated with that special exception on that back end is for that patio. It's not the big house. I stood in one of my neighbors tonight because I delivered the letter form and we'll talk about the encroaching on the view. And he and I stood there and asked to one another, immediate, they were in his living room, he's like, show me where that patio is going to be and show me where the house is. 11, obviously sign it and the letter is up here in support. The other neighbor on the van links on the other side, they are absolutely in support of this and we have their letter. You know, it was Nevin, Ms. Johnson over there. They're also Lake Park members, you know, and they're here showing support that this house is not going to stand out. I think the resonating theme I heard from the neighborhood time and time again, and everybody who talked to us, why is this, why are we having this conversation? So I don't want to take the time, time, but I would like to just reiterate, we're going to be consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. Yes, it said, I guess the total thing goes out to 5, 571 is worth it, but it's not 571 is worth it. But Gaggen passed, right? It's 36 something, maybe not even 12 or 36. And then I just like to reiterate the flows that, you know, folks, it's pretty important. It's pretty important to have been. We've got peers in the ground. We basically, the design of the house, right wrong or any different, is built. And we've got, forget about how we got here. Repairs in the ground, we have to start with trash. We're gonna pull those peers out. We're gonna redesign the place. And I don't know about you guys, but, you know, a couple hundred thousand dollars, not something I just want to throw out, you know, with a, so I plead with you to please, please consider the neighborhood and obviously the neighbors who are here, you know, joining with us and working on, you know, this is not here by choice. We are very unfortunate here and please consider that as you say. Say, may I have any questions? Yeah, you may wish to have that. And so first of all, your house looks, does look beautiful. I mean, your property, your parcel, where it's located, it's to know. I mean, you're looking right at the yacht look across the way. So obviously, this would definitely help out with property values in in Antioid Bay, which is probably why the neighbors are here because there were probably values to increase. But a couple of questions about the time. So before you demoed the house, you got architectural plans for the New Yorks correct. We did. So how did the architect miss the facility? Yeah, so this is Jerry Davis. He's our architect design and build contractor. So how did we miss that? I don't want to put words in your mouth, but so, but, but I guess we have, I think you may go up. Yeah, I think that's a great. Very. Very. Yes. Well, this. I ask you both questions simultaneously. Oh, and anyone's very dangerous owner of triple in the past a month. Okay. So every architect builder, the first thing you do step one is to pull up the current zone. So why wasn't the current zoning pulled up for this regard? Well, maybe I'll fill a little. See, you know, let's qualify when you say it that way. I was given like a, like, a Mr. Wool said, I was given two surveys, one for 2006, one for 2023. We started the design process of this house early 2024. So, and again, I've been building 28 years, building dozens of city municipalities just never come across a neighborhood that was re-zoned and not, and then setbacks not show up on a current problem, you know, survey. So never happened. So for that, you know, maybe that's some of an experience from not doing that. It's just never happened in over 250 bills and 48 years. So that's what I would kind of how I didn't. So, okay, so just in my background, I'm a commercial real estate and we always, no matter what, pull up. So in your 24 years, when I'm in your playing you, you've been to it, don't you pull up zoning for all your properties before you can do so, that way you, you're, you're, it is, it is, that is a normal thing when we're doing new construction on a lot that's never been built. And that's, that's absolutely a standard. When you're building on an existing lot that has president of setbacks that I have 17 year history of, that's what indicated to me that it didn't seem like I would need to do that. So but don't you typically no matter especially older homes such as you've always just blew up with the current zone, he hasn't even known had to twin up to wait to be platinum just to come first. I mean again I had a survey that was less than a year old. Okay and if the setbacks were changing, so when you're prior to that I would have you would think that would have shown up on the start on a recent survey. That's what that's why I didn't raise He read it flags. Okay, so the 2023 plaque was not updated with the current setbacks. And so your only confirmation was looking at the plaque not going through the city website and just pull up with current zoning experts, those current residents are as nation. Okay. The 2023 survey has been hit by an ending. Thank you. How are you? Sorry. Yes. Yeah. And how I guess this is probably pretty miserable. How did you get this these plans passed through the HOA or potential committee? Oh, that's a wonderful question. Thank you. Um, you know, and I don't know again just reaching, you know, because we've got some members in the neighborhood that are here. Everybody in the neighborhood is welcome. There was no issue with any neighborhood HOA and the design community. But you have an actual HOA committee. And in the Antigua, they bylaws, they clearly states that any new construction or renovation must comply with the zone ordinance. You know I don't know it that well when it sounds like you probably read it. I have it yeah and that's what states so if you were to demo a building and not talk to our contextual committee, whoever they may be, when they come to us ahead, notice knock down the building, what are you playing that doing here? Because we need to approve it before you start building. If we hit rewind and we started this thing over again, we would certainly do things very, very different, right? If we needed the variance, we would've been in front of you guys, you know, back in August, time for him. What a should have could have, what the, what the HOA and the committee was, you got to understand, again, this is ancient people of that. We're not talking about, you know, highly professional engineers and, you know, business interpreters, I apologize if that came across from wrong way, which I don't understand what I'm saying, is that the neighborhood should not that organized. What they saw was a new home coming in, somebody who's lived in the neighborhood for an extended period of time, would build relationships in there, and they saw it, and they said, absolutely, yeah, this is good for me, but that was all I heard from both the architecture committee as well as the nature. Okay, so you were a communication group. Absolutely, we went through our whole process. Yeah, they were approved it. Okay, so the architectural committee. We go ahead, obviously. Just so the architectural committee of the table they did approve this design. Absolutely. No, we only so the communication that we went back and forth on is a 75% requirement from the exterior on the side of the house. So we've made a little bit of a tweak, add a little bit more stone. And yeah, all we want. Yeah, it's 2,200 square feet minimum building, two car garage, yeah, all that stuff. but twice in the document is stated that it had to go forward to current zoning setbacks. So I'm just curious, just thinking about that. How did the committee approve your plans without looking at the setbacks themselves? And if they had done their job to begin with, it probably wouldn't be here today. Sure. Group of volunteers, I don't like yourself doing absolutely the best job that they possibly can. You heard mentioned earlier that they were all caught off guard at the neighborhood of New Horizont. I promise you, not a single person on the architecture committee knew that. And I just, that's an assumption that I'm drawing, but yeah, the reason I'm going to have one historical question, George, may I mean, I do want to ask you here, because you opened the work, because you gave me some yesterday, I know your house was per se, which is your adult or you plus the old was there any issues came up during that obviously you made a decision not to leave a large difference time on it. Sure was there anything that came up in that discussion that would be held in the front? No, not at all Actually, if you got me scratching my head, it was a it's going to try to figure out how to do it correctly and say that we weren't selling us. Actually, no, wait. We were in the process of buying another house over on July, you know, they were in the warehouse instead of here. And there was a sign that was in front of our house and at that point in time, it was a potential remodeling because we were evaluating and remodel when we're doing the addition to get the square footage. But we've never put that home up for sale. I got a question. We got a result of what goes out to the general public or how I always have announced we could just kind of rip them and see if we could listen. So so me I may know with what happened in 2018 typically what you do if you're rezoning an area is you've notified by newspaper and not less made an application for a reason I don't know that but if it was but if it was a council directive to go there, we would put that in this paper for another notification and I would have sent on the website. I don't know what happened at that time. That would be general. Just have a curiosity, interior of the architect, fully taken to bite this component. Who appears to work? Well, I've certainly looked at, you know, not knowing the outcome of the meeting. Much easier to make the front conform versus the rear to conform. So the front would take a little bit of modification on the interior. The only part of the front that's exceeding that is the garage. So it's simply push that garage back and redesign the bathroom, room, mudroom area, we can make it work. But the back, I think that would be just too much. I think it would be just too much. I think it would change the whole course of the house. And so if you redesigned the garage to meet the requirements, does that mean it would be able to flag with coverage ratio? I think it works because I think we're so close. I think it probably would get OK. So. And again, before we set forms, we, we all, especially when you're dealing with a, a tight block, we always do an envelope survey. So we place, you know, of course, you go off of these surveys, you set your forms accordingly, and they, you know, they got the left side all three eights of an inch. That's an easy thing, you know, obviously that's, that's not in question here, I'm sure, but we can definitely fix that issue, but we'll try to be proactive and do that to make sure, you know, we don't have to do this one time, you know. So, and I've known how self-sufficiency very tight, you know, and we have to do the same things. One of the factors we have to find in the three is whether the variance requested is necessary, or the reasonable use of property, and whether it's the minimum variance, you would achieve that purpose. And you speak to that a little bit, is this the minimum necessary to achieve your purpose? I believe so. I mean, I think, you know, doing any major modifications, changing of a plan, I mean, we're in a position now with the work that's been done. It's a good start. I know. Well, let's assume for a second that we can't consider any of the costs that have already been spread because it's a good start. You know, let's assume for a second that we can't consider any of the costs that have already been spread because it's a self created issue. And let's assume for a second we can't consider any of the potential future costs. In that scenario, is it still the minimum necessary to make this property reasonably useful. Your professional opinion? Yeah, it is. You talked about why you think it is. Well, again, I just feel like. I know you call you know, may not weigh into a decision, but it has to weigh into our decision, you know, because you can't look past it when it affects us, you know. So I just built, you know, any, you know, again, the modification of the front could very easily be achieved. And now I'm going to achieve the front barriers, but also achieve the overall 35% maximum of a lot. Think anything outside of those things create real real issues. Okay. So what I'm hearing you saying is that the front could be easily modified to the second. Could be modified easily. But today is we could use the existing weird. And the side one inch. That's not going to happen. You're changing the front. And then the thought is presumably if you're in the front, you're so close you can come in and do the maximum coverage is. So then we're really just talking about the rear, saying exactly, the special exception. One question, this is not picking on you. I have not made it online one way or another one is here. So we'll read into this. Okay. Do you any more question? Do you feel like your neighbors should also get a similar variance? All of the neighbors along that take away? If we were to get that out, basically they would go through the same exact procedure with chair would tear down and want to rebuild to the same place. Yeah, I really do. And we don't want to encourage people to tear down the houses. So if they decide to be in a horrible position, you're in which I'm very simply to set that aside for a second. If we grant the variance, all of the variance, let's say. Sure. Would you, if your neighbors came to us, would you have tried to test if you did one or similar, would you think it would be appropriate for you to musty-gave them a similar variance? Yeah, absolutely would. And here's the logic behind. I'm not saying yes in honest and care insurance, you know? I'm not saying yes just because I'm hoping that turns out to be in our dam. I'm saying yes because that's how the houses already developed are built. Right? I know that the map that we put up there may not have drawn conclusions this all, but the reason that was there was because that's how they're just going back to where they were. Right? So as long as everybody's uniform in the same thing, I don't see it. You know anything. We're actually going to be if we don't have the front, we're actually going to be further back. So we're going to be upset compared to the rest of the run. Whereas one is in zoning. And I really do, I go back to the fact that, thanks to this, in which really did fit a perfect model, right? If we had SF10, it would have been SF10. It just didn't exist. So here we go, right? So that means your push, yes. No one keeps on the front of the number. We're in Texas. We have big trucks. It's a big deal. It's a big deal. Is born have any further questions? Any other one additional question? It's just a question. Just to make sure, you know, now, medically, precisely structure where that whole set ignoring the annuals for a second, is that sit on the exact same footprint as the original ones? I think it's, it's absent, no, not exactly. I'm just a shame on the houses, simply, okay. Okay, that's what I did. You made that comment. I just said, I'm going to make sure I did. Okay. If I, if I, I'm very just out of one thing, remember, so that old house was built eight feet off of the set. So this one's actually going, yeah, to 10. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks. Is there anyone else here who would like to make a short statement? Please approach the podium and say your name. Typically sure I love it. You simply pass. I talk really bad. Robin Johnson, 307, scenic, which is does one house in between hours and a little precedence. I don really fast. Robin Johnson, 307, C. Nick, which is one house at between hours in the middle of the president's with your sense of 1997. First up, I want to thank you all because I don't like coming to meetings because I don't want somebody to volunteer, but it elected to do anything. So, that was not my name. Well, first you know, thinking about this, being there since 1997, now that's a moment, never surpassed, we probably want to go along this people living in Antipurbey, that this particular study. The first, the only concern I had, you know, coming over here to look at this would be what you raised about it being a precedent. I don't know that I want, you know, to, it's just so wacky in there, or for lots to like this. I mean, who's to say that down the road, so when I was not doing it and then being on the set. So I'm really glad to hear first that it's not going to be some kind of a precedent that, you know, now it it's something that an individual will look at each one of these. I really think it should. The question has some view lines, you know, the concern will be, you know, who's the impact of here by this variance? The view lines and the neighboring property owners, I don't have a problem with it too over. I look down at it again today. Just kind of looking at my, you know, it looks good to me. But I guess the other two neighbors, I know what of them said it's coming to come in a day of emergency time. I don't know all of the standards or understand them all. But I heard, you know, neighborhood, the neighbors on either side of the waterfront, the neighborhood, the city is a whole. I cannot see it any scenario how making this small or changing it back to meet these requirements. Great thing are going to be a value to me as a member in property owner to my neighborhood, which I've been in a long time, but in safety. This is going to be a beautiful large home that I'm convinced that they work hard to make it fit in. I mean, I get this small lot. And that's a big picture here, right? And we look at all these only things that we're saying, you're pretty, how since really big on a small lot. I do get that, but that's a popular, I can tell you, I mean, I'm 100% want this. Yeah, I don't know what it was that said. Of course we did for their value, our home value should be more, we're running into the city of Eden. I'm sorry, I make those. I learned a lot because you all were newer to you, I guess. So's learned a lot about reasonable useful in that standard. I didn't really understand except, you know, this is a link for property. I think, you know, the city in 1977, you know, we recognized the docs. You know,, that was hugely useful to classes of the late part of the party. I just think it's a special, it's a special project. If you want to make the best use, you can have that late part of the party. And I think this is it. And I think it was my house back, no. I mean, not right now. It would be so far away out of line. So I mean, I'm not being a fitting for this. You know, should you breath this? And then I was looking little confused. I don't, you know, all the history about why this happened or why didn't they know. I didn't see that as relevant. Just wanted to throw that out there. I didn't know how that should impact. That's all I'm not kidding. I just want to spend a few years. Yeah, I asked you a question. So you've been in the neighborhood since 1997. Yes. This neighborhood is very unique. It has a lot of redevelopment potential. So if we grant a variance for this house, there are, so we always have to be careful of what we grant because we don't want to pay ourselves an corner or a future board in a corner with future variances. And I would suspect that since the laws are typically smaller, that we're going to have a lot of variance requests in the future. And I would also suspect that many future buyers will demo houses or redevelop the house or renovate the houses and it just can be hard to come forward with yes up to the teams of it. In Europe and it has a long time resident, how do I think we're best weathered with this? How concerned are you with the redevelopment of your neighbor, but are there any things that you or other homeowners would be skeptical of or concerned about for future redevelopments? Great question. You know, we are, are and also know, our, I don't say our heart and soul, but, you know, we're very, you know, we've lived there since 1997 by a believer, you know, forever. Love our neighbors. It's really important to us. I do think that I was sincere about yet when we said, you know, we're going to look each of these individually. I try to picture a picture in the properties in my neighborhood where it could be subject to abuse or making a big difference to neighborhood that might be, right? And so I appreciate the fact that we still really haven't forgotten it. I did, it did occur when we were talking about the decisions that haven't some kind of precedent. I'm going to show the city attorney can do better action. That I don't know. But it makes sense to me that we're looking each other. But no, I don't have any concerns with this. I'm a big go in this every minute. I feel like our water property is full of the value of our that clearly does the the value of our. But you'll think any future development of labor properties would impede any views or create any future problems amongst the neighbors who don't conduct for problems. That's also actually an issue that is something that is pretty important to me to be the neighbors, my neighbors. I don't see that as being at concern. I mean, we're all already in the homes of the man who had been two stories. Did you start with three stories? Network down on January 1, 2000. But we, you know, all of them have been two stories. We also have several existing two stories. And I'm saying that he was, I'm one over and I have an addition on top. You know, is his two story going to be a little bit yes. But that is somebody, you know, didn't have the, you know, a lot to buy a waterfront house in 97. I'm going to have slightly less less view maybe. But you know, it's just kind of, I don't see you all that gonna do is go up, right? Because these little acts I'm telling you, you can see, are so small already. But it's not like, it's not like this is not, it's gonna make any difference. If they want to know the time you are for, you know, they're adopted. I'm going to go to the bathroom. Yes. You need to go to the bathroom. Yes. Yes. different. So they want to know the time you are for, you know, their job. Then I'm good with it. Anyway, thank you. Thank you guys. My name is Manipada Chiyam. Chiyam, I can see a couple of those down from the North. When I got this as Mr. Wolf's figure that, you know, it came as price to me, I didn't know that was the values of the change. But I think Mr. Wolf did a great job in presenting how we feel about this. And the corrections, I'm not here because I'm hoping that this nice house, beautiful house will include the value of my property. I'm yet to support the low family and the value of the property and what the name is in shade is, no. Like this, This is hot list. Yeah. The Coli users. Okay. Maybe. Eric, you made so many references to prisons. But the authors of as clearly stated many, many times there's no presidency. In the case, as we brought to the board. And so right now, I don't see any issue of this because if you look at the original footprint of the house, and what the wolf said doing down now to meet it doesn't bother anybody at all. I mean, when I misoved the time to sit what came in the, what all the other sex that what came in that notice that notification I mean I got to have to go back to school to take a ride home. But Mr. Wolf the wolf family did a beautiful job coming across all the neighbors, actually high-picking what is the variance from the original footprint. And really, there's not much at all. None of us can be affected by this. We were all spoken, the neighbors are spoken, and we would be very, very disappointed if the wolves won't be able to build this property that they dream on. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else like to do? Okay. Then at 714, we will close the public. The discussion portion of the series. We want to discussion of the board. Is anyone have any questions or comments for discussion? Board. Question came up and it's part of the outside of the house. It's the city of the board. Is anyone having any questions or comments for discussion? Questions about the outside of the house. Is the city of the Mediterranean problem inside of the house? No, we cannot. The side will be relevant to the coverage, lock average. And so that part of the request for the one's every cent. just need to meet our other requirements for our high-end total of the, when Lisa is indicated that it meets everything else that we would require in addition to. So we're valid by the five stipulations to the order to keep grants a very, so that's sort of a jurisdictional threshold. We cannot grant the variance unless the applicants carried the burden from farmers. That's what regard to the frontline, frontline, national coverage, not the real. Right. You know, it's definitely a very unique neighborhood, a very., art soul, and it's going to be difficult to build a house. As a board, we love our neighbors. We want our neighbors to succeed. We want our property values to go up. We want the town to continually be improved with better looking to our homes. It's definitely a beautiful home, but we always have to be concerned about the current zoning ordinance in that we have to maintain the integrity of the comp 2018 plan. However, this is a unique situation with Aaron stating the fact that there is no current zoning that that really fits this particular portion. And so therefore you guys are definitely not a disadvantage. The question I have from the board. What if we were to grant a variance for the rear setback only request that the front set set back in garage meets the front set that requirements. So therefore it gets us at or very close to the coverage ratio. And that would be a good compromise. Does the board see that kind of variance going against getting the circulations we're bound by. Don't we see any problem with that? But it wouldn't be this way. In much more fails for the fellow domains, I don't see if there's no precedence here. You're saying it's not. It's we want you to do this? We're going to have to go do it. What's the point of disowning the letter of law? You know, the way it is now. What does it do? What does it accomplish? Like the attack. So here, let me ask you up on the three that you were proposed to remind Denal. And again, the rear is an especially exception. So for the three variances that you proposed to more Denal, what in the five do you think there's no that? I'm still trying to kick this type. So that's why I'm asking the, I'm asking my questions about more. Does anyone see any problems? And again, we have, we have, we can grant the entire variance or you know, we've discussed at least and how to meet the front setback requirements. I have no problem with the rear, especially when we granted the variance two years ago for a cadet of a Tupper right down the street. I have no, especially when there, if I can get some tape lines, I've got no issue with the rear at all. But But, you know, and like I said, this is a, I think or key property that is older, it's older neighborhood that is just given a specific zoning, but there was no zoning when it was built. So it creates a lot of issues, but at the same time as a board, we are the gatekeepers, and we people have entrusted us to maintain the 2018 comprehensive plan. But at the same time, there are unusual situations such as this where possibly a variance is required. required. So again last support just anyone of the board seeing any issues of the class simulations I have either with all the all the variances or at least just granting the rear setback. I'll see you in front of you with grants of all I them. Obviously, it's only the, you know, the partial to everybody else's skills. Don't need all those stipulations just to go. Well, I can't. Maybe I can. Throw in some of the results. Yes, is that, you know, as I read through the information in the information and the daily injury requirements that we need, I tend to also agree that, first of all, the idea of the patio, the house mix completely exempts me, so how it's instilled with us, a reasonable thing, and a special exception when I lead through the legal requirements here, it seems to me that that could be writing or we we supported the special exception for the back. Where I get stuck with the variance is under criteria and law of the criteria three. And as I go, OK, I haven't heard enough. But I'm certainly definitely open to, would love to have somebody convince me otherwise that one in three really aren't being met. And that's where I'm starting right now. I agree. You know, one in three or more wants for me. I think David, the traffic can defend issue, the debt factor, traffic, that's all the deficit that I manage you on. The second detriment to health again, I don't see any issue on those two points. I think we could probably cross to this office. Big net. Unnecessary hardship, I think they've also met because of the 28% reduction because of the setback lines. The reducing her global area by more than 25% which the state of Texas considers something we can treat as a necessary modular. So I think Dave met two or five. The only questions are one and three. I'm inclined to say what we're writing number one that Dave met the special circumstances with regard to the zone because the minimum for the zone is 15,000 square feet and so I would take an 11,000 square foot lot would be unusual, especially relative to the zone. I still have some question I understand the staff's position then it's either or it strikes me as unusual that the council would create city ordinances that would allow an entire neighborhood to seek reception or the marries. So I'm struggling with that but assuming that we take staff's interpretation as they presented it, that the Apple can't have met none to what, because they've shown it to be special in order to develop the zone. So then we're only left with number three. Necessary for reasonable use. And point on that, it's not that the question is not what they're proposing is reasonable or not not. That's not the question. The question is is the variance necessary for any reasonable use? Is there another reasonable use that they could make of the property that would not require the variance. I think that's a tougher one. But I would tend to look to the neighbors on the point and they seem to think that it's appropriate. And again, it's a prayer. But then the question is, is it the minimum necessary for that region to lose? Again, I struggle with that as well. That's really the end of this. one question maybe this if we can ask the city for information. Right now this was set up as that's a 15 correct. Yes, that's correct. Yeah, and so the city had to make a decision. a little bit about FF, I said 2243. Would there be a, get the city ever consider a zone that would have had setbacks that allowed this hospital? So, so we take a look at the zoning in this, I mean, in this case, in 2018, there was in the shadow of we were there at that time, that's up to the team. It's air-to-discated. We've been in, maybe, maybe, Mr. Wolf. There was no SF-10, you know, a 10,000, which was worth a bit of a lot. Smaller lots, we'll have to fit that home, or maybe more homes, than just there is. From the 65 plaque. There was, there was not that available to that, so you go to the next available. So what's the closest available for that that would be the exit 15 although that does not be meet. It does make it a lot of record. It does meet the distance requirement for the depth. know, it barely made the funded requirements when they added on the extra portion. So there are other variables such as that that are to be considered like you like to reign up. If is there a SF-10 standard today? There is not. There is not. And my fact is that 15 and this up 22 are actually, absolutely now. These, the area here is a non-conforming or legal non-conforming area. So we can look at the request, say, the form of accessory building, same like that, they can still meet whether those are promised after that, but as far as anything else to resound, SF 15 for SF 22 will not resound, they'll send it this time. There's no further discussion of questions or comments support the board. Chair, I'll entertain a motion. Okay, I'll put it out there. We'll pull acceptance of the very needs. Including the special exception for the near plot line in that motion. Yeah, so we let's start with the grand end. So can you make that in the form of a motion that will include, you know, the, let me go back to the front paper, you can take a look at this to indicate. That if that's your motion to include the for the front yard setback I requested to allow for the side yard setback and requested to allow for the maximum building coverage to exceed and back to go for coverage requested until I was a special exception as requested such as that fact in the motion that we know for time down here. Yeah, I'm saying to set every floor the subclass was there, we've logged in, it's in priority each of those separate points for the variance. So the The motion we have on the table is to floor the area to issue a variance under section 159.236 to allow for 4.1 foot infringement in the minimum 30 foot courtyard setback and a variance under section 159.238.10 foot infringement into the minimum 10 foot side yard setback and to issue a variance under section 1.159.238. 2, 3, 2, maximum building coverage in a lot area by 1.7% and issue a special exception the section 1.59.8 B for the rear yard of setback and funding the city of Dallas, tickle. I line 14.5 in bridge and come to the menu. the section 1.59.8 B for the rear yard of setback and funding the city of Dallas, Tickle. By 11, 14.5, Bridge and Kings, the memory of 25 foot rear yard for that section. That is the motion on the table. Do we have a second? But I have a second, I have a second. That motion is not. I will make a motion to grant a special exception under section 159.87b for the rearview I sent back about in the city of Dallas take line by allowing 14.5 foot incursion into the minimum 25 foot rear yard first section 159.2 through. So. I mean. So sorry. So. All those in favor say I. Any opposed. That motion passes unanimously. So approved exception under the form before there. We have a motion on one, two, and over three. We're going to do a little bit. We can do it individually if you want. We want to just do it. I make a motion. We. We want to do that. I make a motion to deny the application with regard to section with regard to 4.1 for encouragement from the front yard and to deny the application. If you've got the very request for the point of my foot impression into the 10 yard side yard into deny the application for the . The application for the . The .. What does. Yeah, but we can't pass. We need to. Or approve it. That. All right. So let's go one. The. The. The chair. What is the motion. Let's put it. Yeah. Let's put that up. There's section 159-23 for a 10 foot encroachment and to the minimum 10 foot side of set plan. 30 seconds. Sorry. All those in favor say hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Get that passage. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. All those in favor say aye. I was opposed. Okay. So the application for various 4.1. What can push them in the 30 yard. But I'm sure setback is denied. The application for variance for the 30th of September. the area is denied. The application for variance for the 30% maximum doing coverage. The light area is denied. And the application for variance of point one foot and encouragement on the side yard is granted. And the application for special exception for the rear yard take line by line 14.5 foot encouragement into the rear guard take line by line 415 lift and push. And he's really hard. He's, he's also next. On the second vote, I'll give it now. We're really that. Yes. No, no. It's good. Great. We're doing it. You didn't see that. You said you two. You two were in favor of the denial. You two were not. Right. On the one that just happened a second one for denial of number one and number three for the front of growth length and third option max moment average. We got Colin G kids. I think you were a good guy with that. It was a good guy. I was a good, all the, the shungaim. Can you guys just make paper, no, clearly? Yes, I'm going to ask you that. Yes, please. For the denial of one and three, this is the 4.1 foot enrichment into the Frank R. and the maximum building coverage. I vote to deny. I'm sorry. I was denied. So, four and one, yes. And four and one. And because it did not always approve. Four and one. But that we are, Virginia. I don't hear your phone. I'm not sure if I can do it. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. that's that's and and and and and But you have to not get sick. So, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I really, I're doing a hard job. Oh, good luck. But that's right. You know, that's a very good deal. What does that mean? I guess we're doing an hour or so. Oh, no. And you know what? It's part of the process. I'm sorry that you called me. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry. I mean, that's all we did. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to get it on the side. I'm going to get it on the right side. You're going to blow to the right. Hey, maybe. Yeah. Yes, immediately. Yes. Okay. I'm going to get ready for that. Oh, I'm going to get ready for that. Director. You know, we've got to go to the parent meeting. So I've been doing that for a whole minute. Yeah. Okay. So what do you do? And you know, the parents always did one. We always had a city attorney. I'm sure. Yes. I want you to show us any turns. I see me. I mean, I'll make a big shout. Okay. But yeah, it's always good. I have city attorney available to patients. You did great. I mean, it's my first time from a lot of y'all. Yeah, no, this is, you did fantastic. I mean, this in the future, man, I know we kept in the rough, we were in the presentation, but normally, when the air day of presentations, we would just stay quiet until our presentation was over. But in this particular case, there were so many different aspects I think. I needed to ask questions as they absolutely, just that is, once you pass that, purely under the example. I was guilty of that too, that's it. I'm sorry. Thank you.