[9:39] Okay, we'll call this meeting to

[9:43] order and, um, start with

[9:46] introductions.

[9:48] I am Marshall Albritton, the city attorney.

[9:53] Debbie Chadwick, board member.

[9:55] Kathryn Booth, board member.

[9:57] Mary Catherine Bradshaw, chair.

[9:59] Chris Goetz, board member.

[10:01] Robert Diehl, board member.

[10:02] Patrick Napier, Planning, Zoning and Permitting, City of Oak Hill.

[10:06] Jeff Sharp, building official.

[10:08] Okay. I would like to read into the minutes that Pat is joining us and

[10:14] minutes that Pat is joining us and replacing

[10:15] Matt Harris and thank him for his service here.

[10:19] He will be on the— he's a commissioner now and we will We miss him,

[10:25] but we wish him well. And thank you, Kat, for agreeing to join us.

[10:31] Happy to be back.

[10:32] Okay, so let's— join us for the Pledge of Allegiance.

[10:37] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

[10:42] America, and to the republic for which it stands,

[10:48] one nation under God, indivisible,

[10:51] with liberty and justice for all.

[10:58] First order of business is approval of the minutes,

[11:03] and we have all had the opportunity to look at the minutes from the July

[11:11] 21st meeting. Are there any comments or changes?

[11:16] Is there a motion to approve the minutes?

[11:20] I'll make a motion. Goetz?

[11:25] I'll second it.

[11:26] Chadwick.

[11:27] Okay, all those in favor?

[11:28] Aye.

[11:29] Chadwick.

[11:30] You can— you want to abstain?

[11:32] I'll abstain.

[11:33] Okay, since you weren't there. Uh, Bradshaw? Yes.

[11:36] Aye.

[11:37] Goetz?

[11:37] Aye. Diehl?

[11:38] Okay, so the minutes pass.

[11:42] Um, we'll sign that right now.

[11:47] Okay, sir, did you sign in over there on

[11:54] that table? If you'll do that first.

[12:00] And we have one, one case tonight for 4129

[12:07] Outer Drive. We'll follow the same

[12:13] process. Were the notices sent out?

[12:19] Yes.

[12:19] Okay, thank you. And the Presenters can come up.

[12:23] When you come up, if you'll please speak into the mic and tell us your name and

[12:30] what you're asking. And then maybe there will be some public comments.

[12:35] We'll give it time. And if there are no public comments,

[12:40] then we'll talk and we can ask questions then. Okay? So the floor is yours.

[12:46] Great.

[12:46] And that mic can be taken out of there if there's something you want to point to

[12:51] up there and you Want to, but we're streaming and recording, so we use the

[12:56] streaming and recording, so we use the mic.

[12:56] Great.

[13:00] Cool.

[13:01] Good evening. My name is Ryan Hooper.

[13:03] I'm a developer and contractor here in Nashville.

[13:07] I've been doing this for about 6 years.

[13:09] I have ongoing projects and have completed projects in West Meade, 12 South,

[13:15] Sylvan Park. This will be my first project in Oak Hill, and of course,

[13:19] it's It's one I have to come in front of you guys for, but it is what it is.

[13:25] So anyway, this property at 4129 Outer Drive is in Zone B of your guys'

[13:30] jurisdiction, whatever you want to call it.

[13:33] There's some hardships that are creating a little bit of a challenge when it comes

[13:38] to the development of this site.

[13:41] For one, the shallowness of this lot compared to other ones in Zone B.

[13:46] Yes.

[13:46] Is substantial, as well as on General Bate,

[13:49] there is a platted setback or just a setback of 40 feet.

[13:53] So those 2 obstacles, as well as the zones for both 1 and 2 and the height,

[13:59] make it very challenging or almost— I mean,

[14:02] it's currently impossible to build a house of the square footage that is presented

[14:08] across the board in Zone B and in Oak Hill,

[14:11] which is around 5,500 square square feet, it's not possible at this point based on,

[14:18] again, the shallowness and the width as well as the setback off General Bate.

[14:23] So I've come, I've spoken to Patrick a handful of times now, and with his

[14:29] handful of times now, and with his guidance,

[14:30] just wanted to present a solution which is reducing the setback from General Bate

[14:36] from 40 to 20. Originally, I was going to suggest maybe reducing the rear setback,

[14:42] but with the placement being on corner and with that neighboring property north

[14:48] facing General Bate,

[14:49] as well as obviously it's very important to have big backyards in Oak Hill,

[14:55] I figured the reduction from 40 to 20 off General Bate would still meet the

[15:00] satisfaction from a development standpoint, but also not affect—

[15:05] The view.

[15:06] neighboring properties as well.

[15:09] So yeah, that's, that's my push,

[15:12] and I can answer any questions or—

[15:15] Well, okay. Are you here to make a public comment?

[15:20] She's the owner.

[15:24] Okay. You can comment now if you want to,

[15:27] or you don't have to comment at all either.

[15:29] But if you'll come up— if you want to comment, if you'll come up and—

[15:33] Yeah.

[15:34] Does it hurt?

[15:36] Just tell us your name and—

[15:39] My name is Debbie Waddell, and I've lived in the house for 26 years.

[15:46] I bought it in 2000.

[15:49] It's been a nice area,

[15:51] and while I really definitely respect the restrictions,

[15:57] I'm going to miss that Oak Hill because I feel like that's been my

[16:05] home. But I'm facing a dilemma right now as I have— I'm getting—

[16:12] I'm selling and wanting— I'm going to a condo, downsizing. It's time.

[16:20] I'm retired. And I have been very selective of who I've chosen as a

[16:27] developer, if you will.

[16:30] I've had multiple texts, multiple calls, as you can imagine,

[16:37] and I've looked at their proposal and I've looked at their rendering,

[16:44] and while I would love To be able to sell my home to somebody that

[16:52] could do something with it, it's just not possible.

[16:58] And I feel like what they want to do with it versus what they would

[17:05] have to do with it if they did not have the opportunity to make it—

[17:13] I know this is not about aesthetics, but it is about—

[17:19] Aesthetic value.

[17:20] Making it fit in and pleasing to what's already there.

[17:26] And I feel like they've done that.

[17:29] So I have been very selective, and they've done a good job with that.

[17:36] So I just would hope that y'all would consider this.

[17:42] And it is being fully transparent.

[17:45] It is— makes a difference on what I can get and what I can find to live

[17:53] in as a person that's retiring. So thank you.

[17:57] Thank you. So there we have no public comments.

[18:03] So if you want to come back up,

[18:07] it's time for board members to ask any questions,

[18:13] and I have one.

[18:15] Chair, quick point of order.

[18:17] She did not receive any letters in support or opposition.

[18:21] Okay. Thank you. Clarify. All right. Thank you.

[18:26] We've got these 9 standards that need to be met,

[18:30] and you address 2 of them in the application.

[18:34] And on 3 through 9, you simply said correct,

[18:39] as if you were agreeing with the statement.

[18:43] Financial returns, number 4,

[18:45] financial returns only shall not be considered as a basis for granting a

[18:52] variance. You said correct.

[18:54] Can you elaborate a little bit more on those standards?

[19:00] What are the reasons convince us that That, that's true.

[19:05] Okay. The financial return shall not be considered as a basis for granting a

[19:10] variance. The reason that I'm presenting this 40—

[19:13] this reduction in the setback is to match the cohesiveness throughout the

[19:17] neighborhood in regards to the height and the width of the homes.

[19:21] In order to develop this based on this 40-foot general base setback, me,

[19:26] whoever is going to develop it, Is going to create a 20—

[19:29] I think 28 feet is zone 1 for the height, and then 35.

[19:33] But with a narrow house, you're going to look—

[19:35] this home is going to look more like a pencil instead of something that fits the

[19:40] neighborhood cohesive— cohesively. Um, I live in Sylvan Park.

[19:44] I build homes in 12 South.

[19:46] I've seen developers build homes that just try and get as much square footage in

[19:51] that are built 45 feet tall,

[19:53] and It's terrible for the neighborhood and it's something that sticks out.

[19:57] And that's one thing that would be harder for me to sell.

[20:01] But at the end of the day, it's ultimately what fits that neighborhood.

[20:05] And I think that's why you guys are here and have your own jurisdiction and

[20:10] regulations. So I think I put correct on— I mean,

[20:13] we can go through every single one of them.

[20:16] I put correct on them because I didn't see—

[20:18] I agreed with the variance will not authorize activities in the zone district

[20:23] authorize activities in the zone district other

[20:23] than those permitted by this chapter.

[20:26] Okay.

[20:27] I mean, it's going to be a single-family house, so—

[20:29] Okay.

[20:30] Financial returns, I just touched on.

[20:33] The alleged difficulty has not been created by any persons having interest in

[20:38] created by any persons having interest in the

[20:38] property. I didn't create the hardship, obviously. Ms. Debbie did not.

[20:42] Granting the variance request will not confer on the applicant any special

[20:47] confer on the applicant any special privilege

[20:48] that is denied to other lands, structures, buildings in the same districts.

[20:53] I could touch on that.

[20:54] I'm— I don't know if anyone else has been given a reduced setback on the corner.

[20:59] The reason that we're requesting it is we have a 174-foot in-depth lot.

[21:04] Everything else on the corner is 199.

[21:06] If you go up to Greenland or Greerland,

[21:09] if you even go directly south of the property across the street from 4129

[21:13] property across the street from 4129 Outer,

[21:14] that's at right around 200 is the depth of that lot, and we're working with 173.

[21:19] So— I I obviously wouldn't want to— I don't—

[21:22] if I didn't have to be here to request this and I can fit a home that is

[21:26] this and I can fit a home that is cohesive,

[21:27] I would have done that.

[21:29] Um, the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible reasonable use of

[21:34] land and building. That's the meetings I had with Patrick, um,

[21:38] to not request something that's going to go above what I think is necessary to

[21:43] go above what I think is necessary to build

[21:43] a home that fits in Oak Hill.

[21:45] Thank you.

[21:46] The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to public welfare or injurious

[21:51] to other property or improvements in the area which this property is located.

[21:56] Of course not. Should not affect public welfare or injurious.

[22:00] And then the proposed variance will not impair adequate supply of light and air to

[22:05] adjacent properties.

[22:06] Again, that's— I'm fitting in with the height restrictions that you guys have

[22:11] requested and have put in there.

[22:13] I'm not asking to I'm not asking for more height or even—

[22:16] I'm not even requesting to reduce that side setback to the right side,

[22:20] which would build that home closer to the one if you're looking at outer to the

[22:25] right. So that's the reason I put correct for all that.

[22:29] Okay. Thank you for the explanation.

[22:32] Yeah, of course.

[22:33] That's helpful. And I'm wondering if you have any figures for what the contextual

[22:39] setback is.

[22:40] Yeah.

[22:40] With the houses to the— on the street.

[22:45] Yep.

[22:45] Yes, ma'am.

[22:46] Are there any that have a 20-foot?

[22:48] So all the homes on Outer, the 4 that we took, which per code is 62 feet,

[22:53] 0.78 of front setback, which we are staying in line with.

[22:58] Regarding the 20-foot The only one I can really think of that's across the street

[23:04] really think of that's across the street is

[23:04] abiding by, from what I can tell.

[23:06] We did not get that measured, but it looks like it is 40 feet.

[23:11] However, they do have the depth, and that's what—

[23:14] if you pull that up on Google Maps,

[23:17] you'll be able to see that they did an addition and were able to get the square

[23:23] footage and build to the rear of the lot because they had that additional 20—

[23:29] it was 20-plus feet,

[23:30] which is what I'm requesting for So I don't know if that answers your question.

[23:36] It does.

[23:36] Okay, great.

[23:37] Thank you. Yeah.

[23:39] I've got a question. Have you considered changing the address of the lot?

[23:47] I have not, no.

[23:50] It seems to me if it was a General Bait lot,

[23:53] the house would fit in a lot better on this lot and it wouldn't require I think

[24:00] this lot and it wouldn't require I think 20

[24:00] feet is very close and I'm not inclined to grant that.

[24:05] But if you came— if you reoriented the house to face General Bate and changed the

[24:11] address to a General Bate address, I think that would solve your problems. Yes?

[24:18] I tried. And this has been years ago.

[24:23] Come on, stand up.

[24:24] You can come up here.

[24:27] This is being televised.

[24:28] Oh, I'm sorry. I'm so sorry.

[24:30] People will want to hear what you're saying.

[24:33] Okay.

[24:34] No, I tried because I hate going to my mailbox on Outer.

[24:38] And my door is— my address is basically General Bay because that's where my

[24:44] General Bay because that's where my driveway

[24:45] is. The, uh, I went my— at Melrose is where— and I went there and they denied

[24:51] where— and I went there and they denied it.

[24:51] Now, that's been several years ago.

[24:53] Who denied it?

[24:56] At the— I went to the post office at Melrose.

[25:01] Okay. But I don't— as a legal matter,

[25:04] I don't think that the post office can dictate to the City

[25:09] of Oak Hill how often—

[25:10] And I don't know, it's been several years. Right, sure.

[25:13] We're not questioning—

[25:14] Yeah, no, no.

[25:15] And I don't know who I talked to. Yeah, but I did, I did ask.

[25:19] I didn't make a, like, a formal request, I guess, if you will.

[25:24] I mean, but I, I agree.

[25:26] I've always felt like it really needed— however,

[25:32] I do sit directly across from another house in the same

[25:39] situation, but it's—

[25:41] I've seen this done. Within the last 5, 6 years in my neighborhood.

[25:46] So I think this is something you'd have to do with Metro. Is that right?

[25:50] I mean, I really don't know how it was done,

[25:53] but I just know it was done and can be done.

[25:56] I've, um, I pursued this on a project I'm currently building in Westmead.

[26:01] It's on the corner of Robin Hill and Davidson.

[26:04] And I tried to orient it towards Robin Hill.

[26:07] Metro said no, because they need The front,

[26:09] the shorter side of the lot is where the home has to face because I pushed for

[26:14] home has to face because I pushed for about

[26:15] 5 months with Joey Hargis and they said the home has to orient,

[26:19] the front door has to orient on the shorter side of the lot for orientation

[26:23] cohesively across around on both sides of the block because I am on a corner on 401

[26:29] Davidson's the address. But yeah, that's been my experience with Metro.

[26:33] Well, may I ask, if I may, Assuming that you could get it done,

[26:37] would there be any problem here with you doing that?

[26:40] Any other thing that— other than Metro saying—

[26:43] your belief that Metro wouldn't change your address and all that,

[26:46] if that could be done, would you be open to that?

[26:49] Because then it does look like what Mr.

[26:51] Diehl said, it may not need a variance at all.

[26:54] I don't know that because I'm not a surveyor, but it's real close.

[26:58] If that's the case, I would have to shoot the 4 homes contextually off General Bate,

[27:03] which we didn't do because we were under the assumption we would build off Outer.

[27:07] So I obviously don't have my laptop.

[27:09] Oh, I see what you're saying.

[27:11] The 62.78 building setback, if you turn the house,

[27:15] it would extend beyond the setbacks to the ones on— yeah, on Outer.

[27:20] And Marshall, if you have it available, figure Figure 4, with—

[27:25] under our definitions,

[27:27] lays out the orientation of a front yard and side yard and rear yard for corner

[27:33] lots. And so having that example, and I would defer to you on this decision,

[27:39] does that then mean we are required to orient homes based on that building

[27:45] orient homes based on that building envelope

[27:46] and setbacks as shown in Figure 4 for a corner lot?

[27:50] Can you pull up Figure 4 for me? Can someone do that?

[27:53] I can do it.

[27:54] I don't have a hard copy. Give me just a second.

[27:57] I'm probably going to need to get around you to look at that.

[28:01] Yeah, no problem.

[28:12] Oh no, I'm sorry.

[28:17] That's Section

[28:21] 14-113.

[28:23] What code section are you in?

[28:25] That is Section 14-113, Definitions.

[28:29] Okay.

[28:39] While they're looking this up, I do have a question.

[28:43] The renderings that you provided The side view to me appears to be equally as long

[28:50] or longer than the front view.

[28:53] But then when I look at the proposed footprint, that doesn't seem to reflect

[29:00] footprint, that doesn't seem to reflect that.

[29:00] Like if I look at the—

[29:02] I'm assuming you're talking about garage access off of General Bay?

[29:08] Correct.

[29:11] Is that— does that footprint truly match this rendering?

[29:14] The footprint that— yeah, I mean, the rendering is not—

[29:18] so it's in the definitions—

[29:20] as scale as it probably should be. But yes, the access is going to be there.

[29:24] So you're, you're going to fill up that entire box, essentially?

[29:28] It would be—

[29:29] or close, closer to—

[29:31] yeah.

[29:31] Okay.

[29:31] Yes, sir.

[29:32] So the proposed residence as shown on this plan is not Reflective of what the

[29:37] proposed residence will actually be.

[29:40] It would be— if we have 50 feet, 3-car garage,

[29:43] we need 24 feet and then we have some room.

[29:47] So maybe the height's not correct, but that is the envelope that I can build,

[29:53] that I was proposing and going to build for.

[29:56] What I think is incorrect is just the rendering that I made.

[30:02] Right.

[30:02] And that's my fault.

[30:03] Well, one thing, the chimney is on the left side and the garages are on the right

[30:09] side.

[30:09] Yeah.

[30:10] So, and the other thing I was going to mention too is it looks like the house,

[30:17] and the owner I think alluded to it,

[30:20] directly across Outer is in that same situation where they've built a longer,

[30:27] narrower Correct. They're maybe not as restricted in the rear as yours.

[30:33] They have more depth.

[30:34] They're more depth.

[30:35] Yeah, roughly 40 feet.

[30:42] Yeah. Yeah. I'm at what section now, Jeff?

[30:44] You were—

[30:44] You're on section 14-113, definitions.

[30:49] Definitions. And is it Figure 1,

[30:54] Lot Example?

[30:55] Figure 4. Figure 4.

[30:57] Sorry about that.

[30:58] Defined under yard, the term yard.

[31:02] Okay.

[31:03] Thank you. Okay.

[31:10] And again, if you restate the question for me.

[31:12] So in Figure 4, it shows an image and an exhibit layout of corner lot building

[31:17] envelopes and setbacks.

[31:19] Right.

[31:19] Which would specifically orient the front of a structure towards

[31:24] the more narrow street frontage, similar to what Metro requires.

[31:28] There's nothing in our ordinances.

[31:30] I'm not aware that OPO has a requirement—

[31:33] That we would require that.

[31:34] That we orient it that way.

[31:35] Okay.

[31:36] I understand that—

[31:37] That's the clarification.

[31:37] Davidson Road, and I can see how you wouldn't want Davidson Road—

[31:42] I've driven it all my life— to end up with the sides of a bunch of houses.

[31:47] It's always been a drive where you saw the front of houses.

[31:52] So Metro may have some kind of a requirement there,

[31:55] but I'm not aware of a requirement for that here in Oak Hill.

[32:00] Okay.

[32:00] And even if there were,

[32:02] I think that this Board could grant a variance to allow the house to be turned.

[32:07] That would just be a different variance.

[32:10] And it looks like, according to the applicant, Mr.

[32:13] Applicant, you would— if you do that,

[32:16] you'll have to grant a variance on Outer Drive so that it extends beyond the

[32:21] contextual setback. And further,

[32:23] if you're a neighbor and this matter was advertised as such and any neighbors

[32:29] advertised as such and any neighbors looked

[32:29] into it and thought, oh, well, he wants to have the house face this way,

[32:34] I don't I don't object to that at all,

[32:36] but somehow it ends up where it gets turned in the middle of this hearing and

[32:42] neighbors didn't get notice of that,

[32:44] they may have a feeling about that and the board may want to hear from them.

[32:49] Yeah, I don't think it's a variance—

[32:51] that variance is something we could grant today. Do you guys agree?

[32:54] No.

[32:54] Yeah.

[32:56] That would have to be a future hearing.

[32:57] But you could, you know, we've done this before where a person says, hey,

[33:02] I need an one of these 2 variances.

[33:04] And he can give everybody notice of that and people can come and then you all can

[33:10] absorb all that comment and then decide what you think is correct.

[33:15] Either no variance at all or one or the other.

[33:18] We did that with that house that was in the small subdivision on Harding Place,

[33:23] remember?

[33:24] Yes.

[33:24] I think Mitch Barnett may have been the architect and It was a nice couple,

[33:29] and she may have worked with Ms. Booth at the Attorney General— at the U.S.

[33:33] Attorney's Office, if I'm not mistaken. But you were not on the board at that

[33:37] But you were not on the board at that time.

[33:37] I don't think I'd remember that.

[33:40] But I'm just recollecting who that was, and I think it was a young woman,

[33:45] dark-haired, who had worked at the U.S. Attorney's Office.

[33:49] So, and there were options for the board.

[33:51] So I think that's an That is an option for you, but I believe—

[33:55] but everybody would need to get notice that it possibly could go that way so that

[34:01] they would have an opportunity to comment.

[34:03] And I, again, based on the applicant, I don't think that he has the—

[34:08] he can say this is not right, but I don't think he cares as long as he gets to,

[34:13] you know, build what he thinks the lot should yield.

[34:16] And because it's on a corner lot, it presents a hardship.

[34:20] And so I don't know that he cares one way or the other which way the house points,

[34:25] but he can say so if he does.

[34:27] Yeah, I would say that's accurate.

[34:29] The biggest thing I want to ensure if we do flip it is how that's going to appear

[34:34] driving down Outer, if that's going to stick out with the side elevation when

[34:39] stick out with the side elevation when you're

[34:40] going down that street when everything is, again, lined up.

[34:44] across the street is facing Outer as well.

[34:46] Another thing to consider too is, at least that I'm thinking through,

[34:51] is if we flip that house,

[34:52] there's going to be a 40-foot rear setback now on that side elevate—

[34:57] or that right side if you're looking at Outer.

[35:00] Again, then if we're going to take a front setback from the 4 all the way down

[35:05] General Bate, this might actually shrink the envelope more than it is now,

[35:10] which Again, I can't speak on that.

[35:12] I did not get the shots down General Bate, but it might lead to a wider house,

[35:17] which is great. But if you're shrinking the depth of it, we're back to square one,

[35:22] and it might even look funkier. So those are my thoughts on that.

[35:27] And it sounds like turning the house would still require a variance with a setback.

[35:32] Correct.

[35:34] Just a different setback.

[35:35] One or both.

[35:35] Yes, potentially more than one.

[35:37] You could say, well, we don't want it to stick out that much on outer,

[35:41] so we'll shift it over and we'll let you get a little grace on the other side.

[35:45] So it would be all those possibilities.

[35:47] Would it make more sense to give them relief from the rear setback?

[35:51] Yeah, that's a question for you guys.

[35:55] Well, that would make more sense to me,

[35:57] but I don't think we're here to do his job for him.

[36:03] Mr. Diehl pointed out, which I think is true,

[36:05] is the lot is a rectangle and the house is a rectangle, but as currently situated,

[36:10] it's a— the rectangle is turned differently than the rectangle of the lot.

[36:14] And if you turn the house so that it meets the— follows the rectangle of the lot,

[36:19] it does seem to fit more naturally. And I think that was Mr. Diehl's point.

[36:23] Or build a house that's longer and more narrow.

[36:27] I mean, there are— it would not be unique in the City of Oak Hill to

[36:31] have such a house.

[36:33] Can you pull that up, Jeff?

[36:35] Can you pull up the parcel viewer and just look at it across the street there?

[36:38] It is 4129.

[37:03] What is the square footage of the current house, approximately?

[37:07] 1,500, give or take.

[37:12] So it's just a cross outer.

[37:13] Yeah. And is the current house within the setbacks? As they are dictated now?

[37:21] It doesn't look like it from there.

[37:22] No.

[37:23] Yeah, that's the one.

[37:24] No, it's not.

[37:24] Yeah, that's the house.

[37:26] This is the house. That's the one we're talking about,

[37:30] but the one directly across out of— that one right there looks like it's—

[37:36] I think it is exactly on the rear setback line.

[37:40] It looks like it's 40 feet from the property line,

[37:44] but it appears to still honor The setback along General Bay.

[37:49] According to Metro's tax

[37:53] records, it's 1,706 square

[37:58] feet.

[37:59] It's actually 60 feet.

[38:00] Can you zoom back out? I'm trying to get a picture.

[38:04] Where is the applicant's house?

[38:06] Just put your cursor on it.

[38:09] Right there.

[38:22] Yeah, of course.

[38:30] This is this house, all right, like right on the property line.

[38:34] Yes, I know, but it looks like that.

[38:37] We would have to assume that it's just right on the 15-foot side setback.

[38:41] Yeah.

[38:46] So if he got that kind of a variance and moved it over to where it's—

[38:51] I don't know.

[38:53] Yeah, it's hard. It's just hard to tell.

[38:55] Marshall, will you take the mic, please?

[38:57] Oh, sorry. I didn't want to—

[38:59] So Marshall, when we were meeting with the applicant,

[39:02] we did research all the permit records for the Lot that you were currently looking

[39:06] at, we did not have a permanent record of the construction of that house, nor did I—

[39:11] nor was I able to find any record of any sort of variance granted for it.

[39:15] It's hard to know with the tangents, but, you know, you've got—

[39:19] or these curves right here.

[39:21] This has got 84 feet and this is 76, and you got 33 here and 39.

[39:26] But then if you look in the back, you've got 108, and over here it's 99.5.

[39:31] So if they honored the 40 feet here,

[39:33] they're probably really close to the property line there.

[39:38] And he could do that if the board wanted him to shift the house further away from

[39:43] General Bates and closer to this property line. He could do that.

[39:48] That would reduce the setback another 10 feet.

[39:52] But those are—

[39:53] again, those are all options for you guys to give him some direction.

[39:58] Okay.

[39:58] Thank you, sir.

[39:58] I think I'm having a little bit of a hard time with numbers 4 and number 7.

[40:02] And I recognize that we need, you know,

[40:04] to have homes that sort of fit in in Oak Hill,

[40:07] but I think we're seeing sort of repeat, you know, we're seeing—

[40:10] and I know you don't— haven't built in Oak Hill before,

[40:13] but we're seeing a lot of builders come in and want to put giant houses on the lot,

[40:17] and it's because they want to make a lot of money.

[40:20] And, you know, we have rules for a reason.

[40:22] We don't want to squish out the other homes and get rid of all the backyards and

[40:26] homes and get rid of all the backyards and all

[40:26] the side space and all the street frontage. And so I have a hard time with

[40:30] frontage. And so I have a hard time with number 4.

[40:31] Number 6, I mean, what is, you know, if we give a variance here,

[40:34] why isn't the next developer going to come in and say,

[40:37] I really want to build a giant house so I can make a lot of money?

[40:40] And then that puts us in the same position.

[40:42] So it's sort of like we're granting a special privilege.

[40:45] Uh-huh.

[40:46] And then I think for number 7, you know,

[40:48] I'm not convinced that the reasonable use of this lot is a house with 5,500 square

[40:52] feet. I mean, there's a 1,700-square-foot house on it now.

[40:55] I'm not saying it has to be that size, but, you know, I mean, I think that there—

[41:00] I think there are— I think there are other options aside from this sort of massive

[41:04] expansion that's requested.

[41:06] Those are my 2 cents. Come on, come on up.

[41:12] Since you spoke at the beginning, yes,

[41:17] absolutely.

[41:19] Thank you. I'm sorry.

[41:20] You were one of the— you are one of the presenters.

[41:22] Well, I'm sorry.

[41:23] It's good.

[41:24] It's like 2 things. I agree with you 100%, okay?

[41:29] I've witnessed what you're talking about,

[41:34] and that's why I've been very choosy on who I have talked with,

[41:41] and I've turned down multiple developers.

[41:45] I have, a year ago, watched 2 houses being built at the same time

[41:52] on my corner lot. One on outer did exactly what you're talking

[41:59] about.

[41:59] Okay.

[42:00] The other one did it respectfully.

[42:04] I've had conversations to say that's what I want done.

[42:10] And I am investing that into it.

[42:13] Because across the street,

[42:15] I've watched Tall Skinnies and I've watched Green Hills.

[42:21] I mean, I'm old Nashville. I'm going to be straight. And this is killing me.

[42:29] And that's why I say I respect I respect the restrictions that Oak Hill has

[42:37] done, but I also have to accept that here's what it is.

[42:42] So do I work with the developer and agree to go this far,

[42:48] which they have done,

[42:50] to get what I believe would be great and have what you're talking about and

[42:58] meet that requirement.

[43:00] So I guess that's where I'm saying it, because I am—

[43:06] I am invested in the neighborhood and what it's worth.

[43:11] It's clear that you are,

[43:12] and I do appreciate all the hard work that you're doing to find somebody.

[43:16] And, you know, I don't want to say that you're not being respectful of the

[43:19] you're not being respectful of the processes

[43:20] or that you're going to build an ugly house or anything like that.

[43:23] I don't want to come across like that. I think it's just in terms of process.

[43:26] I think that's kind of where my mind is sitting, but I'll defer to my—

[43:30] As some additional background, the home located at 4108 General Bate,

[43:36] which is the home which would be at the rear of this,

[43:40] and the home that shares the northeastern property line are both in excess

[43:47] of 5,400 square feet.

[44:03] Big.

[44:03] You might just stand up when she gets it up. He gets it up. Point there.

[44:11] Well, while he's pulling that up, the— there we go.

[44:15] You have the option,

[44:17] and I believe I believe this was deferred from a previous meeting,

[44:22] but if you want to investigate turning it and checking into the,

[44:27] the change and what the measurements would be and what that would be and come back

[44:34] and offer 2 choices to see if we could come to an agreement on a variance or not,

[44:40] but we would have options.

[44:42] Yes.

[44:43] That you have that possibility if that's what

[44:48] you want to do as opposed to having us vote

[44:52] now—

[44:52] Having us vote to reduce the setback by half,

[44:56] which is probably not going to happen.

[44:59] I mean, my suggestion would be to design something else.

[45:04] I mean, obviously, this is a very large site.

[45:08] There's not a whole lot of— I'm not looking at a lot of effort with these 2

[45:14] looking at a lot of effort with these 2 photos.

[45:15] So I would go for— if no one has the stomach to try and go through Metro to

[45:22] stomach to try and go through Metro to have

[45:22] the address changed on the tax records, then I would— my recommendation anyway,

[45:29] this is personal— would be to reorient the house and make it—

[45:34] Yes.

[45:36] more narrow but deeper and go for a different

[45:40] variance, possibly in the rear,

[45:42] which might be more palatable.

[45:45] What—

[45:48] thank you for that recommendation.

[45:49] I appreciate that.

[45:52] Is there a— is there hesitancy on a specific number reducing that reduction

[45:59] specific number reducing that reduction off

[45:59] general base? Is it something that you guys can stomach if it's instead of 40,

[46:06] 25?

[46:06] It's hard to know without seeing.

[46:08] I think part of it, too, is that we don't have real information.

[46:12] Right.

[46:12] You know, it's just a— it's a rendering that is not real.

[46:16] And the proposed residence that's hatched on this plan,

[46:20] I'm not sure that's real either.

[46:23] That's the envelope.

[46:24] That is the envelope.

[46:25] That's an envelope.

[46:26] That is the envelope.

[46:27] Yes, the footprint. That's the footprint.

[46:29] Yes, but typically we have much more detailed plans for the houses

[46:36] than we're looking at right here.

[46:40] It doesn't seem that there's a tree issue. Yeah, and that's nice.

[46:47] You guys are helpful with all of that.

[46:51] But really, This is— this seems preliminary,

[46:56] and I think what I'm hearing is maybe reducing the house size would

[47:03] enable you to ask for a smaller variance,

[47:08] that half seems like excessive,

[47:11] and that would be the variance The minimum variance,

[47:17] that's number 7. This half seems like that's probably not a

[47:24] minimum. And there are alternatives to consider.

[47:29] So it's not— I'm not hearing a hard no, but—

[47:34] Yeah, for sure. And again,

[47:36] I tried to simplify making a 20-foot reduction because I know that would get us

[47:41] reduction because I know that would get us to

[47:41] the envelope that I need that still allows to build a home that fits the

[47:46] neighborhood. Back to the comment about large homes,

[47:49] I did want to mention I'm restricted by the size of this lot to build a massive

[47:54] house. It is what it is. So that's why I'm here.

[47:57] I wouldn't— I wish I wasn't here to talk about this, you know.

[48:01] I wish I had 199 feet or 200 feet in depth where I could push it back like every

[48:07] other home. Uh, and majority of those homes in Zone B.

[48:10] We're not on a corner, but it is what it is.

[48:13] But, but if you were dealing with the depth of the property,

[48:17] that would be a much more understandable hardship.

[48:20] Which I am, right?

[48:22] No, it's really—

[48:23] you're not.

[48:24] This is a side—

[48:25] this is a side setback we're dealing with here.

[48:27] I understand. Yeah, but the depth is 177, which is why I can't go.

[48:31] That's what I understand what you're saying, but it,

[48:35] it is a very real hardship if you're trying to build a house that's necessarily

[48:41] deeper because of the setbacks along—

[48:44] the setback along General Bay that has to be respected,

[48:48] then that's a much more understandable hardship if you have to go deeper into the

[48:54] rear setback.

[48:55] I get it. I guess my assumption was going 40 foot off of General Bay creates a

[49:00] narrower envelope than most homes. A narrower house per homes across.

[49:04] But I understand what you're saying too.

[49:07] I didn't know what was the most important to you guys regarding a reduction off

[49:12] General Bade, off the rear, off the side, which is kind of why—

[49:16] and like I said before, this is the first time I've been in front of you guys,

[49:21] so I'm learning, you know.

[49:22] Yeah.

[49:22] Um, so it sounds like— and please correct me if I'm wrong,

[49:28] I can Maybe next meeting or have it shown envelope of a reduction of a

[49:34] rear setback, maybe a side, maybe a mix of 3.

[49:38] I mean, what would be better to resolve this?

[49:43] You know, and I'll just make the comment for what it's worth that it is so close

[49:49] that your proposed footprint for this house If you put it in the square that

[49:54] house If you put it in the square that would

[49:54] exist with the existing setbacks, it would require some architectural adjustments.

[50:01] But gosh, that is so close.

[50:03] You're still going to be able to build a really big house.

[50:07] It just may not be exactly the way that one— you see what I'm talking about?

[50:12] Yes.

[50:13] From here to here to here, that's— I just don't have measurements on it,

[50:17] but that is a really big house, and you may not lose Hardly any square feet.

[50:22] And it just would make it very easy for this board not,

[50:26] not to have to grant you a variance when it's not required.

[50:29] And that's what they're struggling with.

[50:32] You know, if you built a house that's from here to here to here to here,

[50:36] that is a lot of house. It's just not the same shape rectangle that you've got.

[50:41] Yes, sir. I got plans drawn for that.

[50:44] The square footage does not match what is in the neighborhood, but 2, the height.

[50:49] And this is what I brought up at the beginning with your zone—

[50:53] zones in 1 on both sides.

[50:54] You're going to have a much taller house than wider,

[50:58] and there's a specific ratio architects prefer, and we're past that ratio.

[51:02] So I— In my opinion, you're driving down Outer,

[51:05] you're going to see a home that's much taller than width or in that sweet spot.

[51:10] Spot, in my opinion, is going to stick out, which is why I've requested this.

[51:15] Well, there you go. I mean, I think the board spoke— but not spoken,

[51:19] but you hear what they're saying.

[51:21] Yeah, yeah, you got to decide what you want to do.

[51:24] And keep in mind, just because there are 5,500-square-foot houses in the

[51:27] neighborhood, I mean,

[51:28] I've got a house across the street from me that's 3 times the size of my house.

[51:33] So 3 times the size?

[51:35] Yeah, of my own house.

[51:37] So Because there are 5,500 square foot houses in the neighborhood doesn't mean

[51:43] somehow you have the right to build a 5,500 square foot house.

[51:47] Yeah, right. I guess the reason I— take the square footage aside.

[51:52] Okay.

[51:53] You know, the envelope that it currently sits at is going to—

[51:57] if it was me or you guys rejected it and someone did build a home,

[52:01] it's going to cause a home that's much taller in width in comparison to the

[52:06] taller in width in comparison to the actual

[52:06] width of the house, which in my opinion may stick out substantially compared to

[52:11] everything else on that block.

[52:13] So as long as it stays within the height restrictions, I doubt that it's going to—

[52:17] that it would stick out.

[52:19] Yeah.

[52:19] Okay.

[52:21] Um, so the process is me just requesting—

[52:26] Requesting a deferral, and, and by Requesting a deferral, you don't pay

[52:31] Requesting a deferral, you don't pay again.

[52:31] If you, you know, if you want us to vote on this variance, we can vote,

[52:36] and then you can come back again and pay and do another variance if you want to do

[52:41] it that way.

[52:42] Okay.

[52:42] But be certain that you've asked for the variance options that you think

[52:48] are ones that are viable for what you want to do,

[52:53] and they can be different?

[52:55] Okay.

[52:55] Based on what you've heard.

[52:57] Okay.

[52:59] I'm going to ask for a deferral, obviously.

[53:02] So I come prepared with everything you guys want,

[53:06] because my understanding was provide elevations, which I did.

[53:11] Yes, they're not accurate on the chimney,

[53:14] but they are to the envelope that I shared. Do you guys want floor plans

[53:19] shared. Do you guys want floor plans drawn?

[53:20] Do you want me to Do a full— I mean, spec on this?

[53:24] The more specific you can be,

[53:26] the more helpful it will be for us to make sense of what

[53:32] you're asking for and why.

[53:34] Okay.

[53:35] Yeah.

[53:36] They don't approve architectural elevations here.

[53:39] We're not looking at that to approve those.

[53:42] That's the Planning Commission.

[53:45] But it helps us understand Why—

[53:48] or it would help me understand why one variation is more

[53:53] reasonable than another.

[53:55] Mm-hmm.

[53:56] Why it would be more of a minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable

[54:03] use of land. For me, it's number 7 that is the sticking point.

[54:08] So going away with a deferral and thinking, okay, what are the minimum,

[54:13] thinking, okay, what are the minimum, where,

[54:14] where can I compromise, where can I adjust, and what will—

[54:18] how will the board see that?

[54:21] I would see, for example, you've asked for a 20-foot, 50% reduction, right?

[54:27] That's a lot. If you came back and asked for a fourth, I'm thinking, well,

[54:32] he did some thinking there.

[54:35] Yeah.

[54:35] If you came back and asked and it was a 4,500 square foot house.

[54:40] You're looking to move toward minimum,

[54:43] and that is what we're hoping for because we have to stick to these standards.

[54:49] Is that fair?

[54:50] Yes.

[54:51] Yes.

[54:51] Okay. To be helpful.

[54:54] Yeah, that's very helpful.

[54:55] I mean, that's what— and those are your decisions, not mine,

[55:00] but that's the trajectory and the pattern.

[55:04] Understood.

[55:06] Okay.

[55:07] Then, yeah.

[55:07] Okay. Well, the deferral is granted and you can work with

[55:13] Patrick to get on the next agenda and we'll go from there.

[55:19] We'll set a meeting and we'll look at some options and work through the code to make

[55:23] sure we don't have a blind spot or any other conflicts and we'll bring it back

[55:27] other conflicts and we'll bring it back when

[55:27] we're—

[55:27] And perhaps they can be updated. First, if they—

[55:31] Yeah, we always place deferrals at the top of the agenda.

[55:33] Deferrals at the top, so you—

[55:36] this is a unique meeting when we only have one.

[55:40] Usually there's 6 or 7, so.

[55:43] Yes, welcome back, Kath.

[55:45] Okay. All right. Thank you.

[55:47] Yeah, thank you, everyone.

[55:48] And we'll see you again, we think.

[55:50] Yes.

[55:51] Okay. All right.

[55:51] Thank you, guys.

[55:52] Appreciate it.

[55:53] Thank you. Thanks.

[55:53] Thank you.

[55:54] All right. This meeting is adjourned.

[55:56] Short meeting.

[56:05] Short end.

Board of Zoning Appeals

Transcript