[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.