Elm Thicket Builders Were Directed to Compromise With Neighbors But Can’t Agree on Meeting Details

The Dallas Board of Adjustment has been tasked with the unenviable decision of whether to allow builders to finish their construction projects — that were built in violation of a zoning code approved two years prior — or appease the hard-fighting Elm Thicket neighborhood that was granted stipulations via an overlay district to ensure compatible development. 

Most everyone agrees the City of Dallas fumbled when it granted building permits and approved plans based on “pocket notes” with outdated information. Someone will be punished when all is said and done, and it’s likely to be the builders or the neighbors, not the City of Dallas. 

Botched Permits: Elm Thicket Duplex Builder Told to Compromise With Neighbors, Appeal Deferred

The Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial panel limited in its authority. It can affirm or revoke the action of the building official, which in this case was to issue stop-work orders on construction projects in various stages of completion. One builder told us it would bankrupt his business if he has to tear down and start over after investing more than $600,000 into his project.

Panel A, chaired by former Dallas City Councilman Dave Neumann, is hearing all cases related to the Elm Thicket permitting blunder. Panel A members include Kathleen Davis (District 1), Michael Hopkovitz (District 12), Rachel Hayden (District 9), Jay Narey (District 6), and alternate Nicholas Brooks. 

The panel heard two Elm Thicket appeals on Sept. 17 — that of Akber Meghani’s property at 6801 Tyree St. and Danny Le’s property at 6529 Victoria Ave. 

Both matters were deferred to the Board of Adjustment’s next meeting on Oct. 22. After Meghani presented his case, the Board directed the builder, city officials, and neighborhood representatives to “figure it out” and come back with a compromise. 

Watch the Sept. 17 Board of Adjustment meeting or view the latest memorandum from Interim Assistant City Manager Robin Bentley on the Elm Thicket building permit oversights and violations. 

‘Figure it Out’ 

Following the Sept.17 Board of Adjustment meeting, representatives of the Save Elm Thicket activist group led by Morton Street residents Gus and Mimi Perez immediately asked for a meeting with the builders. Mimi Perez is a weekly columnist for CandysDirt.com.

“Since the BOA is pushing the city and the builders to ‘compromise’ in terms of these non-conforming structures, the neighborhood would like some input as to what Elm Thicket neighbors will have to live with from said compromise,” Gus Perez wrote in an email to city officials. “I have copied our City Councilmen Jesse Moreno (D2) and Omar Narvaez (D6) so perhaps they can also help facilitate this meeting, if necessary. It would be best if we could schedule the meeting for a Saturday morning at the K. B. Polk Recreation Center so that way no one has to miss work and we have time to notify the Elm Thicket/Northpark neighborhood.”

After a Hard-Fought Battle, Dallas City Council Approves Elm Thicket/Northpark Rezoning

Zoning Administrator and Interim Assistant Planning and Development Director of Customer Excellence Jason Pool responded in a Sept. 20 email to Perez. 

“To clarify, no public meeting has been scheduled at this time,” Pool wrote in the email. “We are currently reviewing our options and need to have internal discussions before determining the next steps regarding the city’s role in facilitating a neighborhood meeting. I have provided your contact information to the developers, so they can begin working on the ‘compromise’ referenced in the Board of Adjustment discussions. We will keep you informed if a city-facilitated meeting becomes possible. I appreciate your patience as we continue to assess this situation.”

Dallas Cothrum, a zoning consultant with Masterplan, was hired by Meghani and appeared on the builder’s behalf at the September Board of Adjustment meeting. 

“I’ve seen this happen in my career too often where the stakes are made and the city isn’t the one that has to pay the fee,” Cothrum said. “It’s worse that it’s about 20 homes they did this on … It’s 19 or 20 different addresses where the same mistake was made by the same people over and over with over a year to fix it. I guess that’s at the heart of what I think is so egregious about this. If it was such a well-known zoning case and everyone knew, why did the City Attorney’s Office not get that document to building inspection immediately?” 

Cothrum also has argued that Meghani’s violations are minor — a 26-foot, 6-inch building height where 25 feet is required and 45.7% lot coverage where 40% is required. But it’s also a duplex and the zoning calls for single-family detached homes. 

Seventy-five letters were sent in opposition to Meghani’s and Le’s appeals. One letter was submitted in support, according to Board of Adjustment coordinator Mary Williams. 

“Neighbors are encouraged to have their voices heard in regard to these cases,” Save Elm Thicket wrote in its September newsletter. “If one builder is allowed to finish a non-conforming structure, that will open the door for other builders to ignore the building standards and build non-conforming structures that will destroy the character of our historic neighborhood. We fought much too hard for the zoning changes to allow that to happen.”

Cothrum told CandysDirt.com last week that he’s willing to meet with Gus and Mimi Perez but he doesn’t anticipate a public town hall-style meeting. He’s open to changing the structure to a pitched roof at the required height.

“We’re exploring options that allow for a compromise but maintain the structural integrity of the home,” Cothrum said.

Gus Perez told us he wants a public meeting.

“We will not meet behind closed doors,” he said. “This is going to be an open process for our neighborhood to voice their concerns which have been completely ignored up to this point.”

Board of Adjustment Ruling 

Board of Adjustment chair Dave Neumann came down hard on city officials at the Sept. 17 meeting, criticizing the delay in posting zoning ordinances long after they were approved and the handwritten notes inspectors consulted when providing builders with information. 

“How do you expect the applicant to go from zero to 100% of accountability and awareness?” he said. “How is it that we’re supposed to be aware of what the law is when the public land use map available online [has] a lag period and on top of it the very people approving the permits are using their own sidebar system? I don’t know where to go with that.” 

Dallas Admits Elm Thicket Permits Were Issued Erroneously, Builders Ordered to Stop Work

Cothrum said it’s “like a savage or sadistic scavenger hunt” to determine the zoning for a particular area under Dallas’ infrequently updated paper system. City officials have said they are updating the system to an electronic one and providing training to inspectors so everyone is armed with the proper information before permits are issued. 

But it’s too late for the Elm Thicket builders, so the Board of Adjustment asked for an agreement to be reached among all parties before the cases are heard again in late October. 

Board member Hopkovitz said he didn’t think anyone’s hands were clean. 

“I don’t think there is an innocent party in this matter,” he said. “The representative of the applicant mentioned some type of resolution that doesn’t involve them tearing the structure down. If that is within our purview, I think we should discuss what that might look like, so as not to penalize the neighborhood too much, not to penalize the applicant too much, and not to penalize what appears to be an error on the part of the city too much, and try to see if we can split the baby.” 

Neumann said he could not support a motion to revoke the stop-work order. 

“On the other hand, an ordinance was passed by the City Council,” he said. “Part of our charge is to fulfill the intent and spirit of the ordinance, but part of the intent and spirit also is public awareness of the law they create.” 

Narey, the only board member on Panel A who represents a portion of the Elm Thicket neighborhood, said he found it appalling that the city doesn’t do a better job of updating its zoning dashboard.

“That’s something that has to be addressed by the city going forward so we as a board are not put in this position again,” he said. 

Davis said it makes sense to focus on a solution rather than placing blame. 

“I think what we should do is come up with a compromise,” she said. 

Hayden suggested that, for example, maybe the neighborhood would be OK with a duplex if the builder changed the roof line. 

“There has to be something that can be done to lessen the impact on both sides,” she said. 

Davis was the first to suggest that the compromise come from those who are directly impacted.

“I’ve been in court cases before where the judge has said, ‘Y’all go back and figure this out …You figure it out and then you come back to me.’ Can we do that?” she asked. 

Neumann replied, “I think we’re about to.” 

There was some confusion after the fact as to whether the Board of Adjustment directed city officials to negotiate with the builders or whether the builders were being asked to reach a solution directly with the neighbors. The motion was simply to hold over the case to Oct. 22 but Board members discussed the compromise at length. 

“You guys come up with a potential interpretation … and we as a Board may codify that in a modified order,” Neumann said. 

Davis added that there must be extensive public engagement, and if a compromise is not reached among all involved parties, the Board would do it for them. 

“And you may not like what we come up with,” she said. “If you come back and you haven’t engaged with the other side, then that really hurts your credibility. This needs to be a sincere effort if this is the way that we’re going to be moving forward.”