In October 1993, I was informed that the City received a building permit application on the Kingsley Park North apartments at 9763 Audelia at Kingsley. Having served on the City’s Board of Adjustments, I knew the application approval process would require a zoning change.
The property is zoned Community Retail, making the complex a non-conforming use under current zoning laws. I and other residents of the neighborhood saw this as an opportunity.
The Lake Highlands Home Owners Association was concerned about the physical condition of the complex, as well as the unresponsiveness of past ownership and management to our requests for maintenance improvements. Also, the management refused to abide by City or Apartment Owners Assciation guidelines concerning the number of tenants per unit. With the three adjacent complexes, this caused considerable overcrowding at Northlake Elementary.
A phone call to the Home Owners Association treasurer got me a check for $450 to the City of Dallas, which I filed with an application for a Termination hearing before the Dallas Board of Adjustments on the property. The owner of a property within the City limits that doesn’t conform with current zoning codes can be made to remove the non-conforming use.
If the owner purchased a non-conforming use after the 1989 enactment of the current zoning codes, which was the case with the Kingsley Park North Apartments, the board of adjustments can close the property within 30 days, but six months is the normal rule.
Within two weeks of filing our application, I received a call from a local lawyer who wanted to discuss – on behalf of the new property owner – what could be done to persuade the home owners association to rescind our termination hearing request.
The lawyer was told that unless his client improved the facility to neighborhood expectations, there would be no reason for negotiations. I requested a plan of renovation, including renderings of the expected finished product; copies of their building permit application, which provides their estimate of costs; a proposed rental rate schedule; a copy of the proposed lease documents and tenant screening process; landscape and security plans.
All of this information provided a picture of the new ownership’s integrity. I also asked for information about other properties they own and manage to see their track record. The other Dallas property this company manages was inspected, and we ran a check on its code violations.
In late November, a meeting was held with the new owner, who is from Seattle, and his construction superintendent. They furnished the information I requested, and we discussed many things, such as the number of units on the property, traffic flow, active participation in the homeowners association by the ownership, and type of zoning.
We decided a Planned Development was the best way to achieve what the neighbors would support because each concern would be itemized in the zoning request. If approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council in PD form, any violation of the PD guidelines would allow the City to revoke ownership’s occupancy permits, no matter who owned the property at the time of the violation.
Lake Highlands Home Owners Association wanted the following: no more than 21 units per acre of land (which would result in the demolition of 50 units); perimeter fencing around the property; creation of a playground; entrances and exits only from Audelia; exterior lighting; landscaping to screen the complex from the single-family developments to the West; occupancy limitations per unit; and third-party screening of tenant applicants based on income, employment, criminal record and lease history.
The owner promised he would address each issue, and the lawyer and I had several discussions during the next eight weeks as each concern was addressed.
In March 1994, a meeting was held at my home to consider the ownership’s final proposal to the two neighborhood associations most affected. After this meeting, a general membership meeting of the homeowners association was held at Northlake Elementary, with 250 residents attending.
The plan was approved with some reservations. After a second meeting, the plans were cleared for a neighborhood support.
The Dallas Planning and Zoning Commission approved the plan in early June. The City Council was to consider it June 22. As of this writing, the Homeowner’s Association is confident that the plan will be approved. When it is, we will withdraw our Termination Hearing request.
I must admit that in all my years in real estate and related businesses, this is the first time I have seen this level of effort and cooperation on both sides of an apartment versus single-family-interests confrontation.
The process should be a model where multi-family rehabilitation is involved in this City. Even where proper zoning exists, the City should require a PD approach to the plan approval process. This would put multi-family owners and operators on notice that the City will not put up with neglect and sloppy maintenance in any complex.
I want to thank all of the neighbors who attended meetings and City hearings. You showed our elected officials that this was an issue Lake Highlands felt strongly about.
Your ability to compromise showed that community spirit above self-interest is alive and well in our area of this great City.
Well done, Lake Highlands.
