Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Dispute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mistletoe Heights setback dispute divides neighbors; Board approves reduced setback after permit‑reliance arguments
Summary
A nearly‑built home on Mistletoe Drive that exceeded an established front setback sparked a large neighbor turnout. The owners said they relied on an issued building permit; opponents said the lot was a blank slate and design professionals erred. The board voted to allow the reduced setback after extended testimony.
A heated debate over a near‑complete home on Mistletoe Drive ended Jan. 21 with the Fort Worth Board of Adjustment approving a reduced front setback for a house whose owners say they relied on a city‑issued building permit.
Homeowners Thomas and Carrie Riley told the board they proceeded in good faith after the city issued a permit and that moving the entire footprint back to meet a 47‑ft established setback would require tearing out substantial work and cost the family considerable time and money. Thomas Riley said the project had reached framing and that the family had already invested substantially. “We proceeded in good faith and in full reliance on our approval,” he told the board.
Neighbors, including leaders of the Mistletoe Heights Neighborhood Association, urged denial. Graham Brisendine, vice president of the association, said the lot was a purchased blank slate and that the architect should have confirmed the unusual 47‑ft established setback before design; he said the case failed several of the legal variance criteria. “Because they were led astray is not a reason for us to bend the city code,” Brisendine said.
Staff noted an important measurement detail: the front porch is sometimes treated differently for setback measurement. City zoning staff explained the front‑yard standard is measured to the main wall of the structure, not to an open porch, and that the applicant might be measured to 35 ft to the main wall rather than 31 ft‑10 in to a porch edge. That technical clarification factored into the board’s deliberations.
After lengthy public testimony and discussion, the board voted to approve the variance as presented. Members said they were sympathetic to both sides — neighbors worried about the historic streetscape and the applicants who cited reliance on a permitted plan — but ultimately a majority concluded the requested relief could be granted with conditions of record.
What’s next: Approval allows the applicant to proceed with the current permit path; opponents were urged to work with staff on any follow‑up enforcement or design questions. The board’s action underscores the tension that arises when permit review and design mistakes leave homeowners faced with costly revisions.
