[00:00:01]
[1 Call to order]
CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.START WITH THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
[3 Approval of Minutes]
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY.[4 Approval of Agenda (additions/deletions)]
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.ANY CHANGES? THERE ARE NO, OH, THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO THE AGENDA.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
ANY CITIZENS WOULD LIKE TO TALK OUTSIDE OF THIS CASE? DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT.
[6.a Case #260417 – 146 US Highway – 72 Guff’s Wine and Liquor – Appeal of Staff Decision related to a wall sign in a multi-tenant shopping center]
FORMAL AGENDA CASE 2 6 0 4 1 7.WHO'S PRESENTING? I'LL MAKE THAT PRESENTATION FOR STAFF.
AND I'LL PREFACE BY SAYING YOU MIGHT FEEL LIKE YOU'RE THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION TONIGHT.
'CAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT A LOT OF DESIGN RELATED THINGS, BUT THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE IN THE REGULATIONS THAT ARE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE THAT ARE APPEALABLE, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY.
UH, ABOUT A SIGN, UH, THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST IS AN APPEAL OF A STAFF DECISION RELATED TO A WALL SIGN AT A MULTI-TENANT SHOPPING CENTER ON H HIGHWAY 72.
IT'S FOR THE GOVS, SWINE AND LIQUOR STORE SIGN.
UM, UH, I'LL START OFF BY SAYING THIS IS NOT A VARIANCE REQUEST WITH VARIANCE, AS Y'ALL KNOW, THERE, THERE ARE SEVERAL CRITERIA THAT HAVE TO BE MET.
UM, NAMELY A, A HARDSHIP, SOME TYPE, TYPE OF PHYSICAL CONSTRAINT WITH THE PROPERTY AMONGST SEVERAL OTHER THINGS THAT Y'ALL LOOK AT WITH THE VARIANCE.
UM, IN THIS CASE, IT'S AN APPEAL OF A STAFF DECISION.
WE DON'T GET TOO MANY OF THESE, UH, BUT WHEN WE DO HEAR THEM, THE, THE BUS'S ROLE IS TO FIND OUT WHETHER STAFF ACTED, UH, INCORRECTLY OR MADE AN ERROR IN ITS DECISION OR INTERPRETATION OR ACTED ARBITRARILY OR CAPRICIOUSLY, IN OTHER WORDS, UNFAIRLY TO, TO THE APPLICANT IN, IN ITS ACTION.
THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, IS ON HIGHWAY 72.
IT'S THE CONNECTION MARKETPLACE, WHICH IS FORMERLY ROSE ROSEVIEW SHOPPING CENTER.
IT'S ACROSS FROM CHENEY DRIVE AND THE, THE SPECIFIC TENANT SPACE, GUFFS WINE AND LIQUOR.
UM, THEY'RE REPLACING OR THEY'VE REPLACED WILKINSON'S LIQUOR STORE, WHICH WAS THERE FOR, FOR MANY YEARS.
AND THAT'S THE, THE SUBJECT OF THE SIGN REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT IS, UH, JASON GUFF, AND HE'S, HE'S HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING GUFFS.
AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS JOHN PAUL PRITT, WHO OWNS THE, THE MULTI-TENANT SHOPPING CENTER.
UH, THE ZONING, THE, THE PROPERTY HAS SPLIT ZONING, SHOPPING CENTER, COMMERCIAL AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL.
THEY'RE IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE SHOPPING CENTER'S ABOUT SIX ACRES IN SIZE.
SO GETTING INTO THE, THE DETAILS OF THE REQUEST AND THE, THE APPEAL.
UM, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT THE SHOPPING CENTER.
THIS, THIS IS A MULTIPLE TENANT SHOPPING CENTER, AND IT WAS BUILT IN 1973, WELL BEFORE THE TOWN'S CURRENT ZONING REGULATIONS.
UM, THE FORMER ROSEVIEW SHOPPING CENTER DOES NOT HAVE A PRIVATE SIGN POLICY.
I DID REACH OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER TO ASK IF THEY HAD HAD A POLICY THAT THEY, THAT THEY ENFORCE, AND THEY DO NOT.
THEY, THEY SAID THAT THEY RELY ON THE TOWN'S ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH THEY BELIEVE IS STRINGENT AND, AND PROVIDES A CERTAIN LEVEL OF QUALITY.
UM, BUT IT'S A COUPLE COUPLE OF THINGS ABOUT PRIVATE SI SIGN POLICIES.
THE TOWN CAN ENFORCE PRIVATE SIGN POLICIES AND, BUT OTHER SHOPPING CENTERS DO HAVE THEM.
I KNOW BOYLE INVESTMENT HAS, HAS SOME FOR SHILLING FARMS OR PRICE FARMS, CARRIAGE CROSSING, EDWARDS REALTY ADMINISTERS THAT.
UM, BUT, AND SO THEY HAVE CERTAIN STANDARDS.
SOMETIMES THEY HAVE CERTAIN PRIVATE STANDARDS WHERE THEY'RE TRYING TO ENFORCE A CERTAIN DESIGN THEME, BUT THAT, THAT IS NOT THE CASE HERE.
AND I DID LOOK BACK IN OUR ARCHIVES AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY, UH, OLDER SIGN POLICIES FROM YEARS AGO.
SO I, WE BELIEVE THAT, THAT, THAT NOT ONLY DO THEY NOT HAVE ONE NOW, WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY HAD ONE IN THE PAST.
UM, THE TOWN AMENDED ITS SIGNAGE REGULATIONS SOMETIMES MANY YEARS AGO TO, UH, TO PROHIBIT PLASTIC
[00:05:01]
FACE CABINET SIGNS.AND THAT'S WHAT THE WILKINSON'S LIQUOR STORE SIGN IT WAS.
UM, AND SO IT'S, IT'S JUST THE DEFINITION OF THAT IS PRETTY MUCH JUST WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE.
IT'S A BOX THAT MAY, MIGHT HAVE METAL SIDES, BUT IT'S GOT A PLASTIC FACE THAT GLOWS.
UM, THAT KIND OF SIGNAGE WAS PRETTY PROLIFIC THROUGHOUT COLLIERVILLE, BUT AT A CERTAIN POINT, THEY CHANGED THE REGULATIONS TO SAY THAT THOSE WERE, WERE NOT ALLOWED.
AND SO THAT MADE, WHEN THAT WAS ADOPTED, THAT MADE THAT SIGN A LEGAL NON-CONFORMING SIGN.
SOMETIMES PEOPLE REFER TO IT AS A GRANDFATHERED SIGN, BUT TECHNICALLY IT'S A, UH, THE, THE SIGN WAS A LEGAL NON-CONFORMING SIGN AND IT HAD CERTAIN PROTECTIONS.
IT COULD CONTINUE IN USE, UH, WITHIN, WITHIN CERTAIN PARAMETERS.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO BRING IT UP TO THE CODE WHEN THE, THE NEW NEW ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED.
GU GUS WINE AND LIQUOR WENT INTO THE 10, THE TENANT, THE TENANT SPACE THAT, THAT WILKINSON'S USED A AFTER THEY CEASED TO OPERATE.
AND WHEN THAT HAPPENED, UH, THE, THE SIGN LOST ITS NONCONFORMING PROTECTIONS.
THE WAY THE ORDINANCE READS, IF THERE'S A CHANGE IN TENANT AT, IN A MULTI-TENANT SHOPPING CENTER, THE SIGN WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH, WITH TOWN STANDARDS.
SO THAT SECTION IS, IS REFERENCED THERE.
SO THE STAFF BELIEVES THAT, UH, THAT THE, THAT THE NEW ORDINANCE OR THE THE SIGN WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT CURRENT STANDARDS.
SO YOU CAN SEE A COMPARISON OF THE WILKINSON SIGNS AND THE, AND THE GOV GOFFS SIGN, UM, DOWN BELOW.
AND IT'S A PRETTY RECENT PICTURE DOWN BELOW LOU ON, UH, CONTINUING ON WITH SOME OF THE, THE BACKGROUND AND HOW, HOW WE GOT HERE.
UM, SO GOFFS, THEY TOOK OVER THE SPACE, REPLACED THE, THE TENANTS ON.
UM, IN TALKING WITH THE, THE APPLICANT, THEY, THEY RECEIVED SOME ADVICE THAT MAYBE THEY DIDN'T NEED TO GET A, A PERMIT JUST TO CHANGE THE, THE, THE TENANT FACE.
UM, BUT THEY DID, DID MAKE THOSE CHANGES WITHOUT A SIGNED PERMIT.
AND DURING THAT PROCESS, THEY ALSO CONVERTED THE, THE LIGHTING FOR THE SIGN, THE OLD WILKINSON SIGN TO LED.
APPARENTLY IT WASN'T WORKING, AND THEY WANTED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE VISIBILITY AT NIGHT.
AND THE APPLICANT'S COVER LETTER, THEY MENTIONED THAT THEY, THEY BELIEVE THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO, TO HAVE AN ILLUMINATED SIGN.
THEY SAID THAT THEY HAVE A LOT OF, A LOT OF CUSTOMERS TO COME IN A AFTER DARK, SO THEY WANTED TO HAVE THAT OPERATIONAL.
UH, SO LAST YEAR WE NOTIFIED THE, UM, APPLICANT THAT A PERMIT WAS REQUIRED FOR, FOR THE NEW SIGN.
AND IN NOVEMBER, THEY DID APPLY FOR THAT WALL SIGN PERMIT.
A SEPARATE APPLICATION WAS ALSO MADE FOR THE PROJECT SIGN, WHICH IS THAT TALL SIGN ON THE UPPER RIGHT HAND SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN.
UM, NOW THE WAY THE, THE LAWS READ, EVEN THOUGH THAT THAT IS A PLASTIC BASED CABINET SIGN, THE ORDINANCE DOES SAY THAT THOSE ARE PROTECTED AND THOSE COULD CONTINUE EVEN THOUGH A TENANT CHANGES, THOSE ARE SO PROLIFIC IN TOWN, THE TOWN DIDN'T WANT TO, UM, CAUSE A LOT OF RECONSTRUCTION OF THOSE, THOSE TYPE OF SIGNS.
SOME HAVE VOLUNTEERED, LIKE WHERE TARGET IS, THEY VOLUNTEERED TO REPLACE THEIR PLASTIC FACES WITH, WITH, UH, NON ILLUMINATED FACES.
UH, BUT IN THIS CASE, THEY HAVE TO REPLACE THE, THE FACE AND MATCH IDENTICALLY.
WHAT WAS THERE, THE, THE WHITE, WHITE PLASTIC WITH THE, THE BLUE LETTERS.
AND GUFFS HAS, HAS ALREADY DONE THAT.
AND THEY GOT A PERMIT AND, AND DID REPLACED OR PUT THEIR, THEIR NAME ON THAT PROJECT SIGN.
UM, THE STAFF DENIED THE WALL SIGN PERMIT IN FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR.
AND THE, ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WAS, UH, WE CITED WAS A LACK OF COMP COMPATIBILITY WITH THE ADJACENT BUSINESS.
THE APPLICANT WAS GIVEN UNTIL MID-MARCH TO REMOVE THE WALL SIGN OR THEY COULD FILE FOR AN APPEAL, WHICH THEY DID.
SO ESSENTIALLY, WE'VE STOPPED ANY ENFORCEMENT MEASURES UNTIL WE GET AN ANSWER FROM THE BZA ABOUT THE, THE DENIAL.
AND SO THEY DID, UH, THEY DID APPLY FOR THE APPEAL IN THEIR COVER LETTER.
THEY WERE, THEY NOTED THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO REPLACE THE SIGN.
UM, BUT THEY WOULD PREFER A SIGN THAT WOULD HAVE IN INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED LETTERS, UH, AS OPPOSED TO, UH, A NON ILLUMINATED SIGN.
UH, SO GETTING BACK TO THE POINT ABOUT WHY A PERMIT WAS NEEDED, IT, IT WAS A CHANGE TO THE FACE OF THE SIGN.
UM, FOR, FOR THE NEW NEW TENANT.
AND SINCE IT WAS DIFFERENT ART ARTWORK, A DI DIFFERENT IMAGE, IT, IT LOOKS DIFFERENT FROM THE PREVIOUS SIGN.
AND WE BELIEVE THAT THAT'S BEYOND MAINTENANCE.
A MAINTENANCE OF A SIGN WOULD'VE BEEN IF IT WAS WILKINSON'S AND THEN, UH, SOMEHOW IT GOT CRACKED IN A STORM OR, OR JUST DUE TO SUN DAMAGE.
IF THEY HAD REPLACED IT AND IT LOOKED EXACTLY LIKE IT DID, THAT WOULDN'T HAVE REQUIRED A PERMIT.
BUT IF THEY REPLACED IT AND, AND CHANGED THE WAY IT LOOKS, STAFF BELIEVES A PERMIT IS REQUIRED.
IT'S BEYOND JUST ROUTINE MAINTENANCE.
DURING THE SIGN PERMIT PROCESS, IT GIVES US A CHANCE TO LOOK AT SEVERAL THINGS.
[00:10:01]
I DID MENTION THEY CONVERTED TO LED.THE SIGN PERMIT ALLOWS US TO LOOK AT WHETHER THE COLOR TEMPERATURE IS, UH, APPROPRIATE, AND THAT'S THE, THE COLOR OF THE LIGHT.
SOMETIMES YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED THAT LEDS SOMETIMES LOOK REALLY BLUE OR REALLY WARM.
AND, AND, AND, AND YELLOW, UH, ARE REQUIREMENTS ARE FOR 5,000 KELVIN OR LESS, WHICH HAS A MORE, A WARMER APPEARANCE, NEUTRAL WHITE TO WARM, WARM APPEARANCE.
I LATER FIND OUT OR HAVE FOUND OUT FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THEIR SIGN IS LESS THAN 5,000.
SO IT WASN'T ON THE PERMIT, BUT THAT WE DENIED.
BUT I HAVE FOUND OUT THAT, THAT THE EXISTING LIGHT BOX DOES NOT, DOESN'T EXCEED 5,000.
ANOTHER BENEFIT OF THE SIGN PERMIT PROCESS IS WE GET TO LOOK AT COMPATIBILITY.
AND WHAT THAT, WHAT THAT'S ALL ABOUT IS IN 2010, WE COMP COMPREHENSIVELY REWROTE THE SIGN CODE.
UM, WE WERE TRYING TO GET OUT OF THE BUSINESS OF REGULATING CONTENT AND SIGNAGE.
AND THAT THAT'S AN IMPORTANT, UM, TREND IN, IN RECENT YEARS.
TOWNS AREN'T REALLY SUPPOSED TO TELL PEOPLE WHAT THEY SAY ON THEIR SIGNS.
AND SO WE, OUR PREVIOUS ORDINANCE DID THAT A LOT.
AND SIGNS ENDED UP GOING TO THE, UH, THE DRC.
ALMOST EVERY SIGN WENT TO THE DRC FOR A, A APPROVAL BEFORE A PERMIT COULD BE ISSUED.
AND NOW THEY'RE ALL ALL DONE ADMINISTRATIVELY AS LONG AS THEY MEET CERTAIN CRITERIA.
AND THE EMPHASIS WAS ON MAKING SURE THAT OLDER SHOPPING CENTERS THAT HAD AN ESTABLISHED DESIGN THEME, THAT THEY WERE, THE SIGNS WERE COMPATIBLE.
NEW, NEWER SIGNS ARE COMPATIBLE.
UM, SO COMPATIBILITY IS DEFINED IN THE CODE IN A, IN A VARIETY OF WAYS, SUCH AS ILLUMINATION MATERIALS, COLORS, UM, WHERE THE SIGN IS PLACED IN A SIGN BAND, UH, THE TYPES OF SIGNS.
BUT THE SIGN, THE ORDINANCE IS NOT DEFINED ADJACENT BUSINESSES.
THE ORDINANCE IS A NEW SIGN IS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT BUSINESSES.
WE, AND SINCE IT'S NOT DEFINED, WE LOOKED IN, IN THE WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY AND IT TALKS ABOUT IM THE IMMEDIATELY TOUCHING OR NEAREST, UH, SPACE.
SO THAT, THAT, THAT WAS OUR INTERPRETATION.
AND WHILE WE LOOKED AT THE SOUTHERN STYLES SIGN, WHICH IS RIGHT, RIGHT NEXT DOOR, WHICH IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE GOV SIGN, THEIR, THEIR SIGN HAS, UH, A WOOD BACKING PLASTIC LETTERS.
UH, AND, UM, IT'S NOT ILLUMINATED.
AND IT DOES FIT PRETTY MUCH WITHIN THE SIGN BAND.
I WISH IT FIT A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
YOU CAN SEE IT'S KIND OF HANGING OVER THE BLUE AT THE BOTTOM.
UM, BUT IT, IT DOES FIT WITHIN THE SIGN BAND.
AND GOV'S IS AN END CAP BUILT, UH, TENANT SPACE.
IT'S THERE IS, THEY ONLY HAVE A TENANT, AN ADJOINING TENANT TO THE, TO THE NORTH.
SO THERE'S NO ONE TO THE RIGHT TO LOOK AT TO SEE WHAT THEIR SIGNS LOOK LIKE.
SO GETTING MORE ABOUT INTO THIS ISSUE OF COMPATIBILITY AND WHAT THE BOARD WAS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IN THE CODE.
UM, THE UPPER LEFT IMAGE IS ONE I POINT TO A LOT.
UH, WHERE HUEY'S IS LOCATED, IT'S A MULTI-TENANT CENTER, AND IT'S KNOWN FOR ITS WHITE SIGNAGE, WHITE CHANNEL LETTER SIGNS.
AND THE WAY THE, THE ORDINANCES READS, WHENEVER A NEW TENANT COMES IN, WE LOOK AT THE, AT THE SIGNS IN THE AREA TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S THE, THE NEW SIGNS ARE COMPATIBLE.
AND IF THEY ARE, THEY GET A PERMIT.
AND IF NOT, WE ASK THEM TO MAKE CHANGES OR WE DENY, DENY THE PERMIT.
BUT MO USUALLY FOLKS WILL AD ADJUST AND, AND COMPLY WITH, WITH THE SIGN PERMIT PROCESS AND THE REGULATIONS.
BUT THE INTENT IS TO HAVE SIGNAGE THAT THAT IS COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF WHAT WAS ESTABLISHED.
THERE WAS A TIME PRIOR TO 2010 WHERE THE TOWN ST STAFF WOULD ENFORCE, UH, UH, THESE PRIVATE SIGN POLICIES.
AND THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS WE WERE TRYING TO GET OUT OF IN 2010.
IS THERE, THERE WAS A SIGN SIGN POLICY IN THIS, THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT SAID THAT YOU HAD TO HAVE WHITE SIGNAGE.
UM, SO THAT, THAT WAS THE BOARD'S INTENT IS TO TRY TO HAVE A COMPATIBLE SIGNAGE AND NOT DISRUPT WHAT WAS THERE.
ON THE BOTTOM, UH, YOU CAN SEE TWO PICTURES OF POST 2010 SHOPPING CENTERS, AND THEY HAVE SIGNS, A VARIETY OF SIGN TYPES THAT ALL COMPLY WITH THE, THE STANDARDS.
THEY MAY HAVE PRIVATE, UH, DESIGN CRITERIA, BUT WE DON'T, WE DON'T ENFORCE THAT.
THE GOAL THERE IS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SIGNS MEET THE, THE NEW, THE NEW SIGN CODE AT THE UPPER RIGHT SIDE OF THE BUILDING OR THE, THE SLIDE.
YOU SEE A, UM, AN EXAMPLE OF A SHOPPING CENTER WITH MULTIPLE TENANTS, AND THEY DO HAVE A PRIVATE SIGN POLICY
[00:15:01]
THAT THEY ENFORCE.COMPAT COMPATIBILITY DOESN'T APPLY TO THAT, THAT SHOPPING CENTER EITHER.
I APOLOGIZE FOR COUGHING SO MUCH.
SO WHERE DID COMPATIBILITY COME FROM? RIGHT AFTER THE 2010 ORDINANCE ACT, WHEN WE THOUGHT THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A, A NEW SIGN CODE THAT APPLIED EVERYWHERE AND THAT, THAT WE HAD SOLVED ALL THE TOWN'S PROBLEMS WITH SIGNAGE.
UM, WE REAL, UH, SOMEBODY CAME IN THOMAS, UH, MEAT AND SEAFOOD AND INSTALLED THE SIGN, WHICH LOOKS PRETTY GOOD.
I COULD EVEN SEE THAT ON THE TOWN SQUARE SOMEWHERE.
UH, BUT IT DIDN'T BLEND IN WITH ANY OF THE OTHER SIGNS.
AND WE GOT A LOT OF PUSHBACK FROM THE ELECTED OFFICIALS PRETTY QUICKLY.
AND THEY MENTIONED THAT WE NEEDED TO THANK YOU.
SO THE ELECTED OFFICIALS ASKED THAT WE AMEND THE CODE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.
THEY'RE LIKE, WE, WE DON'T WANNA DISRUPT THESE OLDER CENTERS.
UH, WE THINK THAT LOOKS WEIRD.
WE DON'T, WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE SIGNS THAT ARE NOT COMPATIBLE.
SO WE PRETTY QUICKLY ADDED THAT PART, AMENDED THE CODE AND ADDED THAT, ADDED THAT TO THE, THE COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENT FOR THESE OLDER CENTERS.
UM, AND EVENTUALLY THOMAS MEAT AND SEAFOOD MOVED ACROSS THE STREET.
THEN THEY MOVED TO ANOTHER SHOPPING CENTER, AND NOW, NOW THEY'RE NOT IN BUSINESS ANYMORE.
SO THE SITUATION RESOLVED ITSELF THERE.
UM, BUT THAT, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THAT COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENT IS PRETTY MUCH THIS ONE SIGN AND HOW THE BOARD WASN'T READY TO, UM, HAVE A MORE ECLECTIC, UH, SHOPPING CENTER, UH, AS, AS, AS NEW NEW TENANTS TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE NEW SIGN CODE.
SO A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT ROSEVIEW SHOPPING CENTER.
UH, AS FAR AS THE COMPATIBILITY, UH, REQUIREMENTS GO, UH, YOU CAN SEE IT'S, IT'S GOT THREE DISTINCT BUILDINGS THAT, THAT ARE WITHIN THE, THE MULTI-TENANT CENTER.
NOT ALL OF THEM ARE WALL SIGNS.
SOME OF THEM ARE WINDOW SIGNS.
UM, SO A WALL SIGN IS NOT NECESSARILY A REQUIREMENT.
UH, BUT THE SIGNAGE IS PRETTY ECLECTIC.
YOU CAN SEE A ZOOM IN, UH, THREE OF THE SIGNS ON THE LEFT AND UPPER SIDE.
UH, UPPER PARTS OF THE SLIDE ALL LOOK PRETTY SIMILAR, LIKE A METAL BACKING VINYL LETTERS ON THE, ON THE SIGN.
UH, BUT SOME NEW TENANTS HAVE COME IN THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY, UH, CONSISTENT WITH, WITH THAT, THE, THE OTHER SIGNAGE LIKE SOUTHERN STYLES, THAT'S NEXT TO GUFFS WITH THE WOOD BACKING AND THE, THE PLASTIC FORMED LETTERS AND STATE FARM HAS PLASTIC FORMED LETTERS AS WELL.
UM, WE DID GET A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THOSE WERE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED.
THE PERMIT DOES NOT SHOW THAT THEY ARE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED.
AND STAFF HAS GONE OUT THERE AT NIGHT AND WE HAVEN'T SEEN THEM ILLUMINATED.
UH, THEY DON'T LOOK WIDE ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY HAVE ANY, ANY TYPE OF LEDS IN INSIDE OF THEM.
BUT, UH, BUT WE BELIEVE THAT IT'S NOT ILLUMINATED.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE REALLY IS NO CONSISTENT PATTERN OUT, OUT IN THE, IN THE SHOPPING CENTER, UM, RIGHT NOW.
UM, SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE STAFF ISN'T MAKING A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION 'CAUSE WE'VE ALREADY WEIGHED IN AND THIS IS AN APPEAL.
UM, SO IT'D BE REDUNDANT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON SOMETHING WE'VE ALREADY ALREADY DECIDED.
SO REALLY THE, THE QUESTION IS MORE, UH, FOR THE BCA TO DECIDE ABOUT WHETHER THE STAFF HAS ACTED IN, IN ERROR OR NOT.
STATEMENT NUMBER TWO IN THE STAFF REPORT CONTAINED SOME OF THE STAFF'S INTERPRETATIONS.
IF YOU AFFIRM STAFF'S INTERPRETATION THAT WE ACTED CORRECTLY IN, IN ADMINISTERING THE ORDINANCE, UM, THEN WE WOULD RESUME, UM, A REQUEST TO REMOVE THE SIGN AND, AND PURSUE, PURSUE THAT.
UM, REGARDLESS OF YOUR DECISION.
AND ANY PARTY COULD APPEAL THE B'S DECISION TO COURT IF, IF FOR, IF BASED ON WHATEVER HAPPENS TONIGHT, IF THEY DISAGREE WITH, WITH THE B'S DECISION.
AND THEN THE B'S DELIBERATION, WE SUGGEST THAT YOU THINK OF IT'S MORE THAN JUST DID WE ACT IN ERROR? THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT PARTS TO THAT DECISION.
UM, THERE, THERE'S THE QUESTION, WHETHER A PERMIT WAS REQUIRED OR NOT.
UH, THAT WAS PART OF OUR DECISION TO TURN IT DOWN.
DID THE SIGN LOSE IT'S NONCONFORMING STATUS? DID THEY HAVE
[00:20:01]
THE RIGHT TO PUT UP A PLA PLASTIC FACE CABINET SIDE AGAIN IS ANOTHER QUESTION.AND THEN, SHOULD THE SIGNAGE BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT BUSINESSES? AND HOW SHOULD COMPATIBILITY BE DEFINED? UM, AND SO AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMPATIBILITY, UM, THE ORDINANCE FROM THE, FROM 2010 DIDN'T TALK ABOUT, UM, SIGN OR SHOPPING CENTERS THAT HAD A DESIGN THEME NEEDED TO BE COMPATIBLE.
IT JUST SAID SHOPPING CENTER, NEW TENANT AND MULTI-TENANT CENTERS, THE SIGNS NEED TO BE COMPATIBLE.
THERE DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE AN EXEMPTION FOR OLDER CENTERS THAT ARE NOT THAT, THAT DON'T HAVE A UNIFIED DESIGN THEME.
MOST CENTERS IN TOWN DO HAVE A UNIFIED DESIGN THEME.
UM, SO RO ROSEVIEW IS KIND OF AN OUTLIER WHEN THAT, UH, WHEN COMPAT COMPATIBILITY IS, UH, TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
SO THE PROMOTION MOTION'S ON YOUR SCREEN, I'M PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
AND I KNOW THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL.
SO FOR THE APPLICANT, REAL QUICK, WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'RE GONNA HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK STAFF SOME QUESTIONS AFTER WE FINISH ASKING THEM QUESTIONS.
WE'LL CALL YOU UP, LET YOU PRESENT WHATEVER YOU'D LIKE TO PRESENT, ASK YOU QUESTIONS, AND THAT'LL GO OFF FROM THERE.
SO, UH, SO WE'LL START OFF WITH QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF.
UM, SO SOUTHERN STYLES, I'M ASSUMING, CAME IN AFTER WILKINSON'S, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO AT THAT TIME, WOULD SOUTHERN STYLES SIGN HAVE BEEN INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE LEGAL NON-CON OR WHATEVER SIGN OF WILKINSON'S? IT WAS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH GOVS.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE ISSUED A PERMIT FOR A PLASTIC FACE CABINET SIGN.
UM, SO WE WOULD'VE LOOKED, BUT I'M, I'M LOOKING AT ALL OF THE SIGNS.
TO ME THERE'S NO UNIFORMITY WITH ANY OF 'EM.
UM, IN, AND I DON'T, I YEAH, I, I I STRUGGLE WITH USING THAT AS ONE OF THE REASONS WITH THIS COMPATIBILITY ISSUE WHEN I DON'T THINK ANY OF THESE ARE REALLY COMPATIBLE AS FAR AS LOOKING AT FONTS AS FAR AS LOOKING AT MM-HMM
ARE THEY CHANNEL LETTERS? ARE THEY BACK LIT? ARE THEY GOOSENECK SIGNS? I MEAN, WITH LIGHTS, I MEAN, IT'S ALL OVER THE PLACE.
YOU GOT THE MEXICAN PLACE THAT EXTENDS OVER THE BLUE LINE, YOU'VE GOT SOUTHERN STYLES THAT SOMEWHAT STAYS INSIDE OF IT.
UH, I MEAN, I, I WOULD ALMOST, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S POSSIBLE OR NOT, BUT, AND THIS MAY BE WAY OUT OF BOUNDS, BUT I THINK SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE WITH THE OWNER OF THIS CENTER TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S SOME TYPE OF CONFORMITY THING PUT IN PLACE FOR ALL OF HIS RESIDENTS, FOR RENTERS OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE.
BUT, UH, I GUESS THAT WAS MY FIRST QUESTION IS, WOULD YOU, IS CONFORMITY REALLY ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE? BECAUSE I DON'T THINK ANY OF 'EM LOOK LIKE THEY'RE CONFORMING.
IT WAS A BIG, IT, IT IS PART OF THE CODE AND SINCE IT'S A MULTI-TENANT CENTER, AND IT WAS PART OF OUR DECISION NOT, NOT TO APPROVE THE, THE, THE SIGN, THE REPLACEMENT SIGN.
NOW THE APPLICANT HAS ALLUDED TO MUL CHANNEL LETTERS, KINDA LIKE THE HUEYS EXAMPLE.
UM, SO IF THEY HAD APPLIED FOR THAT, A PERMIT WOULD'VE BEEN REQUIRED.
BUT I THINK WE WOULD STILL COME BACK TO THE COMPATIBILITY ISSUE AND IT WHETHER IT WAS COMPATIBLE OR NOT WITH THE, WITH THE CENTER.
SO YOU TOUCHED ON MY NEXT QUESTION, SO SURE.
THANK YOU FOR READING MY MIND THERE.
UH, IF HE WAS TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, SENT IN THE PERMIT REQUEST IN, IN THE CORRECT FASHION MM-HMM
AND I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT, UH, THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR WITH, UH, BY HAVING A LIT SIGN.
I MEAN, IT, IT'S ESPECIALLY, YOU KNOW, DURING THE WINTERTIME, UM, WOULD, HOW WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN LOOKED UPON? BECAUSE, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE ARE, I MEAN THERE IS A, A RESTAURANT THERE.
CAPTAIN JOHN'S HAS A LIT SIGN THERE, THERE ARE MONUMENTS, I CALL IT A MONUMENT SIGN, BUT THEIR MM-HMM
UM, SO THERE IS SOME LIGHTING IN THAT AREA.
WOULD IS THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD KEEP THE LIGHTING IT AS NON-CONFORMING IS THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T MATCH SOUTHERN STYLES? CORRECT.
WHICH DIDN'T MATCH WILKINSON'S.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
[00:25:01]
BEGIN, UH, THE, DID YOU MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, TO THE APPLICANT AS FAR AS WHAT WOULD BE, UH, ACCEPTABLE OTHER THAN WHAT THEY HAVE NOW? NO.ONE OF OUR STAFF MEMBERS THAT WORKS WITH SIGNS DID REACH OUT TO THEM WITH MUL MULTIPLE IDEAS AND OPTIONS.
SOME OF THE IDEAS THROWN OUT WERE EVEN LIKE MULTI-CHANNEL LETTERS.
UM, I, I REMINDED THAT STAFF MEMBER OF THE COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENT, UM, SO HAD, HAD THEY PURSUED THAT WE, WE MIGHT BE SITTING HERE STILL TALKING ABOUT, UH, COMPATIBILITY, BUT THERE WERE OTHER IDEAS THROWN OUT.
WHEN THE, WHEN THE OTHER TENANTS CAME IN, LIKE SOUTHERN STYLES MM-HMM
DID SOUTHERN STYLES ALSO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PERMIT APPLICATION PROCESS? THEY DID NEED TO GET A PERMIT.
I DIDN'T RESEARCH WHETHER THEY OBTAINED A PERMIT, BUT I ASSUME THAT THEY DID GET A PERMIT.
UM, BUT WHEN COMPATIBILITY, COMPATIBILITY WAS, UM, APPARENTLY DIDN'T COME UP DURING THE, THAT REVIEW.
I JUST HAVE CONCERNS BECAUSE THERE'S A BIG TEAR IN ME THAT I UNDERSTANDS THE REGULATIONS.
UM, BUT LIKE YOU, THE, THE STATE OF THE SIGNAGE AND THE SHOPPING CENTER IS, UH, HAS NO CONFORMITY.
UM, AND I WON'T PUT ANY PERSONAL OPINION IN THAT OTHER THAN THAT
WHAT, WAS THERE ANY COMPATIBILITY, I KNOW I, I KNOW YOU DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS, BUT WHICH SIGN WOULD SOUTHERN, UH, BE COMPARED WITH AS FAR AS COMPATIBILITY? IT'S CLOSEST TO RESTAURANT, UH, THE, THE MAYOR MARY TIERRA RESTAURANT AND THAT THAT'S WHO IT WOULD'VE BEEN COMPARED TO, UH, IF COMPATIBILITY WAS, WAS APPLIED.
I'M GONNA ASK ONE MORE QUESTION TOO, JAMIE.
IF, IF NONE OF THESE, EVEN IF, IF GUS HAD NOT BEEN THERE, UM, LET'S JUST SAY THERE WAS NOBODY, UH, THIS WAS JUST A COMPLETELY EMPTY RETAIL TENANT SPACE MM-HMM
AT THAT POINT, YOU WOULD JUST COMPLETELY LOOK AT CODE REGULATION FOR THE SIGNAGE WHEN IT COMES IN ON A SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION IF THERE WAS NO NOT ANYTHING ADJACENT.
UH, SINCE WE MIGHT JUST KEEP LOOKING DOWN THE SHOPPING CENTER UNTIL WE FIND ONE.
SIR, IF YOU WILL JUST, UH, COME TO THE MICROPHONE, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, ANYTHING THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SAY TO THE BOARD, AND THEN IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS, WE'LL LET YOU KNOW.
UH, ADDRESS THE BUILDING OR MY, MY HOUSE.
PROBABLY THE, WHEREVER YOU GET YOUR BILLS SENT.
UH, SO MY NAME'S ERIC, JASON GUFF.
UM, MY, UH, BUSINESS ADDRESS IS 1 46 EAST US HIGHWAY 72, SUITE 1 0 1 THROUGH 1 0 4.
UM, I JUST HAD A FEW THINGS TO SAY.
UM, WHAT Y'ALL HAVE BEEN ASKING MR. JAMIE, UM, IS KIND OF THE MAIN PROBLEM THAT I HAD.
WELL, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS I HAD, UM, THAT ALL THE SIGNS ARE DIFFERENT.
UM, ALL OF, THERE'S NO CONFORMITY WHATSOEVER ON ANYTHING.
SO I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND WHY.
I MEAN, I KNOW WHY MINE AROSE, BUT I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND, UM, WHY I WAS THE ONLY ONE.
UM, I WILL TELL YOU, UM, ME PERSONALLY, I, I WISH I DIDN'T HAVE TO AFFORD TO PAY FOR A, A LIGHTED SIGN.
THEY'RE 20 TIMES MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THOSE, PROBABLY MORE THAN THAT.
UM, IT LETS PEOPLE KNOW THAT WE'RE OPEN.
UM, NONE OF THESE PLACES ARE OPEN AT NIGHT.
WE ARE, ESPECIALLY IN THE WINTER TIME WHEN IT GETS DARKER AROUND 4:30 PM ABOUT 75% OF OUR BUSINESS IS DONE WHEN THE SUN GOES DOWN.
IF WE DIDN'T HAVE AN ILLUMINATED SIGN, WE, I DON'T THINK PEOPLE WOULD KNOW THAT WE WERE THERE.
UM, AND THEN ONE MAJOR, MAJOR FACTOR IS SAFETY.
[00:30:01]
A LOT OF LIGHT.UM, WE HAVE A FEW LIGHTS THAT HAVE BEEN CHANGED TO LED THAT THE OWNER OF THE SHOPPING CENTER CHANGED VERY RECENTLY.
AND WE WERE HOPING THAT IT WOULD PROVIDE MORE LIGHT IN THE, IN THE PARKING LOT.
UM, IT, IT DIDN'T, UM, IT DIDN'T.
SO IT'S, IT'S VERY DIM AND ESPECIALLY ALL THESE OTHER BUSINESSES, UM, ARE, ARE SO, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT OPEN AT NIGHT.
SO THERE'S NO EXTRA LIGHTING, UM, AT WILKINSON'S STORE.
UM, I USED TO WORK WITH JOHN FOR MANY YEARS.
UM, WE EVEN ONE TIME, AND IT WAS PROBABLY ILLEGAL, I ADMIT THAT, UM, WE PUT OUT THOSE, UH, LIGHTS YOU BUY AT HOME DEPOT, THE MOTION SENSOR, LIKE JUST A FOR SOMETHING, BECAUSE WE FELT LIKE ESPECIALLY, UH, UH, LADIES THAT WOULD COME IN IT, THEY WOULDN'T COME TO OUR CENTER 'CAUSE IT WAS SO DARK.
AND, UH, SO THAT'S WHY IT WAS DONE.
I I DID GIVE SOME, PROBABLY SOME BAD ADVICE FROM THE, THE GUY THAT DID NOT ONLY CAPTAIN JOHN SIGN, BUT DID MINE.
HE TOLD ME THAT, UM, AS LONG AS I DIDN'T TOUCH THE BASE, THE PERMANENT PART, THAT IT WOULD BE LEGAL.
UM, I HAD TO CHANGE THE, THE FACE PLATE OF IT BECAUSE WE CHANGED THE NAME OF THE STORE.
UH, AND THEY COULD NOT FIX THE, UH, OLD LIGHTING.
THAT'S WHY THEY HAD TO CHANGE IT TO LED.
BUT THE REASON THAT WE INITIALLY DID IT IS 'CAUSE JUST THE NAME OF THE STORE CHANGED.
UM, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER PART IS TOO, I'M, I'M A NEW BUSINESS OWNER IN COLLIERVILLE.
MY KIDS GO TO SCHOOL IN COLLIERVILLE.
UM, I HAVE TAKEN A STORE, AND THIS IS NO DISRESPECT TO ANY FORMER PERSON THERE.
UM, I TOOK A ONCE EYESORE AND WE REALLY TURNED IT AROUND.
UM, I KNOW THAT'S PRETTY MUCH INSIDE THE BUILDING, BUT AS NOW I AM WORKING ON THE OUTSIDE, LIKE I LITERALLY WAS PLANTING GRASS SEED THE OTHER DAY, UH, AT A BUILDING THAT I DON'T OWN.
UM, BUT WE'VE REALLY BEAUTIFIED THE INSIDE OF IT TOO.
AND SO THERE'S A FINANCIAL PART IS KIND OF THE THIRD TIER OF THIS.
IF I WAS MADE TO TAKE THE SIGN DOWN AND PUT UP A NEW SIGN OF, OF ANY WAY, I, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE COULD AFFORD IT.
UM, AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT Y'ALL'S PROBLEM.
UM, BUT IT IS A FACTOR FOR ME.
UM, I'VE PUT EVERY PENNY BACK INTO THE STORE.
UM, AND IT'S, IT'S GROWING REALLY WELL AND PEOPLE LOVE IT, UH, MYSELF INCLUDED.
UM, BUT ANYWAYS, I WOULD JUST ASK THAT, UM, THAT YOU GIVE US A CHANCE WITH, WITH THIS SIGN.
UM, I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME ISSUES WITH IT.
UM, FOR CODE, I DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT THAT.
UM, BUT I THINK IT LOOKS A LOT BETTER.
AND AGAIN, NO, NO DISRESPECT TO ANYONE THAN A CARDBOARD SIGN.
AND SO WHEN I DROVE AROUND AS THEY TOOK PICTURES OF OTHER PLACES, ONE PLACE I WENT TO IS THE KROGER, 'CAUSE THAT'S WHERE I SHOP THE KROGER ON, UH, HOUSTON LEVEE.
IT'S NOT A FREESTANDING BUILDING.
IT'S CONNECTED TO MICHAEL'S AND THE HOME GOODS STORE.
THEY'RE ALL ILLUMINATED, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF 'EM.
UM, BECAUSE WHEN WE ALL INITIALLY MET TO DISCUSS THINGS, THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTOOD IS THAT IF IT'S A FREESTANDING BUILDING, THEY, THEY CAN HAVE ILLUMINATION, BUT A MULTI-USE CANNOT.
BUT THAT'S NOT, IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE THE CASE.
UM, BECAUSE THE, THAT THEY'RE ALL CONNECTED AND THEY ALL HAVE ILLUMINATED SIGNS.
UM, I PUT THAT IN THE PACKET THAT I TURNED IN.
I DON'T HAVE A POWERPOINT, BUT, UH, ANYWAYS, UM, I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I REALLY WANTED TO SAY.
UH, HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT IF YOU WERE ASKED TO CHANGE, WHAT WOULD BE YOUR, THE CHANGES TO THE SIGN IF YOU WERE ASKED THE CHANGES? I WAS, UH, YES SIR.
I WAS TOLD THAT, UH, THE, THE ALL WHITE LETTERING SIGN, UH, ILLUMINATED COULD MAYBE BE A POSSIBILITY.
AND I'M NOT AGAINST THAT AT ALL, IF THAT'S WHAT THE CITY WANTS.
AGAIN, I'M NOT HERE TO, TO GET INTO IT WITH THE CITY.
UM, I JUST WOULD ASK IF THAT'S THE DECISION TO PLEASE GIVE ME JUST A LITTLE TIME TO COME UP WITH THE RESOURCES TO DO SO, UH, MAKE THAT MAY ANSWER.
[00:35:01]
SIR.JAMIE, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE LAST SLIDE? IT'S GOT THE THREE POINTS THAT YOU WERE DISCUSSING.
YOU ARE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, I KNOW YOU SAID YOU WORKED WITH JOHN PRIOR.
BUT NOW YOU WERE THE SOLE OWNER.
AND WHEN IT CHANGED HANDS, IT COMPLETELY CHANGED BUSINESS ENTITY HANDS.
THERE WAS NEVER, AND I DIDN'T EVEN BUY THE, THE LICENSE.
SO, UM, JOHN'S STORE UNFORTUNATELY, WAS SHUT DOWN, UH, BY THE ALCOHOL ETT COMMISSION, UM, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE.
UH, SO HIS, I DID NOT, UH, TRANSFER LICENSE OR ANY, MINE IS A BRAND, BRAND NEW LICENSE.
UM, HIS WAS COMPLETELY SHUT DOWN.
JAMIE, IF WE, IF WE STICK WITH STAFF'S DECISION AND BACKING AND, YOU KNOW, WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT MAKING MR. GUFF TAKE THE SIGN DOWN, IS THERE A WORLD WHERE HE COULD APPLY FOR A VARIANCE WITH THE EXISTING, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE, THE DIFFERENT SIGNS THAT WERE LIT, AND I THINK WHAT WAS LOST IS THAT THIS IS CONSIDERED THAT CABINET SIGN WHERE IT'S A BOX THAT'S GOT YOURS.
AND YOU TALK ABOUT KROGER AND STUFF, AND IT'S THE CHANNEL LETTERS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ON A MUCH LARGER SCALE, IT'S A KROGER DESIGN OR A MICHAEL'S DESIGN, ET CETERA.
IS THERE A WOR WORLD WHERE MR. GOFF CAN APPLY FOR A VARIANCE TO MAYBE CHANGE THE FACE OF THE SIGN AND KEEP THE SIGN AS A CABINET WOULD SIGN, MAYBE CHANGE THE FACE TO MATCH WHAT WILKINSON'S HAD AND CLAIM HARDSHIP? NOT SAYING THAT THAT WOULD GET APPROVED, BUT YEAH.
IS THERE A WORLD WHERE THAT'S A POSSIBILITY? IT COULD.
BUT WOULD THERE BE NO PHYSICAL CONSTRAINT THAT PRECLUDES HIM FROM HAVING OTHER TYPES OF SIGNAGE? STAFF WOULDN'T RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF SUCH A VARIANCE.
UM, WHAT I WORRY ABOUT IS THAT SIGN HAS BEEN UP FOR DECADES, 39.
AND IF YOU LOOK, IT'S NOT ON THERE, UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE ON THE RIGHT, WHERE HE'S GOT THE SIGN NOW, YOU CAN SEE THAT SIGN IS CUT INTO THE TRIM BOARDS TO MAKE IT, I GUESS, FIT MORE FLUSH.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S BEHIND THAT.
AND ADDITIONALLY, IF YOU MAKE HIM GO IN AND REPLACE IT TO HAVE CHANNEL LETTERING, WHO'S TO SAY THAT THAT PAINT WILL EVER MATCH WHAT'S THERE? SO AT, AT WHAT POINT ARE WE QUOTE UNQUOTE, MAKING THINGS WORSE? MM-HMM
UM, SO YOU DID APPLY FOR PERMIT AFTER THE FACT AND IT WAS DENIED? YES, SIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, SIR.
SO JAMIE, JUST REMIND ME ON CASES LIKE THIS, TYPICALLY AT THIS POINT WE MAKE A MOTION AND THEN WE HAVE DISCUSSION.
DO WE NEED TO MAKE ANY KIND OF MOTION AT THIS POINT? OR IS IT JUST DISCUSSION TIME? YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION.
UM, WE OFFER THE STAFF OR THE, THE MOTION IS WRITTEN AS THE APPLICANT WANTED, SO THAT IF YOU AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT, THEN THE ANSWER WOULD BE THE VOTE WOULD BE YES.
AND IF OKAY, IF YOU DON'T AGREE, THE, THE VOTE WOULD BE NO.
SO WE SHOULD READ THE PROPOSED MOTION.
I, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT FOR, JUST FOR CLARITY.
YOU COULD MAKE OTHER MOTIONS, BUT OKAY.
SO MAY I HAVE A MOTION PLEASE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
SORRY, I THINK WE DID HAVE A CITIZEN COMMENT TOO.
ROBERT, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND THEN YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
YEAH, MY NAME'S ROBERT JULIE, I LIVE AT, UH, 4 6 6 9 FLEMING ROAD.
I CAME ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO, MET WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEY HAD NO CLUE WHAT WAS GOING ON.
I DID GET A LETTER FROM COLLIERVILLE.
UH, IT'S ABOUT THE EXPANSION OF SHELBY ROAD, AND I JUST MET WITH THE APPRAISER YESTERDAY.
DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? THIS IS A DIFFERENT CASE, CORRECT? IT IS.
AND SINCE YOU GUYS ARE BOARD PLANNING, YOU KNOW, OR BUSINESS, OR DO YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON? IS IT GONNA BE A SIX LANE HIGHWAY NOW? IS
[00:40:01]
IT GONNA BE A FOUR LANE? BECAUSE THE GUY THAT APPRAISED DIDN'T KNOW, SO THAT'S A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT.YOU'D PROBABLY DEFER TO STAFF.
THIS, THIS BOARD IS FOR THE ZONING APPEALS BOARD ZONING AND APPEALS ONLY.
BUT JAMIE IS YOUR, OR? YEAH, I MET WITH HIM TWO WEEKS AGO.
YEAH, THOSE GUYS CAN HELP YOU OUT.
THIS IS FOR A DIFFERENT CASE THOUGH.
SO YOU GUYS HAVE NO, NOTHING TO DO WITH TDOT OR THE EXPANSION OF ROADS OR ANY OF THAT? YEAH, UNFORTUNATELY, THEY, THEY DON'T, THE, THERE WAS LIKE AN EMAIL THAT WAS RIGHT AFTER THAT MEETING.
YEAH, I THINK HE REACHED OUT TO ME AND, AND THE GUY NEVER GOT BACK TO ME.
I DID MEET WITH THE, UM, THE APPRAISER YESTERDAY.
LUCKILY MY HOUSE ISN'T GETTING HIS, UH, LAND TAKEN AWAY FROM ME AS MUCH.
BUT HE COULDN'T EXPLAIN TO ME WHETHER IT WAS GONNA BE A SIX LANE, LIKE WHAT WE KIND OF READ MM-HMM
OR IF THERE'S A WAY, WHO DO I GET INTO TO SAY INSTEAD OF SIX, CAN'T WE DO FOUR? I MEAN BY HAILEY'S FOUR.
WHY DO WE NEED SIX ON SHELBY? HEY ROBERT, I'M GONNA HAVE TO ASK YOU TO KIND OF WITHHOLD ANY OTHER COMMENTS AND YOU CAN WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE MEETING.
BUT WE'RE IN THE MEETING OF A CASE RIGHT NOW.
AND SO WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A CASE.
SO AFTER THAT'S OVER, FEEL FREE TO TALK WITH STAFF.
I DON'T WANT DISRESPECT OUR CURRENT APPLICANT.
ALRIGHT, SO, UH, MOTION ON, UH, THE APPLICANT OR? YES.
I'LL MAKE, UH, A MOTION TO OVERTURN THE STATUS.
FEBRUARY 12TH, 2026 DECISION RELATED TO A WALL SIGN AND A MULTITENANT SHOPPING CENTER TO OPEN IT UP FOR A DISCUSSION.
SO NOW WE'RE GONNA HAVE OPEN DISCUSSION.
UH, SO WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT IT, BUT YOU GET TO HEAR WHAT WE TALK ABOUT.
I'LL JUST RIP THE BANDAID OFF.
GO THROUGH THE THREE WAS A SIGNED PERMIT REQUIRED? YES.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE BAD ADVICE WAS THROWN YOUR WAY.
UM, SHOULD, I'M GONNA SKIP OVER ONE.
SHOULD THE WALL SIGN SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT BUSINESSES AND HOW SHOULD COMPATIBILITY BE DEFINED AND WHILE IN MOST SHOPPING CENTERS AROUND TOWN, YOUR QE EXAMPLE BEING A GREAT ONE.
DEFINITELY THIS ONE BECAUSE OF JUST THE DIFFERENCES.
I'LL JUST SAY THAT
IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, BUT NOT A FACTOR AND HOW IT SHOULD BE DESIGNED.
I, FOR THIS SHOPPING CENTER, WITHOUT TALKING TO THE LANDLORD, I, I DON'T KNOW UNLESS YOU JUST CONTACT HIM ABOUT GOING STRAIGHT TO THE ORDINANCE.
UM, THE ONE WHERE WE'RE LOSING THE NON-CONFORMING STATUS.
SO BASICALLY SAYING THAT JOHN WILKINSON'S CABINET SIGN WHEN IT EXCHANGED HANDS IN BUSINESS, DID THAT MAKE MR. GUFF LOSE THAT? RIGHT? THAT'S THE ONE ON TO, BECAUSE IN SOME LIGHTS I FEEL YES, BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE REST OF THE SHOPPING CENTER AND WHAT THE OTHER IMPLICATIONS OF CHANGING THAT SIGN WOULD BE CERTAINLY APPRECIATIVE OF YOUR BUSINESS IN THIS TOWN AND YOUR MEDICATION TO THIS TOWN.
SO DON'T WANT TO DISCOURAGE YOU, UM, IN THIS ROOM OR FINANCIALLY
UM, BUT I'M HOPING THAT MAYBE THERE'S SOME, THERE'S SOME OTHER SOLUTION IN HERE THAT'S GOOD FOR THE TOWN, GOOD FOR STAFF AND GOOD FOR MR. GUFF.
YEAH, AS I WAS LOOKING AT THIS, I MEAN, THE ANSWER TO NUMBER ONE IS YES.
UH, EVEN IF I SAY TO NUMBER TWO THAT I THINK THE ANSWER IS YES, I STRUGGLE WITH NUMBER THREE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY WAY TO DEFINE COMPATIBILITY IN THIS PARTICULAR CENTER.
UH, AND SO WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO DEFINE COMPATIBILITY, NOT ONE SIGN LOOKS LIKE THE OTHER.
ONE, NOT ONE SIDE HAS THE SAME FONT AS THE OTHER ONE.
NOT ONE SIDE HAS THE SAME LETTERS AS THE OTHER ONE.
SO WHEN IT SAYS, SHOULD COMPAT, HOW SHOULD COMPATIBILITY BE DEFINED? I LOOK AT COLOR, I LOOK AT FONT, I LOOK AT CHANNEL SIGNS VERSUS A GOOSENECK OVER A NON BACK LIT SIGN.
UH, AND THESE ARE ALL OVER THE PLACE.
AND SO I DON'T THINK WITHIN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, COMPATIBILITY CAN BE USED AS A MEASUREMENT, UH, BECAUSE THERE'S NO COMPATIBILITY.
UM, SO IF I WAS TO VOTE TO OVERRULE
[00:45:01]
THE STAFF'S DETERMINATION, IT WOULD BE ON THAT BASIS.UM, ALL THAT BEING SAID, I DON'T, I, I APPRECIATED THE SIMPLICITY OF WILKINSON'S SIGN WITH JUST THE WHITE BACKGROUND AND THE RED LETTERS MORE SO THAN THE CURRENT SIGN.
UM, AND IF YOU'RE, IF ILLUMINATION OF A PARKING LOT IS A FACTOR, I WOULD THINK OF A WHITE, UH, SIGN VERSUS A BLACK SIGN WOULD BE SOMETHING YOU'D WANT TO, UH, TAKE A LOOK AT.
THOSE ARE, THAT'S ME THINKING OUT LOUD AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE DISCUSSIONS.
YEAH, I, I AGREE WITH BOTH OF BOTH YOU GUYS, UH, STATEMENTS.
UH, THE ONLY THING THAT I, THAT I WANT TO ADD IS, UH, THE SIGN HE WAS FACED WITH A SITUATION WHERE HE HAD TO CHANGE THE SIGN AND, AND, AND BASED ON WHAT WE WERE HEARING, THE SIGN MIGHT MIGHT'VE BEEN IN NON-FUNCTIONING CAPACITIES.
UH, RATHER THAN PUTTING SOMETHING NEW ON TOP OF A A OLD SITUATION, HE, HE ENDED UP TRYING TO MAKE IT BETTER.
AND I DO AGREE, UH, THE ONLY PUSHBACK I HAVE IS THE COLOR AS WELL.
UM, I THINK, UH, IF THERE WERE CHANGES MADE TO LIGHTEN UP THE SIGN RATHER THAN HAVING A DARKER SIGN, 'CAUSE MOST OF THE SIGNS ARE A LITTLE BIT LIGHTER IN, IN SOME ESSENCE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT, I MEAN, I, I'LL TAKE YOUR OPINIONS, YOU FROM THIS VIEW.
IT'S NOT EVEN, WE'RE A CAR TURNING LEFT INTO THIS.
TRAVELING INTO MISSISSIPPI ON 72.
UM, THAT WHITE BACKGROUND KIND OF GOES MORE WITH THAT BAND.
IF I'M SOMEBODY GOING 40 MILES AN HOUR, IT'S NOT QUITE AS STAUNCH AS THE BLACK.
BEFORE I GET TOO FAR INTO THIS THOUGH, JAMIE, LIKE I, YOU MENTIONED WE'RE KIND OF LIKE THE DRC TONIGHT, BUT, UH, VERY, VERY WELL KNOW.
SO IF WE WE'RE, WE'RE OBVIOUSLY TORN UP HERE.
UM, IS IS THERE AN OPTION TO VOTE THE MOTION TO REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO RESUBMIT THE APPLICATION, SHOWING A DIFFERENT FACING THAT CLOSER MATCHES WHAT WILKINSON'S HAD? OR IS THAT TOO FAR OF AN OVERREACH? YEAH, I MEAN, WHICH DOES SOMEWHAT MATCH GIFTED HANDS IN THE RESTAURANT? IT IS JUST, WE WERE OKAY WITH THE, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THE TOWN IN GENERAL SEEMED TO BE, UNLESS Y'ALL ARE GETTING CALLS ABOUT THE WILKINSON SIGN AND WE, YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE SAFETY AND TAKING IN EXISTING PARKING LOT LIGHTING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THERE'S A LOT OF BUSINESS OWNERS THAT DON'T TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT.
AND IF YOU CAN ADHERE TO WHAT STAFF I, I MEAN, I WILL SAY I'M BEHIND STAFF REGULATIONS, THERE'S A REASON THEY'RE THERE.
SO IF YOU, YOU CAN MEET MOST OF THOSE REGULATIONS WITH THE SIGN BY THE, YOU KNOW, 5,000, UM, K REQUIREMENT FOR THE WARMTH.
UM, JUST TRYING TO FIND A MORE WORKABLE SOLUTION IF THAT'S EVEN POSSIBLE WITHOUT OVERSTEPPING.
I I NEED TO LOOK AT THE CODE REAL QUICK TO SEE IF YOU CAN ADD CONDITIONS TO AN APPEAL.
I THINK IT CAN APPLY CONDITIONS TO A VARIANCE.
UM, AND I'LL, I'LL THROW OUT AS, AS YOU'RE STRUGGLING FOR A MIDDLE GROUND, DON'T DO IT ON OUR BEHALF.
LIKE WE, WE WON'T LOSE ANY SLEEP IF YOU OVERTURN, UM, OUR, OUR DECISION.
I DO, I DO HEAR, LIKE Y'ALL ALL THREE AGREED ON THE FIRST ONE, A PERMIT WAS REQUIRED, SEEMS LIKE TWO OUTTA THE THREE AGREE THAT THE NON-CONFORMITY WAS LOST.
THAT ALL OF Y'ALL AGREE THAT COMPATIBILITY SHOULDN'T APPLY.
SO IF YOU WERE TO VOTE AND IT, AND IT WENT THAT WAY, LIKE A TWO TO THREE KIND OF KIND OF VOTE OR TWO TO ONE KIND OF VOTE, WE WOULD, STAFF WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT TO MEAN THAT WE GOT THE COMPATIBILITY WRONG AND WE WOULD WORK WITH MR. GOFF ON COMP WORKING ON A COMPATIBLE SIGN, BUT A PERMIT WOULD STILL BE REQUIRED AND THERE WOULD BE NO CLAIMS TO THE NON-CONFORMING STATUS, WHICH IS REALLY ULTIMATELY THE GOAL OF THE WHOLE NON-CONFORMITY STATUS ANYWAY, IS, IS THAT AT SOME POINT WE'RE TRYING TO GET THE SIGNS TO COMPLY AND AT SOME, SOME POINT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S GOTTA GOTTA BE BROUGHT UP TO CODE.
AND, AND THAT POINT HAS, HAS HAPPENED, WE BELIEVE.
UM, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANT'S WILLING, HE'S POINTED AT LIKE KROGER AND THERE, THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S SIGNS OUT THERE, UM, THAT MIGHT NOT MATCH ANY OF THIS, BUT COULD MEET HIS ILLUMINATION GOALS AND THEN MEET, MEET THE CODE.
UM, SO THAT'S HOW WE WOULD INTERPRET, UH, A DENIAL BASED ON THE DISCUSSION THAT I'VE HEARD SO FAR.
[00:50:01]
OKAY.I SEEM TO, THE WAY I'M LOOKING IT AT IT, IT'S KIND OF WHAT JAMIE SAID.
I'M, I THINK THE ANSWER WOULD BE YES ON ONE OR TWO AND THEN NO ON THREE.
UM, JUST BASED, SHOULD THE WALL SIGN BE COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT BUSINESSES? I MEAN, YES, BUT THERE IS NO COMPATIBILITY WITHIN THIS CENTER.
AND IF YOU JUST LOOKED AT WHAT WILKINSON'S USED TO BE, WHITE BACKGROUND, RED LETTERING, THERE IS A COUPLE OTHER SIGNS THAT ARE WHITE BACKGROUND RED LETTERING, WHICH TO ME WOULD BE THE MOST COMPATIBLE WITHIN THIS CENTER.
AND SO, BUT WHAT JAMIE'S SAYING IS THAT WOULDN'T BE POSSIBLE, CORRECT? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
I THINK IT'S LOST, BUT I MEAN, IF YOU TELL ME THAT WE'RE WRONG AND THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIKE WE WERE WRONG AND THEN YOU JUST DISAGREE WITH THE, THE CODE.
SO THE OTHER ISSUE IS, IS THE ILLUMINATION THAT WE, WE ARE LOOKING AT AS WELL AS FOR THE, AS FAR AS THE BRIGHTNESS OF NO, YOU GOOD ON, I THINK WE WE'RE GOOD ON THAT.
THEY VERIFIED THAT YOU MET THAT.
SO NOW IT'S I THINK MOSTLY A COMPATIBILITY ISSUE.
IF I MAY INTERJECT THAT ONE OF THE THINGS I HEAR, LIKE IF A COMPATIBILITY DOESN'T APPLY, WE COULD TREAT IT LIKE WE DO MODERN CENTERS AND SOME, SOME SIGNS ARE ILLUMINATED INTERNALLY AND SOME ARE NOT.
BUT AS LONG AS IT MEETS THE NEW CODE AND THE THE LIGHT COLOR IS WHITE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE SHOOTING FOR, WE'RE NOT, WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE BLUE OR YELLOW OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
BUT IF IT'S WHITE LIGHT, WHITE, WHITE FACES ON, ON THE LETTERS, THEN THAT IS SOMETHING THAT, THAT COULD HAPPEN HERE IF, IF YOU OVERTURN OUR DECISION.
SO I'M STILL STRUGGLING WITH UNDERSTANDING JAMIE.
SO LET ME, SO IF VOTE, IF WE VOTE TO OVERTURN THE STAFF'S DECISION, EVEN IF WE AGREE WITH ONE AND TWO, BUT NOT THREE MM-HMM
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR THE APPLICANT? THAT MEANS YOU GOTTA GET A PERMIT NO CLAIMS TO THE WILKINSON SIGN AND THEN THE, WE'RE NOT GONNA ENFORCE COMPATIBILITY, WHICH MEANS ANY, ANY OPTION, ANY SIGN OPTION POST 2010 THAT'S ALLOWABLE TO HIM, HE COULD UTILIZE THAT.
SO LOOK LIKE LOOKING AT THE FIVE GUYS EXAMPLE MM-HMM
HE COULD HAVE LIKE THE FIVE GUYS THAT MAYBE THOSE ARE SOLID LETTERS AND THE, AND THE, AND THEY'RE METAL, LIKE METAL CANS AND THE LIGHT GLOWS AROUND IT LIKE A HALO LIT OR IT MIGHT BE LIKE VERIZON WHERE THE, THE LET THE, THE WORDS GLOW.
UH, THAT, SO THERE, HE'S GOT GOT A LOT OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT WOULD OPEN UP TO HIM ON WITH THAT DECISION.
IF WE JUST VOTED COMPLETELY TO OVERTURN STAFF'S DECISION, THAT WOULD MEAN HE WOULD KEEP THE SIGN AS IS IF YOU KEEP OVERTURN THE STAFF DECISION YEAH.
AH, I THINK THAT COULD BE, UM, I GUESS WE WOULD THAT AND THAT'S PART OF WHY I HAVE THE QUESTIONS IN THERE.
LIKE WHY, WHAT WHAT PARTS OF THE DECISION.
UM, SO I WOULD LET LEAN ON THE FACT OUR DISCUSSION, OUR DISCUSSION AND YOUR MINUTES TO SAY A PERMIT WAS REQUIRED AND SO IT WOULD COME RIGHT BACK TO, TO COMPATIBILITY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I DON'T THINK SO.
IS OVERTURNED AND MOVE NOT CORRECT.
SO THE MOTION WAS MADE TO OVERTURN.
SO A NO VOTE MEANS, SO WE AGREE WITH STAFF, CORRECT? CORRECT.
BUT IF WE DON'T AGREE WITH THE STAFF ON THE THIRD POINT, HOW DO WE MAKE NOTE OF THAT FOR THE RECORD? I THINK JUST AS YOU'RE MAKING YOUR VOTE, EXPLAIN WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN.
AND THEN WE WILL, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT GETS IN THE MINUTES.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A CONDITION, BUT IT'S, UH, JUST AN EXPLANATION OF WHY YOU'RE VOTING THAT WAY.
WE READY FOR A VOTE? I DON'T THINK SO.
[00:55:01]
OKAY.COMMISSIONER FLOYD? UH, NO, BUT, UH, WITH AN EXCEPTION OF THREE, UH, CLAUSE ABOUT COMPATIBILITY.
SO A VOTE OF NO MEANS THAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD STAND.
UM, IT'S, I'M WANTING THE, THE TWO ONE AND TWO I AGREE WITH MM-HMM
BUT THREE, I DON'T, SO MM-HMM
IF IT'S, YES, BUT I DON'T AGREE WITH THE, THE, THE THIRD CLAUSE.
SO I, I I DON'T, I DON'T WANNA TALK YOU OUTTA YOUR VOTE, BUT I, I HEAR YOU SAYING THAT YOU, YOU YOU WANNA OVERTURN THE STAFF DECISION RELATED TO COMPATIBILITY.
IS THAT A, IS THAT ACCURATE? YES.
I THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD A, UH, PERMIT IN THE SECOND CLAUSE AS WELL.
BUT COMPATIBILITY IS DIFFICULT TO, TO, UH, LOCATE IT.
CAN WE TAKE A STEP BACK? FOR SURE.
I, I THINK THE THREE OF US ARE ON A PRETTY SIMILAR PAGE HERE.
AS FAR AS WE AGREE THAT HE SHOULD ADD A PERMIT MM-HMM
TWO OF THE THREE OF US DEFINITELY AGREE THAT THE GRANDFATHERING CLAUSE DOESN'T WORK, BUT WE, I THINK ALL THREE OF US AGREE THAT COMPATIBILITY ISN'T A GOOD JUDGMENT HERE, UH, OR CAN'T BE USED IN THIS CASE.
IS THE VOTE, YES, WE VOTE TO OVERTURN THE STAFF, BUT WE DO BELIEVE THERE SHOULD BE A PERMIT AND THEY DID LOSE THE TENANT'S SIGN.
OR IS IT A VOTE OF NO, WE DON'T THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE OVERTURNED, BUT WE THINK SPECIAL CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE SIGN BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A COMPATIBILITY ISSUE.
I THINK IF YOU SAY THAT IT, WHICH SHOULD NOT BE OVERTURNED, YOU'RE AGREEING WITH THE STATEMENTS IN, IN THE LETTER THAT WE SENT.
AND SO IT WOULD BE HARD, I TEND TO THINK IT WOULD BE EASIER FOR YOU TO TURN IT DOWN WITH INSTRUCTIONS ON WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE HAPPEN RATHER THAN APPROVING OR SUSTAINING A, A LETTER THAT YOU DON'T COMPLETELY AGREE WITH ALL THE PARTS OF.
SO THE VOTE WOULD BE YES TO OVERTURN WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE STILL BELIEVE THERE SHOULD BE A PERMIT AND THAT THE NON-CONFORMING STATUS WAS LOST.
BUT WE DON'T AGREE, I DON'T THINK YOU GET THAT OPTION.
WHAT'S THAT? I DON'T THINK WE GET THAT.
I THINK IT'S A YES OR NO, BUT WHEN YOU VOTE FOR IT LIKE A NO AGREES WITH STAFF MM-HMM
TO, TO NOT OVERTURN THEIR DECISION.
A YES IS IN FAVOR OF MR. GOFF.
BUT I, I DON'T THINK WE GET ANY SAY OUTSIDE OF THAT.
WHAT HAPPENS FOR THE, FOR THE RECORD YOU SAY WHY YOU VOTED FOR IT.
SO, SO IT IT IT'S A NO, I AGREE WITH THE STAFF.
BUT, UH, WITH CONSIDERATION, UH, RELATED TO THE COMPATIBILITY BECAUSE IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO ESTABLISH.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS, AM I ALSO WILL SAY NO.
UM, I, I JUST, I DON'T WANT THAT TO DISCOURAGE YOU BECAUSE I WANT YOU TO KNOW WE'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THIS, BUT JUST THE LEGALITIES OF THIS BOARD AND BECAUSE OF THE DISCUSSION WE HAD, IT'S APPROPRIATE VOTE.
BUT I WANT STAFF TO WORK HEAVILY WITH YOU TO FIND A SOLUTION THAT'S GOOD FOR YOU FINANCIALLY THAT DOESN'T HURT YOUR BUSINESS.
'CAUSE WE APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS AND ALL YOU DO FOR THE TOWN, BUT FOR ME IT'S, NO, MY VOTE IS YES, UH, NOT THAT IT WILL IMPACT ANYTHING, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THE, I I STILL KIND OF PUT THE BZA HAT ON AS FAR AS LOOKING AT ORDINANCES AND HOW WE LOOK AT THINGS AND WE HAVE A LIST OF CRITERIA AND ALL THE CRITERIA HAVE TO BE MET FOR US TO DO SOMETHING.
TO ME, THE TOWN DID NOT PROVE ALL THREE CRITERIA HERE, UH, BECAUSE I DO THINK THERE IS A COMPATIBILITY ISSUE.
AND SINCE I DON'T THINK COMPATIBILITY WAS PROVEN BY THE TOWN, MY VOTE IS IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICANT.
PLEASE GET WITH JAMIE AND HIS TEAM AFTER THIS IS OVER AND, UH, SEE WHATEVER
[01:00:01]
THE NEXT STEPS ARE.UH, I, I DO HOPE YOU SEE HOW MUCH WE CARE ABOUT YOU AND YOUR BUSINESS IN THIS TOWN.
UH, HOPEFULLY SOMETHING CAN GET WORKED OUT.
THANK YOU MR. ALRIGHT, ANNOUNCEMENTS.
[7 Announcements]
UM, JUST GIVING A REMINDER ABOUT THE FOUR HOURS, A MINIMUM REQUIRED BY THE STATE BY THE END OF THE YEAR FOR A PC AND OF COURSE BZA MEMBERS.SO CR 2026 TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES, MEMO HANDOUT.
UM, IT HAS LINKS ON IT AND THERE IS A TRAINING OPPORTUNITY TOMORROW.
I THINK WE'RE DOING A WATCH PARTY AT NOON.
AND THEN THE NEXT BZA MEETING, UH, WE HAVE ONE CASE SO FAR.
IT IS A SIDE YARD SETBACK, ENCROACHMENT VARIANCE FOR ONE 10 HILLWOOD LANE.
AND THEN LASTLY, WE'RE STILL DOING OUR 2050 COMP PLAN.
WE DO HAVE CHARETTES PLAN FOR MAY 12TH, 13TH, AND 14TH.
UM, WAIT, UM, IF JAMIE WANTS TO ELABORATE ON THE CHARETTE A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT YOU ARE WELCOME TO COME.
WE SHOULD BE PUBLISHING THE SCHEDULE HERE SOON, AND YOU'LL HAVE A CHANCE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE, THE MEETING TIMES.
IT'LL BE COME AND GO DURING THE DAY.
UM, AND A LOT OF IT WILL BE VERY PUBLIC, BUT THEY'LL DEFINITELY BE AT, AT NIGHT SOME IN UP SESSIONS WHERE WE TALK ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENED EACH DAY.
AND THOSE WILL BE VERY PUBLIC AND IT, AND SOME OF THOSE WE EVEN HAVE IN, IN LARGE, UH, AT LARGE AREAS WHERE PEOPLE CAN GATHER, UH, MAYBE AT A, AT A SCHOOL OR MAYBE EVEN IN THIS ROOM, THE, THE LAST MEETING.
UH, BUT PART A LARGE, SEVERAL OF THE MEETINGS DURING THE DAY WILL BE AT CARRIAGE CROSSING IN A VACANT SPACE THERE.