[ROLL CALL]
[00:00:11]
>>> GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME TO THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT.
WE'LL START WITH A ROLL CALL VOTE.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
WE WILL LOOK AT THE MINUTES FROM LAST MONTH IF ANYONE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION ON THOSE, THE JUNE 1ST MINUTES.>> I SENT IN SOME CORRECTIONS TO JESSICA AND THOSE WERE
INCORPORATED. >> I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE WERE THE ONES UPDATED BUT I JUST SAW IT WAS LISTING DAVID TILL?
>> YEAH, THAT'S BEEN CHANGED. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM JUNE 1ST, 2022.
[CHAIRMAN’S OPENING REMARKS]
>> YES. >> OKAY, I HAVE A DECISION TO READ. ANY PERSONS AGGRIEVED BY ANY DECISION OF THE BOARD MAY WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER SUCH DECISION APPEAL TO THE CUR CUT COURT HAVING JURISDICTION ACCORDING TO SECTION 908.02 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AUBURN.
TONIGHT THERE ARE FOUR OF US SO WE HAVE TO HAVE A UNANIMOUS DECISION FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO PASS.
I THINK STEVE AND STAFF HAVE COMMUNICATED THAT TOO EVERYONE SO IF SOMEONE WANTS TO POSTPONE UNTIL A MEETING WHERE THERE ARE FIVE VOTING MEMBERS, YOU STILL HAVE TO VOTE BUT FOUR VOTE IN
[1. Variance to Section 503, Building Setbacks, of the City of Auburn Zoning Ordinance BZ-2022-009]
FAVOR, IT'S NOT A SIMPLE MAJORITY FOR THIS BOARD.FOR OLD BUSINESS, WE WILL START TO BZ-2022-009.
THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU IS FOR A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK AT 2371 EAST UNIVERSITY DRIVE IN THE CDD ZONING DISTRICT NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH DEAN ROAD AND EUD.
HERE'S AN AERIAL IMAGE SHOWING THE SITE PRECONSTRUCTION WITH A SHARED ACCESS DRIVEWAY BETWEEN THE RIVER TRUST BANK AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE SITE PLAN WAS REVIEWED BY STAFF AND REPRESENTED A CONFORMING SETBACK.
AFTER SEVERAL REVISIONS, THE BUILDING FOOT FINGERPRINT WAS MOVED TO THE EAST SLIGHTLY AND THAT RESULTED IN THE SETBACK BEING NONCONFORMING. ADDITIONALLY ARCHITECTURE PLANS HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED AT THE TIME AND THAT ADDED SIX FEET TO THE REQUIRED SETBACK. SOME PERMITS TO START INITIAL SITE CONSTRUCTION WHILE THE FINAL BUILDING PERMIT WAS BEING REVIEWED WERE ISSUED SO THERE WAS SOME VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION.
STAFF REVIEWED THE PROJECT FOR THE FINAL BUILDING PERMIT AND THAT'S WHEN IT WAS NOTICE THAT HAD THE SETBACK WAS TOO CLOSE WITH THE PATIO AREA BEING APPROXIMATELY 12-FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE AVERILL BUILDING HEIGHT BEING 21-FEET TO THE PROPERTY LINE. SO HERE'S THE CURRENT SITUATION OUT AT THE SITE. THE UPPER PORTION OF THE BUILDING IS ESSENTIALLY FRAMED IN ALREADY.
THERE'S A LARGE RETAINING WALL THAT WAS REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE THE BUILDING FOOT FINGERPRINT. HERE IS A VIEW FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY LOOKING TOWARDS THE BUILDING.
AND HERE'S THE AERIAL AGAIN SHOWING SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THE SITE FACED AND WHY THEY HAD TO BUILD A RETAINING WALL WHICH ESSENTIALLY DROPPED THE BUILDING 13-FEET BELOW GRADE TO HAVE THE GRADE FLUSH WITH THE SHARED DRIVEWAY.
SO THE GRADE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO DOES MEET THE INTEND OF THE SETBACK AND THAT BUILDING DROPDOWN 13-FEET SO THAT ANGLE OF LIGHT IS BEING MAINTAINED IN A SENSE THAT IT'S NOT CREATING A NUISANCE OR A FIRE HAZARD ISSUE SO IF THE VARIANCE WERE GRANTED, THERE'S NO ISSUE TO THE GENERAL WELFARE OR TO FIRE SAFETY BUT
[00:05:04]
THERE ARE NO HARDSHIPS ASSOCIATED WITH THE REQUEST.THEY ORIGINALLY HAD A SITE PLAN THAT WAS CONFORMING.
THERE WERE THINGS THEY CAN DO TO MAKE THE SITE CONFORMING, ALTHOUGH IT MAY HAVE SOME ECONOMIC CHALLENGES TO IT BUT ECONOMIC DIFFICULTIES ARE NOT A GROUNDS FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE.
WE DID RECEIVE A LETTER FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER THAT HAS NO OBJECTIONS TO THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE.
BASED ON THE CRITERIA IN A THROUGH G REFERENCED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT, BECAUSE ALL CRITERIA WERE NOT MET, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL. WE WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK, SIGN IN
TOO YOUR YOUR LEFT ON THAT CLIP >> I'M TRYING TO FIGURE THIS OUT
HERE. >> IF YOU PRESS THE TOP ONE, IT
WILL ZOOM. >> ALL RIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON.
DAVID SLOCUM. I AM THE CIVIL ENGINEER ON RECORD FOR THIS PROJECT AND I WANTED TO BEGIN BY JUST GIVING YOU A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF WHAT THIS PROJECT IS.
THIS IS AN 18,600 SQUARE FOOT CLASS A OFFICE SPACE BUILDING.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU HAVE LOOKED FOR OFFICE SPACE IN AUBURN RECENTLY, BUT IT'S DIFFICULT TO FIND CLASS A OFFICE SPACE. I HAVE LOOKED MYSELF.
SO WE'RE REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS PROJECT COMING ONLINE.
IT WILL ADD 16,000 SQUARE FEET OF LEASABLE SPACE AND 85% OF THAT SPACE IS ALREADY LEASED TO BUSINESSES SUCH AS COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE, CPAS, FINANCIAL ADVISERS, THINGS LIKE THAT, SO IT WILL BE A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING.
AS LOGAN SHOWED YOU, THIS IS THE SITE.
YOU CAN SEE NORTH DEAN HERE. THIS IS RIVER BANK AND TRUST AND THIS IS WHERE WHEN RIVER BANK WAS BEING CONSTRUCTED, THIS WAS THE TEMPORARY BANK LOCATION. I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU REMEMBER, BY THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT SLOPE BETWEEN THIS TREE LINE AND THIS ASPHALT HERE OF ABOUT 13-FEET.
SO IF YOU WILL ALSO NOTICE THIS VERY THICK SHADOW HERE THAT IS A RETAINING WALL BETWEEN THE RIVER BANK SITE AND THE CLIMATE CRUELED STORAGE UNITS AND I CAN'T BEEN BACKONTROLLED STORAG CAN'T BEEN BACK THERE LATELY, BUT THAT'S PROBABLY ABOUT 15-FEET BETWEEN THOSE TWO SITES SO THERE'S SIGNIFICANT GRADE CHANGES AND TOPOGRAPHY CHALLENGES WITH THIS SITE.
THIS IS THE OPEN FIELD THAT YOU HAVE PROBABLY RIDDEN BY AND SEEN THE BIG LONG HORN CATTLE OUT THERE.
THAT'S THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT WROTE THE LETTER SAYING THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION. SO, AS WE MENTIONED, THIS VARIANCE IS ALL ABOUT THE ANGLE OF LIGHT SET BACK.
I'M SURE YOU'RE AWARE OF HOW THAT WORKS.
THE EVE HEIGHT FROM THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS 26-FEET.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE EVE HEIGHT FROM THE ROT LINE IN QUESTION, IT'S ONLY 13-FEET SO HAD THE BUILDING BEEN CONSTRUCTED THE WAY IT'S SHOWN HERE, THERE WOULD BE NO VARIANCE NEEDED, HOWEVER, WE CHOSE TO EXCAVATE THIS AREA, THIS SMALL AREA HERE, AND BUILD A RETAINING WALL, WHICH IS SHOWN HERE.
[00:10:04]
SO THE REASON FOR THAT IS TO ALLOW -- THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS FOR THAT. TO ALLOW AIR CONDITIONER UNITS TO BE PLACED IN THAT SPACE SO THEY'RE NOT VISIBLE FROM EAST UNIVERSITY IN THE PARKING LOT. I WILL SHOW YOU THE FLOOR PLAN IN A MOMENT. THERE ARE TWO DOORS THAT PROVIDE EMERGENCY EGRESS OUT OF THE BUILDING ON THAT END.THERE ARE WINDOWS ON THAT BUILDING THAT ALSO SERVE NOT ONLY AS DAYLIGHT FOR THE TENANTS BUT FOR EMERGENCY FIRE EGRESS ALSO. AND NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT THE GOODING OF THE RETAINING WALL ALLOWS FULL USE OF THE PRO GIVEN A DIFFERENT LAYOUT. THIS IS THE FLOOR PLAN.
YOU CAN SEE THE AIR CONDITIONER UNITS HERE.
THIS IS THE RETAINING WALL. THIS IS THE OPEN SPACE.
YOU CAN SEE THE EXIT THERE AND THERE AND WINDOWS ALONG THIS SIDE OF THE BUILDING. SO, AS LOGAN MENTIONED, WE BELIEVE THE INTENT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS MET.
THE ZONING ORDINANCE SAYS THE ANGLE OF LIGHT SETBACK IS TO ENSURE ADEQUATE AIR, SUNLIGHT, AND PRIVACY TO ADJOINING PROPERTIES. SO IF THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED, THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE IS STILL MET.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS SCENARIO AND THIS SCENARIO, THE EVE HEIGHT DOESN'T CHANGE.
THIS DOESN'T REQUIRE A VARIANCE. THIS DOES REQUIRE A VARIANCE.
SO THE ENTIRE REASON FOR THE VARIANCE IS THIS ONE EXCAVATED AREA. IT NOW HAS THE EVE HEIGHT FROM THIS POINT RATHER THIS POINT. I THINK THIS IS THE SAME PHOTO LOGAN HAD OF THE RETAINING WALL. YOU CAN SEE THAT'S PRETTY MUCH LEVEL WITH THE SECOND FLOOR. SO, IF YOU VIEW THE BUILDING, -- DID WE LOSE THAT OTHER PHOTO? IT APPEARS TO BE A ONE STORY BUILDING BECAUSE OF THE THAT DRASTIC CHANGE. IT AIL JUST COMES DOWN TO A TECHNICALITY. IF YOU DRAW THE ONE TO ONE LINE FROM THAT POINT, IT CLEARS THE EVE HEIGHT.
WE BELIEVE THE VARIANCE IS NECESSARY TO ALLOW FILL USE OF THE PROPERTY, TO ALLOW ADEQUATE EMERGENCY EGRESS, TO ALLOW SPACE FOR EYE UTILITIES TO BE CONCEALED AND AS LOGAN MENTIONED, GRANTING THE VARIANCE DOESN'T NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER OR THE PUBLIC SO WE HOPE YOU WILL CONSIDER MAKING A POSITIVE VOTE AND I APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
>> THANK YOU. IS THAT A STAIRCASE? IS THAT AN EMERGENCY EGRESS THERE OR IS THAT JUST A PATIO
YOU'RE HANGING OUT ON? >> YES, IT IS EMERGENCY EGRESS.
>> I THOUGHT THAT WAS AN EXIT I JUST DIDN'T SEE ANY STAIRS.
I GUESS THOSE ARE COMING LATER. >> SECOND AND FIRST FLOOR.
>> SO THE DOOR ON THE FIRST FLOOR IS AN EMERGENCY EGRESS OR THE PATIO IS AN EMERGENCY EGRESS AS WELL.
>> CAN YOU PUT THE SLIDE UP THAT SHOWS THE CUTAWAY WHERE THE WALL
WAS? >> LOGAN IS IN CONTROL NOW.
[00:15:05]
IS THIS THE ONE? >> THE ACTUAL PICTURE IS WHAT WE
WANT TO SEE. >> EITHER ONE, YEAH.
SCROLL BACKWARDS. OR DID YOU WANT TO SEE A
DIFFERENT ONE? >> THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH.
>> THAT SECOND FLOOR DECK, THAT'S ACCESS OUT OF THE
BUILDING AS WELL? >> YES, BUT THAT WOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED EMERGENCY ACCESS BECAUSE YOU'RE AT THAT END THERE. THERE'S A STAIRCASE IMMEDIATELY TO THE LEFT OF THAT THAT WOULD BRING YOU DOWN TO THAT END OF THE BUILDING WHERE YOU COULD EXIT AND GO EITHER DIRECTION.
>> BUT THERE'S DOORS AND WINDOWS BELOW THE DECK FOR EXIT IN
>> EXACTLY, YES. >> IS THAT EMERGENCY EXIT REQUIRED TO MEET THE CODE FOR EMERGENCY EXITS?
>> YES, IT'S IN THE UNDERSTANDING.
I'M NOT AN ARK TECH BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S
REQUIRED. >> WAS IT APPROVED BEFORE YOU
MADE THIS CHANGE? >> THE BUILDING PLANS WERE NOT REVIEWED UNTIL THIS POINT AND WHEN THEY WERE REVIEWED, THAT'S
WHEN THIS ISSUE BECAME APPARENT. >> AND YOU MEAN REVIEWED BY THE
>> IF YOU DUG DOWN ANOTHER FLOOR, YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE TEN
FEET FURTHER AWAY? >> THE HEIGHT MEASUREMENT IS TAKEN FROM GRADE OF THE BUILDING.
THAT DICTATES THE SET BACK. >> SO THE FACT THAT THEY PUT THAT RETAINING WALL THERE AND LOWERED IT MADE THIS BECOME A
VARIANCE ISSUE? >> YEAH, IF THAT WAS A BASEMENT AND THE GRADE WAS LIKE THE OTHER DRAWING THAT HE SHOWED, UP BELOW THAT DECK THAT EXTENDS OUT, IT WOULD BE MEASURED FROM THAT
POINT AND IT WOULD COMPLY. >> THIS SEEMS LIKE A BETTER USE FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BUILDING. YOU HAVE MORE DAYLIGHT COMING IN. THIS IS ABOUT DAYLIGHT.
YOU HAVE EMERGENCY ACCESS SO THE PEOPLE IN THAT SPACE, IT SEEMS LIKE THEY WOULD BENEFIT LIKE IF I WAS IN THAT OFFICE AND THERE WAS DIRT UP AGAINST THAT WALL, THAT'S NOT AS INTERESTING TO ME.
>> IS THIS A PROPERTY LINE ISSUE? OR AN ANGLE OF LIGHT ISSUE OR BOTH? WHAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT INTEND HERE?
>> IT'S JUST A SETBACK VARIANCE. >> IT'S JUST A STRAIGHT SETBACK? WE DON'T USUALLY LOOK AT ANGLE OF LIGHT.
>> YEAH, MOST OF THE TIME SETBACKS ARE EXPLICITLY DEFINED 20-FEET, 15-FEET, THAT KIND OF THING AND FOR NONRESIDENTIAL
USES, IT'S ANGLE OF LIGHT. >> YOU SEE IT RARELY IN SOME OF THE RESIDENTIAL -- WE HAVEN'T SEEN MANY OF THEM AT ALL.
>> IT'S SORT OF -- THE PREMISE OF THIS SETBACK AND ANGLE OF LIGHT IS BUILT INTO IT. IT TALKS ABOUT THE PURPOSE.
YOU HAVE THIS ANGLE OF LIGHT AND IN THIS DISTRICT, IT'S ONE TO ONE SO IT'S ONE FOOT OF SET BACKED FOR EACH FOOT OF HEIGHT, BUTBACK FOR EACH FOOT OF HEIGHT, BUT TO ARRIVE AT IT, THERE'S NOT A STUDY WHERE YOU LOOK AT IS LIGHT GETTING THROUGH? AND IT TALKS ABOUT SPACE, AIR, LIGHT, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. BUT IT'S MORE OF JUST A SETBACK CALCULATION. IT TALKS ABOUT ANGLE OF LIGHT BUT THEN SAYS TO DETERMINE THE SETBACK, YOU TAKE THE HEIGHT AND IF IT'S ONE TO ONE, IT'S THAT. IF IT'S 0.75-FEET TO ONE, IT'S A
DIFFERENT SETBACK REQUIREMENT. >> DIDN'T IT SAY IN THE DETAILS IT TALKED ABOUT THAT ANGLE OF LIGHT WAS DETERMINED BACK IN THE 1920S IN NEW YORK WHEN THEY WERE BUILDING TAIL BUILDINGS TO MAKE SURE LIGHT COULD COME THROUGH AND PEOPLE WERE NOT GETTING BLOCKED FROM LIGHT AND AIR AND STUFF.
>> THERE'S HISTORY IN ZONING IN BIGGER CITIES WITH HIGH-RISES WHERE THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT LIGHT.
IT'S NOT USUALLY IN RURAL CITIES AND SUBURBAN AREAS WHERE IT BECOMES AS IMPORTANT, BUT IT IS THE FOUNDATION FOR THIS SETBACK IN THE DISTRICT, LIKE LOGAN SAID, WHERE IT'S BASED ON THIS
CONCEPT OF ANGLE OF LIGHT. >> YOU ASKED ABOUT THE EMERGENCY EXIT ON THE EAST SIDE. I ASSUME THE ARCHITECT WOULD BE PLANNED FOR AND FROM A CODES PERSPECTIVE, THERE ARE OTHER
[00:20:04]
MEANS TO MAKE EMERGENCY EXIT REQUIREMENTS WITH EMERGENCYEXITS. >> THANK YOU, THAT'S WHAT I WAS
ASKING. >> ANYMORE QUESTIONS FOR THE
APPLICANT? >> LOCGAN MENTIONING IN ABOUT BEING ON GRADE WITH THE DRIVEWAY.
CAN YOU COMMENT ON THAT? >> I THINK WHAT HE'S REFERRING TO IS THE ENTIRE SITE COULD HAVE BEEN FILLED, POSSIBLY, TO 13-FEET, WHICH WOULD CAUSE A MAJOR DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN RIVER BANK, THE DRIVEWAY AND ACCESS. THAT'S WHY IT WAS LOWERED TO BE LEVEL WITH RIVER BANK AND THE ACCESS POINT WHICH CAUSED THE NEED FOR THE RETAINING WALL AND THE CUT ON THAT SIDE OF THE SITE. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> YEAH, I DON'T BELIEVE THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO GET ANOTHER DRIVEWAY. THEY WOULD HAVE TO USE THE DRIVEWAY THAT'S THERE AND SINGS THAT'S AT THE LEVEL THAT RIVER TRUST BANK IS, IT WOULDN'T HAVE A WAY TO RAISE THE SITE AND
STILL USE THAT DRIVEWAY. >> ANYTHING ELSE?
>> ALL RIGHT. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK THIS FAVOR OF OR OOP POSITION OF THIS
VARIANCE REQUEST. >> I HAVE A QUESTION IF I COULD.
>> YEAH, JUST SIGN IN AND ASK. >> EXCUSE ME, I JUST CAME FROM
>> YES, SIR, AND THEN TELL US YOUR NAME.
>> MIKE THOMPSON. THE REASON I'M ASKING IS I HAVE A SIMILAR SITUATION, NOT EXACTLY THE SAME BUT I HAD ONE BEFORE.
JUST AS A MATTER OF THE CODE ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE, IS THE SET BACK -- I'M ASKING THE EXPERTS, IS THE SET BACK PRIMARILY TO PROTECT THE AREA AND ESPECIALLY THE NEIGHBORS? I KNOW THERE'S ALSO SOME OTHER ISSUES INVOLVED BUT WHAT'S THE PRIMARY REASON FOR A SETBACK LINE.
>> I WILL LET LOGAN ADD IN IF HE WANTS TO BUT SETBACKS ARE FOR A NUMBER OF PURPOSES AND YOU HAVE DIFFERENT TYPES OF ZONING.
THIS ZONING IN AUBURN, WE HAVE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE ANGLE OF LIGHT AND SECTION 5 PRESERVATION OF AIR AND LIGHT FOR ADJACENT ADJOINING PROPERTIES SO YOU'RE NOT HAVING ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
IN A GENERAL SENSE, SET BACKS ARE ALSO USED TO SEPARATE BUILDINGS, PROVIDE SEPARATION BETWEENPROVIDE SEPARATION BETWE, RIGHT? LOGAN, YOU WORK WITH THIS EVERY
DAY, DO YOU WANT TO COVER MORE? >> YOU COVERED IT.
>> OKAY. I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE VARIANCE, THEN. IT SEEMS LIKE THE REASON IS PRIMARILY FOR LIGHT, MOVEMENT OF AIR AND ONLY BECAUSE IT'S DROPPED DOWN 10 OR 12-FEET, WHATEVER IT IS, YOU HAVE AN ARBITRARY MEASUREMENT NOW THAT DOESN'T AFFECT THE INTEND OF THE SIGN OF LIGHT AND AIR FLOW. THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT.
>> WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? ALL RIGHT. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN UP TO THE BOARD FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR A MOTION.
>> THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO DIG THAT DOWN.
IT CREATES A VARIANCE ISSUE BUT IT MAKES THE BUILDING A BETTER PLACE TO OCCUPY TO ME AND THE NARP NE
>> THAT'S JUST ONE OF SEVERAL CRITERIA WE HAVE TO CONSIDER
WITH THE ANGLE OF LIGHT. >> I DON'T SEE HOW THERE WAS A HARDSHIP IN THE FIRST PLACE THAT NECESSITATED THE DIGGING DOWN OF THE INSTALLATION OF THE RETAINING WALL.
THE SITE IS WHAT IT IS. I JUST DON'T SEE WHY YOU NEEDED
[00:25:02]
TO GO THERE. YOU COULD HAVE STILL MET THE REQUIREMENT THE WAY IT WAS AND I AGREE THAT IT MAKES A NICER SPACE, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT, AND AS FAR AS INTENT IS CONCERNED. I GUESS JUST FROM A PROCEDURAL STANDPOINT, IT SEEMS LIKE IT WAS FINE AND NOW IT'S NOT.>> BUT IF YOU VOTE AGAINST THIS, DO YOU HAVE TO FILL IT IN WITH DIRT AND BRING IT UP? IS THAT WHAT HAPPENS, STEVE?
>> YEAH, THEY MOVE THAT WALL AND FILL IT UP WITH DIRT.
THE BUILDING AND LIGHT REMAINS THE SAME.
TO ME IT'S AN ODDITY IN THE CODE.
IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE I THINK AING OF LIGHT ONE BIT WHICH IS
WHAT THE CODE IS WRITTEN FOR. >> COULD THEY ALSO SEE IF THE NEIGHBOR IS WILLING TO DEED THEM A LITTLE LAND AND THE SETBACK IS
FURTHER? >> I'M SURE THEY PROBABLY -- WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET INTO FINANCES BUT I'M SURE MR. PATTON IS NOT JUST GOING TO DEED OVER A FIVE FOOT STRIP OF LAND.
>> I'M JUST SAYING, THERE ARE OPTIONS.
>> I STILL THINK IT'S A SILLY THING FOR THE CODE.
LY MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE BUSHINGS Z-2022-009.
>> TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE? >> SECOND.
>> KIM WHITE? >> NO, MARTY HEFFREN?
[2. Variance to Section 429.06, Corridor Overlay Regulations, of the City of Auburn Zoning Ordinance BZ-2022-010]
>> NO. >> ALL RIGHT, THE VARIANCE DID NOT PASS. MOVING ONTO BZ-2022-010.
>> THEY WISH TO POSTPONE UNTIL AUGUST 3RDRD.
[3. Variance to Article VI, Signs, of the City of Auburn Zoning Ordinance BZ-2022-011]
>> WE GOT AN E-MAIL ABOUT THAT ONE.
BZ-2022-011 -- DO WE NEED TO MAKE EH A MOTION? WE DO. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE BZ-2022-010 TO OUR NEXT MEETING.
>> AND THEN BZ-2022-011. >> THIS IS A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A SIGN TOO ENCROACH INTO THE 10-FOOT SET ENCROACH INTO THE 10-FOOT SET BACK AT THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
THE PROPERTY IS ZONED CDD WITH DDH ACROSS THE STREET, STOKER HEIGHTS, I BELIEVE, AND THE EAST ALABAMA MEDICAL FACILITIES ACROSS THE STREET AS WELL. HERE IS AN AERIAL OF THE SITE.
THE BUILDING IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW OR THERE ARE TWO BUILDINGS UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
ONE TWO STORIES AND ONE THREE STORIES.
THEY ARE BUILDING A RESTAURANT, RETAIL, AND OFFICE SPACE DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT IS WISHING TO PLACE THE SIGN HERE FIVE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE WHEN TEN FEET IS REQUIRED. THE SIGN WOULD BE 120 SQUARE FEET AND SPACE IS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL TENANTS TO HAVE THEIR SIGNAGE. AFTER STAFF'S REVIEW OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST AGAINST THE CRITERIA FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE, WE FOUND THAT THE REQUEST DOE THE CRITERIA AND WE RECOMMEND DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
>> AMBER, I SAW THAT YOU NOTED THAT THERE MIGHT BE A VISIBILITY
ISSUE ON THIS ONE, RIGHT? >> I DID NOT, MORGAN DID THAT.
>> ON F, STAFF IS CONCERNED IT MAY CREATE A SITE ISSUE.
>> AND THE NEIGHBOR SAID THE SAME THING.
>> YOU'RE RIGHT. >> I STARRED THAT ONE.
>> ANYONE HAVE ANYMORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THINK. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO COME AND SIGN IN AND SPEAK, PLEASE.
[00:30:07]
>> OKAY. CAN YOU CLARIFY WHAT YOU WERE
JUST MENTIONING, THE VISIBILITY? >> I CAN READ WHAT THE REPORT SAYS. IT SAYS STAFF IS CONCERNED THAT THE PROPOSED SIGN LOCATION MIGHT CREATE A SITE VISIBILITY
OBSTRUCTION FOR MOTORISTS. >> WAS THAT AN ENGINEERING
COMMENT? >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK THAT'S JUST THROUGH STAFF REVIEW, WHAT THEY LOOKED AT AND THOUGHT TO
BRING TO OUR ATTENTION. >> IT WASN'T BASED ON TECHNICAL DATE, IT WAS BASED ON WHERE CARS LINE UP AND , IT WAS BASED ON W LINE UP A, IT WAS BASED ON WHERS LINE UP AND STOP, PULL OUT AND MOVING THE SIGN CLOSER TO THE STREET IS MORE LIKELY TO CREATE A VISIBILITY ISSUE AS OPPOSED TO WHERE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE.
>> CAN YOU ZOOM IN ON THAT AREA? >> I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE IT OR NOT BUT IT'S BARELY VISIBLE.
THERE'S THE STOP SIGN, SO THAT IS THE STOP BAR WHERE A CAR WOULD STOP TO PULL OUT ONTO EAST UNIVERSITY.
THE SIGN IS WAY BACK BEHIND THAT POINT.
I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW IT WOULD BE VERY EASY TO SHOW THAT THAT DOES NOT OBSTRUCT A VIEW. I'M NOT CHORE WHY THAT COMMENT WAS MADE IF YOU'RE LOOKING THIS WAY AND THIS WAY, THAT SIGN IS NOWHERE CLOSE TO OBSTRUCTING THE VIEW.
>> WHAT'S THE DIMENSION FROM THAT GRAY TO THAT SIGN? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S FIVE FEET.
>> 25, MAYBE MORE THAN THAT. >> SO THE SIGN PROPOSED THERE IS FIVE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND THAT'S 20-FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY BEFORE YOU GET TO THERE WHERE YOU STOP?
>> ARE YOU ASKING FOR A STRAIGHT LINE DISTANCE THIS WAY?
I'M JUST GOING OFF THE FACT THAT I KNOW THAT THIS IS 24-FEET SO IT WOULD BE I THINK 25 WOULD BE ACCURATE.
>> SO WHEN A CAR EXITS OUT OF THERE, CAN YOU PUT YOUR FINGER OR POINTER ON WHERE THE CAR -- IT CAN GO LEFT OR --
>> YEAH, THIS IS A RIGHT OUT ONLY
>> SO WHEREABOUTS WOULD A CAR STOP?
>> RIGHT THERE. THERE'S THE STOP BAR RIGHT
THERE. >> SO WHEN A CAR IS COMING OUT AND A CAR IS COMING IN, DOES THAT SIGN GET IN THE WAY OF XHN WHO IS COMING OUT VERSUS SOMEONE COMING IN? STRAIGHT ACROSS FROM THE REDSOMS SOMEONE COMING IN? STRAIGHT ACROSS FROM THE RED BOX, THAT LITTLE RECTANGLE RIGHT THERE WHERE YOUR HAND IS FROM LEFT TO RIGHT.
IS THAT KIND OF A BLIND SPOT AREA WHERE SOMEONE IS COMING IN AND COMING OUT? OR IF THEY SIGN WAS MOVED BACK A LITTLE BIT MORE, WOULD IT BE BETTER? INSTEAD OF FIVE FEET AWAY, SIX FEET AWAY.
>> I'M NOT SEEING WHERE IT WOULD CAUSE AN ISSUE WITH TRAFFIC.
THAT'S JUST MY OPINION AS A CIVIL ENGINEER.
SO THE THINGS NOT SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING IS THERE'S A WATER VAULT. THIS DRAWING IS A BIT OUTDATED.
I'M NOT SURE WHY IT WAS USED. THERE'S A WATER VAULT SO THE SIGN CANNOT BE MOVED BACK. IT WOULD CONFLICT WITH THE VAULT. THERE ARE TWO WATER METERS HERE, A STORM PIPE HERE, AS YOU CAN SEE.
SO IT'S PRETTY TIGHT ON WHERE TO LOCATE THE SIGN.
ON THIS SIDE, YOU'VE GOT A SIGNIFICANT GRADE CHANGE FROM THE SIDEWALK DOWN TO A NATURAL DRAINAGE FEATURE THAT'S DRAINING THROUGH. IT PROBABLY DROPS EIGHT TO TEN FEET RIGHT THERE. IF IT WAS BACK OUT OF THE EASEMENT IT WOULD NOT BE VISIBLE IT WOULD BE SO LOW AND ANYWHERE ALONG THE FRONTAGE,IC SEE THAT THE SIGN WOULD ENROACH INTO THA
[00:35:02]
THE SIGN WOULD ENCROACH INTO T SEE THAT THE SIGN WOULD ENC SEE THAT THE SIGN WOULD ENCROACH INTO TY SEE THAT THE SIGN WOULD ENCROACH INTO TOU SEE THAT THE SIGN WOULD ENCROACH INTO TC SEE THAT THE SIGN WOULD ENCROACH INTOA SEE THAT THE SIGN WOULD ENCROACH INTOJ SEE THAT THE SIGN WOULD ENCROACH INTO SEE THAT THE SIGN WOULD ENCROACH INTON SEE THAT THE SIGN WOULD ENCROACHINTO THAT SAME EASEMENT. >> SOMEONE DID A BOOR DESIGN WITH THIS. OOR DESIGN WITH THPOOR DESIGN WITH THIS. WAS THE SIGN AN AFTER THOUGHT? I ASSUME IT WAS TALKED ABOUT BEFOREHAND.
>> I DON'T THINK THE SIGN AS AN AFTER THOUGHT, WAS IT?
>> THE WATER VAULT IS THE MAIN ISSUE RIGHT THERE AND OHM NOT SURE WHY IT WAS LOCATED THERE. IT WAS NOT ON THE ORIGINAL PLANS. I THINK IT WAS A CHANGE DURING
CONSTRUCTION. >> I LOOK FOR ODDITIES IN THE CODE OR REASONS TO APPROVE OR DENY A VARIANCE AND ON THIS ONE, WHAT I DON'T LIKE IS WHEN SOMETHING IS BROUGHT TO US AND IT IS NOTHING THAT THE CODE DID, IT'S VERY BLACK AND WHITE OF EYE NEED TO BE TEN FEET, WHATEVER IT IS, TEN FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND SOMEONE THREW A DESIGN TOGETHER AND SAID WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT FIVE FEET AND GO TO THIS BOARD AND ASK RELIEF.
FROM WHAT YOU SAID, YOU HAVE NO WHERE ELSE TO PUT THAT SIGN AND YOU'RE PUTTING THIS BURDEN ON US WHEN WHOEVER DESIGNED IT SAID WE SHOULDN'T PUT THIS HERE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO PUT A SIGN.
I KNOW THE CLOSER TO ROAD SIGNS ARE THE MORE THEY INHIBIT VISIT NULLITY AND I KNOW THAT'SVISIBI ALSO A BUSY ROAD BEING FIVE FEET CLOSER TO THE ROAD DOESN'T HELP YOU SEE THOSE SIGNS A WHOLE LOT MORE. I DON'T KNOW IF PEOPLE EVEN LOOK AT SIGNS A WHOLE LOT ANYMORE BUT THAT'S MY THOUGHT ON IT.
JUST A SECOND, SIR. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU.
>> CAN YOU EAT UP A PARKING SPACE AND JUST SHIFT IT OVER AND
BACK? >> PASS BLUE, THAT PARKING LOT IS QUITE A BIT LOWER. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD DO ANY GOODQUITE A BIT LOWER. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD DO ANY GS QUITE A BIT LOWER. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD DO ANY GI DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD DO AN GIS QUITE A BIT LOWER.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD DO ANY GQUITE A BIT LOWER.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD DO ANY GOOD BEING THAT LOW.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY PICTURES OF IT ZOOMED OUT FURTHER THAN WHAT
>> THERE'S A PICTURE THAT SHOWS THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE.
WE CAN'T SEE THE GRADE OR SEE WHAT'S ACTUALLY THERE.
WE JUST HAVE A SITE LOCATION WITH VERY MINIMAL MEASUREMENTS.
WHAT'S YOUR ISSUE WITH PUTTING IT DOWN THERE?
>> THAT WAS SUGGESTED. IT'S IN A POWER COMPANY EASEMENT AND THE OWNER IS AFRAID THAT EASTBOUND TRAFFIC WOULD GO BEYOND THE DRIVEWAY BEFORE THEY SAW THE SIGN.
SO THE BEST LOCATION FOR THE SIGN IS AT THE DRIVEWAY.
THERE'S ALSO AN EXISTING SIGN FOR THE APARTMENTS IN THAT ISLAND RIGHT NEXT TO IT SO YOU NEVER REALLY WANT TWO SIGNS THAT CLOSE TO EACH OTHER TO BLOCK EACH OTHER.
>> SO DOES THE ALABAMA POWER EASEMENT TAKE UP THAT WHOLE AREA
WHERE YOU COULDN'T PUT IT THERE? >> YEAH, YOU CAN SEE IT RIGHT THERE. THERE'S THE POWER LINE AND THE
EASEMENT IS RIGHT THERE. >> BUT IT COULD GO -- I CAN'T TELL IT MUCH FROM THE DRAWING BUT IT COULD GO THERE IT LOOKS
LIKE. >> WITH POWER COMPANY APPROVAL, WE'LL HAVE TO SEE IF THEY WOULD APPROVE THAT.
I'M JUST NOT SURE IF THE OWNER WOULD EVEN BUILD A SIGN THAT FAR AWAY FROM YOU CAN HEAR FROM HIM IF HE'S ALLOWED TO COME UP.
>> ANYMORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF OR AGAINST THIS
A COUPLE OF THINGS ABOUT THE WATER VAULT.
THE ORIGINAL PLANS WERE APPROVED BY THE CITY WITH A CERTAIN SIZE VAULT. AFTER THE APPROVAL OF THE PLANS
[00:40:02]
AND EVERYTHING ELSE WE WERE TOLD THAT THERE WAS NOT ADEQUATE SPACE IN THERE FOR THE METERS THEY WANTED.WE HAD TO ENLARGE THAT VAULT SO THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES.
THE OTHER ISSUE IS THAT DOWN THERE ON THAT CORNER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I KNOW Y'ALL CAN'T SEE THE GRADE, BUT IT'S PROBABLY SIX OR EIGHT FEET BELOW THE LEVEL OF THE PARKING LOT SO TO PUT A SIGN THERE AND MEET THE CITY CODE FOR SIGN HEIGHT AND SQUARE FOOTAGE, YOU WOULD HARDLY SEE IT COMING FROM THAT
THE PARKING LOT? >> THIS BOTTOM RIGHT HAND CORNER IS THE LOWEST PART OF THE PROPERTY.
>> SO THAT WOULD BE MORE VISIBLE, RIGHT?
>> THE PARKING LOT IS UP HERE AND SO YOU WOULD HAVE A SIGN DOWN HERE COMING FROM THIS WAY -- THIS WHOLE THING COMING FROM WHERE THE DRIVE GOES GOING THAT WAY, THERE'S A BANK THAT
GOES UP. >> YEAH, NOW I'M RECALLING.
>> SO IT WOULD BE STUCK IN A WHOLE COMING FROM THAT
DIRECTION. >> BY HOLE YOU MEAN IT WOULD BE AT GRADE WITH THE ROAD BASICALLY?
>> IT WOULD BE AT GRADE WITH THE ROAD.
THE OTHER ISSUE ON THAT, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO OPERATE THIS THING BUT THAT GRAY AREA THAT DAVID WAS TALKING ABOUT WHERE THE CARS STOP, THAT GRAY AREA IS JUST A TURN LANE, IT'S NOT ONCOMING TRAFFIC. THE ONCOMING TRAFFIC IS ACTUALLY ANOTHER LANE THIS WAY, SO THE FACTOR OF THAT RED RECTANGLE BEING ANY KIND OF A LINE OF SIGHT ISSUE IS REALLY, I DON'T SEE HOW IT WOULD BE BUT WE HAD TO CHANGE THAT VAULT AFTER IT HAD BEEN APPROVED THE FIRST TIME WHEN WATER RESOURCES CAME BACK AND LOOKED AT IT AND MADE US PUT IN A LARGER VAULT.
I'M NOT SURE THAT'S THE EXACT REASON BUT I REMEMBER THAT ISSUE AND IT MADE US PUT IN A MUCH LARGER VAULT THERE.
THANK YOU. >> WHAT IS A WATER VAULT? I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
>> I'M SORRY, ONE OTHER THING. WE HEARD THE WATER RESOURCES BOARD HAD AN VERB WITH IT BY I GOT AN E-MAIL FROM CHRIS BARRY TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SAYING THEY HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THIS SIGN. THE WATER VAULT IS WHERE THE MAIN COMES IN AND SPLITS OFF TO THE PARTS OF THE BUILDING.
>> OH, YES, THANK YOU. >> AND MR. THOMPSON, IF YOU GO ACROSS THAT DRIVE AISLE WHERE IT SAYS HYDRANT, IT CAN'T GO THERE?
>> WHEN WE FIRST STARTED EXCAVATING THIS LAND, THERE WAS A NATURAL SPRING RIGHT THERE. WE HAD TO PUT THAT PIPE YOU SEE IN THERE BECAUSE OF THAT NATURAL SPRING AND IT GOES DOWN PROBABLY EIGHT FEET FROM THE CURB DOWN TO THAT SPRING.
SO WE'RE KIND OF -- >> IS THERE ANY WAY TO MOVE IT -- SEE WHERE THAT LITTLE PARKING SPACE IS JUST OFF THE RIGHT TOP CORNER OF THAT RED SQUARE.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO USE ANY OF THAT SPACE SO YOU CAN KEEP IT IN THE SAME AREA BUT MOVE IT BACK AND MAYBE SACRIFICE A PARKING
SPACE? >> WE WOULDN'T MIND SACRIFICING A PARKING SPACE BUT EVEN FROM THAT RED SQUARE DOWN TO THAT CURB JUST ABOVE IT, THAT'S A DROP ALSO.
THIS DRIVEWAY GOES DOWN PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY TO GRADE SO THAT IT'S VERY HIGH RIGHT THERE AND VERY LOW.
>> COULD YOU JUST MAKE A TALLER SIGN?
>> CODE WON'T LET US. YOU CAN ONLY HAVE SO MANY SQUARE
FEET BASED ON THE HEIGHT. >> THEY'RE ALOUD UP TO 16-FEET.
>> BUT YOU COULD BUILD UP THE GRADE OF THAT PARKING SPACE TO
MEET THAT. >> YEAH, COULD YOU BUILD LIKE A PLATFORM AND YOUR SIGN IS ON A PLATFORM?
>> POSSIBLY. I'M GOING TO DEFER TO THE EXPERTS THERE. I DON'T THINK WE CAN PUT IT ON THOSE WATER LINES, THOUGH, COULD WE?
>> NOT WOULD A HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT.
>> THAT'S A PRIVATE LINE. >> AND THE MEASUREMENT OF THE SIGN, THE HEIGHT WOULD BE TAKE FERN THE CENTER LINE OF THE ROAD SOTHE CENTER LINE OF THE ROAD SO IF THE ROAD IS LOWER YOU
[00:45:03]
COULD BUILD THE SIGN UP TO THAT 16-FEET IF THAT MAKES SENSE.>> UNFORTUNATELY THE ROAD, OUR PARKING LOT GOES DOWN FROM THE ROAD EVERYWHERE, WELL, IT GOES DOWN FROM THE ROAD ABOUT HALFWAY DOWN AND THEN IT'S WAY UP FROM THE ROAD.
>> SO YOU COULD BUILD UP ON YOUR SITE WITH THE SIGN AND THEN FROM THE POINT WHERE IT IS LEVEL WITH THE STREET, THAT'S WHERE YOU MEASURE YOUR 16-FEET SO IT WOULD BE TALLER THAN 16-FEET.
>> AND WHAT'S THE WIDTH? >> THERE IS NO MINIMUM?
>> REALLY? >> WE WERE TOLD TEN FEET.
>> THE TEN FEET IS JUST THE SET BACK.
SO THERE IS NO MINIMUM WIDTH FOR A SIGN AS LONG AS IT'S TEN FEET
FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. >> BUT THERE'S A MAXIMUM WIDTH.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? >> NO, THERE'S NOT.
>> THERE'S A MAXIMUM AREA. >> RIGHT.
>> SO IF YOU DO GO 16-FEET, THERE'S A MAXIMUM WIDTH.
>> 120 SQUARE FEET? ALL RIGHT.
>> ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS VARIANCE? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN TO THE BOARD FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR A MOTION.
>> THE OTHER THING I WOULD POINT OUT IS THAT THERE'S A SIDEWALK BEFORE YOU GET TO THAT STOP BAR. TYPICALLY PEOPLE STOP BEFORE THEY JUST PULL UP ON THE SIDEWALK AND SOMEONE MAY BE GOING UP AND DOWN THAT SIDEWALK SO IF YOU STOP AT THAT POINT, WHICH IS RECOMMENDED AND THEN PULL FORWARD BUT THIS IS, AS Y'ALL ALLUDED TO, THIS IS ALL PART OF SITE DESIGN.
IT SHOULD BE SOMETHING YOU'RE DESIGNING A SITE AND OFTEN TIMES STAFF WILL ASK PEOPLE HAVE YOU PROVIDED A PLACE FOR A SIGN? YOU SEE A BUILDING SOMETIMES AND IT'S NOT DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE A SIGN AND YOU SAY HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT WHERE TO PUT A SIGN? IT SHOULD BE DESIGNED AS AN OFFICIAL PART OF THE PROCESS. STAFF HAS ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT OTHER LOCATIONS BUT WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT, IT'S NOT OUR ROLE TO LOOK FOR A SUITABLE LOCATION.
THE REGULATIONS SAY TEN FOOT SETBACK AND CERTAIN TYPES OF THINGS AND WE'RE HAPPY TO REVIEW AREAS THAT THEY WANT TO PROPOSE FOR A SIGN BUT IN THE END, IT'S NOT OUR ROLE TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION FOR THEM. AND WHEN YOU GO THROUGH A THROUGH G, I THINK THERE WERE OTHER COMMENTS MADE BY MORGAN WHEN SHE WROTE THE REPORT AS TO WHY IT DID OR DIDN'T MEET THOSE
OTHER REQUIREMENTS AS WELL. >> SO TO CLARIFY, THERE'S A MARKED CROSSWALK OR THERE WILL BE A MARKED CROSSWALK THERE?
>> IT JUST LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A SIDEWALK RIGHT THERE BEFORE YOU GET TO THE GRAY AREA THAT WAS MENTIONED BY THE APPLICANT, I THINK THERE'S A SIDEWALK THERE. A MULTIUSE PATH IN THIS CASE.
>> IS THAT THE REASON FOR THE TEN FOOT SET BACK?
>> NO, IT'S A TEN FOOT SETBACK FROM A PROPERTY LINE.
>> I SEE IT NOW. IT MEETS THE CURB.
>> LOOKS LIKE IT'S RIGHT UP AGAINST THE BACK OF THE RIGHT OF
WAY. >> ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING? I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY BUS
I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY OTHER BUSINESS THAT WE HAVE.
I SENT THAT E-MAIL OUT. ARE MOST PEOPLE HERE THAT FIRST WEEK OF AUGUST OR DO WE NEED TO POSTPONE THAT?
>> I'M HERE BOTH WEEKS. I DON'T GO ANYWHERE.
[STAFF COMMUNICATION]
>> OKAY. I DON'T HAVE ANY COMMUNICATION.
ANY STAFF COMMUNICATION? >> I WOULD JUST MENTION THAT WE DID SET UP FOR TRAINING FOR YOU IN AUGUST SO IF YOU DON'T HAVE THAT ON YOUR CALENDAR YET SET THE 24TH.
THANK YOU. >> YEAH, FIRST WEEK IS GOOD FOR
ALL RIGHT. WE ARE A
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.