![youtube image](https://i.ytimg.com/vi_webp/iDRyVvAPTx4/mqdefault.webp)
►
From YouTube: BOA & Sign Code BOA Meeting 04 08 2015
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
C
A
You,
the
first
item
on
the
agenda,
is
the
approval
of
the
March
19
2015
minutes.
I'll
need
a
motion
in
a
second
motion
by
mr.
McGuire
second
by
mr.
stone
Berger
all
in
favor,
say.
Aye
opposed
motion
carries
the
second
item
on
the
agenda:
Josh
SUSE
Appeals
for
requirements,
a
zoning
ordinance
sections
21
o3o
for
a
property
in
a
non-conforming
garage
at
2001,
East
Kemp
again.
B
Currently
this
subset
and
planted
lot
located
in
the
r2.
A
single-family
attached
residential
district
consists
of
a
non-conforming
primary
structure
and
a
non-compliant
launch
ed,
there's
no
legal
buildable
area
on
this
parcel.
The
boulevard
of
Ag
right
away
is
being
used
to
satisfy
the
entire
West
required
front
yard
setbacks
for
the
existing
single-family
dwelling
and
proposed
garage.
B
Additionally,
a
1.5
setback
is
proposed
or
a
minimum
xx
standard
parking
length
needed
for
the
front
garage
doors
and
so
as
to
avoid
encroaching
over
into
the
public
right
of
ways.
If
this
is
approved,
we
would
recommend
a
waiver
right
to
protest
for
sure
better
Street
all
standard
street
improvements.
Thank
you.
B
B
He
was
up
here,
of
course,
he
was
granted
his
brains
back
in
the
day
too,
and
then
we
had
another
party
that
doesn't
support,
but
didn't
want
to
be
publicly.
It
knows
and
sorry
here,
no
apparently
not
engineering
recommends
eliminating
the
existing
illegal
parking
pad
and
well
a
maximum
overall
36
foot
driveway.
Those
are
the
initial
comments
ahead.
Sorry.
B
Engineering
staff
has
recommended
right
here:
there's
a
parking
pad
right
now,
apparently
concrete
pad
where
this
car
sitting.
If
the
garage
is
allowed
to
be
here,
they'll,
be
allowed
to
have
up
to
a
36
foot
concrete
driveway,
and
then
this
one
should
be
removed.
Just
what
they're
requesting
for
your
consideration.
B
B
They
just
think
it's
too
tight
on
too
much
of
a
lot,
but
you
know
in
the
truest
sense
of
having
to
have
a
hardship.
This
lot
does
have
a
hardship
I
mean
at
some
times
I'm
real
of
this
non-conforming
house.
We
built
on
this
lot
without
a
garage
now
we're
pushing
that
everything
has
to
be
put
someplace
on
the
property
and
he's
merely
been
trying
to
get
a
garage
to
get
the
stuff
off
the
property.
How.
B
B
B
D
B
D
B
F
Generally,
we
would
allow
up
to
36
feet
maximum
of
a
driveway
for
any
individual
residents
and
not
as
many
driveways
as
they
want
each
one
having
a
maximum
of
36
feet
but
a
maximum
of
36
feet,
and
so
you
could
put
it
right
where
that
car
is
parked
and
extended
out
for
a
total
of
36
feet.
That's
not
gonna
be
where
he
wants.
It
he's
gonna,
want
it
in
front
of
his
garage
and
so
to
have
a
total
of
36
feet.
F
A
F
In
this
case,
it's
impossible
for
him
with
a
driveway
accessing
off
12th
to
park
anywhere,
but
in
the
right-of-way,
where
you
know,
if
you
put
the
driveway
off
of
the
alley,
he
could
park
entirely
on
his
own
property.
But
then
the
garage
is
going
to
be
too
far
away
from
the
house.
I
mean
he
wants
a
close
to
the
house,
I'm
sure
impractical.
B
B
C
G
G
A
Tough
issue
with
this
one
josh
is
that
one
and
a
half
foot
setback
we're
in
an
hour
to
a
zone.
Our
normal
zones
have
a
nine
foot
setback
on
each
side.
Again.
This
is
a
small
lot.
We've
made
accommodations
for
that
part
of
town
in
our
our
to
a
zone
which
allows
a
six
foot
setback
on
each
side.
The
reason
we
have
those
setbacks
is
just
to
keep
things
apart,
where
I
struggle
with
this
one
is
with
a
one
and
a
half
foot
setback
is
that
to
the
sidewall
or
to
the
eave.
B
A
So
when
the
rain
comes,
and
it's
not
the
the
the
average
drizzle,
it's
then
inch
per
hour
rain
that
flies
off
the
roof
and
lands
on
the
neighbor's
house
or
the
snow
that
accumulates
in
the
neighbor's
yard
that
if
we
had
adequate
setback,
some
of
that
would
be
encompassed
on
yours,
but
I
really
struggle
with
a
foot
to
have
setback
I
realize,
even
if
we
said
you
know,
sometimes
will
bend
to
four
feet.
But
still
if
we
took
you
got
three
feet
of
setbacks.
A
If
we
went
to
eight
that's
another
five
feet,
that
leaves
your
garage
at
17
feet
wide
and
I
know
what
you're
probably
trying
to
do
is
22
feet
is
barely
enough
to
park
a
car
in
when
I
looked
at
it
I
went,
you
know
to
me.
The
only
viable
alternative
is
to
come
in
from
the
alley
and
put
the
garage
on
the
backside
of
it.
And
yes,
it
is
further
from
the
house
unless
you
have
a
longer
driveway
but
boy
to
me.
That's
awful
awful
close
to
the
lot
line.
B
A
B
A
C
F
A
F
B
E
I
B
A
A
Seren,
in
a
case
like
that,
when
you
look
in
that
part
of
town
and
go,
we
carry
an
80-foot
right
away
there
in
today's
standards.
We're
evaluating
this
structure
with
a
garage
based
on
today's
standards,
but
the
road
white
right
away
is
much
larger
than
what
today's
standards
are.
Why
wouldn't
we
vacate
that
right
away
on
streets
like
that
that
we
know
that
we're
never
going
to
need
80
feet?
Oh
right
away,
is
there
utilities
and
things
like
that
and
there
that
prevent
us
from
doing
that?
It's.
F
Possible
the
wider
ride
ways
aren't
just
were
necessarily
wider
pavement.
It
allows
for
a
broad
Boulevard
and
you
know
big
trees
and
things
that's
what
they
envisioned
when
they
plaited
it,
but
we've
gone
back
and
forth.
It
does
look
to
me
like
the
sidewalks
up
farther
to
the
north.
You
can
measure,
maybe
they
were
thinking
you
might
be
vacated
there
didn't
want
the
sidewalks
to
be.
You
know
we,
wouldn't
you
like
to
vacate
consistently
an
entire
block
and
there's
already
sidewalks
we're
gonna
put
those
in.
B
A
I
mean
to
fix
it
and
to
make
it
to
make
it
better
would
be
to
pursue
a
vacation
in
there
to
see
if
it's
a
feasible
alternative.
You
know
from
our
standpoint.
That's
an
old
part
of
town.
We're
not
gonna
put
a
collector
street
down
there.
It's
not
being
used,
it's
not
even
paved
if
a
person
who
it
would
foresee
a
vacation
you'd
have
to
go
all
the
way
up
to
1st
Avenue,
and
then
you
probably
down
south
to
to
make
it
consistent
and
then
you'd
go
a
66
foot
right
away.
A
D
A
F
A
H
One
option
is:
you
can
figure
out
today
what
that
setback
would
be,
that
you'd
be
satisfied
with
on
both
the
east
and
west
side
and
grant
the
variance
for
that
size,
knowing
that
the
individual
or
the
right
away
is
gonna
have
to
be
baking
it
to
get
to
that
point.
That
would
be
item
one
so
that
the
variance
is
in
place
at
the
time
when
the
vacation
is
done
or
you
could
just
sit
back
table
it
until
the
vacation
is
taken.
Care
of
those
are
probably
the
two.
What's.
B
B
G
A
A
G
A
J
A
What
we're
saying
is
if,
if
we
vacated
that
property
on
the
opposite
side
of
his
lot,
once
we
once
his
lot
goes
from
25
feet
to
32
feet,
then
we'll
reassess
it
and
go.
You
know
what
now
that
you
got
a
32
foot
lot.
We
we
take
another,
look
at
it,
yeah
that
would
give
us
more
room
to
move
the
building
further
over
in
a
way.
A
You
know,
I
think
in
97,
when
we
had
all
that
snow,
everything
was
fine
until
it
started
to
melt
and
there
was
ice
heaves
everywhere
and
the
water
inadvertently
went
most
people's
basement
windows.
So
that's
what
our
goal
is
is
to
vacate
some
land,
possibly
on
the
other
side.
That
would
allow
that
building
to
sit
somewhere
else
than
what
was
presented
to
us
today.
A
K
Want
to
say
something
first,
just
procedurally,
if
hypothetically
he
does
have
to
come
back
before
the
board,
since
he
did
all
the
notice,
the
public
hearing
and
stuff.
If
he
has
to
come
back
before
the
board
for
for
further
discussion
about
possible
variance
relief,
can
you
wave
the
the
feast
customarily.
K
A
L
A
By
mr.
Dahle
I'm,
sorry
a
second
by
mr.
stone
Berg
any
other
further
discussion.
Any
questions
from
the
applicant
all
in
favor,
say
aye
I
had
proposed
motion
carries
we
have
one
item
in
old
business.
Can
you
can
help
me
lead
through
this?
This
has
to
do
with
the
beacon
Center
on
Jensen
Avenue.
If
you
bring
it
up
what
discussion
came
in
regard
to
that
as
they've
continued
to
fulfill
their
building
permit
and
put
the
business
there?
A
We
talked
about
a
little
bit
at
the
LAT
last
meeting
and
the
landscaping
on
Jensen
Avenue
with
that
project,
not
going
through
ken
and
I,
were
approached
by
a
couple
of
people
and
what
their
concerns
were.
Is
they
want
to
know
what
our
procedure
was
is
to
if
a
person
came
in
for
a
property
and
needed
a
building
permit?
A
Would
we
make
them
abide
by
the
landscape
ordinance
as
it's
in
place
today
and
Kenan
said
no,
that
we
normally
wouldn't
require
that
as
long
as
the
footprint
of
the
building
stayed
the
same
in
this
particular
case,
it
was
a
little
convoluted
because
it
came
to
us
twice
with
a
couple
of
different
options
or
gave
us
a
couple
different
vision,
what
they
do
when
it
came
to
us.
They
included
landscaping
on
Jensen
and
on
what
that
what's
another
Street
8
there
Jensen
and
8th
and
I
think
they
thought
there
was
a
miscommunication.
A
They
thought
they
were
required
to
put
the
landscaping
in
it
came
in
on
their
plans,
so
we
just
approved
their
plan
as
it
was
and
said
nice
they
want
to
put
their
landscaping
in
they've.
Come
back
now
and
said.
We
had
no
idea
how
expensive
that
landscaping
really
was,
and
would
you
reconsider
not
making
us
put
the
landscaping
in,
like
you
would
with
any
other
permit
that
came
in
yeah,
my
clothes
yep.
C
They
said
we
want
to
be
a
you
know,
good
steward
of
the
community.
We
want
to
have
a
nice
facility,
we
don't
want
to
make
a
look
really
nice
and
we
want
to
have
a
nice
atmosphere
for
the
children,
and
so
they
said
we're
going
to
have
this
curb
gutter,
we're
going
to
have
the
green
area,
and
it's
going
to
look
nice
and
now
they're
coming
back
and
said.
Well,
we
don't
want
to
abide
by
what
we
agreed
to
and
so
I
would
be
against
granting
them
doctor.
Well.
B
B
B
A
One
of
the
questions
we
have
from
from
our
decision
is
when
somebody
comes
in
with
a
bear
piece
of
ground:
they
have
to
uphold
all
the
landscaping
ordinances
and
what
we
end
up
with
our
older
places
that
don't
meet
the
code
right
next
to
a
brand
new
place
that
does
meet
the
codes.
So
it's
kind
of
hopscotched
or.
A
I
A
Was
my
thought
as
I
look?
No
it's
to
me.
We
normally
wouldn't
have
required
them.
If
it
was
a
an
insurance
office
or
a
real
estate
office
or
an
engineering
office,
they
would
have
come
in
got
their
building
permit
and
been
fine
in
this
case,
because
it's
a
needed
a
conditional
use
for
counseling.
They
got
slapped
with
$50,000,
with
the
landscaping
and
like
John,
says
and
I
agree
with
John
part
of
their
condition
was
we
want
to
conform
to
the
neighborhood?
A
E
L
It's
from
my
standpoint
that
landscaping
wasn't
a
deciding
factor
in
my
support
of
they'd
gone,
where
it's
at
and
I
wouldn't
be
opposed
to
doing
a
waiver
a
right
to
protest
and
tell
the
rest
of
that
block.
You
know,
Jensen
Avenue
does
get
completed
with
those
infrastructure
improvements.
You
know
we
discuss
it
at
the
time
it
was
looking
at
Jensen's,
probably
going
to
be
redone
shortly
in
the
future
here
and
if
that's
not
the
case
anymore,.
B
C
A
It'd
probably
be
in
two
parts:
the
the
waiver
can
be
on
two
sides,
two
waivers
basically
I
mean
the
assumption
would
be
if
when
Jensen
gets,
redone
and
sidewalks
and
curb
and
gutter
go
and
they
they
have
no
choice.
To
put
it
in
there.
When
eighth
Street
is
developed
to
a
point
that
the
city
feels
the
nay
it's
in
the
best
interest
of
the
city
and
the
neighborhood,
then
the
city
can
pull
the
trigger
on
the
waiver
and
I
mean
you
look
on
the
other
side
of
the
street.
A
It
does
look
like
there
is
the
real
estate
offices
to
the
north
or
right
is
that
that's
curb
gutter
lands
there
there'll
at
the
other
side
of
the
street,
is
compliant
to
the
landscaping
mostly
and
where
the
greenhouse
is
there's
some
green.
There
I
see
that's
for
sale,
I
assume.
If
somebody
buys
that
they'll
have
to
and
redevelop
it
they'll
have
to
uphold
the
landscaping
ordinance.
D
A
That
they
didn't
understand
weren't
required.
That's
there
there's
a
little
bit
of
Ken
says
no
I
went
to
require
that,
but
when
they
brought
me
the
plan,
it
showed
it
I'm,
not
gonna,
tear
it
apart
and
tell
him
what
you
know
you're
doing
too
much.
The
assumption
was,
is
that's
the
environment
that
they
wanted.
They
thought
that
was
the
environment.
They
were
required
to
do
so.
They
put
it
in
there
not
knowing
what
the
expense
was
I
mean
to
me.
We've
got
three
options.
A
We
can
remove
it
and
just
say
you
don't
have
to
do
it.
We
can
put
a
waiver
right
to
protest
and
or
we
can
put
a
time
frame
in
there
and
I,
don't
know
I
mean
I,
look
and
go
when
Jenson
Avenue
goes
in
and
the
rest
goes
in.
Maybe
it
all
should
go
in
because
you
do
say
it.
What
at
what
point
do
we
pull
the
trigger
on
the
waiver?
The
other
side
of
the
road
is
already
done.
You
know
so
now
we're
waiting
for
wise
Mantle's
to
do
theirs,
which
probably
not
gonna
happen.
A
So
at
what
point
at
50%,
you
pull
the
trigger
51%.
Once
Jensen
is
done
down
there,
you
know
me
personally,
I'm,
okay,
saying
I
understand
you're
in
there,
but
when
Jensen
Avenue
goes
in,
you
have
a
waiver
a
right
until
Jensen
Avenue
goes
in
and
then
it
needs
to
go
in
on
both
sides
of
the
road
I
have.
E
A
What
happened
when
they
came
here?
It
was
a.
It
was
a
really
fast
one
that
was
put
together
because
the
property
that
they
were
renting
was
sold,
so
they
actually
had
a
purchase
agreement,
not
realizing
that
they
working
we'll
use.
So
it
was,
it
first
came
to
us
and
we
turned
it
down
because
as
it
was,
it
was
as
it
was
explained
to
us.
It
was
more
of
a
place
where
people
were
staying
on
a
regular
basis.
We
turned
it
down.
A
It
came
back
before
us
with
a
different
sales
pitch
that
it's
more
of
a
clinical
environment
in
a
counseling
environment,
with
supervision
and
very
little
overnight,
stayin,
and
that's
actually
how
it
is
so
it
was.
It
was
a
hot
potato
when
it
came
to
us
and
there
was
a
lot
of
things
going
on
there
working
with
a
different
boy.
You
know
their
own
boards.
So
what
do
you
think.
B
This
little
trough
and
then
drains
this
way.
So
when
Jensen
comes
in
at
that
elevation
curve,
where
everything
changes,
it's
not
like,
they're
just
gonna
go
down
here,
saw
cut
this
out,
find
some
Raskin.
They
have
to
tear
up
this
entire
area
here
to
make
it
rework
and
that's
kind
of
what
happened
to
be
the
problem,
and
now
we
can't
even
tell
them
what
the
elevation
of
the
streets
gonna
be
for
them
to
try
to
work
up
to
it.
In
the
meantime,.
A
B
A
That's
fair
because
we're
at
50%
on
the
other
side
of
the
street.
At
what
point
you
know
we
always
we
get
these
waivers
signed,
but
who's,
the
bad
guy.
That
has
to
pull
the
waivers,
and
you
know
then
it's
another
public
hearing.
In
this
case
we
can
say
you
know
what
50
percents
already
done.
You're
doing
it
now
we're
at
75
percent
of
the
two
block
area.
A
Only
way
in
to
me
to
it's
fair
to
the
neighborhood,
you
know
everybody
else
has
got
curb
and
gutter
and-
and
it
has
a
look
to
it
and
they've
they've
spent
good
money
in
there.
So
we
just
want
everything
to
come
up
to
standards
sooner
or
later,
and
in
this
case
it
can
be
later.
We
don't
even
know
how
much
later.
A
C
A
A
L
A
A
C
A
A
Thank
you
first
item
on
the
agenda
is
the
approval
of
the
minutes
from
November
5th
2014,
so
no
motion
by
mr.
stone,
burger,
saying
goodbye,
mrs.
Johnson,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries
second
item
on
the
agenda.
State
Farm,
Kathy,
Witte
Holmes
sign
permit
one
three,
nine
six
appeals
the
requirements
signed
code
ordinance
located
at
9:24,
fourth
Street
southeast,
and
on
this
one
I'll
make
a
note.
Mr.
Stein
is
gonna
recuse
himself
because
he
is
in
the
same
business.
He
will
be
available
for
the
discussion.
He
just
can't
vote.
A
Okay,
Thomas
and
Kathleen
Holmes
made
application,
because
this
state
is
acquiring
additional
right
away
on
this
property.
For
the
reconstruction
of
a
revamp
of
the
sign
that
they
have
there
is
will
be
in
the
public
right
away
and
must
be
moved
and
the
way
our
site
known
ordinance
is
worded
now
that
signs
actually
an
illegal
or
a
non-conforming
sign,
because
it's
a
multi
pole
structure,
new
ones,
must
be
single
pole.
A
Additionally,
this
sign
this
business,
isn't
an
r3,
zoned
piece
of
property
and
no
signage
is
allowed
in
the
residential
zone
and
free-standing
signs
are-
or
there
is
a
very
little
signage
allowed.
I
should
say,
and
residential
zone
and
free-standing
signs
are
completely
prohibited.
So
so
all
public
notices
we're
Matt.
We
I
heard
we
heard
nothing
back
from
anybody
one
way
or
the
other
and
I
guess
we've
kind
of
touched
on,
though
the
reasons
why
we're
here
so.
A
Not
really
it's
a
pre-existing
building
that
was
built
as
it
was
Nichols
flowers
originally,
as
what
this
building
was
built
for
so
was
always
been
used
as
retail
/
office
type.
When
these
guys
bought
it,
they
they
turned
it
into
an
office
building,
but
before
that
it
was
retail
sales
and
they
think
expressions
was
even
there
when
you
guys
recall,
but
it's
never
been
used
for
anything
other
than
what
it
is
presently,
but
in.
A
A
We
don't
have
a
provision
in
our
sign
ordinance
for
for
specific
use.
Office.
Buildings
for
signage,
therefore,
is
pretty
clear
in
their
ordinance.
We
have
an
institutional
provision
which
deals
with
clinics,
hospitals,
schools,
churches,
things
like
that,
our
loud
signage
and
they
have
it-
they
have
their
own
column
in.
I
H
I
A
A
Well,
we
we
also
have
you
know,
as
this
gets
done,
there's
other
those
specific
use
office
buildings
to
the
north
of
this
property
that
you're
referring
to
we
have.
You
know
we
have
a
few
of
them,
there's
already
one
for
sure,
I've
gotten
the
question
on
with
preventive
dental
arts
that
they
they
need
to
move
their
sign
because
it's
in
the
right
away
so
we're
we
might
have
more
of
this
issue
that.
A
A
G
L
A
Just
for
our
sake,
give
us
the
one-on-one
on
banners
again:
banners
are
excluded
from
sign,
permit
and
excluded
from
us
really
counting
them
as
long
as
they're
compliant
ly,
put
together
this
one's
out
of
post
cemented
in
the
ground
minnow
two
feet
in
the
ground
like
it
is,
or
they
can
be
attached
to
the
building.
That's
your
two
options
on
and.
A
B
A
C
A
A
All
right,
let's
get
back
to
the
sign
part
of
it.
You
know
I,
think
if
I
remember
on
this,
what
we
did
is
we
went
back
from
there
and
we
tried
to
fit
everything
into
the
ordinances
with
specific
use
offices
we
could,
but
there
were
some
places
that
had
occupancies,
that
weren't
part
of
a
specific
use,
tanning
salons
haircutting
places
vet
clinics
and
we
skipped
all
of
those
and
just
from
a
compliance
issue
is
why
I
asked
that
question
for
the
applicants
protection
the.
B
A
A
D
A
E
A
That
was
shot
down,
but
the
the
questions
we
had
were
more
on
zoning
as
to.
Why
is
not
zoned
properly,
but
let's
get
back
to
the
sign,
so
they
want
to
move
slide
the
sign
over.
It's
not
going
to
infringe
on
the
right
away.
It's
a
better,
looking
sign
that
it
than
it
currently
is.
It
meets
everything
in
the
code
that
we
think
it
should
meet
if
it
were.
If.
I
A
A
H
Yeah
I've
got
to
say
it
the
so
we're
clear
we
need
to
be.
We
need
to
be
certain
whether
or
not
this
the
use
of
having
a
sign
is
an
allowable
use
in
this
particular
district,
because
if
it
is
not,
that
is
not
something
you
can
vary
in
such
a
use.
Variance
at
that
point
and
I
guess:
I
should
defer
to
legal
counsel
on
that
question,
but
if
it
is
a
use
of
variance,
that's
a
no-no.
H
A
E
A
K
I'm
struggling
with
whether
or
not
it's
it
as
a
use
within
that
zoning
district
it
would.
The
sign
would
not
be
allowable
when
you
look
at
the
conditional
uses
that
are
allowed.
We've
got
clubs,
lodges,
community,
centers,
clinics,
hospitals
and
all
those
uses
if
they're
enter
our
three
zone
have
signs.
K
A
K
Shouldn't
be
there,
that's.
My
point
is
that
we
clearly
allow
them
so
I
think
that
the
position
the
city's
probably
taken
is
to
not
to
disagree
with
Luke
but
but
I
think
I
think
it's
probably
just
to
tag
along
with
what
he
said.
I
think
that
the
sign
should
be
considered
a
component
part
of
it
that
why
would
you
get
it?
Why
would
you
put
a
clinic
or
a
hospital
there
if
you
couldn't
put
a
sign
that.
E
A
She's
getting
at
is
one
in
our
meeting
last
week
when
Luke
showed
pictures
of
the
signage
that
goes
up
and
down
there.
All
the
signs
to
this
point
were
low.
I
would
say
what
would
you
say,
a
low
standing
monument
sign
in
it
to
what
point
on
this
stretch.
Do
we
allow
taller
signs-
and
we
really
don't
address
that
anywhere
in
the
code?
There's
nothing,
there's
nothing
in
that
specific
use,
office,
building
zoning
or
any
of
those
zonings
that
dictate
the
size
of
the
sign.
A
To
use
the
institutional
provision
or
is
that's
my
guideline
that
I
use
for
a
specific
use?
Let's
say-
and
this
is
a
65-foot
frontage,
so
they
would
out
be
allowed
one
square
foot
for
every
two
lineal
feet,
so
they
would
be
allowed
a
thirty
seven
and
a
half
square
foot
sign
is
all
they
would
be
allowed
to
have
if
we
in
in
the
the
funeral
homes
and
the
I
clinics
and
things
that
they
could
put
dollar
signs
up
if
they
wanted
to
buy
colored,
they.
I
A
H
That
they
have
to
like,
like
I,
think
I
think
that's.
The
other
point
that
we
did
mention
was
that
it
was
kind
of
a
case
of
gosh.
Take
a
look
at
this.
It's
happened
without
us
regulating
it.
Basically,
so
you
don't
have
that
regulation
requiring
that
it's
just
that's
what
the
characters
been
as
you
go
up
that
way.
So
there's
really
nothing
in
your
ordinance
that
would
specify
that
they
have
to
do
it
aside
from
disagreement
I
had
earlier,
but
that's
from
the
standpoint
of
requiring
the
monument
sign
to
be
lower.
E
A
A
Yeah
and
that
banner
might
end
up
having
to
move
actually
because
it
might
actually
encroach
on
that
right
away.
Also,
and
that's
the
other
question:
are
they
as
a
banner
allowed?
If
they're
you
know,
it
doesn't
really
say
it
just
as
banners
are
allowed
on
businesses
and
it's
a
business
so
I
don't
think,
there's
any
that
banners
gonna
stay
or
be
moved
and
still
be.
There.