►
From YouTube: BOA SignCode BOA Meetings 10 20 2016
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).
A
B
A
A
By
mr.
McGuire,
second
by
mr.
snowbarger,
by
a
nose
all
in
favor,
say,
aye
opposed
motion
carries
second
item
on
the
agenda
is
just
a
night
permit
number
one
705
2
is
a
requesting
of
variance
at
205
campus
Cibola
vard
free
our
to
a
single-family
attached,
a
residential
district
I
believe
it
is
on
a
deck
replacement.
Yeah
thank.
B
You
application
was
submitted
requesting
to
remove
the
existing
140
9.73
square
foot,
six
point:
nine
foot
by
twenty
one
point:
seven
foot
front
porch
and
constructed
noon:
non-conforming,
154
square
foot,
7
by
22
foot,
porch
addition
to
the
existing
single-family
dwelling
said,
structure
proposed
to
be
constructed,
twelve
point,
seven
feet
from
the
front
east
proper
line
or
25
foot
setback
was
required.
Basically
Justin's
just
coming
for
us
and
saying
this
front.
Porch
on
testing
is
really
shot
terrible.
He
just
wants
to
tear
it
off
and
basically
build
it
back
on
there.
B
A
B
A
B
A
What
normally
would
be
if
we
had
a
66
foot
right
away
in
and
the
Lots
were
adjusted
in
that?
That
means
he
would
be
well
within
his
suback
right.
Okay,
anyone
to
speak
in
the
open
up
for
against
seem
nanako's
above
they'll
close.
The
public
hearing
ask
for
a
motion
in
a
second
for
discussion
motion
by
mr.
Stein,
a
second
by
mr.
Murg
or
any
other
discussion.
Anyone
have
any
questions
concerns
see
none
I'll
ask
for
a
vote.
B
Correct
application
was
submitted
by
mr.
wobba
requesting
constructor
nine,
conforming
1428
square
foot
34
by
42
on
attached
garage
and
a
nine
thousand
six
hundred,
sixty
nine
point.
Five
quarter,
foot
parcel
said
structural
proposed
to
be
constructed
on
a
parcel
that
allows
for
a
maximum
of
one
thousand
two
hundred
and
fifty
seven
square
feet
of
attached
garage.
B
This
property
has
like
a
twenty
foot
utility
easement
on
this
side,
but
what
mr.
wobbly
is
wanting
to
do
is
build
a
garage
over
here.
You'll
meet
all
the
required
setback
requirements.
He
currently
has
a
race
car
in
a
trailer
that
he
stores
over
here
adjacent
to
this
property.
He
owns
this
house
here
and
he
had
bought
this
one
for
a
rental
property,
but
he
intends
to
store
his
equipment
inside
that
garage
on
the
other
side.
B
A
Can
just
for
a
backdrop
on
this
is
every
size
we
broke
we've
when
we
we
used
to
have
one
shoe
fit
all
on
this
years
back
we
went
and
said
you
know,
there's
different
size,
Lots
out
there
and
different
size.
Lots
can
handle
different
sized
footprints
of
accessory
structures,
and
when
we
I
was
talking
to
Jason
about
this
a
little
bit
today
when
he
drove
by
there
I
said
it
was
just
we
kind
of
put
a
number
on
a
paper
and
said
this
should
be
right.
There
was
no
scientific
evidence.
A
Our
goal
was
to
make
sure
we
didn't
encroach
on
neighbors
that
we
had
enough
air
movement
sunlight,
we
weren't
over
building
on
a
lot,
but
it
it
wasn't
necessarily
scientific.
We
just
came
up
with
a
number,
and
we
said
that's
why
the
Board
of
Adjustment
is
here
to
look
at
the
individual
ones.
This
particular
one
has
a
only
1/2
street
in
front
of
it.
I
see
yeah.
B
Conditioned
upon
approval,
if
request,
if
granted,
would
be
a
waiver
right
to
protest,
a
protest
for
the
street
and
stuff.
In
fact,
I
was
actually
going
to
ask
Ain
there's
a
sidewalk
that
goes
along
the
east
property
line,
nothing
than
going
south
property
line
yet,
except
for
his
but
I.
Would
you
rather
wait
with
a
sidewalk
and
put
that
on
the
way
right
report
to
so
it's
built
with
the
street
curb
height
instead
of
just
being
thrown
out
there
and
what
she
says?
Yes,
he
would,
if
it
if
it
is
approved.
B
A
B
B
Has
built
the
slab
well,
knowing
that
the
slab
is
not
I
mean
the
permit.
That
he's
already
got
to
build
a
slab
does
not
include
he
there's
only
for
a
garage
that
he
could
legally
fit
on
the
lot
right
now.
So
if
it's
not
passed,
he'll
end
up
with
a
garage
and
a
apron
if
it
is
passed
and
he
gets
to
use
the
whole
thing.
F
G
H
A
Anyone
to
speak
in
the
open
up
before
I
close
the
open
scene
on
I'll
close
the
open.
They
closed
the
public
hearing
and
asked
for
a
motion
in
a
second
for
discussion
offered
by
mr.
stone
Berger
second
by
mr.
Arnold,
any
other
discussion.
I
do
think
we
look
when
we
have
these.
When
we
have
the
footprint,
we
have
the
square
footage
and
the
lot
falls
into
that
category.
A
I
still
think
you
know
I
dust
from
our
due
diligence.
Standpoint
I
think
we
looked
at
it
and
we
took
a
look
at
the
special
use
of
that
that
area
and
the
size
of
the
lot,
the
adjacent
buildings
that
are
around
it,
that
it's
not
encroaching
in
setbacks.
It's
not
encroaching
and
view
and
vision
of
the
neighbors,
and
he
he
is
one
of
the
adjacent
neighbors
himself.
So
there's
my
thought
on
it.
Any
other
discussion,
seeing
none
of
us
for
a
vote
all
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries.
A
B
Correct
mr.
Murphy
has
company
an
application
was
submitted
requesting
to
construct
a
non-conforming
264
square
foot
11
by
24,
open
sided
carport
onto
an
existing
compliant
single-family
dwelling
says:
structure
proposed
reconstruction,
four
point:
five
feet
from
the
side:
north
property
line,
where
a
nine
foot
minimum
setback
is
required.
B
B
B
A
You
well
that'll
open
the
public
hearing
if
anyone's
here,
to
speak
on
behalf
or
against
the
variance
again.
This
is
kind
of
an
interesting
one,
because
we've
come
through
with
our
storage
ordinance,
where
we
say
we
don't
want
stuff
on
the
street.
We
want
everything
beside
the
house
first
question
I
ask
is:
is
this
on
the
right
side
of
the
house?
We've
said
that
you
have
to.
You
can
only
store
on
certain
sides
of
your
house
correct.
A
A
Don't
know
about
anybody
else,
but
I
have
been
I
have
driven
over
the
last
year
around
the
parts
of
the
town
we
had
issues
with,
and
they
do
have
seemed
to
have
taken
care
of
themselves.
I
think
there
is
a
sense
of
people
to
understand
that
we're
asking
them
to
move
this
stuff,
and
now
we
run
into
the
the
downside
of
that
is:
there's
not
always
enough
room
in
the
side
yards
to
put
what
we've
asked
them
to
put
there,
but.
B
E
H
I
I
A
I
I
I
A
C
A
G
A
A
B
B
A
Your
doors
open,
but
how
wide
is
this
cube?
How
wide
is
this
carport
11
feet?
So
almost
the
size
of
a
building
and
I'd
much
rather
have
a
three-sided
open
carport
than
one
of
these
monster
sheds
we
see
out
there
200
square
feet,
which
fairly
is
this
size
are
bigger,
and
this
this
is
more
aesthetically
pleasing
to
the
neighborhood
than
a
large
storage
shed.
So
all
right
this
my
opinion
anyway.
Any
other
questions.
Any
discussion
with
that
ask
for
a
vote.
A
All
in
favor,
say:
aye
opposed
motion
carries
item
number
five
Kevin
and
Stacey
Neiman
doing
businesses.
Ksn
properties
permit
number
one
705
five
for
his,
allowing
is
requesting
to
construction
construct
a
non-conforming
garage
onto
a
non-conforming
single-family
dwelling
at
401.
Second
Street
southeast.
B
Currently,
this
is
a
substandard,
are
to
a
zone
parcel
consisting
of
a
non
compliant
primary
structure,
single-family
dwelling
with
attached
garage,
single
stall
garage
and
then
unpermitted
accessory
building,
and
that
was
the
way
before
these
people
ever
bought
it
or
got
hold
of
it.
So
there's
an
18
wide,
concrete
Boulevard
access
along
for
one
legal
inside
parking
space
and
one
legal
outside
parking
space.
Next
to
the
west
property
and,
however,
the
16
foot
long
driveway
is
currently
unimproved.
B
H
B
B
They
do
do
approval
on
this.
This
has
only
got
a
six-foot
side
yard
six-foot
side.
Here
is
the
posted
side
yard.
You
know
25
foot
front
in
front
and
he's
requested
to
build
in
line
with
here
then
go
back
24
feet.
If
this
is
something
that
you
decided
to
approval,
I
was
also
wondering
maybe
Kevin,
if
you'd
be
willing
to
maybe
go
closer
to
the
South
property
line
and
keep
a
little
bit
more
space
here
to
allow
parking
that
would
fall
between
the
building
and
the
sidewalk.
B
A
A
B
I
A
B
D
D
A
D
A
C
C
B
I
A
More
functional
and
bring
it
up
to
date
and
in
the
same
time
it's
an
eyesore
to
the
neighborhood.
So
anyone
else
have
anything
in
the
open.
Before
I
closed
the
public
hearing
seem
9:00.
I'll
close
the
public
hearing
ask
for
a
motion
in
a
second
for
discussion
motion
by
mr.
McGuire
second
by
mr.
Arnold
any
other
discussion.
Any
concerns
seem
none
us
for
a
vote.
All
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries.
A
Our
concern
was,
it
could
go
from
a
hair
salon
to
a
full-blown
bar
with
a
liquor
license
and
be
open
till
2:00
in
the
morning.
So
we
asked
that,
is
there
a
stoploss
we
could
put
in
there?
Somehow
when
I
talked
to
Ken,
he
said:
what
did
you
guys?
Do
we
it's
impossible
for
us
to
track
this?
Can
you
allude
on
that
a
little
bit.
B
Actually,
because
the
way
you
guys
put
it
in
there,
you
said
use
or
change
of
ownership,
I
mean
we
may
never
know.
If
there's
a
change
of
ownership
to
verify
that
and
right
now,
you're
gonna
have
a
change.
We
use
every
time.
Something
goes
in
there.
It's
nothing
and
they're
gonna
build
something
in
there.
That's
a
change.
B
B
Your
check
and
balance
on
this
thing
is
anytime
a
liquor
license.
Transfers
across
it's
gonna
have
to
go
to
the
City
Council
and
have
a
two
readings
and
everything
else
so
there's
time
for
anybody
having
an
issue
or
an
input
to
go
and
speak
to
city
council
and
ask
for
that
to
be
yes,
no
or
maybe
other
than
us.
A
The
the
we
had
some
residents,
that
said
our
fear
is,
is
that
you've
approved
it
for
one
type
of
usage
now
and
in
that
spectrum
is
another
kind
of
usage
that
we
wouldn't
be
comfortable
with
you're
telling
us
that
don't
worry
about
it,
the
City
Council.
When
that
happens,
the
City
Council
should
be
able
to
bird
dog
the
fact
that
it
went
from
a
hair
salon
to
a
bar.
A
B
A
Handled
in
another
side
of
you
guys
comfortable
with
just
leaving
that
as
it
is,
we
didn't
realize
that
there
was
another
trigger
in
there.
That
would
prevent
something
from
happening
there.
I
mean
we
knew
it,
but
you
know
we'll
have
to
put
our
full
faith
and
trust
in
the
council.
That
they'll
realize
that
it's
too
big
in
an
if
it,
and
if
it
is
too
big
of
a
change
then
they
would
send
it
back
to
us.
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
L
B
A
A
Item
on
the
agenda
is
the
approval
of
the
minutes
from
June
23rd
2016
can
I
get
a
motion
in
a
second
motion
by
mr.
stone
Berger
second
by
mr.
Stein,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
post
motion
carries
second
item
on
the
agenda.
Is
family
cosmetics
and
implant?
Dentistry
appeals
following
requirements
for
signed
code
arnott's
as
it
applies
to
the
property
at
2300?
Ninth
Avenue,
South,
East
great.
B
Yeah,
the
as
stated
they
are
applying
for
a
third
billboard,
sign
the
history,
and
this
is
a
little
bit.
Is
it
in
April,
4
2007?
The
variance
for
a
number
of
third
freestanding
sign
was
requested
in
tonight.
At
that
time,
applicant
now
request.
I
had
a
third
freestanding
sign.
There's
proposed
to
go
on
this
parcel
right
here.
I
mean
this
was
really
difficult
to
try
to
write
everything
out
that
happened
on
this,
so
I'm
gonna
have
to
try
to
just
show
me
and
explain.
A
little
bit
can
I
have
the
override.
Please.
B
So
previously,
when
this
came
through
the
board,
this
was
set
up
as
a
condo
plat,
so
you
had
one
parcel
of
property.
That
was
the
whole
thing
and
then
you
had
your
three
interior
lies
for
the
separate
buildings,
and
at
that
time
this
property
was
allowed
by
definition
under
the
Board
of
Adjustment,
two
signs
for
the
size
of
the
parcel
of
this
property.
I
guess
said
they
did
come
and
request
a
third
at
that
time
and
it
was
denied
because
it
failed
to
show
our
ship
so.
B
B
B
This
parcel
well
I'm,
actually
miss
parcel,
and
this
parcel
are
all
aimed
by
this
time
same
party,
but
now
they're
still
three
separate
parties.
So
so
we
have
no
sign
on
this
property.
You
got
two
signs
on
this
property,
but
it
doesn't
have
enough
furnish
to
occupy
two
signs,
and
then
you
have
this
parcel
left
that
has
probably
about
and
when
I
say
here,
I
actually
have
it
calculated
out.
B
B
Right
now,
this
is
the
what
the
property
is,
that
you
have
the
existing
sign
here
sign
here
and,
of
course,
the
third
one
is
proposed
to
go
here.
I
wasn't
able
to
find
the
old
permits.
My
Secretary's
gone
the
person.
That
is
all
my
digging
for
me,
but
I've
estimated
this
one
here
to
be
about
70
square
feet
and
I.
Think
this
one
about
81
square
feet
for
the
actual
sign
itself,
and
then
they
also
came
back
to
me
and
of
course
they
were
asking
for
this
one.
B
B
C
B
And
this
one
is
roughly
about
300
square
feet:
I
mean
I'd
had
318,
but
that
was
taken
like
a
foot
lesson
and
it
probably
would
fall
into
the
300
square
foot,
which
is
the
maximum
size
allowed
for
a
sign
in
the
C
3
zone
district
is
either
2
square
feet
for
each
one,
lineal
foot
of
frontage
or
a
maximum
of
300
square
feet.
I
have
not
heard
from
any
of
the
Jason
neighbors
pro
or
con.
L
A
And
I'll
also
open
the
public
hearing
everyone's
here
to
speak
on
behalf
or
against
the
sign.
Permit
John,
you've
kind
of
been
in
currently
history.
The
signed
court
ordinance,
so
we
worked
out
for
many
years,
put
it
in
place
and
it's
currently
being
re-evaluated
a
little
bit.
I
know
John's
been
well
in
neck
deep
into
into
that
when
some
of
the
discussion
as
to
what's
working
on
the
sign
or
code
ordinance,
what's
not
and
what's
around
the
corner,
especially
with
it
highway
212
project
as.
K
Highway
212
gets
reconstructed,
we're
reviewing
the
same,
coordinates
to
see
what
works.
What
doesn't
work
the
size
of
this
property
would
allow
to
have
two
signs,
and
it
came
back.
I
think
was
2007
the
gist
and
was
turned
down
for
a
third
sign.
I,
don't
know
what
has
changed
or
what
type
of
hardship
or
whatever
you
could
come
up
with
to
talk
us
into
a
third
sign.
How
far.
E
B
B
A
B
E
M
Correct
Ryan,
DD,
first
of
all,
yeah
so
actually
I'm
just
trying
to
get
up
to
speed
here
to
in
talking
to
dr.
prowdy,
because
I
wasn't
with
an
organization
back
when
it
started.
The
three
buildings
were
put
there
and
and
and
I
get
I
asked
why
it's
laid
out
the
way
it
is
today
with
all
of
the
goo
that
goofy
boundaries
and
brian
says
that
there
is
no
definitive
reason
for
that.
He
does
know
that
it
was
set
up
so
that
all
three
buildings
do
pay
separate
taxes
on
that,
so
I
mean
it
really
comes.
M
You
know,
like
the
frontage
and
and
what
what
we
can
do
and
I
think
the
Ken
just
pointed
out
that
the
third
sign
over
there
is
is
not
I
mean
technically
it's
it's
apparently,
if
with
that
middle
building
there,
but
that's
that's
for
the
chiropractic
clinic,
not
for
us
and
they're.
Two
separate
completely
separate
entities
right
now
to
to
dr.
Prada
runs
them
completely
separate
from
the
middle
building
to
the
other
building.
So
we
have
no
front
door,
no
signage
at
all
for
family
cosmetic,
which
is
now
gonna,
be
embraced.
Dentistry,
Ryan.
G
G
M
K
B
A
M
A
What
happens,
what
happens
is
when
we
developed
in
John?
You
can
explain
when
we
developed
frontage,
it
was
the
intent
and
spirit
of
it
was
the
frontage
of
the
property,
and
when
you
look
and
go
this
one's
been
cut
down
into
three
pieces,
you
know
it
wasn't
designed
that
every
frontage
gets
a
sign
and
if
everybody
has
14
feet
of
frontage,
you
can
put
all
the
signs
there.
You
follow
me
on
that.
It's
just
because
you
have
frontage
doesn't
mean
you
get
a
sign
just.
B
A
Part
of
the
corner
lot
thing
was:
is
we
weren't
going
to
allow
someone
to
take
the
signage
from
that
street
and
put
it
on
the
other
Street
it
was
it
would.
They
were
in
the
group
that
was
reviewing
at
City
Council
staff
and
some
of
the
Planning
Commission.
Was
there
very
insistent
that
we
can't
piggyback
signs
on
other
frontages?
Just
because
you
know
if
you've
got
300
feet
on
one
front,
you
can't
use
it
on
the
other
front,
it
has
to
be
used
on
that
front.
A
B
M
M
C
L
B
H
L
Our
purpose
and
water
tone,
and
certainly
we
want
to
respect
the
work
and
the
thoughts
and
everything
that's
gone
into
the
sign
ordinance
and
not
go
against
that
in
the
City
Council,
and
there
was
reasons
for
that.
But
here
we've
got
a
corner
lot.
We've
got
a
lot
of
frontage.
If
you
consider
that
corner
a
lot
on
a
notepad
you
you
talked
about
how
that
was
considered
originally
well.
We
also
see
it
here
today
and
we
want
Watertown
to
prosper
and
grow
and
we
want
to
see
businesses
in
Watertown.
We
want
to
see
them
advertise.
L
A
B
B
A
B
B
A
M
B
B
B
E
B
A
B
B
M
M
B
A
N
And
comment
on
that,
the
two
signs,
my
name
is
Brittany
Chapin.
By
the
way,
the
reason
we
were
hoping
to
have
three
separate
signs
instead
of
two
signs
on
one
like
you're,
mentioning
the
difference
between
the
embrace
and
the
other
sign.
That's
on
there,
the
one
that's
the
implant,
sedation,
dentistry,
the
reason
we're
hoping
to
keep
those
two
separate
ones.
We've
had
customers
that
come
to
us.
N
The
point
of
the
implant
and
sedation
is
those
are
actually
customers
that
go
completely
under
sedation
and
they
don't
know
much
what's
happening
when
they
get
their
dinner
work
done.
What
we're
finding
is
those
people
are
really
scared
to
death,
a
dentist.
They
don't
want
to
come
to
the
dentist,
they're
horrified
they've
gone
with
pain
for
twenty
years.
They
don't
want
to
come
to
a
regular
dentist
so
by
us
having
that
associated
with
our
regular
dentistry,
we're
finding
that
they're
not
coming
and
then
when
they
do
find
out
hey.
This
is
actually
separate.
N
A
A
B
B
B
B
A
C
B
B
A
I
A
L
The
thing,
though,
to
me,
doesn't
make
any
sense
is
if
you
have
a
corner
a
lot
like
that,
let's
say
that
first
building
on
the
left
was
cut
in
half
and
you
had
a
business
on
the
south
and
a
different
business
in
the
north
end,
and
you
have
those
other
businesses
across
the
road
which
can
have
a
three.
What
you're
saying
a
totally
different
street
you're
50
feet
off
the
corner:
that
business
can't
have
a
sign,
don't
understand
that
which.
C
B
A
Three
three
buildings
equally
put
on
that
lot:
equal
together,
they
could
have
three
signs,
all
of
it
about
150
square
feet
apiece
now
what
we
have
is
we've
got
two
signs
that
are
a
total
of
150
square
feet
and
the
third
sign
wants
300
square
feet.
So
if
we
had
all
three
signs
together,
we're
okay,
but
one
signs
hogging
all
the
square
footage.
A
H
H
Our
only
issue
with
the
sign
is
kind
of
alluding
to
what
you
just
said
is
that
having
some
consistency
in
the
area
in
terms
of
signage
is
being
of
similar
size
just
to
be
consistent
and
aesthetically
pleasing
the
design
of
the
sign
that
we've
seen
is
great
but,
like
you
said
it's
much
larger
than
the
other
two
signs
in
the
area.
However,
we
implore
that
a
little
common
sense
from
the
board
is
used
in
in
granting
the
sign,
just
simply
because
there
are
three
businesses
and
we
don't
have
a
huge
stake
in
the
matter.
H
However,
it
does
the
signage
situation.
The
way
it
sits
now
almost
makes
that
property
look
offset
a
little
bit
obscure
and
I
think
that
a
third
sign
would
be
would
balance
out
that
property
for
the
overall
benefit
of
the
current
situation
and
future
development
in
the
east
part
of
the
212
corridor.
M
If
I
can
add
to
that,
you
guys
can
see
the
island
there.
That's
that's
right.
Next
to
the
car,
it
was
initially
in
the
drop
right
there.
The
sinus
has
already
been
plumbed
for
electrical
that
was
put
in
when
the
building
was
put
up
when
the
structure
was
put
up,
so
it
was,
it
was
there
originally.
That
was
the
initial
thought
and
doctor
in
talking
to
dr.
Prada.
He
says
that
talking
to
the
old
mayor
and
some
of
the
other
people
that
he
thought
that
that
sign
would
be
approved.
M
G
A
C
A
Know
I'm
just
kind
of
throwing
all
sides
of
it.
Now
we
got
six
hundred
square
feet
available,
we're
using
less
than
that
we're
using
one
more
sign
then
what's
we're
supposed
to,
but
it
balances
out
the
building.
It's
a
quirky
setup
I.
Get
that
when
I
look
at
the
sign,
the
embrace
dentist
dentistry
sign
is
150
square
feet
or
less
to
match
the
other
signs.
What
you've
done
is
you've
put
brick
is
there
a
mark
here.
Is
that
an
electronic
board
of
some
sort.
M
A
A
A
Know
and
but
what
I'm
trying
to
say
is
the
the
Sun,
the
rocks
aren't,
selling
anything
you
know.
Is
it
but
but
kind
of
I'm
sure
I'm
just
trying
to
do
a
little
due
diligence
and
know
if
we
approve
this.
We
say
this
is
the
thought
process.
We
went
through
it.
You
know,
John
your
thoughts.
I
you've
been
deeper
into
the
signage.
Then
we
have.
A
E
B
M
L
B
K
Would
like
to
see
you,
people
have
a
nice
sign,
however,
the
sign
Court
review
or
is
looking
at
the
placement
and
the
size
of
signs
and
we're
trying
to
clean
up
the
city
a
little
bit
because,
quite
frankly,
there's
a
lot
of
junky
signs
in
town,
and
there
are
a
lot
of
signs
that
are
too
close
together
and
for
my
physician
granting
a
variance
from
the
two
poles
to
three
poles.
I
am
against
that
now.
K
M
M
E
E
A
Know
I
think
we
look
and
go
in
in
a
perfect
world.
There's
600
square
feet
allowable
on
that
frontage
in
I.
Think
most
of
us
agree
a
hundred
percent
that
it
doesn't
matter
which
of
the
three
signs
are
using
the
square
footage
that
one
is
using
a
little
more
square
footage
than
1/3
of
600.
But
we
go
back
and
say
it
looks
nice
and
I.
Don't
think
anyone
has
a
problem
with
that.
I
think
the
problem
comes
in
of
two
signs
versus
three.
G
M
E
A
J
A
M
M
B
A
A
I
I
would
say
that
if
this
has
approved
its
in
the
motion
its,
we
request
that
you
explore
replating
us.
So
we
don't
do
this
again,
but
the
negative.
It's
not.
You
were
worried
about
it's
the
owner
20
years
from
now,
when
we're
all
gone
where
somebody
comes
in,
you
know,
we
approve
all
this
and
everything
goes
well
and
a
wind
storm
comes
and
takes
them
down.
It's
a
non-compliant
sign,
you're
back
here
again
when.
A
A
M
A
G
A
I'll
start
I'll
say
that
I
think
we
we've
said
everything.
There
is
there's
available
a
six
hundred
square
feet
in
a
perfect
world
with
two
signs.
They
have
less
than
six
hundred
square
feet,
but
they
want
three
signs.
One
of
those
signs
having
greater
than
a
third
of
the
600
square
feet
you
guys.
Okay
with
that,
you
know
that's
what
we're
gonna
vote
on
is.
E
K
J
C
J
J
A
A
B
A
J
A
B
M
M
They
they
dominate
the
frontage
that,
and
that
could
be
why
it
was
broken
down
like
that,
so
that
they
were
in
control
of
that
signage.
So
there
is
no
third
party.
That's
going
to
I
mean
dr.
Danzer.
Right
now
has
know,
given
the
way
the
property
lines
are
and
what
he
purchased.
He
couldn't
come
in
and
say
that
he
wanted
to
sign
no.