[0:07] Good evening. Welcome to the Zoning Board of Appeals. August 10th meeting. As always, everybody, please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance if you're able.
[0:19] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
[0:35] All right. Secretary Marlin, can we get a roll call, please?
[0:38] Yes, please. President Kozol.
[0:40] Here.
[0:42] I was going to say trustee. I saw my old hat. Mr. Poulet here. Mr. Pollack here. Miss Hall here. Miss Mallon here.
[0:53] Right. I get an approval for the agenda.
[0:58] I'll make that motion to approve the agenda I support.
[1:01] Okay. All in favor? Aye aye aye. Approval of the minutes.
[1:06] So moved.
[1:08] I'll second.
[1:10] Thank you. All in favor? Aye aye aye.
[1:15] Correspondence. Any correspondence? No. Correspondence. Correspondence. All right. Old business for six, five. 422 and 6545 for Van Dyke. This is from the July meeting. Welcome back. Thank you very much for coming back.
[1:29] Uh, Michael Torres, five eight, six five. Jacqueline Korte, Washington Township. So we're here because we we're revisited. We made some changes, offered some changes to the islands, uh, that are attractive and functional. Uh, we put some grasses in the middle, and we put the rocks around the surrounding perimeter. The grasses don't have to be cut. It's a natural look. It'll. It'll look good with the entire surrounding out there, which is kind of natural with the wetlands and the conservative. Uh, I noticed when we left the last meeting, I did a drive in the township in 90% of every single commercial development has boulders. Rocks, right? As a matter of fact, I drove down the street and Kroger had a big pile in the middle of their parking lot. They were putting them in as we speak, and Meyers just replaced all their chipped bark with rocks.
[2:19] So everybody's just replacing it.
[2:21] I think just everyone that's in the commercial business that deals with this on a day to day basis, you know, we wanted to look good all the time. Nobody wants change because that's what it looks terrible. And for functionality. You know, we hear it from our landscapers. You know they can't get up to the islands because of the cars parked next to them. They don't want to damage a car. These mower decks are large. They don't want to come after hours to do it. They charge you more. It gets expensive for maintenance. So just in looking at what's there today, you know, it just sets the tone for why it's like that. It's because anyone that deals with property maintenance. You know, we want functionality. We want to look good. So doing what I did to add the grass and having the stone, I think it's pleasing. Aesthetically pleasing. And at the same time, there's nothing to be cut so we don't have to worry about cutting them, but we still water them for the trees that are there. It'll look. It'll look good.
[3:13] I think last last month we had it was a 2 to 2 vote. And this is to replace instead of doing fields. Instead they wanted to put or you wanted to put, you wanted to put in the field stone. And we're at, uh, impasse on it. So you came back with another idea, which I think is a very helpful thing. It's beautiful. I think it'll look really nice. I saw the plans that you set up there in the packet. I think the maintenance is much better.
[3:37] It looks actually more attractive, I think, because you got taller grasses that you can see and they stay there all the time. You're not worried about cutting the grass or killing the grass. So in spring you see a lot of yellow. Or when a when a plow goes by, he'll pick up the grass, pick up the heads and cut them. And it's just it's just it becomes a constant nightmare, right?
[3:55] When you look at what you're about to do. If we're able to do.
[3:57] No, it won't bother nobody. I think unless someone drives over the island.
[4:01] Yeah, the people might gravitate maybe to that. If that gets approved, that. Yeah, this might be an option. The Board of trustees might be able to look at it if it's viable. Um, to keep the the rural nature and.
[4:13] Yeah. I told Dana she can use my drawing for the new, you know, the new agenda when she changes the ordinance.
[4:20] Well, since I was one of the no votes, I want to thank you for listening to us. And you absolutely have my support tonight going forward.
[4:26] Thank you.
[4:28] I think it's a good compromise that you did. Uh, and I just just wondering, because I drove by there a couple of times just to see it. And I see you're open right now as far as business. And then, um, is there irrigation system there in the islands right now?
[4:46] Yeah, we still have that because we have trees. So we still have to water the. But what we do is we, we water them with ringers So they're not pop ups that the plow can hit. So we put one down the middle and the end. They go around the base of the tree and it waters the tree.
[5:00] And then also, uh, what? The stone. What kind of matting are you putting down there?
[5:06] Because they put a weed barrier. It's a commercial weed.
[5:10] Barrier, you know, because if, uh, sometimes when people put the stone or those rocks in there, weeds, weeds pop out pretty quick. So you need to have a have a good matting. This way you won't have to have any maintenance for us. Yeah. With the spray can. Well the weeds.
[5:26] Yeah. Our maintenance guys will spray every year because the problem is, even with barrier, over time, any type of of a mulch relief that falls, it creates dirt, it creates a spot for a seed to grow, and weeds will grow. But they spray. So as long as they spray and they can keep it killed, because we hire them to pull weeds and to do everything. So if they don't maintain it by spraying, they're going to be pulling more weeds.
[5:48] I have a question for for Dan or Kayla. Now he's proposing to have wood chips in there. Now that that. Is that acceptable or not acceptable in ordinance right now?
[6:03] Um, so in the ordinance, mulch is also a prohibited material in those islands. Dana, I believe, did follow up with the fire department to make sure that they were comfortable with that, if you want to speak to that.
[6:15] Yeah, I did add that both of those reviews from both wraps in here, because I know there was concern expressed, depending on the location of that. I just wanted to make sure they were comfortable with it, and both of them had responded back with no objection.
[6:29] So for the sake of the record, though, if you do make a motion, you should make sure to include that it's for the mulch and stone, um, versus just on.
[6:40] And I want suggestion to there's another building that's going to be built pretty soon. Make sure you check with staff. So hopefully you won't have to come back here. I mean.
[6:50] Yeah, we'll file the same.
[6:52] Yes, if we're going to ask for the same. Same thing. You're going to have to come back.
[6:55] Absolutely.
[6:56] Okay.
[6:56] Yeah. It's included with the included both properties. So this will cover both.
[7:01] Okay. I thought it was just for the parking for the larger building.
[7:04] No, it's all the way. He highlighted all the the different areas throughout the city would be.
[7:13] We had opened up public comments again. Do we have to reopen public comments for this?
[7:19] We do.
[7:20] We do. Okay. We want to see if anybody from the public wants to speak on this. After watching the the meeting last month and has just decided that they want to join us for this meeting.
[7:30] I think there's anybody. Mr. Henrich, would you like to talk about your neighbor's property right now.
[7:36] As you make your motion? I'm sure you're already planning to do so, but make sure that especially that last item. Intent of the ordinance based on the discussion. Last meeting. Make sure you know how this change design changes the finding on that intent of ordinance.
[7:51] Okay.
[7:54] We open and close the public hearing. I'm sorry.
[7:56] We did okay so fast. Open public made the motion to open. I supported the motion to close. I support it, okay. I think that's how it went. Mr. Boulet. Are you good with that? Okay.
[8:08] You said both of you.
[8:10] Yeah.
[8:11] Okay.
[8:11] Yes. We tech team got rid of it fast.
[8:13] Okay.
[8:16] That worked for you.
[8:18] All right, what I'm doing is I'm just going to open up the approval or denial.
[8:28] Since I wasn't.
[8:29] Able to print everything off to them online.
[8:31] Now I'm learning it. I think I've got it.
[8:36] I'm assuming there's no one from the public that wants to speak.
[8:40] I'm going to close the hearing.
[8:42] Oh we.
[8:42] Did.
[8:48] All right then. Um, if there's no further comment, I'm going to make a motion to approve the request made for both 65422 and 65454. Van Dijk parcel number 240411300034
[9:08] and 240411300035
[9:15] for variance from the Washington Township Zoning Ordinance Article 5.0 site standards, section 5.12 off street parking and loading requirements, parking lot and frontage landscaping requirements. Interior parking lot landscaping and allow for the alternative alternate landscaping plan which includes a mix of tall wild grass plants, wood mulch trees and fieldstone to be installed within the parking lot. Curbed islands. Ordinance requires that sod entries are planted within the curbed parking lot islands. This decision was based on criteria as outlined in the Washington Township Zoning Ordinance, Section 7.9. Echo Zoning Board of Appeals variance Review Procedures, number one. Strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would cause practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to the property owner. I do do the number of islands created and small size of them. This could be an unnecessary hardship. Furthermore, the revised landscape plan provides a reasonable alternative for the parking islands while maintaining landscaped areas with living plants. The revised design addresses the practical maintenance concerns presented by the applicant without eliminating landscaping from the islands. The conditions that make the variance necessary are unique to the property. The criteria is met based on the particular configuration, location and maintenance circumstances of this parking islands on the site. The approval is based on the specific conditions presented for this property and the revised plan. Due to the large number of islands in the small scope of them. It helps break up the concrete. I think it's a very nice design. The conditions that make the variance necessary were not created by the property owner. The need for relief relates to the physical configuration and ongoing maintenance conditions with the parking lots. The revised plan responds to those conditions while retaining trees and incorporating some living landscaping. The variance does not confer any special privileges. The specific facts of this property and revise the landscape plan does not establish a general exemption from the township's landscaping requirements for other properties, and more properties may want to look at what you do as an example. Therefore, this variance will not be contrary to the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance because of the revised plan and that it continues to provide landscape parking lot islands and incorporates trees now wild grass mulch along with the fieldstone with the fine borders and the combination of living and non-living landscape materials, preserves the visual aesthetic function of the islands while providing the requested relief. And I believe this is in the spirit of the township's ordinance.
[12:02] I'll support that.
[12:04] Can we get a roll call?
[12:05] Yes, please.
[12:06] Mr. Kozel? Yes. Miss Holl? Yes. Yes, Mr. Pollack. Yes. Mr.
[12:15] Thank you very much. Thank you.
[12:15] Appreciate your.
[12:16] Time.
[12:16] Thank you.
[12:20] Okay.
[12:25] We got a new business. 64200 Van Dyke. We have three separate motions. We're going to have to. We can look at them together, but we have to treat them each individually as we go through them, for each one, for a motion. But the first one is for Hendricks Chevrolet Zoning Ordinance. Article 5.0 site standards. Section 5.20 sign regulations. Golf allowed signs, thank you and Dimensional Standards three allowed permanent signs. Table 5.20 golf three allowed permanent sign types and standards for nonresidential zoning districts. Monument sign the number permitted. So we have three motions here three different requests. And I know you're going to speak on probably a lot of them as we go through this. So for the first one you can speak on, however, how we'd like.
[13:12] What.
[13:13] We're going to be looking at specifically right now. The number of signs is what we're looking at for.
[13:17] The first.
[13:17] One. So we're calling this like the extra monument one. Correct.
[13:22] All right.
[13:22] So speak on the number of signs first.
[13:24] You can. Yeah. You can speak on anything. But we're looking at we have to take them in each in order to enter. So I'm sure what you say in the first time is going to relate probably to the rest of them a little bit to.
[13:36] You know, take the lead and I'll do color commentary.
[13:39] Sure.
[13:40] Just please state your name and address.
[13:42] Russ McCoy.
[13:44] Just kind of.
[13:44] Tell us what 264.
[13:46] 200. Van Dyck.
[13:47] Thank you. Daughter. Yes. Right. Same commercial address.
[13:52] Okay.
[13:52] And just tell us a little bit about what you're doing, what you're planning on renovating and what your overall.
[13:57] Sure. So currently in the variance review that was done. You can see the the site plan there. And we currently have the four signs um at the dealership. We have multiple businesses within that business but all run within one overall rooftop. But separately we have three different buildings. So why we're looking for the variance is to keep some of our current directional signage while updating what we currently have. Um, you'll see that first sign is our certified service, and that is designated for our service customers to come in that specific, um, driveway that we have. We have the three different driveways. Um, so that is important for our customers. We have about 100, 150 service customers a day, and without that, it could cause a bit of havoc amongst the, uh, the parking lot. The other signs we're looking to update, um, both structurally and physically, the large main sign. And here I'll go within some of the other variances. Um, the large main sign is currently 36ft high and a about 121ft². So we're looking to bring that down. Um, and you'll see that on the second page with the proposed signage, the third sign that.
[15:30] We let's go back on the number because you guys want to talk about the number a little bit.
[15:34] You can talk about.
[15:35] Stay on that. Marissa's probably light on the number of cars that come in that. That would be the south entrance. That's the main drag. So if we get cars that miss that one, it's going to create a little bit of havoc in the rest of the place. And we know that internally, you folks, you know, aren't there day in and day out. So, um, I realize it's a we've got more than our fair share of signs. We understand that, uh, that little ones are fairly important to us. Uh, for that reason, I'm not sure we can make it any smaller. Um, I'm not sure they have a smaller one, but, uh, kind of that arrow getting people in that is, is a key. Because we have our we got our service entrance right there. Body shops in the next building. Uh, the trucks come in there, the semis. Um, it's an active joint. We want them all going in the right direction, or our body shop business will go up a little bit, and we're already busy enough. So, um, just we appreciate your consideration on that. We know that we're stretching you out. Um, and, uh, we'll save anything else on talking about those other signs and their size for the next conversation.
[16:45] I think we need to talk about them, though, as a trifecta. Sure. Because it makes sense that I'm able to see easily how two of your three are for sure. No problem. The one, though I can't find the evidence of the five to approve for the first one for the extra monument, and especially then if we can give them the other two that they need, it might help. So would you have asked for all three? If you knew, you could win on the other two? What I'm trying to say is the first one, the extra monument side. If we're able to give you the other two because they fit in our check box. So the way we have to answer the questions of meeting the criteria. Would that be enough for you guys not to need that extra monument side?
[17:29] I understand that logic. You know that you can't. Can't tell you that it necessarily works for a business case. But I understand your point of view, too. You know, as we get into the as we get into what we're doing with the other signs, we're probably moving about 40 years in the right direction here because that big honkers from 1971 and it's, it's old and ugly and, uh, the new stuff that we lay out in a monument style is where we want to go, and we're happy to go there, but we're hoping for a little, a little extra consideration.
[18:01] In here a really long time. And we appreciate all that that you've done in the community and just sticking with it and being here. How many how many signs are currently there?
[18:09] Right now.
[18:10] There's.
[18:10] Four.
[18:10] Currently there's currently.
[18:11] Four.
[18:19] Right. And I'm just thinking as an alternative, let's say you didn't upgrade your signs at all and you just left and you went home. Right now you would still have four signs there. Correct. Because the township is not asking you to tear one down right now. What you're looking right now is to renovate and and kind of bring what most people expect right now in the 21st century here, what what a car dealership looks like. And I can only imagine how competitive that is with the with the surrounding dealerships in the area. Um, but what I'm thinking is if you did nothing, you would still have four signs. And you're asking for four signs because you're asking for newer and updated ones.
[19:03] So we're just for clear. Yeah. Were you going to clarify the same thing for the one extra one?
[19:09] Yeah.
[19:10] Go ahead for the certified for the service.
[19:13] That's what I'm looking at.
[19:14] That's not part of this. They're leaving that alone. And that was granted by variance.
[19:18] Correct.
[19:18] So the other three signs. So that's a separate you know they're not touching that one. So the other three signs are what we're or what you're looking at as far as if you're allowing them to still keep three, which is the one extra because we're taking that certified service out of that calculation.
[19:37] Correct.
[19:37] And going by what they would be permitted for monument.
[19:42] And is this are these larger signs, because one of them I saw is going to be a smaller sign. I know that's a separate issue, but what I'm trying to understand is right now they have an extra sign. There is one there right now. And other than and I know what we're looking at, I'm just saying right now they have four signs there. And if everything were to get approved, they would have still the four signs a different signs. But there wouldn't be five now.
[20:10] There would be four.
[20:11] It would be four.
[20:12] It would still be four. There'll be the four signs. They would just be updated signs. That's what I understand why they need the variance I understand that. I'm just trying to understand if if they did nothing. I know there was a little bit of go. We had a we were updating car wash. They needed a variance for a car wash that had been over on 27 Mile Road, and they were looking to do some things to modernize it, to bring it, to bring people safety into the community or keep that car wash going. Family run again. And, you know, we kind of thought about that, that that was a family run business that's been there forever. That's looking to modernize so that they can compete. So we granted that variance based off the fact that we want this business to succeed. We want businesses to succeed. We want legacy businesses that have been here in the township supporting the township and the community for a long time. And my thought is, you know, if we do nothing, we're going to have four signs. They're essentially.
[21:12] Yeah, they're not adding.
[21:13] More than just pushing before they have.
[21:15] Yeah, fixing three of them.
[21:17] If Kayla can give us the language to make it work. Of course, we always want to.
[21:21] Work.
[21:21] In the betterment of the businesses.
[21:23] I actually just have a question because it's not clear in the application materials, and I'm not finding it here either. So the service sign we're not touching, but the three other signs that are remaining, what are each of those signs intended to to represent?
[21:40] I have a used car sign. You have your your main General Motors Chevy nameplate sign. And then we want to go with the digital. A digital would be our third sign which allows us to move around, promote whatever the service special or the used car special or what's going on in the community.
[22:02] And you don't want to attach the digital to the the Chevy sign.
[22:06] GM will not let you do that.
[22:07] Okay. Okay. I think that's some of the content that the DBA was looking for to understand why the number of signs is needed.
[22:14] Okay.
[22:18] General Motors will not let, uh.
[22:21] The franchisees.
[22:22] Uh, Cine division or something. They've got their rules. So I got to try and please them and then got to fit in with you guys, and, uh. Yeah, you can't do a digital like I came up with like, ten years ago. Let us put the digital on the bottom and put your gym up on top and probably be an easier sale to get you guys to go for that, but they won't play on that.
[22:42] Okay. But this could help us then wouldn't that represent a hardship for him if he's not allowed to do it any other way with the franchise laws?
[22:49] Yeah, and that's exactly kind of the information that was on there. An initial variance request way back in the 90s. Um, so that is really important for understanding why there's a unique situation here.
[23:01] Thanks for bringing that up.
[23:04] And so like I said, it's been here a long time. It's a lot of it's really when I look at it and I know nothing about a car dealership other than I bring my car there and magic things happen. I get it back and it works. And, um, but there's a lot of things, different departments that are like multiple businesses inside a conglomerate almost where you have alternate you need of your body shop, you have your sales shop, you have your used cars. You're bringing your kind of.
[23:31] Out money dealership that's running a body shop.
[23:35] Prior ordinance did have language in there, but based on the content, you know, neutral aspect of it. That's why we're we we can't showcase on the amount of businesses. We have to have it on quantity. And, you know, basically location size.
[24:09] No. I wish I would have went and thought to read that 1990 variance request. I would have been able to say right away this was a no brainer.
[24:17] If like a favor of upon heaven three signs. But I understand what the General Motors. And as I know at the service sign. You have to have that, of course. And then a pre-owned. But I was hoping that there will be a compromise and have one in between with the reader board. But what you're saying is with the General Motors, it's not going to work so.
[24:47] Well, not, you know, not the way that we want it to work, you know, or really the way you want it to work either. We could both agree on that digital and one of the other ones would something we'd shake our head to. But it's not going to happen.
[25:00] Well, to me it doesn't leave you with reasonable identification then. So for me it's an easy vote. Yes for the extra sign. If they can't use the sign that's dedicated to the franchise.
[25:15] Absolutely. And it's in a spot there. But, you know, we'll work through it one way or another.
[25:19] Yeah, absolutely.
[25:21] How long have you been in that spot? Over 50 years. Is it?
[25:24] How long have we got?
[25:25] How long have you been? Since 1971.
[25:28] I came out here in 10th grade with my dad.
[25:30] And 1971.
[25:33] Been a long time. So they've been. And we've grown a lot, too. You know, when we started, we had 35 employees, I think maybe of that. And now we're touching 100. So it's a different game. It's a very busy, busy place these days.
[25:56] To open up.
[25:57] Public hearing. So what we'll do is we'll make a motion to open up public hearing. I don't know if there'll be any here or anybody online that wants to correspond, but we'll give them the opportunity and then we'll close and see if we have any more questions and maybe have a little bit more discussion on the side.
[26:09] Okay. I'll make a motion to open public hearing.
[26:12] Thank you.
[26:14] All right. Thank you, Miss Hall. All in favor?
[26:16] Aye, aye.
[26:17] All right. So. Notice of public hearing by the charter township of Washington Township. Zoning board of appeals, Washington Township zoning ordinance, article 5.0 site standards. Section 5.20 sign regulations allowed. This is for allowed. Sign dimensional standards allowed. Permanent signs and table 5.20 golf three allowed permanent sign type standards. Non-residential districts. Monument signs. And this is what we're looking at specifically the number permitted. Purpose of the request one additional monument sign two are permitted based on the total road frontage exceeding 400ft. One sign to exceed. All right. So we're really just looking at that. The first point right now is that good numbers look after read all this.
[27:08] Yeah.
[27:09] Make it official. Um and the address is 64200 Vandyke.
[27:14] All right.
[27:17] Anybody make a motion to close public hearing support?
[27:21] All right. All in favor?
[27:25] There's a lot of support there. So I feel like this is all right. I guess for me, it's there's four signs there right now, and the business is a franchise that's been there since 1971.
[27:41] Are you been here since 1971? I don't know if it was there.
[27:44] Well, yeah, they were. The dealership was here before we before I was.
[27:48] Okay.
[27:49] So it's it's it's been a big piece of the township history and there's, there's four signs there. And if you wanted to, you could walk away and keep your four signs instead. We want the area to grow. Um, and this is where I look at the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Um, so if nobody has anything and no opposition, I'm going to make a motion.
[28:12] I support.
[28:13] Yeah.
[28:18] All right. So I'm going to make a motion to approve the request made for 64200. Van Dyke, parcel number 240414000003.
[28:31] And 240414100004
[28:37] for variance from the Washington Township Zoning Ordinance Article 5.0 site Standards, section 5.20 sign regulations. Golf allowed signs and dimensional standards. Three allowed permanent signs. Table 5.20 golf three allowed permanent sign types and standards for nonresidential zoning districts. Monument sign number permitted and allowed for one additional monument sign, bringing the total number for the site at three. Our ordinance allows for a maximum of two monument signs signs for the site based on the total frontage road frontage exceeding 400ft. This decision was based on the criteria outlined in the Washington Township Zoning Ordinance, section 7.9 echo. The Zoning Board of Appeals variance review procedure. Number one. Strict enforcement would cause practical difficulty or hardship as a large established automobile dealership containing multiple different operations, including vehicle sales, pre-owned vehicle sales, and service functions. These operations function as a distinct component within the larger dealership, and may reasonably require separate identification and customer direction. This is further shown because this is a franchise and science cannot be linked due to brand that this the number of signs is required so that you can establish exactly which vehicles are sold in your dealership. The condition that make the variance necessary unique to the property and do not apply to other properties. The property is large. Again, it's an established dealership consisting of two parcels and 550ft of frontage. When you look at it, says 400ft, allows anything over 400ft allows two. Now we're adding an extra 150ft of that. There's also extensive vehicle display area and multiple different businesses or brands inside your operation. Therefore, because it's a franchise that's been here a long time and they have rules that need to be abided by, I believe that this is a unique situation. Number three, the conditions and circumstances were not created by the owner. The applicant is not establishing an entire you're not making a new pattern of signs. The four signs already exist on the property for many years, and there has been previous variance relief that's been granted for the signage on the site. Um, the current request arises from replacement and modernization of the long standing sign. Yeah. You could you could otherwise just retain your current signage and not update anything. Therefore, the variance will not confer special privileges. The relief is based upon specific size, frontage, existing development, and multiple dealership functions that you have going on in the property. Therefore, I believe that this will not be contrary to the spirit and intent of the ordinance. The signs provide identification and direction for distinct operations on a large commercial site, which is consistent with the ordinance proposed of providing for business identification,
[31:51] and the business has been here and part of the community
[31:56] part of Washington.
[31:57] Romeo also.
[31:58] Support.
[32:00] Hey, can we get a roll call.
[32:03] Mister Council?
[32:05] Yes.
[32:05] To approve.
[32:06] Miss.
[32:06] Hall? Yes.
[32:07] Mr.
[32:09] Mr.
[32:11] Yes. To approve.
[32:14] Third of the way there.
[32:18] All right, let's take a look at the next one.
[32:25] So we're still looking at. This is still a sign. Still same property. 64200. Pandemic zoning ordinance article 5.0. Site standard section 5.20 sign regulations. Golf allowed signs and dimensional standards. Three allowed permanent signs. Table 5.20 golf three allowed permanent sign types and standards for nonresidential zoning. Districts, monument signs, dimensions, maximum sign area, and maximum height. So now what we're looking at is as the sign that you're looking at changing. And if I understand, I'll let you talk on it. But if I understand you're actually making it smaller than what it currently is.
[33:04] Correct.
[33:05] Hopefully this one's a little bit clearer here. So on this first page those are our that's our big massive high tech bright Chevrolet sign right now. That's 11 by 11. So we're looking to decrease that to this proposed. The actual sign will be this one this eight eight by eight eight and eight inches by eight. So if you calculate that out it's about a 41% decrease. While we're also bringing down the overall height of that sign.
[33:38] So you're going to go for this P 137 to.
[33:42] M36P137.
[33:46] Goes to M 64. So the current one goes to the proposed one. And then the current two. We're looking to bring that site down that sign down lower to the ground.
[34:01] Okay.
[34:04] We've talked about, of course, at a smaller but on the record, I want to talk about the fact that last month we had the medical facility. The medical facility wanted to double in size. So just before that gets out there, that we voted yes for Mr. Hyde and know around the medical facility, it's a big difference in numbers and this is a reduction of size. So I want that on the record.
[34:24] Sure.
[34:26] So it is 64ft² and 12ft in height.
[34:31] 64ft² and 12ft in height.
[34:34] Uh, yes. Yeah. We're a little over your height restriction as well, I think.
[34:39] Okay.
[34:40] I think that was on there. You're showing. Sorry. I just want to make sure I'm clear on this attachment. So the proposed two is that corresponding to current sign number two? Yes. Okay. And you weren't initially requesting variances for that sign. Correct. You were just requesting it for this. The size and height for the height of. Right. Correct.
[35:49] So in spirit, they're getting more in line with our variance.
[35:52] You're coming.
[35:52] Closer. Yes, yes.
[35:55] That.
[35:57] Yeah. The digital would be great at spend whatever the township spec is or.
[36:06] We'll buy accordingly.
[36:09] Should we open public comment on this one?
[36:10] Then we could.
[36:15] Any other questions?
[36:17] I think I'm I'm more in favor of staying. Same with our ordinance with 4040ft² minimum of a ten feet high, because I think we compromised with the number of signs and going with the 48ft² and the ten feet, that would be more in line with the current ones that have been approved, like a township hall. And there's Myers down the street, and I think it's level. It's high enough that people can look and see those signs. So I'm in favor of not giving like the like a variance at this time, unless you can give me another reason why you should have a larger sign.
[37:01] But this is a reduction of what they already have.
[37:04] I understand that, but most of most of the newer signs that are coming in. Now, whether they are complying with the 48ft² and then the ten feet of height, and I think we need we we need to be consistent. And I think, you know, the large signs are very large right now. And I think this would be a lot more in line with the direction of the township, like the wind, the direction are going with the different signs.
[37:38] So so you're you're marquee signage, you're going to be putting up, you say that's going to meet all the requirements. That's in addition to these other signs. The marquee you said you're going to put one up. That's a digital.
[37:51] That's the plan was to put.
[37:53] Where's that. Is that in addition to these other ones.
[37:56] That's to replace. So we would be removing this the really old pre-owned.
[38:02] Old one okay. That's going to go there.
[38:03] Yeah. That would. Well we would move our current. We have a car Bravo sign. That's our certified used move that in line with that building and put the the digital monument between the.
[38:15] The digital.
[38:16] Signs.
[38:16] The Digital Marquis will go there. Correct. This large one that you want to take out, you want to make it a little smaller, but it's still not going to meet the requirements of being what it should be. That's what we're asking.
[38:29] Yeah, yeah. That one that would be over. Um, eight by eight would be 64ft. Um, it does say in the review that, uh, and I understand the number of signs. You're already giving us an allowance there, but Sarah and Jim Reals, both of their signs exceed the height and area of the ordinance.
[38:54] Um, and I know it's in this packet and I've gone through it. I know, so you're reducing it to 64ft² allowable 48ft². Correct. And I'm missing that I don't see in my notes. Here is what is the current square footage of that site.
[39:10] About 125ft².
[39:13] It's 11 a little over 11 by 11.
[39:16] Okay. So you're taking a sign. And how high is that sign? Did you.
[39:20] Say.
[39:20] That one's 36ft at the base. 36ft, 36. About 48ft tall.
[39:26] Right.
[39:27] That's an impressive sign.
[39:29] It's very large.
[39:30] Yeah. Those used to be approved by Mdot because before Van Dyke. Van Dyke used to all, like all the state regulated, all the the billboard, the billboard signs that you see that are still up are because they were reviewed by Mdot before Macomb County Department of Roads took over Van Dyke that when the bypass and everything was constructed. That's why you see a lot of these taller signs, even like we're Tractor supply. You know, there's that really tall sign. That's why some of those still exist. It was a different form of government that did those reviews back then. And then when the county took over, they had their rules and right aways and square footage requirements.
[40:09] Okay.
[40:09] So I have a couple of questions. Um, I don't want to lose sight of what you're voluntarily doing for us by making the sign smaller. Is there a reason why? 648 it just didn't work for you. Did you look at 48?
[40:23] Um, it would be the same size as the certified used, so I wouldn't see it as standing out and really noting the dealership, um, would be my main argument, for lack of a better word.
[40:37] That's going to be your your scholarship size.
[40:39] Yeah, that would be the sign.
[40:41] So if it went to.
[40:41] 48, how many of the signs would be larger than that. So you're saying one of one of the, one of the other signs would be small. Would it would actually be larger than your main.
[40:54] It would all be the same size.
[40:55] It would all be. So they would all be forged.
[40:56] There would be nothing that would stand out or be prominent. I think it's.
[40:59] What they.
[41:00] Want. One that's a little bigger than the other two, though.
[41:02] Okay. Because all the other signs are in compliance. Then as far as size.
[41:06] The other two would comply.
[41:08] Right.
[41:08] Correct.
[41:10] Are we are we good on the height. On the 48?
[41:13] Correct.
[41:14] Yeah.
[41:18] Um, the applicant referenced that table that has kind of signed size compared to the number of signs on the site. That's on page five of our review letter for anyone that was looking for that.
[41:32] Write the number on the poles on all that suburban.
[41:37] Ford suburban.
[41:38] Ford does not have.
[41:39] See, for me, I don't feel like I'm approving a larger sign. I feel like I'm approving a sign reduction in size.
[41:46] Sure.
[41:47] I get that. You want everyone to come into compliance with what we're asking in the ordinance, and instead you're asking for relief to build a sign that's too big for what's there. But the alternative to me is they'll then you leave 125 foot sign up as your marquee or as your business, which is almost double the size. So really, I'm looking at a almost 100% reduction.
[42:13] In a much cleaner look.
[42:15] And a cleaner look.
[42:16] I mean, no offense, but that sign is ugly. Your old one.
[42:20] There's a.
[42:20] Few updates.
[42:21] That need to be happened, that need to happen to bring us up, you know, to.
[42:25] You don't notice.
[42:26] The safety as well that the poll if you look at the poll for that very large sign there, there's could be. I'm not a structural engineer, but.
[42:36] There's rusty holes in.
[42:37] It.
[42:37] I wouldn't have noticed it. I wouldn't have noticed that you needed a replacement until you brought it before. Because your place always looks spectacular, clean and neat.
[42:46] Beautiful. It's so much nicer when it's down. And I mean, this was probably great in 1970. But you know.
[42:52] What?
[42:52] We don't make the little wood shingles.
[42:54] It would be common for the main sign to have a little more beef to it than your, uh, your used car sign.
[43:05] I'm going to make a motion for open public comments support.
[43:11] I'll make the motion.
[43:12] Okay. Thank you.
[43:13] All in favor?
[43:14] Aye.
[43:15] All right.
[43:17] No one from the public.
[43:18] Here.
[43:19] For this one. All. Anybody want to make a motion to close public hearing?
[43:22] Oh.
[43:23] Yes. Let me just remind the public what we're in case they're missing yet.
[43:49] Thank you.
[43:54] Make a motion. Nobody's here. Do we want to make a motion to close public hearing?
[43:59] I support.
[44:03] If I can make the motion, I'll make the motion to close the public. Appreciate you. She supports it. Thank you. All right. Anybody have any questions.
[44:11] About the.
[44:12] Suit? No. Basically, he's going for 125 square foot, making lower on the 64 square foot. What? A requirement is 48 square foot.
[44:26] And getting rid of the old look.
[44:27] Under.
[44:29] The shingles. All that jazz.
[44:31] And how tall is this new sign going to be? 12ft off the ground.
[44:37] Is it 12 or 11? Because this graphic shows 11ft.
[44:42] The motion is says 1012.
[44:48] I thought it was two. That was the. The dimensions that were given was 64ft² and 12ft in height.
[44:54] Are you able to.
[44:54] Clarify.
[44:55] For the sign how high it is? So you're going from the the current sign is.
[44:59] It's 12ft, 64.
[45:01] 12ft.
[45:05] Yeah. So 64ft² and 12 foot height is. Is there an ordinance. What's the ordinance right now? 1010. So it's two feet over.
[45:14] Yes.
[45:15] But it's currently.
[45:18] But what was what was presented today on the record. Proposed sign one with the 41% decrease is showing a height of 11ft.
[45:29] Would you give me the dimensions? They were at 12.
[45:32] That's why we said 12.
[45:36] Yeah. When I had asked the. Because this was a little confusing with like the all the varieties of So this. Yeah. So 66 to 64. And the 12 was what was.
[45:49] Asking for.
[45:50] Six in the email. But I mean if you.
[45:53] But.
[45:54] You would know more than I would.
[45:55] I'm just but this.
[45:55] Is what I.
[45:56] Like.
[45:56] The motive.
[45:57] I think it should be.
[45:58] It looks like the measure, you know, the sign area and then the frame up above.
[46:02] Yeah. It's from the great. So it's the established grade to the top of the sign.
[46:06] To the top.
[46:06] Yeah.
[46:08] Well our board packet is correct. Dana, did you do the board packet. Yes it's correct.
[46:13] Would there agree.
[46:14] On the board packet. You have it correct.
[46:16] For the 12ft.
[46:17] Yep. You have 64ft² in area and 12ft in height.
[46:20] Yes.
[46:20] What we're looking at is this what.
[46:22] They just handed over.
[46:23] To them.
[46:24] But yeah that was what was sent originally. So just just for purposes of making the motion, you know, I mean obviously if it if they make the motion for 12 and it's 11 that's a foot lower.
[46:35] 11.
[46:35] You know, it's but you go the opposite way and now you're trying to reduce it by a foot. so I just make sure that.
[46:44] I stick with their original numbers. I guess I didn't realize it, but there is no 48 option apparently here. So at 36, we're a little under spec on the used car sign.
[46:58] When you when you pick a sign company, um, how did you select them? Was that GM did they help drive.
[47:04] Me towards.
[47:05] This?
[47:05] So you you you lease the signs from them. You don't even own them. You release them.
[47:08] From. So this is something you lease. So you.
[47:12] Yeah. This is what you pick from.
[47:20] On the.
[47:20] Base.
[47:21] Yeah.
[47:21] Okay.
[47:25] So if I had a sign company, I could give you a better deal. You couldn't even buy from me. But you're saying.
[47:31] I know.
[47:32] A digital sign we could get from. Yeah.
[47:34] Oh, don't say that. We're going to get mail about this.
[47:37] I don't have a digital sign.
[47:39] Mr. Cassel is not looking for sign business.
[47:41] No.
[47:43] The applicant will have to come in for separate sign permits. This is just the variance piece.
[48:01] So basically you just want to go 64 square foot.
[48:11] At 1212ft off the ground. Is it 11 now?
[48:14] Yes. Yes. My other one's my mistake.
[48:18] Other one was 36ft off the ground at 125ft².
[48:23] So what I have here is, is, is a.
[48:28] Is a 16 square foot variance per square foot for the sign and a variance for a two foot and additional height. Is that what. Is that my understanding?
[48:39] Yes.
[48:40] As what's written in the actual paper. Now, this was a good handout, but this just didn't have the right height in there, right? Or could I, especially if you can read the.
[48:50] I can't read. That's why I asked. I can't read that.
[48:54] Yes. Good question.
[48:55] And if it's 11 I just can't go the opposite.
[49:07] Well you could it would just require.
[49:09] Another another round of our presence here.
[49:15] All right. Hope everyone vote. So they believe based off this. But I'm going to make a motion to again approve the request made for 64200 Van Dyke, parcel number 240414100003.
[49:31] And parcel 240414100004
[49:36] for variance from the Washington Township Zoning Ordinance Article 5.0 site standards. Section 5.20 sign regulations. Golf allowed signs and dimensional standards. Three allowed permanent signs. Table 5.20 golf three allowed permanent sign types and standards for non-residential zoning districts, monument sign dimensions, maximum sign area, and maximum height and allow for the for one ground sign to exceed the maximum square footage by 16ft and a maximum height by two feet. The proposed sign is 64ft² in area and 12ft in height. Ordinance requirements for monument sign dimensions allow for a maximum sign area to be 48ft, and the maximum height to be ten feet. This decision was based on the criteria outlined in the Washington Township Zoning Ordinance, Section 7.9. Echo Zoning Board of Appeals variance review procedures One, strict enforcement would cause practical difficulty or hardship. The main shrubby sign serves as the primary identification for this large, long established dealership on 550ft of Van Dyke frontage. The request of a relief allows adequate identification while actually reducing the size of the existing signage from 125ft² to 64ft². The condition that makes US variance necessary are unique to the property and do not apply to other properties. The site is approximately 550ft of frontage. Multiple dealership operations and a long standing commercial development. It's. Moreover, it's unique because GM gives you a certain allotment of signs to pick from that don't necessarily correspond with the ordinance included in Washington Township. Therefore, conditions and circumstances were not created by the owner again. You're replacing a long standing existing sign, and it was approved by Mdot. Then you're now establishing a new sign. Oh. I'm sorry. This is not an undeveloped site. You're replacing a sign, and the replacement is actually smaller than the larger existing sign, and therefore actually reduces the degree of existing nonconformity. Right. The applicant could otherwise just retain the existing sign. The variance will not confer special privileges. Other automobile dealerships in the township do have signs that exceed the area. And again, you're asking to actually reduce the overall square footage of the sign. And I want to say that as well. And the height down to 12ft. So therefore the variance will not be contrary to the spirit or intent of the ordinance. The proposed sign, although larger than what's currently permitted, is actually smaller than the existing sign. It allows for continued effective business identification while bringing the property into compliance with the standards. And what I believe the spirit of the ordinance is trying to do for the township I support. Okay, can we get a roll call, please, Mr. Kozel? Yes. To approve.
[52:55] Yes to approve, Miss Hall? Yes to approve, Mr.
[53:01] Mr.
[53:05] He answered for you.
[53:06] Oh.
[53:07] Sorry. Sometimes it's hard to hear. Names are so close.
[53:11] Okay. So you're a no. No. In a yes.
[53:14] Okay.
[53:15] All right. Motion carries. All right. One to go. So now we're looking at again same property.
[53:25] 64200 Vandyke zoning ordinance, article 5.0 site standards. Section 5.0. 5.20 sign regulations. Hotel General regulations for setback standards. Table 5.20 hotel four required sign setbacks. Major road is 70ft. Again, this is for parcel 240414100003
[53:49] and 004. All right. Now we're talking about bringing the signage which should be 70 foot setback from the road you're looking to. Can you talk a little bit about what you're the sign locations which if I understand they're not changing. They're keeping it silent.
[54:07] Yeah. The signs would stay right in line with where they are now.
[54:58] I know one of the things that I appreciated you had included in the packet was, uh, was a letter from the right of way agent from Macomb County Department of Roads, and he says that the he's he's looked at where the signs are right now, and he concurs that, uh, the area between the 33ft of existing right of way, which you shaded in blue and the future right of way, which is shaded in green. So that might be a future development. Is that what they're talking about is that when they talk about the part that shaded blue versus shade of green.
[55:32] Um.
[55:33] You're possible right away.
[55:35] No, it's actually where their right of way falls today. So for whatever reason, they have the West as a larger right of way than the East. It's separated.
[55:44] Okay.
[55:44] Yeah. So their future right away is the Green line on page four of our review. And that image provided by the applicant.
[55:51] Okay. And that future right away, uh, remains your property. It says that and it would not we. And it says and you would not need anything from us as far as a permit to place a sign in that area. Uh, there may be setbacks, EIS and replacement requirements, basically saying that those signs currently allow for the right of way that could be given. So I do appreciate that we ask that for a lot of times for someone to check with the road commission before they do something, especially with the setback. And I have that included.
[56:23] I thought that was great. I'm going to ask him to do it.
[56:39] That was the easiest part of the whole thing was once I got all that guy, he was like, oh yeah, no problem.
[56:44] He did apologize in the letter, so he maybe had to call him twice on twice.
[56:50] Funny how pretty friendly guy. I wasn't looking for an apology. I wasn't mad about anything.
[56:56] And again, what you're looking at doing, as we keep saying over and over again, is that these signs are currently where they are. You're not asking to bring them any closer to the road. You're not asking. You're asking to keep them in the same spots.
[57:09] Correct.
[57:11] You've seen some of their concerns about. They want to make sure you don't block any kind of right of way, and it's not too bright for cars and all that stuff.
[57:20] Correct.
[57:22] And they have sign lighting standards they'll have to comply with through our ordinance.
[57:26] Okay, I know that's going to be getting light pollution. And I always think that's tough on a major road. But yeah, complying with that is.
[57:41] Shall we make a motion for public comment?
[57:44] A motion for public comments.
[57:46] I'd like to make a motion for public comment.
[57:50] We have a second.
[57:52] Oh, come on, don't leave me hanging here.
[57:54] Somebody might do that.
[57:57] All right, I have a motion for Miss Marlon, supported by Miss Hall. All in favor?
[58:01] Aye.
[58:02] Great. So again, this is for the same property, 6400. Let me look a little bit further into it just to talk about the actual.
[58:15] The distance from the road here. I love computers.
[58:22] They're not moving their current sign.
[58:24] Correct. Yeah. I'm just talking about what the variance is that. So anytime you tear something down, technically, um, we're moving it. So this was.
[58:34] A setback variance for all three proposed signs in the amount of 36ft. So this is a 36 foot measured from the centerline of band. The right of way again for 64200 van Dyke 240414100003
[58:51] and 004.
[58:57] Clearance for all.
[58:58] Three.
[58:59] Signs. Anybody from public comments?
[59:03] I'll make the motion to close the public.
[59:06] Oh, I'll support.
[59:07] How quick that was. All in favor?
[59:09] Aye.
[59:10] Thank you. How far is 70ft? So currently, how far are they from the road? Is it 36ft or is it 30?
[59:19] It would be 34.
[59:20] From the sidelines.
[59:21] Request 3036.
[59:22] Plus.
[59:23] Variance.
[59:25] Did I read some of that? Said, if you made it go where it was supposed to be, like in the second row of the car?
[59:30] Yeah it would, yeah. B be towards the showroom entrance. So yeah.
[59:35] It wouldn't work.
[59:37] I know the Samaritan house too. They're very close to the road. But again, if you ask them to push it back they would lose space for providing food.
[59:58] Do you have anything else with this?
[1:00:08] I've been practicing with this computer thing. How to find stuff? It's not that bad. Okay, um, looks like there was one other thing that I wanted to bring up.
[1:00:41] A motion. I'll make a motion. One more time to approve the request. Made for 64200. Van Dijk, parcel number 240414100003
[1:00:54] and 2404 1400 1410 0004
[1:01:02] for variance from the Washington Township Zoning Ordinance Article 5.0 site Standard section 5.20 sign regulations. Hotel General Regulations number for setback standards. Table 5.20 hotel for required sign setbacks, major road requirements, 70ft and allow for a reduction and setback for the monument sign locations and the amount of 36ft, making the distance as measured from the centerline of Van Dyke Road right away, 34ft. Decision was based on criteria outlined in the Washington Township Zoning Ordinance, Section 7.9 Echo Zoning Board of Appeals variance review procedures number one strict enforcement would cause practical difficulty.
[1:01:47] The signs are currently there. They're not in a different location. And if you were to bring them into compliance, be moving the signs into your parking lot. Therefore, this is a hardship that you'd have to face. The conditions that make it necessary are unique to the property and that the property has two parcels. Approximately 550ft of Van Dyke frontage and has been developed and operated as a dealership for, we'll say, over 50 years. It's been there a long time. The long standing sign locations, vehicle displays and existing site configuration create conditions that are particular to this developed property. This is not created by the owner. The requested setback does not result from a newly selected sign location. Instead, the applicant proposes to maintain the general locations or the locations of the longstanding existing signs while replacing and modernizing them.
[1:02:55] This practical difficulty results from applying the current setback requirements and replacing the sign frontage that's already been developed on the site. The variance will not confer special privileges. The variance is based on particular circumstances of this established property and its existing development.
[1:03:19] Also, Macomb County Department of Roads has verified that this would not impede with the right of way. Therefore, the variance will not be contrary to the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance. Maintaining the general existing sign locations allowed continued business identification without changing the long standing locations of the sign. The signs are not being moved closer to the roadway, and the variance does not authorize an encroachment on the existing right of way in Macomb, um, in the existing right of way. And again, the Macomb County Department of Roads did not identify the maintained areas as affecting the existing right of way. Therefore, I believe this is in the spirit and intent of the ordinance.
[1:04:11] Anybody want.
[1:04:12] A second? I'll second that.
[1:04:15] We have a motion by Colesville, seconded by Pawlak. Roll call.
[1:04:19] Yes. To approve.
[1:04:20] Pawlak.
[1:04:21] Yes.
[1:04:21] To approve Pohlad.
[1:04:22] Yes. To approve.
[1:04:24] Milam. Yes. To approve?
[1:04:26] Yes, sir.
[1:04:49] That's the goal.
[1:04:50] Thank you for all you do.
[1:04:52] Thank you.
[1:04:55] Hold on. I'll get a hold of GM too and see if by chance we can get that one signed to come down and get rid of some of that base. Okay, maybe we could squeeze in and look a little better. So I'll make a call and see if I can find the right person.
[1:05:08] All right.
[1:05:09] That old sign. That old sign has been around for a long time. Oh, yeah, I remember seeing that. I remember seeing that in the yearbooks in the 70s.
[1:05:18] When we lost Oldsmobile. I was able to. We're supposed to break them all up and take them away. But I said, maybe you guys should go grab some pizza. You know, and I had my garage for a long time. I only gave it away to some Oldsmobile club. Yeah, I think we got some history.
[1:05:33] Yeah, I said I seen it in some of the, you know, they put pictures in the yearbook. I remember seeing that in the yearbook this morning.
[1:05:41] And dad, my dad was so. Yeah. Fun stuff. We had lots of stories around this long. So appreciate your time.
[1:05:49] Thank you very much.
[1:05:50] You have a good day.
[1:05:52] All right. Public comments. We had so much from the public earlier. Anybody else from the public want to talk at this time?
[1:06:01] Member comments.
[1:06:02] I have one comment. Since we have the issue with the landscaping like approval. I think we need to have something in place, either with staff planning or pre-planning, that no construction should start unless it's approved by someone and staff. Because, for instance, that property like I happen to be in a township hall today and there's a property on Van Dyke south of 27th on the west side, and they're in violation of the ordinance already. So somewhere there needs to be information or like a checklist that no one should be able to concert or construction until they get approval.
[1:06:55] But they did conform with the approved site plan. So it was something that should have been caught during the review process.
[1:07:01] Well, that's what I'm saying. Yeah. Somehow, because that person's violation right now, So are they going to come before the NBA?
[1:07:12] Well they should.
[1:07:13] They should have ordinance enforcement.
[1:07:18] I know that's a tough thing. Ordinance enforcement.
[1:07:21] Does that work with an approved site plan?
[1:07:23] Yes. So in this case, that specific property. Um, there was a site plan on file with the township that had been approved. Um, even though, you know, there was that issue in the parking lot, islands of of not being compliant, compliant with the Sod standard. Um, it was an approved site plan, which means at this point it can't be enforced for that ordinance because it conforms to the site plan that was approved and then on file with the township. Um, I'm not sure what year that was approved. Um, we, you know.
[1:07:56] Yeah, not that long ago, but with other ones that have removed, you know, materials and then put materials in, that would be an enforcement if it was approved with a plan that required the sod. Then yes, we can go. And you know, obviously we are working on some ordinance updates. Um, I don't know where we'll land with that configuration of what would be acceptable. That's up to the planning commission and board. But, you know, ultimately the the only ones on an enforcement, you know, standpoint would be ones that are in violation and removed Sod that had an approved site plan. But the one that you're referencing was approved with, with landscaping. And, um, Stone.
[1:08:47] Is a moving that there's about three, three other buildings that are going up. And I think one won't need a variance, but the other two might, depending upon me. I haven't seen anything on the Planning Commission.
[1:09:02] And with the particular one that was in front of the CBA. They were approved. They met the ordinance requirements. They came back after, you know, for consideration. So their approved site plan on file had showed, you know, the sod and the trees.
[1:09:17] So I had to have someone come before us after. It's violating the ordinance, that's all.
[1:09:26] That's a tough thing. When they come.
[1:09:28] Back it's an after after.
[1:09:29] The hoops. You caught me.
[1:09:31] Yeah. We've had that happen where people coming after and said, you know, I'm sorry, I didn't know I couldn't do that, especially even with decks and patios. And I know you've seen your fair share of those, too.
[1:09:52] I'll make the motion to adjourn.
[1:09:54] All right. I'll see you.
[1:09:55] All in favor?
[1:09:56] Aye, aye.
[1:09:57] All right. Thank you.