1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:10,900
 Okay. So, after determining that a quorum is present, I hereby call this meeting of

2
00:00:10,900 --> 00:00:15,300
 the city of Denton's Zoning Board of Adjustment in session. The Zoning Board of Adjustment

3
00:00:15,300 --> 00:00:23,900
 of the city of Denton, Texas will convene at its regular meeting at 5 45 p.m. Item

4
00:00:23,900 --> 00:00:35,000
 number one on our agenda is the U.S. and Texas Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance

5
00:00:35,000 --> 00:00:41,900
 to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one

6
00:00:41,900 --> 00:00:49,000
 nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And now for the Texas

7
00:00:49,000 --> 00:01:00,100
 flag, I pledge allegiance to the people of Texas, one state under God, one indivisible.

8
00:01:00,100 --> 00:01:07,800
 All right. My name is Connor Hall. I am the vice chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment

9
00:01:07,800 --> 00:01:12,900
 of the city of Denton. Prior to commencing our hearing, I would like to review our meeting

10
00:01:12,900 --> 00:01:18,100
 format for the benefit of those in the audience. The board consists of seven regular members

11
00:01:18,100 --> 00:01:22,700
 and three alternates. The members of the Zoning Board of Adjustment are residents of the city

12
00:01:22,700 --> 00:01:28,500
 of Denton. We serve voluntarily and have been appointed to our positions by the city council.

13
00:01:28,500 --> 00:01:34,800
 It takes six votes to authorize a variance from the city's zoning or sign ordinances.

14
00:01:34,800 --> 00:01:38,900
 If there are any members of the public who wish to speak on item, please fill out a blue

15
00:01:38,900 --> 00:01:46,100
 card and hand it to Carly. We will now commence with our regularly scheduled agenda. Item

16
00:01:46,100 --> 00:01:51,100
 number two A's is for the approval of, what was the date for November?

17
00:01:51,100 --> 00:01:52,100
 17.

18
00:01:52,100 --> 00:01:58,100
 We're doing two meeting minutes. We're doing 23rd and 17th.

19
00:01:58,100 --> 00:02:06,100
 Okay. Thank you. The approval of the June 23rd, 2025 minutes. Do I need to say both?

20
00:02:06,100 --> 00:02:11,100
 Since we have it as two items on the agenda, let's do two things.

21
00:02:11,100 --> 00:02:17,100
 Okay. That works. Each member of the board has been provided with copies of these minutes.

22
00:02:17,100 --> 00:02:22,100
 Are there any corrections, additions, or deletions to these minutes?

23
00:02:22,100 --> 00:02:34,100
 Okay. Chair would entertain a motion on item, or at least item two A, on item number two

24
00:02:34,100 --> 00:02:41,100
 A. I motion. Okay. Would anyone like to second?

25
00:02:41,100 --> 00:02:42,100
 Second.

26
00:02:42,100 --> 00:02:51,100
 Thank you. Okay. Having received a motion and a second,

27
00:02:51,100 --> 00:03:01,100
 is there further discussion? Okay. There being no further discussion, please vote on the

28
00:03:01,100 --> 00:03:08,100
 motion. All in favor of approving the June 23rd, 2025 minutes, say aye.

29
00:03:08,100 --> 00:03:09,100
 Aye.

30
00:03:09,100 --> 00:03:17,100
 All opposed? Okay. The ayes have it. The results of the vote are six in favor and zero against.

31
00:03:17,100 --> 00:03:23,100
 The minutes are approved. Item number two B is to consider the approval of the November

32
00:03:23,100 --> 00:03:29,100
 17th, 2025 minutes. Each member of the board has been provided with a copy of these minutes.

33
00:03:29,100 --> 00:03:35,100
 Are there any corrections, additions, or deletions to these minutes?

34
00:03:35,100 --> 00:03:43,100
 Okay. The chair would like to entertain a motion on item number two B.

35
00:03:43,100 --> 00:03:44,100
 I motion.

36
00:03:44,100 --> 00:03:47,100
 Okay. Is there a second?

37
00:03:47,100 --> 00:04:00,100
 Okay. Thank you. Having received a motion and a second, is there any further discussion?

38
00:04:00,100 --> 00:04:06,100
 Okay. There being no further discussion, please vote on the motion. All in favor?

39
00:04:06,100 --> 00:04:07,100
 Aye.

40
00:04:07,100 --> 00:04:08,100
 Aye.

41
00:04:08,100 --> 00:04:16,100
 All opposed? Okay. The results of the vote are six in favor and zero against. The minutes

42
00:04:16,100 --> 00:04:26,100
 are approved. We are having one variance hearing tonight. Items B25-0063. In the interest of

43
00:04:26,100 --> 00:04:31,100
 time, I will swear on all witnesses at this time. Will all witnesses who will provide

44
00:04:31,100 --> 00:04:39,100
 testimony at tonight's hearing please stand and raise your right hand. Under penalty of

45
00:04:39,100 --> 00:04:45,100
 pre-jury, do you swear or affirm that any testimony or information that you provide

46
00:04:45,100 --> 00:04:49,100
 or any statement you make before this board is complete, true, and correct to the best

47
00:04:49,100 --> 00:04:53,100
 of your knowledge and ability? If so, please answer, I do.

48
00:04:53,100 --> 00:04:54,100
 I do.

49
00:04:54,100 --> 00:05:02,100
 Okay. Is there any witnesses who are unable or unwilling to take this oath? Great. All

50
00:05:02,100 --> 00:05:08,100
 right. So in order to ensure an orderly meeting, the hearing procedure for each variance will

51
00:05:08,100 --> 00:05:16,100
 be as follows. No person shall speak unless they are recognized by the chair to speak

52
00:05:16,100 --> 00:05:24,100
 and then shall only speak from the podium. First, the city's presentation and questions

53
00:05:24,100 --> 00:05:35,100
 from the board. Let's see. City staff will present the requested variance, staff's analysis

54
00:05:35,100 --> 00:05:45,100
 of how it does or does not meet the criteria of approval and staff's recommendations. Next,

55
00:05:45,100 --> 00:05:49,100
 applicant presentation and questions from the board. The applicant will present any

56
00:05:49,100 --> 00:05:53,100
 evidence and arguments to support the requested variance. Consistent with the city council's

57
00:05:53,100 --> 00:05:59,100
 rules and procedure, the board shall allow up to 10 minutes per speaker for presentation

58
00:05:59,100 --> 00:06:04,100
 with a total of no more than 20 minutes for all speakers from this party. After the parties

59
00:06:04,100 --> 00:06:09,100
 have finished their presentations, members of the public may speak on the item. Members

60
00:06:09,100 --> 00:06:14,100
 of the public may provide comments with potential questions of speakers from the board. Consistent

61
00:06:14,100 --> 00:06:19,100
 with the city council's rules and procedure and board will allow up to four minutes per

62
00:06:19,100 --> 00:06:24,100
 speaker. But this may be limited by the board chair to three minutes if numerous speakers

63
00:06:24,100 --> 00:06:29,100
 desire to comment on an item to give as many individuals as possible the ability to speak

64
00:06:29,100 --> 00:06:34,100
 on the item. Finally, the board may ask any follow-up questions of staff or applicant

65
00:06:34,100 --> 00:06:40,100
 that were raised by the public and not previously answered. The city staff and/or the applicant

66
00:06:40,100 --> 00:06:46,100
 will answer any further questions of the board. At the conclusion of the evidence, I will

67
00:06:46,100 --> 00:06:52,100
 close the public hearing. Upon conclusion of this testimony, evidence, any questions

68
00:06:52,100 --> 00:06:57,100
 and answers, and arguments or summary statements, and when the chair has determined the board

69
00:06:57,100 --> 00:07:03,100
 has adequate information to the site, the chair will then close the public hearing.

70
00:07:03,100 --> 00:07:14,100
 The board will have an opportunity to deliberate and vote. Item number 3A is B25-0063. Hold

71
00:07:14,100 --> 00:07:19,100
 a public hearing and consider approval of a variance from Chapter 33 signs and advertising

72
00:07:19,100 --> 00:07:27,100
 devices of the Code of Ordinances, specifically Section 33.14.2B as it relates to the maximum

73
00:07:27,100 --> 00:07:34,100
 effective area of a ground sign to allow for a sign with an effective area of approximately

74
00:07:34,100 --> 00:07:41,100
 451 square feet for an existing fuel station and restaurant use. Located on approximately

75
00:07:41,100 --> 00:07:49,100
 17.2 acre property on the southwest corner of the intersection of Arthurville Road and

76
00:07:49,100 --> 00:07:59,100
 North IH35, B25-0063 loves travel stop sign media minds. The matter before the board is

77
00:07:59,100 --> 00:08:04,100
 whether to grant a variance to the city's sign code regulations regarding the effective

78
00:08:04,100 --> 00:08:15,100
 area of the sign. I now open the meeting. Will the city please make a presentation of

79
00:08:15,100 --> 00:08:19,100
 the requested variance and analysis of criteria for approval?

80
00:08:19,100 --> 00:08:29,100
 Thank you, Chair. This is the board, Mia Hines, Senior Planner, here to present the variance

81
00:08:29,100 --> 00:08:35,100
 on tonight's agenda. So for a little background, the property is located at the southwest corner

82
00:08:35,100 --> 00:08:44,100
 of Bartho and North IH35, just north of where 35W and 35 East merges. The site was developed

83
00:08:44,100 --> 00:08:51,100
 in 2017. At that time, there was one ground sign along Bartho, one ground sign along IH35,

84
00:08:51,100 --> 00:08:59,100
 and at that point, following the development of this property in 2022, the city or the

85
00:08:59,100 --> 00:09:07,100
 city and tech stock came in to acquire additional right-of-way for the expansion of North IH35

86
00:09:07,100 --> 00:09:14,100
 and the city also realigned Bartho road adjacent to the subject property. In addition to these

87
00:09:14,100 --> 00:09:20,100
 new property lines and this right-of-way acquisition, there is a requirement of 20 foot wide utility

88
00:09:20,100 --> 00:09:26,100
 easements along the street frontage of both Bartho road and North IH35. And so the proposed

89
00:09:26,100 --> 00:09:35,100
 sign that the applicant now is currently requesting does not meet the sign code ordinances. So

90
00:09:35,100 --> 00:09:40,100
 again, there were two signs on this property prior to the acquisition and the expansion

91
00:09:40,100 --> 00:09:46,100
 of North IH35. Now there is only one because of some restrictions associated with easements

92
00:09:46,100 --> 00:09:53,100
 following that acquisition. The variance being requested this evening is to consider approval

93
00:09:53,100 --> 00:09:57,100
 of the variance request to increase the size of the existing ground sign that is there

94
00:09:57,100 --> 00:10:03,100
 on the premises to no more than 451 square feet. That maximum effective area per the

95
00:10:03,100 --> 00:10:10,100
 sign code is 250 square feet. Again, they are proposing a total sign area of about 451

96
00:10:10,100 --> 00:10:18,100
 square feet. I did also add in a code requirement for the maximum monument sign effective area

97
00:10:18,100 --> 00:10:22,100
 is that one of the signs that they had on the site that they could not replace because

98
00:10:22,100 --> 00:10:29,100
 of easements and utilities. And so they are essentially seeking to allow for the effective

99
00:10:29,100 --> 00:10:34,100
 area that would have been permitted on that sign that they can no longer install onto

100
00:10:34,100 --> 00:10:45,100
 this additional sign. So with this request, there are four key points of criteria for

101
00:10:45,100 --> 00:10:49,100
 approval for your consideration. Again, just to remind you, the applicant is proposing

102
00:10:49,100 --> 00:10:54,100
 the sign be in compliance with all other requirements of Chapter 33 except for that effective area.

103
00:10:54,100 --> 00:10:59,100
 So it's in the correct location. They do have the correct number of signs on the site, not

104
00:10:59,100 --> 00:11:03,100
 asking for a variance there. It is just with regards to that effective sign area. The first

105
00:11:03,100 --> 00:11:08,100
 criteria is that due to some unique condition or feature of the property, which is not generally

106
00:11:08,100 --> 00:11:12,100
 common to other properties, literal compliance with the sign regulation would cause unnecessary

107
00:11:12,100 --> 00:11:17,100
 hardship. In this case, what staff found is that the development of the property did occur

108
00:11:17,100 --> 00:11:21,100
 before the additional acquisition of the right of way and the changing of those property

109
00:11:21,100 --> 00:11:27,100
 lines and those easements that are on the site. The applicant also had to remove the

110
00:11:27,100 --> 00:11:32,100
 second permitted ground sign that was closer to Barthold Road monument sign and was not

111
00:11:32,100 --> 00:11:37,100
 able to replace it due to the existing improvements, the parking lot and some other things that

112
00:11:37,100 --> 00:11:41,100
 were already on the site and the easement complex that came as a result of that right

113
00:11:41,100 --> 00:11:45,100
 of way acquisition and expansion. Deliberal compliance would cause the property owner

114
00:11:45,100 --> 00:11:52,100
 to miss out on what would otherwise be a permitted sign area for this property. And other

115
00:11:52,100 --> 00:11:59,100
 properties in this area are developing following that right of way expansion. So this design,

116
00:11:59,100 --> 00:12:06,100
 they would have to design their site in accordance with our sign code. For this property, the

117
00:12:06,100 --> 00:12:10,100
 granting of the variance, one of the other criteria is that the granting of the variance

118
00:12:10,100 --> 00:12:15,100
 will not violate the spirit or the intent of the ordinance. Again, the intent of Chapter

119
00:12:15,100 --> 00:12:20,100
 33 is to balance the right of free speech and public interest and safety and aesthetics.

120
00:12:20,100 --> 00:12:25,100
 This particular variance request would allow for the installation of a total maximum effective

121
00:12:25,100 --> 00:12:31,100
 sign area that again would otherwise be permitted had that acquisition and easements not be

122
00:12:31,100 --> 00:12:38,100
 there. The third criteria is that the condition or feature which creates the need for the

123
00:12:38,100 --> 00:12:42,100
 variance did not result from the property owner's own acts. Again, the site was developed

124
00:12:42,100 --> 00:12:48,100
 prior to the right of way acquisition. What I have here shown on the left is what the

125
00:12:48,100 --> 00:12:53,100
 site was prior to that acquisition and sort of the reconfiguration of the site. As you

126
00:12:53,100 --> 00:12:58,100
 can see, they have reoriented some parking spaces. The property lines have gotten closer

127
00:12:58,100 --> 00:13:04,100
 to the canopy. They actually ended up installing a new fuel pump canopy in order to respect

128
00:13:04,100 --> 00:13:10,100
 the distance requirements for those new property lines. So a large chunk of the property's

129
00:13:10,100 --> 00:13:17,100
 frontage, of course, has been pushed back and where those signs can now go is significantly

130
00:13:17,100 --> 00:13:24,100
 shorter as far as not being encumbered by the access ways and fire lines and things

131
00:13:24,100 --> 00:13:30,100
 like that. And then finally, the last piece of consideration is that the board shall not

132
00:13:30,100 --> 00:13:35,100
 grant a variance to any applicant solely for the purpose or personal convenience, financial

133
00:13:35,100 --> 00:13:39,100
 hardship or other reasons unrelated to the property. Again, the purpose of this variance

134
00:13:39,100 --> 00:13:43,100
 request or the intent behind this variance request is related to those improvements made

135
00:13:43,100 --> 00:13:48,100
 to I-35 North along the property's frontage that are impacting the subject property's

136
00:13:48,100 --> 00:13:54,100
 ability to place additional signs and have that maximum effective area within the subject

137
00:13:54,100 --> 00:14:02,100
 property. With that, staff is recommending conditional approval of this request to install

138
00:14:02,100 --> 00:14:08,100
 the ground sign with a maximum effective area of 451 square feet as the request does meet

139
00:14:08,100 --> 00:14:11,100
 that criteria for approval that we just went through. That condition that staff would like

140
00:14:11,100 --> 00:14:16,100
 to add on to this recommendation is that the site shall not be permitted to install or

141
00:14:16,100 --> 00:14:20,100
 construct any additional ground signs that might otherwise be permitted by the code of

142
00:14:20,100 --> 00:14:24,100
 ordinances. Again, the reason that they are requesting is because they have those existing

143
00:14:24,100 --> 00:14:30,100
 encumbrances. Should easements change or should the property recline or whatever, what this

144
00:14:30,100 --> 00:14:35,100
 would ensure is that although they have that additional sign effective area for this one

145
00:14:35,100 --> 00:14:41,100
 sign, they couldn't then come and request another sign to ultimately have more than

146
00:14:41,100 --> 00:14:47,100
 what would otherwise be permitted as far as a maximum effective area. So this is a summary

147
00:14:47,100 --> 00:14:52,100
 of the actions. Again, the Board of Adjustments may approve the variance, approve with the

148
00:14:52,100 --> 00:14:59,100
 condition, or deny the variance, and those are the criteria for your consideration as

149
00:14:59,100 --> 00:15:05,100
 a reminder. So that pretty much concludes staff's presentation. At this time, I will

150
00:15:05,100 --> 00:15:09,100
 happily answer any questions I believe if that is in order.

151
00:15:09,100 --> 00:15:13,100
 Do any board members have questions for city staff?

152
00:15:13,100 --> 00:15:20,100
 I have a question. So basically you're relieving what would be a hardship because they were

153
00:15:20,100 --> 00:15:26,100
 normally entitled to two signs and due to traffic flow, if you have a larger sign, it

154
00:15:26,100 --> 00:15:32,100
 would seem further away, so instead of having two more favorable locations for a sign, it's

155
00:15:32,100 --> 00:15:38,100
 going to be one sign that's larger, but it's to offset a hardship that would have caused

156
00:15:38,100 --> 00:15:44,100
 due to circumstances beyond love's control group, the corporation's control.

157
00:15:44,100 --> 00:15:48,100
 Correct. And I think it's actually three signs that they would be permitted to have along

158
00:15:48,100 --> 00:15:54,100
 I-35 or within the property. In this case, there are those easements that have come because

159
00:15:54,100 --> 00:15:59,100
 of the realignment or the widening of the right of way and that additional acquisition,

160
00:15:59,100 --> 00:16:04,100
 so it's pushed back the amount of space that they actually have to install those signs.

161
00:16:04,100 --> 00:16:09,100
 Sir, you're allowing for a larger signage that can be seen further away so it doesn't

162
00:16:09,100 --> 00:16:14,100
 negatively affect the business. Thank you, ma'am.

163
00:16:14,100 --> 00:16:23,100
 I guess, so just in my mind, did they lose two signs or just one sign?

164
00:16:23,100 --> 00:16:30,100
 They lost one. They lost one, but they're allowed three per the zoning code, and then,

165
00:16:30,100 --> 00:16:39,100
 so this is just for, so like say they get this variance, they replat, and then something

166
00:16:39,100 --> 00:16:46,100
 happens to that sign, would they still be under this variance or would they be back

167
00:16:46,100 --> 00:16:53,100
 under the original code? Can that depart me for the week? Is that a question? Yes, you

168
00:16:53,100 --> 00:17:03,100
 can. Replat with the new owner? Or like say, like say like something changes like with

169
00:17:03,100 --> 00:17:10,100
 the easements and stuff, like I guess like... They wind again. Yeah. Yeah, something, like

170
00:17:10,100 --> 00:17:13,100
 just something changes about the property. So the only thing that you're authorizing

171
00:17:13,100 --> 00:17:23,100
 right now is an increase in size for this one sign. That's going to be kind of the

172
00:17:23,100 --> 00:17:29,100
 law for this piece of property. As circumstances change and the applicant or the current owner

173
00:17:29,100 --> 00:17:36,100
 wants to change the signage situation, they're going to either be in compliance with the

174
00:17:36,100 --> 00:17:46,100
 sign code or they're going to come back for another variance. Okay. Are there any other

175
00:17:46,100 --> 00:17:56,100
 questions for staff member Rimsky? Basically, what they're doing is combining signs. So

176
00:17:56,100 --> 00:18:02,100
 when you put it all together, your square footage doesn't exceed what you're allowed

177
00:18:02,100 --> 00:18:08,100
 to do with multiple signs. And the whole reason that they're doing this is they got caught,

178
00:18:08,100 --> 00:18:19,100
 so to speak, with eminent domain. They had no choice. And by doing so, the state with

179
00:18:19,100 --> 00:18:31,100
 text op and the city are infringing on their ability to have sufficient signage in order

180
00:18:31,100 --> 00:18:43,100
 to be used and observed in order to draw their business. Yes, that does sound right. There

181
00:18:43,100 --> 00:18:49,100
 are other potential ways that they would have... There are other ways that they could establish

182
00:18:49,100 --> 00:18:53,100
 a sign. They would have to sort of tear up some concrete that was already in existence.

183
00:18:53,100 --> 00:18:59,100
 So this variance would be the more feasible option for them to be allowed to do that.

184
00:18:59,100 --> 00:19:11,100
 Well, it seems like it's a very feasible option that isn't going to impact anything around

185
00:19:11,100 --> 00:19:20,100
 it negatively. And again, it's a result of eminent domain. So that's one of the rationales

186
00:19:20,100 --> 00:19:35,100
 that, with your comment, that anyone who builds a property, develops it, now that that process

187
00:19:35,100 --> 00:19:46,100
 of reorganizing the streets and realigning is going to have to be inside compliance or

188
00:19:46,100 --> 00:19:54,100
 else whether or not there would be any type of feasibility for them to also come forward

189
00:19:54,100 --> 00:20:02,100
 to have an adjustment. So, member Rimsky, I'm going to remind the group that we are

190
00:20:02,100 --> 00:20:07,100
 in the questions for the applicant phase. Because this is a formal quasi-judicial process,

191
00:20:07,100 --> 00:20:13,100
 I'm just going to keep us kind of rigidly on track. So we're doing questions for staff

192
00:20:13,100 --> 00:20:17,100
 then we're going to hear from the applicant and then we're going to have questions for

193
00:20:17,100 --> 00:20:31,100
 the applicant. Could we go back to that first map? Was there an apartment complex? Is that

194
00:20:31,100 --> 00:20:35,100
 a hotel or an apartment complex? That is an apartment complex, a newer apartment complex

195
00:20:35,100 --> 00:20:47,100
 that came forward following after the acquisition. And what direction will the sign be facing?

196
00:20:47,100 --> 00:20:54,100
 It currently faces north and south, so you're viewing the faces as you're traveling along

197
00:20:54,100 --> 00:21:08,100
 I-35. And I guess, will there be any difference in the lighting for the people on the north?

198
00:21:08,100 --> 00:21:17,100
 I'm just asking, any difference in the lighting, like the light affecting them from the north?

199
00:21:17,100 --> 00:21:22,100
 That is not a part of this variant, so they would have to adhere to all photometric requirements

200
00:21:22,100 --> 00:21:34,100
 and lighting standards in our code. Are there any other questions for our city staff? Thank

201
00:21:34,100 --> 00:21:53,100
 you for your presentation. Will the applicant please present any evidence or arguments to

202
00:21:53,100 --> 00:22:04,100
 the applicant? Good evening everyone, I'm Chad Brunner, I'm the Senior Director of Real

203
00:22:04,100 --> 00:22:09,100
 Estate at Love's Travel Stops. I'm actually pinch-hitting for somebody who was stuck on

204
00:22:09,100 --> 00:22:19,100
 a cruise when they came here. So, this sign did a great job in kind of going through all

205
00:22:19,100 --> 00:22:23,100
 of this and really, I'm not going to really present any real new information other than

206
00:22:23,100 --> 00:22:28,100
 I just maybe just clarify a few things here as I kind of listened to the discussions.

207
00:22:28,100 --> 00:22:34,100
 So, yes, essentially our old sign that we lost had the Pricer on it and everybody's

208
00:22:34,100 --> 00:22:37,100
 been to our gas station, there's a Pricer, right? Everybody wants to know how much gas

209
00:22:37,100 --> 00:22:44,100
 is. We don't have Pricer anymore. So, we're just trying to find a way to have a Pricer

210
00:22:44,100 --> 00:22:49,100
 on the property so that vehicles traveling through here, you know, will be able to cut

211
00:22:49,100 --> 00:22:53,100
 no gases, right? So, we have a competitor across the way, they have a big high rise

212
00:22:53,100 --> 00:22:58,100
 with a Pricer, so, you know, not different from what's already in the neighborhood there.

213
00:22:58,100 --> 00:23:04,100
 You know, it should be a great job of pointing out the hardships. I mean, you know, we started

214
00:23:04,100 --> 00:23:07,100
 out with a, actually I'll go a little further back in time, we actually had a store close

215
00:23:07,100 --> 00:23:12,100
 to here, remember, I believe further up north, TechStop took that store from us. So, we had

216
00:23:12,100 --> 00:23:18,100
 to move here and they kept taking property from us here too. So, I don't know, I don't

217
00:23:18,100 --> 00:23:21,100
 know if we're just unlucky or they just don't like Oklahoma companies or I don't know what

218
00:23:21,100 --> 00:23:26,100
 the deal is, but. So, I mean, really it was, it wasn't a matter of losing that signage

219
00:23:26,100 --> 00:23:31,100
 out of the hardship of the eminent domain and easements and right of ways and all those

220
00:23:31,100 --> 00:23:37,100
 types of things that were taken. The one thing that I want to kind of put out there and I

221
00:23:37,100 --> 00:23:44,100
 think you guys talked around it is, you know, we are allowed three signs. So, and believe

222
00:23:44,100 --> 00:23:47,100
 it or not, we don't like a ton of signs out there, just like you guys don't, we don't

223
00:23:47,100 --> 00:23:53,100
 like the clutter. So, we are, it's Mr. Rimsky's point, we are trying to combine efforts here.

224
00:23:53,100 --> 00:23:59,100
 Now, we can put up another sign that just has a Pricer on it, by right, we can just

225
00:23:59,100 --> 00:24:04,100
 do that. But we don't want to do that because then we're like, here's an existing sign,

226
00:24:04,100 --> 00:24:08,100
 then we're adding another sign and then you're, you know, again, you get this line, sign

227
00:24:08,100 --> 00:24:13,100
 card that nobody wants. So, really what we are trying to do is just combine those efforts

228
00:24:13,100 --> 00:24:19,100
 into one sign as opposed to having multiple signs up there. So, again, I think most of

229
00:24:19,100 --> 00:24:25,100
 the arguments were kind of hit there. So, if you have any questions, I'm free to answer

230
00:24:25,100 --> 00:24:32,100
 those. So, do any board members have questions for the applicant? I do have, where the yellow

231
00:24:32,100 --> 00:24:37,100
 dot is, that's where the intention of the sign is going to go in. So, it's basically

232
00:24:37,100 --> 00:24:44,100
 in the middle of the property for the Pricer and. Yeah, so this is the existing sign. I

233
00:24:44,100 --> 00:24:53,100
 think there was a, am I able to go back and forth on that? So, this sign exists. Right.

234
00:24:53,100 --> 00:24:59,100
 So, yeah, we're just adding this to this sign. So, I think that goes back to your point about

235
00:24:59,100 --> 00:25:06,100
 our neighbors, right? So, yeah, it's an existing sign here. One of the things we talked about

236
00:25:06,100 --> 00:25:11,100
 was, I believe if we're 83 feet away from this sign, we can put another sign up. So,

237
00:25:11,100 --> 00:25:16,100
 we looked at possibly doing something back here, but again, going back to, you know,

238
00:25:16,100 --> 00:25:21,100
 that goes closer to these guys, that's not good, right? So, we thought we'll just, if

239
00:25:21,100 --> 00:25:26,100
 we can make this happen, then that meets the intent that everybody's looking for here.

240
00:25:26,100 --> 00:25:37,100
 That was my only question. I'm just wondering. Member Rich, can you point out where the original

241
00:25:37,100 --> 00:25:43,100
 sign was before the acquisition? Yeah, we had a sign out here on the corner. We called

242
00:25:43,100 --> 00:25:47,100
 it our street sign. So, our street sign would have the Pricer and all that stuff on it,

243
00:25:47,100 --> 00:25:51,100
 but it was right here in this corner. So, was that Pricer only visible, well, was it

244
00:25:51,100 --> 00:25:57,100
 visible from the highway? I'm trying to remember. I believe it was one of the signs where we

245
00:25:57,100 --> 00:26:03,100
 have a, it's a 25-foot kind of goalpost-type sign. Yeah, and I think I remember being able

246
00:26:03,100 --> 00:26:14,100
 to see it driving from the south before it got removed. Yeah. Are there any other questions

247
00:26:14,100 --> 00:26:25,100
 for our applicant? Thank you for presenting. Now that the applicant and the city have presented

248
00:26:25,100 --> 00:26:30,100
 their testimony, evidence and arguments, is there anyone who wishes to speak regarding

249
00:26:30,100 --> 00:26:35,100
 this variance? If so, please come forward and state your name and mailing address. You

250
00:26:35,100 --> 00:26:46,100
 have four minutes to address the board. After hearing all the testimony, evidence and arguments

251
00:26:46,100 --> 00:26:51,100
 and questions and answers, as well as hearing from all those desiring to speak in support

252
00:26:51,100 --> 00:26:56,100
 and in opposition to the variance, I will entertain further questions from the board

253
00:26:56,100 --> 00:27:05,100
 for any of the parties or the speakers. Okay, I just want to note that this ends the testimony

254
00:27:05,100 --> 00:27:18,100
 part of the meeting, so questions are over. Okay. Okay. Hearing none, I now close the public

255
00:27:18,100 --> 00:27:24,100
 hearing. The board will now deliberate and decide on the variance request. Upon the completion

256
00:27:24,100 --> 00:27:29,100
 of the board's deliberation, the board shall render an unbiased decision based on the record

257
00:27:29,100 --> 00:27:35,100
 and supported by reasons and findings of fact. In considering the variance, this board shall

258
00:27:35,100 --> 00:27:40,100
 consider the facts and information in the agenda backup, including staff's written analysis

259
00:27:40,100 --> 00:27:46,100
 of the variance, the applicant's narrative and testimony presented in the public hearing,

260
00:27:46,100 --> 00:27:50,100
 and the board's consideration and evaluation of the requirements of the applicable standards

261
00:27:50,100 --> 00:27:59,100
 from the Denton Development Code and Denton Sign Code. The board may grant the variance

262
00:27:59,100 --> 00:28:05,100
 as presented or with conditions. The board shall not grant a variance to any applicant

263
00:28:05,100 --> 00:28:11,100
 solely for personal convenience, financial hardship, or other reasons unrelated to the

264
00:28:11,100 --> 00:28:17,100
 property. If the board grants a variance, the variance shall be granted only to the

265
00:28:17,100 --> 00:28:24,100
 extent that is reasonably necessary to remedy the hardship. The board may impose conditions

266
00:28:24,100 --> 00:28:29,100
 relating to the request of variance. If the board grants a variance, the decision shall

267
00:28:29,100 --> 00:28:35,100
 state that all conditions for a variance were met, specify the degree to which the regulations

268
00:28:35,100 --> 00:28:44,100
 are being varied, and be signed by chairperson. The other option is to deny the variance.

269
00:28:44,100 --> 00:28:49,100
 If a variance is denied, the decision shall state the conditions for the variance which

270
00:28:49,100 --> 00:28:55,100
 were not met. All decisions of the board granting or refusing a variance shall be reduced

271
00:28:55,100 --> 00:29:01,100
 to writing and signed by the chairperson.

272
00:29:01,100 --> 00:29:16,100
 I was just going to motion to accept the variance as presented. I do. I do have fancy verbiage

273
00:29:16,100 --> 00:29:25,100
 requests. That's what we were getting at. Because there was condition. Also true. May

274
00:29:25,100 --> 00:29:42,100
 we see the slide with the-- That's right. That's actually a great motion test. I did

275
00:29:42,100 --> 00:29:50,100
 say as presented. When it says as presented, it includes that condition, right? Or not

276
00:29:50,100 --> 00:29:57,100
 necessarily enough. If you can throw me another motion, I'd be much obliged. I would like

277
00:29:57,100 --> 00:30:07,100
 to-- I misunderstood. I guess point of order question. Since I have made the motion, do

278
00:30:07,100 --> 00:30:13,100
 we need to go through the-- It wasn't seconded. I would say before we go to motioning, we

279
00:30:13,100 --> 00:30:18,100
 should probably at least have a little bit of deliberation discussion before we do. Do

280
00:30:18,100 --> 00:30:23,100
 we need the motion before we can have the discussion? Roberts allows us to do either

281
00:30:23,100 --> 00:30:30,100
 way. We can discuss. If there's a vibe that we want to recommend approval, we can propose

282
00:30:30,100 --> 00:30:39,100
 that and discuss any reservations or suggestions or what have you about the proposal. Did you

283
00:30:39,100 --> 00:30:47,100
 want to-- I have a question as to why the staff's recommendation is putting a condition

284
00:30:47,100 --> 00:30:55,100
 that they would not be permitted to install or construct any additional ground sites that

285
00:30:55,100 --> 00:31:04,100
 might otherwise be permitted. Because if they originally had three signs or they're allowed

286
00:31:04,100 --> 00:31:13,100
 three signs, they're working at combining two of them. And yes, that process does give

287
00:31:13,100 --> 00:31:24,100
 them greater size than it was approved for the one. But you still have a third. And looking

288
00:31:24,100 --> 00:31:34,100
 back at that property, there may be some point in time, and I'm not sure what specific restrictions

289
00:31:34,100 --> 00:31:43,100
 on signage. But if they are having to put in some signs that direct traffic for parking

290
00:31:43,100 --> 00:31:51,100
 or what is there, there is presently a Wendy's there. I'm not sure whether or not they have

291
00:31:51,100 --> 00:32:01,100
 any thoughts to expand anything else on the property. To put in, in addition to a Wendy's,

292
00:32:01,100 --> 00:32:10,100
 I'm just going to throw out a pizza place or something. That would necessitate and require

293
00:32:10,100 --> 00:32:18,100
 a signage. And here, you're constricting them from having that potential. Granted, in order

294
00:32:18,100 --> 00:32:23,100
 to put in a pizza place, they'd have to go through the zoning request and everything

295
00:32:23,100 --> 00:32:32,100
 else on that. But you'd still want the feasibility of them having a sign. Sure, Member Remske.

296
00:32:32,100 --> 00:32:39,100
 So in that instance, something that the board can consider is whether or not to accept staff's

297
00:32:39,100 --> 00:32:47,100
 recommended condition. So you have a couple of options. You can motion to approve with

298
00:32:47,100 --> 00:32:52,100
 the listed condition. You can motion to approve without conditions. You can, of course, motion

299
00:32:52,100 --> 00:33:00,100
 to deny. Okay, so we can pull out, as part of our condition, being that that condition

300
00:33:00,100 --> 00:33:04,100
 is removed. Well, I'd recommend phrasing it differently, but yes, we'd get there, we'd

301
00:33:04,100 --> 00:33:10,100
 get to the same place. Yeah. My phraseology may not, but it's okay. I'm picking up what

302
00:33:10,100 --> 00:33:18,100
 you're putting down, yes ma'am. I see, Member Winkle, I see my fellow board members point

303
00:33:18,100 --> 00:33:26,100
 because there may be a point where they want or need to put a sign on their north road,

304
00:33:26,100 --> 00:33:33,100
 like east, west road. Yeah, I don't want to do your job here, but I do want to note that

305
00:33:33,100 --> 00:33:39,100
 there's a gross effective area of all of the signs that would be allowed. So there's kind

306
00:33:39,100 --> 00:33:44,100
 of two issues. There's the count of signs and then there's the signs of the signs. What

307
00:33:44,100 --> 00:33:50,100
 we're doing here is basically combining two signs into one, and I don't know that we have

308
00:33:50,100 --> 00:34:04,100
 the numbers for what that third sign would be. So what do you have? Yeah, probably. For

309
00:34:04,100 --> 00:34:14,100
 recording purposes, because it's been picking up on the podium, it is probably easier on

310
00:34:14,100 --> 00:34:19,100
 the side. Yeah, so we do have that requirement that Henry was mentioning as far as the gross

311
00:34:19,100 --> 00:34:24,100
 effective sign area. I did want to make one point of clarification on the like way finding

312
00:34:24,100 --> 00:34:28,100
 and directional signs, the smaller signs that are on the property. Those are counted as

313
00:34:28,100 --> 00:34:34,100
 different types of signs, so they would not be in the ground, covered in the ground sign

314
00:34:34,100 --> 00:34:39,100
 description. So if there was an additional drive through a business or in that event,

315
00:34:39,100 --> 00:34:45,100
 they would be able to install those additional minor signs. And I think the purpose behind

316
00:34:45,100 --> 00:34:49,100
 staff's condition to this recommendation was the applicant stated that part of their purpose

317
00:34:49,100 --> 00:34:54,100
 for requesting this variance is to, like he said, decrease the clutter on the property

318
00:34:54,100 --> 00:35:01,100
 as far as sign space goes and having multiple monument signs. This condition would ensure

319
00:35:01,100 --> 00:35:09,100
 that that clutter or that the number of signs does not increase, ground signs does not increase.

320
00:35:09,100 --> 00:35:20,100
 But again, like Henry said, you can choose to accept or not accept that condition. My

321
00:35:20,100 --> 00:35:28,100
 only thing was 451 square feet came out of one of your other slides where you had showed

322
00:35:28,100 --> 00:35:35,100
 one up on the 250 feet and 300 square feet, or there was something, those conditions.

323
00:35:35,100 --> 00:35:42,100
 Is that one of your slides? Do you mind going backwards? No, that's fine. That one here?

324
00:35:42,100 --> 00:35:47,100
 Yeah. Yes, so the green, the area highlighted in green here is the existing sign square

325
00:35:47,100 --> 00:35:54,100
 footage. That's about just under 250 square feet. The proposed addition is another about

326
00:35:54,100 --> 00:36:01,100
 203 square feet. So total they would be just under 450 square feet or 51 square feet. The

327
00:36:01,100 --> 00:36:08,100
 reason that we took it to 451 is because that would be the max. So they would have to stay

328
00:36:08,100 --> 00:36:20,100
 under that. I think it's like 450.44. I'd like to know, why did you, what was the logic

329
00:36:20,100 --> 00:36:27,100
 in, I can understand combining two signs into one sign, but why did you all of a sudden,

330
00:36:27,100 --> 00:36:32,100
 or why did you come up with, oh, but we're not going to let you use the third sign that

331
00:36:32,100 --> 00:36:37,100
 you were allowed to use unless you come back to the board. What is the purpose of that?

332
00:36:37,100 --> 00:36:42,100
 And just the larger sign, part of the, the applicant's stated purpose was decreasing

333
00:36:42,100 --> 00:36:48,100
 cuttering, cluttering. That condition would just decrease the clutter. If the board so

334
00:36:48,100 --> 00:36:54,100
 choose to amend that condition, I believe that is within your willpower as well.

335
00:36:54,100 --> 00:37:02,100
 Okay. This, may I direct a question to the petitioner? We're actually really on the

336
00:37:02,100 --> 00:37:09,100
 bubble. We're kind of accepting more testimony from the applicant and it's sort of getting

337
00:37:09,100 --> 00:37:17,100
 a little off. It's, we're getting a little bicep. So I'd like us to circle back to just

338
00:37:17,100 --> 00:37:28,100
 asking questions about maybe procedure or legality. I guess I'm confused in regarding

339
00:37:28,100 --> 00:37:37,100
 that because if I'm going to be making a decision and I'm looking at, you know, I understand

340
00:37:37,100 --> 00:37:44,100
 procedure. I understand Robert's rules, but one of the questions that I have, and that

341
00:37:44,100 --> 00:37:56,100
 was, whereas looking, you know, specifically because of that codicil that says they could

342
00:37:56,100 --> 00:38:07,100
 not put up another sign. What I'm curious about that is who owns the entire property?

343
00:38:07,100 --> 00:38:23,100
 Does Wendy's rent from the loves corporation? And if Wendy's is renting from the corporation,

344
00:38:23,100 --> 00:38:32,100
 then to put a restriction on an additional sign to the corporation because then basically

345
00:38:32,100 --> 00:38:43,100
 what you have is the corporation and you have Wendy's. So they're not, you know, the

346
00:38:43,100 --> 00:38:51,100
 corporation is being kind and considerate in making one big sign. They're looking at

347
00:38:51,100 --> 00:39:00,100
 it aesthetically. They're looking at it business-wise and, you know, being noticed

348
00:39:00,100 --> 00:39:11,100
 for both entities. So was any of that taken into consideration? Because then, you know,

349
00:39:11,100 --> 00:39:19,100
 as I say, the codicil that says they can't put another sign up kind of puts an extra

350
00:39:19,100 --> 00:39:29,100
 restriction in my estimation to the blamed owner. Okay. So I'm going to answer the legal

351
00:39:29,100 --> 00:39:36,100
 question and then I'm going to make a procedural recommendation to the chair. This is a quasi-judicial

352
00:39:36,100 --> 00:39:42,100
 matter, which means that we have to follow a very specific procedure in the interest

353
00:39:42,100 --> 00:39:50,100
 of procedural due process. We had a point in the process where chair asked for questions

354
00:39:50,100 --> 00:40:02,100
 and that process was finished. And so that's where we are. Chair, I have a recommendation

355
00:40:02,100 --> 00:40:09,100
 for two different ways that you can perceive. The first is to take a motion whether to reopen

356
00:40:09,100 --> 00:40:19,100
 the public hearing and complete further discussion. The second is to ask for a motion on the

357
00:40:19,100 --> 00:40:27,100
 variance, whether to approve it with staff's recommended condition, whether to approve

358
00:40:27,100 --> 00:40:39,100
 it without condition, or whether to deny it. Do we have more questions perhaps for the

359
00:40:39,100 --> 00:40:51,100
 applicant or for our city staff? All right. In that case, we should either -- remember

360
00:40:51,100 --> 00:41:04,100
 where it feels at. It is -- I definitely see Board Member Rimsky's point of -- I don't

361
00:41:04,100 --> 00:41:12,100
 see the point of keeping -- putting the restriction in because they're already doing that voluntarily

362
00:41:12,100 --> 00:41:19,100
 and I'm guessing if these two signs are combined, even if they add the third, they would still

363
00:41:19,100 --> 00:41:25,100
 have to follow the amount of signage in the -- because this is the only variance being

364
00:41:25,100 --> 00:41:30,100
 allowed and as stated, this is the only variance being allowed. So they still have to follow

365
00:41:30,100 --> 00:41:43,100
 the code for everything else. So I feel like people are saying like if they want a third

366
00:41:43,100 --> 00:41:49,100
 sign, but we're not -- these aren't two different signs. This is one single sign, so they would

367
00:41:49,100 --> 00:41:56,100
 still be allowed two additional signs. Not if we accepted the -- the condition, of course.

368
00:41:56,100 --> 00:42:05,100
 Right. But if we approve the variance as presented -- Okay. I would offer more -- Guys, I'm going

369
00:42:05,100 --> 00:42:13,100
 to have to sorry ocean of some kind. Okay. I'm going to make a motion to -- do I need

370
00:42:13,100 --> 00:42:21,100
 the full wording? Yes. Otherwise, you'll do what I did. Yes. Approval of the variance.

371
00:42:21,100 --> 00:42:27,100
 So if you want to just approve it without condition, I would just say staff recommends

372
00:42:27,100 --> 00:42:38,100
 conditional approval and then skip this sentence. Yes. Okay. Okay. So my motion is to approve

373
00:42:38,100 --> 00:42:46,100
 the variance, staff recommends with conditional approval, is that correct, of the request

374
00:42:46,100 --> 00:42:52,100
 to install a ground sign with maximum effective area of 451 square feet as the request meets

375
00:42:52,100 --> 00:43:02,100
 the criteria for approval in section 33.63 of the code of ordinances. So member Lennett.

376
00:43:02,100 --> 00:43:08,100
 Actually, I should not have said conditional, just -- So your intent is to motion for unconditional

377
00:43:08,100 --> 00:43:14,100
 approval? Unconditional. Per the -- Per the -- The fact-finding of the -- The fact-finding

378
00:43:14,100 --> 00:43:26,100
 of the -- Okay. Yes. That's my motion. Thank you. Second. Having received a motion and a

379
00:43:26,100 --> 00:43:34,100
 second, is there further discussion on this variance? Okay. The board may ask clarifying

380
00:43:34,100 --> 00:43:40,100
 questions of the staff liaison and city attorney's office liaison. Prior to calling for a vote,

381
00:43:40,100 --> 00:43:46,100
 the board chair must state the grounds in support of or in opposition to its finding

382
00:43:46,100 --> 00:43:55,100
 and determination. So we've kind of already done that in that we've had a motion and a

383
00:43:55,100 --> 00:44:03,100
 second to adopt staff's findings and analysis that the request meets the criteria for approval.

384
00:44:03,100 --> 00:44:08,100
 All right. There being no further discussion on this variance, please vote on the motion

385
00:44:08,100 --> 00:44:17,100
 by show of hands. All in favor of produce -- of approving of the variance unconditionally?

386
00:44:17,100 --> 00:44:24,100
 That's the director. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Okay. The ayes have it.

387
00:44:24,100 --> 00:44:29,100
 Just for minute-keeping purposes, that was everybody, right? Okay. All right. The results

388
00:44:29,100 --> 00:44:35,100
 of the vote are six in favor of the ordinance of the variance and zero against. So the motion

389
00:44:35,100 --> 00:44:47,100
 passes. The request variance is approved? Yes. Okay. Next item on the agenda is concluding

390
00:44:47,100 --> 00:45:01,100
 items. Are there any concluding items? Yes. I have just an FYI interesting thing. This

391
00:45:01,100 --> 00:45:10,100
 whole site requirement and going through the process is a result of eminent domain in that.

392
00:45:10,100 --> 00:45:20,100
 How much staff time is involved with researching all of this? I'm just looking at city budget

393
00:45:20,100 --> 00:45:32,100
 staff usage. Whether or not there would be any other way without having to spend how

394
00:45:32,100 --> 00:45:41,100
 many hours doing the research on it, putting together a PowerPoint presentation, et cetera.

395
00:45:41,100 --> 00:45:47,100
 Because I know you have to -- you know, you turn your staff hours in as fillable hours.

396
00:45:47,100 --> 00:45:52,100
 And so if you're working on this project and it took you five hours, you work on something

397
00:45:52,100 --> 00:46:00,100
 else and it takes you two. I'm just curious as to how much some of this takes. I believe

398
00:46:00,100 --> 00:46:08,100
 it's question time for staff. So we're off of whether to grant the variance or not. This

399
00:46:08,100 --> 00:46:14,100
 board doesn't actually have a matrix for bringing future discussions back. So that's why you

400
00:46:14,100 --> 00:46:19,100
 see staff kind of going, hmm, where now do we address this? But it's a fine question

401
00:46:19,100 --> 00:46:29,100
 to ask. Well, member Remsky, the very short answer is that the not insignificant staff

402
00:46:29,100 --> 00:46:37,100
 time to bring you a ZBA case or a sign variance is far less expensive than the outside council

403
00:46:37,100 --> 00:46:42,100
 fees that we would need to incur to rewrite the sign code.

404
00:46:42,100 --> 00:46:50,100
 Well, I was just, you know, curious or even if you say the sourcing it out to somebody

405
00:46:50,100 --> 00:46:56,100
 else, I was just thinking that for something -- to me, this one just seemed a little bit

406
00:46:56,100 --> 00:47:02,100
 more cut and dry and if there was some way to facilitate it going through.

407
00:47:02,100 --> 00:47:09,100
 But that's kind of the point of the ZBA is that when it's not a cut and dry, the ZBA

408
00:47:09,100 --> 00:47:12,100
 is that final.

409
00:47:12,100 --> 00:47:13,100
 Oh, I appreciate that.

410
00:47:13,100 --> 00:47:19,100
 So I think that when it does -- when it is more cut and dry and there doesn't need to

411
00:47:19,100 --> 00:47:28,100
 be a request in that way, I understand where you're coming from and I totally -- I appreciate

412
00:47:28,100 --> 00:47:36,100
 that considering cost is very important in the number of hours. I just wonder if it's

413
00:47:36,100 --> 00:47:43,100
 worth it. I think that the fact that we do need to have that final community group, I

414
00:47:43,100 --> 00:47:46,100
 think that's helpful.

415
00:47:46,100 --> 00:47:54,100
 And we actually made a change. Staff recommended a condition and we as a board said we recommend

416
00:47:54,100 --> 00:48:02,100
 no condition. So in that way, having the staff having done the research for a condition helped

417
00:48:02,100 --> 00:48:08,100
 us make a decision. I guess that's the way I think of it.

418
00:48:08,100 --> 00:48:14,100
 It's a good check to have on like so that the city doesn't act unilaterally without --

419
00:48:14,100 --> 00:48:19,100
 But I do agree, too, that we need to think about costs.

420
00:48:19,100 --> 00:48:20,100
 Right.

421
00:48:20,100 --> 00:48:25,100
 Absolutely. And from a logistical standpoint, if we were bringing you monthly signed code

422
00:48:25,100 --> 00:48:32,100
 variances that were functionally the same, absolutely would be a signal of like, hey,

423
00:48:32,100 --> 00:48:37,100
 maybe there's something here that doesn't need to come to y'all because there really

424
00:48:37,100 --> 00:48:41,100
 isn't, you know, something that is not really --

425
00:48:41,100 --> 00:48:46,100
 I mean, this is my first sign and I've been here a year.

426
00:48:46,100 --> 00:48:56,100
 Yeah, they don't come all that frequently. Chair, I just want to note that everyone needs

427
00:48:56,100 --> 00:49:00,100
 to sign this letter tonight before they leave. That's my concluding item. But if there are

428
00:49:00,100 --> 00:49:02,100
 others, that's completely cool.

429
00:49:02,100 --> 00:49:08,100
 Okay. Besides signing this letter here, are there any other additional concluding items?

430
00:49:08,100 --> 00:49:16,100
 I will go ahead and ask. And this is just if we end up having a January ZBA meeting because

431
00:49:16,100 --> 00:49:20,100
 you know how it goes, being in the first ZBA, we're never 100% sure unless there's a base.

432
00:49:20,100 --> 00:49:24,100
 However, there is currently one on the calendar. Let me double check the dates. We just approved

433
00:49:24,100 --> 00:49:29,100
 y'all's calendar in January. I believe it is the --

434
00:49:29,100 --> 00:49:35,100
 So if you could let me know your availability for January 26th, right now, that would be

435
00:49:35,100 --> 00:49:36,100
 great.

436
00:49:36,100 --> 00:49:38,100
 As far as I know, I'm good.

437
00:49:38,100 --> 00:49:44,100
 Okay. Any conflicts for that?

438
00:49:44,100 --> 00:49:47,100
 Perfect. If things change, obviously you all have my contact information. I just thought

439
00:49:47,100 --> 00:49:53,100
 I would get a general idea for you. Thank you all.

440
00:49:53,100 --> 00:50:02,100
 Okay. Any additional concluding items?

441
00:50:02,100 --> 00:50:06,100
 Merry Christmas.

442
00:50:06,100 --> 00:50:08,100
 Merry Christmas.

443
00:50:08,100 --> 00:50:11,100
 Happy holidays to all.

444
00:50:11,100 --> 00:50:21,100
 Happy New Year. May the worst day that you have in 2026 be a far better day than the

445
00:50:21,100 --> 00:50:26,100
 best day you have in 2025.

446
00:50:26,100 --> 00:50:28,100
 I don't think there can be a better day.

447
00:50:28,100 --> 00:50:36,100
 So with the hearing no other items, and lovely speech by the way, I adjourn this meeting

448
00:50:36,100 --> 00:50:38,100
 at 6.36.

449
00:50:38,100 --> 00:50:39,100
 Okay.