Board of Zoning Appeals

CITY OF MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Regular Meeting, July 24, 2019, at 1:00 p.m. City Hall, 111 West Vine Street, Council Chambers, 1st Floor AGENDA 1. Call to order 2. Consideration of minutes for the regular meeting on June 26, 2019 3. New Business Special Use Permit Requests a. Application Z-19-022 by Ben Spell of Good Ranchers, requesting a Special Use Permit to operate a Temporary Vendor business (food sales) on property in the Highway Commercial (CH) district located at 1720 Old Fort Parkway. b. Application Z-19-023 by Ken Anderson of Franklin Road Baptist Church, requesting a Special Use Permit for a Recreational Field at an Institutional Group Assembly Use on property in the Single-Family Residential 15 (RS-15) district located at 138-154 Gresham Lane. Administrative Appeal c. Application S-19-024 by Charles Stofel of Columbia Neon, appealing an administrative decision by the Director of Building and Codes related to off- premise signage on property in the Light Industrial (L-I) district located along the east side of South Church Street and identified as Tax Map 113C, Group B, Parcel 2.01. All interested parties are invited to attend. 4. Staff Reports and Other Business 5. Adjourn 1  Regular Meeting Minutes of the Murfreesboro Board of Zoning Appeals June 26, 2019 – 1:00 P.M. Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Davis Young, Chair Ken Halliburton, Vice-Chair Julie King Tim Tipps Misty Foy STAFF PRESENT Brad Barbee, Planner David Ives, Assistant City Attorney Donald Anthony, Planning Director Brenda Davis, Recording Assistant Chairman Young called the meeting to order at 1:00 P.M. The minutes from the May 22, 2019 regular meeting were approved as submitted. Mr. Anthony came to the podium and introduced Mr. Brad Barbee to the Board Members. Mr. Barbee has worked in the Planning Department less than a year but has worked for the City much longer handling landscape, landscape review and sureties in the Urban Environmental Department. Mr. Anthony said when the Urban Environmental Department was dissolved, Mr. Barbee transferred over to the Planning Department. He handles, along with Ms. Amelia Kerr, a lot of the Planning duties for the eastern and southern portions of the City. He said Mr. Barbee will be presenting the Staff Report today for this application. Mr. Anthony said he would like to expand on Mr. Barbee’s remarks, at the end of the Staff Report. Special Use Permit Application Z-19-021 by Mr. Yassin Dakkak, represented by Mr. Clyde Rountree of Huddleston-Steele Engineering, Inc., is requesting a special use permit in order to operate a motor vehicle sale (automobile sales) establishment in a Highway Commercial (CH) zone for property located at 2135 Southeast Broad Street (Manchester Pike). BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 Mr. Barbee reviewed the application and staff comments. If the Board approves this application, Staff recommends the following conditions: 1) Parking and display of automobile inventory shall occur only in areas designated in the special use permit application. Driveway aisles, public right-of-way, and landscaped areas shall not be used for automobile parking or display. 2) Automobile parts and salvage/junk automobiles shall not be stored on any outdoors portion of the site. 3) All automobiles visible from the public right-of-way or lying adjacent to any area zoned for residential uses shall be operational. 4) Outdoor sound amplification shall not be allowed. 5) Automobile loading, unloading, staging, and maneuvering shall not be permitted within any public right-of-way. 6) Automobile service bays and overhead service area doors shall not be visible from any public right-of-way. 7) Hours of operation shall be limited to “daytime hours” as defined in the Murfreesboro Noise Control Ordinance. Mr. Anthony came to the podium and voiced the department’s opposition to this request. He said there are multiple corridors throughout the City that house quite a few automobile dealerships, Broad Street, South Church Street, Medical Center Parkway, Memorial Boulevard being among those. Mr. Anthony said Mr. Barbee and he have been visiting many of them and have cited or come very close to siting repeated zoning violations at many of these dealerships. He said, driving on Broad Street to Smyrna this morning, between City Hall and Florence Road he was able to identify eleven different automobile lots that were violating the Zoning Ordinance and/or parking in the right-of- way. Mr. Anthony said those are very common things they are seeing. Parking on grass, parking on driveways, blocking driveways and parking in the right-of-way is what they keep seeing. He said the inventory at these dealerships quite often exceeds the ability to park the cars. This plan that has been submitted to us has fewer than twenty spaces for inventory vehicles to be parked. The competitive nature of automobile dealership tells him there will be way more cars on that lot over time than what they are able to provide spaces for. Mr. Anthony said they are also concerned about he compatibility with the surroundings. He said there is a daycare center located nearby, and an office park adding an automobile dealership is just out of character with the area. Mr. Anthony said they also have concerns with access to the site as well as the roadway network. He recognizes that the site has been used as a car wash and could continue to be used as one adding there are other “by-right” uses that could be problematic for traffic access and compatibility. Mr. Anthony said although automobile dealerships bring unique challenges to a site and he asked that the Board not permit yet another use that could further disrupt this area. Mr. Anthony asked the Board to deny this Special Use Permit based on the first standard of general applicability listed in Section 9 of the 2 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 Zoning Ordinance. Staff is available to answer any questions and the applicant is present as well. Chairman Young asked if there was consideration of closing the entrance onto Broad Street due to traffic concern and using Keeneland Commercial Boulevard. Mr. Anthony said they run into issues when they try to require someone with road frontage to close off a pre-existing access. He did not think they could legally close off a pre-existing access. Chairman Young asked if there was any way to know or compare traffic flow from a car wash to a car dealer. He understands there are so many variables, that would be difficult. He asked if traffic would be comparable between those two types of uses. Mr. Anthony said the traffic probably would be comparable adding their argument is just that there are already the “by-right” uses that are disruptive and granting another use that is not a “by-right” use would complicate the matter. Mr. Tipps asked Mr. Anthony to summarize some of those “by-right” uses. Mr. Anthony said in the Highway Commercial Zone, thinking of washes and auto uses, you could have various types of vehicle washes, vehicle repair. He said the City had to issue a citation a few months ago at this site because there was an illegal vehicle repair operation being conducted. Mr. Anthony said generally the heavier industrial type uses such as retail and offices could also be on that site. Mr. Tipps said it appears to him the days of the self-car washes have kind of come and gone adding the economic viability of that just doesn’t seem to be there and seems to be extremely saturated with the automated-type car washes in the City as well. He expressed appreciation on the summary of the other uses. Ms. Foy asked if there is currently street parking on Keenland Commercial Boulevard. Mr. Anthony said if people are parking on that, he doesn’t know if that would be sanctioned parking. Ms. Foy said that is what she thought and thanked Mr. Anthony. Mr. Clyde Rountree with Huddleston-Steele Engineering, representing the applicant came to the podium and thanked the Board for allowing him to address Keeneland Car Sales. He said they have been working thru this process for quite a while. He said there is a bias against any kind of car lots because there are so many issues with them. Mr. Rountree noticed when he was driving to City Hall today from Huddleston-Steel 3 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 Engineering that most of the car lots on Broad Street would not comply with the new Zoning Ordinance, primarily due to the unloading zones. He said when they had their initial meeting with Staff, they went thru the 21 characteristics of a car lot. He said there was a pretty clear expectation that more than likely this would not work. Mr. Rountree said after they made it thru that hurdle and discovered it could actually work for a car lot because basically there are very few lots in the City that will. He said there are lots larger than this lot that wouldn’t qualify for a car lot because there was no way to unload the vehicles. He said that is the biggest issue. Mr. Rountree said when they made it thru that hurdle, they went thru multi concepts. He said the big criteria was unloading the cars on-site. He said they went thru 3-4 different site plans, met with City Staff to make sure they could get it to work. He said they finally got a site plan that would work for a car lot with the unloading of cars on-site. Mr. Rountree said the concerns with traffic, because of the shear size of this lot, is not going to be a high-volume type of car lot. He did not feel traffic would be a major concern. Mr. Rountree said the issue they are walking into is there is an existing building as a car wash on-site. He said the building just sits there and collects trash. The owners have had issues where people go into the bays and run off. He said the owners are stuck with a building that probably won’t be a car wash and it is a building that could be retrofit to allow this to potentially work as a car lot. Mr. Rountree said it would take some improvements on the sight, enclosing the bays, the access doors would be away from the right-of-way. He said they met all criteria to make it a car dealership. Mr. Rountree said the interpretation is it is an underserved, dilapidated building available for multi-type. He said anyone that purchased that property and it cannot be used as a car wash, the current building would have to be torn down. He said it puts the potential Developer in a situation where that will probably sit as a vacant car wash for a long time just because of the criteria already on the site. Mr. Rountree said as far as the owners are concerned, they have done their best to meet all the expectations outside of the one that says it is just a car lot and that is what the City doesn’t want. With that in mind, Mr. Rountree asked the Board Members to consider that because he feels the effort on their and the interaction with the City has been such that they were never told “no” from the Staff in terms of “no way, we’re not going to approve it” but more “you need to meet the criteria”. He said they kept revising the plan to “meet the criteria”. For example, they realize additional landscaping will be needed to screen the bay doors that are visible from Broad Street. Mr. Rountree wanted to make sure they represented the fact they have been thru the process, met expectations and were never really told “no and it was just not going to happen”. He said that is how it is handled sometimes when working with a special exception. From the owner’s standpoint, they did all they could to meet the expectations the City had and once the site was given clearance in the sense they can meet those 21 criteria and even the ones mentioned by Brad. He said the applicant will make the site very nice. Mr. Rountree said traffic is not going to be a major concern for a car lot on this site. Mr. Halliburton asked if the turning radius for a truck tractor will be able to turn into this place and take a right out of the site. 4 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 Mr. Rountree said yes as they can enter in off Broad Street and circle the building. They had to move the drive-isle. The exit-isle is going to be to the right of the property to allow the car hauler to exit off the property. Mr. Rountree said the Zoning Ordinance reads wherever a car/vehicle unloader are, it can’t inhibit any movement on-site. You have to make sure to accommodate room for the vehicles to be unloaded but you also have to accommodate room for whoever comes on-site so the vehicle is not inhibiting normal traffic. He pointed out the traffic arrows to show the flow of movement. He said in theory a car could be dispensed off the truck and the business operate as normal. Mr. Rountree said that is a new nuance, as well because the 100-foot by 25-foot zone that is needed, to have that happening while the business operates is a little challenge. He said they were happy to find a way to allow the business to function if cars were being loaded / unloaded on-site. Chairman Young opened the public hearing. There being no one to speak for or against the application, Chairman Young closed the public hearing. Ms. King said with the concern being about parking spaces and she sees there are two employee parking spaces and two customer parking spaces designated on the site plan which would leave 19 spaces for sale of automobiles. She asked if there were any other comparable sites in Murfreesboro with 19 or less car bays for commercial sales. She said there are several other small auto dealerships in town but didn’t know if there were any comparable sites presently. Mr. Anthony said he drove by a couple car lots this morning that were probably designed for about the same amount as requested today or perhaps even fewer and at both sites, cars were parked in the grass, pulled up into the driveway inhibiting the flow of traffic in and out of their site. He said it becomes an inventory control issue. Ms. King asked if, in the history of the many years of BZA meetings there ever has been any previously approved sites of this nature not under the current Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Anthony said no. He said automobile sales in the past were “by right” in districts and does not believe any would have come before the Board of Zoning Appeals. It is only with the enactment of the new Zoning Ordinance a year and half ago but now in the CH zoning district BZA action is required. He asked if any of the Board Members have seen any applications. Mr. Halliburton agreed with Mr. Anthony and said he does not remember any coming before the BZA in the past. 5 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 Ms. King said she has seen tire and tire sales in the Avenue area but doesn’t recall anything like this. She was trying to get some kind of precedent, if possible, if there was any at all. Mr. Anthony said prior to the announcement of the new Ordinance, vehicle sales were allowed “by right” in CH and Industrial zones. He said when they revised the Zoning Ordinance, they remained “by right” in the Industrial zones but they became a Special Use Permit in the CH district. Chairman Young asked who polices the zoning violations that occur at these sites. Mr. Anthony said Mr. Barbee stating enforcement of those have become very difficult. He said Mr. Barbee has been dealing with one lot for six months and they finally have a court date within the next month. Mr. Anthony said that is how long it takes. Chairman Young asked if the Ordinance has been in place since the last change you are talking about. Mr. Anthony said the issues of cars parking in the grass, blocking driveways and parking in right-of-way are not affiliated with current Ordinance. He said those are things that are just not permitted in the City under the current Ordinance and under the previous one as well. Mr. Halliburton asked so you go thru this process and what happens, are citations given, what happens after that. Mr. Anthony said the one the City has been working thru the last few months, have ultimately got compliance. The City is still moving forward with a court date for a different reason. He said the car lot moved their cars to another property and doing the exact same thing there. Now the City has to start that process all over again on a different site. Mr. Anthony said they are dealing with the same cars in two different locations. The cars were moved from one spot to another. He said they got compliance out of one spot but created a situation in another spot. Ms. King asked if that was because the previous Ordinance did not include a Special Use Permit and if the BZA were to grant a Special Use Permit they would lose their Special Use Permit if they were not in compliant, or do we not have that kind of regulation. Mr. Anthony said it had nothing to do with a Special Use Permit but had to do with having the will and human power to carry out the Ordinance. He said zoning enforcement in our City is a task that is tacked on to someone’s roll. Mr. Anthony said Mr. Barbee has about five other rolls he fills for the City and zoning enforcement ends 6 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 up being one of those. Having the ability to go out and actually take care of those things, that becomes very difficult when limited on personnel to handle. Ms. King said under our current situation, if we were to grant this and they became a violation and that violation persisted because the conditions under the Special Use Permit if this was granted, they would lose their Special Use Permit if they became in violation of those and wouldn’t be able to operate as a business. Correct? Mr. Anthony said it could be treated a couple different ways: 1) it could be treated as a zoning violation, Brad could handle it, and we could work thru months or 2) as the City’s Appointed Administrator, he could revoke the Special Use Permit, they could come back and appeal and get granted again. He said we could go thru an endless cycle of how to deal with that. Mr. Anthony said from the department’s perspective, not granting it in the first place would be the preferred thing. Ms. King said she just wanted to understand procedures and said it seems to be a new thing for the BZA. Mr. Anthony said dealing with car dealerships is brand new due to the changes in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Anthony addressed of couple of things Mr. Rountree mentioned. The first is the Staff didn’t say “no”. Mr. Anthony doesn’t know how things were done previously, but he has no interest or desire to usurp Mr. Rountree’s authority and does not tell people “no” if they come in, present a legal application that meets the standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. He said we allow the application to move forward. We do not tell people “no” but advises repeatedly. Mr. Anthony issued a staff report about a week ago with the City’s recommendations, so hopefully this doesn’t come as too much of a surprise to Mr. Rountree or the applicant. Mr. Anthony said the other thing that Mr. Rountree mentioned was that the City does not want car lots and that is not accurate. Mr. Anthony said the City already has corridors that are covered with car lots. He said there are already buildings available. He drove by a lot this morning that is pre-approved because the lot already existed there. What the City does not want are car lots spreading into random spots throughout the community and setting some kind of precedence or expectation that now the next lot is available for a car lot also. He said car lots conglomerate, where there is one there is usually two or three, four, ten, twenty. The City is trying to avoid all new corridors from forming for car lots. In the City’s opinion, this is not an appropriate corridor or location for a car lot. Mr. Tipps said his first observation with SE Broad Street, traffic is an issue. He asked with a smaller type dealership / smaller type use as this, does it create that much more 7 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 traffic than already there. He said some of the other “by-right” uses that Mr. Anthony referenced, they would all pretty much guarantee increased traffic, maybe even more than a car dealership. Mr. Tipps said from reading thru Staff’s comments, as it referred to the different sections of the Zoning Ordinance it appeared that the main concern is this traffic issue and the other sections appears that the property met those. He asked Mr. Anthony and Mr. Barbee if he was missing that. Mr. Anthony said when Mr. Barbee evaluated, he determined that it either meets or potentially meets the characteristics Mr. Barbee agreed, stating it is possible for them to be met once it goes thru a full site plan approval. He said they have a conceptual site plan at this point that doesn’t have all the necessary requirements on there. In looking at the property, Mr. Barbee feels it is possible for them to meet that once a proper site plan has been submitted and approved. Mr. Tipps said if they have the opportunity with the proper plan that it meets everything that it should meet then we are back to traffic and we’re back to this grouping of a new applicant in the same boat as other violators. He asked if that was a fair statement. Mr. Anthony said he thinks that is fair, but he doesn’t think that is the whole story. He agreed we are having repeated issues with tons of car lots in town but thinks there is also compatibility in context issue that we talked about as well. Mr. Tipps asked if Mr. Anthony was referring to compatibility to the neighborhood where there is a mixture of retail, office, convenience store. Mr. Anthony said the compatibility is referring to having no car lots in this area. Mr. Tipps asked no car lots but mixed uses? Mr. Halliburton asked if the applicants did not comply with the Special Use Permit, if granted and the City revokes the Special Use Permit, then go thru the process and the applicants could then appeal, would they be appealing to this Board. Correct? Mr. Anthony said correct. Mr. Halliburton said they would have to, at that point not complied with the grant of the Special Use Permit. He said if the Board denies because they applicants did not comply, at that point are they out of business or no? Is it still a legal action that they can appeal? Mr. Halliburton was trying to find out where would this end. Mr. Anthony said they can apply for a Special Use Permit again. 8 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 Mr. Ives said let’s assume they are accused of violating. Mr. Halliburton said correct. Mr. Ives said let’s assume this Board finds they have violated and revoked the Special Use Permit. That decision can be appealed to the courts. Mr. Halliburton said ok. Mr. Ives said whether it would be or not and how long that appeal takes, anywhere from 3 months and 3 years depending on how hard someone pushes it and how backed-up the court is. After that, if they chose, they could appeal assuming they would lose at Circuit or Chancery Court, they could then go to the Court of Appeals. He said that process takes quite a while too. Mr. Halliburton said ok. Mr. Tipps said he can’t get into the minds of the investor when he purchased this property had in mind or what they thought. As its current use, it’s not going anywhere and at some point, it becomes, it may become an eye-sore and cause other problems to the neighborhood and what this plan will bring. Mr. Tipps said you look into what’s economically feasible and this is one of several ideas. Mr. Anthony pointed out there are at least 100 other uses, by right, that would be allowed on the subject site. Mr. Tipps asked if they would require a much larger investment than maybe this would. He said you have to make that financial decision and have the wherewithal to do those things. He said, as they say, you can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube once you’ve gotten so far with the property. Chairman Young does not want to lump them in with the other issues. He said you can see the issues with the other car lots but doesn’t want to assume that this lot would operate like some of those others. Chairman Young knows this intersection is busy and the character of the neighborhood are two big components for him. He said he would have a hard time with it, based on that. Just because they could have potential problems, he didn’t want to base his decision based on that and assume they are guilty before any violations occur. Mr. Tipps said concurred with Chairman Young. Ms. Foy asked why there are only two parking spots for customers. She asked if that is all they expect to have at any time. 9 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 Mr. Rountree said the City has done a great job, as far as trying to create safeguards. He wished it was so enforceable that the minute they violate you could pull their business license. He said that seemed like the logical thing if they were granted a special exception, you would not longer be in business. Mr. Rountree said, if that were the case, Mr. Barbee and Mr. Anthony’s jobs would be a lot easier. He said there would be a lot of empty spaces as it has been notoriously abused in the City, no question about it. Mr. Rountree said it is tough because the applicants saw an opportunity for a CH zoned property and it they could get a special exception, they could utilize the building without demo it at all. He has to retro-fit the whole site to be a dental office. He thinks the logic was there and the City never told the applicants “no” but as they moved through the process and met the expectations. Mr. Rountree said the expectations were almost impossible to meet and that is where the City has done well, whether they are not for a car lot or against car lots there would not be a lot of car lots coming into Murfreesboro anymore, based on the criteria. Mr. Rountree said it is not even site driven because a lot of the large lots still don’t have the capacity to unload on-site because of the way it is situated. He mentioned again, he saw five car lots in violation as they drove to the meeting today adding that would not happen today. He said the City is making sure if a car lot gets approved in Murfreesboro that it has the ability to function and it has the ability to work. This is not a large inventory type of business for the applicants, so they are taking a risk, however if you meet the criteria a special exception is required. Mr. Rountree said if everybody had to go through that process, 70-80% probably would not make it. He said the City has done a great job to create the criteria to make it very difficult to have a car lot. He said he was kind of shocked the applicants found a lot in the City of Murfreesboro that would work as a car lot. Mr. Rountree said the Zoning Ordinance states the number of cars, employee and customer parking spaces are based on the size of the lot. Again, Mr. Rountree said the applicants met the expectation of the Zoning Ordinance but the Ordinance is written so that when someone comes to buy a car has a place to park. Mr. Tipps made a motion to approve a special use permit in order to operate a motor vehicle sale (automobile sales) establishment in a Highway Commercial (CH) zone for property located at 2135 Southeast Broad Street because he believes it complies with the character of the neighborhood and traffic conditions. He said those conditions exists at a lot of other places in the City. The car lot is going to be arranged to be compatible and only interfere with adjacent properties. He said it is serviced adequately by facilities services, is not going to result in any damage, loss or destruction of natural scenic / historic importance, and complies with additional standards. Mr. Tipps said the motion also includes the following conditions: 1) Parking and display of automobile inventory shall occur only in areas designated in the special use permit application. Driveway aisles, public 10 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 right-of-way, and landscaped areas shall not be used for automobile parking or display. 2) Automobile parts and salvage/junk automobiles shall not be stored on any outdoors portion of the site. 3) All automobiles visible from the public right-of-way or lying adjacent to any area zoned for residential uses shall be operational. 4) Outdoor sound amplification shall not be allowed. 5) Automobile loading, unloading, staging, and maneuvering shall not be permitted within any public right-of-way. 6) Automobile service bays and overhead service area doors shall not be visible from any public right-of-way. 7) Hours of operation shall be limited to “daytime hours” as defined in the Murfreesboro Noise Control Ordinance. Mr. Barbee requested an 8th condition be required as follows: The Special Use Permit is null and void upon the sale or transfer of the property. Mr. Tipps agreed with the additional condition of approval: 8) The Special Use Permit is null and void upon the sale or transfer of the property. The motion was seconded by Ms. Foy. Mr. Halliburton said he understands where the Staff is coming from but if the applicant has met the plan design and the only kind of hold-up is the traffic, he is not sure that this use is going to be much different than any other use in reference to traffic. Mr. Halliburton told the applicant he will be the first to come to the City and contact Mr. Barbee if the applicant is unloading on Broad Street or on Keeneland and not using the space you are supposed to. Mr. Halliburton said he is not necessarily for this application but at the same time he doesn’t know how this Board could deny the request. Chairman Young said he will be voting “no” based on a judgement call on the character of the neighborhood and the traffic congestion that will be there. Mr. Rountree asked for clarification from Mr. Barbee about the 8th condition of approval. He asked Mr. Barbee if this gets approved, and they have a car lot on the subject property when they sell that property it goes back to straight CH zoning and there is no special use permit associated with it. Mr. Barbee said yes, that is correct. If the property is sold or transferred, the conditional use permit expires. 11 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 Ms. King verified the new owners would need to apply for a special use permit. Mr. Rountree asked the rules the new owner would need to apply for a special use permit. Mr. Ives said it is not uncommon for a special use permit to go to an owner or an operator and it expires upon the sale or transferred to another person. It doesn’t happen all the time, but it is the most common for a special use permit. Ms. King said this condition is on every mother-in-law apartment that she has ever seen. Mr. Tipps added also daycares have this condition. Mr. Rountree asked, to be clear, if the applicants got the property zoned as a car lot in the City and decided to sell it as a car lot without these applicants ever occupying it, the new owners would have to go back through the Board of Zoning Appeals. Ms. King said if there was a new owner, the new owner would have to come back through the Board of Zoning Appeals. Todays approval is only for the present owner. Mr. Rountree said thank you. Ms. King said this is difficult, the way she had discerned the factors the Board has to go through. She feels it weighs more in favor of the applicant, but it is very much on the edge. She said it is definitely challenging and she agreed wholeheartedly with Mr. Halliburton and his comments. She said I agree without question, let’s do it. The motion carried in favor with a 4 (yes) and 1 (no) vote. Chairman Young voted against the application. Staff Reports and Other Business Chairman Young announced it is time to elect a Chairman for the next year to serve on the Board of Zoning Appeals. Ms. King made a motion to reelect Chairman Young for the Chairman position. The motion was seconded by Mr. Halliburton and carried unanimously in favor. Chairman Young announced it is time to elect a Vice-Chair for the next year to serve on the Board of Zoning Appeals. 12 BZA Minutes Regular Meeting June 26, 2019 Mr. Tipps made a motion to reelect Mr. Halliburton for the Vice-Chair position. The motion was seconded by Ms. King and carried unanimously in favor. The meeting adjourned at 1:45 P.M. _____________________________ _______________________________ CHAIRMAN SECRETARY 13  MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT JULY 24, 2019 Application: Z-19-022 Location: Stones River Mall – 1720 Old Fort Parkway Applicant: Ben Spell, Good Ranchers Owner: SVAP II Stones River, LLC Zoning: CH (Commercial Highway) Requests: A Special Use Permit to operate a temporary vending business (packaged food sales) 1 Special Use Permit Request Overview Good Ranchers, represented by Mr. Ben Spell, is requesting a Special Use Permit to operate a temporary vending business (packaged food sales) in the parking lot of the Stones River Mall located at 1720 Old Fort Parkway. The subject property is zoned CH (Highway Commercial District) and is also located in a PSO (Planned Signage Overlay District) for the mall. The subject property is surrounded on all sides by CH zoning. The applicant would like to sell frozen pre- packaged steaks from a 20’ by 20’ tent beginning on August 8th and ending on September 16th. Relevant Zoning Ordinance Section The application will be required to comply with the Standards of General Applicability set forth in Section 9 of the Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance as well as the additional standards for temporary vending in Section 9. A list of all of the standards as well as how this application addresses those standards is provided below. Standards of general applicability. An applicant for a special permit shall present evidence at the public hearing on such special permit, which evidence must establish: 1. That the proposed building or use will not have a substantial or undue adverse effect upon adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, utility facilities, and other matters affecting the public health, safety, and general welfare; o Stones River Mall and the surrounding areas have an established retail character that will not be impacted by this application. The tent is situated so as to not to have a negative impact on traffic flow or take up prime parking spots. However, staff would request that any approval be conditioned on a review of the site plan by the Transportation Department to determine if any additional traffic control measures will be necessary during the time of operation. 2. That the proposed building or use will be constructed, arranged, and operated so as to be compatible with the immediate vicinity and not to interfere with the development and use of adjacent property in accordance with the applicable district regulations; o Staff finds that the proposed use will be compatible with the immediate vicinity. 3. That the proposed buildings or use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, parking spaces, drainage structures, refuse disposal, fire protection, water and sewers; or that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use will provide adequately for such services; o The impact of this use on public infrastructure will be minimal. The application includes a statement from Stones River Mall allowing the site to use its restroom facilities. There is ample parking on-site and the proposal will not affect drainage structures. Electric will be provide via a generator. 4. That the proposed building or use will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of any feature determined by the BZA to be of significant natural, scenic, or historic importance o Staff finds that no such feature will be affected by this application. Temporary vendors, as described in Section 25(D)(4) of this article, are subject to the following additional standards: 1. The application for a temporary vendor Special Use Permit shall include the signature of the owner of the property or the owner’s authorized agent. The owner of the property may be the applicant if the owner is to be the operator of the temporary use. 2  o Letter from the owner’s authorized agent is included in the agenda materials. 2. The site for a temporary vendor shall be improved to provide adequate parking as determined by the BZA and shall provide for an on-site turn around area so that backing onto the street will not be necessary. Parking areas shall have an asphalt, concrete, or other hard dustless surface. In the event the proposed location will be on the site of an existing permanent business, the applicant must provide verification that the parking spaces displaced by the temporary vendor (including areas for tents, trailers, inventory, and parking for the temporary vendor) will not total more than 25% of the total parking available on the site. o There will be ample asphalt parking on site and the vending operation will not total more than 25% of the total parking available on-site. 3. Traffic control measures may be required by the BZA. These may include a requirement that the applicant make provisions for directing traffic during expected peak hours of operation. staff would request that any approval be conditioned on a review of the site plan by the Transportation Department to determine if any additional traffic control measures will be necessary during the time of operation. o Staff requests that any approval be conditioned on a review of the site plan by the Transportation Department to determine if any additional traffic control measures will be necessary during the time of operation. 4. Temporary facilities, including vehicles, trailers or tents, will be permitted provided they are erected or placed in conformance with all applicable Codes. Any tent must provide an emergency exit remote from the point of entrance into the tent. Vehicles, trailers and tents must be located on an asphalt, concrete or hard dustless surface and in no event may be erected or placed on a gravel or grass area. All approved vehicles, trailers or tents must be maintained in good condition. Any vehicle, trailer or other moveable equipment used in connection with such temporary vendor shall be removed from the site at the conclusion of each business day. No such vehicle, trailer or equipment shall be removed and then be parked or stored in a residential area where such parking or storage is prohibited by ordinance or restrictive covenant. A vehicle or trailer may remain on the site overnight only if it is being used to provide security for items for sale remaining on the site, which items are not in a vehicle or trailer, provided the vehicle or trailer is constantly occupied or attended. The applicant shall be required to identify any vehicle, trailer or equipment to be used, and its overnight use and location, in the application. o The applicant will have a truck that remains overnight to store the merchandise. The tent will be located on an asphalt parking lot. Staff recommends that the BZA condition approval on the tent being weighted down above ground instead of using stakes that will penetrate the surface of the parking lot. 5. Any site used for a temporary vendor must be located so that all parts of all facilities and sales inventory on the site are no more than five hundred feet from an operable fire hydrant. o The site is 330 feet from an operable fire hydrant. 6. [6] A deposit in the amount of five hundred dollars ($500) per site shall be made with the Building and Codes Department. In the event the site has not been cleared and cleaned within the time specified, the deposit shall not be refunded. Additionally, unless the owner (and permit holder, if different) can prove good cause, the site shall not be eligible for other permits for temporary vendors, and the permit holder shall not be eligible for another 3  temporary vendor Special Use Permit, for six (6) months for the first offense, twelve (12) months for the second offense and eighteen (18) months for the third and all subsequent offenses. Except as otherwise specifically provided herein in subsection [10], all sites must be cleared and cleaned within five (5) days after the expiration of the Special Use Permit. o The applicant is aware of the deposit and the clean-up requirements. 7. Adequate provision shall be made for restroom facilities on the property. Restroom facilities must be located on-site for all temporary vendor locations that include on-site overnight security. Portable toilets, if used, shall be located on the site and may not be located in any required front setback or in any required side yard. The BZA may approve the use of off-site restroom facilities provided they will be available during all business hours and provided that the applicant provides the written permission of the owner or manager of the off-site facilities. o Restroom facilities will be provided by Stones River Mall (permission letter included in agenda packet). 8. The applicant shall post on the property documentation of the BZA’s granting of a temporary vendor Special Use Permit for inspection by City officials or others during the course of the temporary use. o The applicant understands this requirement. 9. No special use permit shall be granted to any applicant who occupies or proposes to occupy premises for the temporary vendor where conditions exist on the site which are in violation of the sign, building, fire, electrical, or other ordinances of the City. If any such violations occur after the issuance of the temporary vendor Special Use Permit and same are not cured within 24 hours after notice, the Special Use Permit may be suspended, revoked or terminated by written notice, any temporary electrical service may be interrupted, and the deposit may be forfeited. The written notice referenced in the previous sentence may be given by the Director of the Planning and Zoning Department, the Director of the Building and Codes Department, the City Manager or the Assistant City Manager. The City may, in addition, initiate any other enforcement remedies with respect to such violations as may be provided by law. o The applicant is aware of this requirement. Staff is not aware of any existing violations on-site. 10. Any electric meter installed on a freestanding permanent pole and/or any temporary pole installed to supply power to a temporary vendor shall be removed within 14 days after the Special Use Permit expires. o This does not apply as the applicant will be using a generator on-site. However, an electrical permit and inspection will be required prior to beginning operation. 11. Any site for a temporary vendor must be located so that all parts of all facilities and/or tents and all inventory are outside of any easements for electric power transmission or distribution. o Based on the tent location depicted in the application materials, the tent will not be located in an electric easement. However, there is an electric easement just to the east, so the tent should not be located any further east than shown on the site plan submitted. 4 12. Adequate provision shall be made for solid waste management. If a dumpster is to be located on-site, it shall be located in such a manner as to minimize impact on adjoining properties or other businesses on the same lot of record. o According to the applicant, this vending operation will generate very little solid waste. Any solid waste that is generated will be placed in the bed of the pick-up truck parked on-site and will be disposed of as needed. 13. Signage for a temporary vendor shall conform to the requirements of the City’s sign regulations including but not limited to an application for a sign permit and payment of applicable sign permit fees. The granting of a temporary vendor Special Use Permit shall not, by itself, allow any signage on the site in addition to that which was allowed prior to the granting of such permit. o The applicant is aware of this requirement. Staff recommends that approval be conditioned on compliance with all applicable signage regulations, including those contained in the Stones River Mall PSO. 14. The using, operating, or permitting to be played, used or operated any radio receiving set, musical instrument, phonograph, live band, amplifiers, loudspeakers, or other machine or device for producing or reproducing sound in such a manner as to disturb the peace, quiet and comfort of neighboring residents at any time with louder volume than is necessary for convenient hearing for the persons responsible for producing or reproducing such sound shall not be permitted. o The applicant will not have any amplified noise. 15. A site may be used for temporary vending for no more than 70 days during any 12-month period. The BZA may approve a site to be used by multiple temporary vendors provided that no site shall be used by more than one temporary vendor at any time. A Special Use Permit for temporary vending shall expire at the end of one year after the date of approval. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a site which was approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals as a location for a temporary vendor of food or retail merchandise during the 12 months immediately preceding the effective date of this ordinance will continue to be an eligible site for a temporary vendor Special Use Permit for up to six months during any 12 month period provided all other conditions for site approval continue to be met, and provided further, that the eligibility of any such site for the issuance of an extended Special Use Permit shall end at the end of any 12 month period during which the site was not given approval for use by a temporary vendor of food or retail merchandise, or on November 14, 2017, whichever shall first occur. o This request does not exceed the maximum 70 days allowed at this location. 16. The BZA may require additional standards be met in order to assure compatibility of the proposed location with adjoining properties. o The applicant understands this and will adhere to any additional requirements. 17. Notwithstanding subsections [2] and [4] above, a temporary vendor may be permitted to locate parking areas, tents and other facilities on lots with gravel surfaces if such gravel surfaced lots were legally established, in existence and had been used for temporary vending purposes prior to January 1, 2007 provided however that the exception in this subsection shall end on November 14, 2017. o Not applicable. 5  18. The application for and grant of a Special Use Permit for the temporary vending of food, beverages, animals, produce, other merchandise and any other such temporary sales event that is not an accessory use to the principal use on a lot or a portion of a lot shall be subject to the following additional conditions: [aa] Tables, chairs, or other furniture that would allow or facilitate on-site consumption of food or beverages shall not be allowed on the site. o There will be no furniture for customer seating on-site. Recommended Conditions of Approval: If the Board decides to grant this special use permit request, Staff recommends the following conditions: 1. In addition to compliance with the Sign Ordinance, this site must also comply with all of the terms of the Stones River Mall PSO. 2. The tent shall be weighted above-ground and no stakes or other appurtenances penetrating the surface of the parking lot shall be used to anchor the tent. 3. An electrical permit must be obtained for electricity to the tent and the site must pass an electrical safety inspection prior to beginning operation. 4. A tent permit must be obtained from the Building and Codes Department prior to the tent being erected. 5. A more detailed site plan, drawn to scale and showing the exact location of the tent, shall be submitted for review and approval of the Planning and Transportation Departments prior to the issuance of the tent permit. 6. Additional traffic control measures, possibly including Type 3 barricades, may be required by the Transportation Department prior to beginning operation. Attached Exhibits A. Site aerial and photos B. Application C. Site Plan D. Letter from permission from property owner’s authorized agent E. Stones River Mall restroom agreement F. Letters from applicant addressing special use permit standards 6 Attachment A (Aerial photograph of the subject property) (Site photograph facing Old Fort Parkway) 7 (Site photograph facing Stones River Mall entrance) 8  MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT JULY 24, 2019 Application: Z-19-023 Location: 138 and 154 Gresham Lane Applicant: Ken Anderson, representing Franklin Road Baptist Church Zoning: Single Family Residential (RS-15) District Request: Special Use Permit for a Recreation Field at an Institutional Group Assembly Use 1 Request Overview The applicant, Ken Anderson, representing Franklin Road Baptist Church (FRBC), is requesting a special use permit to construct a recreation field for soccer at an existing institutional group assembly use in accordance with the City of Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance, Appendix A, Chart 1, which allows the recreation field use in the Single-family Residential (RS-15) zoning district with approval of a Special Use Permit by the Board of Zoning Appeals. FRBC is located at 3148 Franklin Road, which is in the unincorporated portion of Rutherford County, and is served as an outside the City sewer customer. However, it owns several parcels adjacent to the main church parcel, which are located inside the City limits, including the project area, which is located at 138 and 154 Gresham Lane. The portion addressed as 154 Gresham Lane is zoned RS-15 and while 138 Gresham Lane is zoned Local Commercial (CL), which does not require a Special Use Permit because the use is permitted by right per the Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance, Chart 1. The applicant will develop a soccer field, dimensions 185 feet by 330 feet, and 58 new parking spaces. The parking lot expansion, however, is in the area zoned CL and is not the subject of this special use permit request. According to the applicant, the athletic field will be used for soccer games, Franklin Road Christian School athletic activities, and by Franklin Road Baptist Church for occasional outdoor events. The applicant proposes to install a type “B” buffer and an eight- foot tall privacy fence to shield the residential lot to the north of the field from the proposed use. No lighting of the field is proposed. Relevant Zoning Ordinance Section The application will be required to comply with the Standards of General Applicability set forth in Section 9 of the Murfreesboro Zoning Ordinance as well as the additional standards for institutional group assembly uses (including recreation fields) in Section 9. A list of all of the standards as well as how this application addresses those standards is provided below. Standards of general applicability. An applicant for a special permit shall present evidence at the public hearing on such special permit, which evidence must establish: A. That the proposed building or use will not have a substantial or undue adverse effect upon adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, utility facilitates, and other matters affecting the public health, safety and general welfare. The use will meet this standard because there is adequate parking and access to the site, a Type B landscape buffer and privacy fence will be installed along the north property line, and the use would not negatively impact the neighborhood, traffic conditions, utilities or other matters affecting the public health, safety and general welfare. B. That the proposed building or use will be constructed, arranged and operated so as to be compatible with the immediate vicinity and not to interfere with the development and use of adjacent property in accordance with the applicable district regulations. 2  No new building structures would be constructed. The proposed use will not interfere with the development and use of adjacent property. C. That the proposed buildings or use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, parking spaces, drainage structures, refuse disposal, fire protection, water and sewers; or persons or agencies responsible would provide such services. All these items are already provided to the site. The new 58 parking spaces will need to be striped to the City parking standards to ensure safe parking and circulation. D. That the proposed building or use will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of any feature determined by the BZA to be significant natural, scenic, or historic importance. The soccer field and 58 parking spaces would not result in destruction, loss or damage of any of these listed. E. That the proposed building or use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the particular provision of this section authorizing use. Applicant states that the proposed soccer field will comply with any additional standards imposed by the BZA. Institutional group assembly uses, including recreational fields, public buildings, public or private schools grades K-12, lodges, country clubs, clubs, churches, and other places of worship, shall be subject to the following additional standards: [1] Parking areas shall be designed and arranged so that backing from the site onto a public right- of-way will not be necessary and adequate space will be available for vehicles to turn around on- site. An on-site off-street area shall be provided for vehicles to load and unload passengers. Parking areas shall not be permitted in the required front yard; No parking is located in the area zoned RS-15 and considered in this special use permit request. All parking is located in the portion of the property zoned CL, in which institutional group assembly uses are permitted by right. However, Staff will ensure that, during the site plan review process, the parking proposed in the CL-zoned area will meet these criteria and all other minimum zoning requirements. [2] In all residential districts an institutional group assembly use shall have a lot size not less than three times the minimum lot size permitted in the zoning district where the institutional group assembly use is proposed to be located. In the event the institutional group assembly use is proposed to be located on land that has two or more different zoning classifications, the minimum lot size shall be calculated by applying the larger required minimum lot size; The parcel in question at 154 Gresham Lane is approximately 41,000 square-feet in area. By itself, it does not appear to meet this minimum lot size requirement. Therefore, in order 3  to meet this requirement, the subject parcels must be combined with the main church parcel via a subdivision plat. [3] On-site lighting for parking areas, fields for athletics, scoreboards, and grounds shall be arranged in such a manner as to minimize intrusion of lighting into areas zoned or used for residential or medical purposes. To this end, a plan depicting the proposed location of on-site exterior lighting fixtures shall be submitted for review by staff and the BZA. Such plan shall depict the arrangement of the lighting fixtures, their height, their specifications, and the direction in which lighting will be oriented. Additional information may be required by the staff or the BZA in order to verify whether the lighting will be intrusive into areas zoned or used for residential or medical purposes; No lighting is proposed to be located in the area zoned RS-15, which is the subject of this special use permit request. Lighting is proposed for the new parking area, which is zoned CL and which is not a part of this special use permit request. Lighting in the proposed parking lot will be reviewed for compliance with City lighting standards during the site plan review process. [4] Applications for an institutional group assembly use shall indicate the proposed locations of garbage dumpsters or receptacles. These facilities shall be located in such a manner as to minimize adverse affects upon neighboring properties and aesthetics from the public right-of-way. The use of dumpsters may be prohibited in the event the BZA determines that such would have a detrimental effect upon the adjacent property; FRBC has an existing Dumpster on-site. According to the applicant, no additional permanent solid waste facilities are proposed with this recreation field, but garbage cans will be placed at the field during events. [5] Areas for outdoor recreational use or outdoor group activities shall be screened or fenced in such a manner as to provide an effective buffer for adjacent uses. Screening shall be required pursuant to Section 27 of this article or as required by the BZA; The applicant proposes to install a Type B landscape buffer and an 8’-tall privacy fence along the northern property line in order to mitigate any negative impacts on the adjacent single-family residence to the north. The site plan depicts the width of the buffer as 5’. However, Type B landscape buffers are a minimum 10’ in width. The plan should be revised accordingly to demonstrate compliance with the minimum width. [6] The number of required parking spaces provided on-site shall be in accordance with Chart 4 of this article provided, however, if the applicant can present evidence satisfactory to the BZA that a substantial portion of the expected users will arrive at the institutional group assembly use by bus, bicycle, walking, or by carpooling or that off-street parking areas on adjacent or nearby properties will be available on a long term basis, the BZA shall have authority to determine the number of required parking spaces to be provided on-site. The BZA may require that a reserve area be retained on-site for future expansions of the parking area; 4  If the proposed recreation field is on the same lot of record as the church, then the field is accessory to the church and can utilize the parking on the main church property to meet minimum parking requirements. As stated earlier, the parcels at 138 and 154 Gresham Lane must be combined with the main church lot via a subdivision plat. [7] an application for a special use permit for an institutional group assembly use shall be accompanied by a description of uses or activities proposed for the facility which may be subject to separate regulation or which may result in unusual traffic patterns, traffic volumes, or other detrimental impacts upon adjacent properties, including but not necessarily limited to those uses which would require a special permit if not a part of the institutional group assembly use; The proposed field will be used for school and church soccer games during soccer season as well as for physical education classes for the school. Staff does not envision the traffic patterns related to the proposed field to differ substantially from existing traffic patterns for the church and school. [8] the BZA shall have authority to approve an on-site location with water, sewer, and electric utility connections for accommodations for travel trailers or R.V.s (recreational vehicles) for use by visiting or traveling speakers or guests associated with the institutional group assembly use. Provided, however, such location for travel trailers or R.V.s shall not be permitted for use as a permanent residential dwelling unit; No such utility connections are proposed with this application. [9] the BZA shall have the authority to grant variances to the standards imposed by this subsection for temporary or short term uses of property for the institutional group assembly use purposes. In such cases, the BZA may impose conditions of approval to assure the compatibility of the short- term land use with other property in the vicinity of the proposed use; and No variances are proposed with this application. [10] the application for a special use permit for an institutional group assembly use shall indicate any intentions for the use of systems for the external broadcast of speech, music, or other sounds. If such are proposed, the applicant shall indicate the times of day and duration of their proposed use. The BZA shall have the authority to place restrictions upon their use in order to minimize excessive noise from intruding upon neighboring properties especially those zoned or used for residential purposes. In no event shall the BZA approve the use of such which would be in violation of the City Code or ordinances regulating noise. BZA approval does not constitute a waiver of any City Code or ordinances regulating noise. According to the applicant, there will be no amplified noise in conjunction with the typical use of the recreation field. However, there is proposed to be infrequent amplification associated with outdoor church events that may occur on the field. The applicant has been made aware that all noise must comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance. 5 Recommended Conditions of Approval: If the Board decides to grant this special use permit request, Staff recommends the following conditions: 1. No lighting is requested or permitted with this special use permit. In the future, if lighting is desired, it will require amending the special use permit. 2. No outdoor amplification is allowed with this use, except on an infrequent basis associated special church events. The use of the proposed athletic field shall operate in a manner that is consistent with the City of Murfreesboro Noise Ordinance. 3. The applicant shall apply for and obtain approval of a site plan for the athletic field and new parking area. 4. The parcels at 138 and 154 Gresham Lane must be combined with the main church lot via a resubdivision plat. 5. The site plan should be revised to demonstrate compliance with the minimum 10’ width for a Type B landscape buffer. Attached Exhibits 1) Aerial photos 2) Site plan 3) BZA application 4) Letter from applicant 5) Letter signed by FRBC and adjacent neighbor to the north 6 7 8 9 10  MURFREESBORO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT JULY 24, 2019 Application: S-19-024 Location: Vacant Lot S. Church Street in front of 2135 S. Church Street Applicant: Columbia Neon Zoning: L-I (light Industrial) Request: Appealing a decision of the Director of Building and Codes regarding an off-site sign Overview The existing sign is located on a 0.18-acre tract of land that is located in front of Baymont Inn at 2135 S. Church Street and connects to the south property line of Cracker Barrel at 2115 S. Church. The sign is a two-pole sign that is 80 feet tall and has a display area of 230 SF. The sign was erected in 1975 along with the original Cracker Barrell Restaurant/Fueling Station. In 2003 Cracker Barrell demolished the original structure and rebuilt the store along with a new On-Site ground mounted interstate sign. The sign face of the original sign was removed from the existing sign. The sign existed without a face until 2010. On April 9, 2010 Columbia Neon made application for an On-Site Permanent Sign Permit (See Attachment “A”) to install a new sign face in the original Cracker Barrell Sign. The sign face was to advertise “Lot for Sale” Sims Realtors and Auctioneers” (See Attachment “B”). The sign permit was issued and inspected on April 13, 2010. The sign face remained until a storm blew it out. On March 21, 2017 a storm moved through Murfreesboro and blew out the “Lot for Sale” sign face. The sign remained without a face until November 2018 when the Building and Codes Department discovered that a new sign face had been installed. Research revealed that the new sign face was installed without permits. On December 28, 2018 Notice of Violation was mailed to Columbia Neon advising them that a permit application must be submitted for review and a permit is required prior to placing a new sign face and additionally the sign is advertising a business that is not located on the same lot as the sign. In order to qualify as an Off-Site sign it cannot be located within 1,000 feet of an Interstate Interchange. Columbia Neon is appealing the Notice of Violation and more specifically requesting that the use of the sign be changed to an Off-Site sign. Staff recommends that this administrative appeal not be approved as follows: 1) Due to the number of signs that could make a similar request. 2) Regardless of the use the original sign, the last permit established the sign as an on- premise sign and the sign and sign structure do not comply with the requirements of an off- site sign as regulated by the sign ordinance. Attached Exhibits 1. Attachment A: Picture of Original Sign 2. Attachment B: Sign application and Sign drawing for On-Site Sign 3. BZA application package from Columbia Neon