Mobile City Board of Adjustment Meeting - March 2, 2026
Mobile City Board of Adjustment Meeting - March 2, 2026
The Board of Adjustment met on March 2, 2026, to consider three variance applications, approve minutes from previous meetings, and elect officers. The meeting included public comment and deliberation on requests for signage, aggregate surface, and hotel development variances.
Application 1: Banner and Feather Flag Variance for Apartment Complex
- The applicant requested a variance to increase the size of a banner on Sage Avenue and to allow six feather flags for a new apartment community, citing that the current 32 square feet allowance is inadequate for the building's scale and setback from the road. The applicant noted that the community is 13.5% occupied and 20.1% leased, with a lease-up period of 12–14 months, and requested a 6-month duration for the temporary signs. The board discussed the standard regulation (30 days per banner, 3 per year, max 90 days) and the potential precedent. A board member expressed support, noting the project's scale and the need for visibility during lease-up. The variance was approved for 6 months subject to findings of fact. The vote was in favor with one opposed.
Application 2: Aggregate Surface Variance for Truck Parking on Shipyard Road
- The applicant, Jackson Burke Pickler, requested to amend a previously approved surface variance to allow aggregate surfacing for truck parking and maneuvering at 4570–4590 Shipyard Road, associated with a new structure. The site currently uses aggregate paving, and the variance is needed due to a site plan change. A property owner, Robert Altman, spoke in support, noting the expansion is minor. The board clarified that the variance is a technicality due to the new site plan. The variance was approved subject to findings of fact A, B, and C. The vote was unanimous.
Application 3: Variances for Hotel at 720 Museum Drive
- Kathy Sherman, representing Museum Partners, requested five variances for a boutique hotel, including a building footprint exceeding 20,000 square feet (proposed 22,408 sq ft) and a reduction of front landscape area (from 60% to a lower percentage, though overall site landscaping is 22% vs. 15% minimum). The hotel previously received a use variance (not specific to room count). Jennifer Tremain, representing the Village of Spring Hill neighborhood association, expressed full support and noted two years of collaboration. The board discussed condition 3, which would require a new use variance if the room count differed from the original estimate of 87+/-. The board clarified that the original use variance was for hotel use only, not limited to a specific room count. The motion to approve included conditions 1, 2, and 4, striking condition 3, and confirmed that the previous use approval was not specific to any exact room count. The vote was unanimous.
Other Business
- Minutes for the following dates were approved unanimously: July 7, 2025; August 4, 2025; September 8, 2025; October 6, 2025; October 27, 2025 (appeal transcript for 316 Dauphin Street); November 3, 2025; and December 1, 2025.
- Officers were elected for the coming term: Adam Metcalf was re-elected as Vice Chair (unanimous), and Mr. Guess was elected as Chair (with one abstention).
- Staff noted upcoming court dates regarding a previously approved car lot on Highway 90 and a property on Shell Road, but no action was taken.
Meeting Transcript
Adequate mic up a little bit. We feel the 32 square feet is inadequate for the building's scale and size based on our setback from the road that we agreed to. And so that's why the banner on Sage Avenue we would like to see increased. And then the feather flags along Sage Avenue, we feel like it's very customary to allow for the notification of a new community that has been developed and built to notify vehicular traffic that we're tucked back off the road over 900 feet from Dolphin Street, which is where our front door is. Okay. Questions of the board? Chair. Yes. How do I choose six? Sir? How did you choose six? Well, we did it based on the scale and the scope of our primary entrance, and we worked with off the point and first U.S. bank who are the property owners on either side, and we felt like it was an appropriate number, not too many, not enough. For y'all, which is in the middle, I guess. Yeah. Thank you. All right. Any other questions for the applicant? Now I will say that a lot of people have watched this project developed for some time. So it's not a surprise or for the most part that it's there. But we're very pleased and proud of it and very appreciative of the city and the staff that has worked with us to get to where we are. We would just like for this interim period while we're still working through lease up to enhance our marketing and visibility for a very short period of time. Okay. All right. Question. So the board is the project come finished. Is it finished? Yeah. We have delivered um our clubhouse and our first five residential buildings. We lack two residential buildings that both have 51 units apiece in them. So we're about three quarters of the way through. Gotcha. So five buildings currently in lease up, ready to go. Could lease tomorrow. Yes, sir. Okay. And how long has that been? How long have they been finished? We opened our first units in early November. Okay. What is your current occupancy? We're 13 and a half percent occupied and 20.1% leased. Okay. All right. Other questions of the board. Okay. Anyone in the audience, either in support or opposition to the application today? All right. Any public comment regarding this? No, sir.
openpublica.com