We're gonna call the Board of Adjustment Order for March 2nd, 2026.

First, I've got a series of announcements to make and then we'll get started.

First, um, as we call an agenda item, if the applicant will come to the podium and give us their name and address for the record, there per rules for individuals to speak in favor of an application and for an opposition.

So if you have more than four for either way, please figure out who you want to come to the podium.

Five minutes per speaker, one minute buzzer will give you a notice this time to kind of wrap it up.

We have a long agenda, so I will probably try to keep to the time more than usual.

And then uh the applicant gets a two-minute opportunity for a rebuttal for any comments or questions.

I have the luxury of extending time if I think that we've interrupted an applicant or a speaker, and we want to allow them to answer questions or complete their comments.

I would ask that you have electronic devices, you put them on silent or off so that we don't have a disturbance during the meeting, including the board.

Remind the board members to turn their mics on as they uh make a statement.

And uh once we hear all the comments, either in support or statements in support or opposition, we'll do deliberation.

And if there's any questions regarding the vote of the board on an application, then you call 251-208-5895 for the planning department.

And uh we'll see here if anything else I need to mention.

If you got any handouts, give them to the staff now so that we don't have to stop the meeting, wait for those to be disdistributed.

I think we've got had all those so far.

Okay, well, we'll get started with um first roll call, and then we'll move on to the approval of the agenda.

Mr.

Metcalf?

Here, Mr.

Golden, here Mr.

Milling, Mr.

Petway, yeah.

Mr.

Morris?

Yeah, Ms.

Farrell.

Absent.

Mr.

Atcheson?

Here, Mr.

Williams.

Absent.

Okay, we have a quorum, Mr.

Atcheson, a supernumerary is voting in the absence of a voting normal member uh regular member appointed member, and we have a quorum, so we can proceed with the meeting as scheduled.

Uh chair entertain a motion to approve the agenda as presented.

Have a motion to approve.

Do I have a second?

I have a second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Agenda is approved, and we'll proceed with the meeting as scheduled.

Starting with application one regarding 3201 Airport Boulevard.

This is 6691, 6331, 6042, 6031, 57, 64.

If the applicant will come to the podium, please.

Good afternoon.

Your name and address, sir.

Uh good afternoon, Brandon Black, 11 Northwater Street, suite 9290.

Um, with Kimley Horn, we're here today for a variance extension for a previously approved variance for the target retail store at Belair Mall.

Okay, and why should the board consider an extension?

Uh target's getting started next month.

They've had some internal delays that haven't allowed them to uh update their signage yet.

Okay, so they're planning on getting started next month at the beginning of April.

And what time frame for the extension would be needed?

Six months?

Six months.

Okay.

All right.

Questions of the board for the applicants, rep.

Okay.

Do we have anyone in the audience either in support or opposition to the request for an extension?

All right, thank you.

All right, thank you.

Yep.

All right, with that, chair entertain a motion.

Motion to approve, Mr.

Chair.

Six months.

Yes.

I have a motion to approve six month extension.

Do I have a second?

Second.

I have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Motion carries.

All right, let's go to the next application.

Or this is regarding 960 South Lawrence Street, 6685, 6611, 6431, 3924.

And this for his extension as well.

Name and address, sir.

Hello, my name is Paul Davis.

My address is 756 St.

Louis Street.

Okay, and you're requesting an extension of a previously approved variance as well.

Yes.

So for the restaurant, we're just we had requested that variance.

We're almost complete with the drawings, but our variance is going to expire before we could submit it.

So we just would request an extension so that we can complete the drawings and turn that in.

And you think six months will be a sufficient time?

Yes, yes, definitely.

All right.

Questions of the board for the applicant.

All right.

Do we have anyone in the audience either in support or opposition to the request for an extension?

All right.

Thank you.

That'll conclude our public hearing regarding the request for an extension.

Chair entertain a motion.

Motion to approve.

Extension six months.

Okay, a motion to approve with a six-month extension.

Do I have a second?

Second.

I have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Motion carries.

All right, let's go to application 6686 regarding 850 Merrion Street.

And this is for an extension as well.

Yes, sir.

Uh Chester Lackowitz with Alabama Power 618th Street North Birmingham.

We are asking for an extension on this.

Um the reason for the delay was we had some trouble procuring some materials to complete the project.

Um right now we're we're kind of shooting for an in-service date of October of this year.

Um would like to get a little latitude from the board, maybe carry it to the end of the year just because we're coming up into some weather season, and sometimes that can uh cause delays and cause uh assets to be shifted around, but um that's the reason for this extension, sir.

Okay.

Uh nine months or you think nine months, yes, sir.

That will be sufficient.

Okay.

All right.

Questions of the board for the applicant.

All right.

Do we have anyone in the audience either in support or opposition to the request for an extension?

Nine months.

Do we have any public comments on any of these?

I should have asked that earlier.

No, sir.

Okay, thank you.

All right, that'll conclude our public hearing regarding the request for an extension.

Nine months is being proposed.

Chair entertain a motion.

You can proceed, sir.

Motion to approve and I'm an extension.

Motion to approve nine month extension.

Do I have a second?

Have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Motion carries.

Okay.

We'll go to application four, which is for 985 Schillinger Road, South.

If the applicant will come to the podium, please.

Good afternoon.

Your name and address?

Andrew.

Excuse me.

Andrew Alander.

Address is uh 100 North Meridian, Brazil, Indiana.

Okay, you might pull that mic just a little bit closer or speak a little louder.

Okay.

Even with us here at Hardy Hear you.

Thank you.

All right.

This is for five wall signs, one freestanding sign for a single business site, community unified development code limits single use sites to a three signs with no more than one free standing.

So why should the board consider your application?

Well, there's there's seven signs on there now, so we'll be reducing that to five.

And then the other thing is it's at a crossroad, and so there the visual isn't as good if we just put it on the building and nothing on the on the gas canopy itself.

And this is a change in the the name of the identification.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

All right.

Questions of the board for the applicant?

All right.

Thank you.

Do we have anyone either in support or opposition to the application of the day?

Do we have any public comment regarding this application?

No, sir.

And a reduction in signs from seven wall.

Yeah, so seven to five.

Actually, it's five wall signs on one freestanding.

So how many are we actually reducing?

He's he was stating that there were seven signs currently on the building, and what they're proposing is five.

Okay.

That's apart from what's on here.

Okay.

Questions or comments of the board.

Chair entertain a motion.

Motion to approve.

Motion to approve, Mr.

Chair.

Okay.

I have motion to approve.

Subject to findings of fact.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Have a second.

Any further discussion?

Think a reduction in the number of signs is a good indication or consideration for the board.

With that, chair calls for once again, calls for a vote.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Motion carries.

All right.

Well, moving on quick here.

Application 6731 regarding 4250 and 4300 Dauphin Island Parkway.

If the applicants rep will come to the podium.

And this is for a special exception.

Ray.

That is correct.

My name is Brock Jones.

I'm with Kimley Horn Associates.

I'm at 11 Northwater Street, suite 9290.

And I can speed you up a little bit because really this is one project, but it's in reference to five, six, seven, and eight on the agenda.

Um we are the design engineer for Mawz.

We are requesting approval to allow a wastewater lift station within an R1 single family zoning district along with associated variances.

These variances are necessary for the safe operation of a wastewater lift station and are not intended to support public access or commercial activity.

Okay.

Questions of the board for the applicants rep.

All right.

Do we have anyone in support or opposition today to the application?

All right.

Do we have any public comment regarding this?

No, sir.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

You just hang hang around.

Yeah.

All right.

Questions, comments of the board.

All right.

With that, we'll conclude our public hearing.

Chair entertain a motion.

We're gonna take these one by one.

We have two.

Motion to approve with special exceptions.

And uh subject to findings of facts.

Yeah, subject to findings and facts.

Okay, I have a motion to approve.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Motion carries.

All right, let's go to the next one.

6732 regarding it's the same number, right?

42.

Yeah.

All right, 4250 and 4300 Dauphin Island Parkway.

Name and address.

We'll go through the whole.

It's just a matter of formality.

No worries.

Uh Brock Jones, uh 11 Northwater Street, suite 9290, uh, with Kimley Horn.

Okay, now this one is um a very actual variance request.

Correct, yes, sir.

Okay, and why should the board consider the variance request?

So there's several points on here.

There is, and so this project really includes construction of two lift stations.

This is one of the first sites.

Um, these are critical infrastructure for MAS.

These um lift station facilities which pump wastewater flow, have high voltage electricity.

They also have uh mechanical bar screens, so limiting access to the public is kind of a safety concern.

Um, and so that's why we have a lot of the requests for variances.

So happy to answer any questions if there are any.

Okay, well, part of this is tree planting and landscape, variance from those requirements.

So the the existing site that we are working with, um, it's very constrained in terms of property boundaries, wetlands, drainage.

We're using up all that we have available to us without impacting the existing wetlands environment, all those kind of things.

Um, and so that's why we're requesting also the these facilities are not manned 24-7, they are um re frequently visited by maintenance and operation staff, and so then being able to drive up very quickly and see everything's operating uh like it needs and intended is is something that's critical for the project.

Okay, so there wouldn't be any screening from residential so you have a fence, and that fence is gonna be code vinyl coded, it can either be black or green.

Um, but now they need to be able to visually see the pump station as they're driving up to it, make sure you know no one's accessing it.

That's not supposed to, those kinds of things.

Okay, are there any kind of security systems?

There are so there um the they have notifications if someone accesses the building because it's not manned 24-7.

Also, it's completely fenced and has lock and key.

That's one of the reasons why we also request the variance to not do wood fencing because wood fencing is just not as resilient.

Um, and also it's easy to easier to access wood fencing than it is metal barbed wire fence.

Okay, all right.

Questions of the board for the applicant?

Teller anything the frontage trees they're still Crape Myrtles out front, so there seems to be sufficient vegetation at this time.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Uh anyone in support or opposition to the application has anything to add today.

All right, thank you.

No public comment regarding this.

All right, chair entertain a motion.

Motion to approve, Mr.

Chair, subject to findings of fact.

Okay, a motion to approve, subject findings fact.

I have a second.

And there are also some conditions.

So y'all, y'all are getting lazy in your motion making here.

Uh identify the findings of fact and the conditions, please.

And subject to the conditions outlined one through six.

Second emotion.

Okay.

I have a motion with a second with uh findings of fact as listed.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Motion carries.

Thank you.

All right, and uh this is your third out of four.

Your name and address again.

Brock Jones, 11 Northwater Street, suite 1990 with Kimley Horn.

This is regarding application 6733 for 2590 Dolphin Island Parkway, sir.

Okay, and this is for a special exception as well.

Uh tell us why we should consider this.

Um again, so we're requesting the approval to allow wastewater lift station.

This is critical infrastructure.

Um, it is an R1 designation again, but this is um to allow for um repumping of the wastewater flows from the previous project.

So it's um increasing capacity of the area, um, and it just really supports um overall wastewater uh infrastructure of that area.

Okay, any questions of the board for the applicant?

Mr.

Chairman, yes.

Is this the same site or has it it's another site that is further down Dolphin Island Park?

And it will be and will be constructed the same type of improvements.

Correct, exact same just another one just like it.

Correct, yep.

There's already one down there.

There is so we're actually replacing that one that's down there.

It's small.

It's it's it's small, it's not doesn't have enough capacity.

It was built, I think, back in the 70s, so it's it's beyond its useful life.

Is that gonna be eliminated?

It's gonna be eliminated, yeah.

Taken down.

Yep, completely demoed um and graded out.

Okay, thank you.

Yep, okay.

Any other questions for the board for the applicant?

Okay, anyone in the audience either in support or opposition to the application for a special exception.

All right, we have none for the record, and uh any public comment regarding this one as well?

No, sir.

All right, thank you.

That'll conclude our public hearing regarding the request for special exception.

Chair entertain a motion.

Motion to approve with the special acceptance, binding effects.

I need to call them out, ABCDEFG at K A L L P and the conditions one through three, right?

And condition one, two, and three.

For Mr.

Anderson's benefit.

All right.

I have a motion to approve.

Do I have a second?

Second.

I have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

All right, motion carries.

All right.

I think we're on your last one, right?

All right.

This is for 6734 regarding 2590 Dolphin Island Parkway.

This is for an application for a variance, series of variances.

Uh, your name and address for the record.

Yep, and Brock Jones, 11 North Water Street, suite 1990 representing Kimley Horn.

All right, and why should the board consider this application?

Again, this is Ma's critical infrastructure.

As you can see, the property boundaries we working with are pretty tight.

Um, there's existing wetlands, there's existing uh property constraints, and so we're very limited on where this lift station can go.

It's also re pumping flows from the one that is down south.

So that is the reason for the request of variants.

Okay, and do we have any landscape tree issues on this property, Mr.

Okay?

All right, any questions of the board for the applicant?

All right, do we have anyone that would like to speak in favor or in opposition to the application today?

All right, we have none for the record.

Thank you.

That conclude our public hearing regarding this application.

With that, chair entertain a motion motion to approve with a nice and facts, A B and C and filing condition one, two, three, four, five, and six.

One, two, three, four, five, and six.

All right.

I have a motion to approve.

Do I have a second?

Once again.

Second.

Second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Motion carries.

Right.

All right.

We're on application nine.

This is uh for 5831 U.S.

Highway 90 West.

Good afternoon.

Your name and address, sir.

Good afternoon, Sir Harold Russell with uh Edward Sign and Graphics from one Freedom Square Law, Mississippi.

All right.

And this is for variance for a wall sign greater than 350 square feet.

Informational signs greater than 20 and community best business district unified UDC limits wall signs to a maximum of 315 limits information signs to 20 and it'll be three community business district.

So why should we consider your application?

Any questions you say?

Yeah, I'm asking you why should we consider it?

Oh, oh, oh, I'm sorry, I misunderstood you.

The uh the sign bearings is asking for that change uh to be allowed.

Uh it's sort of across their brand, that's the size of their signs across the brand to the greatest degree possible.

When this permit was first applied, it was in applied through in Mobile County by ARA, and just before they issued it, they said, Oh, we can't issue this.

This is not our jurisdiction.

So we find out at the last minute, it's instead of being theodore and which it is in Theodore, but it's in Mobile City proper and not in Mobile County.

So we we just come to the board asking for the variance, keeping the sign consistent across their uh brand.

Uh it was a formal Wind Dixie being changed to a corner market.

Uh they've been expanding as Windixie's been going away.

Yeah, I remember when it was annexed in and about the same time the signs changed.

So we've seen this property once before, I think.

All right, questions of the board for the applicant.

All right, do we have anyone in the audience either in support or opposition to the application of the day?

All right.

That'll conclude our public hearing regarding the application.

Um chair entertain a motion.

Can I I've got a question real quick, Mr.

Chair?

Yes.

The differential on the signs that for staff, I'm sorry.

Um, so the corner market sign that's uh out front on the pile line.

Is that filling a box that was there previously, or is that a completely on the freestanding sign?

Yeah, the corner market sign out front.

Yes, sir.

That was refacing an existing sign cabinet.

Okay, so it's not increasing the sign from what was there, it's just refacing.

Correct.

It's only the wall signage that's under consideration for the variance.

Okay, and the wall signs that are greater than 20.

How how much larger are those?

So the corner market one, let's see.

I have to do the math just a moment.

Quite a bit.

Yeah, uh the corner market sign.

I I don't have that number with me.

Um, but it would be the 60, it's uh 62 feet wide, 62 and a half feet wide almost by at least six feet tall.

Uh so sixty two times the at least three hundred and seventy-five square feet uh three hundred and fifty is the maximum, uh, and then twenty square feet is the maximum for the informational signs, and those vary in their size, but uh do exceed the twenty square feet.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Okay, any further questions.

Okay, I just want to make sure that number was identified in the motion uh before in the record.

So they would be limited to that.

Okay, thank you.

All right, any other questions, comments of the board?

Okay, with that, chair entertain a motion motion to approve, Mr.

Chair, um, with consideration that the uh the wall sign will not be any greater than 350 square feet, and the informational signs no greater than 20 square feet.

And well, if you do 350, you'll be within code, you won't have to have a variance.

I'm sorry.

My apologies.

I was reading the wrong thing.

Subject to considerations and findings of facts, standards of review.

Okay, and 375 is what the approximate right.

375 square feet.

Is that what you need to dough?

Not to exceed 375.

Maybe instead of throwing in an exact number, we can just say limited to the size depicted in the application.

Limited to the size depicted in the application.

Yeah, thank you.

I think that'll be helpful.

All right, do I have a motion to second?

Second.

Have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Okay, motion carries.

All right, application 10, which is 6736 regarding 1558 Lowling Street.

If I mispronounce it, I apologize.

Yeah.

Yes, but that's uh 1558 low link.

My name is Dennis Carlisle.

I'm the architect on that project.

Your address, sir.

1568 Monterey Place Mobile.

And why should the board consider the application?

Well for several reasons.

Um the carriage house, this is a three-phase project.

First is to build a carriage house, second is to renovate the main dwelling, the third is to landscape build a pool and a courtyard.

And because of a neighbor that's across the easement, their property overlooks, he's actually over the property line.

It's a two-story structure that looks in the backyard of our property.

So we want to fix our carriage house directly behind the main dwelling to create a buffer.

So we're asking for some additional feet back there to allow for the family to be a little more safe around the pool.

And because the property line is at a skewed angle relative to the street and the geometry of the structures, we're actually giving up three and a half feet if you measure on the northeast off the corner of our carriage house to the property line.

It's over 8.5 feet.

That's if you give a minimum distance off the north west corner because of the relative the hypotenuse of the ankle.

So we're asking to measure that distance of five feet from the center line of the structure.

That will give us an average dimension across the rear.

And it will give in about two and a half feet to our courtyard.

What is the size of the carriage house?

What's the square footage?

Total of two stories, it's about 2100 square feet.

Okay.

So about 1100 square feet footprint.

And then what is the size of the deck between or whatever deck or concrete between it and the pool?

Beg your pardon?

What's the distance between the pool and the carriage house?

I think it's 24, 25 feet.

Okay, so the carriage house couldn't be shifted towards the pool any more than well, three feet.

To allow for a reasonable small pocket pool.

And some I know distance around the courtyard between the pool and the house and the pool and the carriage house.

So this will give them a little more gracious space around there.

Okay.

Questions of the board for the applicants, rep.

All right.

Do we have anyone either in support or opposition to the application today?

Is there any issue regarding coverage square foot coverage of the site?

Well, there staff.

Oh, go ahead.

I'm sorry.

No, sir.

There was previously because technically the site uh was two lots, however, they did a one lot subdivision, and so site coverage is compliant now.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Questions of the board for the applicants rep once again.

All right.

Yes, sir.

I'd like to mention a couple other things around the our immediate uh address.

It's not on Lowling Street, but it's a property that adjoins our property off the corner on the northeast corner.

It's I think 106 Catherine Street.

Their property abuts our property, but they have actually built onto the property line.

And then as I mentioned earlier, the structure that's across the east, it has an address of Monterey Place, 1557, I think Monterey Place.

That two story apartment is hanging over the property line.

And I think it's in the packet of material that y'all have.

It shows that.

But that's the one that actually looks into our back of our property that we're trying to screen from.

So I just wanted to point those out.

There are two in the area that are that are similar.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

Welcome.

All right.

Once again, we have no one in the audience either in support or opposition.

All right, that'll conclude our public hearing regarding the application.

Comments of the board.

All right.

Chair entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion due to the area of town.

There's a lot of structures on these back alleys built right up on the property line.

So I'll make the motion to uh approve.

Following findings effect.

Uh A B and C subject conditions one, two, and three.

Okay.

I have a motion to approve.

Do I have a second?

Second.

I have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Motion carries.

All right.

Application 6737, 6566 regarding 824 West I-65 Service Road South.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh members of the board.

I'm Jay Watkins with Maynard Nexon, 11 Northwater Street, uh suite 24290.

This is for three freestanding signs, a four wall signs and a B3 community district, service suburban district, unified development code limits.

Single site to three and no more than one freestanding sign.

You want to tell us why we should consider it?

Yes, sir.

Um, this is the DI Sun Hotels.

This is the new Drury in and suites in the southwest quadrant of airport and uh I-65.

Uh this is a very substantial sites, almost four and a half acres.

Uh it's unique in this context that it fronts not only the service road, but it also has frontage, uh, substantial frontage along Western American Circle.

Um what we're asking for is to allow uh wall signs designating the jury end logo on all four sides of the building.

Uh if you look at the map, it's got close proximity to not only Airport Boulevard but also I-65.

Um, and we would like to be able to address uh the name and logo of the building from all directions.

Uh also with respect to the the frontage on both the service road and Western American, we would like a pylon sign indicating the entries.

Uh and last, uh, due to proximity to I-65, um, the property would be uh allowed a pole sign, and so uh given the large size of the site itself and the multiple frontages, we feel like this is not uh an unusual request.

Um additionally, this was originally three lots, and we came in and uh asked for it to be a single le legal out of record.

So we feel like had it been developed as three lots, uh you would be looking at nine, potentially nine or more signs uh in that configuration.

Uh so we feel like the the justifications are there to support a request for the signage uh on the building as well as the pylon signs.

There is a lot of signs, uh no doubt, Mr.

Chairman.

Yes, Jay, you're asking for one also facing southwest facing Western America.

Yes, sir.

So a pile on a pile on Western America indicating the entryway, a pile line on airport.

No, I was talking about on the building itself, the building itself, yes, sir.

That seems a bit uh excessive to me.

I mean, you you've got I can see where where you would want the frontage going north and south, yes, sir.

Um, and on airport um 65, but I know that streak pretty well, it's not traveled unless you're going back to the executive center.

So um I I think that's a bit excessive.

Uh Mr.

Metcalf, I I don't necessarily disagree.

I have a client who made a request.

I'm doing my job, and I think we would certainly uh be grateful for uh whatever concessions this board would grant.

And so if you feel like that is uh a little too much for this particular site, we certainly understand that.

Okay, thanks.

Okay, any other comments of the board or questions?

I I would concur with Mr.

Metcalf's assessment because I was thinking the same thing.

All right.

Any questions once again?

All right, do we have anyone in the audience either in support or opposition to the application?

Do we have any public comment regarding this application?

No, sir.

Okay.

Well, that'll conclude our public hearing regarding the application.

Chair entertain a motion.

Chair, I uh um move to approve um on the standards of review and the considerations um uh AB and C and one and two subject to uh the elimination of the request for the sign spacing southwest to uh um on the building um um to American Western America Circle.

Okay, I have a motion with a condition to eliminate one of the requested wall signs.

Any further questions, comments?

All those in favor say aye.

Excuse me.

Wait a minute, I I I need to call for a second.

I apologize.

Do I have a second?

Second.

I have a second.

Okay.

With that, all those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Motion carries.

All right.

Application 6738 regarding 360 Palmetto Street.

Your name and address for the record.

Yes, Patent Hond 1901 6th Avenue North Birmingham, Alabama for the applicant.

Um I think as your staff report uh indicates the the amount of variances we're not actually seeking here and are not uh we're not acting, we don't actually need a setback variance, and we don't actually need a parking space uh relief from the parking space variance.

The variances we're talking about for this proposed cell tower are for camouflage and for landscaping.

And before I talk about those specifically, this is the culmination of an attempt to locate a cell tower site for eight years since Al Dot began its original project down there.

There was originally coverage down there on almost on that very parcel before it was condemned by Aldot and the tower had to come down.

Following that, they've moved to a hot the holiday inn close by the Holiday Inn remodeled their roof and said you have to leave.

So ever since that time they've had a kind of temporary they call a cell on wheels, and this is an attempt to find a permanent spot for the cell coverage.

And this is cell coverage specifically in this instance for ATT, but we would imagine that Verizon and T-Mobile would need to also to put uh their equipment on this tower because it serves a very important uh uh basically serves a lot of downtown mobile.

Um we've proposed uh variants from the camouflage requirement because we think trying to put a stealth stealth this tower would simply increase the visual uh its visual impact on the area.

We've we proposed a variance from the landscaping requirement because there really isn't sufficient size to fully landscape this parcel, which also happens to be an industrial parcel, but we have proposed in our plans to put trees on the pro on the project.

And I'm happy to answer any questions.

Um Sean Blaziken from municipal communications is also here with me today.

Okay, now we did receive comments from uh the L dot.

But I did, and our representative is here, so I was gonna wait to address those once I heard those.

Okay.

All right.

Questions of the board for the applicant and from a tree standpoint, Mr.

Anything from your perspective.

There is there is limited frontage to plant trees along the the roadways.

Uh but we do definitely need to see some tree plantings take place that that helps on this.

Okay, thank you.

I'd like to say there are some outlined in our plans that are in your packet.

All right, and do we have anyone else to speak on this request in support?

All right, anyone in opposition?

We have Al Dot here.

Yes, sir.

And by the way, we did have uh handouts that was presented to all of you.

Your name and address, sir.

Yeah, my name's uh Paul uh Jellino.

Um I'm an employee of uh Alabama Department of Transportation address 1701 uh I-65 West Service Road Mobile.

Um Dot's position is just the proximity.

Yes, uh the gentleman spoke that we did condemn that property and there was an existing cell site on there.

I don't I don't know the height of that site or what the characteristics of of it was, but my recollection is I think they may have moved down St.

Emmanuel Street to the south.

I don't uh I know they relocated back during the project eight, was it ATC uh on the on the tower?

Um but Aldots concern is the proximity.

Um I provided a couple of exhibits.

I wish I had uh additional copies, I didn't, but but the first exhibit is a a plaid of one we acquired from uh Mr.

Hardy and in blue shows the remainder and that that cell tower is gonna be about 15 feet from our right-of-way line.

And um that's you know 160 feet that the um the tower would go the height would go well over across the center line of our of our Mobile River Bridge project as the the approach goes to the main span to go over the river.

And um uh along with that, just the struct structural integrity of it, you know, if a collapse would happen, you know, what would it do to the infrastructure?

Also, to the bridge at that location, if you look on the aerial that uh provided, it has a uh circumference there of a hundred and sixty-foot radius, which I think is that's the height of this tower.

And um it doesn't show the present Rodaby line, but you can see our fence that we put there, but but at this location between those piers, the elevation of the road at that location is gonna be about 160 feet in elevation, similar to the um similar to the tower height, then the radio frequencies, how does that affect the traveling public?

We don't we don't know.

We you know we haven't done any studies of that measure.

Um and you know what kind of exposure would would the traveling public have, and then also just uh radio uh frequencies if it would interfere with any of our uh system operations for the for the bridge, as well um as it's been told it's gonna be a toll booth and those mechanisms that supply that uh the frequencies that supply that how how will they affect it?

So those are our main concerns uh about the tower in opposition to it, and um so we just ask y'all to according to the uh unified development code per y'all's literature that you know the the the requesting a variance from that 160 foot understand it the code they're in compliance with light industrial uh offsets, but we we we respectfully request y'all to to look at our concerns and um and consider the unified development code requirement.

And that's that's all I have.

Any questions of the board?

Yeah, Mr.

Chairman.

Yeah, so if the if the road bed is essentially the same, 160 some odd feet as what the top of the I'm sorry.

So what we're saying is that the top of the tower where the equipment is would essentially be at the same elevation as the road bed itself.

Yes, obviously at that point it's going up maybe from like 140, maybe towards the south property line, getting up to to 160, once 165 as it goes through the property.

So you and you're concerned about about its um structural integrity if it fell down.

Well that too, and also too uh the tower itself would be about.