Loading...
BZA 07-19-11 Meeting Agenda5) Other AGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia July 19, 2011 3:25 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 1) Determination of a Quorum 2) Minutes of June 21, 2011 PUBLIC HEARING 3) Appeal Application #01 -11 of Dr. Ayman Salem, who is appealing the decision of the Zoning Administrator as to Chapter 165 Zoning, Part 201 Supplementary Use Regulations, Signs, under Sections 165- 201.6G(7)(c) Height and 165- 201.611(7)(c) Size, of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. The subject property is located at 241 Garber Lane, and is identified with Property Identification Number 64 -A -5 -C in the Shawnee Magisterial District. PUBLIC MEETING 4) Variance Request 1102 11 of Connie Carter, fora 13 f of front yard variance, resulting in a 17 foot fr nt yard setback, for a deck. This property is located at 130 Rhinchart Lane, and is identified with Property Identification Number 28 A 22 in the Gaincsboro Magisterial District. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN CANCELLED. MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building, 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia, on June 21, 2011. PRESENT: Jay Givens, Vice Chairman, Back Creek District; Gary Oates Stonewall District; Eric Lowman, Red Bud District; Bruce Carpenter, Gainesboro District;f and 'Robert W. Wells, Member -At- Large. ABSENT: Kevin Scott, Chairman, Shawnee District; and{ R: K. Shirley, I11, Opequon District. STAFF PRESENT: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator;_and Dellinger, BZA Sec, The meeting was called to order.by.Vice Chairman Givens at 3:25 p.m. and he determined there is a quorum. On a motion made by Mr. Wells and seconded By Mr Carpenter;'the minutes for the May 17, 2011 meeting were unanimously approved as'presented X44 a Vice Chairman Givens inquired if there are any applications pending for July, other than the two that were tabled from May.�Mr. Cheran responded there are no new applications at this time; the cut off date is Friday, June 24, 2011. CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request #03 -11 ofOrange Partners at Kernstown Commons, for a four and one half foot variance of the ten foot setback for an interstate sign as it relates to Chapter 165 Zoning, d'art 704 IA Interstate Area Overlay District, Section 165- 704.05(1)(1) District Regulations; Setback Requirements. The subject property is located °on'the southwestern quadrant interchange for Route 37 and Route 11 in Kernstown, and is identified with Property Identification Number 75 -5 -10 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. ACTION VARINANCE APPROVED Mr. Cheran presented the staff report. Frederick County adopted the Interstate Area Overlay District (IA) in 1995. The IA District qualifies uses to be allowed on the sign, height of the sign, number of signs and sign setbacks within the district. The IA District setbacks are ten feet from property lines. The applicant is requesting a four and one half foot variance of the required ten foot setback due to utility easement lines and the future expansion of Interstate 81. If granted, the variance Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1570 June 21, 2011 will result in a five and one half foot setback from the property line. Mr. Cheran stated that the sign itself has met the qualifications of and been approved by Frederick County and VDOT. Mr. Cheran further stated that the sign manufacturer met with him and VDOT. Because this is the interstate overlay and this request concerns VDOT's right -of -way, Mr. Cheran felt that VDOT should be represented in the meeting. VDOT, by email, stated that as Frederick County's regulations are more stringent than VDOT, they will defer the waiver question to the County. VDOT further stated that they have provided information so that "the applicant's engineer has been made aware of the planned excavation for the construction of the future I -81 Exit 310 ramps and C -D lanes, and should design the sign footer accordingly. The incursion into the zoning buffer': will be at the applicant's risk and liability should any problems arise from the future excavation on th e Interstate right -of- way." In conclusion, Mr. Cheran stated that this request fromcurrent setbacksof.the IA District may be justified to accommodate the future expansion of Interstate 81 aria due to the existing, utility easements in the vicinity which restricts movement of the sign. This variancerequest appears to meet the intent of The Code of Virginia 15.2309 (2). xf The application shows the request is for a five foot setback°'and Mr. Lowman asked Mr. Cheran if it is five feet or four and one half feet. Mr. Cheran responded they're requesting a four and one half foot variance resulting in a five and one half Mr. David Lellock, who is representing the applicant, stated thattwhere the sign is proposed to be located, Orange Partners has dedicated about 20 :feet of propertyyand'lhat the previous sign easement extended the original VDOT right-of-way line whichis actually. the fence line. Mr. Lellock said it is unique that they have donated the'property to VDOT but a new limited access fence has not been constructed yet. Mr. Scott Marsh of Marsh Z Legge Land Surveyors stated that he and Mr. Lellock work together. Mr. Marsh said the'additional'right-of wayis a voluntary right -of -way area and that it was the right thing to-do... A s ign be in the wrong place and cause people to go the wrong way or it can be in the correct place an help guide peopleto where they want to be. Further, this sign meets Frederick County's and VDOT's requirements Alaarger sign has a large concrete "dead man" and that's the restrictive element of where a sign is positioned. Mr. Marsh feels the sign is proposed for the right place and he requests- approval of this variance: Mr. Carp if they had looked into a monopole -type sign instead of a two post type sign as shown in their sign design.r;Mr. Bob Runyan of Eddie Edwards' Signs responded that what works out the best for all parties involved is to do a sign of this style, where the structural integrity of two poles is shared. With two poles, you don't have to have as much structure built into the huge cabinet, which is 23 feet wide and 22 feet tall, for all the properties' signs /logos. It would be very difficult to take a box that big and put it 80 feet in the air with just one support. Two supports makes for a safer, better built system. Mr. Oates asked if a monopole -type sign would work if it was 50 or 60 feet tall instead of 80 feet. Mr. Runyan stated the same issues are involved. The same square footage amount would be subject to up to maybe 90 mph winds. Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1571 June 21, 2011 Mr. Oates stated that one of VDOT's comments was that if the variance is granted, it will be at the applicant's risk and liability should any problems arise from the future exaction on the Interstate right -of -way. Mr. Lellock stated that the bottom of the sign foundation is going to be below their ditch line in this area. Mr. Lellock's understanding is that basically signs are now designed so that it would not be a fall hazard. So excavation near this is going to be minimal and it doesn't appear there will be any undercut of this sign. Mr. Oates stated it sounds to him like if the sign needs to be removed, it will be at the applicant's cost, not VDOT's. Mr. Oates asked if the applicant has any problem wiih,:the, condition of the variance. Mr. Lellock said they're fine with that provided they don't take more right-of-way. =J'� Vice Chairman Givens stated that it seems the setback question carne 'up: earlier this month, based on the date on the plat. Part of the applicant's reasoning of a variance is because the applicant has a manufactured sign. Why has the sign already been manufactured? Mr Marsh responded that originally the easement created for the sign was intended'to go ;:all the way to the existing right -of- way into the voluntary area There was an implication that was the'original intent and the reservation of all this was to allow for that Mr. Marsh explained the design of the sign is very standard and tailored to the site They're here for the variance; the sign-hasn't been built dnd the foundation hasn't been poured because they want to get this resolved with the variance.,,_ pipes. Vice Chairman Givens referred to a letter from Lellock Consulting to the BZA where it states "will require additional revisions to portions of the sign that have already been manufactured Mr. Ca ii" Lellock stated the only part of the'sign that's been:manufactured t is the columns and the columns have been ordered because there was a mistake made between the purchasing person and the vendor for the Mr. Cheran stated the applicantwas.'within. the County's required setback requirement and the permit was issued The applicant's representatives discovered this issue, came to the County for guidance and then applied for the variance. This accounts for what may appear to be a discrepancy in the time line. Mr. Wells asked Mr. Cheran it there was any other place on the property where the sign could be located and achieve the same signage effect without granting this variance. Mr. Cheran responded no Vice ChairmanGivensrasked if anyone present wished to speak either in favor of or against this variance request. There was'no response and Vice Chairman Givens closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. 1 i Discussion Vice Chairman Givens suggested that any motion that is made, particularly to approve, that we include the fact that the applicant is responsible. The BZA and the County will have no responsibility for approving a variance only not the design of the sign or any future design of 1 -81. Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1572 June 21, 2011 Vice Chairman Givens looked at the site and he understands that storm drain structures and the water lines would have to be relocated if the sign was moved back. Vice Chairman Givens questions if that's a hardship to relocate those utilities even though there is cost involved. Why wouldn't it work if the sign was moved a little further south? Mr. Lellock said if they try to move it past the structures that are existing, they'll have to go back through the process of moving the sign easement. That involves going back through the covenants with Kernstown Commons, which at times is cumbersome with some of the national tenants they have in the development. Another aspect is there is a certain distance that this sigh/has to'be located to existing parking spaces. Mr. Lellock believes right now they meet that criteria; but if they move further south, they'll be required to add additional paved surfaces and parking area's 'to rrieet;that requirement. Mr. Cheran stated this is a requirement of the Department of Transportation; they're very particular about signs on the interstates and byways. Vice Chairman Givens stated that would create `an''unusual hardship for the applicant. Mr. Lellock continued that the sign can only reach a certain' height. The way it's designed now, they are just at that height. The further they move south, the shorter the sign legs have to be, so poles that have been manufactured are going to be too long. Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals June 21, 2011 Other Respectfully submitted, Jay Givens, Vice Chairman Bev Dellinger, Secretary Mr. Wells made a motion to approve VananceRequest #03-I 1 of Orange Partners at Kemstown Commons with the understanding that after construction ofth that Frederick County and the Board of Zoning Appeals be held at bay,,and that any obstacle pertaining the sign or placement of the sign be held between the applicant and the Virginia Depart Transportation. the motion and the vote was unanimous. There being no further business, the Meetingg adjourned at 3:55 p.m. Page 1573 APPEAL APPLICATION #01 -11 DR. AYMAN SALEM Staff Report for the Board of Zoning Appeals Prepared: July 1, 2011 Staff Contact: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Board of Zoning Appeals to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING DATE: May 17, 2011 Tabled by Applicant until July 19, 2011 July 19, 2011 Pending SUMMARY FROM MAY 17, 2011 MEETING: The Board did not hear the public hearing because the applicant requested this application be tabled. STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Tim Mayfield, representative for Dr. Salem, stated in the May 17, 2011 BZA meeting that the reason they requested the appeal be tabled was because they retained the services of a new architecture firm to design a different sort of scheme to meet Frederick County's code requirements. To date, neither Mr. Mayfield nor Dr. Salem has contacted staff concerning a different type of sign. For that reason, no progress has been made in resolving the violations presented to Dr. Salem in a letter dated March 3, 2011, from the Zoning Administrator. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 241 Garber Lane. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 64 -A -5 -C PROPERTY ZONING USE: Zoning: B -2 (Business, General) Land Use: Veterinarian Office ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING USE: North: B -2 (Business, General) East: B -2 (Business, General) South: B -2 (Business, General) West: B -2 (Business, General) Land Use: Restaurant Land Use: Office /Vacant Land Use: Motel Land Use: Residential Appeal 01 -11, Dr. Ayman Salem July 1, 2011 Page 2 APPEAL: To appeal the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance in determining required height and size of a sign. REASON FOR APPEAL: Applicant is appealing the decision of the Zoning Administrator citing grade level of the adjacent street and also stating that the sign was existing when the property was purchased. STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant applied for a building permit to erect a sign 22 feet in height and 88 square feet in size to be located on the property at 241 Garber Lane. The proposed sign does not meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with regards to the height and size of the sign. The building permit was not signed nor was it issued by the Zoning Administrator, and a letter was sent to the applicant to modify the building permit for the sign. This letter stated that the permit in its current form could not be acted upon, as the sign would be in violation of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. The height of signage is noted within Section 165 -201.6 G (7) (c) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. which requires that signage height is to be reflective of the roadway upon which the site's entrance is located. The entrance for this site is located on Garber Lane and, due to this roadway's classification, the height of the sign is not permitted to exceed 12 feet. The size of signage is noted within Section 165 -201.6 H (7) (c) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, which requires signage size to be reflective of the adjacent roadway's classification. Due to Garber Lane's classification, the size of the sign shall not exceed 50 square feet. This building permit in its current form cannot be issued. In order for a building permit to be issued, the applicant will need to change the height and size of the sign, and reapply for a building permit. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE JULY 19, 2011 MEETING: Staff is requesting to affirm the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Section 165 -201.6 G (7) (c) signage height for this site not to exceed 12 feet, and Section 165 -201.6 11 (7) (c) signage size for this site not to exceed 50 square feet. 64B No FRONT ROY PIKE' LLC 64 A 4C COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 1 I y SAINATH LLC 64+AA 4B WINCHESTER 'cam CENTER TITANS G EORPCRATION NIM.. COMES WO COMM AMMO 64B A 1 AU BILLY D 64B.A 2 GA JAMES it 64B URLIN Al", G i r6461 2 HILDA'M' GORDON ENTERPRISES A,1 D SHRI PADMAVATI Appeal 01 2011 Dr. Ayman Salem PIN #64 -A -5C (Sign Height Size yr Interstate Overlay District CD Parcels IgApplication Future Rt 37 Bypass ICI Urban Development Area C O Sewer and Water Service Area Appeal 01 2011 Dr. Ayman Salem PIN 64 -A -5C (Sign Height Size) 0 100 200 400 1 1 1 I I Note: Frederick County Dept of Planning Development 107 N Kent St Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 540 665 5651 Map Created: April 4, 2011 eet Staff: mcheran BLACK INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGN CABINET W/ POLYCARBONATEFACE .AND.TRANSLUCENT VINYL GRAPHICS (3M' #22 BLACK, 3M #73 DARK RED) 3999 CARLISLE PIKE NEW OXFORD, PA 17350 16803 SOUTH NOTLEY RD HAGERSTOWN, MO Fax 717 www.strIcklerslgna.com n JEREMIAH REICHERT GAT Irekhert@slrleNesigns.com bud 717-624-7151 CLIENT/LOCATION SILVER SPRING VETERINARY HOSPITAL WINCHESTER, PA DRAWING NAM/ SILVER SPRING VETERINARY- HOSPITAL u PYLON SIGN DRAWING WEL 12/2/10 24660 3/8 -1 rw ELECTRIC REQUIREMENTS TOPED. SIGN __VOLT AMPS PER SIGN TOTAL_AMPS SIGN TO BE CONTROLLED BY TIMER P HOTOCELL TO BE STALLED AT SIGN ELECTRONIC SIGN VOLT _AMPS PER SIGN TOTAL_AMPS ELECTRIC sTP E ELECTRONIC SIGN E C LISTED ©COPYRIGHT MGNA1URE /10 DATE CCS co cc 0 0 0 0 PO 0 a GI ra rt. rxi N. CCI k[ n1 0 01 H 0 0 ea Permit Application Page Three SIGNS Type of Sign Monument Sign Size (Dimensions) 11' x 8', 88 SF Sign Reads Silver Spring Veterinary Hospital 540 662 -2301 Height From Ground To Top Of Sign 22.3' Other Signs On Property Input Amps 40 Input Volts 110 Marking Listing Number Square Footage of Front of Structure (if wall sign) ELECTRICAL PERMIT RESIDENTIAL: Amp Service (this is the only thing needed for new dwellings) For Additions/Remodeling: Number of Switches Lights Receptacles Size of sub -panel if adding one: Upgrading service to COMMERCIAL: (List all equipment, motors, and wiring) 110 PLUMBING PERMIT: Residential Commercial (list number of fixtures Basins Dishwasher Floor Drains Garbage Disposal Grease Traps Laundry Tub Sewer Pump Sewer Service Showers Sump Pumps Tubs/Whirpools Urinals Water Closets Water Heater Water Service Other MECHANICAL PERMIT RESIDENTIAL: (list number of fixtures installing) Heat Pump Gas Furnace A C Unit Gas Piping Gas Logs Gas Water Heater Other Size of Tanks Under 500 Gal. COMMERCIAL: (list all equipment giving btu's and tons) All building permits for residential jobs will need to submit 1 set of plans. by each) Fountain Lawn Faucets Sinks Wash Machine Well Pump Gas Range NOTE: All commercial jobs for building, electric, plumbing and mechanical will need to submit 2 sets of plans (sprinkler plans and fire suppression systems require 4 sets). March 3, 2011 Mr. Ayman Salem 241 Garber Lane Winchester, VA 22602 RE: Building Permit (Sign) #0736 -2010 241 Garber Lane Property Identification Number (PIN): 64 -A -5C COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 Dear Mr. Salem: This letter is in regards to a building permit applied for on December 12, 2010 for a sign to be placed on property located at 241 Garber Lane. This proposed sign does not meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with regards to the height and size of the sign. The permit notes the height of the sign as 22 feet and size as 88 square feet. Section 165 -201.6 G (7) (c) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires signage height to be reflective of the roadway upon which the site's entrance is located. The entrance for this site is located on Garber Lane and, therefore, due to this roadway's classification, the height of the sign is not permitted to exceed 12 feet. Section 165 -201.6 H (7) (c) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires signage size to be reflective of the adjacent roadways classification. Due to Garber Lane's classification, the size of the sign shall not exceed 50 square feet. This building permit in its current form cannot be issued at this date. In order for a building permit to be issued you will need to change the height and size of the sign, and reapply for a building permit. You have the right to appeal this notice of violation within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter in accordance with Section 15.2 -2311 of the Code of Virginia. This decision shall be final and unappealable if it is not appealed within thirty (30) days. Should you choose to appeal, the appeal must be filed with the Zoning Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) in accordance with Article X, Section 165- 1001.02 (A), of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. This provision requires the submission of an application form, a written statement setting forth the decision being appealed, the date of decision, the grounds for appeal, how the appellant is an aggrieved party, any other information you may want to submit, and a $300.00 filing fee ($250.00 filing fee and a $50.00 refundable sign deposit). Once the appeal application is accepted, it will be scheduled for public hearing and decision before the BZA. If you have any questions call me at (540) 665 -5651. Sincerely, Mark R. Cheran Zoning Administrator Enclosure MRC/bhd cc: 3- .Michael Solak, Esq., 102 S. Kent St., Winchester, VA 22601 John Trenary, Building Official 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 APPLICATION FOR APPEAL IN THE COUNTY OF. FREDERICK, VIRGINIA MUST BE TYPED OR FILLED OUT IN INK PLEASE PRINT 1. The applicant is to list the owners x adult occupants or parties in interest of the property (Check one) OCCUPANT: (if different) NAME: Dr. Ayman Salem NAME: ADDRESS 241 Garber Lane ADDRESS: 2. APPLICANT: Winchester, VA 22602 TELEPHONE: (540)662 -2301 TELEPHONE: 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): 241 Garber Lane, Winchester, VA 22602 The parcel is triangular in shape and located between Interstate 81 and U.S. 522 South. near Costco. 4. Magisterial District: Shawnee 5. Property Identification No.: 64 si• 6. The existing zoning of the property is: B2 7. The existing use of the property is: Veterinary Hospital 8. Adjoining Property: USE ZONING North Business B2 East B7 South Business B2 West Business B2 9. Describe the decision being appealed. (Attach a copy of the written decision.) The denial of Building Permit (Sign) 11 0736 -2010, 241 Garber Lane, dated March 3, 2011. A copy of the written decision is attached. 10. Describe the basis of the appeal, indicating your reason(s) for disagreeing with the decision. (This may be provided on separate sheet.) The denial of the permit applied foron 12', 2010 was improper. The adjacent roadway of this site is U.S. Route 522 and pursuant to 165- 201.6G(8) "sign height shall be measured from the grade level of the adjacent street... 11. Additional comments, if any: The existing sign was present when the property was purchased by Dr. Salem. Without being able to advertise on Route 522, this business cannot remain at this location. Beall House LC c/o Henkel Harris Co i P, nch 0. este Box r, 21V72 22604 -1370 Address 210 Front Royal Pike Property ID 64 -A -3 Commonwealth of Virginia P. 0. Box 2249 Staunton, VA 24402 -2249 Address none Property ID 64 -A -4C Front Royal Pike, LLC P. 0. Box 2468 Winchester, VA 22604 -1668 Address 250 Front Royal Pike Property ID 643 -1 -4 Cracker Barrel Old Country Store ATTN: Property 17GT P. 0. Box 757 Lebanon, TX 37088 -0787 Address 200 Front Royal Pike Property ID 64 -A -1E Grimes, Jerry L. Patricia B. 229 Garber Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Address 229 Garber Lane; 198 Garber Lane pro ert ID P Y 64 -A -5B Nations Media, LLC 201 Shannon Court Winchester, VA 22602 -2373 Address none PropertylD 64 -A -1A Address Property ID Address Property ID Address Property ID Address Property ID Address Property ID 12. The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to the property for which the appeal is being sought, including properties at the sides, rear, and in front of (across street from) the subject property. (Use additional pages if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application: (Please list Property Identification Number.) NAME SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT (if other than applicant) APPEAL OVERRULED File 0: \Land U se Application FormsWPPEAL Revised 01/14 AGREEMENT APPEAL D 1 1 I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully petition the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) to overrule the administrative interpretation of the County Zoning Ordinance as described herein. I agree to comply with any conditions required by the BZA. I authorize the members of the BZA and Frederick County officials to go upon the property for site inspection purposes. I hereby certify that all of the statements and information contained herein are, to the best of my knowledge, true. SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE 1 DATE 05-5)—\\ OFFICE USE ONLY BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF 5//7 l MELO) ACTION: DA E- /iq /1 h APPEAL SUSTAINED SIGNED: DATE: BZA CHAIRMAN 05 -13 -2011 04:22pm From- HARRIe& JOHNSTON HARRISON JOHNSTON, PLC 21 South Loudoun Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 P.O. Roe 909 Winchc ter, Virginia 22604 Telephone 540.667.1266 Facsimile 540.667.1312 Frederick County Department of Planning and Development Mark R. Cheran Zoning Administrator 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Building Permit #7036 -2010 241 Garber Lane Property Identification Number: 64 -A -5C Dear Mr. Cheran, May 13, 2011 5406671314 T -765 P.002/002 F -299 Timothy M. Mayfield mayficld r@hanison johnston.com I write in regard to the above matter which is scheduled for a hearing on May 18, 2011 at 3:30 p.m. before the Board of Zoning Appeals. As we discussed earlier today, the property owner Ayman Salem and I are working toward an alternative solution to the problem of locating signage on the property. We have hired the architecture firm Carter+Burton. Who have been in contact with Dana Johnston of your office and are working toward approval of a plan involving placing a sign on the building rather than continuing the use of a free- standing sign. I would therefore request that our appeal scheduled for next Tuesday be tabled to allow more time for the development of this alterative plan and its approval. I appreciate your consideration of this request and look forward to further discussion and a mutually agreeable resolution of this case. With kind regards, I am TMM /abc cc: Dr. Ayman Salem Carter+Burton Architecture Very Truly Yours, Timothy M. Mayfield