00:14:29.250 --> 00:14:35.970 christian harden (DDRB Chair): So I'm going to go ahead and call to order. This is the July 9 Meeting of the DDR be July 9 2020. In an effort to slow the spread of covid 19 and to encourage social distancing governor DeSantis issued Executive Order 20-69 allowing local governments local governments to hold public meetings using communication media technology, rather than a physical location. In keeping with THE EXECUTIVE ORDER THE DOWNTOWN Development Review Board meeting is being held via zoom teleconference which allows interested persons to view and participate in the meeting remotely. I'm going to go ahead and introduce our staff that is an attendance. We have Ina, we have Guy, Lori Radcliffe-Meyers, and then I see we have Kealey West from the Office of General Counsel today. We have Karen Underwood as well. And Steve Kelley from DIA. And then we have our board. We've got Trevor Lee vice chair, we have Joe Loretta, Bill Schilling, Brenda Durden, and I believe that is it. We're waiting on Joe Loretta. Okay welcome Joe Loretta. The agenda for this meeting can be viewed and downloaded from the city of Jacksonville website by navigating to https://dia.coj.net/downtown/Downtown-Development-Review-Board-(DDRB). When the meeting has concluded the recorded version may be accessed by emailing rmezini@coj.net. Then I'm going to hand it over to Ina to explain how to use the zoom toolbar for participants. 79 00:16:36.060 --> 00:16:43.260 Ina Mezini: Thank you, Christian. I see most of you are on your desktop. So for those of you that are if you hover over the bottom toolbar will appear and on the lower left hand corner, you'll see a mute button next to the stop video. So there, you'll be able to mute unmute yourself also share and stop sharing your video as well. And then in the middle, sort of middle in your of your toolbar. There is a participants button and by clicking that you're able to see who's in the meeting, but also be able to rename yourself, raise your hand and also mute and unmute yourself there as well. And that is about it for the general directions. If you are on the phone and you want to mute that star six. And if you want to raise your hand on the phone that's star nine. If you have any difficulties with anything like this. Just email me at rmezini@coj.net. Thank you. 84 00:17:32.220 --> 00:17:36.390 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay. Do we need to go into any other details on public comments. 85 00:17:39.660 --> 00:17:51.300 Ina Mezini: Public comment is received, until one minute from now, I have not received any via email. If anybody that is on the call right now wants to raise their hand and speak. They may, but I did not receive any public comment. 86 00:17:52.500 --> 00:17:53.070 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay, great. Alright. So go ahead and start with our action items today. First we will review the approval of the June 12 2020 DDRB regular meeting minutes. Seeking a motion for approval. 90 00:18:13.890 --> 00:18:14.490 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): I'll make a motion to approve. 91 00:18:16.110 --> 00:18:16.830 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Motion to approve. 92 00:18:17.550 --> 00:18:23.100 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay so motion by Mr. Lee a second by Ms. Durden. All in favor say aye. 93 00:18:23.790 --> 00:18:24.930 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Aye. Brennda Durden (DDRB Board): Aye. Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Aye. 94 00:18:25.260 --> 00:18:25.590 Joe Loretta (DDRB Board): Aye. 95 00:18:26.670 --> 00:18:33.930 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Alright we have five ayes, motion carries. all right we're going to move next to item B. DDRB 2020-008 Woolsey Morcom Special Sign Exception. Applicant is here, Ms. Kelly Varn. I'll go ahead and hit it to Ms. Radcliffe-Meyers to provide the staff report. 97 00:18:48.900 --> 00:19:00.240 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Thank you, Chairman Harden. My name is Lori Radcliffe-Meyers with the Downtown Investment Authority, and I will be presenting an overview of DDRB application 2020 008, The Woolsey Morcom Special Sign Exception. DDRB application 2020 008 seeks approval for a special sign exception to allow for two proposed wall signs per street frontage. Wall signs painted on or afixed to buildings, up to five stories in height, the shall not exceed 10% of total area of the facade fronting a street or 300 square feet, whichever is less. Each building may have one building identification sign per side of street frontage. The dimensions of the proposed wall signs are as follows: the Adams street front of sign is 48 inches in height by 31 feet two inches in length with an overall square footage of 124.66. The second sign requested is 52 inches in height by 13 feet eight inches in length with an overall square footage of 59.22. The allowed square footage for the atom street frontage is 185.14 feet their proposal all signs total 183.88 square feet. The request also includes two wall signs placed on the eastern facade of the building, which fronts toward Broad Street. Sign one is 70 inches in height by nine feet eight inches in length with an overall square footage of 56.38. Sign two is 70 inches in height by six feet five inches in length with an overall square footage of 37.43. The allowed square footage along this frontage just 174.8 the proposed signed square footage is 93.81. Due to the building being a single story building versus a multi story building staff is supportive of the wall signs along the eastern facade which fronts towards Broad Street. Staff understands that this is a different situation than the signage typically approved for single story buildings within downtown but feels that the proposal does not meet the strict letter the code due to the height of the building. So based on the foregoing the downtown development review board STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF DDRB application 2020 008 For a special sign exception to the downtown overlay district to allow for to wall signs per frontage as identified in the attack signage application request for approval. This concludes staff summation. staff is available for questions. Thank you. 111 00:21:48.960 --> 00:21:51.420 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Let's go ahead and turn it over to the applicant. 112 00:21:54.480 --> 00:22:08.550 Kelly Varn (Randy Taylor speaking, Kelly Varn present): Hi there, I'm Randy Taylor, Taylor Sign 4162 St. Augustine road Jacksonville, Florida, and also have Kelly Varn and my permit specialist also at 4162 St. Augustine road Jacksonville, Florida. Yeah, so we're going to pull up some drawings for you so you can take a look at everything. Have to bear with us too is all new to us as well. 115 00:22:25.320 --> 00:22:25.890 christian harden (DDRB Chair): No problem. 116 00:22:28.890 --> 00:22:33.660 Kelly Varn (Randy Taylor speaking, Kelly Varn present): That'll be fine. You can just click on the next page. Okay, so we'll see. That's the Adams Street. Yeah. Okay. Can everybody see the Adams Street. Ina Mezini (DIA Staff):Yes. 119 00:22:45.960 --> 00:22:51.300 Kelly Varn (Randy Taylor speaking, Kelly Varn present): Okay, all right, in this building. Obviously, they have two tenants so they're both looking for signage for the building. The Adams street side is right on the sidewalk. So, it is hard to see it until you get right up on the building and therefore on the other side of the building is where their parking lot is, which also shows there are signs there. The signs are conducive to the downtown overlay signage as far as their non illuminated so they're not intrusive or anything. There's no lumens or anything to be aware of. Basically for identification purposes and branding for the city. I mean, for the for the two different tenants that are in that building. So everything is we're under the square footage what we're allowed. So we're right there on our allowance part of it. And it's just the but there is dual tenants in that particular property So on the location you can see it's You can see that I'm seeing Yeah, so there's the building. There's kind of a overview of the building in the streets and you can see their parking lot area where the second sign is on that side of the building. There is an entrance in there so it is a way for people to park and get into the building and identify the building. And these are surrounding signs that are in that area, everything is kind of unique to the downtown buildings and this one we feel has a nice clean look to it. As I mentioned, it's not illuminated very professional. I think adds to the to the, you know, to the looks at the downtown area. Does anybody have any questions on any of that? christian harden (DDRB Chair): Does that conclude the presentation? 137 00:25:15.540 --> 00:25:25.440 Kelly Varn (Randy Taylor speaking, Kelly Varn present):Yeah, you can see the drawings. We've, we've got some comparables out there for you to take a look at and you know you've got the pictures of the building in question and as I mentioned, she's gone over the square footage allowances, we are under the square footage allowance for that building so it is I think conducive to what what the downtown is looking for. 140 00:25:42.930 --> 00:25:49.320 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Alright, well, we'll go ahead and start with the board. I'll go ahead and start with let's start with Mr Schilling. 142 00:25:55.560 --> 00:26:03.450 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I'll just ask ask a couple questions and these these are probably more more directed to staff. So so I understand the request here is the deviation is because the Adams street signage is actually two different signs and not necessarily one sign but from a overall square foot area the sign complies. The two signs combined comply with the, the size requirements so that's the first clarification question. I guess I'll ask that the staff, Miss. Miss Radcliffe Meyers through the chair. 146 00:26:38.400 --> 00:26:49.800 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Yes board member Schilling through the chair, you are correct. The reason that they're coming in for a special sign exception is to allow for two wall signs versus what's allowed one wall sign is allowed. But they are under the square footage that they are allowed for the frontage of the Adams street they would be allowed up to 185.14 square feet and the proposed wall signs combined both signs are 183.88 square feet. 149 00:27:10.380 --> 00:27:20.850 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Okay, great. And then for the, the two signs that are as I would call it on the side of the building. So, so technically, those would be the same deviation because there are two signs not one side but but i guess i understand. There was also possibly a deviation, because that wall does not actually, front, front on it right of away. Is that so, so really for the side signage. They're looking for two deviations to have those approved. 151 00:27:40.080 --> 00:27:50.820 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Board member Schilling through the chair, you are correct. Yes. So the Per the letter of the code that facade does not a but that property line does not abut a street frontage but it is street facing towards Broad Street. So they would be requesting the allowable going from one wall sign to to wall signs and then to allow for the signage to be placed on that facade. Correct. 153 00:28:12.270 --> 00:28:20.760 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): So, and then a couple questions to the to the applicant on the side wall signs, you know, knowing, knowing that they're not technically fronting a street.You know what. What are y'all seeing is the benefit of those signs and then the second question is, have Have y'all or the building owner, the tenants. Have y'all considered instead of doing the signs on the side of the building, doing a blade sign on the, I guess that would be the north east corner of the building there rather than signage on the side. 156 00:28:45.090 --> 00:28:48.270 Kelly Varn: First question, I'm sorry, repeat the first question again one more time. 157 00:28:48.660 --> 00:28:52.470 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Yeah. So the first question is on the side building signage you know the intent of that and you know what what you're targeting. And I guess the views from that side of the building, knowing it's not technically fronting a street what you know the goal. Y'all are trying to accomplish with that. 160 00:29:08.460 --> 00:29:13.530 Kelly Varn (Randy Taylor speaking, Kelly Varn present): Sure, basically when you're going down the street. As you can see the building is right on the sidewalk. So obviously, as you're going down the street, unless you actually have to look to your left to your right, depending which direction you're going. You would have to find the building now coming down the street that faces you as she mentioned So you're looking at that, that's also parking for that building. So as you're going down the street. If you're looking for a building, you don't see anything on that end of the building, you're pretty much going to miss it until you get in front of the building. And then you have to look to your left, or your right to see the sign. So we're feeling that this is going to help as far as safety wise and people are trying to find something they're not overshooting the parking lot and it's also as I mentioned, as an entrance on the side there. So people come down the road know where to park. They have had issues with people parking across the street and other people's properties and things like that. That will eliminate the confusion of the parking for most people to know that's the building. That's their destination and We feel that's just going to like say it's, I think it is a safety feature to as far as people not missing the building and trying to stop or turn around in the middle of the road or something like that. So, That's basically, I think, is the intention, because that is going to be more visible going in that direction and the front signage, obviously. 171 00:30:28.560 --> 00:30:28.980 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Okay. And then I said, the second question was, had there been any consideration instead of that, the signage on the building doing it as a blade sign on on the corner at that front edge of the building. 173 00:30:42.540 --> 00:30:44.310 Kelly Varn (Randy Taylor speaking, Kelly Varn present): Blade signs are restrictive. I'm not hundred percent sure on this.But I know it's blade signs, you're only allowed to project about three feet. It would be a very small sign it's overhanging the city right of away so therefore it can be a public safety issue if there was a hurricane or something like that. And something blows out. You're right on the sidewalk and things like that could you know, could be a safety feature as well, like I say, it really restricts the square footage. You couldn't do 186 square foot blade sign on that building would be from the roof to the ground and stick out too far. So this is really, you know, sticking within their total signage allocation and giving them some good exposure in the building and it looks modern. I think it's very nice looking signage, it's not just a name on a building. I have they both have nice logos. I think that enhances the building and in that area down there, because as we all know, there's some other signs down there aren't that nice. So I think this sets a nice trend going forward that this is nice looking signage and it's, as I mentioned, is not illuminated. So it's not intrusive, it's not you know, it's just really a good identification vehicle for people driving down the street and trying to find the building. 183 00:31:52.890 --> 00:32:04.890 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Okay, great. And, and then last question is, so based on the application. I just wanted to confirm it appears that there's no request to put any signage on the Jefferson street frontage of the building. 184 00:32:06.150 --> 00:32:11.700 Kelly Varn: No, currently, there is an existing sign there, but it's going to be removed and no they're not going to do any more signage on the social next one. Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Okay. All right. Yeah, that that answers all my questions. So yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 186 00:32:21.930 --> 00:32:27.330 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. I also want to let the record show that I do have Mr Davisson in attendance. I missed that earlier. So I apologize if he's maybe just popped in there, but I just saw. There's Craig and he's entered his name in so. All right, let's move down to Ms Durden for comment. 189 00:32:45.120 --> 00:32:46.380 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a question about the existing signage that's on the building through the chair to the applicant. I believe. Is this is a this is the same building where Bronco has her sign on the angle is that correct? 192 00:33:08.910 --> 00:33:10.740 Kelly Varn: Correct. That's correct, and that sign is being removed. 193 00:33:11.430 --> 00:33:13.020 brenna durden (DDRB Board): That sign is going to be removed? 194 00:33:13.140 --> 00:33:19.560 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Yes, ma'am. brenna durden (DDRB Board): And so is there any other current signage on the building? 195 00:33:20.520 --> 00:33:21.240 Kelly Varn: No that's the only one. 196 00:33:22.140 --> 00:33:22.530 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Okay. Is there space for more tenants in the building? And the reason I'm asking that is because the location on Adams street of your two signs looks like there's space in the middle for third sign. And I'm just wondering if you're anticipating that that there could be a third tenant at some point. 199 00:33:50.190 --> 00:34:00.510 Kelly Varn: As far as we understand no. It's just the building is split from the two two tenants that's it. Well they bought that building. They purchase that building. And it's only going to be them two. 200 00:34:01.800 --> 00:34:08.700 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Okay, um, Mr. Chairman. Is this a time for comment, or do you just want questions at this time? 201 00:34:09.750 --> 00:34:10.800 christian harden (DDRB Chair): I think it's for both. Yeah, especially in this format. I think it's probably good that we try to get as much out during this conversation, you know, to keep the conversation going. We do have three items on there. So we'll try to consolidate everybody's comments and questions. 203 00:34:24.750 --> 00:34:27.540 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Okay, thank you. I appreciated Mr Schillings questions. Um, and I really don't have any problem with the Adams street signage. I think that even though it's two signs, you are keeping within the maximum size and, that seems appropriate to me, given that our code says one sign per street frontage. I'm not comfortable with the signs on the side of the building. They're, number one, they're not on the street frontage number two they there's two signs and I appreciate your desire to or the applicants desire to have more signs, but our code is quite strict and calls for, you know, you to have signage on a street frontage. And so, in my opinion, this is goes far beyond the the intent of the sign code for the downtown area. I'm in favor of the Adams street signage. I think that there are some ways for you to if the blade sign is the same kind of sign that hangs down like over the sidewalk, there is a way for you to identify that if you will, from a sideways projection with some signs that would hang under the awnings and allow for them to utilize their logos, which I think is a good way of identifying businesses, but so I can't the application is one application so I think that I don't know that there's any way for me to vote in favor of the Adams street signage, but to not to vote against the side of the building. So I might ask staff or Ms. West, it is one application. Is that accurate or is there any way for me to divide my vote? 222 00:37:13.650 --> 00:37:21.690 christian harden (DDRB Chair): And I would say this before staff answers that question. You know, we've run into situations like this before. If there is not consensus on the sign then in your we're going around to the other board members. If you have a solution that would grant your approval, that we can consider that you know that that's not a that's not what, I asked him for a motion. But if you have a suggestion, we can consider that. 225 00:37:38.370 --> 00:37:47.820 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Okay, my suggestion would be that the the approval would would condition on the approval of the Adams street signage but not the but not this side, not the signage on the side of the building.Thank you very much. 229 00:38:00.420 --> 00:38:08.310 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay. All right. Thank you, Mrs Durden all move to just kind of working down our participant list and Mr Davisson. If you're speaking. Mr. Davis and Craig it's, it's on mute. 231 00:38:18.300 --> 00:38:18.990 Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): Can you hear 232 00:38:19.320 --> 00:38:20.310 christian harden (DDRB Chair): I can now. Yeah. 233 00:38:21.390 --> 00:38:24.750 Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): I guess, let me back up. My question goes to Lori. Maybe I was a little confused when we spoke about it earlier. This entity, it's, it's the owner owns the corner. How does the, how does the city by code look at street frontage and and you know side side in the sense of, you know, I asked the question, is the signage are both signage signage areas you know by code, but are they are both signage, as if they were under one on on Adams street would both those signs fall together added up together fall within the code minimum or code maximum rather. 242 00:39:22.110 --> 00:39:27.750 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Board member Davisson through the chair, you're correct. So in regards to the Adams street frontage, both the signs as they are now separated out meet their requirement in regards to what's allowed on the square footage of that facade. So they're not exceeding the square footage of that facade. The technicality with this is in regards to this is a one story building on a street corner, you're correct. And so obviously that East facade is it faces Broad Street, but does not the property line does not abut the street so per our code, that's how street frontage is viewed. Now, if this were a multi story building and if the building was built in a certain way that the east facing facade was the only placement for a sign. We would probably approve it. Because again, the way the buildings are built certain buildings have areas for signage, like the Barnett building and such like that. So we're looking at it more as that you know, we don't want to, you know, have a harsh look at the code based off of that. This is just a single story building and they're only allowed the Adams street frontage because the code is specifically states as such. So I review the project based off of that that East facade is street facing so it's facing towards Broad Street. It just does not abut it per our code, but even again that facade still would be under the allowed square footage for the signage. So again, the two signs along that East facade also are under the allowable square footage. 250 00:41:14.220 --> 00:41:22.320 Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): Okay. So I guess my question would be, let's pretend that where that parking lot is was just part of the building. That the building was twice the square footage and it covered the entire covered that corner of a lot, would they be allowed on a building that's one story to put a sign on Adams street as well as Broad Street. 252 00:41:40.920 --> 00:41:42.000 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: They wouldn be allowed...you mean if if Broad Street was up against that? 254 00:41:46.530 --> 00:41:58.410 Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): Let's just say that we're on the parking lot on the corner. Okay. Just opposite scenario would they be allowed to do what they're doing today or what they're proposing. 255 00:42:00.510 --> 00:42:01.530 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Yes, they would. 256 00:42:01.980 --> 00:42:06.510 Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): Okay, so then the issue becomes if they're allowed a sign at that scale at that dimension either A they could put it on the building or B then they can put it on the lot that abuts the sidewalk, which is really a fence on the edge of the pedestrian path, so they could basically technically move that sign to the fence. Is that correct, that would be an option? 260 00:42:33.000 --> 00:42:39.660 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Board Member Davisson. And I'm not sure about the putting it on the fence. Do you mean like a like a monument sign within? 261 00:42:40.230 --> 00:42:48.960 Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): Yes, if you're if we're saying that the square footage of the signage on with of the two signs meets our code, and we're supposed to have we're supposed to be an abutment to the property if they own the parking lot, then they can put a sign on the fence that abuts the sidewalk that's the way I would read it so it'd be hard to do that. 266 00:43:06.390 --> 00:43:09.930 guy parola: So if I may on behalf of Lori here. We would consider that to be a monument style sign. There is an avenue to get a monument style sign and that would be a special exception and if at another time, they decided they wanted to come in for a special exception for a monument style sign we would look at it that way. Right now, if you look at their walls or their frontages that that are allow wall signs. It's Adam Street and Jefferson so what they're asking for on their non street facing side. So there I guess I would be the East Side. The reason they're coming in for an exception is because under the code they're allowed zero square feet of signage on that because it doesn't front a road so regardless if it's one square foot or 1000 square feet, at the end of the day, they still have to come in for the exception for that particular sign when this case those particular two signs. So what I'm What I'm hearing is at least from a couple of the board members, is there a way to buy 4K the East signage, so the the signage on the portion of the building that has no frontage from the Adam street signage and grant an exception for those two signs, recognizing that those two signs or were combined into one would have a square footage within the allowable square footage pursuant to their frontage. Did I get that right, Lori? Nod on your head Guy you're a genius. 275 00:44:29.100 --> 00:44:31.110 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Correct. 276 00:44:33.690 --> 00:44:35.100 Craig: Thank you. That's all, that's all. Thank you. That's all I have. 278 00:44:40.620 --> 00:44:41.010 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. Thank you, Mr Davison. Let's see, Mr. Loretta 281 00:44:48.810 --> 00:44:50.490 Joe Loretta (DDRB Board): Hello, so I guess I don't have a big problems overall on the qualm the biggest issue, if any, would be the signage on the parking lot side is closer together and it's just much larger. So the signage.... 287 00:45:20.550 --> 00:45:22.860 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Joe we're losing you a little bit last five seconds were pretty hard to understand. 288 00:45:31.260 --> 00:45:32.280 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Joe, are you still there? 289 00:45:38.190 --> 00:45:40.620 Joe Loretta: Removing that that's not gonna bother me, either. That's it. 290 00:45:47.280 --> 00:45:49.950 christian harden (DDRB Chair): You just restate what you said the last 15 seconds. 291 00:45:51.540 --> 00:45:52.860 Joe Loretta: Yeah, I'm sorry, guys. So basically, the last 15 seconds I said was that I would be in favor of somebody making a recommendation on the parking lot side signage being reduced by 50% and/or I'd be okay with, you know, removing it completely from application at this point, but I'm also, you know, willing for support as is. 294 00:46:24.240 --> 00:46:32.400 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Well, I think the question would be if we if we made a reduction of a motion with a reduction with the applicant be in a position to make it on behalf of the client. Yeah, I guess maybe that might be a question for the applicant, what would you guys be in a position to make that decision? 297 00:46:44.880 --> 00:46:57.600 Kelly Varn (Randy Taylor speaking, Kelly Varn present): Yes, I would be able to make that decision and also while you got me. I just wanted to comment on the one as far as the fence sign. I don't believe you can defer to Lori, but I think they're not allowed to have signs on a fence. 299 00:47:07.980 --> 00:47:24.810 Joe Loretta: I'll respond to that, if I could, I mean, you, you may not have to sign on the fence. You just have to, you know, design a legitimate monument sign and build it into the fence area and create a nice, you know, nice columns with fencing and and an a side panel. I'm in it it should be able to be done. 301 00:47:30.990 --> 00:47:36.420 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Well, okay, so, um, I hear from Mr. Loretta that he would recommend or offer up a 50% reduction to the sign that faces it's really Broad Street. Right. faces the parking lot. I heard, I heard Mrs Durden suggests that she would be in favor of motion that only approves the Adam street signs. So I'll probably go back to Mr Schilling, Mr Davisson and Mr Lee to see if there's any other for further comment on that notion at this point. 308 00:48:19.230 --> 00:48:21.210 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Mr. Chairman, I'll jump in. And I guess share a couple thoughts and and I guess maybe we're where I was heading as well and through the chair to Mr Davison. I think one of the points I think the point you were driving at is if the parking lot fronts Broad Street and I've been I was looking at the aerial here as you were talking through that and and there is another building between this parking lot and the front edge of broad street so so this parking lot doesn't actually front broad but but I think thinking along the same lines, and the thought process you're heading down is this building owner controls the parking lot. So, so they control the ability to not have another building built here that would obscure the signage. I guess the direction I was heading in and you know, maybe following along, Mr Loretta with your comments was, would there be a way to make this signage on the side of the building, maybe a little smaller because I was thinking that the signage, the larger signage on Adam street was really to identify the building in the side streets signage was really to more directional signage, in my mind, so that people driving down Adams would would be able to see the sign in recognize that they need to turn left into this parking lot rather than seeing the signage on Adams and so my one thought was maybe you know, if the signage was a little smaller or smaller. And I was thinking of blade sign to get it more more out over the sidewalk and maybe more prominent to a vehicle, but but the flip side is, you know, Mr. Loretta, I think I could get on board with keeping it on the side of the building, knowing that the building owner owns the parking lot controls the parking lot. But, but if it could be smaller. I think that would help in in getting me on board with it so to speak whether that's 50% 60%. I don't know. I'd be happy to hear what the other board members think about that as well. 320 00:50:33.780 --> 00:50:36.960 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Mr. Lee or Mr Davison. Do you guys have any further comment on that? 321 00:50:40.170 --> 00:50:44.040 Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): I would support a 50% reduction on the site signage if the owner accepts it. 323 00:50:50.220 --> 00:50:53.610 Kelly Varn (Randy Taylor speaking, Kelly Varn present): To the chair, we do accept that we could do a 50% reduction. 324 00:50:55.830 --> 00:50:56.340 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay. Yeah, I mean I would just, I think it's a good solution. I mean, I would caution the board. Is it going to be in the same location. Is it going to be on either side of that wall pack light Mr. Taylor, or would you try to squeeze both of them on that corner and between the wall pack and the building corner. 327 00:51:19.560 --> 00:51:20.280 Kelly Varn (Randy Taylor speaking, Kelly Varn present): I would like to spread them out a little bit so they're not on top of each other. I think aesthetically, it would look better reducing them down. We probably would go closer to the pack lighting and they might even obviously be able to move the pack lighting so that they wouldn't be it really needs to be toward that end of the building because that's where you get the best visibility. I just don't know if by reducing them by 50% squeezing them both in between the pack lighting, if that's going to look all jammed up you know they're two separate entities. So obviously you want to get understand that that they need a little separation. So they're not running into each other and like I said I've been doing this a long time. Aesthetically, I like to give a little separation in between them. I'm sure the owner. If he needed to we've moved that pack light that shouldn't be a big issue to move that over and and that gave us enough room for the two sides to be separate enough and be visible enough to look aesthetically pleasing. 334 00:52:23.880 --> 00:52:29.010 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Well, I would, I would make. I would offer this idea in this, I'd probably go to OGC on this. If we could make a motion to approve the Adams street signage as listen to the application and then modify the, I guess we're going to call that the East elevation. I'm trying to look for it on the design to see if it has a description so that way we can have that in the record for that page. 338 00:53:01.290 --> 00:53:05.490 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Chairman Harden it doesn't it's just the east-facing facade. 339 00:53:05.550 --> 00:53:20.010 christian harden (DDRB Chair): So the east-facing facade. On page 19 of the agenda packet would be reduced by 50% and then re submitted to staff and approved by staff so that way we don't have to take this back back up to the board. Would that be permissible? 340 00:53:23.220 --> 00:53:35.580 Kealey West - OGC: Theough the chair Kealy West, OGC. Yes, you could do that. And you can have emotion before you to approve with the modification as you stated, and then have final approval, with regard to placement given to staff. 341 00:53:38.550 --> 00:53:48.600 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, with that, that'd be said, I think that this point we'll seek a motion for for that description and if if someone does have a motion support that if we can get that specificity. 342 00:53:51.660 --> 00:53:54.960 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Mr Chairman may I, Oh, go ahead. Go ahead and Mr Loretta 343 00:53:56.070 --> 00:54:00.060 Joe Loretta: No its fine you go Bill, you're probably got it written down and notes in there better. 344 00:54:01.260 --> 00:54:05.010 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): I'm not so sure about that, but I'll go ahead and take a stab at the motion but Mr. Chairman, I'd like to go ahead and make a motion for approval. And just so I understand we do, we do want to split this into two motions? 348 00:54:20.070 --> 00:54:28.740 Kealey West - OGC: Through the chair to member Schilling. You don't need to make it into it can be one motion because you're actually because the packet came to you together. It's just you're approving with the modifications. Or Guy I'm not sure how you guys usually phrase it isn't a modification or condition? Lori? 351 00:54:39.900 --> 00:54:41.850 guy parola: We look at it as a condition. 352 00:54:42.270 --> 00:54:52.980 Kealey West - OGC: Okay, so you can make a motion to approve with the following condition, which is the reduction of 50% for the East elevation signage to find a placement to be approved by staff. 353 00:54:54.090 --> 00:55:13.950 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Okay, great. So, so, Mr. Chairman. I'll make a motion to approve the application as submitted with the condition that the East facade signage be reduced by 50% and subject to final approval regarding location and design by staff. 354 00:55:15.900 --> 00:55:16.560 Joe Loretta: I'll second that. 355 00:55:17.490 --> 00:55:22.770 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. We have a motion by Mr Schilling, a second by Mr. Loretta. Any further discussion on that? 356 00:55:23.880 --> 00:55:24.480 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Yes. Yeah, hi. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I'm going to end up voting against the, the proposal, the motion because it's one of the applicants know that I didn't have a problem with the Adam street side. I'm concerned about us agreeing to signage on the side of a building, simply because you can see it from the street. I think that we have so many buildings like that in downtown and if we start to do this, it's going to be really hard for us to say the next go round. Why it's inappropriate or that the next one will be just a proliferation, or the potential for proliferation of more signage and I understand the need for signage. I understand the desire for visibility. Very much so but our code doesn't allow for it. And I think that until our code does allow for it. And we have some standards that allow for it, that we should honor what the code says and recognize that there are other ways for them to accomplish the visibility through the blade signs or whatever the sides are called the go over the sidewalk there, we've discussed a potential for monument sign and I just believe that we're setting up an example here, that could be replicated many times, so for the applicants. You know, I, I hope that you understand why I'm going to vote against it and what my concerns are and and I appreciate the opportunity to thank you, Mr. Chairman. 369 00:57:40.050 --> 00:57:55.050 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. Thank you, Ms Durden. We have an a motion by Mr Schilling, we have a second by Mr. Loretta. I'm going to walk down our attendance list for individual votes, starting with Mr Schilling, yay or nay. 370 00:57:55.500 --> 00:57:55.860 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Yay. 371 00:57:56.940 --> 00:57:59.580 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Yay, by Mr Schilling, Mr Davisson yay or nay. 372 00:58:00.180 --> 00:58:00.630 Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): Yay. 373 00:58:02.010 --> 00:58:04.230 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Yay, by Mr Davison. Mr Loretta. 374 00:58:05.310 --> 00:58:05.730 Joe Loretta (DDRB Board): Yay. 375 00:58:06.870 --> 00:58:09.720 christian harden (DDRB Chair): And Mr. Lee. 376 00:58:15.600 --> 00:58:16.950 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Think we've lost. Mr. Lee. 377 00:58:22.680 --> 00:58:35.730 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Some you I don't see him here present so well. I will go. Yay. On that I believe we have four years. And one day, I'm sorry. I apologize. I jumped to conclusions here since you stated previously, Ms. Durden. 378 00:58:37.140 --> 00:58:38.670 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Nay. Thank you. 379 00:58:40.620 --> 00:58:42.150 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Alright motion carries. 380 00:58:43.230 --> 00:58:44.220 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Mr. Parola. 381 00:58:44.580 --> 00:58:55.440 guy parola: Let me. I just want to make a comment here that this wouldn't was kind of a tough one for us. And I didn't personally went into it with some doubts that that we should approve it. But what I will say is when you look at the site and the peculiarities of the site and it's a one way street with two lanes going at the confluence of another one way street. That kind of put us in the idea that there needed to be some sort of directional signage, so people can know where to go. I want to give Board member Durden some little bit of faith in us that we look at these things very particular and we're not looking at this particular one as a reason to grant another one. This just happened to be a unique situation from our point of view, and we appreciate everyone's comments. 386 00:59:31.440 --> 00:59:32.820 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. Thank you, Mr. Parola. 387 00:59:34.860 --> 00:59:35.370 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. 388 00:59:36.900 --> 00:59:39.300 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Thank you, Mr. Taylor. Ms. Varn. Thank you for your time. 389 00:59:40.650 --> 00:59:41.040 Kelly Varn: Thank You 390 00:59:41.550 --> 00:59:45.090 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Gonna jump, you guys are staying, Oh, you guys are on the next number here. Yeah, great. Alright our next item is a DDRB 2020-010 for ShareMD. I'll go ahead and let Mrs Radcliffe Meyers provide the staff report. 393 01:00:04.170 --> 01:00:07.440 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Thank you, Chairman Harden and so DDRB application 2020-010 seeks approval for a special sign exception to allow for one oversized garage wall sign per the ordinance code, the allowed square footage for wall signs attached to garages without retail is 75 square feet. The dimensions of the proposed wall sign are 43 inches in height by 286 inches in length with an overall square footage of 85.4. Based on the foregoing the downtown development review board STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL and DDRB application 2020-010 for a special sign exception to the downtown overlay district to allow for one oversized garage wall sign as identified in the attached signage application request for approval. This concludes staff summation staff is available for questions. Thank you. 398 01:01:11.910 --> 01:01:13.350 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: You're on mute Christian 399 01:01:15.510 --> 01:01:16.980 christian harden (DDRB Chair): What I said was we just kick it back to the applicant. Ms. Varn and Mr. Taylor. 401 01:01:26.550 --> 01:01:28.590 Kelly Varn (Randy Taylor speaking, Kelly Varn present): Pull up the drawings for you. All right. As you can see this garage is a pretty significant in size and doing the 75 square foot signage was a little small up there. It's about six stories up in the air. Therefore, they just want to, we're trying to center and utilize that space in the very center of those columns up there to get good recognition and also aesthetically look nice center, top to bottom, left to right in that area up there. They're really not asking for a lot it's a it's a 10 square feet difference in size but compared to what the 75 was the the 10 square feet. Does help as far as visibility goes being so high up in the air so therefore, they were looking for an exception to the extra 10 square feet as opposed to the 75. I understand there's also the Baptist garage, which is right across the street from them had. I'm not sure what how much was theirs. (Kelly) It was over the 75 square feet. Yeah, it's over the 75 square feet there and there's quite a bit. We're not asking for much like, as I mentioned, it's really more of a visibility, because there's at Baptists was a little bigger, but they're on a two story and we're on a six story. So as I mentioned, we don't feel like we're really reaching here is just to fill out that facade up there to make it look aesthetically pleasing and also to get visibility from the Acosta bridge where they can see the sign all the questions. 413 01:03:36.840 --> 01:03:43.050 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Well, let's go ahead and and we'll go back around word again. So let's go ahead and start again with Mr Schilling 414 01:03:44.160 --> 01:03:48.480 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Uh, Mr. Chairman. I don't have any questions, and I'm in support of this application. 415 01:03:49.860 --> 01:03:53.010 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. Thank you, Mr Schilling, Mrs Durden. 416 01:03:56.880 --> 01:04:01.830 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't have any questions, I'm in support of the application. 417 01:04:03.300 --> 01:04:05.460 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. Thank you, Mr. Davis. 418 01:04:08.250 --> 01:04:09.450 Craig: I have no comments. 419 01:04:11.220 --> 01:04:12.690 All right. Thanks, Mr. Loretta 420 01:04:16.410 --> 01:04:36.570 Joe Loretta: I'm not drastically in favor of this application. I actually think it's similar and significantly worse to some extent than Mr Durdens last application that the building that this is associated with already has two large signs one One Call, one blue Cross. I don't know what is. Blue Cross Blue Shield, or it's the the hospital sign right there as it's really just a Baptist. Yes, this is really just completely a billboard on top of a parking garage. And so I am significantly concerned on the advertising of this it's odd that I poke staff to give me information. So ShareMD has 17 employees in this building. I guess I do now own the One Call building. So it's like my issue would be, why is it going here and not where One Call is and so I I question that this is really the appropriate thing that we should be approving in downtown. 426 01:05:28.890 --> 01:05:29.340 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay. All right. Does not appear that we've had. Mr. Lee rejoin us so Alright, so we've heard from everybody on the board. Does anybody have a motion on this particular item. 429 01:05:45.180 --> 01:05:46.830 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Sorry to interject. This is yeah, this is a Trevor Leah, just wanted to say that I don't have any comments and I apologize. I was kicked off earlier. 431 01:05:58.470 --> 01:06:00.090 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Are you the 502 number on there. 432 01:06:01.290 --> 01:06:01.770 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: I am 433 01:06:01.860 --> 01:06:04.290 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Yes, actually set up. Now I can see you. Great. Alright, thank you. 436 01:06:12.120 --> 01:06:17.460 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to go ahead and make a motion for approval of this application. 437 01:06:19.140 --> 01:06:19.950 brenna durden (DDRB Board): I'll second. 438 01:06:20.820 --> 01:06:24.300 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, we have an approval by Mr Schilling, and the second by Mrs Durden. I'll go back through the same process, unless we have any further discussion on this item. All right. Mr Schilling, yay or nay. 442 01:06:38.430 --> 01:06:38.760 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Yay. 443 01:06:40.080 --> 01:06:42.210 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Yay by Mr. Schilling. Mrs Durden, yay or nay. 444 01:06:42.720 --> 01:06:43.230 brenna durden (DDRB Board): yay 445 01:06:44.310 --> 01:06:47.160 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Yay, for this Durden, Mr Loretta 446 01:06:48.150 --> 01:06:48.600 Joe Loretta: Yay. 447 01:06:50.340 --> 01:06:51.690 christian harden (DDRB Chair): That's a yay in favor? Joe Loretta: Yes. 448 01:06:52.410 --> 01:06:55.650 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, Mr Davison Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): Nay 449 01:06:56.070 --> 01:07:00.780 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Nay by Mr Davisson and Mr. Lee. 450 01:07:04.800 --> 01:07:05.370 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Yay. 451 01:07:07.050 --> 01:07:11.010 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, and then I would vote yay on this sign, motion carries. Thank you. The applicant. 453 01:07:15.810 --> 01:07:18.840 Kelly Varn: Thank you very much, guys, I hope you all have a good day and stay safe. 454 01:07:19.350 --> 01:07:21.510 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Thank you, you as well. Alright, next we're going to move to DDRB 2020-011 Maxwell House Special side exception Brad Ginzig is here on behalf of the applicant, but I'll go ahead and let Mrs. Radcliffe-Meyers provide the staff report. 456 01:07:42.600 --> 01:07:45.930 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Thank you, Chairman harden so DDRB application 2020-011 seeks approval for a special sign exception to allow for Maxwell House to change the existing red and blue LED lighting to a new LED multi colored programmable lighting and to also introduce lighting to the eastern facade of the building, the Maxwell House coffee signage. The new lighting will allow Maxwell House to change the coloring of a sign the cup and to end the drips to reflect the colors of holidays, special occasions and possibly even the teal and gold for a Jaguar games. The new lighting will also allow for the reintroduction of the sequencing of the drips, which we're seeing historically on the face of the building. New blue lighting will be added to the existing signage found on the eastern facade of the main building these letters are routed into the building and the lighting will be introduced into that routing. Based on the foregoing the downtown development review board STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF DDRB application for a special sign exception to the downtown overlay district to allow for Maxwell House to change the existing red and blue LED lighting to a new multi colored programmable LED lighting and to introduce LED lighting to the eastern facade Maxwell House coffee signage as identified in the attack signage application request for approval. This concludes staff summation staff is available for questions. Thank you. 465 01:09:19.290 --> 01:09:20.430 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. Thank you. So Mr. Ginzig I'll hand it over to you if you want to pull up the screen share and provide the application. 468 01:09:31.560 --> 01:09:34.440 Brad Ginzig: Absolutely. I have two separate documents. I'll start with the with the presentation. 470 01:09:40.830 --> 01:09:42.930 christian harden (DDRB Chair): I apologize for not asking this earlier, but if you could just state your name and address. 472 01:09:47.790 --> 01:09:56.010 Brad Ginzig: Absolutely. Sorry. Bradley Ginzig, Vice President of General Sign, 1940 Spearing St, Jacksonville, FL 32206. So the Maxwell House sign, particularly the large what is referred to in the industry, the spectacular sign facing downtown or West is where we're where we are proposing the introduction of the multi colored LED and like Lori mentioned on the east side adding LED to a sign that I believe has been there since the 40s. The overall location map some additional signage in the area, which is in this boards overlay. So there's a great deal. The overall lumen output of the of the west facing elevation would be about the missus maximum so that because it's a variable LED system and when it's lit bright white is 79 it's just slightly over 79,000 lumens. However, in its normal iteration, which would be the red and a little bit of blue would be significantly less as the sitemap knows I'm sure you're both from all of you are familiar with the signage Maxwell's facing the West, the east is within side the delivery area, you might not be familiar with it, so I'll share this other screen to give you some more information. So on the west side just to continue on it. It was mentioned different color combinations. These are just some examples. Currently, the only thing that has been agreed upon with Maxwell House would be the red the additional blue and returning the drips to the sequence that had previously historically been the system of dropping from the first drip on the top of the remnant cup down the wall facia currently only the three drops below the cup sequence in in series. And that's because those are been rained as neon and not LED when the sign was retrofitted to LED it about seven years ago, it did not have LED at the time to not have the ability to sequence. So it lost the traditional sequence in the historic series of the drips. Layout. Facing the east wall its edge, it's really only noticeable from Bay Street, the wall heading west, and that would be the addition of some blue LED, which is one of their corporate colored with inside that area so that that can light blue. That would be a very minimal amount of lumens which I didn't calculate, but I don't think I if you have, if you would like just let me know about it. That's about it. So any questions or? 493 01:12:55.200 --> 01:13:02.910 christian harden (DDRB Chair): It will go ahead and we'll go ahead and work around the board for any questions go ahead and circle the same one are good and Mr Schilling 494 01:13:06.780 --> 01:13:08.010 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Comment here is this, this looks pretty exciting. And yeah, it's gonna be great to see see the drip come back so i i don't have any questions and yeah in support of this application. 496 01:13:29.280 --> 01:13:38.490 christian harden (DDRB Chair): You know, one thing I have also forgot to bring up because of this format. We don't have any public comment that's come to our attention, do we 497 01:13:40.230 --> 01:13:40.740 Ina Mezini: No we do not have any public comment. It looks like Nancy Powell was trying to raise your hand. However. 499 01:13:46.020 --> 01:13:52.860 Nancy Powell: Yeah, I guess I'm confused about how we do public comments, but I just had a question really about how that how the white in the cup is, is that kind of internally illuminated. It was hard to tell from the, from the drawings. What that's going to be? 502 01:14:03.810 --> 01:14:13.170 Brad Ginzig: No, no. The, the letters in the coppers what's called steel porcelain. It's a method of manufacturing. That's not used it with the exception of Coca Cola and perhaps Golden Corral or about the only two companies that still use any sort of skilled person in their percentage. It's extremely expensive manner of making it so that white is actually white porcelain on steel sheets. So that would not be lit. 508 01:14:34.920 --> 01:14:35.730 Nancy Powell: Okay, thank you. 509 01:14:38.670 --> 01:14:49.440 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Sorry about that Mrs. Powell If anybody has further comment on on this item. Please raise your hand or message Ina Mezini. She's taking any kind of requests for public comment. Do you have another comment Mrs. Powell? 512 01:14:59.490 --> 01:15:06.300 Nancy Powell: I guess it's more of an overall comment is more of these you know programmable LED lights come about. I don't know if their standards around like how quickly they might be changing, but I would hope that they if they're teal for the for the Jaguars that they're Teal but they're not like going to and read back and you know they're not like moving because I think there's a lot of potential for I just think that would be something the, the standard should anticipate it and decide upon so that we don't have all these lights kind of flashing or changing or things like that. And I'm not saying Maxwell House is going to do that. I just, I just have noticed, you know, there's not more capability with LED lights. So anyway, that's my comment. 517 01:15:52.050 --> 01:16:04.440 Brad Ginzig: Just address that in theory. Yeah. See, you could have it do that. In general, in general, not the Maxwell House sign itself because of the way it's being set up. Maxwell House, and then the cup and then the drip would be the only things that are programmable separately. So in the case of, say, a jaguars game they might have Maxwell be teal and house be gold but you wouldn't really be able to have it sequence on those letters. The only thing that we plan on sequencing would be the drips and go back to the original time of the neon time or which was between five and 10 seconds per, per sequence on and off. 520 01:16:39.720 --> 01:16:41.760 christian harden (DDRB Chair): To to staff. Is there any language in our signage code that would restrict that for moving signs. 522 01:16:49.650 --> 01:17:08.790 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Chairman Harden, yes there is that the city of Jacksonville sign ordinance talks about animated signs are not allowed, which would kind of fall under if a if a sign was flashing like that all the time, it would be considered an animated sign. And those are not allowed. And correct me if I'm, if I'm incorrect Guy If you want eleaborate. 525 01:17:16.200 --> 01:17:16.860 guy parola: Yeah, our sign ordinances is pretty straightforward when it comes to animation and how its defined. 527 01:17:29.460 --> 01:17:30.060 All right. Thank you, Ms. Radcliffe-Myers and Mr Parola and Mrs. Powell for your comment. Alright, so let's go with Mr. We've heard from Mr Schilling, and I'm going to move to Mr Davisson 529 01:17:44.190 --> 01:17:45.180 Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): No comment. 530 01:17:47.220 --> 01:17:49.680 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, Mr. Loretta 531 01:17:51.270 --> 01:17:52.410 Joe Loretta: No comment. Looks good. 532 01:17:54.690 --> 01:17:55.800 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, Mr. Lee. 533 01:17:58.170 --> 01:18:00.690 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Thank you, Chairman No other comments from me as well. 534 01:18:03.900 --> 01:18:07.290 christian harden (DDRB Chair): I have no comments I except for it's exciting to see it bring the, the, the motion back to the drip. I know this is an iconic structure over downtown. So we'll be excited to see that, how soon before this is planned to be installed? 536 01:18:21.990 --> 01:18:24.510 Brad Ginzig: Well that's a good question. Randy's here to he might be able to answer this better than me. 538 01:18:32.700 --> 01:18:33.210 Brad Ginzig: Hello. My name is Randy Ginzig, I'm Bradley faher. And I can't see. You can see here. Yeah, yeah. So anyway, the folks at Maxwell Housethey still have to get the funds procreating from corporate and they're hoping that that would occur and that this event would take place not before the RNC probably in September. And that's pretty much what they're looking at about a sep tember event. If the we will we will probably need about two to two and a half weeks in the fields and make make it happen once all the materials come in and I there's a probably about a one month lag, lag. So like I said I would expect that this would most likely the car. And if it's approved the lighting around the end of September is that the best I could tell you 548 01:19:45.450 --> 01:19:47.520 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Um, I didn't have a chance to comment. 549 01:19:47.700 --> 01:19:50.250 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Oh I'm so I'm so sorry I'm trying to work through the names. 550 01:19:51.570 --> 01:19:52.980 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Very hard. It's very hard. I just want to say I'm very supportive of this application. This is a historic sign in my perspective, if we need to do all we can to really support, you know, this sign it. It's kind of a, it's almost iconic it for the city of Jacksonville. And I don't know if you know, I think this is the either the only or maybe one of only two places in the United States where Maxwell House actually roast coffee beans. So, you know, this to me, you know, the fact that they want to, you know, kind of modernize, if you will, their sign bring back the drip and I'm really excited about it and I'm I hope that they get the support from corporate so for for the improvement. 555 01:20:54.690 --> 01:20:59.580 Brad Ginzig: Ma'am. I believe this is actually the last Maxwell House plant. It is, yeah. 557 01:21:05.010 --> 01:21:05.700 brenna durden (DDRB Board): So we're lucky to have you. 558 01:21:07.770 --> 01:21:08.970 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Sorry about that Ms. Durden. 559 01:21:10.380 --> 01:21:11.040 brenna durden (DDRB Board): It's okay, No problem. 560 01:21:13.140 --> 01:21:14.550 christian harden (DDRB Chair): The list keeps changing. Alright, so we have no further comment think we would seek a motion on on this application. 562 01:21:25.290 --> 01:21:26.010 Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): Motion to approve. 563 01:21:27.420 --> 01:21:30.690 christian harden (DDRB Chair): I'm going to give it to Mrs Durden since I mistakenly moved. Motion by Ms. Durden. We have a motion by Mr. Durden. 566 01:21:44.640 --> 01:21:45.540 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): I'll make a second. 568 01:21:49.830 --> 01:21:52.320 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Motion by Ms. Durden, second by Mr. Lee. Mr Schilling, yay or nay. 571 01:21:56.850 --> 01:21:57.150 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Yay 572 01:21:59.400 --> 01:22:01.080 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Mr. Loretta yay or nay. 573 01:22:01.110 --> 01:22:02.340 Joe Loretta: Yea, yea. 574 01:22:03.630 --> 01:22:04.560 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Mr Davisson Yay or nay. Craig Davisson (DDRB Board): Yay 576 01:22:06.570 --> 01:22:08.490 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Mrs. Durden yay or nay 577 01:22:08.940 --> 01:22:09.540 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Yay. 578 01:22:11.100 --> 01:22:11.640 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. And Mr. Lee yay or nay. 580 01:22:16.620 --> 01:22:17.010 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Yea, 582 01:22:19.950 --> 01:22:22.620 christian harden (DDRB Chair): And I will vote. Yay, as well. Motion carries, unanimously, congratulations. 583 01:22:23.820 --> 01:22:25.980 Brad Ginzig: Thank you. y'all havea great weekend or Sorry. 585 01:22:29.550 --> 01:22:30.570 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Almost the weekend will get 586 01:22:35.580 --> 01:22:41.280 Joe Loretta: CHAIRPERSON harden. I'm going to need to exit the meeting. At this point, I apologize. But I'm gonna need to leave for the rest of the meeting. 588 01:22:44.610 --> 01:22:49.230 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Alright, it's fine. I think with everybody else stayed on. We still have a quorom. So thank you, Mr. Loretta 589 01:22:49.890 --> 01:22:50.190 Joe Loretta: Thank you. 590 01:22:53.940 --> 01:22:54.480 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. So last of the agenda, we have application, I should say last on our meeting is we will have one other agenda item at the very end, I'll just add for election for a new chair just so everybody knows this is not technically the last time we'll have on the agenda today. This is application 2020-009 for the Ruby beach Brewing Co. 595 01:23:22.080 --> 01:23:24.990 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Believe we have Mr. Hionides here today as the applicant and first we'll start with Ms. Radcliffe-Meyers with the staff report. 597 01:23:32.790 --> 01:23:34.950 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: Great, thank you again, Mr. Chairman. Harden DDRB application 2020-009 seeks conceptual approval for the renovation of an existing two story brick building, formerly known as the letter shop along with the construction of a new 14 foot by 24 foot outdoor beer garden for the Ruby beach brewery. The project is located at 228 and 230 East Forsyth street in the central core overlay district. The site is 0.18 acres and is bounded to the north by Forsyth street to the south by the black stone building to the east by the law exchange building and to the west by library building. Mr Hionides will go further into detail regarding what's being proposed. But based on the foregoing the downtown development review board staff supports the conceptual approval of DDRB application 2020-009 with the following recommendations: A) that prior to submittal for final review the developer shall meet with staff to identify any deviation sought. B) At final review the developer shall provide enough detail so as to illustrate that the pedestrian zone meets the definition of such and the ordinance code and meets the various requirements and design amenity features for the pedestrians zone. C). That streetlights, benches and street furnishings shall be placed in the amenity area, and D). at final review the developer shall provide enough detail so as to illustrate that the screening and landscaping of surface parking meets the definition of such in the ordinance code and meets the square footage in depth required. This concludes staff summation staff is available for questions. Thank you. 609 01:25:29.640 --> 01:25:33.990 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Thank you, Ms. Radcliffe-Meyers. I will move the applicant provide the presentation. 610 01:25:35.220 --> 01:25:42.360 Elias Hionides: Good afternoon, everybody. Elias Hionides here. let me figure out how to share my screen. 611 01:25:44.010 --> 01:25:46.230 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Elias could you state your address for the record? 612 01:25:46.350 --> 01:25:52.680 Elias Hionides: Yes, Elias Hionides, 329 West Sixth Street Jacksonville, Florida, 32206. Okay. That's my Gmail. Can you guys see that. So Ruby Beach Brewing Company is moving from Jacksonville Beach to downtown Jacksonville at the letter shop building at 228 East Forysth Street. What's great about this project is that it's mostly you know it's an adaptive reuse of an existing historic building. So there's not a ton of deviations to be had from from what's existing there it's in the central business district. As you can see here. it's addressed to 228 which is the billing address and just to the east is 230 East for side street which is the parking and where the beer garden goes, it's the two properties together. CCBD. And obviously the location as you can see here. Across the street from the Yates building adjacent to the library building and the law exchange building there's the front facade as well. This is the conceptual rendering of the exterior for review beach Brewing Company. You can see the outdoor beer garden which will be here. You know the again the intent is to keep the facade very close to what it is currently, there will be cleaning done to it and some upgrades. We have some fun things planned for some of these decals that are on the front we want to keep them. I mean, if you look up in the corner here. Let's see if I can zoom in, you know, it says Jacksonville established October 1963 so there's some really cool things on there that we want to keep that that's the plan. We actually have like there's a stamp of George Washington, we're going to add some interesting tube blighting and we're going to maybe do some hand painting with some local artists to make them, keep them existing but add some modern character and some references to the brewery to that front facade. This is not the final signage location or rendering there at this time. So that will be an adjustment that will be made before final approval and will be meeting with staff about their proposed signage. That's all being finalized now. We want to be sure that we're taking into consideration the historic nature of the building and the move to downtown when when looking at the signage and the location. Another update is this window here, which is the Western storefront window. The tenant is considering a glass roll up door there to increase interaction with the pedestrian zone facing Forsyth street. So in addition to the outdoor beer garden there would also be and part of part of the impetus for that was also just from Covid19 the desire to have more fresh air working through the building itself. That's an additional reason why they are considering a garage roll up door, but I think it also meets the requirements of the DDRB. Even more so and you can see here again from the exterior. There is a new staircase exterior egress stair that will go to the rear that's required per code the upstairs will be an event space. If you guys recall from the downtown Investment Authority approval package. So this is an egress staircase only and will not be used for public use. There's an interior stare for the access and as Lori spoke about, here is a parking a surface parking lot. That is a adjacent and I'm going to skip over to the sidte plan here. So part of the reason this space was attractive to Ruby beach was there is a garage roll up door on the side of the building here so part of this parking is less for parking for patrons and more so for the ability of a box truck to be able to come in here. This is for deliveries. Loading and unloading their brew house is in the rear of the building where this garage roll up door is so that's part of what this would look like the remaining parking is for patrons. At this time, as she stated the conceptual review has the beer garden and what we're calling like a beer hut. This is a parking lot that's been there. It's existing. The plan is to convert that to have kegs and to be able to serve beer out of it and to have mostly outdoor interactive space there. And that's the general conceptual plan. 644 01:31:26.700 --> 01:31:31.380 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, do we have any public comment on this application. 645 01:31:35.700 --> 01:31:39.660 Ina Mezini: I have not received any public comment via email. 646 01:31:41.700 --> 01:31:46.110 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay. All right. Thank you. All right, well let's. That being said, let's move around. And Ms. Durden do you want to start? 648 01:31:51.180 --> 01:31:51.660 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Sure. So, I, I don't have any real big concerns, other than what's already been raised in the staff report. I do think that those are going to be important things for you to consider Mr. Hionides. So that when you come back, that those will be important. I like to see existing buildings we used very much and not torn down. So I'm pleased to see that. I gather that some of the backspace They're actually going. It's going to be a working brewery. Is that correct? Elias Hionides: That's Correct. 656 01:32:45.660 --> 01:32:55.860 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Okay. And, um, you know, with regard to the the outdoor beer garden portion, um you know, I was just thinking, you know, you know, I don't know if that's exactly the right style or the right you know location or right up. But, you know, is it you know where you want it to have it seems like you may need from a safety perspective to think rethink the parking how the parking lot itself is going to work. It seems a little close or, you know, they're all angled so I guess, they'd have to turn you know backwards to get out. So I think there's some issues there and I think that could impact the size of the the outdoor beer garden or at least the shape of it and you know, the, the signage. I appreciate your sounds to me like you're going to come back, either at final with with the signage or or in a separate application. Yeah, I think that that will be very important. You know, this is a historic you know the livery is a very historic building further on down and we got the Florida theater. So, you know, That I think the signage is going to be important to kind of, I'd like you to think about a little bit from that perspective. I like the fun ideas you know that's fun and exciting, but I also think that keeping it in, you know, Keeping it in maybe the same style as as the as the other buildings in in that area or or addressing its historic nature, you know I nod to its historic nature but i'm i'm supportive of the project. I'm glad to see the building. Get a good use, and there'll be fun. Thank you. 671 01:35:12.900 --> 01:35:20.880 Elias Hionides: Mr. Chairman. Can I add one more thing? Christian Harden (DDRB Chair): Please. Elias Hionides: I want to go back to my shared screen here quickly. If you one thing I wanted to add regarding this site plan and the parking is we being that this is part of the elbow entertainment district and we're getting some synergies with the Florida theater and a number of other uses in the immediate area. This entry to the parking. Again, it's less important for the tenant to have dedicated parking spaces they recognize Downtown and its urban setting, but more so for the deliveries to go here. So they really just need one lane and the truck isn't going to be operating It'll be operating more in the off hours of the Tap Room than on the on hours of the Tap Room. one idea that we have had is to place a shipping container of some kind here up at the front facing Florida theater or facing Forsyth street, I should say. With a storefront on it in order to use it as a pop up or as a separately leased retail space something, you know, under 500 square feet. Again, that's more. So a thought that we've been playing around with, but I wanted to just be completely transparent, as we talked through this. And obviously will work with staff down the line when we meet together about what those things look like. But that's part of why we were hoping to keep this corner flexible was rather than have it be just dead space here. Let's try and take advantage of the frontage facing foresight Street. You know, we've got a brewery entering here. There's some exciting things happening down Market Street and Ford on Bay around the corner. That there may be a play here to add in some additional retail and get another bang another pop of activity. So that's just kind of a thing obviously we'll discuss with staff and a half before final. 683 01:37:29.160 --> 01:37:29.430 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. Thank you for that additional insight. All right, Mr Schilling 686 01:37:37.410 --> 01:37:43.170 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll share the good news is you had me up until the shipping container part I'm not sure that the shipping containers is maybe the vision I had for the parking lot. So, so I'll share that but I come, I think I had many of the same thoughts as Ms. Durden. And I see. And again, I recognize this is conceptual and that that when this comes back before the board, you know, some of these things will be More will provide further detail and further refinement. But I agree with staffs comments. On paying particular attention to the the amenities zone the pedestrian zones and looking to the downtown streetscape guidelines and I think there's some really neat things that can be done out on the streetscape connecting the beer. The beer garden in the building to the beer garden outside and could really be tied into that public space. So, so I'd really encourage you to take a look at that and and i think there's some tremendous opportunities for that. And then the second thought. Again, I'm echoing miss. Ms. Durden's thoughts is looking at the the parking layout again in the parking lot at a minimum, you know, the spaces that that are cross from the outdoor beer garden. At least maybe designating them compact to try to encourage recognizing that not everybody pays attention to that. But trying to encourage the shorter cars to park in the in the front spaces, maybe throw that out as a suggestion, but but overall I agree. I think this is a great reuse adaptive reuse for this building and Mr. Chairman, those are all the comments I have. Thank you. 696 01:39:34.410 --> 01:39:37.350 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right. Thank you, Mr Schilling, Mr Davisson 697 01:39:39.630 --> 01:39:50.250 Craig Davisson: Again, I got a question for the owner. Has anybody ever seen drawings or photographs or do you understand what's behind that steel frame and corrugated metal panel stucco that was put on that facade? That's question number one. 700 01:40:01.950 --> 01:40:07.890 Elias Hionides: I know that there is an original facade behind it. I have never seen it, nor attempted to view it mainly because at this point it's been over 50 years which is part of the qualification for a historic landmark for national standards and for the city of Jacksonville. So the way that we look at it is, that's an era and timeframe that we're trying to memorialize and make that shine. But we do I, you know, you can see from the interior that there looks that there was some type of facade there, but I've never seen an actual photo of it. No. 703 01:40:46.410 --> 01:40:49.650 Craig Davisson: Okay, I think you'd be pleasantly surprised if you saw it. The next the next comment. I've got is, I think it's a great. It's a great project. Let me just start there. I walked by it every day. It's still it's what you've got is this kind of chamber of asphalt concrete and brick that goes up multi story and the parking is what it is. You can't change it it's it's it's awkward. It's like this 30 degree parking however, if you're taking this on, you know, I think it's this kind of screenage perhaps to the parking that you've got these spaces that run all the way up to the street and you got this triangular piece that could easily become landscape or some type of screen there because right now it's just asphalt to break it says, even with your My feeling is, even when I see your rendering. It's a cold hard space and I think on the parking. I think you're even required to do it if you're doing parking improvements I think you're required to have landscape screening. So when you have the end of that Bay that's up against the sidewalk, there's an opportunity there to create basically a more of a welcome space and something softer. You know, and I understand you got to get back there and it's still parking. You're not really taking any parking away. I think that's something that you need to consider. I think it's a great project. That's all for now. 715 01:42:36.720 --> 01:42:39.570 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Alright. Let's See Mr. Lee. 716 01:42:42.540 --> 01:42:52.020 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Thank you, Chairman Harden I appreciate that. I can also appreciate this projects attempt to maintain the facade with a light touch and applaud them for doing that. I'd also agree with Mr Davisson's assessment of being a little bit harsh and looking at ways to soften this a little bit more would be welcome in the final approval. I don't have a specific recommendations but you know another another thought towards, towards that I think will be helpful to all my comment. 719 01:43:18.960 --> 01:43:30.840 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay, now I think an important thing. You know, this is a conceptual approval and I think that the design documents that we have a little bit limited, you know, seeing a full site plan might have addressed some of those concerns about the separation between the parking in the streetscape and I think that staff has done a great job of identifying the areas that can improve. Are there any other questions, Elias you might have from the Board or staff to take this sort of conceptual the final? 722 01:43:54.120 --> 01:44:03.480 Elias Hionides: Not particularly. I think the key is more us to meet with staff to go over some of these concerns and then to be able to come back and really put some thing for that I think is going to be exciting for everybody and addresses all of these comments because there are certainly some limitations that we recognize also based on this conceptual that, you know, as we were going through the process and again with Covid you know there's a lot of things that I think are going to end up benefiting the public realm that will also benefit the tenant in the long run. 725 01:44:29.460 --> 01:44:29.970 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay. All right, great. Do we have any other further comment. In the interest of seeking a motion for a conceptual approval with the recommendations made by staff and from this board. 729 01:44:48.720 --> 01:44:58.980 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to to make the motion for approval with conditions. A through D as presented by staff in the staff report. 730 01:45:01.440 --> 01:45:03.480 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, we have a motion by Mr Schilling. 731 01:45:05.130 --> 01:45:05.910 Craig Davisson: Second, 732 01:45:06.780 --> 01:45:08.850 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Second by Mr. Davisson and any further comment? 733 01:45:12.270 --> 01:45:15.780 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, well, let's move to vote, Mrs Durden 734 01:45:16.920 --> 01:45:17.460 brenna durden (DDRB Board): I 735 01:45:19.980 --> 01:45:21.510 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Approval by Mrs Durden. Mr Schilling 736 01:45:22.530 --> 01:45:22.920 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Yay. 737 01:45:23.700 --> 01:45:26.310 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Yay by Mr Schilling , approved Mr Davison 738 01:45:27.300 --> 01:45:27.900 Craig Davisson: Yay. 739 01:45:28.920 --> 01:45:31.080 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Approval by Mr Davison Mr. Lee. 740 01:45:32.970 --> 01:45:33.390 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Yay. 741 01:45:34.500 --> 01:45:37.410 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Approval by Mr. Lee and I will also vote in approval and the motion security unanimously. 743 01:45:42.180 --> 01:45:43.320 Elias Hionides: They very much, everybody. 744 01:45:46.560 --> 01:45:47.220 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Alright. So that concludes our action items are applications, I would say portion of the agenda. Moving to old business. We have none. Moving to new business. We do have the matter of election of our chair for this the next 12 months. And I would go ahead and make a recommendation or make a suggestion for Mr. Lee as a nomination. I should say for Mr Lee's Chair. Mr. Lee is served as our vice chair of the past two years, and I think we do an excellent job. I'll leave it up to the board. If anybody has any other recommendations are supportive that. 754 01:46:46.350 --> 01:46:47.160 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Mr. Chairman. 755 01:46:47.880 --> 01:46:48.870 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Mrs. Durden, please. 756 01:46:49.350 --> 01:46:51.930 brenna durden (DDRB Board): I would be supportive of that. I think in his role as vice chair, you know that it's I think it's a good idea to have a move up although you've done a great job, Mr Harden. 760 01:47:07.680 --> 01:47:08.190 Christian Harden (DDRB Chair): Well, thank you. 761 01:47:09.810 --> 01:47:10.740 Craig Davisson: I concur. 762 01:47:13.980 --> 01:47:16.020 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Agreed. Mr. Chair, with them and support as well. 763 01:47:20.070 --> 01:47:23.220 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, well, that's, that's our that's our lot here today. So I guess I would turn back to staff, our process for making this formal would be to make a motion. Alright. Well, we would seek a motion to elect Mr. Lee as our chairperson starting our next meeting. 769 01:47:51.540 --> 01:47:53.880 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to make that motion as stated. 770 01:47:54.270 --> 01:47:55.560 christian harden (DDRB Chair): You've been great. 771 01:47:55.620 --> 01:47:56.430 Brenna Durden (DDRB Board): I'll second. 773 01:48:01.800 --> 01:48:08.010 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Thank you. Second by Mrs Durden and I'll move. Do we have any further discussion on that. Mr. Lee. Are you interested in taking this well? 775 01:48:12.600 --> 01:48:24.750 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Yeah, I appreciate that and I'll absolutely am willing to serve as chair for the next year, and I appreciate the support from all the members and it means a lot. Thank you. 776 01:48:26.430 --> 01:48:37.230 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Well, thank you. I know you've been on this board for a number of years. So we appreciate on behalf the city. Appreciate your service to this board. All right. Well, we have a motion by Mr Schilling a second by Mrs. Durden. Mrs. Durden your vote is yay or nay. 778 01:48:41.730 --> 01:48:42.150 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Yay 779 01:48:42.870 --> 01:48:45.660 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, we have approval by Mrs Durden and Mr Schilling Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Yay. 780 01:48:46.650 --> 01:48:51.210 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Yay by Mr. Schilling, approved. Mr Davisson 781 01:48:51.630 --> 01:48:52.230 Craig Davisson: Yay. 782 01:48:52.650 --> 01:48:56.310 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, approved by Mr. Davisson. Mr. Lee will ask for your vote. If you're able to give one. Should ask that to staff and Mr. Lee is able to vote on himself as because that we would need that for quorum technically, yes. I see a nod of approval. All right, Mr. Lee. 787 01:49:17.910 --> 01:49:20.280 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Yeah. Yes. Yay, if I'm allowed to vote yet. 788 01:49:22.290 --> 01:49:28.350 christian harden (DDRB Chair): And I will vote. Yay, as well. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much for for serving. 789 01:49:31.110 --> 01:49:31.920 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Mr. Chairman. 790 01:49:32.610 --> 01:49:34.020 Trevor Lee (DDRB Board): Thank you again. I appreciate that. 791 01:49:36.780 --> 01:49:51.150 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Yeah. Mr. Chairman, if I'm a quick second I want to echo what several the other board members shared as well and say thank you to you for for serving this past year and the dedication and the time commitment for that. Thank you very much. 792 01:49:51.990 --> 01:49:57.090 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Well, thank you, guys. I appreciate that. And I couldn't do without staff. We have a tremendous staff. I see Ms.Boyer is there and attendance and you have an excellent staff that does a great job of making sure that we are all very, very well prepared for these meetings I I think particularly the past year having served on this board for several years. I think that staff has done a tremendous job getting the the agenda package to us well in advance so that we have an opportunity to review things, and particularly the last four months. I don't think I had envisioned doing zoom meetings on a daily basis, much less than a public forum. So I don't think we could have done this without everybody on that staff. brenna durden (DDRB Board): Absolutely. 797 01:50:33.810 --> 01:50:35.460 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Agreed. 798 01:50:37.800 --> 01:50:46.680 christian harden (DDRB Chair): All right, well, seeing though we have. That's the only other new business we have any other public comments up Mr. Parola. 799 01:50:47.130 --> 01:51:05.610 guy parola: Yeah, they're your, your last kind of official action here is going to be appointing a two person nominating committee who get together, between now and the August meeting to bring forth to the board in August, a slate of vice chair and Secretary, just so you all know Vice Chair was Trevor your secretary currently is is Brent Allen. So if you want to point to two person nominating committee, they will meet and then they will bring back to the board as a whole, recommended slate for vice and Secretary 801 01:51:26.160 --> 01:51:36.720 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Well, I know that in the past, we've had former leadership serve in that role. And so if if I knew Mr Schilling and Mr. Davisson have served that role. you are present mrs. durden so you're free to participate in that as well. If you'd like but yeah, I think that typically we have, former chairs, just to make it easy. Because typically, although I think that we're in a position now where we have a lot of leaders to have it have been appointed in leadership. So we might have people taking roles that they have previously had so but if Mr. Davisson that Mr Schilling would serve in that capacity. 806 01:52:04.800 --> 01:52:09.960 Bill Schilling (DDRB Board): Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to to serve in that capacity and participate in that. 807 01:52:13.500 --> 01:52:14.340 Craig Davisson: I will as well. 808 01:52:15.540 --> 01:52:18.780 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Alright, well you guys coordinate with Ms. Underwood, so that you guys can we, I think we need to notice that meeting so we can have that on the docket before we meet again and then bring those recommendations to the next board meeting, do we have a meeting scheduled in August. 811 01:52:36.600 --> 01:52:38.700 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay, we do. All right. 812 01:52:38.730 --> 01:52:42.690 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: We don't have any items as of yet. But yes, there is a scheduled meeting. 814 01:52:45.210 --> 01:52:46.050 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Mr. Chairman. 815 01:52:46.530 --> 01:52:47.070 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Please. 816 01:52:47.760 --> 01:52:49.470 brenna durden (DDRB Board): I don't know if this fits in with old business or new business or comments or but um you know we had three out of four things today. We're about the signs and I would just like to express an interest in you know having staff maybe bring a report to us about signs and whether or not we should be thinking about revising and updating the sign code or the sign provisions that apply. Its um you know i think that you know the scale seems a little bit off to me, you know, we had today. We had a 75 foot square on a huge garage, you know, and yet we had on a one story building 188 square feet of signage. I think that this issue about the lumens. We talked about that almost every single time. We think that that's another area you know, I just think it's time for maybe a refresh, if you will, on, on our sign code and would like to just throw out the idea that maybe this is the time that we could be as asked the staff to start to think about an appropriate time. I know, Steph is working on some other updates for us, and those are in progress, but I'd like to encourage staff when they when you can prioritize that. I think the sign code or provision should be something that we we could look at. 829 01:54:49.920 --> 01:54:50.340 guy parola: If I may. 830 01:54:51.180 --> 01:54:51.690 christian harden (DDRB Chair): You go ahead 831 01:54:52.080 --> 01:55:01.020 guy parola: I think a wonderful first start and I'm going to throw work on Lori Radcliffe Meyers right now so we'll see if she's smiling smiling at the end of the zoom call is now let's do an inventory over the past five years of every sign exception we've approve, and the vote. Can we do that? 837 01:55:19.710 --> 01:55:20.340 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA Staff: Yes. 838 01:55:22.050 --> 01:55:24.750 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Yeah, I was gonna, I was gonna suggest that similar to this Board I think maybe three years ago I think in when when this is Boyer was on council to go and look at particular exceptions or look look at applications that have been made over the years and try to find commonalities on parking and then assess areas of the code that we might be able to modify to, you know, that would reduce applications potentially if they were items that were commonly accepted and so I think that maybe what could result out of that assessment of data from previous applications is a direction that we had on that. So it's not not not as nebulous, you know. Perhaps it's a recommendation that we evaluated and maybe Ms. Radcliffe-Meyers If you come to the conclusion of that there are three or four things that need to be included in the signage code, such as lumens lumens is I think it's a good example, something that started mentioned that comes up on every single sign something that probably none of us even were aware of until we joined this board, but it is the qualifier for LED signs on how bright they are so if there's anything else that you would recommend and then maybe we can use that section of our agenda to to discuss that and give staff some direction on that just that it's not so nebulous. 848 01:56:46.920 --> 01:56:50.160 Lori Radcliffe-Meyers DIA staff: I agree, chairman. Yes, I agree. 849 01:56:51.810 --> 01:56:52.920 brenna durden (DDRB Board): She stopped smiling, though. 850 01:56:55.530 --> 01:57:07.200 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Well, I just want to give, I think it would be helpful to provide some direct into that work, you know, so that if there. It's more of this. This next month, or maybe the next two months depending on what your schedule allows is an assessment of the data and then you can come back and try to provide some what what you found and then provide that direction to the board and see if that's the direction we want to go down and if it needs to be if we need to meet on that or if you know, for example, I know Mr knew you had met with staff on the code on parking, you know, so if we had a board member that wanted to do that and volunteer for that we could go down that path. I think that would be helpful. So it's not such a broad task. 854 01:57:37.860 --> 01:57:52.170 brenna durden (DDRB Board): Yeah. And then the other idea is that, you know, I don't know what the workload is so I don't know that I'm not even suggesting the next month or the next two months. It could be sometime this year. You know, But I do think that it's something that you know when we have so many like this I think there's confusion about it. And I just think a refresh is probably in order. 860 01:58:12.540 --> 01:58:21.930 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Will and we should probably. I think the feedback you know maybe this board can consider this between now and we meet on this again to have some some notes thought through of what our objectives are for signage, you know, I know that we I've heard Mr. Davisson and say before you know that we should reduce signage to a minimum and let the architecture standout we've had others say that you know, the site and I've probably been included in this that signage is necessary for businesses and if if the visibility helps business exceed downtown. Then we want to encourage it. So we want to try to find some guidelines on how to direct the signage of the future so that it's not tacky and I'm noxious but it helps businesses do what it's set out to do the first place. Right, a lot of heads nodding. That's great. 866 01:59:02.250 --> 01:59:03.060 Lori Boyer: Mr. Chairman. 867 01:59:03.930 --> 01:59:04.800 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Yes, please. 868 01:59:05.580 --> 01:59:12.450 Lori Boyer: One of the things I would like to add real quickly that we did when we worked on the zoning overlay and I think would be an important part of this is to understand why each of the sign exceptions were requested. What was it that what regulation, did they not meet that necessitated the exception because part of our goal and addressing the overlay was if you saw something that was a regular exception then the system was broken. There was something broken with the rule that you needed to fix the rule in the first place. So that and and so i i'd also like our analysis that we're doing, we're just, we're going back to see to include not only whether it was granted and what was granted, but what part of the current code. Did they have to have an exception from what didn't work because that starts to tell us where we were. We need to adjust something. 874 02:00:03.720 --> 02:00:15.930 christian harden (DDRB Chair): I think that's a great point. Yeah. And it also begs to consider how other growing urban areas like ourselves, how they're dealing with it. And if you know there's another way of thinking about it. So maybe there's some research that you know that we could look at to to do our own homework be better prepared and you know staff feel free to share that with us. All right. Okay. So do we have any public comment. I think we only have a few members of the public here left that are bearing with us. So we have any other further comment. 878 02:00:41.250 --> 02:00:42.480 Ina Mezini: I do not see any hands up. 879 02:00:43.290 --> 02:00:44.280 christian harden (DDRB Chair): Okay. All right, we'll move to ajourn. Thank you, everybody. Thank you. 881 02:00:48.840 --> 02:00:50.220 Kealey West - OGC: Thank you. Thank you.