►
From YouTube: 9-23-20 Zoning Board of Adjustment
Description
Des Moines Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting via teleconference on Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2020.
Help us caption & translate this video!
https://amara.org/v/C2fuc/
A
A
Any
material,
written
or
otherwise
used
today,
as
part
of
any
presentation,
will
become
a
permanent
part
of
the
record
and
will
not
be
returned.
You
may
contact
staff
after
the
hearing.
If
you
need
a
copy
of
anything
that
was
presented
at
the
hearing
today
and
again,
if
there's
anything
you're
presenting
with
documents,
photos
pictures
plan
drawings,
you
will
have
needed
to
email
those
to
planning
at
dmgov.org.
A
A
A
B
B
E
B
A
A
A
staff
is
recommending
approval,
subject
to
a
list
of
staff
recommendations
and
requirements
that
that
applicant
would
need
to
comply
with
in
order
to
receive
and
maintain
their
conditional
use
permit.
So
staff
is
recommending
approval
and,
as
this
is
on
consent,
the
the
board
would
be
looking
to
approve
this
item
without
discussion.
A
A
If
so,
if
you're
participating
by
zoom
again,
please
hit
the
raise
hand
icon
in
your
little
toolbar
to
be
recognized
or
if
you're
participating
by
phone,
please
hit
star
9,
and
then
staff
will
know
that
you'd
like
to
speak.
So
again.
Anybody
with
any
concerns
with
approving
the
conditional
use
permit
request
on
our
consent
agenda
at
323,
east
walnut
I'll
do
a
going
once
going
twice.
A
A
H
A
Okay,
all
right
so
we'll
have
the
decision
and
order
prepared
for
item
number
one
and
the
applicant
and
we'll
get
a
copy
that
next
week
we
wish
you
well
in
your
business
venture
all
right.
That'll
bring
us
now
to
our
regular
hearing
where
we
will
hear
each
item
as
an
individual
agenda
item
and
take
testimony
item.
Two
is
a
conditional
use
approval
request
at
the
vicinity
of
1606
center
street
and
we'll
have
staff.
Kick
us
off
today
by
first
giving
a
brief
summary
of
the
applicant's
request.
I
I
Are
you
seeing
it
now
just
the
agenda
yeah?
That
was
the
opening
slide,
so
just
just
to
go
back
to
the
opening
slide.
Yes,
we
are
reviewing
a
conditional
use
application
for
the
sitting
of
a
small
wireless
facility
on
a
utility
pole
within
a
an
area.
That's
designated
a
local
historic
district
is
the
short
way
to
describe
what
that
section.
Bio
code
is
referring
to.
I
Photograph
looking
west
towards
the
site
closest
to
the
the
intersection
is
a
pole.
That's
intended
to
be
removed
as
part
of
this
overall
project
and
the
replacement
pole
you
can
see
behind.
That
would
take
its
place
with
regard
to
both
supporting
the
lines
that
you
see
running
along
the
there
and
then
with
also
the
addition
of
the
wireless
facility.
I
I
won't
spend
a
lot
of
time
going
through
all
these
sheets,
but
we
did
they
did
provide
their
full
design.
Submittal
set,
showing
you
know
the
location
of
the
existing
poll,
the
location
of
the
new
pole.
You
can
see
in
this
drawing
a
general
design
of
the
equipment
that
be
mounted
to
the
top
of
the
pole.
I
I
I
I
I
I
In
our
recommendation
report,
we
did
note
that
there
are
other
polls
in
the
area
that
perhaps
could
work
as
alternatives
or
in
alleys.
Nearby
we've
had
that
discussion
with
applicant
they've
indicated
that
it
won't
address
their
needs,
but
as
staff
we
we
weren't.
It
wasn't
terribly
clear
to
us
other
than
it's
less
than
ideal
to
not
have
in
this
location.
So
I
wanted
to
hit
that
as
well.
I
This
is
a
response
map.
I
think
I
didn't
update,
use
the
updated
map.
We
do
have
a
response
from
the
wall's
house,
which
is
the
you
know,
the
joining
property.
I
have
a
have
that
in
my
presentation
here
that
I'll
share
with
you,
the
applicant,
has
had
ongoing
correspondence
to
communication
with
the
neighborhood
association
and
and
neighbors.
I
This
is
a
summary
of
that.
We
can
come
back
to
this
at
any
point
or
mail.
If
you
want
me
to
leave
it
up
long
enough
for
folks
to
read,
it
is
two
pages
I
can.
I
think
it
might
be
best
let
the
applicant
kind
of
share
their
what
they've
had
as
far
as
correspondence,
but
we
can
come
back
to
this
people.
A
I
We
also
had
correspondence
from
the
adjoining
property
owner,
as
I
noted
in
my
presentation,
expressing
concern
and
opposition.
This
was
a
photograph
that
they
submitted
in
their
correspondence.
This
happened
far
enough
back
that
they
weren't
they
were
caught
off
guard
that
the
poll
had
already
been
installed,
that
prior
to
the
board
action,
and
then
we
have
a
correspondence
from
the
neighborhood
association
president
offering
opposition
to
the
proposal,
and
then
yesterday
we
received
this
letter
from
the
applicant
and
I'm
gonna.
I
I
think
when
they
give
their
presentation,
we
can
come
back
to
this
if
they
would
like
us
to
or
if
the
board
has
questions
on
it.
I
also
have
some
slides
that
they'll
be
presenting
that
I
think
summarizes
what's
in
this
letter,
but
I'll,
let
them
clarify
that
and
then
they
also
provided
a
detailed
response
to
the
different
criteria
for
the
additional
use.
J
A
I
I
don't
know
that
it's
fair
to
say
without
permission,
the
the
this
involves
a
coordination
with
the
utility
company
and
so
the
neighbor
it
it
was
installed
after
our
notices
had
gone
out.
So
okay
suggested
that
I,
I
believe
part
of
it's.
The
communication
with
the
you
know
contractor
wasn't
aware
that
we're
still
having
discussions,
I
will,
I
will
add,
and
I'm
sure
the
applicant
will
point
out
that
the
direction
from
the
traffic
and
transportation
division
of
the
city
is
that
you
know
the
pole.
That's
at
the
intersection.
I
K
I
A
Okay,
hearing
none
for
the
next
part
of
the
hearing.
The
appellant
has
up
to
10
minutes
to
present
their
appeal.
Now
for
you
folks,
at
verizon.
I
know
there's
a
number
of
you
present
here
today,
so
you
have
10
minutes
to
present
your
reasoning
for
your
case
and
we
hold
people
pretty
strictly
to
that
requirement.
L
M
Good
afternoon
I'm
sherman
boss.
I
appreciate
the
chair
and
the
board
giving
us
the
opportunity
to
appear
today,
I'm
with
the
law
firm
of
stinson
llp,
located
at
1201
walnut
in
kansas
city
missouri,
and
I'm
appearing
as
attorney
of
record
for
verizon
this
afternoon,
I'm
licensed
to
practice
in
the
state
of
iowa.
M
M
N
N
So
this
first
slide
is
based
background
and
timeline
of
our
application
for
this
small
cell
site.
It
was
originally
submitted
in
january
with
a
batch
application
of
with
eight
other
small
wireless
facilities.
Those
eight
other
sites
were
approved
and
have
very
similar
equipment
to
what
we're
proposing
for
this
sherman
hill
site.
We
pulled
this
site
out
as
it
was
identified
as
a
historic
location.
L
The
first
issue
was
that
attachment
of
our
radio
equipment
to
the
existing
mid-american
electric
pole
may
provide
an
obstacle
to
future
undergrounding
in
short.
Well,
we
can
talk
about
this
later
as
well.
We
don't
think
that's
the
case
as
mentioned.
This
is
mid-american
energy's
poll
in
the
future.
If
mid-american
energy
would
choose
to
or
if
they
were
required
to
remove
the
pole
and
underground
their
lines.
L
N
L
So
this
is
an
example
of
a
currently
installed
small
cell,
that's
of
the
same
technology
and
type
it's
on
1605
9th
street
in
des
moines.
If
you
notice
the
radio
equipment
is
the
the
gray
equipment
to
the
very
top.
So
it's
top
mounted
it's
very
small.
It
shouldn't
cause
any
visual
clutter.
It
doesn't
really
impose
any
restrictions
on
sight
lines
in
the
neighborhood
with
regard
to
the
technology.
This
is
the
fastest
stuff
we
have,
so
it
should
provide
tremendously
increased,
download
and
upload
speeds
to
the
neighborhood.
L
That
poses
a
pretty
significant
issue
for
our
site.
Selection
in
neighborhoods,
like
sherman
hill
sherman
hill,
has
a
lot
of
old
growth,
beautiful,
dense
foliage
and
a
lot
of
multi-story
houses
relatively
close
together.
So
it's
very
important
in
neighborhoods
like
that
in
locations
like
that
with
this
technology
that
we
get
as
close
to
our
target
coverage
as
possible,
we
really
are
limited
in
those
situations
to
line
of
sight
coverage,
so
we
try
to
go
into
the
right-of-way
as
close
as
we
can
to
the
roadways
or
the
intersections.
L
N
So,
in
addition
to
the
way
the
technology
works
and
that
it's
better
with
line
of
sight,
we
actually
did
have
our
engineers
go
out
and
look
at
the
alley
and
take
these
pictures
to
see
if
there
are
polls
that
would
be
possible
for
us
to
co-locate
on
and
both
of
all
of
the
polls
that
are
located
in
the
alley.
Currently,
we
cannot
go
on
because
mid-american
energy
does
not
allow
us
to
co-locate
on
these
polls
because
they
contain
transformers
or
u-guards,
and
it
presents
a
safety
risk
for
us
to
co-locate
on
these
poles.
N
O
Yes,
okay,
so
I
will
try
to
run
through
these
fairly
quickly.
I
know
we're
running
out
of
time,
so
for
the
first
criteria,
the
location
and
operation
of
the
small
wireless
facility
will
adequately
safeguard
the
health,
safety
and
general
welfare
of
persons
near
the
site,
as
they
previously
discussed.
The
replacement
midam
pole
was
moved
to
the
west
to
provide
more
turning
clearance
for
the
intersection,
and
that
is
in
order
to
improve
safety.
O
O
O
So
far,
criteria
number
three:
the
small
wireless
facility
will
not
increase
congestion
in
the
streets
or
public
danger
of
fire
safety
or
flooding.
No
portion
of
the
equipment
will
be
located
on
the
ground
next
slide.
Please,
the
small
wireless
facility
will
not
impair
nearby
property
values.
It
is
very
low
profile.
It's
located
nearly
30
feet
above
the
ground,
where
most
people
won't
notice
it
and
it
actually,
it
will
improve
verizon's
network
capacity
and
reliability,
which
is
valued
by
prospective
purchasers
next
slide.
O
Please,
the
proposed
small
wireless
facility
is
consistent
with
the
general
purpose
of
the
zoning
ordinance
and
comprehensive
plan.
It
complies
with
fcc
regulations,
the
ios
cell
sighting
act
and
all
applicable
zoning
regulations.
It's
located
in
the
nx-2a
zoning
district,
where
the
zoning
regulations
specifically
allow
the
small
wireless
facility
with
cep
approval
next
slide.
Please,
the
proposed
small
wireless
facility
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
goal
of
protecting
the
historic
assets
of
the
sherman
hill.
O
Local
historic
district
verizon
will
not
be
adding
a
new
poll
that
will
increase
any
visual
clutter
in
the
right-of-way,
because
the
small
wireless
facility
will
be
co-located
on
the
replacement,
mid-am
utility
pole.
The
small
wireless
facility
is
very
low
profile.
Again,
it's
nearly
30
feet
above
ground
level.
There
will
not
be
any
ground
cabinets,
it
will
have
a
minimal
impact
on
the
character
of
sherman
hill.
Most
people
won't
notice
it.
The
small
wireless
facilities
are
the
most
modest
deployment
that
telecom
companies
can
provide
and
are
deployed
instead
of
100
feet.
Tall
macro
sites.
O
Next
slide,
please,
the
the
small
wireless
facility
does
comply
with
the
design
requirements
in
section
134-4,
it's
minimally
obtrusive.
It
reasonably
matches
the
mid-aim
utility
pole,
which
doesn't
have
rid
of
elements
or
lighting
next
slide.
Please
the
it's
located
at
the
top
of
the
mid-air
pole
in
the
public
right-of-way,
where
it
will
be
minimally
visible.
O
My
next
slide,
please,
the
height
complies
with
with
the
limitations
set
forth.
The
pole
is
29.5
feet
with
the
small
wireless
facility.
Total
height
is
32.1
feet.
Next
slide,
please,
as
john
mentioned,
the
site
is
not
included
in
an
existing
underground
district
and
verizon
is
not
adding
a
new
or
additional
poll
in
the
event,
as
he
noted
that
an
underground
district
is
adopted,
verizon
will
remove
the
s
the
small
wireless
facility
next
slide.
O
A
O
The
small
wireless
facility
will
not
will
have
no
significant
detrimental
impact
on
the
use
and
enjoyment
of
surrounding
properties,
and
it
is
because
of
the
previous
discussion
about
its
low
profile.
It
will
be
co
located
on
a
replacement,
mid,
amp
poll
that
is
going
to
be
there,
no
matter
what
the
no
additional
polls
will
be
added
to
the
public
right-of-way
and
as
noted
before
on
slide
12.
There
are
descriptions
as
to
why
it
will
have
a
minimal
impact
on
the
character
of
sherman
hill,
okay.
G
A
P
Mr
chair,
this
is
cindy
smith.
Go
ahead,
I'm
not
sure.
If
verizon
knows
the
answer
to
this,
but
as
they
were
speaking,
I
was
curious
what
other
cell
companies
have
if
other
cellular
companies
have
equipment
in
that
vicinity,
I'm
thinking
of
u.s
cellular
and
maybe
some
other
providers.
I
was
just
curious
if
they
knew.
L
K
L
This
is
john
palm
tag
again.
I
believe
the
existing
poll
was
or
is
29
and
a
half
feet,
and
I
believe
the
radio
equipment
adds
another
two
to
three
feet
on
top
and
as
to
the
specific
width-
and
I
don't
have
those
numbers,
but
it's
certainly
within
the
definition
of
a
small
wireless
facility
in
iowa
code
and
it's
the
best
description
we
could
give.
You
is
the
photograph
in
the
slide.
P
H
N
N
L
Man,
this
is
the
jungle
tag
again,
even
if
there
was
a
pole
that
we
could
co-locate
on
in
the
alley.
Unfortunately,
with
the
radio
wave
characteristics,
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
provide
effective
service
to
almost
anyone
that
we're
targeting
it
would
effectively
just
be
with
all
the
foliage
and
with
the
housing
in
the
neighborhood.
It
would
effectively
just
be
the
backyards
on
that
block
and
the
alley
line
of
sight
going
north
south.
P
Mr
chair,
this
is
cindy
again,
I'm
I'm
assuming
as
a
as
a
vendor,
verizon's
heard
from
customers
or
their
clients
that
the
service
isn't
that
great,
you
know.
What
can
you
do
to
enhance
it,
and
I
know
there
was
a
mention
of
folks
working
at
home.
Obviously
I'm
remote
now
covet,
so
I
rely
heavily
on
my
cell
phone
and
also
on
my
internet.
P
Well,
it's
kind
of
just
my
assumption
and
if
verizon
has
anything
to
throw
back
at
it
at
me
with
that,
then
I'm
I'm
willing
to.
I
would
love
to
hear
that.
I
you
know
as
a
customer,
if
you
don't
have
good
coverage,
you
often
call
your
whether
it's
usl
verizon
whomever
you
call
to
complain.
So
I'm
just
throwing
that
out,
because
I
understand
the
importance
of
working
right.
L
So,
yes,
those
are
good
questions.
I
think
everyone
does
want
the
best
coverage
possible
right
and
verizon
wireless
is
trying
to
provide
the
best
possible
coverage
in
des
moines.
That's
also
the
most
reliable
in
the
case
of
this
small
cell
equipment.
This
provides
the
next
generation
a
level
of
service
and
certainly
within
two
or
three
years
as
new
cell
phones
are
purchased
by
our
customers.
This
type
of
radio
frequency
service
will
be
in
very
high
demand
and
we're
trying
to
build
out
and
be
prepared
for
that
over
the
next
year
or
two
okay.
A
All
right,
we
have
some
other
questions
for
verizon,
I'm
just
going
to
throw
on
a
quick
one
at
you
guys
myself.
I've
been
following
along
here
on.
You
know
both
staff
presentation
as
well
as
your
own.
So
if
you
need
to
have
this
small
wireless
facility
on
this
pole
at
16th
and
center
to
ensure
you've
got
adequate
coverage
for
your
motorists
and
those
traveling
there
well,
whether
they're,
walking
or
driving,
I'm
assuming
that
means
in
other
areas
of
the
historic
sherman
hill
district.
A
You
already
have
adequate
coverage
with
other
towers,
etc,
because
I
guess
the
question
that
I
would
have
if
we're
getting
down
to
really
brass
tacks
on
this
one
specific
pole
in
this
one
specific
corner,
are
you
going
to
need
to
do
this
time
and
time
again
in
this
district
or
throughout
the
city?
Or
is
this
just
one
very
specific
instance
where
your
coverage
is
weaker
or
non-existent?.
L
So
that's
also
a
really
good
question.
We
are
trying
to
build
out
capacity.
We
do
go
where
the
demands
are
for
the
most
part
and
right
now
we
do
see
that
in
this
specific
location
in
sherman
hill,
there
will
be
significant
capacity
demand
in
the
near
future.
So
we're
trying
to
address
that
as
well
as
interlock
this
with
coverage
provided
by
existing
and
future
locations
as
to
where
exactly
those
future
locations
are.
L
A
A
All
right,
so
anybody
in
support
going
once
twice
sold.
Okay,
all
right
is
there
anybody
that
wishes
to
speak
in
opposition
to
the
applicant's
request,
if
so
again
same
sign,
get
the
raise
hand,
function
and
zoom
or
star
9
on
your
phone.
I
will
try
to
take
those
in
order
of
appearance
but
we'll
see
who
bert
wants
to
recognize,
and
when
we
do
that,
you
have
up
to
five
minutes
to
present
your
concerns.
A
You'll
need
to
start
by
giving
again
both
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
if
more
than
one
person
wants
to
speak
in
opposition,
I
would
encourage
you
to
add
comments,
certainly
one
that
are
relevant,
but
but
two
that
have
a
different
bearing.
If
you
want
to
just
concur
with
who
spoke
earlier,
you
can
simply
say
that
no
anybody
wants
to
speak
in
opposition.
A
Q
A
A
R
R
I
sub
court
staff
recommendation
to
deny
this
application
for
the
reason
to
try
to
get
verizon
to
meet
with
the
neighborhood
and
explain
their
future
plans.
We
asked
that
before
and
we
were
denied
based
on
they
didn't
want
to
share
because
of
you
know,
concerns
for
public
information
on
their
plans.
R
S
Yes,
okay,
thank
you
so
much
ann
taylor
and
I'm
at
the
wallace
house
at
756,
16th
street,
and
I'm
a
staff
member
here,
and
I
would
first
of
all
I
appreciate
the
clarification
in
terms
of
the
number
of
polls
that
are
located
close
to
our
building.
That
was
not
clear
to
me
when
I
wrote
my
letter.
It
seemed
like
it
was
just
adding
another
poll-
and
I
I
understand
now
the
reasoning
behind
behind
adding
a
pole
and
then
because
the
one
at
the
corner
will
be
removed
eventually.
So
I
appreciate
that
clarification.
A
P
P
You
know
we've
had
situations
like
that
where
they
have
the
maintenance
building
surrounded
by
a
fence
at
the
bottom
of
the
poll,
and
I
re
I
recall
there
were
some
fcc
guidelines
or
requirements
that
we
were
bound
by
or
needed
to
be
aware
of,
I'm
not
sure
how
tightly
we
were
bound
by
those.
But
I
do
remember
some
discussion
about
that
and
I
didn't
know
if
this
same,
if
those
same
guidelines
or
discussion
would
be
pertinent
to
today's
conversation.
U
I
don't
believe
so
because
we're
talking
about
a
significantly
different
type
of
facility
here,
I
know
the
big
towers
that
are
freestanding,
that
you
are
thinking
of,
or
at
least
I
believe,
you're
thinking
of
and
because
of
the
actual
physical
requirements
of
those
there.
There
are
additional
considerations,
but
this
you're,
looking
at
the
criteria
that
are
laid
out
on
jason's
report
and
of
those
the
one
that
is
of
significance,
is
really
what
the
discussion
should
be
focused
on.
A
I've
just
got
a
real,
quick
one
for
city
staff,
and
perhaps
the
appellant
can
address
this
as
well
in
their
rebuttal,
but
the
appellant
is
proposing
to.
It
sounds
like
remove
the
pole
on
the
corner
or
they'd,
be
agreeable
to
that
and
keep
the
pull
they've
installed
to
put
their
cell
phone
equipment
on,
but
would
that
pull
also,
then
carry
a
mid-american
electric
line?
So
in
other
words,
the
pole
would
be
used
for
more
than
just
the
the
small
cell
phone
equipment
horizon.
Is
that
correct
staff.
I
A
Okay,
all
right,
then
we'll
go
ahead.
Appellant!
You!
You
guys,
can
share
this
stage
as
much
as
you'd
like,
but
you've
got
up
to
three
minutes
for
any
closing
comments
or
any
rebuttal
of
any
comments
or
if
you
want
to
address
some
points
or
questions
that
have
been
presented
here,
you've
got
three
minutes
to
wrap
it
up.
O
Yes,
this
is
anna
carsolidge.
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
okay?
So
I
would
just
take
this
time
to
address
some
of
the
points
that
were
raised.
We
verizon
did
not
propose
to
remove
the
pole.
This
was
something
that
came
up
in
the
discussions
with
the
city
in
terms
of
the
poll
location,
the
city.
It
was
the
city's
request
to
remove
the
to
move
the
pole
further
away
from
the
turning
radius
of
the
intersection
it
is.
It
is
mid-amp's
pull
as
noted,
and
we
would
be
co-locating
on
on
that.
O
As
far
as
regulatory
requirements
related
to
historic
preservation,
verizon
has
confirmed
that
it's
completed
all
of
its
regulatory
due
diligence
and
that
they
are
in
compliance.
I
would
also
note
that
any
sort
of
section,
106
or
historic
preservation
requirements
are
not
identified
in
the
cup
requirements.
So
it's
not
relevant
to
this.
O
This
appeal,
the
as
far
as
future
plans
verizon
doesn't
share
those
because
they
are
not
fully
developed
or
because
there
are
competitive
reasons
for
not
putting
that
out.
There.
Verizon
did
not
ask
midam
to
install
the
poll.
It
was
already
there
and
again
if
that
poll
were
to
be
removed.
For
any
undergrounding
purposes,
or
you
know,
moving
out
of
the
roadway,
we
would
verizon
would
be
responsible
for
removing
its
roof.
It's
its
equipment
and
again
the
the
poles
in
the
alley
are
just
not
they're,
not
feasible
options.
A
P
Mr
chair,
this
is
cindy
smith,
I'll
start
it
off.
I
don't.
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
with
the
request.
You
know
it's
a
very
small
footprint.
It's
going
to
go
on
an
existing
poll,
we're
not
going
to
be
adding
polls,
it's
going
to
be
at
the
very
top.
It's
a
service
that
people
need
in
this
day
and
age,
whether
we
like
it
or
not.
There's
going
to
be
cell
phone
power
cell
phone
infrastructure
that
we're
going
to
need
in
order
for
our
phones
to
work
efficiently.
P
You
know,
and
then
we've
already
talked
about
the
work
at
home,
remote
issues
for
users
and-
and
I
do
understand
about
utility
poles.
Even
sherman
hills
is
a
beautiful,
wonderful
area
and
I
just
wish
for
the
city
of
all
of
the
city
of
des
moines
that
we
could
get
rid
of
all
the
overhead
utility
poles.
K
K
We
do
require
our
cell
phones
pretty
much
as
a
service
nowadays
to
get
through
everything.
And,
yes,
I
think
the
city
would
love
to
go
with
underground
wiring
throughout,
because
just
look
what
happened
with
the
derivative
with?
I
have
overhead
lines
in
my
neighborhood
and
they
were
out
for
eight
days
because
it
took
so
long
to
repair
them,
but
so
I
think
that
overhead
poles
are
going
to
be
there
for
a
while,
since
this
is
at
the
top,
it's
unobtrusive,
it
doesn't
have
logos
all
over
it
and
everything.
K
I
think
it's
smaller
than
a
transformer
than
you
see
on
many
of
the
polls
that
I
don't
think
the
visual
aspect
of
it
is
anything.
That's
all
that
objectionable
these
historical
living
in
the
modern
age.
If
they
want
to
be
without
cell
service
there,
then
they
can
do
that,
but
I
don't
think
many
people
there
would
want
to
live
without
cell
service.
V
Mr
chairs
must
be
gross
yes,
I
just
wanted
to
share
with
the
board
just
a
small
concern.
I
hear
what
has
been
said
by
lynn
and
and
what
I
guess
I
would
say,
is
that
it
does.
It
sets
a
bit
of
a
dangerous
precedent
here
I
feel
like
moving
forward,
even
though
we
don't
know
the
future
plans
of
a
verizon
it.
You
know
it
will
be
looked
back
on
as
well.
You
know
we
allowed
it
to
happen
here
on
this
instance,
so
I
just
wanted
to
share
that
concern
with
the
board.
A
A
You
know
8
to
12
foot
bases
painted
blue
or
stainless
steel
and
and
razor
wire
and
all
kinds
of
stuff
around
them
here
our
technology
is
getting
better
while
getting
smaller,
and
I
think
that
that
would
be
a
benefit
to
anybody
to
look
at,
including
that
I
do
have
a
concern
about
the
proliferation
of
vertical
utilities
like
poles,
certainly
in
1877,
when
hoyt
sherman
built
his
mansion.
That's
why
it's
called
sherman
hill.
A
There
were
no
polls
of
any
type
there
also
weren't
any
automobiles
there
weren't
any
parking
lots
there
weren't
any
city,
stop
signs
there,
weren't
any
city
street
signs.
Historic
preservation
is
extremely
important
and
it
certainly
has
parameters.
But
if
we
really
wanted
to
free
sherman
hill
in
time,
we'd
have
to
take
all
those
things
out
too.
A
So
if
verizon
had
proposed
installing
additional
utility
pool
polls
which,
by
designer
default
that's
what's
happened
here,
I
would
not
be
in
support
of
that,
but,
as
my
colleagues
have
stated,
the
the
true
heart
of
the
matter
minimizing
that
visibility
to
the
fullest
extent
they're
more
than
going
to
do
that.
I'd
love
to
see
all
the
other
ones.
Converted
like
this
around
the
city,
probably
not
possible.
This
is
for
a
very
localized
area,
but
what
I
would
suggest
here
is
that
I
don't
like
seeing
three
big
fat
telephone
poles
all
right
next
to
one
house.
A
A
A
K
A
Okay,
all
right
well,
we'll
see
how
this
goes.
We've
got
a
motion
by
mr
pins
and
a
second
by
lynn,
carlson,
all
those
in
favor
of
granting
the
requested
conditional
use
permit,
subject
to
the
condition
that
the
it's
it's
built
as
generally
presented
and
the
existing
poll
right
there
on
the
corner
is
removed
per
staff
concerns
favor,
we'll
take
roll
call
for
eyes
or
nays.
H
A
W
Okay,
thank
you
so,
as
mentioned,
this
is
a
zoning
variance
request
for
some
signage
located
along
merrell
hay
road.
The
subject
property
is
quite
large
and
many
people
will
know
it,
because
it's
also
the
location
of
quite
a
number
of
businesses
in
a
couple
of
strip
malls,
including
aspen,
gym
and
there's
a
laundromat
in
there
as
well,
and
then
the
the
actual
subject.
W
Property
is
the
tenant
bay
located
on
the
very
north
end
known
by
most
as
northern
equipment
and
tools.
I
apologize
if
I've
gotten
that
name
a
little
bit
out
of
order
just
a
little
bit
of
site
context
from
the
far
side
and
then
northern
tool
and
equipment.
I
apologies
and
the
applicant
is
asking
to
do
a
little
bit
of
signage.
W
W
W
Hopefully,
that's
fairly
clear.
So
again
they
are
looking
to
remove
this
sign
and
then
they
would
replace
it
with
the
still
sign
in
approximately
the
same
location
and
then
are
proposing
a
a
second
new
sign
located
underneath
it
staff
just
points
out
that
this
is
a
variance
request
and
the
variance
test
is
a
little
is
typically
rather
hard
to
meet.
Your
criteria
are
located
in
the
staff
recommendation.
W
W
Staff
has
reviewed
this
over.
We
have
determined
that
we
are
recommending
denial
of
these
requested
variances,
just
simply
because
the
variances
themselves
are
not
consistent
with
the
criteria
necessary
to
grant
a
variance,
but
we
do
feel
that
the
applicant
has
grounds
for
the
maximum
relief
allowed
by
type
2
exceptions,
which
would
be
50
over
the
numerical
regulations
of
the
code,
meaning
that
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
an
amended
appeal
for
one
sign
over
the
maximum
allowed
choose
signs
and
a
zoning
exception
of
59.17
square
feet
over
the
maximum
allowed
within
the
error.
W
W
W
P
Okay,
okay,
this
is
cindy,
maybe
I'm
just
not
tracking
today,
but
they.
What
you're
saying
is
they
could
keep
their
two,
their
northern
sign
and
their
I'm
going
to
call
it
their
emblem
sign
and
they
could
take
out
the
honda
sign
and
replace
it
with
either
the
steel
sign
or
part
service,
but
not
have
four
signs
they
could
they
could
still
have
that
third
sign
and,
and
can
that
third
sign
be
any
bigger
than
it
currently
is.
That's
where
I
got
lost.
Oh
my
apologies!
No!
No!
It's
just
confusing.
W
I
used
a
measuring
tool
and
I
think
it's
approximately
15
square
feet
is
what
the
honda
sign
is.
The
applicant
can
probably
clarify
that
better
for
us,
so
they
are
reasonably
within
the
range
of
what
they
are
allowed
to
essentially
jockey
around
yes,
so
they
could.
But
the
thing
is
they're
asking
for
two
additional
signs
over
the
two
that
they're
allowed
and
we're
recommending
for
just
one
over
the
two
that
are
allowed
for
a
total
of
three
rather
than
a
total
of
four.
Does
that.
P
W
It
would
make
it
an
exception,
love
it
would
make
it
an
exception
level
for
them
to
go
up
to
approximately
just
under
180
square
feet
of
total
signage
so
that
they
could
use
it.
However,
they
would
like
to
but
they're
also
limited
to
using
it
only
within
two
signs
per
the
code,
whereas
the
exception
level
would
grant
them
the
right
to
go
to
three
total
signs.
A
X
Yes,
from
assistant
construction
manager
of
northern
tooling
equipment,
are
you
guys
able
to
hear
me?
Yes,
okay,
thank
you.
So,
yes,
we
would
like
to
replace
our
steel.
The
current
honda
sign
that
we
have
in
our
building
with
steel
as
steel
is
a
new
vendor
that
we
are
selling
in
our
stores.
That
is
requiring
us
to
put
the
sign
on
our
building
and
with
that
requirement
in
remodeling
the
store
we
had
invested,
400
000
dollars
worth
of
work
in
this
recent
remodel
that
we're
just
finishing
up.
Y
Y
So
the
the
two
signs
are
are
specifically
related
to
helping
the
community
understand
that
we
offer
the
services
for
our
parts
and
service
and
repair
for
the
the
parts
room
that
we
constructed
during
the
remodel,
as
well
as
as
sarah
mentioned,
steele
is
a
very
well-known
vendor
and
provider
of
equipment
to
do-it-yourselfers
and
professionals
all
over
the
country
and
their
requirement
to
have
their
products
sold
in
our
stores
is
to
have
a
sign
on
the
building.
That
says
we
have
steel
in
it.
Y
So
that's
really
the
reasoning
for
the
two
signs.
If
we
didn't
carry
the
steel
line,
we
wouldn't
have
applied
for
this
variance,
because
we
would
have
just
put
the
the
parts
and
service
sign
on
the
building
and
removed
the
honda
sign
and
we
would
have
been
under
the
required
allowance.
So
again
we
appreciate
you
all
hosting
us
today.
So
thank
you
very
much.
Okay,
all
right.
F
F
They
don't
believe
that
the
criteria
for
of
variance
has
been
met
here
and,
if
you'll,
if
you're
kind
of
aware
of
what
the
criteria
is,
it
is
rather
strict
and
one
of
the
the
component
basically
is
to
you
need
to
establish
a
necessary
hardship.
There
are
three
components
to
that,
one
of
which
is,
I
I
think
in
my
tenure
here
that
the
most
difficult
to
to
attain-
and
that
is
the
the
first
one,
which
is
you
can
see
kind
of
on
the
screen
there.
F
The
in
question
cannot
yield
a
reasonable
return
from
any
use
permitted
by
the
regulations
of
the
district
in
which
the
land
is
is
located.
I
hesitate
to
continue
reading
that
everyone
can
read,
but
it
suffice
it
to
say
it's
not
enough
to
just
show
that
that's
going
to
have
a
detriment
on
on
something.
That's
you
know
your
profits
or
or
something
like
that,
but
that
it's
at
actually
no
reasonable
return
from
any
use
permitted.
F
My
general
feeling
is
that
it
is
the
one
out
of
a
million
signs
that
would
hit
this,
but
I'm
interested
in
hearing,
because
I
didn't
feel,
like
I
heard
in
the
presentation-
an
argument
that
even
attempts
to
address
this
particular
requirement.
So
I'm
interested
in
hearing
how
you
think
that
it
hits
this
requirement
thanks.
Y
Y
We've
been
told
by
our
customer
base
in
the
des
moines
area
that
they
would
like
to
see
us
carry
this
product
along
with
the
product.
Again,
the
requirement
from
steel
is
to
install
a
sign
on
the
building
and
while
we
also
sell
their
product,
we
also
service
their
products.
So
we
invested
in
installing
a
constructing
a
parts
and
service
area
in
the
store
to
be
able
to
service
the
equipment
that
we
sell,
including
the
steel
product
line,
so
that
that's
our
reason
for
applying
for
the
variants.
Y
A
Okay,
all
right
well
seeing
no
questions
we'll
go
to.
If
there's
anybody
that
wishes
to
speak
in
support
of
the
applicant's
request,
we
can
see.
There's
anybody
in
the
audience
that
would
like
to
speak
in
support
and
to
do
so
through
zoom
hit
the
raise
your
hand
icon
to
be
recognized
by
phone
hit,
star
9
on
your
phone
keypad
and
we'll
have
our
host
recognize.
You.
A
A
T
Yes,
chair
members
of
the
board,
this
is
suen
donovan,
the
zoning
enforcement
officer
for
the
city
of
des
moines.
I
do
not
believe
that
they've
met
the
variance
test.
If
they,
if
the
board
should
decide
to
allow
three
signs,
it
would
seem
that
they
could
put
the
steel
sign
parts
and
service
into
one
sign
area.
Perhaps
the
word
steel
would
be
smaller,
but
you
could
incorporate
maybe
another
design
to
get
what
you
want,
but
I
don't
believe:
they've
met
the
variance
test
for
the
four
signs
or
the
increased
area
of
signage.
K
C
F
T
A
A
Y
Are
we
always
trying
to
get
on
meeting
there?
So
I
want
to
thank
you
for
your
time
today
again,
we
just
wanted
to
reiterate
that
we
just
invested
over
hundred
thousand
dollars
into
the
store
to
remodel
it
to
better
for
the
community
shopping
experience
and
we're
just
looking
for
consideration
from
the
city
to
allow
us
this
exception
to
these
to
these
two
signs
on
the
building.
So
we
appreciate
your
time
today.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
A
There
parts
trailers
tires,
you
name
it
I'm
glad
to
know
that
you've
invested
in
expanding
the
store
business
must
be
doing
well,
I'm
pleased
to
have
you
part
of
our
city
and
our
community
as
a
retailer
with,
within
that
any
retailer
would
love
to
advertise
and
have
as
many
signs
as
possible.
There's
no
doubt,
but
there
also
has
to
be
a
function
of
community
character
with
within
that.
So
in
in
looking
at
that,
this
this
site
does
sit
pretty
far
off
the
street.
A
I
don't
think
that
was
their
argument,
but
they're
in
just
because
your
vendor
or
the
line
of
tools
you
carry
quote,
requires
you
to
have
signage
that
does
not
usurp
or
trump
any
any
regulatory
authorities
for
community
character.
If
so,
I
think
that
hyvee
food
stores
would
have
kellogg's
and
anderson
erickson
pasted
all
over
their
storefronts.
They
can't
do
that.
So
I
think
there
needs
to
be
some
reasonable
thing.
P
Mr
chair,
this
is
cindy
smith.
I
would
concur
that
the
exception
level
makes
more
sense
for
this,
and
I
would
also
agree
that
northern
is
a
great
place.
My
husband
continually
goes
there,
especially
after
directo.
He
went
there
and
bought
a
chainsaw.
That
was
the
first
place
he
headed
so
often
times
there
are
top
on
our
list
and
it's
a
great
store.
V
Mr
chair,
this
is
justin
gross.
I
would
concur
with
the
statements
already
made,
but
I
also
would
encourage
the
applicant
to
consider
the
idea
that
was
brought
forth
by
sue
and
donovan.
It
sounds
like
it's
something
that
could
be
considered.
They
could
and
and
have
kind
of
both
of
those
two
ideas,
maybe
into
one
sign,
so
I
would
be
for
the
amended
for
the
type
two
zoning
exception.
A
Okay,
I
think
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
just
go
ahead,
maybe
just
coming
full
circle
here,
I'm
going
to
make
a
motion
kind
of
a
dual
motion
here
denial.
I
make
a
motion
to
deny
the
requested
zoning
variances,
but
to
grant
approval
of
an
amended
appeal
for
a
type
2
zoning
exception
to
allow
for
the
one
wall
sign
over
the
maximum
allowed
2
and
the
type
2
zoning
exception
for
the
square
footage,
as
noted
so
long
as
they
comply
with
the
sign
permit
ordinances.
So,
basically,
I'm
making
a
motion
for
the
staff
recommendation.
G
A
Z
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
eric
lendy
senior
city
planner
item
four,
is
the
at
the
intersection
of
where
south
union
becomes
chaffee
road
and
where
east
and
west
army
post
diverge
it's
in
the
southwest
corner.
The
applicant
is
requesting
two
variances
to
allow
the
retention
of
an
existing
pole
sign
that
was
was
installed
at
the
time.
It
was
actually
a
large
supermarket
and
has
been
reused
in
that
time.
Z
The
triggering
event
here
is
the
change
of
usage
of
the
building,
while
there's
some
office
being
retained
by
the
by
the
new
owner
or
the
new
purchaser
of
des
moines
area,
religious
council.
They
are
also
planning
to
consolidate
other
aspects
of
their
operation,
including
their
warehousing
and
distribution
of
food
pantry
commodities
here
as
well.
So
that's
a
change
of
use
and
and
in
the
code
the
triggering
element
is
when
the
there's
a
site
plan
required
by
the
change
of
use
that
triggers
the
removal
of
any
existing
pole
signs.
Z
So
they
certainly
earn
monument
signs
on
the
property.
If
they
wish
to,
they
actually
have
two
frontages.
They
could
earn
up
to
200
square
feet
of
a
monument
sign
either
of
the
eight
foot
tall
variety,
when
it's
closer
than
25
feet
or
going
taller
up
to
15
feet
when
it's
outside
that
25
feet
from
the
street
front
property
line
on
both
army
post,
road
and
chaffey
road.
Z
So
they
they
do,
earn
signage
they're
not
obligated
to
have
signage
in.
In
any
event,
they
can
certainly
have
signage
just
on
the
building
if
they
want
or
no
signage
at
all,
which
the
arguments
you're
going
to
hear
from
them,
as
is
that
the
visibility
of
of
their
location
is
important.
So
I'm
I'm
assuming
that
they're
needing
signage
for
their
for
that
purpose,
but
they
do
earn
signage
under
the
new
code
provisions.
So
the
code's
intent
really
is
to
trigger
that
attrition
of
monument
signs
as
investment
is
made.
Z
Z
The
location
is
right
in
this
northeast
part
of
the
site
relative
to
their
parking.
This
is
a
sketch
that
was
provided
with
their
application
to
show
that
location
again,
they
have
over
200
feet
of
lineal
frontage
on
both
chaffey
road
and
army
post
road
to
max
out
the
freestanding
sign
earnings
for
a
sign
on
each
frontage
in
the
form
of
a
monument
sign.
Z
This
is
their
part
submitted
as
part
of
their
application
to
show
that
the
dimensions
that
we're
talking
about
here
and
again,
there's
where
you
see
the
arch
actually
intact
in
that
photo,
they
made
their
application
william
c
knapp
lc
is
actually
the
property
owner
currently,
unless
that
has
changed
hands
since
the
application
was
made
in
the
staff
report,
you
will
see
the
chart
from
the
code
that
shows
the
permitted
sign
types
and
the
earnings.
Then
you'll
also
see
the
applicable
requirements
for
what
requ
monument
sign
is
required
to
have.
Z
Z
Z
Z
Certainly,
the
applications
submitted
and
you're
going
to
hear
from
the
the
appellant
that
they
definitely
have
challenges
to
getting
the
visibility
and
their
clientele
as
a
challenge,
clientele
who,
who
really
needs
to
find
this
location
to
to
get
their
service
that
they
need,
and
so
it
they've
definitely
made
a
case
for
this
need
to
have
this
visibility
and
what,
whether
that's
a
practical
when
we
require
this
sign
to
be
removed.
Is
that
taking
away
their
their
ability
to
achieve
that?
And
so
I
think
there
are
some
practical
hurdles
here
for
them.
Z
Z
I
don't
believe
staff
thinks
that
this
request
would
at
all
not
meet
those
five
elements
in
part
d
there,
and
then
it
has
to
be
within
the
applicable
district
regulations
which
again,
we
would
be
applying
in
our
recommendation
for
an
exception.
In
this
case,
there's
staff
put
forward
the
information
provided
in
the
application
by
the
applicant
as
to
their
situation
and
challenges
and
and
what
they're
wanting
to
do
moving
forward
and
and
what
their
argument
is
for
for
retaining
the
existing
pull
signs.
Z
So
that'll
be
that's
in
in
the
additional
information
section.
The
other
thing
is:
is
this
entire
project
did
require
rezoning
recently
over
the
summer
by
the
city
council
to
allow
this
facility
to
be
located
here,
where
they're
consolidating
their
operations,
including
office
and
their
food
pantry
warehouse,
basically
in
the
same
location,.
Z
We
believe
there
is
a
practical
alternative
that
would
achieve
the
same
thing.
We
do
recognize
that
that
would
come
at
a
cost.
That's
beyond
what
they
were
proposing
to
build
new
signs,
you're,
probably
going
to
see
some
examples
of
how
they
view.
That
would
be
done,
and
I
would
argue
that
if
they
do
go
with
a
22
foot,
tall,
22
and
a
half
foot
tall
sign,
we
certainly
don't
require
them
to
make
all
of
that
sign
the
base
the
base
would
only
need
to
be
25
of
the
height
of
the
sign.
Z
They
could
use
other
material
extending
up
from
that
as
long
as
the
base
and
the
and
the
support
is
the
same
width
as
the
as
the
actual
sign
face
of
the
sign
face
again.
They're
going
to
max
out
a
200
square
foot
sign
area
on
each
of
those
sides.
Actually
so
they
would
have
a
fairly
substantial
ability
to
to
provide
a
visible
sign,
even
if
they
pulled
that
25
feet
back
from
the
frontage,
and
certainly
a
200
square
foot
sign
at
an
eight
foot.
Z
Height
closer
to
the
street
would
also
be
fairly
visible,
especially
if
you
get
one
on
each
frontage
which
they
would
do
which
they
would
have.
The
ability
to
do
again
cost
is
is
going
to
be
a
factor
there,
one
way
or
the
other,
I'm
sure
they
didn't
anticipate
this
as
part
of
their
cost
of
their
overall
project,
but
when
they
started
putting
it
together.
Z
So
staff
does
believe
that
the
variance
test
isn't
met,
so
the
variances
should
be
denied.
However,
we
could
could
support
the
argument
that
this
does
meet,
that
practical
difficulty
test
we
would
want
whatever
signs
were
installed
to
be
in
character.
We
believe
that
the
historic
limestone
entrance
gate
is
is
a
good
context
for
them
to
look
at
in
terms
of
a
base
material
trying
to
either
match
or
look
at
something
that's
compatible
to
that,
and
as
well
as
the
building
itself
that
they're
going
to
be
occupying
the
again
in
this
situation.
Z
Certainly
they
don't
need
to
make
something
massive
and
and
large
either
if
they
don't
choose
to.
This
is
a
question
of
what's
necessary
for
the
visibility
that
they
need,
and
you
know
if
they're
going
to
max
it
out
at
200
square
feet
in
in
a
22
foot
and
a
half
sign
that
is
going
to
be
a
large
monument
sign.
Z
Z
V
Z
Yes,
that
so
there's
a
site
plan,
that's
part
of
their.
You
know
getting
occupancy
of
that
building.
That's
actually
what's
triggered
the
removal
of
the
sign.
So
when
the
site
plan
came
about
due
to
the
change
of
use
of
the
building,
that
is
the
element
that
triggered
the
removal
of
the
pole,
sign
and
so
there
they,
but
they
will
have
to
do
things
with
the
with
the
parking
area
for
landscaping
and
so
forth.
V
I
guess,
furthermore,
I
guess
my
question
is
as
part
of
that
side
plan,
though
there
will
be,
I
mean,
there's
going
to
be
trees
that
are
all
along
that
property
property
line.
Right
I
mean,
I
think
part
of
their
argument
is
that
when
trees
are
going
to
be
planted,
it's
hard
it's
going
to
be
hard
to
see
any
signage.
Z
So
our
sign
requirements
are
designed
to
be
compatible
with
the
other
standards
that
we
have
in
place,
such
as
placement
of
landscaping
along.
You
know,
front
frontage,
buffers
and
things
like
that.
So
it's
contemplated
that
you
know
signs
will
be
located
in
a
way
to
you
know
not
not
be
impacted
as
much
by
the
landscaping
otherwise
and
on
every
site
they're
going
to
be
working
against
each
other.
So
I
guess
I
think,
that's
a
tough
argument.
Z
If
we
were
if
we
were
pinpointing
it
to
a
certain
place
and
we
knew
there
was
existing
trees
that
were
going
to
block
it.
I
think
that
might
be
a
reasonable
argument,
but
you
know
people
be
asking
for
waiver
of
landscaping
all
the
time,
because
you
know
people
driving
by
can't
see
through
it
to
see
the
front
of
the
store
or
something
like
that
so
where's.
Z
Z
A
AA
AA
The
other
pretty
serious
concern
for
us
is
cost
as
a
non-profit
organization
and
a
charitable
organization
that
is
working
to
meet
human
needs.
It
is
very
difficult
to
put
together
funds
to
do
a
project
like
this
at
all,
but
to
make
the
argument
to
those
that
would
fund
us
to
pay
the
cost
of
removing
a
sign
to
replace
it
with
a
similarly
sized
sign.
AA
That's
just
in
a
little
bit
different
of
a
look.
It
gets
to
be
a
very
difficult
sell
as
a
charitable
giver
myself.
I
know
when
I
donate
to
organizations.
I
want
to
know
that
that
money
is
going
towards
things
that
are
going
to
really
further
the
programming,
and
while
we
can
make
the
argument
that
this
is
a
critical
need
for
us,
so
that
folks
can
find
us
the
the
cost
we're
going
to
have
to
incur
to
do
that.
It
makes
the
sale
much
tougher.
AA
I
I
respect
and
understand
the
arguments
being
made
by
staff,
but
the
the
sort
of
proposed
alternative.
There
are
also
some
concerns
with
where
exactly
we'd
be
able
to
put
that
on
site,
given
some
other
pieces
that
are
in
that
area
that
that
doug
will
speak
to
doug.
Do
you
want
to
talk
about
the
the
difference
between
the
two
signs
and
some
of
the
problems
that
poses
to
go
the
alternate
route.
AB
Certainly,
someone
could
pull
up
the
pdf
I
sent
for
signed
existing
allowed.
There
we
go.
Thank
you
on
the
left
is
the
existing
poll
sign
that
shows
the
rough
dimensions,
basically
a
t
shape
and
what
staff
is
indicating
that
we
could
construct
up
to
22
and
a
half
feet
high,
and
I
put
on
a
sign
face
of
25
feet
wide,
so
we
couldn't
go
as
high
by
a
little
less
than
three
feet,
but
we
can
go
wider
and
it's
much
more
massive
than
what
the
existing
sign
is.
AB
It
was
a
observation
or
question
by
one
of
the
board
members
about
trees.
This
does
not
show
the
landscaping,
but
the
islands
you
see
out
in
the
existing
parking
lot.
Those
are
not
there.
Now
we
have
to
cut
those
in
all,
but
about
two
of
them
to
install
parking
lot
trees
and
then
also
we
are
putting
in
12
trees
along
army
post
road,
along
with
a
three
foot
high
ornamental
fence
and
a
continuous
row
of
shrubs
across
there
to
form
a
continuous
hedge.
AB
We
looked
at
two
potential
locations
for
installing
such
a
tall
monument
sign.
One
is
at
the
corner
of
army
post,
road
and
chaffee
road
very
near
to
where
the
existing
pole
sign
is.
I've
indicated
that,
on
this,
drawing
we'd
have
to
lose
a
couple
parking
stalls
which
parking
is
not
an
overall
issue
for
us
on
this
site.
Surprisingly,
compared
to
most
developments,
however,.
AB
It
would
be
behind
that
limestone
entrance
feature,
so
we
also
looked
at.
Could
we
place
it
over
to
the
west
by
that
entrance
and
again,
we'd
have
to
take
out
several
parking
stalls
to
do
that,
to
get
the
25
foot
set
back
and
directly
west
of
where
I'm
showing
that
there
is
an
existing
sign.
That's
about
30
feet
tall
right
now
that
lists
businesses
in
that
existing
shopping
center.
AB
So
if
you
could
turn
to
one
of
the
photos
I
sent
the
west
eastbound,
I
believe
there
we
go.
Thank
you
so
looking
eastbound
out
in
front
of
the
strip
center
there,
you
can
see
the
sign
they
currently
have
and
any
monument
sign
that
we
would
be
placing
would
basically
end
up
right
behind
that.
So
until
you're
about
at
the
driveway
ready
to
enter,
you
wouldn't
see
our
signage.
AB
AB
AB
And
again,
and
we're
thinking
that
since
staff
would
allow
us
to
put
in
a
sign
that
would
be
actually
much
more
massive
than
what
we're
seeing
here.
We
have
to
have
the
expense
of
tearing
this
down
and
then
the
expense
of
putting
up
another
sign
and
I'm
sure
matt
doesn't
want
to
be
operating
this
facility
and
someone
come
up
and
ask
him
to
help
help
them
with
the
services
they
provide
and
matt's
asked
to
tell
them.
AB
No,
we
can't
do
that
today,
but
we
would
like
you
to
go
out
into
our
parking
lot
and
enjoy
this
new
monument
sign.
We
have
that
we
spent
in
excess
of
probably
forty
thousand
dollars
to
construct.
So
with
that,
I
don't
have
anything
more
unless
someone
has
questions
or
matt
wants
to
add
anything.
Thank
you.
A
K
AB
No,
we've
not
had
a
estimate
that
I'm
aware
of
unless
matt
hasn't
shared
it
with
me,
but
yeah.
It's
more
of
a
poke
in
the
air.
I've
been
on
other
projects
where
I've
seen
monument
signs
that
are
in
this
six
to
eight
foot
tall
and
12
foot
length
run
in
the
25
000
range.
So
I
know
the
foundation
for
a
taller
sign
is
going
to
be
more
expensive
and
also
just
the
there's
more
material
to
put
into
a
taller
sign.
AB
A
Okay,
gentlemen,
thank
you
for
your
presentations.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
all
right,
we'll
see.
If
there's
anybody
in
the
audience's
wishes
to
speak
in
support
of
the
applicant's
requests,
I
just
hit
the
raise
hand
symbol
in
zoom
or
hit
star
9
on
your
phone's
keypad,
and
then
we'll
have
staff.
Look
for
you
and
recognize
you!
T
T
T
I
think
that
that
sign
is
sort
of
a
poster
child
for
a
sign
that
the
city
would
want
to
be
removed
and
have
a
nicer,
cleaner
monument
sign
put
in
its
place,
and
so
therefore,
I
argue,
even
if
they
get
the
exception,
they
don't
have
to
build
to
that
level.
They
can
build
something
more
in
keeping
with
their
budget,
just
because
they're
non-profit
doesn't
mean
that
they
get
a
special
consideration
on
a
variant,
so
I
would
argue
that
the
sign
needs
to
come
down.
A
AB
AB
Yeah
the
going
with
the
lower
sign
and
pulling
it
closer
to
the
right-of-way
of
army
post
road.
That's
an
option,
but
then
again
we
start
competing
with
the
landscaping
out
front.
We've
got
the
street
trees.
We've
got
to
put
in
at
30
feet
on
center,
we've
got
the
ornamental
fence
and
the
hedge,
and
so
we
do
get
closer,
but
we've
got
to
go
down
in
height
and
then
again
we're
competing
with
more
landscaping
and
that's
regardless
of
whether
we're
which
corner
we're
at
and
if
we
go
to
the
northeast
corner.
AA
The
only
other
thing
I
would
rebut-
and
this
is
matt
unger
again-
is
that
I
appreciate
where
coming
from,
but
just
because
someone
is
looking
for
and
in
need
of
the
service,
if
they
can't
find
it
doesn't
mean
they
will
find
it
most
of
the
folks.
We
serve
are
bouncing
between
service
appointment
and
trying
to
work
and
trying
to
collect
a
number
of
different
pieces
of
assistance
and
there's
a
finite
amount
of
time
to
do
that,
and
if
they
can't
find
it,
they
will
just
go
without
food.
A
K
To
carolyn
carlson
here
you
know
they're
talking
about
expenses
and
they
really
don't
have
any
proof
on
it,
and
I
would
really
like
to
see
if
you're
going
to
use
it
as
argument
to
have
a
couple
of
estimates,
I
guess
it
wouldn't
be
too
hard
to
get
a
couple
of
estimates
on
that,
and
but
the
whole
thing
with
the
monument
signs
is,
we
are
looking
to
clean
up
the
ski,
the
landscape
of
the
city.
Make
things
look
nicer
and
poll
signs
are
going
to
be
assigned.
K
It
shows
that
a
building
is
older
and
I
I
just
don't
think
they've
met
the
requirement
for
the
variants,
but
if
I'm
a
lot,
I'm
inclined
to
go
with
the
exception
level
and
again
they
don't
have
to
go
that
high.
If
they
don't
want
you
to
save
money,
a
lot
of
people.
Yes,
they
are
going
between
appointments,
but
most
people
I
know-
do
have
their
their
phones,
which
have
a
gps
function
which
should
get
in
there.
So
those
are
my
thoughts.
A
A
This
location
was
the
original
albertson's
grocery
store,
so
that
explains
the
layout
functionality
and
the
original
pole
sign
base.
That's
there.
The
albertson
chain
wasn't
here
very
long
for
a
good
part
of
the
last
15
years
that
site
had
sat
vacant
for
quite
a
bit
of
time.
Yes,
there
was
a
medicaid
office
in
there
for
a
while,
but
this
property
based
on
size
and
scope.
It
was
difficult
to
find
the
right
kind
of
use
for
it.
A
So
I'm
pleased
that
these
folks
are
in
there,
but
that
did
require
a
rezoning
request
on
on
this
corridor
in
looking
at
the
character
of
the
corridor,
and
now
this
use
for
the
food
pantry.
The
idea
that
we
still
need
to
have
a
sign
from
an
old
grocery
store
came
out.
I
just
don't
get
it.
This
is
the
largest
single
freestanding
building
on
the
army
post
corridor,
take
southridge
mall
out
of
the
picture.
That's
multi-tenant,
this
largest
freestanding
building
is
one
of
the
largest
parking
lots.
It
sits
at
a
serial
or
a
signalized
intersection.
A
The
building
itself
has
an
extremely
large
vertical
facade.
That's
where
albertsons
had
their
sign
before.
I
don't
think
we
need
to
make
people
play
hide
and
seek
to
find
any
kind
of
service,
but
I
also
don't
think
that
that
we
need
a
poll
sign
that
is,
is
certainly
now
considered
illegal
and
non-conforming.
A
A
A
lot
of
the
development
in
this
area
happened
before
the
city
annexed
this
area.
So
there's
been
a
lot
of
incongruent
growth
down
there,
but
in
the
last
decade
we've
had
plenty
of
new
developments
that
have
complied
with
our
sign
ordinance,
including
installing
monument
sign
across
the
street.
There's
an
ethnic
grocery
store
in
an
old
come
and
go
meets.
All
the
requirements
got
a
local
financial
advisor
across
the
street
doesn't
have
a
poll
sign
two
new
gas
stations
to
the
west
and
a
new
car
wash
all
monuments
sign.
A
So
I
don't
see
the
hardship
here,
we're
not
meeting
the
variance
test
at
all.
Frankly,
I'm
not
even
in
support
of
recommending
an
amended
appeal
at
an
exception
level,
they'd
be
allowed
to
have
a
15
foot
tall
sign.
They
should
be
able
to
position
it
somewhere
on
the
property
for
visibility,
so
just
kind
of
wanted
to
throw
that
that
that
one
in
on
a
local
level.
V
V
However,
you
know
the
city
council
has
made
it
a
priority
to
eliminate
these
pole
signs
and
over
time,
if
there's
any
triggering
events
and,
of
course,
with
the
rezoning
and
the
amended
plan
there.
That's
the
triggering
events.
I
would.
I
would
like
to
make
a
motion
chair
and
or
and
members
that
we
deny
the
variance,
but
that
we
approve
the
exception
type
2
exception.
A
A
Okay,
that'll,
take
us
to
item
number
five,
which
is
the
reconsideration
of
a
conditional
use
permit,
and
our
format
for
this
agenda
item
in
the
hearing
will
be
slightly
different
than
our
standard
items.
We've
had
thus
far
as
this
is.
This
is
a
request
for
hearing
being
brought
by
the
zoning
enforcement
officer,
so
our
process
is
just
a
little
different.
We're
going
to
put
that
up
on
the
screen
for
everybody
to
see
here.
So
we'll
start
off
with
the
zoning
enforcement
officer's
presentation
and
we'll
give
we'll
give
suanne.
T
T
T
T
T
We
have
a
card
that
says
from
tim
ripma.
The
tenant
has
not
been
a
good
neighbor
and
has
caused
many
issues.
We
have
a
statement
from
the
a
realty
company
at
604
east
grand
stating
that
they're
in
support.
We
have
emails
from
brittany,
french,
where
she
has
complained
about
this
business.
Brittany
has
now
told
me
that
they're
moving
from
east
village,
due
to
the
continued
noise
and
violations
of
this
property
here,
is
a
picture
where
it's
showing
illegal
parking
of
motorcycles
in
a
loading
zone.
J
J
AC
J
J
J
T
T
A
A
Ann
all
right-
and
we
can
come
back
to
you
later
on
that
as
well.
All
right
tell
you
what
let's
go
ahead
and
hear
from
the
property
owner
or
the
business
operator
holder
the
conditional
use
permit.
I
just
need
your
name
and
address.
You've
got
up
to
10
minutes
to
present
your
reasoning
of
why
we
should
not
revoke
your
conditional
use.
Permit.
AD
D
D
Actually
we'll
just
skip
that.
I
need
to
know
that
as
landlords
we're
not
living
on
site,
we
aren't
even
aware
of
issues
that
happen
unless
we're
notified
of
them
and
given
the
opportunity
to
address
them
with
our
tenants
as
they
occur.
With
this
tenant
we've
been
notified
exactly
twice.
The
first
time
was
regarding
a
meeting
outlining
our
tenants
responsibilities,
which
they
have
addressed
and
continue
to
address
since
that
time,
and
the
second
time
was
notification
about
this
hearing.
D
On
august
27th,
we
were
copied
on
a
letter
to
our
tenant
from
the
city
stating
the
city
has
received
numerous
complaints
regarding
525
east
grand
second
floor
coming
from
bands
with
sound
systems.
Not
only
has
our
current
tenant
not
had
a
band
on
the
second
floor,
ever
they
haven't
even
had
a
band.
On
the
first
floor,
this
tenant
was
set
to
open
in
april,
but
due
to
the
lockdown,
ended
up
opening
in
june
of
this
year.
D
Also,
in
your
words
on
the
decision
and
order
for
the
cup
for
the
rooftop,
it
said
this
is
an
appropriate
location,
for
the
proposed
use,
as
it
is
located
in
the
downtown
nearby
residents
should
expect
the
level
of
impact
created
by
businesses
selling
liquor
as
part
of
the
mixed-use
environment
of
the
downtown,
and
those
are
city
words.
Those
aren't
my
words.
The
current
ten
of
those
city,
words.
D
Or
I
say
you're,
quoting
I
can,
when
matthew's
speaking
I'll,
find
those
is
that
okay,
okay,
all
right,
also
your
words
on
the
decision.
Sorry,
a
current
tenant
is
a
brand
new
business
and
has
some
kinks
to
work
out,
but
every
new
business
in
the
city
of
des
moines
should
really
be
worried
if
it
takes
this
little
to
kill
them
in
less
than
four
months
of
being
open
in
the
meantime,
they're
fighting
for
all
the
business
they
can
get
and
dealing
with
the
pandemic
closures
and
restrictions
unprecedented
in
our
lifetimes.
D
This
truly
appears
to
become
a
case
of
harassment
based
on
the
this
proposal
is
based
on
complaints,
not
actual
violations.
The
city
should
be
working
with
businesses
to
rectify
any
problems.
The
cup
allows
for
100
subjective
application
of
the
laws
and
needs
to
be
measurable
instead
being
on
the
east
village
board
for
five
years.
D
Looking
at
the
evidence
presented,
it
appears
that
the
recordings
may
have
been
made
in
2019,
based
on
the
labels
of
the
files.
It
says
la
hacienda
they
vacated
the
building
in
january
appears.
They
haven't
attempted
to
verify
that
these
apply
to
the
current
tenant.
Negative
cards
came
from
people.
Don't
that
don't
live
on
the
block.
Apparently
the
mail
service
wasn't
able
to
get
our
card.
D
D
D
D
D
AD
AD
0-00137,
which
actually
approved
the
conditional
use
permit
back
in
2010
at
a
vote
of
five
to
zero
by
the
board
condition.
Number
nine
just
offers
just
too
much
opportunity
for
bias
from
the
zoning
enforcement
officer.
It
reads
that
the
conditional
use
permit
shall
be
subject
to
amendment
or
revocation
in
the
zoning
enforcement.
If
the
zoning
enforcement
officer
determines
that
the
operation
of
the
business
becomes
a
nuisance
or
exhibits,
a
pattern
of
violating
the
conditions
set
forth
in
the
conditional
use
permit.
AD
At
this
point,
we
have
unsubstantiating
complaints
that
have
been
presented
to
the
board
without
any
real
sound
evidence
to
really
make
such
a
critical
decision
immediately.
So
for
those
reasons
we
would
like
to
deny
the
recommendation
from
the
staff
member
to
go
ahead
and
revoke
immediately
revoke
this.
This
conditional
use
permit
and,
as
we
start
to
speak,
to
bias,
I
think
it's
really
important
that
you
hear
from
the
business
owner
mr
larry
mason
himself.
Larry.
Can
you
go
ahead
and
just
share
your
experience
so
far?
Okay,.
AD
AD
AE
Thank
you,
okay
board.
I
really
appreciate
hello
board.
I
really
appreciate
you
letting
me
speak.
I
just
got
a
couple
things
I
want
to
touch
on
and
I'll
make
it
really
quick.
I
just
want
to
know
I
just
I.
It
took
me
a
little
time
to
prepare
for
this
meeting,
obviously,
because
we
just
received
our
information
on
9
22
2020
of
all
the
evidence
that
was
presented
and
all
of
the
evidence
that
was
presented
to
you
guys
actually
wasn't
presented
to
us.
AE
Obviously,
you
know
my
business
is
not
la
hacienda,
so
I
don't
know
what
that
video
with
la
hacienda
even
came
from
so
I'm
in
strictly
denial.
I
post
that
video
and
all
the
evidence
that
was
shown
and
in
our
previous
meeting
mr
joe
gatto,
told
us
that
he
would
do
readings
of
the
jukebox
upstairs
before
we
would
be
recommend
recommended
to
be
on
the
border.
AE
Go
against
the
board,
go
go
to
the
board
of
adjustments,
I'm
sorry
and
there
has
been
no
readings
of
any
jukebox
or
any
any
jukebox
on
our
rooftop
and
we're
here
at
the
board
of
adjustments.
I
thought
that
was
unfair
in
the
prejudice
towards
the
business
that
I'm
trying
to
run
during
this
pandemic.
Also,
I'm
gonna
leave
you
with
this,
because
I'm
not
I'm
not
gonna
go
over
everything.
I
don't
wanna.
AE
You
know
use
up
too
much
of
you
guys
time,
but
I
I
met
with
mr
al
tungs,
which
is
assistant
captain
of
des
moines
police
department
yesterday,
and
we
had
a
conversation
and
I
wanted
to
know
like
okay.
What
am
I
doing
wrong
and
he
told
me
that
well,
I
have
no
idea
what's
been
going
on
down
there
and
I
said
okay
here
you
might
not
and
he
goes
well.
I
know
that
I
signed
for
off-duty
police
officers
to
be
able
to
work
at
your
police
at
your.
AE
AE
Like
that's
weird,
so
I
know
for
a
fact
that
I
have
reached
out
to
the
des
moines
police
officers
to
have
police
officers
out
of
my
establishment
to
make
sure
that
there's
no
incidents
that
go
on,
let
alone
I
haven't
had
any
incidents
happen
at
my
establishment
to
show
any
time
any
type
of
resistance
to
the
neighborhood
association
or
anything
going
on
in
the
neighborhood.
Also,
I
want
to
leave
you
with
this.
AE
A
A
AE
A
AE
A
AE
AE
Yes,
sir,
I
have
the
conditional
use
permit.
I
read
it
thoroughly
and
I
also
on
the
jukebox
upstairs
I
have
the
decimals,
the
packet
of
the
decimal
enforcement
that
you
guys,
I'm
not
sure.
I'm
sorry,
I
don't
know
the
true
name
of
it,
but
I
have
a
packet
of
the
decimal
force
next
to
the
jukebox
upstairs
and
also
our
jukebox
is
set
by
the
guy
that
does
our
jukebox
it's
set
for
the
decimals
not
to
be
over
what
it's
supposed
to
be
set
at.
A
A
We
wanted
to
allow
a
tavern
to
be
there,
but
we
specifically-
and
this
is
all
on
the
record-
for
anybody
to
go
back
and
find
we
specifically
spent
time
to
make
it
clear
that
the
patio
operation
had
to
be
extremely
limited,
though
we
didn't
have
noise
emanating
from
the
patio,
because
this
this
is
the
reverse.
It's
not
that
people
should
understand,
there's
bars
down
there
and
get
along
with
it.
We
understood
that
there
were
people
living
there
and
would
be
other
people
living
there.
A
A
AE
AE
Yep
and
I
totally
understand
that
usage
permit
and
we
actually
like
I
said
we
got
our
info.
I
hope
I
didn't.
I
hope
I
didn't
interrupt
you.
No,
no,
that's
fine!
Okay,
that's
fine!
Yeah!
We
got
our.
We
actually
got
the
evidence
that
was
presented
to
us
of
what
this
meeting
was
going
to
be
at
yesterday.
AE
So
we
didn't
have
time
to
upload
videos.
We
didn't
have
time
to
you
know
do
any
of
our.
I
mean
the
stuff.
I
was
sorry
that
I
kind
of
stuttered
around
and
things
because
I
really
I
mean
I
I
try
to
get
as
much
information
as
I
can,
but
being
straight
to
the
point,
because
I
know
I
only
had
five
minutes
right
last
night
through
to
today.
You
know
this
morning.
I've
been
working
on
it
too,
so
you
know
I
wasn't
able.
AE
AE
Yeah,
the
music
on
them,
videos
that
she
presented
are
the
motorcycles
and
we've
had
this
discussion
and
I've.
Okay,
I've
talked
to
him
about
it
and
I
even
go
as
far
as
going
outside
and
telling
the
motorcycle
guys,
and
they
actually
do
it
for
me.
Now
I
tell
them:
don't
turn
your
music
up,
don't
rev
your
bikes
right
right,
so
I
mean
I'm
policing
the
outside
area
of
my
establishment,
also
not
just
when
we
close.
Whenever
I
see
the
the
motorcycles
pull
up
and
everything
yeah.
A
The
stage
here
of
where
our
decision
making
has
to
be
the
board
is
hearing
this
item
because
it's
been
brought
to
us
by
the
zoning
enforcement
officer
and
basically
the
staff
is
saying
they're
recommending
that
the
conditional
use
permit
be
revoked.
So
then,
therefore,
there
there
can
be
no
tavern
there.
Now,
I'm
assuring
I'm
assuming
that's
not
what
you
want.
A
Would
would
you
be
you
you've
got
to
give
us
then
an
alternative?
Do
we
just
walk
away
and
say
well,
all
of
these
concerns
are
obviously
foolish,
or
would
you
be
willing
to
sit
down
and
work
with
residents
the
police
department,
the
neighborhood
and
put
together
one
of
those
good
neighbor
agreements.
AE
I've
reached
out
to
the
police
department,
the
neighbors
come
over
and
buy
food
because,
obviously
you
know
I'm
just
not.
I
mean
I
have
food
here,
also
a
restaurant
part
of
it.
They
come
over
and
buy
food,
so
I've
talked
to
them
and
everything,
but
my
my
whole
thing,
my
my
thing
is,
is
I
really
haven't
done
anything
wrong,
so
it
would
be.
AE
It
would
be
nice
to
at
least
let
me
establish
a
business
and
try
to
see
if
I'm
gonna
do
something
wrong
before
you
know,
I'm
almost
I'm
handcuffed
with
you
know
being
able
to
actually
run
a
business.
The
pandemic.
Has
you
know
annihilated
my
business?
We
don't
have
very
many
people,
you
know.
Obviously
those
pictures
were
I
wish.
I
did
have
that
many
people
in
my
inside
my
establishment,
I
mean
yeah,
it's
just
I
mean
I
just
would
like
to
be
given
give
a
fair
chance
to
be
able
to
run
my
business.
A
A
AF
AF
I
strongly
would
like
to
deny
the
staff
recommendation
to
revoke
the
conditional
use
permit
for
many
of
the
reasons
that
mr
mason
nancy
and
his
attorney
and
the
attorney
have
stated
before,
particularly
when
it
comes
to
the
evidence
being
that
they
were
not
given
an
opportunity
to
review
this
evidence
in
a
timely
fashion
in
order
to
have
even
more
strategic
pushback.
To
that
evidence,
I
believe
that's
egregious
in
itself.
This
was
information
that
I
believe
they
requested.
After
the
initial
meeting
last
month,
they
were
stated
that
they
would
receive
that
in
a
timely
fashion.
AF
I
don't
believe
a
24-hour
notice
is
a
timely
fashion.
In
addition
to
that,
as
he
stated,
many
of
those
pictures
and
video
come
from
a
time
before
mr
mason
was
actually
in
operation
at
that
building.
In
addition
to
that,
I
do
believe
from
naacp's
standpoint
and
also
just
so
full
clarity.
I
do
work
for
iowa
state
university
as
a
minority
business
coordinator,
so
I
work
with
I've
worked
with
larry
in
the
past,
worked
with
many
minority
owned
businesses
in
and
around
the
des
moines
area.
I
mean
I
understand.
AF
AF
This
is
an
establishment
I
have
frequented
many
times,
but
I
have
seen
mr
mason
utilize
every
covet
standard
necessary
to
operate
that
business
as
safe
as
possible.
I've
also
been
in
conversation
with
him
about
the
many
times
that,
as
he
has
addressed,
he's
going
out
and
police
the
streets
just
as
he's
police
inside
of
his
own
establishment.
AF
I
think
it's
also
important
to
note
that,
even
before
that
conversation
that
he
had
mr
tux
yesterday,
mr
mason
did
have
an
approval
about
a
month
or
so
ago
and
has
yet
to
receive
any
help
or
support
from
off-duty
officers.
He
has
instead
gone
into
his
own
pocket
and
added
extra
security
to
ensure
the
safety
and
the
noise
ordinances
were
under
control.
AF
I
believe
they
should
be
afforded
a
much
broader
opportunity
to
be
in
line
not
only
with
their
neighbors,
but
also
with
the
city.
It's.
It
is
my
opinion.
As
of
right
now,
based
on
the
recommendations
are
based
on
the
actions
that
mr
mason
has
taken
throughout
the
summer.
He
has
stayed
in
compliance
with
this
order.
In
addition
to
that,
I
believe
this
is
kind
of
want
to
go
back
as
well.
So
some
of
you
may
know,
I
also
serve
as
a
chair
of
the
civil
and
human
rights
commission.
AF
A
few
months
ago,
we
put
forth
a
anti-policing
ordinance
attached
to
that
ordinance
was
a
resolution
to
start
a
committee
entitled
the
policy
practice
and
review
committee.
This
committee
is
not
only
tasked
with
reviewing
policy
and
practices
from
the
police
department,
but
also
enforcement
arms
of
the
city,
being
the
reason
being
that
we've
seen
unbiased
practices
and
unbiased
policies
that
have
put
minorities
in
a
disadvantaged
situation.
AF
AF
AF
He
has
done
so
in
a
compliant
way
and
again,
I
truly
recommend
that
this
board
this
goes
against
the
staff
recommendation
and
allows
this
business
owner
to
to
to
operate
in
a
well-mannered
space
and
also
operate
in
a
space
that
they
can
come
to
an
agreement
with
the
neighbors
and
the
police
department
to
help
support
him
in
policing
the
outside
of
his
establishment,
which
is
hard
to
do
when
you're
running
a
business
yourself
inside
again.
Thank
you
all
for
your
time
and
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
speak
on
his
behalf.
A
C
AG
Hi
this
is
kerry.
Nelson,
can
you
hear
me
hi?
This
is
kerry.
Nelson
I'd
also
like
to
oppose
I'm
gonna.
Be
brief
with
my
comments.
However,
I've
been
down
to
larry's
establishment
several
times,
in
fact,
trying
to
promote
local
artists,
who
also
are
struggling
in
this
time.
I
worked
for
several
many
many
years
at
meredith
corporation
and
it
not
only
is
larry's
bar
unique
they're
trying
to
bring
in
that
art
vibe
into
the
east
village,
just
a
a
bar-
and
I
you
know
the
times
I've
been
in
there.
AG
AH
AH
It
told
us
that
80
of
small
business
owners
have
been
hurt
and
have
taken
a
significant
financial
loss
during
the
pandemic.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
it
tells
us
that
55
of
those
businesses
will
never
recover,
which
then
puts
communities
such
as
african-american
communities
and
latino
communities
at
a
disadvantage
when
it
comes
to
small
businesses.
AH
I
would
like
to
reiterate
the
fact
that
mr
larry,
mr
larry
mason
jr,
opened
a
small
business
in
des
moines
iowa
in
the
middle
of
in
the
middle
of
a
pandemic,
understanding
that
he
was
trying
to
provide
an
opportunity
for
people
in
that
community,
but
also
a
small
business
for
the
state
of
iowa
and
to
add
to
that
he
has
put
in
his.
He
has
taken
money
out
of
his
own
pocket
in
order
to
ensure
that
the
safety
of
his
establishment,
the
neighborhood
and
the
residents
are
taken
care
of.
AH
I
believe
mr
mr
mason
has
gone
over
and
beyond
his
call
of
duty
to
make
sure
that
he
is
in
compliance.
He
is
making
sure
that
he
is
doing
it
by
the
book
and
making
sure
that
his
business
is
an
upstanding
business.
For
those
of
us
who
frequently
visit,
I
myself,
I
may
not
drink
alcohol,
but
the
food
there
is
fantastic.
AH
AF
A
D
A
AD
A
Yeah,
as
as
a
point
of
order,
he
is
correct
on
that.
I
don't
want
to
debate
merits
here.
Each
side
gets
a
chance
to
give
its
testimony,
but,
yes,
those
are
the
nine
conditions
that
the
zoning
board
of
adjustment
attached
to
allow
that
conditional
use
permit
to
expand
that
existing
tavern.
To
add
that
rooftop
patio,
so
regardless
of
who
the
operator
is
those
are
the
nine
conditions
that
have
been
consistent
and
those
are
the
nine
conditions
that
the
property
owner
should
be
more
than
aware
of
as
well.
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
K
T
The
discussion
this
is
sue
donovan,
zoning
enforcement
officer.
The
discussion
at
that
point
was
noise
violations,
which
would
be
a
decibel
reading
for
failure
to
or
for
having
sound
too
loud
on
the
patio.
There
was
a
discussion
about.
If
it
came
back
for
a
sound
violation,
we
would
do
three
readings.
What
what
is
really
before
us
now
is
the
general
nuisance
question
and
how
to
resolve
that.
K
T
K
V
T
Chair
members
of
the
board,
I
don't
believe
that
they're
talking
about
notice,
they
get
notice
of
the
hearing
under
the
rules
of
the
board
staff
generally
presents
our
case
at
the
hearing.
We
did
provide
them.
I
usually
try
to
hand
out
what
we're
going
to
present
at
the
board
before
the
meeting.
I
usually
do
that
in
person
and
paper
copies
under
the
covet
and
the
way
we're
doing
meetings
now
we
did
send
them
the
information
on
what
we
were
going
to
present
to
them.
Yesterday
it
was
that
is
our
normal
practice.
T
We
did,
it
was
brought
back
to
you
in
october
of
2019
at
that
time.
The
operator
which
is
not
this
operator
and
and
what
happened
then
doesn't
have
anything
to
do
with
what
we're
doing
today
correct.
That
operator
was
actually
running
amplified
music
through
outdoor
speakers,
okay,
and
when
we
got
complaints
about
loud
music.
T
We
realized
that
they
were
running
the
music
through
the
speakers
which
wasn't
allowed.
They
agreed
to
quit
doing
that
on
the
upper
patio,
and
so
you
did
not
revoke
you
found
that
they
should
just
adhere
to
the
noise
control
part
of
the
decision
and
order
yeah,
okay
and
all
right.
I
think
what
I
think
to
be
honest,
larry
or
whoever's
running
this.
This
patio
bar
is
probably
as
the
board
envisioned
when
they
first
issued.
T
The
per
the
approval
is
going
to
have
problems
with
the
noise
coming
off
that
patio
directly
across
the
street
into
apartment
units.
Right.
I
I
believe
the
best
use
for
that
patio
is
probably
for
people
to
be
sitting
and
gathering
with
just
background
music,
not
necessarily
a
jukebox,
not
necessarily
anything
that
produces
loud
loud
sound,
because
then
it
isn't
going
to
travel
across
the
street
and
cause
a
problem
for
the
residents.
T
I
do
understand
how
sound
travels
and
you
could
have
unnecessarily
a
band
or
some
sort
of
amplified
music
on
the
on
the
upper
patio
and
probably
not
hear
it
on
the
sidewalk
but
hear
it
directly
across
as
if
you
were
sitting
on
that
patio.
So
that
is
a
problem
not
necessarily
larry's
own
making,
and
it
is
a
it-
is
unique
to
that
patio
being
up
above.
But
that
is
what
causes
some
problems
for
the
neighborhood.
K
AB
A
We
have
part
of
this
agenda.
Item
left
is
to
be
determined,
but
I
just
wanna.
That
was
the
reason
I
had
that
question
that
some
of
these
issues
have
come
up
before
not
related
to
this
this
operator,
but
this
location,
this
conditional
use
permit
and
the
current
owner
of
the
property
suanne
this
picture
you've
got
in
front
of
us.
Is
there
a
specific
date
or
description?
T
T
T
A
Sure
yeah,
you
know
if
people
are
laughing
and
talking,
I
really
don't
think
the
board
of
adjustment
has
much
authority
in
that
regard.
But
when
I
look
at
this
picture,
it
would
indicate
to
me
that
everybody's
looking
in
the
same
general
direction,
the
odds
are
there's
some
live
outdoor
music.
If
there
is
live
outdoor
music,
it
better
be
non-amplified
and
if
they're
just
looking
at
a
jukebox,
then
that
jukebox
would
also
need
to
be
at
an
auditory
level.
That
is
background
in
nature.
It
would
appear,
there's
maybe
a
little
bit
more
going
on
there.
A
V
V
U
For
judy,
yes-
and
I
was
just
going
to
answer
that
thanks-
I
believe
it
is
within
your
authority-
your
you
can
entertain
emotion
to
allow
additional
evidence.
I
know
I've
heard
that
in
other
types
of
cases
that
have
come
before
you,
where
a
question
has
arisen
and
you
actually
needed
to
have
some
more
information
that
was
available,
but
nobody
anticipated
it
and
that
is
in
essence
the
framework
we're
in
right.
U
V
A
T
Yeah,
I
will
do
a
brief
chair
members
of
the
board
just
a
brief
statement.
I
I
totally
respect
all
of
the
information
that's
been
brought
up
by
by
the
owner
and
the
people
that
have
supported
the
owner
what's
before
us
is
not
necessarily
equity
or
other
ordinances
or
the
small
business.
Although
I
do,
I
do
understand
those
comments,
but
what's
what's
really
before
us
is
how
do
we
make
this
business
work
at
this
location
so
that
it
can
coexist
in
a
in
a
mixed-use
neighborhood
that
has
residents?
T
So
I
think
we
have
tried
to
work
it
out,
we're
still
getting
complaints.
I
would
rather
not
see
complaints.
I
don't
like
bringing
these
things
forward.
If
a
continuance
will
help
us
get
to
a
presentation
back
to
the
board
that
comes
up
with
a
way
that
we
can
help.
This
business
grow
help.
It
prosper,
help
it
stay
here,
I'm
all
about
it.
That
would
be
a
great
resolution.
T
A
AD
Closing
remarks
yeah.
Thank
you
bert.
This
is
matthew
gilbert
again
here
representing
mr
larry
mason
in
his
business
affairs
and
interest,
and
I
just
like
to
start
with
you
know
letting
you
understand.
Mr
mason
is
a
good
guy,
he's
a
mentor
to
children,
he's
involved
in
youth,
sports
and
athletics.
You
know
he
is
really
engaged
in
wanting
to
sort
of
move.
AD
That
is
just
too
too
too
opportunistic
to
be
tainted
with
bias
right,
and
so,
as
I
mentioned
to
you,
when
we
talk
about
conflicting
provisions
and
the
city
regulations,
you
know
one
of
those
provisions
right
now
is
the
des
moines,
the
city
of
des
moines,
unbiased
policing
notice
in
that,
in
that
ordinance,
the
first
line
of
that
ordinance
reads:
unbiased
policing
the
city
of
des
moines
shall
be
committed
to
the
unbiased,
equitable
treatment
of
all.
So,
unlike
with
the
zoning
enforcement
officer,
mentioned
that
this
is
not
about
equity.
No.
AD
What
that
would
allow
us
to
do
is
to
really
look
at
the
potential
gaps
that
are
that
are
present
that
are
now
becoming
human
errors
are
now
becoming
neighborhood
errors
when
we
could
really
resolve
this
with
equitable
policy.
So
for
those
reasons
you
know,
I
would
acknowledge
that
we
really
look
to
make
a
recommendation
that
the
board
have
this
be
reviewed
by
the
city
of
des
moines
policy
and
practices.
Commission
committee,
we
we
noted
a
few
things
in
the
evidence.
AD
AD
So
I
do
think
that
there
is
a
chance
for
some
real
cool
community
engagement
and
community
and
relationship
building
here,
but
I
believe
that
it
starts
with
the
city
staff
and
I
think
it
starts
with
the
zoning
enforcement
officer,
and
at
this
point
we've
only
talked
to
suen
twice
and
the
second
time
we
talked
to
her
was
to
be
notified
that
we
would
be
heading
to
this
to
this
hearing
under
your
statutes.
Under
your
rules,
there's
a
30-day
requirement
that
at
least
30
days
be
provided
to
before
a
hearing.
AD
We
were
kind
of
well
within
that,
and
I'm
not
sure
why
that
is,
but
this
seems
a
little
bit
rushed.
It
also
seems
a
little
bit
biased
and
for
those
reasons
I
just
feel
like
there's
there's
nothing
that
has
been
presented
today.
That
can
make
a
healthy
decision
for
revoking
the
conditional
use
permit.
AD
So,
for
those
reasons,
I
would
ask
that
the
board-
please
deny
the
immediate
revocation
of
the
permit
and
look
to
recommend
on
record
that
this
be
an
issue
that
be
reviewed,
not
a
private
matter,
a
policy
matter,
a
systemic
matter,
be
reviewed
by
by
those
that
are
more
competent,
and
that
would
be
the
policies
and
practices
committee.
Thank
you
for
that.
A
K
A
AI
I'm
kind
of
confused
with
this
whole
thing.
I
think
some
of
the
evidence
presented,
I'm
not
sure
that
we
even
know
when
it
occurred,
yeah,
whether
the
picture
that
we
saw
where
they're
getting
their
picture
taken,
they're
looking
at
a
band,
you
know
the
la
hacienda
we've
got
a
gal
who
obviously
lives
across
the
street.
Had
a
cell
phone
recorded
some
stuff.
AI
You
know,
I
I
think
in
fairness
to
this
owner
and
in
fairness
to
the
city,
because
I
don't
think
we've
done
our
due
diligence
on
this
thing
very
well,
based
on
the
evidence
presented
today
that
and
he's
tried
to
hire
off-duty
police
officers,
which
they
haven't
been
evidently
on
site,
yet
which
I
think
could
help.
If
anything,
it
can
help
substantiate
some
of
the
stuff.
AI
So
you
know,
I
think
we
need
to
work
towards
some
kind
of
emotion
here
that
we're
going
to
allow
this
owner
to
work
through
this.
The
city
needs
to
work
with
them
and
we
need
to
find
a
way
to
help
this
guy
be
successful
and
if
he
can't
be
successful
because
of
the
location
and
because
of
the
nature
of
the
business,
and
it
continues
to
hindrance,
at
least
let's
say
we've,
given
it
a
chance
and
we've
done
the
best
thing
we
can
for
everybody.
AI
You
know-
and
I
I
think
too,
and
some
evidence
was
presented
about
you
know
if
you
live
down
in
this
district
you're
going
to
expect
to
hear
some
noise
that
doesn't
mean
you
have
to.
It
has
to
be
a
concert
every
night,
but
to
hear
motorcycles
pulling
away
from
a
business.
How?
What
control
does
he
have
of
that
guy?
AI
I
think
he
has
zero
other
than
you
can
say:
hey
guys,
can
you
please
be
respectful
of
my
neighbors
and
not
have
your
radios
up
so
loud
and
you
don't
need
to
rev
your
engines
when
you're
leaving
at
1
45
in
the
morning
right
yeah.
So
I
I
think
we
need
to
work
towards
some
sort
of
a
emotion.
That's
going
to
allow
him
to
function.
AI
AI
H
A
I
I
don't
necessarily
know
that
we
want
want
legal
to
suggest
one,
but
could
we
they
could
comment
if
we
want
to
suggest
something.
Could
we
look
at
deferring
the
review
of
this
conditional
use
permit
for
30
days
and
looking
at
as
may
be
needed,
amending
the
conditional
use
permit
to
either
clarify
or
add
to
conditions
that
will
allow
the
operation
to
you
know
continue,
while
ensuring
reasonable
protection
of
the
intended
neighborhood
character?
We
do
something
like
that.
A
A
X
T
T
Is
there
a
way
to
say
that
for
the
next
90
days
that
we
continue
this
and
try
to
work
with
the
owner
over
the
next
90
days
to
come
up
with
some
operating
standards
that
dmpd
and
zoning
can
work
with
to
make
this
successful,
for
instance,
maybe
no
jukebox
up
there
and
and
reduce
the
sound
on
the
patio
and
keep
the
music
down
on
the
lower
level.
Well,.
A
T
A
And
what
I'm
going
to
do
here?
I
want
to
listen
to
my
other
colleagues,
but
since,
since
it
was
kind
of
a
question
while
we're
in
deliberation
and
suanne
spoke,
I
am
going
to
give
the
I
am
going
to
give
both
well
I'll,
give
larry
or
his
representative
an
opportunity
to
to
see
what
they
might
think
before.
We
decide
to
vote
on
something.
U
And
I
want
to
go
back.
This
is
your
legal
counsel
as
well.
I'm
sorry
I
was
muted.
I
didn't
realize
that
I
I
I
would
also
concur
with
the
idea
of
continuing
it
for
a
period
of
time.
I
don't
know
that
there
are
interim
conditions
that
you
can
impose
at
this
point
just
given
the
state
of
the
uncertainty
of
what
those
might
be.
A
And
if
we
choose
to
do
that
judy,
the
current
conditions
then
would
still
apply
as
right.
It's
kind
of
yeah,
it's
kind
of
a
baseline
golden
rule.
Everybody
might
want
to
review
those
as
you
operate,
your
fine
establishment
and
then
sit
down
with
staff.
Okay.
So
let's
continue
the
discussion
with
my
colleagues
here
since
we
met.
A
K
This
is
lynn
carlson.
I
really
like
what
dave
said
about.
We
really
haven't
given
him
a
chance
with
pandemic
conditions,
everything
I
am
all
in
favor
of
giving
90
days
and
not
putting
any
conditions
on
it.
He's
heard
enough
that
I
think
he
knows
you
can
talk
to
sue
man.
I
might
try
approaching
the
neighbors
across
the
street,
maybe
the
ones
with
the
second
floor
windows
and
reach
out
to
them
and
see
what
their
complaints
are
and,
let's
just
let
open
to
him.
A
AD
Thanks,
I
really
appreciate
that
I
will
definitely
give
larry
a
quick
second
to
you
know
acknowledge
his
ascent,
but
I'd
like
to
reserve
that
for
a
time
where
him-
and
I
can
talk
so
I'm
not
sure
if
he'll
be
able
to
respond
with
a
with
the
ascent
that
you're
looking
for,
but
I
will
say
that
I
think
we're
moving
in
the
right
direction.
I
do
think
that
you
know
having
a
continuance
for
a
period
of
time
without
any
any
new
conditions.
I
think
is
right.
AD
I
think
what
that
would
allow
for
us
to
do
is
to
really
explore
you
know
what
are
those
gaps
that
you
know
suanne
may
be
running
into
where
she
sort
of
put
in
a
position
to
sort
of
be.
You
know,
be
more
enforcer
versus
be
more
sort
of
community
builder,
and
I
think
that
you
know
the
neighbors
in
that
area
have
a
great
relationship
with
her.
AD
Unfortunately,
my
client
hasn't
had
an
opportunity
to
really
develop
a
good
relationship
with
her,
whereas
a
lot
of
these
complaints
could
really
be
resolved
with
a
phone
call,
but
instead
it
gets
tracked.
It
gets
piled
on
your
record
and
then
now
we're
here.
So
what
I
would
suggest
is
that
we
continue
to
look
at
a
continuance,
but.
J
AD
That
time,
I
would
say
that
we
do
make
a
recommendation,
a
formal
recommendation
that
this
that
this
particular
policy
right
this
particular
practice,
be
reviewed
by
the
policies
and
practices
committee.
I
think
that
there
are
just
so
many
opportunities
to
just
you
know
include
bias
in
how
the
conditions
are
written,
so
until
we
actually
have
an
independent
body
that
could
really
sort
of
look
at
that.
I
definitely
think
that
is
just
sort
of
out
of
our
wheelhouse
to
try
to
make
up
something.
AD
So
I
would
like
the
idea
of
us
sort
of
being
able
to
present
either
an
amended
conditions
or
just
some
clarifications
to
these.
But,
as
you
mentioned,
my
client
definitely
understands.
What's
going
on,
unfortunately,
he's
had
to
understand
what's
going
on
under
the
gun,
and
not
only
that
he's
got
a
business.
That's
that's
starving
right
now,
and
this
is
not
helping
his
business.
AD
So
definitely
would
appreciate
some
grace
and
definitely
would
appreciate
the
cooperation
from
from
the
board
to
really
see
that
the
policies
and
practices
committee
actually
look
at
being
involved
in
this
process
and
then
not
just
be
my
client
versus
the
neighbors,
because
that
could
get
real
ugly
too.
Thank
you,
yep.
Oh,
we.
A
X
A
AD
A
A
A
A
I
encourage
everybody
to
start
working
together
between
staff
and
the
operator,
and
I
think
the
property
owner
should
make
sure
that
they've
got
their
head
in
the
game
as
well.
At
the
end
of
the
day,
the
property
owner
profits
from
owning
that
property,
and
I
personally
believe
that
they
should
be
paying
attention
what's
going
on
there
and
if
they've
got
a
good
tenant
now,
then
we
can
keep
it
okay.
So
that
concludes
our
formal
hearing
items
for
today,
minor
business
to
still
deal
with
would
be
approval
of
minutes.