►
From YouTube: 11-18-20 Zoning Board of Adjustment
Description
Des Moines Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting on Wednesday November 18, 2020
A
B
The
members
of
this
board
are
citizens
of
the
city
of
des
moines
and
have
been
appointed
to
the
board
by
the
city
council.
The
members
of
the
board
are
volunteers
and
they
receive
no
compensation
for
their
public
service.
I'm
going
to
take
a
minute
here
and
introduce
our
board
members.
We
have
a
seven
member
board
and
our
members
are
nathan,
blake,
cindy
smith,
marlos
jones
lynn,
carlson
dave,
gere,
justin
gross
and
again
my
name
is
mel
pins,
I'll,
introduce
our
city
staff,
who
will
also
be
assisting
us
today.
B
The
staff
includes
the
board's
legal
counsel,
judy
parks,
cruise
and
then
presenting
and
assisting
in
the
background
bert
drost
city
planner,
eric
lundy
city,
planner,
jason
van
essen
city,
planner,
catherine
dostart,
city
planner.
The
city's
zoning
enforcement
officer
is
suanne
donovan.
Our
meeting
moderator
today
is
tyler
hall.
Our
planning
administrator
is
michael,
ludwig
and
also
assisting
with
some
of
the
setup
and
background
meeting
moderator
glory
parks.
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
We
will
then
move
to
the
public
comment
portion
of
the
hearing
and
anyone
wanting
to
speak
in
support
of
first
opposition
to,
secondly
or
perhaps
in
neutrality,
but
maybe
they
have
some
comments
for
us
to
consider
in
that
order.
We
will
take
comments
and
those
speakers
will
be
allowed
up
to
five
minutes
each
to
present
their
comments.
This
will
be
their
one
and
only
opportunity
to
address
the
board
and
again
I'll,
go
over
that
as
we
go
through
each
agenda
item.
B
B
B
We
will
then
unmute
your
microphone
and
acknowledge
that
it
is
your
turn
if
you
are
then
participating
over
the
phone
after
you've
hit
star
9
and
we've
recognized.
You
you'll
also
have
to
hit
star
six,
because
your
phone
call
would
have
been
muted
again.
We'll
guide
you
through
that.
So
we
haven't
had
any
problems
with
people
being
able
to
participate
by
phone
or
by
zoom.
B
B
So
we
try
to
be
as
generous
as
we
can,
but
we
got
to
keep
things
and
boundaries
here
and
if,
if
need
be,
I
I
do
run
the
timer
here.
So
after
everybody
has
commented,
the
board
will
close
any
further
public
comment
on
the
agenda
item.
The
board
will
immediately
deliberate
the
request
and
we
will
make
a
decision
here
today.
B
If
your
appeal
is
approved
today,
we
would
ask
that
you
wait
until
next
week
if
you
would
need
to
contact
the
city's
permit
and
development
center
for
any
necessary
building
permits.
This
will
allow
the
decision
of
this
board
to
be
documented
in
the
form
of
a
decision
and
order.
You
will
be
provided
a
copy
of
that
once
it's
signed
and
completed,
and
our
permit
and
development
center
will
also
receive
a
copy.
B
All
material,
written
or
otherwise
used
today,
as
part
of
any
presentation,
is
part
of
the
permanent
record,
and
you
may
contact
staff
after
the
hearing
if
you
would
need
a
copy.
And
finally,
we
ask
that
you
keep
your
microphone
on
mute
other
than
when
addressing
the
board.
This
will
limit
distractions
during
the
hearing
that
is
in
progress.
B
We
also
ask
that
you
refrain
from
using
the
chat
or
any
question
and
answer
functions
here
within
zoom
as
part
of
the
meeting.
Those
are
not
planned
to
be
monitored,
but
they
could
be
considered
as
outside
communication
or
what's
called
ex
parte
communication
to
the
formal
hearing
process.
So
that's
all
I've
got
here.
So
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
mr
drost
and
see
if
we
have
any
changes.
A
B
B
B
If
you
want
to
object
in
zoom,
hit
the
raise
hand,
little
icon
function
down
in
your
little
toolbar
that
I
think
is
at
the
bottom
or
to
the
side
you're
participating
by
phone
hit
star
9.
If
you'd
like
to
be
recognized.
If
anybody
again
wants
to
object
to
granting
the
conditional
use
requests
for
4
or
3121
forest
bert
tyler,
anyone
do
we
see.
B
Okay,
all
right,
so
I
will
ask
our
board:
you
don't
have
to
reply
unless
you
have
a
concern.
Is
there
anybody
here?
That
would
object
to
granting
the
conditional
use
approval
and
if
I
don't
see
any,
would
there
be
anyone
from
the
board
who
would
want
to
make
a
motion
to
grant
the
conditional
use
approval
at
3121
forest
as
a
single
item,
as
it
is
present
on
our
consent
agenda.
F
D
D
D
B
Okay,
all
right!
So
if
you
were
here
for
item
one
that
has
been
approved,
as
I
mentioned,
the
decision
and
order
will
be
signed-
probably
early
next
week
on
that,
and
we
will
get
a
copy
of
that
to
the
applicant
and
our
permit
and
development
center.
So
we'll
move
on
here
then
that'll
bring
us
to
our
first
item
on
the
full
discussion
agenda:
item
3,
which
is
a
zoning
variance
request
and
the
address
for
that
is
400
southeast
6th
street,
and
I
will
turn
this
over
to
our
city
staff
and
they'll.
G
G
G
H
G
C
G
C
G
B
Jason
mel
pins
here
just
kind
of
a
fundamental
question:
businesses
do
have
a
right
to
a
certain
amount
of
signage
based
on
square
footage,
number
of
signs,
etc.
But
this
appears
to
kind
of
hinge
on
the
fact
that
the
sign
was
not
affixed
to
the
building,
but
rather
the
characters
or
the
lettering
was
painted
directly
on
the
building.
G
B
Right,
so
if
I,
if
I
kind
of
applied
that
to
some
things,
I've
seen
in
the
past
that
I
think
you
guys
have
dealt
with,
probably
through
enforcement,
not
necessarily
in
front
of
us,
but
I
had
seen
where
people
would
just
quote
hand
letter
a
sign
or
use
a
spray
can
and
write
liquor
on
a
store
and
again
not
aesthetically.
Pleasing,
probably
wasn't
going
to
stand
up
to
to
the
weathering
and
didn't
meet
the
intent
of
community
character
for
quality
and
signage.
B
G
B
Got
it
okay,
all
right
and
not
to
belabor
this,
but
one
final
one,
the
the
city's
recommendation
is
denial
of
the
variance.
If
we
denied
the
variance
they
they
would
still
be
allowed
to,
in
essence,
keep
the
aqua
colored
stripe
or
keep
the
red
stripe
on
the
west
side.
They
would
just
have
to
in
essence,
kind
of
fill
in
the
lettering
there.
So
it
doesn't
say
rita's
cantina!
Is
that
correct?
Yes,
okay,
all
right,
so
general
color
schemes,
building,
trim
stuff
like
that,
can
still
be
allowed
to
be
painted.
G
B
H
I
And
basically
I
am
the
one
who
who
painted
the
quote
sign
when
we
do
a
concept
I
usually
try
to
take
them
to
the
to
the
nth
degree
as
far
as
authenticity,
and
what
we
were
trying
to
do
here
was
basically
duplicate.
What
I
would
call
say,
a
roadside
cantina.
You
might
find
along
route
66
in
the
southwest
new
mexico,
arizona,
et
cetera,.
I
And
I
it's
an
oversight
by
me,
but
I
honestly
did
that
as
basically
an
artistic
enhancement
to
the
concept,
you
would
normally
see.
That's
that's
what
was
done
I
do
have.
I
do
have
several
examples
that
I
would
have
shown
at
a
live
meeting,
but
that's
obviously
not
possible.
So
you
know
honestly
at
the
time
I
I
viewed
it
as
a
work
of
art
to
go
along
with
the
concept
and
looking
back.
Maybe
I
should
have
rather
than
using
the
the
business
name.
I
B
F
G
Yeah,
that's,
I
would
encourage
him
if
he
moves
forward
to
you
know.
Did
you
look
at
doing
something
else
to
work
with
suan
donovan
zone
enforcement
officer
to
find
that
that
that
I
don't
want
to
call
it
middle
ground,
but
the
ground
where
it
is
art,
because
if
it
said
you
know
tacos
or
something
that
they
sell,
it's
still
considered.
You
know
it'd
be
signage
from
my
understanding,
so
that
I
don't
know
if
stu
wants
to
chime
in
on
that.
But
certainly
we
need
further
discussion.
B
B
You
know
perhaps
we'll
be
inclined
to
approve
the
variance,
but
if
we
are
not
inclined
to
do
that,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
at
least
for
the
short
term,
if
the
variance
was
not
approved
would
would
you
be
able
to
kind
of
fill
in
or
fill
over
where
it
says,
read
his
cantina
and
and
still
kind
of
retain
that
stripe
and
color
theme
there
would.
Would
you
be
able
to
modify
that
fairly
easily.
I
B
B
Is
there
anybody
here
by
zoom
or
phone
that
wishes
to
speak
in
support
of
the
applicant's
variance
request
if
you'd
like
to
speak
in
support
of
this,
in
granting
the
variance
for
them
to
keep
this?
The
quote
sign
the
painted
sign.
Please
hit
the
raise
hand,
icon
and
zoom
or
star
nine
on
your
phone.
If
you'd
like
to
speak
in
support,
if
you're
participating
by
phone
hit
the
star
nine
key,
if
you'd
like
to
be
recognized
to
speak
and
support
going
once
going
twice,
I
do
not
see
any
okay.
B
H
B
Okay
and
same
sign,
if
you
just
like
to
talk
about
signage
for
five
minutes,
anyone
else,
nobody
all
right
all
right.
Seeing
no
request
for
public
comment
on
this
item.
Let's
see,
do
we
have
any
final
questions
for
the
board
or
I'm
sorry,
do
you
have
any
final
questions
for
staff
or
does
staff
have
anything
that
they'd
like
to
add
staff
doesn't
have
to.
K
H
B
Alrighty
clear
enough
andy,
you
just
wrapped
up
your
comments,
but
you
do
have
the
opportunity
to
present
a
rebuttal
of
up
to
three
minutes.
If
there's
anything
you
would
like
to
add
to,
or
or
as
suanne
had
mentioned,
the
staff's
position
on
this
anything
else,
you
want
to
say
in
closing,
if
not
no
big
deal.
B
F
I
think
it's
important
to
maintain
the
law
as
it
is,
and
the
person
who
painted
the
signs
obvious
agreeing
to
go
along
with
it
and
sees
the
point
to
it.
So
I
would
be
in
favor
of
recommending
or
going
forward
with
staff
recommendations
of
not
allowing
this
there's
no
reason
that
it
has
to
be
there.
There's
ample
signage
elsewhere,
and
I
think
the
colors
will
stay
there
and
we'll
still
people
recognize
that
as
being
rita's
cantina
or
the
colors
that
you
see
with
the
southwest
this
system
at
new
mexico.
B
B
B
L
M
F
F
B
All
right,
so
so
andy
don't
take
this
one
personally
or
professionally.
This
is
just
kind
of
a
nuance
in
how
the
zoning
ordinance
does
work.
It
is
very
important
for
the
public
character
to
regul
to
regulate
signage,
but
murals
artwork,
building
color
schemes,
generally
speaking,
would
not
be
regulated,
but
I
would
encourage
you
to
check
with
staff
on
any
other
modifications
you'd
like
to
do
here
and
certainly
down
the
line
if
you're
getting
into
other
projects.
B
N
N
N
N
N
So
there
really
isn't
any
any
negotiating
with
this
owner
to
shift
their
sign
to
make
it
a
little
easier
to
meet
the
requirement
for
the
for
the
subject
property,
because
this
sign
is
is
already
also
in
place
on
the
next
property
to
the
west.
So
it
sort
of
has
started
to
set
a
pattern.
You
know
I
don't
know.
If
the
expectation
is
that
you
know
the
property
owner
should
work
with
multiple
property
owners
to
sort
of
reconfigure
things
in
this
case.
N
They
happen
to
be
proposing
it
in
the
center
of
that
20
feet,
bringing
that
separation
down
to
10
feet
which
throws
them
into
the
variance
situation
they
they
are.
This
is
the
schematic
they're
showing
for
their
for
their
theme
for
their
sign
program.
This
is
a
mock-up
of
how
that
sign
would
project.
N
N
N
N
H
B
N
Regulations-
information
about
you,
know
the
property
and
the
criteria
by
which
the
board
has
to
consider
this
and
then
the
staff
recommendation
staff
does
not
believe
that
they
are
demonstrating
meeting
the
test
for
variants.
We
believe
they
wouldn't
even
require
a
projecting
sign.
They
could
continue
with
the
use
of
the
premise
without
the
projecting
type
signs,
so
so
the
the
relief
that's
needed
isn't
absolutely
necessary
to
continue
a
reasonable
use
of
the
property
staff.
Believes
there's
some
practical
aspects
of
this.
N
N
That
would
be
allowed
to
be
considered.
Staff
believes
that's
still
from
a
character
perspective
still
problematic.
I
think
as
much
as
this
could
be
mounted
to
the
east
of
the
building
and
make
that
separation
is
as
great
as
possible.
I
think
that
would
better
meet
the
character
of
the
established
kind
of
cadence.
Of
those
projecting
signs
that
we
see
on
the
block
face.
N
Staff
would
think
that
we
could
find
that
that
situation
would
meet
the
test
for
a
type
two
exception,
with
the
practical
difficulty
being
that
you
know
it
could
be
mounted.
It
might
need
to
still
be
mounted
on
that
header
and
and
not
on
that
that
soft
brick
in
terms
of
where
it
would
make
sense.
But
if
you
look
at
that,
the
east
edge
of
that
header
you're
nearly
at
the
property
line,
you're,
maybe
a
foot
or
a
foot
and
a
half
west
of
the
property
line.
This
would
be
the
property
line.
N
The
reality
is
that
this
is
also
probably
six
to
eight
inches
west
of
the
property
line,
so
something
in
this
area
would
be
even
if
it
was
mounted
on
the
east
edge
of
this
header
and
still
able
to
take
structural
advantage
of
that.
You
know:
that's
maximizing
the
the
ability
to
separate
that
within
the
within
the
20-foot
wide
building
there,
so
staff
does
believe
it
could
meet
that
test
and
and
staff
would
recommend
approval
of
an
ex
a
type
2
exception.
N
Well,
we
recommend
denial
of
the
variance
to
go
less
than
15
feet
at
10
feet.
We
are
recommending
approval
of
a
type
2
exception
for
15
feet
less
than
the
minimum
separation
of
30
feet
for
projecting
sign,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
they
have
proper
issuance
of
the
sign
permit,
and
we
also
want
to
ensure
that
any
projecting
sign
would
be
installed
as
far
east
on
the
building
as
possible,
given
the
practical
ability
to
structurally
mount
the
sign
on
the
building.
N
So
we
didn't
want
to
get
so
tight
with
our
recommendation
as
to
create
an
issue
with
with
the
actual
physical
mounting
of
the
sign
in
in
a
certain
location
that
doesn't
work.
So
that's
where
we're
recommending
at
this
point,
we've
gotten
a
few
cards
in
favor
and
in
opposition
from
surrounding
property
owners
I'll
scroll
through
those.
N
B
N
No,
they
could
contact
us
and
we
would
provide
them.
Any
information
got
it
from
the
application
that
they
would
want
to
look
at
so
or
have
any
discussion.
They
they
just
sent
their
com.
You
know
yep
and
I
can't
speak
to
anybody
contacting.
I
only
had
one
one
call
personally
on
this
matter
from
one
of
the
notified
people
and
and
they
did
respond
in
favor,
all
right
yeah.
In
fact
that
was
so.
N
B
F
F
N
O
N
I
think
going
to
the
ordinance
itself.
It's
it's
really
meant
to
actually
protect
existing
signs
for
one
so
that
they're
visible.
You
know
as
your
their
projecting
signs
are
generally
intended
to
be
visible
to
motorists
and
pedestrians
that
are
walking
along
the
street
front,
and
so
by
making
them
too
close
together
they
obstruct
each
other
and
they
don't.
You
know,
they're,
not
effective.
Well,
you
know
from
that
standpoint,
so
we
wanted
to
create
with
the
ordinance
a
reasonable
amount
and
30
feet
was
probably
based
on
the
typical
bay
with
in
this
case.
N
You
know
we're
talking
about
20-foot
bays
on
on
an
old
historic
area,
so
that
created
a
situation
where
you
know
30
feet,
wasn't
even
possible
for
every
building
then
to
have
a
sign.
So
that's
what
puts
it
in
front
of
the
board,
but
I
it's
it's
based
on
getting
a
reasonable
separation
on
these
projecting
signs
and
not
having
them
clutter
and
block
and
obstruct
each.
B
N
N
B
And
so
potentially,
why
you
know
we
might
be
inclined
to
grant
the
variance?
I
don't
know,
but
if
we're,
if
we're
not,
we
want
to
grant
an
exception.
Couldn't
we
just
say
hey,
it's
got
to
be
a
minimum
of
15
feet
from
the
other
side.
Then
they
decide
how
to
best
mount
it.
They
decide
how
they'd
like
to
place
it,
because
if
I
was
them,
I'd
want
to
have
it
centered
over
my
little
picture
window
there.
N
N
B
J
J
I
guess
kind
of
our
our
reasoning
of
why
we
wanted
to
do
a
projection
sign.
Is
you
know?
The
intent
of
that
of
that
neighborhood
is,
is
a
pedestrian
feel
and
movement
of
people,
and
also
very
slow
traffic
for
bringing
the
traffic
that
is
through
there.
With
that,
you
know
a
sign
flat
on
the
on
the
building.
It
makes
it
harder
to
see
from
from
farther
down
the
block
as
people
are
walking.
J
I
completely
understand
the
the
situation
with
the
with
the
zoning
I
serve
on
the
city
council
in
indianola,
and
we've
been
going
through
our
our
zoning
ordinance
as
well
and
and
trying
to
clean
up
some
updates
and
things.
So
I
completely
understand
you
know.
We
also
understand
the
the
variance
situation
to
allow
for
situations
like
this,
where
the
property
is
so
narrow
that
it
that
there's
no
way
we
could
meet
the
recommended
distance
of
30
feet.
J
B
B
Okay,
well
pretty
straightforward
here
it
looks
like
oh
okay,
all
right!
Well,
john,
we'll
check
back
with
you
here
in
a
few
minutes,
we'll
go
ahead
and
see
if
we've
got
any
audience
questions
so
do
we
have
anybody
here,
participating
by
zoom
or
phone
that
wishes
to
speak
in
support
of
the
applicant's
request
for
their
variants
to
allow
for
their
sign,
get
the
raise
hand,
function
and
zoom
or
star
9
on
your
phone
to
be
recognized.
B
K
H
B
From
the
board
going
once
going
twice
on
that,
okay,
I
see
none.
So
mr
parker,
we
we
do
have
the
appellants
rebuttal.
You
don't
necessarily
have
to
do
this
if
you
don't
want,
but
since
we
really
didn't
have
anybody
speaking
in
opposition
aside
from
staff,
reasserting
their
position,
hey
is
there
anything
you
want
to
add
in
closing
john.
B
O
This
is
nathan,
I
think
everyone
on
the
board-
although
probably
not
everybody
in
the
audience-
is
well
aware
of
my
adherence
to
pretty
strict
interpretation
of
the
variant
standard
and,
unfortunately
I
don't
think
that
they've
made
their
case.
I
do
think
that
the
underlying
law
is
kind
of
silly.
I
think,
30
feet
is.
I
mean
this
is
a
great
example
of
why
that's
way
too
much,
but
it's
not
in
our
role
to
make
policy.
It's
our
role
to
apply
the
law.
O
B
F
B
P
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
catherine
dray,
has
a
planner
for
the
city
of
des
moines.
This
case
does
have
a
number
of
similarities
to
our
earlier
case,
presented
by
jason,
a
little
context.
The
site
is
located
in
the
just
south
of
the
viaducts,
literally
just
at
the
top
of
this
map
is
where
the
seventh
street,
via
deck,
begins
as
it
heads
north.
P
P
As
you
already
know,
we
are
recommending
denial
of
the
request
for
the
retention
of
these
signs.
Our
consent
map.
We
did
not
receive
any
cards
back
to
the
notification
mailing
and
I'd,
be
more
than
happy
to
answer
questions,
but
I
don't
want
to
belabor
the
the
case
as
it's
so
similar
to
one
we've
already
had.
B
F
C
B
A
This
is
bert
drost
planner
for
the
city
of
des
moines,
when
the
applicant
submits
site
plans,
the
signage
isn't
reviewed
at
that
time.
They
might
show
a
sign
on
the
site
plan,
but
the
staff's
general
comment
is
always
that
the
signs
are
considered
separately
yeah
at
the
time
that
a
sign
permit
is
issued.
Q
Q
Perfect
just
to
answer
a
couple,
quick
questions.
That
is
the
only
sign
that
we
have
right
now
and
I
I
think,
while
there
are
similarities
to
the
the
rita
cantina
sign
variance
request,
there
are
some
unique
differences,
one
while
during
site
plan
approval,
they
do
not
approve
the
signs.
I
just
want
to
clear
up
that
it
was
on
our
site
plan,
as
a
painted
sign,
I
think,
what's
unique
about
this
is
when
we
submitted
for
site
plan
approval,
we
were
under
a
different
zoning
ordinance
that
I
believe
would
have
allowed
for
it.
Q
That
was
kind
of
always
our
intent.
Had
we
pulled
a
permit
at
that
point,
we
may
have
been
been
issued
it
and
been
able
to
do
a
painted
sign
and
it
would
have
been
great.
However,
we
were
12
months
away
from
having
the
building
complete
and
being
able
to
paint
sign
on
there,
and
then
zoning
changed
and
we
kind
of
got
into
this
situation.
Q
H
Q
The
hubble
family
owns
a
lot
of
the
buildings
in
this
south
of
mlk
corridor,
formerly
known
as
riverpoint
we've,
we've
done
historic
renovations
of
rocket
transfer
loss.
River
point
loss
stuff
like
that,
so
it
was.
It
was
definitely
our
intent
to
pay
homage
make
this
building
look
like
it
was
a
historic
building,
so
I
think
for
for
us,
unlike
rita's
cantina,
who
was
kind
of
trying
to
do
a
southwestern
theme
and
to
us
this.
This
really
is
an
artistic
expression.
It
is
a
mural.
It
is
a
way
for
us
to
well.
Q
B
Q
Q
You
to
be
100
honest
with
you,
what
happened
was
is
typically,
we
have
a
signage
contractor,
do
our
signage
and
they
pull
permits
for
us
and
they
do
it,
and
because
this
was
more
of
an
artistic
painting,
we
had
a
painter,
do
it
and
the
painters
do
not
know
to
pull
permits
and
and
our
our
contractor
did
not
catch
that
either.
So,
ultimately,
we
did
not
pull
a
permit.
G
B
H
B
K
Chair
members
of
the
board,
suanne
donovan
zoning
enforcement
officer
for
the
city
of
des
moines-
I
I
think
they
have
pointed
out
that
it's
not
a
mural,
although
they
kind
of
danced
around
that.
But
this
is
definitely
not
a
mural.
It's
not
art
is
absolutely
a
sign
and
would
have
required
a
a
permit
that
didn't
get
pulled
if
they
would
pull
the
permit.
K
K
B
B
Q
I
don't
have
a
rebuttal,
I
I
think
I've
stayed
my
case
as
best
as
I
could.
I
do
want
to
point
out
that,
while
unfortunate
how
this
played
out
the
the
painted
sign
is
there
we,
we
did
use
a
paint
that
is
specific
to
brick
adhesion
if,
if
our
variance
is
not
not
granted,
I
totally
understand
and
appreciate
that
I
want
to
do
as
best
as
I
can
to
to
to
write
that.
Q
I
think
our
intent
would
be
to
do
to
pull
a
permit
and
to
do
a
a
actual
sign
that
would
be
of
similar
size,
similar
logo,
but
on
like
an
aluminum
sign
on
standoffs,
and
then
we
would
apply
that
directly
to
over
the
painted
sign.
We
will
try
our
best
to
get
that
paint
off
that
brick,
but
I
just
I
want
to
be
clear
that
I
can
only
do
what's
in
my
in
in
my
ability,
yeah.
B
B
D
D
Let's
talk
about
signage,
because
you
know
this
isn't
the
first
time
this
has
been
brought
forth,
that
you
know
it
was
part
of
the
site
plan,
but
it
wasn't
discussed
and
and
then
when,
when
you
know
suanne,
I
appreciate
what
suan
was
saying,
but
I
think
it's
it's
up
to
the
city
to
make
sure
that
the
applicants
and
the
folks
who
are
submitting
these
site
plans
it's
really
clear
to
them
what
they
need
to
do
for
signage.
You
know
I
I
personally
like
the
way
this.
This
sign
looks
on
this
building.
D
I
think
putting
a
aluminum
sign
up,
I'm
not
sure
that's
gonna,
look
better.
I
think
it
looks
good.
It
looks
clean.
It
really
fits
the
building.
It
makes
it
it.
It
just
gives
it
a
nice
feel.
I
I
really
don't
have
a
problem
with
it
and
I
know
there's
a
variance
issue,
but
this
isn't
the
first
time
we've
been
kind
of
had
had
sign
issues
brought
before
before
us
that
make
us
all
stop
and
not
even
know
what
to
how
to
react
to
it.
F
I
I
do
like
the
look
of
it
because
you
know
the
historic
buildings
I
enjoy
going
downtown
and
seeing
the
old
faded
paint
that
comes
through
and
makes
it
look
historic,
and
I
like
the
fact
that
they
were
doing
that
with
that,
and
I
that's
why
I
was
hoping
that
this
was
a
historic
building
that
they
had
rehabbed
and
we
could
include
it.
You
know
it's
it's
a
hard
thing
to
say
it
is:
where
do
we
follow
the
strict
line
of
the
law
and
where
we
go
with
something
that
makes
sense,
yep.
B
Maybe
I
need
a
sign
permit.
Maybe
we
should
double
check.
It
appears
that
this
was
delegated
downward,
which
I
understand
that
that's
why
you
hire
people
to
do
work
for
you,
but
if
that
was
not
done
or
done
improperly
well,
maybe
that's
why
they
have
errors
and
emissions
insurance,
but
the
buck
ultimately
stops
with
the
property
owner
or
the
developer.
So
the
developer
should
have
double
checked
on
this
one.
That's
that's
some
of
my
concern,
but
yeah.
It
generally
looks
nice.
D
B
E
B
All
right:
okay,
that's
a
very
nice
project
and
a
very
nice
building,
but
we
we
do
have
some
regulations
on
the
books
so
appreciate
coming
in
today,
tim-
and
hopefully
you
can
work
through
this
with
the
city
for
something
that
remedies
the
situation
as
simply
as
possible.
Yep.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
Right,
mr
chair
members
of
the
board,
bert
drost
planner,
for
the
city.
This
last
item
is
a
conditional
use
permit
that
would
allow
a
use
of
a
area
within
the
kirkwood
building
for
a
bar
and
assembly
or
entertainment
use
with
sales
of
alcoholic
liquor,
wine
and
beer
throughout
the
subject.
Property
is
located
at
the
southwest
corner
of
walnut
street
and
4th
street
in
the
downtown
core
just
to
the
south
of
the
capitol
square
building
and
a
little
bit
to
the
north
of
court
avenue.
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
I
also
want
to
mention
that
this
is
the
only
condition
that
the
applicant
is
in
disagreement
with
so
he'll
be
focusing
on
this
during
his
discussion
or
I'm
sorry
during
his
presentation.
He
would
just
like
a
little
more
flexibility
in
the
ability
to
sell
beverages
and
take
out
containers
he's
not
wanting
to
sell
full
bottles.
It's
just
the
mixed
drinks
and
take
out
containers
which
has
been
pretty
popular
with
other
bars
during
the
pandemic,
and
then
the
other
change
to
the
staff
recommendation
was
condition
number
six.
A
That
was
an
oversight
that
was
meant
to
be
replaced
by
the
condition.
Number
five,
which
just
says
any
speakers
or
amplified
sound
within
the
patio
area,
should
be
in
accordance
with
the
sound
or
class
e
sound
permit
only
which
limits
the
amplified
sound
to
levels
that
are
considered
background
auditory
in
nature.
A
B
A
B
H
B
Q
O
A
Right,
well,
that's
actually
a
standard
condition
that
we've
been
putting
on
bars
these
days,
just
as
no
sale
of
alcoholic
liquor
for
off-premise
consumption.
It
was
when
the
applicant
reached
out
to
me
earlier
this
week
that
he
said
he
didn't
agree
with
that.
Then
I
took
a
second
thought.
I'm
like
yeah.
H
A
A
So
I
might
have
you
asked
that
of
the
applicant.
So
then,
the
last
few
slides
here
are
just
showing
you,
the
neighborhood
outreach
that
they
did.
They
did
a
great
job
reaching
out
to
their
neighborhood
and
they
had
a
virtual
zoom
meeting
and
they
had
a
lot
of
good
input
from
the
neighbors
okay.
So
that's
all
I
had
any
other
questions
or
I'll
turn
it
over
to
the
applicant.
A
B
So
so
so
my
my
question
was
a
normal
conditional
use
permit
for
a
tavern
or
bar.
Has
a
ban
on
take
out
liquor
correct
correct?
So
why
can't
we
just
continue
to
have
that
as
the
standard
conditional
use
permit
for
here,
but
then,
with
whatever
good
nature,
the
city
councils
had
on
policy
on
allowing
takeout
within
parameters.
B
K
K
You
can
also
sell
mixed
drinks
to
go
as
part
of
a
meal
delivery
or
a
meal
purchase
yeah
we're
not
interfering
with
that.
Okay,
all
we
were
trying
to
do
in
this
decision
in
order
is
clarify
that
if
you
want
to
strike
it
we're
going
to
we're
going
to
treat
it
just
like
we
do
any
other
conditional
use
permit
one
the
covid
is.
Restrictions
are
lifted,
they're,
going
to
go
back
to
exactly
what
the
state
anyway
authorizes
that
liquor
license
to
do.
B
R
I'm
currently
in
the
process
of
purchasing
this
commercial
real
estate,
we're
still
under
our
due
diligence
time
period
and
and
approval
of
this
conditional
use.
Permit,
is
part
of
that.
Due
diligence,
essentially
we're
working
on
creating
a
social
gathering
space
and
an
event
center,
where
cocktails,
music,
art
and
technology
come
together
to
create
a
unique
cultural
experience
in
des
moines.
R
Without
going
into
too
much
detail
about
our
operations.
At
the
end
of
the
day,
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
guys
might
have
about
any
aspects
of
our
planned
operations
and
very
specifically,
including
what
we're
doing
in
regards
to
sound
control
and
isolation,
because
those
are
a
big
deal
for
us,
but
today
I
think
we
really
kind
of
are
focused
on
one
specific
issue
to
comment
on
staff's
recommendations,
we're
very
supportive
of
all
of
them
and
are
in
agreement,
but
in
review.
R
We
wanted
to
dive
in
and
talk
about,
number
three
a
little
bit
and
discuss
to
clarify.
I
think
all
the
other
conditions
we
very
much
expected
and
understood
that
they
would
be
in
place
this
one.
We
want
to
talk
about
a
little
bit
more
given
recent
developments
with
changes
in
iowa's
law,
and
so
our
position
on
that
is,
and
we
had
to
kind
of
get
ourselves
up
to
speed
on
those
recent
developments.
R
But
so
our
position
is
that
it's
not
our
interest
or
intent
to
sell
bottles
of
liquor
or
cases
of
beer
for
off-premises
consumption.
We
believe
that
there
should
be
a
condition
in
place
that
prohibits
the
sale
of
alcohol
in
the
same
manner
as
how
liquor
stores
operate.
Therefore,
we're
not
necessarily
requesting
that
this
condition
be
stricken
completely.
R
In
summary,
the
kovid
19
business
disruption
relief
program
was
not
limited
to,
but
it
did
include
governor
reynolds.
Allocating
federal
cares,
act,
funds
to
assist
bars,
taverns
and
other
establishments
impacted
by
the
august.
27Th
covid19
disaster
proclamation
that
closed
bars
in
six
counties
eligible
businesses
were
to
receive
a
one-time
ten
thousand
dollar
grant
to
assist
with
short-term
cash
flow.
So
this
was
a
one-time
thing
and
isn't
particularly
related
to
the
businesses
ability
to
sell
mixed
drinks
or
cocktails
to
go.
R
R
B
Well,
sir,
I
have
a
question
for
you
on
this
I'll
just
lead
off.
Then
your
appeal,
what
you
requested
when
you
filed,
was
a
conditional
use
approval
to
operate
a
bar,
correct
yeah,
so
until
the
staff
put
this
condition
forward,
this
was
not
a
premise
or
basis
or
or
something
that
that
you
ask
for
permission
for
in
your
original
application.
R
B
F
B
F
H
M
Well,
that's
what
I'm
reading
and
from
what
I
can
see.
I
don't
know
the
language
here
hasn't
shown
me
anything
that
would
put
a
time
limitation
on
this
and,
to
be
honest
with
you,
I
haven't
read
its
provisions
outside
of
this
setting
either
to
know
whether
there
is
some
sort
of
date
on
which
this
would
no
longer
become
effective.
M
B
R
B
Can
somebody
skip
down
to
the
end
of
house
file
2540.
I'd
like
to
see
the
date
that
it
was
signed,
okay
june
29th
2020
and
then
that
that
will
be
codified
codified,
so
it
would
become,
like
you
know,
iowa
code,
455g,
657a
or
something
so
it's
a
house
file
now,
but
but
once
it's
in
law
it
will
say
what
code
sections
like
code,
section
321.
B
B
B
B
K
Chair
members
of
the
board,
this
is
suen
donovan.
I
got
kicked
off
for
a
while.
So
I
didn't
hear
all
of
the
conversation
on
the
state
law
question,
but
I
would
say
that
if
you
want
to
you
could
change
number
three
to
say
any
sale
of
alcoholic
liquor.
Wine
and
beer
for
off-premise
consumption
shall
comply
with
the
laws
of
the
state
of
iowa,
and
then
we
can
follow
whatever
the
legislature
does.
In
regards
to
that.
B
So
what
I'm
getting
at
is
not
that
specifics,
but
this
house
file
2540
seems
to
be
kind
of
the
the
the
new
kid
in
class
here.
So
are
there
any
provisions
in
there
where
a
city
could
say
that
it
wants
to
have
further
restrictions,
or
is
this
one?
No
it's
past
statewide
and
you,
local
city
ordinances,
can't
have
any
impact
on
this.
I
would
be
concerned
that
if
we
just
steamroll
this
in
without
further
study
by
the
city,
there
may
be
opportunities
where
the
city
may
or
may
not
want
to
have
further
restrictions.
K
Well,
I
I
will.
This
is
suing
donovan.
I
will
say
this
my
understanding
when
this
was
passed
without
reading
it
was
that
it
was
in
connection
with
covert
relief.
I
have
not
read
it
to
the
point
where
I
understand
exactly
what
it
does
beyond
that
yeah.
So
I
I
can't
answer
that
question
today
without
looking
at
it
further
now
you
could
further.
You
could
further
refine
number
three
to
say
in
compliance
with
the
house
file
number
and
then,
if
that
gets
overturned
at
some
point,
then
that
provision
goes
away.
B
K
B
That's
exactly
right,
and
that
is
my
concern
because
remember
a
state
law
was
passed
and
said:
yeah
any
pharmacy
grocery
store
get
and
go
can
sell
alcohol,
but
there
were
some
provisions
in
there
that
allowed
for
some
reasonable
zoning
correct.
I
just
I'm
a
little
bit
concerned
with
with
a
few
aspects
of
this
so
to
keep
this
moving,
but.
O
But
mel,
wouldn't
we
then
just
say
that
it
needs
to
adhere
to
state
and
state
law
and
city
code
and,
to
the
extent
that
there's
there's
a
policy
that's
put
in
place
by
the
city
council
with
those
types
of
restrictions.
Then
this
this
business
would
have
to
adhere
to
it
rather
than
having
it
as
a
as
one
of
the
conditions
for
the
conditional
use.
Permit,
restrict
them
beyond
what
is
otherwise
allowed
by
state
and
local
ordinance.
B
Well,
I
I
get
where
you're
coming
from
nathan.
I'm
not
trying
to
be
obstinate
here,
but
remember,
a
state
law
was
passed
that
said,
just
about
any
store
can
sell
liquor,
but
that
same
state
law
hidden
in
there
was
a
thing
that
did
allow
for
some
reasonable
restrictions
and
that's
why
we
have
all
these
cases
about
they've
got
to
be
so
far
from
a
church
and
so
far
from
a
park.
O
B
H
F
M
Not
necessarily
lynn,
this
is
judy
parks,
cruz.
There
are
some
areas
in
which
the
state
preempts
cities
from
doing
anything
different
than
what
the
the
state
has
done
this.
This
may
not
be
one
of
those,
because
there
is
some
room
for
cities
to
regulate
location
and
spacing,
and
that
kind
of
thing,
but
I
I
guess
it
depends
on
what
the
actual
restriction
is,
that
we're
looking
at.
R
Yes,
sir,
yes
excellent,
you
know,
I
would
say
that
you
are
absolutely
correct.
I,
this
is
a
due
diligence
time
period
and
not
necessarily
opening,
but
rather
making
the
final
decision
to
purchase
the
property
we
did
want
to
get
this
conditional
use
permit
in
place
to
have
a
general
awareness
that
we
can
operate
right.
So
you
know
I
would
like
to
see
that
happen
today.
I
would
like
to
see
this
approved.
R
I
guess
I
would
suggest
if,
if
it's
appropriate
to
do
so,
that
the
board
somehow
approves
this
conditional
use
permit
today,
but
I
guess
I
very
much
am
interested
in
coming
back
for
the
next
meeting.
I
do
think
it's
appropriate
for
everybody
to
have
the
right
a
reasonable
amount
of
time
to
review
these
laws
and
and
and
administrative
orders
and
such.
B
F
B
That's
that's
just
so
something
the
applicant
mentioned,
depending
on
how
heavy
of
a
lift
you
want
to
do
here.
We
have
a
request
for
conditional
use
permit
to
operate
a
tavern
in
front
of
us.
The
city
staff
has
provided
their
staff
wreck
for
approval,
which,
generally
speaking,
is
similar
to
almost
every
other
one.
B
F
Q
O
I
don't,
I
don't
think
we've
heard
any
arguments
down
that
way
and
so
I'd
be
comfortable
with
number
three
reading
something
like.
As
you
know,
I
don't
know
that
we
have
to
put
anything,
but
we
could
put
you
know.
Off-Premise
consumption
should
adhere
to
you,
know
state
law
and
local
ordinance
and
then
they'd
be
put
on
the
same
footing
as
as
every
other
entity
rather
than
being,
and
I
understand
that
to
this
point-
it's
often
been
included
in
conditional
use
permits.
It
sounds
like,
but
because
of
you
know,
changing
legal
environments.
O
That
might
not
be
the
case
in
the
future,
and
that
way
it
gives
the
opportunity
for
the
city
council
to
wrestle
with
the
issue.
However,
they
want
to
for
the
whole
city
whether
they
want
separation
restrictions
or
or
to
ban
it
if
they're
able
to
under
state
law
or
or
whatever
it
is,
but
then
we
don't
have
to
go
through
the
process
of
of
having
this.
This
particular
applicant
come
back
and
deal
with
them
kind
of
piece
by
piece
in
the
future.
I
don't
I
don't.
D
H
O
O
M
O
M
L
B
Okay,
all
right.
Well.
That
concludes
that
item.
So
brad.
We
will
get
this
in
a
form
of
decision
and
order
for
you.
So
then
you'll
have
all
those
conditions
and
then,
if
that
helps
you
make
your
further
decision
here.
Hopefully
things
will
work
out
for
you.
Thank
you
very
much
appreciate
it
all
right.
You
have
a
good
evening.
Thank
you,
okay,
so
just
a
few
items
of
business
decision
making
wise
we
have
to
approve
minutes
at
the
last
meeting.
B
L
B
A
Have
just
three
more
housekeeping
items.
The
first
is
that
our
december
and
january
meetings
are
going
to
be
held
virtually
again.
I
know
last
time
we
spoke,
the
order
was
set
to
expire
at
the
end
of
november,
but
it
has
been
extended
now
through
at
least
december
and
january,
so
expect
those
to
be
held
over
zoom
I'll.
A
Keep
you
posted
if
or
when
it
gets
extended
past
january,
and
then
also
just
wanted
to
point
out
again
that
the
december
meeting
will
be
december
16th,
which
is
the
third
wednesday
of
the
month,
rather
than
the
typical
fourth
wednesday
of
the
month
and
then.
Lastly,
I
just
wanted
to
remind
you
that
we're
still
planning
to
do
the
training
session,
either
before
or
after
the
january
27th
regular
board
meeting
just
depending
on
the
length
of
the
regular
agenda.